Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Chapter: 10 Scandal Of Dr. Al-Qifari In His "Aaidu Shia"

Among the numerous books Wahabists publish and direct against us the Shias is the three volume book named 'Principals of sect of the Imamite Ithnasharite Shism. Survey and critique.' written by Dr. Nasir Bin Abdillah Al-­Qifari second edition 1415 A.H 1994 AD. On the introductory page of the book it is written "Origin of this book is a scientific thesis provided for the Ph.D. degree from Department of Faith and Modern Sects Mohammed Bin Saud Islamic University. This thesis has been granted the premier Degree of Honor and it has been conferred that it should be printed and exchanged among universities."

It seems that the thesis was a minor survey that the Wahabist professors revered for its objectivity maybe; therefore they support the writer with a considerable number of titles and hundreds of Shiite reference books. Hence by joining these efforts this (objective) encyclopedia regarding beliefs and sect of Shism came forth.

Because of variety in styles used in the book and existence of linguistic defects the source of which cannot be a (Qifari) Saudi Arabian's we could decide that a group contributed in sending forth the book.

We however should rule on appearances. We do hope this study would provide considerable information and analysis due to fertility of its reference books. As long as origin of this book was discussed by experienced professors it should be fitting the academic certificate it gained.

Our expectations should increase when we read the writer's good tidings carried in his introductory of the book. On pages 14 and 16 part 1 he records:

As much as it is necessary to refer to definite points in this introduction I should admit that since the first steps of my journey with Shias and their books I pledged my self not to view in books that indirectly refer to them. I favored to

deal with the Shiite books directly so that my survey would not deviate its course. I did my best to be as objective as possible within the frame required by topics appertained to beliefs. The straightforward objectivity is nothing other than referring to their books directly and honestly and opting for their reliable reference books and documents and exerting all efforts for singling out narratives authenticated by them or prevalent in their books… Through providing their beliefs I do commit myself to resting upon their reliable reference books. At random I do not neglect what other books suggest in the topic involved. It is very useful to cite the two opinions before readers so that they would compare… A many difficulties I encountered during preparing this survey. First unlike these of Sunnis the Shias' reference books are not indexed in any order; therefore I had to spend many hours in reviewing such references. Once I had to review the thorough pages of Biharul-­Anwar the multivolumed Ussoulul Kafi and Wesailushia so that I might inspect the narrative I needed. Sometimes I had to review the total chapter or even hundreds of pages for obtaining so.

Well then the writer has promised us of resting upon reference books of the Shias in communicating their opinions. As long as he had to recite hundreds of narratives let us hear what he tells us about their 'corporalism':

Principals of sect of the Imamite Ithnasharite Shism. Survey and critique part 2 page 527:

Chapter Three: Shias' Tenet Of The Lord's Names And Attributes.

In this regard Shias are engaged in four errors.

First error: Exaggeration in substantiating the Lord. This is called corporalism.

Second error: Depriving the Lord of the names and attributes.

Third error: Accrediting the divine names and attributes to their imams.

Fourth error: Distorting the Quranic Verses for depriving the Lord of the names and attributes.

Following each of these errors will be discussed independently and reference books involved will be referred.

First theme: Exaggeration in substantiating the Lord. (Corporalism).

The Jews were known of their adopting for faith of corporalism. Rafidites were the principal Islamic faction who embraced this misbelief. Ar­Razi stated "Majority of the Jews are anthropomorphists. Rafidites such as Husham Bin Al-­Hakam Husham Bin Salim Al-­Jawaliqi Younus Bin Abdirrahman Al-­Qummi and Abu Jafar Al-­Ahwal were the foremost bearers of this belief among Muslims. (Refer to Itiqadatu Furaqil Muslimine Wel Mushrikin page 97.)All of the previous individuals are the precedent masters and the authentic narrators of (Ithnasharism). (Refer to Muhsin Al-­Amin's Ayanush Shia part 1 page 106.) Sheikul­Islam Ibn Teimiya identified the foremost individual who get embroiled in this forgery "Husham Bin Al-­Hakam was the first man in Islam who claimed Allah's being a corporeality." (Refer to Minhajus Sunna part 1 page 20.)

