By Muhammad Mansur Ibrahim – Usmanu Danfodiyo University, Sokoto
Rendered To English By – Barrister Muhammad Nasiru Sidi
In the Name of Allah Most Gracious Most merciful
LATE SHEIKH JA’AFAR MAHMUD ADAM
(May Allah have mercy on his soul)
The following are the direct statements of late Sheikh Ja’afar Mahmud Adam after he finished delivering the translation and meanings of the Qur’an (tafseer) at the routine time in the jumu’ah Mosque of Uthman bin Affan located at Gadon Kaya, on jumu’ah 15th Muharram (1428AH), equivalent to 2nd February 2007. It was exactly ten weeks (10wks),which is equality to Seventy days (70days) before what Allah destined would happened to him. May Allah reward him abundantly and accept him as a martyr, ameen.
They are as follows;
“There is a tape of Mallam Mansur, Seventy questions that have no answers; all are directed to the Shi’ites. I listened to the whole of the tapes on my way from Sokoto to Kano.
Frankly speaking, I have never heard a convincing lecture in Hausa language that discussed Shiism as those tapes. It is nothing but an inspiration from Allah; it will be a great loss if it happened that you have never listened to the tapes.
However, it instigates me personally to present it to brothers in Islam for them to distribute it, whoever records tapes should have them for distribution amoung the populace. I gave my words of advice to the author i.e. Mallam Mansur, that the tapes/lecture should be converted to a book for easy accessibility.
On a serious note, the tapes are really convincing, and May Allah reward him abundantly. Further more, I’m not marketing the tapes on behalf of those that are responsible (tape recorders), but if a student of knowledge missed it, then he has incurred a great loss.
I admit that I learnt a lot, and by this Allah is my witness. There are some things I knew and he reaffirms them to me, and there are others that I never knew of, I heard them.
Conclusively, the tapes are of utmost importance, Look for them! Look for them!! Look for them!!! I am re-attesting this to you.”
In the name of Allah Most Gracious Most Merciful
These questions were delivered and presented in the masjid of Sultan Bello situated at Sokoto town, on Friday 14th Dhul Qidah 1427(AH) equivalent to 2nd December 2006. I challenge the shi’ites with these questions, giving them assurance that if they answer only 7 out of them I will declare myself as a shi’ite.
The program was organized by “Ahlul baiti & Sahabah foundation, Nigeria” the foundation which pledge to create awareness to the public of the part that exited between the students/companions of the propet sallahu alaihi wassalam and his household ( Ahlul baiti). Because this two parties as Allah described them are one and the same, they have the same life style, they are their brothers’ keeper, and they have affection for one another and help one another. They live and practiced the same doctrine, they have one leader, and their objective in life is single, I.e. following the footsteps of our leader, the prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam.
The following questions and those that are akin to them are as a result of a long research conducted by Sunni scholars on the Religion of Shi’ah, and their gripping arguments/challenges among the Shiite from time immemorial. This could be evident looking at the history of Sheikhul Islam Ibn Taimiyyah during his life time, so also late Sheikh Ihsan Ilahi a Pakistani among others.
However, this kind of challenge was also directed to Shi’ite in a program stationed by “Al-Mustaqillah” channel, conducted during the month of Ramadhan 1418(AH). It was a live transmission of two hours daily from the beginning to the end of the mouth, and was transmitted to different parts of the world. The Sunni scholars like Sheikh Usman Al-Khamis, Saudies, Sheikh Abdurrahman Dimashqiyyah, Iraqis and Sheikh Abul Muntasir Al-Balushi, Iranian, are among those that hade this kind of sessions with “Ayats” of shi’ah, and they challenged them with similar questions like mine. These kinds of questions can be viewed in the Sunni web pages, especially the pages of alburhan.com, wylsh.com, and fnoor.net. e.t.c.
I came across a book written by Sheikh Sulaiman bn Salihu Al-kharashi titled “As’ilatun Qadat shababas Shi’ati Ilal haqqi”. It was a week after I delivered my lecture. We also share the same doctrine, and we use the same authority i.e. following research on shi’ite books and the statements of their scholars of the past and the present.
One other reason that influenced me to present these challenging questions is the fact that, the state and some local government representatives attended a workshop of six month at Iran. They are presently back in the country with what they thought is real knowledge. These questions are presented to them for it may lead them to the fact about the devilish doctrines that were introduced to them.
Our hope is that piety should be their yardstick in response to these questions. We have no doubt that they are seekers of truth and were misguided. However, if they reason well, with Allah’s Mercy, they are then pressed to return to the truth i.e. the footpath of Muhammad Sallahu Alaihi Wassalam (Sunnah).
In conclusion, I must thank Allah the Almighty that eased my task. And also, must extend my appreciation to Barrister Muhammad Nasiru Sidi who transcribed the presented lecture into English. I followed the whole of the work and chaptarised it, I also add seven (7) additional questions to the first seventy (70), the question ever chapterised into ten (10) chapters all with the intention of simplifying it for the shi’ite to understand the truth.
May Allah help us.
Muhammad Mansur Ibrahim
At Sokoto, 01/06/1429AH-06/06/2008
Shi’ism and Islam
This question is underlined under the saying of Allah (Subhanahu Wata’ala) in Suratul Ma’idah verse 3 where he says;
“… this day, I have perfected your Religion for you, completed my favour upon you, and chosen Islam as your Religion…”.
The above verse was revealed on the 10th year after migration (Hijra), ninety seven (97) days before the demise of the Noble prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam. This is an automatic indication. that the Noble prophet has spent twenty-three years preaching the Religion of Islam. However, it is also ten years after the establishment of Islamic state.
The Religion of Shi’ism, its doctrines and politics, attempted rebellion of the Religion all happened after the demise of the Noble prophet.
The question here is Shi’ism part of the Religion that was perfected on the day of Arafah or not? If it is part of that Religion, then why didn’t the Noble prophet mention it? Why didn’t he establish his Religion on it? Why didn’t he teach his students about it? An if it was after the Religion has been perfected that the Religion (Shi’ism) emerged, then what is its need?
It is a known fact that when Sayyidina Uthman was martyred, the whole of the Muslims paid homage to Aliyu bin Abu dalib Radiyallahu Anhu . The mantle of authority and leadership was given to him unanimously. It was after he decided to change one of the Governors he met in power, and that Governor has a massive support of his citizens, further more, the blood compensation of one of the Governors household that was murdered i.e. Sayyidina Uthman, and that was the point that triggered disagreement between them. That was the motive the terrorist used to ignite their temper and caused war.
The question here is, when Sayyidina Ali Radiyallahu Anhu was in position of authority, why didn’t he proclaim Shi’ism? Why didn’t he produce a new Qur’an? Why didn’t he decree temporary marriage (mut’ah) and perform it? Why didn’t he give the acclaimed farm of Fatima radiyyahu anha that you always claim (fadaq) and hand it over to her heirs? Why didn’t he abrogate “Assalatu Khairun Minan Naumi” that you said is an innovation of the companions? Why didn’t he also add “Ashhadu Anna Aliyyan Waliyullah” in the Adhan proclamation, since doing so is part of Religion in your doctrines? Why didn’t he deviate from any of the things that the three Khalifs (successors) did?
Is this not a clear indication that Aliyu is a Sunni and not shi’ite? And he has a complete loyalty and affection to those successors that preceded him against your insinuations?
Kulaini in Al-Kafi (1/397) has a chapter that he titled: “ the rise of Imam (establishing an authority) will lead by the laws of the Jews”. He proceed by saying; “…they will never request for an evidence nor witness (in dealing with issues regarding evidence)” (then the murder of who ever is not a shi’ite will be rampant whether he is the one with convincing argument or not in any lawsuit).
In the book “Biharul Anwar”(52/354) Majlisi said; “when Mahdi appears, he will come with a new Religion, a new book (scripture) and new laws/decrees”. Nu’umain also corroborated this in the book of “kitabul Ghaibati” pp 154
It was reported in the a fore mentioned book that Ja’afar As-Sadiq said; “I can forecast/prophesize Mahdi when he will appear in the Ka’abah between Ruknul Yamani and Maqamu Ibrahim, he will be pledging to people on an authority to follow a new scripture and not the Qur’an”. The above was reported in the book; “Biharul Anwar” (52/135)
However, Majlisi in the above book (Biharul Anwar) said; “when Mahdi appears, by the time people notice how he will commit murder, they will have wished he had never appeared.” He continued; “… Majority of citizens will doubt him as a blood relation to the Prophet, sallahu alaihi wassam because if he is a member of the (Prophet) household, he is bound to be merciful.
My question here is, why is it that if your Mahdi appears he will be governed by the laws/decrees of the Jews? Is it not that prophet Muhammad; sallahu alaihi wassalam decree has abrogated all laws before it? Why should they leave the Qur’an aside? Is this not a pointer that the origin of your Religion is from Jewish Religion joined with Magus (paganism), wrapped with Paganism and named Islam?
What is the relationship between your Religion (Shi’ism) and the parsian language? This is because you disregard Arabic language completely, and you give high esteem to Parisian and their language above any language or person. Before you disconcour let me give an example that will clarify my intent.
Your books revealed that if your Mahdi appears, he will murder the Quraysh, and murder the Arabs, Further more, among his names is “Kisrul Magus” The king of pagans! You already confess that “Choesroes” the King of Persia that tore the letter of the Prophet sallahu alaihi wassallam as you say out of disrespect will dwell in the hell fire but hell fire is prohibited against him. However, your books also gave more priority to Salmanul Farisy over almost all the companions of the Prophet, Abu Lu’luata, a pagan that kill Umar is earning great respect in your doctrines, you also visit his grave yard. Al-Gharithi in the introduction/preface of his book “Aqdud durar fi Baqri Badri Umar” said; Abu-Lu’luata is entitled to Allah’s mercy even though he is not a Muslim. Visiting his graveyard and praying for him is among the great deeds that earn rewards, because of the great act he deed for the murder of Umar, the in-law of the Noble Prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam !!!!
Don’t you see how Al-Ahqaqi in his book “Risalatul Islam” pp 324, he protested against what people that are filthy, devils and thoroughly bad “as he said” did to sanctified woman of Paris (Pagans) when it was conquered. He is referring to the compaions of the Prophet sallaju alaihi wassalm !!.
The place of Karbala located at Iraq (Persia) is better than Makkah and Madinah under your doctrines. This reached to the extent that the degree of Ka’abah in comparison with Karbala is like what a needle will carry of the water from an ocean; this is the assertion of Majlisi in Biharul Anwar (98/106).
Indeed, today Iranian nation has adopted Parisian language as an official language as provided under the provision of Iranian constitution P3. This shouldn’t be a surprise looking at the fact that, most of the recognized and authorized scholars of shi’ite, that are allowed to give their respective opinions in religious matters are foreigners (Ajami) i.e. they don’t speak Arabic language. Scholars like Khumaini, Khamna’ei, Rafsanjani, and Khatame, even Sistani “Sayyidul Muhaqqiq” the real leader of the shi’ate scholars of this time. All of them do not speak Arabic! Just some year’s back, Al-jazeerah channel has an interactive session with the leader of Nigerian shi’ite, but Arabic was translated to him and he responded in English language! Don’t you notice that? !!! before then, he confessed that he could not not read Arabic text without vowel singns !!!.
