The Hindus of Islamic Bangladesh Fear for Their Future

Subhash Ghosh, back, and his brother stand in the ruins of their family home in Satkhira, Bangladesh. The home was razed by Islamists seeking to drive minority Hindus from their holdings

Subhash Ghosh, back, and his brother stand in the ruins of their family home in Satkhira, Bangladesh. The home was razed by Islamists seeking to drive minority Hindus from their holdings

[TIME] Bangladesh’s minority Hindus are being attacked by Islamist who seem as preoccupied with land as they are with politics or religion.

Subhash Ghosh was away when, early on Dec. 13, dozens of activists from Bangladesh’s largest Islamist party, Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), descended on the home in which generations of his family have lived. They paid particular attention to his valuables, smashing TVs and looting gold. They gave the same treatment to the home’s Hindu shrine. Then they torched the property.

On Jan. 5, Bangladesh concluded what many judge to have been the country’s most violent election to date. But in the rural Satkhira district something much more substantial than ballot papers is at stake. Here, minority Hindus are targeted for their land.

“When anything happens, Hindus get attacked in Bangladesh,” explains Ghosh, 63, standing in the verdant greensward at the back of his house. Even if it weren’t ruined, he would be too scared to live in it. “They came at around 9:30 and suddenly set fire to the building with petrol bombs and gunpowder,” he explains.

The district of Satkhira lies only a few miles from the Indian border and just north of the world’s largest mangrove forest, the Sundarbans. It is spliced by creeks and tributaries that form the final reaches of the Ganges riverine plain. With a large Hindu minority, this area has seen some of Bangladesh’s worst violence over the past year. Much of that violence is down to land — or rather its scarcity.

With a population in excess of 160 million crammed into less than 148,000 sq km, Bangladesh is one of the world’s most densely populated countries. To make matters worse, almost the entire country lies in a floodplain, with lives, farms and crops constantly hanging in the balance. The pressure on land is enormous.

“When we say it’s just political, it legitimizes the violence,” explains Jyotrimoy Barua, a Supreme Court lawyer in the capital Dhaka. “Most of the people’s houses they are burning are [those of the] poor. If you burn their house, they will leave the country, and you get their land.”

Ghosh, who fought for Bangladesh’s independence from Pakistan in 1971, is determined not to give his enemies that satisfaction. “If we leave the country, then everybody will take our property,” he says. “I cannot leave and be a rickshaw puller in India like a coward.”

In Satkhira’s isolated villages, however, there is palpable fear. Ghosh’s sons, like many Hindu children, can no longer go to school. When we visit a Hindu community, dozens emerge out of the mist and huddle around us, explaining how they are unable to travel the small rural lanes alone for fear of attacks by Islamists. A local journalist we are traveling with receives threatening calls from an Islamist leader.

In parts of Satkhira, the Islamists are a law unto themselves. The village of Agordari lies just a few miles from Satkhira’s main town, but the police dare not visit. Locals call it “East Pakistan,” run as it now is by the JI, which supported Pakistan in the 1971 war. The authorities are trying to restore order. “People didn’t come out of their houses, no vehicles, no people, no nothing, like a graveyard,” is how the new chief of police for the district, Chowdhury Monzirul Kabir, describes the atmosphere after a recent crackdown that saw 90 arrests. But fear of the Islamists persists.

There clearly is a sectarian basis to attacks on Hindus. Bangladesh’s ruling Awami League (AL) was voted into power in 2009 on the strength of its promise to try pro-Pakistan figures for atrocities committed during the 1971 war, and violence often accompanies attempts to mete out justice to war criminals. The hanging of JI leader Abdul Quader Mollah, on Dec. 12 last year, preceded the attack on Ghosh’s house.

However, the sectarian issue is exacerbated by intense competition for usable land. After the monsoon of 2011, tens of thousands of Satkhira’s small holdings — almost half the homes in the district — were ruined by waterlogging, which occurs when groundwater saturates the soil and makes agriculture extremely difficult or impossible.

The violence isn’t just perpetrated by JI. In other provinces, opportunistic AL leaders have been accused of using divisive communal sentiments to enrich themselves. “In some constituencies, it’s Awami League,” says the lawyer Barua. Both the AL and JI, he says, “are tussling from the same group of voters — if anyone loses, he blames the Hindus.”

4 thoughts on “The Hindus of Islamic Bangladesh Fear for Their Future


    To our best knowledge, there is no religion or cult in the world, more disgracing, more humiliating, more belittling and more degrading to women than the Shi’i Religion ever. This is another proof that the Jewish Rabbis, starting with Abdullah bin Saba’- the founder of Shi’ism – had a lot to do in formulating this so-called “Shi’i Islam” to act as a cavity, or better said, as the AIDS virus to destroy the Muslim Ummah from within. This page is dedicated to expose all I was able to read from the Shi’i Rabbis books regarding women, their usage as mere sexual objects and homosexuality, hoping to shed some light on this dark area of Shi’ism.

    General Characteristics of women:
    (1)”Narrated to us Ali bin Ahmad bin Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Abi Abdillah al-Barqi: Narrated my father, from his grandfather Ahmad bin Abi Abdillah, from his father, from Muhammad bin Abi Omair, from more than one person from the Truthful Ja’far bin Muhammad from his father, from his forefathers, peace be on them, said:
    One of the companions of Amirul-mu’mineen (Ali) complained to him his women. He [as] thus stood to address the public saying:

    O people, Obey not the women in any case, nor trust them with money, nor let them be in charge of the children, for if they are left to do what pleases them, they will lead (you) to troubles and aggress the rights of the lords. We found them to be unhesitant when they are in need, impatient when their (sexual) lust at peak, wasteful spending is part of them even if they are old, and self admiring follows them even at their senior age. They don’t appreciate the “much” when they are prevented the “little”. They forget the good and recall the bad. They rush to falsehood, insist on arrogance and follow Satan. So deal with them at any how, address them well that their deeds be well (as a result).
    Al-Amaali: Ibn Babawaih al-Qummi, the 37th council, narration No. 6, p.172
    (2) “Narrated few of our friends on the authority of Ahmad bin Abi Abdillah, from his father, from Wahab, from (Imam) Abu Abdullah [as] said: Amirul-Mu’mineen (Ali) [as] said:

    Men were created from Earth, and all they care for is the land. As for the woman, she was created from the man, and all she cares for is men, O Men, lock up your women”.
    Al-Kaafi ( fil Furoo’ ): al-Kulainy, Kitaab al-Nikah, Chapter What’s Recommended for Women Who Reached pubery…; vol.5, p.337, narration 6.
    Women are less Intelligent !!??:
    Shi’ites spare no opportunity to humiliate, degrade and belittle women but rush to grasp it, mainly because their Infallible Imams taught them so, and following the commands and footsteps of those “Infallibles” is naturally a virtue:

    “Narrated Muhammad bin Omar bin Salamah bin al-Baraa’ al-Hafiz al-Baghdadi: Narrated to us Ahmad bin Abdallah al-Thaqafi Abul-Abbas saying: Narrated to us Issa bin Muhammad al-Katib saying: Narrated to me al-Madayini from Ghiyath bin Ibrahim from the Truthful Ja’far bin Muhammad from his father from his grandfather, peace be on them, said: Ali bin Abi Talib [as] said:
    The brains of women are in their beauty, and the beauty of men is in their brains”.
    al-Amaali: Ibn Babawaih al-Qummi, the 40th Council, narration No. 9, p.189
    Q: What do Women, vehicles and houses have all in common according to the Infallible Shi’i Imams? A: bad luck. LOL
    “Narrated Muhammad bin Ali Majilwaih: Narrated to us Muhammad bin Yahya al-‘Attaar saying: Narrated to us Sahl bin Ziyad al-Adami saying: Narrated to me Othman bin Issa from Khalid bin Nujaih from Abu Abdallah [as] saying:

