100 Questions ask by shias

Bismillahi Wassalatu Wassalamu ala Rasulillah.

Peace be upon him who follows the guidance.


In its introduction to the 100 questions , the shia website answering-ansar says:

These one hundred questions are from the pen of Allamah Abdul Kareem Mushtaq, a name that needs no introduction for Urdu readers. A former Sunni scholar that converted to Shi’a Islam in the late 1960′s, he dedicated his entire life to defending the path of truth. Author of over thirty books, the vast bulk of his works were rebuttals to Nasibi texts attacking the Shi’a, and he managed to silence many leading lights of Mu’awiya’s cause, such as Dost Muhammad Qurayshi and Qadhi Mazhar Husayn. A continual thorn in the flabby sides of the Nasibi, the inability of the Marwani Mullah’s to refute his books, led to them seeking to ban his books through Court on the grounds that they constituted ‘disrespect of the Sahaba’. Despite such efforts, he continued his mission undeterred by Nasibi hate mail and death threats. Some of his most notable books include Furu-e-Deen, wherein he presented one thousand questions for the Ahl’ul Sunnah Ulema to refute and Chodha Masalai (replies to 14 questions typically raised against the Shi’a). A great orator as well as a prolific writer thousands of people in Pakistan converted to the path of truth, through him.

Indeed, this person needs no introduction. How can he need introduction when he considers Quran incomplete on the basis that Pakistan is not mentioned in it.

Allama Mushtaq

the guru of answering-ansar in his book, “hazar tumhari das hamari”:

The guru says , Quran is corrupt because there is no mentioning of Pakistan in it.

Scanned ImagePage 553Page 554

Now God knows well whether people can convert to the path of truth , through him, or the path of the shia cult.

His book was well refuted by Hafiz Muhammad Meher and you can read that book by clicking here.

As far as the 100 questions put by answering-ansar in their website, we will answer each one of them one by one inshaAllah. Just like the absurd questions in “hazar tumhari das hamari”  ”e.g when was Abu Bakar (may Allah be pleased with him) circumcised? (Question 319) , shia books are filled with such absurd questions , you will also find many absurd questions here which doesn’t prove anything. That is why many a times, Sunnis don’t even like to answer such absurd questions. Here also, these 100 questions doesn’t prove anything. It would have been better if the answering-ansar had put some questions which had some meaning, but you will find here a list of garbage which even if unanswered, doesn’t prove anything.

Questions 1-10:

1. It is an established fact that all things are recognized by their name, even Allah (swt) first taught names to the father of Mankind Adam (as). Your sect also has names such as Sunni, Ahl’ ul Sunnah or Ahl’ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah. Direct us towards any such verse of the Qur’an wherein any of these names have been indicated.

Proof of the importance of the Sunnah from the Qur’an itself:

  1. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “He who obeys the Messenger has indeed obeyed Allah…” [4:80] Allah described obedience to the Prophet (peace be upon him) as being a part of obedience to Him. Then He made a connection between obedience to Him and obedience to the Prophet (peace be upon him): “O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger…” [4:59]
  2. Allah warns us not to go against the Prophet (peace be upon him), and states that whoever disobeys him will be doomed to eternal Hell. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “…And let those who oppose the Messenger’s commandment beware, lest some fitnah (trial, affliction, etc.) befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on them.” [24:63]
  3. Allah has made obedience to His Prophet a religious duty; resisting or opposing it is a sign of hypocrisy: ”But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you [Muhammad] judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them)with full submission.” [4:65]
  4. Allah commands His slaves to respond to Him and His Messenger: “O you who believe! Answer Allah (by obeying Him) and (His) Messenger when he calls you to that which will give you life…” [8:24]
  5. Allah also commands His slaves to refer all disputes to him: “… (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger…” [4:59]
  6. Allah also calls all people who accept Allah but refute the Messenger as ‘Real Kafirs’: “Verily, those who deny Allâh and His Messengers and (those who) wish to separate Allah from His Messengers (by believing in Allâh and disbelieving in His Messengers), saying: “We believe in some but reject others”: and (those who) wish to adopt a way in between. They are in truth (equally) Unbelievers; and We have prepared for Unbelievers a humiliating Punishment. To those who believe in Allah and His Messengers and make no distinction between any of the Messengers, We shall soon give their(due) rewards: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful.” [4:150-153]

If you want to follow Quran only , and not hadith , than you will find that Quran tells us to follow the sunnah of the Prophet, there is no mentioning of following the ahlel bayt or the 12 imams in Quran at all, but what Quran mentions is following the sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him). So now how would the shia like to respond if we ask them to prove from Quran that it is the Quran and ahlelbayt that we have to follow and not Quran and sunnah as we believe! In fact, if we have to see Quran only, than our belief is indeed the one which looks the better of the two. Thus a Muslim must be sunni or in other words,  ahle sunnah (i.e follower of the sunnah) and if a person is not sunni or ahle sunnah, he is not a Muslim according to Quran. So it is proven that it is the Quran which tells us to be sunni.

So being a sunni is what Quran requires every Muslim to be.

[030:031]  … and be not ye among those who join gods with God,-

[030:032]  Those who split up their Religion, and become  Sects (shias) …


[030:031]  … wala takoonoo mina almushrikeena

[030:032]  Mina allatheena farraqoo deenahum wakanoo shiyaAAan ….

Arabic (from right to left):

‏30:31… ولاتكونوا من المشركين

…‏30:32 من الذين فرقوا دينهم وكانوا شيعا

It seems Quran wants us to be sunni and not shias. A big confusion for shias? But we will not mislead you like answering-ansar! Keep reading and you will know the truth.


H 202, Ch. 22, h 6

It is narrated through the same chain of narrators from ibn abu ‘Umayr from certain persons

of his people who has said the following.

“Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) who has said, ‘Whoever disagrees with the book of Allah and the

Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.) he has certainly become a unbeliever.’”

H 204, Ch. 22, h 8

“A man asked a question from Imam abu Ja‘far (a.s.) who replied to it and then the man said,

“The Fuqaha, scholars of law, do not say this.”

The Imam then said, “It is a pity. Have you ever seen a Faqih, a scholar of law? The real

Faqih, scholar of law is one who maintains restraint from the worldly matters, who is deeply

interested in the life hereafter and holds firmly to the Sunnah, noble tradition of the holy

prophet (s.a.)”

H 203, Ch. 22, h 7

Ali ibn Ibrahim has narrated from Muhammad ibn ‘Isa ibn ‘Ubayd from Yunus in a marfu’

manner from Ali ibn al-Husayn (a.s.) who has said the following.

“The best deed in the sight of Allah is the one that is performed according to the Sunnah, the

noble tradition of the holy Prophet (s.a.) even if it would be in small degree.”

H 199, Ch. 22, h 3

A number of our people has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid from his father

from al-Nadr ibn Suwayd from Yahya al-Halab from Ayyub ibn al-Hurr who has said the


“Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) has said, ‘Everything must be referred to the holy Quran and the

Sunnah, the noble traditions of the holy Prophet (s.a.)”

Nahjul Balagha , Sermon 127

Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said: Certainly you are the most evil of all persons and are those whom Satan has put on his lines and thrown out into his wayless land. With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority (of Muslims) because Allah’s hand (of protection) is on al jama’ah ( الجماعة ). You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is (a prey) to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is (a prey) to the wolf.


Someone may say why have I replaced the word “keeping unity” with (al-jama’ah), the thing is the actual arabic word here is (al-jama’ah) which has been translated by the shias as “keeping unity”.

The actual sentence in Arabic here is

الزموا السواد الأعظم، فإنّ يدالله مع الجماعة

be with the great majority (of Muslims) because Allah’s hand (of protection) is on al jama’ah

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, only one sect will go to heaven, People asked, which sect? The Prophet said (three times)

الجماعة, الجماعة ,  الجماعة

Book : Khisal, Page 375

Author : Shaikh Sadooq

So we understand from this , that ahle sunnah wal jama’ah  are the people who are on the right path.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said “The Ummah will be divided into 73 sects , all of them will go to hell except one”. He was asked “Which sect is that one”. Prophet (peace be upon him) said “That is the one on which I and my companions (ashaab) are”

Book : Maani Al Akhbar, Page 370

Author : Shaikh Sadooq

As far as the word shia is concerned, first of all the hadith is unauthentic, after that, we know that the ahlelbayt hated the shias, e.g

Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said:

“O’ Kufa, if this is your condition that whirlwinds [of deciet] continue blowing through you, then Allah may destroy you…Your disobedience of your Imam in matters of right and their [the Syrian’s] obedience to their leader [Muawiyyah] in matters of wrong, their [the Syrian’s] fulfilment of the trust in favor of their master [Muawiyyah] and your betrayal, their good work in their cities and your mischief. Even if I give you charge of a wooden bowl I fear you would run away with its handle.”

Ali invokes Allah against his Shia:

“O my Allah, they are disgusted of me and I am disgusted of them. They are weary of me and I am weary of them. Change them for me with better ones”


Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) want to change his shias because of their bad behaviour. So how can you claim that Shias of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) will be successful, when the ahlelbayt were fed up of them in their own lives?

So certainly, the right group is ahle sunnah wal jama’ah, i.e follow sunnah and remain with the jama’ah , the great majority, rather than living as ten percent which by no means can be the great majority and the jama’ah.

So the present shias should start thinking now.

2. If these titles cannot be located in the Qur’an could you produce this title from any hadith of the holy prophet (s)? Produce any such ‘mutawatir’ ‘marfuu’ or ‘saheeh’ narration from your books with a complete source (meaning the name of the book, version number, page number, edition etc) wherein the names Sunni, Ahl’ul Sunnah and Ahlul Sunnah wa al Jamaah have been mentioned by the holy prophet (saww) as a sect of Islam.

As we proved from Quran, “He who obeys the Messenger has indeed obeyed Allah…” [4:80] so sunni is indeed what Quran wants every Muslim to be, i.e the follower of the sunnah (the way) of the Prophet  (peace be upon him)

As far as ahadith are concerned, the majority of the shia and sunni ahadith state, Quran and sunnah, and not Quran and ahlel-bayt.

To mention a few:

H 187, Ch. 20, h 10

A number of our people has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid from ‘Isma’il

ibn Mihran from Sayf ibn ‘Umayra from abu al-Maghra from Sama‘a from abu al-Hassan

Musa (a.s.) who has said the following.

“I asked the Imam, ‘Is everything in the book of Allah and the Sunnah of His messenger or

you have a say in it?’ The Imam replied, “As a matter of fact, everything is in the book of

Allah and the Sunnah of His messenger (s.a.)’”

For example:

H 199, Ch. 22, h 3

A number of our people has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid from his father

from al-Nadr ibn Suwayd from Yahya al-Halab from Ayyub ibn al-Hurr who has said the


“Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) has said, ‘Everything must be referred to the holy Quran and the

Sunnah, the noble traditions of the holy Prophet (s.a.)”

H 202, Ch. 22, h 6

It is narrated through the same chain of narrators from ibn abu ‘Umayr from certain persons

of his people who has said the following.

“Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) who has said, ‘Whoever disagrees with the book of Allah and the

Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.) he has certainly become a unbeliever.’”

H 181, Ch. 20, h 4

Ali has narrated from Muhammad ibn “isa from Yunus from Hammad from abu ‘Abdallah (a. s.) who has said the following.

“There is no case for which there is not a law in the book or the Sunnah, the noble tradition of  the holy Prophet (s.a.)”

H 203, Ch. 22, h 7

Ali ibn Ibrahim has narrated from Muhammad ibn ‘Isa ibn ‘Ubayd from Yunus in a marfu’  manner from Ali ibn al-Husayn (a.s.) who has said the following.

“The best deed in the sight of Allah is the one that is performed according to the Sunnah, the noble tradition of the holy Prophet (s.a.) even if it would be in small degree.”

You can download Al Kafi from the shia website by clicking here

Apart from this , many many ahadith can be quoted from other shia hadith books, which says we should follow Quran and sunnah.

You can definitely see the importance of being a sunni, i.e the follower of sunnah and if you don’t agree to follow the sunnah, this can make you unbeliever according to the shia ahadith.

3. If these are not to be found in the hadeeth, then at least come up with an exact date, month and year of hijrah from the history of Islam when these names were adopted as your identity.

Doesn’t need to be answered when the above questions have been answered.

4. What were you famously known as before adopting these names?

Muslims , just like now, till the shias separated and became ahlel bidah (followers of innovations). For the readers, the person who is asking these questions, his sect’s real name is shia imamiya ithna ashariya or twelver shia which is one of the many of the sects of shias. The same sect also calls itself Jafri, and amongst its other names are Usooli.

A better understanding of this sect can be understood from the website of its rival shia sect, which is akhbari.


5. Why have you forsaken your previous title?

We have not forsaken our title, i.e Muslims, we are still known as Muslims unlike shias, apart from this , kindly let us know why you were forced to write not just one but so much more terms with your names, Shia Ithna Ashariya, Imamiya, Usooli, Jafriyah etc etc?

6. According to your sect, an introduction of any new thing to Islam constitutes bid’a, therefore to effectuate such an introduction is also a bid’a, so who was the person responsible for introducing this bid’a?

The ancestors of Shias, the people of kufa, who started mourning on tenth of Muharram, after deceiving Imam Hussain (may Allah be pleased with him)

7. Could you provide decisive evidence with regards to the meanings of Sunni, Ahl Sunnah and Ahl’ul Sunnah wal Jamaah?

Followers of the Sunnah

8. Which one is the most ancient of the three titles?

Which one amongst shia, shia imamiyah, shia imamiyah ithna ashariya , or twelver shia is the most ancient one?

9. Which one of the three titles do you consider the best?

Which one amongst shia, shia imamiyah, shia imamiyah ithna ashariya ,  twelver shia, millat-e-jafriyah or shia imamiyah ithna ashariya usooli, or ithna ashariyah imamiyah jafriyah etc etc etc do you consider the best?

10. Why are the remaining two of lesser merit? Which one of those two is the least and what is the reason behind it?

Same question goes for you.

Questions 11-20:

11.The title ‘Shia’ is present in the Qur’an and the hadeeth and Hardhat Ibraheem (as) has also been named a Shia. Do you accept this?

Yes, e.g Quran 30:31-32, 6:159 and for more details, http://www.discoveringislam.org/shia_in_quran.htm

12.If you do accept this, then what you do mean by ‘Millat e Ibraheem’ in your sect? And if you don’t accept this then please give us a reason as to why the word Shi’a has been used with reference to Prophet Ibraheem (as)?

Now let us end all the drama and clear it all for once. The word shia means three things “sect” or “party/group” or “follower”. This word can have both positive and negative meanings as clear from Quran.

The word shia has been used with reference to the friends and followers of Pharaoh too, perhaps that can broaden your knowledge a bit more , an

13.Does opposition to the title ‘Shia’ not constitute opposition to the Qur’an and the sayings of the holy prophet (s) when this title has been related to Ali (as), Fatima (as) and the Ahlul Bayt (as)?

Please see our article “To know the Shia’a”

On the basis of Quran 30:31-32 , opposition to shia is exactly what Quran wants from every Muslim. Can you disagree with that?

14.If it is then what is the punishment for opposing Allah (swt) and His Messenger? If it is not, then present an explicit narration with evidence to support your position?

Indeed it is not. You can read Quran 30:31-32, that is enough to explain that shia can be used in both positive and negative terms. Just because a cult is known as shia, it doesn’t prove anything, the shia word has been used for the followers of Pharaoh also, so can anyone say that they are the righteous ones? Indeed not. So just because shia has been used for the millat-e-Ibraheem, it doesn’t prove that everyone who labels himself or is known as shia , is the righteous one. It is very simple to understand. Nowadays, the word shia is used for a cult, and we use this term to refer to that cult.

