Majority of Muslims are aware of some deviant sects other than the Shia who adopt the concept of Takfir as an ideology in which they believe and embody in their lives. Probably, the most significant and notorious of these sects, unconditionally, is the Khawarij who went public during the era of Imam ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Their existence is extinct or almost extinct in current times.
Despite the Khawarij cooperating with the Shia in the underlying idea—excommunicating the opposition and considering his blood permissible—there is a substantial and significant difference which every examiner of the history of these two Takfir sects—past and current—realises regarding the manner each of them handles his claim and conducts himself and introduces others to his stance. While we find truthfulness and daring in proclamation among the Khawarij sect, we conspicuously find that amount of helpless ambiguity, nay shameful falsehood, which Shia callers and scholars adhere to in presenting and explaining their concepts and beliefs to the masses.
While the clarity and daring of the first in pronouncing their ideology resulted in inciting all the Muslims against them and isolating them from society, in fact battling against them, the false, spineless technique and scheming of the second led to them being overlooked. In fact, the arena became spacious for them and gave them the opportunity to infiltrate the ranks of the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah. They were thus successful in assuming many positions of power and influence in the community and state. Thus, their destruction to the Ummah and Muslims was far greater and their detriment extensive and widespread.
Perhaps, the strange and disgraceful aspect is that those who were guilty of this shameful falsehood in the Imami creed were not a group of base advisors or a handful of amateur missionaries. Rather, they were a league of the most prominent and intelligent authors and scholars, unrestrictedly. Some of them are authorities of Shi’ism and Grand Ayatollahs.
I will suffice in this brief discussion on listing a collection of them who are infamous with peculiar activeness in this field—the field of falsehood and deception—and proficiency in pulling the strings. From among these are:
He is one of the most prominent Shia scholars who mastered the art of falsehood and deception and is infamous for his resolve to disfigure and change realities with a distinguished literal methodology, which hardly anyone else mastered. Many of his lies dominated over scores of Ahlus Sunnah laymen, if I do not claim over some scholars as well, who were unaware of the reality of their creed and the fundamentals it comprises.
From the samples of his cheap lies are the following:
a. He determines with complete nerve and insolence that the Imamiyyah do not excommunicate the Ahlus Sunnah. He affirms:
ألا ترى أن الشيعة لم تكفر أهل السنة بإنكارها إمامة الأئمة من أهل البيت (ع) مع أن إمامتهم من أصول الدين على رأي الشيعة
Do you not see that the Shia did not excommunicate the Ahlus Sunnah for their rejection of the Imamah of the Imams of the Ahlul Bayt ‘alayhim al Salam notwithstanding Imamah being one of the fundamentals of din according to the Shia?
b. He attempts to refute the words of Musa Jar Allah who proved the existence of the concept of Takfir according to them:
قال صرحت كتب الشيعة أن الفرق الإسلامية كلها كافرة ملعونة خالدة في النار إلا الشيعة … إلخ فأقول نعوذ بالله من تكفير المسلمين والله المستعان على كل معتد أثيم هماز مشاء بنميم كيف يجوز على الشيعة أن تكفر أهل الشهادتين والصلاة والصوم والزكاة والحج والإيمان باليوم الآخر
I say: We seek Allah’s protection from excommunicating the Muslims. Allah’s help is sought against every transgressor, sinful, scorner, going about with malicious gossip. How is it possible for the Shia to excommunicate adherents of the shahadatayn, Salah, Sawm, Zakat, Hajj, and belief in the Last Day?
c. While refuting Muhammad Kurd ‘Ali—president of the Academic Academy in Damascus—who accused the Shia of Takfir, he says:
الحادي عشر زعم أن الشيعة كفروا كل من لم يوافقهم على هواهم قلت هذه إفكة أفاك وفرية صواغ يدس النمائم ويبس العقارب نعوذ بالله من سماسرة الشقاق وزراع العداوات ظلما وعدوانا ونبرأ إلى الله من تكفير أحد من أهل الإيمان بالله ورسوله واليوم الآخر والصلوات الخمس إلى القبلة والزكاة المفروضة وصوم الشهر وحج البيت
Eleven: He determines that the Shia excommunicated all those who do not conform to them in their passions.
I say: This is the liar’s untruth and the fabricator’s slander. He thrusts calumnies and shoves stings. We seek protection in Allah from the agents of dissension and the planters of hatred oppressively and aggressively. We declare our innocence to Allah from excommunicating any of the adherents of faith in Allah, His Messenger, and the Last Day, those who adhere to five Salahs towards the Qiblah, [paying] obligatory Zakat, fasting the month, and Hajj of the House.
He boldly claims in the very article:
ونحن لو كلفنا الأستاذ بإثبات شيء مما عزاه إلينا لأحرجناه مدحورا بل لو اجتمع الأمويون بعضارطهم والخوارج بحثالتهم والنواصب بطغامهم وسائر أعداء الله ورسوله بقضهم وقضيضهم على أن يأتوا بدليل على تلك المفتريات لا يأتون به ولو كان بعضهم لبعض ظهيرا وها نحن نتحداهم هاتفين هاتوا برهانكم إن كنتم صادقين
Had we charged the Ustadh to establish a single aspect he attributed to us, we would have embarrassed him, leaving him upbraided and expelled. In fact, if all the Umayyads with their cronies, the Khawarij with their scum, the Nawasib with their common folk, and all the enemies of Allah and his Messenger, all without exception, gathered to produce a single evidence for these fabrications, they would not be able to, even if they were to each other assistants. Look, we challenge them shouting: Produce your proof, if you should be truthful!
a. I do not think we will need much effort to reveal his deception and to uncover the falsehood of his claim of Shi’ism being innocent from the disaster of Takfir. This treatise is sufficient to expose and shame him; the abundance of their narrations and scholars’ verdicts I presented which affirm the mark of disgrace upon them. The pages have come as a roaring flood blasting all the forts he built on the supports of his trickery and deception. They tumbled down and lay desolate leaving behind not a trace!
b. Although the, “Yes,” of Ibrahim ‘alayh al Salam exists in point one, it is necessary to supplement this “so that my heart may be satisfied”. Furthermore, let the reader himself realise the extent of deception of this ‘Ayatollah al ‘Uzma’ and the cheapness of his approach, so that he may comprehend the condition of the common folk, the followers, those who are lower than him in status. After all this reckless defence in exonerating the Shia from the accusation of excommunicating their opposition in the fundamental of Imamah and after all the lamentation and wailing over their oppression and their helplessness against the tyranny and harshness of the Ahlus Sunnah, we find him returning to destroy what he built, affirming the very thing he denied, thereby shooting himself in the leg.
In a discussion of his under the heading: A selection of authentic narrations, according to the Ahlus Sunnah, affirming the deliverance of absolute monotheists, ‘Abdul Hussain al Musawi firstly quotes statements from the Ahlus Sunnah establishing the salvation of all monotheists from eternity in Hell, saying:
الفصل الخامس في طائفة مما صح عند أهل السنة من الأحاديث الحاكمة بنجاة مطلق الموحدين أوردناها ليعلم حكمها بالجنة على كل من الشيعة والسنة وهذه الأخبار أجلى من الشمس في رابعة النهار وصحتها أشهر من نار على علم فيها من البشائر ما ربما هون على المسلم موبقات الكبائر فدونك أبوابها في كتب أهل السنة لتعلم حكمها عليك وعليهم بالجنة وكلما ذكرناه شذر من بذر ونقطة من لجج بحر اكتفينا منها بما ذكره البخاري في كتابه وكرره بالأسانيد المتعددة في كثير من أبوابه ولم نتعرض لما في باقي الصحاح اذ انشق بما ذكرناه عمود الفجر واندلع لسان الصباح
Section Five: A selection of authentic narrations, according to the Ahlus Sunnah, affirming the deliverance of absolute monotheists. We have reported them so that their verdict of Jannat for both the Shia and Ahlus Sunnah be realised.
He further states: These narrations are more evident that the sun at midday and their authenticity is more apparent than a fire on a mountain. They contain so many good tidings which perhaps underestimates the destructive consequences of major sins for a Muslim. Study the chapters of the books of the Ahlus Sunnah to know of the verdict of Jannat for you and them. What we documented is scattered seeds and droplets of a deep ocean. We sufficed on what al Bukhari documents in his book and repeats through various chains across many chapters. We did not cite what appears in the other authentic compilations, as what we mentioned caused true dawn to break and the tongue of morning to hang out.
After he completed reporting the view of the Ahlus Sunnah, he went on to explain the belief of the Shia in this regard. He emphasises—in a moment of his cunningness being absent and his deception losing the way—that salvation on the Day of Qiyamah according to the Shia does not include all monotheists. Instead, it is confined to those who believe in the Imamah of their Twelve Imams and adheres to it, i.e., it is a monopoly of the Shia, to the exclusion of all others. His exact words are:
وان عندنا صحاحاً أخر فزنا بها من طريق أئمتنا الاثني عشر روتها هداة قولهم وحديثهم روى جدنا عن جبريل عن الباري فهي السنة التالية للكتاب وهي الجنة الواقية من العذاب وإليكها في أصول الكافي وغيره تعلن بالبشائر لأهل الإيمان بالله ورسوله واليوم الآخر لكنها تخصص ما سمعته من تلك العمومات المتكاثرة بولاية آل رسول الله وعترته الطاهرة الذين قرنهم بمحكم الكتاب وجعلهم قدوة لأُولي الألباب ونص على أنهم سفن النجاة إذا طغى زخّار الفتن وأمان الأمة إذا هاج إعصار المحن ونجوم الهداية إذا أسلدهم ليل الغواية وباب حطة لا يغفر إلا لمن دخلها والعروة الوثقى لا انفصام لها ولا غرو فان ولايتهم من أصول الدين
We have other authentic compilations which we attained through the chain of our Twelve Imams; narrated by guides: their statements and hadith. Our grandfather [Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam] narrated from Jibril from the Originator [Allah]. It is the Sunnah following the Book and the Jannat which protects from punishment. Have a look at them in Usul al Kafi and other books, announcing good tidings for the believers in Allah, His Messenger, and the Last Day.
However, these abundant general reports you heard are confined to the Wilayah of Rasulullah’s household and pure family—whom He joined with the decisive Book and appointed as leaders for the intelligent. He emphatically declared them ships of saviour when the profuse trails overflow, sanctuaries for the Ummah when the tornados of difficulties are rough and stormy, stars of guidance when they are covered by the night of temptation, doors of repentance—there is no forgiveness except for one who enters through them, and the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. Undoubtedly, their Wilayah is from the fundamentals of din.
He is one of the most prominent contemporary academic Shia figures in Shia educational circles and at the heart of the universal Shia in a general capacity. Currently, he is one of three leading authorities of the religious authority in Najaf, Iraq which is considered the foremost and most pure religious authority of the Shia in the world and the principal in their past and current history. Owing to this, undertaking his view in a specific topic is regarded as undertaking the religious authority itself, like an institution, and presenting its stance and view on the topic.
Despite him definitely not being the first and only authoritative leader who makes his contribution in presenting a view or regulation—these matters need attention and deserve consideration—the importance of his take in this arena provides us with an opportunity to come out with a clear and genuine impression of the current religious authority of the time we live in. We all may see their stance and the part they play in current affairs. They boast of confronting many current and future affairs of Muslims. We may also ascertain whether this religious authority and these authorities have the ability to return to the path of truth and genuineness and to eliminate (or make amends) for the mistakes of the distant and close past, relying on truth and honesty in asserting their beliefs and presenting their stance towards the majority of Muslims in the world. This may make it possible to identify areas of convergence or create the possibility of communication with them regarding other aspects, such that attention can be focused upon it (so that coordination and concerted efforts can be accomplished) or away from it to a different objective, without us continuously spinning around the first [i.e., Takfir], unable to differentiate knee from elbow.
Indeed, what I discussed about the “Hakim (wise)” authority is not the wisdom of moderation and tolerance. This is naturally and definitely—in the light of what we learnt from everything in the treatise—from the impossibilities. Nonetheless, I searched for truthfulness in speech, honesty in presentation, the discusser’s nobility, and the scholar’s integrity. Sadly, without my supposition ever being disappointed, I found him like the rest of his contemporaries: a forger of a rare class, and a liar of an exceptional class. He, thus, truthfully provides evidence that he is nurtured by the authorities of misguidance and deception and establishes the aptitude of him being a worthy chief and leader of it and a true spokesman for it.
O honourable reader and brother, I present to you the falsehood of this Ayatollah al ‘Uzma by presenting one of his deceitful statements with which he endeavours to turn the minds of Muslims away from the reality of his belief and the belief of his creed. He says:
إن الإسلام عند الشيعة كما سبق في أوائل جواب السؤال الثاني يكون بالشهادتين الشهادة بالتوحيد والشهادة بنبوة سيدنا محمد صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم مع الإقرار بفرائض الإسلام الضرورية من الصلاة والزكاة ونحوهما وإعلان دعوته وبذلك يتفق الشيعة والسنة في أنهم مسلمون يجمعهم هذا الدين العظيم الذي هو أشرف الأديان وخاتمها والذي يحفظ لكل منهم حرمته في ماله ودمه كما تجمعهم أهدافه المشتركة التي تهمهم بأجمعهم من الدعوة له ورفع كلمته وردّ كيد الأعداء عنه وعنهم فليوحدوا كلمتهم من أجل ذلك مع الرعاية للآداب والأخلاق الرفيعة التي حثّ عليها الإسلام مع غير المسلمين فضلاً عن المسلمين فيما بينهم وقد سبق في آخر الجواب عن السؤال الثاني التنبيه على ذلك وبذلك يتم بينهم التلاقي العملي لصالـح الإسلام والمسلمين بعد التلاقي العقائدي في أصول الإسلام وليحتفظ كل منهم بعقيدته لنفسه أو يدعو لها بالتي هي أحسن وبالطرق العلمية والبرهانية الهادئة والهادفة مع البعد عن الكذب والبهتان والشتم والسبّ والتهريج والتشنيع … فلماذا لا يتعاون المسلمون فيما بينهم الآن من أجل ذلك مع أنه يجمعهم دين واحد وأصول أصيلة مشتركة ولماذا كلما زاد عدوهم قوة وشراسة زادت خلافاتهم فيما بينهم حدة وقسوة وشاعت فيهم لغة الطعن والشتم والكذب والبهتان والتشنيع والتهريج
Islam, according to the Shia—as appeared previously in the beginning of the answer to question two—is with the shahadatayn: testifying to the oneness [of Allah] and testifying to our master Muhammad’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam Nubuwwah, coupled with attesting to the essential fara’id of Islam, like Salah, Zakat, etc., and to publicly invite to it. The Shia and Sunnah are thus in agreement of them being Muslims.
