<b>INTRODUCTION</b> - The Origin of Shitte Islam and Its Principles [Electronic resources] نسخه متنی

BISM - ILLAH - IR -
RAHMAN - IR - RAHEEM

(In the name of God, the most
Compassionate, the Merciful)

AL- HAMDU L'ILLAH

(All praise be to God)

Call unto the way of your Lord with
wisdom and good exhortation,

and reason with them in the best way. Lo! your Lord best
knows those

who go astray from His path, and He knows best those who
are rightly guided.

(Qur'an, 16:125)

INTRODUCTION

It was about two years ago that I
received a long letter from an Iraqi student in Egypt.
Briefly speaking, the writer of the letter had had an
exchange of views with some eminent scholars of al-Azhar.
Perhaps they talked about Najaf al-Ashraf, the scholars
of that seat of learning and their ways of studies and
also about those devoted to the spiritual atmosphere at
the mausoleum of Hazrat Ali (a.s.).

There is no doubt, of course, that the educated class
of Cairo are all praise for the great seat of learning at
Najaf and are also well impressed with the intellectual
advancement of its scholars. In spite of all this they do
not refrain from saying: "Oh! What a pity! They are
Shi'as."

The writer of the letter says that he was very
astonished and often used to plead with them,
"Gentlemen! The Shi'as are a Muslim sect and a part
of the Muslim community." But their reply was,
"No, Sir! The Shi'as are not Muslims. What has
Shi'ism to do with Islam? It is wrong to count it as a
sect among the sects and a religion among the religions
of the world; it was a plan devised by the Iranians and a
political stunt to overthrow the Umayyad rule and bring
about the 'Abbasid Caliphate. What has it to do with the
ways prescribed by God?"

After this, this young man writes. "Respected
Sir, at present I am young and have no knowledge of
religions.

I know neither the philosophy of religious growth, nor do
I know the history of its flourishing. Consequently I
have entertained some doubts."

After writing these words this student of the great
college at Cairo desired that I should unveil the truth
and rid him of that mental worry. In this connection he
also wrote that if his request proved futile and he was
misled from the right path, I would stand responsible for
that.

Accordingly I considered the reply necessary and wrote
to him in a letter answering him according to his
intelligence. I must admit, however, that my own worries
were more than the doubts of this youth.

I thought to myself: how is it credible that a
cultured country like Egypt - the cradle of Islamic
learning, the centre of the Arabs, nay, of all the
Muslims in such a state of ignorance and hostility among
its intelligentsia!

It was by chance that a book entitled "Farjru
'l-Islam" by the famous writer Ahmad Amin
reached my hands. I started wading it but. when I reached
the place where he wrote about the Shi'as, I felt that
the learned author was not writing a book but building
castles in the air. During the present age, even if a man
from the distant regions of China had written such
irresponsible things, he could not be easily forgiven.

Anyhow, I now felt satisfied that all that the Iraqi
student had written was quite correct and instantly it
struck me that if the people used to writing like Ahmad
Amin have such a mentality, what can be the condition of
the illiterate or half-literate masses; according to the
spirit of the times, however, every Muslim of today
supports unity and brotherhood among the Muslims and also
believes that without such unity our life as well as
death will be without meaning.

In truth, if our Muslim brothers were of the reality
of the Shi'a religion and also proved to be just, such
literature which lays the foundation of mutual enmity and
satisfies the cravings of the Imperialist and irreligious
forces would be done away with.

Let us study this passage of "Fajru
'l-Islam" and consider its repercussions:

"The truth is that Shi'aism was the refuge of the
destroyers of Islam." p. 330.

The writer is not innocent. He knew that the pen of
the critics would pursue him and also knew that his
aggressive tendency would injure the feelings of a nation
which comprises tens of millions of people and is a very
great power in the Islamic world.

It was thus quite a surprising event when last year
(1349 A.H.), a cultural delegation from Egypt, comprising
thirty members, came here and included Ahmad Amin
himself. All the members of the delegation came to my
residence. It was the month of Ramadan, night time, and
the gathering was large. No sooner had I seen Ahmad Amin
than "Fajru 'l-Islam" came to my mind,
since this book had already been seen by a number of our
scholars.

We raised objections, but with respect, in a very mild
and soft tone, so that it might not hurt his feelings. On
this occasion the strongest explanation that Ahmad Amin
offered was a lack of information and a dearth of books.
To this we said, "Sir, when someone starts writing
on some topic, he first gathers relevant material and
then he fully examines the matter, otherwise the writer
has no right to touch upon the topic at all."

Consider the libraries of the Shi'as. Row well stocked
they are! Examine our own library. It contains about five
thousand volumes and most of the books are written by
Sunnis: this is the collection of books in a small city
like Najaf; strange how Egypt with its many large
libraries is devoid of Shi'a literature!