15.The religion of Islam is established and its continual existence through every generation is a necessity. Hence, during the period of the Sahaba and the Tabe’een what titles were used?

During the period of sahaba, the title of the Muslims was Muslims. It was later when political groups started, they were named shia of this , shia of that, e.g  shia of Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him), shia of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) in the sense of party or group. The title that Muslims as general used for themselves was Muslims. The term shia was used in the political sense. It had nothing to do with religion. The term ahle sunnah was adopted by the mainstream Muslims when certain group of people started innovations, hence they were termed ahlul bidah. The shias (when became a cult with the beliefs as you have) were called originally called Rafidhis (literally: the rejectors , the people who rejected the normal islamic ways and started their own ways) by the mainstream Muslims, it was later that the term shia became the particular title of their sect, hence there is a shia hadith that a man comes to imam and asks, why people call us rafidhis? He answers, people have not named us Rafidhis but God himself.

16.Which one of these titles was the oldest? Narrate with evidence.

Muslim. Doesn’t need any evidence as it is well known and commonly accepted by all.

17. If it is Shi’a that was in use as has been confirmed by Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddas Dahlavi in Taufa Ithna Ashriyya, then all the Sahabah, Tabe’een and Taba Tabe’een were Shia’a. Does your hatred to a title used by these great personalities not discredit their name?

We do not hate this title , as the word “group or party” is not something that anyone would hate, but the shias of today are a cult, not a political group, this cult has become famous as shias as with the passage of time, this political group started becoming a cult, with specific religious beliefs, different from Muslims, while other political parties vanished with the passage of time without becoming a cult. The shias of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) started saying things about Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) which were not present in him. The beliefs of shias as in the present age were established much later. The ahadith books of shias were written much later after the hadith books of Muslims.

18. With questions 17 in mind, why do you say that the Shi’s martyred Imam Husayn (as)?

This is what your own scholars have written that he was a shia of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him).

19. What is the definition of Shi’a in your sect? Mention it with a lexical reference.

Already answered

20. Define Nasibi and Rafidhi in detail with lexical reference.

Nasibi are the people who had hatred towards Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) , and the rafidhi are the people who rejected the norms of the Muslims, and started saying things about Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) which were not present in him, ultimately they started saying that it was Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) who should have been the first caliph.

Questions 21-30:

21. Do you believe in the ‘Tawheed’ of Allah (swt)? If you do, then is the essence of Allah (swt) Wajibul Wujood or Mumkinul Wujood?

Wajibul Wujood:

Belief in: Allah has always been, will always be, has no boundaries or limitations

Mumkinul Wujood:

Belief in: May be Allah has not always been (in existance), may be He might not be forever, and he has boundaries.

We believe in that the existence of Allah Most High is independent, complete, eternal and beginningless whatever name you give to it.

22. If Allah (swt) is Wajibul Wujood then what is your belief with regards to Hulool like Maulana Room has written in relation to Bayazeed Bistami:

Baa Mureedaan Aan Fakeere Muhtasham,

Baayazeed aamad ke yek Yazdaal Manam

Give us a detailed account of it.

Hulool: Meaning, a belief that God can descend in any living being’s body, and so communicate spiritually with the being.

Such belief is to be rejected.

23. Do you regard Allah as Aalam (knowledgeable) or Aleem (possessor of infinite knowledge)? If Aalam, then your greatest book after the Qur’an, “Sahih al Bukhari” Volume 6 hadith number 371:

“The Prophet (saws) said, “The people will be thrown into the (Hell) Fire and it will say: ‘Are there any more (to come)? (50:30) till Allah puts his foot over it and it will say ‘Qat! Qat!” (Enough! Enough!)” [Sahih Bokhari, Vol. 6, Hadeeth 371]

I ask, while creating Hell, did Allah under estimate its size to such an extent that he deemed it necessary to place his leg in to expand it at a later date?

24. Is Allah not the possessor of the power of ‘Kun Fayakun (everything)? If He is, then why can’t he just limit hell with a simple command?

[038:075]  He said: O Iblis! What hindereth thee from falling prostrate before that which I have created with both My hands ? Art thou too proud or art thou of the high exalted ?

I ask was the making of Adam so difficult for God (nauzobillah) that He had to use both of His hands to create Adam? According to your own dumb logic, does this verse mean that the creation of Adam for God was so difficult that he had to use His own hands?  Isn’t God the possessor of the power of ‘kun fayakoon’ (Be and It is) ? If He is than why He said that He created Adam with His own hands?

Lets come to the shia ahadith now


In Kamel al-ziyarat we read by Jaffar bin Muhammad Koloway: (page 141-142)

Narrated Abi Rahmanullah, from Sa’ad bin Abdullah, from Muhammad bin Issa bin Abeed al-Yaqteen, from Muhammad bin Sinan, from Abi Saeed al-Qammat, from Abi Yaqoob, from Abi Abdullah (as) who said: “While messenger of Aallah (saw) in house of Fatima’s (as) and Hussein was in the room, all of a sudden he (messenger) cried and felt on the ground in prostration then said: O Fatimah daughter of Muhammad verily the high the exalted (Allah) was seen in your house, in this hour, in best of image and shape and told me: O Muhammad do you love Hussein (as), I said: Yes he is coolness of my eyes, my sweet scent, fruit of my heart and the skin between my eyes, so He told me: “O Muhammad, and then He placed His Hand on Hussein’s head (as), blessed he to whom he was born, My Blessings, My Prayers, My Mercy and My Pleasure. And My Curse, My displeasure, My Torment, My disgrace and My Punishment upon who Kills him or hate him or who stand in hostility towards him or fight him. Verily he is the leader of Martyrs from among the first and last in this world and hereafter.

(كامل الزيارات- جعفر بن محمد بن قولويه
ص 141 :
[ 166 ] 1 – حدثني ابي رحمه الله ، عن سعد بن عبد الله ، عن محمد بن عيسى بن عبيد اليقطيني ، عن محمد بن سنان ، عن ابي سعيد القماط ، عن ابن ابي يعفور ، عن ابي عبد الله ( عليه السلام ) ، قال :
/ صفحة 142 /
بينما رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) في منزل فاطمة ( عليها السلام ) والحسين في حجره إذ بكى وخر ساجدا ثم قال : يا فاطمة يا بنت محمد ان العلي الاعلى تراءى لي في بيتك هذا في ساعتي هذه في أحسن صورة وأهيا هيئة ، وقال لي : يا محمد أتحب الحسين ( عليه السلام ) ، فقلت : نعم قرة عيني وريحانتي وثمرة فؤادي وجلدة ما بين عيني ، فقال لي : يا محمد – ووضع يده على رأس الحسين ( عليه السلام ) – بورك من مولود عليه بركاتي وصلواتي ورحمتي ورضواني ، ولعنتي وسخطي وعذابي وخزيي ونكالي على من قتله وناصبه وناواه ونازعه ، اما انه سيد الشهداء من الاولين والاخرين في الدنيا والاخرة – وذكر الحديث .)



Allama Mirza Muhammad, nicknamed as Hujjat al-Islam narrated this narration from Medinat al-Ma’ajiz from Dla’al al-Tabari:
He said narrated…….then he (Hussein) comes to Mountain of Ridhwan and there will remain none from among believers except that he comes to him on bed made of nor (light), already Ibrahim (as), Musa (as) and Isa (as) have surrounded him! And all the messengers! And behind them believers, and behind the believers Angels, all waiting what Hussein (as) will say, while they are in this state, Al-Qaem will appear, even Karbala will come and there remain none from the inhabitants of heaven or earth except that they surround al-Hussein, even Allah visit al-Hussein (as) and shakes his hand and sits beside him on the bed.

روى شيخهم العالم العلاّم ميرزا محمد تقي الملّقب بحجة الاسلام هذه الرواية نقلا من مدينة المعاجز عن دلائل الطبري : قال أخبرني أبو الحسين محمد بن هارون عن أبيه عن أبي علي محمد بن همام عن أحمد بن الحسين المعروف بابن أبي القاسم عن أبيه عن الحسين بن علي عن محمد بن سنان عن المفضل بن عمر قال: قال أبو عبدالله (ع) لما منع الحسين(ع) وأصحابه الماء نادى فيهم من كان ظمآن فليجئ فأتاه رجل رجل فيجعل أبهامه في راحة واحدهم فلم يزل يشرب الرجل حتى ارتووا فقال بعضهم والله لقد شربت شرابا ما شربه أحد من العالمين في دار الدنيا فلما قاتلوا الحسين(ع) فكان في اليوم الثالث عند المغرب أعقد الحسين رجلا رجلا منهم يسميهم بأسماء آبائهم فيجيبه الرجل بعد الرجل فيقعد من حوله ثم يدعو بالمائدة فيطعمهم ويأكل معهم من طعام الجنة ويسقيهم من شرابها ثم قال أبو عبدالله (ع) والله لقد رآهم عدة من الكوفيين ولقد كرّر عليهم لو عقلوا قال ثم خرجوا لرسلهم فعاد كل واحد منهم إلى بلادهم ثم أتى لجبال رضوي فلا يبقى أحد من المؤمنين إلاّ أتاه وهو على سرير من نور قد حفّ به ابراهيم وموسى وعيسى ! وجميع الانبياء ! ومن ورائهم المؤمنون ومن ورائهم الملائكة ينظرون ما يقول الحسين(ع) قل فهم بهذه الحال إلى أن يقوم القائم و إذا قام القائم(ع) وافو فيها بينهم الحسين(ع) حتى يأتي كربلاء فلا يبقى أحد سماوي ولا أرضي من المؤمنين إلاّ حفّوا بالحسين(ع) حتى أن الله تعالى يزورالحسين(ع) ويصافحه ويقعد معه على سرير,

كتاب الأصول الستة عشر ص47 ـ 62

25. Among your beliefs is the fact that good and evil comes from Allah[swt], mean that Allah[swt] is the source of evil as well (astaghfirullah)? Prove this belief intellectually.

Yusuf Ali:

[004:078]  “Wherever ye are, death will find you out, even if ye are in towers built up strong and high!” If some good befalls them, they say, “This is from God”; but if evil, they say, “This is from thee” (O Prophet). Say: “All things are from God.” But what hath come to these people, that they fail to understand a single fact?

Astaghfirullah now the idiots will say that this Quran is corrupt.

But now read this verse too!

[004:079]  Whatever good, (O man!) happens to thee, is from God; but whatever evil happens to thee, is from thy (own) soul. and We have sent thee as an apostle to (instruct) mankind. And enough is God for a witness.

Astaghfirullah now the idiots will firmly believe that the present Quran is corrupt.

Now the answer from Ahle Sunnah is here.

Praise be to Allaah.

Understanding this aayah is easy for the one whom Allaah enables to understand it. It is one of the unambiguous aayahs in the clear Book of Allaah, and there is no contradiction in it, except in the minds of some of the haters, who are aided by their ignorance of Arabic and of the meanings of the Holy Qur’aan, so they think that the words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning): “but whatever of evil befalls you, is from yourself” [al-Nisa’ 4:79] mean that calamities, which are referred to here as “evil”, are created by man himself. This is obvious ignorance which no one falls into but someone who has no knowledge of the Arabic language, or an Arabic-speaker who is misled and overwhelmed by his whims and desires. That is because the preposition min (from) here, in the phrase min nafsika (“from yourself”), refers to the cause, i.e., it is because of you yourself, O man, because of your disobedience and your going against the command of Allaah, that calamities befall you, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And whatever of misfortune befalls you, it is because of what your hands have earned. And He pardons much” [al-Shoora 42:30].

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked:

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And if some good reaches them, they say, ‘This is from Allaah,’ but if some evil befalls them, they say, ‘This is from you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم).’ Say: ‘All things are from Allaah’” [al-Nisa’ 4:78], then in the next verse He says (interpretation of the meaning): “Whatever of good reaches you, is from Allaah, but whatever of evil befalls you, is from yourself”. How can we reconcile between them?

He replied:

They may be reconciled by noting that the first verse refers to the decree of Allaah, i.e., it is from Allah; He is the one who decrees it. The second verse refers to the cause i.e., whatever of evil befalls you, you are the cause, and the One Who decrees evil and decrees the punishment for it is Allaah. End quote.

Liqaa’aat al-baab il-Maftooh (no. 15, question no. 15).

For more details:


26. You have six Kalimas, the sixth of which is called ‘Radde Kufr’ wherein you do tabarra. Like in:

Fatabarra’tu Minal Kufri wash Shirki wal Kidhb.

I disassociate myself from Kufr and Shirk.

Do you regard the doing of tabarra as permissible?

27. If you deem it permissible then why do you object to the Shi’a? And if you consider it forbidden then why not terminate your sixth kalima wherein you disassociate from Kufr? Would it not be better to simply accept that Tabarra is a means of dissociating oneself from Kufr?

Tabarra is permissible when it is against kufr. But the shia gatherings just to curse the wives and the companions (may Allah be pleased with them) of the Prophet, and not a single gathering for dissociation from kufar , not a single gathering for dissociation from Abu Lahab, Firoun etc? This is the point where you should start using your brain.

28. ‘Laa tudrukuhul absaar’ are Qur’anic words, translate them and clarify the meaning of ‘Lan Taraani’.

لاتدركه الابصار وهو يدرك الابصار وهو اللطيف الخبير

[006:103]  No visions can encompass Him, but He encompasses all visions. He is the Compassionate, the Cognizant.

ولما جاء موسى لميقاتنا وكلمه ربه قال رب ارني انظر اليك قال لن تراني ولكن انظر الى الجبل فان استقر مكانه فسوف تراني فلما تجلى ربه للجبل جعله دكا وخر موسى صعقا فلما افاق قال سبحانك تبت اليك وانا اول المؤمنين

[007:143]  And when Moses came at the time and place appointed by Us, and his Lord spoke to him, he said: “O my Lord! Show me (Yourself), that I may look upon You.” Allah said: “You cannot see Me, but look upon the mountain if it stands still in its place then you shall see Me.” So when his Lord appeared to the mountain, He made it collapse to dust, and Moosa (Moses) fell down unconscious. Then when he recovered his senses he said: “Glory be to You, I turn to You in repentance and I am the first of the believers.”

Now the explanation. Indeed no vision can see God in this world, but if God wills, than we can see Him. And if that is not the case, than what the believers are looking at in this verse?

29. When the holy prophet went on Mi’raj, was he blessed with the sight of Allah (swt)? If he was, provide us with a hadeeth with a complete source and reference wherein the holy prophet describes the appearance of Allah (swt).

30. If Allah was behind the veil and the holy prophet had just heard His voice then why was the holy prophet deprived of seeing the beautiful appearance of Allah (swt)?

Questions 31-40:

31. What is the basis of your doctrine of God’s visibility, the Qur’an or Hadeeth? If it is the Qur’an, then provide us with the verse and justify the contradiction as God’s words are devoid of any contradiction. If it is hadeeth, then present it in relation to the Qur’an.

Two questions need to be answered: Can Allah be Seen and Did Muhammad see his lord.

Lets answer the first question.

Can Allah be seen? Is it possible for him to be seen? The answer is yes, it is possible. However, is it possible to see him in this life with our very eyes? The answer is no.

The commentary of the verse that states that no vision can grasp God (6:103) says this….

Source: http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?nType=1&bm=&nSeg=0&l=arb&nSora=6&nAya=103&taf=KATHEER&tashkeel=0

Ibn A’lba said regarding this verse, it is in this life, narrated by Abi Hatim

This shows that it is not possible for vision (from our eyes) to grasp God in this life.

