AN OBJECTIVE PERSPECTIVE

Imaamah and the Quran

BY: ABU SALIH

chapter five
General And Specific Verses Of The Quran And Problems With Imaamah

As I was reading the Quran looking for the instances of the words Imaam, Rasul, and Nabi in its different aspects, I noticed many Verses that put the Shia doctrine of Imaamah under further problems.

• First General Problem: Is the Imaam the main source of guidance?
  • When did the other Prophets become “Imaams”?
  • How do they present themselves?
• Second General Problem: Prophets for every nation, Imaams for every time?
  • Not until Allah sends a Prophet?
  • The dilemma of Shias concerning Isa (Alayhi Salam) and the Imaamah up to Muhammad (ﷺ)
• Third General Problem: Proof for all of humanity?
  • Objections to this view
• Fourth General Problem: The most knowledgeable?
• Fifth General Problem: Prophecies and Imaams?
  • Ibrahim and the Dua for the Prophet to come in Land of Makkah
  • Isa (Alayhi Salam) and the coming of Muhammad (ﷺ)
  • The Unlettered Prophet

There a number of broad ideas of Imaamah in Shiaism that clash with the Quran. These can be categorized under the following topics:

• The idea that the Imaam is the main unit of guidance.
• The notion that there is an Imaam for every time.
• The belief that the entire world should recognize one Imaam.
• The notion that the Imaam is the best of all humans in all virtues, especially in terms of his knowledge and wisdom.
• The belief that the coming of the Imaams has been foretold by the previous Prophets and Messengers.

Some of the problems these notions have with the Quran were briefly explored in the previous sections. In this chapter, a series of Verses will be presented that portrays this lack of corresponedence between Shiaism and the Quran in clearer terms, and that showed for me many of the serious deficiencies in Shia doctrine that may be overlooked by other researchers.

First General Problem: Is the Imaam the main source of guidance?

The Shia insistence on Imaamah as a supposed central doctrine in Islam is an indication that the “Imaam” should be the main source of bringing the people out of their darkness and showing them the truth. Notwithstanding, this assumption is put under severe strain due to the confusion of the Imaami Shias with respect to when Prophets became “Imaams” and started to guide their people under this “superior” position of authority, and the fact that none of the Prophets mentioned in the Quran ever presented himself as an “Imaam” to his nation.

When did the other Prophets become “Imaams”?

One of the unanswered problems of the Imaami Shias is with respect to explaining who was an Imaam and who was a Prophet. Outside of Ibrahim’s (Alayhi Salam) case, they cannot say for sure when certain Prophets became “Infallible Imaams”.

Many ordinary Shias say that these noble figures were appointed Imaams at the same moment they became Prophets. Nevertheless, the case of Ibrahim as explained by Shia scholars in this Verse shows otherwise… a Prophet does not become an Imaam until he reaches a “higher level of spirituality”, a stage that according to the Shia scholars may not come until very late in the Prophet’s life.

To take the case a little further, there is no way to know when Ishaq (Alayhi Salam) or Yaqub (Alayhi Salam) became “Imaams”, since Shias mention no incident about their “appointment to Imaamah”. If it is supposed that Ishaq (Alayhi Salam) was named by Ibrahim (Alayhi Salam), and Yaqub (Alayhi Salam) was named by Ishaq (Alayhi Salam), the question would arise as to why Ibrahim was named as Imaam by Allah in such a direct manner, rather than (as the Shias believe should be the case) a will from his “predecessor”.

In any case, this would answer the paradox for three “Imaams” only. There would still be dozens of “Prophet-Imaams” about whom it is not known when they were “elevated to Imaamah”. It must be remembered that the time when the Imaam “leads the faithful of the world” is of more importance to the Shia than where he lives. For me, this turned out to be one of the more problematic issues with the Imaami Shias, since it was obvious their scholars had not paid much attention to it outside of Verse 2:124.

How do they present themselves?

It would be of utmost importance for the holy personalities sent by Allah to make extremely clear from the very outset of their mission exactly who they are and what they have been sent for. It is seen from the Quran that the Messengers of Allah go to their people and specifically inform them about their position as “Rasools” of Allah. The following examples can be provided in connection to this issue:

لَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا نُوحًا إِلَىٰ قَوْمِهِ فَقَالَ يَا قَوْمِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّـهَ مَا لَكُم مِّنْ إِلَـٰهٍ غَيْرُهُ إِنِّي أَخَافُ عَلَيْكُمْ عَذَابَ يَوْمٍ عَظِيمٍ ﴿٥٩﴾ قَالَ الْمَلَأُ مِن قَوْمِهِ إِنَّا لَنَرَاكَ فِي ضَلَالٍ مُّبِينٍ ﴿٦٠﴾ قَالَ يَا قَوْمِ لَيْسَ بِي ضَلَالَةٌ وَلَـٰكِنِّي رَسُولٌ مِّن رَّبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ ﴿٦١﴾

We sent Noah (of old) unto his people, and he said: O my people! Serve Allah. Ye have no other Allah save Him. Lo! I fear for you the retribution of an Awful Day. The chieftains of his people said: Lo! we see thee surely in plain error. He said: O my people! There is no error in me, but I am a messenger from the Lord of the Worlds. (Quran 7:59-61)

وَإِلَىٰ عَادٍ أَخَاهُمْ هُودًا ۗ قَالَ يَا قَوْمِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّـهَ مَا لَكُم مِّنْ إِلَـٰهٍ غَيْرُهُ ۚ أَفَلَا تَتَّقُونَ ﴿٦٥﴾ قَالَ الْمَلَأُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِن قَوْمِهِ إِنَّا لَنَرَاكَ فِي سَفَاهَةٍ وَإِنَّا لَنَظُنُّكَ مِنَ الْكَاذِبِينَ ﴿٦٦﴾ قَالَ يَا قَوْمِ لَيْسَ بِي سَفَاهَةٌ وَلَـٰكِنِّي رَسُولٌ مِّن رَّبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ ﴿٦٧﴾

And unto (the tribe of) A'ad (We sent) their brother, Hud. He said: O my people! Serve Allah. Ye have no other Allah save Him. Will ye not ward off (evil)? The chieftains of his people, who were disbelieving, said: Lo! we surely see thee in foolishness, and lo! we deem thee of the liars. He said: O my people! There is no foolishness in me, but I am a messenger from the Lord of the Worlds. (Quran 7:65-67)

كَذَّبَتْ ثَمُودُ الْمُرْسَلِينَ ﴿١٤١﴾ إِذْ قَالَ لَهُمْ أَخُوهُمْ صَالِحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ ﴿١٤٢﴾ إِنِّي لَكُمْ رَسُولٌ أَمِينٌ ﴿١٤٣﴾

(The tribe of) Thamud denied the messengers (of Allah) When their brother Salih said unto them: Will ye not ward off (evil)? Lo! I am a faithful messenger unto you (Quran 26:141-143)

وَإِذْ قَالَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ يَا بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ إِنِّي رَسُولُ اللَّـهِ إِلَيْكُم

And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you… (Quran 61:6)

وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا مُوسَىٰ بِآيَاتِنَا إِلَىٰ فِرْعَوْنَ وَمَلَئِهِ فَقَالَ إِنِّي رَسُولُ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ ﴿٤٦﴾

And verily We sent Moses with Our revelations unto Pharaoh and his chiefs, and he said: I am a messenger of the Lord of the Worlds. (Quran 43:46)

In the instances shown above, it can be observed that each Messenger of Allah went to his respective people and proclaimed that he was a Messenger sent from Allah to convey the true message to his people. It is essential to note that this announcement was made at the very beginning of the each Prophetic mission, so as to absolve these noble souls from any misinformation and falsehood that may have been attributed to them later.

By the same token, it would be expected for the "Imaams" (such as Ibrahim (Alayhi Salam), Musa (Alayhi Salam) and others whom the Shias say were Imaams) to come to their people and give this important declaration to them, due to the overwhelming significance Imaamah should have in the Divine Message. However, this is not the case ... there is no individual coming to his people at any time and presenting himself as an "Imaam" who will lead his nation out of darkness into light and give them divine guidance as a product of his position as "Imaam". As seen in the previous sections, even in the few cases where Prophets become "Imaams", there is no significant change in the mission of these Prophets, to the point that some Shia commentators themselves fail to see the difference in these cases.