In his Meqalatul Islamiyin Al-­Ashari emphasize that the headmost Shias were corporalists. Later on corporalism as a faith was prevalent among followers of this sect. He records their sayings regarding this topic. Finally he confesses that some of the late Shias shifted into faith of depriving the Lord of the divine names and attributes ­Tatilism­. (Meqalatul Islamiyin part 1 page 106­9.) Depending on the previous the Ithnasharites' tending to Tatilism occurred in an early period. Later on we shall provide sayings identifying this date. (The second theme).

Writers of books of the Islamic sects record numerous nasty statements of anthropomorphism and corporalism ascribed to Husham Bin Al-­Hakam and his partisans. Abdul-­Qahir Al-­Baghdadi says "Husham Bin Al-­Hakam claims that his god is a corporeality having a definite edge and extremity and being tall wide and deep. His tallness is same as his width." (Al-­Farqu Beinel Furaq page 65.) He also records "Husham Bin Salim Al-­Jawaliqi is extremist in corporeality and anthropomorphism. He claims his god's having the same look of humans. He also alleges that his god enjoys the five senses enjoyed by mankind." (Ibid. pages 68­9.) He also writes down that Younus Bin Abdirrahman Al-­Qummi is extremist in anthropomorphism too. He gives examples on that extremity. (Ibid. page 70). Ibn Hazm records "Husham claims that his god is seven ordinary span height. (Al-­Fasl part 5 page 40.)

While the writer promises resting upon the reference books of Shias exclusively he totally refers to books of their opponents. Nevertheless he cites Ayanush Shia within his references. Having referred to the position in Ayanush Shia the writer had suggested we could not find the evidence he rested upon.

It seems referring to reference books of Shias gives the opposite meaning! The writer rests upon reference books of the Shias' die­hard opponents. This is quite contrary to his promise!

The innumerable Shiite reference books suffocated with statements and faiths of promoting the Lord against unfitting matters are listed in the end of that writer's book. What for then does he shun? These books comprise one hundred titles and questions at least respecting denial of anthropomorphism and corporeality by Quranic and prophetic narrations besides theological studies. Was the professor unable to see any of these?!

The first volume of the two volumed Ussoulul Kafi the professor claims of reviewing thoroughly is titled as follows:

Title: Monotheism.

Chapter: Contingency of the cosmos and substantiating existence of the contingent.

Chapter: General claim of God's being a thing.

Chapter: God is recognized by His notifications only.

Chapter: Least of knowledge.

Chapter: The Worshipped.

Chapter: Cosmos and space.

Chapter: Accreditation.

Chapter: Warning against asking about conditions of the Lord.

Chapter: Nullity of God's seeableness.

Chapter: Warning against accrediting claimed attributes to the Lord other than what He uses for Himself.

Chapter: Warning against claims of having corporeity and look.

Chapter: Attributes of Entity.

Chapter: Additional information.

Chapter: The Lord's will is attribute of operation. The other attributes of operation.

Chapter: Contingency of the Names.

Chapter: Meanings and derivation of the Names.

Chapter: Difference between purports of the divine Names and names of creatures.

Chapter: Interpretation of 'Samad'.

Chapter: Moveableness and action.

Chapter: The divine Throne and Chair.

Chapter: The divine Spirit.

Chapter: Combination of monotheism.

Chapter: Miscellaneous exceptional questions.

The Professor did see all this. On other pages of his book he uncovers the secret that he did attentively overlook reference books of Shias for the matter that their opponents are more acquainted and faithful in providing their faiths.

Principals of sect of the Imamite Ithnasharite Shism. Survey and critique part 2 page 531:

It is may be said that the previous sayings ascribed to Husham Bin Al-­Hakam and his followers should not be taken as an evidence since they are quoted from books of the Shias' opponents. Books of followers of the different sects of Islam did assign such sayings to such heretic individuals abundantly. They are however more reliable and authentic than Rafidites. All these prove that Rafidites were the origin of leading this heresy to Muslims. Readers who passed by the Shias' denial of such affairs may take in consideration the fact that ascribing corporalism to Shias was instituted by their opponents and nonexisted in reference books of Shias themselves. The factuality is contradictory to this cogitating.

