Questions for Sunni Brothers

8/8/2019 Questions for Sunni Brothers

1/23

In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

Dear Sunni `Ulama, may Allah protects you all,

Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh,

We hope that you are enjoying yourselves, and we beg Allah, theMaster,to protect you. We hereby, present to you some questions

regardingreligion and beliefs. And we would like to receive your

kind answers andexplanations.

We would like to Thank you in advance for your response.

Yours sincerely,

A group of your brothers.

Question No.1

The books of Sihah, especially the sahih of al-Bukhari and Muslim,bothhave conveyed hadiths from the Holy Prophet (s.w.) in which

manyhuman characteristics such as face, eyes, hands, fingers,

legs, feet, andetc... have been attributed to Allah. In those hadithsit is also said that Helaughs, has a certain place, He comes down

from heaven to theterrestrial world, and soon [ 1].

Now, our question is:

a\ How could the ancestors accept such fabricated hadiths? Whydidn'tthey check the chain of narrators of these hadiths? Does not

thesehadiths clearly refer to incarnation?

b\ How could the ancestors urge the Muslims to believe in theoutwardmeaning of such hadiths without searching the

inwardmeaning [ 2], sincetheir outward meaning forces us to

believe in the incarnation of Allah,and the Sunnis do not believe inincarnation, especially when it is to beattributed to Allah, the

Exalted?

c\ The same Sihah have conveyed other part of prophetic hadithswhichdeclare that a human being can see Allah, the Exalted, by his

naturaleyes, and that in the Dooms Day He shall appear to those

who see as afullmoon [ 3]. According to this, all Sunni scholars,

narrators, and theimams of the four main sects of Islam, believethat it is possible to seeAllah, the Exalted, and have considered

that as one of the principles thatconsist theirbelief [ 4]. Moreover,

imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal regardsanyone who does not believe inthe possibility of seeing Allah as anirreligious infidel and a

polytheist (tafseer al-Manar, vol.9, p.135).


2/23

Here, we ask:

Does not the meaning of those hadiths contradict the concepts of

theHoly Quran in which Allah, the Exalted says:"Visioncomprehends Himnot, and He comprehends (all) vision..."(Anàm:

103); and "he said: MyLord! show me (Thyself), so that I may look

upon Thee. He said: Youcannot (bear to) see Me..."(A`raaf: 143);and "nothing like a likeness ofHim"(Shura: 11); and "And when you

said: O Musa! we will not believe inyou untill we see Allah

manifestly, so the punishment overtook you whileyou lookedon"(Baqarah: 55).

And does not such a notion contradict rational intelligence, since

lookingupon something requires that the seen thing exists in a

certain place,and that it is a certain distance away from looker.Consequently, both thelooker and the seen thing shall be in front

of each others, and suchcondition cannot apply to the Creator, the

Exalted, because that meansthat His Holy Essence must be

regarded as a certain material; and thus,He shall be in need of anabode and direction. But, as we know, suchconditions are only

related to materials, and it is also known that theSunni ùlama donot believe in incarnation?

Now, if these hadiths are contrary to the Holy Quran and

rationalintelligence, then how could Sunni ùlama accept them and

agree uponthem without even discussing their chains of narratorsordocumentation? However, is it correct to agree on these hadiths

onlybecause they have been mentioned in the two Sahihs?

Question No.2

Many Sunni ùlama do not agree with most of MuhammadAbdulWahhab's opinions. Some of those opinions are:

1- He considers the imitation of an imam of the four famous

Islamic sectsas heresy and illegal.2- He regards all Muslims as polytheists because of the rites

andceremonies they are performing, while imam Abi Hanifa does

not agreeon considering any Muslim as a polytheist.

3- He thinks that even the prophets shall undergo an ordinary lifeafterdeath, and that they shall not be distinguished from other

human beingsduring the isthmian interval, while the Hanafi ùlama

believe that theprophets shall have distinguished life after theirdeath, moredistinguishing than the isthmian interval. They also

explain the reasonwhy the Prophet's wives were forbidden to other

men. They say that thisis because the Prophet (s.w.) is alive evenafter his death.

4- He considers visiting the Prophet's tomb as illegal and heresy,

whileSunnis regard it as mustahabb, and sometimes, according to

some oftheir ùlama it is wajib.


3/23

5- He considers the celebration of the Prophet's birthday as

heresy,while the majority of Muslims regard it as mustahabb.

6- He considers Qunoot (raising of the hands for duà while inprayer) aheresy, while the rest of the Muslims regard it as a part of

duà.

7- Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab and his followers considers theritesthat a dervish (murshid) practices in the majalis of dhikr and

otherspiritual ceremonies is mere heresy, while the majority of

Muslimsconsiders it as a recommended act in order to have morespiritualpotential [potential [ 1].

8- The same Abdul Wahhab and followers consider asking

intercessionfrom the Holy Prophet (s.w.) and other saints as illegal

(haram) and as atype of polytheism, but we see that SunniMuslims are performing that.

These wicked and extreme opinions of Muhammad ibn Abdul

Wahhabare strongly refuted by the ancestors of the Sunni

Muslims. They alsohave compiled lots of books regarding thisissue, in which they couldprove the vanity of such opinions in

comparison with the Holy Quran andthe prophetic sunnah.Ibn Àbdeen, a grand Sunni scholar, had described the followers

ofAbdul Wahhab as the historical sect called Khawarij who

rebelled againstImam Ali (a.s.), because, as he thought, both

sects are pretending thatthey are the only representatives of Islamand that all other Muslim sectsare infidel, and they should be

slaughtered along with theirscholars [ 2].

However, in these days, in spite of this great differencebetweenSunnism and Wahhabism, we witness that the relationship

between bothsects has improved - and the Sunnis have given up

their struggle againstthe Wahhabis.Thus, we ask: Can this approaching and harmonization be

consideredas a conclusion for the harmonization occurred

between the two schoolsof thought? Shall that be a retreat of onepart towards the other part? Orcan we consider that as a result of

the political and economicalpressures?

Question No.3

Without doubt, the main issue that caused the division of the

Muslimsinto two sects, Sunni and Shià, is the different opinion ofeach secttowards Imamate and Caliphate after the demise of the

Holy Prophet(s.w.). Shià says that imamate, like any other

religious issues, must beunder the control of Islamic legislation,and that the succeeding andelecting of an imam as a successor

and vicegerent of the Holy Prophet(s.w.) must be according to

Allah's commandment through His Prophet -since imamate is a

continuation of the prophecy, especially in its majorobligations.


4/23

Imamate is the method by which a society is guided - it isthe

faithful custodian of the religion that holds its main duties to

beguidance and upbringing.The Sunnis, on the other hand, believe that imamate is a matter

that hasa close relationship with the ummah (nation). That is to say

that it isupon the ummah to elect the appropriate leader, as it istheir exclusiveright to do so.

