Khomeini’s popular slogan is:”NO SUNNI’ISM AND NO SHI’ISM.” This overt call of the Shi’i priest is designed for the consumption of the Sunni Muslims who constitute the Ummah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

However, like numerous verbal professions of the Shi’i priests are based on their doctrine of Taqiyah, so too, is this vociferous slogan of “No Sunni’ism and no Shi’ism.” (Taqiyah is the Shiah doctrine of holy hypocrisy by which it is permissible for them to conceal their true beliefs and profess verbally what they do not believe.) How is it possible for there not to be Sunni’ism? And, how is it possible for there not to be Shi’ism? The foundation on which Sunni’ism is reared is Love for the Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) while the cornerstone of Shi’ism is Hatred for the Sahaabah. The two religions, viz, Islam and Shi’ism are irreconcilable opposites. The one repels the other. The slogan of Khomeini is nothing other than a piece of political trickery to gain the support of the Ahlus Sunnah for the fulfilment of his despicable motives of political power. A group which pours out such extreme hatred for the Sahaabah of Nabi-e- Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) such as the Shiah sect, can never stand on the same platform as those whose article of faith includes Love and respect for all the Sahaabah. Shiahs who proclaim that the highest among the Sahaabah were murtads and kaafirs cannever themselves be Muslims. Such vile claimants cannever be the friends of those who follow the Path of Sunnah, the Path of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the illustrious Sahaabah.

Khomeini stated in a message for a youth rally:

“ The Islamic and non- Islamic powers of the world will not admit our power till such time that we establish our hold over Makkah and Madinah because these are the centres and citadels of Islam. Hence our domination over these places is an essential requirement. . . when as a conqueror I will enter Makkah and Madinah, the first thing to be done at that time by me would be to dig out two idols (i.e. Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar) lying by the side of the Prophet’s grave.” (Khomeinism & Islam - by Abu Rehan Faarooqi)

This attitude of Khomeini is not only his personal belief and personal hatred for the two greatest Sahaabah, but it mirrors the belief of Shi’ism regarding Hadhrat Abu Bakr Siddique and Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhuma). In the books of Shi’i theology, the following noxious beliefs are propagated:

* When Imaam Mahdi appears, he will order the exhumation of the bodies of Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar. Their bodies will be hung on a tree for public show. Their bodies which even according to Shi’ism have not decomposed, will be stripped of their kafan. Thus, the nude bodies of these noble Sahaabah will be put up for a disgraceful display.

* Imaam Mahdi will restore Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar to life.

* The sins of the entire mankind, right from the inception of the world until the time of Imaam Mahdi’s appearance, collectively devolves on these two noble Sahaabah. Hence, Imaam Mahdi will put them to death. They will then be revived and death will be continuously inflicted on them a thousand times daily, forever and ever. These corrupt and vile allegations are stated in the Shi’i book, Haqqul Yaqeen, the author of which is among the highest Shiah theologians, Mullah Baaqir who is also the author of another book Zaadul Ma’aad which likewise contains many vile fabrications about the Sahaabah. In his book, Zaadul Ma’aad, Mullah Baaqir asserts that:

* Hadhrat Umar, the second Khalifah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), was a Kaafir. Nauthubillah! Not only Kaafir, but the leader of the Munaafiqeen.

* Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had cursed Hadhrat Umar and had prayed for his destruction. As a result of the la’nat (curse) which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and Hadhrat Faatimah invoked on Umar (radhiallahu anhu) he was murdered by the Kaafir Persian, Lu’lu’.

*The murderer of Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhu), by virtue of having murdered Hadhrat Umar, deserves the mercy of Allah, hence, Hadhrat Huzaifah (according to Shi’i falsehood) prayed for Allah’s Rahmat to be on the Kaafir, Lu’lu’, the murderer of Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhu).

* The most auspicious day in the year is the day Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhu) was murdered and the virtues and excellences of this day stem from the murder of Umar. In honour of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu), Allah Ta’ala annually grants Shiahs three consecutive days in which they are permitted to sin freely. The Recording Angels are instructed to cease recording sins in these three days commencing on the day Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhu) was murdered. Three free days of sinning are among the ways of rejoicing the murder of Umar (radhiallahu anhu).

* Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhu) altered the Qur’aan Shareef and prevented others from Islam.

