The Shia, el-Zakzaky and the North

Saturday 10-Nov-2018, 6:14PM / 1396


Events of the past week in Nigeria have brought some attention to a group ascribing itself to Islâm, a group with horrific historical and ideological background in Islam. That is the Shia. One of the numerous sects with Islamic claims.

The intent of this write-up is not to add to the already frenzied atmosphere between the Shia and the authorities but to educate, as usual, those Muslims, and the general public, that might have got swerved by the seeming political calculations of the Shia in the unfolding milieu.

Without mincing words, the Shia are a set of treacherous people as will be shown later in this work. They have been a thong in the flesh of the Muslims right from the heydays of Islam.


According to Ash-Shihrstaanee in Al-Milal wa An-Nihal, the Shia are the people who have the belief that the right to the Islamic Caliphate is limited to the noble Companion of the Prophet, ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib, may Allâh be pleased with him, and his progeny. They claim that Aboo Bakr As-Siddîq, Umar bn Al-Khattâb and Uthmân bn Affân became Khalîfah (Caliph) before him was stealing from the latter and an act of transgression against the command of the Noblest of Mankind Muhammad, SalaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam. All the claims of the Shia are based on lies.

Some of them view Aisha, the dear wife of the Prophet, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, as worse than a dog. They send curses upon her and her father, Aboo Bakr, after prayers instead of saying the usual invocations that often come after Prayers.

They do depict a picture of chaotic living among the Companions forgetting that ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib later allowed ‘Umar bn Al-Khattâb to marry a daughter of his, Umm Kulthûm. Al-Kulaynee, their author of Usool Al-Kaafee (which they give the same regard we the people of Sunnah give Sahîh Al-Bukhârî though it is not worth the weakest anthology of ours), wrote a lie that one of their Imams said: ‘The genital was wrongly taken from us.’ Vol.2 p.141

Apart from their belief that the right to Khilaafah (Caliphacy) rests on ‘Alee and his progeny, they also believe that their leaders [Imams] are infallible; that they cannot commit errors, big or small.

They believe, such as their Kaysaaniyyah sub-sect, that the religion of Islam is obedience to man. This has made them give esoteric meanings to Islamic teachings such as the Pillars of the Deen viz. Prayer, Fasting, Zakâh and Hajj. They have weak belief in the resurrection such as some of them say there is re-incarnation; that the soul will transform into something else after death. This most often applies to their Imams upon whom their endless and stupid arguments and disagreements, such as who is really the Expected Imam, lie.

So stupid are their disagreements that they retroactively differed as to who was entitled to the Khilaafah after ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib; some said it was Muhammad bn Al-Hanafiyyah (another son of ‘Alee from another wife apart from Fâtimah] others said it was Al-Hasan then Al-Husayn. Such was their stupidity.

Do you know that some of them believed that Muhammad bn Al-Hanafiyyah did not actually die, that he only disappeared and hid in Rad’wa Mountain being sustained by a pond of water and honey and being guarded by a lion on the right and a tiger on the left until the time he shall reappear. To those people, that is the Expected Imâm – their Mahdee.

As if they relish their Imams being described as cowards, the Muhammadiyyah sub-sect of theirs believe that Muhammad bn ‘Abdillâh bn Al-Hasan bn Al-Hasan bn ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib did not die rather he is hiding in Mountain Haajar and will soon come out! These people are very sure this Muhammad is the Expected Mahdee because his name is Muhammad bn Abdillâh, the same a the name of the Noble Prophet, Muhammad bn Abdillâh, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, as it has come in the authentic narration.

Their Mukhtaariyyah sub-sect has the belief of Al-Badaa with respect to Allâh, may He be extolled from their blasphemy. The belief is that, certain things occur in the world not known to Allâh that they would occur. They often cite that to justify their claim that Allâh did praise the Companions of the Prophet in many places of the Qur’aan [which they actually believe has been altered by the Companions and that the original Mushaf was with Fâtimah before it was transferred to her sons] when He did not know what would later become of them.

To them, the eventual ‘unbelief’ of the Companions, for not enthroning ‘Alee as the Khalîfah, was not known to Allâh, that was why He did praise them then. May Allâh despise the Shia. The belief of the Shia, except the Zaydiyyah among them, is that all the Companions, save a few [Al-Miqdad Al-Aswad, ‘Ammaar bn Yaasir, Salman Al-Faarisee, of course, ‘Alee and his two sons], apostatised after the death of the Prophet, SalaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam.

