ভূমিকা

Shiavault - a Vault of Shia Islamic Books Explanation to the Belief of Mahdism in Shi'a Imamia Division of the Dominion of Leadership ========================================== The writer again here too speaks wrongly. He says that in the days of Imam Sadiq the leadership split into two - that of terrestrial and the other of spiritual. Each one separated from the other.

Shias have never thought nor did they ever consider that the Imams should not possess a worldly leadership and that they are fit only for a spiritual leadership. They did and do consider that they hold both offices, that is, the leadership of worldly affairs and the spiritual leadership. Both positions are combined in their authority. Shias, therefore, regard those who seized power out of the hands of the Imams as tyrants. They could not revolt without the Imam’s permission.

They took to propagate the facts. They confronted the tyrants. They acted prudently and with caution so as not to provide the slightest pretext that could result in a general massacre of Shias. Shia conduct has always been such as to make the rulers of their time sympathetic towards them. It was unacceptable that the leadership be divided into sectors. It can be said that before the martyrdom of Imam Husayn both dimensions were combined in the leadership.

For example, Omar Bin Khattab and Osman Bin Affan were regarded as such. But when the martyrdom of Imam Husayn occurred the Muslims themselves regarded the leadership as forming two separate angles, which was a result of that unique Holy war. They gave the most important one, that of religion and its issues to the Imams because they never considered the caliphs as their real spiritual leaders. They respected the caliphs as a symbol towards maintaining the unity and preserving the existing state.

The advantage of the influence which the blood of Imam Husayn exercised on the preservation of Islam cannot be computed neither by the Shia nor by the Sunni. In some cases if this be said, it will sound reasonable, that the readers were satisfied that the Imam would not create a danger of uprising against them. For example, to some extent we see such a conviction in Mansoor with regards to Imam Ja’far Sadiq.

But, still he was not convinced because he adopted provisionary measures such as to keep a vigilant watch on the Imam and to have spies watch over him. Finally in order to relieve himself of this suspense of danger he poisoned him Imam Sadiq and ended his life.