Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Chapter Six: The doctrine of Imamate from a Shi’a perspective (Part II)

In this section we will discuss in detail the objections raised by the Nasibi authors in their respective works on the following topics:

[1]: Believing in Imamate is on par with believing and Tawheed and Nubuwah

[2]: Rejecting Imamate is tantamount to rejecting Prophethood

[3]: Did the vast bulk of the Sahaba apostatize after the death of Rasulullah (s)?

[4]: Deliberately rejecting the Imams is Kufr

[5]: Rejecting the Imams is on par with rejecting Allah (swt)

[6]: Rejecting the Imams is on par with rejecting all Prophets (as)

[7]: The position of false Imams

[8]: The enemies of the Imams are Kaafir

[9]: One who refuses to obey the Imam is a Kaafir

[10]: Afriqi’s efforts at creating Fitnah by using Shia belief of Imamate

[11]: The difference between a Mumin and a Muslim

[12]: Salvation on adhering to the Hujutallah (Imam)

[13]: Paradise for the Mumins

[14]: Differing rights for a Mumin and Muslim

[15]: Differing ranks of Mumin

[1]: Believing in Imamate is on par with believing in Tawheed and Nubuwwat

Madrassa Inaamiyah states:

The Shi’i book, ‘The faith of Shia Islam’ states, ‘We believe that Imaamat is one of the fundamentals of Islam and that man’s faith can never be complete without belief in it. It is wrong to imitate our fathers, family or teachers in this matter, even if we respect both, for it is just as necessary rationally to consider Imaamat as it is to consider Tawheed and Nubuwwat.’

The Ahl’ul Sunnah have six kalima, the first of which is referred to as Kalima Tauheed:

There is none worthy of worship but Allah

Muhammad (Sallallaho-Alaihe-Wa-Sallam) is Allah’s Messenger.

Logic would dictate that Kalima Tauheed (Tauheed means unity of Allah) should have within just an affimration in the unity of Allah (swt), but we see that also testifying to the Prophethood of Muhammad (s) forms part of Kalima Tauheed. One that testifies to the oneness of Allah (swt) but makes no comment about the Prophethood of Muhammad (s) has rejected Kalima Tauheed. Whilst the oneness of the Creator and Prophethood of Muhammad (s) are two separate subjects, they are interlinked in that one does not truly believe in the oneness of Allah (swt) until he also believes in the Prophethood of Muhammad (s). Exactly the same concept applies with the doctrine of imamate since it forms part of Usul al-Deen.

Usool al-Deen are linked with one’s faith, whilst Furu al-Deen are linked with one’s actions. As Shi’a we place the following things in Usul al-Deen:

Tauheed

Adalat of Allah (swt)

Prophethood

Imamate

Day of Judgement

As Shi’a we believe that the rejection of any of these makes one a kaafir. The Ahl’ul Sunnah count Imamate as a part of Furu al-Deen, linking the appointment to a necessity under Shari’ah. As Shi’a we believe that Imamate is linked to aqeedah and is there an Usul al-Deen. In this regards the evidence that we can advance is the appointment of Imam Ali (as) at Ghadeer Khumm. In Hadith No. 22 recorded by Dr Muhammad Tahir ul Qadri in the Ghadir Declaration he states”

Exegetes and hadith-scholars have described the following narration in the mode of revelation of the verse:

Today, I have perfected your religion for you. Qur’an (al-Ma’idah, the Table spread) 5:3.

“Abu Hurayrah (r) has narrated that one who fasted on 18 Dhul-hijjah will receive a reward equal to 60 months of fasting. This was the day of Ghadir Khum when the Prophet (s), holding ‘Ali bin Abi Talib’s hand, said: Am I not the guardian of the believers? They said: why not, O messenger of Allah! He said: One who has me as his master has ‘Ali as his master. At this ‘Umar bin al-Khattab (r) said: congratulations! O Ibn Abi Talib! You are my master and (the master of) every Muslim. (On this occasion) Allah revealed this verse: Today, I have perfected your religion for you.”

[Khatib Baghdadi related it in Tarikh Baghdad (8:290); Wahidi, Asbab-un-nuzul (p.108); Razi, at-Tafsir-ul-kabir (11:139); Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh Dimashq al-kabir (45:176,177); Ibn Kathir, al-Bidayah wan-nihayah (5:464); and Tabarani in al-Mu‘jam-ul-awsat (3:324#).

Ibn ‘Asakir narrated it through Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri in Tarikh Dimashq al-kabir (45:179)

Suyuti said in ad-Durr-ul-manthur fit-tafsir bil-ma’thur (2:259) that the verse (5:3) revealed when the Prophet (s) said on the day of Ghadir Khum:

‘One who has me as his master has ‘Ali as his master’.]

After the narrations of the two companions Abu Sa’eed and Abu Hurairah it is crystal clear that until the Prophet (s) declared the Wilayat of Ali (as) on the day of Ghadir e Khum, Allah (swt) did not declare the Deen to be perfected until this happened. Something that is complete is not necessary perfect. A building may be complete on account of its structure and brickwork but to be perfect it requires a chandelier, paintings, central heating. Likewise when a child is born, he is complete, but it is only when he attains puberty that the level of reasoning / understanding emerges to make him perfect. Similarly, on the day of Ghadeer Islam was complete but was perfected with the Wilayah of Ali (as). Allah (swt) linked the Wilayah of Maula ‘Ali (as) to the Deen. If The Wilayah was not a part of the Deen, Allah (swt) would have said ‘On this Day I have completed the Shari’ah’ hence making it a part of Furu al-Deen. Allah (swt)’s deeming the Deen completed with the Wilayah of ‘Ali (as) means that the concept of Imamate is a part of Usul al-Deen, just like Tauheed and Nubuwah. If Nawasib are still not convinced then the Hadith, “Whoever dies without recognising the Imam of his time dies the death of Jahilyya (ignorance)” (Munsub e Imamate page 108) shall suffice, after all in the same way that rejecting Tawheed and Nubuwah makes one a Kaafir, the same is the case with one that fails to recognise the Imam of his time.

This clearly places the doctrine of Imamate within Usul-e-Deen. Ponder over the crucial word in this Hadeeth ‘whoever’ – a term that incorporates every person, whether that be Muslims living through this era of post modernity back through to the time of the Sahaba or Tabieen, ‘whoever’ amongst the Ummah dies without recognising his Imam of his time, will die the death of jahiliyya. Ignorace of Furu-e-Deen (branches of religion) does not result in an individual dying a kaafir. One ignorant of Furu-Deen (e.g Salat, Fasting, Zakat) remains a Muslim, he will at worst be a Fasiq (transgressor) whilst rejecting the Usul-e-Deen automatically renders one a kaafir. This fact has been expounded on by Imam of Ahl’ul Sunnah Ibn Jazim in al Muhalla page 45 (published in Egypt):

“In the world that can only exist one Imam at one time. One that spends even one night without the bayya of an Imam, dies the death of Jahiliyya”

Al Muhaddith Shah Waliyullah Dehlavi in Izalatul Khifa Volume 1 page 1 states:

“The rightly guided khalifas are counted within the Usul-e-Deen, since one cannot resolve religious problems unless one grasps them”

Iman is linked to recognizing the Imam of your time. The crucial word here is that of recognition. The pre-requisite for recognition is Iman (faith). If you don’t have faith in the Imam of your time, how can you recognise him? When you don’t have a certaintly in them how will you understand / appreciate their teachings? When one does not have certainty or faith in a scholar, what benefit will you attain from their knowledge? How will you recognize scholars of the likes of Afriki and appreciate the level of knowledge that he possesses when you don’t even recognize him? It can only be attained when your heart has faith in that scholar. Once you have faith in that scholar all doubts are automatically removed, you appreciate his valuable words and recognise the depth of knowledge that he has. When the recognition of a scholar is dependent upon having faith in him, then it is common sense that you can only recognize the Imam of you time, when you have faith in him that is why the Shi’a incorporate belief in Imamah as part of one’s iman, following faith in Tauheed and Nubuwah. Recognistion of all three is dependent upon accepting all three as part of one’s iman, rejecting them makes one a kaafir.

[2]: Rejecting Imamate is tantamount to rejecting Prophethood

Afriqi states:

It is interesting to note that the book from which this statement is drawn was written for the express purpose of correcting contemporary misconceptions about the Shi‘ah. Since Imamah is then for all practical purposes on exactly the same plane as Nubuwah and Risalah, consistency would dictate that the rejection of Imamah be censured with the same severity as the rejection of Nubuwah and Risalah. If rejection of the Nubuwah of Muhammad sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam cast the likes of Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab outside the fold of Islam, then it is only logical to expect that rejection of the Imamah of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiyallahu ‘anhu should cast the likes of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and the rest of the Sahabah radiyallahu ‘anhum out of the fold of Islam.

The Nabi sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam said: “Whoever shall deny ‘Ali his Imamah after me has denied my Nubuwah, and whoever denies me my Nubuwah has denied Allah His divinity.”

Reply One – The curse on Harith ibn Numan proves this to be the case

We are in absolute agreement with this fact, and this is proven by the event of Harith bin Numan. Like Afriqi, Harith was also a Nasibi who had a hatred for Maula ‘Ali (as) in his heart. When Imam Ali (as) was divinely appointed as the Imam at Ghadir Khumm, he openly opposed the designation, this is how Imam of Ahl’ul Sunnah Halabi and others have recorded the event:

On the day of Ghadir the Messenger of Allah summoned the people toward ‘Ali and said: “Ali is the mawla of whom I am mawla.” The news spread quickly all over urban and rural areas. When Harith Ibn Nu’man al-Fahri (or Nadhr Ibn Harith according to another tradition) came to know of it, he rode his camel and came to Madinah and went to the Messenger of Allah (s) and said to him: “You commanded us to testify that there is no deity but Allah and that you are the Messenger of Allah. We obeyed you. You ordered us to perform the prayers five times a day and we obeyed. You ordered us to observe fasts during the month of Ramadhan and we obeyed. Then you commanded us to offer pilgrimage to Makkah and we obeyed. But you are not satisfied with all this and you raised your cousin by your hand and imposed him upon us as our master by saying `Ali is the mawla of whom I am mawla.’ Is this imposition from Allah or from you?”

The Prophet (s) said: “By Allah who is the only deity! This is from Allah, the Mighty and the Glorious.”

On hearing this Harith turned back and proceeded towards his she-camel saying: “O Allah! If what Muhammad said is correct then fling on us a stone from the sky and subject us to severe pain and torture.” He had not reached his she-camel when Allah, who is above all defects, flung at him a stone which struck him on his head, penetrated his body and passed out through his lower body and left him dead. It was on this occasion that Allah, the exalted, caused to descend the following verses:

“A questioner questioned about the punishment to fall. For the disbelievers there is nothing to avert it, from Allah the Lord of the Ascent.”(70:1-3)

al-Sirah al-Halabiyah, by Noor al-Din Ali bin Burhan ud-din al-Halabi, v3, part 2, page 336 & 337.

Al-Kashaf wal Bayan fi Tafsir al Quran by Abu Ishaq Thalabi, commentary of verse 70:1-3. The Tafsir can be downloaded from Wahabi/Salafi website

Download from almeshkat.net

Nur al-Absar, Shaykh Shiblanji, p119

Mufti Ghulam Rasool quoted the same incident from ‘Tadkiratul Khawwas’ page 39 in his book

Imam Zain al Abdeen, pages 49-51

Tafseer Qurtubi, under the commentary of 70:2.

Faiz al Qadeer Shrah Jami al-Sagheer by Imam Abdurauf al-Munawi, Volume 6 page 218 No. 9000

This verse and cause of its descent serves as clear evidence that those that reject the Wilayah of Imam Ali (as) are Kaafirs.

Reply Two – Momin are those that are firm in their belief about the khilafath of ‘Ali (as)

A momin is that individual who attests to a belief in Allah (swt) and his Messenger with his tongue and heart. A Munafiq is an individual who recites the Shahadah (testimony) with his tongue but does not believe in it in his heart. It is from this context that we deem anyone who denies the Wilayah of Maula ‘Ali (as) in his heart to be a munafiq (i.e. a hypocrite) or a Kaafir.

In this connection we have this Hadith recorded by Ibn Maghazali in his famed work ‘Manaqib Ameer’ul Momineen’:

“Whoever dispute with ‘Ali over the Khailafath after me is a Kaafir”

Manaqib Ameer’ul Momineen, page 48

Along similar lines we have this Hadith recorded by Shaykh Suleman Qandozi al-Hanafi in Yanabi al Mawaddah Volume 1 page 290 on the authority of Ayesha:

“The Prophet (s) said ‘Verily Allah (swt) has promised me that anyone that rebels against Ali is a Hell Bound Kaafir’. When Ayesha narrated this, she was asked ‘O Lady why did you rebel against ‘Ali?’ She replied ‘I forgot this Hadith on the Day of Jamal but remembered it again when I arrived in Basra. I have sought the forgiveness of Allah (swt) for this’

Yanabi al Mawaddah Volume 1 page 290

Reply Three – Momin are those that accept the superiority of Ali (as)

From a logical perspective, if we believe that Imam Ali (as) was the true successor of the Prophet (s) then it is because he was the best of men, and we believe that the person the best of men should lead the Ummah, in the capacity of Khalifa of the Prophet (s). Those who excel in merits are those who should be entitled to lead the Ummah. So what merits does Allah (swt) deem essential to lead the Muslims? The answer to this and all question’s lies in Allah (swt)’s Glorious Book. Saul (as) appointed a successor, a decision that was resented by the people:

“And their Prophet said to them, ‘Surely Allah has raised Talut to be a King over you’. They said, ‘How can he hold Kingship while we have a greater right to Kingship than him, and he has not been granted an abundance of wealth?’ He said, ‘Surely Allah has chosen him in preference to you, and He has increased him abundantly in knowledge and physique, and Allah grants his Kingdom to whom He pleases and Allah is Ample-giving, knowing”.

The verse makes it clear that the Leader is chosen by Allah (swt) not by the people, had it been their choice they would have voted in a man with wealth. Monetary power is nothing in the eyes of Allah (swt); He makes it clear that the right to succeed is based on the individual possessing superiority in:

Knowledge

Bodily Strength

If we look at the Seerah of the Prophet and his Sahaba we can safely conclude that no one was greater in knowledge and physical strength than Imam Ali (as). From a knowledge perspective Rasulullah (s) said ‘I am the City of Knowledge and ‘Ali is its Gate’.

Physical strength is tested in the battlefield, and one only need to pick up the books of classical history to see the manner in which ‘Ali (as) came out to duel in Badr, stayed with the Prophet (s) when all around had fled in Uhud a fact testified by the Prophet (s) (see the scan below from Madarij un Nubuwwa, v2 p 210-211), he slew the leader of the Kuffar in battle at Khunduq (trench), and through his leadership conquered the main fortress at Khayber killing Mahrab in the process. What greater proof of the superiority of ‘Ali (as) in battle can there be than the testimony of Gibrael (as) at Uhud: ‘There is no brave young man but Ali, and there is no sword but Dhulfiqar’

1. Madarij un Nubuwat, Volume 2 page 210-211

2. History of al-Tabari Volume 7 pages 120-121

If we look at these two criteria via which Allah (swt) chose Talut above others, then it is logical that ‘Ali (as) should likewise succeed the Prophet (s) as he was the best of men, and to hold a different opinion is Kuffar. To corroborate our position what better evidence can we present than the testimony of Ayesha from Yanabi al Mawadah page 290:

Ata narrates: ‘I asked Ayesha about Ali. She replied: ‘He is the best of men; no one denies this except a Kaafir”.

Yanabi al Mawadah Volume 1 page 290

The same text has also been narrated from Hudhayfa, Jabir ibn Abdullah and Imam Ali (as) himself on the same page. Other Sunni scholars have also recorded this from the blessed lips of our Prophet (s); here is a list of where it can be located:

Tareekh Damishq Volume 2 page 942, by Ibn Asakir

Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v3, page 193

Min Hadith Khaithema bin Sulaiman page by Khaithema bin Sulaiman Al-Qusashi

Kunuz Al-Haqa’iq, by Abdul Raouf al-Manawi, Volume 2 page 15, the letter Ayn

Faraid al Simtayn, Volume 1 page 154 Chapter 31

Kifayath al Muttalib Volume 9 page 245

Muwaddat ul Qurba page 30

Kanz ul Ummal, Hadith 33046

“Ali is the best of Men, and the denial is nothing but Kufr”

Online Kanz ul Ummal, Hadith 33046

http://www.al-eman.com/Islamlib/viewchp.asp?BID=137&CID=410

A salafy website with the book “Min hadith Khaithema bin Sulaiman” by Khaithema bin Sulaiman Al-Qusashi also records:

علي خير البشر من أبي فقد كفر

“Ali is the best of Men, and the denial is nothing but Kufr”

http://www.alsunnah.com/Hadith.aspx?Type=S&HadithID=426376

Reply Four – Momin are those who submit to the authority of the Gate of repentance Maula ‘Ali (as)

002.058 [YUSUFALI]:

And remember We said: “Enter this town, and eat of the plenty therein as ye wish; but enter the gate with humility, in posture and in words, and We shall forgive you your faults and increase (the portion of) those who do good.”

In this verse the Israelites were ordered to prostrate at the Gate of repentance prior to entering the town. The act of submission to the Gate meant recognising the status of the Gate that was linked to submitting to Allah (swt). This act of submission before the Gate was a means via which Allah (swt) forgave the people of Moses (as) and deciphered between momins and munafiqs. Now let us link this verse to this Hadeeth of Rasulullah (s) recorded by Ibn Hajar in his al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah:

“The Prophet (s) stated Ali is the Gate of Repentance, whoever entered therein was a believer and whoever went out was an unbeliever.”

Sawaiq al Muhriqah, page 425

If the Gate of Repentance acted as the means via which the Israelites could prove that they were momin’s by submitting to their Creator through the Wasila of this Gate then for this Ummah affirming that one is a momin depends upon submitting to the authority of ‘Ali (as). Whoever submits to the authority of ‘Ali is in fact submitting to the authority of Allah (swt) and is hence a momin Those that have turned their backs on ‘Ali (as), keeping aloof from his teaching, preferring to praise those that hated fought and cursed him (as) cannot be deemed momins.

[3]: Did the vast bulk of the Sahaba apostatize after the death of Rasulullah (s)?

Afriqi states:

For one who views the problem from this perspective it thus comes as no surprise to find the Shi‘ah narrating from their Imams that “all the people became murtadd after the death of Rasulullah, except three,”2 since it is consistent with the principle that equates Imamah with Nubuwah in the sense that each of them is a position appointed by Allah.

Reply One

This is one of the favourite narrations that Nawasib cite as part of their campaign to stoke up anti Shi’a feelings. The tradition is weak since one of the narrators of this tradition was Hanaan bin Sadeed who adhered to the “Wakfee al Madhab”, and Imam Raza (as) declared the following about such persons:

“An adherent of the wakfee al madhab is an individual opposed to the truth, should he remain on this deviant path until his die, his ultimate resting place shall be in Hell”.

Mukees ad’a raraya fi ilm al riwaya page 83

Reply Two

Whilst Nawasib of the rank and caliber of Abu Sulaiman cite this to create sectarian strife, there are open minded Sunni scholars have sought to interpret in a manner that will prevent dissent. The famous Wahaby scholar Allamah Waheed’udeen Zaman Khan narrates a similar narration in his famous work ‘Lughaat al Hadith’, one should observe the translation that he made of it:

“All the people turned from Ali with the exception of three Salman Farsi, Abu Dharr Ghaffari and Miqdad bin Aswad. I said ‘is Amar Yasir not amongst them and he (Imam Abu Jafar) said: ‘he was also turned little bit (then he returned to the right path)’.”

‘Lughaat al Hadith’ Volume 1 page 143, letter Jeem

Those who wish to incite sectarian violence should inspect the interpretation offered by this late Sunni scholar, is there any suggestion that the Sahaba became kaafir from such a translation?

If we for arguments sake accept this Hadith as correct then we will provide the same explanation that had been offered by Allamah Zaman, namely that the Sahaba turned away from ‘Ali (as), yet when we look at those Sahaba that stood with ‘Ali on the position of Khilafath, then this narration can only be understood in this manner.

We believe that far more than three people believed in the Imamate of Maula ‘Ali (as), which is why Abu Bakr used methods of State terrorism to quell support for our Imam. In no way were just three believers left the tradition cited from Usul Kafi carries a weak Isnad.

[4]: Deliberately rejecting the Imams is Kufr

Other comments that the Nawasib advances are:

Afriqi states:

The prolific Abu Ja‘far at-Tusi, called Shaykh at-Ta’ifah, (died 460AH), who is the author of two of the four canonical Hadith collections, has the following to say:

Rejection of Imamah is kufr, just as rejection of Nubuwah is kufr.5

Madrassa Inaamiyah states:

Rejection of a Nabi is Kufr. One who does not believe in a Nabi is a Kaafir. This is the belief of Islam. But according to the Shi’ah religion, belief in Imaamat is Fardh just as Fardh as it is to believe in Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam). According to Shi’ism, one who denies any of the Shi’i Imaams – one who does not accept any of the Shi’i Imaams – is a Kaafir. Propounding this view, the Shi’i authority, Kulaini, states in his ‘most trustworthy and celebrated work of Hadith’, Al-Kaafi:

“We (i.e. the Imaams) are those whose obedience Allah has made Fardh… Whoever denies us is a Kaafir.’

