A brief refutation to the allegation of nepotism on Uthman ibn Affan

Uthman’s Governors From Banu Umayyah:
1. Muawiyah ibn Sufyan 2. Abdullah ibn Saad ibn abi Sarah 3. Waleed ibn Uqbah 4.  Saeed ibn al-Aas 5. Abdullah ibn Aamir

Uthman’s Governors from Other tribes:
1. Abu Musa al-Ashari 2. Qa’qa ibn Amr 3. Jabir al-Mazni 4. Habeeb ibn Muslima 5. Abdul Rahman ibn Khalid ibn Waleed 6. Abu al-Awar al-Salami 7. Hakeem ibn Salama 8. Ash’as ibn Qais 9. Jareer ibn Abdullah al-bajali 10. Uyaynah ibn Nahas 11. Malik ibn Habeeb 12. Naseer Ijli 13. Saib ibn Aqra 14. Saeed ibn Qais 15. Salman ibn Rabee’a 16. Khunais ibn Habeesh 17. Ahnaf ibn Qais 18. Abdul Rahman ibn Rabee’a 19. Yala ibn Maniyyah 20. Abdullah ibn Amr Hazrami 21. Ali ibn Rabee’a ibn Abd al-Uzza.

Few facts about the Umayyad Governors of Uthman:
The five Umayyad governors didn’t remain at the post at one time. Rather, Uthman made Waleed ibn Uqbah as his governor, then removed him and appointed Saeed ibn al-Aas. When he died, only three Banu Umayyad governors remained. 1. Muawiyah ibn Sufyan 2. Abdullah ibn Saad ibn Sarah 3. Abdullah ibn Aamir.

Muawiyah ibn Sufyan was the governor of Syria in the era of Caliph Umar. So Uthman appointed only two governors i.e Abdullah ibn Saad ibn Sarah, and Abdullah ibn Aamir. Both were highly skillful in wars, and lead Muslims to many victories over the Romans and Persians.

The Prophet (S) also appointed Umayyads as governors of various places:
1. Utaab ibn Saeed ibn abi al-Aas the governor of Mecca 2. Abu Sufyan ibn Harb al-Umawi the governor of Najran, 3. Khalid ibn Saeed al-umawi the collector of Zakat on Bani Mazhaj, 4. Abaan ibn Saeed the governor of Bahrain 5. Amr ibn Saeed al-Umawi as the governor of Khaiber 6. Hakam ibn Saeed on Sawq 7. Amr ibn al-Aas over Amman 8. Uthman ibn Saeed the governor of Tayma.

Abu Bakr appointed Yazeed ibn Sufyan the governor of Syria. Then Umar made Muawiyah the governor of Syria after he died.

The Hashimi Governors of Ali ibn Abi Talib:
1. Ubaidullah ibn Abbas over Yemen, 2. Qasam ibn Abbas over Makkah and Taif, 3. Tamam ibn Abbas over Madinah, 4. Abdullah ibn Abbas over Basrah. Moreover, he appointed Muhammad ibn Abu Bakr, his son, over Egypt.

So where is nepotism in the era of Uthman (ra) ?

Taqiyyah, an excuse to misguide people in Shia Cult

Shias say that Imams practiced Taqiyyah to protect themselves. Outwardly, this looks a sound belief. But the reality is that the Imams practiced Taqiyyah in such minor issue, that only an ignorant will say he did it to protect his life.

Here are few examples from Bihar ul Anwar:

Where Adam landed after coming down from the Heaven

This, as you will understand easily, is the most negligible issue which no one would have even cared if there was any difference of opinion. Now read a Shia narration:

عن أبي جعفر عليه الصلاة والسلام قال إن آدم ع نزل بالهند فبنى الله تعالى له البيت وأمره أن يأتيه فيطوف به أسبوعا فيأتي منى وعرفات ويقضي مناسكه كما أمر الله

It is narrated from Imam Baqir that Adam landed in India. Allah built a home for him and ordered him to do its Tawwaf every week. So he would come to Mina and Arafat and perform the rituals as he was ordered by Allah.

