Ghulat of yesterday, are moderate Shia of today.


Ghulat(exaggerators/extremists) of yesterday, are moderate Shia of today.

In The Name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful.

This article is a response to those Ghulat Shia, who make Takfeer of the beloved companions(Sahaba) of Prophet Muhammad(saw) and his beloved wife(Ahlelbayt), such as Abubakr(as), Umar(as), Uthman(as) and Ayesha(as). Out of ignorance and due misinformation they received, those Ghulat declare these companions of Prophet(saw) and his beloved wife as innovators, disbelievers, and hypocrites.(al-liyaazubillah). Hence the Ghulat abuse, curse, slander and mock, the highly revered personalities of Ahl us-Sunnah.

No matter how we try correcting them, they continue their bigotry as they are brain-washed and filled with hatred against these personalities to such an extent that, nothing works on them, neither Quran nor authentic narrations of Prophet(saw), they continue insulting, mocking, cursing and making Takfeer of the beloved companions of Prophet(saw) and the beloved wife of Prophet(saw), considering it to be a virtues deed and a part of their faith. They are even made to believe that, their actions are backed by Quranic verses, even though, they are unaware that, their incorrect perspective towards certain issues related to Sahaba and their judgements over them, are similar to Khawarij. Because even the Khawarij’s misunderstanding and  misapplication of Quranic verses led them to first declare some Sahaba as disbelievers and when Ali(as) acted contrary to their perspective they ended up hating, abusing and making takfeer of Ali(as). Likewise the Ghulat Shia too are influenced by the Khawariji ideology due to which they end up hating, abusing and making takfeer of beloved companions of Prophet(saw) and his wife in paradise – Ayesha(as).

Therefore, By the help of Allah, we would be unveiling the mask from the face of those Khawariji influenced- takfeeri Ghulat Shia, who are present among the ranks of Shia, using purely Shia sources. Readers should also take a note that, initially Khawarij were Shia of Ali(as) at some point of time, before dissecting from the party of Ali(as) by making the takfeer of Muslims.

We have divided this article in the following parts:

I. Testimonies of contemporary Shia scholars that their beliefs were considered Ghulu by classical Shia scholars.

II. Some examples from the beliefs of Ghulat which were adopted by moderate-Shia.

III. What is the ruling upon Ghulat?

IV. Advice of Imam Sadiq(as) regarding the Ghulat.

 

I. Testimonies of contemporary Shia scholars that their beliefs were considered Ghulu by classical Shia scholars.

Ghulat in simple terms means “people who exaggerate”. Ghulu means Extremism or exaggeration and a man from the Ghulat is a man who became an extremist in his beliefs to the point that he clearly deviated from truth. Over the long evolution of Shiite theology, many foreign concepts assimilated into Shia faith, and some of those concepts or beliefs were symbolic of Ghulat, and were adopted by the so called “moderate-Shia” .

Following are the testimonies of contemporary Shia scholars who admitted the shocking fact that, some of the beliefs of “moderate-Shia” of today were considered Ghulu by the classical Shia scholars.

1. Shia Ayatullah Burujerdi wrote in Taraiful Maqal, Volume 2, Page 356

وبالجملة الظاهر أن القدماء كانوا مختلفين في المسائل الأصولية، فربما كان
شئ عند بعضهم فاسدا أو كفرا أو غلوا، وعند آخرين عدمه بل مما يجب الاعتقاد
به، فينبغي التأمل في جرحهم بأمثال الأمور المذكورة

And the bottom line is that it is apparent that the beliefs of the classical scholars were different, so sometimes something according to them would be invalid/corrupt, kufr (disbelief) or Ghulu, while according to the latter scholars it would not be so, in fact it would be regarded obligatory to believe in it. Therefore it is required to think over their jarh (attacking/weakening of hadith narrator by rijal scholars) due to the issues such as those mentioned.

2. Shia Allama Mamqani wrote in his book Tanqihul Maqal (Volume 3, Page 230) in the biography of Mu’alla b. Khunais:

قال العلامة المامقاني في «تنقيح المقال» (ج3/ص 230) ضمن ترجمه «المعلَّى بن خُنَيْس»: «إن ما يُعدّ اليوم من ضروريات المذهب في أوصاف الأئمَّة عليهم السلام كان القول به معدوداً في العهد السابق من الغُلوِّ والارتفاع، ويُطعن بالقول به أوثق الرجال ويُرمون بالغلوّ

“Indeed what is counted presently among the fundamentals of religion with regards to the characteristics of the Imams (as), professing by it was regarded as Ghulu and elevation (of the status of the Imams) , and even highly trustworthy men would be slandered and cast aside for ghulu due to professing by it.”

Similarly Shia Allama Mamqani wrote under the biography of Muhammad b. Sinan (Tanqihul Maqal, Volume 3, Page 125):

وقال ذيل ترجمته لـ «محمد بن سنان» (ج3/ص125): «وقد بينّا مراراً عديدة أنه لا وثوق لنا برميهم رجلاً بالغلوّ، لأن ما هو الآن من الضروري عند الشيعة في مراتب الأئمَّة -عَليهِمُ السَّلام- كان يومئذ غلواً، حتى أن مثل الصدوق (ره) عد نفي السهو عنهم (ع) غلواً مع أن نفي السهو عنهم اليوم من ضروريات مذهبنا

“And we have explained many times that we can not trust their (classical scholars) decision of casting aside a man (hadith narrator) due to Ghulu, because what is now considered among a necessity of religion according to the Shias with regards to the ranks of the Imams (as), it was in those days Ghulu, such that Shaikh Sadooq (ra) listed the belief that the Ma’soomeen (as) do not forget as Ghulu although at present this belief is among the fundamentals of our religion.”

