How should a muslim believe in the Names and Attributes of Allah?

The creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah in regard to Allaah’s Names and Attributes

Question: What is the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah in regard to Allaah’s Names and Attributes? And what is the difference between a Name and an Attribute? And does affirmation of a Name necessitate affirmation of an Attribute, and (likewise) does affrimation of an Attribute necessitate affirmation of a Name?

Response: The creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah in regard to Allaah’s Names and His Attributes is affriming that which Allaah has affirmed for himself from the Names and Attributes, without:

1) tahreef (changing/distorting a Name and/or Attribute of Allaah to other than its true meaning, i.e. from Allaah to al-Laat, and al-‘Azeez to al-‘Uzzah);

2) ta’teel (denying some or all of Allaah’s Names and Attributes);

3) takyeef (questioning as to “how” (Allaah’s Name or Attribute is), i.e. How does Allaah descend, etc.?);

4) tamtheel (to imply a similarity between Allaah’s Names and Attributes and that of His creation).

And the difference between a Name and an Attribute is that a Name is that which Allaah has named Himself by; and an Attribute is that which Allaah has described Himself by. And between them is a clear difference.

So a Name is that which is considered a Name of Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta’aala), (and that) which incorporates an Attribute.

And affirmation of a Name necessitates affirmation of an Attribute. For example:

al-Ghafoor (the Most Forgiving) is a Name, and (its affirmation) necessitates the (affirmation of the) Attribute of Maghfirah (Forgiveness);

And ar-Raheem (the Most Merciful) is a Name and (its affirmation) necessitates the affirmation of ar-Rahmah (Mercy).

And the affirmation of an Attribute does not necessitate the affirmation of a Name. For example: al-Kalaam (Speech) does not necessitate the affirmation of the Name al-Mutakallim (the Speaker) for Allaah.

So, based upon this, the Names are more wider (in scope), since every Name encompasses an Attribute, however, every Attribute does not encompass a Name.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen
Fataawa Arkaan al-Islaam – Page 73, Fatwa No.30


Testification of one’s eemaan because he regularly attends the masaajid

Testification of one’s eemaan because he regularly attends the masaajid
*Please appropriately reference this fatwa to:, thankyou!*
Question: Is it permissible to bear witness to someone’s eemaan (faith) just because he regularly goes to the masjid, as occurs in the hadeeth?

Response: Yes. No doubt, whoever attends the prayers in the masaajid, then his attendance in this regard is evidence as to his eemaan, since nothing but his eemaan in Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta’aala) caused him to leave his house and exhert himself to go to the masjid.

And as for the questioner saying ((as occurs in the hadeeth)), then he is referring to that which is narrated from the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam):

((If you see a man regularly attending the masaajid, then bear witness to his eemaan)), [Transmitted by at-Tirmidhee, No.2617]

However, this hadeeth is weak, and not authenticated from the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam).

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen
Fataawa Arkaan al-Islaam – Page 34, Fatwa No.11

What is the first obligation upon the creation?

The first obligation upon creation
*Please appropriately reference this fatwa to:, thankyou!*
Question: What is the first obligation upon creation?

Response: The first obligation upon creation is the first thing to which they are called to. The Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) explained to Mu’aadh ibn Jabal, when he sent him to Yemen, and told him:

((Indeed you are going to the People of the Book, so the first thing to which you shall call them to is the testification that there is no god except Allaah,and that Muhammad is the messenger of Allaah…)), [Transmitted by Imaam al-Bukhaaree – The Book of Zakaah, Numbers 1458, 1496; and Imaam Muslim – The Book of Eemaan, Numbers 29, 30, 31].

So this is the first obligation upon the servant (of Allaah), that he singles out Allaah (alone for worship), and he testifies to His messenger (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) who came (forth) with the message (of Islaam).

And by singling out Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta’aala) (alone for worship), and testifying to His messenger (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) who came (forth) with the message (of Islaam), one actualises purity of intention and adherence (to the messenger’s teachings), both of which are conditions for the acceptance of all forms of worship.

So this is the first obligation upon the servant (of Allaah), that he singles out Allaah (alone for worship), and he testifies to (all of) His messengers (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) who came (forth) with the (same) message.

So the testification that there is no god except Allaah (alone) incorporates tawheed (singling out Allaah alone for worship) in its entirety.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen
Fiqh al-‘Ibaadaat – Question 4, Page 18

Whoever abuses the religion and the prophets, what happens to them?

Whoever abuses the religion and the prophets
*Please appropriately reference this fatwa to:, thankyou!*
Question: What is the ruling regarding someone who abuses the religion or any of the prophets?

Response: Anyone who abuses the religion or abuses Allaah or His messenger, then he is a kaafir – out of the fold of Islaam, and we seek refuge in Allaah (from that). (This is the case) even if he believes he is a Muslim. Even the people of knowledge have said: Indeed whoever abuses Allaah, then he is a kaafir, even if he was joking. And the evidence they use is His (Subhaanahu wa Ta’aala) saying:

{If you ask them, they declare: “We were only talking idly and joking.” Say: “Was it at Allaah, and His Aayaat and His Messenger that you were mocking?” Make no excuse; you have disbelieved after you had believed}, [Soorah at-Towbah, Aayahs 65-66].

So, everyone who abuses Allaah or His messenger, or His Book, or His religion, or any of the prophets (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) then he is a kaafir. And it is upon these people to repent to Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta’aala) and return to Him (to Islaam), otherwise they will be given the glad tidings of the Fire of Hell.

We ask Allaah to guide them, and Allaah is the Expounder of success.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen
Fataawa Manaar al-Islaam – Question 8, Page 25

What happens to the people that were not introduced to Islam?

The final destination of Ahlul-Fitrah

Question: What is the final destination of those who lived during the period of the messenger of Allaah, ‘Eesaa (Jesus) (`alayhis-salaam), and before the beginning of the mission of our messenger, Muhammad (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam). Are they considered to belong to Ahlul-Fitrah?

Response: The correct statement is that Ahlul-Fitrah are divided into two categories: The first category is the one before whom the evidence is established, and he recognised the truth, yet followed what he found his forefathers following. In this case, there is no excuse for him and he is among the inhabitants of the Fire; As for the one before whom the evidence has not been established, his matter is for Allaah, the Almighty and Majestic, to decide. And we do not know his final destination. This is because we do not know of a Sharee’ah text (ruling) for that case. But in the case of one about whom it is confirmed that he will be in the Fire based upon authentic evidence, then he is in the Fire.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen
Fataawa Islaamiyyah – Volume 1, Page 108

The meaning of the Prophetic statement: ((All of them will be in the Fire, except one))

The meaning of the Prophetic statement: ((All of them will be in the Fire, except one))

Question: What is the meaning of the following hadeeth:

((My ummah will be divided into seventy three sects. All of them will be in the Fire except one?)), [Saheeh Muslim, no.976]

Who is that sect ? And will the seventy two sects live forever in the Fire, as the mushrik will or not? And does the term “ummah” of the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) apply to thos who follow him as well as those who do not, or is it to the former only?

Response: What is meant by the term “ummah” in this hadeeth is the ummah of response (ummatul-ijaabah – those who responded to the call to Islaam after having been invited), which shall be divided into seventy three sects; seventy two of which are deviant, who practice innovated religious practices that do not constitute apostacy. Each shall be punished in accordance to the innovations and deviation (it practiced), except for those who Allaah pardons and forgives. Their final abode will be Jannah. The only sect that will be safe is Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, who adhere to the Sunnah of the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) and hold fast to what he and his companions (radhi-yallaahu ‘anhum) were holding to. It is they about whom the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) said:

((A group of my ummah shall remain steadfast, on the truth, victorious, unharmed by those who oppose them, and do not support them, until the death or until the Day of Resurrection)), [Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, nos.71 and 3641, and Saheeh Muslim, no.1920]

As for those whose innovation casts them out of Islaam, they belong to the ummah of invitation (ummatud-da’wah – those to whom the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) was sent to invite to Islaam), not the ummatul-ijaabah. They shall remain in the Hell Fire forever, and this is the most valid opinion.

