When talking of Tawhid al Rububiyyah, the oneness of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala in terms of him being the nourisher, some of their contemporaries have made such statements in conceding for their Imams attributes which purely belong to Allah that were not previously reported from their early scholars. One of their scholars ‘Abdul Hussain al ‘Amili, regarding whom they falsely claim that he is one of the Ayat (signs) of Allah, says the following when praising ‘Ali (may Allah purify him from what they attribute to him):
وعنوان قدرته السامية
|أبا حسن أنت عين الإله|
|فهل عندك تعزب من خافية||
وأنت المحيط بعلم الغيوب
وعلة أيجادها الباقية
|وأنت مدير رحي الكائنات|
|وإن شئت تسفع بالناصية||
لك الأمر إن شئت تنجي غدا
O the father of Hassan, you are Allah himself and a manifestation of his great power.
You encompass the knowledge of the unseen. Can any discreet thing then possibly be hidden from you?
You are the one giving motion to the mill of all that happens. And you are the cause of its enduring existence.
For you will be the prerogative tomorrow, if you wish you will grant salvation, and if you want you will grab by the forelock.
See how he has made a creation from the creations of Allah the deity himself, and the one who possesses all the divine attributes of maintaining the world and creating it, of giving life and giving death; he is allegedly the administrator of all that happens, the cause of its existence and a manifestation of the divine power; he has all-encompassing knowledge of the unseen and will be the reckoner on Judgement Day; for him solely will the prerogative on that day and thus the salvation and ruination of the bondsmen will depend upon him.
This is no surprise, for it is the natural product of the narrations of al Kulayni, al Qummi, al Majlisi, and the rest; narrations which take on this very extreme. We have presented some examples of them in the previous chapters.
The Twelvers of today represent in their narrations and via the representation of some of their scholars the Saba’iyyah and the other extremist sects who dieficated ‘Ali, regarding who we assumed that they no more existed. But suddenly we come to learn that they are still alive amidst the Twelver dogma, so much so that it can be claimed that ‘Saba’iyyah’ was the old name and ‘Twelver’ is the new name due to them sharing the same reality. These words did not emanate from a layman of the Shia or a junior writer, rather it has emanated from one of their Ayat to whom thousands of people have recourse.
You will likewise find that Muhammad Hussain Al Kashif al Ghita’, also one of their supreme authorities and someone who always calls for unity between the Ahlus Sunnah and the Shia, saying the following when praising the Imams:
أملاك فعرشه ميقاتها
|يا كعبة الله إن حجت لها ال|
|أشياء بل ذرئت بها ذراتها||
أنتم مشيئته التي خلقت بها
ما لم تقله في المسيح غلاتها
أنا في الورى قال لكم أن لم أقل
O the Ka’bah of Allah, when the angels perform the pilgrimage to it they consider the throne of Allah to be their Miqat.
You are the will of Allah by virtue of which things were created, rather by virtue of which their particles were produced.
I would be your hater in the world if I do not say regarding you that which the extremist Christians did not say regarding the Messiah.
He considers his Imams the Ka’bah to which the angels perform pilgrimage, and the Throne of Allah the Miqat wherefrom they start. He considers them to be the will of Allah and His power through which things were created. He has taken a pledge upon himself to say regarding his Imams what the extremist Christians did not say regarding ‘Isa ‘alayh al Salam. Probably by enlisting these attributes he has reached the goal he intended.
This is what one of the supreme authorities of the Shia has to say, an authority that represents them in conferences and who is considered by some of the Ahlus Sunnah, who are not aware of his reality, to be from the moderate Shia. Owing to this misunderstanding they made him their Imam in the first conference of al Quds, i.e. owing to the fact that he is two faced and that the secrets and ways of Taqiyyah know no limits for them.
If I were to document everything I came across in this regard I would be giving longevity to the discussion. However, I will say that in the poetic material which the poets of the Shia and their writers left behind this extremism is found to an appalling extent. It seems as if the flame of emotion and the spark of enthusiasm overpowers the reigns of Taqiyyah and thus the reality comes to the fore without manipulation and deception. Maybe that is why this particular topic requires a dedicated study.
