چکیده:
Imamate is the first controversial and divisive issue in the history of Islam, which created the first categorizations and divisions among Muslims after the death of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). The Ismaili and Zaidi sects are among the most important Shia sects after the Twelver Shia, which still have political and social life, but their view on the issue of Imamate has been formed since the early centuries of Islam. Research findings show that these two sects initially believed in the Imamate and leadership of the Ahl al-Bayt of the Prophet. But over time, they took others besides them as Imam and leader. Therefore, the grounds for deviation gradually became apparent among them. In this article, we aim to examine the discussion of Imamate from the perspective of the Ismaili and Zaidi sects based on the historical method.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Imamate from the Perspective of Ismailis and Zaidis Mohsen Parvish 1, Abdolrafie Rahimi 2 (Article Received: 2013/08/29 - Final Acceptance Date: 2013/12/15) Abstract Imamate is the first controversial and divisive issue in Islamic history that created the earliest categorizations and schisms among Muslims after the death of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).
The most fundamental dispute after the death of the Prophet (PBUH) was over the Imamate and caliphate, and this caused the Islamic nation to be divided into two groups: Shia and Sunni; The Shiites accepted the Imamate and caliphate of Ali ibn Abi Talib (AS) after the Prophet (PBUH) and considered it the explicit text of the Prophet (PBUH) and the Quran, but other Muslims said that the Prophet had not appointed a successor for himself, and left the matter to the people.
Mustafa Ghalib says in this regard: “Among the principles and foundations of the true belief is that the existence of an infallible and designated Imam from the lineage of Ali ibn Abi Talib is necessary, and it is obligatory that the designation be through the previous Imam, so that the Imamate remains in the descendants, meaning the father designates the eldest son” [23, p.
In *Milal wa Nihal*, al-Shahristani wrote that Zayd ibn Ali (AS) accepted the Imamate of the inferior over the superior because expediency required that Abu Bakr and, after him, Umar, assume the caliphate and leadership of the community, an expediency whose most important aspect was extinguishing sedition and avoiding discord.
(
, 
, 
)