Questions On (Imamah) Leadership
The Religion of Shi’ism is based on the doctrine that Aliyu bin Abi Xalib Radiyallahu Anhu is the first successor or rather leader (Khalif), This is how the name, Imamiyyah, was derived and attributed to them. They insinuate that the Prophet sallahu alaihi wa sallam willed the succession of leadership to Ali Radiyallahu Anhu, and the progeny of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu should be the train of the Will.
This doctrine was the main reason why the shi’ites viewed the companions especially those that succeeded the Prophet before Ali as leaderships taken by force, tyrants’ unfaithful to the Prophet and his will/bequest. This issue regarding leadership is of utmost importance to the Shi’ite, because they take it as the greatest pillar of Islam which the other pillars can’t stand if it is not established, they reached to the extent of saying that it is even more than prophet hood in importance.
Why is this great pillar of Religion not mentioned in the Qur’an jus like the other pillars whom you think they are not as important as it (Imamah). Allah has mentioned so many things in His detailed book (Qur’an). Lets take prayer as an example, not even the prayer it self , purity, ablution, ceremonial ablution, qibla & even excrement were discussed in the Qur’an.
Further more, what is prohibited or otherwise were mentioned and discussed in the Qur’an the blessed book, as Allah says;
“When he hath explained to you in detail what is forbidden to you – Except under compulsion of necessity…” Q6: 119.
However, not even things that are compulsory or otherwise even those that are recommended and discouraged are discussed in the Qur’an. Things like loan, hunting, have almost four verses revealed.
Why is it that a verse wasn’t revealed to declare the leadership of Aliyu, this is evident because there is no verse that shows Aliyu to be the first leader of Muslim Community after the demise of the prophet. Why is the name of Aliyu not mentioned in the Qur’an but the name of Zaidu is very clear in Suratul Ahzab?
It’s a known fact that Shi’ite scholars had a consensus that Aliyu’s name is provided in hundred of Qur’anic verses but the companions removed it. This is clear in their holy book; Alkafi. A million-dollar question here is where is the safety and guard Allah has promised regarding the Qur’an?
On the day of conquest of Makkah, the Noble Prophet sallahu alaihi wassalm borrowed the key to the door Ka’abah from the tribe of Banu Dalhatu who are the custodians to the keys; this was an inherited custom from time immemorial.
When the prophet conquered Makkah, he requested the key to open the door of Ka’abah, this was a very tragic event to Banu Dalhah that the end of their custody to the key has come, and this led them to crying. Immediately Qur’an was revealed on the issue where Allah says;
“Allah doth command you to render back your Trusts To those to whom they are due; And when ye judge Between people That ye judge with justice: verily how excellent is the teaching which He giveth you! For Allah is He who heareth and seeth all things.”
In response to above verse, the Noble prophet took back the keys to Banu Dalhah, he further make a pronouncement that re-affirm their custody of the key till the day of resurrection and said;
“Take the keys O Banu Dalhah, it stays with you forever, and no one will take it away from you except a tyrant.”
Our question here is, if an issue of just the keys to Ka’abah the prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam was so direct and clear for establishing the trust of the custodians, and the trust is just for custody and not ownership, then why is there no any bequest or pronouncement regarding the leadership of Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu that you always claim? Why didn’t the Prophet make such a pronouncement and say; “take this leadership o the family of Ali, forever and no one will take it away from you except a tyrant” why didn’t the prophet sallahu alaihi wa sallam do this? Is the concept of leadership more important than any thing as your insinuation asserts?
You always claim that your twelve leaders are infallible. If you are asked to give proof /authority, you would say the reason of their leader ship as well asa being infallible that the Noble Prophet clothed Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussain and said; “Oh Allah! These are my household, and then remove all abomination from them, make them pure and spotless”
However, since Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala purifies them then they are regarded as infallibles (ma’asum).
Our question here is, why didn’t you call Fatima as (ma’asumah), we didn’t see her name among your leaders because that Prophetic tradition is the evidence of leadership in your doctrine!! Further more, where are the cremaining nine leaders in that verse or the Prophetic tradition?
During the life of Muhammad sallahu alaihi wassalam many people from different cities did come and convert to Islam at Madinah, After that, they returned to there various cities. Many of them met the Noble Prophet once, twice or thrice. These kinds of people have never heard of anything as regard the leadership of Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu as the one the prophet bequeath leadership to as you always claim.
Our question here is, is their Islam complete or is yet to be completed? Are they having a mini-Islam? !!! If you say there is reduction and is a mini Religion, then why didn’t the Prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam complete it for them and explain this important pillar? But if you believe their Religion is complete, then what is the essence of the statement that Religion is incomplete without attesting to the leadership of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu.
Is this an affirmation that the Noble Prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam has shorten his message as Khumaini profess in his book “Kashful Asrar” he believed that “The Prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam has not completed the message of Allah regarding Aliyu as he completed Allah’s message of his Prophet hood”?
It is a known fact that the Shi’ites claim that Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu is the person who own the right of leadership, and those successors before him are tyrants that were in power by force, then why was he a member in a constituted six man committee during the demise of Umar Radiyallahu Anhu, and from among them, a successor would be selected.
The detail is as follows; when Umar Radiyallahu Anhu was in the process of demise after he was stabbed while praying, he became optimistic that he will die, Umar Radiyallahu Anhu then announce six names, and from among them a new leader shall emerge. He testified that all of them are equal to the task and qualified, and that their relationship with the Noble Prophet was cordial.
These six people are; Uthman bin Affan, Aliyu bin Abi Dalib, Abdurrahman bin Auf, Dalhatu bin Ubaidullah, Zubair bin Auwan, Sa’ad bin Waqqas. They were given the ultimatum of three days to announce who shall be the next leader, and an interim government was constituted.
During the first sitting of that committee (Shurah), they agreed that three should step down and let the contest be between the three others. However, one of them i.e. (contesting three) stepped with the consensus that he shall choose between the remaining two i.e. Uthman and Ali Radiyallahu Anhu. Abdurrahman bin Auf was now the one that was given three more days to decide who shall be the new leader, after various consultations with the Muslim ummah, he nominated Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu who emerge as the new leader (Khalif) of the Muslims.
Our question here is, why didn’t Ali Radiyallahu Anhu told them that he was the initial chosen person by Allah , Subhanahu Wa Ta’ala and the rest shall automatically withdraw? Why then did he accept the membership of the Shurah if he knew that his right would be taken away from him? If he knew the initial bequest of the Noble prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wassalam, then what is the essence of contesting for the office?
If what you are claiming is a fact, that the Noble prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam wished Ali Radiyallahu Anhu to be his successor, he even made an effort to inform his companions. But it is a known fact that under Islamic doctrine, a leader is the one who supposes to lead prayers. Why didn’t the Noble prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam instruct Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu to lead prayers even if it was just once before the demise of the Prophet.
Either from our books or yours, our source of history or yours, is their any source that established Ali Radiyallahu Anhu to have led prayers even if it once? From both our books and yours we knew that Abubakar Radiyallahu Anhu led prayers. But there is no any source that informed us Ali Radiyallahu Anhu has led prayers, why? And you say he is the leader by bequest/will!!!
Why did Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu accept so many offers of appointment on different occasions during the reign of Umar Radiyallahu Anhu? Example; when Umar Radiyallahu Anhu was to leave for Qudus to collect the keys to the third 3rd most important and sacred masjid after was conquered under the leadership army of Khalid bin Walid. During that time Umar Radiyallahu Anhu appointed Ali Radiyallahu Anhu as the acting Khalif of Madinah (Governor), at that time, the office was like the office of Vice-President. Because he will be an automatic President (Amirul Muminin) of the interim administration i.e. de facto president before the new president is elected as de jure.
Why did Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu take the office of a Special Adviser, and Governorship office under the reign and administration that the Shiite termed it as an Unislamic and tyrant? See Nahjul Balagah pp 325 & 340.
Further more, when Umar Radiyallahu Anhu was on his way to wage war against Iraq and later changed position and returned to Madinah, he appointed a representative who was Ali Radiyallahu Anhu as Governor of Madinah (Vice-President). Salmanul Farisy also was once a Governor at Madinah under the reign of Umar, Ammar bin Yasir was the Governor at Kufah under the same administration, and these two companions are close associates of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu. See Siyaru A’alamin Nubala’I (1&547, & 422).
Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu was also a Judge during the same reign, why didn’t he claim and profess his leadership, and for that reason he should have denied to serve under the administration of Umar?
Why didn’t Ali bin Abi dalib Radiyallahu Anhu climb the (mimbar) of the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wassalam even once just to inform the Ummah about his right? For example; to say; “Oh people;! Remember the Noble Prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam instructed me to lead you, so go against these tyrant?” and this could be done if the three successors that came before him are really tyrants as you claim?
Is Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu not a warrior? Where is the warrior ship? Why didn’t he fight those that took away his sacred right? In the books of Shi’ah, it was written that the leadership of Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu was a divine revelation from heaven, and Allah subhanahu wata’ala referred to him as Amirul Muminin as it came in their popular book “Al-kafi” authored by “Kulaini.” Then why didn’t Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu declare a religious war against them to protect his sacred revealed right? Or is there any evidence that there was a war between him and those that succeeded the Prophet before him? Or did he request for any aid from the Ummah as the position of his son Hussain when he made effort to fight Yazid as a tyrant?
In the book of “Nahjul Balagah” pp 136 one of the most outstanding book to Shi’ites, it was said that; Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu has requested that the leadership should not be given to him after Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu died, this was because of the misfortune and calamity the Ummah was facing. A “Coup d’etat” was successful and the plotters came from Kufah, they were very few, not more than two thousand (2000) men.
But they were left to actualize their mission because Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu disallowed the people to counter their attack. Finally, they lunched their attack against Amirul Muminin (President) and murdered him in his residence, in the sacred city of the Noble Prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam. The following was the reported request of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu as it came in Nahjul Balagha;
“Leave me alone and look for someone else, for me to be a minister to help the president is better for you than I become the President (Ameer).”
Our question to the Shi’ites here is why didn’t he accept his right that was revealed by Allah subhanahu wata’ala? Is he afraid? Then who is he afraid of after Allah subhanahu wata’ala? If he was defeated and bullied at the initial stage, now that chance was clear to establish Allah’s command has come, he should have use this opportunity? Or is it a fallacy on what you always claim about Allah’s instruction?
Why did you exclude the family of Al- Hassan from leadership? But you establish it to the family of Hussain? The following is the list of your leaders (imams) as recorded in your books; none came from the family of Al-Hassan except him;
1, Aliyu bn Abi dalib
2, Hassan bn Ali
3, Hussain bn Ali
4, Ali bn Hussain (Zainul Abidun)
5, Muhammad bn Aliyu bn Hussain (Al-Baqir)
6, Ja’afar bn Muhammad bn Ali bn Hussein (As-Sadiq)
7, Musa bn Ja’afar bn Muhammad bn Ali bn Hussain (Al-Kazim)
8, Ali bn Musa bn Ja’afar bn Muhammad bn Ali bn Hussain (Ar-Ridha)
9, Muhammad bn Ali bn Musa bn Ja’afar bn Muhammad bn Ali bn Hussain (At-Taqiyyu)
10, Aliyu bn Muhammad bn Ali bn Musa bn Ja’afar bn Muhammad bn Ali bn Hussain (Naqiyyu)
11, Alhassan bn Ali bn Muhammad bn Ali bn Musa bn Ja’afar bn Muhammad bn Ali bn Hussain (Al-Askari)
12, Muhammad bn Hassan bn Ali bn Muhammad bn Ali bn Musa bn Ja’afar bn Muhammad bn Ali bn Hussain (Mahdi)
Why is it that all your (Imams) leaders are Hussain’s lineage? Why was the family of Al-Hassan not included? Is it not establishing the fact of the accusation against you that, it is because Hussain is an in-law to Choesroes the king of Persia you give him and his lineage high esteem because they have blood relation with Choesroes, who was the leader and King of fire worshippers?
