Taqiyya: The Two-Faced Religion!



INTRODUCTION: Taqiyya in the tongue of the Arabs means to fear or to be cautious or wary of something, in order to protect oneself from it.

al-Imam ibn Hajar (rah) says in “Fath-ul-Bari” 19/398:

[It is to be wary from exposing what is concealed in oneself -such  as the belief- from others]

Taqiyya in the religion of Islam is permissible because of these two verses:

Sura 3 Verse 28:

Translation of Arberry:

{Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends, rather than the believers — for whoso does that belongs not to God in anything — unless you have a fear of them. God warns you that You beware of Him, and unto God is the homecoming.}

Translation of Pickthall:

{Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. Whoso doeth that hath no connection with Allah unless (it be) that ye but guard yourselves against them, taking (as it were) security. Allah biddeth you beware (only) of Himself. Unto Allah is the journeying.}

Sura 16 Verse 106:

Translation of Arberry:

{Whoso disbelieves in God, after he has believed — excepting him who has been compelled, and his heart is still at rest in his belief — but whosoever’s breast is expanded in unbelief, upon them shall rest anger from God, and there awaits them a mighty chastisement;}

Translaion of  Pickthall:

{Whoso disbelieveth in Allah after his belief – save him who is forced thereto and whose heart is still content with the Faith – but whoso findeth ease in disbelief: On them is wrath from Allah. Theirs will be an awful doom.}


al-Imam al-Qurtubi (rah) in his book “Tafseer al-Qurtubi” lists three opinions while commenting on those verses:

[Mu`adh ibn Jabal and Mujahid both said: Taqiyya was at the beginning when Islam was not yet strong, but today Allah strengthened this religion so that they may not practice Taqiyya  with their enemies.

`Abdullah ibn `Abbas said: It is to utter (Kufr) with the tongue while the heart is at peace with the faith. However, it is not permissible to kill or commit sins.

al-Hasan al-Basri said: Taqiyya is permissible until the day of judgement but one may not kill.]

He continues:

[It was said that, if the believer is residing between disbelievers, and if he fears for his life from them, then he can humor them with his tongue but his heart must be comfortable and content with the Islamic faith. Taqiyya is not permissible except from fear of being killed, or greatly harmed (i.e having the limbs cut). As for the one who is forced to commit an act of Kufr, the correct opinion is that he can disobey and avoid uttering any words of Kufr.]

al-Imam ibn Kathir (rah) expands on this in his book “Tafseer ibn Kathir” while commenting on the same verses:

[{except one who was forced while his heart is at peace with the faith} This is an exception in the case of one who utters statements of disbelief and verbally agrees with the polytheists because he is forced to do so by the beatings and abuse to which he is subjected, but his heart refuses to accept what he is saying, and he is, in reality, at peace with his faith in Allah and His Messenger . The scholars agreed that if a person is forced into disbelief, it is permissible for him to either go along with them in the interests of self-preservation, or to refuse, as Bilal did when they were inflicting all sorts of torture on him, even placing a huge rock on his chest in the intense heat and telling him to admit others as partners with Allah. He refused, saying, “He is One, One.” And he said, “By Allah, if I knew any word more annoying to you than this, I would say it.” May Allah be pleased with him. Similarly, when the Liar Musaylimah asked Habib bin Zayd Al-Ansari, “Do you bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah” He said, “Yes.” Then Musaylimah asked, “Do you bear witness that I am the messenger of Allah” Habib said, “I do not hear you.” Musaylimah kept cutting him, piece by piece, but he remained steadfast insisting on his words. It is better and preferable for the Muslim to remain steadfast in his religion, even if that leads to him being killed, as was mentioned by Al-Hafiz Ibn `Asakir in his biography of `Abdullah bin Hudhafah Al-Sahmi, one of the Companions. He said that he was taken prisoner by the Romans, who brought him to their king. The king said, “Become a Christian, and I will give you a share of my kingdom and my daughter in marriage.” `Abdullah said: “If you were to give me all that you possess and all that Arabs possess to make me give up the religion of Muhammad even for an instant, I would not do it.” The king said, “Then I will kill you.” `Abdullah said, “It is up to you.” The king gave orders that he should be crucified, and commanded his archers to shoot near his hands and feet while ordering him to become a Christian, but he still refused. Then the king gave orders that he should be brought down, and that a big vessel made of copper be brought and heated up. Then, while `Abdullah was watching, one of the Muslim prisoners was brought out and thrown into it, until all that was left of him was scorched bones. The king ordered him to become a Christian, but he still refused. Then he ordered that `Abdullah be thrown into the vessel, and he was brought back to the pulley to be thrown in. `Abdullah wept, and the king hoped that he would respond to him, so he called him, but `Abdullah said, “I only weep because I have only one soul with which to be thrown into this vessel at this moment for the sake of Allah; I wish that I had as many souls as there are hairs on my body with which I could undergo this torture for the sake of Allah.” According to some reports, the king imprisoned him and deprived him of food and drink for several days, then he sent him wine and pork, and he did not come near them. Then the king called him and asked him, “What stopped you from eating” `Abdullah said, “It is permissible for me (under these circumstances), but I did not want to give you the opportunity to gloat.” The king said to him, “Kiss my head and I will let you go.” `Abdullah said, “And will you release all the Muslim prisoners with me” The king said, “Yes.” So `Abdullah kissed his head and he released him and all the other Muslim prisoners he was holding. When he came back, `Umar bin Al-Khattab said, “Every Muslim should kiss the head of `Abdullah bin Hudhafah, and I will be the first to do so.” And he stood up and kissed his head. May Allah be pleased with them both.]

What we conclude so far, is that the Muslim is allowed to hide his faith and even show disbelief if he fears great harm, but it is more noble and much greater in the sight of God, if one were to die for his belief for the sake of Allah.

Shaykh al-Maududi (rah) also wrote in commentary to these verses in “Tafheem ul-Qur’an”:

[This verse deals with the case of those Muslims who were being persecuted with cruelty and were being-subjected to unbearable torments to force them to give up their Faith. They are being told that if at any time they are forced to utter words of disbelief to save their lives, when in fact in their hearts they are secure against disbelief, they will be pardoned. On the other hand, if they accepted unbelief from the core of their hearts, they shall not escape the torment of Allah even if they succeed in saving their lives.

It does not, however, mean that one should utter words of disbelief to save one’s life. This is merely a permission but not the ideal thing for a Believer. According to this permission if one utters such a thing, he shall not be taken to account. In fact, the ideal for a Believer is to utter words of truth in any case whether his body is cut into pieces. There are instances which show that during the period of the Holy Prophet some acted upon the ideal while others took advantage of the permission. There was Khabbab bin Art (May Allah be pleased with him) who was made to lie on embers of fire until the fire was extinguished by the melting of his fat, but he remained firm in his Faith. Then there was Bilal Habashi (May Allah be pleased with him) who was made to put on an armor and stand in the scorching heat. Then he was dragged on the burning sand but he went on saying, “Allah is one.” There was another Believer, Habib Gin Zaid bin `Asim, whose limbs were cut one by one by the order of Musailimah, the Liar. Each time his limb was severed it was demanded of him that he should acknowledge the Liar as a prophet but each time he refused to bear witness to his claim of prophethood until he breathed his last. On the other hand, there was the instance of Ammar bin Yasir (May Allah be pleased with him) whose parents were mercilessly butchered before his eyes. After this he himself was put to such unbearable torture that, in order to save his life, he had to utter the same words of unbelief that were demanded of him. Afterwards when he came crying to the Holy Prophet, he said, “O Messenger of Allah, they did not let me go until I spoke evil of you and praised their deities” . The Holy Prophet asked him, “How do you feel about this, in your heart?” He replied humbly, “My heart is fully convinced of the Faith.” At this the Holy Prophet replied, “If they put you to the same torture again, you may utter the same words”.]

As we see from the words of the noble scholars of Islam, Taqiyya is practiced with the enemies from the Kouffar in order to protect oneself from death or great harm! On the other hand, a Twelver Imami Shia will also make a similar claim, he will say that Taqiyya in his religion is also a means to avoid death in extreme cases… but is this true? or is the Shia lying and practicing his own deceptive version of Taqiyya?


We begin by quoting the leaders of the Twelver Shia faith from their own books.

1) Shaykh al-Saduq, ibn Babawayh al-Qummi in his “al-I`tiqadat” (p 114) said:

[Our belief regarding Taqiyya is that it is obligatory. He who leaves it is like he who leaves praying, and it’s impermissible to dismiss it until the Mahdi rises, he who leaves it before al Mahdi rises has left the religion of Allah and the religion of Imami Shia and has disobeyed Allah and the Prophet and the Imams.]

2) As quoted from “Bihar al Anwar” 75/421 and “Mustadraq Safeenat al-Bihar” 10/416, the author of al-Hidayah says:

[Taqiyya is obligatory and it’s impermissible to leave it until the Mahdi rises and he who left it has broken the rule of Allah and his Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) and the Imams (alaihuma salam).]

 3) `Abbas al Qummi said in “Al Kuna wal Alqab” 1/141:

[Taqiyya is an obligatory act upon us in the government of oppressors -he means Sunni Islamic Caliphate- and he who leaves it has left the religion of Imami Shia and strayed away from it.]

4) In “Mir’at al-Anwar” (p 337), al`Amili says:

[The clear authentic and mass transmitted (Mutawatir) narrations prove that Taqiyya shall remain until the Mahdi rises.]

5) al-Khomayni said in “Al Makasib al Muharramah” (2/162):

[Leaving Taqiyya is a sin which can lead to the bottom of hell and is equal to rejecting the prophet-hood and Allah.]

However he contradicted himself in another location, when Khomayni wished to overthrow the king of Iran, he ordered his followers to stop practicing Taqiyya and to fight against the ruler of Iran, this is documented in many locations such as “al-Taqiyya fil-Fikr al-Islami” p.103 and “Durous fil-Jihad wal-Rafd” p55-58.

al-Khomayni said:

[Taqiyya is Haram and exposing the truth is obligatory no matter what the price.]

al-Khomayni also contradicted himself and the early scholars for political purposes when he said in “Tahreer al-Wasilah” issue #2792:

[It is a disgrace to remain silent in such conditions, and to display cowardice in front of the oppressors who wish to harm the honor of the human and the Qur’an and the eternal Islamic laws. Rise and revolt and struggle and reform!]

6) While Khomayni is speaking about the various types of Taqiyya in “al-Rasa’il” 2/174, he explains the “Mudaratiyah Taqiyya”:

[It is the act of making those who differ with us – Ahlul sunnah – love us and to lure them by friendliness in a situation where there is no fear of harm or damage -to the shia- unlike the Taqiyya of fear.]

7) al-Khomayni continues in “al-Rasa’il” 2/201 by saying:

[Taqiyya is wajib (obligatory) with those who differ with us -Ahlul Sunnah- even if there is no fear on oneself or on someone else’s.]

8) al-Shirazi said in “al Qawa`id al Fiqhiyah” 1/410:

[The Purpose of Taqiyya is not limited to preserve one’s self and to repel harm and danger from the self and the family and the wealth. It can also be to preserve the unity of the Muslims in situations where there is no need to reveal the true beliefs or defend them. It can be for other purposes as well, like spreading the message in a better way…]

Basically what their leader al-Shirazi is saying, is that they’ll lie in order to get close to you, and when they earn your trust they’ll begin spreading their message and bit by bit you’ll start doubting your religion and then you can easily be converted to Shia faith.

9) Muhsin al-Hakeem said in “al-Mustamsak” 2/410:

[I say: The duty is to humor them (The Sunnies) and keep up with them, it is forbidden to leave this, so that they may not become aware of the differences]

And he said on pg.332:

[What we benefit from the narrations of Taqiyya is that they were legislated so that the Shia may hide from their opponents, and so that they may not be known for their Shiasm and Rafidhism]

We conclude from this, that they know for a fact that they are Rafidhah who curse and insult the companions, they only hide this to be on our good side and later convert us to their faith.

10) Muhammad Sadiq al-Roohani in his book “Fiqh al-Sadiq” 11/418, he says about the Imam Ja`far:

[We conclude from this, that Taqiyya is his (Ja`far’s) religion and that of his fathers, and it is to conceal our ways from the opponents, and to try and spread them in secret. It is necessary to preserve the religion (Shiasm) and its followers, also spreading it depends on this.]


1) The Shia have narrated in their books that the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) said:

“He who leaves Taqiyya is like he who leaves Prayer.”

Source: “Al Hidayah” by Saduq p51, “Man La Yahduruhu al faqih” 2/127, “Wasael al Shia” 7/94-11/466, “Bihar al Anwar” 50/181-64/103-72/412, “Kashf al Ghummah” by Arbeeli 3/182.

2) And they have narrated from Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq:

“If you had said that he who leaves Taqiyya is like he who leaves prayer then you would have been truthful.”

Source: “Al Makasib al Muharramah” by Khomayni 2/144, “Man La Yahduruhu al faqih” 2/127, “Wasael al Shia” 16/211-7/94-11/466, “Al Kuna wal Alqab” by `Abbas al Qummi 1/142.

3) And they narrated from their Imams:

“He who leaves Taqiyya is a Kafir.”

Source: “Fiqh al Rida” By Ali ibn Babaweih p338, “Bihar al Anwar” 75/347.

4) They have attributed to prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam):

“Taqiyya is from the religion of Allah and there is no religion for he who has no Taqiyya, By Allah if it weren’t for Taqiyya then Allah would not be worshiped.”

Source: “Mustadrak al Wasael” 12/252, “Jami` Ahadith al Shia” 14/504.

5) They have narrated from `Ali:

“Taqiyya is my religion and that of my household.”

Source: “Mustadrak al Wasael” 12/252, “Jami` Ahadith al Shia” 14/502.

6) Narrated from Abu Ja`far al-Baqir:

“Taqiyya is from my religion and that of my fathers and there is no belief -in another version no religion- for he who has no Taqiyya.”

Source: “Al Kafi” 2/219,224 (authenticated by Majlisi and Behbudi); `Ayyashi “Tafseer” 1/166; “Bihar ul Anwar” 13/158 ، 66/495 ، 67/103 ، 75/77.

7) And they have narrated from as-Sadiq:

““9/10th” of this religion is Taqiyya and there is no religion for he who has no Taqiyya.”
Source: “Al Khisal” by Saduq 1/14, “Al Kafi” 2/217, “Bihar al Anwar” 66/486, 75/394,399,423, 79/172.

This Hadith was authenticated by sheikh Murtada al-Ansari who is called by the Shia – “Ustadh Fuqaha wal Muhadetheen” or “The teacher of thee jurists and scholars of Hadith”  in his book “al-Taharah” vol 2,279-280.

8.) And they have narrated:
“Taqiyya is the shield of the believer and there is no belief for he who does not do Taqiyya.”

Source: “Bihar al anwar” 75/394,437, “Qurb al Isnad” p17, “Noor al Thaqalayn” by Huwaythi 3/89, “al Kafi” 2/221 (authenticated by Majlisi and Behbudi).

9) And they narrated:

“There is nothing good in he who does not do Taqiyya and there is no belief for he who does not do Taqiyya.”

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 75/397, “al Mahasen” p257, “al `Ilal” p51, “Mustadrak al Wasael” 12/254.

