WHO ARE THE SHIAH?

Aqeedah & Creed Aqeedah & Creed WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 1 | P a g e WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 2 | P a g e Contents WHO ARE THE SHIAH? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 SHI’ISM- NOT A VALID MATH-HAB ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 THE USOOL OF SHI`ISM------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 SPECIAL KUFR OF SHI`ISM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 SAHAABAH UNFIT !------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9 HATRED FOR THE SAHAABAH – SENIOR SAHAABAH ARE ‘UNCULTURED’ SAY SHIAHS-------- 11 SHIAHS AND JIHAAD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12 SHI`I ADL------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 14 SHI`I SLANDER ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15 THE DISMAL REALITY OF THE AHLUS SUNNAH----------------------------------------------------------- 15 IN IRAN ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15 WHAT SHIAHS SAY ABOUT RASULULLAH(SALALLAHU ALAYHI WASALLAM)--------------------- 20 WHO ARE THE SHIAH? Shi’ism’s fundamental basis – the cornerstone of its religion - is its principle of reviling, abusing and rejecting the Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The murderers of Hadhrat Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhu) realised that their politically and nafsaani inspired movement can never be successful as long as the authority of Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) Sahaabah is retained. They had, therefore, no alternative other than raising the structure of Shi’ism on the basis of opinion which necessitated the denial of the authority of the Companions of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They thus propagated the doctrine of the rejection of the Sahaabah with brutal blasphemy, which they shamelessly attributed to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Their religion is based on the vilification of those whom Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) loved so dearly and whose authority is established, not on the basis of opinion and love, but on the basis of Divine Directive. Without the Sahaabah there can be no Islam, no Qur’aan, no Sunnah, no Shariah, no Imaan. The Deen of Allah Ta’ala came to us and to all and will continue to travel to the end of time by means of Naql (authoritative and authentic narration), the first link in the chain of narration and transmission joining us with Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) being the noble Sahaabah. But, Shi’ism has broken that very first and vital link with Nabi-e- Kareem(sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They thus have no Shar’i authority and no Shar’i proof for their beliefs of the nafs. The way they have tried to overcome this hurdle is by their doctrine of fabricating Ahaadith to substantiate their claims. WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 3 | P a g e Nifaaq or hypocrisy is a principle of the Shi’i religion. They technically term such hypocrisy as Taqiyah which means the permissibility to conceal one’s true beliefs for the sake of any expediency. Thus they attribute even such hypocrisy to Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu). It is the Shi’i belief that although Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) believed that Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhuma) usurped the Khilaafat and deliberately betrayed Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) he nevertheless pledged loyalty to these senior Sahaabah on account of some political expediency. This blatant baatil and blasphemy attributed to Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) exhibit the crookedness of Shi’i mentality. The Shiahs who have gone out of their way to belittle the Sahaabah and to drop them from the pedestal of authority which the Shariah assigns to them can never be the lovers of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) nor can Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) have love for such miscreants of belief. About hatred for his Sahaabah, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:”Those who hate the Sahaabah, hate them because [in reality] they hate me.” It is a Shi’i contention that the great Sahaabah, especially Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan, etc.(radhiyallahu anhum) did not understand the teachings of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They further shamelessly and blasphemously assert that these illustrious Khulafa-e-Raashideen are usurpers, frauds, fabricators of Ahaadith and wholly incompetent in Deeni matters. Indeed, the la’nat of Allah Ta’ala must be on such slanderers as the Shi’i clergy who make such wicked assertions. Inspite of their slander being shocking and despicable in the extreme, it is not surprising since they are the worst fabricators and frauds peddling their nafsaani opinions in the name of Islam and attributing it to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They have accused the Sahaabah of being involved in conspiracies to eliminate Islam and supplant it with the Arab tribal systems of the time of jaahiliyyah. The blasphemous drivel which clutters their books and preachings exhibits their wickedness and detestation for the Islam of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Inspite of the open venom which the Shiahs spit against the Sahaabah, the ignorant supporters of the Shiahs among the Ahlus Sunnah expect the Ulama to raise slogans of brotherhood and to fabricate a common basis and a common platform of fraternity with the enemies of Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) Companions. They expect the Ummah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to unite with those whose very religion is reared on hatred for the Sahaabah. No, that can never come to pass. The enemies of Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) Sahaabah can never be the friends or brothers of the Ahlus Sunnah. There is no apologetism in our capital for such ventures. We know of no diplomacy and recognize no expediency for such vile brotherhood. If unity and brotherhood with all and sundry are of such importance, let the supporters of the Shi’i clergy advocate unity and brotherhood with shaitaan and Qaadianism as well. We unequivocally maintain that those (the Shiahs) who claim that Hadhrat Zubair, Talhah and Aishah (radhiyallahu anhum) are Jahannami (inmates of the fire) are our enemies. In fact they themselves are Jahannami. Only those standing in line to be condemned to Jahannum can be so shameless as to say that these illustrious Sahaabah among the Asha’arah Mubash-sharah and the beloved wife of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) are Jahannami. May Allah Ta’ala save us from uttering such kufr. Muslims should now realize that it is haraam to support in any way the Shiahs. Support for Khomeini and the Shi’i clergy is support offered to the enemies of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). What does the intelligence and Imaan of Muslims direct and conclude? Does the Imaan of the Mu’min opine that the Shiahs are in the Naaji (the saved) group or the Sahaabah? Will the Sahaabah be in the one sect which will go to Jannat or in the 72 sects condemned to hell? Will the Shiahs be despatched to Jannat and Hadhrat Aishah, Talhah, Zubair, Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan(radhiyallahu anhum) to Jahannum as the Shi’i clergy asserts? What does your Imaan tell you? Who will be in Jahannum? The beloved wives and Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) or the Shiah clergy of Iran? WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 4 | P a g e SOME OPINIONS OF SHIAHS 1. HADHRAT ABU HURAIRAH (radhiyallahu anhu) The name of Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (radhiyallahu anhu) is familiar to most Muslims. About this eminent Sahaabi and narrator of Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) Ahaadith, Khomeini of Iran says: “God knows what misfortunes Islam has suffered from its inception down to the present at the hands of these evil ‘ Ulama’. Abu Hurairah was one of the fuqaha, but God knows what judgements he falsified for Muawiyyah and others like him, and what damage he inflicted upon Islam.” But when a faqih like Abu Hurairah or a judge like Shuraiyh joins such a government, he improves its standing while besmirching the reputation of Islam.” Commenting on this statement of Khomeini, Hamid Algar the complier of Khomeini’s writings declarations, states: “Shi’i scholars have regarded him is unreliable and even dishonest.” But, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) made special du`aa for Abu Hurairah in respect of narration of Ahaadith, hence we observe the Ahaadith in abundance narrated by him. The following statement bears out the love which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had for Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (radhiyallahu anhu): “O Allah! Endear this, your servant (Abu Hurairah ) and his mother to your believing servants and endear the believers to them.” (Muslim) Thus those who are Believers love Abu Hurairah (radhiyallahu anhu). Those who are unbelievers detest Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (radhiyallahu anhu). 2. HADHRAT SAMURA BIN JUNDUB (radhiyallahu anhu) Khomeini, slandering the eminent Sahaabi, Hadhrat Samura Bin Jundub (radhiyallahu anhu) says: “Dissemination of the ordinances of Islam, as well as the teaching and instruction of the people, is the duty of the fuqaha who are just. For if they are not just, they will be like those who forged traditions harmful to Islam, like Samura Ibn Jandub, who forged traditions hostile to the Commander of the Faithful.” 