Al-Qaradawi's Statement on Shiites:

Religious Authority: 
Yusuf al-Qaradawi
Fatwa Question or Essay Title: 
Al-Qaradawi's Statement on Shiites:
Websites and Institutions: 
Islam Online

Translated By Dr. Ahmad Al-Gharbawi Al-Qaradawi

A Furious Attack

On Ramadan 13th,1429 A.H., September 13th, 2008, the semi-official Iranian news agency Muhr launched a furious attack against me, exceeding all limits and descending to very low levels, over a dialogue published by Al-Masri al-Youm newspaper about me . This dialogue touched upon the subject of the Shiites and their doctrine. In this regard, I said: “I do not consider them as non-Muslims as do some of those who go to extremes. Rather, I regard them as Muslims, yet religiously innovative Muslims. Furthermore, I warned of two serious issues as far as many Shiites are concerned: Cursing the Prophet’s Companions and invading the Sunni community with the Shiite doctrine given the great wealth at their disposal from which they assign millions, even hundreds of millions, for the achievement of this purpose. Also, they have trained individuals capable of disseminating their doctrine. Ordinary Sunnis, on the other hand, have no cultural immunity against this invasion, as we, the Sunni scholars, have not armed them with a protective culture. This is because we usually avoid talking about these issues, even though we are well aware of them, for fear of causing fitnah (sedition) and out of keenness to maintain the unity of the Ummah (greater Muslim religious community).”

My words provoked the Iranian news agency. As a result, it acted irrationally and began directing its attacks toward me from every side. Commenting on my position, the erudite scholar, Ayatollah Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah, made a statement which astounded me, especially as it came from a person like him. Also, commenting on my speech was Ayatollah Muhammad Ali Al-Taskhiri, my deputy at the International Union for Muslim Scholars, who uttered even stranger words.

My Position on the Shiites and their Doctrine:
Before responding to them all, I would like to clarify my position regarding the Imamiyyah (Imamate) Shiites, their doctrine and their attitudes. I want to tell the truth and seek the good pleasure of Almighty Allah in the belief that He took the covenant of the scholars that they should present the truth to people in a plain manner. Indeed, I have already clarified this truth in my book “Principles of Dialogue and Rapprochement between the Muslim Doctrines and Sects” based on a research I presented at the conference of rapprochement held in Bahrain. What I am going to say today is only a confirmation of what was said earlier.

First: I believe in the unity of the Muslim Nation with all its groups, sects and doctrines, since the entire Ummah believes in one Book and one Messenger, and faces one qiblah (the direction that Muslims take when praying to face Ka`bah). Furthermore, the existing difference between the Ummah’s various groups does not separate any of them from the Muslim body. The hadith that refers to the division of the Ummah into groups indicates that they all belong to the Ummah. “My Ummah will split…” except those who went outside for the sake of Islam in a complete and categorical manner.

Second: Among the seventy-three sects mentioned in the hadith, there is only one that will be saved from Hellfire, unlike the rest that are astray and will end in ruin. Each sect views itself as the saved one while the others are seen to be in error. We, the Sunnis, have certain belief that only we are the saved group and that all other sects and groups have fallen into error and religious innovations. Based on this, I said that the Shiites are producers of religious innovations, not unbelievers, and this is a view that is unanimously held by the Sunnis. If I hadn’t said that, I would have been contradicting myself, as the truth has only one face. Praise be to Allah, almost nine-tenths of the Muslim Ummah are Sunnis. This being the case, the Shiites also have the right to voice their beliefs about us.

Third: My position on the Twelver Shiites is the same as that of every moderate Sunni scholar. However, immoderate scholars declare them to be disbelievers on account of their attitude toward the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the Companions. Because of their sanctification of their imams: they are regarded as infallible and believing that the imams know of the Unseen what Prophets did not know. In my book "Principles over Dialogue and Rapprochement" I wrote a response to those who consider them to be disbelievers.