Source: http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?l=arb&taf=KORTOBY&nType=1&nSora=6&nAya=103

And Ibn Abbas said: “No vision can grasp him” in this life, and that the believers will see Him in the next life because Allah said so  “That day will faces be resplendent, Looking toward their Lord”

وجوه يومئذ ناضرة‏ الى ربها ناظرة (Surah 75:22-23)

Reported on the authority of Ibn Abbas as well and he said: The meaning that the vision of the hearts cannot grasp Him, is that a person’s mind cannot grasp Him in order to comprehend Him. “There is none like unto him” (Surah 42:11) and he said: The meaning is that the visions created here on earth, however he can create for those who want his generosity a vision and comprehension in order to see Him just like he did for Muhammad peace be upon him.

Source: http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?nType=1&bm=&nSeg=0&l=arb&nSora=53&nAya=11&taf=TABARY&tashkeel=0

Some of them said: The heart (of the Prophet) has seen the Lord of The Worlds and they said that He (God) made his vision in his heart so he saw him with his heart and he did not see him with his eyes.

Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0347:

Suhaib reported the Apostle (may peace be upon him) saying: When those deserving of Paradise would enter Paradise, the Blessed and the Exalted would ask: Do you wish Me to give you anything more? They would say: Hast Thou not brightened our faces? Hast Thou not made us enter Paradise and saved us from Fire? He (the narrator) said: He (God) would lift the veil, and of things given to them nothing would he dearer to them than the sight of their Lord, the Mighty and the Glorious.

Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0349:

Abu Haraira reported: The people said to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him): Messenger of Allah, shall we see our Lord on the Day of Resurrection? The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Do you feel any trouble in seeing the moon on the night when it is full? They said: Messenger of Allah, no. He (the Messenger) further said: Do you feel any trouble in seeing the sun, when there is no cloud over it? They said: Messenger of Allah. no. He (the Holy Prophet) said: Verily you would see Him like this (as you see the sun and the moon)…

So basically as we can see, it is possible to see God but it is impossible that our vision could encompass him.

Book 001, Number 0337:

It is narrated on the authority of Masruq that he said: I was resting at (the house of) ‘A’isha that she said: O Abu ‘A’isha (kunya of Masruq), there are three things, and he who affirmed even one of them fabricated the greatest lie against Allah. I asked that they were. She said: He who presumed that Muhammad (may peace be upon him) saw his Lord (with his ocular vision) fabricated the greatest lie against Allah. I was reclining but then sat up and said: Mother of the Faithful, wait a bit and do not be in a haste. Has not Allah (Mighty and Majestic) said:” And truly he saw him on the clear horizon” (al-Qur’an, lxxxi. 23) and” he saw Him in another descent” (al-Qur’an, iiii. 13)? She said: I am the first of this Ummah who asked the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) about it, and he said: Verily he is Gabriel. I have never seen him in his original form in which he was created except on those two occasions (to which these verses refer) ; I saw him descending from the heaven and filling (the space) from the sky to the earth with the greatness of his bodily structure. She said: Have you not heard Allah saying.” Eyes comprehend Him not, but He comprehends (all) vision. and He is Subtle, and All-Aware” (al-Qur’an, v. 104)? (She, i. e. ‘A’isha, further said): Have you not heard that, verily, Allah says:” And it is not vouchsafed to a human being that Allah should speak unto him otherwise than by revelation, or from behind a veil, or that He sendeth a messenger (angel), so that he revealth whatsoever He wills. Verily He is Exalted. Wise” (al. Qur’an, xii. 51) She said: He who presumes that the Messengerof Allah (may peace be upon him) concealed anything, from the Book, of Allah fabricates the greatest lie against Allah. Allah says:” O Messenger! deliver that which has been revealed to thee from thy Lord, and if thou do (it) not, thou hast not delivered His message” (al-Qur’an, v. 67). She said: He who presumes that he would inform about what was going to happen tomorrow fabricates the greatest lie against Allah. And Allah says” Say thou (Muhammad): None in the heavens and the earth knoweth the unseen save Allah” (al-Qur’an, xxvii 65).

Ibn Hajr answers the claim that ‘Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) asked the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) about the meaning of the verse, upon which he asserted that he saw Jibrael. He writes that ‘Aisha asked about the verse ‘And surely he saw him on the bright horizon’. This verse is undoubtedly referring to the Prophet’s (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) vision of Jibrael. This is because this actual verse is from Surah Takvir , verse 19-23, which does refer to Jibrael. Allah says in the Qur’an,

‘This [Qur’an] is the word (brought) by an honoured Messenger- who is powerful and dignified with the Lord of the Mighty Throne- There he is the obeyed one (of the angels) and trustworthy. And this companion of yours is not mad. And surely he saw the messenger on the bright horizon.’ (Takvir 19-23)

So Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) thought, due to this, that it was Gabriel whom the Prophet saw during the night of miraj. She didn’t got the knowledge that the Prophet (peace be upon him) saw Allah Almighty also.

Book 001, Number 0341:

It is narrated on the authority of Abu Dharr: I asked the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him): Did you see thy Lord? He said: He is a Light;. how could I see Him?

Book 001, Number 0342:

Abdullah b. Shaqiq reported: I said to Abu Dharr: Had I seen the Messenger of Allah, I would have asked him. He (Abu Dharr) said: What is that thing that you wanted to inquire of him? He said: I wanted to ask him whether he had seen his Lord. Abu Dharr said: I, in fact, inquired of him, and he replied: I saw Light.

The thing is , our vision can indeed not encompass God, but it doesn’t mean that we will not be able to even see God at all. The whole story lies in the word , encompass. Everyone agrees that eyes can’t encompass Him, i.e Allah Almighty. If someone understands it, than he will understand that there is no difference between Quran and hadith.

Thanks to http://www.answering-christianity.com/bassam_zawadi/can_allah_be_seen_rebuttal.htm

32. Despite the fact that you do not regard the companions as infallible and accept the notion of them committing sins, you consider it wrong to criticise them due to the respect you afford them. You regard their holiness to be in keeping evil off them, which proves the fact that, for the honour of a respectable and dignified personality it is necessary that he is kept away from sins and treated as immune from defects. This concept is infallibility in all but name. Then what objection do you have in considering the holy prophet as infallible when you consider it a sin to call his companions as sinners and reject the infallibility of the holy prophet himself?

A good Muslim will respect his father and mother, knowing fully well that they are not infallibles, and knowing fully well that they do commit mistake every day. If someone tells him that his mother is fat, he will dislike such person even though what he said was a matter of fact. The reason is that guy does’t know how much the mother has sacrificed for that person. He will not tolerate such guys. Does that mean the person is considering her mother infallible? Know that it is not necessary to give respect to a person that he should be infallible.

You don’t know anything about the sacrifices of the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him). You think that it was only Prophet (peace be upon him) and Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) who defeated an army of 1000 kuffar in Badar, 3000 in Uhud, 10000 in Khandaq, and more 100000 in the latter fights. You think that the person who had to keep hungry for many days because of being Muslims were hypocrites, you think that the people who were torchered and humiliated in the streets of Mecca everyday were hypocrites, you think that the people who were stoned and whipped and laid on burning sand in the deserts of Arabia in summer at full noon and huge stones were placed on them so that they leave Islam were a bunch of hypocrites who later apostated, and only three of all those people remained Muslims after the death of the Prophet (peace be upon him), i.e Miqdad ,Salman and Abu Dhar (may Allah be pleased with him) , amongst whom Salman (may Allah be pleased with him) hadn’t even face these torchers at the hands of the people of Mecca because he embraced Islam later. Don’t you know that the Prophet (peace be upon him) didn’t leave these companions till his death and even he died in the residence of Aisha and the companions didn’t leave him even after his death and now they are buried near eachother?

Their sacrifices for Islam , you can’t even imagine, because your heart if filled with their hatred, and you have been blinded by this hatred. Which of the sacrifices of the companions will you ignore? Know that two persons alone can’t fight an army of 1000, 3000 or 10000 or 100000, if your mind is working , you will realize that the other companions who were with the Prophet (peace be upon him) at this harsh times had faith thousands of times more than you and your forefathers, the shias of Kufa, Iraq,  who ran away, leaving ahlelbayt at the mercy of the 4000 soldiers of ibn ziyad, even though they were four times more than them.

Infallibility unlimited for shia scholars:


4. Doctrine Concerning the Position of mujtahid

We believe that a fully qualified mujtahid is a representative of the Imam, in the case of the latter’s absence. Thus he is an authority over Muslims and he performs the functions of the Imam as regards judgement and administration among the people. Because of this, Imam Ja’far as Sadiq said:

To deny the authority of a mujtahid is to deny the authority of the Imam, and to deny tile authority of the Imam is to make an objection to the authority of Allah. and this is tantamount to polytheism (shirk).

Therefore the qualified mujtahid is not only one who issues fatwas, but he also has general authority over Muslims who must consult him if they require judgement, this being obtainable only from him. It is correspondingly wrong for anyone to give judgement except him or one who is appointed by him, as no-one can pass sentence without his permission. Also, all that which belongs to the Imam should be given to the mujtahid.

Such authority has been bestowed upon the qualified mujtahid by the Imam so that he may represent him in his absence; hence he is known as the representative of the Imam (na’ ib al-imam).

33. To you it is not God that nominates people for the post of Imamah or Khilafah but it is based on the choice of human beings that is why the doctrine of Imamah does not form part of your Islamic doctrine. When Khilafah does not have a religious place to you at all, but you regard it as something outside of the Deen then why do you constantly engage in debates with the Shi’a on this? Is this not a contradiction? Why do you not confine political issues to politics only?

We are not interested in engaging in debates with shias, but these are shias whose whole basis is based on proving the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) as non Muslims and than to say things about Ali which were not in him, so that somehow he could be given the title of infallible. Stop talking ill about the wives and other companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) , but how can you do this? Your whole faith lies on it.

34. If Khilafah or Imamah is a matter of religion then as per the Qur’an, the Sunnah of God does not change. Therefore, beginning with Adam (as) through to the prophet Isa (as), name any prophet after whom one of his companions had been chosen as his vicegerent without gap, depriving the members of that prophet’s household of the same right.

35. If none of the prophets preceding the holy prophet had a vicegerent who wasn’t from his near of kin then why was the Sunnah of Allah (swt) changed in relation to Rasulullah (s)? Refer us to the verse and a hadith of commentary to prove such a change.

36. The slogans “Naara Takbeer Allahu Akbar, Naara Risaalat Ya Rasoolullah and Naara Hayderi Ya Ali” have been in practice for centuries but just recently you have introduced a new one “Naara Khilafat Haq Chaar Yaar” which signifies that only those four personalities have the right over the post of Khilafat. Mulla Ali Qari in Sharh Fiqh Akbar, Page 176, considers Yazeed Bin Muawiyah as the sixth Khalifah of the holy prophet. What about the rest of khalifahs of Khilafah? Did the holy prophet not state that there will be twelve khalifahs? Mention their names.

Please see our article “Imamate; The perfection of Deen”

Forget about the slogans, there are thousands of slogans and if someone say that “Pakistan zindabad” it doesn’t mean that he says only Pakistan zindabad and the rest murdabad. Don’t get so childish. And I have not

37. Our mothers and sisters will proclaim their God is Allah, their apostle the holy Prophet and their Maula, Ali (as) but none of them would dare proclaim ‘Our Four Rightful Men’ out of modesty considering it as an abuse. Then tell us, is this slogan for men only or for both men and women?

Note: The original slogan in Urdu, uses the work “Yaar”, which can also be used as “very close friends”. In India & Pakistan, therefore women hesitate to use this slogan.

The slogan is Haq chaar yaar, that is “the right of the four friends” , it doesn’t mean our friends, but the four people who were friends of one another.

Anyhow, the funny thing is that shias also think of the hesitation of the women. Lol can you or any Pakistani or Indian shia publish a single mutah card of their daughter or sister like they publish marriage cards? I am asking you to publish only one such mutah card for your sister or daughter and distribute it. Dude mutah is a fundamental part of your faith and in your faith, it has huge reward, but you Pakistani and Indian shias feel so much ashamed of doing it that you can’t publish a single mutah card of your sister or daughter or mother?

38. It is reported in the traditions that a sword was brought for Ali (as) from heaven, angels came down to earth to assist Hadhrath Fatima (as) in revolving the grinding stones (chakki) in cookery, Ridhwan had appeared in the form of a tailor and brought clothes for Imam Hassan (as) and Imam Hussain (as), could you please refer to any hadeeth wherein even one sock is reported to have been revealed for Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and their like.

39. What is your position regarding the faith of Hadhrath Fatima (sa)?

MashaAllah we respect both the companions (may Allah be pleased with them) of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and Ahlelbayt (may Allah be pleased with them) and don’t doubt their faith. They were great Muslims and no Muslim from the present age can claim to have better faith than them.

40. If she was a Mu’menah then is it permissible to obey her or not? When every companion is Adil ( Just ), is following one of them a way of salvation?

Indeed, it is permissible to obey her, if her claim was correct. But as far as Fadak is concerned, her claim was not correct and this is the thing she herself accepted.

Questions 41-50:

41. If not then tell us why did the holy prophet say, “Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry.”

Sahih al Bukhari Volume 5 hadith 61

Actually this was said when Ali [ra] angered Fatima [ra] according to the shia ahadith.

Details here:


42. If it is permissible to obey her then it is reported in Saheeh Bukhari that Hadhrath Sayyedah Fatima was displeased with the two shaykhs. She had even instructed (in her will) that they should not participate in her funeral procession.

Please see our article “Burning the house of Fatima[sa]“

43. If Hadhrath Fatima’s displeasure towards the two shaykhs was not against Islam then why is it important upon the general mass to love them? Allah[swt] deemed His anger and Fatima’s to be the same, and Syeda Fatima left the earth angry with the 2 Shaykhs.

Her claim was wrong, so on which basis should we dislike Abu Bakar [ra]? Refer to our article , Fadak.

Ali also angered Fatima on many instances according to shia books , Click here.

Prophet (peace be upon him) himself got angry at Fatima , Jilal ul Ayoon, by Baqir Majlisi.

Again, Ali angered Fatima , Ilalul Sharaie by Shaikh Sadooq.

Once again, Ilalul Sharaie by Shaikh Sadooq.

If you are blind in blaming Abu Bakar , than open your eyes today. You have to look whether her claim was correct or not. If her claim was not correct, than on what basis can you blame Abu Bakr?

44. You are of the opinion that there had been no opposition between Hadhrath Ali (as) and the three companions. Suppose I accept that, but let me tell you, I have a very deep respect and honour for the pure lady Fatima (as) who was part of the flesh of the holy prophet (saww) and she has this esteem to her credit that whenever she appeared in the presence of the holy prophet (saww) he used to stand up as a welcoming gesture of honour to her. Therefore, will following such a respectful personality be a cause of salvation or not? Decide by keeping Bukhari and Muslim before your sight.

Yup if you truly follow her.

Shia records confirm that Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) became pleased with Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه). The Shia author of Hujjaajus Saalikeen states:

“Verily, when Abu Bakr saw that Fatima was annoyed with him, shunned him and did not speak to him after this on the issue of Fadak, he was much aggrieved on account of this. He resolved to please her. He went to her and said: ‘Oh daughter of Rasool-Allah! You have spoken the truth in what you have claimed, but I saw Rasool-Allah distributing it (i.e. the income of Fadak). He would give it to the Fuqaraa, Masaakeen and wayfarers after he gave your expenses and expenses of the workers.’ She then said: ‘Do with it as my father, Rasool-Allah had done.’ Abu Bakr said: ‘I take an oath by Allah for you! It is incumbent on me to do with it what your father used do with it.’ Fatima said: ‘ By Allah! You should most certainly do so.’ Abu Bakr said: ‘ By Allah! I shall most certainly do so.’ Fatima said: ‘O Allah! Be witness.’ Thus, she became pleased with this and she took a pledge from Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr would give them (Fatima and others of the Ahlel Bayt) expenses therefrom and distribute the balance to the Fuqaraa, Masaakeen and wayfarers.”

