Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Alhassanain (p) Network for Islamic Heritage and Thought

With Infallibles

Author (s): A Group of Authors

Translator (s):Maryam Akhond Ali & AlaEdin Pasargadi

www.alhassanain.org/english

Name: With Infallibles

Author: A Group of Authors

Translator: Maryam Akhond Ali & AlaEdin Pasargadi

Firs t Edition: 2008

Publis her: Naba Cultural

E-mail: Info@Naba Cultural.org

ISBN: 978-964-8323-64-1

Table of Contents

Introduction 4

Deatail of Topics and Writers 5

Another Prayer 6

Not Out of Rage 8

Revelation of Delight 12

The Mid-Day Traveler 16

I am Sakinah 20

A Gift from Sky 23

Coins of Victory 26

The Last Words 30

The Second Growth 33

De'bel's Secret 36

No one saw 39

In Those Palaces 44

The Great Secret 48

The Last Hope 53

Introduction

Preparing "with infallibles" is a step towards recognizing the lives of 14 imams; each story of this collection is recreated and written according to historical events. This book comprised of 14 stories of different authors, and each story is about one of our 14 imams. It is started with a story of the Prophet and ended with a story about the 14th infallibles.

The 2,8,10, and 12 stories (according to the content's numbers) are translated by Dr. AlaEdin Pasargadi and the rest are translated byMaryam Akhond Ali.

Deatail of Topics and Writers

1. Another Prayer (Mostafa Rahmandoost )

2. Not out of Rage (AhmadArabloo )

3. Revelation of Delight (Syed Mehdi Shojae )

4. The Mid-Day Traveler (Sarvare Katbi )

5. I amSakinah (Syed Mehdi Shojae )

6. A Gift from Sky (Sarvare Katbi )

7. Coins of Victory (Mostafa Rahmandoost )

8. The last words (Mostafa Rahmandoost )

9. Rebirth (Azar Reza'ee )

10.De'bel's Secret (Fariba Kalhor )

11. No one saw (Sa'eed AleRasool )

12. Those palaces (Mehdi Hejvani )

13. The Great Secret (Mehdi Rahimi )

14. The Last Hope (Mehdi Rahimi )

Another Prayer

It was three months that "Salimah " had not gone to the mosque. She thought about the mosque especially when she heard the sound of the 'Azān '. It was three months now that she had become a mother. She had no one to look after her baby so she could attend to the mosque for praying. Her husband was a peddler date-seller who walked through the alleys of Medina, from morning to night, in order to run his family.

He neither had time to take care of his baby, nor money to pay someone to look after it.Salimah was content with her life, but she always had a strange feeling when she heard the Azan. She was reminded of the pleasant and warm voice of the Prophet in the mosque. How she longed to go to the mosque as before, when she heard the sound of the Azan and attend the mass prayer.

Her first baby was born three months ago. It was a crying baby and did not keep quiet. Most of the time,Salimah was tired and sleepy. She knew that going to the mosque and praying behind the prophet would make her fresh and happy. But there was no one to leave her child with.

That day, like every other day, was ending when once again the sound ofAzān echoed through the sky of Medina…"Allaho -Akbar"

Salimah felt deeply sad at heart. She stared at her child, listening to theAzān . The baby was asleep and breathed quietly.Salimah could not take it anymore. She got up and put on her clothes. She performed ablution and slowly took her child in her arms. She went out of the house in a hurry, to get to the mosque in time for mass prayer. She looked straight ahead of herself and not paying attention to her surrounding strode quickly towards the mosque to be in time for the prayer. Her feet moved involuntary towards the mosque.

She became calm when she arrived at the mosque. The prayer had not started yet. She was joyful for being at the mosque in time. She slowly entered the mosque.Salimah looked at her child. The baby had woken with a sweet smile on its lips.Salimah thought, "Why did I trouble myself all this time? I could've brought my child to the mosque like now. It's a pity to pray alone at home and not attend the mass prayer. It's a blessing, even if I pray just one "Rak'a " with the prophet."Salimah had not yet stood in the rows of prayer, when she heard theMuazzin crying, "Ajjeloo beSalah ," meaning, hurry up to prayer.Salimah quickly stood in one of the rows. She was looking around for a suitable place to put her child, when she heard the voice of the Prophet saying, "Allaho -Akbar".

The praying started.Salimah laid her child on the straw mat, which covered the floor of the mosque. Her child was quiet.Salimah glanced at its face and wished that the baby would keep quiet until the end of the prayer, so she could perform a peaceful prayer after three months.Salimah prepared herself quickly and stood to prayer…

The pleasant voice of the Prophet was heard. Apart from his voice, nothing else could be heard. It seemed that the mosque, the birds, and the sky were all silent and still, to listen to the voice of the Prophet, praying.Salimah listened to the Prophet reciting theSurah , Al-Fatihah , with all her heart. For three months, she had missed listening to the recitation of thisSurah in the Prophet's voice.Salimah's heart was filled with happiness and serenity.

With the hearing of "Allaho -Akbar," all prayers prostrated,

-"Sobhana Rabi-al-Azime va behamdeh …Allaho -Akbar"

And suddenlySalimah's baby started to cry.

Salimah's heart sank. In the pleasant silence of the mosque, the sound of her child seemed very loud. The baby was crying continuously.Salimah was not aware of the way she finished thatRak'a . She blamed herself, for disturbing others by bringing her baby to the mosque. She wished to finish her prayer as fast as possible, to take her child away.

"Allaho -Akbar"…all prayers stood up. So didSalimah . The baby continued to cry.

The Messenger of God recited the words of the prayer hurriedly. He performed the prostrations very quickly. The secondRak'a was done very fast. The thirdRak'a was also done a lot faster than the other evenings.

Salimah's child was still crying.Salimah was so anxious that she did not realize that the Prophet had ended the prayer sooner than before.Salimah was sad at heart and ashamed that she had disturbed the peace of other prayers. She was about to take her child and go, when she confronted with the smiling face of the Prophet. The Prophet had kneeled next to the baby and he was smiling at it. The baby became quiet when it saw the smiling face of the Prophet.

The prayers were surprised of the quick prayer of that evening. They were even more surprised when they saw the Prophet getting up straight after the prayer. When the Prophet returned they all went towards him and asked the reason for what he had done.

The Prophet answered, "Didn't you all hear a baby weeping and crying?"

Everyone understood that the Prophet had finished the prayer sooner, to quiet the child.Salimah too, heard what the Prophet said. She knew that the Prophet had finished the prayer sooner so she could care her baby. She was not embarrassed anymore. She turned to the baby and said, "You naughty child, you cried so much, that you attracted the attention of the Prophet to yourself. When you grow up, I shall tell you how much the Prophet loved the children."

Not Out of Rage

After some thirty days of tiresome march the army of Mecca reached the outskirts of the city of Medina. AbuSofyan , commander ofMeccan infidels, had, since a long time before, prepared this large army. His plan was to carry out a big raid upon Medina, which was the center of the new government of Islam. He had also planned to kill the holy Prophet and his loyal friends and overthrow Islam. TheMeccan infidels, in order to make sure of the success of their evil plan, concluded a pact with the Jews of Medina, who were great enemies to Islam, and intended to attack Medina with an army of about ten thousand soldiers.

When theMeccan army reached the city of Medina, they were faced with a strange scene. Round the city a wide canal of three to four meters depth had been dug. Inside the canal, too, many obstacles had been placed, so that despite their every effort the infidels could not overcome these obstacles and enter the city.

The Muslims of Medina had learned of the infields' raid. So, on the suggestion ofSalman Farsi, who was an Iranian Muslim and a faithful friend of the Prophet, they had dug this canal round the city before the enemy's imminent attack.

TheMeccan infidels who never expected such a measure, halted in awe and amazement. They had cherished the hope of entering the city on their horsebacks, easily and unchecked, to massacre the Muslims. But the canal round the city proved to be an insurmountable barrier for the pagans.

Then, AbuSofyan broke the terrible silence of his frustrated army with a loud cry which showed his rage and anxiety. He ordered his troops to camp near the canal so that he might consult his army officers to find a solution. Very soon the tents were raised and the city of Medina surrounded by the army of Abu-Sofyan .

The siege lasted many days. AbuSofyan's army soon became tired and weary.

They were deeply enraged at being unable to find a way to infiltrate the city. Inside the city the Muslims who were about three thousands in number, with their trust in God, were preparing for the confrontation and each time the enemy army intended to pass the canal, they would pour showers of arrows upon them.

One day, however, an incident took place. In the infidel army there was a soldier named 'Amr Ibn-Abduwod who had won great fame as a brave warrior among all Arabs. He had become weary and angry that the siege had had taken so long. So, he mounted his horse and surveyed the canal several times. Suddenly, he chose a sport where the width of the canal was shortest and managed to jump over to the other side of the canal.

This caused a great uproar in both armies and all eyes turned towards him. TheMeccan infidels encouraged him with their cries of support.

When 'Amr reached the vanguard of the Muslim army, he waved his sword in the air and boastfully challenged a match, saying: "Hark! Is there anyone who dares to step into the field to confront me?"

The Muslims held their breaths in the breasts and bowed their heads. To fight against such a powerful warrior was not a simple matter.

Suddenly, a voice from among the Muslimarmy, broke the silence. It was the voice of Ali (p.b.u.h .) who had volunteered to fightAmr , and was begging Prophet's permission to enter the field.