Now read what Mulla Baqir Majlisi says regarding it:

بيان المشهور في أخبار أهل البيت ع أن نزول آدم ع كان على الصفا ونزول حواء على المروة وهذا الخبر وأمثاله يخالفها ويمكن حملها على التقية إذ المشهور بين العامة أن آدم ع هبط على جبل في سرنديب

The famous thing amongst the narrations of ahlel bayt is that Adam landed in Safa, and Hawa landed in Marwa. And this particular narration (regarding their landing in India) and the similar reports oppose such narrations, and it is possible that they are based on Taqiyyah as it is famous amongst the Sunnis that Adam (as) landed on a mountain in Sarandeep (i.e in Sri lanka).

Bihar ul Anwar, Vol. 11, p. 180

If Imam is doing Taqiyyah even in this kind of issue, understand that he is misguiding you only.

Bading Salam upon the one who performs prayer

Like the previous case, this is also one of the very minor issues. Now read a Shia narration

الخصال، عن محمد بن علي ماجيلويه عن عمه محمد بن أبي القاسم عن هارون بن مسلم عن مسعدة بن صدقة عن الصادق عن أبيه قال لا تسلموا على المصلي لأن المصلي لا يستطيع أن يرد السلام لأن التسليم من المسلم تطوع والرد فريضة

Imam Sadiq said : Don’t bade Salam upon the one who is performing prayer, because he can’t reply the Salam, and because sending salaam from a Muslim is a voluntary issue and replying is obligatory.

Mulla Baqir Majlisi says regarding it:

بيان الظاهر أن النهي عن التسليم محمول على التقية

What is apparent is that the prohibition from bading Salam is based upon Taqiyyah.

Bihar ul Anwar, Vol. 81, 300

When Imam practice Taqiyyah in a minor issue like it, understand that he is misguiding you only.

Jesus died first or Yahya died first

This is also one of the issues, in which a difference of opinion wouldn’t raise the eye brows of the caliphs.

Now lets read what we find in a Shia narration:

ك، [إكمال الدين] بإسناده عن أبي رافع عن النبي ع قال لما رفع الله عيسى ابن مريم ع واستخلف في قومه شمعون بن حمون فلم يزل شمعون في قومه يقوم بأمر الله عز وجل حتى استخلص ربنا تبارك وتعالى وبعث في عباده نبيا من الصالحين وهو يحيى بن زكريا ع فمضى شمعون وملك عند ذلك أردشير بن أشكاس أربع عشرة سنة وعشرة أشهر وفي ثمان سنين من ملكه قتلت اليهود يحيى بن زكريا ع فلما أراد الله أن يقبضه أوحى إليه أن يجعل الوصية في ولد شمعون إلى آخر ما سيأتي في باب أحوال ملوك الأرض

Ikmal al-deen. Through his chain of transmission from the Prophet (S) that he said : When Allah lifted Jesus, the son of Mary, up into the heavens after he had completed his tenure and when He decided to take him up He revealed to him to entrust his light and wisdom and the knowledge of the Divine scripture to Shamoon bin Hamoon who is called Safaa. Isa (a.s.) willed him as his caliph on the believers. Then Shamoon kept on propagating Allah’s Word and continued to give the directives of Isa (a.s.) to his community and to struggle against the disbelievers. Whoever obeyed him and believed (put faith) in the things which he possessed from Allah became a believer and whoever denied and disobeyed him became an infidel until Allah called Shamoon back to Him. Then He sent another Messenger from His virtuous slaves to guide the people. He was Yahya, son of Zakariya. (a.s.). When Shamoon passed away from this world, Urdeshir son of Scotish became king and ruled for 14 years and ten months. When he completed 14 years of his rule the Jews martyred Yahya (a.s.) son of Zakariya (a.s.). At the time of the martyrdom of Yahya (a.s.) Allah sent a revelation (revelation) to him that he should bestow his will (Wasiyyat) and leadership (Imamate) to the progeny of Shamoon until the end which will be mentioned in the chapter of the conditions of the kings of the earth.

Majlisi says regarding it:

بيان الجمع بين الأخبار الدالة على تقدم وفاة يحيى ع على رفع عيسى ع وبين ما دل على تأخرها عنه مشكل إلا أن يحمل بعضها على التقية أو يقال إن الله أحيا يحيى بعد موته وبعثه إليهم 

The summary of the narrations prove that Yaya died before Jesus was raised (to the heavens), and what proves it being after it is difficult to explain, until some parts of it be based on Taqiyyah, or it is said that Allah gave life to Yahya after his death and sent him towards them.

