Who are the Shi’a (Raafidi)?

According to the Islamic history the first seed of strange thought of sectarianism was seen in a small group of people among the muslims after the demise of the prophet with a sincere intention and truthful thought opining that the khilaafah of the rasuul should be from his household. They hold this opinion with deep sense of reasoning that his vicegereancy is more befitting to be from his household. On this, they gather themselves to form a party upon a single alliance thereby differing from the majority of the muslims on this. This is the early beginning of the sect shi’ah. The Shia began after the death of Prophet Muhammad(ﷺ). People believed Prophet Muhammad(ﷺ) did not name a successor to lead Muslims after his death. As a result, Muslims elected a new leader. The first four leaders, called the Rightly Guided Caliphs(Abubakar, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and ‘Aliyy) may Allaah be pleads with them. In contrast, Shia followed Ali, the son-in-law of prophet Muhammad(ﷺ), before different thought and ideologies entered into them which are ordinarily different from the Islamic belief system. In a simple term the shi’ah are the acclaimed party of Alli (the 4th khaleefah of Islam after the prophet). They called to the imamship/leadership both in text and recommendations I. e curatorship openly and secretly. They are of the view that the leadership of Islam should not be a public thing and be restricted to the household of the prophet I.e It should be a blood title.

Upon this claims they got themselves divided into five or six groups and into several other sub-sects and sub-groups. In terms of sectarianism no other group meet up with the shi’ah looking it from the numbers of their divisions. They has many names ranging from Arraafidhoh to Shi’ah to Ithna athariyyah and the likes. They refused to accept the leadership of Abu bakr Assideeq and umar bn Khattoob(may Allaah be pleased with them.

Imam Abu bakr Alarabiyy Alandaluusyy in his book Al-‘awaasimu minalqawaasimi, he says: The shi’ah came about purposely from the muslims that are of the Persian history. They were experienced of the days of the Persian king in terms of the honour and prestige they game him. When they entered into Islam they viewed that the prophet is more befitting of that honour than their kings this makes them thought of giving the honour to the household of the prophet so far he is dead. This thought became developed, heretical and entrenched in their creed born out of going beyond bounds, lies and deceit.

According to Ash-Shihrstaanee in Al-Milal wa An-Nihal, the Shia are the people who have the belief that the right to the Islamic Caliphate is limited to the noble Companion of the Prophet, ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib, may Allâh be pleased with him, and his progeny. They claim that Aboo Bakr As-Siddîq, Umar bn Al-Khattâb and Uthmân bn Affân became Khalîfah (Caliph) before him was stealing from the latter and an act of transgression against the command of the Noblest of Mankind Muhammad, SalaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam. All the claims of the Shia are based on lies.

Believe of the Shii’ah

They hold beliefs and principles which are contrary to those of the people of Islam, such as the following:


They exaggerate about their imams, claiming that they are infallible, and they devote many acts of worship to them such as supplication, seeking help, offering sacrifices and tawaaf (circumambulating their tombs). This is major shirk which Allaah tells us will not be forgiven. These acts of shirk are committed by their scholars and common folk alike, without anyone among them objecting to that.


They say that the Holy Qur’aan has been distorted, and that things have been added and taken away. They have books concerning that which are known to their scholars and many of their common folk, and they even say that believing that the Qur’aan has been distorted is an essential tenet of their beliefs.


They regard most of the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) as kaafirs, and disavow them, and they seek to draw closer to Allaah by cursing and reviling them. They claim that they apostatized after the death of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) except very few (only seven). This is a rejection of the Qur’aan which affirms their virtue, and says that Allaah was pleased with them and chose them to accompany His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). It also implies a slur against the Qur’aan itself, because it was transmitted via them; if they were kuffaar then there is no guarantee that they did not distort it or change it. This is what the Raafidis believe anyway, as stated above.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: As for the one who goes further and claims that they apostatized after the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, apart from a small number, no more than ten or so, or that they became evildoers, there is no doubt that he is a kaafir, because he is rejecting what it says in the Qur’aan in more than one place, that Allaah was pleased with them and praised them. Indeed, the one who doubts that such a person is a kaafir is to be labelled as a kaafir himself, because what this view implies is that those who transmitted the Qur’aan and Sunnah were kuffaar or rebellious evildoers. The verse says “You (true believers in Islamic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad(ﷺ) and his Sunnah) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind” [Aal ‘Imraan 3:110], and the best of them were the first generation. But according to this view, most of them were kaafirs and rebellious evildoers, and this ummah is the worst of nations and the earliest generations of this ummah were the most evil of them. The fact that this is kufr is something that no Muslim has any excuse for not knowing. End quote from al-Saarim al-Maslool ‘ala Shaatim al-Rasool (p. 590).


They attribute badaa’ to Allaah, i.e., forming a new opinion that was not held before. This implies attribution of ignorance to Allaah, may He be exalted.


They believe in taqiyah (dissimulation) which means showing outwardly something other than what one feels inside. In fact this is lying and hypocrisy and skill in deceiving people. This is not something that they do at times of fear; rather they regard use of taqiyah as a religious duty for minor and major matters, at times of fear and times of safety. Whatever of truth was narrated from one of their imams, such as praise for the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or agreeing with Ahl al-Sunnah, even in matters of purification or food and drink, is rejected by the Shi’ah who say that the Imam only said that by way of taqiyah.


Belief in raja’ah, which is the belief that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and the members of his household (ahl al-bayt), ‘Ali, al-Hasan, al-Husayn and the other imams will return. At the same time, Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthmaan, Mu’aawiyah, Yazeed, Ibn Dhi’l-Jooshan and everyone who harmed Ahl al-bayt – according to their claims – will also return.

All of these people will return – according to their beliefs – to this world once more before the Day of Resurrection, when the Mahdi reappears, as the enemy of Allaah Ibn Saba’ told them; they will return in order to be punished because they harmed Ahl al-Bayt and transgressed against them and denied them their rights, so they will be severely punished, then they will all die, then they will be resurrected on the Day of Resurrection for the final recompense. This is what they believe.