And as with regard to Tawhid al Uluhiyyah, the oneness of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala in terms of him being the only deity worthy of worship, the shrines of the Shia and their holy sites have become the greatest manifestations of Shirk. And there is no hope of reforming this vice for them, due it being supported by those narrations which are falsely attributed to the Ahlul Bayt. As opposed to the reality of the Ahlus Sunnah, for this is considered a deviation according to them and is vehemently opposed in their principle sources. Anyone who visited these sites has witnessed the Shirk which takes place there.
Sheikh Musa Jar Allah, after having visited Iran and Iraq for a few months, concludes that their holy sites and shrines are worshiped.
And Sheikh Abu al Hassan al Nadwi says the following after visiting the shrine of ‘Ali al Rida:
فإذا دخل غريب في مشهد سيدنا علي الرضا لم يشعر إلا وأنه داخل الحرم فهو غاص بالحجيج مدوي بالبكاء والضجيج، عامر بالرجال والنساء، مزخرف بأفخر الزخارف والزينات. قد تدفقت إليه ثروة الأثرياء وتبرعات الفقراء
When a stranger enters the shrine of our master ‘Ali al Rida he will not feel but as if he is in the holy Haram. For it is packed with pilgrims, echoing with cries and shouts, filled with men and women and adorned with the most lavish of embellishments and decorations. The wealth of the rich and optional charities of the poor have been emptied into it.
And the author of al Tuhfah al Ithna ‘Ashariyyah has stated that they continue to do extreme practices at the graves of the Imams and circumambulate them. Rather they even perform salah toward them whilst their backs are facing the Qiblah. They do many other such actions that when compared with the devotions of the idol-worshippers for their idols the latter seems insignificant. He then says, “If you are in doubt, then go to some of their sites and have a look for yourself.”
Furthermore, you will find that in his book ‘Aqa’id al Imamah which he compiled in order to elucidate the beliefs of his cult, and which was accepted by the Shia due to us not finding anyone who criticised it, and which he compiled in order to call people toward Shi’ism, one of their contemporary scholars Muhammad al Muzaffar does not hold back in emphasising the belief of the Shia regarding the shrine of the Imams. He thus says regarding the shrines of the Imams that one of the specialities of his cult is the following:
تشييدها وإقامة العمارات الضخمة عليها، ولأجلها يضحون بكل غال ورخيص عن إيمان وطيب نفس
Fortifying them and erecting huge buildings upon them. And because of them they sacrifice every lavish and ordinary thing with faith and with generosity of heart.
He then clearly mentions that the reasons for this is:
وصايا الأئمة وحثهم شيعتهم على الزيارة، وترغيبهم فيما لها من الثواب الجزيل عند الله تعالى وباعتبار أن هاتيك القبور من خير المواقع لاستجابة الدعاء والانقطاع إلى الله تعالى
The emphasised directives of the Imams and their exhortations to visit their shrines, and their promises of the great rewards contained therein by Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala… and due to considering the fact that these graves are the best locations for the acceptance of prayers and for being devoted to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.
He further goes onto mention the etiquettes and actions of the visitations without any shame and fear of openly proclaiming the manifestations of idolatry.
Moreover, a group of their scholars till today openly proclaim without any qualms and compunction that Karbala’ is more virtuous than the holy Ka’bah. Here we have one of the senior authorities of the Shia, a scholar who spearheads the movement of calling for unity between the Ahlus Sunnah and the Shia, claiming that Karbala’ is more virtuous than the Ka’bah which Allah made a source of people sound existence, a place to which people continuously flock, a place of amnesty and a place filled with blessings, as is mentioned in the Qur’an. Muhammad Hussain Al Kashif al Ghita’ hymns the following poem which is against the text of the Qur’an and the unanimity of the Muslims:
ومن حديث كربلاء والكعبة *** لكربلاء بان علو الرتبة
Part of the discussion regarding Karbala’ and the Ka’bah is that for Karbala’ higher merit has become evident.