However, the Shi`ites have their own demonstrations, both rational

andconclusive, to prove their belief about imamate, some of whichare asfollows:

1- It is impossible that the Holy Prophet had left the issue of

imamatewithout specifying and appointing his successor. This is

because themost critical issue after his demise would have beenthe rational andpolitical leadership. Without a responsible

leadership there shall be agreat vacancy which may cause serious

catastrophe to the Muslims,especially if we take into consideration

the dangerous of internal divisionsof the Islamic ummah - betweenthe Ansars, the Muhajireen, and - thewicked factor inside the heart

of the ummah - the hypocrites whose aimalways was to destroyIslam. This is in addition to outside factors, whichwere threatening

the ummah at that time. Thus, it would not bereasonable for an

apostolic leader to neglect this critical issue - letting itpass by

without giving it any heed. Hence, Muhammad (s.w.), as theSeal ofthe Prophets and he who Allah had said about him: "Certainly

anApostle has come to you from among yourselves; grievous to

him isyour falling into distress, excessively solicitous respectingyou; to thebelievers (he is) compassionate, merciful"[Tawbah:

128], must fulfill thisjob very accurately.

If we check the texts of the Holy Quran we can discover that theHolyLegislator had paid great attention to the issue of writing a will,

statingthat a man must write his will so that his children and

relatives may notsuffer from confusion and unexpected conflicts,as the Quranic versedeclares: "Bequest is prescribed for you

when death approaches one ofyou, if he leaves behind wealth for

parents and near relatives, accordingto usage, a duty (incumbent)

upon those who guard (against evil)[Baqarah: 180]".A prophetic tradition said,"Whosoever dies without writing a will,

thencertainly he shall die as a pagan". This tradition informs us that

theLegislator (Allah) is very precise with a personal matter such asthewriting of a will; so, how can such an important matter like

"leadership"be neglected - leaving the Islamic ummah to face

unperceived destiny?!Now, let us suppose that the Holy Prophet (s.w.) didn't refer to

thisserious issue, wasn't it his companions' duty to ask him about

the matterof succession?

Therefore, in conclusion, because of the circumstances of the


5/23

Islamicummah at that time, there was need to give special care to

such anissue.

2- According to what has been said, it is normal that the HolyProphet(s.w.) stands positively beside this sensitive case and

declares the mainpoints of the succession after him. Thus, we

cannot possibly supposebut one of two probabilities: (1) either theProphet (s.w.) has to politicallybring up the Muhajireen and Ansar

according to the rules of a shura(counsel) - when they want to

elect a leader (whether spiritual orpolitical). After showing them thebases of how to practise such an act,for example, appointing a

so-called committee consisting of membersfrom both parties (i.e.

Muhajireen and Ansar), or it was upon him toappoint a certain

person who is capable to hold this heavyresponsibility.It is clear that history didn't convey to us any trace of the first

probability,neither through the Holy Prophet's (s.w.) attitudes, nor

in the policy ofthe caliphs after him. Therefore, the second

probability seems to bemore logical.3- A quick and brief look at the series of events that the

Prophet'smission has undergone, from the first moments of themission until thelast seconds when his holy soul was leaving this

world, we come to thisconclusion that the Holy Prophet (s.w.) had

referred in many occasionsto Imam Ali's (s.a) virtues, great status,

and other unique characteristics,showing that he is the bestamong the Prophet's companions. Inaddition to this, Ali was

brought up by the Holy Prophet (s.w.) himself; hewas the first male

who believed in the Prophet's mission and the onlyMuslim whonever bowed to an idol before. Moreover, Imam Ali spentmost of

his life accompanying the Holy Prophet (s.w.). Imam

Aliparticipated in almost all the battles that occured between theMuslimsand the polytheists, and he was sipping on the pure cup of

knowledgedirectly from the Holy Prophet (s.w.). All Imam Ali's

behaviour, piety,worshipping, and etc... were indifferent to those ofthe Holy Prophet(s.w.). Most of the heroes from among the

polytheist were slaughteredby Imam Ali's sword in the battles of

Badr, Uhud, Khaybar, Khandaq,and other famous wars. There was

only one battle that Imam Ali did notparticipate in; it was the battleof Tabook, when the Holy Prophet (s.w.)himself ordered him to

stay in Medina and protect it from anyunexpected attack. Before

the battle of Khaybar, the Holy Prophet (s.w.)said, describingImam Ali,: "I am going to give the banner of this battle toa man

who loves Allah and His Apostle, and Allah and His Apostle

lovehim too. A man who is combative."[1] And when the HolyProphet (s.w.)ordered him to stay in Medina, he said to him,"You

have the same rank,with me, that Aaron had with his brother

Moses, except that there is notany prophet after me."[2] The Holy

Prophet also had said, "I am the cityof knowledge, and Ali is its


6/23

gate"[3], and "Ali is the best of judges amongyou."[4] He also said,

"Ali moves with Quran, and Quran moves with Ali;they won't

separate from each other until they both arrive to me nearthePool"[5], and "Ali moves with truth and truth turns with him

wherever heturns,"[6], and "No one loves Ali save a believer, and

no one hates himsave a hypocrite"[7] and other traditions whichhave been agreed uponby all Muslims and were mentioned in their

sihah.

A tradition was narrated for the benefit of Imam Ali (a.s.), his wife(Fatimaal-Zahra (a.s.)) and their two beloved sons, al-Hasan and

al-Husayn(a.s.), that the Holy Prophet (s.w.) had said, "O my Lord!

these are themembers of my family." and upon this Allah sent

down verses to himsaying, "Allah only desires to keep away theuncleanness from you, Opeople of the House! and to purify you a

(thorough) purifying" (Ahzab:33); and "But whoever disputes with

you in this matter after what hascome to you of knowledge, they

say: Come let us call our sons and yoursons and our women andyour women and our near people and yournear people, then let us

be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse ofAllah on the liars."(Aal `Imran: 61) Allah also says, "Say: I do not ask ofyou any

reward for it but love for my near relatives" (Shuraa: 23), and"And

they give food out of love for Him to the Poor and the orphan

andthe captive." (al-Dahr: 8) Another verse mentioned about themis: "OnlyAllah is your Vali and His Apostle and those who believe,

those whokeep up prayers and pay the poor-rate while they bow"

(Ma'idah: 55),and "... and that the retaining ear might retain it"(Haqqah: 12), and manyother holy verses.

All these Quranic verses and in addition to prophetic traditions

arereferring to the preference of Imam Ali over others as a leader,Imam andcaliph after the Holy Prophet (s.w.). Rather, the Holy

Prophet (s.w.) hadopenly declared this by the command of Allah

Who ordered him saying,"O Apostle! deliver what has beenrevealed to you from your Lord; and ifyou do it not, then you have

not delivered His message, and Allah willprotect you from the

people" (Ma'idah: 67). This verse descended on theDay of

Ghadeer, during his (s.w.) return from Mecca. When hedeliveredthis verse, he ordered the pilgrims to perform the

prayers. After that, hedelivered an oration wherein he said, "Am I

not the Master of you all?",the whole crowd answered: Sure, OApostle of Allah. He continued,"Then, whosoever I am his master,

Ali is his master. O Allah! be fried towhom he becomes his friend,

and be enemy to whom he becomes hisenemy..."[14]Even, the Holy Prophet (s.w.), in the last moments of his life he

wantedto put his speech in a written legal form and to call the

companions towitness this action; thus, he called the companions

- and `Umar ibnal-Khattab was among them. When the Holy


7/23

Prophet (s.w.) began hisspeech, Ùmar immediately got the point

and retained the aim of theProphet's call, so he (i.e. Ùmar) said :

It is obvious that pain and illnesshave overcame the Prophet(s.w.)!!! Other narrators declared that Ùmarrather said, "It is clear

that the Prophet is hallucinating. The Book of Allahis sufficient for

us"!!! The companions were then divided into two groups,oneaccepted the suggestion of Ùmar, and the other protested

againsthis rough words and manner. And when they began to

argue loudly, theHoly Prophet (s.w.) said to them, "Go away andleave me alone!"