The hard­working professor does not exhibit the factuality he intends. Is it the factuality of Shias' reference books before which he closes his eyes or is it the factuality of Shias around him? He will certainly be able of listening to principals of Shias if he only uses his telephone to contact any number of Shias whether scholars or ordinary in and out of Saudi Arabia. He can also pick up the nationality and the geographical province he opts for.

Thus and so promise of the professor elapsed. For him the actual meaning of referring to Shias' reference books in quoting their faiths means nothing other than quoting the inaccurate charges against them and judging through them.

We do seek the Lord's help only in this regard. Let's take another look at objectivity of the professor in field of investigation and citing evidences. On part 1 page 14 he assures "I did my best to be as objective as possible within the frame required by topics appertained to beliefs." On page 57 he asserts "Scientific course and objectivity require resting upon the involved individuals in field of referring to their opinions."

As a model of this objectivity we provide the following theme recorded by the professor on page 535 part 2:

Second Theme: Tatilism of Shias.

During the last years of the third century changes occurred on this sect. They were influenced by the Mutazilites' course of depriving the Lord of the divine attributes and names that are asserted by Quranic and prophetic texts. In the fourth century they adopted course of Tatilism in a stronger way. Depending upon faiths of Mutazilism Al-­Mufid Al-­Musawi ­the named Sharif Al-­Murteda­ and Abu Jafar At­-Tusi wrote down several books about this faith. (Minhajus Sunna part 1 page 229).

Majority of their writings were literally quoted from books of Mutazilism. By the same token their exegeses of Quranic texts regarding the divine attributes

fatalism and the like are literally excerpted from books of Mutazilism. (Minhajus Sunna part 1 page 356).

Readers of the late books of Shias can scarcely feel a difference from books of Mutazilism specially in questions of the divine names and attributes. They claim that intellectuality is their foundation in this regard. The late master Shias adopted questions contrived by Mutazilites regarding creation of the Quran denial of the Lords' seeableness in the Hereafter and denial of the divine attributes. The seditious matters stemmed by Mutazilites are as same as those asserted by the late masters of Shism.

Page 537 part 3:

A number of their narratives ascribe negative attributes of the Lord of the worlds when they denied the diligent divine attributes. In more than seventy narratives Ibn Babawayih claims "Time place condition movement and changing should not be assigned to Allah the Exalted. Besides qualities of corporealities should not be accredited to the Lord Who is not a material a corporeality or a demeanor." (Refer to Ibn Babawayih's At­Tawhid page 57.)

Masters of Shism ensued this deviating course of depriving the Lord of the divine attributed asserted by Quranic and prophetic texts and ascribing negative attributes to Him.

Page 537 part 3:

Through reliable authentic narratives it is proved that Ali (God please him) and imams of the Prophet's progeny declared the Lord's having attributes. This is commonly recorded in books of scholars. (Refer to Minhajus Sunna part 2 page 44.)

The professor decides Shias as corporalists till the fourth century. Thereafter they shifted into Tatilism when they did not accredit (qualities of corporealities) to the Lord the Exalted.

Previously it has been clear that the professor rests upon sayings of the Shias' opponents in question of their faith of corporalism claiming their being more faithful than the group involved. Now what should his evidence be in charging them of Tatilism?

He cited nothing more than names of the master scholars of Shism as his evidence on their opting for Tatilism. He cannot refer to any saying of those scholars. Hence he says "In the fourth century they adopted course of Tatilism in a stronger way. Depending upon faiths of Mutazilism Al-­Mufid Al-­Musawi ­the named Sharif Al-­Murteda­ and Abu Jafar At-­Tusi wrote down several books about this faith."

