Whaling A Taqiya 1

Whal­ing A Taqiya

We recent­ly came face-to-face with the lies of a low-lev­el Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ary on the voice chan­nel Paltalk with regard to the so-called abro­gra­tion” of Qur’an, 2:256 (“There is no com­pul­sion in reli­gion…”). When this author took the micro­phone and attempt­ed to address the claims which has no basis in Qur’an­ic tafsir (com­men­tary), he was shout­ed down by the same Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ary who accused this author of com­mit­ting taqiyyah, which is exclu­sive­ly a Shia belief.

Unfor­tu­nate­ly for the mis­sion­ary, the author in ques­tion is a Sun­ni Mus­lim and hence could not be com­mit­ting taqiyyah as per the mis­sion­ary’s claims.For the Sun­ni per­spec­tive on the Shia doc­trine of taqiyyah, see this arti­cle.. The mis­sion­ary thus resort­ed to the tafsir (com­men­tary) of Sura’ al-Imraan (3):28 by Ibn Kathir from the same vol­ume (the abridged trans­la­tion) to lend sup­port” to his fur­ther mis­in­ter­pre­ta­tion of the Qur’an­ic text.

Hence our pur­pose in writ­ing this arti­cle is two-fold : what exact­ly did Ibn Kathir say with regard to the issue of taqiyyah ? What is Sun­ni Islam’s posi­tion on this exclu­sive­ly Shia doc­trine ? And what is the deal with the so-called abro­ga­tion” of Qur’an, 2:256, which the Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ary claims is no longer valid” in Islam ?

We seek to answer these ques­tions, insha’Allah.

The Deal With Taqiyyah : What Did Ibn Kathir Real­ly Say ?

The Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ary had referred to Qur’an 3:28 and relied on his copy of Ibn Kathir’s com­men­taryTafsir Ibn Kathir (abridged), Vol. 2 (Darus­salam, 2000), pp. 141 – 142 for some inter­est­ing” infor­ma­tion of taqiyyah and quot­ed it (par­tial­ly) in his speech over Paltalk when we deflect­ed the charge of taqiyyah. What he failed” to men­tion was the con­text in which this com­men­tary was made. The con­text of the com­men­tary is with regard to Mus­lims tak­ing the dis­be­liev­ers as their pro­tec­tors or polit­i­cal allies.

We, there­fore, repro­duce the whole com­men­tary here as follows.

{28. Let not the believ­ers take the dis­be­liev­ers as friends instead of the believ­ers, and who­ev­er does that, will nev­er be helped by Allah in any way, unless you indeed fear a dan­ger from them. And Allah warns you against Him­self, and to Allah is the final return.}

The Pro­hi­bi­tion of Sup­port­ing the Disbelievers

Allah pro­hib­it­ed His believ­ing ser­vants from becom­ing sup­port­ers of the dis­be­liev­ers, or to take them as com­rades with whom they devel­op friend­ships, rather than the believ­ers. Allah warned against such behav­ior when He said,

{And who­ev­er does that, will nev­er be helped by Allah in any way}

mean­ing, who­ev­er com­mits this act that Allah has pro­hib­it­ed, then Allah will dis­card him.

Sim­i­lar­ly, Allah said,

{0 you who believe ! Take not My ene­mies and your ene­mies as friends, show­ing affec­tion towards them}


{And whoso­ev­er of you does that, then indeed he has gone astray from the straight path.} [60:1]

Allah said,
{0 you who believe ! Take not for friends dis­be­liev­ers instead of believ­ers. Do you wish to offer Allah a man­i­fest proof against your­selves?} [4 : 144]


{0 you who believe ! Take not the Jews and the Chris­tians as friends, they are but friends of each oth­er. And who­ev­er befriends them, then sure­ly, he is one of them.} [5:51

Allah said, after men­tion­ing the fact that the faith­ful believ­ers gave their sup­port to the faith­ful believ­ers among the Muha­jirin, Ansar and Bedouins,

{And those Who dis­be­lieve are allies of one anoth­er, (and) if you do not behave the same, there will be Fit­nah and oppres­sion on the earth, and a great mis­chief and cor­rup­tion.} [8:73]