In the very reliable narration of Sunan Al-Bayhaqi, we read:

“When Fatima became ill, Abu Bakr came to her and asked for permission to enter. So Ali said, ‘O Fatima, this is Abu Bakr asking for permission to enter.’ She answerd, ‘Do you want me to give him permission?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ So she allowed him (to enter), and he came in seeking her pleasure, so he told her: ‘By Allah, I only left my home and property and my family seeking the pleasure of Allah and His Messenger and you, O Ahlel Bayt.’ So he talked to her until she was pleased with him.” (Sunan Al-Bayhaqi)

This Hadith is narrated by Bayhaqi in al Sunan al Kubra (6:300-301) and Dala’il al-Nubuwwa (volume 2, page 517-518)  click here ,  who said: “It is narrated with a good (hasan) chain.” Muhibb al Din al-Tabari cited it in al Riyad Al Nadira (2:96-97 #534) and Dhahabi in the Siyar (Ibid). Ibn Kathir states it as Sahih in his Al Bidayah and Ibn Hajar in his Fath Al Bari.

Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her) said :

Instruct your folks to speak only good wording near the corpse. As the harem of Bani Hashim asked her to poetize near her father’s corpse, Fatima, the daughter of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), said, “Leave mourning and supplicate to God.”

Tuhaf ul Aqool (تحف العقول عن آل الرسول) : You can download from http://shia-online.com/books.php

45. While departing from this world, did the holy prophet (saww) leave the Qur’an with the ummah or not?

No, as proven from shia books also, Ali [ra] says that Prophet [peace be upon him] told him to collect Quran.

46. If he did then why did the need for the collection of the Qur’an arise? And why were the Ummah kept without the Qur’an till the period of Uthman?

He didn’t , Quran was indeed revealed completely, but it was not in arranged form, but it was written on different pieces, the Quran was arranged in the form of book by the Caliphs.

47. If the holy prophet (saww) did not leave the Qur’an with the Ummah prior to his departure then the task of Risallah was not accomplished because the purpose of his arrival was to convey the message of Allah to the ummah. How then is the religion complete?

The message was conveyed, to convey the message, it is not necessary that it must be in the form of a book , i can convey my message to anyone without writing a book, but in the form of letters too. The message was indeed conveyed, but Quran in itself was not in an arranged form. This great work was done by the Caliphs as proven from lots of your books.

48. You make a long list of Muslims who compiled the revelations which proves the fact that the holy prophet (saww) had himself been causing the Qur’an being written and preserved it. But to our surprise, after the holy prophet (saww) up until the period of Uthman, people could not get the Qur’an. Could you explain why this gap occurred?

Seems the scholar you are so fond of hasn’t read even the shia books very well. Anyhow, people had the Quran, but not in an arranged form, but in pieces. One chapter or some part written on one piece , another chapter or part on another piece.

49. You are proud of the memorizers of the Qur’an and even claim the fact that there had been many such people among the companions of the holy prophet. Then, tell us, from among Ali (as), Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman who knew the Qur’an by heart? Give your answers with complete sources and refer to your books.

50. If none of the three companions had been Haafidh of the Qur’an then why scoff the Shias despite the presence of many Haafidh among them?

Indeed they knew Quran by heart, Uthman would recite the entire quran in one or two rakah.


Al bidaya wan nihaya , volume 7, page 214

Tabaqat ibn saad , volume 3, page 75

Tarikhul Khulufa, Imam Suyuti

Al Farooq, Shibli Numani

Tehzeeb Nowi

Hulyatul Awliya

Is it allowed to scoff shias now?

Questions 51-60:

51. In a reliable book of your sect, ‘Itteqaan’ by Suyuti, vol. 1 page 59, it is narrated that Ali (as) had once told Abu Bakr that an addition was being made to the Qur’an and that my heart tells me that apart from the salaam, I am not going to wear my robe up until I have collected the Qur’an, to which Abu Bakr said, you saw the right thing. This report has been received from Akramah who is a reliable leader of the Sunnis and every Sunni accepts this report as correct. Is this not a sufficient proof that after the departure of the holy prophet (saww), according to your sect efforts were made to interpolate the word of Allah (swt) and obviously the doers of that were Muslims themselves? What evidence can you then produce in support of the Qur’an being free from Tahreef (addition)?

This narration is unauthentic. Ibn Hajar said

“This narration is daeef “unauthentic as its sanad doesn’t reach Ali (may Allah be pleased with him)”

Read the authentic narrations in “Itteqaan”

قال علي – رضي الله عنه – “لا تقولوا في عثمان إلا خيرًا ، فوالله ما فعل الذي فعل في المصاحف إلا عن ملأ منا

Ali said – may Allah be pleased with him – “Do not say anything but good about Osman, by God what he did in the matter of Quran, he did with our consultation.

قال علی – رضي الله عنه – : “لو وليّت لعملت بالمصاحف التي عمل بها عثمان”

Ali said – may Allah be pleased with him – If it was my Rule , I would have done the same regarding Quran, what Uthman did.

52. It is narrated in saheeh Bukhari that the holy prophet used to forget the Qur’an? If the bearer of the book, the prophet himself forgets it then the word’s correctness becomes doubtful, which makes the Qur’an unreliable. Does such a narration not create doubts on the status of the Qur’an and Rasul’Allah? If Rasul’Allah (s) can err in relation to the Qur’an then does this not also mean he can forget on the Sunnah as well? When the authenticity of the Qur’an and Sunnah comes into question, how can your sect be the true one?

See also: Sunan Abu-Dawud, page 350

Joseph could also forget, does this make the sayings of Prophet Joseph unreliable?

[012:042]  And of the two, to that one whom he consider about to be saved, he said: “Mention me to thy lord.” But Satan made him forget to mention him to his lord: and (Joseph) lingered in prison a few (more) years.

But this forgetfullness was temporary

[Yusufali 87:6] By degrees shall We teach thee to declare (the Message), so thou shalt not forget,

So even if he would have forgotten on few incidents, it doesn’t signify your claim, just like an ordinary person, who remembers a thing by heart, than just like other human beings, he may forget it , but when someone reminds him, he again remembers it by heart.

And here’s hadith sahih from al-kafi which agrees with what was narrated in bukhari about the man who asked the prophet if prayer was changed because rasool allah forgot the number of prayers !

الكليني عن محمد بن يحيى ، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى عن عثمان بن عيسى عن سماعة بن مهران قال : قال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام : من حفظ سهوه فأتمه فليس عليه سجدتا السهو ، فإن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم صلى بالناس والظهر ركعتين ثم سها فسلم ، فقال له ذو الشمالين : يا رسول الله أنزل في الصلاة شيء ؟
فقال وما ذلك ؟
فقال : إنما صليت ركعتين ، فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم : أتقولون مثل قوله ؟ قالوا : نعم فقام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم فأتم بها الصلاة وسجد بهم سجدتي السهو قال : قلت : أرأيت من صلى ركعتين وظن أنهما أربعاً فسلم وانصرف ثم ذكر بعدما ذهب أنه صلى ركعتين ، قال : يستقبل الصلاة من أولها ، فقال : قلت : فما بال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم لم يستقبل الصلاة وإنما أتم بهم ما بقي من صلاته ؟ فقال : أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم لم يبرح من مجلسه ، فإن كان لم يبرح من مجلسه فليتم ما نقص من صلاته إذا كان قد حفظ الركعتين الأوليتين

this hadith is extremely sahih see : al-kafi volume 3 page 355

The Messenger of Allah prayed “dhuhr prayer” two rakat only and did tasleem. A person named Dhu al shamalain said “O Messenger of Allah , has something happened to the Prayer? The Messenger of Allah said “What is that?” He answered : ” You prayed only two rakat”. Than the Messenger of Allah prayed two rakat of sahu “meaning forgetfulness”

53. In your innumerable books of hadeeth, there are various reports that the Qur’an has Tahreef in it. For instance it’s mentioned in al Itteqaan that Surah Ahzaab had two hundred verses before and now it has 73 verses. What happened to the rest? If they were abrogated then refer us to those verses that came down to abrogate them? Similarly in Itteqaan, vol. 2, page 25 Abdullah Ibn Umar states that none of you should ever claim to have received the whole Qur’an, rather what remains. The presence of such reports shows that according to your sect the Qur’an has been changed. Can you elaborate?

You take ahadith from the chapter of Nasikh wa mansookh (the abrogating and the abrogated verses) and than tell us that the they mean the Quran has been tampered? Sorry on the people who take Answering-Ansar as their guide.

Why don’t you include the text before the narration of 200 hundred verses too

قال ابوالحسن المنادی فی کتابہ الناسخ والمنسوخ

So it is talking about the abrogated verses. Don’t take things out of the context.

As far as the second narration is concerned

حدثنا إسماعيل بن إبراهيم، عن أيوب، عن نافع، عن ابن عمر، قال: لا يقولن أحدكم قد أخذت القرآن كله، وما يدريه ما كله؟ قد ذهب منه قرآن كثير، ولكن ليقل: قد أخذت منه ما ظهر

Again this narration has been taken from the chapter of Nasikh wa mansookh,

Read the sentence before it too.

“… And this type of abrogation has many examples. Abu Ubaid said, Ismail bin Ibrahim narrated from Ayoob from Nafi from Ibn Umar who said “you should not say that you have gathered all [whatever has been revealed as] Quran, since much of it has gone [by the way of abrogation] (the translation of ذهب is not lost, but gone, leave etc), rather he should say I took from it what appeared to me… “

Second thing is that this hadith has been translated poorly by the rafidhis.

Ibn Umar [May Allah be pleased with him] said: you should not say that you have gathered all [whatever has been revealed as] Quran, since much of it has gone [by the way of abrogation] (the translation of ذهب is not lost, but gone, leave etc), rather he should say I took from it what appeared to me.

An important point to note here is that it was the way of speech of Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him)

E.g he also said:

“No one should say that he keeps fast during the entire Ramadhan, as night is also included in Ramadhan, and no one keeps fast during night.”

[Ibn Abi Sheba]

54. Can the apostle forbid what has been allowed by Allah? Can you reply by relying on a Qur’anic verse?

The Prophet doesn’t forbid anything allowed by Allah on his own, without receiving any revelation from Allah regarding that.

55. Is anyone from among the ummah authorised to forbid what has been allowed by Allah and His messenger?


56. Allamah Shibli Nu’mani in al Farooq page 217 narrates from Saheeh Muslim that Umar had said that two Mut’a were allowed during the time of the holy prophet but I disallow them from now and these are the Mut’a of Hajj and the Mut’a of Nisaa. On what religious authority did Umar forbid what the apostle and Allah (swt) allowed? Clarify this point.

Indeed, mutah of Nisaa was allowed during the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), he did not say anything wrong. If someone says that wine was allowed during the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), is it wrong? No, for we know very well that wine was allowed during the time of the Prophet (peace  be upon him). And it also doesn’t mean that wine was never disallowed later. Similarly, here also , it doesn’t mean that mutah was never disallowed. What he said was exactly correct, and when he forbade, that was not from his own, but in accordance with the command of the Prophet (peace be upon him). That is why when he said that if anyone claims that mutah is allowed (even now), than he should bring four witnesses (Ibne Majah) and no one brought four evidence , even Ali and the ahlelbayt did not bring four witnesses, if they considered mutah allowed even then, it was their duty to bring four witnesses. But the fact is that everyone , except a few sahaba who came to know later, knew that mutah was disallowed by the Prophet (peace be upon him) in his last days, and was never allowed thenceforth.

Also remember, that when a Prophet says that he forbids something, it doesn’t mean that he is doing it on his own, rather it means that he is doing so on the command of God Almighty.

This has been very beautifully explained in the very same book.

Al Farooq , By Shibli Numani, Page 334-335

Similarly it is well known to the Muhadditheen that when a sahabi says something in which he didn’t use his own opinion or ijtihad, than even if he doesn’t take the name of the Prophet (peace be upon him) , it will mean that he has listened that from the Prophet (peace be upon him). For example, Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) wrote to all the states that zakat is fardh on this and this thing, and at this rate” Than it doesn’t mean that Umar said this on his own, and gave verdicts on his own, rather it will mean that Prophet (peace be upon him) had given orders regarding zakat.

[003:049]  “And (appoint him) an apostle to the Children of Israel, (with this message): “‘I have come to you, with a Sign from your Lord, in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by God’s leave: And I heal those born blind, and the lepers, and I quicken the dead, by God’s leave; and I declare to you what ye eat, and what ye store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe;

[003:050]  “‘(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear God, and obey me.

Now here it doesn’t mean that Jesus was making lawful something which was forbidden by God , without the commandment of God, similarly when Umar said that I disallow it now, it doesn’t mean that he was doing it on his own, rather it means, in accordance with the command of Allah and his Prophet (peace be upon him).

And the ahadith about the prohibition of mutah has been narrated by so many companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him)

Here is a very short list of such ahadith on the prohibition of mutah by the Prophet (peace be upon him)

It was narrated from Ali (رضّى الله عنه) that:

The Messenger of Allah forbade Mutah marriage and the meat of domestic donkeys at the time of Khaybar. According to another report, he forbade Mutah marriage at the time of Khaybar and he forbade the meat of tame donkeys. [Narrated by Bukhari, 3979; Muslim, 1407.]

It was narrated from al-Rabee’ ibn Sabrah al-Juhanithat his father told him that he was with the Messenger of Allah who said:

“O people, I used to allow you to engage in Mutah marriages, but now Allah has forbidden that until the Day of Resurrection, so whoever has any wives in a Mutah marriage, he should let her go and do not take anything of the (money) you have given them.” [Narrated by Muslim, 1406.]

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said:

“O people, I had permitted you Mutah before, [but now] whoever of you has any part in it currently must part with her, and do not take back anything which you may have given them, as Allah Exalted and Majestic has forbidden it until the day of resurrection.” [Muslim, Abu Dawood, Ibn Majah, Nasa`i, and Darimi]

Ali (رضّى الله عنه) said:

“The Messenger of Allah had forbidden Mutah on the day of Khaybar and had forbidden the eating of the meat of domestic camels.” [Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmizy, Ibn Majah, Nasa`i, Tahawy, Shafi’i, Bayhaqy, and Hazimy]

Ali (رضّى الله عنه) said to a man who was engaging in Mutah:

“You are a straying person, the Messenger of Allah has forbidden temporary marriage and the meat of domestic camels on the day of Khaybar.” [Muslim and Bayhaqy]

A man called Rabee’ Bin Sabra said to Umar bin Abdul Aziz:

“I testify that according to my father that it happened that the Messenger of Allah had forbidden it [Mutah] on the farewell pilgrimage.” [Abu Dawood and Imam Ahmad]

According to Abu Huraira:

The Messenger of Allah had forbidden or abolished temporary marriage, its marriage and its divorce, its waiting period, and its inheritance. [DarQutny, Ishaq Bin Rahwiya, and Ibn Habban]

When Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was given the Caliphate, he thanked Allah Most High and praised Him and said:

“O people, the Messenger of Allah had permitted Mutah three times then forbade it. I swear by Allah, ready to fulfil my oath, that if I find any person who engages in temporary marriage without having ratified this with a proper marriage, I will have him lashed 100 stripes unless he can bring two witnesses to prove that the Messenger had permitted it after forbidding it.” [Ibn Majah]

57. The Qur’an says that ‘Qaala Mumin min aale firaun yukassim imaanahu’ a believer from the Aal of Firaun had concealed his belief and hence its shown that the concealment of belief out of fear is not disbelief or abhorrent on the part of a believer. Why then is the Taqiyyah of a Shia abhorrent to you?

Your imam is saying that Taqiyah is from the religion, and that is why Prophet Joseph (may Allah be pleased with him) called the people of the caravan  thieves though they had not stolen a thing.