Of course, these people know nothing about the Shi'as,
but never hesitate in writing anything about them that
they wish.

It is even stranger that the fellow Sunni brothers of
Iraq living in our neighborhood are unaware of the
Shi'as!

Only a few months ago a promising Shi'a boy of Baghdad
wrote in a letter that recently he happened to go to
Dalyam (just adjacent to the Baghdad district). Most of
the people there are Sunnis. The correspondent became
intimate with them and attended their assemblies. Since
the people of Dalyam were unusually impressed by the
excellent behaviour and high morals of the stranger, they
warmly welcomed him. But when they came to know that the
person in whom they were taking so much interest was a
Shi'a, their wonder had no bounds. "We were under
the impression that the people of this sect were deprived
of even the smallest light of civilisation and culture -
quite wild, totally savage!" Such were their whims
and speculations.

At the end of the letter this young boy appealed to my
conscience that, through the endeavours of my pen, I
should remove the misunderstanding in the minds of such
people and introduce a true picture of Shi'aism.

After some time the same youth went to Syria to spend
the summer there. From there he went to Egypt.

From Cairo he wrote another letter, telling me that the
condition of Egypt was not different from that of Dalyam.

He wrote: "Here also the same views about the Shi'as
are common. So, it is requested that you may perform your
duty of informing them of the truth. Believe me, the
views that the common people of Islam have formed about
the Shi'as are intolerably obnoxious."

And this is not all. The false imputations, which are
being continuously published in the journals of Egypt,
Syria, etc. are no less grievous; those under attack are
as innocent as Joseph, but unfortunately ignorance and
fanaticism have no remedy.

However, silence in the face of transgression is
synonymous with the acceptance of injustice, so I had an
obligation to speak out. But it should be made clear that
I do not wish to reply to the slanderers of the Shi'as
but rather to remove that veil of ignorance from the eyes
of the rest of the Muslims so that the truth may be
clearly visible to them; moreover it may serve as the
last word to the elements hostile to Shi'as and as a true
picture of Shi'aism. We hope it may also remove the
mutual discord among the Muslims, so that writers like
Ahmad Amin may never get another opportunity to indulge
in destructive activities. The author of "Fajru
'l-Islam" writes "The truth is that Shi'ism
was the refuge of those who wished to destroy Islam
through enmity and baseless talk, and it was the place of
shelter for those who wanted to introduce their ancestral
teachings of Israelite, Christian and Zoroastrian
religions into Islam".

Again he writes: "Thus the faith in
"raj'at" (the returning) is what the
Isra'elites believe in. The Shi'as believe, moreover,
that the fire (of hell) is "haram" (unlawful)
for them.

The Israelites also say that the fire will not touch them
except for a few counted days.

"Christianity's influence appeared likewise in
the way in which some of the Shi'as have given the same
relationship for the Imam to God as is given for Christ
to Him.

They also say that the Imam is the confluence of 'Lahut'
and 'Nasut' (where divinity and earthly beings meet).
Also, according to their faith the continuance of
prophethood and risalat (messengership) is unbreakable.
They hold the view that he who is absorbed in 'Lahut' is
a prophet. Besides this, transmigration of souls, the
physical body of God and 'hulul' (God's entering another
body), which are the old beliefs of the Brahmins,
philosophers and fireworshippers, appeared one by one in
the Shi'a religion . . . ."

For fear of destroying the unity of the Muslim
community and inciting hatred I will refrain from
replying.

Otherwise it would be quite easy to show who those people
were who introduced un-Islamic ways into Islam to
undermind and divide the Muslim community'.

Of course I should like to ask the author of 'Fajru
'l Islam": Respected Sir, which was that group
of Shi'as which had decided to destroy Islam? Was it the
first group, which includes the selected companions of
the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), for instance. Salman
Muhammadi, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, al-Miqdad, 'Ammar,
Khuzayma, Dhu sh Shahadatain, Abu Tihan, Hudhayfah
Yamani, az-Zubayr, al-Fadl ibn al-'Abbas and his
respectable brother 'Abdullah, Hashim ibn 'Utbah,
al-Marqal, Abu Ayyub al-Ansari, Aban and also his brother
Khalid, the sons of Sa'id ibn al-'As, Ibn Ka'b and Anas
ibn al-Harith who had heard the Holy Prophet saying:
"My son Husayn (a.s.) will be martyred at the place
known as Karbala'. So any one of you, present at the time
of that tragedy must go to help him." Accordingly
Anas drank the cup of martyrdom on the 10th of Muharram,
(see "al-Isabah fi ma'rifati' s-sahabah"
and "al-Isti'ab fi ma'rifati' s-sahabah".
These two books on the lives of the Companions are the
most authentic compilations of the Sunni community.)