In a dialogue that occurred between Ùmar and Ibn Abbas, Ùmar

said,"The Apostle of Allah saved a serious sentence and he

wanted to say itin that gathering during his last illness. A sentencethat cannot be refutedby any pretension or excuse. He wanted Ali

to sit on his throne after him.He was about to mention Ali's name,

but I stood between him and that."This same dialogue has also

been mentioned in (Sharhu Nahjil Balagha)by Ibn Abi al-Hadeed,vol.III, p.141, published by Dar al-Fikr, and invol.III, p.764 of

Maktabat al-Hayat's publication.4- Now, because the legal caliphate was the right of Ali, he and the

restof Bani Hashim, and many other companions refused to give

allegianceto Abu Bakr after the gathering of Saqifah. Imam Ali did

not giveallegiance to Abu Bakr at that time, rather, after severalmonths hadpassed. And his giving of allegiance to Abu Bakr was

only to protect theIslamic ummah from unexpected troubles or

calamities; and it was a wayto protect the Muslims from divisionand argumentation.

However, Imam Ali showed in many occasions, in the presence of

manycompanions, his objection (to this sistuation) and that it is hisright, priorto anyone else, to have the caliphateship in his hand.

5- Some Muslims may say that it is not logical to say that the

Prophet'scompanions, who are considered the elite of theMuslims, have rebelledagainst his (the Prophet's) will to give the

caliphate to Imam Ali. TheShiìtes' answer to this suspicion, is that

by studying the biographies ofsome of the Prophet's companions

we can discover that many of themhave considering themselvesas the most appropriate persons to be theProphet's successor;

and many times and on many occasions they wereopposed the

Prophet's suggestions or orders - especially thosesuggestionsand orders that concerned the relationship of public affairsand

policy, wars, administrations, and so on. This was clear even

duringthe lifetime of the Holy Prophet (s.w.) and became moreclear after hisdemise. They were giving themselves the right to

discuss the Prophet'scommands and to argue against any of his

proposals. Ùmar ibnal-Khattab was the leader of such a group. It

was he who protestedagainst the Prophet's acceptance of the


8/23

treaty between the Muslims andthe polytheists of Mecca, known

as "Sulh al-Hudaybiyah". Ùmar also wasthe one who refuted the

Holy Prophet's legislation called "mutàh of Hajj".Othercompanions refused to join the army of Usamah ibn Zayd

whomwas prepared by the command of the Holy Prophet (s.w.)

himself. Hehad appointed Usamah ibn Zayd to be a commander ina battle againstthe Romans - exactly few days before his demise.

Ùmar also preventedthe attendants from bringing the paper and

ink which the Holy Prophet(s.w.) had requested to write someimportant text.

Here, our question is: Did not all these rational and intellectual

reasonsand proofs indicate on the fact that the Holy Prophet had

indeedappointed Ali to be his successor and the caliph after him?Some of theProphet's companions were planning, even during his

lifetime, to concealthis important issue; and, thus, transferring the

caliphateship from theHouse of Bani Hashim to some men of

Quraysh, for legal and maybesometimes illegal purposes - Godknows the truth. If so, then why doessome Islamic sects, other

than the Shià, blame the Shiìtes for adheringto the Household ofthe Holy Prophet (s.w.)?

Question No.4

The historical records relate that Fatima al-Zahra (a.s.), the

daughter ofthe Holy Prophet (s.w.), was angry with the two shaykhs

(i.e. Abu Bakrand Ùmar) until she died. For this very reason sherequested herhusband, Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.), to bury her in

secret, permitting only afew of the very close companions of the

Holy Prophet (s.w.) such asSalman al-Farsi and Abu Tharr to knowof her barial. She also askedImam Ali to conceal her grave, as a

form of protest.

The reasons for this protestation can be explained as follows:1- Ùmar's and his followers attacked the house of Imam Ali (a.s.)

andset it on fire. This was done in order to force Imam Ali and his

adherentsto give allegiance to Abu Bakr.

2- Abu Bakr's and Ùmar's refusal to give back to Fatima herinheritance(from her father).

3- Also because she considered Ali as the legal successor

andvicegerent of the Holy Prophet (s.w.).Historians have narrated that, when Ùmar ibn al-Khattab brought

somewood in order to set Imam Ali's (a.s.) house on fire, he was

told thatFatima, the daughter of the Holy Prophet (s.w.), is insidethe house too!He replied: LET IT BE!!! Then he kindled the fire

and began to set fire tothe house of the daughter of the Holy

Prophet! "O son of Khattab! areyou really going to set our house

on fire?" Fatima (a.s.) asked. Ùmarreplied, "Sure! Unless you


9/23

agree on what the whole ummah had agreedupon." The daughter

of the Holy Prophet (s.w.) said, "I do not remembera people that

have done worse than yours... You have left the HolyProphet'sbody lying among us, while, at the same time, you were busyin

electing a caliph among yourselves, without consulting us or

askingour opinion. You have plainly misappropriated our right."Then Ùmar andmuhajirin proceeded in burning the house!

Al-Ya`qoobi, in his book, had recorded the following:"There were a

bunchof people who attacked the house. They broke Ali's sword,and pulledout Ali with all the force they could muster and drove

him toward AbuBakr. Then Fatima cried Ò Father! O the Apostle

of Allah! see what weare facing because of the son of Ibn

al-Khattab and Ibn Abi Quhafah(Abu Bakr) after your demise.' Awarm argumentation occurred betweenAli and those who were

attending the meeting in the presence of AbuBakr, Ùmar, and

Abu Ùbaydah. Ali tried to explain to the people hisright to be the

caliphate and his deserving of this position, but that didn'tpleaseÙmar who then began to threaten Ali if the latter refused to

giveallegiance to Abu Bakr, and said to Ali:"You have no choicebut to giveallegiance!" "And what if I refused to give allegiance?"

Ali asked. Ùmarreplied roughly, "I swear by Allah, the only god,

that we shall behead youimmediately!" Ali said,"Then you are

going to kill whom he is the servantof Allah and the brother of theApostle of Allah?" Ùmar angrilyanswered, "It is right that you are

the servant of Allah, but it is not truethat you are the brother of the

Apostle of Allah." After this dialogue, ImamAli then left themeeting and walked toward the tomb of the Holy Prophet(s.w.).

