Manifestation 9

Manifestation 6 – Manifestation 8
September 15, 2023
Chapter Three – Abnormal Consequences of a Creed Adopting the Concept of Takfir – Introduction
September 20, 2023

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

Manifestation 9

 

Killing the Ahlus Sunnah and Considering Looting their Wealth Permissible—from the Most Dangerous Effects of their Concept of Takfir

Perhaps, many of us will be surprised at the great number of horrible realities the Shia Imamiyyah creed contains, including fundamentals and accepted facts, as well as aspects that have been hidden and concealed from us with their glittering false and deceptive communication, despite our conviction that it is not implausible for anything more despicable to be existent in it. Nonetheless, I am capable of determining that all the above will not be enough to prepare us to brace what we will witness after a short while, just as I can well imagine the strong resentment felt by some readers by merely reading the heading.

Probably, the reader predicts what he will find written in the forthcoming lines of this treatise on this specific topic, not more than conclusions based on the realities and truths determined previously or sheer exaggerations and assumed horrors for which there is no actual proof when examined thoroughly by fair and solid judgement. In fact, probably some are now happy to accuse me by saying, “There is no doubt that the real reason prompting the writer of this treatise in his effort to establish this accusation is the emotional baggage he holds from painful events of the past[1]; wars between members of the Abbasid Islamic state and the disbelieving Tartars, who endeavoured to destroy it and kill the Muslims residing there, all with the assistance of the Shia.[2]

At this, few might object correctly, “Yes, undoubtedly, that occurrence stokes emotional pain which develops resentment towards those involved in the crime of conspiracy and treachery. However, it is inappropriate for all this to be applied to Shi’ism as a concept, leaving it accountable for the crime committed by some of its symbolic figures or adherents.”

Then, some of the noble might further the accusation and tell himself, “Maybe, the writer combining that painful catastrophe and others with the beliefs and manifestations mentioned previously has filled the souls and excited the senses, and will lead the minds of such people to believe everything that might be said.”

He might then correctly recommend, “While we hold Shi’ism accountable for everything contained in the past pages and announce our resistance and grudge against it; however, we as Muslims, as the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah, have been commanded to be just and fair, even with our enemies. This forces us not to deceive people and indict them or accuse them without proof or evidence. That being said, we are unable to believe that there is a Muslim in the world, when his views are different and his ideologies are dissimilar, to regard the blood and wealth of his Muslim brother permissible, for no other reason save his disagreement in rational ijtihad.[3] For this reason, we determine the non-existence of a single proof or evidence, even weak, to support this claim against the Shia and we clearly state that had it been permissible for us to believe accusations like this, it would be possible for us to believe all impossibilities which the mind accuses Shi’ism of!”

Had refuting these honourable objectors been decreed for me, I would begin firstly by humbly apologising for the resentment created in their hearts or for what their minds find an improbability. The details of this bloody manifestation, containing hideousness and obnoxiousness, make it difficult to believe and embrace. Despite this, however, I will delve into discussing this topic; notwithstanding the profound bitterness surrounding it and the intense pain the heart feels due to it. I will apply the same methodology I had relied on in exposing what has passed in the previous sections of this treatise. I will explain this in two issues:

Firstly, I will establish with definiteness the existence of clear and distinct declarations from the writings of their scholars, authorities, and luminaries indicating the permissibility of shedding the blood of the Ahlus Sunnah and stealing their wealth.

Secondly, I will present practical manifestations of these bloody views in real life, describing many bloody examples, which is shocking to Islam, in fact shocking to humanity in general; and the pages of history are embarrassed to present some images of it.

After apologising, I present to you, O beloved reader, these two matters:

 

1. Some of their authorities adopting this as a belief

This is an extremely important issue which removes the astonishment and denial of some good people who have positive thoughts of the Shia. It establishes this consequence as a well-grounded aqidah (belief) held by some of their scholars. In fact, they invite to it and present evidences and proofs to emphasise it, so that others who are somewhat confused and fail to accept it attain contentment. We will suffice by citing two of their distinguished authorities who defended this belief and clearly called towards it[4]:

 

1. Shia Muhaddith Yusuf al Bahrani[5]

Have a look at his expression of his dark, malicious, deviated belief:

Firstly, he determined the disbelief and impurity of the Ahlus Sunnah:

 

والمشهور في كلام أصحابنا المتقدمين هو الحكم بكفرهم ونصبهم ونجاستهم وهو المؤيد بالروايات الإمامية

The common aspect in the speech of our early scholars is the verdict of their disbelief, nasb, and impurity which is supported by narrations of the Imamiyyah.[6]

 

He says:

أقول وهذا القول عندي هو الحق الحقيق بالاتباع لاستفاضة الأخبار بكفر المخالفين وشركهم ونصبهم ونجاستهم

I say: This view according to me is the definite truth worthy of emulation, due to the abundance of narrations on the disbelief, shirk, nasb, and impurity of the opposition.[7]

 

Secondly, he clearly permits killing the Ahlus Sunnah and stealing their wealth.

a. He says:

 

وإلى هذا القول ذهب أبو الصلاح وابن إدريس وسلار وهو الحق الظاهر بل الصريح من الأخبار لاستفاضتها وتكاثرها بكفر المخالف ونصبه وشركه وحل ماله ودمه كما بسطنا عليه الكلام بما لا يحوم حوله شبهة النقض والإبرام في كتاب الشهاب الثاقب والقول بالكفر هو المشهور بين الأصحاب من علمائنا المتقدمين رضوان الله عليهم أجمعين

Abu al Salah, Ibn Idris, and Salar have opted for this view. And it is the apparent, in fact, the categorical truth from the narrations due to their abundance and profusion on the disbelief, nasb, and shirk of the opposition and the permissibility of his wealth and blood, as we discussed in detail, not surrounded with the doubt of refutation and demolition, in the book al Shihab al Thaqib. The view of disbelief is the common one among our early scholars—may Allah be pleased with them all.[8]

 

b. He says:

 

وحينئذ فبموجب ما دلت عليه هذه الأخبار وصرح به أولئك العلماء الأبرار لو أمكن لأحد اغتيال شيء من نفوس هؤلاء وأموالهم من غير استلزامه لضرر عليه أو على أحد إخوانه جاز له فيما بينه وبين الله تعالى

In such an instance, as a necessary outcome of what the narrations indicate and these pious scholars state, if anyone is able to kill any of them or steal their wealth without necessitating harm against himself or any of his brethren, it is permissible for him between him and Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.[9]

 

Muslims should be wary that al Bahrani is not attributing this view to himself only. He is in fact portraying it as a widely accepted belief by their early scholars and authorities, in which they have unanimously agreed to believe.

 

2. Ni’mat Allah al Jaza’iri

Have a look at his statement of his dark, malicious, deviated belief.

Firstly, he determined the disbelief and impurity of the Ahlus Sunnah.

a. He quoted and supported the verdict of al Murtada and Ibn Idris al Hilli of the disbelief and impurity of the opposition. He says:

 

ومن هذا يقوى قول السيد المرتضى وابن إدريس قدس الله روحيهما وبعض مشائخنا المعاصرين بنجاسة المخالفين كلهم نظرا إلى إطلاق الكفر والشرك عليهم في الكتاب والسنة فيتناولهم هذا اللفظ حيث يطلق ولأنك قد تحققت أن أكثرهم نواصب بهذا المعنى

The view of Sayed al Murtada and Ibn Idris—may their souls be purified—and some of our contemporary scholars of the impurity of all the opposition is strengthened, taking into consideration the application of disbelief and shirk to them in the Book and Sunnah. Hence, this word will apply to them whenever used unrestrictedly. And you have ascertained that majority of them are Nawasib with this meaning.

 

b. He rejected the ruling of Islam encompassing them and regarded it improbable. He says:

 

ولكن أنى لهم الإسلام وقد هجروا أهل بيت نبيهم المأمور بودادهم في محكم الكتاب بقوله تعالى قُلْ لَّا أَسْأَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ أَجْرًا إِلَّا الْمَوَدَّةَ فِي الْقُرْبىٰ فهم قد أنكروا ما علم من الدين ضرورة

Then again, where is Islam in them? Whereas they have abandoned the household of their Nabi, whom they have been ordered to love in the perfect Book through His statement: Say [O Muhammad], I do not ask you for it [i.e. this message] any payment [but] only good will through [i.e. due to] kinship.[10] They have thus rejected what is known essentially of din.

 

c. He asserts the impurity of the Ahlus Sunnah with his words:

 

وماء الفرات ولا تسأل عن عذوبته ولطافته وحلاوته وبركته لأنه ورد في الحديث أنه يصب فيه ميزاب من ماء الجنة كل يوم وفي الحديث أنه كان يبرئ الأكمه والأبرص وذوي العاهة لكن باشره نجاسة أبدان المخالفين فأزال عظيم بركته وبقي القليل

The water of the Euphrates: Do not ask of its purity, delicateness, sweetness, and blessings as it appears in the hadith, “A gutter of water of Jannat is poured therein daily,” and the hadith, “It cures the blind, leper, and those with physical disablements.” However, the impurity of the bodies of the opposition touched it and removed much of its blessings, leaving only a little.[11]

 

Secondly, he permits the killing of the Ahlus Sunnah and stealing their wealth.[12]

a. He emphatically asserts this saying:

 

جواز قتلهم واستباحة أموالهم

The permissibility of killing them and appropriating their wealth.

 

b. He supports this with established narrations according to them; some of them are:

i. Sheikh al Ta’ifah narrates in the chapter of Khums and Booty in the book al Tahdhib through an authentic chain from their Imam al Sadiq ‘alayh al Salam who asserted:

 

خذ مال الناصب حيث ما وجدت وابعث إلينا بالخمس

Take the wealth of the Nasibi wherever you find it and send a fifth to us.

 

ii. He reports through a hassan chain from al Mu’alla:

 

خذ مال الناصب حيث ما وجدت وابعث إلينا بالخمس

Take the wealth of the Nasibi wherever you find it and send a fifth to us.

 

iii. Al Saduq reports in al Ilal on the authority of Dawood ibn Farqad who says:

 

قلت لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام ما تقول في قتل الناصب قال حلال الدم لكني أتقي عليك فإن قدرت أن تقلب عليه حائطا أو تغرقه في ماء لكي لا يشهد به عليك فافعل فقلت فما ترى في ماله قال خذ ما قدرت

I asked Abu ‘Abdullah ‘alayh al Salam, “What is your view regarding killing a Nasibi?”

He answered, “His blood is permitted. However, I fear for you. If you are able to drop a wall on him or drown him in water so that no testimony is given against you, then do so.”

I asked, “What is your view regarding his wealth?”

He said, “Take what you can.”

