The Imamah of the Shia, a hidden call for the continuation of Prophet-hood.

السلام عليكم

باسم الله

Preface:

Praise be to Allah and peace be upon the messenger of Allah and his family and companions,

The one who closely follows the differences between the Islamic groups certainly knows that the fundamental point that sets the Imami Shia sect apart from all others, is their belief in the need of the existence of an infallible Imam(1) after the Prophet (SAWS) until the coming of the hour.

(1) Imam: Leader, the Shia believe that the leader of the nation is infallible and divinely appointed by Allah.

Shia scholar and `Allamah Muhammad Rida al-Muzaffar says in his book "`Aqa'id al-Imamiyyah" pg102-103:

[There must be in every era an Imam of guidance, who succeeds the prophet in his jobs (…) and based on this, no period of time must be devoid of an Imam whose obedience is obligatory, appointed by Allah most high].

It was natural and expected, that the Shia try to prove the validity of this belief, to defend this belief by all possible means. From one side they present what they hope backs up their call from proofs of `Aql(2) and Naql(3), from another side they initiate a merciless attack on the beliefs of the Muslims who do not believe in this Shia "Imamah".

(2) `Aql: Intellect, meaning they try to present intellectual proofs to back up their claims.

(3) Naql: Divine texts, meaning they also try to present proofs from the Qur'an and the Sunnah.

If this matter of "Imamah" remained within the known bounds of academic research, in a way that it would be presented as a scientific theory which resulted from the effort and research of intellectuals after they checked different proofs, and that this theory was subject to discussion, evaluation and criticism by the men of knowledge and opinion, without the need of denying the opinions of those who oppose it and exiling them outside the borders of Islam, then we could have said that there may not have been much harm, as it simply would be a result of human thought, not a non-negotiable fundamental Islamic belief.

However, the Shia scholars took a very dangerous turn with this belief, far from the discussions taking place between the groups within the circle of Islam. This is because they counted the matter of Imamah as being from the foundations of faith like Tawheed(4) and Nubuwwah(5) and Mi`ad(6). They even consider it to be higher than some of those great foundations such as the prophet-hood.

(4) Tawheed: Unity or oneness of God.

(5) Nubuwwah: Prophet-hood.

(6) Mi`ad: The day of resurrection.

From the contemporary Shia scholars who consider it from the foundations of faith are:

Shia grand Ayatullah and Muhaqqiq and `Allamah Ja`far al-Subhani, who says in his book "al-Milal wal-Nihal" 1/257, under the title "Is Imamah from the foundations or the branches":

[All of the Shia have agreed that it is a foundation from the foundations of faith, and they proved it in their books, this is why they consider that the belief in the Imamah of the Imams is necessary for correct faith, as for Ahlul-Sunnah they wrote in their books that it isn't a foundation.]

Shia scholar al-`Allamah Muhammad Rida al-Muzaffar says in "`Aqa'id al-Imamiyyah" pg102:

[We (shia) believe that Imamah is a foundation from the foundations of religion, and that Iman(7) cannot be achieved without believing in it.]

(7) Iman: Faith, what makes one a believer in Islam.

Grand Ayatullah Ruh-Ullah al-Musawi al-Khomeini said in "Kashf al-Asrar" pg149:

[The Imamah is one of the foundations of Islamic religion.]

Shia scholar `Abdul-Hussein al-Muzaffar says in "al-Shafi fi Sharh Usool al-Kafi" pg49:

[This is why it is obligatory upon us to search for the Imamah, as it is a foundation from the foundations of the religion and it is not correct without it.]

Grand Ayatullah Nasir Makarim al-Shirazi says in "Nafahat al-Qur'an" 9/10:

[Imamah in the view of the Shia sect and the followers of Ahlul-Bayt (as) is from the foundations of religion and fundamentals of faiths, on the other hand the sect of Ahlul-Sunnah considers it from the branches and practical rulings.]

Ayatullah al-Sayyed `Ali al-Husseini and Milani says in "al-Imamah fi Ahamm al-Kutub al-Kalamiyyah" pg43:

[Either Imamah is from the foundations of religion and faith or it is from the branches? The truth is: It is from the foundations like prophet-hood.]

Grand Ayatullah `Abdul-Hussein Sharaf-ul-Deen al-Musawi says in "al-Muraja`at" pg260:

[Know that it shows that the Wilayah of `Ali(8) is from the foundations of religion, as the Imamiyyah believe.]

(8) Wilayah of `Ali: A Shia belief meaning the absolute authority of `Ali, in other words, his Imamah.

With this dangerous turn, the Shia scholars made the Imamah a cross roads between them and other Muslims, putting an obstacle to realizing Islamic unity between the great majority of Muslims and the individuals belonging to the Imami Shia sect. It even made the Shia live in sadness and complete isolation from the rest of the Islamic world, with a huge gap that cannot be filled because of the current nature of their belief in Imamah.

Logically and as a result of this dangerous belief they adopted and forced on themselves, anyone who opposes them in their belief in Imamah has the same ruling as that of a person who denied one of the three Islamic foundations: 1- Affirming the unity of God. 2- Believing in the prophets of God. 3- Believing in the day of resurrection. Since the Muslims agree that the one who denies one of these three foundations is a Kafir, then the Shia scholars naturally ruled that the one who denies this fourth foundation that they added to the previous three must also be a Kafir who deserves to go to the hell-fire.

Not only do they believe that the ones who oppose them in the matter of Imamah will end up in hell-fire like the Jews and Hindus and pagans, but they believe that they will receive even greater punishment than people of other faiths. After citing some of the Shia narrations that prove what we mentioned, the grand Shia Ayatullah and leader of the Shia of his time, Muhammad Hassan Najafi comments on them, he says in his book "Jawahir al-Kalam" 36/93-94:

[Either way, the origin of this saying are the many Mutawatir(9) narrations that prove the disbelief of those who oppose us, and that they are the Zoroastrians of this nation, and they are worse than the Jews and the Christians, so you (reader) know what this implies concerning their condition in the after-life.]

(9) Mutawatir: Mass transmitted.

Classical Shia scholar and leader of their sect at his time, al-Mufid says in "Awa'il al-Maqalat" pg44:

[The Imami (shia) have agreed, that he who denies the Imamah of one of the Imams, and rejects their obedience which Allah has ordered, then he is a Kafir, misguided and deserving to abide in hell-fire forever.]

Shia `Allamah Zayn al-Deen al-`Amili says in "Bihar al-Anwar" 8/368 that there is a consensus on this matter:

[And this is why they (shia scholars) have reported that they will enter the fire by consensus.]

The leader of the Shia sect Naseer al-Deen al-Tusi says in "Noor al-Baraheen" 1/64 by Ni`matullah al-Jaza'iri:

[The Imami (Shia) have adopted the unique opinion, that entering paradise and salvation cannot be obtained except after believing in the Wilayah of the family of the Prophet (as) and believing in their Imamah. As for the rest of the Muslims, they agreed that the salvation can be obtained after affirming the two testimonies of faith.]

I ask, which of the two groups leans more towards unity and love? Is it the Twelver Shia who agree on the disbelief of anyone who disagrees with them and banish their opponents to hell-fire? Or the mainstream Muslims, Ahlul-Sunnah, who believe that if anyone bears testimony that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad (SAWS) is his messenger, he will enter heaven?

Grand Shia Ayatullah `Abdul-Hussein Sharaf-ul-Deen says in "al-Fusoul al-Muhimmah" pg32:

[We have other authentic narrations that we won by means of our twelve Imams (…) and here are some from the book "Usool al-Kafi" and others, they give glad tidings to the believers, those who believe in Allah and his messenger and the final day, but what you just heard is only exclusive to those who follow the Wilayah of the family of the messenger and his pure progeny (…) this is not strange, as their Wilayah is from the foundations of the religion.]

Their top scholar al-Murtada who carries the title of `Alam al-Huda says concerning those who do not believe in Imamah, in his research "al-Risalah al-Bahirah fi al-`Itrah al-Tahirah" 2/251-252:

[What also proves their superiority peace be upon them, and their greatness from among the humans, is that Allah most high showed us that, knowing them is like knowing him, in that it signifies Islam and Iman, and He showed that being ignorant about them and doubting them is like being ignorant about him and doubting him, in that it signifies Kufr and disbelief. This rank is not given to anyone except our Prophet (SAWS) and after him the chief of believers `Ali (as) and the Imams from his progeny (…) what proves to us, that the leadership of those whom we mentioned (as) is from Iman, and not believing it is Kufr and disbelief, is the consensus of the Imami Shia, they do not differ on this.]

Sheikh of their sect al-Tusi says in "al-Rasa'il al-`Ashrah" pg103:

[In the name of Allah the merciful, in him I trust, if a questioner asked you: What is faith? then say: It is to believe in Allah, and the messenger, and what the messenger and the Imams have brought peace be upon them. (…) It is based on five pillars, the one who knows them is a believer, the one who is ignorant of them is a Kafir, they are: Unity of God, Justice of God, Prophet-hood, Imamah, resurrection.]

