Archive for September, 2008

ibn Hazm on Taqlid

Posted: September 30, 2008 by millatibraheem in Laa ilaha illAllaah

Imaam Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm wrote in ‘al-Muhalla bil ‘Athaar’ vol. 1:

“Issue: It is not permissible for anyone to make taqlid of any other person, dead or alive. Everyone must exercise ijtihad according to his ability. So the one who asks about his religion, he only intends to know what Allah had obligated upon him in this religion. So it is obligatory upon him, (even) if he is the most ignorant of all creation, to ask the most knowledgeable scholar in his locality, the most knowledgeable in terms of the religion that the Prophet sAllaahu alayhi wa salam brought. If he is told about this scholar, he should ask him, and then when he gives him a verdict, he should ask him “Is this what Allah and His Prophet sAllaahu alayhi wa salam said?”. If he says yes, he should accept it and act upon it always. But if he (the scholar) says “This is my personal opinion or analogy i drew upon or that this is the saying of so-and-so and names a Companion or a Follower or a Faqih, old or new or remains silent or scolds him or says I don’t know”, then he should not take his verdict, but ask someone else.

The evidence for this is the saying of Allaah “Obey Allaah and His Messenger and the Ulu al-Amr among you”, so Allaah did not tell us to obey specific scholars, so he who makes taqlid of some scholar or a group of scholars, then he neither obeys Allaah nor his Messenger sAllaahu alayhi wa salam nor the Ulu al-Amr. So if he does not do that (ask other scholar), he has disobeyed Allaah, because Allaah never Commanded to obey some scholars to the exclusion of other scholars.”

“If it is said (in defense of taqlid) that Allaah Said “ ask the people of the Reminder if you do not know.” (al-Anbiya 21:7) and that “of every troop of them, a party only should go forth, that they (who are left behind) may get instructions in religion, and that they may warn their people when they return to them, so that they may beware (of evil).” (at-Tawbah 9:122)”

Then we say: Yes indeed, but Allaah did not Command that we should accept the (baseless) opinions of the party who were instructed in Islamic religion (9:122) because they have understanding of Allaah’s religion and neither that the people of Remembrance (21:7) should be obeyed obeyed in their opinions or legislation they carve out that Allaah Did not Command (excuse his sharp tongue). Allaah only Commanded that the Ahli Dhikr (21:7) should be asked about the Dhikr they know of that has come to them from Allaah only, not about what so-and-so, whom we are not ordered to hear and obey, said. Similarly Allaah only Commanded that the warning of the party who were instructed in religion (9:122) , because of their understanding of Deen, should be accepted in matters they understood from Allaah’s religion that was brought by the Prophet sallallaho’alaihiwasallm, not in the religion that was not Legislated by Allaah.

So he who claims that it is waajib for the layman to make taqlid of the mufti, then he has claimed falsehood, and uttered something of which is not proven by anything in the Quraan, Hadith, Ijma’ or Qiyas. So something which is like that is void, since it is a saying without evidence. Infact the evidence points to its invalidity, as Allaah condemned those who will say : “Our Lord! Verily, we obeyed our chiefs and our great ones, and they misled us from the (Right) Way.” (al-Ahzab 33:67).”

So, Ijtihaad means to try one’s utmost to seek Allaah’s religion that he made obligatory on all His slaves. Anyone one with sound senses knows instinctively and naturally that a Muslim cannot be a Muslim except that he affirms that Allaah his his Deity and none is to be worshipped except Him and that Muhammad sAllaahu alayhi wa salam is the one He sent with His religion to eveyone. So if there is no doubt in that, then whoever on earth is faced with a new religious issue actually asks about Allaah’s Commandment in that matter. So if there is no doubt in that, then it is obligatory upon him to ask when he hears the (verdict of the) mufti : “Is this Allaah and His Messenger’s Commandment?” This is what anyone who knows about Islaam is capable of doing , even ( if he is totally ignorant). And Allaah is the Source to do good…”

In ‘al-Ihkaam fi Usool ul Ahkaam’ Imaam ibn Hazm writes:

“The taqlid that we oppose them in is “To accept the saying of a person other than the Prophet sAllaahu alayhi wa salam, whom Allaah did not Command us to obey, such that there is no evidence to support that saying of his, except that (this person uses as ‘evidence’ that ) so-and-so said this…”

“If it is said: what should a layman do in case of a new religious issue?
The answer is: We already explained that Allaah forbade taqlid completely, without differentiating the scholar from the layman… and Ijtihaad in seeking Allaah and His Prophet sAllaahu alayhi wa salam’s command in all that regards a person’s religion is an obligation on every one too, upon the learned scholar and the layman without any distinction…but they differ in the way they perform their Ijtihaad, as a person is only obligated to do what he can do within his abilities, as Allaah said: “Allaah does not burden anyone except up to his capacity” and “Fear Allaah as much as you can”, and fearing Allaah (taqwah) means to act upon what Allaah Requires him to from the religion , and Allaah does not require us to do anything from the religion except that which we are able to do.. Hence what we are not able to do becomes inapplicable to us. So this is clear evidence that no one is required to search for what the religion’s commandment, except what he is able to. So every person has his share of Ijtihaad”

