Make your own free website on



Islamic Books
Contact Me
Holy Pictures

ALI(AS)_un WAli Ullah In_Namaz

Aliyan wali allah in namaz

Namaz & The 3rd Shahadat

Proof of recitation from Quran, Ahadith, Logic & the statements of Ullemas / Marajas.

Namaz is a very important part of Deen-e- Islam and there is a Riwayat that if ones Namaz is accepted all his acts of worship will be accepted and if ones Namaz is not accepted all his acts of worship will be rejected. Hence it is compulsory on every one of us to make sure that we pray Namaz in a way which is accepted by God Almighty. Tashahud in Namaz is a very important part of it .

Tashahud is standing witness to or giving testimony. All other sects of Islam / Muslims have consensus on tashahud as they all agree that be it Kalma or Azaan, Aqamah or Tashahud in every place only 2 testimonies i.e. testifying the oneness of God & Prophet hood of Hazrat Mohammad ( pbuh & hp ) is enough, whereas Shias believe that the main difference between Shi’ism and other sects is the acceptance of Wilayat-e- Moula Ali so where ever we give the first 2 testimonies ( i.e. Touheed & Risalat ) we should immediately give the 3rd testimony, the wilayat of Moula Ali and all shias believe that the Third testimony ( ) is just as necessary as the first 2 testimonies. Unfortunately, since a few years because of the ignorance of Shias towards the orders of Quran and Holy Traditions of Aimma , just like other muslims we too have stopped reciting the Third Shahadat and have restricted ourselves to only 2 testimonies in Namaz. Our ignorance towards the orders of Quran and Ahadith results in our shias raising questions and objections on the very basis of our sect i.e. . Even though there are many books dedicated to prove the necessity of recitation of in Namaz but the fact is that firstly these books are not in reach of everyone as they are either in Arabic, Farsi or Urdu and many shias are not familiar with either of the languages, secondly our lives have become so hectic that we don’t even get enough time for our selves let alone reading such big and lengthy books. This is the reason why we decided to compile this article with some undeniable proofs while keeping it as short as we possibly can.

We have to bear this in mind that just because something is not practiced at present time it does not mean that it is not a part of our act of worship. We all know that so many things have been changed in Namaz that it is now a very big problem between different sects of Muslims as they all have different ways to pray Namaz so accepting Namaz as it is practiced today cannot be justified without trying hard to find out the things which were originally part of Namaz but were struck off sometime back by the enemies of Islam in a well planned and organized manner. We have to look and seek further deep down inside it Specially if something is regarding the Wilayat of Moula Ali as we surely know that this was the very things that the rulers have tried their level best to eradicate and there was a time when just taking the name of Moula Ali was enough to be killed by the tyrant rulers and their equally tyrant lobby. Thinking about such a time we have to consider that how could anyone testify the wilayat of Ameer ul Momineen Ali ibn - e - Abi Talib openly and loudly? Majority of people during those times used to do ‘ Taqayya ‘ just to save themselves from harm. This period of Taqayya was so prolonged that disappeared even from the thoughts of Shias themselves. Even our Aimma refrained from openly teaching the Kalma which included to general public but instead used to teach the complete Kalma to some trustworthy companions only who would then convey it to the lovers of Ahlul Bait . Hence in the Book Al Kafi there is a tradition ( Hadith ) of Imam Mohammad Baqar which says “ If we would have fixed the tashahud of Namaz , our followers and lovers ( Mawalis ) would have been killed “ . Hence if the recitation of in Tashahud is not practiced today it should not be taken for granted but instead we should try and see if it was practiced earlier and if we could find the proofs in Saqalain ( Quran & Ahadith of Aimma ). We should all try and find out the answers to the following questions which come to our mind regarding the Third Shahadat in Namaz :

Does our faith and logic ( Aql ) allow us to recite in Tashahud of Namaz ?

Has Quran ever Ordered us to recite the third Shahadat ?

Are there any Ahadith ( Traditions of Aimma [as]) to support the recitation?

How did Rasool-e-Khuda ( pbuh & hp ) and our Imam used to recite Tashahud ?

What does the Fuqahas ( Islamic Clergy / Scholars) say about Third Shahadat?

Now let us try and shed some light on each of the Questions separately :

Aql ( reasoning )

Normally at present time we only give 2 testimonies i.e. of Touheed & Risalat. In Arabic 2 testimonies are called Shahadatain whereas if the testimonies are at least 3 or more the word used in Arabic is Shahad’aat. The word Shahadatain ( 2 testimonies ) cannot be found any where in Quran but the word Shahad’aat can be seen in Quran and that too in the context of Namaz. But if someone still refuses to stand witness to atleast 3 testimonies , would that not be rejecting Quranic order ?

Surah Al Maida : Quran said “ Al Youma Akmalto Lakum Deenakum…… “ This Ayat was revealed on the day of Ghadeer and the word “ Al youm “ signifies that on one special day one special thing happened which completed the deen ‘ Islam ‘ . The history stands witness that the thing that happened on that day was the announcement of Wilayat of Moula Ali . If we look at the aayaats that were sent before announcing the completion of Deen Islam we will notice that the order from God Almighty to convey this message was so strict that if this announcement was not made the Risalat of Rasool-e-Khuda ( pbuh & hp ) would have been in danger. If Rasool-e-Khuda (pbuh & hp ) would not have announced the Wilayat of Moula Ali could his Risalat be saved? Could the Deen Islam be saved without this announcement ? Is Namaz not included in Deen ? Thus, if without testifying and announcing this Shahadat the Risalat of our Holy Prophet (pbuh & hp) was incomplete, The Deen Islam was incomplete - How can the prayers ( Namaz ) of anyone be complete without it?

Who doesn’t know that Tashahud is a part of Namaz ( Prayers ) and the Namaz, which tashahud is a part of - Shaikh Mufeed says in his book “ Al Ikhtesas “ and other Ulemas in their own books quote from Imam Mohd Baqar - Imam says ‘ Namaz is Ameer ul Momineen ‘At quite many places it is quoted from Moula Ali this saying “ Ana Salat ul Momin “ I am the Salat ( Namaz ) of Momin.

Is there any logic to exclude the testimony of some one who himself is “ Namaz “ ?


Surah Al Muarij - Ayat # 33 to 35

" And those who are upright in their testimonies ( Shahadaatehum ), And those who keep a guard on their prayer, Those shall be in gardens, honored"

It is important to note here that the word Shahad’aat ( Plural ) in Arabic is only used for atleast 3 testimonies - It cannot be used for 2 testimonies , For 2 testimonies the word in Arabic is ‘ Shahadatain ‘

In the above Ayat-e-Quran God Almighty is describing the glories of people who testifies 3 Shahad’aat in their Namaz and safeguards their prayers ( Namaz ).

Surah Fatir - Aya # 10

[Shakir 35:10] Whoever desires honor, then to Allah belongs the honor wholly. To Him do ascend the good words ( Al Kelam Al Tayyab ); and the good deeds, lift them up, and (as for) those who plan evil deeds, they shall have a severe chastisement; and (as for) their plan, it shall perish.

In the above ayat of Quran the word used is "Al Kelam Al Tayyab" which is again in plural form (Sega-e-Jama) and as mentioned above in Arabic the plural form like this is only only used for Three or more. So the usage of "Al Kelam Al Tayyab" or the The Purified (3 or More) Kalamas clearly indicates that the Kalma which reaches and is accepted by God Almighty consists of Three or more Kalma. Now if we see that majority of Muslims including some Shias only recite Two Kalmas (Kalma-e-Tauheed & Kalma-e-Risalat) in Tashahud, allow me to say that this type of Kalama does not reach or is not accepted by God Almighty as he only accepts the shahadat (witness) which consists of 3 or more Kalmas.