There, he began to cry and speak to the tomb saying,"Son of

mymother! surely the people reckoned me weak and had well-nighslainme!"

Regarding the issue that Abu Bakr and Ùmar had refused to give

backto Fatima her inheritance, one can refer to various historicalsources andfind more details.

When Fatima (a.s.) was ill for the last time before her demise, Abu

Bakrand Ùmar visited her. She seized the opportunity and spoke

to them,"Ishall inform you a hadith of the Holy Prophet, but, shallyou be honestenough and tell me whether you have heard it from

the Holy Prophet ornot?" "Sure we will!" They both answered.

Then Fatima (a.s.) said,"Iadminister an oath to you to say the truth.Didn't you hear the HolyProphet (s.w.) say that, "Fatima's

satisfaction is my satisfaction, and ifshe becomes angry I will

become angry too. He who seek Fatima's love,is as one whoseeks my love; and he who satisfies Fatima, it is as if hehas

satisfied me. Whosoever makes Fatima angry shall make me

angrytoo." Abu Bakr and Ùmar said, "For sure we have heard this

hadith fromthe Apostle of Allah." "Then I bear witness that you two


10/23

have made meangry and did not satisfied me. When I meet the

Prophet (s.w.), I shallcomplain to him against both of you." Fatima

(a.s.) continued. Here, AbuBakr said, "I seek refuge in Allahagainst His anger and your anger,Fatima!" Then he began to cry

until his soul was about to come out ofhis body. Fatima (a.s.)

continued, saying, "By Allah I shall curse you inevery prayer I mayperform!"

Here, our question is: What is your opinion in this regard, to the

mannerof the two Shaykhs toward the Household of the HolyProphet (s.w.)?Wasn't it more humane for Abu Bakr and Ùmar to

satisfy the Householdof the Holy Prophet (s.w.), especially during

and after loosing their (theHousehold's) Great Father, the Holy

Prophet (s.w.)? Would it not havebeen more honorable if AbuBakr and Ùmar tried to solve thesuspended issues between them

and Ali (a.s.) and Fatima (a.s.) and atthe same time they could

have keep the respect of the Holy Prophet(s.w.) and guarded the

benefit of the Islamic Ummah?

Question No.5 :

What was the reason for the argument between the Muslims in the

situation when some companions were preventing the

HolyProphet (s.w.) from writing down his will?1- The holy body of the Prophet (s.w.) was still lying on the bed

when allthose disputes occurred, concerning the matter of who

shall succeedhim after his demise. And if some of thecompanions had done what theHoly Prophet (s.w.) had asked

them (i.e. by bringing the ink and a pen)such catastrphies wouldn't

have happened among the Islamic sects.In a tradition narrated in the sahih of al-Bukhaari (vol.1, chpater

no.83), itis said that the companions who were present during the

moment of theHoly Prophet's death divided into two parties: aparty called to bring theink and pen to the Holy Prophet (s.w.), and

the other party tried toprevent that. And if the second party had

obeyed the Holy Prophet(s.w.), would they therefore, need to

fabricate a false character calledAbdullah ibn Saba' and relate allthe confusions to him, and free thosecompanions who were the

main players in this objection from any chargeor responsibility? Is

it possible for anyone who works in the field ofresearching andstudy history to be convinced with illogicalinterpretations of those

events?

2- Without doubt the source of the Islamic differences returns tothosewho did the following:

a\ Preparing the appropriate ground and time for the Umayyad and

theAbbaside dynasties. This is especially seen in the time of

Muàwiyah,who had destroyed the powers of Islam and distorted


11/23

its facts.

b\ Excilling many of the faithful companions of the Holy Prophet

(s.w.)from Medina, such as Abu Tharr al-Ghifaari whom the HolyProphet(s.w.) had described him saying, "There isn't a person

upon whom atree's shadow fell, or a piece of ground hold, truer

than Abu Tharr!" Andon the other hand, they had returned all thosewhom the Holy Prophet(s.w.) had exciled or dismissed like

al-Hakam ibn al-Àass, Marwan ibnal-Hakam (to whom Othman had

given his daughter as a wife) while it isnot compatible with the HolyProphet's (s.w.) tradition.

c\ All those who had participated in the assassination of Othman

werepeople like Marwan ibn al-Hakam who killed Talha ibn

al-Zubayr in thebattle al-Jamal, and forged the seal of Othman thatwas supposed to besent to the wali of Egypt, which of course was

the main reason for theanger of the Egyptians against the caliph.

d\ Those who broke their allegiane to Imam Ali (a.s.), and began torebelagainst him, especially in the battles of Siffin, al-Jamal, and

al-Nahrawan.In fact, if Muàwiyah, Talha, Zubayr, Àyisha, and the

chiefs of theKharijites would not have incited their followers toparticipate in battlesagainst Imam Ali (a.s.),then all the riots and

arguments among theMuslims would not have occured - leading

them to such a miserablesituation like that which they are living in

nowadays. Nor would it havebeen possible for the deviators, theirreligious, or the hypocrites to leadthe Islamic ummah to that

catastrophic deviation.e\ Wasn't the assassination of Othman a plea to create twodestroyingbattles in which many of the Prophet's companions

were killed? Wasn'tthe battle of Nahrawan a logical result for the

battle of Siffin? Can anyonedeny that the active factors for incitingÀyisha (the Prophet's wife) toparticipate in a battle in which she

had indeed disgraced the respect ofthe Holy Prophet (s.w.), were

the Umayyad and the Marwanian, andbecause of her many of the

pious were martyred for their resistanceagainst that gang who hadgone astray?

f\ Wasn't that gang the same gang who fought against Ali (a.s.)

and hishousehold? Did not they deny the Aalul Bayt's virtues andfabricatedfalse hadiths which insulted them and eulogized their

enemies?

Some Sunni ulama and researchers blame Muàwiyah for whattheummah had faced, and they considered his acts contradictary

to theIslamic rules. At the same time, some of them used to

eulogizeMuàwiyah and began to justify his acts, deeds, anddeviations. They callhim the writer of the revelation and the uncle


12/23

of the believers, while thereare many other companions who

deserve this title more than him -people like Muhammad ibn Abi

Bakr.Didn't Muàwiyah fight Imam Hasan (a.s.), the son of the Holy

Prophet(s.w.), and after he made a treaty with Imam Hasan (a.s.)

he broke hisoath and planned against Imam Hasan (a.s.)?Didn't he kill all the companions of the Holy Prophet (s.w.) such as

Hijribn Àdiyy without any reason or accusation except for the

reason that heloves Ali and adheres to his way? Didn't he orderhis gang to insultImam Ali (a.s.) on the pulpit, in all states and

provinces, which lasted untilthe period of Ùmar ibn Àbdil Àziz?

