Title: Regarding Shitte Muslims Question: Regarding Shiite Muslims May I know the Islamic verdict regarding Shia? I have heard that they keep some severe anti-Islamic concepts like Badaa (i.e. Allah tells lie and do wrong and forgets some things); secondly their creed of imamate and which I was told that Shia beleives that Imaams are higher in rank to prophets? And their cursing behaviour towards sahaba-e-kiraam (ra) and some other beleifs that they keep are against Islamic teachings like telling lies (kitmaan+taqiya) mutta etc. Please guide me about the truth. Wassalam Akram Pakistan Answer: Thank you for your question brother. Before trying to answer your question, I would like to express my amazement on the fact that how enthusiastic and keen are some Muslims to declare another one, non-Muslim. Unfortunately it seems like while in the non-Muslim world, the moves are mostly towards harmony, in the Muslim world, the move is mostly towards discord. Please note I am not referring to you, but I am referring to an atmosphere that leads good brothers like you to get engaged with the thought. Please also note that I am not talking about unity, I am only talking about harmony. When you say verdict, you are talking about a legal act. We cannot run a verdict by calling people non Muslim on the basis of the opinion of individuals, even if those individuals are great scholars (of course unless that individual is a prophet). As pointed out by brother Moiz Amjad in one of his posts : ... the matter of declaring an individual or a group to be non-Muslim does not rest with individuals or groups but with the collectivity of the Muslims. A person or a group can only be declared to be non-Muslim by the Islamic State, not by any other individual or body of individuals. Obviously this (collective declaration) has not been reached and I would like to argue that if we study Shia Islam closely Insha'Allah it will never be the case in future (you did not specify which branches of Shia you are talking about, but Imami Shia being in majority among the rest at present, I presume the word "Shia" by itself, refers to this branch). Let me also refer you to what brother Moiz pointed out about understanding the meaning of Islam from Quran: فَإِذَا انسَلَخَ الأَشْهُرُ الْحُرُمُ فَاقْتُلُواْ الْمُشْرِكِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدتُّمُوهُمْ وَخُذُوهُمْ وَاحْصُرُوهُمْ وَاقْعُدُواْ لَهُمْ كُلَّ مَرْصَدٍ فَإِن تَابُواْ وَأَقَامُواْ الصَّلاَةَ وَآتَوُاْ الزَّكَاةَ فَخَلُّواْ سَبِيلَهُمْ ( التوبة 9: 5) Thus, when the sacred months are over, slay these polytheists wherever you find them, arrest them, besiege them and wait for them in every ambush. Then if they repent [from their wrong beliefs], establish prayer and pay Zaka'h , then leave their way. Then again, a few verses later, in Taubah 9: 11, the Qur'an says: فَإِن تَابُواْ وَأَقَامُواْ الصَّلاَةَ وَآتَوُاْ الزَّكَاةَ فَإِخْوَانُكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ Then if they repent [from their wrong beliefs], establish prayer and pay Zaka'h , then they are your brethren in religion. A close look shall show that the two verses are quite similar in their subject matter. According to the first verse, if a person: Repents from wrong belief and accepts the elements of faith made essential by the Qur'an; Establishes regular prayer; and Pays Zaka'h to the treasury of the Islamic state no further obligation can legally be imposed on him to get the rights of a Muslim citizen in an Islamic state. While the second verse, stresses the same point positively and states that if a person fulfils these three conditions, he should - positively - be given all the rights of a Muslim citizen in an Islamic state. If you are interested to refer to ahadith with regard the same issue, there are numerous ahadith in the main books of hadith in which a similar issue is addressed and they lead to a similar conclusion. I refer to one of them here: Anas Ibne Malik narrates from the prophet (PBUH), "Whoever prays like us and faces our Quibla and eats our slaughtered animals is a Muslim and is under Allah's and His Apostle's protection. So do not betray Allah by betraying those who are in His protection." ( Bukhariy , narrative no. 378) I can assure you that all the conditions mentioned in the above two verses and in the above hadith and a numerous ahadith on the same subject are fulfilled by an observant Shia Muslim. The only thing that remains is the list of the beliefs that you mentioned as factors that made you doubtful about Shia being Muslim. Although I hope the above explanation has answered your inquiry but let me briefly explain the beliefs you mentioned as I think your information about them is not consistent with what they really are and this explanation could become useful for other readers as well. Taqya : Taqya is not equal to telling lie. Taqya means to hide your real belief for the sake of your safety. Some times, to keep oneself from a danger, one might tell a lie to hide one's real belief, although one is not really a sort