In Defence of Truth
- :Dr. A. Al-Wa'ili
In Defence of Truth
Dr. A. Al-Wa'ili
Every tracer of nations’ and groups’ circumstances can evidently conceive and be sure that it hadn’t happened throughout all history that a party or a group had been subjected to calumny and been defamed in every purport as shi’ites had been subjected to in whatever is related to it as groups and sometimes as individuals.
They were subjected to the worst accusations and stigmatized of what they had been innocent, related to have what others had and perhaps to what the accuser himself had. We shall recite some examples of what we have said and we shall try to mention them briefly because of the very long list and the huge amount being accumulated throughout several centuries.
This subject has been treated elaborately and so much had been written on it so we will refer to it briefly. Certainly if those who wrote about shi’ites and explained their beliefs had been motivated by a good intention or a searching for truths they would have found in what shi’ites themselves wrote, what they answered questioners and by what they had refuted biansed inquirer what satisfied them in order to manifest truths, to scatter obscurities and to illuminate the darkness that had been wanted to cover their history.
But it appears that the issue is far from being a searching for truths, rather it is an unveiled attempt to obliterate symptoms, to slander truths, to blockade shi’ism and shi’ites and to oust them from islamic identity at all costs, this goal has not been fulfilled throught years in so many attempts but those people are still insisting on that aim in a strange consensus.
Some regimes insist on it for unhidden reasons while ordinary people do that for different motives, some are mercenarized for that, another is led astray and grown up in an environment that norished him with these ideas while he has agood intention about them, another one keeps step with the current without minding to examine such issues, another has taken that as a sacred tradition then he find it difficult to suspect least he should hurt his religious conscience which has been brought up to take them as axioms and so on.
But we can except few ones from those we have mentioned whose religion and conscience had obliged them to be fair. Or that who has realized the dangers of such issues on islamic nation.
Those had called shyly for moslems to equit shi’ites and to attempt to adjust their Islamic Identity from the viewpoint of other islamic sects This may be done by taking some of the ideas related to shi’ites as to be of some individuals or relating them to some perished sects of shi’ites, or by regarding some of their views as wrong discretions from which they must be advised to desist, others proposed to leave them out and to arrange quiet campaigns to contain them in order to preserve unity and to protect islamic structure from cracking.
But I have found neither of those intending to review his traditional stored thoughts which insist on shi’ites’ enmity nor was he ready to examine his items to know wheter what he espouses is sound or merely some fancy which has taken the shape of religion or a belief the items of which, as he thinks, are conceded truths that cann’t be discussed or reviewed.
I said that those who called for sh’iite’ equity are very few and their sounds diappear in the long distant space, and that their wishes vanish…, in an overwhelming trend which calls for eradication of shi’ietes and to separate them from life in all its fields. All this happens at the sametime we find sunnis throughout all of its currnents devote themselves to persuade a single person to join their sect,
but they at the sametime do their best to expel three hundred million shi’ites moslems out of the nation’s body depending on unjustified evidences if those - so called - researchers bothered to examine the foundations of their warrants they would find that they are related to sentiments not to bases or evidences, and that the conslusions from them are built on a collapsed groundwork.
They also hadn’t taken in consideration the dangerous probable results of such practices, the least of which is preparing the background for those who intend to rift among moslims to serve their own interests and attempt to provoke doubts in minds that Islam is not the religion of unity,
rather the religion of dispersion in addition to what we believe that Allah willn’t grant us his mercy and success Allah said in Quran "They forgot Allah so He made them to forget themselves".
We may wonder as we are dealing with the identification of this issue and others wonder too about the reason and the secret of this attitude. To answer this questions I will summurize what I could find, hoping them to be sufficient for explaining that enmity, so I say:
1. Since shi’isim was born at the prophet’s lifetime and a group of people had been identified as Ali’s shi’ites like Selmaan, Abuzer, Almekdad, Ammar Ibn Yaser and others, it was bombseiged because it’s birth had been an evaluation of Ali Ibn Abitalib (A.S) and was a result of distinguishing him from others according to the texts ascribed to the prophet (s.w.a) and his attitudes towards Ali (A.S) as a result of the great achievments which Ali (A.S) has fulfilled to serve Islam and Moslems.
2. As for the texts, from the verses of the Holy Quran we have a number that ranges from 70 to 300 verses of the Quran as Abdullah Ibn Abbass and others stated.
These verses dealt with some concerns of Ali(A.S) alone one time and with others another time, the books which explain the reasons of the verses’ descendence from heaven had undertaken the task of counting them, we also have hundreds of Hadiths recited by those concerned with the honourable prophetic sunna.
