Pakistan’s founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, was an Ismaili by birth and a Twelver Shia by confession, though not a religiously observant man. He had studied at the Inns of Court in London and was better versed in English law than in Shia jurisprudence, was never seen at an Ashoura procession, and favored a wardrobe that often smacked as much of Savile Row as of South Asia. Yet insofar as he was Muslim and a spokesman for Muslim nationalism, it was as a Shia. His coreligionists played an important role in his movement, and over the years many of Pakistan’s leaders were Shias, including one the country’s first governor-generals, three of its first prime ministers, two of its military leaders (Generals Iskandar Mirza and Yahya Khan), and many other of its leading public officials, landowners, industrialists, artists, and intellectuals. Two later prime ministers, the ill-fated Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and his Radcliffe-educated, currently exiled daughter, Benazir Bhutto, were also Shia. Feeling the wind shift in the 1990s, Benazir styled herself a Sunni, but her Iranian mother, her husband from a big Shia landowning family, and her father’s name, the name of Ali’s twin-bladed sword, make her Shia roots quite visible. In a way, Benazir’s self-reinvention as a Sunni tells the tale of how secular nationalism’s once solid-seeming promise has given way like a rotten plank beneath the feet of contemporary Pakistan’s beleaguered Shia minority.
Benazir’s father came from a family of large Shia landowners who could afford to send him for schooling to the University of California at Berkeley and to Oxford. He cut a dashing figure. Ambitious, intelligent, and secular, he was a brilliant speaker, with the ability, it is said, to make a crowd of a million people dance and then cry. His oratory manipulated public emotion as the best of Shia preachers could, and his call for social justice resonated with Shia values. His party’s flag conveniently displayed the colors of Shiism: black, red, and green. Although he never openly flaunted his Shia background, he commanded the loyalty of Pakistan’s Shia multitudes, around a fifth of the population. What he lacked in the area of regular religious observance he made up for with his zeal for Sufi saints and shrines, especially that of Lal Shahbaz Qalandar, the widely popular Sufi saint of Shia extraction whose tomb is a major shrine in southern Pakistan.
Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s years in power (1971–77) marked the pinnacle of Shia power in Pakistan and the high point of the promise of an inclusive Muslim nationalism. But the country that Jinnah built and Bhutto ruled had over time become increasingly Sunni in its self-perception. The Sunni identity that was sweeping Pakistan was not of the irenic Sufi kind, moreover, but of a strident and intolerant brand. Bhutto’s Shia-supported mix of secularism and populism—sullied by corruption and his ruthless authoritarianism—fell to a military coup led by pious Sunni generals under the influence of hard-eyed Sunni fundamentalists. In April 1979, the state hanged Bhutto on questionable murder charges. A Sunni general, Muhammad Zia ul-Haq, strongly backed by Sunni fundamentalist parties, personally ordered that the death sentence be carried out, even after Pakistan’s highest court recommended commutation to life imprisonment.
The coup of 1977 ended the Pakistani experiment with inclusive Muslim nationalism. Shia politicians, generals, and business leaders remained on the scene, but a steadily “Islamizing” (read “Sunnifying”) Pakistan came to look more and more like the Arab world, with Sunnis on top and Shias gradually pushed out. Pakistan in many regards captures the essence of the political challenge that the Shia have faced. The promise of the modern state has eluded them as secular nationalism has been colonized from within by Sunni hegemony.
SOURCE: The Shia Revival: How Conflicts Within Islam Will Shape the Future, by Vali Nasr (W. W. Norton, 2006), pp. 88-90



73 Comments
20 October 2007 at 3:50 pm
[...] scholar as the leader of the nation, but at least give me a practicing Muslim? I mean Benazir doesn’t even represent the majority Sunni sect of Pakistan. Though I think that matters little because the Sunni Prez [...]
12 January 2008 at 6:20 am
Benazir bhutto was not shiite by faith and her father z.a bhutto too was not shiite but a hanfi sunni (brailvi) even z.a bhutto’s 2nd wife was a Iranian Shiite but he was a sunni.
z.a Bhutto,shanawaz, murtaza and benazir namaz jinaza was done by a sunni brailvi mullah name mufti ibrahim iskandri and his late father who was a sunni mullah too.
If bhuttos were Shiite then sunni mullah would never have done(funaral prayer) namaz jinaza of them.
If one visit the graveyard of Bhutto family can see the names of 4 companions abu bakar,umar,usman and ali are written on the graves which is not the Shiite tradition.
During the z.a bhutto’s government a sunni hanafi(brailvi) Maulana Kausar Niazi (1934-1994) was a most powerful federal minister in Pakistan during the Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s government was made minister of religious affairs not any Shiite.
If any one have any doubt about Bhutto family being a Shiite, must contact the Pakistan government officially where all the information’s about this issue can be find.
Zia ul haq was not a sunni he was a big wahabi.
12 January 2008 at 7:15 pm
thanks for quoting vali nasser. I was astonished to learn of the Bhutto’s Shia faith. check out my blog if you have time…
16 January 2008 at 8:41 am
[An excerpt from an interview in the Washington Post:]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/12/27/DI2007122701722.html
Mind, syeda abida hussain is well known politician in Pakistan and Former Ambassador to the U.S and a top leader of Pakistan people’s party. Abida hussain is from a feudal Shiite family of Punjab.
11 March 2008 at 8:22 pm
Thanks for this informative discussion . I have heard of these facts but now it is obvious that Benazir belong to a Shia family
27 March 2008 at 8:53 pm
REply to: Majdid1969 …
lol, YOU need to go visit the tomb of Benazir Bhutto, and her paternal families. I have NO idea where on earth you got the fact there are names of Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman in the shrine.
31 March 2008 at 10:54 am
It doestnt matter if u r shia or sunni,but to be a muslim is a matter of proud,incase of Z.ali bhutto and benazir bhutto they were sunni and rest of the thier family is sunni as well,i m from larkana and i know who they r shia or sunni?wikipedia gives information to the people but it should be right one,i offerred the funneral of benazir bhutto shaheed,i was in 4th line while performing her funeral prayer.the sunni mulla hafiz abdul rahim has lead the funeral prayer.i hope this information will reach to the general public who wants to know about bhutto family.
31 March 2008 at 7:31 pm
Why are you guys making up so much information, that is not even true??
It doesnt matter if you are Muslim or non-Muslim, but alteast give your facts straight.
Do you want to explain why the Bhutto family prayed the salat in accordance with the Ja’afri Madhab?
and you are aruging with Vali Nasr, one of the greatest political and religious writers on Pakistan, and Shi’ite Islam.
1 April 2008 at 12:22 pm
I am Sunni Muslim. But I accept that Benazir Bhuto was Shia Muslim because on his return after exile she wear something on right arm written YA IMAM ALI RAZA. also in his all homes even in Dubai,UK or Pakistan I see in several videos that they have some names like shia use in homes. Like when Bilawal do first press conference whole World clearly see that on the back they have scenry with Shia wording about Hazrat Ali r.a
Further, Zulfiqar junior and Fatima also commonly use to go shia festivels.These politicians try to hide their faith bcoz in Pakistan majority of peoples are sunni. So they dont want to hurt anyone, It does not matter someone suni or shia. Legends are always legends.
10 April 2008 at 1:04 am
I don’t really see the importance. Doesn’t it all just root from who should be the caliphate? So why does it really matter? we all believe in the same thing and just disagree about who should have lead the muslims after Muhammad’s (PBUH) death. surely that does not matter in modern day society where there is no long a caliphate? yes, the rituals may be slightly different because we see different people as martayrs but we all really believe the same thing. we are all allah’s children and therefore what does a silly historical row matter these days? i just don’t understand and i don’t think i know enough about the conflict. can someone please explain?
11 April 2008 at 7:50 am
@Majid and @Hassan Ali
Hi!!
Yaar apni Bakwaas Bannd karo!!
Just by saying lies about her you cant change the reality!!Abida Hussain herself i a strong Shia Muslim from Jhang,and Believe Benazir was too a Shia!!She had Two Namaz-e-Janazas like her father and Quaid-e-Azam had,one was in private in a shia way because of their faith and other one for the public in the Sunni way!!Every extremist knows that fact that Zia-ul-haq a Wahabi hanged and killed Zulfiqar Ali bhutto due to American pressure and his personal grudge with the Shias!!
And during his reign he tried to hide the facts about the Quiad-e-Azam being shia by putting a Judicial inquiry in it ,and falsely declaring that Quiad-e-Azam had never mentioned what he was!!
Even their is a proof in his nikah nama and his Sister said so,and even his sunni friend Laiquat Ali khan declared that he was a Shia!!
By the way where the hell you get all this false info!!
I am not a Shia but still these facts cant be denied!!
5 May 2008 at 12:24 am
Listen People, i m from Banguldero, Larkana. Graveyard of Garhi Khuda Bux khan is only 4 km away from our village.
Now come to the point: Z.A Bhutto and her family is 101% Sunni. Z.A Bhutto himself visited many times to the “Great Sunni Saint of his time Muhammed Qasim Qadiri Rashidi of Mashwari Shareef, Larkana Sindh.”
Apart from that Z.A also visited the another famous saint of Qambar Shareef “Qibla Syed Ghulam Hussain Shah Bukhari.”
Benazeer Bhutto also visited the “Qibla Syed Ghulam Hussain Shah Bukhari.” 3 times. When she came back from Dubai on 18th october, few days later she visted the Qibla Syed Ghulam Hussain Shah Bukhari, i’ve video as well as picture of that.
If anyone needs proofs, i can upload those videos.
6 May 2008 at 8:11 am
But surely both of them would visit both sunni and shia places of worship because they were politicians and wanted votes?!
7 May 2008 at 4:31 am
No Mr UKPAK, Mr Z.A Bhutto visited Qibla Muhammed Qasim Qadiri in 1965. Now tell me in 1965 was there any election inPakistan ???
Benazeer Bhutto made his first visit to Qambar Shareef in 1988, not vote and other things related with election; but she just went over there to ask a Qibla to “Pray for my victory.”
Secondly, Benazeer Bhutto visited Qibla Syed Ghulam Hussain Shah Bukhari in 1994, on that time She was Prime Minister of Pak.
Apart from that Both of these Saints had nothing to do with politics.
7 May 2008 at 7:38 am
hmmm… interesting point… but then, you say that it was evident that they are sunni but people above say they also went to shia places… i thougt ZAB was definatly sunni and his wife was shia for definate but maybe benazir kept people guessing for political reasons as, afterall, she knew she would go into politics from 1979 onwards at least! if im honest, i do not know much about the difference seen as i am sufi. Obviously i know the basics but are they really that different? is it possible that she could have been kind of in between? In her reconciliation book she talks of how both are good in their own ways… maybe im missing the point, i really should find out more about shia islam!
9 May 2008 at 4:01 am
One more clear proof of bhutto family and she (benazir) was not Shiite.
Watch the video clip and see she (benazir) was a member of a sunni brailvi religious organistion
Minhaj ul quran .