Wasn't Muàwiyah the one whomthe Holy Prophet (s.w.) had

cursed()?Wasn't it right that Muàwiyah had broken the terms of the peace

treatywith Imam Hasan (a.s.) by appointing his son Yazid as his

successor?Wasn't it Yazid who killed the son of the Holy Prophet

(s.w.) (i.e. ImamHusayn), invaded Mecca, and assassinated itsinhabitants? Was notMuàwiyah his son's partner in all those

crimes?Why did Àyesha (the Holy Prophet's wife) rebell against the

successorof the Holy Prophet (s.w.), i.e. Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.),

while it is said in aclear hadith that whoever rebels against the

Imam of his time, he shall beconsidered rebellious andirreligious?! Was not her rebellion against Amiral-Muminin in

al-Jamal battle a frank contracdiction to the Quranic

texts,especially the well-known verse, "And stay in yourhouses..."[Holy QuranXXXIII:33]?

Didn't the Holy Prophet (s.w.) say, "O Ali! whosoever fights against

you,he is like that who fights against me; and whosoever makespeace withyou, then he is making peace with me"? Now,

according to this holytradition, were not Muàwiyah, Àyesha,

Talha, and al-Zubayr fightingagainst the Holy Prophet (s.w.) whenthey rebelled against Imam Ali(a.s.)?

Can we not discover the source of disputes by reading history and

studyits events? Those disputes which were the main reasons for

the divisionof the Islamic ummah.

Question No.6

Can anyone who accompanied the Holy Prophet (s.w.) and saw

him beconsidered a just sahaabi?There is no doubt that anyone who acompanied the Holy Prophet

(s.w.)is considered a companion. The companions were very

fortunatebecause they have seen the Holy Prophet (s.w.) and

benefitted from hisholy existence and spirituality. But, at the same


13/23

time, we have to say thatthis accompaniment does not protect the

companion from falling in thewrong, and it cannot be anyone's

ticket to enter paradise. Rather, truebelief in Allah, good deeds,and adhering to the Islamic shariàh is thereal security. This is

clear from the holy verses, especially the surah ofal-Àsr.

We don't have in our hand any hadith or narration confiring thatanyonewho accompanied the Holy Prophet (s.w.) is infallible or

just, or evenpious. On the contrary, we have many verses

declaring that some of theHoly Prophet's companions werehypocrite and they remained on theirhypocrisy until they died.

Thus, the opinion which says that all the HolyProphet's

companions are just, and that they must be obeyed isabsolutely

incorrect, rather it contradicts the Holy Quran. How can weregardall the companions to be just and that they must be followed,while

some of them have accused the Holy Prophet's wife of having

anillegal relationship?! This event has been mentioned in the Holy

Quran inthe surah of al-Noor, verse 11. Some other companionswere drunkards,like Qudamah ibn Madhòon who had been

punished for this act. Walidibn Ùqbah was also a companionabout whom the following Quranicverse had been revealed: "O

you who believe! if an evil-doer comes toyou with a report, look

carefully into it, lest you harm a people inignorance" [al-Hujurat:6].

Other companions had committed adultry!(See: Usd al-Ghaabah,vol. 4&5, where you can get more informationabout their names

and shameful biography in details). How can weadhere to any

companion, while at the same time when we findoutrightcontradictions between what they say and what they do.

This is besidethe mental, dogmatic, and political disputes that had

happened betweenthe companions themselves? When AbdulRahman ibn Àwf said to ImamAli (a.s.) in the gathering when

Ùmar was dying: I swear allegiance toyou according to the Quran,

the sunnah of the Prophet, and the way oflife of the two caliphs.Imam Ali (a.s.) said,"No! I accept your allegianceaccording to the

Quran, the sunnah of the Prophet, and my opinion!"This means

that Imam Ali (a.s.) didn't agree to follow the way of life ofthe two

caliphs.Thus, we can ask that:

1- Does investigating the companions' biographies and way of

lifecontradict the Holy Quran? The Holy Quran itself disclosesmany factsand unveils many characters, the following verses are

examples: (1) "Thedwellers of the desert are very hard in unbelief

and hypocrisy, and moredisposed not to know the limits of whatAllah has revealed to HisApostle; and Allah is Knowing, Wise"; (2)

"And of the dwellers of thedesert are those who take what they

spend to be a fine, and what theywait (the befalling of) calamities

to you; on them (will be) the evilcalamity"; (3) "And of the dwellers


14/23

of the desert are those who believe inAllah and the latter day and

take what they spend to be (means of) thenearness of Allah"; (4)

"And as for the foremost, the first of the Muhajirsand the Ansars...and from among those who are round about you of thedwellers of

the desert there are hypocrites, and from among the peopleof

Medina(also); they are stubborn in hypocrisy; you do not knowthem;We know them; We will chastise them twice, then shall they

be turnedback to a grievous chastisement" [Tawbah:98-100].

In other Quranic verses we see that the names of some ofthecompanions have been mentioned in the Holy Quran. In these

versesthey have been considered irreligious, like Walid ibn

Ùqbah about whomthe Holy Quran has said,"O you who believe! if

an evil-doer comes toyou with a report, look carefully into it, lestyou harm a people inignorance" [al-Hujurat:6]. The narrations of

Sunni sources have disclosedthe name of this person whom the

Quran is making reference too. Anarration had been mentioned in

the Sahih of al-Bukhari (the book ofduàs, a chapter onal-Hawdhthe pool) declares the Holy Prophet(s.w.) had said,"I am

your missing baby near the pool. There, some menwill be liftedunto me, but when I come down to lift them up, they will

bescattered around me! At that time, I will say, Ò my Lord! these

are mycompanions!' He will answer me saying, `You don't know

what they didafter you!'Many traditions have been narrated in The Sunni sources

(Sahihal-Bukhari that are having such meaning - a chapter on

al-Hawdhthepool, vol.8, pp.13,504,505.)It is incorrect to look at all the companions with one eye; this is in

factopposite of the Holy Quran. The truth is that many of the Holy

Prophet'scompanions were pious and true believers, while therewere some whowere known for their false belief and hypocrisy.

History shows us manyexamples of such individuals.

2- Is it correct to close our eyes and ears, saying that all thecompanionswere pious, good, and that all of their deeds were

credible even if theyhad some deeds which were opposed to the

Islamic law (shar`)?

3- Is it right to justify their evil deeds, saying that they werepractisingijtihad, and that their wrong doings did not happen

intentionally?

If they were free to practise ijtihad, why can't we also practiseijtihad?Why is it that some say: You are kafir (an infidel)! if you

practise ijtihad?Why do you consider all those who criticizes the

companions accordingto the Holy Quran, kafirs? One of the Hanafischolars, Ibn Àbdeen, hadmade a nice statement, saying,

"Considering others as kafirs withoutevidences is the behaviour of

the pagans not the mujtahids!"

4- Can we call this behaviour of yours but extremity and


15/23

exaggeration?How could you accuse others of exaggeration and

forget to criticizeyourselves? We haven't any evidence that the

companions of the HolyProphet (s.w.) were infallible, but when youtalk about their deeds youtalk exaggeratedly, and even at times,

you consider the companionseven better than an infallible or the

Holy Prophet (s.w.) himself. However,when the Shiìtes speakabout their Imams as infallible imamas, youaccuse them of

fabrication and lies! Many Sunni scholars have dared tosay that

many Quranic verses were revealed according to Ùmar's will.Yes,these words have been written by a Sunni scholar under the

title"Muwafaqaat Ùmar".