10) Shia scholar Muhammad Rida al-Muzaffar in his “`Aqa’id-ul-Imamiya” in chapter 33 “Doctrine of Dissimulation (Taqiyya)” said:

“It is related from Imam al-Sadiq in an authenticated tradition: “Taqiyya is my religion and the religion of my forefathers. Whosoever has no Taqiyya has no religion.”

11) And they narrated:

“Taqiyya is from the religion of Allah”, I asked: “From the religion of Allah?” He said: “Yes by Allah, it is from the religion of Allah”.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 75/425, “al Kafi” 2/217 (Majlisi said it’s Muwaththaq), “Mishkat al Anwar” p43.

12) And from their book “Mishkat al Anwar fi Ghurar al Akhbar” chapter #11:

They narrated that Imam al-Sadiq reported on the authority of his father: “I swear by God that there is nothing on the Earth dearer to me than Taqiyya, my darling. God will raise the status of whomever practices Taqiyya, and God will abase whoever does not.”

13) Also in the same book and chapter:

In “al-Taqiyya” by al-`Ayyashi it is narrated that Imam al-Sadiq said: “There is no religion for he who has no Taqiyya. And indeed the practice of concealing faith is wider than whatever exists between the Heavens and the Earth.”

14) And again from the same source:

Imam al-Sadiq said: “Whoever believes in God and the Resurrection, shouldn’t talk in the unjust government except by Taqiyya.”

Comment: By “unjust government” he means any land ruled by non-Shia.

15) And they have narrated from their Imam:

“Allah forgives all sins for the believers in this world and the hereafter except for two: Leaving Taqiyya and wasting the rights of his brothers.”

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 68/163-74/229-75/409,415, “Tafseer al `Askari” 128, “Wasael al Shia” 11/474-16/223, “Jami` al Akhbar” p95.

16) Shaykh as-Saduq in his book “al-Hidayah”, under the chapter of “Taqiyya” wrote:

[It is related from as-Sadiq that he was asked about the saying of Allah (swt), {Verily the most noble of you with Allah is the most fearing}. He said “The one from you who most practices Taqiyya.”]

And he wrote several narrations such as:

[He (The Imam) said, “Mix with the people (Sunnies) on the outside, and oppose them on the inside, so long as the affair (Of the Mahdi)  is longing.”]

And he wrote:

[He (The Imam) said, “Ostentation (Riya’) with the hypocrite in his house is worship, and with the believer, is shirk.”
Taqiyya is obligatory; it is not allowed to abandon it until the Qa’im (Mahdi) comes forth. Whoso abandons it has entered in the interdiction of Allah, `azza wa jalla, and the interdiction of His Messenger and the Imams, the blessings of Allah be upon them all.]

17) And they have narrated from imam al-Rida:

“There is no religion for he who has no piety and no belief for he who has no Taqiyya. The kindest amongst you in the sight of Allah are those who practice Taqiyya the most.”

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 75/395, “Kamal al Deen” 346, “Noor al Thaqalayn” 4/47, “Muntakhab al Athar” 220.

18) And they have attributed to prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam):

“The example of the believer who has no Taqiyya is like that of a headless body.”
Source: “Wasael al Shia 11/473, “Bihar al Anwar” 74/229-75/414, “Mustadrak al Wasael” 9/48, “Jami` al Akhbar” p110.

19) And from `Ali

“Taqiyya is from the best acts of the believers.”
Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 75/414, “Tafseer al Askari” 127, “Jami` al Akhbar” 94.

20) From `Ali ibn Husayn:

“Who is the most complete of the people in terms of good habits? He said: he who practices Taqiyya the most.”
Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 75/417, “Tafseer al Askari” 128.

21) And they narrated that al-Baqir said to as-Sadiq:

“Allah has not created anything more beloved in the sight of your father than Taqiyya, and the Taqiyya is the Jannah of the believer.”

Source: “Al Khisal” 1/14, “Bihar al Anwar” 75/394,398,412,432-78/287, “al Mahasen” p258, “Jami` al Akhbar” p95, “al Kafi” 2/220.

22) And from him:

“The most honorable of morals of the Imams and the virtuous men of our Shia is Taqiyya.”
Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 75/415, “Tafseer al Askari” 127.

23) From as-Sadiq:

“Never has Allah been worshiped by anything more beloved to him than the Khub. They asked: What is the khub? He said: the Taqiyya.”

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 75/396, “Ma’ani al Akhbar” p162, “Wasael al Shia” 16/207,219.

24) They narrated that al-Sadiq said to Suffiyan ibn Sa`eed:

“O Suffiyan, do Taqiyya for it is the sunnah of Prophet Ibrahim al Khalil (alaihi salam).”

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 13/135-75/396, “Ma`ani al Akhbar” p386, “Wasael al Shia” 16/208.

25) And they narrated from him, that he said to his Shia:

“You (People) have a religion which if you hide it (by Taqiyya) then Allah will raise your rank and if you spread it then Allah will humiliate you.”

Source: “Bihar alAnwar” 75/397,412, “al Mahasen” 257, “al Kafi” 2/222, “al Rasa’il” by Khomayni 2/185.

26) And they attributed to the Imam that he said:

“By Allah there is nothing on the face of this earth which is more beloved to me than Taqiyya. O Habib, he who has the Taqiyya then Allah will elevate him and Allah will lower the one who doesn’t have it.”

Source: “Mishkat al Anwar” 41, “Bihar al Anwar” 75/398,426, “al Mahasen” 256, “al Kafi” 2/217 (Behbudi said it’s Sahih).

27) And they narrated from the Imam:

“Taqiyya is vast and he who does it shall be rewarded for every aspect of it.”

Source: “Al Kafi” 3/380, “Tahtheeb al Ahkam” by Tusi 3/51, “Wasael al Shia” 8/405, “Bihar al Anwar” 85/69.

28) And from the Imam:

“(On the day of judgment) The man from our Shia who was very negligent in his worship of Allah shall be brought forward, but since he has the belief in Wilayah and he has the Taqiyya and he preserved the rights of his brothers. Then Allah will place in front of him a hundred thousand Nasibis – meaning Ahlul Sunnah – and it shall be said to him: They shall be in hell-fire instead of you, thus those believers enter heaven and the Nawasib enter hell.”

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 8/44, “Tafseer al Askari” 242, “al Burhan” 2/325.

29) And it was narrated that As-Sadiq was asked:

“Who is better, us or the companions of the Mahdi? He said: You are better than the companions of al-Mahdi because you wake up and sleep in fear for your Imam from the tyrant rulers. If you pray then you pray in Taqiyya and if you fast then your fasting is in Taqiyya and if you make pilgrimage then you make it in Taqiyya … I said: Then why do we wish for the Mahdi to appear? He said: Subhan Allah don’t you wish for justice and that the oppressed be saved?”

Source: “Al Ikhtisas” by Mufid p20, “Bihar al Anwar” 52/144, “Ithbat al Hudat” 3/557, “Mu`jam Ahadith al Imam al Mahdi” by Kourani 3/404.

30) And from as-Sadiq:

“He is not from us who does not stick to Taqiyya.”

Source: “Al Qawa`id al Fiqhiyah” by Nasir Makarim 1/410,478, “Wasael al Shia” 11/466, “Amali” by Tusi 281, “Al Sirat al Mustaqeem” by Amili 3/71.

31) And from the Imam that he said:

“If our Mahdi rises, then Taqiyya is dismissed.”

Source: “Ithbat al Hudat” 3/564, “Bihar al Anwar” 24/47, “Kanz al Fawa’id” by al Karajki p282.

32) And they narrated from ar-Rida:

“He who leaves Taqiyya before our Qa’im (Mahdi) rises then he isn’t from us.”

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 75/411,396, “Kamal al Deen” by Saduq 346, “Noor al Thaqalayn” 4/47, “Ithbat al hudat” 3/477,567, “Muntakhab al Athar” p220, “Kashf al Ghummah” by Arbilee 2/524, “Kifayat al Athar” 274.
The Shia Mahdi himself is shrouded with Taqiyya.

In “Qawaid al-fiqhiya” by Nasir Shirazi (1/497, for hadith see “Wasael al Shia” 11/487) written:

Abu Abdullah al Salihi said: Our companions asked me after Imam Abu Muhammad (alaihi salam) had left. They asked me about the name and the location and the answer was: If you tell the name then they’ll spread it and if they know the location they will tell on him(reveal him).

And it was narrated that one of the emissaries, Muhammad ibn Uthman al-Umari was asked:

“You saw the successor?” He said: “Yes, By Allah” – until he was asked – And his name? He said: “It is forbidden for you to ask for his name and I don’t say this from my own mind because it is not my place to say what is Haram and Halal, but that’s (only) from him (to say) peace be upon him. The Sultan thinks that abu Muhammad al Imam al Askari (alaihi salam) had died without a son – until he said- And if you mention a name then they will ask for him so fear Allah and refrain from it.
Source: “Al Kafi” 1/330 (authenticated by Majlisi and Bahbude), “Al Ghaybah” by Tusi p244,360, “Bihar al anwar” 51/348, “I’ilam al Wara” by Tabrasi 2/219.
Ali ibn Asim al-Kufi said:

It was mentioned in the writings of the Mahdi that “He is cursed, he is cursed, he who calls me by my name in a place full of people”.

Source: “Mu’ujam al Rijal” by Khoei 13/70, “Kamal al Deen” by Saduq 482, “Wasael al Shia” 11/489, “Jami’i Ahadith al Shia” 14/561.

And from Muhammad ibn Uthman al-Umari:

A writing that I am familiar with says: “He who calls me by my name between a group of people then the curse of Allah be on him.”

Source: “Al Qawa’ed al Fiqhiyah” 1/495,499, “Wasael al Shia” 11/489.

But let’s not get derailed, we go back to the narrations of Taqiyya.

33) They narrated from as-Sadiq:

“Do Taqiyya for he is not from among us who does not make it his slogan and habit with those who are closest to him, so that he can later use it against those he fears.”

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 72/395, “Al Amali” p293, “Wasael al Shia” 11/466, “Mustadrak Safeenat al Bihar” 10/415.

34) They also narrated:

“Make Taqiyya in situations where there shouldn’t be Taqiyya.”

Source: “Fiqh al redah” p338, “Bihar al anwar” 75/347.

So in brief the rules of Taqiyya in the religion of the Twelver Shiites are completely and utterly different than those of the traditional correct Islamic Taqiyya. The true Muslim scholars permitted this practice when one is surrounded by disbelievers, those who seek your blood or when your family is in extreme danger. In such cases it’s permitted to hide your Islam.


Below you would see few samples from a huge ocean of Shia narrations in which they claim their imams to be doing Taqiyya and concealing the truth. It’s up to you to judge if these are indeed life threatening situations? You’ll also see how the Shia scholars pick and choose the narrations which contradict with their own beliefs and pass them off as Taqiyya.

1) Narrated ar-Rida from his fathers:

While explaining the verse {Then on that Day, you will be asked concerning pleasure}[Al Takathur:8] Ali ibn Abu Talib said: It’s al Rutab(Dates) and cold Water”.
Shia giant scholar of hadith Muhammad Baqir al Majlisi said: Maybe this could be considered Taqiyya.

Source: Bihar al Anwar 7/273.

One has to ask himself what type of life threatening situation was caliph `Ali (ra) or Imam al Rida (rah) in which would push them to  lie about something so insignificant and minor? Would they have been killed if they didn’t say dates and cold water?

2) And again from him:

“Eve is created from the liver of Adam, in another narration: from the side of Adam while he was asleep”.

Allamah Majlisi says: This News is considered Taqiyya.

Source: Bihar al Anwar 11/116, 222.

Who would have harmed him if he were to say otherwise? What is the need for Taqiyya here?

3) And they narrated:

“Adam (as) descended in India”.

Scholar al Majlisi says: We can consider this narration as Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 11/180, 213.

What’s the purpose of telling people that Adam (as) descended in India? Did al-Sadiq say this while being chased by an angry mob of Indians? Why use Taqiyya to tell people something like this?

4) And they narrated that Tawus al-Yamani asked the Imam:

“Do you know in which day a third of humanity died? He replied: O Abu AbdurRahman, a third of humanity never died but a quarter of humanity died. He said: How’s that? Imam said: It was Adam and Eve and Qabil and Habil, Then Qabil killed Habil so it was one fourth of humanity”.

Al Majlisi said: The Fact that he never mentioned their sisters is considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 11/230.

Can anyone explain why he used Taqiyya here? What’s the danger?

5) And they have narrated from as-Sadiq:

“Ismail (as) died at 130 years of age”.

Al Majlisi said: This news is considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 12/113.

Would they have killed him if he were to say 129 years?  or 131? Why do Taqiyya in this situation?

6) In some narrations the Imams mentioned that the sacrificed son of Ibrahim (as) is Isaac and not Ismail (as) so al Majlisi said: We can consider these narrations as Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar Al Anwar” 12/135.

Although Ahlul-Sunnah differed in this matter and no one got killed for it, no one had to hide his beliefs and lie to save his life.

7) The Shia  narrated:

“Al Baqir (as) said: Yahya (as) was the son of Mariam’s Aunt (from her Mother’s side)”.
Majlisi said: Maybe this is Taqiyya.

Source: Bihar al Anwar 14/202.

In Other Narrations, That Mariam (as) was the sister of Yahya’s (as) Mother, and one of these can be considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Mustadrak Safeenta al bihar” 4/268.

8) And from al-Baqir:

Al Baqir (as) said: The Day of Ashura is the day when Isa bin Mariam (as) was born.

Al Majlisi: This can be Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 14/215.

Who would kill him or harm him for saying something like this?

9) And Majlisi also said:

All narrations which state that the man whom Allah had put to death for a hundred years is `Uzayr , are considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 14/378.

10) And he said:

The narrations which differ regarding the period of time that Yunus spent in the belly of the whale some of them can be considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 14/401.

11) And they narrated in a long hadith from as-Sadiq:

The Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) went to the house of Zayd to ask for him so he saw Zaynab sitting in her room preparing food. He opened the door and looked at her and she was beautiful, so the prophet (saw) said: “Subhan Allah the creator of Noor and Tabarak Allahu, (who is) the best of creators”. Then he went back home and Zaynab was in his heart…

Majlisi said: Maybe this is Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 22/216.

According to this, the Imam is tarnishing the reputation of the prophet (saw) and spreading filthy rumors as Taqiyya? Just to save his life?

12) And they narrated that when `Ali (alaihi salam) was asked about the days and what actions are permitted in each one, he said:

“Saturday is a day of scheming and trickery, Sunday is a day of planting and building, Monday is a day of traveling and seeking”.

Al Majlisi said: We can consider what came on Monday as Taqiyya and this is the opinion of sheikh al Amili.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 59/23.

13) In another narration the Imam compliments Monday so Majlisi says that this is done as Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al anwar” 59/52, 62/138.

14) In another narration Imam Musa al Kadhim criticizes the day of Nawrouz. So al Majlisi says he did so out of Taqiyya.

Source: Bihar al anwar 59/101.

15) And they narrated from Abul Hasan:

“The Mousoukh -Humans who transformed to beasts- are twelve kinds. The elephant was a king of adultery who was a homosexual, the bear was a corrupt wondering Arab, the rabbit is a woman who is betraying her husband, the bat used to steal other people’s dates … The flower used to be a woman who made fitnah with Haroot and Maroot, the pigs and monkeys are a people of Bani Israel who transgressed on a saturday … The scorpion is a man who talks about others behind their back”.

Al Majlisi said: Some of these can be Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 65/221

16) And they narrated that ibn Kawa asked Ali:

“I found a dead chicken and an egg came out of it, can I eat it? Ali said: No”.
Al Majlisi: Impermissibility can be attributed to Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 66/50.

17) In some narrations the Imam criticizes meat, al Majlisi says: All narrations criticizing meat are Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al anwar” 66/57,70.

18) Mouwafaq the Mawla (Servant) of Abu al Hassan said:

“Out of all plants he used to tell us to have lots of Jarjeer (Plant like Mint commonly known as rocket or arugula)”.

Majlisi says: it’s possible this is Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 66/237.

If the imam starts telling his followers to eat lots of Jarjeer, why should we consider this Taqiyya? What life threatening situation makes him claim that eating lots of Jarjeer is good for us? Was Yazeed Pro-Jarjeer? Nonsense!

19) And they have narrated from as-Sadiq:

“Three breaths while drinking are better than one breath”.

Majlisi said: Maybe the multitude (of breaths) is Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 66/463.

20) Sadiq was asked:

“If a woman has Janabah does she need to do Ghusl from it if a man didn’t release in her?” He said: No.

Shia scholar Al Amili says: We can consider this Taqiyya.

Source: “Wasael al Shia” by al Hurr al Amili 2/192.

21) And al-Baqir was describing Ghusl:

“Wash your palms and your sexual organ and make ablution like that of prayer then wash up”.

Sheikh al Amili says: This is considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Wasael al Shia” 2/247.

22) And from as-Sadiq:

“If you make ablution then wipe your feet from the bottom and top”.

Sheikh al Shia al Tusi said: This news is considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Al Tahtheeb” 1/92, “Al Istibsar” by Tusi 1/61,62, “Wasael al Shia” 1/415.

23) And they narrated from `Ali:

“I sat to make ablution and the prophet (saw) came when I started -until he said- He told me: O Ali wipe between your toes”.

Sheikh al Tusi said: This narration is one of Taqiyya because it agrees with the mainstream Muslims (Sunnies).

Source: “Al Tahtheeb” 1/93, “al Istibsar” 1/66, “Wasael al Shia” 1/421.

24) And they narrated that as-Sadiq was asked about the man who wipes his face with a small towel, he said: No problem with that. In another narration that as-Sadiq made ablution then wiped his face with the bottom of his clothes and said “Do this because it’s what I do”.
Al Amili and al Majlisi said: We can consider these narrations as Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 80/331, And Amili said the same in “Wasael al Shia” 1/475.

25) And from al-Kadhim:

The prophet (saw) said: Open your eyes during ablution so that they may not see the fire. In another narration: Let your eyes contact water (during ablution).

Al Majlisi said: It’s not unlikely that these two reports are Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 80/337.

26) And they narrated that al-Kadhim was asked:

“About a man who made ablution but forgot to wash his left, he said: He washes his left only and does not repeat the entire ablution”.

Al Majlisi said: Maybe this is Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 80/358.

27) And they narrated from `Ali:

“A woman in her period does not make prostration if she hears the verses of prostration”.

Al Majlisi said: What’s apparent is that this is Taqiyya, and this is what shaykh al-Amili also said, because the majority of mainstream Muslims forbade it.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 81/118, “Wasael al Shia” 2/342.

28) When as-Sadiq was asked about Tayamum, he replied:

“He placed his hand on the floor and then wiped his face and his arms until the elbows”.

Sheikh al Tusi said: This is Taqiyya because it agrees with the Madhab of the mainstream muslims, sheikh al-Amili said the same.
Source: “Al Istibsar” 1/170, Al Amili said the same in “Wasael al Shia” 3/362,365.

29) And from al-Baqir:

“The most deserving person to pray upon the woman when she dies is her husband”.

Al Majlisi said: The narrations which state that the brother is more deserving than the husband are Taqiyya and this is the opinion of sheikh Tusi, because it agrees with the madhab of the mainstream Muslims.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 81/346, “Al Tahtheeb” 3/205, “al Istibsar” 1/487, “Wasael al Shia” 3/116.

30) And they narrated that the prophet (saw) said:

“Don’t pray twice on Janazah”.

Al Amili and al Majlisi said: The news of impermissibility are considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 81/350, “Wasael al Shia” 3/87.

31) They narrated that as-Sadiq disliked praying upon the deceased when the sun is yellow and when it rises.

Sheikh Tusi said: It’s disliked because it can be the Madhab of some mainstream Muslims, so he made Taqiyya.

Source: “Al Tahtheeb” 3/321, “Al Istibsar” 1/470, “Wasael al Shia” 3/109.

32) And they narrated that after as-Sadiq explained how to perform funeral prayer, he said: “And if you’re done then you make Tasleem on your right”.

At-Tusi said: When he said that you make Tasleem on your right after you’re done he did Taqiyya because it agrees with the Madhab of the mainstream Muslims.

Source: “Al Tahtheeb” 3/192, “Al Istibsar” 1/478.

33) And they have narrated from as-Sadiq, that he said:

There is no prayer after `Asr until you pray the Maghrib, and no prayer after Fajr until the sun rises.

Sheikh at-Tusi said: These narrations and the ones similar to them are considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Al Istibsar” 1/291.

34) And they narrated from Sama`ah:

I said to Abu Abdullah (as) regarding Maghrib: We pray it but fear that the sun could be hidden behind a mountain or is concealed by one. He replied: You don’t have to climb the mountain.

Al Amili and al Majlisi said: It’s best to consider this Taqiyya.
Source: “Wasael al Shi”a 4/198, “Bihar al Anwar” 83/85.

35) And they narrated from as-Sadiq:

“He who delays Maghrib prayer until the stars appear without an excuse then by Allah I have nothing to do with him”.

Al Majlisi said: We can consider this from Taqiyya as well.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 83/60.

36) They narrated from Abu Arandas:

“That he saw al Kadhim (as) during Ramadan when the caller (to prayer) was calling: “Allahu Akbar”, his servant poured him a drink and he drank it”.

Al Majlisi said: We can consider this Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 83/62.

SubhanAllah! Where bani Umayyah waiting for him to drink so they can execute him or arrest him!?

37) From Zurarah:

“I saw Al Baqir and As Sadiq when they raise their heads from the second prostration; they stand back up and don’t sit in a position of Joulous”.

Shia scholar Al Amili says: We can consider this to be Taqiyya.

Source: “Wasael al Shia” Al Hurr al amili, 6/346.

38) Narrated Zurarah and Abi Hamza from al Baqir in a Hadith of ablution:

… “And he dipped his hand in the water container and he wipes on his head and feet”.

Al Majlisi said: Dipping the hand in a water container to wipe, in this story, is considered Taqiyya.

Source: Bihar al Anwar 80/273.

For sure! Another extreme case for Taqiyya?

39) And they narrated from al-Baqir:

“Do not greet one who is praying with “Salam” because he cannot return your greeting”.

Al Majlisi said: It is apparent that forbidding the Tasleem is caused by Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 84/300.

40) And they narrated from al-Kadhim, that:

Was asked about a man who is praying and another man greets him with Salam, could he return it? Imam said: Yes, he says as “Peace be on you” and he points to him with his finger”.

Al Amili and Al Majlisi said: As for pointing it could be considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 84/299, “Wasael al Shia” 7/269.

41) And from `Ali:

“The caller to prayer (mu’adhin) faces Qiblah during Adhan and Iqamah, when he says: “Hay `Ala al Salat Hay `Ala al Falah”, he turns right then left”.

Al Majlisi said: It could be that turning is Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 84/158.

42) From al-Baqir:

” The prophet (saw) said: Don’t take my grave as a Qiblah and a mosque, because Allah had cursed those who took the graves of their prophets as places of worship and prostration”.

Al Majlisi says: It’s not far (from possibility) that such a narration should be considered as Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 83/314.

Simply because they insist on worshiping the graves, they consider this one as Taqiyya.

43) From as-Sadiq:

“Take your shoes off, because it was from the skin of a dead donkey.”

Al Amili and al Majlisi said: it’s apparent that this is Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 83/237, “Wasael al Shia” 4/344.

By Allah! These so called Shia have no shame! His title was as-Sadiq (The Truthful)! Why do you invent narrations to make him look like a compulsive liar?

44) And they narrated from prophet (saw):

“If it weren’t too hard on my nation, I would have delayed `Isha prayer until the end of the night”.

Al Majlisi said: Could be considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al anwar” 83/64.

I’m sure the readers know the narration which was narrated with authentic chains in the books of Ahlul-Sunnah, the Prophet (saw) says: “He who attributes a lie to me, let him take his rightful place in hell.”

45) From as-Sadiq:

“I Disassociate myself from one who delays Maghrib until the stars appear in the sky without a good excuse”.

Al Majlisi Said: We can also consider this Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar Al Anwar” 83/60.

46) From `Ali:

“The grave of messenger of Allah (saw) was bumped (elevated) from the surface of the ground by small distance and four fingers and water was sprinkled on it”. `Ali said: “And the Sunnah is to spray the grave with water”.

Al Majlisi said: Maybe the addition of four fingers is considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 82/37.

Do you know why he said it’s Taqiyya? Because the Shia built huge shrines on all the graves of their Imams or scholars or historical personalities.

47) And from as-Sadiq:

During Adhan he said “Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar” and at the end of it “La Ilaha Illa Allah” once.

Al Amili and al Majlisi said: Saying it once can be Taqiyya.

Source: “Wasael al shia” 5/421, “Bihar al anwar” 84/119.

48) And they narrated from as-Sadiq:

“In the Iqamah you say everything once except for “Allahu Akbar”, you say it twice”.
In another narration he said: “In the call to prayer you say everything twice but in Iqamah you say everything once”.

At-Tusi said: These two agree with the Madhab of the mainstream Muslims, so they are a type of Taqiyya.

Source: “Al Tahtheeb” 2/62, “al Istibsar” 1/307, “Wasael al Shia” 5/415,424.

49) al-Sadiq from his fathers:

The Prophet (saw) prayed with Jahr (an audible voice) while reciting. When he finished he asked his companions: “Did I drop (forget) any verse from the Qur’an?” They were silent. He then asked “Is Ubay ibn Ka`b among you?” They said yes, so he asked him “Did I drop anything from it?” He said “Yes O messenger of Allah, you dropped so and so…”

Al Majlisi said: we can consider this Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 84/242, “Mustadrak al Wasael” Noori al Tabrasi 4/111.

They will definitely consider narrations like these Taqiyya, because according to them the Imams and prophets can never forget anything.

50) From al-Kadhim:

That he said about man who reads two Suras in one Rak`ah: “If it was a Nafilah (Voluntary) prayer then no harm as for obligatory prayer this is not correct”.

Al Majlisi said: We can consider the narrations which permit it to be Taqiyya.
Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 85/13.

51) From as-Sadiq:

“He was asked about one Sura, can a man pray with it in two Rak`at from the obligatory prayer? He said: Yes”.

al-Tusi said: This narration is considered Taqiyya because it agrees with the Madhab of the mainstream Muslims, and al Amili said the same.

Source: “Al Tahtheeb” 2/294, “Al Istibsar” 1/316, “Wasael al Shia” 6/44,46.

52) From as-Sadiq:

“He was asked about a man who stood as an imam and started prayer by saying “Alhamdulillah” without reading “Bism Allah al Rahman al raheem”? he said: No harm in this.

at-Tusi said: Considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Al Tahtheeb” 2/68,288, “al Istibsar” 1/312, “Wasael al Shia” 6/62.

53) And from him:

“He was asked about the people saying “Ameen” in the prayer in congregation after they read Al Fatiha, he said: How great it is with low voice”.

At-Tusi said: If this was true it would be considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Al Tahtheeb 2/75, “Al Istibsar” 1/318, “Wasael al Shia” 6/68.

54) From awaited Mahdi:

“He was asked is reciting better or is making Tasbeeh better in the last two Raka`at? He said: recitation.”

Al Amili said: This can be considered Taqiyya.
Source: “Wasael al Shia” 6/127.

We wonder why the hidden Mahdi of the Shia is doing Taqiyya if he is already not in danger.

55) From as-Sadiq:

“Qunoot in Witr is in the third Raka`ah”.

Al Majlisi said: we can consider this Taqiyya.
Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 85/209.

56) From al-Baqir:

“Qunoot is before Ruku` or after it if you wish”.

At-Tusi said: “His saying “Or after it if you wish” is Taqiyya”.
Source: “Al Tahtheeb” 2/92, “Al Istibsar” 1/341, “Wasael al Shia” 6/267.

57) From as-Sadiq:

He was asked: In which prayers can we make Qunoot? He said: “Don’t make Qunoot (in any prayers) except Fajr prayer”

at-Tusi said: “Considered Taqiyya, some from mainstream Muslims holds this opinion.”

Source: “Al Tahtheeb” 2/91, “Al Istibsar” 1/340, “Wasael al Shia” 6/265.

58) From as-Sadiq:

He was asked about Qunoot on the Friday, He said: No Qunoot in it.

at-Tusi said: Considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Al Istibsar” 1/418, “Wasael al Shia” 6/272.

59) From `Ali:

“The Prophet (saw) used to pray two (extra) Raka’at after every (obligatory) prayer”.

Al Majlisi said: We can consider this Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 87/47.

60) From as-Sadiq:

On every Friday the Lord descends to the sky in the beginning of the night, and He descends on the last third of every night -in some narrations He has two angels in front of him- Then He (swt) says: “Is there anyone who wants to repent so I can forgive him? Is there anyone who wants to make Istighfar so I can make Istighfar on him? Is there anyone who wishes to ask anything?” When Fajr comes the Lord returns to his throne and divides the bounties amongst his slaves”.

Al Majlisi said: Considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 87/165.

61) From `Ali:

“If a man leads others in prayer while he is in a state of Junub (impurity from sexual act) then they all need to repeat their prayer”.

Al Majlisi said: We can consider this narration Taqiyya.
Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 88/68.

62) Majlisi said: “All narrations about the prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) making the prostration of forgetfulness, are Taqiyya”.

Source: “Bihar al anwar” 88/219.

This is because as we said before, they don’t believe that prophets or Imams can forget, so any narration they have in their books about a prophet or an Imam forgetting something, they will reject it as Taqiyya.

63) And they narrated:

Sadiq was asked about a man who forgot to pray Maghrib and remembered in the second Rak`ah of `Isha prayer. He said: He finishes the prayer and then prays Maghrib after it.

Al Majlisi said: We can consider it Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 88/325.

64) From as-Sadiq:

`Ali bin abi Talib (ra) led the people in prayer when he was not on purified (he was Junub or without Wudu’) and it was Zuhr. Then he entered (his house) and a caller went out and  said: “Ameer al Mumineen prayed while not being in a state of purity so repeat the prayer and tell the people who are absent.”

Al Amili said: This hadith is considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Wasael al Shia” 8/373.

65) Muhammad al-Baqir from his father:

“`Ali (ra) used to dislike returning the greeting while the Imam is giving his sermon”.

Al Majlisi said: The dislike is out of Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 98/176.