Now don’t name minhaj ulquran a Shiite organisation and tahir qadri a Shiite scholar? lol
It is not true that minhaj ulquran is not a sunni organisation and shias are not the member of it?
Here is the link
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-5QxFmb8Pzw&feature=related
10 May 2008 at 4:35 am
I watched ur video and was very interesting but I thought that Minhaj-ul-Quran was a non- sectarian NGO? I thought is was just a moderate group which aims to promote Islam and moderate interpretations which relate to the modern world and Islam’s role in science. in fact, i thought its key aim was to bridge sectariansim within islam and also to promote good relations with other religions? so therefore she could join this and be either!?
11 May 2008 at 2:22 am
I agree with you brother ukpak but mind Minhaj ul quran is mainly known as a
Sunni school of thought religious, social organisation and its leader professor tahir qadri is a disciple of a great branch of stem of SufismQadriya. So it is very unlikely a shia will join it? As we know the leader of qadri silsala
Sheikh abdul qadir jilani Ghuas azam is not in the good book of shia’s.
22 May 2008 at 10:50 am
Brother majid1969, you make a very good point and it is unlikely a shia would join! But i suppose it is still possible – if unlikely?! I have also been told that she was relgious but not very ritualistic and so maybe is it possible she could have been on the brink of the two sects? i mean… obviously they waver vastly in rituals and as to whom they celebrate and the caliphate question but interpretations of the qaran are largely similar I thought? Or at least between moderate sects which i am sure is what she would have followed. In her book Reconcilliation, she praises both sunni and shia and the basis of both and states how it is tragic that they have broken appart in the ways they have. Surely she would at least hint as to which side she falls down upon in her book as, afterall, true beliefs are somewhat hard to conceal usually?! Maybe she purposefully defined herself as neither due to her beliefs that the ummah should unite after all this time? And therefore did not submerge in such sunni/shia rivallries?
22 May 2008 at 6:49 pm
hmmmmmmmmmmmm
adequate answers to prove tat bb wasnt shia
23 May 2008 at 8:44 pm
She married Asif Ali Zardari a shia. Isnt that proof enough that she she and her children are shia.
23 May 2008 at 11:41 pm
Sunni and shia should not divide when it comes to marriage and her father was sunni and her mother shia so the sect of her husband probably did not make any difference….
25 May 2008 at 10:22 pm
All i can say Ziaul Haq was a bastard due to him Pakistan became a taliban state.shame on him
4 June 2008 at 2:02 am
This is 101% sure that ZAB was shia But any how this is not a matter that you are Sunni or shia infact this is the main reason of killing of ZAB and the rest of his family
5 June 2008 at 12:53 am
khan sahib can you come with some solid proof that z.a.bhutto was a shia?
6 June 2008 at 9:09 am
nafis ahmed, am totally agreeing with you here!
29 June 2008 at 7:18 am
Salam to all,
I read all the above replies, according to my information Quaid-e-azam was a Pure shia muslim but ZAB and his family are Maulai, Maulai are those people who are sunni but they have beleive that the Hazrat Ali(R.A) was the Prohphet (P.B.U) nominated persons to be a Caliph after Him(P.B.U)
1 July 2008 at 11:59 pm
one cant be sunni or muslim even,who beleive that the Hazrat Ali(R.A) was the Prohphet (P.B.U) nominated persons to be a Caliph after Him(P.B.U)
im sure this is just a big lie on ZAB.
4 July 2008 at 6:48 am
You have to correct yourself first everyone knows Kalmae Shahadat and plus some more beliefes like belief on Khatmay nabuwat, belief on judgment day, belief on prophets(RA) etc are basic conditions to be a muslim so if someone says Hazrat Abu Baker(R.A) or Hazrat Ali(R.A) was the actual person doesnt effect his/her basic faith but he/she can be responsible for the sin if any of them misbehaves with prophet’s companions(R.A). Also if you travel to the interior sindh or interior punjab you will find a large number of people who called thierself mulai you can ask them why they called thierself mulai. It is important to note that they follow Sunni way to pray and other religious responsibilities. I will be grateful if you dont try to be mufti by doing fatawah this is drawback of our nation they dont have tolerance. You were looking very nice in above replies but suddenly you lost your way. Take care yourself and your family
Allah Hafiz
23 July 2008 at 7:27 pm
AoA all dear,
I,m a Muslim and i want to tell all of u that there is only one GOD. His beloved HolyProphet ( PBUH )
and HolyProphet ( PBUH ) ’s Al….
We can’t get success in this world even in BEROZ-E-MAHSHER with them.
We should respect ASAHAB-E-RASOOL (r.a) whom were sincere with HolyProphet ( PBUH ) in his life and after his life. thanx
6 August 2008 at 8:59 am
asaalam alekum
i want to tell everybody that we all r muslim and we should not abuse any khalifah at all 4 khalifah r like brothers they never show interest in kingdom they just love muhammed [p.b.u.h]we can never be like them they our prophet will never like us abuse these personalities if u want to abuse then abuse salman rushdie and the people who r against islam not the people whom because is islam thank pleas understand what i m taking
17 August 2008 at 12:39 pm
Who is abusing Caliphs? I said above if someone misbehaves with Holy Prophet(S.A.W) companions including first four caliphs(R.A) will be reponsible for a sin but will not be a Kafir.
22 August 2008 at 3:35 pm
Dear Bors and Sis. I am 70 years old so please listen to me. Mohammed Ali Jinnah was a Shia Muslim. He did not follow Sunnism. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was a Maulai but primarily belonged to a Shia Muslim family. Benazir did not lean towards any specific faith but after getting married and facing lots of problems started leaning towards religion but not any specific faith.
However, I must say that we should focus on being a good person rather than arguing who follows Sunnism or who is Shia. In the end, we all be questioned: what have we done good in this world? If we pray 5 times, observe fasting regularly, do Haj, distribute poor rate, we will get the benefit in the hereafter. But those actions will be turned back to us negatively if our deeds are bad, if we lie, if we kill, or if we criticize other faiths including believers of other books.
And yes, General Zia was a big wahabi and is responsible for all this current mess in Pakistan.
27 August 2008 at 10:30 am
I agree with Dooper999. We all are muslim brothers including brelvi, deobandi, shia, wahabi etc we have to think as a whole ummah and try to follow thier own path to get closed with the God instead of throwing the shit on the other sects. In india these all sects are very closed with each other it is surprised for me that why do they fight in Pakistan.
2 September 2008 at 9:40 am
Excuse me my brother and sisters for hampering your heated discussions, but I would just like to add that all these people who you are discussing were politicians.
Have you people ever been curious to find out the sect of the doctor which is busy saving a dying patient?
Realize!! Our country has always been such a patient and it requires the youths time.
Please dont waste the patients medicine(your time in such blogs) otherwise it would die before time.
7 September 2008 at 5:13 am
if you are a patriotic nationalist then your religious belief is your personal matter. Mr. Jinnah Said
” …… and his life, his property and his religious belief should be fully protected by the state at any cost. And I am sure with your support and cooperation to making Pakistan one of the greatest nation of the world.”
I am a shia muslim but never want to enforce my ideology upon others. My all friends are sunni muslims, they also have the same thinking. I always want that my country’s leaders should be loyal to motherland and good human beings regardless of their religious believes. Kindly stop discussing such irrelevant issues and think that how we can make progress in this 21st century.
Thanks
Syed Benazeer Abbas Naqvi
15 September 2008 at 12:24 pm
In politics nobody is shia or sunni its abt getting vote from both sects . well forget abt shia and sunni we should praise all those who made Pakistan a prosperous nation like ZAB and curse all those who used islam to reign and control their country like Zia ul haq . MAY ALLAH SEND ZIA TO DEEPEST OF HELL for creating secetarianism in Pakistan amin
21 September 2008 at 5:34 am
I have read all of the above comments and the common factor that I have found is that “It’s ok to bash/insult wahabis”,WHY ? Shia, sunni, deobandi, barelvi etc etc all are acceptable but WAHABIS. Please create and practice a tolerant behaviour even with people who do not agree with you. Lookout for Shaitaan inside you and not outside or maybe you are accusing the person in the mirror. The people who understand they know that the “Witch Hunt” never ends. Once you eliminate all of the Wahabis you will find somebody else to accuse. Because that’s all you know is to point fingers at others. Thanks Asim
29 November 2008 at 9:58 am
I’m a Muslim from Bangladesh and belong to the Hanbali (Salafi) School of Thought. I don’t care whether the Bhutto Family is Shia or Sunni. All I care is that, Z A Bhutto was a hypocrite who broke the integrity of Pakistan in 1971 for selfish reasons. But I regard his daughter, Benazir Bhutto, as a champion of democracy in Pakistan with great respect. In my point of view, the so-called Shia-Sunni Division is deeply related to the Zionist conspiracy and tremendous efforts must be taken in order to prevent further splits among Muslims. However, I believe it was the Shiites who at first diverted themselves from the orthodox principles of a glorious Islam and General Zia was not a Wahhabi but a slave of the USA who tactically carried out his enforced duties.
27 December 2008 at 11:29 am
Oh my brother Nabil, just think about your own country don’t be involved in Pakistani issues. Unfortunately everyone is the mufti-e-azam in muslims, we are in the top of the third world contries but still didnt come out from the debates of shia and sunni. Please dont try to put your leg and think only about your own sect and country.
2 January 2009 at 7:46 pm
I read all of above messages and i found Raja has some courage to face and listen what is truth and have mind to understand others points or even think but i am sorry to say that Mr. Majid has nothing in his skul.come on leave all this aside and just think about your country and other muslim countries when non muslim bombard then they never asked from them”are you Shia or Sunni”for them Shia Iran and Sunni Iraq are very equal.
just try to get out your feet from those shoes who orthodox Mullah gave you in gift.
Yes it is very right to say that Zia-ul-Haq is man culprit of all this what is going on here since 1979.
Bhutto family is shia or not it is not an issue of today if we will prove that Bhutto family is shia or Sunni it will not cause prosperity in our country just get up and work harder than before.
May ALLAH Pak bless all you(Ameen)
15 January 2009 at 11:19 pm
I wanna say one thing here Muhammed Ali Jinnah was Shia Ismaili he was not just shia he was Shia ismaili, he was a khoja of Gujrat and his faith was Ismailism(Aga khani) Muslim. Ismailis of India are also known as khojas. His surname was poonja, i am Ismaili too and all poonjas are ismailis.
17 January 2009 at 6:20 am
Muhammed Ali Jinnah was a shia ismaili by birth but he converted to shia 12 imamia as he accepted himself. check the link below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Ali_Jinnah.
Not all Khojas are ismaili. There is a large population of khoja shia 12 imami in pakistan and india.
24 January 2009 at 7:35 pm
hahahahaha Wikipedia you need to grow up my friend even i can go there and write Jinnah was a Jew,you can write whatever you want to on wikipedia lol.
Brother you can go to Supreme court of pakistan, In times of Zia Sunni ulema and Shia Ulema were fighting on this issue at last the court decided he was Ismaili (Aga Khani).
You can read his sisters book my brother Jinnah, You will get your Answer.