“So the layman’s Ijtihaad is that when he asks a scholar about religious issues and the scholar gives him a verdict, then he should ask that scholar: ‘Is this how Allaah and His Messenger ruled?’. If the scholar says, ‘Yes’, then the layman is not required to look any further and should act upon it. But if the scholar says ‘no’, or ‘this is my opinion’ or ‘this is the saying of Malik or Ibn al-Qasim or Abu Hanifa or Abu Yusuf or Shafi’i or Ahmad or Dawood or so-and-so Companion or Follower or anyone below them other than the Prophet sAllaahu alayhi wa salam’ or remains quiet or scolds him off, then it is impermissible for him to accept his verdicts. It is obligatory upon him to ask some other scholar and to seek him out wherever he may be. Because the Muslim, when faced with a religious issue he did not face before and asks a scholar, then he only (intends to) asks the scholar about what Allaah and His Prophet sAllaahu alayhi wa salam commanded in this situation and what Islam obligates in this situation. If the questioner gets to know that the scholars verdict is not based on that, that he should absolve himself from this scholar and run away from him!

And it is obligatory upon the scholar that if he knows that the verdict he gave this layman is based upon the Quraan and Sunnah or Ijmaa’, then he should say ‘Yes’. And it’s not permissible for him to ascribe anything to Allaah or His Prophet sAllaahu alayhi wa salam, if what he based his verdict upon was analogy or istihsaan or taqlid of anyone except taqlid of the Prophet sAllaahu alayhi wa salam…And this is what we said is what no one can be excused from even if he reaches the extreme in ignorance…”

Government scholars are the body established by the rulers containing the top scholars of the country, made and sponsored by him, to justify the following:

1. His authority over the country and its people, even though he legislates against what Allaah has revealed, which is a clear kufr, under the Islamic Shari’ah. This nullifies his position as a leader of Muslims.

2. Cloaking him with qualities and titles, which deceive the Muslims and hinder them from fulfilling their obligations to Allaah to keep the Sharia intact.

3. Calling those who challenge his authority after he commits such crimes as khawaarij and disobedient to the amir of the Muslims, i.e. him.

4. Then they approve the killing and torture of those righteous Muslims who demand adherence to Allaah’s Law, whom they deceitfully defined as Khawaarij.

5. Although they might match Islamic Law most of the time, in the particulars, their main function is to screen the leader from being harmed, challenged or ultimately removed.

Ruling Regarding These Types of Individuals

These government scholars are the greatest harm to Islaam and Muslims.  This is with the stipulation that any such body of scholars in any country shouldn’t be judged for the label they carry, rather for their actions, i.e. their stance for Islaam and Muslims.  Let us refer to what Allaah and His Rasool have said about them…

Collected by Imaam Ahmad in his Musnad and also reported in Saheeh at-Targheeb wat-Tarheeb hadeeth #2241, that Abu Hurayrah narrated Rasoolullaah sallallaahu alayhi wasalam said, “Whoever approaches the ruler’s gates becomes afflicted. Whenever a slave draws closer to the ruler, he only gains distance from Allaah.”

Collected by Ahmad, al-Bazzaar, and Ibn Hibbaan, also recorded in Saheeh at-Targheeb wat-Tarheeb, hadeeth #2243 stating Jaabir Ibn ‘Abdullaah narrated that Rasoolullaah sallallaahu alayhi wasalam said to Ka’b Ibn ‘Ujrah, “O Ka’b Ibn ‘Ujrah, I seek Allaah’s protection for you from the leadership of fools. There shall be rulers, whoever enters upon them, then aids them in their oppression and validates their lies, then he is not from me nor I from him, and he shall not be admitted to the Hawd. Whoever does not enter upon them, and does not aid them in their oppression, nor validates their lies, then he is from me and I from him, and he shall be admitted to the Hawd.”

Recorded in Musnad Ahmad hadeeth # 20335 that Abu Dhar said, “I was in the presence of the Prophet one day and I heard him saying, ‘There is something more I fear for my Ummah than the Dajjaal.’ It was then that I became afraid, so I said, ‘O Rasoolullaah! Which thing is it that you fear for your Ummah more than the Dajjaal?’ He [the Prophet] said, ‘Misguided and astray scholars.’

It is related by Shidaad ibn Aws that the Prophet sAllaahu alayhi wasalam said, “Truly, I do not fear anything for my Ummah except astray scholars. Thus when the sword is raised against my Ummah, it will not be lifted until the Day of Judgment.” [Musnad of Ahmad, ahadeeth # 16493, 21360, 31359, 20334 and ad-Daarimi, ahadeeth # 211 and 216 and all of these collections are classed as authentic.]