 

He reveals his nefarious malice by necessitating the killing of the Ahlus Sunnah wherever they are, and whatever they are—humans, jinn, or birds. He emphatically asserts that a sparrow from the Ahlus Sunnah ought to be killed. This is not a fabrication of mine. It is verbatim what he asserted:

 

روي أن العصفور يحب فلانا وفلانا وهو سني فينبغي قتله بكل وجه وإعدامه وأكله

It is reported that a sparrow loves so and so and he is a Sunni. It is appropriate that it be killed in whichever way, executed, and eaten.[13]

 

A genocide of all the Ahlus Sunnah is compulsory in the Shari’ah of al Jaza’iri, the heretic, even if this Sunni is an animal with no intellect like a sparrow.

This establishes the fact that murdering the Ahlus Sunnah and appropriating their wealth is a belief which some of their authorities have asserted, acknowledging the subscription of all their early scholars to it.

 

2. Practical demonstration of this belief in the real world

The effect of this has manifested in many incidents to which history bears testimony with sorrow and regret. Shia scholars narrate them with all haughtiness and pride, as it brings coolness to their hearts for what happened to their worst enemies, the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah—their killing, banishment, and torture. At the same time, they see in it a fixed model, an action plan which may motivate the Shia to implement in the future.

 

Tragic incidents highlighting the outcome of this Concept of Takfir

Before you, O honourable brother, is a true picture of the result of this deviant concept of Takfir. We have chosen four bloody incidents as examples, at the lowest ebb of violation, to expose the extent of malice and rancour their poisoned sick hearts conceal.

 

1. The Massacre of the Ahlus Sunnah in Baghdad at the hands of Hulagu with the blessings of Shia Grand Sheikh al Nasir al Tusi

In order to do justice to this horrific incident, we will have to present it in detail, so that it might open the eyes of many of the Ahlus Sunnah.

 

a. Depiction of the Bloody Massacre of the Ahlus Sunnah

Ibn Kathir narrates to us a few snippets of it:

 

ومالوا على البلد فقتلوا جميع من قدروا عليه من الرجال والنساء والولدان والمشايخ والكهول والشبان ودخل كثير من الناس في الآبار وأماكن الحشوش وقني الوسخ وكمنوا كذلك أياما لا يظهرون وكان الجماعة من الناس يجتمعون إلى الخانات ويغلقون عليهم الأبواب فتفتحها التتار إما بالكسر وإما بالنار ثم يدخلون عليهم فيهربون منهم إلى أعالي الأمكنة فيقتلونهم في الأسطحة حتى تجري الميازيب من الدماء في الأزقة فإنا لله وإنا إليه راجعون وكذلك في المساجد والجوامع والربط ولم ينج منهم أحد سوى أهل الذمة من اليهود والنصارى ومن التجأ إليهم وإلى دار الوزير ابن العلقمي الرافضي وطائفة من التجار أخذوا لهم أمانا بذلوا عليه أموالا جزيلة حتى سلموا وسلمت أموا لهم وعادت بغداد بعدما كانت آنس المدن كلها كأنها خراب ليس فيها إلا القليل من الناس وهم في خوف وجوع وذلة وقلة وكان الوزير ابن العلقمي قبل هذه الحادثة يجتهد في صرف الجيوش وإسقاط اسمهم من الديوان فكانت العساكر في آخر أيام المستنصر قريبا من مائة ألف مقاتل منهم من الأمراء من هو كالملوك الأكابر الأكاسر فلم يزل يجتهد في تقليلهم إلى أن لم يبق سوى عشرة آلاف ثم كاتب التتار وأطمعهم في أخذ البلاد وسهل عليهم ذلك وحكى لهم حقيقة الحال وكشف لهم ضعف الرجال وذلك كله طمعا منه أن يزيل السنة بالكلية وأن يظهر البدعة الرافضة وأن يقيم خليفة من الفاطميين وأن يبيد العلماء والمفتين والله غالب على أمره وقد رد كيده في نحره وأذله بعد العزة القعساء وجعله حوشكاشا للتتار بعد ما كان وزيرا للخلفاء واكتسب إثم من قتل ببغداد من الرجال والنساء والأطفال فالحكم لله العلي الكبير رب الأرض والسماء وقد اختلف الناس في كمية من قتل ببغداد من المسلمين فقيل ثمانمائة ألف وقيل ألف ألف وثمانمائة ألف وقيل بلغت القتلى ألفي ألف نفس فإنا لله وإنا إليه راجعون ولا حول ولا قوة إلا بالله العلي العظيم وكان دخولهم إلى بغداد في أواخر المحرم وما زال السيف يقتل أهلها أربعين يوما … وقتل أستاذ دار الخلافة الشيخ محيي الدين يوسف بن الشيخ أبي الفرج ابن الجوزي وكان عدو الوزير وقتل أولاده الثلاثة عبد الله وعبد الرحمن وعبد الكريم وأكابر الدولة واحدا بعد واحد منهم الدويدار الصغير مجاهد الدين أيبك وشهاب الدين سليمان شاه وجماعة من أمراء السنة وأكابر البلد وكان الرجل يستدعى به من دار الخلافة من بني العباس فيخرج بأولاده ونسائه فيذهب به إلى مقبرة الخلال تجاه المنظرة فيذبح كما تذبح الشاة ويؤسر من يختارون من بناته وجواريه وقتل شيخ الشيوخ مؤدب الخليفة صدر الدين علي بن النيار وقتل الخطباء والأئمة وحملة القرآن وتعطلت المساجد والجماعات والجمعات مدة شهور ببغداد وأراد الوزير ابن العلقمي قبحه الله ولعنه أن يعطل المساجد والمدارس والربط ببغداد ويستمر بالمشاهد ومحال الرفض وأن يبني للرافضة مدرسة هائلة ينشرون علمهم وعلمهم بها وعليها فلم يقدره الله تعالى على ذلك بل أزال نعمته عنه وقصف عمره بعد شهور يسيرة من هذه الحادثة وأتبعه بولده فاجتمعا والله أعلم بالدرك الأسفل من النار ولما انقضى أمد الأمر المقدر وانقضت أربعون يوما بقيت بغداد خاوية على عروشها ليس بها أحد إلا الشاذ من الناس والقتلى في الطرقات كأنها التلول وقد سقط عليهم المطر فتغيرت صورهم وأنتنت من جيفهم البلد وتغير الهواء فحصل بسببه الوباء الشديد حتى تعدى وسرى في الهواء إلى بلاد الشام فمات خلق كثير من تغير الجو وفساد الريح فاجتمع على الناس الغلاء والوباء والفناء والطعن والطاعون فإنا لله وإنا إليه راجعون ولما نودى ببغداد بالأمان خرج من تحت الأرض من كان بالمطامير والقني والمغاير كأنهم الموتى إذا نبشوا من قبورهم وقد أنكر بعضهم بعضا فلا يعرف الوالد ولده ولا الأخ أخاه وأخذهم الوباء الشديد فتفانوا ولحقوا بمن سبقهم من القتلى واجتمعوا في البلى تحت الثرى بأمر الذي يعلم السر وأخفى الله لا إله إلا هو له الأسماء الحسنى … وذكر أبو شامة وشيخنا أبو عبد الله الذهبي وقطب الدين اليونيني أنه أصاب الناس في هذه السنة بالشام وباء شديد وذكروا أن سبب ذلك من فساد الهواء والجو فسد من كثرة القتلى ببلاد العراق وانتشر حتى تعدى إلى بلاد الشام فالله أعلم

They stormed the city, killing every person they laid hands on; men, women, children, elderly, middle aged, and the youth. Many people hid for days in wells, bushes, and dirt pipes. Similarly, some groups hid in hostelries. They secured the doors but the Tartars managed to open them by either breaking them down or burning them. They fled to the roofs but the Tartars managed to kill them there, so much so that the gutters along the streets flowed with blood. Certainly, to Allah do we belong and to Him shall we return. The situation was similar in the Masajid and at the border posts.

The only people saved were the Jews and Christians from the Ahl al Dhimmah (people living under the protection of the Islamic State), those to whom they granted asylum, those who sought refuge in the house of the Minister, Ibn al ‘Alqami al Rafidi, and a group of traders who promised to pay a large amount on condition that they and their wealth remain unharmed. After all this, the Baghdad that used to be entertaining became desolate[14] with very few inhabitants, who lived in fear, poverty, humiliation, and privation.

Before this catastrophe, Minister Ibn al ‘Alqami strove hard in averting the [Muslim] armies and removing their [soldiers] names from the register. The armies during the last days of al Mustansir were close to one hundred thousand fighters—among them were the generals who were like senior-ranking kings. He endeavoured continuously to reduce them until only ten thousand remained.

He then wrote to the Tartars and enticed them to usurp the lands, facilitating this for them. He divulged to them the reality on the ground and disclosed the weakness of the men, avaricious to completely terminate the Ahlus Sunnah, to manifest the innovation of the Rafidah, to establish a khalifah from the Fatimids, and to exterminate the scholars and jurists. And Allah will accomplish His purpose. Allah thwarted his scheme, humiliated him after his firmly established power, and made him a protagonist for the Tartars after being a minister for the khalifas. He earned the sin of all the men, women, and children killed in Baghdad. The Judgement is for Allah, the Most High, the Great, Rabb of the earth and sky.

People have differed regarding the number of slain in Baghdad in this catastrophe. Some suggestions are: 800 000, 1 800 000, and 2 000 000. Certainly, to Allah do we belong and to Him shall we return; there is neither might nor power except with Allah, the Most High, the Great. They entered Baghdad towards the end of Muharram and the massacre continued for 40 days.

Ustadh of the House of the Khalifah, Sheikh Muhyi al Din Yusuf ibn al Sheikh Abi al Farj ibn al Jawzi—an enemy of the minister—was killed along with his three children, viz. ‘Abdullah, ‘Abdur Rahman, and ‘Abdul Karim. Moreover, the seniors of the state were killed one after the other including al Duwaydar al Saghir Mujahid al Din Aybak, Shihab al Din Sulaiman Shah, a group of Sunni leaders, as well as senior officials of the city.

Men of the Banu al ‘Abbas would be called out from the House of the Khalifah together with their children and womenfolk. They would be taken to al Khilal graveyard which was facing the watch tower where they would be slaughtered like sheep. Their daughters and slave-girls whom they chose would be taken captive.

The grand Sheikh, official educator of the Khalifah, Sadr al Din ‘Ali ibn al Niyar was killed. The lecturers, Imams, and Huffaz of the Qur’an were massacred. Masajid were desolate and congregational Salah and Jumu’ah were not performed for months in Baghdad.

Minister Ibn al ‘Alqami—may Allah disfigure and curse him—intended to leave Masajid, Madaris, and border posts in Baghdad desolate and continue with mashahid (religious shrines) and centres of Rafd. He intended building for the Rawafid a fabulous seminary to disseminate their knowledge and characteristics. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala did not give him the ability to carry this out but rather deprived him of His favour and ended his life a few months after this catastrophe, together with his son. They thus gathered—and Allah knows best—in the lowest depth of Hell.