Shi’ite see that Jews are better than Muslims:

This Ummah (nation) is the best among all nations. The best of this nation is the first generation (people at the time of the prophet(ﷺ) Although those people are the most perfect people by their righteous follow to the Sunnah of the prophet(ﷺ) , Shia claimed that those people are kâfirs (disbelieves in Islam) and were not following the truth even though they knew it! Whereas since Allah said about Jews (after all the corruption that they did):

“Of the people of Moses there is a section who guide and do justice in the light of truth.” (Qur’an 7:159)

And whereas none of this Ummah, as the Shia claim follow the truth,do justice in the light of truth, then Jews are better than Muslims! Clearly Jews and Christians respect their prophets more than the Râfida:

Imam Sha3bi asked the Jews: “who is the best among your nation?” They said: “the companions of Moses.” Then he asked the Christians so they replied: “the apostles of Jesus.” Then he asked the Râfida “who is the worst among your nation?” They said: “the Companions of Muhammad”

Obviously those Râfida are included in the meaning of this Ayah: Have you not seen those who were given a portion of the Scripture, who believe in superstition and false objects of worship and say about the disbelievers, “These are better guided than the believers as to the way”?(Qur’aan 4:51)


Shia curses Aisha, the mother of the Believers (May Allah be pleased with her)

Some of them view Aisha, the dear wife of the Prophet, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, as worse than a dog. They send curses upon her and her father, Aboo Bakr, after prayers instead of saying the usual invocations that often come after Prayers.

Furthermore, how do these Rafida curse and insult Ummul Mu’mineen (mother of the Believers) A’isha when Allah Himself has mentioned her in the Qur’an as the mother of the believers?

“The Prophet is more worthy of the believers than themselves, and his wives are [in the position of] their mothers. And those of [blood] relationship are more entitled [to inheritance] in the decree of Allah than the [other] believers and the emigrants, except that you may do to your close associates a kindness [through bequest]. That was in the Book inscribed.” (Al-Ahzaab, verse 6)

There is no doubt whatsoever that only that person will curse and insult Umm al-Mu’mineen who does not consider her to be a mother. Because for one who does have a mother, does not curse and insult her, but loves her. Allah promised to give a great punishment to those who slander her:

“When you were propagating it (the slander) with your tongues, and uttering with your mouths that whereof you had no knowledge, you counted it a little thing, while with Allah it was very great.” (An-Nur 24:15)

Imam Malik stated that anyone who slanders her should be killed right away because Allah forbids us (in the Qur’an) from it forever and because anyone who curses the Prophet(ﷺ) or any member of this family should be killed too. This fatwa was also issued by his teacher Imam Ja’far al-Saadiq. Allah says:

“Allah forbids you from it (slandering ‘A’isha) and warns you not to repeat the like of it forever, if you are believers.” (An-Nur 24:17)


Shia curses Hasan son of Ali (May Allah be pleased with them)

Also, by cursing Mu’aawiya (May Allah be pleased with him), these Rafida (Shia) are actually cursing Hasan (May Allah be pleased with him). Because Hasan withdrew from, and gave up the Khilaafah to Mu’aawiya purely for the pleasure of Allah. The Messenger(ﷺ) foretold of this in the Hadith. So can the grandson of The Messenger(ﷺ) actually have withdrawn from and left the Khilaafah in the hands of a Kafir for him to rule over the people? Subhân Allah! This indeed is a great accusation and insult!

If the Rafida say that Ali and Hasan were forced into doing this, then this is proof enough that these Rafida have no sense whatsoever. The accusations levelled against these two honored companions of the Prophet(ﷺ) are the worst insults ever imaginable and are beyond belief. They should remember that Ali faced the unbelievers in Makkah pace to face although Muslims were less than 40 man. So, why does he hide his Islam when Muslims became the majority and why he does not face the hypocrites?

They do depict a picture of chaotic living among the Companions forgetting that ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib later allowed ‘Umar bn Al-Khattâb to marry a daughter of his, Umm Kulthûm. Al-Kulaynee, their author of Usool Al-Kaafee (which they give the same regard we the people of Sunnah give Sahîh Al-Bukhârî though it is not worth the weakest anthology of ours), wrote a lie that one of their Imams said: ‘The genital was wrongly taken from us.’ Vol.2 p.141

Apart from their belief that the right to Khilaafah (Caliphacy) rests on ‘Alee and his progeny, they also believe that their leaders [Imams] are infallible; that they cannot commit errors, big or small.

They believe, such as their Kaysaaniyyah sub-sect, that the religion of Islam is obedience to man. This has made them give esoteric meanings to Islamic teachings such as the Pillars of the Deen viz. Prayer, Fasting, Zakâh and Hajj. They have weak belief in the resurrection such as some of them say there is re-incarnation; that the soul will transform into something else after death. This most often applies to their Imams upon whom their endless and stupid arguments and disagreements, such as who is really the Expected Imam, lie.

So stupid are their disagreements that they retroactively differed as to who was entitled to the Khilaafah after ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib; some said it was Muhammad bn Al-Hanafiyyah (another son of ‘Alee from another wife apart from Fâtimah] others said it was Al-Hasan then Al-Husayn. Such was their stupidity.

Do you know that some of them believed that Muhammad bn Al-Hanafiyyah did not actually die, that he only disappeared and hid in Rad’wa Mountain being sustained by a pond of water and honey and being guarded by a lion on the right and a tiger on the left until the time he shall reappear. To those people, that is the Expected Imâm – their Mahdee.

As if they relish their Imams being described as cowards, the Muhammadiyyah sub-sect of theirs believe that Muhammad bn ‘Abdillâh bn Al-Hasan bn Al-Hasan bn ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib did not die rather he is hiding in Mountain Haajar and will soon come out! These people are very sure this Muhammad is the Expected Mahdee because his name is Muhammad bn Abdillâh, the same a the name of the Noble Prophet, Muhammad bn Abdillâh, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, as it has come in the authentic narration.

Their Mukhtaariyyah sub-sect has the belief of Al-Badaa with respect to Allâh, may He be extolled from their blasphemy. The belief is that, certain things occur in the world not known to Allâh that they would occur. They often cite that to justify their claim that Allâh did praise the Companions of the Prophet in many places of the Qur’aan [which they actually believe has been altered by the Companions and that the original Mushaf was with Fâtimah before it was transferred to her sons] when He did not know what would later become of them.

To them, the eventual ‘unbelief’ of the Companions, for not enthroning ‘Alee as the Khalîfah, was not known to Allâh, that was why He did praise them then. May Allâh despise the Shia. The belief of the Shia, except the Zaydiyyah among them, is that all the Companions, save a few [Al-Miqdad Al-Aswad, ‘Ammaar bn Yaasir, Salman Al-Faarisee, of course, ‘Alee and his two sons], apostatised after the death of the Prophet, SalaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam.

To some of them, such as their Bayaaniyyah, Nusayriyyah and Saba’iyyah sub-sects, ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib is Allâh! Some of them say, he has some qualities of divinity while some say he is all divine.

The followers of ‘Abdullâh bn Saba [the Saba’iyyah] are the promoters of the latter thought. This ‘Abdullâh bn Saba was a Jew who claimed to have embraced Islâm. He only came into Islam to wreak havoc therein; historically he was the founder of the Shi’i thoughts. It was from him other teachings of Shia evolved.

Ibn Saba’ and his followers said it to the face of ‘Alee that he is Allâh! ‘Alee, being a righteous slave of Allâh, did not take it lightly with them, he burnt many of them while others escaped. Among the escapees was this devilish Ibn Saba’. They believe every time there is thunder, that is ‘Alee roaring; the lightning is his smile! That ‘Aliyy will soon come back (as Eesa shall come) to fill the earth with justice after it has been filled with injustice. They believe the succeeding Imams share in some divinity possessed by ‘Aliyy.

Interestingly, some of the ideologues of the Shia have striven to deny the existence of this Ibn Saba’. They thought if they accept his existence then the foundation of their thought will become shaky. Alas, Allâh has exposed them.

Some of them have inadvertently confirmed his personality in many of their academic works. One of their authors, Ibn Abî Al-Hadeed said in Shar’h Nahj Al-Balaagah [vol.5 p.5 as quoted in ‘Lillaah…thumma Li-Târikh p.13] that: ‘Abdullâh bn Saba’ stood up to ‘Alee while the latter was delivering a Khutbah and said: ‘You are, you are!’ He repeated it severally. ‘Alee then said: ‘Woe betide you, who am I? He then commanded that he should be arrested alongside those with him upon his thought.’

The leading sect of the Shia today is Al-Imaamiyyah. This sect can be found in the so-called Islamic Republic of Iran. It is worthy of note that the ideological and philosophical base of the Shia today is Najaf in Iraq where they claim the grave of ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib is situated. That is it, the Shia are grave worshippers; they throng the mausoleums of their leaders than they come to mosques. Iran is just the political headquarters.

Iran serves as the promoters of the Shi’i thoughts no matter how blasphemous. That is why you will see them supporting the Huthis of Yemen (who are majorly of Zaydi inclinations) and Bashaar Asad Family of Syria (who are of the Nusayree Enclave – those who say ‘Alee is Allâh, and who have reduced the Islamic teachings to nothing). Iran used the un-Islamic revolution to beguile many of the Muslim youths. We are coming to this later Inshâ Allâh.

The Shia have always been very treacherous. They celebrate falsehood upon a justification of a warped belief of Taqiyyah [pretention]. If a Shiite is cornered where he knows he cannot have his way [not necessarily when his life is threatened], he will deny being a Shi’ite. Treachery is their emblem. No wonder their forefathers in Kûfah deceived al-Husayn after twenty thousand of them had made oath of allegiance to him that they would defend him. The author of ‘A’yaan Ah-Shia wrote about the phenomenon of the Karbala which they do shamelessly celebrate today that: ‘they tricked him and rebelled against him while their oath of allegiance was upon their necks; they killed him.’ See Part One p.34 of the book.

Al-Hasan said when he was to abdicate to Mu’aawiyyah bn Abî Sufyân in an occurrence the Prophet, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, had foretold would serve as a unifying factor among the Muslims; he said: ‘By Allâh I see Mu’aawiyyah as being better than these people who say they belong to me. They only want to kill me and take my wealth. That I accept from Mu’aawiyyah what with which I will ensure my safety and that of my family is better than these people should kill me and make my family suffer…’ See Al-Ihtijaaj vol.2 p.10.

‘Alee bn Al-Husayn [Zaynul’Aabidîn] even made jest of them especially with respect to their 10th day of Muharram celebration of fake cries and agonies: ‘The people cry over us; who have killed us if not they?’ See Al-Ihtijaaj vol.2 p.29.

And there are other corrupt beliefs which one can find more details about in the following books, which explain how false they are:

• al-Khutoot al-‘Areedah by Muhibb al-Deen al-Khateeb (available in English, translated by Abu Bilal Mustafa al-Kanadi)

•Usool Madhhab al-Shi’ah al-Imamiyyah by Dr. Naasir al-Qafaari

•Firaq Mu’aasirah tantasib ila al-Islam by Dr. Ghaalib ibn ‘Ali ‘Awaaji (1/127-269)

•Al-Mawsoo’ah al-Muyassarah fi’l-Adyaan wa’l-Madhaahib wa’l-Ahzaab al-Mu’aasirah (1/51-57).

The status of the imams of the Ithna ‘Ashari Shi’ah

The Raafidis, Imamis or Ithna ‘Asharis (“Twelvers”) are one of the branches of Shi’ism. They are called Raafidis because they rejected (rafada) most of the Sahaabah and they rejected the leadership of the two Shaykhs Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, or because they rejected the imamate of Zayd ibn ‘Ali, and deserted him. They called Imamis because they are primarily focused on the issue of imamate, and they made it a basic principle of their religion, or because they claim that the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stated that ‘Ali and his descendents would be imams. They are called Ithna ‘Asharis (“Twelvers”) because they believe in the imamate of twelve men from the Prophet’s family (ahl al-bayt), the first of whom was ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) and the last of whom was Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-‘Askari, the supposed hidden imam, who they say entered the tunnel of Samarra’ in the middle of the third century AH and he is still alive therein, and they are waiting for him to come out!

The scholars of the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas were asked: Is the Imam Shi’ah way part of Islam? Who made it up? Because they, i.e., the Shi’ah, attribute their madhhab to Sayyiduna ‘Ali (may Allaah ennoble his face).

Answer: The Imami Shi’ah madhhab is a fabricated madhhab that has been introduced into Islam. We advise you to read the book al-Khutoot al-‘Areedah and Mukhtasar al-Tuhfah al-Ithna ‘Ashariyyah and Minhaaj al-Sunnah by Shaykh al-Islam [Ibn Taymiyah], which will explain a lot of their innovations.

‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Baaz, ‘Abd al-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan. End quote.

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (2/377).


From the above it is clear that this madhahb is false and that it goes against the beliefs of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah, and that its beliefs will not be acceptable from anyone, either from their scholars or their common folk.

As for the imams to whom they claim to belong, they are innocent of this lie and falsehood.

There follow the names of these imams:

1- ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allaah be pleased with him) who was martyred in 40 AH.

2- Al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) (3-50 AH)

3- Al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) (4-61 AH)

4- ‘Ali Zayn al-‘Aabideen ibn al-Husayn (38-95 AH), whom they call al-Sajjaad

5- Muhammad ibn ‘Ali Zayn al-‘Aabideen (57-114 AH) whom they call al-Baaqir

6- Ja’far ibn Muhammad al-Baaqir (83-148 AH) whom they call al-Saadiq

7- Moosa ibn Ja’far al-Saadiq (128-148 AH) whom they call al-Kaadim

8- ‘Ali ibn Moosa al-Kaadim (148-203 AH) whom they call al-Rida (Reza)

9- Muhammad al-Jawaad ibn ‘Ali al-Rida’ (195-220 AH) whom they call al-Taqiy

10- ‘Ali al-Haadi ibn Muhammad al-Jawaad (212-254 AH) whom they call al-Naqiy

11- al-Hasan al-‘Askari ibn ‘Ali al-Haadi (232-260) whom they call al-Zakiy

12- Muhammad al-Mahdi ibn al-Hasan al-‘Askari, whom they call al-Hujjah al-Qaa’im al-Muntazar. They claim that he entered a tunnel in Samarra’, but most researchers are of the view that he did not exist at all, and that he is a Shi’i myth.

See: al-Mawsoo’ah al-Muyassarah (1/51).

Ibn Katheer said in al-Bidaayah wa’l-Nihaayah (1/177): As for what they believe about the tunnel of Samarra’, that is a myth which has no basis in reality and no proof or sound reports. End quote.

Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) divided the Imams of the Ithna ‘Ashari Shi’ah into four categories:

1 – ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib, al-Hasan and al-Husayn (may Allaah be pleased with them). They are noble Sahaabah and no one doubts their virtue and leadership, but many others shared with them the virtue of being companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and among the Sahaabah there are others who were more virtuous than them, based on saheeh evidence from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

2 – ‘Ali ibn al-Husayn, Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-Baaqir, Ja’far ibn Muhammad al-Saadiq and Moosa ibn Ja’far. They are among the trustworthy and reliable scholars. Manhaaj al-Sunnah (2/243, 244).

3 – ‘Ali ibn Moosa al-Rida, Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Moosa al-Jawaad, ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-‘Askari, and al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al-‘Askari. Concerning them, Shaykh al-Islam (Ibn Taymiyah) said: They did not show a great deal of knowledge such that the ummah might benefit from them, nor did they have any authority by means of which they could help the ummah. Rather they were like any other Haashimis, they occupy a respected position, and they have sufficient knowledge of what which is needed by them and expected of people like them; it is a type is knowledge that is widely available to ordinary Muslims. But the type of knowledge that is exclusive to the scholars was not present in their case. Therefore seeks of knowledge did not receive from them what they received from the other three. Had they had that which was useful to seekers of knowledge, they would have sought it from them, as seekers of knowledge are well aware of where to go for knowledge. Minhaaj al-Sunnah (6/387).

4 – Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-‘Askari al-Muntazar (the awaited one). He did not exist at all, as stated above.

[Please take note that many of these Imams these Shia have heaped lies of infallibility and divinity about are figures well respected in the Ahlus-Sunnah Circles because they are believers from among the Household of the Prophet, loving and respecting them is a religious requirement. You should also know that, none of these Imams has ever supported these people in their evil exploits.]

The Shia in their treachery have only pretentiously singled out ‘Alee and his progeny as the Ahlul-Bayt. As for the other branches of the Ahlul-Bayt such as Al-‘Abbâs, his son, Abdullâh, and another son of his, ‘Ubaydullaah and ‘Aqeel, a brother of ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib, they were not safe from their invectives and curses. Were they not aware that Ibn ‘Abbâs was strongly behind ‘Alee in the civil wars?

You will never hear them speak good of Ja’far bn Abee Tâlib, a direct brother of ‘Alee. May Allâh be pleased with both.


Shia’s Temporary Marriage [Al-Mu’tah] is worthy of a special mention. It has been rightly argued that Al-Mu’tah is one of those magnetising message of the Shia, especially to the youths. It is sheer adultery, nothing more. Some of their academics have brought horrendous reports extolling this sinful practice. They lied against the Prophet, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, that he said: ‘Whoever sexually enjoys a believing woman for a temporarily appointed time is as if he has visited the Ka’bah seventy times.’ They said Ja’far As-Sâdiq said: ‘Mu’tah is from my religion and the religion of my fathers; whoever puts it into action has acted with our religion, whoever rejects it has rejected our religion and accepted another creed apart from our Deen.’

The author of Usool Al-Kaafee say there is no minimum time to engage in it. Also, it is not a condition that the woman must have come of age; it can be done with a toddler.

The author of Lillaah…Thumma Litaareekh, Sayyid Husayn, who was a former Shia scholar who repented and embraced the pure Sunnah, narrated that Al-Khomeini [yes the same Khomeini of the infamous ‘Islamic Revolution of Iran’] used to visit them at their Shia seminary at Najaf in Iraq, and that anytime he called, the students would throng him to take knowledge from him. There was a time he was invited to other part of the country; he said he accompanied him on that journey. He said they stayed in the house of one of the Shia families there. He said on their return from the journey, they had a stop-over in a suburb of Iraq and had to stay overnight in one of the houses of the Shia member there. He said they were greeted with a very fabulous dinner and people came from all places to see the ‘Imâm’ and sought blessings from him by kissing his hands {an act of polytheism]. He said when it was time for sleep, people began to leave. At that, Khomeini saw a very girl, a daughter of their host, around four or five years, who was very beautiful. He said the ‘Imâm’ requested from the father if he would allow him ‘enjoy’ the girl for the night. He said the man accepted with all pleasure. So the little girl was arranged for the ‘Imâm’ to enjoy for the night. The girl’s cries, sobs and screaming rented the night all through.

In the following morning he said when they sat at the table for breakfast Khomeini could read from his face that he was unhappy with what he did. He said he asked him: ‘O Sayyid Husayn, what is your view regarding Mu’tah with toddlers?’ he said he said: ‘O Master, it is your view that will be taken. Whatever you do is most correct. You are the Imâm the Mujtahid…’ He said: ‘O Sayyid Husayn, it is permissible to enjoy them but it should be play alone, kissing and placing the genital between her thighs, as for the actual sexual act, no, because she may not be able to take it.’ See the story in p.34-35 of the book.