Allah said next,

{unless you indeed fear a dan­ger from them.}

mean­ing, except those believ­ers who in some areas or times fear for their safe­ty from the dis­be­liev­ers. In this case, such believ­ers are allowed to show friend­ship to the dis­be­liev­ers out­ward­ly, but nev­er inward­ly. For instance, Al-Bukhari record­ed that Abu Ad-Dar­da said, We smile in the face of some peo­ple although our hearts curse them.” Al-Bukhari said that Al-Hasan said, The Tuqyah is allowed until the Day of Res­ur­rec­tion.” Allah said,

{And Allah warns you against Himself.}

mean­ing, He warns you against His anger and the severe tor­ment He pre­pared for those who give their sup­port to His ene­mies, and those who have enmi­ty with His friends.…ibid.

Note the bold sen­tences in the above quote. If some­one is threat­en­ing to kill you and is only will­ing to let you go if you say or do the things he demands, then in such a dire cir­cum­stances, a per­son is per­mit­ted to say what needs to be said to save his/​her life. That is all there is to it.

Con­sid­er the exam­ple of the Amer­i­can jour­nal­ist Jill Car­rol who was recent­ly released in Iraq by mil­i­tants. While still in Iraq, she appeared on tele­vi­sion prais­ing the mil­i­tants who kid­napped her and mur­dered her trans­la­tor. Lat­er, once she was released and returned to Amer­i­ca, she said that she was demand­ed to say those types of things, or else her life would have been in dan­ger. Can any­one blame her for doing that and for say­ing the things she said in Iraq ?

Like­wise, Ibn Kathir explains that in such a sit­u­a­tion, where you are being threat­ened with vio­lence and you are not strong enough to defend your­self, a per­son may say cer­tain things so that the aggres­sor would not harm him/​her. Ibn Kathir does not state any­where that you can just lie for fun” or when­ev­er you want to. Nor is this act specif­i­cal­ly named as a doc­trine” called taqiyyah.

In the Qur’an we also read (16:106):

Who­ev­er dis­be­lieved in Allah after his belief, except him who is forced there­to and whose heart is at rest with Faith but such as open their breasts to dis­be­lief, on them is wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a great tor­ment.” (Yusuf Ali)

Ibn Kathir has this to say in the abridged commentary :

{except one who was forced while his heart is at peace with the faith}

This is an excep­tion in the case of one who utters state­ments of dis­be­lief and ver­bal­ly agrees with the Mushrikin because he is forced to do so by the beat­ings and abuse to which he is sub­ject­ed, but his heart refus­es to accept what he is say­ing, and he is, in real­i­ty at peace with his faith in Allah and His Mes­sen­ger(P).

The schol­ars agreed that if a per­son is forced into dis­be­lief, it is per­mis­si­ble for him to either go along with them in the inter­ests of self-preser­va­tion, or to refuse, as Bilal did when they were inflict­ing all sorts of tor­ture on him, even plac­ing a huge rock on his chest in the intense heat and telling him to admit oth­ers as part­ners with Allah. He refused, say­ing, Alone, Alone.” And he said, By Allah, if I knew any word more annoy­ing to you than this, I would say it.” May Allah be pleased with him.

Sim­i­lar­ly, when the Liar Musaylimah asked Habib bin Zayd Al-Ansari, Do you hear wit­ness that Muham­mad is the Mes­sen­ger of Allah?” He said, Yes.” Then Musaylimah asked, Do you bear wit­ness that I am the mes­sen­ger of Allah?” Habib said, I do not hear you.” Musaylimah kept cut­ting him, piece by piece, but he remained stead­fast insist­ing on his words.

It is bet­ter and prefer­able for the Mus­lim to remain stead­fast In his reli­gion, even if that leads to him being killed, as was men­tioned by Al-Hafiz lbn Asakir in his biog­ra­phy of Abdul­lah bin Hud­hih Al-Sah­mi, one of the Com­pan­ions.…ibid., Vol. 5, p. 530.

And so, accord­ing to Ibn Kathir, if some­one is being com­pelled and forced, then they can do and say cer­tain things — even pre­tend to renounce Islam — in order to save their lives, although it is prefer­able they face the tor­ture and stick to Islam.

The Qur’an clear­ly speaks against lying and acts of decep­tion in numer­ous pas­sages and in Islam lying is absolute­ly wrong and condemned.