As to Ali’s attitudes, there are in the books of "sieerah" what is enough to enchant minds and hearts, all that called forth, that a group of "Sahabah" gathered around him and preferred him to others, others took a negative attitude against them regarding them as an apposed group when power was taken by the other groups.
They mobilized against them all what rulling groups often mobilize against the opposition.
2 – Because Ali Ibnaabi Talib’s debts of Qureish bloods were very heavy beginning from "Alsaraia" battles ending to the big wars whose number was eighty three small and big battles. Ali’s share was the most. In "Badr" battle half of the murdered were killed with Ali’s Sword, in "Auhud" battle the number of those killed with his sword was eighteen in addition to the Arabic families of whom he killed some persons.
Those wars inspite of being Islamic wars against infidel sides i.e they didn’t take place for a special motive or a tribal aim rather it was a conflict between infidelity and Islam fulfilled by moslem fighters against infidel fighters but the responsibility of those killed in those battles was not accounted to Islam as a religious side but the prophet (s.w.a) and his household were hold accountable for them and Ali ibn Abitalib (A.S) undertook its complete responsibility.
This responsibility extended to include those who gathered around him for this Ali’s shi’ites were exposed to a revenge in different shapes ranging from shed blood, plundered right, wasted esteem and finally floods of accusations and slanders against them.
The least of those accusations was to drive them out of Islam, then all that had been fulfulfilled by Qureish rulers whose period of rule lasted for a long time, in reality it was a revenge on shi’ites by those whom Ali (A.S) has killed their infidel ancestors.
3) During that the shi’ites’ theory of rule integrated and whose right it has been was identified, the political nature of shi’ism became clear.
This nature formed an itellectual conflict in the field, the pens of the two sides were animated to it, the intellectual abilities of the two sides were mobilized to form two wrestling currents one of them defends (shi’ites current), the other attacks (the current of rulers) and the governed masses who are mostly follow the religion of their kings, and this was the stronger side rather there is no place for comparison between them.
Some of those means were the pens called up to carry on a continuous war in which history was betrayed, responsibility to one’s word disappeared, rather the honest word vanished, exchanged with a blasphemy which islamic treatment and honest pen don’t accept, the issue reached to an extent of impoliteness that makes every ardent moslem feel sad.
As a result of that a large amount of slanders about shi’ites accumulated and stretched out since the first day till nowadays, rather now it has become more violent and more wild because it is norished by two flowing veins of money and grudge, they supply pens and furnish the fire with fuel least it goes out only, Allah can save moslems from this fire through His mercy.
4) A compelete conviction dominated the Islamic field that reigning has been fixed at the hands of sunnis, certain geographic, racial and ideological factors helped that fixation, here is not the proper time to explain them in detail but here we merely hint to them, it is clear that the party which holds power attracts all energies but some exceptions and that was what exactly had happened as the proponants of the party in power monopolized every thing in the field using different means while shi’ites were forced out of the field, the belief that rule remains at the hand of sunnies resulted that shi’ites were antagonized by opportunists.
5) shi’ites’ thought and jurisprudence is known of its literal alherance to sacred texts, they don’t subject the text to other considerations such as interst, or to the viewpoint of the doctrine when it contrasts with the doctrine as a result of that there is no room here for that who wish to gain a share or that who wants to jump over the signification of texts to reach one of these aims at the time which the signification of text has been extended in order to open a vast space for the expectation searching for a vent to go through for its interest eventhough at the expense of religion for this reason and other reasons people overlooked shi’itic thought,
then this overlooking of the shi’itic intellect developed into an attack under the guise of sluggishness and the disability to keep with the spirit of the text, a pretext used to veil their interest although it was covered with another guise.
This trend formed big funds which created a tradition difficult to be dissent from, the proponents of this tradition attacked what contradicts with it even though by distorting truths. These are merely some examples and samples of many factors which resulted in creating that huge amount of slanders against shi’ites and as a result of what we have mentioned the intellectual and social activities of shi’ites must dwindle because of successive blows on different levels.
The mass media such as press, books, radio and T.V at the others’ hand, the curriculums also are an attack against the shi’itic intellect and a praise to the other ideology, the apportunities of life are opened for sunnis intellectuals while they are shut for shi’ites rather they are shut for those who sympathized with them except a little personal activity here and there that form the least possible amount, and if there hadn’t been the divine providence for A’ali Mohamad’s ideology even this remnant would had gone.
6- If the reader doesn’t accept what we have metioned of reasons as a justification or an accuse for the attack on shi’ites across centuries there shouldn’t remains single factor which is summurized in the truth.
That the motives of blockading shi’ism since it’s early days were political, aiming at driving them out of power by expelling their Imams from reign, justifications for this expel must be created.
