Why Islamic teachings should NEVER be taken from Shia Sources?

In The Name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful.

In this article we will be presenting before our respected readers the major reasons, “that why Islamic teachings should never be taken from Shia Sources”. And we will be relying on Shia narrations and testimonies of esteemed Shia scholars inorder to prove our claim. (Insha’Allah)

PROBLEM (I) – Impact of Taqiyah(dissimulation) on teachings of Shiism.

Infallible Imams of Shias misguided people due to being in a state of dissimulation(Taqqiyah).

As per Shiism, the infallible Imams from whom Shias took majority of their religious teachings used to practice taqqiyah(dissimulation) throughout their life and they used to misguide their followers due to being in a state of taqqiyah, because of which the major problem that occurred in Shiism is the huge amount of contradictory reports regarding the teachings of Imams, and with no valid tool to differentiate between these contradictions. It wasn’t possible for Shias to know that which among those contradictory reports was said by Imam under taqqiyah and without practicing taqqiyah, as some Shia scholars themselves testified. And on the top of this problem, the other problem was that, even the companions of Imams who spread the teachings of infallible Shia Imams used to practice taqqiyah, while narrating the teachings of Imams, which worsened the problem which Shias were facing regarding the teachings of Imams.In Sunnism, many narrators of Imam Al-Sadiq and Imam Al-Baqir(whom Shia to be infallible Imams) were the people of Al-Madinah, which makes sense since this is where both Imams lived. However in Shiasm the people of Al-Kufa were the “companions” of the Imams, and they were non-locals and they used to seek teachings from Imam and then would spread in the land from where they belong . So, what used to happen is that they used to narrate contradictory reports, with no way to judge which was the correct teachings of Imam, since as we said Imams were from Al-Madinah. We will try to explain this to our readers by using a true scenario from Shia books; One Shia narrator from Al-Kufa would narrate a tradition from infallible Shia Imam, in which he would say that “Imam Al-Sadiq said that Muta’a is halal(allowed).” However, another Shia narrator would say, “No, he said that it was haram(prohibited)!” Then, a third Shia narrator would say, “I heard him say that it is mustahab(preferable),” and the fourth would claim that it is makrooh(disliked), and so on and so forth. Now, in light of these contradicting opinions, the Shias were lost, since all these Shia narrators claiming that they heard these things from the Imams, so who does one choose? So, one day, when one Shia narrator said that he heard Imam Al-Sadiq say that such and such is haram, a second Shia narrator said, “No, I heard him say that it is halal, and I also heard him say that you are mal’oon(accursed)!” The first narrator shot back, “That’s funny, because I heard him say that YOU are mal’oon(accursed).” Then, a third narrator came and said, “Both of you are mal’oon(accursed) upon the tongues of Al-Sadiq and Al-Baqir!” And suddenly, everybody in Kufa became mal’oon(accursed).

As time progressed, about a century and a half later, Shia scholar Al-Kashshi compiled his book on narrators. Due to the huge amount of disagreements, he included all the narrations. So, when we look into the chapter on big Shia narrators like Zurarah or Yunus bin Abdulrahman, we will find various attributions that say that so and so is in paradise, then in the next hadith it says that so and so is damned to hell. Shia scholars were baffled by this and had no way to reconcile this other than to say that this is due to taqiyyah, because there is no way that one can say that the Imams contradicted themselves, So they considered that Imams were just practicing taqqiyah(dissimulation).

The one who has opened Shia books of Hadith knows the gigantic amount of Hadiths that were labeled as Taqqiyah by the Shia scholars thinking that it would solve their problems, and MANY of these are authentic according to Shia standards, and this saves them the effort of having to make illogical and strange explanations in order to reconcile them. After reading these explanations one can only come to the conclusion that the Imam was on Taqqiyah most of his time, and this is indeed what many of Shia scholars stated in their books, and they said that even their closest companions never knew most of the religious rulings because the Imams would use Taqqiyah even on their own followers, moreover majority of the contradictions revolve around regular aspects of the shariah, from tahara to tafseer to the stories of the earlier prophets, not some critical and controversial Shia-Sunni issues, which implies that Shia Imams used to practice taqiyah for unnecessary issues too.

Few examples from Shia narrations where we find infallible Shia Imams misguiding people due to being in a state of Taqqiyah(dissimulation).

1.

أَحْمَدُ بْنُ إِدْرِيسَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْجَبَّارِ عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ عَلِيٍّ عَنْ ثَعْلَبَةَ بْنِ مَيْمُونٍ عَنْ زُرَارَةَ بْنِ أَعْيَنَ عَنْ أَبِي جَعْفَرٍ ( عليه السلام ) قَالَ سَأَلْتُهُ عَنْ مَسْأَلَةٍ فَأَجَابَنِي ثُمَّ جَاءَهُ رَجُلٌ فَسَأَلَهُ عَنْهَا فَأَجَابَهُ بِخِلَافِ مَا أَجَابَنِي ثُمَّ جَاءَ رَجُلٌ آخَرُ فَأَجَابَهُ بِخِلَافِ مَا أَجَابَنِي وَ أَجَابَ صَاحِبِي فَلَمَّا خَرَجَ الرَّجُلَانِ قُلْتُ يَا ابْنَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ رَجُلَانِ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْعِرَاقِ مِنْ شِيعَتِكُمْ قَدِمَا يَسْأَلَانِ فَأَجَبْتَ كُلَّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا بِغَيْرِ مَا أَجَبْتَ بِهِ صَاحِبَهُ فَقَالَ يَا زُرَارَةُ إِنَّ هَذَا خَيْرٌ لَنَا وَ أَبْقَى لَنَا وَ لَكُمْ وَ لَوِ اجْتَمَعْتُمْ عَلَى أَمْرٍ وَاحِدٍ لَصَدَّقَكُمُ النَّاسُ عَلَيْنَا وَ لَكَانَ أَقَلَّ لِبَقَائِنَا وَ بَقَائِكُمْ قَالَ ثُمَّ قُلْتُ لِأَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ( عليه السلام ) شِيعَتُكُمْ لَوْ حَمَلْتُمُوهُمْ عَلَى الْأَسِنَّةِ أَوْ عَلَى النَّارِ لَمَضَوْا وَ هُمْ يَخْرُجُونَ مِنْ عِنْدِكُمْ مُخْتَلِفِينَ قَالَ فَأَجَابَنِي بِمِثْلِ جَوَابِ أَبِيهِ .

Ahmad ibn Idris from Muhamad ibn ‘Abdul-Jabbar from al-Hassan ibn ‘Ali from Tha’alabah ibn Maymoun from Zurarah ibn A’ayun that he said: I asked Imam al-Baqir (as) a question so the Imam gave me the answer then another man came and asked the same question so the Imam gave him a different answer, then another one came and asked about it so the Imam gave him a completely different answer than both of us. when both men left I asked the Imam: “O son of Rassul Allah, two men from ‘Iraq and from your Shia came to ask you but you gave each of them different answers.” He replied: “O Zurarah, this is good for us so that we may remain safer because if you all agree on this then the people will believe in it and they would be guided to us but we will not remain for long.” Later I said to his son al-Sadiq (as): “Your Shia always walk away from you with different opinions and answers” so he gave me the same reply as his father.

source: al-Kafi 1/65.

al-Majlisi said: Muwaththaq like the Sahih.

al-Behbudi said: Sahih(authentic).

Comment: Shia Imam misguided his own followers here by practicing taqiyah, since he considered that if Shias have common teachings then they will be guided to Imams, which will put the Imams in trouble.

2.

عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي نَجْرَانَ عَنْ عَاصِمِ بْنِ حُمَيْدٍ عَنْ مَنْصُورِ بْنِ حَازِمٍ قَالَ قُلْتُ لِأَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ( عليه السلام ) مَا بَالِي أَسْأَلُكَ عَنِ الْمَسْأَلَةِ فَتُجِيبُنِي فِيهَا بِالْجَوَابِ ثُمَّ يَجِيئُكَ غَيْرِي فَتُجِيبُهُ فِيهَا بِجَوَابٍ آخَرَ فَقَالَ إِنَّا نُجِيبُ النَّاسَ عَلَى الزِّيَادَةِ وَ النُّقْصَانِ قَالَ قُلْتُ فَأَخْبِرْنِي عَنْ أَصْحَابِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) صَدَقُوا عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) أَمْ كَذَبُوا قَالَ بَلْ صَدَقُوا قَالَ قُلْتُ فَمَا بَالُهُمُ اخْتَلَفُوا فَقَالَ أَ مَا تَعْلَمُ أَنَّ الرَّجُلَ كَانَ يَأْتِي رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) فَيَسْأَلُهُ عَنِ الْمَسْأَلَةِ فَيُجِيبُهُ فِيهَا بِالْجَوَابِ ثُمَّ يُجِيبُهُ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ مَا يَنْسَخُ ذَلِكَ الْجَوَابَ فَنَسَخَتِ الْأَحَادِيثُ بَعْضُهَا بَعْضاً .

‘Ali ibn Ibrahim from his father from ibn abi Najran from ‘Assim bin Humayd from Mansour ibn Hazim who said: I said to al-Sadiq (as): “What is the matter with you, I ask a question and you give me an answer then another man comes and asks it so you give him a completely different one?” The Imam replied: “we answer people in matters of addition and deletion.” I said to him: “Then tell me about the companions of Rassul-Allah SAWS do they narrate truthful narrations or do they lie?” the Imam said: “They are truthful” I asked: “Why did they differ?” he replied: “Do you not know that a man used to come to Rassul-Allah SAWS and ask a question then he answers him but later he would answer to the same question differently because the Ahadith they abrogate each other.”

source: al-Kafi 1/65.

al-Majlisi said: Hasan(good).

Comment: Here too we find that Shia Imams used to give contradictory answers to people, as they were in a state of Taqiyah. But if Shias claim that they did this due to ruling being abrogated then, We ask were the Ahadith still being abrogated during the time of the infallible Shia Imams?

3.

