We always ask one another: Why do Islamic countries lag behind other nations in the race for progress? What is the secret for advancement of America and Europe in the field of science and technology? We also ask why is it that among all the Arab countries, Saudi Arabia lags behind in science and knowledge?

We wonder all the more at its backwardness when we see that this country achieved independence earlier than other countries in this region and enjoys large number of Hajj pilgrim visitors every year. We cannot believe when we hear the Hajj pilgrims narrate that hungry and naked persons pursue them at every step.

Why should we believe them? What happened to the oil wells that overflow in Dahran, Fawaz, Safainah and Rub’al Khali? Where goes the large wealth gained from Hajj pilgrims from all over the world? However, when we go through the 5^th issue of Rayat ul-Islam, dated 15^th Rabi’ ul-Awwal, 1380 A.H. we cease to wonder because if you know the cause of something, you are not surprised about it anymore. This magazine, published in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia has made the cause clear.

Indeed, some religious persons and journalists, who are the worst animals in the eye of Allah, can be seen in Saudi Arabia. Instead of improving the pitiable conditions of the millions of people living in a state of ignorance, poor health, and hunger, and instead of meeting the needs of the helpless inhabitants of Najd and Hijaz - who are exposed to the rigours of summer and winter - they make a show of the wealth of Saudi Arabs, who construct, amidst the nomadic huts of the nation, skyscrapers resembling those in Versailles and Kremlin.

In this issue of Rayat ul-Islam, an article by Ibrahim Jabhan was published. In that article, he has pronounced Islamic sects to be heretical. He also attacked the leaders of religious sects and Mujahideen.1 But he did not take the trouble to ask the government where the billions of dollars earned from black gold (oil) have gone to. Why do the Rockefeller brothers exercise so much influence in Saudi Arabia? Why are all the profits of oil deposited in the accounts of Wall Street, while the poor of the country are in greater need?

Jabhan has severely condemned the Rector of al-Azhar University, Shaykh Mahmood Shaltut, and mentioned unbecoming words about the religious leaders of Muslims. We reproduce below some of his slanderous remarks and propose to refute them.

Jabhan says: The difference between us and the Shi’as is about the principles of faith and this difference is the root of all differences.

Thus, the writer formally admits that he does not believe in Allah, the prophet and the Judgment Day, because these are fundamentals of Shi’a faith: i.e. Tawhid (monotheism), Risalat (prophethood) and Qiyamat (Judgment Day). These principles have been published in thousands of Shi’a books and this belief is announced from the top of the minarets of Shi’a masjids by saying: “there is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is His Messenger”.

It is no wonder that Jabhan is disgusted with this belief because his predecessors who thought like him hated Imam Ali (‘a) and condemned his beliefs, although his beliefs and religion were the same as those of his cousin, Muhammad, the seal of the prophets. Shi’as are real Muslims and believe Allah the Mighty and Sublime to be free from every defect.

They do not subscribe to certain beliefs held by some sects of Muslims whom the Wahhabis consider to be the leaders of the Muslims. For instance, Shi’as do not say any of these:

“None of the acts of Allah is indecent (not even injustice) and He can throw the prophets into Hell and send the polytheists to Paradise.”

“The length of Allah is equal to seven spans of His own.”

“Allah is made of flesh and blood.”

“Allah wept so much on account of Nuh's Deluge that His eyes were injured, and the angels went to inquire about His health.”

“Allah is like a handsome child. On Friday nights He mounts a donkey and arrives on Earth and shouts from above the rooftops: Is there anyone who wants to repent?”2

Shi’as also do not ascribe things to the Holy Prophet which are against contrary to the position and greatness of his prophethood. For example, that he continued to sleep till the time for his prayers lapsed, and that he made mistakes while offering prayers, or watched some Bedouins dancing, or listened to songs.3

Jabhan writes: “The Islam which Shi’as profess is nothing but an initiation of the deceptive Jews.”4

Yes! In Jabhan's view, Shi’as are bad because they have not surrendered the lands to America, the real master of Israel and which brought it into existence. He dislikes the Shi’as because they do not provide funds and weapons to the Jews to massacre Muslims and oppress Palestine.5 Shi’as do not give their land under the control of America so that they may establish a secret military base to support Israel. Shi’as did not fight against Algeria in collaboration with France.