Woe to every wicked liar.” (Qur’an, 45:7)

Allah will say : This is the Day when the truth­ful­ness of the truth­ful will ben­e­fit them. They will have Gar­dens with rivers flow­ing under them, remain­ing in them time­less­ly, for­ev­er and ever. Allah is pleased with them, and they are pleased with Him. That is a Great Vic­to­ry.” (Qur’an, 5:119)

Any­one who com­mits an error or an evil action, and then ascribes it to some­one inno­cent, bears the weight of slan­der and clear wrong­do­ing.” (Qur’an, 4:112)

They are peo­ple who lis­ten to lies and con­sume ill-got­ten gains. If they come to you, you can either judge between them or turn away from them. If you turn away from them, they can­not harm you in any way. But if you do judge, judge between them just­ly. Allah loves the just. (Qur’an, 5:42)

Why, when you heard it, did you not, as male and female believ­ers, instinc­tive­ly think good thoughts and say : This is obvi­ous­ly a lie?” Why did they not pro­duce four wit­ness­es to it ? Since they did not bring four wit­ness­es, in Allah’s sight they are liars. Were it not for Allah’s favor to you and His mer­cy, both in this world and the Here­after, a ter­ri­ble pun­ish­ment would have afflict­ed you for your plung­ing head­long into it [slan­der]. You were bandy­ing it about on your tongues, your mouths utter­ing some­thing about which you had no knowl­edge. You con­sid­ered it to be a triv­ial mat­ter, but in Allah’s sight, it is immense. Why, when you heard it, did you not say : We have no busi­ness speak­ing about this. Glo­ry be to You ! This is a ter­ri­ble slan­der!”? (Qur’an, 24:12 – 16)

O you who believe ! If a devi­a­tor brings you a report, scru­ti­nize it care­ful­ly in case you attack peo­ple in igno­rance and so come to great­ly regret what you have done. (Qur’an, 49:6)

Do not say about what your lying tongues describe : This is law­ful and this is for­bid­den,” invent­ing lies against Allah. Those who invent lies against Allah are not suc­cess­ful. (Qur’an, 16:116)

Who could do greater wrong than those who lie about Allah and deny the truth when it comes to them ? Do the unbe­liev­ers not have a dwelling place in Hell ? (Qur’an, 39:32)

On the Day of Ris­ing you will see those who lied against Allah with their faces black­ened. Do not the arro­gant have a dwelling place in Hell ? (Qur’an, 39:60)

Say : Peo­ple who invent lies against Allah will not be suc­cess­ful.” (Qur’an, 10:69)

Look how they invent lies against Allah. That suf­fices as an out­right sin. (Qur’an, 4:50)

Hence what the mis­sion­ary has claimed about the con­cept of taqiyyah in Islam is a false lie and goes against the spir­it of the Qur’an. One can also see the numer­ous state­ments by the Prophet(P) against lying and liars, as well as the state­ments of Mus­lim schol­ars against lying and liars.

Qur’an 2:256 : Where is the Abrogation ?

Now we come to the gist of the whole issue, name­ly the so-called abro­ga­tion” of Qur’an 2:256. The Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ary cit­ed Ibn Kathir’s com­men­tary to this verse in order to prove” that this verse was abro­gat­ed” accord­ing to Ibn Kathir. How­ev­er, Ibn Kathir does not say in the abridged com­men­tary that this verse has been abro­gat­ed, which is con­trary to the mis­sion­ary claim on Paltalk.

We cite the rel­e­vant pas­sage as follows.

No Com­pul­sion in Religion

Allah said,

{There is no com­pul­sion in reli­gion}, mean­ing, Do not force any­one to become Mus­lim, for Islam is plain and clear. and its proofs and evi­dence are plain and clear. There­fore, there is no need to force any­one to embrace Islam. Rather, who­ev­er Allah directs to Islam, opens his heart for it and enlight­ens his mind, will embrace Islam with cer­tain­ty. Who­ev­er Allah blinds his heart and seals his hear­ing and sight, then he will not ben­e­fit from being forced to embrace Islam.”

