There is no doubt that Islam is the truth and that the people of the Sunnah, the Ahlul-Sunnah, are the closest people to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). There is also no doubt that Rafidism (Twelver Shia Imamism) is a dumpster of various forms of zandaqah, kufr, shirk, and ghuluw in the name of the Ahlul-Bayt. No damage control attempts can ever change that.
There is also no doubt that the seeds of the da’wah sprout and eventually bear fruit as shall be proven in this article.
In the years of my da’wah alone I (and I seek refuge from the word ‘I’) have encountered numerous people who thanked me for my work and that of my team/colleagues. In fact, even if I’d had ‘only’ managed to help one person to realise the kufr he was upon and finally accept Islam, it was all worth it.
I myself used to be a Rafidi Shi’ite and I didn’t leave the sect overnight. I knew a number of Shia friends who had a lot of doubts. Some of them knew very well how inherently false Rafidism is, but they had not the courage to leave it. People from minority sects are more unlikely to leave their sect (that’s a psychological issue and too deep for such an article).
That’s life, however, that doesn’t mean that the Rafidi fortress is not crumbling, undoubtedly it is, and I am just an insignificant individual who is part of a large and increasing caravan.
Shia reformists are doing their part as well. Every person of intellect is realising that Rafidism stands on shaky foundations; the noise about Ghadir, Saqifah, Fitnah between (some) Sahabah, etc. and of course Imam-centrism has been the oxygon for the obnoxious Rafidi religion for too long, the refutations of Ahlul-Sunnah over the years have been too devastating.
The late 90s and early 2000s are over where Iranian and other Rafidi propagandists flooded the net with little to no resistance (as no Sunni platforms existed to counter their lies and propaganda).
Ex-Shias (converts to Ahlul-Sunnah) are on the rise and even some more sensible, reasonable, and intelligent reformist Shi’ites have started to doubt the extreme Church-like beliefs and practices that are strongly pushed by the Shia clergy (especially their ‘Ayatollahs’). People are realising that they have been fooled and conned in the name of the Ahlul-Bayt.
To any unbiased observer, it is clear that Twelver Shia Imamism is an Imam-centric religion where lip service is given to Allah/God and His Messenger (ﷺ). And no, supplications, where Allah is called upon alone, won’t change this fact just like a cesspool stays a cesspool even if you poor some honey in it. The very root of Imamism i.e. Imamah is falsehood and thus the mother of all falsehood.
Shi’ism has produced a culture of shirk, wherever you go you see ghuluw, sometimes the type of ghuluw that you won’t even see amongst the most extreme batini quburi Sufis.
For every ‘Ya Allah’ (invocation of God) you will hear thousands of supplications to other than Allah in Shia circles and lands, and no, it’s not some extreme fringe group, it is their mainstream that got it from none other than the Rafidi clergy who have poisoned the masses with ghuluw (extremism). Opposing them on these polytheistic customs comes with the risk of being labeled as a ‘Wahhabi’ or ‘Nasibi’.
As for their ‘divine arguments’ in support of their heresy that is the invocation of the saints (imams): this is nothing but a Church-like bid’ah) which they falsely sell to the gullible as ‘tawassul/intercession. No Muslim denies Islamic Tawassul except for a deviant, however, the practice of the Rafidah is that of the Catholic and Orthodox Church and that of extreme quburi Sufis. No wonder the Rafidah clutch to the same narrations that other grave worshippers misuse and that have been thoroughly refuted by Ahlul-Sunnah.
The arguments the Rafidah (including their top scholars!) use in defence of Shirki Tawassul and Istighathah are all based on either outright weak narrations or distortion of narrations and often even on nonsensical ‘logical’ shreds of evidence that are the furthest from the truth and logic.
Du’a as in calling on people (wheather they are dead or alive) beyond the curtain of the Unseen is an act of worship. Nobody just casually speaks to his favourite tombed and buried saint in London, requesting to assist him in his dissertation. This is nonsensical. This is why you see those who ‘ask’ other than Allah literally praying to their saint with utmost Khushu’ and Khudhu’, exactly how Muslims invoke Allah alone. Even a Hindu could tell that the following person is worshipping (making du’a) to his Imams:
Likewise when you call upon the dead (martyrs are alive with their Lord, not floating around awaiting our distress calls), what’s pushing you to call upon this dead person is the belief within that he can hear and somewhat benefit you… whether or not the benefit sought from the dead is dependent upon Allah or independent from Allah is another subject, but there is a belief that this dead person you call upon can hear and somewhat benefit you when you call upon him.