It is also said that the term “ummah” in this hadeeth means ummatud-da’wah, which is a general term indicating all those to whom the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) was sent (i.e. mankind) those who believe and those who do not believe. Whereas the term “the saved sect” is the ummatul-ijaabah, which strictly applies to those who believe in the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam), truthfully and die in such a state (of belief). This is the sect that whill be saved from the Fire; either by prior punishment or without prior punishment, and their final abode will be Jannah, (inshaa.-Allaah).

As for the seventy two sects (in the second opinion) they are all, excluding the saved sect, disbelievers who will live forever in the Fire. Hence, it is clear that the ummatud-da’wah is more general in connotation than the ummatul-ijaabah. That is to say, whoever belongs to the ummatul-ijaabah belongs to the ummatud-da’wah, while not everyone of the ummatud-da’wah belongs to the ummatul-ijaabah.

And with Allaah lies all success and may Allaah send prayers and salutations upon our Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) and his family and his companions.

The Permanent Committee for Islaamic Research and Fataawa
Fataawa Islaamiyyah – Volume 1, Page 16


Where is Allaah?

Question: What is the ruling regarding those who say: “Indeed Allaah is not below and nor above, and nor to the right and nor to the left, and nor outside of this world and nor inside it, etc…”?

Response: They are regarded as innovators (mubtadi’ah).

And we believe that indeed Allaah has ascended over His ‘Arsh (Mighty Throne), an ascension befitting His Majesty, as Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta’aala) says:

{The Most Gracious (Allaah) rose over (Istawaa) the (Mighty) Throne (in a manner that suits His Majesty)}, [Soorah TaaHaa, Aayah 5]

…and we believe in His statement and disbelieve in the statement of the Mu’tazilah. And certainly, I advise the reading of “al-‘Uloo lil-‘Alee al-Ghaffaar” of Imaam ath-Thahabee and it’s summary by Shaykh al-Albaanee.

Shaykh Muqbil al-Waadi’ee ‘alaa – Question 152, Page 300

How should we understand Barakah (blessings)?

The Understanding of Tabarruk with Ahl us-Sunnah
Author: Salih bin `Abdul-`Aziz bin Muhammad Aal ash-Shaikh
Source: Hadhihi Mafahimuna (Eng trans. and additions by Abu Iyad)
Article ID : TAW040001  


At-Tabarruk means to seek blessings (barakah) in something. It is derived from al-Barakah, which means, or is often translated as blessing.

Al-Barakah is explained by ‘ziyadah’ (increase) and ‘namaa’ (growth).

Hence someone who performs tabarruk is seeking an increase/growth in something. The things for which growth and increase is desired are numerous: possessions, wealth, strength, offspring, success, etc. Reason For the Talk:

Abu Waaqid al-Laythee: “We went out with the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) on the campaign to Hunain while we had just left disbelief (kufr) for Islaam. The pagans had a sidrah (lote-tree) called ‘Dhat Anwat’ where they would remain and hang their arms upon it. When we passed by it we said, ‘O Messenger of Allaah, won’t you make for us another Dhat Anwat just like their Dhat Anwat?’. The Messenger of Allaah said, ‘Allaahu Akbar! By the One in Whose Hand is my soul, verily these are the ways of the earlier nations. You have said exactly as the Banu Israil have said to Musa, “Make for us a god just as their Gods He (Musa) said, ‘Verily you are an ignorant people’ (7:138)”. Certainly, you will follow the ways of those who went before you.” [Tirmidhi – Sahih].

The Companions thought that the tree can bring some benefit and repel harm, which is shirk. They sought tabarruk through this tree. The last part of the hadeeth shows that this Ummah will certainly follow the ways of those nations that came before it. Hence, the need to discuss this topic. The Talk

This increase and growth (ziyadah, namaa) can exist in a number of ways:

  1. In Places
  2. In Physical Essences (Bodies) i.e. Humans
  3. In the Characteristics and Attributes of things

This is in terms of the linguistic aspect. As for the Sharee’ah aspect, then that will be discussed later inshaa’allaah.

1. Places

  • And We have placed therein Mountains on top of it and we have placed blessings (barakah) therein 41:10
  • And then We made to inherit those who were weak and oppressed the eastern and western parts of the earth, in which We had placed blessing (barakah) 7:137
  • We should have opened blessings (barakaat) for them from the heavens and the earth 7:96
  • And say (O Nuh), “O My Lord, cause me to land at a blessed place 23:29

2. Physical Essences

  • And We blessed him and Ishaaq, and from their offspring are those who do right and those who wrong themselves 37:113
  • O Nuh, come down from the ship with peace from Us and blessings on you and the people who are with you (and on some of their offspring) 11:48

3. Attributes of Things

  • But when you enter the houses, greet one another with the greeting from Allaah (As-Salaamu Alaikum), blessed and good 24:61
  • And this is a Blessed Reminder which We have sent down. Will you then deny it? [21:50]

So from the linguistic point of view, barakah, which is increase and growth, can be found in one of the three ways mentioned above; in places, physical essences or in the attributes of things. The Sole Owner and Distributor of Barakah is Allaah

When one reflects upon the Qur’an one finds that it indicates that barakah is from Allaah and is to be requested from Him, the Most High. It is also He alone Who places it whomever He wills from His servants and in whatever He wills from His creation.

  • Blessed be Allaah, Lord of the Worlds 7:54
  • Blessed be He in Whose Hand is the Dominion 67:1
  • Blessed be He Who sent down the Criterion upon His Slave 25:1
  • Blessed be He who has placed in the heaven big stars 25:61
  • So Blessed be Allaah, the Best of all creators 23:14
  • Blessed be the Name of Your Lord, the Owner of Majesty and Honour 55:78

And this is indicated by the fact that the word “tabaaraka” occurs in the Qur’an being attached only to Allaah and nothing else. And this shows that all the Barakah belongs to Allaah, that it all originates from Him and that He gives Barakah to various categories from His creation. The General (Restricted) and Absolute (Specific) Types of Barakah

The general restricted type of barakah is found in various things. Amongst them:

1. The Rain is blessed since an increase in tillage, plants, crop and life in general is obtained by it and there is also considerable growth on account of it.

  • And We sent down blessed rain from the sky and produced from it gardens and grain that are reaped 50:9

2. Whatever has been placed on the Earth, is also from His Blessings.

  • And We have placed therein Mountains on top of it and we have placed blessings (barakah) therein 41:10
  • …The eastern and western parts of the earth, in which We had placed blessing (barakah) 7:137

3. Blessings in whatever comes down from the heavens and what comes out of the earth

  • And if the people of the towns had believed and feared Allaah (taqwaa) We certainly would have opened for them blessings from the heavens and the earth

There are other examples similar to these in which there is the general (restricted) type of barakah from by which benefit, goodness, growth and increase is obtained. However, it is not always the case that everything that comes from the heavens and earth that it always brings barakah. This is dependent upon other things, which if they are found, the barakah is given and if they are not, then the barakah will end. Hence, this is not absolute barakah and this thing does not in and of itself produce barakah. Eg. The rain might come down, but if it is not followed up by some sunshine and if the soil is not right, then the crops will not go. So this type of barakah sometimes occurs and sometimes it does not occur.

