Non-Shias in the view of Taqiyyah-free Twelver Shiism.


Non- Shias in the view of Taqiyyah-free Twelver Shiism.

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

We were notified by some respected readers, that the Shia propagandists are trying very hard to malign the ideology of Ahl us-sunnah, and there wasn’t any academic refutation available  online which refuted their false propaganda. Therefore this article is a refutation of Twelver Shia propagandists. As the title suggests this article presents before the readers, the Taqiyyah-free ideology of Twelver Shiism, because usually the Twelver Shia are hesitant in revealing their true ideology and resort to presenting their venomous ideology by sugar coating it, and by practising Taqiyyah(dissimulation). Taqiyyah is an important teaching of their religion, and the one who doesn’t practice it, is believed to get humiliated. We read in the major Shia hadeeth book, Al-Kafi – Imam Abu Abdullah(AS) said: “O Sulaiman, you are on a religion that he who hides it is honored by Allah, and the one who propagates it [openly] will be humiliated!”(“Al-Kafi” vol 2, p 222). [A Similar report is also present in the same chapter Al-Kafi H2260 CH94, h8].

It is unfortunate that many of the general folk, who love the Qur’aan and Sunnah and desire good, do not know of the heretical beliefs of the Twelver Shiism as well as its enmity towards the People of Sunnah(Ahl us-Sunnah) – and this is partly due to the fact that the Twelver Shia Scholars practice Taqiyyah and they do not make wide-spread their foundational books that their ideology (madhhab) is built upon. So in this article we will mention some of the wicked and offensive concepts of Twelver Shiism that they themselves have penned in their own source reference books.

We have divided this article into the following parts:

I – Introduction

II – Ahl us-sunnah and Non-Twelver Shia are considered Nasibis by Twelver Shiism.

III –  Taqiyyah-free Testimonies of  Twelver Shia scholars, declaring Ahl us-sunnah/Non-Twelver Shia as Kafir(disbelievers).

IV-  Current Twelver Shia Scholars who admitted the undeniable fact that, Twelver Shiism makes Takfeer of Non-Shias.

V – Ruling of Twelver Shiism upon killing Nasibis(label given to Sunnis), destroying their property and taking over their wealth.

VII – What was outcome of this horrible ideology of Twelver Shiism.?

VII – There cannot be brotherhood between Shias and their opponents(Non Shias), as per Twelver Shiism.

VIII –  As per Twelver Shiism, their opponents(Non-Shias) are children of Zina(prostitution).

IX – The opponents(Non-Shias) are worse than Jews and Christians and filthier than dogs, as per Twelver Shiism.

X – The Sunni Scholars who were labeled as Nasibis by Twelver Shia Scholars – An undeniable proof over Taqiyyah practicing Shia propagandists.

XI – Outcry of Shia propagandists that they do not practice Taqiyyah(dissimulation).

XII – Message to Ahl us-sunnah.

 

I – Introduction

In the recent times the rise of Deviant Khawarij(eg: Daesh, ISIS, Boko Haram, etc) and their atrocities have made Islam a center of target from attacks of Enemies of Islam. They are using all of their means to malign Islam and Muslims, even though Islam has no association with the deviant ideology of the Khawarij. When Islam and Muslims are being targeted by the Enemies of Islam , how could the Twelver Shia propagandists remain in the back seat? The Twelver Shia propagandists took full advantage of this situation and started the propaganda against the mainstream Muslims(Ahl us-Sunnah wal Jama’ah) by associating the deviant Khawarij and their ideology with Ahl us-Sunnah, even though it is well known fact that every one is suffering from the fitna of Khawarij, be it Sunnis, Shiites, any other sect or be it the Non-Muslims. Infact, history testifies that the first to suffer from the fitna of Khawarij were Ahl us-sunnah, their Caliph and the son in law of Prophet Mohammad(SAWS) – Uthman bin Affan(ra) – was martyred by these same people, who held a deviant ideology. These same people martyred another son in law of Prophet Mohammad(SAWS) – Ali ibn Abi Talib(ra), they made an assassination attempt on Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan(ra), and even on Hasan bin Ali(ra).

But the Shia propagandists aren’t bothered to reflect on these facts, their motive is to somehow defame Ahl us-sunnah. Hence, they have flooded social media with their false propaganda and allegations against Ahl us-sunnah, and are trying to associate the Khawarij and their ideology to Ahl us-sunnah. It seems these Shia propagandists aren’t well versed with Islamic history, because it is a known fact among the people of knowledge, that the first Khawarij group that emerged was from the ranks of supporters(Shia) of Ali bin Abi Talib(ra). The first Khawarij were Ex-Shias(supporters) of Ali(ra) who later separated from him and started making his Takfeer and the Takfeer of other Sahaba(ra) revered by Ahl us-sunnah. These people were called Khawarij due to their deviant ideology, and the influence of this ideology of those Ex-Shias(Khawarij) is still present on the ideology of Twelver Shiism.

Let us present before the readers an example of a notorious Twelver Shia speaker, to give the readers an idea that, how cunningly the Twelver Shia propagandists are trying to malign the ideology of  Mainstream Muslims(Ahl us-sunnah).

Shia lecturer Ammar Nakshawani in his lecture states :”No doubt that an honest member of Ahlus-Sunnah will never accept this nonsense, but the honest member of Ahlus Sunnah must also accept that a part of his theology and law is to kill and massacre the shia.” [Source] .

These Shia propagandists(including their Media) are following the foot-steps of the Enemies of Islam(Esp. The Western media), which strategically keeps on alleging that, “Not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims”, by this they aim is to defame the global identity of Islam/Muslims, to morally weaken Muslims and to embarrass them by making them feel guilty over the religion they follow, and to develop a negative public opinion against the Muslims among the Non-Muslims masses. By doing this the Enemies of Islam(esp Western Media) are achieving several goals, such as: Weakening the global opposition/condemnation towards their Governments over their illegal invasions of Muslim countries(which are in a way or other planned to benefit their Governments economically and politically); Attempting to legitimize/justify the illegal occupation of Muslim lands by the political allies of their Governments, along with covering and hiding their crimes and also weakening the opposition/condemnation for these crimes; Distracting the attention of the world from the atrocities committed by their criminal Governments by giving no importance to that news and at the same time giving a lot of hype to such less significant issues(take example of western drones killings  hundreds of innocent women and children in Muslim countries and the negligible Media coverage given to it, versus the incident of Malala YousafZai and hype given to it); To slow down the growth of Islam on a global level; To turn away the weak faith Muslims from being practicing Muslims, etc. [Note: Our entitlement to ” Western Media” as an “Enemy of Islam”, is due to its own actions, take example of their hypocrisy from some recent incidents, where we realize that it has reserved the word “terrorist” only for those people who associate themselves to Islam, even when such a person is merely a suspect, this media is quick to declare such a person ” terrorist”, whereas on the other hand when the Non-Muslim terrorists kill and murder innocent Muslims in cold blooded manner, the same Media avoids terming those Killers as “Terrorists”, because this would refute their own rhetoric that ‘all terrorists are Muslim’. This bias and prejudice of western media towards Muslims/Islam perfectly qualify them to entitled as “Enemies of Islam”, one of whose agenda is to defame Islam and Muslims].

Likewise even the Shia propagandists(along with Shia Media) are trying to create a similar atmosphere as created by Enemies of Islam by using the similar rhetoric as the enemies of Islam use, because their goals are identical. Shia propagandists with their false propaganda and by attributing the crimes done by deviant khawarij to Ahl us-sunnah, aim to achieve some goals such as: To make the Sunnis masses apologetic towards them, since this neutralizes to an extent the opposition and condemnation their Governments could face for their crimes done on the Sunnis;  To support the intervention of their Governments in Sunni ruled countries where their governments support and fund armed rebellions against the legitimate Sunni leadership, creating a state of chaos and political unrest in those countries; To get a resistance-free platform for the propagation of Twelver Shiism among Sunnis.

The Shia propagandists are attributing the atrocities of the modern day Khawarij to Ahl us-sunnah by alleging that, “part of Sunni ideology is to kill and massacre the Shia”. We say this is like the pot calling the kettle black, it is not a Sunni ideology but rather it’s the ideology of Twelver Shias to kill their opponents especially the Ahl us-sunnah(Sunnis). And as for the emergence of deviant extremist groups such as ISIS or Daesh[which are denounced by Ahl us-sunnah] then the Sectarian Shia beliefs played a major role in their formation. Not only the Sunni intellectuals, but even the Shia scholars admit this fact.

Shia Ayatullah Hashemi Rafsanjani stated: “We’ve ignored these controversies and started the whole Shia-Sunni discussion and even the celebration of death of Omar(Second Caliph of Muslims). Also the cursing of companions(Sahaba) of Prophet(SAWS), which is a norm amongst many of us, some even regard it as a form of worship. These very controversies and disputes that we’ve caused in the Muslim Ummah have lead to the likes of Al-Qa’ida, Daesh and the Taliban. Many have come to that conclusion…” [Source video].

Cursing the revered Sunni personalities is just one of reasons, as for the other ones then it’s their ideology to kill the opponents especially the Ahl us-sunnah(Sunnis); Take example of the on-going massacre of Sunnis in Syria from years, which is backed and supported by Twelver Shia Government, or take example of the massacres of Sunnis in Iraq at the hands of Shia death squads, or the target killing of Sunni scholars in Pakistan. However, due to stronghold of Shia propagandists in Media and due to backwardness of Sunnis in Media, these atrocities against Sunnis doesn’t get much attention from the media and such news is just over-looked  or not given proper coverage or sometimes they portray this news in such a distorted way that the massacred Sunnis are portrayed as terrorists or rebels, with this they try to justify the killing of innocent Sunnis. However when it comes to Shias then the media becomes over-sensitive and over-supportive, which gives the Shia propagandists an open-stage to freely blame Ahl us-sunnah for anything they like and to portray them as intolerant, evil and barbaric people. This hypocrisy is the bitter reality of media’s role nowadays, where the voice of Sunnis is unheard and the blood of Sunnis is considered worthless.

Therefore, it is necessary to refute the Shia propagandists by exposing the ugly reality of Twelver Shiism before the world so that innocent Muslims/Non-Muslims don’t fall prey to their false propaganda.  However, we would like to clarify that, the reason behind writing this article is not to create hatred for the Shia Community. But, rather to refute the Shia propagandists and to educate the naive Shia and Sunni Brothers and Sisters who due to their ignorance are being fooled by the Shia propagandists.

 

IIAhl us-sunnah and Non-Twelver Shia are considered Nasibis by Twelver Shiism.

To establish this fact before the readers, we would like to present some Shia hadeeth of Shia Imams and also the statements of some esteemed Shia scholars.

1. In the book, Ma’ani al akhbaar by Shia Shaikh Sadooq

(باب) * (معنى الناصب)
Section (on the) (Meaning of the [term] nasibi)

حدثنا محمد بن على ماجيلويه – رضى الله عنه – قال: حدثني عمى محمد بن أبي القاسم، عن محمد بن على الكوفي، عن ابن فضال عن المعلى بن خنيس، قال: سمعت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام يقول: ليس الناصب من نصب لنا أهل البيت لانك لاتجد أحدا يقول: أنا ابغض محمدا وآل محمد، ولكن الناصب من نصب لكم وهو يعلم أنكم تتولونا أو تتبرؤون من أعدائنا، وقال عليه السلام: من أشبع عدوا لنا فقد قتل وليا لنا

Told us Muhammad b. Ali Majiluwaih (ra) who said: Told me my uncle Muhammad b. abi al Qasim, from Muhammad b. Ali al Kufi, from ibn Fudhaal from al Mu’alla b. Khunais, who said: I heard Aba Abdullah (as) saying: “The nasib is not one who has hatred for us ahlulbayt (as) for indeed you will not find anyone saying: I detest Muhammad (pbuh) and his (pbuh) pure family, but instead the nasib is one who has hatred for you people and he knows that you people love us (as) or hate those from our (as) enemies.” And [Imam (as)] said: “Whoever fed our enemy, then he has killed a friend of ours”.

2. Thawabul ‘amaal wa ‘aqaabul ‘amaal by Shaikh Sadooq (ra)

و بهذا الإسناد عن محمد بن أحمد عن إبراهيم بن إسحاق عن عبد الله بن حماد [عبد الله بن سنان] عن أبي عبد الله (ع) قال ليس الناصب من نصب لنا أهل البيت لأنك لم تجد رجلا يقول أنا الناصب [أبغض] محمدا و آل محمد و لكن الناصب من نصب لكم و هو يعلم أنكم تتوالونا و أنكم من شيعتنا
And from same chains from Muhammad b. Ahmad from Ibrahim b. Ishaq from ‘Abdullah b. Hammad[‘Abdullah b. Sinan] from Abi Abdullah(as) said: “The nasib is not one who has hatred for us ahlulbayt(as) for indeed you won’t find a man say I’m the hater (I detest/loathe) of Muhammad (PBUH) and the pure family of Muhammad(PBUH) but instead the nasib is the one who has hatred for you people and he knows  that you people love us and that you people are among our shias.”

Comment: These Shia hadeeth shows that, if any Sunni hates Shiites for their corrupt practices, such as  cursing of Abubakr(ra), Umar(ra) or Ayesha(ra) or rest of Sahaba or if any Sunni hates a Shia for his/her enmity towards Sahaba(as) and some wives of Prophet(Saw) then this will make the Sunnis as Nasibis, as per Shiism. From these reports we can clearly see that the complete Ahlesunnah are Nasibis according to Shias, since no true Sunni could avoid hating the Shias, for their insults, cursing and enmity towards Sahaba(as) and mothers of believers(as).

3. Grand Ayatollah al-Sayyid Bashir al-Najafi describes him in one of his answers as:

الناصبي هو الذي يظهر العداء لأحد المعصومين ابتداءً من الرسول الأعظم صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم ، إلى الإمام المنتظر والزهراء عليهم السلام وأما السب فاجتنبه ، ويجوز لك أن تلعنه بينك وبين ربك ، وتلعن من لا يلعنه ، ولكن فليكن ذلك بينك وبين الله لتحظى بالأجر على البراءة من أعداء الله ورسوله وأعداء ذريته لعنهم الله
“Nasibi is he who makes (his) enmity for anyone of the infallibles obvious, starting from the greatest Messenger(SAWS) to the awaited Imam and al-Zahra(as). As for insulting him, then take precaution; and it is permissible for you that you curse him between you and your Lord, and that you curse whoever doesn’t curse him, but that will be between you and Allah because you are receiving reward over disassociation from the enemies of Allah, His Messenger and the enemies of his progeny la`anahum allah.”

4.

الشهيد الثاني من الاطلاع على غرائب الأخبار فذهب إلى أن الناصبي هو الذي نصب العداوة لشيعة أهل البيت (عليهم السلام) وتظاهر في القدح فيهم كما هو حال أكثر المخالفين لنا في هذه الأعصار في كل الأمصار

Shahid al Thani discerned from the information in strange ahadith, so he adopted the view that the nasibi is the one who holds enmity towards the Shias of ahlulbait and expresses slanders on them, as is the state of our opponents(non-shias) in this period in all the countries.” (Hadaiq al Nadhirah by Shaikh Yusuf al Bahrani,Volume 5, Page 175).

5. Ayatollah al-Sayyid Murtada al-`Askari says in Ma`alim al-Madrasatayn [1:81] that “Nasibi” according to them is:

كل من يبغض الأئمة من أهل البيت عليهم السلام
“Everyone who hates the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt.”

6.  Shia sheikh Muhammad Hasan an-Najafi al-Jawhari in his book “Jawaher al-kalam” (vol 6, p 66) quoted other shia scholar saying:

أن الناصب يطلق على خمسة أوجه: الخارجي القادح في علي (ع)، الثاني ما ينسب إلى أحدهم (عليهم السلام) ما يسقط العدالة، الثالث من ينكر فضيلتهم لو سمعها، الرابع من اعتقد فضيلة غير علي (ع)، الخامس من أنكر النص على علي (ع) بعد سماعه أو وصوله إليه بوجه يصدقه

The Nasibi title is designated (for a person) over five reasons: For a Khariji who criticizes Ali (as); Secondly for he who attributes something that invalidates uprightness (adala) to any of the Imams, Thirdly, for he who denies a virtue of theirs when he heard it; Fourthly, for one who believes in the superiority of someone other than Ali (over him); Fifthly, he who denied the report of explicit election of Ali after hearing it or its reaching to him in a manner that allows him to confirm it”.(Jawaher al-kalam”vol 6, p 66)

Comment: From the fourth reason given by Shia scholar, complete Ahlesunnah become Nasibi, since Ahl us-sunnah believes in superiority of Abubakr(ra) over Ali(ra), as this was the view of Ali(ra) himself, which was authentically reported in Mutawattir reports present in book of Sunnah.

7. Shia scholar Hussain ibn al-Shaikh Muhammad al-Usfoor ad-Drazi al-Bahrani in his book “Mahasin nafsaniya fi ajwibat masail horasaniya” (p157) said:
أنه ليس الناصب إلا عبارة عن التقديم على علي غيره
“As you have learned before term nasib doesn’t mean other thing than favour someone over Ali”. (“Mahasin nafsaniya fi ajwibat masail horasaniya”, p157).

Comment: From this definition, complete Ahlesunnah become Nasibi, since they believe in superiority of Abubakr(ra) over Ali(ra), as this was the view of Ali(ra) himself, which was authentically reported in Sunni books through Mutawattir reports.

8. Shia scholar Husien Aal-‘Asfour states : “… Rather, their narrations [‘Alaihim Al-Salam] are in declaration that the Nasibi is he who is referred to as the Sunni”And there is no disagreement that what is meant by the Nasibah in [that narration] are the People of Sunnah (Sunnis), who say that the Azhan was shown to Ubi ibn Kaa’b in a dream. So it became apparent for you that the dispute between those holding these three views [about the definition of the Nasibi] – i.e. those who said that it involves only favoring, carrying hatred to their Shi’ah as was adopted by Muhammad Amin in Al-Fawaed Al-Madaniya, and carrying animosity towards them ‘Alaihim Al-Salam, as is what is chosen by … is only a linguistic dispute, since it is clear how these [three views] are [attached and related] to each other”.  (Source: “Al-Mahasen Al-Nafsaniyah fee Ajwebat Al-Masael Al-Khurasaniya”, p. 147).

Comment: This shia scholar openly declares Sunnis as Nasibis, which strengthens our claim that as per Taqiyyah-free Shism Sunnis are considered Nasibis..

9. It is mentioned in Shia book Haq al-Yaqin that:

“People wrote to Imam Ali Naqi that are we required to know besides that Nasibi considers Munafiq Awwal (First Munafiq – Sayyiduna Abu Bakar) and Daum (Second – Sayyiduna Umar) to be superior than Janab Amir (Sayyiduna Ali) and believes in their Imamat (Khilafat). Hadhrat replied, ‘Anyone who holds such a belief is a Nasibi’.(Haq al-Yaqin of Mullah Baqir Majlisi, Vol. 2, p. 521).

10. Esteemed Shia scholar Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi says in commentary of a narration in Mir’at al-`Uqul [24:211] where the word “Nasibi” was used for a man:

إن كان المراد بالناصب، المبغض المعاند لأهل البيت عليهم السلام كما هو الأظهر فهو كافر، ودمه هدر
“If by ‘Nasibi’ it was meant the hater and enemy of the Ahl al-Bayt(as), which is most obvious, then he is a kafir and his blood is to be spilled unavailingly.”

11. Renowned Shia scholar Muhammad Tijani Samawi in his book “The Shi’ah are (the real) Ahl al-Sunnah” entitled  30 chapter  “Enmity of “Ahl al-Sunnah” Towards Ahl al-Bayt Reveals their Identity”.