We do address at Dr. Al-­Qifari whether it is accurate to evidence a matter by mentioning names only. How should the reverent academic professors in a

respectful university who investigated this thesis admit such a thing? Ordinary Bedouins and abiders of deserts ­Qifar­ will not accept so.

The professor should have cited sayings of those men so that readers would recognize their Tatilism or corporalism and they would not accuse the professor of issuing unattested judges and absconding principals of the theme and keeping them hidden in his own chest!

We would like to inform the professor of the fact that Sheik Al-­Mufid was dead in 413 his disciple Sharif Al-­Murteda in 436 and At­-Tusi in 460. According of the claim that those individuals were Tatilists this should bring us to believe that Tatilism was adopted by Shias in the fifth not the fourth century!

Besides the professor asserts that he has reviewed the Shias' narratives related to the Prophet and the immaculate progeny written down in Ibn Babawayih's At­Tawhid. He claims "In more than seventy narratives Ibn Babawayih claims 'Time place condition movement and changing should not be assigned to Allah the Exalted.'" This Ibn Babawayih is Mohammed Bin Al-­Hussein As­Saduq whose death was in 281. Hence history of Shias' Tatilism retreats to the third century and related by authentic narratives to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Where is then corporalism Shias adopted till the fourth or fifth century when Al-­Mufid Al-­Musawi ­the named Sharif Al-­Murteda­ and Abu Jafar At-­Tusi recorded faith of Tatilism in their books?

Now has the truth become established! The professor unburdens himself to the fact that As­Saduq's At­Tawhid is filled up with the Prophet's statements regarding promoting the Lord against unfitting affairs. Hence he confesses that Shias were neither corporalists nor Tatilists. Only those corporalists who decide promoting the Lord against unfitting affairs as Tatilism and decide denial of God's having corpreity as deviation and atheism; only those individuals claim the Shias' being corporalists.

The simplest right of readers of that professor's work is that he should have mentioned even a single narration of these seventy in order that the claimed Tatilism and atheism of Shias would be emerged specially after the claim that the Shias did distort all these seventy narrations that falsely comprise denial of the proved divine attributes. This means that Shias unlike Wahabists did not rest upon the extrinsic meanings of aspect of the divine attributes texts.

We see our duty be explaining the accusal of Tatilism Al-­Qifari and Wahabists used as a cane for striking faces of those who oppose them and avoid resting upon the extrinsic meanings of aspects of the divine attributes texts. For Wahabists the forbidden interpretation Tatilism and atheism are befallen when claiming that 'hand of Allah' mentioned in God's saying (The hand of Allah is above their hands) stands for the Lord's competence. Reckoning with the faithful believers is decided only when claiming the Lord's having a material realistic hand is adopted.

Even if it is claimed that meanings of 'eye of Allah' 'hand of Allah' 'side of Allah' and the like idioms are not recognized; therefore these are commended to Allah and His Apostle then Wahabists will issue the same verdict which is deciding deviation Tatilism and commendation. Such decisions can be avoided only when the extrinsic meanings of such expressions are adopted.

For Wahabists all the commenders and the interpreters are decided as deviate Tatilists since they deprive the Lord of the attributes materiality and conditions! They also decide atheism of such individuals for their denial of the material attributes mentioned in the Quranic texts!! Thus saving Wahabists and corporalists there is no real Muslim at all!!

Like their corporalist grandfathers Wahabists commit the exaggerative mistake of ascribing physical existence to the Lord the Exalted and deciding their opposers as deviate and atheists. They commit another exaggerative mistake when they forbid from seeking intercession of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) and the virtuous disciples and rule of illegality of visitating their tombs. They regard such lawful processes as polytheism deviation and atheism.

The common party between Wahabism and corporalism is that followers of the both are partisans of materiality. They neither conceive nor believe in other faiths. The western materialists are little inflexible.

Finally Dr. Al-­Qifari charge the Prophet's household of 'Teimism' and Wahabism. He was sufficed by Ibn Teimiya's saying without referring to any evidence. He records "It is proved that Ali (God please him) and imams of the Prophet's progeny declared the Lord's having attributes. This is commonly recorded in books of scholars." Lacking any evidence Ibn Teimiya records this claim in his books frequently.

