Wednesday, March 07, 2007

The Great Divide

What exactly is the difference between the Shi’a and Sunni Muslims? What is it that makes them hate each other enough to shed the blood of our Ummah so willingly? It is a question I have pondered for many years, but never as much as I have since the invasion of Iraq by America. Since 2003 I have seen the Shi’a and Sunni Muslims of Iraq fight each other harder then they have fought the people who are occupying their lands. I felt it is time to delve deeper into the situation to try and discern a meaningful reason for why we should spill the blood of our own brothers.

The majority of Muslims, both Sunni and Shi’a believe in the basic principles of Salat (Prayer), Sawm (Fasting), Hajj (Pilgrimage) and Zakhat (Charity). Both Sunni and Shi’a believe in Tawheed (Generally referred to as The Oneness of Allah) and in the Rasul Allah Muhammad (Prophethood of Muhammad.). Fundamentally speaking, Shi’a and Sunni appear conform to the same boundaries.

Let us now move beyond the fundamentals of Islam, and look further for the differences. To help understand Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence) the majority of Muslims look to a specific Madhab or school of thought for guidance. These madhab are named after the Imams who started them and for the Sunni they are, Hanafi (Imam Abu Hanifa), Shafi’ (Imam Shafi), Hanbali (Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal), Maliki (Imam Malik ibn Anas) with the Shi’a following the Ja’fari madhab (Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq). This is where we begin to see the differences appear between the Sunni and Shi’a as the Sunni follow the four madhab while the Shi’a refer to only the one, and while Sunni can recognize the Ja’fari madhab, the Shi’a do not follow the other four either preferring the Ja’fari over all others because of his direct lineage from Ali ibn Abu Taleb.

The lineage of Ali ibn Abu Taleb is where the break between Shi’a and Sunni becomes visible. Not only by way of the Ja’fari madhab but also in the ways of succession after the Prophet, specifically regarding Al-Khulafa-ur-Rashidun. The Sunni view as the majority of Muslims did at the time, that the Caliphate should go to Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, followed by Umar ibn al-Khattab, who was followed by Uthman ibn Affan, which made Ali ibn Abu Taleb the fourth and last of the ‘Rightly Guided’ Calipha. For Shi’a, the first three Calipha are summarily dismissed because they believe the line of succession from the prophet should have fallen directly to Ali ibn Abu Taleb who had become the head of Ahl al-Bayt (People of the Prophets House).

Ahl al-Bayt seems to be the driving divide between the Sunni and Shia. Both Sunni and Shi’a use Quran and Hadeeth to support their claims, but if this is what is really dividing us – why? Why must we divide ourselves becoming so dynamically opposed to each other that blood flows when we meet?

In the 1950’s at the prestigious al Azhar University in Egypt several Sunni and Shi’a scholars came together to form the ‘Dar al-Taqreeb al-Madhahib al-Islamiyyah’ or ‘Center for bringing together the various Islamic schools of thought’. This would help lead Sheik Mahmood Shaltoot, the head of Al Azhar to issue a fatwa in 1959 which authenticated the Ja’fari Madhab as a legitimate school of thought, thus meaning the Shi’a are not outside the boundaries of Islam.

I am neither promoting nor detracting from either Sunni or Shi’a, my goal instead has been to try and shed some light into the political differences that seem to have caused a major division within our Ummah. It imperative that we determine each other as Muslims and respect our rights as brothers because only then can we begin to truly move forward as one Ummah. I leave you with this thought, a saying I have seen numerous times…

"Once the sword is unsheathed among my followers, it will not be sheathed until the Last Day."


The Sphinx said...

It's sad that Sunnis and Shias in Iraq are wasting their energy fighting each other, while their priority should be fighting their common enemy, who is dealing Death and Destruction™ to their country.

Thanks for passing by my blog earlier =) Keep up the good blogging!

Hamza Hashem said...

The Sphinx,

I am glad you found my blog, and hope you get a chance to read some of the other works on it. I hope to add more, but I write when moved to do so, such as when I see our brothers killing each other instaed of as you said, the common enemy who has devasted their entire country for almost 4 years now. InshAllah we will find a way, a spark, a thought, anything that moves us to unite.