3. HADHRAT TALHA, ZUBAIR AND AISHAH (radhiyallahu anhum) Mutahhiri, a leading cleric of the Shiah religion, says: “Now that we see Ali, and Ammaar, Uwais al-Qarni and others face to face with Aishah and Az Zubair and Talhah, we do not feel any hesitation, for we see the second group as people with the look of criminals, that is, the effects of evil and treachery are evident on their faces; and when we look at their faces and their treacherous characters we guess that they are people of the fire.” (TEHRAN TIMES, 25th August, 1982) From the above vile remarks made by one of Khomeini’s leading Shi’i theologians, it will be evident that the Shiah religion describes Hadhrat Aishah Siddiqah (radhiyallahu anha), the beloved wife of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) as criminal, evil, treacherous and among the people of Jahannum– Nauthubillah! But, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) warned: “Do not hurt me regarding Aishah.” (Bukhaari and Muslim) “The superiority of Aishah over women is like the superiority over Thareed [a kind of food] over all food.” (Muslim) “O Aishah! Jibraeel recites Salaam upon you.” (Muslim) In the Shiah religion, Hadhrat Zubair (radhiyallahu anhu) is described as a criminal, evil, treacherous and among the people of Jahannum–-Nauthubillah! But, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said about Zubair: “Every Nabi had a hawaari [helper], and my Hawaari is Zubair, Zubair will be in Jannat.” (Tirmizi) Hadhrat Zubair and Hadhrat Talhah whom the Shiahs claim are among the “people of the Fire”, are in fact members of the Asharah Mubash-sharah who are the ten Sahaabah to whom Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) delivered the glad tidings of Jannat. These Sahaabah already were informed by Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) that their place in Jannat has already been secured, but Khomeini and his Shiahs believe that these noble men are among the people of the Fire. WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 5 | P a g e The Shiahs believe that Hadhrat Talhah (radhiyallahu anhu) is evil, treacherous, a criminal and among the people of the Fire, but Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “ Talhah and Zubair will be my two neighbours in Jannat.” (Tirmizi) 4. HADHRAT ABU BAKR, UMAR AND UTHMAAN (radhiyallahu anhum) “At last the first Caliph died, but while going he appointed another to fill this vacancy. It is not astonishing that during his lifetime he was always badly in need of the help of others to compensate for his imperfections and defects and to cover his faults and failures, but at the time of his death he thought himself to be wise and learned enough to fix and appoint somebody to carry on the duties at which he was a complete failure himself. Boldly and unscrupulously he and his successor [ a reference to Hadhrat Umar], each in turn, pillaged and plundered the wealth of the community leaving the state in such a sadly injured condition that the passage of time was increasing the intensity of the injury. ....But it was carried on under the guise of law and order and many unacceptable excuses were offered to justify these irreligious and ungodly arrogations and many more will be repeated in the future. Consequently the third [i.e. Hadhrat Uthmaan] proudly took charge of the Khilaafat, as if it was a private grazing ground, and with bloated stomachs he and members of his clan [Bani Umayyah] started plundering the wealth of the Muslim world in the same reckless gluttonous manner which characterizes a camel when it devours harvest grass. However, this man died an untimely death. The greed of his clan was the cause of his undoing.” (Nahjul Balaaghah-A book of Shi’sm) 5. HADHRAT AMR IBNUL Aa’s (radhiyallahu anhu) Another lie which the Shiahs attribute to Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) is the following statement: “ You know very well that Amer-Ibn Aa’s himself is an inveterate liar, he usually lies, he makes promises without intention of fulfilling them....he habitually breaks his pledges, never keeps a promise and is unkind and unmerciful. In the battlefield before the swords are drawn and fight begins, he is usually very bold in giving orders and very conspicuous in pretension of leading the army; but when the fight actually begins his greatest tactic is to show his opponents his naked buttocks.” (Nahjul Balaaghah) Ameerul Mu’mineen Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) never uttered such falsehood, slander, abuse, insult and vulgarity. Such abuse and vituperation are the stock weapons of Shi’ism. Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) had the utmost respect and honour for Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Hadhrat Umar and Hadhrat Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhum). In fact, Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) took the oath of allegiance (ba’yt) on the hands of the first three Khulafa-e-Raashideen. Furthermore, Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) could never have spoken so disparagingly of the great Conqueror of Islam, viz., Hadhrat Amr Ibnul Aa’s (radhiyallahu anhu) who was among the top-ranking Companions of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). 6. THE SAHAABAH About the Sahaabah in general, Murtaza Mutahhiri the cleric of the Shiah religion, says: “...the fundamentals of Islam were violated at the hands of these very people who had served Islam for a long time...” So, according to Shi’ism, Hadhrat Abu Bakr , Umar, Uthmaan and the vast majority of the Sahaabah who had served Islam, in the end turned their backs on Islam and violated the fundamentals of Islam. If those great and illustrious Sons of Imaan and Islam did so, do we expect Khomeini and the Shiahs who sprang from the murder of Ameerul Mu`mineen, Hadhrat Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhu) to uphold the fundamentals of Islam? The villainy of Hadhrat Uthmaan’s murderers permeates and sustains the entire Shi’i movement, hence Mutahhiri could be so callous to make the above-quoted observation in denigration of the beloved Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The above statement appeared in Tehran Times of 25th August, 1982. WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 6 | P a g e ALLAH’S PLEASURE Declaring His Pleasure for the Sahaabah, Allah Ta`ala states in the Qur`aan Majeed: “VERILY ALLAH HAS BECOME PLEASED WITH THE MU`MINEEN (THE SAHAABAH) WHEN THEY TOOK THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE UNDER THE TREE. HE WAS AWARE OF WHAT IS IN THEIR HEARTS, HENCE HE CAST PEACE OVER THEM AND GRANTED THEM A QUICK VICTORY AND SPOILS OF WAR IN ABUNDANCE WHICH THEY WILL ACQUIRE. ALLAH IS THE MIGHTY, THE WISE.” [SURAH FATAH] 7. RASULULLAH (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) In another kufr aspersion cast against the mission of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the Shi’i priest, Baaqir Sadr states: “ Everything that has gone before proves that the instructions given by the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wasallam] to the Muhaajirun and the Ansaar did not reach a level which would have been necessitated by the conscious, intellectual and political preparation required to guide the future path of Da’wa and the process of change which had been instigated by the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wasallam].” SHI’ISM- NOT A VALID MATH-HAB To make Shi’ism acceptable to Muslims, Shiahs and their supporters are attempting to make Shi’ism appear as a valid Math-hab of Islam in the same way as the Four Math-habs of the Ahl-e-Sunnah Wal Jama’ah. It is being claimed that Shi’ism is the fifth Math-hab and its Fiqh is dubbed ‘Ja’fari Fiqh.’ However, in Islam there is no such a thing as ‘Ja’fari ‘ Fiqh. Every Muslim knows that in Islam there are only four valid Math-habs and every Muslim knows that Shi’ism never came under the shade of the Islamic Umbrella under which stand the four Math-habs, viz., Hanafi, Shafi`, Maaliki and Hambali. Shi’ism has always been regarded as a mutant by the people of Islam from its (Shi’ism’s) inception. It is alien to Islam and no amount of propaganda emitting from Tehran and the protagonists of Khomeinism can ever make Shi’ism acceptable to Islam. Muslims should not be deceived by propaganda of the so-called Ja’fari Fiqh. Such ‘Fiqh’ has neither basis nor sanction in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. The denigrators of Taqleed – those who belittle the illustrious Imaams of the Math-habs – should direct their attention a bit to this ‘Ja’fari Fiqh’ presented as the fifth Math-hab. Let them open their mouths a bit in denigration of the blind, stupid and kufr type of Taqleed which Khomeini and his Shiahs offer to their ‘Ja’fari Fiqh’ and their imagined institution of infallible Imaamat. The denigrators of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen of the Ahlus Sunnah will find a greater field and a better target for their criticism in Shi’ism and its so-called ‘Ja’fari Fiqh’. THE USOOL OF SHI`ISM The religion of Shi`ism is based on five fundamental principles (Usool) while Islam is based on three Usool. Usool (the Roots) refer to those fundamental doctrines which constitute the foundations of Deen. In the unanimous opinion of all – both Shiahs and Sunnis —rejection of anyone of the Usool constitutes kufr. Any person who denies any one of the Usool is termed a Kaafir (unbeliever) according to both the Shiahs and Sunnis. The five Usools according to Shi`ism are: Tauheed, (belief in the Unity of Allah Ta`ala), Risaalat or Nubuwwat (Belief in the Ambiyaa), Imaamat (Belief in the Imaams), Adal (Belief in the doctrine of compulsory WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 7 | P a g e OUR SPIRITUAL MOTHERS While Shiahs brand Hadhrat Aisha (radhiallahu anha) and Hadhrat Hafsa (radhiallahu anha) – two of Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) Wives – as treacherous, cunning, murderers, adulterous, etc., the Qur`aan states about them: “THE NABI HAS GREATER CLAIM OVER THE MU`MINEEN THAN EVEN THEIR OWNSELVES, AND HIS WIVES ARE THEIR MOTHERS.” [SURAH AHZAAB] justice – that Allah Ta`ala is