In the very beginning of this chapter shia said: Any researcher stands dumbfounded when he collides with the reality about “Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`ah” and comes to know that they were the enemies of the pure Progeny of the Prophet, following those who fought Ahl al-Bayt and cursed them and spared no means to murder them and obliterate their legacy. This is why you find “Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`ah” placing the label of “reliable” on all traditionists if they are Kharijites or Nasibi followers of Uthman. They charge and accuse all the traditionists who are loyal to Ahl al-Bayt of being “weak.

12. Shia scholar Shahid Hussain Fatimi writes in his book Parda Uthta Hai, p.269,

“History is witness that Abu Bakar, Usman, Aishah, Hafsa, Hassan Basri, Abu Hurayra, Khalid, Muawiyyah, Umar bin A’as, Marwan, ‘Abd al-Rahman…Yazid, Shimar, Abu Hanifah, ‘Abd al-Wahhab Najdi, Bukhari, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir Jilani, and Mirza Hayrat and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadyani all are inspired (gleaners) by Umar in their hatred of Ahl al-Bayt…” (Parda Uthta Hai, p.269).

13. Shia scholar Nematullah Jazairi states in his book:

It was narrated from the Prophet(saw) that the sign of the Nawasib is favoring other than Ali over him (i.e. a Nasibi is anyone that favors anyone over Ali, be it Abu Bakr, Umar, or Uthman) … This can also be returned to the first, [meaning] that what is meant by favoring others over him are those who do it in a manner of firm belief and certainty, in such a way that the imitators and the weak are not included; [That is because] their (i.e. the imitators) favoring of others over him (i.e. Ali) was a result of their imitation of their scholars, fathers, and predecessors, and that they have no means of arriving at [such a conclusion] or even affirming [it with certainty by themselves]. This meaning (i.e. that Nasibi is anyone who favors anyone over Ali) is supported [by the fact that] the Imams [‘Alaihim AlSalam] and their Khawas (close companions) have referred to Abu Hanifa and his likes as Nasibis. Even though Abu Hanifa was not from among those who demonstrated animosity to Aal Al-Bayt [‘Alaihim Al Salam], rather he used to [love] visiting [and accompanying] them, and used to demonstrate [love,] care and affection towards them. Yes, he did go against their views [in cases], and used to say: Ali said [so-and-so], [and] I say [so-and-so] [So] with that, the view of Al-Sayid Al-Murtada and Ibn Idrees [… their souls] is strengthened, as well as the view of some of our contemporary scholars that all those that oppose us (Al-Mukhalifeen) are Najasah (Filth – unclean). That is based on using the terms Kufr and Shirk to describe them in the Book and the Sunnah, so that term would [also] encompass them when used, and because you have verified that most of them are Nawasib by that meaning.( Book: Anwar an-Nomaniyah. Vol 2, page 308, Author: Nematullah Jazairi.)

Other Shia Sects which were declared as Nawasib by Twelver Shiism:

(i). We read in the Shia book of Abu Amr al-Kashi known as Rijaal al-Kashi:

409- حمدويه، قال حدثنا يعقوب بن يزيد، قال حدثنا محمد بن عمر، عن محمد بن عذافر، عن عمر بن يزيد، قال : سألت أبا عبد الله (عليه السلام) عن الصدقة على الناصب و على الزيدية فقال لا تصدق عليهم بشي‏ء و لا تسقهم من الماء إن استطعت، و قال لي الزيدية هم النصاب.

409 – Hamdawayh said: Ya`qub b. Yazid narrated to us.  He said: Muhammad b. `Umar b. `Udhafir narrated to us from `Umar b. Yazid.  He said: I asked Abu `Abdillah(as) about (giving) sadaqa upon the Nasib and the Zaydiyya.  So he said: Do not give sadaqa (of) anything upon them and do not give them to drink of water if you are able to.  And he said to me: The Zaydiyya, they are the Nassab. (Rijaal al-Kashi).

(ii).

محمد بن الحسن، قال حدثني أبو علي الفارسي، قال حكى منصور، عن الصادق علي بن محمد بن الرضا (عليهم السلام) : أن الزيدية و الواقفة و النصاب بمنزلة عنده سواء.

410 – Muhammad b. al-Hasan said: Abu `Ali al-Farsi narrated to me.  He said: Mansur related from as-Sadiq `Ali b. Muhammad b. ar-Rida(as) that the Zaydiyya, the Waqifa, and the Nassab are according to him of an equal status. (Rijaal al-Kashi).

(iii). Shia scholar Muhammad Hassan Jawahiri in his book quoted a hadith which states:

ان الزيدية والواقفة والنصاب بمنزلة واحدة

Zaydiya, Waqifiyah and Nawaseeb are at the same level”.(“Jawahir al-kalam” 6/67)

(iv). Esteemed Shia scholar Baqir Majlisi stated in his book Under chapter:

باب مناكحة النصاب والشكاك(Chapter of marrying Nassab and Shakkak).

ولا خلاف في عدم تزويج الناصبي والناصبية

There is no difference of opinion that marrying nasibi men and women is haram. (Mirat al uqool 20/50).

Comment: Therefore we came to know that, Nassab are Nawasib.

Nasibis are considered Kafir(disbelievers) as per Twelver Shiism:

As we have proven above that Ahlesunnah are considered Nasibis in the light of Shia narrations, So now let us see what is ruling of Shiism upon Nasibis.

(a). Shia scholar  Baqir al-Majlisi says in commentary of a narration in Mir’at al-`Uqul where the word “Nasibi” was used for a man:

إن كان المراد بالناصب، المبغض المعاند لأهل البيت عليهم السلام كما هو الأظهر فهو كافر، ودمه هدر
“If by ‘Nasibi’ it was meant the hater and enemy of the Ahl al-Bayt(as), which is most obvious, then he is a kafir and his blood is to be spilled unavailingly.(Mir’at al-`Uqul , vol 24:page 211)

(b). Shia scholar Ni`matullah al-Jaza’iri says about a “Nasibi”:

الذي ورد في الأخبار أنه نجس وأنه شر من اليهودي والنصراني والمجوسي، وأنه كافر نجس بإجماع علماء الشيعة الإمامية رضوان الله عليهم ، فالذي ذهب إليه أكثر الأصحاب هو أن المراد به من نصب العداوة لآل بيت محمد (ص)
“What is reported is that he is worse than the Jew, Christian and the Magian; and he is an impure kafir by the unanimity of the scholars of Shi`a Imamiyya ridwanullahi `alayhim; and what the majority of scholars have opined is that what is meant by nasb [i.e., the trait that makes one Nasibi] is enmity for the progeny of Muhammad sallallahu `alayhi wasallam.” (al-Anwar al-Nu`maniyya(vol 2, page 306).

(c).
قال الصادق (ع) الناصب لنا أهل البيت لا يبالي صام أو صلى أو زنى أو سرق
إنه في النار
Imam al Sadiq(as) said: “The nasibi of ahlul bayt shouldn’t care about fasting or praying or doing zina(fornication) or stealing because he (will go) in the fire(of hell). (Thawabul a’amal wa aqabul aaa’mal)

 

III –  Taqiyyah-free Testimonies of  Twelver Shia scholars, declaring Ahl us-sunnah/Non-Twelver Shia as Kafir(disbelievers).

1. Esteemed Shia scholar Baqir Majlisi wrote in his book:

يطلق على من أخل بشي‏ء من العقائد الإيمانية و إن لم يكن ضروريا لدين‏

الإسلام كالإمامة، و المشهور أنهم في الآخرة بحكم الكفار و هم مخلدون في النار كالمخالفين و سائر فرق الشيعة سوى الإمامية، و قد دلت عليه أخبار كثيرة أوردناها في كتابنا الكبير….

و أما الأحكام الدنيوية أيضا كالطهارة و التناكح و التوارث فالمشهور أنهم في جميع ذلك بحكم المسلمين، و ذهب السيد المرتضى رضي الله عنه و جماعة إلى أنهم في الأمور الدنيوية أيضا بحكم الكفار، و الذي يظهر من بعض الأخبار أنهم واقعا في جميع الأحكام بحكم الكفار لكن الله تعالى لما علم أن للمخالفين دولة و غلبة على الشيعة و لا بد لهم من معاشرتهم رخص لهم في جميع ذلك و أجرى على المخالفين في زمان الهدنة و التقية أحكام المسلمين و في زمن القائم عليه السلام لا فرق بينهم و بين الكفار، و به يمكن الجمع بين الأخبار

Whoever does not believe in something required for eeman (true belief), although not essential for Islam (i.e. to be a mere Muslim) such as Imamah, so it is well known that they are considered kuffar (disbelievers) in the akhirah and would reside in hellfire like the non Shias and all the sub sects of Shiaism other than the Imamis (i.e. Twelver Shias). This has been proven by extensive ahadith which we have recorded in our voluminous book….And as for the religious rulings to be applied to them in dunya (i.e. in this world, not the hereafter), such as in issues of taharah (ritual purity), nikah (marriage) and inheritance, so it is popular that they would be treated as Muslims in all those issues, while Sharif al Murtada and a group of scholars adopted the view that they should be treated as kuffar in dunya also. And it does appear from some of the ahadith that they should truly be treated as kuffar in all Islamic affairs, but however, since Allah (swt) knew that the opponents(non Shias) would rule and prevail over the Shias and therefore the Shias would have no choice but to socialize with them, thus He (swt) made a concession for the Shias on this and established the application of Islamic laws upon the opponents(non Shias) during the period of truce and taqiyya. But when Imam Mahdi (as) appears, there would be no difference between the opponents(non Shias) and the kuffar. This way it is possible to reconcile between the ahadith (i.e. to reconcile those ahadith which declare non shias to be Muslims and those which declare them kuffar). (Miratul Uqul by Majlisi, Volume 11, Page 190).

Comment:This confession from high ranking Shia scholar Baqir Majlisi clearly shows that, some Shia scholars declared their opponents(non-Shias) as Muslims due to being in State of Taqiyyah(dissimulation), however the reality is that the opponents(non shias) are considered Kuffar. And when there will be no taqiyyah then non-Shias would be considered Kuffar. So its only the ignorant among the Ahl us-sunnah who fell into the trap of Shias who claim that they consider Sunnis as Muslims, while the reality is what Shia scholar Baqir Majlisi revealed.

2. Views of Esteemed Shia scholars such as Shiekh Mufeed, Shiekh Tusi and Allama ibn Idris al Hilli:

قال المفيد في المقنعة: ولا يجوز لأحد من أهل الايمان أنيغسل مخالفا للحق في الولاية ولا يصلي عليه

ونحوه قال ابن البراج. وقال الشيخ في التهذيب بعد نقل عبارة المقنعة: الوجه فيه أن المخالف لأهل الحق كافر فيجب أن يكون حكمه حكم الكفار إلا ما خرج بالدليل.

وقال ابن إدريس في السرائر بعد أن اختار مذهب المفيد في عدم جواز الصلاة على المخالف ما لفظه: وهو أظهر ويعضده القرآن وهو قوله تعالى: ” ولا تصل على أحد منهم مات أبدا.. ” (١) يعني الكفار، والمخالف لأهل الحق كافر بلا خلاف بيننا

Shaikh Mufid said in his book “al Muqnia”: “It is not permissible for anyone among the believers to bathe the dead body of an opponent of the truth of wilayah, or to pray upon him.” Qadi ibn al Barraj also said similar to it. And Shaikh Tusi wrote in his book “Tahdhib al Ahkam” after quoting the above mentioned text of “al Muqnia”: “The reason for this is that the opponent of the people upon the path of haqq (truth) is a kafir, thereby deserving the ruling of a kafir, except for the one who is exempted due to proof.” And Allama ibn Idris al Hilli also adopted the view of Shaikh Mufid regarding the impermissibility of praying the funeral prayer of the opponent(non-shia), he wrote: “It is apparent and supported by the Qur’an. Allah says (al Qur’an 9:84) “And never offer a prayer on any one of them who dies”, which means that they are kuffar. The opponent of the people of truth is a kafir and there is no disagreement among us on this point.” (Hadaiq al Nadhirah by Shaikh Yusuf al Bahrani,Volume 5, Page 175).

3. Shia scholar Al-Mufeed stated in his book:

16 – Speech about Innovators and the titles and the rules they deserve:

Imamia agree that all innovators are Kafir. It is necessary for the Imam, when in power, to make them do repentance, after inviting(dawah) them(to reject biddah) and reasoning with them and providing them evidence. If they repent and return to the straight path, they will be freed, otherwise, on the ground of turning back from the faith, they will be killed. And if anyone of them dies in a state of innovation is from the people of hell.  (Awail al-Maqalat., point 16. Page 65)

4. Shia Ayatullah Naraqi states in his book:

دليل القائل بالنجاسة: أنهم كفرة ونصاب، وكل أولئك أنجاس

أما الأول: فلانكارهم ما علم من الدين ضرورة، ولتواتر الأخبار معنى به، ولذا صرح جماعة بكفرهم، كابن نوبخت مسندا له إلى جمهور أصحابنا، والشيخ في التهذيب، والسيد، والحلي، والفاضل في بعض كتبه، وهو الظاهر من المفيد والقاضي

Reasons adopted by proponents of their (non shias’) najasah (ritual impurity), their being kuffar (disbelievers) and nasibis, and all of them being najis (ritually impure).

As for the first (reason), so it is due to their rejection of what is known to be among the fundamentals of religion, and due to tawatur of the ahadith implying such. And thus a group of scholars like Ibn Nawbakht (predecessor of Shaikh Sadooq) as well as the majority of the classical Imami scholars, Shaikh Tusi (385 – 460 AH) in Tahdhibul Ahkam, Sharif al Murtada (355 – 436 AH), Ibn Idris al Hilli (543 – 598 AH), and Allama Hilli (648 – 726 AH) in some of his books (in Muntahul Matlab) declared them to be kuffar. And this ruling is also apparent from Shaikh Mufid (336 – 413 AH) and Qadi ibn al Barraj (401 – 481 AH). (Mustanad al Shia by Ayatullah Naraqi, Volume 1, Page 206).

5. Shia scholar Faydh al-Kashani in his book states:

And who would reject Imamate of one of them, is like rejected prophecy of all prophets – alaihuma salam.

And Sadiq (alaihi salam) said: The one who rejected last from us is like rejected first from us.

And from messenger (sallalahu alaihi wa ali): Who would reject (not believe in) Ali, his Imama after me, is like the one who rejected my prophecy, and who rejected (didn’t believe in) my prophecy is like the one who rejected Allah and His Rububbiyah.( Minhaju Najat, page 4344)

6. Shia Aytollah Shubbar In his book “Sharhul ziyaratul jamiatul kabira” at page 136  called Hasan al-Basri – the mukhalif (opponent).

And later he expressed his opinion on these opponents by saying:

وقد دلت اخبار كثيرة على كفر المخالفين يحتاج جمعها الى كتاب مفرد

And many narrations proofs disbelief(Kufr) of the opponents(non-shias), it makes necessary to gather them in book dedicated especially to this.(“Sharhul ziyaratul jamiatul kabira” p 150.)

7. Shia Shaikh Yusuf al Bahrani states in his book:

المشهور في كلام أصحابنا المتقدمين هو الحكم بكفرهم ونصبهم ونجاستهم وهو المؤيد بالروايات الإمامية، قال الشيخ ابن نوبخت (قدس سره) وهو من متقدمي أصحابنا في كتابه فص الياقوت: دافعوا النص كفرة عند جمهور أصحابنا ومن أصحابنا من يفسقهم.. الخ. وقال العلامة في شرحه أما دافعوا النص على أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) بالإمامة فقد ذهب أكثر أصحابنا إلى تكفيرهم لأن النص معلوم بالتواتر من دين محمد (صلى الله عليه وآله) فيكون ضروريا أي معلوما من دينه ضرورة فجاحده يكون كافرا كمن يجحد وجوب الصلاة وصوم شهر رمضان. واختار ذلك في المنتهى فقال في كتاب الزكاة في بيان اشتراط وصف المستحق بالايمان ما صورته: لأن الإمامة من أركان الدين وأصوله وقد علم ثبوتها من النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله) ضرورة والجاحد لها لا يكون مصدقا للرسول في جميع ما جاء به فيكون كافرا. انتهى. وقال المفيد في المقنعة: ولا يجوز لأحد من أهل الايمان أنيغسل مخالفا للحق في الولاية ولا يصلي عليه

ونحوه قال ابن البراج. وقال الشيخ في التهذيب بعد نقل عبارة المقنعة: الوجه فيه أن المخالف لأهل الحق كافر فيجب أن يكون حكمه حكم الكفار إلا ما خرج بالدليل.

وقال ابن إدريس في السرائر بعد أن اختار مذهب المفيد في عدم جواز الصلاة على المخالف ما لفظه: وهو أظهر ويعضده القرآن وهو قوله تعالى: ” ولا تصل على أحد منهم مات أبدا.. ” (١) يعني الكفار، والمخالف لأهل الحق كافر بلا خلاف بيننا

what is popular among the classical scholars is that the opponents(non shias) are kuffar (disbelievers), nasibis and najis. This view is supported by shia ahadith. Shaikh ibn Nawbakht who was one of the classical scholars, said in his book “Fas al Yaqoot”: “The ruling of kufr has been advocated by the majority of our companions, while there are some among our companions who consider them sinners……..”. And Allama Hilli explained this text by saying “As for defending the Prophet (pbuh)’s ruling of Ali (as) being the Imam, so most of our companions have ruled upon the opponents being kuffar (disbelievers) since the hadith designating Ali as the Imam is known to be mutawatir, thereby making it a fundamental aspect of the religion. Therefore, one who rejects it is deemed a kafir like one who rejects the obligation of salat (Islamic prayer) or fasting of Ramadan.” And he adopted this view in his book “Muntahul Mutlab” where he wrote in the section on zakat, while explaining the conditions of it being necessary for the receiver to be a believer “Because the Imamate is among the pillars of the religion and its fundamentals, and evidence of its necessity is known from the Prophet (pbuh), its rejector does not affirm collectively what the Prophet (pbuh) came with, therefore he is deemed a kafir….”( Hadaiq al Nadhirah by Shaikh Yusuf al Bahrani,Volume 5, Page 175).

8. Shia Ayatullah Saleh Mazindrani

قال الفاضل المولى محمد صالح المازندراني في شرح أصول الكافي:

ومن أنكرها يعني الولاية فهو كافر حيث أنكر أعظم ما جاء به الرسول وأصلا من أصوله

Ayatullah Saleh Mazindrani wrote in his commentary of Usul al Kafi: “And whoever denied it, i.e. wilayah, so he is a kafir as he has denied the greatest fundamental principle brought by the Prophet (pbuh). (Hadaiq al Nadhirah by Shaikh Yusuf al Bahrani,Volume 5, Page 175).

9. Shia scholar Qadi Noorullah Shostri:

قال الشريف القاضي نور الله في كتاب إحقاق الحق: من المعلوم أن الشهادتين بمجردهما غير كافيتين إلا مع الالتزام بجميع ما جاء به النبي (صلى الله على وآله) من أحوال المعاد والإمامة كما يدل عليه ما اشتهر من قوله (صلى الله عليه وآله) (٢) ” من مات ولم يعرف إمام زمانه مات ميتة جاهلية ” ولا شك أن المنكر لشئ من ذلك ليس بمؤمن ولا مسلم لأن الغلاة والخوارج وإن كانوا من فرق المسلمين نظرا إلى الاقرار بالشهادتين إلا أنهما من الكافرين نظرا إلى جحودهما ما علم من الدين وليكن منه بل من أعظم أصوله إمامة أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام

Qadi Noorullah Shostri (Aka Shahid Thalith) wrote in his book Ihqaqul Haq: “It is known that the two testimonies alone are not sufficient until they are supplemented collectively with what was brought by the Prophet (pbuh) among the teachings of resurrection and Imamate, as is evidenced by the popular hadith “Whoever died without knowing the Imam of his time, would have died the death of jahilliyah.” And there is no doubt that its denier is neither a Momin (believer) nor a Muslim because even though the Ghulat and Khawarij are listed as Islamic sects due to their professing the two testimonies (shahadatain) but they are still kuffar due to their rejection of what is known to be a part of religion, and from it, in fact from the greatest of religious principles is the Imamate of Amirul momineen (as).” (Hadaiq al Nadhirah by Shaikh Yusuf al Bahrani,Volume 5, Page 175).