Shia Allama Mamqani wrote in Tanqihul Maqal (Volume 1, Page 334):

قال المامقاني في تنقيح المقال ج1 ص334 : قد نبهنا غير مرة على أن رمي القدماء سيما القميين منهم ، الرجل بالغلو لا يعتنى به ، لإن الاعتقاد بجملة مما هو الآن من ضروريات المذهب ، كان معدوداً عندهم من الغلو ، ألا ترى عدهم نفي السهو عن النبي صلى الله عليه وآله والأئمة عليهم السلام غلواً ، مع أن من لم ينفي السهو عنهم اليوم لا يعد مؤمناً ، ولقد أجاد الفاضل الحائري حيث قال : رمي القميين بالغلو وإخراجهم من قم لا يدل على ضعف أصلاً ، فإن أجل علمائنا وأوثقهم غالٍ على زعمهم ، ولو وجدوه في قم لأخرجوه منها لا محالة

We have warned more than once that an accusation from the classical scholars, especially of the ones from Qum, of a man (hadith narrator) being ghali should not be taken into consideration. This is because overall what is considered among the fundamentals of the religion these days was considered Ghulu by them. Do not you see that they counted denial of the belief that the Prophet (pbuh) and the Imams (as) can forget as Ghulu, even though one who does not deny that they (as) may forget would not be considered a momin (believer) these days. And Ayatullah Fadhil al Haeri excellently put it, where he said: “Accusation by the classical scholars of Qum, of hadith narrators being ghali and their exiling them from Qum (on charges of ghulu) does not prove in principle their da’f (weakness/unreliability). For indeed, most of our scholars and their most trustworthy ones would have been considered ghali by them, and if they had found them in Qum then they would have definitely exiled them from it inevitably.”

Shia Allama Mamqani wrote (in Tanqihul Maqal, a major shia rijal book, Page 170) under the biography of Muhammad b. al Furat:

وقال ذيل ترجمته لـ«محمد بن الفرات» (ص170) ما حاصله أن «الكشي» روى في ترجمته لـ«محمد بن الفرات» حديثين أظن أن قصده من روايتهما الاستدلال على غلوه، هذا مع أنه ليس في الحديثين ما يدل على الغلو لأن مضمونهما يُعدُّ اليومَ من ضروريات المذهب

“The point is that Shaikh al Kashi reported (in his book Rijal al Kashi) under the biography of Muhammad b. al Furat two ahadith, I (i.e. Allama Mamqani) think that his (Shaikh al Kashi) intention was to prove Muhammad b. al Furat’s Ghulu through those two narrations, despite that there was nothing in those ahadith which evidences upon Ghulu because their content is counted among the fundamentals of religion these days.”

3. Shia Allama Musa al Ihqafi al Iskoi, in his Ihqaqul Haq, Page 173 stated:

السيد علي بحر العلوم في كتاب “البرهان القاطع” في المجلد الثاني منه في صفحة (435) في آخر الصفحة قال: بكفر من يعتقد أن الأئمة يخلقون ويرزقون ويحيون ويميتون بإذن الله ومداده ومشيته، (والحال) أن في زمامننا هذا من ضروريات مذهب الأمامية، وقدرتهم على كل شيء بإذن الله ومداده ومشيته، ولم يكفه رحمه الله- هذا حتى قال: بكفر قائله وكونه من الضروري

Sayyid Ali Bahrul Uloom wrote in his book “Al Burhan al Qati’ (The definitive proof)”, in its second volume’s page 435 at the end of the page that “one who believes that the Imams (as) do takhleeq (creation of the creatures), provide rizq, give and take life by the permission of Allah (swt) and His help and will is a kafir“; while presently in our age it is among the fundamental beliefs of the Imamiyah (Shia Ithna Ash’ari) religion to have belief on their power over everything by the permission of Allah (swt) and His help and will. And he (Sayyid Bahrul Uloom) did not just stop at this, he even said that “one who advocates it or deems it among the fundamentals of the religion is a kafir.”

 

II. Some examples from the beliefs of Ghulat which were adopted by moderate-Shia.

Example #1: Ghulat added the phrase (Ali un wali Allah) into the Adhan(call to prayer) and Iqamah!

One of the biggest classical Shia scholars Shaikh Al-Saduq(Ibn Babawayh Al-Qummi) exposed the Ghulat who ‘merely’ included “Ali is the Wali of Allah” into the Adhan.

Shia Shaikh Saduq wrote in his book:

هَذَا هُوَ الْأَذَانُ الصَّحِيحُ لَا يُزَادُ فِيهِ وَ لَا يُنْقَصُ مِنْهُ وَ الْمُفَوِّضَةُ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ قَدْ وَضَعُوا أَخْبَاراً وَ زَادُوا فِي الْأَذَانِ مُحَمَّدٌ وَ آلُ مُحَمَّدٍ خَيْرُ الْبَرِيَّةِ مَرَّتَيْنِ وَ فِي بَعْضِ رِوَايَاتِهِمْ بَعْدَ أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّداً رَسُولُ اللَّهِ أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً وَلِيُّ اللَّهِ مَرَّتَيْنِ وَ مِنْهُمْ مَنْ رَوَى بَدَلَ ذَلِكَ أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً أَمِيرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ حَقّاً مَرَّتَيْنِ وَ لَا شَكَّ فِي أَنَّ عَلِيّاً وَلِيُّ اللَّهِ وَ أَنَّهُ أَمِيرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ حَقّاً وَ أَنَّ مُحَمَّداً وَ آلَهُ صَلَوَاتُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِمْ خَيْرُ الْبَرِيَّةِ وَ لَكِنْ لَيْسَ ذَلِكَ فِي أَصْلِ الْأَذَانِ وَ إِنَّمَا ذَكَرْتُ ذَلِكَ لِيُعْرَفَ بِهَذِهِ الزِّيَادَةِ الْمُتَّهَمُونَ بِالتَّفْوِيضِ الْمُدَلِّسُونَ أَنْفُسَهُمْ فِي جُمْلَتِنَا

‘This is the authentic (Sahih) Adhan, nothing is to be added or subtracted from it. The Mufawwidah’s (form of Ghulat), may Allah curse them, have fabricated traditions and have added to the Adhan مُحَمَّدٌ وَ آلُ مُحَمَّدٍ خَيْرُ الْبَرِيَّةِ (Muhammad and the family of Muhammad are the best of mankind) twice. In some of their traditions, after saying أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّداً رَسُولُ اللَّهِ (I bear witness that Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah) (they add) أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً وَلِيُّ اللَّهِ (I bear witness that ‘Ali is the Wali of Allah) twice. Among them there are others who narrate this أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً أَمِيرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ (I bear witness that ‘Ali is the commander of the faithfull) twice. There is no doubt that ‘Ali is the Wali of Allah and that he is the true commander of the faithful and that Muhammad and his family, peace be upon them, are the best of creatures. However, that is not of the original Adhan. I have mentioned this so that those who have been accused of concocting tafwid and have insulated themselves in our ranks should be known”. (Man Laa YaHduruh Al-Faqeeh, vol. 1, pg. 290 – 291)

Comment:

Therefore, as per classical Shia Shaikh Saduq, the Ghulat added different phrases to Adhan(call to prayer), such as Ali is the Wali of Allah; and they have  mingled in the ranks of Shias, whom Shaikh Saduq was exposing. And we know that, the mosques of the so called “moderate Shia”, call out the Adhan which has  an added phrase of “Ali is the Wali of Allah” in it.