24 January 2009 at 7:42 pm
Yes there are Khoja Itna sheris (12wers) but they converted from ismailis to shia islam 250 years ago.
I have seen Sunni brothers claiming Jinnah was sunni loooooooooooooooool and same goes for shia brothers looooooooooooooooool. His first wife was ismaili. We even know their relatives. Unfortunately Fatimid caliphs were Ismailis tooo shia brother say they were shia (12wers). On wikipedia Its written Ibn Sinna(Aveecina) converted from Shia ismailism to shia (12wers) how come every famous person converts, The whole world know Jinnah or Aveecina were Ismailis. People confuse Shia 12 wers with Ismailis because both are branches of shia branch of Islam.
24 January 2009 at 9:16 pm
I am providing a link here although it has become difficult to trust anything on net i wouls still suggest you to read Jinnah My brother written by Fatima Jinnah or go to supreme court of Pakistan lol.
nways here is the link
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/intro/islam-barelvi.htm
25 January 2009 at 1:26 pm
I love quaid coz he was a Muslim I don’t care if he was a Sunni or Shia. I said quaid was a Shia 12 imamia on behalf of the majority of the citation and references even on Wikipedia mentioned them. One thing is confirmed for me is that quaid azam was not an Ismaili coz he declared that Pakistan is an Islamic state and Islamic laws would be applied in Pakistan. Ismailis believe on the secularism and pluralism as we see in the life of Agha Khan himself, his daughter married with a Christian man and their dancing pictures are available on the websites. The website you provided is fabricated and there are several things clearly wrong in it and no detail about the quaid azam. These are issues which will never be resolved, just think about the good Pakistan do practice according to your believes and don’t touch the others.
Regards
28 January 2009 at 1:06 pm
Brother i will request you to Not bring in my Imam and his family in this matter that’s a different topic, even i can be disrespectful about your Imams after Imam Jafar Sadiq. And second thing Ismailis are as Muslim as a Sunni can be. Show me one country where Ismailis have been declared non-muslim, I challenge you. Even in country like Iran where Khomeini declared a lot of Sahabas Kafirs and Munafiqs. In 1895 Amir Abdur Rahman khan of Afghanistan declared Shia(12wers) kafir but there is not a single country that has declared Ismailis kafir.XXXP.
And as far as Jinnah is concerned he was born Ismaili and died as an Ismaili. Because of his Ismaili faith hardliner Muslims even used to call him Kafir Azam(NazubiAllah).
And Jinnah was the most Liberal leader of his time which a shia(12wers) can never be. Just read life history of Quaid-e-Azam how liberal he was alas those molvis who were against him and creation of pakistan now call him Babe Quam.
28 January 2009 at 1:13 pm
As far as declaring Pakistan Islamic State it was Sir sultan Muahmmed Shah Aga Khan the 48 Imam of Ismaili Muslims, who was also President of Muslim league now don’t say he converted to shia(12wers) looooooooool.
In 1935 when Jinnah wasnt coming back from london to fight for Independence It was Sir sultan Muhammad Shah Aga Khan(48th Ismaili Imam) who convinced him, but people say Allama iqbal, he would never listen to Allama Iqbal it was Sir sultan Muahmmed Shah Aga Khan. Jinnah’s Imam who convinved him, he would never dare to say no to his Imam.
Brother first have complete information of Pakistan History and then talk. I would say again dont be disrespectful to My Imam and his family.
Thank you.
28 January 2009 at 1:28 pm
ok if that website is fabricated here is another website Nation master.
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Jinnah
I am telling you again read any authentic documnet on his life you will know.
And i Just checked wikipedia it is written he was Ismaili :P.
99% of Sunni Scholars like Maulana Maududi say he was Aga Khani (Ismaili).
I wanna mention again Jinnah was very Liberal and used to believe in pluralism. His quotes like
”State has nothing to do with religion” Show his pluralistic thinking.XXXXXXPPPPPPPDDDDD.
28 January 2009 at 1:41 pm
In this link people are saying Jinnah was hindu his father christian he later converted to Islam, some are saying he was Ismaili. The thing is there is a saying in urdu
Jitne Mooo(mouth) itni batein.
Instead of arguing with anyone simply go to supreme court and get your answer. My uncle used to be in presidential Secretariat he has seen files thats why i am saying and in Pakistan’s bureaucracy Ismailis are highly respected because of Quaid Azam and sir sultan Muhammad shah 48th Imam of Ismailis.
30 January 2009 at 10:07 am
Ok put quaid-e-azam in your pocket , we are happy with Allah and His Rasool (S.A.W). I can’t beat Jahalat. I pray Allah give us a lot of tolerance. There will be a miracle if we see any positive change in Pakistan in these conditions (when everyone got a sword in his hands). Anyway I apologise if I hurt you.
Please remember me in your prayers.
Regards
8 February 2009 at 7:46 am
Discussion about Quaid e Azam that was he shia.
There was only one Namaz e Janaza of Quaid e Azam performed by Allama Shabbir Ahmad Usmani and that was wish of Quaid e Azam. Quaid e Azam never went to any Ismaili Jamat Khana and Shia Imam Bara.
Quaid e Azam loved the Ulamas like Allama Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, Moulana Abdul Hamid Badaiuni, Allama Syed Sulaiman Nadvi Desnavi Bihari, Moulana Abdus Sattar Khan Niazi, etc.
And now about Shias and Sunnis. In Bangladesh below 1% the Shias, in Pakistan upto 15%. The Sunnis in Iran upto 15%. There is not a single Sunni Masjid in Teheran. Shah Iran started a project for Sunni Masjid but after his departure Khomeini and his so called revolution finished this project. For decades the Sunnis perform Namaz e Juma in the premises of the Embassy of Pakistan in Teheran.
There is not even a junior minister from a Sunni sect in the Iranian government. No president, no prime minister, no high ranking officers in army, police, government and semi government department. But quite opposite: In Pakistan the Shias have been ministers army chief, naval chief, airforce chief, prime ministers, presidents, etc. Asif Ali Zardari is Shia and president of Pakistan and queu of the ministers, advisers is Shia.
Shias says Pakistan is a Islamic state, not a Sunni state. About Iran they say nothing. According to constitution of Iran, Iran is a Shia state. The Sunnis are persecuted. Many Sunni Allamas have been killed, secretly by the squads of Iranian government since the so called Khomeini revolution.
If Iran is Shia state, why not Pakistan becomes Sunni state.
Being Bangladeshi after 1971, I want to express that the creators of Bangladesh are getting curse from Allah. Many innocent muslims were killed by the politics of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Indira Gandhi and Sheikh Mujib.
Please look and think over it that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Indira Gandhi and Sheikh Mujib and their families did not get natural death, all were killed.
Being Muslim this is my belief, ALLAH NEVER SPARES THE EVILS.
20 February 2009 at 12:22 pm
[...] Iraq and on to Hezbollah in Lebanon. The following extract forms the introduction to a spirited debate between Pakistanis on the existential question of their national identity predicated as Pakistan [...]
24 February 2009 at 9:56 am
Some facts:
Begum Shafiqa Zia ul Haq was chairman of Shia shrine Bari Imam, she was also head of Imam husain council Islamabad. She and Zia use to distribute Niaz on 10th Moharram.
Quaid e Azam was not Shia, he was trapped by Shia religious fanatics like Raja Mahmood Abad, Abul Hasan Isphahani, Abdullah Haroon, Habib Bank group and Hashim Raza Comm Karachi, Kazim Raza IG, Abid Ali Abid etc. Raja Mahmood influenced him to declare Shia state, when he refused, he never came back to Pakistan and buried at Iran.
Z A Bhutto family is not Brelvi Raza Khani, however Bhutto’s licentious nature pushed him to become Shia, visiting Dragah did not show a person is Shia or Sunni. Benazir was sold by her mother and adopted mother’s religion. Zardari is most arzal caste of Iran who were expelled from Iran. Moreover usually feudal like to become Shia because of Mutta, all prostitutes in Pakistan are declared Shia. Bhutto clan is Sunni but Nusrat Bhutto influenced Z A bhutto family, so all of sons and daughters married to shia’s, even Fatima bhutto visited Tehran in Shia dress, her pictures are available on google.
vali Nasr was hired by Bush to help him in Iraq invasion, and he helped Shia rising with american money. Not only he but Husain Haqqani, farahnaz Ispahani, Abdullah Husain haroon, Hasan Askari Rizvi, Khalid hasan, Najam sethi, Sherry Rahman, Rahman Malik and so many others were hired by CIA and provided jobs to propagate in favor of Iraqi invasion. Shia’s of Pakistan are politically with Iran and help to leak info to their intelligence agencies. Iran is providing funding to major terrorists Shia organizations, Kurram agency, Hazara’s, Northern areas, Karachi is main centre of their finance and influence.
Offering Namaz e Janaza does not symbolic gesture of faith of any political leader. Peoples say Shia Janaza of Quaid e Azam was offered in bath room with two persons. A bundle of lie, moreover a person says that Shia Panja was buried under bed of Fatima Jinnah, means she has been sleeping on Panaja, what a nonsense. Politicians are hippocrites, Benazir was later re-arranged for Nikkah. What a nonsense. Religion is a personal matter then why to make fool peoples.
24 February 2009 at 5:53 pm
Great article- fascinating comment stream
Thanks and great work!
28 February 2009 at 7:35 am
The Shias not only in Pakistan but in the other parts of the world should accept, the Sunnis are oppressed in Iran, Iraq, etc. See in Pakistan that the Shias are in politics and high ranking officers in civil and armed forces departments.
Pakistan must become a Sunni state.
The rubbish from Shias is not acceptable.
Tolerance does not mean that the Shias rule Pakistan.
1 March 2009 at 4:17 am
I don’t understand why we are so narrow minded why we don’t accept the Shias as our brothers. When I was a child I heard from my parents and molana that shia kill children and drink blood but when I grown up I didn’t find anything so why it was? I have several shia friends and no one said me anything wrong about sunnis. I have read Khomeni he always said there is no difference between shia and sunni. In out of the 57 or 58 Islamic countries there are only two or three countries have majority of population shia and they got Islamic states in Iran. What about us? we don’t have even one Islamic state. Alqaida is terrorist organisation represented by sunnis no one like it and no one support it whilst Hizbollah is a shia organization people love it even sunni and Christians. Iran is the only country who fully supports Hamas (sunni organisation in Palestine) and always raise the voice against Israel for Palestini sunni brothers. Why we don’t accept this? Suadi Arab calls USA for help in 1991 against Iraq and allows non-muslims to be entered into Kaba, why? There are several shias have been killed in Pakistan and still being killed I remembered in 1995 only 100 shia doctors were killed in Karachi. We don’t want to investigate we don’t want to read the books we just follow propagandas. I investigated about the actresses and actors and I found majority of them are sunnis including most famous porn actresses in 1980s Anita Ayub and Amber Ayub. Maria Wasti and Aisha khan videos can be found in Youtube. There is nothing belong to shia in Red Areas in Lahore. They get the money to wear black dresses and recites mourning songs. There are several other merasis who recites the mourning songs because they get the money. Ok just leave this thing and go into Egypt, Jordan, Libya and see the women dresses there they all sunnis whilst in Iran its hard to find out even one woman withoud Hijab. It is not the matter who is Shia and who is Sunni actual thing what is the right direction unfortunately we all stuck into these stupid debates.