وأما الذين أثبتوا الإمامة لعلي بن أبي طالب ثم للحسن ثم للحسين ثم لعلي بن الحسين ثم نزلوا بعد وفاة علي بن الحسين إلى القول بإمامة ابنه أبي جعفر محمد بن علي بن الحسين باقر العلم وأقاموا على إمامته إلى أن توفي، غير نفر يسير منهم فإنهم سمعوا رجلا منهم يقال له عمر بن رياح زعم أنه سأل أبا جعفر عن مسألة فأجابه فيها بجواب ثم عاد إليه في عام آخر فسأله عن تلك المسألة بعينها فأجابه فيها بخلاف الجواب الأول، فقال لأبي جعفر: هذا خلاف ما أجبتني في هذه المسألة العام الماضي، فقال له: إن جوابنا ربما خرج على وجه التقية، فشك في أمره وإمامته، فلقي رجلا من أصحاب أبي جعفر يقال له محمد بن قيس فقال له: إني سألت أبا جعفر عن مسألة فأجابني فيها بجواب ثم سألته عنها في عام آخر فأجابني فيها بخلاف جوابه الأول فقلت له لم فعلت ذلك فقال فعلته للتقية وقد علم الله أني ما سألته عنها إلا وأنا صحيح العزم على التدين بما يفتيني به وقبوله والعمل به فلا وجه لاتقائه إياي وهذه حالي، فقال له محمد بن قيس: فلعله حضرك من اتقاه؟ فقال: ما حضر مجلسه في واحدة من المسألتين غيري، ولكن جوابيه جميعا خرجا على وجه التبخيت ولم يحفظ ما أجاب به في العام الماضي فيجيب بمثله. فرجع عن إمامته وقال: لا يكون إماما من يفتي بالباطل على شيء بوجه من الوجوه ولا في حال من الأحوال، ولا يكون إماما من يفتي تقية بغير ما يجب عند الله ولا من يرخي ستره ويغلق بابه، ولا يسع الإمام إلا الخروج والأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر، فمال بسببه إلى قول البترية ومال معه نفر يسير.

al-Ash`ari al-Qummi says in Firaq al-Shia when discussing the followers of al-Baqir (rah):

[As for those who proved the Imamah for `Ali bin abi Talib, then Hassan, then Hussein, then `Ali bin al-Hussein, and afterwards they declared their belief in the Imamah of his son abu Ja`far Muhammad al-Baqir and remained on this state until his death, except a small group from them, because they heard a man called `Umar bin Rayah claim that he asked abu Ja`far about a matter and he gave him an answer, then he returned the next year and asked about the exact same matter but this time he received an answer that opposes the first answer he originally received. He told abu Ja`far: “This opposes the answer you gave me last year.” he replied: “Maybe our answer was out of Taqiyyah.” so he doubted his Imamah. He later met a man from the companions of abu Ja`far called Muhammad bin Qays, so he told him: “I had asked abu Ja`far about a matter so he answered me, then I asked him about it another year so he answered differently, I asked him why did he do this, he said he did it out of Taqiyyah, and Allah knows that I only asked when I was full of faith in him and sincerity and I wanted to practice upon his verdict, so he had no reason to do Taqiyyah with me.” ibn Qays said: “Maybe he did Taqiyyah because there was someone else in attendance?” He said: “Nobody attended our Majlis in both those times, but his answers were random and he didn’t memorize what he said the previous year so he can answer with it again.” So he disbelieved in his Imamah and said: “He who gives false verdicts cannot be an Imam in any way shape or form, and he who gives his verdicts as Taqiyyah in a way that does not please Allah cannot be an Imam, nor he who sits comfortably at home and keeps his door shut, the Imam must rise against oppression and order what is good and forbid what is evil.” This is why he leaned towards the opinion of the Batriyyah and a small group followed him on this.]

sources:

-Bihar al-Anwar by al-Majlisi (73/33) (69/178).

-Tahtheeb al-Maqal fi Tanqeeh Kitab Rijal al-Najashi by Muhammad `Ali Abtahi (3/464).

Comment: The Shia narrations prove without the shadow of a doubt that the infallible Shia Imams were a source of misguidance to their own followers before anyone else.

4. Rawdat al-Muttaqeen fi Sharh man la Yahduruhu al-Faqeeh vo.3 pg.44:

روضة المتقين في شرح من لا يحضره الفقيه، للمجلسي ج‏3، ص: 44 :

و في الصحيح، عن زرارة قال: كنت قاعدا عند أبي جعفر عليه السلام و ليس عنده غير ابنه جعفر عليه السلام فقال: يا زرارة إن أبا ذر و عثمان تنازعا على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه و آله و سلم فقال عثمان كل مال من ذهب أو فضة يدار به و يعمل به فيتجر به ففيه الزكاة إذا حال عليه الحول، فقال أبو ذر (أما– خ ل) ما يتجر به أو دير و عمل به فليس فيه زكاة، إنما الزكاة فيه إذا كان ركازا أو كنزا موضوعا، فإذا حال عليه الحول ففيه الزكاة فاختصما في ذلك إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه و آله و سلم قال فقال: القول ما قاله أبو ذر،

فقال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام لأبيه عليه السلام، ما تريد إلا أن تخرج مثل هذا فيكف الناس أن يعطفوا على فقرائهم و مساكينهم؟

فقال: إليك عني لا أجد منها بدا.

[In the Sahih, from Zurarah that he said: I was sitting with abu Ja’far (as) at his place, and there was no one present except his son Ja’far (as), so he said: “O Zurarah, abu Dharr and ‘Uthman disputed during the days of the Prophet (SAWS), ‘Uthman said: All money from gold or silver that the people use and work with in trade, they must pay Zakat for it if one year passes. abu Dharr replied: The money you work with in trade and such then you must not pay Zakat from it, but if it was stored and unused and one year passes then one must pay its Zakat. So they went to the Prophet (SAWS) to solve their dispute and he told them: the saying of abu Dharr is correct.”

Abu ‘Abdullah Ja’far (as) said to his father al-Baqir (as): “Why would you bring something like this up? How will the Muslims have kindness and sympathy for the poor and weak among them?”

al-Baqir (as) replied: “Stay away from me, I found it obligatory!”]

Shia scholar al-Majlisi said in his commentary:

الظاهر أن منازعتهما صلوات الله عليهما كان لإسكات العامة بأن يقولوا إن ابنه نازع معه و لم يقبل منه لأنه ما يقول إلا ما نقل، عن آبائه عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه و آله و سلم عن الله عز و جل. أ.هـ

“What is apparent is that their(Imams)(pbut) dispute was to silence the ‘Amah(Sunnies) so that they may say: He quarreled with him and did not accept from him because he only reports what he heard from his fathers from the Prophet (SAWS) from Allah (swt).”

Comment:The report says it was only al-Baqir and Zurarah and al-Sadiq in the house, no Sunnies were present so they can silence them. In fact Shia narrator Zurarah didn’t go and narrated this to “Sunnies” as NO SUNNI narrates the Hadith above, instead Zurarah went and narrated this to Shia and the direct narrator from Zurarah, he’s a shia from the companions of al-Sadiq and a Thiqah(trustworthy) according to Shia hadeeth scholar al-Khu’i.

5. Regarding one of the biggest Shia narrator, upon whom Shiism heavily relies. when Imam Abu Abdallah(as) was informed that Zurarah is narrating something from him, he said:

ليس هكذا سألني ولا هكذا قلت: كذب علي والله كذب علي والله لعن الله زرارة لعن الله زرارة، لعن الله زرارة

He didn’t ask me in this way, and I didn’t answer like this, BY ALLAH HE LIED UPON ME, BY ALLAH HE LIED UPON ME, MAY ALLAH CURSE ZURARAH, MAY ALLAH CURSE ZURARAH, MAY ALLAH CURSE ZURARAH.(Ihtiyar marifatul rijal” by sheikh Tusi.page 162)

However, as per esteemed Shia scholar, infallible Imams misguided their follower for other reason too.

Esteemed Shia scholar Yusuf al-Bahrani writes in his book “al-Duraral-Najafiyyah fil-Multaqatat al-Yusufiyyah”. vol.2 pg.300:

المشهور ‌بين‌ أصحابنا‌-‌ رضوان‌ اللّه‌ عليهم‌‌-‌ تخصيص‌ الحمل‌ ‌علي‌ التقية ‌في‌ الأخبار بوجود قائل‌ ‌من‌ العامة بذلك‌. و ‌ألذي‌ يظهر لي‌ ‌من‌ الأخبار خلاف‌ ‌ما هنالك‌، و ‌هو‌ أنهم‌ عليهم‌ السّلام‌ يوقعون‌ الاختلاف‌ ‌بين‌ الشيعة و ‌إن‌ ‌لم‌ يكن‌ ثمة قول‌ للعامة فمن‌ الأخبار ‌في‌ ‌ذلک‌ ‌ما رواه‌ ثقة الإسلام‌ ‌في‌ (الكافي‌) ‌في‌ الموثق‌ ‌عن‌ زرارة ‌عن‌ ‌أبي‌ ‌جعفر‌ ‌عليه‌ السّلام‌ ‌قال‌: سألته‌ ‌عن‌ ‌مسأله‌، فأجابني‌ ‌فيها‌، ‌ثم‌ جاء رجل‌ آخر فسأله‌ عنها، فأجابه‌ بخلاف‌ ‌ما أجابني‌، ‌ثم‌ جاء آخر فأجابه‌ بخلاف‌ ‌ما أجابني‌ و أجاب‌ صاحبي‌، فلما خرج‌ الرجلان‌ قلت‌: يابن‌ رسول‌ اللّه‌ ‌صلي‌ اللّه‌ ‌عليه‌ و آله‌ رجلان‌ ‌من‌ العراق‌ ‌من‌ شيعتكم‌ قدما يسألان‌، فأجبت‌ ‌کل‌ واحد منهما بخلاف‌ ‌ما أجبت‌ ‌به‌ صاحبه‌؟ ‌فقال‌: « يا ‌ زرارة، ‌إن‌ ‌هذا‌ خير لنا و لكم‌، فلو اجتمعتم‌ ‌علي‌ أمر لصدقكم‌ الناس‌ علينا، و لكان‌ أقل‌ لبقائنا و بقائكم‌».

[What is famous among our companions may Allah be pleased with them, is that Taqiyyah in their (Imams) narrations results from the opinions of the `Amah(Sunnies), but to me there are other reasons for this. It is that they (as) try to create difference among the Shia even if there weren’t any similar opinions from the `Amah(Sunnies). From these narrations is what Thiqat al-Islam narrated in al-Kafi, in the Muwaththaq from Zurarah, from abi Ja`far (as) that he said:

I asked him about a matter and he answered, then another man came and asked him about it and he gave a different than mine, then a third came and he gave a completely different answer. When the two men left I asked: “O son of Rassul-Allah (SAWS), two men from your Shia in `Iraq came and asked but you gave them both conflicting answers?” he (as) replied: “O Zurarah, this is goodness for us and for you, if you unite upon a matter then the people will believe (what you narrate) from us, and it would make our stay and your stay short.”]