He considers this to be from the categorically established tenets of his dogma due to their narrations and reports attesting to it and he thus says:
أشرف بقاع الأرض بالضرورة
Necessarily the noblest of places on earth.
The attestation of their narrations to this is more than enough evidence of the fact that all their narrations are lies. And also of the fact that whoever forged them is out of the fold of Islam and that whoever believes in them has parted with the unanimity of the Muslims. What status can Karbala’ have when Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala says:
إِنَّ أَوَّلَ بَيْتٍ وُضِعَ لِلنَّاسِ لَلَّذِيْ بِبَكَّةَ مُبَارَكًا وَهُدًى لِّلْعَالَمِيْنَ فِيْهِ آيَاتٌ بَيِّنَاتٌ مَّقَامُ إِبْرَاهِيْمَ وَمَن دَخَلَهُ كَانَ آمِنًا وَلِله عَلَى النَّاسِ حِجُّ الْبَيْتِ مَنِ اسْتَطَاعَ إِلَيْهِ سَبِيْلًا وَمَن كَفَرَ فَإِنَّ اللهَ غَنِيٌّ عَنِ الْعَالَمِيْنَ
Indeed, the first House [of worship] established for mankind was that at Bakkah [i.e., Makkah] – blessed and a guidance for the worlds. In it are clear signs [such as] the standing place of Ibrahim. And whoever enters it [i.e. the Haram] shall be safe. And [due] to God from the people is a pilgrimage to the House – for whoever is able to find thereto a way. But whoever disbelieves [i.e., refuses] – then indeed, God is free from need of the worlds.
Does there remain any room for any other view after this?
أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ أَمْ عَلَىٰ قُلُوْبٍ أَقْفَالُهَا
Then do they not reflect upon the Qur’an, or are there locks upon [their] hearts?
In conclusion, the statements of their scholars in this regard are abundant.
Where on the one hand we find the ancient books of the Shia mentioning that Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala forgave the Ambiya’ due to them imploring him through the agency of the Imams, we on the other hand find that this belief (which is steeped in extremism, which entails according the Imams superiority over the Ambiya’ and which is the epitome of gullibility and heedlessness due to it presupposing the existence of the Imams during eras of the previous Ambiya’) is affirmed by some of their senior authorities of the present. Hence ‘Abdullah al Mamaqani advises his son with the following advice:
وعليك بني بالتوسل بالنبي وآله صلى الله عليهم أجمعين، فإني قد استقصيت الأخبار فوجدت أنه ما تاب الله على نبي من أنبيائه من الزلة إلا بالتوسل بهم
And, O my son, hold on to praying through the agency of the Nabi and his household, may Allah have mercy on all of them. For after having done an in-depth study of the narrations I found that Allah did not forgive any Nabi from the Ambiya’ for a mistake but after he prayed through their agency.
And where their ancient sources classify visiting the grave of Hussain as better than doing Hajj to the House of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, we likewise find this grave belief being repeated by some of their contemporary scholars. They actively invite toward it due to there being immense reward in doing so considering the fact that it is the best of actions and devotions, as they allege.
Hence ‘Abdullah al Mamaqani advises his son to visit the grave of Hussain every day and says:
وعليك بني بزيارة قبره (يعني قبر الحسين) في كل يوم من البعد مرة، والضي إليه في كل شهر مرة، وإن كنت في بلدة بعيدة ففي السنة مرة
And, O my son, you should visit his grave (the grave of Hussain) everyday once from a distance. And you should proceed to it once in every month. And if you are in a town which is far, then once a year.
Notice that this scholar does not advise his son to perform salah, rather he tells him to go to the grave where shirk is committed because that is the best of devotions for them. This is obviously the way of the polytheists.
His son makes the following comment upon this advice:
وقد ورد أن من زاره عارفا بحقه كتب الله له ثواب ألف حجة وألف عمرة
It appears in the tradition that whoever visits him knowing his right, Allah will record for him the reward of a thousand Hajj and a thousand ‘Umrahs.