14 March 2009 at 4:29 pm
To Voice of Human Justice:
Khomeini and for the unity of Sunnis and Shias? A good joke. Read the books written by him carefully and you will see how Khomeine abused Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umer.
He wrote that whenever the Shias get power over Saudi Arabia the first job to dig the graves of the campanions of Hazrat Mohammad S.A.W. and clean the Rouza of our prophet, Nauzebillah.
Either you are Shia or you have no knowledge about Shiaism.
15 March 2009 at 11:19 am
Pak Bangladeshi:
You got infection same like the lot of other. There is too much work against shia on youtube and other websites if they are against us why they dont write? why America is fighting with Iran? why not with Saudia? Why Saudian mufti give fatwa against Hamas and Hizbullah in favour of Israel? and also why shias support in palestine and Gazza to sunnis. Just give me good answer of these questions I will change my mind.
If you travel by road to Iran it is written on the wall of the border of Iran “there is no difference between shia and sunni” said by Khumaini so why it is so? just give me the name of his books in which you find this rubbish I want to read. I give you the name of his two books just go and read (1) Chehal Hadis (40 ahadeth) and (2)Islamic goverment. I m sure you will change your opinion after reading these books.
16 March 2009 at 3:16 pm
To Voice of Human Justice:
Please read the books of Khomeini and writers of Shiaism. The original books are written in Persian, Arabic and Urdu and translated into English by Shias.
Kashful Asrar by Khomeini. Names of some books by Shias are Asool Kaafi, Al Shafi, Jila-ul-Ayoun, Israr-e-Muhammad, Anwaar-e-Naumania, Hayat-ul-Quloob, Haq-ul-Yaqeen, Asool-e-Shariat Fee Aqaid-ul-Shia’t, Fasal-ul-Khitab, Shia Mazhab Haq Hai, Min Kitab-ul-Burhan Fee Tafseer-ul-Quran, Hathi Kay Daant Khanay Kay Aur Dikhanay Kay Aur, Quran Majeed by Maqbool Hussain Dehlevi, etc.
For your information and knowledge some sentences from these books are given below:
1. “Bad’ah”; ALLAH tells a lie. (Asool Kaafi, Vol. No.1, Page No. 148. A Shia doctrine.)
2. All Imams are equal in rank and status to Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w). (Asool Kaafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 270)
3. There are seventeen thousand Ayah in real Quran. (Al Shafi, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 616)
4. Sahabah (r.a) became infidel by denying the divine right (Wilayat) of Hazrat Ali. First three caliph and other Sahabas became infidel by denying the divine right of (Wilayat) of Hazrat Ali. (Asool Kaafi, Page No. 420)
5. All the people rejected Islam after the death of the Prophet except three. Miqdad, Abu Zar and Salman Farsi. (Quran Majeed by Maqbool Hussain Dehlevi, Page No. 134)
6. “Difference between ALLAH and Ali”. (Jila-ul-Ayoun, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 66)
7. We are the eyes of the God in his creature and the final authority in all human beings. (Asool Kaafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 145)
8. No one possess complete knowledge of Holy Quran except Imams. (Asool Kaafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 228)
9. Hazrat Abu Bakr (r.a) could not recite Kalma at the time of his death. (Israr-e-Muhammad, Page No. 211)
10. When Our Qaim (12th Imam) gets up, Humira (Ayesha) will be raised from the dead so as to be whipped her due punishment, and so as to avenge the daughter of Muhammad (s.a.w), Fatima. (Al Shafi, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 108)
11. Ali is God. (Jila-ul-Ayoun, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 66)
12. The Hujjat ( Ultimate proof ) of God can not be established without Imam. (Asool Kaafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 177)
13. “Changes in Quran for Drinker Khulafa-e-Rashideen”. (Translation Of Quran Majeed by Maqbool Hussain Dehlevi, Page No. 479)
14. Shaitan was the first to sworn the oath of allegiance from Abu Bakr in the mosque. (Israr-e-Muhammad, Page No. 30)
15. “An accusation of poisoning to Prophet by Ayesha and Hafsa”. (Jila-ul-Ayoun, Page No. 118)
16. Imams are God. (Jila-ul-Ayoun, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 85)
17. Imam knows his hour of death and his death is in his control. (Asool Kaafi, Vol. No. 1,Page No. 258)
18. Pakistan is mentioned in the Original Holy Quran, present Quran is meaningless. (Hazaar Tumhari Das Hamari, Page No. 554)
19. It is infidelity (Kufr) to doubt about the infidelity (Kufr) of Hazrat Umar. (Jila-ul-Ayoun, Page No. 63)
20. “An accusation of poisoning to Prophet by Ayesha and Hafsa”. (Jila-ul-Ayoun, Page No. 118)
21. Abdullah Ibn-e-Saba maintained the indispensability of Imamat and claimed that Ali was the true lord. (Anwaar-e-Naumania, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 234)
22. According to Shia’s nothing can remain hidden from the Imams, they have a complete knowledge of past, present and future. (Asool Kaafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 260)
23. Quran was ascended in four parts whereas present Quran is consist of three parts. (Shia Aur Tehreef-e-Quran, page No. 62)
24. Those who deny the first of Hazrat Ali Caliphate are infidels. (Anwaar-e-Naumania, Vol. No. 3, Page No. 264)
25. Ayesha was an infidel women. (Hayat-ul-Quloob, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 726)
26. We neither accept that God nor Prophet whose successor is Abu Bakr. (Anwaar-e-Naumania, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 278)
27. Imam posses more attribute than a Prophet posses. (Asool Kaafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 388)
28. The present Quran is abridged where as the Original Quran is kept by Imam Mehdi. (Hazaar Tumhari Das Hamari, Page No. 553)
29. Abu Bakr and Umar were more tyrant than Shaitan. (Haq-ul-Yaqeen, Page No. 509)
30. Imam Mehdi (12th Imam) will punish Ayesha with strips. (Hayat-ul-Quloob, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 901)
31. “An acceptance of separate Kalma”. (Asool-e-Shariat Fee Aqaid-ul-Shia’t, Page No. 423)
32. To hide secret and to weep on the operations of Imam is Jihad. (Asool Kaafi, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 226)
33. Shaikheen (r.a) refused to accept the Quran which was compiled by Hazrat Ali (r.a). (Fasal-ul-Khitab, Page No. 64)
34. Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umar among seven doors of the hell. (Haq-ul-Yaqeen, Page No. 500)
35. Ayesha and Hafsa were hypocrite and infidel women. (Hayat-ul-Quloob, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 900)
36. “An acceptance of alteration in the Kalma Tayyibah”. (Shia Mazhab Haq Hai, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 57)
37. Fourteen Imams of Shia’s ( infallible ), the masters of this Universe are desecration of all Prophets and Angels. (Jila-ul-Ayoun, Vol. 2, Page No. 29)
38. Quran was eaten by Goat. (Min Kitab-ul-Burhan Fee Tafseer-ul-Quran, Page No. 38)
39. Imam Mehdi will order, the digging out from grave, the dead bodies of Shaikheen, make them alive and will be punished. (Haq-ul-Yaqeen, Page No. 371)
40. “Ayesha was hypocrite”. (Hayat-ul-Quloob, Page No. 867)
41. To ask for help from Ali is not a polytheism but a way of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w)”. ( Hathi Kay Daant Khanay Kay Aur Dikhanay Kay Aur, Vol. No.2, Page No. 41)
42. Imam Mehdi will kill all the Sunni Scholars. (Haq-ul-Yaqeen, Page No.527)
43. The main compilers of Quran interpreted changed corrupted and perverted the Holy Quran. (Al-Ehtijaj, Page No. 257)
44. Abu Bakr, Umar, Usman and Muawiyah are like idols, they are worst of all the creatures of God. (Haq-ul-Yaqeen, Page No. 519)
45. Ayesha was charged of committing open vulgarity. (Quran Majeed by Maqbool Hussain Dehlevi, Page No. 840)
46. Kalma Tayyibah without Ali Wali uLLAH is false. (Shia Mazhab Haq Hai, Page No. 2)
47. Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umar were the followers of Shaitan. (Quran Majeed by Maqbool Hussain Dehlevi, Page No. 674)
48. Ayesha was not an American or European lady. (Haqeeqat-e-Fiqah Hanfia Dar Jawab Haqeeqat-e-Fiqah Jaffria, Page No. 64)
49. When God becomes happy, He talks in Persian, when He becomes annoyed, talks in Arabic. (Tareekh-ul-Islam, Page No. 163)
50. In Holy Quran (Fahsha) refers to Abu Bakr, (Munkir) refers to Umar, and (Baghi) refers to Usman. (Quran Majeed by Maqbool Hussain Dehlevi, Page No. 551)
What Khomeini wrote in Kashful Asrar please read the following sentences:
KHOMEINI ON QURAN IN HIS “KASHFUL ASRAR”
“TAHREEF (deliberate alteration of words to change the meaning of the holy books, namely, the Bible, etc.) is that fault which Muslims accuse Jews and Christians of indulging in, has proved to be found in the Ashaabs (of Rasoolullah – sallal laahu alaihi wasallam).”
(KASHFUL ASRAR, PAGE 114).
“It was easy for the Ashaabs (of Rasoolullah – sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) to remove verses from the Holy Quran and deliberately add verses to it, and in this way forever concealing from the people of the world the true Quran.”
(KASHFUL ASRAR, PAGE 114).
My Dear,
I am not against any person or system but concealing the truth is sin and crime.
Would these kind of ideas and ideologies mentioned above about quran and sahaba are for
unity?
I hope you will change your opinion after reading the books of Khomeini and writers of Shiaism.
18 March 2009 at 11:34 am
Pak Bangladeshi:
Unfortunately, you are taking the debate on the wrong direction. I asked the different things but your answer is different and also asked the name of the book and page number in which Khomeini misbehaved with caliphs Hazrat Umar and Hazrat Abubaker (R.A), as you wrote above, but you didn’t mention that thing. I would like to hate him if he said so. The following quotations do not have any validity coz they have been condemned by Shia Allamas. I already know the several of these things on internet (probably you copy and pasted from there). First make the proper channels if you want to investigate. Please carefully read the following points.
• Asool Kafi is not the authentic book in shia. Its not like Saha Sattah in Sunnis. It is just the storage of the Ahadees which were collected in emergency when Ahadees were getting burnt in period of Abbasi Caliphs. As shia Allamas say not every Hadees is right in this book.
• I have confirmed from more than 15 shia Allamas about Ali (K.A.W) status. Ali or anyone is not better than Prophet (S.A.W). Allah is the greatest (wahdahu La Shareka Lahu) and after that Prophet (S.A.W) in the eyes of Shias.
• There is a Group usually originated from Syria called NUSARI, they say Ali is the God NOT shia. Same as Qadyanis in Sunnis who deny prophet (S.A.W) is a last prophet of Allah.
