Shi‘ism: A Persisting Enemy of Islam and Muslims

By Mufti Abdullah Moolla -October 14, 2022

By Muftī Radā-ul-Haq (hafizahullāh)

Translated by Mufti Abdullah Moolla

What follows is a translated transcription of a lecture delivered by Muftī Radā-ul-Haq (hafizahullāh) at Dār-ul-‘Ulūm Azaadville on the burning topic of Shi‘ism. Within this lecture, Muftī Radā-ul-Haq opened up the eyes of the audience and passionately conveyed his deep concern for the Ummah regarding the fitnah of this severely misguided sect.

In the name of Allāh, the Beneficent, the Merciful.

All praise is for Allāh, Rabb of the Universe. May peace and salutations be upon our leader and master, Sayyidunā Muhammad, his family, his companions, his spouses and all his followers.

To proceed:

Honorable ‘Ulama, friends and brothers,

I have been requested to advise the audience regarding the Rawāfid. I have been tasked to inform the audience about this fitnah.

During the time of Rasūlullāh sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, there were hypocrites, i.e., munāfiqīn. There were a few of them. There is a report of Sayyidunā Huzayfah (radiyallāhu ‘anhu) which states that there are no munāfiqīn after the time of Rasūlullāh (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam). Another report in Sahīh Al-Bukhārī from Sayyidunā Huzayfah (radiyallāhu ‘anhu) states that the hypocrites after the time of Rasūlullāh (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) will be worse than the hypocrites of the time of Rasūlullāh (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam).

One report mentions that there will be no presence of hypocrites, whereas another report states that the hypocrites that come later will be much worse and far more atrocious than the hypocrites of the time of Rasūlullāh (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam). The scholars have reconciled these two reports in various ways. It is best that we say during the time of Rasūlullāh (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) there were munāfiqīn present. Later on however, the munāfiqīn will exist under a different name, i.e., not under the name of ‘munāfiq.’ This is despite the fact that the munāfiqīn who would come later⁠—after the time of Rasūlullāh (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam)⁠—would be much worse. They would not be named as ‘munāfiqīn.’ They will name themselves differently. For example, they will use zindiq. They will refer to themselves as Rawāfid. They will call themselves Rawāfid, and these are the ones we refer to as Shi‘ah. However, they will not use the name ‘munāfiq.’

RELATED: The Types of Hypocrisy in Islam

It is stated in the books of the Shi‘ah⁠—and I have provided the relevant references in Badr-ul-Layālī Sharh Bad’-ul-Amālī and Al-Asīdah As-Samāwiyyah Sharh ‘Aqīdah At-Tahāwiyyah—where the Shi‘ah themselves have mentioned that:

The word ‘munāfiq’ refers to us (i.e., the Shi‘ah).

A munāfiq is someone who says one thing but has something else in their heart.

Taqiyyah is a special belief (and practice) of the Shi‘ah. Taqiyyah means to make something apparent, but the heart of the person conceals something else completely. I shall not explain their beliefs before you at this point. Most ‘Ulama are aware of them and the people have been taught about this too.

I want to explain how, in terms of politics and state matters, no other group has harmed Muslim Ummah as severely as the Rawāfid have. The non-Muslims will not be able to cause harm to the Muslims for as long as they are not accompanied by Muslims, i.e., those who claim to be Muslims. Once those who claim to be Muslims ally themselves with the non-Muslims, then they will cause harm to the Muslim Ummah.

