Monday 27 May 2024
The Prophet Muhammad`s Companions` Apostasy
ID: 270 Publish Date: 31 January 2016 - 10:03 Count Views: 3129
Speeches » public
The Prophet Muhammad`s Companions` Apostasy

In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful

Responding to the Doubts

Professor Ghazvini

Since, we, previously, had a discussion about the newly posed Wahhabi doubts, today I am going to talk about the Wahhabi doubts, posed in internet and Friday prays, on which they maneuver a lot. There was a debate, three years ago, between Shias, Dr.Tijani and Dr.Abuzahra, and Wahhabis, Osman al-Khamis and Abdul-Rahman Dameshghie,which took about 26 or 27 sessions. It could be considered as the most challenging debate among Wahhabis and Shias during the 15 centuries. My friends provided this debate as a video CD which could be totally helpful for those who want to get familiar with the way Wahhabis pose doubts; I think the seminary schools have to watch this video CD.

I want to say that Osman Al-Khamis is one of  the Wahhabi leaders and ideologists and he is the first one who started posing doubts against Shia internationally. Osman Al-Khamis is originally from Kuwait and he teaches in many universities; and he has been training, almost two years, almost 150 students about the strategies in debates against Shias. He made a speech in the Friday pray in Qatar or Kuwait, I`m not sure, almost three months ago, and he posed almost 50 doubts against Shias. No one is ruder, offensive, and undignified than Osman Al-Khamis among Wahhabis. If you prove him for thousands times that he is making mistake, he won`t believe it. He tried to present all the doubts which have been made from the beginning of the history within that 30 minutes. What he said was published in 20 pages and uploaded in 500 Wahhabi websites.

Someone called from Germany; he was really upset and said:

“They have published the speech into 20 pages and distributed among all schools and mosques in Germany; wherever we go, people talk about these 50 anti-Shia doubts; we don’t have any professor or jurist to respond to these doubts which might deviate our young Shias.”

We figured out the name of that website and we downloaded the 20 pages; we called him; He was crying and said:

“Shias are being oppressed here; they have no one here; these doubts are being distributed and they`ll be weakening the young Shias` beliefs; please help us”

Of course we responded to the 20 pages in 200 pages; and I think it was uploaded in websites. I`ve decided to talk about and respond to these doubts for some sessions.


If you read the books written by Ibn-Teimie, the Wahhabi theorist, Muhammad Bin-Abdul Wahhab, Dr.Ehsan Elahi Zahir, Dr.Ghefari, Osman al-Khamis and Abdul Rahman Dameshghie and all the other Wahhabi books, you would see that they maneuver on the following doubt so much; they say:

“Shias believe that after Prophet Muhammad`s demise, all companions converted except four or five of them.”

First of all: this is nothing but an insult toward Prophet Muhammad; as if he couldn’t train the companions well during the 23 years except four or five of them!!!

Second of all: they think that Shias ignore all the traditions and verses of Quran about companions and simply accuse the companions of conversion. So, as they say, Shias believe that among 115 thousand companions about whom Souti talks about in Tadrib al-Ravi all converted except four or five companions. They also showed some documents from Rejal Kashi and Kafi. 

Osman al-Khamis posed three doubts, in his new bombardment against Shia, which I am going to read their exact wordings and I demand all to pay a close attention to how I am going to respond.

He narrates this tradition from Al-Roze Al-Kafi; he interprets like this:

First tradition:

جائت روايات أن الصحابه كلّهم ذهبوا الّا ثلاثة: سلمان و المقداد و أباذر و جاء في بعض الروايات: «إرتدّ أصحاب رسول الله كلّهم إلّا أربعه»، هذا في كتاب الروضة من الكافي، صفحة 246

The second tradition:

روي الكليني في الكافي عن محمد بن علي الذي هو الباقر أنّه قال: «كان الناس أهل ردّة بعد النبي إلا ثلاثة»، هذا في كتاب الروضة من الكافي، صفحة 246

و فيه أيضاً عن محمد بن علي رضي الله عنه أنّه قال: «المهاجرون و الأنصار ذهبوا إلا ثلاثة» و هذه في الجزء الثاني من الكافي، صفحة 244

The third tradition:

روي الكليني في الكافي كذلك عن محمد بن جعفر: «ثلاثة لا يكلّمهم الله يوم القيامة و لا يزكّيهم و لهم عذاب أليم: من إدّعي إمامة من الله ليست له و من جحد إماماً من الله و من زعم أنّ لهما في الإسلام نصيب»

و الضمير يعود إلي ابي‌بكر و عمر.