• Allah Says in Quran “We delivered this message (Quran) and we will look after it”. (Surah Hijer Ayat 9), after that no one can say Quran is edited or changed (Tehreef). Shia has same believe like Sunni in this Issue. (Plz read 20 Jawab published by Darus-saqafa Karachi).
• Hazrat Tumhari Das or Maqbool Ahmed Dehelvi or others Inidans stupid fabricated Maulvis have been condemned by the shias Allamas several times. They all were NUSAIRI and unfortunately we always imply NUSAIRI ISM on shias. Shia Allamas were sleeping before but now they have been activated against them. Plz click the link in the bottom.
• If Salman Rushdi or some other (who were originally sunni) writes against Quran or Prophet (S.A.W) then it doesn’t means they are representing Sunni Islam. The important thing is to find out proper channels for investigation.
• I agree that shia doesn’t have the same image about first three caliphs and Hazrat Aisha (R.A.) as sunni have, but it doesn’t effect their Islam. In all the sects of Islam no one says believe on the SAHABA (R.A.) is the necessary condition to be a Muslim.
• Except Allah, prophets and Quran, we have a right to criticise anyone in this world including sahaba (R.A) coz they are human like us and can make mistake but misbehave with them is not permissible.
• Shia criticise sahaba (R.A) but they do not misbehave it is prohibited in shias, there is a group called NUSAIRI they only misbehave with them.
• Why Shia criticise Shaba and Hazrat Aisha (R.A) this is a very long debate but just want to point out few things.
1. Hazrat Aisha made a war (JAMAL) against Ali (who was the 4rth caliph at that time) and tried to weaken the Islamic government and also responsible for the killing of the thousands of Muslims in this war. Same as Hazrat Mauvia (R.A) did with Hazrat Ali (K.A.W) in Seffene war.
2. Several others and Maulana Maudodi (former leader of Jamat Islami Pakistan) criticised this act of Hazrat Aisha (R.A) andHazrat Mauvia and also first three caliphs (R.A) in favour of Hazrat Ali (K.A.W). (Plz read his book khilafat u Malukiat).
3. You are trying to abuse the words from KASHAF-UL-ASRAR. Khomeni didn’t write that Sahaba tried to do Tehreef. He said some of the SAHABA (who were not actually Sahaba) tried to do wrong interpretation plz read his student book “SUKHAN” written by Murtaza Mutheri (published by sazman Tablegat Islami Karachi) in which he proved that sahaba (R.A.) saved Quran from tehreef by memorizing it. Khomeini criticised some of the Sahaba but as Maudodi did.
There are several things more to say but can’t write everything. I hope you will think with peace of mind now. You have to make sure that what the truth is. It could be you who is concealing the truth by writing all these things? In last I want to mention that I don’t have any ineterest in Khomeni by beleif.
Wassalam
Plz watch the following video on shia sunni unity.
21 March 2009 at 7:43 am
Voice of Human Justice:
Please see the following website of Sunnis in Iran
http://www.sunnahonline.com/ilm/aqeedah/0042.htm
And please go to youtube (Shias abusing Khalifas and Hazrat Ayesha). I request you that not to mention me that these Shias are Nusairi. Are all the Shias in India, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, etc are Nusairi? No, never no.
I paste the following article:
KHOMEINI
Some Facts
By
Allamah Kaukab Noorani Okarvi
Translated by:
S. G. Khawajah
Published by:
Zia-ul-Qur’aan Publications
Daata Ganj Bakhsh Road
Lahore (Pakistan)
Edition First (in Pakistan) 1996
Collated by:
Maulana Okarvi Academy Al-A’lami, 53-B, S.M.C.H.S. Karachi-74400
* * * * *
All the books from which excerpts have been reproduced in this book are available with me as well as on the market. But if readers find some spelling or other errors in the translation they should inform me so that corrections may be made in future editions.
Mu’min
Banda-e-Parwur Digaaram Ummat-e-Ahmad Nabee
Dost Daar-e-Chaar Yaaram Taab’e Aulaad-e-’Alee
Mazhab-e-Hanfyyah Daaram Millat-e-Hazrat Kkaleel
Khaak Paa’e Ghaus-e-A’zam Zer-e-Saayah Har Walee
A slave of Rabb of all the worlds and a follower (Ummatee) of Prophet
Muhammad (Sallal Laahu ‘Alaihi Wa Sallam) am 1.
To all four friends*
I give allegiance and am subservient to Alee’s progeny. **
Hanafi is my creed, and I belong to Hazrat Ibraaheem Khaleel ul Laah’s millat.
Dust from under the feet of Ghaus-e-A’zam, I am a devotee of all (Auliyaa) the friends of Al-Laah.
————————————————————————————————————
*Hazrat Abu Bakr, Hazrat ‘Umar, Hazrat ‘Usmaan, Hazrat ‘Alec (Radiyal Laahu ‘Anhum)
** Hazrat Imaam Hasan, Hazrat Imaam Husain (Radiyal Laahu Anhuma)
————————————————————————————————————
Al-Laahu Rabbu Muhammadin Salla ‘Alaihi Wa Sallama
(Al-Laah (Subhaanahu) is the Creator and Sustainer of the Prophet
(Saiyyidina) Muhammad (Sallal Laahu ‘Alaihi Wa Sallam) and sends peace and salutations to him)
I think I owe it to my readers to first state my credentials. By Al-Laah’s grace (Al Hamdu Lil Laah), it is my pride and privilege to be a right-guided and steadfast Musalmaan: Muhammadi, Sunni, Hanafi, Maa Tureedi. I also am a believer in all the well-known and extant spiritual orders established by the great Soofi saints of Islam (Auliya’ Al-Laah) (May Al-Laah be pleased with them), and owe allegiance to four of such renowned orders, namely, Naqsh-bandiyah, Qandiriyah, Chishtiyah and Suhrwardiyah. I should also state why I have undertaken to write this tract. It is simply this. During the course of my recent tour of African countries for the purpose of the propagation of the Faith, I found to my horror that many Muslim youths had come under the spell of Khomeini, erstwhile leader of the revolution in Iran. It had occurred simply because although the strident propaganda literature about the legendary exploits of the Iranian leader incessantly poured out- by the Iranian Government had reached the ears of these Muslim youths, but they had remained woefully ignorant about the beliefs and postulates held by the leaders of Shiite thought. I, therefore, felt that it was incumbent on me to expose the Shiite jurists and scholars, including Khomeini, through their own writings, so that Muslim youths become informed of the truth, and are thus able to remain steadfast to the tenets of the Sunni faith.
Now, let us see what that great savant of Islaam, Hazrat Mahboob-e-Subhaani, Saiyyidina Shaikh Abdul Qaadir Jeelaani, better known as Hazrat Ghaus-i-A’zam (May Al-Laah be pleased with him)’ has written about the Shiites in his book Ghunyatut Taalibeen.
On page 170 of the book, he says: “The Shiite faith is much akin to the Jewish faith. According to Allamah Sha’bi, the “love” borne by the Raafzis (Shiites) is like the love borne by the Jews. The Jews hold that no man, unless he is from the House of David, is fit to be an Imaam. The Shiites reject the claim to Imaamat of any man who is not from the
House of Ali Ibne Abi Taalib. The Jews are of the view that until Dajjaal appears and until Hazrat ‘Isaa (May peace and blessings be upon him) does not—delayed so long for one reason or another—descend from the heaven, it is wholly wrong to wage a holy war (Jihaad). Similarly, the Raafizis (Shiites) hold that unless Imaam Mahdi appears and unless the heaven testifies to his Imaamat, it is not permitted to unleash a war for the sake of Al-Laah. The Jews delay their Maghrib prayers (Namaaz) until the stars join together. Similarly, the Shiites delay their Maghrib prayers. The Jews say their prayers while removed from the Qiblah and a bit tilted from it. The Shiites do the same. The Jews move to and fro while saying their prayers. The Raafizis (Shiites) do likewise. While praying, the Jews let their outer garments touch the ground. The Shiites do likewise. The Jews deem the killing of every Musalmaan to be permitted to them. The Shiites hold the same view. The Jews do not attach any importance to the provision of Id-dat (waiting period) for divorced women. The Raafizis also are like them in this matter. The Jews do not think that any harm attaches to pronouncing talaaq (divorce) thrice. The Shiites also believe likewise. The Jews tampered with the Thauraat. The Shiites tampered with the Qur’aan. They say that changes and distortions had already been made in the Qur’aan and alterations had been affected in the arrangement of its verses. They further say that the order in which the Qur’aan was revealed has not been retained and the way it is now recited is not proved by a reference to the Prophet (May Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him). The Shiites, therefore, maintain that additions and subtractions have been made in the Qur’aan. The Jews have an enmity with Hazrat Jibra’eel (May peace be upon him), and they say that he is an enemy to them from amongst the angels. Similarly, one faction of the Shiites says that Jibra’eel grossly erred in delivering (Wah’y) Al-Laah’s Message to Hazrat Muhammad (May Al-Laah’s peace and blessing be upon him) instead of to Hazrat Ali for whom, according to them, it was in fact meant. The Shiites are liars. May they perish till Doomsday!”
One of the giants among the scholars of the sub-continent, Shah Abdul Azeez Muhaddis Dehlvi (May Al-Laah have mercy on him), has written a remarkable book in denunciation of the obnoxious beliefs of the Shiites. It is called Tuhfah Isnaa Ashariyah and is available throughout the Arab and the non-Arab world in all four languages, Arabic, Persian, Urdu and English. Given below are some extracts from the book, exposing some of the most contemptible beliefs of the Shiites, so that Muslim youths are able to know by themselves, instead of asking any Mufti (An expounder of muslim law) whether persons holding such beliefs could be called Musalmaan.
Beliefs of the Shiites and the Raafzis
(Heretics):
* The Qur’aan extant today is not correct because the companions of the holy Prophet
(May Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him)
have tampered with it.
* The “Gharaabiyah” faction of the Shiites maintains that Jibreel (May peace be upon him) grossly erred in delivering (Wah’y) Al-Laah’s Message. Originally intended for Hazrat Ali, it was wrongly delivered to Hazrat Muhammad (May Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him).
* Three of the Caliphs, i.e. Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddeeq, Hazrat ‘Umar Farooq and Hazrat ‘Usmaan Ghani (May Al-Laah be pleased with them) were definitely not Mu’min and, as such, were also not fit to be Ameers and Caliphs.
* Whosoever bears love for Hazrat Ali Ibne Abi Taalib (May Al-Laah be pleased with him) will be blessed with Jannat (Paradise), be he a Mushrik (polytheist) or a Jew or a Christian. On the other hand, whosoever bears love for the companions (Sahaabah) (May Al-Laah be pleased with them) of the Prophet of Al-Laah (May Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him) will go to Hell, howsoever good and righteous he may be and howsoever much he may be in love with the House of the Prophet (Ahl-e-Baiet, May Al-Laah be pleased with them.)