RELATED: The Severity of Selling Out Dīn for Worldly Gain

The era of Rasūlullāh (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) was followed by the eras of Sayyidunā Abū Bakr (radiyallāhu ‘anhu) and Sayyidunā ‘Umar (radiyallāhu ‘anhu). The time of Sayyidunā ‘Alī (radiyallāhu ‘anhu) then arrived [after the Khilāfah of Sayyidunā ‘Uthmān (radiyallāhu ‘anhu)]. During this time, the very same munāfiqīn that had killed Sayyidunā ‘Uthmān (radiyallāhu ‘anhu) had now joined the army of Sayyidunā ‘Alī (radiyallāhu ‘anhu). They did this in order to inflict great harm to the Muslims from within. Sayyidunā ‘Alī (radiyallāhu ‘anhu) was engaged in peace negotiations with Sayyidunā Mu’āwiyah (radiyallāhu ‘anhu). They came to a peace agreement and were successful in their attempt towards reconciliation.

The very same munāfiqīn who had killed Sayyidunā ‘Uthmān (radiyallāhu ‘anhu) had joined the army of Sayyidunā ‘Alī (radiyallāhu ‘anhu). And now, they were unable to digest the occurence of a peace agreement. They did not wish for peace to prevail. These very same people eventually became the killers of Sayyidunā ‘Alī (radiyallāhu ‘anhu). They martyred Sayyidunā ‘Alī (radiyallāhu ‘anhu).

With regard to ‘Abdur-Rahmān Ibn Muljim, it is clearly recorded that he pledged allegiance to Sayyidunā ‘Alī (radiyallāhu ‘anhu). However, he remained with Sayyidunā ‘Alī (radiyallāhu ‘anhu) only until the time of the peace agreement, i.e., for as long as Sayyidunā ‘Alī (radiyallāhu ‘anhu) stood in opposition to Sayyidunā Mu’āwiyah (radiyallāhu ‘anhu). Once they had made peace and united, he (‘Abdur-Rahmān Ibn Muljim) martyred Sayyidunā ‘Alī (radiyallāhu ‘anhu).

As recorded in the books of the Shi‘ah, Sakīnah, the daughter of Sayyidunā Husayn (radiyallāhu ‘anhu), said:

‘You have killed my grandfather, i.e., Sayyidunā ‘Alī (radiyallāhu ‘anhu).’

She was addressing the Rawāfid.

She continued:

‘You killed my father, Sayyidunā Husayn (radiyallāhu ‘anhu).’

This was because he was ready and prepared to make a peace agreement and armistice with the Khilāfah of the time. He was readying himself to go. It was the very same people who martyred him.

She also said:

‘You poisoned my paternal uncle, Sayyidunā Hasan radiyallāhu ‘anhu.’

This is recorded in Al-‘Iqd Al-Farīd, a Shi‘ah work.

RELATED: Is the Shi’a Hadith Literature Reliable?

She continued:

‘My husband, Mus’ab, you have martyred him.’

Hence, we learn that it was the Rawāfid who murdered and martyred the great and lofty personalities in Islām.

The Umayyad era was coming to an end. We do not say that this point of the Umayyad rule was the best, but the initial stage of the Umayyads was excellent. Loss, harm and problems did set in towards the end. At that time, the Rawāfid had selected Abū Muslim Khurāsānī (for their aims and objectives).

Abū Muslim Khurāsānī was in jail. When the Rawāfid heard his speech, they took a liking to him and felt that he was a very suitable candidate to be used by them. His speech made them feel as though he was brave and bold. They had him released, made him a leader and put him forward in order to establish the ‘Alawī Government. He started a significant movement against the Umayyads. As a result, the Umayyad rule was ended. Thereafter the ‘Alawīs oppressed the Umayyads to a great degree. It is reported that the Umayyads were put into a tent and that horses were made to gallop over them, trampling them all to death. In fact, the corpses of the Umayyads were removed from their graves and flung aside.

This was done to the Umayyads, despite them having ruled for over eighty years and after achieving so much. Spain and Portugal were conquered during their time. The areas of Sindh in Pakistan and Gujarat in India were conquered. Punjab and Multan were conquered during the time of Walīd Ibn ‘Abdil-Malik. The area of Turkistan, the place where Imām Bukhārī (rahimahullāh) was born, the entirety of this area [modern-day Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan] was conquered during the Umayyad era.