Ideological justifications were the most important, in the course of time a generation emerged, nourished with shi’ite’s hatred by mass media because they are "deviants from religion" This generation began to form a tendency proliteraled and inherited by generations, believing that the deviations contributed to shi’ites has been truths, their adherance to their religion and their observation of Islam prompted them to take a negative attitude towards shi’ites,
especially with the presence of pens that continue the campaign, supply the fire with fuel to keep with the dominant tendency in order to protect their interests and dignity that may be lost if they say the word of right, and correct the cours, they may be subjected to dangers if they venture to treat shi’ites with equity,
the attitude of Ahlilsham toward Alniss’ei had not been forgotten or eliminated from people’ memory when they asked him about the comparison between Ali (A.S) and Mu’aweia ha said; is it just to say that Mua’weia may be equal to Ali(A.S) aside from being better than him? So they trampled him under foot until he died.
But loyality to history, feeling the responsibility of word, saying the word of right, all of these remain as motives for thinkers and men faithful to religion to reveal the word of right, dot the i’s and cross the t’s, we hope that their feeling of responsibility for islamic interest, the prestige of islamic nation and the nation’s unity would prompt them to find that difficult task facile in order to gain Allah’s satisfaction and the eternal abode considering the profits of islamic unity when it is acheived.
That is a hope which fills every spirit with no fanaticism, became faithful to Allah, although that is an advantage difficult to be obtained, but every important and dear aim cannot be achieved without passing through obstacles, plunging into difficulties, especially now, truths have become evident because of mass media prevailing, the sources of shi’itic thought became available and moslems inter mixing with one another.
All that has been to disperse darkness and to identify realities, wasn’t the alegation of having aspecial Quran of shi’ites enough to come across a single copy of that Quran, and if it is difficult to obtain a copy of it, there they are the sources of shi’itics "Ahkaam", the books of shi’ites’ jurisprudence are available and one can specify their documents as they are clear, for that who has a mind or listens for the truth and accept it.
So the summary of this last respect is that hostility towards shi’ites and slander against them is a movement resulted from the powerful continuoust movement of those who attempted to drive them out of the field.
After this introduction I will get into the essential idea at which I aim. I.e giving some examples of what had been attributed to shi’ites in order to expel them from Islam, alienating moslems from them, and to finish them off. I will confine to three examples to be taken as criterion by which so many of what has been attributed to shi’ites can be compared:
The first example: The slander of saying that Quran is distorted.
The Holy Quran is Allah’s revealed speech which includes no vain at all, it is the source of our civilization and constitution, it is the well spring from which the nation drinks, it has a sacredness at the heart of evry moslem which cann’t be equated by anything.
As it is the main source of islamic legislation to which all other sources end the moslim can not be sure of the soundness of "Ahkaam" with saying that perversion has come over it, as additions or decrease or playing with its words and sentences (we have revealed Quran and we preserve it), because of this dignity evry moslem feels towards Quran so every sect or group says that there is a perversion in Quran they will be considered as a strange body or organ in the structure of the nation, they will be the place of indignation.
For that reason the first thing the kitchens of rule had cooked and asked their agents to market it was attributting the view of distortion in the Holy Quran to shi’ites, we shall see soon the verity of this attribution and what sunnis say in this concern in order that the trueness of what was attributed to shi’ites becomes clear.
Our jurisprudents and explainers have concured to disavow this attribution, to refute this slander in more than one of the source books of shi’ites so that you don’t come acroos a book of shi’ites which deals with the subjects and sciences of Quran without finding a research in which he refutes Quran distortion.
As it is not my aim here to inspect what has been written I only want to direct reader to some of the resources which explain Imameiah’s viewpoint plainly, in a sufficient amount to prove so I mention what satisfies the occasion:
The viewpoint of shi’ites public is that Quran is protected from distortion of any kind of addition or deficiency in its beginning until its end, circulated among moslems, one can be sure of that by turning to the introduction of "Tefseer El-Tebian by Sheikh Al-Toosi, and the introduction of Mejmeaelbaian by Tebressi,
and "keshfel kheta’a" by Sheikh Ja’afar in the chapter of Quran, and "ha’kul yakeen" by Muhsin Feiz kashani, "A’ala’ arrehmaan" by sheikh Mohammad Jawad elbalaghi, "Albaian" by seied Abul Qasim Khuei that was the view point of Mufeed, Behaei and Khazzi rather it is the viewpoint of All our researchers, as to what Is attributed to Alsheikh Al-kuleini in his book "Alkaafei" he mentions some narrations which state that there is perversion in Quran he himself controverts them, that is assured by the foolowing matters:
1) The Hadeeths which give the impression of mentioning perversion stated by Alkuleini are cited by him in the chapter of uncommon Hadeeths, the meaning of uncommon Haddiths is the odd Hadeeths which are not considered in practice, an odd Hadeeth when it contradicts with the Book and sunneh or when it is right in itself but it is opposed with another narration which is more common among narrators than it,
it is not considered, this is what our scholars adopt in the chapter of "Alta’adul waltarajeeh" since the narration of wrench contradicts with the Book and sunneh and it is contrasted with a more common and acceptable narration it is not put into effect.
