Why is Zaydi Imams Correct?

wa alaykum as salaam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu!

Thank you for your questions! I will try my best to address them, inshaAllah, and I'm sure that Bro Ibn Kamal will also have a suitable response.

You asked:

1. If this is the criteria, does it only apply for after Ahl-Kisa. If that's the case, how does Imam Sajad qualify for this when he himself never declare Imama and gave bayah to Yazid. Nor did he lead a rebellion.
Wouldn't that contradicts the Zaydi Criteria of Imama?

There must first be a distinction between an imam of knowledge and an imam obligatory to obey. We have those imams who are respected for their knowledge and their promotion of the madhhab of their ancestors. Examples of these imams include the likes of Imams al-Baaqir, as-Saadiq, 'Abdullah al-Kaamil and others, upon them be peace. This class of imams are considered authoritative in the madhhab but are not obligatory to obey in the absolute sense. However, those imams who have both the prerequisite of unparalleled knowledge as well as unsheathed the sword against the tyrants and was given the oath of allegiance by the nobles of the Ahl al-Bayt as well as others--these would be the imams in the absolute sense. Examples of this class would be Imams Zayd, al-Hussein al-Fakhkhi and Muhammad b. Abdullah an-Nafs az-Zakiyya, upon them be peace. As for the proof of this, history itself testifies to this distinction, as imams such as as-Saadiq were recognised for their knowledge and distinction yet deferred to other imams such as Imam Zayd ash-Shaheed, when the latter initiated an uprising. Keep in mind that the successful uprising against a tyrant is not a criterion in itself. This is because we have imams, such as al-Haadi, who hadn't led an uprising against a tyrant, and we also have imams, such as Zayd, who were not successful in their uprising.

2. Who formed the criteria of Imama? Was it Imam Zayd? Is the narrations accepted by Sunnis too or just Zaydis?

There was no singular person who developed these criteria; rather, the criteria were more so formulated from the actions of the previous generations of the Prophetic Descendants. In the study of history. you have countless instances of the nobles who collectively put their support behind a candidate for the imamate. This is in contrast to the Imami paradigm in which a selected group was the only ones who knew of the imam.
 

3. I have read reports of Imam Hadi having miracles, and a bunch of ghuluu Hadiths about him. Wouldn't the narrators fall into question for narrating these Hadiths such as him praying someone's fingers would fall of something along those lines. After all to my knowledge, Zaydis don't believe their Imams have super powers like Imamis.

The ascription of miracles to the imams is not considered ghulu nor is it considered a prerequisite for the imamate. It is also mistaken to assume that the Zaydis don't believe in the miracles of our imams. We have numerous narrations in our books that mention the miracles of some of our imams, upon them be peace. However, the miracles of the imams take a backseat to their actual scholarly and military efforts.   

4. Was there any history of corrupt imams that Zaydis of has? If not how is that possible? I'm sure with how many Imams Zaydis had, one had to be a hypocrite.

Yes. There is a section dedicated to unseating a corrupt imam in the Ahkaam of al-Haadi, upon him be peace. This means that the imam has to continue to fit the criteria of the imamate and not the other way around. If the imam is shown to be negligent and/or disobedient, it is the job of the scholars and/or another candidate for the imamate to unseat him. As we mentioned before, Zaydis don't see their imams as infallible and thus must continue to judge their actions according to the primary sources of religion. 

5. How many Imams are there total? How can we know they're trusted when there's so many? It's improbable all of them had good intentions.

The numbers of imams may differ a little based on who you ask. We've answered this question here . The numbers of imams do not place them under scrutiny, rather it is their actions that must be judged; the same goes for their intentions. An imam may have had evil intentions, but we are to judge their outward actions, not their inner intentions. This is the reason that I mentioned in another post that Zaydis are not so imam-centred in the sense that our focus is on the person of the imam; rather, our focus is on what the imam does. 

6. What is the position of power for Imams? Are they similar to Maraaji3 for Ithna Ashara? Is this considered a Bida by sunnis? 

I'm not sure what you mean by this question. If you are asking about the extent of authority of the absolute imam, it is basically that their judgements are obeyed, and we are obliged to support them. As for an imam of knowledge, they function as a mujtahid as you said. One is not bound to follow their ijtihad if it is not a matter of consensus; however, their ijtihad is considered authoritative if no other opinion exists in the madhhab. We've addressed this in our introduction to our translation of the Ahkaam. 

7. Can you share a book that proves Zaydism is correct? I have read some that mainly focus on proving Imam Alis imama/calipha, but I've already accepted this a long time ago. I want one more so proving the concept of Zaydi imama as a whole, and why it's logical/proof

Our imams and scholars have dedicated a lot of time and ink proving the Zaydi concept of the imamate. There is a section that covers this topic in every one of our theological texts. You can literally pick up any one of our aqeeda books and find the logical/textual basis of the imamate. It is a matter of whether you can read Arabic or not. If not, you can refer to our book or one of the various theological articles we've translated.  

8. Why are things like raising your hands for Takbir and Qunoot dismissed when there's so much mutawatir Hadith from not only sunnis but shias too. To my knowledge Imam Zayd never spoke ill of this, but also didn't mention it. How is that evidence for dismissal?

As for the issues of raising the hands, it is an issue of furu' ad.deen, as such, it is subject to discussion and debate. You are welcomed to read the article we wrote on the issue.

I think that it is also necessary that we elucidate the role of Imam Zayd, upon him be peace, in what's called the Zaydi madhhab. Imam Zayd, upon him be peace, although considered a valuable authority, is not considered an absolute authority. In that, that which we have transmitted from him is subject to scrutiny like anything else. He is for us a fallible imam and thus, we consider the overall collective opinions of the imams as a proof. The term 'Zaydi' therefore does not restrict us to that which is transmitted from Imam Zayd, upon him be peace.

As for the qunuut, we practice the recitation of it in the Fajr and Witr prayers but not other prayers, as we have no evidence from our imams that they practiced it in every prayer. Plus, you will find that even according to 12er fiqh, the qunuut is not obligatory in the prayers and--to my limited knowledge--the one who neglects it does not have to do the prostrations of forgetfulness. Maybe you can correct me on this.

As for the raising of the hands in the qunuut, our imams similarly negate this practice, as the prohibition of movement in the prayer would include raising the hands for the qunuut. Plus, once again, the raising of the hands in the qunuut is seen as only a recommendation according to the maraaji' of the 12er madhhab; thus, this shows that there is not enough evidence to mandate it as a standard practice.

And Allah knows best!

IRS