Instruction: Do Shias worship Ali ibn Abu Talib (as)?

Context:
Shias do not worship Imam Ali (as). Shias worship Allah (SwT). How can anyone believe that Shias
worship Imam Ali (as) when he himself tells us to worship Allah (SwT)?
Nahjul Balagha
In the famous book, Nahjul Balagha, a compilation of the sermons and sayings of Imam Ali (as), the first
recorded sermon begins with:
“Praise is due to Allah whose worth cannot be described by speakers, whose bounties cannot be
counted by calculators and whose claim (to obedience) cannot be satisfied by those who attempt to do
so, whom the height of intellectual courage cannot appreciate, and the divings of understanding cannot
reach; He for whose description no limit has been laid down, no eulogy exists, no time is ordained and
no duration is fixed. He brought forth creation through His Omnipotence, dispersed winds through His
Compassion, and made firm the shaking earth with rocks.”
Imam Ali (as) continues: “The foremost in religion is the acknowledgement of Him, the perfection of
acknowledging Him is to testify Him, the perfection of testifying Him is to believe in His Oneness, the
perfection of believing in His Oneness is to regard Him Pure, and the perfection of His purity is to deny
Him attributes, because every attribute is a proof that it is different from that to which it is attributed and
everything to which something is attributed is different from the attribute.
Thus whoever attaches attributes to Allah recognises His like, and who recognises His like regards Him
two; and who regards Him two recognises parts for Him; and who recognises parts for Him mistook Him;
and he who mistook Him, pointed at Him; and he who pointed at Him, admitted limitations for Him; and
he who admitted limitations for Him, numbered Him.”
This sermon, and others in Nahjul Balagha show that Imam Ali (as) is the most eloquent exponent of
Allah’s existence, His unity (Tawhid).
Other followers
There are other groups, chief among them the Nuzayris, the various groups of the Ghuluww, the
extremists, who have worshipped Ali, but not the Shias.
Shias take pride that Ali (as) was not Allah but was the first male to worship Allah, with the Prophet (S);
the first to bow down behind Muhammad (S), in prayer (salah), in worship of the one true Lord, Allah
(SwT).
The Ghuluww, the Nuzayris and others, who take delight in their worship of Ali (as), are not friends or
allies, of the Shias. They are people who have abandoned Islam, who have traduced Ali (as) by
ascribing divinity to him. Too many Shias over the years have praised the Nuzayris and the Ali
worshippers in their hymns (marthiyas) and in their religious poetry. This is wrong, un-Islamic and this is
something the Prophet (S) warned against.
In a famous tradition (hadith) of the Prophet (S), narrated by Ahlul Sunnah and Shia scholars alike, the
Holy Prophet said: “O Ali, you have a resemblance to Prophet Jesus (Isa), the son of Virgin Mary whom
some Jews hated so much that they slandered him and his mother Mary and whom some Christians
loved so much that they placed him in a position not rightly his.”
Shias love Ali (as) but do not, and should not, put him in a position which is not rightly his, that is, above
the Prophet (S) or in place of Allah (SwT)
As Imam Ali (as) himself said, “Two kinds of people will be damned on my account. Those who form an
exaggerated opinion about me and those who underestimate me because they hate me.” (Nahjul
Balaghah, list of short sayings no.116).
So the historical evidence, the consensus of the Shia ulema and common sense are all proofs that that
Shias worship Allah (SwT), not Imam Ali (as).

Response: Shias do not worship Imam Ali (as). Shias worship Allah (SwT). How can anyone believe that Shias worship Allah (SwT), not Imam Ali (as).


Instruction: Do Shias believe that Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) is superior to the Prophet (S)?

Context:
Some enemies of the Shias claim that, we believe, Imam Ali (as) was better or superior to Muhammad
(S); some have suggested that we believe that the revelation of the Holy Qur’an was intended for him
but mistakenly given to his cousin Muhammad (S). This is nonsense.
Common sense
Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) was either 10 or 12 years of age when the Prophet (S) received his first revelation,
(wahi), from the archangel Jibraeel (Gabriel) in a cave. Does it make sense to believe that Shias would
claim Jibraeel, an infallible angel, mistook a 12-year-old boy for a 40-year-old man?
Shias do not believe this but rather take pleasure in pointing out how Imam Ali (as) slept in the bed of
the Prophet (S) to protect the Prophet’s life. Ali (as) slept in the Prophet’s bed on the night of Hijra so
that the Prophet (S) could migrate to Madinah safely. How could we then believe he is superior to the
Prophet (S)?
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
In fact, the Prophet (S) famously predicted, in a tradition (hadith) narrated by very famous Ahlul Sunnah
scholars like Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal in his Musnad and Imam Hakim in his Mustadrak: “In truth there
will be, among you, one who shall fight over the ta’wil of the Qur’an, the interpretation of the Qur’an, just
as I fought over its tanzil, its revelation.” Abu Bakr and Umar asked: “Am I he?” The Prophet said: “No, it
is the one who is mending the shoes.” The companions turned to the side to see Imam Ali (as) mending
the Prophet’s shoes.
This hadith shows that:
 • Imam Ali (as) was the one the Prophet (S) singled out to his companions as the protector of
Qura’nic interpretation;
 • Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) used to mend the Prophet’s shoes and take pride in it.
After the Prophet (S), Ali (as) is the most superior and the greatest being created by Allah (SwT) – but
the key point to note here is “after” the Prophet.

Response:
Some enemies of the Shias claim that, we believe, Imam Ali (as) was better or superior to Muhammad
(S); some have suggested that we believe that the revelation of the Holy Qur’an was intended for him
but mistakenly given to his cousin Muhammad (S). This is nonsense.
Common sense
Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) was either 10 or 12 years of age when the Prophet (S) received his first revelation,
(wahi), from the archangel Jibraeel (Gabriel) in a cave. Does it make sense to believe that Shias would
claim Jibraeel, an infallible angel, mistook a 12-year-old boy for a 40-year-old man?
Shias do not believe this.


Instruction: Where is the proof that Ali (as) was appointed by the Prophet (S)?

Context:
This is one of the most important questions to ponder and needs a detailed review. The Shias point to
the hadith of Ghadeer Khumm, narrated by the Ahlul Sunnah (see below) in which the Holy Prophet (S)
declared: “Man kunto mawla hu fa haadha Aliyyun mawla” – “Of whomsoever I am mawla, Ali is also his
mawla, i.e. leader.”
Does “mawla” mean friend?
This comes up again and again – especially that “mawla” means friend, not leader, imam or amir. We
can analyse this by the following:
Meaning of “mawla”?
According to one study, the word mawla has between 20 and 30 different definitions in Arabic, but only
one of which translates as “friend”. Most translate it as “owner”, “leader”, “benefactor”, “guide”, “helper”.
Look at the Holy Qur’an, the words, mawla, awla, wali, wilayat, all come from the same root word, “wali”,
and are all used in the Holy Qur’an to refer to guidance and leadership. For friendship or companionship,
the Holy Qur’an tends to use the words, khaleel, sadiq and hameem.
Context when word “mawla” was used
The word “mawla” was used at Ghadeer Khumm, on the return journey from the last pilgrimage (Hajj) of
the Prophet. The Prophet (S) calls back all those who had gone ahead. He calls forward all the people at
the back. He then builds a pulpit from camels’ saddles, goes up on it and addresses over 100,000
people in the burning heat of the Arabian Desert, to make an important announcement.
Then the Prophet (S) asked just before the declaration, “Do I not have more authority upon you (alastu
awla bi kum) than you have over yourselves?” All the people replied, “Yes, surely.” Then the Prophet (S)
declared: “Of whomsoever I am mawla, Ali is also his mawla.”
Surely the word “mawla”, in this context, refers to authority, to leadership. The earlier reference is from
the verse:
“The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves.” (33:6).[Surah
Ahzab]
As Sunni scholar Sibt ibn Jauzi says, “The saying of the Holy Prophet that Ali has authority or is the
master over the selves of all the believers clearly proves the Imamate or vicegerency of Ali and that
obedience to him is obligatory.”
After the declaration, the Prophet (S) uttered the following prayer: “O Allah! Love him who loves Ali, and
be enemy of he who is the enemy of Ali; help him who helps Ali, and forsake him who forsakes Ali.”
This prayer shows that Imam Ali (as), on that day, was being entrusted with a position that would make
some people his enemies and therefore he would need supporters in carrying out his responsibilities.
This could not be anything but the position of the mawla in the sense of ruler, master and lord. Are
helpers ever needed to carry on or protect a ‘friendship’ from enemies?
The body language
Sunni scholar Allama ibn Hajar Asqalani narrates in his book, al-Isabah, how the Prophet (S) stood next
to Imam Ali (as) on a raised pulpit or mimbar built from the saddles of camels, raised Ali’s hand, his arm
in the air, and placed a turban on his head. Now, if that’s not a coronation, then what is?
Common sense
Why would the Prophet (S) waste time in the hot Arabian Desert, to tell over 100,000 people that Ali (as)
was his “friend”? Didn’t they know that? Wouldn’t you be annoyed if you were in that crowd? Why waste
everyone else’s time, and that too after an exhausting Hajj and in all that heat, unless you have
something important to announce?
Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
Ponder over the Qura’nic verse which was revealed prior to Ghadeer Khumm:
“O Messenger! Convey what had been revealed to you from your Lord; if you do not do so, then
[it would be as if] you have not conveyed His message [at all]. Allah will protect you from the
people.” (5: 67) [Surah Maidah]
Countless classical Ahlul Sunnah scholars have said that this verse was revealed ahead of the event of
Ghadeer Khumm, perhaps the most famous of all being Imam Fakhruddin al-Razi in his Tafisr al-Kabir.
How can Muslims believe, as the Holy Qur’an warns, that the whole of the Prophet’s mission was about
to be rendered null and void if he didn’t tell the people that he and Ali (as) were friends? This verse
shows how important the announcement was – and how controversial Allah (SwT) knew it would be. The
Holy Qur’an says: “Allah will protect you from the people”.
Why might the Prophet need protecting? Because; the issue of succession was being clarified and
confirmed, once and for all, explicitly and publicly, and some people in the crowd were going to be upset
and rebellious.
And what happened after the sermon at Ghadeer was over? What verse was revealed? According to all
the major classical books of the Ahlul Sunnah (Hafiz Jalaluddin as Suyuti, Shaykh Sulayman alQandoozi Hanafi, Allama ibn Kathir, among them):
“This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favour on you and chosen for
you Islam as your religion” (5:3) [Surah Maidah].
This is the final verse of the Holy Qur’an! And what an occasion it was revealed on!
Again, some common sense is needed: would Allah (SwT) really be unable or unwilling to “perfect” his
religion and name it “Islam” unless the issue of the Prophet’s “friendship” with Ali was cleared up for the
Muslims? This is illogical and an insult to our intelligence! The truth is that Islam was completed and
named for the Prophet (S) only after the Prophet (S) announced Ali (as) as his successor. Islam wasn’t
complete until the caliphate of Ali (as) was announced, revealed, made clear, to the Muslim masses.
Otherwise, you have to believe that that the 22-years mission of the Prophet (S) was being invalidated
over the issue of his “friendship” with Ali (as). And ask yourself this: was it the announcement of a
friendship or the appointment of a successor to the Prophet that perfected the religion of Islam? What do
you think?
Second caliph’s reaction
It is narrated that after the sermon was over, the Prophet set up a tent with Ali (as) and the companions
lined up to give allegiance (bay’at) to Imam Ali (as), led by, Umar ibn Khattab, second caliph of the Ahlul
Sunnah.
According to, among others, Sunni scholars like Imam Fakhruddin al-Razi in his book, and Imam Ahmed
ibn Hanbal, in his Musnad, Umar ibn Khattab was the first to arrive on the scene, and looking at Ali, he
said: “Well done ibn Abu Talib! Today you became the master of all believing men and women, ‘Ameer
al-Mo’mineen’!”
This title, Ameer al-Mo’mineen, (Commander of the Faithful), that Shias use today to refer to Imam Ali
(as), and for which they are often condemned and criticised by the Ahlul Sunnah, was first used by none
other than Umar ibn Khattab. How ironic! Ameer al-Mo’mineen has only one meaning – commander,
leader, master of the faithful. When Mullah Umar of the Taliban set up the Islamic Emirate of Afganistan,
what did he call himself ? Ameer al-Mo’mineen.
Yet we know from Ghadeer Khumm, from the public testimony of Umar ibn Khattab, that the first and
only legitimate Ameerul Momineen, appointed by Allah (SwT) via His Messenger, is Ali ibn Abu Talib
(as).
Imam Ali (as) invoked Ghadeer later on
Imam Ali (as) himself offered the event of Ghadeer Khumm, as evidence for his leadership, his caliphate
and imamat, later on in his life, after the Prophet’s death. There are numerous examples and one of the
most famous is as follows: The Sunni scholars ibn Qutaybah, ibn Hanbal, Muttaqi al-Hindi and Abu
Nuaym Isfahani, all record in their books that during the caliphate of Ali, (as) when his authority was
being questioned and rebellions were brewing, Imam Ali (as), in public, said to Anas ibn Malik, the
famous companion of the Prophet (S): “Why don’t you stand up and testify what you heard from the
Messenger of Allah on the day of Ghadeer?”
Anas answered, “O Ameer al-Mo’mineen! I have grown old and do not remember.” To which Ali (as)
responded: “May Allah mark you with a white spot (of leprosy) unconcealable with your turban, if you are
intentionally withholding the truth.” And when Anas got up from his place he bore a large white spot on
his face. From that day onwards, Anas used to say, “I am under the curse of the righteous servant of
Allah, Ali ibn Abu Talib!”
The Ghadeer Khumm incident makes it clear that Ali (as) was the Prophet’s successor. But there are
other examples from the Prophet’s life too. For example, at start of the Prophethood, according to the
Tarikh, or History, of Allama Tabari, the famous Sunni historian: The Prophet (S) asked three times, at a
dinner for his friends and relatives, who will help him in his prophetic mission? On each of the three
occassions, only Ali (as) stood up and said he would. On the first two occasions, the Prophet asked Ali
(as) to sit down. But, on the third occasion, the Prophet said: “Verily this is my brother, my successor,
and my caliph amongst you. Therefore, listen to him and obey.” Abu Lahab (the Prophet’s paternal
uncle) said to Abu Talib (his brother and Ali’s father) “the Prophet (S) has told you to obey your own
son!”
The tragedy is that the majority of the Muslims do not understand today what Abu Lahab understood on
the first day of the introduction of Islam in Makkah.