Shia Muhaqqiq `Ali bin al-Hussein al-Karaki says in "Rasa'il al-Karaki" 1/59:

[In the name of Allah the merciful, on him we rely, praise be to Allah and peace be upon his messenger and his pure family. He who is religiously accountable whether free or a slave, a male or female, must know the five foundations that are pillars of faith: Unity of God, Justice of God, Prophet-hood, Imamah, resurrection. (…) and he who is ignorant of any of these, he does not walk the path of Iman, and deserves eternal punishment with the Kouffar.]

Indeed, the Shia scholars have applied those beliefs on the ground of reality, on all those who disagree with them on Imamah, they made Takfeer on them and cursed them and banished them to the fires of hell forever. The ugly Shia call of Takfeer had reached all Muslims no matter what their rank and virtue is, so they made Takfeer on the companions of the Prophet (SAWS) and the best generation humanity ever knew, and even the rightly guided caliphs of Islam.

The reason they made Takfeer on the companions (ra) is simply because they did mutual consultation when appointing their leader and they accepted to give authority to other than `Ali (ra).

Shia scholar `Ali bin al-Hussein bin `Abdul-`Aal al-Karaki said in "Rasa'il al-Karaki" 1/62:

[Any sane man who believes in giving precedence to ibn abi Quhafa and ibn al-Khattab and ibn `Affan, who are lowly in lineage and stubborn, it is not known that they had virtues in knowledge or Jihad (…) on them and on those who love them is the curse of Allah and the angels and all humanity.]

The seal of the Muhadditheen of the Shia al-`Allamah Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi says in "Bihar al-Anwar" 30/399:

[I say: The narrations proving the kufr of abi Bakr and `Umar and their likes, and the rewards offered to those who curse them and disown them, and their innovations, are more numerous than we can count in this volume or many other volumes. But what we presented is sufficient for those whom Allah wishes to guide.]

Finally, their scholar al-Mufid says regarding those caliphs who preceded `Ali (ra) in his book "Awa'il al-Maqalat" pg41-42, under the title: "The saying about those who preceded Ameer al-Mu'mineen - `Ali bin abi Talib (as)-"

[The Imami (shia) and many of the Zaydiyyah (shia) have agreed that those who preceded the chief of believers (`Ali), are misguided transgressors, and by keeping the chief of believers (as) from the position of the messenger of Allah (SAWS), they are disobedient oppressors, abiding in the fire for eternity.]

Thus, the Shia scholars have cursed the first three caliphs may Allah be pleased with them, and they cursed the rest of the companions (ra) who agreed on appointing them as leaders and served under them, then they cursed all the Muslims who are pleased with them and who loved them.

As a result, the scholars of Islam and the Muslims have begun to look at this Shia belief of Imamah in an objective way, as a serious threat to the unity of the Islamic nation. It is a great call to make Takfeer on all the Muslims just like the call of the Khawarij before them.

In this book I have decided to adopt one of the most important methods of refuting the Shia theory of Imamah. This chosen method is, to prove that the belief in Imamah will lead to great corruption, that the majority of Muslims will reject Imamah if they realized that it is rejected by divine laws and human intellect, without diving into the texts used by Shia to prove Imamah and discussing their meanings or authenticity.

Introduction:

The origin of this belief and the origin of this disease called "Imamah", is that the Shia scholars decided to place their own intellect (`Aql) before the divine texts (Naql). They formulated several intellectual introductions and made them the basis of deciding and adopting religious beliefs. Although we know the errors of this Shia methodology yet we chose to adopt it, simply to show the readers that these so called intellectual introductions used to prove the theory of Imamah, at the same time also carry the destruction of the theory of Imamah.

Indeed, I have seen clearly that the intellectual bases for this theory, carry in their midst much evil and are a great danger to one of the main foundations of the religion of Islam "The finality of Prophet-hood". This means that the Shia intellectual bases that led them to believe in the theory of Imamah are corrupt by necessity. In other words, if the Muslims adopt these same intellectual introductions to prove Imamah, then they will demolish the base foundation of the finality of prophet-hood, and the one believing in Imamah must also believe in the continuation of prophet-hood which is the obviously corrupt belief of the Qadiyani (10) sect.

(10) Qadiyani: or al-Qadiyaniyyah is a sect that believes in the continuation of prophet-hood and deny the seal of prophet-hood.

The objective observer will see, that the call of the Imami Shia sect and the call of the Qadiyani sect are one and the same, the only difference is the name but the main ideas are shared by both groups. In fact, the Shia belief in Imamah is considered a first step towards repealing the seal of prophet-hood, and is used as a bridge for the Qadiyaniyyah to cross in order to prove their belief of continuation of prophet-hood. The observer will also notice that the Qadiyaniyyah have relied on most if not all of the intellectual introductions adopted by the Shia, they only differed in the pronunciation. The Shia called it "necessity of the presence of an infallible Imam" while the Qadiani called it "necessity of the presence of a prophet", we seek refuge in Allah from their call.

It is these types of barren theories that shows us with clarity, the vast amount of evil that has befallen this nation, as a result of placing the human intellect before the divine texts. Making the intellect an absolute ruler while the divine texts just follow along and are given suitable or convenient interpretations. As a result of people's intellects being different in realization, recognition and grasping of certain concepts, we see these small deviant groups, each claiming that their saying is correct and is 'common sense' or 'logical', they all state that their beliefs are backed and affirmed by human intellect, and that all those opposing them are therefore wrong.

The first chapter:

Brief look at the Qadiyani and the Qadiyaniyyah.

The Qadiyaniyyah sect appeared at the end of nineteenth Christian century in India, after the English occupation became comfortable, and it is a revolution against the prophet-hood of Muhammad (SAWS) and all of Islam. A dangerous religious and political conspiracy that can only be likened to the Isma`eeli Batini movement that was led by `Ubeidullah bin Maymun al-Qidah in the third Hijri century.

This movement was adopted and encouraged by the English government, it was also helped by many social and political factors so it can spread at that time even though it is extremely far away from the religion of Islam. The town of Qadiyan in India became a place of preaching and advertising for this new movement, and the Qadiyanis resorted to debates in order to cast suspicion in the hearts of the Muslims, making them doubt their religion. After India divided in 1947 and Pakistan emerged, the English government forced the Qadiyani Zifr-ullah Khan as a minister of foreign affairs for Pakistan, and in turn this man started to plant Qadiyanis in the government, giving them authority over the Muslims. The Qadiyanis started to join the Pakistani army, the air force and the police, reaching important positions therein. They even formed an Emirate in Punjab called al-Rabwah, where only Qadiyanis can get jobs, and the Qadiyani is given absolute authority, like a state within a state.

As for the man behind this movement, he is al-Mirza Ghulam Ahmad al-Qadiyani who was born in 1839 or 1840, and lately it has appeared that he is from Persian origins. In 1907, al-Mirza Ghulam Ahmad challenged a well known Muslims scholar called Mawlana Thanaullah al-Amritasri, and his challenge was that Allah would put the liar among them to death during the life of his opponent by some horrible disease. In 1908, al-Mirza was struck by a horrible disease and died during the life of his opponent on the 26th of May of that year.

Some examples of his delusions and blasphemy:

We will mention some of his sayings briefly,

He says in "Dafi` al-Bala'" pg11: [He is the God who sent his messenger in Qadiyan.]

He says in "Haqiqat al-Wahi" pg68: [By he who holds my life in his hand, He sent me and named me a prophet.]

He says in a footnote in "Haqiqat al-Wahi" pg72: [Allah most high made apparent all prophets and attributed their names to me, I am Adam, I am Seth, I am Nuh, I am Ibrahim, I am Isma`eel, I am Ya`qoub, I am Yusuf, I am `Isa, I am Musa, I am Dawoud, I am a complete appearance to Muhammad (SAWS), meaning I am Muhammad and Ahmad]

He said in "Tuhfat al-Nadwa" pg4: [As I have mentioned, these words which I recite are certainly those of Allah, like the Qur'an and the Torah, and I am a prophet]

He says in "Haqiqat al-Wahi" pg9: [The Awliya and Abdal and Qutbs of this Muhammadi nation have been deprived from the bigger portion of this blessing (meaning the Godly revelations and calls), this is why Allah granted me the name of 'prophet', as for the others they do not deserve this name.]

I am certain that the reader knows well, that these words cannot be uttered by a sane man, but rather a mentally disturbed fool, or a man who was taken over by the devils who speak on his behalf. We ask Allah to protect our brains from foolishness and possession.

The second chapter:

Finality of prophet-hood in Islam from the perspective of Ahlul-Sunnah.

It is from the main principals of Islam, after believing in the oneness of God and the resurrection after death, is that Allah almighty sealed or ended the prophet-hood with Muhammad (SAWS). The Muslims believe that there is no prophet after him, or any revelation, or inspiration that can be used to derive religious rulings. This belief is famously known as "`Aqeedat Khatm-ul-Nubuwwah"(11) and has been considered by All Muslims since the day of the Prophet (SAWS) as a part of faith, or a part of what makes one a Muslim, this is backed by several Qur'anic verses and tens of prophetic narrations making anyone whom denies this fact a non-Muslim by agreement of the nation.

(11) `Aqeedat Khatm al-Nubuwwah: The belief in the finality of prophet-hood.

