Hukum Ulamak Islam Terhadap Syiah (Ebook)

Sesungguhnya masyarakat Islam Malaysia kebanyakannya tidak pernah mendengar apatah lagi mengetahui tentang perkataan ‘Syiah’ sehingga terjadinya apa yang dinamakan “Revolusi Iran” pada tahun 1978M. Maka timbullah selepas itu golongan-golongan yang giat mempelopori kemasukan semangat revolusi tersebut ke masyarakat negeri ini di atas laungan “Penegakan Negara Islam”, “Penyatuan saf-saf Muslimin” dan seterusnya “Pendekatan antara Sunni dan Syiah”. Dan akhirnya lahirlah sebuah golongan kecil yang berterus-terang mengakui dan mempelopori pandangan dan fahaman Syiah hingga tersebarnya buku-buku yang mengagungkan kejayaan revolusi Iran serta fahaman Syiah di kalangan masyarakat kita.

Syiah ialah salah satu golongan pecahan terbesar dalam Islam selepas Ahli as- Sunnah wal Jamaah (AWSJ) atau Sunni. Syiah mengikuti Islam yang bertentangan dengan apa yang diajarkan oleh Nabi Muhammad dan Ahli Baitnya. Syiah menolak kepemimpinan dari tiga Khalifah Sunni yang pertama malah sebahagian mereka menghina para Khulafa’ Ar-Rasyidin yang merupakan sahabat Rasulullah s.a.w. Bentuk tunggal dari Syiah adalah “Shii’ ” menunjuk kepada pengikut dari Ahli Bait dan Imam Ali. Tetapi Ali bin Abi Talib dan para Ahli Bait sendiri telah menolak kepercayaan Syiah dan menyatakan mereka sebagai kafir. Kebanyakan Sunni Islam mengatakan bahawa golongan syiah merupakan satu kefahaman yang bercanggah dengan ajaran Islam kerana fahaman ini mendakwa bahawa Ali iaitu sepupu Rasulullah sepatutnya menjadi Rasul selepas Baginda.

Aliran Syiah mempercayai bahawa Nabi telah mewasiatkan keturunannya menjadi pemimpin umat Islam dan hendaklah bersatu di bawah Imam.

Makalah ini bertujuan untuk mempamerkan kepada saudara-saudara Muslimin perbandingan fahaman antara aqidah Ahli as-Sunnah wal Jamaah yang kita anuti dengan aqidah Syiah. Perbandingan tersebut disusunkan seperti berikut:-

  1. Pendapat ulamak-ulamak besar Ahli as-Sunnah wal Jamaah tentang Syiah
  2. Definisi Syiah menurut ulamak Ahli as-Sunnah
  3. Kenyataan-kenyataan ulamak Syiah tentang fahaman Syiah
  4. Jadual ringkasan perbandingan antara Ahli as-Sunnah dan Syiah
  5. Petikan kenyataan-kenyataan Khomeini, Ketua Negara Iran.


Untuk BACAAN ONLINE atau MUAT TURUN e-book sila KLIK –


Wageih al-Madani

(Second Edition)


  • Preface
  • Publisher’s Note
  • Why Have the Muslim Scholars Condemned Khomeini?
  • His Claim that the Shiite Imaams are Better than All of the Angels and Messengers
  • His Claim that the Teachings of the Imaam Are Equal to Those in the Qur’aan
  • Khomeini’s Defamation of the Messenger of Allaah
  • Khomeini’s Assertion that ‘Wahi’ did not Cease to Continue after the Death of the Prophet
  • Reviling the Companions of the Messenger of Allaah
  • The Stance of Khomeini and his Gang With Regard to the Great Messenger
  • The Guardianship of the Jurist
  • Preliminary Word
  • How Did the ‘Guardianship of the Jurist’ doctrine enter the Shiite Thought
  • ‘The Guardianship of the Jurist’: What Does It Mean?
  • Conclusion


Praise be to Allaah, Whose praise suffices, and may peace be on His chosen slaves.

The Muslim world is facing today the worst affliction recorded in its contemporary history, from the Shiite Iranian revolution of Khomeini. This revolution seeks to undermine the faith of the Muslim world, and attempts to replace it with pre-Islaamic pagan beliefs, to subjugate and fragment the Muslim world and destroy it by collaborating with the enemies of Allaah: the communists, the Jews, the clandestine secretive sects, zindiqs and atheists.

Since many Muslim youths are unaware of the intellectual and ideological background of Khomeini, the leader of this revolution, and are ignorant of the objective he is seeking, a dark fate awaits the Muslim world if they succumb to the deceitful sweet words uttered by some leading figures in the revolution.

We desire in this brief discourse to expose one side of the true ideology of the leader of the Iranian revolution, and to refute the blasphemous statements which he has made on various occasions. In the meantime, we will present the legal evidence upon which the fatwas are based condemning Khomeini to Kufr or blasphemy and deviation, issued by the competent scholars from all over the Muslim world.

This discourse may serve as a caution to the heedless amongst the Muslims, and as an excuse for us to Allaah, the Lord of the Worlds, and as sincere advice to the ummah. Allaah surely protects His religion and Message from all atheists.

“They plot and Allaah plans, and Allaah is the best of planners.” (Qur’aan – 8:30)

The Author


Publisher’s Note

Praise be to Allaah who gives, honors and humiliates whomsoever He pleases. His is goodness and omnipotence. Peace be on the Prophet Muhammad, the Messenger of Mercy to the world, a Light unto all creation and a Savior of the faithful servants of God.

The “Ansar of Imaam AR Association is pleased to present to our dear readers this thoughtful discourse, “THE MUSLIM SCHOLARS’ FATWA CONCERNING KHOMEINI”, in order to refute Khomeini’s allegations and numerous blasphemous statements which caused divisions and dissent in the ranks of the Islamic nation.

Khomeini claims to be a faithful follower of Imaam Alee and his Household, but the facts indicate otherwise. Indeed, Khomeini is the arch-enemy of Imaam Alee for the following reasons:

Firstly, the Imaam (Alee) endorsed the three successors to the Prophet Muhammad, giving them good advice, and serving them as a faithful soldier and trusted adviser. He never reviled or faulted them, let alone accused them of blasphemy or disavowed them. But Khomeini who claims to be a follower of Alee has reviled Abu Bakr and Omar, accusing them and all the Ummah of the Prophet of blasphemy, thus acting contrary to Imaam Alee and having blasphemed himself when he accused the Prophet’s companions of blasphemy.

Secondly, he accused Imaam Alee and all the Shia Imaams of failing to establish justice and virtue. He made himself and his hidden Imaam the qualified leaders to establish virtue and justice, thus denigrating Imaam Alee and and all the struggles of the Prophet and his successors and Imaams.

Thirdly, Khomeini is repeating the falsehood of such zindiqs as the Jew Abdullah Ibn Saba and his followers who claimed that Imaam Alee was a channel of revelation to the Prophet, that he possessed all Islamic knowledge and all the secrets of Islamic religion that he outrank of all the Prophets and Messengers of God. Imaam Alee had burned those Sabaeans, pursued them in every town and village, as he pursued their head Abdullah Ibn Saba to kill him. And by God, if Imaam Alee were alive and ruling, the first thing he would do would be to finish Khomeini and his cohorts who altered God’s religion and ascribed to Alee what the Sabaeans Zindiqs had claimed. For Khomeini and his followers claim that Alee’s virtuous wife, the Lady of all women in Paradise, said: “I have received revelation after the Prophet’s death. For seventy five days the angel Gabriel would visit me, dictating to me a Qur’aan three times larger than the one revealed to my father. It does not even contain one letter from my father’s Qur’aan.” Thus, those Zindiqs have accused Fatimah, may God be pleased with her, of blasphemy, and of ascribing revelation to herself, of saying the Qur’an was false and of giving the lie to the Prophet.

For all that, the “Ansar of Imaam Alee Association” felt the need to defend Alee’s religion, honor and faith. And there is no better defense than to stand up to his enemies who are plundering the Shiites in his name and inflicting grievous injustice on the Shia community.

As a matter of fact, Khomeini and his followers are the archenemies of Imaam Alee and his virtuous children, for they ascribed to them divine feats, such as mastering knowledge of all disciplines and even controlling the atoms of the universe. Those liars claimed that the Shia Imaams had ascribed these powers to themselves, reviled the companions of the Prophet, imputed Kufr (blasphemy) to Muslims, claimed the Qur’aan was incomplete and even distorted, said that they received revelation and that they were created from the light of God, that they could gain admittance to Paradise for whoever they desired, and get out of Hell-fire whoever they pleased. They claimed that they were going to kill all those who contradicted them, destroy all Muslims and wreak vengeance on Abu Bakr and Omar because they allegedly usurped their rights and deprived them of their inheritance, their state and their domain. But all these claims are lies ascribed to the Imaams who were models of virtue, enlightenment, knowledge and faith.

For all the above allegations and lies, the genuine followers of Imaam Alee are duty bound to stand up to those falsifiers and expose their allegations and falsehoods to everyone in order to salvage the reputation of Imaam Alee, the commander of the faithful, and those of his virtuous children, and to protect Muslim beliefs from those apostate Zindiqs.

So we ask God almighty to accept this effort as purely for his own sake.

The Publisher


Numerous religious authorities have issued their judicial rulings respecting the blasphemy and apostasy of Khomeini. Those authorities include the Muslim World League which gave a deliverance on the subject on the 9th of Ramadan 1400 h (1980), and another at its 3rd annual conference in Safar, 1408/1987; the Ministry of Endowment and Religious Affairs in Morroco, HRH ash-Shaikh al-Habib Bal-Khojah, the Jurist consult of the Tunisian Republic; his eminence, ash-Shaikh Abdul-Aziz bin Baz, ash-Shaikh Nasirud-Deen al-Albani, the leading authority in the science of the Prophetic tradition; and many other scholars in the Muslim world.

Since many students of knowledge, as well as common people, may not be aware of the legal evidence upon which the relevant judicial ruling is based, some may even wonder why Khomeini was condemned to kufr, or blasphemy. For this reason, we desire to cite in this discourse the statements and opinions made by him, and follow these with the judicial argument which exposes their blasphemous nature. This will serve as established evidence against the unbelievers and the rebellious, and also to render ourselves excused before Allaah, “… and that they may fear Him.” (Qur’aan – 7:164)


In his book ‘The Islaamic Govement’, Khomeini says:

“Verily, the Imaam has a praised station, a supreme rank and universal sovereignty to which authority and command submit all the atoms of this universe. And of the imperatives of our religion is that our Imaams occupy a praised station which is accessible by neither a close angel nor a sent prophet … And in accordance with the narrations and traditions that are in our possession, the greatest Messenger and the Imaams, peace be on them, were light before the existence of this world, then Allaah made them surround His Throne. It has been related to them that they have states with Allaah which are encompassed by neither a close angel nor a sent prophet” [pp. 52, Cairo, 1979 10]

Ever since this book was published, the Muslim scholars have been issuing their deliverances condemning Khomeini to apostasy for the following reasons:

1. There is neither a verse in the Qur’aan nor an authentic tradition from the Messenger of Allaah referring to the eminence or Imaamate of the alleged Imaams, let alone the alleged status related to them.

2. The so-called “Universal viceregency” requires, from Khomeini’s standpoint, that when those Imaams say to a thing Be, it is. (“…and to them submit the atoms of this universe”). This indeed is a quality restricted only to Allaah, the Creator, who is far removed from every imperfection. He stands in need of no supporters or helpers in creation nor are there any to share His dominion, as He says: “Say, Call upon Those you allege beside Allaah, They control not even the weight of an ant in the heavens nor on the earth, nor have they any share in either, and He has no helper among them”. (Qur’aan – 34:22) He, extolled be His glory, also says, “Blessed is He Whose hand is the domain, and has power over all things”. (Qur’aan – 67.1) All the domain is in the hand of Allaah alone; He does not pass any portion thereof to any of His slaves. He says, “Those of you who allege beside Him own not ‘Qitmeer:” (the thin skin which is upon the datestone). Allaah the exalted says, referring to the angels, “They say, ‘The Beneficent has taken to Himself a son, far removed is He from what they attribute to Him, Say, they are only honored slaves. They speak not before He speaks and they act only by His commands. He knows what is before them and what is behind them, and they intercede not except for him whom He approves. They are awestricken fearing Him. Whoever of them should say: ‘I am a god beside Him, him shall We requite with Hell. Thus do We requite the unbelievers.” (Qur’aan – 21:26-29)

Thus the angels who are the close slaves of Allaah have no command over the disposal of their own affairs, and have no share in His dominion. Similarly all of the Messengers of Allaah, who are the best of men, share absolutely nothing with Allaah; Allaah speaks of the best one of them, Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. “Say, I do not say to you, I possess the treasures of Allaah, nor do I know the unseen.” (6.50) The same words were uttered by Noah to his people. Allaah also addresses His Messenger: “Say, ‘I have no power to do you harm or benefit.” (73.21) And Allaah the Exalted says addressing His Messenger: “Say, ‘I have no power to do myself harm or benefit.” (Quraan – 7:188)

If the Messengers of Allaah and His angels have no power to do themselves benefit or harm, nor any of them has command over the affairs, rather all of them are slaves belonging to Allaah, and are subservient to His command, the claim that the alleged Imaams have control over the atoms of the universe and assume the universal viceregency constitutes a plain Kufr, unbelief, and shirk, or attribution of co-partners to Allaah in His most exclusive attribute, the Lordship; exalted be He above what they attribute to Him. The claim that the Imaams have a special status with Allaah attained by neither a close angel nor a sent Messenger is a lie related to those Imaams, an assertion of polytheism and apostasy.

3. The assertion that the Imaams and the Messenger were light before they were brought into existence is blasphemy, and is not substantiated by the Qur’aan, the Sunnah or the consensus of the Muslims. It is a blasphemous lie with which the polytheists from the nation of Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam resemble their brothers of the other nation who believe Jesus to be the incaate word of Allaah. All the Messengers are created human beings, as Allaah says: “Say, Verily, I am only a human like yourselves; it is revealed to me … “ (18.110) Thus the Messenger never was light or created out of light, but rather is like the rest of the sons of Adam except that Allaah has distinguished him with the Prophethood and the Message.

The alleged Imaams were distinguished by nothing of that nature. The assertion that they were light before they were brought into existence, and that they surrounded the throne of Allaah, is plain blasphemy and clear deviation. Had this been true, it would have been included in the Book of Allaah and in the Sunnah of His Messenger, but it is the falsehood of habitual liars and polytheists. Defying men and attributing lordship to them is tantamount to associating partners to Him, exalted is He from what they attribute to Him. He is the One Who was and nothing was with Him. He is the first, before Whom there was none; He created all by His power and greatness, and by virtue of His saying to a thing Be, it is. He created Adam from the mud of this earth, and made his posterity out of the known substance by mating the male and female. There is none of Adam’s posterity who was created out of light, nor was any of them light before he was created. Similarly, he who claims that a human being has access to the unseen, has control over the disposal of the affairs, or is infallible to slips, not subject to oblivion, has knowledge equal to that of Allaah, and is qualified in the same way as the Lord, is an infidel who does not believe in Allaah, and a polytheist who makes out of the creatures contenders with Allaah equal to Him. Far above is He from what they ascribe to Him.

4. Attributing excellence to those who are not prophets, distinguishing them above the Messengers and Prophets, is an act of disbelief and polytheism, because Allaah has selected the Messengers and the Prophets from mankind as Allaah has selected the Messengers and the Prophets over the rest of the believers is known by necessity from the religion, and agreed upon by the Muslim nation, rejected only by the apostate who deny the Oneness of Allaah, justice and faith. Thus the assertion that Alee, may Allaah be pleased with him, was better than Prophets Ibraheem, Noah or Yunus bin Matta, is an assertion of disbelief. The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “It does not behave a believer to say, “I am better than Yunus bin Matta.” It is not permissible for a believer to claim excellence over Yunus bin Matta, the Prophet, may peace be on him, even though Allaah refers to his behavior when he left his people in anger thinking that Allaah would not deal him severe punishment, but instead would send him to different people. Allaah says, “The fish swallowed him while he was blameworthy.” (Qur’aan – 37:142) He was blameworthy for having left his people without seeking permission from Allaah. “We cast him on a bare tract of land, and he was sick.” That was a lesson for him, and a dear message that Prophets and Messengers were also susceptible to admonishment and punishment were they to behave other than they were expected, yet they doubtlessly occupy the rank of superiority over all mankind, a rank which can be reached by no believing follower of the Messengers, regardless of how pious he might have been. Therefore, neither Alee bin Abi Taalib and his offsprings nor those who are superior to them, such as Abu Bakr and Umar, may Allaah be pleased with them all, have excellence over the Prophets, for the Messengers and the Prophets are the best of the believers by virtue of being chosen by Allaah and having the revelation sent down to them. Thus considering Alee or any of his offspring superior to a Prophet, Messenger or to an angel is surely blasphemy, apostasy in clear opposition to the Book of Allaah, to the Sunnah of His Messenger, and to the consensus of the Muslim Ummah.