Historical source show that when Persia was conquered during the reign of Umar Radiyallahu Anhu and the daughter of Choesroes the King of Persia was taken as a captive name “Shaharbanu”, Umar Radiyallahu Anhu then showered his favour and gave Hussain Radiyallahu Anhu that Princess as a gift, all the children of Hussain are from his union with this slave girl, the daughter of the King of present (Iran). Looking at the fact on how paganism and pagans were against Islam, coupled with the fact that Islam succeeded to conquer and destroy their Religion (paganism), and their kingdom that was built by their fore fathers, this triggered them to establish Shi’ism. The Religion was built by their fore farthers, this triggered them to establish Shi’ism. The Religion was however establish on household ship, connecting it to the Noble Prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam but although the real image connected with for their yardstick, the king of Persia. If you disconcur with this assertion, then we need an explanation of what distinguish and make the image of Al-Hussain higher than Al-Hassan, as reported in your books. Among others are;“Tanqihul Maqal” by Mamaqani (3/142) A’ayunus shi’ah (1/26), Biharul Anwar (27/212), Kitabus Sulaimi ibn Qais pp 288.
It is a fact that your 12th leader (Mahdi) has hidden himself in a cave for over a thousand years, then what is the reason? In Iraq there is a special day that the Shi’ites gather to cry and seek for his quick emergence, this will make him to save the Ummah, he is a Messiah that will save the Ummah against tyrants!!! There some new scholastic opinions that are mostly found in the Internet establishing that spread of vices should be encouraged because it will quickly ease the emerge of Mahdi.
From the first instance why did he hide himself? It’s a fact that fear of tyrant leaders during the Abbasids was the reason for his disappears. Then why didn’t he appear after the downfall of that empire? The Shi’ites later established new governments/Kingdoms of “Ubaidiyyah” and the later authorities after that like “fatimiyyah”, “Buwaihiyya”, “Safawiyya? Even at our Present time we have Iranian Republic, which has in her possession the “Nuclear weapon of mass destruction” how can we believe the Mahdi that fears tyrants can fight against tyranny for the Ummah?
It was reported that during the birth of your acclaimed Mahdi, some birds came from heavens and were playing with their feathers and surpassing on him, they were touching his face and head and flying away, this was their routine acts. When his father was told, he smiled and replied; it was the Angels that came to have good fortune with him, and when he will acquire leadership, they are his helpers.
Our question here is if the Angels are his helpmates then why should he disappear and hide, who then dose he fear?
It was reported in your books that the life lf Mahdi was prolonged because of the immense need the Ummah has for him, as it was reported in the book of Minhajul-Karamah of bin Mudahhir.
Our question here is if there is any being whose prestige could reach that his life is prolonged, then why wasn’t the life of the Noble Prophet prolonged? Or is it that in your creed Mahdi is more valuable and important than the Prophet, or is it that the Ummah needs him more?
It is your (Shi’ites) creed that your 12 Imams including Hassan and Hussein all have the knowledge of the unseen and they don’t die until they so wish to die, This was what was reported in your most authentic book Al-Kafi. Then why did Hussain take himself to death? Why did Al-Hassan eat the poisoned food? He has the knowledge of the unseen and will eat a poisoned food? Did he commit suicide? We know that the Noble Prophet sallahu alaihi wa sallam said; “whoever commit suicide will dwell hell fire.” Are you trying to say Al Hassan has committed suicide after he knew there was poisoned and eat the poisoned food?
You also acclaim the infallibility of Al Hassan & Al Hussain, this also goes to the rest of your 12 leaders. This is the consensus of your scholars, it is evidence in your books among which; Ikmaluddeen by Saduq, Aqidatul Imamiyyah by Muzaffar and Hukumatul Islamiyyah by Khumaini. One of your musicians from Kano (Gadon Qaya) has added the 13th in his hausa poem where he said :
Zazzakiyyu is a Religion reformer
The only infallible
Every Emir is also a follower
Oh the restless should understand
Is not an abuse to Emirs?
Our question is between these two infallible who is right? Is it Al-Hassan or Al-Hussain? Al-Hassan without any duress gave Banu Umayyad the mantle of authority given to him; he passed it over to Muawiyah. Al-Hussain made an attempt to bring back that leadership which led to his assassination. Who among them acted right?
We should be aware of the fact that when Al Hassan gave out this authority, thousands of followers are answerable to him, and were ready to surrender their lives for his safety, he was already the leader. Al Hussain has in his camp only his household and some of his blood relatives that are not more than seventy, mainly women and children. Some of them that notice their weakness left and run away. Those that face the army and fight with him are not up to 50. But he still insisted to accomplish his aim.
Who is on the right path between them? Is it the one who has thousands of army and willingly surrender the mantle of authority to Banu Umayyad? Or the one who insisted on fighting Banu Umayyad without any strong army, who is right between them?
According to Sunni creed, they are not infallible, and Al Hassan is more right because the Noble prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam praised him and what he did, this was when the Prophet was giving good news of the happenings. He said; “this my grandson is a leader, and one day he will be an arbiter between two Muslims though they fight each other, this is because is a war of a misunderstanding not a war against belief (creed). Hussain was wrong in disregarding the advice given to him by observers, destiny led him to miscalculations, because fighting an established government (incumbent) by trusting the shi’ites, whom never stand by their words, is just an act of destiny. The Shi’ites before this incident assassinated Ali and Al Hassan Radiyallahu Anhu.
Before Hussain Radiyallahu Anhu was assassinated, he has given up, and noticed really that the Shi’ites had planned against him. He then gave three options i.e. to go back to Madinah, or proceed and fight together with muslim warriors or the last option to surrender himself to Yazid and pledge his allegiance to him. Some Muslims including some of his household and some companion concur with the last option. They denied him access to any of these options as an individual. This led him to fight the government but not as a rebel. Our wish and hope was he being a martyr, and his assassins should expect and wait for Allah’s anger and wrath if they didn’t repent.
Martyrdom of Hussain is a blessing that Allah bestowed on him as he bestowed on his brother Al Hassan, this is for the elevation of their honor to enable them attain their established destiny of the saying of our Noble Prophet sallahu alaihi wassalam, ; they are the youth leaders of paradise. Before the death of the Noble Prophet they were kids, none of them witnessed any religious war, but by their assassination, Allah has gave them the honor that slipped them.
This is our creed we Sunni, and we await your answers you the Shi’ites, who is right and wrong between them?
In the book of Al-Kafi (1/252) it was narrated; “the 12 leaders knew the day they will die and none will die unless by will.” further, more in the book of Biharul Anwar (43/366) Al- Majlisi narrated “none of the Leaders has died a natural death, its either he is assassinated or he is poisoned”.
It is an established fact in our creed that who ever commits suicide will dwell in hell fire, by the narrations reported from the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wassalam. Then when your leaders were poisoned, are they aware of it and ate the poison, is this not a suicide? Or were they ignorant of it? Or are all these stories fallacies? i.e. the narrations by Kulaini and Majlisi.
You persistently acclaim that Hussain died with thirst and narrated that he said; “whenever you drink water remember me” in the states that shi’ah is established, there are special places set for drinking water and written boldly; “drink and remember the thirst of Hussain”
Our question is that doesn’t he has the knowledge of the unseen? Isn’t he aware of his thirst? Why didn’t he come with enough water? Allah instructs us to carry weapons when embarking on war; how can we travel with weapons and forget of food. Go to Suratul Anfal verse 60, Allah says we should make provision if we are to go for a war. Is there any good provision of some one to take than water if he is liable to death on the journey?
Our creed is that Hussain is ignorant of what is about to happen to him, but he followed his destiny as decreed by Allah, but you that said he has the knowledge of unseen we await your explanations.
Shi’ah And Qur’an
The Shi’ites you accuse the companions of changing the Qur’an, and many of your narrations from your authentic books confirm that. You believe that our Qur’an is fake, because you accuse the companions of hiding the original Qur’an, for example, in the book of Biharul Anwar (24/305) it was reported from Abu Abdullah, Ja’afarus Sadiq alaihis vsalam he said: “The Qur’an was revealed in four different categories; the first category was revealed on us (household of the Prophet), the second category was revealed against our enemies (companions), the third category are combination of tradition and proverbs, the fourth is the composition of compulsory duties, and some rules of authority. All the honors and dignity of the Qur’an is revealed on us”.
Imagine!!! A quarter of the Qur’an is bunch of proverbs; this is the base of their argument against the companions, that they hide the first two categories of the Qur’an. But if you read the whole of the Noble Qur’an from beginning to end, there is no place where the companions were dishonored and accused but vice versa.
Our question here is if the companions hide some portion of the Qur’an where is Aliyu? Why didn’t he unfold it? Or are they the only ones under obligation and Ali Radiyallahu Anhu is not under that obligation? If he unfold it, then where? What did he revealed? Where is the new Qur’an? Produce your proof if you are truthful.
If the companions hid half or the provisions of the Qur’an because they hate the honor of the Prophet’s household, then why didn’t they hide the Prophetic traditions that revealed their honor? They are evidenced in both your books and ours. At this juncture, I will not give example with your books (Shi’ites), I will use our (Sunni) books that are our pride.
After the Qur’an, there is no any book of high esteem and authenticity than the books of Bukhari and Muslim. Let us bring some example from them as regards the honor of the Prophet household. E.g. “ Whoever I am his close inmate then Aliyu is also his close inmate.”
We can deduce that the whole Shi’ites creed is based on this tradition. It was reported in Bukhari by more than 20 companions, in the science of hadith it reach the peak of authenticity i.e. (tawatir), the companions reported it and we believe in it but our argument is the misinterpretations given by you the Shi’ites.
The Noble prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wassalam make this pronouncement on his way back from the farewell pilgrimage at “Ghadir Khum” the Shi’ites refer to this place as a junction where people disperse and follow their routes to their various town/cities, and they claim it to be the reason that the Noble Prophet choose this location to inform the Ummah that Ali Radiyallahu Anhu is his successor.
To authenticate this story; I traced the source and origin of this particular place and asked resource persons in Saudi Arabia, it led me to know the particular place (Ghadir Khum). It was established that the distance from Makkah to this place is 250 kilometers on your way to Madinah.
Lets use our reasoning and see whether it comprehends that pilgrim will take 250 kilometers before each will take his route? The people of da’ifa as an example, their town is not more than 40 kilometers from Makkah, those from Iraq follow a different route back nothing will connect them to Madinah. The people of Kufah, and Basrah will not reach “Ghadir Khum” for them to take their routes. This also re-affirms that Ghadir Khum is not junctions for disperse by pilgrims.
The fact of the story was that the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi qWassalam made the pronouncement after all have dispersed, and warn the people going to Madinah against what he was hearing against Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu. The main reason was that Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu led an army, after the war, some of the companions wanted to exhaust some booties and he denied them until they reached Madinah. The Noble Prophet makes this pronouncement for them to identify the dignity and honor of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu and whoever dishonors him will dwell hell fire.
We the Sunni’s believe that whoever dishonor Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu will dwell hell fire, and there is no any Sunni who dishonor him. Go to places that Sunni are dominants you will have many of their children named Ali, if we dishonor him how can we name our children with his name?
