In my last post, we looked closely at the disagreement between Muhammad al-Baqir and his half-brother Zayd. Without any doubt whatsoever, they both despised the Ummayad who killed their grandfather in Karbala. Today, we are going to take a closer look at Butris/Batris/Battriya who took up the cause of Zayd.
The Butris rejected the leadership of the fifth Imam of Shia, Muhammad al-Baqir and went over to the side of Zayd. There were some Shias in Kufa who broke the allegiance from Zayd and went to the side of al-Baqir. The book mention that Zayd was not able to convincingly explain if Ali ibn Abi Talib was an Imam before he resorted to the sword (see the Jamal war, the Siffin war and the battle of Nahrawan).
The Butris rejected the leadership of the fifth Imam of Shia, Muhammad al-Baqir and went over to the side of Zayd. There were some Shias in Kufa who broke the allegiance from Zayd and went to the side of al-Baqir. The book mention that Zayd was not able to convincingly explain if Ali ibn Abi Talib was an Imam before he resorted to the sword (see the Jamal war, the Siffin war and the battle of Nahrawan).
Zayd's agreed with the Mutazilites about the first and the second caliph (Abu Bakr and Umar al-Khattab). Mutazilites believe Ali was a better candidate for the caliphate than Abu Bakr and Umar. However, they (Mutazilites) also held a politically correct opinion; they accepted both the first and the second caliph as legal representative of the people.
Zayd was very well acquainted with the leader of Mutazilah, Wasil ibn Ata. On the question of the many conflicts among the Muslims (disagreements over the issue of caliphates, civil wars), Zayd sometimes agrees with Wasil ibn Ata and sometimes not. Briefly here are the positions adopted by a number of Muslim sects
- The Sunnis (until today) believe that all companions were correct. In the Jamal war, they believe that both sides were correct.
- The Mutazilah under Wasil ibn Ata believes that one side was in error but they are unsure which side that was (meaning they didn't take the side of Ali or Ayesha in the Jamal war).
- Zayd believe that it was impossible for Ali ibn Abi Talib to be incorrect in the conflict because Ali was virtuous.
- The Shias believe Ali was correct/right and the other side was clearly in error because they were fighting a divinely selected authority from God and a lawful caliph (Muslim representative).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Got something to say?