After the duration of the destined matter ended and the 40 days passed, Baghdad was in utter ruins, inhabited by just a handful. There were heaps of corpses lying on the streets. A cloudburst caused them to moulder, whilst their rancid odour filled the air. A severe plague broke out on account of it which travelled through the air and reached Syria. Many people lost their lives due to the contaminated atmosphere and the pollution in the air. Inflation, defamation, annihilation, epidemics, and plagues became the order of the day. Certainly, to Allah do we belong and to Him shall we return.

When the announcement of peace was made in Baghdad, those who were hiding in the underground pipelines, dirt pipes, and water pipes came out as if they were resurrected from their graves; they did not recognise one another. A father did not recognise his son and a brother did not recognise his sibling. A severe plague afflicted them which consumed them and united them with their deceased ones. Ultimately, they all began decaying together underneath the earth with the command of the One Who has knowledge of the apparent and hidden. Allah, there is no deity but He. The best names belong to Him.

Abu Shamah, our mentor Abu ‘Abdullah al Dhahabi, and Qutb al Din al Yunini mentioned that a severe plague afflicted the people of Syria in this year. They determined the polluted air and atmosphere the reason behind this; poisoned on account of the abundance of corpses in the land of Iraq. It spread until it invaded the land of Syria. And Allah knows best.[15]

 

So that no Shia may raise the objection against us of Ibn Kathir being an Umawi fanatic,[16] and not to expect him to believe what Ibn Kathir reported, I will report to the reader another description of this massacre, but this time from the mouth of Shia contemporary Sheikh Muhammad Mahdi al ‘Asifi under the heading, Fall of Baghdad in 656 AH:

 

سقطت بغداد حاضرة العالم الإسلامي بيد التتار بقيادة هولاكو وكان سقوط بغداد واحدة من أعظم النكبات التي حلت بالعالم الإسلامي منذ ظهور الإسلام إلى اليوم الحاضر وكان التخريب الحضاري والثقافي والاقتصادي والسكاني الذي حل بعاصمة العباسيين في هذا الهجوم بمقاييس ذلك التاريخ من أوسع ما حل بالحواضر البشرية وقد قدر عدد القتلى في هذه المجزرة الرهيبة كما يقول اليافعي بألف ألف وثمانمائة وكسر وإذا كان في هذا التقدير ثمة شيء من المبالغة فمما لا ريب فيه أن الخسائر البشرية كبيرة جدا وفادحة بمقاييس الخسائر الحربية في ذلك التاريخ وقد استمر القتل والنهب سبعة أيام ثم رفعوا السيف وبطلوا السبي وقيل إن القتل والنهب والسبي استمر نيفا وثلاثين يوما وقيل أربعين يوما يقول الدكتور حسن إبراهيم حسن وقد أعمل جند المغول السيف في رقاب أهل بغداد أربعين يوما سلبوا فيها أموالهم وأهلكوا كثيرين من رجال العلم وقتلوا أئمة المساجد وحملة القرآن وتعطلت المساجد والمدارس والربط وأصبحت المدينة قاعا صفصفا ليس فيها إلا فئة قليلة مشردة الأذهان وكان القتلى في الطرقات كأنها التلال ولما نودي بالأمان خرج من تحت الأرض من اختفوا في المطامير والمقابر ومن لجأ إلى الآبار والحشائش كأنهم الموتى قد نبشت قبورهم وقد أنكر بعضهم البعض فلم يعرف الأب ابنه ولا الأخ أخاه ثم انتشر الوباء فحصدهم بمنجله حصدا ذريعا وفسد الهواء وعم الوباء وأما ما حل بخزائن العلم من المكاتب والمدارس في بغداد فحدث ولا حرج فقد كانت بغداد مركزا من أعظم مراكز الاشعاع الفكري في العالم كله في ذلك التاريخ من دون مبالغة وقد أحرق التتار كلما وجدوا في بغداد من علم ومن مراكز للعلم كما قتلوا كل من عثروا عليه من العلماء أو كل من كان في بغداد من العلماء وليس بإمكان أحد أن يقدر ضخامة الخسارة التي لحقت بالفكر والثقافة الإسلامية والبشرية في هذه النكبة يقول قطب الدين الحنفي تراكمت الكتب التي ألقاها التتار في نهر دجلة حتى صارت معبرا يعبر عليه الناس والدواب واسودت مياه دجلة بما القي فيها من الكتب ولنقرأ لتقي الدين ابن أبي اليسر هذه النفثة من شعره في بغداد لسائل الدمع عن بغداد أخبار فما وقوفك والأحباب قد ساروا يا زائرين إلى الزوراء لا تفدوا فما بذاك الحمى والدار ديار تاج الخلافة والربع الذي شرفت به العالم قد عفاه أقفار أضحى لعصف البلى في ربعه أثر وللدموع على الآثار آثار يا نار قلبي نار لحرب وغى شبت عليه ووافى الربع أعصار علا الصليب على أعلى منابرها وقام بالأمر من يحويه زنار وكم حريم سبته الترك غاصبة وكان من دون ذاك الستر أستار وكم بدور على البدرية انخسفت ولم يعد لبدور منه أبدار وكم ذخائر أضحت وهي شائعة من النهاب وقد حازته كفار وكم حدود أقيمت من سيوفهم على الرقاب وحطت فيه أوزار ناديت والسبي مهتوك تجر بهم إلى السفاح من الأعداء دعار ولسنا نستطيع أن نقدر الخسارة التي لحقت بالإسلام وبالبشرية في هذه النكبة التي حلت بمدينة السلام كما نجزم أن الخسارة الواسعة التي حلت بعاصمة العباسيين في القرن السابع الهجري لم تعوض بالمعنى الدقيق للكلمة إلى اليوم الحاضر ولو لم تتعرض بغداد لهذه النكبة لكان تاريخ المسلمين غير هذا التاريخ وكان للإسلام والمسلمين شأن آخر على وجه الأرض غير هذا الشأن

Baghdad, the capital city of the Islamic world, fell at the hands of the Tartars headed by Hulagu. The fall of Baghdad was one of the most devastating catastrophes which afflicted the Islamic world since the existence of Islam to this present day. The civil, cultural, economic, and habitational devastation which afflicted the capital city of the Abbasids in this onslaught—by the measurements of that time—is one of the terribly widespread afflictions to affect human civilisation. The number of slain in this awful massacre as stated by al Yafi’i is estimated at over 1 800 000. Although in this estimation there is some exaggeration, there is no doubt that the losses of human life were extremely tremendous and it is a major calamity with the volume of military losses at the time.

Killing and looting continued for seven days. They then raised the swords and ceased the enslavement. A weak report suggests that killing, looting, and enslaving continued for thirty odd days, or forty days. Doctor Hassan Ibrahim Hassan says, “The army of the Moguls worked their swords on the necks of Baghdad’s residents for forty days.” They snatched their wealth and annihilated plenty scholars, killing the Imams of the Masajid and Huffaz of the Qur’an. The Masajid, Madaris, and border posts lay desolate. The city turned into a level plain with only a few confused souls. Corpses lay in the streets in heaps.

When the announcement of amnesty was made, people came out from beneath the soil from underground pipelines and graves and those who took refuge in wells and bushes, as if they were dead resurrected from their graves, unable to recognise one another. A father could not recognise his son and a brother could not recognise his sibling. A severe plague then afflicted them and rapidly entrapped them in its net. The air was polluted and the plague spread.

As for what happened to the treasuries of knowledge, viz. the libraries and Madaris in Baghdad; Baghdad was the headquarter of knowledge—one of the greatest headquarters of spreading ideologies in the entire world at the time, without any exaggeration. The Tartars burned down whatever knowledge and headquarters of knowledge they found in Baghdad, just as they massacred all the scholars they laid their hands upon or all the scholars present in Baghdad.

It is not possible for anyone to estimate the extent of loss which afflicted Islamic ideologies, culture, and civilisation in this catastrophe. Qutb al Din al Hanafi states, “The books which the Tartars threw into the Tigris River heaped up becoming a bridge which people and animals could cross. The Tigris water turned black on account of the books thrown into it.”

Let us read this portion of Taqi al Din ibn Abi al Yusr’s poem about Baghdad:

There is news about Baghdad for the questioner of tears. Why are you stopping whereas the people have moved on?

O visitors of Zawra’, do not come here, for there is no place of sanctuary nor any shelter among the homes.

The crown of the Caliphate and its inhabitants have been completely obliterated by the Earth.

The region began violently deteriorating right after and the tradition of tears followed.

O the burning desire of my soul, the burning desire to fight has been rekindled whilst a tornado afflicted the people.

The cross has been elevated to the highest platform, and the one who raised it wears it as a girdle.

Many sanctums were dishonoured by the Turks upon being usurped, and there was excluding this pretext… a fire.

Many full moons eclipsed while shining and will never return to shine ever again.

Many treasures appear radiant from the plunderer whereas the disbelievers seized it.

Many borders were established by their swords around their necks where the burden has been placed.

I called out whilst the prisoners were taken to be cut down by the immoral executioner of the enemy.

We are unable to estimate the loss that afflicted Islam and humans in this catastrophe distressing the city of peace. Moreover, we determine that the widespread loss which afflicted the capital city of the Abbasids in the seventh hijri century has not been replaced in the true sense of the word to the present day. Had Baghdad not seen this catastrophe, the history of Muslims would not have been the same. Islam and the Muslims would have had a different status on the earth, different from what they have currently.[17]

 

Shia scholar Faris Rida al Hasun, researcher of the book Irshad al Adh-han, vol. 1 pg. 30, of ‘Allamah al Hilli who was a contemporary of the Baghdad massacre says:

 

وفي زمان صباه أيضا وقعت الفاجعة العظيمة والمجزرة الكبيرة في بغداد التي أذابت الصخر حزنا وألما ولم ترحم حتى الأطفال والشيوخ والنساء

During his childhood, the massive tragedy and the great massacre of Baghdad occurred which dissolved the boulder out of grief and pain. No mercy was shown, not even to children, the elderly, and women.[18]

 

b. Description of the tragic murder of the Khalifah al Musta’sim bi Allah

As regards the tragic scene of the murder of the Abbasid Khalifah al Musta’sim bi Allah, Ibn Kathir says:

 