Now lets see how Imam Jafar e Sadiq explains the words "Al Kelam Al Tayyab"

Tafseer Ayashi - Tafseer Saafi

Our Imam said "Al Kelam Al Tayyab means the act of momin whereby he recites La illaha illallah - Mohammedun Rasool Allah and "

The above is an absolutely clear and undeniable proof that we should all recite not just in Kalma, Aazaan and Aqamah as compulsory part but also in (Tashahud) Namaz as an integral part.

[Shakir 13:25] And those who break the covenant of Allah after its confirmation and cut asunder that which Allah has ordered to be joined and make mischief in the land; (as for) those, upon them shall be curse and they shall have the evil (issue) of the abode.

Tafseer-e-Qummi - Vol 1 page 363 " Kala Rasool Allah sallallaho wa Aalayhi wa sallam Al Mesak fil Zar min wilayat-e-Ameeral Momineen wal Aimma Alaihis salam"

Translation English " This Covenant was that of joining testimony of Wilayat-e-Ali with touheed and Risalat and who ever breaks away from they are the ones who are 'Jahanami' "

URDU " Yeh Ehad Wilayat Ali ki Gawahi ko Bilafasal touheed 'o' Risalat kay saath milanay ka tha - Aur jo qata kartay hain wo hi jahannami hain "


In Tanveerul Eemaan by Shaikh Yaqoob Al Kulainy : Quotes a tradition from Rasool-e-Khuda ( pbuh & hp ) “ God instructed Hazrat Mohammad Mustafa when the Prophet (pbuh & hp ) was returning from Mairaj : God said ‘ inform this to your Ummat that Ali Wali ullah is Waseela between you and me so do not leave him. And remember that neither your Azaan will be complete without it nor Aqamat or Namaz or Roza or Haj or Zakat and not even your birth or death without mentioning .

Book Shajar-e-Touba Published from Najaf - Iraq : - Utba bin Amir Jehni companion of Holy Prophet ( pbuh & hp ) narrates :- We did the ‘ Bait ‘ of Rasool-e-Khuda ( pbuh & hp ) on these lines : Ash hado anna La illaha illalla wa Ash hado Anna Mohammedan Nabiye’hi wa an Ali’in Wasi’yehi : and if we reject any one of these testimonies we will become Kafir

Book Muqadmah Mishkat ul Anwar - Imam Ali ibn-e-Abi Talib says “ The one who does not accept/ testify my Wilayat will not get any benefit from accepting/ testifying Mohammad’s ( pbuh & hp ) Risalat - Be aware both these testimonies are compulsory with each other “

Ehtejaj-e-Tibrisi - Volume 1 : Imam Jaffar As Sadiq ( as ) says “ Thus when ever one says La ilaha illalla and Mohammedan Rasool Allah, he must immediately say Ali is Ameer ul Momineen Wali Ullah “

The point to note in the above tradition of Imam Jaffar As Sadiq is that our Imam has not restricted the order which means that WE HAVE TO recite when ever and where ever we recite the first 2 testimonies

Book Imali Suddook : Imam Ali Raza says “ God Almighty has said that he will NOT ACCEPT anyone’s acts of worship unless he stands witness to Moula Ali ’s Wilayat with Prophet’s ( pbuh & hp ) Risalat.”

Here we should note that isn’t Namaz an act of worship ? If it is, then how can it be excluded from the order of Imam Ali Raza in the above tradition ( Hadith ) .

Now let us see if our beloved Rasool-e-Khuda ( pbuh & hp ) and our 14 Masoomeen used to recite the Third Shahadat ( ) in their Namaz :


Surah Bani Israel “( O Prophet Mohammad ) Do not recite your prayers loudly nor say it under your breath; seek a course in between. (110) “

In : Tafseer Ayashi - Tafseer Saafi - Tafseer Burhan - Tafseer Noor as Saqalain Tafseer Basair Ad Darajaat : Narrated from Imam Mohammad Baqar : Imam says “ means that the testimony of Wilayat-e-Ali should not be given loudly until God Almighty Orders it ; means the testimony wilayat-e-Ali should be given in such a way ( In Namaz ) that only Ali can hear it - Do not hide it from Ali ; means that you should keep asking God Almighty about the permission to announce it loudly - Hence Holy Prophet ( pbuh & hp ) kept asking God Almighty for the permission and on the day of Gadeer-e-Khum Holy Prophet ( pbuh & hp )got the permission to announce it loudly “

The Above Ayat and its Tafseer as done by Imam Mohammad Baqar proves that Rasool-e-Khuda used to testify the wilayat of Moula Ali slowly and quietly until the day of Gadeer after which Rasool -e- Khuda started saying the Third Shahadat loudly.


Bihar ul Anwar Volume 84 - Tradition ( Hadith ) of Imam Jaffar As Sadiq
Imam Jaffar As Sadiq used to recite the Tashahud of his Namaz like this

“ Ash Hado Annaka Ne’amar rab wa ash hado Annaka Mohammedan Ne’amar Rasool wa ash hado Annaka Ali ibn-e-Abi Talib Ne’amal Moula “


FIQAH AR RAZA : Imam Ali Raza used to recite this sentence in his Tashahud

“ Ash Hado Annaka Ne’amar rab wa an Mohammedan Ne’amar Rasool wa an Ali’in Ne’amal Wali “

Now that you have witnessed what Quran & Ahadith says about the 3rd Shahadat ( ) in Namaz and you have also seen how our Rasool-e-Khuda , Imam Jaffar As Sadiq & Imam Ali Raza used to recite Tashahud, so let us see what Fuqahas and Marajas say about this :


Syed Mohammad Tibrisi in Masabeeh Al Rashad says “ Kalma is proven in the time of our Holy Prophet ( pbuh & hp ) but it was discontinued during the time of Bani Ummayya “

There are many many Maraja-e-Taqleed who were confident about the recitation of : The names of a few are as under :

Agha Al Uzma Syed Mohammad bin Mehdi Shirazi
Agha Al Uzma Syed Abul Qasim Al Khoie
Agha Al Uzma Syed Mohammad Jawwad Tabatabai
Agha Al Uzma Syed Mohammad Hassani Baghdadi
Agha Al Uzma Syed Abdullah Shirazi
Agha Al Uzma Syed Mohammad Ali Tabatabai
Agha Al Uzma Syed Shahabuddin Hussaini Najafi Mar’ashi
Agha Al Uzma Shaikh Murtaza Aal-e-Yaseen
Agha Al Uzma Syed Razi uddin Ahmed Mustambat
Agha Al Uzma Syed Mahmood Shoharwardi
Agha Al Uzma Syed Mohammad Shirazi
& Many more

Note: This document contains some arabic text

The Wedding of Hazrat Qasim (a.s)
[Shakir 2:220] On this world and the hereafter. And they ask you concerning the orphans Say: To set right for them (their affairs) is good, and if you become co-partners with them, they are your brethren; and Allah knows the mischief-maker and the pacemaker, and if Allah had pleased, He would certainly have caused you to fall into a difficulty; surely Allah is Mighty, Wise.

Allah (swt) has said in the above Ayat that orphans should be mixed in with your family, so that they do not feel left out. In other words, if there is an Orphan boy then you should marry him with your daughter and if it is an orphan girl then marry her to your son. The inheritor of the Quran –meaning Imam Hussain (as) followed this principle by marrying the Orphan boy of Imam Hasan (as) (Hz Qasim) to his own beloved daughter (and as they of the same ‘Kuf’). This was to show the world what care Orphans should receive and was inline with the commandments of Allah (swt).