It was report­ed that the Ansar were the rea­son behind reveal­ing this Ayah, although its indi­ca­tion is gen­er­al in mean­ing. Ibn Jarir record­ed that Ibn Abbas said [that before Islam], When (an Ansar) woman would not bear chil­dren who would live, she would vow that if she gives birth to a child who remains alive, she would raise him as a Jew. When Banu An-Nadir (the Jew­ish tribe) were evac­u­at­ed [from Al-Mad­i­nah], some of the chil­dren of the Ansar were being raised among them, and the Ansar said, We will not aban­don our chil­dren.” Allah revealed,

{There is no com­pul­sion in reli­gion. Ver­i­ly, the right path has become dis­tinct from the wrong path}

Abu Daud and An-Nasa’i also record­ed this hadith.

As for the Hadith that Imam Ahmad record­ed, in which Anas said that the Mes­sen­ger of Allah(T) said to a man,

{“Embrace Islam.” The man said, I dis­like it.” The Prophet(P) said, Even if you dis­like it.”}

First, this is an authen­tic Hadith, with only three nar­ra­tors between Imam Ahmad and the Prophet(P). How­ev­er, it is not rel­e­vant to the sub­ject under dis­cus­sion, for the Prophet(P) did not force that man to become Mus­lim. The Prophet(P) mere­ly invit­ed this man to become Mus­lim, and he replied that he does not find him­self eager to become Mus­lim. The Prophet(P) said to the man that even though he dis­likes embrac­ing Islam, he should still embrace it, ?for Allah will grant you sin­cer­i­ty and true intent.‘ibid., pp. 30 – 31

The fol­low­ing points are to be not­ed in order to under­stand the above pas­sage by Ibn Kathir :

    1. Accord­ing to Ibn Kathir, the verse is a gen­er­al statement.
    2. Ibn Kathir states that no one is to be forced to become a Mus­lim. It is a per­son­’s choice to accept or reject Islam.
    3. Ibn Kathir does not state any­where in this com­men­tary that this pas­sage has been abro­gat­ed.”

There­fore there is no basis in the mis­sion­ary claim that this verse was abro­gat­ed” accord­ing to Ibn Kathir.

What About the Chris­t­ian Taqiyyah”?

While Islam does not have any notion of a taqiyyah except in the minds of those who whale about it, in Chris­tian­i­ty we find an inter­est­ing exam­ple of how one can resort to taqiyyah. Name­ly, the exam­ple of Paul of Tar­sus, who was not only a schem­ing imposter, but a hyp­ocrite and a false prophet. Such is the taqiyyah resort­ed to by this man that he said thus :

But be it so, I did not bur­den you : nev­er­the­less being crafty, I caught you with guile.” (2 Corinthi­ans 12:16)

Now here is a per­son who open­ly admits that he uses guile (under­stood as decep­tion or lying) in order to spread his mes­sage. Is this the kind of man that the Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ar­ies expect us to follow ?

Anoth­er pas­sage clear­ly dis­plays the flip-flop men­tal­i­ty of this Great Deceiv­er from Tarsus :

To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews ; to those under the law I became as one under the law — though not being myself under the law — that I might win those under the law. To those out­side the law I became as one out­side the law — not being with­out law toward God but under the law of Christ — that I might win those out­side the law.” (I Corinthi­ans 9:20)

Geza Ver­mes, a for­mer Chris­t­ian who is one of the lead­ing schol­ars in his­tor­i­cal Jesus research today, says :

He [Paul] could also be cal­cu­lat­ing and ready to com­pro­mise : To the Jews I became as a Jew…to those under the law I became as one under the law…To those out­side the law I became as one out­side the law…I have become all things to all men’…Or in short, I try to please all men in every­thing I do’ (I Cor. 10:33).“Geza Ver­mes, The Chang­ing Faces of Jesus (Pen­guin Books, 2000), p. 66. Ital­ics are by Vermes.