2) It is stated in the issue of distinction between right and wrong narration that the narration is compared with the Book and sunneh if it agrees with them it is accepted, if it doesn’t it is discounted, and this is an evidence that those narrations are disregarded but they were narrated just as Bukhaari and Moslem have narrated the informations of alteration.
3) He stated the narration of Sa’adel Kheir in Rawzatel kafee", it denies frankly any shortage in Quran, as AlBaqir (A.S) said to Sa’adel Khair: (one aspect of their casting off the Book was that they protected its letters and wasted or violated its laws) and it is clear of the completeness of the letters of Quran.
4) It is not necessary that the narrator who states a naration accepts its purport as it is stated in different branches of sciences.
This is only a mere sammurized idea about the distortion of the Holy Book and shi’ites attitude towards that, it is very plain, we have many evidences stating that shi’ites don’t say that Quran is distorted, rather those who maintain distortion in Quran in the meaning of addition or dimination other than shi’ites.
As for distortion in the meaning of altering the meaning of words, verses, and the reasons of revealation, shi’ites have a frank viewpiont in this concern, they say that distortion in this meaning has taken place by many narrators and explainers for unhidden motives.
We, after that, return to the viewpoint of a group of Ahlulsuneh who say that there is a decrease in Quran (according to their resources):
It is strange that those who say that there are diminutions in Quran are Ahlilsunneh their views are frank about the decrease in the Quran which is circulated among moslems to day disregarding whether they consider the corollaries of this view or not – they got as in the habit of adopting the view without complying with its corollaries, here is not the place of proving that, it has another place and research, we may deal with it in another occasion, I say that their views about that are frank but they charge others with it as we shall see in the coming examples.
Let as review some of their views concerning their professing distortion in Quran, these are merely examples as to that who wants more details we shall refer to some of their resources:
1 – Al-sayoti stated in his book "Aletkhan Fi U’lum el Quran" in the chapter dealing with the numbers of surahs, words, and letters of Quran some narrations cited from the Caliph Au’mer Ibn el Khattab as saying "the letters of Quran are a thoausand thoausands and twenty seven thousands letters.
And Al-Tabarani stated that in a confident title with reference to Umar bin Al-khattab.
2 – The Author of "kenzelu’maal" narrated, from Zer Ibn Hubbeish" as saying: Aubei said to me: "O, Zer how do you read "Suretel Ahzaab" I replied 73 verses, he said: it has been equal to "Suret el Bakarah" or it had been longer than it.
The significance of these two narrations is that according to the caliph’s narrations, the present number of the letters of Quran are less than third of the original number, and the significance of the second narration is that the actual "suretel Ahzab" is athird of the revealed sureh".
3 – Ahlil sunneh stated that the two surehs of "Alhafid walkhale’a" are of the short surahs of Quran that were not cited in Quran, the caliph Aumer Ibn elKhattab, these two missed short surehs has been read by him when he submisses to Allah in his prayer, they are as follows: (O Lord we depend on you and ask your forgiveness, ealogize you,
we don’t disbelieve in you, we take off and leave who disbelieve in you) (O Lord we worship you, pray to you and kneel, strive to you, we hope your mercy and fear your wrath, your torture will befall disbelievers) look up Alsayouti, the chapter of the nmuber of suras He narrated that from different ways. Although these two surahs are not in Quran. 1
4 - Ahmed Ibn Henbel stated in his "Mesned" in the first volume, narrating from Ibn Abbas Quoting Aumer Ibnel Khattab saying: Allah had sent Mohammad (s.w.a) by right and revealed to him alkitaab", Ayatel rejem".
"Do not be away from your fathers, it is infidelity on you to be away from your fathers".
So the prophet threw stones and we threw after him we had been reading (wala terkhebo an A’abaeikum En kefera bek up Anter khebu an A’abaeikum", this verse is not in Quran. 2
5) Alsayuuti stated in "Aletkhan" narrated from nafe’a from Ibn Aumer: Anyone of you must not say that I have taken (read) all the Quran as he doesn’t know what is the whole Quran, so much of Quran has been wasted.
But let him say I have taken what remained, appeared. 3 As it was narrated from A’aeisha the prophet’s wife she said: The sureh of Ahzaab had been read at the prophet’s time two handred verses, when Authmaan wrote Qurans we did not read of it but what we read now, these two narrations are very frank.
6)Imam Moslem narrated in his "Seheeh" in the third volume from Abiherb Ibn eabi elaswad from Abamous’al asha’ari, said to readers of Basrah: we had been reading a sureh like sureh Barra’h in length and violence, I for got it but I memorized of it, if man has two vallies of possessions he would seek a third valley, nothing can fill man’s abdomen but dust, we had been reading a sureh we likened it to one of "almusebbehat" I forgot it but I memorized of it,
o believers why do you say what you don’t practice, as it is written as a witness against you and you will be liable for it in the day of resurrection" nothing of these two surehs or "Aayeh" he cited is there in Quran, they are wasted according to his views, this is in addition to what we presented of examples.
The way Quran has been collected and written as it is narrated by Ahlisunneeh, their belife that its Telawa (recitation) abolishes some verses of Quran whether "Hukum" Abrogated or not, all that results in believing that Quran has been distorted t.e, it has decrements.
7- Ibn Majeh narrated from A’aeish the prophet’s wife as saying: the verse of pelting with stones and the verse of nursing baby until ten were revealed, these verses were written on a leaf under my bed stead, when the prophet died we were busy with his death, a poultry entered and ate it, this is also narrated by Al-Dumeiri in his book "Hayaat el Haiwan" in "Daajin" Our scholars elaborated in many of their books on discussing those who accept distortion in Quran and refuted their views,
one can look up the resources we mentioned, inspite of all that we illustrated only some examples, we have other resources enough to compose books and books in Ahlilsunneh and their professing to distortion but in spite of all that as we stated slanders don’t stop at a limit rather it is continous following the proverb "she accused me of what she has and went.
I believe that what we write and explain to refute these slanders doesn’t benefit but so little of those objective faithful persons who are searching for truths, as to the majority of our people aren’t truth seekers, they insist on falsitude and wrangling to the limit of calling sun as the black stone but our comfort is that we present our effort to that who searches for truth, may Allah benefit by it whom he wishes.
The slander of saying that Gibraeil had mistakened by decending revelation to Mohammad (S.W.A):
One of the established principles of moslems’ beliefs is that: Allah Has sent the prophet Mohammad (S.W.A) to all people and He ended off prophethood with him(S.W.A), the Quranic texts emphasize on that: Allah (Glory to Him) says "O prophet we have sent you as a witness, auspicious, and aherald), He also says "Mohammad is Allah’s prophet" He also says "It is He who Has sent to the illiterated" a prophet from them selves".
The issue is very clear to all moslems that prophet (S.W.A) has been sent by Allah and he is the last prophet of Him, so if a person claims that the prophet has not been sent by Allah but the angel who carries the revelation (Quran) from Allah (glory to him) to His prophets i.e Gibrael (A.S) has breached the trust and instead of decending revelation to Ali bin Abi Talib (A.S) he gave it to Mohammad (S.W.A). there is no doubt that who says that is infidal, outside Islam, cursed by Moslems because:
1) He contradicts with Quranci texts.
2) He denied one of the principals of religion.
3) He accused with treason Gibrael while Allah Has described him as trustworthy.
4) He indicated that Allah (Glory to him) approved Gibraeil’s mistake and didn’t reproach him.
5) He made the prophet (S.W.A) an extorter of others right.
6) He opened the door of suspicion about the purport of revelation because who breaches in delivering revelation he can be accused of treason in its contents and other defects.
The attribution of such a belief as we had described is enough to expel that group or sect from Islam, this is exactly what Ahlilsuneh attribute to shi’ites and they insist on it. We shall discuss this attribution after we reviwe their advocation of attributing that to shi’ites and their considering its consequences by counting shi’ites as not muslims.
Had he who attributed that to shi’ites been an ordinary person the issue would have been easy but the disastor is that who attributes that to shi’itics are weighty people, people of those whose production is read every day and put in the foremost part of islamic thinking, there are some of them:
1) Al-Fakhr Al-Razi
This man adopted the view that shi’ites believe in that idea when he interpreted Allahs saying (Noone can touch it but the purified) 4.
"I may not miss this chance to draw the reader’s attention that Ahlusunnet may name a party and then they attribute it to shi’ites while it is a single person in reality, indeed they indicate that as a party in order to make what is attributed to him is big and prevalent and as a result that idea considered as a viewpoint of a big section of shi’ites such as nominating them a section as "the Mohammadian section" relating them to Mohammad Ibn Abdullah the son of Imam Hassan Alsubbt (A.S) this section to whom some shi’ites were related didn’t come into being as that stated by Ibn – Tahir in his book "Alfareq beinal Feiraq" everyone who is famillar with moslems’ tradition knows who alfakhr Alraazi is,
and what is his scientific stature so when he wants to attribute some thing or aviwepoint to someone it cannot be imagined that he has not made sure of it or that he has depended on a rumor, if it is not so scientific principals lose their value, we will deal with the soundness of this attribution afterwards.