66) And they narrated:

That al-Sadiq said that about 27-th night of Ramadan: In it is Laylat-ul-Qadr.

al Majlisi said: Considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 97/296.

What kind of extreme danger could force the Imam to lie in this situation? If it’s known and accepted as a fact that even the companions differed in this case?!!

67) And they narrated from Ali:

“The Prophet (saw) has forbidden on the day of Khaybar the meat of the donkey and the Nikah of Mut`ah”.

At-Tusi said: This narration is Taqiyya.

Source: “Al Tahtheeb” 7/251, “Al Istibsar” 3/142, “Wasael al Shia” 21/12.

Although the Shia is authentic yet they reject it because they believe in the validity of Mut`ah!

68) from Ma`mar bin Khallad that he said:

“I asked abu al-Hasan al-Rida (as) about if a man marries a woman in Mut`ah, then he accompanies her from one town to another?” He replied: “The other type of marriage is allowed, not this one.”

Source: al-Kafi vol.5 pg.467 #7.

The researcher of the book says: What is apparent from it, is that the questioner asked about the ruling of Mut`ah, so he (as) answered that Mut`ah is not permissible out of Taqiyya.

Another authentic narration, they claim it is Taqiyya because they believe that Mut`ah is permissible.

69) From al-Sadiq:

“He was asked: What say you about visiting the grave of Hussayn? We heard that some of you (Alhulbayt) said that it is equal to one trip of Hajj or `Umrah? He said: These sayings are weak, it doesn’t reach this level but you should visit him and not abandon him because he is the master of the youth of paradise”.

Al Amili and Al Majlisi said: It’s apparently Taqiyya.

Source: “Wasael al Shia” 14/451, “Bihar al Anwar” 101/35.

70) And again from as-Sadiq:

He was asked “If I visit the grave of Hussayn do I make it my Qiblah if I pray?” He said: “Move a bit to the side”.

Al Majlisi said: Maybe he ordered him to move to the side out of Taqiyya.

Source: “Bihar al Anwar” 101/82.

We perfectly understand why he said it’s Taqiyya. Because they worship the graves of their Imams.

71) And from al-Baqir:

`Ali did not attributed anyone from the people who fought him to shirk or to hypocrisy, but instead of that he used to say: “Our brothers, that transgressed against us”.

al Amili said: This is considered Taqiyya.

Source: “Wasael al Shia” 15/82.

There are many more examples, their books are loaded with such cases both the early ones and the late ones.


After stating these brief samples from the Shia books now we turn our attention to another aspect of this study. Most of these lies are attributed to the Imams of Ahlulbayt and mainly the later ones like al-Baqir and al-Sadiq and their children. These Imams of Ahlulbayt lived during the golden age of Islam, from the Umayyad Caliphate starting with Marwan al Umawi until the days of the Abbaside Caliphate of al-Caliph al Ma’moun…

Huge events happened during these years, many wars and invasions and discoveries and disasters which need huge volumes to cover… We’ll try to very briefly mention some of the events which took place during the lives of these Imams, just to give the readers an idea.

-`Amro bin Sa`eed bin al `Aas took Damascus during the absence of `Abdul Malik bin Marwan and wanted the Caliphate for himself. So battles took place and a siege until ibn al `Aas asked for peace.

– The wars between al Azariqah and al Muhallab which lasted many months. In the year 70 the Roum (Christian empire) was angered and they attacked the Muslims then peace happened between them, on the condition that `Abdul Malik would give their King a thousand Dinars every week. But this was a temporary weakness because of the division in the nation and the presence of two Muslim Caliphs at the same time.

– `Abdul Malik prepared Armies to go to Iraq and Mus`ab ibn al-Zubayr went to al-Sham and both armies met and some of Mus`ab’s army betrayed him and defected to `Abdul Malik’s side. Finally Mus`ab was killed with his two children `Isa and `Urwah and the warrior Ibrahim bin al Ashtar and Muslim bin `Amro al Bahili. Then `Abdul Malik took `Iraq and areas around it and placed his brother Bishr as the Ameer, Then Al Hajjaj bin Yusuf was preparing to go to Mecca and fight against caliph `Abdullah Ibn Al Zubayr.

– Al Hajjaj waged war on Ibn al Zubayr and placed catapults on the hills near Mecca and besieged it.  After a long month of battles, `Abdullah bin al Zubayr bin al `Awwam was killed and `Abdul Malik took Mecca.

-Al Hajjaj then made war with Shabeeb who had killed `Uthman al-Harithi so he sent `Utab bin Waraq al Rabahi after him to fight him around Kufah. He was also killed and his army defeated. Then He prepared al-Harith bin Mu`awiyah al Thaqafi for the fight and their armies met with that of Shabeeb and He was victorious yet again and he managed to kill Abu al Warid al Nadari after that as well.
-Al Hajjaj marched with his army to fight with Shabeeb and they met and the battle was fierce. Then Shabeeb went to al Ahwaz and in it was Muhammad bin Musa al Taymi who met him in a battle which he lost his life in. Shabeeb marched to Karaman and reinforced his troops then went back to al Ahwaz to meet the armies of al Hajjaj led by al Abrad and they fought until nightfall and Shabeeb had to leave by crossing the river but the bridge was destroyed and he died with the rest of the Khawarij who left with him. Then `Abdul Malik himself made a Ghazwah against the Christian empire and took the city of Heracles.

-A Plague had hit the people of Sham and it was so strong that they almost all perished. In the next year al Hajjaj sent to Sijistan `Abdul Rahman bin Muhammad al Ash`ath al Kindi who later rebelled and gathered from Al Basrah many Muslims and scholars to fight against Hajjaj and they were able to defeat him at first, and after around eighty four battles the Umayyad armies led by al Hajjaj emerged victorious.

– Ibn al Ash`ath almost managed to conquer `Iraq and he gathered 33,000 mounted warriors and 120,000 soldiers and they rebelled but the army of `Abdul Malik was victorious.

-Then the battle of Deir al Jamajem and the slogan was “Revenge for Salat” because al Hajjaj used to delay it from its correct time so the people rebelled.

-Then the Ghazwah of Muhammad bin Marwan bin al Hakam to Armeniah and their armies clashed with the Christian Roum and in one of the battles the Muslims were hit hard and over a thousand martyred.

-Then the great clash near Bukhara between Qutaybah and the Kouffar. Then Sirdaniyah was opened from the Maghrib.

-The Turk and the people of Faraghanah and the Sughd marched and with them was the son of the Chinese king’s sister and they were a huge army that was unheard of -they say 200,000- So Qutaibah bin Muslim met them and destroyed them. Then the Roum attacked so Maslamah met them in battle and broke them while opening Harathoumah and Tuwanah. Musa bin Naseer prepared his son `Abdullah and took the islands of muwayriqah and munawraqah. His other son Marwan also waged wars and took lands. Maslamah then made a Ghazwah against the Roum and defeated them and took Amouriyah.

-Maslamah attacked Syria and took the five fortresses. The King of Talqan backstabbed Qutaibah with the help of the Turk of Tarkhan but Qutaibah was victorious and then he killed many from the people of Talqan.
-A Huge battle took place between the Muslims and Samarqand and after they opened it they built the mosque. Later the Muslim armies scored huge victories in the east and the west in al Andalus and India.

-Muslims made a Ghazwah of Constantinople. Yazeed bin al Muhallab also took Jarjan.

-Then the king of the Turk Khaqan fought many long battles against the Muslims and his son died ibn Khaqan died after he was able to kill the Ameer of the Muslims Al Harith bin `Amro in Azerbaijan.

-Then the Khazar took Ardabeel by the sword so Hisham sent Sa`eed bin `Amro al Jurashee to Azerbaijan to battle them and he won and took much war booty.

-Then the Turk rebellion in Khurasan and Al Harith bin Abi Shuraih al Khariji joined them so they crossed the river of Jihoun. Then Asad bin Abdullah al Qasree marched against them and he defeated them. Marwan al Himar then opened three fortresses and took the King Touman Shah as a prisoner and sent him to al Sham.

– In al Maghrib lots of wars took place and a huge sect came and gave allegiance to `Abdul Wahid al Huwari and the Berber all supported him. So they fought the Muslims and lost the battle and many of them were killed.

– In the Maghrib Kulthoum bin Ayyad al Qusheeri was killed and his army was ripped apart, they were defeated by Abu Yusuf al Azari the head of the Sufriyah. Kulthoum had given the Wilayah of Damascus to Hashim then gave him the mission of fighting the Khawarij in the Maghrib. Then the cousin of Kulthoum who was called Balj al Qusheeri stood firm and he was able to defeat the Khawarij and their leader Maysarah.

-Abu Muslim al Khurasani took the slaves of Khurasan and defeated the armies and this was the beginning of the state of bani al `Abbas and the defeat of bani Umayyah.

– In 132 hijri al Saffah was given allegiance by the people of Kufah and he prepared his uncle `Abdullah bin `Ali to fight against Marwan who in turn marched against him with a 100,000, but he lost and Abdullah took the Arab peninsula and asked for al Sham, Marwan ran to Egypt but was abandoned.

-`Abdullah went to Damascus and laid siege, in it was the cousin of Marwan called al Waleed bin Mu`awiyah bin Marwan. They took it by the sword and several thousand of the Umayyads were killed amongst them was its Ameer Al Waleed and Suleiman bin Hashim bin `Abdul Malik.

-The Battle of al Musnah took place so from those who died was the Ameer Quhtubah bin Shabeeb al Ta’ee al Marouzi one of Bani al `Abbas then his son took control of that army straight away.

-Abu Muslim al Khurasani managed to kill the Ameer Suleiman bin Katheer al Khuza`ee al Marouzi of Bani Al `Abbas.

-In the year 136 hijri, the Caliph al Saffah died and his state was only 5 years old and there was chaos and many lands in the west of Sudan and the area of al Andalus were lost to the Khawarij and other tribes and groups, then came his brother the caliph Abu Ja`far al Mansour.

-In the beginning of 137 hijri `Abdullah bin `Ali heard of the death of al Saffah his brother, so he asked for al Sham for himself and he made camp in Dabiq and claimed that al Saffah gave him the succession. Al Mansour prepared Abu Muslim al Khurasani to battle him and the armies met in the month of Jamadah al Akhir. The armies of `Abdulah were pushed back and he ran away to al Basarah to his brother. Then Abu Muslim found many treasures of bani Umayyah So he rebelled against al Mansour and opted to remove him from caliphate.

– In the year 138 hijri the tyrant of the Roum appeared and he was Constantine bin Alion bin Constantine and he had 100,000 soldiers, and made camp in Dabiq. Salih bin `Ali the uncle of al Mansour met him there and the armies clashed until the Muslims were victorious.

– After Constantine burned the new Muslim farms a group called Al Rawandiyyah appeared in Khurasan and they used to believe in the cloning of souls and that their God is al Mansour and that al Haytham bin Mu`awiyah was Gabriel and they went to the castle of al Mansour so he arrested them and others got angry so they marched against him with 600 fighters. `Uthman bin Nuhaik who was the Ameer was wounded in al Hashimiyah so al Mansour replaced him with his brother `Isa.

-The Muslims finally opened the lands of Tabarstan after long wars. Then in the Maghrib the Ameer Muhammad ibn al Ash`ath led an army to fight and destroy the Ibadiyah and he killed their leader Abu al Khattab.

– In 145 hirji Muhammad bin `Abdullah bin al Hassan appeared with 250 men in Madinah in the beginning of Rajab. So he imprisoned the Mutawwali of Madinah called Rabah. Then he made a Sermon and the people of Madinah gave him allegiance. He then claimed that he appeared out of anger for Allah and he appointed a governor for Mecca and Yemen and Sham. Then Al Mansour chose his cousin Isa bin Musa to fight him and he did this because he wanted Isa to die as al Saffah had appointed him as his successor while al Mansour wanted his son al Mahdi to rule.

-`Isa marched with 4,000 and he wrote to the Ashraf to get them to side with him so many people abandoned Muhammad bin `Abdullah who in turn refused to seek aid from Egypt but decided to stay fortified in Madinah until Isa decided to march in on him. `Uthman bin Muhammad bin Khalid said: “And Muhammad had killed almost seventy men and with him was only three hundred fighters but finally his head was detached from his body and sent to al Mansour.”

-Ibrahim bin `Abdullah bin al Hassan had rebelled in al Basarah after he entered it in secret with ten people, so he called for himself in secret and 4,000 gave him allegiance. He then sent a `Amil to al Ahwaz and one to Persia and one to al Wasit so he can open them. Al Mansour then sent an army of 5,000 led by Amir al Miski to fight him and they clashed several times, many died in Basarah and Wasit. Finally Ibrahim was killed by an arrow in his throat.

And so on…

That was just a brief sample of some of the events which were happening during those days in which the Imams were alive. So can you imagine dear reader that the Caliphs and generals of Bani Umayyah and Bani al `Abbas left all the affairs of the state and all those wars and the economy and the plagues and the defense of the lands and the planning of the conquests and fighting the isolationists and exploring the oceans ect? Can you imagine that they left all of this and that instead they dispersed their armies in the mosques and the lands and paid them their wages in order for them to see which one of the Imams of Ahlulbayt would speak about “If Eve was created from the liver of Adam or not?” Or  “if Adam had appeared in India”? Or at what age did Ismail (as) die? Or how many years did prophet Jonah (as) spend in the belly of the whale? Or to see the ruling of one who eats lots of Jarjeer? Or opening the eyes during Wudu? Or wiping the face with a towel after it?

No sane human being would accept these ridiculous Shia stories. So from what you just read you can come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no need for this Taqiyya in the first place nor is there a reason which explains why Taqiyya has such a high rank in shiism that they considered it one of their specialties.

As said shia shaikh Muhammad Rza Muzaffar in “`Aqa’id-ul-Imamiya” (chapter 33. Doctrine of Dissimulation (Taqiyya):

[And this (Taqiyya) is still a sign by which the Shi`ah are known, and which distinguishes them from other sects and other people.]


Then shia scholars claim that the shia were the only ones being oppressed and that Ahlul Sunnah were not oppressed at all because they agreed to the Aqeedah of the rulers. And this is nothing but blatant lie!

-Abu Hanifah al Nu`man was tortured until it was said that he was killed in the prison of al Mansour because he supported the revolutions of several from Ahlul-Bayt like Muhammad and his brother Ibrahim the children of al Hassan (r.a). And he supported the revolution of Zayd bin `Ali Zainul `Abideen against the Umayyads. He had said when Zayd revolted: “His Khourouj is equal to the Khourouj of the Prophet (saw) on the day of Badr”. He offered Imam Zayd 30,000 Dirhams to fund his revolution.
Then in 145 hijri, He supported the revolution of Muhammad known as al Nafs al Zakkiyah who was from Ahlul-Bayt . Abu Hanifa made a Fatwa on the permissibility of joining his army and he gave him 4,000 dirhams then told him that he had nothing else left to give.
Abu Hanifa was finally asked by the rulers to be the head of judges, as they wanted to win him over to their side, but when he refused this, they imprisoned him and tortured him to death.

-Imam Malik ibn Anas also was hit with whips until his shoulder was dislocated as he was of the same opinion as Abu Hanifa. When he was asked “Is it permissible to fight those who make Khourouj against the Caliph?” He said: “It’s permissible if they make Khourouj on the likes of `Umar bin `Abdul `Aziz”, it’s a smart way of telling them that it is allowed to make Khourouj on all other Caliphs. Then they asked him: “What if the ruler was not like Ibn `Abdul `Aziz?” He replied: “Then let them fight each other, and let Allah take his revenge from the oppressors with the oppressors”. So he forbade anyone from defending the Caliphs and so he was tortured.
I add, He encouraged going against the Caliph Abu Ja`far publicly during Al Nafs al Zakiyyah’s revolution. The Muslims of Madinah came to him and told him that they can’t join because they have pledged allegiance to the `Abbasi Caliph so he told them: “You made this Allegiance while you were forced to do so, and the one who is forced does not need to keep his promise (of allegiance)”. So the people hurriedly joined the army of Muhammad.

-Then the famous hardships which Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal had to face in the days of Al Ma’moun and Al Mutawakkil in the issues of  “the creation of the Quran” . Many others died as a result like Muhammad bin Nooh who accompanied Ibn Hanbal and the Faqih and Muhaddith Na`eem bin Hammad and Yusuf bin Yahya al Bouti al Masri the companion of Imam al Shafi`i and his successor. These scholars died in prison. Then you have the grand scholar Ahmad bin Nasr al Khuza`ee who was killed by the Caliph al Wathiq himself with a sword.

And many more such as Ibn Taymiyyah who spent most of his life in Jail, or al-Imam al-Bukhari who was exiled and others…

Narrating the stories and hardships and the oppression of the scholars of Ahlul Sunnah is a giant task which needs separate books. It’s totally unacceptable and unfair that the Shia scholars trick the laymen and followers by telling them ‘this or that’ narration is a Taqiyya by the Imam because they were the only victims, and that the caliphs had nothing better to do than to spy on them and hear their news and spread webs of spies to track down their hidden Mahdi.

In the end I find it appropriate to quote the scholars of Ahlul-Sunnah on this matter of Taqiyya and view their stance and then the reader can compare it to that of the Twelver Shia:
Ibn Jawzi said in “Zaadul Mayser” (1/361):

[“Taqiyya is something permitted but not obligatory. When Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal was asked: “If there would be a sword upon your head, you would again tell the truth?” The Imam answered: “When the scholar speaks with Taqiyya, and the layman speaks out of ignorance, who then in this case would reveal the truth?”]


 In the main Shia book al-Kafi, volume 1, page 284, we find a chapter called:

“Affairs that necessitate the proof of the Imam (as)”

By “proof” they mean how you prove that a certain person is a true Imam, because as you know anyone can claim to be an Imam and anyone can claim that anyone else is an Imam, and you can review our article called “Tree of men believed to be Imams by the Shia sects” in the respective section.

So how do you truly prove the validity or legitimacy of an Imam?

In this chapter I quote two authentic Shia narrations:

[…`Abdul-A`la said: I told abu `Abdillah (as): “The one who rushes to claim Imamah for himself, how do we verify him?” He (as) replied: “He is asked about the lawful and the unlawful.” Then he turned to me and said: “There are three proofs that are not gathered in anyone unless he were the patron of this affair: he must be the closest of the people to the Imam before him; he must have possession of the weapon (of the prophet (saw)); and his Wasiyyah must be public and apparent – [so much so, that even] if one had entered Madinah and had asked the commoners and even the little boys, “Whom did fulan depute?”, they would say, “fulan the son of fulan”.]

The second authentic Shia narration:

[…Ahmad bin `Umar from abi al-Hasan al-Rida (as) I asked him about the indicating signs of the patron of this affair. So he said: The indicating signs to him are: elderliness (i.e. the oldest living son), merit, and the testament – if men who traveled on horseback and came to Madinah and asked, “Whom did fulan depute?” it would be said “fulan the son of fulan”, and they follow wherever the armaments reside.]

Based on these narrations and other similar ones, the legitimacy of the Imamah of any person is proven if he gathered certain conditions, from them is that the people of Madinah, all of them, men women and children, must know that such and such is the Imam, and he deputed his son so and so after him and gave him the Wasiyyah.

Question: We know that the main thing that pushes the Shia Imams to practice Taqiyya is because they are afraid of the tyrant rulers, so they hide their Imamah and Wasiyyah out of fear. How then in this case, can the legitimacy of ANY of the Shia Imams be proven if they hide it from the people?

In fact it is prove from many Shia texts and by confession of their scholars that the Imams would hide the matter of Imamah from their closest followers and this is why even their best companions would be confused as to who is the next Imam after the death of his father.

If this is the case, then how can the little boys of Madinah have knowledge of this matter, so that when the riders come and ask them they say: “So and so is the Imam and he appointed his son so and so as his depute and successor”!?

I add, if the Imams do not hide the matter of Imamah and Wasiyyah, then why do they hide smaller insignificant matters? The books of the Shia are full of contradicting Fiqhi narrations, and other narrations which differ with the beliefs of the Twelvers, their scholars explain all of this as “Taqiyya”.

If the Shia were to say that the Imams practice Taqiyya in small Fiqhi matters so they can mingle with the commoners and laypeople of Ahlul-Sunnah, we reply by saying that Ahlul-Sunnah and their scholars had many differences of opinions in many matters of Fiqh. The biggest of the Sunni Imams differed, we take an extreme example, the marriage of Mut`ah: This was the opinion of `Abdullah ibn `Abbas (ra) and Imam ibn Jurayj (rah), yet no one harmed or killed them.

What is known and popular is that the Imams of the Shia are loved by the Sunni laymen and their problem is not that of Fiqh, because they were not killed one after the other because of silly Fiqhi issues such as:

Al-Sadiq was asked about the ruling of the urine of the wild cat, the dog, the donkey and the horse. He replied: “They are like the urine of humans.”

Al-Tusi said in al-Istibsar 1/180: “It’s also possible that these are a type of Taqiyya.”

Al-Baqir said: “There is no harm in the blood of the flea and the urine of the bat.”

Al-Tusi said in al-Istibsar 1/188: “We consider this narration as a kind of Taqiyya as it conflicts with the foundations of (the Shia) Madhab.”

And we’ve seen sufficient examples of such cases previously in our article should you recall.

Our point is that the Imams surely do not give precedence to silly matters such as “praying while wearing the skin of the fox” or “washing the clothes after touching the urine of bats” over a giant and dangerous matter such as Imamah, which means “Leadership” in Arabic.

Rather the Shia Imams were killed mainly because of Imamah as the Shia claim, and they were killed by the oppressive rulers and regimes. This happened because they feared that these divinely appointed Imams would challenge them and overthrow them, not because of differences of opinion in jurisprudence, taking into consideration that the Shia accuse these rulers of being irreligious, and that they would drink wine openly.

In addition, when the Shia leader al-Murtada was asked about the occultation of the Mahdi, in his book “al-Muqni` fil-Ghaybah” he said that the Mahdi hid himself out of fear from the rulers, so a man asked him:

“If fear pushed him into hiding, then his fathers (previous Imams) were in a state of constant Taqiyya and fear from the enemies, why didn’t they also hide!?”

He replied:

[We say: His fathers peace be upon them had no fears from the enemy, because they practiced Taqiyya, and did not act as if they were the Imams, and they denied that they were Imams.]

Which is true, when we observe the confusion of their followers and companions at the time, and when we read their narrations about Imamah, such this narration from Basa’ir al-Darajat by al-Saffar pg.48:

[Verily, our ‘affair’ is a secret in a secret, and a concealed secret, and a secret that is only known as a secret, and a secret upon a secret and a secret veiled by a secret.]

Or such as when Musa al-Kadhim (rah) is talking to his companion, in the famous narration of Hisham ibn Salim, that describes the confusion of the Shia after the death of al-Sadiq (rah), he tells him:

[‘Ask, you will have the answers but do not make them public. If you did so it would be slaughtering.’ I asked him and found him to be like an ocean of knowledge that does not diminish. I then said, ‘May Allah keep my soul in service for your cause, your Shi‘a, followers and the followers of your father are in loss due to false guidance. Thus, can I meet them and call them to you? I will keep it secret.’ He said, ‘If you can find intelligent people inform them but make them to promise secrecy. If they make it public it will be slaughter,’ he pointed with his hand to his throat.]

Our question still remains, if Imamah and Wasiyyah is shrouded by so much secrecy, then how can the little boys and commoners of Madinah know about it? And how then would we be able to prove the legitimacy of their Imamah by their own standards?


The extreme Shia are historically unreliable people and they are popular for fabricating narrations and believing in their own fabrications, they attributed many narrations to their Imams without any thought or planning that they ended up causing themselves a huge issue, the issue of conflicting narrations. Most lies were attributed to two of their Imams, al-Baqir and al-Sadiq, which is why Ibn Tayymiyah said in “Minhaj al-Sunnah” when talking about Ja`far al-Sadiq:

[He is amongst the best in Knowledge and piety (…) They have attributed more lies to him than they’ve done to those before him.]

Below we quickly list some examples of conflicting Shia narrations, please keep in mind that the Shia believe that their Imams are infallible, which means they cannot contradict each-other or change their own religious verdicts, yet below we will see them do just that.

1) Is the remembrance the Prophet (saw) or the Qur’an?

al-Kafi 1/211: […from abu Baseer from Imam abu `Abdullah (as) regarding the saying of Allah: {And indeed, it is a remembrance for you and your people, and you are going to be questioned.} [43:44] he (as) said: “The Prophet (SAWS) is the “remembrance” and his Ahlul-Bayt (as) are those who will be questioned and they are the people of remembrance.”]

al-Kafi 1/211: […from al-Fudayl from abu `Abdullah (as) about the saying of Allah: {And indeed, it is a remembrance for you and your people, and you are going to be questioned.} [43:44] he (as) said: “The Qur’an is the “remembrance” and we are his people and we shall be asked.”]

2) Walking to Hajj or riding to Hajj?

Al-Kafi 4/455: […from ibn Bukayr: I said to abu `Abdullah (as): “We want to walk to Makkah.” He (as) said: “Don’t walk, ride (camels) instead.” I said: “May Allah fix your affair, it has reached us that al-Hasan bin `Ali (as) used Walk to Hajj.” he (as) said: “al-Hasan bin `Ali used to make Hajj walking but his travel equipment was carried for him (on the backs of animals).”]

Al-Kafi 4/456: […from Rifa`ah: I asked abu `Abdullah (as) did al-Hasan walk (to hajj) from Makkah or from Madinah? he (as) said from Makkah, I asked him that if I visit the house(Ka`bah) do I ride or walk? he (as) said: “al-Hasan (as) used to visit (the house of Allah) while riding.” I asked him about riding and walking, which is better? he (as) said: “riding.” I said: riding is better than walking? he (as) said: “Yes because Rassul-Allah (SAWS) used to ride.”]

Al-Kafi 4/456: […from Rifa`ah and ibn Bukayr from abu `Abdullah (as) that he was asked regarding which is better, walking or riding to Hajj? he (as) said: “Riding is better, because Rassul-Allah (SAWS) used to make Hajj while riding.”]

Wasa’il al-Shia 11/78 under the chapter title: [“It is recommended to walk to Hajj rather than riding, and walking bare footed is better than wearing shoes unless there is exception.”]

We read in this chapter:

[…from `Abdullah bin Sinan from abu `Abdullah (as) he said: “Allah was not worshiped by something better than walking (to Hajj).”]

[…from al-Halabee: I asked abu `Abdullah (as) about the virtue of walking (to Hajj)? He (as) said: …… (al-Husayn bin `Ali) made twenty pilgrimages while walking on his feet.]

3) Sending Islamic greeting “al-Salam” to women.

al-Kafi 5/535: […from Ghiyath bin Ibrahim from abu `Abdullah (as): “Do not make Salam on the woman.”]

al-Kafi 5/535: […from Rib`i bin `Abdullah from abu `Abdullah (as): The Prophet (SAWS) used to make Salam on the women and they used to return it, and Ameer al-Mumineen `Ali (as) used to make Salam on the women but disliked to make it on the young teenage women, he used to say: “I fear that I may like her voice, so I would end up with more than just the reward (of making Tasleem).”]

4) Does al-Madhi (prostatic fluid, a substance that comes out of a man’s organ during foreplay before ejaculation.) Does it invalidate the ablution?

Mukhtalaf al-Shia 1/262: [In the SAHIH from Zayd al-Shahham that he said: I said to abu `Abdullah (as): Does al-Madhi invalidate ablution? he (as) said: “No, and the clothes are not to be washed nor the body, for it is similar to spit and mucus.”]

Tahdheeb al-Ahkam 1/18: [Muhammad bin Isma`eel in the SAHIH said: I asked al-Rida (as) regarding al-Madhi so he ordered me to make ablution from it, then I repeated the question in the next year and he again told me to make Wudhu, he (as) said: `Ali bin abi Talib (as) asked al-Miqdad bin al-Aswad to ask the Prophet (SAWS) when he felt shy from asking him, so he (SAWS) replied: “He must make ablution (from it).”]

5) Saying “Ameen” after reciting al-Fatiha (opening chapter) in Salat?

Tahdheeb al-Ahkaam 2/74: […from Muhammad al-Halabee, I asked abu `Abdillah (as): “Do I say “Ameen” when I finish the Fatiha?” he (as) replied: “No.”]

Al-Istibsar 1/318: [From ibn abi `Umayr from Jameel bin Darraj al-Nakh`ee: I asked abu `Abdullah (as) about the saying of the people during Salat after the Fatiha of the Book: Ameen? He (as) said: “How good it is in a low voice.”]

6) Is wine pure or impure?

al-Khoei states this in al-Tanqeeh fi Sharh al-`Urwah al-Wusta, volume 3, book of Taharah, pg.83:

[The difference (of opinion) in this matter is from a group from the early scholars like al-Saduq and his Father in al-Resalah, and al-Ju`fi and al-`Ammani and a group of the late scholars such as al-Ardabilee and others who have went to the opinion that it(Wine) is pure, their difference in this comes from the difference in the narrations and this is because there was no consensus on the impurity of wine after a group from the biggest scholars like al-Saduq and al-Ardabilee and others decided that it was pure, also the holy book does not contain a proof of its impurity]

In al-Hada’eq al-Nadirah by al-Bahrani:

[What is narrated by Thiqat-ul-Islam in the SAHIH from `Ali bin Mehzayar that he said: I read in the book of `Abdullah bin Muhammad to abu al-Hassan (as): May I be a sacrifice for you, Zurarah narrated from abu Ja`far (as) and abu `Abdillah (as) regarding the wine when it stains a person’s clothes that there is no harm in praying in it because Allah prohibited drinking it only. and other than Zurarah narrated from abu `Abdullah (as) that if it stains your clothes then wash the stain unless you do not know where the stain is then wash all of your clothes, and if you pray while it is on your clothes then repeat your prayer. so which of the two sayings should I take? he (as) sent me: take the saying of abu `Abdullah (as).]

Here are some examples of what al-`Amili narrated in Wasa’el al-Shia in chapter 38 from the chapters of Najasat:

[What al-Hassan bin abi Sarah narrated in the SAHIH: I said to abu `Abdullah (as): If my clothes were stained with some wine, do I pray in them before washing them? he (as) said: No harm, the clothes do not get intoxicated.]