10. Shia Muhaqqiq abu al Hasan al Sharif ibn al Shaikh Muhammad Tahir stated:

وليت شعري أي فرق بين من كفر بالله تعالى ورسوله ومن كفر بالأئمة (عليهم السلام) مع أن كل ذلك من أصول الدين؟ إلى أن قال: ولعل الشبهة عندهم زعمهم كون المخالف مسلما حقيقة وهو توهم فاسد مخالف للأخبار المتواترة، والحق ما قاله علم الهدى من كونهم كفارا مخلدين في النار

Muhaqqiq abu al Hasan al Sharif ibn al Shaikh Muhammad Tahir, , in his commentary upon “Al Kifayah”  wrote: “I wonder, is there any difference between disbelieving in Allah and His messenger, and in disbelieving in the Imamate of the Imams even though they are all from the fundamentals of the religion?” He further continued: “And perhaps they are under the impression that the opponent is a Muslim in reality, but it is an invalid delusion which goes against the mutawatir ahadith, and the truth is what has been stated by Sharif al Muratada that they are kuffar who would reside in hell forever. (Hadaiq al Nadhirah by Shaikh Yusuf al Bahrani,Volume 5, Page 175).

11. Shia scholar Nematullah Jazairi states in his book:

It was narrated from the Prophet(saw) that the sign of the Nawasib is favoring other than Ali over him (i.e. a Nasibi is anyone that favors anyone over Ali, be it Abu Bakr, Umar, or Uthman) … This can also be returned to the first, [meaning] that what is meant by favoring others over him are those who do it in a manner of firm belief and certainty, in such a way that the imitators and the weak are not included; [That is because] their (i.e. the imitators) favoring of others over him (i.e. Ali) was a result of their imitation of their scholars, fathers, and predecessors, and that they have no means of arriving at [such a conclusion] or even affirming [it with certainty by themselves]. This meaning (i.e. that Nasibi is anyone who favors anyone over Ali) is supported [by the fact that] the Imams [‘Alaihim AlSalam] and their Khawas (close companions) have referred to Abu Hanifa and his likes as Nasibis. Even though Abu Hanifa was not from among those who demonstrated animosity to Aal Al-Bayt [‘Alaihim Al Salam], rather he used to [love] visiting [and accompanying] them, and used to demonstrate [love,] care and affection towards them. Yes, he did go against their views [in cases], and used to say: Ali said [so-and-so], [and] I say [so-and-so] [So] with that, the view of Al-Sayid Al-Murtada and Ibn Idrees [… their souls] is strengthened, as well as the view of some of our contemporary scholars that all those that oppose us (Al-Mukhalifeen) are Najasah (Filth – unclean). That is based on using the terms Kufr and Shirk to describe them in the Book and the Sunnah, so that term would [also] encompass them when used, and because you have verified that most of them are Nawasib by that meaning.( Book: Anwar an-Nomaniyah. Vol 2, page 308, Author: Nematullah Jazairi.)

12. Shia scholar Muhammad b. Hasan al Najafi:
قال محمد بن حسن النجفي في جواهر الكلام : 6/62 : ( والمخالف لأهل الحق كافر بلا خلاف بيننا ، كالمحكي عن الفاضل محمد صالح في شرح أصول الكافي ، بل والشريف القاضي نور الله في إحقاق الحق ، من الحكم بكفر منكري الولاية ، لأنها أصل من أصول الدين

Muhammad b. Hasan al Najafi wrote in Jawahirul Kalam, Volume 6 Page 62: “And the opponent of the people of truth is a kafir, without any disagreement between us (i.e. the scholars), as has been reported by Fadhil Muhammad Saleh in his exegesis of Usul al Kafi, as well as by Qadi Noorullah Shostri in Ihqaqul Haq wherein he declared the denier of Wilayah a kafir as it is a fundamental principle among the fundamentals of religion.”

13. Shia scholar Baqir Majlisi stated:

قال المجلسي في بحار الأنوار: 23/390 ط. بيروت : ( إعلم أن إطلاق لفظ الشرك والكفر على من لم يعتقد بإمامة أمير المؤمنين والأئمة من ولده (ع) وفضل عليهم غيرهم ، يدل على أنهم كفار مخلدون في النار

“Note that the terms shirk (polytheism) and kufr (disbelief) apply to one who does not believe in the Imamah of Ali (as) or his progeny, and gives precedence to others over them, proving that they are kuffar destined to reside in hell.”( Biharul Anwar, Volume 23 Page 290 ).

14. Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi says in commentary of a narration in Mir’at al-`Uqul [24:211] where the word “Nasibi” was used for a man:

إن كان المراد بالناصب، المبغض المعاند لأهل البيت عليهم السلام كما هو الأظهر فهو كافر، ودمه هدر
“If by ‘Nasibi’ it was meant the hater and enemy of the Ahl al-Bayt `alayhim al-salam, which is most obvious, then he is a kafir and his blood is to be spilled unavailingly.”

15. Shia scholar Abdullah Shabbar stated:

قال عبد الله شبر في حق اليقين في معرفة أصول الدين : 2/188 ط. بيروت : ( وأما سائر المخالفين ممن لم ينصب ولم يعاند ولم يتعصب ، فالذي عليه جملة من الإمامية كالسيد المرتضى أنهم كفار في الدنيا والآخرة ، والذي عليه الأشهر أنهم كفار مخلدون في النار

“And as for the rest of the opponents(non-shias) among those who do not have nasb (i.e. are not nasibis), hostility and prejudice, so a number of Shia scholars like Sharif al Murtada declared them to be kuffar in this world as well as in the hereafter, and the prevailing ruling is that they are kuffar destined for hell.” (Haqqul Yaqeen fi marifatul usul ad-Din, Volume 2 Page 188).

16. Shia Ayatollat Sayed Muhammad Shirazi states in his book:

As for all the other groups [sects] of the shia – other than the the itnaa ashariyya [The twelvers] : then many texts have proved their disbelief , like the previous narrations which have been mentioned. They prove that ”Whoever denies [rejects / opposes] an Imam : is like one who said : ‘Allaah is one of three.’ “(Fiqh” Kitab at-tahara, vol 3)

17. The Giant Shia Ayatullah al-Udhma Abul Qasim al-Khoei, the rijalist Scholar stated:

حرمة الغيبة مشروطة بالايمان: قوله: ثم ان ظاهر الاخبار اختصاص حرمة الغيبة بالمؤمن. أقول: المراد من المؤمن هنا من آمن بالله وبرسوله وبالمعاد وبالائمة الاثنى عشر (عليهم السلام)، اولهم علي بن أبي طالب (عليه السلام) وآخرهم القائم الحجة المنتظر عجل الله فرجه وجعلنا من أعوانه وأنصاره، ومن أنكر واحدا منهم جازت غيبته لوجوه: 1 – انه ثبت في الروايات (1) والادعية والزيارات جواز لعن المخالفين، ووجوب البراءة منهم، واكثار السب عليهم واتهامهم، والوقيعة فيهم اي غيبتهم، لانهم من اهل البدع والريب (2). بل لا شبهة في كفرهم، لان انكار الولاية والائمة (عليهم السلام) حتى الواحد منهم والاعتقاد بخلافة غيرهم، وبالعقائد الخرافية كالجبر ونحوه يوجب الكفر والزندقة، وتدل عليه الاخبار المتواترة (3) الظاهرة في كفر منكر الولاية وكفر المعتقد بالعقائد المذكورة وما يشبهها من الضلالات

Translation: I(Khoei) say: What is meant by “believer” here is the one who believes in Allah and his messenger and the last day and the twelve Imams (as), starting with `Ali bin abi Talib (as) and ending with al-Qa’em al-Hujjah, the awaited one may Allah hasten his appearance and make us among his supporters, and he who denies one of them then it is allowed to backbite him for several reasons: 1- It has been proven in the narrations and Ziyarat and supplications that it is permissible to curse the ones who oppose us, and that it is obligatory to disown them, and increase their insults, and accuse them, and slander them, meaning to backbite them because they are from the people of innovation and doubt. There is no doubt about their Kufr, because denying al-Wilayah and the Imams (as) even if just one, and to believe in the Khilafah of others, and to believe in myths such as al-Jabr and other beliefs necessities Kufr and Zandaqah, as mentioned in the Mutawatir narrations that clearly demonstrate the Kufr of the rejector of al-Wilayah, and the Kufr of the one who believes in the mentioned beliefs and similar other misguided beliefs. 2- Those who oppose us commit Fisq publicly, because their deeds are annulled by default as stated by the countless narrations. They even adopted what is greater than Fisq as you now know, and we will mention later that it is permissible to backbite the one who commits Fisq publicly. 3- What we benefit from the verse and the narrations is that it is forbidden to backbite against the believing brother, and it is obvious that there is no brotherhood or sanctity between us and those who oppose us. 4- It is famous and spread since the past among the laypeople of the Shia and their scholars that they used to backbite against the ones who oppose us, rather they used to insult them and curse them at all times and in all lands, in fact it is mentioned in “al-Jawahir” that this is from the necessities. [Mishbahul Fuqahah 2/11, Dar Al-Huda, Beirut Lebanon / Online reference: 1/503-504].

Comment: Now let us show the readers, the typical Shi’ee Taqiyyah. Imam al-Khoei’s charity foundation called for a conference entitled “الوحدة الإسلامية والمذاهب الفقهية” “Islamic unity and schools of jurisprudence”:
كلمة سماحته في ندوة الاجتماع الدولي لوضع استراتيجية مشتركة للتقريب بين المذاهب الإسلامية المنعقد في فندق إيبلا الشام بدعوة من مؤسسة الإمام الخوئي الخيرية خلال الفترة 10 – 12 /4/1999م . This was held in Damascus 10/12/1999.

18.  Esteemed Shia scholar Majlisi says in his book, Haqqul Yaqeen says that even degrading a Shia jurisprudence (Fiqh) book is kufr, and punishable with death penalty:

و خلافی نیست در آنکه کسی که منکر یکی از ضروریات دین اسلام باشد در حکم کفار است و مخلد در نار است و ضروري دین اسلام آنست که بدیهی شده باشد در دین اسلام و هر که صاحب این دین باشد آن را داند مگر نادري مثل کسی که تازه مسلمان شده باشد و هنوز نزد او ضروري نشده باشد مانند نماز و روزه ماه مبارك رمضان و حج و زکاة و امثال اینها کسی که ترك اینها کند کافر نیست و کسی که ترك اینها را حلال داند کافر است و مستحق قتل است و همچنین اگر فعلی از او صادر شود که متضمن استخفاف بدین یا محرمات الهی باشد عمدا مثل آنکه عمدا مصحف مجید را بسوزاند یا در قازورات اندازد یا لگد بر آن بزند یا حقتعالی یا ملائکه یا یکی از انبیاء را دشنام دهد یا سخنی بگوید که متضمن استخفاف باشد خواه در نظم و خواه در نثر یا کعبه معظمه را خراب کند بیجهت یا عمدا در آن بول کند یا غائط و همچنین نسبت بروضات مقدسه حضرت رسول اللّه و ائمه استخفافی کند بقول یا بفعل یا تربت شریف حسین علیه السّلام را استخفافی کند قولا یا فعلا مثل آنکه العیاذ باللّه بآن استنجاء نماید یا نسبت بکتب حدیث شیعه استخفاف کند و بعضی کتب فقه شیعه را نیز چنین میدانند یا بیکی از عبادات که ضروري دین است استهزاء و استخفاف نماید یا بت یا غیر بت را معبود خود قرار دهد و آن را بقصد عبادت سجده کند یا شعار کفار را که متضمن اظهار کفر باشد ظاهر گرداند مثل آنکه زنار ببندد باین قصد و یا پیشانی خود را بروش هنود زرد کند بقصد اظهار شعار ایشان
And there is no dispute in it, that one, who is a denier of even one of the fundamentals of belief, is included among disbelievers and he will reside in Hell forever. And the necessary fundamentals of faith are those matters, which are deemed as inevitable in Islam, one, who considers his own faith as lawful. But it is rarely regarding the new convert to Islam and till that time that principle has not become necessary in his view. For example, Prayer, fasts of the month of Ramadhan, Hajj and Zakat and the like. One, who omits these, is not a disbeliever, but one, who regards omitting them as lawful is a disbeliever and is eligible for execution. In the same way, if he commits an act that tantamount to disrespect of religion or divine sanctities, as intentionally burning down of Quran, throwing it into impurities or placing foot on it; or he abuses or talks ill of Almighty Allah, angels, prophets or the Holy Imams (a.s.), whether in poetry or prose. Or damages the Holy Kaaba or intentionally makes it impure. In the same way, if he dishonors tombs of Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) and the Holy Imams (a.s.) verbally or practically. Or he insults the dust from the grave of Imam Husain (a.s.) verbally or practically; for example, he cleans himself with it after urinating or insults the tradition books of Shia. The same is applicable to books and jurisprudence of Shia scholars; or he insults a worship act, which is from the necessity of faith; or regards an idol or something else to be his deity and prostrates to it. Or displays symbols of infidelity, which should be an expression of disbelief. (Haqqul Yaqeen, Vol. 2, p. 211).

19. Esteemed Shia Sheikh Muhammad Tahir Al Qumi al Shirazi gives the stance of Shiism regarding Aisha(AS) – The Mother of Believers :

[What has been reported on the shortcomings of the enemies of Ahlulbayt (a.s) that evidences upon the Imamah of our twelve Imams (a.s) is that Aisha is a kafirah deserving of hellfire. It is a necessity of the reality of our religion and the reality of our twelve Imams (a.s), because all those who profess by the caliphate of the three (Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman) believes that she was a believer and honors and respects her, while all those who profess by Imamate of the twelve Imams (a.s) profess by her being deserving of la’nah and Allah (swt)’s punishment. So when her being like that is established, the point is proven, because no one claims a separation (of Aisha from the issue).

As for the evidence of her being deserving of la’nah and Allah (swt)’s punishment, so indeed she waged war against Imam Ali (a.s) and there are mutawatir ahadith from the Prophet (saw) said “one who wars against you (i.e. Ali) wars against me.”, and there is no doubt warring against the Prophet (saw) is kufr.  [Source: Kitab al Arba’een. Pg. # 615616.]

Note:  This Shia Sheikh Muhammad Tahir Al Qumi al Shirazi was among the teachers of high ranking Shia scholars such as, Allamah Baqir Majlisi II and Sheikh Hurr al Amili. He has been praised by giants of Tashayyu scholars such as Muhadith Nuri, Sheikh Muhammad Ardbili (author of the famous rijal book “Jami al Ruwat””), as well as his students Allama Majlisi and Shaikh Hurr al Amili.

20. Esteemed Shia scholar Baqir Majlisi stated regarding Abu Bakr(ra)  :

أقول: الأخبار الدالة على كفر أبي بكر وعمر وأضرابهما وثواب لعنهم والبراءة منهم وما يتضمن بدعهم أكثر من أن يذكر في هذا المجلد أو في مجلدات شتى وفيما أوردنا كفاية لمن أراد الله هدايته إلى الصراط

I  say: The ahadith evidence upon the kufr of Abu Bakr and Umar and their chastising, as well as the thawab (reward) for doing la’nah (damnation) upon them and dissociating from them and what is included in their bid’ahs (innovations), most of which has been mentioned in this volume or in other volumes. And what has been stated is sufficient for one to whom Allah (swt) wills to guide him to the straight path. (“Biharul anwar” (30/399)).

21. Esteemed Shia scholar Baqir Majlisi stated regarding Umar(ra) :

لا مجال لعاقل أن يشك في كفر عمر. فلعنة الله ورسوله عليه ، وعلى كل من اعتبره مسلما ، وعلى كل من يكف عن لعنه

There is no room for any reasonable person to doubt the Kufr (Apostasy) of ‘Umar, Fa La’nat (then May the curse of) Allah and His Messenger be upon him (i.e. ‘Umar), and upon all those who consider him a Muslim, and upon all those who abstain from cursing him  (“Jala’ Al-‘Uyoun” p. 45.)

22. Shia scholar Ali bin Hilal al-Karki said regarding Umar(ra) :

إن من لم يجد في قلبه عداوة لعثمان ولم يستحل عرضه ولم يعتقد كفره فهو عدو لله ورسوله ، كافر بما أنزل الله

Whoever does not find in his heart animosity towards ‘Uthman, and does not deem permissible attacks on his honor, and does not believe that he is a Kaffir, then he is an enemy of Allah and His Messenger, a disbeliever(Kafir) in what Allah revealed. (Nafahaat Al-Lahout; under the biography of ‘Uthman).

23. Esteemed Shia scholar Baqir Majlisi stated regarding Sahaba those who followed the First three Caliphs:

مدحها و فضيلتها كه در آيات و احاديث براى صحابه و مهاجران و انصار وارد شده است براى آنهاست كه از دين به در نرفته‏اند و منافق نبودند و متابعت غير خليفه حق امير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) نكردند، و آنها كه كافر و مرتد شدند و مخالفت امير المؤمنين نمودند و دشمنان او را يارى كردند از همه كفار بدترند

The praise and virtues of Sahaba, Muhajireen and Ansar mentioned in the verses and ahadith are for those only, who didn’t apostate, and didn’t became hypocrites, and didn’t follow any other caliph than Ali (ra). And those (sahaba) who apostated, and opposed Ali (ra) and befriended his opponents, they are worse than the kuffar. (Hayat ul Quloob, Vol. 2, p. 916).

Other Shia Sects which were declared as Kafir by Twelver Shiism:
(i). Esteemed Shia scholars Hurr al-Amili in “Wasailu shia” 28/351-352, Majlisi in “Biharul anwar” 50/274-275 , reported:

[ 34943 ] 40 ـ سعيد بن هبة الله الراوندي في ( الخرائج والجرائح ) عن أحمد بن محمد بن مطهر ، قال : كتب بعض أصحابنا إلى أبي محمد ( عليه السلام ) يسأله عمن وقف على أبي الحسن موسى ( عليه السلام ) ، فكتب : لا تترحم على عمك وتبرأ منه أنا إلى الله منه بريء ، فلا تتولهم ، ولا تعد مرضاهم ، ولا تشهد جنائزهم ، ولا تصل على أحد منهم مات أبدا ، من جحد إماما من الله أو زاد إماما ليست إمامته من الله كان كمن قال : ( إن الله ثالث ثلثة ) إن الجاحد أمر آخرنا جاحد أمر أولنا . . . الحديث .

40 – Sa`id b. Hibatullah ar-Rawandi in al-Khara’ij wa ‘l-Jara’ih from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Mutahhar. He said: One of our companions wrote to Abu Muhammad(as) asking him about waqf upon Abul-Hasan Musa(as){waqf: stopping. i.e. one who believed that Imam Musa al-Kadhim(as) was the Qa’im and denied the Imamate of his son}. So he wrote: Do not ask for mercy upon your uncle and be quit of him (i.e. renounce him). To Allah I am quit of him. So do not befriend them, and do not visit their sick, and do not witness their funerals, and do no pray upon one who dies from them ever. Whoever denies an Imam from Allah or adds an Imam whose Imamate is not from Allah is as one who said “Verily Allah is a third of three” (5:73). Verily a denier of the affair (or, command) of the last of us is a denier of the affair of the first of us.

