Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Saracen21stC

Debunking 'infallible' Shia Imamate

Recommended Posts


 


The Quran Challenge


 

Crux of the Sunni/Shia Divide



The center of the debate between
the Ahlus Sunnah and Shia revolves around the issue of Imamah (i.e. Aimmatal
Masoomeen). The importance of Imamah is so great that the Shia Ulema consider
those who reject Imamah to be Kaffir. Likewise, the Sunni Ulema consider those
who accept (in toto)
the Shia doctrine of Imamah to be Kaffir.



Most of the polemical debate between Sunni and
Shia revolves around peripheral issues such as Mutah, Matam, Saqifah, Ghadeer
Khumm, Fadak, and other such side issues. However, the fundamental issue of
debate–namely Imamah–is oftentimes ignored. In the words of Sidi Abu Salih:



Every other disagreement the Shia have with the
Sunnis [other than Imamah] has its roots in the Shia insistence on Imamah as a
principle of Islam, both in belief and practise. From differing views and
interpretations of history, entirely different systems of Hadith collection and
authentication, and divergent manners of performing Islamic practises, all
these dissimilarities can be traced back to Imamah as a doctrine in Shia faith.



It is therefore only reasonable that the focus of
any serious quest for truth would begin and end with the principle of Imamah in
the mind of the truth-seeker. Trying to research about the differences between
Shia and Sunni without considering the dogma of Imamah as a main sticking point
will lead to dead ends and fruitless arguments. I have personally witnessed a
number of [sunni-Shia] discussions that quickly descend into chaos because one
side or the other wishes to discuss a subject of peripheral importance.



Source: Sidi Abu Salih, Imaamah and the
Quran: An Objective Perspective
, p.5; Download
book here



It is safe to say that if the Shia did not
believe in the concept of Imamah, then they would not be considered a separate
sect. The other issues of contention between Sunni and Shia are simply a
consequence of Imamah. Hence, Imamah and its validity in the Quran is the main
issue of contention between the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah and their Shia brothers.



Imamah



Before we proceed, it is important to state what
exactly is the Shia doctrine of Imamah.



The Shia doctrine of Imamah: Apart from the
Prophets, there are another group of God-appointed persons called Imams. These
are people who possess Ismah (infallibility) and have access to a knowledge
that is not accessible by ordinary people. The world cannot be empty of an Imam
otherwise it will be destroyed. In the Islamic context, these individuals are
twelve people among the descendants of the Holy Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) who are appointed by nobody except Allah (عز و جل)
alone to lead the Muslims. Anyone who chooses a leader other than these twelve
is misguided and not a complete believer. The twelvth (last) of the Imams is
the Mehdi and, although he has been in occultation for more than one thousand
years, he will return when Allah (عز و جل) wishes and then justice will prevail.



Importance of Imamah



The above stated doctrine of Imamah is the core
belief of the Shia. The Shia consider five articles of belief as fundamentals
of religion. These are:



1. Tawheed (Oneness of God)



2. Nabuwwah (Prophethood)



3. Ma’ad (Day of Judgement)



4. Adl (Justice of God)



5. Imamah (the above stated doctrine)



Imamah is considered by the Shia to be one of the
Usool-e-Deen [fundamentals of religion].



In the words of Sidi Abu Salih:



In Shi’ism, the matters of religion are divided
into Usool-e-Deen and Furoo-e-Deen. The Usool-e-Deen are the principles of
belief in the religion, analogous to the Pillars of Faith in Sunnism. The
Furoo-e-Deen relates to the practises in the religion, such as prayer, fasting,
pilgrimage, and so on.



To introduce the reader to what constitutes the
Usool-e-Deen in Shi’ism, I will quote the following tract from Allamah Muhammad
Husayn al-Kashiful Ghita’s book “The Origin of Shi’ite Islam and its
Principles” (Asl ash-Shi’ah wa Usuluha):



“Those matters which
concern knowledge or wisdom, are called Usool-e-Deen (fundamentals of religion)
and they are five: Tawheed, Nabuwwah, Imamah, Adl, and Ma’ad.” [“The Origin of Shiite Islam and its Principles, Part
II: Fundamentals of the Religion”, Part II: The Fundmentals of the Religion,
Section The Fundamental Beliefs, p.218]



In similar
fashion, the Shia scholar Muhammad Ridha Muzaffar states: “We believe that the Imamah is one of the fundamentals of
Islam (Usool-e-Deen), and that man’s faith can never be complete without belief
in it.”



…The [only] real
issue of contention [between Sunni and Shia] is with respect to [the belief in]
Imamah. As [the Shia scholar] Allamah Kashiful Ghita mentions: “It is the question of the Imamah which distinguishes the
Shia sect from all other sects. Other differences are not fundamental; they are
furoo’i (i.e. secondary)” [Asl-ul-Shia wa Usuluha, p.221]



Source: Sidi Abu Salih, Imaamah and the
Quran: An Objective Perspective
, p.7; Download
book here



Thus, the importance of Imamah in Shi’ism is more
than the importance of Salat (prayer); Imamah is considered Usool-e-Deen [i.e.
fundamental] whereas Salat is Furoo-e-Deen [i.e. secondary]. It would be
accurate to say that the Furoo-e-Deen are a direct consequence of the
Usool-e-Deen. Imamah is considered the most important pillar of Islam. And by
Imamah, we do not mean “leadership” since even the Sunni–as well as any group
of people–consider leadership to be an important issue. When we refer to
“Imamah” we are referring to the specific Shia doctrine of God-appointed
infallible leaders who must be followed.



Denying Imamah



The sheer importance that the Shia scholars give
to Imamah can be seen by their views on those who reject Imamah. Let us see
what the popular Shia website, Al-Shia.com, has to say about this:



Al-Shia.com says



:“فيمن جحد إمامة أمير المؤمنين والائمة من بعده عليهم السلام بمنزلة ( 6 ) من جحد نبوة الانبياء عليهم السلام . واعتقادنا

فيمن أقر بأمير المؤمنين وأنكر واحدا من بعده من الائمة عليهم السلام أنه بمنزلة من آمن بجميع الانبياء ثم أنكر بنبوة محمد صلى الله عليه وآله



Translation:
Imam Al-Saduk says, “Our belief is that the one who rejects the Imamah of Ameer
al Mumineen [Ali] and the Aimmah (Imams) after him, has the same position like
the one who rejects the Prophethood of the Prophets.”



Further,
he states: “And our belief is that the one who accepts Ameer al Mumineen [Ali]
but rejects a single Imam after him, has the same position like the one who
believes in all of the Prophets and then rejects the Prophethood of Muhammad
(saws).”



source: http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/behar/behar27/a7.html



Al-Shia.com says



“Shaikh Mufid declared:



اتفقت الامامية على أن من أنكر
إمامة أحد من الائمة وجحد ما أوجبه الله تعالى له من فرض الطاعة فهو كافر ضال
مستحق للخلود في النار



Translation:
“The Imamiyyah [shia] are in agreement (’Ijma) that the one who rejects the
Imamah of one Imam and rejects the obedience to them which Allah ordered is a
misguided Kaffir deserving to remain in Hell-Fire forever.”



source: http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/behar23/a39.html



Therefore, we see that this issue of Imamah is
not one to be taken lightly. On the one side, the Shia scholars say that those
who reject Imamah are misguided and deserving of Hell-Fire. On the other hand,
the Sunni scholars say that those who accept the Shia doctrine of Imamah in
toto
[i.e. in totality] are guilty of believing in false prophethood (i.e.
Dajjals).



Where is the Doctrine of Imamah in the
Quran?



We ask the reader: where is the doctrine of
Imamah in the Quran? This is a very sound question. The Quran is the book of
guidance and we have been told by the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) that whenever we feel lost, we can consult the Quran and it
will never betray us. The Shia doctrine of Imamah is not a minor issue, but
rather it is very important and it is the core belief of the Shia. Its
importance is to the extent that the Shia Ulema hold that because of disbelief
in this doctrine, 80% of Muslims are misguided and in fact not true believers.
If this is the case, then we ask the reader: which verses of the Quran have
given us this “all-important” doctrine of Imamah?



If Imamah is central to Islam, and the Quran is the
central book of Islam, then surely the Quran should have the belief of Imamah
in it. And yet, for hundreds of years, the Shia scholars have not been able to
answer the “Quran Challenge.” The Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah has repeatedly
challenged the Shia to produce even one single verse in the Quran that outlines
the Shia concept of Imamah. Time and time again, anyone who tries to seek proof
for Imamah from the Quran fails to do so.



The Quran Challenge



This is an open challenge for the Shia to give
Quranic verses which outline and justify the Shia concept of Imamah. Can the
Shia produce even a single verse outlining Imamah, without any
additions to the translation, without parenthetical insertions
to the translation, without Hadith to “support” their
interpretation, without Tafseer, and without
their own personal commentaries leading us from verse to verse?



When the Shia is forced to produce the Quranic
verses without any additions, he will find it impossible to even come close to
fulfilling the “Quran Challenge.” Not a single verse in the Quran says anything
even remotely close to “O believers, after the Prophet,
there will be twelve Imams chosen by Allah and you should follow them.” The
Shia can never produce a single verse in the Quran that shows
anything even similar to this. In fact, the Shia will be forced to
produce long Tafseer and circuitious arguments involving certain verses with
added meanings to them; but if we ask the Shia to simply read the verse without
any insertions, then suddenly they cannot produce even a single verse in the
Quran to justify Imamah. Suffice to say that the Shia becomes polemically
incapacitated if he is forced to use the Quran and Quran alone.



The Shia have stated that Imamah is the
fundamental of faith, and so there should thus be many verses in the Quran on
this topic. Yet, the “Quran Challenge” only asks for the Shia to produce even a
couple of verses from the Quran, yet even this is not possible. Not a single
verse in the Quran mentions the names of their Infallible Imams; not even Ali’s
name (رضّى الله عنه) is ever mentioned in the Quran. But more
importantly than this, there is not a single mention of the very concept of
Imamah. This is peculiar, to say the least; how can Imamah be part of
Usool-e-Deen (a fundamental pillar of faith) and yet not be mentioned even a
single time in the Quran? The truth is that the Quran mentions all the
fundamentals of belief, and if something is not in the Quran, then that “thing”
cannot possibly be a fundamental of belief.



Imamah Not Mentioned in Quran



Every single fundamental of Islam is mentioned in
the Quran numerous times. Tawheed and the concept of Allah (عز و جل)
are mentioned over two thousand times. The concept of Messengers and Prophets
[Risalah and Nabuwwah] is mentioned repeatedly; in fact, the words “Rasool” and
“Nabi” is used over four hundred times. All of the other Usool-e-Deen
(fundamental of religion), other than Imamah, are mentioned hundreds of times
in the Quran. Yet, the Quran remains completely silent on the issue of Imamah.



The Shia say that Imamah is one of the
Usool-e-Deen, but we see that even the Furoo-e-Deen (the subsidiary and
secondary parts of religion) are mentioned much more than Imamah is (which is
actually never mentioned). Salat (prayer), the second pillar of Islam, is
mentioned 700 times in the Quran. Zakat (charity), the third pillar of Islam,
has been mentioned over 150 times. And yet, where is Imamah? The Quran is the
complete guide for humanity, and yet the Shia are saying that the fundamental
core belief (i.e. Imamah) is not in it.



The Quran clearly says that Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is divinely appointed as the the Messenger of Allah (عز و جل)
and that we should follow him. If there was another divinely appointed person
we were supposed to follow after him, shouldn’t his name also be mentioned in
the Quran? Why is it too much to ask that the twelve Imams be named in the
Quran? Or how about even one of them? Not even Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
is named in the Quran. For argument sake, we will not even demand names; what
about even the very concept of divinely appointed Imams that will come after
the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and that we must follow them? We would
argue that Allah (عز و جل) should have included the names of such
people for the book to really be complete, yet we are unable to find even a
single verse in the Quran which describes even the concept of Imamah. Not a
single verse can the Shia produce in this regard.



The Quran is the ultimate guide for humanity. It
contains all the fundamental beliefs of our faith. If Imamah was really a part
of our faith, then it would be in the Quran. But Imamah is not in the Quran and
we reject whatever belief is not justified in the Quran. There are many verses
in the Quran that say that the believers are those who pray, give alms to the
poor, do good deeds, and other such things; but why is it that not a single
verse says the believers are those who follow and obey the Infallible Imam?



Conclusion



Both Sunni and Shia, as well as all other
Islamic-oriented sects, have their own set of Hadith, Tafseer, historical
accounts, and rituals. However, the Quran should be mutually agreed upon by
both sides as being an authentic guide to the truth. In the words of Sidi Abu
Salih, in order for a dialogue between Sunni and Shia to be fruitful,



…the Lowest Common Denominator should be found, a
work that will be accepted as fully authentic in terms of its message and its
integriy by both the Sunni and Shia sides. This book is, of course, the Noble
Quran. Therefore, the first and most important place to look for resolving big
differences of doctrine such as those between the Sunni and Shia sects should
be the Quran.



Source: Sidi Abu Salih, Imaamah and the
Quran: An Objective Perspective,
p.14; Download
book here



Thus, whichever group has basis for its beliefs
in the Quran, it is this group that we should adhere to. A group whose beliefs
are not in the Quran cannot be followed as this would be refuting the Word of
Allah (عز و جل). The Quran is complete in its guidance; Allah Almighty (عز و جل)
says: “We have left nothing out of the
Book.” (Quran, 6:38)



In Nahjul Balagha, which the Shia believe are
Ali’s sermons and letters, Ali (رضّى الله عنه) says: “The Quran
is the Hujjat (Proof) of Allah for his servants…it is the basis of Islam…and
the guidance for anyone who follows it and justification for anyone who takes
it as his approach and the evidence for anyone who takes it as his supporter in
his discussions and winner for anyone who uses it for making his arguments.” [Nahjul
Balagha, Sermon 198]



Imam Sadiq is reported to have said in Shia
Hadith: “Anyone who comes to recognize the truth from
any sources other than the Quran will not be saved from Fitnah.”



The importance of the Quran is stated clearly by
the Infallible Imams of the Shia: “If you come across
two Hadiths narrated from us [imams] then compare them with the Book of Allah;
what is in accordance then take it and what is in disagreement then reject it.”
(Al-Istibsar, Volume 1, p.190) And again: “Whatever
comes to you related from us [imams] then compare it with the Book of Allah;
whatever is in accordance with it then accept it and whatever contradicts it
then reject it.” (Al-Istibsar, Volume 3, p.158)



The realization that Imamah does not appear in
the Quran may come as a shock to our Shia brothers. We encourage them to look
in the Quran for verses about the twelve Infallible Imams, and surely they will
not find any. As stated by one brother: “I did not find Shi’ism in the Quran.”



Article Written By: Owais Muhammad

Edited By: Ibn al-Hashimi, www.ahlelbayt.com



Special thanks to the author of the following book



“Imaamah and the Quran: An
Objective Perspective”


By: Abu Salih



Synopsis:
Imamah is one of the fundamental beliefs of the Shia, and it is the major
difference between the Shia and mainstream Muslims. The Quran is the central
book of Islam, and hence, it contains all of the major beliefs of the Muslims.
In the book “Imaamah and the Quran”, the author analyzes how Imamah, the major
belief of the Shia, is absent from the Quran. This book was instrumental in the
creation of this website, and it can be purchased here.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds


 

The Quran Challenge,
Part II



 



Please read Part I of “The Quran Challenge” before proceeding. In
Part I, we challenged the Shia to produce even a single verse in the Quran that
proved their doctrine of Imamah. After miserably failing at this task, there
were many “cop-out” semi-responses to our challenge. We shall address them
here, and it will become abundantly clear to the unbiased reader that the
weakness of the Shia responses is indicative of the baseness of the belief in
Imamah.



Shia Response #1



“There are also no verses in the Quran to tell us how to
pray. We learn some of our duties from the Hadith and not the Quran.





Firstly, the Shia consider Imamah to be
Usool-e-Deen (fundamental of religion) whereas Salat (prayer) is Furoo-e-Deen
(subsidiary and secondary part of religion). Hence, the comparison between the
two is unfair, because Salat is considered an Islamic ritual (a Fiqh matter)
whereas Imamah is considered essential to the core belief of Islam, on the same
level as Tawheed, Prophethood, and the Day of Judgment.



Imamah is important enough to convince the Shia
to separate themselves from the mainstream Islam. If the only difference
between the Shia and mainstream Muslims was the way they perform prayer, then
they would never have become a sect outside of orthodox Islam.



Having said that, the reality is that Salat has
been referred to explicitly and strongly more than 700 times in the Quran. In
each of these verses, one of the aspects of prayer is covered. Many of the
verses talk about the details of prayer, such as how to come prepared for
prayer (ablution), prayer in travel, and other such matters. So we wonder why
the Shia would compare Salat with Imamah. Salat is mentioned over 700 times,
whereas Imamah is never mentioned.



Certainly, with such a vast and strong reference
to Salat from Quran, Muslims will refer to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) to know the details. Nobody is saying that the Quran should
contain the nitty-gritty of where our hands should be placed while praying and
other such minor Fiqh issues. But the concept of Salat is very much stressed in
the Quran; again and again, Allah (عز و جل) says that the believers are those who
establish Salat. There is not a single reference to Imamah; had Imamah been
simply outlined in the Quran, then the Muslims could refer to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) for the nitty-gritty details such as how much Khums to pay to
the Imam and other such minor Fiqh issues. And yet, Imamah is never mentioned
even fleetingly.



The truth is that Imamah is an imaginary concept
concocted by the Shia scholars and it does not exist. If it existed, it would
be in the Quran; its absence from the Quran is evidence of its imaginary
nature. Salat is mentioned 700 times, and yet we find zero verses in the Quran
about “Infallible Imams;” even the name of Ali (رضّى الله عنه),
the leader of these Imams, is not mentioned.



We wonder why Salat is mentioned so many times in
the Quran, but there is absolutely no mention of the 12 Imams, the Infallible
Imamah, or even the divine Imamah of Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
)? The Shia
believe that Imamah is Usool-e-Deen (i.e. primary) whereas Salat is
Furoo-e-Deen (i.e. secondary). So why would a minor point be mentioned so many
times and not the major one? In Islam, it is Haram to enter someone else’s
house without first knocking on the door and getting permission. This is
mentioned in the Quran. How come something so miniscule as this could be
mentioned in the Quran and yet we find nothing on the “all-important” concept
of Imamah, which is supposedly the main pillar of belief? And consider this
with Allah’s (عز و جل) declaration: “We
have left nothing out in the Book.” (Quran, 6:38)



Shia Response #2



“ There are certain verses but you need to look at the
Hadith to understand their true meaning because we are advised to learn the
Quran from the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), and Hadith are
his teachings.





The fundamentals of faith are all mentioned in
the Quran, and their details are in the Hadith. It is unthinkable that
the Hadith would go against the Quran, or expound an entire invisible arm of
faith that is completely absent in the Quran. In fact, such a “Hadith” which
has no basis in the Quran has to be thrown out as unauthentic, even according
to the Infallible Imams of the Shia: “If you come
across two Hadiths narrated from us [imams] then compare them with the Book of
Allah; what is in concordance then take it and what is in disagreement then
reject it.” (Al-Istibsar, Volume 1, p.190) And again: “Whatever comes to you related from us [imams] then compare
it with the Book of Allah; whatever is in concordance with it then accept it
and whatever contradicts it then reject it.” (Al-Istibsar, Volume 3,
p.158)



Why is it that only when it comes to Imamah, we
suddenly need Hadith to help us? We certainly do not need Hadith to understand
from the Quran that Salat, Hajj, fasting, and Jihad are obligatory on Muslims.
We do not need Hadith to understand from the Quran that a Muslim needs to
believe in the Oneness of God; even the Prophets, Angels, and the Hereafter are
mentioned in the Quran, but not a single time is Imamah mentioned. None of the
other fundamentals of faith are completely absent from the Quran!



All of a sudden, when it comes to Imamah, Hadith
becomes a vital tool to understand the Quran? How can this be when the Shia
Hadith itself says that a person should reject those Hadith which do not
conform to the Quran? It is true that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) explains certain verses of the Quran, but explaining is
different from interpreting and changing the very meaning of the verse. The
Quran is the clear guide to the truth; how could Allah (عز و جل)
expect people of our time to use Hadith to understand the meaning of the Quran?
Which Hadith should a person follow? There are dozens of Shia sects, each with
their own sets of Hadith. Surely, Allah (عز و
جل
) did not expect
people to become Hadith scientists and analyze all of these. Instead, Allah (عز و جل)
said that the Quran is the guide to the truth, so the fundamental of faith
should be found from it.



Shia Response #3



“Imamah is an extension of the idea of Ali’s Divine
Appointment (رضّى الله عنه). As such, we do
not need to find proof for Imamah, but rather of Ali’s Divine Appointment (رضّى الله عنه). Evidence for
this can be seen in the Quran: “Only Allah is
your Wali (friend), and His Messenger, and the believers–those who establish
regular prayers and regular charity, who humbly bow down.” (Quran, 5:55)



In
this verse, Allah says our Walis are Allah, His Messengers, and then Ali (رضّى الله عنه). The Quran is referring to Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
when it says “the believers, those who establish regular prayers and regular
charity, who humbly bow down.” This is because Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
was bowing down in prayer and gave his ring in charity to someone while in
Rukoo, so this is why the verse referred to him in this way.





It is incorrect to claim that Ali’s Divine
Appointment is the issue and not Imamah; after all, this Divine Appointment is
to Imamah! Having said that, the same can be asked about Ali’s Divine
Appointment. Not a single time in the Quran is Ali’s name (رضّى الله عنه) mentioned, let alone a verse that refers to his Divine
Appointment. So once again, the Quran is silent on the issue and the Shia find
no basis for their beliefs in the Quran.



In regards to Verse 5:55 above, it is a stretch
to say that this verse refers to Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
). Once
again, we see that the Shia was unable to simply show us the verse in the Quran
without their own commentary. As such, this does not fulfill the “Quran
Challenge” in the least. Without their added commentary, this verse does not in
any way discuss their Shia belief.



In fact, it is an impossibility that this verse
refers to Ali (رضّى الله عنه) when it talks about “believers” which is
in the plural form. How can this verse refer to Ali (رضّى الله عنه) when it is in the plural form? Yuqeemoona, yu-toona, hum, and
raki’oona are all plural structures. Now, the Shia will
respond by saying it is in plural because it refers to all of their twelve
Infallible Imams. But that is peculiar, since the Shia was just arguing earlier
that this verse referred to a specific story in which Ali (رضّى الله عنه) gave his ring in charity while in Rukoo. This is a
contradiction that needs to be pondered upon.



Lastly, even if we let the Shia believe that this
verse refers to Ali (رضّى الله عنه), this still does not answer the “Quran
Challenge.” This verse is talking about “Wali” which means “friend.” It has
nothing to do with Infallible Imamah. If that were the case, were the Shia
arguing that Allah (عز و جل) is one of the Infallible Imams, since
Allah (عز و جل) says that He is Wali of the believers?



What would stop a Bahai person from claiming that
this verse actually refers to Bahaiullah? A Bahai person could easily narrate a
convoluted story about how Bahaiullah gave charity and was bowing down to God,
and then vehemently claim that this verse refers to Bahaiullah. The Aga Khanis
could claim that this verse refers to The Aga Khan. Indeed, if we accept the
Shia claims, then there really is no way to stop anyone from taking any
verse in the Quran and twisting it to mean really whatever they want it to
mean.



It is disconcerting how the Shia play Legoes with
the Quran. For example, if the Quran calls someone(s) Ahlel Bayt, the Shia will
claim it is Ali (رضّى الله عنه), even though it is addressed to the
Prophet’s wives. If the Quran uses the word “Mawla,” then the Shia say this is
Ali (رضّى الله عنه). The Quran calls Ibrahim (عليه السلام)
an Imam, so the Shia claim that this shows Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
is an Imam. Even Qadiyanis can claim that Mawla means Mirza Ghulam Qadiyani. Or
Hindus can claim that Imam means Rama or Kali Mata. Anti-Islam orientalists can
say that it refers to the Moon God that Muslims slay virgin women for.



We sincerely advise our Shia brothers to read the
Quran in an unbiased manner. Ahlel Bidah (the People of Evil Innovation) will
first expound their beliefs and then after this they will look for “evidences”
in the Quran. On the other hand, true believers will first read the Quran and
then this will decide what their beliefs are. If a person adamantly believed in
Santa Claus, then he could easily read the Quran and make different verses
refer to Santa Claus. But if such a person read the Quran with an open heart
and an unbiased mind (i.e. with no preconceptions), then there is no way that
he could arrive at the erroneous belief in Santa Claus.



It should be noted that the response by the Shia,
quoting the verse of the Quran with such excessive and rambling commentary, is
indicative of their weak position. The more they have to talk, the more obvious
their lack of Quranic support becomes.



Shia Response #4



“There is no mention of the name of Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) in the Bible
but still the Christians need to believe in him.





The Quran tells us that the Bible did in fact
give information about Prophet Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
)
but that these verses were removed.



If Allah (عز و
جل
) thought that the
people could be guided to the right path just by the version of the Bible we
have today, then why would He find the need to send the Quran to replace the
Bible? No human being can be expected to know about our Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) from reading the present-day Bible.