    Bad luck was discussed in his presence, he [as] thus said: Bad luck are to be found in three things: in the woman, vehicle (horse, mule, camel, donkey, etc) and house. As for the bad luck in the woman, it is due to her high dowery and her disobedience to her husband, the vehicle is due to its attitude, and the house is due to its narrowness, its bad neighbor and its defects”.
    Al-Amaali: Ibn Babawaih al-Qummi, 42nd Council, Narration No.7, p.199, and in his al-Khisaal, Chapter of the Three, narration 53,p. 100
    Ashorter version of this narration is also found in al-Kafi (fil Furoo’): al-Kulainy, Book of Nikaah, Chapter: Nawadir, vol.5, p. 567, narration 51.
    Following is an interesting narration that induces us to ask whether Ali [ra] treated Fatimah [ra] as he advised the others:
    “Narrated to us Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Yahya al-‘Attaar saying: Narrated to us my father from Muhammad bin al-Husain bin Abil-Khattab from Muhammad bin Sinaan, from Abi al-Jarood from Abu Ja’far al-Baqir [as] from his father, from his grandfather [as] saying: Amirul-Mu’mineen (Ali) [as] said:
    He who places himself in a suspicious position, let him not blame who misjudges him; and he who conceals his secret holds the choice. Any conversation surpasses two (people) will be spread around. Think well of your brother until you see of him otherwise, and think well of a word said by your brother if it is possible to be interpreted as such. Choose the truthful brothers and make lots of them, for they are your ornament in times of peace and your fort in times of need. Consult in your affairs those who fear Allah, and love the brothers according to their level of righteousness. Try to avoid the bad women, and ever be watchful of the best of them, if they enjoined good on you, disobey them so they won’t have a hope to have you obey them in that which is no good”.
    Al-Amaali: Ibn Babawaih al-Qummi, 50th Council, Narration No.8, p.250
    Lying on the Prophet [saw]:
    Lying on Allah [swt] and His Messenger [saw] is the profession of the Shi’ites’ Rabbis. Following are few examples of such lies:
    (1) “Narrated to us Muhammad bin Musa bin al-Mutawakkil [ra] saying: Narrated to us Abdullah bin Ja’far al-Humairi, from al-Fadl bin ‘Aamir, from Musa bin al-Qasim al-Bajaliy, from Thuraih al-Maharibiy, from Abu Abdullah [as] from his forefathers [as] saying: The Messenger of Allah [sawa] said:
    Three (types of people) if you don’t wrong them, they will still wrong you: The low class, your wife and your servant”.
    al-Khisaal: Ibn Babawaih al-Qummi, Chapter of the Three, narration 15, p.86
    (2) “Narrated to us my father [ra] saying: Narrated to us Sa’d bin Abdallah, from Ahmad bin al-Husain bin Sa’eed, from Abu al-Husain al-Hadramiy, from Musa bin al-Qasim al-Bajaliy, from Jameel bin Darraj, from Muhammad bin Sa’eed, from al-Muhariby, from Ja’far bin Muhammad, from his father, from his forefathers, from Ali [as] saying: The Messenger of Allah [sawa] said: Three (type of situations) are good lie in them: Trickery in a war, promising your wife, and reconciliation between people. There are three (types of situations) where telling the truth becomes ugly: snitching, telling the man something he may dislike about his wife, and to disbelieve the man over the rumor. He further said: And there are three (types of people) sitting with them kills the heart: sitting with the low class, talking to women, and sitting with the wealthy people”.
    al-Khisaal: Ibn Babawaih al-Qummi, Chapter of the Three, narration 20, p.87
    (3) (Narrated) Ali bin Muhammad, from Salih bin Abi Hammaad, from Haroon bin Muslim, from Buraidah bin Mu’awiyah from Abu Abdullah [as] said: A man came to the Messenger of Allah [pbuh] saying: O Messenger of Allah, I have the greatest of what men carry (size wise), is it fine if I use my own animals, like a camel or a donkey? Because indeed women cannot handle mine. The Messenger of Allah [pbuh] said: Allah most Exalted did not creat you until He created who can handle you. The man left, but soon returned and repeated to the Messenger of Allah what he initially told him. The Messenger of Allah [pbuh] said: Why don’t you seek a tall black woman? (Imam Abu Abdallah) Said: The man left, but soon returned to the Messenger [pbuh] saying: I really testify that you are indeed the Messenger of Allah. I looked for the type you asked me to seek and found who can handle me and I am contended”.
    al-Kafi ( fil Furoo’ ): al-Kulainy, Kitaab An-Nikah; Chapter Allah the Exalted Created for the People Their Peers; vol.5, p.336, narration 1.

    Discussion: What is actually meant by this narration, is that the man asked about having sex with the animals, and the Messenger [saw] did not rebuke him or forbid him from doing such horrible act, but simply told him, get a tall black woman, she can handle it. In other words, since the Messenger [saw] did not strongly condemn such a request, there is a room for those who feel like trying animals to do so. It further explains why the Ayatullas of Iran are focusing on Africa for their missionaries. LOL
    Virtues of Women’s Lust Over Men’s:
    (1) Several of our friends narrated, from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Issa, from al-Husain bin Sa’eed, from al-Husain bin ‘Alwaan, from Sa’d bin Tareef, from al-Asbagh bin Nabatah said: Amirul-Mu’mineen (Ali) [as] said:
    Allah created the lust in ten parts, and has placed nine parts in women and one part for men. If it wasn’t for the shyness that Allah gave them according to their lust parts, each man would have had nine women hanging to him.”
    al-Kafi (fil Furoo’): al-Kulainy, Kitaab al-Nikah, Chapter The Virtues of Women’s Lust Over The Men’s, vol.5, p.337, narration 1.; al-Khisaal: Ibn Babawaih al-Qummi, Chapter of the Ten, Section: Lust Is Ten Parts, p.338, Narration 28.

    Discussion: Please read the narration once again. Does it make a sense? Probably the “Infallible” meant to say: each woman would have had nine men hanging to her. hahahahahaha
    What is more interesting thou, is the commentary of Ibn Babawaih al-Qummi on this narration. He wrote in the footnote: “Allah the Exalted, created lust in ten parts: Ten for men, and one for women. But that is specifically for Bani Hashim and their Shi’ites. And for the women of Bani Umayyah and their supporters, the lust is ten parts: nine for women, and one for men” ahahhahahaahhaha Subhanallah how Judaism work wonders.
    (2) “Several of our fellows narrated, from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Khalid, from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Abi Nasr, from whoever narrated to him, from Ishaaq bin Ammaar said: (Imam) Abu Abdullah [as] said:
    Verily, Allah made for the woman the patience of ten men, but when it hits her, she gets the lust power of ten men.”
    al-Kafi (fil Furoo’): al-Kulainy, Kitaab al-Nikah, Chapter The Virtues of Women’s Lust Over The Men’s, vol.5, p.337, narration 2; al-Khisaal: Ibn Babawaih al=Qummi, Chapter of The Ten, Section: Woman Has Patience of Ten Men, p.339, narration 32
    “Several of our fellows narrated, from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Issa, from Muhammad bin Sinaan, from Abu Khalid al-Qammaat, from Durais, from (Imam) Abu Abdullah [as] said:
    I heard him (i.e the Imam) saying: Women were given an intercourse power of twelve (men) and the patience of twelve (men).”
    Ibid, p. 339, Narration 3.
    Comments: Please compare to the previous narration. Any discrepency on the part of the “Infallible” ? LOL
    UM Kalthoom, The Daughter of Ali:
    One of the major embarrassments to Shi’ites, is the fact that Ali [ra] gave his daughter Um Kulthoom to Caliph Omar bin al-Khattab as a wife. This, if indicative of any, is an indication that Ali [ra] had no hard feelings toward Omar, to the contrary, he named three of his sons in the following order: Abu Bakr, Omar & Othman. A fact, the Shi’ites hate to mention, and actually seldome mention them, or attribute any virtues to them, simply because it will ruin the myth that the Jew Ibn Saba’ fabricated for them. Let us examine what they have to say about this marriage:
    (1) “(Narrated) Ali bin Ibrahim, from his father, from Ibn Abi Umair, from Hisham bin Salim and Hammaad, from Zurara, from Abu Abdullah [as] in reference to the marriage of Um Kalthoom, said:
    That is a cunt we were forced to give up.”
    Al-Kaafi (fil Furoo’): al-Kulainy, Book of Nikah, Chapter: Marriage of Um Kulthoom, vol. 5, p. 346, Narration 1.
    (2) “(Narrated) Muhammad bin Abi Umair, from Hisham bin Salim from Abu Abdullah [as] said:
    When (Omar) requested the engagement (of Um Kalthoom) from him, Amirul-Mu’mineen (Ali) said to him: She is still young. (Abu Abdullah) said: He (Omar) then met al-Abbaas (the uncle of Ali) and said to him: Why? What is wrong with me? (al-Abbaas) Said: What is it? (Omar) Said: I approached the son of your brother for the engagement (of his daughter), but he turned me down. By Allah I shall backfill Zamzam and leave no virtue for you (Tribe of Hashim) but nullify it, and I shall bringforth two false witnesses testifying that he stole, and shall cut off his right (hand). al-Abbaas then approached him (i.e, Ali) and told him that, and asked him to make him in charged of the matter, which he did.”
    al-Kafi (fil Furoo’): al-Kulainy, Book of Nikah, Chapter: marriage of Um Kalthoom, vol. 5, p. 346, Narration 2.
    The Scientific Side Effect of Wearing Black & Yellow Shoes:

    Let’s examine how scientific are these “Infallibles”:
    “Narrated to us my father [ra] saying: Narrated Ahmad bin Idris saying: Narrated to me Muhammad bin Ahmad, from Musa bin Omar, from Abdallah bin Jablah, from Hanan bin Sudair who said:

    I entered on Abu Abdallah [as] wearing a black shoe, and he said: Why are you wearing a black shoe? Did you not know there are three characteristics in it? The narrator said: I said, what are they; may I be your ransom? He [as] said:
    It weakens your vision, loosens your penis and brings you depression.