وأحضر الخليفة بين يدي هـولاكو فسأله عن أشياء كثيرة فيقال إنه اضطرب كلام الخليفة من هـول ما رأى من الإهانة والجبروت ثم عاد إلى بغداد وفي صحبته خواجه نصير الدين الطوسي والوزير ابن العلقمي وغيرهما والخليفة تحت الحوطة والمصادرة فأحضر من دار الخلافة شيئا كثيرا من الذهب والحلي والمصاغ والجواهر والأشياء النفيسة وقد أشار أولئك الملأ من الرافضة وغيرهم من المنافقين على هـولاكو أن لا يصالح الخليفة وقال الوزير متى وقع الصلح على المناصفة لا يستمر هذا إلا عاما أو عامين ثم يعود الأمر إلى ما كان عليه قبل ذلك وحسنوا له قتل الخليفة فلما عاد الخليفة إلى هـولاكو أمر بقتله ويقال إن الذي أشار بقتله الوزير ابن العلقمي والمولى نصير الدين الطوسي وكان النصير عند هـولاكو قد استصحبه في خدمته لما فتح قلاع ألموت وانتزعها من أيدي الإسماعيلية وكان النصير وزيرا لشمس الشموس ولأبيه من قبله علاء الدين بن جلال الدين وكانوا ينسبون إلى نزار بن المستنصر العبيدي وانتخب هولاكو النصير ليكون في خدمته كالوزير المشير فلما قدم هولاكو وتهيب من قتل الخليفة هون عليه الوزير ذلك فقتلوه رفسا وهو في جوالق لئلا يقع على الأرض شيء من دمه خافوا أن يؤخذ بثأره فيما قيل لهم وقيل بل خنق ويقال بل أغرق فالله أعلم فباءوا بإثمه وإثم من كان معه من سادات العلماء والقضاة والأكابر والرؤساء والأمراء وأولي الحل والعقد ببلاده وستأتي ترجمة الخليفة في الوفيات وكان قتل الخليفة المستعصم بالله أمير المؤمنين يوم الأربعاء رابع عشر صفر وعفي قبره وكان عمره يومئذ ستا وأربعين سنة وأربعة أشهر ومدة خلافته خمس عشرة سنة وثمانية أشهر وأيام وقتل معه ولده الأكبر أبو العباس أحمد وله خمس وعشرون سنة ثم قتل ولده الأوسط أبو الفضل عبد الرحمن وله ثلاث وعشرون سنة وأسر ولده الأصغر مبارك وأسرت أخواته الثلاث فاطمة وخديجة ومريم وأسر من دار الخلافة من الأبكار ما يقارب ألف بكر فيما قيل والله أعلم فإنا لله وإنا إليه راجعون

The Khalifah stood before Hulagu, who questioned him on many aspects. It is said that the Khalifah began to stutter as he saw the disgrace and tyranny he was being subjected to. He then returned to Baghdad with Khawajah Nasir al Din al Tusi and Minister Ibn al ‘Alqami and others in his company. The Khalifah was under circumspection and seizure. He presented from the house of the Caliphate an abundance of gold, jewellery, jewels, gems, and precious items. This group of Rawafid and other hypocrites suggested to Hulagu not to reach a settlement with the Khalifah.

The Minister said, “When the conciliation will take place on half, this will not continue except for one or two years and then the matter will return to its original position.” They adorned the Khalifah’s killing to him. When the Khalifah returned to Sultan Hulagu, the latter instructed the former’s execution.

It is said that the one to suggest his killing was Minister Ibn al ‘Alqami and Mawla Nasir al Din al Tusi. Al Nasir was at the side of Hulagu who took the former as a companion to serve him when he conquered the forts of Alamut and snatched it away from the hands of the Ismailiyyah. Al Nasir was a minister for Shams al Shamus and for his father before him, ‘Ala’ al Din ibn Jalal al Din. They are linked to Nizar ibn al Mustansir al ‘Abidi. Hulagu selected al Nasir to be in his service as a minister, advisor.

When Hulagu arrived and dreaded killing the Khalifah, the minister facilitated this for him. They thus trampled him to death while he was in a large sack so that none of his blood spills on the ground. They feared that he will be avenged as they were warned. Weaker reports suggest that he was strangled to death or drowned. And Allah knows best.

They bore his sin and the sin of the prominent scholars, judges, seniors, chiefs, generals, and men of intelligence and foresight in his land. (The biography of the Khalifah will soon appear in al Wafiyyat.)

Khalifah al Musta’sim bi Allah, Amir al Mu’minin, was killed on Wednesday, 14th Safar. Signs of his grave were obliterated. His age at the time was 46 years and four months. The duration of his Caliphate was fifteen years, eight months, and a few days. His eldest son, Abu al ‘Abbas Ahmed of twenty-five years, was slain with him, followed by his middle son, Abu al Fadl ‘Abdur Rahman at twenty-three years, while his youngest son Mubarak was taken captive along with his three sisters, Fatimah, Khadijah, and Maryam. It is supposed that from the House of the Khalifah, close to a thousand virgins were taken as prisoners. And Allah knows best! To Allah do we belong and to Him is our return.[19]

 

c. Revealing the Identity of the Criminals who soiled their hands with the Blood of Muslims

What is known and accepted by many of the Ahlus Sunnah is that the primary criminal and leading conspirator and instigator responsible for this outrageous massacre is the well-known Shia scholar and great authority Khawajah al Nasir al Tusi, despite the present-day Shia denying his involvement in it stubbornly, dishonestly, or out of embarrassment. I will establish his clear involvement in it[20] in this discussion, quoting the statements of their notable authorities, historians, and researchers, which will leave no scope for any obstinate or devious individual to deny or reject it. Of those I quote who acknowledge this are:

1. Shia ‘Allamah—the leader of Shi’ism in his time—Muhammad Hassan al Najafi: He acknowledges al Tusi’s involvement in this bloody massacre of the Ahlus Sunnah in one of his Fiqh books which, as a matter of fact, is one of the most important Shia books unrestrictedly.[21] The shocking provocation in this matter is that he did not simply quote this incident in a history book for instance so that it may be labelled a simple narration, which occasionally is not authentic and hence citing it as proof is not correct. Instead, he quoted it in a reliable Fiqh book which provides clear indication that the narration’s authenticity is established in his sight and its reliability is emphasised. This is from one angle. From another angle, and it is necessary for us to ponder at length on this point. This convincingly instructs all the Shia of every era to necessarily give this incident a practical Shar’i jurisprudential application through which they worship Allah. In fact, the wicked al Najafi cited the incident of al Tusi while refuting one of their scholars, Muqaddas al Ardabili, who has a rare view—against the majority of Shia scholars—of the prohibition of backbiting the opposition. He thus assaults him with all viciousness and condemns the leniency and weakness of his stance, while declaring the strength and power of the stance of their grand Sheikh al Tusi and their ‘Allamah Ibn al Mutahhar al Hilli who passed the verdict of the permissibility of killing the Ahlus Sunnah, appropriating their wealth, and torturing them—which led to their provocation to attack Baghdad and commit a genocide, unprecedented and beyond imagination. O honourable reader, have a look at his words:

 

وما أبعد ما بينه وبين الخواجه نصير الدين الطوسي والعلامة الحلي وغيرهم ممن يرى قتلهم ونحوه من أحوال الكفار حتى وقع منهم ما وقع في بغداد ونواحيهما

How distant is he from Khawajah Nasir al Din al Tusi, ‘Allamah al Hilli, and others[22] who permit their killing and its like, from the conditions of the disbelievers[23], which led to the genocide in Baghdad and its environs![24]

 

2. Shia Historian Muhammad Baqir al Khuwanasari writes in the biography of the criminal al Tusi:

 

ومن جملة أمره المشهور المعروف المنقول حكاية استيزاره للسلطان المحتشم في محروسة إيران هولاكو خان بن تولي خان بن جنكيز خان من عظماء سلاطين التاتارية وأتراك المغول ومجيئه في موكب السلطان المؤيد مع كمال الاستعداد إلى دار السلام بغداد لإرشاد العباد وإصلاح بالبلاد وقطع دابر سلسلة البغي والفساد وإخماد نائرة الجور والإلباس بإبداء دائرة ملك بني العباس وإيقاع القتل العام من أتباع أولئك الطغام إلى أن أسال من دمائهم الأقذار كأمثال الأنهار فانهار بها في ماء دجلة ومنها إلى نار جهنم دار البوار ومحل الأشقياء والأشرار

From among his famous, well-known affairs which is reported is the incident of him being appointed cabinet minister by honourable Sultan of the Protected Iran, Hulagu Khan ibn Tolui Khan ibn Genghis Khan, from the sublime sultans of the Tartars and Turks of the Moguls. He came in the procession of the powerful Sultan to the land of peace, Baghdad, with absolute preparation to guide the bondsmen, reform the cities, break the backbone of the chain of rebellion and anarchy, and extinguish the flame of war and oppression by destroying the empire of the Abbasids and publicly killing the followers of those oppressors until their dirty blood flowed like rivers into the Tigris River, and from there into the fire of Jahannam—the place of ruin, hardships, and evils.[25]

 

He acknowledges inciting Hulagu to commit the crime:

 

فلما استشعر هولاكو لجأ عنده بإشارة المحقق ومشورته وافتتح القلعة ودخلها أكرم المحقق غاية الإكرام والإعزاز وصحبه وارتكب الأمور الكلية حسب رأيه وإجازته فرغبه المحقق قدس سره في تسخير عراق العرب فعزم هولاكو خان على فتح بغداد وسخر البلاد والنواحي واستأصل الخليفة المستعصم

When Hulagu realised, he took refuge by him on the indication and consultation of al Muhaqqiq (al Tusi) and opened the fort and entered it. He honoured al Muhaqqiq with utmost reverence and respect and accompanied him. He carried out all affairs according to his opinion and with his permission. Al Muhaqqiq enticed him to subjugate the Iraq of the Arabs. Hulagu Khan thus made a determination to conquer Baghdad and subjugate the lands and outskirts and remove the Khalifah al Musta’sim.[26]

 

3. Shia scholar Abu al Huda al Kalbasi confirms his inciting Hulagu to exterminate the Ahlus Sunnah:

 

أنه لما استقرت السلطنة لهلاكو وعمه جنكيز سعى في المرام هلاكو بتدابير العلامة الطوسي نصير الدين فأرسل جمعا كثيرا من العساكر إلى بغداد فقتلوا المستعصم العباسي وانقرضت خلافتهم فقرر هلاكو بسعي العلامة المشار إليه نقابة أشراف هذه الولاية بالسيد المؤيد

When authority settled in the hands of Hulagu and his uncle Genghis, Hulagu endeavoured to achieve the goal conspired by ‘Allamah al Tusi Nasir al Din. He thus sent a huge army to Baghdad, and they killed al Musta’sim al ‘Abbasi; and their caliphate dissolved. Through the effort of the aforementioned ‘Allamah, Hulagu appointed al Sayed al Mu’ayyad [al ‘Alqami] head of the supervisors of the state.[27]

 

4. Shia ‘Allamah and Authority Ibrahim al Zanjani says:

 

كان ابتداء دولة هولاكو خان في إيران عام ٦٥٠ه وانتهاء دولته وسلالته بموت سعيد خان سلطانية زنجان عام ٧٣٦ه وحمل على العراق بقيادة نصير الدين الطوسي فيلسوف الإسلام وبتأييد سديد الدين العلقمي وزير الخليفة العباس بتاريخ ٦٥٦ه وقضى على خلفاء بني العباس