If we were to attempt to compile a list of the Shi'a
companions and begin to prove their Shi'ism, it would
require a complete and volumionous book. And the fact is
that the noble efforts of the Shi'a 'ulema have made it
unnecessary to do so: the brilliant masterpiece, "ad-Darajat
'r rafi'h fi tabaqatu 'sh-Shi'a" written by
Sayyid 'Ali Khan (the author of "as-Salafah"
and the standard dictionary "Tarazu
'l-Lughan" describes the eminent personalities
of the Banu Hashim family like Hamza and 'Aqil Sa'id
Khudri, Qays ibn Sa'id ibn 'Ubadah, Burayda, Bura' ibn
Malik, Khabab ibn al-Irth, Refa'a ibn Malik, Amir ibn
Wa'ila, Hind ibn Abi Hala, Ju'da ibn Hubayra, Makhzumi
and his mother Umm Hani Bint Abi Talib and Bilal ibn
Riyah the mu'adhdhin (caller to prayer) etc.

But I believe that, from the books on the lives of the
Sahaba like "Isaba", "Asadu 'l-ghaba"
and "Isti'ab" we have collected the names of
about three hundred distinguished companions and it is
possible some scholarly person may compile a longer list
than this.

Were these persons desirous of ruining Islam? If the
Imam of the Shi'as, 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.), of whom
the "Thaqalayn" (the book of God and the Ahle
Bayt) are the witnesses, had not used his sharp-edged
sword in the battles of "Badr"
"Uhud", "Hunayn" and "
Ahzab" Islam would not have flourished or attained
an imposing height. Abdu 'l-Hamid Mu'tazali begins his
poem of praise : "lla innama al-Islam law la
hisamahu…" (if his sword had not been there,
Islam ...)

Yes, if "Zulfiqar" (Hazrat 'Ali's sword) had
not been there, if the lion of God had not taken the
lead, as he did before and after the hijrat, if there had
been no sincere help from Hadrat Abu Talib the
illustrious father of 'Ali (a.s.) and if Hazrat 'Ali
Murtada (a.s.) had not offered extraordinary support in
the holy lands of Mecca and Medina, the rebellious group
of the Quraysh and the blood-thirsty wolves of Arabia
would have nipped Islam in the bud.

Muslims pay little respect for Abu Talib's (a.s.)
services in that they do not seem prepared to call him a
Muslim. On the contrary when they talk of Abu Sufyan, the
root cause of all the troubles of the Holy Prophet
(s.a.w.) they are prompt in endowing him with Islam,
although everyone knows that he had very reluctantly and
unwillingly aligned himself with the Muslims. When Hazrat
'Uthman got the Caliphate, it was Abu Sufyan, who cried
out, "Sons of Umayyah! Just catch hold of the
caliphate as you would a ball. I swear by him by whom Abu
Sufyan can swear that there is neither heaven nor
hell!"

In short, according to he verdict of the Sunni
majority, Abu Sufyan is a Muslim and as to Abu Talib the
great supporter of Islam (whose beliefs are apparent from
these lines: "In my knowledge the religion of
Muhammad (s.a.w.) is the best of all religions in the
world") he is labelled as a non-Muslim! Was Abu
Talib (a.s.) either so helpless or of such a weak
intellect that he knew that Muhammad's (s.a.w.) religion
was the best of all religions and did not follow it for
fear of the people? It should be clearly understood that
he was at the center of all Mecca's forces and strengths.

Now let us again examine the story of the subversion
of Islam. Now were these people (about whom we have just
been talking) the persons who subverted Islam, or it was
the later group, which is known as the
"tabi'in" (the followers), in which are
included Ahnaf ibn Qays, Suwayd ibn Ghuflah, Atiyah, Ufi,
Hakam ibn Atibah, salim ibn Abi Ju'd, 'Ali Abi Ju'd,
Hasan ibn Salah, Sa'id ibn Jubayr, Sa'id ibn Musayab,
Asbagh ibn Nabatah, Sulayman ibn Mohran, and Yahya ibn
Ya'mar 'Adwani'? After them come the personalities of the
"tab'inu 't-tabi'in" (the followers of the
followers) who laid the foundation of Islamic teachings
such as Abu 'l-Aswad Du'ali, the originator of syntax,
Khalil ibn Ahmad, the founder of lexicography and the
science of rhyme in poetry, Abu Muslim Ma'adh ibn Muslim
Al-Hira', the founder of grammar, whose Shi'ism has been
admitted even by Siyuti (Al-Muzhir, volume II) and
as-Sakit Ya'qub ibn Is'haq, the master of Arabic
literature. Also, in the group of commentators is the
distinguished name of 'Abdullah ibne 'Abbas, who tops the
list and whose Shi'ism is beyond doubt. Next come the
names of Jabir ibn 'Abdullah al-Ansari, Abi' ibn Ka'b,
Sa'id ibn Musayyab and Muhammad ibn 'Umar Waqidi, who was
the first to collect and arrange the Qur'anic sciences.
(Ibn Nadim and others have acknowIedged that they were
Shi'as. "ar-Raghib" is the name of the
commentary of Waqidi).