These corruptions as well as many other falsehoods are imputed by the Shiahs to Hadhrat Umar, the man about whom Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “If after me there had to be a Nabi, it would have been Umar.” “The most resolute in the Law of Allah is Umar.” But, Shi’i priests shout: “No Sunni’ism and no Shi’ism.”

The chasm which Shi`i Kufr has created between Islam and Shi`ism is unbridgeable.

ZUN-NOORAIN

While Shiahs claim that Hadhrat Uthmaan (radhiallahu anhu), the Third Khalifa, was the enemy of the Ahl-e-Bait (the Family of Rasulullah -sallallahu alayhi wasallam), Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) refuted this falsehood in practical terms by marrying two of his daughters to Hadhrat Uthmaan (radhiallahu anhu). When the one daughter died, Hadhrat Uthmaan married the other daughter of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). It is on account of this good fortune that Hadhrat Uthmaan (radhiallahu anhu) is known as Zun Noorian (The One of the Two Lights).

SHI’ISM IS NOT ISLAM

It is essential that Muslim sympathisers of the Shiahs divest themselves of the notion that Shi’ism is part of Islam– that it is just as one of the other four Math-habs which constitute the Ahlus Sunnah. Shi’ism is not Islam nor is it a sect of Islam. The ostentatious religious calls of an Islamic hue emanating from Khomeini and his clergy do not make Shi’ism any closer to Islam than the religious and ‘Islamic’ calls and slogans of religions such as Qadianism. Like Qadianism, Shi’ism too believes in the extension and perpetuation of Nubuwwat (Prophethood) after Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Although both religions (Qadianism and Shi’ism) overtly assert a belief in the finality of the Nubuwwat of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), they covertly believe by way of fallacious interpretation in the continuation of Nubuwwat.

Shi’i religious literature abundantly clarifies the fact that Shiahs believe in the continuation of Nubuwwat after Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The only cover presented by Shi’ism for this kufr belief is a name, viz., Imam. Instead of calling the one they believe to be a Prophet or a Nabi or Rasool, they describe him as an Imam, and instead of saying Nubuwwat they say Imaamat. But, in terms of Shi’i religion there is absolutely no difference between a Nabi or a Shi’i Imam. In fact, Shi’ism propagates the superiority of an Imam over a Nabi. Hence, Khomeini declares:

“It is one of the essential beliefs of our Shi’i school that no one can attain the spiritual status of the Imams, not even the cherubim or the prophets.”

(Writings and Declarations of Khomeini: Islam & Revolution)

In the same book, Khomeini states:

“In fact, according to traditions that have been handed down to us, the Most Noble Messenger and the Imams existed before the creation of the world in the form of lights situated beneath the divine throne: They were superior to other men even in the sperm from which they grew and in their physical composition.”

“ The Prophet himself said: We have states with God that are beyond the reach of the cherubim and the prophets.”

“It is part of our belief that the Imams too enjoy similar states. . .”

It is thus clear from the above excerpts that Shi’ism asserts the superiority of its Imams above the ranks of the other Ambiya (alayhimus salaam). In fact, they even assert the superiority of Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu) over Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Insha ’Allah, we will show from their writings that the Shi’i priests believe that Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu) is higher in rank than even Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). In Vol.1 of Al-Kaafi, the work of the Shi’i authority, Al-Kulaini, the following appears on page 223:

“A man said to him (Abu Ja’far): O son of Rasulullah! ‘ Has Ameerul Mu’mineen (Hadhrat Ali) greater knowledge or some of the Ambiya?’ Abu Ja’far said: ‘ Listen to what he says! ‘Verily, I have explained to him that Allah has bestowed to Muhammad the knowledge of all the Ambiya and most assuredly He has bestowed all of it to Ameerul Mu’mineen. And he (the questioner) asks me if he (Hadhrat Ali) has greater knowledge or some of the Ambiya.”

Al- Kaafi is one of the most authoritative books in Shiah theology. Kulaini, the author is regarded by the Shiah clergy to be one of their top ranking authorities. Thus, in the Shiah book, Shi’ite Islam by the Shiah priest, Tabatabai, Al-Kaafi is praised in the following terms:

“The book of Kulaini known as Kaafi is divided into three parts. . . .It is the most trustworthy and celebrated work of Hadith known in the Shi’ite world.”