Hulagu Khan’s state of Iran began in 650 AH and his state and progeny ended with the death of Sa’id Khan of Soltaniyeh, Zanjan, in 736 AH. He attacked Iraq under the leadership of Nasir al Din al Tusi, the Philosopher of Islam, and with the support of Sadid al Din al ‘Alqami, the minister of the ‘Abbasi Khalifah in 656 AH. He exterminated the khalifas of the Abbasids.[28]

 

5. Ayatollah al ‘Uzma and Political Leader Khomeini discusses the permissibility or impermissibility of a Shia entering the ministry of non-Shia government officials. He favours permissibility on condition that there is a clear exigency and evident support to the Shia. To authenticate his view, he cites the story of al Nasir al Tusi entering the council of Hulagu, the disbeliever, which he considers great support for Shi’ism, despite the colossal harm to Islam and the Muslims,[29] in a bold statement that the support which this Khomeini advocates is devoted killing and torturing of the Ahlus Sunnah.[30] Have a look at his exact words—may Allah deal with him befittingly:

 

وإذا كانت ظروف التقية تلزم أحدا منا بالدخول في ركب السلاطين فهنا يجب الامتناع عن ذلك حتى لو أدى الامتناع إلى قتله إلا أن يكون في دخوله الشكلي نصر حقيقي للإسلام والمسلمين مثل دخول علي بن يقطين ونصير الدين الطويس رحمهما الله

When the circumstances of Taqiyyah compel someone to enter the ministry of the rulers, it is obligatory to refuse even if this refusal leads to his killing, except if his outward entry contains actual assistance for Islam and the Muslim, like the entry of ‘Ali ibn Yaqtin[31] and Nasir al Din al Tusi—may Allah have mercy on them.[32]

 

He then emphasises his wicked policy of burning the Ahlus Sunnah and stabbing them in the back saying:

 

ومما ذكرناه يظهر عدم صحة التشبث لإثبات المدعى أي جواز ارتكاب المحرمات بالروايات الكثيرة المتقدمة الدالة على جواز التولي من قبل الجائر لصلاح حال الشيعة لما عرفت من أن الظاهر من مجموعها أو المتيقن منها بعد ضعف إسنادها جواز التولي فيما إذا كان صلاح المذهب ولولا التولي لخيف تشتت الشيعة وذهاب حزبهم مع قلة عددهم وضعفهم وقوة أعدائهم وشدة اهتمامهم لعنهم الله بهضمهم وهلاكهم كما هو ظاهر فلولا أمثال علي بن يقطين والنجاشي ومحمد بن إسماعيل ومن يحذو حذوهم لخيف على الشيعة الانقراض

From what we have mentioned above, the incorrectness of establishing the claim, i.e., the permissibility of committing unlawful actions, by clinging to the abundant afore-mentioned narrations indicating the permissibility of assuming an official post from an oppressor for the betterment of the Shia’s condition is clear. As you are aware that what is apparent or certain from the collection [of narrations], after the chain’s weakness, is the permissibility of assuming an official post in those circumstances where there is betterment for the creed. If not for this, there is fear of the dispersing of the Shia and the dissolving of their group due to their few numbers, weakness, and the strength and strong ambition of their enemies—may Allah curse them with oppression and destruction—as is manifest. Had it not been for the likes of ‘Ali ibn Yaqtin, al Najashi, Muhammad ibn Ismail, and those who treaded their path, there was fear of extinction for the Shia.[33]

 

Finally, he praises this criminal murderer and prays for his status to be raised. He says:

 

قال أفضل المتأخرين وأكمل المتقدمين الخواجه نصير الدين الطوسي … انتهى كلامه زيد في علو مقامه

The most superior of latter scholars and the most complete of early scholars, Khawajah Nasir al Din al Tusi says … [End of his quotation], may his high status be raised.[34]

 

2. The Murder of 500 Ahlus Sunnah in Jail at the Hands of the Criminal, trusted by the Shia, ‘Ali ibn Yaqtin

The Shia report that ‘Ali ibn Yaqtin is from the companions of Imam al Kazim—one of the twelve infallible Shia Imams. He was a Shia. He exploited his closeness to Harun al Rashid and the latter’s trust in him to support his creed and kill the Ahlus Sunnah. We will begin by mentioning those who praised and authenticated him.

1. Shia scholar Muhammad Jawwad Mughniyah says:

 

كان علي بن يقطين مقربا عند هارون الرشيد يثق به وينتدبه إلى ما أهمه من الأمور وكان ابن يقطين يكتم التشيع والولاء لأهل البيت (ع) ويظهر الطاعة للرشيد

‘Ali ibn Yaqtin was close to Harun al Rashid, who the latter trusted and commissioned to him significant matters that concerned him. Ibn Yaqtin concealed his Shi’ism and association with the Ahlul Bayt ‘alayhim al Salam and demonstrated obedience to al Rashid.[35]

 

2. Khomeini reports a couple of narrations from him which reveals his adherence to Shi’ism. He says:

 

كما تشهد به مضافا إلى رواية محمد بن عيسى المتقدمة روايته الأخرى أنه كتب إلى أبي الحسن موسى عليه السلام قال إن قلبي يضيق مما أنا عليه من عمل السلطان وكان وزيرا لهارون فإن أذنت جعلني الله فداك هربت منه فرجع الجواب لا إذن لك بالخروج من عملهم واتق الله أو كما قال واحتمال التقية بعيد ولو بملاحظة سائر الروايات

Likewise, a second narration of his coupled with the afore-mentioned narration of Muhammad ibn ‘Isa points out that he wrote to Abu al Hassan Musa ‘alayh al Salam saying, “My heart is anguished due to the work for the Sultan I am responsible for. (He was a minister of Harun.) If you allow me, may Allah sacrifice me for you, I will flee from him.”

The answer came, “I do not permit you to leave their commission. And fear Allah.” Or as he said.

The possibility of Taqiyyah is unlikely even with consideration of all the narrations.[36]

 

He also reports:

 

ونحوها رواية علي بن يقطين قال قلت لأبي الحسن عليه السلام ما تقول في أعمال هؤلاء قال إن كنت لا بد فاعلا فاتق أموال الشيعة قال فأخبرني علي أنه كان يجبيها من الشيعة علانية ويردها عليهم سرا

Similar to it is the report of ‘Ali ibn Yaqtin who says: I asked Abu al Hassan ‘alayh al Salam, “What is your view regarding the actions of these people?”

He explained, “If you have no choice but to administer, then stay away from the wealth of the Shia.”

‘Ali informed me that he would collect it from the Shia publicly and return it to them privately.[37]

 

Highlighting his slaughter of the Ahlus Sunnah

After drawing attention to the scholars’ praise for him, I present to you—O noble reader—the scene of his massacre of the Ahlus Sunnah reported to us by Shia Muhaddith Ni’mat Allah al Jaza’iri:

 

وفي الروايات أن علي بن يقطين وهو وزير هارون الرشيد قد اجتمع في حبسه جماعة من المخالفين وكان من خواص الشيعة فأمر غلمانه وهدموا سقف الحبس على المحبوسين فماتوا كلهم وكانوا خمسمائة رجل تقريبًا فأرادوا الخلاص من تبعات دمائهم فأرسل إلى الإمام مولانا الكاظم فكتب عليه السلام إلى جواب كتابه بأنك لو كنت تقدمت إلي قبل قتلهم لما كان عليك شيء من دمائهم وحيث إنك لم تتقدم إليَّ فَكَفِر عن كل رجل قتلته منهم بتيس والتيس خير منه فانظر إلى هذه الدية الجزيلة التي لا تعادل دية أخيهم الأصغر وهو كلب الصيد فإن ديته عشرون درهما ولا دية أخيهم الأكبر وهو اليهودي أو المجوسي فإنها ثمانمائة درهم وحالهم في الآخرة أخس وأنجس

It appears in the narrations that a crowd of the opposition (Ahlus Sunnah) were in the custody of ‘Ali ibn Yaqtin—minister of al Rashid and religious adherent of Shi’ism. He commanded his slaves to demolish the roof of the prison upon the prisoners, killing them all. They were approximately five hundred men. He wished to settle the claims of their blood, so he wrote to Imam, our master, al Kazim ‘alayh al Salam who replied to him in writing, “Had you approached me before killing them, you would not be responsible for any of their blood. Since you did not approach me, expiate on behalf of every man you killed with a billy goat. And a billy goat is superior to him.”

Have a look at this meagre diyah (blood money) which does not equate the diyah of their younger brother (a hunting dog); which is twenty silver coins, nor the diyah of their elder brother (a Jew or Magian) which is eight hundred silver coins. Their condition in the Hereafter is even more despicable and filthy.[38]

 

My resentment for this narration—unjustly and falsely attributed to al Kazim—has provoked the need for me to emphasise a few aspects I notice in this narration. Some appear in the actual incident while others appear in the commentary of the reporter, al Jaza’iri.

Those which appear in the narration are:

  1. The Shia minister abused his position and killed 500 of the Ahlus Sunnah opposition in his captivity.[39]
  2. Imam al Kazim scolds him, after receiving the news, and notifies him that had he informed him of his desire to kill them before carrying out the crime, there would be neither any sin nor expiation upon him. The reason for the expiation was his delay in informing the Imam, and not the actual crime.
  3. The atonement of a Sunni Muslim—whom Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala honoured and declared his killing, like the killing of any Muslim, more sinful than demolishing the Ka’bah brick by brick—is a billy goat according to the Shia’s infallible Imam. In fact, a Sunni is less valuable than a billy goat in their sight, as stated by the Imam, “And a billy goat is superior to him.”

 

The aspects deduced from the explanation of Shia Muhaddith ‘Allamah al Jaza’iri are:

  1. The atonement for killing a hunting dog is more valuable and expensive than the atonement for killing a Sunni Muslim who is more insignificant than a Jew or Magian.
  2. He considers the Sunni Muslim the middle brother of the two, the elder being a Jew or Magian and the younger being a hunting dog.[40]
  3. He considers our condition in the Hereafter more despicable and filthy.

 

I find nothing to articulate upon this threatening state of affairs except what we have been commanded to declare in every calamity: To Allah do we belong and to Him is our return.

 

3. Slaughterhouses killing the Ahlus Sunnah in Iraq under the Auspices of the American War[41]

Speaking about the malicious role played by the Shia of Iraq[42] in toppling the State and their coalition with the enemies of Islam, America and others, certainly incites compound grief and remorse. From one side, it is an occupation to strengthen its dominion over one of the most significant states of the area in influence and the most prominent in civilisation, which creates restlessness and unrest in the entire area, for everyone.

From another angle, it led to the annihilation of the entire State of Iraq, and the assurance of its non-recovery for many long distant years. This is on the strength of an organised movement to firstly destroy all underlying structures and formative agents for its restoration.[43] Then—and this is more dangerous—by destroying the social structure and distorting human existence by the means of killing the cream of the State—viz. scholars of din, doctors, teachers, and thinkers—or kidnapping them and seizing their families. Thereafter by means of forming a fracture in the centre of the united Iraqi unit which might never be mended and creating a chasm between the Iraqis which increases and expands as time passes until it becomes nearly impossible to fill.

