Sabotage of islam
“O you who believe! Take not into intimacy those outside you ranks: they will not fail to corrupt you.  They only desire to ruin you.  Rank hatred has already appeared from their mouths: something far worse is hidden in their hearts.   We have made plain to you the signs, if you have wisdom.”
Ali-Imran 3:118

            We have described already the curtains which fell one by one in the past through so many centuries, in between human intellect and vision, and the Divine guidance.

            Historians are often astonished to note how the Arabs could reach the height of their glory in such a short span of time, fourteen centuries earlier.  But in fact there is nothing to be astonished about.  Their glory was the natural consequence of acting in the guidance provided by the Quran.  The most astonishing thing on the other hand is that which made the Muslim nation, after it reached the pinnacle of its glory by acting on the Quran and after it witnessed the results of such an action with its own eyes, decline in every sphere of life and ultimately fall into an abyss.   How did it happen that the veils of darkness mentioned above could manage to fall in between the light of the Quran and the followers of the Quran?  The story is most painful and hair-raising and is worth listening to with rapt attention.  It runs as follows: 

            When the forces which opposed the rising tide of Islam in the 7th century A.D. noticed that the uneducated, unskilled, undisciplined and most backward people of the world living on dates for their subsistence, had become the dominant power of the world within a very short period, they became jealous of this.  They simply could not bear the aliens treading on their territories and demolishing the structure of their ancient civilisations.  The superior nations of that period were the Romans and the Persians who comprise the intelligentsia of that age.  They were defeated and overrun by the Arabs who were far inferior to them in material resources.  When Hermazan, the defeated Persian Governor was produced before Hazrat Omar !11 Caliph of Islam), the latter asked him why the Persians were now suffering defeat after defeat at the hands of Arabs while previously they could beat them back easily in any encounter.  Hermazan replied that earlier the Persians had fought the Arabs alone but now they had to fight against the Arabs plus their God and it was not possible for them to defeat these two forces combined.  How true his answer was when we look at the Quranic verse:

“Truly God is with the believers.” Al-Anfall 8:19.

            The Persians were men of wisdom and insight,  they truly realised that Arabs would remain invincible in the battlefield so long as they were close followers of the Quran and that the only way to overpower them was to disassociate them from the guidance of the Quran and thus get them separated from their God.  This was an important turning point in the history of Islam, and thus cam in waves of conspiracies which entirely changed the very face of Islam in the years to follow.  All the basic concepts of the Quran on which the ‘Deen’ or social order established by Muhammad (peace be upon him), came into existence, were replaced, one by one, by ideas, beliefs and superstitions which were the outcome of human thinking.  Muslims in their era of glory and triumph conquered both Romans and Persians but whereas the Roman empire was partly conquered, the Persian empire was not entirely subjugated, but the edifice of its civilisation was completely razed to the ground.  It was only natural that they felt it deeply.

            A point worth considering in this respect is that in spite of the fact that the Persians and Romans were conquered by the Muslims, they were under no impulsion to embrace Islam.  However a large number of Persians voluntarily became Muslims.  For example when the Arabs conquered Quadsia, four thousand of the selected troops of Emperor Yazd Gard, known as ‘Jund Shah’ voluntarily embraced Islam after they became separated from the Persian army and they settled down in Kufa (Iraq) by permission of Saad bin Abi Waqas.  Similarly Siah, a distinguished officer of the Persian army who was entrusted with the task of defending against the Arab invasion by Emperor Yazd Gard, instead of putting up a defence, became a Muslim along with his troops.  They settled in Basr (Iraq).  Such people who embraced Islam included not only the common men but also of intellectuals of high calibre.   It is unjust to say that all such people came into the fold of Islam with a biased mind, not can the Persians of the following generations be made responsible for the acts of their non-Muslim ancestors: they are today as god Muslims as in any other part of the world.  But, as seen from the descriptions that follows, a good number of these converts entered Islam only to spread their own beliefs to which they steadfastly stuck after they outwardly became Muslims.  Arabs of that period were only simple-minded fighters and they were not able to follow the political intrigues of non-Arabs.  But even such Persians who joined Islam in good faith were no better than the Arab tribesmen about whom the Holy Quran has said:

“The Arabs say, ‘We believe.’  Say ‘you do not believe.’  But rather you ought to say ‘We have submitted (to the Islamic power).’  For belief has not yet entered your heart.” Al-Hujarat 49:14.

            What has been described above brings into focus a conspiracy with two different aspects.  One of them being to promote the political weakening of the Muslims’ rule and the other to bring about a change in the basic ideology of Islam.  The latter had such a tremendous effect on the Muslims’ belief and their way of thinking, that it entirely changed the Islam introduced by Muhammad, to the one prevalent today.  The Islam introduced by the Messenger was based on the authority of the Quranic fundamental principles.   On the other hand, the Islam born of conspiracies was based on the authority of un-Quranic ideas given in the man-made books of tradition and history.  The orthodox Muslims today do not hold the traditions subject to the Quranic teachings, rather they give first place to traditions and consider only that version of the interpretation of the Quran to be true which is supported by traditions and the so-called history of Islam.  And one must bear in mind that all such books whether of traditions or history were written by Persians.   Among the Sunni Muslims, there are six collections of Ahadis which are considered to be authentic.  Similarly the Shias have four such collections.  But all such collections whether of Shias or Sunnis, were composed by Persians.  Similarly the first book of the history of Islam was written by Imam Tabri who was also a Persian. 

            All such literature was produced nearly three hundred years after the death of Muhammad (pbuh).  It was not based on any written record but on stories carried verbally through the centuries.

            Taqiyya – as far as the reliability of the Ahadis collections of Shias concerned there is a particular aspect of it which is worth consideration.   Taqiyya is one of the accepted basis of Shia belief.  Let us see what Taqiyya is.  The most reliable book of Shia tradition entitled Asul-el-Kafi describes it as follows: Tradition – Hazrat Abu Jafar said- “Have good outward relations with your opponents but oppose them inwardly.”

            Tradition – Hazrat Abu Abdullah said, “The establishment of institution of ‘Immat’ does not mean merely to accept it and testify it, but also means that our affairs should be kept secret from those who do not belong to us.  Our Ahadis should not be related to them.  Convey our good wishes to our friends and say that we pray for the mercy of God for those who in the state of Taqiyya express their feelings of friendship to their opponents.”  He said “O Suleman! You belong to a religion in which God glorifies those who keep secrecy and bring degradation to those who expose their ideas.”  Hazrat Abu Abdullah further said – “O Moallah! Taqiyya is the religion of myself and of my ancestors.  Without Taqiyya there is no religion.” (Reference: Urdu translation of Asul-el-Kafi by Sayed Zafar Hussain pages 240-247.) 

            Tradition – Imam Jafar Sadiq asked a ‘Shia’ “If I relate a certain tradition this year and when I come back next year, I relate something against it, then which one of the two (traditions) will you follow?”  He replied, “the latter one.”  The Imam said “God bless you.”  It means that the first one was related on the basis of Taqiyya (Al-Shafi, Volume 1, page 73). 

            It can be easily inferred from the above that it is impossible to judge the authenticity of a Hadis in the Shia collections. 

            This is a true picture of the nature of the Hadis literature and yet nobody can dare challenge its sanctity as it forms the basis of Islam amongst the orthodox Muslims.  In fact the authority in Islam is that of the Quran which is self-explanatory.  Anything in the Hadis literature which is consistent with the Quran may be as reliable and anything which goes against the basic concepts of the Quran is surely untrue and unreliable.  Muhammad was the last messenger of God.  His companions were the true believers in God, in His Messenger and in His message which is contained within the Quran.  Anything which goes against the Quranic teachings and which reflects upon the character of Muhammad and his companions is false and forged.  Thus all that is inconsistent with the Quran, in Hadis literature and in Islamic history, is falsely attributed to the Messenger and his companions and is unreliable.  The description that follows makes it abundantly clear that the conspiracy of the non-Arabs against the Arab Muslims of that age which aimed at taking the latter away from the Quran, was most cleverly accomplished.

Issue of Caliphate

            The first mighty blow that shook the very foundation of Islam was the issue of Caliphate.  Earlier it was merely a political issue but later on it assumed the form of a religious issue, which seriously affected the solidarity of the Community and divided it into two permanent sects, so much so that there is no remedy in sight which is capable of healing this wound.  The true significance of Caliphate is evident in the following verse of the Quran:

“Muhammad is no more than a messenger of God.  Many were the messengers who passed away before him.  If he died or was slain will you then turn back on your heels?  If anyone did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to God.  But God (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude.” Ali-Imran 3:144.


            The above verse makes it clear that the organised way of life, introduced by Muhammad, was not limited to his person or to his lifetime.  Rather it was meant to be carried further after his death.  As the message of the Quran was complete and final and was meant to be followed by the future generations of mankind, the organisation set up by the last messenger of God was meant to maintained by successors.  This succession other Messenger, for the purpose of perpetuation of the organisation meant for the enforcement of the Divine laws, or to guide and channelise human affairs within limits of the fundamentals of the Quran is known as Khil’afat or Caliphate: and those who succeed the Messenger are known as Khul’afa (successors).  Caliphate was thus meant to put into practise God’s sovereignty in human affairs.  It was not kingship where one particular person is sovereign, nor was it like the modern democracy of western type where people are supposed to be sovereign.   A Khalifa or Caliph conducted human affairs by consultation but within limits of the Permanent Values provided by the Quran.   According to the Quran, those who do not conduct their affairs within the prescribed limits are not believers, such people follow their own desires:

“Those who do not judge according to what God has revealed are unbelievers.” Al-Maaida 5:47. 

again it is said:

“…So judge between them according to what God has revealed and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the finally established truth that has come to you…” Al-Maa’dia 5:48.

Thus the central organisations of Muslims is only an instrument for the enforcement of the divine laws.  This applies equally to the period when the Messenger himself administered the affairs of the Islamic State, as well as to the successive periods that followed after his death.  Thus the permanent factor in the functioning of an Islamic State is that its affairs are conducted within limitations of the divine laws which are immutable, although the personalities that control its affairs go on changing.

That is why the Quran said:

“…If he (the Messenger) dies, will you then turn back on your heel…” Ali-Imran 3:144. 

consequently an Islamic State is not run according to the whims and wishes of its administrators.Against the background described above, let us see what our Hadith literature and history tell us about the events of transfer of State administration from the Holy Messenger to his line of successors.  But prior to this it is important to focus our attention on the Quranic description of those who were the companions and the successors of the Messenger, and whose character he had moulded in a specific pattern.  They were a united body of righteous people, so much so that they were a source of strength to him.  They were men of such elevated stature that God has bracketed their strength with his own:

“…He it is Who has strengthened thee with His aid and with (the company) of believers.” Al-Anfaal 8:62. 

Their behaviour and way of life was exemplary and worthy of being followed by others:

“And one who follows the path other than that chosen by the believers.  We shall leave him in the path he has chosen and land him in hell – what an evil refuge.” Al-Nisa 4:115. 

The Quran calls them (the companions of the Messenger) ‘True Believers’ because they persistently strove in the cause of God and made all sorts of sacrifices, so much so that they had to leave their hearths and homes and migrate more suited for the establishment of social order based on the Divine laws.  Thus it is said:

“Those who believed and migrated, and strove for the cause of God, as well as those who gave (them) asylum and aid, are (all) believers in truth.   For them is the protection (of God) and a provision most generous and honourable.” Al-Anfaal 8:74. 

There can be no evidence greater than the evidence of the Quran, to show that the companions of the Messenger were men of firm belief in God and men of most exalted position, whose character was above reproach.  In the Quran they are given the glad tidings of a life of peace and plenty.

“The vanguard (of Islam), the first of those who migrated and those who gave them aid and also those who follow them in good deeds.  God is well pleased with them, as they are with Him: for them He has prepared gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein (for ever).  That is supreme felicity.” Al-Taubah 9:100.

The Quran has further given the true picture of the beauty of character of the companions of Muhammad when it is said:

“Muhammad the messenger of God: and his companions are strong and firm (like a rock) against the unbelievers (but) mild and compassionate among themselves.   You will see them bow and prostrate themselves before God seeking grace from God and His pleasure. This is the similitude in the Taur’at: and their similitude in the Gospel is like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick and it stands on its own (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight.  As a result it fills the unbelievers with rage at them.  God has promised protection and good reward to those who believe and perform deeds consistent with the divine laws.” Al-Fatth 48:29.

The Quran states further another aspect of the character of the companions of Muhammad:

“And He has put affection between their hearts.  If you had spent all that is on the earth, you could not have produced that affection, but God has done it, as His power and Wisdom are boundless.” Al-Anfaal 8:63.