This grand din—which is the most sublime and the seal of all religions and which protects each of their sanctity as regards his wealth and blood—unites them. Likewise, they are united by the common targets which concern all of them, like inviting to it, raising its word, and refuting the plots of the enemies from it and them. Let them unite their word owing to this, coupled with giving due consideration to etiquette and lofty character which Islam encourages with the non-Muslims, leave alone the Muslims mutually. Exhortation to this passed at the end of the answer to question two. Through this, practical unity for the betterment of Islam and the Muslims is accomplished after [the realisation of] ideological unity in the fundamentals of Islam.
Let each of them keep his belief to himself or invite to it in a way that is best, with peaceful and marked academic and demonstrative methods, staying aloof from falsehood, slander, swearing, cursing, jesting, and defamation.
Why do the Muslims nowadays not assist one another for this purpose, whereas one din and common genuine fundamentals unite them? Why when their enemies increase in might and viciousness, their mutual disputes increase in violence and harshness, and denouncement, obscenity, falsehood, slander, defamation, and jesting spread among them?
We will see the true stance of this dishonest Ayatollah evident in his statements which expose what his creed confidently affirms, i.e., his antagonistic Takfiri stance towards his opposition, the Muslims. He believes in it and does not deviate from it, not even to the extent of a fingertip. We relate a few passages of these statements to you:
a. He acknowledges that the prohibition of backbiting is limited to a Shia Imami. He thus permits backbiting other Muslims, saying:
وهي أن يذكر المؤمن لا ريب في عدم أخذ الإيمان في مفهوم الغيبة لأنها من المفاهيم العرفية فلا تؤخذ فيها مثل هذه العناوين التي هي شرعية صرفة نعم لا ينبغي الريب في اختصاص حرمتها بالمؤمن كما صرح به غير واحد
And it [backbiting] is speaking about a believer. There is no doubt in not considering iman in the understanding of backbiting, as it is from the commonly understood concepts. Thus, terminologies like these which are purely Shar’i will not be considered in it. Yes, doubt is not proper in its prohibition being particular with a believer, as clearly stated by more than one.
b. He—may Allah deal with him befittingly—did not suffice on his awful permission to backbite all Muslims. He added another appalling reality, stating that they are not honoured and befriended. He says:
ومن الظاهر أنه لا احترام ولا ولاية ولا حق لغير المؤمن
It is obvious that a non-believer enjoys no honour, friendship, or right.
c. He adds that brotherhood with their opposition, Muslims, is not permitted since they are the enemy:
ومن الظاهر أنه لا احترام ولا ولاية ولا حق لغير المؤمن بل هو في حيز الأعداء
It is obvious that a non-believer enjoys no honour, friendship, or right. Rather, he is in the territory of the enemies.
d. He exposes his malicious Takfiri belief in the most obvious form by declaring that cursing, swearing, and dissociating from all the Muslims is established according to them in their Imam’s narrations, saying:
بل ما ورد من لعن المخالفين وسبهم والبراءة منهم يقتضي جواز غيبتهم بالأولوية العرفية
In fact, the reports encouraging cursing, swearing, and dissociating from the opposition demands the permissibility of backbiting them to a greater degree.
This is what the silent authority finally pronounces and articulates. The tongue was dishonest and the speech was deceiving. This only adds another link to their chain of dishonest authorities for which Shi’ism is notorious and its repute became widespread and generally known among the commoners and simple folk—from whom their lies have been hidden, who were hoodwinked by the glitter of their adorned lies and deception for a long time. However, everything has a starting point. Allah willing, this treatise with its like will be the starting point to bring a true end to this dishonest creed.