I am asking what kind of taqiyah was it?

58. Saheeh Bukhari, vol. 4, page 123 Egyptian edition reports from Hassan Basri that ‘Al taqiyyah baaqiyata ila yawmil qiyaamat, (Taqiyya is permissible until the Day of Judgement). When taqiyya is proved to be permissible from both the Qur’an and the Hadeeth, why then your sect attacks the Shi’a practice of taqiyyah?

Let us not worry about the Egyptian edition, here is the complete Bukhari,


Tell me the hadith if you find there.

59. Fataawa Qaadhi Khan vol. 4, page 821 states, that if a person marries a mahram (mother, sister, daughter, aunt etc.) and has sexual intercourse with them and even admits the fact that he knew while performing the marital rites that it was Haraam for him to do that even then according to Imam Abu Hanifa, he is not subject to any type of Islamic penalty. Can we really adhere to a Sect that issues such a fatwa? Give us a rational reply?

Fatawa Qadhi Khan, Page 98

Fatawa Qadhi Khan, Page 821

60. The Qur’an states that ‘Laa yamassuhu illal Mutahharun’ No one can touch it save the pure but in Fatmaada Aalamgeer vol. 5 page 134 and in Fatwa Siraajiya page 75, it is stated that Surah Fateha can be written with urine (astaghfirullah). Could you justify this claim?

Fatawa Siraajiya, Page 75

Don’t have access to these books but if it is really written as you said, than such fatawas are rejected. Lets see the fatwas of shia ayatullahs.

Bestiality Fatwa!

Name: Ali Akbar Mandni
Subject: Sex with animals


Salam alikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh

Our master al-Sistani may Allah give you long age and may Allah sanctify your secret and may He make you provision for Islamic Ummah.
our Master I have a very embarrassing question. Our master I am unmarried and live in desert, I mean I am a shepherd and bachelor. Everything I need is available like mobile, computer.. but I have too much lust. And there is no one available to have muta’h marriage. With regret I have satanic thoughts in my mind. I had sex with two sheeps and a lamb and small calf. And right now I am very afraid because one of the sheep’s stomach became big, and I am afraid it might be pregnant. Is it permissible to have sex with animals our master?? Because I heard from people its halal. Thank you.

In his name

Sex with animals before the mission (Islam) was wide spread and many narrations are narrated that it is halal but makrooh (disliked). And on the compulsory precaution one should abandon this practice that may cause self harm. And you must admit this to the owner of the sheep and pay the owner.

Impregnant animals with rafidi sperms or renting animal wombs to hatch rafidis in them

Source: شبكة السراج في الطريق إلى الله

339 السؤال:
لو امكن التلقيح الصناعي علمياً في رحم صناعي أو رحم حيوان .. هل يجوز التقاء المني الحيمن مع بويضة الاجنبية :
إذا كانا : 1 معلومين 2 مجهولين 3 احدهما مسلما والأخر كافرا ؟
يجوز .

Translation:Question 339:

If it was scientifically possible to artificially fertilize inside an artificial womb or womb of an animal… is it permissible to mix warm sperms with a foreign (non-mahram) woman’s egg:

If so happened that: 1. They (sperm owners) are known 2. They are unknown 3. One is muslim and the other is Kafir?


It is permissible.

Wear Bikini Fatwa!

What are the parts of body which a man and a woman have to guard? Penis, Testicles, Anal Ring and Vagina!


Question 371:

What is the limit of awra for a man infront of his mahrams, like his mother and his maternal aunts and paternal aunts except his wives?
What is the limit of awra for a woman infront of her mahrams, like her father and brother except her husband?
What is the limit of awra for a man in front of another man?
What is the limit of awra for a woman in front of another woman?


Awra of a man is his penis and testicles and anus ring, and awra of a woman is her vagina and anus ring, and there is no difference if he is infront of same sex or opposite sex, stranger or others, yes a woman must cover parts tha arouse sexual desire from other than her husband?

watching Pornography Fatwa by Ayatullah Khoe

9 السؤال: هل يجوز النظر إلى صور الخلاعة قصدا ، إذا لم يحدث أي شهوة ؟
الفتوى: إذا لم يكن مثيرا للشهوة كما هو المفروض في السؤال جاز، والله العالم.

Question (9): Is it permissible to look at Pornographic images intentionally if it does not arouse Lust?

Answer of Ayatullah al Khoe’i: If it does not as the question states then it’s permissible, Allah knows best.

Mutah or Adultery: Let the adulterers choose!


Name: Hussein .A

Country: Iraqi living in Kuwait

Age: 23

Sex: Male

Subject: Mut’ah marriage…is it allowed to kill.


Master al-Sistani may Allah give you long age, I have little embarrassing question…I wish you reply to me as fast as possible because I am in a very bad mood. A week ago one night I went to my house, where I live along with my sister. And when I entered the house, heard some noise in one of the rooms where no one lives. And when I opened the door I saw my sister with a stranger whom I recognised to be a ‘Sayed’ (black turbaned aka Ayatullah), I shouted upon him and caught him and beat him severely. He told me “I am married to your sister in mut’ah, so what do you want”. I then beat my sister and locked her in room till this day, and as for that Sayed I wanted to slaughter him with knife, so I locked him in room and went to bring knife but when I returned, I found that he escaped from the window. And now I have his address, so can I kill him or what should I do?


In his name the exalted.

You have no authority over your sister even if she comes with haram act (adultery). It is not permissible for you to beat or imprison her except if your Marj’i3 (religious authority a rafidi does taqleed of) gives you permission. Regarding the sayed as per his saying he did not do any haram, and even if he did haram you have no authority to implement ‘hadd’ upon him.


For all the shias, what if some sayid entered your home and did this, and than said I am just doing Mutah, you shouldn’t complain, kindly think about your feelings that will be at that time.

Questions 61-70:

61. Every chapter of the Qur’an begins with Bismillah but Surah tawbah doesn’t begin with it, why?

62. When the start of every Surah of the Qur’an has been made with Bismillah, why then do you not start the Surahs in your salaat with Bismillah?

63. Prove ‘Thanaa’ Eulogy from the Qur’an.

64. Point out Assalaatu minan nawm to us from the Qur’an if not then at least from an authentic hadeeth.

65. Prove that these words had been used as part of the Adhan during Abu Bakr’s period.

As regards the matter of insertion of the words ‘come to the prayer’ in Azaan is concerned the claim is also unfounded. The reason being that the words of Azaan is part of the Sunnah of the prayer instituted by the Holy Prophet (pbuh). The practice has been in currency since the day the Holy Prophet (pbuh) instituted it as the Sunnah. The authenticity of the practice does not hinge upon individual reports rather it depends on the generation-to-generation transmission of the words uttered in the call in all the five prayers. It is also clear from various reports that any addition that is deemed appropriate with reference to the circumstance can also be made in the words of this call for prayer. Also there is a legion of narratives, which clearly mention that the practice has been in vogue during the Holy Prophet’s (pbuh) time. Let us study the report that is forwarded to prove the notion that Hazrat Umar (ra) inserted the words in the call to prayer.

Malik narrated that it was reported to him that the Mo`azzan approached Umar (ra) to call him to prayer. When he found Umar (ra) asleep he said: ‘Prayer is better than sleep’. Umar (ra) commanded him to place the saying in the call for the Morning Prayer.

As is obvious the narrator does not mention the source and the report is not traced back to the caliph Umar (ra). Moreover, the text of the report is in clear contradiction with many authentic reports. As I have already mentioned that a host of narratives recorded in other books of the hadith mention that it was the Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself who had commanded his companions to add the sentence in the call for Morning Prayer. These reports which are mostly reported by more reliable and uninterrupted chains of reporters include Sahih of Ibn e Khuzaymah 385, 386; Sahih of Ibn e Habbaan 1682; Sunan of Abu Daud 500, 501, 504; Sunan Nisai 633, 647, 707; Sunan Ibn e Majah 716; Sunan Nisai al Kubra 1597, 1611; Sunan Bahaqi Al Kubraa 1617, 1824, 1831, 1832, 1833, 1835, 1731, 1834, 1836, 1837, 1838, 1840, 1845, and many others in Musnad Ahmad and other books.

Do you know that the sentence of “Prayer is better than sleeping” is also approved in some of the Shia ahadith:

Al-Tahzib by Al-Toosi, Vol. 2, No. 14: “Imam Jafar says: … Al-Taswib (i.e. the statement of ‘Al-Salat Khayron Min Al-Nawm’) in Iqama is part of the Sunnat.

Al-Tahzib by Al-Toosi, Vol. 2, No. 15: “Imam Baqir (RA) says: My father (i.e. Ali Ibn Alhusayn (RA) used to say ‘Al-Salat Khayron Min Al-Nawm,’ in his Azan at home…’

Wasa’el Al-Shia, No. 6998: “Imam Jafar (RA) says: When you are in morning prayer say ‘Al-Salat Khayron Min Al-Nawm’ after ‘Hayye Ala Khayr Al-Amal’[1] in Azan but don’t say it in Iqama.

According to the Shia scholar, Majlesi in his book Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol. 81 P. 150 certain Shia scholars of old times had allowed saying the sentence in the morning prayers. These are Ibn Al-Junayd and Al-Ju’fi.

66. Prove to us that the prayers of taraweeh had been said in congregation during the time of the holy Prophet[saww] and during the period of Abu Bakr.

Hadith fom Sahi Bukhari:

Narrated Zaid bin Thabit: Allah’s Apostle made a small room (with a palm leaf mat). Allah’s Apostle came out (of his house) and prayed in it. Some men came and joined him in his prayer. Then again the next night they came for the prayer, but Allah’s Apostle delayed and did not come out to them. So they raised their voices and knocked the door with small stones (to draw his attention). He came out to them in a state of anger, saying, “You are still insisting (on your deed, i.e. tarawih prayer in the mosque) that I thought that this prayer (tarawih) might become obligatory on you. So you people, offer this prayer at your homes, for the best prayer of a person is the one which he offers at home, except the compulsory (congregational) prayer.” (Book #73, Hadith #134)

Hadith fom Sahi Bukhari:

Narrated Zaid bin Thabit: The Prophet took a room made of date palm leaves mats in the mosque. Allah’s Apostle prayed in it for a few nights till the people gathered (to pray the night prayer (tarawih) (behind him.) Then on the 4th night the people did not hear his voice and they thought he had slept, so some of them started humming in order that he might come out. The Prophet then said, “You continued doing what I saw you doing till I was afraid that this (tarawih prayer) might be enjoined on you, and if it were enjoined on you, you would not continue performing it. Therefore, O people! Perform your prayers at your homes, for the best prayer of a person is what is performed at his home except the compulsory congregational) prayer.” (See Hadith No. 229,Vol. 3) (See Hadith No. 134, Vol. (Book #92, Hadith #393)

67. You only have nine reports at your disposal as far as praying the salaat by folding your arms is concerned. On the principles of the transmitters of hadeeth, prove their chains as ‘Saheeh’ correct. And prove all the transmitters as reliable.

Actually the guru of Answering-Ansar , Abdul Kareem Mushtaq , seemed to have relied on few shias , because if he had himself researched in a good manner, he would not have missed these two ahadith in Abu Dawood and Sahih Muslim.

14 Maslay, Page 167 to 180

Sahih Muslim

Book 004, Number 0792:

Wa’il b. Hujr reported: He saw the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) raising his hands at the time of beginning the prayer and reciting takbir, and according to Hammam (the narrator), the hands were lifted opposite to ears. He (the Holy Prophet) then wrapped his hands in his cloth and placed his right hand over his left hand. And when he was about to bow down, he brought out his hands from the cloth, and then lifted them, and then recited takbir and bowed down and when (he came back to the erect position) he recited:” Allah listened to him who praised Him.” And when prostrates. He prostrated between the two palms.

Abu Dawood:

Book 3, Number 0725:

Narrated Wa’il ibn Hujr:

I purposely looked at the prayer of the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), how he offered it. The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) stood up, faced the direction of the qiblah and uttered the takbir (Allah is most great) and then raised his hands in front of his ears, then placed his right hand on his left (catching each other).

Sahih Bukhari

Volume 1, Book 12, Number 707:

Narrated Sahl bin Sa’d:

The people were ordered to place the right hand on the left forearm in the prayer. Abu Hazim said, “I knew that the order was from the Prophet .”

Indeed this hadith is from Imam Malik, because  because in  his Muwatta (48/159/1), Imam Malik recorded the hadith of the position of the hands in which the right is over the left. This shows his willingness to accept the hadith that are true. His reasons for not following it would have been anything else, God knows well. But there is no doubt that he considered this hadith correct so he included it in his book and the claim of the answering-ansar’s guru that how could this be from Imam Malik when he didn’t practice it, is wrong, as he himself recorded the hadith of the position of the hands in which the right is over the left.

Al-Nawawi said :  This Hadith is sahih

Ibn Hajar said this in Fath Al-Bari while commenting on this hadeeth. He said:

واعترض الداني في أطراف الموطأ فقال هذا معلول لأنه ظن من أبي حازم ورد بأن أبا حازم لو لم يقل لا أعلمه الخ لكان في حكم المرفوع لأن قول الصحابي كنا نؤمر بكذا يصرف بظاهره إلى من له الأمر وهو النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم لأن الصحابي في مقام تعريف الشرع فيحمل على من صدر عنه الشرع ومثله قول عائشة كنا نؤمر بقضاء الصوم فأنه محمول على أن الآمر بذلك هو النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم وأطلق البيهقي أنه لا خلاف في ذلك بين أهل النقل والله أعلم

He says this hadeeth is analogous to the Hadith of A’isha when she said that they (the women) were ordered to make up the days missed in Ramadan. Obviously the one who ordered her to make it up was RasoolAllah, as no one else has the authority to legislate besides Allah and his messenger. The same is the case with the hadeeth of Qabd. Al-Bayhaqi said that there is no dispute amongst the Ulama’ on this issue.

So he also considered it sahih. None of the scholars of hadith have criticized this hadith.

And this hadith can also be found in Musnad of Imam Ahmad (336/5)

68. From the period of Abu Bakr, present any example or a report to prove that Abu Bakr said his prayers by folding his arms. If you can, why do the Malikis keep their arms straight while saying their prayers?

69. The Qur’an instructs us to fast till night “thamar atmou alsiyamar ilaa Al-lail”, and night enters when darkness casts in. Why do you open your fasts early? Why were Umar and Uthman opening their fasts after Maghrib prayers?

Nuqaa’ Umar, Page 110, Hadeeth 351, by Shah Waliallah Dhelavi

Lol, I mean we open fasts when the sun sets, and you , in your historic opposition to us, open your fast just ten minutes after us, do you think ten minutes after sun set becomes night? Dude it is still evening after ten minutes of the sun set and according to your logic, you are still opening your fast in evening, the night has not yet settled. If you really want to follow your logic , open your fast after two one hour of sun set. Ten minutes after us is just a show piece.

The thing is, evening is the beginning part of night and morning is the beginning part of day,

Quran says:

35:13 يولج الليل في النهار ويولج النهار في الليل وسخر الشمس والقمر كل يجري لاجل مسمى ذلكم الله ربكم له الملك والذين تدعون من دونه مايملكون من قطمير

Yusuf Ali:

[035:013]  He merges Night into Day, and he merges Day into Night, and he has subjected the sun and the moon (to his Law): each one runs its course for a term appointed. Such is God your Lord: to Him belongs all Dominion. And those whom ye invoke besides Him have not the least power.


[035:013]  He causes the night to enter in upon the day, and He causes the day to enter in upon the night, and He has made subservient (to you) the sun and the moon; each one follows its course to an appointed time; this is Allah, your Lord, His is the kingdom; and those whom you call upon besides Him do not control a straw.