It is known that Alee himself never made such an assertion, nor did any of his sons, the believers. Rather, he said, “I surely am one of the Muslims”. Nor did he claim excellence over Abu Bakr al-Siddiq and Umar. How then could he rank himself above the Prophets and Messengers, and the close angels? No! It is just a false allegation made up by the liars to add another crime in their record of notoriety against the pious believers.

5. Al-Maqam al-Mahmood, or the exalted station, shall be occupied only by a single slave of Allaah, the Messenger of Allaah, Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam referred to by Allaah, “Wake up in the night to pray reciting the Qur’aan as a Supererogatory act of worship for you. It may be that your Lord will raise you to an exalted station.” (Qur’aan – 17:79) Al-Maqam Al-Mahmood, or the exalted station, is the privilege of the great intercession granted to the Messenger of Allaah, Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, who occupies this station and shall be praised by all creatures on the Day of Resurrection. It is also a rank in Jannah granted only to one slave of Allaah, who is Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam as he said: “When you hear the Mu’azzin repeat his words (i.e. the call to prayer), then pray for me, and ask Allaah to grant me access to the honorable station of excellence; it is a rank in Jannah. It must belong to one slave of Allaah, and I hope to be him.” (Muslim). Hence, neither Alee nor any member of his household shall be privileged with such a station. Whoever alleges otherwise is a disbelieving liar who falsely claims access to the knowledge of the unseen, which is restricted exclusively to Allaah. Such a claim constitutes clear blasphemy.

6. The assertion that the alleged Imaams have with Allaah Subhanahu, a distinct state which cannot be encompassed by a close angel or a sent Messenger, is a fabricated assertion. Where in the Book of Allaah, or in the Sunnah of His Messenger can this be found? Or where in the statements of the truthful Imaams is this stated? Did Alee bin Abi Taalib, may Allaah be pleased with him, or any one of his pious veracious sons claim such a distinct state? Far are they from lying against Allaah the Exalt. This lie can never be made by a believer. Because such states are in the knowledge of the unseen, whoever claims this knowledge is a liar and an unbeliever. Allaah says, Say, “None in the heavens and the earth knows the unseen save Allaah” (Qur’aan – 27:65) Allaah revealed the unseen only to a Messenger or a Prophet. Whoever alleges that a revelation was received after the death of the Messenger of Allaah is ‘Kafir’ and ‘Zindiq’. Anyone who does not believe in the finality of Prophethood and the severance of revelation is an apostate who does not believe in Allaah and His Messages.

The above considerations reflect on some statements made by Khomeini in his book ‘Islaamic Govement’, and prove that he uttered nothing but blasphemy and falsehood, for which the scholars of the Muslim Ummah have condemned him to blasphemy and deviation.


Khomeini also said in his book ‘The Islaamic Govement’,

“The teachings of the Imaams are like the teachings of the Qur’aan. They do not apply to one particular generation, but rather to everyone in every age and place until the Day of Judgment.”

This statement constitutes disbelief in many respects:

1. He puts the words of Allaah the Exalted and those of man on an equal basis. The words of Allaah cannot be equaled. They are contained in the Book to which falsehood cannot be added, and from which nothing can be removed. But the words of the others and their teachings are subject to alteration, slips and errors.

Allaah has willed to safeguard nothing other than the Messages His Messengers conveyed. As for others, no one is infallible. They may be right or wrong. Neither Alee nor any of his household was infallible, nor were his teachings equal to those of Allaah. For example, al-Hasan son of Alee, may Allaah be pleased with him, whom the Shiites consider as one of their Imaams, differed with his father in some issues. In fact the Shiites themselves differ with Alee bin Abi Taalib and the Imaams on many issues. Khomeini himself charges Alee with fault and belittles him for accepting arbitration between him and Mu’awiyah, may Allaah be pleased with them, and for refraining from speaking of what Khomeini and his gang call ‘Mushaf or Qur’aan of Fatimah’ and not bringing it to light. He also charges al-Hasan with fault for abdicating the leadership to Mu’awiyah, and many other errors. The significant point here is that those Imaams were not infallible in all of their sayings and deeds, nor were their teachings equal to those of the Qur’aan, as Khomeini claims. They were like the rest of the believers and the pious slaves of Allaah, except that which conforms with the Book of Allaah from their teachings is accepted, and that which does not is discarded, particularly works compiled by the liars published under the names of the Imaam promoting falsehood and blasphemy amongst people.

They have reviled the pious Imaams by forging against them lies such as that they acquired the knowledge of the unseen, and that nothing in the heavens or the earth is concealed and from them. They claim to admit to Jannah whoever they please, deliver from the Fire whoever they please, control the atoms of the universe, have a free hand in the disposal of affairs, die whenever they desire, and so on and so forth. The pious Imaams are far above the filth of those liars. May Allaah curse whoever attributes such lies to them.


Beside reviling the imams and forging lies against them, Khomeini, may Allaah deprive him of His mercy, claims that all of them failed to establish the foundation of justice, or to guide and reform humanity, saying:

“All prophets came for the purpose of laying down the foundation of justice in the world, but they failed to do so; even Prophet Muhammad, the last of the Prophets who came to reform mankind and to apply justice failed too. The person who will succeed in all this and in laying down the foundation of justice in the world at all levels, and redressing the wrong is the expected mahdi…”

“So the expected mahdi whom Allaah spared as a treasure for mankind will maintain justice throughout the world, and succeed where the Prophet before him failed (!!) The reason why Allaah subhanah, has spared the life of the mahdi, peace be on him, is that there is no one among men who is capable of assuming this great task which neither the prophets nor the forefathers of the mahdi achieved what they came for…”

He further maintained: “Had the mahdi, peace be on him, passed away, there would have been no one among men to lay down the foundation of justice and maintain it in the world. Thus the expected mahdi, peace be on him, is kept for this affair. Therefore, his birthday, we ransom him with our souls, is the greatest of the Islaamic holidays, and the greatest holiday of mankind (!!), because he will make justice and fairness prevail on earth. That is why we must admit that the birthday of the mahdi is the greatest of all. Upon his appearance, he will deliver mankind from its retrogress, guide all to the right path, and fill the earth with justice after it was filled with oppression. The birthday of the mahdi is a great occasion to 18 the Muslims, and is considered more important than the birthday of Prophet Muhammad. Therefore we prepare ourselves for the arrival of the expected mahdi, may peace be on him.” (!!)

Khomeini went on to say: “I can not call him leader, because he is greater than that, nor can I call him the first man, because there is no one to succeed him, therefore I can describe him with words other than ‘the promised expected mahdi’ whom Allaah subhanah saved for mankind. So we have to prepare ourselves to behold him (!!) If we are successful, we will be able to raise our heads in pride over all our government departments. We hope that the other countries prepare themselves for the appearance of al-mahdi, peace be on him, and be ready for his visit.” [An excerpt from a speech delivered by Khomeini on the 15 of Shaaban, 1400H, the result of which fatwas from the Muslim world were issued condemning Khomeini to blasphemy.]

The foregoing statements by Khomeini reveal plain blasphemy in many aspects:

  1. He derides and holds in light estimation the Messengers and the prophets, particularly our Prophet Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Not only that, but he also brings against Allaah, extolled be His glory, the imputation of the fault of assigning the incompetent and the remiss to convey His Messages.
  2. If this ignorant Khomeini means that all mankind did not respond to their Messages, nor were affected by their mission, and persisted in their disbelief and polytheism, then it should not be considered failure or lack of succession on the part of the Messenger, because accommodation to the right path is in the hands of Allaah, extolled be His glory.

The Messenger can only communicate and announce and make manifest the Message. The results are entirely up to Allaah. Had he decreed to accommodate mankind to guidance through the Messenger, they would have been guided, and had He decreed to keep them all in deviation, then no one can do anything about it. He says, “Whoever Allaah wishes to guide, He expands his bosom for the acceptance of Islaam, and whoever He wishes to send astray, He makes his bosom straight and impenetrable as though he is mounting up into the sky”. (Qur’aan – 6:125) Thus guidance and deviation are both in the hands of Allaah alone. The Messengers are only warners, announcers of the glad tidings who strove and exerted their efforts in the cause of Allaah. All of them desired vehemently to direct people to the right path, but the will of Allaah always prevails. Allaah says, “So perchance you grieve your self to death for sorrow after them if they believe not in this discourse.” (Qur’aan – 18:6) and, “If your Lord had willed, He would have sure made mankind one nation; but people would not cease to differ. Save those on whom your Lord has had His mercy, for which He has created them, the word of your Lord has been fulfilled. I will surely fill Hell with jinn and man altogether.” (Qur’aan – 11:118-119).

Accommodation to guidance rests with Allaah. His infinite wisdom and justice rules that only few believe, and many disbelieve, as He says: “Most men will not believe even though you eagerly desire it.” (Qur’aan – 12:102) And: “But few of My slaves are grateful”. (Qur’aan – 34:13). A Messenger should not be considered a failure if most of his people do not believe, nor should he be considered unsuccessful if the majority of the people denounced him; his duty was to convey the Message. As for our Messenger Muhammad, he is undoubtedly the most fortunate among the Messengers with respect to guidance; he has the greatest number of followers, and has left behind enormous influence on earth. It is he who has laid down the foundation of justice, and it is he through whom Allaah caused the best Ummah to evolve to mankind. He has reared the most honorable generations that are reckoned with justice, kindness, excellence and knowledge. Through him Allaah eliminated evil from the world, extinguished the fire of the Magian, destroyed the crosses of the Nassara (the Christians), delivered the Arabs from deviation, eliminated the oppression of the Persian kings and Roman paganism. Thus Allaah has established for him his mission, nation, and justice, and the world shone with light after its darkness. What were Persian, Roman and the Arabian peninsula like before his advent? The Messenger of Allaah is the most influential reformer in the whole world, according to the testimony of the unbelievers as quoted from the Encyclopedia Britannica:

“From the very beginning of Islaam, Muhammad had inculcated a sense of brotherhood and a bond of faith among his followers, both of which helped to develop among them a feeling of close relationship that accentuated by their experiences of persecution as a nascent community in Mecca.”

If the unbelievers have fairly testified to the truth respecting the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) , then how can Khomeini deny the merit of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and the guided caliphs? He also denies the merits of alleged imams from Ahlil-Beit, although he claims to rank them far above all the Messengers, Prophets and angels. He reviles them all and lowers their estimation, alleging that none of them was able to establish justice on earth, or was successful in reforming humanity.

Is not this apostasy, and denouncement of the testimony of Allaah in favor of His Messenger? “O Prophet, We surely have send you as a Witness, an Announcer of glad tidings and as a Warner”. “And an Inviter to Allaah by His command, and as a shining lamp.\”. (Qur’aan – 33:45-46) Has this shining lamp that shed over the whole universe the light of justice, mercy and guidance failed in directing men to the right path, and not succeeded in establishing the bases of justice?

Denying this fact is beyond doubt an insolent repudiation of Allaah’s testimony, and rejection of the tangible facts. Such denial and reputation was not ventured upon even by the heads of the unbelievers or by the polytheists. Rather, all the nations of disbelief testify that the Messenger of Allaah has laid down the foundation of justice in a unique manner comparable to none of those before him, and that the caliphs after him and his companions diffused knowledge, justice, guidance and light everywhere. They were the best models of purity, knowledge and justice known to mankind. Who amongst men, other than Prophets, can match Abu Bakr al-Siddiq or Al-Farooq Umar in purity, fairness, mercy, or perseverance? Are not the companions of the Prophet and the Muslims after them the ones who delivered the people from worshipping men to worshipping the Lord of men alone, and saved them from the dictation of the religions to the justice of Islaam? Anyone who has the slightest doubt regarding these facts is an apostate and an ungrateful person whose heart is full of animosity and jealousy against the Ummah of Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

Khomeini has surely based his assertions on his blasphemous belief that the companions of the Prophet were all apostate traitors except three to five of them. And he along with the rest of his atheist Zindiq clique impute kufr to the companions of the best of Allaah’s Messengers, revile the Mothers of the Believers, the wives of the Prophet, and curse the best of people after the Messenger. Such beliefs are nothing but clear blasphemy, because they defy the testimony of Allaah of the excellence of those pious men. Allaah says, “They are the best people,” but Khomeini and his gang bear false witness that they are the worst of people, denying that Allaah is pleased with them, and that He turned to them with mercy. He says, “Surely Allaah was well pleased with the believers when they were swearing allegiance to you under the tree.” (Qur’aan – 48:19) They were fourteen-hundred men in the Hudaibiyah. Allaah the Exalted also says, “Allaah has certainly turned with mercy to the Prophet and to the Muhajereen (the emigrants) sad the Ansar (the supporters) who followed him in the hour of distress.” (Qur’aan – 9:116) They were thirty thousand. The verse was revealed in reference to this group of the Prophet’s companions, may Allaah be pleased with them all. Allaah also says, “Allaah has promised to those of you who believe and do good deeds that He will surely make them successors on earth as He made successors from among those who were before you.” (Qur’aan – 24:55)

Allaah has certainly fulfilled His promise, and made them successors, and established for them their religion, and perfected His favor upon them, praise be to Him. But the unbelievers say He did nothing of this sort for them. On the contrary, those companions, Khomeini and his people say, changed the religion of Allaah, after the death of the Prophet, and tampered with the Book of Allaah, and passed the office of Caliphate to those who did not deserve it, and withheld it from those who did. Those zindiqs denounce the testimony of Allaah and His Messenger and persist in their infidelity, and accuse Alee, whom they claim to love most, of being too cowardly to demand his rights, or to oppose the first three chaliphs, Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, or to denounce – so they claim – their changing of the laws of Allaah! Khomeini and his gang not only deride Alee, may Allaah be pleased with him, but also believe that Alee’s remissness culminated in giving his daughter in marriage to Umar, whom he considered an unbeliever, (so they claim). His fear persisted even after he was in authority, and he was unable to produce the true ‘hidden Qur’aan’, and the complete revelation which was sent down to his wife Fatimah! Rather he concealed all this for fear of people! Thus he, like the Messenger before him failed in his mission, and neither he nor the Messenger of Allaah was able to lay down the foundation of justice!

*** The above is just a brief summary of the tenets of the zindiqs regarding Alee bin Abi Taleeb, and the Messenger of Allaah; it is plain disbelief. They venture upon reviling them under the pretext of zeal and in the name of Islaam but of course they couch with words of love their derision and reviling. The fact remains that they still accuse Alee of having been a coward until his death. Khomeini and his followers insolently hold the Messenger of Allaah, Alee and his offsprings in light estimation as expressed literally by Khomeini: “Even the Prophets, and the forefathers of imam al-mahdi failed in what they set out to achieve.” The dotards and liars claim that the alleged imam Muhammad bin al-Hasan al-Askari will succeed where those before him failed, in guiding humanity and in laying down the foundations of justice on earth. This is a blasphemous assertion for many reasons:

  1. This imaginary mahdi has never existed in the past nor does he or will he exist.

They allege that the non-existent mahdi was a three or four year-old boy who encompassed the knowledge of this life as well as the Hereafter’s, who entered a tunnel in Samirra, Iraq since 260H. and never came out again. This is nothing other than sheer dotage and mythology, because al-Hasan al-Askari never had a son. It is only a fiction invented to deceive the Shiite mob in order to plunder their money in the names of the imams, under the pretext of supporting the Prophet’s household. Upon realizing that the alleged Imamate will be interrupted if the last of their imams did not have a son, they invented this lie to keep the open door of lies against Allaah and His Messages, and to keep devouring the unlawful wealth. Neither the Qur’aan nor the Sunnah referred to such an event. It was not even hinted at by any of their imams. An imam who remains in his hiding for twelve hundred years, and does not come out of the tunnel is not credible. Allaah is never forgetful. Allaah has referred in His Book to the great events, in general, until the Day of Judgment, and the Messenger sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam spoke of every minor and major event. How is it possible then that he did not speak of this mythical imam who will have greater influence and blessing than all of the Prophets and Messengers?! Did he speak of his upbringing, his absence, disappearance or reemergence, or of his deputies and spokesmen like Khomeini and the others? Is it credible that the Messenger of Allaah, who spoke of a fire which will break out in Medina whose flame will be tall enough to be reflected on the necks of the camels in Basra, Iraq, but neglected to inform us of the greatest event (!) which will take place after his death? What is the importance of the fire of Medina compared to that of the Shiite Mahdi, (!) whom they consider to be greater than the Messengers, Prophets and imams?! In brief, the myth of the alleged imam is speaking of the unseen, and is a gross heresy. While believing that the alleged imam is still alive after these long years is also an invented lie against Allaah, and blasphemy.

  1. The assertion that the birthday of the Mahdi is the greatest holiday for all mankind, (!), and that he will guide all men to the straight path, is made only by one who is ignorant of the institutes of Allaah which He manifested to men. Allaah has already ordained that mankind is not to gather under one single religion, nor to be all guided; there shall be no alteration of the statutes of Allaah. They must be divided into believers and unbelievers.

Due to the infinite wisdom of Allaah, the unbelievers are to constitute the majority in every time and everywhere. Allaah says: “And most men will not believe even though you eagerly desire it”. (Qur’aan – 12:1-2) And, “And if you obey the majority of those on earth, they will lead you astray from Allaah’s way.” (Qur’aan – 6:116) also, “But few of My slaves are grateful.” (Qur’aan – 34:13)

Khomeini asserts, “The birthday of the Mahdi is greater to the Muslims than the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam “. This is plain blasphemy because he considers the imaginary mahdi, who is nothing other than a myth, to be superior to the Messenger of Allaah, the best of the Messengers and the most honorable of mankind, and their chief on the Day of Judgment.”