This marriage is allowed in the laws set by our Prophet Muhammed (saw)and even endorsed by many Shia scholars. So it amazes me how anyone can even reject or criticize it. For instance Mullah Mohammed Taqi Ba’ghani (Maqtal writer) writes in his book Majalis-al-Mutaq’een (Majlas-e-Sabih-ashar) the whole episode of the wedding. Even Mohammed Hussain Dhakko (lanatullah) has accepted the status of Mullah Mohammed Taqi Ba’ghani in a book written by Molana Nehmat Ali Sidhu Qummi called Tofah-e-Shaykhia, Published Faisalabad by his own writing on pages 11-13.

After this there should not be any objections about the Mehndi Ceremony, which is associated with the remembrance of the Aqd of because it is only a way to express grief and sorrow of Hz Qasim (as) and allowed in Islam.

Furthermore Shaykh Abbas Qummi (Author of Mifateh) has written in his book “Nafs-al-Mahmoom” pg 171 (Persian) that “In our views there should not be any reason to reject the wedding”. Even Mullah Hussain Kashfi in his book “Rozatul Shuhada’ wrote on the issue. Mullah Kashfi who was a very well known scholar of Hirat and lived in the time of the Wazir Mir Ali Sher, who had a very large collection of books, which were not found in other places.

It is incorrect to suggest that in the tradegy of Kerbala, a happening like this does not seem logical but remember that Aemma’s (as) actions have hidden reasons and it is not necessary that we to know about that.

There have also been both sunni and shia researchers, who have recorded this happening of this ceremony from the tradegy of Kerbala. For instance, in the book “Ghaib-e-Wasail”, it has been written that on the 21st of Rabi-al-Awwal 1255 AH, Abul Fateh Mohiddeen Adil Mohammed Ali Shah saw Hz Zainab (as) in his dream and she was reciting the following elegy “Oh Qasim (son in law), congratulations on the wedding”. From this dream the Imambargha Hussain Abad in Lucknow started to carry out the Mehndi Ceremony and the organizer Hakeem Abu Ibrahim Faizabadi gained fatwa’s from all leading Marja’s, which is all recorded in Tarikh of Lucknow, Vol 2, Pg 150. The famous poet Tamna Matufi 1332 always used to read about the wedding of Hz Qasim (as) infront of all Ulema and Mujtahideen. Here is an example :

“Rukh sai sar kaya sehrahai Qasim noshah nai bas kai pir janat kai podo sai hava anay ko hai”

Even Agha Darbandi Mujtahid who died while reading the elegies of Kerbala used to read about the ceremony of Hz Qasim (as) infront of people may they be Arab, Turk or Persian and no one rejected or challenged on what he said (Asrar-e-Shahadat, Pg 307). Even today you will find a room in the remembrance of the ceremony of Hz Qasim (as) in Kerbala called “Hujlah-e-Qasim” and has been their throughout the years of many leading Shia Scholars, who have even themselves used to go their to pray. This proves the case that it is their to remember and grieve the great son of Imam Hasan (as).

The following are some references of Shia Scholars who have endorsed the wedding of Hz Qasim (as). Thus being ;
1. Mullah Syed Ali Naqi Lucknowi, Maqalaat-e-Syed-al-Ulema, pg 224-230, Published Karachi, Pakistan. 2. Mullah Mohammed Hussain She’hrabi, Tareek-al-Baqa’, pg 73-74, Vol 1, Published Iran. 3. Mullah Syed Baqir Kanjavi, Maza Mir-al-Awliyah, pg 262-263, Published Iran. 4. Mullah Shaykh Jafar Shostari, Majalis Waiz-wa-Aza’, pg 114-116, Published Iran. 5. Mullah Shaykh Fakhruddin Tareehee’ Najafi, Al-Muntakhab Tareehee’, pg 373, Published Iran. (To further endorse this person, please also refer to the book ‘Roza tul Jannat’ by Agha Khonsari Mujtahid, Vol 5, pg 350, Published Iran). 6. Dr Kalbe Sadiq, Science aur Ghaiba-e-Islam, pg 186.

This is only a brief analysis and I hope this helps to remove any doubts on the ceremony of Hazrat Qasim (as).

In today’s materialistic society, wealth and power have paramount influence on assessing the virtues of a person and when it comes to judging the compatibility of man and women for marriage purposes, these two factors weigh more than any other (i.e., family lineage, and beliefs). Generally, society catch the fancy of superficial appearances and worldly status that may be in terms of higher education and family wealth. As a result believers of Ahlul baita.s. have also been allude to the norm of society, a vice which our forefathers have rejected and resisted for hundreds of years, in particular when it comes to the wedding of a syed lady with a non-syed gentleman. An extremely important issue of today, faced by all of us, in particular by Syed families, which is deliberately being avoided in our religious addresses, publications and other means of religious teaching, simply to obscure the previous examples of such weddings where a fatawa was made available for their justifications or even a syed maraja himself married his daughter with non-syed person.

It is not our intention to target the existing marriages of this nature but to raise public awareness on this very important issue in order to suppress its wider acceptability, at least within our means, so that on the day of judgement we are not considered among those who were disrespectful to the children of Syeda Nisa-e-Allameen s.a. . We have tried in our full capacity to recognise and respect and the un-payable debt of Ahlul baita.s. on all living beings, as per revealed in the ‘Ait-e- Fill Qurba’, (Quran Majeed).

It is, however, imperative to briefly define and discuss the status and virtues of ‘Sadat’ Syed lineage, prior to dwelling further into the details of the invalidity of Syeda-non-Syed marriage.

Once Abdullah bin Misira asked from Imam Jafar-e-Sadiq a.s. (Mani al-Akbar by Sheikh Suduq) ‘Who are the ‘Aal of Mohammeda.s.? Imama.s. replied, those are the ‘Aal’ of Mohammed a.s. (descendents) whose women folk are not permissible to marry Prophet Mohammeda.s. (means they are from the same blood-line), and sadaqah (Ziqaat) is harram on them.

It is obligatory to respect descendents of Propheta.s. even if they do not seem to be example shia-muslims as we do respect Holy Quran which also contain disrespectful words (i.e., qazabeen, kafareen). There is a well cited tradition from Rasool Allaha.s. that ‘Be respectful and friendly to my descendents, pious ones should be respected for the sake of Allahs.w.t. and their good deeds whereas sinful ones should be respect for the sake of myself’. It is narrated from Rasool Allaha.s. (Alwamah Alihia by Sheikh Midad) that I (Rasool Allaha.s.) will personally approve ‘Shafat’ for four types of people:

1) Those who had given due respect to my descendants;
2) Those who had fulfilled any one requirement of my descendants;
3) Those who had provided subsistence to my descendants in their time of need;
4) And those who have loved my descendants.

This brief effort is solely conducted to please Ahlul baita.s., and to demonstrate our love for theira.s. descendants through providing a convincing and concise analysis of the subject in the light of Quranic verses, traditions and sayings of Masoomeena.s.. Thus we may be able to eradicate the fast spreading evil of validity of the marriage of Syedani with Non- Syed person. Let us examine the problem in more detail:


Regarding the marriage of a woman in Islam, a great stress has been laid on compatibility (‘kufv’ ) of the proposed couple. Since the men are given preferences over wives; “The man has upper hand over women”; (34:4) The women of greater nobility than the man will always feel disgraced and hence will remain under a psychological disturbance causing further social stress. As, it is not permissible in Deen-e-Mohammadi, for a woman to marry a slave-man. On the other hand, a salve-girl is permissible to her master. This is purely based on ‘kufv’ for which husband’s status will always be superior to his wife, therefore the distinct quality of Syeda (as Sadaqa is harram on her) would make it ‘unrealistic’ for a non-syed to ask for her hand. Indeed, a non-syed can never attain her inherited status by any means (i.e., education, wealth, nobility and piousness). However, sometimes, the Sadat factor is totally ignored and justifications are sought based on other merits so that this type of marriages may be approved! Surely, without the blessing of Masomeena.s.- which we all seek in every aspect of our lives.



“Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran above all the nations. (Of all times).” Quran 33:3

This verse clearly shows that Allah (swt) has always kept the above categories above all the human beings through HIS own selection. Therefore, any deviation, through our own wishes, against laws of Allahs.w.t. in any respect, will purely be an effort to abrogate the authority of Allahs.w.t.-An act of unforgivable rebellious nature. Since the last selected descendants are of Imran, (Abu Taliba.s.) they have superiority over all the others in the statute of Allahs.w.t., it therefore, follows that their ladies have no ‘kufv’ (compatibility) outside this blessed lineage. This manifest obvious merits to the children of Prophets (as) by the same reason. Unless we stand against Allahs.w.t. we cannot prove otherwise and the Shia’s in particular are the fore bearers of this standard but sadly enough not on the above subject. The rest is left to the judgement of the readers’ vision and wisdom in drawing their conclusions.


“Mohammed is not the father of any of your men, but he is the apostle of Allah (swt) and the last of the prophets; and Allah (swt) is cognizant of all things.” 40:33
This verse clearly rejects the others as prophet’s descendants by the reason of his being the
apostle of Allah (swt) and the last of prophets. Let us cite a few more verses first and then proceed to derive the results.


“The prophet has greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, and his wives are their mothers; and the possessor of relationship have the greater claim in the ordinance of Allah (swt) to inheritance, one with respect to another, than (other) believers and those who have fled (from their homes), except that you do some good to your friends, this is written in the book.” Verse and Sura 33.


“But whoever disputes with you in the matter after what has come to you in the matter,  after what has come to your knowledge, then say; come let us call OUR SONS and YOUR sons and OUR WOMEN and YOUR women and OUR NEAR PEOPLE and YOUR near people, then let us earnest in prayers and pray for the curse of Allah on the liars.” 61:3


In the first verse no one is compatible to the children of IMRAN (as) and that prophets descendants require a still higher compatibility by virtue of being also the common descendants of both the selected descendants of Ibrahim (as) and Imran (as) with added virtue of his own highest selected nobility to this branch. This makes this descendancy most incompatible / inaccessible to all other clan.

In the second verse Allah (swt) has totally rejected the other men to be the sons of Mohammed (as) by using his name for the purpose of total emphasis.
He is not the father of any of your men, neither he was nor he is, never will be and not at all. We are not discussing the purpose of revelation of this verse to avoid lengthy arguments, even done so will certify our viewpoint. This verse also rejects all the others to have anything to do with the nobility of highest order of the prophet’s (peace be upon him) descendancy. It also proves that unlike others the prophet’s descendants are part of his prophet-hood, his finality in prophet-hood and authority.
Thus the preservation of the inaccessible sanctity of the descendant of prophets (as) is the scheme of Allah (swt), a wisdom to achieve various objectives but being beyond the scope of this subject will not be discussed.

In addition, in the third verse the wives of the prophet (as) are called to be the mothers of faithfuls, but he himself is not the father of their men. Logically he should at least be the step-father but there is no mention of this i.e. the rejection of any sort of relationship of others to Propheta.s..

Prophet’s wives were also not the actual mothers of faithfuls as they are/were required to observe ‘Hijab’ from them. Which is not required from the children from their own wombs. They were called mothers to give highest possible respect to the prophet (as) and an absolute prohibition has been declared by Allahs.w.t. to marry Propheta.s.. ‘s wives afterwards ( Sura – e – ahzab, 33rd Sura deals with this subject). It, therefore, follows that the prohibition is by the virtue of prophet (as) dignity/sanctity himself and not the inherited reason /virtue of his wives. They had no such respect prior to becoming his wives, by remaining the others wives or becoming widows and divorcees of others. But no sooner they entered into the marriage with the prophet (as) the status was elevated and prohibition became eternal even after the death of the prophet (as). Even if they lived up to the day of eternity the prohibition would still imply.

In the second part of this verse; “The possessors of relationship have the greater claim in the ordinance of Allah (swt) to inheritance, one with respect to another, than other believers ….”

Here the claim of inheritance is in general and applies to property, caliphate, respect, dignity, sanctity and descendancy. More so it applies to the prophet’s descendants as the verse opens with him and also as in common ‘Shariyya’. Hence the prophets (as) inheritance elevates his descendancy far above others having no ‘‘kufv’ ’ elsewhere. That is why the respect of Sadaat is obligatory on UMMA.

Now let us examine the fourth verse, Here Allah (swt) commands to call OUR SONS, OUR WOMEN and OURSELVES as compared to YOURS. But in the second verse it is clarified that Mohammed (peace be upon him) is not the father of YOUR men. This is a contradiction. But Quran claims to be free of contradictions and thus requires comparison and resolution.
Allah (swt) has used words ‘YOUR’ and ‘OUR’; this draws a clear line between two groups. ‘YOUR’ second person is for Umma in general and ‘OUR’ in a first person is his prophethood clan, not his clan as a person. That is, they all form the part of prophethood. That is why the prophet (as) applied the word OUR SONS, OUR WOMEN, OURSELVES on Imam Hassan (as), Imam Hussein (as) Fatima (as) and Imam Ali (as) rejecting all others in this category including his own wives, and all that under WAHEE.

In other words even the prophet’s wives are not included in the words our women (Nisa – e – Naa) and to preserve the sanctity and effectiveness of the word, it is used only once in Quran. This is a total exclusion of all other women from this verse and so is the word Sons (Abna – e – Naa) used once only. The word OUR SELVES (Unfusanaa) is also used once with reference to prophet (as). Although the address in the verse appears to be a common call but the application of the word by prophet (PBUH) under the will of Allah (swt) is contained to the limited circle of his Ahl – Al – Bayt – Unnabuva. All others including the wives of prophet (PBUH), companions, their wives and children are simply barred from the circle of the Guides. This cannot be by prophet’s (PBUH) own choice or else he would have been corrected by Allah (swt). The prophet (PBUH) simply, was under the command (WAHEE) of Allah (swt), any assumption otherwise is subject to our expulsion from IMAAN.
This narrows down to simply two points:-

a) The Ahl – Al Bait are category one termed as OUR/WE, which the prophet (PBUH) preserved throughout his life as against Umma. Sometimes he termed himself as Ahl – Al – Bait. The best examples are the traditions of Sadaqah, a prohibition for themselves and permitted for Umma in general. This fact is supported by the other three verses written above.
b) Second category includes all other followers (Umma) up to the day of eternity and even there after, as all other relationships will be severed from prophet’s (PBUH) linage. This is supported by various traditions.
Now the above discussion lays down some compelling facts:-

    a) OUR / WE are different.
    b) YOU are others and are different.
    c) WE are to be followed.
    d) YOU are committed to follow US/WE.
    e) The words Us/Ours/We are a definite line between ‘YOU’ as an eternal fact.
    f) No encroachments are permitted.
    g) Under the full text given above. In the context of our main heading we can very categorically conclude that :-

(i) A woman coming from category ‘YOU’ to ‘WE/US/OURS’ category became the sacred Mothers for ‘YOU’ group.
(ii) These women from ‘YOU’ coming across the line to ‘WE’ are more sacred than 'YOUR’ own Mothers. Normal mothers after becoming widows or divorced, are prohibited on a limited Circle of Mahrams and ‘Halal’ for marriage on all the rest. But the ones coming from YOU to WE are eternally prohibited on all the faithfuls. Yet they do not form the part of OURS/WE.
(iii) It therefore gives us the conclusion that the women in the WE/OUR/US class are still more eternally sacred than the prophet’s (PBUH) wives coming from ‘YOU’. They are the blood of prophet/prophethood, an unseverable relationship as against a relationship by convenience of marriage.