This was an important observation I noted, since it made me realize that the concentration of Allah’s messages were given by people who explicitly proclaimed their Messengership (and not their supposed “Imaamah”) even in the face of fierce opposition from all sides. It certainly was unreasonable that these great Men of Allah had simply forgotten to say they were “Imaams” to the world if such a post was of the importance and weight the Shias have given to it.

Second General Problem: Prophets for every nation, Imaams for every time?

The theoretical foundation of Imaamah rests on the supposition that an Imaam is sent for every time. This is why according to the Shias Imaamah continues to this day, since it is a continuous institution that can never be broken.

However, it is interesting to note that the Quran does not say anything at all about there being a correspondence between time and a Divine Imaam, or even between time and a Messenger. Yet, we do find the following Verses in the Quran:

وَلِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَّسُولٌ ۖ فَإِذَا جَاءَ رَسُولُهُمْ قُضِيَ بَيْنَهُم بِالْقِسْطِ وَهُمْ لَا يُظْلَمُونَ ﴿٤٧﴾

To every people (was sent) a messenger: when their messenger comes (before them), the matter will be judged between them with justice, and they will not be wronged. (Quran 10:47)

وَلَقَدْ بَعَثْنَا فِي كُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَّسُولًا أَنِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّـهَ وَاجْتَنِبُوا الطَّاغُوتَ ۖ فَمِنْهُم مَّنْ هَدَى اللَّـهُ وَمِنْهُم مَّنْ حَقَّتْ عَلَيْهِ الضَّلَالَةُ ۚ فَسِيرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ فَانظُرُوا كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الْمُكَذِّبِينَ ﴿٣٦﴾

For We assuredly sent amongst every People a messenger, (with the Command), "Serve Allah, and eschew Evil": of the People were some whom Allah guided, and some on whom error became inevitably (established). So travel through the earth, and see what was the end of those who denied (the Truth). (Quran 16:36)

Thus, the relationship in the Quran is set between a people and a Messenger, not only in these places, but in other parts of the Quran as well. The question that comes up is: If the concept of Imaamah in reality is more important than Prophethood or at least should be on an equal footing for a person to have true belief, then why do we not see this important relationship between period and Imaamah mentioned even once in the Quran?

Thus again, I was puzzled between the manner Shiaism treats Imaamah and the way Allah treats it in the Quran.

Not until Allah sends a Prophet?

Under the same general trend, Allah has revealed Quranic Verses such as:

وَمَا كَانَ رَبُّكَ مُهْلِكَ الْقُرَىٰ حَتَّىٰ يَبْعَثَ فِي أُمِّهَا رَسُولًا يَتْلُو عَلَيْهِمْ آيَاتِنَا ۚ وَمَا كُنَّا مُهْلِكِي الْقُرَىٰ إِلَّا وَأَهْلُهَا ظَالِمُونَ ﴿٥٩﴾

Nor was thy Lord the one to destroy a population until He had sent to its centre a messenger, rehearsing to them Our Signs; nor are We going to destroy a population except when its members practise iniquity. (Quran 28:59)

AND

وَأَخْذِهِمُ الرِّبَا وَقَدْ نُهُوا عَنْهُ وَأَكْلِهِمْ أَمْوَالَ النَّاسِ بِالْبَاطِلِ ۚ وَأَعْتَدْنَا لِلْكَافِرِينَ مِنْهُمْ عَذَابًا أَلِيمًا ﴿١٦١﴾

Messengers of good cheer and of warning, in order that mankind might have no argument against Allah after the messengers. Allah was ever Mighty, Wise. (Quran 4:165)

In the first Verse presented, it is stated that Allah would not destroy a people or nation until a Messenger had been sent by Allah “rehearsing to them Our Signs”. From this the following can be concluded:

1. The criteria for the punishment of a people is based upon their attitude towards their Messengers/Prophets. It is noteworthy that the “sending of Imaams” is not mentioned at all, even though this is the case to be expected, given the Shia idea with respect to the centrality of Imaams with respect to the guidance of people.
2. As mentioned before, the implication in this and other similar Verses (such as Ayah 17:15) is that a people are relatively innocent of the faults they are committing until the time a Messenger comes to them.107 If there had been an Imaam among the nation, already offering guidance towards the path of Allah but being rejected by its inhabitants, then the sending of Messengers before destroying the people would have been redundant, since the Hujjah (proof of Allah) would have been present among them. If the Shia reasoning were to be applied further, it would be doubly irrelevant for Allah to send a Messenger at all, since the Imaam’s duty is greater than that of a Messenger.

Moving on to the second Verse it is seen that the Quran reiterates this line of reasoning in stronger terms. It is stated that the people will not have an argument regarding their misguidance once the messenger has been sent. Again, there is no mention of an angel or an “Imaam” or any other being in this respect.

While the Shias maintain that the “Imaam” is always present among the inhabitants of the earth and it is the responsibility of the people to find out who he is and follow him accordingly, the Qurans states otherwise, saying that the evidence is against the nation once the messenger is sent to them. It is amazing to note that the messenger is the prime source of guidance everywhere in the Quran… he does not “call people to the Imaam” or remind them of the “negligence they were showing the Imaam”, or any other similar statements.

List of Imaams?

The Shia are very fond of showing the Sunni side how the “12 Imaams” are the true leaders of the Islamic community, and how no one else is worthy of being an “Imaam”. However, delving a bit deeper into the Imaami Shia doctrine, it is seen that the Shia scholars are quite confused about the identity of the “Imaams” before the advent of Muhammad(ﷺ).Most Shias do not think about this at all, since the entire effort of the faith is to follow the “12 Imaams” after the Prophet(ﷺ).Yet, if the proper consideration is put on the idea that there should be an Imaam for each epoch as far as the Shia are concerned, it would be of paramount importance for there to be a total list of all the Imaams from the time of Adam (Alayhi Salam) up to now.

The truth is that there is no agreement among the Shia scholars as to the specific figures who occupied the position of “Imaamah” prior to the coming of the Prophet(ﷺ).Yes, it is supposed that certain Prophets like Musa (Alayhi Salam), Nuh (Alayhi Salam), Isa (Alayhi Salam), etc. were also “Imaams”, but this is at most a partial answer to the problem (and as will be seen, this is also a faulty supposition).

The case of Ibrahim (Alayhi Salam) and the Imaam before him

As a direct consequence of the problem discussed above, the time frame of Ibrahim’s (Alayhi Salam) Imaamah should be considered, as well as whether it can blend into the overall Imaamah concept as perceived by Shias.

Now, if Ibrahim (Alayhi Salam) was not an Imaam for many years of his Prophethood, then this would mean that there was another person higher in status than himself who was occupying the post of Imaam during this period of time. If the Shia position is taken as correct, Ibrahim (Alayhi Salam) should have been the “follower" of this Imaam during his “lower” positions of Prophet and Messenger. It is strange that Allah does not inform the Muslims of the identity of this person. In fact, Ibrahim (Alayhi Salam) is always presented as the person calling others to follow his example, or he is presented as having followers (independent of any "higher" human authority), even before his supposed appointment as “Imaam”. For example, in the case of Ibrahim and his father Azar, the Quran says:

يَا أَبَتِ إِنِّي قَدْ جَاءَنِي مِنَ الْعِلْمِ مَا لَمْ يَأْتِكَ فَاتَّبِعْنِي أَهْدِكَ صِرَاطًا سَوِيًّا ﴿٤٣﴾

O my father! Lo! there hath come unto me of knowledge that which came not unto thee. So follow me, and I will lead thee on a right path. (Quran 19:43)

Also, Ibrahim's followers are presented in the Quran:

قَدْ كَانَتْ لَكُمْ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ فِي إِبْرَ‌اهِيمَ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ إِذْ قَالُوا لِقَوْمِهِمْ إِنَّا بُرَ‌آءُ مِنكُمْ .......... ﴿٤﴾

There is a goodly pattern for you in Abraham and those with him, when they told their folk: Lo! we are guiltless of you and all that ye worship beside Allah.......... (Quran 60:4)

It is easy to see that Ibrahim (Alayhi Salam) was always calling people towards following him directly while he was “only a Prophet”. He never hinted towards the need to follow someone “above him” or an “Imaam” anywhere in the Quran. Also, the Shias themselves have not attempted to name who the “Divinely Appointed Imaam” was during Ibrahim’s (Alayhi Salam) Prophethood but before his Imaamah. All these things point to the inevitable conclusion that there was no Imaam during this time, and that the Imaamah doctrine is faulty in its very basis.