Reply One – Rejecting the bounties of Allah (swt) is kufr

Kufr carries a literal and hidden meaning. Under the Shariah to deny any of the Usool-e-Deen for example the Prophets, their books, the Angels is Kufr. With regards to Furoo-e-Deen a person that does not practice them (e.g. offer Salat) is a Faasiq (transgressor). If that same individual does not pray because he rejects the concept of Salat outright, then he has committed Kufr.

It should also be recognised that a failure of man to thank his Creator for the bounties that he has bestowed also constitutes kufr. Ingratitude is kufr as can be evidenced by the fact that the opposite of the word shukr, or “gratitude,” in Arabic is kufr. The Qur’an explicitly uses the word kufr to mean “ingratitude”:

014.007 [YUSUFALI]

And remember! your Lord caused to be declared (publicly): “If ye are grateful, I will add more (favours) unto you; But if ye show ingratitude, truly My punishment is terrible indeed.”

The literal Arabic text denoting “But if ye show ingratitude” reads: wa la’in kafartum. Thus, the Qur’an uses both renderings of the word kufr, namely, denial of truth and ingratitude.

Allah (swt) has bestowed all manner of nemut (bounties) upon the believers and a failure to thank Allah (swt) for such blessing is indeed kufr. We read in Surah Nahl verse 5 to 18:

5. And cattle He has created for you (men): from them ye derive warmth, and numerous benefits, and of their (meat) ye eat.

6. And ye have a sense of pride and beauty in them as ye drive them home in the evening, and as ye lead them forth to pasture in the morning.

7. And they carry your heavy loads to lands that ye could not (otherwise) reach except with souls distressed: for your Lord is indeed Most Kind, Most Merciful,

8. And (He has created) horses, mules, and donkeys, for you to ride and use for show; and He has created (other) things of which ye have no knowledge.

9. And unto Allah leads straight the Way, but there are ways that turn aside: if Allah had willed, He could have guided all of you.

10. It is He who sends down rain from the sky: from it ye drink, and out of it (grows) the vegetation on which ye feed your cattle.

11. With it He produces for you corn, olives, date-palms, grapes and every kind of fruit: verily in this is a sign for those who give thought.

12. He has made subject to you the Night and the Day; the sun and the moon; and the stars are in subjection by His Command: verily in this are Signs for men who are wise.

13. And the things on this earth which He has multiplied in varying colours (and qualities): verily in this is a sign for men who celebrate the praises of Allah (in gratitude).

14. It is He Who has made the sea subject, that ye may eat thereof flesh that is fresh and tender, and that ye may extract therefrom ornaments to wear; and thou seest the ships therein that plough the waves, that ye may seek (thus) of the bounty of Allah and that ye may be grateful.

15. And He has set up on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you; and rivers and roads; that ye may guide yourselves;

16. And marks and sign-posts; and by the stars (men) guide themselves.

17. Is then He Who creates like one that creates not? Will ye not receive admonition?

18. If ye would count up the favours of Allah, never would ye be able to number them: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

In this verse Allah (swt) sets out the vast array of bounties that he provides for the betterment of his servants. In this verse Allah (swt) states that it is His (swt) duty to show the right path and this attained via the stars.

To be unthankful to these bounties is one thing, but it is a fact that no one denies the bounties that are set out in this verse, on the contrary man seeks to determine what further benefits that he can derive from such bounties, for example the stars, or deep sea exploration to locate the bounties in the oceans. The bounties set out in the verses we cited are for our own enjoyment, to improve our personal quality of life. Allah (swt) further states in Surah Nahl verse 11:

and be grateful for the favours of Allah, if it is He Whom ye serve”.

Non Muslims derive benefits from the bounties of Allah (swt) but never give thanks for them. Muslims seek to say thanks through the act of Salat. Whilst Surah Nahl refers to those bounties that we benefit from in this world, what of those bounties from which we will benefit us in the next world? Clearly these bounties must play a pivotal role for Muslims. All humans benefit from the bounties that Allah (swt) provides, but when it comes to the bounties that are linked to the next world, then this will refer to the Muslims alone, for Paradise is for them alone. Guidance is also a bounty, Allah (swt) states in Surah Nahl verse 81:

It is Allah Who made out of the things He created, some things to give you shade; of the hills He made some for your shelter; He made you garments to protect you from heat, and coats of mail to protect you from your (mutual) violence. Thus does He complete His favours on you, that ye may bow to His Will (in Islam).

But if they turn away, thy duty is only to preach the clear Message.

They recognise the favours of Allah. then they deny them; and most of them are (creatures) ungrateful.

Notice how the first portion (verse 81) refers to the blessing on the Believers. The address in verses 82 then switches to the Holy Prophet (s), making it clear that the duty of the Prophet (s) is to only convey these bounties to the Believers, nothing more. The final bounty of Allah (swt) for the faithful was conveyed by the Prophet, following the descent of this verse:

O Messenger! proclaim the (message) which hath been sent to thee from thy Lord. If thou didst not, thou wouldst not have fulfilled and proclaimed His mission. And Allah will defend thee from men (who mean mischief). For Allah guideth not those who reject Faith.

In this regard we read in Tafsir ibn Abi Hatim, Volume 4 page 1172:

حدثنا أبي ثنا عثمان بن خرزاد ثنا إسماعيل بن زكريا ثنا علي بن عابس عن الأعمش وابي الحجاب عن عطية العوفي عن أبي سعيد الخدري قال : نزلت هذه الآية يا أيها الرسول بلغ ما انزل اليك من ربك في علي بن أبي طالب

Narrated my father from Uthman bin Kharzad from Ismail bin Zakaria from Ali bin Abes from al-Amash and Abi al-Hajeb from Attya al-Aufi from Abu Saeed al-Khudari who said: This verse {O Messenger! deliver what bas been revealed to you from your Lord} has been revealed about Ali bin Abi Talib.

We should point out that the chain is authentic as per Imam Abi Hatim because according to his own admission, he had only collected Sahih chains in his book. We read in Volume 1 page 14:

سألني جماعة من اخواني اخراج تفسير القرآن مختصرا بأصح الأسانيد…..فأجبتهم إلى ملتمسهم وبالله التوفيق

“A group of my brothers requested that I write a brief commentary of the Quran with the most Sahih chains…. I therefore responded to their request and Allah grants success”.

It was immediately after this that the Prophet (s) delivered his sermon at Ghadir Khumm declaring Imam Ali (as) to be his successor, clear from his words “One who has me as his master has ‘Ali as his master”.

Just after the declaration of the Imam Ali’s (as) guardianship, Allah (swt) revealed the verse

“Today I have perfected your religion and completed my bounty upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion.” (Quran 5:3)

Here is a small list of those Sunni scholars who attested that the above verse of Quran in Ghadir Khum after the speech of the Prophet:

Tarikh, by Khatib al-Baghdadi, v9, pp 222 from Abu Hurayra

Manaqaib, by Ibn Maghazali, p29-36 (Hadith 23-29)

History of Damascus, Ibn Asakir, v2, p75

Manaqib, by Khawarazmi al-Hanfi, p80

Tadhkiratul Khawwas, page 37 by Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi

Let us quote the complete account recorded by Khateeb Baghdadi in Tarikh Baghdad, Volume 9 page 222 Biography No. 4345:

أنبأنا عبد الله بن علي بن محمد بن بشران أنبأنا علي ابن عمر الحافظ حدثنا ضمرة بن ربيعة القرشي عن ابن شوذب عن مطر الوراق عن شهر بن حوشب عن أبي هريرة قال من صام يوم ثمان عشرة من ذي الحجة كتب له صيام ستين شهراً وهو يوم غدير خم لما أخذ النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم بيد علي بن أبي طالب فقال: ” ألست ولي المؤمنين؟ ” قالوا بلى يا رسول الله قال: ” من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه ” فقال عمر بن الخطاب بخ بخ لك يا ابن أبي طالب أصبحت مولاي ومولى كل مسلم فأنزل الله: ” اليوم أكملت لكم دينكم “

Abdullah bin Ali bin Muhammad Bashran narrated from Hafiz Ali bin Umar Darqutni narrated from Abi Nasr Habshoon bin Musa Khalal narrated from Ali bin Saeed Ramli narrated from Zamrah bin Rabiya narrated from Abdullah bin Showzab from Matar Waraq narrated from Shahr bin Hoshab narrated from Abu Hurrirah that Holy Prophet (s) stated: “Whoever fasts on the 18th of Dhil Hijjah, Allah will grant him the reward of fasting on sixty months. That is the day when the Holy Prophet (s) grabbed the hand of Ali bin Abi Talib and stated: ‘Am I not Wali of all believers (momineen)?. All of them replied: ‘Yes Oh Prophet of Allah’. To which the Prophet (s) said: ‘Of whomsoever I am Maula, Ali is his Maula’. (Upon this) Umar bin Khattab said: “Congratulations, congratulations Oh Ali bin Abi Talib, today you have become my Maula as well as Maula of all Muslims.” It was then that the verse was revealed: “Today I have perfected your religion and completed my bounty upon you, (Quran 5:3)”.

Abdullah bin Ali bin Bashran: Khatib Baghdadi said: ‘His narration is reliable’. (Tarikh Baghdad, v10 p15). Ali bin Umar al-Darqutni: The famous Imam of Ahle Sunnah requires no authentication. Habshoon bin Musa: Dhahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Syar alam alnubala, v15, p316). Ali bin Saeed al-Ramli: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Lisan al-Mizan, v4, p232). Zamra bin Rabiya: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1, p445). Abdullah bin Showzab: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdhib, v1, p501). Matar al-Waraq: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdhib, v2, p187). Shahr bin Hoshab: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdhib, v1, p423).

Baghdadi has recorded the same account with a slight different chain of narration which is:

خبرنيه الأزهري قال حدثنا محمد بن عبدالله بن أخي ميمي قال حدثنا أحمد بن عبدالله بن أحمد بن العباس بن سالم بن مهران المعروف بابن النيري إملاء قال حدثنا علي بن سعيد الشامي حدثنا ضمرة بن ربيعة عن ابن شوذب عن مطر عن شهر بن حوشب عن أبي هرير

Abul Qasim al-Azhari: Dhahabi said: ‘Hujjah’. (Syar alam alnubala, v17, p578). Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Akhi Mimi: Dhahabi said: ‘Thiqah’. (Tarikh al-Islam, v27, p204). Ahmad bin Abdullah al-Nayri: Dhahabi said: ‘Seduq’. (Tarikh al-Islam, v23, p596)

The verse and the declaration before its descent make it clear for everyone that though belief in the Unity of Allah, the Prophethood, prayers, fasting, pilgrimage, the payment of poor-rate and jihad already existed, the final bounty of Allah (swt) and with it the completion of the Deen came with the declaration of the Wilayah of ‘Ali (as).

Iit is crystal clear that it was not until the Prophet (s) declared the Wilayat of Ali (as) on the day of Ghadir, that Allah (swt) declared the religion to be perfected. Whilst previous verses gave the provision for the bounties of Allah (swt) for His servants, the declaration at Ghadir and with it this verse was in effect the seal on all bounties from Allah (swt). The declaration of the Wilayat of Maula ‘Ali (as) at Ghadir Khumm was a confirmation that the bounty of guidance of Prophethood (s) had been sealed forever and had been replaced with the door of Imamate – starting with the guardianship of Imam Ali (as). The designation of Imamate through the twelve divinely appointed Imams is a bounty from Allah (swt) for the Ummah. As the Imams are inheritors of the Qur’an and Sunnah of Muhammad (s) their recognition is linked to Iman (Faith) and their hatred constitutes hypocrisy. In this connection, Imam of the Nasibis Ibn Taymeeya defined Kufr as follows:

“Kufr is the attribute of everyone who rejects something that Allaah has commanded us to believe in, after news of that has reached him, whether he rejects it in his heart without uttering it, or he speaks those words of rejection without believing it in his heart, or he does both; or he does an action which is described in the texts as putting one beyond the pale of faith.”

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, Volume 12 page 335

With this definition in mind let us contemplate over the fact that Allah (swt) states in Surah Nahl verse 83:

They recognise the favours of Allah. then they deny them; and most of them are (creatures) ungrateful.

The Ne’mat (bounty/favour) that the vast bulk of people knowingly deny refers to the Wilayah of Maula Ali (as), and anyone that intentionally denies this nehmath has committed Kufr. Such is the importance of this ne`mat that we will be asked of it on the Day of Judgement.

Referring to the verse “And stop them, they are to be asked (Quran 37:24)” Allamah Ibn Hajr Makki records a tradition in Sawaiq al-Muhriqa (Urdu translation page 503) that on the day of judgment, the Wilayat e Ali (as) will also be questioned about, along with the belief in the Unity of Allah, the Prophethood, the revealed books and faith. He records:

Abu Sa’eed Khudri narrates: “Holy Prophet (s) said that on the day of judgement Allah Almighty will say: Stop them for now, they will be questioned about Wilayah of Ali (as)”

Sawaiq al-Muhriqa, page 503

Mohibuddin al Tabari records the same Hadith in:

Riyadh al Nadhira Volume 2 page 116

The darling of the Deobandi movement equally admired by the Wahabis Shah Ismail Shaheed echoes the same sentiments in, Mansab-e-Imamat, page 109-110, published in Lahore. Whilst discussing evidence of Wilayat in the next world he says:

We read in Surah Azhab ‘The Prophet is aula (authority) to the believers’, and in the next world his Wilayat will remain in tact, as Allah (swt) says ‘What will be the position when a witness will be summoned from each Ummah, and you shall be a witness over them [Surah Nisa]. Similarly the Imam has such authority in this world and the next, which is why the Prophet said ‘Don’t I have more rights over the people than they have over themselves, to which the people replied ‘Yes’. The Prophet then said ‘Of whomsoever I am Maula, Ali is his Maula’. This is why Allah says in the Qur’an that on the Day of Judgement you will be summoned with your Imam and questioned [Surah Safaath], and the Prophet said that we will be asked about the Wilayat of Ali”

Mansab e Imamat, page 109 & 110

When the Wilayah of Maula Ali (as) is such an important bounty in the eyes of Allah (swt) that we will be asked of it on the Day of Judgement then clearly rejecting or denying this bounty is an act of kufr.

Similarly we read in Tafsir Shawahed al-Tanzeel, of al-Hakem al-Hasakani al-Hanafi, volume 2 page 162:

ابن عباس قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله إذا كان يوم القيامة أوقف أنا وعلي على الصراط ، فما يمر بنا أحد إلا سألناه عن ولاية علي

Ibn Abbas reported: that the messenger of Allah (pbuh) said’: On the day of resurrection me and Ali shall stand on the path, verily no one will pass without we ask him about the Wilayah of Ali’.

Reply Two- The Prophet (s) differentiated between belief and disbelief on the basis of successor

In his final recorded Hadith on Ghadir Khumm, Prof. Dr Muhammad Tahir ul Qadri in ‘The Ghadir Declaration’ page 80 narrates this tradition:

It is narrated by ‘Ali (as) himself. He said: on the day of Ghadir Khum, the Messenger of Allah (saww) had a turban tied round my head (as a symbol of honour) and let the loose end hang down at the back. Then he said: The angels whom Allah (swt) had sent to help me at Badr and Hunayn were wearing turbans of the same kind. He then added: surely the turban differentiates between belief and disbelief.” ‘

In the footnotes Qadri cites those sources from wherein he cited this narration, he writes:

Tayalisi related it in al-Musnad (p.23#154); and Bayhaqi in as-Sunan-ul-kubra (10:14).

Hindi says in Kanz-ul-’ummal (15:306,482#41141,41909) that, besides Tayalisi, this tradition has also been narrated by Bayhaqi, Tabarani, Ibn Abi Shaybah and Ibn Muni’. Hindi has added the following words:

“Surely the turban differentiates between Muslims and polytheists.”

‘Abd-ul-A’la bin ‘Adi has also narrated that the Prophet (saww) called ‘Ali bin Abi Talib (as) on the day of Ghadir Khum, tied a turban round his head (as a sign of honour) and let the loose end hang down at the back.

This tradition is recorded in the following books:

i. Ibn Athir, Asad-ul-ghabah fi ma’rifat-is-sahabah (3:170)

ii. Muhib Tabari, ar-Riyad-un-nadrah fi manaqib-il-’ashrah (3:194).

iii. Zurqani, Sharh-ul-mawahib-il-laduniyyah (6:272).

The Ghadir Declaration, page 80

The turban given to Imam Ali (as) at Ghadir Khumm signified his Imamate / succession as the true Khalifa of the Prophet (s). Consider the words of the Holy Prophet (s) “surely the turban differentiates between belief and disbelief” – this clearly means that those that recognise the importance of the turban (i.e. its link to the Imamate of Maula ‘Ali) have true faith whilst those that deny it have committed kufr.

Reply Three – Rejecting the Imams, that Allah (swt) associated as the Ark of Salvation is kufr

Nuh (as) was the first of the Ul’il Uzm Prophets of Allah (swt). When his (as) people remained stubborn and refused to submit to the teachings of Allah (swt), Nuh (as) built and Ark for him and his believers to protect themselves from the pending wrath of Allah (swt). For the disbelievers there was no escape, as we read in Surah al Hud:

011.042-43 [YUSUFALI]:

So the Ark floated with them on the waves (towering) like mountains, and Noah called out to his son, who had separated himself (from the rest): “O my son! embark with us, and be not with the unbelievers!”

The son replied: “I will betake myself to some mountain: it will save me from the water.” Noah said: “This day nothing can save, from the command of Allah, any but those on whom He hath mercy! “And the waves came between them, and the son was among those overwhelmed in the Flood.

This verse makes it absolutely clear that those that failed to board the ark of Nuh (as) were disbelievers that perished on account of their failure to board it. This can be clealrly evidenced from the words of Noah (as) to his son ‘O my son! embark with us, and be not with the unbelievers!’ – words that demonstrate that turning away from the boat of salvation, places such a person within the category of kaafirs. Salvation was restricted to those that boarded the Ark. Similarly, Rasulullah (s) compared his Ahl’ul bayt (as) to the Ark of Noah. In this connection we have sought reliance on a Hadith from the following esteemed Sunni works:

Mishkat al Masabih Volume 2 page 258

Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p786

Tafseer al-Kabeer, by Fakhr al-Razi, under the commentary of verse 42:23, Part 27, p167 al-Bazzar, on the authority of Ibn Abbas and Ibn Zubair with the wording “drowned” instead of “perished”.

al-Sawaiq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p234 under Verse 8:33. Also in section 2, p282. He said this Hadith has been transmitted via numerous authorities.

Hilyatul Awliya, by Abu Nu’aym, v4, p306

al-Kuna wal Asma, by al-Dulabi, v1, p76

Yanabi al-Muwaddah, by al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, pp 30,370

Al Mastadrak al Hakim:

Kitab Tafsir, Surah Hud No. 3270,

Kitab Marfat Sahabah, No. 4703

Musnad al Bazar, No. 3322

Al-Matalib al-Aaliya by Ibn Hajar Asqalani,Kitab al-Manaqib:

Fadl Ahlylbayt No. 4074 ,

No. 4705

Mu’ajam al Kabir by Tabarani, Baab Ulha Hassan bin Ali bin Abi Talib,

No. 2570,

No. 2572,

No. 2573,

Baab min Isma Abdullah, No. 12220

Mu’ajam al Awsat by Tabarani:

Baab ulha, Isma Hussain No. 5694,

Baab al Ghayn, No. 5694,

No. 6032

Mu’ajam al Saghir by Tabarani:

Baab min Isma al Hussain, No. 392,

Baab min Isma Muhammad, No. 826

Amthal Al-Hadith by Abi Al-Sheikh Al-Asbahani, Dikr Salwat al Khams, No. 299

Akhbaar e Makkah by al-Fakehi, No. 1837

Musnad Al-Shehab Al-Qudha’I:

No. 1239,

No. 1240

Al-Sharia’a by Al-Ajeri, Kitaab Jami` Fadail Ahlulybayt:

No. 1653,

No. 1654,

No. 1659

We read in al Mustadrak and in Mishkat:

“Abu Dharr narrates that Rasulullah (s) said ‘ Beware! My Ahlul-Bayt are like the Ark of Noah. Whoever embarked in it is saved, and whoever turned away from it is perished”.

There is no doubt about the authenticity of this Hadith. Al Hakim in al-Mustadrak has graded it as Sahih.

Ibn Hajar Makki has also recorded this hadith from different sources in

Sawaiqh al Muhriqa, (Urdu) page 621-622

The comments of leading Deobandi Imam [similarly loved by the Salafi] Shah Ismail Shaheed are also worthy of note. Having narrated this Hadith in his classical source ‘Taqwitatul Iman’ page 228, Chapter ‘The Companions and Ahl-e- Bait of the Messenger of Allah’ he offers his understanding of the Hadith:

“It is clear from this Hadith that those who follow the ways and modes of the ahl-bait (members of the Prophet’s house) are saved from Unbelief and Hell, like those who were saved by mounting on the Ark of Noah. Those who refused to be in the Ark were ruined, including a son of Noah who was also among the Unbelievers”

Taqwitatul Iman page 228 (published by Idara-e-Islamiaat, Lahore)

Mufti Ghulam Rasool (d. October 2010) offers this commentary of the Hadith in ‘Jawahir al Uloom’ page 85-86:

“In other words obedience and love of the Ahl’ul bayt descendants is a means of salvation, and bearing enmity and opposition to them is destruction, for guidance one must adhere to both, since the Prophet said as long as you adhere to both you will never go astray. From this it becomes obvious that an individual who claims that he will remain attached to the Qur’an and adheres to its orders, but deems the teachings and love of the descendants to be unimportant will not attain guidance or salvation”.