Although celebrating birthdays of the Messengers and others is not sanctioned in Islaam, Khomeini makes incumbent, according to his secretive religion, the aggrandizing of the alleged mahdi, even more than the Messenger of Allaah. This also constitutes a plain blasphemy.

  1. Once we know that Khomeini has appointed himself a deputy to the alleged imam by virtue of the latter’s command (!) to prepare the earth and the state for his emergence, we realize that Khomeini’s ultimate objective of aggrandizing his mahdi is to render himself aggrandized. If the mahdi, is greater than all the Messengers, then his deputy is great by virtue of his greatness, and grand by virtue of his grandeur. Thus it has become easy for Khomeini to make his blind followers believe him to be the leader, to add his name jointly with the name of Allaah in the call to prayer ‘athan’ in the mosques in Iran, to make it a slogan for the mobs to shout it everywhere, even during Hajj in Masjid al-Haram, the Sacred Mosque in Mecca, shrieking, “Allaahu akbar Khomeini rahbar, labbaik ya Khomeini,” meaning: “Allaah is the greatest, Khomeini is the leader; here we are responding to you, Khomeini”!, instead of calling out, “Labbaik Allaahumma Labbaik,” meaning, “Here we are, responding to your call, O Allaah” as the Prophet commanded us to call during the Hajj rituals. Those same followers of Khomeini describe him as, ‘Ibraheem of the age’, and ‘Musa of the time’! Thus he is to them equal to ‘Ibraheem, Khaleelu-Allaah’ (the friend of Allaah) and ‘Musa to whom Allaah has spoken.’

Once it has become clear that the alleged mahdi never did nor will exist, it becomes clear too that Khomeini invented this new heresy in the religion only to set himself up as the legislating lord and the ultimate ruler, to whom all affairs are referred. Otherwise, who else can rule people in the name of an absent prophet, and a hiding mahdi who is to them better than all Messengers? This is exactly what Khomeini is seeking to achieve in accordance with the constitution which he composed and detailed to set himself up as the leader of the nation of which article 5 reads, “During the time when the 12th imam is in occultation, in the Islaamic Republic of Iran, the leadership of the affairs and guidance of the people is the responsibility of a just and pious jurisprudent”.!

Therefore, he has made it easy for his blind followers and mobs to hand over to him both the legislative and the executive powers, to legalize, prohibit and opine as he chooses regardless of the nation’s will. It is impossible to disagree with the deputy of the infallible imam!! And since Khomeini is the deputy of the infallible imam who is superior to all of the Messengers, as he claims, to oppose him is to oppose Allaah, and consequently opposing him is blasphemy and apostasy!! In this manner Khomeini subdues his opponents even though they belong to his religion, because opposing the deputy of the infallible imam is apostasy! Claiming infallibility, holding the right of legislation and assuming absolute authority constitute kufr, because by so doing Khomeini places his words in lieu of the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger.

It is known to us, Ahl al-Sunnah Wal-Jama’ah, that we are commanded rulers and ruled to refer our disputes to Allaah and His Messenger. Allaah the Exalted says, “And if you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allaah and His Messenger”. Once Khomeini appointed himself the deputy of the infallible imam (!), he made it incumbent to refer to him, the lawmaker, any dispute which may occur in the Council of Shura, within the Council of Ministers or in any other department, according to the Iranian constitution, which we will discuss later on. All this is done so that the blind mob will march behind him in what they call ‘the path of the imam’, void of their minds, adhering to this Zindiq who rules them with fire and iron, turning some of them against the others, and creating corruption on earth following the footsteps of his forefathers the Karmathians, the Mongolians, the Ubaidis or the like thereof. Khomeini and his followers are surpassing all those before them in destruction and evil.


This assertion was one of the reasons the Muslim scholars condemned Khomeini to blasphemy and apostasy. He states:

“Fatimah al-Zahra lived 75 days after the death of her father, during which she was sad and lonely. Jibreel used to visit and console her, and informed her about all the events which will take place in the future. It appears from this narration that Jibreel during the 75 days used to visit her often, and I do not think that a narration like this related to anyone other than the great prophets. Imam Alee used to write those revelations which were transmitted to her by Jibreel. It is possible though that the affairs of Iran were among the things revealed to her (!) We do not know, but it is quite possible, because imam Alee was the one who wrote down the revelation as he was the scribe of the Messenger. The descending of Jibreel on a person is not simple or an easy issue, and I do not believe that Jibreel descends on any person; there must be harmony between the spirit of whom Jibreel descends on and Jibreel himself, who is considered to be the ‘greatest spirit’. This harmony existed between Jibreel and the first-class Prophets such as the Messenger sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Eesa, Musa, Ibraheem and the like. Jibreel never descended on any other than these. I could not even find a narration referring to the descending of Jibreel on the imams. Thus this excellent status was enjoyed by none after the Prophets other than Fatimah. It is one of the merits with which Fatimah was distinguished.”

This statement includes many blasphemous aspects:

  1. Khomeini’s denouncement of the belief which is unanimously agreed upon by the Muslims, that Prophethood and revelation ceased to continue after the death of the Messenger of Allaah, as confirmed by the words of Allaah: “Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allaah and the seal of the Prophets.” (Qur’aan – 33:40), and by the Messenger’s words: “…and He has closed the line of Prophethood with me; there is no prophet after me.” (authentic hadeeth) There is consensus among the ummah (the Muslim nation) on this belief which Khomeini has opposed and contradicted by his claim that Jibreel descended on Fatimah, and brought down to her a complete Qur’aan, which the Shiite books allege was three times larger than our Qur’aan.
  2. The second blasphemous aspect in his statement is the claim that it is possible that women can be messengers and prophets and receive revelation. But Allaah says, “…And We sent not before you (as Messengers) but men to whom We sent revelation”. (Qur’aan – 12:109) As for the word “revelation” that was mentioned in reference to the wife of Imran, Maryam and the mother of Musa, it means only “inspiration”, as Allaah says: “And your Lord revealed to the bees,” meaning, “He inspired the bees”. Neither the mother of Musa nor the wife of Imran were prophets or messengers, but Khomeini made of Fatimah a messenger-prophet who received revelation through Jibreel.
  3. The third blasphemous aspect is that he holds Fatimah as superior to the Messenger of Allaah sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and to Alee whom he considers the appointed imam. Claiming that he was only Fatimah’s scribe!! Yet Khomeini claims that the revelation which was revealed to her was more perfect than that revealed to the Messenger himself. According to Khomeini and his sect it was a chaste Qur’aan. Whatever the case might be, Khomeini copied the statements of the Zindiq before him. Al-Kulaini, whom they call “Hujjatul Islaam”, wrote in his book ‘al-Kafi’ which is held by the Shiites as the most authentic reference of the Prophetic tradition collection, the following forged lie against the family of the Prophet, under the head line, [Chapter which includes the reference to ‘Sahifah = sheet’, ‘al-Jafr = bookcase’ ‘alJami’ah = the collection’ and ‘Mushaf Fatimah = the Qur’aan of Fatimah’], the following: I-Abu Basir said, “I entered on Abu Abdullah, peace be on him, and said to him, “May I be your ransom, I would like to ask you a question. Is there anyone around here who may be listening to my words?”. Then Abu Abdullah pulled up a curtain separating between him and another room and looked and said, “Abu Muhammad, ask whatever you wish”. I said, “May I be your ransom, your Shiite followers are saying that the Messenger of Allaah taught Alee, peace be on him, a chapter through which will open to him a thousand chapters”. He said, “Abu Muhammad, the Messenger of Allaah taught Alee a thousand chapters, and each chapter opens up to a thousand chapters”. I said, “By Allaah, this indeed is the knowledge”. He said, “It is, but not the knowledge”. Then he said, “Abu Muhammad, we have al-Jami’ah. What do they know about al-Jami’ah?”. I said, “May I be your ransom, what is al-Jami’ah?”. He said, ‘It is a seventy-yard-long sheet dictated by the Messenger of Allaah to Alee. It contains the names of every lawful and unlawful thing, and everything the people need”. I said, “By Allaah, this is the knowledge”. He said, “It is, but not the knowledge”. Then he said, “And we have al-Jafr, what do they know about al-Jafr?”. I said, “What is al-Jafr?”. He said, ‘It is a leather pouch containing the knowledge of the prophets, the guardians, the dead scholars of the Children of Israel.’ I said, ‘This is the knowledge.’ He said, ‘It is, but not the knowledge.’ Then he said, ‘And we have the Qur’aan of Fatimah, may peace be on her.’ I said, ‘What is the Qur’aan of Fatimah, peace be on her?’ He said, ‘It contains three times as much as your Qur’aan does. By Allaah, it does not have one letter of your Qur’aan.’ I said: ‘This, by Allaah is the knowledge.’ He said, ‘It is knowledge but not that.’ Then He said, ‘We have the knowledge of what happened and what will happen till the Final Hour is established.’ I said, ‘May I be your ransom! By Allaah this is the knowledge.’ He said, ‘It is knowledge, but not that.’ I said, ‘May I be your ransom! What is the knowledge then?’ He said, ‘Whatever happens in the night and day, and the affair after the affair, and the thing after the thing till the Day of Judgment.” Al-Kulaini also reported: “Hammad said: ‘I heard Abu Abdullah, peace be on him, saying, ‘Zindiqs will appear in the year 128H. That is because I looked in the Qur’aan of Fatimah, peace be on her.’ I said, ‘What is Qur’aan of Fatimah?’ He said, ‘When Allaah collected His Prophet she was overcome by sadness which only Allaah knows the depth of, then He sent to her an angel to console, and communicate to her; so she informed Amir al-Mu’mineen Alee, peace be on him, who told her: ‘Let me know when this happens.’ She heard the sound and informed Alee. He began to write all he heard until he compiled them in a mushaf. He said, “It surely contains nothing of the halal and haram, but it contains the knowledge of what will happen.” (!!) Having been acquainted with the contents of al-Kafi, one may realise that Khomeini is not the first to forge lies against Fatimah and Alee. He was preceded by the zindiqs before him who transmitted such dotage and myths, by which they try to impugn the image of Fatimah and Alee, may Allaah be pleased with them. They both are far from what the apostate impute to them. We demand and challenge those zindiqs time after time to produce the alleged Qur’aan of Fatimah. Why did not she confront those who disobeyed the command of Allaah, as you claim? O, atheistic zindiqs, we ask all of you, Where is that material which Alee supposedly wrote? Why did he not publish and publicize it during the five-year period of his rule? Where was the fabricated Qur’aan? The fourth blasphemous aspect is the claim that the Qur’aan revealed to Fatimah is in existence, and that it is kept with the absent imam, and that Alee was not successful in publicizing it during his caleephate. Khomeini says: “Alee, peace be on him, did not have the chance to unveil the knowledge of truth, and this knowledge of truth is that which the Prophet whispered in Alee’s ear. Alee himself said, ‘The knowledge which the Prophet whispered in my ear contains thousands of chapters of knowledge.’ It is unfortunate that the chance was not available to Alee nor to his succeeding imams to bring out this knowledge. Nor did they find a person fit enough to carry it, and to clarify the true meaning of the Qur’aanic teachings. Thus the imam departed with the knowledge of truth.” [“Khomeini’s Method in the Scale of the Islaamic Thought,” as reviewed by the Pakistani magazine ‘Ishya’, September 23,1984.] With these words, Khomeini accuses Alee, may Allaah be pleased with him, that he concealed the Qur’aan of Fatimah as well as the knowledge privately communicated to him by the Messenger of Allaah, and did not publish it, even though he was Caleeph for five years.

Where is this knowledge?? This is a blasphemous statement because it contains an accusation of the Messenger of Allaah, for having betrayed the trust of conveying the Message to all people, but distinguished with it some over the others. Far removed is he from what they impute to him. They impute the same to Alee for leaving the Muslims without the knowledge of truth, according to their claims. In brief, those liars seek to impugn the reputation of the household of the Messenger of Allaah. As for Fatimah, may Allaah be pleased with her, she is the lady of the women in Jannah, and she is far removed from their filthy lies. It is an established fact that whoever claims prophethood, or receiving revelation, is a liar Zindiq like Musailamah, Sajah, al-Aswad al- Ansi, al-Mukhtar, al-Thaqafi and the like who claimed to be prophets. These filthy people, hold the love of the household (Ahl alBait) of the Messenger of Allaah sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam as a cover under which they hide their blasphemy and atheism.

My Muslim brothers, watch over and heed.


Like the rest of the zindiqs, who bear malice and hatred against Islaam and its people, who revile the Messenger of Allaah and his companions, and who are hiding under the pretext of the love of Ahl al- Bait, Khomeini says:

“We are not dealing, at this point, with the two shaikhs, or with whatever violations they committed against the Qur’aan, tampered with the commands of Allaah, declared things lawful and things unlawful on their own accord, practiced oppression against Fatimah, the daughter of the Prophet and her sons. But we want to point out their ignorance of the commands of Allaah and the religion. People like those ignorant fools, hobos and tyrants were not fit to be in the office of Imamate, nor to be included among the people of authority.” [Khomeini, Kashf al-Asrar, pp. 107, 108.]

The liar further asserts: “It is quite obvious from all that has preceded that the violations of the two shaikhs against the Qur’aan were not of great importance to the Muslims. That is because they were either in the party of the two shaikhs and supportive of them or against them, but did not dare to say a thing to those who treated the Messenger of Allaah and his daughter the way they did. Even if one of the opposition was to say something, his words would pass unattended to, even if these issues were mentioned in the Qur’aan. Those two would not have refrained from their way, nor would have they abdicated their office.” [ibid, pp. 116. 33]

The malevolent Khomeini refers to al-Farooq Umar, may Allaah be pleased with him and despites his enemies, saying: “The actions of Umar issued forth from disbelief and heresies and the violations of verse mentioned in the Qur’aan.” [ibid, pp. 117. 34 ]. There is no doubt that these assertions reveal blasphemy and apostasy, and deviation from the path of the believers for many reasons:

  1. Reviling the two shaikhs and imputing to them disbelief and apostasy, and accusing them of violating the Qur’aan willfully and ignorantly, and imputing to them foolishness and tyranny is, first of all discrediting the testimony of the Lord of the Worlds, Subhanahu, Who praised them, and chose them to be the company of His Prophet, the most honorable of His creatures, and distinguished them with guidance, those who fought continuously alongside His Messenger in all battles. The Messenger of Allaah sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam married their daughters, and spoke well of them above the other companions. He testified to their admittance to Jannah, and they enjoyed Allaah’s pleasure. All the Muslim ummah testified to their excellence except the apostate and the heretic who has rebelled against the consensus of the ummah. Allaah the Exalted says, “If you do not help him, then know that Allaah helped him when the disbelievers drove him forth when he was one of the two, when they were both in the cave”. (Qur’aan – 9:40) Here is a testimony from Allaah in favor of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allaah be pleased with him, who was with the Prophet when both of them were hiding in the cave when they took flight to Medina, which was one of the most difficult situations the Prophet endured. Reviling Abu Bakr means rejecting Allaah’s testimony: “But the righteous one shall be kept away from it (the Fire), who gives his wealth (in charity) to become purified. And he owes no favor to anyone which must be repaid”. (Qur’aan – 92:17-19) The exegetes unanimously agree that these verses refer to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, who used to buy slaves with his own money and set them free, seeking the pleasure of Allaah. To revile him means also holding Allaah, extolled be His glory, in light estimation, for He chose him to be the first man to enter the fold of Islaam, and a multitude of men were guided by him in the early stages of Islaam. Allaah chose him to keep the company of His Messenger throughout his life, before and after Prophethood. When he died, his body was laid beside the body of the Messenger of Allaah and Umar, that their companionship be extended to the Hereafter. Reviling al-Siddiq necessitates impugning the Messenger of Allaah who chose him to be his companion throughout his life. When the Messenger of Allaah was asked, ‘Who among people is dearest to you?’. He said, ‘A’ishah.’ Then he was asked, ‘And of men? He replied, ‘Her father.’ (Bukhari & Muslim). He also said, “If I were to take from the people of the earth a friend, I would take Abu Bakr, but the brotherhood of Islaam and its love suffice.”

It is unanimously agreed that he who reviles al-Siddiq reviles Allaah the Exalted and the Messenger of Allaah, who married his daughter and lived with her for the rest of his life. Therefore if al-Siddiq was ignorant, as Khomeini (the insolent liar claims), then this is directed to the Messenger of Allaah sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam because he failed to teach his companion throughout the period of their company; and if al-Siddiq was a tyrant and unjust, as the liar claims, then it is his companion, the Prophet who would be to blame.