Hamza Hashem said...

For Future Readers:

The previous comment was delted for foul and abusive language.

This site: Forever Islam -

Has no connections or affiliations with the person or persons known as or operating under the name of "Hacked By Foreverislam"

The pupose of this site, and my efforts here are to promote Islam, and voice my concerns about Islamic topics I feel we as Muslims should adress.

IMPORTANT: NO FOUL OR ABUSIVE LANGUAGE WILL BE ALLOWED AT ALL. YOU CAN DISAGREE AND CHALLENGE, YOU MAY NOT YOU USE FOUL AND ABUSIVE LANGUAGE. (I also suggest stop using anonymous names. If you have somethnig to say have the courage to at least say it is from you.).

willtotruth said...

Hello Hamza Hashem

I've wondered about this split and why it seems to involve so much bitter hostility. I'm still, however, not entirely clear on why the distinctions and lineage you describe have caused such a division. Does the Shi'a dismissal of the first three Calipha's amount to a dismissal of the Sunni's? Is this what, in the west, might be termed a "doctrinal" dispute? Is it about "holiness" and who is considered the right or correct Imams (i.e, the right or correct schools of thought) based on lineage? It seems that the Shi'a are regarded as "unorthodox" or somehow, standing outside of the mainstream of Islam but this is all very new to me so I am just speculating here. To an outsider with little knowledge of Islam and its history, I feel like I'm still missing something crucial to understanding the divide.

Hamza Hashem said...

Will TO Truth,

I am vrestopped by my blog to share your thoughts. I appologize for my delayed response, I am attempting ot write a little somethingadress your questions more specificy as my ast article was just more of a reminder Muslims that are all Muslims and need not seperate.

Give me another dayr two and I should have something for you. I hope you read a few more of my articles until then...

Hamza Hashem said...


I appologise for the much delayed response. If you will allow me to answer the questions you raised in your comment, I will attempt to do my best to clarify a few points.

“Does the Shi'a dismissal of the first three Calipha's amount to a dismissal of the Sunni's?” – This, as with much of the problem, depends on who you ask. In general one would be inclined to say yes, the principal reason being that the Shi’a believe that the Prophet selected Ali with his lineage preserved from error thus being the only acceptable successor to the Prophet Muhammad. The majority however believed in choosing a successor by choosing the one best qualified by his ability and attributes. This difference is what has lead to the divergence between the Shi’a and Sunni even now.

Is this what, in the west, might be termed a "doctrinal" dispute? – Again this is a yes and no (or more precisely know) answer. As for all major applications of faith, the “doctrine” is Al Quran the Living Miracle, and is accepted by all Muslim. It becomes a doctrinal dispute once we move beyond the word of God as preserved in Al Quran with the majority ascribing to words in the Sahih hadith collections (such as Bukhari and Muslim) while the Shi’a prefer with Nahj al Balaghah (Sermons, letters and sayings of Ali).

Is it about "holiness" and who is considered the right or correct Imams (i.e, the right or correct schools of thought) based on lineage? – Yes. As stated earlier, the Shi’a believe Ali and his lineage as protected by God from error in action or saying thus negating the necessity of the schools of thought present in the Sunni ideology. The schools of thought began in an attempt to clarify the minor points of differences among the Muslims not directly addressed by the Quran in a more uniformed manner.

It seems that the Shi'a are regarded as "unorthodox" or somehow, standing outside of the mainstream of Islam – It seems that way because depending on what figures you look at, The Shi’a make up approximately 15% of Muslims, and your words could not seem more appropriate as they are standing on the outside of “mainstream” Islam, also refered to as Sunni.

I hope I answered you questions as you raised them, however I stil feel this will not satisfy your quest for understanding, nor does it adress why the dispute has continued. My next post will be a continuation on this subject in a manner that will hopefully offer a little clearer picture to "The Great Divide"

willtotruth said...

Thanks Hamza. I have only read a little about Islam and recently read a book by a westerner (Karen Armstrong) on Muhammad (Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Time). Very interesting read. One of the obvious themes within it was how persistently Muhammad worked to transcend tribal divisions and to unite the Arab people. To see "us" or to think of brotherhood in different terms than in the past. Muslims must never fight Muslims. But, it seems, the tribal or sectarian divide is clearly something that continues to challenge this idea even (as I presume) Al Quran urges/demands such unity.