Paul’s decep­tive method­ol­o­gy of win­ning” con­verts result­ed in him being viewed as an oppor­tunist by the Jews :

His goal is not self-grat­i­fi­ca­tion but the inter­ests of the gospel, and in par­tic­u­lar the desire to win’ con­verts. Like a dem­a­gogue who enslaves him­self to the pop­u­lace to com­paign for their rights, Paul has delib­er­ate­ly renounced rights and demeaned him­self to advance the cause of the gospel (v. 19). His self-sac­ri­fice is first illus­trat­ed by the chief char­ac­ter­is­tic of his mis­sion, his cross-cul­tur­al adapt­abil­i­ty (vv. 20 – 1). Among the Jews he could live like a Jew ; that is, among the law-obser­vant he observes the law, although not con­sid­er­ing him­self utter­ly bound to it (v. 20). The pur­pose is to win Jews for the gospel ; for, although his call was to the Gen­tiles’ (Rom 1:5), Paul still asso­ci­at­ed with Jews, as his syn­a­gogue vis­its tes­ti­fies (2 Cor 11:24). Sim­i­lar­ly, for Gen­tiles out­side the law’ Paul lived in a Gen­tile fash­ion, although in truth not law­less before God, but under full oblig­a­tion to Christ (v. 21, under Christ’s law’; no code of teach­ing is here envis­aged). Again the pur­pose is to win Gen­tiles, the task in which Paul was so suc­cess­ful, though at the cost of his rep­u­ta­tion among most fel­low Jews, who took his adapt­abil­i­ty to be mere­ly oppor­tunism (Gal 1:10).“John Bar­ton, John Mud­di­man (eds.), The Oxford Bible Com­men­tary (Oxford Uni­ver­si­ty Press, 2001), p. 1123

Now here is a per­son who can be right­ful­ly charged with the prac­tice of a Chris­t­ian taqiyyah. Such a lying, sin­ful per­son is not wor­thy to be con­sid­ered as a fol­low­er of Jesus(P), much less an apos­tle. Only a prod­uct of Satan will resort to such lies and trick­ery to spread their message.

For more infor­ma­tion, please see Lying In Chris­tian­i­ty.


We have cit­ed from Ibn Kathir and showed how his com­men­tary was mis­used by a low-lev­el mis­sion­ary who whales about taqiyyah and abro­ga­tion and yet end­ed up cit­ing texts which do not sup­port his claims. Hence we are oblig­ed to ask, from where did he get his pop­py­cock sto­ries from ? One won­ders why was this per­son wail­ing about taqiyyah and a so-called abro­ga­tion” when nei­ther one exist­ed in the pas­sages we have cit­ed above.

It is obvi­ous that this rabid mis­sion­ary has no idea on what he was talk­ing about and was just whal­ing for some sort of argu­ment in order to smear Mus­lims with and tar­nish their claims. In log­i­cal fal­la­cy cir­cles, this is called poi­son­ing the well and an ad hominem attack. Per­haps the Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ary should return to his Log­ic 101 class­es to learn the fin­er points of debat­ing instead of resort­ing to wail­ing about taqiyyah or cut­ting his oppo­nent off from the micro­phone when his oppo­nent is speaking.

And only God knows best. Whaling A Taqiya 2Endmark

Cite this arti­cle as : Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi, Whal­ing A Taqiya,” in Bis­mi­ka Allahu­ma, Decem­ber 9, 2006, last accessed Feb­ru­ary 28, 2024, https://​bis​mikaal​lahu​ma​.org/​p​o​l​e​m​i​c​a​l​-​r​e​b​u​t​t​a​l​s​/​w​h​a​l​i​n​g​-​a​-​t​a​q​i​y​y​ah/





11 responses to “Whal­ing A Taqiya”

  1. Junaid Avatar

    Dear Gajibur,

    I think your out­burst against Denis is quite unjus­ti­fied in this instance. He was cor­rect to point out that accord­ing to Bin Baz, the ayah there is no com­pul­sion in reli­gion” has been abro­gat­ed. You can­not pos­si­bly blame Denis for this. He is not respon­si­ble for Bin Baz’s opin­ion, unless you can prove that Denis caused Bin Baz to regard the ayah abro­gat­ed. You are mere­ly shoot­ing the messenger.

    You said that, You des­per­ate­ly hold onto a very small minor­i­ty of mus­lims who have a dif­fer­ent view regard­ing that verse.” But this is not what Denis did. He did not argue for the cor­rect­ness of this view. Let me quote him :

    Now, in no way am I argu­ing that every oth­er Mus­lim should agree with Bin Baaz, nor am I try­ing to por­tray Islam­ic exe­ge­sis as monolithic.”

    So I hope you attempt to read him care­ful­ly the next time.

    You regard the non-abro­ga­tion of this ayah as a very small minor­i­ty of mus­lims who have a dif­fer­ent view regard­ing that verse.” I AGREE WITH THIS.