Suppose if we reject it that evening is the beginning part of night, and morning is the beginning part of the day, than tell me , how would you explain this verse? Indeed morning and evening are the beginning parts of day and night. And we know that evening is the time when sun sets, so it is the time when we open our fast, you are in nowhere, because you open your fast ten minutes after us, if you think that evening is not the beginning part of night, and you think that night is when the darkness settles, than you open your fast neither when sun sets, nor when night settles, but you open your fast in the middle, which follows no logic, but only opposition to the mainstream Muslims.

70. You claim that the Shia’a Qur’an contains forty parts, prove its source from the four Shia key books (Kutub Al-’Arba’a).

Whatever the reason, your guru believes present Quran is corrupt. So what is the need of wasting time here. Anyhow , your most authentic hadith book , Al Kafi, says Quran consists of 14 parts, each part consisting of 1 thousand , 2 hundred and 4 verses so people can finish it two times every month. Enjoy your Quran of 17000 verses.

Questions 71-80:

71. If Mut’a is Haraam, why did Asma Bin Abu Bakr do it? For evidence, refer to Tafseer Mazhari Qadhi Thanaa Allah , page 577.

Lets see the exact narration first.

حدثنا يونس قال حدثنا أبو داود قال حدثنا شعبة عن مسلم القرشي قال دخلنا على أسماء بنت أبى بكر فسألناها عن متعة النساء فقالت فعلناها على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

Narrated Yunos narrated Abu Dawood narrated Sho’ba from Muslim al-Qurashi he said : we visited Asma bint Abi Bakr and we asked her about MUTA OF WOMEN so she said : WE did it during the time of rasool Allah

First of all even from this text, it’s not clear that Asma (r.a) did mutah herself. For example if someone would ask: DOES MOSLEMS MAKING SACRIFICE? I would reply: YES WE DO THAT. But I personally never done it with my own hands.
So answer of Asma: We did it during the lifetime of prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) doesn’t mean that she did it personally.

Also we should notice that there is other version of this hadith.

Tabarani in “Kabir”:

277 – حدثنا عبد الله بن أحمد بن حنبل و محمد بن صالح بن الوليد النرسي قالا : ثنا أبو حفص عمرو بن علي قال : ثنا أبو داود ثنا شعبة عن مسلم القري قال :
: دخلنا على أسماء بنت أبي بكر فسألناها عن المتعة فقالت : فعلناها على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم

Muslim al-Qurashi said : we visited Asma bint Abi Bakr and we asked her about MUTA so she said : WE did it during the time of rasool Allah (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa salam).

As you can see here, the talk wasn’t about mutah of women, but mutah in general, and that could mean mutah al-haj. Allah knows better.
And there is another great proof, that Moslem was asking about haj at-tamattu in sahih of imam Moslem:

Sahih Moslem.

Book 007, Number 2854:

Muslim al-Qurri reported: I asked Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with them) about Tamattu’ in Hajj and he permitted it, whereas Ibn Zubair had forbidden it. He (Ibn ‘Abbas) said: This is the mother of Ibn Zubair who states that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) had permitted it, so you better go to her and ask her about it. He (Muslim al-Qurri said): So we went to her and she was a bulky blind lady and she said: Verily Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) permitted it.

Book 007, Number 2855:

This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Shu’ba with the same chain of transmitters, but with a slight variation of words.

To benefit more on this topic [ Taken from research done by sh. Faisal al-Jassim]:

All the routes of this hadeeth is reported from the way of Shu’ba from Muslim al-Qarri from Asmaa.
The following are the narrators who reported this Hadeeth from Shu’ba and they disputed over its text:

a. Yunus bin Habeeb and Mahmoud bin Ghilaan from Abu Dawd from Shu’ba with the text {Mu’ta of women}. [Musnad al-Tayalsi and Sunan Nasaie]
b. Amro bin Ali and Ibn Abdullah al-Saffar from Abu dawd from Shu’ba without the word “women”. So its text is: {We asked her about the Mu’taa}. [al-Mu’jam al-kabeer by Tabarani]
c. Abdurrhman bin Mahdi from Shu’ba without the word “women so the text of this route is {We asked her about the Mu’taa} [ Sahih Muslim and others]
d. Ghandar from Shu’aba who said: Muslim said: I do not know whether it was the Mu’taa of Hajj or the Mu’taa of women” [Sahih Muslim]
e. Rawh bin Ubadah from Shu’ba: {Mut’aa of Hajj} and in this report he mentioned the full story: he said: I asked Ibn Abbas about the Mu’taa of hajj so he allowed it while Ibn al-Zubair did not allow it. So Ibn abbas said: go to his mother as she narrate that the Prophet permits it as well and ask her about this matter. So we eneterd upon her and she was blind huge woman and said: The Prophet permitted it” [ Sahih Muslim]

The following can be noted:

The Mu’taa of women was only reported from Abu dawud. However, who reported it from his way disputed over it; one said it “Mut’aa of women” while others reporting from him that he said: “The Muta’aa” without the word women.

The rest of routes are clearly show that what is preserved that it is about Mu’taa of Hajj.

This what Shia imams say about Mutah in shia books

قال أمير المؤمنين صلوات الله عليه

( حرم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله يوم خيبر لحوم الحمر الأهلية ونكاح المتعة) انظر (التهذيب 2/186)، (الاستبصار 2/142) ، (وسائل الشيعة 14/441).

Amirul Mua’minin (as) said: Prophet (s.a.w) forbidden on the day of khaiber the meat of donkeys and the mut’ah marriages.
(At-tahdheeb 2/186, Al-Istbsaar 2/142 & Wasael Al-Shia 14/144)

عن عبد الله بن سنان قال سألت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام عن المتعة فقال: (لا تدنس نفسك بـها) (بحار الأنوار 100/318).

It was narrated by Abdullah Bin Senan said : I asked Abu Abdullah about Mut’ah and he said: “Don’t filthy (defile) your self with it” (Bihaar Al-Anwar 100/318).

عن عمار قال: قال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام لي ولسليمان بن خالد: (قد حرمت عليكما المتعة) (فروع الكافي 2/48)، (وسائل الشيعة 14/450).

Narrated by A’maar: Abu Abdullah said to me and to Suliman Bin Khaled: “I made Mut’ah Haram on you”
(Furoo AlKafi 2/48 & Wasaeel Shia 14/450).

وكان عليه السلام يوبخ أصحابه ويحذرهم من المتعة فقال: أما يستحي أحدكم أن يرى موضع فيحمل ذلك على صالحي إخوانه وأصحابه؟ (الفروع 2/44)، (وسائل الشيعة 1/450).

Also he (Abu Abdullah) used to rebuke and warn his companions against mut’ah …… (Furoo 2/44), (Wasael Alshia 1/450)

ولما سأل علي بن يقطين أبا الحسن عليه السلام عن المتعة أجابه:

( ما أنت وذاك؟ قد أغناك الله عنها ) (الفروع 2/43)، الوسائل (14/449).

Ali bin Yaqteen asked Aba Hassan about Mut’ah and he answered : “What is that and You (In Arabic it means what has that got to do with you) Allah had compensated you with something much better” (he meant legal marraige) (Furoo 2/43), (Wasael Al-shia 14/449).

عبد الله بن عمير قال لأبي جعفر عليه السلام (يسرك أن نساءك وبناتك وأخواتك وبنات عمك يفعلن؟ -أي يتمتعن- فأعرض عنه أبو جعفر عليه السلام حين ذكر نساءه وبنات عمه) (الفروع 2/42)، (التهذيب 2/186)

Abdullah Bin Umair said to Abi Ja’far (as) :Is it acceptable to you that your women, daughters, sisters, daughters of your aunties do it (Mut’ah)? Abu Ja’far rebuked him when he mentioned his women and daughters of his aunties.
(Al-Furoo 2/42 & At-tahdheeb 2/186)

72. In Mishkat Shareef, it is reported that when Abu Bakr and Umar asked the holy Prophet[saww] for his daughter, Lady Fatima[sa]‘s hand the Prophet[saww] replied she is too young to marry, is this a correct report?

73. If it is wrong then prove it with full evidence both intellectual and textual.

74. If this is correct then think rationally over the fact that, Umme Kulthum[sa] whose mother was too young to marry these people, marries these same personalities, does this make sense?

Please see our article “Nikah of Lady Umme Kulthum[sa]“

Observe in the above lines the jump from the hadith “she is too young to marry” to the spin that she “was too young to marry these people”.

Rather, as Sharh al-Mishkaat states (Dar al-Fikr ed. 10:476-477), she had been asked at an early time and the Prophet waited, upon him blessings and peace, for specific heavenly revelation concerning Fatima, period.

This is confirmed by the other version of the proposal of the Two Shaykhs of Islam – Allah be well-pleased with them – Abu Bakr and `Umar, in which the Prophet replies, upon him and his Family and Companions blessings and peace: “The qada’ [concerning this decision] has not been revealed yet.”

As far as your article is concerned, why should we consult an article which includes blatant lies?

A common favourite is this tradition from Sahih al Bukhari “Fighting for the Cause of Allah (Jihad)” Volume 4, Book 52, Number 132:

Narrated Tha’laba bin Abi Malik:

‘Umar bin Al-Khattab distributed some garments amongst the women of Medina. One good garment remained, and one of those present with him said, “O chief of the believers! Give this garment to your wife, the (grand) daughter of Allah’s Apostle.” They meant Um Kalthum, the daughter of ‘Ali. ‘Umar said, Um Salit has more right (to have it).” Um Salit was amongst those Ansari women who had given the pledge of allegiance to Allah’s Apostle.’ ‘Umar said, “She (i.e. Um Salit) used to carry the water skins for us on the day ofUhud.”

Reply One:

This is the only time that we read anything of Umme Kalthum in the entire contents of al Bukhari; it does not even appear in the book of Nikah, but in the Book of Jihad. Dr Muhsin Khan in his translation has in fact used dishonesty after Um Kalthum he adds the words “the daughter of ‘Ali” when this is not present in the Arabic. The actual word that is used in the text that Khan interpreted as wife is “Undhuk” whilst we acknowledge Undhuk can indeed refer to one’s wife, its literal meaning in Arabic grammar is “Close”, “Next To” and “Near”.http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/umme_kulthum/en/chap4.php

Actually this lie was also started by the same author of these 100 questions in his book, Mushtaq , the guru of answering-ansar , Afsana Aqd Umme Kulthum , Page 54

Here are four Arabic manuscripts of Sahih Bukhari, look at all of them with open eyes before blaming someone of dishonesty.

Al-Azhar Library manuscript

1849 Indian Edition

1894 Cairo Edition

1981 Beirut Edition

And as far as the word “Undhuk” is concerned , this demonstrates Answering-Ansar’s UTTER ignorance of the Arabic Language.

The “actual word” mentioned by the Answering-Ansar team as “Undhuk” is in reality “`indaka,” as you can see in the book scans, a compound word resulting from the attachment of “`ind” with the directive masculine personal pronoun “ka” [your]. `Ind is a preposition that refers to time, place or possession, and when directed towards a male with a woman of no blood relation mentioned in a possessive manner, it refers to a wife.

For further details about this blatant lie, Click here

And for further questions and answers about Umar’s marriage to Umme Kulthum, the daughter of Ali, click here.

75. Can your prayers be complete without darood? If yes then come up with full evidence and if not then how come the blessings are just sent upon Muhammad[saww] and his progeny and not upon his companions and wives? When the prayers can be complete without sending blessings to the wives and the companions, why does Ahl’ul Sunnah add the names of these groups to Darood in their religious gatherings?

76. Cite a saheeh and authoritative text hadeeth of the apostle with a complete source wherein it is reported that it is obligatory to send darood upon all the companions and wives of the holy prophet (saww). And also tell us if it is obligatory then how can the prayers be in order without them?

We send blessings of Allah upon all the righteous servants of Allah, not just limited to the progeny of the Prophet (peace be upon him)

السلام علینا وعلٰی عباد اللہ الصلحین

Peace be upon us and the righteous servants of Allah.

اللھم صل علی محمد وعلٰی اٰل  محمد کما صلیت علٰی ابراہیم وعلٰی اٰل  ابراہیم انک حمید مجید ۔
اللھم بارک علٰی  محمد وعلٰی اٰل محمد کما بارکت علٰی  ابراہیم وعلٰی ال  ابراہیم انک حمید مجید

The word here is Aal, the best translation of which here is followers. As we know that in the progeny of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) there are many people , on whom you would never send blessings. For example,

Imam clarified:” My grandfather narrated from Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) that he said that when the birth of my son Jafar bin Muhammad bin Ali bin Husain bin Ali ibn Abu Talib takes places keep his name as ‘Sadiq’ because one person from his fifth generation will also bear the name of Jafar and will wrongly claim vicegerency. His name will be Jafar Kazzab. He will ascribe wrong things to Allah and will claim the position for which he is not entitled. He will not only oppose his father but will also bear jealousy towards his brother. This is the person who will strive to tear apart the veil of occupation of Imam.”


Now you will never like to send blessings upon this person. So what Aal really means here? It is followers.

77. You believe that the Khilafat can either be established by public votes or the way of ijma (consensus). Could you verify this with evidence from the sayings of the apostle himself?

Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) himself established his khilafat by Ijma [See Nahjul Balagha]

78. Did the holy prophet (saww) depart from this world without giving guidance on Khilafat? If yes, why then did the two shaykhs say ‘ilaaimatu minal quraysh’ (The Imams are from Quraysh) in saqeefa bani sa’da? Did they specifically lie for leadership? Also why oppose the holy prophet’s Sunnah, why did Abu Bakr candidate Umar?

They didn’t lie.

Sahih Muslim, Book 020, Number 4482:

It has been reported on the authority of Jabir b. Samura who said: I went with my father to the Messenger of Allah (may peeace be upon him) and I heard him say: This religion would continue to remain powerful and dominant until there have been twelve Caliphs. Then he added something which I couldn’t catch on account of the noise of the people. I asked my father: What did he say? My father said: He has said that all of them will be from the Quraish.

Now if you claim that it proves your 12 imams, than it is indeed not so, for if that was really the case, than first of all shias would not have been so disunited amongst themselves over who the 12 imams are. Various shia sects proposed their own 12 imams. Indeed this hadith has been used by various sects to prove their selves correct by presenting their own list of 12 imams. While the fact is that the Prophet (peace be upon him) just told us that there will be 12 caliphs who will be from Quraish. Now it is a must for someone to claim imamate that he be from the Quraish. And a non Quraish can’t claim to be one of these 12 caliphs. The ansar of Madinah when heard this hadith, they readily agreed. Afterwards all the Muslims including Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) paid allegiance to Abu Bakar (may Allah be pleased with him). Hasan and Hussain (may Allah be pleased with them) paid allegiance to Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him). How can an imam appointed by God give allegiance to a person not entitled to it? If imams were divinely appointed, than their allegiance to others who were not entitled to it is disobediene to God. A prophet is divinely appointed, he will never accept another person who is not a prophet as a prophet and he will never give allegiance to him. So on which basis “divinely appointed imam” can disobey God?

79. In majmaul Bihar, Muhammad Tahir Gujrati writes that Abu Bakr confessed that ‘I am not a Khalifah but a Khalifah’ if you regard him truthful then why do you not deny his caliphate?

80. In Sawaiq Al-Muhriqah of Allamah Ibn Hajar Makki writes that there are three siddeeq ( truthful ), Habib an Najaar, Hazqeel and Ali (as), and that Ali (as) was better than the two. Why has Abu Bakr not been mentioned here?