Still, I differ with them over the foundation upon which their doctrine is based and I see it as erroneous. They mistakenly believe that Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him) commanded that `Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) should be his successor in leading the Muslim Ummah, and that the Companions betrayed the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and plotted together to deny Ali his right. Surprisingly,Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) did not declare this openly and did not fight for his right. On the contrary, he pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr As-Siddiq, Umar ibn Al-Khattab and then Uthman ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with them all) and was a helper and advisor to all of them. How is it that he did not declare the truth in front of them? And how is it that he did not make his right known to all people? Moreover, how is it that his son, Al-Hasan ibn Ali, conceded his dictated Caliphate to Mu`awiya ibn Abi Sufyan? Greater still, how come the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) commended his act, saying that through him Almighty Allah will bring about peace between two great Muslim groups?

The Shiites are known for some applied innovations, such as: reliving the tragedy of Al-Husayn ibn `Ali every year by slapping their faces and beating their chests to the point of shedding blood, while this great affliction took place more than thirteen centuries ago. Why do they not do the same in memory of the murder of his father, who was better than him?

Also, among these are the acts of shirk (associating other beings with Allah) that are committed at the shrines and graves where the members of the Prophet’s household were buried. They ask them for help and render their supplications to them instead of Almighty Allah. Some Sunnis may also commit such acts, and their scholars express their strong disapproval. For this, we characterize the Shiites as people of religious innovations, but do not ascribe to them outright or major disbelief that would render them outside the fold of the Muslim faith.

I am one of those who have been resisting – for a long time- the trend of regarding certain Muslims as disbelievers. In my published treatise Dhaherat al-Gholow fi al-Takfir - The Phenomenon of Going to Extremes in Ascribing Disbelief to Muslims, I firmly disapprove and reject such extremism and I assert that whoever has uttered the dual testimony of faith [There is no god but Allah - Muhammad is His Messenger] and has abided by its requirements has certainly entered the fold of Islam and does not go out of it unless by categorical and doubtless shirk.

Fourth: Differences regarding the branches of religion and the rules on acts of worship and dealings can be tolerable, like the fundamentals of religion, as these issues encompass all. Moreover, the difference between us and the Shiites is no larger than that existing between the Sunni doctrines themselves. Therefore, they quoted the fatwa issued by the departed Sunni Sheikh, Shaltout, Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, in which he said that it is allowed for a Sunni to perform his acts of worship in accordance with the Jafaari doctrine, because acts of worship belong to the branches and practical rules, and the difference between them and us with regard to Prayer and fasting and other acts of worship can be accepted and tolerated.

Fifth: What I said to Al-Masri al-Youm newspaper is that which I said and asserted firmly and with outright frankness at all conferences of rapprochement that I attended in Rabat, Bahrain, Damascus and Doha. Thus, the Shiite scholars heard my words and commented on them. Moreover, I openly expressed my position to Ayaat Allah (plural of Ayatollah) when I visited Iran almost ten years ago: that there are red lines that must be observed and not crossed, such as cursing the Companions and spreading the Shiite doctrine in countries that are predominantly Sunni. All Shiite scholars were in agreement with me over this.

Sixth: Despite my reservation about the Shiite position with regard to spreading their doctrine in Sunni communities, I stood strongly beside Iran over its right to possess peaceful nuclear power and vehemently denounced American threats against it. In this regard, I said: We would stand up to the United Stated if it attacked Iran, as Iran is part of the Muslim land; therefore, it should not be renounced or forsaken. Rather, we are obligated by the Shari`ah to defend it, if it is invaded or threatened by a foreign power. All media outlets in Iran highlighted my stance, and some Iranian officials called me to offer their thanks and appreciation. It is to be noted here that I did not take this stance as a compliment, but as a duty to say what should be said by a Muslim in support of his fellow Muslims.

Response to the Iranian News Agency Muhr

1. The Iranian news agency claimed that I reiterate what is said by Jewish rabbis and that I speak on their behalf. It further claimed that my speech plays into the hands of Zionists and rabbis! This uninformed agency, however, did not know that the Jews themselves stated that religious scholars pose the most dangerous threat to the Palestinian cause, and that the most dangerous among them is Al-Qaradawi! As a consequence, they have often incited my assassination, and the Zionist lobby stands against me everywhere and provokes the governments of various countries against me so that they ban my entry into their lands. No wonder then that I have been banned from entering the United States, Britain and some European countries, because I am an enemy of Israel and the Mufti of martyrdom operations.