This description is a true picture of the deeds, character and behaviour with one another of the companions of Muhammad as it appears in the Quran.   Now let us see what history tells us about this distinguished vanguard of Islam – Bukhari the book of Hadith literature, which is considered by orthodox Muslims to be the most true book after the Quran, and which describes the events of the death of Muhammad as follows:

Tradition – When Muhammad was on his death bed, Abbas bin Abdul Mattlab (his uncle) consulted Hazrat Ali (his son-in-law) saying that they should go and seek the opinion of the Messenger as to who should succeed him after his death; whether his successor should be from among his relatives or from amongst other people? Hazrat Ali: “Do you think there can be some aspirants for succession other than we people?” Abbas: “There must be.”  On this Hazrat Ali expressed his apprehension as follows: “If the Messenger gave his verdict against us, then we shall never be in a position to hold the reign of power.  Thus it is not advisable to consult the Messenger about it.”

One can well imagine from the above description that the companions of the Messenger, the illustrious sons of Islam and the lovers of the Quran are shown here to be ignorant of the fact that caliphate was not a personal concern of individuals and that it could not be transferred from one person to another according to their whims and wishes.  They are shown here to be neglecting the Quranic principle of ‘consultation’ for such an important transfer of  caliphate.  They are depicted here as men full of greed and lust for power.  Difference of opinion could arise amongst the companions of the Messenger, because they were after all human beings.  But it is not acceptable that they could so far as to ignore the basic principles of the Quran.

The holy Messenger from his deathbed made no declaration regarding the succession or Khil’afat because the matter was to be decided by mutual consultation amongst his followers.   If he had decided the issue himself, it would have been a tradition among the Muslims for all time to come.  As the matter was of great National importance and the central authority of the Community was to be appointed without delay, it was important to settle the issue even before the dead body of the Holy Messenger was buried.  As related in books of history the Ans’ars, on this occasion, called a meeting of their own, separately from the Muh’ajirs, for the purpose of nominating Sa’ad bin Abaida as the Caliph.  In the meantime, the Muh’ajirs including Hazrat Abu Bakr and others arrived.  What is alleged to have transpired in that meeting is as follows: Hab’ab bin Manzar (one of the Ans’ars) said in his speech, “O Ans’ars! Keep the leadership in your hands so that the people may remain obedient to you, so that nobody may dare to raise his voice against you or differ from your opinion.  You are wealthy and respectable people.  You are superior in number and experience, you are brave.  People are looking towards you.  So do not spoil your case by differing among yourselves.  These people (the Muh’ajirs) are bound to accept what you say.  The maximum concession we can give them is that there shall be one Ameer from amongst us (Ans’ars) and one from amongst them.” (Abu Bakr Siddiq by Muhammad Hussain Haikal, page 107)   This passage from history depicts the character of the Ans’ars, now let us see how it describes the behaviour of the Muh’ajirs.

In reply to the above said speech, Hazrat Omar said, “Two swords cannot be placed in one sheath.   By God, we shall never agree to your leadership because the Messenger was not amongst your people.  But we shall have no objection if the leadership remains with the people to whom the Messenger belonged.  If any section of the Arabs shall refuse leadership and caliphate to us, we shall bring forth our open and decisive arguments against them.  Who can quarrel with us, in the matter of the succession of the Messenger, as we were so close to him in relation, as well as sacrifice?  Only he could quarrel with us in this matter who is a follower of falsehood, full of sins and is prepared to fall into the pit of destruction.” (Abu Bakr Siddiq by Haikal page 108.)

In reply to the above Habab bin Manzar replied, “O Ans’ars! Have courage.  Do not listen to what Omar and his companions say.  If you show weakness at this stage, they shall usurp your share of power.  If they go against you, turn them out of your country and get hold of the reigns of power.  By God, you are the rightful successors.  The glory of Islam came with your swords and you are the source of its present status.  You gave refuge to Islam and are its back.  If you wish, you can reverse its glory.”  Hazrat Omar said in reply, “God will perish you Habab.  Not we.  God will perish you.” (Abu Bakr Siddiq by Haikal pages 108-109.)

This is what history tells us about those who, as stated earlier, are described by the Quran as follows:

“And He has put affection between their hearts.  If you had spent all that is on the earth you could not have produced that affection but God has done it.” AL-Anfaal 8:63.  And about whom it is also said, “They were strong and firm like a rock against the unbelievers, but mild and compassionate amongst each other.” Al-Fatth 48:29.

Again we find here that history has put the same argument in the mouth of Hzrat Omar, as was done in the case of Ali, when the Messenger was on his death bed.  As a matter of fact it is not merely a historical description, it is rather a conspiracy against the Quranic teachings.  It does not stop here, it goes still further, when through another forged Hadith, it tries to involve the Messenger himself in the issue.

Tradition – When the quarrel between the Muh’ajirs and the Ans’ars took a serious turn, Hazrat Abu Bakr (the first Caliph) rose up and said, “The claim of the Ans’ars is baseless.  The Messenger had decided during his lifetime that the leadership shall remain with the Quraish.”  This Hadith is certainly a forged one.

Just imagine if it could be possible that the Messenger had uttered these words, the same Messenger who spent his whole life in putting into practice the Quranic fundamental principle that there is no distinction between on man and the other, based on race and colour, that all human beings are equal and worthy of respect by birth and that the superiority of one man over the other is based only on his being nearer to the divine laws.  This one hadith described above also states that there was a rough handling of each other, between the parties concerned, on this issue.

As we know, Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq was the first caliph who succeeded the Messenger.  History describes the reaction of Hazrat Ali, on Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq becoming the caliph, as follows: Some people from among the Muh’ajirs and Ans’ars were not present when Abu Bakr Siddiq took ‘bai’at’ after he was elected as caliph.  These people were inclined towards Hazrat Ali.  Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq consulted Hazrat Omar and Abu Abaida bin Jarah, Mughira bin Shoeb about it.  They advised Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq to take Hazrat Abbas (uncle of Messenger and of Hazrat Ali) into confidence and have his share in the Khil’afat.   This was a plan to create a rift between Abbas and Ali (both relatives of the Messenger).  This, they said, shall prove useful for you (Abu Bakr) against Ali.  Accordingly Hzrat Abu Bakr met Abbas who rejected the offer on the ground that he could not accept an incomplete Khil’afat (Haikal page 119).  Later on the followers of Hazrat Ali took ‘bai’at’ with Hazrat Abu Bakr, except Hazrat Ali himself who did not do so for 6-7 months.   But he also agreed later, after the death of Hazrat Fatima.

There are several other Ahadis which describe the conflict between Abu Bakr and Ali, but one from Bukhari is worth mentioning.  Tradition – “Hazrat Fatima (daughter of the Messenger and wife of Ali) remained alive for 6 months after the death of the Messenger.  When she died Hazrat Ali quietly buried her during the night and did not inform Abu Bakr Siddiq about her death.  As long as Hazrat Fatima lived, Hazrat Ali was greatly respected, but after her death Ali felt a change in the behaviour of the people around him.  Then he resolved to accept the ‘bai’at’ of Abu Bakr.  Thus Hazrat Ali sent a message to Abu Bakr asking Abu Bakr to come and see him personally but not accompanied by Omar.  Hazrat Omar, on the other hand, foresaw danger and did not wish Abu Bakr to go alone.  However, Abu Bakr was bent upon meeting Ali and thus went to see him without company.  In the above mentioned meeting Ali said, “We realise your personal superiority and all that God has bestowed on you.  We are not jealous of the greatness which God has given you.  But we do feel that being the near relative of the Messenger, we are rightful successors to Khil’afat and that our right has been usurped by tyranny and oppression.”  After the mid-day prayers Abu Bakr first addressed the audience and explained the reason for the late acceptance of Abu Bakr’s Khilafat by Ali.  Then Ali addressed the gathering and explained his point of view.”  This Hadith, if accepted to be true, is a slur on the character of the companions of the Messenger.  As a matter of fact such Ahadis are forged ones.  These are the outcomes of a conspiracy that was hatched at a time when Khil’afat had changed into Kingship.  Imam Bukhari died in 256 A.H. and Imam Tabri died in 311 A.H. during the Abbasid reign.

The reason for our belief in such like Ahadis being forged ones, is that the character of the companions of the Messenger that is depicted therein is against the Quranic version which described them as “True Believers.”  How is it possible that the people who were so highly praised by God Himself descended to such a low level after the death of the Messenger?  Surely the revealed message of God is reliable and not man-made history.   The companions of the Messenger were given training by the Messenger himself and they had a deep insight into the teachings of the Quran.  They were a highly disciplined people.  They had no self interest in the caliphate.  They were not Kings.  They only considered themselves to be an instrument for the enforcement of divine laws.  They never went after any personal gain.  Rather they sacrificed their material possessions for the sake of their faith.  They lived the life of an ordinary man in the street.  Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq, after he became Caliph, continued to earn his livelihood by selling cloth.  There was a suggestion about giving him a maintenance allowance, so that he may be able to devote maximum time to State affairs.  He was asked by his cabinet as to what remuneration he would accept as the Head of State.  His reply was that he would accept the minimum wage given to a labourer in the state.  When asked to accept more, he replied, “I shall try to raise the standard of living of the labourers, so that I may be in a position to get more.”  This was the standard of justice and equality of man that the companions of the Messenger believed in and acted upon.

As regards the standards of discipline they maintained, it is sufficient to quote the following 0 During his lifetime, the Messenger had raised a contingent of the army to fight against the Romans and Os’ama son of Zaid bin H’arith (Zaid was a slave who was set free by the Messenger) was appointed its commander.  It was after the death of the Messenger when Abu Bakr Siddiq took up the first caliph, that the army contingent was mobilised.  The Caliph desired to keep back Omar for consultations.  As a Caliph, Abu Bakr Siddiq was the supreme authority of the State and he could have easily ordered Omar to stay behind.  But as Os’ama was the commander of the force the Caliph did not interfere.  Rather he requested Os’ama to leave Omar behind for his help, if he could so.  Os’ama accepted it with pleasure.

Under the circumstances that prevailed at the time with the highest degree of discipline maintained by the companions of the Messenger, with their thoughts and actions having been moulded in the pattern provided to them by the Messenger himself and with their firm belief and deep insight into the Quranic teachings, there is no reason to disbelieve that Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq took over the reigns of caliphate in an atmosphere of peace, tranquillity and mutual understanding: and that all sorts of cock and bull stories  about the quarrelsome behaviour of the companions of the Messenger are nothing but a conspiracy against the believers and the Quran itself.

Hazrat Omar succeeded Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq as the second caliph.  Abu Bakr Siddiq had the issue of succession after him decided during his lifetime, just before his death.  In modern times the question of succession is not a difficult problem in the presence of ready-made constitutions.  But in the past ages when there was no such constitutions it was advisable to have the question of succession decided in the presence of an existing head of state.

The Quran has commanded to settle the state affairs by mutual consultations and has given this fundamental principle, but has not prescribed the machinery for putting it into practice.   It is left to the discretion of the succeeding Muslim generations to devise ways and means for consultation so as to make it compatible with the changing circumstances and needs of the times. This way of life prescribed by the Quran is a beautiful combination of permanence and change, its fundamental principles being permanent, and the means to put them into practice being changeable with the change of time and circumstances.  The Holy Messenger did not touch on the issue of succession during his lifetime.  There was a reason for this, because in view of the respect and highest esteem in which he was held by his companions, even his slightest inclination towards anybody would have amounted to the nomination of his successor, and thus the process of nomination would have taken the form of tradition amongst the succeeding generations of Muslims.  Abu Bakr Siddiq, on the other hand, gathered men of wisdom available in Medina and with their consent and consultation decided on Hazrat Omar to be his successor.

Inheritance of Caliphate by Descent

How the above said events described in history and in Ahadis are connected with the conspiracy hatched by the Persian intelligentsia shall be explained in the following pages.   But let us note at this juncture that the conspiracy did not stop here.  It took still deeper roots.  The inheritance of caliphate in the line of descent of the Messenger was made an important issue, in order to create a rift among Muslims.  Thus Ibn Jurair Tabri described in his history , the event of Hazrat Osman succeeding Hazrat Omar as caliph, in the following words –

When Hazrat Osman was elected as caliph, Hazrat Ali turned his face to the other side and went away.   But when Abdur Rahman bin ‘Auf objected to it he came back and took ‘bai’at’ at the hand of Osm’an, but uttered at the same time, “It was fraud, it is a big fraud.” (Tabri Vol.IV.)

Hazrat Ali Said again, “After the death of the Messenger, all the three Caliphs usurped his right of succession to caliphate which was his due, by inheritance.” (Re: Nehjul Balagha – a book which is supposed to be a collection of Hazrat Ali’s addresses.) 