(ii). Shia scholar Tusi in “Ikhiyar marifatol rijal” (2/756), Hurr al-Amili in “Wasael ush shia” (9/229):

862 – وجدت بخط جبريل بن أحمد في كتابه حدثني سهل بن زياد الادمي قال : حدثني محمد بن أحمد بن الربيع الأقرع قال : حدثني جعفر بن بكير قال : حدثني يونس بن يعقوب قال قلت لأبي الحسن الرضا ع : أعطى هؤلاء الذين يزعمون أن أباك حي من الزكاة شيئا؟ قال : لا تعطهم فإنهم كفار مشركون زنادقة
(chain) from Yunus ibn Yaqub: I said to Abul Hasan al-Ridha (a): “Shoul I give from zakat something top those who claim that your father is alive?” He answered: “Don’t give them indeed they are disbelievers(Kuffar), polytheists and zanadiqah”.

(iii). Sayyed Ayatullah Al Khoe’i (2/84)

ومنه يظهر الحال في سائر الفرق المخالفين للشيعة الاثنى عشرية من الزيدية، والكيسانية، والاسماعيلية، وغيرهم، حيث ان حكمهم حكم
[وأما مع النصب أو السب للائمة الذين لا يعتقدون بإمامتهم فهم مثل سائر النواصب] أهل الخلاف لضرورة انه لا فرق في إنكار الولاية بين إنكارها ونفيها عن الأئمة – ع – باجمعهم وبين إثباتها لبعضهم ونفيها عن الآخرين – ع – كيف وقد ورد أن من أنكر واحدا منهم فقد أنكر جميعهم – ع – وقد عرفت أن نفي الولاية عنهم – باجمعهم غير مستلزم للكفر والنجاسة فضلا عن نفيها عن بعض دون بعض فالصحيح الحكم بطهارة جميع المخالفين للشيعة الاثنى عشرية و إسلامهم ظاهرا بلا فرق في ذلك بين أهل الخلاف وبين غيرهم وان كان جميعهم في الحقيقة كافرين وهم الذين سميناهم بمسلم الدنيا وكافر الآخرة.

And thus Other Shia teams like Zaidiyah, Kisaniyah, Ismaliyah and others their ruling is the same as that of those who differ with us because there is no difference between denying Wilayah of the Imams altogether and between accepting it for some Imams and denying it for other Imams, and it was mentioned that he who denies one denies all, and I know that Denying this Wilayah does not mean Kufr or Najasah nor does denying Wilayah for some of the Imams, What is correct is The Tahara of all those who differ with the Twelver Shia and their Islam Based on what is Apparent Although in reality They are All Kouffar and we have called them Muslims in The Dunyah and Kaffirs on The Day of judgement. ( kitab al tahara, Khoei, 2/87).

Important Point:

The Twelver Shiites like to monopolize the term “Ahlulbayt” for themselves. They encourage Sunnis to love the Ahl Al Bayt, but the reality is, there is a condition. They want Sunnis to become Twelver Shias and dissociate from the love of some of the closest companions of the Prophet(SAWS), Abu Bakr (ra), Umar (ra), and Uthman (ra). If you do not convert into Twelver Shiism, they become irritated and claim you follow the enemies of the Ahl Al Bayt and will brand you with the term “Nasibi. As we have seen in the Shia narrations and the Fatwas(verdicts) of high ranking and highly revered Twelver Shia Scholars, they declare all  Non-Twelvers(even including other shia sects) to be kaffir.

This is hardly a surprising reaction, since we read in the Holy Quran: {“And never will the Jews or the Christians approve of you until you follow their religion. Say, “Indeed, the guidance of Allah is the [only] guidance.” If you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge, you would have against Allah no protector or helper.” (Quran 2:120)}.

 

IV-  Current Twelver Shia Scholars who admitted the undeniable fact that, Twelver Shiism makes Takfeer of Non-Shias.

1.  Shia Ayatullah Kamal Haydari:

Translation: You will not find an Imami Shia scholar who has not declared Non-Shias as Kafirs. The only difference between Imami Shias scholars is in one thing: Some Imami Scholars declared opponents(Non-Shias) to be Kafirs, both inwardly and outwardly. Other Imami Scholars declared opponents(Non-Shias) Muslims outwardly but Kafirs inwardly. But we have ijma(consensus) over opponents(Non-Shias) being Kafir inwardly. No doubt about it. What is the source of this takfir? What’s the basis of takfir?: It is because Imamate is from the fundamentals of Shia Madhab, or Usool from ‘Usool e Deen’ (roots of deen) or from the roots of our madhab. And due to this reason this issuee: Meaning the takfeeri ideology(Manhaj) in the school of Ahlulbayt cannot be defended or denied, except by changing the foundation/sources.  And as long as the Shia consider Imamah from Usool ad-deen(foundation of religion) or from Usool al-Madhab(foundation of Madhab) or from the necessities of religion and Madhab then it is required to do Takfeer of opponents(non-shias), there is no other way.  The Takfeer is mentioned explicitly in Shia Books, these are reliable statement of Shia scholars. This is Book Al-Jawahir before you, In vol 22, page 62 the author says: “It has reached Tawattur(mass-transmitted) about the opponents(non-shias), meaning the texts are Mutawattir and conclusive, “about cursing them, slandering them, harassing then and knowing them as Kafirs and that they are from the Majoos of this Ummah, and are worse than Christians and impure than dogs”.

2. Shia scholar Hasan Allayari:

In this video, the Shia scholar Hasan Allayari screams at the Shia scholars begging them to stop practicing Taqiyyah(dissimulation) because the truth about their beliefs has already been exposed. He goes through the book of an ex-Shia `Abdul-Malik al-Shafi`i called “Al-Fikr alTakfiri `ind al-Shi`ah”.

 

VRuling of Twelver Shiism upon killing Nasibis(label given to Sunnis), destroying their property and taking over their wealth.

As it is firmly established from the previous testimonies that, Twelver Shia who do not practise Taqiyyah(dissimulation) consider Ahl us-sunnah(Sunnis) as Nasibis, let us now see the teaching of Twelver Shiism regarding killing Nasibis(label given to Sunnis) and taking over their property.

1. In the Shia book Al Hadaiq al Nadhirah of Shaikh Yusuf al Bahrani (1186 AH) Volume 18 Page 156:

وروى في العلل عن الصحيح عن داود بن فرقد قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله ع: ما تقول في قتل الناصب ؟ قال: حلال الدم ولكن اتقى عليك فإن قدرت أن تقلب عليه حائطا أو تغرقه في ماء لكي لا يشهد به عليك فافعل . قلت فما ترى في ماله ؟ قال: أتوه ما قدرت عليه
And it is narrated in al Illal from saheeh (chain of narration) from Dawood b. Farqad who said:I said to abi Abdullah (as): “What do you say about killing the nasib?” Imam (as) said: “The blood is halal(permissible) but I fear upon you, so if you are able to bring down upon him a wall or drown him in water so that no one witnesses by it upon you then do so.” I said: “So what do you consider about his property?” Imam (as) said: “Destroy upon it what you are able to.”  

2.  In shia book Illal ul Sharai of Shaikh Sadooq (381 AH) Volume 2 Page 601:

58 – أبي رحمه الله قال: حدثنا سعد بن عبد الله عن أحمد بن محمد عن علي ابن الحكم عن سيف بن عميرة عن داود بن فرقد قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله ع ما تقول في قتل الناصب قال: حلال الدم لكني اتقي عليك فان قدرت أن تقلب عليه حائطا أو تغرقه في ماء لكيلا يشهد به عليك فافعل قلت: فما ترى في ماله قال توه ما قدرت عليه
58- My father (ra) said: Told us Sa’d b. Abdullah from Ahmad b. Muhammd from Ali ibn al Hakam from Saif b. Umairah from Dawood b. Farqad who said: I said to abi Abdullah (as): “What do you say about killing the nasib?” Imam (as) said: “The blood is halal(permissible) but I fear upon you, so if you are able to bring down upon him a wall or drown him in water so that no one witnesses by it upon you then do so.” I said: “So what do you consider about his property?” Imam (as) said: “Destroy upon it what you are able to.

3.
ومنها – ما رواه الشيخ في الصحيح عن حفص بن البختري عن أبي عبد الله ع قال : (خذ مال الناصب حيثما وجدته وادفع إلينا الخمس
And from them – what the shaikh narrated in (by) the saheeh/authentic (chain of narration) from Hafs b. al Bakhtari from abi Abdullah (as) who said: “Take wealth of the nasib wherever you find it and send to us the khums (fifth portion).” (Hadaiq al Nadhirah).

4.
روى الشيخ في التهذيب في الصحيح عن حفص بن البختري عن أبي عبد الله ع قال : ” خذ مال الناصب حيثما وجدته وادفع إلينا الخمس ” رواه بسند آخر عن معلى بن خنيس عن أبي عبد الله ع مثله
Narrated the shaikh (Shaikh Tusi) in al Tahdheeb in saheeh/authentic (chain of narration) from Hafs b. al Bakhtari from abi Abdullah (as) who said: “Take wealth of the nasib  wherever you find it and send to us the khums (fifth portion).”, narrated by last sanad (chain of narration) Mu’alla b. Khunais from abi Abdullah (as) similar to it.( al Tahdheeb of Tusi).

5. In Wasail al shia by Shaikh Hurr al Amili it is reported:

وعن إسحاق بن عمار، قال: قال الصادق عليه السلام: مال الناصب وكل شئ
يملكه حلال لك، إلا امرأته فإن نكاح أهل الشرك جائز، وذلك أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم
قال: لا تسبوا أهل الشرك فإن لكل قوم نكاحا، ولولا أنا نخاف عليكم أن يقتل رجل منكم برجل منهم، ورجل منكم خير من ألف رجل منهم، لأمرناكم بالقتل لهم، ولكن
ذلك إلى الإمام

And from Ishaq b. Ammar, who said: Imam al Sadiq (as) said: “The wealth of the nasib, and everything he owns, is halal (permissible) for you except his woman for indeed nikah of people of polytheism is legitimate. And that is that Rsool Allah (pbuh) said: Do not abuse the people of polytheism because indeed for every nation there is a nikah, and if I did not fear for you that he murders a man from you with a man from them, while a man from you is better than a thousand men from them, we would have certainly ordered you people to kill them, but that is to the Imam.”(Wasail al shia by Shaikh Hurr al Amili, Volume 11, page 60, Hadith no. 2).

6. Tahzib al Ahkam of Shaikh Tusi (460 AH) Volume 6 Page 387

(1153) 274 – أحمد بن محمد عن علي بن الحكم عن فضالة عن سيف عن أبي بكر عن المعلى بن خنيس قال : قال أبو عبد الله ع: خذ مال الناصب حيث ما وجدت وادفع إلينا خمسه
(1153) 274- Ahmad b. Muhammad from Ali b. al Hakam from Fudhalah from Saif from abi Bakr from al Mu’alla b. Khunais who said: Abu Abdullah (as) said: “Take the wealth of the nasib whereever you found and send to us its fifth portion.” 

7. Esteemed Shia scholar Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi says in commentary of a narration in Mir’at al-`Uqul [24:211] where the word “Nasibi” was used for a man:

إن كان المراد بالناصب، المبغض المعاند لأهل البيت عليهم السلام كما هو الأظهر فهو كافر، ودمه هدر
“If by ‘Nasibi’ it was meant the hater and enemy of the Ahl al-Bayt(as), which is most obvious, then he is a kafir and his blood is to be spilled unavailingly.

8. Shia scholar Nematullah Jazairi states in his book, “Anwar an-Nomaniyah”

In the Permissibility of Killing them (i.e. Nasibis), and taking over their Money
You have known that the Ashaab included (or mentioned) the Nasibii with that special meaning [we mentioned] in the chapters of Taharah and Najasah, and his ruling according to them is the same as the Kaffir Al-Harbi (one who fights or is at war with the believers) in most of the rulings; as for what we have mentioned of him of explanation then the ruling would be comprehensive as Al-Saduq narrates in Al-‘Ilal …
I said to Abu ‘Abdillah [‘Alaihi Al Salam]: What do you say regarding killing the Nasibi? He replied: His blood is Halal (i.e. it is permissible to kill him), however I fear for you, so if you were able to collapse a wall on him or drown him in water so that there would be no witnesses against you, then do so. So I asked: What about his Money (Wealth)? He said: Take what you could …”(Anwar an-Nomaniyah, vol 2, page 307).

Comment: We know that, no Shia scholar would openly admit that they consider Ahl us-sunnah as Nasibis, however readers can just imagine that how easy it is for any Shi’ee extremist to brand any Sunni as Nasibi and murder him, or rob him, believing it to be the teaching of Ahl ul-bayt. Also, another important question for Shia propagandists is that, they might say Sunnis are not Nasibis, Fine! But what about Nasibis in particular, Is it justified to kill people due to their hatred for Ahlul bayt?

 

VI. What was outcome of this horrible ideology of Twelver Shiism.?

The books of history are filled with the tragedies that occurred due to these teachings of Twelver Shiism, and they still continue till date and will continue in the future, since the problem is in their ideology itself. Here, we would like to share with the readers few examples of the tragedies that occurred at the hands of Twelver Shia due to this ideology of Twelver Shiism.

1. Tatars and the genocide of Sunnis in Baghdad due to prominent Twelver Shia Scholar.

The Tatars’ sack of Baghdad and its destruction by Hulagu Khan was the worst tragedy the Muslims had ever known; about two million Muslim persons were murdered and their women were taken as booty. This was the fruit of treacherous plots of two Shias, Muhammad Ibnul-`Alqami and Nasir al-Din At-Tusi, employed as ministers in the government of the last of the Abbasid caliphs, Al-Mustasim bil-Allâh. These two men conspired against the Caliph and handed him over to Hulagu, and then they became ministers for the Tatar chieftain.

Shia scholar Muhammad Baqir al-Khwansari in the biography of highly revered Shia Scholar Nasir Al-Din Al-Tusi, said:
وإيقاع القتل العام من أتباع أولئك الطغام، إلى أن أسال من دمائهم الأقذار كأمثال الأنهار، فانهار بها في ماء دجلة، ومنها إلى نار جهنم
“He is the Examiner, the Philosopher, the Polymath, the Widely-versed, the Honorable … … And one of his famous known transmitted matters, is the story of [his] alliance in Iran with the respected Sultan Hulagu Khan son of Tolui son of Genghis Khan, one of the greatest Sultans of the Tatars and Mongols, and his arrival in the convoy of the supported Sultan with full preparation to Dar Al-Salam Baghdad, to guide the servants and spread harmony [in the land], and putting an end to the chain of transgression and mischief, and extinguishing the circle of injustice and confusion. By ending Rule of Bani Al-‘Abbas (i.e. the Abbasid caliphate), and inflicting the general massacre on the followers of those tyrants, up to the point where their filthy bloods flowed like rivers, collapsing into the Tigris river, and from it, it shall collapse into the fire of Hell, their Home of Misery, and the residence of the wretched and the evil”. (‘Rawdaat Al-Janaat’ 1/300-301.)

Comment: Pay careful attention to his choice of words when he said: “their filthy blood”. Is this how he views the blood of 1.5 million Muslims who were massacred in Baghdad?

We also present here what Ayatullah Al-Khomeini said; He said when speaking about the matter of the Taqiyah:
إن من باب التقية الجائزة دخول الشيعي في ركب السلاطين، إذا كان في دخوله الشكلي نصر للإسلام والمسلمين مثل دخول نصير الدين الطوسي
There is no acceptable excuse he can offer, unless his entry into the service of the state has some rational basis, as was the case with ‘Ali ibn Yaqtin, whose motives in joining state service are well-known, and with Khwaja Nasir Tusi (may God be pleased with him), whose actions resulted in benefits also well-known. [“Al-Hukumah Al-Islamyia” p. 142]

Comment: Subhan Allah! The joining of Nasir Al-Din Al-Tusi with the Tatars brought benefits well-known to the Muslims, since Ahl Al Sunnah documented regarding the tragedy that occurred in Baghdad at the hands of the Tatars.

In the record Ibn Kathir(rah) gave in Al-Bidaya wa Al-Nihaya he said:

The arrival of Hulegu Khan at Baghdad with all his troops, numbering nearly 200,000 fighting men, occurred on 12 Muharram of this year [January 19, 1258] … he came to Baghdad with his numerous infidel, profligate, tyrannical, brutal armies of men, who believed neither in God nor in the Last Day, and invested Baghdad on the western and eastern sides. The armies of Baghdad were very few and utterly wretched, not reaching 10,000 horsemen. They and the rest of the army had all been deprived of their fiefs [iqta’] so that many of them were begging in the markets and by the gates of the mosques. Poets were reciting elegies on them and mourning for Islam and its people. All this was due to the opinions of the vizier Ibn Al-‘Alqami the Shi’ite, because in the previous year, when heavy fighting took place between the Sunnis and the Shi’ites, Karkh and the Shi’ite quarter were looted, and even the houses of the vizier’s kinsmen were looted. He was filled with spite because of this, and this was what spurred him to bring down on Islam and its people the most appalling calamity that has been recorded from the building of Baghdad until this time. That is why he was the first to go out to the Tatars. He went with his family and his companions and his servants and his suite and met Sultan Hulegu Khan, may God curse him, and then returned and advised the caliph to go out to him and be received by him in audience and to make peace on the basis of half the land tax of Iraq for them and half for the caliph. The caliph had to go with 700 riders, including the qadis, the jurists, the Sufis, the chief amirs, and the notables. When they came near the camp of Sultan Hulegu Khan, all but 17 of them were removed from the sight of the caliph; they were taken off their horses and robbed and killed to the very last man. The caliph and the others were saved. The caliph was then brought before Hulegu, who asked him many things. It is said that the caliph’s speech was confused because of his terror at the disdain and arrogance which he experienced. Then he returned to Baghdad in the company of Khoja Nasireddin Al-Tusi, the Vizier Ibn Al-‘Alqami, and others, the caliph being under guard and sequestration, and they brought great quantities of gold and jewels and gold and silver objects and precious stones and other valuables from the seat of the caliphate. But this clique of Shi’ites and other hypocrites advised Hulegu not to make peace with the caliph. The vizier said, “If peace is made on equal shares, it will not last more than a year or two, and then things will be as they were before.” And they made the killing of the caliph seem good to him so that when the caliph returned to Sultan Hulegu he gave orders to kill him.

It is said that he who advised [Hulegu] to kill [the Caliph] are the Vizier Ibn Al-‘Alqami and Nasir Al-Din Al-Tusi. Nasir was with Hulegu where he accompanied him when he (Hulegu) invaded Qilaa’ Al-Lamout from the Ismailis … Hulegu elected Nasir [Al-Din] to be his advising minister, so when Hulegu arrived and had some fear of killing the Caliph, the minister made it seem easy for him, so they killed him …

They [the Tatars] came down upon the city and killed all they could, men, women and children, the old, the middle-aged, and the young. Many of the people went into wells, latrines, and sewers and hid there for many days without emerging. Most of the people gathered in the caravanserais and locked themselves in. The Tatars opened the gates by either breaking or burning them. When they entered, the people in them fled upstairs and the Tatars killed them on the roofs until blood poured from the gutters into the street; “We belong to God and to God we return” [Qur’an, ii, 156]. The same happened in the mosques and cathedral mosques and convents. No one escaped them except for the Jewish and Christian dhimmis, those who found shelter with them or in the house of the Vizier Ibn Al-‘Alqami the Shi’ite, and a group of merchants who had obtained safe-conduct from them, having paid great sums of money to preserve themselves and their property. And Baghdad, which had been the most civilised of all cities, became a ruin with only a few inhabitants, and they were in fear and hunger and wretchedness and insignificance”” [Source: Al-Bidaya wa Al-Nihaya, 13:234].