One may ask Khomeini and all the zindiqs like him, “Was the Messenger of Allaah aware of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq’s disbelief, ignorance and injustice or not?”. If their answer is in the negative, then they declare themselves unbelievers and apostate, for they would be imputing ignorance and poor judgment to the Messenger of Allaah sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam for being unable to know the characteristics of his life-companion. And if they say, ‘Yes, he knew that Abu Bakr was ignorant and unjust, but he kept silent, even praised him instead, married his daughter, died while his head was on her chest, and appointed him to lead the congregational prayers.’ If they testify to all this then they declare themselves disbelievers, because it is impossible that the Messenger of Allaah would have approved of falsehood or erroneous behavior, nor would it have behaved him to do so. Whichever of the two answers they might give shows their disbelief.

We also ask these atheists, “Where was Allaah the Exalted when both al-Siddiq and al-Farook were deceiving His Prophet, as you claim, seeking to gain power after him? Why did Allaah not reveal Qur’aanic verses to expose them, at a time when Allaah was revealing words in reference to much less important issues than theirs? At one time Allaah revealed verses exposing a hypocrite who lagged behind in one of the battles, and another who slandered the Prophet by a word. Others were exposed for having built a mosque as a detriment to the believers. How then is it possible that Allaah did not expose those who manipulated His Messenger, as you contemptuously assert, tampered with His religion, and oppressed the family of His Prophet? If you say that Allaah knew all that but did not expose them, you would certainly testify against yourselves with apostasy by imputing to Allaah the imperfection of not cautioning His Messenger against them and thus of approving of error and falsehood; far removed is He from your attribution. And if you say that Allaah did reveal words exposing them, we would demand of you to bring forth your proof. We further ask you, why did not the Prophet make public those words or at least warn his companion and his ummah against the two shaikhs, Abu Bakr and Umar? And why did he conceal the facts about them all his life?”

“Know, you rebellious apostate, that you do not revile Abu Bakr and Umar, but rather the Messenger of Allaah. In fact you revile Allaah the Exalted Who is above His seven heavens, and revile too the family of the Prophet whom you claim were accomplices in the cover-up. Where was Alee when the Book of Allaah was tampered with, and when the caleephate was taken by force? Why did he not speak up? Why was he the main supporter and advisor of Abu Bakr and Umar? And where was the rest of the household of the Prophet during the alleged ordeal?

You reiterate that the two shaikhs disinherited Alee and Fatimah of the Prophet’s estate, that Fatimah litigated against al-Siddiq over this issue, and that Alee and al-Abbas debated with both of the shaikhs, demanding their rights of the inheritance. We say, this did take place, but the accusation you level against the two shaikhs, of changing the religion of Allaah, and taking over the caleephate by force, are far more serious than the mundane issue of disinheritance. Did Alee, Fatimah and al-Abbas have greater concern over a piece of land than over the religion of Allaah and the leadership of the Muslim ummah? Did they litigate with the two shaikhs respecting the inheritance and neglect litigating over changing the religion of Allaah and tampering with His Book? Did they recover their courage when it came to claiming their own rights and lose it when it came to claiming the rights of Allaah? This is the worst insult you could level against the family of the Prophet. Where were the hundreds of thousands of Muslims when the religion of Allaah was being tampered with? Were those Muslims who sacrificed their property and lives seeking the pleasure of Allaah too cowardly to rectify the wrong? It is they whom Allaah praised and made them the best nation evolved to mankind. Of course, you claim that they all returned from Islaam to disbelief except for three or five of them. [Abu Bakr and Umar did not give out the estate left by the Prophet to his heirs due to the fact that the Prophet instructed: “We Prophets do not bequeath: Our estate which we leave behind goes to charity.”]

“You turned from Islaam to disbelief the moment you imputed ignorance to Allaah, and asserted that He approves of injustice and the unjust, giving unbelievers a free hand in playing havoc with His religion; far removed is He from what you impute to Him.”

“Allaah has promised to guard His Book, saying, “Verily, We have sent down al-dthikr (the Qur’aan), and most certainly We will be its guardians.” (Qur’aan 15:9). But you most certainly are apostate by denying that Allaah has fulfilled His promise, that He did not establish for His Messenger and his nation after him the religion, and praised the evil people, making them the best. You turned to apostasy when you claimed that Allaah chose for His beloved Messenger hypocrites, liars and deceitful people. You turned to blasphemy when you imputed to the Messenger of Allaah ignorance of the two shaikhs. You disbelieved in Allaah when you alleged that the Messenger of Allaah married the daughters of the hypocrites and unbelievers, and when you alleged that he kept both A’ishah and Hafsah as his wives knowing that they were unbelievers. You returned to unbelief when you imputed lying to Allaah, Extolled be His glory, for praising the Ummah of Muhammad in His Book:

“Muhammad is the messenger of Allaah. And those who are with him are hard against the unbelievers, kind among themselves. You see them bowing and prostrating themselves in prayer seeking grace from Allaah and His pleasure. Their marks are upon their faces, being the traces of prostration. This is their description in the Torah, and their description in the Gospel is like a seed produce that sends forth its sprouts, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and stands firm on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may cause the disbelievers to burn with rage…” (Qur’aan – 48:29)

“I am sorry, you actually did not return to apostasy, because you never believed, nor did you ever enter the fold of Islaam, nor did you believe in the Book of Allaah or His Messenger. Your claim of belief is only evasion and falsehood, and your claim of supporting the family of the Prophet is a lie, because you are in truth the worst enemy of his family. You claimed that every filthy liar and a crook who was not an Arab, was a member of the household of the Prophet. How could those with their unchaste tongues be the most honorable of people and belong to the family of the Prophet?

Lo, know you that Allaah holds the family of the Prophet innocent of your filth, and far away from your falsehood, and protects them from your planning. In brief, by reviling the two shaikhs Khomeini reviles Allaah, His Messenger and his pure family, as well as the great honorable ummah which Allaah praised, making bear witness against the first and the last nations saying, “Thus have We made you an exalted nation, that you may bear witness against people, and the Messenger bear witness against you.” (Qur’aan – 2:143)

Praise be to Allaah Who has testified to the goodness, virtue and excellence of the ummah of Muhammad, to the strong faith of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq and Umar, and to their admittance to Jannah. May Allaah’s curse be on every malicious and spiteful detractor who is against the great guided ummah.


Muslims today face the worst catastrophe in modem history, Khomeini’s Shiite revolution in Iran, with its readiness to destroy the Muslim world by setting up the alternative regime and creed. Since this regime uses religious occasions as a pretext to spew its venom and shield its deviant tenets, it has become incumbent upon us to be aware of this fact.

Rabi’ al-Awwal is one of those occasions used by Khomeini’s regime in Tehran to deceive Muslims by celebrating the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to mislead the simple-minded and the ignorant into thinking that he exalts and commemorates the Messenger of Allaah sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. But the fact of the matter is to the contrary. Khomeini and his gang revile the Messenger of Allaah and impute to him all kinds of falsehood and lies as necessitated by their beliefs. The Messenger of Allaah is removed from their lies. According to their beliefs he was traitorous, ignorant, cowardly, and hypocritical, failing to properly convey the Message and to guide the people, and unfit for the Mission he was assigned. They claim that he gathered around him the worst of people, the ignorant Bedouins, and made them his associates, supporters and beloved ones, he married their daughters and gave them his daughters in marriage. In return they were ungrateful to him and did not deserve this honor. They changed his religion, altered his laws, breached his trust, plundered his family’s rights, devoured his inheritance, and tampered with the Book of Allaah. These are some of the beliefs of Khomeini and his gang in brief, as detailed hereunder:

Khomeini has become the representative of Shiite thought which was hidden in the tenet of taqiyyah [See Glossary 40] for a long time, and has gone a step further by making obvious what was once allusion, and textualised the connotations of their beliefs.

  • In his speech on the occasion of the 15th of Shaaban, he claimed that their imam will succeed where all those before him, including the Messenger of Allaah failed. As a result, the Muslim scholars issued their fatwas condemning Khomeini to blasphemy for deriding and holding in contempt the Messenger of Allaah.
  • In another speech he delivered on ‘Women’s Day’ (2.3.1986), he claimed that Jibreel, peace be on him, brought down revelation to Fatimah, may Allaah be pleased with her, for 75 days after the death of the Messenger of Allaah, and that Alee was her scribe. By so claiming, he refers to what all the Shiites quote from their own books: That they have the Qur’aan of Fatimah, which is three times larger than ours and does not include a single letter from ours. Thus Khomeini brings to light what was hidden and holds Fatimah to be superior to the Messenger sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, because the Qur’aan which she received was unalterable and three times larger than the alterable one which her father received.
  • He claims that those who are fighting under his leadership against Iraq and the Muslim countries, and spreading evil everywhere in the world, are more courageous and better than those who fought with the Messenger of Allaah.
  • In his book ‘Kashf al-Asrar’, Khomeini asserts, “The charge of tampering with the Book of Allaah with which the Muslims indict the Jews and Christians, is only established against the Prophet’s companions.” He further elaborated in the same book, “It was easy for them (the Prophet’s companions) to delete verses from the Qur’aan, subject the Divine Scripture to alteration, and hide it away from people.”
  • He who thinks that Khomeini and his gang gratify and love the Prophet’s family is mistaken. In fact they use the false display of love to conceal malice against Islaam, and justify cursing the first and the last of the ummah, and reviling everyone from the Household of the Prophet called for the unity of the Muslims, or anyone who speaks well of the companions of the Messenger of Allaah. On Ghadir’s Day Khomeini criticized Alee for accepting arbitration in the battle of Siffeen, and al-Hassan for abdicating leadership to Mu’awiyah. He also claimed that Alee was not successful in establishing the Islaamic regime as it should have been, and that neither he nor the Messenger, nor those after him, succeeded in applying Islaam or in establishing the Islaamic state, as well as that Divine Justice, has not been established yet. Only he (of course!) on behalf of the absent imam, succeeded in establishing the Islaamic government and the Divine Justice. His supposedly Islaamic rule is massacring tens of thousands on the gallows and in prisons, apprehending hundreds of thousands more and sending them to jails. We mentioned earlier that Khomeini came to represent Shiite thought and to reveal what was concealed implementing it in the Iranian constitution, of which Article 5 reads: “During the time when the twelfth imam (may god expedite his appearance) is in occultation, in the Islaamic Republic of Iran, the leadership of affairs and the guidance of the people is the responsibility of a just and pious jurisprudent, aware of the times, courageously applying drive and initiative, whom the majority of the people know and accept to be the leader….”
  • Article 12 reads: “The official religion of Iran is Islaam of the Ja’fari 12’s sect, and this article is inalterable in perpetuity….”

By virtue of this constitution, Khomeini appoints himself as an imam and a deputy of the absent imam, who never existed and never will. He also designated Ja’fari thought as the state religion. Alee is far from being associated with this line of thought. He never claimed that a revelation came to him, or that he was his wife’s scribe, nor did he claim that he enjoyed a status above that of the Prophet or of Abu Bakr and Umar, let alone above that of all the messengers and angels. He never claimed that there would be twelve imams from his offsprings, or called any group the twelfth imamers, possessing a different Qur’aan and changing the words of the ‘azan’ (call for prayer). Neither did he revile those guided caliphs before him. Rather, he attested to their superiority over him, and wished to meet Allaah having done deeds like those of Umar. In fact he announced in public that there would never be a man like Umar again. This is the creed of Alee bin Abi Taleeb, may Allaah be pleased with him, the leader of the pious, and of his army and supporters. The exception was al-Khawarij, who rebelled and imputed to him disbelief; therefore he fought and conquered them. As for the Shiites to whom Khomeini and his gang relate, they upheld the heretical beliefs throughout the centuries, giving up the deification of khosraus, the Persian kings and the Magian fire worshippers but deifying those whom they called ‘_’. Khomeini and his gang are the descendants of Abdullah bin Saba’, the Jew who desired to corrupt the religion of the Muslims, who found an audience among the Persian mobs and the ignorant people. It was they who said to Ali, “You are Allaah”. For that, he burnt them to death. They threw themselves into the fire, saying, “I hasten me to you, my lord, that you may be pleased. Now we know for sure that you are Allaah, because no one punishes with fire except Allaah.”

Their followers, void of sense, passed on their heresies to those after them, who in turn take every opportunity to vent their hatred on Muslims and to vilify the Messenger of Allaah directly and indirectly. They charge the Prophet with being afraid and evasive, unable to appoint Alee publicly as his successor until Allaah warned him: “O, Messenger, convey to people what has been revealed to you from your Lord. If you do not, you have not conveyed His Message; and Allaah protects you from people.” (Qur’aan – 5:67)

They falsely claim that the above verse originally read as follows: “…convey what has been revealed to you respecting Alee….” And they interpret the word ‘people’ in the verse as referring to Abu Bakr and Umar. But they claim the Messenger was too scared to mention it to them, and make public the will and the command of Allaah, lest they assemble people against him!!

Imagine how filthy-minded Khomeini and his followers are, daring to impute to the Messenger of Allaah such low quality! The least intuitive of the Arabs could distinguish his enemy from his friend, particularly if he lived with him for a short while. By rights, he should have known him better if he spent most of his lifetime with him. Those hypocrites do not impugn his Prophethood only, but also his rectitude, aptitude and perception for having assembled around himself, according to Khomeini, a group of disbelievers and hypocrites who were anxiously waiting for him to die in order to take over the seat of authority, tamper with the Qur’aan, oppress the members of his family and deprive them of their rights of the Imamate!!

Muslims can see for themselves how serious the accusations are with which the Prophet is charged. What could be worse than this revilement of the Messenger of Allaah? No man is known to have kept as close relationship with the Messenger of Allaah as Abu Bakr, may Allaah be pleased with him. There was no woman whom he loved as a wife like A’ishah, yet she has not escaped the reviling of this malicious group to the point of accusing her of hypocrisy and adultery, of which she was exonerated by the words of Allaah, Who called the accusation a lie saying: “Verily, those who brought forth the lie are a group from you… ” and Allaah further referred to A’ishah saying: ‘These are innocent of all that they (the maligners) allege. For them is forgiveness and bountiful provision.” (Qur’aan – 24:26)

The apostates call Abu Bakr and Umar ‘the two idols of Quraish’ and nickname them ‘al-Jibt’ and ‘al-Taghoot’. They mention them in their supplications saying, “O, Allaah curse the two idols of Quraish, their Jibt and their Taghoot (Jibt is sorcery, and Taghoot is every dirty beside Allaah), and curse their two daughters”, meaning the two wives of the Prophet : A’ishah, the daughter of Abu Bakr, and Hafsah, the daughter of Umar.

Those zindiqs desire to revile and defame the Messenger of Allaah, but they know that doing so openly would turn the whole Muslim world against them. Therefore they declare them as apostate and resort to the crafty approach of accusing everyone around the Messenger of Allaah of disbelief, evasion and hypocrisy and of following their whims for mundane gain. Thus to attack the Prophet indirectly and to make him look like a hopeless person who was not fit to be a Messenger of Allaah. The assertion made by those zindiqs, that all the Prophet’s companions apostatized save three or five, is undoubtedly meant to refute the most particular qualities of the Messenger : instructionability, cleansability and trustworthiness, for which Allaah has praised him saying, “He it was Who raised among the unlettered a Messenger from among themselves to recite to them His verses, and to cleanse them and to teach them the Book and the Sunnah, although they had been before in manifest deviation”. (Qur’aan – 62:2) In this verse Allaah the Exalted reminds the Muslim ummah of the favors He conferred upon them by sending them the Messenger to cleanse and instruct them. He also reminds His Messenger of qualifying him for this mission, by virtue of which his ummah was qualified too.

Having been praised by Allaah means that he actually did fulfill the Message perfectly. This leaves no room for doubt that His Messenger was indeed successful beyond all measure in fulfilling the Message, and in rearing well-instructed and well-cleansed companions, thus deserving the praise of Allaah. Had the Messenger of Allaah failed in his mission, Allaah would not have commended him so often.

But this gang of heretics, Khomeini and the like, defy Allaah and persist in their allegations and falsehood, saying that all except a few of the companions turned to disbelief. Even Alee, whom they consider as one of the three or five who remained in Islaam, they claim was afraid to rectify the wrong!!

These are the assertions and accusations Khomeini and his followers charge the Prophet and his companions with. This is their real religion, based on animosity, leaving no room for the Messenger of Allaah sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam or for any member of his family. The constitution which Khomeini calls ‘the constitution of the Islaamic republic’ turns all the power to him, disregarding the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger. This fact is clearly emphasized in the constitution. Paragraph 5 of Article 2 reads:

“Imamate and the positive leadership and sensitive role of it is in the continuity of the Islaamic revolution.” Imamate is the central belief of their religion. The legislation of the Messenger of Allaah it and his Sunnah are replaced in the Iranian government with a legislator whom Khomeini puts on the same level as the Prophet. This legislator is a four-year-old boy who entered a tunnel twelve hundred years ago and never came out again. In the name of this boy, a man rules who is more vile, malicious, hateful and foul tongued than any the world has ever witnessed. Khomeini has surpassed every reviler who has attacked or will attack the Messenger of Allaah and his pure companions. This same man never misses a chance to commend his idols, the worst enemies of the Messenger of Allaah: Nasir al-Deen al-Toosi the Magian and Ibn al-Alqami, who were the advisors of the Mongol Holago who staged the onslaught of the Muslims in Baghdad, Iraq, which marked the end of the Abbasid caleephate. Today the heretics in Iran celebrate the birthday of the Prophet to deceive the Muslims into thinking that they adhere to his Sunnah and faith.


