Shi’ism is Kufr: Imams Superior to Prophets - Finality of
Prophethood And Shia Rebuttal
19 May 2010
By Ibn
al-Hashimi
The Shia Ulema believe
that the position of Infallible Imam (i.e. Imamah) is
higher than the position of Messenger or Prophet (i.e.
Risalah and Nabuwwah). Al-Islam.org, the popular Shia
website, declares that “the office of Imamate is a
higher and more exalted office than prophethood.”
(Lesson Number 17, http://al-islam.org/leadership/)
Thus, the Shia Ulema
believe that their twelve Infallible Imams are
superior to all of the Prophets, except Prophet
Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم). They argue that
Prophet Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is superior to
the twelve Imams not because he was a Prophet, but
rather “since Prophet Muhammad was an Imam during his
time as well.” (Shia Encyclopedia, “Imamat vs.
Prophethood,” Part 1, http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/8.html)
The Shia belief can be
stated in equation form:
Prophet Muhammad > 12
Imams > All of the other Prophets
Imamah >
Prophethood
There should be
absolutely no confusion on this issue; this view is
the dominant view of the Shia Ulema.
Grand Ayatollah
Mohammad Fazel Lankarani, one of the Head Ayatollahs
in the Shia Seminary in Qum, issued the following
statements on his official website:
Imam Ali (Alayhi Salam)
is higher in rank than other prophets, because of his
Imamate, but he is not higher in rank than the Prophet
Muhammad (saws), because Muhammad (saws) was both
Prophet and Imam.
This view is categorically stated in the Shia
Encyclopedia:
The Shia further believe that the twelve Imams of the
House of Prophet Muhammad have the rank higher than
that of ALL the messengers (be Imam or not) except
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).
Source: Shia Encyclopedia, “Imamat vs. Prophethood,”
Part 1, http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/8.html
In the book “Peshawar Nights”, the Shia scholar,
Sultanu’l-Wa’izin Shirazi, says: “Since the holy
prophet was superior to all other prophets Ali was
also superior to them.” (Peshawar Nights, http://www.al-islam.org/peshawar/7.1.html)
The same view is held by the Shia Tafseer, also
available on the Al-Islam.org website: “It means that
a prophet is not necessarily an Imaam and Imaamat is
an office of decidedly higher order…” (S.V. Mir
Ali/Ayatollah Mahdi Puya Commentary of Verse 2:124,
http://www.al-islam.org/quran/)
In all of the
authoratative books of the Shia, the recurring view is
that the Imams are superior to the Prophets except
Prophet Muhammad: “Imam ‘Ali and the other Imaams of
Ahlul Bayt are believed by the Shi’as to be higher in
rank than all prophets and messengers except the
Prophet of Islam (s.a.w.)” (Shiism: Imaamate and
Wilayah, p.96)
Ayatollah Khomeini
declared: “And an essential tenet of our Shi’ite sect
is that the Imams have a position which is reached
neither by the angels nor by any commisioned messenger
of God.” (Hukumat-i-Islami, p.52-53)
Of the four main Shia
books of Hadith, Al-Kafi is considered the most
reliable and authoratative. In it, we find the
following Shia Hadith: “The Imams possess all the
knowledge granted to the angels, prophets, and
messengers.” (Al-Kulaini, Al-Kafi, p.255) Another
narration in Al-Kafi says: “Signs of the prophets are
possessed by the Imams.” (Al-Kafi, p.231)
Allamah Baqir Al-Majlisi
says about the Imams: “Their preference [is] over the
prophets and all the people.” (Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol 26,
Chapter 6) He further stated: “…our Imams are higher
[and] better than the rest of the prophets…they are
more knowledgeable than the prophets…this is the main
opinion of the Imami (Shia), and is only rejected by
one who is ignorant about the traditions.” (Bihar Al-Anwar,
Volume 26, p.297)
In the propaganda book
titled “Peshawar Nights”, the Shia scholar Shirazi
mentions the following about Ibrahim:
Allah intended to make
his rank more exalted. Since prophethood and the title
of Khalil (friend) did not apparently rank a higher
rank, the office of Imamate was the only office of a
higher order to which even a Prophet of Allah could be
entrusted…That Ali attained the rank of prophethood
can be proven by the reference to the Hadith of
Manzila (Tradition Regarding Ranks)
This same view is held by Allamah Majlisi, who even
admits that the Shia “might as well” call their Imams
to be Prophets:
On the whole, after admission of the fact that the
Imams are not prophets, we are bound to acknowledge
the fact that they are superior to all Prophets and
Awsiya (legatees) except our Prophet (salutations and
peace upon him and his family). To our knowledge there
is no reason not to describe the Imams as Prophets
except consideration to the status of the Final
Prophet. Our intellect too, cannot perceive a
distinction between Nabuwwah (prophethood) and Imamah.