As for the absolute and specific type of barakah then that can be found in the following things:

1. The Prophets and the Messengers

  • And We blessed him and Ishaaq 37:113
  • O Nuh, come down from the ship with peace from Us and blessings on 11:48
  • And make me blessed wherever I may be 19:31

2. The Places of Worship

  • Glorified and Exalted is He Who took His Slave (Muhammad) for a journey by night from Masjid ul-Haram to Masjid ul-Aqsa, the neighbourhood of which we have blessed 17:1
  • Verily the first House (of worship) appointed from Mankind was that at Bakkah (Makkah), full of blessing and guidance for the world (men and jinn) 3:96

3. Whatever Allaah has sent down of guidance and revelation

  • And this is a Blessed Reminder which We have sent down. Will you then deny it? [21:50]
  • And this is Blessed Book which We have sent down 6:155
  • This is a Book which we have sent down to you, full of blessings, that they may ponder over its verses 38:29

Hence the Qur’an is a Blessed Reminder, and reflecting upon its verses is a blessed action. From this reflection is the various sciences of the Qur’an, and also the Sunnah explains the general meanings of the Quran. So following the Qur’an and the Sunnah is blessed. And likewise, all the various sciences which arise from reflecting upon the verses of the Qur’an and understanding the Sunnah are also blessed. So the reciter, the jurist, the muhaddith then all of them perform actions which are blessed.

The above three examples contain the specific, unrestricted barakah. In other words, these things physically and as part of their essence contain and bring about barakah.

However, one or two clarifications need to be made here:

Firstly: The specific type of barakah in the places of worship such as Masjidul-Haram and Masjid ul-Aqsaa, then the barakah which they contain is not obtained by the physical parts of the masjid, such as the walls, the floor or the pillars etc. And it is a unanimous agreement of the Muslims that no one touches the pillars or walls of the Mosque seeking barakah thereby. However, the mosques are blessed and this is understood to mean the growth and increase in a person’s eemaan and subsequently in his sustenance etc. Also the increase in goodness that a worshipper attains when visiting them.

Thus, the reward for prayer in the Masjid is 25 or 27 times more than prayer at home, or alone. Then prayer in Masjid ul-Haram is 100,000 times more than in any other mosque. The prayer in the Prophet’s mosque is 1000 times better than the prayer in other mosques. And prayer in Masjid ul-Aqsaa is 500 times better than the prayer in other mosques. And thus, what is understood from this is the actual reward and benefit that a servant gets through a Masjid, since it is a place of worship, and knowledge and teaching etc.

Secondly: The Messengers and Prophets have two types of Barakah. The barakah of ittibaa’ and righteous action is also one of the two types of blessings of the Prophets and Messengers. Hence the follower of their Sunnah, who guides himself by their guidance will obtain growth and increase in the reward for his actions on account of having followed them. The Barakah in The Book and the Sunnah is of Two Types

After this initial introduction has been made, it should now be clear that the Barakah in the Book and the Sunnah is of two types. The First: The Barakah of the dhaat (physical essence) and whatever remnants are left from it. This type is for the Prophets and the Messengers and no one else is included amongst them, not even the best of the Companions of Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) , such as Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali. They do not share in this barakah.

And no person can obtain the barakah of the Prophets, except the one who is upon what they called to (Tawheed and Obedience) and who guide themselves by their actions and who adhere to their commands and prohibitions. And an example of this is that the barakah of the presence of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did not benefit the Companions who disobeyed his command in the Battle of Uhud. (refer to 3:152). So they were made to suffer a great deal on account of their disobedience.

This type of barakah of the physical essence was cut off after the death of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) except what remains of his physical essence after his death (eg. Hair). However, the certainty that something remains today and the truthfulness of that has diminished after the passing of time. Anyone making the claim has to provide isnaad to show that something is from the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) since many make that claim. The Second: The Barakah of Righteous Action and Following the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) . And everyone whose action agrees with the Sunnah of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) attains this. Hence, every Muslim has barakah of action within him to the same extent that he follows the commands and prohibitions of Allaah, by doing the commanded things and avoiding the prohibited things. It is for this reason that there comes the hadeeth in Bukhaaree “Certainly there is within this tree a barakah like the barakah of the Muslim” concerning the date-palm tree. Therefore, every Muslim has barakah to the extent that he follows the Book and the Sunnah. However his barakah is the barakah of action and not the barakah of the physical body. This is only for the Messengers and Prophets, whose bodies are not consumed by the earth.

Likewise, the righteous servants of Allaah have the barakah of righteous action and following to the extent of what the possess of the requirements of that barakah. Hence, the Scholar of the Sunnah has the barakah of knowledge, the Hafidh of the Book of Allaah who guards its commandments has the barakah that results from that and so on. And the ones with the greatest Barakah are the greatest and most severe of them in following the Book and the Sunnah, those who adhere to all the obligatory duties and those who refrain from the prohibited matters.

So the issue here is that whoever is from the Prophets then he has both types of barakah, in the physical essence (i.e. his body) and also in his actions. And whoever is other them, then his barakah is only in his action and not in his physical body.

An example: Urwa’s father said, Aishah said, “I borrowed a necklace from Asma and it was lost. So Allaah’s Messenger sent a man to search fro it and he found it. Then the time for prayer came and there was no water. They prayed (without ablution) and informed Allaah’s Messenger about it and so the verse of tayammum was revealed. Usaid bin Hudair said to Aishah, ‘May Allaah reward you, whenever anything happened which you did not like, Allaah brought good for you and for the Muslims in that”. And he also said, “…O Family of Abu Bakr! This is not the first blessing of yours”. [Bukharee]. So here the barakah of tayammum was sent down, on account of Aishah. However this was not the barakah of the physical essence and Usaid bin Hudair was not seeking the barakah of the physical essence from Abu Bakr and his family such as what they used to do with the hair and other things from the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) .

Likewise: When the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) married Juwairiyyah, Aishah said, “I never saw a woman in whom there was a greater barakah for her people than her” [Musnad and Abu Dawud in his Sunan]. So this was in reference to the fact that many from the tribe of Juwairiyyah were released after her marriage to the Prophet. So again, this shows that the barakah was not in Juwairiyyah physically, but because she married the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) , a great barakah was bestowed upon her.

Hence, to conclude this section: Barakah of both types is only for the Prophets and Messengers, but as for other than them, then whatever barakah they possess it is only on account of following the guidance. To the extent that they follow the guidance, to that extent do they possess barakah. This is the understanding of Ahl us-Sunnah.

After understanding all of this we are now ready to discuss tabarruk through the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and the righteous people. Tabarruk through the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)

The Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is blessed in his physical body, in his characteristics and actions, and this barakah can also be brought about by his physical body, his characteristics and his actions. It is firmly established from the Companions that they used to seek blessings through certain things from his body which had separated from his body, such as his hair, or the water from the wudhoo’ or blood etc. These hadeeths have come in the two Saheehs and are authentic.

The Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) has been given the greatest rank of barakah, more than all the other Messengers and from his various parts (such as hair etc.) barakah is brought about and it is permissible to seek barakah through them. A group from the Companions used to do this.

As for seeking barakah from the places where the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) went, such as a place in which he stopped and rested (on a journey) or a place in which he prayed or where he placed his foot or placed his hand etc., then there is no text or evidence that has been reported which shows that the barakah of the physical essence rubbed off onto these places such that they possessed barakah of the physical essence and that tabarruk should be made through them. And for this reason, none of the Sahaabah used to do this, neither during his life nor after his life.

Therefore, wherever the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) went or stopped then it is not correct to seek tabarruk through these things, this in this there is a glorification of such things and places for which it is not permissible for us to glorify and also this is one of the avenues which leads to shirk. Never did a people follow up the tracks of their Prophets except that they went astray.