It is also good to note that not only did the Prophet (SAWS) inform us that he was the last of the prophets, but he also warned us that there will be certain individuals who shall claim prophet-hood for themselves, when he (SAWS) said in Sahih al-Bukhari and other authentic books: "The hour shall not dawn upon you, until the deceitful liars are sent, around thirty, each claiming to be a messenger of Allah." and he (SAWS) said in Sahih Muslim: "In my nation will be thirty liars, each claiming he is a prophet, and I am the seal of prophets, there are no prophets after me."

Notice that the Prophet (SAWS) used the term "Dajjaloun" in the first narration to describe them, this word means "Those who are extremely deceitful", so the claimants of prophet-hood shall be very good at deceiving and fooling people, acting like Muslims to try and attack the correct Islamic beliefs from the inside, like Musaylamah al-Kazzab tried to do by claiming that he was the partner of Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) in his message.

Indeed what the Prophet (SAWS) said did take place, many people throughout history claimed prophet-hood, some more successful than others, fooling the ignorant people around them, but the Islamic nation was always ready and on the lookout, as they were aware and they had clear guidance in the book of their Lord and the Sunnah of his Prophet (SAWS). Thus, whenever such a person appeared, the nation would expel him outside the circle of Islam and treat him like a Kafir, without even asking him to prove his claims as the companions (ra) did with the liars of their time such as Musaylamah al-Kazzab, al-Aswad al-`Ansi, Tulayha al-Asadi, Sajah al-Nasraniyah, al-Harith bin Sa`eed and others of their like.

However…

{ Lo! the devils do inspire their minions to dispute with you. But if ye obey them, ye will be in truth idolaters.} [Qur'an 6:121]

Sadly, to this day the disbelievers and doubters still cast suspicion on the religion of God in order to misguide the Muslims. From the first doubts the enemies of Allah cast is, the fact that previous nations received prophets to guide them while in our times we have none to guide us. According to them this opposes the justice of Allah, even if we do not need a new Shari`ah(12) yet they claim we always need divinely appointed guides.

(12) Shari`ah: Islamic divine laws.

The origin of this doubt originates from two intellectual introductions:

The first, is that the presence of a prophet is considered kindness on the part of Allah and an act of Lutf(13) towards his slaves who are religiously accountable, so sending the messengers to guide us is from the lavishness of God.

(13) Lutf: Godly grace.

The second, is that Prophets are of two kinds, Tashri`i prophets and Tablighi prophets. A prophet who is classed as being Tashri`i, is the one whom Allah sends with a new Shari`ah or new divine laws to abrogate the divine laws which came before them, as for the Tablighi prophet, his mission is only to revive the past Shari`ah and preserve it from loss or tampering, then to promote it and spread it and guide people towards it.

Shia grand Ayatullah Ja`far al-Subhani says in "Mafaheem al-Qur'an" 3/217-218:

[The prophet, if he was sent with a new Shari`ah, or came with a new holy book, then his prophet-hood is Tashri`iyyah. On the other hand, if the prophet was sent for Da`wah(14) and guidance to the rulings previously established by Allah through past prophets, then his prophet-hood is Tablighiyyah. The first kind are messengers, and is restricted to five individuals mentioned in Qur'an and Hadith, as for the majority, they are from the second kind, they were sent to promote the religion that was revealed upon the messengers so their prophet-hood is Tablighiyyah.]

(14) Da`wah: Calling people to the religion of God.

Below, I will illustrate how some of the Shia scholars begin by casting these doubts on Islam to misguide their followers:

Shia grand Ayatullah Nasir Makarim al-Shirazi says in "Durous fil `Aqeedah al-Islamiyah" pg176:

[Sending the prophets is great kindness from Allah, so why would the humans be deprived from this kindness in our times? why would the people of our time not have a guide and new leader to lead them?]

Grand Ayatullah Ja`far al-Subhani continues on the same exact page as his previous book by saying:

[Then a questioner might ask: Let's accept that the Prophet of Islam came with the perfect and most beautiful Shari`ah and everything else which humanity needs in its life and after-life until the day of judgment, and there is nothing left for anyone to add to it because our prophet (SAWS) came with the best laws and most correct opinions in all matters of life. Because of this perfection the door of the Tablighi prophet-hood that Allah bestowed upon previous nations is closed, (but) no matter how perfect the Shari`ah is yet it still needs one who guides towards it, who explains it and who renews it, so that it may not be lost and it may be transmitted from generation to generation in the correct way, so why then did Allah close the door after it was open for previous nations? and why did Allah bestow this blessing upon the previous nations and sent prophets among them to deliver the message and warn yet he deprived the righteous followers of this nation from it?]

Their Shia philosopher Murtada al-Mutahhari says in "al-Wahi wal-Nubuwwah" pg28-30:

[Now we must see why was prophet-hood renewed in the past, and prophets used to come continuously one by one, even though not all of them were bringers of Shari`ah and laws and most were sent to execute an available Shari`ah? and why did the matter (abruptly) end after the seal of prophets, and the Tashri`i prophet will no longer come, even the Tablighi prophet will no longer come? ...why? by consensus most prophets were Tablighi not Tashri`i, and maybe the Tashri`i prophets numbers wouldn't rise above the number of the fingers in your hand, and the job of the Tablighi prophets was to deliver Shari`ah and spread it and execute it and explain it.]

Their `Allamah Ibrahim al-Ameeni says in "al-Nubuwwah wal-Nabi" pg137-138:

[If we say that the need to send prophets from ulil-`Azm(15) is no longer present, because the rulings and laws are completed, and religious knowledge is perfected, but why would there not be a need for Tablighi prophets who promote these laws? just as Allah would send after each prophet of Shari`ah many other prophets, so they can promote the Shari`ah and deliver it to later generations, so why would Allah not send after the prophet of Islam other prophets to deliver the 'muhammadi message' and promote it, while acknowledging that the presence of such prophets is something necessary and beneficial for societies.]

(15) ulil-`Azm: The messengers who are sent with new laws or books.

It is truly as Allah almighty said in his book:

{ Thus have We appointed unto every prophet an adversary - devils of humankind and jinn who inspire in one another plausible discourse through guile. If thy Lord willed, they would not do so; so leave them alone with their devising} [Qur'an 6:112]

Let's now see the answer of Ahlul-Sunnah to the above doubts raised by the Shia.

We can sum up their answer with two parts, the first part:

The main principal is that the divine revelation decides primarily, it gets the final say in all matters, not the ruling of the intellect.

What the majority of Muslims agreed on is that formulating concepts and understanding life is all based on the divine revelations bestowed upon mankind, not on inferior human intellect. Every matter that is proven to be a part of the divine laws must be followed, whether our intellect agreed or apparently disagreed(16). Thus, if it was proven through divine texts that prophet-hood was finalized with Prophet Muhammad (SAWS), then we must submit to this without wasting our time with the doubts of the diseased minds that are targets for the whispering of the devils.

(16) We say 'apparently disagreed' because every ruling of divine law does not completely disagree with the ruling of human intellect, this is what the renowned Muslim scholar Sheikh al-Islam ibn Taymiyyah (rah) proves in his book "Dari' Ta`arud al-`Aql wal-Naql".

We must believe with certainty that whatever Allah decrees is truth whether our simplistic minds grasp its wisdom or not. In the prophetic Sunnah we see examples of the intellect not being able to comprehend some religious orders at the beginning, such as what happened at the treaty of Hudaybiyyah. The Kouffar placed unfair conditions in the peace treaty to disgrace the Muslims, the Prophet (SAWS) agreed to their conditions but the Muslims couldn't accept them. Later they were forced to leave what their own intellects determined, and followed the ruling of the Prophet (SAWS) because the intellect cannot override Shari`ah. In "Sahih Muslim" we read that: It has been narrated on the authority of Shaqiq: I heard Sahl bin Hunayf say at Siffin: "O ye people, find fault with your (own) opinions. By Allah, on the Day of abu Jandal (i. e. the day of Hudaybiyyah), I thought to myself that, if I could, I would reverse the order of the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) (the terms of the truce being unpalatable)."

The Muslim scholar ibn al-Qayyim (rah) says in "Mukhtasar al-Sawa`iq al-Mursalah" pg87:

[Some of the believers said: "It is sufficient for your intellect to lead you to the truth of the messenger of Allah (SAWS) and the meaning of his words, then it should never come between you two again." Another said: "The intellect is like a Sultan who gave authority to the messenger (SAWS) then removed itself from authority."]

He said on pg88:

[Because the intellect has affirmed the superiority of divine law and revelation, there is no comparison between the two in knowledge, it is as if you are comparing a grain of mustard to a mountain (…) Shari`ah is offered to us by Allah through the angels and the human messengers, and is backed by the verses and signs that the intellect agrees to, or likes, or permits, and at other times the intellect may not even completely grasp them, as it has no means of fully understanding everything so it needs to submit to the rulings and follow the orders and obey.]

The second part:

That the nation having reached a state of ripening and maturity no longer requires new prophets.