To some of them, such as their Bayaaniyyah, Nusayriyyah and Saba’iyyah sub-sects, ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib is Allâh! Some of them say, he has some qualities of divinity while some say he is all divine.

The followers of ‘Abdullâh bn Saba [the Saba’iyyah] are the promoters of the latter thought. This ‘Abdullâh bn Saba was a Jew who claimed to have embraced Islâm. He only came into Islam to wreak havoc therein; historically he was the founder of the Shi’i thoughts. It was from him other teachings of Shia evolved.

Ibn Saba’ and his followers said it to the face of ‘Alee that he is Allâh! ‘Alee, being a righteous slave of Allâh, did not take it lightly with them, he burnt many of them while others escaped. Among the escapees was this devilish Ibn Saba’. They believe every time there is thunder, that is ‘Alee roaring; the lightning is his smile! That ‘Alee will soon come back (as Nabee Eesa shall come) to fill the earth with justice after it has been filled with injustice. They believe the succeeding Imams share in some divinity possessed by ‘Alee.

Interestingly, some of the ideologues of the Shia have striven to deny the existence of this Ibn Saba’. They thought if they accept his existence then the foundation of their thought will become shaky. Alas, Allâh has exposed them.

Some of them have inadvertently confirmed his personality in many of their academic works. One of their authors, Ibn Abî Al-Hadeed said in Shar’h Nahj Al-Balaagah [vol.5 p.5 as quoted in ‘Lillaah...thumma Li-Târikh p.13] that: ‘Abdullâh bn Saba’ stood up to ‘Alee while the latter was delivering a Khutbah and said: ‘You are, you are!’ He repeated it severally. ‘Alee then said: ‘Woe betide you, who am I? He then commanded that he should be arrested alongside those with him upon his thought.’

The leading sect of the Shia today is Al-Imaamiyyah. This sect can be found in the so-called Islamic Republic of Iran. It is worthy of note that the ideological and philosophical base of the Shia today is Najaf in Iraq where they claim the grave of ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib is situated. That is it, the Shia are grave worshippers; they throng the mausoleums of their leaders than they come to mosques. Iran is just the political headquarters.

Iran serves as the promoters of the Shi’i thoughts no matter how blasphemous. That is why you will see them supporting the Huthis of Yemen (who are majorly of Zaydi inclinations) and Bashaar Asad Family of Syria (who are of the Nusayree Enclave – those who say ‘Alee is Allâh, and who have reduced the Islamic teachings to nothing). Iran used the un-Islamic revolution to beguile many of the Muslim youths. We are coming to this later Inshâ Allâh.

The Shia have always been very treacherous. They celebrate falsehood upon a justification of a warped belief of Taqiyyah [pretention]. If a Shiite is cornered where he knows he cannot have his way [not necessarily when his life is threatened], he will deny being a Shi'ite. Treachery is their emblem. No wonder their forefathers in Kûfah deceived al-Husayn after twenty thousand of them had made oath of allegiance to him that they would defend him. The author of ‘A’yaan Ah-Shia wrote about the phenomenon of the Karbala which they do shamelessly celebrate today that: ‘they tricked him and rebelled against him while their oath of allegiance was upon their necks; they killed him.’ See Part One p.34 of the book.

Al-Hasan said when he was to abdicate to Mu’aawiyyah bn Abî Sufyân in an occurrence the Prophet, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, had foretold would serve as a unifying factor among the Muslims; he said: ‘By Allâh I see Mu’aawiyyah as being better than these people who say they belong to me. They only want to kill me and take my wealth. That I accept from Mu’aawiyyah what with which I will ensure my safety and that of my family is better than these people should kill me and make my family suffer...’ See Al-Ihtijaaj vol.2 p.10.

‘Alee bn Al-Husayn [Zaynul’Aabidîn] even made jest of them especially with respect to their 10th day of Muharram celebration of fake cries and agonies: ‘The people cry over us; who have killed us if not they?’ See Al-Ihtijaaj vol.2 p.29.

[Please take note that many of these Imams these Shia have heaped lies of infallibility and divinity about are figures well respected in the Ahlus-Sunnah Circles because they are believers from among the Household of the Prophet, loving and respecting them is a religious requirement. You should also know that, none of these Imams has ever supported these people in their evil exploits.]

[Know also that Khomeini, Khamanei et al, are not from the Household of the Prophet, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, they are rather Dajjaals (Big Liars of this century) promoting the old lies and rancour].

