Although this topic is not directly related to the topic of Nikah al-Mut’ah, but since we have observed that whenever the topic of Muta’h is discussed, some of our opponents find it apt to also bring topics such as sodomy and homosexuality into discussion, therefore we find ourselves compelled to discuss and finish off all such allegations in this very article. We have divided this chapter into two parts:
[1]. Nasibi propaganda regarding sodomy with women
[2]. Nasibi allegations that Shias endorse homosexuality
Whether or not Islam allows a husband to sodomise his wife is an issue that falls within the ambit of Fiqh and it is quite possible for different opinions to even emerge on Fiqh issues from different scholars of the same school. The issue of sodomy is one such case in point, yet we have observed that some narrow-minded and noxious Nawasib have used this issue to conduct propaganda against Shias and give an impression to their naïve masses that Shia Fiqh sodomy and this is tantamount to Kufr and total shamelessness. What these Nawasib do not tell their adherents is that was not just the view of their beloved Sahaba, Tabyeen and other Salaf scholars some led by example and practiced what they preached! Contrary to Nawasib opinion, and despite the presence of Shia Hadiths narrated by Imam of Ahlulbayt [as], the vast bulk of Shia scholars have always been of the opinion that sodomy with one’s wife is at best Makruh or at worst Haram.
Inshallah we will expand on Shia view of the issue later but let us present the Nasibi propaganda and then reveal the opinions of the founding fathers of their own school on the issue which shall leave them embarrassed if they by chance have some shame.
In his book ‘Hurmat Mutah’ page 37 Deobandi scholar Maulana Muhammad Ali Janbaz says:
“An analysis of the Fiqh leads one to conclude that this Fiqh is devoid of humanity and shame, there books have narrations that a reader become ashamed, and you place you hands on your ears and recite Tauba. How can a Fiqh that deems itself the blessed one have such a filthy aqeedah. We shall expose their filthy faces from their books, so that people can decide whether this Fiqh is blessed with Paradise or falls outside of the realms of Islam and humanity…Sodomy is permissible in the Shi’a MadhabSodomy is a filthy unnatural act, deemed bad by Muslim and Kaffir alike, but may one sacrifice oneself for the Shi’a religion which deems this filthy act permissible.”
We have dedicated this chapter to this filthy Nasibi, and we shall present from the books of Ahl’ul Sunnah those Salaf that were pioneers in this practise.
The Salafi website www.allaahuakbar.net states:
[23] “(Narrated) al-Hussain bin Ali bin Yaqteen said: I asked Abul-Hassan about the permissibility for the man to have anal sex with women, he said: It was made halal (permissible) in the Book of Allah, when (Prophet) Lot said: 11:78 Here are my daughters, they are purer for you and he knew it was not the vagina they were after.” [Tafseer al-Ayyashi, vol.1, p.157; Bihaar al-Anwaar vol.21, p.98; Tafseer al-Burhaan vol.2, p.230][24] Narrated Abdullah bin Abi Ya’foor: I asked Abu Abdullah about approaching women thru their anus, he said: No Problem. He then recited: 2:223 Your women are as tilth unto you, so approach your tilth when (or how) ye will .” [Tafseer al-Ayyashi, vol.1, p.110; Bihaar al-Anwaar Baqir al-Majlisi, vol.23, p.98; al-Burhaan fee Tafseer al-Qur'an: Hashim al-Bahraani, vol.1, p.219; Wasaa'il al-Shi'a: al-Hur al-Amily, vol.3, chpater 73: An-Nikaah wa Aadabuh]
According to a Sunni source, Umar indulged in sodomy and subsequently expressed regret and confided with Holy Prophet [s] thence Allah (swt) was forced to legitimise this practise in Surah Baqra verse 223 popularly known as verse of Al-Harth. Allamah Nisaburi records this commentary in his famed work Tafseer Gharaib al-Quran popularly known as Tafseer Nisaburi, Volume 2 page 45:
“Ibn Abbas narrates that Umar went to Allah’s messenger (s) and said: ‘O Allah’s messenger, I am destroyed! Allah’s messenger (s) asked: ‘What thing has destroyed you?’ Umar replied: ‘Last night I changed the direction’. Allah’s messenger (s) did not give any reply to Umar, then Allah (swt) sent down this revelation [i.e. 2:223]. ‘Changing the direction’ is a figurative sentence, it has been said that it means that he had performed intercourse in an unusual place (the anus)”
The author has later advanced another interpretation of Umar’s sentence which is about going in from rear angle and not in anus, but we are more concerned with the fact that the interpretation that Umar used anus was not ruled out.