Thus the mothers in ‘YOU’ are less ‘HARAM’ than the mothers coming from ‘YOU’ to ‘WE’ and hence the women from US/WE/OUR are still more Haram. Or in order of lower to higher prohibition they will be mothers within ‘YOU’, mothers from ‘YOU’ to ‘WE/US’ and the ladies from US/OURS/WE category.

NOW IF the women from ‘YOU’ coming to WE cannot go back from ‘WE/US’ us to ‘YOU’ for the purpose of marriage then how can the women from OURS/US/WE can go from US/OURS/WE to ‘YOU’ who are more sacred than all above. ‘A’ is more Haram than ‘B’ and ‘B’ more than ‘C’, so ‘A’ is most HARAM till the day of eternity. Hence lay off/stay away till the day of eternity and even thereafter.

Another angle is that if the wives of prophet lived till the last day of this world they would have been the mothers of the faithfuls and hence their womb i.e.; daughters would have also remained their sisters of ‘A’ grade and therefore both the wives of the prophets (PBUH) and daughters would have enjoyed their status of being more and MOST HARAM ON UMMA.
Their can be a lengthy discussion through these verses but is left to the readers own views, vision, thoughts and judgement.


As has been stated before, ‘Fatwas’ are seeks from ‘Ulemah’ in order to justify a marriage of Syedah with Non-Syed. However, the presentation of such Fatwas, in case of Syedani, certainly casts a doubt on its validity. It shows that justifications were brought against he clear laws of Allahs.w.t., such marriages have not generally been approved by our community and have not been performed, as a standard practice, or else Fatwa would have not been required. Fatwa in its own definition is not the knowledge of the fact but is only an educated guess with certain element of doubt, hence these have absolutely no value against established laws of Allah swt..

In the case of marriage the factual knowledge is required or otherwise Allah swt’s ‘Harram’ will be turned into ‘Halal’ and therefore invoking Allah swt’s curse and punishment. In this instance, an utmost care must therefore be exercised.
The difference between the two major sects cast a factual doubt on this practice, further fortified by the differences amongst ‘Mujtahideen’. Some of them call it ‘HARAM’ some ‘Makruh’ and some ‘Jaiz’ whereas some talk about containing it within SYEDS, Hashmites for Hashmites etc.
These differences not only cast serious doubts on the validity of marriage of Syedani with Non-Syed but also on the basis of ‘Fatwas’ and ‘Mujtahideen’ themselves, rendering them invalid and non-effective.

Under these circumstances, it is mandatory to be careful and do not fall into the trap of Satan on the basis of unreliable fatawa and doubtful justifications. In this case a slightest doubt might drive into greatest sin and the Fatwas by definition are not free of doubt, not to speak of differences in Fatwas themselves. If we look deep into it, this in it-self becomes a major Fatwa in opposition to such marriages. What a shameful disagreement-where a Haram becomes Halal and vice versa!.


In some of these baseless Fatwa, it is generally mentioned that such marriages should be with ‘Muttaqees’ non-syeds. Why it is recommendation in the case of ‘Syedani’? This in it-self shows that the Syedanis are superior to other women in the Umma.
From the above discussion it is obvious that due to the bases of guess work, some Mujtahideen classify such marriages are Haram, Halal or Makruh. It therefore trickles down to its being at least Makruh, based on the ‘Fatawa’ extraction principles. ‘Muttaqee’ also like Mujtahids cannot be sure if it is Halal, Haram, or Makruh and hence must avoid such marriage even if he blindly follows his Mujtahid. If he does not and marry to a Syed Lady, his bewildering alone would extinguish his spirituality. Simply, as soon as he makes up his mind for such a marriage he would lose all his attributes and hence the marriage cannot take place. Logically this cannot happen and the marriage becomes null and void. It, therefore, results in making a mockery of Deen, another reason that makes even his ‘Emaan’ null and void. A fuller destruction of a Muttaqee who trusted a confused Mujtahid! So, the fabricated condition disintegrated, NO MUTTAQEE, NO MARRIAGE. The whole building was built on a fictitious foundation supported by a wobbly Mujtahid so it collapsed. So non-syed Muttaqee brother! Please STAY AWAY FROM SUCH MARRIAGE IF YOU WANT TO REMIAN WHAT YOU ARE!

Can we identify ‘Muttaqee?’

It is impossible for us to recognise the virtue of a ‘Muttaqee’ as it is only known to Masoomeen a.s. and Allah (swt). An apparently very pious person maybe in disguise ness gain worldly benefits and not for the fear of Allah (swt), a basic condition to be a ‘Muttaqee’. In addition, its time dependent virtue and a person is under a constant possibility of change. A pious person might become heinous and a wicked person through repentance might become righteous. This is a day-to-day observation. A person sunken in sins may achieve the success towards the end of his life and vice versa. A Muslim might become anything other than a muslim and so is the opposite. A ‘Muttaqee’ person may spoil his many years ‘Ibada’ for a little worldly reward, the example of this are quoted here from the Quran.

1. “And recite to them the narratives of him to whom we gave our communication but he withdrew himself from them, so the Shaitan took over him and he became of those led astray.” (175:7). “And if we had pleased we certainly would have exalted him thereby, but he clung to the earth and followed his low desire. So his example is as the example of the dog; if you attack him he lolls out his tongue and if you leave him alone he lolls out his tongue, this is the example of those who reject Ayaat; therefore relate the narrative that they may ponder over.” (176:7)

This verse concerns Wali Balam baaur who was from Bani Israel and was given Ism - E – Azam, and all his prayers were answered by virtue of this Ism. He got inclined towards pharaoh against 50 gold coins and prayed against Musa (as). Please refer to Tafseer - E – Qummi. He lost the ‘Ism’ and the rest is all very obvious in the verses themselves. These happenings are almost common and are well termed as a dog lolling out his tongue, loved or not.

2. “And Musa chose out of his people 70 men for our appointment; so when the earthquake over took them, he said: my ‘RABB’! if thou hadst pleased, thou hadst destroyed them before and myself (too); will thou destroy us for what the fools amongst us have done? It is not but thy trial, thou makest err with it whom thou pleasest and guidest whom thou pleasest: thou art our guardian, therefore forgive us and have mercy on us, and thou art the best of forgivers.” (155:7)

This verse is further supported by (55:2)

These 70 persons chosen by Musa (as) were the most pious ones as per Musa (as)’s best knowledge. As per Tafseer – E – Safi when they arrived on the mountain they told Musa (as) that they will not bring faith unless they see Allah (swt) with their own eyes and apparent. Musa (as) who was a prophet and Rasool, had been given the book, had a Sharayya, was supplemented and fortified with ‘Ismat’ by Allah (swt). If he could not make a correct choice how can a common person do so? His choice of pious ones ended up to be Munafeqeen, so how could our not be?

This example was given to Saeed Ibn – E – Jubair by Imam – E – Zamana (as) as a reason of disqualification of humans to install / appoint a caliph. In other words Imam – E – Zamana (as) has rejected the ability of all the creation to identify Muttaqee and had further supplemented the argument of uncertain choices ending up in hypocrites. Incident is citied in Hayat – ul – Qaloob book of Imamat by Allama Majlisee RA.