of person that uses to tell lies. Ammar for instance (according to some historical records) under the pressure of the sever torture by Kuffar , found no way but denying the prophet hood of the prophet only to the extent of a declaration, but not from the heart. He only did that to get rid of the severe torture and the records say that the prophet assured him that he had not committed sin by that. During the regime of Umawies and Abbasies , many individuals were tortured and murdered merely based on their belief. Many of those ascribed to Shia belief were among them. They therefore needed to practice Taqyah to remain safe. Of course many people might prefer to die for their belief, but it is solely upon the individuals to decide which is more beneficial for the cause. Muhammad Husayn Ale Kashef Alqeta (one of the famous classic Imami Shia scholars) in his book Asl Ashia Wa Osooleha (pages 314-5) says (translated and summarised by me): There are three (different) duties about Taqya : Some times it is obligatory. This is when not doing Taqya causes waste of life (dead) with no benefit. Some times it is permissible. This is when acting according to the belief without Taqya could result in strengthening the truth. In this case one might reveal the truth or one might observe Taqya. Some times it is forbidden. This is when Taqya will result in spreading falsehood and misguiding people and restoring oppression. I think you will agree that the above may sound reasonable to many Muslims and that in fact the practice of many Muslims (and in fact human being) is nothing but the above. In fact Shia uses some of the verses of Quran to prove the permissibility of Taqyah (hiding the real belief) when our safety is in danger and there is no benefit to get in trouble (dying, prison, torture etc.). At present, of course, safety is not an issue for Shia in most of the Muslim communities. However you might find that occasionally some Shia still practices Taqyah to some extent. This could have different reasons and I agree that the reasons are not always good ones from the point of view of a main stream Muslim. Still, however, you can see that the issue has nothing to do with being Muslim or not. Bada : When attributing to a human being, Bada could mean changing a decision after getting correct/new information. Perhaps the reason why many people think that Shia believes God forgets or is misinformed is this humanly use of the word Bada . However the truth is that when it comes to God, Shia do not mean the same thing about Bada . Let's read what Shia really means by Bada from their own sources. The same author as above, the same book, page 316 (translated and summarised by me): They ... think that the Bada that Shia believes in is about God almighty revealing a matter that he was not (fully) aware of. Is this anything but a shameful ignorance and Kufr ?! ... Imami Shia and in fact all the rest of the sects of Islam are far from such statement ... The Bada that Shia talks about ... means God revealing a matter (that is supposed to happen) ... some times close angels are informed about (the matter) so the angel informs a prophet about it and the prophet informs people but then the matter does not happen because God has removed it (from the book in which all the things that are going to happen are recorded)... God almighty had the knowledge of (all) this but it was in his secured (place of) knowledge to which no one has access ... There are good reasons for this (removing/changing of a revealed matter by God) that our mind cannot reach them ... Bada in worldly affairs ( Alam Altakwin ) is like abrogation in religious affairs ( Alam Asharyee ). A very popular example among Shia to explain Bada is a story of Isa ( Alayhe Salam ) where he informs a girl that she will pass away in the night of her wedding. The day after the wedding Isa finds the girl alive and they ask him about his prophecy. Isa asks if her relatives have given out something for charity as Sadaqa and they confirm. The conclusion is that Sadaqa removed what was initially written for that girl (note I am not investigating how authentic is the story, I am only trying to clarify the meaning of Bada as explained by Shia). Having quoted the above and having given that example, I should also say that in my opinion it is true that the concept of Bada plays a significant role in justification of some of the historical facts in an attempt to keep these facts consistent with the theory of Imamat in Shia. I also do not believe that the above quoted comparison between Bada and Abrogation is very reasonable. Cursing Sahabeh : Shia does not curse all the Sahabeh , however I agree that in general, Shia curses some of the Sahabeh , among which there are personalities that are considered as highly devoted and pious Sahabeh by the mainstream Muslims. We do not have any explicit directives from Shariat that says cursing Sahabeh makes one a Non-Muslim, however I do agree that cursing the Sahabeh (specially those who were among the first who migrated to