The author said it is the view of Al-Khomeini that a baby girl being breast-fed can be sexually played with as Mu’tah. Al-Khomeini wrote in Tahreer Al-Waseelah [vol.2 p.241 no.12]: ‘There is nothing wrong with sexually paying with a baby that still sucks breast, when you hold her close and place your genital between her thighs…’.

May Allâh despise the Shia once again.

In their hypocrisy, they allow Mut’ah with the daughters of the common Shia but not with the daughters of the ‘scholars.’

It should be noted that the practice was allowed at a particular time in the general Islamic history before it was prohibited. And it was in this picture: when warriors go for long battles while leaving their wives at home, that they could enter into legal but temporary marriages with the conquered women at where they are having the battle. The Prophet, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, allowed it for the Muslim warriors as an option rather than a request from some of them that they should castrate themselves. The act was stopped the same day it was prohibited to consume the meat of domesticated donkeys.

‘Aashoora day

Shii’ah taking it as a day of mourning

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked What is the ruling on what people do on the day of ‘Aashooraa’ he replied as follows:

‘Praise be to Allaah, the Lord of the Worlds. Nothing to that effect has been reported in any saheeh hadeeth from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or from his Companions. None of the imaams of the Muslims encouraged or recommended such things, neither the four imaams, nor any others. No reliable scholars have narrated anything like this, neither from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), nor from the Sahaabah, nor from the Taabi’een; neither in any saheeh report or in a da’eef (weak) report; neither in the books of Saheeh, nor in al-Sunan, nor in the Musnads. No hadeeth of this nature was known during the best centuries, but some of the later narrators reported ahaadeeth like the one which says “Whoever puts kohl in his eyes on the day of ‘Aashooraa’ will not suffer from eye disease in that year, and whoever takes a bath (does ghusl) on the day of ‘Aashooraa’ will not get sick in that year, etc.” They also narrated reports concerning the supposed virtues of praying on the day of ‘Aashooraa’, and other reports saying that on the day of ‘Aashooraa’ Adam repented, the Ark settled on Mount Joodi, Yoosuf returned to Ya’qoob, Ibraaheem was saved from the fire, the ram was provided for sacrifice instead of Ismaa’eel, and so on. They also reported a fabricated hadeeth that is falsely attributed to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), which says, “Whoever is generous to his family on the day of ‘Aashooraa’, Allaah will be generous to him for the rest of the year.”

(Then Ibn Taymiyah discussed the two misguided groups who were in Koofah, Iraq, both of whom took ‘Aashooraa’ as a festival because of their bid’ah). The Raafidi group made an outward show of allegiance to the Ahl al-Bayt although inwardly they were either heretics and disbelievers or ignorant and bound by whims and desires. The Naasibi group hated ‘Ali and his companions, because of the troubles and killings that had occurred. It is reported in Saheeh Muslim that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “In (the tribe of) Thaqeef there will be a liar and an oppressor [???].” The liar was al-Mukhtaar ibn Abi ‘Ubayd al-Thaqafi, who made an outward show of allegiance to and support of the Ahl al-Bayt, and killed ‘Ubayd-Allaah ibn Ziyaad, the governor of Iraq, who had equipped the party that killed al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with them both); then he (al-Mukhtaar) made it clear that he was a liar, by claiming to be a prophet and that Jibreel (peace be upon him) brought revelation to him. People told Ibn ‘Umar and Ibn ‘Abbaas about this, and said to one of them, “al-Mukhtaar ibn Abi ‘Ubayd is claiming to receive revelation [annahu yanzilu ‘alayhi].” He said, “He is telling the truth, for Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): ‘Shall I inform you (O people) upon whom the shayaateen (devils) descend [tanazzalu]? They descend upon every lying, sinful person.’ [al-Shu’ara’ 26:221].” [Translator’s note: the words translated as “receive revelation” and “descend” both come from the same root in Arabic]. They said to the other: “Al-Mukhtaar is claiming that he receives inspiration.” He said, “he is telling the truth. ‘… And certainly, the Shayaateen (devils) do inspire their friends (from mankind) to dispute with you…’ [al-An’aam 6:121 – interpretation of the meaning].” As for the oppressor , this was al-Hajjaaj ibn Yoosuf al-Thaqafi, who was opposed to ‘Ali and his companions. Al-Hajjaaj was a Naasibi and al-Mukhtaar was a Raafidi, and this Raafidi was a greater liar and more guilty of fabrication and heresy, because he claimed to be a prophet…

There was much trouble and fighting between these two groups in Kufa. When al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with them both) was killed on the day of ‘Aashooraa’, he was killed by the sinful, wrongdoing group. Allaah honoured al-Husayn with martyrdom, as He honoured other members of his family, and raised his status, as He honoured Hamzah, Ja’far, his father ‘Ali and others. Al-Husayn and his brother al-Hasan are the leaders of the youth of Paradise. High status can only be attained through suffering, as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him said, when he was asked which people suffer the most. He said, “The Prophets, then righteous people, then the next best and the next best. A man will suffer according to his level of faith. If his faith is solid, he will suffer more, but if his faith is shaky, he will suffer less. The believer will keep on suffering until he walks on the earth with no sin.” (reported by al-Tirmidhi and others). Al-Hasan and al-Husayn achieved what they achieved and reached the high status they reached by the help and decree of Allaah. They did not suffer as much as their forefathers had, for they were born and raised during the glory days of Islam, and the Muslims respected and honoured them. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died when they were still young, and Allaah blessed them by testing them in such a manner that they would be able to catch up with the rest of their family members, as those who were of a higher status than them were also tested. ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib was better than them, and he was killed as a shaheed (martyr). The killing of al-Husayn was one of the things that caused fitnah (tribulation) among the people, as was the killing of ‘Uthmaan, which was one of the greatest causes of fitnah, because of which the ummah is still split today. Thus the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “There are three things, whoever is saved from them is truly saved: my death, the killing of a patient khaleefah, and the Dajjaal (‘antichrist’).”