Hamza Hashem said...


I am familiar with Karen Armstrong’s work and I am glad you had the opportunity to read a bit about our beloved prophet – however I would also suggest a more thorough look at his life by reading one of the more popular versions “Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum (the Sealed Nectar)” by Saifur Rahman al-Mubarakpuri.

Once more you are absolutely correct that during his life, our Prophet emphasized many times in word and actions, the necessity of unity. Overcoming tribal or cultural boundaries was a given during the time of the prophet because of his message, and even in his final sermon - Khutbatul Wada' he once more adressed this issue by saying “All mankind is from Adma and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black, nor a black has any superiority over a white - except by piety and good action.”

I would also like to suggest my first article ever written on this blog entitled “Unity in Islam” – found in the February 2006 archive

To read “Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum (the Sealed Nectar)” online you can visit
and find it listed under Seerah

or purchase a copy for about $15.00 at
listed under English books -> Biographies and History -> Prophet Muhammad
Thanks for your interest and insight.

Nooreen said...

It is like a curse on our community,we cannot agree to disagree:(

Anonymous said...

The Islamic Ruling on Shi`ites(Rawafid)

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)

Ibrahim reported that his father Hasan said that his father Hasan said that his father Ali bin Abu-Talib (may Allah be pleased with them) said: "The Messenge of Allah said: There will appear, at the end of time, people who are called Rawafidah (rejecters). They will reject Islam." [Musnad Ahmad]

Abdullah ibn Abbaas (may Allah be pleased with them) reported that The Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: "There will be, at the end of the time, people who are called Rawafid (rejecters). They will reject Islam and spit it out. Thus, KILL THEM for they are polytheist."

Ahl-ul-Bayt (the household of the Messenger)

*Imaam Ali (r.a.)
It was reported that Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) used to repeat the following statement: "The best one after the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) is Abu Bakr. And the best one after Abu Bakr is Umar." He also whipped those who claimed that he is better than Abu Bakr and Umar. [Ibn Majah]

*Imaam Ali bin Abu-Talib (r.a.) said: "The Messenger of Allah called me and told me: 'You are alike with Jesus, Jews hated him till they slandered his mother, and Christians loved him till they put him in the position that is not for him.' With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. Verily, I am not a prophet, and there is nothing revealed to me. But I work with the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of his Prophet (pbuh) as much as I can. So whatever I have asked you in regard of obeying Allah, it is your duty to obey me whether you like it or not." [Ahmad]

Imaam Ali (r.a.) said: "There will appear, at the end of time, people claimed to be from our Shia but they are not from our Shia. They have a nickname called Rawafid (rejecters). If you meet them then KILL THEM for they are polytheist."

Imaam Ali (r.a.) said: "With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority (of Muslims) because Allah's hand (of protection) is on keeping unity." [Nahjul Balagha, sermon 126 about the Kharijites]

In the that time, people who called them selves Muslims were three groups :
1- Kharijites who said that Imam Ali was a disbeliever and they send Ibn Muljim to kill him and he did that.
2- Shia who said that he was infalleble Imam and Allah had chosen him for leading Muslims.
3- Sunnies ( Majority of Muslims ) who said that he was a great companion of the prophet and he was a great leader to Muslims but Muslims had chosen him to be thier leader not Allah.
Who are the people of the middle course & the great majority (of Muslims) as Imam Ali said in his sermon, Read Imam Ali's words and then look to the three groups and you will find the answer!

*Imaam Hasan bin Ali (r.a.)
'Aasim bin Damrah said to Hasan bin Ali that the Shi`ites claim that Ali will come back. Then Imaam Hasan said: "Those liers lied. If we had known that, his wives would not have married (other men) nor would we have shared his heritage."

Early Scholars

Imaam Abu Hanifah
It was reported that often Abu Haneefah used to repeat the following statement about the Shi`ites, "Whoever doubts whether they are disbelievers has himself committed disbelief."