From the aforementioned extracts, it will be seen that according to Kulaini’s “most trustworthy and celebrated” work of Hadith, the knowledge of all the Ambiya has been bestowed to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the knowledge of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and all the Ambiya has been awarded to Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu).

That it is a Shi’i conception that Imaamat is a continuation of Nubuwwat, there is no doubt. Their beliefs as propounded by their own authorities unequivocally assert total equality between Nubuwwat and Imaamat, in fact, Imaamat is even accepted to be superior to Nubuwwat by the Shi’i religion. The Shi’i book, “The Faith of Shia Islam” states: “We believe that Imaamat is one of the fundamentals of Islam and that man’s faith cannever be complete without belief in it. It is wrong to imitate our fathers, family or teachers in this matter, even if we respect them, for it is just as necessary rationally to consider Imaamat as it is to consider Tauheed and Nubuwwah.”

“We believe that, just as it is necessary for Allah to send someone as a prophet, so it is also necessary for Him to appoint an Imaam.”

“The Imaamat is therefore a continuation of a prophethood, and the reasoning

which proves the former’s necessity is the same as that which prove the latter’s.” “We believe that, like the prophet, an Imam must be infallible, that is to say incapable of making errors or doing wrong, either inwardly or outwardly. . .”

“Their (i.e. the Shi’i Imams) position in regard to Islam is the same as the Prophet’s, and the reasoning which necessitates their infallibility is the same as that which necessitates the Prophet’s infallibility, and there is no difference between them in matters.”

There is no difference of opinion among the Shiahs regarding their belief of the equality between Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Imams of Shi’ism. The abovementioned statements testify to this claim.

The same book, viz., “The Faith of Shia Islam” , states:

“We believe that the Imaamat, like Prophethood, must be an appointment from Allah through His Messenger, or an appointed Imam. From this point of view, the Imaamat is the same as the Prophethood.”

No one should therefore labour under the misapprehension that Shi’ism believes in the Islamic concept of Finality of Nubuwwah. The Qadianis claim to believe in the Finality of Nubuwwah, but their devious interpretation of this concept opens the way for them to accept Mirza Ghulam as a Nabi. In the same way, the Shiahs believe in the continuation of Nubuwwah inspite of their claim to believe in the Finality of the Nubuwwah of Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Each and every attribute, office, function and institution exclusive with Nubuwwah is asserted for the Imams by the Shiahs. One who studies the religious literature of the Shiahs will not fail to understand that on only this one basis of Imaamat, the Shiahs are not Muslims.

Rejection of a Nabi is kufr. One who does not believe in a Nabi is a Kaafir. This is the belief of Islam. But according to the Shiah religion, belief in Imaamat is Fardh just as Fardh as it is to believe in Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). According to Shi’ism, one who denies any of the Shi’i Imams–-one who does not accept any of the Shi’i Imams–-is a Kaafir. Propounding this view, the Shi’i authority, Kulaini, states in his “most trustworthy and celebrated work of Hadith”, Al- Kaafi:

“We (i.e. the Imams) are those whose obedience Allah has made Fardh. . . Whoever denies us is a Kaafir.”

This belief in Shi’ism categorically indicates that the Shi’i religion regards its Imams as Ambiya. All those who do not subscribe to the Shi’i doctrine of Imaamat are branded as Kaafirs by the Shiah religion. This is an indisputable fact in terms of Shiah theological writings. It is entirely another matter for Khomeini and the present Shiah clergy to ostensibly claim that they regard Sunnis as Muslims. Such devious statements are based on the Shiah doctrine of Taqiyah (holy hypocrisy) and stem from pernicious political motives.

***************************

JANNAT FOR THE MUHAAJIREEN AND ANSAAR

While the Shiahs gorge our hatred and malice for the Sahaabah, Allah Ta`ala declares His Love and Pleasure for these noble Sahaabah of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam):

“THEY WHO WENT AHEAD (TAKING PRECEDENCE OVER ALL) AMONG THE MUHAAJIREEN AND ANSAAR AND THOSE WHO FOLLOWED THEM IN GOODNESS, ALLAH IS WELL-PLEASED WITH THEM AND THEY ARE WELL-PLEASED WITH HIM. HE HAS PREPARED GARDENS (IN PARADISE) BELOW WHICH FLOW RIVERS. THEREIN THEY WILL DWELL FOREVER. THAT IS THE GREATEST SUCCESS.” [SURAH TAWBAH]

WHO ARE THE SHIAH?