Response:
The Shias point to
the hadith of Ghadeer Khumm, narrated by the Ahlul Sunnah (see below) in which the Holy Prophet (S)
declared: “Man kunto mawla hu fa haadha Aliyyun mawla” – “Of whomsoever I am mawla, Ali is also his
mawla, i.e. leader.”


Instruction: Why do Shias think Ali (as) is superior to the first three caliphs?

Context:
This is not just a Shia view, that Imam Ali (as) is superior to the rest of the caliphs and sahabah. A
number of Ahlul Sunnah scholars and books agree with this view.
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, one of the four Ahlul Sunnah Imams of fiqh, said: “There is no Companion
about whom as many merits are reported as Ali ibn Abu Talib.”
The prominent Ahlul Sunnah scholar of India, Shah Ismail Muhaddith Dehlvi, wrote: “Ali al-Murtadha has
also an edge over Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and Umar Faruq and this edge lies because of the greater
number of his followers and all the highest spiritual and saintly activity, from his days to the end of the
world, has to be mediated through him, and he has a say in the kingdom of the kings and the leadership
of the leaders and this is not hidden from those who are familiar with the world of sovereignty. Most
spiritual chains are directly derived from Ali al-Murtadha. So, on the Day of Judgment, Ali’s army,
including followers of high status and great reputation, will outnumber and outshine others to be a source
of wonder for all the spectators.”
In fact, to even compare Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) with any of the companions is absurd. It is a
misunderstanding of who Ali (as) is, what Ali (as) represented and stood for. Imam Ali (as) was on a
different level; he wasn’t a mere companion like Abu Bakr or Umar or even Ammar and Salman.
Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
The Sunni scholar Allama Muttaqi al-Hindi, in his famous book, Kanz al-Ummal, narrates a tradition
(hadith) from the Prophet (S), in which the Prophet (S) was asked by a visitor to Madinah to name his
favourite companion. When he omits the mention of Imam Ali (as), he was asked: “But what about Ali?
“To which the Prophet (S) replied: “Look at this man, he asks me about my own self.”
This hadith of course is a reflection of the Ayat of Mubahela of the Holy Qur’an, (Ch.3: V61) [Surah Ali
Imran] which states:
“But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then
say: Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our selves
and your selves, then let us be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse of God on the liars”(3:61)
All of the Ahlul Sunnah historians, including Muslim in his Sahih, Book 31, Hadith Number 5915, testify
that the Prophet (S) took Hasan (as) and Husayn (as) with him as his “sons”, Lady Fatima (as) with him
as the representative of “women”, and Imam Ali (as) as his self, (as his nafs).
The reason why Ali (as) is not just superior to the rest of the companions, including the first three caliphs
is because he went beyond what a companion was: he wasn’t just a companion of the Prophet (S); he
was, as Allah (SwT) says in the Holy Qur’an, and the Prophet (S) says in his tradition (hadith), a self of
the Prophet, nafs al-Rasoolallah.

Response:
This is not just a Shia view, that Imam Ali (as) is superior to the rest of the caliphs and sahabah. A
number of Ahlul Sunnah scholars and books agree with this view.
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, one of the four Ahlul Sunnah Imams of fiqh, said: “There is no Companion
about whom as many merits are reported as Ali ibn Abu Talib.” he reason why Ali (as) is not just superior to the rest of the companions, including the first three caliphs
is because he went beyond what a companion was: he wasn’t just a companion of the Prophet (S); he
was, as Allah (SwT) says in the Holy Qur’an, and the Prophet (S) says in his tradition (hadith), a self of
the Prophet, nafs al-Rasoolallah.


Instruction: Why did Ali (as) not fight for the leader- ship if it was his God-given right?

Context:
Imam Ali (as) never took up arms against Abu Bakr or Umar or Uthman. Some Ahlul Sunnah scholars try
and argue that this shows he was not opposed to them. This is an incorrect analysis and a
misunderstanding of Imam Ali’s (as) thinking and motivations.
The reasons
The reason Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) did not fight after the death of the Prophet (S) is because he did not
want to divide the nascent, infant Muslim community. He did not want innocent Muslims to die in battle,
killing each other, in order to take power. The historians, Sunni and Shia, record how Abu Sufyan offered
him troops but Imam Ali (as) turned him down and criticised his divisive offer.
His divinely-appointed role as Imam
Imam Ali’s (as) imamat, his caliphate, his wilayat, was given to him by the Prophet (S) on the command
of Allah (SwT). He was not expected to go and force the Muslims, the people, to follow him; it was their
job to find him and follow him. His position as the Imam was not a political or elected position. It was
bestowed upon him by Allah (SwT). Kanz al-Ummal, the Sunni book of ahadith, narrates the tradition in
which the Prophet (S) told Imam Ali (as): “[O Ali], You are like the Kabah, people go the the Kabah, the
Kabah does not come to the people.…”
Common sense
Imam Ali (as) may not have fought against Abu Bakr and Umar; but he never fought for them either, as
part of their armies. Why not? He also refused to give allegiance (bay’at) to Abu Bakr for at least six
months after the death of the Prophet and his beloved wife Lady Fatima (as), who died soon after the
Prophet. Why didn’t he? The Shias, of course, would also argue that he never pledged any formal
allegiance to them at any point in his lifetime. Again, why? What was his problem with them?
This is explained in Nahjul Balagha where Imam Ali (as) devotes entire sermons to questioning how Abu
Bakr and others robbed him of his right to caliph (caliphate) but this is a Shia book. So consider instead
the words of Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) to the six-man committee appointed by Umar on his deathbed
to pick a new caliph – and narrated by all of the Sunni ulema.
The committee requested Imam Ali (as) to take over the position as caliph but on the condition that he
abides with the following:
 • The Holy Qur’an
 • The Prophet’s traditions
 • The laws and regulations, the “sunnah”, introduced by the first two caliphs.
Imam Ali (as) replied that the first two conditions were acceptable to him but, he had his own views and
opinion on the third condition. All of the Sunni historians agree that Imam Ali (as) rejected the sunnah of
Abu Bakr and Umar, upon the death of the latter. Why would he do that if he had accepted the
legitimacy of their leadership?


Instruction: Why do Shias refuse to accept that the Prophet (S) did not leave a successor?

Context:
Some Muslims are of the opinion that the Prophet (S) left it to the people to decide. Wouldn’t he have
written a will if he wanted to leave behind a successor or appoint Imam Ali (as)?
Common sense
The idea that the Prophet of Islam who never left Madinah without appointing someone to take charge of
the city in his absence, left behind an Islamic state without appointing a successor and without even
laying out the rules for how to appoint a successor, is just unbelievable, fanciful and absurd. It is illogical
to believe such a thing.
Then there is the issue of the will – or lack thereof. In Islam, making a will is vitally important. The idea
that the Holy Prophet (S) who told his followers to make sure they left wills behind, when they died, even
if they were the poorest of the poor, would die without leaving a will behind is equally absurd – and an
insult to the Prophet (S).
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
The truth is that the Prophet did try to make a will but was prevented from doing so by a group of his
companions.
According to Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Hadith Number 393, Said ibn Jubair narrated: I heard
Ibn Abbas saying, “Thursday! And you know not what Thursday is? After that Ibn Abbas wept till the
stones on the ground were soaked with his tears. On that I asked Ibn Abbas, “What is (about)
Thursday?” He said, “When the condition (i.e. health) of Allah’s Apostle deteriorated, he said, ‘Bring me
a bone of scapula, so that I may write something for you after which you will never go astray’. The
people differed in their opinions although it was improper to differ in front of the Prophet.”
They said, ‘What is wrong with him? Do you think he is delirious? Ask him (to understand). The Prophet
(S) replied, ‘Leave me as I am in a better state than what you are asking me to do.’ Then the Prophet
ordered them to do three things saying, ‘Turn out all the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, show
respect to all foreign delegates by giving them gifts as I used to do.” The sub-narrator (Said ibn Jubair)
added, “The third order was something beneficial which either Ibn Abbas did not mention or he
mentioned but I forgot.”
How can it be possible that the people who memorized the Holy Qur’an forgot the last, dying instruction
of the Prophet (S)?
According to this tradition (and others) in Sahih Bukhari the Prophet (S) went to write his will but was
prevented by a group of his companions, led according to most of the narrations by Umar ibn Khattab,
who defied the Qur’anic injunction against raising one’s voice in front of the Prophet (S) and who
accused the Prophet (S) of being delirious, of having lost his mind. When the Prophet tried verbally
telling them the contents of his will, his final commands, they claim to have forgotten what he said.
Abu Bakr had the foresight to leave behind a will; Umar appointed a six-man election committee – but
the Prophet (S)? He died without leaving behind any guidance or will… Does this make any sense?
The reason there was no written, public will is because the Prophet (S) wanted to write such a document
but some of his companions knew he was going to put in writing what he had said at Ghadeer Khumm
and so they stopped him from doing so. This important event, this act of rebellion on their part at the
deathbed of the Prophet (S) is narrated in Sahih Bukhari, in Sahih Muslim, in the Musnad of Imam
Ahmed ibn Hanbal and countless other Ahlul Sunnah books of ahadith and history.


