Shaykhi Sect - part 3

Shaykhism - from users contribution

These posts are owned by their respective authors. They have the full rights to it.

post # 12

Sheikh Ahmed Al-Ahsaei is originally from Eastern Al-Jazeera Al-Arabia, and he was an Akbari Sheikh, who believed that Imam Al-Mahdi was going to appear at any time (During the year 1840), and he ordered his followers to look for the Imam, and some of them did. One of those students was Muhammad Ibn Ali Al-Shirazi, who later on Proclaimed to be Imam Al-Mahdi, and the founder of the Babi religion, and Ultimately Bahaism later on.

post # 18 and 21

The name of the founder of Bahaism is Hussayn Ali Al-Nuri, who was later renamed Baha’ullah - and he was one of the followers of Sayed Muhammad Ali Al-Shirazi, who proclaimed to be Imam Al-Mahdi after the death of Sheikh Ahmad Al-Ahsaei.

As for those who said he's not an Akhbari, well I suggest you reread his history again because he rejects Taqleed and the principle of conjecture through emulation of Ahlul Albayte - not to mention his complete rejection of the usage of Aql, but taking all Ahadeeth as true from the Holy Imams, which explains why Sayed Alkhomeini compared him to Wahabbism’s founder (This is the first time I hear of this, so my answer is assumed from what I read above in this regard).

This is not my opinion, but that of the Akhbari School within Athna Ashari Shiism :) Of course, the power of dispute in Ilm Al-Rijal; and how hadeeth basically functions can differ from our two schools, but non the less, it was on a high scale with Sheikh Ahmad Al-Ahsaei, and this is why Sayed Ali Muhammad Al-Shirazi took advantage of that and proclaimed the Mahdism for himself.


Post #24
I am not claiming that Sheikh Ahmad Al-Ahsaei has done anything wrong in being an Akhbari, nor did I say that Akhbaris are not Shias or anything remotely close to such a thing. As for Sheikh Ya3qoob Al-Kulyni rejecting Taqleed, he did but for a very clear reason, and that’s because the infallible Imam was present, and under the grounds that an infallible is present, Taqleed becomes void - and that exactly what Sheikh Al-Kulyni was standing on.

Once again, I am not here to discuss the roots of the two schools, both have great arguments in supporting their stances, but you have to realize that depending on Scholars is an Islamic concept, not a Sunni innovation. Most of the Usoli Mujtahids you're referring to have claimed that Sunnis have beat us to this field first due to the fact that we as Shias were oppressed and killed for many centries due to their stance against us, not to mention that Al-Ghayba Al-Kubra went into full effect in the beginning of the fourth century after the death of Al-Bab Muhammad Al-Sammiri - we did not need scholars in interpreting our faith since the Imams where there, not to mention Al-Niabah Al-Khassah which lasted a little less than a century.

Shaykhi Sect - part 2

A few more notes on the Shaykhi sect (Note: These are mostly from users contribution).

Shaykh Ahmad Ahsai

• Shaykh Ahmad Ahsai is/was an Usooli scholar.
• He promoted using the wisdom and philosophy from the traditions of Ahlul Bayt.
• He strongly believe all knowledge originate or is contain in the Holy Book
• He rejected using Sufi or Greek philosophy.
• Shaykh Ahmad appointed Sayyid Kazim Rashti as his successor

Division

• The Shaykhi school crystallized after the death of Shaykh Ahmad Ahsai (see wiki reference on his bio)
• The division in the Shaykhi school happened after the death of Sayyid Rashti (please see ShiaChat discussion)

This is a direct quote from this discussion

The first group followed Merza Hassan Qohar where he used to live in Karbala. Others followed Mohammad Kareem Khan who lived in Kerman.

The followers of Merza Johar followed Ahmad Alehsaei path in Usool and faith, while Kermanis added things to the Ahsaei intellect as The Fourth Rekn (Alrekn Alreabe3) like Sufis, That shaykh Ahmad is the shaykh and the guide.

Unfortunately yes, there isn\t much about the school of shaykh Ahsaei in English. That is because who follow his school today are inactive. Moreover, the shaykh is oppressed intellectualy by shia like persian who prefare the phlosophy of Mula sadra.

Lecture: Life through Trials

Description:
02/25/2011 - Haj Hassanain Rajabali speaks at the YMA Friday night program. He discusses how we live our life through trials and tribulations, and how we can deal with it. He points to the ultimate role model for living through this life, which are the Holy Prophet and his holy progeny Ahlul-bayt [as].

Listen to the lecture.

ShiaChat it not online

It went down yesterday night.

Some Confusions- Industrial Alcohols vs. the Intoxicants

Interesting reading (see posts by user Abdul Hussain).

Namely:

All kinds of alcohol (whether extracted from wood or other sources) is pure, not najis. So, the medicines, the perfumes, and the food containing alcohol are pure and can be used. It is also permissible to eat such food if the amount of alcohol is very minute, e.g., 2%.

The differentation here is Alcohol which is liquor and intoxicating, i.e which is liquid in origin and underwent the process of fermentation (e.g wine), and that which is not liquid in origin, is not intoxicating and did not undergo fermentation (e.g ethyl alcohol). Personally, I like to use the phrases liquor alcohol to describe the first and industrial alcohol to describe the second. So, it becomes apparent that there is no conflict in the rulings.

It's actually incorrect to say that the ruling is based on the potabilty, though you would be correct to assume that it is the differentiating factor, because the deduction of the ruling comes from the verses and hadiths showing the impermissibilty of firstly drinking alcohol and then it being najis. The scholars of previous times have said that the "intoxicant which is liquid in origin is najis" [Luma'a v1 p22] which shows that even then there was a distinction made between that which is liquid in origin and not. With the development of science a wide variety of chemicals not intoxicating or not liquid in origin have come under the category of alcohols, which is why the fuqaha have exercised precautions in the matter. Thus, what can be drunk as an intoxicant (assuming it is liquid in origin i.e fermented) would be classified as najis, and that which is not drunk as an intoxicant (ethyl alcohol is poisonous dose-related) and is derived from other sources would be classed as tahir either by precaution or as a direct ruling.

That's why fragrances, medicines and most other alcohol-containing consumer products are classed as tahir for use. [There is some controversy over vanilla extract because of the type of alcohol used in the extraction process].