Till he says:
وكأنما زار الله. وحق على الله ألا يعذبه بالنار، ألا وإن الإجابة تحت قبته والشفاء في تربته. ومن زار قبر الحسين عليه السلام ليلة النصف من شعبان وليلة الفطر، وليلة عرفة في سنة واحدة كتب الله له ألف حجة مبرورة وألف عمرة متقبلة، و قضيت له ألف حاجة من حوائج الدنيا والآخرة… ومن أتاه يوم عرفة عارقا بحقه كتب الله له ألف حجة وألف عمرة متقبلات وألف غزوة مع نبي مرسل أو إمام عادل
And it is as if he has visited Allah [!!!]. It becomes incumbent upon Allah not to punish him with hell fire. Behold, acceptance of prayers is under his dome and cure is in his sand. And whoever visits the grave of Hussain ‘alayh al Salam on the fifteenth night of Sha’ban, the night of ‘Id al Fitr, and the night of ‘Arafah—all in one year—Allah will record for him a thousand accepted Hajj and a thousand accepted ‘Umrahs, and a thousand of his needs of this life and the afterlife will be fulfilled. And whoever comes to him on the Day of ‘Arafah being fully aware of his right, Allah will write for him the reward of a thousand Hajj, a thousand ‘Umrahs, and a thousand wars fought with a sent Nabi or a just ruler.
This is how the ancient and recent books of the Shia converge upon this polytheistic belief and how they attribute it to the Imams of the Ahlul Bayt and to Islam whereas the Muslims have no knowledge of it. It is only transmitted by a group of Shia narrators. It can be said without doubt that by way of these anomalies they are announcing their falsehood and disgracing their creed. These alleged narrations had a great influence in the world of the Shia due to them reviving the belief of the polytheists in the shrines of the Shia and their holy sites. Hence these sites are frequently visited and the Masjids are abandoned. Despite all of this their scholars endorse this evil and strive to entrench it and perpetuate it.
On the other hand, some of their narrations explicitly warn against this evil, but their scholars conceal such narrations and do not want them to become known to their gullible followership. In fact they even deny the existence of such narrations thereby distancing their followership even further away from the light of truth.
One of their supreme authorities, as they describe him, Muhsin al Amin whilst defending the Shia in them converting graves into Masjids, in his book al Husun al Mani’ah says that all those narrations which appear in the seminal works of the Muslims which bear the prohibition of converting graves into Masjids and building upon them that they are exclusively narrated through the transmissions of the Ahlus Sunnah and oppose the diffusely narrated traditions of the Ahlul Bayt.
In response I say that this prohibition appears in many narrations which are narrated through Shia transmissions as well. Al Hurr al ‘Amili has cited them in his book Wasa’il al Shia just as others have as well. So it is one of two things: either this person who is known as al Amin (trustworthy) is no so trustworthy after all, due to him wanting to conceal what features in their books, or he is ignorant of what appears in their collections despite him being falsely described as the Ayat Allah ( a sign of Allah).
Moving on, and regarding the names and attributes of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala their contemporary scholars hold the view of their later scholars, i.e. the view of Ta’til (denial of the attributes of Allah). And in this regard they follow the Mu’tazilah completely, to the extent that they believe that the Qur’an is created, they deny that the believers will see Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala in the afterlife, they deny the attributes of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala which are established in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and they describe Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala with negatives. Hence their scholar al Muzaffar says the following under the topic: our belief regarding Allah:
ليس هو بجسم ولا صورة، وليس جوهرا ولا عرضا، وليس له ثقل أو خفة، ولا حركة أو سكون، ولا مكان ولا زمان، ولا يشار إليه
He does not have a body nor a form; he is not substantial nor abstract; He is not characterised by heaviness or lightness; nor by motion or stagnation; He is not confined by space and time nor can he be pointed at.
As you might have picked up, in describing Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala with these sheer negatives they actually deny the existence of Allah altogether. This is nothing new for them, for these very words were repeated again and again by the Jahmiyyah before them. They are merely blindly following them. From here it is clear that those who assume that the Jahmiyyah, the deniers of the attributes of Allah, no more exist are mistaken.