My struggle against Jews and Zionists began when I was fifteen years old, that is seventy years ago, when all those who attack me now had not yet been born! Since the early years of my youth, I have been affiliated with a group considered by Zionists as their first enemy; it is the Muslim Brotherhood that has provided and still provides martyrs for the cause of Palestine.

My position concerning Freemasonry is crystal clear; it has been stated in my fatwa on Freemasonry and my book Contemporary Fatwas.

2. The agency also alleged that the Shiite doctrine finds acceptance among Arab youth who were amazed at the victory of Hizbullah over the Jews in Lebanon, as well as among Muslims that suffer oppression and persecution. This, in the sight of the Iranian agency, is one of the miracles of the Prophet’s household, as the Muslims have found their long-pursued object in this doctrine given the excellent example presented by the Shiites of Islamic governance that was never established after the rule of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) and the rule of Imam Ali (may Allah be pleased with him).

The response to this speech is quite easy, as the Iranian national, like others in Muslim countries, is needy and insecure, especially the Sunnis who continue to suffer from the restrictions that are being imposed on them. In addition, the statements of the agency slanders and casts doubt over the rules of Abu Bakr As-Siddiq and Umar ibn Al-Khattab; they established an excellent example of governance based on justice and mutual consultation. In contrast, the rule of `Ali ibn Abi Talib abounded with internal conflict, so he could not establish his aspired-for system of justice and development in the proper way.

3. Importantly, the agency acknowledged the growing spread of the Shiite doctrine which it considered “a miracle” of the Prophet’s household! This runs counter to the view held by Sheikh Fadlallah and Sheikh Al-Taskhiri and others who deny this view.

4. Another claim made by the agency is that I did not speak about the heroism displayed by the Shiites in Southern Lebanon (2006). This claim too is false and baseless, because I did actually support and defend Hizbullah and I also replied to the fatwa issued by the great Saudi scholar, Sheikh Ibn Jibreen, in a complete episode of my program Shari`ah and Life on Al-Jazeera. The episode was transmitted from Cairo as I was on holiday.

5. The agency spoke with malicious joy about the defeats suffered by the Arabs, especially that of 1967, and it also mentioned the Arab rulers and generals as if I was responsible for them! In fact, I have resisted the oppression and tyranny of Arab rulers, for which reason I faced imprisonment and detention and was court-martialed. Moreover, because of this I was denied my right to a government job, even though I was ranked the first when I graduated.

However, the agency forgot that Egypt engaged in four wars for Palestine, and that it achieved a well-known victory in one of those wars over the Zionist state despite the support Israel received from the United States. I am talking about the Ramadan 10th War (1393 A.H. – 1973 A.D.). The agency also forgot the heroic deeds exhibited by our brothers in Palestine: from Hamas, Jihad, Al-Aqsa Brigades and others.

6. Still, the lowest level the agency descended to is its claim that I am double-faced and deceitful, which is a reflection of the decadence that is more befitting of those who originally issued the statement. An Arab poet said:

Enough is the great difference in level between us

And each vessel sprinkles of what it contains

Those who knew me through personal association and companionship or by reading my biography are aware that since my youth I have unsheathed the sword of truth against every falsehood, and that I have never dealt hypocritically with a king, a president or a prince; and that I speak the truth without thought of the blame of the blamers. Should I be such a person who trades in the market of hypocrisy, I would have done so with Iran that can and do give millions to buy the loyalty of many people. However, I cannot be bought with the world’s treasures. Indeed, Almighty Allah has bought me and I have sold myself to Him. Years ago, they proposed that they award me a prize given to some Sunni scholars, which I refused apologetically.

This deceptive news agency continued to say: It was more proper for Sheikh Al-Qaradawi to warn of the danger of the spread of Zionism that has almost reached the household of Al-Qaradawi himself, as those of his children who live in London have totally integrated into Western culture and kept away from the Islamic culture.

I wonder how they dared to tell such a flagrant lie. Actually, none of my children lives in London. Their work, however, is in the field of teaching at Qatar University and at the Qatari Embassy in Cairo. Among my daughters are three who obtained a PhD from England, and they have all been in Qatar for years and are holding onto their Muslim culture and identity. It may be that this agency considers anyone having scientific specializations as moving away from Islam and Islamic culture.