Bihar ul Anwar, Vol. 14, p. 190

When Imam has to perform Taqiyyah even from the laymen amongst Shias, he is misguiding you

Lets read another narration:

كا، [الكافي] الحسين بن محمد عن المعلى عن محمد بن جمهور عن يونس بن طلحة قال قلت للرضا ع إن الإمام لا يغسله إلا الإمام فقال أما تدرون من حضر يغسله قد حضره خير ممن غاب عنه الذين حضروا يوسف في الجب حين غاب عنه أبواه وأهل بيته

It is narrated from Yunus ibn Talha that he said  “Once I asked al-Rida, recipient of divine supreme covenant, ‘Is it true that only an Imam has the authority to wash the body of an Imam for burial?’ “The Imam asked, ‘Do you not know who came to wash his body for burial? The ones who were far more excellent than those who were absent during washing his body for burial, came to wash him for burial. They were those who came to Joseph in the well to help when his parents and family were absent from him (i.e Jibril and angels).’”

Mulla Baqir Majlisi says regarding it

بيان لعل الخبرين محمولان على التقية إما من أهل السنة أو من نواقص العقول من الشيعة

Perhaps these narrations are based on Taqiyyah, either from the Sunnis or from the laymen amongst the Shias.

Bihar ul Anwar, Vol. 27, p. 289

When Imam performs Taqiyyah from the extremist Shias in a simple issue, know that he is misguiding you

We read in Bihar ul Anwar

ير، [بصائر الدرجات] أحمد بن محمد عن الأهوازي عن النضر عن يحيى الحلبي عن أيوب بن الحر عن أبي عبد الله ع أو عمن رواه عن أبي عبد الله قال قلنا الأئمة بعضهم أعلم من بعض قال نعم وعلمهم بالحلال والحرام وتفسير القرآن واحد

ير، [بصائر الدرجات] أحمد بن محمد عن الأهوازي عن ابن أبي عمير عن الحسين بن زياد عن أبي عبد الله ع مثله

ختص، [الإختصاص] عن محمد بن عيسى عن الحسن بن زياد مثله

Ayub ibn Hurr has narrated either from Imam Jafar or someone who narrated from him, that he (i.e the narrator) said : We say that some Imams are more knowledgeable from the others. Imam replied : Yes. And their knowledge about Halal and Haram, and Tafsir of Quran is similar.
Hussain ibn Ziyad has narrated a similar report from Imam Jafar.
Muhammad ibn Esa has narrated as similar report from Hasan ibn Ziyad.

Now lets read what Majlisi has to say regarding it:

ويحتمل أن يكون ذلك للتقية من غلاة الشيعة

It is possible that it is based on Taqiyyah from the extremist Shias.

Bihar ul Anwar, Vol. 25, p. 358

So the Imam is making false statements because of the fear of not only Sunnis, but the laymen and extremist Shias as well.

When Imam has to make false statement even regarding the marriage of Umm Kulthum bint Ali, know that he is a big misguider

We read in Mirat ul Uqool:

عن الشيخ محمد بن محمد بن النعمان أرفعه إلى عمر بن أذينة قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام: إن الناس يحتجون علينا أن أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام زوج فلانا ابنته أم كلثوم، و كان عليه السلام متكئا فجلس و قال: أ تقبلون أن عليا أنكح فلانا ابنته؟ إن قوما يزعمون ذلك ما يهتدون إلى سواء السبيل و لا الرشاد ثم صفق بيده، و قال: سبحان الله أما كان أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام يقدر أن يحول بينه و بينها، كذبوا لم يكن ما قالوا، إن فلانا خطب إلى علي عليه السلام بنته أم كلثوم فأبى فقال للعباس: و الله لئن لم يزوجني لأنزعن منك السقاية و زمزم فأتى العباس عليا فكلمه فأبى عليه فألح العباس، فلما رأى أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام مشقة كلام الرجل على العباس و أنه سيفعل معه ما قال، أرسل إلى جنية من أهل نجران يهودية يقال لها صحيقة بنت حريرية فأمرها فتمثلت في مثال أم كلثوم، و حجبت الأبصار عن أم كلثوم بها و بعث بها إلى الرجل فلم تزل عنده حتى أنه استراب بها يوما فقال ما في الأرض أهل بيت أسحر من بني هاشم، ثم أراد أن يظهر للناس فقتل فحوت الميراث و انصرفت إلى نجران، و أظهر أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام أم كلثوم، 