    On top of that, it is part of the arrogant apparel. Wear the yellow shoes, for in it is three characteristics. The narrator said: I said, what are they? He [as] said:

    It sharpens the vision, strengthens the penis and puts away the depression, and furthermore, it is part of the Prophets [as] apparel”.
    Al-Khisaal: Ibn Babawaih al-Qummi, Chapter of the Three, narration 50, p.99
    * Similar reports are found in al-Kafi(fil-Furoo’): al-Kulainy, Kitaab: AzZay wat-Tajammul (Apparel & Beautification), Chapter: Shoe Colors, vol.6, p.465, narrations: 1, 2 & 4

    Comments: It is time to put the Imam’s infallibility on the line. Either all Shi’a who wear black shoes are on Viagra or those Imams don’t know what they are talking about. ahahhahahahahhaha but if that what happens to the man, I wonder what would happen to the woman who wears a black shoe, LOL
    Let’s Go Eye Shopping:
    There is basically nothing taught by Allah [swt] & His Messenger [saw] that the Shi’i Rabbis agree to. In fact, there is no evil left that they did not enjoin on their followers, starting with the 1st step of spreading Zina (fornication, adultery) which is to eye shop women, when Allah [swt] said, in several places in His Glorious Book: 24:30 Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: and Allah is well acquainted with all that they do.
    “(Narrated) Muhammad bin Yahya, from Ahmad bin Muhammad, from Ali bin al-Hakam, from Ali bin Suwaid said: I said to Abu al-Hasan [as]:
    I have the problem of looking at the pretty woman, so I (keep) looking at her. He said: Laa Ba’s (No Problem) if Allah knows that your intention is true, but beware of Zina, it causes the blessings and faith to perish.
    al-Kafi (fil Furoo’): al-Kulainy, Book of Nikaah, Chapter of Zina, vol.5, p.542, narration 6.
    Sodomy & Homosexuality are Halaal?? !!!
    Amazing how these Shi’a Rabbis lie on Allah, the Apostle and their own Imams, in a manner that is most insulting to the family of the Messenger [saw], which strengthen the belief that this cult is in fact the product of a few Jewish Ribbis:
    (1) “(Narrated) Ali bin Ibrahim from his father from al-Nufaly from As-Sukoony from (Imam) Abu Abdallah [as] said: Amierul-Mu’mineen (Ali) [as] said: (al-Luwaat ma doon ad-dubur, wad-dubur huwal-kufr) Sodomy is in (anything) other than dubur (anal sex), for dubur [has multi meanings] is actually the Kufr (disbelief)”.
    The commentator on al-Kafi wrote: “It is possible to understand (from the statement) that Sodomizing (a man) is permissible”
    al-Kafi (fil Furoo’): Book of Marriage: Chapter of Sodomy,narration 3, vol.5, p.544
    Mashallah !! what a religion !
    (2) “(Narrated) Muhammad bin Yahya, from Ahmad bin Muhammad, from Muhammad bin Yahya, from Talha bin Zaid, from Abu Abdullah [as] said: The Messnenger of Allah [pbuh] said:
    Whoever volunterily let others sexually molest him, Allah will invest him with women’s lust.”
    al-Kafi (fil Furoo’): al-Kulainy, Book of Nikaah, Chapter: Who Let Others Sexually Molest Him, vol.5, p.549, narration 1.
    Comment: May Allah curse the liars who lie on the Apostle of Allah [saw].
    (3) “(Narrated Muhammad, from Ahmad bin Muhammad, from Ali bin al-Hakam, from Abdul-Rahman al-‘Azramy, from Abu Abdullah [as] said: Amirul-Mu’mineen (Ali) [as] said:
    There are servant (men) of Allah who carry in their lions uteruses like those of women. (Abu Abdullah) Said: He was asked: Then Why they don’t get pregnant? He (Ali) said: Because it is (placed) upside down. They also have glands in their anuses like that of the camel, if erupted they erupt with it, and if it cooled down, they cool down with it.”
    ibid, narration 3.
    My Goddddddddd, men have uteruses??? hahahahahahahhahahaah what an Infallible, hehehheheehehe.
    (4) “(Narrated) Muhammad bin Yahya , from Ahmad bin Muhammad, from Ali bin al-Hakam said: I heard Safwaan bin Yahya saying:
    I said to (Imam) al-Rida [as]: a man among your followers requested me to ask you about a matter, which he feared and embarassed to ask you (directly). He [as] said: What is it? I said: For the man to use the woman’s anus. He said: He may. I said: Do you personally do that? He said: We do not do that.”
    al-Kafi (fil Furoo’): al-Kulainy, Book of Nikaah, Chapter: Women’s anuses, vol.5, p.540, narration 2.
    Comments: Typical hypocrisy condemned by Allah [swt] when He said:61:03-04 …Why say ye that which ye do not? Griviously hateful is it in the sight of Allah that ye say that which ye do not. And is typical to the Devil Iblis’ behavior 59:16 Like Satan when he says to man “disbelieve”: but when (man) disbelieves, Satan says: I am free of thee: I do fear Allah, the Lord of the Worlds. Nevertheless, the Shi’ites are people who love to dive in swamps and isles of human waste.
    (5) “(Narrated) al-Hussain bin Ali bin Yaqteen said: I asked Abul-Hassan [as] about the permessibility for the man to have anal sex with women, he [as] said: It was made halal (permissible) in the Book of Allah, when (Prophet) Lot said: 11:78 Here are my daughters, they are purer for you and he knew it was not the vagina they were after.”
    Tafseer al-Ayyashi, vol.1, p.157; Bihaar al-Anwaar vol.21, p.98; Tafseer al-Burhaan vol.2, p.230
    (6) “Narrated Abdullah bin Abi Ya’foor: I asked Abu Abdullah [as] about approaching women thru their anus, he said: No Problem. He then recited: 2:223 Your women are as tilth unto you, so approach your tilth when (or how) ye will .”
    Tafseer al-Ayyashi, vol.1, p.110;Bihaar al-Anwaar Baqir al-Majlisi, vol.23, p.98; al-Burhaan fee Tafseer al-Qur’an: Hashim al-Bahraani, vol.1, p.219; Wasaa’il al-Shi’a: al-Hur al-Amily, vol.3, chpater 73: An-Nikaah wa Aadabuh
    Comments: This is another evidence on how mentally sick these Rabbis are, and how Satanic they get to distort the Words of Allah or their meanings to lead their followers to behave as the people of Prophet Lot, whom Allah has condemned in all Scriptures.
    (7) Narrated Muhammad bin Yahya, from Ahmad bin Muhammad, from al-Barqiy reporting (Imam) Abu Abdullah [as] sa saying:
    “If the man used the woman’s anus, but did not ejaculate, there is no Ghusl on either one. But if he ejaculated, he must take a ghusl, not her.”
    al-Kafi (fil Furoo’): al-Kulainy, Book of Tahra, Chapter: What Mandates Ghusl on the Man and Woman, vol.3, p.47, narration 8
    Comments: Let us see what comment did Rabbi Ali Akbar al-Ghaffari give on this narration:
    “The fellows (Shi’i Rabbis) dispute was over the Ghusl if the intercourse was in the woman’s anus. The majority, among them the Sayyid, Ibn al-Junaid, Ibn Hamza, Ibn Idris, al-Muhaqqiq (al-Damaad), and the Allamah (al-Majlisi) in several of his books, are of the opinion that it is mandatory to take ghusl. The Sheikh (i.e., At-Tusi) in his al-Istibsaar as well as in his al-Nihayah, the Sadooq (Ibn Babawaih al-Qummi), Sallaar have all said it is not mandatory. As for the intercourse in the man’s anus, they’ve also disputed it. The Sayyid Racist Imams ???
    While Allah [swt] says: 49:13. O Mankind, We created you from a single (pair) of a male and female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each others. Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you, we find that those “Infallible” , who are the Deputies of Allah, preach racism in its ugliest form. While the following reports are sad, yet you will find them funny, so here we go:
    (1) “(Narrated) Ali bin Ibrahim, from Haroon bin Muslim, from Mas’adah bin Ziyad, from Abu Abdullah [as] said: Amirul-Mu’mineen (Ali) [as] said:
    Beware of marrying the Negros (zunj) for they are a distorted creation.”
    al-Kafi (fil Furoo’): Book of Nikah, Chapter: Whom (the Imam) Disliked for Marriage Amongst the Kurdish, Negros and Others, vol. 5, p. 352, Narration 1.
    (2) (Narrated) Ali bin Ibrahim, from Ismael bin Muhammad al-Makki, from Ali bin al-Husain, from ‘Amr bin Othman, from al-Husain bin Khalid, from whom he mentioned from Abu Ar-Rabi’ al-Shami said: Abu Abdullah [as] said to me:

    Do not buy anyone who is a negro, but if you must, then (buy) the Nubians, for they are amongst those whom Allah the Exalted said about them: 5.14 From those too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the Message that was sent them . Surely, a time will come when they will remember that portion, and when the Qa’im (Mahdi) arise, a group of them will come to his support, but never marry anyone of the Kurdish (people) for they are part of the Jinn (demons) whom the screen was lifted from them”
    Ibid, narration 2
    Comments: by “whom the screen was lifted from them” he meant, the screen or divider which Allah has created between us human and Jinn, where we are unable to see them but they can see us.
    The KURDS, according to this narration, are a type of demons which we are enabled to see.