The question of succession of caliphate by inheritance was made further complicated in these books.   It is said that Banu Abbas claimed their own right of succession based on inheritance; on the plea that on the death of the Messenger, Abbas was alive and that he being the uncle of the Messenger, had a prior right than Hazrat Ali who was only his son-in-law and a cousin (Ali being the son of Abu Talib, the second uncle of the Messenger).  Thus the issue was a political one or rather a dispute between two claimants belonging to the same family.  But it was give a religious turn which was more dangerous.  Let us see hoe it happened.  There was a belief among the Persians that kings were super-men and that they possessed divine attributes, that they were the shadow of God on the earth, that they were infallible, that to rule was their inherent right which passes on automatically from one generation to another.   Abdulla Ibn Saba was a Jew from Yemen which in those days was an occupied territory of Persians who lived there in large numbers and influenced the ideas of the local population.  Abdulla Ibn Saba apparently became Muslim at Medina.  In due course he became acquainted with the secrets of the state.  Later on, he shifted to Kufa where he organised a centre for conspiring against Islam.  Another story runs that he remained in Madyan (Persia) for some time, then he left for Egypt from where he started spreading his net of conspiracies.  He gave publicity to a belief, similar to the one already prevalent among the Christians, that “Jesus Christ shall return to the earth once again.”  Abdulla Ibn Saba began to spread the idea that Muhammad shall also come back again on the earth.  This idea could not gain ground amongst the Muslims but instead the belief of “return to Shia Divines” took root among the Shias.

Wasi – History tells us that Abdulla also spread yet another belief, that every messenger of God appoints a Wasi or Khalifa.  It means that he leaves a will that after his death so and so shall succeed him.  Accordingly, he said that Hazrat Ali was the “‘Wasi’ of Muhammad,” thus he (Ali) ought to have succeeded him as Caliph. This gave rise to beliefs among the Muslims similar to those of the Persians about their Kings.  Now the term Im’amat came to be used instead of the term ‘Khilafat’ and the idea began to gain popularity that Im’amat is not a thing which could be left for the people to decide; that is a basic pillar of Islam; that it does not benefit a messenger of God to leave the succession for the people to decide, that he must appoint an Im’am before his death, because it has been commanded by God. Accordingly, they said Muhammad left his will for Ali to be his successor.  Hence Hazrat Ali is called “Wasi al Rasool” by the Sias (the one for who the Messenger left his will).  The innovation does not stop here and goes on to say that every Im’am also leaves a will for the appointment of his successor and that his will left under the divine command.  Accordingly an Im’am is appointed by God Himself and is therefore infallible.  Anybody who acts against him is an usurper.  Thus Im’amat is the right of Hazrat Ali and his line of descent.  Sunni Muslims, however, do not accept this belief of the appointment of an Im’am by God himself.  But this being among the Shias, they consider Sunnis to be outside the pale of Islam.  The natural consequence of this belief was the bifurcation of the Community into two permanent sects.  Haikal in his book entitled “Omar Farroq-e-Azam (Urdu translation page 419), has quoted a passage from Historians History of the World,” published by the Publishers of Encyclopaedia Britannica, which runs as follows:- “The Persians believed their kings as the sons of God and sacred personalities by birth.  Thus when the Persians rebelled against the governments of Medina and Damascus, they gathered around Ali the cousin of Muhammad who they said was his legal successor, but was kept away from Khil’afat, and gave him the dignity and sacredness which their ancestors used to give to their Kings.  Moreover like their ancestors, who used to call (a Persian King) the ‘sacred sons of heaven’ and ‘Sacred King,’ and in their books used to write of him ‘a leader and a guide,’ they gave Ali the title of Im’am, which in spite of being a simple term is very meaningful.”  The matter does not stop here.  In order to maintain a rift in the Muslim community, the Persians gathered round Im’am Hasan and Im’am Hussain, the sons of Hazrat Ali and in turn around their descendants.   There is also a story about the marriage of the daughter of the last ruler of Akass ban Sasan, with the Im’am Hussain which runs as follows –  

“When Arabs conquered Persia, three daughters of Yazd Gard, the Emperor of Persia, were captured by them.  Hazrat Omar, who was the Caliph at the time, ordered their open sale.  But Hazrat Ali advised a better treatment for them, on account of their high descent and suggested that he fix their price and hand them over to respectable people.  Thus Hazrat Ali took charge of them and handed over one of the three to Hazrat Im’am  Hussain, one to Muhammad bin Abu Bakr and one to Abdulla bin Omar.   The girl who came to the lot of Im’am Hussain came to be known as Shehr Bano.”

The story appears to have been forged in order to win favour with the Shias and is untrue on account of the following reasons:

1.                   About the prisoners of war there is a clear injunction in the Quran that they should be released either on payment of a ransom or as an act of generosity.   The Quran closed the doors of slavery for good when it was said: “When you have thoroughly subdued them (the prisoners of war) bind a bond firmly (on them) either generosity or ransom.” Muhammad 47:4 

Thus all such Ahadis relating to the prisoners of war having been made slaves are untrue, in the face of the above Quranic injunction.  If such a thing could actually happen, most of the Arab population would have been slaves by now.  In fact Hazrat Omar, the caliph, always insisted on the release of the prisoners of war.

2.                   During the above conquest when Hazrat Sa’ad entered Madyan, the city had already been vacated and Emperor Yzad Gard had already fled along with his family.  So the question of the captivity of Yazd Gard’s daughters during the Madyan campaign and thereafter does not arise.  The only occasion when the family of Yazd Gard could have been captured was at the time of his assassination, but this took place in the year 30A.H. during the caliphate of Hazrat Osm’am.

3.                   Hazrat Imam Hussain was born in the year 5A.H. and Madyan was conquered in the year 16 A.H. when the Imam was only eleven years old.  It is unimaginable that he could be married to a slave girl at that tender age.

4.                   Yazd Gard ascended his throne in 13A.H at the age of 18 years, at about the same time Hazrat Omar took over the caliphate.  Madyan was conquered in 16A.H. when Yazd Gard was at the most 21 years of age.  It is not possible that at the age of 21 he had three daughters of marriageable age.

Thus the story is obviously a forged one.  There is yet another story which runs as follows – When Shehr Bano was handed over to Hazrat Im’am Hussain, the caliph Hazrat Omar said to him, “O Abu Abdullah, your son shall be born to her who shall be a most respectable person on the face of the earth, because he shall be the best Arab, on account of being a H’ashmi, and the best of non-Arabs, on account of being a Persian.”  The story clearly smells as one of Persian origin.  Many such stories were invented to prove the superiority of the Persians over the Arabs.  Some of them are in connection with the personality of Salman Farsi, who was a Persian who embraced Islam.  His age-span has been described by certain people as ranging between 250 to 600 years.

It is said he lived as early as the companions of Jesus Christ and continued to live until the lifetime of Muhammad.  A Jew travelling towards Medina captured him.  After the Messenger migrated to medina, Salman embraced Islam and he was freed from slavery.  Stories spread by Persians about Salman make interesting reading: There is a verse in the Quran that the message of Muhammad is not confined to the people of his age, it is meant equally for all the future generations of mankind not in personal contact with him:

“(Muhammad is a messenger of God for the people of his age) as well as for others who have not already joined them”).  Al-Jumu’ah 62:3.

The story goes that when the companions of the Messenger asked him who this verse applied to, the Messenger pointed towards Salman Farsi who was sitting down beside him and said “the people of his nation.”  There is another verse in the holy Quran:

“If you turn you back, HE will substitute in your stead another people and they would not be like you.” Muhammad 47:38.

 The verse refers to the rise and fall of nations.  It is a generalised statement that whichever nation bases its social order on the divine fundamentals it is sure to survive, and the one that turns away from this path is replaced by a better one.  It is stated in Jami’a Tirmazi that people asked the Messenger ‘which nation shall follow us, if we turn back?’  The Messenger patted the back of Salman Farsi and said ‘His nation, his nation.’  Such stories were invented by the Persians to impress upon the Arabs their national superiority and to pave the way for the smooth running of their intellectual onslaught.

Another Conspiracy

 There is yet another conspiracy hatched by the Persians, with the object of creating disruption in the Islamic state of that age.  It is a story of the transfer of power from Bani Omayya to Bani Abbas bringing ultimately the end of the Islamic state with the fall of Baghdad.  During the caliphate of Hazrat Ali the Islamic state became divided into two parts.   One part was governed by Ameer Mu’awya, with its capital at Damascus (Syria).  Im’am Hasan son of Hazrat Ali succeeded his father after his death but he resigned in favour of Ameer Mu’away who thus became the sole ruler of the Islamic state.  Caliphate thus transferred to Bani Umayya.  Part played by Persians to overthrow Bani Omayya – It may be pointed out that Bani Umayya and Bani Abbas had a common line of descent.

 When Bani Omayya took over caliphate, Bani Abbas became jealous of them.  The Persians exploited the situation and used Bani Abbas as an effective instrument to overthrow the reign of Bani Omayya.  Abu Muslim Khur’asani (a Persian) was the man who vehemently supported the propaganda in favour of Bani Abbas.  To win over the people, Bu Muslim used the same old tactics that caliphate is the right of Ahle bai’at (family of Muhammad). 

Actually the progeny of Hazrat Fatima (the wife of Ali and daughter of Muhammad) are known as Ahle bai’at or family of the Messenger (whose male issue did not survive).  Bani Abbas on the other hand were the only descendents of Hazrat Abbas, one of the uncles of Muhammad.  Being inspired by the propaganda of Abu Muslim, the Abbasids took over the plea that an uncle had a better right of inheritance to Muhammad  that Ahle bai’at.  They argued that Abbas was the uncle of Muhammad and Ali was his cousin (son of the other uncle named Abu Talib who died earlier than Muhammad) and that an uncle had a better right of succession than a cousin.  However the name of Bani Abbas held no attraction for the people who considered the progeny  of Hazrat Ali and Hazrat Fatima as the real Ahle bai’at.   Abu Muslim was a genius and a highly skilled person in the art of intrigue.  He was born in Isfahan (Persia) and bred in Kufa (Iraq).  Ibrahim son of Muhammad Abbas, having realised his intellectual capacity, put him in charge of the propaganda machinery.  Abu Muslim made Khurasan his centre and without giving publicity to any one person, successfully carried out the campaign against Bani Omayya.  Incidentally, in those days the idea of Im’am Mehsi (the idea of return of an Im’am from hiding), was in vogue.  Anu Muslim gave publicity to the fact that Im’am Mehdi would soon be coming from the Khurasan side and that his army would be clad in black uniforms and its flag would also be black.  When the propaganda reached its pitch, he himself came out of Khurasan with a black army and black flag, attacked Bani Omayya and defeated them.  The Abbasids, after they took the reigns of power, became apprehensive of Abu Muslim’s intellect, intriguing qualities and influence, and killed him.

In the meantime Ahle bai’it themselves had several conflicts with Bani Omayya, such as the tragedy of Karbala in 61A/H., the rising of Zaid son of Im’am Zainal-Abedeen against Bani Omayya in 122A.H, and the rising of Yahya son of Zaid in 126A.H.  But these were all unsuccessful attempts.  After the Abbasids took over caliphate, Ahle bai’it became highly sensitive to the fact that the Abbasids used their name for the purpose of gaining power.  Thus a period of conflict and bloodshed followed between the parties, each claiming a right of succession to the Messenger, on the basis of relationship.  Abu Muslim Khurasani, who came out with the idea of the revival of the Persian Empire from the back door, could not succeed, as he was assassinated, but he left intrigues and divisions amongst the Muslims, as well as sowing the seeds of un-Quranic ideas about the succession of caliphate. 