With regards to the condition of the Ahlus Sunnah in Iraq, speaking about them causes the heart to bleed and the soul to grieve, as they have been the greatest victim, if not the only[44], of the horror of the occupation and its consequences that has afflicted Iraq.

As soon as the first Iraqi transition state was formed by the instruction of the American occupation, and the military base was set up under the supervision of its power and authority, the Ahlus Sunnah’s afflictions began in a terrible form represented in a wide range of crimes—active killings and organised assassinations without any reason or justification. In fact, a Sunni was killed by simply  being identified by name and title.

The Masajid—houses of Allah—became areas of suspicion and mistrust. A Muslim’s departure to the Masjid and return therefrom was an introduction to his murder, abduction, or the restriction of his livelihood. The Ahlus Sunnah lived in a crisis, the like of which is rare and unheard of. Their enemies’ pincers came upon them from every direction. They were pursued firstly by the disbelieving occupation forces due to them alone adopting Jihad and fighting against them. They were arrested by the organisations of the State—the forces of the interior ministry were essentially sectarian soldiers and had open association to the Shia religious authority—to be killed and thrown in the streets and garbage cans, after torturing them in the most despicable and brutal manner, such as puncturing their bodies with sharp objects, gorging out their eyes, and severing their limbs—Allah forbid.

After all of this, the abominable secret service with the establishment of the State supported the actions of some armed Shia militant forces and gave them the necessary remission to direct diverse forms of punishment and chastisement towards the Ahlus Sunnah, like killing, butchering, and displacement.

The Ahlus Sunnah in Iraq suffered from this conspiracy (Shia-American) for three long years.[45] Their suffering continues until this day. In fact, the matter is increasing steadily. Hardly a day passes without hearing of tens of corpses of unidentified individuals discovered, thrown on the roadways or in the dump yards, with hands tied and signs of severe torture.[46]

When I recall this dark manifestation of the current condition of the Shia of Iraq—the natural consequence of the establishment of their concept of Takfir—I stand perplexed at this disdained negligence from the side of the rest of the Ahlus Sunnah of the world towards this dark evil concept and the deceitful imposter awaiting your turns of misfortune, without moving a fingertip towards combatting it.

 

4. The Undertaking of their imaginary Twelfth Imam of Killing the Ahlus Sunnah, beginning with Abu Bakr and ‘Umar and ending with all their followers—May Allah be pleased with them on behalf of the Muslims

I regard this spectacle the darkest of these bloody spectacles and the most thought-provoking due to two basic reasons:

Firstly, and the most significant reason, it is the only spectacle in which one of the infallible Imams of Shi’ism carries out a bloody massacre. This undoubtedly fixes firmly its manifestation and visualisation in the minds of the Shia far stronger than simply narrating reports from them—the infallibles—bequeathing or praising such activity.

Secondly, the rising and appearance of Imam Mahdi—the last of their twelve Imams—is, in the emotional lives of the Shia, a representation of their greatest hopes and ultimate expectations. They see him as the saviour for Shi’ism, through whom their affairs will be set aright and at whose hands their major state will be restored in the world—after this remained a distant hope and dream for the span of their history or a lame reality at some stages. They name him the Absent Imam or the Qa’im of the family of Muhammad. The matter does not pose a great threat, had it stopped here. However, when we realise that this Imam, in their understanding, will judge with the decree of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala—after receiving revelation to carry out what he has to carry out—and his actions will accordingly represent the extreme degree of virtue and justice, it is necessary for us to be aware of a matter of extreme significance.

Everything that originates from this Imam—whether a regulation, ruling, or practice—represents the absolute ideal model in concept and conduct. When this is the case, him actively butchering the Ahlus Sunnah and their leaders, after his emergence at the end of times, definitely enters into the domain of that ideal. It represents the pinnacle of justice and equality in the eyes of the Shia. Based on this, undoubtedly, the establishment of the correctness of this action of the Imam means training the souls of his followers in a complete manner to accept this bloody, critical concept.[47] In fact, awarding it strong logical justification and motivation to implement its natural consequence, i.e. murder.

Let me put the noble reader in the full picture. I will report authentic narrations which present to us details of this violent spectacle, reported by popular Shia researchers in their books. I divide it into two main discussions:

 

a. Crucifying Abu Bakr and ‘Umar and killing them after exhuming them from their graves[48]

Shia scholars who reports this bloody spectacle are:

1. Al Barsi reports in Mashariq al Anwar from Muhammad ibn Sinan who said:

 

قال أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام لعمر يا مغرور إني أراك في الدنيا قتيلا بجراحة من عبد أم معمر تحكم عليه جورا فيقتلك توفيقا يدخل بذلك الجنة على رغم منك وإن لك ولصاحبك الذي قمت مقامه صلبا وهتكا تخرجان عن جوار رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله فتصلبان على أغصان جذعة يابسة فتورق فيفتتن بذلك من والاك فقال عمر ومن يفعل ذلك يا أبا الحسن فقال قوم قد فرقوا بين السيوف وأغمادها فيؤتى بالنار التي أضرمت لإبراهيم عليه السلام ويأتي جرجيس ودانيال وكل نبي وصديق ثم يأتي ريح فينسفكما في اليم نسفا

Amir al Mu’minin ‘alayh al Salam said to ‘Umar, “O imposter! Indeed, I see you slain in the world from an assault at the hands Umm Ma’mar’s slave. You will judge against him oppressively and he will kill you in retaliation. He will enter Jannat due to this, against your will. You and your friend, whose place you took, will have crucifixion and degradation. You have exited the protection of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and will thus be crucified on the branches of a dry tree stump which will sprout, casting those who befriend you into fitnah.”

Umar said, “Who will do this, O Abu al Hassan?”

He replied, “People who remove swords from sheathes. Fire will be brought which was kindled for Ibrahim ‘alayh al Salam. Jarjis, Daniyal, and every Nabi and Siddiq will come. Then a wind will blow you in the sea with a blast.”[49]

 

2. Al Majlisi narrates in al Bihar—blackened with Takfir:

 

قال المفضل يا سيدي ثم يسير المهدي إلى أين قال عليه السلام إلى مدينة جدي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم فإذا وردها كان له فيها مقام عجيب يظهر فيه سرور المسلمين وخزي الكافرين فقال المفضل ياسيدي ماهو ذاك قال يرد إلى قبر جده فيقول يامعشر الخلائق هذا قبر جدي فيقولون نعم يا مهدي آل محمد فيقول ومن معه في القبر فيقولون صاحباه وضجيعاه أبوبكر وعمر فيقول عليه السلام وهو أعلم الخلق من أبو بكر وعمر وكيف دفنا من بين الخلق مع جدي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم وعسى أن يكون المدفون غيرهما فيقول الناس يا مهدي آل محمد ما هاهنا غيرهما وإنهما دفنا معه لأنهما خليفتاه وآباء زوجتيه فيقول هل يعرفهما أحد فيقولون نعم نحن نعرفهم بالوصف ثم يقول هل يشك أحد في دفنهما هنا فيقولون لا فيأمر بعد ثلاثة أيام ويحفر قبرهما ويخرجهما فيخرجان طريين كصورتهما في الدنيا فيكشف عنهما أكفانهما ويأمر برفعهما على دوحة يابسة نخرة فيصلبهما عليها فتتحرك الشجرة وتورق وترفع ويطول فرعها … فيأمر ريحاً فتجعلهم كأعجاز نخل خاوية ثم يأمر بإنزالهما فينزلان فيحييهما بإذن الله ويأمر الخلائق بالاجتماع ثم يقص عليهم قصص فعالهم في كل كور ودور حتى يقص عليهم قتل هابيل بن آدم وجمع النار لإبراهيم وطرح يوسف في الجب وحبس يونس في بطن الحوت وقتل يحيى وصلب عيسى وعذاب جرجيس ودانيال … وإثم وظلم وجور من عهد آدم إلى وقت قائمنا كله يعده عليهما ويلزمهما إياه ويعترفان به ثم يأمر بهما فيقتص منهما في ذلك الوقت مظالم من حضر ثم يصلبهما على الشجرة ويأمر ناراً تخرج من الأرض تحرقهما والشجرة ثم يأمر ريحاً فتنسفهما في اليّم نسفاً قال المفضل يا سيدي هذا آخر عذابهما قال هيهات يا مفضل والله ليردّن وليحضرّن السيد الأكبر محمد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم والصديق الأعظم أمير المؤمنين وفاطمة والحسن والحسين والأئمة عليهم السلام وكل من محض الإيمان محضاً وكل من محض الكفر محضاً وليقتصن منهما بجميع المظالم ثم يأمر بهما فيقتلان في كل يوم وليلة ألف قتلة ويردان إلى ما شاء الله من عذابهما

Mufaddal said to him, “O master, to where will Mahdi travel?”

He answered, “To the city of my grandfather, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. When he arrives there, he will have an amazing station, from which the believers’ happiness and the disbelievers’ disgrace will become manifest.”

Mufaddal said, “O my master, what is that?”

He said, “He will come to the grave of his grandfather and call out, ‘O gathering of creation, this is the grave of my grandfather.’

They will say, ‘Yes, O Mahdi of Muhammad’s family.’

He will ask, ‘Who is with him in the grave?’

They will say, ‘His two companions and comrades Abu Bakr and ‘Umar.’

He will say and he is the most knowledgeable of creation, ‘Who is Abu Bakr and ‘Umar and how were they buried from all the creation with my grandfather, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam? Maybe, other than they are buried.’

People will say, ‘O Mahdi of Muhammad’s family, no one is here besides them. They were buried alongside him as they are his successors and the fathers of his two wives.’

He will say, ‘Does anyone doubt their burial here?’

They will answer in the negative. After three days, he will command their graves to be dug up. He will exhume them, and they will be fresh like their form in the world. He will remove their shrouds and command they be crucified on a tall dry tree. The tree will shake and sprout and rise and its branches will extend.

Mahdi ‘alayh al Salam will command a wind to blow and turn them into fallen hollow trunks of date palms. He will then command that the two be brought down. They will be brought down and he will give life to them by the permission of Allah and command the creation to gather. He will then relate to them incidents of their actions of every era and time. He will narrate to them Habil ibn Adam’s murder, gathering fire for Ibrahim, Yusuf being thrown into the deep well, Yunus’ detention in the belly of the fish, Yahya’s murder, ‘Isa’s crucifixion, Jarjis and Daniyal’s punishment … and every evil, tyranny, and oppression committed from the time of Adam to the emergence of our Qa’im. He will repeat this to them and charge them and they will acknowledge. He will command and revenge will be taken from them at that time for the grievances of those present. He will then crucify them on the tree and command a fire to emerge from the earth and burn them and the tree. He will then command a wind which will blow their ashes into the sea.”

Mufaddal asked, “O my master, is this the last of their punishment?”

