How do Zaydis account for the 12 Imams?

Wa alaykum as salaam!

Thank you for your question! According to Zaydi sources, Imams Zayn al-Abideen, al-Baaqir, as-Saadiq and al-Kaazim, upon them be peace, never claimed the imamate for themselves. Imam Ali b. Musa ar-Reda, upon him be peace, claimed the imamate for himself and is therefore considered an Imam obligatory to obey by the Ummah, similar to Imams Zayd, Muhammad Nafs az-Zakiyya and al-Haadi, upon them be peace.

As for the last four, I haven't come across anything either praiseworthy or blameworthy regarding them. There is a reference in Radd ala ar-Raafida where Imam al-Qaasim ar-Rassi, upon him be peace, mentioned an imam who usurped the money of his followers. Some have said that this refers to either Muhammad al-Jawad or Ali al-Haadi. But Allah knows best!

IRS

Thank you for your question!

We have no records of Imam Ali b. Musa ar-Reda, upon him be peace, claiming infallibility. Imam ar-Reda, upon him be peace, accepted the conditions of being placed forward as imam by the Abbasid Caliph.

Just a quick correction, the text I was referring to is Radd 'ala ar-Rawaafid and not Radd 'ala ar-Raafida. Both texts were authored by Imam ar-Rassi, upon him be peace; however, it was in Radd 'ala ar-Rawaafid that reference was made. As for the reference in Radd 'ala ar-Rawaafid, some Zaydi and non-Zaydi commentators say that the one who misappropriated the wealth of the followers was Ali an-Naqi. However, with all due respect, I have reason to believe that this is not the case for the following reasons:

1. The text Radd 'ala ar-Rawaafid begins by listing the various sects of the Rawaafid and the 12ers are listed among them. It must be remembered that the term Rawaafid did not refer to the 12ers exclusively then, although it refers to them exclusively now.

2. In the text, the imam faults the Rawaafid for appointing child imams and mentions ‘the sons of Ali b. Musa’ and that their master is nine generations from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny. This refers to Muhammad al-Jawad and Ali an-Naqi. However, elsewhere he faults them for having an imam in occultation. This may refer to Muhammad ibn al-Hasan known as the Mahdi. This may also refer to one of the other imams of the Isma’iliya who were also known to go in occultation. So how can he be accusing Ali an-Naqi of usurping money when he also refers to the imams after him?

3. He never explicitly mentioned Ali an-Naqi in connection to taking people’s money. He simply refers to someone taking his followers’ money. This was a common claim that Zaydis charged against corrupt Ismai’li imams.

As for its authenticity and its authority, there is no known criticism of its attribution to Imam al-Qaasim ar-Rassi, upon him be peace. It has been referred to by our imams and scholars as the statements of Imam ar-Rassi, upon him be peace. The text is also the earliest known Zaydi refutation of Imami Shia doctrines.

And Allah knows best!

IRS