    (3)” (Narrated) Several of our fellows from Sahl bin Ziyad, from Musa bin Ja’far, from ‘Amr bin Sa’eed, from Muhammad bin Abdillah al-Hashimi, from Ahmad bin Yousuf, from Ali bin Dawood al-Haddaad, from Abu Abdullah [as] said:

    Marry not from the Negros nor the Khazar, for they have uteruses indicate they are unfaithful. He [as] further said: India, Sind and Qind not a single one of them is smart, meaning Qandaharis
    Ibid, Narration 3.

    Comments: Khazar is the area around the Black Sea, and Qandahar is in Afghanistan.

  2. Shi’ism & Hatred


    Shi’isms fundamental basis–the cornerstone of its religion–is its principle of reviling, abusing and rejecting the Companions of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). The murderers of Uthman (r.a.) realized that their politically inspired movement can never be successful as long as the authority of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) Companions is retained. They had, therefore, no alternative other than formulating Shi’ism on the basis of opinions which necessitated the denial of the authority of the Companions of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). They thus propagated the doctrine of the rejection of the Companions with brutal blasphemy, conspiracy, murder, fraud and fabrication of statements which they shamelessly attributed to Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). Their religion is based on the vilification of those whom Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) loved so dearly and whose authority is established, not on the basis of opinion and love, but on the basis of Divine Directive. Without the Companions there can be no Islam, no Quran, no Sunnah, no Shariah, no Iman (faith).
    The religion of Allah (Ta’ala) came to us and to all and will continue to travel to the end of time by means of Naql (authoritative and authentic narration), the first link in the chain of narration and transmission joining us with Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) being the noble Companions of Prophet Mohammad. Their hatred to most of the Companions necessitated for them to bypass the Companions. So, Shi’ism has broken that very first and vital link with Prophet Mohammad. The way they have sought to overcome this hurdle is by their doctrine of fabricating Hadith (narrations about the prophet) to substantiate their claims.
    Hypocrisy is a principle of the Shia religion.
    They technically call such hypocrisy as taqiyah which means the permissibility to conceal one’s true beliefs for the sake of any expediency. Thus they attribute even such hypocrisy to Ali (r.a.). It is the Shia belief that although Ali (r.a.) believed that Abu Bakr and Umar (r.a.) usurped the Khilafat and deliberately betrayed Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.), he nevertheless pledged loyalty to these senior Companions on account of some political expediency. This blatant falsehood and blasphemy attributed to Ali (r.a.) exhibits the crookedness of Shia mentality.
    The Shia who have gone out of their way to belittle the Companions and to drop them from the pedestal of authority which the Shariah assigns to them can never be the lovers of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) nor can Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) have love for them. About such hatred for his Companions, Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) said: “Those who hate the Companions, hate them because (in reality) they hate me.”
    Muhammad Baqir Sadr, a leading Shia theologian states:
    “The Shia believed that Ali should have ruled instead of these three Caliphs, and should have assumed the Caliphate immediately after the Prophet (s. a. w.).”
    “According to Shia belief, the Companions in general and Abu Bakr and Umar (r.a.) in particular, defied Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.)- rejected his appointment of Ali (r.a.) as the Caliph after him.
    Hence, the Shia revile, abuse and slander these great Companions of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) on the basis of the fallacy concocted by the murderers of Caliph Sayyidina Uthman (r.a.). The actual founders of the Shia sect were the murderers of Uthman (r.a.).
    It is a Shia contention that the great Companions, especially Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, etc. (r.a.m) did not understand the teachings of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). They further shamelessly and blasphemously assert that these illustrious Khulafa Raashideen are usurpers, frauds, fabricators of ahadith and wholly incompetent in religious matters. In spite of their slander being shocking and despicable in the extreme, it is not surprising, since they are the worst fabricators and frauds peddling their nafsaani opinions in the name of Islam and attributing it to Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). They have accused the Companions of being involved in conspiracies to eliminate Islam and supplant it with the Arab tribal systems of the time of jaahiliyyah (Pre-Islamic Age of Ignorance). The blasphemous drivel which clutters their books and preaching exhibits their wickedness and detestation for the Islam of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.).
    In another crude aspersion cast against the mission of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.), the Shia scholar, Baqir Sadr states:
    “Everything that has gone before Proves that the instruction given by the Prophet (s. a. w.) to the Muhajirun and the Ansar did not reach a level which would have been necessitated by the conscious, intellectual and political preparation required to guide the future path of the Da’wa and the process of change which had been instigated by the Prophet (s. a. w.).”
    Muslims should now realize that it is haram to support in any way the Shia. Shiism falls within the purview of the following statements of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.): “My Ummah will be split into 73 sects. Of these, all but one, will be in the Fire.” (Tirmizi)
    Will the Companions be in the one sect which will go to paradise or in the 72 sects condemned to hell?

    Khomeini’s View of the Companions
    Ayatullah Khomeini of Iran, while delivering a message for a youth rally, said: “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.” (Khomeinism and Islam, by Abu Rehan Farooqi, p. 8)
    “A certain person asked the Caliph (Abu Bakr) a point of law and he was unable to answer; he was therefore unfit for the position of a leader and successor to the Prophet. Or again, a certain act he perform was contrary to the laws of Islam, hence he was unworthy of his high past. ” (Writing and Declarations of Khomeini)
    In an annotation on this statement, Hamid Algar, the compiler of Khomeini’s writings and speeches, says: “The reference here is to certain shortcomings Shias have traditionally perceived in the exercise of rule by Abu Bakr.”
    In his book, Kashful Asrar, on page 115, Khomeini accuses Abu Bakr and Umar (r.a.) of having opposed the clear texts of the Qur’an. Thus he says:
    “We shall present a few examples of Abu Bakr and Umar having opposed the explicit laws of the Quran and deciding against it. The general body of the Muslims accept their decisions (which were in conflict with the Quran). ”
    On page 119 of his book, Khomeini openly brands Umar (r.a.) as a kafir (disbeliever) and zindeeq (infidel). Khomeini states: “From the examples of Abu Bakr’s and Umar’s opposition to the Qur’an, cited by us, it is clear that contradicting the Quran publicly and adopting actions in violation of the Quran were not regarded as a serious matter by these two. The Muslims of that time (viz. the Companions) either joined their (Abu Bakr’s and Umar’s) party in the quest for Political leadership which was their goal, or if they did not join their Party because of not fully supporting them, they never said a word in opposition to those unjust oppressors and powerful hypocrites (referring to ‘s Abu Bakr and Umar). They lacked the courage for this…”