As evidence please consult the following authentic Sunni texts:
Here is the direct quote from Tafseer Durre Manthur:
Hasan bin Sufiyan in his Musnad, Tabarani in Al-Awsat, Hakim and Abu Naeem in Al-Mastakhraj with a ‘Hasan’ chain of narration narrated from Ibn Umar who said: ‘This verse was revealed on Holy Prophet (s) in respect to permissibility of performing sex in the anus of a woman’
Imam Tabari records Ibn Umar’s commentary on verse of Al-Harth:
Naf’i narrated that Ibn Umar said: ‘‘{Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will}’ in the anus’
Here we deem it apt to mention the Tahreef committed by Imam Bukhari who recorded the same thing from Ibn Umar but did not record the “in the anus” portion, we read in Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 50:
Narrated Nafi’: Whenever Ibn ‘Umar recited the Qur’an, he would not speak to anyone till he had finished his recitation. Once I held the Qur’an and he recited Surat-al-Baqara from his memory and then stopped at a certain Verse and said, “Do you know in what connection this Verse was revealed? ” I replied, “No.” He said, “It was revealed in such-and-such connection.” Ibn ‘Umar then resumed his recitation. Nafi added regarding the Verse:–”So go to your tilth when or how you will” Ibn ‘Umar said, “It means one should approach his wife in ..”
‘in’ what? Readers should be able to fill in the blanks by now. Still we would like to point out that Ibn Hajar Asqalani while making commentary on the above mentioned tradition of Bukhari completed the sentence that was intentionally left by Bukhari:
في إتيان المرأة في دبرها
“Approach his wife in her anus”
Fatah ul Bari, Volume 8 page 190
Some Nawasib have tried to come to aod of their beloved Sahabi Ibn Umar through an excuse that the narrator namely Naf’i was mistaken when he narrated the edict of Ibn Umar about the legitimacy of sodomy. To such morons we would like to remind them that Naf’i was not the only person to have narrated the fatwa of Abdullah Ibn Umar, as Imam Tabari has stated:
فقال مالك : أشهد على يزيد بن رومان أنه أخبرني , عن سالم بن عبد الله , عن ابن عمر مثل ما قال نافع
Malik stated: “I testify that Yazid bin Roman narrated to me from Salem bin Abdullah from Ibn Umar like what Naf’i has narrated”
Also:
فقال مالك: أشهد على ربيعة لأخبرني عن ابي الحباب عن ابن عمر مثل ما قال نافع
Malik said: “I testify that Rabea narrated to me from Abi al-Habaab from Ibn Umar like what Naf’e has narrated”
The aforementioned stance of Abdullah Ibn Umar on the permissibility of performing sodomy with one’s wife was so affirmed that we read in Tafsir Dur al-Manthur:
“Ibn Abdul Barr stated: ‘Traditions wherein Ibn Umar believed in sodomy with women are known, Sahih and popular’”.
Similarly, Alusi while commenting upon the reports regarding Ibn Umar’s aforementioned stance on sodomy has stated:
والأخبار عنه في ذلك صحيحة مشهورة،
“Such traditions are Sahih and popular”
Please see the following Sunni sources:
Quoting directly from Nail al-Awtar:
“Sodomy with women is the statement of the jurists of Madina”
Let us now present statement from a book considered revered in the Deobandi cult that Janbaz himself adhered to. Qadhi Thanaullah Pani Patti Uthmani in his esteemed work Tafseer Mazhari stated:
“The statement by the people [jurists] of Madina regarding the to sodomise one’s wife is also there”
Ibn Katheer in his Tafseer also stated:
“This statement has been attributed to a group of Madina’s jurists”
We read in Tafseer Qurtubi, Volume 3 page 93:
“This statement has been attributed to Saeed bin al-Musayab, Nafee, Ibn Umar, Muhammad bin Kaad al-Qurzi, Abdulmalik bin Majeshoon and Malik”
We further read:
“Ibn al-Arabi mentioned that ibn Sh’aban attributed this statement to a large group of Sahaba and Tabeen”
Please see the following Sunni texts:
We read in Tafseer Durre Manthur:
“Shafiyee was asked about it and he said: ‘No authentic narration from the prophet (pbuh) clarifies whether it is permissible or not, therefore according to conjecture [Qiyas] it is permissible”
We read in Mukhtasar al-Mazni:
“Shafiyee may Allah’s mercy be upon him said: ‘Some of our companions deem it permissible to sodomise women while others deemed it impermissible’”.