Shi’ism’s fundamental basis–-the cornerstone of its religion–-is its principle of reviling, abusing and rejecting the Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The murderers of Hadhrat Uthmaan (radhiallahu anhu) realised that their politically and nafsaani inspired movement cannever be successful as long as the authority of Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) Sahaabah is retained. They had, therefore, no alternative other than raising the structure of Shi’ism on the basis of opinion which necessitated the denial of the authority of the Companions of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They thus propagated the doctrine of the rejection of the Sahaabah with brutal blasphemy, which they shamelessly attributed to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Their religion is based on the vilification of those whom Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) loved so dearly and whose authority is established, not on the basis of opinion and love, but on the basis of Divine Directive. Without the Sahaabah there can be no Islam, no Qur’aan, no Sunnah, no Shariah, no Imaan. The Deen of Allah Ta’ala came to us and to all and will continue to travel to the end of time by means of Naql (authoritative and authentic narration), the first link in the chain of narration and transmission joining us with Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) being the noble Sahaabah. But, Shi’ism has broken that very first and vital link with Nabi-e- Kareem. They thus have no Shar’i authority and no Shar’i proof for their beliefs of the nafs. The way they have tried to overcome this hurdle is by their doctrine of fabricating Ahaadith to substantiate their claims.

Nifaaq or hypocrisy is a principle of the Shi’i religion. They technically term such hypocrisy as Taqiyah which means the permissibility to conceal one’s true beliefs for the sake of any expediency. Thus they attribute even such hypocrisy to Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu). It is the Shi’i belief that although Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu) believed that Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhuma) usurped the Khilaafat and deliberately betrayed Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) he nevertheless pledged loyalty to these senior Sahaabah on account of some political expediency. This blatant baatil and blasphemy attributed to Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu) exhibit the crookedness of Shi’i mentality.

The Shiahs who have gone out of their way to belittle the Sahaabah and to drop them from the pedestal of authority which the Shariah assigns to them cannever be the lovers of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) nor can Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) have love for such miscreants of belief. About hatred for his Sahaabah, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:”Those who hate the Sahaabah, hate them because [in reality] they hate me.”

It is a Shi’i contention that the great Sahaabah, especially Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan, etc.(radhiallahu anhum) did not understand the teachings of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They further shamelessly and blasphemously assert that these illustrious Khulafa Raashideen are usurpers, frauds, fabricators of Ahaadith and wholly incompetent in Deeni matters. Indeed, the la’natof Allah Ta’ala must be on such slanderers as the Shi’i clergy who make such wicked assertions. Inspite of their slander being shocking and despicable in the extreme, it is not surprising since they are the worst fabricators and frauds peddling their nafsaani opinions in the name of Islam and attributing it to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They have accused the Sahaabah of being involved in conspiracies to eliminate Islam and supplant it with the Arab tribal systems of the time of jaahiliyyah. The blasphemous drivel which clutters their books and preachings exhibits their wickedness and detestation for the Islam of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

Inspite of the open venom which the Shiahs spit against the Sahaabah, the ignorant supporters of the Shiahs among the Ahlus Sunnah expect the Ulama to raise slogans of brotherhood and to fabricate a common basis and a common platform of fraternity with the enemies of Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) Companions. They expect the Ummah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to unite with those whose very religion is reared on hatred for the Sahaabah. No, that cannever come to pass. The enemies of Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) Sahaabah cannever be the friends and the brothers of the Ahlus Sunnah. There is no apologetism in our capital for such ventures. We know of no diplomacy and recognize no expediency for such vile brotherhood . If unity and brotherhood with all and sundry are of such importance, let the supporters of the Shi’i clergy advocate unity and brotherhood with shaitaan and Qadianism as well.

We unequivocally maintain that those (the Shiahs) who claim that Hadhrat Zubair, Talhah and Aishah (radhiallahu anhum) are Jahannami (inmates of the fire) are our enemies. In fact they themselves are Jahannami. Only those standing in line to be condemned to Jahannum can be so shameless as to say that these illustrious Sahaabah among the Asha’arah Mubashsharah and the beloved wife of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) are Jahannami. May Allah Ta’ala save us from uttering such kufr.