This individual is considered a luminary in religious writing and discussions, and a shining star in the sky of contemporary Shia propagation. However, he, like his predecessors, treaded the path of cheap falsehood and clung to the pathway of deviation, without moving a hairbreadth. I will not expose him by searching out his writings and statements—as I did with ‘Abdul Hussain previously. Rather, I rely on citing his answer to a question posed to him by a Muslim sister from the Ahlus Sunnah on the reality of the existence of what is called: Supplication against the two idols of Quraish according to the Shia. He answers:
كما كتبت في رسالتك الأولى بإن الإمام الخميني سمى الخليفتين بصنمي قريش في كتابه كشف الأسرار ص ١١١ ١١٤ ١١٧ ولم أجد في الصفحات المستنسخة التي أرسلتها إلي شيئا من تلك الكلمات
Just as you wrote in your first letter that Imam Khomeini called the two Khalifahs Quraish’s idols in his book Kashf al Asrar, pg. 111, 114, 117. I did not find in the printed pages you sent to me any such words.
He then adds to his evident falsehood, exposing his true character:
وإني بما أنا شيعي وقد ناهزت من العمر ٧٣ عاما وألفت ما يفوق المائة كتاب لم أجد تلك الكلمة وإنما سمعته من شيخ سعودي كان ينسبه إلى الشيعة
In exposing the deception of this dishonest Ayatollah, I will only present the names of the books which contain this supplication as well as the verbatim statements of a few Shia clerics who emphatically verify and authenticate it.
Firstly, I present a list of a few books which have commentated on this supplication and explained its meanings, listed by their authority Agha Buzurg al Tahrani (d. 1389 AH/1969 CE), so that you may realise its veracity and its regular mention in their books, which exposes his deception and falsehood.
Secondly, there are the Imamiyyah clerics’ statements emphasising the supplication’s establishment in Shia circles which break al Subhani’s back:
i. Erudite Shia scholar and Seal of their Muhaddithin al Majlisi writes:
أقول ودعاء صنمي قريش مشهور بين الشيعة ورواه الكفعمي عن ابن عباس أن أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام كان يقنت به في صلاته وسيأتي في كتاب الصلاة إن شاء الله وهو مشتمل على جميع بدعهما ووقع فيه الاهتمام والمبالغة في لعنهما بما لا مزيد عليه
I say: The supplication against the two idols of Quraish is popular in Shia circles. Al Kaf’ami reports from Ibn ‘Abbas that Amir al Mu’minin ‘alayh al Salam would recite it in Qunut in his Salah. It will soon come in the Book on Salah, Allah willing. It comprises of all their innovations. It contains focus and overemphasis upon cursing them for which there is no room for more.
ii. Shia Qadi Nur Allah al Tustari writes in Ihqaq al Haqq:
كما أشار إليه مولانا أمير المؤمنين علي عليه السلام في دعاء صنمي قريش
As our master Amir al Mu’minin ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam indicated in the supplication against the two idols of Quraish.
Al Mar’ashi adds a footnote in his commentary of the book saying:
أورده العلامة المجلسي في باب القنوت من كتاب الصلاة من مجلدات البحار ونقل هناك فوائد عن كتاب رشح الولاء في شرح الدعاء للشيخ الجليل أسعد بن عبد القاهر بن الأسعد الأصبهاني ثم اعلم أن لأصحابنا شروحا على هذا الدعاء منها الرشح المذكور ومنها كتاب ضياء الخافقين لبعض العلماء من تلاميذ الفاضل القزويني صاحب لسان الخواص ومنها شرح مشحون بالفوائد للمولى عيسى بن علي الأردبيلي وكان من علماء زمان الصفوية وكلها مخطوطة وبالجملة صدور هذا الدعاء مما يطمئن به لنقل الأعاظم إياها في كتبهم واعتمادهم عليها
‘Allamah al Majlisi documents it in chapter on Qunut of the Book on Salah in one of the many volumes of al Bihar. He reproduces there a few benefits from the book Rash-h al Wala’ fi Sharh al Dua’ of eminent Sheikh As’ad ibn ‘Abdul Qahir ibn al As’ad al Asbahani. Furthermore, you should know that our scholars have a few commentaries on this supplication. One is al Rash-h, mentioned above. One is Diya’ al Khafiqayn of a scholar who is a student of the learned al Qazwini, author of Lisan al Khawas. One is a commentary loaded with benefits written by Mawla ‘Isa ibn ‘Ali al Ardabili, one of the scholars of the Safavid dynasty. All these are hand-written manuscripts. On the whole, this supplication’s appearance provides satisfaction due to renowned scholars transmitting it in their books and relying upon it.
iii. Shia ‘Allamah and Researcher al Hajj al Mirza Habib Allah al Hashimi al Khu’i states:
وأكثرها احتواء لذلك دعاؤه المعروف بدعاء صنمي قريش الذي كان يواظب عليه السلام عليه في قنوته وسائر أوقاته وقد رواه غير واحد من أصحابنا قدس الله أرواحهم في مؤلفاتهم
The most inclusive of this is his supplication popularly known as the supplication against the two idols of Quraish which he would recite with diligence in his Qunut and at all times. Scores of our scholars have narrated it in their books.
iv. Shia Ayatollah al ‘Uzma and contemporary popular authority ‘Ali al Milani has acknowledged the existence of this supplication. This he attested to while answering a question posed to him which reads:
والسؤال الثاني ما هي حقيقة دعاء صنمي قريش … وهل فعلا وقع عليه عدد من كبار علماء الشيعة
Second question: What is the authenticity of the supplication against the two idols of Quraish? Have a number of senior Shia scholars practically carried it out?