*Imaam al-Shaafi`e
On one occasion al-Shaafi`i said concerning the Shi`ites, "I have not seen among the heretics a people more famous for falsehood than the Raafidite Shi`ites." [Ibn Taymeeyah, Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah, 1/39] On another occasion he said, "Narrate knowledge from everyone you meet except the Raafidite Shi`ites, because they invent Hadeeths and adopt them as part of their religion." [Ibid, p. 38]

*Imaam Maalik
Once Maalik was asked about them and he replied, "Do not speak to them nor narrate from them, for surely they are liars." [Minhaaj as-Sunnah, 1/37] During a class of Imaam Maalik, it was mentioned that the Raafidite Shi`ites curse the Sahaabah. In reply, he quoted the Quranic verse, "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and those with him are harsh with the disbelievers and gentle among themselves. So that the disbelievers may become enraged with them." He then said, "Whoever becomes enraged when the Sahaabah are mentioned is one about whom the verse speaks." [Tafseeer al-Qurtubee, Soorah al-Fath; Editor’s note: That is, anyone who is enraged by the mention of the Sahaabah is a dsibeliever, because the verse says, "…the disbelievers may become enraged with them (Sahaabah)."]

Imaam Ibn Hazm quoted a report with an isnad going back to Hishaam ibn ‘Ammaar, who said: "I heard Maalik ibn Anas say: "Whoever curses Abu Bakr should be whipped, and whoever curses ‘Aa’ishah should be killed." He was asked, "Why do you say that concerning (the one who curses) ‘Aa’ishah?" He said, Because Allah says concerning ‘Aa’ishah, (may Allah be pleased with her): "Allah forbids you from it (slander her) and warns you not to repeat the like of it forever, if you are believers." (al-Noor 24:17)’"

*Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi
Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi said: "Because the people who slandered ‘Aa’ishah accused a pure and innocent person of immorality, then Allah exonerated her. So everyone who accuses her of that of which Allah has stated she is innocent is rejecting what Allah says, and everyone who rejects what Allah says is a kaafir. This is the opinion of Maalik, and the matter is very clear to those who have insight."

*Ibn al-Mubaarak
Ibn al-Mubaarak was reported to have said, "Religion is gained from Ahl al-Hadeeth, scholastic theology and crafty exemptions from religious ordinances of Ahl ar-Ray and lies from the Raafidite Shi`ites." [Adh-Dhahabee, al Muntaqaa min Minhaaj al-I`tidaal, p. 480]

*Abu Zur`ah ar-Raazee
This great scholar was quoted as saying, "If you see someone degrade any of the companions of the Prophet, (pbuh), know that he is a disbeliever. Because the Prophet, (pbuh), was real, what he brought was the truth and all of it was conveyed to us by the way of the Sahaabah. What those disbelievers wish to do is to cast doubt on the reliability of our narrators in order to invalidate the Quraan and the Sunnah. Thus the disbelievers are the ones most deserving defamation."

*Ibn Hazm al-Andaloosee
One day during the period of Muslim rule in Spain, Imaam Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm was having a debate with some Spanish Catholic priests about their religious texts. He brought before them evidence of textual distortions in the Bible and the loss of original manuscripts. When they replied by pointing out to him Shi`ite claims also being distorted, Ibn Hazm informed them that "Shi`ite could not be used as evidence against the Quraan or against Muslims because they are not themselves Muslims." [Ibn Hazm, al-Fisaal fee al-Milal wa an-Nihal, 2/78 and 4/182]

Their claims have been rebutted by numerous other early scholars like Ibn Taymeeyah in Minhaaj as-Sunnah, adh-Dhahabee in Muntaqaa min Minhaaj al-I`tidaal, Ibn Katheer in his history book al-Bidaayah wa an-Nihaayah, Ibn al-Jawzee in Talbees Iblees, al-Qaadee ibn al-`Arabee in al-`Awwaasim min al-Qawaasim, At-Tahaawee in al-`Aqeedah at-Tahaawiyyah, and Al-Qaadee Abu Ya`laa.