Yaqub (Alayhi Salam) near his death and Imaamah

The story of Yaqub (Alayhi Salam) and his plea to his children when his death was near also raises questions about Imaamah. The Quran states:

أَمْ كُنتُمْ شُهَدَاءَ إِذْ حَضَرَ‌ يَعْقُوبَ الْمَوْتُ إِذْ قَالَ لِبَنِيهِ مَا تَعْبُدُونَ مِن بَعْدِي قَالُوا نَعْبُدُ إِلَـٰهَكَ وَإِلَـٰهَ آبَائِكَ إِبْرَ‌اهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَاقَ إِلَـٰهًا وَاحِدًا وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ ﴿١٣٣﴾

Or were ye present when death came to Jacob, when he said unto his sons: What will ye worship after me? They said: We shall worship thy god, the god of thy fathers, Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac, One Allah, and unto Him we have surrendered. (Quran 2:133)

It is clear that Yaqub (Alayhi Salam) is putting a huge amount of emphasis on the Oneness of Allah, and that his children were meant to die only as Muslims. This is expected from a Prophet of Allah, since it constituted the basis of true faith.

But Yaqoob (Alayhi Salam) is not mentioning anything about following the proper “Infallible and Divine Imaam” after his death, or who this “Imaam” was. In Shia ideology, one of the actions every Prophet was very concerned about close to his death was for his disciples to follow the “true Imaam”, since supposedly Imaamah is a pillar of faith. The contrast between the statement of the Quran and Shia ideology was again very clear for me.

Prophet Samuel, Talut, and kings appointed by Allah

Another example of the dilemma seen among the ranks of the Shias in terms of defending the concept of continuous Imaamah is with relation with the Quranic story of Prophet Samuel, Talut, and the victory of the Israelites under Dawud (Alayhi Salam). Allah starts the narration by saying:

أَلَمْ تَرَ‌ إِلَى الْمَلَإِ مِن بَنِي إِسْرَ‌ائِيلَ مِن بَعْدِ مُوسَىٰ إِذْ قَالُوا لِنَبِيٍّ لَّهُمُ ابْعَثْ لَنَا مَلِكًا نُّقَاتِلْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّـهِ ۖ .......... ﴿٢٤٦﴾

Bethink thee of the leaders of the Children of Israel after Moses, how they said unto a prophet whom they had: Set up for us a king and we will fight in Allah's way.......... (Quran 2:246)

The following commentary provided by Ibn Kathir with respect to Ayah 2:246 is noteworthy. The interpretation is of notice, since it shows that the Israelites did indeed have no Prophets for a certain period of time:

The Children of Israel remained on the straight path for a period of time after Moses. They then innovated in the religion and some of them even worshipped the idols. Yet, there were always Prophets sent among them who would command them to work righteous deeds, refrain from doing evil and who would rule them according to the commands of the Torah. When they (Israelites) committed the evil that they committed, Allah caused their enemies to overwhelm them, and many fatalities fell among them as a consequence. Their enemies also captured a great number of them, and took over large areas of their land. Earlier, anyone who would fight the Israelites would lose, because they had the Torah and the Tabut, which they inherited generation after generation ever since the time of Moses, who spoke to Allah directly. Yet, the Israelites kept indulging in misguidance until some king took the Tabut from them during a battle. That king also took possession of the Torah, and only a few of the Israelites who memorized it remained. The prophethood halted among their various tribes and only a pregnant woman remained of the offspring of Lavi (Levi), in whom the prophethood still appeared. Her husband had been killed, so the Israelites kept her in a house so that Allah may give her a boy, who would be their Prophet. The woman also kept invoking Allah to grant her a boy. Allah heard her pleas and gave her a boy whom she called `Shamwil' meaning `Allah has heard my pleas.' Some people said that the boy's name was Sham`un (Simeon), which also has a similar meaning. ¹⁰⁸

The Shia commentary by Ayatullah Mahdi Puya also says a similar thing, although in a more precise form:

After Musa several prophets were sent to maintain his law (Tawrat), but as time passed, people started neglecting the law and took to idolatry. Ultimately a time came when the Jews had no prophet to guide them. In those days their enemies from the tribe of Jalut had captured all the land on the Mediterranean including Egypt and Palestine. They killed 440 princes and noblemen of Bani Israil and enslaved them. The Bani Israil prayed to Allah for a prophet. Allah appointed Samuel as their prophet. ¹⁰⁹

Going back to the commentary provided by Ayatullah Makarem Shirazi with respect to Verse 32:24, this type of occurrence was in agreement with a general pattern:

When the conditions changed, and people broke up into sects, and fell at variances and wrangling, they lost all their dignities, and suffered national annihilation. ¹¹⁰

However, the most interesting opinion comes from Tafseer Al-Qummi, where it is stipulated that Prophethood was in one tribe of the Israelites, while the Kingdom and the Authority were in another house, and the two posts were never from the same tribe. This is the reason why the existing leaders of the Children of Israel told the Prophet: ابْعَثْ لَنَا مَلِكًا (Set up for us a king). ¹¹¹ The importance of this particular comment is that in such a case, spiritual leadership and political leadership were not in the same person during the period of the Israelites before the coming of Talut. This would further put the Imaamah theory under strain, and would make the question of who was the leader among the Children of Israel a moot subject (because such a leader, Prophet or otherwise, could never be the “Imaam” as understood in Shiaism since he did not possess all leaderships at the same time).

Thus, considering the interpretations of this Verse, it is obvious that even Shia scholars contradict the ideology that there is an Imaam for every time.

The dilemma of Shias concerning Isa (Alayhi Salam) and the Imaamah up to Muhammad (ﷺ)

Another important case to ponder upon relates to the time between Isa (Alayhi Salam) and Muhammad (ﷺ). Even though the Shia belief would lead to the belief that there must have been an Imaam who was known to all (or at least to the present-day Shias) the reality is that when Allah raised Isa (Alayhi Salam) unto himself, the earth was devoid of a Hujjah. This view was explicitly stated by the Shiite scholar Al-Sadooq in his book Kamal Al-Din :

“The Messiah –as- has several ghaybas were he walked on earth and his people and shia did not know were he was, and then he appeared and made Simon ben Hamon his successor, and when Simon died the hujjas disappeared after him and the search was strong and the calamity was great such that the religion was fading and the rights were lost, and the obligations and sunnahs disappeared and people went right and left not distinguishing them from each other and the ghaybah lasted 250 years.”¹¹²

Additonaly, some of the answers from the Shia side points to the fact that even though the Shias believe that there was a Hujjah during this time, they do not have a clear idea as to who he was, and sometimes give responses that cannot be true when scrutinized. For example, the following response given by Allamah Sayed Muhammad Rizivi ¹¹³ about who was the Divine Imaam between Jesus (Alayhi Salam) and Muhammad (ﷺ) is worthy of notice:

Unfortunately, I do not recall any names in our sources among the disciples of Jesus as the guides after him. But I believe there must have been some who were true and uncorrupted in their belief in the nubuwwat of 'Isa, and who continued to guide others and also foretold the coming of Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ). For example, Salman al-Farsi, in his journey from Zoroastrianism to Christianity to Islam, was guided by a Christian holy man who gave him some specific signs to look for in the person of the last Messenger of God who he believed was to emerge during their time. And that is how Salman found his way to Islam and Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ).¹¹⁴

Advent of Prophet Muhammad(ﷺ).From the general rule of the Imaami Shia, Allamah Rizivi tries to answer the dilemma by stating that “there must have been some who were true and uncorrupted in their belief in the nubuwwat of 'Isa, and who continued to guide others and also foretold the coming of Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ)”. Then he proceeds to give the example of Salman al-Farsi and the Christian monk.