* Cursing Hazrat Abu ‘Bakr Siddeeq and Hazrat ‘Umar Farooq brings as much good reward (from Al-Laah) as reciting Bismil-Laah and the food that is eaten after cursing these two personages is 70 times more blessed.
* Al-Laah sent all His Prophets and Messengers to the world merely to confirm Hazrat Ali’s Vilaayat (sainthood). Had there been no Hazrat Ali, Prophets would not have been created.
* Al-Laah’s Prophets can lie and slander.
* Revelations used to descend upon Hazrat Ali Ibne Abi Taalib (May Al-Laah be pleased with him).
* Al-Laah was so pleased at the assassination of Hazrat Umar Farooq that He forbade the Kiraaman Kaatibeen
(angels appointed by Al-Laah to write down good and bad acts of every person born into the world)
from noting down the sins of people for three days.
* Pretending to be a Sunni and saying prayer’s behind a Sunni is as great a virtue as saying prayers behind a Prophet. This is meant to show that Taqiyyah (deception) by itself is a great virtue. (May Al-Laah protect us from such beliefs!)
It should be noted that at present there are Shiites who protest their ignorance about the above-mentioned blasphemous beliefs, just as some Deobandi Wahaabi*
————————————————————————————————————
* For details of the blasphemous and altogether abominable ideas held by the Deobandi Wahaabi propagandists readers may see my tract, “Deoband to Bareilly: (The Truth)”.
——————————————————————————————————–
propagandists deny knowledge of the blasphemous and altogether abominable ideas mentioned in their books by their predecessors.
Let us take heed that those who merely say that they have no such knowledge are not to be deemed separate and different from those who hold such blasphemous and wrong beliefs and propagate them unless they declare on oath that they do not subscribe to these views and also that they consider those who hold such views to be infidels, wicked and strayed.
Let him who says that it is not right to altogether condemn a person for doing one bad deed reflect on the fate of Shaitaan, to whom all his prayers for millions of years, his beliefs in the Oneness of Al-Laah (Tauheed) and all his knowledge was of no avail because of a single misdeed he committed. It should be clearly understood that to be a Mu’min and a Muslim, it is absolutely essential to fully subscribe to all the essentials of the Faith, and denying any one of these is enough to condemn a man as an infidel.
Readers ought to realise that there is absolutely no room for any doubt about the correctness and the truth of the Holy Qur’aan. It is a miracle acknowledged to be so by the whole world. But let us now consider the view the Shiites hold about the Qur’aan. On page 228, volume one, of the renowned book of the Shiites, Usool-e-Kaafi, Kitaabul Hujjah, (published by Daar-ul-Kutub Al-lslaamiyah, Tehran), it is stated thus: “It is narrated from Jaabir that he heard it from Aba Ja’far Imaam Muhammad Baaqir, (May Al-Laah be pleased with him) that none amongst mankind could claim to have gathered the whole of the Qur’aan as it had descended. He who makes such a claim is a liar. No one gathered it in the manner it was sent down, and no one memorised it thus, except Ali Ibne Abi Taalib (may Al-Laah be pleased with him) and the Imaams who came after him”. May Al-Laah protect us from such vile thoughts!.
On page 633 of volume 2 of the same book, it is stated “that a man recited the Qur’aan in the presence of Abu Abdul Laah (Imaam Ja’far Saadiq, may Al-Laah be pleased with him) during which some words were recited in a manner which was not according to how people used to generally recite them. Upon this, Abu Abdul Laah (May peace on him) said: “Do not recite like this but recite it as people have been reciting it till Imaam Mahdi makes his appearance. The Qur’aan, as it was originally sent down, will be recited only when Imaam Mahdi appears on the eve of Doomsday, and then the Qur’aan scribed by Hazrat Ali will be brought out”. Al-Laah protect us form such evil thoughts!
Renowned Shiite scholar of the sixth century A.H., Abu Mansoor Tabrasi, on page 254 of volume one of his book, Al-lhtijaaj Lit-Tabrasi, published by Al Matba’ Sa’eed Mashhad-al-Muqaddasah, Iran’ and the 11th century A.H. Shiite researcher, Mulla Mohsin Kaashaani, on page 32 of volume one of his book, Tafseer As-Saavee, published in Iran, have denied in clear terms the veracity and the truth of the Qur’aan.
Despite denying the veracity and the truth of the Qur’aan, Shiite scholars have yet written commentaries of the Qur’aan. Renowned Shiite commentator of the Qur’aan, Ali Bin Ibraaheem Al-Qumi, on page 35, volume one, of his commentary, Tafseer Qumi (published by Mu’as-sisah Daar-ul-Kitaab Lit-Taba’ati wan-Nashar), explaining the Qur’aanic verse, “Of course, Al-Laah does not refrain form giving the likeness of even the smallest of things, be it a gnat in this verse or any thing bigger than this”, says that “gnat in this verse refers to Hazrat Ali
and the words ‘bigger than this’ refer to ” Dear readers! I dare not,
even in translation, name the most scared being which the Shiite scholar
has done in Arabic with abandon. Al-Laah protect me from committing
such a profanity!
Readers will have no realisation of the deep anguish I have been going through while reproducing such abominations. But it is a fact that whereas his fatwa (religious verdict) of death against Shaitaan Rushdie has earned Khomeini all-round applause and approbation, people are generally not aware that Khomeini himself is guilty of a similar blasphemy. As a humble servant of Ahle Sunnat I deem slandering against anybody to be a major sin. Readers would have, therefore, noticed that I have all along this tract been quoting from the writings of Shiite scholars along with the names of the presses from which they had been published and with the fullest sense of responsibility. The idea behind reproducing them is merely to make our simple but enthusiastic youths keep away from being influenced by the apparent charms of Khomeini’s so-called feats in the light of knowledge gained by them regarding this wicked faith (Shiism) and its followers.
On page 671 of the famous book of the Shiites, Usool-e-Kaafi, published from Lucknow, an assertion is made that Abu Abdul Laah (Imaam Ja’far) reportedly held that “the Qur’aan brought to Hazrat Muhammad (peace be upon him) by Jibra’eel (peace be upon him) contained 17,000 verses”. Readers know that the Holy Qur’aan contains only 6,666 verses, while the Shiites believe that 10,344 verses have been expunged. This means that, according to the Shiites, Al-Laah failed to keep His promise He himself made in the Book of preserving the Qur’aan. How ridiculous! (May Al-Laah forbid it!).
Several renowned Shiite scholars have repeatedly made the assertion that the extant version of the Qur’aan is not the original one, and the blame for saying so has been clearly pinned down on venerated Imaama of the House of Muhammad (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him).
All Muslims know it full well that mut’ah (temporary marriage) is forbidden. But a reliable Shiite scholar, Mulla Fathul Laah Kaashaani, on page 493 of his book, Manhaj-us-Saadiqeen, volume 2, published by Intishaaraute llmiyah Islaamiyah, Baazaar Shirazi Junb Nouroz Khan, writes the following and alludes it to the Holy Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessing be upon him) himself. Mulla Kaashaani asserts: “He who contracts mut’ah once gets to the status of Imaam Husain (May Al-Laah be pleased with him); he who contracts it twice gets to the status of Imaam Hasan (may Al-Laah be pleased with him); he who contracts it thrice gets to the status of Hazrat Ali (may Al-Laah be pleased with him); and he who contracts it four times gets to my status (that is to say, the status of the Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessing be upon him) himself)”. Readers should realise how wicked would be the faith according to which contracting a forbidden act like mut’ah four times raises the person so doing to the status of the Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him). May Al-Laah protect us from this wicked faith and its evils!
Shiite Shaikhs, Toosi and Nu’maani, narrate the following from the 8th Imaam, Hazrat Raza (may Al-Laah be pleased with him): “The sign of the appearance of Imaam Mahdi will be that he will be seen in the nude in front of the sun, and a crier will announce that the Ameer-ul-Mu’mineen has come again”. And Mulla Baqir Majlisi, on page 347 of volume 2 of the book Haq-qul-Yaqeen, published by Intishaaraate llmiyah lslaamiyah, asserts thus: “The first to owe allegiance to the (naked) Mahdi will be Muhammad (May Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him)”. According to the same book, “When our Imaam Mahdi will reappear he will raise up Aayishah (May Al-Laah be pleased with her) and take revenge on her on behalf of Hazrat Faatimah (May Al-Laah be pleased with her)”. The same Mulla Baqir Majlisi writes: “Thus the two accursed men, (meaning, Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddeeq and Hazrat Umar Faarooq, may Al-Laah be pleased with them), and the two accursed women meaning, wives of the holy Prophet, Saiyyidah Aayishah Siddeeqah and Saiyyidah Hafsah (may Al-Laah be pleased with them), conspired among themselves to poison the holy Prophet (May Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him)”—page 610 of volume 2 of the book, Hayaat-ul-Quloob, published by Intisharaate Jaawedaan. This assertion clearly means that Al-Laah failed in His promise of protecting the holy Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings he upon him) from the people.
Those influenced by Khomeini himself might say that all this was not written by Khomeini himself. I should ask such of them to read what Khomeini himself has written on page 121 of the book, Kashf-ul-Asraar, published by lntisharaate Mustafavi. Khomeini exhorts his co-religionists thus: “Continue reading the Persian books written by Mulla Baqir Majlisi for the Persian speaking people so that you do not fall into the mischief of some kind of foolishness”. I put it to my readers whether supporting blasphemy does not itself constitute blasphemy! Also to be noted is this pronouncement by Khomeini: “The belief that the status of our Imaams is such that it is not achievable by any of the angels who may be near to Al-Laah, or any Prophet (sent by Al-Laah), is one of the fundamentals of our Shiite faith”, page 58 of Vilaayat-e-Faqeeh, published by Intisharaate Aazaadi, Qum, Seh Rah Mozah.
Dear readers! We of the Ahle Sunnat Wa Jama’at believe, in the light of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, that all the companions (may Allah be pleased with them) of the holy Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him) are true and steadfast Mu’min, are definitely entitled to Jannat (Paradise) and are exalted in ranks in the sight of Al-Laah. Al-Laah has Himself testified in the Qur’aan to the companions of the holy Prophet (May Al-Laah’s peace and blessing be upon him) being Mu’min and entitled to Jannat. Everybody is aware that Islaamic tenets are based on the news given in the Qur’aan and the Hadeeth. Any news given by an Imaam (religious guide) or a Mujtahid (A supervisor of religious matters) or a Mufti (An expounder of muslim law) should be rejected if it is opposed to the Qur’aan and the Hadeeth.
The greatest Muhad-dis of the Shiites, Mulla Muhammad Bin Ya’qoob Koleini, in volume 8 of his book, Ar-Raudah Minal Kaafi, published in Tehran, (page 245), quoting Imaam Muhammad Baaqir (may Al-Laah be pleased with him), writes: “After the demise of the Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him), all his companions had become apostates, excepting Miqdaad Bin Aswad, Abu Zar Ghifaari and Salmaan Faarasi (may Al-Laah have mercy on them)”. On the next page (246) of the same book, he states: “The Shaikhain (Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddeeq and Hazrat Umar Faarooq, may Al-Laah be pleased with them) departed from this world without seeking forgiveness and without repenting for what they had done to the Ameer-ul-Mu’mineen Hazrat Ali (may peace on him). Thus may Al-Laah and the angels and the people curse the two!” We of the Ahle Sunnat Wa Jama’at condemn all such beliefs.