Jawahir al Uloom, page 85-86

When one boards a boat, they are seeking salvation (to get to a destination) by boarding it, and as part of that process the passenger places all his faith in the Captain steering the ship. The duty for the passenger is to accept the authority of the Captain and adhere to the orders / guidance that he issues. During the time of Nuh (as) boarding the ship, involved recognition of the Wilayah (authority) of Nuh (as) and adhering to his guidance. The Hadith of Safina, should likewise be seen in the same manner. Rasulullah (s) identified the Ahl’ul bayt (as) as a means of salvation, turning away from them constitutes misguidance. This form of salvation can only be attained by one that follows them, and recognises their Wilayah (authority) as religious guides, and accordingly attains knowledge and wisdom through these Imams. Shah Ismail had accepted that turning away from them is kufr, that rejecting their Wilayah (by refusing to follow them for guidance) means turning away from them and this is an act kufr.

Reply Four – Rejecting the signs of Allah (swt) makes one a Kaafir

Allah (swt) has made reference about the signs of Allah (swt) in his Glorious Book. In Arabic grammar the word ‘Aya’ carries multiple meanings that have been similarly used in the Quran itself. According to the Hans Wedr Dictionary of Modern Arabic, it means:

“Sign, token, mark; miracle; wonder, marvel, prodigy, model, exemplar, paragon, masterpiece” (page36)

Now that we understand the meaning of Aya, let us see how Allah (swt) grades those that reject his Signs.

Al-Baqarah, Verse 159:

Those who conceal the clear (Signs) We have sent down, and the Guidance, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book,-on them shall be Allah.s curse, and the curse of those entitled to curse,-

Baqarah, Verse 39

“But those who reject Faith and belie Our Signs, they shall be companions of the Fire; they shall abide therein.”

An-Nisa, Verse 56

Those who reject our Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire: as often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for fresh skins, that they may taste the penalty: for Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.

Baqarah, Verse 99

We have sent down to thee Manifest Signs (ayat); and none reject them but those who are perverse [Fasiqoon].

Al-Araf, Verse 147

Those who reject Our Signs and the meeting in the Hereafter,- vain are their deeds: Can they expect to be rewarded except as they have wrought?

Al-Ankaboot, Verse 47

And thus (it is) that We have sent down the Book to thee. So the People of the Book believe therein, as also do some of these (pagan Arabs): and none but Unbelievers reject our Signs.

The state of those that reject the Signs of Allah (swt) are:

Cursed

Hellbound

Transgressors

Kaafrs

People whose deeds will of no use in the next world

Our contention is that the Ahl’ul bayt (as) Imams are also signs of Allah (swt) that automatically makes one that rejects them a kaafir. If Nawasib object saying people cannot be Sign of Allah (swt), then we can refute this by pointing out that Ibn Hajar Asqalani commented:

“The earth is never devoid of him who stands for Allah with a proof (Hujjah)”

Fatah ul Bari Shrah Sahih al Bukhari, Vol 6 page 494 Hadith, No. 3265

This admission constitutes clear evidence that the proof of the existence of the Creator is proven through the existence of the Imam, what greater Sign of Allah (swt) can there be than that? Moreover Maryam (as) and Isa (as) are called Signs of Allah (swt) in our blessed Book.

Muminoon verse 50

And We made the son of Mary and his mother as a Sign: We gave them both shelter on high ground, affording rest and security and furnished with springs.

With this in mind let us once more present the Hadith Safina to our readers:

“Abu Dharr narrates that Rasulullah (s) said ‘ Beware! My Ahlul-Bayt are like the Ark of Noah. Whoever embarked in it is saved, and whoever turned away from it is perished”.

Fadha’il al-Sahaba by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, volume 2 page 786

Rasulullah (s) equated the function of the Ahl’ul bayt (as) and the boat of Noah (as) to be the same, namely the provision of salvation. This is how Allah (swt) describes the Boat of Salvation in Surah Ankaboot verse 15:

We saved him and the companions of the Ark, and We made the (Ark) a Sign for all peoples!

If Allah (swt) has described the Boat of Salvation for the Ummah of Nuh (as) as a Sign of Allah (swt), the Ark of Salvation for the Ummah of Muhammad (s) are likewise a Sign of Allah (swt). Now that we have proven that the Boat of Salvation i.e. the Ahl’ul bayt Imams are amongst the Signs of Allah (swt) the position of those who reject them is the same as those that reject any sign of Allah – namely such people are Hell Bound Kaafirs.

[5]: Rejecting the Imams is on par with rejecting Allah (swt)

Afriqi quoted the words of Shaykh Ibn Babawayh al-Qummi:

Afriqi states:

It is our belief concerning a person who accepts (the Imamah of) Amir al-Mu’minin but rejects any one of the Imams after him, that he is similar to one who believes in all the Ambiya’ but rejects the Nubuwah of Muhammad sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam. The Nabi sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam said: “The Imams after me are twelve. The first is Amir al-Mu’minin ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib and the last is the Qa’im (the Mahdi). Obedience to them is obedience to me, and disobedience to them is disobedience to me. Thus, whoever rejects one of them has rejected me.”

Reply – The Sunnis also believe rejecting Imams is tantamount to rejecting Allah (swt)

It seems that Nawasib have gone down so deep into the hatred of Shia of Ali (as) that they now don’t even bother to have a glimpse at their on books. The Ahl’ul Sunnah books contain this Hadith:

“The Prophet (s) said ‘Whoever obeys me, obeys Allah (swt), whoever disobeys me, disobeys Allah (swt), whoever obeys the Imam [Islamic laws], obeys me, whoever disobeys the Imam, disobeys me”

Sunan Ibn Majah Volume 2 page 550, Chapter ‘Itaat e Imam, translated by Maulana Waheedudeen Zaman, Lahore

Allamah Zaman defines Imam here in brackets as Islamic Laws, but we can refute this by citing the fact that the books of Ahl’ul Sunnah contain this Hadith:

“Whoever dies without recognising the Imam of his time, dies the death of Jahilyya (ignorance)”

Nashr al Fawaid al Jalaal, Sharh Aqaid Nafsee page 197, by Maulana Ubayd’al Haqq, Deoband scholar, Kadeemi Qutbkhana, Karachi.

Allamah Waheedudeen Zaman commenting on this Hadith states:

“Although this Hadith is found in the Sunni books of Aqaid, I have not located it in the books of Hadith”.

Lughaat ul Hadith, Kitab Meem Volume 4 page 102, Karachi

What Zaman admits is the Imamate is linked to aqeedah, as for locating in books of Hadith Zaman needed to look into the matter in further depth.

Shah Ismail Shaheed writes the Hadith as follows:

“Whoever dies without recognising the Imam of his time dies the death of Jahilyya (ignorance)”

Mansab Imamate, page 108

Linked to this hadith we would request our readers to apply the comments of the great Egyptian scholar Syed Qutb Shaheed:

“There are only two possibilities for the life of a people, no matter in what time and place they live. These are the state of guidance or the state of error, whatever form the error may take; the state of truth or the state of falsehood, whatever may be the varieties of falsehood…People live either according to Islam, following it as a way of life and a socio-political system, or else in the state of unbelief, jayiliyyah, whim, darkness, falsehood and error”.

The Islamic Concept and its characteristics, by Sayyid Qutb, translated Muhammad Moinuddin Siddiqui, p 78 (American Trust Publications)

Syed Qutb is quite correct there are two paths for us to choose Islam or jahiliyya. If you have not identified Islam and embraced it then you will die the death of jahiliyya. At the same time we are told from the aforementioned hadith that if you fail to recognise your Imam of the time you will die the death of jahiliyya. The identification / recognition of the Imam of your time is therefore inexorably linked to Deen. If you fail to recognise your Imam, then all your deeds, such as Salat, Saum, Zakat etc will be of no avail, you will die as a non-Muslim. It is therefore incumbent on us to attain guidance from those individuals who are the absolute embodiment of Deen they are perfection par excellence they are the authorised guides and it is through them that we can seek guidance on all aspects of Deen.

Maulana Abdul Aziz Fehrawi sheds light on this matter as follows:

“The appointment of the Imam is compulsory, its foundation is based on the fact that Rasulullah (s) said whoever dies in a state where he has failed to recognise the Imam of his time or who dies at a time when the Imam is present and fails to recognise him, or dies when no Imam exists (nevertheless), his death shall be the death of jahiliyya (one belonging to the time of ignorance). We have a hadith in Sahih Muslim by Ibn Umar whoever dies without an Imam dies the death of jahiliyya. In the tradition of Muslim we find these precise words “Whoever dies in state, having not had bayya over his neck shall die the death of one belonging to the time of jahiliyya”.

al Nabraas Sharh al aqaid, page 512.

At one of the prominent Sunni websites, we read a booklet ‘Aqidah al-Tahawiyya by Imam Abu Ja’far al-Tahawi al-Hanafi (239-321 AH)’ translated by Iqbal Ahmad Azami setout the Sunni belief on the ‘obligation’ of adhering to a Imam:

“We do not recognize rebellion against our Imam or those in charge of our affairs even if they are unjust, nor do we wish evil on them, nor do we withdraw from following them. We hold that obedience to them is part of obedience to Allah, The Glorified, and therefore obligatory as long as they do not order to commit sins. We pray for their right guidance and pardon from their wrongs.”

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/tahawi.htm

Isn’t it an irony that Sunnies and Nawasib in particular attack the Shia belief i.e. the rejection of the ‘just’ Imam is rejection of Allah (swt) while they themselves hold the same belief even for those Imams who are unjust?

To die the death of jahiliyya is definitely kufr. Now that we have addressed this matter, perhaps the Nawasib could enlighten us, ‘which Imam’s recognition is necessary?’, is it Mu’awiya, Yazeed, Marwan and the other Ummayya and Abbaside khalifas, whose bayah is the difference between dying as a Muslim or as a kaffir? Would giving bayya to Yazeed prevent you from dying a kaffir? We believe that the rightful Imams are the Ithna Ashariyya Imams, the Shi’a have always given them bayah and believed in their unconditional obedience. The Nasibis can feel happy in having ancestors that gave bayah to Mu’awiya and Yazeed, we will learn on the Day of Judgement whether Allah (swt) such bayah is one that had protected their ancestors from dying the death of jahiliyya.

The identification / recognition of the Imam of your time is therefore inexorably linked to Deen. If you fail to recognise your Imam, then all your deeds, such as Salat, Saum, Zakat etc will be of no avail, you will die as a non-Muslim. It is therefore incumbent on us to attain guidance from those individuals who are the absolute embodiment of Deen they are perfection par excellence they are the authorised guides and it is through them that we can seek guidance on all aspects of Deen.

We ask people to ponder over this Hadith carefully. You will see later that Abu Sulaiman tries his utmost to suggest that the term Imam in the Qur’an refers to Prophethood and there is no such thing as a doctrine of Leadership after the Seal of all Prophets. If this is the case, what explanation does he have to say about this Hadith? This Hadith clearly means that Imamate is a rank separate from Prophethood. When Rasulullah (s) was the Seal of all Prophets why was he telling all future generations of Muslims, that it was incumbent that they recognise the Imam of their time?

If Imam means Leader of the time there’s no need to recognise him, the Leader is a recognisable individual in the eyes of the people., there is no need to recognise him. If the recognition protects you from dying the death of Jahilyya, then the people must believe that the Imam will enter Heaven. Do the tyrannical leaders of Banu Hashim and Abbas fit into this Hadith? When your books deem it incumbent to obey the Imam and reject him makes him a Kaafir, when rejecting your Imams such as Mu’awiya, Yazeed etc leads to such a person dying the death of Jahiliyya clearly the Shi’a holding the same in regards to their twelve Imams from Ahlulbait (as) should likewise not be an issue of contention.

[6]: Rejecting the Imams is on par with rejecting all Prophets (as)

Afriqi cited to Shi’a texts along this line:

Afriqi states:

What is surprising is the opinion the Shi‘ah of today express about the Ahl as-Sunnah in general. One would expect them to say about the Ahl as-Sunnah as they have said about the Sahabah: that they are unbelievers, out of the fold of Islam. After all, there are many non-Muslims who believe in the oneness of Allah, but do not believe in the prophethood of Muhammad sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, and for that reason we all regard them as unbelievers. If Imamah is then a “divine station, like Nubuwah,” Sunnis who do not believe in the Imamah of the Twelve Imams must also be unbelievers. There have been many ‘ulama of the Shi‘ah in the past who have displayed consistency in this regard and declared all those who deny the Imamah of the Twelve Imams—like the Ahl as-Sunnah—unbelievers. For example, Ibn Babawayh al-Qummi (died 381AH), the author of one of the four canonical Hadith collections of the Shi‘ah, Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih, states in the treatise in which he expounds the creed of the Shi‘ah:

It is our belief about one who rejects the Imamah of Amir al-Mu’minin (Sayyiduna ‘Ali) and the Imams after him that he is the same as one who rejects the of the Ambiya’.

Numani states:

It is related by Zuraih; he relates that “I asked Imam Jafar Sadiq about the Imams after the Prophet (peace be upon him) to which he replied: ‘Amir-ul-Momini Hazrat Ali was the Imam after the Prophet. After him, Hasan was the Imam, and, after him, Husain was the Imam, and after him. Ali Bin AL-Husain was the Imam and then Mohammad bin Ali (Imam Baqar) was the Imam. Whoever denies it is like the denier who denies God and His Prophet’”. (p. 106).

Reply One

In that there is no doubt. When one builds a house the walls, ceilings, brickwork, roof all contribute towards the development of the house. If any of these items are damaged or fall down, the house may get damaged but it will not fall down completely. The house will only fall down if its foundations are damaged or removed. Islam is a deen that passed through 124,000 Prophets, it came bit by bit. This role of Prophethood was explained beautifully by the Prophet (s) himself:

We read in Sahih Bukhari Book 030, Hadeeth Number 5674:

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The similitude of mine and that of the Apostles before me is that of a person who built a house quite imposing and beautiful and he made it complete but for one brick in one of its corners. People began to walk round it, and the building pleased them and they would say: But for this brick your building would have been perfect. Muhammad (may peace be upon him) said: And I am that final brick.

Essentially each Prophet was a brick that developed the Palace. A brick may contribute towards the development of the Palace, but it is not the foundation of the Palace. The foundation has been located by some Sunni Ulema in their commentaries of verse 55 of Surah Zukhraf.

Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud narrated that Holy Prophet (s) said: “An angel came to me and said: “O Muhammad! Ask the messengers sent before you that how were they designated as messengers.” I inquired that how were they designated? The angel replied “They were designated on the affirmation of your and Ali Ibn Abi Talib’s Wilayah”

Tafseer Thalabi, Volume 5 page 416

The foundation of this Palace was the Wilayah of Muhammad (s) and ‘Ali (as). If this foundation is removed the whole Palace falls down, since the brickwork (of each Prophet) was placed upon this foundation, if Prophets did not accept this foundation they would not be regarded as Prophets. If the Prophethood of past Prophets was dependent upon their accepting the Wilayah of Maula ‘Ali (as) the cornerstone of Imamah, then it is common sense that anyone that rejects this same Wilayah has in effect rejected Prophethood.

Reply Two

We have already mentioned that the Imamah of Maula ‘Ali (as) came via divine revelation, and was the final blessing for the Ummah, one that they will be interrogated about on the day of Judgement. Since divine guidance in the form of Imamah followed the Seal of all prophets, to deny the appointment of Imam Ali (as) at Ghadir Khumm is indeed tantamount to rejecting Prophethood outright. One only needs to consider the importance of the declaration in the eyes of Allah (swt), who before the declaration told the Prophet (s):

: O Messenger! Proclaim the (message) which hath been sent to thee from thy Lord. If thou didst not, thou wouldst not have fulfilled and proclaimed His mission. And Allah will defend thee from men (who mean mischief). For Allah guideth not those who reject Faith.

The declaration of Imam Ali (as)’s Wilayah at Ghadir Khumm was so important that if the Prophet (s) had failed to tell the Ummah of the system of guidance that would succeed him, all his Prophetic mission would be in vain. It is therefore little wonder that Professor Anti-Shia debator Shaykh ul Islam Dr. Muhammad Tahir ul Qadri in his preface to “The Ghadir Declaration” page 5 states:

“…18 Dhul-hijjah, the day when the Prophet (S) stayed at Ghadir Khum after his return from Hajjat-ul-wada‘ to Medina, and surrounded by the Companions (ra), he declared while raising the hand of ‘Ali al-Murtada (as):

One who has me as his master has ‘Ali as his master.

This was the declaration of ‘Ali’s spiritual sovereignty and its unconditional acceptance is binding on the believers till the Day of Judgment. It clearly proves that anyone who denies ‘Ali’s spiritual leadership in fact denies the Prophet’s leadership.”

The Ghadir Declaration, page 5

Allamah Tahir ul Qadri in his other book ‘Zibeh-e-Azeem’ pages 62-63 commenting on the event of Ghadir expands on the matter yet further:

“Any individual that denies the Wilayah of ‘Ali, denies the Prophethood of Mustafa (s). One that denies the status of Ali, denies the status of Mustafa (s), whoever rebels on the issue of the closeness of Ali, is a rebel against the closeness of the Prophet, one that rebels against the love of Ali rebels against the love of the Prophet (s), a rebel of MustafA (s) is a rebel of the Creator (swt)”

Zibeh-e-Azeem, pages 62-63 (Minhajj al Quran publications, Model town, Lahore)

Reply Three

If the above mentioned replies are not sufficient to strike the empty brains of Nawasib belonging to Ansar.org and Kr-hcy.com then we shall seek to further strengthen our position by citing the comments of the darling of the Deobandies as well as of Wahabies namely Shah Ismail Shaheed:

The Imam is like the pious son of the Prophet (s) and the Ummah are like servants / helpers etc. If a Kingdom has an heir apparent on account of his piety, opposing him is an act of doubt and rebellion. If you are opposing that choice you are challenging the logic of the Prophet (s), friendship with him is on par with loving the Prophet (s), opposition to him is the same as opposing him (s)… Let us cite an example:

For example if a person has won great position and honour for himself in a kingdom and has been appointed on a special service, and his son is also of the same calibre and abilities and he too is kept in high esteem in the court and honoured, and the king appoints him as a successor to his father, now if anyone from his father’s companions is envious about him, tries to compete with his or boasts about his own position as compared to his, in this way he would be accused of disobedience and rebellion against the king.

Likewise, rebellion or turning away from the Imam of the time is like competing with the Imam, rather competing with the Prophet (s) himself. It is tantamount to criticizing Allah (swt) indirectly, that such a non-deserving person was made the vicegerent of a Prophet. Hence, without these means, approaching Allah (swt) is a mere dream and fantasy and impossible.

Rasulullah (s) said:

‘Friendship of ‘Ali is such a thing that no bad deeds will harm you, hatred of ‘Ali is such a thing that no good deeds will benefit you.

My Ahlul-Bayt are like the Ark of Noah. Whoever embarked in it is saved, and whoever turned away from it is perished.

Mansab-e-Imamate, pages 111-112

The comments of Shah Ismail clearly indicate that rejecting an Imam designated by Rasulullah (s) in effect constitutes rebellion against Allah (swt) and his Prophet (s), and one that opposes them is indeed a Kaafir.

[7]: The position of false Imams

Afriqi states:

Whoever wrongfully claims the Imamah is an accursed oppressor. Whoever places the Imamah in anyone besides its rightful repositories is an accursed oppressor.

Reply One

The meaning of adh-dhulm (oppression) is: “Acting in that which involves another’s rights in a way which is not your right.” Or, “Transgression of boundaries and transgression upon a soul, its honor, its property or causing harm to another human (without right).”

When it comes to the issue of Imamah the attributing of Dhulm as cited by Afriqi apply, one who falsely claims Imamah, or attests in the Imamah of an illegitimate Imam has committed dhulm.

Adh-dhulm can essentially be divided into two categories:

Category One: Dhulm al-insaani nafsahu (for a person to oppress themselves). A person oppresses themselves by following their whims and desires rather than the teachings of Allah (swt) and his Messenger (s). This approach in effect leads to them turning their back on the guidance provided by Allah (swt) through Rasulullah (s). When Allah (swt) has provided the twelve Ahl’ul bayt Imams (as) as a source of eternal guidance for the Ummah on matters pertaining to the Deen, when someone has consciously turned his back on these Imams, and sought to counter their station through attesting in the Imamate of others, by advocating the doctrine of man made appointment then one who does has committed Dhulm (injustice).

Category Two: Dhulm al-insaani li ghairihi (for a person to oppress others) among the slaves of Allah and His creation. This is for a Muslim to unjustly take that which does not belong to him.

It is common sense that anyone that seizes something that does not belong to them is indeed an oppressor. If I have a car and my neighbour breaks into my house, takes the keys and drives off with the car, the car may be his but his illegal method (entering, stealing it) makes him an illegal occupier that has seized property he has no right to. If the Israelis are oppressors for seizing land that they have no legal right, those that occupy a seat that they have no right to are also accursed oppressors.

The outrage that the author has dispayed is on account of his low esteem of the concept of Prophetic succession. He adheres to a school of thought that believes the Prophet (s) left the seat of Imamah completely vacant so that whoever was lucky enough to climb onto it becomes its rightful repository! If Afriki is giving a lecture in a community centre on a seat, a seat that is automatically occupied when he leaves the building, by children who climb on and off the seat and start impersonating Afrki’s mannerisms, style of talking / delivery, should we assume that the child by occupying the seat becomes the rightful repositorie of Imamah and the Khalifa of Afriki? To us there is never any risk of such an illogical position; Rasulullah (s) would never leave such an important role vacant for anyone to climb onto when he departed. He left the Ahl’ul bayt (as) as Imams for the Ummah, starting with the coronation of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib at Ghadhir Khumm. When Rasulullah (s) has appointed the Ahl’ul bayt (as) as Imams to succeed him then it is common sense that anyone that counters such appointment by thrusting himself onto the seat of Imamah is an accursed oppressor.