I am in no need of learning about the danger of the spread of Zionism, from Mr. Hasan Zadah - an expert on international affairs at the agency- as I have been resisting this danger since I was 15 through my poetry and prose, my speeches and books; I authored two books about this: The Lesson from the Second Nakba and Jerusalem is the Cause of Every Muslim in addition to several other fatwas, lectures and speeches.

If he turned on the radio every Friday when I give the sermon or if he listened to it on Qatari satellite TV, he would be acquainted with my true position on the spread of Zionism. No doubt can be cast on me in this regard.

The Attitude of Sheikh Fadlallah:

1. Ayatollah Sheikh Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah commented on my speech in Al-Masri Al-Youm newspaper in a strange manner that is unbefitting for a person like him whom I consider one of the moderate Shiite scholars and with whom I maintain nothing but good relations. The first thing he said was: “I have not heard that Sheikh Al-Qaradawi ever took a stance against Christian missionary work that aims at making Muslims leave their religion.” Indeed, this is astonishing. My stance against Christianization, which they call missionary work, is very plain for all to see. I expressed it many times in my books, sermons and lectures. I have also been to many Muslim countries after the Colorado conference in 1978 that was held to discuss how to Christianize the Muslim world; they appropriated one billion dollars for this purpose. Finally, I endeavored to establish the International Islamic Charitable Organization, in Kuwait, whose first and foremost goal was practical resistance to the frenzied wave of Christianization within the Muslim world.

It is well known that I stand up to anyone who encroaches upon the sanctities of Islam: the Messenger, the glorious Qur’an and the noble Sunnah. My stance concerning the offensive caricatures crisis is known the world over, as was my response to the Vatican Pope, which took on many forms including writing a book entitled The Pope and Islam.

2. Sheikh Fadlallah further said: “We have heard nothing about any speech by Al-Qaradawi concerning the secular or atheistic infiltration into the Muslim world.”

To this I reply: “How astonishing! I opposed and resisted secularists and atheists through my books, lectures and speeches, which are published and widely known, such as:

Al-Islam wa al-Ilmaniyyah wajhan li wajh - Islam and Secularism Face to Face

At-Tatarruf al-Ilmani fi muwajahat al-Islam - Secular Extremism in the Face of Islam

Baiyynaat al-Hall al-Islaami wa shubuhaat al-`Almaanyyeen wal mutgharrebeen – Proof of the Islamic Solution and Suspicions of Secularists and Westernized Figures

Al--Din wa al-Siyasah - Religion and Politics

Men fiqh al-Dawlah Fi Al-Islam – From the State Fiqh in Islam

There are other books that are widely circulated and have been translated into several languages.

Moreover, I have engaged in debates with secularists and Almighty Allah granted success and victory to the arguments presented from the Islamic side and caused the open collapse of the opponents. These debates were taped and have been listened to by many people worldwide.

3. Sheikh Fadlallah criticized me for regarding the Shiites as “people of religious innovations”, forgetting that I said so as a reply to those who regard them as non-Muslims. We, the Sunnis, regard all other Muslim sects as people of religious innovations but do not send them outside the fold of Islam. This is because there is only one saved group and all the others have fallen into religious innovations and errors to varying degrees.

The Shiites have made theoretical and practical religious innovations. Among the theoretical religious innovations is their mistaken belief that `Ali ibn Abi Talib was the rightful successor of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) as was allegedly ordered by the Prophet himself. Such innovations also include sanctifying their imams, going to extremes in dignifying them and considering them to be infallible. Additionally, in their belief, the Sunnah is not only that of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), but of Prophet Muhammad and the infallible imams who are said to succeed him.

Their practical religious innovations include their sad commemoration of the tragedy of Al-Husayn ibn `Ali every year, and the acts of shirk committed at the shrines of the members of the Prophet’s household. Another innovation is that they include `Ali ibn Abi Talib in the testimony of faith during the Adhan.

Regarding what Sheikh Fadlallah said about the Shiites’ distortion of the Quran, I say that I am one of those who believe that the overwhelming majority of the Shiites do not know any other Quran than that held by the Sunnis; that the copy of the Quran that is printed in Iran is the same as that which is printed in Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah and Cairo, and that this copy of the Quran is the one that their scholars explain, their jurists refer to as an argument and source of definitive information, and their children learn by heart.