The Prophet had not yet consented to Ali's request to fight whenAmr once more shouted: "Hark! I have kept on calling for a fighter so many times that my throat had got hoarse. Is there no one to take up the challenge? O Muslims? Do you not claim that on being killed you will send me to hell? So let one of you come and send me to hell or go to heaven himself!"

Again Imam Ali begged the Prophet's permission to fight 'Amr , but again the Prophet did not give permission.

'Amr kept on bragging andwith each bravado the shouts of the infidels' acclaim filled the air. Then he galloped his horse round about the field and for the third time called for a challenger.

Again Ali volunteered to take up his challenge, and this time the Prophet gave him the permission to do so. Imam Ali, smiling and confident with a heart full of faith, took firm and steadfast steps towards his adversary, and addressed him saying, "Amr , keep quiet! Now your challenger is coming to you without the slightest fear!"

All eyes were turned to the field of battle. The infidel army's clamor gradually died down and they stretched their necks to see who had dared to take up the challenge of their great champion. The Prophet who had his eyes on the gallant Imam Ali said: "Now the whole of infidelity is facing the whole of faith." Then he prayed for Ali.

'Amr pulled back the rein of his horse and quieted it he then peered to see the challenger who had dared to confront him. When Imam Ali came in full view, 'Amr looked him up and down, and then said in a tone of surprise: "Young Man! Who are you that wish to lose your life so easily? Have you not heard my name?"

Ali responded: "I have heard your name; and I am 'AliIbn -Abi-Taleb !"

On hearing 'Ali's name, 'Amr trembled with fear and remembered Ali's valiant bravery with battles ofBadr ans Uhod . Then be urged on his horse to getnearerto Ali, and said in a low voice: "O son ofAbi-Taleb ! You are very young. You have plenty of time to live in this world. It would be a pity to take your life so soon. Go back and let someone else come to fight me!"

Ali took another step forward and said: "O 'Amr ! I have come to fight you. Did you not brawl for a match?"

'Amr reasoned: "I have been a friend of your father,Abi-Taleb , and have no wish to see you immersed in your blood!"

Ali said: "O 'Amr ! I have been told that if in the field of battle your adversary makes three requests to you, you will surely grant one of them."

'Amr said: "Yes. What you have heard is true."

Imam 'Ali then said: "Now I have three requests from you; one of which you must fulfill."

'Amr said: "What are they?"

The Imam said: "First, give up infidelity and idolatry and submit that Muhammad is the rightful Prophet and thus live with honor and freedom among the Muslims."

"Amr said: "This is impossible. What is your next request?"

The Imam said: "Abstain from fighting us and return from the very way you have come. Your horse can take you to the other side of the canal."

Amr retorted angrily: "If I return to the other side of the canal I shall be disgracefully reproached by the other soldiers. So, you can be sure that I shall not return before I strike a heavy blow on theMedanese army."

At this answer Imam Ali smiled and concluded: "My third request is that you dismount from your horse to fight me!"

Amr became so greatly enraged that he immediately leapt down from the horse and charged against Imam Ali.

Both armies kept perfect silence, and waited for the outcome of this duel.

Amr waved his sword in the air and brought it down with all his might upon Ali's head, but Ali swiftly protected his head with his shield, and the clash of the sword and shield echoed loudly in the silent field. For a moment the joyful uproar of the infidels dominated the groans of the Muslims.

As a result of this blow Imam 'Ali's shield was split and the corner of 'Amr's sword wounded the Imam's head slightly. 'Ali dressed his wound in a brisk and before 'Amr could collect himself for another assault, the Imam advanced him. He clasped the hilt of his sword firmly with both hands and swiftly swished 'Amr on the body. The flash of the swordsparkled the eyes of the infidels' army and the great historical blow of truth was dealt by Imam Ali.

The blow was so forceful that it could have shaken a mountain, and this it could have shaken a mountain, and this single blow knocked the wretched 'Amr down. Both armies craned their necks in curiosity to see the proceeding amidst the clouds of dust. They could not quite make out the one who was lying down on the ground.

At this moment a Victorious chant put an end to the deadly expectation of both armies. It was the voice of Imam 'Ali, chanting Allah-o-Akbar [God is Great]. The whole army of Islam, hearing 'Ali's voice, joined in chanting, Allah-o-Akbar, which sank the hearts of the infidels to the bottom. 'Amr's wounds were so deep that he was unable to rise.

Imam 'Ali sat on 'Amr's chest, as it was the code of conduct to end his pair. 'Amr was livid with rage and envy at his defeat by the lion-hearted man of Islam. This mental pain was so great that he forgot his physical pain. So in his last moment he resorted to aninsolent and unmanly act, and in his helplessness to move, he suddenly spat on the face of Imam 'Ali.

This moment another heroic act began to take place. Imam 'Ali, who had raised his sword to finish off the work lowered it slowly, rose from 'Amr's chest, and cleaned his face. He let out e deep sigh, looking up at heaven, and began walking to and fro.

The enemy forces, 'Amr and even theMeccan army were struck with astonishment.

They asked themselves:

-Why did 'Ali rise from 'Amr's chest?

- Why does he not end it all?

-Why is he walking to and fro?

-Why doesn't he finish off the work?

-What is 'Ali thinking about?

There were so many 'whys'. But no one but God and His Prophet could know what was in 'Ali's mind or the reason for it. In those moments an utmost faith in God and in His satisfaction was surging within the mind of the Imam.When 'Amr committed his mean and lowly act, 'Ali became very angry, and everyone expected him to kill 'Amr at once. But contrary to the general expectation, 'Ali did not do so. At that moment he thought that killing 'Amr at that instant would be attributed to his own anger. So he rose from 'Amr's chest and walked about until his anger subsided. Then he knelt on 'Amr's chest and with a manly blow, which was dealt only for God's satisfaction and not in revenge, killed 'Amr and returned victoriously to the Muslim army.

'Amr possessed a valuable chain-mail and sword. It was customary among the Arabs that the victor took the mail and weapon of the vanquished for himself. But Imam Ali in his chivalry left those objects of 'Amr in the field.

Some days later when 'Amr's sister heard the news of her brother's death, she inquired who had killed her brother. When she was told that Ali had done so, she said without any show of uneasiness and anger: 'If my brother had been killed by anyone else but Ali, I would have wept and groaned. But I know that Ali is a manly, noble and peerless warrior, and my brother's death at the hand of such a man need not be lamented."

This historical combat of the Imam filled the infidel army with despair, and after a while they abandoned their siege of Medina in defeat and went away.

The significance of Imam Ali's strike in the battle of Ditch (Khandagh ) was so great that the Prophet said: "Ali'sstike in that battle was worthier than the religious devotions of all human beings and angles."

Revelation of Delight

A heavy cold silence has taken over Medina. The people of the town, tired from their daily work have gone to their homes to rest.

The stars have decorated the sky. The earth is lighted from the soft, pale glow of the moon which has spread its rays like a silk cloth over the small mud-built houses of Medina.

Medina is silent and quiet and the only sound which gives it life is the echo of the strong steps of the Prophet. He is getting closer to Ali's home.

The Prophet is accompanied by two of his followers. They too are pondering about what is worrying the Prophet.

Not only them, but the entire town knows how much the Prophet lovesHasan andHussain .

Everybody knows that the Prophet gets sad from what saddensHasan andHussain and is pleased from what pleases them. Everyone knows that his love for them is not just the love of a grandfather for two adorable sweet grandsons. It's a divine love; a divine affection. All Muslims know that they must follow the Prophet and loveHasan andHussain .

Because lots of times before, they had seen the Prophet in front of the eyes of everyone saying, "Oh, God, I loveHasan andHussain . Love whoever may love them."

Now the Prophet and two of his followers have reached Ali's home. The sweet warm voice of the Prophet echoes through the house:

-Dear Ali, darling Fatima, greetings to you. I've come to visit my children with two others. May we come in?

It is the eager voice of Ali and Fatima that is heard from inside the house:

-Greetings to you and the bliss of God! Welcome. Come in please.

First the scent of the Prophet and them himself and his followers enter the house. But this timeHasan andHussain don't come running towards the Prophet. This time they do not throw themselves in his arms nor give themselves to his kisses.

TonightHasan andHussain are in their sickbeds and their illness has weakened them. They open their eyes with difficulty. But they do not find the power in their limbs to get up.

The Prophet, worried and impatient, goes towards their sickbed, rolls his cloak around his legs and sits next to the children kissing their faces.

-What's the matter my dear ones? I hope God removes this illness from you and give your health back.

Hasan andHussain circle their hands around the Prophet's neck and hug him. Although this house belongs to the commander of the Islamic army, but nothing is found in it to serve the guests.

Ali apologizes for not having anything to serve the guests. However, the Prophet and his followers know that Ali's poverty is his honor and the honor of Islam. They know that if Ali wanted, he could have had the best of livings. It was the lifestyle which Ali and Fatima had chosen, themselves.

Therefore, the guests are served with love, kindness and sincerity of the host.

Before leaving, the Prophet asks Ali:

-Dear Ali! Don't you want to perform a vow for the cure of their illness?

Ali answers without hesitation:

-Yes, I will vow three days of fasting. If God gave back their health I will fast for three continuous days.

Fatima, hearing what the Prophet and Ali said, she says:

-I too, vow that if God gave back the health of my children, I fast three continuous days.

Hasan andHussain open their tired eyes and say:

-We will fast for three days too.

And they feel the lips of the Prophet on their faces.

"Fezzah " is a woman who has been the servant of Amana, the Prophet's mother, for years. Now, she has voluntarily come to this house to be the companion of Fatima and learn the lesson of life from her. She, like the rest of her dear ones, vows to fast for three continuous days for the cure ofHasan andHussain .