Umar ibn Uzaynah asked Imam Jafer Sadiq ‘People claim that ‘Ali married his daughter to such a person’. The Imam, who was until then sitting down, stood up and said angrily, “Whoever holds such a viewpoint is misled.” Subhanallah! Was Imam ‘Ali unable to free his daughter from their clutches? He could have stood between them and her to protect, they have fabricated a lie … (the whole story of Umm Kulthum being replaced by Jinn and the Jinn’s marriage to Umar thereforth)

Mulla Baqir Majlisi says regarding it:

أقول: لا منافاة بينه و بين سائر الأخبار الواردة في أنه زوجه أم كلثوم، لأنهم صلوات الله عليهم، كانوا يتقون من غلاة الشيعة، و كان هذا من الأسرار، و لم يكن أكثر أصحابهم قائلين لها، كذا ذكره الوالد العلامة قدس الله روحه

I say: There is no contradiction between this narration and the other narrations that he married his daughter Umm Kulthum, because the Imams would fear from the extremist Shias, and this is from the secrets, and because plenty of his companions didn’t believe in it, this is what Allamah has also mentioned.

Mirat ul Uqool, Vol. 21, p. 198 

The Issue of Fadak in Brief


Fadak is the name of a village situated near Khayber at a distance of 140 km from Madinah, where the Jews resided. The Prophet (S) conquered the place after the battle of Khayber without any battle on the agreement that half of the produce would be given to the Muslims. Therefore, it would be treated as ‘Fai’. Fai includes every such property of the unbelievers which the Prophet (S) seized without any battle. It is mentioned clearly in the Holy Quran:

And what Allah restored [of property] to His Messenger from them – you did not spur for it [in an expedition] any horses or camels, but Allah gives His messengers power over whom He wills, and Allah is over all things competent. And what Allah restored to His Messenger from the people of the towns – it is for Allah and for the Messenger and for [his] near relatives and orphans and the [stranded] traveler – so that it will not be a perpetual distribution among the rich from among you. And whatever the Messenger has given you – take; and what he has forbidden you – refrain from. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.[1]

Hence, Fadak was to be treated as Fai.

The Inheritance of the Prophets According to the Authentic Narrations:

The Sunnis believe that the Prophets don’t inherit wealth, their inheritance is knowledge. And this is what Abu Bakr, Umar, Ali, Uthman, Zubair, Saeed ibn Waqas, Abbas and Ibn Awf believed, according to the narration in Sahih Bukhari:

Umar said “Wait I beseech you, by Allah, by Whose permission both the Heaven and the earth stand fast! Do you know that Allah’s apostle said ‘We (Prophets) our properties are not to be inherited, and whatever we leave is to be spent on charity, and he said it about himself”? They said “He did say it”. Umar then turned towards Ali and Abbas and said, “I beseech you both by Allah! Do you know that Allah’s apostle said this?” They replied in the affirmative.[2]

Similarly we read in the Sahih narration in al-Kafi that Imam Jafar said that the Prophet (S) said:

“Truly the scholars are the heirs of Prophets, the Prophets bequeathed not a single Dinar or Dirham, instead they bequeathed knowledge, and whoever acquires it has indeed acquired a generous portion of their legacy”.[3]

The grand Shia scholar Ayatullah Khomeini says regarding the authenticity of this narration:

“The narrators in the chain of transmission of this tradition are all trustworthy, in fact Ibrahim ibn Hisham, the father of Ali ibn Ibrahim, is not moderately trustworthy but outstandingly so.”[4]

This tradition has been authenticated by Mulla Baqir Majlisi as well.

This Shia authentic tradition clearly supports the Sunni view that the Prophet don’t inherit wealth, rather they inherit knowledge only.

The Inheritance of the Prophets in the Holy Quran:

While trying to refute the Sunnis, the Shias try to argue from a few verses of the Holy Quran that the Prophets do inherit their wealth. We will discuss these verses one by one.