Furthermore, they excommunicate all those who oppose them in the stance of Ta’til. Hence al Muzaffar says:
ومن قال… إنه ينزل إلى السماء الدنيا، أو إنه يظهر إلى أهل الجنة كالقمر، أو نحو ذلك فإنه بمنزلة الكافر به… وكذلك يلحق بالكافر من قال: إنه يتراءى لخلقه يوم القيامة
And he who says that he descends to the first heaven, or that he will appear before the people of Jannat like the moon, or anything of that sort, is equal in status with the one who disbelieves in him… And so will a person be like a disbeliever if he believes that Allah will be visible to his creation on the Day of Judgement.
They claim that reason guided them to Ta’til. Amazing, was reason ever a decisive medium for receiving knowledge of the unseen? And can sound reason ever accept describing Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala with these negative traits for which there is no evidence and which openly violate aspects of revelation?
Furthermore, what is the crux of all those ideologies and philosophies which discussed this issue without any recourse to divine revelation? The crux is that they did not leave behind but a heap of contradictions and frivolities like the frivolities of kids. Ultimately all their views became a source of their confusion and anxiety. Likewise, what was the end result of all those theologians who made reason their guide and their navigator in Islamic history? Was it not confusion and ruination? Indeed those who worked with the methods of Kalam and the thinking processes of philosophy found that they do not quench any thirst nor satisfy any need. They realised that the best way is the way of the Qur’an. But when they shunned it, all their efforts became in vain, they wasted their time and efforts, they unnecessarily occupied the Ummah and diverted it from its mandatory obligations.
The method of the Ahlus Sunnah regarding the names and attributes of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala is indeed a great method. Because it abides by the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and because it preserves the time, efforts, strength and reason of a Muslim from being wasted in investigating issues which he is not obligated to investigate and for knowing the precise description of which there is no way.
Nonetheless, there remains one thing, and that is another view of their contemporaries regarding Tawhid which they have adopted following in the footsteps of the Sufis who opine that there are different levels of Tawhid, the lowest of which is the apparent purport of the Kalimah La Ilah illa Allah. These Sufis contrived in the Din such things for which Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala gave no authority. And owing to these various levels they ultimately reached open disbelief i.e. the view of Ittihad (singularity of existence) and the view that the creation is itself the creator. Hence they deviated from reason and revelation, and they superseded the Christians (who believe in ‘Isa being god-incarnate) in their shirk due to them believing in a general incarnation whereas the Christians believe in a specific one.
Despite all these problems, the scholars of the Shia, who can be characterised as those who across the centuries transmitted to their people the scum of all the innovative sects and the defilements of all the flawed human ideologies, adopted this problematic Sufi stance and transmitted it to their people, rather they even considered it part of their authentic beliefs.
إن مراتب التوحيد أربع… توحيد العوام، وتوحيد الخواص، وتوحيد خواص الخواص، وتوحيد أخص الخواص، والأولى مدلول كلمة لا إله إلا الله.
There are four levels of Tawhid: the Tawhid of the commonality, the Tawhid of the elite, the Tawhid of the elite of the elite and the Tawhid of the most elite. The first level is the apparent purport of the Kalimah La Ilah Illa Allah.
Commenting on this he says that, apart from the rest of the Muslims, his cult is privileged with the Tawhid of elite of the elite and the Tawhid of the most elite.
He further says that although the text does not allow for the elucidation of these levels, but, he says that, that they imbibed this from the teachings of Amir al Mu’minin ‘Ali:
أول الدين معرفة، وكمال معرفته التصديق به، وكمال التصديق به توحيده، وكمال توحيده… نفي الصفات عنه. فمن وصف الله سبحانه فقد قرنه، ومن قرنه فقد ثناه، ومن ثناه فقد جزأه، ومن جزأه فقد حهله، ومن جهله فقد أشار إليه، ومن إشار إليه فقد حده، ومن حده فقد عده
The beginning of Din is recognition; and the perfection of recognition is in affirmation; and the perfection of affirmation is in Tawhid; and the perfection of Tawhid is in denying any attribution of qualities to Him. Hence whoever attributes any quality to Him has coupled Him, and whoever has coupled Him has doubled Him, and whoever has doubled Him has considered him divisible, and whoever considers Him divisible is ignorant of Him, and whoever is ignorant of Him will point toward Him, and whoever will point toward Him will confine Him, and whoever will confine Him will enumerate Him.