Umar forbade this practice. Ma’roor bin Suwaid al-Asadi said, “I went along with Umar (from Makkah to Madinah). When we arose in the morning, Umar saw people going in a certain direction. He said, ‘Where are they going?’ and they said, ‘They are going to a mosque in which the Prophet prayed’. Umar said, “Verily the Prophet before you were destroyed because of their veneration of the places where the Prophets prayed. They used to follow the tracks of their Prophets and made them into places of worship. So whoever manages to pray in these (other) mosques when the time for prayer comes, then let him prayer and whoever misses the prayer at its time, then let him continue (and not to deliberately pray in these places). [Ibn Waddah al-Qurtubi in al-Bida, Ibn Abi Shaibah in his Musannaf with a sahih isnad].

This Umar is the same one about whom the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, “Verily Allaah Ajjawajall has placed the truth upon the heart and tongue of Umar” [Ahmad from Ibn Umar with sahih isnad, also in Abu Dawud, Ahmad with other chains of narration].

And there is not doubt that this statement about following the tracks of the Prophets and seeking what they touched as a means of barakah from Umar is from the truth that Allaah placed upon the tongue of Umar (ra).

Ibn Waddah al-Qurtubi (d. 270ish H) also states (p.34 al-Bida): “Malik bin Anas and others from the Scholars of Madinah would detest that people should go to those Masjids, and the following of the tracks of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) , unless it was Uhud or Quba”.

He also said, “Therefore you must adhere to the Imaams of guidance, those who are well known. And one of those who has passed before us has said, “How many matters are there which are well known considered to be good today, but which were considered evil by those who have passed before us.” [Refer also to the statement of Abdullah ibn al-Mubaarak d.181H].

Hence, the point here is that the Salaf used to dislike seeking tabarruk from places, and they used to dislike being attached to these places and hoping for their blessings.

There is no report to show other than this except for that of Ibn Umar (ra) about whom it is known that he used to follow the tracks of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) , such that he would pray where he would pray and so on. And there is no other truthful report about any other Companion that he used to do what Ibn Umar used to do. So the answer to this is that Ibn Umar did not seek tabarruk from these places, since he did not hold them to contain barakah in their physical essence. However, he sought complete and perfect adherence and imitation of whatever the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did. Hence, he did not seek tabarruk from these things but the barakah of imitation and adherence. But none of the other Companions made this a habitual practice and it is not reported from any of them, and they did not agree with him in this. Rather his own father, Umar forbade from this practice, and hence his statement has greater precedence over the action of Ibn Umar and his opinion and view. Hence, the truth is with Umar and the majority of the Companions. Also from another angle, Umar when he kissed the black stone, said, “You are only a stone and I only kiss you because I saw the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) kiss you.” So this shows the perfect understanding of ‘Umar and with this we reconcile the action of his son Ibn Umar, that he was only seeking to imitate the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) in action, not that he was seeking tabarruk from these places which the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) had travelled upon or touched etc.Tabarruk Through the Righteous

It has already preceded that the barakah of the physical essence is only for the one for whom an authentic text exists from Allaah, that He has bestowed upon some barakah, such as for the Prophets and Messengers.

As for those besides them, from the Righteous then the barakah that they contain is the barakah of righteous action.

Some examples of the barakah of the actions of the righteous: that they call the people to goodness, make supplications for them, and that they bring about benefit to the creation because they behave benevolently and well towards them with pure and good intentions. So all of this brings about barakah for the general people. And this is brought about by their actions.

Among the effects of this barakah of action of theirs is what good Allaah brings about on account of them and what harm He repels on account of them.

  • And Your Lord would never destroy a township wrongfully, whilst its inhabitants are righteous 11:117

So this shows that the barakah of the righteous is in their actions and on account of their actions they bring about good for those besides them.

As for making tabarruk through them, such as seeking to kiss their hands thinking that they contain physical barakah or touching them etc. then all of this is forbidden for anyone besides the Prophets for numerous reasons:

  1. There is no one who is equal to the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) in status so how can he reach the same level of barakah and excellence?
  2. There is no Sharee’ah proof to show that anyone besides the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) has the same position as him with respect to seeking tabarruk from the physical parts of his body.
  3. What has been said by ash-Shaatibee in al-I’tisaam (2/6-7), “The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) never left anyone after himself anyone more superior than Abu Bakr as-Siddiq (ra), since he was his Khalifah and no one did this through him… and nor through ‘Umar (ra) and he was the best of the Ummah after him. Then likewise, ‘Uthman (ra) and then all of the Companions, with respect to whom there is no one who is more superior. There is not established from a single one of them any authentic report that states that someone would make tabarruk from them in any of these ways or what is similar to them . Rather they restricted themselves to following and imitating the actions and statements in which they (the Companions) followed the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) . This, therefore is a unanimous agreement from them for the abandonment of these things.”
    And likewise they never did this with al-Hasan or al-Hussain (ra) and nor Fatimah (ra). So the barakah of physical essence does not continue through progeny. I.e. it is not inherited. And this is in refutation of the extreme Shi’a, the Rafidis, may Allaah curse them who claim otherwise.
  4. That preventing the means (that lead to an evil itself) is one of the principles of the Sharee’ah and this is contained in the Qur’an and the Sunnah in numerous places in hundreds of places. And for this reason the barakah of the physical essence has only been mentioned with respect to the Prophets and Messengers..
  5. That performing this type of tabarruk with someone besides the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is a means of fitnah for him since he might be led to amazement with his own soul, pride and arrogance and showing off. And all these things are prohibited.


Tabarruk is through acting upon the Book and the Sunnah and this is the type of barakah that remains extant today. As for barakah through the remnants of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) (i.e. hair etc.) then whoever claims to be in possession of any artefact needs an isnaad to prove that it is indeed so, since this is an arena where shirk can quite easily be committed. However the certainty of proving this has diminished over time. Nevertheless, the Salaf affirm this type of tabarruk and that the Prophets and Messengers have the barakah of the physical essence and that with respect to the Final Messenger, Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) , the Companions used to make tabarruk through his physical essence.

Every Muslim has barakah to the extent that he or she practises Islaam and follows the Book and the Sunnah. Also to the extent that a Muslim teaches others and brings about benefit by what he or she has learnt. And this is the way of Ahl us-Sunnah, that they learn the religion and teach it to others and they rely upon this as a means of attaining barakah, as opposed to the heretics whose way and method is other than this.

Who killed Hussain-the grandson of rasool-Allah……. u be the judge????


Who Killed Al-Hussain?[1]

Retelling the tragedy of Karbalâ has traditionally been an important feature of Shî‘î spirituality. The passion plays of Iran and the Indian subcontinent, the literature, both prose and poetry, composed upon the subject of the martyrdom of Sayyidunâ Hussain (radiyallâhu ‘anhu) and the general atmosphere of mourning that reigns amongst the Shî‘ah during the month of Muharram, all bear eloquent testimony to importance of that event in the Shî‘î calendar. To the Shî‘ah, ‘Âshurâ is probably the most important day of the year.

However, it is regrettable that despite the huge amount of attention the subject of Karbalâ enjoys, the event is persistently portrayed as two-sided. It is always depicted as Hussain against Yazîd, Right rising up against Wrong, the Quest for Justice against the Forces of Oppression. Many an opportunist has even gone to the extent of superimposing upon the event the theme of Shî‘ah against Ahl as-Sunnah.

In this partial retelling that concentrates upon what actually happened at Karbalâ, and conveniently draws attention away from the other guilty party in the ‘Âshûrâ tragedy, lies another tragedy in itself. For while Hussain’s martyrdom has been oft commemorated, and his physical opponents and killers identified, cursed and eliminated, no one has spared a moment’s anger for those who deserted him at the crucial hour.

It is these men in the shadows, who squarely deserve to be called the real villains of Karbalâ, upon whom this article seeks to cast light.