Reply Two

When Nabi Ibraheem (as) had supplicated that Imamate remain in his lineage, Allah (swt) made it clear that this covenant would not encompass the unjust. It is therefore common sense that an individual that wrongfully claims the Imamah when he possesses the trait of being unjust, then he is automatically an accursed oppressor; he has claimed something that he has no right to. The right repositories are those that Allah (swt) has deemed fit to lead, hence to create a counter to this process via a man made method of appointment is indeed an unjust act.

Reply Three

Mufti Ghulam Rasool of ‘Daar ul Uloom Qadriyah Jilaniyah’ London in his book ‘Imam Zayn’ul Abideen’ pages 32-33 records:

On one occasion Ali in a gathering asked those in attendance to testify if they had heard Rasulullah (s) stated ‘Of whomsoever I am Maula (Master), Ali is his Maula. At that time twelve Ansar present testified save one, who did not testify despite his hearing this Hadeeth. Hadhrat Ameer (ka) said ‘Why don’t you testify, since you heard the Prophet (s) say this, he said ‘I had heard but forgotten it’. Ali supplicated ‘O Creator is he is lying then afflict him with facial disfigurement that even a helmet will be incapable of disguising’. The narrator says ‘I saw this man in Najd and a large white mark was between his eyes’. Hadhrat Zayd bin Arqam narrates ‘I was also present in that gathering, I had heard the Hadeeth but did not testify to it, rather I hid the matter, Allah therefore cause me to go blind, he remained embararessed for his failure to testify and always sought forgiveness before this’ [Shawahid un Nubuwwa page 293]

Imam Zayn’ul Abideen, pages 32-33

Anas ibn Malik was likewise punished by Allah (swt) for his denial of the same episode. Ibn Qutaybah, Kitab al-Ma`arif, Manuscript: British Library Or. 1491, , 710AH/1310CE, Folio 118r records as follows:

Anas bin Malik had al-baras [evident] in his face. Some people mentioned that ‘Ali asked him regarding the saying of the Messenger of Allah, prayers and peace of Allah be upon him: “Oh Allah, Lead [be the Guide of] the one who accepts his leadership and be the enemy of the one who towards him has animosity.” He [Anas] said: “I have grown old in age and I forgot!” So ‘Ali, prayers of Allah be upon him (salawatu Allah ‘alayh) said to him: “If you were lying, then may Allah strike you with whiteness that shall not be hidden by a turban.”

Al-Maarif, page 118

These events relay that Maula ‘Ali (as) was asking those present to affirm the Imamate [Wilayah] that Rasulullah (s) had bestowed on him at Ghadir Khumm. If failure to testify to the Imamate leads to one being cursed with affliction by Allah (swt), then it is common sense that one that not only denies the Imamah but in fact challenges the true Imam’s authority by supporting the Imamate of another or deeming himself an Imam is an accursed oppressor.

Reply Four

It is amusing that according to the Sunni school of thought, one who takes the reigns of Imamah must be obeyed unconditionally. The individual in power becomes the rightful repository under Sunni jurisprudence. If a second person then challenges that Imamah and deems himself to be the Imam, not only is he an accursed oppressor, he should be put to death for his transgression! We read in Sahih Muslim, Kitab al Imara, book 020, Number 4568:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Sa’id al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: When oath of allegiance has been taken for two caliphs, kill the one for whom the oath was taken later.

[8]: The enemies of the Imams are Kaafir

Afriqi states:

Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq said: “Whoever doubts the kufr of our enemies is himself a kafir.”3

Reply

Whoever doubts the Kufr of Nimrod, Pharoah, Abu Lahab is a Kaafir because they were the open enemies of Allah (swt) and His Prophets. When we deem our Imams to likewise be divinely appointed, then its logical that anyone that doubts the Kufr of their (as) enemies is a kaafir!

Beside Nawasib, both Sunni and Shia are in no doubt about the Kufr of the enemies of the Imams of Ahlulbayt (as) as the fact is clearly stated by the Prophet of Allah (s) himself. Love of Imam Ali (as) is linked to one’s iman, and anyone that hates Imam Ali (as) is a Munafiq, that is in reality a Kaafir. We have this tradition in Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0141:

Zirr reported: ‘Ali observed: By Him Who split up the seed and created something living, the Apostle (may peace and blessings be upon him) gave me a promise that no one but a believer would love me, and none but a hypocrite would nurse grudge against me.

On a wider level we read in Tafseer Dur al-Manthur by Allamah jalauddin Suyuti who under the commentary of Ayah Mawwaddah cearly records:

Narrated Ibn Uday in report of Abi Saeed that the messenger of Allah of said: ‘Whoever hated us ahlulbayt, verily he is hypocrite’.

Narrated Ahmad and Ibn Habban and Al-Hakim, in report of Abi Saeed that the Messenger of Allah said: ‘By Him in Whose Hands my life is, anyone who hates us ahlulbayt, will be sent to hell by Allah”

We read in Tafseer Kashaf, under the commentary of the verse of Mawaddah:

ألا ومن مات على حب آل محمد مات مؤمناً مستكمل الإيمان

ألا ومن مات على بغض آل محمد مات كافراً

“One who dies in the love of the progeny of Muhammad dies with complete Iman, one who dies with a hatred of the progeny of Muhammad dies a Kaafir”.

Tafsir Kashaf, Volume 3 Page 467

Imam Fakhruddin Razi has also recorded same traditions in his esteemed commentary of Quran under the commentary of same verse. Please see Tafseer Kabeer, Published in Egypt (1357/1938), Part 27, pp. 165-166.

In ‘Tazkirah Imam Hussain’ page 78, Mufti Ghulam Rasool quotes the above Kashaf’s tradition and similar under the subheading ‘One that hates the pure Ahl’ul bayt is a munafiq’:

“Abu Said Khudri narrates “Whoever hates the Ahl’ul bayt of the Prophet (s) is a munafiq” [Musnad Ibn Hanbal Volume 2 page 661] and Ali Lion of Allah stated ‘that a munafiq would never love me, and a momin would never hate me’.

Ibn Abbas narrates that Rasulullah (s) said ‘If any individual prays in the Kaaba in between Rukn and the place of Ibraheem, fasts, and then dies in such a state that he hated the Ahl’ul bayt of Muhammad that person shall go to Hell ‘ [Dakhair al Ukba page 51]”

Tazkirah Imam Hussain, page 78

[9]: One who refuses to obey the Imam is a Kaafir

Afriqi cites specific traditions wherein obedience to the Shi’a Imams is obligatory.

Afriqi states:

His student Shaykh Mufid (died 413AH) writes:There is consensus amongst the Imamiyyah (the Ithna ‘Ashari or Ja‘fari Shi‘ah) that whoever denies the Imamah of anyone of the Imams, and denies the duty of obedience to them that Allah has decreed, that such a person is a kafir, misguided, and that he deserves everlasting torment in Hell.

Numani took matters to a higher level by citing traditions that conform that disobeying them makes one a kaafir.

Numani states:

Obedience to Imams is obligatory:It is narrated by Abu al Sabah; he says: “I swear that I heard Imam Jafar Sadiq saying” ‘I swear that Ali is the Imam and God has made obedience to him obligatory, and Hasan is the Imam and God has made obedience to him obligatory and Ali bin Husain (Zainul Abidin) is the Imam and God has made obedience to him obligatory, and his son, Muhammad bin Ali (Imam Baqar) is the Imam and God has made obedience to him obligatory” – (p. 109).Another narration tells that Imam Jafar Sadiq once said: “We are those to obey whom God has made obligatory. It is essential to recognize and accept us. Mere ignorance will not serve as an excuse. Those who recognize and accept us are true believers and those who deny us are infidels. Those who neither recognize us nor deny us are misguided and erring till they come back to the right path and profess loyalty to us which is obligatory”. (p. 110).Yet another tradition of the same import is from Imam Baqar which ends with these words: “This is the religion of God and His angels’”. (p. 111).Obedience to Imams is as obligatory as to the Prophets:It is related by Abul Hasan Ata that he heard Imam Jafar Sadiq saying: “Join the Awsiya1 (Imams) with the Prophets in the matter of obedience (i.e. regard obedience to the Imams obligatory in the same way as obedience to the Prophets)” (p. 110).

Reply One

Yet again the Nawasib have failed to look at what is in their own books on this matter. First and foremost one must understand that adherence is based on recognition. Once the Imam is recognised, unconditional obedience is afforded to him, for as Shi’a we believe the Imams to be the legitimate protectors of the Deen. Imamate has been provided for the Ummah by Allah (swt) and since this is a divine appointment then obedience to the Imam is obligatory upon the Ummah. On this type of recognition the Ahl’ul Sunnah ascribe to the same belief. Suffice it to say, Maulana Abdul Aziz Fehrawi sheds light on this matter as follows in his Shrah of ‘Shrah Aqaid’:

“The appointment of the Imam is compulsory, its foundation is based on the fact that Rasulullah (s) said whoever dies in a state where he has failed to recognise the Imam of his time….who dies at a time when the Imam is present and fails to recognise him, or dies when no Imam exists (nevertheless), his death shall be the death of jahiliyya (one belonging to the time of ignorance). We have a hadith in Sahih Muslim by Ibn Umar whoever dies without an Imam dies the death of jahiliyya. In the tradition of Muslim we find these precise words “Whoever dies in state, having not had bayya over his neck shall die the death of one belonging to the time of jahiliyya”.

al Nabraas Sharh al aqaid page 512.

To die the death of jahiliyya is definitely kufr. Now that we have addressed this matter we now question these Nasibis, which Imam’s recognition is necessary, Mu’awiya, Yazeed, and the Ummayya and Abbaside khalifas, whose bayah is the difference between dying as a Muslim or as a kaffir? Would giving bayya to Yazeed prevent you from dying a kaffir? Accordingly we believe that the rightful Imams are the Ithna Ashariyya Imams, the Shi’a have always given them bayah and believed in their unconditional obedience. The Nasibis can feel happy in having ancestors that gave bayah to Mu’awiya and Yazeed, we will learn on the Day of Judgement whether Allah (swt) such bayah as one that had protected their ancestors from dying the death of jahiliyya.

Reply Two

When the Sunni themselves state rejecting Imamate leads you to denying the death of Jahiliyya, and there are clear traditions on obedience in Sunni works, rejection of which makes you a Kaafir. If we hold the same for our Imams (who are divinely appointed Imams from Ahlulbait (as)) there should be no objection, and if Afriqi ail Nawasib finds our position unpalatable then we suggest him to take a close inspection at his own books, specifically in the case of our first Imam Maula ‘Ali (as) this Sunni tradition exists:

“Whoever obeys ‘Ali, obeys me, whoever obeys me, obeys Allah, whoever disobeys ‘Ali disobeys me, whoever disobeys me, disobeys Allah”

[Kanz ul Ummal, Hadith numbers 32973]

Kanz ul Ummal, Page 614, Hadith numbers 32974 & 32977

Mustadrak al Hakim, Vol. 3, Page 128

Riyadh ul Nadira, Vol. 3, Page 110

Rasulullah (s) said exactly the same in relation to obeying the other Imams, he said, Maula Ali (as) narrates that he heard the Prophet say:

The Prophet (s) said ‘The Imams will be from my lineage. Whoever obeys them, obeys Allah (swt). Whoever disobeys them disobeys Allah (swt). This is the form relationship that must be followed, this is the means of approach from the Exalted One”.

Yanabi al Mawaddah page 504

These Hadith make it absolutely explicit, obedience to ‘Ali (as) and the other Imams is unconditional, it is on par with obedience to Rasulullah (s) and Allah (swt).If disobedience to the Imams is tantamount to disobedience to Muhammad (s) and his Creator (swt) and makes such an individual a Kaafir, then this is in complete accordance with the comments of Shaykh Mufid.

Reply Three

We read in Surah Baqarah verses 30-34:

Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: “I will create a vicegerent on earth.” They said: “Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood?- whilst we do celebrate Thy praises and glorify Thy holy (name)?” He said: “I know what ye know not.”

And He taught Adam the nature of all things; then He placed them before the angels, and said: “Tell me the nature of these if ye are right.”

They said: “Glory to Thee, of knowledge We have none, save what Thou Hast taught us: In truth it is Thou Who art perfect in knowledge and wisdom.”

He said: “O Adam! Tell them their natures.” When he had told them, Allah said: “Did I not tell you that I know the secrets of heaven and earth, and I know what ye reveal and what ye conceal?”

And behold, We said to the angels: “Bow down to Adam” and they bowed down. Not so Iblis: he refused and was haughty: He was of those who reject Faith.

Importantly credence should be given to the Arabic used in this verse:

“Ini Ja’ilun Khaleefa fil urz”. In Arabic Jai’lun means permanence, Allah (swt) will always send a khalifa upon the earth. If this was only a temporary measure bestowed exclusively on Adam (as) the following would have been used:“Ini aja’ulu khaleefa”.

If Allah (swt) is going to appoint a khalifa on the earth in the capacity as a representative on earth, it is logical that the authority to appoint vests with Allah (swt) alone and this is confirmed in Surah Nur 024.055

Allah has promised, to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He will, of a sureLy, grant them in the land, inheritance (of power), as He granted it to those before them;

Therefore Allah promises that He will appoint Khalifas as He has always done in the past. When we look at past precedence in relation to the appointment of Khalifas we see that it has been divine. We have cited the example of Adam when Allah (swt) tolf the Angels:

“Verily I intend to appoint a khalifa in the earth” (The Qur’an 2:30)

And, likewise, Allah appointed Dawood (as) as khalifa also, not man:

“O Dawud verily we have you a khalifa in the earth” (The Qur’an 38:26)

Musa (as) was called away by his Lord to Mount Sinai he said to Haroon (as) as he departed:

“…And Musa said unto his brother Haroon: Take my place (as khalifa) among the people.” (The Qur’an 7:142)

In English the one Arabic word “ukhulfni” chosen by Allah in 7:142 has been translated, as above, as “Take my place…”. “ukhulfni” is the root origin of the Arabic word “Khalifa” (Caliph).

The examples here are of divine appointments either by Allah (swt) or his Prophet (musa) which is exactly what we as Shi’a believe that Imamate / Khilafath is divine in nature and that Allah (swt) and his Messenger (s) appoint the Prophet as was the precedent Allah (swt) states in Surah Nur. There is no evidence that any previous Prophet was appointed through a secret meeting or consultation, the decision was Allah’s alone. Like Adam (as) we deem our Imam / Khalifas to be divinely appointed, as they were the greatest in faith and deeds. Ahl’ul Sunnah scholars incapable of hiding this fact have sought to muddy the waters to maintain the Sunni belief in the Khilafath of Abu Bakr as political, and that of Ali (as) as spiritual in nature (thus splitting the spiritual and political realm of ruler ship), but what is important is their acknowledgement that the appointment of the Ahl’ul bayt Imams was divine in nature thus making them Khalifas of Allah (swt). In this regards we have cited the comment of Dr Tahir Qadri who made a distinction between spiritual / hidden legacy (of the Ahl’ul bayt) from political / manifest legacy (of the rightly guided khalifa), he expanded with this admission on page 9 of the Ghadir Declaration:

The manifest caliph is elected by the people.

The hidden caliph is elected by God.

Whilst we dispute with Qadri’s attempts to split leadership in this manner, particularly when Allah (swt) states in Surah Nur that He (swt) alone appoints Khalifas, for the purposes of this discussion the relevant point is that like the Shi’a we have this esteemed Sunni scholar’s admission that our Imams to be divinely appointed as Khalifas by Allah. This being the case, then it logical that one that refuses to accept the authority of the divinely appointed khalifa / imam is a cursed kaafir like iblis who refused to submit to the authority of khalifa Adam (as).

[10]: Afriqi’s efforts at creating Fitnah by using Shia belief of Imamate

Afriqi states:

To us this reveals much more than what the author intended. It reveals to us that when the Shi‘ah say they regard Sunnis as Muslims, it is in strict reference to worldly matters. In eschatological matters, matters of the hereafter, Sunnis who do not believe in the Imamah of the Twelve Imams are just like Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus or any other rejectors of the Nubuwah of Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam. The only reason for saying that Sunnis are Muslims is expedience and convenience. Without professing such an opinion the Shi‘ah would have had to retreat into seclusion and bear ostracism from the rest of the Muslim world. This reason is given by Sayyid ‘Abdullah Shubbar (died 1232AH) in his commentary of az-Ziyarat al-Jami‘ah, the comprehensive du‘a read at the graves of the Imams. At the point where the ziyarah reads:

Whoever denies you is a kafir,

Reply One

All of the above is also held within the Sunni belief in Imamate, namely failure to believe in it makes you die the death of Jahilyya. This is in Sunni books of Hadith and is contained in their books of aqaid, why make a song and dance over the comment ‘Whoever denies you is a kafir’, when your books of aqaid state failure to recognise the Imam makes you die a Kaafir. When no difference exists between these two viewpoints why on earth is this Nawasib falsely alleging that this belief belongs exclusively to the Shi’a? There exist only two options, he either does not know his own aqeedah, or he is lying to create enmity towards the Shi’a. Option two is the more likely, since when your great Shaykh cited this tradition to uphold the Imamate of Yazeed ibn Mu’awiya [Sahih al-Bukhari Volume 9, Book 88, Number 227] then such a viewpoint must be indelibly pumping through Afriqi’s Yazeedi veins.

Reply Two

Anyone that is aware of the texts confirming the Wilayah of Imam Ali (as) and the other Imams, but rejects them has committed kufr, and is no different to the Jews that recognized the Prophethood of Muhammad (s), but hid the reality in their hearts, as Allah (swt) says:

002.089 [YUSUFALI]

…when there comes to them that which they (should) have recognised, they refuse to believe in it but the curse of Allah is on those without Faith.

He (swt) also said:

002.146 [YUSUFALI]:

The people of the Book know this as they know their own sons; but some of them conceal the truth which they themselves know.

Kufr in these verses existed because the Jews were aware of the reality and and refused to embrace it. Exactly the same ruling applies to ‘those’ people who know that the Imams have been designated by Allah (swt) and his Prophet (s) to guide the Ummah, but refuse to accept this fact, such denial is indeed kufr.

Reply Three – The Sunnis also deem the rejecter of ‘their’ Imams to be Kafirs

What these pathetic Nasibies are yapping about? What right do these filthy people have to mock at Shia and spread hatred among Sunni masses while they themselves deem the rejecter of the Imamate of Abu Bakar and Umar as infidels? Why do they hide such editcs from their adherents?

A Sunni author in his anti-Shia book quoting from various Hanafi authority works declares the rejecter of their caliphs to be Kaafir. For example he quotes from Barjundi Sharah Naqayah, Volume 4 page 21 published in Lucknow which quoted Fatwa e Zaheeriya:

“The rejecter of the Imamate of Siddiq Akbar (ra) is Kaafir and some have said that such a person is ill-madhab and not a Kaafir while the correct view is that he is Kaafir and similarly the rejecter of the Imamate of Farooq Azam (ra) is also Kaafir according to correct view.

… Bahar al Raiq, Volume 5 page 131 published in Egypt states that the rejecter of the Imamate and Khilafat of Abu Bakr or Umar is Kaafir”

‘Imam Ahmed Raza aur Shia Madhab’ page 53 (Ahmed Raza Publishers, Lahore)

The author cites similar kinds of edicts from Kiafaya Sharh Hidayah, Vol 1 (Bombay) and Mustakhlis al Haqaiq Shrah Kanz al Dhaqaiq, page 32 (Ahmedi publishers).

The book can be dowanloaded from the following Sunni website

http://www.haqchaaryaar.net//Books.html

We also read in authority Sunni work ‘Hashiat al-Tahawi ala al-Maraaqi’ Volume 2 page 299:

وإن أنكر خلافة الصديق كفر كمن أنكر الإسراء

“If somone denies the Khilafa of al-Siddiq he is kafir like the one who denied al-Isra”

Hashiat al-Tahawi ala al-Maraaqi, Volume 2 page 299

We read in ‘Sawaiq al Muhriqa’ by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Volume 1 page 138:

“The doctrine of Abu Hanifa may Allah be pleased with him is that whoever denies the khilafa of the Siddiq or Umar is kafir”

Sawaiq al Muhriqa, Volume 1 page 138

On Volume 1 page 139:

“It is written in al-Fatawei al-Badi’a that whoever denies the Imamate of Abu Bakr may Allah be pleased with him, is kafir”

Sawaiq al Muhriqa, Volume 1 page 139

If this is not suffice to show the biased and noxious attitude of Nawasib then let us further cite from ‘Al-Sawaiq al-Muhriqa’ Volume 1 page 145:

“The Hanafi Imams have declared anyone who denies the khilafa of Abu bakr and Umar may Allah be pleased of them as Kafir. the statement is recorded in al-Ghaya and other books as it is mentioned in the book of Muhammad bin al-Hassan may Allah have mercy upon him and it appear that they took the judgment from their Imam Abu Hanifa may Allah be pleased with him”

Al-Sawaiq al-Muhriqa, Volume 1 page 145

It is a strange belief clouded in confusion, one who rejects the Imamate of a man given bayya and elected by a handful of individuals is a Kaafir, as is the rejecter of the second Khalifa who was directly appointed by the first! Two different scenarios and yet the rule applies. Accepting the caliphate does not only mean to adopt his rulings when it suits one and rejecting them when it doesn’t. Keeping the Nawasib fatwa in mind we would ask their belief regarding Maula Ali (as) and Fatima Zahra [sa] who according to Sunni sources did not give bayah to Abu Bakr for six months, and never accepted the ruling of the khalifa in the case of Fadak rather they kept rejecting him, labelling him as dishonest, sinful, treacherous, liar. Maula ‘Ali (as) continued to adhere to this opposition stance and flatly refused to adhere to the practices of the previous two khalifas when the election committee for nominating the third was established, and pointed out their mistakes and rejected their rulings during the reign of third khalifa in the issue of Zakat and Hajj-e-Tamatu etc.