This narration which they falsely attribute to Amir al Mu’minin ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu entails denying the attributes of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala which are established in the Qur’an and the Sunnah. And the belief that the perfection of Tawhid is the denial of the attributes is the stance of the Jahmiyyah who considered Tawhid to be one of their principles but then made it inclusive of the denial of the attributes; the aftermath of their stance was the denial of the Being of Allah. This is because denying the attributes necessarily leads to denying the Being, for one cannot envision the existence of a being without attributes in the external.
And because the stance of the Jahmiyyah regarding the denial of attributes is a product of the stance of Hulul, incarnation, and Ittihad, singularity of existence, it became his basis for the view he adopted regarding Tawhid being categorised into Tawhid of the elite and the Tawhid of the elite of the elite.
In order to understand the extent of their deviation, it is sufficient to note that they class the Tawhid with which the Messengers came and with which the divine books descended and to believe in which Allah commanded the first and last as the lowest level thereof. A level that is only behoving of the commonality. Do they have any evidence that they can present to us to prove this?
Here we have in front of us the Word of Allah which descended upon his Rasul and the Sunnah of Rasul Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the verdicts of the best generations after him, did this categorisation come from any one of them? They do not follow but the views of their scholars and their heretics; and apart from conjecture, following the demands of the ego and the dictates of devils from the Jinn and Men they have no firm knowledge.
Likewise, in order to understand the extreme extent which they have reached in ascending these levels, which according to them do not fall under the purport of La Ilah Illa Allah, it is sufficient to understand that it eventually makes a person who treads this path reach the pits of heresy, i.e. the belief in incarnation and singularity of existence.
 Diwan al Hussain 1/ p. 48. (Under the second category which is exclusive to Arabic literature).
 Another poet actually clearly says that all the divine attributes have converged in ‘Ali. he says:
وما اجتمعت إلا لسر وحكمة
جميع صفات الرب فيه تجمعت
All the attributes of the nourisher have converged in him. And they have not converged but owing to a secret and a wisdom. (See: al Ha’iri: Muqtabas al Athar 1/246).
 Muhammad Baqir al Najafi (the compiler): Diwan Shu’ara’ al Hussain (published in Tehran in the year 1374 A.H.) p. 12.
 See the al Azhar magazine for the first conference of al Quds: 25/506, 638, 979; al Muslimun 6/45.
Also see the comments of Rashid Rida in the al Manar magazine upon making Muhammad Hussain Al Kashif al Ghita’ the Imam in salah: 29/628.
 For more examples see: al Ha’iri: Muqtabas al Athar 1/153-245, 248; Muhsin al Amin: A’yan al Shia 5/219; Diwan al Hussain of a group of their scholars; ‘Abdul Hussain al Amini: al Ghadir 7/34-67, etc.
 Al Washia: Introduction.
 Abu al Hassan al Nadwi: Min Nahr Kabul ila Nahr al Yarmuk p. 93; the al I’tisam magazine: edition no: 3 of the year forty one.
 Mukhtasar al Tuhfah al Ithnay ‘Ashariyyah p. 300
 Muhammad Rida al Muzaffar: ‘Aqa’id al Imamah p. 133.
 If they really were the best of places and if they really had such great merit, then at least some of that should have appeared in the Qur’an and the Sunnah and they should have been well established and known; they should not have remained unknown to the Ummah and transmitted only by a bunch of infamous liars who were known for their fabrications against the Ahlul Bayt. And if there was any truth to any of what they say Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would not have emphatically prohibited the Ummah from transforming graves into Masjids.
 Muhammad Rida al Muzaffar: ‘Aqa’id al Imamah p. 133.
Ibid. p. 135-139.
 Muhammad Hussain Al Kashif al Ghita’: al Ard wa al Turbah al Hussainiyyah p. 55-56.