There are twelve Muslim provinces in China. The Muslims had gone there and conquered during the Umayyad time. It has been written about this era that the King of China was extremely awed by the Muslims. He came to know that the leader of the Muslims was Hajjāj Ibn Yūsuf, who was in Iraq. He said:

‘I am prepared to meet your governor because I have heard from the people in China that the people wearing white have come, and wherever those wearing white come, disbelief and falsehood are destroyed.’

RELATED: Is Jihad ONLY Defensive? Did Islam Spread by the Sword? (UNAPOLOGETIC Answer)

The King in China was prepared to meet them because he wanted to traverse the same path that the Muslims were upon. Hajjāj Ibn Yūsuf passed away and then came Sulaymān Ibn ‘Abdil-Malik.

Major leaders and conquerors were killed after this time too.

Anyway, it is recorded that Abū Muslim Khurāsānī was a Rāfidī. He caused great harm to the Muslims.

The ‘Abbāsid era then dawned. The last ruler of the ‘Abbāsids was Musta’sim Billāh. Sa’dī, the poet, wrote a qasīdah upon the end of the ‘Abbasid rule. I shall mention the last two lines:

‘The skies have the right to rain blood because the rule of Musta’sim Billāh has come to an end.’

In Al-Bidāyah wan Nihāyah, Ibn Kathīr (rahimahullāh) has written that eight hundred thousand people were killed in Baghdad at the time. One narration mentions that a million were killed. Another narration reports that one million and six hundred thousand were killed.

The condition of the libraries was such that all of the books had been taken out and thrown into the Tigris River. For a number of days the river ran black (due to the ink from the books). Musta’sim Billāh was granted safety but this was not for long. He was also killed. What was the reason? The very same Rawāfid.

One of the leading ministers in the government of Musta’sim Billāh was Muhaqqiq Tūsī. People study his books in philosophy. He was a staunch Rāfidī. Another minister was Ibn ‘Alqamī; also a Rāfidī.

Hulagu Khan, the grandson of Genghis Khan, was very fearful of the Muslims. He could not stand up and fight them. However, Ibn ‘Alqamī and Muhaqqiq Tūsī wrote to him and invited him. They said that with the arrival of the Tartars, the Muslim Empire shall be destroyed. They also promised their support to the Tartars. They also said that Muhammad (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) passed away, and nothing happened⁠—the world carried on. So what will happen if the ‘Abbāsid Empire comes to an end? Nothing.

The ‘Abbāsid Empire was destroyed with the evil plotting and conniving of Ibn Al-‘Alqamī and Muhaqqiq Tūsī.

Hence, in terms of politics and state matters, the Rawāfid have proven to be very harmful for the Muslims. The scholars have written that the Rawāfid have never supported the Muslims.

It is explained in the works of history that during the time of Walīd Ibn ‘Abdil-Malik, during the conquest of Europe, it was the Jews of the Maghrib that supported the Muslims. This is because they were tired of the King there. However, the Rawāfid have never aided or supported the Muslims. They are pure munāfiqīn. One must recognize them; stay away from their literature; oppose them; and make effort on the youth so that they can also recognize the Rawāfid and know of their beliefs. So that they are aware of how the Iranian Embassies which are situated in all the countries host a so-called ‘Hujjat-ullāh.’ This ‘Hujjat-ullāh’ has a great ‘Mujtahid’ position given to him which is slightly lower than the ‘Āyat-ullāh.’ He is the ‘Hujjat-ullāh’ and the Ambassador. He is a preacher of Shi‘ism as well as the Ambassador.

May Allāh Ta’ālā bless us with the ability to save ourselves and our youth from this fitnah. May peace and salutations be upon our leader and master, Sayyidunā Muhammad (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and his family and companions.

RELATED: An Orthodox Muslim’s Review of ‘The Lady of Heaven’: A Shia Propaganda Film

Follow Mufti Abdullah on Twitter: @MuftiAMoolla


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.