Some people may ask, what this has to do with us today, and whether it is right to hold all Shias responsible for what Nasirud-Din At-Tusi and Muhammad Ibnul-`Alqami. We certainly cannot hold all the Shia responsible for what those two men did, but those [of the Sunnis] who are attracted by the words of Khomeini, who stirred many Muslims hearts with his promises to return Jerusalem and Afghanistan to the hands of the Muslims, should know that he never fails to praise Nasirud-Din At-Tusi. He prays for him and asks Allah to have mercy on him, and even says that At-Tusi played a major role in the victory of Islam. It is a great misfortune that the Muslims fail to understand the real meaning of Khomeini’s words. Nasirud-Din At-Tusi was, in fact, responsible for the death of two million Sunni Muslims and this is what Khomeini considers a great service to Islam.

2. Shia Scholar al-Mawla Haydar Ali al-Shirwânî – The Killer of innocent Sunnis.

al-Mawla Haydar Ali al-Shirwânî, this man is the author of famous Shia books such as “Manâqib Ahl al-Bayt”. His father Mîrzâ Muhammad ibn al-Hassan al-Shirwânî was a student of Muhammad Taqî al-Majlissî who is the father of al-‘Allâmah Muhammad Bâqir al-Majlissî the author of “Bihâr al-Anwâr”. Muhammad ibn al-Hassan al-Shirwânî married the daughter of Muhammad Taqî al-Majlissî, which makes Haydar Ali al-Shirwânî the nephew of Muhammad Bâqir al-Majlissî. Haydar Ali al-Shirwânî later married the daughter of Muhammad Bâqir al-Majlissî to become his son-in-law, this makes him really close to the Majlissî family.

In the introduction of the book “Manâqib Ahl al-Bayt” the researcher (Muhammad al-Hassun) says:

هو المولى حيدر علي ابن الشيخ المولى ميرزا محمد بن الحسن الشرواني، صهر المجلسي الثاني على ابنته التي كانت له من أخت أبي طالب خان النهاوندي. والشرواني نسبة إلى شروان

[He is al-Mawlâ Haydar Alî son of Sheikh al-Mawlâ Mîrzâ Muhammad ibn al-Hassan al-Shirwânî, the son-in-law of al-Majlissî II from his daughter through the sister of Abî Tâlib Khân al-Nahâwandî. And al-Shirwânî means that he is from the region of Shirwân.].

Shia scholar al-Khawansârî wrote about him in “Rawdât al-Jannât”:

المولى الفاضل ، المشتهر بالمولى حيدر علي

[The virtuous Mawlâ, famous with the name al-Mawlâ Haydar Alî.]

While Muhsin al-Âmîn wrote about him in “A’yân al-Shî’ah”:

كان عالماً فاضلاً
[He was a virtuous scholar.]

Let us see what this this great venerated Shia scholar does in his free time:

قال في تتميم أمل الآمل مولانا حيدر علي بن المولى ميرزا الشيرواني كان فاضلا معظما و عالما مفخما كما علمناه من تعليقاته على المسالك و غيرها فإنها و إن كانت قليلة إلا أنها تدل على فضل محررها و بالجملة إنه من أهل الفضل مع أنه كان من أهل الزهد و التقوى أيضا إلا أنه ظهر منه أقوال مختصة به ينكر ذلك عليه و إن كان لبعضها قائل به من غيره سمعت أستادنا و استنادنا الفاضل الأعز و العالم الأكبر مولانا علي أصغر ( رهـ ) يحكي أنه كان يلعن جميع العلماء إلا السيد المرتضى و والده العلامة .و قد تحقق منه أنه كان يضيف أهل السنة إلى بيته و يصبر عليهم إلى أن تحصل له الفرصة و يتمكن مما يريد فيأخذ المدية بيده المرتعشة لكونه ناهزا في التسعين فيضعها في حلق أحدهم فيقتله بنهاية الزجر .و الحيدرية المنسوبة إليه كانوا يصومون فيريدون أن يفطروا بالحلال فيمشون إلى دكاكين أهل السنة أو بيوتهم فيسرقون شيئا و يفطرون به و من آرائهم عدم رجحان صوم يوم الإثنين أو حرمته و إن وافى يوم الغدير و منها حكمهم بخروج غير الإمامية من دين الإسلام و الحكم بنجاستهم و كذا من شك في ذلك إلى غيرها من الآراء و رأيت منه رسالة حكم فيها بوجوب الاجتهاد على الأعيان كما هو رأي علماء حلب و أشبع الكلام في ذلك لكنه مزيف انتهى .

و له رسالة في تنجس غير الإمامي و خروجهم عن الإسلام و للمولى زين الدين الخوانساري رسالة في الرد عليه

[He said in “Tatmim Amal al-Aamil”(book of biographies written by `Abdul-Nabi bin Muhammad Taqi al-Qazwini): “Our Mawlâ Haydar Alî son of Mawlâ Mîrzâ Muhammad ibn al-Hassan al-Shirwânî, he was a virtuous, venerated and great scholar like we knew from his commentaries on al-Masalik and other works even if only little but they show the value of their writer. In brief, he is from the noble people, (but) even though he was from the people of asceticism and piety he also said some things that may lead us to reproach him even if others said them as well. I heard our professor and virtuous reference, the grand scholar Mawlâna `Ali Asghar (rah) say that he(Haydar Alî Shirwânî) used to curse all scholars except al-Sayyed al-Murtadâ and his father al-`Allamah.

And it has been verified about him that he used to receive Ahlul-Sunnah at his place as guests, and he used to exercise patience with them until he gets a chance to fulfill his aim, he would then take a knife with his trembling hand because he was near his nineties, and he would plunge it in their throat killing them after making them suffer.

And al-Haydariyyah(sect) which is attributed to him, used to fast and when they needed to break their fast in a Halal way, they would seek the shops or homes of Ahlul-Sunnah in order to steal anything and consume it on Iftar, also from their opinions is the non-desirability of fasting on Monday or its impremssibility even if it coincided with the day of Ghadeer, and from their opinions is that all non-Imamis are outside the folds of Islam, and they are impure and so are those who doubt this matter and other opinions, and I saw from him a Rissâlah(research paper) in which he ruled that it is obligatory for the elites to practice al-Ijtihâd as was the opinion of the scholars of Aleppo(Halab) and it has been discussed thoroughly and it is forged.”

And he has a Rissâlah about the Najasah of the non-Imami and that they are not in the folds of Islam, and al-Mawlâ Zain al-Deen al-Khawansârî wrote a Rissâlah to refute him.

[Source: “Al-Fayd al-Qudsi” page 250-151 and  “Bihâr al-Anwâr” volume 102, page 137].

3. Crimes of Twelver Shia in Azerbaijan, Iran and Khorasan.

Persia was a Sunni country initially, from the days it was conquered by Muslims in the caliphate of Umar(ra). It was much later, around the sixteenth century, that a Shia dynasty , the Safavids, converted Persia into a Shia country by force, committing countless crimes to achieve this goal. Shah Ismail played a key role in the rise of Twelver Shiism in these regions; he converted Iran from Sunni country to a Twelver Shia state.

(i). We read in Encyclopedia Iranica:

The near-complete eradication of Sunnism from the Iranian plateau, achieved by these and other means, must clearly have been gradual, and at least in some places it consisted initially of the pragmatic and superficial acceptance of a coerced creed. The Sunnite notables of Qazvin in particular proved obdurate, and several of them were executed during the reign of Shah Ṭahmāsb for religious deviance (Bacqué-Grammont, p. 83, n. 231). Nonetheless, enough of them survived to qualify (or claim to qualify) for the reward offered by Esmāʿil II during his brief Sunnite interregnum to all who had steadfastly refused to curse the first three caliphs (Golsorkhi, p. 479). There is evidence, too, for the persistence of Sunnite loyalties in some localities into the reign of ʿAbbās I, particularly in eastern Persia. In 1008/1599 he launched a campaign of persecution against the Sunnites of Sorḵa (Semnān), but three decades later Sunnismwas still widespread in the city, although less so in its environs.

[Source: Enclyopedia Iranica by ].

(ii). We read in Rethinking world history: essays on Europe, Islam, and world history by Marshall G. S. Hodgson, Edmund Burke ,p. 195:

Ismail, the head of the Shi’ite Safawiyya tariqas – which had the roots of its power in the decentralized ways of the late Middle Ages and which depended for its military strength on tribal Turks as was so characteristically the case at that time – seems to have participated many of the events. He set about conquering, at the star of the sixteenth century, as much of the Dar al-Islam as possible and forcing the Sunni populations to adopt Shi’ism. He failed to convert all Islam to the Shi’a, but he did carve out a lasting empire in Iran, the Safavid empire. There he insisted that everyone should publicly curse such heroes of early Islam as Umar and Abu Bakr and follow the Shi’ite form of the Sharia. The Sunni Tariqas were braught in hastily from whatever corners of Islam – chiefly Arab – the Shia had been strong in, and the autonomus body of Shi’ite mujtahids – authorized leading interpreters of the sharia gained an undisputed ascendancy. Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, in the seventeenth century, was especially effective in putting the doctrine into definitive form with the aid of the political authorities. The areas incorporated in the Safavid empire, Persian, Turkish , or Arab speaking, have been insistently Shi’ite since.

[Source: Rethinking world history: essays on Europe, Islam, and world history by Marshall G. S. Hodgson, Edmund Burke , p. 195]

(iii). Roger Savory says in his book ‘Iran Under the Safavids’ p. 27 to 29:

Shias therefore regard the first three Caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman) as usurpers, and the ritual of cursing of these persons has always been a proper duty of Shias, although the emphasis on it varied from time to time. In the early days of the Safavid state, when revolutionary fervous was still strong, great emphasis was palced on this ritual of cursing. Safavid supporters known as tabarraiyan walked through the streets and bazaars cursing not only the three “rightly guided” caliphs mentioned above, but also the enemies of Ali and the other Imams, and Sunnis in general. Anyone who failed to respond without delay, “May it [the cursing] be more and not less”. was liable ot be put to death on the spot. Despite the two centuries of propaganda carried out by Safavids, the promulgation of Shiism as the state religion was fraught with danger, and some of Ismail’s advisers were worried about the reaction to his announcement. “Of the 200,000-300,000 people in Tibriz”, they said “two thirds are Sunnis … we fear that the people may say they do not want Shii sovereign, and if (Which God forbid!) the people rject Shi’ism, what can we do about it?” Ismail’s reply was uncompromising: he had been comissioned to perform this task, he said, and God and the immaculated Imams were his companions, he feared no one. “With God’s help,” he said, “if the people utter on word of protest, I will draw the sword and leave not one of them

[Source: ‘Iran Under the Safavids’ p. 27 to 29]

(iv). Twelver Shia crimes in Azerbaijan

ازآنجا كه مردم آذربايجان در آن زمان سني بودند، شيخ حيدر در اينسال به طور عملي جهاد با سني ها را آغاز نموده ضمن يك فتواي صريح اعلام داشت كه  همة اهل سنت در حكم كفارند، و فقيهان سني دشمنان خدا به شمار ميروند و هركه از آنها تبعيت و تقليد كند از دين خارج شده به كافران ملحق ميشود و قتلش  واجب ميگردد . او در اين فتوا اعلام كرد كه جهاد با اهل سنت يك واجب شرعي است و غارت اموال و اسير كردن و فروختن زنان و فرزندان آنها ثواب  عظيم دارد . او عقائد شيخ بدرالدين را موبه مو اجرا كرد و همان عقيدة افراطي تاتارهاي بكتاشي آناتولي را كه علي ابن ابيطالب را تا مقام الوهي بالا برده  ويرا مورد پرستش قرار ميدادند به صراحت تبليغ كرد؛ وكلية واجبات شرعي را از نماز و روزه وحج را تأويل كرده از گردن مريدانش انداخت . مريدان او كه از اينزمان بطوررسمي لقبِ قزلباش (به فارسي : سرخ سر) يافتند در دسته جات مسلح و منضبط جهادي متشكل شدند، و آباديهاي شروان و داغستان و مناطقي  از قفقاز را كه عموما سني مذهب بودند، تحت عنوان جهاد با كافران مورد حملات غارتگرانه قرار دادند

(شاه اسمایل صفوی – گفتار دوم – منشا قزلباشان و عقاید آنها  صفحه 43 – امیر حسین خنجی)

At that time the people of Azerbaijan were Sunni. Shaykh Haydar practically started the ‘Jihad’ against the Sunnis. IssuingFatwa he openly declared that all Ahl-Sonnat are Kufar and the Sunni Fuqaha are the enemies of Allah and whoever follows them leaves the fold of the religion and becomes one of the Kufar and his killing becomes obligatory. In the Fatwa he declared that  ‘Jihad’ against Ahl-Sonnat is a religious obligation and the plunder of their properties and imprisoning and selling their women and children has a great reward.

He implemented the teachings and beliefs of Shaykh Badruddin bit by bit and propagated the extreme beliefs of Baktashi Anatolian Tatars who believed that Ali bin Abi Talib had a divine status and used to worship him. He interpreted the obligatory rules of prayer, Fast and Hajj. His diciples, who from this time, officially got the title of Qizilbash (red heads) formed disciplined armed ‘Jihadi’ factions. Under the title of ‘Jihad against the Kufar’ they would raid and plunder the settlements and villages of Sherwan, Dagestan and areas of Caucasus who were generally Sunni.

[Source: Shah Ismail Safavi – Second Saying – The roots of Qizilbashan and their beliefs page 43 – Amir Hossein Khonjee.]

We read:

“It was Jumah after the day when the Qizilbasi’s had invaded Tabriz. On the day of Jumah, Sah ismael had entered the Jami masjid. He ordered that between two sunnis there must be a Qizilbashi standing with a sword in his hand. Then he announced that the Sunni madhab is batil and the sunnis were in shock when they heard this. After that he ordered that the ones who don’t curse Abu Bakr, Omar, Osman and Aisha, are to be hitted on the head. He rose on the minbar and said: “Distance yourselves from the sunnis” – “ Curse Abu Bakr, Omar, Osman”. After that the Qizilbashi men with swords yelled “more cursing, much more cursing!” The people (sunnis) rejected this and a fight begun. The Shah then yelled again with a loud voice: “Whoever doesn’t say those words (i.e. cursing the Sahaba) will be killed”. [Alam Arayi Safawi 64. یْفص یاسآ نلاع 64) ]

We read regarding Tabriz:

On capturing Tabriz in 907/1501, a city two-thirds Sunnite in population, Shah Ismāʿil threatened with death all who might resist the adoption of Shiʿite prayer ritual in the main congregational mosque, and he had Qezelbāš soldiers patrol the congregation to ensure that none raise his voice against the cursing of the first three caliphs, viewed as enemies of the Prophet’s family. In Tabriz and elsewhere, gangs of professional execrators known as the tabarrāʾiān would accost the townsfolk at random, forcing them to curse the objectionable personages on pain of death. Selective killings of prominent Sunnites occurred in a large number of places, notably Qazvin and Isfahan, and in Shiraz and Yazd, outright massacres took place. Sunnite mosques were desecrated, and the tombs of eminent Sunnite scholars destroyed. (Aubin, 1970, pp. 237-38; idem, 1988, pp. 94-101).

(v). Twelver Shia crimes in Isfahan

سپس از آنجا راهی اسپهان شدند، و شهر را در محاصره گرفتند، و پس از مدت کوتاهی اسپها ن را متصرف شدند. اسپهان از جمله شهرهای بزرگ ايران بود و همۀ مردمش سنی شافعی بودند. اسپهان در سده های پيش چندين بار پايتخت شده بود و در آن اواخر پايتخت سلطان یعفوب بایندر بود. بناهای تاريخی بسياری از مسجد و مدرسه و کتابخانه و بيمارستان در آن وجود داشت؛ و چونکه اسپهان بر مسير جادۀ ابريشم قرار داشت و شهر  ازرگانی بين  المللی و بسيار ثروتمند بود يکی از بزرگترين بازارهای ايران با چندين کاروانسرای بزرگ در شهر اسپهان بو د. اسپهان در تاريخ پس از اسلامِ خويش چندين دانشمند بزرگ تحويل جامعۀ بشريت داده بود که تا امروز مايۀ فخر جهان موسوم به اسلامی اند. قزلباشان در اسپهان دست به چنان فجايعی زدند که جنايتهايشان در آذربايجان در مقابل آن اندک می نمود. هرچه مسجد و مدرسه و ابنيۀ تاريخی بازمانده از دوران طاهريان و ديلميان و سلجوقيان و تيموريان  در اسپهان وجود داشت به دست آنها آسیب دید . بخش اعظم علما و فقها و مدرسان و اهل دانش که نتوانسته بودند از شهر بگريزند به کشتن رفتند. کشتار  مردم اسپهان چندين روز متوالی ادامه داشت و بخش بزرگی از مردم اسپهان کشتار شدند. در اين ميان اموال مردم به غارت رفت و مزارع و باغستانها  به  آتش کشيده شد

(قزلباشان در تاریخ ایران – نقش قزلباشان صفوی در تاریخ ایران زمین – امیر حسین خنجی صفحه 104)

Then they (safavids) moved towards Isfahan and laid siege to it. After short period they captured Isfahan. Isfahan was one of the largest cities of Iran and all its people were Sunni Shafis. Isfahan had been the capital city many times before and lately it was the capital of Sultan Yaqob Bayendar. There were many historical monuments and buildings such as mosques, madaris, libraries and hospitals in the city. Since the city was on the silk route it was city of international trade and it was wealthy. One of the biggest markets of Iran with many big caravansaries was in the city of Isfahan.

Isfahan during its Islamic history produced many great scholars to the world that till today they are the pride of the Islamic world. The Qizilbash (Safavid soldiers) committed such atrocities [in Isfahan] that their crimes in Azerbaejan became small compared to it. Every mosque, Madrasah and historical building that was built in Isfahan from the times of Tahirid, Daylimite, Seljuks and Timurids were damaged by them.

The majority of scholars and fuqaha and students and the people of knowledge who could not flee the city were killed. The killing the people of Isfahan continued for several consecutive days and great number of the people of Isfahan were massacred. During this time the properties of the people were looted and farms and orchards were burned.

[Source: Qizilibahsan in the History of Iran – The role of Safavid Qizilbash in the History of Iran – Amir Hossein Khonjee page 104.]

(vi). Twelver Shia crimes in Herat

يک گروه قزلباش زير فرمان مردی به نام قلی جان از نوکران نجمِ زرگر (امير نجم) به هرات گسيل شدند. مردم هرات که جنايتهای قزلباشان در مرو را شنيده بودند راه چاره در آن ديدند که داوطلبانه تسليم قزلباشان شوند شايد از تجاوز و کشتار برهند. قلی جان پس از آنکه شهر را تحويل گرفت بر آن شد که کارهای شاه اسماعيل در هنگام تصرف تبريز را تکرار کند. ماه رمضان بود و مردمِ شهر روزه دار بودند. او فقها و علما و کلانتران را به مسجد جامع فراخواند، سپس در مسجد به قاضی القضات هرات فرمود که شيعه شود و برفراز منبر رفته تبرا کند و به ابوبکر و عمر و عثمان لعنت فرستد و فتوا بدهد که سنی ها کافرند. فقيه بيچاره که نمی توانست چنين فرمانی را اجابت کند در همانجا در کنار منبر به دست قزلباشان به قتل رسيد (شکمش را دريدند و امعا و احشايش را به پای منبر ريختند). دومين فقيهی که فرمان يافت به فراز منبر رفته ابوبکر و عمر را دشنام دهد و فتوای کفر سنيان بدهد حافظ زين الدين علی – مفتی اعظمِ هرات – بود. این فقیه پیر سال نیز از اجرای فرمان قلی جان سرباز زد. فلی جان به دست خودش شکم وی را درید و امعا و احشایش را بیرون کشیده وبه میان مردم حاضر  در مسجد افکند, سپس سرش را از تن جدا کرد. سومین کسی که به این سان کشته گردید کلانتر بزرگ هرات بود. پس از آن قلی جان به قزلباشان فرمود تا همه حاصران در مسجد را از خرد و درشت کشتار کنند. جسدهای قاضی القضات و حافظ زین الدین را با اجساد چندین تن دیگر از بزرگان و اعیان هرات در میدان شهر به آتش کشیدند. روزهای آینده بقایای بزرگان بازداشت و دربندکرده شدند تا شاه اسماعیل در باره آنها تصمیم بگیرد.