    Abu Bakr who had plotted the whole conspiracy would have fabricated a hadith in contradiction to the Quran just as he had done for depriving Fatimah of her share of inheritance in the estate of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). And Umar – it is entirely to be expected that he would have said that either Allah Himself erred in revealing this ayat
    or Jibraeel or Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) erred in its delivery. At that time Sunnis would also have supported him and would have aided him in opposition to the command of Allah … just as is their attitude in all these alterations which Umar effected in the religion of Islam and its teachings. In all these (alterations of Umar) the Sunnis accorded
    priority to the statements of Umar in opposition to Qur’anic ayat and statements of the Rasool of Allah (Prophet Mohammad) and that is exactly what they (Sunnis) are following. ”
    These are the claims and allegations of Khomeini who vociferously and deceitfully, raises the slogan: “There is no Sunni’sm and no Shi’ism.” In the above “tract from his book, Kashful Asrar, it is abundantly clear that Khomeini is echoing the following Shia beliefs:
    *That Abu Bakr, Umar and the entire body of the Companions were apostates and hypocrites.
    * That Abu Bakr and Umar interpolated in the Qur’an, changing and deleting to suit their whims and desires. They fabricated and forged ahadith in conflict with the Qur’an.
    The logical conclusion emanating from these Shia beliefs is that the Qur’an which we have with us today is not authentic since it was the compilation of these very Companions who are regarded as munafiqs (hypocrites) by Shi’ism. Besides this fact stemming as the logical conclusion from Shia beliefs, the highest books of the Shia religion categorically assert the falsity of the present Qur’an.
    This attitude of Khomeini is not only his personal belief and personal hatred for the greatest ‘Companions, but it mirrors the attitude of hatred and contempt which Khomeini and his Shia cherish in particular for caliphs Abu Bakr and Umar (R. A.), and about all the Companions (R. A.) in general.
    While this is the vile and abominable attitude of Khomeini towards the illustrious Companions (R. A.) of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.), the Qur’an states the following word about the Prophet Mohammad’s Companions:
    “Muhammad is the Rasool of Allah, and those who are with him (i. e. the Companions) are stern against the kuffar and tender among themselves. You will see them (the Companions) in Ruku’ and Sajdah searching for the grace of Allah and (His) Pleasure. Their sign is on their faces because of the impression of (abundance of) Sajdah… ” (Quran: Surah Fath).
    “Most certainly, Allah was well pleased with the Mu’mineen (i.e. the Companions) when they took the oath of allegiance to you (0 Muhammad!) under the tree…” (Quran: Surah Fath)
    “And the early ones, the first one among the Muhajireen and Ansar and those who follow them (the Muhajireen and Ansar) in virtue, Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him. Allah has prepared for them gardens beneath which flow rivers; therein will they dwell forever. Indeed, that is the great victory. ” (Quran: Surah Taubah)

    And, Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) said about the Companions: “Fear Allah! Fear Allah regarding my Companions. Thus, whoever loves them, does so because of my love; whoever hates them, does so because of my hatred.”
    It is thus abundantly clear that Khomeini cherishes a dislike, an aversion, a hatred for the Companions because of his hatred for Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). The closer a Companion was to Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.), the viler the abuse and the greater the enmity the Shia demonstrate for him.
    The noble Companions (r.a.m) are the foundation and the pivots of Islam. The entire basis and superstructure of Islam have been magnificently raised on the teachings, explanations and expositions of the Companions (r.a.m). The Qur’an itself has been authentically and authoritatively transmitted to the Ummah down the centuries in the form presented by the illustrious Companions – by Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman (r.a.m), the prime targets of Shia and Khomeini vituperation.

    The Shia religion is based on hatred for the Companions (r. a.). Without such hatred, there is no Shi’ism. Hatred for the Companions, which is an overt and conspicuous facet of Shi’ism, is a doctrine of fundamental importance in the Shia religion. It is inconceivable to be a Shia without subscribing to the doctrine of aversion for and vituperation of the noble Companions (r.a.m) of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.).
    Shiism & Prophet Mohammad’s Caliphs (Successors)
    In the Shia book, Rijal Kashi, Abu Bakr and Umar (r.a.) are denigrated in the following narration attributed to Imam Baqir: “Whatever murder is committed in Islam, whatever unlawful wealth is earned and whatever adultery is committed until the appearance of our Imam Mahdi – the sin of all this is “on the necks of” (to be borne by) the two (i.e. Abu Bakr and Umar).” (Rijal Kashi, p. 135)
    In the books of Shia theology, the following noxious beliefs are propagated:
    * When Imam Mahdi appears, he will order the exhumation of the bodies of Abu Bakr and Umar. Their bodies will be hung on a tree for public show. Their bodies which even according to Shi’ism have not decomposed, will be stripped of their kafan. Thus, the nude bodies of these noble Companions will be put up for a disgraceful show.
    * The sins of entire mankind, right from the inception of the world until the time of Imam Mahdi’s appearance, collectively are borne by these two noble Companions. Imam Mahdi will bring Abu Bakr and Umar back to life and then will put them to death. They will then be resurrected and put to death again and again in a continuous cycle a thousand times daily, forever and ever. These vile allegations are stated in the Shia book, Haqqul Yaqeen, the author of which is among the highest Shia theologians, Mullah Baqir who is also the author of another book Zaadul Ma’aad which likewise contains many vile fabrications about the Companions.
    The most authentic book of theology of Shi’ism is Al-Jamiul Kafi. In this book in the section, Kitab Rawdha’, the following narration is attributed to the fifth Shia Imam: “After Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) all people became murtads (apostates) except three persons – Miqdad Bin Aswad, Abu Zarr Ghifari and Salman Farsi (r.a.). ”
    In the same book the following narration is attributed to Imam Baqir who allegedly made the statement in reply to his disciple who had sought the Imam’s opinion regarding Abu Bakr and Umar (r.a.):
    “What are you asking me about them (Abu Bakr and Umar)? Whoever among us (i.e. the Ahl Bait or the progeny of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) departed from this world, departed in a state of extreme displeasure with them. The elders among us admonished the younger ones to perpetuate it (i.e. this displeasure with Abu Bakr and Umar), Verily, the two of them have unjustly usurped our right. By Allah! These two were the first to settle on our necks (i.e. the necks of the Ahl Bait). Therefore, may the la’nat (curse) of Allah, the Angels and of mankind be on the two of them.
    In the same book, on the same page appears the following: “Verily. these two elders (Abu Bakr and Umar) departed from this world without having made tawbah for what they had perpetrated against Ameer Mumineen (Ali). In fact, they did not even think of us (of their wrongs against Ali). Therefore, may curses of Allah, the Angels and of mankind be on them.” (Kitabur Rawdha, p. 115)
    In Kitabur Rawdha on pages 159-160, the Shia attribute a narration to Salman Farsi (r.a.) in which it is claimed that on the occasion when the oath of allegiance was given to Abu Bakr (r.a.), the first person to swear allegiance to him was an old man who stepped forward crying:
    “All praise to Allah who has not caused me to die yet, enabling me to see you on this pedestal. Stretch your hand. ” Thus he (Abu Bakr) stretched his hand and the old man took the oath of allegiance (at his hand).”
    According to the narration, when Ali (r.a.) heard this from Salman (r.a.), he asked: “Do you know who he (the old man who took the oath of allegiance) is?”
    When Salman (r.a.) replied in the negative, Ali (r.a.) allegedly said: “That was Iblees (the Devil), Allah has cursed him.”
    Thus, according to Shi’ism, the first being who accepted the Khilafat of Abu Bakr (r.a.) was Iblees (the Devil) who placed his hand in the hand of Abu Bakr (r.a.).
    At the end of this narration in Kitabur Raudhah, the following words are falsely attributed by the Shia scholars to Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.): “Then, they (a group of the Saqeefah Bani Saidah) will come to the Musjid (i.e. Musjid-e-Nabawi) and the first to swear allegiance to him (i.e. Abu Bakr) on my Mimbar will be Iblees, the La’nat of Allah on him. Iblees will appear (on that occasion) in the form of an old man and say so (i.e. what Salman Faarsi has allegedly said).”
    The Shia theologian, Tabatabai, accusing Abu Bakr (r.a.) of having greater concern for Zakaat than the institution of Caliphate says:
    “Surely the problem of the legitimate caliphate was more important and significant than tithes (Zakaat), and Shi’ism believes that the same principle applied by the first caliph to this matter should have been applied by the whole early community to the problem of succession to the Holy Prophet. ”
    This reflects the Shia belief that Abu Bakr and Umar along with the general body of Companions (r.a.m) usurped the Khilaafat which according to the religion of the Shias was the inherent and divine right of Ali (r.a.). Here the Shia scholar, Tabatabai accuses Abu Bakr of having denied Ali his legitimate rights. He further alleges that Abu Bakr and the Companions (r.a.m) accorded no concern to the question of the appointment of the Khalifah and that they violated the Shariah in installing Abu Bakr (r.a.). The Shia belief in regard to the Khilaafat after Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) is that the Companions failed in applying the principle of ‘truth and justice’ because they accepted Abu Bakr (r.a.) as the Khalifah of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.).
    Mullah Baqir Majlisi is a renowned cleric in Shia circles. He is regarded as a top-ranking Muhaddith. He flourished in the 10th century of the Hijri era. The Shia clergy has accorded him the title, Khatamul Muhadditheen (the seal of the Muhadditheen). His works are regarded as highly authoritative by the Shia scholars. Khomeini has praised and recommended his writings. This Shia scholar, in his books, writes the following statements whenever he mentions the name of Umar (r.a.)