[What was narrated from `Abdullah bin Bukayr in the Muwaththaq: a man asked abu `Abdullah (as) about the intoxicant and the wine if they stain the clothes while we were there, he (as) said: No harm in it.]

[What was narrated by the great dignified reliable scholar `Abdullah bin Ja`far al-Humeiri in Qurb al-Isnad in the SAHIH from `Ali bin Ri’ab: I asked abu `Abdullah (as) about the intoxicating wine if it stains my clothes, do I wash it or pray in it? he (as) said: Pray in them…Allah (swt) only prohibited drinking it.]

[Ibn Babawieh narrated in the Mursal that: abu Ja`far (as) and abu `Abdullah (as) were asked: we buy clothes and they are stained by wine and the oil of the pigs, do we pray in them? he (as) said: Yes, no harm, Allah has only prohibited drinking and eating, he did not prohibit wearing and touching and praying in it.
al-Saduq narrated it in `Ilal al-Shara’e` with a SAHIH chain from Bukayr from al-Baqir (as), also from abu al-Sabbah and abu Sa`eed and al-Hassan al-Nabbal from al-Sadiq (as).]

[al-Sheikh narrated in the SAHIH from `Ali bin Ja`far from his brother Musa (as): that he was asked about a man who passes by rain water mixed with wine and it stains his clothes, does he pray in them before washing? He (as) said: “He does not wash his clothes or his feet and he prays in them and no harm.” He narrated it in Qurb al-Isnad.]

And finally al-Bahrani says on page 105:

[When you know all this, then you should (also) know that a group from the virtuous of the late scholars like al-Sayyed al-Sanad in al-Madarik and al-Fadil al-Khurasani in al-Thakheerah and al-Khawansari and others have chosen the opinion that it is pure, and declared that there was no consensus on this matter]

As you can see, these narrations are SAHIH and MUWATHTHAQ and reliable, but there’s a LOT of other SAHIH and MUWATHTHAQ narrations stating that it is impure and Najis, just like the first Sahih Hadith I quoted in which the Imam tell his companion to take the saying of abu `Abdullah (as), here’s what al-Khoei says in the same source stated above:

[There are plenty of narrations which makes it certain that some of them have come from the Imams (as) and there is no need to even discuss their chains, also they are clear and explicit in declaring that wine is IMPURE.

On the other hand there are lots of other narrations – including Sahih and Muwaththaq narrations – that explicitly prove the PURITY of wine, and when it comes to the amount of narrations they are more than those which declare it to be impure, and the claim that these narrations must have certainly come from the Imams (as) is not far from truth.]

So what do the Shia usually do in this case? They apply their corrupt methodology to see what what agrees with the Quran or what opposes Ahlul-Sunnah, al-Khoei says:

[And these are two opposing groups of narrations, so we must fix this matter by looking at what agree with al-Qur’an and disagrees with al-`Ammah(Sunnies)……And both of these factors are lost, as for the agreement with the Quran, we have previously stated that the book of Allah does not mention anything about the purity or impurity of wine, and as for disagreeing with al-`Ammah(Sunnies) this is not valid because each group of narrations agrees with them in a way and disagrees with them in another way.]

In other words they’re stuck as usual, since the Qur’an most of the time contains nothing about detailed matters of Fiqh, and since Ahlul-Sunnah have a valid difference of opinion on this matter.


The books of the Shia are full of  Taqiyya and conflicting reports from their “infallible” Imams to the extent that no matter is free from differences of opinion. The leader of the Twelver Imami Shia sect al-Tusi says in “al-`Iddah fi Usoul al-Fiqh” 1/138:

 [I (al-Tusi) have mentioned their narrations (as) in different Ahadith regarding Fiqh in my book “al-Istibsar” and “Tahdheeb al-Ahkam” and they number around five thousand(narrations). I have mentioned that the (Twelver) sect differed in following most of them. That is too popular and cannot be hidden. In fact, if you observe their difference in the rulings you would find that they differ more than the difference between Abu Hanifa, Malik and al-Shafi`i.]

We direct the readers to our article “The Sunnah are divided and the Shia are united?” for more on this subject.

Their renowned scholar Ja`far al-Subhani says in “al-Rasa’il al-Arba`ah” pg.201:

[When we read the two books (of Hadith): Wasael al-Shia and Mustadrak al-Wasael for example, we see that there is no chapter or Fiqhi section which is free from conflicting narrations, this has caused some of those who converted to the Imami Madhab to leave it.]

This matter has become so serious that some of their biggest scholars left the Madhab, such as the teacher of their leader al-Tusi, in “Rasa’il fi Dirayat al-Hadith” by abu al-Fadl al-Babili vol.2 pg.223 & in “Tahdheeb al-Ahkam” vol.1 pg.2 we read:

[Then he(al-Tusi) mentions about his teacher abu al-Hassan al-Harouni al-`Alawi, that he used to believe in the truth(Shia Madhab), and that he took Imamah as his religion, but he left it when he became confused because of the conflicting narrations, and he abandoned the Madhab.]

Their famous scholar and researcher Yusuf al-Bahrani said in “al-Hada’iq al-Nadirah” vol.1 pg.5:

[Only a small amount of the rulings of the religion were known for sure, because their narrations were mixed with the narrations of Taqiyya, as was admitted by Thiqat al-Islam Muhammad bin Ya`qoub al-Kulayni may Allah fill his grave with light in his collection al-Kafi]

In other words, the big amount of conflicting narrations and the fact that they can’t tell the difference between them has damaged their entire religion greatly.


The Shia of our days will try to weaken the chains of narrators when faced with examples such as those listed above. However, this does not always work as sometimes both contradicting narrations are authentic and the early Shia were not known for weakening narrations or commenting on chains of transmission, for them the easiest solution was to simply choose one of the two and say “This is Taqiyya!”.

So when the Shia scholars find any narration that does not suit their tastes, they choose the quickest excuse, and settle the issue without headaches and effort!

We read the following narration in “Rawdat al-Muttaqeen fi Sharh man la Yahduruhu al-Faqeeh” vol.3 pg.44:

[In the Sahih, from Zurarah that he said: I was sitting with abu Ja`far (as) at his place, and there was no one present except his son Ja`far (as), so he said: “O Zurarah, abu Dharr and `Uthman disputed during the days of the Prophet (SAWS), `Uthman said: “All money from gold or silver that the people use in trade, they must pay Zakat for it after one year passes”. abu Dharr replied: “You don’t need to pay Zakat for the money you work with in trade and such, but if it was stored and unused for one year, then one must pay its Zakat”. So they went to the Prophet (SAWS) to solve their dispute and he told them: “The saying of abu Dharr is correct.”

abu `Abdullah Ja`far (as) said to his father al-Baqir (as): “Why would you bring something like this up!? The Muslims will cease to have kindness and sympathy for the poor and weak among them (If they hear this).”

al-Baqir (as) replied to him: “Get off my back! I found it obligatory!”]

This authentic narration shows a dispute between two infallible Imams over a matter of religion, how will al-`Allamah al-Majlisi solve this one then? He writes in his commentary:

[What is apparent is that their dispute may peace be upon them was to silence the `Aamah(Sunnies) so that they may say: “He quarreled with him and did not accept from him!” because (we Shia believe) he only reports what he heard from his fathers from the Prophet (SAWS) from Allah (swt).]

I say: The report states that it was only al-Baqir and Zurarah and al-Sadiq in the house, no Sunnies were present so they can “silence” them, unless they’re taking acting lessons in a theater. Zurarah is a Shia not a Sunni, and Ahlul-Sunnah never narrated this tradition only the Shia have it in their books, the one narrating it from Zurarah is a famous Shia called `Umar bin Udhaynah, so ponder!

Another example is Tahdheeb al-Ahkaam by al-Tusi, vol.1 pg.93:

[Zayd bin `Ali from Imam `Ali (as): I sat down to perform Wudhu(ablution)  and the Prophet (SAWS) had come when I began so he said to me: “Rinse your mouth, sniff water and use Siwak” So I washed my face three times so he (SAWS) said: “Wash it only twice.” then I washed my arm and wiped my head twice, so he (SAWS) told me: “Wipe it only once” and I washed my feet so he (SAWS) told me: “O `Ali wash between the fingers so that the fire may not reach them.”]

Now this narration openly states that `Ali (ra) washed his feet in ablution, this is contrary to what the Shia of our days do, since they believe one must only wipe his feet and that washing is an innovation by Ahlul-Sunnah. How will the author of the book, the leader of the Shia sect al-Tusi, how will he deal with this issue?

He writes in his commentary:

[This narration agrees with the beliefs of al-‘Aamah(Ahlul-Sunnah) so it is Taqiyya.]

There is an issue! Al-Tusi says the Imam was in Taqiyya and he only said this to please the Sunnies, I say: Wrong! The Imam said in this narration that you must wash your face twice, yet Ahlul-Sunnah believe that one must wash his face three times in Wudhu!


For this purpose, they started to invent rules and fabricate stories that would help them to pick one narration over the other without having to admit that these narrations are lies or that the Imam made a mistake or differed with another Imam because this would cancel their infallibility.

From these many rules you will come across: In case of conflict, you have to accept only the narrations of the latter Imams because Taqiyya was less in their time, another rule is to choose the more numerous narrations in terms of quantity over the others, another is to compare the content to the book of Allah and reject what conflicts with it, another rule says to take the consensus and what is popular and practiced upon by the majority of Shia, but out of all of these what sticks out the most is the rule that says: “Take whatever contradicts the Sunnies.”

Surely from the worst and most sinister of beliefs that they adopted was to look at their conflicting narrations and take whatever opposes the Sunni view, this belief was invented by their leaders to further push their followers away from the mainstream Sunnies and to keep the identity of the Madhab.

This following authentic narration is from al-Kulayni’s book al-Kafi, in the book of knowledge, from the chapter of the difference of narrations 1/68:

[Ja`far bin Muhammad was asked: May I be sacrifice for you, If two scholars(faqihs) extract a ruling from the Qur’an and the Sunnah and we have two proofs, one proof is in agreement with the mainstream Muslims (Ahlul Sunnah) and the other proof contradicts what they believe in, which proof do we take?

Imam said: take what contradicts the mainstream Muslims because in it you will find guidance.

He said: May I be sacrifice for you, what if both proofs agree with the beliefs of the mainstream Muslims? The Imam replied: then you need to check which of the two they lean towards the most and leave it and take the other. ]

Shia scholar ibn Babawayh al-Qummi al-Saduq writes in “`Uyoun Akhbar al-Rida”:

[On the authority of `Ali ibn Asbat, “I told Al-Rida (as), ‘There are times when I must know the decree on an issue which arises, but I am in another town where none of your followers are present from whom to ask.’ The Imam (as) said, ‘Go to that town’s jurisprudent and present your question. Act against whatever he decrees since that is the right thing to do.’”]

Which means if you are in any Islamic country, which is most likely Sunni, then go to the Mufti, ask him your question, and then whatever he says, you have to do the opposite!

Their leader Ayatullah al-Khomayni in his “Risalat al-Ta`addud wal-Tajreeh” talks about a question that Ja`far al-Sadiq got:

[We come across two hadiths, he orders us to follow one and leave the other. He said: “Don’t practice with any of the two until you meet your (Shia) friend and ask him”. I (narrator) said: “I have to choose one and work with it”. He said: “Take the one which contradicts the mainstream Muslims (Sunnies) and work with it”.]

Shia scholar Ayatullah `Ali al-Milani writes in the second chapter of “al-Tahqeeq fi Nafi al-Tahreef `an al-Qur’an al-Shareef”:

[Thiqat al-Islam Muhammad ibn Ya`qoob al Kulayni has mentioned in the introduction of his book that he adopted two main points in order to verify the Sahih of the Hadiths from the weak ones:

Firstly: Whatever agrees with the Quran is Sahih, whatever disagrees with it is weak.

Secondly: Whatever agrees with the mainstream Muslims is weak, whatever opposes them is Sahih.]


al-Khomeini who surpasses some of the Prophets of bani Israel according to some of their scholars said while defining Taqiyya:

[Dividing Taqiyya based on the ones it is used with, sometimes it(Taqiyya) is used with the Kuffar and those who do not believe in Islam whether they were Sultans or average people, and other times it is used with the Sultans of the `Aamah(Sunnies) or their Emirs, Thirdly: It can be used with their scholars and judges, Fourthly: It can be used with their average laypeople, and Fifthly: It can be used with the Sultans of the Shia and their laypeople among other uses]

source: al-Rasa’el by al-Khomeini 2/175.

In Bihar ul Anwar, Vol. 27, p. 289 we read:

[It is narrated from Yunus ibn Talha that he said “Once I asked al-Rida, recipient of divine supreme covenant, ‘Is it true that only an Imam has the authority to wash the body of an Imam for burial?’ “The Imam asked, ‘Do you not know who came to wash his body for burial? The ones who were far more excellent than those who were absent during washing his body for burial, came to wash him for burial. They were those who came to Joseph in the well to help when his parents and family were absent from him (i.e Jibril and angels).’”]

Mulla Baqir Majlisi says regarding it:

[Perhaps these narrations are based on Taqiyya, either from the Sunnis or from the laymen among the Shias.]

In Bihar ul Anwar, Vol. 25, p. 358 we read:

[Ayub ibn Hurr has narrated either from Imam Ja`far or someone who narrated from him, that he (i.e the narrator) said : We say that some Imams are more knowledgeable than others. Imam replied : Yes. But their knowledge about Halal and Haram, and Tafsir of Quran is similar.
Hussain ibn Ziyad has narrated a similar report from Imam Jafar.
Muhammad ibn Esa has narrated as similar report from Hasan ibn Ziyad.]

Now lets read what Majlisi has to say regarding it:

[It is possible that it is based on Taqiyya from the extremist Shias.]

In Mirat ul Uqool, Vol. 21, p. 198 we read that the Imam lies about Umm Kulthoum’s marriage from `Umar:

[`Umar ibn Adheena asked Imam Ja`far Sadiq ‘People claim that ‘Ali married his daughter to such a person’. The Imam, who was until then sitting down, stood up and said angrily, “Whoever holds such a viewpoint is misled.” Subhanallah! Was Imam ‘Ali unable to free his daughter from their clutches? He could have stood between them and her and prevented this, they have fabricated a lie … (the whole story of Umm Kulthum being replaced by Jinn and the Jinn’s marriage to Umar there-forth)]

Mulla Baqir Majlisi says regarding it:

[I say: There is no contradiction between this narration and the other narrations that he married his daughter Umm Kulthum, because the Imams would fear from the extremist Shias, and this is from their secrets, and because plenty of his companions didn’t believe it, this is what my father al-`Allamah has also mentioned.]

From the modern-day examples of this matter is that the Shia jurists declared the Najasah or physical impurity of Ahlul-Kitab, and they issued verdicts forbidding the Shia from eating their food and drinking their drinks, even bread and water. However, many of the biggest contemporary scholars hold a different opinion and they are of the opinion of Tahara or purity of Ahlul-Kitab but since they practice Taqiyya with their own followers they will not issue verdicts.

Shia scholar Muhammad Jawad Mughniyyah says regarding this matter in his book “Tafsir al-Kashif” 3/18, in Surat al-Ma’edah verse #5:

[Many of the biggest Shia Maraji` are of the opinion of purity, from them is al-Sayyid al-Hakeem and al-Sayyid al-Khoei who confessed his opinion secretly to those he trusts.]