Bramaka – This was followed by yet ANOTHER CONSPIRACY.  A seditious Persian family won the friendship of the Abbasid caliphs, and took over key posts in the administration of the state, but with ulterior motives.  This family was known as Bramaka.  The word Bramaka means the High Priest of the biggest fire worship temple of Persia.  The Bramakas failed in their mission which was meant to revive the Persian Empire, but on the other hand they achieved tremendous success in their sinister plan of changing the very face of Islam.   On account of their influence in the Abbasid caliphate, the Islamic, as well as the Arabic, way of life assumed an entirely disfigured countenance, for all time to come.  Jamasap, the ancestor of the Bramaka family, had held high positions in the Persian Empire, such as the Chief Justice and the Prime Minister etc.  He was related to Zardasht, the prophet of Persia.  Khalid Bramaka was the person who, to begin with held high position in the Abbasid Caliphate.  How he could manage to do so is a matter not related to our discussion.  He gained influence during the reign of the first Abbasid Caliph, Muhammad bin Ali, known as Saffah.  Khalid Bramaka held a highly influential post, as well as having deep friendly relations with the family of the Caliph.  He was later appointed governor of Faras.  Yahya son of Khalid was even more clever than Khalid and had a great mental acumen.  Caliph Mansoor made him the governor of Azar Baijan.  But Khalid sought for his son a rather more important and effective post, from his own point of view and that was the post of tutor to Haroon Rashid, the heir of Caliph Mansoor.  This post provided Bramaka with a much greater influence in the state and the post became more or less hereditary in the family.  Fazal and J’afar, the sons of Yahya, were even more intelligent than their father and grandfather.   During the caliphate of Haroon Rashid, the affairs of the state were more or less entirely in the hands of Yahya who ran the administration with the help of his sons Fazal and J’afar.  The result was that in actual practice the state was run by the Bramaka family, in the name of the caliph.  They used this golden opportunity to gave a Persian colour to the Islamic state and accomplished this task cleverly and successfully.  Yahya founded an institution known as Baitul-Hikmat (the home of wisdom).  He had a substantial part of Persian literature interpreted into Arabic and arranged functions and seminars of high academic standard.  In the theological controversies which took place at these functions, the Persians, Jews and Christians formed one party and Muslim religious leaders the other party, and the subjects of discussion were the Islamic beliefs and ideals.  The Arabs were simple minded men of action who never came into contact with the philosophical controversies in which the Persians were for a long time well-versed.  The Jews and Christians also  had sound knowledge of Persian philosophy.  Thus it was difficult for Arabs to compete with them.  As a result of these debates, doubts began to arise in the minds of common men regarding the Islamic beliefs and ideals, as the non-Arab ideals appeared to be more sound.  Moreover the finance of the state were under the control of Bramaka who distributed handsome rewards to Jewish and Christian debaters.

Before we discuss the details of how the Quranic Islam turned into and un’Quranic one, let us first see the extent of Bramaka’s influence in the Abbasid state.  Yahya had a number of sons and daughters, amongst who Fazal and J’afar were well learned.  Their closeness to the family of the caliph can be judged from the fact that Fasal and Haroon Rashid were both breast fed by the mother of the latter.  Thus when Haroon Rashid took over the reigns of power, he appointed Fazal to posts of the highest responsibility.  But the Bramak, as we have learnt, had their own plans.  Just as Khalid had his son Yahya appointed as tutor to Haroon Rashid, Yahya arranged to keep his son Fazal inside the palace.  J’afar on the other hand was put in charge of state affairs.  Thus the main arteries of the state both inside and outside the palace were under the control of these two brothers: and the age old experience of their father Yahya was a guiding force behind them.  But, as often happens, they became power-crazy after gaining full control of the state machinery and became less careful in the execution of their nefarious designs.  Caliph Haroon Rashid got an inkling of their wickedness, which gradually became more and more manifest.  Wherever the caliph went on tour inside the country, he could clearly notice that the Bramaka were the actual rulers and that his own influence was waning.  This startled him and he had J’afar assassinated, and imprisoned Yahya and Fazal, giving them terrible punishments.  All their properties were confiscated.

The Effects of Persian Influence on the Abbasid Caliphate and Its Ultimate End

The Bramaka were thus finished before they could achieve their ultimate goal of the revival of the Persian empire.  But, on the other hand, they achieved full benefit from their position and influence in giving the Arab state a Persian colour, and in metamorphosing the Quranic Islam brought by Muhammad into an alien Islam, the edifice of which was raised on man-made foundations.  Thus the Islam which followed later was an Ajmi or non-Arab Islam which continues to this day.  As stated earlier, Abu Muslim was the first Muslim was the first link in this chain of conspirators.  He enrolled Persians in the Arab army and thus made even the defence force of the Abbasids non-Arabs.  Khalid also joined the Arab army through Abu Muslim and, after taking a firm foothold, gradually ascended to high positions in the civil administration.  Fazal Bramaka, during the period of his ministership, enrolled exclusively Persian soldiers in the province of Khurasan and they were no less than half a million in number. Moreover all the key posts in the civil administration were allotted to Bramaka.  The finance of the state was entirely under their control, so much so that Caliph Haroon Rashid had to get their sanction to spend even petty sums.  When Im’am Muhammad bin Ali Abbas died, Abu Muslim, in order to commemorate his death, changed the colour of the army uniforms to black and even the Abbasid  state were enclosed in black covers.  Not only that, but even the colour of the people’s dress was changed to black.  Thus Abu Muslim was the person who changed the outward appearance of the Abbasids, but Bramaka changed their thinking, customs and their way of living.  During the period of ministership of Khalid, the Persian Nauroz festival came to be observed in the Abbasid state for the first time, and from then one became a permanent feature: and J’afar Bramaka in turn made popular the observance of Jashane Mehar Jan, another Persian festival.  The Nauroz festival is still observed in present day Muslim Iran and the observance of the festival of Shab-e-Barat in the present-day Muslim world, with all its firework festivities, is also a relic of the old Persian traditions.

Some people think that the Bramaka were shias, but actually they were neither shias nor sunnis.   Their beliefs, ideals and practices were entirely saturated with Zoroastrianism.

Abu Muslim Khurasni and Bramaka were left no more, but the seed they had sown on the soil of Islam continued to flourish, as a result of which the central authority of the Abbasid state became weaker and the provinces became stronger, day by day.  For instance, Dyalam (a part of Persia) was conquered by Arabs during the caliphate of Hazrat Omar.  The inhabitants of this place stuck to their old religion bit later converted to Islam.  Bawaya Dalmi was a politically active person.  He, along with his sons, first established his own kingdom in different provinces of Persia, then gradually added to it certain parts of Iraq and ultimately invaded and entered Baghdad in 334A.H.  By that  time the Abbasid Caliphate had steeply declined to such an extent that Caliph Muktafi welcomed the invaders and recognised their rule.  The caliphs from then on were only religious chiefs whose name was recited in the prayer congregations.   Caliph Muktafi was assassinated only forty days later.

Bani Bawaya were shias.  Their reign lasted till 447A.H. when Slojka replaced them.  For the next 60 years, the name of the Abbasid caliphs still continued to be recited in Jum’aa prayers.  Ultimately Halaku Khan, son of Changez Khan, took the reigns of power.  Abu al Qami was the minister of the then caliph of Baghdad.  He was Ghali Shia (it shall be described later what the significance of being a Ghali Shia is).  On the other hand Nasiruddin Toosi, a minister of Halaku Khan, was also a Ghali Shia.  These two were in league with Halaku Khan and their intrigues resulted in the assassination of Caliph Mustasam which brought to an end the Abbasid Caliphate in 656A.H.

The Persians thus ultimately took revenge for their defeat at the hands of the Arabs in the battle of Q’adsia.  These are not mere conjectures.  Persians themselves accepted this view.  Hussaon Kazimzada is a famous present-day historian pf Iran.  In his book entitled “Tajalliyat-e-Ruh-e-Iran dar Ardwar-e-Tareekhi” he relates as follows: “When Sa’ad bin abi Wqas, as a representative of the second Caliph (Hazrat Omar) conquered Iran, the Iranians since then had nurtured feelings of jealousy and revenge within themselves, which were expressed off and on in different forms, until they completely surfaced with the foundation of the Shia sect.  The well informed people know very well and agree that in the foundation and appearance of Shiaism, in addition to the ideological differences, there is also a political element.  Iranians could neither forget nor forgive that a handful of barefoot desert people of Arabia conquered their ancient kingdom, looted its treasures and killed so many innocent people.”

The same historian writes further: “Ours sane ancestors had neither any love for Bani Fatima (the descendants of the daughter of Muhammad) nor any enmity against Bani Omayya.  Their only goal was to overthrow the Arab rule somehow or other, and thereby revive their ancient kingdom and glory.  Because the Hashamite caliphate came to an end after the death of Hazrat Ali and the caliphate of Bani Omayya, a pure Arabian power took its place and became recognised as the central authority of Islam, the non_arabs thus became completely dominated by the Arabs.  Then the only course left for them was to come to the aid of the Hashamites and instigate them to rise against the ruling power.  This is what our ancestors did.”

Thus in the words of Kazimzada, when the Persians brought about the end of Bani Omayya’s caliphate with the aid of the Hasamites, and Abbasids who were Hashamites took their place, they (Persians) sent for Halakoo Khan to put an end to the Arab rule.      

Revenge Against Islam 

But the above mentioned revenge was against the Arab Muslims.  We now come to the revenge which Persians took against Islam, which had eclipsed their ancient religion of Zoroastrianism.

Before we begin this description, let us recall some of the basic concepts of Islam given to us by the Messenger, and which are contained in the Quran:

1.                   Man gains knowledge through his eyes and ears, known as perceptual knowledge.  Every human being can get it by his own efforts, by means of reading, hearing, observation and experience.

2.                   But there was another source of knowledge which was transmitted directly from God Almighty to certain selected individuals who served as the carriers of divine message to the common man.  This source of knowledge as described earlier, is known as revelation (wahi).

3.                   The messengers of God who carried the divine message from time to time were known as Nabees or the recipients of the message, as well as Messengers or deliverers of the message: Nubuwwat and Risalat thus being two faces of the same coin.   This source of knowledge ended with Muhammad (pbuh) the last Messenger of God, and thereafter perceptual knowledge remained the only source of human information, for all time to come: which means the doors of direct transmission of knowledge from God to man became closed forever.

4.                   The Divine message brought by Muhammad (pbuh), which is a complete code of life for all future generations of mankind, now lies safely inside the Quran.   This code of life is final, complete, explicit, immutable and absolutely safe from external interference. It can be understood by the use of intellect and foresight and the expanding perceptual knowledge of he world all round.  It was handed over to humanity by Muhammad (pbuh) and, as God took its safety upon Himself, there has not been the slightest change in it since it was revealed.

5.                   The way of life prescribed by the Quran is a social order which can be established in a free Muslim state.

6.                   The best suited person from amongst the believers is appointed the head of state by mutual consultations.

7.                   The Head of an Islamic state is an instrument to enforce the divine laws and injunctions contained in the Quran and is not allowed to use his personal authority.  The state administration is carried out in consultation with the Community.

Such a state was first established for them by Muhammad (pbuh) and the pattern that was presented by him continued to be followed for some time after his death.  After that period the Muslim statehood assumed a different shape on account of the non-Arab intervention initiated by the Persians. 

Let us recall that the first difference amongst the Muslim Community took place on the issue of caliphate.  As described earlier, the difference was in the choice of Hazrat Ali as Caliph.  The Persian intriguers introduced the idea that the Caliph is not chosen by mutual consultations among the believers but is appointed by God Himself, and such a person they called Im’am instead of Caliph (the word Im’am as stated earlier, also came to be used later, by Sunnis, for learned men).  The first Im’am they said was Hazrat Ali and the Immamat shall continue from then onwards by succession in his line of descent.  Earlier we discussed this belief in connection with the political situation of that age.  Now we shall describe the way it affected the social order established by Muhammad (pbuh).

The Shia Subsects and Their Beliefs

The Shias became subdivided into subsects as follows: 

1.                  Kais’ania subsect – They believe Muhammad bin Hanfia to be the second Im’am after Hazrat Ali.  He was the son of Hazrat Ali from his wife Hanfia – a wife other than Hazrat Fatima to who Im’am Hussain and Im’am Hasan were born.  At the death of this Im’am his followers spread the belief that he was the promised Mehdi who did not die but ‘had gone into hiding only to return later, after a certain period, in order to establish his rule.’  We find here that the same belief of ‘Return’ which was initiated by the Persian Abdulla Ibm Saba has been put into practice.  The same belief was carried further in respect of certain other persons as well.  Kais’ania also believed that an Im’am is also a representative of the messenger of God and that the personality of the Im’am is everlasting like God Himself.  The centre of Kais’ania subsect was Khurasan, the place from where the intrigues spread against Bani Omayya. 

2.                   Zaidia subsect – They agree with the general body of Shias as far as the succession of Imamat from Hazrat Ali to Im’am Zainal Abedeen is concerned.  But after that instead of Im’am Baqr they believe Zaid as Im’am. 

3.                   Im’amia and Ism’allia subsects – Those who accepted Im’am Baqr as Im’am also accepted his son Im’am J’afar Sadiq as Im’am but at the lower rung of the ladder there again appeared two subsects.  One subsect accepts Ismail as Im’am and the other accepts Musa Kazim as Im’am.  The former sub division is known as Ism’ailia and the latter are known as Im’amia.  The Im’amia thus accept all the 12 Im’ams from Hazrat Ali downwards to Hazrat Muhammad.  They form the major part of the Shia sect. Their belief about the twelfth Im’am (im’am Muhammad) is that he is alive and is hidden in a cave in Iraq: he shall appear before and near the Day of Judgement and shall rule the entire world.   He is also known as Im’am Mehdi.  In fact all Shias believe, in principle, as stated earlier, in the reappearance of a hidden Im’am.