After we explained that there is no need for the theories of our intellect when we are presented with the realities of Shari`ah, we will also provide another reason although the first is sufficient. Ahlul-Sunnah believe that it is not a matter of having a prophet or not having one, but a matter related to the survival of his Shari`ah and teachings without any alteration. Whenever a nation has preserved the heritage of their prophet and guarded it from corruption then it no longer requires the presence of a new prophet, because the good examples and morals are contained within his teachings not his person. As long as his teachings are correct and known by the people, then it is as if he is among them with his guidance, this is what we can see on the ground of reality as the Muslims worship the Lord through the guidance of his last prophet, having both the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Allah tells us about the first books of divine laws, many of them were lost or corrupted, parts of them were hidden or mis-interpreted, this required Allah to send new prophets to show the truth and correct what is wrong:

{Say, Who revealed the Scripture that Moses brought as light and guidance to the people? You [Jews] make it into pages, disclosing [some of] it and concealing much.} [Qur'an 6:91]

{O People of the Scripture, there has come to you Our Messenger making clear to you much of what you used to conceal of the Scripture and overlooking much. There has come to you from Allah a light and a clear Book.} [Qur'an 5:15]

Therefore, the religion is preserved and complete, we do not need one to complete it or preserve it, as Allah almighty himself declared that there shall be no corruption in it, and he declared that it shall reign supreme over all religions by his grace and shall be victorious.

{This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion.} [Qur'an 5:3]

{Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian.} [Qur'an 15:9]

{It is He who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion. And sufficient is Allah as Witness.} [Qur'an 48:28]

Allah most high has praised this nation and stated that it is qualified and worthy to inherit the burdens and responsibilities of the religion and protect it:

{Then we caused to inherit the Book those We have chosen of Our servants; and among them is he who wrongs himself, and among them is he who is moderate, and among them is he who is foremost in good deeds by permission of Allah. That [inheritance] is what is the great bounty.} [Qur'an 35:32]

The Muslim scholar al-Hafiz ibn Kathir (rah) says while explaining this verse in his book "Tafsir ibn Kathir" 3/562:

[Allah says: Then We made those who uphold the Book confirming what came before, the one whom We have chosen from among Our servants. They are this nation, who are divided into three types. Allah says:

{among them is he who wrongs himself} these are the ones who are careless about doing some obligatory actions, and who commit some forbidden actions.

{among them is he who is moderate} these are the ones who follow a middle course, who fulfill their obligations and avoid things that are forbidden, but they may neglect some good deeds and do some things which are disliked.

{among them is he who is foremost in good deeds} these are the ones who do obligatory actions and things which are encouraged, and who avoid doing unlawful and disliked actions, and avoid some actions which are permissible.

`Ali bin abi Talhah reported that ibn `Abbas commented on the verse {Then we caused to inherit the Book those We have chosen of Our servants} "This refers to the nation of Muhammad (SAWS). Allah caused it to inherit every Book that He had revealed; those who wrong themselves will be forgiven, those who follow a middle course will have an easy accounting, and those who are foremost in good deeds will enter Paradise without being brought to account."]

The Shia scholar Sadr-ul-Deen al-Shirazi affirms this praise from Allah to our nation in his book "al-Hujjah" pg111:

[Allah says while honoring Musa (as) who spoke to him: {And We wrote for him on the tablets [something] of all things - instruction and explanation for all things} [Qur'an 7:145] Allah then said to honor the nation of Muhammad (SAWS): {Those -- He has written faith upon their hearts, and He has confirmed them with a Spirit from Himself} [Qur'an 58:22]. A big difference between a prophet whom he honored by writing to him on the tablets and between a prophet whose nation is honored by having Iman written upon their hearts. Iman is but knowledge of Allah and his angels and books and messengers and the last day, so how great they must be and their prophet?]

Muslim scholar Musa Jarullah ibn Fatima al-Rusi (rah) speaks of this in his book "al-Washi`ah fi Naqd `Aqa'id al-Shia":

[Every blessing and virtue bestowed by Allah upon his prophet, and everything that descended from Allah's great throne and reached the prophet becomes to his nation after him, and the nation is in a partnership with their prophet in all that was his during his life, then it inherited him after his death. Whatever blessing the Qur'an mentions for our prophet then it also mentions for his nation, for example:

Allah tells his prophet {We have not sent thee, save as a mercy unto all beings.} and He said about his nation {You are the best nation ever brought forth to men}

And He said to his prophet {and may perfect His favour unto thee} and He said to the nation {and completed My favour unto you}

He said to his prophet {and that God may help thee with mighty help} and He said to the nation {and it was ever a duty incumbent upon Us, to help the believers.}

He said to his prophet {We have given thee a manifest victory} and to his nation {and rewarded them with an imminent conquest}

He said to his prophet {He it is Who supporteth thee with His help} and to the nation {and hath strengthened them with a Spirit from Him}

Allah not only included the nation with their prophet, but in several locations added to their virtue and honor such as:

1- Allah says about choosing the angels and prophets {Allah chooseth from the angels messengers, and (also) from mankind}, then he honored the nation by choosing them {Then we caused to inherit the Book those We have chosen of Our servants}, the word "inherit" means that it is something that the living receive from the dead, and the book is preserved eternally, so the nation is forever alive, He was the one who chose them and He never chose any other nations so they deviated from their books. Allah cut-off the possibility of his slaves deviating by saying {over My servants thou shalt have no authority, except those that follow thee} which makes the nation that follows Allah under his protection according to the verse from Surat al-Hijr, and He mentioned choosing them after his saying {Indeed, Allah, of His servants, is Acquainted and Seeing}, thus his choosing of them comes after his knowledge of their worthiness and it is eternal.

Allah most high also said about the past prophets {and We chose them and guided them unto a straight path} and He said about this nation {And strive for Allah with the endeavour which is His right. He hath chosen you (…) He is your Protecting friend. A blessed Patron and a blessed Helper! } So praise be to Allah who chose this nation while simply favoring other nations, making this nation on the level of prophets.

Allah most high also stated that there will be glory and honor to the Prophet (SAWS) when he said {And indeed, it is a remembrance for you and your people} and he said about the nation {a Book in which is your mention}.

2- Allah most high included the nation with their prophet in being witnesses over other nations {And thus we have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people}

3- He included this nation in blessing their messenger {Indeed, Allah confers blessing upon the Prophet, and His angels [ask Him to do so]. O you who have believed, ask [Allah to confer] blessing upon him and ask [Allah to grant him] peace.} Allah and his angels also send blessings and peace upon the believers {It is He who blesses you, and His angels}. Allah's blessing and his angel's blessing upon the Prophet (SAWS) and his nation is greater than the prostration of the angels to Adam (as) in terms of honor, the entire nation in all its conditions sends blessings and salutations upon the prophet and his nation, the entire nation in all of their prayers ask Allah to confer peace upon the prophet and all of his nation. The nation in terms of dignity and honor is like the Prophet (SAWS), Allah included them in peace as He said: {Say: 'Praise belongs to God, and peace be on His servants whom He has chosen.'} and {when those who believe in Our signs come to thee, say, Peace be upon you. Your Lord has prescribed for Himself mercy.}

4- He included them in victory with their prophet, He said {It is He who has sent His Messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may uplift it above every religion. God suffices as a witness.} and He said to the nation {God has promised those of you who believe and do righteous deeds that He will surely make you successors in the land, even as He made those who were before them successors, and that He will surely establish their religion for them that He has approved.} So Allah described the believers and their religion, and that he is pleased with it and he shall make them the successors as he did with the rightly guided rulers after his Prophet (SAWS).]

Then Musa Jarullah (rah) said:

[The nation is infallible as their Prophet (SAWS) is. They (as a whole) are infallible when it comes to carrying the message and preserving it, When it comes to delivering it and practicing it.]

The Muslim scholar al-Sayyed abu al-Hassan al-Nadwi reports in his book "al-Nubuwwah wal-Anbiya' fi Daw' al-Qur'an" the saying of the Muslim scholar ibn Tayymiyah (rah):

[Sheikh al-Islam ibn Taymiyyah may Allah have mercy on him has excelled in portraying the message of our Prophet (SAWS) and its virtues and results in his book "al-Jawab al-Sahih", he says: The life of the messenger (SAWS) is from his signs, and his morals and sayings and deeds and laws are from his signs, and the knowledge of his nation and their religion and the karamat of their pious men are from his signs (…) He was always acting upon the orders of Allah in the most perfect and complete manner, with honesty and justice and loyalty, not even one lie was attributed to him, nor did he oppress anyone, nor did he betray anyone, but rather he was the most honest and just of people, the most fulfilling of his promises regardless of the conditions, in peace and in war, in safety and fear, in richness and poorness, in little and in plenty, in his victory over his opponents or their rising against him, regardless of it all he was always sticking to the best and most complete of paths, until the divine call reached all the lands of the Arabs which were previously filled with the worship of idols, the sayings of priests, the obedience of the creature in disobedience of the creator, the spilling of innocent blood and cutting the ties of kinship, they did not know a last day or the resurrection. Then with him, they became the most knowledgeable of the people of the earth and the most religious and just, even the Christians when they saw them coming to the land of al-Sham they said: "Those who accompanied Christ were no better than these men." Those of intellect can see the difference between their knowledge and deeds on the face of this earth and those other than them.