* * *

It is a little after their vow that God gives back the health toHasan andHussain . They both get up from their sickbeds, strong and refreshed.

It is now the time to fulfill their vow and the household are all fasting. For breaking their fasts, there is only grain for five breads, which Fatima andFezzah prepare and cook.

The breads are cooked; one per person. They all sit waiting for Ali to come back from the mosque, so they could break their fasts together.

When Ali returns from the mosque, they all sit down to eat after a day of fasting and hunger.

Their hands have not reached the food when a knock on the door is heard:

-I am a poor, wretched beggar. Oh household of the Prophet! I pray God to serve you from his heavenly foods. Help me. My family and I are hungry…

The beggar has not finished his words yet that Ali rises to give his bread to him. Fatima's bread is put on top of Ali's and thenHasan ,Hussain andFezzah do the same? Five breads, the entire dinner of a fasting household is given to a beggar.

Now, there is only water to be served. The five fasters break their fasts with water alone, and thank God!

The second day of fasting is here. Again five breads are prepared for dinner. After two days of hunger and fasting, the hands go towards the hot breads which are the only food in the house; when again there is a knock on the door…

-Oh, household of the Prophet! I am an orphan child that has nothing to eat. Please help me.

A hand, with five breads in it, comes out from behind the door. The breads are given to the child along with good wishes and blessings. Again, the fasters break the second day of their fast with water. Hunger has drained their energy.

The food for the third day of their fasting is the same as the previous nights; flour enough for five breads.

Ali is a powerful man and hunger is something which he is used to. However, how can the slender and delicate Fatima,Fezzeh , and the two children who have just recovered from illness bear two days of hunger and not eat even a single piece of bread?

Anyway, they are fasting on the third day of their huger.

As they get closer to the time of breaking their fasts, their hands start to shake from starvation. The eyes ofHasan andHussain are sunken and they cannot walk nor stand on their feet from hunger. Ali returns from the mosque and there are five breads to eat and a bowl of water. Who knows how these three days have been for the members of this family? How appetizing this piece of bread looks!

Hasan andHussain pull themselves towards the food and stretch their hands towards the breads like the others. But… there is again a knock on the door…

The sound of the knock leaves the hands hanging in the air.

-Hello to the household of the Prophet! Oh, Mohammad's family! Please help a captive that has been hungry for a long time…

Nobody hesitates for a moment. The hands that had been stretched towards the breads to take a piece ofthem, put the breads in one pile and put them in the hands of the captive!

The only thing that gives this pained family strength and power is the joy of giving and self-sacrifice; the joy of giving when you are in need; to take the morsel from your starving mouth and giving it to another hungry being. Only God can value such a deed and knowits worth.

Ali looks at the pale yellow faces of his children and thinks with himself:

-visiting the Prophet will lessen pains and makes we forget our hunger. He turns toHasan andHussain and says,

-let's pay a visit to your grandfather.

The joy of seeing the Prophet excites the children and the three of them go towards his house.

When the Prophet sees the colorless and pale faces of his grandchildren and their delicate bodies, which shake from hunger, tears fill his eyes.

- How can I bear to see my children in such a condition? Oh God, witness what the family of your Prophet do to gain your pleasure. Get up my dear ones to see how my darling Fatima is doing. How has she spent these three days?

Fatima's eyes are sunken from hunger, and her legs are weak, but she still continues to pray.

The Prophet embraces his darling Fatima and cries in a way that his shoulders tremble.

Who can see the loved ones of the God in such a condition and be unmoved?

At this time the air is filled with a beautiful fragrance and Gabriel comes down to the Prophet.

-Oh Mohammad! Accept the gift which I have brought for your family.

-Gabriel! What have you brought with you?

-First the mercy and bliss of God for this family, and then verses about their matchless deed has been sent down.

Real value is in a work that brings about the pleasure of God. I, the faithful Gabriel, the bringer of revelation, and the link between you and God, do not find a greater gift than this.

In these verses, the almighty God has introduced this fasting group as "the righteous ones" and has described their state in heaven:

God protects the ones who perform vows and are fearful of the Day of Judgment and give their food out of love of God to the poor, the orphaned and the captive, saying:

"We only feed you for God's sake. We desire from you neither reward nor thanks. Surely we fear from our God, a stern distressing Day."

Therefore God will guard them from the evil of that Day and cause them to meet with ease and happiness.

And the reward of them for their patience is Heaven.

Reclining therein on raised couches they shall find therein neither heat nor cold.

And the shades of the garden will come down over them. And its fruits will hang low and easy to reach…

Surely this is the reward for you and your endeavor is accepted and recognized.

Now,Hasan ,Hussain ,Fezzeh , Fatima, and Imam Ali no longer feel hungry. Their starvation does no longer bother them and it is replaced by feelings of happiness and glory.

They all bow and thank their God for this wonderful great gift.

Acknowledgments and Observations

The present book is the first English edition of an article which was published in an academic journal in 1994 under the name “El Islām Ši'ita: ¿ortodoxia o heterodoxia?” [Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy?]. The article was well-received in academic circles and was soon widely circulated on various Islāmic sites on the Internet thanks to a digital edition published by the Biblioteca Islámica Ahlul Bayt in Sevilla, Spain.

Thereafter, in the year 2000, the article was published in three parts in Az-Zaqalain, a Spanish language academic journal published in Qum, Iran. In response to the interest received by the article, Dr. John A. Morrow decided to translate it, edit it, and turn it into a book. As often occurs in such cases, the challenge of turning an article into a book relates to its amplification. Dr. Morrow resolved this problem by including an exhaustive amount of notes and bibliographical information from Arabic and Persian sources which, due to their quantity and quality, should be seen as a notable contribution to the original work of the author.

For all intents and purposes, this book constitutes a slightly modified version of that article originally published in Epimelia: Revista de Estudios Sobre La Tradición. The journal in question is the official academic organ of the Center for Research into the Philosophy and History of Religion (CIFHIRE) [Centro de Investigaciones en Filosofía e Historia de Las Religiones] at the Department of Philosophy of the School of Graduate Studies at John F. Kennedy Argentine University.

The book, in its present form, contains nothing new with the exception of the valuable critical and biographical notes, the translator's preface, and the detailed index, provided by Dr. Morrow. It also contains a prologue by the author and an appendix in which we further expound upon our criticism of Orientalism, from the point of view of the philosophy of the history of religion, to the broader field of social studies. Besides these addendums, we have not modified the original text in any substantial fashion for obvious reasons.

For starters, it would be impossible to alter the sentences without changing their original intent. Furthermore, any such changes might arouse suspicion, leading some readers to believe that they were done for Editorial reasons. And finally, one of the main reasons for not making any changes, save those slight details brought to our attention by those who reviewed the original Spanish version or its English translation, is that the work was written with great haste in the space of two months.

It was produced with the specific purpose of responding to endless allegations of Orientalists who, unsatisfied with characterizing Shī'ism as a fundamentalist form of Islām, stubbornly insisted on labeling it as a heterodox sect. By doing so, these scholars were merely echoing old Orientalist prejudices and supporting Muslim reformists. This reformist sector was quickly embraced by Western Orientalists as proponents of “moderate” Islām” while the traditional sector was labeled as representatives of “extremist Islām,” dangerous “fundamentalists” who make militant and violent interpretations of faith based on the Qur'ān.

The purpose of the original study, which has now been converted into a book, was to address this conceptual error which is incessantly repeated, ad nauseam, in academic circles and which passes from textbook to textbook. However, when the time came to review the book for publication, we felt much less optimistic with regards to our goal of conveying to Western readers that Shī'ite Islām is not an extreme, heterodox, fundamentalist or fanatical sect.

Evidently, we never pretended to provide a definitive “solution” to such a complex problem. Any such effort would require broader and more detailed studies. We acknowledge that many of the issues related to the topic remained outside the scope of our study. Although we are most conscious of the gaps in our study, we would never even dream of trying to fill them in the space of this exposition. Such exclusion is the understandable result of the need to assume a determined perspective, forcing us to be selective in our choice of the material covered.

In order to avoid confusing or misleading our readers, we must point out that we never proposed to write an introduction to Shī'ite Islām. This book does not study certain aspects which are crucial in the understanding of the political and metaphysical thought of Twelver Shī'ism. It may touch upon them, it may gloss over them, but is certainly does not study them in depth. Although we have drawn from primary sources in Arabic and Persian, presenting various legal and theological views with respect to issues like consensus [ijmā'], as well as traditional exegesis, both ancient and contemporary, it was not the objective of this book to expound exhaustively upon the views of every school of thought.

Our immediate and most pressing goal was to demonstrate that Shī'ite Islām is a genuine, legal and spiritual expression of traditional Islām, both in orthodoxy and orthopraxy. In the same way that Sunnī Islām is based in doctrine and practice on the basic principles of the Qur'ān and prophetic tradition, so is Shī'ite Islām, which, in its traditional form, has the added advantage of having been preserved and reaffirmed by a continuous and direct line of successors, the Holy Imāms, the natural heirs of the wilāyah, the Cycle of Prophecy.

The goal of this book, then, is to demonstrate that, far from being a heretical schismatic sect or fundamentalist form of Islām, as one hears over and over again, and which is more or less groundless, Shī'ism is the living expression of original Muhammadan Islām, perfectly preserved by his successors, the Holy Imāms from the Prophetic Household [Ahlul Bayt].