Ibn Abi Malika was a famous Tabayee. Imam Dhahabi has stated that he was “Imam, Hujjah, Hafiz” and ‘was a scholar, Mufti, hadith narrator and skillful’ (Siar alam al-Nubala, Volume 5 page 89). About this great Imam of Ahle Sunnah, we read in Tafseer Durre Manthur, Volume 1 page 638:
“Ibn Abi Malika was asked about sodomy with women, he answered: ‘Last night I practiced sodomy with my slave girl, penetration became difficult hence I sought the assistance of oil”
We read in the following Sunni sources:
Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti records:
Abu Sulayman al-Gurgani said: ‘I asked Malik bin Anas about sodomy with women, he replied: ‘I just did this act and have just washed my head’
Allamah Alusi has recorded it in this manner:
Al-Khatib recorded from Abi Sulayman al-Jawzjani that he asked him (Malik) about it, thus he replied: ‘Just now I washed my sexual organ because of it’.
Imam Ibn Qudamah records Malik’s view on sodomy in his authortiy work Al-Mughni:
Malik said: “I never met someone I deem a role model in religion who doubts that it is Halal”
In Tafseer Fatah al-Qadeer, we read more elaborated version of the above cited statement of Imam Malik:
Tahawi said: Asbagh bin al-Faraj narrated from Abdulrahman bin al-Qasim that he [Malik] said: ‘I never met someone I deem a role model in religion who doubts that it is Halaal, means entering a woman in her anus’, then he [Malik] recited ‘{your women are a tilth for you}’, then he [Malik] said: ‘What could be more clear than this’.
Ahkam al Quran al-Jasas:
Abu Bakr said: ‘It is well known that Malik allowed it but his companions deny it because it was a very nasty statement, in fact it is well known and cannot be denied by their denial’
Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani in his book Talkhis al-Habir, Volume 3 page 186 while recording the views of Sunni scholars about sodomy wrote about a Maliki scholar Qadhi Abu Muhammad Abdullah bin Ibrahim al-Asili (d. 392) sated:
“Qadhi Abu Muhammad Abdullah bin Ibrahim al-Asili deemed it permissible”
Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani in his book Talkhis al-Habir, Volume 3 page 186 while recording the views of Sunni scholars about sodomy wrote about two esteemed Maliki scholars namely Muhammad bin Sahnoon (d. 256) and Muhammad bin Sh’aban (d. 355):
“Muhammad bin Sahnoon and Muhammad bin Sh’aban authored a book in proving its permissibility and they narrated the permissibility from a large number of Tabaeen”
Not only from Tabayeen but this great Sunni Imam had actually proved its permissibility from Sahaba also, as we read in Tafsir Ahkam al-Quan by Ibn Arabi, Volume 1 page 222:
اختلف العلماء في جواز نكاح المرأة في دبرها ; فجوزه طائفة كثيرة ، وقد جمع ذلك ابن شعبان في كتاب جماع النسوان وأحكام القرآن ” وأسند جوازه إلى زمرة كريمة من الصحابة والتابعين وإلى مالك من روايات كثيرة
”There is difference of opinion in regards to anal intercourse with wives. Many have permitted it, and that has been collected by Ibn Sha’ban in his book “Jama’a Un Niswan wa Akham ul Quran” and the reason for its permissibility has been attributed to a dignified group amongst Sahaba, Tabayeen and Malik in many narrations…”
We hope that these Nawasib open their eyes to these Sunni sources, the act that they allege is halaal under Shi’a fiqh, is one that is all too common in their own house! Our Ulema have said that at best its extremely Makruh, at worst its haraam!
Regarding the point of view of Shia scholars on the issue, the truth is somewhere in the middle. We have some narrations wherein the Imams (as) said you can, and some wherein they said it is Haraam. Thus scholars arrived at a view that it is Makruh. We read in Zainuddin Al-Amili’s book Sharh Al-Luma, Volume 5 page 101:
“Sodomy is ‘Karaha Mugalaza’ (very close to haraam), but not haraam according to the one of the renowned statements of the two and narrations and the verse of Al-Harth”
Amongst the early Shia schoalrs who deemed sodomy with women Haram were:
While the modern day Shia scholars who deemed it unlawful are:
The remainder Shia scholars of the past such as Sheikh Mufid, Sheikh Tusi, Sharif Murtada, Ibn Mutahar al-Heli and others deemed it Makrooh as do the modern day Shia scholars.
In the end, we should point out that the two Shia traditions cited by the Salafi website are unreliable. The first tradition has bee declared ‘Mursal’ by Sheikh Jawaheri (Jawaher al-Kalam, v29, p104) as for the other one, Zainuddin Al-Amili said: ‘There is doubt about the authenticity of the chain’ (Masalik al-Afham, v7, p59).
We read in Nail al-Awtar, Volume 6 page 255:
“Except the Rafidha, although its makrooh according to them.”