(قزلباشان در تاریخ ایران – نقش قزلباشان صفوی در تاریخ ایران زمین – امیر حسین خنجی صفحه 136-137)

One group of Qizilbash on the orders of a man by the name of Qoli Jaan, one of the servants of Najm Zargar, were dispatched to Herat. The people of Herat who had heard about the crimes of Qizilbashan in Merv decided to voluntarily surrender with the hope that they don’t get massacred. Qoli Jaan after taking the city repeated what Shah Ismail did during the capturing of Tabriz.

It was the month of Ramadan and the people of the city were fasting. He called the Fuqaha, scholars and mayor to the mosque. Then in the mosque he ordered Qazi al-Quzat (Cheif Judge) to become Shia and go to Minbar and do Tabara and send Lanah (curse) upon Abubakr, Omar and Othman, and issue Fatwa that the Sunnis are Kafir. The Faqih couldn’t obey such order so he was killed in the same place next to minbar. (His stomach was torn apart and his intestines were spilt over the minbar). The second Faqih who was given the same order to go to the minbar and slander Abubakr and Omar and issue fatwa of Kufr on Sunnis was Hafiz Zaynuddin Ali, the grand Mufti of Herat. This old Faqih too did not obey the orders [of Qoli Jaan]. Qooli Jaan cut his stomach with his own hands and removed his intestines and threw it at people who were in the Mosque. Then he chopped off his head. The third person who was killed the same way was the chief mayor.

Then Qoli Jaan ordered the Qizilbashan (safavid soldiers) to kil all people present in the Mosque, from minors to adults. The bodies of cheif Judge and Hafiz Zaynuddin and several elders of Herat were burned in the centre of the city. The rest of the elders were imprisioned so that Shah Ismail make a decision about them.

[Source: Qizilibahsan in the History of Iran – The role of Safavid Qizilbash in the History of Iran – Amir Hossein Khonjee page 136-137.]

شاه اسماعيل در آذرماه ۸۸۹ خ (رمضان ۹۱۶ ھ) وارد هرات شد و <حکم ولايی> برای کشتار و ادام و تاراج صادر کر د. علاّمه تفتازانی که پيرمردی بالای هفتادساله و بزرگترين فقيه جهان اسلام در زمان خودش و مرجعِ  مسلم دينی ايران و ماوراء النهر و ترکستان و سلطنتهای هندوستان و عثمانی بود که
سلاطین هند و ترکستان و عثمانی در نامه هایشان او را ((مولانا العظم)) خطاب می کردند, در آن هنگام در حبس قلی جان بود.

چنين شخصيتی را به علت آنکه «سنی متعصب بود»  قزلباشان به فرمان شاه اسماعیل تکه پاره کردند تا ((رسم مبتدعه اهل ضلال)) از جهان برافتد و مذهب حق قزلباشی »  عالمگیر شود. نوشته اند که شاه اسماعیل فرمود تا علامه تفتازانی را با دهان روزه دار آوردند: و به اوحکم کرد که تبرا کند و دست  از  ((مذهب باطل)) بکشد. چون علامه حاضر نبود به فرمان جوانکی گردن نهد که به نظر او از اسلام بیگانه بود, شاه اسماعیل فرمود تا وی را قطعه قطعه کردند. سپس پاره های  جسدش را به آتش کشیدند و خاکسترش را در کوچه ها پراکندند تا لکدکوب عوام گردد

(قزلباشان در تاریخ ایران – نقش قزلباشان صفوی در تاریخ ایران زمین – دکتر امیر حسین خنجی صفحه 137-138)

Shah Ismail entered Herat in 889k (Ramadan 916 h) and ordered the killing, destruction and plunder in the city. Allama Taftazani who was over 70 years old and was one of the greatest scholar of Islamic world in his time and religious authority of Iran, Transoxania, Turkestan, India and Ottoman sultanates. Rulers of India, Turkestan and Ottoman would address him in their letters as ‘Mowlana al-Azam’, the great Mowlana. At this time the Allama was the prisoner of Qoli Jaan.

Personality of such type was cut into pieces by the Qizilbashaan (safavid soldiers) on the orders of Shah Ismail for the reason of being a ‘fanatic Sunni’ and so that the ‘People of Misguidance’ are removed from the world and the ‘Mazhab of Truth of Qizlibash’ becomes universal. They have written that while Allamah Taftazani was fasting Shah Ismail ordered him to do Tabarah and leave his ‘False Mazhab’. Since Allamah did not obey the order, Shah Ismail ordered that he be cut into pieces. Then parts of his body was burned and thrown in the streets.

[Source: Qizilibahsan in the History of Iran – The role of Safavid Qizilbash in the History of Iran – Amir Hossein Khonjee page 137-138.]

Note: Allamah Taftazani mentioned here is not Saaduddin Taftazani, who lived before him.

شاه اسماعيل چهار ماه در هرات مان د. در تمام اين مدت زنان و دختران و پسران هرات مورد تعدی و تجاوز جنسی قز لباشان قرار م یگرفتند، و اموالی که در خانه های زنده ماندگان هرات باقی مانده بود مصادره میشد.

(قزلباشان در تاریخ ایران – نقش قزلباشان صفوی در تاریخ ایران زمین – امیر حسین خنجی صفحه 139)

Shah Ismail stayed in Herat for four months. During this period the women, the girls and the boys of Herat were abused and raped by the Qizilbashaan (Safavid soldiers) and the properties and belongings of people were confiscated.

[Qizilibahsan in the History of Iran – The role of Safavid Qizilbash in the History of Iran – Amir Hossein Khonjee page 139]

کشتار مردم و انهدام مساجد و مدارس و بناهای تاریخی در هرات چندین روز ادامه داشت, و چنان شد که هرات به یک مخروبه تبدیل گردید. مقابر بزرگانی که در هرات خفته بودند شکافته گردید و اجساد شان از گورها بر آورده شده به آتش کشیده شد. لاشه های خواجه های بزرگ هرات را از گورها برا آورده پراکندند. مولانا نورالدین جامی (عارف بزرگ تاریخ ایران, متوفی سال 872 خ) نیز از جمله بزرگانی بود که گورش را شکافتند و جسدش را بیرون کشیدند و به جرم سنی بودن به او تازیانه زدند و استخوانهایش را پراکندند.

(قزلباشان در تاریخ ایران – نقش قزلباشان صفوی در تاریخ ایران زمین – امیر حسین خنجی صفحه 138)

The killing of people of Herat and the destruction of Mosques and Madaris and historical monuments continued for many days. To the extent that Herat turned into a city of ruins. The graves of elders in Herat were openend and their corpses were burned. The bodies and skeletons of respected Khawajas were removed from their graves and their bons were scattered. Mowlana Noruddin Jami (Great mystic in the history of Iran, died 872) was among those elders whose grave was opened and his body was removed and whipped for the crime of being a Sunni and his bones were scattered.

[Source: Qizilibahsan in the History of Iran – The role of Safavid Qizilbash in the History of Iran – Amir Hossein Khonjee page 138.]

در اوائل سال ۸۹۰ شاه اسماعيل از هرات بيرون شده شکارکنان و غارتگران تا ميهنه و فارياب و بلخ در شرق خراسان پيش رفت، و در بلخ و ديگر شهرها کشتارها و تخريبها تکرار گرديد.

(قزلباشان در تاریخ ایران – نقش قزلباشان صفوی در تاریخ ایران زمین – امیر حسین خنجی صفحه 140)

In the early years of 890 Shah Ismail left Herat, the plunderers advanced to Maimana, Faryab, Balkh and east of Khorasan. In Balkh and other cities the massacrs and destruction were repeated.

[Source: Qizilibahsan in the History of Iran – The role of Safavid Qizilbash in the History of Iran – Amir Hossein Khonjee page 140.].

(vii). Twelver Shia crimes in Iraq:

Shah Ismail peacefully seized Baghdad in 1508. However, his armies zealously murdered Sunnis and actively persecuted them through tribal allies of the Shah.[Iraq: Old Land, New Nation in Conflict, By William Spencer, pg.51].

His armies also destroyed several important Sunni sites, including the tombs of Abū Ḥanīfa and Abdul-Qadir Gilani. The Safavids even expelled the family of Gilani from Mesopotamia. After declaring Shiism the official form of Islam in Iraq, Ismail forced his new Iraqi subjects to convert to Shiism and outlawed Sunni practices. He then returned to Persia. These draconian actions by the conquering Safavids caused the Mesopotamian Sunnis to seethe with resentment.[The history of Iraq, By Courtney Hunt, pg.48]

Likewise, under Tahmasp I, central and southern Iraq, including Baghdad and Basra had remained in Safavid hands and efforts were being made to establish Shiism in place of Sunnism in these lands. Sunni scholars who refused to accept Shia doctrines were executed and Sunni tombs and shrines were destroyed once again, while the main mosques were converted for Shia use only. While not extensive, some conversions did take place, and those remaining faithful to Sunnism were subjected to persecution until Suleiman the Magnificent expelled the Safavids from most of Iraq.[History of the Ottoman Empire and modern Turkey, Volume 1, By Ezel Kural Shaw, pg.95]

When the Safavids returned in 1624 under the rule of Abbas I of Persia and reconquered Baghdad, they once more again massacred the Sunni inhabitants.[Gulf States, By Michael Gallagher, pg.17]

[Source: Information about Iraq was taken from Wikipedia] [Screen Shot]

Note: Ammar Nakhswani Brags in his lecture that Iraq is a country having Shia majority, but this shameless chartalan will never let his audience know that, how Iraq- A country with Sunni majority turned into Shia majority.

 4. Shah Ismail Killed his mother because she married a Sunni:

“When Shah Ismail entered Tabriz he didn’t face any resistance (from the people) yet he  slaughtered them. On his command, the bellies of the pregnant sunni women were sliced. The graves of Sultan Yaqub and others were opened and their bones were taken out and burned. The 300 prostitues of Tabriz were gathered on one place and they got cut in two with swords. The head of 800 people from the region Alwan were chopped off. The dogs of tabriz were killed too. After Ismail killed many people he ordered his mother to be brought to him. He learned that his mother married a commander from Bayandur dynasty(a sunni turkish dynasty) and upon that he ordered (his soldiers) to chop of her head. I don’t think after Neron, there was any opressor in history like him (Ismail)”.

[Source: “The voyages of Venetians in iran,(Translated into persian by:Manuchohr Ameeri),Publishing house Kharazm,Tahran,1381(2003),p. 436)“].

5. The Shia Death Squads in Iraq in the 20th Century:

Hundreds of Iraqis are being tortured to death or summarily executed every month in Baghdad alone by death squads working from the Ministry of the Interior, the United Nations’ outgoing human rights chief in Iraq has revealed.

…Figures show that last July the morgue alone received 1,100 bodies, about 900 of which bore evidence of torture or summary execution. The pattern prevailed throughout the year until December, when the number dropped to 780 bodies, about 400 of which had gunshot or torture wounds.

Mr Pace said the Ministry of the Interior was “acting as a rogue element within the government”. It is controlled by the main Shia party, the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (Sciri); the Interior Minister, Bayan Jabr, is a former leader of Sciri’s Badr Brigade militia, which is one of the main groups accused of carrying out sectarian killings. Another is the Mehdi Army of the young cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who is part of the Shia coalition seeking to form a government after winning the mid-December election.

[Source: independent.co.uk ] . [Video Documentary].

This was a glimpse of bright Shia history, which not only Sunnis but even many Shias might not have heard. And the history passed but the ideology of twelver Shiism remained the same, as even in this era we have witnessed the consequences of their ugly and piosonous ideology. We saw them siding with the Americans in Afghanistan where thousands of Muslims were killed; their siding with the Americans in Iraq where millions of Sunnis were killed, their unwavering support to the brutal dictator and Mass-Murderer Bashar Asad in Syria, who killed thousands of Sunnis; And now their support to the Houthi Terrorists in Yemen in Yemen, who are trying to repeat their brutal artocities against Ahl us-sunnah.

Regrettably, the enemies of Islam read history through which they become acquainted with those sects and cults of deviated and destructive beliefs, who played a major role in obstructing the Islamic expansion. It grieves to the heart that those enemies make such erring groups play the same role today against the Sunnis.

If we understand the past, we can profit from it in the present, by taking it as an example of what could be. In the light of past events, we should be more vigilant in our dealings with the factions whose history is full of treachery and betrayals; who extend the hand of friendship to the enemies of this Ummah(Muslim nation). Considering the history of Islam will provide us with many examples of lessons which our lives do not suffice to experience. Many times these groups have brought misery upon the heads of the Muslims. They are today making their same old claims, and calling people to the same twisted doctrines, that so often moved their ancestors to betray and persecute the Muslims in the past.

 

VII – There cannot be brotherhood between Shias and their opponents(Non Shias), as per Twelver Shiism.

1. Esteemed Shia scholar Ayatullah Khomeini states:

المراد بالمؤمن الشيعة الإمامية الاثني عشرية . وأما الأخبار فما اشتملت على المؤمن فكذلك ، وما اشتملت على الأخ لا تشملهم أيضا لعدم الأخوة بيننا وبينهم بعد وجوب البراءة عنهم وعن مذهبهم وعن أئمتهم ، كما تدل عليه الأخبار واقتضته أصول المذهب…وقال: فإنها في مقام تفسيرها اعتبرت الأخوة فيها ، فغيرنا ليسوا بإخواننا
What is meant by the term ‘momin’, is Shia Ithna Ash’ari only. As for the ahadith which are applicable on the ‘momin’, so they are meant to be for the Imami shias only. Therefore, the ahadith which mention ‘your brother’ (for example ahadith on backbiting being akin to eating the meat of one’s brother) do not include the opponents(non shias) for there is no brotherhood at all between us Imami shias and the opponents(non Shias). In fact, it is absolutely obligatory to do tabarra from them, their schools of thought and their leading scholars, based upon our ahadith which deem it (absolute tabarra from non shias) to be the core of our religion. So whenever brotherhood is implied in religious interpretations, it must be kept in mind that the opponents(non shias)  by no means are our brothers.( Makasibul Muhramah by Ayatullah Khomeini, Volume 1 page 250).

2. Esteemed Shia  Ayatullah Khoei states:

ومن البديهي أنه لا إخوة ولا عصمة بيننا وبين المخالفين
It is a matter of basic common sense that there is no brotherhood or support/partnership between us shias and the opponents(non Shias). (Misbahul fuqahah by Ayatullah Khoei, Volume 1 page 505 )

3. Esteemed Shia  Ayatullah Ali Tabatabai states:

ودعوى الإيمان والأخوة للمخالف مما يقطع بفساده، والنصوص المستفيضة بل المتواترة ظاهرة في رده، مضافا إلى النصوص المتواترة الواردة عنهم (عليهم السلام) بطعنهم ولعنهم، وأنهم أشر من اليهود والنصارى، وأنجس من الكلاب
The attribution of iman (belief) and brotherhood towards the opponents(non-shias) is completely invalid. There are explicit and mutawatir ahadith which invalidate this claim, furthermore there are mutawatir ahadith from the Imams (as) mocking and cursing the opponents(non shias), as well as calling them worse than Jews and Christians, and filthier than dogs.( Riyadul Masail by Ayatullah Ali Tabatabai, Volume 8 page 68 ).

4. Esteemed Shia Ayatullah Ahmed bin Muhammad Mahdi AlNaraqi states:

ودعوى الايمان والأخوة للمخالف مما يقطع بفساده.
وتؤكده النصوص المتواترة الواردة عنهم في طعنهم ولعنهم وتكفيرهم، وأنهم شر من اليهود والنصارى وأنجس من الكلاب
The attribution of iman (belief) and brotherhood towards opponents(non shias) is completely invalid, and this is evidenced by mutawatir ahadith from the Imams (as) mocking, cursing and doing takfeer of the opponents(non shias), as well as calling them worse than Jews and Christians, and filthier than dogs.( Mustanad al Shia by Ayatullah Naraqi,  Volume 14 page 163)

5. Esteemed Shia Shaikh Jawahiri states:
وكيف يتصور الأخوة بين المؤمن والمخالف بعد تواتر الروايات، وتضافر الآيات في وجوب معاداتهم والبراءة منهم» (جواهر الكلام22/62)
How is it possible to imagine brotherhood between shias and the opponents(non shias) when there are mutawatir ahadith supported by numerous Qur’anic verses that it is obligatory to be hostile to the opponents(non shias) and to do tabarra from them? (Jawahirul Kalam by Shaikh Jawahiri, Volume 22 page 62) .

 

VIII –  As per Twelver Shiism, their opponents(Non-Shias) are children of Zina(prostitution).

1. We find a narration in Shia books al-Kafi 8/285 and al-Tahtheeb 4/136 in which the infallible Shia Imams accuse all those who differ with them of being sons of Zinah(prostitution) such as this:

Ali b. Muhammad from Ali b. al Abbas from al Hasan b. Abdur Rahman from Asim b. Hameed from abi Hamza from abi Ja’far (as),(narrator) said: I to him (as):” Indeed some of our companions are slandering and accusing those from their opponents.” So [Imam (as)] said: “Best to stop them.” Then [Imam (as)] said: “O aba Hamza, by Allah (swt), indeed the people, all of them, are children of prostitutes except our shias.” Then [Imam (as)] said: “We are owners of the khums and we have made it haram (illegal) on all the people except our shias.”

2. Wasail al shia

وعن علي بن محمد عن علي بن العباس عن الحسن بن عبد الرحمن عن عاصم بن حميد عن أبي حمزة عن أبي جعفر ع قال : قلت له : إن بعض أصحابنا يفترون ويقذفون من خالفهم فقال: الكف عنهم أجمل ثم قال: يا با حمزة والله إن الناس كلهم أولاد بغايا ما خلا شيعتنا ثم قال: نحن أصحاب الخمس وقد حرمناه على جميع الناس ما خلا شيعتنا الحديث

And from Ali b. Muhammad from Ali b. al Abbas from al Hasan b. Abdur Rahman from Asim b. Hameed from abi Hamza from abi Ja’far (as), I (narrator) said to him (as), that some of our companions are slandering and accusing those from their opponents. So [Imam (as)] said: “Best to stop them.” Then [Imam (as)] said: “O aba Hamza, by Allah (swt), indeed the people all of them are children of prostitutes except our shias.” Then [Imam (as)] said: “We are owners of the khums and certainlty we made it haram (illegal) on all the people except our shias.”(Wasail al shia)

3. Shia scholar Yusuf Bahrani states in his book, in the commentary in the footnote of volume 18 page 155 under the title:
“في أن المخالف ليس مسلما على الحقيقة و أن المخالف كافر في نفس الأمر”
“That those who differ with us are not real Muslims but those who differ with us are Kuffar

In his discussion of the fifth point he presents this Hadith:
“قوله: أنه كما لا يجوز أخذ مال المخالف و قتله لا يجوز تناول عرضه ”
“His Saying: Just like it is impermissible to take the money of he who differs with us or kill him, it is also impermissible to insult/slander his family”

Then al-Bahrani comments on this narration by saying that it is an incorrect addition and he says in the footnotes:

قول : من أوضح الواضحات في جواز غيبة المخالفين طعن الأئمة – عليه السلام -بأنهم أولاد زنا

I say: “It is extremely clear that it is permissible to do Gheebah(Back-biting) to those who differ with us, just like the Imams (as) did Gheebah by accusing them of being sons of Zinah.”