When Nawasib themselves uphold such ideology about their man made khalifas then why do they have objection when it comes to the ‘deliberate’ rejection of the Imamate of the Imams of Ahl’ul bayt (as) proven from Quran and Hadith?

[11]: The difference between a Mumin and a Muslim

Afriqi states:

This is the opinion held by four of the most eminent classical scholars of the Shi‘ah, and if seen from the angle of consistency, it is a commendable position indeed. Yet, if one has to ask the Shi‘ah of today (especially recent converts to Shi‘ism) whether they believe Sunnis are Muslims are not, they will respond with surprise, and might even appear grieved at such a question. As far as recent converts to Shi‘ism are concerned, this is to be expected, since it is in the interest of any propaganda scheme that certain facts be kept secret from neophytes. However those who are more knowledgeable about the technicalities of Shi‘ism will know that in the eyes of the Shi‘ah a distinction is made between a Muslim and a Mu’min. All those who profess Islam outwardly are Muslims: Sunnis, Zaydis, Mu‘tazilis, and all other sects. A Mu’min, however, is only he who believes in the Twelve Imams. By this clever ruse the fuqaha of the Shi‘ah kill several birds with one stone. By accepting all other sects as Muslims they protect themselves against the ridiculousness of casting out of the fold of Islam over 90% of its adherents, and the same men who carried the banner of Islam to all corners of the world. At the same time they avoid the antagonism of Sunnis and others, which facilitates proselytisation for them.

Reply One – Allah (swt) draws a distinction between a Mumin and Muslim in the Qur’an

A Munafiq is a Muslim on account of his reciting the Shahada (testimony), but a Munafiq can never be a Mumin. A munafiq is in reality a Kaafir but he is protected on account of his recital of the kalima. One that refuses to accept the Wilayah may well be a Muslim in that he has recited the Shahada, but he is in fact a munafiq. Allah (swt) provides a distinction between a Mumin and Muslim in Surah al Hujurat verse 14:

The desert Arabs say, “We believe.” Say, “Ye have no faith; but ye (only) say, ‘We have submitted our wills to Allah,’ for not yet has Faith entered your hearts. But if ye obey Allah and His Messenger, He will not belittle aught of your deeds: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.”

Allah (swt) accepted that they had embraced Islam, but not Iman. An esteemed Wahabi Scholar Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips in his Tafseer Soorah Hujurat page 132 provides the following comments on this verse:

“The Prophet (s) is told to inform them that they are merely Muslims who have formally accepted Islam and not Mu’min, true believers. That is, they have only complied with the preliminary requirements of Islaam by their declaration of the Shahaadataan, there is no God but Allaah and Muhammad is His Messenger), by their acceptance of the obligation to perform Salaah, pay Zakaah, fast in the month of Ramadaan and make Hajj if they are able”.

Tafseer Soorah al-Hujuraat, page 132

Bilal Philips states that acceptance of the preliminary requirements of the Deen distinguishes a Muslim from a Mumin. We also place the doctrine of Imamate as such a preliminary requirement of the Deen, we have cited Sunni books of Aqaid quoting the Hadith ‘‘Whoever does not recognise his Imam of the time dies the death of jahiliyya”. Imamate in the eyes of the Holy Prophet (s) is so important that not recognising the Imam of your time leads to you dying a Kaafir. When the Prophet (s) placed such an importance on recognising the Imam of your time, then why the objection if we as Shi’a place this as a preliminary requirement of Islam that distinguishes a Mumin from a Muslim?

Reply Two – Mumineen are those that deem Maula ‘Ali (as) to be their Imam and have turned to him for Guidance

Whilst the adherents of both sects are Muslims, attesting to the Wilayah of the Imams gives one the rank of Mumin. Rasulullah (s) declared the Wilayah of Maula ‘Ali (as) at Ghadir Khumm and also stated ‘Ali (as) inherited his teachings (Qur’an and Sunnah). As such Mumins are those that uphold the Wilayah at Ghadir Khumm, and have accordingly taken their understanding of the Qur’an ad Sunnah through him. It is obligatory to turn to ‘Ali (as) for religious guidance and those that have accordingly done so deeming Maula ‘Ali (as) their Imam are Mumin, what clearer proof can there be than the words of our Holy Prophet (s), recorded by Dr Tahir ul Qadri al Hanafi from Kanzul Muttalib fee Fadail Manaqib ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) page 62:

” Umran bin Husain narrates the Prophet (s) said ‘verily ‘Ali is from me and I am from him. He is the Wali of every believer after me.

[Sahih al-Tirmidhi, Vol 5, Page 236, al Sahih by Ibn Habban Volume 1 page 383, Mustadrak al Hakim , Vol. 3, p. 119, Sunan al Nasai Volume 5 page 132, by Ibn Abi Sheeba Volume 6 page 383 Musnad Abu Yala Volume 1 page 293]”

Kanzul Muttalib fee Fadail Manaqib ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, page 62

Imam Nisai in ‘Khasais’, Imam Hakim in his ‘Mustadrak’ and Ibn Hajar Asqlani in ‘Al-Istiab’, Mulla Mutaqi Hindi in ‘Kanz ul Ummal’, Dahabi in ‘Talkhees Mustadrak’ and Al-Baani the Wahabi in ‘Silsilat al-ahadith al-Sahiha’ have called the tradition ‘Sahih’.

Also narrated by Maula ‘Ali (as) himself:

“Ali is the door of the Deen, one that enters it is a Mumin, one who turns away is a Kaafir”.

Yanabi al Mawqaddah, Volume 1 page 278

Kaafirs are those Nasibis that distanced themselves from Maula ‘Ali (as) in regards of teachings. The Ahl’ul Sunnah have no doubt taken some aspects of the Deen through Maula ‘Ali, hence they are Muslim. The Shi’a are those that have taken all their religious teachings, interpretations of the Qur’an / Sunnah through Imam Ali (as) the door of the Deen, hence they are Mumin.

Reply Three – Mumineen are those that deem ‘Ali (as) to be their Maula (Master)

Dr. Tahir ul Qadri al Hanafi records the following tradition in his book “The Ghadir declaration”:

Hadith No. 46

“It is narrated by ‘Umar (ra) that two Bedouins came to him disputing with each other. He said to ‘Ali (ra): O Abū Hasan: decide between these two. So he decided between them (and settled their dispute). One of them said: Is he the only one left to decide between us? (At this) ‘Umar (ra) moved towards him and caught him by his collar and said: May you be dead! Do you know who he is? He is my master and the master of every believer [Mumin] (and) one who does not acknowledge him as his master is not a believer [Mumin].”

The Ghadir declaration, page 74

Dr. Tahir ul Qadri then sets out the texts from where he narrates this tradition:

“Muhib Tabari has narrated this tradition in Dhakha’ir-ul-‘uqba fi manaqib dhaw-il-qurba (p.126), and says that Ibn Samman has mentioned it in his book al-Muwafaqah. He also narrated it in ar-Riyad-un-nadrah fi manaqib-il-‘ashrah (3:128)”.

We have attached a scanned image of this narration from

Al Riyadh al Nadhira, Vol. 3, Page 115.

In the tradition Umar states clearly that one who does not recognise ‘Ali (as) as his Maula (Master) is not a Mumin. It was unfortunate that Umar was aware of the true merits of Ali (as) but thrust of power did not allow him to remember those merits throughout his life. If the Ahl’ul Sunnah will embrace the fatwa of Umar we will gladly accept them as Mumin, whilst they choose not to, and worse oppose such a terminology for ‘Ali (as) they will remain Muslims.

Reply Four – Mumineen are those who love Imam Ali (as) through word and deed

We have this tradition in Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0141:

Zirr reported: ‘Ali observed: By Him Who split up the seed and created something living, the Apostle (may peace and blessings be upon him) gave me a promise that no one but a believer [Mumin] would love me, and none but a hypocrite would nurse grudge against me.

In this Hadith Iman is linked to the love of ‘Ali (as). Love is dependent on two components

Love by words

Love by actions

You can truly love an individual only when you posses these two components. Let us provide an example:

“I claim to love my father, and constantly tell him how much I love. Despite my claim, I ignore his guidance and prefer to make my own decisions. I also keep close friendship with those that my father dislikes, including those that have subjected untold hardships on him”

From this example it is clear that the love I proclaim for my father is just by mouth, it cannot be demonstrated on a practical level, on the contrary my actions evidence the exact opposite to love. My love for my father is nothing more than token words. As Shi’a we deem ourselves Mumin by virtue of word and deed, just like the great Salaf, praised as the early Shi’a by Al Muhaddith Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlavi:

The title Shi’a was first given to those Muhajireen and Ansar who gave allegiance (bay’ah) to Ali (may Allah enlighten his face). They were his steadfast faithful followers during his (Ali’s) caliphate. They remained close to him; they always fought his enemies, and kept on following Ali’s commands and prohibitions. The true Shi’a are these who came in 37 Hijri”

Tauhfa Ithna ‘Ashariyyah, (Gift to the Twelvers), page 27 Urdu version published in Karachi

These great Salaf were the shining example of Mumins, they were Shi’a were those who:

Pledged their allegiance to ‘Ali (as)

Remained close to him

Followed his orders

Fought his enemies

Alhamdullillah that is exactly the same definition of the Shi’a today. All the above attributes of the Shi’a then, are still inherent in the Shi’a today, which is why deem ourselves to be Mumin. When we make an overall assessment of the Ahl’ul Sunnah Sect we see that they have failed to adhere to the path of the Salaf in this regards, rather they have taken scant traditions from him and have praised and defended his enemies such as Mu’awiya and Amr ibn Aas, whilst their love for Imam Ali (as) is on their lips, it cannot be substantiated through actions, which is why we deem such individuals Muslim rather than Mumin.

[12]: Paradise for the Mumins

Afriqi states:

while Mu’mins are those to whom salvation in the hereafter belongs exclusively, and that depends upon belief in the Twelve Imams.

Reply One – All Sects believe that Paradise is exclusively for them

What is the issue if we as Shi’a adhere to this viewpoint? Both major Sects accept that the Prophet (s) said in a Sahih Hadith that Muslims would be divided into 73 sects of which only one would attain paradise. We read in Sunan Abu Dawud, vol 3, Hadith Number 4580, English Translation:

“Indeed those who were before you, from the people of the book (Jews and Christians) split into seventy sects, and this religion will split into seventy three; seventy two will go in to the hell fire, and one of them will go to paradise, and it is the Jamaah.”

Do the Ahl’ul Sunnah not believe that they are that sole Sect that will attain Paradise? Do they not regard themselves as the fortunate Jamaah? If the Shi’a also hold this position why the objection?

Reply Two – Paradise is exclusively for the Shi’a

Whilst each group claims that the path of salvation is with them, there exists only one path to salvation, all others lead to misguidance and hence ruin in the next world. We read in the esteemed Sunni work, Miskhaat ul-Masaabih:

“Allah’s Messenger (s) drew a line with his hand and said, “This is the straight path of Allaah.” He then drew lines to its right and to its left and said, “These are the other paths, which represent misguidance and that at the head of each path sat a devil inviting people to it (path).” He then recited, “And verily, this is My straight path, so follow it, and follow not (other) paths, for they will separate you away from His path.”

Reported by Ahmad, an-Nasaa’ee and ad-Daarimee and collected in Miskhaat ul-Masaabih, Vol 1, Hadith #166, Arabic-English Translation

Salvation is dependent upon the path that has been set for us by Allah (swt) and his Prophet (s). It is crucial that you are sure that the path that you are adhereing to is that left for us by the Prophet (s) after all, you do not want to end up like Christopher Columbus who discovered America but until his last breath was adamant that he had discovered India. It would be illogical to blindly follow the majority on the belief that they are taking you to one place, when you actually want to go somewhere else. With the harsh consequences of adhering to the wrong path we ask ‘would Rasulullah (s) really have simply left the Ummah to determine what that path of salvation was, by simply drawing a line on his hand, particularly when he predicted the division of the Ummah into 73 Sects all of whom assumed that were treading on that right path’? We believe that Rasulullah (s) would never inform us about a path, without providing the appropriate road signs that would ensure that we were on it. Those road signs, to adhere to the path of salvation came in two forms a map (the Qur’an) that provided theoretical direction, and from a practical form guides (the Ahl’ul bayt) that would assist us, thus ensuring we never took a wrong turning and went elsewhere. Rasulullah (s) told the Ummah of these two essential tools, required to tread on the path to salvation, when he declared:

“I am leaving you two weighty things, if you follow them you will never go astray, they are the Qur’an and my Ahlul’bayt”.

Sunan al-Tirmidhi, v5, page 662-663

It is clear and logical that when the Prophet (s) is informing the people that ‘follow them and you will never go astray’ then these sources are the path to salvation, that Rasulullah (s) was referring to. If the Qur’an is the theoretical guide book for us the Ahl’ul bayt (as) are our Practical Guides, hence we can only tread the path of salvation if we submit to their authority. It is for this precise reason that he (s) said of Imam Ali (as):

“Ali is a guide (Hadi), a guided one (Mahdi) and shall take you to the right path [Siratul Mustaqim]”

Kanz al Ummal, page 612

When Imam Ali (as) is the means via which the people after the Prophet (s) would be guided, he (s) accordingly appointed him as his successor, so that all the people could benefit from his guidance and adhere to the path of salvation. Salvation is hence for those that if grasped Imam Ali (as) by accepting his Wilayah.

We read the following words of Holy Prophet (s):

“Whoever wants to live and die like me and abide in eternal heaven which Allah promised me, should acknowledge Ali Ibn Abi Talib as WALI, he will never lead you out of guidance and never lead you astray.” The Isnad of this hadith are Sahih.

Therefore we believe that Paradise is exclusively for the Mumins who took Maula Ali (as) as their Imam. Allah (swt) says in His Glorious Book:

“On the Day when some faces will be bright and some faces will be black, And as for those whose faces will have turned black, it will be said ‘What did you disbelieve after believing, taste the chastisement for your disbelief’. And as for those whose faces are white, they shall be in the Mercy of God, they shall abide therein forever”. The Holy Qur’an 3:106-107

It is clear from this verse that the successful Party on the Day of Judgement will be those, whose faces are bright. Now apply this verse to the following Hadith, taken from two recognised Sunni works:

“Three things have been revealed to me about Ali: That he is the Sayyid al Muslimeen (Chief of Muslims), Imam-ul-Muttaqeen (Imam of the Pious), and wa Qa’id ul Ghurrul Muhajj’ileen (Leader of the bright) face people on Yaum al Qiyamah”.

1. Al Mustadrak, by Imam Hakim, Vol 3 p 137 & 138

2. Riyad al Nadira, by Mohibbudin al Tabari, Vol 2, p 122

So Ali (as) will be the leader of the bright face people, the bright face people referred to in the tradition as the Mumineen will follow him i.e. they will be his Shi’a and it is this group which will attain Paradise.

In “al Dhurrat ul Bayza fee Manaqib Fatima al Zahra” page 105, Dr Tahir ul Qadri records this Hadith:

“Ali narrates, ‘The Prophet told me ‘alongside me the first to enter Paradise shall be you, Fatima, Hasan and Hussain’. I asked ‘O Messenger of Allah (swt) where will our lovers be?’ He said ‘behind you’.

[1]al Mustadrak al Hakim Volume 3 page 164 No. 4723 [2]Tarikh Damishq Kabir, Volume 4 page 173, [3]Kanz ul Ummal, Volume 12 page 98 No. 34166 [4]In Sawaiq al Muhriqah it is stated that Ibn Sa`ad narrated this [5] Dakhair ul Uqba, page 214.

al Dhurrat ul Bayza fee Manaqib Fatima al Zahra, page 105

Notice how in this Hadith, Maula Ali (as) questions the whereabout of the lovers of Ahlulbayt (as). The Ahl’ul Sunnah have themselves stated that the terms Shi’a refers to the above personalities. We read in Al Munjudh page 423, the term Shi’ah:

“The Shi’a of any person is he who will help him and follow him, the plural of Shia or Ashi’a. The word is generally used for more than one it can be used for masculine and feminine tens… In this day and age it has become exclusively associated with those who love ‘Ali and his household, although it has become their specific name, the literal meaning of Shi’a is Sect”.

This further strengthens our position that Paradise if for the Shi’a alone. If that is not clear enough that what more explicit evidence can there be than the Hadith narrated by Suyuti in Tafsir Durre Manthur, Volume 6 page 643 (Beirut edition).

وأخرج ابن مردويه عن علي قال‏:‏ قال لي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم‏:‏ ‏”‏ألم تسمع قول الله‏:‏ ‏{‏إن الذين آمنوا وعملوا الصالحات أولئك هم خير البرية‏}‏ أنت وشيعتك وموعدي وموعدكم الحوض إذا جئت الأمم للحساب تدعون غرا محجلين‏”‏‏.‏

“Ali narrates that the Prophet (s) said to him, “Have you not heard this verse:

‘Those who have faith and do righteous deeds,- they are the best of creatures’.

This verse refers to you and your Shi’a, I promise you that I will meet you at the Fountain of Kawthur” when the nations comes for judgement, you and your shia will come gloriously”

Tafsir Durre Manthur, Volume 6 page 643

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti has recorded this hadith from many chains. Ibn Hajr Makki records this tradition from Imam Ahmed:

Holy Prophet (s) said to Hadhrat Ali (as): “Are you not pleased with it that you will enter the heaven with Me, Hasan and Hussein and our descendents will follow us and our wives will follow our descendents and our Shi’a will be to the left and right of us”.

Sawaiq al Muhriqah, page 541 (published in Faisalabad, Pakistan)

Reply Three – The deeds of believers will be weighed in accordance with our love for the Imams

Scales act as a means of measurement. Different types of scale are used to measure different things, for example milk, clothes etc. On the Day of Judgment the quality and quantity of a Muslim’s deeds will also be placed on scales and weighed:

Surah Anbiya verse 47:

We shall set up scales of justice for the Day of Judgment, so that not a soul will be dealt with unjustly in the least, and if there be (no more than) the weight of a mustard seed, We will bring it (to account): and enough are We to take account.

Surah Muminoon verses 102-103:

Then those whose balance (of good deeds) is heavy,- they will attain salvation:

But those whose balance is light, will be those who have lost their souls, in Hell will they abide.

Surah Qariya 006-10:

Then, he whose balance (of good deeds) will be (found) heavy,

Will be in a life of good pleasure and satisfaction.

But he whose balance (of good deeds) will be (found) light,-

Will have his home in a (bottomless) Pit.

And what will explain to thee what this is?

Surah Araf verses 8-9:

The balance that day will be true (to nicety): those whose scale (of good) will be heavy, will prosper:

Those whose scale will be light, will be their souls in perdition, for that they wrongfully treated Our signs.

What we see from theses verse is that only our good deeds will be weighed. This method of assessment will only apply to Muslims. In this verse Allah (swt) refers to scale as Mawadheen, the plural of Maudhoon which literally means ‘one that has already been weighed’. The question that needs to be asked is ‘what will be the scale via which our deeds will be weighed?’

We read in Surah Shura verse 017:

It is Allah Who has sent down the Book in Truth, and the Balance (by which to weigh conduct). And what will make thee realise that perhaps the Hour is close at hand?

We read in Surah Hadeed 025:

We sent aforetime our messengers with Clear Signs and sent down with them the Book and the Balance (of Right and Wrong), that men may stand forth in justice; and We sent down Iron, in which is (material for) mighty war, as well as many benefits for mankind, that Allah may test who it is that will help, Unseen, Him and His messengers: For Allah is Full of Strength, Exalted in Might (and able to enforce His Will).

Allah (swt) associated the Meedhan (scales) alongside the Book of Allah (swt). The Qur’an first appeared on the blessed lips of our Holy Prophet (s) and was codified into book form after his death. With regards to the scales Hadhrat Muhammad (s) provided a practical commentary of this. We are narrating a Hadith recorded by Dr Tahir ul Qadri al Hanafi in “al Dhurra tul Bayza fee Manaqib Fatima al Zahra” page 104:

“Abdullah ibn Abbas narrates that the Prophet said ‘I am the scale of knowledge, Ali is its weights, Hasan and Hussain are the beams, Fatima is the supporting rod, the pure Imams are the ropes, the deeds of our lovers and our enemies will be weighed through this”.

[1]Dalimi – al Fardaus page 441 No. 107, [2]Ajlooni – Kashal al Hifdh wa Mazzel al Labaas Volume 1 page 236

al Dhurra tul Bayza fee Manaqib Fatima al Zahra, page 104

[13]: Salvation on adhering to the Hujutallah (Imam)

Maulana Manzoor Numani cites two Hadeeth from Usul-e-Kafi, in an effort to prove that the Imams (as) endorsed Paradise for the Shi’a, irrelevant of their bad conduct. In the process the mullah utilised maximum dishonesty, by presenting words that are not present in the actual text. We shall look at each Hadeeth cited separately.

Numani states:

Shias believing in Imams are dwellers of Paradise even if they be vicious, licentious and oppressors. All other Muslims, even if they be righteous, are doomed to Hell.