compelled to act in accordance with justice as understood by the Shiah religion), and Aakhirah. According to Islam, the three Usool of Deen are Tauheed, Risaalat and Aakhirah. The widely divergent paths and attitudes between the Shiahs and the Sunnis can be well understood when this great disparity in the fundamental basis in their respective religions is studied. Since the Sunnis reject two of the Shiah roots as being utterly baseless and concoctions, it is clear that all Sunnis in terms of the Shiah religion are Kaafir. This fact is explicitly proclaimed by Shiah authorities. Of the five fundamental principles of the Shiah religion, the doctrine of Imaamat is considered of greater importance than Rislaalat. Thus the Shiah religion accords greater importance and greater rank to those whom it regards as its Imaams. Some Shi`i references will be cited here to indicate the high rank and vital importance which Shiahs bestow to their Imaams. In fact, the importance Shiahs accord to their Imaams eclipses the ranks of the Ambiyaa. In the Shi`i book of theology, Usoolul Kaafi of Kulaini, the following teachings of Shi`ism are recorded regarding the doctrine of Imaamat: « The Hujjat (Proof) of Allah is not established over His creation without the medium of an Imaam from whom the inner knowledge of Allah is acquired. « If the earth remains without an Imaam it will be annihilated. « If the Imaam is removed from earth for even a moment, it (the earth) will churn with its inhabitants like the ocean churns with its waves. « A man cannot be a believer unless he recognises Allah, His Rasool, all the Imaams and the Imaam of his age. « Whoever denies the Imaam is like a person who denies the recognition of Allah and His Rasool. « Whoever recognises (accepts and acknowledges) us (the Imaams) is a Mum`min and whoever denies us is a Kaafir. « Obedience to the Imaams is Fardh (compulsory) like the obedience to the Rasools. « The Imaams possess all the knowledge which was bestowed to the Malaaikah, the Ambiyaa and the Rusul. « Allah Ta`ala has a special kind of knowledge from which He bestows to the Imaams exclusively. When Allah Ta`ala commences with anything of His special type of knowledge, He presents it to the Imaams. « The entire earth belongs to the Imaam. « The entire earth and the Hereafter belong to the Imaam. He places it as he pleases and gives it to whomever he pleases. The differences between Islam and Shi`ism are numerous and wide. A study of Shi`ism will conclusively establish that the type of reconciliation between Islam and Shi`ism called for by those who are not versed in the Shariah, is quite impossible. The difference on just this one issue of Imaamat is so vast and extreme that the gap between the two groups – Shiahs and Sunnis – can never be bridged. The Sunnis follow the Path of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah, while the Shiahs are astray plodding the path of baatil and kufr. The only way in which Islam can reconcile with those who have gone astray is by their renunciation of dhalaal (error and deviation) and kufr. There is no other way. WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 8 | P a g e SPECIAL KUFR OF SHI`ISM Impact International, Vol. 14: 16 reports some preposterous observations made by Khomeini of Iran. Among the claims made by Khomeini at the birthday anniversary of the Shi`i Imaam Raza, are the following: · The failure to achieve an Islamic system of government right from the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) until the present day. According to Khomeini the Islamic system of Government was not even achieved by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). · Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) was not allowed to reveal the special knowledge which he obtained from Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and that this ‘special’ knowledge was apart from the Qur`aan Shareef. · Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) and the Imaams did not find anyone to whom they could impart their special knowledge and the knowledge of the Qur`aan. Thus this special knowledge and the knowledge of the Qur`aan departed with the Imaams. · The Qur`aan today is veiled in mystery and its meanings are hidden. · The interpretations of the existing Qur`aan, from the beginning to the present, are not the interpretations of the Qur`aan, but are translations which resemble the Qur`aan. Although these are shocking statements of kufr, they are not surprising to those who have made a study of Shi`ism. Shi`ism propagates some of the worst opinions of kufr, hence it is not surprising to read such evil statements flowing from the lips of Khomeini. The books considered as authoritative by the Shi`i priests teach that the existing Qur`aan is not authentic, hence Khomeini says that the ‘interpretations of the existing Qur`aan are not real interpretations of the Qur`aan’ which in Shi`i belief will be brought by Imaam Mahdi (alayhis salaam). Needless to say, this is the highest aspect of kufr of Shi`ism. The Shi`i clergy believes that the existing Qur`aan is not the true version. What greater kufr can there be? In the claim that Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) was endowed with a secret knowledge which is not to be found in the Qur`aan and Sunnah, is the implication that Islam is in an imperfect and incomplete state. Furthermore, the allegation that Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) was prevented from revealing the knowledge which he gained from Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), implies that a considerable part of Islam is missing and has always been missing. This claim negates the Qur`aanic verse: “This day have I perfected for you your Deen...” In view of the Shi`i blasphemous claim that on the demise of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) the overwhelming majority of the Sahaabah became Murtad (Nauthubillah!), it is not at all surprising for Khomeini to assert that an Islamic government was never achieved. A bit of reflection will reveal that the motive underlying these observations made by Khomeini is merely to present a cover for the failure of Khomeini’s revolution in Iran. Having realised this fact of failure, Khomeini is presenting excuses to hoodwink the Iranian public. This should be clear from the following statement attributed to Khomeini by ‘Impact’: “What we have lost,” said the Iranian leader, with ostensible sorrow, “is the divine government of justice which we have not achieved.” However, he went to add that, “now that Almighty Allah has granted this people success and encompassed them with His Care and Kindness, we see with our own eyes what they are doing against the Divine government in Iran. The enemies have not given the officials in Iran the opportunity to make Islam known and to present it to the world.” This sums up the failure of Khomeini’s revolution. It tends to offer an excuse to the Irani people for the failure. A gullible public in Iran will accept that if Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) failed (Nauthubillah!) to achieve an Islamic government; if even the Shiahs greatest Imaam, Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) failed to achieve a true Islamic government and if the entire world of Islam from the very beginning to the present times failed to achieve the divine system of government which Islam envisages, then it should be accepted with contented resignation that Iran’s objective too has failed in this direction. Indeed, Shi`ism will resort to the most blasphemous types of kufr to justify its failures. The motive beneath all Shi`i conspiracies is nothing but worldly gain and considerations of aggrandizement. The Aakhirah and altruistic motives are furthest from Shi`i plans. After all, Shi`ism still has the sacred blood of Ameerul Mu`mineen Sayyidina Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhu) on its murderous hands. Shi`ism is a political sect concealing itself under religious colours to gain the WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 9 | P a g e THE ENEMIES OF ISLAM (Extract from an article by Sheikh Abdur Rahmaan al-Baluchy) “it is an established fact that Iran was a Sunni nation until the Tenth century of the Hijri calendar. During this period, Iran produced thousands of scholars in every discipline; the most salient of these facts is that the six Hadeeth books (i.e Bukhaari, Muslim, Abu Dawood, etc) were written by scholars from Iran. However, when the Safawi Shi’ites took control, they established their government on the skulls of the Sunni scholars and jurists. This was one of the reasons of the evacuation of the largest cities that were at the foremost centres of religious sciences, such as Tibriz, Isfahan, Ray, Tus. There were many Sunni Muslims that were killed, forced into Shi’ism, or compelled to flee to the mountains, leaving Iran as a centre for conspiracies against Islam and the Muslims. Fredinand, the ambassador to the Austrian king, remarked ,”had it not been for the Safawids in Iran, we would have been reading the Qur’aan this day like the Algerians,” meaning that his nation would have been conquered by the Ottoman Muslims. However, the Safawids conspired with the crusaders and the imperialists to halt the Islamic expansion is France and Vienna. The Sunni Muslims in Iran number about 15 to 29 million, living mainly in the mountainous and border regions. They are mainly Kurds, Turks, Baluchis and Arabs. There is also a good number living in the cities.” approval and support of the masses. It is for this reason that an independent observer will be quick to notice that every religious activity of the Shiah clergy is cast into a political mould. SAHAABAH UNFIT ! and Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), according to Shiahs failed in his mission According to Shi`i belief Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) did not prepare Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Hadhrat Umar, Hadhrat Uthmaan and most of