Mughniyyah says in “Fiqh al-Imam al-Sadiq” pg33 that he met three contemporary Shia scholars:

[Sheikh Muhammad Reda Aal Yasin in Najaf, al-Sayyid Sadr al-Deen al-Sadr in Qum, and Sayyid Muhsin al-Ameen in Lebanon, and they all issued verdicts about the purity of Ahlul-Kitab but it was done secretly to those whom they trusted, and they did not declare it publicly out of fear from the trouble makers, and many of the jurists view their purity but will  not declare it out of fear from the people of ignorance, and Allah deserves to be feared more.]

Mughniyyah also says in “al-Jawami` wal-Fawariq bayn al-Sunnah wal-Shia” pg184:

[What some Shia laymen do in Lebanon and `Iraq and Iran, from wearing shrouds and hitting their heads and foreheads with swords on the tenth of Muharram, this is a shameful habit and an innovation in the religion and the Madhab, the people of ignorance innovated it for themselves without permission from an Imam or a big scholar just like what happens in every religion or Madhab, none dared to confront this in our days except very few scholars and at their forefront is Sayyid Muhsin al-Ameen al-`Amili (ra)]

All of us know how Muhsin al-Ameen was attacked and cursed and refuted by Shia scholars before the laymen when he opposed Tatbeer and Zinjeer…

Next we quote al-Tijani al-Samawi who talks about smoking in “Kull al-Huloul `Inda Aal al-Rassul” pg169:

[I find it strange that the Maraji` of the Shia would forbid playing chess but do not forbid smoking although there is a huge difference between the harm of smoking and the harm of chess. I always hated this situation so I raised these issues many times with some scholars but never found one with sufficient courage to ban it and forbid it. I remember that al-Shaheed al-Sadr never smoked and when I asked him he replied: “I do not smoke and I advise each Muslim not to smoke.” but I never heard him explicitly forbid it. It is said that some scholars forbade it for new smokers but declared it Makruh on the average smoker, and some forbid it completely but they do not have the courage to declare it out of fear of being accused of using Qiyas. The Maraji` have to declare it explicitly and not fear anyone other than Allah, and they need to forbid it even if by their own Ijtihad, but if the scholars and Maraji` remain silent because the people will not accept it then this is a problem, or maybe they fear the reaction of the smokers so they will not declare it as Makruh and I have heard some scholars try their hardest to convince me that in it(smoking) are great benefits(for health) and this is a dangerous matter with many consequences, it has encouraged Muslim youth to smoke regularly.]


In Tahtheeb al-Ahkam by Tusi 2/195 we read the following narration:

[Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Yahya from Ahmad bin Muhammad from ibn Sinan from abu al-Jaroud: I said to abu Ja’far (as): “When do I make the two prostrations of forgetfulness?” he (as) said: “Before making Tasleem, because if you make Tasleem then your prayer is finished.”]

The author al-Tusi commented on this narration and the others before it by saying: “These two narrations are to be considered a kind of Taqiyya, because they agree with the Madhabs of many of the `Aamah(Sunnies).”

This is the usual case, it is the norm, the Imams being scared of everyone and trying their best not to show any signs of disagreement with Ahlul-Sunnah. I’m sure that’s the impression the readers got after reading all the previous narrations in this book. However, since the Shia back then were known to be fabricators of Hadith, there’s bound to be contradictions. They portray the Imams as being fearful scared individuals who are in constant hiding, yet at the same time they narrate the opposite of this, Ahadith that show the Imams being quite careless and exposing themselves as if all that secrecy had no meaning.

In al-Kafi vol.5 pg.449 we read:

[`Ali bin Ibrahim from his father from ibn abi ‘Umayr from `Ali bin al-Hassan bin Ribat from Hariz from ‘Abdul-Rahman bin abi ‘Abdullah: I heard abu Hanifa ask abu ‘Abdullah (as) about Mut’ah, so he (as) said: “Which of the two you ask about?” abu Hanifa said: “I am asking about the Mut’ah of women because I already asked you about the Mut’ah of Hajj, is it correct?” he (as) replied: “Subhanallah! Have you not read in the book of Allah (swt)? : {So for whatever you enjoy [of marriage] from them, give them their due compensation as an obligation.}” abu Hanifa said: “By Allah it is as if this is the first time I hear it.”]

al-Majlisi said: Hasan in al-Miraat 20/229.

al-Behbudi said: Sahih in Sahih-ul-Kafi 3/45.

al-Sadiq who practiced Taqiyya more than any other Imam in their book wasn’t just talking to a any random ignorant Muslim in the streets, nor was he talking about a small minor issue, he is talking about one of the biggest differences of Fiqh which is Mut`ah. And yet, he openly exposes his beliefs, casually I might add, in front of the leader of the scholars of Baghdad and the head of one of the four Madhabs Imam abu Hanifa al-Nu`man, a man who had thousands of followers.


Muhammad bin `Ali bin al-Hussein with his Isnad, from Yahya bin abi ‘Imran that he said: I wrote to abu Ja’far II (as) regarding the squirrel and the fennec fox and the beaver, and I said: “May I be sacrifice for you, I would like it if you did not reply with Taqiyya in this matter.” So he wrote me with his own hand-writing: “Pray in them.”

(He means while wearing their skin.)

sources: al-Hadaeq al-Nadirah by Yusuf al-Bahrani (7/62-69), Mustanad al-Shia by al-Naraqi(4/321), Jawahir al-Kalam by al-Jawahiri (8/88-98), Man la Yahduruhu al-Faqih by Saduq (1/262), Wasael al-Shia by al-‘Amili (3/253) & (4/349).

In his book “Minhaj al-Ahkam” pg.47, al-Mirza al-Qummi says while commenting on this:

“The questioner may have asked about the condition of a certain matter and said “What is the ruling on this? Answer me without Taqiyya?” or “Answer me with no Taqiyya.” so they (as) would answer that it is so and so, but this is also Taqiyya.”

This means the Shia are in so much doubt, that they cannot know for sure if the Imam is doing Taqiyya or if it’s a trick to fool their enemies.


al-Tusi in “Tahtheeb al-Ahkam” vol.1 pg.335:

[Our sheikh (Mufid) may Allah strengthen him says: “It is not permissible for any of the believers(Twelvers) to wash anyone from those who differ with us in the Truth of the Wilayah (of `Ali) nor should he pray on him, unless there is a necessity in the case of Taqiyya, so he  gives him the washing of those who oppose us, and if he prays on him he curses him and does not make Du`a for him.”

So this shows that the one who opposes us is a Kafir and his ruling is that of a Kafir unless in special cases where there is proof, and if washing the Kafir is not permissible then washing the one who opposes us is also not permissible, as for praying on him it should be like the prayer of the Prophet SAWS and Ahlul-Bayt (as) on the Mounafiqoun(Hypocrites), and we will show insha-Allah the method of how that prayer in conducted.]

al-Majlisi says in “Zadul-Mi`ad” pg.345 after mentioning the impermissibility of praying on the Kouffar and the Khawarij and the Nawasib and the Ghulat:

[As for those who oppose us there is a difference, between not praying on them or praying on them with only four Takbeerat and on the fourth one you curse them…]

al-Bahrani in “al-Hadaeq al-Nadirah” 5/176:

[And it is clear and is supported by the Quran which is the saying of Allah “And pray thou never over any one of them when he is dead” meaning the Kouffar, and he who differs with the people of Truth(Twelvers) is a Kafir and there is no disagreement on this among us.]

al-Qummi al-Saduq says what Du`a should be made upon the Mukhalif(Sunni) when he dies during Salat al-Janaza, we read in “Fiqh al-Rida” pg178:

[And if the dead person is a Mukhalif(Sunni) then say in your fourth Takbeera – O Allah, disappoint your slave and the son of your slave – O Allah let him into your fire – O Allah make him taste your most painful punishment – O Allah surround him with fire and fill his insides with fire – O Allah tighten his grave – for he was an enemy of your friends and a friend of your enemies – O Allah do not reduce his torture and pour your torment on him – So when his Janazah is lifted say: “O Allah do not raise him nor give him virtue”]

And their scholar abu Salah al-Halabi (died 447 AH) says in his book also called “al-Kafi lil-Halabi” pg157:

[And if he was from those who oppose the truth, like a Mujabbir or a Mushabbih or a Mu`tazili or a Khariji or a denier of Imamah, then he curses him after the fourth and leaves. Prayer on them is not allowed except in Taqiyya.]


The Shia narrations prove without the shadow of a doubt that the infallible Shia Imams are a source of misguidance to their own followers before anyone else, let’s see why with our own eyes from al-Kafi …

[Ahmad ibn Idris from Muhamad ibn ‘Abdul-Jabbar from al-Hassan ibn `Ali from Tha’alabah ibn Maymoun from Zurarah ibn A’ayun that he said: I asked Imam al-Baqir (as) a question so the Imam gave me the answer then another man came and asked the same question so the Imam gave him a different answer, then another one came and asked about it so the Imam gave him a completely different answer than both of us. when both men left I asked the Imam: “O son of Rassul Allah, two men from ‘Iraq and from your Shia came to ask you but you gave each of them different answers.” He replied: “O Zurarah, this is good for us so that we may remain safer because if you all agree on this then the people will believe in it and they would be guided to us but we will not remain for long.”

Later I said to his son al-Sadiq (as): “Your Shia always walk away from you with different opinions and answers” so he gave me the same reply as his father.]

source: al-Kafi 1/65.

al-Majlisi said: Muwaththaq like the Sahih.

al-Behbudi said: Sahih.

[`Ali ibn Ibrahim from his father from ibn abi Najran from ‘Assim bin Humayd from Mansour ibn Hazim who said: I said to al-Sadiq (as): “What is the matter with you, I ask a question and you give me an answer then another man comes and asks it so you give him a completely different one?” The Imam replied: “we answer people in matters of addition and deletion.” I said to him: “Then tell me about the companions of Rassul-Allah SAWS do they narrate truthful narrations or do they lie?” the Imam said: “They are truthful” I asked: “Why did they differ?” he replied: “Do you not know that a man used to come to Rassul-Allah SAWS and ask a question then he answers him but later he would answer to the same question differently because the Ahadith they abrogate each other.”]

source: al-Kafi 1/65.

al-Majlisi said: Hasan.

Shia scholar Yusuf al-Bahrani in the introduction of his book “al-Hadaeq al-Nadirah” says:

[And to this points his saying (as):

“And if you(shia) all gather upon one thing then the people will believe you concerning us ect…”

And the Sheikh has also narrated in al-Tahtheeb in the SAHIH from Salim abu Khadeejah from abu ‘Abdullah (as): a man asked him (as) while I was present: “sometimes I would enter the mosque and I would see some of our companions(shia) praying ‘Asr while the others pray Zuhr?”

he (as) replied: “I ordered them to do this because if they all prayed at the same time then our matter would be known and they would be executed.”

The Imam is very honest in his saying and in this case he did not do what the mainstream Muslims do as it is clear for them(sunnies) that the timing of both prayers are separate.

Also what is narrated by the sheikh in his book al-‘Iddah in the Mursal from al-Sadiq (as): “He was asked about the difference among our companions in timings(of acts of worship)” he (as) responded: “I am the one who made them differ among themselves.”

And what is narrated in al-Ihtijaj with its Sanad to Huraiz from abu ‘Abdullah (as), he said to the Imam: “There is nothing more saddening for me than the difference of our companions(shia)” the Imam (as) replied: “I did this.”

And what he narrated in the book Ma’anee al-Akhbar from al-Khazzaz from he who told him from abu al-Hasan(as) who said: “The difference among my companions is a mercy.” and he (as) also said: “When that (appearance of Mahdi) happens I will unite you upon one thing.” and in another place he (as) was asked about the difference among our companions(Shia) so he (as) said: “I did this to you, and if you were to unite upon one matter then your heads will be taken.”

And what is narrated in al-Kafi with its Isnad from Musa bin Ashyam, he said: I was with abu ‘Abdullah (as) so a man asked him about a verse from the verses of the book of Allah almighty, he answered him then another man came and inquired about the same verse but he gave him a different answer from the first man, I then doubted him greatly – until he said – and while I was like this suddenly a man enters and asks about that same verse so he gave him an answer different from mine and my companion’s answers, so my doubts subsided and I realized this was Taqiyya.”]

I ask the Shia who fear Allah, is this acceptable? The divine Imams who are sent from God to guide men and rule the nation are living by Taqiyya misguiding and confusing everyone?

Yusuf al-Bahrani writes in his book “al-Duraral-Najafiyyah fil-Multaqatat al-Yusufiyyah”. vol.2 pg.300:

[What is famous among our companions may Allah be pleased with them, is that Taqiyya in their (as) narrations results from the opinions of the `Amah(Sunnies), but to me there are other reasons for this. It is that they (as) try to create difference among the Shia even if there weren’t any similar opinions from the `Amah(Sunnies). From these narrations is what Thiqat al-Islam narrated in al-Kafi, in the Muwaththaq from Zurarah, from abi Ja`far (as) that he said:

I asked him about a matter and he answered, then another man came and asked him about it and he gave a different than mine, then a third came and he gave a completely different answer. When the two men left I asked: “O son of Rassul-Allah (SAWS), two men from your Shia in `Iraq came and asked but you gave them both conflicting answers?” he (as) replied: “O Zurarah, this is goodness for us and for you, if you unite upon a matter then the people will believe (what you narrate) from us, and it would make our stay and your stay short.”]

Then he explains…

[Maybe the secret to this, is that if the Shia were to differ among each other, each one narrating from his Imam what contradicts the other, then their Madhab would appear silly in the eyes of the `Amah(Sunnies), they would accuse them of lying and fabricating their narrations, and they’d  accuse them of ignorance in religion, and they’d become lowly in their eyes. On the contrary, if they agreed on one word, they’d believe them and their hatred would increase for them and their Imam and Madhab, this becomes a cause of raging enmity.]

Notice he admits his Madhab is silly, he continues…

[From that is what al-Shaykh narrated in al-Tahdheeb, in the Sahih `ala al-Dhahir, from Salim bin abi Hudhayfah, from abi `Abdillah (as), that he said: A man asked him while I was present: “Sometimes I come into the mosque and some of our companions are praying `Asr while others are praying Dhuhr.” he (as) replied: “I ordered them to do this, if they pray at one time they will be known and their heads would fall.”

And what al-Shaykh narrated in al-`Iddah, Mursal from the narration of al-Sadiq (as) that he was asked about the difference between our companions in timings, so he said: “I created this difference between them.”

And what he narrated in al-Ihtijaj with his Sanad to Hurayz, from abi `Abdillah (as) that he told him: “Nothing gets to me more than the difference of our companions!” so he (as) replied: “This was caused by me.”

Also what he narrated in the book Ma`ani al-Akhbar from al-Khazzaz, from he who told him, from abu al-Hasan (as) that he said: “The difference between my companions is a mercy for you.”

And he (as) said: “If ‘that’ should happen I shall gather you all upon one matter.”