1.  Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male, what is equal to the share of two females.[5]

This verse states the general rule, but the inheritance of the Prophets is a particular case regarding which Sunnis say that there is exception. Even Shias themselves claim that there are certain exceptions to the general rule laid down in this verse. According to Shias, wife can’t inherit land, though this is not mentioned in this verse. Secondly, according to Shias, a Kafir can’t inerit from a Muslim. And the Shias base these opinions on the basis of their own traditions attributed to their Imams. Similarly, we base our opinion on Prophetic traditions.

2. And Solomon inherited David. [6]

This verse doesn’t mention the inheritance of wealth. Only inheritance is mentioned here, and we know that inheritance can be of different types besides wealth. For example, the inheritance of knowledge, the inheritance of book, the inheritance of wisdom and the inheritance of kingdom etc. In this verse, the type of inheritance is not mentioned.  Our view is that this verse can’t be regarding the inheritance of wealth, and there are few reasons. David had 19 sons, and only one son i.e Solomon has been mentioned here. This means that it refers to a particular type of inheritance which the other sons didn’t receive. And that is the inheritance of knowledge and wisdom. It can also refer to the inheritance of prophethood and kingdom. Someone may say that prophethood is not inherited. That is true, but it can be said in a metaphorical way.  For example, wisdom is not necessarily inherited, but if a child is wise like his father, it can be said that the child inherited wisdom from his father.

3. [This is] a mention of the mercy of your Lord to His servant Zechariah. When he called to his Lord a private supplication. He said, “My Lord, indeed my bones have weakened, and my head has filled with white, and never have I been in my supplication to You, my Lord, unhappy. And indeed, I fear the successors after me, and my wife has been barren, so give me from Yourself an heir. Who will inherit me and inherit from the family of Jacob. And make him, my Lord, pleasing [to You].”[7]

In this verse as well, it is not mentioned which sort of inheritance is meant here. But since it includes the inheritance of the posterity of Yaqub (as) as well, hence we can understand that this can’t mean the inheritance of wealth. Because no one inherits wealth from a whole posterity. Hence it can only refer to knowledge, wisdom and prophethood.

Was Fadak a Gift?

Fadak was definitely not a gift and there is no authentic Sunni narration which shows that Fadak was a gift. Rather it is against the authentic narrations according to which Fatima (ra) asked Fadak as inheritance from her father, and not as a gift.  Almost all of these traditions include a weak narrator ‘Atiyah al-Awfi’ who is weak according to the majority of scholars. Moreover, how can the Prophet gift a whole piece of land to his daughter, when he didn’t allow a golden necklace to his daughter saying:

“O Fatima (ra)! Will not the people say that Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad (S) is dressed in the attire of the oppressors?”[8]

Similarly, in another Shia tradition, Fatima requested a servant from her father, which Prophet (S) didn’t give to her, and instead taught her a supplication.[9]

This clearly shows that the Prophet (S) didn’t gave worldly objects to his daughter. So how could he gave a huge piece of land to his daughter?

Ali (ra) never returned Fadak to the Children of Fatima (ra)

This is a historical fact that Ali (ra) never returned Fadak to the Children of Fatima (ra) and it clearly shows that he agreed with the view of Abu Bakr (ra). In order to answer this, Shias fabricated a tradition and attributed it to their Imam, according to which Imam Jafar said :

Ali (ra) followed in the footsteps of Prophet (S). When he conquered Makkah, he found out that Aqeel (the brother of Ali) has sold his house, so he was asked, ‘O Prophet (S), why don’t you take your house back? So he said, “Has Aqeel left any house for us?” And we belong to the household who never take anything back that is taken from us unjustly. So that is why Ali (ra) didn’t take Fadak back.[10]

Now this is a very wrong excuse, because Caliphate was also snatched from the Imams. Because when Fadak was purportedly snatched from Fatima, she herself went to the caliph to take it back. Why would she go and ask that Fadak be given to her, if it was snatched unjustly, and if ahlelbayt don’t take back what is unjustly snatched from them? Moreover, the 12th Imam will fight to restore his caliphate, wasn’t caliphate snatched from the ahlelbayt according to the Shias? And most importantly, if Abu Bakr had oppressed Fatima by snatching Fadak as the Shias say, then didn’t Aqeel also oppress the Prophet (S) by selling his home without his permission? Why don’t Shias accuse Aqeel of the same crime, and declare him a tyrant?

Was Fatima (ra) angry upon Abu Bakr (ra) throughout her life?