the Sahaabah (radhiyallahu anhum) sufficiently to enable them to assume control of the affairs of the Islamic Ummat after Him (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Hence, in terms of the belief of the Shi`i religion, those whom we, the Ahlus Sunnah, believe to be the Khulafa-e-Raashideen, were not qualified for their posts, which they had occupied. According to the Shiahs, Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhum), were not Islamically qualified to become the Khulafa of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Propounding this vile falsehood, the Shi`i cleric, Muhammad Baaqir Sadr writes: “These are the dangers which might have arisen from the religious immaturity on the [part of his companions, who had not yet attained the standard at which the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) could feel satisfied of a reasonable reaction to the Khalifah after his death, within the religious frame- work of Islam, and their ability to overcome the hidden contradictions which existed, and continued to exist, in the minds of the WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 10 | P a g e Muslims, regarding their divisions into Muhaajirun and the Ansaar, Quraish and the rest of the Arab tribes, of Maccah and Madinah.” [Islamic Echo, England] In denying the qualifications of the illustrious and top-ranking Sahaabah such as Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhum), Baaqir, the Shi`i priest says: “In fact all this proves without a shred of doubt, that the first generation of the Islamic community (i.e. the Sahaabah), which also included those who came to power after the death of the Prophet (this refers to Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan in particular), did not give thought to the concept of a Shuraa as regards the appointment of the Khalifah, nor did they possess a clearly defined understanding of its principles; so how can we believe that the Prophet had instituted a policy of educating his followers, concerning the legal and theoretical concept of a Shuraa, to prepare the Muhaajirun and the Ansaar to submit their leadership of Islam to one elected according to these principles,.....” “For inspite of the fact that the first generation of the Muslims was the purest ever to embrace Islam and the most prepared to sacrifice for it, we cannot detect any indication of the specialized preparation required to assume the guardianship of the Faith,....” Again the Shi`i priest, Baaqir Sadr writes: “In fact the events which took place after the death of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) proved that the Muhaajirun and the Ansaar had not received any sort of instruction concerning many of their momentous problems which the Da`wah had to face after the time of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), so that neither the Khalifah, nor the central government who supported him, had a clear idea as to how the lands won by the Islamic conquests should be dealt with according to the Shariah, whether these lands should be divided amongst the fighting forces or should be regarded as endowments (awqaf) for the good of all Muslims.” Among the fallacious reasons Baaqir Sadr advances in support of the Shiah contention that the Khulafa-e- Raashideen were unqualified to assume the reigns of the Khilaafat due to inadequate teaching and training by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), is the claim that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) could not devote all his time to the companions in order to ground them solidly in the Shariah, hence the knowledge of men like Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhum) was deficient according to Shi`ism. In this regard Baaqir Sadr says: “For this relationship was not one of a teacher or instructor who could devote his time totally to his students, but was in fact that of a Prophet who was an instructor while also the military leader and the head of State.” Baaqir Sadr stated more brazenly: “Indeed, even the majority of these individual elites (a reference to the senior Sahaabah) did not possess the religious qualifications which would have made them capable of leading the empire as regards its intellectual and cultural features, in spite of their staunch loyalty and profound devotion,......” Thus, according to the Shiahs the great Sahaabah, even the elite among them such as the Khulafa-e-Raashideen who were trained directly by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) “did not possess the religious qualifications” to rule the Islamic Empire. But, Khomeini possesses such qualifications, and the hordes of Shiah priests possess such qualifications and the murderers of Ameerul Mu`mineen Sayyidina Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhu) possessed such qualifications!!! This is Shi`ism. In the above comments of Baaqir Sadr, it is quite evident that the Shiahs believe that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) did not accomplish his mission and that he departed from the earth at such a stage when his Sahaabah were not fully developed Imaanically, Islamically, spiritually and culturally. In fact, in terms of the Shi`i belief, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) did not achieve the aim of having secured qualifications for his Sahaabah in even the knowledge of the Deen. It is because of this kufr belief of the unaccomplished mission of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) that the Shiahs introduced the doctrine of Imaamat, which is in actual fact the perpetuation of Risaalat (Prophethood). The Shiahs extended the Risaalat of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) into the persons of their twelve Imaams, who according to Shiah theology are superior to many Ambiyaa. They have assigned all the attributes of Nubuwwat to the 12 Imaams so that the Imaams can ‘complete’ what Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) left ‘unfinished’ of his Risaalat – Nauthubillah! WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 11 | P a g e HATRED FOR THE SAHAABAH – SENIOR SAHAABAH ARE ‘UNCULTURED’ SAY SHIAHS In a booklet emanating for Qumm, the religious headquarters of Khomeini in Iran, some scandalous views regarding senior Sahaabah are expressed by the Shi`i theologian, Muhammad Amin Al-Antaaki. On page 12 of the booklet states: “What, do you not see what has been innovated by the tyrannical Muawiyyah, Amr Ibnul A`as, Marwaan , Ziad, Ibn Ziad, Mugheerah Bin Shu`bah, Amr Bin Sa`ad, whose father is amongst the Ashara Mubash-sharah in their (i.e. the Sahaabah and the Ahlus Sunnah) opinion and Talhah and Zubair who pledged loyalty to Ali then reneged from the pledge and waged war against their Imaam with Aishah in Basrah. They introduced therein such crimes which a cultured person will not commit.” In this statement, the Shiahs are branding some of the most illustrious Sahaabah as tyrannical, liars, disloyal and criminals. But Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has declared emphatically: “My Sahaabah are like the stars. Whomever (among them) you follow, you will attain Hidaayat.” “All my Sahaabah are uprighteous.” Commenting on Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) declaration that all his Sahaabah are uprighteous, the Shi`i priest states on page 13 of the booklet from Qumm: “We have never heard that any Nabi among the Ambiya came to his nation and all of them became uprighteous. In fact, the reality in this regard is the opposite. The Kitaab and Sunnah confirm this.” This is the type of Shiah onslaught against the authentic Ahaadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). To substantiate their belief that the overwhelming majority of the Sahaabah reneged from Islam (Nauthubillah!), the Shiahs have to refute the declaration of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) proclaiming the up righteousness and justice of ALL his Sahaabah. HADHRAT MUAWIYYAH (radhiyallahu anhu) Among the greatest excellences of Ameerul Mu`mineen Hadhrat Ameer Muawiyyah (radhiyallahu anhu) is the fact that he was one of Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) scribes who wrote the Wahi of the Qur`aan under the instructions of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). This unique position of trust assigned to him by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is sufficient to refute the crude and vulgar Shi`i slander and abuse directed against this noble and illustrious Sahaabi. Another fact which bears out his proximity to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his lofty rank among the Sahaabah is his appointment as commander of the Muslim army by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Stressing the lofty rank of Ameerul Mu`mineen Hadhrat Muawiyyah (radhiyallahu anhu), Sheikh Waliyullah Muhaddith Dehlwi (rahmatullahi alayh) says in Izaalatul Khifaa: “Know that Muawiyyah Bin Sufyaan (radhiyallahu anhuma) was a Sahaabi of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). In the general group of the Sahaabah , he held a distinguished position and rank. He is a Sahaabi of outstanding virtue and excellence. Beware! Never revile him. Never commit the Haraam act of abusing him.” Shiahs claim that if Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu) had possessed the qualities of leadership, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) would have appointed him commander of the army. This false assertion has already been rebutted earlier in a discussion on Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu) in the book ‘ Shi’sm Exposed ’. (Copies of the book Shi’sm Exposed may be obtained from the printers, see inside back cover for contact details) It was shown that Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu) was in fact made commander of the army in several battles. If Shiahs honestly believe that only one who has been appointed commander possesses the qualifications of leadership, then let them accept the leadership of Hadhrat Muawiyyah (radhiallahu anhu) who was appointed commander of the army by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 12 | P a g e HADHRAT ALI (RADHIALLAHU ANHU’S) VIEW HADHRAT ALI (RADHIALLAHU ANHU) SAID: “THE BEST OF THE UMMAH AFTER ITS NABI ARE ABU BAKR AND UMAR.” [BUKHARI] DECIEVING MUSLIMS (Extract from an article by Sheikh Abdur Rahmaan al-Baluchy) “however, the double faced regime was able, through raising the banner of Islamic unity, to fool many Muslims outside Iran as they ask them to attend their conferences, and transform their way of thinking within a short period of time. They became false witnesses within their own people, beguiling them with what they have been taught about the greatness of Islamic unity, without knowing anything about the plight of Ahlus Sunnah inside Iran. They repeat in all simplicity: “we are brothers, there is no difference between us.” Despite the imprisonment of the scholars and the demolished Islamic schools, they go to the grave of Khomeini, which has become a worshiped idol, offering their worship, and placing flowers at his grave. Their stance has mislead many young minds and opened the way for them to accept and tolerate Shi’ism. A person is further baffled when he realises the superficiality of these people, their oblivion to the reality and their inability to comprehend the situation. They keep on defending the Rawaafidh Shiah who are weaving conspiracy after conspiracy against Ahlus Sunnah.” Bearing testimony to the rank of Hadhrat Muawiyyah (radhiyallahu anhu), Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) says: “O People! Do not revile the reign of Muawiyyah. I swear by Allah! When he lives no longer, anarchy will spread wildly on earth.” [Izaalatul Khifaa] Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) said: “The best of the Ummah after its Nabi are Abu Bakr and Umar.” [Bukhaari] This statement of Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) has been narrated by eighty persons. Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) said: “ During the lifetime of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) we used to say: ‘The noblest of the Ummah of Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) after the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is Abu Bakr, then Umar and then Uthmaan.” [Bukhaari] WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 13 | P a g e SHIAHS AND JIHAAD That Shiahs are the enemies of Islam, enemies of the Sahaabah and the enemies of the Muslims who follow the Sunnah, there is no doubt. The history of Shi`ism demonstrates this fact without ambiguity. Inspite of their vociferous slogans laying claim to Islam, they are perpetually involved in bloody conspiracies to undermine Muslims. The Irani priests clamour much about Jihaad. But, Shi`ism has not waged a single Jihaad under the banner of Islam for the sake of Islam and Allah Ta`ala in all the centuries of Islam’s history. Their salient features have always been schemes, plots conspiracies and intrigues of strife, fitnah and murder directed against the people of the Sunnah. Even the anarchy which the Shi`i priests unleashed in Iran in these times was not Jihaad in the Path of Allah. It was a plain political struggle to wrest power from the Shah. Religion is always used by Shi`i’s for worldly political ends. In fact, according to Khomeini the goal and ultimate purpose of religion is politics. Shiahs are thus grounded to this ephemeral material abode. A people whose minds are blocked with kufr and hatred for the Beloved Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) can never be expected to wage Jihaad in the Path of Allah Ta`ala. There is no affinity whatsoever between Shi`ism and Jihaad. Jihaad is exclusive to the People of the Sunnah notwithstanding the present neglect of this vital Pillar by the People of the Sunnah of these times. Islamic history bears ample testimony that the Standard-Bearers of Islamic Jihaad have always been the Ahlus Sunnah, never the Shiahs. In this regard Ibn Taymiah who is not from the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah states in Minhaajus Sunnah: “The Shiahs do not wage Jihaad against the Kuffaar. The enemies of the Deen. On the contrary, numerous among them befriend the enemies of Allah. In their hatred for Muslims, they aid the Kuffaar. They have hatred for the Auliyaa of Allah and the Mu`mineen. They become the allies of Allah’s enemies, the Mushrikeen and the Ahl-e-Kitaab just as they have become the enemies of the noblest of creation, viz. The Muhaajireen, the Ansaar and their followers.” This is the Shi`i stance even today. While slating America as the ‘Satan’, Iran has joined hands with the kuffaar of America, India, Russia and Israel against the Taliban of Afghanistan. All these kuffaar, whether American kuffaar, Indian kuffaar, Israeli kuffaar, Russian kuffaar or Iranian Shi`i kuffaar, are of the same breed and ilk. They have joined forces in their conspiracy to eliminate the Islamic government of Afghanistan, hence they all support the un-Islamic alliance lined against Taliban. It is said Kufr is a single breed! The natural consequence of hatred for the Muhaajireen and Ansaar is love for the Mushrikeen, Yahood and Nasaara. It is therefore not possible for Shiahs to wage Jihaad against the Kuffaar. Their claims are hollow and lack any factual basis. To this day, against which Kuffaar did the Shiahs ever wage Jihaad? In the past their hatred was vented only on Muslims, never Kuffaar. And, in present times their hatred is likewise vented against Muslims – the Iraqis and Palestinians – never the Kuffaar. Further on in this book is explained the Shiah discrimination, oppression and torture of the Ahlus Sunnah citizens of Iran. Shi`i epithets hurled against America in womanish style are not representative of Islamic Jihaad. Verbal vituperation gorged out against the other Fussaaq rulers and governments of Muslim lands is not the Jihaad which Islam exhorts. About Jihaad, Allaama Anwar Shah Kashmiri wrote: “Most certainly, besides the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama`ah, Allah Ta`ala has not granted the Tawfeeq of Jihaad to any other group. Most Islamic states were ruined by the machinations of the Shiahs. May Allah Ta`ala destroy them.” [Faidhul Baari] Ameerul Mu`mineen Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhu) was murdered by the forerunners of the Shi`i movement. The last Khalifah of the Abbaasi Khilaafat in Baghdaad, Al-Mu`tasim Bil-Laah was murdered by the Shiahs. Shiah conspiracy accomplished the rape of Baghdaad. Such murderers can never embark on Jihaad in the Path of Allah. They are adepts in conspiracy and intrigue. Cruelty and brutality are their methods. The pillage of Baghdaad during the time of Al-Mu`tasim Bil-Laah is glaring evidence of the villainy of Shi`ism. Describing some of these heart-rending episodes enacted by the Shiahs, Ibn Qayyim writes in Ighaathatul Luhfaan: WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 14 | P a g e “.......They murdered the Ulama of Islam – The Qaadhis, the Fuqaha and the Muhadditheen – and befriended the philosophers, astrologers and sorcerers. They transferred the auqaaf funds of the Musaajid, Madaaris and Maraabit to these atheists. They erected institutions for these atheists. Abu Ja`far Tusi (the Shi`i) endeavoured to substitute the Qur`aan with Ishaaraat, the book of Ibn Sinaa, the leader of the atheists, but he did not succeed. He said that the book Ishaaraat is the Qur`aan of the elite. He tampered with Salaat and attempted to fix it (Salaat) at two, but he did not succeed.” These vile perpetrations continue in Iran to this day against the Ahlus Sunnah. The rape, pillage and destruction of Baghdaad with Shi`i connivance cannot be adequately described in words. Approximately a quarter of the Muslim population was murdered in cold blood. Streams of Muslim blood flowed. Copies of the Qur`aan and Books of Ahaadith were burnt. Those who loudly claim to be lovers of the Ahl-e-Bait (the Family of Rasulullah - sallallahu alayhi wasallam) initiated a witch-hunt for the children of Hadhrat Abbaas (radhiyallahu anhu), the uncle of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They all were mercilessly murdered by the Shiahs. These acts of injustice were perpetrated with the connivance, instigation and advices of Ibn Alqami and Nasruddin Tusi, both Shiahs. These enemies of the Deen cooled the fire of their hatred in this brutal way with the aid of the Tartar barbarians. How can we ever accept the slogan: “NO Shi`ism, NO Sunni`ism.”