Now, we would like to present a muwaththaq (reliable) Shia hadeeth directly from Imaam Muhammad Al-Baaqir(as) where he talks about the number of parts/phrases which are there in the Adhaan.

عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عِيسَى بْنِ عُبَيْدٍ عَنْ يُونُسَ عَنْ أَبَانِ بْنِ عُثْمَانَ عَنْ إِسْمَاعِيلَ الْجُعْفِيِّ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا جَعْفَرٍ ع يَقُولُ الْأَذَانُ وَ الْإِقَامَةُ خَمْسَةٌ وَ ثَلَاثُونَ حَرْفاً فَعَدَّ ذَلِكَ بِيَدِهِ وَاحِداً وَاحِداً الْأَذَانَ ثَمَانِيَةَ عَشَرَ حَرْفاً وَ الْإِقَامَةَ سَبْعَةَ عَشَرَ حَرْفاً

Imam Baqir(as) said: The Adhaan and the Iqaamah have 35 characters/parts, just check it by his hand one by one, the adhaan has 18 characters/parts and the Iqaamah has 17 characters/parts.”[Source: Al-Kaafi, Al-Kulaynee, vol. 3, pg. 302 – 303, hadeeth # 3]

Grading: [Al-Majlisi has said this hadeeth is Muwwaththaq (Reliable)–> Mir’aat Al-‘Uqool, vol. 15, pg. 82]

Now if we were to add the 3rd testimony in the Adhaan & Iqaamah, the Adhaan would consist of 20 part and the Iqaamah would consist of 19 parts. These two combined would make it 39 parts, and as you can see the Imaam(as) never said anything about that.

Here is what top ranking Shia scholar Al-Toosi(d. 460 AH) had to say about the 3rd testimony in the adhaan:

و أمّا ما روي في شواذّ الأخبار من قول: «أشهد انّ عليا وليّ اللّه و آل محمّد خير البريّة» فممّا لا يعمل عليه في الأذان و الإقامة. فمن عمل بها كان مخطئا

Translation: “The are some odd (shaadh) reports of saying أشهد انّ عليا وليّ اللّه (I bear witness that Ali is Wali of Allah) and آل محمّد خير البريّة. You must NOT DO IT in the Adhaan and Iqaamah. And whoever does this action is in mukhTi (error)“.(Al-Nihaayah fee Mujarrad Al-Fiqh wa Al-Fataawaa, pg. 69).

Another esteemed Shia scholar Shaheed Al-Thaanee talking about 3rd testimony in Adhaan & Iqaamah stated:

و أمّا إضافة «أنّ عليّاً وليّ اللّه»، و «آل محمّد خير البريّة» و نحو ذلك فبدعة، و أخبارها موضوعة

Translation: “And addition (to the adhaan & iqaamah) of عليّاً وليّ اللّه (Ali un Wali Allah) and آل محمّد خير البريّة is a bid’ah(innovation) and the narrations regarding it (3rd testimony) is mawdoo’ (fabricated).”(Al-RawDah Al-Jinaan fee sharh Irshaad Al-Adhhaan, vol. 2, pg. 646 ; Fiqh Al-Imaam Al-Saadiq, vol. 1, pg. 175).

 

Example #2: Ghulat rejected the possibility of forgetfulness(Sahw) in Salah(prayer) from Prophet Muhammad(saw).

Classical Shia scholar Shaikh Saduq wrote in his book “Man la yahduruhul faqeeh” (1/359):

وكان شيخنا محمد بن الحسن بن أحمد بن الوليد رحمه الله يقول: أول درجة في الغلو نفي السهو عن النبي صلى الله عليه وآله، ولو جاز أن ترد الاخبار الواردة في هذا المعنى لجاز أن ترد جميع الاخبار(4) وفي ردها إبطال الدين والشريعة.

“And our sheikh Muhammad ibn Al-Hasan ibn Ahmad ibn al-Walid(rahimuhullah) said: “First level in Ghulu is denial of Sahw(forgetfulness) from Messenger(saaw), and if it is permitted to deny narrations with that meaning, then it’s permitted to deny all narrations, and in their denial is restriction(ibtal) of religion and Shariat”.

Then Sheikh Saduq quoted the words of his Shaikh, He added:

وأنا أحتسب الاجر في تصنيف كتاب منفرد في إثبات سهو النبي صلى الله عليه وآله والرد على منكريه إن شاء الله تعالى.

“And I hope to gain reward in compiling a book dedicated to prove Sahw(forgetfulness) of Nabi(saw) and refutation to those who reject that”.

At page 359 of Man la yahduruhul faqeeh, Classical Shia scholar Sheikh Saduq said:

إن الغلاة والمفوضة لعنهم الله ينكرون سهو النبي صلى الله عليه وآله ويقولون: لو جاز أن يسهو عليه السلام في الصلاة لجاز أن يسهو في التبليغ

Al-Ghulat and al-mufaqida May Allah Curse Them, reject possibility of forgetfulness(Sahw) from Nabi(saw), they say: If error in prayer is possible, then error in tabligh is also possible”

Shia scholar Muhammad Baqir Majlisi in his “Biharul anwar” 25/350 reported:

تميم القرشي عن أبيه عن أحمد بن علي الانصاري عن الهروي قال: قلت للرضا عليه السلام: يا ابن رسول الله إن في الكوفة (1) قوما يزعمون أن النبي صلى الله عليه وآله لم يقع عليه السهو في صلاته، فقال: كذبوا لعنهم الله إن الذي لا يسهو هو الله لا إله إلا هو.
“Tamim al-Qurashi from his father, from Ahmad ibn Ali al-Ansare from al-Harwi: I said to Ar-Redha(as): In Kufa there is group of people they reject (possibility) that prophet(saw) forgot in Salah”. He(as) said: They lied, may curse of Allah be upon them, the One who didn’t forget is Allah, no God except Him“.[Shia book, Biharul anwar” 25/350)]