The People of Kufaa invite al-Hussain

It was in Ramadân 60AH that the letters from Kûfah started to arrive at the house of ‘Abbâs ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib in Makkah where Hussain ibn ‘Alî was staying after his flight from Madînah, letters urging him to lead the Kûfans into revolt against Yazîd ibn Mu‘âwiyah, and assuring him of their loyalty and allegiance. Mu‘âwiyah died two months earlier, and there was much resentment for his son Yazîd for whom the bay‘ah was taken as his successor. The people of Kûfah especially were looking at Hussain for leadership, and soon there was stream of letters coming in from Kûfah. On certain days there would be as many as 600 letters, with messengers who enthusiastically described the support he would receive from the Kûfans.

Kûfah was a unique place, and the Kûfans a peculiar people. In 37AH Sayyidunâ ‘Alî (radiyallâhu ‘anhu) shifted his capital from Madînah to Kûfah, and ever since that city became the home of those who claimed partisanship of the Ahl al-Bayt. After the reconciliation between Hasan and Mu‘âwiyah in 41AH many of those who had been in Sayyidunâ Hasan’s army settled in Kûfah. At the time of Mu‘âwiyah’s death in 60AH pro-‘Ali sentiments were still to be found in abundance in Kûfah. At the time of Mu‘âwiyah’ s death in 60 AH Kûfah was still very strongly pro-‘ Ali. Thus when the opportunity arose the Kûfans, who still regarded themselves as the Shî‘ah (supporters) of the Ahl al-Bayt, turned to Hussain to lead them against Yazîd.

Sayyidunâ Hussain decided to send his cousin Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl to investigate the situation in Kûfah. If he found it feasible he would write to inform Hussain, who would depart with his family from Makkah to join him in Kûfah. Muslim arrived in in Dhul Qa‘dah. The Kûfans, when they learnt of his arrival presented themselves at the residence of Muslim ibn ‘Awsajah al-Asadî where he was staying. Soon there were 12 000 Kûfans who had given their solemn pledge to support and protect Hussain with their lives and all they possessed. When this number rose to 18 000 Muslim felt confident enough to dispatch a messenger to Hussain informing him of the bay‘ah of the Kûfans, and urging him to proceed from Makkah.

Yazîd replaces the Governor of Kufah with Ubaydullâh ibn Ziyâd

Rumours of what was happening in Kûfah soon reached Yazîd in Damascus. He immediately replaced Nu‘mâ n ibn Bashîr, the governor of Kûfah, with the ruthless ‘Ubaydullâh ibn Ziyâd with orders to find Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl and kill him. Ibn Ziyâd entered Kûfah early in Dhul Hijjah, accompanied by seventeen men on horseback. With the end of his turban drawn over his face he was unrecognizable, and the people of Kûfah, who were expecting Sayyidunâ Hussain, mistook him for Hussain. ” Peace upon you, o son of Rasûlullâh,” they hailed him. Thus it was that Ibn Ziyâd learnt the truth of the rumors. It was only when one of his mounted men shouted at them, ” Stand back! This is the governor ‘Ubaydullâh ibn Ziyâd!” that the Kûfans realized the seriousness of their blunder.

Soon after reaching the governor’s residence ‘ Ubaydullâh sent a servant of his own with a bag containing 3000 dirhams to pose as a newcomer from the Syrian town of Hims eager to join the imminent revolution, and thereby discover the whereabouts of Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl. He located Muslim in the house of Hânî ibn ‘Urwah, and took the pledge of allegiance at his hands. The money he handed over to Abû Thumâmah al-‘Âmirî who was acting as Muslim’ s treasurer. After staying with them for a few days, during which he learnt most of what there was to know about their intrigue, he returned to Ibn Ziyâd and informed him. Hânî ibn ‘Urwah was arrested. At first he denied all knowledge of Muslim’ s whereabouts, but when the ” newcomer from Hims” was brought before him he confessed. But he still refused to reveal where Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl was.

In the meantime Muslim came to hear about the arrest of Hânî ibn ‘Urwah. Realizing that the hour for a decisive encounter had arrived, he raised his battle cry ” Yâ Mansûr” , at which 4000 of the men who had given him their oath of allegiance and loyalty to Hussain gathered around him and proceeded towards the governor’ s fort. When he saw Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl with the Kûfans at his gate, ‘Ubaydullâh sent some of the tribal leaders of Kûfah to speak with their people and draw them away from Muslim and warn them of the wrath that would descend upon them when the armies from Damascus arrived.

Soon Muslim’s army was called upon by mothers telling their sons, “Come home , there are enough other people here,” and fathers ominously warning their sons, “What will happen tomorrow when the Syrian armies start arriving from Damascus? What will you do?”

The resolve of the men who had taken a sacred oath to support and defend the cause of Hussain and the Ahl al-Bayt against Yazîd and his Syrian armies could not hold in the face of such threats and discouragement, even though Hussain was on that very moment making his way to Kûfah with his nearest and dearest relying upon the promises of the Kufans.

The Kufans start deserting one by one

One by one the Kufans deserted Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl under the gates of the governor’ s fort. At sunset he was left with only 30 men. He led them in Maghrib, and then moved away to the doorway of the Kindah quarter of Kûfah. He went through that door with no more than 10 men, and before he knew it, he was all on his own in the streets of Kûfah. Of all those who had so anxiously and enthusiastically written to Hussain to come and lead them in revolt against Yazîd, and out of the 18 000 men who but days before placed their right hands in his, solemnly pledging allegiance to the cause for which they had invited the grandson of Rasûlullâh , not a single one was there to offer Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl the solace of their company or refuge from the night.

Eventually, parched with thirst, he knocked at a door. The occupant, an old lady, took him in when she learnt that he was Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl. She hid him away in her house, but her son, from whom she extracted a promise not to tell anyone of his presence there, waited only till the morning to take the news to the governor’ s residence. The next thing Muslim realized was that the house was surrounded. Thrice he managed with his sword to drive the attackers out of the house, but when they started putting fire to the house he was forced to face them outside. It was only when ‘Abd ar-Rahmân ibn Muhammad ibn al-Ash‘ath, one of those sent to arrest him, promised him the safety of his life, that he lowered his sword. It was a mistake, for they took away his sword and mounted him upon an ass to be taken to Ibn Ziyâd.

Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl fears for Al-Hussain’s life

Muslim knew his death was at hand. Tears flowed from his eyes, not at his own fate, but at the thought of Hussain and his family traveling through the harsh, merciless desert towards a fate much more harsher and merciless, to an enemy firmly resolved to bring an end to his venture, and to the most treacherous of partisans whose desertion at the hour of need had brought his life to this tragic end. He begged Ibn al-Ash‘ath to send someone to Hussain with the following message: “Ibn ‘Aqîl has sent me to you. He says to you: ‘Go back with your family. Do not be deceived by people of Kûfah. They are those same supporters of your father from whom he so dearly wished to part, by death or by being killed. The Kûfans have lied to me and have lied to you, and a liar has no sense.’ ”

Later that day —the Day of ‘ Arafah, the 9th of Dhul Hijjah— Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl was taken up to the highest ramparts of the fort. As he was being led up, he recited the tahlîl, tasbîh, takbîr and istighfâr. His last words reflect his intense disappointment with the people of Kûfah, “O Allâh, You be the Judge between us and our people. They deceived us and deserted us.” From high upon the ramparts his head fell down in the dust, in full view of those whose invitations and oaths of allegiance had given him so much to hope for, but whose cowardice and treachery had left him with nothing but despair. And Hussain was on his way…

‘Ubaydullâh ibn Ziyâd had entered Kûfah with only seventeen men. For each man that came with him there was over a thousand who had taken the oath of allegiance at the hands of Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl. Yet not a single sword was raised in his defense. Not a single voice had the courage to protest his execution. And these were the same men who had been telling Hussain, “Come, we are with you.”

Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl’s letter reaches Al-Hussain

Upon receipt of Muslim’s letter, Sayyidunâ Hussain started making arrangements to travel to Kûfah. He immediately dispatched a messenger, Qays ibn Mus-hir, to inform the Kûfans of his imminent arrival. This messenger was captured by ‘Ubaydullâh ibn Ziyâd, who ordered him to mount the walls of the fort and publicly curse Hussain and his father. Instead he praised Sayyidunâ ‘Alî and Sayyidunâ Hussain, telling them that Hussain was on his way, and exhorting them to assist him as they had promised. He ended his brief address by imprecating curses upon Ibn Ziyâd. Upon the order of Ibn Ziyâd he was flung from the ramparts and killed. Despite this impassioned plea, the men of Kûfah were unmoved.

In Makkah, a number of the eminent Sahâbah and children of Sahâbah tried to dissuade Hussain from going to Kûfah, and reminded him of the fickleness of the Kûfans with both his father and his brother. ‘Abdullâh ibn ‘Abbâs, ‘Abdullâh ibn ‘Umar, Jâbir ibn ‘Abdillâh, Abû Sa‘îd al-Khudrî, his own brother, Muhammad, and his brother-in-law and cousin , ‘Abdullâh ibn Ja‘far all remonstrated with him and tried to persuade him not to go to Iraq. His mind, however, was made up. He set out from Makkah on the 8th of Dhul Hijjah, not knowing of the sad end of Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl.

Al-Hussan reaches Iraq

After an arduous journey of almost a month, his party reached Iraq. It was there that he first heard of the treachery of the Kûfans and the death of Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl. Later he also learnt of the death of Qays ibn Mus-hir. A large number of desert Arabs had by that time attached themselves to his party, thinking that Kûfah was already practically his. Hussain addressed them, saying, “Our Shî‘ah have deserted us. Therefore, whoever wants to leave is free to do so.” Soon he was left with only those who left Makkah with him. With them he continued towards Kûfah.

Meanwhle Kûfah was placed under heave surveillance by Ibn Ziyâd. When news of Hussain’s approach reached him, he dispatched a 4000 strong contingent, which was on its way to fight the Daylamites, to stop Hussain. This contingent was put under the command of ‘Umar ibn Sa‘d. There can be little doubt that the Kûfans witnessed the departure of this force from Kûfah with their own eyes. This would be their last chance to honor the oaths of allegiance to Hussain which they had taken upon the hands of Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl. This was the final opportunity to rush to the side of the grandson of Rasûlullâh . It was after all their invitations and assurances of support that encouraged him to abandon the safety of Makkah for the precarious battlefields of Iraq. But once again faithfulness, courage and commitment was found lacking in the people of Kûfah. Only a handful emerged to join Hussain at Karbalâ.

Al-Hussan is Martyred

And when the sun set on the 10th of Muharram, it was too late for the faithless Shî‘ah of Kûfah to make amends, for the sands of Karbalâ was stained red with the blood of Sayyidunâ Hussain and his seventy-one followers.

Four years later the Shî‘ah of Kûfah attempted to make amends for their desertion of the family of Rasûlullâh . There emerged a group of Kûfans calling themselves the Tawwâbûn (Penitents) who made it their duty to wreak vengeance upon the killers of Hussain. On their way to Syria in pursuit of Ibn Ziyâd they passed by Karbalâ, the site of Sayyidunâ Hussain’ s grave, where they raised a great hue and cry, and spent the night lamenting the tragedy which they allowed to happen four years earlier. Had they only displayed that same spirit of compassion for Hussain when he was so much in need of it the history of Islâm might have taken a different course.

The Sheites seek to hide their Treachery 

There have been attempts by certain writers to absolve the Shî‘ah from the crime of deserting Hussain. Some find an excuse for them in Ibn Ziyâd’s blockade of Kûfah. S. H. M. Jafri writes in his book The Origins and Early Developments of Shi’ah Islam:

…it should be noted again that the blockade of all the roads coming into Kûfa and its vicinity made it almost impossible for the majority of those Shî‘îs of Kûfa who were in hiding, and also for those residing in other cities like Basra. [2]

This explanation of their desertion does not seem plausible when one considers the large number (18 000) of those who had taken the bay‘ah at the hands of Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl. Ibn Ziyâd, as we have seen, entered Kûfah with only 17 men. Even the force that he dispatched to engage the party of Sayyidunâ Hussain at Karbalâ consisted of only 4000 men. [3]

 Furthermore, that force was not recruited specifically for Karbalâ; it was only passing through Kûfah on its way to fight the Daylamites. It is not at all credible to assume that Ibn Ziyâd was able to cow the Kûfans into submission with forces such as these, whom they outnumbered by far. It was rather their own treacherousness and fickleness that led them to abandon Sayyidunâ Hussain. This can be clearly seen in the manner they deserted Muslim ibn ‘Aqîl.

There is also the tendency of claiming that those who deserted Sayyidunâ Hussain were not of the Shî‘ah. Jafri writes:

… of those who invited Hussain to Kûfa, and then those 18,000 who paid homage to his envoy Muslim b. ‘Aqîl, not all were Shî‘îs in the religious sense of the term, but were rather supporters of the house of ‘Alî for political reasons – a distinction which must be kept clearly in mind in order to understand the early history of Shî‘î Islam. [4]

Jafri’ s motive in excluding the deserters of Sayyidunâ Hussain from the ranks of the “religious” (as opposed to the “political”) supporters of the house of Sayyidunâ ‘Alî is quite transparent. He is clearly embarrassed by the fact that it was the Shî‘ah themselves who abandoned their Imâm and his family after inviting him to lead them in revolt. What leads us to reject this distinction between “religious” and “political” supporters is the fact that Sayyidunâ Hussain himself, on more than one occasion, referred to the Kûfans as his Shî‘ah.

There are also the numerous references to the people of Kûfah as the followers (albeit capricious followers) of his father and brother. And were we to assume that many, or even most of them were not Shî‘ah in the “religious” sense, the question which next presents itself is: Where were the real Shî‘ah when their Imâm required their help?

Were they only that handful who emerged from Kûfah? It is strange that while there is so much reluctance on the part of the Shî‘ah to accept the deserters of Kûfah as their own, they are quite proud and eager to identify themselves with the movement of the Tawwâbûn. The speeches made at the inception of the movement of the Tawwâbûn very clearly prove that they were the same people who invited Sayyidunâ Hussain and then deserted him. [5]

Their very name is indicative of their guilt in this regard. The attempt by the Shî‘ah to absolve themselves from the crime of deserting Sayyidunâ Hussain is therefore at best nothing more than pathetic.

The Sheite Treachery against Zayd ibn ‘ Alî ibn Hussain

Karbalâ was not to be the last act of treason by the Shî‘ah against the Family of Rasûlullâh . Sixty years later the grandson of Sayyidunâ Hussain, namely Zayd ibn ‘ Alî ibn Hussain, led an uprising against the Umayyad ruler Hishâm ibn ‘Abd al-Malik. He received the oaths of allegiance of over 40 000 men, 15 000 of whom were from the very same Kûfah that deserted his grandfather.

Just before the battle could start they decided upon a whim to ask his opinion about Abû Bakr and ‘Umar. Zayd answered: “I have never heard any of my family dissociate himself from them, and I have nothing but good to say about them.”

Upset with this answer, they deserted him en masse, deciding that the true imâm could only be his nephew Ja‘far as-Sâdiq. Out of 40 000, Zayd was left with only a few hundred men. On the departure of the defectors he remarked: “I am afraid they have done unto me as they did to Hussain.” Zayd and his little army fought bravely and attained martyrdom. Thus, on Wednesday the 1st of Safar 122 AH another member of the Ahl al-Bayt fell victim to the treachery of the Shî‘ah of Kûfah. [6]

This time there could be no question as to whether those who deserted him were of the Shî‘ah or not.