    A small num­ber of schol­ars, such as Bin Baz and some ear­li­er schol­ars, deemed this ayah to be abro­gat­ed. But accord­ing to the schol­ar­ly con­cen­sus, the ayah is not abro­gat­ed. Its rul­ing stands.

    The mis­sion­ary Shamoun, who is a com­pul­sive liar, claimed that Ibn Kathir regard­ed this pas­sage to be abro­gat­ed. But, as shown, this was a lie.

    As with regards to Takiyah, in Sun­ni Islam that is not tak­en as a green light to tell lies. Its appli­ca­tion is as fol­lows : if some­one is about to kill you and says he would not do so if you meet his demand, such as, for exam­ple, renounce Islam, then you may do so. God knows your dire cir­cum­stance and would not con­sid­er this to be a sin. Peri­od. What is wrong” with this ?

    Shamoun’s claim in oth­er rant­i­ngs of his bor­der on the absurd. He cites tra­di­tions which per­mit decep­tion in WARFARE. Yet this is a method fol­lowed by ALL armies on this plan­et. The mod­ern Amer­i­can mil­i­tary, for instance, does every­thing it can to mis­lead the ene­mey and prop­a­gate dis­in­for­ma­tion towards them in order to main­tain an upper-hand and defeat them. This is what all armies do. Shamoun would, pre­sum­ably, have no prob­lems” with this ; it is only that he has prob­lems” when Mus­lim armies prac­tice this. Again, this is only applied in war sit­u­a­tions, it is no gen­er­al rule or a per­mis­sion to lie for what­ev­er reason.

    Shamoun’s absur­di­ty is clear because he uses the above to make a broad gen­er­al­iza­tion, sug­gest­ing that this shows” Mus­lims can tell lies when­ev­er they like. This is a dis­tor­tion. Islam­ic teach­ings are clear about the sin of lying and deception.

    Oth­er exam­ples of his down­right ridicu­lous and laugh­able rea­son­ing are too numer­ous and too sil­ly to even mention.

    I am amazed that such a men­tal­ly shal­low char­ac­ter, not to men­tion a vul­gar per­son­al­i­ty, is pop­u­lar among some extrem­ist Chris­tians. For an orga­ni­za­tion whose pur­pose is to intro­duce the gospel” to the Mus­lims, Shamoun is a major embar­rass­ment and makes their job so difficult.

  2. Gajibur rahman Avatar
    Gajibur rahman

    Denis Giron, you real­ly are quite a des­per­ate soul aren’t you. The verse which say there is no com­pul­sion in reli­gion” has not been abro­gat­ed accord­ing to most mus­lims. You des­per­ate­ly hold onto a very small minor­i­ty of mus­lims who have a dif­fer­ent view regard­ing that verse. Clear­ly you do this because they help in your efforts to demonise the mus­lims as intol­er­ant peo­ple. My advice to you is to be less des­per­ate, that way you wont look like a des­per­ate clown.

    Heri Nurheryawan, The verse there is no com­pul­sion in reli­gion” is not con­tra­dic­to­ry in my opin­ion, as far as i know it has noth­ing to do with prayers or fast­ing. The verse is say­ing no one can be forced into the islam­ic religion.

  3. shadowofears Avatar

    (Taqiyya has been a part of Islam, ever since It’s Cre­ation. And if Taqiyya Is an act of Kufr”, as the the Author so claims, Then the Prophet would be the First Per­son to be charged with such accu­sa­tion since he Kept his faith for him­self for the first three years of his Da’wa” in Mecca)In response to this i will say that Prophet did­nt keep his faith to him­self as my above fel­low clear­ly mis­un­der­stood it but He preached his mes­sage start­ing from his friends and fam­i­ly members.Those who fol­low Taqiyyah have just mis­in­ter­pret­ed Quran (sad­ly).

  4. A.M. Avatar

    Taqiyya has been a part of Islam, ever since It’s Cre­ation. And if Taqiyya Is an act of Kufr”, as the the Author so claims, Then the Prophet would be the First Per­son to be charged with such accu­sa­tion since he Kept his faith for him­self for the first three years of his Da’wa” in Mecca.