Comment:

Therefore, according to classical Shia scholar Sheikh Sadooq and his teacher Shaikh Muhammad ibn Al-Hasan ibn Ahmad ibn al-Walid, the Ghulat are those who reject the possibility of Sahw(forgetfulness) from Prophet Muhammad(saw). Now the so called moderate-Shia too reject the possibility of Sahw(forgetfulness) from Prophet Muhammad(saw), even though there are authentic narrations in Shia books regarding the Sahw(forgetfulness) of Prophet Muhammad(saw). Here is an example:

مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عِيسَى عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ النُّعْمَانِ عَنْ سَعِيدٍ الْأَعْرَجِ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ (ع) يَقُولُ صَلَّى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ (ص) ثُمَّ سَلَّمَ فِي رَكْعَتَيْنِ فَسَأَلَهُ مَنْ خَلْفَهُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَ حَدَثَ فِي الصَّلَاةِ شَيْ‏ءٌ قَالَ وَ مَا ذَلِكَ قَالُوا إِنَّمَا صَلَّيْتَ رَكْعَتَيْنِ فَقَالَ أَ كَذَلِكَ يَا ذَا الْيَدَيْنِ وَ كَانَ يُدْعَى ذَا الشِّمَالَيْنِ فَقَالَ نَعَمْ فَبَنَى عَلَى صَلَاتِهِ فَأَتَمَّ الصَّلَاةَ أَرْبَعاً وَ قَالَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الَّذِي أَنْسَاهُ رَحْمَةً لِلْأُمَّةِ أَ لَا تَرَى لَوْ أَنَّ رَجُلًا صَنَعَ هَذَا لَعُيِّرَ وَ قِيلَ مَا تُقْبَلُ صَلَاتُكَ فَمَنْ دَخَلَ عَلَيْهِ الْيَوْمَ ذَاكَ قَالَ قَدْ سَنَّ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ (ص) وَ صَارَتْ أُسْوَةً وَ سَجَدَ سَجْدَتَيْنِ لِمَكَانِ الْكَلَامِ .
Muhammed bin Yahya (reported) from Ahmad bin Muhammed bin Isa from Ali bin an-Nu`man from Sa’eed al-‘A`raj who said: I heard Abu Abdillah (as-Sadiq), aleyhis salam, “The Messenger of Allah once said Salam in two rak`aat and those behind him asked, “O Messenger of Allah, has something happened to Salat?” The Messenger of Allah asked, “Why is that?” They replied, “You performed only two rak`aat”. The Messenger of Allah then asked, “Was it so, O Dhu al-Yadayn?” – he was also called Dhu al-Samalayn – He replied, “Yes it was so”. The Messenger of Allah based his Salat on that and completed it as four rak`aat. He (the Imam) said, “Allah made him forget to grant and make it a mercy for the nation (his followers). Is it not true that if a man does so (i.e. this mistake), he is reproached and is told that his Salat is not accepted? If today someone experiences such a condition, he says that the Messenger of Allah has established a Sunnah (tradition) (for dealing with this mistake) and it has become a guideline to follow. He (the Messenger of Allah) performed two sajdahs (i.e. sajdah as-sahw) because of speaking.
[Source: al-Kafi, vol 3, kitab as-Salat, chapter 43 “speaking duirng salat or turning away before completion” “باب من تكلم في صلاته أو انصرف قبل أن يتمها أو يقوم في موضع الجلوس”, page 357, hadeeth 3.
Grading: al-Majlisi II said this hadeeth is saheeh (authentic) in Miraat al-Uqool, volume 15, page 205.]

 

Example #3: The Ghulat believed that Imams had Ilm al-Ghaib(knowledge of unseen).

One of the top ranking Shia scholar Shaikh Tabrisi stated:

ومما خرج عن صاحب الزمان صلوات الله عليه، ردا على الغلاة من التوقيع جوابا لكتاب كتب إليه على يدي محمد بن علي بن هلال الكرخي

What came among the signed letters of Imam Mahdi (as) in refutation of the Ghulat, which he had written in reply to what Muhammad b. Ali. b. Hilal al Karkhi wrote to him.

يا محمد بن علي تعالى الله وجل عما يصفون، سبحانه وبحمده، ليس نحن شركاؤه في علمه ولا في قدرته، بل لا يعلم الغيب غيره، كما قال في محكم كتابه تباركت أسماؤه: (قل لا يعلم من في السماوات والأرض الغيب إلا الله
وأنا وجميع آبائي من الأولين: آدم ونوح وإبراهيم وموسى، وغيرهم من النبيين، ومن الآخرين محمد رسول الله، وعلي بن أبي طالب، وغيرهم ممن مضى من الأئمة صلوات الله عليهم أجمعين، إلى مبلغ أيامي ومنتهى عصري، عبيد الله عز وجل يقول الله عز وجل: (من أعرض عن ذكري فإن له معيشة ضنكا ونحشره يوم القيامة أعمى * قال رب لم حشرتني أعمى وقد كنت بصيرا * قال كذلك أتتك آياتنا فنسيتها وكذلك اليوم تنسى) يا محمد بن علي قد آذانا جهلاء الشيعة وحمقاؤهم، ومن دينه جناح البعوضة أرجح منه.
فأشهد الله الذي لا إله إلا هو وكفى به شهيدا، ورسوله محمد صلى الله عليه وآله، وملائكته وأنبياءه، وأولياءه عليهم السلام.
وأشهدك، وأشهد كل من سمع كتابي هذا، أني برئ إلى الله وإلى رسوله ممن يقول: إنا نعلم الغيب، ونشاركه في ملكه، أو يحلنا محلا سوى المحل الذي رضيه الله لنا وخلقنا له، أو يتعدى بنا عما قد فسرته لك وبينته في صدر كتابي

O Muhammad b. Ali! Allah (swt) is far above and exalted of what they describe, He is glorified and worthy of praise. We are not His partners in His knowledge or His authority. In fact, no one has the knowledge of the unseen (ghaib) other than Him, as He, blessed are His names, said in His clearly established book (al Qur’an 27:65)[Say: “None in the heavens and the earth knows the Ghaib (unseen) except Allah].