The fact that the thousands of Shî‘ah who deserted Zayd ibn ‘Alî looked upon Ja‘far as-Sâdiq as their true Imâm shows that by and large they were the same as the Ithnâ ‘Asharî, or alternatively Imâmî or Ja‘farî Shî‘ah of today.

Why then, if he had so many devoted followers, did Imâm Ja‘far not rise up in revolt against the Umayyads or the ‘Abbâsids? The answer to this question is provided in a narration documented by Abû Ja‘far al-Kulaynî in his monumental work al-Kâfî, which enjoys unparalleled status amongst the hadîth collections of the Shî‘ah:

Sudayr as-Sayrafî says: I entered the presence of Abû ‘Abdillâh ‘alayhis salâm and said to him: “By Allâh, you may not refrain from taking up arms.” He asked: “Why not?” I answered: “Because you have so many partisans, supporters (Shî‘ah) and helpers. By Allâh, if Amîr al-Mu’minîn (Sayyidunâ ‘Alî) had as many Shî‘ah, helpers, and partisans as you have, Taym (the tribe of Abû Bakr) and ‘Adî (the tribe of ‘Umar) would never have had designs upon him.” He asked: “And how many would they be, Sudayr?” I said: “A hundred thousand.” He asked: “A hundred thousand?” I replied: “Yes, and two hundred thousand.” He asked again: “Two hundred thousand?” I replied: “Yes, and half the world.” He remained silent.

Then he said: “Would you accompany us to Yanbu‘?” I replied in the affirmative. He ordered a mule and a donkey to be saddled. I quickly mounted the donkey, but he said: “Sudayr, will you rather let me ride the donkey?” I said: “The mule is more decorous and more noble as well.” But he said: “The donkey is more comfortable for me.” I dismounted. He mounted the donkey, I got on the mule, and we started riding. The time of salâh arrived and he said: “Dismount, Sudayr. Let us perform salâh.” Then he remarked: “The ground here is overgrown with moss. It is not permissible to make salâh here.” So we carried on riding until we came to a place where the earth was red. He looked at a young boy herding sheep, and remarked: “Sudayr, by Allâh, if I had as many Shî‘ah as there are sheep here, it would not have been acceptable for me to refrain from taking up arms.” We then dismounted and performed salâh. When we were finished I turned back to count the sheep. There were seventeen of them. [7]

It seems from this narration that the tragedy of Karbalâ taught Imâm Ja‘far as-Sâdiq something about those who claimed to be his followers which the Shî‘ah of today are still refusing to come to terms with: that in the trials and misfortunes of the Family of Rasûlullâh the role of the Shî‘ah was as great, if not greater, than that of their physical enemies. It therefore does not come as a surprise that none of the supposed Imâms after Hussain ever attempted an armed insurrection against the rulers of their times. Karbalâ had taught them the fickleness and treacherousness of those who claimed to be their Shî‘ah.

It is about them that Imâm Ja‘far is reported to have said: “No one bears us greater hatred than those who claim to love us.”

Imâm Ja‘far is also reported as having said: “No verse did Allâh reveal in connection with the Munâfiqîn, except that it is to be found in those who profess Shî‘ism.” [9]

Before Sayyidunâ Hussain, his elder brother Sayyidunâ Hasan was the victim of the treacherousness of the Kûfans. In his book al-Ihtijâj the prominent Shî‘î author Abû Mansûr at-Tabarsî has preserved the following remark of Sayyidunâ Hasan: “By Allâh, I think Mu‘âwiyah would be better for me than these people who claim that they are my Shî‘ah.” [10]

When Sayyidunâ Hasan eventually became exasperated at the fickleness of his so-called Shî‘ah, he decided to make peace with Mu‘âwiyah. When someone protested to him that he was bringing humiliation upon the Shî‘ah by concluding peace with Mu‘âwiyah, he responded by saying:

“By Allâh, I handed over power to him for no reason other than the fact that I could not find any supporters. Had I found supporters I would have fought him day and night until Allâh decides between us. But I know the people of Kûfah. I have experience of them. The bad ones of them are no good to me. They have no loyalty, nor any integrity in word or deed. They are in disagreement. They claim that their hearts are with us, but their swords are drawn against us.” [11]

Imâm Mûsâ al-Kâzim, the son of Imâm Ja‘far, and the seventh of the supposed Imâms of the Shî‘ah, describes them in the following words:

“If I had to truly distinguish my Shî‘ah I would find them nothing other than pretenders. If I had to put them to the test I would only find them to be apostates. If I were to scrutinize them I would be left with only one in a thousand. Were I to sift them thoroughly I would be left with only the handful that is truly mine. They have been sitting on cushions all along, saying: ” We are the Shî‘ah of ‘Alî.”


If today ‘Âshûrâ will be commemorated as a day of struggle and sacrifice, let it also be remembered as a day of treachery and desertion.

When the names of Yazîd ibn Mu‘âwiyah, ‘Ubaydullâh ibn Ziyâd, ‘Umar ibn Sa‘d and Shamir ibn Dhil Jawshan are mentioned and curses invoked upon their memories, then let us not forget the treachery of the Shî‘ah of Kûfah. The time has long been due for the Shî‘ah to reintroduce into their ‘Âshûrâ ceremonies an aspect that was in fact part of the very first commemoration ceremony of the Tawwâbûn. That lost aspect is the admission of their own guilt, along with that of Ibn Ziyâd, Yazîd and others, in the shedding of the holy blood of Sayyidunâ Hussain ibn ‘Alî radiyallâhu ‘anhumâ.




  1. The historical material for this study has been taken largely from al-Bidâyah wan-Nihâyah of Ibn Kathîr. The Shî‘î source Maqtal al-Hussain by ‘Abd ar-Razzâq al-Mûsawî al-Muqarram (5th edition published by Maktabah Basîratî, Qum in 1382) was also consulted.

  2. See S. H. M. Jafri, The Origins and Early Development of Shi’ah Islam p. 198 (Ansariyan Publications, Qum, n.d.)

  3. The figure of 80 000, given in certain Shî‘î sources, and quoted recently on local radio, is clearly fictitious. Apart from contradicting reliable historical sources, its origin in the emotionally charged hyperbolism of the Shî‘ah is self-evident.

  4. Jafri, p. 195

  5. ibid. p. 223

  6. Muhammad Abû Zahrah, Târîkh al-Madhâhib al-Islâmiyyah, p. 613 (Dâr al-Fikr al-‘Arabî, Cairo, n.d.)

  7. al-Kulaynî, al-Kâfî (Usûl) vol. 2 p. 250-251 (Dâr al-Adwâ, Beiru1992)

  8. ‘Abdullâh al-Mâmaqânî, Miqbâs al-Hidâyah vol. 2 p. 414 (Mu’assasat Âl al-Bayt li-Ihyâ’ at-Turâth, Beirut 1991) quoting from Rijâl al-Kashshî.

  9. ibid. vol. 2 p. 407

  10. Abû Mansûr at-Tabarsî, al-Ihtijâj vol. 2 p. 290-291 (Mu’assasat al-A‘lamî, Beirut 1989

  11. al-Kulaynî, Rawdat al-Kâfî vol. 8 p. 288

Allah Guides an ex-Shi’ite scholar to Islam- look at the tribulations he had to go through for his faith…..but yet he never gave it up……Indeed all praise belongs to ALLAH!!!