Instruction: Why is Ali’s (as) name not mentioned in the Holy Qur’an?

Context:
There are four responses to this common and provocative question.
Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
Imam Ali’s (as) name might not be mentioned in the Holy Qur’an but there are countless verses of the
Holy Qur’an devoted to the praise of Ali (as) and to announcing his superiority over the rest of the
Muslims, proving his leadership, his wilayat and his imamat.
Allama ibn Hajar Makki, the famous Sunni aalim, quotes the companion and cousin of the Prophet,
Abdullah ibn Abbas, saying that he heard from the Prophet (S) himself that 300 verses of the Holy
Qur’an were revealed specifically in praise of Imam Ali (as).
For example, the famous verse of the ring:
“Your master [wali] can be only Allah; and His messenger and the those who believe, who
establish worship and pay the poor rate, and pay the zakat while bowing down (in prayer), in
ruku” (5:55) [Surah Maidah].
Ahlul Sunnah and Shia commentators of tafasir unanimously agree that this particular verse refers to
Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (as), who gave his ring to a beggar while in the state of bowing (ruku) in the
middle of his (salah) prayer, as narrated by Abu Dharr al-Ghafari.
Importance
Why is it so important to have Imam Ali’s (as) name in the Holy Qur’an? Are we ranking people’s
importance on whether their name appears in the Holy Qur’an or how many times? If so, then it is worth
mentioning that the name of the human being mentioned most in the Holy Qur’an is Prophet Musa
(Moses) – 136 times in 34 different chapters (surahs). Then there is Prophet Yusuf (Joseph) mentioned
by name 27 times, and Prophet Isa (Jesus) mentioned 25 times.
The Holy Prophet, however, Muhammad (S), the Messenger of Islam and the Seal of the Prophets, is
mentioned by name just four times, in surah numbers 3, 33, 47 and 48. Are Muslims expected to believe
that Musa is higher in status or more important than the Holy Prophet? Or Yusuf is? Or Isa is? This is
what happens when you start determining people’s status on the crude and arbitrary basis of how many
times their name is mentioned in the Holy Qur’an. Allah (SwT) decides in His wisdom whose name
appears in His book.
What if his name had been mentioned?
What if Imam Ali’s (as) name was mentioned in the Holy Qur’an? Would that change anything? Would
that change his opponents’ minds about the validity and legitimacy of his imamat? Of course not! Those
who do not want to follow Imam Ali (as) would not do so no matter where his name appeared in the
Qur’an. After all, the Holy Prophet explicitly said at Ghadeer Khumm: “Of whomsoever I am mawla, Ali is
also his mawla”. Imagine this sentence as a verse of the Holy Qur’an – how would life be any different?
Some would still say it meant friend not leader, others would try and deliberately misrepresent and
misinterpret it, or simply ignore it.
It’s a diversionary tactic to bring up the fact that Allah (SwT) in His Infinite Wisdom decided not to refer to
Imam Ali (as) by name in the Holy Qur’an, even though He did make around implicit or indirect 300
references to Imam Ali (as) – as testified by Ibn Abbas.
Common Sense
Imagine if we extended this argument – Ali (as) is not the leader because his name isn’t mentioned in
the Holy Qur’an; Ali (as) is not important because his name is not explicitly cited in any of the verses of
the Holy Qur’an– to the rest of our religious principles, beliefs and obligations. How would we know how
to pray morning (Fajr) prayers? Or know that evening (Maghrib) is three units (rakaat) and night (Isha) is
four units (rakaat)? The Holy Qur’an doesn’t say so; it was left to the Prophet (S) to explain the details of
the Qur’anic diktats, the Qur’anic commandments.
As the sixth Shia holy Imam Jafar as Sadiq (as) famously told his companions: “The Qur’an says to pray
Fajr salah (morning prayers) but it is the Prophet who tells us that Fajr is two units of prayer (rakatain),
the Qur’an tells us to pay zakaat, but it is the Prophet who tells us how to calculate zakaat; in the same
way, the Qur’an tells us to obey the “ulul-amr”, the people charged with authority, and it is the Prophet
who tells us that the “ulul-amr” are: Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) and the Imams of the Ahlul Bayt.”


Instruction: Why do you call yourselves “Shias”, or “Shias of Ali”, and not just Muslims?

Context:
The word “Shia” in Arabic simply means follower, friend, lover, partisan. It is a word that has no negative
connotations. In fact it is used in the Holy Qur’an twice with reference to prophets of God.
Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
“And, verily, of among the followers, among the Shias, of Nuh (of Noah), was Ibrahim (Abraham)
(37:83)[Surah Saffat].
“And he (Musa /Moses) went into the city at a time when people (of the city) were not watching,
so he found therein two men fighting, one being his Shia – min SHIAtehe - and the other being
his enemy, and the one who was his Shia cried out to him for help against the one who was of
his enemy.” (28:15)[Surah Kahf].
So Shia is a word used by Allah (SwT) Himself! But these Shias weren’t, of course, Shias of Ali (as).
Where does this phrase, “Shia of Ali”, come from? It comes from the Prophet’s own lips, during the
Prophet’s own lifetime.
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal, Allama ibn Hajar Makki, Hafiz Abu Nuaym Isfahani, and countless other
classical scholars of the Ahlul Sunnah all narrate that the Prophet said: “Glad tidings, O Ali! Verily you
and your companions and your Shia (your followers) will be in Paradise.”
Hafiz Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, the famous Ahlul Sunnah scholar of Egypt, in his book, al-Durr al-Mansur,
narrates a tradition (hadith) in which the companions say: “We were with the Holy Prophet when Ali
came towards us. The Holy Prophet said: He and his Shia will acquire salvation on the Day of
Judgement.”
Allama ibn Hajar Asqalani, another famous Ahlul Sunnah scholar of hadith, narrates the following
tradition of the Prophet (S): “The parable of Ali is like a tree, in which I am the root, Ali is the branch,
Hasan and Husayn are the fruits, and the Shias are the leaves.”
Allama ibn Hajar al-Haythami al-Makki - of the Ahlul Sunnah says in his book al-Sawaiq al-Muhriqa
that the Shias are “rafidhi” (liars, deviants) and yet in the same book he narrates a tradition from
Abdullah ibn Abbas in which ibn Abbas says that: When the verse: “Those who believe and do
righteous deeds are the best of the creation” (98:7) [Surah Al Bayyina] was revealed, the
Messenger of Allah said to Ali: “They are you and your Shia.”
He continued: “O Ali! (on the Day of Judgment) you and your Shia will come towards Allah well-pleased
and well- pleasing, and your enemies will come angry with their head forced up. Ali said: “Who are my
enemies?” The Prophet (S) replied: “He who disassociates himself from you and curses you. And glad
tiding to those who reach first under the shadow of al-Arsh on the Day of Resurrection.” Ali asked: “Who
are they, O the Messenger of Allah?” He replied: “Your Shia, O Ali, and those who love you.”
Now, here is an important point to consider: some Muslims ask why there is a sect called Shias? They
tend to call themselves Sunni Muslims. But where is the word Sunni in the Holy Qur’an or in the ahadith
of the Holy Prophet? Where is the hadith in which the Prophet (S) refers to his “Sunnis” or even to the
“Ahlul Sunnah wal Jamaah”? There isn’t one. But the Shias have been around since the time of the
Prophet (S) and Shia is a title of distinction used in the Holy Qur’an.


Instruction: Isn’t Shia’ism a product of Abdullah ibn Saba, a Jewish convert to Islam?

Context:
Who is he?
There is a question as to whether Abdullah ibn Saba even existed! In Ahlul Sunnah tradition, he was a
Yemenite Jew who embraced Islam very late in life. During the time of Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) he is
alleged to have introduced a number of concepts that later were ascribed to both the Shias and the
Ghuluww: the exaltation of Ali (as), his divine appointment by the Islamic Prophet Muhammad (S) as a
successor, and his alleged divinity. These are all claimed to be concepts that were first formulated and
expressed by Ibn Saba and his followers, who are also accused of killing the third caliph of the Ahlul
Sunnah, Uthman ibn Affan, and dividing the Muslims into two sects.
Yet neutral modern western historians, non-Muslims like Godfrey Hodgson, Leone Caetani, Israel
Freidlander and Bernard Lewis have all concluded that he probably did not exist and even if he did, he
certainly wasn’t responsible for all the intrigues, plots and religious conspiracies that have been
attributed to him by some anti-Shia scholars.
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
Tabari’s source for the story of Ibn Saba, Sayf ibn Umar, has been discredited by Imam Hakim, Ibn
Hajar Asqalani and several other prominent Ahlul Sunnah scholars. In his acclaimed book, “The
Succession to Muhammad”, former Oxford University professor Wilferd Madelung writes how “few if any
modern historians would accept Sayf ’s legend of Ibn Saba”. Note the use of word “legend”!
Even the Egyptian historian, Dr Taha Husayn, one of the most influential Ahlul Sunnah scholars of the
20th century, has said that the “fabrication” of Ibn Saba was done by the enemies of the Shias and that
the insertion of a “Jewish element” was aimed at discrediting the Shias. He noted that the absence of
any record of Ibn Saba being present at the Battle of Siffin suggests that Ibn Saba is a fictitious person.


Instruction: Why do you give such importance to the father of Ali (as), Abu Talib? Wasn’t he a non- believer?

