The Epilogue

All praise is due to Allah by Whose grace all good actions reach culmination. May His peace descend upon the one with whom He terminated prophethood, upon his household, and his Companions, who were loyal to Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the truth that he came with, were partisans thereof, and were by the grace of Allah brothers at all times.

I have spent more than four years deliberating over the issues of this study. I spent this time gathering academically credible content from the reliable sources of the Shia and other sources, organising it, presenting it, studying it, and analysing it. How difficult it is indeed to read regarding and listen to a people whom Allah has caused to be unfortunate, misguided, and blinded; a people who follow a non-existent Imam, believe in a non-existent book, a fictitious Jafar and many other fables; a people whose narrations attack the Book of Allah which He revealed, preserved, and upon which the Muslims unanimously concurred throughout the centuries, who believe the Sunnah of Rasul Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam—which the Ummah compiled and spent all its efforts in preserving, who discard the unanimity of the pious predecessors and adhere to the ‘views’ of an unknown group entertaining the possibility that the Mahdi might have emerged in disguise from his hiding spot and voiced his opinion with them; a people that excommunicate the Sahabah of Rasul Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam with whom Allah was pleased and who in return were pleased with Him, who strove in His path and propagated the word of Allah on the earth; all of this due to believing in lies and forgeries which some heretics attributed to the Ahlul Bayt.

All praise is due to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala upon the boons of intellect, iman, and conviction.

At the end of this study it is crucial to pause and sum up some of the results which have come through. We will thus present, whilst focussing on some aspects of its various angles, the following points:

1. The literal meaning of Tashayyu’ is to support and follow. This meaning is neither found in the Shia of today nor in most of the Shia of the past. Hence they are the Rafidah as the pious predecessors dubbed them, or, in other words, they are Shia by name but are far from being the partisans and supporters of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

2. The word Tashayyu’ has appeared in the Qur’an in most places with negative connotations. In the Sunnah there is no specific mention of this cult save in a few weak narrations wherein the word ‘Rafidah’ appears, and that also with negative connotations.

3. Shi’ism has many phases, sects, and levels; some steeped in extremism and others more moderate. Hence the understanding of the term ‘extremism in Shi’ism’ was different for those of the early past in contrast to those who came thereafter. It has actually become evident that many of the beliefs of the contemporary Shia were considered to be extreme according to their early scholars of the fourth century. What would then be the viewpoint of the initial Shia regarding these beliefs?

The definition of Shi’ism is thus linked to the phases of its inception and the stages of its doctrinal development. Hence in the past a Shia was a person who gave preference to ‘Ali over ‘Uthman. But after the scholars of the Shia accepted the books of al Kulayni, al Qummi, al Majlisi, and their like as their primary sources; extremism became rampant amidst the Shia. Shi’ism eventually settled upon fanaticism and radicalism, to the extent that we see al Khu’i, the supreme Shia authority of the current era, authenticating the narrations of Ibrahim al Qummi which he brings in his Tafsir despite them entailing disbelief.

For any person who is in doubt regarding the Shia, in order to realise that the Shia have chosen for themselves a religion other than the religion of Islam, it is sufficient to have a look at this book which is authenticated according them.

Those who assumed a Shia identity drew from the religions of Persia, Rome, Greece, and from the Jews and the Christians, amongst others. They infused whatever they had thumb sucked therefrom into Shi’ A true realisation indeed of a prophecy of Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wherein he foretold that some of the members of this Ummah will follow the ways of those who preceded them.

4. The attempt to infuse some of these ideas into Muslim societies started at the hands of Ibn Saba’ and his cohorts, but they did not gain acceptance in the cities of the Muslims except amidst a small group in Kufah. They did, however, managed to exploit some of the atrocities which befell the Ahlul Bayt, like the murder of ‘Ali and Hussain, and promulgated these heresies in the Muslim world under the disguise of Shi’ism.

5. The Shia splintered into many sub-sects throughout history, into three hundred, as suggested by some. But in these times they are all confined within three sects: the Ismailiyyah, the Zaidiyyah, and the Ithnay ‘Ashariyyah which is the largest of them.