Then he(Bahrani) explains…

و لعل‌ السر ‌في‌ ‌ذلک‌ ‌أن‌ الشيعة ‌إذا‌ خرجوا عنهم‌ مختلفين‌؛ ‌کل‌ ينقل‌ ‌عن‌ إمامه‌ خلاف‌ ‌ما ينقله‌ الآخر، سخف‌ مذهبهم‌ ‌في‌ نظر العامة كذبوهم‌ ‌في‌ نقلهم‌، و نسبوهم‌ ‌إلي‌ الجهل‌ و ‌عدم‌ الدين‌، و هانوا ‌في‌ نظرهم‌، بخلاف‌ ‌ما ‌إذا‌ اتّفقت‌ كلمتهم‌، و تعاضدت‌ مقالتهم‌؛ فإنّهم‌ يصدقونهم‌ و يشتدّ بغضهم‌ لهم‌ و لإمامهم‌ و مذهبهم‌، فيصير ‌ذلک‌ سببا لثوران‌ العداوة

[Maybe the secret to this, is that if the Shia were to differ among each other, each one narrating from his Imam what contradicts the other, then their Madhab would appear silly in the eyes of the `Amah(Sunnies), they would accuse them of lying and fabricating their narrations, and they’d accuse them of ignorance in religion, and they’d become lowly in their eyes. On the contrary, if they agreed on one word, they’d believe them and their hatred would increase for them and their Imam and Madhab, this becomes a cause of raging enmity.]

Comment: We say, it’s true! Your Madhab does look silly in our eyes so congratulations on your silly Madhab.

Some examples where infallible Shia Imams practiced Taqiyyah in minor issues.

1. Taqiyyah regarding the location, 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]

Comment: If Imam is doing Taqiyyah even in this kind of issue, then what else could it be called other than ‘misguidance’?

2. Taqiyyah regarding, 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).

3. Imam had to perform Taqiyyah even from the laymen amongst Shias.



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).

4. Imam had to perform Taqiyyah from the extremist Shias in a simple issue.



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)

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

5. Imam had to make false statement even regarding the marriage of Umm Kulthum bint Ali.

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)

Testimonies of Shia scholars regarding the contradictory teachings they received from Imams due to Taqqiyah.

1. Esteemed shia scholar Yusuf al Bahrani said:

قال: فإن جُلَّ الاختلاف في أخبارنا بل كله عند التأمل والتحقيق إنما نشأ من التقية

“The majority of contradictions in our narrations after observation and research or even all of the contradictions originate from Taqqiyah.” Source: al-Hadaeq al Nadirah by Yusuf al Bahrani 1/8.

2. Again Esteemed Shia scholar Yusuf al-Bahrani said in “al-Hadaeq al-Nadirah” vol.1 pg.5:

فلم يعلم من أحكام الدين على اليقين إلا القليل، لامتزاج أخباره بأخبار التقية، كما اعترف بذلك ثقة الإسلام وعلم الأعلام محمد بن يعقوب الكليني نور الله مرقده في جامعه الكافي

Only a small amount of the rulings of the religion were known for sure, because their narrations were mixed with the narrations of Taqqiyah(dissimulation), as was admitted by Thiqat al-Islam Muhammad bin Ya’aqoub al-Kulayni may Allah fill his grave with light in his collection al-Kafi.

3. Shia Shaikh Murtaza states:

Afterwards, this person has claimed that the companions of Aimma(Imams) were able to get the (knowledge of usul and furu) with complete belief, this is a claim which can’t be accepted. Its witness is the eye which saw it and which was known with the narration (athar) , that the companions of Aimma had differences in Usul and Furu. And due to this reason people complained to Aimma that your companions have great differences. The Aimma sometimes replied that we have ourselves put these differences amongst them so as to protect them, as is present in the narrations of Huriz and Zarara and Abu Ayub Jazzar. (Faraid ul Usul , p. 86, by Shaikh Murtaza). [ Scan of Hadeeth]

Comment: From this testimony of Shia scholar it is apparent that Shia Imams used to misguide people by preaching contradictory teachings, inorder to protect them. So they did Taqiyah for the lives of their companions too.

4. The Esteemed Shaykh of Shiism, Tusi says in his Tahtheeb:

ويقول شيخ الطائفة الطوسي في تهذيبه: إن أحاديث أصحابنا فيها من الاختلاف والتباين والمنافاة والتضاد حتى لا يكاد يتفق خبر إلا وبإزائه ما يضاده، ولا يسلم حديث إلا وفي مقابلته ما ينافيه حتي جعل مخالفونا ذلك من أعظم الطعون على مذهبنا وتطرقوا بذلك إلى إبطال معتقدنا، إلى أن قال: أنه بسب

And among the Hadiths (narrated) by our companions (Shia scholars/companions of the Imams) are so many disparities, contrast, contravening and contradictions that you will not find a single report that we agree upon which doesn’t have another that contradicts it, and not a single Hadith is safe from another which denies it. These (contradictions) are to such an extent that our opponents (the Muslims/Ahl Al-Sunnah) have used it as the biggest accusation/attack against our school and as a proof for the falsehood of our creed.( Tahtheeb Al-Ahkam 1/8 by sheikh of the Shia sect al Tusi.)

Due to the misguidance of infallible Shia Imams from contradictory teachings, Shia Scholars and general Shias left Shiism.

1. Ahmad ibn Idris from Muhamad ibn ‘Abdul-Jabbar from al-Hassan ibn ‘Ali from Tha’alabah ibn Maymoun from Zurarah ibn A’ayun that he said: I asked Imam al-Baqir (as) a question so the Imam gave me the answer then another man came and asked the same question so the Imam gave him a different answer, then another one came and asked about it so the Imam gave him a completely different answer than both of us. when both men left I asked the Imam: “O son of Rassul Allah, two men from ‘Iraq and from your Shia came to ask you but you gave each of them different answers.” He replied: “O Zurarah, this is good for us so that we may remain safer because if you all agree on this then the people will believe in it and they would be guided to us but we will not remain for long.”

Later I said to his son al-Sadiq (as): “Your Shia always walk away from you with different opinions and answers” so he gave me the same reply as his father.

source: al-Kafi 1/65.

al-Majlisi said: Muwaththaq like the Sahih.

al-Behbudi said: Sahih.

2.

al-Ash`ari al-Qummi says in Firaq al-Shia when discussing the followers of al-Baqir (rah):

[As for those who proved the Imamah for `Ali bin abi Talib, then Hassan, then Hussein, then `Ali bin al-Hussein, and afterwards they declared their belief in the Imamah of his son abu Ja`far Muhammad al-Baqir and remained on this state until his death, except a small group from them, because they heard a man called `Umar bin Rayah claim that he asked abu Ja`far about a matter and he gave him an answer, then he returned the next year and asked about the exact same matter but this time he received an answer that opposes the first answer he originally received. He told abu Ja`far: “This opposes the answer you gave me last year.” he replied: “Maybe our answer was out of Taqiyyah.” so he doubted his Imamah. He later met a man from the companions of abu Ja`far called Muhammad bin Qays, so he told him: “I had asked abu Ja`far about a matter so he answered me, then I asked him about it another year so he answered differently, I asked him why did he do this, he said he did it out of Taqiyyah, and Allah knows that I only asked when I was full of faith in him and sincerity and I wanted to practice upon his verdict, so he had no reason to do Taqiyyah with me.” ibn Qays said: “Maybe he did Taqiyyah because there was someone else in attendance?” He said: “Nobody attended our Majlis in both those times, but his answers were random and he didn’t memorize what he said the previous year so he can answer with it again.” So he disbelieved in his Imamah and said: “He who gives false verdicts cannot be an Imam in any way shape or form, and he who gives his verdicts as Taqiyyah in a way that does not please Allah cannot be an Imam, nor he who sits comfortably at home and keeps his door shut, the Imam must rise against oppression and order what is good and forbid what is evil.” This is why he leaned towards the opinion of the Batriyyah and a small group followed him on this.

sources:

-Bihar al-Anwar by al-Majlisi (73/33) (69/178).

-Tahtheeb al-Maqal fi Tanqeeh Kitab Rijal al-Najashi by Muhammad `Ali Abtahi (3/464

3. The Esteemed Shaykh of Shiism, Tusi says in his Tahtheeb:

ويقول شيخ الطائفة الطوسي في تهذيبه: إن أحاديث أصحابنا فيها من الاختلاف والتباين والمنافاة والتضاد حتى لا يكاد يتفق خبر إلا وبإزائه ما يضاده، ولا يسلم حديث إلا وفي مقابلته ما ينافيه حتي جعل مخالفونا ذلك من أعظم الطعون على مذهبنا وتطرقوا بذلك إلى إبطال معتقدنا، إلى أن قال: أنه بسبب ذلك رجع جماعة عن اعتقاد الحق ومنهم أبوالحسين الهاروني العلوي حيث كان يعتقد الحق ويدين بالإمامة فرجع عنها لما إلتبس عليه الأمر في اختلاف الأحاديث وترك المذهب ودان بغيره لما لم يتبين له وجوه المعاني فيها، وهذا يدل على أنه دخل فيه على غير بصيرة واعتقد المذهب من جهة التقليد

تهديب الأحكام،1/2

And among the Hadiths (narrated) by our companions (Shia scholars/companions of the Imams) are so many disparities, contrast, contravening and contradictions that you will not find a single report that we agree upon which doesn’t have another that contradicts it, and not a single Hadith is safe from another which denies it. These (contradictions) are to such an extent that our opponents (the Muslims/Ahl Al-Sunnah) have used it as the biggest accusation/attack against our school and as a proof for the falsehood of our creed. (Until he said): ‘… and this is why a number (of Shias) have left the true creed and amongst them are the likes of Abu Al-Hassan Al-Harouni Al-Alawi, who used to be on the true creed, upon the creed of Imamah (Imamate), but he turned away from it when confusion overtook him due to the issue of the contradicting Hadiths. So he left the school (of Shiism) and attached himself to another (school), as he could not grasp the different understanding (of our text) and this is an indication that he did not embraced it (Shiism) without insight, rather based on Taqleed. Source: Tahtheeb Al-Ahkam 1/8 by sheikh of the sect al Tusi.