And me and all my forefathers; from the earlier generation of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses and others among the prophets, as well as the later generation of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), Ali (as) and others before the Imams (as) to the end of my days and end of my era, were slaves of Allah (swt). Allah (swt) says (al Qur’an 20: 124-126):[“But whosoever turns away from My Reminder verily, for him is a life of hardship, and We shall raise him up blind on the Day of Resurrection.” He will say:”O my Lord! Why have you raised me up blind, while I had sight (before).” (Allah) will say: “Like this, Our signs came unto you, but you disregarded them, and so this Day, you will be neglected.”] O Muhammad b. Ali! The uneducated people and the idiots among the shias, and (people like) the one whose religion is outweighed by a bug’s wing, have hurt us.

So I make Allah (swt), the one apart from whom there is no one worthy of worship, a witness and it is a sufficient testimony, and (I make witness) Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), His angels, His prophets and His beloved people. Peace be upon them all. And I make you a witness and all those who hear this message, I declare my dissociation to Allah (swt) and His messenger (pbuh) from anyone who says that we know ghaib(unseen), share His kingdom or attributes to us a position other than the one chosen by Allah (swt) for us and which we were created for, or transgresses with regards to us in what has been explained to you and laid out in the heart of this message. (Al Ihtijaj by al-Tabrisi, Volume 2, Page 288).

Comment:

Therefore, as per the classical Shia scholar Tabrisi, Ghulat attributed Ilm al-Ghaib to Imams. And we know that a large section of moderate Shia also attribute Ilm al-Ghayb to Imams. Even though this belief was rejected by their Imam as well as by the classical Shia scholars. Following are few examples:

ما رواه الكشي في الصحيح عن ابن أبي عمير، عن شعيب، عن أبي بصير، قال قلت لأبي عبد الله (ع) إنهم يقولون! قال: و ما يقولون قلت يقولون تعلم قطر المطر و عدد النجوم و ورق الشجر و وزن ما في البحر و عدد التراب، فرفع يده إلى السماء، و قال: سبحان الله سبحان الله لا و الله ما يعلم هذا إلا الله.
Shaikh Kashi reported in a sahih hadith from ibn abi Umair, from Shu’aib, from abi Baseer, who said: I said to abi Abdullah (as): “Indeed they claim!” Imam (as) asked: “And what do they claim?” I said: “They claim that you know (number of) drops of the rain, number of stars and leaves of trees, weight of what is in the seas and number of (particles of) sand.” So Imam (as) raised his hand towards the sky and said: “Subhanallah! Subhanallah! No one knows all this except for Allah (swt).”

Shia Shaikh Tabrisi wrote in Majma al Bayan, for the commentary of this verse (Surah al Hud Vrse 123):

صاحب تفسير «مجمع البيان» يقول في تفسيره لقوله تعالى: ﴿وَلِـلَّهِ غَيْبُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ﴾ [هود/123] ما نصُّهُ:وَلا نعلم أحداً منهم استجاز الوصف بعلم الغيب لأحد من الخلق فإنما يستحق الوصف بذلك من يعلم جميع المعلومات لا بعلم مستفاد وَهذه صفة القديم سبحانه العالم لذاته لا يشركه فيها أحد من المخلوقين وَمن اعتقد أن غير الله سبحانه يشركه في هذه الصفة فهو خارج عن ملّة الإسلام. فأمّا ما نقل عن أمير المؤمنين (عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ) وَرواه عنه الخاص وَالعام من الإخبار بالغائبات في خطب الملاحم وغيرها….. فإن جميع ذلك مُتَلَقَّى عن النبيِّ صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم مما أطلعه الله عليه فلا معنى لنسبة من روي عنهم هذه الأخبار المشهورة إلى أنه يعتقد كونهم عالمين للغيب
“And for Allah is the knowledge of ghaib of the skies and the earth”: “We do not know of any Shia scholar who permits attributing the knowledge of ghaib to any of the makhlooq (creatures) for the only one who is worthy of being characterised by such an attribute is the one who possesses all knowledge without acquisition. And this is true only for Allah whose knowledge is eternal and He knows everything by Himself (without acquiring it from any source). None is a partner of Him in this attribute and whoever believes that anyone other than Allah knows ghaib then he is outside the fold of Islam. Now as for what has been narrated by the Shias and non Shias among the ahadith of Imam Ali where he mentions some events which would take place in the future, so all that knowledge is what he inherited from the Prophet who in turn was informed by Allah (about some limited future events). So those ahadith do not at all mean that the Imams have knowledge of ghaib.

Shaikh Mufid wrote in his book Awailul Maqalat (page 38):

فأما إطلاق القول عليهم بأنهم يعلمون الغيب فهو منكر بيِّنُ الفساد

“As for saying that the Imams know Ghaib, so it is an extremely evil and corrupt belief.

Ibn Shahr Ashoob (586 AH) wrote in his book Mutashabih al Qur’an (Volume 1 page 211):

النبيّ والإمام يجب أن يعلما علوم الدين والشريعة ولا يجب أن يعلما الغيب وما كان وما يكون، لأنّ ذلك يؤدّي إلى أنّهما مشاركان للقديم تعالى

“The Prophet and the Imam must have full knowledge of the Islamic laws,but it is not incumbent upon them to have knowledge of ghaib, after all that would then mean that they are partners of Allah.