See also: Tafseer e Kabir, Vol. 7, Page 317

Lets read the hadith with the chain of narr

حدثنا محمد قثنا الحسن بن عبد الرحمن الأنصاري قال : نا  عمرو بن جميع  ، عن إبن أبي ليلى ، عن أخيه عيسى ، عن عبد الرحمن بن أبي ليلى ، عن أبيه قال : قال رسول الله (ص) : الصديقون ثلاثة : حبيب بن مري النجار مؤمن آل ياسين ، وخرتيل مؤمن آل فرعون ، وعلي بن أبي طالب الثالث ، وهو أفضلهم

This hadith has been declared mawdu (Fabricated) by Shaikh Albani. Ibn Tayimmah says “It’s a lie” see Ahadith Daeefa by Allama Albani, Urdu translation by Sadiq Khaleel , Volume 3 , Page 65. The problem with it is Umru Bin Jamee’. Lets read what scholars say about him.

آفته عمرو بن جميع فقد كذبه ابن معين

و قال الدارقطني و جماعة :
” متروك ” .
و قال ابن عدي :
” كان يتهم بالوضع ” .
و قال البخاري :
“منكر الحديث

Questions 81-90:

81. Was Umar the heir of the holy Prophet[saww]‘s knowledge? If yes then why as is stipulated by Jalaludeen Suyuti ‘Umar used to seek refuge with Allah from every difficult question or case when there is no Abul Hassan (History of the Khalifahs who took the right way (English translation by Abdassamad Clarke page 178)? And why did he confess that ‘lau la Aliyyan lahalakal Umar’? If Ali (as) wasn’t there, Umar would have perished (Tadkhiratul Khawwas, by Sibt Ibne Jauzi, page 127). Note: The comments in Dhikr-e-Hussain by Maulana Kauthar Niyazi are also worthy of note.

He loved Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) , you will find similar statements of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) about Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman (may Allah be pleased with them). They loved and respected eachother. They were not hate filled like you.

82. Did the two shaykhs of Ahl’ul Sunnah participate in the burial rituals of the holy Prophet[saww], if you claim they did, then why do we read that both Sharh mawaqif and Al Farooq Shibli Nu’mani confirm their absence? If they did not participate then what type of friends are these?

Al-Farooq, by Shibli Naumani, Page 40

Read your given scan of Al farooq by Shibli Naumani again, the word mentioned here is تجہیز و تکفین , but what about تدفین (the actual burial of the deceased)? In burial rituals, تدفین i.e the actual burial of the deceased is also included , and this is what the most important thing is? Or is it not the most important part of burial rituals to bury the deceased? What value تجہیز و تکفین (i.e the arrangements for the burial) has if you don’t do the main thing i.e تدفین (burial) of the deceased?

Regarding the same issue, the author says in the next few lines.

We give the following extract form the Musnad of Abul Yala, a work of unquestionable authority, which will throw fully light on the subject:

“It is related by Omar that as they were seated in the Prophet’s house a man cried out all of a sudden from outside: ‘O son of Khattab (Omar” pray step out for a moment’. Omar told him to leave them alone and go away as they were busy in making arrangements for the burial of the Prophet. The man replied that an incident had occurred i.e., the Ansar were gathering in force in the Thaqifah Bani Sa’idah and, as the situation was grave, it was necessary that he (Omar) should go and look in to the matter lest the Ansar should do something which would lead to a war. On this Omar said to Abu Bakr, ‘Let us go’. [Al Faruq, by Allamah Shibli Numani, Vol 1 p 86, 87]

So why did the go? The answer is in the same book.

As far as the question, they did participate in the burial rituals after they returned. The place of burial of the Prophet (peace be upon him) was chosen after Abu Bakar (may Allah be pleased with him) said that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said that Prophets are buried where they die. So Prophet (peace be upon him) was buried in the house of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) where our beloved Prophet (peace be upon him) had passed away.

Again, they did perform the funeral prayer of the Prophet (peace be upon him), as your own books [e.g Hayat ul Quloob] verify.

83. In Musnad Ahmed Hanbal and so on, it is mentioned that Ayesha had named Uthman as Nathal, who should be killed and Murtakib Kufr. If you regard Ayesha as the truthful then you will have to accept what she called Uthman. And if she did not tell the truth then why do you call her the truthful?

Please see our article “Ayesha”

Please see our Article

Accusing the Prophet’s Wife of Murder: “Kill this old fool (Na’thal)”

84. The soldiers that the holy prophet (saww) had prepared against Musailimah ibn kazzab were commanded by Usama and Abu Bakr and Umar were also instructed to be under him. Why did Abu Bakr and Umar not go? What legal dispensation did they have that entitled them to ignore the holy Prophet[saww]‘s commands? If they have such dispensation, why did the holy Prophet[saww] curse those who were appointed for participation but did not go?

See also: Milal wa Al-Nihal [English translation] page 18

The Prophet (peace be upon him) died at this time, which made them return. The whole burden of uniting the Muslims and protecting them from the enemies fell on him. Later he did meet up with the army of Usama.

Shortly before his death the Prophet had decided to despatch an expedition to Syria under Usama. The army had actually left Medina and bivouacked at Juraf, at a little distance from Medina when the Prophet breathed his last. Abu Bakr insisted on its departure to give effect to his master’s last wishes although [since] Medina [was] hemmed in on all sides in those days, anyone would have hardly dared taking this action. There was the danger of apostates attacking Medina or other unruly tribes taking advantage of the chaotic conditions prevailing around the capital of infant Islamic State.

Abu Huraira has correctly estimated the far-reaching effect of the decision taken by Abu Bakr. Abul ‘Araj relates from Abu Huraira : “I swear to God save whom no deity is there that God would not have been worshipped, if Abu Bakr had not ascended the caliphate.’ Abu Huraira repeated it thrice over and then related the incident of sending the expedition under Usama. He said, ‘Abu Bakr despatched the army under Usama, saying, 1 will riot allow the army to return already sent by the Prophet : I will not fold the flag unfurled by the Prophet !’ The result was that when Usama passed the tribes which were disposed to rebellion and apostasy, they said to one another; ‘Had these prople not been strong enough, they would not have ventured on this expedition. Let them go and face the Romans.’ Thus the army went forth, fought the Romans and returned after defeating the enemy. Thus the tribes prone to defection were reassured and continued to remain votaries of Islam.”

Than there was a great apostasy and there was a great danger of attack on Madinah. After defeating these people and making Madinah secure, the Caliph returned to Madinah. On arrival at Madinah he spent a few days in dealing with matters of state; then he moved to Zhu Qissa with the Army of Usama. But it had now ceased to be the Army of Usama, for Usama had completed his work and his army was now the Army of Islam-to be used by the Caliph as required.

85. In Muwatta of Imam malik, translated by Allamah Waheed al Zamaan, Page 147, hadeeth 603, Rasulullah (s) narrates that a companion had approached him, beating his chest and ripping his hair. If chest beating in the presence of Rasulullah (s) is allowed then why do you object to it?

86. Sheikh Abdul Haq Muhaddath Dehlavi in his book Midaaraj Nabaweeya, vol. 2, page 544 writes that the Mu’adhdhin of the apostle, Hadhrath Bilal Habashi (r.a) came to the Mosque of the Prophet[saww] beating his chest and complaining. What is your verdict regarding chest beating?

On your article about azadari, you gave the reference Madarij al Nubuwah, Volume 2 page 441 , see here , and here you give the page 544?

Anyhow we have read both the pages , here is book scan of both these pages, click here , you will see no mentioning of Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) at all. We also read under the other relevant places in volume two, but found nothing which supported your claim. Now its your duty to present the book scan if you really have it. Otherwise, many of your lies have been exposed [see here] and this will add to the list. Good luck.

87. In the Musnad of Imam Hanbal, Egyptian edition, Vol. 6, Page 274 it is written that upon the demise of the holy Prophet[saww], Ayesha beat her chest along with the other women, what is your opinion regarding this act of Ummul Mu’mineen?

مسند الإمام أحمد بن حنبل المؤلف : أحمد بن حنبل أبو عبدالله الشيباني الناشر : مؤسسة قرطبة – القاهرة عدد الأجزاء : 6 الأحاديث مذيلة بأحكام شعيب الأرنؤوط عليها [ جزء 6 – صفحة 274 ] ح26391( حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبى ثنا يعقوب قال ثنا أبى عن بن إسحاق قال حدثني يحيى بن عباد بن عبد الله بن الزبير عن أبيه عباد قال سمعت عائشة تقول : مات رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بين سحري ونحرى وفي دولتي لم أظلم فيه أحدا فمن سفهي وحداثة سني ان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قبض وهو في حجري ثم وضعت رأسه على وسادة وقمت ألتدم مع النساء واضرب وجهي تعليق شعيب الأرنؤوط : إسناده حسن من أجل ابن إسحاق )

“I heard Ayesha saying “The Messenger of God died on my bosom during my turn, I did not wrong anyone in regard to him. It was because of my ignorance and youthfulness that the Messenger of God died while he was in my lap, and then I laid his head on a pillow and got up beating my chest and slapping my face along with the women”

The proper reading of Ahadith will protect you from such misguidance.

Matam is forbidden by the Prophet (peace be upon him) and your infallible imams too :

The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said:

Allah hates two sounds. They are the noise of mourning when a misfortune falls and the sound of a pipe when a blessing falls.

Tuhaf ul Aqool (تحف العقول عن آل الرسول) : You can download from http://shia-online.com/books.php

Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said:

He (i.e Ali) says thus in Nahjul Balagha: I remained patient while there was a thorn of sorrow in my eye and suffocation in the throat.


Imam Ali (peace be upon him) said:

Prayer is the offertory of the pious. Hajj is the jihad of the weak. Everything has its tax, and the tax of bodies is fasting. The best deed of a man is the expectation of the Relief. The instructors who do not apply their instructions to themselves are like those who try to shoot without having a string. He who is certain of the reward will give generously. Seek earnings through almsgiving. Protect your wealth by defraying the zakat. The moderate will never suffer neediness. Moderation is the half of livelihood. Amicability is the half of intelligence. Care is the half of senility. Fewness of dependants is one of the two facilities. To depress the parents is impiety to them. As for those who beat the hand on the thigh in misfortunes, their rewards will be cancelled.

Tuhaf ul Aqool (تحف العقول عن آل الرسول) : You can download from http://shia-online.com/books.php

Imam Al-Kadhim (peace be upon him) had said:

Fewness of the dependants is one of the two facilities.

To depress the parents is impiety to them.

As for those who beat the hand on the thigh or strike the hands together in misfortunes, their rewards will be cancelled.

Tuhaf ul Aqool (تحف العقول عن آل الرسول) : You can download from http://shia-online.com/books.php

Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her) said :

Instruct your folks to speak only good wording near the corpse. As the harem of Bani Hashim asked her to poetize near her father’s corpse, Fatima, the daughter of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), said, “Leave mourning and supplicate to God.”

Tuhaf ul Aqool (تحف العقول عن آل الرسول) : You can download from http://shia-online.com/books.php

More shia books verify:

Irshad, by Shaikh Mufeed , Imam Hussain (may Allah be pleased with him) forbade his sister from mourning :

Hayat ul Quloob , the Prophet (peace be upon him) was carried to heaven one night, and he saw a woman in the form of dog because she was a mourner.

88. Hadhrath Ali Hajweeri Al Mash-huur Daata Ganj Bakhsh Lahori in his book Kashful Mahjoob, chapter 2, page 118, section 8 reports it from Umar, that the holy Prophet[saww] played as a camel for the then young Imam Hussain[as], meaning he made himself a replica of a camel. Following the Sunnah of the holy Prophet[saww] is it Sunnah (tradition) to make a replica of Imam Hussain[as]‘s horse or is it a bid’at (Innovation)?

That was the love of grand father for his grand child so that he could ride, this doesn’t mean that people should now fix a date and mourn on that day and make a drama, replicas of the horse of Imam Hussain (may Allah be pleased with him), symbolic burials, and the strange things we see on the 10th of Muharram.

89. Kanzul A’mal, Hayder Aabad edition, vol. 5, in the Musnad of Ali karramallahu wajhu, page 147, hadeeth 2403 it is written that, the holy Prophet[saww] used to wipe his feet during wudhoo, why do you not regard wiping as permissible? If the feet will go to hell by being kept dry during wudhoo then how is the wiping over the socks correct?

Shia muhadith al-Haj Mirza Hussain an-Noore Tabarsi in his “Mustadrak al wasail” (1/305-306) narrated (you can load it HERE):

إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ الثَّقَفِيُّ فِي كِتَابِ الْغَارَاتِ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ الْحَسَنِ عَنْ عَبَايَةَ قَالَ كَتَبَ عَلِيٌّ ( ع ) إِلَى مُحَمَّدٍ وَ أَهْلِ مِصْرَ أَمَّا بَعْدُ إِلَى أَنْ قَالَ ( ع ) ثُمَّ الْوُضُوءُ فَإِنَّهُ مِنْ تَمَامِ الصَّلَاةِ اغْسِلْ كَفَّيْكَ ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ وَ تَمَضْمَضْ ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ وَ اسْتَنْشِقْ ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ وَ اغْسِلْ وَجْهَكَ ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ ثُمَّ يَدَكَ الْيُمْنَى ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ إِلَى الْمِرْفَقِ ثُمَّ يَدَكَ الشِّمَالَ ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ إِلَى الْمِرْفَقِ ثُمَّ امْسَحْ رَأْسَكَ ثُمَّ اغْسِلْ رِجْلَكَ الْيُمْنَى ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ ثُمَّ اغْسِلْ رِجْلَكَ الْيُسْرَى ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ فَإِنِّي رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ (ص) هَكَذَا كَانَ يَتَوَضَّأُ قَالَ النَّبِيُّ ( ص ) الْوُضُوءُ نِصْفُ الْإِيمَانِ

Then ablution it’s from perfectness of pray. Wash your hands 3 times.Then make mazmazah 3 times. And make istinshaq 3 times. And wash your face 3 times. Then your right hand 3 times in the direction of elbow, and your left hand 3 times in the direction of elbow. Then wipe your head. Then wash your right leg 3 times, and then wash your left leg 3 times. And I seen prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) making ablution in this way.

90.In the Bai’at of Ridhwan, the Muslims took a covenant of not fleeing from the battle field. But the battle of Hunayn took place after the “bay’at of under the tree”. Of those people who went against their covenants, what is your verdict with regards to them?

The Muslims took a covenant of fleeing from the battle which may happen if the kuffar didn’t return Uthman and the Muslims have to fight with them. It was only for that battle. In the battle of Hunayn, some Muslims did run away from the battle due to the extreme severity of the battle but it was only temporary and afterwards they did return. Actually they had claimed that this time , they could not be defeated because they were in large numbers. So Allah showed upon them that it is not the large number that can do them any benefit but its only Allah who can give success and loss.

Questions 91-100:

91. The historian, Habib as Sayr writes regarding the battle of Hunayn that:

Purseed Abu Bakr wa Umar kujaa Budand? Guft aan neez dar goshe rafte budand.

Meaning when it was enquired where Abu Bakr and Umar were?, the narrator replied they had also fled to some corner. Contemplate over this narration, let it be very clear that in your Tafseer Qaweri, Tafseer Hussayni, Rawdhatus Safaa, Taareekhul Khamseen, Rawdhatul Ahbab, Ma’aarijun Nubuwwah, etc it is mentioned that the three gentlemen had fled from the battle of Hunayn. Why did they break the covenant of the Bay’at of Ridhwan? Reply after reading all these books.

The temporary defeats in the battle of Uhud and Hunayn carried a huge message for the ummah. On the battle of Uhud, the Muslims disobeyed the Prophet (peace be upon him) and so Allah showed them the result of disobedience to the Prophet (peace be upon him), on the battle of Hunayn, the Muslims said ‘Indeed we will not be defeated in this battle because today we outnumber the enemies’. So Allah showed them , that the large number will do them no good, rather it was Allah who gives success to whom he wills and defeat to whom he will. In both the battles, the Muslims came back after the temporary defeats, they got clear message for the Muslims, not to disobey the Prophet (peace be upon him) and not to boast, as everything is in the hands of Allah Almighty.Both times, Allah forgave them too, so its of no use to mention to mention these two battles, as temporary defeats in both of them carried a message for the Muslims, and both times, Allah forgave. We will not even go into books, once Allah has forgiven someone, how can you blame that person again? Or do you consider yourself superior to God?