Imaam Abu Abdullaah al-Qurtubi stated in ‘Jaami’ ul Ahkaam ul Fiqhiyyah’ Vol. 2, Pg. 227:   “The ‘Ulama have said, ‘One who is an Imaam for an oppressive ruler, prayer is not to be made behind him unless he reveals his excuse or reason why (he is an Imaam for the oppressive ruler) or he repents from it.”

Imaam ibn Taymiya stated in ‘Majmua’ al-Fataawa‘ Vol. 20, Pg 200:

“The person who is obeyed in disobedience of Allaah or the person who is obeyed in following other than the guidance of the religion of truth; in either case, if what he orders mankind is in opposition to Allaah’s orders, then he is a Taghoot. For this reason, we call the people who rule by other than what Allaah revealed, a ‘Taghoot’.”

And he (ibn Taymiya) said in Majmu’a Fataawa vol 35. Page 373:
“Whenever the ‘aalim follows the hukm of the ruler, and leaves off his knowledge, in contradiction to the book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, he is a kaafir (an unbeliever) and a murtadd (an apostate), who deserves to be punished in this life and the hereafter. This rule can also be applied with regard to the group of scholars who jumped and joined the Mongols due to fear of them and that they wanted to take benefit from them. These scholars made the excuse that some of the Mongols were speaking the Shahaada and that they were Muslims. Allaah has said,
‘Alif Laam Mim Saad. A Book sent down to you, so do not have any worry in your breast from it, so that you may warn and be a reminder to the believers. Follow what has been sent down to you from your Lord and do not follow protectors and helpers besides Him. Little is it that you remember!’ [Surat al-A’raaf, ayaat 1-3]

“And even if this ‘aalim is captured, put behind bars and tortured to leave what Allaah has taught him from His Book, he should be patient with that. If he leaves all that and follows the ruler, then he is one of the people that are supposed to be doomed by Allaah Ta’ala. He should be patient even if he is harmed in the cause of Allaah Ta’ala. This is the Sunnah that Allaah Ta’ala has wanted and accepted from the Prophets and from the people who follow the Prophets. Allaah says,
‘Alif Laam Mim. Do people think that they will be left alone because they say, ‘We believe,’ and will not be tested? And We indeed tested those who were before them. Allaah will certainly make it known those who are true and will certainly make it known those who are liars. And He will make it known who the liars are.’ [Surat al-‘Ankabut, ayaat 1-3]

COMMENT: Replace the Mongols and the scholars of the past with our current regimes and scholars that rule over Muslim lands (Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Syria, Algeria etc.)

Various Ahadith on Approaching the Rulers

Abdullaah Ibn ‘Abbaas said that Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, “There shall be rulers whom you will recognize from them good and evil. Whoever opposes them is saved. Whoever abandons them is freed. And whoever intermingles with them is destroyed.” (Collected by Ibn Abi Shaybah and at-Tabaraanee; al-Albaanee authenticated it in “Saheeh al-Jaami’”, hadeeth #3661).

Abul-A’war as-Sulamee said that Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, “Be wary of the ruler’s gates; for there, there is difficulty and humiliation.” (Collected by ad-Daylamee and at-Tabaraanee; al-Albaanee authenticated it in “as-Silsilah as-Saheehah”, hadeeth #1253).

Aboo Hurayrah said that Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, “Whoever approaches the ruler’s gates becomes afflicted. Whenever a slave draws closer to the ruler, he only gains distance from Allaah.” (Collected by Ahmad; al-Albaanee authenticated it in “Saheeh at-Targheeb wat-Tarheeb”, hadeeth #2241. A similar narration, save the last sentence, is reported from Ibn ‘Abbaas; al-Albaanee authenticated it in “Saheeh at-Targheeb wat-Tarheeb”, hadeeth #2242).

Jaabir Ibn ‘Abdillaah said that Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said to Ka’b Ibn ‘Ujrah, “O Ka’b Ibn ‘Ujrah, I seek Allaah’s protection for you from the leadership of fools. There shall be rulers, whoever enters upon them, then aids them in their oppression and validates their lies, then he is not from me nor I from him, and he shall not be admitted to the Hawd. Whoever does not enter upon them, and does not aid them in their oppression, nor validates their lies, then he is from me and I from him, and he shall be admitted to the Hawd.” (Collected by Ahmad, al-Bazzaar, and Ibn Hibbaan; al-Albaanee authenticated it in “Saheeh at-Targheeb wat-Tarheeb”, hadeeth #2243. Similar narrations are reported from an-Nu’man Ibn Basheer, ‘Abdillaah Ibn Khabbaab (from his father), Abi Sa’eed al-Khudree, and Ka’b Ibn ‘Ujrah; Al-Albaanee authenticated these other narrations in “Saheeh at-Targheeb wat-Tarheeb”, ahaadeeth #2243-2246).