Furthermore, there is an interesting side-note to
be added here. The Jews and the Christians believe in the concept of
prophethood; but do they have any institution of Imamah? They have never even
heard of this word, and there is surely no English equivalent of it. This is
another point to ponder for the Shia; up until the Shia invented it, there was
no concept of Imamah.



Although it would be appropriate for the Quran to
mention the twelve Imams by name, the “Quran Challenge” is not asking the Shia
to even find the names of their Imams in the Quran, but rather simply the concept
of Imamah. The concept of prophethood is well-established in the Bible (both
old and new testaments). It is only after the establishment of this concept in
the Christian holy book that they were expected to believe in another
prophet, namely Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
). The concept
of Imamah, however, has not been referred to in the Bible, let alone being
established as a doctrine. Therefore, from this respect too, the comparison is
illogical.



Shia Response #5



“ The verses of the Quran are usually general and it is not
the style of the Quran to name people (i.e. the Imams). Show us the names of
all 124,000 prophets if everything is supposedly in the Quran.





Nobody asked for names. We are simply asking for
the concept. We are looking for a few general verses that simply outline the
doctrine, or at least even the mention of the doctrine. In fact, we’ll
settle for something along the lines of: “O Muslims, be aware that there will
be certain Imams for you after the Prophet who are appointed by Allah and you
need to follow them.” It is as if the Shia want us to believe that Allah (عز و جل)
was worried about talking about Imamah explicitly.



Having said that, we have the name of Zaid (رضّى الله عنه) in the Quran who was a Sahabah, and his name is there to refer
to a very minor issue. It is not unfair to ask for a single verse with the name
of Ali (رضّى الله عنه) in it if (according to the Shia) he was a
central part of faith (i.e. the first Infallible Imam). To the Shia, the
religion revolves around Ali (رضّى الله عنه), so shouldn’t he be mentioned in the
Quran? The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) has been mentioned numerous times by name
and his position as prophet and messenger are mentioned in multiple places.



It is incorrect to say that Allah (عز و جل)
would not reveal the names of the Imams; the name of the man we had to follow
was mentioned explicitly (i.e. Muhammad [صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
])
and if there was someone other than him, then the name would be mentioned. Yes,
all 124,000 prophets do not need to be named (namely because they have no
relevance to us), but the one(s) we have to follow (i.e. Muhammad [صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم]) has special relevance to the Muslim and was revealed to the
people so there would be no doubt who to follow. Had there been others to
follow afterwards, then surely Allah (عز و جل) would have included their names in the
Quran. The Arabs of Mecca could not be expected to need to know the names of
all of these 124,000 prophets, but the one prophet they had to follow was named
many times (i.e. Muhammad [صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
]). Surely, if
there was another divinely appointed person in the future, then that person is
important enough to be named like Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
)
was.



Ninety-nine different names for Allah (عز و جل)
have been mentioned in the Quran. Six entire chapters are named after the names
of the Prophets (yet not a single verse let alone an entire chapter is about an
Infallible Imam). Luqman, Aziz of Egypt, Zulqarnain, Abu Lahab, and Zaid (رضّى الله عنه) are some of the few mentioned by name in the Quran. Four
different angels are mentioned by name, five different Masjids are mentioned by
name, etc. So why is it that Ali’s name (رضّى
الله عنه
) is not
mentioned a single time in the Quran? If Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and his divine appointment of Imamah are the fundamental part
of faith, then where are the Quranic verses that mention Ali (رضّى الله عنه)? His name is not used a single time. If Allah (عز و جل)
could mention the names of Zaid (رضّى الله عنه), Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), Moses, Haroon (عليهم السلاّم), and such, then why didn’t Allah Almighty
(عز و جل) also mention the name of Ali (رضّى الله عنه)?



The Quran is supposed to be complete, and yet the
Shia are saying that the fundamental core belief is not even in it. An author
who writes a book without getting his main point across would get an ‘F’ if an
English teacher graded it. Are the Shia trying to say that the author of the
Quran, Allah the Almighty (عز و جل), deserves an ‘F’ for failing to mention
the crux of faith in a book which Allah (عز و
جل
) Himself declares
to be a complete guide for humanity?



Shia Response #6



“ The Quran says “follow the Prophet.” There are Hadith from
the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) that prove the
doctrine of Imamah and this should be enough for a Muslim if he wants to follow
the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم).





At this point it should be stated that the Shia
Hadith are fabrications. So it is really quite convenient for the Shia to say
that we won’t see this in the Quran but only in their Hadith. Meanwhile,
different Shia branches have different Hadith that say whatever they want. The
Ismaili Shia (i.e. the Aga Khanis) have contradictory Hadith saying other
people are the Imams. The various Shia branches debate with each other based on
their respective fabrications.



Our refutation to “Shia Response #1″ is also applicable
here, since it is the same argument in different wording.



Why is it that it is only for this article of
faith that we need to consult the Hadith? Let us test something. If we take the
Quran in our hands and open it up by chance to a random page, we are guaranteed
that no matter where it is opened up, a few verses before or after are about
either the Oneness of God, Prophethood, the Day of Judgment, destiny of the
human being, or duties of Muslims. Now, how far would we have to go in order to
find a verse that (and this only with the help of Shia “Hadith” and rambling
Tafseer) could be interpreted as Imamah in the Shia doctrine? How come for our
other fundamental beliefs the Quran is quite direct, even for our main duties
as Muslims; but when it comes to Imamah, suddenly the Quran is silent and only
the Shia Hadith mention it. This is inconsistency and Allah (عز و جل)
is far greater than having inconsistency in His perfect book. Hadith is not the
second volume of the Quran. Authentic Hadith are the details of the
Quran, but the basics of our belief are of course in the Quran.



The Shia position is further weakened when we
take into account that for every Hadith the Shia use to prove Imamah, there are
other Hadith that are in contradiction to it. In fact, even Hadith (as a whole)
are not structured in a way to prove Imamah. Such a justification is in fact
the main reason for having different Islamic-oriented sects. Zaidis, Ismailis,
Bohris, Ibadis, and Bahais all have their own Hadith. All of these have the
same problem, namely that they are trying to understand their religion from
sources other than the Quran, using fabrications to prove their faith and
expounding beliefs that can find no bearing in the Quran.



There is no denying the sheer importance of Hadith.
However, the Hadith should have basis in the Quran. It is wrong to believe that
entire arms of our faith have to be derived only from Hadith and such beliefs
have no basis in the Quran. To all Muslims, except those who have broken up
into sects, the fundamentals of belief are derived from the Quran; if they are
not, then either they are wrong or they are not fundamental and thus not
acceptable reasons for forming a specific sect to be separated from the rest of
the Muslims, especially when the Quran explicitly forbids splitting up into
sects. In fact, since all of these sects have different sets of Hadith, and so
too do the mainstream Muslims, we must see which set of Hadith has consistency
with the Quran. If the Shia Hadith are inconsistent with the Quran, then we
must reject this source altogether. And ofcourse the Shia Hadith are
inconsistent because the Quran never mentions the institution of Imamah.



Shia Response #7



“There are no explicit verses because if there were, then
the Quran was in danger of being tampered with by the Sahabah.





This is actually guessing Allah’s (عز و جل)
intention and is very close to Kufr (disbelief). From where would one come to
this conclusion? Is there any verse in the Quran that says Allah (عز و جل)
has not revealed certain things because if he does, then someone will change
the Quran? In fact, the Quranic verses are supportive of the opinion that nothing
has been left out for us from the Quran; furthermore, Allah (عز و جل)
promises that He will keep the Quran safe.



To argue that Allah (عز و جل) did
not reveal the entire message in the Quran for fear of tampering is actually
attributing Taqiyyah (lying to save one’s religion) to Allah Himself (عز و جل),
which is pure blasphemy. Allah Almighty (عز و
جل
) declares: “We have left nothing out in the Book.” (Quran,
6:38) Did Allah Almighty (عز و جل) say “We have left some stuff out of the
Book because We are scared someone might change it?”



Allah Almighty (عز
و جل
) has promised
in the Quran that He will protect it from being tampered with: “Absolutely, We have revealed the Reminder [the Quran], and
verily, We are its Guardian; We will preserve it.” (Quran, 15:9) In
another verse, Allah says: “This is an honorable Quran
in a protected book, well-guarded. A revelation from the Lord of the universe.”
(Quran, 56:77-80) And again: “Indeed, it is a
glorious Quran, in a preserved master tablet.” (Quran, 85:21-22)



By arguing that there is a fear that the Quran
will be tampered with, even though Allah (عز و
جل
) has promised that
this won’t be the case, this is either accusing Allah (عز و جل)
of lying or of questioning Allah’s (عز و جل) promise and power. In any case, there are
many reasons why this argument is horrible, and it should be fairly obvious
that it is a fallacious. For example, if Allah (عز و جل)
couldn’t preserve knowledge via the Quran, then why could He do it through the
Hadith? The Shia themselves reject many of their own Hadith as Daeef (weak) and
Mawdu (fabricated), so what logic could Allah (عز و جل)
possibly have to not include this precious information in the Quran but instead
put it in Hadith?



Furthermore, why was Allah (عز و جل)
only fearful of revealing about Imamah but not about other things? The Quran
felt no qualms in declaring idolatry to be Haram even though the Quraish were
ready to kill the Muslims for this declaration. By the same logic, Allah
Almighty (عز و جل) shouldn’t reveal verses against idolatry
since the Munafiqoon might tamper with the Quran then. We could pretty much say
anything and argue that Allah didn’t include it for fear of tampering.



Shia Response #8



“The Quran was changed by the Sahabah who hated the Ahlel
Bayt, and certain verses were removed by them.





This has actually been the opinion of some
classical Shia scholars. In fact, this is the most logical reply to the “Quran
Challenge.” However, no Shia scholar these days refers to this response. In
fact, they publically deny that the Quran has ever been tampered with.



In any case, such a believe in Tahreef
(tampering) of the Quran would be a violation of the verses in the Quran in
which Allah (عز و جل) promises that He will protect and
safe-guard the integrity of the Quran. Allah Almighty (عز و جل)
has promised in the Quran that He will protect it from being tampered with: “Absolutely, We have revealed the Reminder [the Quran], and
verily, We are its Guardian; We will preserve it.” (Quran, 15:9) In
another verse, Allah says: “This is an honorable Quran
in a protected book, well-guarded. A revelation from the Lord of the universe.”
(Quran, 56:77-80) And again: “Indeed, it is a
glorious Quran, in a preserved master tablet.” (Quran, 85:21-22)



In any case, if certain verses were removed, then
how do we know that there wasn’t some verses in the Quran in support of
Bahaiullah or even George W. Bush? By this assumption (i.e. that the Quran has
been changed), there is no basis for any opinion derived from Quran.



Furthermore, the anti-Islam Orientalists have
constantly tried questioning the integrity of the Quran, and they in fact cite
the opinions of classical Shia scholars who believed in Tahreef. The Quran
declares that the Bible and Christianity are invalid now because the Bible has
been tampered with; if a religious book is tampered with, then the religion
itself has been invalidated. To argue that the Quran has been adulterated is to
say that Islam has been invalidated. This is pure Kufr.



Shia Response #9



“ Where in the Quran is it said that Abu Bakr should be the
first Caliph?





Firstly, it is not appropriate to answer a
question with a question. We oftentimes see Shia responding to questions with
questions, as if the Ahlus Sunnah also being wrong somehow justifies the Shia
to be wrong. If the Ahlus Sunnah said that 2+2 is not 6 as the Shia believe,
would it be valid for the Shia to respond that 6 is correct since the Ahlus
Sunnah say 2+2 is 5 and this too is incorrect? Both 5 and 6 are incorrect
answers. The point is that it is not a valid methodology of justifying one’s
faith by finding errors in someone else’s faith.



Having said that, this question raised by the
Shia only shows the misunderstanding of some people about the belief of the
Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah. Believing in the Caliphs is not a fundamental element
of Islam. According to the Ahlus Sunnah, there are only 6 Articles of Faith and
5 Pillars of Islam; believing in the Caliphate of Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) is not part of either of them. (This is altogether unlike the
Shia faith in which Imamah is an article of faith and is the most important
one.)



Any group of people tends to select someone as
their leader. And the rational and most reasonable way to do so is by election.
This is a routine social/political practise. Certainly, no system of public
election was established at that time and the election of Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was done through Shura of those people present at Saqifah.
Someone could argue that Abu Bakr (رضّى الله
عنه
) was not a good
choice or that not all qualified people were present at the time; this is an
individual opinion, but it has nothing to do with looking for evidences in the
Quran about it. It is simply a routine social practice that was and is and will
be done in any society and no logical mind would expect a divine evidence for
that.



Let us not compare apples with oranges. The
doctrine of Imamah is a fundamental belief of Shi’ism, whereas election or
selection of Caliphate is just a routine and common socio-political practise.
It’s like comparing the election procedure of President of the USA (i.e.
Caliphate) to the divine appointment of the Pope by the Vatican (i.e.
Infallible Imam). The President (or the Caliphate) doesn’t claim Divine
Providence like does the Pope (or the Imam). If a certain person wants to claim
religious right and divine appointment, then surely this person better bring
the proof from the religious book!



On the other hand, does anybody ask for divine
proof when one selects a President or even the Imam of prayers in our Masjids?
Nobody would ask an MSA President to bring evidence from the Quran about his
election, but if someone were to claim to be divinely appointed by Allah (عز و جل),
then we ask for evidence from the Quran for this claim.



In any case, let us look at the present situation
in Iran. Is there any divine command about how to establish a leadership in the
occultation of Mehdi? Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was selected to lead much like Khomeini
was selected to lead. Let us remember that there were no religious system of
governing for the Shia after the occultation of the Mehdi 1,000 years ago. No
divine ordinance came down to make Ayatollah Khomeini leader of Iran; in fact,
there were many Ayatollahs who spoke out against Khomeini and they were
subsequently jailed for treason.



It has turned out that the Shia ended up being in
the same situation as the mainstream Muslims, namely that they had to elect a
leader by themselves in the absence of any direct divine command or
appointment. Why are the Shia so much against Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) and yet they support Khomeini?



Shia Response #10



“ It is a test and that is why it is not mentioned in the
Quran. It is to see who will be a believer and who will not.





This claim puts the function of Quran as a book
of guidance under serious doubt. By this claim, there is no use to read Quran
to get any guidance because (who knows?) maybe there is a fundamental part of
our belief that is not mentioned in the Quran because Allah (عز و جل)
wants to test us! By the same token, Bahais claim that the Quran talks about
their prophet Bahaiullah. When we ask them where in the Quran, they will show
some verses that have nothing to do with their claim. When we say but these
verses are not clear about their claim, they say “Oh because God is testing
you…” How convenient indeed.



This is again playing with divinity. Who are we
to decide for Allah (عز و جل) that what is a test and what is not a
test? The prophethood of Muhammad (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
) was
also a test but there are many verses in the Quran that directly tell people
that Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is a prophet. A test is different from a
puzzle. Allah (عز و جل) says in the Quran that He makes things
clear for people. Even a teacher first makes it clear for his students what is
the material of the exam and then he designs a test based on that material. We
need to read the Quran to see what are the materials that Allah (عز و جل)
is going to ask us about on the Day of Judgment. Is ‘believing in the doctrine
of Imamah’ one of the materials that the Quran commanded us about? Allah (عز و جل)
makes things clear for us and sends us enough evidences and then tests us to
see if we can be humble enough to obey His guidance.



Let us give an analogy. Let us pretend that there
was not a single verse in the Quran about the Day of Judgment. It is like
saying that Allah (عز و جل) is testing us to see if people can
somehow magically guess or deduce that there is a Day of Judgment. This runs
totally contrary to logic, as well as to the fact that humans cannot see the
Ghaib (the Unseen) so how can we know anything that Allah (عز و جل)
hasn’t revealed to us? Allah (عز و جل) makes it clear in the Quran that we need
to believe in Him and His Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
) and
to do good things and the test is whether we obey these commands. Allah (عز و جل)
does not play games with us. He does not expect us to solve puzzles and
riddles. We wonder why the Shia cannot see this in any other way. Imamah is not
explicitly referred to in the Quran but still the Shia insist on themselves to
be separated from the mainstream Muslims because of this doctrine, and then
they expect everyone else to simply guess or deduce that Imamah is necessary.
On what basis is a mainstream Muslim supposed to be able to deduce that Imamah
is a part of faith?



Shia Response #11



“There are certain verses in the Quran but they are coded
and only Allah knows their meanings. For example, “Alif Lam Meem” is in the
Quran and nobody knows the meaning of this. Another example is that of Surah
Kawthar; Kawthar is the code name Allah uses for Fatima (رضّى الله عنها).





Again, what can stop a Bahai person from saying
that certain verses are coded and if we break the code, it actually says that
Bahaiullah is the next prophet? In fact, there was a man by the name of Rashad
Khalifa who claimed to be prophet based on a mathematical code he made of the
Quran. Again, all of our previous responses apply here. Which verse in the
Quran tells us that it is in code? On the contrary, the Quran says that it is
clear. Please refer to our earlier rebuttals for Shia Responses 2, 3, 5, 7, and
10, since they all apply to this argument as well.



Conclusion



We see that none of the above responses by the
Shia are really answering the “Quran Challenge.” These responses are actually
escaping from the truth. Give a Quran (the translation) to an English man who
has no idea about Islam and ask him to read it and write down five important
articles of Islamic belief based on his understanding from the Quran. We
imagine that he will write down the Oneness of God, Prophethood, the Day of
Judgment, perhaps the rewards and punishments, prayer, Zakat, and so on. But is
there any chance that he writes the doctrine of Imamah as the Shia put it?
Surely not!



The very reason that the Shia need to include
lots of explanation and commentaries and Hadith to “prove” the Imamah doctrine
from verses of the Quran proves that the Quran is not explicit
and direct about Imamah, and when a book of guidance is not explicit and direct
about something, that “thing” cannot possibly be a fundamental of guidance;
people who have chosen to be separated from the mainstream Muslims because of
that “thing” are responsible for their sectarian attitude. We should keep in
mind that whereas there is not a single verse to show Infallible Imamah, there
are many Quranic verses which reprimand those who split up into sects.



The Quran says that the main complaint of the
Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) about his people on the Day of Judgment
is that they put the Quran aside and ignored it: “And
the messenger cried out: ‘O my Lord! Surely, my own folk have made this Quran
of no account.’” (Quran, 25:30)



 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 

The Quran Challenge,
Part III:


 

 



  • Introduction


In this article, we examine every single time the
word “imam” is used in the Quran. A central tenet of Shi’ism is to follow the
twelve Infallible Imams; to the Shia, it is one of the Usool-e-Deen
(Fundamentals of Religion). If this concept of Imamah were truly a fundamental
of Islam and if it really were as important as the Shia claim, then surely this
concept should be mentioned in the Quran. However, we find that the Quran does
not mention the Infallible Imams of the Shia in any way, shape, or form.



The Arabic word “imam” appears seven
times in the Quran, and its plural form (a’immah) appears another five
times. One of the interesting things about Arabic is the manner in which one
word is used in so many different ways all with the same basic root meaning. In
regards to the word “imam”, it means “a thing which is followed.” This thing
which is followed can be a person, place, or thing. For example, in the Quran,
the word “imam” is used to refer to a leader (who is followed), a road (which
is followed), and a book (which is followed). In the Quran, the word “imam” is
used five times to refer to a thing (i.e. inanimate non-human object), whereas
it is used to refer to a person the other seven times. Of these seven times,
the word “imam” is never used to refer to the Infallible Imams of the Shia.



  • Imam =
    road


The word “imam” translates to “road” in verse
15:79 of the Quran.



1. Quran, 15:79: “So we
took vengeance on them; And verily, the two (cities) are on a clear
road (imam).”



For
Shia Tafseer of verse 15:79 along with an in-depth analysis, please click here.



  • Imam =
    book


Another four times that the word “imam” is used,
it translates to “book” or “record.”



2. Quran, 46:12: “And
before this (Quran), there was the book (imam) of Musa, an
example and a mercy; and this (Quran) is a confirming book in the Arabic
language, that it may warn those who do wrong and bring good tidings for the
righteous.”



3. Quran, 11:17: “…And
before it was the book (imam) of Musa, a guide and a mercy…”



For Shia Tafseer of
verses 46:12 and 11:17 along with an in-depth analysis, please click here.



4. Quran, 36:12: “Verily,
We will restore the dead to life, and We write that which they sent forth, and
that which they left behind; and everything We have recorded in a clear book
(imam)
.”



5. Quran, 17:71-72: “One
day We shall call together all human beings with their respective record
book (imam)
: those who are given their record in their right hand will
read it (with pleasure), and they will not be dealt with unjustly in the least.
But those who were blind in this world, will be blind in the hereafter, and
most stray from the Path.”



For a critical analysis
of verses 36:12 and 17:71-72, please click here.



  • Other
    Seven Instances


As we have seen, the word “imam” has been used
for inanimate objects five of the times it is used in the Quran, and thus these
five verses cannot fulfill The Quran Challenge (i.e. providing proof of the
Infallible Imamah from the Quran). The other seven times the Quran mentions the
word “imam”, it actually does refer to a person and thus translates to
“leader.” However, none of these eight instances refer to the
Infallible Imam of the Shia.



The word “imam” is used in the Arabic language to
describe any leader. The leader of the prayers would be called “imam”, the
leader of the football team would be called the “imam” of his team, and the
leader of an army would also be referred to as the “imam” of his troop. Thus,
it should be noted that there is a monumental difference between using this
word “imam” to describe a leader of a certain group and when we use it to
denote the twelve Infallible Imams of the Shia. The Ahlus Sunnah refers to its
own prayer and Masjid leaders as “imams”; the Shia as well will refer to their
political and religious leaders as “imams”, and we commonly hear phrases such
as “Imam Khomeini” and “Imam Majlisi”, neither of whom were part of the twelve
Infallible Imams of the Shia.



So now the question is: the other seven instances
that the word “imam” is used in the Quran, are these verses relating
specifically to the twelve Infallible Imams of the Shia, or are they rather
referring to “leaders” in general? The answer is clearly the latter: the term
“imam” is used to refer to “leader” in the generic sense like the word “leader”
is used in the English language.



  • Evil
    Leaders


It becomes abundantly clear that the Quran is
using the term “imam” to denote “leader” rather than the Infallible Imam of the
Shia. Irrefutable proof of this lies in the following two verses in the Quran:



6. Quran, 9:12: “Fight
the leaders (imams) of kufr.”



7. Quran, 28:41: “And We
made them leaders (imams) who call towards the Fire.”



It could be argued that these two verses are
referring to the Shia Infallible Imams, warning us to fight them because they
call us towards Hell-Fire. To such an accusation, the Shia would quickly
respond that the word “imam” is used in these two verses not to refer to their
Infallible Imams, but rather that the word is being used in the generic sense
of “leader”.



We wonder then why the Shia apply a
double-standard and apply a different meaning to the verses in the Quran which
use the word “imam” in a positive sense? Surely, it would be more consistent
and honest to say that the Quran universally uses the word “imam” in the
generic sense and that it never refers to the twelve Infallible Imams
of the Shia.



The above two verses cannot possibly be in
relation to any divinely appointed persons since the persons in question are
evil and wicked. Again, the conclusion to be reached is that the Quran uses the
word “imam” to denote a leader in the general sense of the word, and has
absolutely nothing to do with the Infallible Imams.



  • israelites


Allah says in the Quran:



9. Quran, 28:4-5: “Lo!
Pharaoh exalted himself in the earth and made its people castes. A tribe among
them he oppressed, killing their sons and sparing their women. Lo! he was of
those who work corruption. And We desired to show favor unto those who were
oppressed in the earth, and to make them leaders (imams) and
to make them the inheritors.”



These two verses cannot possibly be in relation
to any Infallible Imams, since all of the israelites are promised to become
leaders if they persevere with patience and had faith in Allah’s
communications. The verse relates to all of the israelites, and surely all of
them were not Infallible Imams. Even Allah says in the same verse that “your
Lord will judge between them on the Day of Judgment, in the matters wherein
they differ.” This makes it clear that the context is in regards to all of the
8. Quran, 32:23-25: “We made it a guide for the
children of israel. And We made of them leaders (imams) to
guide by Our command so long as they persevered with patience and continued
to have faith in Our communications. Verily your Lord will judge between them
on the Day of Judgment, in the matters wherein they differ (among themselves).



israelites who differed amongst each other.



A very convincing argument is found in the book
“Imaamah and the Quran: An Objective Perspective”:



The Ayah clearly states that the Bani israel as a
whole were made “Imaams” on Earth. Thus, the entire tribe is given the position
of Imaamah in this verse. Comparing it with other Quranic Ayahs about the
Children of israel, we see that it closely resembles Verses such as this one:



“They [the Children of
israel] said: ‘We suffered hurt before you came to us, and since you have come
to us.’ He [Musa] said: ‘It may be that your Lord is going to destroy your
adversary and make you viceroys in the earth, that He may see
how you behave.’” (Quran 7:129)



We see that the position of vicegerency and
dominion does not refer in here to a perfect infallible leadership, but rather
a leadership where the people are judged for their actions; hence the
statement: “that He (Allah) may see how ye behave.”