Mulla Baqir Majlisi, in his book Haq-qul-Yaqeen, (page 342), in his usual abusive and filthy style, “likens Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddeeq and Hazrat Umar Faarooq to Fir’aun and Haamaan” (Al-Laah forbid). On page 259 of the same book Mulla Baqir has this to say about Hazrat Umar (may Al-Laah be pleased with him): “It is not necessary to repeat what has already been written in larger books about the meanness of the family background and about his being born outside of wedlock”. The same Mulla Baqir, writing on page 522 of the same book, makes bold to quote Imaam Zainul Aabideen (may Al-Laah be pleased with them) as having said, “on being questioned about the affairs of Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umar (may Al-Laah be pleased with them) that both Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umar (may Al-Laah be pleased with him) were infidels, and he who bears love to these two is also an infidel” (Al-Laah forbid). And yet it is this Mulla Baqir whom Khomeini exhorts his followers to keep drawing inspiration from! Can Khomeini, even after this; be called a “leader and guide?”
Besides this, the greatest Muhad-dis of the Shiites, Muhammad Bin Ya’qoob Koleini, on page 285 of his book, Ar-Raudah Kaafi, volume 8 (published by Daarul Kutub Al-lslaamiyah, Tehran) has used the name of Imaam Muhammad Baaqir (may Al-Laah be pleased with him) for the assertion that “all except our Shiites are bastards”. It is mentioned in Haq-qul-Yaqeen, volume 2, page 527, that, “on appearing, Imaam Mahdi will first kill all Sunni ulama before killing all other infidels”. And Majma-ul-Bayaan also carries the same Hadeeth with its source pegged on to the Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him) himself. (Al-Laah forbids!).
- On page 521 of Haq-qul-Yaqeen, volume 2, such people who approve of the Imaamat and Khilaafat of Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddeeq, Hazrat Umar Faarooq (may Al-Laah be pleased with them) and who consider these two to precede Hazrat Ali (may Al-Laah be pleased with him`), have been called “Naasibi”. And Mulla Baqir Majlisi, in his writings, says: “A ‘Naasibi’ is worse than a bastard. It is true that Almighty Al-Laah has not created a worse creature than a dog, but in the sight of Al-Laah a Naasibi is more mean than a dog”.
(Haq-qul-Yaqeen, volume 2, page 516).
Those who can agree to be worse than bastards and dogs, as claimed by Mulla Baqir Majlisi, who has been praised by Khomeini, may accept Khomeini as “leader and guide”. But thanks to Al-Laah, we of the Ahle Sunnat Wa Jama’at do no subscribe to such heathenistic beliefs and postulates.
Apart from Mulla Baqir Majlisi, let us see Khomeini’s own perverse thinking about Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddeeq and Hazrat Umar Faarooq (may Al-Laah be pleased with them). He writes: “It was impossible for those people (Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umar, may Al-Laah be pleased with them), who had for many years attached themselves to the Messenger (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him) and had formed themselves into a group in the hope of one day grabbing power, to resist doing what they did just for the sake of carrying out the commands of the Qur’aan. They had to seize power and run their governments anyhow, somehow”, (page l 14, Kashful Asraar.)
On the same page of this very book, he further says: “They Abu Bakr and Umar (may Al-Laah be pleased with them) had nothing to do with Islaam and Qur’aan, except to seize worldly power, and had been using the Qur’aan as a smokescreen to fulfil their evil intentions” At the end of this very book, Khomeini has given these headlines to various chapters: “Abu Bakr’s opposition to the text of the Qur’aan; Umar’s opposition to Al-Laah’s Qur’aan”. (Kashful Asraar. pages 114 and 117). On page 120 of this very book, Khomeini has headlined one of his chapters thus: “A glance at the babblers (Ahle Sunnat Wa Jama’at)”. While ranting against Hazrat Usmaan (may Al-Laah be pleased with him), Khomeini could not hold his pen even regarding Al-Laah. He says: “We worship that Khuda (Al-Laah) and recognise only Him as Khuda (Al-Laah) whose acts are based on mature wisdom and who does not do anything against the dictates of wisdom. Nor do we recognise such Khuda (Al-Laah) who having built the edifice of justice and piety on the exalted foundation of devotion to Khuda (Al-Laah), Himself paves the way for its destruction and ruin, and hands over leadership and governance to such oppressors and scoundrels as Yazeed, Mu’aa Wiyah and Usmaan”. (Kashful Asraar, page 107).
Readers would have noticed that Khomeini has used the words “oppressors and scoundrels” not only for Yazeed but also for the Prophet’s companion, Ameer Mu’aa Wiyah and Ameer-ul-Mu’mineen Saiyyidina Usmaan Ghani (may Al-Laah be pleased with him), and that Khomeini got so excited in the process that he even refused to acknowledge Al-Laah and to worship Him because Al-Laah Himself had bestowed leadership and governance upon Hazrat Usmaan (may Al-Laah be pleased with him). The insolent language, which Khomeini has used about Al-Laah, reminds one of the beliefs held by the Magians (Fire-worshippers) of ancient Iran that there are two separate Gods, one of good and the other of evil. May the merciful Al-Laah protect from such filthy beliefs and such filthy people!
I still have with me a small pamphlet in which Khomeini has declared: “I will fulfil the mission which the holy Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him) failed to fulfil”. This pamphlet had been brought to the notice of members of the Federal Majlis-e-Shoora (Pakistan Parliament) at one of its sessions, and the feelings of the faithful throughout Pakistan had been inflamed by it, and I am sure a glance at other writings of Khomeini would reveal many other blasphemies uttered by him. Knowledge of the contents of this small pamphlet would convince the faithful that Khomeini and his Shiite faith have nothing to do with the Qur’aan and the Sunnah.
Thanks be to Al-Laah that He has raised us among the followers of His beloved and last Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him) and has allowed us to be among the right-guided Ahle Sunnat Wa Jama’at.
It is our faith that love of the holy Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him) and the great personages of his blessed family are the assets of the faith and the means to our redemption.
Having full faith in the news given by the Qur’aan and Sunnah we bear witness that the Prophet’s caliphs Saiyyidina Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddeeq, Ameer-ul-Mu’mineen Saiyyidina Hazrat Umar Faarooq, Ameer-ul-Mu’mineen Saiyyidina Hazrat Usmaan Ghani, Ameer-ul-Mu’mineen Saiyyidina Hazrat Ali Murtaza and all the companions of the holy Prophet, and all the revered spouses of the holy Prophet, and all the members of the Prophet’s Household (May Al-Laah be pleased with them) are the most venerated among the Muslim Ummah.
We also believe in their greatness and truthfulness, in their sense of justice and honesty, in their faith and piety, in their devotion and prayers, in their knowledge and grace and in their nobility and Imaamat.
All these are Al-Laah’s chosen and blessed bondsmen and bearing love to all of them is of the essence of the faith. And to he disrespectful and insolent to any one of them is most hurtful to us and is bound to bring upon us the wrath of Al-Laah and the displeasure of His Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him).
It is our faith that the Qur’aan, from its sending-down to this day’ is preserved in the original form and there is no possibility of any alterations or changes in it, for Al-Laah has made it incumbent upon Himself to preserve the Qur’aan. The very thought that the Qur’aan has been altered, or can be altered, is a wholly reprehensible idea.
We are convinced that it is an act of blasphemy to doubt the veracity and truthfulness of even one word of the Qur’aan.
We hold that any sect which belies the Qur’aan, belies the traditions of the holy Prophet, or is insolent towards the holy Prophet, the spouses of the Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him), the companions of the Prophet, the members of the Prophet’s Household, and the saints (may Al-Laah be pleased with them) ceases to belong to the Faith. We believe that all others are deviationists, except the right guided Ahle Sunnat Wa Jama’at.
May Al-Laah enable us to be steadfast to the creed of the Ahle Sunnat Wa Jama’at and may we meet with death in this state. Aameen! May Al-Laah so ordain, for the sake of the holy Prophet (may Al-Laah’s peace and blessings be upon him), his companions, and the blessed ones who followed in their footsteps! Aameen.
Wa Sallal Laahu ‘Alaa Habeebihi Saiyyidina Muhammadin
Wa Aalihi Wa Ashaabihi Wa Sallam.
(Wamaa ‘Alainaa Illal Balaagh)
Karachi- 1 990.
Kaukab Noorani Okarvi
(Ghufira Lahu)
Now declaration of Khomeini:
KHOMEINI’S DECLARATION
“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 centers 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 (Abu Bakr and Umar) lying by the side of the Prophet’s grave.”
What Maudoodi wrote is not Islamic. Maudoodi was founder of Maudoodiat (Maudoodiism).
My Dear,
The Shias never show their real face. I lived in Karachi, Rawalpindi and Lahore during united Pakistan time and had contacts with Shias. The Shias call all the Sunnis as Nasibi. Do you know the meaning of Nasibi? Nasibi are those who hate Hazrat Ali.
Do you? Do I? No.
Do you, I and the Sunnis hate Hazrat Ali?
23 March 2009 at 10:38 am
Pak Bangladeshi:
Oh Bhai! kisi per Jhotay Ilzamat kyun lagatay ho. I have already told you that shia do not accept all those things which you are trying to impose on them. Rewriting again and again just wasting of the time . I have confirmed by myself, it’s not true. There are several thousands books have been written against shia but they all based on personal observations or based on those books which have been condemned by shia Ulmas. Why do you look at Shia or Nusairi to make the decision? Meet the right Ulmas and then ask them what is right or what is wrong. It is the same situation that being happened with the Muslims nowadays. Non-Muslims say that Islam is the bad religion coz they look at Muslims. You blame before that Shia believe, Ali is the God. I mentioned you above that it’s not true, Ali is not the God in Shias. I again rewrite all the things and plz do not accused again shias on these issues.
SHIA BELEIFES
• Shia believes that, there is no God except Allah and He is the only God, no one shares His powers.
• Prophet Mohammed (S.A.W) is the last prophet of the Allah and superior in all the human being including Ali (R.A).
• Quran is the book of Allah and it is free from any kind of TEHREEF. It is not possible to make any change in Quran even for one word up to the end of this world.
• Shia believes on all the prophets and angels and the day of judgement same like Sunnis.
• They believe all the COMPANIONS (R.A) of Prophet (S.A.W) are very great people and sacrificed for Islam, but they criticise some of them for e.g, Hazrat Abubaker, Hazrat Umer, Hazrat Uthman, Hazrat Maauvia (R.A) etc. but they stop to misbehave with them same as with Hazrat Aisha (R.A).Plz watch the following video. SHIA DO NOT ABUSE SAHABA (R.A)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-oZL_SwLU8&NR=1
• They criticize some of the Sahaba coz of the several reasons some of them I described above and some of them described by maulana Ishaq (a sunni scholar) in the videos given in bottom.
