Zaydi v/s 12ver

Wa alaykum as salaam wa rahma!

Thank you for your question! We addressed the issue of explicit vs implicit designation here and here . It includes the statements of Imam Zayd, upon him be peace, and other early imams.

As for the claim that Imam Muhammad b. Abdullah an-Nafs az-Zakiyya and Imam Yahya b. Abdullah an-Nafs ar-Radiyya, upon them be peace, did not adhere to the concept of nass, this is a statement without proof. On the contrary, according to Zaydi sources, the two aforementioned imams did indeed hold to the idea of the explicit designation of Ali, upon him be peace. One of our chief scholars of hadith, Muhammad b. Suleiman al-Kufi narrated on the authorities of both imams from their ancestors to Ali that Allah's Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, said about him: ((He is your imam after me...)). I cannot think of any other statement that indicates explicit designation other than this! Therefore, there is no doubt that Imams Muhammad b. Abdullah and Yahya b. Abdullah ascribed to the explicit designation of Ali, upon him be peace.

The misunderstanding regarding the Zaydi view of nass has to do with either ignorance of early Zaydi thought and material or the confusion of Mu'tazila views with that of Zaydis. Although some imams (such as Imam Yahya b. Hamza and Imam Ahmed b. Yahya) ascribed to the implicit designation, their individual views cannot be said to represent Zaydism as a whole. We mentioned the earliest Zaydi views so that should be sufficient. As for the confusion between the Zaydi views and the Mu'tazila, the latter held to the view that the caliphates of the first three were legitimate although they agreed that Ali was unparalleled in virtue. As Shia, the Zaydis were not interested in exculpating the first three caliphs or justifying their actions. Therefore, you do not find in early Zaydi/Imami polemics any defense of the first three caliphates. Because the Mu'tazila were non-Shia, the onus of justifying and vindicating the first three was on the Mu'tazila not the Zaydis. To counter the apparent contradiction between the unparalleled virtue of Ali and the caliphates of the first three, they adopted two doctrines: the leadership of the less virtuous and the implicit designation. It was by these two doctrines that they were able to excuse the first three caliphs from preceding Ali, upon him be peace. It is only in the Mu'tazila and Mu'tazila-influenced trends among later Zaydis that there was this tendency. After all--they argued--if Allah's Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, did not make the appointment of Ali clear and explicit, the actions of the first three were justified and legitimate. However, if the appointment was said to be explicit, that which took place twenty-five years or so from the death of the Prophet would be extremely problematic to say the least.

As for the argument regarding the Imamate in the line of Imam al-Hasan, this is a point of disagreement between Imamis and Zaydis as you said. The Zaydis hold to the imamate of the descendants of al-Hasan and al-Hussein, peace be upon them, due to the fact that there is nothing that restricts the descendants of Imam al-Hasan from Imamate--either textually or intellectually. In fact there was a debate that took place between one of our scholars, Allama Ahmed b. Musa at-Tabari, and an Imami. The Imami asked him to prove the Imamate of the descendants of al-Hasan, upon him be peace. Allama at-Tabari responded by saying that both Isaac and Isma'il were brothers and they shared in Prophethood. There was a long line of Prophets from the line of Isaac, upon him be peace, but Prophethood similarly continued through the line of Isma'il, upon him be peace. So how is it that nubuwwa can be transferred through the lines of two brothers but not imaama? Needless to say, the Imami was silenced.

And Allah knows best!

IRS

Wa alaykum asalam wa rahamt Allah

For proof and discussion of the Imamate in Zaidism please refer to this link a translation of the Imamate section in the book Sublime Answers to the Iraqis Questions:
www.salvationark.com/index.php?option=co...howall=&limitstart=1

In Zaidism we do not believe that anyone can intercede from entering Hellfire (May Allah protect us) but intercession might happen between the levels of paradise. The proof of this are many in the quran:
وَاتَّقُواْ يَوْماً لاَّ تَجْزِي نَفْسٌ عَن نَّفْسٍ شَيْئاً وَلاَ يُقْبَلُ مِنْهَا شَفَاعَةٌ وَلاَ يُؤْخَذُ مِنْهَا عَدْلٌ وَلاَ هُمْ يُنصَرُونَ.
“And be on your guard against a day when one soul shall not avail another in the least, neither shall intercession on its behalf be accepted, nor shall any compensation be taken from it, nor shall they be helped.”(Surah Baqarah, 2 :48)

وَاتَّقُواْ يَوْماً لاَّ تَجْزِي نَفْسٌ عَن نَّفْسٍ شَيْئاً وَلاَ يُقْبَلُ مِنْهَا عَدْلٌ وَلاَ تَنفَعُهَا شَفَاعَةٌ وَلاَ هُمْ يُنصَرُونَ.
“And be on your guard against a day when no soul shall avail another in the least neither shall any compensation be accepted from it, nor shall intercession profit it, nor shall they be helped.” (Surah Baqarah, 2:123)

And Allah knows best