Among those who laid the foundations of the teaching
of "Hadith" is Abu Rafi', who was the freed
salve of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) and the author of the
book, "al-Ahkam wa 's-sunan wa 'l-qadaya".
He had a special relationship with Amir al-mu'minin
(a.s.); during the caliphate of the Holy Imam (a.s.) he
was in charge of the Treasury at Kufa, his sons also were
both remarkable personalities. 'Ali ibn Rafi' was the
secretary of Amir al-Mu'minin (a..s.) He was the first
person after his father who began writing on
"fiqh" (jurisprudence) and his brother,
'Abdullah ibn Rafi' took the lead in the writing of
history and the recording of events in the Muslim
community.

Abu Hashim ibn Muhammad ibn Hanafiya was the first to
write about the nature of Islamic beliefs. Many fine
books on this topic have been written by him. We may
examine also the works of 'Isa ibn Rawzah who lived up to
the time of Abu Ja'far (Imam Baqir). It should be noted
that the above persons lived before Wasil ibn 'Ata and
Abu Hanifah, and that Siyuti's opinion is correct that
the latter were the earliest writers on the philosophy of
Islamic beliefs.

Next we may reflect upon two eminent Shi'as, Qays
an-Nasir and Muhammad ibn 'Ali Ahwal, (known as Mu'min
at-Taq"), Hisham ibn al-Hakam and an-Nawbakht. The
latter was an exalted family who continued serving the
cause of Islam for more than a hundred years. Among their
works, "Faslu 'l-yaqut", is of extraordinary
importance. Also among the pupils of Hisham Ahwal, and
an-Nasir, the names of Abu Ja'far Sakak Baghdadi, Abu
Malik Zuhak Khazrami, Hisham ibn Salim and Yunus ibn
Ya'qub deserve special mention. These were the persons
who undertook masterly debates with sages of other
religions and provided irreputable arguments on topics
like the unity of God and the Imamate.

If all their scholastic subjects of discussion,
particularly the debates of Hisham ibn Hakam, were
collected together, it would make an excellent book.
Similarly, if we included all the Shi'a philosophers and
scholars, a great number of voluminous compilations will
be required.

I request therefore that the author of "fajru
'l-Islam" tell me whether these men wanted to ruin
the religion of God, or whether they were so
conscientious that they worked day and night to record
historical facts and events and collect together reports
of matters relating to the life, miracles, battles, and
the purity of character of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.)

One of the finest scholars in this connection is Aban
ibn 'Uthman al-Ahmar Tabi'i (died 140 A.H.). He was a
pupil of Imam Ja'far Sadiq (a.s.). After him Hisham ibn
Muhammad, ibn sa'ib Kalbi, Muhammad ibn Is'haq Matalabi
and Abu Makhnaf Azdi continued in this particular field
of knowledge. All the writers of the later age depended
upon them as source material in historical matters.

If we examine a list of historians, we will find that
all the distinguished writers were Shi'as; for instance,
the compiler of Kitab al-Mahasin, Ahmad ibn
Muhammad ibn Khalid Barqi, Nasr ibn Muzahim Manqari,
Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Sa'd Thaqafi, 'Abdu 'l-'Aziz
Juludi Basri Imami, Ahmad ibn Ya'qub(whose book Tarikhu
'l-Ya'qubi has been published in Europe), Muhammad
ibn Zakariya, Abu 'Abdillah Hakim, al-Ma'sudi, author of
"Muruj adhdhahab" Muhammad ibn 'Ali ibn
Taba'taba' the author of "Adabu 's-sultaniyah"
and hundreds of other scholars like them, who cannot be
included here.

Among the men of letters, the Shi'as are also in a
majority. The literary men are of different groups. The
first group is that of the companions. All the famous men
of letters belonging to this class are attached to
Shi'ism. Nabigha Ju'di, for instance, took part in the
battle of Siffin on the side of 'Ali (a.s.) and the
"Rajaz" (rousing verses) that he composed for
the occasion are very well known; 'Urwah ibn Zayd
al-Khayl was also with the Holy Imam (a.s.) in the battle
of Siffin (see al-Aghani). some people acknowledge that
Lubayd ibn Rabi'ah 'Amiri was of the Shi'a faith; Abu
Tufayl 'Amir ibn Wa'ilah, Abu 'l-Aswad Du'uli, and Ka'b
ibn Zuhayr, the author of "Banat Sa'id" are
likewise but a few of the Shia' men of letters we have
room to mention here.