Our question is why didn’t the companions hide the above tradition? And more than 20 twenty of them narrated the tradition, it clearly shows the honor and dignity of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu, how possible it is to believe that they hide some Qur’anic verses on his honor and the Prophetic household at large?
The hadith of “Kisa” (cloth) is another base of the Shi’ites creed. The hadith shows that the Noble Prophet covered Fatima, her husband and two of her sons Al Hassan & Al Hussain and said;
“Oh Allah!! These are my household, remove evil deeds and sins from them and purify them with thorough purification.”
The Mother of believers, Aisha Radiyallahu Anha and Ummu Salamah Radiyallahu Anha, narrated the above hadith.
The hadith that portray the honor of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu and his position, it says;
“Your position to me is like Harun’s position to Musa.”
Harun is a junior brother to Musa likewise Ali a junior brother to the Noble Prophet, but the first category are Prophets while in the second category Ali is not a Prophet.
Sa’ad bin Abi Waqqas was the narrator of the above hadith while the shi’ites refer to him as an apostate because they claim he dishonor Ali Radiyallahu Anhu. The Hadith was reported in Bukhari (3505).
On the night of Khaybar, the Noble Prophet said; “tomorrow I will give a flag to someone that loves Allah and his Prophet, also, Allah and his Prophet loves him & we will be victorious”
Because of the above good fortune, all the companions wished to be in possession of the flag. Umar Radiyallahu Anhu said; I leaped on that day for the Noble Prophet to see me and call me, at that moment; the Noble Prophet called on Ali and gave him the flag.
Sa’ad bin Abi Waqqas & Salamah bin Akwa were the narrators of the hadith, and reported also in Bukhari. Why didn’t these companions hide this honor but they hide some portions of the Qur’an on Ali’s honor and dignity?
A hadith that show the honor of Fatima and her children, are many. Among them was her position of the First lady in the Paradise, and her children as the youth leaders in Paradise.
Further more, Al-Hassan was referred as a born leader and arbiter of two Muslim camp/factions. So many narrations on how the Prophet cherishes them and his saying; “Oh Allah I really love them so please love them also.”
The above traditions were narrated by Usamah bin Zaid, Barra’u bin Azib, Anas bin Malik & Abdullah bin Umar among others and all are reported in Bukhari, why did they unfold these traditions?
The tradition on the honor and dignity of Prophet household as regard their love as obligation and hatred as great torment were all narrated by the companions. Why should they hide the Qur’anic verses on that and reveal the prophetic traditions? Or does Allah not guard the Qur’an? Why did he (Allah) guard the hadith and didn’t give the Qur’an such guard? Lets think!!!
It an established fact, that the companions of the Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wasalam narrated and reported the Qur’an directly from the Prophet. And the chain of narration for Qur’an is (Mutawatir) i.e. peak of all chains in the study of transmission. We have ten different narration of the Qur’anic rondos having two schools from each rondo, all the narrators are Sunnis.
In the present world, three rondos are the most exposed, i.e. Nafi’u, Asim and Abu Amrul Basri. The rondo of Nafi’u is well exposed by two of his schools of Warsh and Qalun; the rondo of Asim is exposed through the school of Hafs while the rondo of Abu Amrul Basri is exposed through the school of Duri. All the printed copies of Qur’an even in Iran are one of these rondos, but is mostly published and printed with the school of Hafs, which he narrated it from Asim, from Abu Abdurrahman As-Sulami, from Uthman bin Affan, Ali bin Abi Dalib, Zaid bin Thabit, Ubayy bin Ka’ab.
Our question is where does the Prophetic household narrate the Qur’an? Where is your chain from Ali bin Abi Dalib? What of the chain of Al Hassan, Al Hussain & Zainul Abidin?
Where is the chain of Ridha from Kazim, from Sadiq & Baqir?
What of Askari from Naqiyyu & Taqiyyu?
Are they not your claim as natural born leaders and Allah’s plea against his creatures?
Did they teach everything with the omission of the Qur’an? Why should you refer to unbelievers’ narration (as you claim)? Researched proved that there is only one Qur’anic narration of rondo from the prophetic household which is the rondo of Hamza Az-Zayyat (Sunni) narrated from Sadiq, from Baqir and from Zainul Abidin, where is the shi’ites narration of this rondo? Why is it that Zayyat a Sunni scholar is the only narrator and reporter? Why didn’t Kazim narrate from Sadiq? Or Askari from Naqiyyu? From Taqiyyu from Kazim & from Sadiq? And this narration is very rare to find, why don’t you publish and recite that rondo since is the only household narration?
We await your claim of Qur’anic rondo narration either (mutawattir or shadh) from the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi WAssalam.
The Qur’an of Fatima that you always make reference to, was mentioned in your book “Al-Kafi” (1/239); a stranger came to the house of Abu Ja’afar and say; I want to ask you a question but confirm weather there is secrecy in the house, he opened through a curtain and replied; ask what ever you wish, the infallible Imam said; we really have a Qur’an called the Qur’an of Fatima, is a Qur’an that triple your Qur’an, in the content of our Qur’an, there is no any word which you have in your Qur’an.
What an amazing situation, a Qur’an without Bismillah? !!! Is the Prophet Sallahu Alaihi WAssalam aware of the Qur’an or not? If he is aware, why did he not inform his companions? Why did he hide it for the Ummah? While Allah says;
“Oh messenger of Allah! Proclaim (the message) which has been sent down to you by your Lord. And if you do not, then you have not conveyed his message…”
But if you say he is not aware of it then how do you come across it? The fact is, a Shi’ites scholar Dabrisi has revealed the secrete where he published a book titled; “comprehensive explanation in confirming the changes of Allah’s book”.
He brought more than two thousand narrations of Shi’ites that confirmed that this Qur’an is pirated/fake, he brought views of Shi’ites jurists, Shi’ites hadith scholars and all that Shi’ites see them as the most highly respected scholars of their creed. He concluded by saying; “it is imperative to believe that the present Qur’an of the Ummah is fake”
However, sayyid Hashimul Bahrani the author of Al-Burhan said in the introduction pp “49!” is my opinion that as this issue has been well researched and confirmed, it is imperating to authorize every Shi’ite to believe as pillar of faith that this Qur’an is not authentic. This was the aim of the tyrant leaders that rule before Ali Radiyallahu Anhu, lets reason more and judge their actions”. Yes we reason, think and confirm your fallacies.
Ni’imatullahi Jaza’iri, a Shi’ite scholar was giving a reply and challenge to those that believe the Qur’an is original, he replied as follows;
“ Who ever believes that the whole of this Qur’an that is with the Ummah is the original Qur’an revealed through Jibril has contradicted the narrations of our leaders, and friends, because their narrations are (Mutawatir). But by believing in that, he is automatically not a Shi’ite” (Al-Anwarun Nu’umaniyyah 2/357)
Further more, the following was reported from Al-kafi; “who ever thinks there is an original complete Qur’an in possession of any being is a great liar. This is because no one memorized it how it was revealed from Allah only Aliyu and the leaders that came from his progeny”
Al-Khu’i, a great Shi’ite scholar of the contemporary time, as coated in the book titled “Lillahi Summa lit Tarikh” pp 80 he said the following; “I urge you to use this Qur’an of our present time before the Qur’an of Fatima is revealed”.
What a surprise!!! The Qur’an should be used for occasional purpose? When and where is the original Qur’an? They are not in possession of Fatima’s Qur’an nor Is it in their memory, we know there is no any special Qur’an left for Fatima.
The Shi’ites claim to have more than Fatima’s Qur’an, they have among others, Al-Jami’ah, its details is found in Al-Kafi (1/239), Biharul Anwar (26/25).
They have another Qur’an called “An Namus”, it was mentioned in “Biharul Anwar” (25/117). There is also another book/manuscripts which they claim was revealed, it is called Al-Abitah, it was mentioned in Biharul Anwar (26/37), another one is called “Zu’abatus Saifi” Biharul Anwar (25/56)
Lastly, they also have Al-jafar which they believed is a revealed book from Allah, “Usulul Kafi” (1/24).”
It is a known fact that your books are filled with establishing that companions because of their selfish desire faked the Qur’an. Then do you have any narration that shows the Qur’an is complete and has originality? I reply by saying you haven’t any narration that says this in your books, but if you challenge me you can bring your proofs.
During the reign of Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu why didn’t he produce those books? If during the reigns of Abubakar, Umar, Uthman he is not in power, during his reign he has absolute authority not to fear anything or anyone. Why didn’t he produce it to put the Ummah in the right path?
You also claim that Ali Radiyallahu Anhu has the Qur’an as it was revealed i.e. from Suratul Alaq to “alyauma akmaltu lakum …” which is different from the Qur’an and the prophet and the companions arranged it, but his own is chronologically, then why didn’t he produce it during his reign?
Other Leaders Before Ali
It is an established fact and a peak of narrations (Mutawatir) that Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu makes so many public pronouncements in the Prophet mosque as follows; the best of this generation after the Noble Prophet is Abubakar, then Umar.
Why did he (Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu) praise them? You can reply by saying is dissimulation. Then why don’t you all practice it? If you will engage in practicing dissimulation, it would have been better!!!
Why was the Noble prophet buried in the room of an unbeliever in your creed/doctrine and together with whom you regard as unbelievers? Under your creed, Pharaoh is better than these two persons (Abubakar & Umar). Why was the Prophet not protected against this evil? In this world they were his most intimate friends, and presently they are still the closest and most intimate to him, but you believe they are not together on the day of resurrection, why should Allah make them this close?
Why and where was Ali Radiyallahu Anhu when the Prophet was buried in Aisha’s room? He should have discouraged it and never let it happened! Or was his bravery at decline during the death of the Noble Prophet?
The shi’ites believed that the first three successors of the Noble Prophet were unbelievers, why did Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu pledge his allegiance to them? Fought religious war with them during their reign?
Some of your scholars answer the above questions with the reason for not to have a violence breakout (fitna), but why did he engage in the battle of the camel, were he fought against Aisha, & Dalha & Zubairu Radiyallahu Anhu, and the battle of siffin, where he founght MA’awuya and his Muslim followers of Syria (Shams), the two led to the massacre of over 70,000 seventy thousand Muslim from both sides.
The Sunni doctrine never see any fault in these battles he engaged himself, because it was a destined violence breakout (fitna), which if it breaks out you have no chance to escape. As a result of this breakout, the companions were of there different opinions, some were with Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu because he is a legal Muslim leader, some with Muawiyya for the argument and fight he claim against those responsible for the murder of Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu to be brought to book. Lastly the category those hang on the fence without taking side but busy trying to reconcile the two parties. This third category was the opinion of the majority of the Prophet’s companions join and later many shared the same view, even Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu. But the shi’ites never have this opinion as tangible, all that occur is nothing but Allah’s destiny we await your response to the above question, and his reason that made him not to fight those before him.
The shi’ites believed that the leaders before Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu were tyrant and force themselves to power because of worldly benefits; they denied the revealed leader as the Prophet pronounced because of selfish interest.
What did they accumulate during their reign? Who was rich among them? When Umar died, there was debt of which the whole of his family and tribe men cannot settle, but was only settled after some of the Quraish extend there helping hands. Abubakar & Uthman were initially known as rich and clergy; their riches were disbursed for the uplift of Islam during their life time. Who among them nominated his son as a successor? If really there is a selfish interest, it should have been extended to their siblings? You the shi’ites claim and say Ali Radiyallahu Anhu bequeath the leadership to his son Al Hassan? Why didn’t Abubakar bequeath to his son Abdurrahman? Why didn’t Umar bequeath to his son Abdullah? Why didn’t Uthman bequeath to his son Abanu?