Context:
Some Muslims not only criticise and reject Ali (as), they even go after his father. Abu Talib is described
as an unbeliever (kafir). Even the recent BBC2 documentary on the life of the Prophet (S) presented by
Rageh Omaar, stated as a fact that he died as a non-believer.
Yet the following proofs from history and proofs from the Holy Qur’an prove that he was a Muslim.
He perfomed the Prophet’s wedding
Abu Talib performed the wedding ceremony (nikah) of Prophet Muhammad (S) and Lady Khadija (as)
and paid the dowry (mahr). How can anyone believe that the wedding ceremony of the Holy Prophet of
Islam would be performed by a non-Muslim?
His marriage
Abu Talib was married to Fatima bint Asad, the mother of Ali (as) and stayed married to her even after
the advent of Islam. If he was a non-Muslim, this would be in defiance of the injunctions contained in the
Holy Qura’n.
Even the Prophet’s own adopted daughters were divorced from the sons of Abu Lahab (who refused to
become Muslims). Fatima bint Asad, remember, was the second lady to accept Islam (after Lady Khadija
(as) the Prophet’s first wife).
Imam Sajjad (as), the fourth Shia Imam, said about his great-great-grandfather: “I wonder why people
doubt the faith of Abu Talib, when a woman cannot continue her matrimonial alliance with a non-Muslim
husband after she has embraced Islam, and Fatima bint Asad was amongst those women who
embraced Islam at a very early stage and still remained his wife till he breathed his last.”
Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
Ch.4:V 144 [Surah Al Nisa], says:
“O you who believe! Do not take the unbelievers as protectors instead of the believers” (4:144)
and Ch 9:V 23 [Surah Tawba] proclaims:
“O you who believe! Take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love infidelity
above Faith: if any of you do so, they do wrong.”(9:23)
The Prophet’s grandfather Abdul Muttalib died when he was 8 years old. The Prophet was looked after
by Abu Talib (not by his other uncles, Harith or Abbas); from the age of 8 to 25. The Prophet lived under
either the direct or indirect care and supervision of his uncle Abu Talib right up until the latter’s death in
619 ad, when the Prophet was 49. The Prophet lived under the protection of his uncle, the alleged nonbeliever, for over 40 years! So was the Prophet (S) violating the commands of the Holy Qur’an?
The Holy Qur’an refers to Allah (SwT) and the Prophet, in Ch 93, V 6-9) [Surah Al Duha]:
“Did He not find thee an orphan and give you shelter? And He found thee wandering, and He
gave thee guidance. And He found thee in need, and made thee independent.”(93:6-9)
There is no disagreement, as the historical records show, that it was Abu Talib who gave shelter to the
Prophet (S) took care of all his needs and gave him guidance. Now how is it that in this case Allah (SwT)
is taking credit for things that a “kafir” did? How could Allah (SwT) ask for help from a “kafir” in taking
care and bringing up His most beloved and final messenger? How could Allah (SwT) do something that
He is prohibiting the believers from doing? The fact that the Prophet of Islam took refuge with, and
guidance from Abu Talib shows that Abu Talib was not only a Muslim but a mu’min; not just one who
submits, but one who believes.
Here is a challenge: can any person, Sunni or Shia, Muslim or non-Muslim, identify even one occasion
on which Abu Talib publicly or privately:
• rejected the concept of unity and oneness of Allah (Tawhid)?
• condemned Islam by name, rejected Islam by name and, in doing so, rejected his nephew the Prophet
(S) of Islam?
• worshipped in front of an idol?
On the contrary, when Muslims pray they should thank Abu Talib, because without him, there would
have been no Prophet of Islam and, by extension, no religion of Islam. There is no Muhammad (S),
without Abu Talib.
Chapter 2: The Ahlul Bayt
The Ahlul Bayt (The Prophet’s Household)


Instruction: Doesn’t the Ahlul Bayt refer to the wives of the Prophet? Or at least include them?

Context:
The phrase Ahlul Bayt, or “people of the household”, refers only to certain members of the Prophet’s
family. The wives of the Prophet (S) are excluded from the Ahlul Bayt. How do we know this?
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
It is narrated in Sahih Muslim that Yazid ibn Hayyan reports from Zayd (a companion of the Holy
Prophet), who said: “One day Allah’s Messenger (S) stood up to deliver a sermon at a watering place
known as Khumm situated between Makkah and Madinah. He praised Allah, extolled Him and delivered
the sermon and exhorted (us) and said: “O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a
messenger (the angel of death) from my Lord and I, in response to Allah’s call, (I bid farewell to you), but
I am leaving amongst you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allah in which there is right
guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it… The second are the members of
my household and I remind you (of your duties) to the members of my family.”
He (Husayn) said to Zayd: Who are the members of his household? Aren’t his wives the members of his
family? Thereupon Zayd said: His wives are the members of his family (but here) the members of his
family are those for whom acceptance of Zakat (alms and charity) is forbidden.” [Book No.31, Hadith
no.5920]
In another version of the same tradition (hadith), narrated by Sahih Bukhari:
Zayd says to the Holy Prophet (S): “Who are amongst the members of the household? Aren’t the wives
(of the Holy Prophet) included amongst the members of his household?”
The Prophet (S) replied: No, by Allah, a woman lives with a man (as his wife) for a certain period; if he
then divorces her and she goes back to her parents and to her people; the members of his household
include his ownself and his kith and kin (who are related to him by blood) and for whom the acceptance
of Zakat (charity) is prohibited. [Book No.31, Hadith no.5923]
The mention of divorce here is important – not because divorce is a “good thing” or something to be
encouraged but because, the Holy Qur’an, in Surah Al Tahrim,
Allah warns two trouble-making wives of the Prophet with divorce: “If he [Muhammad] divorces
you, Allah may give him instead wives better than you…(66:4-5)”
In Volume 6 of the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, Umar ibn Khattab says it was Aisha bint Abu
Bakr and Umar’s own daughter Hafsa who were the wives referred to in the the afore-mentioned
Qur’anic verses.
The Prophet (S) again and again, in the traditions of the Ahlul Sunnah, identifies the Ahlul Bayt as being
five people: himself, his daughter Fatima, her husband, Ali ibn Abu Talib, and Hasan and Husayn, the
two grandsons of the Prophet. Not just at Ghadeer Khumm or on the Day of Mubahela, when he takes
only those four members of his family with him, but on the day the verse, or ayat, of “tathir” (purification)
itself was revealed. [Surah Al Ahzab Ch.33: V 33]
It is important here to note that both Sahih Muslim and Sunan Tirmidhi, as well as many other leading
Sunni books, confirm this Shia view.
In Sahih Muslim, there is a chapter named “Chapter of Virtues of the Companions”. This chapter
includes, “Section of the Virtues of the Ahlul Bayt of the Prophet”. There exists only one tradition in this
section, (hadith number 5955), and this tradition contains no reference to the wives of the Prophet (S).
The tradition is known as “The Tradition of the Cloak” or “Mantle” (Hadith al-Kisa), and is narrated by
Aisha bint Abu Bakr, wife of the Prophet, as follows:
One day the Prophet (S) came out in the afternoon wearing a black cloak (upper garment or long coat),
then al-Hasan ibn Ali came and the Prophet accommodated him under the cloak, then al-Husayn came
and entered the cloak, then Fatima came and the Prophet entered her under the cloak, then Ali came
and the Prophet entered him to the cloak as well. Then the Prophet recited: “Verily Allah intends to
keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O People of the House (Ahlul Bayt), and purify you
with perfect purification” (33: 33) [the last sentence of Verse 33 in Chapter Al-Ahzab].
Note that it is Aisha, the wife of the Prophet (S) (and daughter of the first Sunni caliph Abu Bakr) who is
the narrator of the above tradition, and she herself is testifying that the Ahlul Bayt are the abovementioned individuals, and do not include any wives, even her.
Another version of this famous “Tradition of the Cloak” is contained in Sunan Tirmidhi, which is narrated
on the authority of Umar ibn Abu Salama, the son of Umm Salama (another wife of Prophet):
The verse “Verily Allah intends to ...” Ch.33:V33 [Surah Al Ahzab] was revealed to the Prophet (S) in
the house of Umm Salama. Upon that, the Prophet gathered Fatima, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn, and
covered them with a cloak, and he also covered Ali who was behind him. Then the Prophet said: “O’
Allah! These are the members of my House (Ahlul Bayt). Keep them away from every impurity and purify
them with a perfect purification”.
“Umm Salama (the wife of Prophet) asked: “Am I also included among them, O Apostle of Allah?” the
Prophet replied: “You remain in your position and you are toward a good ending.”
Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
The above verse in Ch.33:V33 [Sura Al Ahzab] known as Ayat of Tathir is very important. It does not
refer to the wives of the Prophet, though it appears in a section of verses in which the wives are being
discussed.
Those who understand Arabic know that the Holy Qur’an changes subject all the time from verse to
verse; also, the gender changes, from feminine to masculine, which refers to a mixed group. It definitely
doesn’t refer to wives only (as even the Sunni commentator on, and translator of, the Holy Qur’an
Abdullah Yusuf Ali admits in his footnote on this verse).
It is also worth mentioning that the Prophet (S) did not say: “These are among the members of my
House”. He said: “These are the members of my House”. Also note that Umm Salama who is one of the
virtuous wives of the Prophet, is the narrator of the tradition to her son and the one who bears witness
as to who the Ahlul Bayt are.
The wording of the tradition as narrated by Sunni scholar Imam al-Hakim in volume 2 of his alMustadrak makes it quite clear: Umm Salama said: “O Prophet of Allah! Am I not one of the members of
your family?” The Holy Prophet replied: “You have a good future but only these are the members of my
family. O Lord! The members of my family are more deserving.”


Instruction:
The Prophet said “I leave two things - the Holy Qur’an and my Sunnah”. Why not follow them, rather than the
Ahlul Bayt?

Context:
It is a common misconception amongst the Ahlul Sunnah that the Prophet (S) said we should follow the
“Holy Qur’an and Sunnah” – especially in his final sermon.
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
As mentioned earlier, Sahih Muslim in his narration in Book No.31, Hadith No.5920 is very clear in what
the Holy Prophet (S) said: I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allah
in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it.. . The
second are the members of my household I remind you (of your duties) to the members of my family.
The hadith about the “Holy Qur’an and Sunnah” appears in other Ahlul Sunnah books, for example alMustadrak (on the authority of Abu Hurayrah) but not in the Sihah Sittah, the six authentic books, of
which the two most authentic for the Ahlul Sunnah are Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. And yet, in
Sahih Muslim, as we have seen, it clearly states that two things, the two weighty matters, are the Holy
Qur’an and the Ahlul Bayt, the Prophet’s household.
In Sunan Tirmidhi it says the “two shall not separate from one another until they return to me at the Pool
of Paradise”. Even if we accept that the Holy Prophet (S) referred to Holy Qur’an and his Sunnah – who
knew the Prophet’s life, his “sunnah”, better than anyone else? His family and his household, of course.
Those people, like Ali (as) and Fatima (as) who were with him from the beginning of his mission; from
the revelation of the Holy Qur’an to the boycott in the valley of Abu Talib, to the Battles of Badr, Ohud
and Khaybar, to the event of Mubahela and the day of Ghadeer Khumm.
Remember: Shias are those Muslims who follow the Holy Qur’an and Ahlul Bayt, as instructed by the
Holy Prophet (S) of Islam. Shias do not take one and reject the other; it is a complete package from
Allah (SwT) via His Messenger.


Instruction: Where is the concept of Imamat, or Imams, mentioned in the Holy Qur’an?

Context:
Most Sunni Muslims refer to the person who lead the congregational prayers (salah) in the local mosque
as the “imam”. But the word Imam is mentioned in the Holy Qur’an in a number of places and it is worth
pondering over some of these verses.
Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
The Holy Qur’an states: “Yawma naduu kulla unaasim- bi-Imaamihim.”
“And remember that on the Day of Judgement we will call together all human beings with their
respective Imams.” (17:71) [Surah Bani Israel].
“With their respective Imams!” Not with their parents, not with their Prophets, not with their holy books,
but with their Imams. That is what the Holy Qur’an says: “with their respective imams”. Abdullah Yusuf
Ali, however, translates the above verse, verse 71, as, “… we will call them together with their Holy
books”. However, the verse states “be- imaamihim” not “be-kitaabihim”.
The 12th verse of chapter 36 of the Holy Qur’an in Surah Ya Sin, Allah (SwT) says:
“Verily it is We who bring the dead to life and keep record of what they have sent forward and left
behind; and everything of importance has been vested in the clarifying Imam, the Imam mun
Mubeen.” (36:12)
This verse shows the divinely-mandated importance of the person who is the Imam; it’s about much
more than just filling a community role and leading the congregational prayers!
Verse 124 of Surah Baqarah, second chapter (surah) Allah (SwT) says:
“And remember when the Lord tried Ibrahim (Abraham) with certain words and he fulfilled them;
the Lord said: “Verily I make you an Imam for mankind”. (2:124)
Imam is a very holy title, a very holy post, or position, explicitly referred to in the Holy Qur’an by Allah
(SwT) Himself. Ibrahim (as) in fact, becomes a prophet first and then an imam; and the the title of imam
is bestowed upon him by Allah (SW) after he is “tried” and tested.