His nation is the most complete of nations in all virtues, if their knowledge was measured with that of other nations, you can clearly see the virtue of their knowledge, if their religion and worship and obedience of God was measured with that of other nations, you can see that they are more religious, if you measure their courage and struggle in the cause of Allah and their patience in the face of hardships, it appears that their struggle is greater and their hearts are more courageous, if their kindness and charity and forgiveness were measured with others, it shall appear that they are kinder and more generous than the others.

They received these virtues through him, and learned it from him, he was the one who ordered them, they did not follow a book before him that he came to complete as `Isa (as) came to complete the Torah. Some of the virtues and good morals and knowledge of the followers of `Isa (as) were from the Torah, and some from al-Zabour, and some from prophecies, and some from `Isa (as) himself, and some were from those who followed him like the disciples, and they sought aid from the words of the philosophers until they inserted things in the religion of the Messiah that conflict with it. As for the nation of Muhammad (SAWS), they did not read a book before him, most of them did not believe in Musa (as) or `Isa (as) and Dawoud (as), and the Torah and the Injeel and the Zabour, they believed in them only through him, he was the one to order them to believe in all prophets and to affirm all the sent books, he forbade them from differentiating between any of his messengers, so the most high said in the book he sent: {Say (O Muslims): We believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and that which Moses and Jesus received, and that which the prophets received from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered.}]

This is the answer of the mainstream Muslims, this is the answer of Ahlul-Sunnah and of Islam, there is no more need for a divine infallible guide whether he is a prophet as the Qadiyanis state or an Imam as the Shia state.

The third chapter:

Finality of prophet-hood in the view of the Twelver Shia.

PART I:

Declaring that the nation has matured enough so they no longer require the presence of prophets to guide them.

The Shia who have previously questioned "why do we no longer have prophets?" now need to give their followers a satisfying answer, so if you observe you will see that they copied the exact same answer that Ahlul-Sunnah gave in their books.

Grand Shia Ayatullah Nasir Makarim al-Shirazi says in "Durous fil-`Aqeedah al-Islamiyah" pg.176-177:

[That the deprivation of our nation at this age (from prophets) is not because we are not good enough, but rather because humanity in this age has reached the end of its intellectual journey, and has reached in its awareness a stage that enables it to continue this journey in following Shariah, for example:

Ulul-`Azm from the prophets who came with a new religion and a new book from the sky, they are five (Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa, `Isa, Muhammad PBUT) and they appeared each in a specific period in time, and they tried to guide humanity and put them on the path of perfection, so each of them guided humanity from a certain stage to the next and handed the matter to the following prophet from Ulil-`Azm, until the caravan reached the last path, it also reached the ability to continue alone until the end of the journey, we compare it to a student that finishes his primary school, then middle school and finally high-school, this does not mean that he stops learning but it means he is qualified to continue on his own with no need of a teacher or school (...)]

Grand Ayatullah Ja`far al-Subhani says in "Mafaheem al-Qur'an" vol.3 pg.217-221:

[The fact that the door of Tablighi prophet-hood was opened to previous nations but closed after the advent of the prophet of Islam, this does not mean that the previous nations had a special rank that made them worthy of this blessing, or that the Islamic nation was deprived because it was less important - No - but rather the reason is that the past nations were in need of it, whereas the Islamic nation does not require any prophet to preach and promote the Shari`ah of Muhammad (SAWS).

That is because societies differ in awareness and maturity, imagine a society that is so ignorant like a small minor, incapable of guarding the heritage that he received, like a child who rips his notebooks not realizing their value.

Compared to a society that has reached the heights of intellectual and moral and social values, a society that preserves its religious heritage and uses it wisely, then in that case it does not require anyone to promote its religion, or one who reminds it of the teachings or a teacher who guides it towards moral values and (clarifies) what could be confusing in its book and so on. So the individuals living in past societies were like minors, not mature intellectually and socially, they did not know the value of that heritage that they received but they used to play with it like a boy plays with his books, by corrupting it and mis-interpreting it according to their desires, so Shari`ah would be lost after centuries pass.

This is why, Allah (swt) used to send among them prophets, generation after generation, so they can remind them of their religion that he chose for them, and renew the Shari`ah of the messenger before them and promote his sayings and actions and remove all impurities the people ascribe to it.

As for the human society after the passing of the Prophet (SAWS), it has reached from knowledge and awareness and open mindedness and maturity a great amount that enables it of preserving the heritage of its prophet and protecting his book from loss and corruption, it took such good care of its religious book that it authored many works in relation to it such as Tafseer and Balagha and Mufradat and I`rab and Qira'at(17), so Qur'anic sciences flourished.

As a result of this mental maturity in human society, the job of warning and delivering the message has now been placed on the shoulders of this same nation, until they took the job of educating and calling (to Islam), and they no longer rely on the coming of a new prophet to renew the message of the one before him.]

(17): Tafseer: Interpretation - Balagha: Eloquence - Mufradat: Vocabulary - I`rab: Grammar - Qira'at: Recitations.

Shia scholar Sayyed Mujtaba al-Lari says in "Usool al-`Aqa'id fil-Islam" vol.2 pg.193-201:

[One of the purposes of renewing the message of prophets and the continuity of messengers, is what takes place from corruption to heavenly books, rendering them unsuitable for guiding humanity. On the other hand when the human reaches a stage of maturity in a way that enables him to preserve the traditions and religious teachings from corruption and change, it also enables him to spread them and in this situation the need for renewal of the message is no longer there.

Consequently, the times in which the Prophet of Islam (as) appeared are completely different from the times of appearance of other prophets, because the human has now entered the stage of intellectual maturity and the conditions are set for the ending of the prophet-hood.

The social maturity and knowledge and awareness have led the human to a level where he has become the one who memorizes and delivers the heavenly message, this way one of the main pillars of the ending of prophet-hood has been fulfilled, and the job of guiding and calling to this religion is now entrusted to scholars and thinkers, because from this point in time the human is able to guard his historical heritage and meaningful accomplishments thanks to this kind book, and because of his intellectual and social maturity. He needs to prevent the corruption of this book which was inspired to the Prophet (SAWS), as this message now shall spread to the whole, as the Qur'an states:

{And let there be [arising] from you a nation inviting to [all that is] good, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong, and those will be the successful.} [3:104]

When the human reaches that level of maturity, and posses the ability to acknowledge the absolute truths, and the godly laws, then the scholars become the inheritors of the prophets (...) and they take it upon themselves to carry on the mission of researching and doing Ijtihad(18) and struggling against corruption and spreading the godly ways (...) Humanity has proven throughout around fifteen centuries that it is ready and capable to carry on the big responsibilities, and that it is able to preserve the knowledge and the mental inheritance.

These things prove that the human has now reached a level of freedom and the ability to safeguard the heavenly verses with extreme accuracy, and that he can carry the responsibility of calling (Da`wah) and making Tafseer, and spreading the religion.

When the godly teachings reached the human then there was no more need for new prophets(...)]

(18): Making of a decision in Islamic law by personal effort and research.

Shia scholar al-`Allamah Ibraheem al-Ameeni says in his book "al-Nubuwwah wal-Nabi" pg.130-131:

[The human society at that time had reached its limits mentally and intellectually and in their scientific capabilities, it was able to preserve its scientific and religious inheritance in a perfect picture, and to transmit it to the next generations with accuracy and honesty.

It was in these times that our Prophet (as) was sent by Allah, to place in the hands of the fully developed and ready humanity the most high prestigious knowledge (...) And the Qur'an has prevailed because of the writers and because of the ones who memorized it, it remained in its prefect image without any addition or deletion, without change and corruption, until the day of judgment. Thus all the rulings and laws of Islam remained in an accurately written format in the bellies of books and compilations.]

And on pg.138:

[So why is there no more need for Tablighi prophets to promote these Shari'ah laws, just like Allah would send after the messengers of Ulil-`Azm, he would send many prophets after them to promote the previous Shari`ah and spread its message to coming generations? it is possible for us to say that human society in the time of the coming of the Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) had reached mental integrity and intellectual maturity to an extent that it became good enough to preserve the teachings of the prophets, and protect them from the danger of accidents, and that society itself can deliver the sacred virtues and knowledge, so society becomes self sufficient, so there was no more need to send prophets.]

Shia philosopher Murtada al-Mutahhari says in "al-Wahi wal-Nubuwwah" pg.30:

[It becomes clear from what is being said that the social intellectual maturity of humanity plays a role in the finality of prophet-hood.]

and on pg.29:

[The early man of old times, because he was not fully developed and mature, they were not able to preserve their heavenly book, and the heavenly books became victims of corruption and change, or they may even end up being lost completely, this is why it was necessary to always renew the message. The age in which the Qur'an descended, meaning before a thousand four hundred years, this was the time when humanity placed its childhood behind it, and it was capable of safeguarding its scientific and religious heritage, this is why corruption never infiltrated the last heavenly book, the Qur'an. Generally all the Muslims memorize each verse when it descends in their chests or books, this is one of the reasons of the finality of prophet-hood]

and pg.30:

[And the good scholars of this Islamic nation carry out a lot of the jobs of Tablighi prophets and some of the jobs of Tashri'i prophets - with them not being Musharri`een(19) - they do it through Ijtihad and the obligation of guiding this nation, this is why there is no more need to renew prophet-hood and the descent of a new book or the coming of a new prophet forever.]