Source: Bihar Al-Anwar, Volume 26, p.82
Syed Ali Milani, another leading Shia personality,
wrote an entire book entitled“The Preference of the
Imams over the Prophets (A.S.)” This book is available
on the following Shia website: www.shiaweb.org
We could provide more
references to prove our point, but we shall stop here
for brevity sake. The bottom line is clear: the Shia
believe that their Imams are superior to Prophets.
Shi’ism is Kufr
We have often heard
the attractive rhetoric that Muslims should unite
(i.e. Sunni-Shia unity) and that the differences
between Sunni and Shia are minor. Some say that the
differences are only on minor things such as the way
we pray. Others say the differences are merely
political and historical, not religious or spiritual.
This could not be farther from the truth! The
difference between Sunni Islam and Shi’ism is
monumental; the Shia believe in false prophets after
Prophet Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and thus there
should no confusion that Shi’ism is Kufr. The
difference between Sunni Islam and Shi’ism is on a
core fundamental issue, one which shapes the entire
faith itself.
The Shia will argue
that they do not believe in Prophets after Muhammad (صلّىالله عليه وآله وسلّم),
and that their Imams are not Prophets. But, as is the
case with the Shia, they swallow the second part of
this statement, namely that their Imams are
not Prophets but rather they are superior to Prophets.
It would be Kufr enough to believe that there are
people equal to Prophets after the Prophet Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآلهوسلّم), but it
is an even greater Kufr to say that there are people
who are superior to the Prophets. To give an
appropriate analogy: it would be Kufr to say that
there is a god equal to Allah, but it would be even
greater Kufr to say that there is a god greater than
Allah.
The faith of Shi’ism
is Kufr just like Ahmadis, Submittors, Nation of
Islam, Bahais, and Aga Khanis are Kaffir.
Finality of Prophethood
A central belief of
Islam is that Prophet Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآلهوسلّم) is the
final Prophet. Anyone who believes in a Prophet after
Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is considered a
Kaffir.
Allah Almighty says in
the Quran:
“Muhammad is not the
father of any man among you, but the Messenger of
Allah and the Last of Prophets. And Allah has
knowledge of everything.” (Quran 33:40)
As soon as Prophet
Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم) died, there
arose many Dajjals (false prophets) in the land of
Arabia. The followers of these Dajjals formed deviant
and heretical sects. The Sahabah waged war against
these false prophets, their followers, and all other
apostates; thus began the Wars of Riddah (Apostacy) in
which the heretics were defeated and the finality of
the Prophethood defended.
Unfortunately, every
generation and land has witnessed its fair share of
false prophets. Today, many divergent cults and
heretical sects still exist. And yet, no matter how
divergent their beliefs are to each other, there is
one commonality to them all: they do not believe in
the finality of prophethood, or somehow they get
around this concept by playing word games. One such
example is the Qadiani sect that believes in the
messengership of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadian. Another
deviant sect is the Rashad Calipha sect (i.e. the
Submittors) who believe that Rashad Calipha is a
messenger after Muhammad. The Nation of Islam (NOI)
believes that Elijah is a God-appointed leader, and
the Bahais believe that Bahaiullah is a God-appointed
individual after Muhammad.
These sects claim to
follow the Quran and yet they defy its very words in
which Allah Almighty so clearly defines Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآلهوسلّم) as the
last of the Prophets. How do they justify this
contradiction? They resort to a method used by the
Jews: playing word games with the Word of Allah.