Then Shaykh al-Islam (may Allaah have mercy on him) mentioned a little about the biography of al-Hasan and his just character, then he said:

“Then he died, and Allaah was pleased with him and honoured him. Some groups wrote to al-Husayn and promised to support and help him if he went ahead and declared himself khaleefah, but they were not sincere. When al-Husayn sent his cousin [son of his paternal uncle] to them, they broke their word and gave help to the one they had promised to defend him against, and fought with him against [al-Husayn’s cousin]. Those who were wise and who loved al-Husayn, such as Ibn ‘Abbaas and Ibn ‘Umar and others, advised him not to go to them, and not to accept any promises from them. They thought that his going to them served no useful interest and that the consequences would not be good. Things turned out just as they said, and this is how Allaah decreed it would happen. When al-Husayn (may Allaah be pleased with him) went out and saw that things were not as he had expected, he asked them to let him go back, or to let him join the army that was defending the borders of Islam, or join his cousin Yazeed, but they would not let him do any of these things unless he gave himself up to them as a prisoner. So he fought with them, and they killed him and some of those who were with him, and he was wrongfully slain so he died as a shaheed whose martyrdom brought him honour from Allaah, and so he was reunited with the good and pure members of his family. His murder brought shame on those who had wrongfully killed him, and caused much mischief among the people. An ignorant, wrongful group – who were either heretics and hypocrites, or misguided and misled – made a show of allegiance to him and the members of his household, so they took the day of ‘Aashooraa’ as a day of mourning and wailing, in which they openly displayed the rituals of jaahiliyyah such as slapping their cheeks and rending their garments, grieving in the manner of the jaahiliyyah. But what Allaah has commanded us to do when disaster strikes – when the disaster is fresh – is to bear it with patience and fortitude, and to seek reward, and to remember that all things come from Allaah and we must return to Him, as He says (interpretation of the meaning): “… but give glad tidings to al-saabiroon (the patient ones), who, when afflicted with calamity, say: ‘Truly, to Allaah we belong and turly, to Him we shall return.’ They are those on whom are al-salawaat (the blessings) (i.e., who are blessed and will be forgiven) from their Lord, and (they are those who) receive His Mercy, and it is they who are the guided ones.” [al-Baqarah 2:155-157] .

It is reported in al-Saheeh that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “he is not one of us who strikes his cheeks, rends his garments and prays with the prayer of Jaahiliyyah.” And he said: “I have nothing to do with those who strike [their cheeks], shave [their heads] and rend [their garments].” And he said: “If the woman who wails does not repent before she dies, she will be raised up on the Day of Resurrection wearing trousers made of tar and a shirt of scabs.” In al-Musnad, it is reported from Faatimah bint al-Husayn, from her father al-Husayn, that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “There is no man who suffers a calamity, and when he remembers it, even if it is old, he says ‘Innaa Lillaahi wa innaa ilayhi raaji’oon (Truly, to Allaah we belong and truly, to Him we shall return),’ but Allaah will give a reward equal to the reward He gave him on the day he suffered the calamity.” This is how Allaah honours the Believers. If the disaster suffered by al-Husayn, and other disasters, are mentioned after all this time, we should say “Innaa Lillaahi wa innaa ilayhi raaji’oon (Truly, to Allaah we belong and truly, to Him we shall return),” as Allaah and His Messenger commanded, so as to be given the reward like that earned on the day of the disaster itself. If Allaah commanded us to be patient and steadfast and to seek reward at the time of the disaster, then how about after the passing of time? The Shaytaan made this attractive to those who are misled, so they took the day of ‘Aashooraa’ as an occasion of mourning, when they grieve and wail, recite poems of grief and tell stories filled with lies. Whatever truth there may be in these stories serves no purpose other than the renewal of their grief and sectarian feeling, and the stirring up of hatred and hostility among the Muslims, which they do by cursing those who came before them, and telling many lies, and causing much trouble in the world. The various sects of Islam have never known any group tell more lies or cause more trouble or help the kuffaar against the Muslims more than this misguided and evil group. They are even worse than the Khawaarij who went beyond the pale of Islam. They are the ones of whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “They will kill the people of Islam and will leave alone the people who worship idols.” This group cooperated with the Jews, Christians and mushrikeen against the members of the Prophet’s household and his believing ummah, and also helped the mushrik Turks and Tatars to do what they did in Baghdaad and elsewhere to the descendents of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), i.e., the ‘Abbaasid rulers and others, and the believers; the Turks and Tatars killed them, enslaved their women and destroyed their homes. The evil and harm that they do to the Muslims cannot be enumerated by any man, no matter how eloquent he is. Some others – either Naasibis who oppose and have enmity towards al-Husayn and his family or ignorant people who try to fight evil with evil, corruption with corruption, lies with lies and bid’ah with bid’ah – opposed them by fabricating reports in favour of making the day of ‘Aashooraa’ a day of celebration, by wearing kohl and henna, spending money on one’s children, cooking special dishes and other things that are done on Eids and special occasions. These people took the day of ‘Aashooraa’ as a festival like Eid, whereas the others took it as a day of mourning. Both are wrong, and both go against the Sunnah, even though the other group (the Rafidis) are worse in intention and more ignorant and more plainly wrong… But Allaah commands us to be just and to treat others well. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Those of you who live after my death will see many disputes. I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the sunnah of my rightly-guided successors (al-khulafa’ al-raashidoon) who come after me. Hold onto it as if biting it with your eyeteeth. Beware of newly-innovated matters, for every innovation is a going astray.” Neither the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) nor his rightly-guided successors (the khulafa’ al-raashidoon) did any of these things on the day of ‘Aashooraa’, they neither made it a day of mourning nor a day of celebration.

But “when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) came to Madeenah, he saw the Jews fasting on the day of ‘Aashooraa’. He said, ‘What is this?’ They said, ‘This is the day when Allaah saved Moosa from drowning, so we fast on this day.’ He said, ‘We have more right to Moosa than you,’ so he fasted on that day and commanded [the Muslims] to fast on that day.”

Quraysh also used to venerate this day during the Jaahiliyyah. The day on which people were ordered to fast was just one day. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) came to Madeenah it was Rabee’ al-Awwal, and the following year he fasted ‘Aashooraa’ and commanded the people to fast. Then in that year fasting in Ramadaan was made obligatory and fasting on ‘Aashooraa’ was abrogated. The scholars disputed as to whether fasting on that day (‘Aashooraa’) was waajib (obligatory) or mustahabb (encouraged). Of the two best known opinions, the more correct view is that it was waajib, then after that whoever fasted it did it because it was mustahabb. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not tell ordinary Muslims to fast on ‘Aashooraa’, but he used to say, “This is the day of ‘Aashooraa’; I am fasting on this day and whoever wishes to fast on this day may fast.” And he said: “Fasting on ‘Aashooraa’ expiates for the sins of one year and fasting on the day of ‘Arafaah expiates for the sins of two years.” When, towards the end of his life, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) heard that the Jews took the day of ‘Aashooraa’ as a festival, he said, “If I live until next year, I will certainly fast on the ninth” – to be different from the Jews, and not to resemble them in taking the day as a festival.

