Honesty Is Needed To Tackle The Sunni-Shiite Strife

15 March 2013

By Khalid Amayreh

A recent letter to President Muhammed Mursi by a number of Iranian academics, intellectuals and theologians urged the Egyptian leader to adopt the Shiite brand of Islam as a platform for development and prosperity. The letter claimed rather mendaciously that the Shiite sect, which constitutes less that 10% of the world's Muslim population, was following the School of Jurisprudence of Ahlu al-Bayt, the family of the Prophet Muhammed.

The letter drew angry reactions from Islamic (Sunni) circles in Egypt and abroad. One high-ranking Sunni scholar labeled the letter "a shameless insult to Islam."

"The letter would want more than 90 million Egyptians to switch from the worship of the one and only God to a heretical cult based on the vilification of the companions of the holy prophet and effective deification of 12 mini-gods called imams."

The Azhari Sheikh, named Abdul Alim Mahmoud, added that Egypt "will not accept polytheism and pagan worship under the rubric of Shiism or Ahlu al-bayt."

In fact, the Azhari Sheikh's fierce opposition to Shiism is shared by the vast majority of Muslims, many of whom feel provoked and affronted by Iran's clerical regime's efforts to export Shiism to Sunni countries.

Do Shiites really follow Ahlu al-Bayt?

Shiite theologians and mouthpieces are quite incessant in claiming that the Shiite Ithna-asharies (followers of the twelve saints) are actually following the School of Thought of the Family of the Prophet.

However, a meticulous scrutiny of Shiite practices and beliefs shows beyond the slightest doubt stark and inherent contradictions between Ahlu al-Bayt's beliefs and value system on the one hand and Shiites' beliefs and practices on the other.

To begin with, most Shiites believe that Ali, the Prophet's cousin and son-in-law and his offspring were ordained by God as imams or political and religious leaders of the Muslim Umma.

The claim has absolutely no corroborating evidence from the Quran or the authentic traditions. Indeed, neither Ali nor his sons ever claimed that the so-called imamate was ordained by God.

Some Shiites make far-fetched interpretations of some prophetic hadiths (sayings of the prophet Muhammed) to back their claims. However, these interpretations collapse like a house of cards when compared and contrasted with unmistakably clear Quranic texts and authentic hadiths. (Unlike Sunni Muslims, who devised an elaborate and meticulous system to expunge unauthentic sayings of the prophet, the Shiites don't have a single authentic book of Hadith which can be relied upon given the huge number of Hadiths that are false or dubious.)

In addition, Shiites generally ascribe to their imams or saints God-like powers. Thus an imam is omniscient and omnipotent as well as sinless and infallible. In Islam, only God Almighty is omniscient and omnipotent. Some Shiite scholars go as far as claiming that God Himself is subservient to the will of the imam.

When a Shiite wants to make a supplication, he invokes the name of an imam, not the name of God.

This writer heard one Shiite scholar claim that "were it not for the imam, God himself wouldn't have existed."

Traditionally, Shiites pride themselves on rejecting anthropomorphism or "Tajseed."

However, the Alawite Shiite sect of Bashar el-Assad believes that Imam Ali is God incarnate.

None the less, this serious and fundamental deviation from Islam didn't prevent Shiite seminaries in Qum and Najaf from recognizing the heretical Alawites as bona fide Shiites.

This is while the two seminaries resisted rather vehemently all efforts aimed at pressing them to issue a biding fetwa or edict prohibiting the demonizing and vilification of the Companions and wives of the Prophet, especially Abu Bakr, Omar and Aisha, the mother of believers.

There is no doubt whatsoever that Ahlu al-Bayt are totally innocent of Shiite canards and lies. Even Shiite references testify to this fact.

First of all. There is no historical evidence suggesting that Ali and his family indulged in cursing or vilifying the Khulafa or successors of the Prophet. In fact, the opposite is quite true. Ali actually had his own daughter married to Omar, the second Caliph. Does one betroth and marry his beloved daughter to his arch enemy?