Rashad Calipha’s sect, for example, says that Verse
33:40 only declares an end to Prophethood but not to
Messengership; he thus declares that he is a Messenger
and not a Prophet. In this way, the Submittors give
lip service to the idea of finality of prophethood,
but in reality, they exalt their leader above that of
the Prophets. Similar justifications and word games
are utilized by the Qadianis, who refer to their
leader as a “Messiah” or “Mahdi” instead of Prophet.
The Aga Khanis believe that their leader, the Aga
Khan, is a God-appointed person after Prophet Muhammad
(صلّى الله عليه
وآلهوسلّم),
and they thus exalt Prince Kareem.
In the end, all of
these sects are using word games to extend the
prophethood and destroy the finality of Islam. They
give all the same powers, prestiges, and honors to
their leaders as Prophets but they will deny that this
person is a Prophet after Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم), and will use
other words such as “Mahdi”, “Messiah”, “Aga Khan”, or
even “Messenger.” However, both Sunni and Shia Ulema
declare these sects to be deviant Kuffaar for the
reason that they deny the finality of prophethood.
Indeed, a rose would still be a rose even if it were
to be called by another name. Simply changing the name
of an entity does not change the nature of that
entity.
The Shia sect has also
extended the institution of prophethood by playing
word games. They follow the “Aimmatul Masomeen”
(Infallible Imams) who are considered equal to
Prophets. In fact, they are superior to Prophets as we
have seen above. For all practical intents and
purposes, Imams are the same thing as Prophets, as
indicated by the statements of the Shia leader,
Allamah Majlisi:
On the whole, after
admission of the fact that the Imams are not prophets,
we are bound to acknowledge the fact that they are
superior to all Prophets and Awsiya (legatees) except
our Prophet (salutations and peace upon him and his
family). To our knowledge there is no reason not to
describe the Imams as Prophets except consideration to
the status of the Final Prophet. Our intellect too,
cannot perceive a distinction between Nabuwwah (prophethood)
and Imamah.
Source: Bihar Al-Anwar,
Volume 26, p.82
It is simply a
formality that the Shia do not refer to their Imams as
Prophets. Otherwise, the Imams are equal to and even
superior to the Prophets. They have all the same
powers, prestiges, and signs as Prophets; the Shia
Hadith book, Al-Kafi, states: “Signs of the prophets
are possessed by the Imams.” (Al-Kafi, p.231)
The finality of
Prophethood is thus abolished in the Shia sect, and
instead there is a continual extension of it in the
form of Imamah. The popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org,
declared: “The Shi’ah believe that the Imamate
constitutes an extension of prophethood in its
spiritual dimension.” (Lesson Number 24: http://al-islam.org/leadership/
)
As can be seen clearly
by the unbiased observor, all of these deviant sects
extend Prophethood in one way or the other, and thus
believe in Dajjals. The truth of the matter is that
Prophet Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is the
absolute seal of the Prophets. There is no other
position equal to or higher than the status of the
prophets and messengers; such a thing as having a
position higher than prophetood would obviate the need
to declare the finality of prophethood.
Allah declares in the
Quran:
“Muhammad is not the
father of any man among you, but the Messenger of
Allah and the Last of Prophets. And Allah has
knowledge of everything.” (Quran 33:40)
What is the point of
declaring Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم) as the Last of
the Prophets if there are people superior to Prophets
that will come later? Why didn’t Allah say “Muhammad
is the Last of the Prophets but he is also an Imam,
and there will be Imams who are superior to Prophets
that will come after Muhammad.” Surely, that would
have cleared up the confusion.
The Shia believe that
there can be no Imam after Imam Mehdi; he is the
twelvth Imam and the absolute last. Anyone who claimed
to be an Infallible Imam today would be declared a
Kaffir by the Shia Ulema. In fact, the (Twelver) Shia
call the Aga Khanis to be deviant because they believe
in Imams after the twelvth. Just like Muslims believe
that anyone is a Kaffir who believes in a Prophet
after Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم), so too do the
Shia believe that anyone who believes in an Infallible
Imam after Imam Mehdi is a Kaafir.
Now let us suppose
that a Shia follower suddenly started his own sect,
let us call it Mullah-ism. Followers of this
hypothetical sect believe in another position other
than Imam known as “Mullah”. According to followers of
Mullah-ism, Mullahs came after the 12th Imam when he
went into occultation, and these Mullahs are higher in
rank than the Imams. Imagine the reaction of the Shia
to a person who says that there can be a Mullah
greater in rank to their Infallible Imams! How quickly
would the Shia Ulema be to condemn these followers of
Mullah-ism.