? SHI`I ADL According to the Shi`i concept of Adl (justice) it is incumbent on Allah Ta`ala to reward good deeds and punish evil deeds. This is an obligatory principle which Allah Ta`ala has to incumbently follow according to the Shi`i belief of Adl. The imposition of this principle of Shi`ism on Allah Ta`ala implies the curtailment of the Freedom and Power of The Creator. The belief of Islam is that while Allah Ta`ala will reward good deeds and punish evil deeds, He is under no obligation to do so. There will be countless people on the day of Qiyaamah who will enter Jannat without having been punished for sins which they committed. The Attribute of Rahmat (Mercy) of Allah Ta`ala will dictate such matters, not the Baatil Shi`i concept of Adl. The following narration of Hadhrat Ubai Bin Ka`b (radhiyallahu anhu) sufficiently negates the Shi`i concept of Adl: “Verily, if Allah Azza Wa Jal punishes the inhabitants of all the heavens and the inhabitants of His earth, He can punish them and in doing so, He will not be acting unjustly. And, if He wishes to have Mercy on them (thus forgiving them), then His Rahmat will be better for them than their good deeds.” [Ahmad, Abu Dawud, Ibn Maajah] PERSECUTING THE SUNNIS “whilst we are living in the twentieth century, we find a third of the population of a nation deprived of their most basic rights. Is there any other country on the face of the earth which prevents its people from choosing names like Umar, Aishah, Hafsah, Abu Bakr, Zubair,...” (Sheikh Abdur Rahmaan al-Baluchy) SAHAABAH - THE TRUEST MU’MINEEN The Qur`aan Majeed states the nobility, piety and truth of the Sahaabah in the following Aayat: “THOSE WHO ACCEPTED IMAAN, MADE HIJRAT AND WAGED JIHAAD IN THE PATH OF ALLAH (I.E. THE MUHAAJIREEN) AND THOSE WHO GAVE ASYLUM (I.E. THE ANSAAR) AND ASSISTED (THEM) , UNDOUBTEDLY THEY ARE THE TRUE MU’MINOON. FOR THEM IS MAGHFIRAH (FORGIVENESS) AND A GRACIOUS RIZQ.” [SURAH ANFAAL] WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 15 | P a g e SHI`I SLANDER A brother from Australia writing about the pernicious propaganda efforts of the Shiahs in Australia, says: “The Shiah make light jokes about the Sahaabah and crack dirty jokes about Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (radhiyallahu anhu). They claim that he was a fabricator of Hadith. One Shiah got hold of a copy of Riyaadus Saaliheen (a Hadith Book) and wrote on its cover: THE NEW TESTAMENT ACCORDING TO ABU HURAIRAH. This mocking and slandering goes on and on. Shiahs teach Muslims to recite the Shi`i Tashahhud; to pray on wood; to do Sajdah on stone and they say that to say ‘Ameen’ in Salaat violates the Salaat. They say to fold the hands in Salaat is the way of women. They claim that Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh) poisoned the grandson of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They say that the Hanafis are Kaafirs. They claim that Maghrib Salaat is valid until midnight. They condemn the practice of washing the feet and say that it is a Jewish custom to wear a topi under the turban. Their campaign grows worse by the day.” These false claims are not surprising. Abuse and slander are salient features of the Shiahs. Their most important target of criticism and vilification is the beloved Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Their propaganda campaign against the Ahlus Sunnah is part of the political conspiracy of Khomeini who himself is an arch-enemy of the Sahaabah. Khomeini himself has singled out Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (radhiyallahu anhu) for his vile comments of falsehood. They put up an external show of ‘brotherhood’ and ‘unity’ with the People of the Sunnah, but their hearts are filled with poison and daggers for the Mu`mineen who love the Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Muslims should be on their guard and not allow themselves to be duped by the slogans and propaganda of Khomeini’s agents. THE DISMAL REALITY OF THE AHLUS SUNNAH IN IRAN Nida`ul Islam (The Call of Islam) – Australia (By Sheikh Abdur Rahmaan al-Baluchy) BRIEF INTRODUCTION OF THE SHEIKH Sheikh Abdul Rahmaan al-Baluchy completed his secondary education in Iran, after which he was admitted to the Islamic University of Madinah Munawwarah in 1979 where he studied Arabic before joining the Usuluddeen (Principles of Faith) and Da’wah college. He reached his second year of studies before the policy to expel Iranian students was implemented. He went to Syria to complete his Shari’ah studies at Damascus university, were he graduated in 1984. He also studied under the scholars of Damascus, such as Sheikh Abdul Qadir al Arna’ out and others. Upon graduation, he enrolled for his Masters degree at al Awza’y college in Beirut where he graduated in 1989. His thesis was on the Baluchy people and Baluchistan. He enrolled for his PHD at the same college and graduated in 1995. His PHD thesis was on “ The Transformation of Islamic Thought In Iran from Sunni to Shiah during the Safawi Rule.” This same topic was not accepted for his Masters Degree owing to certain political reasons. He currently directs the Ahlus Sunnah Association of Iran, London Office. “Would you kindly give us a glimpse of the history of the Ahlus Sunnah in Iran. The main areas where they are concentrated and their numbers.” It is an established fact that Iran was a Sunni nation until the Tenth Century of the Hijri calendar. During this period, Iran produced thousands of scholars in every discipline; the most salient of these facts is that the six most authentic Hadith books (i.e. Bukhaari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, etc.) were written by scholars from Iran, or scholars who received their education in Iran. However, when the Safawi Shi’ites took control, WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 16 | P a g e they established their government on the skulls of the Sunni scholars and jurists. This was one of the reasons for the evacuation of the largest cities that were at the foremost centres of religious sciences, such as Tibriz, Isfahan, Ray, Tus. There were many Sunni Muslims that were killed, forced into Shi’ism, or compelled to flee to the mountains, leaving Iran as a centre for conspiracies against Islam and the Muslims. Fredinand, the ambassador to the Austrian King, remarked: “Had it not be for the Safawids in Iran, we would have been reading the Qur’aan this day like the Algerians,” meaning that his nation would have been conquered by the Ottoman Muslims. However, the Safawids conspired with the crusaders and the imperialists to halt the Islamic expansion in France and Vienna. The Sunni Muslims in Iran number about 15 to 20 million, living mainly in the mountainous and border regions. They are mainly Kurds, Turks, Baluchis, and Arabs. There is also a good number living in the cities. “How was the condition of the Ahlus Sunnah before the revolution, did they participate in it, and how and what was their reward from this participation?” Ahlus Sunnah hail from non-Persian people. They were regarded as second class citizens under the Shah regime, since they mostly resided in rural areas, as well as the fact that their creed differed from that of the Shiah. As the Arabs, Kurds, Baluchis and others of Ahlus Sunnah did not have any role in the idolatrous Persian nationalism, they did not have equal rights socially nor economically with Persians “The Chosen People”! The Shah’s regime was secular, non- religious, so it dealt with religious and sects in a similar way. Some of the Ahlus Sunnah scholars had apposed the Shah and its secular regime, and some of these scholars initially sympathised with the Khomeini revolution such as Sheikh Ahmad Mufti Zadah as well as a few others, may Allah forgive them. Sheikh Ahmad Mufti Zadah apposed Khomeini shortly after the revolution. He was arrested and imprisoned for 10 years, even though his sentence was only for five years. He was only released when the authorities felt that he was on the brink of death. I was a witness to the words of Ahmad Mufti Zadah to Khomeini in the latter’s house when he said: “Khomeini, you promised me an Islamic republic, however you established a Safawi- Shi’ite republic. Although I believe that I am not permitted to raise arms against you [such was his belief, unfortunately], however, I will fight you politically.” This occurred during the same meeting where my brother Mawlawi Abdul Aziz , may Allah have mercy on him, the representative for Baluchistan in the Authoritative Council, opposed clause 13 of the Iranian constitution, and then resigned from the Council. He later formed along with Sheikh Zadah the centralised Consultative Council of Ahlus Sunnah, and held two annual meetings, one in Tehran and one in Baluchistan. Mawlawi Abdul Aziz was also able to attain a promise allocation of 10,000 square metres of land in Tehran to build a mosque and a centre for Ahlus Sunnah. This promise was given due to internal and external pressures, when the regime was still weak and developing. This promise, however, was blatantly dishonest as soon as the regime became stronger. The land allocated for constructing the mosque was confiscated, as well as the offices and bank accounts of the Consultative Council, whose scholars, members and supporters- both men and women- were detained. The regime continued in its efforts to destroy the infrastructure of Ahlus Sunnah, spreading between their ranks deviations, innovations and acts of Shirk. They unashamedly told the imprisoned students of Sheikh Zadah: “We hoped that you would have taken up arms against us, so we could have had an excuse to uproot you, as we did with the other parties.” The regime then persecuted any person who dared to call for their rights, and punished them with imprisonment or execution, or degrading their character, as was the case with the martyr Bahram Shakoury. Many Sheikhs were imprisoned, exiled, tortured and humiliated, such as the Baluchistan parliamentarian member Mawlawi Nathar Mohammad who was subjected to sever torture and made false confessions under duress, until he escaped and was able to flee to Pakistan. He was not able to get a visa to enter any of the Gulf countries, not even as labourer. Sheikh Mawlawi Muhyiddeen and Sheikh Dost Mohammed Sirawani were also imprisoned, then exiled to the city of Najaf Abad, as well as many other Sheikhs. There is also Sheikh Ibrahim Dammini who continues to be imprisoned and put to torture for more than five years. WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 17 | P a g e “Is there a single capital city in the world without a Sunni mosque, with the exception to Tehran - the capital of the Shiah - which has forty Christian churches and a cemetery for the Baha`is...” Ahlus Sunnah were rewarded under the current sectarian government with a life of dishonour and subjugation, and their situation is far worse - as I have experienced myself - than that of the Muslims in occupied Palestine. Is there a single capital city in the world without a Sunni mosque, with the exception of Tehran - the capital of the Shiah - which has forty Christian churches and a cemetery for the Baha`is. In all, even the infidel minority have their temples and places of worship , yet Ahlus Sunnah are not allowed to build any mosque or cemetery. Khomeini stated after the revolution: “All the Persians in the world can look at Iran as their nation”, they are, therefore, first class citizens of Iran, even if they were Magians from India. As for us, we must be exiled