بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Some people have fallen victims of confusing Iran with Shi’a. They try to imply that Shi’a were persians who hated Arabs and that is why they oppose Umar and some other companions.

Iran is a country and Shi’a is a belief, they are two different entities!

Many people are Shi’a but they are NOT Iranian. There are Shi’a in Iraq, Hijaz (Arabian Peninsula), Syria, Lebanon, and all of them are Arabs. In addition to that, there are Shi’a in Pakistan, India, Africa, America, and all of them are neither Arabs nor Persians.

More over all of the 12 Imams of Shi’a are Arabs, from Quraish and from Bani Hashim. If Persians were prejudice and hated Arabs, as some people claim, they would have chosen Salman al-Farsi as their Imam since he was a great companion of the Prophet, and respected by both Shi’its and Sunnits.

On the other hand, most of the leading Sunni Imams were Persian, such as Abu Hanifa, al-Nisa’i, al-Tirmithi, al-Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Majah, al- Ghazzali, Ibn Sina, al-Farabi, and many others.

If Shi’a were all Persians who rejected Umar because he destroyed their power, then how can we explain the rejection of Arabs who were not Persians? Thus, this is an illogical claim. These people refused Umar because of his role in excluding ‘Ali from leadership after the departure of prophet and because of the tragic disputes.

It is true that Shi’a whether they were Arabs or Persians or any other nationalities, followed closely Qur’an, and the tradition of the Prophet transmitted by his family, and refused to accept the alternatives, despite the repressive/oppressive policies of the Umayad and later the Abbasid for seven centuries. During that period, they chased Shi’a every where. They killed them, displaced them, denied their rightful grants, tried to destroy their cultural and intellectual heritage, and spread all sorts of rumors about them in order to keep people away from them. The legacy of such policies is still felt up to now.

Another Wahhabi (Umayad reborn) mentioned:

All the historical records show that truely Iran was the hotbed for most of the turbulence in the Islamic history, be it the Khurramiah, the Khawarij, the Hashshasheen, the Qaramitah, and all kind of corrupted groups including the worshippers of the 12.

Pure non-sense. Khawarij appeared in Iraq. Hamdan Qarmat (the head of Qaramitah) was living in Kufah. Most of Qaramitah were from Yemen. FYI, there is no group who worship 12. This is what you have been granted by your mother’s milk.

Although I do not want to favor any nationality, but the authentic Sunnicollections contain many traditions which is in favor of the Persians. I just quote some of them here:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.420

Narrated Abu Huraira:

While we were sitting with the Prophet Surat al-Jumu’a was revealed to him, and when the Verse, "And He (Allah) has sent him (Muhammad) also to other (Muslims).....’ (62:3) was recited by the Prophet, I said, "Who are they, O Allah’s Apostle?”The Prophet did not reply till I repeated my question thrice. At that time, Salman al-Farisi was with us. So Allah’s Apostle put his hand on Salman, saying, "Even if Faith were at (the place of) Ath-Thuraiya (pleiades, the highest star), then some men or man from these people (i.e. Salman’s folk) would attain it."

The next tradition right after the previous one:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.421

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said "Then some men from these people would attain it."

I have to also mention that Salman was from a province inside of Iran named "Fars". It is now in the middle of present Iran. Sahih Muslim has also many traditions in this regard:

Abu Hurairah reported: We were sitting in the company of Allah’s Apostle(may peace be upon him) that Sura al-Jumua was revealed to him and when he recited (these words):

"Others from amongst them who have not yet joined them (62:3)”

a person amongst them (those who were sitting there) said: Allah’s messenger! But Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) made no reply, until he questioned him once, twice, or thrice. And there was amongst us Salman the Persian. The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) placed his hand on Salman and then said: Even if faith were near the Pleiades, a man from amongst these would surely find it.

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter MLI, titled as: The merit of the people of Persia, Tradition #6178

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If the din (religion) were at the pleiades, even then a person from Persia would have taken hold of it, or one amongst the Persian descent would have surely found it.

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter MLI, titled as: The merit of the people of Persia, Tradition #6177

Again, I do not intend to favor any nationality, but I merely quoted these traditions to show the absurdity of the false aqusations against the Muslims from Iran.

The Wahhabi contributor further mentioned:

Actually most of Iran have accepted the SUnnah of the prophet and joined the Jamaah before they were forcefuly converted to Rafidhism by the Safwiyyeen, to show the extent of the strength of the fitnah in there.

Most people of Persia followed Ahlul-Bayt from the beginning of the appearance of Islam in that place, eventhough the Umayad and Abbasid oppressive governments continued to prosecute the followers of Ahlul-Bayt in Persia, Iraq, Hijaz, and other places.

No body can force a person to convert into another religion, since religion is in the heart of People and not in ID. Your logic slips away from me when I see many Arabs inside the Arabian Peninsula (what is now know as the kingdom of Saudi Arabia) are the Shi’a of Imam ‘Ali (as) despite the oppressive regimes in Hijaz since the early history of Islam. Perhaps you give me an excuse that Hijaz was a part of Iran at the time!