Khomeini has produced another blasphemous innovation in the Shiite thought: the guardianship of the jurist, upon which the Iranian constitution is based. The Shiites are divided on this issue. What does this innovation mean, and why have the Muslim scholars notified the legal decision of condemning Khomeini to blasphemy regarding this innovation, as they have done previously regarding the other statements mentioned above? This chapter contains a brief summary of this innovation, exposes its blasphemous aspects and the motives behind it, and discusses its effects on the Shiite religion.


Shiism is based on the doctrine that no government in Islam shall be without the presence of an Imaam. The Imaam, according to their false thought, must be appointed by an unequivocal decree. They claim that Allaah commanded His Messenger to specifically appoint Alee as his successor. But the companions, the heretics assert, rejected His command in defiance, and passed on the caliphate to Abu Bakr and to Umar after him, then to Uthman, may Allaah be pleased with them all, but deprived Alee of it.

The Shiites stretched the lie to encompass the appointment of al-Hussein by Alee, and the appointment of al-Hassan by his brother, who in turn appointed his son, and so forth. It is a fact that ‘al-Rafidhah’ [See Glossary] are divided into several sects. Each of them claimed the Imaamate belonged to its own Imaam, but then the Imaamate was interrupted by the death of al-Hassan al-Askari, who died without having any children.

Having realized that a sudden interruption of the Imaamate would put an end to their false religion and cause their sects to fall apart, they concocted the story of the imaginary son of al-Hassan al-Askari who according to their myth, slipped into a tunnel in Samirra’ for fear of assassination and will reappear eventually! Those who fabricated this tale thought that they would confuse the matter, on the chance that someone would appear after a few years and be claimed to be the one! They went as far as claiming that whoever mentions Allaah a certain number of times he would not die until he meets the mahdi! [“The Islamic Government”]

Since Shiism is based on this doctrine, neither Jum’ah, congregational prayers nor Jihad were established pending the reappearance of the hidden twelfth Imaam. But the Rafidhah felt the period of concealing their doctrine was too long. Thus the wickedness of their religion, which is based on reviling the companions of the Messenger of Allaah, cursing every believing Muslim, and commending every Zindiq who opposes Allaah and His Messenger, while hiding behind the household of the Prophet has become manifest.

Since the time they fabricated their gross lie of the disappearance of their Imaam, the Shiites have maintained throughout the ages strong ties with the Jews, Christians, Magians and polytheists against Ahl us-Sunnah Wal-Jama’ah. The Jews masterminded and initiated Shiism through Abdullah bin Saba’, the Jew who laid down the cornerstone of this false religion. The contemporary Jews, with the influence they enjoy in America, have found the opportunity to establish their rule in Palestine more peacefully, to divide the Muslim world, and to replace its faith with Shiism whose adherents have been their allies throughout the history. Therefore they have contributed generously to the establishment of the Shiite state. For the first time in the history of Shiism there is a Shiite leader who discards taqiyyah [See Glossary], calls for Jihad and for holding Jum’ah and congregational prayer even during the absence of the infallible Imaam! Khomeini bases this all on the doctrine called ‘the guardianship of the Jurist’.


Khomeini wrote his book ‘The Islamic Government’ shortly before the outbreak of the Iranian revolution. In it he asks the Shiites, “For how long will you wait before the appearance of the absent Imaam? We must work from now on for his appearance, to prepare the land for him, so that when he does appear he will find conditions in order and the government already established!”

He suggested a different use of the fifth or 20% of the annual income of every Shiite to be paid to allbyeit, saying, “Bani Hashim, who deserve the fifth, are sufficed by a tenth of a tenth of this amount. What are they doing with these piled millions? We can commence Jihad now, and use this wealth to establish the Islamic state?”

Many Shiites were attracted by Khomeini’s opinion, and found in it a relief from humiliation, oppression and the covert practice of their religion throughout their long history. Most of those who were excited by his ideas were the Shiite youths and the Iranian opposition parties during the Shah’s autocratic, sacrilegious regime. Thus Khomeini rallied massive power behind him. But Khomeini’s seniors, the leaders of their religion, objected to this new trend and considered it as such a departure from the mainstream of Shiite thought that it led to Kufr. Their religion necessitates that no Jum’ah or congregational prayers be held, nor Jihad be called, without the infallible Imaam. In fact Shiism in its entirety is based on this doctrine of the Imaamate, and only the infallible one is entitled to Imaamate, to rule the people in war and peace, and to lead their prayers. How can someone else substitute for him?

The senior Shiite leaders opinion that there was no one to take the place of the infallible Imaam, but Khomeini solved the problem by formulating the doctrine of the deputyship of the absent infallible Imaam, presenting himself as the jurist who combines the conditions of justice and jurisprudence upon which the Shiites must agree. The dissidence over the new doctrine persisted among the Shiites, but was overshadowed by the massive support which Khomeini’s revolution received from all the parties who resented the Shah and his rule, coupled with the American Zionist lobby and the active Jewish propaganda which portrayed Khomeini as a mythical hero. As a result, the Muslim youth were captivated by the glitter of this revolution. They naively thought, that this man was the savior who would deliver them from tyrannical rule and loathsome colonialism. The well-orchestrated propaganda which accompanied the revolution preoccupied the Muslims, to the point that they did not endeavor to ask, “What does the doctrine of ‘guardianship of the jurist’ (which was enshrined in the Iranian constitution) mean?”‘ Or, “What does the Rafidite Iranian revolution entail?”‘

Naturally, no one could hear the voice of the Shiites who opposed the blasphemous doctrine, nor the warnings of those possessed of knowledge among Ahl-al-Sunnah against this innovation, pointing out its dangerous consequences not only to Islam, but also to the world in general.


This doctrine, conceived by Khomeini, stipulates that during the absence of the infallible Imaam, according to the Shiite false beliefs, the guardianship(!) and leadership of the nation is the responsibility of a just and pious jurist (!!), according to Article 5 of the constitution, (cited above). Article 57 reads:

“The governing authorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran, i.e. the legislative, executive and judicial authorities are to perform all their duties under the guardianship of the Imaam.” * And Article 107 reads:

“If the majority of the people know and confer upon one of the qualified jurists the qualities for leadership defined in Article 5 of this constitution as they are combined in the great religious authority, the leader of the Islamic revolution, Ayatollah Alozma Imaam Khomeini, then that jurist assumes the guardianship as well as the responsibilities derived from the two titles. Otherwise the experts elected by the people shall discuss among themselves who among the qualified jurists possesses the charisma of leadership and is recognized as the leader of the people. Otherwise they must appoint three or five jurists possessing the qualifications as members of the ‘leadership council’, and introduce them to the people.”

The responsibilities of the leader or the deputy of the infallible Imaam, according to the constitution, are listed in the Article 110:

  1. Appointing jurists to the council to guard the constitution;
  2. Appointing the highest judicial authority in Iran;
  3. Commanding of the armed forces, which entails: * appointment or removal of the commander- in-chief, and * appointment and removal of the general commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.
  4. Forming the National Defense Council, which is consisted of The president of the republic, the prime minister, the minister of defense, the commander-in-chief, the general commander of the Iranian revolutionary guards, two advisors to be appointed by the leader;
  5. Appointing the commanders of the three forces, by recommendation from the supreme council of national defense;
  6. Declaring war and peace, and the military mobilization by a recommendation from the above council;
  7. Signing the results of presidential elections following the people’s representative elections, the candidates in the presidential elections must be approved by the council, as guardians of the constitution, prior to elections.
  8. Removing the president if it is in the national interest, after a supreme court decision based on inability to perform constitutional duties and upon deliverance from the national Shura council confirming the president’s political incapacity;
  9. Granting clemency or lightening sentences within the framework of Islamic criteria, after a recommendation from the supreme court.

Careful reading of the articles of the Iranian constitution, and the ‘Guardianship of the Jurist’ in particular, reveals the following facts:

1) This direction contradicts the doctrinal bases of Shiism of ‘no government without the infallible Imaam’. For this reason, the Shiites disacknowledge the governing authority of Ahl al-Sunnah who believe that the responsibility of governing the Muslim ummah belongs to the Khalifah, who is chosen and approved by the ummah. And the Khalifah, or caliph, according to the people of truth, Ahl al-Sunnah Wal-Jama’ah is the Imaam whose ‘Ijtihad’ is subject to write or wrong, and who consults the people of knowledge, and if they differ over any issue, then the final arbiter is the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger as commended by Allaah: “O, you who believe! Obey Allaah, and obey the Messenger and those who are in authority among you. And if you differ any thing among yourselves, refer it to Allaah and to His Messenger, if you are believing in Allah and the Last Day. That is best and most commendable in the end.” (Qur’aan – 4:59) However, the Rafidites declare that there is no governing authority without the infallible Imaam, and that that is no room for Ijtihad, errors or oblivion in governing the nation!! This was only so until Khomeini who is not infallible of course, emerged with his ‘guardianship of the jurist’ doctrine, which is incongruous with the Rafidite basic principle. Thus to undo the first knot of Shiism.

2) The Iranian constitution gives Khomeini (who claims to possess justice, knowledge of jurisprudence, and familiarity with the present age) a mandate to concentrate all powers in his hands. Thus this jurist, the deputy of the Imaam, has become the lawmaker and self-appointed ruler, with unchallenged authority over all aspects of the lives of the Iranian people. He certainly exercised his authority when he removed the elected president, Bani Sadr, from office as if he were a minor employee. He also gave himself power over all levels of government, as well as the right of interpreting the religion and the absolute ijtihad.

3) It is obvious that the Iranian constitution has invested Khomeini with all this authority by virtue of the guardianship of the jurist’ doctrine, and as the deputy of the absent Imaam. It is also obvious that the absent Imaam is infallible according to the Rafidite religion, and that oblivion, slips or mistakes do not apply to him. Undoubtedly, all authority originally belonging to the alleged absent Imaam has automatically been transferred to his deputy. Consequently, any objection directed against this deputy is, ipso facto, objection against the deputized!! For this reason everyone opposed Khomeini was destined to expulsion, isolation, banishment or death, regardless of the religious, or academic status the unfortunate may have previously earned. In his renowned book ‘The Miserable Revolution’, Dr. Musa al- Musawi says: “The whole world, Muslim and non-Muslim should know that the senior jurists of Iran, and the grand men of religious authority have vehemently opposed the ‘guardianship of the Jurist’ doctrine and declared that it has no relevance to the religion, and that it is an innovation and deviation. The great spiritual leader Shari’at Madari, who contributed greatly to the beginning of the revolution, was about to pay the price of his life for opposing this doctrine. And when he insisted on his opposition, Khomeini sent ten thousand men with clubs to his house to kill him and his followers, shouting in unison and pointing at his house saying, “The den of espionage; it must be demolished and burnt down.” The guards of Imaam Shari’at Madari put up a desperate struggle against the barbaric attack waged by a rising Imaam at the cost of two lives.

4) When Khomeini arrogated to himself the position of deputy of the alleged Imaam (whom he considers to be superior to the preceding Imaams, the Messengers and Prophets), he consequently assumed for himself the status of his Imaam!!! Speaking of his alleged absent Imaam, Khomeini says: “I cannot call him leader, because he is greater than that, nor can I call him the first man, because there is no one to succeed him, nor is there anyone comparable to him. Therefore, I cannot describe him with words other than ‘the promised expected mahdi’ whom Allaah saved for mankind. So we have to prepare ourselves to behold him (!!) If we are successful, we will be able to raise our heads in pride. We hope that the other countries prepare themselves for the appearance of al-mahdi, peace be on him, and be ready for his visit.” [Ibid 55] He added in the same speech: “Al-Imaam al-mahdi, whom Allaah Subhanahu has preserved as a treasure for mankind, will work to establish justice throughout the world, and will succeed where all the prophets failed.” Thus Khomeini places his absent mahdi (who has never existed, nor will he ever) above all the prophets. And naturally, since he is the deputy of the alleged Imaam, he also is superior to the prophets. For this reason Khomeini’s followers describe him as the ‘Ibrahim of the time’ and the ‘Musa of this age’. In his book, ‘Master Khomeini on the Scales’, Dr. Musa alMusawi states, “Khomeini, glorifies and deifies himself to the point of appointing Fajr Hijazi as Iran’s representative to the People’s Council and as head of the Institution of the Oppressed, the largest financial outfit in the country. By giving himself absolute authority, as the deputy of the Imaam, he acquired the title ‘leader” and made it a slogan for the mobs to call, “Allaahu Akbar, Khomeini rahbar”. But to further satisfy his arrogance, he added a new sentence to the ‘azan’, (the call for prayer), placing his name before the name of the Prophet , as follows: “Allaahu Akbar Allaahu Akbar Khomeini rahbar (the leader) ash-hadu Anna Muhammadan Rasoolullah….”

5) One can imagine how the nation looks when its resources, legislation, government, and people are controlled by a foolish dotard in his eighties. By one word from his mouth he can pass a law, appoint or remove from office whomever he pleases, change the religion, or kill and torture whoever he pleases. Imagine how a man like this can drag the country to destruction, without any regrets! If a God-fearing person were to concentrate in his hands so much authority, he would produce catastrophe. How much more so when the leader is Khomeini!? Dr. Musawi comments: “Khomeini is a narcissist, and egotist to the point that he does not mind if the whole world is destroyed for his own ends; he can see none but himself. This is the worst attitude a dictatorial leader may possess, particularly if that leader is invested with ecclesiastical power.” Dr. Musawi further elaborates, “Of his most peculiar Shiite characteristics is the hidden grudge which he carries against anyone who has offended him once, even half a century ago. He never forgets offenses. He never forgets nor pardons an offense; and avenges at the first opportunity. Bloodshed and mass execution do not bother him, nor does Iying in public or in private embarrass him.” “When power came into his hand,” Dr. Musawi elaborated, “He committed crimes that make the skin crawl. He undertakes corruption in the name of Islam, a stigma which will remain throughout history. This ascetic Taghoot, ruthless jurist, rebellious dictator and aged executioner bereaves mothers of their children, and renders children orphans. He killed as many of the sons of the Iranian people in four years as his predecessor killed in thirty years. This is the one who is indeed the worst known swindler and deceiving impostor in history”. Musawi added: “Thus the poor Iranian people are subjects of the bloodthirsty lunatic disguised in ecclesiastic garb.” If the above are only some of Khomeini’s characteristics, then how evil are the consequences of his assumption of leadership with absolute authority? We read and hear about the daily destruction and killing. He has executed 100,000 persons during the black years of his reign. The contemporary history has not since Stalin known a more ruthless ruler than this man. However, we may not be surprised to hear of similar crimes committed by another tagoot like Stalin, but we are when a maniac tagoot like Khomeini commits all his crimes in the name of Islam and the Qur’aan, spreading his evil across the Muslim world. Even the Holiest shrine, al-Masjid al-Haram in Mecca, did not escape his evil. He desired to turn it into a slaughterhouse in which the Muslims were about to be massacred. Can there be more evil than the ‘the Guardianship of the jurist’, the just and pious who is aware of the contemporary age?!

6) The blasphemous aspect of the articles relevant to the ‘guardianship of the Jurist’ enshrined in the Iranian constitution, is that it made this jurist (in whose hands lie all the powers), the final arbiter in every dispute and gave him the final word in religion. This contradicts the source of authority in Islam, Allaah alone, and that any dispute between the ruler and the ruled must be referred to the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger as commanded by Allaah: “And obey Allaah and obey the Messenger, and those m authority among you, and if you differ in anything among yourselves then refer it to Allaah and to the Messenger if you believe in Allaah and the Last Day. That is better and more seemly in the end.” (Qur’aan – 4:59) But the Iranian constitution stipulates that all disputes must be referred to the just jurist, the deputy of the absent infallible Imaam, Khomeini. Thus he inducted himself in the place of Allaah to become the source of power and the one who executes it as well. Since the Imaam, according to Shiites, is the source of power and legislation, has the right of interpreting the Qur’aan, and is the one who executes the authority, Khomeini, by virtue of his position as the deputy of the alleged Imaam, assumes all his powers including appointing and removing from office every head of any authority in the country in accordance with Article 110, which deals with the validity of leadership.


Thus Khomeini’s innovation, ‘the Guardianship of the Jurist’, along with the myth of the absent Imaam (whom, if he ever exists might or might not be content with the one who represents him) constitutes sheer blasphemy. Blasphemous as it may be, this innovation has awakened many of the Shiites from their deep sleep to discover the falsity of this school of thought, and of the gross lie, ‘the guardianship of the jurist’ doctrine, because they are the first to suffer its consequences. It has made those who believe in the absolute Imaamate of Khomeini and in his representation of the infallible Imaam gain the upper hand over the Iranian people. The Shiites who oppose Khomeini receive severe torment. Surprisingly enough, Khomeini and those who adhere to his ominous tract of thought take pains to export their listless doctrine all over the world, and endeavor to promote it in the Muslim world, inviting the Muslims to embrace their ominous religion and to pledge allegiance to Khomeini as the Imaam of the whole Muslim ummah (!) and as deputy of the mythical Imaam! This indeed is despicable devilish insolence. It is also surprising to find among Ahl al Sunnah those who are void of perception and discernment supporting him and preaching his ideas without being aware of the doctrinal, practical or judicial dimensions of this ominous innovation of ‘Wilayat al-faqeeh’, or the guardianship of the jurist!!