Top ranking Shia scholar, Shaikh Sadooq in his book Kamal al Deen, page 116 stated:

قد أكثرت في ذكر علم الغيب، والغيب لا يعلمه إلا الله، وما ادعاه لبشر إلا مشرك كافر

الصفحة ١١٦

We have expanded a lot about the issue of knowledge of the unseen, and no one knows the unseen except Allah (swt), and no one claims it for a human except for a polytheistic disbeliever (mushrik kafir).[Kamal al Deen, page 116]

 

Example #4: The Ghulat held the belief of Tafwidh

Classical Shia scholar Shaikh Sadooq in his book Iteqadat, under:

باب الاعتقاد في نفي الغلو والتفويض

Chapter: Belief in negation of the Ghulu(exaggerating the status of the Imams) and the tafwidh(delegation of affairs of creation) stated:

وروي عن زرارة أنه قال ، قلت للصادق ـ عليه السلام ـ : ( إن رجلا من ولد عبد الله بن سبأ يقول بالتفويض.
قال ـ عليه السلام ـ : ( وما التفويض ) ؟ قلت : يقول : إن الله عزوجل خلق محمدا صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم وعليا ـ عليه السلام ـ ثم فوض الأمر  إليهما ، فخلقا ، ورزقا ، وأحييا ، وأماتا.
فقال : ( كذب عدو الله ، إذا رجعت إليه فاقرأ عليه الآية التي في سورة الرعد ( أم جعلوا لله شركاء خلقوا كخلقه فتشابه الخلق عليهم قل الله خالق كل شيء وهو الواحد القاهر ) . فانصرفت إلى رجل فأخبرته بما قال الصادق ـ عليه السلام ـ  فكأنما ألقمته حجرا ، أو قال : فكأنما خرس

And it is narrated from Zurarah that he said, I said to Imam al Sadiq (as): “Indeed a man from children of Abdullah ibn Saba professes by tafwidh.” Said [Imam] (as): “And what is tafwidh?” I said: “He says: Indeed Allah (swt) created Muhammad (pbuh) and Ali (as), then delegated the command to them, for creation, and to give rizq (sustenance), and to give life, and to give death.” So [Imam (as)] said: “Enemy of Allah (swt) lied, when you go back to him then recite upon him these ayaat (verses) in Surah al Ra’d (Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s translation): [Or do they assign to God partners who have created (anything) as He has created, so that the creation seemed to them similar? Say: “God is the Creator of all things: He is the One, the Supreme and Irresistible.”] So I turned (went back) to (that) man, then informed him by what Imam al Sadiq (as) had said, so it (his reaction) was as if he had swallowed a stone or had become mute/dumb.”

Similarly, Shia Shiekh Sadooq in his, Uyun Akhbar al Redha, Volume 1, Page 219, stated:

حدثنا محمد بن علي ماجيلويه (ره) قال: حدثنا علي بن إبراهيم بن هاشم عن أبيه عن ياسر الخادم قال: قلت للرضا عليه السلام ما تقول في التفويض؟ فقال: إن الله تبارك وتعالى فوض إلى نبيه (ص) أمر دينه فقال: (ما آتيكم الرسول فخذوه وما نهيكم عنه فانتهوا)  فاما الخلق والرزق فلا، ثم قال عليه السلام: إن الله عز وجل يقول: (الله خالق كل شئ) وهو يقول: (الله الذي خلقكم ثم رزقكم ثم يميتكم ثم يحييكم قل هل من شركائكم يفعل من ذلكم من شئ سبحانه وتعالى عما يشركون

Told us Muhammad b. ali Majiloweh (ra) who said: Told us ali b. Ibrahim b. Hashim from his father from Yasser the servant who said: I said to Imam al Redha (as): “What do you say about al tafwidh (the belief that Allah has delegated the affairs of creation to His chosen people)?” So [Imam (as)] said: “Indeed Allah (swt) delegated to His (swt) prophet command of His (swt) religion.” Then [Imam (as)] said: “So take what the Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you.” (Al Qur’an 59:7), as for the creation and the sustenance, then no.” Then [Imam (as)] said: “Indeed Allah (swt) says (in al Qur’an 13:16): “Allah is the Creator of all things”, and He (swt) says (in al Qur’an 30:40): “It is God Who has created you: further, He has provided for your sustenance; then He will cause you to die; and again He will give you life. Are there any of your (false) “Partners” who can do any single one of these things? Glory to Him! and high is He above the partners they attribute (to him)!”

Comment:

From these reports we found that, The Ghulat believed in tafwidh (the belief that Allah has delegated the affairs of creation to His chosen people), which was rejected and refuted by the Imams. However a large section of the so called moderate-Shia believe in the same concept under the name of Wilayah al Takwiniyyah. Also note that, in the above hadeeth Ghulat believed that Imams were given the authority to give rizq(sustenance) etc, by Allah, which means it was “Bi idhnillah”(with permission of Allah), it wasn’t from their own, UNLIKE what Christians believe for Isa(as). However, even though the Ghulat believed that the authority was given to Imams by Allah(swt), but still it was rejected by Imam Jafar Sadiq(as) and Imam al Redha(as), and Classical Shia shiekh Sadooq brought this hadeeth under the chapter of Ghulu and Tafweedh.

 

Example #5: The Ghulat denied the occurrence of the marriage between Umar bin khattab(as) and daughter of Ali(as) – Umm Kulthum.

We read in Shia book Mirat ul Uqool:

عن الشيخ محمد بن محمد بن النعمان أرفعه إلى عمر بن أذينة قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام: إن الناس يحتجون علينا أن أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام زوج فلانا ابنته أم كلثوم، و كان عليه السلام متكئا فجلس و قال: أ تقبلون أن عليا أنكح فلانا ابنته؟ إن قوما يزعمون ذلك ما يهتدون إلى سواء السبيل و لا الرشاد ثم صفق بيده، و قال: سبحان الله أما كان أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام يقدر أن يحول بينه و بينها، كذبوا لم يكن ما قالوا، إن فلانا خطب إلى علي عليه السلام بنته أم كلثوم فأبى فقال للعباس: و الله لئن لم يزوجني لأنزعن منك السقاية و زمزم فأتى العباس عليا فكلمه فأبى عليه فألح العباس، فلما رأى أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام مشقة كلام الرجل على العباس و أنه سيفعل معه ما قال، أرسل إلى جنية من أهل نجران يهودية يقال لها صحيقة بنت حريرية فأمرها فتمثلت في مثال أم كلثوم، و حجبت الأبصار عن أم كلثوم بها و بعث بها إلى الرجل فلم تزل عنده حتى أنه استراب بها يوما فقال ما في الأرض أهل بيت أسحر من بني هاشم، ثم أراد أن يظهر للناس فقتل فحوت الميراث و انصرفت إلى نجران، و أظهر أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام أم كلثوم،