The second group is contemporary with the Tabi'in. In
this class al-Farazdaq, Kumayt, Kathir, Sayyid Humayri
and Qays ibn Dharih . have a very prominent place.

The third group belongs to the second century of the
hijrah: Abu Nawas, Abu Tamam, Bahtari, Da'bil Khuza'i,
Dik al-Jin, 'Abd as-Salam, Abu sh-Shaysh, Husayn ibn
Duhak ibn Rumi, Mansur an-Namri, Ashja' asalmi, Muhammad
ibn Wahib and Sari' al-Ghawani. Morevoer, during the
reign of the 'Abbasid rulers all the prominent literary
figures, excluding Marwan ibn Abi Hafsah and his progeny
were Shi'as:

Similarly among the celebrated poets and men of
letters of the fourth hijra century were many Shi'as :
Mutanabbi Maghrib ibn Hani Andalusi, ibn at-Ta'awidhi,
Husayn Hajjaj (the author of "al-Majnun"),
Mahyar Daylami, Abu Fads Hamdani, (about whom it has been
said that poetry began and ended with him); we may cite
also Kashajum, Nashi' saghir, Nashi' Kabir, Abu Bakr
Khwarizmi, Badi' Hamadani, Tughrai, Ja'far Shams
al-Khilafah, , Ammarah al-Yamani, Wida'i Zahi, ibn Basam
Baghdadi, Sibt ibn Ta'awidhi, Salami, Nami who were all
Shi'as.

The fact is that the Shi'as attained such an exalted
rank in the field of literature that experts had to say:
'Is there any literary man who is not a Shi'a?' It is
worth noting that in praising some piece of composition,
there was a common saying that such and such a man writes
like the Shi'as. Some people have written that Mutanabbi
and Abu 'l-'ula' were also Shi'as (please refer to where
some of their verses are quoted).

Shi'a poets of the Quraysh family such as Fadl ibn
'Abbas (whose life history is given in
"al-Aghani"), Abu Dihbai Jamhi, Wahib ibn
Rabi'ah and the literary scholars such as Sharif Radi,
Murtada, Sharif Abu'l Hasan , Ali 'Alawin Jumani son of
Sharif Muhammad ibnja'far ibn Muhammad ibn Zayd ibn 'Ali
ibn al-Husayn (a.s.) are also worthy of attention.

Sharif Jumani used to say "I am a poet; my father
was a poet; my grandfather was a poet". Muhammad ibn
al-'Alawi was an eminent man of letters. Writing about
him Abu 'l-Faraj Isfahani has made available to us the
valuable pearls of wisdom that he left behind. For
further details it is worth while studying "Nasmatu
's-sahr min tashayyu' wa shi'r". In this esteemed
masterpiece of Sharif Yamani, there is not only a fair
account of the 'Alawimen ofletters, but there is also an
account of the Shi'a poets of the Amawi dynasty. For
instance Zamakhshari writes in his book "Rabi
'al-abrar" about 'Abdu 'r-Rahman ibn Hakam, Khalid
ibn Sa'id ibn 'As and Marwan ibn Muhammad Saruji Amwi;
these verses -are quoted from the latter:

"Oh descendents of Hashim ibn 'Abd Munaf!

wherever I amy be I am yours.

"You are ,God's chosen ones, and Ja'far Tayyar
belongs

to your own family.

"Ali, the Lion of God, Hamzah the uncle of the
Prophet and

al-Hasan and al-Husayn are the members of your own
family.

"Yes, though I am of Amawi lineage, yet I have no

concern with Banu Umayyah."

Similarly, the name of Abu Warda, the well-known
author on Najdi and 'Iraqi schools of thought, is also
worthy of mention. A part from these there are also many
other notables of this lineage, but since this book is
being written without preparation it is difficult to give
details of all of them.

When we study the history of great kings,
distinguished politicians, statesmen and viziers, we find
the Shi'as likewise in prominence also. Besides the
Fatimid and Bawayhid rulers, other kings like the Al
Hamdan, Banu Mazid, Banu Wasis, 'Imran ibn Shahid,
Muqallid ibn Musayyab, 'Aqili and Qarwash ibn Musayyab
were all Shi'as. Also the faith in Shi'ism of Wajihu'
d-dawlah Dhu 'l-qarnayn Taghlabi and Tamim ibn Mu'izin
the ruler of Marakish is not a secret thing.

If we now consider the early Muslim viziers
(ministers) we find that nearly all of them are Shi'as.