4. Esteemed Shia scholar Ja’far al-Subhani says in “al-Rasael al-Arba’ah” pg.201:

عندما نطالع كتابي: الوسائل، والمستدرك مثلاً؛ نرى أنه ما من باب من أبواب الفقه إلا وفيه اختلاف في رواياته، وهذا مما أدى إلى رجوع بعض ممن استبصروا عن مذهب الإمامية

When we read the two books (of Hadith): Wasael al-Shia and Mustadrak al-Wasael for example, we see that there is NO chapter or Fiqhi section which is free from conflicting narrations, this has caused some of those who converted to the Imami Madhab to leave it.

5. Shia scholar Dildar Ali (renowned Shiite Mujtahid of India) states:

The ahadith that have been narrated from the Imams have great differences, there is not a hadith the opposite of which is not present, that is why it lead to the apostacy of the people weak in belief, as Shaikh ut taifa (Tusi) has mentioned in the beginning of “Tahdheeb” and “Istibsar”. (Asas ul Usool, p. 15)

Islamic teachings of Ahlesunnah NEVER had any impact of Taqqiyah. (Best Source of taking Islamic teachings).

In orthodox Islam(i.e Ahlesunnah), Taqqiyah has completely different meaning, it simply refers to the permissibility of hiding your beliefs when your life is threatened, unlike in Shiism where it is highly recommended to be practiced even under non-threatening situations. Islamic teachings of Ahlesunnah never had any impact of Taqqiyah on them, unlike Shiism. As per Ahlesunnah neither Prophet Muhammad(saw) practiced Taqqiyah while peaching the teachings of Islam, nor did his companions(sahaba) practiced taqqiyah while transmitting those teachings to the later generations.Thus teachings of Ahlesunnah are free from the tremendous problems which Shiism faced due to their Imams and the companions of Imams practicing Taqqiyah.

For a better understanding of our readers, we would like to present some historical facts from the lives of famous Imams of Ahlesunnah, inorder to certify that Taqqiyah never made any impact on the Islamic teachings of Ahlesunnah, unlike Shiism.

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal(rah) :

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (d.241AH) (for the sake of Truth i.e Quran) was exposed to torture to such a degree that the doctors of his time said:”We have not seen wounds like this before!”. Yet he remained firm, and held onto the correct ‘aqeedah and minhaj and NEVER compromised for the rulers. And this was his stance after he survived the torment. When Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal(rahimahullah) was asked: “Would you cave in if you were threatened by a sword?”. Imam answered: No, and He said: “When a scholar would talk by taqiyah, and layman by his ignorance, who then in this case would reveal the truth”?. [Zad al-Masir fi ilm al-Tafsir, page 187].

Imam Ahmad was imprisoned and subjected to various forms of torture for twenty-eight months under the Abbasid caliph al-Mu`tasim in an effort to force him to publicly support the [Mu`tazila] position that the Holy [Qur’an] was created, but the Imam refused to give up the belief that the [Qur’an] is the uncreated word of Allah, after which Allah delivered and vindicated him.

Comment: These words from Imam Ahmad(rah) are to be written with gold, we recommend the truth-seeking Shias to ponder over these words of Imam Ahmad(rah). This shows us the responsibility of true Scholars.

Imam Maalik ibn Anas(rah) :

Similarly, the hands and arms of Imam Maalik ibn Anas(rahimahullah), were rendered useless after he was tortured and imprisoned at the hands of the rulers, and then they tried to humiliate him by tying him by his hands to a mule and then dragging him through the streets like that, hence he lose the use of his arms and eventually dies from his injuries, yet whilst tied to a mule[or camel] he proclaimed the haq(truth) to the people and said “Whoever knows me, knows me; whoever does not know me, my name is Malik ibn Anas, and I say: The divorce of the one who is compelled is baatil(false)!”

Imam Abu Hanifah(rah) :

Yazid ibn ‘Amr, Governor of Iraq during the time of Marwan ibn Muhammad, the fourteenth and last Umayyad Khalifah, asked Abu Hanifa to become a judge for the law-court of Kufa. But, since he had he refused his offer, for he wanted to devote his time and effort serving Islam, and had not interest in worldly pleasures. He was afraid of not being able to safeguard human rights because of human weaknesses. With a command from Yazid, he was given a whipping, hundred and ten blows to the head. His blessed face and head swelled. The next day, Yazid took the Imam out and oppressed him by repeating his offer. The Imam said, “Let me consult,” and obtained permission to leave. He left to Mecca and remained there for five or six years.

The ‘Abbasid Khalifah Abu Jafar Mansur offered Imam Abu Hanifa to be the chief of the Supreme Court of Appeal in 150 A.H. [767 A.D.]. Again the Imam refused, and was put into jail. He was subjected to whipping, ten blows more every following day. When the number of whipping reached one hundred, he attained martyrdom.

Imam Ibn Taymiyyah(rah) :

Some false beliefs that were attributed to Ibn Taymiyyah were those that he, himself refuted in his books. His fatawa and Ijtihads were misinterpreted and given conclusions that were far away from the truth. Ibn Taymiyyah’s enemies also succeeded occasionally in inciting the rulers against him, leading to his imprisonment several times between 693H-728H and he passed away while in prison in the year 728H and yet he NEVER compromised to the rulers who imprisoned him.

Imam Hassan al Muthanna(rah) once said to a person advising about the practice of Taqiyyah (subterfuge):

ويلك التقية انما هي باب رخصة للمسلم، إذا اضطر إليها وخاف من ذي سلطان أعطاه غير ما في نفسه يدرأ عن ذمة الله. وليست باب فضل، وإنما الفضل في القيام بأمر الله وقول الحق. وأيم الله ما بلغ من التقية أن يجعل بها لعبد من عباد الله أن يضل عباد الله

Woe to you! Verily Taqiyyah is only a concession for a Muslim when compelled to do so and he fears the king will do something to him which he will be unable to avert from his responsibility to Allah; It is not an act of virtue, verily the virtuous thing to do is to establish the order of Allah and to state the Truth. By Allah, Taqiyyah does not reach the point where one of the slaves of Allah can use it to misguide the slaves of Allah. [Tarikh Dimashq, 15/60]

Though there are countless examples as such from the lives of Sunni Imams, but we think this should be sufficient evidence for the truth-seeking Shias to realize that the BEST SOURCE from which Islamic teachings should be taken are the sources of Ahlesunnah and the WORST sources to take Islamic teachings are the Shia sources.

PROBLEM (II) – Cocktail of narrations from which authentic ones cannot be distinguished.

Narrations present in Shia books are like a cocktail, some are narrations which were narrated under taqqiyah, some are lies attributed to companions of Imams by later narrators, some are the result of Tahreef(tampering) that constantly took place in Shia books, some are true sayings of Imams with weak or Majhool(unknown) chains, some are fabrications attributed to the Imams but with authentic chains, etc and the irony is that, there is no way to distinguish the genuine ones with the false ones.

Let us present before our readers, testimonies of Esteemed Shia scholars regarding this issue:

1. Here we are quoting from the book of one of the Esteemed Shia scholars of Hadith “Muhyee al-Deen al-Musawi al-Ghurayfi” “محي الدين الموسوي الغريفي” in his book “Qawa’ed al-Hadith” “قواعد الحديث” starting from page 135:

كما وأن كثيراً من الأحاديث لم تصدر عن الأئمة (ع) ، وإنما وضعها رجال كّذابون ونسبوها اليهم ، إما بالدس في كتب أصحابهم أو بغيره (١). وبالطبع لا بد وأن يكونوا قد وضعوا لها أو لأكثرها أسناداً صحاحاً ، كي تقبل حسبما فرضته عملية الدس والتدليس. وحيث لا علم لنا بتلك المجموعة من الأخبار المؤلفة من ذينك الطائفتين أعني الموضوعة ، والصادرة تقية ، ولا طريق لنا الى تمييزها عن الأخبار المعتبرة فكيف يسوغ العمل بكل خبر سالم السند من الضعف ، مع احتمال أن يكون من تلك المجموعة التي لا يصح العمل بها؟. وترك العمل بجميع الأخبار المعتبرة سنداً المروية عن أهل البيت (ع) باطل قطعاً ، حيث لا طريق الى معرفة الأحكام الصادرة عنهم (ع) غالباً إلا تلك الأخبار ، فيتعين الرجوع الى فقهائنا الأقدمين في تمييز الحجة منها عن غيره لكثرة القرائن لديهم ، فيكشف عملهم بخبر عن عدم كونه من تلك المجموعة ، وقد فرضناه سالم السند من الضعف فيكون حجة ، كما يوجب إعراضهم عن خبر قوة احتمال كونه منها فيسقط عن الاعتبار.

“And that many of the narrations were not told by the Imams (as) but they were fabricated by liars who attributed them to the Imams by inserting them into the books of their companions or by other means (1). And of course they must have placed for these narrations or to most of them authentic chains of narrators so that they may be accepted. And as we cannot tell the difference between both groups of narrations, I mean the fabricated ones and the ones issued by Taqqiyah and we have no way of making a distinction so how can we still work with the narrations of authentic chains with the possibility of them being from that group?

Abandoning the authentic narrations of Ahlul-Bayt (as) is definitely wrong as we cannot know their rulings except through these narrations , which is why we must return to our early Fuqahaa (scholars) as they have lots of evidence to make the distinction between the narrations, their knowledge proves that a narration is not from that group and if the chain is good then we work with it as a Hujjah, while others could have strong chains but since it is suspected of being from that group then it is dropped and abandoned.”

In the footnotes the Muhaqiq(Researcher) of this book writes:

كما اضطر الأئمة من أهل البيت (ع) الى استعمال التقية فقد ابتلوا بجماعة من الزندقة الكذابين الذين بذلوا أقصى جهودهم في وضع الأحاديث ، ونسبتها اليهم (ع). فقد روى الكشي بسنده عن محمد بن عيسى أنه قال : إن بعض أصحابنا سأل يونس بن عبد الرحمان « وأنا حاضر فقال له : يا أبا محمد ما أشدك في الحديث ، وأكثر إنكارك لما يرويه أصحابنا فما الذي يحملك على رد الأحاديث؟ فقال : حدثني هشام بن الحكم أنه سمع أبا عبد اللّه يقول : لا تقبلوا علينا حديثاً إلا ما وافق القرآن والسنة ، أو تجدون معه شاهداً من أحاديثنا المتقدمة ، فان المغيرة بن سعيد ـ لعنه اللّه ـ قد دس في كتب أصحاب أبي أحاديث لم يحدث بها أبي. فاتقوا اللّه ، ولا تقبلوا علينا ما خالف قول ربنا تعالى ، وسنّة نبينا (ص) … قال يونس … وأخذت كتبهم فعرضتها من بعد على أبي الحسن الرضا فأنكر منها أحاديث كثيرة أن تكون من أحاديث أبي عبد اللّه وقال لي : إن أبا الخطاب كذب على أبي عبد اللّه لعن اللّه أبا الخطاب. وكذلك أصحاب أبي الخطاب يدسون هذه الأحاديث الى يومنا هدا في كتب أصحاب أبي عبد اللّه ـ الخ » ( رجال الكشي ص ١٤٦ ـ ١٤٧ ).

ولذا قال الشيخ يوسف البحراني : « … ورد عنهم : من أن لكل رجل منا رجلاً يكذب عليه ، وأمثاله مما يدل على دس بعض الأخبار الكاذبة في أحاديثهم (ع). ( الحدائق ج ١ ص ٨ ).

(1): As the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt (as) were forced to use Taqqiyah they also had a group of Zanadiqah and liars who tried their best to fabricate narrations and attribute them to the Imams (as). al-Kashshi narrated with its Isnad to Muhammad bin ‘Isa that he said: some of our companions asked Yunus bin ‘Abdul-Rahman while I was present so he said to him: O Abu Muhammad you are very strict in Hadith and you reject a lot of what our companions narrate, why is this? He said: Hisham bin al-Hakam told me that he heard Abu ‘Abdullah say: DO NOT ACCEPT FROM US A HADITH EXCEPT THAT WHICH AGREES WITH THE QURAN AND THE SUNNAH, OR THAT YOU FIND EVIDENCE FROM OUR EARLY NARRATIONS, BECAUSE AL-MUGHEERAH BIN SA’EED (LA) HAS INSERTED INTO THE BOOKS OF THE COMPANIONS OF MY FATHER THAT WHICH HE DID NOT NARRATE, SO FEAR ALLAH AND DO NOT ACCEPT FROM US THAT WHICH CONTRADICTS WITH OUR LORD AND WITH THE SUNNAH OF THE PROPHET (SAWS)…Yunus said…I took their books then presented them to Abu al-Hasan al-Reda (as) so he rejected many narrations as they could not be narrated by Abu ‘Abdullah (as) and he told me: ABU AL-KHATTAB HAS LIED ON ABU ‘ABDULLAH (as) MAY ALLAH CURSE ABU AL-KHATTAB AND ALSO HIS COMPANIONS WHO INSERT THESE FAKE NARRATIONS UNTIL OUR VERY DAY IN THE BOOKS OF ABU ‘ABULLAH ect… (al-Hadaeq 1/8) – end –

Comment: So the only way to know if something is authentic is to compare the Hadith of Ahlul-bayt in Shia books to the Quran which was preserved by the mainstream Muslims(i.e Ahlesunnah) and the authentic prophetic Sunnah preserved in the books of the mainstream Muslims(i.e Ahlesunnah), and the sayings of Ahlul-Bayt transmitted through reliable men also found in the books of the mainstream Muslims(i.e Ahlesunnah). Because the Shia books were tampered and fabricated, and fabricated reports with good chains were inserted into the books of companions of Imams, due to which they cannot be distinguished.

2. The famous Shia scholar and researcher Yusuf al-Bahrani said in “al-Hadaeq al-Nadirah” vol.1 pg.5:

فلم يعلم من أحكام الدين على اليقين إلا القليل، لامتزاج أخباره بأخبار التقية، كما اعترف بذلك ثقة الإسلام وعلم الأعلام محمد بن يعقوب الكليني نور الله مرقده في جامعه الكافي

[Only a small amount of the rulings of the religion were known for sure, because their narrations were mixed with the narrations of Taqqiyah, as was admitted by Thiqat al-Islam Muhammad bin Ya’aqoub al-Kulayni may Allah fill his grave with light in his collection al-Kafi].

3. Esteemed Shia scholar of Hadith Muhammad Baqir al-Behbudi writes in “Ma`rifat al-Hadith” pg.172:

على انك عرفت في بحث الشذوذ عن نظام الامامة ان الأحاديث المروية في النصوص على الأئمة جملة من خبر اللوح وغيره كلها مصنوعة في عهد الغيبة والحيرة وقبلها بقليل فلو كانت هذه النصوص المتوافرة موجوده عند الشيعة اللإمامية لما اختلفوا في معرفة الأئمة هذا الاختلاف الفاضح ولما وقعت الحيرة لأساطين المذهب واركان الحديث سنوات عديدة وكانوا في غنى ان يتسرعوا في تأليف الكتب في اثبات الغيبة وكشف الحيرة عن قلوب الامة بهذه الكثرة

[And you (reader) now know after the research on “al-Shudhudh `an Nizam al-Imamah” that the narrations about the general identity of the Imams such as the narration of the Tablet (1) and others, are all fabricated during the time of al-Ghaybah (2) and al-Hayrah (3) and some short time before it. For if these narrations were available with the Imami Shia, they would not have disagreed so openly and greatly about the identity of the Imams, nor would the biggest personalities and narrators of Hadith have faced much confusion for long years, nor would they have needed to quickly write books proving the Ghaybah to unveil the confusion from the hearts of the nation in such great numbers.]

Comment: So clearly esteemed Shia scholar of Hadith is saying that there are no authentic narrations with the names of Imams, Had it been there, then there wouldn’t have been so many confusions and disagreements regarding identity of Imams between Imami Shias. So according to this Shia scholar those reports which Shia believe in, regarding the identity of Imams are fabrications.

Footnotes:

(1) Narrations of the Tablet are those when Jabir (ra) walks in on Fatima (ra) and sees a tablet with the names of the Imams on it.

(2) al-Ghaybah is the period of occultation of the Shia 12th Imam when he was never seen nor heard from by anyone except four people and only for a couple of years, then followed by the greater occultation.

(3) al-Hayrah is the great confusion that struck the followers of the Imami branch of Tashayyu` when the news of their Imam stopped reaching them after the death of the fourth emissary and lots of them abandoned the Madhab.

Problem (III) – Careless-ness and Negligence of Shia scholars regarding Sanad(chains) of the hadeeth books and ahadeeth

As we have seen in (Problem II) that, lies were attributed to Shia Imams, books of their companions were tampered, good chains of narrators were attached to those false narrations, etc; and on the other hand the early Shia scholars never paid much importance to the Chain of narrators nor did the later shias cared for the chains through which it could be determined how did a certain book reach the Shias.

Lets us present before our readers some shocking testimonies of Esteemed Shia scholars:

1. Esteemed Shia scholar Hurr Al-Amili in Wasa’il Ash-Shi’a, 30:260-61 states:

ويلزم بطلان الإجماع ، الذي علم دخول المعصوم فيه ـ أيضا ـ كما تقدم .

واللوازم باطلة ، وكذا الملزوم .

بل يستلزم ضعف الأحاديث كلها ، عند التحقيق ، لأن الصحيح ـ عندهم ـ : Â« ما رواه العدل ، الإماميّ ، الضابط ، في جميع الطبقات Â» .

ولم ينصوا على عدالة أحد من الرواة ، إلا نادراً ، وإنما نصوا على التوثيق ، وهو لايستلزم العدالة ، قطعا ، بل بينهما عموم من وجه ، كما صرح به الشهيد الثاني ، وغيره .

ودعوى بعض المتأخرين : أن Â« الثقة Â» بمعنى Â« العدل ، الضابط Â» .

ممنوعة ، وهو مطالب بدليلها .

وكيف ؟ وهم مصرحون بخلافها ، حيث يوثقون من يعتقدون فسقه ، وكفره ، وفساد مذهبه ؟ !

وإنما المراد بالثقة : من يوثق بخبره ، ويؤمن منه الكذب عادة ، والتتبع شاهد به ، وقد صرح بذلك جماعة من المتقدمين ، والمتأخرين .

ومن معلوم ـ الذي لاريب فيه ، عند منصف ـ : أن الثقة تجامع الفسق ، بل الكفر .

وأصحاب الاصطلاح الجديد قد اشترطوا ـ في الراوي ـ العدالة فيلزم من ذلك ضعف جميع أحاديثنا ، لعدم العلم بعدالة أحد منهم ؛ إلا نادرا .

ففي إحداث هذا الاصطلاح غفلة ، من جهات متعددة ، كما ترى .

وكذلك كون الراوي ضعيفا في الحديث لا يستلزم الفسق ، بل يجتمع مع العدالة ، فإن العدل ، الكثير السهو ، ضعيف في الحديث ، والثقة ، والضعف غاية ما يمكن معرفته من أحوال الرواة .

ومن هنا يظهر فساد خيال من ظن أن آية ( إن جائكم فاسق بنبأ ) [ الآية (6) من سورة الحجرات (49) ] تشعر بصحة الاصطلاح الجديد .

مضافا إلى كون دلالتها بالمفهوم الضعيف ، المختلف في حجيته .

ويبقى خبر مجهول الفسق :

فان أجابوا : بأصالة العدالة .

أجبنا : بأنه خلاف مذهبهم ، ولم يذهب إليه منهم إلا القليل .

ومع ذلك : يلزمهم الحكم بعدالة المجهولين ، والمهملين ، وهم لا يقولون به .

ويبقى اشتراط العدالة بغير فائدة .

الخامس عشر :

أنه لو لم يجز لنا قبول شهادتهم في صحة أحاديث كتبهم ، وثبوتها ، ونقلها من الأصول الصحيحة ، والكتب المعتمدة ، وقيام القرائن على ثبوتها ، لما جاز لنا قبول شهادتهم في مدح الرواة ، وتوثيقهم .

فلا يبقى حديث ، صحيح ، ولاحسن ، ولاموثق ، بل يبقى جميع أحاديث كتب الشيعة ضعيفة

In a nutshell, Hurr al-Amili states in Wasa’il ash-Shia:

i) The science of rijal (men) should not be used.

ii) The science of rijal in shi’ism was a recent innovation, and elsewhere he states that it was invented because of the Ahlus-Sunnah’s continual criticism of the shias for not having and following a system for deriving laws from ahadith.

iii) If the system was actually applied, very few, if any, shia ahadith would prove to be sahih (authentic), hasan (good) or muwathaq (trusted) – and the entire shia collection of hadith would prove to be weak.

Comment: So Basically Shias did it later because they didn’t want the Muslims to criticize them and not for the purpose of actually learning the True Hadiths from the False ones and this is why they have a very weak science of Hadith and their books are full of contradictions, they never wanted the truth but just to escape criticism by their “enemies”.