Umar ibn Uzaynah asked Imam Jafar Sadiq: ‘People claim that ‘Ali married his daughter to such a person’. The Imam, who was until then sitting down, stood up and said angrily, “Whoever holds such a viewpoint is misled.” Subhanallah! Was Imam ‘Ali unable to free his daughter from their clutches? He could have stood between them and her to protect, they have fabricated a lie … (the whole story of Umm Kulthum being replaced by Jinn and the Jinn’s marriage to Umar thereforth)

Esteemed Shia scholar Mulla Baqir Majlisi says regarding it:

أقول: لا منافاة بينه و بين سائر الأخبار الواردة في أنه زوجه أم كلثوم، لأنهم صلوات الله عليهم، كانوا يتقون من غلاة الشيعة، و كان هذا من الأسرار، و لم يكن أكثر أصحابهم قائلين لها، كذا ذكره الوالد العلامة قدس الله روحه

I say: There is no contradiction between this narration and the other narrations that he married his daughter Umm Kulthum, because the Imams would fear from the Ghulat Shia, and this is from the secrets, and because plenty of his companions didn’t believe in it, this is what Allamah has also mentioned. (Mirat ul Uqool, Vol. 21, p. 198).

Comment:

Therefore, as per Mulla Baqir Majlisi, the Ghulat Shia didn’t believe in the marriage of Umar bin Khattab(as) with Umm Kulthum bint Ali(as), though this is authentically reported both in Sunni as well as Shia books such as Al-Kafi, and these reports were authenticated by Baqir Majlisi. For example:

حُمَيْدُ بْنُ زِيَادٍ عَنِ ابْنِ سَمَاعَةَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ زِيَادٍ عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ سِنَانٍ وَ مُعَاوِيَةَ بْنِ عَمَّارٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع قَالَ سَأَلْتُهُ عَنِ الْمَرْأَةِ الْمُتَوَفَّى عَنْهَا زَوْجُهَا أَ تَعْتَدُّ فِي بَيْتِهَا أَوْ حَيْثُ شَاءَتْ قَالَ بَلْ حَيْثُ شَاءَتْ إِنَّ عَلِيّاً ع لَمَّا تُوُفِّيَ عُمَرُ أَتَى أُمَّ كُلْثُومٍ فَانْطَلَقَ بِهَا إِلَى بَيْتِهِ
From `Abd Allaah bin Sinaan and Mu`aawiyah bin `Ammaar from Abee `Abd Allaah (as): He said: I asked about the women whose husband dies, can she do her `iddah in her house or wherever she wants? He(as)said: “It is wherever she wants, that `Ali(as) brought Umm Kulthoom to his home when she became free, when `Umar died”. [Al-Kulayni, Al-Kaafi, vol. 6, pg. 115, hadeeth # 2 ; Al-Majlisi said this hadeeth is SaHeeH (Authentic)à Mir’aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 21, pg. 199]

But we know that just like the Ghulat during the time of Imams disbelieved in this fact, even today a large section of so called moderate-Shia deny and reject the occurrence of marriage between Umm Khulthum bint Ali(as) and Umar bin Khattab(as).

 

Example #6: The Ghulat denied the three daughters of Prophet Muhammad(saw) being his biological daughters.

When we look through the books of Seerah(biographies) there seemed to be an ijmaa`(consensus) amongst the Shia scholars that the Prophet(saw) did indeed have four daughters. If there was an ijmaa(consensus) amongst the scholars of the Shia, then who came up with this theory of Prophet(saw) only having one daughter[i.e Fatima-A.S]?

When we look through the books, the earliest traces of when this theory of there being only one daughter of the Prophet(saw) first began comes from a guy named `Ali bin ahmad Abu al-Qaasim Al-Koofee. He, Abu Al-Qaasim Al-Koofee, was the first one who proposed that Ruqayyah and Zaynab were not daughters of Khadeejah(ra); rather they were daughters of haalah, sister of Khadeejah.

Esteemed Shia scholars such as, Ibn Shahr Ashoob in, Manaaqib, vol. 1, pg. 159; and Al-Majlisi in, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 22, ch. 2, pg. 191 stated:

“And the bidah(innovation) that Ruqayyah and Zaynab were two daughters of Haalah, sister of Khadeejah”.

Shia scholar Al-Tustaree(d. 1415 AH) said that this bid`ah(innovation) was started from the book of Abu Al-Qaasim Al-Koofee, we read:

“Then there is no doubt that Zaynab and Ruqayyah were daughters of the Prophet(saw) , and the bid`ah which it has been mentioned in the book of Abu Al-Qaasim (Al-Koofee).”(Al-Tustaree, Qaamoos Al-Rijaal, vol. 9, pg. 450).

This, Ali bin ahmad Abu Al-Qaasim Al-Koofee was Ghali Shia. There is an ijmaa`(consensus) among classical Shia scholars to contemporary scholars on the status of Abu Al-Qaasim Al-Koofee. They have all said that he was a “Ghulat (exaggerator), “kadhaab” (liar), and a person who had a “faasid madhhab” (corrupt belief).

Classical Shia scholar Ibn Al-GhaDaa’iree (d. 411 AH) said about him:

“Liar, Ghaali (exaggerator), person of bid`ah and discourse. I saw that he has many books, and he is not turned to.” (Kitaab Al-Du`afaa, pg. 82, person # 104)

Classical Shia scholar Al-Najaashee (d. 450 AH) said about him:

Ghulaa (exaggerator) at the end of his life, and he has a fasad (corrupt) belief, and he composed many books, many (of those books while) on the fasaad (corrupt belief)”

“And this man is claimed to the Ghulat a great position”. (Rijaal Al-Najaashee, pg. 265 – 266, person # 691).