Ayatullah Abu Alfathel Alburqai

His full name is: Abulfadhal the son of Al-Hasan the son of Hijjat Al-Islam Al-Sayyid Ahmed the son of Ridha Al-Deen the son of Al-Sayyid Yahya the son of Mirza Meeran the son of Yahya the son of Meer Muhsin the son of Meer Ridha Al-Deen the son of Al-Sayyid Muhamed the son of Meer Fakhr Al-Deen the son of Meer Hussain the son of Badshah the son of Meer Abu Al-Qasim the son of Meerah the son of Abu Al-Fadhal the son of Bindaar the son of Isa the son of Abi Jaffar Muhamed the son of Abu Al-Qasim the son of Ali the son of Ali Muhamed the son of Ahmed the son of Muhamed the lame the son of Al-Sayyid Ahmed the son of Mousa Al-Mubarqi’e the son of Al-Imam Muhamed Al-Taqi the son of Al-Imam Ali bin Mousa Al-Ridha the son of Al-Imam Mousa bin Jaffar Al-Khadhim the son of Al-Imam Jaffar bin Muhamed Al-Saddiq the son of Al-Imam Muhamed bin Ali Al-Baqir the son of Al-Imam Ali bin Al-Hussain Zaynul A’abideen the son of Al-Imam Al-Hussain bin Ali bin Abi Talib the son of Al-Imam Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased at them all.

He was nicknamed Al-Burqu’ei in relation to his grandfather Al-Sayyid Mousa Al-Mubarqa’a.

His Quest for Knowledge:

Ayatullah Al-Uthma Abu Al-Fadhl Al-Barqa’ei sought knowledge from the following scholars:

         Al-Sheikh Abdul Kareem Al-Ha’eiri Al-Yazdi,

         Ayatullah Hujjat Koh Kamrah,

         Ayatullah Al-Sayyid Abul Hassan Al-Esfihani,

         Al-Haaj Al-Sheikh Muhamed Ali Al-Qummi,

         Mirza Muhamed Al-Samera’ei,

         Al-Haaj Al-Shiekh Abdul Nabi Al-A’araki,

         Al-Qassim Al-Kabeer Al-Qummi,

         Ayatullah Shah A’abadi, and many other scholars

The Phenomenon of Ayatullah Al-Barqa’ei:

In matter of fact, Al-Barqa’ei, may Allah have mercy on his soul, was part of a phenomenon that we need to understand and try to spread and adopt. This phenomenon that we are talking about is the guidance of some Shia scholars to Islam and their realization of the falsehood of their previous sect. Al-Barqa’ei mentioned in his book “The Destruction of the Idol” or “Kasr Al-Sanam” that he was influenced by Mustafa Tabteba’ei. Tabteba’ei had graduated from the Shia schools in Qumm, the holy Shia city, reached the degree of Ijtihad – the right to deduce fatwas from Sharia – , and then left Shiasim. Other prominent Shias who left Shiasim include but not limited to the following:

         Dr. Ali Muthfarian who was a surgeon and left Shiasim to become the prayer Imam for Ahl Al-Sunnah mosque in Shiraz,

         Mousa Al-Mosavi who resolved on correcting the path of Shiasim and in the process wrote many books including: Shiasim and Correction (Al-Shia wa Al-Tasheeh), O’ Shia of the World, Wake up (Ya Shiat Al-A’alam, Estayqathou), The Miserable Revolution (Al-Thawrah Al-Ba’eisah), and many other books.

         Ahmed Kasravi: a prominent Shia judge and writer, who left Shiasim to be later assassinated by extremist Shias, and wrote a book named Shiasim and Shia (Al-Tashayu’a wa Al-Shia), and

         Ahmed Al-Katib, a Shia who rejected the hypothesis of the birth of the Awaited One Muhamed bin Al-Hasan Al-Haskari aka Lord of All Ages and invalidated all of the historical Shia stories regarding this matter, story after story.

His Suffering, May Allah Have Mercy on His Soul:

After ordering him to fear Allah, to establish regular prayer, enjoin what is just, and forbid what is wrong, Luqman said to his son, “and bear with patient constancy whatever betide thee,” because every reformer who calls for reforms suffers from pain and is always surrounded by rumors.

At the time of the Shah, and through the instigation of Ayatullah Shari’timdari, the leader of Shias at that time, Al-Burqa’ei was imprisoned, tortured, and then exiled. Ayatullah Shari’timdari managed to gather six thousand signatures, and that resulted in expelling Al-Burqa’ei from the mosque that he was its leader. The mosque is located in Tehran. Since the Shah’s government was secular in nature, he showed indifference towards what Al-Barqa’ei was doing i.e. refuting the beliefs of Shiasim. However, the increased instigation and hatred from Shia scholars lead to cast some suffering on Al-Barqa’ei.

However, the true suffering and the greatest agony started after the Iranian Revolution. The Shia scholars tormented him, and encouraged the ignorant people to attack him. As a result, his house was attacked many times. And when the regime noticed that he is not refraining from telling the truth with great courage and that he is continuing in his activities, though in a small scale, then the regime instructed one of its followers to assassin him as they tried to do the same thing with Haydar Ali Qalamdaran, may Allah have mercy on his soul, who left Shiasim long time ago. The person who tried to assassin Haydar Ali was one of the scholars of Qumm who visited Haydar Ali in the beginning days of the revolution to kill him with a knife. However, Haydar Ali managed to flee away, and lived for many years afterwards.

However, the Shia regime was much annoyed by the works and books of Al-Barqa’ei, which he used to type on the typing machine and distribute it to people.

As we said earlier, the regime had sent one of its followers to assassin Al-Barqa’ei by gun at his house. And while Al-Barqa’ei was praying, some bullets had been fired on him, and a bullet managed to enter his left cheek to leave from the right cheek. Al-Barqa’ei, may Allah have mercy on his soul, at that time aged 80 years and was transported to the hospital for treatment. However, the doctors were ordered by the regime not to treat him. After that, a doctor advised Al-Barqa’ei to leave the hospital and seek treatment at his house.

And all of that did not break the iron will of Al-Barqa’ei, and he continued in his doings until the regime imprisoned him. Prison was no stranger to Al-Barqa’ei; however, this time it was the notorious prison Evin, which is considered to be the most infamous political prisons in Iran. He stayed a year in that prison, then he was exiled to Yazd, a very far away city from Tehran, his dwelling city.

However, after 5 days of his exile, he was again lead to prison to be exiled again to the same city later on. Then he passed away, and no one knows for sure whether he was murdered or not, may Allah have mercy on his soul.

Al-Barqa’ei passed away in the year 1993 and advised his friends and family not to be buried in a Shia cemetery or to write any poems on his grave, even though he wrote some wonderful poems for such an occasion before his guidance, but he preferred not to have them in the end.

His Works:

Al-Barqa’ei wrote many books, some of them as follows:

         An Index to the Beliefs of Shiekhism and its Contradiction to Islam (Fahras Aqa’eid Al-Sheikhiyah wa Mukhalafatha lil Islam)

         A Study in the Supplication of Al-Nadab (Dirasat Du’oa Al-Nadab)

         Supplication of Al-Nadab and its Contradictory Nature to Quran (Du’oa Al-Nadab wa Mukhalaft Ebaratuh lil Quran)

         The Many Superstitions in Visiting the Grave (Al-Khurafat Al-Katheerah fi Ziyarat Al-Quboor)

         The Prohibition of Temporary Marriage in Islam (Yahreem Al-Mut’ah in Al-Islam)

         The Destruction of the Idol – A Study in the Hadeeths of Al-Kafi (Kasr Al-Sanam)

         A Scientific Study in the Hadeeths of Al-Mahdi (Dirasah Eilmiyah li Ahadeeth Al-Mahdi)

         The Contradiction of ‘The Keys to Heavens’ to the Verses of the Quran (Mukhalafat Mafateeh Al-Jinan li Ayat Al-Quran)

And he also translated into Persian the book “Al-Muntaqa” by Al-Thahabi, which is a summary of “Minhaj Al-Sunnah Al-Nabawiya” by Ibn Taymiyah.

« Older entries