This has been similarly recorded in Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani, Volume 2 page 125:
“Some of the Imamia (permit) it but not all of them, unlike what the people think about them especially those who are not expert in their (Shia) school”
Modern day Salafi scholar Shaykh Dr. Tariq Muhammad al-Tawari state in his book Wute al-Mara fy al-Maudhe al-Muharam, page 2 :
“The statement of Shias where in they have unequivocally endorsed sodomy is not true, while the truth that it is well-disliked (Makrooh) according to their sect”
http://islamport.com/w/fqh/Web/5500/2.htm
On a lighter note, for those Nawasib who believe that Shia fiqh explicitly endorses sodomy with one’s wife then we will reply stating that we have merely supported the position of Umar and Ibn Umar for the purposes of Muslim brotherhood!
On page 55 of the same book, he states that:
“I had cited the traditions on sodomy right from the Shi’a books, but they did not advance any refutation, it can therefore be concluded that the Shi’a like their Imams deem this act to be halaal, if not why the silence?”
On page 34 of the same book this Nasibi Mullah says that:
“…to even contemplate such a thing makes you a kaffir”.
On page 48 he states:
“Sodomy in the eyes of some of the Ulema is Kufr”
On page 42 he himself admitted:
When the Shi’a Imam was asked whether he practised it, he said ‘No’..
Maulana Janbaz, let it be known that none of our Imams practised sodomy, whilst your Imams like Ibn Umar, Abu Malika , Shafiyee and Malik endorsed it and some of them practised it as well! Thus, their Iman is now in your hands. Interestingly we also read these comments of Maulana Haq Nawaz Jhangvi (the founder of the Wahabi terrorist outfit – Sipah Sahaba) in his article on Mut’ah:
“THE IMAMIAH ARE, NOT ONLY OUTSIDE THE PALE OF AHLE-SUNNAH BUT ALSO OUTSIDE PALE OF UMMAH. THEY INDULGE IN ZINA. BY USING THE RECTUM OF WOMAN THEY HAVE OPENED SEVERAL GATES OF ZINA FOR THEM. ON ACCOUNT OF SUCH SENSUALITIES THEY ARE PRODUCTS OF ZINA. WE PRAY TO ALLAH TO SAVE US ALL FROM FOLLOWING THE FOOTPRINTS OF SATAN.”
If the perpetrators of sodomy are fornicators who adhere to the Sunnah of Satan, then this taunt clearly falls back on the above individuals, and all the Sunni Ulema that practised it and endorsed it, the Shia madhab does not deem sodomy to be halaal, and as proof we advance the following evidence…
Not satisfied with their propaganda relating to sodomy with women, the cyber takfeeris have taken their les to further depths, by suggesting that the Shia endorse homosexuality! These liars present certain traditions that we shall address in this section.
[20] The Shiite authentic works also permits homosexuality and sodomy: “(Narrated) Muhammad bin Yahya, from Ahmad bin Muhammad, from Muhammad bin Yahya, from Talha bin Zaid, from Abu Abdullah (as) said: The Messenger of Allah [pbuh] said: Whoever voluntarily let others sexually molest him, Allah will invest him with women’s lust.” [al-Kafi (fil Furoo') al-Kulainy, Book of Nikaah, Chapter: Who Let Others Sexually Molest Him, vol.5, p.549, narration 1.]Comment: May Allah curse the liars who lie on the Apostle of Allah [saw].
Had these narrow-minded Nawasib removed the spectacles of Shia-hatred, they would have reazlied that the tradition which they cite as a rod with which to beat the Shia mock actually denounces homosexuality and if, according to this Salafi website, this is a lie attributed to the Holy Prophet [s], are they suggesting that the Prophet [s] was wrong for dispelling homosexuality?
Those with open and unbiased minds, should know that the Prophet [s]‘s statement is clear, if a heterosexual male consents to having sex with another male, the former adopts the role of a female and Allah (swt) will on account of his disgraceful and unnatural habit, make him run after men to satiate the lust in his anus.
[21] “(Narrated) Ali bin Ibraaheem from his father from al-Nufaly from As-Sukoony from (Imam) Abu Abdallah (as) said: Amierul-Mu’mineen (Ali) (as) said: (al-Luwaat ma doon ad-dubur, wad-dubur huwal-kufr) Sodomy is in (anything) other than dubur (anal sex), for dubur [has multi meanings] is actually the Kufr (disbelief)”.The commentator on al-Kafi wrote: “It is possible to understand (from the statement) that Sodomizing (a man) is permissible” (Al-Kafi (fil Furoo’): Book of Marriage: Chapter of Sodomy, narration 3, vol.5, p.544Comments: May Allah keep us away from such filth.