He explained, “Never, O Mufaddal. By Allah, they will be resurrected and the great master, the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam will be present as well as the greatest Siddiq, Amir al Mu’minin coupled with Fatimah, Hassan, Hussain, and all the Imams ‘alayhim al Salam coupled with every sincere believer and every sincere disbeliever and revenge will be taken from them for all the oppressions. Then a command will be passed for them to be killed every day and night a thousand times and they will be returned to their punishment which Allah desires.”[50]

 

3. Shia Muhaddith Ni’mat Allah al Jaza’iri emphasises this crime against the august Khalifahs of the Muslims saying:

 

وفي الأخبار ما هو أغرب من هذا وهو أن مولانا صاحب الزمان عليه السلام إذا ظهر وأتى المدينة أخرجهما من قبريهما فيعذبهما على كل ما وقع في العالم من الظلم المتقدم على زمانهما كقتل قابيل هابيل وطرح إخوة يوسف له في الجب ورمي إبراهيم في نار نمرود وإخراج موسى خائفا يترقب وعقر ناقة صالح وعبادة من عبد النيران فيكون لهما الحظ الأوفر من أنواع ذلك العذاب

More astonishing than this are the narrations relating that our master, the leader of the era ‘alayh al Salam, when he emerges and arrives in Madinah, he will exhume their bodies from their graves and punish them for all the oppression that took place in the world previous to their eras, like Qabil’s killing of Habil, Yusuf’s brothers’ throwing him into the deep well, casting Ibrahim into Namrud’s fire, Musa’s expulsion with fear and anticipation, hamstringing Salih’s camel, and the worship of the fire-worshippers. They will receive the comprehensive share of various types of such chastisement.[51]

 

b. Universal Massacre of all the Ahlus Sunnah

Their narrations clearly sketch out that when the promised Absent Imam will wake up from his extended sleep[52] and emerge in front of the people, he will abandon Taqiyyah[53] to expose the real gloomy face of Takfir. He will thus allow the general extermination of all the Ahlus Sunnah and carry this out himself without differentiating between a Sunni or another, nor the elderly, females, and children. I present to you the evident narrations which depict the reality of the deep-rootedness of these spectacles’ illustration in the Shia Takfiri ideology.

 

1. Sheikh al Ta’ifah al Tusi reports:

 

عن الحسن بن هارون بياع الأنماط قال كنت عند أبي عبد الله عليه السلام جالسا فسأله معلى بن خنيس أيسير القائم عليه السلام إذا سار بخلاف سيرة علي عليه السلام فقال نعم وذاك أن عليا سار بالمن والكف لأنه علم أن شيعته سيظهر عليهم من بعده وأن القائم إذا قام سار فيهم بالسيف والسبي وذلك أنه يعلم أن شيعته لم يظهر عليهم من بعده أبدا

Hassan ibn Harun, seller of shapes, reports: I was sitting with Abu ‘Abdullah ‘alayh al Salam when Mu’alla ibn Khanis asked him, “Will the Qa’im conduct himself contrary to how ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam conducted himself?”

“Yes,” he replied. “This is because ‘Ali practiced grace and restraint as he was aware that his Shia will be overpowered after him. The Qa’im, when he rises, will undertake killing and enslaving. This is because he knows that his Shia will never be overpowered after him.”[54]

 

2. Thiqat al Islam al Kulayni reports:

 

عن أبي بكر الحضرمي قال سمعت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام يقول لسيرة علي عليه السلام في أهل البصرة كانت خيرا لشيعته مما طلعت عليه الشمس إنه علم أن للقوم دولة فلو سباهم لسبيت شيعته قلت فأخبرني عن القائم عليه السلام يسير بسيرته قال لا إن عليا صلوات الله عليه سار فيهم بالمن للعلم من دولتهم وإن القائم عجل الله فرجه يسير فيهم بخلاف تلك السيرة لأنه لا دولة لهم

Abu Bakr al Hadrami reports that he heard Abu ‘Abdullah ‘alayh al Salam saying, “Indeed, ‘Ali’s ‘alayh al Salam conduct with the residents of Basrah was better for his Shia than what the sun rose over. He knew that the people [Ahlus Sunnah] will have kingdom. Had he imprisoned them [the Ahlus Sunnah], his Shia would be imprisoned.”

I said, “Inform me about the Qa’im ‘alayh al Salam, will he conduct himself the same?”

“No,” he replied. “‘Ali—may Allah’s salutations be upon him—acted with favour due to his knowledge of their state. The Qa’im—may Allah hasten his emergence—will behave with them contrary to this as they will have no state.”[55]

 

3. Seal of the Shia Muhaddithin al Majlisi reports:

 

فإذا ظهر القائم عليه السلام يجري عليهم حكم سائر الكفار في جميع الأمور وفي الآخرة يدخلون النار ماكثين فيها أبدا مع الكفار

When the Qa’im ‘alayh al Salam emerges, he will apply the verdicts of all the disbelievers to them in all matters. In the Afterlife, they will enter Hell, remaining therein forever with the disbelievers.[56]

 

4. Shia ‘Allamah Muhammad Hassan al Najafi says:

 

عند ظهور صاحب الأمر عليه السلام بأبي وأمي يعاملهم معاملة الكفار كما أن الله تعالى شأنه يعاملهم كذلك بعد مفارقة أرواحهم أبدانهم وفاقا للمشهور بين الأصحاب

When the authority (Twelfth Imam ‘alayh al Salam)—may my parents be sacrificed for him—will emerge, he will deal with them like the disbelievers, just as Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala will deal with them after their souls separate their bodies, in accordance to the common view among the scholars.[57]

 

5. Shia Muhaddith and Researcher Yusuf al Bahrani states:

 

وقد أوضحنا سابقاً أنّ حكم هؤلاء المخالفين كحكم أسلافهم من الغاصبين والناكثين والقاسطين والمارقين حذو النعل بالنعل والقذّة بالقذّة وأمير المؤمنين صلوات الله عليه قد قاتل أُولئك واستباح أموالهم ودماءهم ولكن شريعة التقيّة بعده عليه السلام لخمود نور الحقّ وقيام دولة الشرك حظرت ذلك ومنعته ألا ترى أنّه بعد قيام القائم صلوات الله عليه يستبيح أموالهم ودماءهم فلولا أنّهم مباحوا الدم والمال في هذا الحال لولا شريعة التقيّة لما استباحه عليه السلام بعد خروجه فيصير حكمهم من قبيل حكم الكافر الحربي كأسلافهم الماضين ضاعف الله تعالى عليهم جميعاً العذاب الأليم

We explained earlier that the verdict of these opposition is like the verdict of their predecessors—the usurpers, disloyal, oppressors, and renegades—identical and deceptively alike. Amir al Mu’minin—may Allah’s salutations be upon him—fought against these people and regarded their wealth and blood permissible. However, the legislation of Taqiyyah after him, due to the extinction of the light of truth and the rising of the state of shirk, prohibited and forbade that. Do you not see after the Qa’im’s—may Allah’s salutations be upon him—appearance, he would regard their wealth and blood permissible? Had their blood and wealth not been permissible in this state—if not for the legislation of Taqiyyah—he would not have permitted it after his emergence. Their ruling thus becomes from the same source as the ruling of a disbelieving rival, like their predecessors, the usurpers—may Allah multiple painful punishment upon them all.[58]

 

With these bloody, repulsive spectacles, we end the presentation of the most significant effects and manifestations of the horrible concept of Takfir which the Shia direct to other Muslims besides them. They blacken their contaminated books by documenting narrations and statements to establish it and give practical implementation to it in the most abominable forms on the strength of the collection of strange jurisprudential verdicts and declarations. And finally, the bloody spectacles at the height of offense, which breaks the heart of everyone who hears it and robs the sleep of everyone who becomes aware of it.

We close chapter two with this lesson, hoping that it will be the final step in gaining the correct understanding of the depth of the problem and, in addition, it strongly promotes exerting genuine efforts to combat it and put a definite end to it, after which it will be possible for Muslims to be at ease over their beings and existence. They may then begin the journey of bringing back the great Islamic glory and rebuilding its everlasting, time-honoured state. The attached condition is that the journey this time is examined, the building is formidable, and the depth of its foundation is not infested with Shia Imami termites.

 

NEXT⇒ Chapter Three – Abnormal Consequences of a Creed Adopting the Concept of Takfir – Introduction


[1] In fact, in contemporary times as well, as happened lately in Iraq.

[2] A detailed discussion on this will soon appear.

[3] The Shia are distinctive, from the remaining Takfiri sects like the Khawarij for example, in excommunicating all Muslim sects because they oppose them in the doctrine of Imamah, which is the product of rational deduction, not supported by any distinct, categorical textual evidence, neither apparent nor hidden. Meanwhile, the Khawarij provided plenty external textual evidences of the Qur’an to support their deviant belief. Yes, they stubbornly asserted their explanation and applied it incorrectly.

[4] We have sufficed on mentioning these two authorities as they have reported to us the subscription of all early Shia scholars to this ‘aqidah, as we will soon see in their texts. Shedding light on their view is actually revealing the views of all reliable scholars of Shi’ism.

[5] Whoever wishes to learn of his biography to realise his value and the value of his book al Hada’iq al Nadirah as well as the upcoming Shia scholar Ni’mat Allah al Jaza’iri should refer to my book Mawqif al Shia al Imamiyyah as elucidation here goes against the foundational object of this treatise.

[6] Al Hada’iq al Nadirah, vol. 5 pg. 175.

[7] Al Hada’iq al Nadirah. vol. 3 pg. 405.

[8] Al Hada’iq al Nadirah, vol. 10 pg. 360.

[9] Al Shihab al Thaqib, pg. 266–267.

[10] Surah al Shura: 23.

[11] Nur al Barahin, vol. 1 pg. 20.

[12] It is known that the permissibility of killing them is a derivative of excommunicating them. Hence, when the disbelief of the opposition is established, asserting their impurity and permitting their blood and wealth follows. And this is what al Bahrani and al Jaza’iri set up as a basis.

[13] Al Anwar al No’maniyyah, vol. 2 pg. 308.

[14] Whoever sees Baghdad in these times (between 2003–2006) after the occupation of the modern Tartars and their faithless Rafidi personnel is afflicted with bewilderment and dismay at the striking resemblance of Baghdad in both wars. How much does the day resemble last night!

[15] Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 13 pg. 234 – 237.

[16] It is their habit to describe everyone who exposes their disgraceful acts and discloses their hidden flaws as such, i.e., an Umawi fanatic.

[17] Riyad al Masa’il, pg. 6–8, introduction to second volume.

[18] Some might sense some grief from the words of these two Shia scholars over what occurred in Baghdad in that period. We do not know whether this is a genuine emotion in which they are isolated from the majority of the Shia or Taqiyyah, which we hear and see plenty examples of, especially when we will shortly come to realise the reality of their scholars’ and senior authorities’ view when examining that tragedy and the reality of one of these men’s stance—Oh the irony—’Allamah al Hilli to whose book the footnotes were added. So be aware!