This common Notion as adopted by most who are in favour of this type of marriages, destroys the entire concept of family life for:-
a) It frustrates the right of man over his wife as per verse 34 Sura 4 as given in opening paragraphs. It therefore is repugnant to Islam and an unholy effort. It not only is repugnant to Islam but is also making Islam pregnant with new/own views.
b) Respect should otherwise be mutual and is recommended.
c) The incident of disrespect can occur and if the respect is made a condition it will make the marriage null and void at any time.
d) Such a condition is nowhere citied in Shariyya.
e) Slight deviation from these conditions frustrates the marriage contract and if continued will be in form of Zina and the subsequent issues will be illegitimate. Only a non – Syed can own such children and continue/think of marriages.
f) The divorce is made impossible which might become necessary, hence it is assumed that marriage will remain happy and no separation will take place. Religion is not based on assumptions. If divorced it will be an insult to the Syedani and a proof of their unhappy life, meaning that there has been no respect, hence, the marriage had remained invalid throughout.
g) In view of above since the divorce right cannot be withdrawn the marriage also cannot take place. Withdrawal of the right of divorce is repugnant to Islam.
h) Syeds are automatically immuned from above possibilities / defects.

In view of above any tendencies as cited above will open the flood gates to evil attacks on Islamic social structure, thus no chances can be taken. The author of this booklet has seen such incidents and so must have all the others. Such inherent faults must be avoided and the only solution to this is staying away from the Syedah – Syedah can only be married to Syed.


Some times another argument is put forward, based on superficial conditions, that a poor Syed may find it very difficult to provide satisfactory subsistence to a Syeda wife and hence a better-off non-syed husband may be a better choice. However, Syeds are always preferable even if at present poor. Poverty has never been of paramount consideration in the deen. One poor person approached prophet (as) complained about poverty and was advised to marry once again and then again (until third time) until his condition improved. So there is the solution.


Islam permits more than one marriage. This question can be posed only when Shariyya options are exhausted. Maintenance difficulties are solved in above topic. It is only a question of firm belief in Prophet (as) to which we invite.


This is again a worst question. As, we under no condition, marry, mothers of Momineen, own mothers, sisters and other Moharramat, similarly, non-syed cannot marry a Syedah.

These are some questions posed to the author and replied as such. It is believed that such questions are posed by many, purely to find a crack somewhere due to lack of faith, desire to play with religion and should be avoided at all costs. It will also be observed from all above and previously discussed conditions that these questions are only in case of Syedani’s and hence prove that the Syedanis do have a different status in law of Islam or even in the mind of people.


Let us first begin with marriage of Bibi Fatima (as) and making it basis proceeds for further discussion.

1. Allama Majlisee R.A. In his book Jala – ul – Uyoon states with references to Manaqab – E – Khawrzami and other books of Shias and Sunnis who have narrated it from Ameer – Al – Momeen (as), Umm – E – Salma (as) and Sulaiman – E – Farsi (r.a.) that when Fatima (as) reached the age of puberty many nobles from Quresh, the wealthiest, pious, and respected ones approached the Prophet (PBUH) to ask her hand in marriage. The prophet (PBUH) always turned his face away and expressed dislike for such requests. (chapter : Fatima’s marriage – p113)
2. Abi has narrated from some companions of prophets (PBUH). Anyone asked for the hand of Fatima (as), Prophet (pbuh) always turned his face away from him. When he wanted to get her married he spoke to Ali (as) in privacy. (Bihar volume 43 part 1 of tenth, her life history chapter. Her marriage p101).
3. Prophet (pbuh) said “Were Ali (as) not there, there would have been no ‘‘kufv’ ’ for Fatima (as).
4. Younus bin Zibian narrates that Imam Sadiq (as) said if the Ameer – Al – Momineen had not been there, there would have been no ‘kufv’ for Fatima. (Bihar volume 43 chapter 3 part 5 page 97)

The above traditions clearly prove that the ladies from OURS cannot go to YOURS group or else prophet (pbuh) would have accepted the request from YOUR class and proved the validity of any woman’s marriage with any other man’. He would not say something he would not do.

His action give following conclusions:-

a) Fatima (as) remained in WE/US category.
b) It is not possible to assume that all those desirous of this marriage were not Momins. No one other than ‘Momin’ could have dared approaching the Prophet (as) for this purpose.
c) He rejected Momins.
d) He rejected wealthies.
e) He rejected Qureshites.
f) He rejected nobles of Quresh, the best-known tribe of fame and nobility.
g) He expressed dislike on all such requests.
h) He could have said ‘No’ instead of expressing dislike.
i) He rejected through dislike all the persons with all the qualities as in c, d, e, and f, put together in anyone person.

The above points further prove that the ‘‘kufv’ ’ of Momin being Momin concerns only the Momineens of Umma and not the prophet’s (pbuh) lineage. In other words WE/US/OURS are for WE/US/OURS and not for YOU/YOURS. Any other assumption will prove contradiction in prophet’s (pbuh) words and actions, which, of course, is absolutely impossible at least for Shia’s. Unfortunately Shia’s got derailed from preserving the sanctity of prophets (pbuh) descendancy in this respect, far more than non – Shias.

Since the prophet (pbuh) is the father of the children of Fatima (as) as per tradition; “All the children are the descendants of father except for Fatima (as), I am their father and their father (inheritor) above all” (Bihar volume 43, part 1).

This exception clearly proves the superiority of Syed/Syedani category over Umma in general. That is why the respect of ‘Sadaat’ is obligatory on Umma in general even if Syed is not pious. And this is a standard scale of judgment of respect to the prophet (pbuh) himself through the descendants. There are quite a few traditions and incidents in this respect.

There are many traditions like looking at the face of Syed is an act of worship etc, which proves them a different group altogether. Thus there can be no ‘kufv’, for this group from any other group. Marriage is committing a woman to the servitude of a man, as stated in traditions and also sayings of ‘Masoomeens’. To reverse this status will undermine the basic principles of marriage bond depriving the man of his rights under Islamic law and hence an opposition to Islam and ‘kufv’.

Many of the Mujtahideen did not accept Non – Syed to be the ‘kufv’ of Syedah and called it the part of Shia Aqaaed (Belief). But the believers otherwise start talking about Hashmites which has no bearing on this subject. All the Hashmites or not the descendants of Prophet (pbuh) and the subject of Hurmat (prohibition) is only about Syeds, the Zurriyyat – E – Rasool (sa). Here most people do not take to the reasons. Even Hashimite are under obligation to respect Syeds. So much so that all the children of Ali (as), except From Hazrat Fatima (sa) are not the children of Rasool (sa). They call themselves as ALVI SADAAT and considered themselves as slaves/servants of Sadaat i.e. descendants of Prophet (pbuh). Maula Ameer – Ul – Momineen (as) himself called Hasnain (as) as Abnaa – Ar – Rasool, Prophet’s sons and included none else.

Sheikh Saddooque states that: - “Our belief about Alvis is that they are the Prophet’s descendants (children/progeny). Their Mawaddat is obligatory because this the Ajar – E – Rasaalat, and Sadaqah is prohibited on them being the cleansing part of (dirt) their Maal, except for their own amongst themselves, and they are ‘kufv’ of each other. This is due to the Prophet (pbuh) where he said on looking at the children of Ali (as) and Jaffar – E – Tayyar (as) that, OUR daughters are the equals of OUR sons and OUR sons of OUR daughters”.
He further explains that this does not concern all the children of Ali (as) but only the children from Hazrat Fatima (sa) (Shara chapter 11 rasala Fi Ihtaqaadaat Sheikh Saddooque, page 148).

In Mun la Yah Zahra Hul Faqih chapter of Nikah, page 249, under the tradition.
“Prophet (pbuh) looked at the children of Ali (as) and Jaffar (ra) and said;
“OUR daughters are for OUR sons and OUR sons for OUR daughters”; He informs that the Non – Syed is not the ‘KUFV’ of Syed even if Hashemite. This is a nail into the coffin of those who call it otherwise.