Muslims should now realize that it is haraam to support in any way the Shiahs. Support for Khomeini and the Shi’i clergy is support offered to the enemies of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

What does the intelligence and Imaan of Muslims direct and conclude? Does the Imaan of the Mu’min opine that the Shiahs are in the Naaji (the saved) group or the Sahaabah? Will the Sahaabah be in the one sect which will go to Jannat or in the 72 sects condemned to hell? Will the Shiahs be despatched to Jannat and Hadhrat Aishah, Talhah, Zubair, Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan(radhiallahu anhum) to Jahannum as the Shi’i clergy asserts? What does your Imaan tell you? Who will be in Jahannum? The beloved wives and Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) or the Shiah clergy of Iran?

SOME OPINIONS OF SHIAHS

1. HADHRAT ABU HURAIRAH (radhiallahu anhu)

The name of Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (radhiallahu anhu) is familiar to most Muslims. About this eminent Sahaabi and narrator of Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) Ahaadith, Khomeini of Iran says:

“God knows what misfortunes Islam has suffered from its inception down to the present at the hands of these evil ‘ Ulama’. Abu Hurairah was one of the fuqaha, but God knows what judgements he falsified for Muawiyyah and others like him, and what damage he inflicted upon Islam.” But when a faqih like Abu Hurairah or a judge like Shuraiyh joins such a government, he improves its standing while besmirching the reputation of Islam.”

Commenting on this statement of Khomeini, Hamid Algar the complier of Khomeini’s writings declarations, states:

“Shi’i scholars have regarded him is unreliable and even dishonest.”

But, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) made special du`aa for Abu Hurairah in respect of narration of Ahaadith, hence we observe the Ahaadith in abundance narrated by him. The following statement bears out he love which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had for Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (radhiallahu anhu):

“O Allah! Endear this, your servant (Abu Hurairah ) and his mother to your believing servants and endear the believers to them.”
(Muslim)

Thus those who are Believers love Abu Hurairah (radhiallahu anhu). Those who are unbelievers detest Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (radhiallahu anhu).

2. HADHRAT SAMURA BIN JUNDUB (radhiallahu anhu)

Khomeini, slandering the eminent Sahaabi, Hadhrat Samura Bin Jundub (radhiallahu anhu) says:

“Dissemination of the ordinances of Islam, as well as the teaching and instruction of the people, is the duty of the fuqaha who are just. For if they are not just, they will be like those who forged traditions harmful to Islam, like Samura Ibn Jandab, who forged traditions hostile to the Commander of the Faithful.”

3. HADHRAT TALHA, ZUBAIR AND AISHAH (radhiallahu anhum)

Mutahhiri, a leading cleric of the Shiah religion, says:

“Now that we see Ali, and Ammaar, Uwais al-Qarni and others face to face with Aishah and Az Zubair and Talhah, we do not feel any hesitation, for we see the second group as people with the look of criminals, that is, the effects of evil and treachery are evident on their faces; and when we look at their faces and their treacherous characters we guess that they are people of the fire.”

(TEHRAN TIMES, 25th August, 1982)

From the above vile remarks made by one of Khomeini’s leading Shi’i theologies, it will be evident that the Shiah religion describes Hadhrat Aishah Siddiqah (radhiallahu anha), the beloved wife of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) as criminal, evil, treacherous and among the people of Jahannum– Nauthubillah! But, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) warned:

“Do not hurt me regarding Aishah.” (Bukhaari and Muslim)

“The superiority of Aishah over women is like the superiority over Thareed [a kind of food] over all food.” (Muslim)

“O Aishah! Jibraeel recites Salaam upon you.” (Muslim)

In the Shiah religion, Hadhrat Zubair (radhiallahu anhu) is described as a criminal,evil, treacherous and among the people of Jahannum–-Nauthubillah! But, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said about Zubair:

“Every Nabi had a hawaari [helper], and my Hawaari is Zubair.”