Otherwise, you wouldn’t call upon him Nobody calls upon a deaf person because there’s no belief within one that the deaf person can hear and benefit him for him to even contemplate calling out to a deaf person.
Yet you still have the learned amongst the Shi’ites defending absurd heresies with all sorts of mental gymnastics such as the invocation of lady saint Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) in prostration. These people will clutch at every straw in order to justify the invocation of other than Allah in du’a, often with the most shallow arguments that one can imagine.
However, on the bright side, some turban heads have started to use their brains, at least parts of it. Some of them have started to express doubts regarding the mainstream Shia practice of invoking and beseeching the Imams directly in du’a. A hideous bid’ah which sort of turns the saints into buried demigods who are all-hearing, all-seeing, etc. i.e. a form of deification take place even if the Rafidah deny it (and try to justify it with the ‘with the permission of Allah’ clause).
These doubts are in clear contradiction to the teachings of major Shia Ayatullats who openly advocate the belief and practice of praying to the Imams at any place and any time and for every need, one might have:
Their turban heads are having a hard time justifying their blatant shirk that they present to their naive devotees as ‘intercession/tawassul’. They know that no person of intellect will buy their claims; it has put so many people off, not just Sunnis, but lately, even many Shi’ites who have started to use their brains, may Allah guide them away from Rafidism.
Some time ago I wrote a piece about a deluded turban head who shot in his own foot when he tried to present Shi’ism as monotheistic by rebuking some of the Shia clerics and eulogy singers and their excessive praise and beliefs regarding the Imams of the Ahlul-Bayt
Today, that very same person has no choice but admit that one of the most mainstream Shia customs, peddled by their biggest scholars, is nothing but BS based on pathetic arguments that defy logic whilst claiming logic.
Take a look at this and see how the game is changing in favour of Ahlul-Sunnah, the people of Tawhid:
Yes, you read right, flimsy arguments; flimsy arguments peddled by their ‘Ayatollahs’ and other clerics and parroted by their following who in return, in their simplicity, believe that those pathetic arguments are the golden truth, the final cut that will silence every ‘Vahhabi’.
Mind you, the turban head and cleric ‘Seyed’-Ali Hosseini (‘Sayed Ali Shobayri’) was responding – credit where credit is due, Shobayri has wiped the floor with him – to this utter Jahil here: Mohammad al-Hilli (as foolish as Ibn Mudannas al-Hilli):
Acknowledgment of a problem is the first step towards its solution. Trust me, it is a big deal if a Shia cleric says that he chooses not to invoke the Imams from any place at any time. Such a Shi’ite person has a better ‘aqidah than millions of so-called Sunnis who pray to their ‘Ghous-E-Azam’ for all their needs. Tawhid is the crux of the matter to a Muslim, a Rafidi with bid’i beliefs who rejects shirk is closer to Islam than a million pir worshippers who masquerade as ‘Ahlul-Sunnah’. It’s that simple.
Rejecting Ghuluw, extremism (saint veneration), the mother of all shirk, i.e. the invocation of the saints at any place and any time has been adopted by many Shia reformists, it’s a good first step, the most crucial one really. The Ahlul-Bayt’s name must be purified from all ghuluw and shirk.
Invoking other than Allah in du’a is shirk, it is a form of deification. No human being, not even a Prophet, let alone the Ahlul-Bayt, has ever claimed that during or after his demise he’s are capable to hear millions of distress calls and rush to the needy at any time and any place. In fact, it has never been the task of the pious, whether Angels, Prophets, Awliya, etc. to hear and fulfill the wishes of those who call upon them, nor has it ever been their task to deliver prayer requests of Allah. It is therefore fallacious to compare humans (no matter how great) with the angels.
Allah has never appointed ‘secretaries’ without whom our prayers won’t be as effective, so stop comparing Him with a CEO of a company who is too moody and busy to listen to the call of the needy. Our Prophet (ﷺ) being able to hear our salams is a different topic (and its no form of deification as we pray for him, not to him) altogether and I’ve answered this shubhah already.