Fatima (ra) wasn’t angry at Abu Bakr (ra) throughout her life. These are the words of Zuhri, which are mentioned in Sahih Bukhari, and not the words of Ayesha (ra). The evidence is that before these words, the pronoun change from feminine to masculine, which indicate that these words are not the words of a female, but a male. Similarly the words that Abu Bakr (ra) didn’t participate in her funeral also belong to this category. Hence, even if these words are present in Sahih Bukhari, they are the view of a narrator, and not a companion. And the views of a narrator who didn’t witness these events can’t make these statements as facts, even if they are in Sahih Bukhari.

Moreover, this also negates the high status of Lady Fatima (ra). Why would she become angry at someone for her entire life just because of a piece of land? And why would she not allow anyone to her funeral due to it, while her father was the most merciful upon the Ummah, so much so that he forgave a person like Habshi, who had killed his dearest uncle, i.e Hamzah? We can’t expect it from her daughter that she would get angry at someone for her entire life just because of a piece of land.

And all praises belong to Allah!



[1] Surah Hashr 59:6-7

[2] Sahih Bukhari, Hadith # 3756

[3] Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, p. 42

[4] Islamic Government, by Ayatullah Khomeini

[5] Surah Nisa, Verse 11

[6] Surah 27, Verse 16

[7] Surah Maryam 19:2-6

[8] Uyun akhbar al-Reza Vol. 2, p. 57

[9] Ilal al-Shara’ie, Vol. 2, p. 288

[10] Ilal al-Shara’ie, Vol. 1, p. 155


The Sincerity of Earliest Companions Can’t be Questioned

When Prophet Muhammad (S) announced his Prophethood, his tribe Quraish didn’t pay much attention. But when they saw that people were continuously embracing Islam day by day, and the new converts were refuting the customs and traditions of their forefathers, the people of Quraish tribe started oppressing them hoping that this would stop them. But the oppressions didn’t stop the new converts. Now this became a serious issue for Quraish. They tried all the tactics they could think of to stop the new religion. They offered wealth, rank, women and everything they could think of to Prophet Muhammad (S). At that time, the Muslims numbered in few hundreds only.

These few hundred Muslims were the reason for the worries of Quraish. They remained attached to the message of Islam ignoring all worldly desires and offers to them. If they were not sincere, they would have become the victims of the tactics used by Quraish. But they remained steadfast. Allah ordered these people to migrate towards Abyssinia because of the oppressions against them. Later on, Allah allowed them to migrate towards Madinah for the same reason. This was only due to their sincerity and steadfastness due to which Quraish were oppressing them and Allah was ordering them to migrate. Allah named those who migrated as ‘Muhajiroon’ or the ‘Immigrants’.

Ali (ra) said regarding them:

ولعمري ما كنت إلا رجلا من المهاجرين … وما كان الله ليجمعهم على ضلالة، ولا ليضربهم بالعمى

By my life, I am just a person from the Muhajireen … Allah will not gather them upon falsehood and Allah will not make them blind.

Nahj al-Sa’ada fi Mustadrak Nahj al-Balagha, Vol. 4, p. 93

They migrated to Madinah after they were invited by few converts from Madinah. Madinah at that time was composed of different tribes, and the Jews had a prominent position. When the Muhajiroon migrated to Madinah, the people of Madinah welcomed them wholeheartedly. Allah named these people of Madinah as the ‘Ansar’. Those people protected Muhajiroon from not only Quraish, but also the Jews and other enemies within Madinah with their wealth and lives. If they were not sincere, Muslims couldn’t survive in Madinah and Allah wouldn’t have allowed the Muslims to migrate there.

Ali (ra) said regarding them:

وَقَالَ (عليه السلام) فِي مَدْحِ الْأَنْصَارِ: هُمْ وَاللَّهِ رَبَّوُا الْإِسْلَامَ كَمَا يُرَبَّى الْفِلْوُ مَعَ غَنَائِهِمْ بِأَيْدِيهِمُ السِّبَاطِ وَأَلْسِنَتِهِمُ السِّلَاطِ

Eulogising the Ansaar: By Allah, they nurtured Islam with their generous hands and eloquent tongues as a year old calf is nurtured.