    “Umar Bin Khattab – May on him be the curse and punishment (of Allah).”
    This is the Shia attitude towards the beloved Companions of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.).
    This Mullah Baqir Majlisi has mentioned in his book, Zadul Ma’ad, numerous virtues and excellencies of the 9th of Rabiul Awwal. According to Baqir Majlisi, the significance and excellence of 9th Rabiul Awwal are because “Umar, the enemy of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) and the enemy of the Ahl Bait” was killed on the 9th Rabiul Awwal. It is for this reason that the 9th of Rabiul Awwal should be celebrated as a great occasion of happiness and festivity according to Shi’ism.
    The relevant part of this fabricated narration attributed by the Shia to the famous Companion, Huzaifah (r.a.) is as follows:
    “Huziifah Bin Yaman narrates: Once on the 9th of Rabiul Awwal I went to Prophet Mohammad. I saw Caliph Ali Murtaza, Imam Hasan and Imam Husain also there. All were busy eating. Prophet Mohammad smiling in great happiness said to Hasan and Husain: ‘Sons, today is the day on which Allah will destroy your enemy and the enemy of your grandfather, and Allah will accept the curse of your mother (Fatimah). Eat sons, eat I Today is the day that Allah accepts the deeds of your Shia (partisans), and beloved. Eat sons, eat! Today is the day when the power of your enemy and the enemy of your grandfather will be broken and annihilated in the dust. Eat sons, eat! Today is the day when Fir’on to my Ahl Bait, the one who will oppress and persecute them and who will usurp their rights, will be destroyed.”
    Huzaifah said: I exclaimed: ‘O Prophet Mohammad! Will there be such an evil person in your Ummah, who will perpetrate such villainy?’

    Prophet Mohammad replied: ‘O Huzaifah!
    Among the munafiqs (hypocrites) there will be one idol who will be the leader of the group of the hypocrites . He will carry in his hand the whip of cruelty and injustice; he will prevent people from the Path of truth; he will alter the Qur’an; he will change my Sunnah and my ways; he will oppress my Wasi (Appointee), Ali Bin Abi Talib and he will deprive my daughter, Fatimah of her rights. My daughter will then curse him. Allah Ta’ala will accept her la’nat (curse) and prayers.’ Huzaifah then said: ‘O Prophet Mohammad! Why do you not supplicate to Allah to destroy this Fir’on and oppressor in your very lifetime?’
    Prophet Mohammad replied: ‘O Huzaifah! I do not regard it proper to interfere in the decisions of Allah Ta’ala… But, I have requested Allah Ta’ala to grant excellence and superiority to that day when that oppressor and Fir’on is dispatched to Hell (e.i. when he is destroyed). That day should be decreed superior to all other days so that honoring of that day becomes a Sunnah for my Shiane Ahl Bait (i.e. partisans of my family). Allah (Ta’ala) then sent this Wahi (revelation):
    ‘It has already been decreed in My Eternal Knowledge that the usurping munafiqs (hypocrites) will persecute you and your family. They will inflict many hardships on you and your family. O Muhammad! Ali has been awarded your rank because of these (impending) hardships which will be perpetrated on him by the usurper of his rights and the Fir’on of this Ummah. I have commanded the angels of the seven heavens to rejoice and celebrate Eid on the day he (i.e. Umar) is killed – this is for the sake of the partisans and lovers of the Ahl Bait. I have commanded the recording Angels to cease recording the sins of My servants for three days from that day. This is in honor of that day (on which Umar will be murdered). O Muhammad! Three days grace and permission in general to commit sins have been given in your honor and in honor of your appointee (Ali) … Every year on this day, will I free from Hell thousands of your Shia.’ Huzaifah says: ‘After Prophet Mohammad said this, he arose and left the room and went to the house of Umme Salmah. After having heard this talk of Prophet Mohammad I was convinced of Umar’s Kufr (disbelief). There remained no doubt in this. Finally, after the demise of Prophet Mohammad, I witnessed the fitnah which he (Umar) created. He exhibited the Kufr (disbelief) which was concealed in him. He reneged from Islam and usurped the Imamate and Caliphate. To achieve this end he adopted the most shameless methods. He altered the Qur’an and burnt the holy house of Prophet Mohammad. He pleased the Jews, Christians and the Magians and displeased Fatimah and the entire Ahl Bait, and he conspired to have Ameerul Mu’meen ( Ali) murdered. He made haram what Allah had made halal and legalized what Allah had made unlawful. He slammed the door against the face and stomach of Fatimah(r. a.).
    Huzaifah then said:
    ‘Finally Allah Ta’ala accepted the curses of His Holy Nabi and his daughter in regard to this Munafiq (i.e. Umar) and had him killed at the hands, of his killer (Abu Lu’lu’ Irani). May there be the Rahmat (Mercy) of Allah on his (Umar’s) killer.”
    (Source: Zadul Ma’ad – Pages 433-436)
    Needless to say, this whole narration, from beginning to end, is a colossal fabrication of the Shia enemies of the Companions in general, and of the first three Caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman) in particular. Shia scholars are notorious for the fabrication of narration’s which they falsely attribute to their Imams.
    Shia’s fabrications state that:
    1. Umar (r.a.), the second Caliph of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) was a kafir (apostate).
    2. Not only was Umar (r.a.) a kafir, but a munafiq (hypocrite).
    3. Umar (r.a.) was the leader of the Munafiqeen (hypocrites).
    4. Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) and the Ahl Bait had cursed Umar (r.a.).
    5. Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) had prayed for the murder of Umar (r.a.).
    6. Umar (r.a.) had altered and interpolated the Qur’an..
    7. Umar (r.a.) was a cruel oppressor, unjust and a usurper.
    8. Umar (r.a.) prevented others from Iman (faith) and Islam.
    9. Umar (r.a.) conspired to murder Ali (r.a.).

    The day when Umar (r.a.) was killed is such an occasion of rejoicing that Shia’s falsely claim that Allah declared the permissibility of sinning for three consecutive days. That is, each year for three days from the date of Umar’s murder, Shia are permitted to fornicate, consume alcohol, steal and commit all sins and crimes with complete equanimity since sins are not recorded in these three days. The Shia consider the murderer of Umar (r.a.) to be a great hero for killing Umar.

    These are the abominable teachings of Shi’ism regarding the illustrious Caliph Umar Ibn Khattab (r.a.) about whom Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) said: “If there had to be a Nabi after me, it would have been Umar.
    Also Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) said: “The sternest in the Law of Allah is Umar. ”
    Nahjul Balaaghah, the highest theological book of the Shia, have this to say about Abu Bakr and Umar (r.a.):

    “Boldly and unscrupulously he (i.e. Abu Bakr) and his successor (i.e. Umar), each in turn, pillaged and plundered the wealth of the community leaving the state in such sadly injured condition that the passage of time was increasing the intensity of the injury,.. But, it was carried on under the guise of law and order and many unacceptable excuses were offered to justify these irreligious and ungodly arrogation’s and many more will be repeated in the future.”

    The Shia scholar Muhammad Baqir Sadr writes about Prophet Mohammad Companions in general and Umar (r.a.) in particular:
    “… we find that it is necessary to accept the existence of a large trend, from the very lifetime of the Prophet, who inclined towards proposing the use of Ijtihad and circumstantial considerations in determining their interests, above strict adherence to the religious texts……..This trend was represented by a daring group of important Companions like, Umar bin-al-Khattab, who disputed with the Messenger and made judgements contradicting the text in many subjects, believing that he had the right to do so.”
    The type of ‘Ijtihad’ which the Shia attribute to Umar (r.a.), in particular, and to other Companions, in general, is described in the following statement of Shia scholar, Baqir Sadr: “…we mean by ‘ijtihad’ the making of judgements in contradiction to the text or acceptance of such a judgement.”
    A king who pillages and plunders the wealth of a nation is supposed to lead a life of luxury-living in palatial mansions and palaces; relaxing in gardens and orchards; adorning himself in garments of silk, velvet and brocade; indulging in sumptuous feasts and extravagance. But history bears loud testimony to the austere, simple, in fact, life of extreme poverty led by Caliph Umar (r.a.). A dozen patches adorned his kurtah of coarse cloth. The frugality and austerity of Umar (r.a.) have already attained proverbial significance. The most ardent Sunni sympathizer of Khomeini will not fail in acknowledging this glaring historical fact. Yet the Shia scholars dare to accuse a great man such as Umar of having pillaged and plundered the wealth of the Ummah!
    HaqquI Yaqeen is another very highly placed book of Shia theology. The author of Haqqul Yaqeen is the same Shia Mullah Baqir Majlisi, author of Zadul Ma’ad from which the lengthy fabricated narration (mentioned earlier) has been cited. In his book HaqquI Yaqeen, Baqi Majlisi cites a very lengthy narration in which Abu Bakr and Umar (r.a.) are subjected to extreme vilification. Some excerpts from this fabricated narration of vilification are reproduced here:
    “After Makkah Muazzamah, Imam Mehdi will proceed to Madinah, the city of our grandfather, Prophet Mohammad. At Madinah, he (Imam Mehdi) will demonstrate an astonishing act which will be a cause of great happiness for the Believers and a cause of disgrace for the kuffar (disbelievers) and hypocrites … When Imam Mehdi will reach the grave of Prophet Mohammad, he will ask the people: “0 people! Is this the grave of our grandfather, Prophet Mohammad?”
    The people will say – “Yes, this is his grave.” Imam Mehdi will then ask:”
    “Who are these persons who have been buried alongside our grandfather!”
    The people will say: “They are Abu Bakr and Umar, the closest companions of Prophet Mohammad I” Imam Mehdi (in spite of knowing everything) will say:
    “Who was Abu Bakr? And, who was Umar? What was their excellence which necessitated their burial alongside our grandfather?”…
    “After three days, Sahibul Amr (the Shia title for Imam Mehdi) will order the walls to be broken and their bodies exhumed .. After the exhumation of their bodies, he will order their kafan to be removed and their bodies will be hung up on a dried out tree… ”
    Imam Mehdi will command a dark storm to destroy those who loved them (i.e. Abu Bakr and Umar). Imam Mehdi will then order that the bodies be taken down from the tree. With the power of Allah, Imam Mehdi will restore them to life. He will order all mankind to gather. Then these two will be held liable for the sin of all oppression and Kufr (disbelief) which occurred from the beginning of the world. They will be held responsible for all such sin …..
    The sin of every murder committed, of every act of adultery committed, of every act of riba, of every act of haram wealth and injustice perpetrated until the advent of Imam Mehdi’s appearance, will be charged against them (Abu Bakr and, Umar). Both of them will plead guilty to all these crimes … Sahibul Amr will then command that they be hanged on a tree. He will command a fire to rise from the earth and devour them. A fire will (miraculously) rise and reduce them (Abu Bakr and Umar) and the tree to ashes.. ”
    “Muhammad Prophet Mohammad, Ameerul Mumineen (i.e. Ali), Fatimah Zahra, Hasan Mujtaba, Husain Shaheed, and all the sinless Imams will come to life. All Mumins (believers) and all kafirs (disbelievers or apostates) will also come to life. ”
    “… The two (Abu Bakr and Umar) will then be punished so much, that daily, in one day and one night, they will be killed and restored to life a thousand times. After this, Allah will take them away to wherever He desires and continue punishing them as long as He desires. ”
    (source: HaqquI Yaqeen)