4.                   Ghali subsect – A part of this subsect known as Khuram Dinia believed the Im’ams to be Gods, the messengers of God and angels.   

They did not believe in the day of resurrection.  Abdul Khitab, the pioneer of another part of this subsect known as Khitabia believed Ima’, J’afar Sadiq as God and himself as the messenger of God.  All Shia subsects believe in ‘Taqiyya.’  Khitabia also believed that there has always been two messengers of God at a time, one being vocal and the other non-vocal.  In spite of all these beliefs they still called themselves Muslims.  Intrigues and conspiracies against the government of any particular age was their aim in life.  The Ghali subsect has now become extinct.   

Let us recall that Abu al’Qami,the Minister of the last   Caliph of Baghdad and Nasirud-din Toosi, the Minister of Halaku Khan were Ghali Shias.

5.                   Ism’ailia subsect – This subsect is so particular about keeping their beliefs and teachings secret that it is rather difficult to say anything definite about them.  But some time ago a member of this subsect who was a research scholar, plucked up courage and published a book containing extracts from their secret books and documents.  He was Zaid Ali Khan, Professor of Arabic and Vice Principle of Nizam College Hyderaba Deccan (India). 

The title of this book is “The true nature of our Ism’ailia religion and its organisation.”  The following passage is from page 611 edition 1954 of this book.  “The originator of this invitation is Himoonul Qadah, a Persian, or his son Abdullah.  The objective before them was to start a religious movement which could stand against the Abbasid Caliphate.   For this purpose Im’am Abdulla formed an organisation in which they enrolled such people who were inclined towards the belief of ‘M’otazila’ and the views of their philosophers.  For the success of this movement they had to seek the help of ‘Ahle bai’at’ so as to attract the Shias who loved them.”

  Dr Zahid Ali describes further the teachings of his subjects as follows: “The primary basis of their education is that Muhammad instituted a manifest code of life and Hazrat Ali started to explain its hidden meaning.  After Hazrat Ali six Im’ams completed this secret education and the seventh Im’am Muhammad bin Ism’ail suspended the manifest Shari’at (code of laws) of Muhammad.  All the past and future Im’ams in his line of succession are ‘Khulafai Quaim’ i.e. they exist forever.  They are in hiding and at any time one of the could reappear and convert the whole of humanity to Ism’ailis.”  Zahid Ali Khan further states “Secrecy is an outstanding feature of Ism’aili teachings.  We never disclosed our real beliefs to anybody except the prominent members of our own sect, on account of political expediencies and requirements of the state, because the majority of our people were Sunnis (here he talks of the F’atimid rule in Egypt).  That is why our teachings to the common man were different to those of our selected members.  Even the newcomers into our sect were not told the secrets which were made known to our mature members.” (Preface – B)

   Dr Zahid Ali describes the Ism’aili beliefs further as follows: “ An Im’am has the right to life the Shari’at laws, as well as to reintroduce them at any time.  Regarding the Quran, they believe that just as the Jews and Christians left their original books Torah and Bible respectively and complied other books of their own thinking and speculation, the same thing happened with the Quran in the hands of the Muslims.  The Messenger composed the book of God and in the presence of his companions handed it over to his Wasi (Hazrat Ali).  These people (the companions) did not take care of it and composed another version of the Quran in their own way.  The third Caliph burnt the later compilation and prepared a version of his own.  After that Hajjaj came in and in turn burnt the version compiled by the third Caliph and made alterationd of his own.” (Preface)

  Dr Zahid Ali has quoted certain differences by comparing the present-day Quran with the one compiled by Hazrat Ali.  For example, we find in Sura al-Maa’idah verse 5:67. “Yaa’ayyu-har-Rasulu ballig maa ‘unzilla ‘ilayka mir-Rabika…”  Hazrat Ali’s version is as follows: “Yaa’ayu-har-Rasulu ballig muaa ‘unzilla ‘ilayka mir-Rabika fi Ali…”

   About the Quran compiled by Hazrat Ali, they say that it is kept in safe custody of their Im’ams and shall be opened in due course by a hibernating Ima’m after he reappears.  Regarding the interpretation of the Holy Quran they believe that the correct interpretation does not lie in its manifest words because these words have a hidden meaning which is known only to Im’ams.  On this account they say that a nabee is “Messenger N’atiq” or a vocal messenger of God whose orders are manifest, and a Wasi is “ Messenger S’amit” whose orders are secret.   The hidden meaning of some words is said to be as follows: “There is no sovereign except God” means “There is no Im’am except the Im’am of the time.” (page 408)  “Ablution” means “Hazrat Ali” as the words Wudhu and Ali both contain three letters in Arabic.

Similarly they say: Salat means Muhammad as each word contains four Arabic letters.  Thus “There is no prayer without ablution” means to accept Muhammad as the messenger of God is meaningless without accepting Ali as Wasi (page 424).  Thus according to them all the words in the Quran have hidden meanings.  It is also interesting to note that such interpretations, as they say, are ever changing.

Im’am – The central theme in shia thinking is their belief in the institution of Im’amat.  Its basis is as follows: Abdul Matlab, the grandfather of Hazrat Muhammad was the descendent of Hazrat Ibrahim.  Nabawat, the receipt of the divine message, Risalat, the delivery of the divine message, the representation of the messenger by another messenger of God and Imamat (leadership), all the four missions were entrusted in his (Abdul Matlab’s) person.  He gave separate missions to his sons Abdulla (Father of Muhammad) and Abu Talib (father Ali): Nubuwat and Ris’alat to the former and Wis’ayat and Ima’mat to the latter.  But all the four missions had accumulated in Abu Talib who in turn gave Nubuwat and Ris’alat to Muhammad and Wis’ayat and Im’amat to Hazrat Ali.  But after the death of Abu Talib all the four missions were transferred to Hazrat Ali (pages 63-64).  Thus Hazrat Ali was the real Im’am and Muhammad was only sent to certify his Im’amat.  The last message that Muhammad gave was about the Im’amat of Hazrat Ali.  Muhammad appeared only to eradicate the hidden Shirk (shirk means to make equals to God).  There is no Shirk in this world.  All believe in God.  Shirk is only the unbelief in the Wis’ayat of Hazrat Ali (page 363).  “If you see an Im’am drinking wine, committing adultery or other shameful acts, do not think that he is a disbeliever and do not express it with your tongue and have no doubts about his truthfulness, because Im’ams are under the protection of God.” (page 363). 

            “Our Im’ams are free from sins and are far superior in rank to the messenger of God: the difference between the two being that of a master and a slave.  Im’ams are free from sin while the messengers of God are not, not even Moses, not even Muhammad.” (page 366)  God forbid. 

            In India Ism’aili subsects comprise ‘Khojas and Bauhras.’  Their beliefs are given in their book entitled Mashab and B’aini T’aleem (Religion and Hidden Teachings) by Mirza Muhammad Saeed Dehlvi, are as follows: “In ancient times when Hazrat Ali was Vishnu, Muhammad took the form of ‘Ved Vayas.’  Some Khojas believe that Ali was God and Muhammad was his messenger.  Nasari (a sub-division of Ism’ailis) believe their Im’ams down to the present Agha Khan as Awtars of Hazrat Ali, and thus like Hazrat Ali are believed to be Gods.  These people, like Hindus, also believe in the transmigration of souls.  They believe in the Quran as the last authenticated Ved: but they do not consider the present Quran to be its true version (page 339-342).  Their Shari’at (religious code of law) varies according to what country they live in.  They follow the Shari’at as is followed by the majority population of that country.

 Im’amia Subsect

Herewith we quote the views of this subsect regarding Im’amat from the book entitled al-Osul-ak-Kaft, by Suqatul-Islam Muhammad bin Yaqub bin Ishal al Kalini al-Razi (died 329 A.H.).  This is the most reliable and authenticated book of Hadith amongst them and serves as a pillar of their religion.

            As stated already, the direct transfer of knowledge from God to a certain person is called Wahi or revelation, and that the message of Wahi received by Muhammad today lies safely in the pages of the Quran and that God has taken Himself the safety of this message.  This is exactly what the Quran teaches us.  Khatme Nubuwwat or the close of the divine message through the messengers of God signifies that in Deen or the way of life prescribed by God, the authority is only that of the Quran, the last book of God, and after the Quran was revealed, nobody had the right to claim that such and such a thing is from God almighty, unless it was consistent with the Quranic teachings.   Direct receipt of knowledge from God is the peculiarity of the Nabee, who is a recipient of revelation.  But we find in the book al-Osul al-Kafi that the shias have attributed this unique qualification to the Im’am as well: although they have not used the word Im’am in this respect, they have used the word Muhaddath instead.  We find one Hadith in this book which runs as follows: “Zahara relates that he asked Im’am Muhammad Baqar, to explain the difference between the words Nabee (a recipient of divine message) and Rasool, a deliverer of the divine message, as they occur in the Quranic verse (19:54).  The Im’am replied that Nabee is the one who hears the voice of the angel and can hear his voice; and Rasool is the one who hears the voice of the angel and can see him both in a dream, as while as while awake.  Zahara next asked, what would be the position of an Im’am in this respect; Im’am Muhammad Baqar replied, “An Im’am hears the voice but does not see the angel.”  After that he recited verse 22:52 of the Quran as follows: “Wa ma ‘arsalana min qablika mir-rasuulinawaa la naiyyin (wal muhaddas) illaa…” (al-Kafi, Volume 1, page 203)

              The first surprise is the extra words ‘wal Muhaddas’ here, which is not present in the Quran.  But according to the Shias, this is how the Ahele-e-bai’at (the family of the Holy Messenger) read it.  This is not a singular instance, we find so many other Quranic verses quoted in al-Kafi which contain extra words.  But here the main point of our discussion is the word Muhaddas. As stated already, a Muhaddas according to them is one to whom an angel delivers the divine message, he can hear the voice of an angel but cannot see him.  Another Hadith says, “Muhaddas is one who talks with the angel, hears his voice, but does not see him either in a dream or while awake.”  According to yet another Hadith Hazrat Ali said, “Amongst my descendants eleven Im’ams are Muhaddaseen.” (al-Kafi, Volume 1, page 281) 

            One may conclude from what has been said above that as far as the transmission of knowledge from God to man is concerned there remains no difference between a Messenger and a Muhaddas.  There are scores of Ahadis in Shafi Volume 1, in which the rank of an Im’am is shown to be equal or even superior to that due to a Messenger or even to God Himself.

            In matters of Deen, the Quran is the authority amongst the Muslims.   In this respect Im’am Muhammad Baqar said, “Nobody can claim to have the manifest as well as the hidden knowledge of the Quran except the Ausia (the plural of the word Wasi which has been explained earlier).”  Thus according to them the Im’ams are superior in knowledge to Messengers in that they also possess hidden knowledge.  They say that the knowledge began to be received by the Messengers and reached its climax in the Im’ams (Shafi, Volume 1, page 291). 

            According to the Quran, the descent of Wahi is not dependant on the will of a Nabee, it is rather God who chooses to send it at an appropriate time.  A Nabee never knew beforehand that he was going to receive Wahi until it actually descended upon him (al Quran 28:86).  On the contrary it is said in Shafi, Volume 1, page 295 that Im’am J’afar Sadiq said, “An Im’am is bestowed knowledge as and when he wills.”

              About all that lies hidden beyond human conception, the Quran says that its knowledge is only with God and that God transmits its knowledge to His messengers through revelation only as much as is required.  On the other hand it is given in Shafi, Volume 1, page 295 that Im’am J’afar Sadiq said, “An Im’am who does not know that calamity is in store for him and what its future consequences shall be, cannot guide humanity.”

            The central belief in Christianity is that Jesus Christ gave his life in order to save the sinful, i.e. his blood became a compensation for other people’s sins.  It is contrary to the Quranic teachings that every man is responsible for his own actions and that even an insignificant human action leaves its imprint on the human personality which flourishes or disintegrates according to whether the action is good or bad respectively.  The Law of Requital is the basic theme of the Quranic message.   But it is given in Shafi, Volume 1, page 297 that Im’am Musa Kazim said, “God became furious on our sins on account of their abandoning the Taqiyya and thus gave me an option to accept one of the two alternatives, my own execution or the execution of my followers.  I gave my life in order to save them.