“Zubair will be in Jannat.” (Tirmizi)

Hadhrat Zubair and Hadhrat Talhah whom the Shiahs claim are among the “people of the Fire”, are in fact members of the Ashrah Mubash-sharah who are the ten Sahaabah to whom Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) delivered the glad tidings of Jannat. These Sahaabah already were informed by Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) that their place in Jannat has already been secured, but Khomeini and his Shiahs believe that these noble men are among the people of the Fire.

The Shiahs believe that Hadhrat Talhah (radhiallahu anhu) is evil, treacherous, a criminal and among the people of the Fire, but Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“ Talhah and Zubair will be my two neighbours in Jannat.” (Tirmizi)

4. HADHRAT ABU BAKR, UMAR AND UTHMAAN (radhiallahu anhum)

“At last the first Caliph died, but while going he appointed another to fill this vacancy. It is not astonishing that during his lifetime he was always badly in need of the help of others to compensate for his imperfections and defects and to cover his faults and failures, but at the time of his death he thought himself to be wise and learned enough to fix and appoint somebody to carry on the duties at which he was a complete failure himself.

Boldly and unscrupulously he and his successor [ a reference to Hadhrat Umar], each in turn, pillaged and plundered the wealth of the community leaving the state in such sadly injured condition that the passage of time was increasing the intensity of the injury. ....But it was carried on under the guise of law and order and many unacceptable excuses were offered to justify these irreligious and ungodly arrogations and many more will be repeated in the future.

Consequently the third [ i.e. Hadhrat Uthmaan] proudly took charge of the Khilaafat, as if it was a private grazing ground, and with bloated stomachs he and members of his clan [ Bani Umayyah] started plundering the wealth of the Muslim world in the same reckless gluttonous manner which characterizes a camel when it devours harvest grass. However, this man died an untimely death. The greed of his clan was the cause of his undoing.” (Nahjul Balaaghah)

5. HADHRAT AMR IBNUL A’S (radhiallahu anhu)

Another lie which the Shiahs attribute to Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu) is the following statement:

“ You know very well that Amer-Ibn Aas himself is an inveterate liar, he usually lies, he makes promises without intention of fulfilling them....he habitually breaks his pledges, never keeps a promise and is unkind and unmerciful. In the battlefield before the swords are drawn and fight begins, he is usually very bold in giving orders and very conspicuous in pretension of leading the army; but when the fight actually begins his greatest tactic is to show his opponents his naked buttocks.” (Nahjul Balaaghah)

AmeerulMu’mineenHadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu) never uttered such falsehood, slander, abuse, insult and vulgarity. Such abuse and vituperation are the stock weapons of Shi’ism. Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu) had he utmost respect and honour for Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Hadhrat Umar and Hadhrat Uthmaan (radhiallahu anhum). In fact, Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu) took the oath of allegiance (ba’yt) on the hands of the first three Khulafa Raashideen. Furthermore, Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu) could never have spoken so disparagingly of the great Conqueror of Islam, viz., Hadhrat Amr Ibnul A’s (radhiallahu anhu) who was among the top-ranking Companions of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

6. THE SAHAABAH

About the Sahaabah in general, Murtaza Mutahhiri the cleric of the Shia religion, says:

“...the fundamentals of Islam were violated at the hands of these very people who had served Islam for a long time...”

So, according to Shi’ism, Hadhrat Abu Bakr , Umar, Uthmaan and the vast majority of the Sahaabah who had served Islam, in the end turned their backs on Islam and violated the fundamentals of Islam. If those great and illustrious Sons of Imaan and Islam did so, do we expect Khomeini and the Shiahs who sprang from the murder of Ameerul Mu`mineen, Hadhrat Uthmaan (radhiallahu anhu) to uphold the fundamentals of Islam? The villainy of Hadhrat Uthmaan’s murderers permeates and sustains the entire Shi’i movement, hence Mutahhiri could be so callous to make the above-quoted observation in denigration of the beloved Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The above statement appeared inTehran Times of 25th August,1982.

7. RASULULLAH (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)

In another kufr aspersion cast against the mission of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the Shi’i priest, Baaqir Sadr states:

“ Everything that has gone before proves that the instructions given by the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wasallam] to the Muhaajirun and the Ansaar did not reach a level which would have been necessitated by the conscious, intellectual and political preparation required to guide the future path of Da’wa and the process of change which had been instigated by the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wasallam].”