The Sunni people perform the prayers known as "taraweeh"

inRamadhan in congregation, while it is an inovation fabricated byÙmar.Was such a prayer mention in the sunnah of the Holy

Prophet (s.w.)?When the Shiìtes practise their deeds according

to Imam Sadiq'ssayings and narrations, the Sunni people say that

the Shiìtes refer theirdeeds to their Imams because they arema`soom, while they (the Sunnis)give a better rank to a companion

than the rank of the Holy Prophet(s.w.). This clearly dicloses theircontradictions.

It is better for those who accuse the shiìtes of untrue

performance tolook to their beliefs and sayings?

What a beautiful saying that Imam Ali (a.s.) said: "The lover of athing isblind and deaf."

What are the basis upon which Mu`wiyah depended to practise

ijtihad -eventually causing him to wage a savage war against ImamAli (a.s.); thewar which caused many eminent companions to die?

It is not logical to interpret some Quranic verses like,"You are best

of thenations raised up for (the benefit of) men," or "And thus Wehave madeyou a medium (just) nation," etc..., that they are

describing thecompanions and their being just and equal. This is

because it is clearthat these verses and others are talking aboutthe whole ummah notcertain individuals. For example, when it is

says that the inhabitants ofthe so city are bettere than others, the

whole inhabitants of that city areincluded in this expression -

generally speaking, not necessarily meaningeach of them.Anyhow, a person may be pious in the lifetime of the Holy Prophet

(s.w.)and it is possible that he changes his behaviours after his

(the Prophet's)demise. This is exactly what happened and whatthe narrations havetold.

Question No.7

What are the references and sources from which we can identify

theHoly Prophet's sunnah?


16/23

Allah, the Exalted, said, "... and whatever the Apostle gives you,

accept it,and from whatever he forbids you, keep back..."

All the Islamic sects agree on the prophetic sunnah - no one hasdoubtin it. The dispute is in regard to the sources of this prophetic

sunnah.Both the Shiìtes and Sunnis have narrated the well-known

tradition intheir books in which the Holy Prophet (s.w.) said, "I amleaving with youtwo weighty things (Thaqalayn); if you adhered to

them, you won't bemisguided at all. They are the Book of Allah

and my family. They won'tseparate from each other until theyarrive to me near the Pool."

All sects have agreed on the chain of this hadith. Ibn Hajar, a

Sunninarrator, has said, "This tradition has been conveyed by

more than 20companions. It is also mentioned in the sahih ofMuslim, sunan ofal-Daarimi, musnad Ahmad, and tens of sources.

This clearly makesindicates that the Holy Prophet (s.w.) had

shown us how to derive hissunnah and from which sources. There

is no doubt that the main sourceof the Prophet's (s.w.) sunnah isthe Aalul Bayt (a.s.). However, at thesame time we see that the

Sunni ulama do not paying any attention tothis sahih hadith. Why?Is the Prophet's hadith insufficient.

2- Why do they follow the other tradition which says,"...the Book of

Allahand my sunnah"? Now, suppose that the Holy Prophet (s.w.)

did wordthis tradition in this fashion, does it differ with the firstone? Ibn Hajar hadsaid that the Islamic ummah needs the Holy

Quran, the sunnah, andAhlul Bayt (a.s.). If we examin the text we

shall be quite sure that itconfirms the infallibility of the Imams andthat they are unique intellectualsand political sources. Hence, we

have no other choice but to adhere tothem because they are the

firmest link handle between us, Allah and HisProphet (s.w.).The Sunnis believe that the traditions and the sunnah have not

beenrecorded for about a century, i.e. from the caliphate of Ùmar

till thecaliphate of Ùmar ibn Abdil Aziz (the Umayyad caliph). Manytraditionshave been burned in the lifetime of Abu Bakr and Umar.

3- Can we expect any remaining of the trdaitions and sunnah after

acentury of prohibition? Even if we found some of them, we

should askhow much and to what degree of accuracy were theyrecorded? Do wedare say that all the traditions existing in the

Sunni sources remainedsafe from abrogation? And, if those

traditions were all accredited andreliable, then why did Muslimchoose only six thousand hadith fromabout three hundred

thousand? Or why did al-Bukhari choose only fourthousand

hadiths from more than six hundred thousand - and left therest?If all the traditions that are talking about the Prophet (s.w.) and

hissunnah were reliable and trustworthy then why do the Sunnis

practiseijtihad, qiyas and istihsan? Wasn't Abu Hanifa, and other

scholarspractising qiyas and istihsan in order to derive certain


17/23

rules of the Islamiclaw (shar`)? Doesn't this prove that the

traditions do not contain religiousrules? Even those which contain

some religious rule, are not reliable. Weread in the book titled"Kitaab al-Mawdhouàat" (vol.1, Beirut edition, thelast lines of the

chapter called `fadhaaìl al-Khulafa'') that the two greatand eminent

scholars, i.e. al-Soyouti and Ibn al-Jawzi, had declared thatmost ofthe known narrations which eulogize the caliphs are fabricatedand

not trustworthy!

4- Prohibiting the writing of the traditions led the enemies of AhlulBayt(a.s.) to omit all these traditions containing the virtues of the

Prophet'sHouse, and in their place they fabricated thousands of

traditions thateulogize their enemies! (See the first volume of

tafseer al-Fakhral-Raazia great Sunni scholarwhen interpreting thephrase "BismAllah"; he says: The traditionalists have concealed

many traditions thatrelated the virtues of Imam Ali (a.s.) because

they feared Muàwiyah!!!

5- If the Sunnis are true when they pretend that the Muslims havetofollow the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (a.s.), then why do they

refuse tonarrate the traditions that eulogize the Holy Imams (a.s.),especially ImamSadiq (a.s.). This is so, while in the same time

they narrate manytraditions about the Khawarij and Nawasib. For

example, Bukhaarinarrated in his sahih, from Ìmran ibn Hittan (a

khariji).6- Why do Sunnis narrate most of the traditions through the chain

of AbuHurayra? It is said that the number of traditions narrated by

Abu Hurayraare about 5,374, while Abu Hurayra didn't accompanythe Holy Prophet(s.w.) except in the last two years of the Holy

Prophet's lifetime - afteraccepting Islam.

As for Imam Ali (a.s.), who accompanied the Holy Prophet (s.w.)sincehis childhood until the Holy Prophet (s.w.) died between his

hands, thereare only 537 traditions narrated from him (a.s.) in

Sunnis books. This isso, while Imam Ali (a.s.) delivered the mostremarkable orations andsayings especially during the time which

he ruled over the Muslimummah, which lasted less than five years.

And in this five years heexplained to the Muslims every minute rule

and regulation in the Islamicshariàh and the prophetic sunnah.None of these orations and sayingshas been mentioned in the

sahih of al-Baukhari or Muslim.