Contemporary Scholars

*Abul-A'laa al-Maududi
This great Pakistani scholar and leader wrote an introduction to the book, Ar-Riddah bain al-Ams wa al-Yaum (lit. Apostacy in the Past and the Present) by Muhammad KaadHim Habeeb published in 1977. In it the author wrote of the Imaami Ja'fari Shi'ites, "In spite of their moderate views (relative to other sects of Shi'ism), they are swimming in disbelief like white blood cells in blood or like fish in water." Maududi supported these views by praising the author and recommending that the book be done in hardback.

*Imaam al-Aloosee
He declared the Raafidite Shi'ites disbelievers because of their defamation of the Sahaabah. His position was based on the rulings of Imam Malik and other scholars who were in agreement with him. In reply to their claim to be Ahl Bayt (the Prophet's (pbuh) family), al-Aloosee said, "No, they are really followers of the Devils and Ahl Bayt are innocent of them."

*Bahjat al-Baitaar
When this great Syrian scholar was asked if transactions were permissible with Shi'ites, he replied in a book called Al-islam wa as-Sahaabah al-Kiraam bain as-Sunnah wa ash-Shee'ah in which he said, "Political and economic dealings with them are allowed in the same way that they are allowed with states and people with whom there are treaties in spite of differences between their lands and religions and ours. And help can only be sought from Allah."

*Muhammad Rasheed Ridaa
This scholar was among those who worked sincerely for rapproachment between the Sunnites and the Shi'ites, and they in turn pretended moderation for his benefit. However, in the midst of his efforts they caught him by surprise by presenting him with some of their books which slandered islam. He then replied to them in a paper called As-Sunnah wa ash-Shee'ah in which he exposed their doctrines and idolatrous practices.

*Dr. Hilaalee
After living closely to the Shi'ites for some years, the famous Morrocan scholar, Dr Hilaalee, wrote a paper on them in which he declared them disbelievers.

*Al-Basheer al-Ibraaheemee
While visiting Iraq, this professor who is the leading religious scholar in Algeria saw with his own eyes the Shi'ite book, Az-Zahraa, in which 'Umar ibn al-Khataab - may Allah be pleased with him - is accused of homosexuality. On his return home to Algeria he exposed the Shi'ites and clearly outlined their principle beliefs and practices.

*Mustafaa as-Sibaa'ee
This eminent Palestinian scholar was also among those who lived with the Shi'ites for a period and worked for rapproachment with them; however, he soon discovered their real intentions and noted them in the foreword of his classic, As-Sunnah wa Makaanatuhaa. He wrote, "Those people continue to hold fast to their books in which slanderous attacks and false descriptions are given of the incidents of disagreement among the Sahaabah. Hence their intention behing the call to rapprochement seems to be bringing the Sunnites closer to the Shi'ite creed and not bringing them closer to each other." On another occasion, he wrote, "A Muslim would almost be in a state of total bewilderment and confusion at the audacity of these people towards Allah's Messenger (pbuh) were it not for his knowledge that most of the Raafidites are Persians. Some Persians feigned islam and used Shi'ism as a cover for the destruction of islam. There were also among the Persians those who were unable to free themselves from the effects of their former religions and thus they entered islam with a pagan mentality which did not mind telling lies about the Prophet (pbuh)"


Obviously,it is an act of blasphemy to doubt the veracity and truthfulness of even one word of the Qur'aan.To this day, the Shiites believe that Abu Bakr and Omar Al Farouk usurped Ali’s rightful inheritance as ruler of Islam (may allah be pleased with them all). Not only that, but during the succession struggle Omar Al Farouk (r.a) burst into Ali’s house, crushing the pregnant Fatima (r.a)behind the door, leading to the stillbirth of her son. And although Ali (r.a) formally accepted the elevation of Abu Bakr, and then Omar, the Shiites still speak of Omar with intense hatred. In Iran today, one of the harshest things you can say about another person is Iaanat be’Omar, cursed by Omar.
What kind of unity would that be with those whom cursing Abu Bakr ,Ummar,Othman,Mo'awia and Aisha(may allah be pleased with them)after every single prayer!

Hamza Hashem said...


That is quite the impressive work you have supplied me with. It will take some time for e to review it propperly and check referances against what I can. I do greatly appreciate your insight into this and look forward to future discussions on such matters.