The Shia in their treachery have only pretentiously singled out ‘Alee and his progeny as the Ahlul-Bayt. As for the other branches of the Ahlul-Bayt such as Al-‘Abbâs, his son, Abdullâh, and another son of his, ‘Ubaydullaah and ‘Aqeel, a brother of ‘Alee bn Abî Tâlib, they were not safe from their invectives and curses. Were they not aware that Ibn ‘Abbâs was strongly behind ‘Alee in the civil wars?

You will never hear them speak good of Ja’far bn Abee Tâlib, a direct brother of ‘Alee. May Allâh be pleased with both.


Shia’s Temporary Marriage [Al-Mu’tah] is worthy of a special mention. It has been rightly argued that Al-Mu’tah is one of those magnetising message of the Shia, especially to the youths. It is sheer adultery, nothing more. Some of their academics have brought horrendous reports extolling this sinful practice. They lied against the Prophet, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, that he said: ‘Whoever sexually enjoys a believing woman for a temporarily appointed time is as if he has visited the Ka’bah seventy times.’ They said Ja’far As-Sâdiq said: ‘Mu’tah is from my religion and the religion of my fathers; whoever puts it into action has acted with our religion, whoever rejects it has rejected our religion and accepted another creed apart from our Deen.’

The author of Usool Al-Kaafee say there is no minimum time to engage in it. Also, it is not a condition that the woman must have come of age; it can be done with a toddler.

The author of Lillaah...Thumma Litaareekh, Sayyid Husayn, who was a former Shia scholar who repented and embraced the pure Sunnah, narrated that Al-Khomeini [yes the same Khomeini of the infamous ‘Islamic Revolution of Iran’] used to visit them at their Shia seminary at Najaf in Iraq, and that anytime he called, the students would throng him to take knowledge from him. There was a time he was invited to other part of the country; he said he accompanied him on that journey. He said they stayed in the house of one of the Shia families there. He said on their return from the journey, they had a stop-over in a suburb of Iraq and had to stay overnight in one of the houses of the Shia member there. He said they were greeted with a very fabulous dinner and people came from all places to see the ‘Imâm’ and sought blessings from him by kissing his hands {an act of polytheism]. He said when it was time for sleep, people began to leave. At that, Khomeini saw a very girl, a daughter of their host, around four or five years, who was very beautiful. He said the ‘Imâm’ requested from the father if he would allow him ‘enjoy’ the girl for the night. He said the man accepted with all pleasure. So the little girl was arranged for the ‘Imâm’ to enjoy for the night. The girl’s cries, sobs and screaming rented the night all through.

In the following morning he said when they sat at the table for breakfast Khomeini could read from his face that he was unhappy with what he did. He said he asked him: ‘O Sayyid Husayn, what is your view regarding Mu’tah with toddlers?’ he said he said: ‘O Master, it is your view that will be taken. Whatever you do is most correct. You are the Imâm the Mujtahid...’ He said: ‘O Sayyid Husayn, it is permissible to enjoy them but it should be play alone, kissing and placing the genital between her thighs, as for the actual sexual act, no, because she may not be able to take it.’ See the story in p.34-35 of the book.

The author said it is the view of Al-Khomeini that a baby girl being breast-fed can be sexually played with as Mu’tah. Al-Khomeini wrote in Tahreer Al-Waseelah [vol.2 p.241 no.12]: ‘There is nothing wrong with sexually paying with a baby that still sucks breast, when you hold her close and place your genital between her thighs...’.

May Allâh despise the Shia once again.

In their hypocrisy, they allow Mut’ah with the daughters of the common Shia but not with the daughters of the ‘scholars.’

It should be noted that the practice was allowed at a particular time in the general Islamic history before it was prohibited. And it was in this picture: when warriors go for long battles while leaving their wives at home, that they could enter into legal but temporary marriages with the conquered women at where they are having the battle. The Prophet, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, allowed it for the Muslim warriors as an option rather than a request from some of them that they should castrate themselves. The act was stopped the same day it was prohibited to consume the meat of domesticated donkeys.


Now to Ibrahim El-Zakzaky. He was one of those people captured by the false joy that greeted the un-Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979. He was a student of Ahmadu Bello University [a first-class student as it was said] who for one reason or the other could not complete his university education; some said it was due to student unionism.

It was after the ‘expulsion’ that he and some of his comrades got an invitation to Iran. This writer had met with one of those who eventually went and studied and at the Islamic University Madînah and became a doctor of hadith [Maa Shaa Allâh] quitting Shi’ism for life.

