QUESTION:
Does it make any sense that all the jurists are deviated and deviating, except you? Is Sheikh Yasser the only one who is guided and guiding? Is the Sheikh the only one who is more knowledgeable and better-rounded in matters of jurisdiction? When one reads your website, he will discover that many jurists are deviant according to your standards. Your approach leads to disunity among the Shia. The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has put a huge effort into spreading out the message of Ahl Al Bayt (peace be upon them)? Why do you discredit them?
ANSWER:
In the Name of Allah, the All-Beneficent, the All-Merciful.
May Allah bless Muhammad and his Family and damn their enemies.
People wonder if our style in proselytization is the only and absolute truth! Shias keep asking if our pathway was contributing to unity among the Shia. Sheikh Yasser has never even claimed that all the jurists are deviated and are deviating. He has never even said that most of them are deviated and deviating. He respects all the well-known Jurists in Najaf, such as Sayed al-Sistani, Sayed M. S al-Hakeem and Sheikh Ishaq Fayyad. He also respects all the known Jurists in Qum, such as Sayed al-Shirazi, Sheikh Wahid al-Khorasani and Sayed Sadiq al-Rohani, for example. If he differed with any of them on some viewpoints and edicts, he would not call them deviating scholars. Normally, he would disagree with some of their viewpoints.
Sheikh Yasser only disputes with the jurists made and appointed by governments or made by political parties. He openly and massively disagrees with so-called jurists who hold Batri and/or Mysticist tendencies. They are a small group, so one can not jump to a conclusion that he said that all jurists are deviated and deviating. Some are, yes, and they are a minority.
Sheikh Yasser builds his assessment about jurists on the narration recorded by Imam Al-Askari (peace be upon him):
As for those jurists who guard themselves, protect their faith, oppose their desires and obeyed their Master, the ordinary Shia can follow them. That can only happen, however, with some of the Shia jurists, not all of them.
Wasail al Shia, volume 27, page 131.
As for those who commit sins and offences similar to the scholars of the general public (‘Sunnis’) you should not accept anything from their side. There will be plenty of mix-up and misunderstanding of what we, Ahlul Bayt, have said. Immoral scholars will receive our words, but they will misinterpret our words due to their ignorance. They will fail in their rulings due to their lack of knowledge. Others will tell lies and attribute them to us to gain worldly benefits. Such positions will lead them to Hell. Some scholars are Nawasib; they would not be able to discredit us. They will, however, learn our words and deceive the Shia by that and belittle us in front of our enemies. They will additionally increase our words with numerous lies from their part. Some Shia will listen to those fabricated tales and submit as though those tales are our own words. When such lies are not ours, those are deviated and deviating scholars. Their harm on our weak Shia is worse than the army of Yazid on Al Hussain (peace be upon him) and his companions.
Please pay attention to the words of Imam Al-Askari (peace be upon him): “That can only happen, however, with some of the Shia jurists, not all of them.” We conclude that we cannot have all those who appear as jurists, as good respectable, virtuous and decent scholars. There will be among them liars, deviators, Nawasib and immoral scholars who imitate the ‘Sunnis’; and they are – their harm – is worse on the weak Shias than Yazid’s army.
A true, conscious, believer has to review the reasons before he assesses the outcome. If you do so, you would be able to find whether the Sheikh was right in condemning those who claim to be jurists whilst praising the killers of Ahlul Bayt (peace be upon them), or whether he was not right. The Sheikh presents proof on the one who claims to be a jurist, yet who orders the murder, imprisonment and oppression of innocent Shia. The Sheikh presents proof on those who claim to be a jurist, yet who holds within his heart Mysticist deviated principles.
As for sounding alarms or oversimplifying the issue in such a dramatic way, as though the Sheikh discredits all the jurists, that can only be in line with the ‘Sunni’ marketing and media tactics. The ‘Sunnis’ stress day and night that the Shia denounce all the companions when we condemn only some of their companions, the hypocrite and deviated ones to be precise.