This is what I mentioned in some of my books. I merely said that some Shiites hold the view that the Quran is incomplete and that the Mahdi will come with the complete Quran; and that books were authored on this issue, such as Fasl Al-Khitab – The Definitive Speech and I said that the majority of Shiites deny this, yet do not consider it as a belief of shirk as the Sunnis do, which is the difference between them and us.

4. Within his speech, Sheikh Fadlallah posed a question to me about my opinion regarding the books published by some Sunnis wherein they declare the Shiites as disbelievers and apostates.

My reply is: I reject this, and I would not regard anyone who prays in the direction of the qiblah a disbeliever except if he committed an act or held a belief that categorically renders him outside the fold of Islam. Otherwise, the fundamental rule is that a Muslim should be regarded as a Muslim, be given the benefit of the doubt and that any suspicion about him ought to be interpreted in his favor.

5. The Sheikh also disapproved of what I mentioned about the Shiite invasion of our Sunni communities, and he asked me through some friends to provide him with statistics of what happens exactly in the countries that face Shiite infiltration such as Egypt, Algeria, and Syria. My reply is: No one has ever told me about this request, which is not a new one. However, such acts of infiltration take place secretly, especially in strictly Sunni communities, such as Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Algeria and others. Furthermore, there is no need for statistics when we have clear instances that suffice as proof.

I think that what the Iranian Muhr news agency has mentioned about the spread of the Shiite doctrine within Muslim and Arab countries and that it regarded this as a miracle of the Prophet’s household has spared me the reply to the Sheikh in this respect.

The Attitude of Sheikh Al-Taskhiri:

The comment of my friend, Sheikh Al-Taskhiri, was even stranger. He knew me very well, nearly a quarter of a century ago. I have chosen him as my deputy at the IUMS, and we often get together at the board of trustees and the executive office, as well as our meetings at conferences and the Fiqh Academy.

1. The Sheikh saw that my statements could provoke fitnah, and that they were made under pressure from extremists and those regarding others as disbelievers that present fabricated information about the Shiites, and that I was influenced by them! The Sheikh, however, forgot that I have never ever provoked fitnah. On the contrary, I have always been a caller to unity and friendly relations. Moreover, I have opposed those extremist groups and warned of their danger. For this purpose, I have authored books, given sermons and lectures and written articles calling to moderation in religion. Moreover, I have even become a symbol of moderation among Muslim da`is, intellectuals and jurists.

My books on the rectification and direction of the Islamic Reawakening are widely known; and they have been published and translated into many languages.

2. Al-Taskhiri further added: “Al-Qaradawi compares Shiite preaching to missionary work, when this term is only employed to refer to Christian missionary work.”

To this I reply: I have used the same term employed by Imam Muhammad Mahdi Shams Ad-Din (may Allah have mercy on him). Earlier I used to employ the term “the dissemination of the doctrine”.

I call Christian missionary work by its true name: Christianization. There can be no dispute about the correctness of this term.

This gives the impression that the Sheikh accepts Shiite preaching, yet he refuses to call it missionary work. However, I reject it regardless of what it is called. It is the content and substance that matters, not names and titles.

3. Al-Taskhiri asserted that by these practices, Al-Qaradawi does not work for the unity of the Muslim Ummah and its interests, and that this contradicts the goals of the International Union for Muslim Scholars for whose establishment he made serious efforts with the aim of eliminating fanaticism and discord, while calling for moderation, as stated in the Islamic charter of the Union.

On the other hand, Sheikh Al-Taskhiri is aware that throughout my life I have been calling for the unification of the Muslim Ummah; and if its unity is an elusive goal, then at least we ought to maintain mutual solidarity among its peoples and countries. He must also know that I supported the call to rapprochement and attended conferences held for this purpose at which I presented significant researches. However, this does not mean that when I observe a clear danger before me that I should turn a blind eye to it in order to compliment this and please that. By Allah! I would never sell my religion even if the price were the treasures of the world.

I warned clearly and strongly against all the rapprochement conferences that I attended against any attempt to export a doctrine to a country that purely belongs to the other doctrine.