He answered saying:
هذا الدعاء من الأدعية المشهورة المتداولة بين المؤمنين
This supplication is one of the common supplications in circulation among the believers.
Subhani could have connected with al Milani through a phone call to ask him about the establishment of the supplication according to them. It would have been better for him than lying and claiming it to be a fabrication of a Saudi Sheikh. Allah refused but to sink his reliability and integrity among the Muslims.
He also walked in the footsteps of his predecessors and the majority of Shia clerics, following in their tracks of falsehood and deception. However, he tried to leap beyond its many hazards and countless pitfalls, hoping to stumble less and fall softer. Instead of simply denying or concealing the reality, he went on to challenge there being a single proof for it.
After a television interview on the topic of the Ahlus Sunnah and Shia, he gathered the material in a book titled al Muwajahat bayn al Shia wa al Sunnah. When he touched on the subject of criticising the Sahabah, and Shi’ism being accused of permitting and encouraging this; he announced a challenge, with all impudence and pomposity, for any individual to produce a single Shia narration permitting cursing and swearing the Sahabah or a single Shia cleric’s verdict in which he criticises or curses any of them, passes such a verdict, or displays his pleasure with it. He states, with swagger, the following, on page 130:
فأقول إني أتحدى أن يعثر أحد على رواية صحيحة عن أئمتنا في كتبنا المعتمدة أو المعتبرة تجوز لعن الصحابة أو تنال منهم بشيء أو أن يعثر على فقيه واحد من فقهائنا في أي كتاب فقهي وفتوائي منتشر بيننا من كتب الشيعة يعثر فيه مثل هذا الكلام
I say: I challenge anyone to discover a single authentic narration from our Imams in our reliable or trusted books permitting cursing the Sahabah or insulting them, or to discover such speech of a single Jurist among our Jurists in any fiqhi and fatwa Shia book widely accepted among us.
He writes on page 132:
وقلت أتحدى أن يأتيني أحد بكلام لواحد من علمائنا وفقهائنا يشتم به أحدا من صحابة رسول الله
I said: I challenge anyone to bring me the speech of one of our scholars or jurists swearing a single Companion of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
He denies the existence of the supplication against the two idols of Quraish on page 148:
وأنا أتحداه وما زال التحدي قائما في أن يجد هو أو غيره كتابا لدى الشيعة الإمامية الاثني عشرية من الكتب المعتبرة لدينا ولدى فقهائنا تذكر مثل هذا الدعاء
I challenge him, and my challenge still stands, for him or others to find a book of the Twelver Shia Imamiyyah from the reliable books in our sight and our jurists’ sight which mentions a supplication like this.
He repeats the same on page 147:
فلا يوجد لدينا مثل هذا الدعاء الموثق
A supplication like this is not found by us, which is validated.
Undoubtedly, a dedicated refutation of this pompous researcher is not required. All the previously mentioned content—the narrations, verdicts, and declarations permitting cursing, swearing, and criticising the Sahabah and levelling nasty accusations against them coupled with the establishment of the nasty renowned supplication against the two idols of Quraish which passed shortly and their scholars’ acknowledgement of the same, in fact them dedicating sections of their books to expound on it and explain its meanings—suffices us the trouble to dedicate a refutation against him and takes care of the effort of exposing him in front of the entire world.
Nonetheless, I will go the extra mile in refuting this phoney researcher and end my encounter with him by quickly presenting the text of an answer of a contemporary Ayatollah al ‘Uzma, Muhammad Sadiq al Shirazi, to a question posed to him on the permissibility of specifically cursing and swearing certain prominent Sahabah by taking their names. May my final meeting with this bogus researcher be a blow of discipline. Perhaps, from his stingy face, some of the blackness—due to his grave lies and nasty deception—will fall away.
هل يجوز اللعن بالأسماء للثلاثة مغتصبي الخلافة والجهر بذلك ودمتم موفقين مسددين
Is it permissible to curse the three usurpers of Caliphate by name and to do so publicly? May you remain divinely assisted and guided.
كونهم من مصاديق الظلمة الذين ينطبق عليهم قوله تعالى أَلَا لَعْنَةُ اللهِ عَلَى الظَّالِمِيْنَ مما لا شك فيه وأما الجهر بذلك فهو تبع للظروف الموضوعية فإن ترتب على ذلك ضرر أو مفسدة فلا يجوز وإلا فلا إشكال فيه
Them being the wrongdoers to whom Allah’s subhanahu wa ta ‘ala statement applies: Unquestionably, the curse of Allah is upon the wrongdoers is undisputed. Publicising this is in accordance to relative circumstances. If it leads to harm, corruption, or evil, then it is not permissible. If not, there is no objection to it.