To revert of Usul-e-Kafi, it says that Imam Baqar (once) said:”God will not spare from chastisement the community which believes in an Imam who has not been nominated by Him (like Hazrat Abu Bakr, Hazrat Omar and Hazrat Usman) even if that community (Ummat) is righteous and doer of good deeds. And God will spare from chastisement those who believe in Imams designated by Him even if, in their practical lives, they are oppressors, wicked and evildoers”. (p. 238).

Reply One – The actual Hadith refers to adhering to the divinely appointed Imam

We shall now present to our readers the ‘actual’ text so that they can see for themselves how dishonest the author was.

Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Muhammad ibn al-Husayn from Safwan ibn Yahya from al-‘Ala’ ibn Razin from Muhammad ibn Muslim who has said the following. “I heard abu Ja‘far (a.s.) say, ‘Whoever follows the religion of Allah worshipping assiduously without an Imam, Leader with Divine Authority his toil will not be acceptable. In fact, he is lost and confused and Allah disdains his deeds. Such person’s case and example is like a sheep that has lost the shepherd and the flock that runs back and forth the whole day. As the night would fall that sheep would see a flock of sheep with a shepherd. The (lost) sheep would then join the flock affectionately that in fact is only a deception. The sheep would pass the night in their shelter but when the shepherd would lead the flock to the pasture the lost sheep would feel lost and away from the flock and the shepherd,. thus, run back and forth in search of the flock and the shepherd. Then it would find a flock of sheep with a shepherd and affectionately join them but, in fact, suffer a deception. This shepherd would shout at the lost sheep saying, “Go and find your own flock and shepherd you are lost, confused and without a flock and shepherd. The lost sheep then would run back and forth in confusion, fear and frustration without a shepherd to guide to the pasture and to the shelter. While the lost sheep is in such confusion a wolf would seize the opportunity and would kill the lost sheep for food. Thus, by Allah, O Muhammad is the case of a person from this ’Umma (nation) who would live without an Imam (Leader with Divine Authority) from Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most gracious, who is clearly supported with evidence and is just in his dealings. A person without such Imam is lost and confused and if he would die in such condition his death would be like dying in disbelief and hypocrisy. O Muhammad, bear in mind properly that the unjust Imams and their followers are far away from the religion of Allah. They are lost and misleading. Their deeds that they do are like the dust blown by the winds away in a windy day which, would go out of hand without benefits. Thus is straying far away from the truth.”

Usool al Kafi, Volume 1, Kitab al Hujjah, Ch. 86, Hadith 2

We appeal for justice and ask our readers to pinpoint where in the text can we find Numani’s claim that

Numani states:

“…God will spare from chastisement those who believe in Imams designated by Him even if, in their practical lives, they are oppressors, wicked and evildoers”?

With this deception in mind we would urge our readers to remember the word of Allah (swt) in Surah Hujuraat:

O ye who believe! If a wicked person comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth, lest ye harm people unwittingly, and afterwards become full of repentance for what ye have done.

The entire Hadith places influence on the importance of adhering to the Imam appointed by Allah (swt) since adhering to man made Imams, who have no authority to lead the Ummah is the path of destruction. A person may assume that he is adhering to the right path may assume that he is following the right path, has submitted to an Imam himself needs guidance, and this entire concept runs the risk of leading adherents to the path of destruction. Of relevance here are the words of the man made Imam, in his first inaugural speech we are quoting from Tarikh Tabari: English translation Volume 9 p 201:

“Now then: O people, I have been put in charge of you, although I am not the best of you. Help me if I do well; rectify me if I do wrong”

We would ask our readers to ponder carefully over this speech, and in its context think about this example:

“Five or six of us decide to embark on a journey to Manchester. We get prepared and the group decide that they will ask that I lead guide them to Manchester. I have been appointed as the Guide who will show you all the sights, the sounds everything. Now I have never been to Manchester I do not know my way around the city, so my reply will be ‘Well brothers, I’ve never been to Manchester before, I might get lost, so If I do give me a hand guide me, help me so I don’t make any mistake’. I’m not going to be much use as a guide if I am myself requesting that others guide me. Now as a group we would have no sense whatsoever If I am chosen as the guide when ‘X’ has a greater right to lead, being a Manchurian who knows the sights and sounds of Manchester like the back of his hand”.

Now apply this example to the inaugural speech of Abu Bakr. His first speech when he became Khalifa over the people. When Abu Bakr was himself looking to other for guidance, on account of their superiority to him, then what is the benefit in Muslims placing their trust in him and turning to him for guidance? That is the difference between a man made imam and a divinely appointed Imam, who looks for guidance, the other is a guide. Those that turn to man made Imams for guidance have essentially placed their lives into hands of men that depend on other for guidance, and the scenario is one of ‘the blind leading the blind’. Our Imam (as) gave the example of a flock without a shepherd, it is interesting that Mu’awiya sited this example, he sought to justify his desire to appoint his son Yazid as his successor to Abdullah ibn Umar via this argument:

“I am afraid of leaving my subjects uncared for like the flock of sheep and goats in the rain but without a shepherd” .

The life of Caliph Ali, by S. Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi, p 220, who takes it from al Bidayah wa al nihayah, by Ibn Kathir, Vol 8 p 80

If Mu’awiya was so concerned about leaving his flock without a shepherd, hence his desire to appoint his Fasiq son as a Shepherd, do you not think Allah (swt) would also have such a concern and would seek to appoint the perfect Shepherd that could guide the flock to success in this world and the next? We believe that Allah (swt) is just and he would never leave the Ummah wondering about aimlessly like flock searching for a Shepherd, rather he appointed twelve Shepherds. Adherence to the divinely appointed Imams means adhering to the Will of Allah (swt), attaining understandings of the Qur’an and Sunnah from those that Allah (swt) has appointed as inheritors of the Qur’an and Sunnah. The Usul-e-Kafi hadith stresses the importance of following the Imams that Allah (swt) has told us to follow, not to appoint Imams, that turn to others for guidance and run the risk of misinterpreting the true Qur’an and Sunnah. We shall seek to expand on this by providing another example:

If you want to travel abroad the best means is to make contact with an authorised representative. You went to get to a specific place and you want to follow the route, which will get you to that point. There may well be four routes to a specific destination, but you are unable to travel all four so how can you say that all four are okay? You will need to decide which of these paths is the clear, straight chosen path…the path which will take you to your desired destination…the path which will ensure you arrive there safely…the path chosen by Allah (swt). Let’s assume that you finally reach your destination point. Even then to get out of the airport, you’ll first of all need to convince the authorised representative that you have the correct documentation, only when you have convinced him will you be given authorised entry.

This is important, because authorised representatives exist in this world and the next, for “Abu Bakr narrates that the Prophet (s) said no one will be allowed to cross the bridge on the Day of Judgement until he has the permission of Ali”

Sawaiq al Muhriqah, page 429

It is common sense if Allah (swt) appoints Imams’ in this world it is only rational that he would give those Imams’ rights of intercession in the next world, and will be provided to those adherents that followed them in this one. Salvation in the next world cannot be attained if you choose to create your own system of guidance appointing any Shepherd you find – since this contradicts what Allah (swt) has told us to do, it can only be attained if you follow the Shepherd (Imam) that Allah (swt) had told us to adhere to.

Numani states:

There is another narration by a devoted disciple of Imam Jafar, Abdullah bin Ali Yafur, which tells that once, he said to the Imam : “When generally, I meet people I am surprised to find that those who do not believe in your Wilayat and Imamate i.e. who are not Shias and believe in the Wilayat and Imamate of so-and-so i.e., Abu Bakr and Omar they possess the virtues of sincerity, integrity, truthfulness and trustworthiness and those who believe in your Wilayat and Imamate (i.e. happen to be Shias) they are devoid of honesty, truthfulness and trustworthiness (but are perfidious, treacherous, liars and cheats)”.Upon it, Imam Jafar sat up and said to him in a state of great anger:”The faith and religious deeds of a person who believes in an Imam not nominated by God are neither right and creditable nor acceptable. A person who believes in the Wilayat and Imamate of the just Imams nominated by God will be exempted from punishment by God. (Meaning that however wicked and evil-doer such a person may be he will attain salvation if he believes in the Imamate of the Twelve Imams”. (p. 238).

The actual Hadith is very different to the one cited by Manzoor Numani moreover he left out the remaining part of the hadith as well which is quite related to the preceding part. It is as follows:

A number of our people has narrated from Ahmad Muhammad ibn ‘Isa from ibn Mahbub from ‘Abd ‘Aziz al-‘Abdi from ‘Abdallah ibn abu Ya‘fur who has said the following. “I said to abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.). ’Isma‘il meet people and it increases my wonders when I find people who do not consider you as their guardians and Imams but they consider so and so as their Imam. However, they are trustworthy, truthful and loyal. I also find people who consider you as their guardian and Imam but are not that trustworthy, loyal and truthful.” The narrator has said that abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) then sat in an upright position and turned to me as if with anger and then said, “One follows the religion of Allah under the guardianship of an unjust Imam who possesses no Divine authority, he has no religion. One who follows the religion of Allah under the guardianship of an Imam who just in his dealings (possesses Divine authority) will face no destruction.” I then said, “Those have no religion and these will face no destruction.” The Imam (a.s.) said, “That is correct “those have no religion and these will face no destruction.”

Then the Imam (a.s.) said, “Have you not heard the words of Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most gracious, “God is the Guardian of the believers and it is He who takes them out of darkness into light. .” (2:257) It means that He takes them out of the darkness of sins to the light of repentance and forgiveness because of their love for and their being under the guardianship of the just Imams who possess Divine authority. He has also said, “The Devil is the guardian of those who deny the Truth and he leads them from light to darkness.. .” (2:257) It means that they were in the light of Islam but when they accepted the guardianship and the leadership of every unjust Imam who possessed no authority from Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most gracious, their guardianship took them out of the light of Islam to the darkness of disbelief. Allah then made it necessary for them to suffer in fire along with the unbelievers. “These are the dwellers of hell wherein they will live forever.” (2:257)

Usool al Kafi, Volume 1, Kitab al Hujjah, Ch. 86, Hadith 3

Reply Two – Deeds must be accompanied by correct aqeedah

Manzoor Numani prior to citing both traditions claimed:

Numani states:

‘Shias believing in Imams are dwellers of Paradise even if they be vicious, licentious and oppressors. All other Muslims, even if they be righteous, are doomed to Hell’

Could his adherents kindly show us where such a thing had been written in the Hadith? The Hadith compares two groups of individuals, those with correct aqeedah and those with false aqeedah.

The deeds of an individual are of no use if they are unaccompanied by correct belief. Take the example of Mother Teresa she was a deeply pious woman, who dedicated her life in the service of the poor and destitute of Calcutta. Her deeds far exceed those of the vast majority of Muslims, yet we still believe that she will not attain Paradise in the next world, due to her wrong beliefs, particularly Shirk which is an unforgivable sin. Allah (swt) says about shirk:

“But if they had joined in worship others with Allah, all that they used to do would have been of no benefit to them.” (6:88)

Along the same lines the two Hadith that Maulana Manzoor Numani presented to his flock compares those with correct aqeedah but are sinners against those with good deeds but incorrect aqeedah. What the Hadith are saying is that those with wrong aqeedah no matter how decent they are in terms of deeds will not be successful in the next world. We ask these Nasibis:

‘We have two individuals. One is a deeply pious individual and performs good deeds on daily basis but believes in the leadership of Pharaoh. The other has some imperfections, and has sinful traits, but nevertheless believes in the divinely bestowed leadership to Musa (as), what will be the end result of these individuals? Will they be judged the same way? Will there abode be the same?

Clearly not, and we will allow the Deobandi’s Imam Shah Ismail Shaheed to comment on this:

“Salvation in the next world is within one’s individual power. If someone recognizes God through his efforts but does not believe in prophets, he will not attain salvation. We have a similar case with one that implements Islamic principles but does not obey the Imam of his time, all his deeds will be of no avail, Rasulullah (s) said: “Whoever dies without recognising the Imam of his time dies the death of Jahilyya (ignorance)”

Rasulullah (s) also said “Pray five times a day, fast in the month of Ramadhan, pay Zakat, obey the ‘Wali al Amr’ then you may enter Paradise of your Lord”

Mansab Imamate, pages 122-123

This Hadith makes it clear that no matter that the value of someone salat, fasting, zakat and Hajj is of no bearing if he has not adhere to the basic aqeedah of recognizing the Imam of his time. This means that virtues of sincerity, integrity, truthfulness and trustworthiness cited by the narrator Abdullah are of no value if these people did not recognize the Imam of the time, they would die apostates. A sinner with correct aqeedah (believe in the Adil Imam of the time) may possess indiscretions, and even if those sins are weighed against him on a measuring scale, they will not result in him becoming a kaafir, his end will not be the same as those that died as Kaafirs for not recognizing the Imam of their time, and this is the simple concept we have been taught in the two cited hadiths.

Reply Three – The door of repentance is available for those with correct aqeedah

The tradition states that there is no salvation available to those that follow the wrong Imam, whatever their deeds, whilst repentance is available for those that follow the Divinely appointed Imams yet indulge in some kinds of sins. Nowhere does the text suggest that bad deeds are irrelevant and that being a Shi’a suffices for Paradise, rather it says the door of repentance is available for such individuals, since they adhered to the correct aqeedah (of believing in Hujutallah; the just Imam from Ahlulbayt), and what is the issue if we believe this, after all Rasulullah (s) did say:

My Ahlul-Bayt are like the Gate of Repentance of the Children of Israel; whoever entered therein was forgiven.”

al-Sawaiq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, page 505

(also see Matalib Aliya by Ibn Hajar Asqalani and Muajam al Kabir/Awsat/Saghir by Tabarani)

One of the pioneer scholars of Numani’s own school Shah Ismaeel Shaheed shed light on the issue of accepting Imams as Hujjutullah and deeming them the means of approach to Allah (swt) in order to seek repentance for their sins, in the following manner:

The Imam is Hujjutullah

Verily take it to your hearts that when an Imam openly declares his Imamate all sinners should know that proof of Allah (Hujuthullah) has arrived, and that Allah (swt) has fulfilled his promise, failure to adhere to it shall lead to the wrath of Allah (swt), and sins and wrongdoing against the Imams shall take one to the doom.”

Hence the human beings are designated to find them and know them (get Ma’rifat), therefore Allah (swt) has said:

[5:35] O ye who believe! Do your duty to Allah, seek the means of approach unto Him…

Meaning of Waseela (means of approach):

Waseela is a person who due has nearness to Allah due to his high status, as Allah Almighty says in the Quran:

[17:57] Those whom they call upon do desire (for themselves) means of access to their Lord, – even those who are nearest..

Prophet is nearer to Allah than all the Imams:

In regards to nearness to Allah, the Prophet is nearer to Allah as compared to the Imams, after the Prophet, the Imams being his successors are nearest to Allah (swt). As Prophet (s) said: ‘On the Day of Judgment, the beloved and closest to Allah would be the Just Imam’.”

Mansab-e-Imamate, pages 107-108

Hence unlike Manzoor Numani tried to suggest, at no point did the Imams state that the Shi’a would be forgiven even with involved in evildoings, wickedness, oppression etc rather bulk of traditions prove that they continually emphasised the importance of keeping aloof from lies, oppression, untrustworthiness and all other kinds of evildoings and always emphasized on righteous deeds. For example:

Imam Hadi, the tenth Imam [a], said: “People are respected in this world for possessing wealth and in the Hereafter for possessing righteous deeds.”

Bihar-ul-Anwar, vol. 78, p. 368

Imam Ali (as) said:

“Lying is the most abominable trait”

Ghurar al Hikam page 175

On being untrustworthy, Imam Ali (as) said the following to Malik al Ashthar:

“Refrain from bragging to your subjects about your kindness (to them), and from preferring yourself (as governor) to your subjects, or to promise them and follow your promises with betrayal, for bragging thwarts kindness, preference conceals the light of righteousness and betrayal deserves Allah and the people’s resentment. Allah (swt) said ‘It is a great resentment to Allah that you say that which you do not act on”

Mustadrak al Wasail volume 2 page 85

Regarding oppression, the following hadith has been transmitted from the Imams of Ahlulbayt (as) which goes back to Holy Prophet (s):

Ali (as) narrated that Holy Prophet (s) said: ‘beware of oppression, it destruct your hearts’

Bihar Al-Anwar Volume 75 page 315

Ahmad ibn Hanbal said about this chain of narration:

“If this chain of narration is read a mentally ill individual, he would be cured of his mental condition”

Al-Sawaiqh Al-Muhriqa by Ibn Hajar p122

The following words of Maula Ali (as) shall be final nail in Numani’s coffin made by the wood of dishonesty:

Imam Amir ul Mu’mineen Ali [a] said: “If one of you desires to know his standing with Allah he may evaluate his situation in relation to his sins against Allah, such is his worthiness to Allah, the Blessed and Exalted.”

Bihar-ul-Anwar, vol. 70, p. 18

Reply Four – Nawasib believe that Rasulullah (s) guaranteed paradise for Yazeed

Whilst Numani the Nasibi is expressing outrage at the suggestion that Shi’as that sin will attain salvation in the next world let us present the character of their own beloved Imam Yazeed.

Imam Dhahabi records the following words from the sermon of Abdul Malik bin Marwan in ‘Tarkeeh Islam’ Volume 1 page 634:

ولست بالخليفة المستضعف – يعني عثمان – ولا الخليفة المداهن – يعني معاوية – ولا الخليفة المأبون – يعني يزيد

“I am not weak like Uthman and I am not cunning like Mu’awiya and I am not a homosexual like Yazid”

The tradition is also recorded in old transcripts of ‘Al Bidayah wal Niahayh’ while in the present transcripts available on the internet, the filthy Nawasib have done Tahreef in the word Ma’bun (homosexual) and have made it Ma’un (secure).

It is recorded in Tabaqat al Kabeera Volume 5 page 66 Dhikr Abdullah bin Hanzala and also in Volume 4 page 283:

“Abdullah bin Hanzala stated ‘By Allah we opposed Yazeed at the point when we feared that stones would reign down on us from the skies. He was a fasiq who copulated with his mother, sister and daughters, who drank alcohol and did not offer Salat”

We read in Tafseer Ruh al Ma’ani, Volume 26 page 72 commentary of Surah Muhammad:

“Al-Tabarani narrated with Hasan chain of narration: ‘Oh Allah perpetuated injustice and frightened the residents of Medina, scare him and may the curse (la’nat) of Allah (swt), His Angels and all the people be on such a person, may any of his deeds or justice not be accepted.

The great tragedy was what he did to Ahlulbayt and his complacency over the killing of al-Hussain and showing happiness for it, and insulting (Hussain’s) family, as this is narrated in ‘Mutwater’ reports but the details in ahad reports”

People who wish to learn more about Yazeed should read our article on him. Suffice it so say this CV shall suffice to convince our readers of his disgraceful man. Now what position would Allah (swt) hold of such a person? What is interesting here is the fact that the filthy Nawasib of Sipah-e-Sahaba (kr-hcy.com) who have put Manzoor Numani’s booklet at their website in order to attack Shias, one of their diseased leader Azam Tariq (like plenty of other supporters of Yazeed) was of the opinion that Yazeed was guaranteed Paradise! In one of the article on Yazeed (la) available at the very website, Azam Tariq [la] said:

Azam Tariq states:

YAZID WAS THE COMMANDER OF MUSLIM FORCES WHO MARCHED TO CAESAR’S CITY. THIS EXPEDITION WAS SENT DURING THE REIGN OF HAZRAT MUAWIYAH AND IN THIS TASK FORCE WERE INCLUDED ELDERLY AND ILLUSTRIOUS SAHABA LIKE HAZRAT ABU AYYUB ANSARI WHOSE FUNERAL PRAYER WAS LED BY YAZID ACCORDING TO THE WILL OF HAZRAT AYYUB ANSARI HIMSELF. THIS EXPEDITION TOOK PLACE IN 51 H IN WHICH HAZRAT HUSAYN FOUGHT UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF YAZID. THIS WAS THE PIONEERING MUSLIM FORCE WHICH LANDED IN CAESAR’S CITY AND ACCORDING TO A HADITH NARRATED BY ABDULLAH BIN UMAR WHICH HAS BEEN RECORDED BY BUKHARI, RASUL-ALLAH SAID:

“THE ARMY WHICH WILL FIRST EMBARK ON THE EXPEDITION OF CONTANTINOPLE WILL BLESSED.” (BUKHARI).

YAZID WAS THE COMMANDER OF MUSLIM FORCES ON THIS EXPEDITION WHO WAGED JIHAD IN CAESAR’S CITY AND AS SUCH HE FALLS WITHIN THE PARAMETER OF ABOVE HADITH OF THE PROPHET (SAW). IN VIEW OF THIS IT IS NOT BECOMING ON ANY MUSLIM TO CAST ASPERIONS ON YAZID AS THE ENTIRE ARMY WHICH TOOK PART IN THIS COMPAIGN HAS BEEN BLESSED BY ALLAH IN THE CONTEXT OF ABOVE HADITH.

We appeal to justice! If Yazeed a drunk homosexual, graded by the Sunni Ulema as a Fasiq, Faajir, rejecter of prophet hood and the slayer of the Ahl’ul bayt (as) and Sahaba can attain Paradise, then why the issue, if the Shi’a believe that repentance is available for Shias who have some individual weaknesses? After all such traits are nothing compared to those of Yazeed!

Reply Five: The reason Nawasib attack the authority bestowed on the Imams of Ahl’ulbayt (as) for providing salvation to their followers is because their own caliphs were deprived of such blessings

“Ad Dahhak said: Abu Bakr said: By Allah, I wish that I were a tree by the side of the road which a camel passed by, and took me into its mouth, chewed me, swallowed me, passed me out as dung, and that I were not a man. Umar said: ‘Would that I were my family’s ram, which they were fattening as much as seemed right to them, until when I became as fat as can be, some people whom they love visit them, until when I became as fact as can be, some people whom they love visit them, and tyhey sacrifice me for them, make some of me into roasted meat, some of me into dried meat, then eat me, and that I were not a human being”

History of the Khalifas who took the right way, page 143

Just compare the words of the shaykhayn with those of the regretful for their grave sins to the extent they would wish they were some abase creature but not human beings. According to Allah (swt) on the day of judgement they will say:

Surah An-Naba’ verse 78[YUSUFALI]:

Verily, We have warned you of a Penalty near, the Day when man will see (the deeds) which his hands have sent forth, and the Unbeliever will say, “Woe unto me! Would that I were (metre) dust!“

For the followers of the Shaykhayn this should be all the more concerning, when one considers the fact that Allah (swt) says:

010.062-64 [YUSUFALI]:

Behold! verily on the friends of Allah there is no fear, nor shall they Those who believe and (constantly) guard against evil;-

For them are glad tidings, in the life of the present and in the Hereafter; no change can there be in the words of Allah. This is indeed the supreme felicity.

We would appeal do those that attack us for have boarded the Ark of the Ahl’ul bayt (as),

‘when your most esteemed Imams state was such that they wished they were faeces and had never been born, then what is the likelihood of them providing salvation to their adherents in the next world?’

Alhamdolillah those that have recognised the divine rank of the Imamate of Ahl’ul bayt (as), have nothing to fear, Qadhi Iyad wrote:

“Recognition of the family of Muhammad is freedom from the Fire. Love of the family of Muhammad is crossing over the Sirat. Friendship for the family of Muhammad is safety from the fire”.

Ash-Shifa, page 241 by Qadi Iyad, (d.544 Hijri) English translation by Aisha Bewley, Madinah Press 1991.

[14]: Differing rights for a Mumin and Muslim

Afriqi states:

This distinction between Muslim and Mu’min can be found throughout classical Shi‘i literature. The seventh century faqih, Yahya ibn Sa‘id al-Hilli (died 690AH), for example writes in his manual on fiqh, al-Jami‘ lish-Shara’i‘:It is correct for a Muslim to make an endowment (waqf) upon Muslims. Muslims are those who utter the two shahadahs, and their children. But if a person makes something waqf upon the Mu’minin, it will be exclusively for the Imamiyyah who believe in the Imamah of the Twelve Imams.7

Eight centuries later, exactly the same view is propounded by Ayatullah Khomeini. In his own manual of fiqh, Tahrir al-Wasilah, he states:

If a person makes a waqf upon the Muslims it will be for all those who confess the two shahadahs … If an Imami makes a waqf upon the Mu’minin it will be restricted to the Ithna ‘Ashariyyah.

Reply One

One wonders why there is any form of objection here. When Afriqi’s Sect do not deem Shi’as as Muslims to the point that you cannot give them any land, gift, sit with them, leave them inheritance etc then why the opposition if such a distinction is made?

Reply Two

If the distinction is a point of contention, then perhaps they should look at the distinctions in stipends that were drawn between Nasibis and Shi’as during the reign of Mu’awiya. We read in al Imama wa al Siyasa Volume 1 page 173 Dhikr Bayya as follows:

“Mu’awiya sent stipends to the people of Medina he increased their amounts, with regards to Banu Hashim stipends were withdrawn as they had rejected the bayya of Yazeed”

Reply Three

If the distinction is causing distress to Afriqi, lets take a look at the distinction that your Khalifa Umar drew up with regards to stipends to the Sahaba. We read in Hayatus Sahaba volume 2 pages 240-24:

“When Hadrat Umar (rad) was appointed Caliph after the death of Hadrat Abu Bakr (Rad) victories took place in quick succession. Hadrat Umar (Rad) said ‘I differ from Hadrat Abu Bakr (Rad) in regard to the distribution of wealth among people. I cannot bring about equality for those who fought for and against the Holy Prophet (s). Thus he have preference to the Immigrants and the Ansars (Madenites) and fixed five thousand each for those who took part in the Battle of Badr; four thousand each for those that embraced Islam before the Badrites…”

Hayatus Sahaba, volume 2 pages 240-241

[15]: Differing ranks of Mumin

Afriqi states:

Some amongst the contemporary spokesmen for Shi‘ism, like Kashif al-Ghita, have realised that even this ruse is not sufficiently subtle. He thus devised another terminology. He speaks of being a Mu’min in the special sense, and of being a Mu‘min in the general sense. Whoever believes in Imamah is regarded as a Mu’min in the special sense, while those who do not believe in it are regarded as being Mu’min in the general sense, as a result of which all the temporal laws of Islam are applicable to him. The result of this difference, he says, will become apparent on the Day of Judgement, in the degrees of Divine proximity and honour that will be bestowed upon the believers in Imamah.

Reply One – Different levels for believers can be proven from Qur’an

We read in Surah Nisa verse 69-70:

“All who obey Allah and the messenger are in the company of those on whom is the Grace of Allah,- of the prophets (who teach), the sincere (lovers of Truth), the witnesses (who testify), and the Righteous (who do good): Ah! what a beautiful fellowship! Such is the bounty from Allah: And sufficient is it that Allah knoweth all”.

This is a special honour bestowed on the true lovers of the Prophet (s). Qadi Iyad in al Shifa page 224 (English translation by Aisha Bewley) states:

“It is related that a man came to the Prophet and said, “Messenger of Allah, I love you more than my family and my possessions. I remember you and I cannot wait until I come and look at you. I remember that I will die and you will die and I know that when you enter the Garden, you will be raised with the Prophets. When I enter it I will not see you”. Allah then revealed, ‘Whoever obeys Allah and his messenger those are with those whom Allah has blessed among the prophets (the true ones, the witnesses, the martyrs and the right doers. They are the best of Companions (4:68)’. The Prophet called the man and recited the verses to him” [Tabrani]

al Shifa by Qadi Iyad, page 224 (English translation by Aisha Bewley)

Ibn Katheer says as follows in his commentary of this verse:

“Any individual that acts in accordance with what Allah (swt) and his Prophet (s) have given and distances himself from those acts they said refrain from; such person shall enter Paradise with the Prophets and shall become the Rafiqeen”

Reply Two – Different levels for believers can be proven from the Books of Ahl’ul Sunnah

If different ranks of Mumin exist in the eyes of al Ghita then this can be proven from traditions. We find this tradition in Sahih Muslim, The Book of Faith (Kitab Al-Iman), Book 001, Number 0359):

“Abdullah b. Mas’ud reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: “I know the last of the inhabitants of Fire to be taken out therefrom, and the last of the inhabitants of Paradise to enter it. A man will come out of the Fire crawling. Then Allah, the Blessed and Exalted will say to him: Go and enter Paradise. So he would come to it and it would appear to him as if it were full. He would go back and say: O my Lord! I found it full. Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, would say to him: Go and enter Paradise. He would come and perceive as if it were full. He would return and say: O my Lord! I found it full. Allah would say to him: Go and enter Paradise, for there is for you the like of the world and ten times like it, or for you is ten times the like of this world. He (the narrator) said. He (that man) would say: Art Thou making a fun of me? or Art Thou laughing at me. though Thou art the King? He (the narrator) said: I saw the Messenger of Allah laugh till his front teeth were visible. And it was said: That would be the lowest rank among the inhabitants of Paradise.

Reply Three – Those that love the Ahl’ul bayt (as) will have a special position with the Prophet (s) on the Day of Judgement

There are different levels on the Day of Judgement and in Paradise, those that have affiliation with the Imams from Ahl’ul bayt (as) will indeed have a rank of close proximity with them, pre judgement and in Paradise. Dr. Tahir ul Qadri records this Hadith in “Maraja Al-Bahrayn fi Manaqib al-Hasnayn” page 58:

“Ali narrates, that he heard the Prophet (s) say ‘Me, Fatima, Hasan and Hussain and those who love us, will gathered at one place on the Day of Judgement, we will eat and drink together, until (after their deeds are judged) when they will be dispersed”

[1] Mu`ajam al Kabir, Vol 3 page 41 No. 2623. [2] Tarikh Damishq, Vol 3 page 227 [3] Majmal Zawaid, Vol 9 page 174

Maraja Al-Bahrayn fi Manaqib al-Hasnayn, page 58

Upon entry into Paradise the lovers of Ahl’ul bayt (as) will yet again rejoin their leaders. We have already cited Shi’a traditions that confirm that the Shi’a of Ali (as) will be with him in Paradise. Dr. Tahir ul Qadri records this Hadith in “Maraja Al-Bahrayn fi Manaqib al-Hasnayn” page 57:

“Ali narrates ‘The Prophet (s) grabbed Hasan and Hussain by the hands and said ‘Whoever loves me, these two and mother and father, shall be with me, in my rank on the Day of Judgement“.

[1] Sunan Tirmidhi Volume 5 page 641 No. 3733, [2] Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal Volume 1 page 77 number 576, [3] Fadail as Sahaba volume 2 page 693 No. 1185, [4]Mu`ajam al Kabeer al Tabarani, Volume 3 page 50 No. 2654…

Maraja Al-Bahrayn fi Manaqib al-Hasnayn, page 57

Chapter 1: Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (as)

Question 1: Do Shias worship Ali ibn Abu Talib (as)?

Shias do not worship Imam Ali (as). Shias worship Allah (SwT). How can anyone believe that Shias worship Imam Ali (as) when he himself tells us to worship Allah (SwT)?

Nahjul Balagha

In the famous book, Nahjul Balagha, a compilation of the sermons and sayings of Imam Ali (as), the first recorded sermon begins with:

“Praise is due to Allah whose worth cannot be described by speakers, whose bounties cannot be counted by calculators and whose claim (to obedience) cannot be satisfied by those who attempt to do so, whom the height of intellectual courage cannot appreciate, and the divings of understanding cannot reach; He for whose description no limit has been laid down, no eulogy exists, no time is ordained and no duration is fixed. He brought forth creation through His Omnipotence, dispersed winds through His Compassion, and made firm the shaking earth with rocks.”

Imam Ali (as) continues: “The foremost in religion is the acknowledgement of Him, the perfection of acknowledging Him is to testify Him, the perfection of testifying Him is to believe in His Oneness, the perfection of believing in His Oneness is to regard Him Pure, and the perfection of His purity is to deny Him attributes, because every attribute is a proof that it is different from that to which it is attributed and everything to which something is attributed is different from the attribute.

Thus whoever attaches attributes to Allah recognises His like, and who recognises His like regards Him two; and who regards Him two recognises parts for Him; and who recognises parts for Him mistook Him; and he who mistook Him, pointed at Him; and he who pointed at Him, admitted limitations for Him; and he who admitted limitations for Him, numbered Him.”

This sermon, and others in Nahjul Balagha show that Imam Ali (as) is the most eloquent exponent of Allah’s existence, His unity (Tawhid).

Other followers

There are other groups, chief among them the Nuzayris, the various groups of the Ghuluww, the extremists, who have worshipped Ali, but not the Shias.

Shias take pride that Ali (as) was not Allah but was the first male to worship Allah, with the Prophet (S); the first to bow down behind Muhammad (S), in prayer (salah), in worship of the one true Lord, Allah (SwT).

The Ghuluww, the Nuzayris and others, who take delight in their worship of Ali (as), are not friends or allies, of the Shias. They are people who have abandoned Islam, who have traduced Ali (as) by ascribing divinity to him. Too many Shias over the years have praised the Nuzayris and the Ali worshippers in their hymns (marthiyas) and in their religious poetry. This is wrong, un-Islamic and this is something the Prophet (S) warned against.

In a famous tradition (hadith) of the Prophet (S), narrated by Ahlul Sunnah and Shia scholars alike, the Holy Prophet said: “O Ali, you have a resemblance to Prophet Jesus (Isa), the son of Virgin Mary whom some Jews hated so much that they slandered him and his mother Mary and whom some Christians loved so much that they placed him in a position not rightly his.”

Shias love Ali (as) but do not, and should not, put him in a position which is not rightly his, that is, above the Prophet (S) or in place of Allah (SwT)

As Imam Ali (as) himself said, “Two kinds of people will be damned on my account. Those who form an exaggerated opinion about me and those who underestimate me because they hate me.” (Nahjul Balaghah, list of short sayings no.116).

So the historical evidence, the consensus of the Shia ulema and common sense are all proofs that that Shias worship Allah (SwT), not Imam Ali (as).

Question 2: Do Shias believe that Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) is superior to the Prophet (S)?

Some enemies of the Shias claim that, we believe, Imam Ali (as) was better or superior to Muhammad (S); some have suggested that we believe that the revelation of the Holy Qur’an was intended for him but mistakenly given to his cousin Muhammad (S). This is nonsense.

Common sense

Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) was either 10 or 12 years of age when the Prophet (S) received his first revelation, (wahi), from the archangel Jibraeel (Gabriel) in a cave. Does it make sense to believe that Shias would claim Jibraeel, an infallible angel, mistook a 12-year-old boy for a 40-year-old man?

Shias do not believe this but rather take pleasure in pointing out how Imam Ali (as) slept in the bed of the Prophet (S) to protect the Prophet’s life. Ali (as) slept in the Prophet’s bed on the night of Hijra so that the Prophet (S) could migrate to Madinah safely. How could we then believe he is superior to the Prophet (S)?

References from books of Ahlul Sunnah

In fact, the Prophet (S) famously predicted, in a tradition (hadith) narrated by very famous Ahlul Sunnah scholars like Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal in his Musnad and Imam Hakim in his Mustadrak: “In truth there will be, among you, one who shall fight over the ta’wil of the Qur’an, the interpretation of the Qur’an, just as I fought over its tanzil, its revelation.” Abu Bakr and Umar asked: “Am I he?” The Prophet said: “No, it is the one who is mending the shoes.” The companions turned to the side to see Imam Ali (as) mending the Prophet’s shoes.

This hadith shows that:

• Imam Ali (as) was the one the Prophet (S) singled out to his companions as the protector of Qura’nic interpretation;

• Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) used to mend the Prophet’s shoes and take pride in it.

After the Prophet (S), Ali (as) is the most superior and the greatest being created by Allah (SwT) - but the key point to note here is “after” the Prophet.

Question 3: Where is the proof that Ali (as) was appointed by the Prophet (S)?

This is one of the most important questions to ponder and needs a detailed review. The Shias point to the hadith of Ghadeer Khumm, narrated by the Ahlul Sunnah (see below) in which the Holy Prophet (S) declared: “Man kunto mawla hu fa haadha Aliyyun mawla” - “Of whomsoever I am mawla, Ali is also his mawla, i.e. leader.”

Does “mawla” mean friend?

This comes up again and again - especially that “mawla” means friend, not leader, imam or amir. We can analyse this by the following:

Meaning of “mawla”?

According to one study, the word mawla has between 20 and 30 different definitions in Arabic, but only one of which translates as “friend”. Most translate it as “owner”, “leader”, “benefactor”, “guide”, “helper”. Look at the Holy Qur’an, the words, mawla, awla, wali, wilayat, all come from the same root word, “wali”, and are all used in the Holy Qur’an to refer to guidance and leadership. For friendship or companionship, the Holy Qur’an tends to use the words, khaleel, sadiq and hameem.

Context when word “mawla” was used

The word “mawla” was used at Ghadeer Khumm, on the return journey from the last pilgrimage (Hajj) of the Prophet. The Prophet (S) calls back all those who had gone ahead. He calls forward all the people at the back. He then builds a pulpit from camels’ saddles, goes up on it and addresses over 100,000 people in the burning heat of the Arabian Desert, to make an important announcement.

Then the Prophet (S) asked just before the declaration, “Do I not have more authority upon you (alastu awla bi kum) than you have over yourselves?” All the people replied, “Yes, surely.” Then the Prophet (S) declared: “Of whomsoever I am mawla, Ali is also his mawla.”

Surely the word “mawla”, in this context, refers to authority, to leadership. The earlier reference is from the verse:

“The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves.” (33:6).[Surah Ahzab]

As Sunni scholar Sibt ibn Jauzi says, “The saying of the Holy Prophet that Ali has authority or is the master over the selves of all the believers clearly proves the Imamate or vicegerency of Ali and that obedience to him is obligatory.”

After the declaration, the Prophet (S) uttered the following prayer: “O Allah! Love him who loves Ali, and be enemy of he who is the enemy of Ali; help him who helps Ali, and forsake him who forsakes Ali.”

This prayer shows that Imam Ali (as), on that day, was being entrusted with a position that would make some people his enemies and therefore he would need supporters in carrying out his responsibilities. This could not be anything but the position of the mawla in the sense of ruler, master and lord. Are helpers ever needed to carry on or protect a ‘friendship’ from enemies?

The body language

Sunni scholar Allama ibn Hajar Asqalani narrates in his book, al-Isabah, how the Prophet (S) stood next to Imam Ali (as) on a raised pulpit or mimbar built from the saddles of camels, raised Ali’s hand, his arm in the air, and placed a turban on his head. Now, if that’s not a coronation, then what is?

Common sense

Why would the Prophet (S) waste time in the hot Arabian Desert, to tell over 100,000 people that Ali (as) was his “friend”? Didn’t they know that? Wouldn’t you be annoyed if you were in that crowd? Why waste everyone else’s time, and that too after an exhausting Hajj and in all that heat, unless you have something important to announce?

Evidence from the Holy Qur’an

Ponder over the Qura’nic verse which was revealed prior to Ghadeer Khumm:

“O Messenger! Convey what had been revealed to you from your Lord; if you do not do so, then [it would be as if] you have not conveyed His message [at all]. Allah will protect you from the people.” (5: 67) [Surah Maidah]

Countless classical Ahlul Sunnah scholars have said that this verse was revealed ahead of the event of Ghadeer Khumm, perhaps the most famous of all being Imam Fakhruddin al-Razi in his Tafisr al-Kabir.

How can Muslims believe, as the Holy Qur’an warns, that the whole of the Prophet’s mission was about to be rendered null and void if he didn’t tell the people that he and Ali (as) were friends? This verse shows how important the announcement was - and how controversial Allah (SwT) knew it would be. The Holy Qur’an says:“Allah will protect you from the people” .

Why might the Prophet need protecting? Because; the issue of succession was being clarified and confirmed, once and for all, explicitly and publicly, and some people in the crowd were going to be upset and rebellious.

And what happened after the sermon at Ghadeer was over? What verse was revealed? According to all the major classical books of the Ahlul Sunnah (Hafiz Jalaluddin as Suyuti, Shaykh Sulayman al-Qandoozi Hanafi, Allama ibn Kathir, among them):

“This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favour on you and chosen for you Islam as your religion” (5:3) [Surah Maidah].

This is the final verse of the Holy Qur’an! And what an occasion it was revealed on!

Again, some common sense is needed: would Allah (SwT) really be unable or unwilling to “perfect” his religion and name it “Islam” unless the issue of the Prophet’s “friendship” with Ali was cleared up for the Muslims? This is illogical and an insult to our intelligence! The truth is that Islam was completed and named for the Prophet (S) only after the Prophet (S) announced Ali (as) as his successor. Islam wasn’t complete until the caliphate of Ali (as) was announced, revealed, made clear, to the Muslim masses.

Otherwise, you have to believe that that the 22-years mission of the Prophet (S) was being invalidated over the issue of his “friendship” with Ali (as). And ask yourself this: was it the announcement of a friendship or the appointment of a successor to the Prophet that perfected the religion of Islam? What do you think?

Second caliph’s reaction

It is narrated that after the sermon was over, the Prophet set up a tent with Ali (as) and the companions lined up to give allegiance (bay’at) to Imam Ali (as), led by, Umar ibn Khattab, second caliph of the Ahlul Sunnah.

According to, among others, Sunni scholars like Imam Fakhruddin al-Razi in his book, and Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal, in his Musnad, Umar ibn Khattab was the first to arrive on the scene, and looking at Ali, he said: “Well done ibn Abu Talib! Today you became the master of all believing men and women, ‘Ameer al-Mo’mineen’!”

This title, Ameer al-Mo’mineen, (Commander of the Faithful), that Shias use today to refer to Imam Ali (as), and for which they are often condemned and criticised by the Ahlul Sunnah, was first used by none other than Umar ibn Khattab. How ironic! Ameer al-Mo’mineen has only one meaning - commander, leader, master of the faithful. When Mullah Umar of the Taliban set up the Islamic Emirate of Afganistan, what did he call himself ? Ameer al-Mo’mineen.

Yet we know from Ghadeer Khumm, from the public testimony of Umar ibn Khattab, that the first and only legitimate Ameerul Momineen, appointed by Allah (SwT) via His Messenger, is Ali ibn Abu Talib (as).

Imam Ali (as) invoked Ghadeer later on

Imam Ali (as) himself offered the event of Ghadeer Khumm, as evidence for his leadership, his caliphate and imamat, later on in his life, after the Prophet’s death. There are numerous examples and one of the most famous is as follows: The Sunni scholars ibn Qutaybah, ibn Hanbal, Muttaqi al-Hindi and Abu Nuaym Isfahani, all record in their books that during the caliphate of Ali, (as) when his authority was being questioned and rebellions were brewing, Imam Ali (as), in public, said to Anas ibn Malik, the famous companion of the Prophet (S): “Why don’t you stand up and testify what you heard from the Messenger of Allah on the day of Ghadeer?”