Ishaq Katib, for example, was perhaps the first person
for whom the appellation of Vizier was formally used. Abu
Salmah Khilal al-Kufi was the vizier of the first
'Abbasid Caliph. In view of his administrative capability
Saffah entrusted him with all the affairs of the State.

Abu Salmah was known as the 'Wazir Al Muhammad and it
was because of his love for Al Muhammad that he was
martyred on the order of the same Saffah.

Abu 'Abdillah Ya'qub ibn Dawud was the Vizier of
al-Mahdi al-'Abbasi; the Caliph confided the entire
administration of the state to him. This verse, "Oh
Banu Umayyah! Get up! And arise from your deep slumber!
Ya'qub ibn Dawud is the Caliph", refers to him. He
too was to later suffer captivity for his Shi'a belief.

Al Nawbakht and Banu Sahl are well known as the
families of the viziers. Fadl ibn Sahl and Hasan ibn Sahl
were the viziers of Ma'mun ar-Rashid. Similarly from Banu
al-Furat, Hasan ibn 'Ali was thrice made the vizier of
the Caliph Muqtadar. Abu 'l-Fadl Ja'far, Abu 'l-Fath Fadl
ibn Ja'far and , Amid Muhammad ibn Husayn and his eldest
son Dhu'l-kifayatayn Abu'l-Fath 'Ali ibn Muhammad were
the viziers of Rukn ad-dawlah.

Banu Tahir Khyza'i was likewise entrusted with minis
tership by. Ma'mun. Other viziers were Mahlabi, Abu Dalf
'Ajalli, Sahib ibn 'Ibad, the great politician Maghribi
and Abu 'Abdillah Husayn ibn Zakariya, who is known by
the epithet "Shi'i".

There are others besides them, such as Ibrahim Suli,
Talaya' ibn Zarik, Afdal, the commander-in-chief of Egypt
and his son Ja'far ibn Muhammad ibn Fatit, Abu'l Mu'ali
Habat-ullah, Vizier of Mustazhir and Mu'yad Muhammad ibn
Abd al -Karim Qummi, who first became the vizier of Nasir
and was later offered ministership by Mustazhir.

During the time of "Baramakah" Hasan ibn
Sulayman was the Chief Secretary. He was also widely
known as "Shi'i".

Among other Shi'as entrusted with administrative posts
we may mention the author of "al-Awraq", (Suli)
Yahya ibn Salamah Hasfaki and ibn Nadim (the author of
"alFihrist"), Abu Ja'far ibn Yusuf and his
brother Abu Muhammad Qasim (whose panegyrics and elegies
upon the Ahlu 'l-bayt have no parallel: see
"al-Awraq") were "mu'tamad 'umumi (general
secretaries) during the time of Ma'mun, and even for a
considerable time after the latter's death. Similarly the
names of Ibrahim Uysuf and his son, the master of the
Arabic language and author of "al-Mu'jam", Abu
'Abdillah Muhammad ibn 'Imran Marzbani, are also worth
remembering, Sam'ani has made mention of their Shi'ism.
Viewed in the same perspective there are hundreds of
persons whose administrative abilities, political
sagacity and national services would need volumes and
volumes to be recorded.

My late father had tried to collect the life histories
of different groups of Shi'as. He classified thirty
groups into alphabetical order in ten volumes, under the
titles "'Ulama (scholars), philosophers, kings,
viziers, astronomers and physicians, etc." The name
of this collection is "al-Husun al-Mani'ah fi
Tabaqat ash-Shi'a". This voluminous book despite its
nature is not complete.

At this stage we would also like to ask the author of
"Fajru 'l-Islam" whether, in his opinion, these
persons who had established the teachings of Islam and
provided the basis for true knowledge and learning,
wanted to ruin our sacred religion.

And again the question arises whether he and his
teacher Dr. Taha Husayn are true supporters of the
Islamic religion.

If that is the case, we can bid farewell to Islam, or
rather we may quote the words of a poet, if one calls
Hatim Ta'i a stingy person "it is better to die than
to live oneself with such a narrow outlook on life."

In fact it was not my aim to write at such length but
the pen moved on regardless. We hope that the present-day
or future writers might learn something from it and they
may at least be careful in the manner of their writing
and may express their thoughts only after researching
into their subject.

Islam's greatest sage Hadrat 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.)
says: "A wise man's tongue is subordinate to his
heart, and the heart of an ignorant person is obedient to
his tongue."

Ahmad Amin's opinion that "the belief in
Raj'ah" (the return) came from Judaism among the
Shi'as" is extremely deplorable. I wish they would
make it clear whether "raj'ah" is the main
element of Shi'ism, whether it is one of the fundamental
beliefs of their religion, so that they may justify their
criticism. If one's knowledge is of this nature, is it
not proper for him to hold his tongue and preserve his
dignity?

The fact is that faith in "raj'ah" is not
one of the fundamentals of Shi'ism. Of course recognising
its validity is considered necessary, just as in other
Islamic groups one should affirm the events of the unseen
and the signs of doomsday: we may mention for instance,
the coming of Christ and the appearance of the Dajjal,
which all the sects believe in. These are not counted
among the principles of Islam nor is their denial the
cause of expulsion from Islam, nor belief in them proof
of one's being a Muslim. The same argument view holds
good for faith in "raj'ah".

Indeed even if it is demonstrated that it relates to
the roots of the faith of the Shi'as, we should ask
whether concurrence with any Jewish belief is the result
of Jewish influence. The Muslims believe in the oneness
of God.

The Jews also worship one God. As a result of these
shared views, can anyone have the courage to talk of the
influence of Judaism? It would be interesting to see what
these people who indulge in taunts and emotional slander
have to say in this matter.

"God Almighty will give life to a group of people
for the second time." Is it an impossibility? Has
this story never been mentioned in the Book of God ?
"Consider, oh Muhammad, Those of a past age who left
their homes in their thousands, fearing death, and God
Said to them: Die, and then be brought back to
life." (2:243) Has the following holy verse never
been read by anybody? "And the day on which We shall
raise a group from every "ummah" (27:83). If it
means the day of judgement, then on that day not a group
from every ummah but all the ummahs (peoples) will be
restored to life.

This is not a new affair. The 'ulema of the majority
community have been making this matter a target of attack
since the very beginning. It has been noted, in this
connection that when they do not find any grounds for
criticising the veracity of an eminent Shi'a reporter of
hadith, they begin taunting the Shi'as about
"raj'ah" as if they were accusing someone of
idol-worshipping or polytheism. Relative to this problem
in question is the well known story of Mu'min at-Taq and
Abu Hanifah. We believe, however , that this matter does
not merit further argument.

We consider it sufficient to have established the moral
perversion of certain misguided persons.

The author of "Fajru 'l-Islam" says:
"The fire of gehennam will not be allowed to burn
the Shi'as, except for a few among them and then only for
a time." Only God knows from which Shi'a book this
view has been taken. I wish the learned writer had some
better evidence and could provide the necessary proof for
this view.

The Shi'a books clearly says: "Paradise is the
reward for the obedient servant of God even if he is an
Abyssinian slave, and hell is for the wicked even if he
is one of the Sayyids of Quraysh. Traditions on the above
subject have been related by the Holy Imams (a.s.) and
they are so many in number that they can hardly be
counted. If the above mentioned author is referring to
the intercession of the Prophet (s.a.w.) or the Imams
(a.s.) then of course the question of intercession is
another matter which all the Muslims believe in. This
matter will be dealt with in more detail in another book.

Suffice it to say that belief in such a matter is
hardly a reason to say that Shi'ism has been taken from
Judaism just because the latter shows this belief.

Abu Hanifah agrees in some questions of marriage
(nikah) with the Zoroastrians, but would it be
appropriate to say that the Imam of the Hanafis had based
his 'fiqh' (jurisprudence) on Zoroastrianism? And for
further proof, advantage could be taken of his being a
man of Iranian descent. In short, these are all baseless
ways and means through which the desires of certain
Shi'ahs men for mutual confusion and discord among the
various Muslim sects are fulfilled.

The alleged influences of Christianity in the Shi'a
religion is another taunt, which is hardly less painful.
Honesty should demand that Ahmad Amin research his
material more carefully. he erroneously considered sects
like the Khitabiyyah, the Gharabiyyah, the Alawiyyah, the
Mukhmasah, the Bazi'iyyah and the Ghullat as Shi'as,
although, like the Qaramitah, they are apostate groups
having no real link with the Shi'as. The Imania Shi'as
and their religious leaders are absolutely aloof from
these schools of thought; the aforesaid sects are hardly
like Christians, but they go so far as to believe that
the Imam is himself god in the the form of an
incarnation. Their faculty concepts have a striking
resemblance to the faith and beliefs of mystics. It
appears from the statements of well-known mystics like
Hallaj, Gilani, Rafa'i and Badawi, etc. which they
thought that they had reached a stage which was higher
than divinity and godhead itself Those who believe in
'wahdat al-wujud' (pantheism) also have the same
conceptions.

But the Imamia Shi'as who number millions in Iraq,
Iran and the subcontinent of India and Afghanistan are,
as Shi'a, free from such beliefs, and regard these
conceptions as infidelity and digression from the right
path. Their religion is pure 'tawhid' (Oneness of God).
Neither do they believe that God resembles any created
being, nor do they tolerate that His perfect attributes
be considered defective or comparable to creation's
attributes; rather they consider any concept which is the
negation of His eternal existence and attributes utterly
wrong.