Ibn Teimiya's Majmu'etur Resail part 1 page 115:

Imamites contradict the Prophet's household in their principals. None of the Prophet's household such as Ali Bin Al-­Hussein Abu Jafar Al-­Baqir and Jafar Bin Mohammed deny God's seeableness.

Readers are rightful to inquire an example from these commonly recorded evidences Ibn Teimiya followed by his son Dr. Al-­Qifari claims. Definitely his stuff and he could not find a single indication to this topic in sayings of imams of the Prophet's household in the entire books and references they had referred to. Nevertheless they insist on their master's claim wanting evidences.

Like promise of referring to reference books of Shias for providing their opinions the professor's promise of objectivity and erudition went with the wind.

We do refer this to the Lord exclusively. Folding this thesis let us move to the third promise of the professor. He promised of being honest in referring to

reference books of Shias. The professor has previously stated "The straightforward objectivity is nothing other than referring to their books directly and honestly and opting for their reliable reference books and documents and exerting all efforts for singling out the narratives authenticated by them or prevalent in their books…"

Let us see the professor's applying this honesty in the question of the Lord's seeableness.

Part 2 page 551:

Owing to their accordance to Mutazilism Imamite Shias recorded impracticability of God's seeableness. In his At­Tawhid Ibn Babawayih records numerous narrations supporting this idea. Compiler of Biharul Anwar collects most of these narrations that are contrary to the texts asserting the believers' seeing their Lord in the Hereafter. Denial of the Lord's seeableness in the Hereafter is figured as an eluding purports of doctrinal texts. Moreover it is spontaneity from the Ahlul­Beit sect. Some of their narrations declared this fact.

Ibn Babawayih Al-­Qummi records:

Abu Basir: I asked Abu Abdullah whether the believers shall see their Lord on Resurrection Day or not. He answered affirmatively. (Refer to Ibn Babawayih's At­Tawhid page 117 and Biharul­-Anwar part 4 page 44 and Al-­Kishi's book of narrators page 450 sequence 848.)

The professor is quite objective in this regard. He claims existence of a narration related to Imam Jafar As­-Sadiq in which it is affirmed that believers can see their Lord on Resurrection Day while Shias deny so in their beliefs and claim their being followers of the Prophet's household!

This is null since our professor is not honest in referring to these books. He incises a part of the narration so that it will accord his claim. Thus and so his honest objectivity has gone away and been shifted into a western objectivity for instance.

The following is the entire narration:

As­Saduq's At­Tawhid page 117:

… Abu Basir: I asked Abu Abdillah (peace be upon him) whether the believers shall see their Lord the Excellent the Glorified on Resurrection Day or not. "Yes they shall. Besides they could see him before that " answered Abu Abdillah. "When was that?" I questioned. "It was when he asked them 'Am I not your Lord?' and they submitted." After a while imam As-­Sadiq added "The true believers can see Him in this world before Resurrection Day. Can you not see Him now?"

I sought his permitting me publicizing this among people but he discommended so. He commented "I anticipate that the unlettered may deny so due to their ignoring the actual meaning we are referring to. Then they may charge us of anthropomorphism which is atheism. Heart sight is different from eyesight. Allah be excellently exalted against sayings of anthropomorphists the atheists."

This honorable narration proves the Lord's seeableness by hearts and minds. It avers that such a sort of vision has been occurring in this world since the Lord's taking Adam's progeny's covenant of confessing His godhood. In the Hereafter this intellective sight shall be more evident and obvious. Hence this narration denies the claim of the Lord's material seeableness. It reckons so to anthropomorphism which is atheism.

See how the professor quotes the first line only and withholds the others. This is aimed at ascribing the claim of God's material seeableness to Imam Jafar As­-Sadiq (peace be upon him).

Such an error can be evaded by an ordinary grocer Muslim not an honored first class professor in a university like University of Mohammed Bin Saud. By committing such an error the premier Degree of Honor given by the university elapses. As an introduction to the book involved the statement "This thesis has been granted the premier Degree of Honor " has been recorded.