2. Sheikh Baqir el Ayruwani “باقر الأيرواني” Says in his book Durros Tamhidiyah fil Uloom el Rijaliyah “دروس تمهيدية في القواعد الرجالية ” Page 86:

السبب في تأليف النجاشي لكتابه هو تعيير جماعة من المخالفين للشيعة بأنه لا سلف لهم ولا مصنف

“The Only Reason Why Al Najashi Wrote his Book is because the opponents(Sunnis) said that the Shiites never had a Salaf or Musannaf

3. The Giant Shia Muhaqqiq called Abu al Hassan al Sha’arani says:

إن أكثر أحاديث الأصول في الكافي غير صحيحة الإسناد ولكنها معتمدة لاعتبار متونها وموافقتها للعقائد الحقّة ولا ينظر في مثلها إلى الإسناد

“The majority of the hadiths of Usool(principle) in al Kafi are NOT sahih(authentic) in their sanad(chain) but they are adopted because their matn(text) agrees with the correct aqeedah and we do not need to look at the sanad(chain) in such narrations”

Source: [Miqyas al Hidayah 2/282, in the intro of Sharh al Jami’i Ala al Kafi]

4. Esteemed Shia scholar Al Allamah Muhammad Baqir al Majlisi says:

فإننا لا نحتاج إلى سند لهذه الأصول الأربعة وإذا أوردنا سنداً فليس إلا للتيمن والبركة والإقتداء بسنة السلف

“We do not need sanad(chain) for the four books of Usool(principles) and when we place the Sanad we do it just out of blessing and to follow the Sunnah of our predecessors”

Source: [Rasael abi al Ma’ali lil Majlisi page 459]

Comment: Majlisi is talking about the sanad(chain) which is the tareeq to the books meaning how did these books reach the Shias , here he is talking about the four main books : Al-kafi – Al-istibsaar – Tahdhib Al-Ahkam and Man La Yahduruhu Al-Faqih.

5. Many of esteemed Shia scholar; Al-Tusi’s chains to books and narrations include a narrator called Ahmad bin Mohammed bin Al-Hasan bin Al-Waleed. This narrator is unknown, but to how often he is quoted, Shia fiqh and books in general would be considered useless without proper tawtheeq(worthiness) given for him. Due to this, several late scholar attempted to make tawtheeq for this unknown narrator by giving reasons like that he was considered trustworthy by late scholars, or that Al-Tusi and Al-Mufeed relied on him heavily, which makes him reliable.

Esteemed Shia scholar, Syed al-Khoei considered him majhool(anonymous) though:

لاشتماله على أحمد بن محمد بن الحسن بن الوليد وهو ممن لم يوثق في الرجال

(source)

إلاّ أنّ طرق الشيخ كلّها ضعيفة،فإنّ الطريق الاوّل فيه: أحمد بن محمد بن الحسن ولم يرد فيه توثيق

[Source]

أحمد بن محمد بن الحسن بن الوليد : من مشايخ الشيخ المفيد – لم تثبت وثاقته عندنا

The above is from Al-Mufeed min Mujam al-Rijaal.

Ironically, Esteemed shia shaykh Al-Mohseni says the following in response to the claims of those late Shia scholars who gave tawtheeq to Ahmad bin Mohammed bin Al-Hasan bin Al-Waleed, says: “Those that have found our book will know that these reasons that are given do not equate trustworthiness. However, the heart does not allow us to reject his narrations. So, we must accept his narrations out of caution.” (Buhooth fi Ilm Al-Rijal, p. 339).

Comment: How can this be a form of caution?! Shouldn’t one be cautious and REJECT this man instead due to the lack of tawtheeq?

6. Al-Khoei argued for the reliability of a major Shi’ee narrator Ibrahim bin Hashim, the narrator of six thousand four hundred and fourteen (6414) narrations, by arguing the following

1- Ibn Tawus (a late scholars) saying that there is a consensus about a group of narrations in a chain being reliable, in his book Falah Al-Sa’il.

2- Being the first to spread hadiths in Qum, and that they are very strict, and if he was weak, they wouldn’t have accepted narrating from him.

3- His son, Ali, narrated from him in Tafseer Al-Qummi, and he declared the narrators of this book as trustworthy.

4- Ibn Quluwayh narrated from him in Kamil Al-Ziyarat, and he made tawtheeq of the narrations in this book. Esteemed Shia scholar Al-Mohseni’s comments on the above: I say: All of the above is weak in my opinion. However, to reject his narrations (Ibrahim bin Hashim) by declaring him to be majhool, is not possible (or easy) for me to do. So, there is no choice but to be cautious in problematic cases like these. [Buhooth fi Ilm Al-Rijal (p. 344)] Comment: Subhanallah! How does one be cautious with such a case? Do you know what he chooses to do? He becomes cautious by ACCEPTING all the narrations of Ibrahim bin Hashim. Does this make any sense? Doesn’t caution imply rejecting the narrations or at least sustaining from having a view?! How is accepting 6414 narrations from someone that you don’t know a form of caution?! 7. Shia Ayatollah Khamenie regarding Major Shia books of Rijal said:

بناء على ما ذكره الكثير من خبراء هذا الفن ، ان نسخ كتاب الفهرست كأكثر الكتب الرجالية القديمة المعتبرة الاخرى مثل كتاب الكشي والنجاشي والبرقي والغضائري قد ابتليت جميعاً بالتحريف والتصحيف ،ولحقت بها الاضرار الفادحة ، ولم تصل منها لابناء هذا العصر نسخة صحيحة

“Based on saying of many experts in this field: copies of book al-Fihrist (author al-Abu Jafar at-Tose) as the other majority of old books on rijal, like al-Kashi, an-Najashi, an-Burqui, and al-Ghadairi, were all distorted, and (get changes in their) diacritical marks, and suffered heavy damage, and there is not one single correct copy that reached to the people of this era”.(”Usul al-Arba fi Ilmul Rijal” p 50)

Also refer these two excellent articles, exposing the major flaws in the Shia hadeeth Science:

Oral transmission: The declaration of hearing from the scholars

Understanding & Application of the Confusion of Reliable narrators

PROBLEM (IV) – The people from whom Shias took majority of their books, narrations, fiqh(jurisprudence), Usool(principle), were of Corrupt Madhabs and Beliefs. (Shia Scholars testify).

1. Esteemed Shia scholar Shareef Al-Murtada says:

” والذي يختص هذا الموضع مما لم نبينه هناك: أنه لا خلاف بين كل من ذهب إلى وجوب العمل بخبر الواحد في الشريعة، أنه لا بد من كون مخبره عدلا، والعدالة عندنا يقتضي أن يكون معتقدا ” للحق في الأصول والفروع، وغير ذاهب إلى مذهب قد دلت الأدلة على بطلانه، وأن يكون غير متظاهر بشئ من المعاصي والقبائح. وهذه الجملة تقتضي تعذر العمل بشئ من الأخبار التي رواها الواقفية على موسى بن جعفر عليهما السلام الذاهبة إلى أنه المهدي عليه السلام، وتكذيب كل من بعده من الأئمة عليهم السلام، وهذا كفر بغير شبهة ورده، كالطاطري وابن سماعة وفلان وفلان، ومن لا يحصى كثرة. فإن معظم الفقه وجمهوره بل جميعه لا يخلو مستنده ممن يذهب مذهب الواقفة، إما أن يكون أصلا في الخبر أو فرعا “، راويا ” عن غيره ومرويا ” عنه. وإلى غلاة، وخطابية، ومخمسة، وأصحاب حلول، كفلان وفلان ومن لا يحصى أيضا ” كثرة، وإلى قمي مشبه مجبر، وأن القميين كلهم من غير استثناء لأحد منهم إلا أبا جعفر بن بابويه – رحمة الله عليه- بالأمس كانوا مشبهة مجبرة، وكتبهم وتصانيفهم تشهد بذلك وتنطق به. فليت شعري أي رواية تخلص وتسلم من أن يكون في أصلها وفرعها واقف أو غال، أو قمي مشبه مجبر، والاختبار بيننا وبينهم التفتيش” .( رسائل الشريف المرتضى 3/310 .

There is no difference amongst those who decided to accept and work with the Khabar al-Wahid(report which reached through only one narrator) in matters of Shari’ah that it must come through a ‘Adl, in our madhab ‘Adl means that the narrator must have a correct belief in Usool and Furu’u, that he must not be from a corrupt madhab according to the proofs, that he must not commit disobedience and evil deeds apparently. This means that we must not work with any of the narrations by the Waqifah of Musa bin Ja’afar (as) who believe that he was a Mahdi and all those after him are liars, this is clear kufr, such as al TaTari and ibn Sama’ah and such people which we cannot count as to their large numbers. The majority of our Fiqh or all of it is related to narrations from the Waqifah, whether they narrated the Hadith from someone or someone narrated it from them. Also others such as the Ghulat(exaggerators), the Mukhammisah(Shia sect which believed that Allah came in the form of Ahlebayt), the people of Hulul(Those who believe Allah can appear in a specified physical form) and they are too many to count “Or from a Qummi who is a Mushabbih or a Mujabbir(those who liken the creator to the creation), and all qummies with no exceptions except for Ibn Babaweih are Moushabihah and Moujabirah, their books all bear wtiness to this clearly. So what narration is safe from having in its chain a Waqifi or a Ghali or a Qummi who is a Mushabbih and a Mujabbir.”

Source: Rasael al-Shareef al-Murtada 3/310.

2. Esteemed Shia Sheikh al-Taefa al-Tusi says:

شيخ الطائفة :” إن كثيراً من مصنفي أصحابنا وأصحاب الاصول ينتحلون المذاهب الفاسدة وان كانت كتبهم معتمدة ” الفهرست ص 2

“Many of the authors from our companions and those who wrote the Usool have adopted corrupt Madhabs although their books are accepted.” Source: al-Fihrist pg 2.