• They believe that there are five prayers in Islam and they have to be done according to their timings but Asr can be done quick after Zuhur and Isha quick after the Maghrib (choice) according to the Ahadees. (click on the video link bottom)
I already told you Usool kafi or any book of Ahadeeth in shias are not considered free of mistakes, shia Mujhtahidin put too much efforts to find out right Hadees from these books and they don’t accept any hadees if it goes against Quran so plz do not quote any hadees from these books. After that I also request you to not to rewrite all these things. These above are all the understood facts and more than 100% confirm and according to them Shia are Muslims like Sunnis.
Mutta and these kinds of debate are secondary issues and everything has logic as described by Shia Ulmas several times, but we don’t want to listen them. No one do the Mutta in current time but they believe the permissibility of Mutah coz it is proved from Quran (SURAH NISA AYAT 24) and several AHLESUNNAT Ahadees. Plz click following link for details.
http://alhujat.tripod.com/Aqd-e-Mutta.htm
Khomeini never misbehaved with any companion of prophet (S.A.W), you are giving the wrong impressions of the words. I agree he criticised few sahaba (R.A) same as Sunni scholars criticize, criticism and misbehave are two different things. Don’t forget Khomeini was the person who killed corrupt Beaurocrates and Politicians, coz of him naked women wearing Islamic dress; people are worshipping Allah in Iran. He kicked away America and Israel from Iran who are the actual enemies of Islam.
I wrote above that Maulana Maudodi (former leader of jamat islami and a sunni scholar) criticise sahaba karam and Hazrat Aisha (R.A) but you don’t accept coz it is not in your favour. I put the following video links of Maulana Ishaq who is the sunii scholar and also criticized Sahaba plz must watch them and put the fatwa of Kufur on Maulana Ishaq and Maulana Maudodi (according to your theory).
(1) HAZRAT UMER MURDERED BIBI FATIMA (RA) DAUGHTER OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD (S.A.W) [SPEECH BY SUNNI MAULANA]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zue9WFD4i5Q
(2) BIDAT IN ISLAM – HAZRAT UMER FAROOQ STARTED AS TARAWEEH AND HAZRTA USMAN STARTED AS 2 AZANS IN FRIDAY PRAYERS.[ SPEECH BY SUNNI MAULANA]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lHMUD7Th9I&NR=1
(3) CURSING SAHABA DOES NOT MAKE ANYONE KAFIR [SPEECH BY SUNNI MAULANA]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcMX7Zeqz-c&feature=related
(4) SHIA NAMAZ AND KALIMA IS AUTHENTIC [SPEECH BY SUNNI MAULANA]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nug62dprBQI&NR=1
(5) SUNNI MIBEHAVES WITH HAZRAT AISHA (R.A) NOT SHIA [EVIDENCE FROM JAMA TERMIZI AND SAHI BUKHARI]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ni7goDeX3fc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2GoyQTNF1E&feature=related
I gave you everything on spot. After watching all these videos I m sure you will have the soft heart for Shias. I want to remind you that shia do not say Sunnis are bad and helping sunnis in (Gazza and Palestine).
Please decrease your hate and do efforts for unity of Muslims.
Waassalam
24 March 2009 at 9:38 am
Voice of Human Justice:
My Dear,
I do not hate any person and I will not.
Mr. Maudoodi was not Sunni. Moulana Ishaq is Ahle Hadees. Both and there followers were and are not from the four school of thoughts. Maudoodiat and Ahle Hadeesiat are sponsored by the Saudis. This is a nacked truth.
Once again there is one point: Why abuse the Shias Sahaba Karam and Hazrat Aisha? Your answer will be: these are not Shias but Nusairis.
Then the Shias in Iran; Pakistan, Insia, Iraq, etc, are Nusairis because they abuse such Islamic personalities. See the youtube (abusing Khilafa).
I wonder you that you dont see the reality.
Thanks for reply.
Waassalam
25 March 2009 at 7:46 am
Mr Pak Bangladeshi,
Pakistans issues between Sunnis and Shias is our internal matter, and before this matter one matter that we all are agreed and united upon is the departure of all bengladeshis from Pakistans and the recalling of the rightful Pakistanis stranded in Bangladesh.
Thank You and kindly stop inciting hate between 2 sects.
25 March 2009 at 2:55 pm
The Muslims do need to look within for their problem lies within. What they have been doing for years now, is look everywhere except the origins of ploys and politics of terrorism that have for 1400 years gripped the value system of Islam, a faith they claim to love, live by and live for. So long they persist in denying the facts of history they can never prevent or help repeat the errors and blunders of their history while they keep believing the very corruptions resulting from these errors to be the crux of their faith and politics. It will only be well for Muslims and others now to go beyond their tendency to focus on terrorism as a particular nation, country, bloc, or group of despicable peculiar people. It is imperative that we consider focusing on the situations that determined terror in order, to recognise, identify and locate – the common forces of terrorism, the fertile fields of terrorism, the swindlers of faith, the spin-doctors of fake spirituality – who seduce normal minds into becoming most cruel perpetrators of evil.
26 March 2009 at 12:26 pm
Pak Bangladeshi
Brother why do you always think on the basis of sects, please think as a Muslim any individual with Kalama-e-shadat is a Muslim, Maulana Maudodi and Maulanan Ishaq said every thing on the basis of Quran and SAHA-SATTAH.
As far as I know not in Iran, (don’t know about Iraq) but in Pakistan there are some paid speaker or Zakireen (not Allamas) definitely use abusive words for Ashab, several of them have been declared Nusairis by shia Ulmas. This trend is slightly higher in interior Punjab coz of uneducation, some people come to listen them just for fun, some come coz of the lack of knowledge, in Karachi most recently a zakir is beaten by shia boys coz he was trying to abuse companions. Abusing the Ashab-e- Rasool (S.A.W) is a pre-plan scheme to split the Muslims.
Unfortunately, we become a part of this anti-Islam scheme by initiating these sorts of debates. If we are qualified and lover of prophet (S.A.W), then we should efforts to develop the environment for Muslim unity.
Wassalam
Talib-e-dua
28 March 2009 at 2:21 am
Ahmed:
Voice of Human Justice:
Thanks for comments. I am not against any group, sect or organization.
About Pakistanis in Bangladesh I would say that they are true Pakistanis and waiting for the last ca four decades.
In the name of Islam and muslim-brotherhood millions of Afghans are welcome in Pakistan. What they brought i.e. drugs, arms, prostitution,etc.
The government of Bangladesh offered many times Bangladeshi citizenship to these Pakistanis. Atlast they accepted.
I am ashamed that the so-called Pakistanis have closed the doors to the true Pakistanis. Their crime is that these are Urdu speaking. And Pakistan is involved in ethnic problems.
Please accept thee reality.
4 April 2009 at 12:18 am
Pak Bagladeshi:
I wish, but if we go through your comments then we can know better that how much the poision you have in your mind about shia and other sects of Islam. When I proved that you are wrong then you jumped on the language, you want to split the Pakistani Muslims on the basis of sects and languages. I respect you as my muslim brother, but we all know that in 1971 Bangalis were involved in the killing of Pakistani soldiers and several others civilians including women.
Please leave us and if you are really faithful with Islam then I suggest you to go Israel and start Tableegh there.
Waassalam
14 April 2009 at 7:24 am
Voice of Human Justice, you are a typical dishonest Paki Shaytan (satan). You lack humanity but you still call yourself “Voice of Human Justice”. You claim to be a Muslim but you are probably a low caste Hindu convert from Punjab. Shame on you that still have not learnt that Islam is about truth and justice for all mankind.
Your mother tongue is not Urdu, a language of the Ganges plain, but a folk tongue called Punjabi! You are Ahmadi, Shia, Sunni or Hindu-influenced mystical sects with pirs.
Pakistan was founded by the Shia Muslims, many of them low caste Hindu converts from Gujarat. Jinnah was a Ismaili Shia.
In Punjab, before partition of India, most of the landlords were Sikh, Hindu and Shia Muslim, the most of poverty-stricken peasants were Sunni Punjabis who lived as virtual slaves. Incredibly, the leader of the Punjabi Sunni Muslims was a Ahmadi (Quaidani) from Sialkot Muhammad Zafarullah Khan!
West Pakistan went on to become Pakistan in 1971 after the terrible crimes against humanity by Punjabi Muslim Pakistan Army in Bangladesh. The Pakistani Army men in the name of ISLAM. Quran, Allah and Mohammed killed over a million people, raped 200, 000 boys, girls and women. Why? Punjabi Muslims, who had led a nice life at the expense of Pashtuns, Sindhis, Baluchis and especially Bengali people were afraid that after Bengali-led Awami League won power running Pakistan would lose the chance to cheat the other nationalities.
Because the Saudis were insisting that Bengali forgive crimes of the Punjabi Pakistan Army of rapists and killers in the name of Islamic Unity, Bengalis bit their lips tightly. For that Punjabis, like Kafirs, pretend they were not rapists and killers in the name of Allah and Islam.
By the way many of Punjabi Muslims who killed and raped in 1971 were also involved in the mass killing, rape and abduction of Sikh and Hindu Punjabis in 1947. So they had very good training. This is now being investigated by academics.
You will find Muslims in Egypt, Algeria, Bosnia, Iran, Palestine, Syria, Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq feel angry that Pakistani Punjabi Army was never tried Islamically for their horrible crimes in 1971, against a Muslim nation, IN THE NAME OF ISLAM.
Today, Shia-founded Pakistan is still run like a colony by uncultured Punjabi peasants. The Pashtuns, the Baloch nation, the Sindis are but colonies to the Punjabi Army.
The Sindhis, Baloch and Pathans have living languages and cultures. They are all nations under occupation. None of the nations have any problem have any problem as Sunni or Shia Muslim.
On the other hand, the Punjabis have no written langauge apart from Sikh dominated Gurumukhi. They are landlocked and in future at the mercy of Sikhs and Hindis. Muslim Punjabis will starve and live the life of slavery as before partition under Sikh Raj.
One last fact: The “Muslim” Punjabi element has a bloody history between various castes (yes, they still follow the Hindu caste system), Ahmadi, Shia and Sunni. They can keep the cover as long as Pakistan (West Pakistan until 1971) remains.
18 April 2009 at 2:16 pm
FreshFace
its ppl like u who divide the country apart, i m with human justice, sunni or shia which ever1 u r we r all 1, and infront of Allah if u gona say tht punjabi’s r worse then us put them in hell more i dont noe whts gona happen with u
i m a muslim i dont even rite if i m sunni or shia, y cuz Islam says dont divide, who ever says the kalma is a muslim an tht is it, then Allah decides how much of faith does he really have
i even go an pray behind other imams the way they pray cuz i m no God 2 judge who is rite an who is wrong
plz dont divide the country b 1 guys, strong if we united can b strong enough 2 do everythin
i dont wana fight or anythin more guys thanks
Allah Hafiz
27 May 2009 at 2:59 am
[...] Iraq and on to Hezbollah in Lebanon. The following extract forms the introduction to a spirited debate between Pakistanis on the existential question of their national identity predicated as Pakistan [...]