The above tradition is also given in Usool – E – Kaafi volume 5 Urdu, with slight variation. Prophet (pbuh) looked at Ali (as) and Jaffar (ra) and said; “OUR daughters are for OUR sons and OUR sons are for OUR daughters”. The same tradition is further supported by Sunni sources in their various books like Anwar – E – Namaania and Ahkaam – E – Sharayya, the books of high authenticity. This fortifies the case.

Some objections are about the marriage of Hz Zainab (as) and Hz Umme-Kulthum (as) with the sons of Hz Jaffar (as). Let us examine this weak objection through the following inferences.

1. Declaration of the status of the sons of Hz Jafar (ra) is from AAL-E-IMRAN, already selected by Allah (swt) as in verse quoted in the opening pages.
2. The Prophet (pbuh) has through out in these Hadiths used the words OURS and never YOURS, which is in conformity with the words in the opening pages stated under the explanation of Quranic verses. The sanctity of the word OUR is well preserved by him (as) and is also well established. There is no contradiction, inconsistency or refutation in this line of thinking.
3. The Prophets (as) did exactly that, a case proven from Quran. Prophet (sa) is always under Wahee and has done so under Wahee i.e. by the will of Allah (swt) not by himself as a person.
4. If we now apply our own Fatwa on the validity of the marriage of Syedani with the Non-Syed then we must fulfil the following conditions:-
• We must be Prophets.
• We must be under Wahee to declare the status of someone to qualify for such a Marriage. If we try to fulfil above conditions then we must become Kafirs and Kafirs cannot be as in i) and ii) above. Rest is left to the minds of the respected readers.
5. e. Allah (swt) can under his divine authority include or exclude the son in or descendancy as is in the case oh Nuh’s (as) son.


In brief, Isa bin Zaid Bin Imam Zain – Al – Abideen (as) was into hiding and got married with the daughter of the person he was living with who did not know that Isa bin Zaid (ra) was a Syed. A daughter was born and on reaching the marriageable age his wife got the message for the son of a well to do person who did watering services. Isa’s (ra) wife happily asked him for approval however, Isa (ra) got highly upset as he could not disclose his identity as being Syed. His wife’s continued insistence became unbearable and he prayed for the death of his daughter as a help from Allah (swt), and she died freeing him of his worries. But sorrow over came him for the reason that he could not tell her that she was the daughter of a Syed and not an ordinary labourer. And so her marriage was not valid being a none ‘kufv’. This incident is quoted in Umdat – Ul – Matalab page 278, Zaid Shaheed by Ayatullah Abd – Ar – Razzaq Najfi P177, muqaatlut-talibeen, and Chouda (fourteen) Sitaaray by Allama Syed Najamul – Hassan Kararvi page 309.


Following are the inferences from the above incident:-

a) This marriage of Syedah was not valid with a non – Syed.
b) Death of Syedah is preferred over her marriage with non – Syed.
c) Allah (swt) gave his approval by lifting her.
d) Allah (swt) also preserved the sanctity of Prophet’s (pbuh) blood.
e) The words used by Isa (ra) were that it is not permissible by reasoning of her being Syedani i.e. the child of prophet (pbuh) being not her ‘kufv’ and also approved by Allah (swt).
f) This incident took place somewhere around 145A.H. in the Imamate of Imam – e – As Sadiq (as)
g) Any Fatwa in favour of Syedahs marriage with non-Syed will be in opposition to Imams.
h) If it was invalid up to 145 A.H. (approx), than it certainly was not before and hence cannot be thereafter. Agha Syed Hassan Abtahee’s remarks in his book Anwar – E – Zahra page 137 are also the same.
i) Isa Bin Zaid (ra) was the 2nd cousin of Imam As Sadiq (as), a close companion and must have accurate Knowledge of this problem and his saying that she was Syedani and for whom her hand was asked was not her ‘kufv’ and therefore not valid (Na-Jaiz), proves our point and also that the ‘kufv’ of Syedani is within the blood of Prophet (pbuh).
j) Imam As Sadiq (as) also did not ever reject Isa’s (ra) point of view.


Inclusion of this historic anal was not necessary in “Chouda Sitarray” as far the theme of this book. Hujjat-al-Islam -Allama Najam – Ul – Hassan Kararvi (Peshawar), (RA) was a historian, researcher and an Aalim of great repute. He himself was against such Haram acts.
There are forewords of Agha-al-Ozamah Syed Muhammed Kazim -Shariyat Madar (ra) who himself was opposed to such venture and called it HARAM. If he was not, he would have not certified the book. Agha-al-Ozamah Syed Muhammed Kazim -Shariyat Madar (ra) had great following and was a Mujtahid of great repute. His disapproval of Syedani’s marriage with Non-Syed is weighty enough to demolish the opposing school of thought.


Sheikh Abbas Qummi writes in his book Muntahee – Ul – Amaal, volume 2, page 243, that Rizvi Syeds did not marry their girls because they did not find their ‘kufv’.
Imam Musa Kazim (as) had 21 daughters and all of them remained unmarried. This was a normal practice amongst these girls. Imam Mohammed Taqi (as) had bought ten agricultural properties, reserved for these unmarried girls livelihood and income used to be sent to Qum for the Syedani’s migrated from Medina to Qum.
In the history of Ibn - E – Wazih Yaqoobi volume 2, page 415 published in Qum, it is mentioned that Imam Musa Kazim (as) had willed for his daughters not to marry and hence they did not in accordance with the will.
Masooma - E - Qum, Fatima’s (sa) bint Musa Kazim (as) age according to Nuzhat – Ul – Abrar was 18 and as per reference in the ‘history of Masooma (as) page 415 by Amad Zadeh Asphahani, she was 22 at the time of her death.

Aqa – e – Duwaani writes in the forwards of history of Qum by Nasir Hussein Asharayya Published by Dar – al – Fikr Qum, Khayabani Irum, that it is established from narrations and histories that none of the daughters of Imam Musa Kazim (as) got married. The times were not favourable and we know that in those unfavourable times, Sadaat’s youth and the descendants of Abu Talib (as) were subjected to the tyranny of Banoo Abbas and were slaughtered. Non-Syeds were not compatible (‘kufv’ ) to the grand daughters of the Prophet (pbuh) and the daughters of Imams (as), that is why it is well known that Masooma – E – Qum (sa) also did not marry and died unmarried.

In Anwaar – Al – Masahaseen (book) it is mentioned that Mamoon – Ar – Rashid caliph, had a desire to marry Masooma – E – Qum and for that reason he got his daughters married to Imam Raza (as) and Imam Taqi (as). Imam Musa Kazim (as) had willed that none of his daughters was to marry without the permission of Imam Raza (as). Masooma – E – Qum (sa), in abiding with the will of the reverend father did not like to marry in non – ‘kufv’ and died.