 Surah Al ‘Imran: 96, 97.
 Surah Muhammad: 24.
 For example: Mirza Hussain al Ha’iri says the following:
كربلاء تلك التربة الطيبة الطاهرة، والأرض المقدسة التي قال في حقها رب السموات والأرضين مخاطبا للكعبة حينما افتخرت على سائر البقاع قري واستقري لو لا أرض كربلاء وما ضمنه لما خلقتك.
Karbala’ is that pure and sublime soil, and that sanctified land in reference to which the Lord of the heavens and the earths said addressing the Ka’bah when it boasted about itself before all the other pieces of land, “Settle down and calm down, for had it not been for the land of Karbala’ I would not have created you.”
He further says:
وكذلك أصبحت هذه البقعة المباركة بعد ما صارت مدفنا لإمام رضي الله عنه مزارا للمسلمين وكعبة للموحدين ومطافا للملوك والسلاطين ومسجدا للمصلين
And after having become the resting place of the Imam radiya Llahu ‘anhu, like this did this blessed land transform into a holy site for the Muslims, into the Ka’bah for those who believe in the oneness of Allah, a place regularly encircled by the kings and rulers and a masjid for those who pray. (Al Ha’iri: Ahkam al Shia 1/32).
And ‘Abdul Jawwad Al Tu’mah avers in his book Tarikh Karbala’ that their narrations have classed Karbala’ as the best piece of land on earth. Hence the Shia consider it to be the chosen, sanctified and blessed land of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala. And according to their standards it is the Haram of Allah and his Rasul and the Qiblah of the Muslims. In its soil is cure. And it holds such virtues as not found in any other piece of land, not even the Ka’bah. (Tarikh Karbala’ p. 115-116. This book has been authenticated by a number of their scholars; see the introduction of the book for more details).
Similarly their scholar Muhammad al Shirazi says:
تقبل أضرحتهم كما تقبل الحجر الأسود، وكما تقبل جلد القرآن
Their graves should be kissed just like how the black stone and the skin of the Qur’an are kissed. (Muhammad al Shirazi: Maqalat al Shia p. 8)
 This is the view of the extremist among the Rawafid as stated by al Qadi ‘Ayad, al Baghdadi and Ibn Taymiyyah. And Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab has cited that a person who believes in this is unanimously out of the fold. (See: Section Two – Chapter 4: Discussion 2).
 See how they acknowledge mistakes for the prophets but claim completely infallibility for their Imams!
 Mir’at al Rashad p. 104.
 ‘Aqa’id al Imamiyyah p. 133.
 Mir’at al Rashad p. 105- 114.
 Muhyi al Din al Mamaqani.
 Mir’at al Rashad p. 110 (see footnote).
 Mir’at al Rashad p. 113 (see footnote).
 Muhsin al Amin: al Husun al Mani’ah p. 27.
 Muhsin al Amin: A’yan al Shia 1/461; al Amini al Najafi: al Ghadir 3/139.
 Muhsin al Amin: A’yan al Shia 1/463; a-Muzaffar: ‘Aqa’id al Imamiyyah p. 59.
 Al Ghadir 3/139.
 ‘Aqa’id al Imamiyyah p. 59.
 Ibid. p. 59-60.
 Ibid. p. 60.
 See: Majmu’ Fatawa Sheikh al Islam 5/10-11; Ibn Abi al ‘Iz: Sharh al Tahawiyyah p. 169-172; Mulla ‘Ali al Qari: al Fiqh al Akbar p. 10.
 Al Khu’i describes him as the pillar of Islam and the support of the ‘Ulama’.
 This book has been approbated by some of their seniors like al Khu’i and Hassan al Musawi.
 ‘Aqa’id al Imamiyyah al Ithnay ‘Ashariyyah p. 24.
 Ibid. p. 24.
 Sharh al Tahawiyyah p. 16.
 Sheikh al Islam has mentioned that the beginning of the view of Ittihad in the Ummah of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was during the era of Tatar dynasty (Majmu’ Fatawa Sheikh al Islam 2/171).Back to top