First of all let us present the correct translation of the statement of Amir al-Mumineen (as) without the additions inserted by the Nasibi author:
“The commander of believers said: ‘Homosexuality is in even other than the anus, while in the anus, it is Kufr’
If Nawasib really want to accept this tradition and the words of Amir al-Mumineen (as), then they have no grounds for mocking this statement since Amir al-Mumineen (as) destroys any mischief by the Nawasib as the first part of His (as) statement says that if a man derives sexual pleasure from another man without entering into the latter’s anus, his conduct still falls within the ambit of homosexuality. In the second part of his statement, Imam Ali bin Abi Talib (as) has equated the act of a man entering the anus as a form of Kufr. What else do the Nawasib want?
Coming to the comments of the commentator of al-Kafi cited by the najis Nawasib, it seems that whilst writing the article, the author desperately sought to adhere to the Sunnah of his caliph who denied the daughter of the Holy Prophet (s) of her inheritance rights. Let us show the original words of the commentator Ali Akbar Ghefari so that the deception committed by these impudent Nawasib becomes clear:
“It is like the status of kufr in punishment (in the hereafter), and it perhaps means Istehlal (bloodshedding)”.
Thus, in the cited tradition, the commentator inferred two possible meanings, i.e. it either incurred punishment in hereafter or merited the death penalty in this world (Istehlal). What is clear is that at no point did the commentator state “Sodomizing (a man) is permissible” as the author asserted. Like the commentator, other Shia scholars have also advanced the same two possible interpretations of the cited tradition, see
1. Mabani Takmelat al-Minhaj, by Khoei, v1, p238
2. Taqrirat al-Hudud, by Golpaygani, v1, p193.
Finally as for author’s statement i.e. “May Allah keep us away from such filth” then the only filth that has been proven here is the illegitimate filth called Nasibism.
It has also come to our notice that the Nawasib of ‘Ajuman Sipah-e-Sahaba’ (ASS) often quote the following passage from the renowned Shia book Rijal-al-Kashi, Volume 2 from the pages wherein there are discussion about a man called Muhammad bin Nusair al-Numairi:
وكان محمد بن موسى بن الحسن بن فرات يقوي أسبابه ويعضده وذكر أنه رأى بعض الناس محمد بن نصير عياناً وغلام له على ظهره وأنه عاتبه على ذلك فقال: ان هذا من اللذات وهو من التواضع لله وترك التجبر
Muhammad bin Musa bin Furat used to support him and once he said that a group of people eye witnessed a male slave upon Muhammad bin Nusair’s back, an individual thereafter reproached him for it, to which he (Nusair) replied: ‘This is a piece of joy and it’s kind of humbleness toward Allah and avoiding arrogance’’
By citing this passage from a Shia book, these shameless Mullahs have sought to demonstrate to their adherents the absurdity of Shia works, what these shameless individuals have failed to do is cite the text in its entirety since such an approach would impede their evil intentions by making the context clear to all.
What these Nasibi Mullahs quote is a partial biography of the notorious infidel of an era gone by, Muhammad bin Nusair al-Numairi as recorded by the Shia scholar. To quote al-Kashi:
قال أبو عمرو : و قالت فرقة بنبوة محمد بن نصير النميري، و ذلك أنه ادعى أنه نبي رسول و أن علي بن محمد العسكري (عليه السلام) أرسله،و كان يقول بالتناسخ و الغلو في أبا الحسن (عليه السلام) ، و يقول فيه بالربوبية، و يقول بإباحة المحارم، و يحلل نكاح الرجال بعضهم بعضا في أدبارهم، و يقول إنه من الفاعل و المفعول به أحد الشهوات و الطيبات، و إن الله لم يحرم شيئا من ذلك، وكان محمد بن موسى بن الحسن بن فرات يقوي أسبابه ويعضده وذكر أنه رأى بعض الناس محمد بن نصير عياناً وغلام له على ظهره وأنه عاتبه على ذلك فقال: ان هذا من اللذات وهو من التواضع لله وترك التجبر
Abo Amr said: ‘There was a cult that believed that Muhammad bin Nusair al-Numairi was a Prophet and that was because he (Ibn Nusair) claimed to be a Prophet and an Apostle and claimed that he had been sent via Ali bin Muhammad al-Askari. He used to attribute transmigration of souls and divinity to Abi al-Hassan peace be upon him [The tenth Imam] and used to claim that incest was permitted and he permitted male sodomy and would say regarding it: ‘Both, the person who does it and the one with whom this is done feels joy and Allah didn’t forbid it’. Muhammad bin Musa bin Furat used to support him, and once he said that a group of people eye witnessed a male slave upon Muhammad bin Nusair’s back, an individual thereafter reproached him for it, to which he (Nusair) replied: ‘This is a piece of joy and it’s kind of humbleness toward Allah and avoiding arrogance’’.
