Sunni religious scholar Moulana Ghulam Hussain Naeemi converted to Shia Islam.
He writes 20 questions which he claims Sunni scholars could not answer for him.
Moulana Ghulam Hussain Naeemi of Sahiwal, Pakistan, was a Sunni scholar who after considerable research converted to the Shia Islam. His questions were not answered by Sunni scholars of his own faith.
History testifies that when Muhammad declared his Prophethood, the Quraish1 subjected the Bani Hashim to a boycott. Abu Talib took the tribe to an area called Shib Abi Talib where they remained for three years, suffering from immense hardship. Where were Abu Bakr and Umar during that period? They were in Mecca so why did they not help the Holy Prophet? If they were unable to join the Prophet at the Shib Abi Talib is there any evidence that they provided any type of support (food etc), breaching the agreement that the Quraish boycott all food / business transactions with Bani Hashim?
1. "The Quraish gathered together to confer and decided to draw up a document in which they undertook not to marry women from Banu Hashim and the Banu al Muttalib, or to give them women in marriage, or to sell anything to them or buy anything from them. They drew up a written contract to that effect and solemnly pledged themselves to observe it. They then hung up the document in the interior of the Kaba to make it even more binding upon themselves. When Quraish did this, the Banu Hashim and the Banu al-Muttalib joined with Abu Talib, went with him to his valley and gathered round him there; but Abu Lahab Abd al Uzza b. Abd al-Muttalib left the Banu Hashim and went with the Quraish supporting them against Abu Talib. This state of affairs continued for two or three years, until the two clans were exhausted, since nothing reached any of them except what was sent secretly by those of the Quraish who wished to maintain relations with them". (Taken from The History of al-Tabari, Volume 6 page 81 - Muhammad at Mecca, translated by W.Montgommery & M.V. MacDonald).
2. "These days were very hard with them and very often they had to feed on the leaves TALH or plantain" (taken from Siratun Nabi by Shibli Numani Vol 1 p 218, English translation by M. Tayyib Bakhsh Budayuni.
Fatima died 6 months after her father, Abu Bakr died two and a half years later and Umar in 24 Hijri. Despite their later deaths how is it that they attained burial sites next to the Prophet and not Fatima? Did she request that she be buried away from her father? If so, why? Or did the Muslims prevent her burial?
(see Sahih al Bukhari Arabic - English Vol 5 hadith number 546).
Amongst the companions Abu Bakr is viewed as the most superior on account of his closeness to the Holy Prophet. If this is indeed the case then why did the Holy Prophet not select him to be his brother when he divided the companions in to pairs on the Day of Brotherhood? Rather, the Prophet chose Ali saying "You are my brother in this world and the next", so on what basis is Abu Bakr closer?
See The History of the Khalifahs who took the right way, by Jalaladeen Suyuti, English translation by Abdassamad Clarke p177, (Taha publishers)
The books of Sunnis are full of traditions narrated by Aisha, Abu Hurraira and Abdullah Ibn Umar. Their narration's; far exceed those relayed by Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Hussain. Why is this the case? When the Prophet declared "I am the City of Knowledge and Ali is it's Gate", did Ali benefit less from the company of the Prophet than these individuals?
If Ali had no differences with the first three Khalifa's why did he not participate in any battles that took place during their reigns, particularly when Jihad against the Kuffar is deemed a major duty upon the Muslim? If he did not view it as necessary at that time, then why did he during his own Khilafat whilst in his fifties unsheathe his sword and participate in the battles of Jamal, Sifeen and Naharwan?
If (as is the usual allegation) the Shias were responsible for killing Imam Hussain then why did the majority Sunnis not come to his aid? After all they were in the majority, there were millions of such individuals, what was their position at that time?
If Umar was correct when he denied the dying request of the Holy Prophet on the premise that the 'Koran is sufficient for us' (Sahih al Bukhari Vol 7 hadith number 573) what will be the reward for accusing the Holy Prophet of speaking nonsense?
(See Sahih al-Bukhari Vol 5 number 716)
Allah sent 124,000 Prophet's to guide mankind. Is there any proof that on the deaths of any one of these Prophet's his companions failed to attend his funeral preferring to participate in the selection of his successor? If no such precedent exists then why did the Prophet's companions follow this approach?
"the Sahaba viewed the appointment of the Imam as so important that they preferred it to attending the Prophet's funeral" - taken from Sharh Fiqa Akbar, by Mulla Ali Qari, p 175 (publishers Muhammad Saeed and son, Koran Muhall, Karachi).
Of the 124,000 Prophets' that Allah sent, what evidence is there that they left everything for their followers as Sadaqah (Charity)? If they did, then why did the Prophet's wives not give all their possessions to the Islamic State? After all, Sunnis consider the wives to be Ahlulbayt. Sadaqah is haram on the Ahlulbayt, this being the case why did they hold on to their possessions?