There were some of the Sahaabah and scholars who did not fast on this day and did not regard it as mustahabb, but thought it makrooh to single out this day for fasting. This was reported from a group of the Koofiyeen (scholars of Kufa). Some other scholars said that it was mustahabb to fast on this day. The correct view is that it is mustahabb for the one who fasts on ‘Aashooraa’ to fast on the ninth day [of Muharram] too, because this was the ultimate command of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), as he said: “If I live until next year, I will certainly fast on the ninth as well as the tenth.” This was reported with a variety of isnaads. This is what is prescribed in the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

As for the other things, such as cooking special dishes with or without grains, or wearing new clothes, or spending money on one’s family, or buying the year’s supplies on that day, or doing special acts of worship such as special prayers or deliberately slaughtering an animal on that day, or saving some of the meat of the sacrifice to cook with grains, or wearing kohl and henna, or taking a bath (ghusl), or shaking hands with one another, or visiting one another, or visiting the mosques and mashhads (shrines) and so on… all of this is reprehensible bid’ah and is wrong. None of it has anything to do with the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or the way of the Khulafa’ al-Raashidoon. It was not approved of by any of the imaams of the Muslims, not Maalik, not al-Thawri, not al-Layth ibn Sa’d, not Abu Haneefah, not al-Oozaa’i, not al-Shaafa’i, not Ahmad ibn Hanbal, not Ishaaq ibn Raahwayh, not any of the imaams and scholars of the Muslims.

The religion of Islam is based on two principles: that we should worship nothing besides Allaah Alone, and that we should worship Him in the manner that He has prescribed, not by means of bid’ah or reprehensible innovations. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “… So whoever hopes for the Meeting with his Lord, let him work righteousness and associate none as a partner in the worship of his Lord.” [al-Kahf 18:110].

Righteous deeds are those which are loved by Allaah and His Messenger, those which are prescribed in Islam and in the Sunnah. Thus ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) used to say in his du’aa’: “O Allaah, make all of my deeds righteous and make them purely for Your sake, and do not let there be any share for anyone or anything else in them.”

(The above is summarized from the words of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah – may Allaah have mercy on him. Al-Fataawa al-Kubra, part 5). And Allaah is the Guide to the Straight Path.

Was al-Husayn died as a martyr?

Yes, al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) was killed as a martyr.

That was when the people of Iraq (Kufah) wrote to him and asked him to come out to them so that they could swear allegiance to him as their ruler, which happened after the death of Mu‘aawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him), and the accession of his son Yazeed to the caliphate.

Then the people of Kufah turned against al-Husayn after ‘Ubaydullah ibn Ziyaad was appointed as governor of the city by Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah and killed Muslim ibn ‘Uqayl, who was al-Husayn’s envoy to them. The hearts of the people of Iraq were with al-Husayn, but their swords were with ‘Ubaydullah ibn Ziyaad.

al-Husayn went out to them, not knowing of the killing of Muslim ibn ‘Uqayl, or of the people’s changed attitude towards him.

Wise men who loved him had advised him not to go out to Iraq, but he insisted on going out to them. Among those who gave him this advice were: ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbaas, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, Abu Sa‘eed al-Khudri, Jaabir ibn ‘Abdullah, al-Miswar ibn Makhramah, and ‘Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr (may Allah be pleased with them all).

So al-Husayn travelled to Iraq, and halted at Karbala’, where he came to know that the people of Iraq had turned against him. So al-Husayn asked the army that came to fight him for one of three things: either to let him return to Makkah, or to let him go to Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah, or to let him go to the frontier to fight in jihad for the sake of Allah.

But they insisted that he should surrender to them, and al-Husayn refused, so they fought him, and he was killed wrongfully as a martyr (may Allah be pleased with him).

Al-Bidaayah wa’n-Nihaayah (11/473-520

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah was born during the caliphate of ‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan (may Allah be pleased with him) and did not meet the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). He was not one of the Sahaabah, according to scholarly consensus, and he was not one of those who were well known for religious commitment and righteousness. He was one of the Muslim youth, and he was not a disbeliever or a heretic. He became the caliph after his father died, despite the objections of some of the Muslims and with the approval of some of them. He was courageous and generous, and he did not outwardly blatantly commit immoral actions, as some of his opponents said that he did.

During his rule, a number of grievous events occurred, one of which was the killing of al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him). Yazeed did not issue orders that al-Husayn be killed, and he did not express joy at his killing. He did not poke the severed head of al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) with a stick, and the head of al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) was not brought to him in Syria, but he did issue instructions that al-Husayn be prevented from achieving his goal, even if that involved fighting him. But those who received his instructions went further than that.

Al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) asked them to let him go to Yazeed or let him go to the border and keep watch there, or let him go back to Makkah, but they insisted on taking him prisoner and ‘Umar ibn Sa‘d issued orders to fight him, and they killed him wrongfully – him and a number of his family members (may Allah be pleased with them). His killing was a major calamity, because the killing of al-Husayn, and of ‘Uthmaan before him, was among the main causes of turmoil in this ummah, and their killers are among the most evil of people before Allah. End quote.

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (3/410-413)

He also said (25/302-305):

When al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was killed on the day of ‘Ashoora’, he was killed by the transgressing, wrongdoing group. Allah honoured al-Husayn with martyrdom, as He honoured other members of his family; He honoured Hamzah and Ja‘far with martyrdom, as well as his father ‘Ali and others. His martyrdom was one of the means by which Allah raised him in status, for he and his brother al-Hasan will be the leaders of the youth among the people of Paradise, and high status is only achieved by means of trials, as the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said, when he was asked which of the people are most sorely tested? He said: “The Prophets, then the righteous, then the next best and the next best. A man will be tested to a degree commensurate with his level of religious commitment. If there is firmness in his religious commitment, his test will be greater, and if there is any weakness in his religious commitment, the test will be reduced for him. Trials will continue to befall the believer until he walks upon the earth with no sin on him.”