Dear readers, there have been many false claimants of Prophethood in the history of Islam and all of these people propagated strange and absurd beliefs. We find it amazing that the bizarre and Kufr beliefs of such are likened to those of present day Muslims and that too, on the basis of the biography of the said individual as recorded by a Shia author? How can these Nasibi Mullahs on the basis of the aforementioned biography claim that the Shias of Ahlulbayt (as) permit homosexuality?
Having unveiled Nawasib efforts to assert that Shia fiqh endorses homosexuality on the basis of a distorted text, let us at this juncture present the actual Shia perspective on the issue. We read in Wasael al-Shia, Volume 20 page 334:
Abu Abdullah (as) narrated that Allah’s messenger (s) said: ‘If a man allows others to sodomise him, Allah shall imprison him in the bridge of hell fire, until the judgment of all the creations is concluded, Allah will then order that he be taken to hell fire wherein he shall experience tortured in each of the levels of hell fire, until he reaches to the deepest level from where he shall never leave.’
Let us now present a few statements from Shia scholars on the issue. Shaykh Seduq stated in Al-Muqne, page 437:
“You have to know that sodomy (homosexuality) is worse than fornication”.
We read in Tahrir al-Ahkam by Allamah al-Heli, Volume 5 page 329:
“Sodomy (homosexuality) is one of the most grave sins”
We read in Fiqh al-Sadiq by Rohani, Volume 25 page 446:
“The prohibition of it is one of the necessary factors of the religion”
It is indeed curious that our opponents concoct false allegations of homosexuality against the adherents of Ahulbayt (as) when in fact both their elite rulership and clergy are replete with homosexuals a fact admitted to by none other than the great Imam of Nawasib Ibn Kathir who in his authority work al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya Volume 9 page 184
وهي فاحشة اللواط التي قد ابتلي بها غالب الملوك والأمراء والتجار والعوام والكتاب والفقهاء والقضاة ونحوهم إلا من عصم الله منهم ، فإن في اللواط من المفاسد ما يفوت الحصر والتعداد ولهذا تنوعت عقوبات فاعليه ولإن يقتل المفعول به خير من أن يؤتى في دبره ، فإنه يفسد فساداً لا يرجى له بعده صلاح أبدا ، إلا أن يشاء الله ويذهب خبر المفعول به ، فعلى الرجل أن يحفظ ولده في حال صغره وبعد بلوغه ، وأن يجنبه مخالطة هؤلاء الملاعين الذين لعنهم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم.
Homosexuality has spread amongst the majority of kings, commanders, merchants, folks, clerks, clerics (Fuqaha), judges etc. except those who have been protected by Allah (swt), verily homosexuality contains countless defects, which is why the punishment varies for homosexuals, verily to kill a homosexual is better than allowing him to partake in it, because there is no likelihood of rehabilitation, unless Allah (swt)’s desires that he be cleansed of it, a man should therefore preserve his son during his childhood and adulthood, and he should not let him communicate with these cursed people who have been cursed by Allah’s apostle.
Now that we have Nawasib’s own scholar acknowledging that homosexuality is rampant in his Sect, let us now shine a light of the famed Salaf that were homosexuals..
Before we unveil the character of this person, let us introduce this person from the words of Imam Dhahabi who cited him as ‘the supreme judge, the jurist, the scholar’ (Siar alam alnubala, v12 p5) and also stated: ‘He was among the mujtahid Imams’ (Siar alam alnubala, v12, p6).
Allamah Ragihb Asfahani records in his famed work Al-Muhadarat al-Udaba, Volume 3 page 351:
“Once Yahya bin Aktham went to Mamun and saw a cute boy sitting next to him, Mamun asked: ‘Talk to him and examine him.’ Then the Qadhi asked: ‘What’s the news?’ The boy replied: ‘On earth it is known that you are a homosexual whereas in the skies it is known that you have an addiction to the anus’. The Qadhi asked: ‘Which news is correct?’ The boy replied: ‘The news in the skies can never be wrong’ Yahya then felt shy and remained silent.
In Siar alam alnubala, Volume 12 page 10, we read the following about this esteemed Sunni Imam:
“He used to mess with cute boys when he was young”
We read the following poem by Ahmad bin Abi Naeem which he wrote for Yahyah bin Aktham in Tarikh Baghdad, Volume 14 page 196:
“Our Governor takes bribe,
Our Judge is homosexual
And as long as the Abbasides rule
I have no confidence that tyranny will subside”
If these Salafi in this day and age keep barking about cleansing the Deen of Bidah, they should know one of their esteemed State Imams was a homosexual, aloof from all form of Bidah! We congratulate the Salaf Ulema for refusing to deem homosexuality bidah!
