Imagine there is a religion that teaches that there is a so-called ‘infallible hidden Imam’ on earth (who’s guiding nobody) who left his nation without an infallible guide for over a thousand-year (but no worries, he left behind Iranian ‘Ayatullats’ who can’t even recite a Fatihah with semi-correct Tajwjid), who’s literally scared (despite all his alleged superpowers) of being killed (by Abbasids and the ‘Vahhabis’…) and then will be killed anyway, but by whom? by a bearded lady!
Nahj al-Balagha (Arabic: نهج البلاغة) (the Peak of Eloquence) is a collection of sayings and writings attributed to ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (رضي الله عنه). It is a highly revered Twelver Shia book often referred to by Shia ‘Ayatollahs’ as the brother of the Qur’an (then they have the audacity to claim that Sunnis exaggerate with Sahih Bukhari who nobody dares to compare to the Qur’an).
In Rafidism (Twelver Shiism) the Jews are whitewashed of the murder of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). Who do the Shia blame instead? None other than his companions/wives of course!
This makes Twelver Shi’ism the only sect out of all deviant sects that lifts the blame from the Jews and shifts it to the Sahaba. In this article, I’ll be dissecting their spurious pieces of evidence one by one with the Help of Allah.
Hafiz ibn Hajr quotes Ali ibn Abi Talib رضي الله عنه:
One of the most famous quotes by Imam Abu Zur’ah al-Razi (one of the Imams of the Salaf of Persian descent) with regards to the Rafidah Shia:
‘If you see a man belittling anyone from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) then know that he is a Zindeeq(heretic who claims Islam i.e. Munafiq). That is because we believe that the Messenger (ﷺ) is true, the Qur’an is true and those who conveyed this Qur’an and the Sunnah to us were the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). Rather what the heretics want to do is criticise our trustworthy narrators so they can nullify the Book and the Sunnah, they are more deserving of being criticised since they are the Zanaadiqa (heretics).’ (Narrated by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi in Tarikh al-Baghdad)
How true this statement is when one considers common and foolish Rafidi reasonings like the following:
Imam Hussain was killed by Yazid…who was appointed by Mu’awiyah…who was appointed by ‘Uthman (who appointed Muawiyah Governor of Syria)…they stop here, wheras if one were to follow they zindeeqi logic one could go further and say: and the Prophet (ﷺ) befriended the likes of ‘Uthman and honoured him twice by giving ‘Uthman two of his daughters…and the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) was sent by Allah…so let’s blame all of them, wal-‘Ayadhubillah!
Throughout history, various Muslim schools (asides from the Twelver school) have claimed to be the inheritors of Ahlulbait’s legacy. Most classical Shi’ite schools, however, have perished, and only a few remain today. The few surviving schools, nevertheless, all claim to be representative of the teachings of the Prophet’s household.
By Abu Al-Abbas al-Shami and Ebn Hussein (Hassan Shemrani)
Twelver orthodoxy today asserts that those who fought ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) were apostates, they excommunicate most of the Sahabah anyway, but in particular the likes of Mu’awiyah, Talha, al-Zubayr, ‘Aisha (may Allah be pleased with them) and other companions of the Prophet (ﷺ) who were in any shape or form opposed ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib.
Islam came to eliminate saint and grave veneration from its very roots, especially in the forms of erected graves, shrines, mausoleums, statues, and images of revered figures. One of the greatest iconoclasts in Muslim history was none other but the Commander of the Believers, ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him, a role-model for all idol-breakers who are slandered today as ‘Wahhabis’:
What is the actual truth regarding the Zaydi (Zaydiyyah) Shia sect? How true is their claim to the Ahlul-Bayt (عليهم السلام) where they (like every Shia sect) claim to be their exclusive true followers (and everybody else is misguided)?
Imagine a king, a rightful king, who got dethroned by a bunch of thugs who conspired against him and eventually usurped his rights (and killed his wife and unborn child in the process of all of that).
Al-Hasan and al-Husayn (رضوان الله وسلامه عليهما) believed & fought for the sake of reviving Shurā and Khilāfah and not Persian-Sasanian like heredity Shia Imāmah.
One of the arguments and proofs (read spoofs) Rafidah always pull out when being confronted with the uselessness of their non-guiding ‘Imam’ (‘Mahdi’) is their diversion to other Awliyah and Prophets who went into some form of ‘hiding’. On the surface, their arguments might convince some gullible folks, the sharp-minded truth-seeker will however see through such pathetic arguments such as:
According to Shia, the Imam is present to guide the believers out of Lutf (divine bounty and grace). If he takes him away then it means Allah has not bestowed upon us his grace making him an unjust god according to Shia.