Abu Hurairah (ra) narrated that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“??? ?????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??????? ? ????? ???? ??????? ? ???? ???? ??????? ? ????? ???? ?????? ? ???? ???? ?????????“”Indeed, before the Hour (Day of Judgement) there are deceptive years -the truthful one will not be believed, the liar will be believed, the trustworthy one will be accused of betrayal, the treacherous one will be trusted, and the Ruwaibidah will speak.”It was said, “And what is the Ruwaibidah?” He (saw) said: “????? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ???????” “The man who is Tafih (insignificant, unwise, etc.), he will speak on the affairs of the general public (he will be trusted to rule and he will speak in the name of the people).” (Ahmad (2/291) Ibn Maajah (4042), and Al-Haakim (4/465).In As-Saheeh (1787), Albaani declared that it is an authentic Hadith.)

“Allah would grasp the whole planet of the earth and roll it up on the Day of Resurrection and all the heavens will be in His Right Hand. Then He will say: I am the King. Where are the monarchs of the earth?” (Bukhari and Muslim)

Ibn Majah on the authority of Abu Saeed, Ahmad and Ibn Majjah and Tabarani and Baihaqi on the authority of Abu Umamah, Ahmad and Nisa’i on the authority of the tabie Tariq Ibn Shihab all narrated that the messenger (saw) said : “The best of Jihad is a word of truth in the face of a tyrant ruler”.

Ma’qil bin Yasar, may Allah be pleased with him, reported: Verily I have heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Anyone amongst the slaves (of Allah) who was entrusted with the affairs of his subjects and he died in such a state that he was dishonest in his dealings with those over whom he ruled, Paradise would be forbidden for him. [Bukhari complied it the book of Legal Judgements no 6617,6618]

AbdulRazzaq and Imam Ahmad both narrated on the authority of Ibn Masood (ra) that the messenger (saw) said to him: “What will you do O Abu AbdulRahman (Ibn Massood) if you had rulers who abolished the sunnah and delayed the prayer from its time?”. Ibn Masoood said: What do you order me o messenger of Allah?. The messenger said: “Ibn Umm Abd (Ibn Masood) is asking me what will he do!!!There is no obedience to the creature by disobeying the creator”.

Al-Harth narrated on the authority of Ibn Masood that the messenger (saw) said: “For every matter, there is a thing that spoils it, and what spoils this deen is the evil rulers”. (Saheeh according to Imam Suyooti)

On the authority of Abu Musa(ra), the messenger of Allah (saw) said: “In the hellfire there is a valley, and in this valley there is a well called “Habahab”, it is duty upon Allah to reside in this well every stubborn oppressor (ruler)”. (Narated by Tabarani and its Isnad is Hasan)

“Any leader of a ten men or more, he will be brought in the judgment day chained until either the justice will unchain him or the oppression will chain him”. (Narrated by Al-Bazzar, and the men in the chain are Saheeh)

As for narrations from the words of the Companions, then as-Suyootee has collected from ‘Ali Ibn Abi Taalib, Ibn Mas’ood, Hudhayfah Ibn al-Yamaan, and Abi Dharr, narrations of general warning against approaching the rulers or their gates. See “Maa Rawaahul-Asaateen Fee ‘Adam al-Majee’ Ilas-Salaateen”.

There are many with similar meanings, so here are some examples:

Ibn Mas’ood said, “Whoever wishes to honour his religion, then he should not enter upon the ruler.” (Collected by ad-Daarimee).

Ibn Mas’ood also said, “A man enters upon the ruler, carrying his religion with him, then exits without anything with him.” (Collected by al-Bukhari in his “Taareekh” and Ibn Sa’d in “at-Tabaqaat”).

On the authority of Abdullah Bin Masood (may Allah be pleased with him), he said: “There will be rulers over you, who will leave the sunnah like this,” and he pointed to the origin of his finger. “If you were to leave these rulers alone, they will bring great affliction and disaster. There has been no previous ummah except that the first thing they left from their religion was the sunnah, and the last to be left was the salat , and were not these rulers shy and afraid from people, they would not pray”. (Narrated by Al-Hakim and he said this is saheeh hadith on the condition of Bukhari and Muslim)

Muslim Scholars Hatred Towards Philosophy

Muslim scholars resisted the trend towards mixing matters of ‘Aqeedah – belief – with philosophy and ‘ilm al-kalaam, which was started by those who were known as the “philosophers of Islaam,” such as Ibn Seena (Avicenna), and they fought those who were influenced by these philosophies.