It was for this reason, that we proposed, without any polemical or apologetic intent, to present the Shī'ite point of view, with the highest possible degree of objectivity, without any concession to influence by the prejudiced views of its detractors, be they Muslim or non-Muslim. We have presented Shī'ite Islām from a Shī'ite point of view. We made sure to put aside outside influences received during our academic formation for, as G. Bachelard has pointed out, these can turn into real epistemological obstacles which impede objectivity.

Readers should not be offended if, at given moments, they get the impression that they are reading a panegyric. This impression is to be expected as this work does not contain the redundant repetition of pejorative postulations presented in Orientalist works which claim to present Islām and the Arab world “objectively.” Despite the overt contempt its secular ideologists manifest towards Islām, the West remains cynically passive.

This attitude, however, can only be understood within its historical context. The Western animosity towards Islām forms part of a long history of cultural encounters through which the West attempted to impose its hegemony on the East. It should come as no surprise that the unrepressed hatred towards Islām and Arabs forms the very basis of much Western Orientalism.

In many cases, Orientalism has been more or less officially at the service of the intellectual self-satisfaction of secular illustrated despotism and the conservatism of Western imperialist authoritarianism. Be it politically, militarily or intellectually, Western imperialism rarely hides its overwhelming aversion towards those who resist being physically or economically annexed as colonies, and those who refuse to be assimilated culturally, linguistically, mentally and spiritually.

It should be known from the onset that we are not unaware of the various aspects which have fallen outside of the reach of our study. Despite shortcomings related to time and space, we have attempted to develop our arguments in the most satisfactory fashion, using all our abilities to help readers overcome their resistance to the topic, the result of heightened sensitivities caused by events of worldwide repercussions which, directly or indirectly, involve Shī'ite Islām.

Since this book was written so rapidly as a response to current events, it cannot be considered an introduction to Shī'ite Islām. Any such claim would do a grave injustice to Muslim scholars who have devoted their entire lives to the study of one of the many fields which this book has merely surveyed with a bird's eye view. We have merely shown some of the scenery of Shī'ism, not its depth and detail. However, in our own defense, the general overview we have provided may be justified by the fact that it is not the fruit of improvisation.

This book is the result of years of study on the origins of Shī'ite Islām. Even though the book was written during the first semester of the 1994 academic year, it should be mentioned that its final form was based on various preliminary versions and partial drafts from courses and lectures we delivered in the Seminarios de historia, pensamiento y cultura del mundo islámico [Lectures on the History, Thought, and Culture of the Islāmic World] between 1991 and 1992.

This series of lectures was organized by the Argentinean Institute for Islāmic Culture and the Cultural Bureau of the Iranian Embassy in Buenos Aires and took place in the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Buenos Aires. Any good which comes from this limited contribution to the topic of Shī'ite Islām is due, in great part, to the valuable critical interest displayed by colleagues, friends, and students, whose questions and observations contributed considerably to the preparation of the final version of the book.

The very idea of writing an article on the basis of those classes and lectures owes much to the guidance of Dr. Francisco García Bazán, Dean of the Department of Philosophy, and Director of the Center for Research into the History and Philosophy of Religion at John F. Kennedy Argentine University, as well as the Editor of the journal Epimeleia. Dr. García Bazán must be thanked, first and foremost, for encouraging me to write this article.

He deemed the article a necessary contribution to scholarship. He understood, much better than most Orientalists, that Shī'ism, although representing a minority tradition, represents a spiritual current of Gnostic illumination, law and theology, which is entirely Islāmic in orthodoxy and orthopraxy, to the same extent as mainstream and majority Sunnī Islām. To be sincere, we must recognize that it was our director, Dr. García Bazán, who revived our interest in writing that article which was always in an indefinite state and which we could never come around to completing.

Dr. García Bazán's constant encouragement gave us an almost journalistic rhythm of redaction and, in little time, he granted us the time and the confidence to transform those initial rough drafts into a completed work. We are greatly indebted to the generous spirit of Dr. F. García Bazán, who, besides always knowing how and when to help us, from start to finish, has been of great benefit due to his scholarly knowledge and experience, counseling and guiding us with mastery in many ways. We will always consider it a privilege and an honor to have worked besides this great master of philosophy and comparative religion. We also thank him for permitting us to republish our work.

We are equally grateful to Hujjat al-Islām wa al-Muslimīn Feisal Morhell of the World Center of Islāmic Sciences of the Hawzah 'Ilmiyyah from Qum in the Islāmic Republic of Iran, who also happens to be the Director of Cultural Affairs for the Fundación Cultural Oriente and Editor of the Spanish version of the academic journal Az-Zaqalain, for his interest in republishing the article which gave origin to this book.

Hujjat al-Islām wa al-Muslimīn Feisal Morhell is a young specialist in traditional Islāmic sciences who is not alien to this work since he proof-read our Arabic and Persian translations and, furthermore, provided us access to all of the primary Islāmic sources which appeared in the original article. The bibliography for the book, however, has been greatly amplified by Dr. John A. Morrow.

We would also like to thank Hujjat al-Islām wa al-Muslimīn Murtadā Beheshtī, General Director of the Islāmic Thought Foundation of Tehran, and the Editor-in-Chief of the Spanish version of the journal Az-Zaqalain; Hujjat al-Islām wa al-Muslimīn Sayyid Muhammad Rizvī, the resident 'ālim at the Ja'farī Islāmic Center in Toronto, Canada, and Dr. Liyakat 'Alī Takīm, Assistant Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Denver, whom we thank especially for reviewing the doctrinal, juridical, and historical aspects dealt with in the present book, with truly limitless dedication, patience and generosity.

There is no doubt whatsoever that we would have faced many difficulties during the preparation of this work were it not for the constant advice and observations made by these great scholars and brilliant Muslim. Thanks to their help, however, we have overcome many obstacles and we will be certain to include their contributions in a future edition of the Spanish version of the book.

There are many people in Argentina, the United States, Canada, the U.K., Spain, and Iran, who collaborated with us during the preparing of this study, in its dissemination, and in its first English translation. In this sense, we are particularly grateful to Mrs. Sumeia Younes from the World Center of Islāmic Sciences of the Hawzah 'Ilmiyyah in Qum in the Islāmic Republic or Iran and Editorial Secretary for the journal Az-Zaqalain, for reading the manuscript of the first Spanish article, as well as the American linguist, Mrs. Barbara Castleton, from Ohio University, who had the kindness of proofreading the English translation and preparing a commendatory preface.

To Mrs. Rachīda Bejja for painstakingly correcting the Arabic transliteration and for Mr. Gustavo César Bize, Associate Professor of Arabic and Islāmic Thought in the Faculty of Social Sciences of the Universidad de Buenos Aires and at the Universidad Nacional de 3 de Febrero in Buenos Aires who was in charge of reviewing the English translation. We are also grateful to the following young Islāmologists, Mr. Ángel Horacio Molina and Mrs. María Eugenia Gantus, who read the final Spanish and English versions of the work.

They are both young research scholars at the Center for Oriental Studies, School of Letters, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, at the Universidad Nacional de Rosario, in Santa Fe, Argentina, an institution associated with the Mullā Sadrā Center for Islāmic Studies and Research (CEDIMS) [Centro de Estudios y Documentación Islámicos Mullā Sadrā] at the Universidad Católica Argentina de La Plata (Sede Bernal). We are particularly grateful to its General Coordinator, Dr. Horacio López Romano, for the generous institutional space he has provided to us, opening us the door to his installations and Dr. Sonia Yebara, Director of the Center for Oriental Studies of the School of Literature of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at the Universidad Nacional de Rosario for their unselfish institutional support.

Other friends and colleagues read fragments or complete version of my rough drafts, providing an impressive volume of critical observations and facts. It would be impossible to mention them all. Nevertheless, we would like to express our gratitude to the following persons, whose constant kindness and cooperation facilitated our task: Mr. Ángel Almazán de Gracia, the Spanish cultural journalist, writer, and historian, who specializes in Sorian culture and Numantine archeology, for enthusiastically reading this work and citing it in many of his articles and books, as well as his generous and selfless support.

To Mr. Mikail Álvarez Ruiz, Director of the Biblioteca Islámica Ahlul Bayt from Sevilla, Spain, to whom we owe the first digital version of the Spanish original, and which has been well-received and distributed over the Internet. He was the first to conceive of the idea of turning our article into a book and he is also one of the most energetic promoters of our work on the Internet.

It was on the basis of the digital edition that he prepared that Dr. John A. Morrow based his English version. The valuable collaboration of Mr. Héctor H. Manzolillo, one of the most prolific and recognized translators of Islāmic texts in Spanish, also stands out. He was kind enough to review the notes to the English translation, making corrections which were greatly appreciated by the translator and Editor.

Finally, we would like to express our endless gratitude to the Editor, Dr. John A. Morrow, Assistant Professor of Modern Languages at Northern State University in the United States, to whom we owe the first English edition of our work, as well as his scrupulous critical annotations.

The exchanges which resulted from his translation have allowed us to know a marvelous human being, wise yet humble, who honors us by his irreplaceable friendship. We would also like to thank our wife, Mónica Delia Pereiras, for supporting patiently and lovingly our domestic “absences” through all the time it took us to write and correct this book.

We would also like to thank our three daughters, Ruth Noemí, María Inés and María de los Ángeles, whose affectionate interruptions made the labor of this book both pleasant and possible; to our parents, Saturnino and Elvira; to our brothers, Daniel and Cristina; and to all our family and friends for standing by us, unconditionally, in a thousand and one ways. And, last but not least, we would like to thank Mr. Muhammad Taqī Ansariyan and Mawlanā Muhammad Rizvī for encouraging and supporting this academic endeavor.