Thus, the placement of “Imaamah” in the hands of
the Children of israel in this Verse is similar to the dominion and leadership
that Allah may bestow upon any people after rescuing them from their
oppressors. It cannot refer to a special form of Imaamah simply because the
population as a whole is granted this Imaamah, and they are responsible for the
good and bad actions they commit once they are placed under this position.



Source: “Imaamah and the Quran: An Objective
Perspective”, authored by
Sidi Abu Salih. This
book is endorsed by the Ahlel Bayt website and can be downloaded
here.

Furthermore, the israelites were promised leadership so long as they
perservered with patience and had faith in Allah’s communications. Thus, their
leadership was contingent on fulfilling these two things. According to the
Shia, Imamah is a title given to a person at birth and it is not a position
that is earned by doing good deeds or showing patience. So why would Allah make
the leadership contingent on the behavior of these individuals? Clearly these
two verses do not conform to the Shia doctrine of Imamah, and the authentic
Shia Tafseer do not attempt to use these verses to refer to the doctrine of
Infallible Imamah.



  • Leaders
    of the Pious


There are only two verses left which the Shia use
to respond to The Quran Challenge and which they base their entire theology
upon:



10. Quran, 2:124: “And
(remember) when his Lord tried Ibrahim with (His) commands, and he fulfilled
them, He said: ‘Lo! I have appointed you a leader (imam) for
mankind.’ (Ibrahim) said: ‘And of my offspring (will there be leaders)?’ He
said: ‘My covenant includes not Zalimoon (wrong-doers).’”



11. Quran, 21:72-73: “And
We gave him Ishaq and Yaqoub, a son’s son, and We made (them) all good. And We
made them leaders (imams) who guided (people) by Our command,
and We revealed to them the doing of good and the keeping up of prayer and the
giving of the alms, and Us (alone) did they serve.”



Now the question is: is the word “imam” being
used to denote a leader in the generic sense, or are we referring to the
Infallible Imams of the Shia? The Shia will adamantly claim that this refers to
their Infallible Imams, and yet they will conveniently ignore the following
verse in the Quran which also uses the word “imam” in a similar context:



12. Quran, 25:71-74: “And
whoever repents and does good has truly turned to Allah
with an (acceptable) conversion; Those who witness no falsehood, and, if they
pass by futility, they pass by it with honorable (avoidance); Those who, when
they are admonished with the Signs of their Lord, droop not down at them as if
they were deaf or blind; Those who say: ‘Our Lord, grant us the coolness of our
eyes in our wives and children, and make us leaders (imams) of
the pious.’”



In this verse, Allah Almighty is talking about
who are the righteous believers. This verse speaks of normal people who do not
belong to a special class like the Prophets, asking Allah to make them leaders,
in the sense of paragons of virtue, whose example others would strive to
emulate. It is very obvious that it cannot refer to a group of “divinely
appointed Imams.” The verse clearly mentions that whoever fulfills those
conditions (i.e. repents, does good, etc.) should invoke Allah to make them
paragons of virtue (i.e. leaders of the pious).



In the verses we discussed previously, we have
seen that the word “imam” was used to denote an evil leader in the general
sense of the word; over here, we see that the word is used to denote a good
leader in the general sense of the word. This is not referring to any
Infallible Imam of the Shia. It is telling normal people to invoke Allah to
make them leaders. The Infallible Imams are, according to Shia belief,
appointed Imams at birth and this position of infallibility is not something
that a person can pray for or get simply by doing good deeds.



The Shia will continually try pushing the verse
in relation to Prophet Ibrahim (عليه السلام) to prove their doctrine of Imamah. They
will state that the verse clearly declares that the Imams will be infallible
because in it Allah says: “My covenant includes not
Zalimoon (wrong-doers, unjust, etc).” This argument is quickly rejected
because the opposite of Zalimoon (wrong-doers) is not Infallible but
rather it is Mu’min (good-doer) or ‘Adl (just). Allah
promised to make the righteous to be leaders of the world, but His promise
would not extend to those who were Zalimoon.



Indeed, a person who is fallible is not
necessarily one of the Zalimoon. If that were the case, are we going to argue
that Ayatollah Khomeini is one of the Zalimoon? Or what about the Prophets who
were not raised to the level of Imams; are they Zalimoon? What about Salman
Al-Farsi (رضّى الله عنه) who is fallible but still revered by the Shia? Or the other
great heroes of Islam? How can the pious Muslims be Zalimoon when Allah orders
them to fight the Zalimoon? This would be a logical inconsistency. As can be
seen, the opposite of Zalimoon is not infallible; otherwise, this would be
declaring all of these pious personalities to be Zaalim!



The verse in the Quran regarding Prophet Ibrahim
(عليه السلام)
simply states that Allah’s covenant does not extend to the unjust, so what is
the opposite of unjust? The following response can be found in the book
“Imaamah and the Quran: An Objective Perspective”:



Who is a just person?



The immediate word that would come to our minds
when thinking of the opposite of “unjust” is “just”. It is not “perfect” or
“Infallible”. This is obvious, and does not need much elucidation. Thus, the
qualities of a just person in general is what the reader should strive to look
for. The answer is found from the answers given by the office of Grand
Ayatullah Ali al-Sistani:



Question: Who is a just person?



Answer : A person is said to be just when he
performs all those acts which are obligatory upon him, and refrains from all
those things which are forbidden to him. And the sign of being just is that one
is apparently of a good character, so that if enquiries are made about him from
the people of his locality, or from his neighbours, or from those persons with
whom he lives, they would confirm his good conduct.



Source: http://www.sistani.org/html/eng/main/index.php?page=4&lang=eng&part=4



It is seen from the Ayatullah’s answer that under
normal circumstances the definition of “just” is not at all connected with
divine protection from sin, but rather concerns the overall good conduct and
piety of a person. It struck me as strange as to how this can suddenly change
for one Verse of the Quran, without any unbiased reason provided from the Shia
side.



Source: “Imaamah and the Quran: An Objective
Perspective”, authored by
Sidi Abu Salih. This
book is endorsed by the Ahlel Bayt website and can be downloaded
here.

The unbiased person could not justify the concept of Imamah simply from a
couple verses in the Quran which refer to Prophets as leaders of the pious. The
term “imam” is used in the generic sense of “leader” and it would take a wild
imagination to say that it refers to some distinct position or rank (i.e. the
Infallible Imamah). The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
)was referred to as a
“noor” (light) and “bashar” (human being) but do we say that these are two
distinct positions and ranks? Of course not! Any sane person would agree that
these words are used in there general sense. It would be preposterous to say
that the Prophet was given the rank of Noor and that there are other people who
also reach this position of Noor. Likewise, the Quran uses the common Arabic
word “imam” and it is an injustice of the Shia to mangle it to create a
specific position or rank based around it. The evidence that the word “imam” is
used in the general sense can be seen quite clearly when the Quran refers to
“leaders (imam) of Kufr” or the other verses in the Quran that we have examined
which show that either a whole group of people were made into “leaders (imam)
of the pious” or that they prayed to be so.



  • Conclusion


We find that the Quran does not contain the Shia
doctrine of Imamah. The Shia believe that after the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم),
there were twelve Infallible Imams and that it was the fundamental of faith to
follow them and adhere to them. Where then are these twelve Infallible Imams in
the Quran? Can the Shia even provide one verse in the Quran which says
something to the effect of “there will be twelve Infallible Imams after the
Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), and you must follow them”? Instead of
finding a verse even vaguely similar to this, the Shia will be forced to mangle
a handful of verses in the Quran just to prove that even one single Imam is mentioned
in the Quran.



Indeed, the true question is this: if the Quran
can use the word “imam” to mean a book, a road, and leaders of kufr…then why
cannot the Quran also mention the twelve Infallible Imams? The twelve
Infallible Imams are the core belief of the Shia, so then why are they not
mentioned in the Quran? Surely, the only logical conclusion is that the
doctrine of the twelve Infallible Imams is an innovation and deviation from the
Islam of the Quran, otherwise Allah would have mentioned it in the Quran. And
because Imamah is absent from the Quran, the Shia will be forced to toy around
with a handful of verses that use the word “imam” albeit in a completely
different context than intended by the Shia.



It is not a small part of faith to pledge allegiance
to a divinely appointed leader. So surely it should be mentioned in
the Quran! It is an oddity that such an important command such as to follow
Imams after Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) is not worthy of being
mentioned in the Quran. Indeed, this is what led some classical Shia scholars
to say that the Quran has been tampered with. This is the only logical
conclusion that could be made, but today you will not find any Shia who will
claim this publically.



The question remains: why is there no verse in
the Quran about the institution of the twelve Infallible Imams? We find Shia
literature replete with references to the Imams. Indeed, the Shia have elevated
the status of the Imam to monumental proportions, exhorting him as a creature
that possesses more knowledge than the angels, prophets, and creation. Then how
come the Quran just doesn’t say it?



Article Edited By: Ibn
al-Hashimi, www.ahlelbayt.com



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 

Special thanks to Abu Salih
and Owais Muhammad from whom much of this
article was lovingly stolen from. The book “Imaamah and the Quran: An Objective
Perspective”, authored by Abu Salih, is endorsed by the Ahlel Bayt website and
can be downloaded
here. It was instrumental in the
publication of this article and is a valuable guide for those who want a more
in-depth discussion of the topic.




The Quran Challenge,
Part IV



 



This article is the fourth in a
series of articles entitled “The Quran Challenge.” The reader is advised to go
through Parts I-III before proceeding to Part IV.




 

In Part I, we discussed how important Imamah is
to the Shia, and how they view it as more important than Prophethood/Messengership.
In Part III, we looked through every instance in the Quran in which the word
“Imam” is used, and we found that not once is the Shia concept of Imamah
referred to in the Quran.



Now we compare this with the plethora of verses
in the Quran which discuss Prophethood/Messengership. Verse after verse
mentions the Prophets and Messengers, their names, their roles, and their
stories. And yet, we fail to see any similar such discussion of the Shia Imams.
In fact, no mention of the twelve Imams is in the Quran. The obvious question
is why would Allah mention Prophethood/Messengership so many times in the
Quran, but fail to mention Imams, which–according to the Shia–are more
important than the Prophets/Messengers? This is a very big anomaly that is
difficult to explain away.



The following is an excerpt is from “Imaamah
and the Quran: An Objective Perspective” by Sidi Abu Salih:



After going through the instances where the word
“Imaam” is mentioned in the Quran and determining that none of them proves nor
supports the concept of Imaamah in Shiaism, it was only apppropriate to examine
the context and meaning provided to the words “Nabi” and “Rasool” in the Quran.



Examining the Word Nabi in the Quran



The case with the usage of the word Nabi is quite
different from that of the word Imaam. While the root word from which “Nabi”
originates is used in different ways, such as “Naba’” (news), “Naba’tukuma”
(inform you), “Anbaaka” (informed you), the terms Nabi and Nabieen/Anbiyaa
(plural forms of Nabi) themselves are used in a very specific manner in the
Holy Quran. From the approximately 80 instances wherein the words Nabi or
Nabieen occur, not one of them refers to anything other than a Prophet of
Allah.



Below is a list of a few instances when the word
Nabi is used in the Quran. The list is categorized, to show that Allah has
revealed a variety of topics surrounding His Prophets.



Rejecting and killing Nabis without just cause
and its punishment





﴿
ضُرِبَتْ عَلَيْهِمُ الذِّلَّةُ أَيْنَ مَا ثُقِفُواْ إِلاَّ بِحَبْلٍ مِّنْ
اللّهِ وَحَبْلٍ مِّنَ النَّاسِ وَبَآؤُوا بِغَضَبٍ مِّنَ اللّهِ وَضُرِبَتْ
عَلَيْهِمُ الْمَسْكَنَةُ ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ كَانُواْ يَكْفُرُونَ بِآيَاتِ
اللّهِ وَيَقْتُلُونَ الأَنبِيَاء بِغَيْرِ حَقٍّ ذَلِكَ بِمَا عَصَوا وَّكَانُواْ
يَعْتَدُونَ ﴾






Ignominy shall be their portion wheresoever they are found save (where
they grasp) a rope from Allah and a rope from men. They have incurred anger
from their Lord, and wretchedness is laid upon them. That is because they used
to disbelieve the revelations of Allah, and slew the prophets wrongfully. That
is because they were rebellious and used to transgress.
(Quran
3:112)



True believers accept all Nabis of Allah



﴿ قُلْ آمَنَّا بِاللّهِ وَمَا أُنزِلَ عَلَيْنَا
وَمَا أُنزِلَ عَلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ
وَالأَسْبَاطِ وَمَا أُوتِيَ مُوسَى وَعِيسَى وَالنَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لاَ
نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ ﴾



Say (O Muhammad): We believe in Allah and
that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham and
Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and that which was vouchsafed unto
Moses and Jesus and the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction
between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered.
(Quran 3:84)



Belief in the Nabis is a basis of faith



﴿ وَلَـكِنَّ الْبِرَّ مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللّهِ
وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ وَالْمَلآئِكَةِ وَالْكِتَابِ وَالنَّبِيِّينَ ﴾



…but righteous is he who believeth in
Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets…
(Quran
2:177)



Allah sending Nabis as bringers of both good news
and warnings



﴿ كَانَ النَّاسُ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً فَبَعَثَ اللّهُ
النَّبِيِّينَ مُبَشِّرِينَ وَمُنذِرِينَ وَأَنزَلَ مَعَهُمُ الْكِتَابَ
بِالْحَقِّ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَ النَّاسِ فِيمَا اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ ﴾



Mankind were one community, and Allah
sent (unto them) prophets as bearers of good tidings and as warners, and
revealed therewith the Scripture with the truth that it might judge between
mankind concerning that wherein they differed…
(Quran 2:213)



Allah’s covenants with the Nabis





﴿
وَإِذْ أَخَذَ اللّهُ مِيثَاقَ النَّبِيِّيْنَ لَمَا آتَيْتُكُم مِّن كِتَابٍ
وَحِكْمَةٍ ثُمَّ جَاءكُمْ رَسُولٌ مُّصَدِّقٌ لِّمَا مَعَكُمْ لَتُؤْمِنُنَّ بِهِ
وَلَتَنصُرُنَّهُ قَالَ أَأَقْرَرْتُمْ وَأَخَذْتُمْ عَلَى ذَلِكُمْ إِصْرِي
قَالُواْ أَقْرَرْنَا قَالَ فَاشْهَدُواْ وَأَنَاْ مَعَكُم مِّنَ الشَّاهِدِينَ ﴾



When Allah made (His) covenant with the
prophets, (He said): Behold that which I have given you of the Scripture and
knowledge. And afterward there will come unto you a messenger, confirming that
which ye possess. Ye shall believe in him and ye shall help him. He said: Do ye
agree, and will ye take up My burden (which I lay upon you) in this (matter)?
They answered: We agree. He said: Then bear ye witness. I will be a witness
with you.
(Quran 3:81)



Forbidden to take Nabis as Lords



﴿ وَلاَ يَأْمُرَكُمْ أَن تَتَّخِذُواْ
الْمَلاَئِكَةَ وَالنِّبِيِّيْنَ أَرْبَابًا أَيَأْمُرُكُم بِالْكُفْرِ بَعْدَ
إِذْ أَنتُم مُّسْلِمُونَ ﴾



And he commanded you not that ye should
take the angels and the prophets for lords. Would he command you to disbelieve
after ye had surrendered (to Allah)?
(Quran 3:80)



Some Nabis favored over others



﴿ وَرَبُّكَ أَعْلَمُ بِمَن فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ
وَالأَرْضِ وَلَقَدْ فَضَّلْنَا بَعْضَ النَّبِيِّينَ عَلَى بَعْضٍ وَآتَيْنَا
دَاوُودَ زَبُورًا ﴾



And thy Lord is Best Aware of all who are
in the heavens and the earth. And we preferred some of the prophets above
others, and unto David We gave the Psalms.
(Quran 17:55)



Nabis sent to previous nations



﴿ وَكَمْ أَرْسَلْنَا مِن نَّبِيٍّ فِي
الْأَوَّلِينَ ﴾



How many a prophet did We send among the
men of old!
(Quran 43:6)



The reader may think of other categories where to
place some of these Verses in addition to the ones provided, and there exist
many other cases when the word “Nabi” is used in the Quran that are not listed
(this would prove repetitive in the context of the discussion).



From the few examples provided, it is obvious
that the term is used with the meaning of “Prophet of Allah” and nothing else.
The Sunni and Shia commentaries do not even spend time in trying to prove that
the “Nabi” refers to a Prophet sent on a mission from Allah, save for perhaps
the first time the term occurs in the Quran. This is because the inference is
so obvious it needs little explanation. Even the bitterest enemy of Islam does
not attempt to show that “Nabi” means some other type of “prophet” that is not
related to its religious connotation.



The different ways in which the functions and
roles of the Prophets are delineated in the Quranic verses themselves is very
straightforward, while the term “Imaam” is not treated in such clarity. I
personally found myself amazed at such a contrast. The reason for this is the
weight given to the doctrine of Imaamah in Shaism to the point that many Shia
scholars consider it as being higher than Nubuwwah. It seems strange that in
the “more important” case only 12 examples are mentioned, some of which go
against the doctrine under discussion, while the “less important” dogma has
been mentioned much more often (almost seven-fold), all of them pointing
towards “Divine Prophethood”.



Examining the Ayahs of the Quran it is seen that
there is not a single Verse with the word “Nabi” that speaks against the
concept of Nubuwwah. Moreover, the belief of Nubuwwah can easily be put
together by using the Quran as the prime reference without stretching the
meaning of any of the Ayahs. Later it will be seen that some of the Verses
discussing Prophets and Messengers contradict and seriously undermine the
essence of the Shia Imaamah doctrine. For the time being however, it is enough
to note the difference between the manner in which Nabis and Imaams are
discussed in the Quran in terms of clarity and importance given to them.



Examining the Word Rasool in the Quran



The next topic to look into is the Quran and its
usage of the word “Rasool” (Messenger). Like in the previous case with the word
“Nabi”, the root word has been used in different ways, with the terms
“Arsalna”, “Arsala”, “’Yursil” sometimes referring to Allah sending Messengers,
or to Allah sending a punishment, or at other times to a Ruler sending a
delegation.



However, with respect to the specific word Rasool
(and its plural “Mursalin”/”Rusul”), we see that the total number of times the
term has been used exceeds 360 times. There are a few instances (around 15)
where the Messenger being referred to is either an Angel, or a Messenger that
is not divinely sent. However, in the remaining cases (about 350 cases) it can
be seen that the Rasool is in effect a human sent by Allah to declare His
religion to a given people. So yet again, the level of clarity the Quran uses
in describing Rasools and its coherence with Islamic belief is quite unlike the
comparison between the term “Imaam” and the doctrine of “Imaamah” in Shiaism.



Again, some of the places where the word Rasool
has been used are presented below, placed in categories for us to understand
the various ways in which the Quran explains the role, function, and duties of
Messengers:



Messengers sent to Every Nation



﴿ وَلِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَّسُولٌ فَإِذَا جَاء
رَسُولُهُمْ قُضِيَ بَيْنَهُم بِالْقِسْطِ وَهُمْ لاَ يُظْلَمُونَ ﴾



And for every nation there is a
messenger. And when their messenger cometh (on the Day of Judgment) it will be
judged between them fairly, and they will not be wronged.
(Quran
10:47)



People will not be punished until a Messenger is
sent to them





﴿
مَّنِ اهْتَدَى فَإِنَّمَا يَهْتَدي لِنَفْسِهِ وَمَن ضَلَّ فَإِنَّمَا يَضِلُّ
عَلَيْهَا وَلاَ تَزِرُ وَازِرَةٌ وِزْرَ أُخْرَى وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ
حَتَّى نَبْعَثَ رَسُولاً ﴾



Whosoever goeth right, it is only for
(the good of) his own soul that he goeth right, and whosoever erreth, erreth
only to its hurt. No laden soul can bear another’s load, We never punish until
we have sent a messenger.
(Quran 17:15)



Peoples rejecting Messengers





﴿
وَلَقَدْ كُذِّبَتْ رُسُلٌ مِّن قَبْلِكَ فَصَبَرُواْ عَلَى مَا كُذِّبُواْ
وَأُوذُواْ حَتَّى أَتَاهُمْ نَصْرُنَا وَلاَ مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِ اللّهِ وَلَقدْ
جَاءكَ مِن نَّبَإِ الْمُرْسَلِينَ ﴾



Messengers indeed have been denied before
thee, and they were patient under the denial and the persecution till Our
succour reached them. There is none to alter the decisions of Allah. Already
there hath reached thee (somewhat) of the tidings of the messengers (We sent
before).
(Quran 6:34)



Punishment for those who reject the Messengers of
Allah



﴿ وَلَقَدْ أَهْلَكْنَا الْقُرُونَ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ
لَمَّا ظَلَمُواْ وَجَاءتْهُمْ رُسُلُهُم بِالْبَيِّنَاتِ وَمَا كَانُواْ لِيُؤْمِنُواْ
كَذَلِكَ نَجْزِي الْقَوْمَ الْمُجْرِمِينَ ﴾




We destroyed the generations before you when they did wrong; and their
messengers (from Allah) came unto them with clear proofs (of His Sovereignty)
but they would not believe. Thus do We reward the guilty folk.
(Quran
10:13)



Belief in Messengers as a Pillar of Faith



﴿ آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِن
رَّبِّهِ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ كُلٌّ آمَنَ بِاللّهِ وَمَلآئِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ
وَرُسُلِهِ لاَ نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِ وَقَالُواْ سَمِعْنَا
وَأَطَعْنَا غُفْرَانَكَ رَبَّنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ ﴾



The messenger believeth in that which
hath been revealed unto him from his Lord and (so do) believers. Each one
believeth in Allah and His angels and His scriptures and His messengers - We
make no distinction between any of His messengers - and they say: We hear, and
we obey. (Grant us) Thy forgiveness, our Lord. Unto Thee is the journeying.
(Quran
2:285)



﴿ يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ آمِنُواْ
بِاللّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَالْكِتَابِ الَّذِي نَزَّلَ عَلَى رَسُولِهِ وَالْكِتَابِ
الَّذِيَ أَنزَلَ مِن قَبْلُ وَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِاللّهِ وَمَلاَئِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ
وَرُسُلِهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلاَلاً بَعِيدًا ﴾



O ye who believe! Believe in Allah and
His messenger and the Scripture which He hath revealed unto His messenger, and
the Scripture which He revealed aforetime. Whoso disbelieveth in Allah and His
angels and His scriptures and His messengers and the Last Day, he verily hath
wandered far astray.
(Quran 4:136)



Some of the Messengers’ stories have been told to
us, some have not



﴿ وَرُسُلاً قَدْ قَصَصْنَاهُمْ عَلَيْكَ مِن قَبْلُ
وَرُسُلاً لَّمْ نَقْصُصْهُمْ عَلَيْكَ وَكَلَّمَ اللّهُ مُوسَى تَكْلِيمًا﴾



And messengers We have mentioned unto
thee before and messengers We have not mentioned unto thee; and Allah spake
directly unto Moses
(Quran 4:164)



Purpose of Messengers





﴿
رُّسُلاً مُّبَشِّرِينَ وَمُنذِرِينَ لِئَلاَّ يَكُونَ لِلنَّاسِ عَلَى اللّهِ
حُجَّةٌ بَعْدَ الرُّسُلِ وَكَانَ اللّهُ عَزِيزًا حَكِيمً
ا ﴾



Messengers of good cheer and of warning,
in order that mankind might have no argument against Allah after the
messengers. Allah was ever Mighty, Wise.
(Quran 4:165)



﴿ وَأَطِيعُواْ اللّهَ وَأَطِيعُواْ الرَّسُولَ
وَاحْذَرُواْ فَإِن تَوَلَّيْتُمْ فَاعْلَمُواْ أَنَّمَا عَلَى رَسُولِنَا
الْبَلاَغُ الْمُبِينُ﴾



Obey Allah and obey the messenger, and beware!
But if ye turn away, then know that the duty of Our messenger is only plain
conveyance (of the message).
(Quran 5:92)



Disbelievers and Messengers on Day of Judgement



﴿ هَلْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلاَّ تَأْوِيلَهُ يَوْمَ
يَأْتِي تَأْوِيلُهُ يَقُولُ الَّذِينَ نَسُوهُ مِن قَبْلُ قَدْ جَاءتْ رُسُلُ
رَبِّنَا بِالْحَقِّ فَهَل لَّنَا مِن شُفَعَاء فَيَشْفَعُواْ لَنَا أَوْ نُرَدُّ
فَنَعْمَلَ غَيْرَ الَّذِي كُنَّا نَعْمَلُ قَدْ خَسِرُواْ أَنفُسَهُمْ وَضَلَّ
عَنْهُم مَّا كَانُواْ يَفْتَرُونَ ﴾



Await they aught save the fulfilment
thereof? On the day when the fulfilment thereof cometh, those who were before
forgetful thereof will say: The messengers of our Lord did bring the Truth!
Have we any intercessors, that they may intercede for us? Or can we be returned
(to life on earth), that we may act otherwise than we used to act? They have
lost their souls, and that which they devised hath failed them.
(Quran
7:53)



Believers and Messengers on Day of Judgement



﴿ وَنَزَعْنَا مَا فِي صُدُورِهِم مِّنْ غِلٍّ
تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِهِمُ الأَنْهَارُ وَقَالُواْ الْحَمْدُ لِلّهِ الَّذِي هَدَانَا
لِهَـذَا وَمَا كُنَّا لِنَهْتَدِيَ لَوْلا أَنْ هَدَانَا اللّهُ لَقَدْ جَاءتْ
رُسُلُ رَبِّنَا بِالْحَقِّ وَنُودُواْ أَن تِلْكُمُ الْجَنَّةُ أُورِثْتُمُوهَا
بِمَا كُنتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ ﴾



And We remove whatever rancour may be in
their hearts. Rivers flow beneath them. And they say: The praise to Allah, Who
hath guided us to this. We could not truly have been led aright if Allah had
not guided us. Verily the messengers of our Lord did bring the Truth. And it is
cried unto them: This is the Garden. Ye inherit it for what ye used to do.