We should teach ourselves that we can have a position against jurists who are deviated. Sheikh Yasser never claimed that he was the only guided and guiding one. He has neither claimed to be the most knowledgeable nor most aware of matters in jurisprudence. When he was asked about some individuals, he could not butter up the answer and beat about the bushes and say something that may invoke Allah’s displeasure. If it would have been found out that he had been mistaken, he would be pardoned by Allah Almighty, as he only positioned himself as an enemy of those individuals for the sake of Allah.
For instance: Sheikh Al Mufeed opposed his teacher Sheikh Al Sadooq, discredited him and condemned his pathway in his refutation known as “Reply on the Beliefs”. We know he did not do that based on a personal grudge, but that for the sake of Allah and to seek His satisfaction, he had his edicts and rulings. None is infallible except the 14 Infallibles. Even if the Sheikh would have said that most of the jurists are deviated and deviating – which he had not – but let us presume that he said so, still, such a position could be plausible. Many verses and narrations stress the fact the majority is not always right.
Only a small number of my servants are thankful.
Qur’an 34:14
We should remark that not all those who call themselves Shia are going to be saved on Judgment Day. Most of them will not be saved. Shias will be divided into 13 groups, of which 12 will be sent to Hell and only one will be saved. Imam Ali (peace be upon him) said
Oh People! The Jews were divided into 71 groups, of which 70 will be sent to Hell and one to Paradise. This is the group that followed Joshua, son of Nun; Christians will be divided into 72 groups, of which 71 will perish in Hell and one will be saved. This is the group that followed Simon Peter. Muslims will be divided into 73 groups, of which 72 will be sent to Hell and one to Paradise. This is the group that followed me.” And he pointed to his chest simultaneously. He added: “13 groups of those 73 groups will pretend to follow and love me. Only one of those 13 groups will end up in Paradise, and 12 will go to Hell
Sheikh Al Tousi, in Al Amali, page 524.
This is the middle part group.For instance, Sheikh Yasser dismisses anyone who assumes the position of a jurist when such a so-called jurist does not fulfil the conditions of his assumed position. Khamenei, for example, does not fulfil the condition of Belief. He mixes up his belief with Sufi doctrine and Philosophy. Khamenei also lacks the condition of jurisprudential capacity to derive religious rulings. Moreover, Khamenei lacks the condition of justice. Streams of blood that belonged to scholars and ordinary believers were shed under his watchful eyes in Iran. Thereby, Khamenei is incapable of issuing religious decrees. Let us presume, for argument’s sake, that he was a qualified jurist – which he is not – then he has no right to prohibit us from discrediting the symbols of our so-called “Sunni’ brothers”, as his infamous so-called edict stated. His prohibition was issued in the context of absolute forbiddance. Where was his religious evidence for that? If we had to accept his ruling, we would have dropped our Imams (peace be upon them) to a position of erring. They have denounced the symbols of hypocrisy both openly and privately.
Read the following example on the advice and practice of our Imams (peace be upon them) regarding the symbols of deviation:
Abu Bakr, Omar and Abu Ubayda were the top symbols of the infamous Saqeefa, and yet Imam Ali (peace be upon him) faced them and said to them in their faces
Oh, you licentious, shameless traitors whose origin was a filthy, mucky foul-smelling sperm! You rose, rolled up your sleeves in quest of deviation! You are seeking hypocrisy, and you are in love with ignorance and dissension! How awful is what you are offering yourselves! Oh, you overflowing sewers
Ibn Al A’randas, in Kashf Al La’ali
The point here is that Imam Ali (peace be upon him) did not just pray to Allah to dismiss His mercy from them, but swore onto them and insulted them in open language. He referred to them in harsh terms resembling them to sewers, originating from mucky foul, tainted smelling semen and so on. This comes very much in tune with the narration found in Al Kafi, The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said according to Imam Al Sadiq (peace be upon him)
If you see the figures of deviation and innovation after me, make apparent your dissociation of them, maximise your insults to them, oppose them verbally, stun them with your sharp words so that they do not cause corruption to Islam and so that ordinary people may be warned against them and realise their innovations in faith. Allah will write for you rewards for this and will raise your status in the Hereafter
al Kafi, volume 2, page 375
There is a common mistake or misconception that we cannot swear or insult the icons of evil. Says who? Claiming that it is wrong to swear or insult the icons of evil, is an illusion according to the narration referred to above. You can send curses onto them and insult them as well. The problem is that those who take up the podium, do not read, and if they read, they do not understand how to put things into context, and if they know how to do so, they refrain from sharing their findings with their audience.