Professor Luis Alberto VittorProfessor Luis Alberto Vittor

Center for Research into the Philosophy and History of Religion (CIFHIRE)

Department of Philosophy, School of Graduate Studies

John F. Kennedy Argentine University

Mullā Sadrā Center for Islāmic Studies and Research (CEDIMS)

Department of Social and Political Sciences in Africa and the Middle East

Catholic University of Argentina de la Plata (Sede Bernal)

Associated with the Center for Oriental Studies

Faculty of Arts and Sciences, National University of Rosario

Genesis of the Work

As a result of the popularity of Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy, many readers have inquired about its genesis. In light of such interest, we decided that it would be worthwhile to contextualize the historical moment in which the work was created as well as its ultimate objective. As a close friend and colleague of the author, it is our privilege to share our inner knowledge of the works origin.

Although some rough drafts had been presented in the course of classes and conferences, it was not until 1994 that Luis Alberto Vittor felt the need to complete Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy. The author's desire to finish the work was motivated by two violent events: the explosions of the Israeli Embassy and the Asociación Mutal Israeli-Argentina or AMIA which occurred in Buenos, Aires, Argentina on March 17th and July 18th, 1994, terrorist attacks which were both attributed arbitrarily to Shī'ite Muslims.

Due to the circumstances in which it was written, the work was redacted rapidly in response to an urgent need to confront journalists, specialists, and international observers who joined together to label Shī'ite Islām as a “sect” which was “heterodox” with respect to “orthodox” Sunnī Islām. The author was also responding to seditious attempts to separate the Sunnī and Shī'ite schools of thought, labeling Shī'ites a minority of hard-core religious fanatics with a history of violence.

The enemies of Islām rallied around the tragic events in Argentina denouncing Shī'ites as “fundamentalists” and “terrorists.” Their objective was clear: a callous attempt to isolate Shī'ite Muslims from the Islāmic Ummah as an unorthodox faction composed of radical extremists.

In an unparalleled fashion, many Argentinean and American Orientalists, made tabula rasa with everything written about Shī'ite Islām from Corbin to the present, and started to echo the most hostile attitudes towards Islām expressed by early Orientalists and which had long been rejected. It was evident from the onset that certain academics were benefiting from the terrorist attacks in Argentina to launch an ideological assault against Shī'ite Muslims.

In their zeal to prove that Shī'ite Muslims had been the instigators or perpetrators of the most serious criminal attacks ever suffered by Argentineans, Argentinean and American academics stressed the minority character of Shī'ite Muslims, characterizing them as a group of sectarian zealots who stood in clear contrast to the moderation and orthodoxy of the Sunnī majority. Academic specialists, journalists, international observers, so-called “experts” on the Middle East, along with ex-intelligence officers, and military envoys, stressed the minority status of Shī'ites in order to accentuate their sectarianism.

Like cockroaches crawling from the under the wood-work in the dark hours of night, these “experts” on Islām attempted to give the Shī'ah Ithnā 'Asharī traits which belonged to other Shī'ite schools like the Ismā'īliyyah or the Zaydiyyah. They associated Twelver Shī'ites with Zaydī revolutionaries, and the Ismā'īlī Hashashīn or Assassins, in order to establish that Shī'ites were historically a group of extremist rebels who never hesitated to use radically violent methods against their enemies. The enemies of Islām employed Iblīsī analogies to say that Shī'ite Muslims were all murderers. They argued that since the Hashashīn or Assassins were Ismā'īlis, and the Ismā'īlis were Shī'ites, then every Shī'ite was a potential assassin.

Evidently, both the premises and the conclusion were false. Nevertheless, this syllogism had the expected effect. The press and the airwaves were soon speaking about Shī'ite terrorism, Shī'ite fundamentalism, Shī'ite extremism, as if they were all synonyms. It was imperative for someone to come forward to demonstrate that these terms were the result of false logic or a false logical construct whose sole objective was to demean Shī'ite Muslims.

In an attempt to give credence to accusations against Shī'ite Muslims, there are those who continue to insist that the terrorist attacks which took place in 1992 and 1994 in the city of Buenos Aires were the work of Shī'ite Muslims. In effect, the majority of encyclopedias continue to attribute these crimes to Hizbullāh or the Islāmic Republic of Iran. Despite such stubbornness, nobody in Argentina believes in these accusations and Argentinean authorities are now exploring an Israeli trail. As a result, Washington is putting pressure on the Argentine government to put an end to its investigation which is starting to annoy the United States and Israel.

The Argentinean people, however, want the guilty parties brought to justice as the events were not without deadly consequence for Argentine society. On the 17th of March of 1992, a violent explosion destroyed the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aries and seriously damaged the adjacent Catholic Church and school. Twenty-nine people were killed and 242 were injured. The deaths were gruesome. Argentine television broadcasted streets littered with human remains and rubble, pieces of mutilated corpses, like the leg of a woman with a sock and shoe which was severed from her body.

In the early days of the investigation, efforts were directed towards the Islāmist trail. It was believed that the attack had been committed by a Palestinian suicide bomber who drove a mini-van full of explosives. It was suggested that he was a member of Islāmic Jihād who wanted to avenge the death of 'Abbās al-Mūsawī, the head of the Lebanese Hizbullāh, and his family. According to this version, the Buenos Aires operation had been prepared by a group of Pakistanis and coordinated by Mohsen Rabbanī, the Cultural Attaché from the Iranian Embassy. This later was even detained, one year later, while he was in Germany, only to be liberated later due to lack of evidence.

On July 18th, 1994, another explosion devastated the Buenos Aires building of the Asociación Mutual Israelita-Argentina (AMIA) resulting in 85 deaths and 300 injured. The investigation into this new terrorist bombing also attempted to uncover an Islāmist trail. The attack was attributed to a so-called Islāmic “kamikazi:” 29 year old Ibrāhīm Husein Berro who supposedly drove a vehicle full of explosives.

While it is true that Ibrāhīm Husein Berro existed, his brother demonstrated that he died in Lebanon several years before and not in the attack in Buenos Aires. Whoever drove the vehicle full of explosives, it could not have been Ibrāhīm Berro. Years later a warrant was released for the arrest of Imad Mughniyyah, a member of the Lebanese Hizbullāh. Later, the ex-Ambassador of Iran in Argentina, Hade Soleimanpur, was detained in the United Kingdom but had to be released due to lack of evidence.

All of these elements, which seem to be definitive conclusions, have been reflected for years in various encyclopedias, books, and journalistic articles, although nothing can confirm them. The most interesting thing is that with the passing of time some Argentinean investigative journalists have debunked the versions of events proposed by the Israelis and the Americans, developing their own hypothesis which is the exact opposite. According to investigations conducted in Argentina, the two attacks were committed by Israeli agents in order to counter the growing anti-Zionism of the Jewish community in Argentina. This discovery, however, took place after Vittor published his article in Epimelia.

At present, the supposed intellectual or material connection of Islāmists to the Buenos Aires attacks has largely lost credibility. The Islāmist trail is simply inconsistent with the facts and it for this reason that the American and Israeli government are pressuring the Argentineans to put an end to their investigation. While it is presently possible to speak about these events with hindsight and tranquility, the only individual who dared speak about such events, and defend Shī'ite Islām when it was being attacked by international public opinion, was Luis Alberto Vittor.

Like Prophet Yahyā, Luis Alberto Vittor was a voice in the wilderness, exposing himself to criticism, threats, and physical danger. Unlike some of the official Islāmic authorities who stood still, making themselves complicit through their silence, Vittor raised his voice and pen in defense of Shī'ite Islām at a time when doing so was associating oneself, explicitly or implicitly, to a Muslim minority of “extremists” and “terrorists.”

Putting his trust in Almighty Allāh and the solidarity of his fellow Muslims, all of whom were simple believers with no power or political influence, Vittor produced the present work which was viewed as a moral and intellectual duty. Surely, in this lies the greatest value of his work.Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy must be viewed as a work of service in defense of the followers of Ahlul Bayt. At the time it was written, there was not a single Orientalist, Arabist or Islāmologist, in Argentina or abroad, who was willing or capable of defending Shī'ite Islām.

While the Shī'ite community was being attacked from all sides, some Sunnī Muslims sought to separate themselves from the Shī'ites, echoing the arguments of the enemies of Islām who claimed that the followers of Ahlul Bayt were sectarian extremists (ghulāt).

As if that were not enough, Shī'ite convertswere accused of having links to so-called “Iranian-inspired Islāmic terrorism.” In order to divert attention from themselves, some sectors of the Sunnī community insisted on proving the Orientalists thesis correct, accusing the Shī'ite community of committing the terrorist bombings when the real perpetrators of the atrocities were not even Muslims.

As a result of these actions, many Shī'ites, both Iranians and Latinos, suffered from severe social discrimination. Many mu'minīn [believers] lost their jobs. Many mu'minīn [believers] were forced out of university, including a group of Iranian medical students. Being both Shī'ite and Iranian was seen as synonymous with terrorism and criminality. Fear ran so high during those days that, out of the entire community, only six or seven brothers, two of them converts, dared to attend the sole Shī'ite mosque in the city.