Instruction: Why should we believe in 12 Imams, as Shias do?

Context:
The reference to the 12 Imams is included in the following books:
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
Narrated by Jabir ibn Samura: I heard the Prophet (S) saying, “There will be twelve Muslim rulers (who
will rule all the Islamic world).” He then said a sentence which I did not hear. My father said, “All of them
(those rulers) will be from Quraysh.” [Sahih Bukhari, Book No.89, Hadith No.329]
“It has been reported on the authority of Jabir ibn Samura who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah
(SwT) say: The affairs of the people will continue to be conducted (well) as long as they are governed by
twelve men. Then the Holy Prophet said words which were obscure to me. I asked my father: What did
the Messenger of Allah (SwT) say? He said: All of the (twelve men) will be from the Quraysh.”
And also: “It has been narrated on the authority of Jabir ibn Samura who said: I heard the Messenger of
Allah (SwT) say: Islam will continue to be triumphant until there have been twelve caliphs. Then the Holy
Prophet (S) said something which I could not understand. I asked my father: What did he say? He said:
He has said that all of them (twelve caliphs) will be from the Quraysh.” Eight different versions of this
hadith are narrated in Sahih Muslim: Book 20, hadith numbers 4477 to 4484.
In fact, there are also countless such traditions (ahadith), referring to twelve caliphs or successors,
contained in many other Ahlul Sunnah books – Sunan Tirmidhi, Sunan Abu Dawud, Musnad of Imam
Ahmed ibn Hanbal, and Kanz al-Ummal.
The Bible
Then there is the Old Testament of the Bible, in the Book of Genesis, which refers to God speaking to
Prophet Abraham (Ibrahim).
“…as for (your son) Ishmael, I have heard you (your prayers): I will surely bless him; I will make
him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will
make him into a great nation.” [Genesis, 17:17-21]
These twelve rulers are often interpreted as being the twelve sons of Ishmael, but even classical Ahlul
Sunnah scholars like Allama ibn Kathir (whose reference books are best sellers in Saudi Arabia) say it
relates to the Holy Prophet’s progeny.
Ibn Kathir quotes the Sunni scholar, and forefather of the Wahhabis, Ibn Taymiyah as saying: “And
these are the same, regarding whom the Prophet (S) has given the glad tidings in the tradition of Jabir
ibn Samura and stated their number; indeed this is with regard to the Imams and the Hour will not come
till they last.”
Indeed Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (as), the fifth Shia Imam, once said: “We are the remnant of [that]
progeny. And that was the prayer of Ibrahim (as) regarding us.”


Instruction: How do we know the 12 Imams are the 12 Shia Imams?

Context:
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
First of all, these traditions (ahadith) are contained in the leading books of Ahlul Sunnah scholars.
Hence, the burden of proof is on Ahlul Sunnah to say who they are, unless Muslims wish to question the
prophesy of the Holy Prophet (S)! So, who are they?
There is no definite or conclusive response in any of the Ahlul Sunnah books.
Ibn Arabi, for example, goes through all of the Ummayad and Abbasid caliphs and concludes: “I cannot
understand the meaning of this hadith.”
Ibn Hajar Asqalani, a leading Ahlul Sunnah scholar and biographer, says: “No one has much knowledge
about this particular hadith of Sahih Bukhari.”
Hafiz Jalaluddin as Suyuti (a famous Egyptian scholar and Sunni commentator on the Holy Qur’an) has
explained as follows: “We see that from the twelve, four are the Righteous Caliphs, then Hasan, then
Mu’awiyah, then Ibn Zubayr, and finally Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz. They are eight. Four of them remain.”
So where are the 12 names he needs? Suyuti pulls together eight names and then just starts guessing
and speculating, in a desperate but unsuccessful attempt to get to 12, as per the prophesy of the
Prophet (S).
Shias have our 12 Imams and know who the 12 are, by name and lineage.
Yanabi al-Mawaddah
Some scholars of the Ahlul Sunnah have backed the Shias belief in their 12 Imams.
Shaykh Suleman ibn Ibrahim al-Hanafi al-Qandozi states in his book Yanabi al-Mawaddah:
A Jewish man named Na’thal, went to the Prophet (S) and said: Every Jewish Prophet left a successor,
who is your successor? The Prophet said, specifying them, “After me, Ali ibn Abu Talib and then my two
sons, Hasan and Husayn and after Husayn, nine Imams will follow from his children.”
“The Jewish man said, ‘Name them.’
“The Prophet said, ‘When Husayn leaves this world, his son, Ali, and after him, his child Muhammad and
after Muhammad, his son Ja’far and after Ja’far, his son Musa and after Musa, his son Ali and after Ali,
Muhammad. After Muhammad, his child, Ali and after Ali, Hasan and after Hasan, his child Muhammad
al-Mahdi. These are the twelve Imams.”


Instruction: Who is this Imam Mahdi (as) that the Shias believe in and await?

Context:
The Shia belief in the Mahdi (as) is not some unorthodox, unconventional, alien or mystical unIslamic
belief. Although, many of the Ahlul Sunnah brethren do not know about it or talk about it, all of the three
Abrahamic faiths, including Islam (Sunni and Shia), believe in the concept of a messiah, or one who
shall return.
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
In fact, traditions in the Sihah Sittah, the six authentic books of Ahlul Sunnah comfirm this point.
Sunan Tirmidhi narrates that the Prophet said, “The world will not come to pass until a man from among
my family, whose name will be my name, rules over the Arabs.”
Sunan Abu Dawood: “Even if only a day remains for the day of Judgement (Qiyamah) to come, yet Allah
(SwT) will surely send a man from my family who will fill this world with such justice and fairness, just as
it initially was filled with oppression.”
Sunan Ibn Maajah is specific and states: “The promised Mahdi will be among my family.”
Sunan Abu Dawood is even more specific: “The promised Mahdi will be among my progeny, among the
descendants of Fatima.”
The only real or substantive difference between the Shia Mahdi and the Sunni Mahdi is that the Shias
believe that the Mahdi is already born, already alive but, in occultation (or “ghaybat”), while Sunni
Muslims believe the Mahdi is still to be born.
In fact, the Ahlul Sunnah scholars narrate that not only will there be this Mahdi, but he will be different to
the Messiah, to Prophet Jesus (Isa), who will also return. It is narrated in Sahih Muslim, the Musnad of
Ibn Hanbal and other Sunni books that Prophet Jesus will pray behind the Mahdi. Is it any wonder why
the Shias hold their Imams in such high regard?


Instruction: How can a small child become an Imam?

Context:
Shias are often criticised for believing in an Imam or leader who was a young boy – Imam Mahdi (as),
after all, was still a small child when his father, the 11th Shia Imam, Hasan al-Askari (as), was martyred
and passed away. The critics claim that such a young Imam would not have the mental capacity to lead
the Muslims and be an infallible guide for mankind.
In response to the non-Muslims:
Why the objection to a brilliant or genius or special child? In the west, child prodigies are accepted and
some common examples (accessible via Wikipedia!) include:
• Blaise Pascal (from France) who had mastered Euclidean maths at age 11.
• Jeremy Bentham was fluent in Latin at age of 3.
• John Stewart Mill had a command of Greek at the age of 3.
• Ruth Lawrence entered Oxford in the 1980s at the age of 11 to study maths.
• Kim Ung-Yong, from South Korea, attended university Physics courses at the age of 4 and had
obtained a PhD in Physics by the age of 15.
• Akrit Jaswal from India was reading Shakespeare aged 5 and carried out a medical operation aged 7
• Sayid Mohammed Husayn Tabatabai, the Shia prodigy, could recite 60 verses of chapter 30 of the
Holy Qur’an at the age of 2. At the age of 5, he could recite the Qur’an from memory (hafidh); and
obtained a PhD from Coventry University at the age of 7.
These are all verifiable facts - so why are Shias questioned on the divinely-appointed child prodigy,
Imam Mahdi (as)? No one says that child achievements are impossible or that child prodigies do not
exist. Right?
In response to other Muslims
Why not use the Holy Qur’an as evidence? The following verses very clearly confirm a child can be
guided by God: Ch.19: V12 [Surah Maryam]: Allah (SwT) says, about Prophet Yahya, (John the Baptist):
“We gave him wisdom and judgment while still a child.”(19:12)
John the Baptist, at least, was a child but what about Prophet Isa (Jesus) who as a baby spoke from the
cradle? The Holy Qur’an, describes the birth of Jesus:
“O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!” But she
pointed to the baby. They said: “How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?” (19: 28-34)
[Surah Maryam].
Jesus said: “I am indeed a servant of Allah: He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet. . .
.And He hath made me blessed wheresoever I be, and hath enjoined on me Prayer and Charity as long
as I live; (He) hath made me kind to my mother, and not overbearing or miserable. So peace is on me
the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again).”
So youth, childhood, even babyhood, is no barrier to receiving revelation or inspiration from Allah (SwT).
In fact, a number of Shia Imams were very young when they became Imams. The 4th and 11th Shia
Imams were in their early twenties, and the 9th and 10th were of ages 7 and 8 respectively when they
became Imams upon the deaths of their fathers.


Instruction: How can Imam Mahdi (as), the 12th Shia Imam, still be alive today? How can he be more than 1,000 years old?

Context:
Scientific facts
Contrary to conventional wisdom, there is nothing in science, which precludes or negates the possibility
of such a long life. Human beings are getting older and older – according to Britain’s Office of National
Statistics (ONS), in 1911: 100 people lived to be over the age of 100 yet in 2007, 9,000 people lived to be
over 100!
Dying might be inevitable and unavoidable but ageing isn’t – it is a physical process which can be
slowed down. One of the world’s leading experts in gerontology, former Cambridge University academic
Aubrey de Grey has said: “I think the 1st person to live to 1,000 might be 60 already.”
Thus, the only difference between the Shias and Aubrey de Grey is that Shias believe that fist person to
live to 1,000 is 1,000 already! He is the Imam of our time, the Imam Zamana, Imam Mahdi (as).
Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
Muslims who criticise Shias for believing in an Imam who can live till 1,000 years of age should ponder
over the verses of the Holy Qur’an.
The Holy Qur’an, after all, says Noah lived till almost a 1,000 years:
“Indeed, We sent Noah (Prophet Nuh) to his people, and he tarried among them a thousand
years, all but fifty; so the Flood seized them, while they were evil doers.”(29:14) [Surah Ankabut].
The Holy Qur’an also states that Prophet Jesus did not die – but was raised to Heaven:
“That they said (in boast), ‘We killed Christ, Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God’;- but
they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ
therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a
surety they killed him not:- Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power,
Wise.” (4:157–158) [Surah Nisa].
So, Jesus is still alive and yet Sunni Muslims doubt the Shias for believing Imam Mahdi (as) is alive –
despite the fact that Jesus would already have been a thousand years old when the occultation
(ghaybat) of Imam Mahdi (as) began.
And then, of course, there’s the Devil: Satan or Shaitan, who was born before Prophet Adam and yet is
still with us today; he is a Jinn who has not died. So what we are expected to believe is that Allah (SwT)
allows Shaitan to live as long as he likes but Allah (SwT) cannot prolong the life of His representative,
His caliphate on earth, Imam Mahdi (as)? This is nonsensical.