The problem with this hypothesis is that people who are “true and uncorrupted in their beliefs” are not necessarily Infallible. This is known from the discussion about “unjust persons” in the previous chapter, in addition to the fact that even the “holy men” in Shiaism today (such as the Ayatullahs and Allamahs) are not seen as “Infallible and divinely appointed” by the Shia faithful.

You are the Witness over them…

The following Ayah is also very relevant when discussing Isa (Alayhi Salam) and his “Infallible successor”:

.......... وَكُنتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَّا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ ۖ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنتَ أَنتَ الرَّ‌قِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ ۚ وَأَنتَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدٌ ﴿١١٧﴾

..........I was a witness of them while I dwelt among them, and when Thou tookest me Thou wast the Watcher over them. Thou art Witness over all things. (Quran 5:117)

In the first part of this Ayah, Isa (Alayhi Salam) says that he was aware of the deeds of the people while he was amongst them, while after his ascension, Allah was the only One who knew what the nation was doing.

It is known that Allah is always the watcher and witness over the people’s deeds. However, Isa (Alayhi Salam) mentions himself as the witness amongst the Israelites because he was the Prophet sent to them. It is puzzling as to why Isa (Alayhi Salam) does not mention any “Infallible Imaam” as the person who kept watch over the Children of Israel after his departure. According to the Shia faith, Isa (Alayhi Salam) did in fact appoint someone to succeed him before he left, yet there is no trace of him neither in this Ayah nor in the other Verses (such as 2:252, 19:37, etc.) that mention the problems that arose after Isa’s (Alayhi Salam) ascension. All this throws into doubt the theory that Isa (Alayhi Salam) appointed an “Infallible Imaam” to succeed him, and the best that can be supposed is that any successor after Isa (Alayhi Salam) was fallible and not a "Divinely Appointed Imaam".

Third General Problem: Proof for all of humanity?

In addition to the above, I noticed contradictory and inconsistent remarks from part of the Shia about the universal nature of the Imaam’s duty. It starts from considering the following Verse:

وَمَا أَرْ‌سَلْنَا مِن رَّ‌سُولٍ إِلَّا بِلِسَانِ قَوْمِهِ لِيُبَيِّنَ لَهُمْ ۖ فَيُضِلُّ اللَّـهُ مَن يَشَاءُ وَيَهْدِي مَن يَشَاءُ ۚ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ ﴿٤﴾

And We never sent a messenger save with the language of his folk, that he might make (the message) clear for them. Then Allah sendeth whom He will astray, and guideth whom He will. He is the Mighty, the Wise. (Quran 14:4)

The mention of sending Messengers in the language of a people may seem as an obvious issue, yet there are important lessons to be learned from this Verse:

1. Allah says that he has never sent a Messenger except in the language of his people. By deduction, it is understood that every Prophet and Messenger prior to the advent of Muhammad (ﷺ) was sent as a local warner, rather than to the world at large. Consequently, if the Prophet or Messenger were to “appoint” an Imaam to take over the responsibilities of protecting the religion after his death, his scope would also be limited to the local sphere. This is important to note, since if the “Imaam’s” responsibility is global as the Shia see it, restricting his scope to a local mission does not correspond to his task.
   
   
2. There is an issue that may be raised up about there being multiple Imaams at one time. However, in the beginning of this work it was noted that the individual who has been granted the Imaamah excels every other person in every virtue. It is clear that these guidelines would necessarily restrict the Imaamah to exactly one person for each time frame, even if there are a multitude of Infallible persons.
   
   
3. If it is assumed that indeed there can be multiple Infallible Guides at the same time for a variety of places, then this would force us to say that Allah should have appointed, prior to the advent of Muhammad (ﷺ), one Imaam or Guide for every single town or village on Earth. This is in view of the following reasons:
   
   
   • Allah has clearly said that there has been no nation, save a Prophet has passed through it (at some point in its history).
     
     
   • If the Shia idea of necessity for divine preservation of the religion and the obligation of a Messenger to appoint a successor is considered, this would mean that every single Messenger left an Imaam to protect the religion. It would be highly unfair to say that only the Israelites had continuous divine protection of their religion (through a continuous line of Imaams), while the rest of the world was left on its own. Whether the society knew of this Imaam is irrelevant for this case since the area of discussion should first focus on the existence of the Imaam.

However, this incongruence is not even mentioned or thought of when formulating the theory of Imaamah by the Imaami Shias. Yes, there may be an effort to show that certain nations had “Imaams” among them, or that “large areas” had an “Infallible Imaam”, but from the standpoint of how Imaamah is designed to work universally, this raises more questions than it answers.

Objections to this view

There have been some who oppose the idea that the Messenger sent for a people was to accomplish his duties only among the people he was sent to. For example, the interpretation by Ayatullah Mahdi Puya regarding this Verse says: To every people was sent a messenger of Allah who conveyed the divine message to them in their language, but it did not restrict his mission to that particular people. Through them it reached all mankind. The most distressed area was selected to start the campaign of "guidance unto order through knowledge of divine laws'' to put an end to disorder and ignorance prevailing in the society, which also served other such areas. As a matter of course the language of the people who were originally addressed had to be used.¹¹⁵

one example, that of Isa (Alayhi Salam), mentioning that he was sent to the Israelites specifically, “but today he is accepted as a universal teacher”.

However, using the example of Isa (Alayhi Salam) as a universal teacher is incorrect, because his “universal teaching” came about solely due to the corruption his original message suffered at the hands of treacherous personalities. As many of us Muslims know, the rapid spread of Christianity to all corners of the world happened at the expense of the pure teachings of Isa (Alayhi Salam), as many of the Jewishbased practices were cast aside and pagan rituals were introduced in order to gain converts from among the Greeks, Romans, and other non-Jewish races. Even today, the Churches sacrifice their main rituals, replacing them with more “society-friendly” practices simply in order to attract the local population to the Church.

In addition to this, the more established Shia commentaries do not mention this idea, but rather reinforce the notion that the previous Messengers were sent to the specific people only. As a case in point, the Al- Safi tafseer quotes a narration wherein Allah tells Muhammad (ﷺ) that every Prophet was sent to his people in their language but he (i.e. Muhammad) has been sent “to every red and black-skinned person of My Creation”.¹¹⁶

Indeed, this idea is continuosly reinforced in the Holy Quran, as the Prophets of previous nations are often shown interwined with the people they were sent to, and vicecersa. For example, the Quran says:

أَلَمْ يَأْتِهِمْ نَبَأُ الَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ قَوْمِ نُوحٍ وَعَادٍ وَثَمُودَ وَقَوْمِ إِبْرَ‌اهِيمَ وَأَصْحَابِ مَدْيَنَ وَالْمُؤْتَفِكَاتِ ۚ أَتَتْهُمْ رُ‌سُلُهُم بِالْبَيِّنَاتِ ۖ فَمَا كَانَ اللَّـهُ لِيَظْلِمَهُمْ وَلَـٰكِن كَانُوا أَنفُسَهُمْ يَظْلِمُونَ ﴿٧٠﴾

Hath not the fame of those before them reached them - the folk of Noah, A'ad, Thamud, the folk of Abraham, the dwellers of Midian and the disasters (which befell them)? Their messengers (from Allah) came unto them with proofs (of Allah's Sovereignty). So Allah surely wronged them not, but they did wrong themselves. (Quran 9:70)

.......... أَلَا بُعْدًا لِّعَادٍ قَوْمِ هُودٍ ﴿٦٠﴾

.......... A far removal for A'ad, the folk of Hud! (Quran 11:60)

وَيَا قَوْمِ لَا يَجْرِ‌مَنَّكُمْ شِقَاقِي أَن يُصِيبَكُم مِّثْلُ مَا أَصَابَ قَوْمَ نُوحٍ أَوْ قَوْمَ هُودٍ أَوْ قَوْمَ صَالِحٍ ۚ وَمَا قَوْمُ لُوطٍ مِّنكُم بِبَعِيدٍ ﴿٨٩﴾