The personality of Abdullah ibn Mubarak is well known amongst the Ahle Sunnah. He was a famed student of Imam Abu Hanifa. Imam Dhahabi stated about him: ‘Imam, Sheikh ul Islam, the scholar of his time, the leader of the pious of his time’ (Siar alam alnubala, v8 p378). Ismail bin Ayash said: ‘There is no one on the earth better than ibn al-Mubarak and every good quality Allah has created, He placed in Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak’ (Siar alam alnubala, v8 p384). Now, let us read about one such ‘good quality’ possessed by Imam Ibn Mubarak as recorded by Allamah Ragihb Asfahani in his famed work Al-Muhadarat al-Udaba, Volume 1 page 199:
“When al-Nasir ruled Tabaristan, he appointed Abdullah bin Mubarak as a Judge, who was addicted to the anus (was homosexual) he (Ibn al-Mubarak) asked: ‘Oh commander of the believers, I need some tough men who can help me’. He (al-Nasir) said: ‘I was aware of your need before this’.
Regarding the sixth caliph of Nawasib, Imam Dhahabi records the following words from the sermon of Abdul Malik bin Marwan the seventh caliphs of Nawasib in ‘Tareekh Islam’ Volume 1 page 634:
“I am not weak like Uthman and I am not cunning like Mu’awiya and I am not a homosexual like Yazeed”
The fact that Waleed bin Abdulmalik, the seventh caliph of Ahle Sunnah was a homosexual has created a mess around the Nasibi camp that nowadays argue that Waleed was a Caliph of Bani Umayah hence it doesn’t matter if he had bad character.
This is nothing other than a feeble attempt to sever ties between their cult and their beloved Caliph. The Prophetic traditions about the twelve caliphs are well known amongst the masses and the fact that Sunni Imams have placed Waleed at the seventh place among the twelve shall suffice to water down any detachment these Nawaisb intend to make from Waleed. Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti who has rendered a remarkable work on the lives of the (Sunni) caliphs namely ‘Tarikh Khulfa’ has stated in the preface of the book:
الخلفاء امراء المؤمنین القائمین بامر الامتہ من عھد ابی بکر صدیق رضی اللہ عنہ الی عھدنا۔۔۔۔
“This is a very sound history book wherein I have referenced in sequence, starting from caliphate of Abu Bakar Sidiq (ra), until all the caliphs and rulers of Muslims of this era upon whom the Muslim Ummah has an agreement”
Suyuti then in the very book also penned the life of Waleed bin Abdulmalik meaning thereby that he has counted among amongst those twelve caliphs who were predicted in Prophetic traditions and considered them as their caliphs.
It is in respect of this very caliph of Ahle Sunnah, Imam Dhahabi records about him in Tarikh al-Islam, Volume 8 page 294:
‘It is not true that al-Waleed was Kafir or Zindeeq, yes he was known as drunkard and a homosexual’
When Waleed’s head was placed on spear, his brother Sulayman bin Yazeed testified that Waleed had once tried to commit sodomy with him. We read in Syar alam alnubala, Volume 5 page 373:
On Friday, it was placed on a spear, thus his brother Sulayman looked at it and said: ‘Woe to him, he was alcoholic, immoral and he sought to seduce me’
The harsh reality is the Nawasib cannot seek to separate themselves from this shameless, debauched, pervert for his being counted as one of the 12 Caliphs automatically grants him an elevated position in their Sect, a fact acknowledged by Hakeem Mahmood Ahmad Zafar Sialkoti, who on page 261 of his ode to Muawiya “Sayyadina Mu’awiya (ra), Shakhsiat aur kirdaar” [Personality and Character of Sayyadina Mu'awiya (ra)] declared:
“These 12 caliphs are good natured, pious men and in their reigns Islam shall be protected and respectable, their reigns shall be in accordance with the Qur’an and Sunnah and in their reign the rule of justice shall be apparent. Mulla Ali Qari put forward these twelve as “Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Mu’awiya, Yazeed, Abdul Malik bin Marwan, Walid bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan, Sulayman bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan, Umar bin Abdul Aziz, Yazeed bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan, Hasham bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan – taken from Sharah Fiqh Akbar page 184; Fatah ul Bari Volume 3 page 182). It becomes evident from the aforementioned statement of Mullah Ali Qari (rh) that Syedina Muawiya (ra) was a Khalifa Rashid (rightly guided caliph) and the rightly guided caliphate is not restricted to four but there are more whose actual number is twelve as mentioned in Sahih Hadiths” “.