Personally had I been the dean of the college such an erroneous student is one of its members I would certainly have canceled the Degree of Honor given to him and banned publicizing such a thesis and offer apology to the party misjudged by that scholastic student. By doing so value of my university would have been preserved. The dean and instructors of Al-­Qifari can never do so since they lack the competence to apply such decisions. The standing of Al-­Qifari may be exalted because he did well in the field of censuring and reviling at Shias in an academic way.

Earlier I conceived that Al-­Qifari's book would be too interesting to avoid because it will be an objective work. Unfortunately now I see it be too ineffective to spend any time in continuing on it. A single falsity is too sufficient to regard.

There are however two questions regarding this topic recorded in Al-­Qifari's book.

First all the writer charges us of adopting faiths of the Jews Magi and pagans.

On page 87 part 1 he records:

Shism is successor of the ancient Asian beliefs:

Some added that Shism has been the home of the ancient Asian beliefs such as Buddhism and the like. Ahmed Amin records "Under shades of Shism beliefs

of spiritualism corporalism incarnationism and the like embraced by Brahminists philosophers and Magi before Islam were enlivened. A number of orientalists aver that a majority of the non­Islamic beliefs could find their way to Shism. Through Magianism Manu Buddhism and other pre­Islamic faiths of Asia these beliefs were copied in Shism."

It seems that our professor changed into modernism and secularism when he rests upon Ahmed Amin the secularist Egyptian and orientalists to whom as he conceive objectivity is ascribed for nothing other than standing against Shias. By imitating sayings of secularists and orientalists about Shism Al-­Qifar imitates another Wahabist that wrote a book the title of which stands for proving that Shias are equal to the Jews.

As an answer we do provide the fact that narratives of Kabul­-Ahbar and his faction are still nesting and embedding in reference books of our brothers not ours. Besides these narrations have been ceaselessly printed in the modernest technologies of typography and provided as lessons in institutes and universities. Kabul­-Ahbar and his faction were abiding in the chateaux of caliphs not in the Prophet's household's houses. More information about these facts can be easily obtained by reviewing our books titled Al-­Aqidetul­Islamiya volume 2 and Tadwinul Quran.

Regarding influence of Magianism and Asian beliefs in Shism we do assert that many centuries before their embracing Shism and participating in compiling books of the sect the Magus were Sunnis that they compiled the most celebrity Sunni reference books respecting their hadithology beliefs and jurisprudence.

Supposing they were influenced by Magianism and the ancient Asian beliefs Persian Muslims would have communicated so to Sunnism that they have been masters of its different sects and hadithology before they shifted into Shism.

Sons of those Persian Sunnis should have been influenced by their Sunni not Magian fathers' beliefs unless this influence comprised some of the earlier Magianism that they inevitably communicated it to Sunnism.

Is it true that this professor ignores the fact that there is no single sect enjoys Arabism of Shism?! While founders of his sect about which he disputes us and compilers of his reference books by whom he contests are thoroughly Persian. Ninety percent of the master compilers of Sunni reference books are Persian. All the (Imams) who are Hanbalite corporalists and adopters of the faith of God's having material attributes Wahabists do provide their evidences are either Jews or Persian.

It seems likewise that the professor ignores the fact that a number of the Shiite Persian scholars he reviles at are offspring of the masters he reverences. The compiler of Biharul Anwar encyclopedia Al-­Majlisi died in 1111 A.H is the descendant of Abu Nueim Al-isfahani the Sunni scholar died in 435. Many

centuries later the offspring of Ibn Jizi Ibn Khuzeima Al-­Juweini Muslim An­Nisai At­Tirmithi Ibn Madga Abu Dawud Al-­Hakim Abu Haneefa and hundreds of the Persian scholars embraced Shism. Some of them became master scholars of the sect.

Then who should be charged of being influenced by the Magianism and the ancient Asian beliefs; is it the Sunni forefathers and their culture or the Shiite progeny?