The following is a summarized list of scholars who approve that narration that allows to verbally abuse the people of innovation and the prominent figures of evil. The narration is to be found in al Kafi, volume 2, page 375.
Those scholars who say it is a credible, reliable and authentic narration are:
- Al-Majlisi. He said that this narration is authentic – Mir’aat Al-`Uqool, volume 11, page 77
- Yoosuf al-Bahraani. He said this in – al-Hadaa’iq al-naadirah, volume 18, page 164
- Murtada al-Ansaari (d. 1281). He said this in – Kitaab al-Makaasib, volume 1, page 353
- Al-Khoei. He said this in – Misbaah al-Faqaahah, volume 1, page 354
- Jawad al-Tabrizi. He said this in – Irshaad al-Taalib ‘ila al-Taleeqala alMakaasib, volume 1, page 162
Some readers, at this moment, might say:
“But didn’t Imam Ali (peace be upon him) ask his companions during the battle of Sifeen not to swear and insult the soldiers in Muawya’s army”?
The answer:
Imam Ali (peace be upon him) did not prohibit his soldiers in Sifeen from swearing. He advised them, saying: He said: “I find it disliked for you to be using insulting language.”
He did not say it is forbidden to insult ordinary people/soldiers who followed Muawya. Therefore, it is disliked to verbally abuse ordinary ‘Sunnis’, but forbidden to verbally abuse believers. A believer is defined as the one who endorses belief in the Divine Authority of Ahlul Bayt (peace be upon them) and who dissociates from their enemies. It is recommended, and sometimes even obligatory, to verbally abuse the senior past figures of the people of innovation, such as the ‘Sunni’ unholy trinity (consisting of Abu Bakr, Omer and Aisha) to present figures like Qaradhawi, Dymashqya and Arour. Nevermind the sending of curses, which is dutiful on the past and present symbols of the people of innovation
There are more examples from the Imams of Ahlul Bayt (peace be upon them) on public naming and shaming of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd tyrants
Imam Al Sadiq (peace be upon him) said, as recorded in
Abu Bakr and Omer are the two Idols of Quraish being worshipped.
Bihar Al Anwar, volume 30
Imam Ali (peace be upon him) said, when reciting a supplication against Omer, as recorded in
Oh Allah, punish Omer, for he caused injustice even to rocks and boulders.
Al Jamal, by Sheikh Al Mufeed, page 92
Imam Ali (peace be upon him) said, as in
May Allah curse the son of Khattab, for it had not been for him, none would have committed adultery unless he was wicked, as Mut’a would have sufficed for Muslims instead of adultery.
Bihar Al Anwar, volume 53
A man once came to Imam Ali (peace be upon him), saying: “Stretch your hand so I may give you my allegiance!” The Imam (peace be upon him) said: “On what basis?” He replied: “On the tradition of Abu Bakr and Omer.” The Imam (peace be upon him) stretched his hand and said:
Shake my hand on the basis that Allah cursed the two. I see you dead while still holding deviation in your heart.
Basair Al Darajat, by Al Safar, page 412.
Imam Ali (peace be upon him) cursed the two most sacred figures of that man in front of his face, in a public setting as allegiance is not paid in private
Whenever Omer’s name was mentioned before Imam Al Sadiq (peace be upon him), he said:
He was a son of adultery.” And whenever the name of Abu Jaffar Al Dawaneeqi was mentioned before the Imam (peace be upon him), he also called him a son of adultery
Bihar Al Anwar, volume 30
We all know Imam Al Hussein’s position towards Yazid, but none dares to tell you of his position towards Abu Bakr and Omer. A man asked Imam Al Hussain (peace be upon him) about Abu Bakr and Omer, to which he responded:
By Allah, both took away our Divine right; they took over the leadership position that belongs to us, stepped on our necks and made people step on our necks as well
Taqreeb Al Ma’arif, by Al Halabi, page 243.