Nahjul Balagha, English Translation, Saying # 474, p. 695

This is a historical reality which can’t be questioned by any knowledgeable person. No tradition, historical narration or the saying of any scholar can prove them hypocrites. These Muslims who were the first the embrace Islam are believers without any doubt. If we declare majority of them as disbelievers or hypocrites, it doesn’t match with the context. The oppression of Quraish on them and the battles of Quraish against them look absurd, and Ansar’s sacrifices for them look without any purpose. And Allah’s order to them to migrate from Makkah looks meaningless. Even the presence of hypocrites in Madinah and all their plots against Muslims look unreal. Because if majority of these people were enemies of the Prophet (S) at heart, all they had to do was not to participate in any war, which the enemies waged upon the Prophet (S). If majority were hypocrites, then the hypocrites wouldn’t plot to kill the Prophet (S) during the Tabuk event, when it could have been done much more easily in Madinah.

Hence, it is clear that the earliest Muslims were sincere companions of the Prophet (S), whether someone considers the companions who embraced Islam later on as sincere or not. Now how many of these earliest Muslims agreed with the Shia view that Ali (ra) is the first divinely appointed Caliph? There are plenty of traditions in Shia books which testify that only three, or seven, remained on the view that Ali (ra) is the first divinely appointed Caliph. So when those earliest sincere companions didn’t consider Ali (ra) to be the first divinely appointed Imam, it really puts a big question mark on this belief. Shias definitely have got no satisfactory answer to it.


Condemnation of Mukhtar Thaqafi

ايضا از عمر بن على بن الحسين روايت كرده است كه اول مختار براى پدرم بيست هزار درهم فرستاد، پدرم قبول كرد، و خانه عقيل بن ابي طالب را و خانه‏هاى ديگر از بنى هاشم كه بنى اميه خراب كرده بودند پدرم به آن زر ساخت، چون مختار آن مذهب باطل را اختيار كرد، بعد از آن چهل هزار دينار براى پدرم فرستاد، پدرم از او قبول نكرد و رد كرد

It is narrated from Umar, the son of Zainul Abideen, that in the beginning, Mukhtar sent 20,000 dinar to my father, and my father took them, and rebuilt the homes of Aqeel ibn abi talib and other bani hashim which were destroyed by bani umayyah. And when Mukhtar adopted a false religion, and then he sent 40,000 dinar to my father, but he didn’t accept and returned it.

ايضا به سند معتبر از امام محمد باقر عليه السلام روايت كرده است كه مختار نامه‏اى به خدمت حضرت امام زين العابدين عليه السلام نوشت و با هديه‏اى چند از عراق به خدمت آن جناب فرستاد، چون رسولان او به در خانه او رسيدند، رخصت طلبيدند كه داخل شوند، حضرت فرستاد كه: دور شويد كه من هديه دروغگويان را قبول نمى‏كنم و نامه ايشان را نمى‏خوانم

Similarly it is narrated with a reliable chain from Imam Baqir that Mukhtar wrote a letter to my father, alongwith gifts from Iraq. When the messengers reached the place of Imam, and asked to enter, Zainul Abideen said: Turn back, I don’t accept gifts from liars, and neither do I read their letters.

در بعضى از كتب معتبر روايت كرده‏اند كه مختار براى امام زين العابدين عليه السلام صد هزار درهم فرستاد، و آن جناب نمى‏خواست كه آن را قبول كند، و ترسيد از مختار كه رد كند و از او متضرر گردد، پس آن حضرت آن مال را در خانه ضبط كرد. چون مختار كشته شد، حقيقت حال را به عبد الملك نوشت كه: آن مال تعلق به تو دارد و بر تو گوارا است، و آن جناب مختار را لعنت كرد و مى‏فرمود: دروغ مى‏بندند بر خدا و بر ما، مختار دعوى مى‏كرد كه وحى خدا بر او نازل مى‏شود

In few reliable books, it is narrated that Mukhtar sent one hundred thousand dirham for Imam Zainul Abideen. But Imam wanted not to accept them. And he also feared that if he returned, than Mukhtar will create trouble for him, so he let the money at his home. When Mukhtar was killed, Imam wrote to Abdul Malik that this is your right, take it away. And he cursed Mukhtar and said, he would lie upon us, and he would claim that wahi of Allah reveals on me.