            Further it is given in Shafi, Volume 1, page 462 that Im’am J’afar Sadiq said, “God is not ashamed of sending his wrath on those who do not love Im’am J’afar and do not pray under his Wilayat, however good their actions may be; but is ashamed of sending his wrath on those who pray with the love of Im’am Mansoosmin God, however bad their actions may be.”  Thus according to them good or bad actions make no difference as long as the love of Im’am is there. 

            Abu Hamza relates that he heard Im’am Muhammad Baqar  saying, “Ali is the gate which God has opened.  One who entered this gate is a believer and one who came out of it is a non-believer: and one who neither entered nor got out of it belongs to a category about whom God has said that it is up to Him whether to bestow salvation on such a person or not.”  One can well imagine how fantastic those beliefs are.

Shia Belief About Hazrat Ali 

            According to another tradition Im’am Raza said, “The Wisayat of Hazrat Ali has been mentioned in all respective scriptures of the messengers of God.   God never sent a messenger on the earth who did not accept the Nubuwwat of Muhammad and the Wisayat of Hazrat Ali.”           

            Muarif-e-Islam, a shia Monthly Journal in Lahore, states in its issue of September 1971 as follows: “Had there been no Ali, Muhammad could not have been born and had there been no Muhammad, the creation of the universe could not have taken place.   Thus without Ali nothing could have come into existence.”

            Shia Kalima reads as follows: “There is no deity but God, Muhammad is His messenger and Ali is his wali.” (Muarif-e-Islam page 141)

            Let us recall that we started the present discussion from the belief in what is known as Muhaddas and we have followed its implications.  It is apparent that when the criterion of salvation became dependent on the obedience of Mansoos Im’ams the importance of the Quran as well as of Kahtme Nubuwwat (finality of Prophethood) went to the background. Not only that, even such beliefs came into vogue which gave rise to suspicions about such basic concepts of Islam as the safety of the Quranic text, and its being a code of life for humanity for all time to come.  Shias claim that the words of certain verses of the Quran have been changed from the original.  There is a chapter in al-Kafi entitled “Kitabul Hujjat” which quotes so many verses of the Quran which are different in text from the one that lies safe with the rest of the Muslim world.  With such beliefs and practices, the Quran is reduced to the level of modified ancient scripture belonging to other messengers of God: although God took upon Himself the safety of the Quran:

“We have without doubt, sent down the message and we will guard it.” Al-Hijr 15:9. 

            As regards those verses which according to them remain unchanged, their belief is that these verses have hidden meanings which are known only to the Im’ams.   Not only that, they even believe in the presence of other records of Wahi besides the Quran and after the Quran was revealed.  A tradition in Al-Kafi, chapter Kitabul Hujjat, chapter 39 runs as follows – Im’am Abu J’afar, in reply to a question by Abu Baseer said: “Abu Muhammad! We have got Jamia and people do not know what Jamia is.” Abu Baseer said: “Sir! Tell us what Jamia is.” The Im’am replied, “It is a book which measures seventy hand lengths. It was dictated by the holy Messenger and was written by Hazrat Ali.  It describes all that is lawful and all that is unlawful, and all that a man could possibly be in need of, so that it describes even small abrasions…” Then he raised his hand and said, “Abu Muhammad! May I do a certain thing?”  Abu Muhammad said “Sir! I am yours, do whatever you like.”  The Im’am rubbed his two fingers and said “This is also described in Jamia.”  Then he kept quiet for a moment and again said, “We have also got Jafr.  Do you know what Jafr is?  It is a vessel which contains all the knowledge possessed by Ambiya (the messengers of God) and Ausia of all ages, it also contains knowledge possessed by the learned men of Bani Israel.”  Abu Muhammad said, “That is real knowledge.” The Im’am said, “That is not all.”  He kept quiet for a moment and again said, “We also possess the (Scripture of Fatima) and people do not know what it is.”  Abu Muhammad asked, “Sir! What is that?”  The Im’am said “That scripture is three times the volume of the Quran.”  He kept quiet for a moment and said again, “Not only that, we possess the knowledge of all that happens or shall happen in the world till the day of judgement.”  Abu Muhammad said, “That is real knowledge.”  The Im’am said, “There is something more than that.   We possess the knowledge of all accidents that take place day and night and anything that happens in the world successively and shall continue to happen till the day of judgement.”  He explained further.  “When the Messenger died,  Hazrat Fatima (his daughter) was extremely overwhelmed with emotion.  God sent an angel to console her, and the angel talked to her.  Hazrat Fatima then related this event to Hazrat Ali (her husband) who instructed her to inform him when the angel came back again, and when she might hear his voice.  Hazrat Fatima acted accordingly and when the angel returned, Hazrat Ali noted down what the angel said, and this is how the (scripture of Fatima) came into existence.” (Al-Shafi, Volume 1, page 270-272.) 

            The relationship of the above described Shia beliefs with the Persians: 

1.          A question arises that the beliefs and ideas described above are of the Im’ams who were all Arabs; then how do Persians come into the picture?

2.          The second question is that the above described beliefs are those of the Shias and not of the Sunnis who form the major portion of the Muslim population: then is it true to say that the basic concepts of the Quran also became non-existent from amongst the sunnis?   If so, how did it happen?

These are very pertinent questions indeed.  The true position is that it is correct to say that such beliefs are attributed to Shia Im’ams but we possess no authenticated record to prove that these beliefs were actually initiated and compiled in the form of books by the Ima’ms themselves.  These beliefs have come down through successive generations by means of Ahadis literature.  Suqatul Islam Kalini is considered to be the most prominent and reliable composer of Hadith literature amongst the Shias.  He was born in Rey, now known as Tehran, in the year 250A.H.  and died in 329A.H.  The eleventh Shia Im’am Hasan Askari died in 260A.H.  and four to five years after the 12th Im’am went into hiding as the Shias believe, inside a cave in Samra in Baghdad.  Thus it is apparent that Kalini did not take such Ahadis directly from any Im’am, rather he noted them down as related by other people.  The other three books of Ahadis with the Shias were written even later.  As regards ‘Kafi,’ it is claimed that out of 16199 Ahadis, about 5000 are true ones (Al-Shafi, Volume 1, page 6).  But whether these are really true can be judged from the fact that they are contrary to the basic teachings of the Quran.

            Now let us discuss the second question i.e. how far and in what way the Persian conspiracy affected the Sunni beliefs.

            It may be recalled that the pivotal point in the Persian conspiracy was to bring an end somehow or other the importance and the superiority of the Quran.   To achieve this objective, the first idea that was publicised was that the Quranic text was not compiled by Muhammad himself, as he left it in a scattered form.  And regarding the compilation of the Quran, strange fairy tales were spread, of which the details feature in a separate chapter of this book.  The objective before the conspirators was to battle the worth of the Quran and they did it by introducing the idea that the words of the Quran had been changing off and on, and that the present text of the Quran is not the real one.

            Not only that, the conspiracy was pushed further and it was said that some of the verses existing now within the Quran had been repealed, meaning thereby that although they are present in the Quran, they no more form a part of its injunctions.   Two separate views were spread about this.   First, that certain Quranic verses repealed the others.  Second, that certain Ahadis have repealed the Quranic verses.  As regards the first view you will find no such indication inside the Quran itself and it all depended on the whims and wishes of Muslim priests to cancel whichever verse they liked.  This evil practice prevailed to such a degree that about five hundred verses of the Quran were declared abrogated, and this figure varied in different times, so much so that Shia Waliullah reduced the figure to five only.  But it is of no consequence of the figure is five or five hundred, the very idea is vicious: it gives the impression that (God forgive) God Almighty Himself was uncertain when He revealed these verses for the first time. 

            Now what about the rest of the verses which according to them have escaped abrogation.  What are the means at our disposal to understand their true meaning.  This is a significant point where the Persian conspiracy is automatically exposed.  As noted earlier, according to the Mohaddas belief, it was said that revelation is of two kinds; one which was revealed to Muhammad and the other which was revealed to Im’ams.  This belief was spread amongst the Shias.  But amongst the Sunnis a different idea propagated and it was said that although revelation is of two kinds, Wahi Jali and Wahi Khafi, both of them were revealed to Muhammad.  The former Wahi Jali , they said, lies inside the Quran and the latter Wahi Khafi is contained inside the books of Ahadis.  It was also said that Wahi Khafi is exactly like the one contained inside the Quran, or rather it is in addition to the Quran.  Thus a tradition by Miqdad bin Mehdi Karb is related as follows: The Messenger of God said, “I am given the book and something in addition to it which is like it.”  This, it is said, is the Ahadis literature.

            It is said that this particular belief was introduced by Im’am Shafi.   The said Im’am was born in Asqalam in 150A.H.  During the reign of Caliph Haroon Rashid he lived in Yemen which was the central place of the Shias.  It is also said that he himself was a Shia and was summoned to appear before the Caliph on account of this belief.  Anyhow, whosoever may be the originator, this belief became widespread.  Those who had an insight into the teachings of the Quran, and who knew that it was the final and complete code for humanity for all times to come protested against this novelty and pleaded for the Quran to be the only authority in matters of Deen.  But, as is the usual practice with the Orthodox, they labelled such right thinking people as Motzalla, and started a campaign of vicious propaganda against them.  So violent and successful was their propaganda that, even today, if anyone talks reason and it is difficult to argue with him, it is sufficient to label him Motzalla, in order to defeat him.  The result was that this belief of (some thing in addition to the Quran and like the Quran) became a permanent and basic feature of Islam.  Not even that, they went even farther and claimed that Ahadis are less dependant on the Quran, it is the Quean which id dependant on the Ahadis (Page 223).  Yahya Ibn Kaseer goes still farther and says that Ahadis are superior to the Quran.  It is also said that a Hadith can be used to repeal a Quran injunction.

Origin of this Conspiracy 

            Now let us see how and when this conspiracy against the Quran started.   There was no collection of Ahadis during the Caliphate of the four Caliphs.  Such collections were rather strongly resisted at the time.  Even during the Caliphate of Bain Umaya no such thing existed. These collections made their first appearance during the Abbasid Caliphate.  As noted earlier, six such collections are considered to be authentic by the Sunnis, and it is noteworthy that, like Shia collections of Ahadis, all the six were composed by the Persians. 


Resident of

Died in

Ahadis Collected

Ahadis selected for composition

Imam Muhammad ismail Bokhari


260 A.H.



Imam Muslim bin Hajjaj


261 A.H.



Imam Abu Isa Muhammad Tirmrmazi


279 A. H.



Im’am Abu Daood





Abu Abdulla Ibn Maja


273 A.H.



Imam Abdul Rahman Nisai

A village in Khurasan province

303 A.H.



            Just imagine these Ahadis are said to be the utterances of the Messenger, but none of those who collected them was an Arab; they were all Persians.  There was no written record of what was collected.  The collection was made 250 years after the death of the Messenger, depending on what was verbally related by the people all around.  According to Im’am Bokhari’s own statement, he collected 600,000 Ahadis, and based on his personal judgement he selected only 2,762 out of six hundred thousand, as true ones, and rejected the rest as unreliable.  These 2,762 are now give the status of the Quran, even more than that, they are said to be in a position to repeal the Quranic injunctions.  The nature and worth of such Ahadis can be judged from those I have quoted at appropriate places in this book, but it shall be worthwhile to mention some of them here, in order to enable readers to form their own judgements: 

            Tradition – The Messenger said, “(Belief in God) cannot enter the heart of a person unless he does not love Hazrat Abbas and his descendants.” 

            Another tradition regarding the companions of the Messenger, the same companions who in the words of the Quran were true believers, runs as follows: According to ‘Ibn Abbas, the Messenger said in one of his sermons, “Beware!  Certain people from amongst my Community shall be brought forth on the day of Judgement and angels shall drive them towards hell.  I shall say at the time, “My Lord, these are my Companions.”   A voice from God shall proclaim, “You are not aware of what they did after your death.”  On that occasion I shall say (like Christ), “You are the witnesses on them.”  Again the voice of God shall be heard saying, “O Muhammad!  These people turned Murta (converts from Islam to other faiths) soon after you left them.” (Bokhari, Kitabul Tafsir.)

            Here you find a malicious campaign to lower the companions of the Messenger in the eyes of believers, because they are so highly praised by the Quran.  Let us recall that these books belong to the Sunnis rather than Shias and are considered to be authentic and reliable to such an extent that anybody who rejects such Ahadis is considered to be outside the pale of Islam.

            After a foundation was provided by this Hadith literature, it no longer remained difficult to build the ‘magnificent’ structure of a new Islam on it.  The ‘sacred’ task was accomplished by an eminent learned personality from amongst the Sunnis known as Muhammad Jurair Ibn Tabri.

            About Tabri, Allama Tamanna imadi remarked, “He was born and bred in Ami, a town in Tabristan.  He was educated at his place of birth and for 44 years continued his pursuit of knowledge.  He was Shia but by Taqiyya he expressed himself as Sunni.   The name of his grandfather was Rustam who, after he became Muslim, came to be known as Yazid.  In such books which Tabri wrote exclusively for Shias he wrote his name as Muhammad bin Jurair bin Rustam and in the books which he wrote for Muslims other than Shias he gave his name as Muhammad bin Jurair bin Yazid.”  But Shias do not accept him as one of them.

            The first and foremost task performed by Tabri was to write down the commentary of the Quran in 30 volumes.  He quoted Ahadis to explain the verses.  By doing so it was meant to create the impression that all that was said in his books was not by Tabri but came down from the Messenger himself.  It was an effective step because from then onwards only those commentaries came to be considered correct and reliable which followed Tabri.  It is obvious that if it is claimed that so and so is an explanation of a Quranic verse is by the Messenger himself, no Muslim can dare to raise an objection to it.  Thus the door for any further thinking and research on the Quran became closed for good.  Anybody who differs from Tabri is said to differ from the Messenger and is therefore considered to be outside the pale of Islam.  The conspiracy is evident.  The Quranic concepts became bound and dependant on the concepts given in the books of Ahadis which were composed by Persians, and thus a new Islam took birth.

            The task of bringing back the real Islam of the day of Muhammad and his companions could be accomplished by writing down the history of that period. Btu Tabri was shrewd enough to take precautions.  Thus besides commentary of the Quran, he also composed a history of Islam in 13 volumes.  Amongst Sunnis this is considered to be the most authenticated book.  All subsequent books on the history of Islam became based on the material provided by Tabri.  In this book Tabri has related events that took place during the lifetime of the holy Messenger and his companions, in order to support his commentary on the Quran.  On the other hand, in support of the events described in his history book, he quoted the Ahadis given in his commentary.  This is how these two interdependent books assumed the representative character of that of Islam which was present during the time of Muhammad and his companions and this very Islam came to be followed in the subsequent period of Islamic history.

 Islam Changed from ‘Deen’ or a Social Order to Religion

            The vicious concept of gaining knowledge direct from God, by people other than the messengers of God, and sources of Wahi other than the Quran after the last message of God was revealed to Muhammad not only resulted in changing the basic concepts of Islam by means of forged Ahadis, but even worse than that, it transformed the Deen into religion. The difference between Deen and Religion shall be described later, in a separate chapter, under the heading of Mysticism.  However, let us mention at this juncture that Deen, or the way of life prescribed by the divine guidance, can only be established in a free state run by the believers and such guidance is contained only in the Quran, in the form of fundamental principles, permanent values and injunctions.  If there is no free state, no Deen can be established.  In religion, which is supposed to be a personal relationship between God and man, and which a medley of dogmatic creeds, no results can be produced in the practical field. In the observance of such creeds, a man remains under the impression that he is subservient to God while in fact he is not.  According to the Quran, inheritance of power on earth is the prerequisite of Deen.

            Thus it is said:

“God has promised to those amongst you who believe and work deeds that promote the development of their potentialities and the formation of a balanced society, that He will, of surety, grant them in the land inheritance of power, as He granted it to those before them and He will change their state after the fear in which they lived, to one of security and peace: they will be subservient to My law alone and not associate any other law with it.   If any do disbelieve after this, they break my prescribed pattern.”  Al-Noor – 24:55.

            But as noticed earlier, inheritance of power on earth is not the prerequisite of Im’amat.  As a matter of fact, no Im’am except Hazrat Ali, if you call him Im’am at all, has ever held power.  In order to wriggle out of this difficulty the Shias maintain that the inheritance of power, as mentioned in the above said verse of the Quran, does not refer to worldly power.  Rather it refers to spiritual power.  In support of this they quote Ahadis from al-Kafi, which even goes so far as to say that the reigns of power on the earth are means of destruction.  Thus according to tradition Im’am Raza said, “In matters of Deen among Muslims the ambition for a state is as dangerous and harmful as the presence of two predator wolves in a herd of goats which has been separated from its herdsman.”  Al-Shafi, Volume 1, pages 284-285.

            Yet another tradition runs as follows: Hazrat Abu Abdulla said, “One who yearned for a state or for ruling a territory met destruction.”  The natural consequence of the spread of this belief was that worldly rule and spiritual power became two separate entities and worldly rule came to be considered as a hateful thing.  This is how the duality of State and Religion took birth among the Muslims. As a consequence of the concept of Im’amat, it originated among the Shias and gradually made inroads into the Sunni sect.  Moreover the concept of ‘Ancestral Im’amat’ also influenced the institution of Caliphate.  The Caliphate which had already changed into kingship, also separated from each other; the State which became the concern of Kings, and religious affairs which became the concern of priests.  Consequently the Personal Laws and Public Laws became two different entities.  This not only gave birth to two sects of rules within one territory, but also entirely changed the concept of law making as prescribed in the Quran and which formed the foundation stone of Deen.  The Quranic concept of law making was that the Ullmat by mutual consultation made laws consistent with the needs of the time but remaining thereby within the four walls of the fundamentals provided by the Quran.  Thus, whereas the Quranic fundamental principles remained immutable and unchanged, the laws framed within their boundary line changed with the changing times.  This beautiful blending of Permanence and Change formed the principle of law making of an Islamic State.  But the Muslim kings put an end to the consultation machinery and the Muslim priests made the change of laws with the changing times a prohibited act. 

            According to Im’am Shafi , the laws and injunctions are all given in the books of Ahadis and these laws are unchangeable and therefore there is no need for any further law making.  This is the viewpoint of Ahle Haddis.  Ahle Fiqa protested against it in the beginning.  Their viewpoint was that new laws could be framed in the light of the Quran and Ahadis by consensus of opinion, but later on, they also adopted the same attitude that the door of further thinking is closed and that there shall be no further change in the decisions already made on the basis of Fiqa.  According to Ahle Hadis if there is a conflict between a Quranic verse and a Hadith, the injunction of Hadith shall be considered supreme because Hadith is in a position to repeal a Quranic injunction.  A similar view came to be adopted by ‘Ahle Fiqa.’  Thus according to Abdul Hasan Abaidullah al-Karkhi, any verse of the Quran which goes against the decisions of predecessors is either silent and inoperative or abrogated.   Similarly they said “…any Hadith which goes against the decisions of predecessors is inoperative or abrogated.”  It means to say that if any injunction of the Quran conflicts with a Fiqa decision, we should try to bring the two into harmony with each other.  But if this is not possible, then the decision of Fiqa shall abrogate the Quranic injunction.  As ‘Ahle Hadis’ do not accept the abrogation of any Hadith, so they differ with Ahle Fiqa in this respect, but as far as the abrogation of Quranic verses is concerned, they are both on equal footing. 

            Thus the Muslim community is today divided into sects with conflicting views such as Shias and Sunnis, the Sunnis are subdivided into Ahle Hadis and Ahlq Fiqa.   Ahle Fiqa are again divided into Hanafis, Shafis, Humblies and M’alikis.  With all of them the matters of Deen is either Ahadis or the decisions of Fiqa Im’ams.  The Quran, on the other hand, is left for only mere recitation (without understanding), or for easing the death of a dying person or for using its verses as magic words against the occurrence of calamities and adverse happenings. 

Forces of destruction that worked against the pattern provided by Muhammad for the development of humanity.

            The Quran describes Muhammad as ‘a mercy for all the worlds’ meaning thereby that he provided a pattern for the development of human potentialities and for the nourishment of the human Self, as well as the human society.  In the words of the Quran, the object of sending the last Messenger of God on the earth was:

“…He releases them (the humanity) from their burdens and from the yokes that are upon them…” Al-A’raaf 7:157. 

            Let us see what the burdens are, which humanity has always been groaning under the weight of, and what the yokes and shackles are with which humanity has been chained since it came into existence.  These burdens and shackles are the forces of tyranny and exploitation which have been explicitly described by the Quran in the story of Moses (Ghaafir 40:24).  These forces appear in various forms but come under three main headings: 

1.      The tyranny of kingship, or dictatorship or one man rule.  Pharaoh has been described by the Quran as the representative of this group.

2.      The tyranny of priesthood.  H’am’an has been described as its representative.

3.      The tyranny of capitalism.  Q’aroon has been described as representing this category.   

In the entire history of mankind humanity has been heard shrieking under the weight of kingship, priesthood and capitalism.

            The Deen or social order prescribed by the Quran and put into practice by Muhammad was the real counter-force which could defend humanity against the forces of tyranny and exploitation and which could provide the pattern by means of which human potentialities were free to develop and which could pave the way for the smooth future evolution of man. When we cast a glance at the social order established by Muhammad and his companions on the basis of Quranic Fundamentals, we find that one man rule could not stay in this pattern because the head of the state and his working machinery were simply an agency to enforce the divine laws in human affairs; there was a rule of law in the perfect sense and the people enjoyed freedom undreamt of in human history.  There was no priesthood and the people lived in a world free from superstitions in which their mental faculties were free to develop.  There was no capitalist exploitation, a head of state and a common man had exactly the same living standards, and the wealth circulated among the people like blood circulating in a living body, each component part of the body getting its due share of nourishment.

            The Quran put a seal on Kingship by saying that no human being, not even a messenger of God, has the right to establish a personal rule over his fellow beings.   Thus it is said:

“It is not for any human being, unto whom God has given the scripture and wisdom and the office of a messenger of God, to say to people: Be subservient to me instead of God.” Ali-Imran 3:79.            

            The Quran put an end to Priesthood by saying that there are no intermediaries between man and God: obedience is that of the divine laws which shall be enforced by means of a social order which anybody may join willingly and none shall be forced to join.  The Quran not only put an end to priesthood but also declared that there shall be no messenger of God after Muhammad, because:

“The law of thy Sustainer is completed in truth and justice.  There shall be no change in the laws of God.” Al-An’aam 6:115.

            From now onwards man shall solve his own problems in the manner of the practical demonstration given by Muhammad and his companions: man has been provided with the signposts of the highway of life and he is now mature enough to find hid own way by use of his intellect.

            The Quran put an end to Capitalism.  A vivid picture of the Quranic economics is as follows: All must get sustenance proportionate to their needs.  It is said:

“He made in the earth mountains standing high above it and bestowed ‘self-perpetuation’ on it and measured therein all things to give them nourishment in due proportion, in four eras, in proportion to (the needs of) all those who seek (sustenance).”  Fussilat 41:10. 

            All resources on earth are for the collective benefit of mankind.  Thus it is said:

“It is He Who has created all that is on earth, for your collective benefit.”  Al-Baqarah 2:29. 

            Strive hard to earn your living

“…So disperse through the land and strive hard to seek the bounty of God.” Al-Jumu’ah 62:10. 

            Only eat of what is lawful.  The Quran has explicitly explained what is lawful and what is unlawful.  The Quran disallowed an economy based on interest.  It prohibited and condemned Usury (all types of profiteering) in the strongest terms and differentiated between trade and usury.  The Quran only allowed a return in lieu of one’s labour.   In trade one puts in both capital and labour while in usury only capital is spent.  Thus interest on capital is disallowed while genuine profit in trade is permitted. 

“God has permitted trade and forbidden usury.” Al-Baqarah 2:275.

            Piling up of wealth is prohibited.

“(There is destruction for) one who piles up wealth and then goes on counting it, thinking that his wealth would last for ever. By no means. He will surely be thrown into which breaks to pieces.  And what will explain to thee that which breaks to pieces? (It is) the fire of (God’s law of Requital), kindled to a blaze which will engulf the hearts.” Al-Humazah 104:2-7. 

            After fulfilling your needs, the surplus wealth that you possess is to be returned to society to meet the requirements of others who are in need of it. 

“They ask thee how much they are to spend (for the benefit of others), say, what is surplus (to your needs).”  Al-Baqarah 2:219. 

            This return of surplus wealth to society is not under duress: one parts with it willingly because spending on others promotes nourishment and stability of one’s own personality.

“And the likeness of those who spend their substance seeking to please God and to stabilise their own personality is as a garden high and fertile: heavy rain only makes it yield a double increase of harvest and if it receives not heavy rain, light moisture suffices.  Whatever you do is within sight of God’s law of Requital.” Al-Baqarah 2:265. 

            So far as we have dealt with the conspiracy which brought back Pharaohs and H’a,’ams into the leadership of Islamic society.  The story of the entry of Q’aroons into Islam dates back much earlier. But since the introduction of Hadith literature, the task was made easy.  After paying 2.5% of your wealth annually by way of Zak’at, you get the licence to pile up any amount of wealth and by all possible means: fair, unfair, or even vicious.  Such exploitation in the economic field now prevails in all walks of Muslim society, more so amongst the priestly class who exploit people under the garb of their sacredness.  Their strategy is to make people believe in the unlimited spiritual powers which they pretend to possess, so much so that their followers give them the status of God.  The Quran says:

“They take their priests and anchorites to be their Lords, in derogation of God.” Al-Taubah 9:31. 