3. Esteemed Shia scholar Muhammad al-Majlisi says:

فإنك إذا تتبعت كتب الرجال وجدت أكثر أصحاب الأصول الأربعمائة غير مذكور في شأنهم تعديل و لا جرح (إما) لأنه يكفي في مدحهم و توثيقهم أنهم أصحاب الأصول فإن أصحاب الإمام أبي عبد الله جعفر بن محمد الصادق عليه السلام المصنفين للكتب كانوا أربعة آلاف رجال … ( وإما ) لبعد العهد بين أرباب الرجال و بين أصحاب الأصول و غيرهم من أصحاب الكتب التي تزيد على ثمانين ألف كتاب كما يظهر من التتبع

“If you were to closely study the books on the biographies of narrators, you will discover that most of the authors of the four-hundred Usool have not received any praise or disparagement; this is either because their reliability and praise were established based on them being from the authors of the Usool (…) Or because of the long period of time that sets them apart from the scholars who specialize in the condition of narrators…”. (Rawdatul Muttaqin fi sharhul Man la Yahduruhul Faqih, page 197).

Comment: This is known as circular logic. Most of the authors of their four hundred Usool of Shiites, are anonymous. And the significance of their Usool as well as establishing a man’s reliability is based on the fact that he authored the Usool.

4. Esteemed Shia scholar Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi in his book “Miratul Uqul” said:

و اختلف أصحابنا في ذلك، فذهب الصدوق ابن بابويه و جماعة إلى أن القرآن لم يتغير عما أنزل و لم ينقص منه شي‏ء، و ذهب الكليني و الشيخ المفيد قدس الله روحهما و جماعة إلى أن جميع القرآن عند الأئمة عليهم السلام، و ما في المصاحف بعضه، و جمع أمير المؤمنين صلوات الله عليه كما أنزل بعد الرسول صلى الله عليه و آله و سلم و أخرج إلى الصحابة المنافقين فلم يقبلوا منه

“And our companions differed in this matter (tahrif in Quran). As-Saduq ibn Babaveyh al-Qummi and group hold opinion that Quran is exactly in such form as it was revealed, nothing changed or omitted from it. And Kulayni with sheikh Mufid … and group turned to opinion that gathered Quran with imams (alaihuma salam), as for the (verses) in mushaf it’s (only) some of it, and commander of faithful (salawatullah alaihi) gathered (Quran) as it was revealed after prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) and brought it to hypocrites companions, which didn’t accept it from him…”. Source: “Miratul uqul” 3/30

Esteemed Shia scholar Kashani in “Tafsir as-safi” vol 1, p 52 stated:

“As for (the opinion of) OUR SCHOLARS (may Allah be pleased with them (!!!)) on this topic, then what is obvious from Thiqatul Islam Muhammad bin Ya’kub AL-KULAYNI that he believed in the MANIPULATION AND LOSS in the QURAAN because he recorded narrations of this meaning in his book Al-Kafi without criticizing it at all, besides he mentioned at the beginning of his book that he trusted in what he had narrated and also (this applies to) his teacher Ali bin Ibrahim Al-Qummy (may Allah be pleased with him (!!!)) since his tafsir is full of that (manipulation of the Quraan) and he has some extremism on this topic and also Sheikh Ahmad bin Abi Talib Al-TABRASSI (may Allah be pleased with him (!!!)) since he followed these two (on this matter) exactly in his Al-Ihtijaj”

Comment: Thus as per the testimonies of esteemed Shia scholars regarding the author of the Shia hadeeth book, Al-Kafi, Muhammad ibn Yaqub Al-Kulayni, the author of the greatest Shia hadeeth book believed in tahreef of Quran, which entails that he had series problems in his Aqeedah.

Problem (V) – Conflicts and disagreements exits in all chapters of Jurispudence in Shiism.

1.The biggest scholar of the Shia sect “Shaykh al taefa” at-Tusi says in his book “Uddat al-Usul” (1/354):

فاني وجدتها مختلفة المذاهب في الاحكام، يفتي أحدهم بما لا يفتي به صاحبه في جميع أبواب الفقه من الطهارة إلى أبواب الديات من العبادات

“I have found different ways (schools) in the legal rulings (ahkam). One of them issues a fatwa, which his contemporary does not. These differences exist in ALL chapters of jurisprudence from those concerning the laws on ritual purity (al-tahara) to the chapter on indemnity (al-diyat) and on the questions of WORSHIP…..”

2. al-Tusi talks more about their differences in “al-`Iddah” 1/137:

ومما يدل أيضاً على جواز العمل بهذه الأخبار التي أشرنا إليها ما ظهر من الفرقة المحقة من الاختلاف الصادر عن العمل بها فإني وجدتها مختلفة المذاهب في الأحكام . ويفتي أحدهم بما لا يفتي صاحبه في جميع أبواب الفقه من الطهارة إلى باب الديات . من العبادات والأحكام والمعاملات والفرائض وغير ذلك. مثل اختلافهم في العدد والرؤية في الصوم . واختلافهم في أن التلفظ بثلاث تطليقات ان يقع واحدة أو لا . ومثل اختلافهم في باب الطهارة في مقدار الماء الذي لا ينجسه شيء. ونحو اختلافهم في حد الكر . ونحو اختلافهم في استئناف الماء الجديد لمسح الرأس والرجلين. واختلافهم في اعتبار أقصى مدة النفاس . واختلافهم في عدد فصول الأذان والإقامة . وغير ذلك في سائر أبواب الفقه حتى أن باباً منه لا يسلم إلا وجدت العلماء من الطائفة مختلفة في مسائل منه أو مسائل متفاوتة الفتاوى

[You will see one (Shia scholar) making a Fatwa that his companion disagrees with, this is true to all matters of Fiqh from purity to blood-money. From worship to rulings to worldly issues to obligatory duties and others… such as their difference in the number and the seeing of the moon in fasting, and their difference about if uttering divorce three times is counted as one or more, and their difference about what quantity of water preserves its purity and the measurement of al-Karr, and their difference about using new water to wipe the head and feet, and their difference about the maximum period for post natal bleeding, and their difference about the number of words in the call to prayer and the Iqamah, and other differences in all matters of Fiqh. Not even one chapter of Fiqh is safe unless you find the scholars of the (Ja`fari) sect differing in it.]

3. The leader of the Twelver Imami Shia sect al-Tusi says in “al-`Iddah fi Usoul al-Fiqh” 1/138:

وقد ذكرت ما ورد عنهم عليهم السلام في الأحاديث المختلفة التي تخص الفقه في كتابي المعروف بالاستبصار وفي كتاب تهذيب الأحكام ما يزيد على خمسة آلاف حديث. وذكرت في أكثرها اختلاف الطائفة في العمل بها. وذلك أشهر من أن يخفى، حتى إنك لو تأملت اختلافاتهم في هذه الأحكام وجدته يزيد على اختلاف أبي حنيفة والشافعي ومالك

[I (al-Tusi) have mentioned their narrations (as) in different Ahadith regarding Fiqh in my book “al-Istibsar” and “Tahdheeb al-Ahkam” and they number around five thousand(narrations). I have mentioned that the (Twelver) sect differed in following most of them. That is too popular and cannot be hidden. In fact, if you observe their difference in the rulings you would find that they differ more than the difference between Abu Hanifa, Malik and al-Shafi`i.]

4.Esteemed Shia scholar Dildar Ali (renowned Shiite Mujtahid of India) states:

The ahadith that are narrated from the Imams ,especially in the jurisprudence, which are more than five thousand in Istibsar and Tahzeeb ul Ahkam, and in those ahadith, the differences in Shiites is also present, this is very famous thing and can’t be hidden. So much so that if you see their differences in the rulings, then you will find their differences are more than the differences in Abu Hanifa, Shafi and Malik. And you will also see that inspite of those differences, they don’t call each other deviants or fasiq, and don’t distance themselves from their opponents. (Asasul Usool, p. 91).

5. Grand Ayatullah Fadlullah confirms this in his book “al-Ma`alim al-Jadidah lil Marji`iyah al-Shi`iyah” pg.117:

إن المشكلة التي نواجهها في تعدد المرجعيات هي المشكلة التي نواجهها في تعدد المذاهب الفقهية لأن المرجعيات هي مذاهب فقهية متعددة من خلال طبيعة تنوع الفتاوى، وتنوع النظريات في هذا المجال

[The problem that we are facing in having numerous Marja`iyat (plural of Marji`) is the same as that of having numerous Fiqhi Madhabs, because the Marji`iyat are numerous Fiqhi Madhabs in their natural variety of Fatwas and views.]

6. Esteemed Shia scholar al-Faydh al-Kashani describes the situation of the Shia scholars in the introduction of his book “al-Wafi” 1/9:

تراهم يختلفون (أي علماء الشيعة) في المسألة الواحدة إلى عشرين قولاً أو ثلاثين قولاً أو أزيد. بل لو شئت أقول: لم تبق مسألة فرعية لم يختلفوا فيها أو في بعض متعلقاتها

[You will see them (Shia scholars) differ in one issue with about twenty or thirty different opinions, or more. In fact I can even say: That there is not one single minor issue that they did not disagree on.]

7.Esteemed Shia scholar Ja`far al-Shakhouri says in “Marji`iyat al-Marhalah wa Ghubar al-Taghyir” pg.135:

فلو نظرنا إلى فتاوى علمائنا المعاصـرين فسوف نجد أنهم كلـهم خارجـون عن دائرة المـذهب الشيعي

[If we were to observe the Fatwas of our contemporary scholars, we will find that they all have left the circle of the Shi`ah Madhab.]

Comment: After seeing this height of disagreements and conflicts between Shias, do Shias still believe in the myth that they are being guided from their hidden Imam? We ask the truth-seeking Shias to ponder over the fact, that had it been so, then there wouldn’t have remained a single conflict between them. Or are the going to come up with a more foolish excuse that even their hidden twelfth Imam is under Taqiyah due to which He guides the Shias differently as the previous Imams. Wake up O Shias!

Defence of innocent Imams from Ahlelbayt.

Shias have attributed all sort of heresy and lies to Imams from Ahlelbayt, but the Imams from Ahlelbayt are free from these attributions, just like Jesus(pbuh) is free from the wrong attributions of Christians. Imams of Ahlelbayt were the scholars of Ahlesunnah, they weren’t Shia. They lived and died on the creed of Ahlesunnah and we shall defend our noble Imams/Scholars from Ahlelbayt from the false attributions of Shias. Insha Allah!.

Example #1:

Here is an authentic narration in the books of Ahlesunnah from Imam Ja`far al-Sadiq(rah) who narrated from his father Imam Muhammad Baqir(rah), who narrated from al-Miqdad, who narrated the “anti-Umayyad” and “pro-Ahlul-Bayt” hadeeth regarding Ali bin Abi talib(ra) during the Caliphate of Uthman(ra).

Maliks Muwatta Book 20. Hajj; Section : Doing Hajj and Umra Together (Hajj al-Qiran).