Anas answered, “O Ameer al-Mo’mineen! I have grown old and do not remember.” To which Ali (as) responded: “May Allah mark you with a white spot (of leprosy) unconcealable with your turban, if you are intentionally withholding the truth.” And when Anas got up from his place he bore a large white spot on his face. From that day onwards, Anas used to say, “I am under the curse of the righteous servant of Allah, Ali ibn Abu Talib!”

The Ghadeer Khumm incident makes it clear that Ali (as) was the Prophet’s successor. But there are other examples from the Prophet’s life too. For example, at start of the Prophethood, according to the Tarikh, or History, of Allama Tabari, the famous Sunni historian: The Prophet (S) asked three times, at a dinner for his friends and relatives, who will help him in his prophetic mission? On each of the three occassions, only Ali (as) stood up and said he would. On the first two occasions, the Prophet asked Ali (as) to sit down. But, on the third occasion, the Prophet said: “Verily this is my brother, my successor, and my caliph amongst you. Therefore, listen to him and obey.” Abu Lahab (the Prophet’s paternal uncle) said to Abu Talib (his brother and Ali’s father) “the Prophet (S) has told you to obey your own son!”

The tragedy is that the majority of the Muslims do not understand today what Abu Lahab understood on the first day of the introduction of Islam in Makkah.

Question 4: Why do Shias think Ali (as) is superior to the first three caliphs?

This is not just a Shia view, that Imam Ali (as) is superior to the rest of the caliphs and sahabah. A number of Ahlul Sunnah scholars and books agree with this view.

References from books of Ahlul Sunnah

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, one of the four Ahlul Sunnah Imams of fiqh, said: “There is no Companion about whom as many merits are reported as Ali ibn Abu Talib.”

The prominent Ahlul Sunnah scholar of India, Shah Ismail Muhaddith Dehlvi, wrote: “Ali al-Murtadha has also an edge over Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and Umar Faruq and this edge lies because of the greater number of his followers and all the highest spiritual and saintly activity, from his days to the end of the world, has to be mediated through him, and he has a say in the kingdom of the kings and the leadership of the leaders and this is not hidden from those who are familiar with the world of sovereignty. Most spiritual chains are directly derived from Ali al-Murtadha. So, on the Day of Judgment, Ali’s army, including followers of high status and great reputation, will outnumber and outshine others to be a source of wonder for all the spectators.”

In fact, to even compare Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) with any of the companions is absurd. It is a misunderstanding of who Ali (as) is, what Ali (as) represented and stood for. Imam Ali (as) was on a different level; he wasn’t a mere companion like Abu Bakr or Umar or even Ammar and Salman.

Evidence from the Holy Qur’an

The Sunni scholar Allama Muttaqi al-Hindi, in his famous book, Kanz al-Ummal, narrates a tradition (hadith) from the Prophet (S), in which the Prophet (S) was asked by a visitor to Madinah to name his favourite companion. When he omits the mention of Imam Ali (as), he was asked: “But what about Ali? “To which the Prophet (S) replied: “Look at this man, he asks me about my own self.”

This hadith of course is a reflection of the Ayat of Mubahela of the Holy Qur’an, (Ch.3: V61) [Surah Ali Imran] which states:

“But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our selves and your selves, then let us be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse of God on the liars”(3:61)

All of the Ahlul Sunnah historians, including Muslim in his Sahih, Book 31, Hadith Number 5915, testify that the Prophet (S) took Hasan (as) and Husayn (as) with him as his “sons”, Lady Fatima (as) with him as the representative of “women”, and Imam Ali (as) as his self, (as his nafs).

The reason why Ali (as) is not just superior to the rest of the companions, including the first three caliphs is because he went beyond what a companion was: he wasn’t just a companion of the Prophet (S); he was, as Allah (SwT) says in the Holy Qur’an, and the Prophet (S) says in his tradition (hadith), a self of the Prophet, nafs al-Rasoolallah.

Question 5: Why did Ali (as) not fight for the leader- ship if it was his God-given right?

Imam Ali (as) never took up arms against Abu Bakr or Umar or Uthman. Some Ahlul Sunnah scholars try and argue that this shows he was not opposed to them. This is an incorrect analysis and a misunderstanding of Imam Ali’s (as) thinking and motivations.

The reasons

The reason Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) did not fight after the death of the Prophet (S) is because he did not want to divide the nascent, infant Muslim community. He did not want innocent Muslims to die in battle, killing each other, in order to take power. The historians, Sunni and Shia, record how Abu Sufyan offered him troops but Imam Ali (as) turned him down and criticised his divisive offer.

His divinely-appointed role as Imam

Imam Ali’s (as) imamat, his caliphate, his wilayat, was given to him by the Prophet (S) on the command of Allah (SwT). He was not expected to go and force the Muslims, the people, to follow him; it was their job to find him and follow him. His position as the Imam was not a political or elected position. It was bestowed upon him by Allah (SwT). Kanz al-Ummal, the Sunni book of ahadith, narrates the tradition in which the Prophet (S) told Imam Ali (as): “[O Ali], You are like the Kabah, people go the the Kabah, the Kabah does not come to the people.…”

Common sense

Imam Ali (as) may not have fought against Abu Bakr and Umar; but he never fought for them either, as part of their armies. Why not? He also refused to give allegiance (bay’at) to Abu Bakr for at least six months after the death of the Prophet and his beloved wife Lady Fatima (as), who died soon after the Prophet. Why didn’t he? The Shias, of course, would also argue that he never pledged any formal allegiance to them at any point in his lifetime. Again, why? What was his problem with them?

This is explained in Nahjul Balagha where Imam Ali (as) devotes entire sermons to questioning how Abu Bakr and others robbed him of his right to caliph (caliphate) but this is a Shia book. So consider instead the words of Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) to the six-man committee appointed by Umar on his deathbed to pick a new caliph - and narrated by all of the Sunni ulema.

The committee requested Imam Ali (as) to take over the position as caliph but on the condition that he abides with the following:

• The Holy Qur’an

• The Prophet’s traditions

• The laws and regulations, the “sunnah”, introduced by the first two caliphs.

Imam Ali (as) replied that the first two conditions were acceptable to him but, he had his own views and opinion on the third condition. All of the Sunni historians agree that Imam Ali (as) rejected the sunnah of Abu Bakr and Umar, upon the death of the latter. Why would he do that if he had accepted the legitimacy of their leadership?

Question 6: Why do Shias refuse to accept that the Prophet (S) did not leave a successor?

Some Muslims are of the opinion that the Prophet (S) left it to the people to decide. Wouldn’t he have written a will if he wanted to leave behind a successor or appoint Imam Ali (as)?

Common sense

The idea that the Prophet of Islam who never left Madinah without appointing someone to take charge of the city in his absence, left behind an Islamic state without appointing a successor and without even laying out the rules for how to appoint a successor, is just unbelievable, fanciful and absurd. It is illogical to believe such a thing.

Then there is the issue of the will - or lack thereof. In Islam, making a will is vitally important. The idea that the Holy Prophet (S) who told his followers to make sure they left wills behind, when they died, even if they were the poorest of the poor, would die without leaving a will behind is equally absurd - and an insult to the Prophet (S).

References from books of Ahlul Sunnah

The truth is that the Prophet did try to make a will but was prevented from doing so by a group of his companions.

According to Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Hadith Number 393, Said ibn Jubair narrated: I heard Ibn Abbas saying, “Thursday! And you know not what Thursday is? After that Ibn Abbas wept till the stones on the ground were soaked with his tears. On that I asked Ibn Abbas, “What is (about) Thursday?” He said, “When the condition (i.e. health) of Allah’s Apostle deteriorated, he said, ‘Bring me a bone of scapula, so that I may write something for you after which you will never go astray’. The people differed in their opinions although it was improper to differ in front of the Prophet.”

They said, ‘What is wrong with him? Do you think he is delirious? Ask him (to understand). The Prophet (S) replied, ‘Leave me as I am in a better state than what you are asking me to do.’ Then the Prophet ordered them to do three things saying, ‘Turn out all the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, show respect to all foreign delegates by giving them gifts as I used to do.” The sub-narrator (Said ibn Jubair) added, “The third order was something beneficial which either Ibn Abbas did not mention or he mentioned but I forgot.”

How can it be possible that the people who memorized the Holy Qur’an forgot the last, dying instruction of the Prophet (S)?

According to this tradition (and others) in Sahih Bukhari the Prophet (S) went to write his will but was prevented by a group of his companions, led according to most of the narrations by Umar ibn Khattab, who defied the Qur’anic injunction against raising one’s voice in front of the Prophet (S) and who accused the Prophet (S) of being delirious, of having lost his mind. When the Prophet tried verbally telling them the contents of his will, his final commands, they claim to have forgotten what he said.

Abu Bakr had the foresight to leave behind a will; Umar appointed a six-man election committee - but the Prophet (S)? He died without leaving behind any guidance or will… Does this make any sense?

The reason there was no written, public will is because the Prophet (S) wanted to write such a document but some of his companions knew he was going to put in writing what he had said at Ghadeer Khumm and so they stopped him from doing so. This important event, this act of rebellion on their part at the deathbed of the Prophet (S) is narrated in Sahih Bukhari, in Sahih Muslim, in the Musnad of Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal and countless other Ahlul Sunnah books of ahadith and history.

Question 7: Why is Ali’s (as) name not mentioned in the Holy Qur’an?

There are four responses to this common and provocative question.

Evidence from the Holy Qur’an

Imam Ali’s (as) name might not be mentioned in the Holy Qur’an but there are countless verses of the Holy Qur’an devoted to the praise of Ali (as) and to announcing his superiority over the rest of the Muslims, proving his leadership, his wilayat and his imamat.

Allama ibn Hajar Makki, the famous Sunni aalim, quotes the companion and cousin of the Prophet, Abdullah ibn Abbas, saying that he heard from the Prophet (S) himself that 300 verses of the Holy Qur’an were revealed specifically in praise of Imam Ali (as).

For example, the famous verse of the ring:

“Your master [wali] can be only Allah; and His messenger and the those who believe, who establish worship and pay the poor rate, and pay the zakat while bowing down (in prayer), in ruku” (5:55) [Surah Maidah].

Ahlul Sunnah and Shia commentators of tafasir unanimously agree that this particular verse refers to Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (as), who gave his ring to a beggar while in the state of bowing (ruku) in the middle of his (salah) prayer, as narrated by Abu Dharr al-Ghafari.

Importance

Why is it so important to have Imam Ali’s (as) name in the Holy Qur’an? Are we ranking people’s importance on whether their name appears in the Holy Qur’an or how many times? If so, then it is worth mentioning that the name of the human being mentioned most in the Holy Qur’an is Prophet Musa (Moses) - 136 times in 34 different chapters (surahs). Then there is Prophet Yusuf (Joseph) mentioned by name 27 times, and Prophet Isa (Jesus) mentioned 25 times.

The Holy Prophet, however, Muhammad (S), the Messenger of Islam and the Seal of the Prophets, is mentioned by name just four times, in surah numbers 3, 33, 47 and 48. Are Muslims expected to believe that Musa is higher in status or more important than the Holy Prophet? Or Yusuf is? Or Isa is? This is what happens when you start determining people’s status on the crude and arbitrary basis of how many times their name is mentioned in the Holy Qur’an. Allah (SwT) decides in His wisdom whose name appears in His book.

What if his name had been mentioned?

What if Imam Ali’s (as) name was mentioned in the Holy Qur’an? Would that change anything? Would that change his opponents’ minds about the validity and legitimacy of his imamat? Of course not! Those who do not want to follow Imam Ali (as) would not do so no matter where his name appeared in the Qur’an. After all, the Holy Prophet explicitly said at Ghadeer Khumm: “Of whomsoever I am mawla, Ali is also his mawla”. Imagine this sentence as a verse of the Holy Qur’an - how would life be any different? Some would still say it meant friend not leader, others would try and deliberately misrepresent and misinterpret it, or simply ignore it.

It’s a diversionary tactic to bring up the fact that Allah (SwT) in His Infinite Wisdom decided not to refer to Imam Ali (as) by name in the Holy Qur’an, even though He did make around implicit or indirect 300 references to Imam Ali (as) - as testified by Ibn Abbas.

Common Sense

Imagine if we extended this argument - Ali (as) is not the leader because his name isn’t mentioned in the Holy Qur’an; Ali (as) is not important because his name is not explicitly cited in any of the verses of the Holy Qur’an- to the rest of our religious principles, beliefs and obligations. How would we know how to pray morning (Fajr) prayers? Or know that evening (Maghrib) is three units (rakaat) and night (Isha) is four units (rakaat)? The Holy Qur’an doesn’t say so; it was left to the Prophet (S) to explain the details of the Qur’anic diktats, the Qur’anic commandments.

As the sixth Shia holy Imam Jafar as Sadiq (as) famously told his companions: “The Qur’an says to pray Fajr salah (morning prayers) but it is the Prophet who tells us that Fajr is two units of prayer (rakatain), the Qur’an tells us to pay zakaat, but it is the Prophet who tells us how to calculate zakaat; in the same way, the Qur’an tells us to obey the “ulul-amr”, the people charged with authority, and it is the Prophet who tells us that the “ulul-amr” are: Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) and the Imams of the Ahlul Bayt.”

Question 8: Why do you call yourselves “Shias”, or “Shias of Ali”, and not just Muslims?

The word “Shia” in Arabic simply means follower, friend, lover, partisan. It is a word that has no negative connotations. In fact it is used in the Holy Qur’an twice with reference to prophets of God.

Evidence from the Holy Qur’an

“And, verily, of among the followers, among the Shias, of Nuh (of Noah), was Ibrahim (Abraham) (37:83)[Surah Saffat].

“And he (Musa /Moses) went into the city at a time when people (of the city) were not watching, so he found therein two men fighting, one being his Shia - min SHIAtehe - and the other being his enemy, and the one who was his Shia cried out to him for help against the one who was of his enemy.” (28:15)[Surah Kahf].

So Shia is a word used by Allah (SwT) Himself! But these Shias weren’t, of course, Shias of Ali (as). Where does this phrase, “Shia of Ali”, come from? It comes from the Prophet’s own lips, during the Prophet’s own lifetime.

References from books of Ahlul Sunnah

Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal, Allama ibn Hajar Makki, Hafiz Abu Nuaym Isfahani, and countless other classical scholars of the Ahlul Sunnah all narrate that the Prophet said: “Glad tidings, O Ali! Verily you and your companions and your Shia (your followers) will be in Paradise.”

Hafiz Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, the famous Ahlul Sunnah scholar of Egypt, in his book, al-Durr al-Mansur, narrates a tradition (hadith) in which the companions say: “We were with the Holy Prophet when Ali came towards us. The Holy Prophet said: He and his Shia will acquire salvation on the Day of Judgement.”

Allama ibn Hajar Asqalani, another famous Ahlul Sunnah scholar of hadith, narrates the following tradition of the Prophet (S): “The parable of Ali is like a tree, in which I am the root, Ali is the branch, Hasan and Husayn are the fruits, and the Shias are the leaves.”

Allama ibn Hajar al-Haythami al-Makki - of the Ahlul Sunnah says in his book al-Sawaiq al-Muhriqa that the Shias are “rafidhi” (liars, deviants) and yet in the same book he narrates a tradition from Abdullah ibn Abbas in which ibn Abbas says that: When the verse:“Those who believe and do righteous deeds are the best of the creation” (98:7) [Surah Al Bayyina] was revealed, the Messenger of Allah said to Ali: “They are you and your Shia.”

He continued: “O Ali! (on the Day of Judgment) you and your Shia will come towards Allah well-pleased and well- pleasing, and your enemies will come angry with their head forced up. Ali said: “Who are my enemies?” The Prophet (S) replied: “He who disassociates himself from you and curses you. And glad tiding to those who reach first under the shadow of al-Arsh on the Day of Resurrection.” Ali asked: “Who are they, O the Messenger of Allah?” He replied: “Your Shia, O Ali, and those who love you.”

Now, here is an important point to consider: some Muslims ask why there is a sect called Shias? They tend to call themselves Sunni Muslims. But where is the word Sunni in the Holy Qur’an or in the ahadith of the Holy Prophet? Where is the hadith in which the Prophet (S) refers to his “Sunnis” or even to the “Ahlul Sunnah wal Jamaah”? There isn’t one. But the Shias have been around since the time of the Prophet (S) and Shia is a title of distinction used in the Holy Qur’an.

Question 9: Isn’t Shia’ism a product of Abdullah ibn Saba, a Jewish convert to Islam?

Who is he?

There is a question as to whether Abdullah ibn Saba even existed! In Ahlul Sunnah tradition, he was a Yemenite Jew who embraced Islam very late in life. During the time of Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) he is alleged to have introduced a number of concepts that later were ascribed to both the Shias and the Ghuluww: the exaltation of Ali (as), his divine appointment by the Islamic Prophet Muhammad (S) as a successor, and his alleged divinity. These are all claimed to be concepts that were first formulated and expressed by Ibn Saba and his followers, who are also accused of killing the third caliph of the Ahlul Sunnah, Uthman ibn Affan, and dividing the Muslims into two sects.

Yet neutral modern western historians, non-Muslims like Godfrey Hodgson, Leone Caetani, Israel Freidlander and Bernard Lewis have all concluded that he probably did not exist and even if he did, he certainly wasn’t responsible for all the intrigues, plots and religious conspiracies that have been attributed to him by some anti-Shia scholars.

References from books of Ahlul Sunnah

Tabari’s source for the story of Ibn Saba, Sayf ibn Umar, has been discredited by Imam Hakim, Ibn Hajar Asqalani and several other prominent Ahlul Sunnah scholars. In his acclaimed book, “The Succession to Muhammad”, former Oxford University professor Wilferd Madelung writes how “few if any modern historians would accept Sayf ’s legend of Ibn Saba”. Note the use of word “legend”!

Even the Egyptian historian, Dr Taha Husayn, one of the most influential Ahlul Sunnah scholars of the 20th century, has said that the “fabrication” of Ibn Saba was done by the enemies of the Shias and that the insertion of a “Jewish element” was aimed at discrediting the Shias. He noted that the absence of any record of Ibn Saba being present at the Battle of Siffin suggests that Ibn Saba is a fictitious person.

Question 10: Why do you give such importance to the father of Ali (as), Abu Talib? Wasn’t he a non- believer?

Some Muslims not only criticise and reject Ali (as), they even go after his father. Abu Talib is described as an unbeliever (kafir). Even the recent BBC2 documentary on the life of the Prophet (S) presented by Rageh Omaar, stated as a fact that he died as a non-believer.

Yet the following proofs from history and proofs from the Holy Qur’an prove that he was a Muslim.

He perfomed the Prophet’s wedding

Abu Talib performed the wedding ceremony (nikah) of Prophet Muhammad (S) and Lady Khadija (as) and paid the dowry (mahr). How can anyone believe that the wedding ceremony of the Holy Prophet of Islam would be performed by a non-Muslim?

His marriage

Abu Talib was married to Fatima bint Asad, the mother of Ali (as) and stayed married to her even after the advent of Islam. If he was a non-Muslim, this would be in defiance of the injunctions contained in the Holy Qura’n.

Even the Prophet’s own adopted daughters were divorced from the sons of Abu Lahab (who refused to become Muslims). Fatima bint Asad, remember, was the second lady to accept Islam (after Lady Khadija (as) the Prophet’s first wife).

Imam Sajjad (as), the fourth Shia Imam, said about his great-great-grandfather: “I wonder why people doubt the faith of Abu Talib, when a woman cannot continue her matrimonial alliance with a non-Muslim husband after she has embraced Islam, and Fatima bint Asad was amongst those women who embraced Islam at a very early stage and still remained his wife till he breathed his last.”

Evidence from the Holy Qur’an

Ch.4:V 144 [Surah Al Nisa], says:

“O you who believe! Do not take the unbelievers as protectors instead of the believers” (4:144)

and Ch 9:V 23 [Surah Tawba] proclaims:

“O you who believe! Take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love infidelity above Faith: if any of you do so, they do wrong.”(9:23)

The Prophet’s grandfather Abdul Muttalib died when he was 8 years old. The Prophet was looked after by Abu Talib (not by his other uncles, Harith or Abbas); from the age of 8 to 25. The Prophet lived under either the direct or indirect care and supervision of his uncle Abu Talib right up until the latter’s death in 619 ad, when the Prophet was 49. The Prophet lived under the protection of his uncle, the alleged non-believer, for over 40 years! So was the Prophet (S) violating the commands of the Holy Qur’an?

The Holy Qur’an refers to Allah (SwT) and the Prophet, in Ch 93, V 6-9) [Surah Al Duha]:

“Did He not find thee an orphan and give you shelter? And He found thee wandering, and He gave thee guidance. And He found thee in need, and made thee independent.”(93:6-9)

There is no disagreement, as the historical records show, that it was Abu Talib who gave shelter to the Prophet (S) took care of all his needs and gave him guidance. Now how is it that in this case Allah (SwT) is taking credit for things that a “kafir” did? How could Allah (SwT) ask for help from a “kafir” in taking care and bringing up His most beloved and final messenger? How could Allah (SwT) do something that He is prohibiting the believers from doing? The fact that the Prophet of Islam took refuge with, and guidance from Abu Talib shows that Abu Talib was not only a Muslim but a mu’min; not just one who submits, but one who believes.

Here is a challenge: can any person, Sunni or Shia, Muslim or non-Muslim, identify even one occasion on which Abu Talib publicly or privately:

• rejected the concept of unity and oneness of Allah (Tawhid)?

• condemned Islam by name, rejected Islam by name and, in doing so, rejected his nephew the Prophet (S) of Islam?

• worshipped in front of an idol?

On the contrary, when Muslims pray they should thank Abu Talib, because without him, there would have been no Prophet of Islam and, by extension, no religion of Islam. There is no Muhammad (S), without Abu Talib.