(Quran 7:43)



Messengers put under hardship



﴿ حَتَّى إِذَا اسْتَيْأَسَ الرُّسُلُ وَظَنُّواْ
أَنَّهُمْ قَدْ كُذِبُواْ جَاءهُمْ نَصْرُنَا فَنُجِّيَ مَن نَّشَاء وَلاَ يُرَدُّ
بَأْسُنَا عَنِ الْقَوْمِ الْمُجْرِمِينَ ﴾



Till, when the messengers despaired and
thought that they were denied, then came unto them Our help
(Quran
12:110)



Believing in Allah and His Messengers as a way to
Sincerity and Paradise



﴿ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ
أُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الصِّدِّيقُونَ وَالشُّهَدَاء عِندَ رَبِّهِمْ لَهُمْ أَجْرُهُمْ
وَنُورُهُمْ﴾




And those who believe in Allah and His messengers, they are the loyal,
and the martyrs are with their Lord; they have their reward and their light

(Quran 57:19)



Thus, it is seen that the way the word “Rasool”
has been mentioned in the Quran is even more commanding and authoritative than
for the word “Nabi”. Only 13 of the occurrences of the word “Rasool” were
included above, and yet theer can be no doubt as to what type of “Messenger”
the Quran is referring to. As noted before, there are some cases in which the
word “Rasool” has been used outside of its religious meaning or has been used
with respect to non-human Messengers. Yet the total number of occurrences where
the Messenger being alluded to is in line with Islaamic doctrine are so many
and so unambiguous that only a fanatic would deny the importance Allah has
placed upon the concept of “Risaalah” in the Quran. Even if a person with minimal
knowledge on how to interpret the Quran where to give his opinion about these
Verses, we would find that his understanding in many cases corresponds closely
to that of the expert scholars of Islam. This is due to the radiating clarity
with which many of these Ayahs have been revealed. Again, if we were to compare
it with the “higher” principle of Imaamah, we would see the weakness of the
Shia arguments.



Conclusion



I started to see the difference between what the
Shia scholars were stating in terms of the importance of Imaamah and what Allah
Himself has said in the Quran. Was it only a coincidence that the manners in
which these doctrines are discussed are so vastly different? Or is it because
Imaamah is not part of the Islam revealed to Muhammad (Salla Allahu Alayhi wa
Salaam), and is the product of a different outlook?



This article was excerpted from the following book:



“Imaamah and the Quran: An
Objective Perspective”


By: Sidi Abu Salih



Synopsis:
Imamah is one of the fundamental beliefs of the Shia, and it is the major
difference between the Shia and mainstream Muslims. The Quran is the central
book of Islam, and hence, it contains all of the major beliefs of the Muslims.
In the book “Imaamah and the Quran”, the author analyzes how Imamah, the major
belief of the Shia, is absent from the Quran. This book was instrumental in the
creation of this website, and it can be purchased here.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


Shi’ism is Kufr: Imams Superior to Prophets


 

 



The Shia Ulema believe that the
position of Infallible Imam (i.e. Imamah) is higher than the position of
Messenger or Prophet (i.e. Risalah and Nabuwwah). Al-Islam.org, the popular
Shia website, declares that “the office of Imamate is a
higher and more exalted office than prophethood.” (Lesson Number 17, http://al-Islam.org/leadership/)



Thus, the Shia Ulema believe that their twelve
Infallible Imams are superior to all of the Prophets, except Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). They argue that Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is superior to the twelve Imams not because he was a Prophet,
but rather “since Prophet Muhammad was an Imam during
his time as well.” (Shia Encyclopedia, “Imamat vs. Prophethood,” Part 1,
http://www.al-Islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/8.html)



The Shia belief can be
stated in equation form:               



Prophet Muhammad > 12 Imams > All of the
other Prophets



Imamah > Prophethood



There should be absolutely no confusion on this
issue; this view is the dominant view of the Shia Ulema.



Grand Ayatollah Mohammad Fazel Lankarani, one of
the Head Ayatollahs in the Shia Seminary in Qum, issued the following
statements on his official website:



Imam Ali (Alayhi Salam)
is higher in rank than other prophets, because of his Imamate, but he is not
higher in rank than the Prophet Muhammad (saws), because Muhammad (saws) was
both Prophet and Imam.



Source: http://www.lankarani.org/English/faq/110q.html



This view is categorically stated in the Shia
Encyclopedia:



The Shia further believe
that the twelve Imams of the House of Prophet Muhammad have the rank higher
than that of ALL the messengers (be Imam or not) except Prophet Muhammad
(PBUH).



Source: Shia Encyclopedia, “Imamat vs.
Prophethood,” Part 1, http://www.al-Islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/8.html



In the book “Peshawar Nights”, the Shia scholar,
Sultanu’l-Wa’izin Shirazi, says: “Since the holy
prophet was superior to all other prophets Ali was also superior to them.” (Peshawar
Nights, http://www.al-Islam.org/peshawar/7.1.html)



The same view is held by the Shia Tafseer, also
available on the Al-Islam.org website: “It means that a
prophet is not necessarily an Imaam and Imaamat is an office of decidedly
higher order…” (S.V. Mir Ali/Ayatollah Mahdi Puya Commentary of Verse
2:124, http://www.al-Islam.org/quran/)



In all of the authoratative books of the Shia,
the recurring view is that the Imams are superior to the Prophets except
Prophet Muhammad: “Imam ‘Ali and the other Imaams of
Ahlul Bayt are believed by the Shi’as to be higher in rank than all prophets
and messengers except the Prophet of Islam (s.a.w.)” (Shiism: Imaamate
and Wilayah, p.96)



Ayatollah Khomeini declared: “And an essential tenet of our Shi’ite sect is that the Imams
have a position which is reached neither by the angels nor by any commisioned
messenger of God.” (Hukumat-i-Islami, p.52-53)



Of the four main Shia books of Hadith, Al-Kafi is
considered the most reliable and authoratative. In it, we find the following
Shia Hadith: “The Imams possess all the knowledge
granted to the angels, prophets, and messengers.” (Al-Kulaini, Al-Kafi,
p.255) Another narration in Al-Kafi says: “Signs of the
prophets are possessed by the Imams.” (Al-Kafi, p.231)



Allamah Baqir Al-Majlisi says about the Imams: “Their preference [is] over the prophets and all the people.”
(Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol 26, Chapter 6) He further stated: “…our Imams are higher [and] better than the rest of the
prophets…they are more knowledgeable than the prophets…this is the main opinion
of the Imami (Shia), and is only rejected by one who is ignorant about the
traditions.” (Bihar Al-Anwar, Volume 26, p.297)



In the propaganda book titled “Peshawar Nights”,
the Shia scholar Shirazi mentions the following about Ibrahim:



Allah intended to make
his rank more exalted. Since prophethood and the title of Khalil (friend) did
not apparently rank a higher rank, the office of Imamate was the only office of
a higher order to which even a Prophet of Allah could be entrusted…That Ali
attained the rank of prophethood can be proven by the reference to the Hadith
of Manzila (Tradition Regarding Ranks)



Source: Peshawar Nights, http://www.al-Islam.org/peshawar/4.2.html



This same view is held by Allamah Majlisi, who
even admits that the Shia “might as well” call their Imams to be Prophets:



On the whole, after
admission of the fact that the Imams are not prophets, we are bound to
acknowledge the fact that they are superior to all Prophets and Awsiya
(legatees) except our Prophet (salutations and peace upon him and his family).
To our knowledge there is no reason not to describe the Imams as Prophets
except consideration to the status of the Final Prophet. Our intellect too,
cannot perceive a distinction between Nabuwwah (prophethood) and Imamah.



Source: Bihar Al-Anwar, Volume 26, p.82



Syed Ali Milani, another leading Shia personality,
wrote an entire book entitled“The Preference of the
Imams over the Prophets (A.S.)” This book is available on the following
Shia website: www.shiaweb.org



We could provide more references to prove our
point, but we shall stop here for brevity sake. The bottom line is clear: the
Shia believe that their Imams are superior to Prophets.



Shi’ism is Kufr



We have often heard the attractive rhetoric that
Muslims should unite (i.e. Sunni-Shia unity) and that the differences between
Sunni and Shia are minor. Some say that the differences are only on minor
things such as the way we pray. Others say the differences are merely political
and historical, not religious or spiritual. This could not be farther from the
truth! The difference between Sunni Islam and Shi’ism is monumental; the Shia
believe in false prophets after Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and thus there should no confusion that Shi’ism is Kufr. The
difference between Sunni Islam and Shi’ism is on a core fundamental issue, one
which shapes the entire faith itself.



The Shia will argue that they do not believe in
Prophets after Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
), and that
their Imams are not Prophets. But, as is the case with the Shia, they swallow
the second part of this statement, namely that their Imams are not
Prophets but rather they are superior to Prophets.
It would be Kufr
enough to believe that there are people equal to Prophets after the Prophet
Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), but it is an even greater Kufr to say
that there are people who are superior to the Prophets. To give an appropriate
analogy: it would be Kufr to say that there is a god equal to Allah, but it
would be even greater Kufr to say that there is a god greater than Allah.



The faith of Shi’ism is Kufr just like Ahmadis,
Submittors, Nation of Islam, Bahais, and Aga Khanis are Kaffir.



Finality of Prophethood



A central belief of Islam is that Prophet
Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is the final Prophet. Anyone who believes
in a Prophet after Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم
) is
considered a Kaffir.



Allah Almighty says in the Quran:



“Muhammad is not the
father of any man among you, but the Messenger of Allah and the Last of
Prophets. And Allah has knowledge of everything.” (Quran 33:40)



As soon as Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) died, there arose many Dajjals (false prophets) in the land of
Arabia. The followers of these Dajjals formed deviant and heretical sects. The
Sahabah waged war against these false prophets, their followers, and all other
apostates; thus began the Wars of Riddah (Apostacy) in which the heretics were
defeated and the finality of the Prophethood defended.



Unfortunately, every generation and land has witnessed
its fair share of false prophets. Today, many divergent cults and heretical
sects still exist. And yet, no matter how divergent their beliefs are to each
other, there is one commonality to them all: they do not believe in the
finality of prophethood, or somehow they get around this concept by playing
word games. One such example is the Qadiani sect that believes in the
messengership of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadian. Another deviant sect is the Rashad
Calipha sect (i.e. the Submittors) who believe that Rashad Calipha is a
messenger after Muhammad. The Nation of Islam (NOI) believes that Elijah is a
God-appointed leader, and the Bahais believe that Bahaiullah is a God-appointed
individual after Muhammad.



These sects claim to follow the Quran and yet
they defy its very words in which Allah Almighty so clearly defines Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) as the last of the Prophets. How do they justify this
contradiction? They resort to a method used by the Jews: playing word games
with the Word of Allah. Rashad Calipha’s sect, for example, says that Verse
33:40 only declares an end to Prophethood but not to Messengership; he thus
declares that he is a Messenger and not a Prophet. In this way, the Submittors
give lip service to the idea of finality of prophethood, but in reality, they
exalt their leader above that of the Prophets. Similar justifications and word
games are utilized by the Qadianis, who refer to their leader as a “Messiah” or
“Mahdi” instead of Prophet. The Aga Khanis believe that their leader, the Aga
Khan, is a God-appointed person after Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), and they thus exalt Prince Kareem.



In the end, all of these sects are using word
games to extend the prophethood and destroy the finality of Islam. They give
all the same powers, prestiges, and honors to their leaders as Prophets but
they will deny that this person is a Prophet after Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), and will use other words such as “Mahdi”, “Messiah”, “Aga
Khan”, or even “Messenger.” However, both Sunni and Shia Ulema declare these
sects to be deviant Kuffaar for the reason that they deny the finality of
prophethood. Indeed, a rose would still be a rose even if it were to be called
by another name. Simply changing the name of an entity does not change the
nature of that entity.



The Shia sect has also extended the institution
of prophethood by playing word games. They follow the “Aimmatul Masomeen”
(Infallible Imams) who are considered equal to Prophets. In fact, they are
superior to Prophets as we have seen above. For all practical intents and
purposes, Imams are the same thing as Prophets, as indicated by the statements
of the Shia leader, Allamah Majlisi:



On the whole, after
admission of the fact that the Imams are not prophets, we are bound to acknowledge
the fact that they are superior to all Prophets and Awsiya (legatees) except
our Prophet (salutations and peace upon him and his family). To our knowledge
there is no reason not to describe the Imams as Prophets except consideration
to the status of the Final Prophet. Our intellect too, cannot perceive a
distinction between Nabuwwah (prophethood) and Imamah.



Source: Bihar Al-Anwar, Volume 26, p.82



It is simply a formality that the Shia do not
refer to their Imams as Prophets. Otherwise, the Imams are equal to and even
superior to the Prophets. They have all the same powers, prestiges, and signs
as Prophets; the Shia Hadith book, Al-Kafi, states: “Signs
of the prophets are possessed by the Imams.” (Al-Kafi, p.231)



The finality of Prophethood is thus abolished in
the Shia sect, and instead there is a continual extension of it in the form of
Imamah. The popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org, declared: “The Shi’ah believe that the Imamate constitutes an extension
of prophethood in its spiritual dimension.” (Lesson Number 24: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/ )



As can be seen clearly by the unbiased observor,
all of these deviant sects extend Prophethood in one way or the other, and thus
believe in Dajjals. The truth of the matter is that Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is the absolute seal of the Prophets. There is no
other position equal to or higher than the status of the prophets and
messengers; such a thing as having a position higher than prophetood would
obviate the need to declare the finality of prophethood.



Allah declares in the Quran:



“Muhammad is not the
father of any man among you, but the Messenger of Allah and the Last of
Prophets. And Allah has knowledge of everything.” (Quran 33:40)



What is the point of declaring Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) as the Last of the Prophets if there are people superior to
Prophets that will come later? Why didn’t Allah say “Muhammad
is the Last of the Prophets but he is also an Imam, and there will be Imams who
are superior to Prophets that will come after Muhammad.” Surely, that
would have cleared up the confusion.



The Shia believe that there can be no Imam after
Imam Mehdi; he is the twelvth Imam and the absolute last. Anyone who claimed to
be an Infallible Imam today would be declared a Kaffir by the Shia Ulema. In
fact, the (Twelver) Shia call the Aga Khanis to be deviant because they believe
in Imams after the twelvth. Just like Muslims believe that anyone is a Kaffir
who believes in a Prophet after Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
),
so too do the Shia believe that anyone who believes in an Infallible Imam after
Imam Mehdi is a Kaafir.



Now let us suppose that a Shia follower suddenly
started his own sect, let us call it Mullah-ism. Followers of this hypothetical
sect believe in another position other than Imam known as “Mullah”. According
to followers of Mullah-ism, Mullahs came after the 12th Imam when he went into
occultation, and these Mullahs are higher in rank than the Imams. Imagine the reaction
of the Shia to a person who says that there can be a Mullah greater in rank to
their Infallible Imams! How quickly would the Shia Ulema be to condemn these
followers of Mullah-ism.



By creating a station or position higher than
that of Imam, the followers of Mullah-ism have obviated the very reason the
Shia declare Imamah to have ended with the twelvth Imam. Suddenly, Mullahs
become higher than Imams, thereby making it inconsequential that the station of
Imamah came to an end. Of course, this example of “Mullah-ism” is only
hypothetical, but it fits perfectly with the relationship of Shi’ism to (Sunni)
Islam. By creating a rank and station higher than that of Prophet, the Shia
have obviated the very reason that we declare a seal on Prophethood. What is
the point of saying that there will be no more Prophets if there are people who
supercede Prophets?



Shia Rebuttal



The Ahlus Sunnah accuses the Shia of believing in
false Prophets/Messengers; indeed, the Shia simply call them by a different
name (i.e. “Imam”). The Shia deny this claim and say that there is a difference
between Imams and Prophets/Messengers. The typical Shia counter-response to
this is:



“Nabuwwah/Risalah (Prophethood/Messengership) and
Imamah are two different stations. Messengers recieve revelation. The Imams do
not recieve revelation. They are only divinely inspired (ilham). So
Imamah is not the same as Risalah.”



What the above fails to mention is that although
Imamah may not be the same as Risalah (Messengership), it is definitely the same
as Nabuwwah (Prophethood). The Shia Ulema have said that the difference between
Messengers and Prophets is that the former recieves revelation whereas the
latter is divinely inspired (ilham). This is rooted in the Shia belief.
According to Al-Kafi, the Shia book of Hadith:



“What is a Messenger, a
Prophet and one who is told? He said: A Messenger is one to whom the angel
appears and speaks. A Prophet is one who sees in his dream [ilham]. Possibly
the Prophethood and Messengership is combined in a single person.” (Source:
Usool Al-Kafi, Book 4, 442-4)



In another narration in Al-Kafi:



“A Prophet is one who
sees the angel while asleep, and hears him but does not see the angel awake
[ilham]. A Messenger is one who hears the voice while awake and sees, while asleep,
and also with his eyes sees the angel when awake.” (Source: Usool
Al-Kafi, Book 4, 439-1)



The Shia are in agreement that there is a
difference between the word “Nabi” (Prophet) and “Rasool” (Messenger). And the
Shia believe that only those who are Messengers recieve revelation whereas
those who are Prophets only will recieve divine inspiration (ilham).



So whereas the Shia might find some room to claim
that their Imams are not the same as Messengers (for the reason that they do
not recieve revelation), but they still do not prove that Imams are different
than Prophets. Both Prophets and Imams recieve their words through divine
inspiration (ilham) only. There is thus no difference between Prophets and
Imams, and the names are basically interchangeable.



Alinaam.org



The website alinaam.org explains why the Shia
sect is Kufr:



Alinaam.org says



“It is essential that Muslim sympathisers of the Shias
divest themselves of the notion that Shi’ism is part of Islam – that it is just
as one of the other four Madhabs which constitute the Ahlus Sunnah. Shi’ism is
not Islam nor is it a sect of Islam. The ostentatious religious calls of an
Islamic hue emanating from Khomeini and his clergy do not make Shi’ism any
closer to Islam than the religious and ‘Islamic’ calls and slogans of religions
such as Qadianism.



Like
Qadianism, Shi’ism too believes in the extension and perpetuation of Nubuwwat
(Prophethood) after Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam). Although both
religions (Qadianis and Shi’ism) overtly assert a belief in the finality of the
Nubuwwat of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam), they covertly believe by
way of fallacious interpretation in the continuation of Nubuwwat.



Shi’i
religious literature abundantly clarifies the fact that Shias believe in the
continuation of Nubuwwat after Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam). The
only cover presented by Shi’ism for this Kufr belief is a name, viz., Imaam.
Instead of calling the one they believe to be a Prophet or Nabi or Rasool, they
describe him as an Imaam, and instead of saying Nubuwwat they say Imaamat. But,
in terms of Shi’i religion there is absolutely no difference between a Nabi or
a Shi’i Imaam. In fact, Shi’ism propagates the superiority of an Imaam over a
Nabi.



Imaamat
is a continuation of Nubuwwat, there is no doubt. Their beliefs as propounded
by their own authorities unequivocally assert total equality between Nubuwwat
and Imaamat, in fact, Imaamat is even accepted to be superior to Nubuwwat by
the Shi’i religion.



The
Shi’i book, ‘The faith of Shia Islam’ states,



‘We
believe that Imaamat is one of the fundamentals of Islam and that man’s faith
can never be complete without belief in it. It is wrong to imitate our fathers,
family or teachers in this matter, even if we respect both, for it is just as
necessary rationally to consider Imaamat as it is to consider Tawheed and
Nubuwwat.’



‘We believe
that, just as it is necessary for Allah to send someone as a prophet, so it is
also necessary for Him to appoint an Imaam.’



‘The
Imaamat is therefore a continuation of a prophethood, and the reasoning which
proves the former’s necessity is the same that which prove the latter’s. ‘We
believe that, like the Prophet, an Imaam must be infallible, that is to say
incapable of making errors or doing wrong, either inwardly or outwardly …’



‘Their
(i.e. the Shi’i Imaams) position in regard to Islam is the same as the
prophet’s, and the reasoning which necessitates their infallibility is the same
as that which necessitates the Prophet’s infallibility, and there is no
difference between them in matters.’



‘The
Faith of Shia Islam’, states:



‘We
believe that the Imaamat, like Prophethood, must be an appointment from Allah
through His Messenger, or an appointed Imaam. From this point of view, the
Imaamat is the same as the prophethood.’



No
one should therefore labour under the misapprehension that Shi’ism believes in
the Islamic concept of Finality of Nubuwwat. The Qadianis claim to believe in
the Finality of Nubuwwat, but their devious interpretation of this concept
opens the way for them to accept Mirza Ghulam as a Nabi. In the same way, the
Shi’as believe in the continuation of Nubuwwah inspite of their claim to
believe in the Finality of the Nubuwwah of Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi
Wasallam). Each and every attribute, office, function and institution exclusive
with Nubuwwah is asserted for the Imaams by the Shi’as. One who studies the
religious literature of the Shi’as will not fail to understand that on only
this one basis of Imaamat, the Shi’as are not Muslims.



Rejection
of a Nabi is Kufr. One who does not believe in a Nabi is a Kaafir. This is the
belief of Islam. But according to the Shi’ah religion, belief in Imaamat is
Fardh just as Fardh as it is to believe in Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi
Wasallam). According to Shi’ism, one who denies any of the Shi’i Imaams – one
who does not accept any of the Shi’i Imaams – is a Kaafir. Propounding this
view, the Shi’i authority, Kulaini, states in his ‘most trustworthy and
celebrated work of Hadith’, Al-Kaafi:



“We
(i.e. the Imaams) are those whose obedience Allah has made Fardh… Whoever
denies us is a Kaafir.”



This
belief in Shi’ism categorically indicates that the Shi’i religion regards its
Imaams as Ambiyaa. All those who do not subscribe to the Shi’ah doctrine of
Imaamat are branded as Kaafirs by the Shi’ah religion. This is an indisputable
fact in terms of Shi’ah theological writings. It is entirely another matter for
Khomeini and the present Shi’a clergy to ostensibly claim that they regard
Sunnis as Muslims. Such devious statements are based on the Shi’ah doctrine of
Taqiyyah (holy hypocrisy) and stem from pernicious political motives.





Conclusion



We have proven in this article that the Shia sect
is Kufr. We have established this fact by providing references from well-known
sources in which the Shia declare their Imams to be superior to Prophets. This
belief voids a person’s Kalimah since it is implicit in the Kalimah that we
mean to say that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم
) is not
just a Prophet, but he is the last Prophet. The Shia believe in Imams
who have the same position as Prophets, and the only difference is in the names
and nothing else.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


Infallibility = Shirk


 

Introduction



Muslims believe that only the
Creator Allah Almighty is perfect. On the other hand, creation cannot possibly
be perfect as this is an attribute only Allah Almighty can posses. Humans, who
were created simply out of dust, are an excellent example of imperfection. All
humans commit mistakes and sin.



As Perfection is an attribute of Allah,
Imperfection then is an attribute of human beings. This is why the imperfect
human beings bow down to the perfect Creator. Indeed, to ascribe an attribute
of Allah to a human being is an act of Shirk; it is ascribing partners to Allah
Almighty. If we believed that a human being was perfect/omniscient/omnipotent,
then we are guilty of Major Shirk.



From the very beginning of time, Prophets have
taught humanity this same message. Unfortunately, people have always been led
astray by Shaytan who tricks them into commiting Shirk. The prime example of
this are the Christians, who eventually started giving Allah’s Attributes to
Prophet Isa (عليه السلام). Prophet Isa (عليه السلام)
himself would preach Tawheed, and yet his astray “followers” started
attributing Prophet Isa (عليه السلام) to God! The Quran clearly says what the
fate of such people will be: on the Day of Judgement, Prophet Isa (عليه السلام) himself will testify against these so-called “followers.”



It should be noted that the story of Prophet Isa
(عليه السلام) is mentioned in the Quran not only for the Christians but in
fact more for the Muslims. After all, a Christian would reject the Quran, so
the primary audience of the Quran is the Muslims. The example of the Christians
was put forth in the Quran as a reminder to Muslims so that Muslims
don’t fall into the same trap.



Unfortunately, this is exactly what happened and
the Shia followed the same pattern of innovation as the Christians: the Shia
started attributing the attributes of Allah to the Prophets and their Imams.
The Shia believe in the Infallibility (Ismah) of Prophets and Imams. In this article,
we will examine what exactly Infallibility (Ismah) means to the Shia and why
the rightly guided Ahlus Sunnah considers this belief of the Shia to be Shirk.



Ismah (Infallibility)



The Shia believe that Prophets/Imams do not ever
sin and cannot commit mistakes; to them, the Prophets and Imams are perfect.
This is a core belief of Shi’ism, and is actually part of the Usool-e Deen of
the Shia.



Let us examine some quotes from authentic Shia
sources to see what the belief in Ismah is all about.



ShiaNews.com says



“ Shaykh Muhamad Riza Muzaffar, a famous and eminent scholar
of the first half of this century writes, “We
[shias] believe that all Prophets are infallible… Infallibility means purity
from all sins, both major and minor ones, and from mistakes and forgetfulness.”
(Al-Muzzafar, The Faith of Shia Islam, p. 21)



Shaykh
Abu Ja’far as-Saduq, a scholar born during the minor occultation of the Present
Imam and died in 381 AH, says: “Our [shia]
belief concerning the Prophets, Apostles, Imams and Angels is that they are
infallible, purified from all defilement (damas), and that they do not commit
any sin, whether it be minor or major. He who denies the infallibility to them
in any matter appertaining to their status is ignorant of them… Our belief
concerning them is that they are infallible and possess the attributes of
perfection, completeness and knowledge, from the beginning to the end of their
careers.” (As-Saduq, A Shi’ite Creed, p. 87)



Allamah
Ibn Mutahhar al-Hilli (d. 728 AH) writes the following of the Shia Imams: “He is immune to sin from the first of his life to the last
of it.” (Allamah al-Hilli, Al Babul Hadi
Ashar, p. 58)



source: http://www.shianews.com/hi/articles/Islam/0000006.php



Grand Ayatollah Shirazi was asked the following
question on his official website, www.shirazi.org.uk
:



Grand Ayatollah Shirazi says



“ Are the Prophet (S), his daughter Fatimah al-Zahra’ (AS),
and the twelve Imams (AS) Ma’soom (infallible)? What is the limit of this Ismah
(infallibility)? Is it from committing any disobedience? Or is it from making
mistake, and forgetting (things)? Or is it from overcoming sleep such that
(potentially) the prayer time is missed?



[Grand
Ayatollah Shirazi answered]: “…Imams, peace and blessings of Allah be upon them
all, are all Ma’soom – infallible – from committing any disobedience,
any mistake, and any forgetfulness, even an overcoming sleep such that they may
the prayer time…We have discussed in detail the logical and rational proofs as
well as the narrated evidence with respect to this ‘Ismah in many of our books
on the fundamentals of belief and Fiqh.”



source: Grand Ayatollah Shirazi’s official website,

http://www.shirazi.org.uk/



The Shia thus believe in
three points:                                                                                                                        



1. The Imams can never commit major or minor
sins.



2. The Imams do not make mistakes.



3. The Imams never forget anything.



We see that these are all attributes of
Perfection which are unsuitable for humans. Only Allah Almighty is the One
incapable of forgetting or making a mistake. All human beings can make
mistakes. This is the definition of being a human being.



The Quran



We will now proceed to prove without a shadow of
doubt that Prophets are not infallible according to the Quran. We will show how
the Quran refutes all three points and how Prophets can sin, do
make mistakes, and do forget.



The most obvious example is that of Prophet Adam
(عليه السلام). We cannot fathom how the Shia factor in the story of Adam (عليه السلام). Allah Almighty forbade Prophet Adam (عليه السلام) from going near a tree in Paradise. But Shaytan convinced
Prophet Adam (عليه السلام) to sin and violate the Law of Allah.



In Verse 20: 121-122 in the Quran, Allah Almighty
says:



Thus did Adam disobey his
Lord, so he went astray.

Then his Lord chose him, and turned to him with forgiveness, and gave him
guidance. (Quran, 20:121-122)



Prophet Musa (عليه
السلام
) also
committed a mistake of killing an Egyptian man. In Verse 28:16 of the Quran,
Allah Almighty says:



He [Musa] said: ‘My Lord!
Verily, I have wronged myself, so forgive me.’ Then He [Allah] forgave him.
Verily, He is the Oft-Forgiving, the Most Merciful. (Quran, 28:16)



Prophet Dawood (عليه
السلام
) commited the
sin of passing judgement before hearing the case of the second disputant. In
Verse 38:23-24 of the Quran, Allah Almighty says:



…and he [Dawood] sought
forgiveness of his Lord, and he fell down prostrate and turned (to Allah) in
repentance.

So We forgave him that, and verily, for him is a near access to Us, and a good
place of (final) return (Quran, 38:23-24)



And our Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was rebuked by his Lord for several things that are mentioned
in the Quran, such as the following in verse 66:1:



O Prophet! Why do you
forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you, seeking to please
your wives? And Allaah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (Quran, 66:1)



In another verse in the Quran, the Prophet (saaw)
is rebuked for not listening to an old man:



(The Prophet) frowned and
turned away, because the blind man came to him. But didn’t you know that
perhaps he might grow (in spiritual understanding)? Or that he might have
received an important lesson, and the teaching might have profited him. As to
the one who thought he was self-sufficient, you attended to him - though it was
not your fault that he did not grow (in spiritual understanding). But as to the
one who came to you earnestly seeking and with reverence, of him you were
unmindful. It should not be so! (Quran, 80:1-11)



In another instance, the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) decided to free prisoners in the Battle of Badr, but Allah
wanted him to first seek justice by punishing the enemies of Islam. And so it
was that Allah corrected the Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
)
in the Quran:



“It is not for a Prophet
that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had
made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of
this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allah
desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise” (Quran,
8:67)



There should be no doubt left in the minds of
anyone that the Prophets cannot only make mistakes but they can also commit
minor sins. No human being is above this, and to believe such a thing is to
commit Shirk. The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) will reject
those who dare elevate his status to that which is not befitting of a man.



The Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
)
repeatedly told his followers that he is just a man and no more. Indeed, the
Prophet’s modesty is a shining example to us all. The Shia have committed a
grave sin by associating the Attributes of Allah to human beings.



The Prophets were the best of the human beings.
There is no doubt about this. We should respect all the Prophets and they are
leaders to humanity. But we should not exalt them to the status of God, or else
we will be falling in to the same trap as the Christians fell into.



Allah Almighty says in the Quran: “O People of the Scripture, do not exceed limits in your
religion beyond the truth and do not follow the inclinations of a people who
had gone astray before and misled many and have strayed from the soundness of
the way.” (Quran, 5:77)



Shaikh Ibn Taymiyyah



Shaikh Ibn Taymiyyah said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa:



The view that the Prophets were protected from
major sins (kabaa’ir) but not from minor sins (saghaa’ir) is the view of the
majority of the scholars of Islam… It is also the view of the majority of the
scholars of tafseer and hadeeth, and of the fuqahaa’. Nothing was reported from
any of the Salaf, Imams, Sahabah, Tabi’een or the successive generation that
does not agree with this view.



What has been narrated from the majority of
scholars is that they (the Prophets) are not infallible with regard to minor
sins, but they are not left to persist therein. They do not say that this does
not happen under any circumstances. The first group from whom it was narrated
that they are infallible in all cases, and who say that the most, are the
Raafidis (Shi’ah), who say that they are infallible and protected even against
forgetfulness and misunderstanding…



(Source: Islam-QA,

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=42216&dgn=4)



Prophets as Role Models



Shia says



“ Allah has commanded us to follow the Messengers and take
them as our example. The command to follow them is taken as meaning that
everything they did is an example for us to follow, and that every action and
belief of theirs is an act of worship. If we suggest that that the Messenger
committed a sin, there will be a dilemma, because that implies that we are
commanded to imitate this sin which was committed by the Prophet because we are
commanded to follow his example, but at the same time we should not agree with
it or do it, because it is a sin.





This argument would only be valid and appropriate
if the sin is hidden and not obvious in such a way that it could be
confused with acts of obedience.
But Allah has explained to His Messengers
where they went wrong and enabled them to repent without delay. Thus, there is
no confusion on the matter, and the Muslims know what is right and what is
wrong. Shaikh Muhammed Al-Munajjid responded to this Shia argument by saying:



This argument is valid and is appropriate if the
sin is hidden and not obvious in such a way that it could be confused with acts
of obedience. But Allah has explained to His Messengers where they went wrong
and enabled them to repent without delay.



(Source: Islam-QA,

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=42216&dgn=4)



In fact, the believers can imitate the Prophets
in the manner in which they repent and seek Allah’s Help. For example, the
example of Prophet Adam (عليه السلام) touching the forbidden tree serves as a
good reminder for all Muslims; we know from this story that we should obey
Allah and that when we disobey Him, then we should repent immediately and
sincerely like Adam (عليه السلام) did.



Although the Prophets are not infallible in
totality, they are infallible in the specific aspect of conveying the Message
of Islam. For example, the Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
)
would never make a mistake when he was reciting the Quran. Angel Jibrael (عليه السلام) instructed the Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
)
to “read” to which the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم
) responded
that he could not read. But Allah allowed him to read and recite when it came
to the Quran because it was Allah Himself who would ensure that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) would convey it correctly. The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was at first worried that he would forget the words of Allah,
but Allah reassured Him that Allah has taken the responsibility of ensuring
that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) conveys it with 100% accuracy.



Allah says in the Quran: “Your
companion (Muhammad) has neither gone astray nor has erred. Nor does he speak
of (his own) desire. It is only a Revelation revealed. He has been taught (this
Quran) by one mighty in power.” (Quran, 53:1-5)



The Ummah is agreed that the Messengers do not
make mistakes when it comes to conveying the message. They did not forget
anything that Allah revealed to them, except for things that were abrogated.
And Allah guaranteed His Messenger that he would remember it and would not
forget it, except for that which Allah wanted him to forget, and He guaranteed
to remember the whole Quran in his heart. Allah declared: “We shall make you to recite (the Quran), so you (O Muhammad)
shall not forget (it).” (Quran, 87:7)



So the fact that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is not infallible in totality does not mean that the Message
will be compromised at all. The reason for this is clearly stated in the Quran,
namely that Allah has taken the responsibility: “It is
for Us to collect it and to give you (O Muhammad) the ability to
recite it (the Quran).” (Quran, 75:17)



Hence, the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) could not make mistakes when it came to religion namely
because Allah ensured this. On the other hand, it is not impossible for the
Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) to make minor mistakes on issues that
have no bearing on his delivering the message. For example, he could make minor
mistakes when it came to non-religious issues, such as agriculture, carpentry,
and other such secular matters. Making minor mistakes in such matters does not
put into question the Prophet’s ability to convey the Message.



Shaikh Muhammed Al-Munajjid declared:



With regard to worldly matters…with regard to
agriculture, medicine, carpentry, etc., he was like all other people. Allah did
not tell us that he was sent to us as a businessman or a farmer or a carpenter
or a doctor. His mistakes in these fields are quite natural and do not impact
on his Message at all.



(Source: Islam-QA,

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=7208&dgn=3)



In a Hadith narrated by Muslim:



The Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
)
came to Madinah, and they were pollinating the date-palms. He said, “What are you doing?” They said, “We always used to pollinate them.” He said, “Perhaps if you do not do that, it will be better.” So
they did not do it, and the harvest was lacking. They mentioned that to him,
and he said, “I am only a human being like you. If I
tell you to do something with regard to religion, then follow it, but if I tell
you to do something based on my own opinion, I am only a human being.” (narrated
by Muslim, 2361).



We note that the Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) made a mistake in this worldly matter, because he was like all
other human beings. But this does not take away from his greatness as a
Prophet. A Prophet is not expected to know extraneous things such as how to fix
an automobile radiator, solve quadratic equations, or other such matters which
do not pertain to his Prophethood nor do they aid him in his mission to spread
the religion of Islam to the corners of the globe.



The Standing Committee



The Standing Committee, one of the most respected
scholarly bodies of the Ahlus Sunnah, was asked:



Do the Prophets and Messengers make mistakes?



The Standing Committee replied:



Yes, they make mistakes but Allah does not let
them persist in their mistakes, rather he points out their mistakes to them as
a mercy to them and their nations, and He forgives them for their mistakes, and
accepts their repentance by His Grace and Mercy, for Allah is Oft-Forgiving,
Most Merciful, as will be clear to anyone who studies the verses of the Quran
which speak of that.



(Source: Islam-QA, Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah,
3/194,

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=42216&dgn=4)



Greatness of the Prophets



There is absolutely no doubt that the Prophets
are the best of human beings. It does not take away from their character at all
to say that they are not perfect, or to say that they can commit minor mistakes
and such. In fact, this only increases them in their greatness. First off, the
Prophets do not commit major sins, but only minor ones. And Allah allows them
to commit these sins so that He increases them in their faith when they ask for
repentance. When a person sins, and then repents, Allah increases him in status
for this.



Yes, sins are a shortcoming, but only if they are
not accompanied by repentance, for repentance brings forgiveness of sin, and
does not contradict goodness or bring blame upon a person. Rather, in many
cases a person may be better after repenting than he was before he fell into
sin. It is well known that no Prophet committed sin except that he hastened to
repent and seek forgiveness. The Prophets did not persist in sin or delay
repentance, for Allah protected them from that, and after repenting they became
better people than they were before. [Paraphrased from the words of Shaikh
Muhammed Al-Munajjid, Source:

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=42216&dgn=4]



Conclusion



The debate over the issue of the Prophets’
infallibility is completely unnecessary, since the Quran itself mentions
several instances in which Allah is reprimanding the Prophets for making a
mistake. We have cited some of these verses in this article. These verses
should be enough to convince the unbiased viewer that the Shia idea that their
Imams are infallible is an exaggeration and blasphemous innovation that runs
contrary to the Quran.



Simple logic dictates that it makes little sense
for the Prophets to be asking for forgiveness from Allah unless they were
capable of comitting mistakes and minor sins in the first place; otherwise, why
would there even be a need to ask for forgiveness? If a person does not commit
sins, then there is no need to ask for forgiveness, and yet we find that the
Prophets repeatedly asked for forgiveness. This can only mean that they did
commit mistakes and minor sins, although they hastened for repentance.



The idea of Ismah (Infallibility) is at the core
of the Shia faith. We have disproved it by providing verses from the Quran, and
thereby we have toppled the ideological foundation of Shi’ism.



Article Written By: Ibn al-Hashimi,
http://www.ahlelbayt.com/



Reference: Islam-QA,

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=42216&dgn=4



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


Imamah and Shirk


 

  • Introduction


The
major difference between the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah and their Shia brothers
is the concept of Imamah. The Shia believe in their twelve Infallible Imams.
The Christians have exalted the status of Prophet Isa (عليه السلام) to a
level higher than that of a human, and for this, Allah has condemned them in
the Quran. Likewise, the Shia have exalted their Imams to a level of Shirk,
granting them powers, abilities, and qualities only befitting of Allah
Almighty.



  • Ayatollah
    Ibrahim Amini


Muslims believe that nobody can help us
or hurt us except Allah Almighty. He is the absolute reason for our survival
and existence on this earth. Without Allah, the human species would be extinct.



Instead of believing that our existence
revolves around Allah, the Shia believe that their existence revolves around
the Imam. Ayatollah Ibrahim Amini declared: “If the Imam is absent the human
species will be extinct.”



(Source:
http://www.victorynewsmagazine.com/WhatBenefit12thImaminOccultation.htm )



This is truly a contradiction to the
verse in the Quran in which Allah says: “Allah has
granted you life…” (Quran, 45:26)



The full text of the Ayatollah reads as
follows:



“The existence of the Imam as a perfect
and unique embodiment of humanity serves as a link between the material and the
spiritual world. If the Imam is absent the human species will be extinct.
If there is no Imam then God cannot be known or worshipped perfectly. Without
the Imam the link between the material and the spiritual becomes severed. The
heart of the Imam is like the source of electricity that distributes light to
numerous lights. The illumination and energization of the hidden universe first
mirrors in the heart of the Imam and then from there it reflects on the hearts
of humankind. The Imam is the heart of the created universe and the
leader and guide of humankind.”



(Source:
http://www.victorynewsmagazine.com/WhatBenefit12thImaminOccultation.htm )



What is truly perplexing is the fact
that the Infallible Imams are not mentioned in the Quran at all. If they truly
were so important that existence was impossible without them, then where is
this mentioned in the Quran? Where does it say in the Quran that Allah cannot
be worshipped without the Imam? Where in the Quran does it say that the link
between the material world and the spiritual world becomes severed without the
Imam? Where in the Quran does it mention that the Imam is the heart of the very
universe? If the Imam was truly the heart of the universe, wouldn’t this have
been mentioned in the Quran?



  • Imam
    Sadiq


One of the Infallible Imams of the Shia,
Imam Sadiq, said the following about himself:



“We are the leaders of the Muslims,
God’s proofs for His creatures, masters of the believers, guides for the
Godfearing, and those invested with discretionary authority over the affairs of
the Muslims. We are the security for the dwellers of the earth, just as the
stars are the security of the dwellers of the heavens. It is because of us that
the heavens descend on earth whenever God permits. It is because of us that the
rain descends and blessings of earth come out of it. If we had not been on
earth its dwellers would have been consumed in it.” (source: http://www.karbala-najaf.org/Fourteen/Occultation.htm
)



Arrogance (Khibr) is Haram (forbidden).
How can the Imams talk about themselves in such an arrogant manner as this?
Truly, if the Shia are adamant in their belief that Imam Sadiq said all of this
self-praise, then this only makes the Imam seem like a pompous egoist. Let us
simply look at the humbleness of the Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
who was instructed to say repeatedly that he was just another man. Allah
Almighty says in the Quran: “Say [O Muhammad]: ‘I am
but a man like yourselves’” (Quran, 18:110)



How can the Imams be the masters of the
believers? Where in the Quran does it say that the Imams are our masters?
Surely, Allah is our Master, Glorified and Exalted be He! It is Allah who gives
rain and the Imams have nothing to do with causing rain to shower the earth.
Allah says in the Quran: “See you not that Allah sends
down rain from the sky…” (Quran, 22:63)



  • Imam
    Al-Rida


Imam Al-Rida–yet another of the Shia
Imams–was also very arrogant about himself (if we give credence to Shia
sources). In Al-Kafi, the most reliable of the four Shia books of Hadith, Imam
Al-Rida says the following about himself:



“The Imam is utterly free of sin and
pure of all fault. He is celebrated for his knowledge and his forbearance…The
Imam is unique in his age, in the sense that no one can attain his rank. No
scholar can come within range of his knowledge, and he is unequalled in all his
qualities. He possesses all virtues and worthy attributes without any striving
on his part, and he is adorned with all lofty characteristics.” (Al-Kulayni,
Al-Kafi, Vol. I, p.200, Source: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/
)



How can the Imam possess all the good
things without even striving for them? This is truly an exaggeration beyond
bounds. Every human being must strive, and Allah commands His followers to do
so.



  • Imam
    Jafar al-Sadiq


The Shia are known for their
exaggeration in matters of faith. This exaggeration and innovation can be
clearly seen on the Shia book on Imamate, available on the Al-Islam.org
website. Imam Jafar al-Sadiq said the following:



“Whenever the Imam wishes to be informed
of something, God informs him of it…We are the administrators of God’s affair,
the treasures of His knowledge, and the repository of His revealed
mysteries…God’s greatness requires that when He appoints a person as His proof
to mankind He discloses to him the knowledge of the heavens and the earth.”
(Source: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/ )



Imam Jafar also said:



“If I were to meet with Musa and Khidr,
I would tell them that I am more knowledgeable than both of them, and I would
expound to them matters unknown to them. For they knew only what had been and
what was, and they knew nothing of what would happen down to the Day of
Ressurection, whereas we have inherited knowledge of all that from the
Prophet.” (Source: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/
)



Imam Jafar is reported by the Shia to
have said the following to his peers: “I swear by God that knowledge of the
first things and the last things has been bestowed on us [imams].” On hearing this
utterance of the Imam, one of his companions asked him wether he had knowledge
of the unseen. He [imam Jafar] answered:



“Woe upon you that you find it necessary
to ask such a question. We are fully informed of each drop of sperm in the
loins of men and the wombs of women. Woe upon you; open your eyes, and let your
hearts perceive the truth! We are God’s proof, dwelling among His creation, but
only the believers whose faith is as firm as the mountains of Tihamah has the
ability to perceive this truth. I swear by God that if I wished I could inform
you how many pebbles exist in the world, even though their number is constantly
growing, by night and by day.” (Source: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/
)



These quotes are all contradictory to
the Quran, in which Allah declares that He and He alone possesses knowledge of
the Unseen. This idea that the Imams can see the Unseen, that they can know
everything about the heavens and the earth, and all of these other
exaggerations are contradictory to the spirit of Islam. To give the attributes
and qualities of Allah to the creation is the unforgiveable sin that is known
as Shirk.



  • Ali
    ibn abi Talib
    (رضّى الله عنه)


The Shia indirectly slander Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
by attributing fallacious statements to him. If we were to believe these
reports, then we would be forced to see Ali (رضّى الله
عنه
) as having Khibr
(arrogance). Hence, the Ahlus Sunnah categorically rejects these statements as
fabrications. Ali (رضّى الله عنه) is reported by the Shia to have said the following:



“He [Allah] opened up for me channels of
knowledge permitting me to know when every death occurs, when disasters
descend, what are men’s genealogies, and the decisive speech (that separates
truth from falsehood); He permitted me to hook upon the world of the unseen, so
that past and future events were unfolded before me; He perfected religion for
mankind, completed His blessing for them, and accepted Islam for them as
religion for them by appointing me as the holder of divine authority. and He
instructed Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, to inform
the people of all that. These are God’s gifts to me, so may praise be given to
Him alone.” (Source: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/
)



The Shia originate from the Saba’ites,
followers of Abdullah ibn Saba. They praised Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
) excessively and
eventually exalted his status to equal to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم).
Today, the Shia deny that they originate from the Saba’ites, yet the statements
about Ali (رضّى الله عنه) seem to verify the link between Abdullah ibn Saba and the
Shia. Let us examine a statement attributed to Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
) by the Shia, in
which Ali (رضّى الله عنه) is said to be equal in knowledge to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم); according to the Shia, Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
) said:



“I swear by God Who holds my soul in His
hand that I know all that the Prophet knew, and that I know all of the past
and all of the future,
up until the Day of Resurrection.” (Source: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/ )



Not even the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
knew all of the future, as mentioned in the Quran itself:



“Say (O Muhammed), ‘I do not
say to you that I possess the treasures of Allah. Nor do I know the future. Nor
do I say to you that I am an angel. I simply follow what is revealed to me.” (Quran, 6:50)



It is Kufr to say that Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
knew all of the future, for it is denying this verse in the Quran in which the
Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) himself denies this ability. Imagine the reaction
of the Shia if the Ahlus Sunnah declared that Umar bin Khattab (رضّى الله عنه)
was equal in knowledge to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم
)!



According to the Shia, Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
said:



“He [Allah] opened up for me channels of
knowledge permitting me to know when every death occurs, when disasters
descend, what are men’s genealogies, and the decisive speech (that separates
truth from falsehood); He permitted me to hook upon the world of the unseen, so
that past and future events were unfolded before me; He perfected religion for
mankind, completed His blessing for them, and accepted Islam for them as
religion for them by appointing me as the holder of divine authority. And He
instructed Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, to inform
the people of all that. These are God’s gifts to me…” (Source: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/ )



Truly this is an exaggeration beyond
bounds, indicative of the Shia faith as a whole. The Shia find no corroboration
in the Quran for these errant beliefs.



  • Al-Kafi


Al-Kafi is the most reliable of the four
Shia books of Hadith. In it, we find Hadith after Hadith wherein the Imams
decare their own greatnesses to the world to behold. One such Hadith is:



“We [the Imams] are the eyes of Allah in
his creatures and the final authority in all human beings.” (Usool-e Kaafi,
Vol. No. 1, Page No. 145)



The methodology in which the Shia exalt
their Imams is very similar to the manner in which the Christians exalt Prophet
Isa. In another Hadith, the Shia Imams declare:



“The Imam knows his hour of death and
his death is in his control.” (Usool-e Kaafi, Vol. No. 1,Page No. 258)



According to the Shia, nothing can
remain hidden from the Imams, and they have a complete knowledge of past,
present and future. (Usool Al-Kafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 260) The Imams could
supposedly tell who is going to Paradise and who is going to Hell-Fire merely
by listening to a person’s voice. “By listening to the voice of a person, the
Imams can tell if the person was destined to go to hell or to heaven; they
would thus answer his questions accordingly.” (Usool Al-Kafi, p. 185) We see
here that the Shia are granting Ali the role of the Creator–namely to judge
people.



In the Shia book Khilaqat-e-Norania, the
Shia say that the Imam possesses authority to declare anything lawful or
unlawful. (Khilaqat-e-Norania, Page No. 155) This is completely contradictory
to the Quranic injunctions, in which Allah Almighty warns the believers not to
declare the lawful to be unlawful and vice/versa, and that this right was given
only to Allah and His Messenger.



In Usool Al-Kafi, the Shia Haidth
declares “The Imams are the face of Allah.” (Usool Al-Kafi, p83.) This is
blasphemy to declare a human being to be the face of Allah.



Another narration in Al-Kafi brazenly
declares: “All of the earth belongs to the Imams.” (Al- Kulaini. Al-Kafi,
p.407) How this contradicts the Quran, where Allah declares: “To Allah belong all things in heaven and earth!” (Quran,
31:26)



The following is another Shia Hadith in
Al-Kafi: “There is not a single truth possessed by a people saved that which
originated with the Imams, and everything which did not proceed from them is
false.” (Al- Kulaini, Al-Kafi, p.399) Does this not contradict the Quran, which
says Allah is the originator of all truth, not human beings, as narrated in
verse 24:25: “…and they will realize that Allah is the
(very) Truth, that makes all things manifest.” (Quran, 24:25)



  • Conclusion


This article is only the tip of the
iceberg, but it is a good insight into the manner in which the Shia exalt their
Imams and commit Shirk in the process. What is the most perplexing is the fact
that if any of these statements about the Imams were really true, then why is
this not mentioned in the Quran? Surely, it is significant to mention the
greatness of the Imams in the Quran if all creation depends on the Imams and
life cannot be sustained without them. And yet, the Quran remains completely
silent on the Imams. This is something for the Shia to ponder upon.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


Imam Knows the Hour of His Death



 



The
Shia believe that the Imams know when they are going to die and die only by
their own will. We find in Al-Kafi, the most reliable of the four Shia books of
Hadith:



“The Imam knows his Hour of death and
his death is in his control.” (Usool Al-Kafi, Vol. No. 1,Page No. 258)



Of course, this contradicts the Islamic
belief, for not even the Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
) knew when he
was going to die, and he definitely did not do so out of his own control. It is
a fundamental belief in Islam that nobody knows when they are going to die and
nobody has any control over it save Allah Almighty.



Allah Almighty says in the Quran that
everyone’s time of death is decided by Allah and Allah alone:



“And no soul can die except by Allah’s
leave- a [divine] decree with a fixed term!” (The Noble Quran, 3:145)



The Shia claim that their Imams have
control over their own deaths. But it is a basic concept in Islam that nobody
has control over his death. Allah decrees death, and nobody can change the manner
in which they die, in which land they die, nor can they avert death or even
postpone it by a fraction of a second. Allah challenges human beings to avert
death:



“Say: Avert death from your ownselves,
if you speak the truth!” (Quran, 3:168)



“Even if you had remained in your homes,
those from whom death was decreed would certainly have gone forth to the place
of their death.” (Quran, 3:154)



“It is Allah that gives life and causes
death.” (Quran, 3:156)



The hour in which a person dies is known
only to Allah Almighty. This also holds true for the Day of Judgment–only Allah
knows when the Day of Reckoning will be, but the Shia will say that their Imams
know everything about the future. How can they know of the Hour when Allah
says:



“They ask you about the (final) Hour -
when will be its appointed time? Say: ‘The knowledge thereof is with my Lord
(alone): None but He can reveal as to when it will occur. Heavy were its burden
through the heavens and the earth. Only, all of a sudden will it come to you.’
They ask you as if you were eager in search thereof: Say: ‘The knowledge
thereof is with Allah (alone), but most men know not.’” (The Noble Quran,
7:187)



“Verily the Hour is coming - My design
is to keep it hidden” (The Noble Quran, 20:15)



“They say: ‘When will this promise come
to pass, if you are telling the truth?’ If only the Unbelievers knew (the time)
when they will not be able to ward off the fire from their faces, nor yet from
their backs, and (when) no help can reach them! Nay, it may come to them all of
a sudden and confound them: no power will they have then to avert it, nor will
they (then) get respite.” (The Noble Quran, 21:38-40)



“Verily the knowledge of the Hour is
with Allah (alone). It is He Who sends down rain, and He Who knows what is in
the wombs. Nor does any one know what it is that he will earn on the morrow: Nor
does any one know in what land he is to die in.
Verily with Allah is full
knowledge and He is acquainted (with all things).” (The Noble Quran, 31:34)



“Men ask you concerning the Hour: Say,
‘The knowledge thereof is with Allah (alone)’: and what will make you
understand?- perchance the Hour is near!” (The Noble Quran, 33:63)



“The Unbelievers say, ‘Never to us will
come the Hour’: Say, ‘Nay! but most surely, by my Lord, it will come upon you;-
by Him Who knows the unseen,- from Whom is not hidden the least little atom in
the heavens or on earth: Nor is there anything less than that, or greater, but
is in the Record Perspicuous:’ ” (The Noble Quran, 34:3)



“And blessed is He to Whom belongs the
dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all between them: with Him is the
Knowledge of the Hour: and to Him shall you be brought back.” (The Noble Quran,
43:85)



“Say [O Muhammad]: ‘I know not whether
the (Punishment) which you are promised is near, or whether my Lord will
appoint for it a distant term.” (The Noble Quran, 72:25)



The Quran declares that nobody knows in
which land he will die, so how can the Imam know this? How can the Imam know
even more than this (such as his time of death, manner of death, etc)? Surely,
none of this is in control of a human being. How can the Imam know all of this
when the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said he did not even know what will
happen to himself? Allah says in the Quran:



“Say (O Muhammed), ‘I am not different
from other messengers. I have no idea what will happen to me or to you. I only
follow whatis revealed to me. I am no more than a profound warner.’” (The Noble
Quran, 46:9)



“Say (O Muhammed), ‘I do not say to you
that I possess the treasures of Allah. Nor do I know the future. Nor do I say
to you that I am an angel. I simply follow what is revealed to me.” (The Noble
Quran, 6:50)



The manner in which the Shia have
exaggerated with their Imams is very similar to the manner in which the
Christians did with their prophet. Such exaggeration always leads to one
inevitable result, either directly or indirectly–and this end result is Shirk.
The Shia are attributing powers and prestiges that should not be given to
anyone except Allah Almighty.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


Imam Knows the Hour of
His Death



 



The
Shia believe that the Imams know when they are going to die and die only by
their own will. We find in Al-Kafi, the most reliable of the four Shia books of
Hadith:



“The Imam knows his Hour of death and
his death is in his control.” (Usool Al-Kafi, Vol. No. 1,Page No. 258)



Of course, this contradicts the Islamic
belief, for not even the Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
) knew when he
was going to die, and he definitely did not do so out of his own control. It is
a fundamental belief in Islam that nobody knows when they are going to die and
nobody has any control over it save Allah Almighty.



Allah Almighty says in the Quran that
everyone’s time of death is decided by Allah and Allah alone:



“And no soul can die except by Allah’s
leave- a [divine] decree with a fixed term!” (The Noble Quran, 3:145)



The Shia claim that their Imams have
control over their own deaths. But it is a basic concept in Islam that nobody
has control over his death. Allah decrees death, and nobody can change the manner
in which they die, in which land they die, nor can they avert death or even
postpone it by a fraction of a second. Allah challenges human beings to avert
death:



“Say: Avert death from your ownselves,
if you speak the truth!” (Quran, 3:168)



“Even if you had remained in your homes,
those from whom death was decreed would certainly have gone forth to the place
of their death.” (Quran, 3:154)



“It is Allah that gives life and causes
death.” (Quran, 3:156)



The hour in which a person dies is known
only to Allah Almighty. This also holds true for the Day of Judgment–only Allah
knows when the Day of Reckoning will be, but the Shia will say that their Imams
know everything about the future. How can they know of the Hour when Allah
says:



“They ask you about the (final) Hour -
when will be its appointed time? Say: ‘The knowledge thereof is with my Lord
(alone): None but He can reveal as to when it will occur. Heavy were its burden
through the heavens and the earth. Only, all of a sudden will it come to you.’
They ask you as if you were eager in search thereof: Say: ‘The knowledge
thereof is with Allah (alone), but most men know not.’” (The Noble Quran,
7:187)



“Verily the Hour is coming - My design
is to keep it hidden” (The Noble Quran, 20:15)



“They say: ‘When will this promise come
to pass, if you are telling the truth?’ If only the Unbelievers knew (the time)
when they will not be able to ward off the fire from their faces, nor yet from
their backs, and (when) no help can reach them! Nay, it may come to them all of
a sudden and confound them: no power will they have then to avert it, nor will
they (then) get respite.” (The Noble Quran, 21:38-40)



“Verily the knowledge of the Hour is
with Allah (alone). It is He Who sends down rain, and He Who knows what is in
the wombs. Nor does any one know what it is that he will earn on the morrow: Nor
does any one know in what land he is to die in.
Verily with Allah is full
knowledge and He is acquainted (with all things).” (The Noble Quran, 31:34)



“Men ask you concerning the Hour: Say,
‘The knowledge thereof is with Allah (alone)’: and what will make you
understand?- perchance the Hour is near!” (The Noble Quran, 33:63)



“The Unbelievers say, ‘Never to us will
come the Hour’: Say, ‘Nay! but most surely, by my Lord, it will come upon you;-
by Him Who knows the unseen,- from Whom is not hidden the least little atom in
the heavens or on earth: Nor is there anything less than that, or greater, but
is in the Record Perspicuous:’ ” (The Noble Quran, 34:3)



“And blessed is He to Whom belongs the
dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all between them: with Him is the
Knowledge of the Hour: and to Him shall you be brought back.” (The Noble Quran,
43:85)



“Say [O Muhammad]: ‘I know not whether
the (Punishment) which you are promised is near, or whether my Lord will
appoint for it a distant term.” (The Noble Quran, 72:25)



The Quran declares that nobody knows in
which land he will die, so how can the Imam know this? How can the Imam know
even more than this (such as his time of death, manner of death, etc)? Surely,
none of this is in control of a human being. How can the Imam know all of this
when the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said he did not even know what will
happen to himself? Allah says in the Quran:



“Say (O Muhammed), ‘I am not different
from other messengers. I have no idea what will happen to me or to you. I only
follow whatis revealed to me. I am no more than a profound warner.’” (The Noble
Quran, 46:9)



“Say (O Muhammed), ‘I do not say to you
that I possess the treasures of Allah. Nor do I know the future. Nor do I say
to you that I am an angel. I simply follow what is revealed to me.” (The Noble
Quran, 6:50)



The manner in which the Shia have
exaggerated with their Imams is very similar to the manner in which the
Christians did with their prophet. Such exaggeration always leads to one
inevitable result, either directly or indirectly–and this end result is Shirk.
The Shia are attributing powers and prestiges that should not be given to
anyone except Allah Almighty.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


Imams Can See Al-Ghaib (the Unseen)




 

The Shia believe that their
Infallible Imams posses knowledge of Al-Ghaib (the Unseen). Here is a quote
from Lesson 23 on the popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org:



“The Immaculate Imams can also make contact with
the world of the unseen (Al-Ghaib) whenever necessary by seeking God’s aid and
support and thereby gain access to knowledge they need.” (Source:
http://al-Islam.org/leadership/ )



So the Imams are believed to be able to see
Al-Ghaib , even though the Quran clearly says:



“None knows Allah’s Al-Ghaib (Unseen realm)
except those whom He chooses from among His messengers.” (Quran, 72:26)



In this verse, Allah categorically declares that
only Messengers can see Al-Ghaib by the Grace of Allah. There is categorical
exclusion of anyone else, and this is known to anyone who understands the
Arabic. This puts the Shia in a dilemma. The Ahlus Sunnah has always accused
the Shia of believing in false messengers (Dajjals), but the Shia have
adamantly denied that their Imams are messengers. So we wonder then: how do the
Shia respond to this Quranic verse without either admitting that they believe
in false messengers after Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) or by admitting that they are commiting Kufr by
believing that their Imams see Al-Ghaib? What a predicament for the Shia!



There is no way out for the Shia on this matter.
According to the Quran, only messengers can see Al-Ghaib. This is clear
evidence to the unbiased observor that the Shia believe in messengers after
Prophet Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
) since
they say that their Imams see Al-Ghaib. The Shia simply do not call them
by the name “messenger” or “prophet”, but rather they use the term “Imam”
instead. However, other than the name, the Imam has all the same powers and prestige
as a messenger or prophet. Denying the finality of Prophethood is Kufr since it
violates this verse in the Quran:



“Muhammad is not the father of any man among you,
but the Messenger of Allah and the Last of Prophets. And Allah has knowledge of
everything.” (Quran 33:40)



  • Al-Kafi


Let us examine what the Imams say in Al-Kafi, the most reliable of the
four books of Shia Hadith:



عبدالله عليه السلام يقول : إني لاعلم ما في السماوات وأعلم ما في الارضين وأعلم ما في الجنة وأعلم ما في النار وأعلم ما كان وما يكون



Imam Abu Abdullah said: “I have a knowledge about what in the heavens and what is in
the earth,what in the paradise and what is in the fire, and I know what was
(before) and what is going to happen…”



“Biharul anwar” vol 26, p 111



“Al Kafi” vol 1, p 261



The name of the chapter is simply
shocking:



(باب)* (أن الائمة (عليهم السلام) إذا شاؤوا أن يعلموا علموا)



“If the
Imam wants to know anything, he will know it”



“Al Kafi” vol 1, p 258



According to the Shia, Imam Jafar said: “Whenever the Imam wishes to be informed of something, Allah
informs him of it.” (Source: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/
)



He further stated: “I
swear by God that knowledge of the first things and the last things has been
bestowed on us.” On hearing this utterance of the Imam, one of his
companions asked him whether he had knowledge of Al-Ghaib (the Unseen). He
answered:



“Woe upon you that you find it necessary to ask
such a question. We are fully informed of each drop of sperm in the loins of
men and the wombs of women. Woe upon you; open your eyes, and let your hearts
perceive the truth! We are God’s proof, dwelling among His creation, but only
the believer whose faith is as firm as the mountains of Tihamah has the ability
to perceive this truth. I swear by God that if I wished I could inform you how
many pebbles exist in the world, even though their number is constantly
growing, by night and by day. I swear by God that after me you will rise up in
enmity against each other until one group among you destroys the other.”
(Source: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/ )



Imam Baqir is reported to have said: “We have been given complete knowledge of the heavens and the
earth.” (Source: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/
)



  • The
    Quran


Once again, the Shia find no validation for their
belief in the Quran, but rather the Quran rejects the idea that the Imams can
know Al-Ghaib. According to the Quran, none save a few chosen Messengers
can see Al-Ghaib, and even this is limited access as Allah pleases. Nobody save
Allah and Allah alone knows “anything and everything” as the Shia claim their
Imams do. Indeed, there were matters of Al-Ghaib that were not shared with
Prophet Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
),
and this is mentioned in the Quran. For example, the knowledge of the Hour of
the Day of Judgment was not given to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم).



The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) repeatedly declared that he had limited knowledge and
that only Allah knew all of Al-Ghaib. To cogitate that the Imams know all of
Al-Ghaib is a blasphemy beyond bounds. Here are some verses in the Quran that
refute the Shia belief:



“And with Him [Allah] are the keys of the Unseen
(Ghaib); none knows them but He. ” (Quran, 6:59)



“Say (O Muhammed), ‘I am not different from other
messengers. I have no idea what will happen to me or to you. I only follow
whatis revealed to me. I am no more than a profound warner.’” (Quran, 46:9)



“Say (O Messenger): ‘I do not control any benefit
or harm for my own soul except as Allah pleases; had I known the Unseen (Ghaib)
I would have had much of good and no evil would have touched me; I am nothing
but a warner and the giver of good news to a people who believe.’” (Quran,
7:188)



“Say (O Muhammed), ‘I do not say to you that I
possess the treasures of Allah. Nor do I know the future. Nor do I say to you
that I am an angel. I simply follow what is revealed to me.” (Quran, 6:50)



“Nor will Allah disclose to [any of] you the
secrets of the Unseen (Ghaib), But He chooses of His Messengers (for the
purpose) whom He pleases.” (Quran, 3:180)



The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) only knew a limited amount of Al-Ghaib and only what
Allah revealed to Him of it. It certainly was not an absolute knowledge of
Al-Ghaib, which is something that only Allah and Allah alone knows because He
is Al-Aalim (All-Knowing, Omniscient). In fact, Allah told His Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) that:



“These are announcements relating to the Unseen
(Ghaib) which We reveal to you, you did not know them– neither you nor your
people…
” (Quran, 11:49)



Surely, the Imams would be included in “neither
you nor your people.”



Allah declares:



“And they say: ‘Why is not a sign sent to him
from his Lord?’ Say [O Muhammad]: ‘The Unseen (Ghaib) is only for Allah;
therefore wait– surely I too, with you am of those who wait.” (Quran, 10:20)



“Say: ‘No one in the heavens and the earth knows
the Unseen (Ghaib) but Allah; and they do not know when they shall be raised.’”
(Quran, 27:65)



“None knows Allah’s Al-Ghaib (Unseen realm)
except those whom He chooses from among His messengers.” (Quran, 72:26)



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imamah: the Antithesis of Egalatarianism

 

 

 

  • Introduction

All
four of the rightly guided Caliphs were selected by a system of Shurah (mutual
consultation); furthermore, the general public gave their Bayat (pledge of
allegiance) to show their acceptance of each of these nominations. As is
apparent, this system of nomination was egalatarian in spirit and consistent
with fairness.


The Four Rightly Guided Caliphs did not
utilize the system of absolute monarchy or hereditary kingship that was common
during that time, namely because it was contrary to the spirit of Islam.
Hereditary kingship entails that certain people are created superior to others
based simply on who their parents are, and whose womb they come from. A prince
becomes king simply because he was born from a mother who is a queen and a
father who is a king. He could be the most wretched and vile person on earth,
but this does not matter because he was born to the right family. Likewise, a
person born to a peasant would “inherit” the status of peasant and could never
rise to the rank of leader of the people.


The Shia would have us believe that the
leadership of the Muslims is to forever be a hereditary kingship. The title of
“Imam” is passed down by birthright. As such, the Imam’s bloodline is
inherently superior to everyone else. The son of the Imam automatically becomes
the future Imam simply because he was fortunate enough to be born to the right
womb. The Shia say that Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) has no right to the Caliphate because he
was not related to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم) and was not part of the
Ahlel Bayt; they say that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) must be Caliph because he was related to
the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). Likewise, they scorn Muawiyyah (رضّى الله عنه)
because they say that he was born from the lineage of Abu Sufyan, and the Shia
will never forget to mention this fact, as if this has any bearing on the
nature of Muawiyyah (رضّى الله عنه).


The Shia adamantly believe that the
leadership of the Muslims cannot go outside one lineage, namely that of the
Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). This concept of birthright is contrary
to the spirit of Islam, which dictates that men work for their rank and
position in this life, and that their lineage cannot possibly dictate their
greatness. This would go against not only Islamic morals, but against our
contemporary notion of fairness as well.

  • The
    Quran

Islam came and destroyed the concept of
hereditary rank. The Quran declares that people are created inherently equal
and differ only based on their Taqwa (piety):


“Verily the most honored of
you in the sight of Allah is he who is the most righteous of you.” (Quran, 49:13)


The Quran repeatedly holds each
individual responsible for his or her own conduct. The actions of one soul
cannot affect another, neither positively nor negatively. To do so would go
against the egalatarian spirit of Islam, and would instead be a reflection of
Jahiliyyah custom in which people thought they would be saved based on their
familial connections as opposed to their Taqwa. The Quran categorically
declares that on the Day of Judgement a person’s familial connections will be
cut off: “so now all relations between you have been
cut off” (Quran, 6:94)


And then Allah says:


“…one soul shall not avail
another” (Quran,
2:48)


And again:


“…one soul shall not avail
another” (Quran,
2:123)


The Quran categorically states that no
soul shall have an effect on another:


“…no soul benefits except from
its own work, and none bears the burden of another” (Quran, 6:164)


And again, Allah repeats it “that no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of
another–And that man shall have nothing but what he [himself] strives
for” (Quran, 5:38-39)


As well as: “that
every soul delivers itself to ruin by its own acts” (Quran, 6:70)

  • The
    Hadith

The Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم) declared
that people were born inherently equal “except by piety
and good action (Taqwa). Indeed the best among you is the one with the best
character (Taqwa). Listen to me. Did I convey this to you properly?…Each one of
you who is here must convey this to everyone not present.” (Excerpt from
the Prophet’s Last Sermon as in Baihiqi)


The Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said:


“There are indeed people who
boast of their dead ancestors; but in the sight of Allah they are more
contemptible than the black beetle that rolls a piece of dung with its nose.
Behold, Allah has removed from you the arrogance of the Time of Jahiliyyah
(Ignorance) with its boast of ancestral glories. Man is but an Allah-fearing
believer or an unfortunate sinner. All people are the children of Adam, and
Adam was created out of dust.” [At-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud]


The Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said
further:


“Undoubtedly Allah has removed
from you the pride of arrogance of the age of Jahiliyah (ignorance) and the
glorification of ancestors. Now people are of two kinds. Either believers who
are aware or transgressors who do wrong. You are all the children of Adam and
Adam was made of clay… If they do not give this up (i.e. pride in ancestors)
Allah will consider them lower than the lowly worm which pushes itself through
Khara (dung).” [Abu
Dawud and Tirmidhi]


The Shia are accusing the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) of being a hypocrite; after all, how could the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) praise and exalt his progeny and lineage whilst forbidding
anyone else from glorifying their lineage?

  • Historical
    Examples

People should not be accorded special
rights simply because they were born to the right womb. People should be judged
on their Taqwa, not their birth. Bilal (رضّى الله عنه) was a slave, born to a slave woman, and
today he is remembered as one of the noblest of Sahabah–despite his “lowly
birth.” (He is also one of the few Sahabah that the Shia respect.) On the other
hand, both Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab were from the same bloodline as the
Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), and yet they are the two people who
Allah has promised Hell-fire for them.


And to take it even one step further:
today, there are descendants of Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab who are highly religious
Muslims, and will Insha-Allah enter Paradise. We do not think their lineages
will any way hamper their greatness. Such a thing would run contrary to the
egalatarian spirit of the Quran. And what about the example of Prophet Nuh (عليه السلام),
in which his own progeny died as a Kaffir? And what of Prophet Ibrahim (عليه السلام)
whose own father was a Kaffir?


Another interesting observation is that
if Allah really wanted to exalt the lineage of Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
in such a manner as the Shia do, then why was Ali (رضّى
الله عنه) not the son of
Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)?

  • Conclusion

The bottom line is clear: the womb a
person is born to does not decide the status of the person in the eyes of
Allah. On the contrary, the only thing which distinguishes people is their
Taqwa. Hence, it is inconsequential that Ali (رضّى
الله عنه) was related to the
Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and it does not boost his nomination to
Caliphate over that of Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه). The fact that Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه)
is not related to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم) cannot possibly even be
mentioned as a criterion for his rejection as Caliph. The birthright of Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
or Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) cannot be even one iota of the reason for their nomination as
Caliph as this would be discrimination and bigotry, and Allah is not a bigot
but rather he is “Most Just.”


It is discomforting that the Shia trace
Imamah through bloodline in the same manner as a hereditary kingship. The title
of Imam passes down through the blood, and the progeny are considered superior
to everyone else based on their birthright. They are born Imams, and
this is a rank given to them based on no effort on their own part. Regarding
the Imam, the Shia Hadith in Al-Kafi says: “He
possesses all virtues and worthy attributes without any striving on his part,
and he is adorned with all lofty characteristics.” (al-Kulayni, al-Kafi,
Vol. I, p.200) Source: http://al-Islam.org/leadership/


Allah did not select people to become
leaders based on their birth but rather instead He chose from amongst the
people those of best of character and those with the most Taqwa. Taqwa
is what defines a person’s rank and station on this earth. It would be completely
unfair for Allah to decide rank based upon birth, as this goes against basic
morality and ethics. Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم) was not the best
of the humans because of his birth, but only because he was the best in Taqwa.


The idea that one lineage is superior to
another runs contrary to the egalatarian spirit of Islam. The leadership of the
Muslims cannot be confined to one family as the Shia claim it is, but rather it
is open to any Muslim, namely the one who is most pious, regardless of his
familial descent of which he had no control whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 

Turbulent History of Imamah
 

  • The
    First Ten Imams


The
cornerstone of the Shia faith is the belief that the spiritual and temporal
leadership of this Ummah after the demise of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is
vested in the Imam, who is appointed, like the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
himself, by Allah, and who enjoys all the distinctions and privileges of a
Prophet.  (In fact, the Shia regard their Imams as superior to all of the
Prophets aside from Prophet Muhammad [صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم
])  



However, the Shia believe that Imamah,
unlike Prophethood, can never come to an end. In this regard there is a
well-known Shia hadith which says that “the world cannot exist without an
Imam,” and another which says: ”if the earth were to be without an
Imam for a single day, it would sink.”



Thus, when it came to pass that the
first of those whom they regard as their Imams (Ali [رضّى
الله عنه
]) left this world, a
problem arose. Some of those who regarded themselves as his followers claimed
that he did not in fact die, but that he was in occultation and would return to
establish justice. Others said that he was succeeded as Imam by his son Hasan (رضّى الله عنه),
who was in turn succeeded by his brother Hussain (رضّى
الله عنه
).



When Hussain (رضّى
الله عنه
) died, there
were some who claimed to follow his other brother Muhammad (known as Ibn
al-Hanafiyyah) as their Imam. When he died, his followers claimed that he was
in reality alive, in occultation, and that he will return in due time. Others
amongst the Shia took Hussain’s son, Ali, surnamed Zayn al-Abidin, as their
Imam, and upon his death transferred their loyalties to his son, Muhammad
al-Baqir.



When al-Baqir died, there were once
again elements from amongst the Shia who denied his death and claimed that he
would return one day, while others took his son Jafar as-Sadiq as their Imam.



When he died, there was mass confusion
amongst the Shia: each of his sons (Ismail, Abdullah, Muhammad, Zakariyya,
Ishaq and Musa) were claimed by various groups amongst the Shia to be their
Imam. In addition to them, there was a group who believed that Jafar did not
really die, and that he would return one day.



More or less the same thing happened at
the death of his son Musa. Some of the Shia denied his death, believing that he
will return, and others decided to take as their new Imam one of his sons. Some
of these chose his son Ahmad, while others chose his other son Ali ar-Rida.



After him, they took as their Imam his
son Muhammad al-Jawwad (or at-Taqi), and after him his son Ali al-Hadi (or
an-Naqi). At the death of Ali al-Hadi, they looked upon his son Hasan al-Askari
as their new–and 11th–Imam.



 



  • Death
    of the Eleventh Imam


Six years later, in 260 AH, Hasan al-Askari,
at the very young age of 28, is lying on his deathbed, but unlike any of his
forefathers, he leaves no offspring, no one to whom the Shia might appropriate
as their new Imam.



The Shia who had been regarding Hasan
al-Askari as their Imam were thrown into mass disarray. Would this mean the end
of the Imamah? The end of the Imamah would mean the end of Shi’ism and the Shia
were surely not ready for this.



The confusion that reigned amongst the
Shia after the death of Hasan al-Askari is reflected by the Shia writer Hasan
ibn Musa an-Nawbakhti (who was alive at the time), who counts the emergence of
altogether fourteen sects amongst the followers of Hasan al-Askari, each
one with a different view on the future of the Imamah and the identity of the
next Imam. Another Shia writer, Saad ibn Abdullah al-Qummi, who also lived
during the same time, counts fifteen sects, and a century later the historian
al-Masudi enumerates altogether twenty separate sects.



There were four major trends amongst
these various sects:



(1) There were those who accepted the
death of Hasan al-Askari as a fact, and accepted also the fact that he left no
offspring. To them, Imamah had thus come to an end, just like Prophethood came
to an end with the death of Prophet Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
).
However, there were some amongst them who kept hoping for the advent of a new
Imam.



(2) The second trend was to deny the
death of Hasan al-Askari, and to claim that he would return in the future to
establish justice upon earth. This idea of occultation of the Imam is used by
the Shia of various sects whenever it is convenient.



(3) The third trend was to extend the
chain of Imamah to Hasan’s brother Jafar.



(4) The fourth trend was the claim that
Hasan al-Askari did in fact have a son, but that the son went into
occultation.  The Ithna Ashari Shia (i.e. Twelvers) are from this group.



 



  • Multitude
    of Shia Sects


Throughout the history of the Shia,
there have been dozens upon dozens of sects, each claiming another lineage for
the Imamah.  And at each turn, either the Imamah goes to a son, a brother,
or if not any of these, then the Imam must have gone into occultation; at each
step, there are more schisms and consquently more Shia sects. Because of this,
there have been somewhere near one hundred or even more sects of
Shi’ism. Today, there are dozens of existing Shia sects (Druze, Bohras,
Nizaris, Zaydis, Jarudis, Sulaymanis, Butris, Ismailis, Kaysaniyyas,
Qaddahiyyas, Ghullat, Aga Khanis, Usoolis, Imamis, Shaikis, Akhbaris, etc) but
it should be remembered that for each sect in existence today, there are dozens
more which died out. There are fiver, sixer, sevener, niner, elevener, twelver,
fourteen-er Shia.



In Shia belief, it is Kufr (disbelief)
to falsely ascribe Imamah to an individual who is not really the Imam.  As
such, each Shia sect looks down upon the other Shia sects as Kufaar
(disbelievers) since they follow a different chain of Imamah.  An
unbiased outsider would no doubt find this amusing, but the Ithna
Ashari Shia is adamant when he looks down on Ismailis, Aga Khanis, Bohras,
Druze, and other Shia sects, unable to see the same inaneness about
himself.  In their own circles, the Ithna Ashari Shia scoff at
Ismailis and look at them as a silly minority of heretics.  Little do
these same Ithna Ashari Shia realize that the vast majority of the Ummah
(namely the Ahlus Sunnah) looks down upon the Ithna Ashari Shia in the same
way.  Shi’ism is simply a collection of heretics of every different color.



Even the way a Shia has to identify
himself is reflective of the number of sects at every turn: the Shia must
describe himself as not just an Ithna Ashari but rather as Ithna Ashari Imami
Usooli Jaffari Shia.



Twelver Ithna Ashari Shi’ism was never
the predominant sect of Shi’ism like it is today;  it was as marginal as
the rest of the Shia sects.  The only reason that the Twelver
Ithna Ashari Shia have become so predominant is simply because of the
actions of one man: Shah Ismail I, ruler of the Safavid Empire. He
converted to Ithna Ashari Shi’ism because he wanted to oppose the dominant
Ottoman Empire which was Sunni. So Ismail I made Ithna Ashari Shi’ism the
official state religion and forced the entire Persian population to convert to
Shi’ism or accept the penalty of death. This was the Shia Inquisition against
the Sunnis of Persia, who made up the majority of the population in
Persia up until this point.



If it had not been for Shah Ismail I,
the Ithna Ashari sect would have died out just like the other dozens of Shia
sects died out; or at most, it would have been a marginal sect like all the
other obscure Shia sects (including Ismailis, Druze, Bohras, etc).  Had
Shah Ismail I converted to the Druze Shia sect, then the majority of Shia today
would be Druze.  It was simply chance that the Ithna Ashari sect
became the dominant Shia sect;  had Shah Ismail I not been born, then the
chances are that the majority of Shia alive today would not be Ithna Ashari.



Despite the multitude of Shia sects,
they are the same:  they are all false religions which use their
fabricated Hadith to justify their own Imams. These Shia criticize the Sunnis
for not following the Imams, but they themselves can’t agree on who the Imam
is! How fickle are the Shia that they can attribute divine appointment at whim!



The truth is that there is no such thing
as Imamah, and the Doors of Prophethood have forever been closed with the
Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). There is nobody after him, and anyone
who claims this is a Dajjal. The last Prophet was Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and
his name was mentioned in the Quran. Where are these other so-called Infallible
Imams in the Quran? Why did Allah not include them? Certainly that would have
cleared up the mass confusion amongst the various Shia sects. Will the Shia
then not understand the folly in their ways and how far they have strayed away
from the Quran? 



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 

Fraudulent Representatives of the Hidden Imam



  • Introduction


The
Shia say that their 12th Imam went into hiding, the lesser and greater
occultation. What is interesting to see is what happens when the Imam went into
hiding [i.e. who takes his place during his absence].



When the 12th Imam supposedly went into
Lesser Occultation, various people set themselves up as the representatives of
the Imam, and who were in control of a network covering various parts of the
Islamic empire–a network for the purpose of collecting money in the name of the
Hidden Imam.



All followers of the Imams were obliged
to pay one fifth of their income to the representatives of the Imams. This is called
Khums, which is a Wajibat of Shia faith. At the head of this network was
a man who self-appointed himself as the Khums collector; his name was Uthman
ibn Said al-Amri.
(Note: This practice of Khums continues to this day: the
Shia of Iran pay a religious tax that goes in the coffers of their Ayatollahs.)



  • Death
    of the 11th Imam


The predicament at the time was that the
11th Imam, Hasan Al-Askari, had died without any offspring. Uthman ibn Said
resolved this predicament in an interesting manner: Uthman ibn Said declared
that Hasan al-Askari had left behind a son before he died. This child was
supposedly four years old and was named Muhammad. According to Uthman ibn Said,
this son went into occultation and nobody but Uthman ibn Said himself could
have any contact with the Hidden Imam. And from that point onwards Uthman ibn
Said would act as the wakeel (representative) of the Hidden Imam and
collect money in his name.



The truth is that Hasan al-Askari did
not have any son, and there is an overabundance of historical evidence to prove
this. All secular historical accounts attest to this fact, and indeed, many
sects of the Shia in fact admit that Hasan al-Askari did not have a son. It is
only the Ithna Ashari Shia and a few other branches of the Shia which believe
in this mysterious son.



Hasan al-Askari’s own family were
completely ignorant of the existence of any child of his, and Hasan al-Askari’s
estate had been divided between his brother Jafar and his mother (instead of
any to the son). If Hasan al-Askari really had a child, then why did his own
family not give a share of the inheritance to him? To deal with this
discrepancy, Uthman ibn Said and his ilk responded by denouncing Jafar (Hasan
al-Askari’s brother) as al-Kadhab (the Liar). Moojan Momen writes in “An
Introduction to Shi’i Islam” (London, 1985, p. 162) that, “Jafar remained
unshakable in his assertion that his brother (Hasan al-Askari) had no progeny.”
In this manner, the Shia accuse Jafar of being a thief who stole from their
Hidden Imam. (It should be noted that Jafar, according to the Shia belief,
would also be part of Ahlel Bayt, since he was the brother of Hasan al-Askari.
The Ithna Ashari Shia thus abandon Jafar, a member of the Ahlel Bayt, and
instead follow Uthman ibn Said.)



Uthman ibn Said spread this wonderous
fairytale of a son who was born to Hasan al-Askari. In due time, a fantastic
story was brought into circulation about the union between the 11th Imam and a
Roman slave-girl, who is variously named as Narjis, Sawsan or Mulaykah. She is
mentioned as having been the daughter of Yoshua (Joshua), the Roman emperor,
who is a direct descendant of the apostle Simon Peter.



But history shows that there never was a
Roman emperor of that name. The Roman emperor of the time was Basil I, and
neither he nor any other emperor is known to have descended from Peter.



The story goes on to tell of the Roman
slave-girl’s capture by the Muslim army, how she eventually came to be sold to
Hasan al-Askari, and of her supernatural pregnancy and the secret birth of the
son of whom no one–aside from Uthman ibn Said and his clique–knew anything of.
Everything about the child is enveloped in a thick and impenetrable cloud of
mystery.



  • The
    Four Representatives


Uthman ibn Said remained the
“representative of the Hidden Imam” for a number of years. In all that time, he
was the only link the Shia had with their Imam. During that time, he supplied
the Shia community with tawqiat, or written communications, which he
claimed were written to them by the Hidden Imam. Many of these communications,
which are still preserved in books like at-Tusi’s Kitab al-Ghaybah, had to do
with denouncing other claimants to the position of representative. In fact,
many people had come to realize exactly how lucrative a position Uthman ibn
Said had created for himself, but Uthman ibn Said blocked their efforts by the
tawqiat which called them liars and frauds. The Shia literature dealing with
Uthman ibn Said’s tenure as representative is replete with references to money
collected from the Shia public (i.e. Khums).



When Uthman ibn Said died, his son Abu
Jafar Muhammad produced a written communication from the Hidden Imam in which
he himself is appointed the second representative, a position which he held for
about fifty years. He too, like his father, had to deal with several rival
claimants to his position, but the tawqiat which he regularly produced to
denounce them and reinforce his own position ensured the removal of such
obstacles and the continuation of support from a credulous Shia public.



Abu Jafar Muhammad was followed in this
position by Abul Qasim ibn Rawh an-Nawbakhti, a scion of the powerful and
influential Nawbakhti family of Baghdad. Before succeeding Abu Jafar Muhammad,
Abul Qasim an-Nawbakhti was his chief aide in the collection of the one-fifth
taxes (i.e. Khums) from the Shia. Like his two predecessors, he too had to deal
with rival claimants, one of whom (Muhammad ibn Ali ash-Shalmaghani) used to be
an accomplice of his. He is reported in Abu Jafar at-Tusi’s book Kitab
al-Ghaybah as having stated: “We knew exactly what we
were into with Abul Qasim ibn Rawh. We used to fight like dogs over this matter
(of being representative).”



When Abul Qasim an-Nawbakhti died in 326
AH, he bequethed the position of representative to Abul Hasan as-Samarri.
Whereas the first three representatives were shrewd manipulators, Abul Hasan
as-Samarri proved to be a more conscientious person. During his three years as
representative, there was a sudden drop in tawqiat. Upon his deathbed, he was
asked who his successor would be, and he answered that Allah would Himself
fulfil the matter. We wonder: could this perhaps be seen as a refusal on his
part to perpetuate a hoax that had gone on for too long? Abul Hasan as-Samarri
also produced a tawqiat in which the Imam declares that from that day till the
day of his reappearance he will never again be seen, and that anyone who claims
to see him in that time is a liar.



Thus, after more or less 70 years, the
last “door of contact” with the Hidden Imam closed. The Shia term this period,
in which there was contact with their Hidden Imam through his
representatives-cum-tax-collectors, the Lesser Occultation (al-Ghaybah
as-Sughra), and the period from the death of the last representative onwards
the Greater Occultation (al-Ghaybah al-Kubar). The Greater Occulation has
lasted for over a thousand years.



  • Conclusion


When one reads the classical literature
of the Shia in which the activities of the four representatives are outlined,
one is struck by the constantly recurring theme of money. The representatives
of the Hidden Imam are almost always mentioned in connection with receiving and
collecting “the Imam’s money” from his loyal Shia followers. There is a
shocking lack of any activities of an academic or spiritual nature. Not a single
one of the four is credited with having compiled any book, despite the fact
that they were in exclusive communion with the last of the Imams, the sole
repository of the legacy of the Prophet as the Shia claim.



The Shia community at large never had the
privilege of seeing or meeting the person they believed to be the author of the
tawqiat. Their experience was limited to receiving what the representatives
produced. Even the argument of a consistent handwriting in all the various
tawqiat is at best melancholy. There is no way one can get away from the fact
that the existence of the Hidden Imam rests upon nothing other than acceptance
of the words of the representatives.



This concept of someone writing hidden
communiques has no basis in Islam. If there was any need for this, then why
wouldn’t the Prophet be the one to send these tawqiat? And in any case, the
Prophet never did such a thing and this belief is a Mushrik belief adopted from
the Christian concept of the Holy Ghost. Just like the Christians claim to
reach out to the Holy Ghost, likewise do these Shia claim the same with their
Hidden Imam. Many Shia adherents today pray to the Hidden Imam for help much
like the Christians do so with the Holy Ghost. The presence of the Hidden Imam
is supposedly in the room, exactly how the Christians say that they reach out
to the presence of their Holy Ghost. And just like the Catholic Church gets
rich off of donations from its adherents, so too do the representatives of the
Imams get rich off their Shia followers.



In Iran today, the Shia Imams and
Ayatollahs are multi-millionaires and even billionaires. They are exploiting
religion for money, wealth, and power. These Ayatollahs claim to be
representatives of the Hidden Imam. Perhaps, the greatest fraud representative
of the Hidden Imam was Ayatollah Khomeini who duped the entire Shia community.
Khomeini claimed Wilayat ul-Faqih and called himself Wilayat ul-Mutlaqa,
meaning that he has absolute authority from Allah since he was the
“representative” of the Imam in his absence. Like the Four Representatives
during the Lesser Occultation who condemned rival claimants to their position,
so too did Ayatollah Khomeini put so many Ayatollahs in house arrest for
questioning his position as representative of the Imam. These rival Ayatollahs
decried Wilayat ul-Faqih as a fraud, but Khomeini silenced any threat to his
rise to power.



Indeed, the reason that the Shia Imams
and Ayatollahs preach this concept of Infallible Imams is not out of reverence
for their twelve Infallible Imams, but rather it is to secure their own
position of prestige as representatives of these late Infallible Imams.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 

How Does the Current Imam Lead the Shia?



 

How
does the current Imam lead the Shia?



After the death of Prophet Muhammad, Abu
Bakr was elected by Shurah (mutual consultation) as Caliph of the Ummah. The
Shia reject Abu Bakr’s election, and say that only Allah can decide the
leadership of the Ummah. The Shia further argue–and this they do
emphatically–that it is not justice from God to leave us without any divine
leadership, and that this divine leader is the Infallible Imam. To further
emphacize this argument, the Shia ask the Ahlus Sunnah pointedly: “How is it
possible that Allah would leave his Ummah without a leader?” And they
categorically state that it would indeed not be possible for Allah to leave his
Ummah leaderless after the death of the Prophet.



On the surface, these seem like valid
arguments. Let us assume for the time being that the Ahlus Sunnah accepted the
fallacious assumption that we need an Infallible Imam to lead us, and that it
would not be justice from God to leave us without divine leadership. If the
Ahlus Sunnah accepts this, then would it not be fair to ask the next relevant
question, which is: “Where is this divine leader now?” Where is the Infallible
Imam today? To this, the Shia will respond: “Oh, he has been hidden for more
than 1,000 years and will come out near the end of the world.” Nice!



This means that the theory of Justice of
God in terms of guidance worked only for about three hundred years (before the
occultation)! Indeed, if the Shia want to argue that there is no way that the
Ummah could be left leaderless after the death of Prophet Muhammad, then why
would Allah leave his Ummah leaderless after the death of the eleventh Imam and
the sudden disappearance of the twelvth Imam?



Imam means “leader;” how can a person be
led when the leader is not contactable and accessible? Nobody has had direct
contact with the Imam Mahdi during his Greater Occcultation which has lasted
over 1,000 years. So what is the point of all this debate?



The Shia believe in Imamah and accuse
the Ahlus Sunnah of not having a leadership system; well, at the end of the
day, we all ended up at the same point, didn’t we? The Shia had no leadership
system up until the Iranian Revolution, and the Irani system of “Wilayat
ul-Faqih” (the current leadership system in Iran) is nothing but a man-made
system in certain scholars do Shurah (mutual consultation) in order to elect a
leader for them. Well, this is exactly what happened at Saqifah when people
elected Abu Bakr, so what is all the fuss about? If the Shia are willing to
accept Ayatollah Khomeini as the leader of the Ummah, then why not Abu Bakr?
Why do the Shia find it OK for Khomeini to be the elected representative of the
Hidden Imam, but they do not find it OK for Abu Bakr to be the elected
representative of the Prophet?



The main pillar of Shi’ism is that we
need a divinely appointed Imam and the leadership of the Muslims is divinely
appointed. Without this pillar and buttress, the entire faith of Shi’ism
collapses on itself. We again ask the Shia why they can follow Khomeini but not
Abu Bakr? The truth is that Ayatollah Khomeini was elected by man, and so dies
the entire argument of the Shia regarding how it would not be justice for God
to leave us without divine leadership. Khomeini is certainly not divinely
appointed, and most Shia agree upon this. Some of the Muslims have elected
Usamah Bin Laden to be their leader; does Khomeini (the leader of the Shia)
have any divine advantages to Usamah?



The point is that if the Shia had a live
Imam who was supposedly infallible and had access to extraordinary knowledge,
then we did not need this dialogue. Instead of all these debates, we would have
asked a Shia to take us to his Infallible Imam and there surely the Imam could
prove us his right by his extraordinary knowledge, character, and attitude.
This is not the case now. If someone becomes a Shia these days, nothing will be
changed for him in terms of guidance. He will combine the prayers and attend
ceremonies for Hussain and pay Khums to scholars…but nothing in terms of being
directed by a divine Imam.



So what exactly is all the fuss about?
The Shia says it is obligatory to know the Imam of one’s time, but from the
so-called Imam of their time what do they know? Anything more than his name and
the fact that he will not come out till near the end of the world? So is it all
about knowing a name rather than actual guidance?



We are fighting over a non-issue: The
Infallible Imam doesn’t even exist.



The occultation of the Imam is 100% in
variance with the very basis of the reason the Shia claim we need an Imam. The
Shia belief is in fact not self consistent.



On the one hand, the very reason we need
an Imam is to lead, but now the Imam has been in occultation, so what benefit
does the Imam give now?



The whole foundation of Shi’ism is that
the Shia needed an Imam after the demise of the Prophet and that it did not
make sense for Allah not to divinely appoint a successor to the Prophet. Then
what about today? Why have the Shia been living without any Imam for over 1,000
years? Why has Allah left the Ummah without a divinely appointed leader for
over a thousand years?



To respond to this question, the Shia
will say that the Hidden Imam still guides them while he is in occultation, but
our question is: if the Hidden Imam (Mahdi) can guide the Shia without being
alive with them physically, why couldn’t our Prophet Muhammad guide us without
being alive with us physically? Thus, the Shia simply prove by their Aqeedah
that their Twelvth Imam is higher and more superior than our Muhammad in
everything.



So again, we ask the Shia point-blank: How
does the Imam lead the Shia?
There have been no substantial replies to this
question, but we shall address the semi-replies that we sometimes get to this
question.



Shia Response #1



The guidance of the Imam is not
restricted to direct guidance. There are other functions of Imamah that we
cannot fully understand except that his existence is a must for the universe.



Refutation #1



This is just a philosophical argument
(being affected by pre-Islamic belief) that has absolutely no support from the
Quran and Hadith. We have been told that certain angels are arranging certain
things for the universe but we have heard nothing about such an extraordinary
claim that Imams are needed for the existence of the Earth. If the existence of
the universe was really linked to the Imam, then where is this mentioned in the
Quran?



If we were to believe that the Earth
needs an Imam to exist, then who was the Imam immediately before the Prophet?
Did the Prophet ever meet him? And why do we need someone being alive on the
earth to do the job? Imam Reza, the 8th Imam of the Shia, made a very
interesting point: “If Allah wanted to extend the life
of any of his servants for the need of people to him, he would have extended
the life of his Prophet.” (Kashi, Marifah al-Rijal, p.379)



Furthermore, by the above reply in fact
the Shia are stepping down and surrendering their main argument that says in
every time there is a need for an Imam to direct and lead people (i.e. tangible
direction and leading, not philosophical direction).



Indeed, the classical Shia scholars of
old used to say that there is no need to even prove that we need a divinely
appointed Imam since it is “self-evident” that Allah would bestow each people
with such a leader. It was only logical, they reasoned. And they would scoff at
the Ahlus Sunnah, taunting them for their lack of a tangible leader. Let us
examine one of the arguments for the existence of Imamah; Shaykh Mufid, one of
the classical Shia scholars, said:



“… Rationality tells us that surely
there should be an infallible leader at every time who is not relying on people
in matters…of religion because it is impossible that people live in a time when
there are no leaders to bring them closer to good and farther from bad; and
every incomplete human needs someone to advise him and every oppressor needs
someone to control him…and there should be someone who teaches those who don’t
know and wakes up the ignorant, advises the misguided and performs the Hadood
(Punishments of Shariah) …and solves the differences of opinion and appoints
governors and defends the borders and protects properties…and gather people for
Eids and collective prayers.” (Al-Irshad by Shaykh Mufid, Section 36)



As it can be seen, this Shia scholar
(who was one of the forefathers of Shia theology and who established Shia
doctrine) clearly says that there always needs to be an Infallible Imam at all
times who could practically (and in a tangible way) direct and guide people.
For many generations after the Prophet’s death, the Shia berrated the Ahlus
Sunnah for not having a divine leader present, and the classical Shia
literature is replete with arguments about how it is not possible for Allah to
leave the Ummah without a divinely appointed leader.



This of course was before the Imam
suddenly went into occultation and dissapeared for one thousand years,
completely obliterating the entire theory that Allah would always bestow a
physical leader since of course that is “self-evident” as mentioned by the
classical Shia scholars. How can we reconcile the classical Shia position to
the current one?



Shia Response #2



The benefit of the Imam in occultation
is like the benefit of the sun when it is behind a cloud.



Refutation #2



This is nothing but a poetic
justification of the problem. What is exactly meant by the sun behind clouds?
The sun behind the clouds has many benefits; in fact, there are too many to
list. The sun still provides a lot of sunlight even when it is behind a cloud,
thereby giving light to human beings, aiding in photosynthesis for plants, and
warming the planet. These are just some of the many functions of the sun behind
the clouds. What then are the benefits of the Imam in occultation?



How has the Imam Mahdi been of any
benefit while he is in hiding? Did he help in any way in the leadership and
ruling of Iran? There are a lot of controversial issues in Iran nowadays, and
the Shia scholars are at loggerheads over them. Some of these controversial
issues include the extent of Wilayat ul-Faqih, modernism and Islam, television,
freedom of speech, and many other pressing concerns. There are even certain
Shia scholars (Mujtahids) that are under house arrest because they do not agree
with the current policies and leader. Were there any letters, voices, or emails
from Imam Mahdi to clear up a bit of these difficulties? Which one of these
Mujtahids who are in severe disagreement with each other are directed and led
by the Imam Mahdi and how are the Shia people expected to realize this? Where
is the benefit from the “sun behind the clouds?”



As can be seen, there is a difference
between a fairy-tale and reality, and we sincerely hope that the Shia realize
this. The answer that the Imam is like the “sun behind the clouds” is fit only
for youngsters who are sufficed with poetic and fluff-filled answers. But for
the people who want substance and meaning, this answer does nothing. Of course,
if a person wants to be fooled, then perhaps any explanation will do. Perhaps
even the silly and childish hoo-haa that the Imam is like the sun behind the
coulds will do for those who do not like to think for themselves, or rather,
for those who want to cling onto their belief no matter what.



Shia Response #3



Here is an excerpt from the Shia
website, Al-Islam.org:



“The following hadith corroborates the
point we are trying to make, namely, that the actual reason for occultation was
not explained for the people, and except for the Imams themselves no one knew
anything about it.”



Imam Sadiq said: “The one entrusted with
the command will necessarily live an invisible life…” I asked the Imam the
reason. He said: “I am not permitted to reveal the reason.” (Shia
Hadith, reported by ‘Abd Allah b. Fadl Hashimi)



Refutation #3



Finally, the Shia will admit that they
do not know the reason their Imam went into hiding or what benefit the Imam
gives in occultation. Of course, this is not an answer but rather the lack of
an answer.



The Shia repeatedly declare the
importance of the Hidden Imam, but when the Ahlus Sunnah asks “why do we need
him and what benefit does he give you right now”, then the Shia will say: “We
don’t know!”



This is the mentality of a school child
who pretends to know something, and when another child asks what it is, then he
will say “I am not telling!” The reality is that the child could not say
anything because he knew nothing to begin with. Likewise, the reality is that
the Shia Imams could not give a reply to the question of why we need an Imam if
he is in hiding, so they simply said “I am not telling!”



Why would the Shia Imams hide such a
thing? What purpose does this serve? Does this make any sense? It is an obvious
cop-out. But of course, those minions who want to be fooled don’t really need
good cover-ups to be convinced. Any explanation will do, even the school child
response of “I’m not telling!”



Every faith should have a logic behind
it, or else the entire faith is baseless. We can find no reason for the
necessity of this Hidden Imam, and we openly challenge the Shia to produce a
response to the question: How does the current Imam lead the Shia?



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


Some Questions for the Shia



 



Imamah is the foundation of
Shi’ism; the Ahlus Sunnah rejects Imamah because the doctrine makes little
logical sense. Indeed, there are many perplexing questions for the Shia as well
as several holes in the doctrine of Imamah.



For example, if the Imam Mahdi is really hiding,
then why is he doing so? Who or what exactly is he hiding from?



The only response the Shia can come up with is
that there is too much injustice in the world and he would be persecuted by
these tormentors if he appeared now (like what happened to their previous
Imams), so because of this, the Imam is in hiding. So then, couldn’t it be
asked why the other eleven Imams didn’t also go into hiding to protect
themselves?



The Shia will stress that the twelvth Imam had to
go into hiding for fear of tormentors and injustice. There is a Shia Hadith in
Al-Kafi, the most reliable book of Shia Hadith, in which the Infallible Imam
declares that the Imam Mehdi went into hiding out of fear.



Al-Islam.org says





Al-Kafi, vol 1, p 338.
narration 9



- محمد بن يحيى، عن جعفر بن محمد،
عن الحسن بن معاوية، عن عبدالله بن جبلة، عن عبدالله بن بكير، عن زرارة قال
: سمعت أبا عبدالله
عليه السلام يقول
: إن للقائم عليه السلام غيبة قبل أن يقوم، قلت: ولم؟ قال: إنه يخاف - وأومأ بيده إلى
بطنه
- يعني القتل



Muhammad
ibn Yahya has narrated from Ja’far ibn Muhammad from al-Hassan ibn Mu‘awiya
from ‘Abdallah ibn Jabala from ‘Abdallah ibn Bukayr from Zurara who has said
the following:



“I
heard (Imam) Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) say, ‘The person who will rise to Divine
power on earth will disappear from the public sight before he will do so.’ I
then asked, ‘Why will this happen so?’ He said, ‘He will be afraid.’ He then
pointed to his midsection meaning he (Mehdi) might be murdered.”



source: http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/al-kafi-1/144.html



That is awfully strange, since the Shia claim
that the Imam Mahdi will come to rid the world of tormentors and
injustice. Why would he hide from tormentors unless he is scared of them? The
Shia explanation for the necessity of the Imam Mahdi’s return is 100%
contradictory to the very reason he went into hiding in the first place! He
left because of injustice but supposedly is going to return to destroy it? Why
not just get on with it? If anyone was in need of destroying, it would be the
supposed killers of the eleven Imams many of whom were alive in the time when
the twelvth Imam was supposedly born. So why didn’t the Mahdi go slay them and
collect Qisas (blood money)? No, instead he went into hiding thereby letting
the tormentors go unscatched.



And why would an Infallible Imam leave his
fallible minions to fend for themselves? What kind of leader does this? How
will a Hidden Imam hide from his responsibility of settling disputes, explaining
the laws of God, and providing guidance to his community? Instead of all this,
he went into hiding, leaving his community at the mercy of the fallible ones
and the tyrants that he hid from?



Why should he be hiding to even warrant the
question of “waiting for him” or “searching for him?”



Also, is it necessary for the Infallible Imams to
exist incognito at all times until the end of time? What are the duties and
functions of the Imams to demand such a necessity? The Shia will respond that
the universe needs the Imam to exist and that all the atoms of the universe
submit to the Imam, and without the Imam nothing could survive. If the Imam is
so powerful, then how come he cannot protect himself from the tyrant Sunni
Nasibis who slayed so many of them? The Shia believe that their Imams know all
of Al-Ghaib (the Unseen) and even know how they are going to die. If this is
the case, then how come they didn’t know that they were going to be poisoned or
stabbed when they were? If they knew, then they surely would have prevented it!



Even if we concede that it is necessary to have
Imams, why does it stop at twelve? If we concede we needed an Imam after the
death of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and that electing Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه)
or any other person cannot be just of Allah, then shouldn’t that logic continue
to hold true? Don’t we always need an Imam and not just a hidden one? If the
Imamah was a religious obligation on the community, then why did the Imam just
pack up and leave? The truth is that the whole problem was that the eleventh
Imam did not have a son and so this ended the chain of Imamah, so of course the
Shia invented the convenient story of a mysterious son going into hiding.



Why twelve Imams? Why were eleven Imams just left
to be killed by the evil Sunni Nasibis, and then the twelvth decided to jump
ship? Wouldn’t it make more sense then for the first Imam to have simply gone
into occultation? Why didnt Ali (رضّى الله عنه) go into occultation? Or for that matter,
why not the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)? Surely, Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
) would be a better
Mahdi than some little kid who according to the Shia is hiding naked in a cave!



Why is the Imam hiding? And more importantly, why
is the Hidden Imam hiding holy books from us? The Shia believe that the Imams
possess special holy books that nobody else can see, and these holy books are
what give the Infallible Imams all their immense knowledge. The Imams have the
Book of Fatima, Al-Jafr, and Al-Jami. Ask a Shia from what source does the
Hidden Imam (who is just a child) get his immense knowledge from, they will
respond it is from these books. So how come Allah only gave these books of
guidance and immense knowledge to the Imams and not to everyone else? Why would
Allah Almighty only give a book of guidance to some people but not others? Did
Allah restrict the Quran to only a few people, and hide it from the rest? How
can a book of guidance be hidden from the people that it is meant to guide?



Another perplexing question for the Shia is: what
was the point of the Lesser Occultation? The Hidden Imam apparently sent
communiques to his Four Representatives in the form of Tawqiat. Why didn’t the
Imam simply tell everyone himself instead of going through a representative?
What function does the representative serve? The truth is that there is no
reason, other than the fact that the Hidden Imam was a figment of the
representative’s imagination used to get him rich by collecting Khums (religious
tax) in the name of this Hidden Imam. “I have an imaginary friend and he
demands that you give me money!”



Also, what is the basis of these Tawqiat (hidden
communiques that the Imam Mahdi sent his Four Representatives)? Why doesn’t
Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) communicate through these Tawqiat?



And how come the whole Shia doctrine throughout
the first eleven Imams was that the Sunnis were lacking leadership and did not
have an Imam? The Shia would taunt the Sunnis saying that they cannot come up
with an explanation for why Allah would leave them without a leader. But then
suddenly after the twelvth Imam, the Shia can make up amazing excuses and
fascinatingly complex reasons for why they now don’t need an Imam for over
1,000 years.



Again, the most fundamental question: why did the
Imam go into hiding? The only semi-response the Shia can give is that Allah is
testing the Shia to see who will be strong while the Imam is absent. That is
awfully strange. The Shia would always taunt the Sunnis for why Allah would
leave the Muslims leaderless after the death of Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم).
The Sunnis believe that near the end of time, Prophet Isa (عليه السلام) will
return. So couldn’t we argue that the death of Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was a test for the believers to see who was strong in the
absence of a divine leader, until Prophet Isa (عليه
السلام
) returns? And in the
meantime, the Muslims could select their own leader, such as Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه)?



Suddenly, this explanation is invalid to the
Shia.



The Shia doctrine of Hidden Imam makes no sense,
and the only plausible explanation is the truth: the Deputies of the Imam, from
the 4 representatives during the Lesser Occultation to the modern day
self-appointed deputees like the Ayatollah Khomeini, are simply using and abusing
the concept of some imaginary Imam so that they have the right to be his
authority on earth while he is in hiding. This is why it is twelve Imams
because the eleventh one did not have a son, so it gave these opportunists a
chance to claim to be the Mahdi’s representative, and thereby grow powerful by
collecting the Khums (religious tax) and dictating laws to the people.



No other logical explanation can be made why the
Ithna Ashari Shia have this concept of Hidden Imam. What would make some sense
to the unbiased observor would be like what the Ismaili Shia have, in the form
of continuous Imams up until this day; but just twelve doesn’t make sense. Can
the Ithna Ashari Shia really think of a reason why they are right and not the
other dozens of Shia sects out there who follow another chain of Imams?



The theory of the Hidden Imam and the twelve
Imams makes no intuitive sense, nor is it in the Quran. It is thus completely
Batil (false).



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


The 12th Imam of the Shia is Dajjal?



 



  • Introduction


The Shia are waiting for their Twelvth Imam to descend upon them. The
evidence suggests that the person that the Shia will take as their Twelvth Imam
will be none other than Dajjal, as prophecized in the Hadith of the Prophet.
The Ahlus Sunnah should thus always keep in mind that the Shia are the future
followers of Dajjal.



  • Jewish
    Law


The “Qaem” or Imam Mahdi of the Shia will rule
according to the Laws of David and the family of David, according to the Shia Hadith
in Al-Kafi, the most reliable of the four books of Shia Hadith. All of the
following Shia Hadith come from the same section in Al-Kafi reported by
Al-Kulyani, located in Al-Kafi (Volume No.1, p.387-398):



Narrated Ali
ibn Ibraheem -from his father-from ibn Abi Umair-from Mansour-from Fadhl al
Aour-from Abi Ubaidah who reported:


“When the Qaem of the household of the Prophet appears, he will rule according
to rule of David and Solomon.”



Muhammad ibn
Yahya-Ahmad ibn Muhammad-Muhammad ibn Sinaan-Abaan who reported:
“I
heard Abu Abdullah[as] saying: ‘The world will not fade
away unless a person from us appears who will rule according to the rule of the
family of David’”



Ahmad–Ahmad ibn
Muhammad–Ibn Mahboob–Hisham ibn Salim–Ammar as Saabati who reported:

“I asked Abu Abdullah [as] : ‘On what will you rule if
you are made the rulers.’ He replied: ‘By the
rule of God and the rule of David. And if we are confronted by a situation
which we cannot solve, Gabriel (Ruh al Quds) will reveal it to us.’”



Muhammad ibn
Ahmad–Muhammad ibn Khalid–Nazr ibn Suwaid–Yahya al Halabi–Imran ibn
Oueiyn–Jaeed al Hamdani–Ali ibn al-Hussein [as] said:
“I asked him by which law will you rule?” He said: “By the rule of David, and if there is something which we are
unaware of, Gabriel (Ruh al Quds) will reveal it to us.”



Ahmad ibn
Mahran[ra]–Muhammad ibn Ali–Ibn Mahboob–Hishaam bin Salim–Ammar as Saabati
reported:
“I asked Imam Abu Abdullah [as]: ‘By
what will you rule?’ He replied: ‘By the rule of
God, and by the rule of David.’”



  • Hebrew


Furthermore, the 12th Imam will speak in Hebrew:



Reported to us
Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Saeed al Uqdah who said: Narrated to us Ali ibn al-Hasan
at-Taymali who said: narrated to us al-Hasan and Muhammad the sons of Ali ibnu
Yusuf, from Sa’daan ibnu Muslim, from rajaal, from al-Mufadhaal ibn Umar who
said: Abu Abdullah [as] reported:
“When the
Imam Mahdi calls out, he will supplicate to God in Hebrew.” [Al-Ghaybaa
of an Numani, p.326]



  • Jewish
    Followers


According to the Shia, the Jews will also be the
followers of Imam Mahdi:



Sheikh
al-Mufeed has reported in his Al-Irshaad from al=Mufadhaal ibnu Umar that Imam
Abu Abdullah [as] has reported:
“There will
appear along with Imam Mahdi…people from the tribe of Moses.” [Al-Irshaad
of al-mufeed at Tusi p.402]



According to Shia Hadith in Al-Kafi, the Hidden
Imam learns from a book called al-Jafr, which contains the knowledge from the
israelites:



The Imams (a.s.) remained silent for a while and
then said, “With us there is al-Jafr (the parchment).
What do they know what al-Jafr is?” I then asked, “What is al-Jafr (the parchment or a container) ?” The
Imams (a.s.) said, “It is a container made of skin that
contains the knowledge of the prophets and the executors of their wills and the
knowledge of the scholars in the past from the israelites.” [al-Kafi,
Hadith 635, Ch. 40, h 1]



  • Conclusions


All of these beliefs lead us to believe that the
Shia’s 12th Imam is actually the Jewish Dajjal that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) warned us about, who would mislead many and create destruction
on earth. This is who the Shia are waiting for. According to the evidence, this
is what we know about their “Qaem”:



1. He will rule according to the system of the
family of David, using the Talmud.



2. His language will be Hebrew.



3. His followers will be of the Jews and
israelites, for he is the king of the Jews.



4. The Hidden Imam learns from the Talmud which
is contained in the “Jafr.”



  • Hadith
    of the Ahlus Sunnah


Let us now examine the true Hadith from the Ahlus
Sunnah in regards to the Jewish Dajjal that is prophecized to appear:



The Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
) told us in
Hadith that Allah will grant the Muslims victory over Dajjal and the Muslims
will kill him and his shia; when the shia of Dajjal hide
behind a tree or a stone, then the tree and the stone will say to the Muslim
that there is a Jew behind me come and kill him. (Musnad Imam Ahmad #5099) Is
it simply a coincidence that this Hadith uses the Arabic word “shia” to
describe the followers of Dajjal?



The Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
) said:



“To every Ummah there is
a magian and the magian of this ummah are those who reject the Qadr
[pre-destination]. If anyone amongst them dies, do not attend their funeral,
and if anyone amongst them becomes sick don’t visit them and they
are Shia-tul Dajjal
and it is the right of God to join them with
the Dajjal.” (Sunan Abi Dawoud #4072)



The Shia reject the concept of pre-destination
and instead have adopted the Mutazallite school of thought which shuns Qadr.
And who are the descendants of the Magians other than the Persians who mix
Magianism with Islam?



And perhaps most conclusive of all is the
frightening Hadith in which the Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
) has said:



“The Dajjal will be
followed by 70,000 Jews of Isfahan, having on themselves Persian shawls.” [sahih
Muslim #5227]



Today, we see the military alliance between
israel and Iran. Click here for more details. Why would
the Jews be wrapped with Persian shawls? Today, Persia is Shia. Shouldn’t the
Ahlus Sunnah be prepared to deal with this alliance between the Jews and the
Persian Shia?



The Shia ask Allah to hasten the coming of their
Hidden Imam who is locked up and hidden somewhere. The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) has promised that the Jewish Dajjal will also be locked away
somewhere and hidden from the world, as reported in the narration of Tamim
ad-Darri in Sahih Bukhari.



Indeed, the founder of Shi’ism was the Jewish
Abdullah ibn Saba and the so-called “savior” of the Shia will be the Jewish
Dajjal. Of course, we don’t know this for certain and it is only a theory, but
the evidence suggests that it is a highly likely scenario.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quran (13:7): Not a Proof for Imamah
 


 

Al-Islam.org says



“[Pooya/Ali Commentary 13:7]



“You
are only a warner and (there is) a guide for every people.” [Quran, 13:7]



Imam
Muhammad bin Ali al Baqir also said that “the warner” means the Holy Prophet
and “the guide” means Ali and added “the authority to guide continues among
us”. This verse also points to the continued existence of a “guide”, namely al
Mahdi al Qa-im…



The
enemies of the Ahl ul Bayt try to conceal their merits, and deny their divine
rights, but Allah’s plan is always executed and His will invariably takes
effect…



Aqa
Mahdi Puya says…The Holy Prophet is a warner and every nation has a guide [i.e.
the 12 Imams]



source: Pooya/Ali Commentary, http://www.al-Islam.org/quran/



Response



This translation of verse 13:7 relies on the
current “Shakir” translation which is actually a forgery based off of Maulana
Muhammad Ali’s 1917 translation, who was an Ahmadi (i.e. Qadiani)!



The proper translation of the Quranic verse
reads:



Verse 13:7



YUSUFALI: And the disbelievers say: “Why is not a
sign sent down to him from his Lord?” But you (O Muhammad) are truly a warner
and to every people a guide.



PICKTHAL: Those who disbelieve say: “If only some
portent were sent down upon him from his Lord!” You (O Muhammad) are a warner
only and for every folk a guide.



It is clear that here Allah has called the
Prophet Muhammad as both a warner and a guide to all people. Indeed, it is our
Islamic belief that the Prophet was the only Prophet sent to all of mankind,
and this is what is meant by this Quranic verse.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


Turbah: Sajdah to the Imams



 



The
Shia place a piece of stone or clay, known as “Turbah,” on the ground so that
their forehead touches the stone when they prostrate themselves in prayer. The
Turbahs are made out of the stone or clay from the shrines of Imams or saints.
Oftentimes, the Turbah is made from the clay or stone from Imam Hussain’s
shrine. The Shia Ulema have declared that no Turbah has a higher sacredness
than a Turbah made from Imam Hussain’s shrine, not even the stone from the Holy
Ka’abah.



By praying to stones made from the
shrines of their Imams and saints, the Shia are practising a polythiestic and
paganistic act of grave-worshipping; they are quite literally making Sajood
(prostration) to the Imams or saints. Indeed, praying to the Turbah of these
Imams and saints is Bidah (evil innovation) and Shirk; it is not much different
than idol worshipping. What is the difference between the idol that Hindus do
Sajood to and the Turbah that the Shia do Sajood to? Both are considered
Waseelah to bring them closer to God, and both of them are prostrated to.



Shi’ism is rooted in Shirk; the Shia
have allowed their so-called love for the Imams translate into polythiestic
adoration.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By mgharaibeh
      It is indeed that Mosul is bleeding and surrounded by Shia militias from Iraq, Iran and  Afghanistan.
      Everyone blamed the killing on Islamic State only as they think Shia militias are god sent angels to protect the people of Mosul who are Sunnis.  
       

       
       
    • By mgharaibeh
      More than 70 Shia died today after Islamic state bombing inside the heart of Sadr City
       
       

    • By mgharaibeh
      What is the difference Sunnis and Shia?
      Why do Shia hate Sunni so much?
    • By Saracen21stC
      Hadith of Ghadir Khumm [A Sunni Perspective]

                                      
                      
                          


      Introduction
      It is impossible to discuss the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm without first understanding the specific context in which the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
      said what he said. This is a general rule of thumb pertaining to the
      Islamic canon as a whole: it is important to know the background in
      which a Quranic verse was revealed or a certain Hadith was said.
      For example, the Quranic verse “slay them wherever you find them” is
      often used by Orientalists to wrongfully make it appear as if Islam
      advocates the slaying of people wherever you find them all the time.
      Of course, if we look at when this verse was revealed, we find that it
      was specifically revealed during a battle between the Muslims and the
      Quraish Mushriks; this makes us realize that it is not a general ruling
      to slay people but rather it was a verse revealed in a specific
      situation.
      Likewise, the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm can only be understood in the
      context in which it was said: A group of soldiers were severely
      criticizing Ali ibn Abi Talib (رضّى الله عنه) over a certain matter, and this news reached the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم),
      who then said what he said in the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm. Like the
      Orientalists, the Shia propagandists attempt to remove this background
      context in which the Hadith was said in order to paint a totally
      different (and misleading) picture.
      The Prophet’s intention behind saying what he said at Ghadir Khumm was not at all to nominate Ali (رضّى الله عنه) as Caliph but rather it was only to defend Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
      against the slander being said against him. It is only by removing the
      background context that it is possible to render a Shia understanding
      of the text; it is for this reason that we should always remind our
      Shia brothers of the background context in which the Hadith of Ghadir
      Khumm was said.
      The Importance of Ghadir Khumm to the Shia
      The Shia claim that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) divinely appointed Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
      to be his successor at a place called Ghadir Khumm. Before we discuss
      the event of Ghadir Khumm with our Shia brothers, we should first define
      the parameters of such a debate. In other words, we should “set the
      stakes”:
      (1) If the Shia can prove their version of Ghadir Khumm, then definitely Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was divinely appointed by the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and the Shia creed is correct.
      (2) If, however, the Sunnis disprove the idea that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) appointed Ali (رضّى الله عنه) at Ghadir Khumm, then our Shia brothers should be willing to accept the fact that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was never appointed at all by the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and therefore the entire Shia creed is invalid.
      The reason we need to make this very clear from the outset is that
      the Shia propagandists have this uncanny ability to move the goalposts
      whenever they lose a debate. They will jump from one topic to another;
      if they lose the debate over Ghadir Khumm, then they will bring up the
      Incident of the Door, or Saqifah, or Fadak, or who knows what else.
      The entire foundation of Shi’ism rests on the event of Ghadir Khumm, because it is here that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) supposedly nominated Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to be his successor. If this event did not take place as the Shia claim, then the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) never appointed Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and the Shia must abandon all of their claims, such as the idea that Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) usurped the God-appointed Caliphate of Ali (رضّى الله عنه).
      Indeed, the event of Ghadir Khumm is so central to the Shia
      paradigm–and so important to the Shia theology–that the Shia masses have
      a yearly celebration known as “Eid-e-Ghadir”.
      Based on what supposedly happened at Ghadir Khumm, the Shia reject the Caliphate of Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه), split away from the mainstream Muslims, and declare that Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
      was the first of the divinely appointed Imams. The Shia website,
      Al-Islam.org, refers to Ghadir Khumm as a “momentous event” and the
      basis for the Imamah of Ali (رضّى الله عنه).
       
      Amaana.org says “Eid-e Gadhir is celebrated with great
      rejoicing by Shia Muslims where they remember Prophet Muhammad’s last
      instructions to the believers. Eid-e-Ghadir is one of the most important
      days of rejoicing for Shia Muslims around the world as that was the day
      our beloved Prophet Muhammad (s.a.s.) declared Hazrat Ali’s vicegerency
      at Ghadir e Khumm on his return from his last pilgrimage…

      source: http://www.amaana.org/gadhir/gadhir1.htm ” The reason it is neccessary to strongly emphasize the importance of
      Ghadir Khumm to the Shia is that we will show how the supposedly
      strongest ‘weapon’ in the arsenal of the Shia propaganda is actually
      very weak. If this is the very basis of Shi’ism, then indeed Shi’ism is
      a very weak doctrine. The Shia say that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) appointed Ali (رضّى الله عنه) at Ghadir Khumm but simple logic dictates otherwise.
      What the Shia Claim Happened
       

       
      Al-Islam.org says “After completing his last pilgrimage
      (Hajjatul-Wada’), Prophet was leaving Makkah toward Madinah, where
      he and the crowd of people reached a place called Ghadir Khumm (which is
      close to today’s al-Juhfah). It was a place where people from
      different provinces used to greet each other before taking different
      routes for their homes.
      In this place, the following verse of the Qur’an was revealed:
      “O Apostle! Deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord;
      and if you don’t do it, you have not delivered His message (at all); and
      Allah will protect you from the people …” (Qur’an 5:67)
      The last sentence in the above verse indicates that the Prophet
      was mindful of the reaction of his people in delivering that message but
      Allah informs him not to worry, for He will protect His Messenger from
      people.
      Then followed the key sentence denoting the clear designation of ‘Ali
      as the leader of the Muslim ummah. The Prophet held up the hand of
      ‘Ali and said:
      “For whoever I am his Leader (mawla), ‘Ali is his Leader (mawla).”
      Immediately after the Prophet finished his speech, the following verse of the Qur’an was revealed:
      “Today I have perfected your religion and completed my favour
      upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion.” (Qur’an 5:3)
      The above verse clearly indicates that Islam without clearing up
      matter of leadership after Prophet was not complete, and completion
      of religion was due to announcement of the Prophet’s immediate
      successor.
×