However, I have noticed an issue which I think should be studied and analysed in a dedicated study. And that is that there is barely a viewpoint which was propounded by a Shia denomination in the various phases of history but that you will find evidence supporting it in the sources of the Twelvers. Hence you will find the heretical views of Ibn Saba’, Mukhtar ibn Abi ‘Ubaid, Bayan ibn Sam’an, and Mughirah ibn Sa’id, amongst others, mentioned therein.

6. The Twelvers are also known as the Rafidah, the Jafariyyah, and the Imamiyyah. In the past they were also dubbed the Qat’iyyah and the Musawiyyah. However, many scholars have suggested that the term Shia if said today only applies to them.

Also, From the Twelvers many sub-sects emerged. Some being: the Sheikhiyyah, the Kashfiyyah, and the Babiyyah.

7. The Shia have, in attempting to substantiate their irregularities, gone in every direction. Hence at times they claim that the evidentiary texts which support their position were omitted by the Sahabah, at times they resort to esoteric interpretations for which Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala has revealed no evidence, at times they claim that divine books descended upon their Imams to support their dogma, and at times they cling onto narrations narrated through the transmissions of the Ahlus Sunnah which are either forgeries or do not in any way establish what they claim. They have other deceitful ploys in this regard which even the Jews have no knowledge of even a tenth of. All of this is proof of the fact that they are incapable of establishing their dogma through sound Shar’i principles.

8. Since the year 260 A.H. the Shia are following a fictitious figure who does not exist. This renders them the Shia of their scholars but not of the Ahlul Bayt, or, put differently, they are the followers of the devils who assume the form of their ‘absent Imam’, as per the abundant reports which suggest their meeting with him.

Furthermore, all the Shia have unanimously accepted the belief of this non-existent Imam due to it delivering them from the Ahlul Bayt; because amongst the Ahlul Bayt there were pious scholars, men of integrity, who exposed these heretics who ate the wealth of people in the name of the Ahlul Bayt, and who innovated such innovations for which Allah has revealed no evidence and ascribed them to the Ahlul Bayt. Thus by acknowledging this fictitious figure, all authority, wealth, and honour became the exclusive share of the scholars.

9. The Shia assert that the Qur’an cannot be evidence but with a guardian who has to be one of the Twelve Imams. They say, “The Imam is the speaking Qur’an and the Book of Allah is the silent Qur’an.” They claim that all the knowledge of the Qur’an is with this guardian and there is no one who shares that knowledge with him. Hence he is the explanation of the Qur’an, rather the Qur’an itself. Therefore, he has the prerogative of specifying the generalisations of the Qur’an, restricting the unqualified, clarifying the unclear, and abrogating whatever he wants. Beyond that, they have actually accorded the Imam cart blanche authority in all of Din.

They also claim that every verse has an esoteric meaning. They say, “Every verse has seven inner meanings.” Then their allocations of meanings to the verses drastically increase. They thus say, “Every verse has seventy inner meanings.”

Likewise, regarding the Book of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala which He revealed to guide this Ummah to the straight path in all spheres of life, they claim that it was revealed regarding the Twelve Imams and their enemies, who are the Sahabah according to them.

That is why we find that they have interpreted all the verses of Tawhid, Islam, the principles of iman, permissible acts, and impermissible acts with the Twelve Imams. Conversely, they have interpreted all the verses of Shirk, kufr, obscene acts, vice, and oppression with the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum and whoever followed them from the believers.

It is evident that the origins of all these interpretations are from Mughirah ibn Sa’id and Jabir al Ju’fi. Subsequent to them, the extremist Rawafid followed them and gradually made additions, exaggerated and consequently reached an extent unfathomable even to their predecessors. The scholars of these times consider these collections which contain this nonsense to be from their most reliable sources.

10. The fallacy of the interpolation of the Qur’an was first propounded by the Shia of the second century. The first proponents thereof are said to be Hisham ibn al Hakam and Shaitan al Taq. One of the reasons which compelled them to espouse it was that they could not find any evidence wherewith they could convince their followers of their claims, due to the Book of Allah being empty of any explicit mention of their Imams and their beliefs.