Madinah or first who helped the immigrants) is contrary to the very spirit of the Quran. In this sense I consider this act of Shia to be extremely wrong. However, you should note that Shia curses these Sahabeh on the basis of information that is available to them in some of the history books and some books of ahadith and not because of any hatred for Sahabeh per se. I have seen many Shia who have stopped cursing Sahabeh after getting correct information, having a closer look to some of the verses of Quran and after looking at the historical facts from a wider perspective. Belief that Imams are higher in rank then prophets: Imami Shia believes in a position called Imamat that is different from prophet hood. They believe that there are God appointed Imams who are infallible and it is obligatory upon Muslims (and in fact the nation of any prophet at their own time) to follow these Imams. Whether Imams have a higher rank than prophets in the view of Imami Shia is a complicated issue. They do believe that the position of Imamat is higher than the position of prophet-hood however they also believe that there were prophets who at the same time were also Imams. Look at the following explanation by one of the very famous present Leading Mujtaheds (Mufti) of Shia (as called in Shia context: a Marja): We believe that among all the prophets there are five archprophets who are the most prominent ones, who have had law, divine book and new religions. The first was Noah, the second was Abraham then came Moses. The fourth of them was Jesus Christ and the last of all was Mohammad. ... we believe that all the Archprophets had the dignity and grade of Imamate through their prophethood. This is because whatever they decreed by their prophethood they put it to work as an Imam. So was the great prophet of Islam, when at the beginning of his mission he conveyed the messages of God to His servants, and meanwhile he carried on his leadership teaching people and leading them to the path of truth. "Our Belief" by Naser Makarem Shirazi, Chapters 2, 5, Shia does believe that Imams have a higher rank than Non-Imam prophets. Now when it comes to their 12 Imams and (as titled in the above quotation) archprophets, firstly all Imami Shia agree that prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as a prophet and Imam has a higher rank than the 12 Imams, however in terms of other (so called) archprophets there are differences of opinion. I do agree that the classical opinion, the one that can be found in classic Imami Shia books and the one that is held by many (if not the most of) the Shia scholars of the present time is that the 12 Imams of Shia have a higher rank than all the prophets (including archprophets) except prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Obviously the above belief is different with the conscious of the mainstream Muslims and to me it has no basis in Quran however we cannot consider some one a Non-Muslim merely based on this belief. Muta : Muta or temporary marriage is merely a Feqhi issue. Shia believes in permissibility of Muta based on Feqhi reasons in the same way that Main Stream Muslims believe in Muta being Haram . This is merely a Feqhi difference just like many Feqhi differences between the 4 main schools of Feqhe among the mainstream Muslims, only here, the differences of approaches and sources have led to a more sever difference. I do not agree with the Shia point of view about Muta but this does not make me even think about considering them non Muslims. As you see brother, there is a huge difference between what you have heard and the truth. (Even if what you had heard was true, based on the points I made and quoted at the beginning of this post, still they could not form a basis for declaring some one a non-Muslim.) I therefore strongly advise you and other learned brothers, not to make their conclusions based on what was heard and to investigate the matters as closely as possible, in particular when it comes to judging about others (if judgement is at all necessary). The last point I want to refer to is that there is a difference between calling some one a Muslim and calling his belief an Islamic belief. A Muslim can be wrong about his belief and we have many cases, even among the mainstream Muslims, where a Muslim or a group of Muslims were considered by the rest of Muslims to have a wrong belief. Therefore, if you (like me) have the opinion that some of the belief of a group of Muslims is not in accordance or is in conflict with the true Islam, then there is no problem to consider those items of belief, non-Islamic or Un-Islamic and even to try to peacefully correct them if the time and conditions are appropriate. This however is different from calling the one who ascribes to those beliefs a non-Muslim. I should also say, I know a very dear friend who is so much engaged with trying to be a good Muslim, to the extent that he has no time to decide whether another Muslim is really Muslim or not. In need of your prayers. Abdullah Rahim September 28, 2003