Rather than coming to the rescue of Shī'ite Muslims who were falsely accused of being violent sectarian terrorists, Orientalists like Bernard Lewis came forth to add fuel to the fire, arguing that there was a historic continuity and an ideological bond between medieval Muslims assassins, who were Ismā'īlīs, and contemporary Shī'ite fundamentalists or extremists, who were Ja'farīs. For those who dabble in academic dishonesty, they were one and the same: socially maladjusted minorities who resorted to violence and terrorism as their only means of expression.

When one reads Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy, it is important to remember the context in which it was created. At a moment in which the enemies of Islām were attempting to divide the Ummah, Luis Alberto Vittor pulled up his sleeves and pulled out his pen to demonstrate that Shī'ite Islām, despite being a minority, was as orthodoxy as the majority Sunnī Islām.

And not only that, the author demonstrated that Shī'ite Islām was the only group which remained faithful to the will of Allāh and the Prophet Muhammad: to hold fast to the Two Treasures, the Qur'ān and the Household of the Prophet.

Besides presenting the Shī'ite position, the author's goal was to reestablish the balance between Sunnism and Shī'ism which some sectors were attempting to destabilize, labeling one group as orthodox and another as sectarian, heterodox, extremist, and heretical. It is for this reason that the author devotes so much time to explaining why it is improper to label Muslims as “fundamentalists.”

Considering the context and extraordinary circumstances in which the book was written, completely changes one's critical appreciation of the work. Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy was a lone voice denouncing despots in the desert, a strident voice denouncing the indifference of academia and the vested interests of those who sought to define Shī'ite Islām as a radical, sectarian, heterodox form of Islām rather than a traditional expression of its orthodoxy and orthopraxis.

Although the author has accepted that his work to be annotated, he has always insisted that it remain intact as a reflection of the socio-historical context in which it was created. Attempting to modify certain concepts would undermine the very objective of the work, reducing it to a vain theoretical discussion. The author's goal, of course, was other: to demonstrate that the claims made by the detractors of Shī'ite Islām were false and illogical and that the fact that Shī'ite Islām has a minority status does not imply, from an Islāmic point of view, that it represents a sect in the sense in the Western Christian sense of the term.

The events of 1992 and 1994 which occurred in the city of Buenos Aires are not a thing of the past. Attempts to support the allegations made against the Shī'ite Muslims of Argentina continue to be made, accusing them of implication in the terrorist bombings. Despite the fact that thirteen years have passed since this work was originally published, it continues to be current. The enemies of Islām never sleep and nor do we.

15th of Sha'bān / August 28, 2007

Dr. John A. Morrow, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Modern Languages

Northern State University

Aberdeen, South Dakota

Acknowledgments and Observations

The present book is the first English edition of an article which was published in an academic journal in 1994 under the name “El Islām Ši'ita: ¿ortodoxia o heterodoxia?” [Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy?]. The article was well-received in academic circles and was soon widely circulated on various Islāmic sites on the Internet thanks to a digital edition published by the Biblioteca Islámica Ahlul Bayt in Sevilla, Spain.

Thereafter, in the year 2000, the article was published in three parts in Az-Zaqalain, a Spanish language academic journal published in Qum, Iran. In response to the interest received by the article, Dr. John A. Morrow decided to translate it, edit it, and turn it into a book. As often occurs in such cases, the challenge of turning an article into a book relates to its amplification. Dr. Morrow resolved this problem by including an exhaustive amount of notes and bibliographical information from Arabic and Persian sources which, due to their quantity and quality, should be seen as a notable contribution to the original work of the author.

For all intents and purposes, this book constitutes a slightly modified version of that article originally published in Epimelia: Revista de Estudios Sobre La Tradición. The journal in question is the official academic organ of the Center for Research into the Philosophy and History of Religion (CIFHIRE) [Centro de Investigaciones en Filosofía e Historia de Las Religiones] at the Department of Philosophy of the School of Graduate Studies at John F. Kennedy Argentine University.

The book, in its present form, contains nothing new with the exception of the valuable critical and biographical notes, the translator's preface, and the detailed index, provided by Dr. Morrow. It also contains a prologue by the author and an appendix in which we further expound upon our criticism of Orientalism, from the point of view of the philosophy of the history of religion, to the broader field of social studies. Besides these addendums, we have not modified the original text in any substantial fashion for obvious reasons.

For starters, it would be impossible to alter the sentences without changing their original intent. Furthermore, any such changes might arouse suspicion, leading some readers to believe that they were done for Editorial reasons. And finally, one of the main reasons for not making any changes, save those slight details brought to our attention by those who reviewed the original Spanish version or its English translation, is that the work was written with great haste in the space of two months.

It was produced with the specific purpose of responding to endless allegations of Orientalists who, unsatisfied with characterizing Shī'ism as a fundamentalist form of Islām, stubbornly insisted on labeling it as a heterodox sect. By doing so, these scholars were merely echoing old Orientalist prejudices and supporting Muslim reformists. This reformist sector was quickly embraced by Western Orientalists as proponents of “moderate” Islām” while the traditional sector was labeled as representatives of “extremist Islām,” dangerous “fundamentalists” who make militant and violent interpretations of faith based on the Qur'ān.

The purpose of the original study, which has now been converted into a book, was to address this conceptual error which is incessantly repeated, ad nauseam, in academic circles and which passes from textbook to textbook. However, when the time came to review the book for publication, we felt much less optimistic with regards to our goal of conveying to Western readers that Shī'ite Islām is not an extreme, heterodox, fundamentalist or fanatical sect.

Evidently, we never pretended to provide a definitive “solution” to such a complex problem. Any such effort would require broader and more detailed studies. We acknowledge that many of the issues related to the topic remained outside the scope of our study. Although we are most conscious of the gaps in our study, we would never even dream of trying to fill them in the space of this exposition. Such exclusion is the understandable result of the need to assume a determined perspective, forcing us to be selective in our choice of the material covered.

In order to avoid confusing or misleading our readers, we must point out that we never proposed to write an introduction to Shī'ite Islām. This book does not study certain aspects which are crucial in the understanding of the political and metaphysical thought of Twelver Shī'ism. It may touch upon them, it may gloss over them, but is certainly does not study them in depth. Although we have drawn from primary sources in Arabic and Persian, presenting various legal and theological views with respect to issues like consensus [ijmā'], as well as traditional exegesis, both ancient and contemporary, it was not the objective of this book to expound exhaustively upon the views of every school of thought.

Our immediate and most pressing goal was to demonstrate that Shī'ite Islām is a genuine, legal and spiritual expression of traditional Islām, both in orthodoxy and orthopraxy. In the same way that Sunnī Islām is based in doctrine and practice on the basic principles of the Qur'ān and prophetic tradition, so is Shī'ite Islām, which, in its traditional form, has the added advantage of having been preserved and reaffirmed by a continuous and direct line of successors, the Holy Imāms, the natural heirs of the wilāyah, the Cycle of Prophecy.

The goal of this book, then, is to demonstrate that, far from being a heretical schismatic sect or fundamentalist form of Islām, as one hears over and over again, and which is more or less groundless, Shī'ism is the living expression of original Muhammadan Islām, perfectly preserved by his successors, the Holy Imāms from the Prophetic Household [Ahlul Bayt].

It was for this reason, that we proposed, without any polemical or apologetic intent, to present the Shī'ite point of view, with the highest possible degree of objectivity, without any concession to influence by the prejudiced views of its detractors, be they Muslim or non-Muslim. We have presented Shī'ite Islām from a Shī'ite point of view. We made sure to put aside outside influences received during our academic formation for, as G. Bachelard has pointed out, these can turn into real epistemological obstacles which impede objectivity.

Readers should not be offended if, at given moments, they get the impression that they are reading a panegyric. This impression is to be expected as this work does not contain the redundant repetition of pejorative postulations presented in Orientalist works which claim to present Islām and the Arab world “objectively.” Despite the overt contempt its secular ideologists manifest towards Islām, the West remains cynically passive.

This attitude, however, can only be understood within its historical context. The Western animosity towards Islām forms part of a long history of cultural encounters through which the West attempted to impose its hegemony on the East. It should come as no surprise that the unrepressed hatred towards Islām and Arabs forms the very basis of much Western Orientalism.

In many cases, Orientalism has been more or less officially at the service of the intellectual self-satisfaction of secular illustrated despotism and the conservatism of Western imperialist authoritarianism. Be it politically, militarily or intellectually, Western imperialism rarely hides its overwhelming aversion towards those who resist being physically or economically annexed as colonies, and those who refuse to be assimilated culturally, linguistically, mentally and spiritually.

It should be known from the onset that we are not unaware of the various aspects which have fallen outside of the reach of our study. Despite shortcomings related to time and space, we have attempted to develop our arguments in the most satisfactory fashion, using all our abilities to help readers overcome their resistance to the topic, the result of heightened sensitivities caused by events of worldwide repercussions which, directly or indirectly, involve Shī'ite Islām.

Since this book was written so rapidly as a response to current events, it cannot be considered an introduction to Shī'ite Islām. Any such claim would do a grave injustice to Muslim scholars who have devoted their entire lives to the study of one of the many fields which this book has merely surveyed with a bird's eye view. We have merely shown some of the scenery of Shī'ism, not its depth and detail. However, in our own defense, the general overview we have provided may be justified by the fact that it is not the fruit of improvisation.

This book is the result of years of study on the origins of Shī'ite Islām. Even though the book was written during the first semester of the 1994 academic year, it should be mentioned that its final form was based on various preliminary versions and partial drafts from courses and lectures we delivered in the Seminarios de historia, pensamiento y cultura del mundo islámico [Lectures on the History, Thought, and Culture of the Islāmic World] between 1991 and 1992.