2- Alkurtubi Almaliki in his "The Big Interpretation"
This person is like his previous one, he is not an ordinary person, his interpretation is one of the important interpretations of Quran, his scientific stature is remarkable, rarely subject written in Quranic sciences without a refrence to this interpretation what is the reader’s attitude when he knows what alkurtubi attributes to shi’ites in this regard?
3- Ibn Taimeia
In the first volume of his book "Menheejels sunneh" in a comparison between shi’ites and jews he says: Jews dislike Gibrael and say He is our enemy of angles "Rafeza" also says that Gibraeil mistakened by giving revelation to Mohammad (S.W.A), this man has a heavy concern with shi’ites I appeal to Allah to punish shi’ites if what he attributed to them is true and I ask Him to punnish Ibnteimeia if what he attributed to them is no more than allegations.
I haven’t seen a person more nonchalant in dividing faith and infidelity among people than this man after those some people came and followed the traces of them such as "Aljebhan" in his book "Tebdeedd zalaam" and "Mahibideen elkhateeb" and their likes.
Just as another group began to take the consequences of that by considering shi’ites as nonmoslems because of their belife, so Al- baghdadi stated in his book "alfereq beinel fereq" that it is not right to pray on their dead, not to pray after him, his carcass is not halaal a shi’ites must not get married with a sunni woman a sunni cannot get married with a shi’itic woman if she has their belifes, the author of the book.
"Ala’nkehaal fassedah" Dr.Ameer also adopted the same Idea as it is accepted by a number of those who follow blindly their ancestors and became "mufti" in islamic countries, anyhow the issue is famous and it doesn’t need more explaination.
As a commentary that we say what they attributed to shi’its if it has been right – is enough to consider them infidels and there is no need to seek evidence to prove infidelity of those who deny one of religious principals but we say:
1 – On which document did those depend in their attributing that to shi’ites, we demand for – and that is our right – those to present only one of our sources which contains this view may they do afavor for us by doing that, and if they don’t find what props up their pretext do they deter from their slander, do they feel shy of these allegations or not, most likely they don’t deter because their motives are known.
2- If it is supposed that they have found one person who says so is it right and just to attribute a whole nation to that individual becausee a person of that nation says so at the time which all shi’itics’ resources prove the contrary, these are their resources in beliefs and jurisprudence fill libraries, they state frankly that Allah Has sent Mohammad (S.W) as the last prophet, and that Gibraeil is the trustee of Heaven revelation, Quran states that he is obeyed and trust worthy.
Al-kurkhi is one of Ala’hnafs’ Imams, he believes that Quran and sunneh must be changed in meaning if they contrast with the views of "Ahnaaf" jurisprudent. So do Ahlul- sunnet agree that we announce that they believe that Quran must agree with their views, does this saying if we declare it, coincide with logic.
There are so plenty of individual views of Ahlilsunneh in different branches of jurisprudental rules and beliefs that if we collect them they may form many books, some views don’t accord with islamic lines such as al-bukharis view in which he says that cow’s milk causes "Hurmh" i.e (if two persons drink the milk of a cow they become "muhram" so is it right to attribute this view to Ahlsunneh? In spite of that we ask them to give only one person of those who say that Gibraeil mistakened or committed a breach by giving revelation to Mohammad (S.W.A), let them guide as to him.
3- It is confirmed that Imam Ali (A.S) has been closer to the prophet (S.W.A) than his shadow, he was self-sacrificing in defending the prophet and Allah’s religion, he has been the prophet’s selfsame as the Holy Quran states so why hadn’t the stealing of prophethood left any effect such as a kind of rupture or an admonition at least between them?
Would you say that shi’ites – whose history has so many genius thinkers – don’t understand that but Aljeehan and his likes whom Allah Has sealed their hearts off understand that, had they believed in that they would have seen its effects on the relation between the prophet and his testament.
4 – Imam Ali (A.S) was 7 to 10 years old when revelation descended from Heaven, would you say that a boy 7-10 years old is sent as a prophet have we an example of such a prophet of those who preceded Mohammad (S.W.A) is this an ambiguous meaning that can not be comprehended? What happened to those people so they cannot understand a discourse?.
5- Quran says "we have sent before you but men" one is not called "man" unless he reaches maturity about 25 years old and Imam Ali (A.S) had been a boy as we said previously.
Notes like these should be considered before attributing this slander to Alshu’abi before he had been born, we confuted that in our book "The identity of shi’ism". 5
After all that we say: these are our mosques "Azan" is read from their minarets in most of the world five times a day shouting "I certify that Mohammad is the prophet of Allah" don’t these minarets give a proof to refute this slander? Certainly those will say that you say so to be cautious to hide your real belief, we save them the answer before they utter it so we say:
In our "Azan" we declare publicly "we witness that Ali (A.S) is Allah’s "walei" we don’t fear, we also can disclose our views frankly in our mosques in Europe or other places if we fear to do that here.
Just as we could announce that in the counties ruled by shi’ites such as Egypt during the era of "Fatimieen", and Iraq during the era of Buwaihhieen" and shi’itic Iran and other countries, in these countries we could announce that publicly without any fear, then why don’t we announce that? Do those, whom suspected sources nourish them and put them in charge of dividing moslems and stirring discord among them, answer us?
The answer is no, because they don’t search for truths, had they been truth seekers they wouldn’t have initially fabricated such slanders, inspit of that we are not deprived of – might we thank Allah – some conscienious men who refuted this slander such as "sheikh M-Algazzali in his book" A defence of belief" and Dr. Abdulwahid waafi in his book" between shi’ites and sunnis".
Writers of Ahlusunnet, with their different specializtions related to islamic sciences, persisted in charging shi’ites with excessiveness of their Imams, and that they give them a stature which they don’t deserve, they exaggerate of attributing virtues to them, perhaps some of them charged as with saying that they i.e our Imams, know the unseen truths by themselves i.e their selves are initially the reason of the disclosure of existent beings.
And that we say that they have the right or the ability to dispose of universe by themselves e.t.c of their views which are summurized in saying that we raise them above human level to avery exaggerated one.
The first thing her I begin with is that I hint that most of those who read shi’itic thought he doesn’t read it written by shi’itic pens rather it is written either by the pen of their opponents or pens that didn’t reach enough maturity in understanding religious procedures, digesting their expressions so they confuse that Imams,
knowledge is overflowed on them by Allah the Glory in away or another just as our brother Ahlisunnet say relating that to ordinary peaple as it will be stated – confused that with their being know by themselves this resulted in this wrong understanding of shi’ites’ views.
I refer to another issue, it is that some writers may find an aberrant view of an extinct person or group then he considers it as the view of all shi’ites, som writers also may find anarration, as he has no specialization in this field to trace whether there is another narration contradicts with it or not, or whether there is what explains it generally,
or what explains some of it’s concomitants, following the way of treating with narrations and reports in the jurisprudential procedure, so he states that narration without all that, deducing from it and involving unfactual judgements.
There may be who knows and masters sciences like these but he has a disease in his heart so he follows in his work the way of "there is no God without saying But Allah", generally I will intimate in this Quick discussing shi’ites’ views with enough evidence then I will shift to Ahlusunnet’s view or views on their Imams to see where excessiveness is:
1) Imamieh concluded that extremists "ghulaat" are infidels and shi’ites is claimed them one of their evidences is Allah’s saying in the 77th verse of "Sureh Almaaedeh" "Say: O followers of the Book! Be not unduly immoderate in your religion, and don’t follow the low desires of people who went a stray before and led many astray and went astray from the right path’.
2) Imam Ali (A.S) says (two kinds of men are perished of me, an excessive adorer and a resentful detester).
3) Imam Sadiq (A.S) said: we are no more than Allah’s slaves, who created us and chose us I swear by Allah that we have no plea before Him, we have no indulgence, certainly we are dead and held responsible, that he who loves "ghulaat" has hated us, he who hated them has loved us, "ghulaat" are infidels "mufaweeza" are polytheists, Allah may curse "ghulaat" they be christians, would they be "khuderiea" would they be "Murje’ea" or "Herooreia". 6
4) They consider "ghulaat" as soiled persons don’t perform the ritual ablution "khusul" for their dead, don’t bury their dead "Zakaat" can not be paid to them, don’t give a moslem woman in marriage to them, don’t inherit moslim but moslem inherts them, all these rules are agreed on by Imamieh jurisprudent 7.
5) Sheikh Almufeed says in his book "sherhil akaeid elSadooq" (interpretation of Alsadook’s beliefs): "Alghulaat" are of those who pretended to be moslem, are those who attributed Amirel mou’amineen Ali Ibne Abitalib and the Imams from his progeny to godhood and prophethood, they attributed so much of superiority in religion and present life to them in which they exceeded all limits and deviated from moderatoin so they i.e "Alghulaat" are aberrant and infidel persons. 8
These texts we have presented as examples indicate clearly Imameiahs view concerning excessireness and excessiveists, I don’t think that those who accuse shi’ites with excessiveness haven’t been acquainted with them but malice prevailed in their hearts, we depend on Allah to endure what they practise.