            The Quran says further:

“Oh you who believe!  There are indeed many among the priests and anchorites who in falsehood devour the substance of others and hinder (them) from the way of God.  And there are those who amass gold and silver, and spend it not in the way of God: announce unto them the most grievous penalty – on the day when heat will be produced out of this (wealth) in the fire of Hell and with it will be branded their foreheads, their flanks and their backs (and it will be said unto them) “This is the treasure you amassed for yourself: taste now what of what you have amassed.” Al-Taubah 9:34-35. 

            This proclamation by the Quran strikes at the very root of concentration of wealth amongst a few individuals.  But just take note of a tradition in this respect. 

According to Abu Daood, Ibn Abbas said, “When the (above said) verse was revealed it had a profound effect on the minds of Muslims, they took it with a heavy heart.  Hazrat Omar told them that he would remove their worry and get a solution to this problem.  So he went to the Messenger and requested, “O Messenger! This verse has produced an embarrassing effect on your companions.”  The Messenger replied, “God has enjoined upon you Zak’at, so that it can purify the rest of your wealth: and has enjoined upon you the law of inheritance, so that people who survive after the death of their predecessor, get wealth.” (Abu Daood-Ref-Mishkwat Chapter Sak’at.)

 The Effects of The Conspiracies on our Beliefs

            The worst thing that happened was that the conspiracies described above had a tremendous effect on Muslim beliefs.  The edifice of the life of an individual, as well as that of a nation, is built on its beliefs and ideology.  According to the Quran,

“Because God will never change the grace which He has bestowed on a people until they change what is within themselves.” Al-Anfaal 8:53. 

            This psychological change in a man depends on his beliefs and his ideals.  Arabs were able to conquer the super nations of the world of that age, after the Quran bought about an ideological change in them.  The non-Arabs counter-acted by changing the mental equipment of Muslims to such an extent that only faint traces of Quranic concepts are left in the Muslim world today. 

            Fate – As described earlier, one of the basic concepts presented by the Quran was that this is a world of cause and effect: that every individual is responsible for his own acts of which he must bear the consequences; that a good deed (a deed consistent with the Permanent Values given by the Quran) results in the development of the Personality or Self of an individual, and a bead deed (inconsistent with the Permanent Values) causes the disintegration of the Self; that a person cannot shift his responsibility to another person; that life is a continuous process and that a developed Personality survives the physical death.  In brief, an individual as well as a nation makes its own fate.  This belief in the law of requital and the life hereafter invigorated the Arabs and made them a fearless people so that they could dominate nations far superior to them in material resources and manpower.  The Persian and Byzantine Christians believed man to be passive and bound by fate.  It was not possible for them to stand against a nation who believed in making its own fate.  Thus the first target of the Persian intelligentsia’s onslaught was the Muslim belief in the law of Requital.  Reliance on fate was the outstanding belief of Zoroastrians.  They believed that all that happens in the world is bound by fate.  Persians started spreading this belief amongst the Muslims.  History tells us that the first person who initiated the spread of this belief was M’abad bin Khlaid Jahni.  He took it from Abu Yunis who belonged to the Oswara.  As noted earlier the Oswara were a group of intelligentsia in the service of the Persian Emperor, who spread all over Kufa and Basra, after they embraced Islam.  Briefly speaking, the belief they introduced was that man is bound by the chains of his fate and is helpless in all his actions. 

            The question arises as to how this belief, which was against the basic concept of Islam, could be accepted by Muslims? But one can well realise that with the introduction of Hadith literature, the answer to this question remains difficult no more.  A few Ahadis from ‘Mishkwat-chapter Taqdir’ are presented herewith.

            Tradition 1.  According to Abdulla bin Omar the Messenger said, “God prepared in written form the fate of His creation, fifty thousand years before the heavens and earth were created, when His Throne was still on water.”  How ridiculous!  Does it mean to say that water was present fifty thousand years before the creation of the universe or does it mean to say that water is not a created object?  This forged Hadith is a reflection of the poor understanding of the Quranic words. 

           Tradition 2.  According to Hazrat Ibn Omar, the Messenger said, “All that happens on the earth depends on fate, even stupidity and wisdom.” 

            Tradition 3.  According to Hazrat Ali, the Messenger said, “There is none amongst you whose abode is not written (in the book of fate)” i.e. whether the abode is hell or heaven (Ref. Bokhari-Muslim). 

            Tradition 4.  According to Abu Huraira, the Messenger said, “A person shall have to commit adultery, to the extent that is written in his fate.” (Ref. Bokhari-Muslim)

            Tradition 5.  According to another Hadith the Messenger also said, “God created Adam, rubbed his back with His right hand and got his progeny out and said, “I have created them for heaven, they will act like heavenly people”: again rubbed His hand a second time and brought out some more of his progeny and again said, “I have created them for hell, they shall act like people of hell.”  On hearing such things from the Messenger, somebody asked, “O Messenger – God!  Then what is the value of our deeds?” God replied, “Anybody who is created for heaven, He makes him do good deeds and makes him enter heaven on account of his good deeds.  Similarly anybody who is created for hell, he is made to do bad deeds and thus he enters hell on account of his bad deeds.” (Ref: Malik, Tirmazi, Abu Daood) 

            Tradition 6.  According to Abdulla bin Omar, the Messenger once came out with two books in his hands and turning towards us said, “You know what these books are?”  We said, “O Messenger: We do not know.”  Pointing towards his right hand he said, “This book is from God.  It contains the names of all those who shall go to heaven, now there can be no addition to, nor subtraction from it.”  Then he pointed towards his left hand and said, “This book is also from God and it contains the names of all those who shall go to hell and there can be no addition to, nor subtraction from this list as well.” (Ref: Tirmazi.) 

           Tradition 7.  According to Abu Darda, the Messenger said, “God relieved Himself of five things about every individual person, i.e. he noted down the following five things in the books of fate –  

1)      The life span of a person

2)      His good and bad deeds

3)      His place of residence

4)      His coming back, and

5)      His means of sustenance

It is apparent that anybody who has a little knowledge of the Quranic teachings will feel doubtful about such Ahadis and will try to satisfy himself about their authenticity.  But those who forged them devised a remedy for this particular issue in anticipation by concocting another set of Ahadis.  As for example, Abu Huraira said, “We were discussing the issue of Taqdir (fate) when the Messenger appeared.  When he heard what we were talking about, his face became red with anger and he said passionately, “Have I ordered you about it? Have I been sent to you for this purpose?  The earlier nations argued about this issue and were destroyed.  Therefore you must promise on oath to undertake that you will never discuss this issue again.” (Ref: Tirmazi.) 

This idea of Taqdir (fate) was given great publicity, especially by Bramaka.  It was a belief amongst the Zoroastrians that all the coming events of a particular year along with the fates of individuals are decided on the eve of Naurox.   Bramaka made the night before Nauroz put on an Islamic garb and named it Shab-e-Barat which became a permanent Muslim festival.

The fireworks on the eve of Shab-e-Barat remind us of Zoroastrian practice.  Shias believe in ‘Shab-e-Barat’ as being Shabe-Moqaddrat i.e. the night of decisions of fates.  Following is a quotation from Kafi ‘-Im’am Abu Jafar said, “God first created Shabe Qadr and during this night he created the first Nabee and first Wasi: then he willed that such nights will come every year when the details of all future events of the coming year shall be decided.  Anybody who denies it, denies the knowledge of God because during this night Nabees, Messengers and Muhaddaseen convey to the people what they receive (from God).  This night Gabriel brings these commandments.” (Al-Shafi, Volume 1, page 284-285.)

When one embraces Islam, he affirms his belief by the proclamation the he believes in God, His angels, His Messengers, the divine scriptures (given to mankind in different ages through His messengers) and in the life hereafter.  But the conspirators added a sixth element i.e. the fate of good or bad.  Thus belief in fate came to be the sixth basic condition for becoming a Muslim and the authority for it is Ahadis as usual.

 According to one Hadith, said to be related by Ali, the Messenger said, “Nobody can become a Muslim unless he believes in four things:

(a)                To be witness to the fact that there is no other object of worship except God, that I am His messenger and that God has sent me with truth.

(b)                To believe that death is sure to come.

(c)                To believe in life after death.

(d)                To believe in Taqdir.

This is how Taqdir became part and parcel of Muslim belief, a belief that any profit or loss, health or disease, wealth or poverty, grace or degradation, good deeds or bad deeds, rise or fall of nations, victory or defeat, power or slavery, in short everything, was decided and written in the book of fate, before the creation of the universe: and that human efforts can make no change in it.  This is how the Muslim nation was turned into a heap of dust, a tremendous achievement of the conspirators.

Tasawwaf or Mysticism 

This is not all, there is another arrow in the bag of the conspirators, far more poisonous than those mentioned above and which (God forbid) may prove to be the last nail in the coffin of the Islam brought  by Muhammad.   As mentioned earlier, according to the Quran, humanity received divine guidance through the messengers of God in different ages and Muhammad was His last Messenger who brought a message complete and final for all time to come.  But, as stated already, the concept of Mohaddas was introduced by the conspirators, in order to negate the Quranic concept of the finality of Nubuwwat.  But those people applied this concept to the Shia Im’ams only and thus it remained confined within their own sect.  On the other hand, as stated earlier, the idea of two types of revelation was introduced amongst the Sunnis which produced exactly the same results, because beliefs and injunctions, with their origin from outside the Quran, acquired the same status as the Quranic injunctions.   But this remained ascribed to the personality of the Messenger and was thus confined to Hadith literature only.  From now onwards, in order to make the fortress of conspiracy impregnable, the concept of direct communication of any man with God, after the finality of Nubuwwat was introduced.  This end was achieved by the introduction of mysticism in Islam.  (The subject of Mysticism is dealt with as a separate subject in this book.)  It is apparent that this particular concept, and the fact that any man who tries to do it can come into contact with God, is contrary to the Shia belief because according to them only the Im’am can contact God.  But it is a strange incidence that all the Sufi (Muslim mystics) lines of descent came down from Hazrat Ali through the Siua Im’ams (except Naqshbandis) and by consensus of opinion, Hazrat Ali is considered by them to be the Kings of Walis (saints).  The Sufis claim that their beliefs and ideas are consistent with the Quran.  They say that the Quranic words have hidden meanings which are known only to themselves.  About this hidden knowledge they say that it is not be disclosed to the common man.  In support of this view the following Hadith had to be concocted – Abu Huraira said, “I received two vessels of knowledge from God’s messenger, one of manifest knowledge which I have spread, but I do not disclose the other one (i.e. the hidden one) even if my life artery is cut.” (Ref: Bukhari-Babul Islam, also Mishkwat Babul-Ilm).  This Hadith is present in Sahih Bukhari which is considered by the Sunnis as a ‘true book.’   What a pity that neither Im’am Bukhari nor those who committed such a false allegation to the Messenger so that he delivered a secret sect of knowledge to a selected few, could imagine how far it reflects on the personality of the Messenger, in the face of the following Quranic verses:

“O Messenger: Proclaim this message that has been sent to you from your Lord (so that every individual may be benefited).  If you did not, you would not have fulfilled and proclaimed its mission.” Al-Maa’idah 5:67. 

“Those who conceal the clear message and the guidance We have sent down after we have explained it in the book, explicitly for humanity, on them shall be God’s curse and the curse of those entitled to curse.” Al-Baqarah 2:159. 

Was the Messenger of God (God forbid) not aware of this forceful warning present in the Quran?   The Hadith described above presents a most heinous allegation against the person of the Messenger.  When this concept of direct communication with God by any person who tries to do it, took root amongst the Muslims, it was followed by the appearance of certain self-proclaimed messengers of God.  One of them Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, also ascended his throne of Nubuwwat by means of this ladder.   He said, “I have not said anything to the people except that which I have written in my books, that I am a Muhaddas and that God talks to me as He talks to other Muhaddaseen (Hanamtul Bushra, page 96).”  As described earlier, the Shais added the word Muhaddas in the beginning of the verse Al-Hajj 22:52 of the Quran and it read as follows:

“Wa maa ‘arsalnaa minqablika mir-rasuulinwwa laa nabiyyin (wal muhaddas) illaa…” Al-Hajj 22:52. 

In the beginning Mirza Ghulan Ahmad also enlisted the support of this very verse with the additional words ‘Muhaddas’; but later on he proclaimed himself a full fledged Nabee.