The great scholars were of two types: one group was composed of those who noted the danger of this idea from the start and resisted this trend from the outset, such as Imam Ahmad and Imam ash- Shaafa’i (may Allaah have mercy on him). Shaafa’i said: “My ruling concerning the scholars of ‘ilm al kalaam (philosophy) is that they should be beaten with palm-branches and shoes, and paraded before the tribes and clans, and it should be announced that this is the punishment of those who forsake the Qur’aan and Sunnah and turn to ‘ilm al-kalaam.”

The other group is composed of scholars who followed in the footsteps of the philosophers and were exhausted by their methods, but they did not realize what was happening until the sunset of their years, when they were filled with regret at the time when it was too late. They were left with nothing but grief and sorrow, and could do no more than ask Allaah for forgiveness and warn those who came after them against following the mistaken path that they trod. Among this group was Muhammad ibn ‘Umar ar-Raazi, who said in his book Aqsaam al-Ladhdhaat {Ibn al-Qayyim, As-Sawaa’iq al- Mursalah, Pp. 7; Ar-Raazi, I’tiqaadaat firaq al-Muslimeen, Pp. 23}:
“The most that reason can achieve is a dead end, and the ultimate result of people’s striving is misguidance. Our souls are alienated in our bodies, and all that we get from this world is harm and annoyance. We have not gained anything from our lifelong search apart from a collection of what the philosophers said. How often have we seen men and nations, but they have all vanished quickly and disappeared. How many mountains have men climbed, but the men have gone and the mountains remain.”

Ar-Raazi said:
“I examined the various kalaami and philosophical schools of thought, and I realized that they have nothing to offer to one who is sick, and they cannot quench a man’s thirst (for knowledge).” He came back to the Qur’aanic methodology, and gave an example of the Qur’aanic methodology concerning divine attributes: “I saw that the best way is the way of the Qur’aan. Read where it confirms the attributes of Allaah (Subhana wa Ta’ala):

“The Beneficent (Allaah) Who established Himself on the throne in a manner that suits His Majesty” {Qur’aan 20:5}

“…Good words ascend to Him…” {Qur’aan 35:10}

And read where it denies things with regard to His attributes:

“…There is no one like Him…” {Qur’aan 42:11}

“…While they do not encompass any knowledge about Him.” {Qur’aan 20:110}

Then he said: “Whoever goes through the same experience as I have will know what I know.” {Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyah, al-Fatwa al-Hamawiyah al-Kubra, Pp. 7.}

Ash-Shahrastaani said the same thing, noting that after spending a long time studying with the philosophers and scholars of ‘ilm al-kalaam, he found nothing but confusion and regret, as he says{Ash-Sharastaani, Nihaayat al-Iqdaam fi ‘Ilm al-Kalaam, Pp. 3.}:
“All my life, I went around all the schools of philosophy, studying all of those schools. And I never saw anything but people resting their chins on their hands or gnashing their teeth in regret.”

Al-Juwayni, one of the most prominent students of Islaamic philosophy (‘ilm al-kalaam), warned against studying this: “O’ my friends, do not study ‘ilm al-kalaam. Had I known what ‘ilm al-kalaam would do to me, I would not have studied it.” {Majmoo’ al-Fataawa Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah; see Al-Fatwa al-Hamawiyah al-Kubra, Pp. 7.}

When he was dying, he said in regret and sorrow: “I threw myself into a vast ocean, and forsook the people of Islaam and their knowledge. I indulged in that which they had warned me against and now if Allaah does not shower me with His mercy, then woe to Ibn al-Juwayni. ‘Here I am, dying on the the ‘aqeedah of my mother,’ or he said, ‘on the ‘aqeedah of old women (i.e., simple ‘aqeedah).'”

Abu Haamid al-Ghazaali (may Allaah have mercy on him) was one of those who spent a long time examining and studying ‘ilm al-kalaam, moving from one group to another, until at the end of his life he was hesitant and confused about philosophical matters. He wrote a book entitled Iljaam al- ‘Awaam ‘an ‘Ilm al-Kalaam (Preventing the masses from studying ‘Ilm al-Kalaam – Islaamic Philosophy i.e., Scholasticism). He regarded it as haraam to study philosophy except in certain circumstances: “The truth is that ‘Ilm al-kalaam is haraam except for two types of people.”

At the end of his life, he turned away from the study of ‘Ilm al-kalaam and turned to the ahaadeeth of the Messenger (sallAllaahu alayhe wa sallam), and he died with a copy of Saheeh al-Bukhari on his chest.
Abu’l-Hasan al-Ash’ari grew up as a Mu’tazili, and remained such for forty years, then he turned his back on that and stated clearly that the Mu’tazilah were misguided, and he refuted them in unequivocal terms. {See our book, Mu’taqad al-Imam Abi’l-Hasan al-Ash’ari wa Manhajuhu.}

Later there emerged a group which followed the correct methodology, but they studied the work of the philosophers in order to know its weak points and refute them according to the Qur’aanic methodology.

They fought them with their own weapon, pointing out what was wrong with it. The leader and standard-bearer of this group was Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allaah have mercy on him).

Source: {Islaamic Creed Series – Vol 1. – Belief in Allaah In the Light of the Qur’aan and Sunnah by Shaykh ‘Umar S. al-Ashqar, Pages 81-84.}

And also in page 85, Shaykh ‘Umar al-Ashqar says:

“Professor Ahmad Ameen (may Allaah have mercy on him) made a comparison between man of philosophy and man of ‘aqeedah, and the respective effect on life.

“There is a great difference between holding an opinion and believing in something. If you have an opinion, it simply becomes a part of the information that you have retained; but if you believe in it, it flows with your blood and sinks deep into your heart and mind.”

The philosopher who has an opinion and an idea says, “I think that this is correct but in reality it may be wrong; this is what the evidence points to today, but tomorrow the evidence may point to the opposite; I may be wrong about this or I may be right.”

But the one who follows ‘aqeedah – creed – is definite and certain; he has no doubts and does not engage in speculation.”{Islaamic Creed Series – Vol 1. – Belief in Allaah in the Light of the Qur’aan and Sunnah by Shaykh ‘Umar S. al-Ashqar, Page 85.}

The Role of Zoroastrianism in the Development of Shia’ism

Posted: September 22, 2008 by millatibraheem in al-Imaan, Rebuttals
The Role of Zoroastrianism in the Development of Shi’aism

They call the Sahaba who overrun the Sassanid Empire as uncivilized Bedouins.
Al-Ihqaqi said, “The catastrophes that befell both the Iranian and Roman Empires were because of the Muslim invasion and the Arab treatment. The newly converts who were not accustomed much with the spirit of Islam, had implanted in their hearts hate to the Arabs and to their customs. This was because the conquerors were uncivilized Bedouins who ravaged and destroyed their beautiful cities and cultivated lands, in the east and the west. The thirsty worshippers of carnal desires raided the chastity and honour of these two empires…… (Risalatul Emaan,p.323, Mirza Hasan al Haieeri al-Ihqaqi, As Sadiq library, Kuwait)

According to this Shiite al-Ihqaqi, the noble companions who conquered Persia ,the superpower of the time, with zeal and faith were early Bedouins, who worshipped their carnal desires and they spread havoc and destruction. And this is the main reason why many Shiite Iranians have hatred towards Umar ibn al-Khattab because the later overrun the mighty and arrogant Persian Empire.

In the Iranian city of Keyshan, there is a street by the name of Firouzi. By the side of this road lies the ground of Firouzi which holds the tomb of Abu Lu’lu al-Majusi the killer of Umar. The Shiite Iranians call him “Baba Shujahudeen” or the “brave of religion” and they present their respect and condolences to him on the day he died. By giving the attribute of “Baba Shujahudeen” to Abu lu’lu leaves two impressions:

  • Firstly it makes it clear the Abu Lu’Lu is the spiritual father of the Shiites.

  • Secondly the attribution of “Shujahudeen” shows that the Zoroastrian religion is the real religion for them. Thus the religion of the Rawafid is a mere Magian sect.

The same is the reason behind the exaltation of the descendents of Imam Hussein solely, and not of the progeny of Imam Hassan(RA). This is because the descendents of Hussein are their own Persian brethren as Imam Hussein(ra) was married to ShahrBano the daughter of Yazgard who was the last Persian Empire. [Shiite source: Bihaarul Anwar 45:329]

One is amazed to see that the Shiites weep over the martyrdom of Imam Hussein(ra) whereas they never weep over the martyrdom of his brother Abu Bakr ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib and over the martyrdom of his son Abu Bakr. Those who bear those names are from the Ahlul Bayt also.

Why negligence?

Is it because they have names which are disliked by the Rafadhis and by announcing it to their Shiite listeners would expose the love of the Ahlul Bayt to the companions especially to Abu Bakr and Umar?

Shiite muhaditeen like Abu Faraj al-Isfahani in his Muqatil at-Talibeen-p.88,142,188; Al-Arbali in his Kashful Ghumamah vol.2,p.64; and Majlisi in Jila el-ou’ioun 582[/COLOR] stated that amongst those who were martyred with Hussein in Karbala were Abu Bakr ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib and Abu Bakr ibn Hussein ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib.

Why doesn’t the ceremonies held during Ashoora not mention the names of the following who were martyred with Hussein:
Umar ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib
Abu Bakr ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib
Uthman ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib
Abu Bakr ibn Hassan ibn Ali
Umar ibn Hassan ibn Ali
Abu Bakr ibn Hussein ibn Ali
Umar ibn Hussein ibn Ali
Uthman ibn Hussein ibn Ali.

Is it because that the likes of Abu Bakr and Umar wiped out the Sassanid arrogance and for this reason mentioning their names are unbearable?