The third tradition:

“There are three groups which god does not talk to in hereafter; they won`t be blessed; severe punishments are ahead of them. 1. The one who is not Imam, but he claims to be one 2. The one who denies the Imam who is appointed by God 3. The one who thinks that these two, Omar and Abu-Bakr, will be blessed in Islam”

Lately, Wahhabis either inside or outside of the country started narrating some traditions from Shias` books and use them against Shias. Either about Abu-Bakr’s mistakes and his being a legitimate man. Last Ramadan, someone gave me a CD from Zahedan in which one of the Friday pray leader of Zahedan, a knowledgeable seminary professor in Dar-al-Olum, the one who has written 50 books which most of them have been translated and taught as the Sunni research books, shows some documents from Shias` sources to prove the legitimacy of Abubakr`s guardianship. The same strategy we have been using for 15 centuries, using Sunni sources to prove the legitimacy of Amir-al-Momeneen`s guardianship. Today, after 1400 years, they try to extract some traditions from the Shias` books and then cut the beginning and the end of the traditions and merely talk about part they prefer to in the Friday prays. For example, they say that in Oyoon Akhbar Al-Reza something like this quoted from Imam Reza or Imam Ali; and they people applaud him for that, whereas all these traditions are…………………

Responding to the Doubt:


The first thing we should do is to check whether the tradition, from our sources, they are talking about is accurate and authentic or not? They often refer to the traditions which our scholars consider them as weak and inauthentic, so they have no value in scientific discussions; they are showing off the tradition which we do not believe and care about. This is the best strategy in responding the doubts.

In these cases, we ought to see if the source of the tradition they are referring to is authentic. I am going to give you a perfect example; and I demand you to pay attention. Recently, Mr. Abudl Rahman Sarbazi, the Friday pray leader in Chabahar- a town in Sistan and Baluchestan which is the center for spreading the Wahhabi school of thought, has written a book under the name “Raz Delbaran” about which Mr.Soleimani, the Friday pray leader of Zahedan , says:

“Mr. Abudl Rahman Sarbazi, in the festival in Syria for young Sunnis, claimed that if this book gets published, Shias will be annihilated”

And he also said:

Oh young Shias    

يدخلون في دين أهل السنة افواجاً.

This is a pocket-size book; it has been published for more than 100 thousand copies and it has been distributed in Iran and all the other countries like Germany, Canada, Holland and Qatar.

But let`s see what this book is about:

This story belongs to 20 years ago; someone from Taibad, a border town in Khorasan whose people are 70 percent Sunnis, wrote a letter to the institutions in Qom which said:

“You have a tradition in Tafsir Ghomi which says that Prophet promised people that Abubakr and Omar would be caliphs. Why don’t you care about the traditions stated in your interpretation books like Kafi?”

Unfortunately, the institute didn’t respond to him well, and their answer was not convincing, they said:

“This tradition has not been stated in Tafsir Ghomi, if you are right, why don’t you let us know about the number of volume and the page?”

This man sent this answer, from Taibad to Chabahar, to the Friday pray leader, Abdul Rahman Sarbazi; He wrote: “This tradition has been stated in that volume that page in Tafsir Ghomi, Tafsir Safi, Tafsir Ayashi”

Mr. Abdul Rahman Sarbazi published the letter of that man, that institute`s response and also his own responses in more than 100 thousand copies.

This is not a proper way of responding. Of course, this doubt has been comprehensively responded by one the jurist in the seminary school. We also analyzed it for 50 percent and it is about to be published under the name of “Criticizing the Delbaran”.

We have to see that with kind of strategy they try to weaken our young Shias` beliefs and how the strengthen their own young men`s beliefs.

But about the tradition in Tafsir Ghomi:

First of all:

This tradition is attributed to Ghomi, it is not clear that whether he, himself, said so. The writer of the book is Abulfazl Al-Abbas, an unknown man, whom no Shias` books consider him as an authentic person ergo the book itself is problematic.