Instruction: How can Shias believe in an Imam that you cannot see?

Context:
First, not seeing something does not mean it does not exist. Otherwise, how can we believe in the
existence of God?
Then there are the angels and jinns. All Muslims believe in angels that they cannot see, like Gabriel
(Jibraeel), the bringer of revelation to Muhammad (S). Or how about the Angel of Death? We believe in
his existence but we cannot see him in this world.
Again, there’s Shaitan too. We cannot see the Devil but we not only believe in his existence but also
believe that, despite his ‘invisibility’, he has the power to do us harm: to manipulate and trick us, to
whisper in our ears, as the Holy Qur’an describes in the 114th and final surah of the Holy Qur’an, an-Nas.
Yet, when Shias say they believe in a positive force, a countervailing force, authorised by Allah (SwT),
and that this force, this hidden Imam, is alive and available to Muslims as a spiritual (if not a physical)
guide, they are accused of being mad, crazy, irrational, weird. Is this fair? Does this make any sense?
Also, it is worth remembering that the occultation or “ghaybat” does not change the status or importance
of the 12th Imam, just as the Prophet (S) did not stop being the Prophet, nor did the Muslims stop
believing in his prophethood, during the Prophet’s own enforced disappearance or ghaybat: that is, when
the Prophet (S) was trapped in a cave for three days while on the way from Makkah to Madinah from
during the Hijrah in 622 ad.


Instruction: Why do Shias believe that the Prophet or the Imams are infallible and sinless?

Context:
Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
In Surah Najm, Chapter 53 of the Holy Qur’an, the first five verses state:
“By the Star when it sets, Your companion [the Prophet] does not err/wander, nor is he deceived,
Nor does he speak out of his desire; It is no less than a revelation that is revealed. The Mighty in
Power that has taught him.”(53: 1-5)
The above is very explicit and specific – it is nothing less than a revelation and he doesn’t speak out of
his own desire. Allah (SwT) is vouching for Him in the Holy Qur’an, so who are we to say or believe
otherwise?
Some Ahlul Sunnah scholars say the Prophet (S) was only infallible on religious issues and that in
private he made mistakes. Some Ahlul Sunnah books say he forgot to pray on time, or perform correct
wudhu (wash), etc, etc. But use your common sense: how would we know that Prophet (S) was giving
us correct religious information if he was an ordinary, fallible man? Today, how can we be sure that, the
morning prayer (Fajr) is three and not two units (rakaat)? If the Prophet (S) was fallible, maybe he made
a mistake or misremembered when communicating the number of rakaat to his companions. The truth is
that infallibility goes hand in hand with prophethood and with all forms of divinely-inspired religious
leadership and guidance.
But there are other people, besides the Holy Prophet (S), who are also infallible. After all, what does Iblis
or Shaitan say, as quoted in the Holy Qur’an,? In Surah Hijr, Ch.15:V 39-40: He said: “My Lord!
Because Thou hast sent me astray, I verily shall adorn the path of error for them in the earth, and shall
mislead them every one of them. Save such of them as are Thy perfectly devoted slaves.”
Aha! According to the Holy Qur’an, not only is the Prophet (S) protected from sin and error but there is a
group of “perfectly devoted slaves” who even Shaitan admits he cannot mislead or trick. Who are they?
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
According to Sunni scholars Tirmidhi in his Sunan, ibn Hanbal in his al-Musnad and Hakin in his alMustadrak state:
“The Messenger of Allah (S), from the time the revelation of “Verily Allah intends to... (the last part of
Ch.33:V33)” and for six months thereafter, stood by the door of the House of Fatima (as) (his daughter)
and said: “Time for Prayer Ahlul Bayt; No doubt! Allah wishes to remove all abomination from you and
make you pure and spotless.”
According to the companion and cousin of the Prophet, Abdullah ibn Abbas: “The Messenger of Allah
recited “Verily Allah intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O’ People of the House
(Ahlul Bayt), and purify you a perfect purification”. . . and then the Messenger of Allah (SwT) said: “Thus
Me and my Ahlul Bayt are clear from sins.” [al-Durr al-Mansur, by Hafiz Jalaluddin al- Suyuti, vol.5,
under the commentary of Verse Ch.33:V33 of Holy Qur’an – Surah Al Ahzab]
Case closed.
Chapter 3: The Companions and Miscellaneous
Issues


Instruction: Are Shias hostile to all the companions (the “sahabah”)?

Context:
Definition of companions
The majority of the Muslims are obsessed with the companions, (sahabah) – but who are they exactly?
How many of them are there? There is no point in Ahlul Sunnah falsely accusing Shias of cursing or
rejecting all the companions, if we cannot first agree on who the true companions of the Holy Prophet
were.
Allama Ibn Hajar Asqalani, the Sunni scholar, writes in his famous book al-Isabah: “Every one who has
narrated a hadith or a word from the Prophet, or seen him while believing in him, is counted among the
Sahabah. Also, (the sahabah) is anyone who has met the Prophet (S) while believing in him, and died as
a Muslim, whether his meeting with him being long or short, narrating from him or not...or who has seen
him without sitting with him, or has not seen him due to an excuse.”
This is a very, very wide definition and “companions” defined in this broad and loose way could number
more than 100,000 people!
In fact, some Sunni Muslim scholars even include their children as sahabah as well. How can all these
“companions” be accepted as being beyond scrutiny? How can anyone accept that all such companions
were rightly guided and made no mistakes.
The word itself, sahaba or companion, has become a label of distinction, of nobility and honour. But
there is nothing holy or pure about the title ‘companion’; it has been elevated beyond its meaning.
Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
For example, the word is mentioned in the Holy Qur’an in the following verses:
Surah Zukhruf:
“And whoever turns himself away from the remembrance of the Beneficent Allah, We appoint for
him a Qareen, (a devil, a shaitan), so he becomes his associate, his comrade, his intimate
companion.”(43:36)
According to Islam’s holy book, your own personal shaitan is called a companion.
Then there is the story of Prophet Yusuf (Joseph), contained in Surah Yusuf, where the latter, while in
prison, questions the disbelief and idolatry of two fellow prisoners:
“O my two companions of the prison! (I ask you): are many lords differing among themselves
better, or is the One Allah, Supreme and better?” (12:39) [Surah Yusuf].
The Holy Qur’an mentions the following three types of companions:
The good
“Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against the
unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate
themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are
their marks, the traces of their prostration.” (48:29) [Surah Fateh]
These are companions that Shias have no problem with and no objection to. Indeed, these are
companions that Muslims today, Sunni and Shia, should adore and try and emulate. Men like Abu Dharr
al-Ghafari, Ammar ibn Yasir and Salman Farsi.
Allama Ibn Hajar Makki, the Sunni scholar, narrates that the Prophet (S) said, “Verily, Allah has
commanded me to love four persons and has told me that He loves them.” When the people asked who
these four persons were, he said: “Ali ibn Abu Talib, Abu Dharr, Miqdad, and Salman.”
Sunan Tirmidhi: “The blue sky has not sheltered, nor has the earth borne a man more honest than Abu
Dharr; he lives upon earth with the same austerity and simplicity since the days of Isa ibn Maryam
[Jesus, son of Mary].”
Such sahabah are respected and admired by all Shias, who have no objections in following them,
quoting them and emulating their behaviour.
Not so good
“O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that when ye are asked to go forth in the Cause
of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter?” (9:38)
[Surah Baraat]
“O you who believe! Do not raise your voices above the voice of Prophet ... lest your deeds
become null while you do not perceive.” (49:2) [Surah Al Hujarat]
The companions referred to here are those who were Muslims but did not always follow the rules and/or
did not always follow the Prophet (S). History is full of such examples:
• When the Treaty of Hudabiya was signed, the second caliph Umar and others were reluctant to agree
to the treaty and questioned the Prophet’s judgement. From Sahih Bukhari: “Umar ibn Khattab said, ‘I
went to the Prophet and said, “Aren’t you truly the messenger of Allah (SwT)?” The Prophet said, “Yes,
indeed.” I said, “Isn’t our cause just and the cause of the enemy unjust?” He said, “Yes.” I said, “Then
why should we be humble in our religion?” He said, “I am Allah’s (SwT) messenger and I do not disobey
Him, and He will make me victorious.”’ [Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 50, No. 891]
• During the battle of Ohud, a number of leading companions fled the battlefield, leaving the Prophet (S)
on his own. Their names appear in the history books, both Muslim and non-Muslim and include the first
and second caliphs of the Ahlul Sunnah.
• As has been discussed on the previous pages, before he died, the Holy Prophet (S) asked for a pen
and paper to write a will. The companions did not oblige to this request and raised their voices of his,
upsetting and angering him. He asked them to leave his room.
The hypocrites
There is a whole chapter in the Holy Qur’an addressed to such “companions”: Surah Al-Munafiqun,
“The Hypocrites”
“When the hypocrites come to you, O’ Prophet, they say: “We bear witness that you are the
Messenger of Allah.” Allah knows that you are His Messenger and Allah bears witness that the
hypocrites are liars. They have made their oaths as a shield and turn people away from Allah.
Evil indeed is what they do!” (63:1-2)[Surah Al-Munafiqun]]
Read and ponder over the verse in this chapter. Who is Allah (SwT) referring to? Some ask: why did the
Prophet (S) not identify these evil hypocrites? The Holy Qur’an replies:
“And of the people of Madinah are those who are bent on hypocrisy. You know them not, but we
know them. Twice we will punish them, and then they will be case into severe punishment.”
(9:101) [Surah Baraat].
21.3 References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
It isn’t just the Holy Qur’an but the ahadith, which refer to the hypocrites around the Prophet (S), whom
the Prophet (S) was unaware of! “Some men from my companions will come to me by the Fountain and
they will be driven away from it, and I will say, ‘O Lord, my companions!’ It will be said, ‘You have no
knowledge of what they innovated after you left: they turned apostate as renegades (reverted from
Islam).” [Sahih Bukhari, volume 8, book 76, Tradition 586]
Sahih Bukhari narrates several versions of this particular hadith, Volume 8, Book 76: 578, 585, 586, 587
and 592, translated by Mohammed Muhsin Khan and available, in full, in English, online.


Instruction: Why don’t Shias follow all the companions? What about the “hadith of the stars”?

Context:
The famous Sunni tradition says: “Verily, my companions are like the stars (nujum) in the sky; whichever
of them you follow, you shall be guided rightly.”
The authenticity of this hadith is questioned by many Sunni scholars, including Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal,
the founder, of one of the four main Sunni schools of fiqh and law, but let us not dwell on this. Instead,
let us use our common sense. After all, history tells us that the various companions fought each other in
various battles, after the death of the Prophet – including the battles of Siffin and Jamal.
So, if some Muslims say we have to “unite “around the companions, the response is: which
companions? How do we unite around Imam Ali (as) and Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan, when the latter went
to war against the former at Siffin?
How do we follow both Abu Dharr and Uthman ibn Affan, the third caliphate of the Ahlul Sunnah, when
the latter had the former beaten and exiled from Madinah after Abu Dharr accused Bani Ummaya of
corruption and excess?
Muslims today should unite around the Holy Qur’an and the Ahlul Bayt, not around the various
companions, good, not-so-good and hypocritical, who could not even unite themselves.