7- Didn't the Holy Prophet (s.w.) say, "I am the city of knowledge,and Aliis its gate"; "I am the house of wisdom and Ali is its gate";

"Ali is withtruth and truth is with Ali", etc... Are these not clear

proofs that show thehigh rank of Imam Ali (a.s.)?8- Weren't Ali (a.s.), Fatima (a.s.) and their sons al-Hasan and

al-Husayn(a.s.) the people about whom the verse of "tatheer" and

"mubahala" hadbeen revealed?

9- What is the meaning of "loving the Household of the Holy


18/23

Prophet(a.s.)"? Their love can be verified by two means, first:

speaking andmentioning their virtues in gatherings of those with

true faith, andsecond: adhering to them by word and act, as theHoly Prophet (s.w.)had said, "if you adhered to them, you won't be

misguided at all." Canone love the Aalul Bayt (a.s.) only by words

instead of heart?10- Is it logical that the Muslims follow any individual, even if

thatindividual was like Muàwiyah who was known for his enmity

againstAalul Bayt (a.s.)? Can't we consider this following as anopen enmityagainst the Aalul Bayt (a.s.) and the Holy Quran?

The Holy Quran had clearly mentioned that loving the Aalul Bayt

(a.s.) isthe cause of receiving a great reward; thus, is it right to

follow anyfabricated hadith or to call the Muslims to followindividuals likeMuàwiyah who is not infallible. He is the one who

had committed lots ofmistakes and crimes against Islam and its

regulations. The most wickedamong Muàwiyah's deeds is his

warfare against Imam Ali (a.s.) and thewicked ritual - enacted byhim - to insult Imam Ali (a.s.) on the pulpit inevery part of the

Islamic country - this lasted until the ruling time of theUmayyadcaliph Ùmar ibn Abdil Àziz. It is worthy to mention that theHoly

Prophet (s.w.) had already said, "Whosoever enacts a wicked

ritual,then the penalty of enacting such a ritual shall be on him and

those whofollow this ritual."

Question No.8

When did the Sunni Sects Exist?

It is certain that there was nothing called "Sunni sects" in the

lifetime ofthe Holy Prophet (s.w.), not even after his demise. The

Sunni sects haveemerged in the 3rd and 4th centuries (Hijri) as aresult of political anddogmatic differences. Some of those sects

have been abrogated andother were authorized.

We have here some questions in regard to this subject:

1- Why were some of those sects authroized and other wererejected?Are there any Quranic evidences and demonstrations, or

prophetictraditions that urge us to follow, for example, the Hanafi

or Maaliki sect?Weren't the founders of the rejected sectsmujtahids? If so, hasn't anymujtahis the right to disclose his own

opinion, like Abu Hanifa whopractised ijtihad - which he remained

doing so till the end of his life?2- Were the four famous sects existing in the time of the caliphs?

Werethe caliphs performing their duties and judging people

according to theirown opinions?

We can notice the great difference between the Sunnis in the time


19/23

of theUmayyad, Abbasid, and the Ottoman dynasties, and

between the Sunnisin present time, especially in regard to issues

of fiqh and beliefs.3- Can we trust those traditions fabricated by the oppressive

Umayyad,Abbasid and Ottoman caliphs; traditions which were

fabricated in theirown benefit and to keep them in power -traditions which were cosider tobe the exact words of the Holy

Prophet (s.w.)?

4- Can we regard all the savage behaviours of the partisans called"theArmy of Sahabah" or the Wahhabites as Islamic propagation,

and thatthey are guiding people to the true rules of Islam? Are the

Sunnispropagating the true sunnah of the Holy Prophet (s.w.), or in

fact, theyare propagating the sunnah of the Umayyads and theAbbasids?

5- Were there any sects in the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (s.w.)?

Allhistorical records confirm that there were not any sects in that

time.Moreover, the term "Sunni" had generated in the time ofMuàwiyah andlater on.

6- Wasn't the belief of the determinists declaring that man mustobey hisruler, no matter whether he (i.e. the ruler) was just or

oppressor? Wasn'tthe opinion that "all the companions are just"

derived from the falsetraditions which Muàwiyah and the

Umayyads had generated?7- Is it correct to return to the old texts of a person who died

centuriesago, to derive new issues?

8- Why do the Sunnis return to persons who died 13 centuries agowhilethey can consult contemporary scholars (faqihs) and eminent

ùlamawho have obtained high ranks not less than those who have

pasted?Why isn't there any scholar (mujtahid) among the Sunnis who can

savethem from disputes and answer their religious questions of

the day, whilethe Shiìtes have many scholars in every time andplace?

Is the present knowledge and science the same as the knowledge

andscience of past times? Are the needs of our communities

today the sameas those which were existing 1,300 years ago?9- Why don't the Sunnis follow the fatwa of the shaykh

MahmoudShaltoot, the dean al-Azhar who considered Shiìsm as

an authorizedsect, as he says it depends on the intellectual andfiqh bases? Isn't thata clear religious prejudice? Is not Shiìsm the

right sect which is basedon that which the Holy Prophet (s.w.) had

recommended? Wasn't thefamous tradition (i.e., "I am leaving withyou two weighty things(Thaqalayn); if you adhered to them, you

won't be misguided at all. Theyare the Book of Allah and my

family") sufficient to follow the Shià sect?Have you any other

evidences to prove the correctness of the famousfour sects?


20/23

Surely the answer will be "NO"! If you study the Shià bookswithout

partisanship or prejudice, you will certainly not find any kind

ofcontradictions and you will notice that they are not forging liesagainstanyone. However, we may find some Sunnis when they

want toinvestigate other sects and their beliefs, they depend only

on their ownscholars' (shaykhs') speeches and opinions withoutpaying any attentionto the ideas of the ùlama of the other sects. Is

it correct to follow suchmethodology to investigate another sects'

teachings?

Question No.9

What is the Sunnis' attitude in regard to the revolution of Imam

Husayn(a.s.)?

Every body recognize the high rank of Imam Husayn (a.s.).

Hisgrandfather is the Holy Prophet (s.w.). The Holy Prophet (s.w.)wasalways describing Imam Husayn (a.s.), that he is the

counter-balance ofthe Holy Quran. And in other tradition he (s.w.)declared that Husayn ibnAli (a.s.) shall always remain an Imam

whether he rises (rebelled againstthe oppressors) or not. He (s.w.)

also insisted that the Muslims shouldlove Imam Husayn (a.s.) and

adhere to his teachings. Anyhow, it iswell-known that Imam Husayn(a.s.) is the best person of his era after hisfather and elder brother.