PUBLISHED AND DISTRIBUTED BY: Ansar of Imaam Alee (May Allaah be pleased with him) Association

Click here for more more books.


Pada tahun 1979 setelah sekian lama berada di bawah sistem pemerintahan beraja, Iran mula memasuki era baru di dalam pemerintahannya apabila revolusi yang dicetuskan oleh Khomeini (seorang tokoh ulung Syiah di abad ini) dengan teori “walayatul faqihnya” berjaya menumbangkan kerajaan Shah Reza Pahlavi. Umat Islam di mana-mana mengalami satu kejutan apabila negara yang ditegakkan itu berasaskan agama Islam dengan slogan-slogannya yang kelihatan Islamik dan propoganda-propoganda demi kesatuan umat Islam dan masa depan mereka yang cemerlang.

Sebelum pergi lebih jauh, terlebih dahulu hendaklah kita pastikan sama ada teori “walayatul faqih” itu bersesuaian dengan agama Islam sehingga boleh dikatakan negara yang tegak di atas teori itu adalah tertegak di atas asas–asas Islam atau ianya bersesuaian dan bertepatan dengan akidah dan ajaran Syiah Imamiyyah Itsana Asyariyyah yang dianuti oleh Khomeini dan majoriti rakyat Iran hari ini.

Untuk mengetahui sama ada teori “walayatul faqih” itu bersesuaian dengan ajaran Syiah Imamiyyah perlulah kita merujuk kepada para ulama’ Syiah sendiri kerana merekalah yang berhak menentukan perkara ini. Antara ulama’ Syiah yang boleh dikemukakan sebagai contoh ialah Ayatollah Hasan Thabathabdi Al-Qummi. Kerana menentang teori “walayatul faqih” yang dikemukakan oleh Khomeini, beliau terpaksa menderita berbagai-bagai tekanan dan penindasan dari pihak kerajaan Khomeini sehingga dilarang bercakap menerusi telefon, menemui sahabat handai dan kaum kerabat, begitu juga dihadkan kepadanya menggunakan air dan eletrik, juga telah dihalang dari mendapat rawatan di hospital.

Beliau berpendapat tidak ada orang yang layak memegang wilayah `aammah (kekuasaan umum merangkumi sudut pemerintahan, perekonomian, ketenteraan dan sebagainya) selain daripada orang-orang yang maksum seperti para Nabi dan para Imam, kerana selain mereka biar bagaimanapun alimnya, wara’nya, bertaqwanya dan adilnya namun ia tetap tidak terlepas daripada kelalaian dan kekeliruan, lupa atau mungkin dipengaruhi oleh sentimen. Adalah mustahil bagi Allah s.w.t. menentukan ketaatan kepada mana-mana kerajaan atau pemerintah yang tidak terpelihara daripada dosa dan kelalaian itu.

Menurut pendapat beliau lagi, jika keputusan faqih mesti ditaati maka akan timbul kekacauan dan haru biru dalam masyarakat yang tidak mungkin terkawal kerana tidak mungkin kesemua faqih itu bersepakat dalam sesuatu perkara. Jadi pendapat faqih yang manakah di antara sekian ramai faqih itu mesti dipegang dan ditaati? Tentu sekali ketaatan seperti ini tidak diharuskan.

Selain daripada itu tabiat semulajadi manusia, menurut beliau, adalah (manusia itu) benar-benar derhaka. Seandainya seorang faqih itu betul-betul seorang yang adil, beragama dan jujur sehingga dapat kita katakan sifat–sifat yang ada padanya itu akan menegahnya daripada melakukan khilaf dengan kehendak Allah dengan sengaja, tetapi mungkin ia melakukanya dengan kelalaian, bahkan mungkin ia melakukan banyak sekali percanggahan kerana kelekaan dan terlupa. Ini bererti tindak tanduknya itu menyalahi kehendak Allah dan kemaslahatan umum negara Islam.

Kata beliau lagi, “Sesungguhnya saya tidak dapat menerima dengan apa cara sekalipun pencabulan dan penghinaan terhadap aliran Syiah dan saya tidak membenarkan mana-mana kediktatoran berlaku di dalam dunia ini”.

Akhir sekali di dalam kenyataan akhbar “Kayhan” yang diterbitkan di London beliau menyatakan secara terbuka, katanya, “Saya mengisytiharkan kepada sekelian ahli-ahli fikir dan cerdik pandai di dunia ini dan kepada sekelian umat Islam bahawa banyak tindak tanduk yang berlaku selepas terbentuknya Republik (Iran) yang “bukan Islam” atas nama Islam ini langsung tidak mempunyai hubungan dengan Islam yang sebenar dan ugama yang dibawa oleh Nabi Muhammad s.a.w. dan bertentangan dengan sekelian nas-nas daripada Tuhan yang telah sampai kepada kita. Saya mengisytiharkan kepada sekelian makhluk Allah bahawa tidak ada sesiapapun yang berhak untuk mengkritik Islam dengan sebab tindak-tanduk tindak-tanduk yang tidak berperikemanusiaan dan tidak berakhlak yang telah mereka (penguasa Iran) lakukan kerana tindakan–tindakan itu langsung tidak ada kena mengena dengan Islam, (lihat Naqdu Walayatil Faqih-Muhammad Maalullah, m.s. 27 & 28, 30 & 31)

Dr. Musa Al Musavi seorang cendiakiawan Syiah berpendapat “walayatul faqih” adalah satu bid’ah yang dihubungkan dengan penguasa–penguasa yang mendakwa mereka sebagai wakil-wakil Imam Mahdi di zaman Ghaibah Kubra (Keghaiban Besar). Fikrah ini sebenarnya berpunca daripada fikrah huluhiyyah (incarnation) yang telah meresapi pemikiran Islam daripada pemikiran orang-orang Kristian yang berpendapat bahawa Allah telah menjelma di dalam Al-Masih dan Al-Masih pula telah menjelma di dalam Pope Agung.

Di zaman terdapatnya mahkamah-mahkamah ‘Inquisition’ di Sepanyol, Itali dan sebahagian wilayah Peranchis, Pope-pope menghukum orang-orang Kristian dan lain-lain atas nama kekuasaan ketuhanan yang mutlak, di mana ia memerintahkan supaya seseorang dihukum gantung, dibakar atau dipenjarakan.

Bid’ah ini telah meresap ke dalam pemikiran Syiah selepas Ghaibah Kubra dan telah bertukar menjadi akidah bila mana para ulama’ Syiah sibuk membuat perincian tentang Imamah dengan mengatakan Imamah ialah suatu jawatan ketuhanan yang diberikan kepada Imam sebagai pengganti kepada Rasulullah s.a.w. dan oleh kerana Imam itu hidup (Imam Ke-12) tetapi ia terlindung daripada penglihatan mata kasar, maka dengan ghaibnya itu, tidaklah ia kehilangan kuasa ketuhanannya tetapi kuasanya itu berpindah kepada wakil-wakilnya kerana wakil itu menepati orang yang diwakili di dalam semua perkara. (As Syiah Wa At Tashih, m.s. 70).

Pada muka surat yang lain di dalam buku yang sama, Dr.Musa Al Musavi berkata, “Konsep walayatul faqih” bertentangan dengan nas Al-Quran dan sesiapa yang menentang nas Tuhan, ia akan dikira terkeluar dari Islam”. (m.s. 73)

Sementara Ayatollah Syariat Madari, guru kepada Khomeini sendiri yang telah mengujakan gelaran “Ayatollah” kepada Khomeini, dan merupakan seorang tokoh ulama’ atau faqih yang sangat besar dalam istilah mereka. Beliau telah memberi sumbangan yang besar dan memainkan peranan yang penting dalam mencetuskan revolusi Iran itu. Dalam umurnya yang telah menjangkau 80 tahun, telah diserbu oleh algojo-algojo Khomeini kerana menentang pendapatnya berhubung dengan ”walayatul faqih”. Ayatollah Syariat Madari juga seperti tokoh-tokoh Syiah yang lain membataskan kekuasaan faqih dalam bidang-bidang tertentu sahaja. Khomeini telah menghantar 10,000 orang algojo-algojonya supaya menyerbu rumah Ayatollah Syariat Madari untuk membunuh beliau dan pengikut-pengikutnya (Dr.Musa Al Musavi At-Tsauratuu Al-Baaisah, hal. 51)

Demikianlah kita lihat teori “walayatul faqih” itu adalah satu teori yang dikemukakan dan dipraktikkan oleh Khomeini tetapi ditentang dengan hebat oleh tokoh-tokoh ulama’ Syiah dan mereka tidak mahu menerima teori itu sebagai sebahagian dari ajaran Syiah.

Untuk mengetahui sama ada teori “walayatul faqih” itu bersesuaian dengan agama Islam yang sebenar yang dianuti oleh majoriti penganut agama Islam di dunia ini, perlulah kita membandingkan di antara akidah Syiah anutan Khomeini dengan akidah Islam yang dianuti oleh majoriti umat Islam itu atau dengan kata lain, akidah Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah.

Walayatul faqih adalah satu teori penubuhan negara yang dikemukakan oleh Khomeini dan dikuliahkan oleh beliau sekian lama kepada penganut-penganut Syiah dengan alasan Naib Imam boleh menggantikan Imam dalam menubuhkan sesebuah negara dan penubuhan itu dianggap sah setelah mereka putus asa pada hakikatnya dengan “kemunculan Mahdi” yang tak kunjung datang (Khomeini– Al Hukumah Al-Islamiyyah, m.s. 74). Sedangkan mengikut akidah Syiah, tidak ada sebuah kerajaan Syiah pun yang boleh ditubuhkan atau ditegakkan sebelum kemunculan Imam Mahdi.

Mengikut Syiah, setiap negara yang ditegakkan sebelum kemunculan Imam Mahdi adalah tidak sah walaupun pembawanya berada di atas jalan yang benar. Al-Kulaini meriwayatkan dari Abi Bashir dari Abi Abdillah (Jaafar Shadiq) bahawa beliau berkata, “Setiap orang yang menjulang bendera sebelum Qaaim (Al Mahdi) adalah taghut yang disembah selain dari Allah s.w.t.”. (Ar-Raudhah Min Al-Kafi, m.s.295)

Pensyarah kitab Al-Kafi, Maula Muhammad Soleh Al-Maazan Daraani (wafat 1080 H) di dalam syarahnya terhadap kitab Al-Kafi yang dianggap sebagai syarah Al-Kafi yang muktamad menyebutkan bahawa, “Walaupun orang yang menjulangnya itu menyeru kepada kebenaran”. (Syarah Al-Kafi, jilid 2 m.s. 371)

Muhammad Husain Al-Kasyifin Ghitha’ juga menyatakan kepercayaan Syiah tentang terbatasnya wilayah `aammah kepada para Imam sahaja. Kata beliau, “Syiah Itsna Asyariyyah mempercayai wilayah umum (kekuasaan umum) terhadap Islam tergantung pada beberapa orang yang termaklum nama-nama dan bilangan mereka. Mereka telah di pilih oleh Allah sebagaimana Ia memilih para Nabinya”. (Ashlu As Syiah Wa Ushuluha, m.s. 58)

Sementara Ayatollah Al-Uzma Muhammad Al-Husaini Al-Baghdadi An-Najafi pula mengatakan, “Sesungguhnya terlalu banyak riwayat daripada para Imam yang mengharamkan pemberontakkan terhadap musuh-musuh dan sultan-sultan yang sezaman dengan mereka” (Wujubu An Nahdhah li Hifdzi Al Baidhah, m.s. 93)


Di dalam beberapa perkara, Khomeini memang telah menyalahi ajaran Syiah dipegang oleh majoriti Syiah Imamiyyah Itsna Asyariyyah. Antaranya ialah teori walayatul faqih seperti yang telah dikemukakan sebelum ini. Kerana itu adalah benar jika dikatakan ajaran dan`trend’ yang dibawa oleh Khomeini ini merupakan satu pecahan baru kepada aliran Syiah Imamiyyah Itsna Asyariyyah dan boleh kita namakan dengan “Khomeinism”. Tetapi pada keseluruhannya Khomeini tetap berpegang teguh dengan akidah dan ajaran Syiah yang diterima di kalangan Syiah Imamiyyah Itsna Asyariyyah secara turun temurun. Boleh dikatakan tidak ada perbezaan di dalam akidah dan ajaran Syiah yang diterima oleh generasi Syiah yang dahulu dengan Syiah yang diterima oleh Khomeini ini. Kalaupun ada, hanyalah dari segi mempraktikkan konsep taqiyyah dengan seluas-luasnya sampai ke peringkat negara dan antarabangsa. Antara yang dapat kita lihat dengan ketara sekali ialah akidah Khomeini tentang Imamah, ismah, takrif Al Quran, takfir sahabat , taqiyyah, mut’ah dan lain-lain lagi.

Syiah dahulu mempercayai Imamah, iaitu kepercayaan bahawa Imam-imam dilantik dan ditentukan oleh Allah s.w.t. Imamah merupakan salah satu rukun iman. Sesiapa yang tidak percaya kepada rukun ini, tidaklah ia termasuk golongan orang-orang mukmin. Khomeini juga mempercayai demikian.

Di dalam kitabnya Al Hukumah Al Islamiyyah di bawah tajuk “Wilayah Takwiniyyah” Khomeini berkata, “Sesungguhnya di antara akidah aliran kita yang asasi dan terpenting ialah para Imam (Dua Belas) kita mempunyai darjat dan kedudukan yang tidak sampai kepadanya Malaikat Muqarrab dan Nabi lagi Rasul (Al-Hukumah Al-Islamiyyah, m.s. 52 ). Di tempat yang lain Khomeini menulis, “Pengajaran–pengajaran para Imam sama seperti pengajaran Al-Quran, tidak khusus untuk generasi tertentu malah ia adalah pengajaran untuk semua di setiap masa dan negeri dan wajib diikuti sampai hari kiamat”. (Al-Hukumah Al-Islamiyyah, m.s. 113)

Jika Syiah dahulu mempercayai para Imam Dua Belas itu adalah maksum (terpelihara dari dosa-dosa sama ada besar atau kecil) mereka juga tidak tersalah dan tersilap di dalam tindak tanduknya; Syeikh Muhammad Ridha Al Muzaffar di dalam kitabnya ‘Aqaaid Al Imamiyyah menegaskan bahawa di antara akidah golongan Imamiyyah ialah Imam itu mestilah terpelihara (maksum) daripada kelalaian , tersalah dan terlupa (`Aqaaid Al Imamiyyah, m.s.72) maka Khomeini juga demikian. Kata Khomeini, ”Kita tidak dapat menggambarkan para Imam itu lupa dan lalai”. (Al-Hukumah Al-Islamiyyah, m.s. 91)

Syiah mempercayai Al-Quran telah ditahrifkan (diselewengkan). Ni’matullah Al-Jazaairi di dalam kitabnya Al-Anwar An-Nu’maniyyah mengatakan, “Sesungguhnya Al-Quran sebagaimana telah diturunkan tidaklah ditulis kecuali oleh Amirul Mukminin (Ali a.s.) dengan wasiat daripada Nabi s.a.w. Maka selepas kewafatan Rasulullah s.a.w. Sayyidina Ali sibuk mengumpulkannya selama enam bulan. Setelah dia mengumpulkannya sepertimana ia diturunkan (kepada Rasulullah s.a.w.) diapun membawa Al Quran itu kepada orang-orang yang telah berlaku curang setelah kewafatan Rasulullah s.a.w. (maksudnya Sayyidina Abu Bakr, Sayyidina Umar dan Sayyidina Uthman)…dan di dalam Al Quran itu terdapat banyak tambahan (daripada Al-Quran yang ada pada masyarakat umum umat Islam di setiap zaman). Ia kosong daripada sebarang tahrif (penyelewengan). (Al-Anwar An-Nu’maniyyah jilid 2 m.s. 360).

Khomeini juga di dalam bukunya “Kasyful Asrar” walaupun tidak dengan secara terbuka dan terus terang mengatakan Al-Quran ini telah ditahrifkan tetapi daripada kata-katanya secara logik dapat disimpulkan bahawa dia juga tidak berbeza dengan Syiah-syiah lain dalam soal ini. Umpamanya, di satu tempat Khomeini menulis sebagai menjawab kepada kemungkinan soalan ditimbulkan tentang kenapakah Imam itu tidak disebutkan di dalam Al-Quran?