Second of all:

This book is the combination of the interpretations made by Ali Bin Ebrahim Ghomi and Ziad ibn-Manzur Abu-al-Jarud, the head of Zeids in Mazandaran; so the book itself is problematic.

Third of all:

This tradition has been stated as the status of revelation for the first verse of Surah Tahrim:

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ لِمَ تُحَرِّمُ مَا أَحَلَّ اللَّهُ لَكَ تَبْتَغِي مَرْضَاةَ أَزْوَاجِكَ وَ اللَّهُ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ

O Prophet! Why bannest thou that which Allah hath made lawful for thee, seeking to please thy wives? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

And it does not have any relationship with the hadith told by Prophet or an infallible Imam. It is the status of a revelation which Ali ibn-Ebrahim personaly quotes; there is also no mentioned document for it. When there is not document, the tradition is inauthentic.

Fourth of all:

This is tradition is about caliphs` negative points not their positive points. The story is as follow:

Once when Prophet was in his spouse`s house, Hafse, his other spouse, Marie Ghobtie brought prophet food and prophet ate the food. Habse got upset and treated prophet in a rude manner. Then Prophet took an oath not have relationship with Marie any more. Allah revealed the beginning verses of Surah Tahrim. Then it is quoted that Prophet told Habse:

“I want to reveal a secret for you and if you tell anyone:

عليك لعنة الله و الملائكة و الناس أجمعين.

Hafse promised not to tell anyone; Prophet told her the secret:

“Abubakr will be the caliph after me and then your father”

Hafse visited Aisha and told her the secret. Aisha as well told her father, Abubakr, and Abubakr told his father, Omar. When Omar asked Hafse about the truth or otherwise of the statement, Hafse denied it first, but when Omar threatened her, she confessed the truth. Then these four, Abubakr, Omar, aisha and Hafse decided to poison Prophet. God let know Prophet about this conspiracy. When this decision was revealed, Hafse asked Prophet:

من أنبأك بهذا؟ قال: أنبأني العليم الخبير.

God addresses his speech, through the verses, to Prophet:

“God, Gabriel and righteous men will support you; and this righteous man is Amir-al-Momeneen”

You see what Abdul Rahman Sarbazi says:

“Shias do not believe their Imams` traditions; they don’t believe the traditions said by their Imams` promising the guardianship of Omar and Abubakr”

Fifth of all:

This tradition does not have any document so it is not authentic. We consider narrating these traditions as something against religion. Because it creates hostility and conflicts among Sunnis and Shias; even narrating these traditions might pave the way for insults and it even might get Shias killed either inside or outside the country. This is what we, late Imam Khomeini, supreme leader and the great jurist have repeatedly said. We neither narrate these traditions nor recommend others to narrate these.

Sixth of all:

When you talk about this tradition, why don’t you say that Hafse revealed the secret and was cursed by god and Prophet as it was told? We don’t believe this tradition; since you are referring to it, what do you say as an answer?

Seventh of all:

You said when Aisha told her father about it, Abubakr visited Omar and said:

“Aisha told me this and I don’t really believe what she says”

Since Abubakr didn’t believe what his own daughter said, how could you believe all the Shias` traditions?

Eight of all:

When Omar referred to his daughter to check the truth or otherwise of the story, Hafse, completely denied the story. But after Omar insisted so much, she confessed the truth. Don’t you think that it might question Hafse`s tradition and her position?

Ninth of all:

The significant point here is that these four decided to poison Prophet. Do you believe this? We don’t consider this tradition authentic; but you refer to the second line of the tradition whereas this tradition has a first line, a third line and a fourth line. Why don’t you refer to all parts of the tradition?

Tenth of all:

Besides, at the end of the verse it is stated that this righteous man refers to Amir-al-Momeneen. So if we take look upon this tradition without bias, we see that this tradition is proving the guardianship of Amir-al-Momeneen.

You see, this is how they play. They read our books and they talk about a tradition from Bahar al-Anvar, Tafsir Ghomi, Tafsir Ayashi or Anva Neamanie, which is inauthentic. I`m not sure in what kind of conditions late Jazayeri wrote this book. They refer to the traditions which do not have any authentic documents, the traditions which we, ourselves, do not narrate. So the best strategy is first to check the authenticity of a tradition and then to check whether the content of the tradition is in accordance with the Shias` beliefs.