As a matter of fact decent researchists should not adopt baseless judgment. Ideas and beliefs should be scrutinized independently. It is also essential to inspect whether such an idea or belief has a ground in Quranic or prophetic texts or not. Likewise it is necessary to note whether intellectuality admits such a belief or not. If there is a doctrinal text supporting the idea involved then it will be inappropriate to regard whether this belief is existed at another sect or religion or not. It is also irrelevant to regard whether people admit or reject so. We should look upon the saying "We are followers of evidence. We turn whenever it turns."

Secondly notion about the most reliable reference books of the Shias.

On page 368 part 1 he records:

Jafar An­Najafi ­died in 1227­ master of Imamite Shism and the chief juriscounsult reveals in his Keshful­Ghitta how it is proper to rest upon narratives recorded in the four major reference books of Shism and the other three books. He states "It is improper to rest upon knowledge recorded in these books while each is contrary to the other. Besides these books comprise narratives thoroughly fabricated such as relations of corporeality anthropomorphism anteriority of the cosmos and actuality of space and time. On the other hand compilers of these four reference books assert in introductories of their books that they record what is authentic only. We answer that it is necessary to dedicate such assertion as to definite topics or find suitable interpretation for them or opt for shifting into adhering to what they committed themselves to in the introductory."

The following is a gravest objection. They claim that these four reference books are based upon principals supervised by the imams. The book titled Ussoulul Kafi was compiled in the Minor Disappearance age when it was possible to attain the imam's opinion in any narrative. However they allege that their Mahdi admitted the forecited book by saying "It is sufficient for our Shias." Besides the compiler of Men La Yahdaruhul Faqih did attain more than twenty years of the Minor Disappearance age.

In any event our brothers should first understand our connotation of the most reliable reference books. We differ from Sunnis in understanding that connotation. For us the entire narratives and verdicts of these reliable

reference books should be submitted to objectivity probity and correct inference. For Shias a most reliable reference book can never be a coalescing piece that we either reject thoroughly or admit thoroughly. Saving the Holy Quran each single narrative opinion or verdict recorded in any reference book is independent in its objective evaluation.

Sunnis our brothers regard their most reliable reference books so exceedingly that they do not submit them to objectivity and scientific research. For instance for them Al-­Bukhari's book of hadith is meticulously faultless. They regard it as the most authentic reference after God's Book. They esteem its entire narratives in the same degree. Deciding uncertainty of any narrative of that book does stand for criticizing the entire contents. Hence decision of contradicting Al-­Bukhari which means contradicting Ahlus­Sunna is adjudged.

This implies that the Shiite researcher can freely and accurately deal with any narrative found in Ussoulul Kafi or any other reliable reference book and can adjudge uncertainty or even inaccuracy of that narrative that he would repeal. This would not prejudice his faithful believing or belongness to Shism. While Sunnis are forbidden from adjudging so. If a Sunni does he shall inevitably be ruled as mutinous Rafidite or antagonist to the Prophet's companions!

The professor and his likes should also understand that a compiler's testimony for authenticity of his book is a personal question that may prejudice his partisans and him. This fact is emphasized in books of hadith. Therefore it is quite rightful for inferrers to inspect scrutinize and criticize contents of that book. Researchist may and may not be influenced by judgments of the compilers. Apart from inference of the compilers the absolute argumentation should be the researchist's inference.

Al-­Qifar should have conceived the point accentuated by Jafar Al-­Jenahi's saying "It is improper to rest upon knowledge recorded in these books while each is contrary to the other."

He suggests that it is improper for inferrers to rest totally upon claims of compilers of such reference books since each of them had his own inference and reached a definite conclusion depending upon personal factors and grounds. Inferrers should depend upon their personal competencies in jurisprudence hadithology and adjudging authenticity or inaccuracy of narrators.

This same rulings should have been applied on the most reliable reference books of Sunnis our brothers. The compilers' testimonies of authenticity of their books should not be considered as an evidence on accuracy of contents of such books. For instance Al-­Bukhari's book of hadith is full of contradictory and conflicting narratives that it is impossible to rest upon. Hence it is the inferrers' task to opt for the authentic and disregard the doubtful. Perpetually ordinary people refer to scholars and experts in deciding the authentic and the doubtful reports.