And what he narrated in al-Kafi with his Sanad to Musa bin Ashiyam: I was with abu `Abdillah (as) so a man asked him about a verse from the book of Allah and he told him about it, then another one came in and asked him about the same verse but he gave a different answer, so that caused a lot of doubt in me (…until he says…) while I was sitting another one came so he gave him an answer different than mine and my companions, so I calmed down and realized it was Taqiyya on his part.]

Finally he says…

[Maybe with the help of these, you can know that trying to figure out the correct narrations of Taqiyya, is to present them to the book of Allah, and that is the strongest of means of outweighing between the evidence]

Sadly, the strongest means according to them is the weakest means, because the vast majority of topics discussed in Shia narrations are not mentioned anywhere in the Qur’an, including Imamah and the number of Imams and their qualities and their rulings in Fiqh.

How can the Shia believe the Imams misguide their folowers, yet at the same time believe in what al-Mufid said in “Tashih I`tiqadat al-Imamiyyah” pg.128-130:

[The infallibility given by Allah to his Hujaj(Imams) is the success and grace and the protection from sins and from making mistakes in the religion of Allah most high]

What bigger mistake is there than misguiding your followers and confusing them? What good is this “grace” is they’re gonna resort to this? Wouldn’t this be better described as “curse”?

Shia scholar Muhammad Rida  al-Muzaffar says in `Aqa’id al-Imamiyyah pg.65 when discussing the qualities that the Imam of the nation must have:

[He (the Imam) also needs to be protected from forgetfulness and mistakes, because the Imams are the preservers of religious laws, and those who oversee it, their condition in this regard is the same as the condition of the prophet]

I say, since when the Prophet (saw) so proud of creating differences and manipulating rulings to please the tyrants?

Shia scholar Ja`far al-Subhani says in Adwa’ `ala `Aqa’id  al-Shi`ah al-Imamiyyah, pg.388:

[We can prove the necessity of the Imam’s infallibility in different ways, from the most important of them:

Firstly: The Imamah being a continuation of the function of prophet-hood and message, and since the Imam fills all the gaps which resulted by the passing of the Prophet (SAWS), then in this case he certainly needs to be infallible, because if he were to sin then it would conflict with the reason of his creation in the first place as leader of the nation. The goal is to guide the nation towards the correct path, this cannot happen unless his sayings are trusted, and unless one can be comfortable that he speaks truth. If it were allowed for the Imam to make mistakes, or forget, or sin, or contradict himself, then his words and actions cannot be trusted, and the people’s trust in him would weaken, and this contradicts the reason of his appointment…]

What trust and what truth when the Imam are supposedly hell-bent on spreading lies and misguidance and deceiving even their own followers!? Truly, this contradicts the reason for their existence as guides in the first place.


We read now that the followers of the Imams, to see what type of people they were.

In al-Kafi 2/242, is a Hadith judged as “Hasan kal-Sahih” by Majlisi in “al-Mir’aat” 9/286:

[From ibn Ri’aab that he heard abu `Abdullah (as) say to abu Baseer: “By Allah, if I were to find among you three believers who keep my narrations secret, I would not have allowed myself to keep my narrations a secret from you.”]

abu `Abdillah here is Ja`far, as you can see he couldn’t even find three pious reliable people from among his companions and followers, so he kept his narrations a secret. We ask how then does al-Kafi contain around 16,000 narrations mostly from Ja`far? I hope the reader can see through their lies.

al-Sayyed Ni’imatullah al-Jazaeri says in his book:

[When al-Sadiq (a) was asked by his companions about al-Qaem (a) and that they wish to meet him, he would say: “You have to be diligent and you have to be patient, with this you will receive the rewards of Jihad even if you die on your beds.” Although even if they remained until his appearance (a) only a small minority among them will support him  like what happened with al-Husein (a) and the Shia of his father who wrote for him and when he came to them they “handed him over to be killed” and I wished that they stopped there but they even supported his oppressors.”]

source: al-Anwar al-Nu’umaniyyah 2/35.

[Until he apparently gathered supporters so he called to Jihad and prepared for battle and headed with his children and family from the sanctuary of Rassul-Allah SAWS towards ‘Iraq to seek the aid and support of his Shia who called on him, before him his cousin Muslim ibn ‘Aqeel went to get their pledge of allegiance and to call to the cause of Allah, the people of Kufa gave him the pledge and oaths and the promises and they guaranteed him victory, it did not take long though before they turned on him and broke their pledge, they let him down and handed him over so he was killed in between them and they did not aid him, then they went to fight against al-Husein (a), they surrounded him and prevented him from fleeing and cornered him in an area where he could not escape, they prevented him from drinking the water of the river of Furat and when they saw the chance they killed him.]

source: Tareekh al-Aimmah min Athar al-Qudamaa min ‘Ulemaa al-Imamiyah, pages 289-290 printed by the order of grand ayatullah Shihab-ul-Deen al-Mir’ashi al-Najafi.

[A man came to `Ali bin al-Hussein (a) and said: I preferred Jihad over Hajj, and Allah had said: “Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise.” `Ali said to him: “read what comes after it” the man said: “the repentant, the worshippers, the praisers [of Allah], the travelers [for His cause], those who bow and prostrate [in prayer], those who enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong, and those who observe the limits [set by] Allah.” so `Ali said: When you meet these people then Jihad with them would be better than Hajj.]

source: Man la Yahduruhu al-Faqih.

[What is meant by this is that Jihad has conditions such as ability and loyalty and he meant that if we had followers who would stick true to their promises then we will make Jihad, the Imams (a) never had such followers like the ones with the qualities mentioned in the verse.]

source: Rawdat al-Muttaqeen fi Sharh Man la Yahduruhu al-Faqih 4/76.

[The explanation of his saying: “Allah was angry with the Shia.”

This is because they oppose truth and they are disobedient and they never supported the truthful Imam.]

source: Sharh Usool al-Kafi by al-Mazandarani 6/40.

[With this Isnad from Muhammad bin Ahmad from al-Hassan bin al-Hussein al-LuLuee from Muhammad bin Sinan from Huthyfah bin Mansour that he said: I was with Abu ‘Abdullah (a) in al-Heerah, the messenger of ibn ‘Abbas the Caliph came to him inviting him, so he wore a piece with one black side and one white side and said (a): “I wear it knowing that it is the clothing of the people of the fire.”

The author of the book said:

He wore it as Taqiyya but he told Huthayfah bin Mansour because he trusted him and a group of Shia came to him asking him about wearing black but he did not trust them in keeping his secret so he used Taqiyya with them.]

source: ‘Ilal al-Sharae’e by al-Saduq 2/347.

[The majority of the followers of the Imams were not able to keep secrets.]

source: Malath al-Akhyar fi fahm Tahtheeb al-Akhbar 13/321.

[Abu ‘Abdullah (a) said: my father told me and he was a great father: “If I found three who are trustworthy I would have given them knowledge that they would no longer need to look into matters of Halal and Haram or anything else until our Qaem (a) rises.”]

sources: basaer al-darajat 1/478, Bihar al-Anwar 3/213.


Here I will quote from the book of one of the Shia scholars of Hadith “Muhyee al-Deen al-Musawi al-Ghurayfi” in his book “Qawa’ed al-Hadith” starting from page 135:

[“And that many of the narrations were not told by the Imams (as) but they were fabricated by liars who attributed them to the Imams by inserting them into the books of their companions or by other means (1). And of course they must have placed for these narrations or to most of them authentic chains of narrators so that they may be accepted. And as we cannot tell the difference between both groups of narrations, I mean the fabricated ones and the ones issued by Taqiyya and we have no way of making a distinction so how can we still work with the narrations of authentic chains with the possibility of them being from that group?

Abandoning the authentic narrations of Ahlul-Bayt (as) is definitely wrong as we cannot know their rulings except through these narrations , which is why we must return to our early Fuqahaa (scholars) as they have lots of evidence to make the distinction between the narrations, their knowledge proves that a narration is not from that group and if the chain is good then we work with it as a Hujjah, while others could have strong chains but since it is suspected of being from that group then it is dropped and abandoned.”]

In the footnotes the Muhaqiq(Researcher) of the book writes:

[(1): As the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt (as) were forced to use Taqiyya they also had a group of Zanadiqah and liars who tried their best to fabricate narrations and attribute them to the Imams (as). al-Kashshi narrated with its Isnad to Muhammad bin ‘Isa that he said: some of our companions asked Yunus bin ‘Abdul-Rahman while I was present so he said to him: O Abu Muhammad you are very strict in Hadith and you reject a lot of what our companions narrate, why is this? He said: Hisham bin al-Hakam told me that he heard Abu ‘Abdullah say: DO NOT ACCEPT FROM US A HADITH EXCEPT THAT WHICH AGREES WITH THE QURAN AND THE SUNNAH, OR THAT YOU FIND EVIDENCE FROM OUR EARLY NARRATIONS, BECAUSE AL-MUGHEERAH BIN SA’EED (LA) HAS INSERTED INTO THE BOOKS OF THE COMPANIONS OF MY FATHER THAT WHICH HE DID NOT NARRATE, SO FEAR ALLAH AND DO NOT ACCEPT FROM US THAT WHICH CONTRADICTS WITH OUR LORD AND WITH THE SUNNAH OF THE PROPHET (SAWS)…Yunus said…I took their books then presented them to Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Reda (as) so he rejected many narrations as they could not be narrated by Abu ‘Abdullah (as) and he told me: ABU AL-KHATTAB HAS LIED ON ABU ‘ABDULLAH (as) MAY ALLAH CURSE ABU AL-KHATTAB AND ALSO HIS COMPANIONS WHO INSERT THESE FAKE NARRATIONS UNTIL OUR VERY DAY IN THE BOOKS OF ABU ‘ABULLAH ect… (al-Hadaeq 1/8)]

Shia popular scholar Hashim Ma`rouf al-Husayni says in “al-Mawdou`at fil-Athar wal-Akhbar” pg150:

[The authentic narrations of Imam al-Sadiq confirm with certainty and so do the narrations of other Imams, that al-Mugheerah bin Sa`eed and Bayan and Sa’id al-Nahdayn and `Umar al-Nabti and al-Mufaddal and other deviants of Tashayyu` and agents, that they inserted between the narrations of the Imams a big number of fabrications in all topics.]

And he said:

[It was narrated by al-Mugheerah that he said: “I fabricated and inserted into the narration of Ja`far bin Muhammad twelve thousand Hadith.”]

And he said:

[Him and his followers remained for a long time within the folds of Tashayyu`, they used to visit the Imams with them and were never exposed until after the fundamental primary books of Hadith were filled with their narrations as stated by Yahya bin Humayd.]

In Ikhtiyar Ma`rifat al-Rijal by Tusi 2/616, we read:

[Kashshi, from Hamani: I said to Shareek: “Some people claim that Ja`far bin Muhammad (as) is weak in Hadih!” Shareek replied: “Let me tell you the story behind this, Ja`far was a pious righteous man, unfortunately he was surrounded by ignorant folks who enter on him and see his lectures then they leave saying: ‘Ja`far narrated to us such and such’ so they’d narrate lies and falsehoods and attribute it to Ja`far in order to take people’s money and rob them such as al-Mufaddal bin `Umar, Banan, `Amro al-Nabti and others.”]


1- “Taqiyya” as a name is shared by both the Sunni and Shi`ee Madhab, but the purpose and function is completely different. In Islam, making Taqiyya is uttering Kufr and hiding Iman in necessary situation. In Tashayyu`, Taqiyya is showing Iman and hiding Kufri beliefs such as Shirk and Ghuluw and Tahreef  and Takfeer of the Sahabah and other evil matters.

2- Taqiyya in Tashayyu` is not an exception or a dispensation(Rukhsah) in case of necessity, rather it in itself is a necessity and is obligatory, he who leaves it is like he who left prayer, it is not permissible to drop it until the Mahdi or 12th Imam rises and is a tool to get closer to their opponents and earn their trust in order to convert them.

3- Taqiyya in Islam is fundamentally practiced against the Kouffar, as for Taqiyya in Tashayyu` then it is essentially against Ahlul-Sunnah, they differ on whether it can be used against Kouffar.

4- Those who established the belief of Taqiyya in the Shi`ee Madhab wished to divide the nation and to further separate the Shia from the rest of the Muslims, it is to save their belief in infallibility and to avoid telling their followers that their sources are forged and unreliable.

5- Those who fabricated narrations ordering the Shia to keep their beliefs secret, and praising those who never announce their true beliefs, they are the deviants who infiltrated the school of Ahlul-Bayt and wished to keep their falsehood hidden and their reality concealed so they may not be exposed.

6- The narrations in which the Imams cursed the liars and deviants and extremists were all covered up by the excuse that the Imams only cursed these men to protect them from danger.

7- The life of the scholars of Ahlul-Bayt which is recorded in history books opposes Taqiyya, they were all honest and truthful and brave, nothing in their lives agrees with the principals of Taqiyya.

8- Even according to Shia standards, the narrations praising Taqiyya and encouraging it and warning from abandoning it, they are all mainly un-authentic.

9- Many of the narrations of Taqiyya cannot be explained in clear and convincing ways as is apparent from Tusi’s failed attempts to reconcile, which is why some deviants fabricated narrations accusing the Imams of intentionally misguiding the nation.

10- Shia scholars have admitted that a lot of the rulings of the school of Ahlul-Bayt were lost because of Taqiyya, and that they differ in one issue on more than twenty or thirty opinions, this led to many Shia abandoning their Madhab.

11- They permitted that Taqiyya be used between the Shia as they never trust each other and their scholars always try to offer religious verdicts to please the laymen out of fear from being harmed or losing status, authority and popularity.

12- They have to resort to the reasoning and fallible deduction skills of their scholars in order to know the true religion, which deprives the nation from infallible guidance and defeats the purpose of Imamah.

Praise be to Allah and glory be to him, and may His peace and blessings shower our Prophet Muhammad and his family, companions and followers until the day of judgment.

Written by Hani al-Tarabulsi al-Shafi`i based on the book “Taqiyya: The other face.” By Faysal Noor.


  1. Why do you consider Shia as a madhab? In your conclusion, you said ‘“Taqiyya” as a name is shared by both the Sunni and Shi`ee Madhab’. Shi’aism has a totally different dogmas and doctrines as compared to Islam therefore it cannot be considered as madhab of Islam. The madhaheb of Shafiee, Hanbali, Maliki and Hanafi do not consider cursing Abu Bakr r.a., Umar r.a., Aisha r.a. and Hafsah r.a. as a way to Jannah. Nor do these madhaheb consider all Sahabas as apostates and liars nor do they consider the Quran as corrupted and not preserved nor do they consider eating dung and drinking urine of Imams as a ticket to Jannah nor do they modify the 5 Pillars of Islam and include Imamah as one of the 5 pillars, do they? The proper term to use when referring to Shia is DEVIANT CULT, never a madhab of Islam. Kindly modify your article. Thanks and regards…

    • We didn’t use the expression “Shia Madhab” as opposed to Shafi`i, Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki Madhab. Rather we used it in its linguistic meaning, as in “The way of the Shia”, this “way” could be complete and utter deviance.

  2. Extremely helpfull article my brothers. Very informative… important events of history in one sum up. All of the misconception cleared. I pray Allah keep you people safe and strengthen you in the path of knowledge… here, other book Tohfa Isna Ashria also to be dhelvi sahb. JazaakAllah

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.