Muhammad Ali Mu’zi, an Iranian Shiite researcher in France has stated with pride: “The basic fundamentals of the Zoroastrian religion has entered into Shiaism even in some minute issues. The marriage of Imam Hussein with the daughter of the last Sassanid Empire is a symbol of ancient Iran as Shahrbano became the first mother or lady for the Iranian nation. And this relationship marked the brotherhood between Shiaism and the ancient Magian Iran.”

For this reason they exalt Salman al-Farsi regardless of the other companions in so much that they claimed about him that he used to receive revelations because he was a “Persian”. (Shiite source: Rijaal Kashshi)

For this reason we see in their works that Ali ibn Abi Talib said with respect to Kisraa: “God has saved him (Kisraa) from the punishment of hell fire, and hell is made forbidden for him.” [Shiite source: Bihaarul Anwar 41:14]

This show that Iranians of today are same as Iranians 1400 years back.

Similarities Between Shi’aism and Judaism pt2

Posted: September 22, 2008 by millatibraheem in al-Imaan, Rebuttals

Allamah Kaukab Noorani Okarvi

Translated by:
S. G. Khawajah

Published by:
Zia-ul-Qur’aan Publications
Daata Ganj Bakhsh Road
Lahore (Pakistan)

Edition First (in Pakistan) 1996

Collated by:
Maulana Okarvi Academy Al-A’lami, 53-B, S.M.C.H.S. Karachi-74400
* * * * *

..I should also state why I have undertaken to write this tract. It is simply this. During the course of my recent tour of African countries for the purpose of the propagation of the Faith, I found to my horror that many Muslim youths had come under the spell of Khomeini, erstwhile leader of the revolution in Iran. It had occurred simply because although the strident propaganda literature about the legendary exploits of the Iranian leader incessantly poured out- by the Iranian Government had reached the ears of these Muslim youths, but they had remained woefully ignorant about the beliefs and postulates held by the leaders of Shiite thought. I, therefore, felt that it was incumbent on me to expose the Shiite jurists and scholars, including Khomeini, through their own writings, so that Muslim youths become informed of the truth, and are thus able to remain steadfast to the tenets of the Sunni faith.

Now, let us see what that great savant of Islaam, Hazrat Mahboob-e-Subhaani, Saiyyidina Shaikh Abdul Qaadir Jeelaani, better known as Hazrat Ghaus-i-A’zam (May Al-Laah be pleased with him)’ has written about the Shiites in his book Ghunyatut Taalibeen.

On page 170 of the book, he says:

“The Shiite faith is much akin to the Jewish faith. According to Allamah Sha’bi, the “love” borne by the Raafzis (Shiites) is like the love borne by the Jews. The Jews hold that no man, unless he is from the House of David, is fit to be an Imaam. The Shiites reject the claim to Imaamat of any man who is not from the

House of Ali Ibne Abi Taalib.

The Jews are of the view that until Dajjaal appears and until Hazrat ‘Isaa (May peace and blessings be upon him) does not—delayed so long for one reason or another—descend from the heaven, it is wholly wrong to wage a holy war (Jihaad). Similarly, the Raafizis (Shiites) hold that unless Imaam Mahdi appears and unless the heaven testifies to his Imaamat, it is not permitted to unleash a war for the sake of Al-Laah.

The Jews delay their Maghrib prayers (Namaaz) until the stars join together. Similarly, the Shiites delay their Maghrib prayers.

The Jews say their prayers while removed from the Qiblah and a bit tilted from it. The Shiites do the same.

The Jews move to and fro while saying their prayers. The Raafizis (Shiites) do likewise.

While praying, the Jews let their outer garments touch the ground. The Shiites do likewise.

The Jews deem the killing of every Musalmaan to be permitted to them. The Shiites hold the same view.

The Jews do not attach any importance to the provision of Id-dat (waiting period) for divorced women. The Raafizis also are like them in this matter.

The Jews do not think that any harm attaches to pronouncing talaaq (divorce) thrice. The Shiites also believe likewise.

The Jews tampered with the Thauraat. The Shiites tampered with the Qur’aan. They say that changes and distortions had already been made in the Qur’aan and alterations had been affected in the arrangement of its verses. They further say that the order in which the Qur’aan was revealed has not been retained and the way it is now recited is not proved by a reference to the Prophet (May Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him). The Shiites, therefore, maintain that additions and subtractions have been made in the Qur’aan.

The Jews have an enmity with Hazrat Jibra’eel (May peace be upon him), and they say that he is an enemy to them from amongst the angels. Similarly, one faction of the Shiites says that Jibra’eel grossly erred in delivering (Wah’y) Al-Laah’s Message to Hazrat Muhammad (May Al-Laah’s peace and blessing be upon him) instead of to Hazrat Ali for whom, according to them, it was in fact meant.