Instruction: Why do the Shias criticise Aisha, wife of the Prophet?

Context:
There is no denying the fact that Shias are hostile towards Aisha bint Abu Bakr, the wife of the Prophet
who is often described as “Ummul Momineen,” mother of the believers.
Aisha must be respected
However, most educated Shias do not believe in abusing the name or reputation of Aisha not just
because she is someone of great importance to our Sunni Muslim brethren but because she was,
whether we like it or not, a wife of the Holy Prophet. Even in the Battle of Jamal, when she went to war
with Imam Ali (as), the latter treated her with respect. He sent her half-brother Muhammad ibn Abu Bakr
to catch her when she fell from her camel, after Malik Ashtar had cut off its hind legs. Imam Ali (as) did
not humilate Aisha - so who are we to curse and humilate her?
Battle of Jamal
Nonetheless, it is because of events like the Battle of Jamal that we Shias will always be opposed to
Aisha and critical of her actions. Shias are those who follow the Holy Prophet (S). And what did he say
at Ghadeer Khumm? The Prophet (S) declared: “O Allah! Love him who loves Ali, and be enemy of he
who is the enemy of Ali; help him who helps Ali and forsake him who forsakes Ali.”
How can we then love, respect or admire a woman who chooses to become an enemy of Ali? Who tries
to persuade others to “forsake” Ali? The fact that she was married to the Holy Prophet is irrelevant here;
the issue is whether or not she obeyed the Prophet (S) and adhered to the truth.
Taha Husayn, the famous Egyptian Sunni scholar, in his book ‘Ali wa banuh’ (Ali and His Sons), tells the
story of a man during the Battle of Jamal (Battle of Camel) who is confused as to which of the two sides
is in the right. He says to himself, “How is it possible that such personalities as Talha and Zubair should
be at fault?” He tells Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) about his dilemma and asks him whether it is possible
that such great personalities and men of established repute should be in error. Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib
(as) answers him: “You are seriously mistaken and reversed the measure! Truth and falsehood are not
measured by the worth of persons. Firstly find out what is truth and which is falsehood, then you will see
who stands by truth and who with falsehood.”
Sadly, the Ahlul Sunnah scholars these days tend not to engage in the debate around the rights and
wrongs of the Battle of the Camel. They maintain that the Prophet told us to follow all his companions,
because they are like stars, but cannot explain or justify how “stars” like Talha and Zubayr went up
against a star like Ali ibn Abu Talib (as)? And what was the widow of the Holy Prophet doing on the
battlefield, fighting Ali (as) and leaving her house to do so, despite the Holy Qur’an saying in Surah
Ahzab (Ch.33 V:33) that the wives of the Prophet should “stay quietly in their houses”?
It is a rather simple question: which of them was correct at Jamal? Ali (as) or Aisha? Who was right and
who was wrong? It is illogical, irrational and disingenuous to claim that both were “right”.
One Sunni researcher, Ather Khan, an aide to Dr Zakir Naik of India, has claimed that “the Battle of
Jamal that was fought between the Mother of the Believers, Aisha and Ali. took place as a result of
difference of opinion on a political issue. We respect and revere both the companions of the Prophet (S).
However, with regards to the Battle of Jamal, we neither favour one nor are we against the other.”
This is an abdication of moral responsibility. How can you avoid taking a position? What about the
people, the Muslims on both sides, killed in that fateful battle? According to the Western historian William
Muir at least 10,000 people died in the Battle of Jamal. Others estimate the death toll to be 20,000 or so.
What will these souls be told on the Day of Judgement when they are resurrected? Were they on the
right side or wrong side? Did they die in vain?
The fundamental fact is: Aisha took up arms against Ali ibn Abu Talib (as), despite the Prophet (S)
warning against such a move. And if some Ahlul Sunnah scholars of the Wahhabi or Salafi variety in
places like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan today can criticise Imam Husayn (as) for going against Yazid ibn
Muawiya, the self-proclaimed caliph, how can they try and silence Shias who try and point out how
Aisha bint Abu Bakr wrongly took up arms against Imam Ali (as), about whom the Holy Prophet (S) said:
“Love him who loves Ali, and be the enemy of he who is the enemy of Ali”, and in doing so caused the
deaths of between 10,000 and 20,000 Muslims.
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
In fact, such was her enmity, her hatred for Imam Ali (as) that the famous and classical Sunni historian
Allama Tabari writes, in the History of al-Tabari Volume 17, page 224 (English translation), that Aisha
was delighted when the news of Imam Ali’s (as) death in the mosque of Kufa reached her in 661 ad.
One last tradition worth mentioning on the subject of the Battle of Jamal and the “Mother of the
Believers”, Aisha bint Abu Bakr, comes from the Sunni book al-Iqd al- Fareed, in which it is narrated:
“After the battle of Jamal a woman comes to Aisha and asked her: ‘What shall be the punishment if a
woman murders her child?’ (Aisha) replied: ‘The fire’. Then the woman asked: ‘What is the punishment
[then] for a woman that kills twenty thousand of her children at one place?’ (Aisha), angry and outraged,
said: ‘How dare she say this? Arrest and apprehend this enemy of Allah.”


Instruction: Why don’t Shias respect Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan?

Context:
There are many reasons that explain and justify the Shia hostility and hatred towards Muawiya. Here are
just three of them:
He killed Imam Hasan (as)
Muawiya was the man who had the Prophet’s grandson Imam Hasan (as) poisoned and killed. This is a
historical fact: more than a dozen of the most famous, most respected classical scholars and historians
of the Ahlul Sunnah – including Ibn Abdul Barr, Zamakshari, Abul Fida and Masudi – write that Muawiya
offered Juda, wife of Imam Hasan, 100,000 dirhams, as well as his son Yazid’s hand in marriage, as a
reward for poisoning the second Shia Imam, which she agreed to do.
He killed Ammar ibn Yasir
Muawiya was the man, the “rebel”, who the Prophet prophesied would kill the famous companion
Ammar ibn Yasir.
Sahih Muslim, Book 41 Hadith, 6966: “Allah’s Messenger (S) said to Ammar as he was digging the ditch
(on the occasion of the Battle of the Ditch) wiping over his head: O son of Summayya you will be
involved in trouble and a group of rebels will kill you.”
There are four more such ahadith in Sahih Muslim: numbers 6967 to 6970. And classical Sunni scholars
Allama ibn Hajar Asqalani and Hafiz Jalaluddin as-Suyuti have both written that this hadith is
mutawaatir, which means there can be no doubt about its chain of narration, it is 100% authentic.
So, if any more conclusive historical proof was needed to show the infidelity and hypocrisy of Muawiya
then this particular authentic hadith is it. No historian, Sunni or Shia, Muslim or non-Muslim, denies the
fact that Ammar was killed by none other than Muawiya in the Battle of Siffin, which was launched by
Muawiya and his Syrian army against Imam Ali (as) and his allies.
The famous and contemporary English translator of Sahih Muslim, Abdul Hamid Siddiqui, has written in
the footnote of his translation of this hadith that not only was Ammar killed in the Battle of Siffin but he
goes on to add that “this hadith is clearly indicative of the fact that in the conflict between Hazrat Ali and
his opponents, Hazrat Ali was on the right as Ammar ibn Yasir was killed in the Battle of Siffin fighting in
the camp of Hazrat Ali.”
Ironically, a desperate and conniving Muawiya recognized the damage done to his status and standing
from the death of Ammar and the prediction of the Prophet (S). He subsequently tried to claim that Imam
Ali (as) was to blame for Ammar’s death as it was he who had brought Ammar to fight in the Battle of
Siffin in his army. Imam Ali (as), however, reminded the people that if that was the case, then the
Prophet of Islam was to blamed for the death of his uncle Hamza as it was the Prophet (S) who had
brought Hamza to fight in the Battle of Ohud!
He began the cursing of Ali ibn Abu Talib (as)
According to Sunan Tirmidhi, the Holy Prophet (S) once said: “Loving Ali is the sign of belief, and hating
Ali is the sign of hypocrisy.”
And the companions are quoted by Tirmidhi as saying:“We used to identify the hypocrites by their hatred
for Ali.”
Yet Muawiya not only fought against Imam Ali (as), at Siffin, he cursed Imam Ali (as) as well and
demanded, during his rule of the ummah, that everyone who spoke from the pulpit (mimbar) curse Ali
(as) also. To prove it, let us begin with Sahih Muslim, Book 31, Tradition 5915:
Sa’d ibn Abu Waqqas narrated that: Muawiya, the son of Abu Sufyan, gave order to Sa’d, and told him:
“What prevents you that you are refraining from cursing Abu Turab (nickname of Imam Ali)?” Sa’d
replied: “Don’t you remember that the Prophet said three things about (the virtue of) Ali? So I will never
curse Ali.”
Hafiz Jalaluddin as Suyuti, the Egyptian Sunni scholar, narrates in al-Durr al-Mansur: “That it was in the
days of Bani Umayyah, there were more than seventy thousand pulpits (mimbar) in mosques upon
which they cursed Ali ibn Abu-Talib - Muawiya made it a sunnah for them.”
Allama Shibli Numani, the dean of India’s Sunni historians, writes in his famous biography of Prophet
Muhammad, Sirat-un-Nabi: “Among all those extraneous forces which affect and influence the writing of
history, none is more powerful than the government…For full 90 years, from Sind in India (IndoPakistan) to Asia Minor and Andalusia in Spain, Ali and the children of Fatima were cursed from every
pulpit in every mosque after every Friday sermon. Thousands and thousands of hadith glorifying
Muawiya, were manufactured, and were put into circulation.”
This official media bias, this propaganda, this demonization of Ali (as) is what created the conditions for
the later massacre of the Prophet and Ali’s (as) family at Karbala, and what set the tone for the
humiliations of the Prophet’s granddaughters at the hands of Muawiya’s son, Yazid, in the court of
Damascus in 680 ad.
Rememebr: hatred of the Prophet’s household, his Ahlul Bayt, did not appear overnight: it came from
Muawiya, who was in power for almost two decades.


Instruction: Why don’t Shias accept Abu Hurayrah’s traditions?