Imam Zain Al Abedin (peace be upon him) described Abu Bakir and Omer as:
Disbelievers, and whoever loves them, becomes a disbeliever.
Taqreeb Al Ma’arif page 244
Talha, Aisha and Zubair were mighty symbols of the faith of the opponents of Ahlul Bayt (peace be upon them). When a group of men travelled from Basra to Medina, met Imam Al Sadiq (peace be upon him) and asked him what he says of the war of Ali against Talha, Zubair and Aisha, our Imam (peace be upon him) did not back off, but rather said, as part of a prolonged narration:
Aisha’s crime is huge, her sin is monumental and every drop of blood spilt that time is in her neck and the necks of her two partners.” Imam Al Sadiq (peace be upon him) added that: “Talha and Zubair were two Imams of disbelief.
Mustadrak Al Wasail, volume 11, page 63
Imam Al Baqir (peace be upon him) said in an authentic narration, according to our Shia criterion of accrediting narrations:
The two old men, Abu Bakr and Omar, departed life and did not repent and did not mind what they did to Imam Ali (peace be upon him)- May Allah, His Angels and all the people curse them both.
Al Kafi, volume 8, page 246
Where can we hide when we read that Imam Al Sadiq (peace be upon him) used to say after each obligatory prayer, according to Abu Salamah Al Saraj:
May Allah curse Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman, Muawya, Aisha, Hafsa, Hind and Um Al Hakam.’ He named them all and I heard him name them all.
Al Kafi, volume 3, page 342
In the well-known Shaqshaqya Sermon Imam Ali (peace be upon him) described Othman as someone like:
A farm animal whose main affair and purpose in life was to eat and discharge its own dung around itself, yet putting a show as though he was self-important.
Nahj Al Balagah
Now, when we read the so-called edict of Khamenei that offers an absolute prohibition to denounce the symbols of the ‘Sunnis’, we have to conclude that Khamenei dismisses the words of Ahlul Bayt (peace be upon them) in that regard. Some of his followers would respond in defence that he made his edict linked to publicity; i.e. that one should not denounce and condemn those symbols in public forums.
That line of counter-argument is a defect one. Khamenei failed to link his so-called edict to the prohibition of denouncement in public forums. He also failed to link his so-called edict to permissibility in sequences or stages to comply with such counter-arguments. Khamenei issued his indiscriminate so-called edict haphazardly and baselessly. That attitude can only be viewed as in defiance to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his pure family). It is a well-known fact that his so-called edict is a statement that aimed to gain the endearment of the ‘Sunnis’ and to serve the interests of his government. His statement was in search of materialistic acquisitions.
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said:
Oh, Ali! Your Shia are those who are steadfast on the Truth and Straight Path. They do not aim for gaining the endearment of their opponents. They detach themselves from worldly affairs.
Amali Al Sadooq, page 658.
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said, according to Imam Al Sadiq (peace be upon him):
If you see the figures of deviation and innovation after me, make apparent your dissociation of them, maximise your insults to them, oppose them verbally, stun them with your sharp words so that they do not cause corruption to Islam and so that ordinary people may be warned against them and realise their innovations in faith. Allah will write for you rewards for this and will raise your status in the Hereafter
Al Kafi, volume 2, page 375
Denouncing the symbols of hypocrisy is a necessity. This duty can not be suspended from the action only under a condition of Taqiya whereby a believer experiences severe testing conditions that deprive him of announcing the truth and forces him to save his neck from the sword. You can not suspend this duty only because some people believe in the holiness of such symbols. Otherwise, one has to respect Satan, as some people worship him, technically, Satanic worshippers. Could any sane person say then that we have to respect Satan?