    This is the official teaching of Shia’s religion regarding the two highest & closest Companions of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.).
    In his book Kashful Asrar on page 121, Khomeini advises his Shia brethren to study the books of Mullah Baqir Majlisi who has presented these repugnant fabrications regarding the Companions (r.a.).
    Nahjul Balaaghah, one of the highest books of Shia theology has the following abuse and vituperation for the Khulafa-e-Raashideen and the illustrious Companions of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.); this scurrilous attack and abuse is ascribed by the Shia to Ali (r.a.).:
    “At last the first Caliph died, but while going, he appointed another to fill his vacancy. It is not astonishing that during his lifetime he was always badly in need of the help Of Others to compensate for his imperfections and defects and to cover his faults and failures, but at the time of his death he thought himself to be wise and learned enough to fix and appoint somebody to carry on the duties at which he was a complete failure himself.”
    “Boldly and unscrupulously he and his successor (a reference to Umar), each in turn, pillaged and plundered the wealth of the community leaving the state in such sadly injured condition that the passage of time was increasing the intensity of the injury … But it was carried on under the guise of law and order and many unacceptable excuses were offered to justify these irreligious and ungodly arrogation’s and many more will be repeated in the future.”
    “Consequently the third (i.e. Uthman) proudly took charge of the caliphate, as if it was a private grazing ground, and with bloated stomachs he and members of his clan (Bani Umayya) started plundering the wealth of the Muslim world in the same reckless gluttonous manner which characterizes a camel when it devours harvest grass. However, this man met an untimely death. The greed of his clan was the cause of his undoing. ”
    (Nahjul Balaaghah)
    The Shia scholar Ghulam Husain Najfi wrote in his book, Fi Jawab: Nikah Umme Kulthoom: “Umar did not believe in the Quran.” (Page 429) “Umar continued to consume liquor even after it was declared unlawful. The last thing which he consumed before his death was liquor.” (Page430) “Umar is the lock of Hell.” (Page 430)
    There are many other statements of extreme filth which these Shia hoodlum scholars gorge out against Umar and Uthman (r.a.). But we feel too ashamed to record and too difficult to write the filthy words of vulgarity and immorality which the scholars of Shi’ism so shamelessly and mercilessly direct against the most illustrious Companions of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.).
    The filthiest charges of moral debasement are hurled at Caliph Uthman about whom Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) spoke so glowingly. His modesty and shame were of such a lofty degree that, according to Prophet Mohammad ( s. a. w.), even the Angels felt shy for him. It is only Shia renegades and unbelievers who possess sufficient audacity and shamelessness to besmirch such a paragon of virtue and modesty with the vilest charges of immorality and moral debasement.
    The Shia scholar, Muhammad Hussain Dakkoo, states in his book, Tajalliat- e-Sadaqat:
    “While the Sunnis consider them Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman) to be the noblest after Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) we (Shia) firmly believe that they were bereft of the wealth of Iman (faith) and Ikhlas (sincerity).” (Tajalliat- e-Sadaqat, p. 201)

    “….. the three Khalifs (Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman) in his (Ali’s) estimation were sinners, liars, treacherous, cheats, oppressors and usurpers… ” (Tajalliat- e-Sadaqat, p. 206)

    “The conquests during the reign of the first three Khalifs sullied the name of Islam.” (Tajalliat- e-Sadaqat, p. 95)

    Marriage of Ali’s Daughter to Umar
    Shia, unanimously regard Ali as the first and highest of their Imams. Some regard him even as God. The main sect of Shi’ism, the Twelvers, to which Khomeini belongs, claims that Ali (r.a.) to be on the same rank as Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) as well as being higher than even other prophets.
    Khomeini states: “It is one of the essential beliefs of our Shia school that no one can attain the spiritual status of the lmaam, not even the cherubim or the prophets. ” (Writings and Declarations of Khomeini)
    The Shia book, Usool-e-Kafi states: “The laws brought by Ali … His rank is like the rank of Muhammad.”
    Ali (r.a.) approved the marriage of his eldest daughter, Umme Kulthoom (r. a.) to Umar (r.a.). Umme Kulthum (r. a.) was the eldest daughter of Fatimah (r. a.). This act of Ali (r.a.) completely confuses the Shia and entirely repudiates the Shia doctrine of hatred for the Companions in general and for Umar (r.a.) in particular. Shia scholars are at pains and to this day remain in the grip of mental labor pains attempting to explain away and misinterpret this act of Ali (r.a.).
    In struggling to explain away this indictment against Shi’ism, the Shia scholars resort to a variety of Taqiyah Tricks. But, far from satisfactorily explaining this truth, they only succeed in compounding their confusion and exhibiting their mental absurdity.
    How was it possible for Ali (r.a.) to have consented to his daughter marrying Umar (r.a.) whom Shi’ism unanimously brands as a munafiq, kafir, murtad, murderer, oppressor and a multitude of other vile epithets? Indeed, this holy marriage is perpetually dangling on the necks of the Shia scholars like a dead albatross which they are unable to shed off – with which they have to live and be haunted.
    Among the most ludicrous explanations fabricated by the Shia to argue away this historical fact, Rawindi the ‘ Qutubul Aqtab’ of the Shia claims that when Umar (r.a.) pressurized and threatened Ali (r.a.) to consent to this marriage with Umme Kulthum, he (Ali) miraculously transformed a female Jinn into the form, and appearance of Kulthum. Thus, Umar (r.a.) married this female Jinn while the real Umme Kulthum remained in concealment. Only plunderers of Iman (faith) could fabricate such nonsensical absurdity. This alleged miraculous transformation of the female Jinn is described in detail in the Shia book, Mawaiz-e-Husainiyah.
    Regarding this marriage, Abu Ja’far Yaqub Kaleeni, claims in his book Furoo’Kafi (an authoritative book of the Shia) that Umar (r.a.) did not marry Umme Kulthum, but abducted her by force. According to these miserable Shia slanderers, Umar captured her by force, had intercourse with her and kept her in captivity against her wishes and without marrying her.

    Contempt for the Other Companions
    The Qur’an speaks glowingly regarding the Companions. In one place, the Qur’an praises the Companions in the following terms:

    But, Shi’ism preaches that all these Muhajireen and Ansar among the Companions, in fact all the Companions with the exception of three, reneged from Islam, i.e. they became murtads (apostate) and kafirs (disbeliever) after the demise of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). Thus, the “Asah-hul Kutub” The Most Authentic “of Books” of the Shia religion, Al-Jamiul Kafi, states in its chapter, Kitabur Raudhah on page 115: “After (the demise of) Nabi-(s. a. w.) – all the people (i.e. the Companions) became murtads (apostates), excepting three. – Miqdad Bin Aswad, Abu Zar Ghifari and Salman Farsi”

    The Shia in the introduction of Nahjul Balaaghah revile the eminent Companion of Prophet Mohammad, Abu Musaa Ash’ari (r.a.) by saying:
    “A weak and old man, named Abu Moosa Ashari, who was also secretly hostile to Ali be nominated as the arbitrator from this side (i.e. the side of Ali).”
    “…these arbitrators (i.e. Abu Musaa Ashari and Amr Ibn Aas) sold the cause of Islam along with their souls to the Devil.
    “Abu Moosa-e-Ashari, was a man with weak faith more inclined to look after his worldly interest than the cause Of religion.”