But with the start of the fourth century the entire Ummah unanimously impugned them and excommunicated them due to making such horrendous assertions. Hence their supreme scholar Ibn Babawayh announced the disassociation of the Shia from this belief and deemed any person who attributes it to them to be a liar. He was followed by Ibn al Murtada, al Tusi, and al Tabarsi.

It was probably owing to this denial that some scholars attributed this belief to the Batiniyyah, whereas the Batiniyyah did not get involved in this issue; the people who were responsible for it and forged many a reports regarding it were the Twelvers.

This belief was recorded in the first book of the Shia, the book of Sulaim ibn Qais, which according to many of their scholars is a fabrication and the author thereof is unknown.

11. Regarding the pristine Sunnah they hold some very reprehensible principles; like the belief that the Imams received revelation, that the greatest of Allah’s creation Jibril ‘alayh al Salam would come to them and that a person who heard something from the Imam can relate it by saying that ‘Allah said’, because their speech is like the speech of Allah and obedience to them is like obedience to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.

They also aver that the Holy Spirit is amongst them (the Imams) and through his medium they learn of what is beneath the throne to what is beneath the soil; they see through his medium what is hidden from them in the various parts of the land and what is in the heavens. The Imams also go to the throne of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala every Friday to take whatever knowledge they desire.

They likewise say that Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala directly converses with ‘Ali and the Imams.

All of this according to them is spontaneous knowledge. As for the documented knowledge which they inherited from Rasul Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, it is contained in imaginary books, like the Jami’ah, the Jafr, the book of ‘Ali, the ‘Abitah, the Diwan of the Shia, etc.

They go on to say that ‘Ali continually assimilated this knowledge and these books during the lifetime of Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and even after his demise, to the exclusion of the rest of the Sahabah. Thus he alone is the gateway to the Sunnah of Rasul Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and whoever claims to have heard from anyone other than him has committed Shirk.

Furthermore, revelation to the Imams did not seize to continue till the year 260 A.H. Another 74 years thereafter it continued via the medium of the representatives of the Mahdi; and thereafter through the medium of their scholars who had secret relationships with the Mahdi. Owing to this, their scholars would always invent new innovations for them, so much so that ‘Ali al Karaki, the supreme scholar of the Safawid dynasty contrived for them the permissibility of prostrating to the creation and the ruling of prostrating upon soil. Khomeini likewise accorded himself and his state all the tasks and authorities of the Mahdi.

Furthermore, they have books exclusive to them which contain all these fallacies. These are four books: al Kafi, al Tahdhib, al Istibsar, and Man la Yahduruhu al Faqih. Their later scholars added four more books: al Wafi, al Bihar, al Wasa’il, Mustadrak al Wasa’il. Over and above these books they have deemed a number of other works of their scholars to be just like the four early works in terms of evidence.

Furthermore, at first they would accept everything which appeared in their narrations until Ibn Taymiyyah came about, refuted the claims of Ibn Mutahhar al Hilli, and derided their ignorance regarding hadith. This prompted them to categorise their narrations in to Sahih, Hassan, Muwaththaq, and Da’if. The catalyst for doing so was avoiding the criticism of people, as is clear from the animated dispute which broke out between the Shia due to their differences on the issue which divided them into Usulis and Akhbaris. This is a very important conclusion which was reached in this study.

One of their scholars has actually admitted that if they apply the Sunni principles of authenticating and impugning, nothing of their legacy will remain, and thus the Shia would have to find themselves another dogma.

Moving on, amongst the transmitters of their narrations there are fictitious figures who do not exist, and most of them are affiliates of heterodoxies even according to the Twelvers themselves. Hence they are disbelievers, but they still accept their narrations due to them being Shia. As for the Ahlus Sunnah the Zaidiyyah and members of the Ahlul Bayt beside the Twelve Imams, they reject their narrations; they have even gone to the extent of rejecting the narrations of Zaid ibn ‘Ali. The narrations of an Imami who is upon their creed on the other hand, be he whoever he is, is accepted. Hence their scholars say, “A blemish in the Din of a person does not affect the authenticity of his narration.”