Surely, Al-Taskhiri can recall that when I visited Iran, I told them: What could you possibly gain from your attempts to disseminate your doctrine in Sunni countries? Perhaps, one or two hundred, one or two thousand, or more or less? However, when the matter is exposed, they will all hold you as enemies and oppose you. We never want anything like this to happen. Upon this, Sheikh Al-Taskhiri replied: “Are you correct?” My view was further confirmed by what happened to their office in Khartoum. He said: “Earlier, we used to have good relations with the Sudanese leadership after the salvation revolution, and they allowed us to open offices there. Afterward, the manager of the office set out to distribute a book entitled Then I Have Come to Guidance that attacks the Sunni doctrine and calls to the Shiite doctrine, for which reason the Sudanese government closed these offices and sent the officers back to Tehran.

4. Al-Taskhiri commented on my statement to the Egyptian newspaper that the Shiites are Muslims, yet religiously innovative Muslims, saying: “Again, Al-Qaradawi accuses the Shiites of distorting the Quran, which is a great error; he knows that the Shiite scholars throughout the ages have maintained that no distortion has touched the Quran.”

I admit that Al-Masri al-Youm newspaper did not transmit my words literally; rather, it adapted them. As a result, the published statement was not accurate and understandable as my original words to the newspaper were. Nevertheless, the newspaper did not quote me as saying that all Shiites believe that the Quran has been distorted; rather, it reported me as saying: Many of the Shiites claim that the widely available Quran is truly the word of Allah, but it is lacking some parts, such as Surat al-Wilayah.

Among these is the famous Shiite scholar, one of the senior scholars of Najaf, Al-Hajj Mirza Hussein Muhammad Taqyy An-Nuri At-Tubrusi. While in Najaf, he authored his famous book Fasl al-Khitab fi ithbat tahreef kitab rab al-Arbab – The Definitive Speech on Proving the Distortion of the Book of the Lord of all Lords. This book is characterized by comprising a wealth of texts from Shiite sources and their authentic books. The book also contains statements by several Shiite scholars in different eras, which all establish that the Quran was subject to additions and omissions.

This book caused a great fuss when it emerged in Iran. Many people wrote responses to it, to which he replied with another book in an attempt to refute the suspicions that were raised about his book.

In the research I presented at the rapprochement conference held in Bahrain, I wrote down my opinion about the Shiite attitude towards the Qur’an. Moreover, I had this research published in a treatise entitled "Principles of Dialogue and Rapprochement between the Muslim Doctrines and Sects" which I included in the treatises intended for rectifying and guiding the Reawakening. They are published by Wahbah Bookstore, Egypt, and Resalah Foundation, Lebanon. In this treatise, I replied to those who accuse the Shiites of holding the belief that the Qur’an has been distorted, and as a result regard them as disbelievers. Responding to them, I said:

“I have already clarified that all Shiites believe that what lies between the two covers of the mushaf is truly the miraculous and preserved word of Almighty Allah that the whole Ummah must abide by. That is why they memorize the Qur’an, recite it as an act of worship, and refer to it for proof on creedal issues and secondary rulings. This is unanimously agreed upon among them. We have never come across any mushaf that is different from the one in our hands; the mushaf that is printed in Iran is the same as that which is printed in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. As for the false allegations that the Qur’an lacks some parts, they have differences of opinion on this matter, and their scholars of authentication deny it. Furthermore, no practical ruling is based on these alleged additions.”

I quoted the statements of some moderate Shiites – transmitted by some Sunni scholars –affirming that the Quran is free from any addition or omission. An example of this is what was quoted by Sheikh Rahmatullah Al-Kiranawi Al-Hindi is his famous book Idhhar Al-Haqq – Clarification of the Truth:

A- Sheikh Al-Sadouk Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Ali ibn Babwih, one of the greatest Twelver Shiites scholars, said in his creedal treatise: “Our belief about the Quran is that the Quran that was revealed by Almighty Allah to His Prophet is what is contained between the two covers of the mushaf which is available in the hands of people, not more than that. Its surahs, as with people, amount to one hundred and fourteen surahs, whereas we have the surahs of Ad-Doha and Alam nashrah combined in one, and Li ilaf Quraish and Alam tara kaifa also are combined in one surah. Hence, whoever attributes to us the statement that the Quran is more than that is a liar.” End quote.