The Shiites are liars. May they perish till Doomsday!”

Similarities Between Shi’aism and Judaism pt1

Posted: September 22, 2008 by millatibraheem in al-Imaan, Rebuttals

Here are some further proofs of Jewish influences on Shi’ism and this leaves no doubt that Shiism was started By Ibnu Saba and his task was further accomplished by the hypocrite companions of the Imams of the Ahlul bayt like Zurara ibn Ayan, Abu Baseer al Muradi. al Mufadhaal ibnu Omar etc.:

—The Jews said only the progeny of David has the authority to rule likewise the Shiites stated that only the descendants of Ali(ra) should be the Imams or leaders.

—The Jews stated that there can be no fighting in the way of God unless the Messiah(Dajjal) comes and the sword descends. Similarly the Shiites stated that that there can be no fighting in the way of God unless Qaem appears and an announcer will call from the sky.

—The Jews delay the Dusk until the stars appear, likewise the Shiites delay the maghrib prayer until the stars appear. The Prophet is reported to have said, ” My Ummah will remain in the state of Fitra unless they delay their maghrib till the stars appear.” He further stated:” Hasten to the maghrib prayer before the appearance of the stars and don’t be similar to the Jews for they pray when the stars appear.”

—The Jews distorted the Torah similarly the Shiites distorted the Quran.(by giving wrong explanation and misusing of the verses-like those of tafseer al-Qummi- and alleging that parts of the Quran are changed, missing and deleted out by the Sahabah. Examples of such allegation is that of the respected Shiite scholar at-tabarasi, when he regarded that two surahs: Wilayah and an-Nuraiyn, were deleted out of the official Quranic text by Uthman ibnu Affan)

—The Jews wrote the book with their own hands and stated that this is from God, likewise the Shiites wrote down lies and stated that this is from God.(al-Kulyani’s al-Kafi is full of it).They also fabricated lies and attributed them to the Prophet and his family. It is also well known to the hadith scholars that the Rafdhis/Shiites form the bulk of those narrators who are weak, unreliable and abandoned.

—The Jews don’t wipe on their slippers or light shoes (for ablution) likewise the Shiites abandon the same thing.(it should be noted that the Jewish ablution is similar to that of the Shiites)

—The Jews regard Al-Jari and Al-Marmahi(two kinds of fishes) forbidden and the Rafidhis regard the same.

—The Jews forbid the eating of rabbits and spleen and likewise the Shiites regard the same.

—The Jews had slandered the chaste and pure Mary the mother of Jesus(as), whereas the Shiites slandered and accused Ayesha(ra) the wife of the Prophet. It should be known that Imam Malik issued a fatwa of kufr on the Shiites for this reason.

—The Jews stated that the daughter of Prophet Jacob left rebellious and was held by a polytheist man, whereas the Shiites state that Umar forcefully took hold of the daughter of Ali(ra).

—The Jews were changed into pigs and monkeys and so did it happen on the Rafdhis in the city of Madina al Munawarra and other places. It is stated that their figures were transformed at the time of their deaths.

— And there are some of the Rafidhis who don’t pray in congregation or they don’t hold Fridays stating the this has to be done once the Mahdi appears. Likewise the Jews pray solely stating that congregation should be held once the Jewish Messiah appears.

—The Jews abandoned Moses against the Cannanites stating that, ”go and fight You and your Lord, whereas we remain here sitting.” Similarly the Shiites abandoned Ali(ra), Hussein(ra), and Zayd ibn Zainel Abideen when they were in the battlefield fighting against the oppressors.

—The Jews exalt some their Prophets and Holy men so much that they regard them as deities(in terms of obedience and attachment), whereas they degrade some of the other Prophets and the holy men to such an extent that they call them whores, unchaste, drunkards, corrupt, and idolaters. similarly the Rawafid exalt Ali(ra) and his descendents to a status they don’t reserve and on the other hand they regard the other companions of the Prophet to be corrupt, hypocrites, idolaters, unchaste(as in the case of Mugheerah ibn Shuba) and whores(as in case of Muawiyah, Amr ibn Al-As, and Umar ibn al-Khattab).

—Disgrace and cowardice befell the Jews wherever they were and similarly disgrace and cowardice caught the Rafidhis in so much that they resurrected Taqiyya out of extreme fear and humiliation.

—The Jews pray three times a day, similarly the Shiite pray three times a day such that they combine Asr and Dhuhur and pray them at the same time, and they combine Maghrib and Isha and pray them together

—An extinct sect of the Shiites used to believe that Gabriel made an error by revealing to prophet Muhammad instead of Ali, and thus Gabriel should be hated, and similarly the Jews, they abhore and hate Angel Gabriel.

All of these are unique similiarites b/w judaism and Shiism and proves the fact that Shiism is the product of the accursed Abdullah ibn Sabah.