هل من المراجع العظام من يجيز اللعن (الأول والثاني والثالث) وغيرهم من مغتصبي حق أهل البيت وهل لعنهم يقربنا إلى الله وهل اللعن من فروع الدين
Are there any major authorities who allow cursing the first, second, and third [Khalifahs] as well as others who usurped the right of the Ahlul Bayt? Does cursing them draw us closer to Allah? Is cursing from the branches of din?
ورد في زيارة عاشوراء المعتبرة معنى هذا العبارات وأما فروع الدين فمنها التولي والتبري وهو التولي لأولياء الله والتبري من أعدائهم وقد يكون اللعن من مصاديق التبري
The meaning of these texts appear in the reliable book Ziyarat ‘Ashura’. As for the branches of din, included in them is association and dissociation: Association with the friends of Allah and dissociation from their enemies. Cursing is from the authentications of dissociation.
Before I conclude this topic and move to another topic, I find that I am compelled yet again to draw the attention of those with good intentions and pure souls from the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah, especially those with a peace-making focus who spend the majority of their efforts and time calling to Taqrib (rapprochement) between the mazahib (schools), to the necessity of them being realists more than being tolerant, for their invitation to others or with others to be upon complete knowledge and insight of their condition, not from a station of ignorance and negligence, and for them to realise properly that the primary conditions for the success of the calls to Taqrib is genuine patronage, sincere intentions, and lofty goals from both the sides and pivots.
Now that the contemptable condition of the Shia is apparent and emphasised to us, it is compulsory for us to ask: Is it possible for an intelligent person to feel safe from what the hearts of the Shia harbour and hide? Do we have hope that they will be truthful with us in speech and action after realising with true conviction the shameful condition of those considered Shi’ism’s clerics and leading thinkers? In fact, more amazing than all of this is the leading callers to Taqrib derive pleasure from falsehood and practice it as a profession over the simple-minded and pure-hearted Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah involved in this activity.
One who finds the courage to lie and deceive in one of the most crystal clear matters and most established concepts in the eye of the public—I refer to the dismissed concept of Takfir—is it comprehendible and sensible for him to be believed in a concealed matter, a mere intention he conceals in his heart? No one is able to determine its genuineness and true nature. O people of intelligence and insight, beware of this reality. The one who misleads and lies in the former aspect, is more misleading and a greater liar in the latter.
 It is a Shar’i obligation upon a Muslim to combat and challenge vice.
 To the extent that no Islamic state was formed except that it had wars and battles with this deviant sect. Victory, with the grace of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, was in favour of the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah against the falsehood of the Khawarij heretics.
 The title Ayatollah al ‘Uzma (Grand Ayatollah) is limited to a select few senior scholars of Shi’ism, which differentiates them from other junior scholars. It is an academic station making one fit for ijtihad.
 Among the Imamiyyah who asserted this are: Famous Shia missionary Ahmed al Wa’ili who wrote in his book Min Fiqh al Jins fi Qanawatihi al Mazhabiyyah, pg. 75:
وأود هنا أن ألفت النظر إلى نقطة هامة هي أن موقف الشيعة من أهل السنة باستثناء النواصب حتى ولو خالفوهم بنظرية الإمامة التي هي محور النزاع فإن الشيعة لا يخرجون من يخالفهم بذلك عن الإسلام خلافا لموقف غير الشيعة من الشيعة
At this stage, I wish to draw attention to a significant point, i.e., the stance of the Shia towards the Ahlus Sunnah—excluding the Nawasib—even those who oppose them in the doctrine of Imamah which is the core of the disagreement. The Shia do not eliminate those who oppose them in this from Islam, contrary to the stance of the non-Shia towards the Shia.
Everything I said and will state regarding ‘Abdul Hussain applies to al Wa’ili due to the same crime.
 Al Fusul al Muhimmah, pg. 208, section 9.
 Ajwibat Masa’il Jar Allah, pg. 47.
 Ila al Majma’ al ‘Ilmi bi Dimashq, pg. 27.
 Ila al Majma’ al ‘Ilmi bi Dimashq, pg. 61.
 Section five of his book al Fusul al Muhimmah fi Ta’lif al Ummah, pg. 25–32.
 As pronounced by the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah.
 As regards their Muslim brothers, they will be doomed to Hell forever and ever.
 Al Fusul al Muhimmah fi Ta’lif al Ummah, pg. 25–32.
 Added to ‘Ali al Sistani and Bashir al Najafi.