B- In the tafseer of Magma al-Bayan, which is highly regarded among the Shiites, it is mentioned that: Al-Sayyid al-Agall al-Murtada alam al-Huda dhu al-Magd, Abu al-Qasim Ali ibn al-Hussein al-Musawi, said: “The Qur’an during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger (peace and blessing be upon him) was collected and combined as it is now. He mentioned as evidence for this the fact that the complete Quran was studied and memorized at that time and that some of the Companions, such as `Abdullah ibn Mas`ud and Ubay ibn Ka`b, recited all of the Quran in front of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) several times. Hence, it does not require much contemplation to derive from this that the Quran was collected and well-ordered; not scattered and dispersed. Furthermore, he said that whoever holds an opposing view from the Imamiyyah and Al-Hashawiyah, his view is inconsiderable, as it is attributed to some people of Hadith who transmitted weak narrations thinking them to be authentic. Such narrations cannot outweigh that which is authentic and well-established.” End quote.

C- Al-Sayyid al-Murtada further said: “Knowledge of the authenticity of the Qur’an is like knowledge of the countries, the famous and great events and widely circulating Arabic poetry. Meticulous care was paid and the appropriate tools were employed in transmitting the noble Qur’an, which is the miracle of prophethood, and the spring from which shar`i sciences and religious rules are derived. Indeed, the Muslim scholars attained the highest degree in memorizing and taking care of the Qur’an to the extent that they obtained knowledge about everything related to it: the analysis of its words and sentences, the ways it can be read, its letters, and its verses. How then can it be altered or incomplete given such earnest care and keen accuracy?” End quote.

D- Al-Qadi Nourallah al-Shustri, a famous Shiite scholar, said in his book Masa’ib An-Nawasib: “What was attributed to the Imamate Shiites regarding the alteration of the Qur’an is actually not what the majority of Imamate said; it is only the view of an inconsiderable handful of individuals among them.” End quote.

5. In Sharh al-Qalini, al-Mulla Sadeq said: “Upon the advent of the twelfth Imam, the Qur’an will emerge in the same order that exists now and will spread and be well-known.” End quote.

Thus, it is concluded that the authentic and undoubted view held by the scholars of the Twelver Shiites sect is that the Qur’an which Almighty Allah revealed to His Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is that which is between the two covers of the mushaf, and which is available in the hands of people, and no more than that. It was collected and combined during the lifetime of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) and was memorized and transmitted by thousands of the Companions; and that a group of the Companions, such as `Abdullah ibn Mas`oud and Ubay ibn Ka`b, recited the complete Qur’an in front of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) several times. They also view that the Qur’an will emerge and spread upon the advent of the twelfth Imam in the same order that it is currently in. Moreover, they regard the view held by a handful of people that the Qur’an was altered, as rejected and insignificant; they see that the weak reports that were transmitted in their doctrine cannot outweigh that which is authentic and well-established. This is true, since if an Ahaad or solitary report (also known as Khabar Al-Wahid) requires the performance of some act of worship, and there is no conclusive evidence to support it, then it should be rejected. This is also mentioned by Ibn Al-Mutahhir Al-Hulli in his book Mabadi’ al-Wosoul Ila Ilm Al-Usoul. In the Qur’an, Almighty Allah says, (Surely We, Ever We, have been sending down the Remembrance, and surely We are indeed Preservers of it.) (Al-Hijr 15:9) In the tafseer of As-Sirat Al-Mustaqim, which is highly revered among Shiite scholars, this explanation has been given: “Certainly, We will protect it against any distortion, alteration, addition or omission.” End quote.

This is what I mentioned in my book Principles of Dialogue and Rapprochement; it demonstrates the reality of my position concerning the Shiites’ opinions about the Qur’an. This is known to their scholars. Therefore, it is not appropriate to seek any word that has been uttered here or there and use it as a pretext to launch an attack on me.

However, I still maintain my stance concerning Shiite endeavors to infiltrate Sunni communities, and I say that we should resist such endeavors; otherwise, we will be betraying our trust and neglecting our responsibility toward the Ummah. As I warn of this invasion, I intend to raise the awareness of the Ummah of the dangers that may well befall it because of this irresponsible attitude. This is to protect it from any fitnah that, it is feared, may break out, thus destroying everything. The wise person is the one who avoids evil and prevents it from happening.