Sebagai menjawabnya, Khomeini mengemukakan beberapa andaian antaranya ialah andaian keempat yang bermaksud, “Kalaupun Allah telah menyebutkan nama Imam secara terang-terangan di dalam Al Quran, namun orang-orang yang hanya memeluk agama Islam dan menerima Al-Quran semata-mata kerana kepentingan dunia dan untuk mendapat kuasa. Mereka telah menjadikan Al-Quran itu sebagai alat dan sarana untuk sampai kepada matlamat–matlamat mereka yang rosak itu. Kerana itu mungkin sekali mereka ini akan mengeluarkan daripada Al-Quran ayat-ayat yang menyebutkan nama Imam-imam itu dan melakukan tahrif terhadap kitab suci dari langit itu dengan melenyapkannya dari pandangan manusia selama-lamanya. Maka sampai kiamat kenyataan ini akan memalukan umat Islam dan mengaibkan Al-Quran dan dengan itu kritikan yang mereka hadapkan kepada orang-orang Yahudi dan Kristian berhubung dengan kitab-kitab mereka yang sudah ditahrifkan (diselewengkan) akan mengenai diri mereka dan Al-Quran, kitab mereka sendiri. (Kasful Asrar, m.s. 114)

Sekiranya Syiah dahulu begitu benci dan dendam terhadap para Sahabat sehingga luahan dendam mereka itu dapat dilihat dengan jelas sekali di dalam tulisan ulama’-ulama’ mereka dan hampir tidak dapat ditemui sebuah kitab Syiah yang tidak memuatkan caci-maki sumpah-seranah terhadap Sahabat. Maka Khomeini juga tidak terbelakang dalam akidah dan tabiat ini.

Kenyataan dapat dilihat umpamanya di celah-celah tulisannya, antaranya, “Abu Bakr dan Umar telah banyak menyalahi hukum-hukum Allah yang terang. Mereka berdua telah banyak mempermain-mainkan hukum-hukum Tuhan. Mereka telah menghalalkan dan mengharamkan dari pihak diri-sendiri. Mereka berdua telah melakukan kezaliman terhadap Fatimah dan anak cucunya”. (Kasyful Asrar, m.s. 110). Khomeini juga di antara 6 orang yang telah mengesahkan dan merestui kitab “Tuhfatul Awam” yang mengandungi doa supaya Allah melaknat Sayyidina Abu Bakr, Sayyidina Umar dan pengikut-pengikutnya. Antara lain doa itu bermaksud, “Ya Allah! Laknatlah dua berhala quraisy, dua jiblnya, dua taghutnya, dua orang yang malang dari kalangan mereka dan dua orang anak perempuan mereka. Mereka berdua telah melanggar perintah-Mu, mengingkari wahyu-Mu, menolak kurniaan-Mu dan derhaka kepada Rasul-Mu. Mereka berdua telah mengubah agama-Mu dan menyelewengkan Kitab-Mu, mereka berdua telah mencintai musuh-musuh-Mu, menolak nikmat-nikmat-Mu dan telah menghentikan hukum-hukum-Mu …” dan seterusnya. Dua orang tersebut yang diminta supaya dilaknat oleh Allah itu ialah Abu Bakr dan Umar.

Betapa dalamnya rasa dendam dan benci di dalam hati Khomeini terhadap para Sahabat Rasulullah s.a.w, dapat dilihat pada tulisan-tulisannya di dalam kitabnya Kasyful Asrar. Dia menulis, “Kita hanya menyembah Tuhan yang segala perbuatanNya tegak di atas asas kebijaksanaan dan tidak bercanggah dengan akal. Kita tidak menyembah Tuhan yang mendirikan sebuah bangunan yang megah untuk ibadat, keadilan dan agama, kemudian merobohkan sendiri bangunan itu dengan melantik orang-orang yang jahat seperti Yazid, Muawiyyah, Utsman dan lain-lain sebagai khalifah serta tidak menentukan nasib umat sesudah wafat Nabi-Nya”. (Kasyful Asrar, m.s. 107)

Kalau Tuhan yang telah melantik mereka itu menjadi khalifah, tidak disembah oleh Khomeini, maka Tuhan manakah yang disembahnya? Adakah Tuhan lain selain Allah telah melantik mereka itu sebagai khalifah?!

Syiah dahulu telah mengemukakan kata-kata dan anjuran para Imam tentang mut’ah; fadhilatnya, keistimewaannya dan bagaimana orang yang tidak melakukan mut’ah itu tidak terbilang sebagai Syiah. Khomeini pergi lebih jauh dan ke halaman yang lebih terang apabila ia menulis di dalam kitabnya “Tahrirul Wasilah” bahawa mut’ah boleh dilakukan dengan perempuan Yahudi, Nasrani dan Majusi juga dengan pelacur. (Tahrirul Wasilah, jilid 2 hal.292)

Seandainya Syiah dahulu mengamalkan konsep taqiyyah dan mempercayai taqiyyah sebagai salah satu ciri keimanan yang terpenting, maka Khomeini juga menganjurkan orang-orang Syiah supaya bertaqiyyah dengan orang-orang Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah. Umpamanya beliau berkata, “Perkara kedua (yang membatalkan sembahyang) ialah takfir iaitu meletakkan satu tangan di atas tangan yang lain (dakap qiam) seperti yang dilakukan oleh orang-orang bukan dari kalangan kita. Tetapi tidak mengapa melakukannya dalam taqiyyah”. (Tahrirul Wasilah jilid m.s. 186). Dia berkata lagi, “Dan sengaja mengucapkan “Amin” selepas selesai membaca Fatihah (juga membatalkan sembahyang) kecuali kerana taqiyyah, tidak mengapa mengucapkannya”. (Tahrirul Al Wasilah ,jilid 1 m.s. 190)

Sesetengah kalangan terpedaya apabila Khomeini menganjurkan penganut-penganut Syiah bersembahyang berimamkan Imam masjidil Haram ketika mereka berada di Mekah. Mereka berhujjah dengan mengatakan bahawa Khomeini tidak seperti Syiah pelampau yang menganggap tidak sah bersembahyang di belakang Ahli Sunnah kerana beliau sendiri menganjurkan supaya mengikut Imam Masjidil Haram yang berakidah Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah, padahal kalaulah mereka sedar betapa besarnya senjata taqiyyah ini di sisi Syiah sehingga dikatakan 9/10 agama terletak dalam taqiyyah tentulah mereka tidak terpedaya dengan anjuran Khomeini itu.

Ini kerana mengikut akidah Syiah bersembahyang di belakang Ahli Sunnah secara taqiyyah sama seperti berimamkan Rasulullah s.a.w. di dalam saf pertama. Mereka meriwayatkan daripada Jaafar As-Shadiq bahawa beliau berkata, “Sesiapa bersembahyang di belakang Imam Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah secara taqiyyah seolah-olah ia bersembahyang dalam saf pertama dengan berimamkan Rasulullah s.a.w”. (Man La Yahhurihul Faqih, hal. 250)

Sementara itu di dalam kitab Jaamul Akhbar m.s. 108, Jaafar As-Shadiq berkata, “Sesiapa bersembahyang di belakang munafiqin secara taqiyyah ia seperti bersembahyang di belakang para Imam”. (Ibn Babwaih Al Qummi-Jaamiul Akhbar, hal.108)

Dari kenyataan-kenyataan Syiah ini dapat kita mengetahui betapa Khomeini telah mempraktikkan apa yang tersebut di dalam kitab-kitab Syiah itu. Sebabnya menurut ajaran Syiah yang sebenar, tidak ada perbezaan sembahyang Ahli Sunnah dengan perzinaan yang dilakukannya. (Al-Kafi, jilid 8 m.s. 162, tafsir Al Burhan, jilid 4. ha.l 453) dan tidak sah bersembahyang di belakang mereka (Ahli Sunnah). (At-Thusi An-Nihayah, hal. 112)

Amalan taqiyyah ini begitu penting dan istimewa sekali di sisi Syiah sehingga Jaafar As-Shadiq diriwayatkan ada berkata, “Mengamalkan taqiyyah itu lebih afdal dari sedekah, haji dan berjihad”. (Ibn Babwaih Al-Qummi, Jaamiul Akhbar, hal. 108)

Ini hanya sebahagian kecil daripada akidah dan amalan orang-orang Syiah, yang juga merupakan akidah dan amalan Khomeini, sedangkan jika ditinjau dari pandangan Islam dan jika ditimbang dengan neraca keislaman dan keimanan yang sedia ada pada kita Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah yang merupakan majoriti umat Islam di setiap zaman, orang-orang yang menganut akidah dan kefahaman seperti yang tersebut itu adalah sesat dan kafir.

Akidah Imamah yang merupakan Rukun Iman di sisi Syiah tidak menjadi akidah kepada Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah kerana itu secara tidak langsung golongan Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah mengikut akidah Syiah adalah bukan mukmin dan bukan Islam dan serentak dengan itu membuktikan bahawa perbezaan di antara Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah dan Syiah bukanlah di sudut cabang tetapi dari sudut akidah dan pegangan hidup.

Bagi kita umat Islam, sesuatu itu hanya menjadi akidah apabila terbukti dalam Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah yang mutawatir dengan jelas dan ertinya tidak menerima takwilan (qat’iyu as–subut wa ad-dalalah) sedangkan tidak ada satupun ayat dalam Al-Quran yang jelas yang tidak menerima takwilan berhubung dengan Imamah ini atau keadaan Imam Dua Belas itu sebagai imam yang wajib ditaati, dilantik oleh Allah, terpelihara dari dosa dan sebagainya.

Konsep Ismah dalam akidah Syiah juga meletakkan para Imam melebihi para Nabi seperti yang dapat kita lihat dengan jelas dalam tulisan Khomeini sedangkan mengikut ulama’ Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah seperti yang digambarkan oleh Qadhi Iyadh Al-Maliki bahawa, “Kita menghukum putus tentang kufurnya orang-orang yang mempercayai para Imam lebih utama dari para Nabi”. (As Syifa’, jilid 2 m.s. .290)

Jika Syiah sudah sampai mempercayai keterpeliharaan para Imam bukan sahaja daripada dosa tetapi juga daripada tersalah dan terlupa, tidakkah akidah ini bererti mempercayai para Imam itu melebihi para Nabi? Kerana para Nabi itu hanya terpelihara daripada dosa tetapi tidak terpelihara daripada tersilap dan terlupa seperti yang jelas tersebut di dalam Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah.

Konsep Imamah dan Ismah yang dikemukakan oleh Syiah ini pada hakikatnya menyerang konsep “Khatmu An Nubuwwah” yang merupakan salah satu akidah Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah. Mempercayai konsep ini mengikut Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah akan menjunamkan seseorang ke jurang kezindiqan dan riddah.

Syah Waliyyullah menyatakan perkara ini di dalam kitabnya “Al-Musawwa”, katanya, “Demikian juga umpamanya orang yang mengatakan Sayyidina Abu Bakr dan Sayyidina Umar bukan ahli syurga, sedangkan hadith yang menceritakan mereka berdua ahli syurga adalah mutawatir atau ia berkata memang Nabi Muhammad adalah penyudah sekelian Nabi tetapi maksud penyudah sekelian Nabi itu ialah tidak harus seseorang yang datang selepasnya dinamakan dengan Nabi. Adapun intisari dan hakikat kenabian iaitu keadaan seseorang itu diutuskan daripada pihak Allah kepada makhluk-Nya, wajib ditaati, terpelihara daripada dosa-dosa dan terpelihara daripada berterusan di atas kesalahan dan kesilapan pada pendapatnya; intisari-intisari dan hakikat-hakikat itu ada pada Imam-imam selepasnya. Maka orang yang berfahaman seperti itu adalah zindiq. Jumhur ulama’ mutaakhirin dari kalangan Hanafiyyah dan Syafi’iyyah sepakat menghukumkan supaya orang yang seperti itu dibunuh”. (Musawwa Syarah Muwattha Imam Malik , jilid 2 , m.s.110)

Syiah mempercayai Al-Quran yang ada ini telah ditahrifkan tetapi mengikut Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah, orang yang mempercayai Al-Quran ini telah diselewengkan atau ditahrifkan isinya walaupun satu ayat adalah terkeluar dari Islam. Maka kerana umat Islam tidak dapat menerima Syiah yang mempunyai kepercayaan yang seperti itu terhadap Al-Quran, mereka (Syiah) mula memilih strategi baru di dalam pengembangannya iaitu mengisytiharkan kepada seluruh umat Islam bahawa mereka juga mempercayai Al Quran yang dipercayai oleh Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah.

Tetapi Al-Quran yang ada ini telah diterima oleh kedua-dua pihak Ahli Sunnah dan juga Syiah sebagai Al-Quran yang dikumpulkan oleh para Sahabat dan merekalah yang menulisnya sedangkan mereka (Sahabat) jika kita nilaikan dengan penilaian yang dapat kita ambil dari tulisan Khomeini, adalah orang-orang yang jahat, yang berpura-pura memeluk agama Islam.

Tidakkah timbul tandatanya di dalam kepala kita yang telahpun Islam ini atau orang-orang yang bukan Islam bahawa, “Tidakkah mungkin Al-Quran ini telah ditokok tambah oleh para Sahabat yang begitu jahat peribadinya dan mempunyai kepentingan politik di dalam menganut agama Islam?”.

Bagaimanakah dari segi logiknya golongan Syiah dapat menerima Al-Quran ini sebagai benar, tidak diselewengkan atau ditukar gantikan isinya oleh para Sahabat yang mereka anggap sebagai seburuk-buruk manusia bahkan telah murtad setelah kewafatan Rasulullah s.a.w, hanya tinggal segelintir sahaja yang masih tetap dengan Islam, itupun secara sembunyi-sembunyi atau taqiyyah??

Berkenaan dengan Sahabat pula, bagi kita umat Islam, mereka adalah sebaik-baik generasi dari umat Muhammad s.a.w kerana mereka adalah generasi yang telah menerima pengajaran dan pendidikan Rasulullah s.a.w secara langsung. Allah s.w.t. berfirman yang maksudnya:

“Sesungguhnya Allah telah mengurniakan nikmat yang besar kepada orang-orang mukmin kerana ia telah mengutuskan seorang Rasul dari kalangan mereka, yang membacakan ayat-ayat-Nya kepada mereka, membersihkan jiwa mereka serta mengajarkan Al-Kitab (Al-Quran) dan hikmat kebijaksanaan walaupun sebelum itu mereka berada di dalam kesesatan yang nyata”. (Ali Imran:164)

Jika kita menerima aqidah Syiah tentang Sahabat, bermakna kita telah mengingkari nikmat besar yang telah dikurniakan oleh Allah kepada para Sahabat itu iaitu satu nikmat yang sungguh besar sehingga disebut sendiri oleh Allah. Di samping kita menganggap Rasulullah s.a.w. telah gagal di dalam pengajaran dan usaha–usaha membersihkan peribadi mukmin, apakah Sahabat-sahabat yang begitu jahat, berperibadi hina, berpaling tadah dan mengkhianati Rasulullah s.a.w sepeninggalan Baginda s.a.w seperti yang dipercayai oleh Syiah itu layak disebutkan oleh Allah sebagai suatu keistimewaan dan nikmat dari pihak-Nya, sedangkan setelah sekian lama mereka mendapat pengajaran dan pendidikan Rasulullah s.a.w. mereka tetap sesat bahkan menyesatkan pula umat Rasulullah s.a.w??

Bagi Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah keimanan para Sahabat dan peribadi mereka merupakan pengukur dan penilai kepada keimanan dan peribadi orang-orang selain mereka. Ini adalah berdasarkan firman Allah yang bermaksud;

“Maka kalau mereka beriman sebagaimana kamu (Sahabat) beriman (dengan Kitab-kitab Allah dan RasulNya), maka sesungguhnya mereka telah beroleh petunjuk (terpimpin)”. (Surah Al-Baqarah, Ayat 137)

Sebenarnya golongan Syiah yang pada hakikatnya adalah musuh Islam yang telah merancang untuk merobohkan Islam secara total dengan cara menghentam dan memukul para Sahabat itu. Betapa tidaknya, jika Sahabat itu diragui dan dipertikaikan bukan sahaja hadith-hadith yang akan dipertikaikan atau ditolak bahkan Al Quran sendiri akan tertolak dan dipertikaikan kerana kedua-dua asas Islam ini disampaikan kepada generasi kemudian oleh para Sahabat Rasulullah s.a.w. Hakikat ini telahpun disedari oleh ulama’ Islam sejak zaman berzaman lagi.

Sebagai contohnya dapat kita kemukakan pendapat seorang tokoh ulama’ hadith yang terkenal dari kalangan salaf iaitu Imam Abu Zur’ah Ar-Razi (wafat 264H). Kata beliau, ”Bila engkau lihat seseorang mencari-cari kesalahan mana-mana Sahabat Rasulullah s.a.w, maka ketahuilah bahawa sesungguhnya orang itu adalah zindiq kerana Rasulullah s.a.w. di sisi kita adalah benar dan Al-Quran (juga) benar. Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah disampaikan kepada kita oleh Sahabat–sahabat Rasulullah s.a.w. itu. Mereka sebenarnya mahu mencederakan saksi-saksi kita untuk membatalkan Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah. Mereka itulah yang patut dicederakan. Itulah dia orang-orang zindiq”. (Khathib Baghdadi-Al-Kifayah Fi Ilmi Ar-Riwayah, hal. 49)

Khomeinisme – Menyingkap Tabir Ideologi dan Kepalsuan AqIidahnya

Ramai orang telah terpesona dengan berjayanya Khomeini menumbangkan rejim tirani Syah Iran. Dan banyak pihak tanpa pengamatan yang teliti telah menganggap bahawa Khomeini benar-benar menegakkan Negara Republik Islam. Apa yang zahir, Khomeini menegakkan Islam, namun fakta lain menunjukkan bahawa mereka telah terang-­terangan memesongkan kebenaran dan mencemarkan kemuliaan Islam.