There is promising in this story. Prophet, in this tradition, is informing about a fact. As Quran, about the Bani Ommiads, in the verse 60 Surah Esra:

وَ إِذْ قُلْنَا لَكَ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ أَحَاطَ بِالنَّاسِ وَ مَا جَعَلْنَا الرُّؤْيَا الَّتِي أَرَيْنَاكَ إِلَّا فِتْنَةً لِلنَّاسِ وَ الشَّجَرَةَ الْمَلْعُونَةَ فِي الْقُرْآَنِ وَ نُخَوِّفُهُمْ فَمَا يَزِيدُهُمْ إِلَّا طُغْيَانًا كَبِيرًا

“And (it was a warning) when we told thee: Lo! thy Lord encompasseth mankind, and We appointed the sight which We showed thee as an ordeal for mankind, and (likewise) the Accursed Tree in the Qur 'an. We warn them, but it increaseth them in naught save gross impiety.”

Said that Prophet saw, in his dream, monkeys climbing up the pulpit; Gabirel descended and told Prophet that Bani Ommiad would take the guardianship for a while. So is it like promising something?!! What Prophet promised is quite different with what he said about a fact. So it is not promising at all.

This is the new strategy of Sunnis; unfortunately, Sunnis, inside the country, are being influenced by Wahhabis. So, Mr. Osman Al-Khamis quoted three traditions from Kafi and said:

“Shias believe that all companions of Prophet converted except four or five of them”

Documentary analysis:

First, we have to have documentary analysis then reasoning analysis.

There are some unknown figures in the document of this tradition:

Yahya Ibn-Khaled:

Since he is an unknown figure, scholar neither praised him nor talked against him.

Sahl Ibn-Ziad:

Najashi, in Rejal about him, explicitly says:

كان ضعيفاً في الحديث، غير معتمد فيه و كان احمد بن محمد بن عيسي يشهد عليه بالغلوّ و الكذب و أخرجه من قم الي الريّ.

“He is weak and unreliable in Hadiths, and Ahmad Ibn-Muhammad Bin Isa, the chief of the people in Qom and the famous scholar in the time of Imam Hadi and Imam Askari, testifies that he is a liar and he was exiled from Qom to Rey”

Rejal Najashi p 185 no 490

Sheikh Tusi, in Fehrest, considers him weak.

Alfehrest Sheikh Tusi p 142

Mr. Ibn Ghazaeri, in his Rejal, says:

كان ضعيفاً جدّاً فاسد الرواية و الدين.

“Sahl Ibn-Ziad is too weak; His faith and traditions are both corrupted”

Rejal Ibn-al-Ghazaeri p 67

You are showing off a tradition about which our scholars talked like that. So, in terms of document, this tradition is weak.

Responding to the doubt about the third tradition:

It is really strange that it is stated in the third tradition that:

“There are three groups which god does not talk to in hereafter; they won`t be blessed; severe punishments are ahead of them. 1. The one who is not Imam, but he claims to be one 2. The one who denies the Imam who is appointed by God 3. The one who thinks that these two, will be blessed in Islam”

And Mr.Osman Al-Khamis immediately says:

“The pronoun لهما refers to Abubakr and Omar”

How do you know that this pronoun refers to these two? Apparently, the pronoun refers to the two mentioned groups; It means the one who believes that these two, the one who denies Imamat and the one who denies the Imam, will be blessed, god will not talk to him at all. If this pronoun was supposed to refer to Abubakr an Omar, it should have beenلهم. It means for these three persons. Since in all the traditions in Mataen, all three persons is one. So if we deny Imamat it is as if we deny the third.

Ayatollah Sobhani, in Azva Ala Aghaed Shia p 522 to 542, talked about this Shia tradition ـ كفر الناس بعد النبي إلا ثلاثة  and he brilliantly responded. I think seminary school student have to read this book.

Contradictory response:

What Shias say as a contradictory response to you is:

If in our books it is stated that all the companions of Prophet were converted except four of five; you, in your books, have traditions which say:

“After Prophet, all companions without any exception were converted”

  What do you have to say as an answer? Mr. Ibn-Kasir, a great Sunni scholar about whom Wahhabi says that he is the most authentic author, in al-Bedaya va Al-Nahaya v 6 p 336, quotes a tradition from Aisha:

“After Prophet Muhammad`s demise, all Arabs were converted and hypocrisy got to its climax”

Sunni scholars, after narrating this hadith, say that this tradition is authentic.