This series of lectures was organized by the Argentinean Institute for Islāmic Culture and the Cultural Bureau of the Iranian Embassy in Buenos Aires and took place in the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Buenos Aires. Any good which comes from this limited contribution to the topic of Shī'ite Islām is due, in great part, to the valuable critical interest displayed by colleagues, friends, and students, whose questions and observations contributed considerably to the preparation of the final version of the book.

The very idea of writing an article on the basis of those classes and lectures owes much to the guidance of Dr. Francisco García Bazán, Dean of the Department of Philosophy, and Director of the Center for Research into the History and Philosophy of Religion at John F. Kennedy Argentine University, as well as the Editor of the journal Epimeleia. Dr. García Bazán must be thanked, first and foremost, for encouraging me to write this article.

He deemed the article a necessary contribution to scholarship. He understood, much better than most Orientalists, that Shī'ism, although representing a minority tradition, represents a spiritual current of Gnostic illumination, law and theology, which is entirely Islāmic in orthodoxy and orthopraxy, to the same extent as mainstream and majority Sunnī Islām. To be sincere, we must recognize that it was our director, Dr. García Bazán, who revived our interest in writing that article which was always in an indefinite state and which we could never come around to completing.

Dr. García Bazán's constant encouragement gave us an almost journalistic rhythm of redaction and, in little time, he granted us the time and the confidence to transform those initial rough drafts into a completed work. We are greatly indebted to the generous spirit of Dr. F. García Bazán, who, besides always knowing how and when to help us, from start to finish, has been of great benefit due to his scholarly knowledge and experience, counseling and guiding us with mastery in many ways. We will always consider it a privilege and an honor to have worked besides this great master of philosophy and comparative religion. We also thank him for permitting us to republish our work.

We are equally grateful to Hujjat al-Islām wa al-Muslimīn Feisal Morhell of the World Center of Islāmic Sciences of the Hawzah 'Ilmiyyah from Qum in the Islāmic Republic of Iran, who also happens to be the Director of Cultural Affairs for the Fundación Cultural Oriente and Editor of the Spanish version of the academic journal Az-Zaqalain, for his interest in republishing the article which gave origin to this book.

Hujjat al-Islām wa al-Muslimīn Feisal Morhell is a young specialist in traditional Islāmic sciences who is not alien to this work since he proof-read our Arabic and Persian translations and, furthermore, provided us access to all of the primary Islāmic sources which appeared in the original article. The bibliography for the book, however, has been greatly amplified by Dr. John A. Morrow.

We would also like to thank Hujjat al-Islām wa al-Muslimīn Murtadā Beheshtī, General Director of the Islāmic Thought Foundation of Tehran, and the Editor-in-Chief of the Spanish version of the journal Az-Zaqalain; Hujjat al-Islām wa al-Muslimīn Sayyid Muhammad Rizvī, the resident 'ālim at the Ja'farī Islāmic Center in Toronto, Canada, and Dr. Liyakat 'Alī Takīm, Assistant Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Denver, whom we thank especially for reviewing the doctrinal, juridical, and historical aspects dealt with in the present book, with truly limitless dedication, patience and generosity.

There is no doubt whatsoever that we would have faced many difficulties during the preparation of this work were it not for the constant advice and observations made by these great scholars and brilliant Muslim. Thanks to their help, however, we have overcome many obstacles and we will be certain to include their contributions in a future edition of the Spanish version of the book.

There are many people in Argentina, the United States, Canada, the U.K., Spain, and Iran, who collaborated with us during the preparing of this study, in its dissemination, and in its first English translation. In this sense, we are particularly grateful to Mrs. Sumeia Younes from the World Center of Islāmic Sciences of the Hawzah 'Ilmiyyah in Qum in the Islāmic Republic or Iran and Editorial Secretary for the journal Az-Zaqalain, for reading the manuscript of the first Spanish article, as well as the American linguist, Mrs. Barbara Castleton, from Ohio University, who had the kindness of proofreading the English translation and preparing a commendatory preface.

To Mrs. Rachīda Bejja for painstakingly correcting the Arabic transliteration and for Mr. Gustavo César Bize, Associate Professor of Arabic and Islāmic Thought in the Faculty of Social Sciences of the Universidad de Buenos Aires and at the Universidad Nacional de 3 de Febrero in Buenos Aires who was in charge of reviewing the English translation. We are also grateful to the following young Islāmologists, Mr. Ángel Horacio Molina and Mrs. María Eugenia Gantus, who read the final Spanish and English versions of the work.

They are both young research scholars at the Center for Oriental Studies, School of Letters, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, at the Universidad Nacional de Rosario, in Santa Fe, Argentina, an institution associated with the Mullā Sadrā Center for Islāmic Studies and Research (CEDIMS) [Centro de Estudios y Documentación Islámicos Mullā Sadrā] at the Universidad Católica Argentina de La Plata (Sede Bernal). We are particularly grateful to its General Coordinator, Dr. Horacio López Romano, for the generous institutional space he has provided to us, opening us the door to his installations and Dr. Sonia Yebara, Director of the Center for Oriental Studies of the School of Literature of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at the Universidad Nacional de Rosario for their unselfish institutional support.

Other friends and colleagues read fragments or complete version of my rough drafts, providing an impressive volume of critical observations and facts. It would be impossible to mention them all. Nevertheless, we would like to express our gratitude to the following persons, whose constant kindness and cooperation facilitated our task: Mr. Ángel Almazán de Gracia, the Spanish cultural journalist, writer, and historian, who specializes in Sorian culture and Numantine archeology, for enthusiastically reading this work and citing it in many of his articles and books, as well as his generous and selfless support.

To Mr. Mikail Álvarez Ruiz, Director of the Biblioteca Islámica Ahlul Bayt from Sevilla, Spain, to whom we owe the first digital version of the Spanish original, and which has been well-received and distributed over the Internet. He was the first to conceive of the idea of turning our article into a book and he is also one of the most energetic promoters of our work on the Internet.

It was on the basis of the digital edition that he prepared that Dr. John A. Morrow based his English version. The valuable collaboration of Mr. Héctor H. Manzolillo, one of the most prolific and recognized translators of Islāmic texts in Spanish, also stands out. He was kind enough to review the notes to the English translation, making corrections which were greatly appreciated by the translator and Editor.

Finally, we would like to express our endless gratitude to the Editor, Dr. John A. Morrow, Assistant Professor of Modern Languages at Northern State University in the United States, to whom we owe the first English edition of our work, as well as his scrupulous critical annotations.

The exchanges which resulted from his translation have allowed us to know a marvelous human being, wise yet humble, who honors us by his irreplaceable friendship. We would also like to thank our wife, Mónica Delia Pereiras, for supporting patiently and lovingly our domestic “absences” through all the time it took us to write and correct this book.

We would also like to thank our three daughters, Ruth Noemí, María Inés and María de los Ángeles, whose affectionate interruptions made the labor of this book both pleasant and possible; to our parents, Saturnino and Elvira; to our brothers, Daniel and Cristina; and to all our family and friends for standing by us, unconditionally, in a thousand and one ways. And, last but not least, we would like to thank Mr. Muhammad Taqī Ansariyan and Mawlanā Muhammad Rizvī for encouraging and supporting this academic endeavor.

Professor Luis Alberto VittorProfessor Luis Alberto Vittor

Center for Research into the Philosophy and History of Religion (CIFHIRE)

Department of Philosophy, School of Graduate Studies

John F. Kennedy Argentine University

Mullā Sadrā Center for Islāmic Studies and Research (CEDIMS)

Department of Social and Political Sciences in Africa and the Middle East

Catholic University of Argentina de la Plata (Sede Bernal)

Associated with the Center for Oriental Studies

Faculty of Arts and Sciences, National University of Rosario

Genesis of the Work

As a result of the popularity of Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy, many readers have inquired about its genesis. In light of such interest, we decided that it would be worthwhile to contextualize the historical moment in which the work was created as well as its ultimate objective. As a close friend and colleague of the author, it is our privilege to share our inner knowledge of the works origin.

Although some rough drafts had been presented in the course of classes and conferences, it was not until 1994 that Luis Alberto Vittor felt the need to complete Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy. The author's desire to finish the work was motivated by two violent events: the explosions of the Israeli Embassy and the Asociación Mutal Israeli-Argentina or AMIA which occurred in Buenos, Aires, Argentina on March 17th and July 18th, 1994, terrorist attacks which were both attributed arbitrarily to Shī'ite Muslims.

Due to the circumstances in which it was written, the work was redacted rapidly in response to an urgent need to confront journalists, specialists, and international observers who joined together to label Shī'ite Islām as a “sect” which was “heterodox” with respect to “orthodox” Sunnī Islām. The author was also responding to seditious attempts to separate the Sunnī and Shī'ite schools of thought, labeling Shī'ites a minority of hard-core religious fanatics with a history of violence.

The enemies of Islām rallied around the tragic events in Argentina denouncing Shī'ites as “fundamentalists” and “terrorists.” Their objective was clear: a callous attempt to isolate Shī'ite Muslims from the Islāmic Ummah as an unorthodox faction composed of radical extremists.

In an unparalleled fashion, many Argentinean and American Orientalists, made tabula rasa with everything written about Shī'ite Islām from Corbin to the present, and started to echo the most hostile attitudes towards Islām expressed by early Orientalists and which had long been rejected. It was evident from the onset that certain academics were benefiting from the terrorist attacks in Argentina to launch an ideological assault against Shī'ite Muslims.