One can indeed denounce and deplore those deviated personalities by employing various means. On the first instance, one can use “shock therapy”, and on other occasions, one can use a slow, step-by-step technique. It all depends on conditions and circumstances. However, one cannot by any means rule the basis of denouncement out totally.
If one asks: “I live with a ‘Sunni’ family. Shall I declare dissociation openly and forcefully?” The answer is: the matter of exercising open dissociation is up to that person. He has to assess the situation and choose what fits it. If a slow step-by-step technique works, then, that is fine. If not, then a “shock therapy” approach can be used. What is of paramount importance here is the fact that one should not give up his duty of calling for the Divine Authority and befriendship of Ahlul Bayt (peace be upon them all) and the rejection of their hypocritical enemies. The choice of the best approach is left to the individual to consider, so long as religious boundaries are not violated. Sheikh Yasser al-Habib, by the way, uses both approaches according to overall circumstances and the intellectual potential of individual ‘Sunni’ cases.
When one would state that many people converted to Shiism due to the proselytization efforts of Khamenei’s regime, one should bear in mind that many more people became Muslims due to the efforts of the Saudi regime! The Saudi regime performs massive roles in spreading ‘their version of Islam’ all over the world. There are hundreds of mosques and charities here in Europe that contributed to converting European youths into ‘their version of Islam’. Does that mean that we have to respect and recognise the role of the Saudi regime in that regard? Does that mean we have to feel grateful for their activities?
Similarly, the regime of Khamenei is performing massive roles in spreading ‘their version of the Shiism’. They are not showing people the authentic version of our Imams (peace be upon them). The version that is being spread is a brand that represents a combination of Batri, Sufi and Mysticist ingredients topped with a rich layer of Philosophy. The motivation behind spreading out that brand is solely political. The version of Islam that is spread out by the Saudi regime is a deviated and void version of Islam that is driven by a political agenda as well.
As for the one who is affecting disunity among the Shia, ordinary Shias need to register the acts of the ‘Supreme Leader’, who issues baseless edicts and violates the humane and religious sanctity of scholars. His regime arrested imprisoned, tortured and murdered thousands of believers in Iran, not to mention scholars. So who is now the party responsible for causing disunity among the Shia?
We cannot remotely claim that our approach represents the absolute truth! You will not find any scholar who will utter such a claim. Therefore, no objective person would say that our approach is infallible! To ascertain that, one would just have to read and listen to the replies offered whether on our website or in other forums. Those replies represent evidence that arguments and counter-arguments are given room to no matter who the inquirer is.
When a competent jurist issues an edict, he cannot declare that his edict represents the absolute truth. He is surely excused by the fact that he reached such a ruling based on the evidence he found. He, therefore, applies his knowledge according to his best abilities and intentions. Our approach and pathway are similar in that regard. We sincerely hope that all Shias do believe, for example, that Aisha is in Hellfire. Some ordinary and even Shia “scholars” do believe that she could be in Paradise for the sake of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family)
We would like those who oppose our approach with regards to dissociation to stop issuing statements of condemnation that serve as a soother for the ‘Sunnis’. All they have to do is to say, for example: “He represents himself. We are not under question here to defend any accusation aimed at us. He is accountable for his deeds.” We wish for them to appear before the ‘Sunnis’ dignified and honoured, instead of undignified and dishonourable!
A true Shia is someone who rebels against his surroundings if they were humiliating. He is not someone imprisoned by such dishonourable surroundings. A true Shia alters such surroundings. A true Shia provides freedom for himself and does not wait for others to provide him with freedom! The threats, intimidation and oppression of the Saudi regime against the Shia in the Eastern Province of were far greater during the Iraq – Iran war (1980-1988) than the time and occasion when we celebrated the death of Aisha. The Shia in the Eastern Province refused to denounce or reject Khomeini, formally or informally. They endured, despite the loss of blood and souls then. However, the criterion nowadays, unfortunately, has become one related to ‘who said what’ Instead of ‘what was said by whom’.
The injustice caused by your nearest kinship is more ruthless and severe than the strike of a sword onto your body by an enemy, says a poet!
The Office of Sheikh al-Habib