Battle of Uhud

[003:152]  God did indeed fulfil His promise to you when ye with His permission Were about to annihilate your enemy,-until ye flinched and fell to disputing about the order, and disobeyed it after He brought you in sight (of the booty) which ye covet. Among you are some that hanker after this world and some that desire the Hereafter. Then did He divert you from your foes in order to test you but He forgave you: For God is full of grace to those who believe.

Battle of Hunayn

[009:025]  Assuredly God did help you in many battle-fields and on the day of Hunain: Behold! your great numbers elated you, but they availed you naught: the land, for all that it is wide, did constrain you, and ye turned back in retreat.

[009:026]  But God did pour His calm on the Apostle and on the Believers, and sent down forces which ye saw not: He punished the Unbelievers; thus doth He reward those without Faith.

[009:027]  Again will God, after this, turn (in mercy) to whom He will: for God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

92. If these three men had been brave then show us from your book Tafseer Qaweri the names of these three men from among those who did not flee in the battle of Hunayn. And prove it to us from all of your books, how many non-believers had been killed by these three men in the battles of Badr, Uhud, Khaybar, Khandaq and Hunayn. How many non-believers did they inflict with harm? And how much harm did themselves sustain in their bodies? And just mention five names with complete sources from among those whom these people killed.

Man you really seem to be mentally ill. What if they had killed people? Khalid Bin Waleed killed lots of people after embracing Islam in various battles, and defeated great armies. Why not mention him here? Who conquered Palestine, Egypt, Iran , Syria , oh man the list is so long. They were all conquered in the era of the first three caliphs. How can you call them cowards? Do we really have to count the number of persons killed by a person to know his bravery? Do we have to see the number of man killed by Napolean Bonaparte , Alexender, and the other great warriors in the little skirmishes around their cities to know their bravery? Why ignore the huge armies they defeated? Historians have not named people with complete sources who were killed by the sahabas, they only mentioned the armies they defeated, and yes, we don’t have the biodata of the people whom sahabas killed , but historians have indeed recorded the nine swords of Khalid bin Waleed which were broken during the fight while he defeated 2 hundred thousand roman army with just 3 thousand men in the battle of Mu’tah. That was the easier thing to count rather than counting all the men he killed.

Another of thee great 100 undefeated battles of Khalid Bin waleed was battle of Yarmuk.


The land Muslims conquered during the reign of First three caliphs and the Umayyads. Show a map of the places Ali may Allah be pleased with him conquered if you can.

Look at the victories of the people whom you call cowards. Look at their victories from an unbiased source and if you still consider these people cowards , there must be some fault in your brain.

Also read, Historical Role of Islam , Chapter The Causes of Triumphs of Muslims by a Hindu , M. N. Roy

93. If Umar has been brave then write the names of people who got killed at his hands in the battles of Uhud and Hunayn from historical sources compare Ali[sa] and Umar so that their doings in those two battles become known.

The bravery of the warriors is not proven from the people they killed, but the grand armies they defeated. Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) defeated ,not just one , but two super powers of his time, Iran and Rome. How can you ignore that? Again, You accuse Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) of killing Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her) in the presence of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), don’t you allege Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) of being more coward than a normal person? As every normal person is greatly enraged if his wife is beaten by someone and he can’t keep silence at this. Why Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), according to your beliefs , kept silent? Doesn’t your this belief puts a huge question mark on his bravery?

94. In the Tafseer of Dur Manthur Suyuti, vol. 54, and Izalatul Khifa of Shah Waliyyullaah Muhaddath Dahlavi, page 199 etc. it is written that the holy Prophet[saww] told Abu Bakr ‘The polytheism is moving in you like the moving of an ant’. Take notice of this hadeeth and tell us how then was he a siddeeq? And if he did not have shirk within himself then dare to belie like a disbeliever the truthfulness of the holy Prophet[saww].

Mistranslation, half quotation, blah blah blah, is that the way you preach your religion? That is indeed the way of the imams who themselves are misguided and who misguide others.

الشرك فيكم أخفى من دبيب النمل وسأدلك على شيء إذا فعلته أذهب عنك صغار الشرك وكباره تقول اللهم إني أعوذ بك أن أشرك بك وأنا أعلم وأستغفرك لما لا أعلم – تقولها ثلاث مرات

The Shirk among you people is more hidden than the crawling of an ant, but I shall guide you to that which if you do it, will protect you from both minor shirk and the greater ones as well; to say three times:

Allahumma innee a’uthu bika an ushrika bika wa ana a’lam wa-astaghfiruka limaa laa a’lam

“O Allah, I seek refuge in You from that I ascribe partners to You knowingly and I seek forgiveness from You for those things which I do not know.”

More ahadith clearly tells us it was not about Abu Bakr but the ummah as a whole about whom the Prophet (peace be upon him) was talking about.

Abu Musa al-Ash’ari reported that Allah’s Messenger sall Allahu Alayhi wa Sallam delivered a sermon to them one day and said, “O People! Fear this Shirk (meaning riyaa’), for it is more inconspicuous than the crawling of an ant” [Musnad Ahmad , Tabrani]

Allah’s Messenger sall Allahu Alayhi wa Sallam said,

“The thing I fear the most for you is the minor shirk: Ar-Riyaa’” [Musnad Ahmad vol. 5, p 428-429, Sharh As-Sunnah no. 4135]

The following hadith explains Riya also

Abu Sa’id al-Khudri radiaAllahu Anhu reported that the Messenger of Allah sall Allahu Alayhi wa Sallam came to us while we were discussing about ad-Dajjal (the anti-Christ) and said, “Should I not inform you of that which I fear for you even more than the danger of ad-Dajjal? It is the hidden shirk: A person stands to pray and he beautifies his prayer because he sees the people looking at him.”

[Sahih Sunan ibn Majah vol.2, p. 410, no. 3389]

عن أسماء بنت أبي بكر ‏(‏م‏)‏ عن عائشة‏.‏

7501- الشرك في أمتي أخفى من دبيب النمل على الصفا‏.‏

كنز العمال في سنن الأقوال والأفعال

عن جابر‏.‏

7521- أيها الناس اتقوا الشرك، فإنه أخفى من دبيب النمل، قالوا‏:‏ وكيف نتقيه يا رسول الله‏؟‏ قال قولوا‏:‏ اللهم إنا نعوذ بك أن نشرك بك شيئا نعلمه، ونستغفرك لما لا نعلمه‏.‏

كنز العمال في سنن الأقوال والأفعال

قال: إن أخوف ما أخاف عليكم الشرك الأصغر. قالوا: وما الشرك الأصغر يا رسول الله؟ قال: الرياء… مسند الإمام أحمد … وعن أبي موسى قال: خطبنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ذات يوم، فقال: يا أيها الناس اتقوا هذا الشرك، فإنه أخفى من دبيب النمل، فقال له من شاء الله أن يقول: وكيف نتقيه وهو أخفى من دبيب النمل يا رسول الله؟ قال: قولوا: اللهم إنا نعوذ بك من أن نشرك بك شيئاً نعلمه، ونستغفرك لما لا نعلمه. رواه أحمد والطبراني وغيرهما

Now read the shia hadith

Imam Jafar said

ان الریا مع المومن الشرک

Riya with the believer is shirk.”

Aitqadat, page 112, by Shaikh Sadooq

This hadith is also narrated in the infamous shia book of lies and deceptions, Peshawar Nights.

The vain display of good deeds is minor polytheism, which negates our good actions. It has been reported that the holy Prophet said: “Abstain from minor Polytheism.” People asked him, “O, Prophet of Allah, what is minor polytheism?” He replied, “Al-riya wa’s-sama’” (i.e., to show people, or to let them hear of your worship of Allah). Also the holy Prophet said: “The worst thing which I fear for you is your hidden polytheism; so rise above it since among my followers polytheism is more secret than the creeping of the ant on a hard stone in the dark night.Source

As proven from the ahadith above, that hadith was generally about the ummah , not directed towards any single individual. Riya is what the Prophet (peace be upon him) meant here, that it is very common amongst people, and that was what the Prophet (peace be upon him) feared that the ummah will fall into it. In the same hadith, the supplication is also given, which every Muslim should read, so as to protect himself from this minor shirk. May Allah protect us. Amin.

95. In your Fataawa Qaadhi Khan, vol. 1, page 64, it is written that if a person who is in a state of prayers kisses a woman without lust then his prayer is valid. Is the time for it too short except in prayers? Where is the need for such a thing in prayers?

96. Imam Ghazzali in sirrul Aalameen, Maqaalidul Ba’aa page 9, writes the desire for power had prevailed among the Sahaba and they first turned into opposition. They threw the holy Prophet[saww]‘s message onto their backs, they demanded some payment in return for the foundation and they did a very bad trade. Could you please elaborate on this?

Pseudo Works (Attributed to al-Ghazali): These works are questionable at best.

Sirr al-’Alamin (Secret of the two worlds)


97. You oppose the halaal Mut’a and do not hesitate terming it as adultery. But in your book Sharh Wiqaaya, page 298, it is mentioned that to your Imam Abu Hanifa, stated the expenditure of an adulteress is halaal and there is not any jurisprudential limit on one who rewards a woman for zinah. Is Mut’ah worse than this?

98. By calling Marwan back from Medinah, Uthman bin Affan opposed the holy Prophet[saww]. Do you reproach this or support it?

Please see our article “Who really killed ‘Uthman”

Prophet (peace be upon him) had forgiven Marwan bin Hakam on the request of Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) later on. [Asaaba , Asadul Ghaba]

Muhamed bin Sireen said, “Al-Hasan, Al-Hussain, Ibn Omar, Ibn Al-Zubair, and Marwan rushed to the house of Uthman raising their swords. Uthman told them. ‘I order you to go back home, put your swords in their shields, and stay at home.’” [Tareekh Khaleefah Al-Khayyat, p.174]

Kunanah, the slave of Safiyah, said, “I witnessed the murder of Uthman. Four young men from Quraysh were taken out from Uthman’s house. These young men were covered by blood, and they were defending Uthman may Allah be pleased at him; Al-Hasan bin Ali, Abdullah bin Al-Zubair, Muhamed bin Hatib, and Marwan bin Hakam.” [A’asr Al-Khilafah Al-Rashidah by Akram Diya’a Al-Umari, p.390. Al-Umari said that the hadeeth was narrated in Al-Estia’ab with a good authentication]

99. It is an established fact in the books of Sunnis that Muawiyah had disputed with the Khalifah Rashid (the rightly guided caliph) and ordered the poisoning of Imam Hassan[sa] (check Mahram Naama, khwaja Hassan Nidhami) and why are the companions who made Ali[as] be abused on the pulpits considered as fair players? Give us intellectual and textual reasoning.

Please see our article “Mu’awiya”

It is an established fact that these are lies.

It is a lie that Mu’awiyah ordered to insult Ali from the pulpits. There is no rightful or clear evidence about that. Mu’awiya’s biography and manners refuses this accusation. What some of the historians mention about that has no value because when these historians presents these words about Mu’awiyah, they do not differentiate between true or false stories. But some of the Historians narrated in their books sound stories and false stories, but they are excused when they attributed these stories to their narrators so that we could judge these stories, whether to accept them or reject them. Among these historians is Al-Tabari, who lived in a time of Shia’s growing power. Al-Tabari says in the introduction to his history: “Let the person who reads through our book know that my reliance on whatever I recorded is on news and history with attribution to their narrators, without using intellect except in rare occasions. The knowledge of what had happened before, and what is going to happen at present time, is not reached to those who did not see and their time did not allow them for it without being told by people and without the interference of intellect. Therefore, whatever news you find in my book about history that the reader may deny it, or the listener may abhor it because he did not find it truthful according to him, then let him know that we did not present it ourselves, but it came from some of the people who narrated the story to us. We just presented what we have been told.” [Tareekh Al-Tabari, Introduction, p.13]

It is a lie also what al-Tijani says that Muslim narrated in his Saheeh a similar incident in “Ali’s Virtues” Chapter. The story that Al-Tijani is meaning is the story which is narrated by A’amir bin Sa’ad bin Abi Waqqas who narrated from his father who says: (Mu’awiyah bin Abi Sufyan ordered Sa’ad and asked him: “What prevented you from insulting Abu Turab (Ali bin Abi Talib)?” Sa’ad answered: “The prophet peace be upon him said three things to him (Ali bin Abi Talib), so I would not insult him because to have one of these three things is more beloved to me than Humr Al-Nni’am (a kind of best camels). I heard the prophet peace be upon him saying to appoint Ali as a leader when the prophet used to go to Jihad (Holy War). Ali then would say to him: “O’ Messenger of Allah, you left me with the women and children?” The prophet peace be upon him answered him: “Would not you be pleased if you were for me as Haroon was for Mousa? Except there is no prophecy after me.” And I heard the prophet saying at the day of Khaybar: “I would give this banner to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger and who Allah and His Messenger love him too.” He said: “Then we were looking for this honor.” Then the Prophet said: “Call Ali.” Ali was brought and he had sore eyes. So the prophet peace be upon him spitted in his eyes and gave him the banner. Then Allah granted victory to the Muslims by the hands of Ali. And when this verse revealed: “Come, let us gather together, our sons and your sons,” the messenger of Allah called Ali, Fatima, Hasan, and Hussain and said: “O’ Allah, they are my family.”) [Saheeh Muslim with Explanation, Book of “The Companions,” Chapter of “Virtues of Ali,” #2404]

This hadeeth does not mean that Mu’awiyah ordered Sa’ad to insult Ali. But, as it is obvious, Mu’awiyah wanted to know the reason that prevented Sa’ad from insulting Ali. Therefore, Sa’ad gave him the reason, and we do not know that when Mu’awiyah heard Sa’ad’s answer got angry with him or punished him. Mu’awiya’s silence is a correction for Sa’ad’s opinion. If Mu’awiyah was despotic; forcing people to insult Ali as Al-Tijani claims, then Mu’awiyah would not be quiet and would force Sa’ad to insult Ali, but nothing of that happened. Hence, it is known that Mu’awiyah did not order to insult Ali nor was pleased by that. Al-Nawawi says: “Mu’awiyah’s saying does not declare that he ordered Sa’ad to insult Ali, but asked him for the reason that prevented him from insulting. As if Mu’awiyah was saying to him: “Have you refrained from insulting Ali as a result of piety, fear or anything like that? If it was as a result of piety and veneration to refrain from insulting, then you are rightful and if it were other than that, then there would be another answer.” Or it might be that Sa’ad was in a group of people who insults Ali and he did not insult Ali with them, and could not prevent them and controverted them so Mu’awiyah asked him this question. They said: “And it may have another explanation, that what prevented you from making Ali wrong in his thought and opinion, and to show to people our good opinion and thought and that Ali was wrong?” [Ibid. p250-252]

100. How and with whose instructions did the incident of Harra transpire? What happened to Medina and Ahl Medinah during the same? Please give a detailed account of it.


In conclusion, we will present a shia hadith, which is enough to let you understand the whole story.

Imam Al-sajjad (as) said: If you see people of suspicion and innovation – other than shias or new shia – then show disownment from them and abuse them much, backbit them, make false accusations on them – that is, backbite them by attributing lies on them and make false accusations on them (‘Buhtaan’)[tanbiah al-khawatir v.2 p.162 – wasael al-shia v.11 p. 508 – Nahj al-intisaar p.152]