We read in the Koran "And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense shall be hell, he shall abide therein and God's wrath (Ghazibullaho) shall be on him and his curse (lanato), and is prepared for him a great torment" (Surah Nisa, v 93) History testifies that during the battles of Sifeen and Jamal 70,800 Muslims lost their lives. What is the position of the killers here? Is this verse not applicable to them? If these individuals opposed the Khalifa of the time and were responsible for spreading fitnah (dissension) and murder, what will be their position on the Day of Judgement?
Allah tells us in the Koran "And of the people of Madina are those who are bent on hypocrisy. You know them not, but we know them". (The Koran 9:101). The verse proves the existence of hypocrites during the lifetime of the Prophet. After the Prophet's death where did they go? Historians record the fact that two groups emerged following the Prophet's demise, Banu Hashim and their supporters, the State and their supporters. Which side did the hypocrites join?
Sunnis have four principles of law the Koran, Sunnah, Ijtihad and Qiyas. Were any of these principles adopted by the parties during their discussions about the Prophet's successor at the Saqifa?
If rejecting a Rightly Guided Khalifa is tantamount to apostasy and rebelling against any khalifa even Yazid ibn Muawiya will lead to such persons being raised as betrayers in the next world; what of those individuals who rebelled and fought the fourth rightly guided Khalifa?
This was the verdict of Abdullah Ibn Umar in his defence of Yazid (See Sahih al Bukhari Arabic - English Volume 9 hadith number 127)
It is a basic principle of rationality that if two parties have a dispute both can be wrong, but both can not be right. Applying this to the battles of Jamal and Sifeen, will both the murderers and the murdered be in heaven, because both were right?
The Holy Prophet had said "I swear by the one who controls my life that this man (Ali) and his Shia shall secure deliverance on the day of resurrection". Do any hadith exist in which the Prophet had guaranteed paradise for Imams Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi, Hanbal and their followers?
Tafsir Durr al Manthur, by al Hafidh Jalaladeen Suyuti in his commentary of verse 98:7
During her lifetime Aisha was a severe critic of Uthman, to the point that she advocated his killing. How is it that following his murder, she chose to rebel against Imam Ali on the premise that his killers should be apprehended? Why did she leave Mecca, portray Uthman as a victim and mobilise opposition from Basrah? Was this decision based on her desire to defend Uthman or was it motivated by her animosity towards Ali?
History records that she said the following about Uthman "Kill this old fool (Na'thal), for he is unbeliever", see History of Ibn Athir, v3, p206, Lisan al-Arab, v14, p141, al-Iqd al-Farid, v4, p290 and Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadid, v16, pp 220-223
If failing to believe in Aisha is an act of Kufr what opinion should we hold with regards to her killer?
Aisha was killed by Muawiya (Tarikh al Islam, by Najeeb Abadi, Vol 2 p 44)
It is commonly conveyed that the companions were brave, generous, and knowledgeable and spent their time worshipping Allah. If we want to determine their bravery, then let us delve in to history, how many kaffir's did the prominent companion Umar slay during the battles of Badr, Uhud, Khunduq, Khayber and Hunain? How many polytheists did he kill during his own Khilafath? If we wish to determine who is firm against the unbelievers it cannot be that individual who despite the Prophet's order refused to go the Kaffir's prior to the treaty of Hudaiybiya on the grounds that he had no support and instead suggested Uthman go on account of his relationship to the Ummaya clan.
Al Faruq by Allamah Shibli Numani, Volume 1 page 66, English translation by Muhammad Saleem, (Ashraf Publishers)
The Saha Sittah has traditions in which the Holy Prophet foretold the coming of twelve khalifa's after him(1). Who are they? We assert that these are the twelve Imams from the Ahlulbayt. Mulla Ali Qari whilst setting out the Hanafi interpretation of this hadith lists Yazid ibn Muawiya as the sixth Khalifa?(2) Was the Holy Prophet really referring to such a man? When we also have a hadith that states 'He who dies without giving bayah to an Imam dies the death of one belonging to the days of jahiliyya'(3) then it is imperative that we identify and determine who these twelve khalifa's are.
1. "The affairs of the people will continue to be conducted as long as they are governed by 12 men, he then added from Quraish" (taken from Sahih Muslim, hadith number 4483, English translation by Abdul Hamid Siddiqui).
2. Sharh Fiqa Akbar, by Mulla Ali Qari, p 175 (publishers Muhummud Saeed and son, Koran Muhall, Karachi).
3. ibid, page 175
Can anyone change Allah laws? The Koran states quite categorically that no one has that right "And it is not for a believing man or woman that they should have any choice in a matter when Allah and his Messenger have decided a matter; and whoever disobeys Allah and his Messenger; surely strays off a manifest straying". With this verse in mind, why did Umar introduce Tarawih prayers in congregation, three divorce utterances in one sitting and the formula 'Prayer is better than Sleep' in the Fajr Adhan? What right did he have to substitute Allah's orders in favour of his own?
Al Faruq by Allamah Shibli Numani, Volume 2 page 338, English translation by Muhammad Saleem, (Ashraf Publishers)