Anonymous said...

First of all, I do apologize for my tone of voice, which was excessive. I used to believe that Sunni-Shia unity was I highly doubt it. I used to believe that its all about some political/ historical difference and shouldn't have existed but unfortunately the core issue is quite another matter. Shia and very very sinful in most cases, and many of them have committed 'Shirk' but that does not mean that they are 'Mushriken' as a general rule. That is the whole point I am trying to explain. As I am not debating this point because I do have a personal feud toward Shia rather I am debating this point so that we --Muslims-- can protect ourselves and our people who may get misled by their venomous beliefs, into a potential punishment from Allah. and consequently end up with substandard belief system.

Also I do apologize for my lengthy ramblings contained herein.However, I thought it is important to share with you some of Shia beliefs in order to spread awareness and understading of their fallacious belief system.

*Shia Holy Books After The Quran*

Q: Do Shia believe in present Quran as uncorrupted, unaltered final word of Allah?

As Muslims, we believe in the finality of Prophethood and the finality of the Holy Books. Prophet Muhammad (s) is the final Prophet. The Quran is the final Holy Book of Allah.

The Shia reject both of these central tenets of Islaam. They extend the Prophethood through their Imams, who are superior to Prophets.

The Shia also believe in holy books after the Quran, including the Mushaf Fatima (Book of Fatima), Al-Jamia, and Al-Jafr (The Parchment). There are many Shia Hadith on this topic, and I shall reference them.
These Shia Hadith are in the most important of the four books of Shia Hadith, Al-Kafi. You can look at these Shia Hadith yourself at this site:
I strongly urge you to click on that link so you can see all of this for yourself from the most reliable Shia website on the internet; I do NOT want you to take my word for it, but rather to see it for yourself from this Shia website where they brazenly show their Hadith about these holy books after the Quran that their Imams possess and these books have more than the Quran in them!
Or you can see where the Shia scholars explain what these Holy Books are at, the popular Shia website:

In Islaam, no other person after Prophet Muhammad (s) is allowed to get Wahi (Divine Revelation). Anyone who claims to get divine inspiration through Angel Jibrael (as) is a liar and a Dajjal. The Shias are accusing Bibi Fatima (ra) of being a Dajjal, Nauzibillah! The Shia have "Hadith" that Bibi Fatima (ra) would recieve divine inspiration from none other than Angel Jibrael (as) just like the Prophet (s) did.

I will now show the Shia Hadith so that you can see for yourself. These Shia Hadith are from the one of four Shia books of Hadith, Al-Kafi. My commentary is in italics and in brackets. Again, you can view the Shia Hadith yourself (please do!) at the Shia website I gave you before:

H 635, Ch. 40, h 1

The Imam (a.s.) then said, "O abu Muhammad, with us there is al-Jami'a. What do they know what al-Jami is?" I then asked, "May Allah take my soul in service for your cause, what is al-Jami'a? The Imam (a.s.) said, it is a parchment seventy yards by the yards of the Messenger of Allah long that contains his dictations that is engraved in to with the right hand writing of Ali (a.s.). It contains all the lawful and unlawful and all matters that people need, even the law of compensation...[even for] a scratch caused to a person. [Deriving laws from a Holy Book other than the Holy Quran is Kufr. And there is no law in the Quran for a scratch caused by a person, so this hadith is saying that Al-Jami contains more than the Quran!] He then stretched his hand to me and asked, 'May I, O abu Muhammad?' I then replied, "May Allah take my soul in service for your cause, I am all at your disposal." He pinched me with his hand and said, "Even there is the law of compensation for this."

The Imams (a.s.) remained silent for a while and then said, "With us there is al-Jafr (the parchment). What do they know what al-Jafr is? I then asked, "What is al-Jafr (the parchment or a container) ?" The Imams (a.s.) said, "It is a container made of skin that contains the knowledge of the prophets and the executors of their wills and the knowledge of the scholars in the past from the Israelites." [The Quran does not contain this, so again, the Shia believe in a holy book superior to the Quran.]