What & which interest the rest the companions have for disobeying the will of the Noble Prophet? What did Abubakar gave them (companions) or promised them that led them follow him against Allah & Muhammad Sallahu Alaihi Wassaam commands? Initially, they left everything and every one because of Allah, this action was mentioned in the Qur’an 5:100 among others.
How can you reply a member of Khawarij creed and doctrine if he accuses Aliyu’s Radiyallahu Anhu reign for a massive blood shed of innocent Muslims, while the other three leaders before him establish the root of Islam, conquer Unislamic countries & kingdoms and Islamatize them. During the reign of Uthman and the occasion of his death, coup plotters came to Madinah and he denied any counter attack against them with the reason for discouraging blood shed of Muslims, they attacked his house and massacre him. While during the reign of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu he traveled as far as Kufah & Basra to fight those that didn’t fight him but only presented a request prior, this will make them give their allegiance & pledge, and this reason was what led to the battle. What then shall be your response?
Further more, if he\ (Khawarij) poses the following again how will you respond to him; the three leaders were aid’ed by Allah during their reigns, they fought the greates dynasties on eath by that period and they were victorious. They past the message of Islam to various nations successfully. While Allah didn’t aid Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu during his reign, because he never fight an enemy, nor did he extend the Islamic land with a meter they were on the right path while Ali isn’t, that’s why his assassinators were from his discifles who rebelled against him lastly. What shall be your response?.
The actual fact is that Sunni’s are the only ones that can defend Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu from all these accusations. We the Sunni’s that believe with the leadership of the three successors, and that all their victories Ali Radiyallahu Anhu was part of it. And what occurred during his reign was only what Allah destined but not his will & wish as the leader. Almost all the accusations the Shi’ite accuse the leaders before Ali were the same accusations the Khawarij point fingers against Ali Radiyallahu Anhu in the eyes of a reasonable man, all the honor and dignity the Shi’ite elevate Ali is more doubtful than if such elevation are positioned to the leaders before him.
Shi’ites accuse Umar of denying the Noble Prophet write what he said will be the path to faith and that the Ummah will not go astray if they stick to it after his death, you claim that it was his will for leadership but Umar denied bringing any paper.
In the narration of your books, you said that Umar even say that the Prophet was demented, but our authentic books have no such added narration. What was narrated in Bukhari and other Sunni books was; “Depression accruing to the illness of the Noble Prophet is much, don’t increase his depression/illness. The book of Allah (Qur’an) is enough.”
This was according to you the instruction of the prophet that he destroyed and for that reason he is an unbeliever. He was responsible for the evil deeds of the Ummah because he led them astray by living the Prophet died with sadness, displeasure and sorrow of not delivering the last message.
Where was Ali Radiyallahu Anhu at that time? Why didn’t he follow the Prophet’s instruction? Or was the instruction directed to Umar alone? Is Umar stronger than Aliyu? Or is he more influential? Why didn’t he fight him or fight his opinion against the Prophet’s opinion and make sure that the mission of the prophet was fulfilled?
The reported narration in “Musnad” of Ahmad, it was Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu that replied and say; I can memorized it, say whatever you wish, the Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wassalam replied; I urge you to be firm in prayers, Zakah should be given out as commanded and explained, I also urge you to be kind to your slaves.
If the paper was not brought, who actually denied the paper to be presented? Is it the one who said he can memorized or the one who said that depression is much let us give him time to rest?
The above happened on Friday morning, why didn’t he request for the paper during the whole daytime? After that, he has Saturday, Sunday and Monday noon before he died, he never mentioned it again, he should have request for it again?
This sorrow that you said the Prophet died of which he wants to pronounce, is it part of the Religion or not? If your answer is, “it is part of the Religion,” are you insinuating that the Prophet died and the Religion was not complete because he didn’t make the pronouncement? If it is not part of the Religion, what then is the need for all these?
Must this message be in writing? Why shouldn’t it be pronounced for the public that will serve as a reference?
Who on earth inform you of the content of what was somebody’s intention, which he didn’t mention? You claim it was the name of a successor that was the will, have you the knowledge of the unseen/unknown? Or are your leaders who were blessed with such knowledge (unseen) your source?
Since Umar Radiyallahu Anhu is an apostate because he disobeys Prophet instructions, then what shall be the status of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu, when he was instructed to clean the Prophet’s name of Prophet hood, and replace it with his real name and surname, during hudaibiyyah (treaty) which he didn’t? What was the action of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu here?
Under Sunni doctrine both were right, Umar was kind to the Prophet and discourage any stress or depression against him, and the Noble Prophet affirm it by not requesting it again. While Ali Radiyallahu Anhu on the other hand showed how high & respect he has with Prophet hood, the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam respected his opinion and clean the name himself. If Umar apostate by not producing paper to the Prophet and disobeying him, then Ali Radiyallahu Anhu also was disobedient by not cleaning what he was told to clean ?
The doctrine of Shi’ite accuse Uthman for giving his relation special regard and priority in terms of appointment, and special assignment, this make them Nike named him lover of relatives.
Our question is why did Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu appointed also his relatives during his reign?
During the reign of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu he appointed Abdullah bin Abbas bin Abdul- Muxxalib as the Governor of Basra. (Abu Xalib and Abbas are germane brothers). His Governor of Yemen was Ubaidullah bin Abbas, a brother to Governor of Basra. At Makkah he appointed Quthamu bin Abbas, a brother to the above Governors. At Madinah he appointed Ma’abad bin Abbas, a brother to the above three Governors. What a surprise!!! To have four Governors from the same family? They are all first cousins to the president?
Further more, they are not the only relation of his that were part of his administration, his Governor at Khurasan was his Nephew, Ja’adatu bin Hubairah, his mother is the daughter of Abu Dalib. The Governor he appointed at Egypt was Muhammad bin Abubakar Siddiq, don’t think he is not related to Ali the mother to this Governor is Asma’u bint Umais whom was married to Ali Radiyallahu Anhu when he was appointed as Governor. Ali Radiyallahu Anhu married her after the death of her husband Abubakar Radiyallahu Anhu. What!!! If is wrong to appoint a relative, then how comes? !!!
We want to bring to your notice that we the Sunni do not accuse Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu and what he did. he was right. Because public office should be entrusted to whoever qualify to occupy it without regard to his family background or his origin, all that is needed is his Islam and competency. But you that accuse Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu for appointing his relations, then what answer will you give in favour of Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu on the same allegation for we to see and ponder, it might aid us to use the same defense for Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu. But Uthman has powerful reasons than Ali Radiyallahu Anhu for many grounds. Among which is that he was not the one that appointed them at the initial stage, he assume office while they were serving the office they held, and he didn’t change them.
However, the families of Banu Umayyad were those that the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam appointed more during his life time as his official staffs. He rarely appoints the family of Banu-Hashim i.e. his family together with Ali in position of authority, but during Ali they even have four Governors at a time.
In most of your books among which, “Kashful Gummah” by Arbali, “Biharul Anwar” of Majlisi, “Manaqib” of Khuwarizmi all narrated that Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu helped Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu with the dowry of his wife Fatima Radiyallahu Anhu why should he accept such a kind gesture from an unbeliever or apostate and an enemy of Allah? As you always claim.
Why did Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu sent his children Alhassan and Alhussain to counter attack the rebels that came to assassinate Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu?
This is evidence in both Sunni & Shi’ite books refer to “Tarikhul Umam” by Dabari, the topic on what happened between thirty- second year of hijra. Also, “Muruz Dhahab” by Masudi (2/344).
Why should Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu send his children to defend and apostate/unbeliever, and a tyrant that denied the Prophet household their right (power). He should have allowed the coup de-tat for him to claim his right easily. If you disconcur with this story and that he did nothing during the attack against Uthman, what will you give the Khawarij answer to their allegation that he (Ali) was responsible for the coup for him to attain leadership of the Ummah.
You believe that Mu’awiyah Radiyallahu Anhu is an unbeliever, why then did Alhassan give him the leadership of Muslim Ummah? He appointed him as a successor to the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam. After the assassination of Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu the Muslim Ummah especially those at Kufah had a consensus that Alhassan shall be the new leader, and they pledged their allegiance to him. But Shi’ite disconcur to this. There believe is that it is an appointment by the out gone leader, who appointed his son as his successor, i.e. Ali. This is against the backdrop of the action of Abubakar, Umar & Uthman. Alhassan assume the mantle of authority, and after six month, he invited Mu’awiyya and gave him the leadership by stepping down willingly, this is just for peace to reign. He compels his people (Alhassan) i.e. the people of Kufah to obey the new leader.
Alhassan an infallible as you claim, has now stepped aside for an unbeliever to lead the Muslim Ummah? Or is it that Mu’awiyya Radiyallahu Anhu is a Muslim but you charge him with false accusation?
The Companions Of Muhammad
Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam
It is part of the Shi’ite doctrine that all the companions of the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam apostate after his life time but they exclude very few. Some are of the opinion of only three or four, the maximum opinion they have is thirteen companions, in these thirteen the in-laws o the Prophet, his wives and his other relatives were all not included.
If one apostate he has to change from a Religion to another. If the companions apostate, from which Religion have they changed? Is it from the Religion of Shi’ite? Were they initially Shi’ite and apostate to Sunni? If the Religion of Shi’ism was not in existence during their time, then from what Religion do they apostate? But if you claim that they change from Islam, what then was the new Religion they embrace?
What shall be your response to a man that challenge the practicability of Islam, because the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam failed to have those that will be firm in practicing the Religion during their life time. Since Islam wasn’t practicable during his time, how on earth can the present or future generation practise it?
Remember!! These are the ones that Allah praise their actions, cure their hearts from any dirt of evil, He proclaimed His trust in them in His Glorious Book, if they are found wanting, whom on earth could be firm?
the Shi’ite accuse the companions of disrespecting Prophet’s command and opinion during the treaty of hudaibiyyah, he has the opinion to embark on a treaty while none of them share same with him, they all believed that they are on the right opinion, and they are powerful, even the Glorious Qur’an revealed to them promise of entering Makkah, peacefully and perform Umrah a lesser hajj, while they came and were not able to even enter Makkah. The Noble Prophet consented to the treaty which the terms were completely unfavorable to Muslims & Islam, part the terms were; whoever is a Quraish that embrace Islam and came to Madinah, the Noble Prophet shall return him back to Makkah, while if among his companions one will apostate, he has no right against him and he should allow him return to Makkah safely.
The companions were never certain for the possibility of this treaty they all believed that Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala will make a revelation that will disconcur with the treaty, that was the motive when the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam instructed them to sacrifice their animals and remove their “Ihram” they kept silent and sat waiting for a divine intervention, the Prophet following the advise of his wife led by example, this establish the fact that automatically this interding rite is impossible, they later obeyed him and do as he did.
The Shi’ite interprets this action as amounting to apostasy by all of the companions.
Our question is on those days were was Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu? Or was he at home didn’t attend the treaty? Both our Books & yours establish his presence, what happened then? He should have obeyed instructions alone for him not to be among the apostates?
Whatever shall be your response for his reason(s), will be the same for Abubakar Radiyallahu Anhu, Umar Radiyallahu Anhu, Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu and the whole of the companions.
You always accuse Zubair bin Awwam for fighting Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu during the battle of camel, you claim that it was because he hates Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu.