Classical Shia scholar Al-Toosee (d. 460 AH) said about him:

He was an Imaamee (12er Shee`ah) of the straight path, and he composed many relevant books, from them were: Kitaab Al-Awsiyaa‟, Kitaab fee Al-Fiqh `ala Tarteeb, and Kitaab Al-Muzinee. Then, was confused, and showed the madhhab of al-mukhammasah, and he composed books in the (states of) Ghulu and confusion” [Al-Toosi, Fihrist Al-Toosee, pg. 271, person # 390]

Shia scholar Ibn Dawood Al-Hillee (d. 707 AH) said about him:

“He was an Imaamee of the straight path, and composed many relevant books, then became confused, and took the madhhab of al-mukhammasah. And he composed books in the (state) of ghuluww and confusion. He is a liar, Ghaali, and a person of bid`ah. I have seen many of his wicked/evil (khabeethah) books”. [ Ibn Dawood Al-Hillee, Rijaal, pg. 480, person # 318]

Comment:

Therefore, it was a Ghali Shia, who innovated the theory that, Prophet Muhammad(saw) only had one daughter[i.e Fatima(as)] and his other daughters weren’t his biological daughters. The classical Shia scholars considered the originator of this theory as a Ghali and a man of corrupt belief, however as the classical Shia scholars said, this man was held in great position by the Ghulat, thus the Ghulat adopted his Bidah and rejected the fact that Prophet(saw) had four biological daughters. Ironically, a large section of so called moderate-Shia, adopted the innovation of this Ghali Shia – Abu Al-Qaasim Al-Koofee, and followed him by rejecting the established fact proven from authentic reports present in Sunni as well as Shia books, regarding Prophet Muhammad(saw) having four biological daughters.

 

III. What is the ruling upon Ghulat?

(i). Here is verdict given by Imam al Redha(as) over Ghulat. We read:

حدثنا محمد بن علي بن بشار ره قال حدثنا أبو الفرج المظفر بن أحمد بن الحسن القزويني قال حدثنا العباس بن محمد بن قاسم بن حمزة بن موسى بن جعفر (ع) قال حدثنا الحسن بن سهل القمي عن محمد بن خالد عن أبي هاشم الجعفري قال سألت أبا الحسن الرضا (ع) عن الغلاة و المفوضة فقال الغلاة كفار و المفوضة مشركون من جالسهم أو خالطهم أو آكلهم أو شاربهم أو واصلهم أو زوجهم أو تزوج منهم أو آمنهم أو ائتمنهم على أمانة أو صدق حديثهم أو أعانهم بشطر كلمة خرج من ولاية الله عز و جل و ولاية رسول الله (ص) و ولايتنا أهل البيت

Told us Muhammad b. Ali b. Bashar who said: Told us abul Faraj al Mudhaffar b. Ahmad b. al Hasan al Qazwini who said: Told us al Abbas b. Muhammad b. Qasim b. Hamza b. Musa. b. Ja’far who said: Told us al Hasan b. Sahl al Qummi from Muhammad b. Khalid from abi Hashim al Ja’fri who said: I asked aba al Hasan al Redha(as) about the Ghulat and mufawwidha, so [Imam (as)] said: “The Ghulat are disbelievers and the mufawwidha are polytheists, whoever sits with them or mingles with them or eats with them or drinks with them or sticks/holds on to them or gives in marriage to them or marries among them or gives them peace/security or takes them as safekeepers upon their things or affirms their saying or helps them with a word, he is expelled from wilayah of Allah (swt), and wilayah of Rasool Allah (pbuh) and our wilyah of ahlulbayt (as).”  [Uyun Akhbar al Redha by Shaikh Sadooq (ra), Volume 1, Page 219].

(ii). Classical Shia scholar Shaikh Sadooq said:

قال الشيخ أبو جعفر – رضي الله عنه -: اعتقادنا في الغلاة والمفوضة أنهم كفار بالله تعالى، وأنهم أشر من اليهود والنصارى والمجوس والقدرية والحرورية (١) ومن جميع أهل البدع والأهواء المضلة

“Our belief regarding the Ghulat and Mufawidha is that they are disbelievers of Allah (swt), and they are worse than the Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Qadria, Haruriya and all the people engaged in bid’ah (innovations in Islam) and pursuing deviant desires.”[‘Iteqadat by Shaikh Sadooq (ra), Page 97]

(iii). Shia Allama al-Hilli says in Nihayat al-Ahkam [1:274]:

والخوارج والغلاة والناصب ، وهو الذي يتظاهر بعداوة أهل البيت ( عليهم السلام ) أنجاس

“The Kharijis, Ghulat and the Nasibi, who demonstrates enmity for Ahl al-Bayt `alayhim al-salam, are impure individuals.

 

IV. Advice of Imam Sadiq(as) regarding the Ghulat.

Shia Shaikh Tusi  in Al Amali, page 650 wrote:

1349 / 12 – وعنه، قال: أخبرنا الحسين بن عبيد الله، قال: أخبرنا أحمد بن محمد بن يحيى العطار، قال: حدثنا أبي، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن العباس ابن معروف، عن عبد الرحمن بن مسلم، عن فضيل بن يسار، قال: قال الصادق (عليه السلام): احذروا على شبابكم الغلاة لا يفسدونهم، فإن الغلاة شر خلق الله، يصغرون عظمة الله، ويدعون الربوبية لعباد الله، والله إن الغلاة شر من اليهود والنصارى والمجوس والذين أشركوا.
12/1349- And from him, who said: Informed us al Hussain b. Ubaidillah, who said: Informed us Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Yahya al Attar, who said: Told us my father, from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid, from al Abbas b. Ma’roof, from Abdur Rahman b. Muslim, from Fudail b. Yassar, who said: Imam al Sadiq (as) said: “Protect your youth, so that the Ghulat do not corrupt them, for indeed the Ghulat are the most evil makhlooq of Allah. They lessen the glory of Allah and claim divinity for the slaves of Allah. By Allah! Indeed the Ghulat are worse than the Jews, Christians, Majoos, and those who do polytheism.”

 

Holy Quran says:

(In spite of the clear signs of the Oneness of Allah), there are people who set up equals and rivals with Allah and adore them with the adoration due to Allah, whereas the Believers adore Allah most ardently. Would that these transgressors could realize now what they will realize, when they will see the chastisement before them that power and authority wholly belong to Allah and that Allah is severe in punishment! When He will inflict punishment, those very leaders and guides whom they followed in the world will disown them. But punishment they shall get and all their bonds shall be cut off. Then those who followed them will say, “Would that we were given another chance to return to the world: then we will disown them just as they have disowned us today.” Thus will Allah bring before them the deeds they did in the world in such a manner as to make them wring their hands in regret but they shall be unable to come out of the Fire.(Quran 2: 165-167)

Article By AbuMuslimKhorasani

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s