Tafsir Al-Ghortobi  v 8 p 148 /  Tafsir Al-Esabi v2 p 395 / Al-Sonan Kobra Nesaee v 2 p 280 / Sonan Kobra Beihaghi  v 8 p 177 / Al-Mostadrak Alal Sahihein Hakim Neishaburi v3 p 260 / Sonan Nesaee Nesaee v 6 p 7 / Nil Awtar Shokani v1 p 366


So, Amir-al-Momeneen, himself, believes that all companions were converted and hypocrisy got to its climax, after the demise of Prophet.

Even Zahabi and Mezi, great scholars in the time of Ibn-Teimie, the Wahhabi theorists, say:

لمّا مات النبي كفر الناس إلا خمسة.

Tahzib al-Kamal Mezi v 21 p 557 / Tahzib Al-Tahzib Ibn-Hajar Asghalani v 8 p 9/ The History of Islam Zahabi v 11 p 280 / Al-Bedaya Vanahaya Ibn-Kasir v 6 p 91

Zahabi, in History of Islam v 4 p 177, quotes from Vaki, a great Sunni man:

“In the conspiracy after Prophet Muhammad`s demise, only four men survived: Saad Ibn-Veghas, Ibn-Omar, Osame Bin Zeid and Muhammad Ibn-Mosleme”                  

Sunni believe that Sahih-Bokhari is the most authentic book after Quran; and as Shias read Quran cover to cover, they do the same, near Ramadan, for Sahih-Bokhari. As we heard, this year in Zahedan, in the festival of reading Sahih-Bokhari, 150 thousand people either from inside or outside of the country; and they have officially announced that any type of research in Sahih-Bokhari is considered as heresy. It means that whatever is stated in this book is as authentic as Quran. In Sahih-Bokhari, v 8 p 140 hadith no 6924, it is quoted from Abuhoreire:

لما توفي رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم و استخلف أبو بكر بعده و كفر من كفر من العرب . . .

What do you say as answer about this tradition? If the tradition about companions` conversion is inaccurate, both Sunnis and Shias are inaccurate. Why do you bombard Shias?

But what we say as answer is what Ibn-Asir pointed out in al-Nahaya Fi Gharib al-Hadith:

“The type of conversion stated in Houz and Nazaer`s traditions is not the converting from religion or faith; it refers to shrinking from Prophet`s orders such as guardianship”

There is a tradition in Sahih-Bokhari and Sahih-Moslem which proves this statement. While ago, a Sunni scholar, in internet said:

“I wish that Bokhari didn’t state the traditions about Houz”

For example in Sahih-Bokhari v 7 p 208 hadith 6587, the book Alferagh, the chapter Fil-Houz, it is stated that:

بينا أنا قائم، فإذا زمرة حتى إذا عرفتهم، خرج رجل من بيني و بينهم فقال: هلم؟ فقلت: أين؟ قال: إلى النار والله! قلت: و ما شأنهم؟ قال: إنهم إرتدوا بعدك على أدبارهم القهقري، ثم إذا زمرة حتى إذا عرفتهم، خرج رجل من بيني و بينهم فقال: هلم؟ قلت: أين؟ قال: إلى النار والله! قلت: ما شأنهم؟ قال: إنهم إرتدوا بعدك على أدبارهم القهقري، فلا أراه يخلص منهم إلا مثل همل النعم.

“Prophet Muhammad says:

“ In hereafter, some companions come and visit me, but they won`t be allowed to get close to Hoze, they will be taken somewhere; then I say: Where are you taking  them to; the voice says: I swear to Allah, we are taking them to the hell fire. I`ll say: what have they done? The voice says: they were converted and returned to the time before Islam (ignorance). So all my companions will be taken to hell fire, but few of them, like the animals scattered away from the cattle, will be survived”

Sunni scholars have clearly stated, under this tradition, that the word conversion refers to disobeying the Prophet`s order.

««« و السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته »»»


Dr. Sayyed Muhammad Hussaini Ghazvini




* Name:
* Email:
* Comment :
* Security code:

Latest Articles
Index | Contact us | Archive | Search | Link | List Comments | About us | RSS | Mobile | urdu | فارسی | العربیة |