It seems you have forgotten, or assume not to remember that when the Shurah committee was set up by Umar Radiyallahu Anhu among which the new leader shall emerge Zubair was the first to step down in favour of Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu, Dalhatu Radiyallahu Anhu stepped down for Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu, while Sa’ad bin Abi Wakkas in favour of Abdurrahman bin Auf. If Zubair Radiyallahu Anhu hates Aliyu why shall he step-down in his favour ?
The wives of the Noble Prophet were not excluded from your false accusations, Hafsah & Aisha Radiyallahu Anha were attacked of so many allegation from your creed/doctrine. They are the prophet beloved wives while without fear or favour in your books they were openly accused, among which are; “Tafsirus Safi” (2/720), “Biharul Anwar” (22/33), Siradul Mustaqim by Bayadi (3/165), “Aqaidul-Imamiyyah” by Zanjini (3/85) and almost all the Shi’ite books claim that these wives of the Noble Prophet are unbelievers. While Allah says; Q24:26
“Bad women are for bad men, and bad men are for bad women, Good women are for Good men, Good men are for good women: Such (good people) are innocent of (every) bad statement which they say; for them is forgiveness, and generous provision i.e. (paradise)”
Shiite should be reasonable for discussion, if one will come to you and say that your in-laws are bad people, your wife is an unbeliever, those you gave out your daughters in marriage to are bad people. You are a scholar and all your students are bad people, with the exclusion of very few. Imagine, you spent 23years with them, they never gained anything but disobedience on Allah’s command, automatically whom is he trying to refer as bad man?
Wives And Children Of The Prophet
Muhammad Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam.
Why did you exclude all the children of Muhammad Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam expect Fatima as members of the household? What offence have they committed? You excluded Zainab, Ruqayya, Ummukulthum, Abdullah, Ibrahim and their eldest brother Alqasim; dose their father hate them? Or is he the one that excluded them from his household?
Why did you exclude the wives of the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam as part of his household?
Lets be frank and shame the devil, if you are invited to bring your family, and you brought everyone but you left your wife, are you just to the union and your wife? Why wouldn’t you be just to the wives of the Noble Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam ?
Referring back to the Qur’an, the verse that discussed the issue of “Ahlulbait” household of the Prophet was discussing the wives of Muhammad Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam , the verse that discussed the household of Ibrahim was referring to the wife of Ibrahim alais salam the household of Lut is referring to his wife, and the family of Prophet Musa (Moses) gave reference to his wife as his household. Then why on earth the wives of the Noble Prophet should be excluded? for what hatred? What envy and enmity? Please let it subside!
Relationship Between Prophet’s Household
(Ahlulbait) & the Companions
It is a trite law that Islam commands us to choose the right and conscious person in marriage, either to marry or to give out in marriage, That is the reason that our Noble Prophet advises us to have good in-laws.
Why should the Prophet Sallahu Alaihi Wasallam marry from a house and daughter of personalities that are of questionable character? He married the daughter of Umar Radiyallahu Anhu whom you regard him as a bastard (an illegitimate child). This was the opinion of Bahrani in his book titled “Al-kaskul” (3/212). Furthermore, in the book of Aljazairi (Shiite) titled “Al-Anwarum Nu’umaniyyah” (1/63) he said; Umar has a mental illness (lunatic) that only subside with homosexuality!!! If narrating an issue of disbelief is not amounting to disbelief, this story couldn’t be narrated, but this story is there in your books.
Why should the Noble Prophet marry his daughter if what you are saying is a fact? How could you feel if your in-law is being referred to as bastard, fornicator and a homosexual?
Why did “Ahlulbait” marry the daughters of the companions? how should they (companions) & “Ahlulbait” become in-laws while they are enemies? The creeds of Shi’ites always insinuate that the companions circumscribed the Prophet’s household. They held them hostile etc. All that Shi’ites are after is proclaiming the denied freedom. This led them to be visiting their tomb and praying for them against their enemies i.e. (companions)? But why were they in-laws in the first place? Let’s give some illustrations;
From the beginning, “The Noble Prophet” has in laws, who then were his in-laws? His eleven wives were whose daughters? If you will disagree that not the whole of the in-laws were companions, then what of Aisha and Hafsah?
However, whom did he marry his daughters to? It is surprising that most of us are ignorant that the Prophet has four daughters whom he gave out for marriage, We all knew of his last daughter (Fatima). But the entire three daughters were married to the family of Banu Umayyad. Abu Asim bin Rabi’ah was his first son in-law that married his eldest daughter Zainab; he is a member of the Umayyad clan. The Noble Prophet praised him as follows; “We became in-laws with him, we were happy of his gesture, he promised us and fulfilled his promise.”
The next two daughters i.e. Rukayya & Ummu Kulthum were married to Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu separately. In the history of mankind, there is no any being that was privileged to marry two daughters of a Prophet but Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu a member of Umayyad. This gave him the name “Dhun Nurain” “Owner of two illuminate lights.” This is Because whoever married the daughter of a Prophet is blessed with “illuminate light” (Albarkated light) and Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu was blessed with two.
For us to have a thesis on this let’s only use the house of Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu alone. The eldest son of Uthman, Abanu bin Uthman married Ummu Kulthum bint Abdullah bin Ja’afar bin Abu Dalib.
Furthermore, Musa bin Abanu i.e. grandson to Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu married Ummul-Kasim bint Al Hassan, i.e. granddaughter, of Al- Hassan bin Aliyu bin Abi Dalib.
Additionally, another grandson of Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu i.e. Zaid bin Asim bin Uthman, married Sukainatu bint Hussain bin Ali. In the history of Arabia, narration proved that there was never a beautiful Arabian lady like her (Sukainatu) and her mate in beauty was Aishatu bint Dalha bin Ubaidadullah.
Again, Abdullah bin Abanu bin Uthman married Fatima bint Hussain bin Abu Dalib, a junior sister to Sukainatu.
All these marital relationship/unions are with between only one of the companions a clergyman of Banu Umayyads.
All the above aside, are you aware of the fact that Yazidu bin Mu’awiyya, who the Shi’ites accuse him of assassinating Hussain is married to “Ahlulbait” i.e. Ummu kultum bint Abdullah bin Abbas bin Abdul-Mudalib, they had two issues i.e. namely Amru & Abdullahi?
Wow!!! How true are your stories in trying to establish hatred between Ahlulbait and companions? Or are they myths without source?
Why did Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu give his daughter for marriage to Umar bin Khaddab? Are you not the ones that said he killed her mother while she was seeking for her right on inheritance? Or is that his reward of his evil deed?
Is your doctrine that Umar Radiyallahu Anhu is a bastard/ illegitimate child true? Every Muslim detastes this accusation against him during discussion and writings, you refer to him as an unbeliever and he is more devilish than the devil. Your scholar Ni’imatullahil Jazairi reported that on the day of resurrection the devil shall gaze at the painful torment of Umar Radiyallahu Anhu!! But why did Ali Radiyallahu Anhu give him his daughter for marriage? Was it because her mother (Fatima) died? This union was reported in both your books and our book, Ummu Kulthum, daughter to Ali Radiyallahu Anhu has two issues with Umar Radiyallahu Anhu i.e. Zaid bin Umar & Ruqayyah, bint Umar, these kids are always proud of their origin i.e. being descendandts of two khalifs; their father Umar was a khalif their grand father is Ali who is also a Khalif.
If Ali Radiyallahu Anhu is an infallible why did he give his daughter for marriage to an unbeliever? You just have to go with either of these options, i.e. to believe that he is a believer, this has unraveled the bases of your creed. The second option is that Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu is not infallible which will also unravel your creed.
After the demise of Fatima Radiyallahu Anha Aliyu married many wives and he had a lot of issues with them. My question will come after a very long detailed explanation from Shi’ite books. I will not give the names of his wives and children from the Shi’at sources : “ Kashful Ghummah” “ Binarul Anwar” by Majlisi. They as follws :
He first married Ummul Banina, the daughter of Haramul Kalbi, her issues with him were Abbas, Ja’afar, Abdullah & Uthman.
He then married Laila from Mas’udut- Tamimi, their issues were Abdullah & Abubakar. All these issues died with their brother Hussain at Karbala.
He married Asma’u bint Umais one of the widows of Abubakar Radiyallahu Anhu after her window retirement. Further more, when Fatima Radiyallahu Anha the wife Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu died, she was the one that engineered her ritual bath. Asma’u married two warriors before Ali, she first marry Ja’afar bin Abi Talib Radiyallahu Anhu brother to Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu. In each of these three houses she has “Muhammad” but with Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu she has only Yahya and Aunu. But unfortunately all her issues were not opportuned to have families.
Furthermore, Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu also marred Ummu Habiba from the family of Zam’atu this union was a result of a jihad he fought under the leadership of Khalid bin Walid during the reign of Abubakar Radiyallahu Anhu, she was party of his booties, he freed her & marry her. Their issues were Ruqayya and Umar. This Umar lived for 35 yrs.
He also married Ummu Sa’idu bint Urwatu bin Masudus Saqafi the companion of the Noble Prophet, their issues were Ummul Hassan and Ramlatul Kubra.
He also married Umamatu bint Abu Asim bin Rabi’u, she is a granddaughter to the Noble Prophet through the lineage of his eldest daughter Zainab, it was narrated that Fatima Radiyallahu Anha before her death gave him a will to marry her.
Umamatu is the young lady/pupil that the Noble Prophet normally carry while praying, if he goes on prostration he sat her down on the ground and while raising he carry her again. Their issue was “Muhammad Al – Ausat the middle.” He is the second of the three Muhammad, Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu name his children.
Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu also married Khaulatu bint Ja’afar Al- Hanafiyyah, this union was during the reign of Abubakar Radiyallahu Anhu and she was part of his booty of the “Ridda war.” Unfortunately, the Shiite disconcur the situation as apostasy (Ridda) during that time they always believe that it was just a rebellion against the established authority. Whatever may be the case Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu sacrifice his life for the success of this war, it was in this process he was privilege to own Khaulah and their issue was Muhammadul-Akbar the big, popularly known as ibnul Hanafiyyah, some sects of Shi’ite classify him among the infallible Imams.
During the demise of Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu he left behind four wives, nineteen concubines. Among his female issues not part of those mentioned above are; Ummu Hani’in, Maimunah, Zainabul, Kubra, Ramlatus Sugra, Fatimah, Ummu Khadijah, Ummul Kiram, Ummu Ja’afar, Ummu Salamah & Jumanatu. He has fourteen 14 males, and seventeen female children Most of them were martyred at Karbala.
His progeny became dispersed & exposed through the families of Al-Hassan & Al-Hussain, and Al-Hussain’s lineage is through Zainul Abidin, the only surviving son of Hussain those who attended Karbala, he has no weapon because of his ill health. The terrorist speared him for that. Muhammad ibnul Hanafiyyah, Abbas & Umar were the privilege to have families that became dispersed in the world.
Why did Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu after the death of Fatima, and during the reign of Abubakar, Umar & Uthman Radiyallahu Anhu named his children with their names? All these names were reported in your books mentioned earlier.
If you area reasonable enough, you can reason by the following; have you ever heard a Jew named his child Muhammad? Or a Muslim named his child Jacob? In this country (Nigeria) many of the Shi’ites have changed their names from Abubakar, Umar & Uthman, just not to associate themselves with bad names. Yesterday a lady came to me confessing her repentance from Shi’ite to Islam, she even change her initial name Aisha during her Shi’ite days, she is now using her actual name Aisha, a Sokoto indigene for that matter.
Why should Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu name his children with the names of enemies of Allah? Between all the Quraish Aliyu was the only person that named his children after these great companions. (Abubakar, Umar & Uthman). Is it because he loved them or otherwise?