By creating a station
or position higher than that of Imam, the followers of
Mullah-ism have obviated the very reason the Shia
declare Imamah to have ended with the twelvth Imam.
Suddenly, Mullahs become higher than Imams, thereby
making it inconsequential that the station of Imamah
came to an end. Of course, this example of
“Mullah-ism” is only hypothetical, but it fits
perfectly with the relationship of Shi’ism to (Sunni)
Islam. By creating a rank and station higher than that
of Prophet, the Shia have obviated the very reason
that we declare a seal on Prophethood. What is the
point of saying that there will be no more Prophets if
there are people who supercede Prophets?
Shia
Rebuttal
The Ahlus Sunnah
accuses the Shia of believing in false
Prophets/Messengers; indeed, the Shia simply call them
by a different name (i.e. “Imam”). The Shia deny this
claim and say that there is a difference between Imams
and Prophets/Messengers. The typical Shia
counter-response to this is:
“Nabuwwah/Risalah (Prophethood/Messengership)
and Imamah are two different stations. Messengers
recieve revelation. The Imams do not recieve
revelation. They are only divinely inspired (ilham).
So Imamah is not the same as Risalah.”
What the above fails
to mention is that although Imamah may not be the same
as Risalah (Messengership), it is definitely the same
as Nabuwwah (Prophethood). The Shia Ulema have said
that the difference between Messengers and Prophets is
that the former recieves revelation whereas the latter
is divinely inspired (ilham). This is rooted in the
Shia belief. According to Al-Kafi, the Shia book of
Hadith:
“What is a Messenger,
a Prophet and one who is told? He said: A Messenger is
one to whom the angel appears and speaks. A Prophet is
one who sees in his dream [ilham]. Possibly the
Prophethood and Messengership is combined in a single
person.” (Source: Usool Al-Kafi, Book 4, 442-4)
In another narration
in Al-Kafi:
“A Prophet is one who
sees the angel while asleep, and hears him but does
not see the angel awake [ilham]. A Messenger is one
who hears the voice while awake and sees, while
asleep, and also with his eyes sees the angel when
awake.” (Source: Usool Al-Kafi, Book 4, 439-1)
The Shia are in
agreement that there is a difference between the word
“Nabi” (Prophet) and “Rasool” (Messenger). And the
Shia believe that only those who are Messengers
recieve revelation whereas those who are Prophets only
will recieve divine inspiration (ilham).
So whereas the Shia
might find some room to claim that their Imams are not
the same as Messengers (for the reason that they do
not recieve revelation), but they still do not prove
that Imams are different than Prophets. Both Prophets
and Imams receive their words through divine
inspiration (ilham) only. There is thus no difference
between Prophets and Imams, and the names are
basically interchangeable.
why the Shia
sect is Kufr:
"It is essential that
Muslim sympathisers of the Shias divest themselves of
the notion that Shi’ism is part of Islam – that it is
just as one of the other four Madhabs which constitute
the Ahlus Sunnah. Shi’ism is not Islam nor is it a
sect of Islam. The ostentatious religious calls of an
Islamic hue emanating from Khomeini and his clergy do
not make Shi’ism any closer to Islam than the
religious and ‘Islamic’ calls and slogans of religions
such as Qadianism.
Like Qadianism,
Shi’ism too believes in the extension and perpetuation
of Nubuwwat (Prophethood) after Muhammad (Sallallaahu
Alayhi Wasallam). Although both religions (Qadianis
and Shi’ism) overtly assert a belief in the finality
of the Nubuwwat of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi
Wasallam), they covertly believe by way of fallacious
interpretation in the continuation of Nubuwwat.
Shi’i religious
literature abundantly clarifies the fact that Shias
believe in the continuation of Nubuwwat after
Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam). The only
cover presented by Shi’ism for this Kufr belief is a
name, viz., Imaam. Instead of calling the one they
believe to be a Prophet or Nabi or Rasool, they
describe him as an Imaam, and instead of saying
Nubuwwat they say Imaamat. But, in terms of Shi’i
religion there is absolutely no difference between a
Nabi or a Shi’i Imaam. In fact, Shi’ism propagates the
superiority of an Imaam over a Nabi.