Then he presents narrations from al-Kafi 8/285 and al-Tahtheeb 4/136 in which the Imams accuse all those who differ with them of being sons of Zinah such as this: Ali b. Muhammad from Ali b. al Abbas from al Hasan b. Abdur Rahman from Asim b. Hameed from abi Hamza from abi Ja’far (as),(narrator) said: I to him (as):” Indeed some of our companions are slandering and accusing those from their opponents.” So [Imam (as)] said: “Best to stop them.” Then [Imam (as)] said: “O aba Hamza, by Allah (swt), indeed the people, all of them, are children of prostitutes except our shias.” Then [Imam (as)] said: “We are owners of the khums and we have made it haram (illegal) on all the people except our shias.”

He then says: “So if the Imams (as) have attacked them like this and practised this extreme form of Gheebah then how can we say that it isn’t allowed to back-bite them? In general this matter is so popular that no one can deny it. And when the Imam says “Best to stop them” then he says this only as Taqqiyah(dissimulation).”

At the end of the page he says: “The narrations have made it permissible to kill them and take their money”. (Haqaiq an-Nadira volume 18 page 155).

4. Shia scholar Sheikh Yusuf Bahrani in his book states:

Chapter: From group (of reasons which leads to) adultery is eating khums.

Narrations are mutawatir manawi that khums permitted to shias due to purity of their births. And in some of them that zina and illegitimate births come to opponents(non-Shias) due to khums. And in narration of Abu Hamza from Abu Jafar (alaihi salam): ALL PEOPLE ARE CHILDREN OF WHORES EXCEPT OUR SHIAS.( Kashkul vol 3, pp 16-17)

5. Muhammad Majlisi reports in his book:

القاسم بن يحيى، عن الحسن بن راشد، عن الحسين بن علوان، و حدثني أحمد بن عبيد، عن حسين بن علوان، عمن ذكره، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: إذا كان يوم القيامة يدعى الناس جميعا بأسمائهم وأسماء امهاتهم سترا من الله عليهم إلا شيعة علي عليه السلام فإنهم يدعون بأسمائهم وأسماء آبائهم، وذلك أن ليس فيهم عهر.

From Abu Abdullah: “People would be called in the doomsday by their names and names of their mothers………… except for shias of Ali (alaihi salam), they would be called by their names and names of their fathers, because there is no (children of) fornication between them.( Biharul anwar vol 7, p 240)

6. Esteemed Shia scholar shia scholars – al-Mufeed, in his book Al-Irshad (p 52) reported a shia hadeeth stating:

And when doomsday would come, people would be called by their names and names of their mothers, except our shias. They would be called by their names and names of their fathers DUE TO PURITY OF THEIR BIRTH.( Al-Irshad , page 52)

7. Shia scholar Abdullah Shubbar in his “Tasliyah al-Fuad fi bayan al-Mawt wal Maad” (p 163) reported:
فاذا كان يوم القيامة دعي الناس بأسماء امهاتهم سى شيعتنا فانهم يدعون باسماء ابائهم لطيب مولدهم

And when doomsday would come, people would be called by their names and names of their mothers, except our shias. They would be called by their names and names of their fathers DUE TO PURITY OF THEIR BIRTH.( Tasliyah al-Fuad fi bayan al-Mawt wal Maad” page 163)

Comment: These reports hints that people other than shias cannot be called by the names of their fathers, because they don’t know who were their fathers!

8.  It is stated in Shia Tafseer al-Ayyashi:

“It was narrated that [Imam] Abu Abdullah said : No infant is born but a certain Satan from among the satans is in his presence. If Allaah knew that he [the infant] would be of our Shiia; He protects him from that Satan. If he wouldn’t be of our Shia, Satan sticks his finger in his anus, thus [if its a female he] becomes a catamite, and If it [the infant] was a female, he sticks his finger in her vagina, thus she becomes a whore. Allaah then afterwards clears what He desires or affirms, for with Him is the book of Knowledge.”(Tafseer Al-Ayyashi, page 234).

9. Ayatollah Mohammad Jamil Hammoud Amili stated in his fatwa:

يجوز للمؤمن إغتياب وبهتان المخالف وغيره من ملل الكفر ونعته بإبن الزنا وغيره من الفواحش، وهذا من الهجو الجائز على المخالفين…. الفتوى من مركز العترة الطاهرة للدراسات والبحوث

Translation: It is permitted for the believer to backbit, slander the opponent and other than him from sects of disbelief, and call him – son of adultery, and by other adultery (names), and this is from allowed mentioning of flaws of the opponents.[Markaz al-Itra].

 

IXThe opponents(Non-Shias) are worse than Jews and Christians and filthier than dogs, as per Twelver Shiism.

1. Esteemed Shia  Ayatullah Ali Tabatabai states:

ودعوى الإيمان والأخوة للمخالف مما يقطع بفساده، والنصوص المستفيضة بل المتواترة ظاهرة في رده، مضافا إلى النصوص المتواترة الواردة عنهم (عليهم السلام) بطعنهم ولعنهم، وأنهم أشر من اليهود والنصارى، وأنجس من الكلاب
The attribution of iman (belief) and brotherhood towards the opponents(non-shias) is completely invalid. There are explicit and mutawatir ahadith which invalidate this claim, furthermore there are mutawatir ahadith from the Imams (as) mocking and cursing the opponents(non shias), as well as calling them worse than Jews and Christians, and filthier than dogs.( Riyadul Masail by Ayatullah Ali Tabatabai, Volume 8 page 68 ).

2. Esteemed Shia Ayatullah Ahmed bin Muhammad Mahdi AlNaraqi states:

ودعوى الايمان والأخوة للمخالف مما يقطع بفساده.
وتؤكده النصوص المتواترة الواردة عنهم في طعنهم ولعنهم وتكفيرهم، وأنهم شر من اليهود والنصارى وأنجس من الكلاب
The attribution of iman (belief) and brotherhood towards opponents(non shias) is completely invalid, and this is evidenced by mutawatir ahadith from the Imams (as) mocking, cursing and doing takfeer of the opponents(non shias), as well as calling them worse than Jews and Christians, and filthier than dogs.( Mustanad al Shia by Ayatullah Naraqi,  Volume 14 page 163)

3. Shia scholar Yusuf Al bahrani his book “Hadaiq an-Nadira” states (10/43):

قد استفاضت الروايات والاخبار عن الائمة الابرار (عليهم السلام) – كما بسطنا عليه الكلام في كتاب الشهاب الثاقب في بيان معنى الناصب – بكفر المخالفين ونصبهم وشركهم وان الكلب واليهودى خير منهم

“Widespread (or plenty) narrations and stories from righteous imams (alaihuma salam) – as I elaborated in the book “Shihab as-Saqib fi bayan mana an-Nasib” – (testify) disbelief of opponents, their nasibizm, and their polytheism. And Dog and Jews are better than them”. (“Hadaiq an-Nadira” states vol 10, page 43)

4. Abu Abdallah has been quoted by Shia narrators as saying: “The Nasibi(label given to Sunnis) is worse than the Jew. It was said: And how is that so, O son of the Messenger of Allah? He said: The Jew denied the status of Prophethood (of Prophet Mohammad), while the Nasibi denied the status of Al-Imamah.” (Al-Naafi’ Yawmal-Hashr: Jamaalud-Din al-Suyuri, p.42)

5. We read in Shia book:  “Although Allah, the Exalted, has not created a creature worse than a dog, yet a Nasibi is worse than even a dog.” (Haqqul Yaqeen (Persian) Vol. 2, p. 516).

6. Esteemed Shia Ayatullah Khomeini  states:

فلو خرج سلطان على أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام لا بعنوان التدين بل للمعارضة في الملك أو غرض آخر كعائشة وزبير وطلحة ومعاوية وأشباههم أو نصب أحد عداوة له أو لاحد من الائمة عليهم السلام لا بعنوان التدين بل لعدواة قريش أو بني هاشم أو العرب أو لاجل كونه قاتل ولده أو أبيه أو غير ذلك لا يوجب ظاهرا شئ منها نجاسة ظاهرية. وإن كانوا أخبث من الكلاب والخنازير لعدم دليل من إجماع أو أخبار عليه…”

[كتاب الطهارة: 3/337]

Translation: “If a Sultan were to rebel against Ameer al Momineen(Ali) to oppose him in Leadership or any other purpose Like Aisha and Zubair and Talha and Muawiyah and their likes, or If He built up hatred for Ameer al Momineen or any Imam Then they are not necessarily Najis(Unclean) in their outer appearance Although They are More Malicious Than Dogs and Pigs…”[Kitab al Taharah  457 by Ayatullah Khomeini.]

https://islamistruth.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/31.jpg?w=551https://sonsofsunnah.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/post-5632-0-83119900-1314764642_thumb.jpg?w=421&h=657

 

 

X – The Sunni Scholars who were labeled as Nasibis by Twelver Shia Scholars – An undeniable proof over Taqiyyah practicing Shia propagandists.

The following is a list of some(from many) of highly respected Scholars of Ahl us-sunnah who were labeled as Nasibis by Shia scholars. This list just works as an additional evidence against those Taqiyyah(dissimulation) practising Shia propagandists, who say that Sunnis aren’t considered as Nasibis by them. This list is an apparent proof which exposes the reality.

(1) Imam Abu Hanifa

Nematullah Jazairi wrote in this book: This meaning (i.e. that Nasibi is anyone who favors anyone over Ali) is supported [by the fact that] the Imams [‘Alaihim AlSalam] and their Khawas (close companions) have referred to Abu Hanifa and his likes as Nasibis. Even though Abu Hanifa was not from among those who demonstrated animosity to Aal Al-Bayt [‘Alaihim Al Salam], rather he used to [love] visiting [and accompanying] them .( Book: Anwar an-Nomaniyah. Vol 2, page 308, Author: Nematullah Jazairi.)

(2) Imam al-Sha`bi

Grand Ayatollah Hasan al-Lawasani mentions him in Nur al-Afham [2:34] as:
وعامر الشعبي الناصبي المنحرف عن أمير المؤمنين ( عليه السلام
“…and `Amir al-Sha`bi, the Nasibi, perverted about Amir al-Mu’minin…”

(3) Imam Malik

Muhammad al-Tijani says in The Shi`a are Real Ahl al-Sunna (Arabic [103]):
ومما سبق نفهم بأن الإمام مالكا كان من النواصب
“From the above text we can understand that Imam Malik was a Nasibi…”

(4) Imam al-Shafi`i

al-Muhaqqiq al-Bahrani has written poetry against Imam al-Shafi`i. He starts it with:
كذبت في دعواك يا شافعي * فلعنة الله على الكاذب
“You lied in your claim, O Shafi`i! and the curse of Allah is upon the liar.”

After a couple of lines, he says:
فالشرع والتوحيد في معزل * عن معشر النصاب يا ناصبي
“Shari`a and tawhid is in a different place, from the group of Nasibis, O Nasibi!”

(5) Imam Ahmad

al-Kash-shi says about him — per al-Arba`in [652] by al-Shirazi:
هو من أولاد ذي الثدية ، جاهل ، شديد النصب
“He is from the offspring of Dhul Thudayya; an ignorant, extreme in nasb…”

(6) Imam Ibn Ma`in

Grand Ayatollah al-Mar`ashi says in Sharh Ihqaq al-Haq [7:398]:
وكذا الكلام في يحيى بن معين ، فإنه كان أمويا ناصبيا
“The same speech goes for Yahya ibn Ma`in, for he was an Umayyad Nasibi…”

(7) Imam Abu Dawud

Shaykh Baqir al-Mahmudi refers to him in the hashiya of Jawahir al-Matalib [151] as:
وهو عبد الله بن سليمان بن الأشعث الناصبي
“He is `Abdullah ibn Sulayman ibn al-Ash`at the Nasibi…”

(8) Imam Ibn Hibban

Ayatollah Taqi al-Tustari refers to his opinion in Qamus al-Rijal [9:283] as:
قول ابن حبان الناصبي
“…The saying of Ibn Hibban the Nasibi…”

Grand Ayatollah Muhsin al-Amin mentions it as:
قول ابن حبان الناصبي المعروف
“…Saying of the known Nasibi Ibn Hibban…”

(9) Imam al-Daraqutni

Ayatollah `Ali al-Namazi says about him in Mustadrakat [8:514]:
وكان ناصبيا
“He was a Nasibi.”

(10) Imam Abu Bakr al-Baqillani

Shaykh Muhsin al-Mu`allim counts him in his list of Nasibis in his book al-Nasb wa al-Nawasib [459], and then mentions reasons why he is supposedly a Nasibi.

(11) Abu Hayyan al-Tawhidi

Ayatollah al-Sayyid Murtada al-`Amili says in al-Sahih min Sirat al-Nabi [5:278]
ومن الأمور الطريفة هنا : أن أبا حيان التوحيدي – الناصبي المعروف – يروي
“Among the strange points here is that Abu Hayyan al-Tawhidi, the known Nasibi, narrates…”

(12) al-Khatib al-Baghdadi

Taqi al-Tustari says in the Qamus al-Rijal [9:390]:
ولا عبرة بقول الخطيب الناصبي
“… And no importance is to be given to the opinion of the Nasibi al-Khatib.”

And quotes him as [9:555]:
وفي تاريخ بغداد للخطيب الناصبي
“It is in Tarikh Baghdad by the Nasibi al-Khatib…”

(13) Imam al-Ghazali

al-Muqaddas al-Ardabili says — per Tara’if al-Maqal [1:122] — while mentioning the Imam’s alleged discussion with al-Sayyid al-Murtada ibn al-Da`i al-Hasani:
السيد المرتضى الذي جرت له المباحثة مع الغزالي الناصبي هو ابن الداعي الحسني
“The Sayyid Murtada, between whom and the Nasibi al-Ghazali the conversation took place, is Ibn al-Da`i al-Hasani.”

Sulayman al-Mahuzi says in al-Arba`in [379] when referring to al-Ghazali:
والعجب من هذا الناصب كيف
“…And it is astonishing how this Nasibi…”

(14) Imam Ibn al-Jawzi

Ayatollah Taqi al-Tustari mentions him in Qamus al-Rijal [11:599] as:
ابن الجوزي هو ” عبد الرحمن بن علي الناصبي “
“Ibn al-Jawzi: He is Abdul Rahman ibn `Ali, the Nasibi…”

(15) Imam al-Fakhr al-Razi

Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi mentions Imam al-Razi as a Nasibi in several of his works. In Bihar al-Anwar [35:384], he quotes him as:
وأفحش من ذلك ما ذكره الرازي الناصبي حيث قال
“And more indecent than that is what was mentioned by the Nasibi al-Razi when he said…”

Sulayman al-Mahuzi says in al-Arba`in [64] after quoting him:
العجب من قول هذا الناصب كيف
“The amazing thing from the saying of this Nasibi is that how…”

Nimatullah al-Jaza’iri also refers to him in Nur al-Barahin [2:228] as:
حتى أن الناصبي فخر الرازي ذكر في خاتمة كتاب المحصل
“…to the extent that the Nasibi Fakhr al-Razi mentioned in the end of the book al-Muhassal…”

After this, al-Jaza’iri quotes another thing and says:
وهذا الكلام صريح في كفر هذين الرجلين الرازي وابن جرير
“This expression is explicit in the kufr of these two men, al-Razi and (Sulayman) ibn Jarir…”

(16) Imam al-Dhahabi

al-Shahid al-Thalith Nurullah al-Shustri in his refutation of Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, refers to al-Dhahabi in al-Sawarim al-Muhriqa [198] as:
وأما ما نقله عن الذهبي الناصبي ذهب الله بنوره
“As for what he has copied from the Nasibi al-Dhahabi, may Allah take the nur away from him…”

Muhsin al-Amin says in A`yan al-Shi`a [3:294]:
ذكره الذهبي الناصبي في ميزانه
“He was mentioned by the Nasibi al-Dhahabi in his Mizan…”

And Ayatollah `Ali al-Korani quotes him in Ma`rifat Allah as:
قال الذهبي الناصبي في ميزان الإعتدال
“The Nasibi al-Dhahabi said in Mizan al-I`tidal…”

(17) Ibn Kathir

Ayatollah Muhiyy al-Din al-Mamaqani says in the hashiya of Tanqih al-Maqal [5:175]:
وفي البداية والنهاية للناصبي ابن كثير
“It is in al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya by the Nasibi Ibn Kathir…”

Shaykh Baqir al-Mahmudi says in his hashiya of Shawahid al-Tanzil [2:192]
كذا رواه الناصبي المحترف ابن كثير
“And it was reported similarly by the professional Nasibi Ibn Kathir…”

Shaykh Muhsin al-Mu`allim also labels him as a Nasibi in al-Nasb wa al-Nawasib [283]

(18) al-Iyji

al-Mahuzi says in al-Arba`in [284] about the author of al-Mawaqif, al-Iyji:
اعترض القاضي الناصب في المواقف
“The Nasibi Qadi objected in al-Mawaqif…”

He later says in the  same book [289]:
أن القاضي المتعصب الناصب في المواقف أورد هذا الخبر
“…That the bigot Nasibi Qadi documented this report in al-Mawaqif…”

(19) Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani

Ayatollah Taqi al-Tustari says about a narrator in Qamus al-Rijal [9:286]:
وثقه ابن حجر الناصبي
“…He was declared trustworthy by the Nasibi Ibn Hajar…”

(20) Hafiz al-Suyuti

Sulayman al-Majuzi says in al-Arba`in [390], about al-Suyuti’s interpretation:
وعلى كل حال فتأويل هذا الناصب الجاهل
“In any case, the interpretation of this ignorant Nasibi…”

(21) Shaykh Ibn Hajar al-Haythami

Ni`matullah al-Jaza’iri says in Nur al-Barahin [2:158]:
ولما نظر ابن حجر الناصبي إلى أن هذا الخبر يستلزم
“When Ibn Hajar the Nasibi viewed that this report necessitates…”

al-Qadi Nurullah al-Shustari mentions him in al-Sawarim al-Muhriqa [268] as:
هذا الشيخ المتعصب الجامد الناصبي
“This prejudiced, arrogant and Nasibi Shaykh…”

al-Sayyid Hasan Aal al-Mujaddid al-Shirazi says in al-Nisal al-Khariqa — per Turathuna [50/239] — after quoting Ibn Hajar:
فهل يستجيز هذا الناصب أن يقول في كتابه
“So does this Nasibi ask for permission when he says in his book…”

The reason why Ibn Hajar got fame as a “Nasibi” among Shias, is because of his refutation of them known as al-Sawa`iq al-Muhriqa, even though he filled his book with countless virtues of Ahl al-Bayt which are oft-quoted by Shias. Muhsin al-Mu`allim counts him as a Nasibi in al-Nasb wa al-Nawasib [279] and Mirza `Ali Muhammad Khan even named his refutation of Ibn Hajar’s al-Sawa`iq: “al-Shuhub al-Thawaqib fi Tard al-Shaytan al-Nasib” (“The Shooting Stars in Repelling the Nasibi Devil”)!

(22) Shah Waliullah al-Dehlawi

Ayatollah `Ali al-Milani says in Nafahat al-Azhar [19:415] while mentioning Waliullah’s son `Abdul `Aziz:
قد شبه ( الدهلوي ) انشعاب السلاسل من أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام إلى الشعب المختلفة…خلافا لوالده صاحب قرة العينين ، وغيره من النواصب
“al-Dehlawi likened the branching of the silsilas of Amir al-Mu’minin `alayhis salam to to different branches… as opposed to his father, the author of Qurrat al-`Aynayn, and other Nasibis…”

(23) Shah `Abdul `Aziz al-Dehlawi

Mirza `Abdullah Efendi al-Isfahani refers to him in Riyad al-`Ulama as — per Khatimat al-Mustadrak [2:175] by al-Nuri:
عبد العزيز الناصبي الدهلوي ذكر في التحفة
“…The Nasibi`Abdul `Aziz mentioned in the Tuhfa…”

Ayatollah `Ali al-Milani mentions in Nafahat al-Azhar [4:271] that some of the top Ithna’ `Ashari scholars said in reply to Shah `Abdul `Aziz:
أما ما ذكره هذا الناصبي عن النواصب
“As for what was mentioned about the Nasibis by this Nasibi…”

(24) Abul Qasim an-Naysaburi

Zaynutdin Al-Amuli in his “as-Sirat al-Mustagim” ( 2/183) said:
و عد أبو القاسم الحسين بن حبيب و هو من شيوخ الناصبية في كتاب التنزيل
And added Abul Qasim al-Husayn ibn Hubayb and he was from shuyukh of nawasib in his book “at-Tanzil”.

(25) Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi

Shaykh al-Sayyid Baqir al-Hujja wrote a refutation of his attacks on Ithna’ `Ashari creed and named it: “al-Sahm al-Thaqib fi Radd Ma Laffaqahu al-Nasib” (“The Shooting Arrow in Refutation of What Was Fabricated by the Nasibi”)

Note: This list of Sunni scholars who were lebeled as Nasibis by Shia scholars is a result of short research, we are sure that if one attempts to research further then a lot more names can be found, in fact, a whole booklet can be compiled showing how Sunni scholars have been labeled as “Nasibis” by Shia scholars.

Comment: This must be an eye-opener for the ignorant ones from Ahl us-sunnah who take the word of Shias without proper investigation, where they isolate Sunnis scholars and then conveniently try to label them as Nasibis, for example Sheikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab Tamimi.  But the fact is hidden in the books of Twelver Shias, not only these two scholars are considered Nasibis by them, rather they consider all the esteemed scholars of Ahl us-sunnah as Nasibis.

 

XI – Outcry of Shia propagandists that they do not practice Taqiyyah(dissimulation).

The Shia propagandists often rant that, the stance of Twelver Shiism towards Ahl us-sunnah is often misrepresented. And that they do not practice Taqiyyah[an important Shi’ee doctrine which constitutes, “Nine tenths(9/10th)” of their religion] while proclaiming their stance on Ahl us-sunnah. However, as the saying goes “Actions speak louder than Words”, so let us present before the readers an example of empty slogans and contradictory actions of Twelver Shia.

Shia Ayatullah Sistani on the participation of sunnis in government said: “participate and work with them , and don’t call them ‘our brothers’ but say “ourselves” and work with them through this path”.

These sweet and pro-unity statements are nothing but empty slogans to fool the Sunnis and to gain political benefits. To know the reality let us look at the situation of Ahl us-sunnah of Iran – a Twelver Shia country – to get a true picture. The situation of Ahl us-sunnah in Iran is heart-breaking, they are being oppressed both on social and religious grounds by their sectarian Twelver Shia Government. Here are few examples of how Sunnis are being oppressed in Iran. Sunni MPs Object to Ethnic and Religious Discrimination in Letter to Ayatollah Khamenei ; Iran’s massacre on the Iranian Sunni(Shafi’i) island of Qeshm (larger than Bahrain!) ; The Dismal Reality of Ahl Al-Sunnah in Iran ; Condition of Iranian Sunnis under Wilayat Faqih ; There is no Sunni mosque in Tehran ; Sunnis are prevented to offer Friday Prayers in Tehran province ; Recently, a Central Sunni Prayer-Room was Demolished in Tehran; Sunnis’ worship place sealed in Tehran, Imam detained ; Converts from Shi’ism to Sunnis are prevented from holding prayers in the “Islamic Republic” Over 20 Iranian Kurdish Sunni political prisoners in Iran sentenced to death ;Behind the scenes of the ‘Islamic Unity conference’ (farce) of the Rafidi-Safavid regime ; etc.

Praise be to Allah! The Taqiyyah-free ideology of Twelver Shiism has been exposed from Shia references – Shia Hadeeth and Statements of Shia scholars – in the preceding parts of this article, and there is no scope left for the taqiyyah practising Shia propagandists to have a say in this crystal clear matter. However, we anticipate that the stubborn Shia propagandists will never let their card of Taqiyyah getting exposed before the world so easily, they will still make some tricky attempts to get-away from questioned over this bitter reality; therefore to nail down this issue, we would like to present before the readers a master-piece from the examples of Taqiyyah done by Shia propagandists.

Taqiyyah of Shia Shaikh Mehdi Daneshmand:

In the following video, we see the double-faced Twelver Shiism. At one occassion this Esteemed Shia scholar gives sweet advices to his followers, regarding maintaining good manners and behaviour when meeting with Sunnis. And in another occassion he reveals the true face of Twelver Shiism, by abusing Sunnis, and also abusing some prominent companions of Prophet Mohammad(SAWS).

Narrated Ammar bin Yasir: The Prophet(SAWS) said: He who is two-faced in this world will have two tongues of fire on the Day of Resurrection. (Sunan Abi Dawud #4873 ; Sahih)

Certainly! This is not the only case, but it’s just a drop from an ocean. However, rarely do we find such an evidence where their double-faced beliefs are caught red-handed. This should be sufficient evidence for the truth-seekers and an eye-opener, to see the clear contradiction between empty slogans of  Twelver Shia propagandists and their actions.

Note: As for the statement of Ayatullah Sistani then another Shia scholar Yasis Al-Habib argued that, what Ayatullah Sistani actually meant was “Sunni are NOT our brothers (do not consider them as such), our (only and real) brothers our ourselves, the Shiite”. – Yasis al-Habib claims that Sistani used Tawriyyah(deceit by ambiguity) in his wording.

 

XIIMessage to Ahl us-sunnah.

After reading the Taqiyyah-free beliefs of Shiism in the preceding parts of this article, it is clear like the Sun in a cloudless day that according to Taqiyyah-free Twelver Shiism, Non-Shias(Sunnis, etc) are  considered as Kafir, Nasibis and are considered to be worse than Jews and Christians. No sane and honest Sunni, after knowing these facts could even think of making unity with Shias, but Yes, we encourage Ahl us-sunnah to maintain peace with them and to live in a state of peace with them. Ofcourse, by rejecting unity with Shias, in NO way or means do we encourage harming or hurting Shiites, since this is against the teachings of Ahl us-sunnah. However, at the same time we say, there is No unity with them. How could an honest Sunni even think of forming unity with those people, who fill their books with lies about the Prophet(SAWS), putting false words in his mouth and in the mouths of the members of his Household, whom Allah has raised in honor? How can we unite with people who claim that the Qur’an has been corrupted, and who insult the companions of the Prophet, accuse them of distorting the Qur’ân, and reject hadîths narrated by them? How could real unity be achieved with people who believe that our mother and (spiritual)fathers were disbelievers, or hypocrites or usurpers or oppressors or murders and they abuse them and believe in cursing them as an important part of their faith?; This is what the Twelver Shia believe regarding the Mother of Believers -Ayesha(alaiha salam)- , Abu Bakr(RA), Umar bin Khattab(RA), Uthman bin Affan(RA) and many other revered companions of Prophet Muhammad(SAWS). We are not saying this from our pockets, but this is found in the reference books of Twelver Shia, which were praised by their prominent Scholars. Allah’s Religion is far above being in need of such fragile, useless unity, with people of such straying beliefs.

If any Twelver Shia proclaims that he/she is not practicing Taqiyyah(dissimulation) and truly doesn’t believe in these offensive and sectarian beliefs, then such people should undergo a therapy and get their title changed and stop calling themselves as Twelver Shia, because a Twelver Shia believes in the reference books of Twelver Shiism due to which he/she is entitled as Twelver Shia.

It is possible that their are some ignorant Shia who ascribe themselves to the Twelver Shiism, or call themselves Ja’faris or Twelvers and do not know the wicked beliefs of the sect. So upon them is to recognise the falsehood of the Twelver Shiite sect and free themselves from it, and not continue ascribe themselves to the Twelver Shiism. Truly, a religion is known by its sources, and not by its ignorant followers who have not studied, and we have quoted here the beliefs of the Shiah from the source reference book of the sect.

The need for Sunni-Unity:

Ahl us-sunnah and its current leaders should realize that, the Enemies of Islam/Muslims, are trying various methods to create the disunity among them, as it is in their interest, since it weakenes the Muslims from within.  One of their tactics to accomplish this goal, is to brand a segment of Muslims who are a threat to them with a ‘misnomer’ and isolating them, through this tactic they are able to create differences between the segments of the Muslims. This policy was adopted by the colonist, where they labeled a segment of Muslims of being ‘Wahabi’, as affirmed even by the Shia Ayatullah.

Grand Ayatullah Ali Khamenei says in his book: “Musalmanan dar nahzat azadi Hindustan (Muslims in the Indian freedom cause)” pg. 35-36:
یکی از حربه های کوبنده ای که دستگاه استعمار بر ضد این جمعیت (علمای هند) بکار می برد ، متهم کردن آنان به وهابی گری بود … … و تاکنون همچنان این حربه باقی است و نقش شیطانی خود را که همان ایجاد فاصله میان قشرهای وسیع مسلمین است ایفا می کند .
[“One of the tactics the Colonialism would use against this community (Scholars of India) was accusing them of being ‘Wahabis‘…and to this day this tactic remains and plays its satanic role in creating differences between the large segments of Muslims”.]

Ayatullah Ali Khamenei, the current leader of Iran stated: Accusing Muslims of being a ‘Wahabi’ was Colonialism’s tactic. The book was written by him decades ago (46 years ago).  However, Today he and other Shia scholars are following the foot-steps of those Enemies of Islam(Colonist), by using this same satanic tactic against Sunni Muslims.

Today, the label of ‘Wahabism’ has become a slogan of Twelver Shia inorder to disagree with the Quran and Sunnah. In fact they fight all the people of the Sunnah (first by attacking their creed) and particularly the Sunnah people of Iran under the pretext of “Wahhabism”. For whoever disagrees with them is labelled a “Wahhabi”, no matter if he’s actually a Salafi (what they call “Wahhabi”) or a Sufi.  Due to this, the Ahl us-sunnah brothers of Iran produced a movie titled “Wahhabism – A slogan to disagree [fight] the Qur’an and Sunnah”, exposing the fear and deception of the Twelver Shi’ism propagators i.e. “Ayatollahs, it highlights the Iranian government’s extreme paranoia with regards to what they call “Wahhabism”. [ This Movie can be watched here] .

Therefore, we request Ahl us-sunnah and their leaders from its different school of thoughts[Barelwis, Deobandis and Salafis] to keep aside their internal differences and to get united when the attack is on the creed of Ahl us-sunnah, don’t let your brothers get isolated and targeted by these tactics of Enemies of Islam. Be united like a single body. Remember what Prophet Muhammad(SAWS) said: Muslims are like one body of a person; if the eye is sore, the whole body aches, and if the head aches, the whole body aches.(Sahih Muslim Book 32, Hadith 6261).  And when we remain disunited, and let the other Sunnis get maligned then sooner we find that whole of Ahl us-sunnah gets targeted. Take example of popular Twelver Shia lecturer Ammar Nakhswani, who used to target and malign the Salafis, So other Sunni groups remained silent and no one objected to it, and now he’s up with maligning the ideology of Ahl us-sunnah.

Sunnis must also be aware of Taqiyyah practising Shias(esp. on social networking sites) who portray themselves as Sunni adherents from different schools of thought, they do this to widen the gap of differences between Ahl us-sunnah, because the unity between Ahl us-sunnah is not in their favour and they cannot afford to see Ahl us-sunnah united. These under-cover agents are following the foot-steps of their fore-fathers -The Sabaites- who joined the party of Ayesha(RA) and the party of Ali(RA), and when they were on the verge of making a re-conciliation, they turned a peaceful atmosphere into a horibble battle(of Jamal) between those two parties with their evil plots, which caused a great loss to the Muslim Ummah.

Beware of certain Pro-Shia Groups/Organisations:

We would also like to warn the Sunni readers about certain Pro-Shia groups/organisations, which came into existence in the 19th Century and attribute themselves to Ahl us-sunnah. These groups/organisations are active “Sunni-Shia unity” callers, they admire Twelver Shia leaders and their revolutions, and spread hatred against the Muslims rulers. They are so blind and biased in their hatred towards Muslim Rulers that they often spread false rumous against the Muslim Rulers and their Government. They turn a blind eye to all good the Muslim Rulers are going, but they just focus on spreading false rumours or something negative found in those Rulers, with this they are able to make emotional fool out of those gullible Muslims and implant extreme hatred for Muslims Rulers in hearts of those people. And those Muslims and Scholars who try to rectify their mistakes by refuting them, these groups revile those Scholars. This is why they are fully supported by the Twelver Shia Governments in all manners. The clear sign of hypocrisy which exposes the reality of these groups/organisations is that, they don’t speak against the Twelver Shia Governments[Infact they staunchly defend them and even praise them] nor against the oppression of these Governments on Sunnis, but at the same time they keep spitting venom against Sunni Rulers, and brain-wash the Sunni youth against the Muslim Rulers by filling their hearts with hatred for them, which indirectly gives a politcal benefit to Twelver Shia governments and other Enemies of Islam. Sunnis must be aware of these conspiracies and shouldn’t be a part of it. The Sunnis must know that, As per Ahl us-sunnah its not from the teachings of Prophet Muhammad(SAWS) to revolt against the Muslim Governments or the Muslim Rulers; And those gullible Muslims who abandon these teachings of Prophet(SAWS) and are misled by these groups end up harming the Muslim Ummah and indirectly helping the enemies of Islam.

Shaykh al-Islam Imam Ibn Taymiyyah stated:

“And there is hardly anyone who revolted against a leader with authority except that what arose from his action of evil, was actually greater than whatever good came from it.( Minhāj as-Sunnah, 4/527)

The great Imām al-Barbahārī (died 329H) stated the position and consensus of the Muslims towards their rulers:

“If you find a man making supplication against the ruler, know that he is a person of innovation (deviation). If you find a person making supplication for the ruler to be upright, know that he is a person of the Sunnah, if Allāh wills.

We are ordered to make supplication for them (i.e. the rulers) to be upright. We have not been ordered to make supplication against them, even if they commit tyranny and oppression, since their tyranny and oppression reflect only upon themselves but their rectitude is good for themselves and the Muslims.” [Sharhus-Sunnah of al-Barbahārī]

Shaikh Salih al-Fawzān stated:

“There is no doubt that the rulers, just like people besides them, are not infallible. Advising them is an obligation. However, attacking them in the gatherings and upon the pulpits is considered to be the forbidden form of backbiting. And this evil is greater than that which occurred from the ruler since it is backbiting and because of what results from backbiting such as the sowing of the seeds of discord, causing disunity and affecting the progression of daʿwah (the call to Islām). Hence what is obligatory is to make sure advice reaches the rulers by sound and trustworthy avenues, not by publicizing and causing commotion. And as for reviling the Scholars of this country, that they do not give advice [to the rulers], or that they are being controlled in their affairs, this is a method by which separation between the Scholars, the youth and the society is desired, until it becomes possible for the mischief-maker to sow the seeds of his evil. This is because when evil suspicions are harbored about the Scholars, trust is no longer placed in them and then the chance is available for the biased partisans to spread their poison. And I believe that this thought is actually a schemed plot that has come into this country, and those who are behind it are foreign to this country. It is obligatory upon the Muslims to be cautious of it.” [Al-Ajwibah al-Mufīdah of Shaikh Sālih al-Fawzān]

As for those, groups/organisations who call for Sunni-Shia unity, they do not take the effort to read even one book of history to see the truth of the aims of these sects and the heretical and wicked beliefs they advocate. They even attempt to justify the false doctrine of the Shias. They ally themselves with them, stand with them, and seek help and assistance from them. This is what they call unity!

Several people fell into this empty slogan of unity, due to dealing issues by emotions not by Aqeedah. One such example is of Shiekh Yusuf Al Qardawi, who was a victim of this deception, for several years he tirelessly worked for Sunni-Shia unity. But Praise be to Allah! He realized the blunder he committed, when he found out the reality. His views can be read here{click this} . We pray to Allah to guide the gullible Sunnis from the traps of these deviant Groups/Organisations.

[Lastly, we would like reply back the Shia propagandists in their same tone, saying :”No doubt that an honest Shia will never accept this nonsense, but the honest Shia must also accept that a part of his theology and law is to kill and massacre the Ahl us-sunnah.”]

 

And of the people are some who say, “We believe in Allah and the Last Day,” but they are not believers. They [think to] deceive Allah and those who believe, but they deceive not except themselves and perceive [it] not. In their hearts is disease, so Allah has increased their disease; and for them is a painful punishment because they used to lie. And when it is said to them, “Do not make mischief in the land, they say: We are but peace-makers.” Now surely they themselves are the mischief makers, but they do not perceive. [Quran 2: 8-12]

Article by AbuMuslim Khorasani.

3 thoughts on “Non-Shias in the view of Taqiyyah-free Twelver Shiism.

  1. KHARJIS & NASIBIS ARE THE SAME STUFF,THOSE WHO OPPOSE & HATE THE RASOOL’S IMMEDIATE SUCCESSOR, HAZRAT ALI IBNE ABI TALIB (a s ) THOSE USURPERS WHO TOOK OVER THE RULE EVEN SKIPPING THE BURIAL OF THE RASOOL WERE MUNAFIQS SELF SEEKERS NOT INTERESTED IN ISLAM .

    TAQAIYYA IS THE MOST RATIONAL PROVISION ALLAH GAVE FOR THE BENEFIT OF HUMANITY . OPPOSERS ARE NOT ONLY FOOLS BUT NON MUSLIM KAFFIR FOR THEY MAKE IT RIGHT WHAT ALLAH PROHIBITS AND ALLOW WHAT ALLAH ALLOWS THEY MAKE IT HARAAM..

    ” SHIA IMAMS WERE SUNNI ”YOU SAY THAT IS SO RIGHT BUT NOT SUNNIS LIKE YOU FOOLS BUT REAL AHLE SUNNAH . THAT IS WHAT THE GREAT EX AHLE SUNNAH FROM THE MOST REPUTED CLERIC FAMILY OF TUNISIA SAID IN HIS FAMOUS BOOK ” SHIAS ARE THE REAL AHLE SUNNAH ” HE IS SO RIGHT . THE SUNNIES OF SHAIKHAIN IN FACT ACT ON THE SUNNAH OF SHAITAAN, SUNNAH OF THE SHAIKHAIN, SUNNAH OF MOAVIA MALOUN AND SUNNAH OF YAZEED MALOUN .

    SUNNIES ,YOUR ISLAM IS HIGHLY INNOVATED ALMOST A WIERD CARICATURE OF REAL ISLAM . IF ONE WANTS TO FOLLOW REAL ISLAM THEN ONE CAN FIND IT FOLLOWING THE AHLE BAYT E RASOOL (a s ) WHO ARE THE IMMACULATE, INFALLIBLE FOR THEY ARE THE FLESH & BLOOD OF THE RASOOL (saawaws) .

    IF ANY ONE CAN REFUTE MY WORDS , COME FORWARD , ARGUE POINT BY POINT , YOU ARE A FAILURE, YOU WILL ALWAYS FAIL THAT IS THE PRICE YOU PAY FOR FOLLOWING THE FAMOUS FIVE , THE INNOVATORS OF ISLAMS .

  2. Pingback: Sunnis in the view of the Takfiri Twelver Shia Sect | Giving Dawah to Shia

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