(19) Musharri`een: Islamic law makers.

Grand Ayatullah Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr said in his research "al-Nubuwwah al-Khatimah" pg.57-58:

[It is being able to bear the moral responsibility of this calling(Islam), meaning that the human needs to mature enough to the extent that allows him to carry the burdens of this call, and this has its price and responsibilities and pains and troubles. The ability to withstand the vast responsibilities of the worldly message not limited by a time and place is not possible by default, but he can reach this step by step through many levels and training, to be able to handle the responsibility of humanity. so after a long period of training he developed until he was able to handle the responsibilities of an unlimited message not bound by time and place...]

He says on pg.58-59:

[And what responsibilities did the nations of past prophets carry? the nations whose history is now revealed and exposed to us today, the nations of Musa and `Isa for example?

We(Muslims) in comparison with the nations of Musa and `Isa, and the responsibilities this Islamic nation carried when the revelation descended on our prophet (as) with the final message, in comparison we find a huge difference when it comes to taking responsibility, this great difference shows us the evolution of the readiness (of humanity) throughout the times...]

Shia philosopher Sadr-ul-Deen al-Shirazi said in "al-Hujjah" pg.107-108 under the chapter "reasons for the end of prophet-hood":

[Human entity and instincts have been evolving since the time of Adam (as) based on their readiness and capability. This evolution took place from the beginning of their deficiency until the maximum they can reach in completeness, (this happens) through the sending of prophets and the descent of angels with books from the most high to teach the nations and guide them and free them from the shackles, and to perfect the spirit with the lights of knowledge and verses. Whenever they become more ready and when they posses more polite and educated minds they become more worthy and more deserving of a new Shari`ah and new rulings that abrogates the previous ones. It was always like this until finally it reached the most perfect Shari`ah and religion, that of Islam as Allah said {This day I have perfected your religion for you}]

PART II:

The conflict between their belief in the maturity of the nation and their belief in Imamah.

As it was made obviously clear by both the Muslim scholars and the scholars of the Shia sect, that the belief in the maturity of the nation and its eligibility to carry out the job of the prophets, such as preserving the religious texts, spreading them, teaching them, and practicing upon them, means that it no longer requires the presence of new prophets, and this, in turn, destroys the argument of the Qadiyaniyyah and others who claim the need to always have prophets.

However, what must be mentioned is that this answer does not only destroy the belief of the Qadiyaniyyah, but also the belief of the Imami Shia. The Twelver Shia believe in the need to always have a divine guide, an infallible leader that comes after the Prophet (SAWS) to preserve the religion and spread it. This made them run into an embarrassing contradiction in their beliefs as the intelligent read can see, and we shall provide some examples below:

Their grand Shia Ayatullah Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr who we previously quoted will now contradict himself in order to prove the need for a divine guide in his research "Bahth Hawl al-Wilayah", on pg.37 he says that the time the Prophet (SAWS) spent among us was not enough:

[The Islamic nation as a whole did not live this experience (prophet-hood) for more than a decade. This period of time is normally not enough when it comes to changing the generation that lived for only ten years with the prophet so they can reach a good level of awareness, of objectivity, of freedom from previous beliefs and an understanding of the new religion. A level that enables them to carry the message and to be responsible for spreading the call.]

So he is saying that the Islamic nation after spending a decade with the Prophet (SAWS) did not possess the required level of awareness and objectivity to carry the responsibility of the message.

He also says on pg.37:

[But rather, the logic of divine messages demands that the nation pass by a longer period of guardianship so it can be made ready to rise to the expected level of responsibility.]

Meaning that the time the Prophet (SAWS) spent was not enough to finish the job, we need to be under the protection and guardianship of other divine guides.

He says on pg.37:

[And any hypothesis which implies that the Prophet (SAWS) was planning to place the responsibility of the message and the leadership after him on the shoulders of the generation of the emigrants and the supporters, is in fact a hypothesis that contains a great accusation against the biggest and wisest leader in the history of change.]

He means that if anyone says that the Prophet (SAWS) planned to give authority after him to the Islamic nation, then this person is accusing the Prophet (SAWS) of being a bad strategist and planner. However, the big and famous Shia scholar forgot what he previously said when he was talking about the wisdom and reason behind the finality of Prophet-hood, so let's quote some of his words from before:

In his book "al-Nubuwwah al-Khatimah" pg.58-59 he said when comparing the Islamic nation with previous nations:

[How can we compare that with the (Islamic) nation that carried the burden of the message, how can we compare it with the nation of Muhammad peace be upon him!?]

He said on pg.57-58:

[The human has reached his limits when it comes to taking responsibility of the burdens of the message when Islam came (…) until he was able to handle the responsibilities of an unlimited message not bound by time and place]

So when the Shia scholar wants to provide his followers with the reason for the finality of prophet-hood, he tells them that the nation has reached the heights and limits of maturity and responsibility so there was no more need for new prophets, but when he wants to preach to his followers the Shia belief in divine infallible leaders, he tells them that the time the prophet (SAWS) spent was not enough to change the nation and that they are not responsible enough to carry the burdens of the message, thus we need twelve divine leaders to guide us after-wards.

The grand Shia Ayatullah Ja`far al-Subhani says in "Mafaheem al-Qur'an" vol.3 pg.223 when talking about the importance of Ahlul-Bayt:

[He glory be to him, in order to preserve the unity of the nation and maintain it from straying in the mazes of misguidance, must back up his book with another scale, with a guide to enforce his matter, and a teacher to clarify for them its secrets.]

So he says that Allah glory be to him, must appoint another guide and teacher so that the nation will not fall into misguidance. Whereas, in another location he contradicted himself and says in "Mafaheem al-Qur'an" vol.3 pg.217-221:

[The reason is that the past nations were in need of it, whereas the Islamic nation does not require any prophet to preach and promote the Shari`ah of Muhammad (SAWS).

That is because societies differ in awareness and maturity, imagine a society that is so ignorant like a small minor, incapable of guarding the heritage that he received, like a child who rips his notebooks not realizing their value.

Compared to a society that has reached the heights of intellectual and moral and social values, a society that preserves its religious heritage and uses it wisely, then in that case it does not require anyone to promote its religion, or one who reminds it of the teachings or a teacher who guides it towards moral values and (clarifies) what could be confusing in its book and so on.]

In the first saying he states that the nation is in need of one who guides them and carries their hand and explains the religion to them and promotes it, but then in the second saying he proves that the nation reached a state of maturity where it doesn't require any teachers and guides and this is why no new prophets were sent!

Shia grand scholar, Ayatullah Nasir Makarim al-Shirazi also contradicts himself in "Durous fil-`Aqa'id al-Islamiyyah" pg.188:

[And we shall prove in the following research, the need for the presence of a divine representative, a prophet or an infallible leader, in every time and era]

And he says on pg.189:

[The human travels a long path full of turns and pitfalls in his march towards Allah, towards absolute perfection, towards moral integrity in all of its dimensions. It is evident that the human cannot travel this path successfully without the guidance from an infallible leader, nor can he progress without a heavenly teacher, because it is a road filled with dangers and misguidance (…) so based on this (the presence of an Imam completes the goal of the creation of the human), this is what they call in the books of beliefs as "godly grace", they mean by it that Allah the all wise will provide the human with all necessary things so he can fulfill the goal of his creation, from these things are the sending of prophets and appointment of infallible leaders, otherwise this would contradict the purpose!]

Although this same scholar previously stated that humanity no longer requires new prophets to help them continue their journey after the passing of the Prophet (SAWS), he said in the same book pg.176-177:

[Because the human caravan in this age, have reached in their intellectual journey, and in their awareness, a level that enables them to continue on their path of following Shari`ah (…) until the caravan reached the last path, it also reached the ability to continue alone until the end of the journey]

Shia scholar Murtada al-Mutahhari said in his book "al-Imamah" pg.99:

[The kind messenger brought Islam to the people, and this religion needs the presence of a godly reference, so he can teach them the religion and clarify it for them in a perfect way at least for a set time, in turn the Prophet (SAWS) appointed for this nation a special reference (...) The Imam -in reality- is a reference and a specialist in matters of religion, he is a true expert and his knowledge contains no errors or confusion]

This scholar is talking about the need for a godly guide to clarify the religion for the people, which contradicts what he said in another location, as he stated that the nation no longer requires a divine guide as it is able and qualified to carry out all the jobs of the prophets, he said in "al-Wahi wal-Nubuwwah" pg-29:

[The age in which the Qur'an descended, meaning before a thousand four hundred years, this was the time when humanity placed its childhood behind it, and it was capable of safeguarding its scientific and religious heritage, this is why corruption never infiltrated the last heavenly book, the Qur'an. Generally all the Muslims memorize each verse when it descends in their chests or books, this is one of the reasons of the finality of prophet-hood.]