And, O my people! Let not the schism with me cause you to sin so that there befall you that which befell the folk of Noah and the folk of Hud, and the folk of Salih; and the folk of Lot are not far off from you. (Quran 11:89)

In the cases presented above and in other instances in the Holy Quran, it is obvious that there was a specific Prophet sent to a given people, whose job was to convey the message to that nation specifically. That is why it can be easily deduced that Thamud were the people to whom Salih (Alayhi Salam) was sent to, Hud (Alayhi Salam) to the people of ‘Ad, Shuaib (Alayhi Salam) to the Midyan people, Lut (Alayhi Salam) and Ibrahim (Alayhi Salam) to their respective nations, while the Children of Israel benefited from a series of Prophets and Messengers including Musa (Alayhi Salam), Dawud (Alayhi Salam), Sulayman (Alayhi Salam), and Isa (Alayhi Salam). In all these cases prior to the coming of Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ), there is no mention of these Prophets and Messengers traveling around the whole world or telling their followers to spread the message to every single corner of the globe. The truth is that their mission was limited and even if it reached large stretches of land, it still did not have the dimension of universality attached to the final message of Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ).

Finally, the following comment by Allamah Sayyed Muhammad Rizivi can be quoted in this respect:

… not all the prophets were sent for the entire mankind. The nubuwwat of Prophet 'Isa (a.s.) was not universal; he was not sent for all the people; he was sent only as a nabi for the Israelites. This is also confirmed by the statements of Jesus quoted in the present-day New Testament where he says, "I have not been sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Therefore, we see that while the children of Israel followed their prophets from the line of Ishãq bin Ibrahim, Ismail bin Ibrahim was sent as a prophet to the Arab people.¹¹⁷

Thus, the proper meaning of this Ayah is that all Prophets have been sent to their specific peoples in their own language. The assumption from part of the Shias that an Imaam has a universal responsibility is deeply weakened by the fact that all of the Prophets before Muhammad (ﷺ) had a mission for their own people only.

From these few examples, the objective reader can see that the foundation of the Imaamah belief is not based on Quranic Verses, for there exist Ayahs that essentially contradict the philosophy behind Imaamah and the pillars upon which it rests.

Fourth General Problem: The most knowledgeable?

One of the criterias of Imaamah according to the Shia faith is that the Imaam is the person endowed with the highest degree of knowledge and wisdom among all the inhabitants of the earth. Thus, no one can excel him in any branch of knowledge regardless of the amount of time he may have studied, nor can pass a judgement better than his in any case whatsoever.

In spite of this assertion, there are certain passages in the Quran where the question arises as to whether the supposed “Infallible Imaam” was in reality fulfilling the condition of being the most knowledgeable person of his time. The four cases shown below assume that Prophets Musa (Alayhi Salam), Dawud (Alayhi Salam), and Zakariya (Alayhi Salam) were the “Imaams” when the situation took place. Obviously, even this is not known for sure (given the consfusion of the Shias in this respect that was discussed before). Nonetheless, since this is the assumption Shias work with, it is proper to look at it from their viewpoint.

The case of Musa (Alayhi Salam) and Khidr

One of the Quranic stories against the Shia concept of Imaamah is with respect to the journey of Musa (Alayhi Salam) and his experience with Khidr. The episode is narrated in the Holy Quran as follows in Surah Al-Kahf (Chapter 18):

فَوَجَدَا عَبْدًا مِّنْ عِبَادِنَا آتَيْنَاهُ رَ‌حْمَةً مِّنْ عِندِنَا وَعَلَّمْنَاهُ مِن لَّدُنَّا عِلْمًا ﴿٦٥﴾ قَالَ لَهُ مُوسَىٰ هَلْ أَتَّبِعُكَ عَلَىٰ أَن تُعَلِّمَنِ مِمَّا عُلِّمْتَ رُ‌شْدًا ﴿٦٦﴾ قَالَ إِنَّكَ لَن تَسْتَطِيعَ مَعِيَ صَبْرً‌ا ﴿٦٧﴾ وَكَيْفَ تَصْبِرُ‌ عَلَىٰ مَا لَمْ تُحِطْ بِهِ خُبْرً‌ا ﴿٦٨﴾ قَالَ سَتَجِدُنِي إِن شَاءَ اللَّـهُ صَابِرً‌ا وَلَا أَعْصِي لَكَ أَمْرً‌ا ﴿٦٩﴾ قَالَ فَإِنِ اتَّبَعْتَنِي فَلَا تَسْأَلْنِي عَن شَيْءٍ حَتَّىٰ أُحْدِثَ لَكَ مِنْهُ ذِكْرً‌ا ﴿٧٠﴾ فَانطَلَقَا حَتَّىٰ إِذَا رَ‌كِبَا فِي السَّفِينَةِ خَرَ‌قَهَا ۖ قَالَ أَخَرَ‌قْتَهَا لِتُغْرِ‌قَ أَهْلَهَا لَقَدْ جِئْتَ شَيْئًا إِمْرً‌ا ﴿٧١﴾ قَالَ أَلَمْ أَقُلْ إِنَّكَ لَن تَسْتَطِيعَ مَعِيَ صَبْرً‌ا ﴿٧٢﴾

Then found they one of Our slaves, unto whom We had given mercy from Us, and had taught him knowledge from Our presence. Moses said unto him: May I follow thee, to the end that thou mayst teach me right conduct of that which thou hast been taught? He said: Lo! thou canst not bear with me. How canst thou bear with that whereof thou canst not compass any knowledge? He said: Allah willing, thou shalt find me patient and I shall not in aught gainsay thee. He said: Well, if thou go with me, ask me not concerning aught till I myself make mention of it unto thee. So they twain set out till, when they were in the ship, he made a hole therein. (Moses) said: Hast thou made a hole therein to drown the folk thereof? Thou verily hast done a dreadful thing. He said: Did I not tell thee that thou couldst not bear with me? (Moses) said: Be not wroth with me that I forgot, and be not hard upon me for my fault. So they twain journeyed on till, when they met a lad, he slew him. (Moses) said: What! Hast thou slain an innocent soul who hath slain no man? Verily thou hast done a horrid thing. He said: Did I not tell thee that thou couldst not bear with me? (Moses) said: If I ask thee after this concerning aught, keep not company with me. Thou hast received an excuse from me. So they twain journeyed on till, when they came unto the folk of a certain township, they asked its folk for food, but they refused to make them guests. And they found therein a wall upon the point of falling into ruin, and he repaired it. (Moses) said: If thou hadst wished, thou couldst have taken payment for it. He said: This is the parting between thee and me! I will announce unto thee the interpretation of that thou couldst not bear with patience. As for the ship, it belonged to poor people working on the river, and I wished to mar it, for there was a king behind them who is taking every ship by force. And as for the lad, his parents were believers and we feared lest he should oppress them by rebellion and disbelief. And we intended that their Lord should change him for them for one better in purity and nearer to mercy. And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure belonging to them, and their father had been righteous, and thy Lord intended that they should come to their full strength and should bring forth their treasure as a mercy from their Lord; and I did it not upon my own command. Such is the interpretation of that wherewith thou couldst not bear. (Quran 18:65-82)

Any person who reads these Verses can easily discern the following points:

1. Musa (Alayhi Salam) was fully aware that Khidr was more knowledgeable than himself and that Khidr occupied a position higher than his own as far as this trip was concerned, as is obvious from Musa’s (Alayhi Salam) statements such as:
   • “May I follow thee, to the end that thou mayst teach me right conduct of that which thou hast been taught?”
   • “Allah willing, thou shalt find me patient and I shall not in aught gainsay thee.”
   • (Moses) said: Be not wroth with me that I forgot, and be not hard upon me for my fault.
   • (Moses) said: If I ask thee after this concerning aught, keep not company with me. Thou hast received an excuse from me.
2. By the same token, Khidr knew that his position in terms of knowledge was higher than Musa’s (Alayhi Salam). The following statements from the part of Khidr are a testimony to this fact:
   • He said: Lo! thou canst not bear with me. How canst thou bear with that whereof thou canst not compass any knowledge?
   • He said: Did I not tell thee that thou couldst not bear with me? (twice Khidr says this, with slight difference in the original Arabic)