‘Who is the Imam of your time’ the Rafidah always ask Sunnis in discussions regarding Imamah. ‘Whoever died without an Imam he dies a death of jahilyyah’ they always quote (here>>> a thorough refutation of this and similar report) Now one thing is for sure, our Imam certainly isn’t some mythical ‘Mahdi’ who last time was seen in the Sirdab (basement/cellar) of Samarra (100% Sunni city) in Iraq and who is guiding nobody and nothing due to his so-called occultation.
The Mother of the Believers, Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her), not allowing Hasan ibn ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) to be buried next to the Prophet (ﷺ) is a fabrication, not a reliable report. Shias rely on these lies to fuel their hatred for the wives and companions of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ).
In every Aqidah book, including in Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah’s (‘Nasibis’) ‘Aqeedah al-Wasitiyyah you can read the testimony of Ahlus-Sunnah with regards to their love of Ahlul-Bayt that is based on a balance i.e. they neither hate the Ahlul-Bayt (like Nawasib) nor have fallen into extremism with them (like the Rawafid), it is a middle path where the Ahlul-Bayt are given their due right, love for them is incumbent upon every Muslim and the scholars of Islam from Bukhari to the smallest Muhaddith have filled their books with chapters of the merits of the Ahlul-Bayt.
Modern-day Afghanistan (Khorasan) is founded upon resistance against Rafidi Shiism and the Persian Rafidi Safavid Empire
By Ebn Hussein (Hassan Shemrani)
Some Twelver polemicists cite some statements of Sunni scholars who apparently regarded Imamah/Khilafah (rulership) as one of the Usūl (principles) of the Dīn in addition to declaring the one who rejects the Khilāfah of Abū Bakr and ‘Umar (رضي الله عنهما) as Kuffar.
Shaykh al-Islam Abul-‘Abbas Ibn Taymiyyah denounced and refuted Rafidis AND Nasibis:
In the name of Allah, all praise is due to Allah and may the Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon His final Messenger Muhammad al-Mustafa, his family and Companions, especially the Rightly Guided Caliphs, Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, ‘Umar al-Faruq, ‘Uthman Dhu al-Nurayn and ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, Assadullah al-Ghalib.
Celebrating that day is an innovation (bid’ah), and making it an anniversary for mourning is an innovation.
By Ebn Hussein
Sunni-Salafi scholars have always condemned extremism (tatarruf) and exaggeration (ghuluww) that heretical sects have perpetuated, innovated and propagated in the name of (or in opposition of) the Ahlul-Bayt, peace be upon them. By pondering over the statements presented in this treatise, the non-biased reader will clearly realise that Sunnis (Ahlus-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah) are the middle path between two extremes; namely the extremism of Rafidism (Imamite Shi’ism) and that of Nasibism (the Nasibah or Nawasib i.e. those who embrace the hate of Ali (r) and his family as part of their faith).
Are you aware of the famous hadith of Muadh ibn Jabal (ra) who was sent to the great people of Yemen to teach them Islam and its fundamentals?
I once had a discussion with a Rafidi telling him that calling oneself ‘dog of Ahlul-Bayt’ (or bitches for their females…) is repulsive (yet common and advocated by their top Ayatullats, just like some Sufis do), Ahlul-Bayt are free of impurity, simple.
Sunnis: The Prophet (ص) prohibited us from turning La’n into a habit (let alone a ritual).
Shia: But Allah sends la’nah in the Qur’an though.
Sunnis: No doubt, however, without specifying anybody in particular. Neither He nor his Messenger (ص) have instructed us to innovate entire cursing rituals and prayers as Shi’ism and its clergy have.
Shia: But in your own Sunni reports the Prophet (ص) cursed specific people.
Sunnis: Yes, to every rule there are exceptions, point is he never send la’nah on ANY of his companions (let alone instructing us to perform ritualised cursing marathons).
Visit to Khomeini’s grave:
Of course, during my stay in Iran I was also eager to visit the infamous Khomeini shrine (which even then resembled a Sassanian Zoroastrian palace rather than the modest grave of an alleged ascetic Muslim and leader of the oppressed).
Fact: Most Sahaba did NOT participate in the fitan and civil wars after the Prophet’s (s) demise, and even those who did were upon the same creed as Ali ibn Abi Talib (r) for the simple fact that (unlike Rafidi propaganda) the battles of Jamal and Siffin were not disputes about religion, rather they were political disputes (revenge for Othman etc.).