a) The above references are quoted from Rasoom – Ash – Shia Fi Mizan Ash-Sharayya by Mohammed Hasnain Sabqi Najfi (ra).
b) This book was distributed by the secretary of Anjuman – e – Ulemae – e – Shia, Europe. We therefore assume that all above has a certificate of agreement of all the Ulemaas of Anjuman or otherwise in all the honesty the book should have not been distributed for the purpose of monetary benefits only.
c) Due to the killing of Syed youths, their numbers declined and hence the ladies of Prophet’s progeny could not marry.
d) Their ‘kufv’ were only in Syeds.
e) Imam Musa Kazim (as) would have not willed otherwise, if they could marry outside Syeds. His words are superceding authority over all Fatwas.
f) Even the closest Non-Syed companions of Imams did not qualify for this purpose.
g) A king of grandeur– Mansoor also did not qualify even being a branch of relationship.
h) It is impossible to assume that there were no Muttaqees in Imam’s companions to qualify for marriage.
i) There is no example of any requests by Imam’s companions meaning that they knew it as a prohibition.
j) If there is no ‘KUFV’ in Sadaats it is better to stay unmarried till death.
k) Traditionally the marriages were preferred on achieving the age of puberty as soon as possible but it did not happen due to non – compatibility until their death.
l) Imam’s actions speak far louder and are obligatory to be followed as against any one else’s words/Fatwas.
m) Agha Syed Hassan Abtahee after citing the virtues of Bibi Fatima Syedah – Tun – Nisa – e – Alameen (as) states that the best ‘kufv’ is in the family (blood relatives) and that is Syeda Fatima’s marriage with Non-Syed is a cause of factual differences (i.e. Ulemaas are in disagreement with each other). Anwar – e – Zahra page 66 (Urdu).
n) Agha Syed Hassan Abtahee also writes in the same book page 137; last paragraph, “the way the marriage of Syedani with non – Syed was an act of insult and reduction/ lowering the rights of Aale – Mohammed (as) in the first century, the same way, the marriage of Syedani’s with Non Syed is an act of disrespect / disgrace/ insult to and reduction of the status of Aal – E – Mohammed (as) in 15th century also.

The people who side with the believers of validity must be blind of hearts and minds or otherwise they would not establish any body over Imam, a superior position that expels one from Emaan.


These words are quoted from Usool – E – Kaafi, Kitaab – Ul – Aql, chapter 20, tradition 6. The words are part of a long tradition which should be read in conjunction with Khutba number 17 from the Nahjul Balagha, The words are:-
“He (Qazi/Mufti) made Haram wombs Halal and Halal wombs Haram with his Fatwas. The commands (ahkaam) that come from him are not of knowledge. He has no ability of factual knowledge that he claims/repeats mostly”.
These words from Ameer (as) are eye openers and must be deeply looked into. No one has so far declared the mothers, sisters, daughters and other Haram women as Halal. The words are in general and apply as a practice in general. Since Maula (as) has said so, they must also happen as he saw these problems up to eternity as an eternal truth.

Then which are those wombs declared Halal as a common application/practice. We do not find any other than Syedani’s, the children/daughters of Prophet (as).
Efforts may be made to cast the doubts but are not the facts and hence do not/cannot form the basis of such marriages. Since the practices of Imams are the guidelines, we will be more accurate to interpret as above. In case of doubts, the Prophet’s (pbuh) progeny must not be attacked. These inferences are supported by the full text of the tradition, which is an invitation to the wisdoms of thinking minds, faithfuls and believers.
Take precautions to save Emaan or else be the losers in this world and the next.
Maula Ali (as) has made no exceptions of Qazi/ Faqihs, whoever, Shias or Sunnis.


As is previously mentioned the following tradition is referred to in Furooh – e – Kafi volume 5, Bihar – Al – Anwar, Ad – Damatus – Sakiba by Agha Baqar Dahdashti Bahbani Najfi (ra) Volume 2, page 544 Urdu and Rasoom – Ush – Sharayya Fi Mizan Asharayya by Mohammed Hasnain Sabqi Najfi (ra) etc.
This is quoted here-under for final analysis. Imam As -Sadiq (as) was approached by a Khawarij and asked the hand of Syedani and Imam (as) replied:-
“Your ‘‘kufv’ is in your own blood, your own ‘Hasab’ and your own people (Qoum - قوم) and positively Allah (swt) has kept Sadaqah away from us which is the dirt of the hands of people (in general) and we hate/dislike to include in that superiority/virtue given to us by Allah (swt), someone for whom Allah (swt) has not given the virtue/superiority that he has laid down for us”.


In above tradition the matter is left to no doubt. The marriage of Syedani with Non-Syed is Haram beyond doubt. A few inferences are quoted below:-

a) Imam As – Sadiq’s (as) year of Shahada is 148 AH, the tradition shows that up to that time they hated such a request and thus always refused such approaches.
b) Since it is said by Imam (as) it cannot be differed with by any Imam (as) before and after. In fact it certifies their agreement that all hated the marriage of Syedani with Non-Syed as did prophet (pbuh).
c) Imam (as) should not have said that in opposition of Allah (swt) and HIS messenger (sa), hence Allah (swt) and prophet (pbuh) also hated such an act.
d) This tradition rejects all the false historical incident of Syedanis marriage with non-Syeds as tradition takes precedence over history or otherwise it becomes almost impossible even to prove beyond doubt the Imamate of Masoomeen from history.
e) Imam (as) has given the conditions of Syedani’s marriage and are:-
(i) Dynasty/Clan should be the same.
(ii) Qualities should be the same. References may be made to the verses; verse 22 Sura 3; Verse 61, Sura 3 and other verses given in the opening pages. Without those qualities there is no ‘kufv’ ; hence Syedani cannot marry anyone other than Syed. Those choices are by Allah (swt) and cannot be ever changed.
(iii) Blood should be same. This condition is absolutely impossible to be achieved by a non-Syed, however some imposters do claim to be Syeds without their mothers being married to Syeds and then taking birth from the seed of a Syed. Such a claim is a false accusation on their mothers and Prophet (as) has made his curse on those who change their descent on false pretext.
(iv) Sadaqah should be ‘Haram’ on those who qualify for marriage with Syedani. It is not said that those who eat Sadaqah but Sadaqah should be Halal for them whether or not they eat it. This also applies on all the ‘Umma’.

f) Imam (as) has clearly laid down two groups:-

i) Those on whom ‘Sadaqah’ is Haram.
ii) Those on whom ‘Sadaqah’ is Halal.
Hence Halal and Haram should not be mixed, if mixed even Halal will become Haram.
Two classes are also proved under the Quranic verses in the opening pages.
g) Imam (as) has used word ‘Naa’ US/WE, on whom Sadaqah is Haram. Again please refer to verses for US/WE in the opening pages. In this context of Sadaqah Prophet (pbuh) has always used words ‘US’ in all the traditions. Please refer all the books of traditions compiled by Sunnis or Shia’s alike.
h) One may try to claim only one qualification included in the above tradition but one is required to poses all of them- which is impossible for Non-Syeds.


Some Ulema have objected to this by saying that this tradition by Imam (as) was in reply to the questioner who was a Kharjee, hence it applies to Kharjees and not the others, the marriage of Syedani therefore is not objectionable with a non-Syed.


The above objection is very weak having no basis at all, there are many flaws which can be easily identified from the above comments, some of those are presented below:-

a) Imam (as) did not say for once that ‘you’ are Kharji therefore.
b) Imam (as) laid down the conditions and qualifications to be fulfilled before asking the hand of Syedanis, which can be fulfilled only by Syeds and none else.
c) If we consider it was for Kharjee only, then we will have to apply the same principle on the Imam (as) debates with Christians, Jews, Majoos, and Zindeeqs etc, about Towhead etc. While applying that principle the debates will not be HUJJAT for the muslim Umma. This will be absurdidity / ‘KUFR’ of first degree and applies to the above objection. NO Muslim of a slight fragment of Emaan, wisdom and vision can make such an objection.


We have not gone into lengthy details and have provided concise material in nutshell for the respected readers, leaving a lot to their own judgement. However final conclusion is reiterated here:-

If women from ‘YOU’ coming to ‘US’ cannot go back from ‘US’ to ‘YOU’, then how can ‘OURS’ go from ‘US’ to ‘YOU’. More so when they are ‘Most Haraam’.


Wa – Salat – o – Wa – Salamo Ala Mohammadin Wa Aalayh – Ittayabeen Uttahireen. Wal Hamdo Lillahai Rabbil Aalameen.

Author: Syed Agha Ali Abbas Shah ……