Yahya related to me from Malik, from Jafar ibn Muhammad, from his father, that al-Miqdad ibn al-Aswad once went to see Ali ibn Abi Talib at as-Suqya, where he was feeding some young camels of his with a mash of meal and leaves, and he said to him, “This man Uthman ibn Affan is telling people that they cannot do hajj and umra together”. Al-Miqdad said, “Ali ibn Abi Talib went off with bits of meal and leaves on his forearms – and I shall never forget the sight of the meal and the leaves on his arms – and went to see Uthman ibn Affan and asked him, ‘Are you saying then that people cannot do hajj and umra together?’ Uthman replied, ‘That is my opinion.’ Whereupon Ali got angry and went out saying, ‘I am at your service, O Allah, I am at your service for a hajj and an umra together.'” Malik said, “Our position (here in Madina) is that someone who does hajj and umra together should not remove any of his hair, nor should he come out of ihram in any way until he has sacrificed an animal, if he has one. He should come out of ihram at Mina, on the day of the sacrifice.” (Maliks Muwatta Book 020, Hadith Number 040).

Comment: Here we find that Imams of Ahlul-Sunnah from Ahlelbayt, Imam Ali(ra) during the Caliphate of Uthman(ra) contradicted the view of Uthman(ra) openly. Imam Ja`far al-Sadiq (rah) of Ahlul-Sunnah gave his Fatwa and narrated openly without Taqiyyah. The Imams of Ahlul-Bayt narrate many Hadiths in our book without the so called “Taqiyyah” the example above is Imam Malik (rah) narrating from Imam Ja`far (rah) a popular Hadith that is “anti-Umayyad” and “pro-Ahlul-Bayt”, whereas in Shia books we see the Imam supposedly makes Taqiyyah in such small insignificant Fiqhi issues and that is laughable when compared to what he narrated authentically in our books. This one Hadith and many others like it are enough to destroy the entire Shia theory of Taqiyyah.

Shias might come up with a silly argument that, “ Imam did not do taqiyah regarding Tamattu [joining] of Umrah to Hajj, and in avoiding the intoxicant, and in wiping over the leather socks, but they did taqiyah in the rest of Islamic rulings and teachings”.Then we demand those Shias to explain us and the world the wisdom behind the Imams not doing Taqiyyah in these 3 things and doing Taqiyyah in many more important things such as their Imamate and the other countless issues which were more important that these three things. In other words the Shias are saying that their infallible Imams feared for their life and practiced taqiyah regarding fundamental issues of religion and many major issues, however they suddenly became fearless for their lives and did not practice taqiyah regarding the 3 issues which are minor issues compared to the other fundamental issues. Does it sound logical? Think over it O Shias, before you are doomed.

Example #2:

الكتب » مصنف ابن أبي شيبة » كتاب الصلاة » أَبْوَابُ الْمَسَاجِدِ ، وَأَمَاكِنُ الصَّلاةِ وَغَيْرِهَا … » فِي الصَّلَاةِ خَلْفَ الْأُمَرَاءِ

رقم الحديث: 7390 (حديث موقوف) حَدَّثَنَا حَدَّثَنَا حَاتِمُ بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ ، عَنْ جَعْفَرٍ ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ ، قَالَ : ” كَانَ الْحَسَنُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ ، وَالْحُسَيْنُ ، يُصَلِّيَانِ خَلْفَ مَرْوَانَ ، قَالَ : فَقِيلَ لَهُ أَمَا كَانَ أَبُوكَ يُصَلِّي إِذَا رَجَعَ إِلَى الْبَيْتِ ؟ قَالَ : فَيَقُولُ : لَا وَاللَّهِ ، مَا كَانُوا يَزِيدُونَ عَلَى صَلَاةِ الْأَئِمَّةِ ” .

On the authority of Ja’far (Al-Sadiq) on the authority of his father (Al-Baqir) who said: Al-Hassan Ibn Ali and Al-Hussein used to pray behind Marwan (Ibn Al-Hakam). It was said to him: Did they pray when they returned to their house? He said: No, by Allah, they did not add to the prayer OF THE IMAMS. (Musnad of Ibn Abi Shaybah. Book of Salah, chapter of ‘Al-Masaajid ….’ ; Sunan al-Bayhaqi)

More evidence that there was no Taqiyyah involved AT all when Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein decided to pray behind Marwan:

: روى ابن سعد عن الإمام الباقر «عليه السلام»: أن الحسنين «عليهما السلام» كانا يصليان خلف مروان، وأن الإمام الحسين «عليه السلام» كان يسبه وهو على المنبر حتى ينزل

ترجمة الإمام الحسين من طبقات ابن سعد ص28 وسير أعلام النبلاء ج4 ص406 وفي المصنف لابن أبي شيبة ج2 ص272: الحسن بن علي.

Ibn Sa’d narrates (in his Tabaqat) on the authority of Imam Al-Baqir that he said: “Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein – peace be upon them – used to pray behind Marwan and Imam Al-Hussein(ra) used to insult Marwan until he descended the pulpit. (Tabaqat by Ibn Sa’d, page 28 chapter about Al-Hussein. Also in Siyar A’lam Al-Nubala’, vol. 4, page 406 and in the Musnaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah, vol. 2, page 272).

Imam Al-Baqir destroys any Taqiyyah excuse:

239ـ قال: أخبرنا شبابة بن سوار، قال: أخبرني بسام، قال: سألت أبا جعفر عن الصلاة خلف بني اُميّة؟ فقال: صلّ خلفهم فإنّا نصلّي خلفهم، قال: قلت: يا با جعفر، إنّ الناس [ يقولون ] إنّ هذا منكم تقيّة؟ فقال: قد كان الحسن والحسين يصلّيان خلف مروان يبتدران [ 41/ ب] الصف، وإن كان الحسين ليسبّه وهو على المنبر حتى ينزل، أفتقيّة هذه؟!

(240) ابن أبي شيبة في المصنّف 2/ 300، وج 12 ق 143/أ

Shabbabah Ibn Siwar reported on the authority of Bassaam who said: “I asked Abu Ja’far (Al-Baqir) about the prayer behind the Umayyads. He (Al-Baqir) said: “Pray behind them for we (the Ahl Al-Bayt) pray behind them. I replied: “But of Aba Ja’far (Al-Baqir), the people say that that was done in a state of Taqiyyah.” He (Al-Baqir) said: “Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein used to pray behind Marwan although Al-Hussein used to insult him (Marwan) until he descended the pulpit. Is this what you call Taqiyyah?”. (Ibn Abi Shaybah in his Musannaf, 300 / 2, v. 12).

Similar is reported in Shia Books:

جاء في ” بحار الأنوار ” للمجلسي ( ج44 ص 123 حديث 15 – باب 21 أحوال أهل زمانه وعشائره واصحابه (ع ) – – نوادر الراوندي : باسناده عن موسى بن جعفر، عن أبيه (ع) قال: كان الحسن والحسين (ع) يصليان خلف مروان بن الحكم فقالوا لأحدهما : ما كان ابوك يصلى إذا رجع إلى البيت ؟ فقال: لا والله ما كان يزيد على صلاته .

Musa (Al-Kadhim) Ibn Ja’far (Al-Sadiq) on the authority of his father (Al-Sadiq) – peace be upon him – who said: Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein – peace be upon them – used to pray behind Marwan Ibn Al-Hakam. It was said to him: Did they pray when they returned to their house? He said: No, by Allah, they did not add to the prayer. (Bihar Al-Anwar aka Bihar Al-Dhulumaat by Al-Majlisi, vol. 44, p. 123, Hadith no. 15, chapter 21).

Imam Hassan al Muthanna once said to a person advising about the practice of Taqiyyah (subterfuge):

ويلك التقية انما هي باب رخصة للمسلم، إذا اضطر إليها وخاف من ذي سلطان أعطاه غير ما في نفسه يدرأ عن ذمة الله. وليست باب فضل، وإنما الفضل في القيام بأمر الله وقول الحق. وأيم الله ما بلغ من التقية أن يجعل بها لعبد من عباد الله أن يضل عباد الله

Woe to you! Verily Taqiyyah is only a concession for a Muslim when compelled to do so and he fears the king will do something to him which he will be unable to avert from his responsibility to Allah; It is not an act of virtue, verily the virtuous thing to do is to establish the order of Allah and to state the Truth. By Allah, Taqiyyah does not reach the point where one of the slaves of Allah can use it to misguide the slaves of Allah. [Tarikh Dimashq, 15/60]

NOTE: The Imams of the Ahl Al-Bayt made it clear (like as if they wanted to refute every wicked Rafidhi who might come up with ridicolous excuses) that Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein did not just pray behind Marwan, but they also did NOT repeat their prayers, indicating that they deemed the prayer behind Marwan correct and valid. This again is inline with orthodox Islam i.e. Sunnism and in complete opposition to the Rafidha who claim that even if the Imams of the Ahl Al-Bayt prayed behind the usurpers of their caliphate, then only so in a state of taqiyyah. No taqiyyah here as you can see.

Message to esteemed readers:

A religion that descended from the sky with the mighty angel Jibreel(as), Prophet Muhammad(saw) upon whom it was revealed, preached it openly even when there was a threat to his life. His noble companions(sahaba) too preached the correct teachings even when their life was in danger, thousands upon thousands of its followers died in order to protect it and spread it, But then the Shias come and say that “It’s supposed to be a secret and not even the closest companions of the Imams knew the full religion” We say that is messed up, Shi’ism. The idea in itself is un-Islamic, that Prophet(saw) gathered followers built his own state, gave the leadership to his own family, gave them lots of money and lands as inheritance ect, that actually casts doubts on his prophet-hood and intentions, whereas in proper Islam we believe he died poor he gave everything he had for the needy, he did not give inheritance and did not allow people to give his family Zakat, he did not tell people that appointing his family members after him is a pillar of Islam.That’s how a prophet acts if he was truly sent to all of mankind and not just to a few people who decided to keep the religion a secret and advised their close followers to do so. SO ‘O SHIAS BE CAREFUL HOW YOU JUDGE! May Allah guide you!

O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah and be just witnesses and let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety, and fear Allah. Verily, Allah is Well-Acquainted with what you do. Quran(5:8)

It is not for any person to believe, except by the leave of Allah, and He will put the Rijs(doubt) on those who do not reason. Quran(10:100).

P.S: We recommend our respected readers to read another of our article related to this issue which is, “From whom do you take your religion?” to enhance their knowledge regarding the major and the dangerous flaws in the Shia sources.