In their zeal to prove that Shī'ite Muslims had been the instigators or perpetrators of the most serious criminal attacks ever suffered by Argentineans, Argentinean and American academics stressed the minority character of Shī'ite Muslims, characterizing them as a group of sectarian zealots who stood in clear contrast to the moderation and orthodoxy of the Sunnī majority. Academic specialists, journalists, international observers, so-called “experts” on the Middle East, along with ex-intelligence officers, and military envoys, stressed the minority status of Shī'ites in order to accentuate their sectarianism.

Like cockroaches crawling from the under the wood-work in the dark hours of night, these “experts” on Islām attempted to give the Shī'ah Ithnā 'Asharī traits which belonged to other Shī'ite schools like the Ismā'īliyyah or the Zaydiyyah. They associated Twelver Shī'ites with Zaydī revolutionaries, and the Ismā'īlī Hashashīn or Assassins, in order to establish that Shī'ites were historically a group of extremist rebels who never hesitated to use radically violent methods against their enemies. The enemies of Islām employed Iblīsī analogies to say that Shī'ite Muslims were all murderers. They argued that since the Hashashīn or Assassins were Ismā'īlis, and the Ismā'īlis were Shī'ites, then every Shī'ite was a potential assassin.

Evidently, both the premises and the conclusion were false. Nevertheless, this syllogism had the expected effect. The press and the airwaves were soon speaking about Shī'ite terrorism, Shī'ite fundamentalism, Shī'ite extremism, as if they were all synonyms. It was imperative for someone to come forward to demonstrate that these terms were the result of false logic or a false logical construct whose sole objective was to demean Shī'ite Muslims.

In an attempt to give credence to accusations against Shī'ite Muslims, there are those who continue to insist that the terrorist attacks which took place in 1992 and 1994 in the city of Buenos Aires were the work of Shī'ite Muslims. In effect, the majority of encyclopedias continue to attribute these crimes to Hizbullāh or the Islāmic Republic of Iran. Despite such stubbornness, nobody in Argentina believes in these accusations and Argentinean authorities are now exploring an Israeli trail. As a result, Washington is putting pressure on the Argentine government to put an end to its investigation which is starting to annoy the United States and Israel.

The Argentinean people, however, want the guilty parties brought to justice as the events were not without deadly consequence for Argentine society. On the 17th of March of 1992, a violent explosion destroyed the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aries and seriously damaged the adjacent Catholic Church and school. Twenty-nine people were killed and 242 were injured. The deaths were gruesome. Argentine television broadcasted streets littered with human remains and rubble, pieces of mutilated corpses, like the leg of a woman with a sock and shoe which was severed from her body.

In the early days of the investigation, efforts were directed towards the Islāmist trail. It was believed that the attack had been committed by a Palestinian suicide bomber who drove a mini-van full of explosives. It was suggested that he was a member of Islāmic Jihād who wanted to avenge the death of 'Abbās al-Mūsawī, the head of the Lebanese Hizbullāh, and his family. According to this version, the Buenos Aires operation had been prepared by a group of Pakistanis and coordinated by Mohsen Rabbanī, the Cultural Attaché from the Iranian Embassy. This later was even detained, one year later, while he was in Germany, only to be liberated later due to lack of evidence.

On July 18th, 1994, another explosion devastated the Buenos Aires building of the Asociación Mutual Israelita-Argentina (AMIA) resulting in 85 deaths and 300 injured. The investigation into this new terrorist bombing also attempted to uncover an Islāmist trail. The attack was attributed to a so-called Islāmic “kamikazi:” 29 year old Ibrāhīm Husein Berro who supposedly drove a vehicle full of explosives.

While it is true that Ibrāhīm Husein Berro existed, his brother demonstrated that he died in Lebanon several years before and not in the attack in Buenos Aires. Whoever drove the vehicle full of explosives, it could not have been Ibrāhīm Berro. Years later a warrant was released for the arrest of Imad Mughniyyah, a member of the Lebanese Hizbullāh. Later, the ex-Ambassador of Iran in Argentina, Hade Soleimanpur, was detained in the United Kingdom but had to be released due to lack of evidence.

All of these elements, which seem to be definitive conclusions, have been reflected for years in various encyclopedias, books, and journalistic articles, although nothing can confirm them. The most interesting thing is that with the passing of time some Argentinean investigative journalists have debunked the versions of events proposed by the Israelis and the Americans, developing their own hypothesis which is the exact opposite. According to investigations conducted in Argentina, the two attacks were committed by Israeli agents in order to counter the growing anti-Zionism of the Jewish community in Argentina. This discovery, however, took place after Vittor published his article in Epimelia.

At present, the supposed intellectual or material connection of Islāmists to the Buenos Aires attacks has largely lost credibility. The Islāmist trail is simply inconsistent with the facts and it for this reason that the American and Israeli government are pressuring the Argentineans to put an end to their investigation. While it is presently possible to speak about these events with hindsight and tranquility, the only individual who dared speak about such events, and defend Shī'ite Islām when it was being attacked by international public opinion, was Luis Alberto Vittor.

Like Prophet Yahyā, Luis Alberto Vittor was a voice in the wilderness, exposing himself to criticism, threats, and physical danger. Unlike some of the official Islāmic authorities who stood still, making themselves complicit through their silence, Vittor raised his voice and pen in defense of Shī'ite Islām at a time when doing so was associating oneself, explicitly or implicitly, to a Muslim minority of “extremists” and “terrorists.”

Putting his trust in Almighty Allāh and the solidarity of his fellow Muslims, all of whom were simple believers with no power or political influence, Vittor produced the present work which was viewed as a moral and intellectual duty. Surely, in this lies the greatest value of his work.Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy must be viewed as a work of service in defense of the followers of Ahlul Bayt. At the time it was written, there was not a single Orientalist, Arabist or Islāmologist, in Argentina or abroad, who was willing or capable of defending Shī'ite Islām.

While the Shī'ite community was being attacked from all sides, some Sunnī Muslims sought to separate themselves from the Shī'ites, echoing the arguments of the enemies of Islām who claimed that the followers of Ahlul Bayt were sectarian extremists (ghulāt).

As if that were not enough, Shī'ite convertswere accused of having links to so-called “Iranian-inspired Islāmic terrorism.” In order to divert attention from themselves, some sectors of the Sunnī community insisted on proving the Orientalists thesis correct, accusing the Shī'ite community of committing the terrorist bombings when the real perpetrators of the atrocities were not even Muslims.

As a result of these actions, many Shī'ites, both Iranians and Latinos, suffered from severe social discrimination. Many mu'minīn [believers] lost their jobs. Many mu'minīn [believers] were forced out of university, including a group of Iranian medical students. Being both Shī'ite and Iranian was seen as synonymous with terrorism and criminality. Fear ran so high during those days that, out of the entire community, only six or seven brothers, two of them converts, dared to attend the sole Shī'ite mosque in the city.

Rather than coming to the rescue of Shī'ite Muslims who were falsely accused of being violent sectarian terrorists, Orientalists like Bernard Lewis came forth to add fuel to the fire, arguing that there was a historic continuity and an ideological bond between medieval Muslims assassins, who were Ismā'īlīs, and contemporary Shī'ite fundamentalists or extremists, who were Ja'farīs. For those who dabble in academic dishonesty, they were one and the same: socially maladjusted minorities who resorted to violence and terrorism as their only means of expression.

When one reads Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy, it is important to remember the context in which it was created. At a moment in which the enemies of Islām were attempting to divide the Ummah, Luis Alberto Vittor pulled up his sleeves and pulled out his pen to demonstrate that Shī'ite Islām, despite being a minority, was as orthodoxy as the majority Sunnī Islām.

And not only that, the author demonstrated that Shī'ite Islām was the only group which remained faithful to the will of Allāh and the Prophet Muhammad: to hold fast to the Two Treasures, the Qur'ān and the Household of the Prophet.

Besides presenting the Shī'ite position, the author's goal was to reestablish the balance between Sunnism and Shī'ism which some sectors were attempting to destabilize, labeling one group as orthodox and another as sectarian, heterodox, extremist, and heretical. It is for this reason that the author devotes so much time to explaining why it is improper to label Muslims as “fundamentalists.”

Considering the context and extraordinary circumstances in which the book was written, completely changes one's critical appreciation of the work. Shī'ite Islām: Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy was a lone voice denouncing despots in the desert, a strident voice denouncing the indifference of academia and the vested interests of those who sought to define Shī'ite Islām as a radical, sectarian, heterodox form of Islām rather than a traditional expression of its orthodoxy and orthopraxis.

Although the author has accepted that his work to be annotated, he has always insisted that it remain intact as a reflection of the socio-historical context in which it was created. Attempting to modify certain concepts would undermine the very objective of the work, reducing it to a vain theoretical discussion. The author's goal, of course, was other: to demonstrate that the claims made by the detractors of Shī'ite Islām were false and illogical and that the fact that Shī'ite Islām has a minority status does not imply, from an Islāmic point of view, that it represents a sect in the sense in the Western Christian sense of the term.

The events of 1992 and 1994 which occurred in the city of Buenos Aires are not a thing of the past. Attempts to support the allegations made against the Shī'ite Muslims of Argentina continue to be made, accusing them of implication in the terrorist bombings. Despite the fact that thirteen years have passed since this work was originally published, it continues to be current. The enemies of Islām never sleep and nor do we.

15th of Sha'bān / August 28, 2007

Dr. John A. Morrow, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Modern Languages

Northern State University

Aberdeen, South Dakota