The Nigerian Shi’ites, you always change your names following the advise from your holy land (Iran), this was evident after the return journey of Nigerian Shi’ites that came back from Iran, they were told that there is nothing good of whoever is named Abubakar or Umar.
Why, when and where was the origin of this your innovation of changing names while your earlier scholars have those names and they didn’t change them?
Lets analyze your most holy book i.e. “Al-Kafi,” the introduction can suffice to see the narrators of the acclaimed knowledge of “Ahlulbait.”
The names of some scholars are as follows; Mufaddal bin Umar, Ahmad bin Umar Al-Halabi, Umar bin Aban, Umar bin Uzainah, Umar bin Hanzalah, Musa bin Umar, Abbas bin Umar.
Why didn’t your earlier scholars change their names? But you change yours? From the initial stage, these names were they because of love or hatred of Umar?
Why did Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu make sexual union with the women prisoners that were part of his booties as a result of your acclaimed tyrant and brutal war? All the religious war that was fought during Abubakar, Umar & Uthman were regarded as brutality and tyranny by the Shi’ites. Why should he then have sexual relation with them?
You the Shi’ites accuse Abubakar Radiyallahu Anhu for denying Fatima Radiyallahu Anha her inheritance, your musician of Gadon qaya said;
“Remember of those before you
even among the companions there were your Akins
those that are more evil than you
they committed heinous offence against Imam Ali
Fatima was also not left alone.”
“They meted a false charge/accusation against her husband
Her father’s inheritance also
Was denied to her
They fight with her husband
Because he refuses pledging allegiance”.
You claim that she was denied her right to inheritance by Abubakar Radiyallahu Anhu, she always cry by the grave of the Noble Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam and saying; “Oh the Prophet of Allah, I forward my grievances to you”!! Further more, she went to the market and disgraced Abubakar & Umar Radiyallahu Anhu. Umar Radiyallahu Anhu kicked her, she felt and it led to her miscarriage!!
The Shi’ites named this miscarriage “Muhsinu”. But we knew that “Muhsinu” was her child that died after he has started dragging himself.
Our question here is, Abubakar denied whose wife her inheritance? Is Aliyu not nick named as the king of the lions? Is he not the leader of the warriors and bravery? Why didn’t he do something for her favor? If what you claim is true of the miscarriage, how can one comprehend?
Or is it a revenge that Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu did by later marrying the widow of Abubakar and they even have an issue with Abubakar i.e. Muhammad whom was nursed & brought up by Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu, he was even appointed as Governor by Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu?
The garden of fadaq, is it a gift or inheritance? If it is a gift, why was Zainab denied? Ummu Kulthum was also alive? She survived up to three years after Khaybar i.e. nineth years 9yrs after Hijra, almost close to the death of the Prophet, she was still alive. Why was Fatima given alone? Was it not the Noble Prophet that told Bushair bin Sa’ed when he wanted the Prophet to bear witness of gift to his son, he asked; “have you other children?” he replied “yes”, “have you given them the same type of gift?” he replied “No” the Prophet said “I don’t bear unjust witness(evidence)” (Sahihul Bukhari 2456 & Muslim 3058).
If your answer to the above question is that the garden is a gift, then was it taken away from her possession? Or was not in her possession & she wants it to be given to her? Because the Islamic principle of “hiba”(gift) most be under possession of the donee before the death of the donor, if there is no possession and the donor died the gift automatically revert back to the donor, the gift become’s void.
But if it is an inheritance not a gift, he has other heirs that have right to inheritance? Have you forgotten Abbas, a paternal uncle who is a residual heir to the Noble Prophet and will exclude Ali Radiyallahu Anhu as a paternal uncle’s son under the rules of exclusion?
According to the jurist, the Prophets are not to be inherited by their heirs; this is an authentic Prophetic narration. Among the narrators of this tradition are Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu, Abbas Radiyallahu Anhu and the 6 six of the 10 ten companions that were giving glad tidings of paradise i.e. Abubakar, Umar, Uthman, Abdurrahman bn Auf, Zubayr, bn Awwam, Sa’ad bn Abi waqqas. They all narrated that the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam said; “we the Prophets are not been inheritable by our heirs of our properties, what we left is a (sadaqah) charity to the Muslim Ummah”
We are quiet aware that Fatima Radiyallahu Anha requested for her inheritance from Abubakar Radiyallahu Anhu because she was not aware of the above tradition . It is not something wrong: Abubakar Radiyallahu Anhu denied her share of her inheritance because her father the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam denied her. He also did nothing wrong, it was narrated and reported of her unhappy situation of that. Was it not explained to her or was she not convinced with the explanation? We the Sunni feels she has an excuse for her action but what Abubakar did was right and not wrong. What you claim of her action toward him in the market, whom are you trying to disgrace, dishonor and refer as a bastard? Even if Fati food seller in the motor park will not fight with Market authority and go free with her honor and dignity? Have you forgotten that Abubakar is the intimate friend of her father since childhood? Is he not the first person outside his households that embrace the Religion and affirm the trustworthiness of the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam was he not his friend and escort during migration to Madinah? Is he not his in-law, the father of his wife? But with all these, Fatima Radiyallahu Anhu will disgrace him in the market?
In the book of “Bidayah wan Nihayah” by ibn Kathir, it was reported that Abubakar Radiyallahu Anhu went home to make her understand the situation because of how he noticed her bad feelings, with the permission of her husband, he entered her room and apologized to her, she responded accepting the apology. He handed over the garden to Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu and Abbas Radiyallahu Anhu to oversee its activities, as them been the closest to the Prophet family as overseers not as an inheritable property.
What then was the story of this garden during the reign of the three leaders? If it was Fatima’s right (inheritance), during the time/reign of Ali Radiyallahu Anhu he should have executed the property to the real owners, i.e. himself and his issues with her as inheritance. But nothing as such was narrated, and then what is the origin of your myth?
It was narrated in your books that females don’t inherit landed properties or land in general. In the book of Al-kafi fil furu’I (7/127) there is a chapter titled; “females are not entitle to inheriting any landed property”. He brought a narration from Abu Abdullah whom was asked; “what are women/females entitled as inheritance? He replied; they are given the monetary worth of sand, building and trees but land, farm etc they have nothing to inherit”.
our question is why did Fatima Radiyallahu Anha requested for a void right? Tusi also reported this narration in “Al-Tahzib” (9/254)
In your narrations you said; “whatever belongs to a Prophet, after his demise has become the property of an (Imam) leader. It was narrated in “Al-Kafi” kitabul hujja (1/476) why did Fatima also claim Imam’s property? Abubakar was the Imam, you will respond in the negative, then why didn’t Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu claim and request for his property?
Some Verses from the Qur’an
Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala says in the Noble Qur’an;
“Indeed Allah was pleased with the believers when they gave the (pledge) to you [O Muhammad Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam] under the tree: he knew what was in their heart, and he send down As-Sakina (calmness and tranquility) upon them, and he rewarded with a near victory” (Q48/18).
By the above pronouncement of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala to whom was He referring to? Are they dwellers of hellfire or paradise? The whole world concurs that the three leaders (Abubakar, Umar, and Uthman) are inclusive of the above statement. Is it right to castigate those that help in the up liftment of Islam as a Religion, those that Allah are pleased with and all the good tidings one can think of were directed to them? By Allah’s confirmation of what is in their hearts, is it faith or hypocrisy? Are calmness and tranquility coupled with victory for or against the Religion?
Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala says;
“And know that among you there is a Messenger of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala. If he were to obey you (i.e. follow your opinions & desires) in much of the matter, you would surely be in trouble. But Allah has endeared the faith to you and has beautified it in your hearts, and has made disbelief, wickedness and disobedience (to Allah and his Messenger Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) hateful to you. Such are they who are the rightly guided.” Q 49:7
We have only one question for the above verse, Allah Subhanahu wa ta’ala m is informing us of their inner belief and faith in their hearts, while in the contrary you are saying is it is hypocrisy, Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala confirmed how he built in them love of trust & hatred of falsehood but you totally disconcur. Are you more knowledgeable than Allah?
Wail Of Hussain
Who assassinated Hussain Radiyallahu Anhu? I know your response will be “Yazid”!! I will say; what if your proof?
Let us refer to your books as our arbiter on this issue, because your books have shown the innocence of Yazid from this evil deed!!! In the book of “A’ayanush- Shi’ah” part 1 pp 34, Sayyid Muhsinu Al-Amin said; “20,000 people pledged to Hussain and they are all Iraqi indigenes” who are they? “They are the Shi’ites” “…. They were deceitful and they deceived him, They fought against him while they offered him their pledged and later assassinated him”
It is now clear that the Shi’ites assassinated him, then why all the accusations?
Imam Zainul Abidin remarked as follows to the Shi’ites of Kufah; “Al-Ihtijaj” (2/32) “Have you forgotten letter you wrote to my father? You were deceitful, you gave him your full and complete pledge, and you later on fight him, and disgraced him with all his honor?” With what will you face the Noble Prophet when he will be saying; “you waged war against my family, you dishonored my household, you are not part of my people (Ummah)!!”
In another narration in the same book above, (2/29) he says, “the Shi’ites wail because of the assassination of my parents who massacre them if not the Shi’ites?”
One surprising thing is if you go through the names of people that participated in this massacre and those 20,000 that wrote the letter of pledge to him, with even the Governor that gave the command were all under Aliyu’s Radiyallahu Anhu army during “the battle of siffin” the Shi’ites indeed!!!
One of the Shi’ite scholars that confirmed the story of how the Shi’ites assassinated Hussain were; Kazim Al-Ahsa’i in the book “Ashura” pp 89, Abbas Al-Qummi in “Nafathul Mamuni” pp 365, Al-Tusi in “Muntahal A’amal” (1/485), Murtadhal Muxxahhari in “Malhamatul Hussainiyyah ” (4/94)
Now that we prove that the sycophants & hypocrites Shi’ites are those that assassinated Hussain, they are now pretending to be wailing for this action, we will proceed in giving the full detail of how it occurs.
The people of Kufah after realizing their actions, form a host of multiple of “Repentants” called “the battalion of Repentants.” They now repent & realize what they did against Allah. Hussain was peacefully living in the sacred town of Makkah, they sent him a letter signed by 15,000-20,000 citizens. Realizing how committed they are waiting for his arrival to actualize the coup de tat, he automatically arranged and followed them, he never gave a hearing ear for the advise he was given against their deceitful attitude. He only sent his paternal uncle son Muslim bin Aqil, he was warmly welcomed and he signaled Hussain to continue with his attempt.
When the messenger left, they automatically changed and they pierced him and murdered him, Hussain was unaware, he came and reached a place close to Kufah called Karbala, his thought was thousands of people to come and welcome him, but he saw the faces that were with his father’s army whom he could recognize claiming to be those welcoming him!! They really came to assassinate him after all the peaceful alternative he tendered before them.
Why do you wail for the death of Hussain on the day Ashura? Why don’t you remember the death of Al- Hassan? You said he has more value and honor than Hussain? Why don’t you wail the death of their father Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu? Why don’t you even wail the death of the Noble Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam? Who ever heard the Shi’ites wail for the death of the Noble Prophet? But why are you annually wailing for Hussain?
Why is that your books, lectures, websites when you are discussing the issues of wailing for the death of Hussain you don’t mentioned his brothers and relations that were martyred in Karbala?