    But, Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) spoke in glowing terms of even the members of Abu Musaa Asha’ari’s tribe, leave alone the great Companion known as Abu Musaa Ash’ari. Said Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.): “They (i.e. the tribe members of Abu Musaa Asha’ari) are of me and I am of them.” (Bukhari)

    Abu Hurairah (r.a.) is a famous name. This illustrious Companion of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) is well-known for his copious narration of ahadith. Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) made special dua for Abu Hurairah (r.a.), but Khomeini has the following to say about this eminent Companion and Muhaddith:
    “God knows what Misfortunes Islam has Suffered from its inception down to the present at the hands of these evil ‘ulama’. Abu Hurairah was one of the fuqaha, but Allah knows what judgments he falsified for Muaawiya and others like him, and what damage he inflicted upon Islam – But when a faqih like Abu Hurairah or a judge like Shurayh joins such a government, he improves its standing while besmirching the reputation of Islam.”
    Commenting on this statement of Khomeini, Hamid Algar the compiler of Khomeini’s writings and declarations, states: “Shia scholars have regarded him (Abu Hurairah) as unreliable and even dishonest.”

    But, Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) made special dua for Abu Hurairah in respect of narration of ahadith, hence we observe the ahadith in abundance narrated by him. The following statement bears out the love which Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) had for Abu Hurairah (r.a.).
    “O Allah! Endear this, your servant (Abu Hurairah) and his mother to your believing servants and endear the believers to them.” (Sahih Muslim)
    Thus those who are Believers love Abu Hurairah (r.a.). Those who are unbelievers detest Abu Hurairah (r.a.).
    Khomeini, slandering the eminent Companion, Samura Bin Jundub (r.a.) says: “Dissemination of the ordinances of Islam, as well as the teaching and instruction of the people, is the duty of the fuqaha who are just. For if they are not just, they will be like those who forged traditions harmful to Islam, like Samura ibn Jandab, who forged traditions hostile to the Commander of the Faithful.”
    Every Muslim knows that Khalid Bin Walid (r.a.) has been given the title, Saifullah (the Sword of Allah) by Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). But, the Shia scholar, Hussain Buksh Jara, offers the following vituperation:
    “Tyrant Khalid beheaded Malik and two leaders of his tribe. Their heads were put in the oven in which food was cooked for the feast of Walimah. In this way, the Walimah of zina (adultery) was prepared and Khalid himself ate therefrom and served it to his soldiers as well. ” (Munazarah Baghdad, p. 100)
    In the Shia religion, Zubair (r.a.) is described as a criminal, evil, treacherous and among the people of Hell ! But, Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) said about Zubair, according to Tirmizi :
    “Every Nabi had a hawaari (helper) and my hawaari is Zubair.”
    “Zubair will be in Jannat (Paradise).”

    Zubair and Talhah whom the Shia claim are among the “people destined to Hell”, are in fact members of the ten Companions to whom Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) delivered the glad tidings that they will go straight to Paradise. However, Khomeini and his Shia believe that these noble men are among the people of Hell.
    The Shia believe that Prophet Mohammad’s Companion Talhah (r.a.) is evil, treacherous, a criminal and among the people of the Fire, but Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) said according to Tirmizi: “Talhah and Zubair will be my two neighbors in Jannat.”
    Another lie which the Shia attribute to Ali (r.a.) is the following statement: “You know very well that Amr-ibn-Aas himself is an inveterate liar, he usually lies, he makes promises without intention of fulfilling them … He habitually breaks his pledges, never keeps a promise and is unkind and unmerciful In the battlefield before the swords are drawn and fight begins, he is usually very bold in giving orders and very conspicuous in pretension of leading the army; but when the fight actually begins, his greatest tactic is to show his opponents his naked buttocks. ” (Source: Nahjul Balaaghah)
    Caliph Ali (r.a.) never uttered such falsehood, slander, abuse, insult and vulgarity. Such abuse and vituperation are the stock weapons of Shi’ism. Ali (r.a.) had the utmost respect and honor for Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman (r.a.). In fact, Ali (r.a.) took the oath of allegiance (ba’yt) on the hands of the first three Khulafa Raashideen. Furthermore, Ali (r.a.) could never have spoken so disparagingly of the great Conqueror of Islam, viz., Amr Ibn Aas (r.a.) who was among the top-ranking Companions of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). No believer and no person of any Iman (faith) can ever accept that Ali (r.a.) was capable of uttering such profanity as the Shia ascribe to him.


    Allah (Ta’ala) says in the Qur’an:

    “The Prophet has a greater claim on the Believers than their own selves. And, his wives are their mothers.”
    Thus, an article of our faith is honor, respect and love for Umaahatul Mu’mineen, the holy Mothers of the Believers, Viz., the honorable wives of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). Whoever denigrates them and brands them as unbelievers, is himself/herself a kafir.
    Among the honorable wives of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.), Aisha (Radiallahu Anha) and Hafsa (Radiallahu Anha) are special targets for Shia abuse, slander and vilification. This is because they are the daughters of Abu Bakr and Umar (r.a.) respectively. The same degree of hatred cherished by Shia for Shaikhain (i.e. Abu Bakr and Umar (r.a.)) is gorged out against Aishah and Hafsah (r.a.). Shia narration’s shamelessly describe these illustrious and noble wives of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) as disbelievers and hypocrites, etc. The worst of slanders and calumnies are leveled against them.
    Mullah Baqir Majlisi, in his book, Hayatul Quloob – one of the most authoritative books of the Shia religion – repeatedly described Aisha and Hafsa (r.a.) as munafiqs (hypocrites). In this book, Baqir also alleges: “Aisha and Hafsa mudered Prophet Mohammad by giving him poison.” (Vol. 2, p. 870)
    Accusing Shaikhain and their daughters of conspiracy to murder Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.), the Shia, Baqir writes in Hayatul Quloob on page 745 of Vol. 2: “Thus these two male munafiqs (referring to Abu Bakr and Umar) and those two female munafiqs (referring to Aisha and Hafsa) agreed to martyr Prophet Mohammad by administering poison to him.”

    Mutahhiri, a leading cleric of the Shia religion, says:
    “Now that we see Ali, and Ammaar, Uways al-Qarani and others face to face with Aisha and az-Zubayr and Talhah, we do not feel any hesitation, for we see the second group as people with the look of criminals, that is, the effects of evil and treachery are evident on their faces: and when we look at their faces and their treacherous characters we guess that they are people of the Fire. ” (TEHRAN TIMES, 25th August, 1982)
    From the above vile remarks made by one of Khomeini’s leading Shia theologians, it will be evident that the Shia religion describes Aisha Siddiqah (Radiallahu Anha) the beloved wife of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) as a criminal, evil, treacherous and among the people of Hell.
    Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) warned:
    “Do not hurt me regarding Aisha.” (Bukhari-Muslim)
    “The superiority of Aishah over women is like the superiority of thareed (a kind of food) over all food.” (Muslim)
    “O’ Aisha! Jibraeel recites Salaam upon you.” (Muslim)
    The Shia scholar, Muhammad Hussain Dakkoo, states in his book, Tajalliat- e-Sadaqat:
    “We do not deny the first part of the Sunni claim that Aisha (r. a.) being the wife of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.) is the mother of the Muslims. But we do not hold the view that she was a believer. To be a mother is one thing and to be a Mu’minah (Believer) is another thing. ” (Tajalliat- e-Sadaqat, p. 478)


    In the a foregoing pages, it has been abundantly clarified that Shi’ism stand on the basis of hatred for the Companions of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). Thus, a perpetual tirade of venom, insult, abuse and vilification permeate the books of the Shia religion. This mass of vituperation is directed against the first three Khulafa-e-Raashideen, Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman (r.a.m) in particular and against all Companions in general. As mentioned earlier, the Shia religion propagates that all the Companions of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.), excepting three, became apostate after the demise of Prophet Mohammad (s. a. w.). Hence, vilification of the Companions is regarded as an honorable and meritorious act in Shi’ism.
    But, according to Islam, love for the Companions is a fundamental requirement of Iman (faith). Vilification of the Companions is Kufr (disbelief). Those who deny the Iman (faith) of the Khulafa-e-Raashideen and accuse them of Kufr (disbelief), irtidaad and Nifaaq, are themselves kuffar of the worst order.

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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