from our land because neither us nor our parents accepted Shi`ism or Magiasm! The regime planted the seeds of conflict amongst the scholars of the Ahlus Sunnah, and strode to deride the character of the notable scholars, replacing them with government servants. It then instigated internal conflicts between the scholars, the leaders of the community, and the intellectuals to create an environment filled with distrust and insecurity. They also used some of the ignorant people who adhere to supposedly Sunni Tariqats (orders), to attack the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah, especially Sheikh Ahmad Mufti Zadah, labelling him as a Wahhabi, although the Sheikh did not adhere to the Salafi creed. The regime then aimed at Ahlus Sunnah schools, and tried to influence their curriculums to incorporate Shiah teachings, labelling anyone who refuses to do so a Wahhabi, a “crime” punishable by death in Iran! However, the double-faced regime was able, through the banner of Islamic unity, to fool many Muslims outside Iran as they ask them to attend their conferences, and transform their way of thinking within a short period of time. They became false witnesses within their own people, beguiling them with what they have been taught about greatness of Islamic unity, without knowing anything about the plight of Ahlus Sunnah inside Iran. They repeat in all simplicity : “We are brothers, there is no difference between us.” Despite the imprisonment of the scholars and the demolished Islamic schools, they go to the grave of Khomeini, which has become a worshipped idol, offering their worship, and placing flowers at this grave. Their stance has misled many young minds and opened the way for them to accept and tolerate Shi`ism. A person is further baffled when he realises the superficiality of these people, their oblivion to the reality and their inability to comprehend the situation. They keep on defending the Rawaafidh Shiah who are weaving conspiracy after conspiracy against Ahlus Sunnah. Currently, after two decades of the Shi`ite revolution and the fortification of their rule they have not secured the rights of the Sunni minority, nor their covenants with them. They began by imprisoning the scholars and the Muslim activists, exiling some, and executing others. They also started to expel Sunni Muslims from government, commerce, and manufacturing posts, and to destroy their infrastructure. I still recall what the Iranian Secret Service said vengefully to some of the imprisoned Muslim activists: “ You are like the large room with large spotlights (the more eminent scholars) and smaller lights (the general scholars), and candles (the general activists); we will first extinguish the large spotlights.” This stage has been accomplished as they have killed most of the prominent scholars. “Then we will extinguish the smaller lights”; in this respect many activists have been killed and many others exiled. “Then we will turn the fan to put out the candles.” This is an indication of the final stage of forcing people into Shi`ism against their will. As you can see, the tragedy of Ahlus Sunnah in Iran is unlike any tragedy in the world, considering the nature of the race problem, the falsification of news by the Iranian official press. Government cronies, and the positions of many Muslim movements and activists on the outside who are siding with Iran. Although Muslim minorities everywhere are facing calamities and catastrophes on a large scale the situation in Iran is further exacerbated under the government of Taqiyah (deceit), lies and hypocrisy, in the name of “Unifying the different sects.” Yet it simultaneously slaughters the Sunni scholars and casts their dissected and mutilated corpses into the streets and the garbage dumps. Whereas the plight of Muslims is broadcasted internationally, no TV station or newspaper dares to highlight the case of Sunnis in Iran. Ahlus Sunnah are deprived of their basic civil, social and human rights, not to mention the right of political participation and equality with the Shiah. The erection of a Sunni school or Mosque in Iran is regarded as an unpardonable crime. Many Sunni WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 18 | P a g e Muslims, who supported such projects (even if it were in the past), were imprisoned, killed, or had their beard shaved for merely contributing to the building of a Mosque or to any simple activity relating to Ahlus Sunnah. There are also hundreds of periodical prisoners and many killed purely on suspicion. The following are only some of the names of prominent scholars who have been kidnapped, poisoned or killed: · Bahman Shakoury was amongst the prominent scholars of his area, Tonalis, and was active in Da`wah within the intellectuals. He was arrested and convicted with Wahhabism and executed in 1986. · Sheikh Mawlawi Abdul Aziz was one of the elite leaders of the Ahlus Sunnah who played a prominent role in opposing the Constitution in matters relating to Ahlus Sunnah rights. He was the director of the religious school of Zahdan and the chief of Baluchi armed tribes. He was poisoned in 1987. · Sheikh Abdul Wahhab played a notable role in exposing the calamities of Ahlus Sunnah outside Iran, especially in Pakistan. He was killed in 1990 under torture after being accused of Wahhabism. · Sheikh Nasser Sabhani was one of the leaders of Sunnah in Kurdistan who conducted many educational courses. He was arrested after refuting the false accusations of Kufr directed at Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) by Khomeini in his famous book “Al-Hukumah al-Islamiah” (The Islamic Government). He was killed in 1992 in prison and his relatives were denied from witnessing his funeral and prayer. · Dr. Ali Muzhaffaryan was amongst the eminent intellectual Shi`ites who was a cardiac surgeon and the head of Shiraaz Committee of Physicians. He embraced the school of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama`ah and then converted his house to a mosque because the government of Shiraaz did not permit the establishment of Mosques. He was arrested and convicted with Wahhabism and American treachery and tortured severely when many Shi`ite youth followed him into Sunnism. He was later released only to be assassinated in 1992. “There is no Sunni director in any of the government authorities, ministries, embassies, or local and provincial governments, hospitals or principalities; not even in the lowest government posts anywhere in Iran..” Moreover, the following are some of the Ahlus Sunnah’s Mosques and Islamic schools that were destroyed: · Al-Sunnah Mosque in Ahwaz. The first Sunni Mosque to be confiscated before the war with Iraq. It was transformed to a security police centre. · South of Tehran. The second Sunni Mosque to be confiscated was in 1982. · Tareeth Ham Mosque. This Mosque is in the state of Khurasan. It was transformed to a centre for the revolutionary guard. · School and Mosque of Lakour. It is situated near the city of Jabahar. In Baluchistan state. The government demolished the Mosque and the school in 1987 under the accusation that it was a centre for Wahhabis. · Al-Sunnah Mosque in Shiraz. Confiscated after the murder of Dr. Muzaffar Ban who founded it, and transformed to a centre for selling video and audio tapes produced by the revolutionary guard. · Sheikh Fayad Mosque. This is an ancient Sunni Mosque in Mashhad, one of the main Shiah centres in the world. The government could not tolerate the continued existence of this Mosque in the city, so demolished it in 1993, under the supervision of the revolutionary guard, who also demolished adjoining centres which were used as guest houses and Qur`aan memorisation centres. The demolition orders came from Khomeini personally, the spiritual leader of Iran. What is amazing is the fact that the demolition of this Mosque occurred immediately after the government-sponsored demonstrations against the demolition of the Barbary Mosque in India by the Hindus. · Ahlus Sunnah school, Talish. The government confiscated the Ahlus Sunnah school at Talish — North-west of Iran. Sheikh Quraishy, the principal of the school was also arrested and alleged confessions were obtained from him under torture. · Aabaan Mosque Mashhad city. They confiscated the land, demolished the walls, and expelled the trustee. · Repair of roads. They also repair the roads from time to time, eg. in the city of Zahdan, in order to demolish Sunni houses, Mosques and schools in the name of alleged reconstruction. WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 19 | P a g e “What in reality is the representation of the Ahlus Sunnah in the various government posts in Iran, such as parliament, ministries, etc.?” This is an important question. Ahlus Sunnah, who compose approximately one third of the Iranian population, have in all honesty no representation at all. In fact, the situation has reached a stage of oppression and deprivation where Ahlus Sunnah no longer contest these posts and are satisfied with looking to satiate their food needs without being prosecuted. There is no Sunni director in any of the government authorities, ministries, embassies, or local and provincial governments, hospitals or principalities; not even in the lowest government posts anywhere in Iran. There are some Sunni parliamentarians just like in most middle eastern countries, however, these are token positions so that the common people can be fooled. Before a person’s political nomination is accepted in Iran, he must be approved, by law, by the security agencies which naturally reject any Sunni activist, even if this person was to somehow attempt to appease them. These agencies employ the lowest form of people, and the most vile. This means that even if someone was elected by the people, the council has the right to ostracize him from government. So of what use is such a parliament, especially with respect to the Sunni parliamentarian who does not have a party to protect him? Even if he obtained such a post, what could he possibly offer