In your books you also confirmed that he was not the only one martyred. In “Al-Irshad” by Mufid pp 194, and “Muntahal A’amal” (1/240), “Jalalul Uyun” by Majlisi, pp 528. It was reported that Abubakar bn Ali bn Abi-Dalib, Umar bn Ali bn Abi-Dalib, and Uthman bn Ali bn Abi-Dalib, and Abubakar bn Hassan bn Ali bn Abi-Dalib and Umar bn Hussain bn Ali bn Abi-Dalib were all martyred at Karbala. Why don’t you mention their names? Is it because of their name or what?
If all the wails and the bloodshed you do in the process of wailing is part of Religion, why don’t you do it for the Noble Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam? Why didn’t Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu do such wail during the death of his wife? Why didn’t he also do it during the death of the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam?
The annual wailing on the day of Ashura, is it a Prophetic narration or an innovation? But before your answer, lets go through some of your books.
In the book of “Mustadrakul wasa’il” and “Nahjul Balagha” there is a saying of Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu as follows; it was during the death of the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam.
“By Allah!!! Oh the prophet of Allah! If not you were the person that command for endurance and patience, you discourage wailing, we would have shed out all our tears because of your death. You discouraged it and we will not do it” in the book of “khisal” by Saduq pp 621 &, the book of “Wasa’ilus Shi’ah” Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu remarked as follows; “if any one slaps himself (wail), because of a calamity that befalls him, he has destroyed all his goods deeds” so we can deduce that the act of the Shi’ites has destroyed their deeds.
In “Muntahal A’amal” pp 248, Alhussain told his consanguine sister Zainab; “If I am murdered, don’t wail to even tear up your clothes, to tear your face, don’t cry saying Oh!! Allah” You the Shi’ites why are you doing all these?
In the book of “Furu’ul Kafi” by Kulaini (5/557) the Prophet told his daughter Fatima the following as a will; “please by Allah if I died don’t tear your face (wailing). Don’t unweave your hair (ladies do it before if their father, son or husband died), don’t say Oh!! Allah, and lastly don’t invite any professional wailer”
Why are you doing all such things? If the wailing and slapping is Religion why don’t those scholars with turban remove it and do as other fellow do? Are they not deceitful by giving “fatwa” verdict against their own actions?
The Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam said; “wailing is among the practise of Jahiliyyah”
Majlisi and Dabrisi (Shiite scholars) narrated; the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam said; “there are to sounds that Allah detasted and hate, whoever does them is cursed by Allah; wailing during a calamity and music when there is joy”
So what shall be your fates?
Temporary Marriage (Mut’ah)
Dissimulation & Hyprocracy
Evil & Heinous Habit Of Shiites
If you will go through Shi’ite books, you will see wonders in the virtue of temporary marriage. They have much and unquantifiable reward by whoever practise it. They are classified as part of the practise of the “Imams” leaders, you the Shi’ites further by equating the virtue of whoever practise it one to the virtue of Hussain Radiyallahu Anhu if it practiced twice, one has a virtue like Al-Hassan Radiyallahu Anhu, if it is twice, one has Ali’s Radiyallahu Anhu virtue while by practicing it the fourth, one has the virtue of the Noble Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam. Fathulllahil Kashani reported this tradition in the book “Tafsiru Manhajis Sadiqina” (2/198).
In the book “Man La Yahduruhul Faqih” one of the four most authentic books to Shi’ites, it was reported; Abu Abdullah Ja’afar Sadiq said; “temporary marriage is my Religion, it is also the Religion of my fore fathers. Whoever practise it has embrace and follow our Religion.”
In the above book (3/356) He was asked of the reward for who practise temporary marriage whether it is certain? He replied; “if he embark on a temporary marriage anticipating reward from Allah, what so ever he say to her is a reward” “… if he come closer to her, his sins will be forgiven. If he satisfied his emotion and proceed to have a ritual bath, any drop of water amounts to his forgiveness.”
Don’t be deceived with their notion/opinion that “Mut’ah” as temporary marriage is a cure/alternative for bachelors, because Khumaini in his book “Tahrirul Wasilah” he said one can practise it with a baby that still breastfeed from her mum’s breast. One can hug her, put his penis between her laps, kiss her and satisfying his emotion with her!!! If she is up to seven 7 years, you can do anything and everything with her!!! Majlisi in his book “Biharul Anwar” (100/312) in the process of this marriage there is no need of witnesses!!! A marriage for ten minutes!! From the first union you just proceed to pay dowry, then seclusion and later having sexual relation. This automatically signifies a conclusion of a marital union, no witness, no announcement, nor the gathering to validate the hook. No inheritance between them, no divorce, no mourning after death? What then is the difference with the actionl of epithets/cramps?
Imagine a society with this attitude!! How can one have full confidence in the morality of his children, brother’s even wife/wives? To be frank as a Shi’ite, will you be comfortable your daughter to practise it? Or to be practiced with your mother, or your sister?
In the same book (3/366) they reported a claim Prophetic narration as follows; “whoever practise a temporary marriage one is free from Allah’s wrath, if is twice he will be raised on the day of resurrection among the righteous, if is thrice we will be together racing to enter paradise.”
Our 72nd question is the meaning of the hadith reported in “Biharul Anwar” (100/308) when Abu Abdullah was asked on temporary marriage, he said; “Don’t filth yourself with it.” Furthermore, what is the meaning of Aliyu’s Radiyallahu Anhu saying that was reported in “Wasa’ilus Shi’ah” (21/12) when he heard Abdullah bin Abbas giving his opinion and verdict for practicing “Mut’ah” he said to him; “you gone astray.” Because the Noble prophet has prohibited it and the consummation of the meat of donkey on the day of Khaybar”
To the best of our knowledge, all the virtues and reward that one will have by practicing “mut’ah” temporary marriage has slipped all your Imams (leaders), the same way, as Fatima Radiyallahu Anhu hasn’t have such an opportunity. So we can’t ask you how many times have they engaged in a temporary marriage? And with whom has this marriage occurred? How many issues have they from these unions? But if you have any remark on these, we will be glad to share with you.
Is a practise of the Shi’ites prostrating on “turba” i.e. the sand of Karbala, They believed that there is nothing in this earth is as pure as that sand (turba). Is even more pure than the sand, which the Noble Prophet was buried, is even more pure than the throne of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala (Al-Arsh)!!!!!!!
Our question is whether the Noble Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam has once used it to prostrate? If you answer is in the affirmative, we know is a fabrication. But the answer is in the negative, we say are you better than the Noble Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam?. In your narrations it was reported that Angel Gabriel (Jibril) brought the sand to the Noble Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam and told him that his grandson Hussain will be assassinated on it. It furthered that the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam cried when it was presented to him. You claim it to be the purest, why didn’t the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam prostrate on it? It was present to him, isn’t it?
In the book of “Wasa’ilus Shi’ah” (3/598) it was narrated; “is imperative when prostrating to use eight joints; forehead, nose, two palms, knees, toes. Why don’t you use eight of the “turba”? Have you neglected this tradition? Or is it a selfish and baseless interests and arguments?
Why do males & females of you wear black clothes? This question shouldn’t surprise any one because, Abu Ja’afar Al-qummi in his book “Man La Yahduruhul faqih” (1/232), & “Wasa’lus-Shi’ah” (2/136) Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu has gave a will to his followers; “don’t you ever wear black clothes because is the clothes of Pharaoh (Fira’un)”
In the book “Tafsirus Safi” the author in giving the meaning of the verse Q60:12 “…and t hat they will not disobey you in “Ma’aruf” (Islamic monotheism and all that which Islam ordains)”
He relates that the Noble Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam accept the pledge of women “not to wear black clothes, not to also tear and wound themselves during calamity (death), and not to cry and say Oh Allah” this I think should be related to the Shi’ite scholars to stop putting those black “burnous” and wear white!! However, the Noble Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam love white clothes more than any color, why do your scholars wear black?
Remember, the above is from your book, even in the introduction he said, the book is called “Safi” because it was well researched, scrutinized and has no any narration of Sunni in the book. He said the above against black clothes!!
Please in the world, who wear black clothes other than the sisters/wives of the Shi’ites? Why do they wear black clothes?
You always claim and say dissimulation is your Religion and the Religion of your Imams. Neglecting it is like neglecting prayers, Biharul Anwar (75/421). Here in Sokoto, we have witnessed dissimulation, because all those that came and took oaths for changing from shi’ah in the mosque of Sultan Bello here were later on confirmed as untrue, automatic dissimulation.
I need an answer to the following provision; “Nahjus Sa’adati” (2/339) Aliyu Radiyallahu Anhu came with sorrow saying; “how will you do when the time will come in a near future?” At that time, the laws of Allah will be neglected, the public treasury will be squandered, hatred will be shown to whoever loves Allah, while who hates Allah & his laws will be loved? They asked him; what then shall we do? “You should act like the companions of Isah, (Jesus son of Mary). Their flesh was been cut with saw, they were crucified.” But they never retract. He further by saying to be killed for obeying Allah is better than to live in a sinful situation.
Our question is, if this should be true, and it is, then what is the reason and need for dissimulation?
In conclusion, these seventy-seven 77 questions are few among the questions that the answers would be needed from Shi’ism. I swear by Allah, all I did from these questions has no any intention to dishonor anyone, or disregard someone. It is with a clear mind & intention. Our aim is for Shi’ites to ponder and reason, this will lead us to follow the same path i.e. of the Noble Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam as Allah says; Q 3:64
“Say (O Muhammad Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam): O people of the scripture (Jews & Christians): Come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none-but Allah (Alone), and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allah. Then if they turn away, say: “bear witness that we are Muslims.”
. The cemetery that they visit in the town of Kashana of Iraqis not the real place that he was buried. Because Abu Lu’luata was killed the day he murdered Umar. How on earth could his grave become situated at Iraqi while he was killed at Madinah? How can one even detect the grave of such a criminal? He is not a Muslim and wasn’t buried in the Muslims graveyard? But the Shiite have their fables that led him back to Kashana.
 Usulul Khafi (1/227), its commentary As-Shafi Sharhul Khafi (5/28), Biharul Anwar (26/82), Wadi’un Nubuwwah pp114, Aslush Shari’ah wa Usuluha pp 58.
 Q5:1, 94, 95, 96
 it is funny to know that in Lebanon Hizbullah deny Ahlussunnah drinking from that water, especially areas that Shiite are dominant, the Sunni there don’t know of this Hussein and the thirst (story). The Sunni once claim the compensation of Hussein’s death.
 For detailed explanation, the book titled “kadara ta riga fata” “Allah’s destiny against the wish of shi’ite,” 2006
 There are things to ponder in this bequest, it shows the foresightedness of the prophet, the reason for kindness to slaves can be for the future happenings of attairing leader ship. If their children were not well trained, the next Ummah will suffer a lot.
 For detailed expiation, read our book “Alaka tsakanin Ahlulbait da sahabbai” by sheikh Saleh Ad-Daruish, translated by Muh’d Mansur Ibrahim. “su wane ne masoya Ahlulbait” same another translated by Aliyu Rufa’I Gusau
 He is a son to Hussain, he attended Karbala, he didn’t fight then because of his health, the terrorist space his life as it was his lack.
 This hadith is reported in Bukhari and Muslim, but we reported from the book of “Wasai’lus Shi’ah” to give Shiite & Shiism an authority against their act from their books. The fact still remain on the prohibition of temporary forever, but why all the legends that we narrated from their books? What they always claim that it was and later permitted, prohibited again & later permitted. This was explain of the falsehood of this assertion by bin Taimiyyah in “Minhajus”