Lastly, the Rafidah have based all their beliefs and principles upon the forged narrations of these liars which they attributed to the Imams. The Imams were free from them; because amongst them was ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib to whom obedience was compulsory, like the Khulafa’ before him; amongst them were eminent leaders of knowledge and Din, like ‘Ali ibn al Hussain, Abu Jafar al Baqir, and Jafar al Sadiq who deserved the same veneration the other scholars and religious people deserve; amongst them were those who were below that; amongst them were some who were impugned by the scholars, like al Hassan al ‘Askari; and amongst them is the one who does not exist, i.e. the fictitious Mahdi who is absent since the year 260 A.H. Hence whatever they attribute to them is from the forgeries of the heretics of the bygone eras.

12. They do not believe in the consensus of the Ummah. Therefore, if an opinion is attributed to their non-existent Imam via one of his representatives and the entire Ummah opposes it, evidence will be in his opinion and not in the stance of the Ummah. Actually, opposing the Ummah is one of their established principles. They say, “Whatever opposes the Ummah bears guidance.” What is even more surprising is that if the Shia themselves concur upon something and an unknown group avers something else, evidence will be in the position of the unknown group due to the possibility that the Mahdi might have emerged in disguise and voiced an opinion in harmony with theirs. The implication of this is that their dogma will continue to expand throughout time; because the evil Men and Jinn will continue to forge for them whatever they want as long as this cult holds onto this principle.

13. In their beliefs regarding the principles of Din it has become clear that they are Jahmiyyah in denying the attributes of Allah, Qadariyyah in denying Qadr, Murji’ah in believing that no sin is harmful after acknowledging the Imam, and Khawarij, in comparison to others, in excommunicating everyone besides themselves.

In their beliefs regarding the divine books and messengers some of their beliefs were the following: divine books descended upon the Imams; they possessed the books of the previous prophets which they read and according to which they judged; the Imams miracles were like the prophets; the Imams are superior to the prophets and it is by virtue of them that evidence will be established upon the bondsmen.

In their beliefs regarding the afterlife they aver that it will be for the Imam, that Jannat was the dowry of Fatimah, that the Imams enjoy the bounties of Jannat in this world and that the reckoning of the creation will be the prerogative of the Imam on the Day of Judgment. They believe that there is another Jannat and another Jahannam other than the Jannat and Jahannam the Muslims believe in, that Qum has a door to Jannat, and that the people of Qum will not be raised like the rest.

14. As for their exclusive beliefs which are unique to them, they are the following: the Imamah of the Twelve Imams, their infallibility, Taqiyyah, belief in the absent Mahdi, Ghaybah, Raj’ah, Zuhur, Tinah and Bada’.

Hence the leadership of the Ummah is the exclusive right of the Twelve Imams. Therefore, anyone who presides over the affairs of the Muslims besides them is a Taghut (devil/idol) whom Allah will not look at, will not talk to on the Day of Judgment and will punish with a painful punishment. Similar will be the end result of any person who accepts him as his ruler and pledges allegiance to him.

Furthermore, these Twelve Imams do not err, forget, and make mistakes, since the time of their birth till as long as they live.

When the statements of the Imams and their actions contradicted the belief of infallibility they invented the doctrines of Bada’ and Taqiyyah in order to conceal their false ideas. Hence the actions of the Imams which are harmonious with the Muslims are to be interpreted as Taqiyyah and their foretellings which are against the reality are to be interpreted as Bada’.

In addition, the Shia were faced with a conundrum when the line of Imamah abruptly ended with the death of al Hassan al ‘Askari without issue, due to them conceiving of the Imams as specific individuals (who are divinely appointed).

Hence after a lengthy confusion, they contrived a son for him who went into occultation when he was still a child. This alleged figure is the Imam of the Muslims till today who will one day re-emerge.