Then on pg.30 he talks about how the Muslim scholars in the age of finality of prophet-hood are able to extract rulings based on their knowledge of the fundamentals of religion and the circumstances, he explains Ijtihad and then he says:

[And the good scholars of this Islamic nation carry out a lot of the jobs of Tablighi prophets and some of the jobs of Tashri'i prophets - although they're not Musharri`een - they do it through Ijtihad and the obligation of guiding this nation, this is why there is no more need to renew prophet-hood and the descent of a new book or the coming of a new prophet forever.]

Murtada al-Mutahhari makes the Shia stance even clearer when he says in "al-Imamah" pg.98:

[As for us, we (Shia) believe that the proofs used to explain the reasons behind the sending of prophets, are also leading us to the belief that he (SAWS) will appoint certain saintly people after him, to succeed him.]

So based on his analysis, the proof he mentions is that the nation is incapable of preserving its religious heritage, so it needs a divine guide called the "Imam" to guide them and preserve their religion for them. On the other hand, al-Mutahhari says that the reason why this nation no longer requires the presence of prophets, is because unlike past nations, this nation has reached a sufficient level of maturity enabling it to preserve its religious heritage. A clear contradiction between his two positions when it comes to the need of a godly guide for the nation.

al-`Allamah Ibrahim al-Ameeni says in his book also called "al-Imamah" pg.113-114:

[The rulings from the heavens only descended for the guidance of mankind, so they need to survive without being exposed to corruption, whether additions or deletions, falsehood must not approach them from before them or behind them (...) this cannot be realized without the presence of an infallible godly individual, elevated above sin and error and forgetfulness]

al-Ameeni is clearly stating that the only way to preserve the religious laws and texts from corruption is by having this godly individual otherwise known as the Imam. He continues on pg.122:

[For the godly argument to remain with the presence of Shari`ah, and so that the religious laws can remain with no deletions or additions (...) for this to be realized it is imperative to have among the humans an individual who carries the responsibility of preserving Shari`ah, who seeks to execute the laws of the heavens on earth]

In other words, the Islamic nation is not enough to protect this religion, this is only restricted to the infallible leader or Imam. He completely denies the ability of the nation to preach the religion or preserve it on pg.114:

[That last theory falls apart, because each individual of this nation is prone to error, not protected from sin, not safe from inattention and forgetfulness, and thus they are practically unsafe from making mistakes, this is what drags the godly rulings into the pit of corruption and misguidance (...) because they are not infallible.]

However, this man has contradicted himself when he had said previously that:

[The human society at that time had reached its limits mentally and intellectually and in their scientific capabilities, it was able to preserve its scientific and religious inheritance in a perfect picture, and to transmit it to the next generations with accuracy and honesty.]

And on pg.138 in his book "al-Nubuwwah wal-Nabi" he also said:

[Human society in the time of the coming of the Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) had reached mental integrity and intellectual maturity to an extent that it became good enough to preserve the teachings of the prophets, and protect them from the danger of accidents, and that society itself can deliver the sacred virtues and knowledge, so society becomes self sufficient, so there was no more need to send prophets.]

Another example is their big scholar Mujtaba al-Lari, who claims that the Islamic nation had not yet reached the required level which allows the godly mandate to be lifted from them, he says in "Usul al-`Aqa'id fil-Islam" vol.4 pg.16-17:

[Can we say that: The God who never left any matter from the necessities of materialistic life unless he provided it for the human, had deprived him from the important factor that plays the main role in his spiritual richness? and that he wasn't kind enough to bestow this blessing on him?

The nation of Islam after the death of the Messenger (SAWS) did not reach the level of intellectual maturity, or Islamic maturity, that enables it to continue in its evolution towards completion, except during the mandate of the messenger. The program that Islam proposed for the guidance of the human and his growth and prosperity, if it was not merged with the program of godly Imamah then it shall remain incomplete, even soulless, incapable of playing a valuable role in freeing the human and developing his potential.]

Just like his companions, this Shia scholar also contradicts himself but he does so in the same book, as he had previously said that:

[On the other hand when the human reaches a stage of maturity in a way that enables him to preserve the traditions and religious teachings from corruption and change, it also enables him to spread them and in this situation the need for renewal of the message is no longer there.

Consequently, the times in which the Prophet of Islam (as) appeared are completely different from the times of appearance of other prophets, because the human has now entered the stage of intellectual maturity and the conditions are set for the ending of the prophet-hood.

(...)Humanity has proven throughout around fifteen centuries that it is ready and capable to carry on the big responsibilities, and that it is able to preserve the knowledge and the mental inheritance.]

Has the dear reader seen any clearer contradiction!? Observe how their biggest scholars and leaders fell into this hole one after the other.

Not only is this type of contradiction found in the words of a single scholar but also in the words of two different scholars, where one denies what the other proves. An example of this is what happened between the Shia scholar al-`Allamah ibn al-Mutahhar al-Helli and the researcher of his book "al-Alfayn" Sayyed Muhammad Mahdi al-Khurasan, where al-Helli was discussing the saying of the Shia scholar al-Nusayr al-Tusi about the need of prophet-hood in every time:

[The sixth issue: The need for the sending of prophets in every time. He said: "The proof for this need implies that it is general (for every time)".]

Meaning that the intellectual proof which explains the need for prophets is a general one, in that there is always a need for prophets in every time and every age. It appears that al-Tusi is saying that the finality of prophet-hood makes no sense, which is why al-Helli commented on his words in a way that makes them more in line with Islamic beliefs:

[And the Imami scholars said: The need for the sending of new prophets is always present so that no age would be devoid of the Shari`ah of a prophet.]

So al-Helli, in order to fix the mistake of al-Tusi, stated an extra condition, that there is always a need for new prophets so that the laws of the messengers would be always available to us. In other words, if the laws are already available such as in our case today, then there is no need for new prophets to be sent. Although keep in mind that al-Tusi didn't mention this condition, but rather he made a general statement.

The researcher of the book al-Sayyed Muhammad Mahdi al-Khurasan didn't like this, so he referred to the prophet as the "active reformer" and to his laws as the "silent reformer", then he stated that the silent reformer cannot replace the active reformer:

[If it was said: What replaces him are his laws, the book and the Sunnah, we would reply that: We already stated that they both aren't sufficient to clarify all that the people need, or explain matters that arise, there is disagreement on their texts among the nation. The Prophet (SAWS) is an active reformer while the book and the Sunnah are silent reformers, and the silent is not sufficient to replace the active so the active reformer must be present at all times, because all creations must be treated equally by kindness and grace and mercy, so how can He deprive our time from this kindness and grace when He is kind in all times?]

In other words, al-Khurasan sided with al-Tusi, they believe that in every age there must be a guide to humanity appointed by Allah, the holy book and the traditions are simply not enough for them.

PART III:

The reason why the Shia scholars fell into this clear contradiction.

A questioner will now ask, how can these big Shia scholars fall into such a clear trap?

The answer is that the Shia scholars chose to adopt two beliefs that are completely at odds with one another, so they ran over a big road bump when trying to reconcile between both. They wanted to refute groups such as the Qadiyanis who believe in the continuation of prophet-hood so they stated that the nation has now reached a stage of maturity enabling it to preserve the religion and continue its journey alone, there is no need for new prophets to be sent. At the same time, they wanted to refute the beliefs of Ahlul-Sunnah who say that we no longer need the help of divine infallible guides, so they adopted the belief that the nation has always been in need of divine guides and it cannot be left alone nor are the Muslims capable of preserving and understanding their religion without divine help from the infallible leader.

And so they have become as Allah has described:

{Swaying between this (and that), (belonging) neither to these nor to those. He whom Allah causeth to go astray, thou (O Muhammad) wilt not find a way for him} [Qur'an 4:143]

How would they overcome this contradiction?

In order for the Shia beliefs to make sense, they need to choose one of the two sides, either they agree with Ahlul-Sunnah or they agree with the Qadiyanis. It is evident throughout the history of the Imami Shia, that they always sought to prove their belief in Imamah by any means, which is why the Shia scholars will obviously pick the second choice. The Shia will turn a blind eye to the fact that the Qadiyanis will use their arguments as a bridge to prove their own corrupt beliefs, that they will use it to try and cast doubts on the fortress of prophet-hood and this is a dangerous matter as the intelligent reader is aware.

The fourth chapter:

The most important intellectual principles presented by the Shia scholars.

The first principal:

They said that there is a need for the presence of an infallible leader to guide the people in every age until the coming of the hour, they primarily relied on intellect to prove this, then they backed it up by divine texts, meaning that the origin for their belief and their main proof for it is human intellect.