Imaamat is a
continuation of Nubuwwat, there is no doubt. Their
beliefs as propounded by their own authorities
unequivocally assert total equality between Nubuwwat
and Imaamat, in fact, Imaamat is even accepted to be
superior to Nubuwwat by the Shi’i religion.
The Shi’i
book, ‘The faith of Shia Islam’ states,
‘We believe that
Imaamat is one of the fundamentals of Islam and that
man’s faith can never be complete without belief in
it. It is wrong to imitate our fathers, family or
teachers in this matter, even if we respect both, for
it is just as necessary rationally to consider Imaamat
as it is to consider Tawheed and Nubuwwat.’
‘We believe that, just
as it is necessary for Allah to send someone as a
prophet, so it is also necessary for Him to appoint an
Imaam.’
‘The Imaamat is
therefore a continuation of a prophethood, and the
reasoning which proves the former’s necessity is the
same that which prove the latter’s. ‘We believe that,
like the Prophet, an Imaam must be infallible, that is
to say incapable of making errors or doing wrong,
either inwardly or outwardly …’
‘Their (i.e. the Shi’i
Imaams) position in regard to Islam is the same as the
prophet’s, and the reasoning which necessitates their
infallibility is the same as that which necessitates
the Prophet’s infallibility, and there is no
difference between them in matters.’
‘The Faith
of Shia Islam’, states:
‘We believe that the
Imaamat, like Prophethood, must be an appointment from
Allah through His Messenger, or an appointed Imaam.
From this point of view, the Imaamat is the same as
the prophethood.’
No one should
therefore labour under the misapprehension that
Shi’ism believes in the Islamic concept of Finality of
Nubuwwat. The Qadianis claim to believe in the
Finality of Nubuwwat, but their devious interpretation
of this concept opens the way for them to accept Mirza
Ghulam as a Nabi. In the same way, the Shi’as believe
in the continuation of Nubuwwah inspite of their claim
to believe in the Finality of the Nubuwwah of Muhammad
(Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam). Each and every
attribute, office, function and institution exclusive
with Nubuwwah is asserted for the Imaams by the Shi’as.
One who studies the religious literature of the Shi’as
will not fail to understand that on only this one
basis of Imaamat, the Shi’as are not Muslims.
Rejection of a Nabi is
Kufr. One who does not believe in a Nabi is a Kaafir.
This is the belief of Islam. But according to the
Shi’ah religion, belief in Imaamat is Fardh just as
Fardh as it is to believe in Rasulullah (Sallallaahu
Alayhi Wasallam). According to Shi’ism, one who denies
any of the Shi’i Imaams – one who does not accept any
of the Shi’i Imaams – is a Kaafir. Propounding this
view, the Shi’i authority, Kulaini, states in his
‘most trustworthy and celebrated work of Hadith’, Al-Kaafi:
“We (i.e. the Imaams)
are those whose obedience Allah has made Fardh…
Whoever denies us is a Kaafir.”
This belief in Shi’ism
categorically indicates that the Shi’i religion
regards its Imaams as Ambiyaa. All those who do not
subscribe to the Shi’ah doctrine of Imaamat are
branded as Kaafirs by the Shi’ah religion. This is an
indisputable fact in terms of Shi’ah theological
writings. It is entirely another matter for Khomeini
and the present Shi’a clergy to ostensibly claim that
they regard Sunnis as Muslims. Such devious statements
are based on the Shi’ah doctrine of Taqiyyah (holy
hypocrisy) and stem from pernicious political
motives."
Conclusion
We have proven in this article that the Shia sect is
Kufr. We have established this fact by providing
references from well-known sources in which the Shia
declare their Imams to be superior to Prophets. This
belief voids a person’s Kalimah since it is implicit
in the Kalimah that we mean to say that the Prophet (صلّىالله عليه وآله وسلّم) is
not just a Prophet, but he is the last Prophet. The
Shia believe in Imams who have the same position as
Prophets, and the only difference is in the names and
nothing else.
Add Comments