Context:
The “companion” Abu Hurayrah is one of the key sources for the traditions contained in the books of the
Ahlul Sunnah. The Shias reject him and his traditions for the following reasons:
Content
Perhaps the major reason why Abu Hurayrah is rejected and shouldn’t be trusted is because of the
bizarre and often offensive content of the ahadith which are ascribed to him. For example, the ludicrous
story of Prophet Musa (Moses) and the stone, from Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5, Number 277:
Narrated by Abu Hurayrah: The Prophet (S) said, “The (people of) Bani Israel used to take baths naked
(all together) looking at each other. The Prophet Moses used to take a bath alone. They said, ‘By Allah!
Nothing prevents Moses from taking a bath with us except that he has a scrotal hernia.’ So once Moses
went out to take a bath and put his clothes over a stone and then that stone ran away with his clothes.
Moses followed that stone saying, ‘My clothes, O stone! My clothes, O stone!’ till the people of Bani
Israel saw him and said, ‘By Allah, Moses has got no defect in his body.’ Moses took his clothes and
began to beat the stone.” Abu Hurayrah added, “By Allah! There are still six or seven marks present on
the stone from that excessive beating.”
Are we really supposed to believe such nonsense? About Prophet Musa?
Internal contradictions in his ahadith
Abu Hurayrah said: “Once I entered the house of Ruqayya, the Prophet’s daughter and Uthman’s wife.
She had a comb in her hand. She said: “The Prophet left just a little while ago. I combed his hair. He
said to me: “How do you find Abu Abdullah (Uthman)?” I said: “He is good.” He said to me: “Grace him!
He is the most similar to me, among my companions, in morals.”
Now Imam al-Hakim, famous Ahlul Sunnah transmitter of ahadith, narrates this and says: “This tradition
has a true series of narrators but untrue text, [the content is untrue] because Ruqayya had died in the
third year of hijra during the battle of Badr, whereas Abu Hurayra came and became a Muslim after the
battle of Khaybar [four years later].” So how did Abu Hurayrah have this conversation that he claims?
One which helped the third caliphate Uthman’s reputation, conveniently?
Common sense
Abu Hurayrah narrated over 5,000 traditions after converting to Islam in 629 ad, just three years before
the death of the Holy Prophet (S).
Can it be possible to accept that such a large number of traditions were narrated by this single person in
such a short space of time? And could an illiterate and uneducated man, late to became a Muslim and
therefore late in the period of his companionship with the Holy Prophet (S) narrate more traditions and
sayings from the Prophet than his wives, relatives and lifelong friends and companions?
Remember: he narrated more than 5,000 ahadith in this time. Compare this with the far fewer ahadith
narrated by Aisha, Abu Baker, or Umar and the rest.
In fact, in his book, “Hadith Literature: It’s Origin, Development, & Special Features”, the Sunni writer
Muhammed Zubayr Siddiqui sets out the following details:
 • Abu Hurayrah narrated : 5,374 hadiths
 • Aisha Umm al-Mo’mineen: 2,210 hadiths
 • Umar ibn Khattab : 537 hadiths
 • Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) : 536 hadiths
 • Abu Bakr al-Siddiq : 142 hadiths
Excluding Abu Hurayrah, that is a total between them of 3,425. Abu Hurayra narrated more ahadith than
all of them put together!
Can any sensible or impartial person believe that Abu Hurayrah, despite his obscurity, his illiteracy and
his lack of time alongside the Holy Prophet (S), managed to somehow narrate more traditions than the
first four caliphs, with all their status, their authority, their presence alongside the Prophet (S) during his
22-year mission and their high profile in the decades following his death in 632 ad? Is this what we are
expected to believe? It just isn’t plausible.
Companions’ testimony
Consider the verdict of Umar ibn Khattab on Abu Hurayrah: Allama Muttaqi al-Hindi in his Kanzul
Ummal reports that when he was caliph, Umar lashed Abu Hurayrah, rebuked him and forbade him to
narrate ahadith from the Holy Prophet. When asked why he did so, Umar said: “Because you narrate
hadith in [such] large numbers from the Holy Prophet, you are fit only for attributing lies to him. So you
must stop narrating hadith from the Prophet, otherwise, I will send you back to your tribe in Yemen.”
Then there’s the verdict of Aisha: Sunni scholars Ibn Qutayba, Hakim and al-Dhahabi say that Aisha
repeatedly contradicted Abu Hurayrah and said, “Abu Hurayra is a great liar who fabricates hadith and
attributes them to the Holy Prophet.”
Allama Ibn Qutayba records the story of Aisha telling Abu Hurayrah: “You tell ahadith about the Prophet
Muhammad that we never heard them from him” He answered; “You (Aisha) were busy with your mirror
and make up” She (Aisha) answered him; “It is you who were busy with your stomach and hunger. Your
hunger kept you busy, you were running after the people in the alleyways, begging them for food, and
they used to avoid you and get away from your way, and finally you would come back and pass out in
front of my room and the people think you were crazy and step all over you.”
In fact, Imam al-Hakim counted up those who narrated traditions from Abu Hurayrah. He found that 28
leading companions, including Imam Ali (as), Umar, Uthman, Talha and Zubayr were not among them.
But Abu Hurayrah had a huge impact on the history and direction of Islam. Ahlul Sunnah Islam, in fact, is
built on his narrations, many of them false, unreliable, odd, offensive and contradictory. There is nothing
wrong or objectionable with Sunnis calling themselves the followers of the sunnah, but it depends which
sunnah.
The sunnah as interpreted and narrated by an unreliable narrator who spent less than three years with
the Prophet; or the sunnah as interpreted and narrated by a man like Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) who grew up
in the lap of the Prophet, in the home of Prophet and who was by his side from the very first day, from
the very first invitation to the Quraysh to join Islam, to the moment he passed away with his head in
Imam Ali’s (as) lap.


Instruction: Why don’t Shias accept Sahih Bukhari and the authentic Ahlul Sunnah collections of ahadith?

Context:
Content
Some of the ahadith in Bukhari are shocking, including many of the ones from Abu Hurayrah cited
earlier. Not only are physical attributes ascribed to Allah (SwT); for example, Allah puts His foot in Hell
(!), but what is said about the Holy Prophet (S) is too disgusting and defamatory and sickening to repeat
here in detail. It is sufficent to say that there are traditions contained in Sahih Bukhari which relate to the
Prophet (S) falling asleep and forgetting the prayer time, forgetting to perform the necessary ablution
(wudhu) for prayer, sitting with Aisha to watch a dance with music; taking off his clothes and being naked
in public; and discussing his nightly sexual activities with his wives with his companions. These are
outrageous claims and slurs that Muslims today would not tolerate from Danish cartoonists or from
Salman Rushdie yet we tolerate such offensive nonsense from the supposedly “sahih” book of Bukhari.
Why?
The irony is that if Bukhari were alive today, and published his book now containing the claims that it
does about the Holy Prophet of Islam, those same Ahlul Sunnah scholars who praise him would be the
first to issue fatwas declaring him an apostate and ordering for him to be ex- communicated and/or
killed.
Indeed, by any objective assessment, how can one say that Salman Rushdie is guilty of defaming the
Prophet and “Imam” Bukhari is not?
Bukhari’s agenda:
Of his 7,000 or so ahadith, Bukhari narrates around 1,100 ahadith from Abu Hurayrah, roughly the same
number from Abdullah ibn Umar and 900 from Anas ibn Malik. None of these three men can be
considered front- rank or long-standing or senior companions, by Sunni or Shia standards. What kind of
book of “sahih”, or authentic and correct, hadith from the Prophet does not narrate from the person who
was described by the Holy Qur’an and the Prophet himself as the “self of the Prophet”, the “nafs” of the
Prophet? How could he claim to be compiling sayings of the Prophet without narrating from the gateway
to the knowledge of the Prophet, as Ali (as) was once so famously referred?
He also failed to narrate traditions from other Imams who you might expect him to have quoted from, like
Imam Baqir (as) and Imam Sadiq (as), the 5th and 6th Imams of the Ahlul Bayt and well-known for their
scholarship and knowledge of the Prophet’s traditions.
And it wasn’t just Imam Sadiq (as) that Bukhari refrained from taking ahadith from: he did not take any
from four of the Ahlul Bayt Imams who were actually alive during his lifetime: Imam al-Ridha (as), Imam
at-Taqi (as), Imam an- Naqi (as) and Imam al-Askari (as).
Why is Sahih Bukhari devoid of ahadith narrated by these Imams? Or from Ali ibn Abu Talib (as), despite
the Prophet (S) saying that the two weighty things he was leaving us with were the Holy Qur’an and his
Ahlul Bayt, his household? Can you then blame the Shias for rejecting the so-called Sahih Bukhari?


Instruction: What is “taqiyah”? Is it not lying, deception and deceit?

Context:
“Taqiyah” means dissimulation: concealing or disguising one’s beliefs or intentions.
Today, lots of Islamophobes and Muslim-haters say the traditional Shia belief in Taqiyah makes us
Muslims, Sunni and Shias alike, dishonest, untrustworthy people. Yet nothing could be further from the
truth. Islam takes a hard line against lying in general, and stresses the importance of truth and honesty.
But like every other ethical system on earth, whether religious or secular, there are certain exceptions to
rules in certain, often extreme scenarios.
So, if your life is at risk, or your family’s life is at risk, you are allowed to conceal the fact that you are a
Muslim – just as, for example, the Jews tried to conceal their faith from the Nazis in the 1930s and 1940s
to avoid being sent to the Nazi gas chambers.
Taqiyah is a form of self-defence, of self-preservation and it is referred to in the Holy Qur’an and the
books of the Ahlul Sunnah.
References from books of Ahlul Sunnah
Imam Fahkruddin Razi, one of the greatest of classical Ahlul Sunnah scholars, writes in his famous
Tafseer al- Kabeer, volume 4: “Taqiyyah is permissible till the day of Qayamah…because it is Wajib
(compulsory) to protect our life from any harm.”
In fact, he goes even further than this and writes: “Taqiyyah is permissible for self-protection, but is it
permissible for the protection of wealth?” he asks. Your property? Your money? Your wealth and
income? “It probably is permissible,” he concludes.
Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
Forget for a moment the verdicts of the Sunni and Shia scholars; look at the verdict of Allah (SwT). The
key verse from the Holy Qur’an which states:
“Anyone who, after accepting faith in Allah (SwT), utters disbelief (save under compulsion and
even then his heart remains firm in faith) on them is Wrath from Allah (SwT) and theirs will be a
dreadful Penalty.” (16:106) [Surah An-Nahl].
All Muslim scholars agree that this verse descended in relation to the suffering of Ammar ibn Yasir at the
hands of the Quraysh in Makkah. Allamah Hafiz Jalaludeen as Suyuti of Egypt, in his commentary on
this verse states: “The non- believers once caught Ammar ibn Yasir and they forced him to praise their
false gods and to condemn Prophet Muhammad (S). They forced him to an extent that Ammar ibn Yasir
gave in, and conceded to their demands. After that, when he returned to the Prophet Muhammad (S),
Ammar narrated the whole story to him. The Prophet (S) asked him:
“How do you feel in your heart?” To which Ammar replied: “I am fully content with Allah’s religion in my
heart”. To this the Prophet (S) said: “If non-believers ask you to say the same again, say it”. Then the
following verse (ayat) was revealed:
“Anyone who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters disbelief (save under compulsion and even
then his heart remains firm in faith) on them is Wrath from Allah and theirs will be a dreadful
Penalty”. [Surah Al Nahl, 16:106]
There are several other verses of the Holy Qur’an which speak of the importance and legitimacy of
taqiyah if the situation demands it: one example worth noting is from Surah Yusuf:
“When Yusuf said to his father: O my father! Surely I saw eleven stars and the sun and the moon
- I saw them bowing down to me. “He said: O my son! Do not relate your vision to your brothers,
lest they devise a plan against you; surely the Shaitan is an open enemy to man.” (12:4-5)
Here, Prophet Jacob (Yaqub) is telling Prophet Joseph (Yusuf) to do taqiyah with his own brothers.
Why? Because he’s worried they’ll turn against him and try and get rid of him – which is what they then
do when they discover the truth!
Common sense
Taqiyah isn’t lying or deception, and nor is lying or deception allowed, let alone encouraged or promoted,
in Islam. Taqiyah is, in extreme situations, and for the purposes of self-preservation, the concealing of
one’s beliefs, beliefs that deep down you still hold and haven’t abandoned but have been forced to
conceal against your will – and, on this basis, it is not only an Islamic principle or concept, but, let’s be
honest, it’s common sense.