The Sunni commentaries clearly relate this difference in levels of knowledge. For example, part of Ibn Kathir’s Tafseer in this respect says:

Musa got up to deliver a speech before the Children of Israel and he was asked, "Who is the most learned person among the people'' Musa replied, "I am.'' Allah rebuked him because he did not refer the knowledge to Allah. So Allah revealed to him: "At the junction of the two seas there is a servant of Ours who is more learned than you.''…¹¹⁸

Even from the Shia interpretation given for this series of Ayahs by Ayatullah Mahdi Puya states:

In these verses the Quran describes the meeting which took place between Musa and a chosen servant of Allah, whose name, as per Islamic traditions, was Khizr. Allah told Musa that if he wanted to see a more knowledgeable person then he should go to meet him at the place where the two seas come together…

Musa was the most learned man of his times, but even his wisdom did not comprehend everything. Therefore he was commanded by Allah to go in search of Khizr who would impart to him such knowledge as even he did not possess…

…Verses 66 to 77 describe the actions of Khizr, during their onward journey, which baffled Musa and forced him to question Khizr inspite of the warning Khizr gave to him in the beginning that he would not be able to bear patiently with the events he could not comprehend. In verses 79 to 82 Khizr explains to Musa the interpretation of his actions which he could not bear with patience…¹¹⁹

In synthesis, this story goes against the Shia concept of Imaamah in its entirety. Thus, it can be said with certainty: Musa (Alayhi Salam) did not fulfill the conditions of Imaamah as laid by Imaami Shiaism on account of not being the most knowledgeable person on Earth. Musa (Alayhi Salam) can be considered as a leader in a general sense, but in the specifics of “Infallible Imaamah” there is no manner that he can be included in this category, based on the conclusions reached from the above story.

Musa (Alayhi Salam), Harun (Alayhi Salam) and the deviation of the Israelites

Another story that shakes the foundation of Imaamah is the incident involving the deviation of the Children of Israel while Musa (Alayhi Salam) had gone to the Mount at the command of Allah. The Quran says in this respect:

وَمَا أَعْجَلَكَ عَن قَوْمِكَ يَا مُوسَىٰ ﴿٨٣﴾ قَالَ هُمْ أُولَاءِ عَلَىٰ أَثَرِ‌ي وَعَجِلْتُ إِلَيْكَ رَ‌بِّ لِتَرْ‌ضَىٰ ﴿٨٤﴾ قَالَ فَإِنَّا قَدْ فَتَنَّا قَوْمَكَ مِن بَعْدِكَ وَأَضَلَّهُمُ السَّامِرِ‌يُّ ﴿٨٥﴾ فَرَ‌جَعَ مُوسَىٰ إِلَىٰ قَوْمِهِ غَضْبَانَ أَسِفًا ۚ قَالَ يَا قَوْمِ أَلَمْ يَعِدْكُمْ رَ‌بُّكُمْ وَعْدًا حَسَنًا ۚ أَفَطَالَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْعَهْدُ أَمْ أَرَ‌دتُّمْ أَن يَحِلَّ عَلَيْكُمْ غَضَبٌ مِّن رَّ‌بِّكُمْ فَأَخْلَفْتُم مَّوْعِدِي ﴿٨٦﴾ قَالُوا مَا أَخْلَفْنَا مَوْعِدَكَ بِمَلْكِنَا وَلَـٰكِنَّا حُمِّلْنَا أَوْزَارً‌ا مِّن زِينَةِ الْقَوْمِ فَقَذَفْنَاهَا فَكَذَٰلِكَ أَلْقَى السَّامِرِ‌يُّ ﴿٨٧﴾ فَأَخْرَ‌جَ لَهُمْ عِجْلًا جَسَدًا لَّهُ خُوَارٌ‌ فَقَالُوا هَـٰذَا إِلَـٰهُكُمْ وَإِلَـٰهُ مُوسَىٰ فَنَسِيَ ﴿٨٨﴾ أَفَلَا يَرَ‌وْنَ أَلَّا يَرْ‌جِعُ إِلَيْهِمْ قَوْلًا وَلَا يَمْلِكُ لَهُمْ ضَرًّ‌ا وَلَا نَفْعًا ﴿٨٩﴾ وَلَقَدْ قَالَ لَهُمْ هَارُ‌ونُ مِن قَبْلُ يَا قَوْمِ إِنَّمَا فُتِنتُم بِهِ ۖ وَإِنَّ رَ‌بَّكُمُ الرَّ‌حْمَـٰنُ فَاتَّبِعُونِي وَأَطِيعُوا أَمْرِ‌ي ﴿٩٠﴾ قَالُوا لَن نَّبْرَ‌حَ عَلَيْهِ عَاكِفِينَ حَتَّىٰ يَرْ‌جِعَ إِلَيْنَا مُوسَىٰ ﴿٩١﴾ قَالَ يَا هَارُ‌ونُ مَا مَنَعَكَ إِذْ رَ‌أَيْتَهُمْ ضَلُّوا ﴿٩٢﴾ أَلَّا تَتَّبِعَنِ ۖ أَفَعَصَيْتَ أَمْرِ‌ي ﴿٩٣﴾ قَالَ يَا ابْنَ أُمَّ لَا تَأْخُذْ بِلِحْيَتِي وَلَا بِرَ‌أْسِي ۖ إِنِّي خَشِيتُ أَن تَقُولَ فَرَّ‌قْتَ بَيْنَ بَنِي إِسْرَ‌ائِيلَ وَلَمْ تَرْ‌قُبْ قَوْلِي ﴿٩٤﴾

.............. He (Moses) said: O Aaron! What held thee back when thou didst see them gone astray, That thou followedst me not? Hast thou then disobeyed my order? He said: O son of my mother! Clutch not my beard nor my head! I feared lest thou shouldst say: Thou hast caused division among the Children of Israel, and hast not waited for my word. (Quran 20:83-94)

After his return, Musa (Alayhi Salam) was upset and angry at the Isrelites deviation. Musa (Alayhi Salam) wondered whether Harun (Alayhi Salam) was being disobedient to Musa and let the Israelites in their error. Only after Harun’s (Alayhi Salam) answer is it seen that Musa understood that this had not been the case, and started to look into the matter in a different light. If Musa (Alayhi Salam) was the “Infallible Imaam”, it is strange that he would not know that Harun (Alayhi Salam) had really tried to prevent the people from doing the sins they committed during Musa’s absence. In this case, not only was Harun’s (Alayhi Salam) knowledge of the true situation greater than Musa’s (Alayhi Salam), but even the Israelites who had commited the acts of idolatry knew what had actually happened in this respect.

Thus, it is obvious again that Musa (Alayhi Salam) could not have possibly been the “Imaam” during this time. It should be noted that I am not criticizing Musa (Alayhi Salam) in any manner, but it is appropriate to see how some of the incidents in the lives of people presumed to be “Imaams” by the Shias do not match with the theories of Imaamah in Shiaism.