Narrated by at-Tirmidhi and others.

Al-Hasan and al-Husayn had previously been granted high status by Allah, may He be glorified, and they did not go through the same trials and hardships that had befallen their predecessors, because they were born at a time when Islam was prevalent and they had grown up with honour and dignity. The Muslims venerated them and honoured them, and when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) died, they had not yet reached the age of discernment. The blessing that Allah bestowed upon them was that He tested them with that which caused them to join the other members of their family, just as He tested others who were better than them. ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib was better than them, and he was killed as a martyr. The killing of al-Husayn was an event that provoked turmoil among the people, just as the killing of ‘Uthmaan was one of the main causes of turmoil among the people, as a result of which the ummah is still divided until the present day.

When al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) went out and saw that things had changed, he asked them to let him go back (to Makkah) or to let him go to one of the border regions, or to let him go and join his paternal cousin Yazeed. But they did not let him do any of these things, unless he surrendered to them and they took him captive. They fought him, so he fought back, then they killed him and a number of those who were with him wrongfully and as martyrs. Allah honoured him with martyrdom and caused him to join the pure and good members of his family, and He humiliated thereby those who wronged him and transgressed against him. End quote.

Distortion of the Qur’aan by the Raafidis and their believe that their is a surat in their book which is not in the QURAN which they called Suratu Alwilaayah
With regard to Soorat al-Wilaayah, some of the Shi’ah scholars and imams have stated that it exists. Any of them who denies that does so by way of taqiyah (dissimulation). One of those who clearly stated that it exists is Mirza Hussein Muhammad Taqiy al-Noori al-Tubrusi (d. 1320 AH). He wrote a book in which he claimed that the Qur’aan had been distorted and that the Sahaabah has concealed some parts of it, including Soorat al-Wilaayah. The Raafidis honoured him after his death by burying him in al-Najaf. This book by al-Tubrusi was published in Iran in 1298 AH, and when it was published there was a great deal of controversy because they wanted the doubts about the validity of the Qur’aan, which were known only to their leaders, to remain scattered throughout hundreds of their major books, and they did not want that to be compiled in one book. At the beginning of his book he said:

“This is a good and noble book entitled Fasl al-khitaab fi ithbaat tahreef Kitaab Rabb il-Arbaab (Decisive comment on the distortion of the Book of the Lord of Lords)… He mentioned aayahs and soorahs which he claims that the Sahaabah concealed, including ‘Soorat al-Wilaayah,’” the text of which, according to them, and as quoted in this book, is:

“O you who believe, believe in the Prophet and the Wali [i.e., ‘Ali] whom We have sent to guide you to the straight path, a Prophet and a Wali who are part of one another, and I am the All-Knowing, All-Aware…”

And they have another soorah which they call Soorat al-Noorayn: “O you who believe, believe in the two lights (al-noorayn) which We have sent down to you to recite to you My Verses and to warn you of the punishment of a great Day. They are part of one another and I am the All-Hearing, All-Knowing. Those who fulfil the covenant with Allaah and His Messenger mentioned in the verses (of the Qur’aan), the Gardens of delight will be theirs, but those who disbelieve after they believed by breaking their covenant and disobeying the command of the Prophet, they will be thrown into Hell. They have wronged themselves and gone against the wasiyyah of the Prophet (i.e., the appointment of ‘Ali as khaleefah), and they will be given to drink of boiling water…” and other such nonsense.

You can see the entire soorah, along with a telegraphic picture of the Persian mus-haf at the following site:


Prof. Muhammad ‘Ali Sa’oodi – who was one of the greatest experts of the Ministry of Justice in Egypt – examined an Iranian mus-haf kept by the Orientalist Bryan and he obtained a copy of this soorah; above the lines of Arabic script there is written the translation in the Iranian language.

As it was mentioned by al-Tubrusi in his book, Fasl al-khitaab fi ithbaat tahreef Kitaab Rabb il-Arbaab, it is also mentioned in their book Dabastan Madhaahib, which is in Farsi, written by Muhsin Faani al-Kashmiri. This book has been printed numerous times in Iran, and this false soorah was quoted from it by the Orientalist Noeldeke in his book The History of Qur’anic Manuscripts, 2/120, and was published by the French Asian newspaper in 1842 (p. 431-439).

It was also mentioned by Mirza Habibullaah al-Haashimi al-Kho’i in his book Manhaaj al-Baraa’ah fi Sharh Nahj al-Balaaghah (2/217); and by Muhammad Baaqir al-Majlisi in his book Tadhkirat al-A’immah (p. 19, 20) in Farsi, (published by) Manshoorat Mawlana, Iran.

See also al-Khutoot al-‘Areedah li’l-Asas allati qaama ‘alayha deen al-Shi’ah by Muhibb al-Deen al-Khateeb.

This claim of theirs is a denial of the words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning):

“Verily, We, it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur’aan) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption)”

[al-Hijr 15:9]

Hence the Muslims are unanimously agreed that anyone who claims that anything in the Qur’aan has been altered or changed is a kaafir.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:

The same applies to those among them who claim that some verses of the Qur’aan have been taken away or concealed, or who claim to have some esoteric interpretations that exempt him from having to do the actions prescribed in sharee’ah etc., who are called al-Qaraamitah and al-Baatiniyyah, and who include al-Tanaasukhiyyah [names of esoteric sects]. There is no dispute that they are kaafirs.

Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 3/1108-1110.

Ibn Hazm said:

The view that the Qur’aan has been altered is blatant kufr and is a rejection of what the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said.

Al-Fasl fi’l-Ahwa’ wa’-Milal wa’l-Nihal, 4/139.

There are numerous solid arguments based on logic and Shari’ah refuting their religion and false beliefs. These arguments are so many that it would be difficult to recount them all. Therefore they should repent from their false and unfounded beliefs and enter into the fold of Islam.

“They are the enemies, so beware of them. May Allah curse them! How are they denying (or deviating from) the Right Path.” (al-Munaafiqoon, verse 4)

These Rafida (Shia) actually descend from Abu Lu’luah Majoosi (a Persian fire worshipper) and Abdullaah ibn Saba’ (a Jew). However they are more dangerous from the Non-Muslims themselves. Non-Muslims fight Islam face to face (if they did) while Rafida stab Islam from its back.

And Allaah knows best.


One thought on “Who are the Shi’a (Raafidi)?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s