[19] Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 13 pg. 234–236.

[20] You will soon sense, O respected reader, while reading the declarations of their scholars, the power of tone of apparent satisfaction in their words over what happened, i.e., the killing and annihilation of the Ahlus Sunnah. Likewise, you will notice the extent of great pride with which they boast over the wicked role their criminal al Tusi played in planning and scheming this painful massacre. Read carefully.

[21] Whoever wishes to realise the reliability of the author and his book, should refer to my book Mawqif al Shia al Imamiyyah.

[22] The Muslims should fully understand the text of al Najafi. The word others establishes the fact that killing the Ahlus Sunnah is not a belief peculiar to al Tusi and al Hilli. It is a belief which majority of the Shia scholars subscribe to including al Bahrani and al Jaza’iri whose belief I quoted in the beginning of the section. They are the stars who have emphatically declared that all their early scholars subscribed to this deviant belief.

[23] His statement: who permit their killing and its like, from the conditions of the disbelievers is extremely dangerous as this reveals their concept of Takfir in the most repulsive form. He clarifies that the verdict against us in their belief is the same as the rest of the disbelievers, i.e., the permissibility of blood and wealth. The genocide of Baghdad was simply a practical manifestation of their belief in Takfir of the Ahlus Sunnah.

[24] Jawahir al Kalam, vol. 22 pg. 63.

[25] Muhammad Baqir al Khuwanasari: Rawdat al Jannat, vol. 6 pg. 279.

[26] Ibid, vol. 6 pg. 293.

[27] Sama’ al Maqal fi ‘Ilm al Rijal, vol. 1 pg. 401.

[28] ‘Allamah, Authority Ibrahim al Zanjani: ‘Aqa’id al Imamiyyah al Ithnay ‘Ashariyyah, vol. 3 pg. 231.

[29] I narrated its dreadfulness in detail from Ibn Kathir and Shia ‘Allamah Muhammad Mahdi al Asifi.

[30] It is necessary to remember clearly that Khomeini and the men of his religious Shia revolution applied this bloody concept in a practical manner when they gained complete dominance over Iranian Persia. Frankly speaking, they actively killed, exiled, and prosecuted the Ahlus Sunnah laymen and scholars … even up to today, leaving the city almost vacant of them.

[31] The reader will soon realise the criminal role played by ‘Ali ibn Yaqtin which is not much different to the one played by al Nasir al Tusi. This is in the upcoming spectacle.

[32] Al Hukumah al Islamiyyah, pg. 142.

[33] Al Makasib al Muharramah, vol. 2 pg. 164.

[34] Kitab al Arba’in, vol. 2 pg. 612.

[35] Al Shia fi al Mizan, pg. 237; Sharh Ihqaq al Haqq, vol. 28 pg. 568.

[36] Al Makasib al Muharramah, vol. 2 pg. 119.

[37] Al Makasib al Muharramah, vol. 2 pg. 121.

[38] Al Anwar al No’maniyyah, vol. 1 pg. 292. This crime is documented by al Mulla ‘Ali al ‘Alyari al Tabrizi: Bahjat al Amal, pg. 140; Muhaddith Yusuf al Bahrani: al Shihab al Thaqib, pg. 264; and Muhsin al Mu’allim: al Nasb wa al Nawasib, pg. 622.

[39] Let our rulers fear Allah regarding us and not appoint over us Shia retinue who worships Allah by killing us and gains proximity to Him by shedding our blood. Here is al Rashid’s minister Shia ‘Ali ibn Yaqtin and after him al Musta’sim’s minister Ibn al ‘Alqami. The hadith comments, “A believer is not bitten twice from the same hole.”

[40] O noble reader, observe the profundity of inferior approach and the gravity of the despicable character of one of their senior scholars and authorities, from whom students study the fundamentals and details of Shi’ism and at whose hands they are nurtured. Had I not feared prolongation, I would have mentioned al Jaza’iri’s biography and you would be amazed at the status he enjoys in their eyes.

[41] This bloody spectacle does not need further confirmation. Radio and television news agencies have websites with reports of the killing of the Ahlus Sunnah. One of the most significant websites which present the criminal killings of the Ahlus Sunnah is the website of the massacre in Baghdad. (www.baghdadmass.com.) I will not be in error if I claim that the reports documented in the first spectacle, from Ibn Kathir of Hulagu’s massacre in Baghdad, is only a tenth of what is perpetrated against the Ahlus Sunnah in Iraq by the blessings of Shia authorities, political figures, and scholars.

[42] By Shia, we do not intend all the Shia unrestrictedly. Only the thinkers and influential, from the religious, political, and affluent men, and those recruited from the common folk and populace.

[43] At some stations of the Shia confederates, documents and audios have been discovered which contain commands and directives from high official agencies—religious and military officials—to their followers in various districts of Iraq, and especially the beloved capital, Baghdad; with the necessity of actively burning, plundering, and demolishing every organisation of the state and mobilising the general Shia for this. Moreover, not heeding to the calls and verdicts coming forth from the academic Hawzah in Najaf, as they are part of Taqiyyah and beautifying the image, nothing else. Practically, they have attained their desired objective by joining with the occupied American forces. No organisation, building, or landmark was safe from plunder, burning, and demolition. Even the national library building in Baghdad was damaged by these treacherous hooligans. Majority of what it contained was burnt. Only a small amount survived. Similar, rather astonishingly identical, to what happened to Baghdad at the time of the Moguls’ demolition which, at the end, happened with Shia support as well.

[44] The truth is that the victims of what transpired are all the noble Muslims of the world.

[45] Between 2003 and 2006, when this treatise was being written in 2006.

[46] Despite all the attacks and conspiracy against the Ahlus Sunnah, they remained heroes steadfast on their principles. They were not pleased with the entire world [as a bribe]. They thus were the best successors for the best predecessors. They fulfilled the pledge they made with Allah and did not alter the terms of their commitment by any alteration.

[47] They actively prepared the people to accept the obnoxiousness of the bloody massacres he will carry out and not to despise his blood-thirsty personality, by forging narrations which speak of people of that time having reservations of him being from the family of Muhammad due to the amount of blood he will shed. Al No’mani reports in his book, al Ghaybah, pg. 233:

عن العلاء عن محمد بن مسلم قال سمعت أبا جعفر عليه السلام يقول لو يعلم الناس ما يصنع القائم إذا خرج لأحب أكثرهم ألا يروه مما يقتل من الناس أما أنه لا يبدأ إلا بقريش فلا يأخذ منها إلا السيف ولا يعطيها إلا السيف حتى يقول كثير من الناس هذا ليس من آل محمد ولو كان من آل محمد لرحم

‘Ala’—from Muhammad ibn Muslim—I heard Abu Jafar rahimahu Llah saying: If people knew of the massacre of people carried out by the Qa’im when he emerges, majority will wish they did not see him. Harken, he will not begin except with the Quraysh. He will take nothing from them except the sword and give nothing to them except the sword, until many people will say, “He is not from Muhammad’s family. Had he been from Muhammad’s family, he would have shown clemency.”

They also report that Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is a mercy and the Qa’im is a punishment. They firmly embedded the killing of the Arabs which discloses the malicious anti-Arab sentiment of the fabricator. One example is narrated by al No’mani in his book, al Ghaybah, pg. 233:

عن أبي بصير قال قال أبو جعفر عليه السلام يقوم القائم بأمر جديد وكتاب جديد وقضاء جديد على العرب شديد ليس شأنه إلا السيف ولا يستتيب أحدا ولا يأخذه في الله لومة لائم

Abu Basir reports that Abu Jafar ‘alayh al Salam said: The Qa’im will establish a new affair (religion), new book, and new judgement. He will be stern upon the Arabs. He will only judge with the sword. He will not seek repentance from anyone and the criticism of the critic will not affect him in carrying out the orders of Allah.

He also reports, pg. 235-236:

عن بشر بن غالب الأسدي قال قال لي الحسين بن علي عليهما السلام يا بشر ما بقاء قريش إذا قدم القائم المهدي منهم خمسمائة رجل فضرب أعناقهم صبرا ثم قدم خمسمائة فضرب أعناقهم صبرا ثم خمسمائة فضرب أعناقهم صبرا قال فقلت له أصلحك الله أيبلغون ذلك فقال الحسين بن علي عليهما السلام إن مولى القوم منهم قال فقال لي بشير بن غالب أخو بشر بن غالب أشهد أن الحسين بن علي عليهما السلام عد على أخي ست عدات أو قال ست عددات على اختلاف الرواية

Bishr ibn Ghalib al Asadi reports that Hussain ibn ‘Ali said to him, “O Bishr, the Quraysh will be annihilated when the Qa’im, the Mahdi, puts forward five hundred men and beheads them in captivity, then another five hundred and beheads them, then another five hundred and beheads them in captivity.”

I said to him, “May Allah keep you well, will they be so many?”

Hussain ibn ‘Ali said, “The freed slave of a nation is from them.”

Bashir ibn Ghalib, brother of Bishr ibn Ghalib, told me, “I testify that Hussain ibn ‘Ali repeated it six times to my brother.”

[48] This is what they desire in respect of these sublime men who are the most beloved to the Nabi’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam heart, his Khalifahs after him, and the most superior creation after the Prophets. This is their recompense for the wealth and blood they sacrificed to support and disseminate Islam, until its populated area spread far and wide. You can imagine the extent of the Shia’s rancour for the followers and lovers of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma from the remaining Muslim sects.

[49] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 30 pg. 276.

[50] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 53 pg. 12; Hassan ibn Sulaiman al Hilli: Mukhtasar Basa’ir al Darajat, pg. 186 – 187; Hussain ibn Hamdan al Khasibi: al Hidayah al Kubra, pg. 401- 402.

[51] Al Anwar al No’maniyyah, vol. 1 pg. 141.

[52] Their books, upon which Shi’ism is founded, report that this Imam went into occultation while young and remained in occultation for more than a thousand years, in one of the wells of Samarra’, fleeing from his enemies’ apprehension. He remains on the run to this day. He moves from city to city in split seconds—probably on a flying carpet—to show himself to a handful of special Shia scholars. He appeared during the course of all these years to a number of these special individuals who claimed that the Imam appeared before them and whispered to them some secrets of Divine Sovereignty, which they in turn pass on to millions of foolish followers. The Imam then returns to occultation only to appear at another occasion for a different relevance.

[53] Taqiyyah is observed by Shia scholars often to hide their repudiated concept of Takfir, added to them observing it to conceal many perverted realities of Shi’ism which select individuals pass around in secrecy, far from the senses of others.

[54] Tahdhib al Ahkam, vol. 6 pg. 154.

[55] Al Kafi, vol. 5 pg. 33; Tahdhib al Ahkam, vol. 6 pg. 155.

[56] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 8 pg. 369.

[57] Jawahir al Kalam, vol. 6 pg. 56.

[58] Al Shihab al Thaqib, pg. 265.