Jabhan writes: If we stand in need for political unity so that we may overthrow political colonialism, this aim does not necessitate that we place ourselves in the strait of religious colonialism and consider religion to be the means of unification, because the gaps can be filled in only when there are people by our side who share our objects and afflictions and persevere.

The only object of Jabhan is to obey the orders of the Aramco Oil Company and he wishes that all Muslim nations from the east to the west should obey this company. Anyone who does not obey the orders of this company is expelled from the pale of Islam. If the object of the writer is not submission to Aramco, on what account has he accused the Shi’as of being infidels and heretics?

Did not the Shi’as fight against the colonial British in Iraq in 1920, and were not thousands of them killed? Did they not campaign against the French in Lebanon and consequently their houses were transformed into ruins? Did they not rise as one man against the attack on Port Said in 1956, and were not a number of them belonging to Najaf Ashraf etc. killed?6

History bears witness to the fact that the Shi’as have always fought against crime, injustice, and despotism, and their literature and verses are replete with instances of campaigns against colonialism and despotism. Their books on jurisprudence and principles of faith have declared campaigns against the tyrants and the despotic rulers to be obligatory.

Of course, the Shi’as do not hold the same belief as that held by Jabhan and those in charge of Rayat ul-Islam magazine, who say: No matter how unjust the governors and the rulers may be, it is not permissible to rebel against them.7

Jabhan addresses Shaykh Shaltut, the Rector of al-Azhar University saying: Fear Allah and do not expose yourself and the Islamic countries to danger...for falsehood cannot be fought against with falsehood, and that religious hypocrisy cannot be eliminated by means of political hypocrisy.

According to Jabhan, Shaykh Shaltut is a liar and a hypocrite. His offence is that he has initiated the nation to fraternity and unity, so that Muslims may form a united front against colonial powers and manipulative businesses and protect their economy. Yet, he himself is a true believer while his goal is to destroy the strength and divide the Muslims so that the ground may be prepared for the expansion of Marxism or Zionism and that they will bring the Arab (and Muslim) countries under their sway.

The object of Shaykh Shaltut is to bring Muslims closer to one another, and to achieve this end he had included the study of Shi’a jurisprudence in the syllabus of the Al­Azhar University. He did not do this for the sake of the Shi’as or to propagate the Shi’a faith. Nor did he do this to attract the attention of Najaf or to develop friendship with the ulamas there. He did this for al-Azhar, Islam, and the Muslims.

Shaykh Shaltut took this decision because he possessed religious zeal and was sincere to the Muslims. However, Jabhan has spoken for the sake of Dollars and to sell the Islamic countries (and has cunningly adopted the method of creating religious differences). May Allah curse the hypocrites!

Jabhan writes: ''A man like Sadiq, the liar of the Shi’as, and one who follows his methods and pays attention to him or considers to be correct all or some of the foolish narrations ascribed to Sadiq, the liar of the Shi’as, becomes an infidel and it is obligatory to curse and persecute him.

O Lord! Subject to Your curses and wrath the infidels who have become so impudent as to take liberties with Your saints and the supporters of the religion and progeny of Your Prophet and ascribe falsehood to them.

O Lord! Subject to Your wrath the Aramco Company, the Zionist group, the colonial rulers and their supporters.

If Jabhan calls Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq a liar (God forbid) there is nothing surprising about it, because previously the great prophet of Islam was also accused falsely.

The Holy Prophet used to ask the people of Mecca: “Say: There is no god but Allah, so that you may achieve salvation.” Abu Lahab however threw stones at him and said: “Do not give ear to his words; he is a liar.”

Our time is like the time of the Holy Prophet, and Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq is like his grandfather, the Holy Prophet (S), and Jabhan is like Abu Lahab. Of course, the Almighty Allah has announced in the holy Qur’an:

“(O Prophet!) And if they reject you, so indeed were rejected before you messengers who came with clear arguments and scriptures and the illuminating book” (3:184).

Imam Ja'far Sadiq disseminated the interpretations of the holy Qur’an and the traditions of his grandfather with logical reasoning and proof. However, those who are the enemies of Allah and the holy Qur’an say about him the same things, which they said about his grandfather.

Ibn Hajar writes in As-Sawaiq ul-Muhriqa:

The people quoted so many doctrinal matters from Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq that the caravan of knowledge carried them from place to place and these branches of learning became well-known in all the cities.