his people? The whole council therefore has no practical value. This is supported by Khomeini’s address to Mawlawi Abdul Aziz after the Iranian revolution: “We do not have a Shuraa process. The principal with us is that the Imaam rules, and imitators follow suit. We took the idea of a council from your creed, for this reason, you will not find any value placed on a council.” This is a great shame. Whilst we are living in the twentieth century, we find a third of the population of a nation deprived of their most basic rights. Is there any other country on the face of the earth which prevents its people from choosing names like Umar, Aishah, Hafsah, Abu Bakr, Zubair, or most of the names of the companions amongst the ten fore-told of Paradise? “Do Ahlus Sunnah have an organised movement? What is the extent of its popularity? And how are the Ahlus Sunnah facing the present situation?” Ahlus Sunnah had organised movements at the outset of the revolution, when parties were still present. However, when the government became stronger, they prohibited all the Salafi groups. The danger of the Sunni groups was obvious, amongst these was the central Shuraa council of the Ahlus Sunnah, the Kurdistan movement for equal rights, the Union of Muslims in Baluchistan, the Majdia movement in Zahran, and others. The funds of these groups were confiscated and presently, there are no openly organised Sunni groups. In fact, the Sunnis in Iran are deprived of rights which are freely given even to the disbelievers, such as charities to care for the orphans and the widows and others. As for dealing with the present situation, we are currently only able to offer patience and to take one blow after another. They are like the orphans - they do not have a government to defend them or to dare to mention their plight except on special occasions. They do not have Sunni groups outside of Iran to sponsor them apart from what we initiated a few years ago here (in London). “Whilst we are living in the twentieth century, we find a third of the population of a nation deprived of their most basic rights. Is there any other country on the face of the earth which prevents its people from choosing names like Umar, Aishah, Hafsah, Abu Bakr, Zubair,...” “Do you expect any change in the policies of the present government towards Ahlus Sunnah after the election of Khatemy?” There is a minor change in the policy of the government towards us. Khatemy is not blood-thirsty and does not like the shedding of blood nor the stealing of our money as did Khomeini and Rafsanjany. Khatemi has changed many of the blood-thirsty officials in the Sunni areas with other Shiah who are not as blood thirsty. However, he was not brave enough to appoint one Sunni official. Had Khatemy taken this opportunity, the tyranny and oppression would be reduced dramatically, however, I do not think that he intends or is able to bring equality between Sunnis and the others. I have sent an open letter to him in this respect. “What is the policy of Ahlus Sunnah for their future dealings with this situation? Does the declaration of the Afghan Islamic Emirate have any effect on the internal situation?” WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 20 | P a g e Our policy with this bitter reality is to be patient and abstain from armed conflict. We do not wish to repeat the experiment in Hama, Halab, Tripoli and others which were very bitter experiments. Particularly as we know that there is no government or even an organisation which dares to or intends to support or sponsor us. Yes, the existence of a Sunni Muslim government in Afghanistan will have a definite effect on us. This is why we are witnessing every effort from Iran to halt the establishment of an Islamic government in Afghanistan. The minister for Iranian foreign affairs declared a number of years before: “We will never permit the establishment of a Wahhabi government in Afghanistan”. In view of these devils, any Sunni government is a Wahhabi government. In summary, the existence of any Sunni government is in our interest. It is notable to bear in mind that the Shiah/Safawi State which existed during the Ottoman rule fell at the hands of the Afghan Sunnis. “Is there a message to other Sunni Muslims throughout the world from their brothers in Iran?” We see ourselves as creedal and intellectual extensions of our brothers. What we are facing today is a direct result of our affiliation to the Ahlus Sunnah creed and for no other reason. It is the responsibility of the Muslims in every organisation as groups and as individuals to be concerned over their religion and their faith. We know the reason for the backdown of the authorities and the governments, however, what excuse could there be for the charities, wealthy Muslims, Islamic organisations, and groups? They do not have an excuse before Allah. I have hope that our Muslim brothers will not just look at us through the policies of their groups and parties, but to look at us through Islam as the martyr Sheikh Abdullah Azzam looked at the Afghan cause. I also have a parting word for those who share our creed who visit Iran regularly. We hardly find in any of them any concern towards their religion and the people of their creed. I advise these people to be conscious of Allah and have some concern for their creed and those who subscribe to the same creed. Their visits are proof against us and cause us harm and lead to the murder of many of our members. They are like puppets in the hands of the political regime, they say to us: “Here are your Imaams, your scholars and Sheikhs, they are praying behind us, visiting the grave of the Imaam, and do not ask us for a separate Mosque for themselves in Tehran, they say we pray all together in one Mosque, so why do you differ with your scholars? You must be a Wahhabi!” Finally, we thank Nida`ul Islam magazine for their attention and concern with our plight, we pray for their success. What Shiahs say about Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) In denying the qualifications of the illustrious and top-ranking Sahaabah such as Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan (Radiallahu anhum), Baaqir, the Shi’i priest says: “in fact all this proves without a shred of doubt, that the first generation of the Islamic community (i.e the Sahaabah), which also included those who came to power after the death of the Prophet (this refers to Hadrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan in particular), did not give thought to the concept of a Shuraa as regards the appointment of the Khalifah nor did they possess a clearly defined understanding of its principles so how can we believe that the prophet had instituted a policy of educating his followers, concerning the legal and theoretical concept of a Shuraa, to prepare the Muhaajireen and the Ansaar to submit their leadership of Islam to one elected according to these principles,...” “ for inspite of the fact that the first generation of the muslims was the purest ever to embrace Islam and the most prepared to sacrifice for it, we cannot detect any indication of the specialised preparation required to assume the guardianship of the faith...” Again the Shi’i priest, Baaqir Sadr writes: WHO ARE THE SHIAH? 21 | P a g e SHIAH MUHADDITHEEN AND JURISTS- THE MALICE FOR THE SAHAABAH By Ihsaan Ilaahi Zaheer These fulminating Shiah commentators try to castigate the pious Khalifs but, instead of damaging them, they blast their own reputations. These scurrilous and vituperative critics scandalize the Companions of the Prophet (sallallhu alayhi wasallam) and drag in the gutter the best amount them who guided the Muslim Ummah after the Prophet (sallallhu alayhi wasallam). Their books of interpretation are stuffed with similar implications. The entire inerpretational assets are spiked, malevolence and vituperation. And just consider who they are scandalizing! They invoke curses on those who are symbols of purity and cleanliness, whose integrity has been attested by Allah Himself and whose victory and entry into Paradise He Himself has anticipated. The people these venomous Shiahs revile are Companions of the Prophet (sallallhu alayhi wasallam), his friends, disciples, and followers, who sided with the Prophet (sallallhu alayhi wasallam) through thick and thin, who pledged fealty to him, who supported him, migrated with him, and gave up their family, relatives, children, possessions and their country for his sake. They obeyed the light that was revealed to him, fought the Holy Wars under his banner and sacrificed their most valuable treasures at the flick of his finger. After his death they kept his banner aloft, waved it on the peaks of the mountains and flapped it across the oceans: Who were these people? They were Abu Bakr, Umar, Zun Noorain. The Ahl-e-bait understood them properly, they respected and revered them, they praised them during their lives and after their death, they loved them from the core of their hearts, they followed their instructions and the path charted by them. The Shiahs, who pretend to be their lovers and followers, are openly against them, they besmear and bespatter them, they curse them with bell, book and candle, and drag them in the mire. Their books are padded with expletives and vituperative language against the most pious Companions of the Prophet (sallallhu alayhi wasallam) “In fact the events which took place after the Death of the prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) proved that the Muhaajireen and the Ansaar had not received any sort of instruction concerning many of their momentous problems which the Da’wah had to face after the time of the Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), so that neither the Khalifah, nor the central government who supported him, had a clear idea as to how the lands won by the Islamic conquests should be delt with according to the Shariah, wheather these lands should be divided amongst the fighting forces or should be regarded as endowments (awqaf) for the good of all Muslims.” eRaashideen