As it is known that Imam Husayn had rose up against the authority

ofYazid ibn Muàwiyah to fulfill his duty toward the Holy Quran andhis Holygrandfather (s.w.) when he noticed that the Umayyad

caliphs hadexceeded the limits of Islam with their oppression and

injustice. ImamHusayn (a.s.) followed the tradition of hisgrandfather, namely, "He whosees an oppressor and tyrant ruler,

who is changing what is forbidden(haram) into what is allowed

(halal) - those who broke their covenantwith Allah and fight againstthe sunnah of the Holy Prophet (s.w.). And inthe face of this he

doesn't try to contest or protest against that ruler'sillegal deeds

neither by speech nor by action, Allah shall put him in thesame

place where He shall put that tyrant."Some of the chiefs in Kufa announced that they would assist

ImamHusayn (a.s.) and promised to help him in letters that they

wrote toImam Husayn (a.s.) while he was in Medina. At the sametime, some ofthe companions, whom the Sunnis are still eulogize,

like Abdullah ibnÙmar, Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr, Abdul Rahman ibn

Abi Bakr and manyothers, didn't give their allegiance to ImamHusayn (a.s.). We should askwhy? Moreover, abdullah ibn Ùmar

began calling the people to payallegiance to Yazid, preventing

them from assisting Imam Husayn (a.s.)!This had been recorded

by al-Bukhari (vol.IX, the book of riots, chapter:ìf he said anything


21/23

before the folk'), and in musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal(vol.II, p.48)

[This narration was conveyed by Naafi`].

Now, we ask this question from the Sunnis: Do you disagree withImamHusayn's uprising? If we search in historical records we shall

come tothe conclusion that the Sunnis had preferred silence and

agreed to bewith those who remained behind. But all of us knowthat whosoeverremains silent - not support his Imam (a.s.),

knowing that the Imam, theson of the Holy Prophet (s.w.) is right -

agrees with Yazid and his wickeddeeds. Thus, these people shallbe considered as those who haveparticipated with Yazid's army

and fought against Imam Husayn (a.s.)and were indirect partners

in the massacres of Yazid's army on the dayof Àshoora.

In fact, the rule of Yazid over the Islamic emperor was thecontinuation ofÙmar, Ùthman, and Muàwiyah rule.

Didn't Muàwiyah fight against Ali (a.s.), and therefore the main

factor ofImam Hasan's martyrdom? Didn't he submit the key of

caliphate to hisinsane son Yazid, and by doing so breaking thecovenants he gave toImam Hasan (a.s.)?

We put these questions in front of those who assisted Yazin andstoodwith him. Those who remained behind and abandoned Imam

Husayn(a.s.) in the hour of straitness, when he rose against

oppression andcorruption.

Question No.10

Some commentaries on the Sunni Islamic laws (fiqh):

Every sect has its own rules and regulations, and it is indisputablethatthe imam of that sect had derived those rules and regulations

by meansof ijtihad. However, we still find some rules in Sunni fiqh

that have nolegal or logical base. The most wonderful matter hereis that the Sunnisinsist on following those baseless rules which

sometimes arecontradictory to the texts of the Holy Quran and the

prophetic traditions.Here are some of those rules:

1- Regrading (wudhu) abolution, the Holy Quran says, "... and wipeyourheads and your feet to the ankles"; this part of the verse is

acontinuation of the first part which is "wash your faces and your

hands",so, why do the Sunnis wash their feet - contrary to themeaning of theverse?


22/23

2- All Sunni sects do not consider performing prayer (salat) with

thearms folded across each other as an obligation in the prayer,however,they still insist on performing it. Even some famous

sects, like Shafièe,does not regard that as obligatory, and theysometimes pray with openarms (with their arms to their sides); so

why does other sects insist onpraying with folded arms?3- All narrations and historical record show that in the early times

ofIslam, the Nabawi Masjid was not furnished with carpet, rather,

theMuslims were performing their prayers on the bare ground,andsometimes on plants that were not eaten or woven (into

cloths). We haveno truthful tradition that mentioned that the

Prophet (s.w.) had called theMuslims to perform their prayers oncarpets or the like of it. Why then doyou insist on performing

prayers on carpets and fabrics in spite of themany narrations

(written in your books too) that refer to performpostration (sojood)on the bare ground? Why do you blame the Shià forprostrating ona piece of clay? Isn't prostrating on the ground one of

theProphet's sunnah? Can you verify that prostrating on carpet

andgarments was his (s.w.) sunnah?We hope to receive the answer for these questions from the

learned andwise men.

4- One of Islam's obligatory duties is the five daily prayers,andwhosoever denies them is considered a kafir. Each prayer has

its ownand mutual time. Many Sunni and Shiìte narrations have

declared thatthe Holy Prophet (s.w.) on many occasions, and had

performed - manytimes, the noon prayers in the beginning of thenoon, and in other timeshe (s.w.) performed it in the afternoon. He

did the same thing with thelate evening (maghrib) and ìsha

prayers. It is also narrated that the HolyProphet (s.w.) hadperformed the five prayers with in three times frames,with or

without reasons - he only wanted to remove all kinds of

burdensfrom his ummah.Why do the Sunnis insist on not performing some of the prayers

togetherat one time, which has been permitted by the Prophet

(s.w.)? Isn't thisclear contradiction to the Holy Quran "and has notlaid upon you anyhardship in religion", and the holy sunnah?

Isn't the tradition narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.) which declares

that itis permissible to perform some prayers together at one time

accordingto the holy verse "Keep up prayers from the declining ofthe sun till thedarkness of the night"?

5- Why don't the Sunnis repeat the sentence "hayya àla khayr

al-àmal"although it is recommended, and in its place they added"al-salaatkhayrun min al-nawm" which has no legal evidence to

support it?


23/23

6- There is no doubt that the prayers have lots of benefits and

rewardsfor anyone who performs them, especially the

congregational prayers -when a pious and just imam leads it. So,why do the Sunnis perform thecongregational prayers behind any

individual (no matter whether he isirreligious, injust, oppressive or

he was not)? Do you think that this ispermissible in Islam?7- It is known among the Muslims that the obligatory prayers must

beperformed in congregation, while the mustahabb prayers can

beperformed alone. Umar himself confess that this issue is true.So, fromwhere did he bring the prayers of taraawih? Why did he

oblige theMuslims to perform it in congregation? He has then

inovated a heresy:Obliging the people to perform the mustahabb

prayers in congregationand insisting on that. He announced thatanyone who does not performthe obligatory prayers in

congregation, must perform the taraawihprayers in congregation.

Is this correct?!

8- The Holy Prophet (s.w.) encourged the Muslims to get marriedandsaid that this is a part of his sunnah. And to save this

sacredrelationship, Islam legislated lots of rules and regulations.An example ofthose rules is that Islam prohibited forced divorces.

To perform the legal divorce ceremony, there must be two

witnessesbefore the judge during the three times of divorce. After

the third divorcethe relationship shall absolutely be cut! The Hanafisect, however, doesnot care for the husband's psychological

situation. In this sect it ispermissible for the man to divorce his

wife three time orally, only bysaying the phrase by which mandivorces his wife: "I divorce you (threetimes)."

Now, does not this fatwa bring about difficulty (in remaining

married)while the Holy Quran says, "and has not laid upon you anyhardship inreligion"?

The above question was the last to the Sunni brothers, although

thereare many more to be asked. However, we shall suffice withwhat wehave asked, hoping that the learned researchers will

continue theirstruggle for aquiring the truth.

All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds.

1- Sahih Muslim, the book of benevolence, the chapter of those

whomthe Holy Prophet(s.w.) had cursed or insulted.

Documents

Questions for Sunni Brothers