Ucapan Khomeini bahawa risalah dan missi Muhammad Rasulullah s.a.w. belum sempurna, doktrin mereka bahawa para Sahabat adalah tercela (meskipun para Sahabat telah dijamin masuk syurga); doktrin bahawa al-Quran kurang sempurna; dan sejumlah hadith yang sahih dianggap batil – serta ajaran-­ajaran sesat lain, seperti menghalalkan nikah mut’ah, adalah bukti yang jelas tentang kesesatan Khomeini.

Gejala mencemarkan nama baik Islam ini telah bermaharajalela di mana­-mana. Dan Khomeini mengangap dia di pihak yang benar. Oleh itu, fakta-fakta Islam telah dibatalkan sepenuhnya. Ajaran Syiah ini yang didokongi Khomeini adalah sesat dan menyesatkan kaum muslimin di seluruh dunia.

Kaum muslimin hendaklah berwaspada terhadap propaganda tersebut dan khususnya doktrin Khomeinisme yang sesat itu. Sa’id Hawaa sebagai pemikir Islam yang tidak asing bagi kita, telah merintis jalan bagi meletakkan Khomeini di tempat yang sebenar. Sumber-sumber rasmi Syiah – termasuk buku Khomeini sendiri menjadi rujukannya. Dengan demikian para pembaca dapat meneliti secara lebih mendalam tentang kepalsuan akidah Syiah dan penyelewengan Khomeinisme itu.

Click to access khomeinisme-.pdf

EBOOK – Khomenisme – Menyingkap Tabir Ideologi Dan Kepalsuan Aqidahnya


(Dipetik dari:

Ini buku terbaru yang saya baca, kali ini bukan dari kategori non-fiksi, ia sebuah novel, berlatarkan sejarah tahun 1699, dalam Kerajaan Johor Lama, yang kesudahannya saya rasa semua tahu dan maklum, kerana ia pernah difilemkan, Sultan Mahmud Mangkat Dijulang.

Novel ini adalah tulisan Faisal Tehrani, penulis muda yang sedang membina nama sebagai penulis tersohor. Saya mula menggemari gaya bahasa Faisal sejak mula berkenalan dengan lewat karyanya “1515”. Sebelum itu saya hanya membaca novel Melayu karya Abd. Talib Hassan ataupun Abdul Rahim Awang. Penulis-penulis hebat biasanya membawa personaliti mereka dalam penulisan, begitulah Abd. Talib Hassan, begitulah Abdul Rahim Awang, maka begitulah juga si Faisal Tehrani ini.

“Saasatul Ibaad” maksudnya pemain politik, ringkasnya ia bercerita tentang pemain-pemain utama dalam senario politik Johor Lama di sekitar tahun 1699 itu, cerita ini berkisar di sekitar watak-watak benar yang difiksyenkan secara sangat baik oleh Faisal.

Di sebalik langgam bahasanya yang mengasyikkan, Faisal ternyata telah sangat menggusarkan saya. Menggunakan kehalusan ayat-ayatnya, Faisal melemparkan dan mengajar doktrin Syiah, lebih dari itu meletak watak-watak utama dalam Kerajaan Johor Lama seperti Bendahara Tun Habib Abdul Majid, anakandanya Bendahara Tun Abdul Jalil (kemudiannya Sultan) dan guru mereka Orang Kaya Dato Utama Mahdi Hasan dari Naning sebagai pengamal Syiah. Ya, saya faham atas nama fiksyen dan kreativiti, sejarah boleh dilakar dengan apa sahaja rupa dan wajah, tetapi seperti saya katakan tadi, penulis hebat biasanya membawa personaliti mereka di dalam penulisan, dan itulah personaliti Faisal Tehrani. Kehebatan seni Faisal Tehrani nampaknya semakin hari semakin dicemari propaganda ideologinya sendiri.

Sebagai sebuah novel yang berkait dengan cara pemerintahan baik, tidak kisahlah jika Faisal hanya mahu menurunkan pesan-pesan yang pernah disampaikan oleh Saidina Ali Abi Talib sahaja, padahal banyak lagi pesan pasal pemerintahan negara yang boleh dikutip hasil titipan tiga lagi Khulafa’ ur-Rasyidin, Saidina Abu Bakar, Omar dan Osman. Saya juga tidak ralat bila Faisal memasukkan berderet hadith-hadith yang bersanadkan Muhammad ibn Ya’kub al-Kulaini (yang didakwa sebagai ahli hadith paling baik dan paling awal), yang dikenal sebagai mujadid Syiah ketiga. Faisal mungkin sahaja boleh berkata itu kata orang, bukan kata-katanya sendiri.

Tetapi sebuah pantun yang digarap Faisal dan dimasukkan ke dalam novel ini betul-betul menderau darah saya, perhatikan baris-barisnya;

“Ada berempat sahabat Nabi,

Ada seorang jadi khalifah,

Abu Bakar, Omar, Osman, dan Ali,

Saidina Ali suami Fatimah”.

Faisal nampaknya menganut faham bahawa tidak wujud khulafa’ ur-rasyidin, kerana bagi Faisal, Abu Bakar, Omar dan Osman itu bukan khalifah, hanya Saidina Ali seorang sahaja.

Fasal mensyiahkan Kerajaan Johor Lama pula, Faisal jelas melarik propaganda ini dalam satu dialog Dato Utama Mahdi Hasan, “Sudah. Cakap tuan itu laut yang bahaya. Seperti teluk disangka elok, pulaunya kecil berbahaya, ada batu berendam juga gelombang dan karang yang mengancam. Moleklah disimpan perkara sampai tiba masanya. Mungkin bukan kerja kita. Mungkin zaman Abdul Jalil bila sudah ada peluang dan tersedia ruang, akan kita lakukan perubahan yang pernah kita rencanakan. Johor akan mendapat manusia seperti Alaudin, seperti Aceh pernah mendapat ia, bila tiba masanya. Dan kalau diizinkan Allah dan para sayyid, akan kita dapat negeri walaupun jauh dari Madinah, jauh dari Kufah. Dengan negeri itu kita menantinya nanti kembali mendiri pemerintahan di Kufah.”

Yang lain-lain dari novel ini, yang saya rasa penting juga untuk saya perturunkan di sini sebagai persoalan yang boleh dibincangkan adalah kecenderungan Faisal untuk menggambarkan kebejatan pemimpin dalam novelnya dengan aktiviti seks songsang. Kalau dulu dalam “1515”, Puteri Kembang Piah digambarkan sebagai lesbian, dalam Saasatul Ibaad ini pula Sultan Mahmud digambarkan sebagai seorang pelaku homoseks.

Entahlah, kalau ikut di kulit belakang novel ini, Saasatul Ibaad dikatakan sebagai karya Faisal yang paling bercita-cita besar dan provokatif, tetapi bagi saya novel ini tidak lebih sebagai sebuah naskah dakwah seorang mubaligh Syiah yang dikarang indah.

Sumber: dengan sedikit pindaan pada tajuk.

Syiah Melayu

VIDEO – [Durasi – 7m 26s] – PROJEK AKIDAH – Syiah Melayu


Bila bercakap tentang Syiah, mungkin anda terbayangkan Iran, Iraq & Syria
Sebenarnya mereka dekat dengan anda,
Mereka mungkin jiran anda, mungkin kawan anda, mungkin saudara mara anda
Mereka adalah bangsa Melayu yang beragama Syiah!

Video ini memaparkan personaliti-personaliti Syiah Melayu, Hauzah Syiah, Aktiviti-aktiviti Syiah di Malaysia

Berhati-hati bila anda dapati mereka yang di sekeliling anda melakukan perkara berikut:

  • Simbol-simbol agama Syiah dipamerkan
  • Menepuk paha ketika solat
  • Memperlekehkan dan memandang rendah Sahabat-sahabat Nabi s.a.w
  • Sering memuja dan memuji tokoh-tokoh Syiah seperti Khomeini, Hizbollah
  • Sering menjama’kan Solat Maghrib & Isya, Zohor & Asar tanpa apa-apa sebab
  • Menyebut “Ya Ali” dan “Ya Husain” ketika ditimpa musibah
  • Hanya memakan ikan bersisik
  • Melewatkan berbuka puasa sehingga waktu Isya’
  • Kaki tidak dibasuh tetapi hanya disapu di atas semasa berwudhu’


  • Kenali tokoh Syiah Malaysia. Mereka terdiri dari sasterawan, tokoh politik, pemimpin pelajar, profesor & pensyarah di IPT.
  • Persiapkan diri dengan ilmu Islam yang sahih. Syiah akan memetik rujukan yang kononnya dari kitab Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah. Padahal rujukan itu mungkin tidak wujud atau ditafsir secara salah, sesuai dengan selera mereka.
  • Awasi kawan anda dan kawan anak-anak anda terutamanya di universiti dan kolej. Elakkan bergaul dengan rakyat atau pelajar Iran yang berfahaman Syiah.
  • Bila berdebat dengan Syiah, jangan percaya apa yang dikatakan oleh pihak Syiah; kemungkinan besar mereka bertaqiyyah (menipu).
  • Awasi buku-buku ‘Islamik’ yang dikarang oleh penulis Syiah seperti novel, cerpen dan sebagainya yang menyentuh syariat Islam dan sejarahnya kerana fakta-fakta akan diputarbelit dan dikelirukan.
  • Elakkan makan minum, bergaul dan berurusan dengan mereka sebagaimana panduan dari hadith Nabi.



Click to access ebook-syiah-rafidhah.pdf

Buku ini ditulis ekoran polemik Sunnah-Syiah di dalam akhbar-akhbar tempatan sejak akhir-akhir ini. Ia menimbulkan berbagai-bagai tanggapan sehingga ada di antara masyarakat yang kononnya memilih jalan tengah dalam soal ini dengan mengambil sikap bahawa isu Sunnah Syiah adalah suatu isu yang tidak sepakat pendapat para ulama’ mengenainya sejak dahulu sampai sekarang. Ada di antara ulama’ yang mengkafirkan Syiah dan ada pula di antara mereka yang menganggap Syiah sebagai salah satu mazhab di dalam Islam, tak ubah seperti kedudukan mazhab Maliki atau Hanafi.

Jika demikianlah keadaan ulama’ dari dahulu sampai sekarang, kenapakah kita sibuk berpolemik dan bertengkar tentangnya? Walaupun mereka (orang awam) berada di dalam kebingungan lantaran perbezaan pendapat ulama’ tentang isu ini, tetapi mereka pada hakikatnya telah memilih satu sikap. Lebih menyedihkan lagi, ada satu golongan dari masyarakat kita yang menganggap Syiah lebih baik dan lebih kukuh hujjahnya dari Ahli Sunnah, maka mereka terus mengamalkan ajaran-ajaran Syiah atau cuba mempengaruhi orang lain kepada fahaman Syiah padahal mereka sendiri pun masih belum lagi mengenali hakikat Syiah yang sebenarnya.

Buku kecil ini akan membentangkan titik-titik perbezaan di antara ulama’ yang berbeza-beza pendapat itu. Ia cuba membentangkan faktor-faktor yang menyebabkan para ulama’ tidak sekata di dalam soal ini. Benarkah Syiah itu hanya satu mazhab dari mazhab-mazhab dalam Islam atau ia bukan dan ajaran Islam?

Di antara tajuk perbincangan dan isi kandungan buku ini ialah:

Aliran-Aliran Syiah………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….…….….…..11
Syiah Imamiah Ithna ‘Asyariyyah…………………………….…………………….………………………………..…….…….13
Sikap ‘Ulama Islam Dahulu Terhadap Syiah Imamiyyah Ithna ‘Asyariyyah ………….….……….14
Kitab-Kitab Terpenting Syiah Disembunyikan…………………………………..………….………………..…………18
Buku-Buku Kritik Terhadap Syiah Tulisan Ulama Dahulu ……………..………………………..…..…………19
Tarikh Terdedahnya Kitab-Kitab Syiah Kepada Umum……………………….…………..………….………….22
Buku Kritik Terhadap Syiah Oleh Para Ulama Sunnah India Sebelum Revolusi Iran………..23
Tokoh-Tokoh Ulama Islam Yang Menulis Khusus Untuk Mengkritik Dan Mendedahkan
Ajaran Syiah Selepas Revolusi Iran………………………………………….……………………..………….………….……25
Adakah Syi’ah Imamiyyah Ithna ‘Asyariyyah Rafidhah………………………………………….………………..29
Hubungan Antara Rafidhah Dengan Syiah ……………………………………………….………….……..…………….33
Persamaan Antara Syi’ah Imamiyyah Ithna ‘Asyariyyah Dengan Rafidhah…….…..…….……….33
Syiah Dan Al-Quran………………………………………………………………………………..…………………….…..…….………38
Syiah Dan Sahabat…………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………….40
Syiah dan Raj’ah ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….42
Syiah dan Imamah………………………………………………………………………..…………….…………………………………..43
Syi’ah Imamiyyah Ithna ‘Asyariyyah Adalah Rafidhah……………………………….……………………………45
Rafidhah Di Dalam Hadith-Hadths Rasulullah s.a.w ………………………………………….…………………..47
Sebab-Sebab Perbezaan Pendapat Di Kalangan ‘Ulama Mutaakhir Tentang Syiah…………50
Kebimbangan Tokoh-Tokoh Ahli Sunnah Tentang Usaha Pendekatan Syiah-Sunnah…….60
Kenapa Ulama Benua Kecil India Tidak Menyetujui Usaha-usaha Pendekatan Sunnah-Syiah Oleh Dar At-Taqrib……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….58
Di Antara Sebab-Sebab Sesetengah Ulama Terkeliru Dengan Syiah………..…………………..……60
Pertama ……………………………………………………………………….………………………………………..………..………………..60
Kedua ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………..61
Ketiga ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………..63
Keempat ……………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………….66
Menjadikan Sejarah Sebagai Nas………………………………………………….………………………………………………69
Rujukan Sejarah………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..….…………..74

Tarikh at-Tabari………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………..……………74
Thabaqat Ibn Sa‘ad……………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………77
Fatwa Ulama Di Benua Kecil India Tentang Kekufuran Syiah………………………….…..…………………81
Sikap Ulama Tanahair Kita Terhadap Syiah ………………………………..…………….…………….………………..85

Siapa Dan Apakah Syiah


1- 00:00:14 : Muqaddimah Majlis

2- 00:03:13 : Kesimpulan Umum Tentang “Syiah Imamiyyah Ithna ‘Asya’irah” (Juga Dikenali Sebagai – Syiah Imam Dua Belas, Syiah Rafidhah Atau Syiah Ja’fariyah )

3- 00:15:57 : Syiah Menuduh Para Sahabat Nabi s.a.w Murtad

4- 00:28:19 : Syiah Mendakwa Al-Qur’an Yang Ada Pada Ahli Sunnah Sekarang Ini Adalah Palsu

5- 00:38:10 : Syiah Percaya Terhadap Raj’ah – Kepercayaan Bahawa Imam-imam Bangkit Selepas Mati Untuk Membalas Dendam Terhadap Mereka Yang Dianggap Zalim Seperti Sahabat-sahabat Nabi s.a.w

6- 00:39:50 : Syiah Beramal Dengan Amalan Taqiyah – Menipu, Berbohong Dan Berpura-pura

7- 00:49:48 : Ahli Sunnah Membawa Aqidah Tauhid Tetapi Syiah Membawa Fahaman Syirik

8- 00:57:42 : Siapa Abdullah Bin Sabak (Ibnu Sabak)? – Pengasas Fahaman Syiah

9- 01:01:00 : Aqidah-aqidah Syiah Yang Syirik Kepada Allah s.w.t

10- 01:03:10 : Aqidah Imamah Bagi Golongan Syiah

11- 01:16:03 : Bahaya Golongan Syiah Kepada Syariat, Azan Syiah, Konsep Cinta Kepada Ahlil Bait, Tanah Suci Karbala Dan Ziarah Kubur Imam-Imam Syiah

12- 01:39:27 : Golongan Syiah Mengamalkan Mut’ah (Nikah Kontrak Tanpa Wali, Saksi Untuk Tempoh Tertentu)

13- 01:41:54 : Syiah Mengamalkan Taqiyah


1- 02:25:48 : Tentang Cerita Pintu Khaibar Yang Diangkat Oleh Saidina Ali r.a Dan Apa Motif Sebenar Di Sebalik Nama Tongkat Ali Dan Kacip Fatimah

2- 02:34:54 : Bagaimana Kita Nak Berhujjah Dengan Golongan Syiah?

3- 02:46:49 : Hadith, “Nabi Adalah Kota Ilmi Dan Ali Adalah Pintunya” Ada Dalam Kitab-kitab Ahli Sunnah

4- 02:47:56 : Adakah Syiah Bersekongkol Dengan Penjajah?

5- 02:49:31 : Cara-cara Untuk Menghadapi Golongan Syiah

6- 02:54:10 : Umat Islam Kini Menganggap Syiah Adalah Sebahagian Daripada Islam

7- 02:57:30 : Mengapa Tidak Ada sekatan Pemerintah Islam (Arab Saudi) Terhadap Golongan Sesat Seperti Syiah Dari Menunaikan Ibadat Haji?