Shahristani writes in his book, Al-Milal wan Nihal: Imam Ja'far Sadiq possessed vast knowledge in the fields of religion, literature, philosophy and piety.

Abu Hanifa was asked: Who is the greatest jurist? He replied: Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (‘a).

Traditions quoted about the excellence, greatness and knowledge of Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq and the services rendered by him are too many to be counted. His only offence in the eyes of the enemies of Allah and His prophet is that his knowledge was based on the holy Qur’an, and he always discussed matters relating to Islam. Hence, attacking him means attacking the holy Qur’an and refuting him amounts to refuting Islam.

At the end of his article, Jabhan writes: ''The Wahhabi Ulama should know that they can perform the Islamic mission only when they have removed the traits which bring them near to Islam.”

These lines inform us the secret intention of this dangerous writer. He wishes that the small number of Shi’as who have survived in Hijaz and Qatif should be eliminated. Hence, it is incumbent upon every Muslim, especially upon the Shi’a Ulama, especially upon the honourable scholars of Najaf and Iran, to express their serious objections against this article, by whatever means possible, and protest against the management of the magazine and those who have allowed them to publish this article.

They should call them to account as to why they allowed the publication of such venomous material. They should thus forestall the virulence of colonial Zionism and the plots of Marxism and Aramco, which are spreading falsehood and dissensions in the name of faith and Islam.

I wrote to the scholars of Najaf and Qom and apprised them of the position and they, no doubt, realized its significance and performed their duty.

The ulama of Jebel Amil, in turn, wrote letters of protest to King Saud and also visited the Saudi Embassy in Beirut and expressed their resentment in the dailies and religious meetings.

This expression of aversion should continue till the respective Saudi authorities restrain the hands of the transgressors and take necessary steps to prevent the evil consequences of such acts. However, there is no denying the fact that Allah is with the righteous.