The Imams (a.s.) remained silent for a while and then said, "With us there is the book (Mushaf) of Fatima, (a.s.). What do they know what Mushaf of Fatima is? The Imam (a.s.) said, "Mushaf of Fatima is three times bigger than your Quran. There is not even a single letter therein from your Quran." [The Mushaf Fatima is THREE times as big as the Quran!? Obviously, the Shia holy books are superior and bigger than the Quran. Astagfurallah!]

H 636, Ch. 40, h 2

"The heretics will appear in the year one hundred twenty eight (745/746AD) because I have found it in the Mushaf of Fatima (a.s.)." [Can anyone find this prophecy in the Quran? Again, the Mushaf Fatima is better than the Quran, with much more knowledge in it than the Quran.] The narrator has said that he asked the Imams (a.s.), "What is Mushaf of Fatima?" The Imams (a.s.) said, "When Allah took the Holy Prophet (s.a.) from this world, it caused such a degree of grief to Fatima (a.s.) that only Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, knows its extent. Allah then sent an angel to her to offer solace and speak to her. She complained about it to Amir al-Mu'minin Ali (a.s.) who asked her to inform him whenever she would find the angel speak to her. She then informed him when the angel came to speak. Amir al-Mu'minin Ali (a.s.) then would write down all that he would hear of the conversations of the angel so much so that his notes took the shape of a whole book." [Subhanallah! The Shia believe that Fatima would recieve Wahi like a Prophet from an angel! And then she would narrate it to Ali who would be her scribe, just like the Prophet (s) would narrate his Wahi to scribes!]

H 639, Ch. 40, h 5

"It [Al-Jafr] is the skin of a bull which is full of knowledge." Then they asked the Imam (a.s.) about al-Jami'a. The Imam (a.s.) replied, "It is a parchment that is seventy yards long with a width of hide like that of the leg of a huge camel. It contains all that people may need. [I thought the Quran contains all the people may need?] There is no case for there is a rule in it. In it there is the law to settle the compensation for a scratch caused to a person." [Again, better than the Quran.] The narrator has said that he asked the Imams (a.s.), "What is Mushaf of Fatima?" The Imam (a.s.) waited for quite a while. Then he said, "You ask about what you really mean and what you do not mean. Fatima (a.s.) lived after the Messenger of Allah for seventy-five days. She was severely depressed because of the death of her father. Jibril (a.s.) would come to provide her solace because of the death of her father. Jibril would comfort her soul. Jibril would inform her about her father and his place and of the future events and about what will happen to her children. At the same time Ali (a.s.) would write all of them down and thus is Mushaf of Fatima (a.s.)." [God forbidden, this is pure Kufr to believe that Fatima would get Wahi from Angel Jibrael! Prophethood ended with the Prophet! ]

H 640, Ch. 40, h 6

"With us there are such things that because of which we do not need people [but] instead people need us. With us there is a book that the Messenger of Allah had dictated and Ali (a.s.) had written it down. It is a book. In it there are all laws of lawful and unlawful matters."

H 641, Ch. 40, h 7

The Imam (a.s.) said, "I swear by Allah that with me there are two books in which there is the name of every prophet and the name of every king that would rule on earth." [This information is not in the Quran...again, this book is better than the Quran!]

How can the Shia then claim to be Muslim when they believe in holy books after the Quran and that someone other than the Prophet (s) recieved Wahi after him! This is pure Kufr.

none of the fundamentals of the Shia faith are in the Quran and this is why the Shia need other holy books to derive their entire creed from as opposed to the Quran, which is the fundamental book of guidance for the Muslim--(Sunni)

Anonymous said...

Well, Islam is not a very complex religion. its a simple, natural religion.

Prophet of Islam said "there will be 73 sects in islam and only one will be correct"

so he was not refereing to Shia, Sunni rather he was refering to Imami, Hanfi, Shafai, Maliki, Deobandi, Brelvi etc...
and if you look in history. only one sect Shia-Imami extends throughout the history.
It were the Sahaba like Salman the persian, Abu-Dharr Ghafari, Ammar Yasir and others who recorded their protest against Abi Bakar's caliphat. and in a hadiths these people were called "Shia of Ali" by Prophet himself.

all other sects either came into being way after the Prophet or don't exist today....

mutawassam said...
This comment has been removed by the author.