This is the natural manner of followers of any belief. This is also the sound scientific course determined by intellectuality and logic. The finding that a nation should confine their members' mentalities and lock the door to investigating and scrutinizing their prophet's reported traditions and devote to six or even sixty books only is not more than an Abbasid heresy and constitutional law.

Unfortunately our brothers are still adhering to this intellectual interdiction because they anticipate that if door of scientific research and free investigation is opened their corporalism and false beliefs shall be under feet. They may decide the obligation of acting upon verdicts of Nasir Al-­Albani the Wahabist if they succumb to opening the door to scientific research and free investigation.

We cannot stop them from restricting such a confinement. But they should not look upon the others as unlettered nomads. They should not regard the scientific freedom adopted by Shiite scholars as blemish and field of imputing insults and an evidence on nullity of their reference books and narrations. Owing to his deficiency in perspective Al-­Qifari provided words of the master researchists falsely.

Regarding his 'gravest objection' which is the wonderment why these books had been compiled away from the imams to whom narratives are ascribed while they were reachable this wonder reveals the insufficient expert of the wonderer in field of history and recording of hadith. This perplexity should be addressed at recorders of the Sunnis' six most reliable reference books of hadith and the other references since their (imams) and for one hundred years intercepted people from recording the Prophet's traditions and only then they recorded reports of the narrators admitted by the ruling authorities exclusively.

Till 260 A.H when Imam Al-­Mahdi disappeared our imams were among us. They have been the Lord's argumentation on Muslims. This fact is asserted by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Shias referred to them in questions respecting evaluation of authenticity of hadiths and in jurisprudence. Since the reign of Ali (peace be upon him) up to the third Hijri century narrators and scholars had been recording traditions of the imams incessantly. After that date a number of scholars compiled principals of these reports in encyclopedic books. Hence the four most reliable reference books of Shism have been received directly from the imams (peace be upon them). These traditions are uninterruptedly connected to our imams' grandfather the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). This documentation is called 'the golden series'. This golden series is reverenced by the entire Muslims. Ahmed

Bin Hanbal the master scholar praised this series by saying "If this documentation is recited before an insane he will certainly regain his intellectuality."

In the margin of Musnedu Zaid Bin Ali page 440:

Compiler of Tarikhu Nisapur records the following:

Pushing his way in the mart Ali Ar-­Rida son of Musa Al-­Kadim Bin Jafar As-­Sadiq was under an umbrella on a reddish mule when Abu Zaraa and Abu Muslim At-­Tusi the master scholars intercepted his way and asked "O glorious master and son of the master imams! We adjure you by your immaculate forefathers and patrician ascendants to reveal your noble face and relate a saying mentioned by your fathers and ascribed to your forefather so that we will relate to you."

He ordered his servants to stop and revealed his face to people whose eyes were shiny for their looking at their imam. He had two locks inclining to his shoulders. As people apart from their classes saw him they began to weep and scream. Some threw themselves down wallowing in dust. Others went on kissing legs of his pack animal. It was highly noise there when the master scholars especially Abu Zaraa and Mohammed Bin Aslem At­-Tusi shouted at people to be quiet so that they would listen to the efficacious words of the imam.

Ali Ar-­Rida spoke:

My father Musa Al-­Kadim related to me that his father Jafar As-­Sadiq related that his father Mohammed Al-­Baqir related that his father Zeinul-­Abidin related that his father the martyr of Kerbala related that his father Ali Al-­Murteda related that master beloved and dearest the Apostle of Allah related that Gabriel the angel related that Lord of Excellence said "The statement 'There is no god but Allah' is my fortress. He that utters it will enter My fortress. And he that gains entry to My fortress shall be secured from My anguish.'"

Immediately the imam returned under the umbrella and continued his movement. There were twenty thousand men writing his statement. Ahmed Bin Hanbal comments "If this documentation is recited before an insane he will certainly regain his intellectuality."