• 1. Fighters in holy wars.
• 2. A Wahhabi scholar asked me as to wherefrom I had quoted these words. When I informed him as to the source he said: “Although the writer of this book is a Sunni, he is not a Wahhabi and a Hanbali, we do not rely on him.” I was, therefore, obliged to find out some other evidence. I then saw the above sentences in the book Risalat ul-Aqidat ul-Wasatiyah by Ibn Taymiyyah who is considered by the Wahhabis to be worthy of attention. He writes:
  “Every night, when a part of it has passed, Our Lord comes and says: “Is there anyone who may make a request to Me so that I may grant his request? Is there anyone who may ask Me a question so that I may give him a reply? Is there anyone who may seek forgiveness so that l may forgive him.” Then Ibn Taymiyah writes: “This has, been agreed to unanimously.”
  In the same book he also writes:
  “People will be thrown into Hell continuously and Hell will say: “This is not sufficient. Throw more.” Then Allah will put His leg into the Hell and the Hell will say: “That will do. That will do.” Then he writes: “This has been agreed to unanimously.” (Author)
• 3. The position of the Messenger of Allah (S) is far higher than what we see in the most authentic history and hadith books of Ahl al-Sunna. These same calumnies are arrows in the quiver of the enemies of Islam that they continue to throw every now and then and keep on insulting Islam and the prophet. Some examples of calumnies are as follows:
  Narrated Abu Huraira: The prophet led us in the Zuhr prayer, offering only two raka’ats and then (ended it) with taslim, and went to a piece of wood in front of the mosque and placed his hand over it. Abu Bakr and Umar were also present among the people on that day but dared not talk to him (about his incomplete prayer). And the hasty people went away, wondering whether the prayer has been shortened. Among the people, there was a man whom the prophet used to call Dhul-Yadain (the long-armed). He said, “O Allah's Prophet! Have you forgotten or has the prayer been shortened?” The Prophet said, “Neither have I forgotten, nor has it been shortened.” They (the people) said, “Surely, you have forgotten, O Allah 's Apostle!” The Prophet said, “Dhul-Yadain has told the truth.”
  Narrated Hisham: The Prophet heard a man reciting the Qur’an in the mosque and said, “May Allah bestow His Mercy on him, as he has reminded me of such and such verses of such surah, which I missed (modifying the verses).
  (Sahih Bukhari, Kitab Fadhail al-Qur’an, Chap 33, Vol. 2, Pg. 193, published Bulaq, Egypt; Sahih Muslim, Kitab Salat ul-Musafireen, Baab al-Amr bi-Tahud ul-Qur’an)
  It is mentioned in Sahih Bukhari, KitAbu al-Idain and Sahih Muslim, Kitab Salat ul-Idain that Aisha says: It was the day of Eid, and the black people were playing with shields and spears; so, either I requested the Prophet (S), or he asked me whether I would like to watch the show. I replied in the affirmative. Then the Prophet (S) made me stand behind him and my cheek was touching his cheek and he was saying, “Carry on! O Bani Arfida,” till I got tired. The Prophet (S) asked me, “Are you satisfied (is that sufficient for you)?” I replied in the affirmative and he told me to leave.
  Narrated Ar-Rabi the daughter of Muawwidh Ibn Afra: After the consummation of my marriage, the Prophet came and sat on my bed as far from me as you are sitting now, and our little girls started beating the tambourines and reciting elegiac verses mourning my father who had been killed in the battle of Badr. One of them said, “Among us is a prophet who knows what will happen tomorrow.” On that the prophet said: “Leave this (saying) and keep on saying the verses which you had been saying before.” (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 7, Kitabun Nikah, Baab Zarab Daff)
  Narrated Abdullah Ibn Umar: One day when Zaid Ibn Amr Ibn Nufail passed by the Holy Prophet (S) and Zaid Ibn Haritha, the two of them were eating food. They invited Zaid also. Zaid said: O nephew, I do not eat anything which you slaughter in the name of your stone idols. I eat none but those things on which Allah’s name has been mentioned at the time of slaughtering.” Saeed says that after that the Holy Prophet (S) was never seen eating from that which had been sacrificed for the idols. (Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Vol. I, Tr. No. 1648; Majma az-Zawaid, Vol. 9, Pg. 417; Sahih Bukhari, Kitab Az-Zabahe, Baab Maa Zibha Alan Nasab was Asnaam, Vol. 3)
  Previously scholars used to read such calumnies, but now these things have come out from the pages of Sahih Bukhari, Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Majma az-Zawaid, Seerah Ibn Hisham and Seerah Ibn Ishaq and presented in Ridha’ Aslan's book, No God but God, which is published in various languages and circulated all over the world and even laymen are reading such things:
  It was, the chroniclers say, “one of the hot days of Mecca” when Muhammad and his childhood friend Ibn Haritha were returning from Taif, Muhammad accepted this explanation without comment and opened his bag of sacrificed meat. “Eat some of this food, O my uncle'', he said. But Zayd reacted with disgust, “Nephew, this is a part of those sacrifices of yours which you offer to your idols, is it not?” Muhammad answered that it was. Zayd became indignant. “I never eat of this sacrificial meat and I want nothing to do with them,” he cried: “I am not one to eat anything slaughtered for a deity other than God.”
  The notion that a young pagan Muhammad could have been scolded for his idolatry by a hanif flies in the face of traditional Muslim views regarding the Prophet's perpetual monotheistic integrity'. (Page 16).
• 4. Shaykh Abd ul-Qadir Gilani (470-561 A.H.), the follower of Shaykh Junaid Baghdadi in Gnosticism and Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal in jurisprudence, is also knovm as Ghaus ul-Aazam and Peeraane-e-Peer. He writes in his book, Ghaniyyatut Talibeen:
  “Shobi says that whoever loved Rawafid (Shi’as) loved the Jews because the Jews believe that imamate is restricted only to the Progeny of Dawood and the Rawafid say that imamate is peculiar only to the descendants of Ali Ibn Abi Talib (‘a). The Jews believe that jihad is prohibited till the advent of Masih Dajjal and the Rawafid also say that jihad is prohibited till there is a call from the sky announcing the advent of Mahdi.”
• 5. Because in 2007, Shi’as under the leadership of Sayyid Hasan Nasrullah inflicted a stunning defeat to Israel and won over the masses in the Islamic world and made them fearless of America and its ward, Israel, and gave confidence to the Palestinians?
• 6. Did not the Shi’a scholars and public participate in the campaign against the British and in the formation of India and Pakistan?
• 7. Al-Mazahab al-Islamiyyah from Abu Hurairah, Pg 155, 1st Edition.