بعضى از علما را اعتقاد آن است كه غرض او رياست و پادشاهى بود، و اين امر را وسيله آن كرده‏ بود، و اولا به حضرت امام زين العابدين عليه السلام متوسل شد، چون حضرت از جانب حق تعالى مامور نبود به خروج و نيت فاسد او را مى‏دانست، اجابت او ننمود، پس او به محمد بن حنفيه متوسل شد و مردم را بسوى او دعوت مى‏كرد و او را مهدى قرار داده بود، و مذهب كيسانيه از او در ميان مردم پيدا شد، و محمد بن حنفيه را امام آخر مى‏دانند و مى‏گويند كه: زنده است و غايب شده، و در آخر الزمان ظاهر خواهد شد. و الحمد لله كه اهل آن مذهب منقرض شده‏اند و كسى از ايشان نمانده است، و ايشان را به اين سبب كيسانى مى‏گويند كه از اصحاب مختارند، و مختار را كيسان مى‏گفتند براى آنكه امير المومنين عليه السلام موافق روايات ايشان او را به كيس خطاب كرد، يا به اعتبار آنكه سر كرده لشكر او و مدبر امور او ابو عمره بود كه كيسان نام داشت. و آنچه از جمع بين الاخبار ظاهر مى‏شود آن است كه او در خروج خود، نيت صحيحى نداشته است، و اكاذيب و اباطيل را وسيله ترويج امر خود مى‏كرده است، و ليكن چون كارهاى خير عظيم بر دست او جارى شده است، اميد نجات درباره او هست، و متعرض احوال اين قسم مردم نشدن

Few scholars believe that Mukhtar wanted to gain rule and kingdom, and used this way for his purpose. And in the beginning, he attached himself with Imam Zainul Abideen, since he was not appointed (mamoor) on khuruj he was aware of his false intentions, he didn’t accept Mukhtar’s request. Than Mukhtar attached himself with Muhammad ibn Hanafiya, and he would invite the people towards him, and he would call Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya, the Mehdi. And the Kaysaniya sect was started by him. And they said  Muhammad ibn Hanafiya is alive, and he is the last Imam, and thanks to God, that religion ended and its followers have finished, and they were called Kaysani because they were the companions of Mukhtar and Mukhtar was called Kaysan because according to their reports, Ali called him Kays in some of his letters. Or due to this reason that the leader of Mukhtar’s army and his advisor, was Abu Umra, and he was called Kaysan. And from the reports, it is clear that Mukhtar’s intention regarding his khuruj were not correct. He had appointed liars to preach his religion. But since great things were done by him, we are hopeful of his salvation, and not to indulge in matters of such people is not right.

Jila ul Ayun , by Baqir Majlisi, p. 805-807

A refutation of Shia Cult

In the Holy Quran, we read explicit verses in the virtues of the companions of the Prophet (S)

محمد رسول الله والذين معه اشداء على الكفار رحماء بينهم تراهم ركعا سجدا يبتغون فضلا من الله ورضوانا سيماهم في وجوههم من اثر السجود ذلك مثلهم في التوراة ومثلهم في الانجيل كزرع اخرج شطأه فازره فاستغلظ فاستوى على سوقه يعجب الزراع ليغيظ بهم الكفار وعد الله الذين امنوا وعملوا الصالحات منهم مغفرة واجرا عظيما

[048:029] Muhammad, (SAW), is the messenger of Allah. He and his followers are tough on the unbelievers; but they are kind to each other. You see them bowing, and falling down prostrate (before Allah) seeking His favors and His acceptance. The distinctive effect of prostrating (before their Creator) is apparent on their faces. Such is their description in the Torah. About them, the Gospel quotes the parable, “It is as if the seed is sown in the field…

View original post 2,494 more words

Lectures and booklet of Sheikh Taha Keran on Shi’ism

Abu Bakr, the first Caliph


Umar, the second Caliph

Part 1 : http://ioza.org/dm_files/12%20Ameerul%20mu%27mineen%20Umar%20al%20Khatab%20Ra.mp3

Part 2: http://ioza.org/dm_files/13%20Ameerul%20mu%27mineen%20Umar%20al%20Khatab%20Ra%202.mp3

Uthman, the third Caliph


Ali, the fourth Caliph


Ameer Muawiyah, the scribe of Quran


Introduction to Shi’ism


Lecture on Imamate


Imamate in the light of Quran


History of Shi’ism


History of Unity


Lecture on Leadership


Battle of Camel




Off the Cuff


Battle of Camel


The Fitnah