 This applies to others besides him who have assumed responsibility over these religious authorities and have stood as substitute in passing verdicts in specific matters, judging in disputes, establishing beliefs, or founding ideologies.
 Fi Rihab al ‘Aqidah, vol. 1 pg. 184 – 186.
 I have related all these passages from his book: Misbah al Minhaj, al Taqlid, pg. 302.
 He refers to a Shia Imami with the term: believer and to the rest of the Muslims with the term: opposition. This explanation passed in the second stance of chapter 2 of this treatise.
 This dishonest ayatollah states that the opposition are the rest of the Muslims besides the Shia, especially those who believe in the correctness of Sheikhayn’s—Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma—caliphate. He writes in his book, al Muhkam fi Usul al Fiqh, vol. 6 pg. 194:
الظاهر أن المراد بالعامة المخالفون الذين يتولون الشيخين ويرون شرعية خلافتهما على اختلاف فرقهم لإن ذلك هو المنصرف إليه العناوين المذكورة في النصوص
It is apparent that the purport of ‘ammah (commoners) is the opposition who associate with Sheikhayn and view their caliphate’s Shar’i status with all their diverse sects, because this is what the terminologies in the texts refer to.
 Some Muslims might think that his expression of this substantial reality was naiveté and thoughtlessness on his part. This is an error; he was extremely tactful and cautious when he uttered this. Firstly, he stated it in the midst of his fellow tribesmen during his exclusive lessons which a non-Shia is not aware of. Secondly, he surrounded it with fog using two terminologies viz. believer and opposition. He thought that firstly the Ahlus Sunnah will not become aware of his exact words which is buried in the depth of pages and volumes. And if, hypothetically, they do become aware, they will not realise the purport of his terminologies, leaving things vague. However, Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala disappointed him and disgraced him in front of the Muslims.
أَمْ حَسِبَ الَّذِيْنَ فِيْ قُلُوْبِهِم مَّرَضٌ أَنْ لَّنْ يُخْرِجَ اللهُ أَضْغَانَهُمْ
Or do those in whose hearts is disease think that Allah would never expose their [feelings of] hatred? [Surah Muhammad: 29]
 It is a famous supplication against Sheikhayn, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. It contains obscene words which the pen feels ashamed to write. I do not think that a human’s natural disposition—besides the Shia—no matter how mighty his malice and rancour for Islam and its stalwarts, will be able to formulate some of its obscene and sinful words. Had it not been for the fear of prolongation, I would have quoted it in its entirety. Nonetheless, whoever wishes to pollute his pure mind should refer to my original book: Mawqif al Shia al Imamiyyah min Baqi Firaq al Muslimin where it is quoted in detail.
 Rasa’il wa Maqalat, pg. 412, Letter: 10, answer to a letter about the Shia and their fundamentals.
 Would any intelligent person believe that a man of the calibre of al Subhani at the age of 73 years, most of which he spent in the midst of Shia books thus becoming a grand Ayatollah, has never stumbled over these books, not even one of them! If the man is not a grand liar, then perhaps at this age he is senile and his intelligence has grown weak. These are their grand Ayatollahs, either liars or disorientated.
 Shia clerics did not suffice on documenting the supplication in their books. They endeavoured to explain its meaning and commentate on its text.
 Agha Buzurg al Tahrani: Al Dhari’ah, vol. 31, pg. 256–257.
 The words are of their authority Agha Buzurg al Tahrani.
 Bihar al Anwar, vol. 30 pg. 394.
 Sharh Ihqaq al Haqq, vol. 1 pg. 337.
 Minhaj al Bara’ah fi Sharh Nahj al Balaghah, vol. 14 pg. 397.
 Ajwibat al Masa’il al ‘Aqa’idiyyah, Belief: 21.
 They are contemporaries and fellow countrymen of Iran.
 Do not be amazed, O beloved reader, while reading some aspects of this challenge. This is the practice, in fact the religion, of the Shia.
 Check the website of Ayatollah al ‘Uzma Muhammad Sadiq al Ruhani al Shirazi for verdicts on belief on the internet. The link to this verdicts is: http://www.Imamrohani.com/fatwa-ar/viewtopic/ar.php?=774.
 Check the website of Ayatollah al ‘Uzma Muhammad Sadiq al Ruhani al Shirazi for verdicts on belief on the internet. The link to this verdicts is: http://www.Imamrohani.com/fatwa-ar/viewtopic/ar.php?=1090.
 Perhaps, the stance of some on this reality was blurred with timidity and perplexity before now. Now that the reality has dawned upon us through the above-mentioned content over the various sections of this treatise, that the fundamental they adhere to is excommunicating us and dissociating from us—in fact, considering our blood and wealth permissible—this timidity and perplexity has not the slightest justification, neither rationally nor logically. The enmity is now obvious and the intention has been portrayed and translated through action. The features have thus taken form and became manifest.