The case of Dawud, Sulayman and the sheep

Another case where the supposed “Infallible Imaam” is clearly not the wisest is directly derived from the following Verse in the Quran:

وَدَاوُودَ وَسُلَيْمَانَ إِذْ يَحْكُمَانِ فِي الْحَرْ‌ثِ إِذْ نَفَشَتْ فِيهِ غَنَمُ الْقَوْمِ وَكُنَّا لِحُكْمِهِمْ شَاهِدِينَ ﴿٧٨﴾ فَفَهَّمْنَاهَا سُلَيْمَانَ ۚ وَكُلًّا آتَيْنَا حُكْمًا وَعِلْمًا ۚ وَسَخَّرْ‌نَا مَعَ دَاوُودَ الْجِبَالَ يُسَبِّحْنَ وَالطَّيْرَ‌ ۚ وَكُنَّا فَاعِلِينَ ﴿٧٩﴾

And remember David and Solomon, when they gave judgment in the matter of the field into which the sheep of certain people had strayed by night: We did witness their judgment. To Solomon We inspired the (right) understanding of the matter: to each (of them) We gave Judgment and Knowledge; it was Our power that made the hills and the birds celebrate Our praises, with David: it was We Who did (all these things). (Quran 21:78-79)

It might seem as a non-important issue, but the Verse and the commentaries in this respect cast doubts about the doctrine of “Imaamah”. For example, the Puya/Ali commentary gives the following interpretation for these Verses:

It is reported that a flock of sheep, on account of the negligence of John the shepherd, got into the cultivated field of Elia by night and ate up the plants and fruits. Both of them came to prophet Dawud for equitable settlement. Dawud awarded Elia, the owner of the cultivated field, the flock of sheep belonging to John in compensation for the loss he suffered. Prophet Sulayman son of Dawud was a mere boy of eleven, but he thought of a better decision, where the penalty would better fit the offence. Sulayman's suggestion was that John should cultivate Elia's field and return it to Elia when it was fully restored to the condition before eaten up by his herd; and in the meantime Elia should take possession of John's sheep and use only their milk and wool and return them to John when he gave him back his field duly cultivated. This is because Allah is present every where and having witnessed the whole affair He inspired Sulayman to arrive at the true judgement. As prophets of Allah neither spoke nor acted except as directed by Allah both the decisions were announced as inspired by Allah. The decision of Dawud was based upon the law current at that time. Dawud had many sons. It was Allah's will that Sulayman should be given the prophethood. So after this case in which the young Sulayman was inspired to announce a new judgement, superseding the current law, Dawud, under Allah's command, made Sulayman his heir, and after Dawud, Sulayman was appointed by Allah as His prophet.¹²⁰

Similarly, the commentary by Ayatullah Makarem Shirazi says that while both judgments were just: “Any how, that of Solomon was preferred over the judgement of his father.”¹²¹

The Sunni commentaries also voice this same line of thinking. The Tafseer by Ibn Kather notes:

"Grapes which had grown and their bunches were spoiled by the sheep. Dawud (David) ruled that the owner of the grapes should keep the sheep. Sulayman (Solomon) said, `Not like this, O Prophet of Allah!' [Dawud] said, `How then' [Sulayman] said: `Give the grapes to the owner of the sheep and let him tend them until they grow back as they were, and give the sheep to the owner of the grapes and let him benefit from them until the grapes have grown back as they were. Then the grapes should be given back to their owner, and the sheep should be given back to their owner.'¹²²

From all these opinions, the following points come to the front in this respect:

1. According to Shia ideology, Dawud (Alayhi Salam) would have been the "Infallible Imaam" of his time. How is it possible that he did not know that the appropriate true ruling would involve a new judgement?
2. How could Sulayman (Alayhi Salam) supercede his father (the Infallible Imaam of the time), while Sulayman had not yet become the "Imaam of the time"?

It should be noted that I am not saying Dawud's (Alayhi Salam) judgement was incorrect. Sulayman's (Alayhi Salam) decision was better suited to the situation, as evidenced by the text of the Quran and the accompanying commentaries. However, given the specific qualities that any Imaam should possess at any time, this situation is self-contradictory and inconsistent. Therefore, the only possible conclusion is that Infallible Imaamah did not exist during Dawud’s (Alayhi Salam) time either.

The case of Zakariya (Alayhi Salam) and the Birth of Yahya (Alayhi Salam)

The story of Prophet Zakariya (Alayhi Salam) and the miraculous birth of his son Yahya (Alayhi Salam) is further proof of the shaky nature behind the doctrine of Imaamah. Now, we are supposing again that Zakariyah (Alayhi Salam) is the “Imaam of his time” among the children of Israel, since there is no evidence of there being any other Prophets or Leaders among the Israelites during this time, nor have the Shias made any comments contrary to this hypothesis.

The specific story of Zakariyah (Alayhi Salam) is mentioned in the Quran twice in detail. For example, In Surah Maryam (Chapter 19) Allah says:

ذِكْرُ‌ رَ‌حْمَتِ رَ‌بِّكَ عَبْدَهُ زَكَرِ‌يَّا ﴿٢﴾ إِذْ نَادَىٰ رَ‌بَّهُ نِدَاءً خَفِيًّا ﴿٣﴾ قَالَ رَ‌بِّ إِنِّي وَهَنَ الْعَظْمُ مِنِّي وَاشْتَعَلَ الرَّ‌أْسُ شَيْبًا وَلَمْ أَكُن بِدُعَائِكَ رَ‌بِّ شَقِيًّا ﴿٤﴾ وَإِنِّي خِفْتُ الْمَوَالِيَ مِن وَرَ‌ائِي وَكَانَتِ امْرَ‌أَتِي عَاقِرً‌ا فَهَبْ لِي مِن لَّدُنكَ وَلِيًّا ﴿٥﴾ يَرِ‌ثُنِي وَيَرِ‌ثُ مِنْ آلِ يَعْقُوبَ ۖ وَاجْعَلْهُ رَ‌بِّ رَ‌ضِيًّا ﴿٦﴾

A mention of the mercy of thy Lord unto His servant Zachariah. When he cried unto his Lord a cry in secret, Saying: My Lord! Lo! the bones of me wax feeble and my head is shining with grey hair, and I have never been unblest in prayer to Thee, my Lord. Lo! I fear my kinsfolk after me, since my wife is barren. Oh, give me from Thy presence a successor. Who shall inherit of me and inherit (also) of the house of Jacob. And make him, my Lord, acceptable (unto Thee). (It was said unto him): O Zachariah! Lo! We bring thee tidings of a son whose name is John; we have given the same name to none before (him). He said: My Lord! How can I have a son when my wife is barren and I have reached infirm old age? He said: So (it will be). Thy Lord saith: It is easy for Me, even as I created thee before, when thou wast naught. (Quran 19:2-6)

In this case, it is beyond doubt that Zakariya (Alayhi Salam) himself is unaware of who was to succeed him in Prophethood (or Imaamah in the case of Shia reasoning) until he prayed to Allah and the angels gave him the glad tidings of Yahya (Alayhi Salam). Still, even after this declaration from the angels, Zakariya (Alayhi Salam) needed further reassurances that this news was indeed true.

While this great Prophet is not doing anything contrary to the principles of Prophethood ain Sunnism, if seen from a Shia viewpoint, it would seem out of place for Zakariya not to be aware as to who the “next Imaam” would be, and that the future “Imaam” would be none other than his own son. Additionally, his prayer to Allah raises all sorts of question marks, since it shows that Zakariyah (Alayhi Salam) earnestly did not know whether there would be a successor to him after his death, let alone from his progeny.

Considering the supposed continuity of Imaamah since the beginning of time, along with the many years Zakariyah (Alayhi Salam) had supposedly held the post of Infallible Imaam, the two incongruencies described above are alarming to say the very least. Thus, it can be concluded that Zakariyah does not fulfill the conditions of an Imaam as laid out by Shiism. As a matter of fact, his actions cause us to doubt even more the divine nature behind the post of Imaamah as presented by the Shia.

Fifth General Problem: Prophecies and Imaams?

Sometimes Shias quote certain passages from the Old Testament of the Bible and interpreting them to mean that the “12 Imaams” had been foretold from the time of previous Prophets. Nonetheless, these passages cannot be taken as evidence by the Muslim due to the corruption that has taken place in the Bible throughout the centuries.

What we can take as evidence is the word of the Quran. Indeed, there are places in the Quran where the coming of Muhammad (ﷺ) has been mentioned among the previous Prophets and Scriptures, either by an invocation or a directive from the Prophet or Holy Book. It is interesting to note that in all these cases there is absolutely no mention of any divinely appointed figures to come after him. Looking at each specific case, the startling lack of basis for the Imaamah doctrine (as far as the “12 Imaams” are concerned) comes into light.