The metaphysical beliefs of the shi'as are carefully
explained in numerous books. The smaller
"at-Tajrid" of Khwajah Nasiru 'd-dinn at-Tusi,
or the monumental "Kitab al-Asfar" of Sadru
'd-din ash-Shirazi, both merit study in this subject.
There are thousands of other books in which the theories
of metempsychosis, divine union and re-incarnation are
proved erroneous.

However the author of "Fajru 'l-Islam", by
levelling utterly false charges against the Shi'as, has
not done any useful service to the religion of Islam and
its ummat (nation). Since we have shown in some detail
that the book "Fajru 'l-Islam" is full of false
claims and accusations unsupported by evidence we will
pass on to consider other areas- of misunderstanding. (We
have mentioned this book and its author as an example, so
that the world may know how ignorant the masses must be
if the 'ulema' and authors of the majority community are
as we have described.)

The difficulty is that those who write about the
Shi'as, take such unlikely authors as ibn Khaldun and
Ahmad ibn 'Abdi Rabbih Andalusi as their source. Moreover
the present day writers in their show of liberality
regard Professor Wellhausen and Professor Dozy as
authorities. But no one takes the trouble of referring to
the scholarly works of the Shi'as. The result is that
when a Shi'a goes through the books of these scholars he
finds in them the same sort of absurdities about himself
to which Raghib Isfahani has referred to in his book
"al-Muhadirat". The author writes: "In the
court of Ja'far ibn Sulayman a Muslim was giving evidence
about someone's infidelity. When he was asked what he
knew about the defendant, he said, "This man is
Mu'tazili. he is Nasibi; he is Harwari; he is Jabri; he
is Rafzi; he rails at 'Ali ibn Khattab, 'Umar ibn Abi
Qahafah, 'Uthman ibn Abi Talib, and Abu Bakr ibn 'Affan.
Also he abuses Hajjaj, who pulled down Kufah on Abu
Sufyan, and on the day of Qata'if (the day of Tafur
'Ashura') fought against Husayn ibn Mu'awiyah".
Hearing this Ja'far said, "Damn you! I do not know
for which branch of learning I should envy you -
historical, religious or geographical knowledge!"

As regards 'Abdullah ibn Saba, whose name has been
associated with the Shi'as, if one studies any Shi'a book
one will find that he is held in contempt; rather the
mildest works about him that are to be found in the books
written by Shi'a authors are: "'Abdullah ibn Saba -
curses be upon him". We should mention that some
people hold the view that 'Abdullah ibn saba, like
Majnun, 'Amiri, and Abu Hilal, were in fact only
ficticious heroes of story and legend.

During the middle period of the Umayyah and 'Abbasid
rule, self-indulgence, sport and play, had reached the
middle period of the Umayyah and 'Abbasid rule,
self-indulgence, sport and play, had reached such a
height that story-telling had become a part of the life
of the residents of the palace. It was in such an
atmosphere that the stories were contrived.

Our original aim was to dwell on this subject. But
considering the repeated attacks on the authors of the
present age, we thought it necessary to introduce briefly
the beliefs and faiths, important principles and the
articles of practice of the Shi'as. It should be noted
that in the Shi'a religion the door of
"Ijtihad" (endeavor to arrive at a conclusion
regarding any religious problem) is always open, and so
long as there is no violation of "ijma"'
(consensus), the Book (the Holy Quran), sunnah, and
intellectual reasoning, every "mujtahid"
(religious scholar of exceptional merit) is free in his
opinion; anyone who violates these limits and draws his
own conclusion will be considered misguided; the opinion
of such a man will be regarded as purely personal,
individual and unfit to be followed.

In these pages it is not possible to deal with all
matters in detail, so only those fundamentals of Shi'ism
will be explained in which there is no room for
disagreement.

Not much attention will be paid to arguments and proofs
as this is appropriate only for larger volumes. Our only
aim is that all the Muslims, individually and
collectively, may know the real beliefs of the Shi'as
and, by refraining from attributing false beliefs to
their brothers, may not do injustice to themselves.
Rather than considering Shi'ahs as evil spirits, demons,
jinn, beasts and monsters, they should regard them as a
special branch of their society, since by the grace of
God the Shi'as of Hadrat 'Ali (a.s.) are adorned with a
true Islamic character, knowledge of and belief in the
Holy Quran and Sunnah, blessings of faith, and kind
manners, and live according to principles which are based
on reasoning and certain proofs.

Muhammad Husayn Al-Kashifi 'l-Ghita'

Najaf al-Ashraf

Jamadi 'l-awwal 1350 A.H. (1931 A. D.)