Besides, Ali worked as advisor and deputy for the two earlier Caliphs, Abu Bakr and Omar, for more than15 years. The Quran condemns those who collaborate with disbelievers and oppressors. "And incline not toward those who do wrong, lest the Fire should touch you, and you have no protectors other than Allah, nor you would then be helped ." (Surah Hud-113).

So, was Ali being hypocritical, sycophantic or unctuous? Indeed, if Abu Bakr and Omar had usurped the heavenly-ordained leadership of Muslims from Ali and his family, then he shouldn't have joined them in perpetuating the process of arrogation and usurpation. The truth of the matter is that Ali was not being hypocritical or sycophantic or unctuous. He, like other contemporary Muslims, knew that the caliphs were perfectly legitimate and didn't deviate from the principles of Islam.

Besides, if Ali had possessed God-like powers as the Shiites claim, he could have very easily crushed his purported opponents, especially as he would be actually carrying out a divine decree.

There are actually numerous beliefs and exotic feats practiced by the Shiites which would be anathema for Ahlu al-Bayt. The Shiites of today, or most of them, don't believe in the absolute authenticity of the Quran. According to Shiite theologians, past and present, the true unadulterated Quran is in the possession of the hidden-god-like saint known as Mahdi, who has been hiding in a cave in Samerra, Iraq, for the past 1200 years. One Shiite Jurist named Tabarsi actually penned a book titled "Fasl al-Khitab fee Ithbat tahrif Ketab Rabbil Arbab" or " The Irrefutable evidence in Proving the Distortion of the Book of God." The Quran itself declares in one verse that "We (God) have revealed the Quran and we will preserve it from any distortion," which means the Shiites don't believe in the Quranic proclamation.

But did Ali and his family ever contest the authenticity of the Quran? Of course they didn't, even when Ali himself became the 4th caliph of Muslims. For example, He didn't produce another Quran nor did he claim that he was a divinely-ordained imam.

The Shiites routinely curse Aisha, the daughter of Abu Bakr and youngest wife of the Prophet. They accuse her of adultery, al-though there is a clear unequivocal Quranic text exonerating and vindicating her of any wrong doing. None the less, Shiite scholars effectively belie the Quran.

According to Islam, a Muslim who belies even one word of the Holy Book is no longer Muslim.

The Shiites practice a masked form of prostitution called Mutaa whereby a given woman can have multiple sex partners in return for money. The manifestly whoring practice has caused numerous social problems, including breeding numerous children out of wedlock.

Needless to say, none of ahlu al-Bayt indulged in such promiscuity.

Today, most Shiite stab and cut themselves with swords, blades and sharp objects on the day of commemorating the martyrdom of imam Hussein, known as Ashura. The scene are revolting and abhorrent to say the least. So why do Shiites do such ugly practices if they truly follow the family of the prophet? Do these practices give a positive image about Islam? Besides, Hussein is supposed to be in paradise and his enemies in hell, so why this orgy of bloodshed is repeated every year?

The truth of the matter is that Shiism, as it stands today, is real distortion of Islam.

Shiites do have a point in complaining about the often murderous violence perpetrated against Shiites communities in Iraq, Pakistan and some other places. We must condemn all forms of violence against innocent people, irrespective of their color and creed.

But Shiites are also indulging in an effective systematic genocide against Sunni Muslims in Syria. Shiites can't escape historical and moral responsibility for what is happening in Syria which really dwarfs all Shiite grievances all over the globe. We all know that every day, the genocidal Shiite regime in Damascus murders between 100-200 Syrian citizens, the majority of them Sunni Muslims. How can this be compared to the situation in Bahrain where 10-20 Shiite agitators have been killed in more than two years of violent clashes with the Bahraini police?

To conclude, the Shiite-Sunni rift can not be bridged without seriously reforming the Shiite belief system vis-à-vis the companions of the Prophet. Shiites must stop bad mouthing the dearest people to Muslims' hearts. Shiites have been badmouthing the Sahaba for 11400 years, but what have they achieved other than widening and deepening the chasm between them and more than 1500 million Sunni Muslims?

 

©  EsinIslam.Com

Add Comments