So in order to prove Imamah their big classical Shia scholar al-Mufid said in his book "al-Irshad" pg.347:

[From its proofs is what the intellect deduces with correct reasoning, that there must be an infallible complete leader, who is not in need of his followers help (...) with this principal, there is no need to narrate narrations to prove Imamah, or to count the texts related to it because it is established through intellect]

Leader of their sect al-Tusi mentioned in "Talkhis al-Shafi" vol.1 pg.141:

[As for the existence of the Imam and his deserved attributes (such as infallibility and others), divine texts are not needed to prove it but it is known through the intellects]

al-Tusi said many similar statements in his book, such as 1/98:

[Because it is known for them(Shia scholars) that it is a duty to believe in Imamah and the attributes of the Imam through relying on the intellect, but if they had presented what they heard then that is just to present additional proofs]

and on 1/128:

[For us, proving it (Imamah) is not in need of him (the messenger), because the intellects point towards the need of having Imamah, and they guide us to the attributes of the Imam, and what he is needed for. If the intellects prove something, then there is no more need to prove it through what we heard]

Meaning, the Shia prove the need of having divine guides through their intellects and are in no need of divine texts nor do they rely on them, whether the texts mentioned it or not matters not as they already established it with their brains.

The second principal:

They believe that if the divine texts such as the Qur'an and the Sunnah conflict with their intellects, then the intellect is given precedence and the texts are given suitable or convenient interpretations, if no such interpretations are possible then the divine texts are discarded.

Leader of their sect al-Tusi says in "al-Rasa'il al-`Ashr" pg.325 while commenting on certain narrations that state that the good deeds of a person can be all dropped and nullified on the day of judgment if this person is also committing evil acts such as backbiting:

[Each of these reports comes through a single narrator so they cannot harm the intellectual proofs which point to the corruption of the belief of 'dropped deeds'. Even if they were authentic, we would have given them a suitable interpretation just like we gave some of the apparent Qur'anic verses interpretations which suit our intellects]

He is basically saying, that even if these reports were authentic, he would give them a completely different interpretation which suits his intellect, because the divine texts cannot go against his intellect or logic.

Shia Muhaddith al-Majlisi quotes the words of their leader al-Mufid in "Bihar al-Anwar" vol.10 pg.419:

[If I had accepted the apparent words of Allah most high to Musa (as) {Don't be afraid} [Qur'an 27:10] and His words to his Prophet (SAWS) {let not their speech grieve you} [Qur'an 36:76] and other similar words directed at the prophets (as), then I would have to believe that it is a prohibition for them because they committed an indecent act deserving of disparagement, (...) but I have rejected the apparent words for an intellectual reason that caused me to do so, (...) because of what was established from the infallibility of prophets (as) that makes them avoid sins.]

al-Mufid is saying that Allah according to the Qur'anic text is apparently prohibiting the prophets (as) from doing certain bad actions, this contradicts al-Mufid's intellect as he believes that the leader must be infallible, un-able to commit sins or mistakes, so he rejected the clear words of the Qur'an and gave some sort of an interpretation to these verses that matches his beliefs.

al-Sayyed al-Murtada in his book "Tanzih al-Anbiya'" mentions many things, such as on pg.33:

[As for the narrations mentioned in this regard, we do not pay any attention to them, because the narrations need to be compatible with what the intellect had decided, they cannot be accepted if they conflict with what intellect decides, this is why we reject narrations of Jabr(20) and Tashbih(21) or we give them other interpretations if possible.]

(20) Jabr: narrations stating that the human has no choice and that his actions are created and forced upon him.

(21) Tashbih: narrations likening Allah to his creations.

on pg.171:

[We said that there is no doubt that every narration declaring what the intellect rejects then it becomes invalid, unless it has a palatable, non-arbitrary interpretation so it becomes authentic, having a meaning that matches the intellect]

Shia scholar al-Miqdad al-Siyuri says in his book "al-Anwar al-Jalaliyyah" pg.155:

[The second is what is incompatible with the intellect, we say: If the intellect and the text are contrary to one another, then it is impermissible to accept them as it would mean combining two opposites, nor is it permissible to accept the text and discard the intellect because it would mean that you also have to discard the text because the intellect is the origin of the text, as the intellect is what originally leads to the messenger (as) and the intellect affirms his truthfulness. What remains is the opposite, to work according to the intellect, as for the texts, they are not completely discarded but the scholars have two choices in the matter:

- To ignore the text until its meaning becomes apparent to us.

- To give the text a suitable interpretation that is not rejected by the intellect.]

Sheikh Lutf-Allah al-Safi says "Majmu`at al-Rasa'il" vol.1 pg.47:

[The origin of the belief in the infallibility of the prophet or the Imam, and the necessity for the leader to be infallible is the ruling of the intellect, and the Shari`ah agrees with that ruling (...) in the matter of infallibility of prophets, the intellect is the primary reference, it rules that the prophet must be infallible for several reasons]

Grand Ayatullah Mirza Jawad al-Tabrizi says in "Sirat al-Najat" vol.3 pg447:

[And since what is apparent from this verse is what we stated, then it is improper to reject what is apparent, unless with an intellectual or textual proof]

To sum up what is being said above, the Shia scholars will reject the meaning of any clear saying from the Prophet (SAWS) or any Qur'anic verse if it happens to conflict with what they agreed upon among themselves as being "intellectual proofs". In simpler terms, if any divine text says something that they do not agree with, they will discard it or try to twist the meaning of the text to suite their desires, this is what they referred to as "suitable interpretation matching the intellect".

I will give the reader an example of this, the Shia scholars agreed that the prophets (as) are all infallible, incapable of committing error or forgetting anything. They invented this belief with their "intellects", then they found that the Qur'an openly states that the prophets (as) forget and make mistakes, such as the saying of Allah:

{And Adam disobeyed his Lord, and so he erred.} [Qur'an 20:121]

And His saying to Prophet Muhammad (SAWS):

{that God may forgive thee thy former and thy latter sins} [Qur'an 48:2]

And Allah the most high said:

{So Musa struck him with his fist and killed him. He said: This is of the devil's doing. Lo! he is an enemy, a mere misleader.} [Qur'an 28:15]

Facing these texts and many others in the Qur'an and the Sunnah, the Shia scholars were faced with two options:

1- Either they should leave their intellectual proof for the infallibility of leaders.

2- Or they should give these verses interpretations that match their beliefs.

The Shia scholars did exactly what the reader expects, they stubbornly adopted the second option, they went out of their way to give many of the verses strange or ridiculous interpretations and they rejected many clear narrations. Shia scholar al-Sayyed Hassan bin Sayyed Ahmad al-Iskandari in his book "Risala fi Masa'il al-Khilaf" reported the words of Muhammad bin `Abdul-Nabi:

[Do you not see that al-Mufid and al-Murtada rejected the narrations of 'al-Dharr(atoms)' and 'al-Mithaq(covenant)' and the narrations of 'al-Anwar(lights)' and 'al-Ashbah(ghosts)', also the narrations of 'al-Teenah(clay)' and 'al-Ihbat(dropped deeds)' although they agree with the verses, so they rejected both the verses and the narrations.]

source: Manuscript from the department of monuments and culture (26995).

Sheikh al-Ta'ifah al-Tusi says in "al-Iqtisad" pg.162:

[As for the apparent texts showing that acts of disobedience were committed by prophets, such as His saying {And Adam disobeyed his Lord }, we have clarified what is meant in the interpretation and al-Murtada explained enough in his book "al-Tanzih" but we cannot mention it here. We say: The apparent texts are based on the intellectual proofs, not the other way around, and if we learn from the proof of the mind that indecent acts are not committed by them, we will give the verses other interpretations if they were apparent, even though most aren't too apparent as he proved there.]

Shia Muhaqqiq al-Helli says in "al-Maslak fi Usoul al-Deen" pg.156-157:

[As for what the precious book and many of the narrations mention from apparent acts of disobedience, then we give them a type of interpretation, so that there would be no conflict. We will mention a small part of what has been attributed to the best of prophets so that the answer can help us with what was attributed to others. Like the saying of Allah {and Adam disobeyed his Lord}. and His saying in the story of Nuh {My Lord! Lo! my son is of my household! Surely Thy promise is the truth} and Allah's reply to him {O Nuh! Lo! he is not of thy household}, His saying in the story of Ibrahim {and forgive my father, for he is one of those astray.} and his saying {This is my Lord} some times to the star, other times to the moon and then the sun. In the story of Musa who said {It is only Thy trial, whereby Thou leadest astray whom Thou wilt, and guidest whom Thou wilt}. In the story of `Isa {but if You forgive them - indeed it is You who is the Exalted in Might} even though he knew they were Kouffar and they cannot be forgiven. and the story of Muhammad {that God may forgive thee thy former and thy latter sins} and {And He found you lost and guided [you]} and {And We removed from you your burden}. Because disobedience is to oppose, and there is the possibility that the opposition is in a Wajib(22), it can also be in a Mandub(23), so if both are possible then we shall consider the above acts as a part of Mandub, so that no one would doubt or challenge the intellectual proof.]

(22) Wajib: Obligatory religious duty. Neglecting a Wajib is a sin and will result in a punishment in the hereafter.

(23) Mandub: A commendable or recommended religious act. Failure to do it would not be a sin.

Shia leader and master Muhsin al-Amin al-`Amili says in "al-Shia min al-Haqa'iq wal-Awham" pg.83:

[We say: The prophet in our belief is protected from sins, he does not need forgiveness, this is why those who believe in infallibility had to interpret the saying of Allah {that God may forgive thee} in various ways because if the apparent text opposes the intellectual proof then it should be interpreted differently.]

The fifth chapter:

Debate between a Q