Furthermore, Raj’ah entails that they and their enemies, the Sahabah, and whoever diligently followed them, will return to this world after death. Subsequently the Shia will be afforded the opportunity to take revenge from them.

The belief of Zuhur entails that the Imams can emerge from their graves for specific people before the Day of Judgement and before the alleged Raj’ah. This is a novel belief which was documented by al Majlisi in a dedicated chapter in Bihar.

As for the belief of Tinah, it is a secret belief which they hold. It suggests that the good of the Ahlus Sunnah is for the Shia and the bad of the Shia is for the Ahlus Sunnah. They use this to explain all the oppression, vice and evil which their societies were always replete with since the bygone eras.

15. The contemporary Shia acknowledge the same sources as the ancient Shia for the derivation of doctrine and law. In fact they have even integrated all the fabrications which the Safawid scholars fabricated and included the books which they authored, which are replete with disbelief and heresies, into their dogma. To add to the dilemma, all the publishing houses made it easy for them to spread all this evil. All of this made the Shia even more fanatical.

But they deceive the Ahlus Sunnah. Hence some of their scholars claim that they do not revile the Sahabah and do not believe in Raj’ah, for example. In the previous pages the reality of these claims was exposed.

They also claim that practicing Taqiyyah has come to an end. Whereas their source texts order them to practice it till the emergence of the Mahdi. In addition, their actions and statements suggest that they still practice it. Hence this statement is basically doing Taqiyyah over Taqiyyah.

There probably does not exist another cult on the surface of this earth which has deemed lying to be a commendable religious practice; because it constitutes nine tenths of their Din.

16. As for their influence in the Muslim world, it has become clear that they have left very grave ill-effects in the Ummah in the ideological sphere. They brought about polytheism in the Ummah of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, prevented people from the Din of Allah, engendered the emergence of many heretical sub-sects, and attempted to misguide the Muslims from the Sunnah of their Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The negative influence they have had in the spheres of literature of history and upon some thinkers who are affiliates of the Ahlus Sunnah are quite evident. Apart from this, they have other covert and overt means which they deploy to misguide the Ummah.

Likewise, they have left their influence in the social sphere by instigating internal strife within the Muslims, opposing and clandestinely plotting against Islamic leaderships and the Muslims whenever the opportunity arose. They also espoused obscenities and libertinism under the pretext of Mut’ah Dawriyyah and its like.

Similarly, in the economic sphere their influence is quite clear from their usurpation of the wealth of the Muslims by force and deceit, and their attempts to debilitate the economy of the Muslims in whichever way possible. In addition, the wealth which they receive from the people in the name of the Ahlul Bayt was and still remains one of the main reasons for the desire of their scholars to remain upon their anomalies and opposition of the Muslims.

17. It has been established that they are disbelievers, and that they have no share in Islam whatsoever due to their polytheism, their excommunication of the Sahabah, and their accusations against the Qur’an, amongst others.

There is nothing more astonishing and appalling than the fact that this cult, which comprises of millions of people, still remains upon all its fallacies and fables. Probably the only explanation thereof is that the scholars of the Shia chose not to disclose the reality to their followers, doing so by deploying various deceptive means. Amongst these means the most glaring are the following: the claim that their dogma is backed by what is transmitted through the sources of the Ahlus Sunnah, the claim that their dogma is based upon the love of the Ahlul Bayt and their partisanship, the plays which they do to retell the massacre of Karbala’—which are known as al Shabih, and the establishment of gatherings of condolences which are filled with expressions of grief, mourning, and whatever else accompanies them, i.e. broadcasting, beating of drums, and relating the stories and tales of the alleged oppression. All of this leads to the inactiveness of the intellect and blind following, especially amidst the non-Arabs and the laity.

In conclusion, surely the greatest means to combat the problem of Shi’ism is promulgating the Sunnah amongst the Muslims in every place by deploying various means, and exposing the reality of the Shia and how they oppose the principles of Islam without understating, overstating, and sensationalising.

وصلى الله وسلم على نبينا محمد وآله وصحبه أجمعين. والحمد لله رب العالمين