As for Al-Zakzaky, the Shi’ism dose he took in Iran went down all his flesh. He was convinced, albeit with the pecuniary hopes, that Shi’ism (as it has been shown earlier) is the way.

This writer had a needless interview with Al-Zakzaky in year 2000 at his that now destroyed Gyallesu residence, the residence that is not very far from Federal College of Education Zaria, and just some poles away from the Kongo Campus of Ahmadu Bello University Zaria. He was then a part one Social Science student at Ahmadu Bello University undergoing experimental journalism. The encounter was brief because it was just a kind of a-hour interview. Al-Zakzaky spoke impeccable and fluent English. He had the oratory prowess, as demagogues like him have. He had even taunted me in the course of the interview if I would like to go to Iran. Alhamdulillah I was not taken in by his words.

[It is however advised that one should avoid people with oratory control like him because of the evil ideology that they harbour.] After the appointment had been booked in the earlier week, the interview took place in the week that followed. This writer could remember the encounter, though vividly. That was about 15 years ago. I had asked him if he was a Shi’ite. He replied: ‘If loving the household of the Prophet, salaLlâhu alayhi wa sallam, is Shia, I am one.’

Al-Zakzaky lived a posh live, his Gyallesu house then might not be outwardly massive but the inside spoke volumes. A big satellite dish was in the environment while about five cars were covered with tarpaulin. Youths serving as guards could be seen around. In the first visit they had wondered what brought this writer from ABU. They were convinced I came as a spy though I did not hide my feeling and outlook that I resented their methodology.

The youths around Al-Zakzaky could be irrational and uncouth. This writer could also recall the havoc they wreak in Kaduna in the 90’s. He was a witness to some of those happenings. Their 1996 ‘takeover’ of Kaduna Polytechnic at Tundun Wada area is a pointer to the earlier made assertion. They constituted themselves into a hisbah force of a sort. No woman indecently dressed would walk by on the polytechnic campus except they taught her a lesson such as catapult shots from hidden places. They hoisted their Shia flag on the tallest water reservoir while they blast Iranian lectures from the mosque loudspeakers. For the period of a week they took over the campus it was chaos until the security forces came and dislodged them. What followed that were street battled between them and the soldiers in Kaduna. It was brutal. Many of them lost their lives. That was the period of phenomenon of ‘keria ne’ in Kaduna. ‘Keria ne’ which translates to ‘it is a lie’, was the slogan of the Shia anytime they came across any of the security forces. The slogan was meant to taunt the members of the security forces that they were cocoons.

It was that same period the Shia were fomenting troubles on ABU Samaru Campus. When we got in 1999/2000, the stories of the Shia were what we were greeted with. By then, many of them had quitted schooling. Those who had got certificates got them torn. Perhaps, the Boko Haram members take their cue from them. Some have said Muhammad Yusuf of Boko Haram had some tutelage in Shi’ism before he left them and eventually formed his ultra-violent group.

The attitude of the people of the north to Shia has not been favourable to the cause of the Shia. The Shia are generally resented. In Sokoto for instance, woman who wear black abayas (an insignia of the Shia women though it is generally permissible for Muslim women to so adorn themselves) are taken with suspicion. Today, people will not readily shield a Shia member of a Boko Haram member in contrary to the view of some people down south. The Ulamaa of the Sunnah have also been very outspoken against the Shia but the latter have propaganda, one of which are their processions now and then. The religion of the Shia is a religion of procession and demonstration. They like showing off.

If they have their ways, the Shia will slaughter the Muslims before they slaughter the non-Muslims. Their hatred for the other Muslims, who are in the majority, is not hidden.

It is of note that the Shia activities so also the Boko Haram’s and their likes are limited to the Northern part of the country save some mild manifestations in some groups down south. Generally speaking however, the Shia thoughts are anathematic in the South except in Ilorin, Kwara State Capital, where a group named ‘Ummah’ has some traits of theirs. But they have never been audacious. They do hide under a facade of ‘not-Sunni-not-Shia’. But they are Shia, only that that their Taqiyyah is keeping them at bay. May they remain so forever.

One of the ways the exploits of the Shia can be curtailed is by Muslims generally returning to the correct teachings of the religion via the learning of the Qur’aan and Sunnah upon the ways of the Righteous Predecessors. Wherever such teachings strive, you will hardly find the Shia and other heretics there. Heretical groups thrive most in places where ignorance reigns. May Allâh send peace and blessings upon the Noble Prophet, His Ahl Bayt, his Companions and those who follow them in goodness.