Sayyadina Mu’awiya (ra); Shakhsiat aur kirdaar, page 261
In the same way that Sialkoti has opined that Mu’awiya attains the moniker of a rightly guided Caliph as Mullah Ali Qari counted him as one the twelve Caliphs in his interpretation of the twelve Caliph Hadith, Waleed is present in that same list, meaning that he was likewise a rightly guided Caliph. Nawasib cannot have their cake and also eat it; they cannot count Muawiya as one of the 12 righly guided Caliphs foretold by the Prophet (s) and then seek to strike out Waleed on the premise that he was a man of ill character! Mullah Ali Qari counted Waleed as one of the twelve Caliphs foretold by the Prophet (s) whose presence upon the earth (as per the Hadith) ensured the continued existence of Islam, meaning those fortunate enough to be amongst the fortunate twelve automatically attain rank, prestige, authority and respect that cannot be dismissed by the Nawasib! Sialkoti has relied on the Prophetic Hadith and Qari’s commentary to prove that the twelve Caliphs are the twelve Caliphs who “are good natured, pious men and in their reigns Islam shall be protected and respectable” –traits that prima facie seem alien to Waleed, unless of course the Nawasib could elaborate on the nexus between alcoholism, homosexuality and piety! Or is it such acts of piety are practiced by their pious clergy at the Islamic schools wherein they frequent?
Hakam bin al-Aas, the notorious uncle of Uthman has been included among Sahaba by Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani (Al-Isaba, Volume 2 page 104) and Imam Dhahabi (Syar alam alnubala, volume 2 page 107). Let us read the following characteristics of this beloved relative of Uthman recorded by Allamah Damiri in his famed work Hayat al-Haywan, Volume 2 page 247:
Ibn al-Zafar said: ‘al-Hakam bin Abi al-Aas was homosexual and so was Abu Jahl’
We read the following ‘appraisal’ of a Sahabi in two esteemed books of Ahle Sunnah:
“Heet the homosexual”
1. Usad al-Ghaba, Volume 1 page 1319
2. Al-Isaba, Volume 6 page 563
As evidence we are relying on the following great Sunni works:
We read in Sharh Fiqh Akbar:
Rasulullah (s) said that the Deen shall remain strong as long as these twelve Khalifahs are at the helm, and the twelve are Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali Mu’awiya, Yazid, Abdul Malik bin Marwan, Walid bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan, Sulayman bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan, Umar bin Abdul Aziz, Yazid bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan, Hasham bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan
We congratulate the Salafi for having Imams who came from the seed of a degenerate Nasibi homosexual!
We read in al-Muhadharat, Volume 3 page 253 Chapter 15:
“A drunk man was crying and said: ‘If only I were to apprehend a killer of Uthman’. A homosexual asked: ‘What would you do?’ He replied: ‘I would sodomise him’. The homosexual then said: ‘I killed Uthman’. Thus he turned the homosexual on his back and said: ‘This is vengeance for Uthman’. The homosexual said from underneath: ‘If the executors of Uthman are going to avenge the killing of Uthman in such a manner then I have killed Uthman every day’”
We also read in al-Muhadharat, Volume 3 page 237:
“A man paid a boy some money to secure his consent to sodomise him. When he exposed his penis the boy noticed that his penis was very large thus he refused to allow him to enter. The man replied: ‘You will have to do one of two things, either you allow me to sodomise you or you curse Mu’awiya’. The boy replied: ‘I shall be patient and allow myself to be sodomised rather than curse the uncle of the faithful, Mu’awiya’. When the man started to sodomise him, the boy said: ‘O God, I am suffering this affliction on account of love for your Guardian. O Allah, grant me solace for having refused to curse Mu’awiya’”.
Subhanallah! What a sacrifice! Alhamdolillah we, the Shi’a of Maula Ali (as) have the example of Hujr bin Adi (ra) who sacrificed his head rather than curse Maula Ali, and the Nasibi have this young Salaf rent boy as an example who sacrificed his anus for the love of Mu’awiya!
We read in Sahih Bukhari, page 96, Kitab Bab ul Salaat, narrates a tradition from Zuhri:
Al-Zuhar said: ‘I allow the prayer behind the homosexual unless if it was absolutely necessary’
Sahih al-Bukhari, Page 96, 1375 AH print
We read in Umdat al-Qari, Volume 8 page 403:
“(Mukhanatth) is the one who is homosexual and Abu Abdulmalik said: al-Zuhari meant (by Mukhanath) a person who is homosexual”
This is the madhab of the Salafi and Deobandi, one where a homosexual can attain the rank of a Qadhi, the Imam of a Mosque and such a great personality can also be Ahl’ul Sunnah.