    Not only that. If any­thing, it is Sun­ni Imams and “ Aal­ims” that are the Biggest Prac­ticers of Taqiyya”. How many times have you heard a Sun­ni Aal­im prais­ing their Cor­rupt and Immoral Lead­ers, in con­trast to Shi’ite ones???

    Some of You asked for some Shi’ite Mate­r­i­al about
    Taqiyya”.….Here you go :


    See also :

    The Creed of Shi’a Explained, with a spe­cial Chap­ter on Taqiyya”.


    It’s REAL def­i­n­i­tion from the Quran, and the Sun­nah, and the peo­ple who prac­ticed it through­out the Ages. Take sto­ries from ACTUAL Shi’ites, not from igno­rant, rant­i­ng bash­ers like the Author, and the igno­rant, lack­ies and their juve­nile rants

    here’s some real read­ing with proofs, bet­ter than the Wah­habi, Petro-Dol­lar Horse$hit Pro­pa­gan­da this Pseu­do-Pun­dit calls Replies”.

  5. ak47 Avatar

    these shi­a’s are to blame. kufaars blame us for doing taqqiyah’ for some­thing THEY (the shias) do… wow.

  6. Heri Nurheryawan Avatar
    Heri Nurheryawan

    No com­pul­sion in reli­gion” is total­ly ilog­i­cal because there are always com­pul­sion in reli­gion. Such as you have to pray 5 times a day or you go to hell. In Mekah if you don’t go to pray the secu­ri­ty will beat you with the stick. But the Quran is true because the true mean­ing is not reli­gion but ways.

    No com­pul­sion in ways” this is log­ic. And between the good way and bad way is clear. Allah give mankind the free­dom of choice of their way, whether he choose the bad or the god ones. There no such thing as good reli­gion or bad reli­gion ? every reli­gions claim to be good but is it true ?

    Accord­ing to Quran the good way is to sur­ren­der (islam) to God . So islam is not reli­gion but it is sim­ply a good way, and that is suren­der. How you explain who­ev­er you are from Jews, Nashara or Sabi­ens (in oth­er word = all mankind) as long as you sur­ren­der (islam) and believe in the after­life then you will be safe”

    How come Jews, Nashara and sabi­ens doing 5 times rit­u­al as you does accord­ing to your reli­gion in the name of Islam ?

    You guys abuse the word islam in Quran and cre­ate your own reli­gion just like crhis­t­ian abuse teh real bible and cre­ate their own reli­gion. Jews also the same.

    Islam is NOT reli­gion, is the WAY. Ways can be good or bad. It is your choice but the out­come you will gain after life and God decide where you go. This is the main teach of Quran.

  7. Denis Giron Avatar
    Denis Giron

    While this is not entire­ly rel­e­vant to your arti­cle (though I do believe it is some­what rel­e­vant), it might be worth not­ing that it seems the posi­tion that the rel­e­vant pas­sage in Soorat al-Baqara which reads laa ikra­ha fee’d-Deen has been abro­gat­ed is not entire­ly unheard of among Mus­lims. It seems even the some­what infa­mous Shaykh Bin Baaz took this position :

    [you can get an Eng­lish trans­la­tion by chang­ing the last three char­ac­ters of the URL to eng’]

    Now, in no way am I argu­ing that every oth­er Mus­lim should agree with Bin Baaz, nor am I try­ing to por­tray Islam­ic exe­ge­sis as mono­lith­ic. I am sim­ply not­ing the above as an inter­est­ing his­tor­i­cal note rel­e­vant to your arti­cle (or at least your dis­cus­sion with the rel­e­vant Chris­t­ian on Paltalk).

  8. danny Avatar

    Syed M, why don’t you offer a link where we can see how Shias explain Taqiyah ?

  9. syed M Avatar
    syed M

    akhi shias do not believe that you can do taqiyyah at any­time. What you are claim­ing is not even part of Shia Aqi­dah. I rec­om­mend you study taqiyyah from the point of view shia ula­ma, and not from hos­tile ulama.

  10. syed M Avatar
    syed M

    Assala­mu Alaikum

    It might be smart to actu­al­ly study what the Shia per­spec­tive on Taqiyyah is, instead of using a link which is ded­i­cat­ed to mak­ing Shias look­ing bad with out under­stand­ing the his­to­ry of taqiyyah amongst Shia Muslims.


    Thats just my 2 cents

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *