The interpretation of Bahai faith regarding "son of Hasan Al-askari" is irrational.

[Link]

On page 157:

Talking about Meraaj:

(God says) Would you like to see them? Yes My Lord (Mohammad replies), (Mohammad continues to say )I raised my head and saw that I was in midst of the lights of Ali, Fatima, Hassan, Hussain, Ali son of Hussain, Mohammad son of Ali, Jaffar son of Mohammad, Musa son of Jaffar, Ali son of Musa, Mohammad son of Ali, Ali son of Mohammad, Hassan son of Ali, and Mohammad son of Hassan was in their middle, as if he was a bright star, I asked "O Lord who are these", he replied "They are the leaders, and this is the Qaim, who will allow the allowed and forbid the forbidden, and by him I will take vengeance on my enemies, and he is the relaxation of my friends, and he is who will heal the hearts of your followers from from the oppressors, the deniers, and disbelievers.


My argument: Even these type hadiths it's clear that "son of" is the same meaning as "son of" before mentioned for the other Imams (a), and can't be metaphoric.

 

[Link]

Very relevant, because your claim as well as for any succession of religious authority is without objective evidence or consistent provenance of scripture and history.

It is a fact there is a wide conflicting diverse interpretations in Islam concerning the the hadiths. Your view is one among many in Islam. The Hadiths are a traditional belief of the succession of guidance in Islam, and NOT a well documented universally recognized guidance in Islam,

Hadith - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Some Muslims believe that Islamic guidance should be based on the Quran only, thus rejecting the authority of hadith; some further claim that most hadiths are fabrications (pseudepigrapha) created in the 8th and 9th centuries AD, and which are falsely attributed to Muhammad.

The reality of the validity of the Baha'i claim does not rest on a traditional interpretation of the hadiths.

It's not relevant, because my argument is that your Prophet acknowledged these hadiths while giving them a metaphoric interpretation that is impossible when looking at the actual hadiths.

 

[shunyadragon]

It's not relevant, because my argument is that your Prophet acknowledged these hadiths while giving them a metaphoric interpretation that is impossible when looking at the actual hadiths.

Very very relevant. It depends on the interpretation of the Hadiths. Your rigid interpretation is not widely accepted even within Islam.

If you want to get rigidly stoic as to what is possible or impossible, based on the lack of provenance and objective basis Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the Baha'i Faith as well as all ancient religions are impossible religions based only faith assumptions.

The other problem remains that your view is extremely biased when considering any other religion other than your own.

 

[Link]

on Page 159:

Ali (a) says I entered upon the Messenger (s) of God in the house of Umm Salama, and this verse was revealed "God only desires to ward off the uncleanness away from you O people of the House and purify you a purification" Rasool (s) said "Oh Ali, this verse was revealed regarding you and regarding my branch, and the leaders from your sons", "O messenger of God, and how many are the leaders after you", "You Ali, then your sons Hassan and Hussain, then after Hussain: Ali his son, and after Ali Mohammad his son, and after Mohammad his son Jaffar, and after Jaffar his son Musa, and after Musa his son Ali, and Ali his son Mohammad, and Mohammad his son Ali, and after Ali his son Hassan, and the proof is from the son of Hassan, and I found their names written on foundations of the throne, so I asked God regarding that, so he said: "O Mohammad, they are the leaders after you, purified, protected, and their enemies cursed."


Again, we see the context shows it's not metaphoric but literal.

 

[Link]

Very very relevant. It depends on the interpretation of the Hadiths.

I'm saying the Bahai interpretation of these hadiths is irrational. Your Prophet in response to these hadiths say why can't he be spiritual son of Hassan Al-askari. I'm saying the context of these hadiths show that can't be a rational interpretation.

 

[shunyadragon]

on Page 159:

Ali (a) says I entered upon the Messenger (s) of God in the house of Umm Salama, and this verse was revealed "God only desires to ward off the uncleanness away from you O people of the House and purify you a purification" Rasool (s) said "Oh Ali, this verse was revealed regarding you and regarding my branch, and the leaders from your sons", "O messenger of God, and how many are the leaders after you", "You Ali, then your sons Hassan and Hussain, then after Hussain: Ali his son, and after Ali Mohammad his son, and after Mohammad his son Jaffar, and after Jaffar his son Musa, and after Musa his son Ali, and Ali his son Mohammad, and Mohammad his son Ali, and after Ali his son Hassan, and the proof is from the son of Hassan, and I found their names written on foundations of the throne, so I asked God regarding that, so he said: "O Mohammad, they are the leaders after you, purified, protected, and their enemies cursed."


Again, we see the context shows it's not metaphoric but literal.

I DO NOT claim it is a metaphoric Claim. The variation are traditional claims with many diverse conflicting interpretations in Islam, and yours is one of many,

 

[Link]

I DO NOT claim it is a metaphoric Claim. The variation are traditional claims with many diverse conflicting interpretations in Islam, and yours is one of many,

You don’t but your prophet does.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

To me Bada doesn't mean promises are altered. It means some promises are conditional even if definitive. For example, the Quran says not a city but will be destroyed before day of judgment. That means when Imam Mahdi (a) comes if certain conditions happen, they will be destroyed. However, those conditions are not set to happen. So it's definitive promises, but they won't necessarily happen.

I don't believe God lies in his promises. And Rasool (s) naming Twelve Imams he told Salman, it's not good enough to just know there will be twelve Imams, but you have to know their lineage and names. And Imam Mahdi (a) is son of Hassan Al-Askari (a).

The only thing that is promised is "Mahdi comes even if one day is left to Judgement Day". But how He appears, when He would be born, and how the events of His time will be unfolded, are subject to Bada and alteration, even as Hadithes say. To say, God cannot make such alterations is to disbelieve in Authority of God.

 

[Link]

The only thing that is promised is "Mahdi comes even if one day is left to Judgement Day". But how He appears, when He would be born, and how the events of His time will be unfolded, are subject to Bada and alteration, even as Hadithes say. To say, God cannot make such alterations is to disbelieve in Authority of God.

It's rather disbelief in God to believe he lies about promises and in designating the Imams (a). Your Prophet didn't play the bida card either but said it was metaphorical that he was his son. You are switching the topic.

 

[Link]

Salam

The book I'm quoting from is a 40 hadith book. And it's purpose to pick 40 hadiths that are all mutabar (reliable) in terms of science of men rijaal system of Twelver Shiites.

The fact is there are even way more authentic hadith let alone hadiths that are not considered authentic per system of Rijaal then these forty.

In short, there are too many narrations. You would have to accuse almost every Shiite narrator in our sources of being a liar to do away with these hadiths.

Of course, the Bahai Prophet didn't do that. He instead, tried to explain them metaphorically to mean he some is mystic son of Hassan Al-Askari (a). But if you look at these hadiths, you can't conclude that as plausible. It's obvious the meaning of son is not metaphoric.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

@Link

It is narrated from Muhammad bin Hamam from Fazari from Muhammad bin Ahmad Madini from Ibne Asbat from Muhammad bin Sinan from Dawood Raqqi that he said:

I said to Imam Ja’far Sadiq (a.s.), “May I be your ransom, this matter has prolonged much, so much that our hearts have run out of patience and the grief is killing us.” He said: “When it reaches the highest level of despair and the severest point of grief, a caller will call from the heavens the name of the Qaim and the name of his father.” I said: “May I be your ransom, what is his name?”

He said: “His name is the name of a messenger and his father’s name is the name of a successor.”

Think about it @Link
The shia thought, the Qaim is literally Son of the 11 th Imam. But if you see the hint in this Hadith you would see that idea is false. The Name of his father, is the name of one of the Successors, not that He is literally Son of a successor!
Do you see the difference?
Otherwise what additional value this Hadith would have provided for you?

Hadithes should be Read carefully so, you may see the hints and allusions in the Hadithes.

 

[Link]

@Link

It is narrated from Muhammad bin Hamam from Fazari from Muhammad bin Ahmad Madini from Ibne Asbat from Muhammad bin Sinan from Dawood Raqqi that he said:

I said to Imam Ja’far Sadiq (a.s.), “May I be your ransom, this matter has prolonged much, so much that our hearts have run out of patience and the grief is killing us.” He said: “When it reaches the highest level of despair and the severest point of grief, a caller will call from the heavens the name of the Qaim and the name of his father.” I said: “May I be your ransom, what is his name?”

He said: “His name is the name of a messenger and his father’s name is the name of a successor.”

Think about it @Link
The shia thought, the Qaim is literally Son of the 11 th Imam. But if you see the hint in this Hadith you would see that idea is false. The Name of his father, is the name of one of the Successors, not that He is literally Son of a successor!
Do you see the difference?
Otherwise what additional value this Hadith would have provided for you?

The hadiths are seen in collaboration. There is nothing wrong with this hadith.

Keep in mind Sunnis narrated a lot due to an event in history that the Mahdi's (a) name is that of Rasool (s) and his father name is that of Rasool's (s) father (Abdullah).

So this hadith is to clarify it's not the case.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The hadiths are seen in collaboration. There is nothing wrong with this hadith.

Keep in mind Sunnis narrated a lot due to an event in history that the Mahdi's (a) name is that of Rasool (s) and his father name is that of Rasool's (s) father (Abdullah).

So this hadith is to clarify it's not the case.

Who said, there is anything wrong with the Hadith?

The point is, the Hadith says
His father's name, is a name of a successor. This is different from saying, His father is a Successor.

You seems to conveniently ignore this, or just miss it.

Your idea that, the Qaim is actually son of a Successor is false according to this Hadith, and the other Hadithes that Imam Baghir said, Mahdi will be born during Last Days (أخرالزمان).

 

[Link]

Your idea that, the Qaim is actually son of a Successor is false according to this Hadith,

Suppose this is true which of course would be absurd, still the other hadiths assign him as the son of Hassan Al-Askari (a). And they can't be interpreted metaphorically.

However this is false. Your conclusions are off.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Suppose this is true which of course would be absurd, still the other hadiths assign him as the son of Hassan Al-Askari (a). And they can't be interpreted metaphorically.

However this is false. Your conclusions are off.

First of all, there is no proof the Hadith you are quoting is really accurate or the exact words of the Prophet and Imams. They may have said something like that, but by the time it was memorized and written, it was affected by personal misunderstanding.

Secondly, even if that Hadith is correct and accurate, to claim that, it cannot mean Spiritually son of the Imam Hassan, is your own personal perception. You cannot say, God could not have meant it to mean spiritually.
You don't get it, that God could test, how people submit, when things happen contrary to what they expected.
He tests mankind by making things appear contrary to what they expect or wish.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

@Link

Here are some Hadithes, that tells us, the Name of the Qaim and His father will be unknown until when He rises, and announced:

There is a long Hadith in Bihar, Imam Sadiq answers:

“The caller will call out the name of Qaim and the name of his father and will say: “So-and-so the son of so-and-so is Qaim of Muhammad’s progeny. You are to listen to him, and to obey him.”

Also,

45- Ghaibat Nomani: It is narrated from Ibne Uqdah from Ahmad bin Yusuf bin Yaqub from Ismail bin Mahran from Hasan bin Ali from his father from Wuhaib bin Hafas from Najiya Attar that Abu Ja’far Baqir (a.s.) had said:

“The caller will call out that the Mahdi is from Muhammad’s progeny.
He will call out the name of the Mahdi and the name of his father. Then the
Satan will call out that the truth is with so and-so (Uthman) and his
followers.”

Also:

أخرج النعماني في الغيبة بسنده عن أبي بصير عن الصادق عليه السلام أنه قال: - ينادي باسم القائم يا فلان بن فلان قم

"Al-Nu'mani, in 'Al-Ghaybah', narrated through his chain from Abu Basir, from Al-Sadiq (peace be upon him) that he said: 'The caller will call out the name of the Qaim, saying: O so-and-so, son of so-and-so, rise.'"


أخرج النعماني أيضاً بسنده عن ناجية القطان عن الباقر عليه السلام أنه قال: - أن المنادي ينادي أن المهدي (من آل محمد) فلان بن فلان، باسمه واسم أبيه


"Al-Nu'mani also narrated through his chain from Najiyah Al-Qattan, from Al-Baqir (peace be upon him) that he said: 'The caller will call out that the Mahdi (is from the family of Muhammad), mentioning his name and the name of his father, So and So'"


Why, these Hadithes don't say, o Muhammad son of Hassan Rise? Why they don't say, the Caller will call Muhammad Son of Hassan is the Qaim?
Why it says So and So, leaving His name and His father's name unknown?
There are many Hadithes like these.

 

[Link]

It's because a lot of scholars omit the names in the hadiths and believe his name should not be mentioned. Some would write his name split and some would write so and so for him.

 

[Link]

First of all, there is no proof the Hadith you are quoting is really accurate or the exact words of the Prophet and Imams. They may have said something like that, but by the time it was memorized and written, it was affected by personal misunderstanding.

Hadiths of Shiites aren't contingent on memory like Sunni hadiths. They were always written even during period of time when it was forbidden to write down hadiths by the government of that time.

 

[Link]

Secondly, even if that Hadith is correct and accurate, to claim that, it cannot mean Spiritually son of the Imam Hassan, is your own personal perception. You cannot say, God could not have meant it to mean spiritually.

Of course, it's obvious by context of "son" with the rest of the Imams (a), that is literal. So the Bahais' Prophet's explanation is irrational. But this is just one of the many things that Bahais are not sincere to language in terms of Quran and hadiths.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

You don’t but your prophet does.

Quote Baha'u'llah on this.
I think, you OP should've included Quote from Baha'u'llah.
I think you misunderstood what Baha'u'llah wrote.