There is no doubt that the Shi’a of Ali (as) are a peace loving people, and are the standard bearers of unity amongst Muslims. The Shi’a Ulema have striven hard towards this goal inviting our brothers to sit and talk with us, it should be pointed out that the invitation does not constitute a defect in religious belief on our part.
It seemed that their efforts had borne fruit when in 1959 Shaykh Mahmood Shaltoot, Grand Mufti of Al Azhar University issued a fatwa declaring Fiqh Jafriyah an Islamic school of thought, and adherents were free to adopt it in the same way that they could follow the other four schools.
Despite this major breakthrough, it is with deep regret that we look around us and see that despite entering a new century, this polemical battle, with those who support and revere the enemies of Ali (as) is still going on today.
The contemporary Nawasib, that comprise of the Salafis and certain extremist illiterate ilk amongst the Deobandis (rigid Hanafees from the Indian Subcontinent) have sought to undermine the spirit of the Al Azhar fatwa by orchestrating a well financed / baseless campaign of lies against the Shi’a, aimed at dividing the Muslims. Just like their Nasibi ancestors who sought to undermine and ruin Imam Ali (as) by accusing him of killing Uthman (when they themselves had his blood on their hands) to the point of slandering, cursing and fighting him, their modern day offspring have likewise adopted these same methods against his Shi’a. They have used every form of deception possible to achieve this aim.
This has included the common Nasibi tactic of distorting / denying and re-writing historical facts, misquoting Shi’a texts and intentionally lying about the Shi’a faith to the ignorant masses so as to create a hatred of the adherents of the Ahlul’bayt. They are undoubtedly the leaders of sedition and they are responsible for inciting fitnah and sectarian violence everywhere they operate- in exchange for ‘lucrative’ handouts in the form of cash, presents and young boys from their Saudi / US paymasters.
Curiously whilst attacking the Shi’a, these groups are themselves divided and they frequently issue takfir against one another. The Prophet (s) had once compared the Ummah to a body. The Nawasib are a cancer attacking the body. It is imperative that we uproot this cancer from the body so as to save this Ummah from further fragmentation and destruction.
We will adopt the same steps, as would a Doctor seeking to identify a patient’s ailment. He would:
We have throughout this article cited references from the texts of both groups. Before proceeding into the relevant chapters, we feel that it is important at this juncture that we highlight two common Salafi objections leveled against this article:
First Salafi objection
The citation of Deobandi texts in a book that is primarily against Salafis evidences the lack of knowledge amongst the AA Team with regards to which Sect they are attacking.
We would like to make it clear that when it comes to post modern anti Shia polemics the texts of both groups are virtually identical, indeed it seems that they copy and paste from one another. The similarities between both Sects is a modern day phenomenon, one only needs to gauge the texts of the founding fathers of the Deobandi movement to recognize that their beliefs were markedly different to today’s Salafis and extremist Deobandis. Tragically the lure of Saudi / US petro dollars, fame and all the luxuries that come with it has been such that the testosterone fuelled Deobandis from Sipah-e-Sahaba have deemed it imperative to align their beliefs with those of their Saudi donors. The result of this merger has been the formulation of a shared set of beliefs that distinguish them from other Muslims and evidence their Nasibi status, since both groups:
The nexus between these Nawasib is such that we can see how the adherents of both Sects behave like inseparable Siamese Twins on Anti Shia Chat Forums, wherein they heap accolades on one anothers efforts in attacking the Shia. If these two forces are prepared to unite in their assault on the Shia it is only fair that we group them together for this refutation.
Second Salafi Objection
Salafis deem Deobandis to be the adherents of a deviant Sect, so how can you group them under one category?
When it comes to Shia bashing all grudges that the two groups bear against one another are set aside, in favor of meeting the better goal of inciting hatred of the Shia. Such a merger is no different to the partnership forged between Amr bin Aas and Muawiyah. Other than both being conceived through a four way sex orgy there was little evidence that would indicate that both men would become such close sleeping partners in the future. If anything the greater probability was that both men would live a life of animosity towards one another, after all Amr bin Aas had played a major role in inciting people to kill the Caliph Uthman.
This being the case, how did the same Amr bin Aas then join forces with Muawiyah and demand vengeance for the very blood that he had shed? How did these two men enter into this unlikely alliance? Simple, they were motivated by their hatred of Ali ibn Abi Talib (as). Exactly the same principles apply when we observe the unlikely alliance between the Salafis and Neo Deobandis, who have merged to target their resources against the Shia of Ali (as).
We would equate both Sects with the example of two guard dogs. Both dogs might share the same DNA, eating and sleeping habits. Both might ferociously guard their Masters home. If the dogs were out running in the park and saw a cat, they would work together to chase it away. That would be as far as the alliance would go.
If you was to alter the scenario, and placed both dogs in a room with no other external stimuli, they would automatically attack one another. The same is the case with the Salafi / Neo Deobandi alliance. Both Sects are working in unison to attack the Shia, if you were to however remove this agenda and leave both in the same room together, they would automatically adopt canine traits and set about attacking one another’s beliefs.
If the Salafis are going to suggest that we have failed to corroborate this position then allow us to cite the example of the Ahlelbayt.com website. The author Ibn al Hashimi has openly declared the website to be Salafi. Despite this Ibn al Hashimi in his articles has sought reliance on the opinion of Gibril Hadad in his article ‘the status of the twelve imams’ even though the Salafis deem both men to be deviant Sufis, as can be evidenced by the this Salafi Chat Site that has forums dedicated to attacking both men. The same approach was adopted by Salafi Bilal Philips whose translation of Afghanis ‘Mirage in Iran’ that included a section wherein the author cited the opinion of scholars condemning the Shia, including Ibn Arabi. In his footnotes Philips wrote short biographies about each, without uttering even a word that would suggest he was a deviant.
The innocent Salafi reader would assume that he was a man of authority and repute in Salafi eyes. Curiously the same Philips launches a scathing attack on the deviations of Ibn Arabi in his own books. Why are the opinion of deviant scholars valued by Ibn al Hashimi and Philips? Simple, because those opinions are vented against the Shia. This proves that Salafis are prepared to rely on the opinions of deviant Sects to aid the propagation of anti Shia hatred. The Salafi / Neo Deobandi alliance is what could best be described as a marriage of convenience, wherein both ‘spouses’ whilst hating one another have entered into this union to further their sectarian agenda. If these two Sects are prepared to share the same platform and present a united front against the Shia then we are entitled to refute them both members of this alliance in one book.
Defending our approach
There is no doubt that some that will criticize the harsh / attacking style used by the book. We however, feel that we have been left with no other choice. Having had to endure attack after attack of volatile abuse from the Nasibis whether that be in book form or on the Internet, we feel that the time has come to adopt this approach.
We wish to make it clear from the onset that this is not a defensive work where we set our stall on the market explaining our beliefs to passers by. Whilst readers can navigate around other articles on this site to see such materials this book takes the method of attack.