Here we take a short stop in the course of sunnit thought to see whether an excessiveness there is or not, I state for you some of these examples:
1- Alladin Dedeh stated in his book "Muuhazaratel awaeilwa musamar awakhir", he said: an Earthquake took place in Almedeeneh Aumer hit land with his stick saying: be steady.
There upon the earth rested and earth quake finished.
He also said: when the water of the Nile river in Egypt decreased, Aumer Ibn ela’as has been the governor of Egypt on that time, Egyptians wanted – as it was their habit – to give it a bride by throwing her in it, Aumer Ibn ela’as forbade them to do so, then he wrote to Aumer Ibn Ilkhataab about the issue, so Aumer sent to him a letter, thrown in the Nile, so the river brimed.
Then he stated the incident of "Sareyetel jabal" and the incident of putting out a fire by the Caliph Aumer, then he followed up that with his saying: he has been –i.e Aumer – mastering over the four constituent, water, air, dust and fire, the meaning of this is "Alwiliah al tekweeneia" I.e, the genetic authority, so had tens narrations like this excited Ahlusunnet, certainly no, if it had been related to one of Ahlilbeit Imams it would has been excessiveness rather an infiedlity and apostasy.
2- "Ibnil jawzi" stated in "Menakib Ibn Hunbal" narrating of Ali Ibn Ismael said: I saw as if –i.e. in a dream – the Day of Resurrection happened people came to an arch way, at this archway no one is let to pass unless he bring forward a signed letter,there was a man sitting aside sealing and giving people, I said who was this? They said: "Ahmed Ibne Henbel".
3- Al-Mekki cited in the second volume of his book "Menaakib Abi Haneefeh" he said: Abuhaneefa has been seen sleeping on a bedstead in an orchard, he had a parchment on which he was writing the award of some people, he was asked about that he said: Allah accepted my work and my doctrine so He accepted my intercession for my nation, now I am writing their awards, it is said to him: what is the least extent of the knowledge of those to whom you write award? He said: if he knows that "Tuemum" can not be performed by using ashes instead of dust.
4- Albaghdadi stated in his history in the 14th volume narrating from Abiumameh quoting from the prophet (s.w.a) he said: I entered paradise until he said: when I was at the door ascale was brought, then I was put in it, my nation was put in the other scale, I outweighted my nation, then Abubakr was brought and put in a scale and my whole nation was put in the other scale Abubekr outweighted my nation, my whole nation was put in the other scale, Aumer outweighted my nation also then the balance was lifted, Alhekeem altermethi also stated that in "Nawadir eleusuul".
5 – Alaubeidi al-maaliki in "umdetel tehqeeq" says; when prophet (s.w.a) has been at two bows’ length from Allah (to whom be longs might and majesty) he felt gloomy and alone, then he heared there Abubekr’s there upon he felt tranquil and at ease with his companion’s voice.
Up to this, to those who accuse us with excessiveness I say: we have so many of your sources which weave like this texture that we can compose a complete encyclopedia without any exaggeration, we don’t want to waste our time and be absorbed in it, not to help your writers to achieve their goals in propogating dispute amonge moslems,
busy in these wrangles instead of using their pens to defend their religion or to disseminate its charms, I don’t doubt for aminute that this is an aim of so many suspected pens that continued to take pleasure in lacerating moslems, in purchasing from the market of dispersion, in ruminating from astored spite that should be melted in a spirit of belief or in a blessed aim strives for unifying moslems on the basis of "There is no god but Allah".
No one of you must think that we say so because of fear of you as we have nothing to fear you for, and we have no hope in so many of you to return to the path of equity, except that few of pure – spirited who seek rightness and truth, so, for those we write and for their sake we strive and after all that we seek Allah’s contentment who ordered us and cultivated us in his saying "This your nation is one nation and I am your creator so worship me".
O my God, we worship you and we don’t take attributes with you, we belive in your Book, prophet and religion you are our God and guardian so treat us with Your mercy, you are the most mercyful.
1. Aletqan fi U’ulum el Quran: 1/ 143.
2. Mesned Ibn Hanbel 1/58, Dar of kutub al elmera beirut 1993.
3. Aletkhan 2/52.
4. Altefseer Alkebeer: 10L 433 – Dar ehiaa ulturath, Beirut 1995.
5. Haweiat Altesheia’a, P.193, Ahlilbeit insitution. Beirut sec. Edition, 1981.
6. Beharel anwar, Almejlissi, 3/51 edited by Iran company 1301.H
7. Allumah Aldemeshkeia: 1L 18/ Nejaf.
8. P. 131 vol.5, 2nd book, Dar almufeed 1993, Beirut.
Share this article