Ibrahim and the Dua for the Prophet to come in Land of Makkah

Reading further after Ayah 2:124, a story is presented that is at the very least puzzling when considering the totality of Shia beliefs with respect to Imaamah after Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ):

رَ‌بَّنَا وَابْعَثْ فِيهِمْ رَ‌سُولًا مِّنْهُمْ يَتْلُو عَلَيْهِمْ آيَاتِكَ وَيُعَلِّمُهُمُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ وَيُزَكِّيهِمْ ۚ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ ﴿١٢٩﴾

Lord! And raise up in their midst a messenger from among them who shall recite unto them Thy revelations, and shall instruct them in the Scripture and in wisdom and shall make them grow. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Mighty, Wise. (Quran 2:129)

This Verse is sometimes explained by the Shia as Ibrahim’s (Alayhi Salam) specific prayer for the land of Makkah, while Ayah 2:124 was the one for Imaamah in general. However, it seems unbelievable that Ibrahim and Ismail (Alayhi Salam) would earnestly pray to Allah for a Prophet to come from among the people of Makkah, but would not mention the 12 Imaams of the Shia religion to rise up from among the line of the Prophet. This is especially perplexing considering that Ali was born in Makkah, and according to the Shia narratives, in the same Holy House (i.e. the Ka’aba) that Ibrahim and Ismail were building many centuries back. In addition, this prayer from Ibrahim and Ismail seems awkward in not mentioning the Imaams, when, besides the Prophet, the 12 Imaams are the best Leaders that the Universe has ever seen.

Finally, it must be remembered that according to the Shia view, Ismail (Alayhi Salam) had absolutely no Divinely appointed heritage before the coming of Muhammad (ﷺ) and the “12 Imaams”. How is it possible that Ismail would allude to one of his future offspring who would occupy a high rank and position (i.e. Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) while being completely silent about the other “Divine Imaams” who would represent Islam until the Day of Judgement?

Isa (Alayhi Salam) and the coming of Muhammad (ﷺ)

Another narrative about the coming of Muhammad (ﷺ) comes from the mouth of Prophet Isa (Alayhi Salam), when he says:

وَإِذْ قَالَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْ‌يَمَ يَا بَنِي إِسْرَ‌ائِيلَ إِنِّي رَ‌سُولُ اللَّـهِ إِلَيْكُم مُّصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيَّ مِنَ التَّوْرَ‌اةِ وَمُبَشِّرً‌ا بِرَ‌سُولٍ يَأْتِي مِن بَعْدِي اسْمُهُ أَحْمَدُ ۖ ........ ﴿٦﴾

And (remember) when 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), said: "O Children of Israel! I am the Messenger of Allah unto you confirming the Taurat [(Torah) which came] before me, and giving glad tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmed...... (Quran 61:6)

Again, this raises the same questions as the situation of Ibrahim and Ismail. Why would Isa (Alayhi Salam) be so specific when declaring his prophecy to the point of even mentioning one of the names of Muhammad (ﷺ), while he says nothing about any of the “Imaams” that would come after Muhammad (ﷺ)?

Another issue that seems quite strange (and that was discussed in brief above) is that Isa (Alayhi Salam) does not say in this Verse nor in any other places about which “Infallible Imaam” the believing Israelites would need to follow immediately after his departure. As a result, the mention of Muhammad (ﷺ) as a Divine appointee after Isa (Alayhi Salam) is made, but no mention of “Imaams” after Isa (Alayhi Salam) or of “Imaams” after Muhammad(ﷺ).All this is further proof that the ideology of Imaamah is not based on the Holy Quran.

The Unlettered Prophet

The Quran also relates about how the Jewish and Christian peoples had been foretold about the coming of Muhammad(ﷺ).Allah says in the Quran:

الَّذِينَ يَتَّبِعُونَ الرَّ‌سُولَ النَّبِيَّ الْأُمِّيَّ الَّذِي يَجِدُونَهُ مَكْتُوبًا عِندَهُمْ فِي التَّوْرَ‌اةِ وَالْإِنجِيلِ يَأْمُرُ‌هُم بِالْمَعْرُ‌وفِ وَيَنْهَاهُمْ عَنِ الْمُنكَرِ‌ وَيُحِلُّ لَهُمُ الطَّيِّبَاتِ وَيُحَرِّ‌مُ عَلَيْهِمُ الْخَبَائِثَ وَيَضَعُ عَنْهُمْ إِصْرَ‌هُمْ وَالْأَغْلَالَ الَّتِي كَانَتْ عَلَيْهِمْ ۚ فَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا بِهِ وَعَزَّرُ‌وهُ وَنَصَرُ‌وهُ وَاتَّبَعُوا النُّورَ‌ الَّذِي أُنزِلَ مَعَهُ ۙ أُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ ﴿١٥٧﴾

Those who follow the Messenger-Prophet, the Ummi, whom they find written down with them in the Taurat and the Injeel (who) enjoins them good and forbids them evil, and makes lawful to them the good things and makes unlawful to them impure things, and removes from them their burden and the shackles which were upon them; so (as for) those who believe in him and honor him and help him, and follow the light which has been sent down with him, these it is that are the successful. (Quran 7:157)

It is evident from the above Verse that the Quran maintains that Muhammad (ﷺ)was prophecized in the Holy Scriptures such as the Torah and the Injeel. Certainly, the only reliable evidence we have about what the Torah and the Injeel said in their uncorrupted form is what the Quran states about these revelations. It is truly remarkable to note that while the prophecies dealing with the coming of Muhammad (ﷺ)are clearly spelled out for all humans to read, there is no word whatsoever about other Divine representatives or “Infallible Imaams” who would come after Muhammad’s (ﷺ)demise.

The real reason for the discrepancies and problems with the “Imaamah” of these Prophets is that the Shias themselves do not have specific texts confirming when these Prophets became “Imaams”, or even that these Prophets in fact were “Imaams”. It is more a matter of guessing and working backwards, trying to corral certain individuals into specific positions in order to keep the doctrine afloat. However, Allah says:

.......... وَإِنَّ الظَّنَّ لَا يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا ﴿٢٨﴾

...... lo! a guess can never take the place of the truth. (Quran 53:28)

It was clear from looking into the consequences of some Quranic Verses that the “Imaamah” of some of the Prophets is nothing but a guess, a guess that is readily revealed as such by the careful observer.

Given these Ayahs of the Quran, and the continued issues that kept on rising to the surface time and time again, I was bound to ask myself one more time: Is it merely a case of Allah deciding not to put this in the Quran for mysterious reasons, or is it not in the Quran because such “Infallible Imaams” simply do not exist as such? As the honest reasearcher will have come to know, the second option is the one closer to Islam.

---

Footnote:

¹⁰⁷ There is a difference of opinion among Muslim scholars regarding the exact level of responsibility a people have before the true message comes to them. However, it is clear to all scholars that a people to whom the message has not arrived for many centuries cannot be expected to follow the true religion in the same way a people whom in their midst is a Prophet.

¹⁰⁸ Tafseer ibn Kathir, Volume 1, p. 665

¹⁰⁹ Ali/ Ayatullah Mahdi Puya Commentary of Verse 2:246

¹¹⁰ Naser Makarem Shirazi Commentary, Volume 5, p.111

¹¹¹ Tafseer al Qummi, Volume 1, p. 81

¹¹² Kamal ad-Din wa Tamaam-e-Nihmah, p.160-161

¹¹³ It should be noted that Allamah Muhammad Rizivi and Allamah Sayyid Saeed Akhtar Rizivi are two different Shia scholars.

¹¹⁴ http://www.dartabligh.org/q_a/i.html#12

¹¹⁵ Ali/ Mahdi Puya Commentary of Verse 14:4

¹¹⁶ Tafseer al Safi, Volume 3, p. 79

¹¹⁷ http://www.dartabligh.org/q_a/i.html#12

¹¹⁸ Tafseer ibn Kathir, Volume 5, p.175

¹¹⁹ Ali/ Mahdi Puya Commentary of Verse 18:, http://www.al-islam.org/quran/

¹²⁰ Ali/ Ayatullah Mahdi Puya Commentary of Verse 21:73, http://www.al-islam.org/quran/

¹²¹ Naser Makarem Shirazi Commentary, Volume 4, p. 193

¹²² Tafseer ibn Kathir, Volume 5, p.355