In the previous lesson we were acquainted with the reasons as why the Qur’an is not distorted. The Qur’an that is available today is exactly the same Qur’an that was revealed to the Prophet (S) fourteen hundred years ago. No single word is added to or omitted from it, nor has any changes occurred in it.
Nonetheless, unfortunately, a particular group of the Sunni Muslims have fabricated the myth of distortion of the Qur’an and accused the Shi’a that they believe the original Qur’an is distorted. They claim the Qur’an of the Shi’a is different from the real Qur’an. They further that the Shi’a only claim in believing in the same Qur’an on the practice of al-Taqiyyah (self-protection)!
In this lesson I share some points for those ignorant Sunnis who blindly follow what is given to them. As we shall see the accusation of believing in distortion of the Qur’an-if at all- is more befitting in the Sunni sources than the Shi’a. The narrations of the distortion of the Qur’an are by far more narrated in the Sunni books of Hadith including their most authentic books then the Shi’a books of Hadith. Nonetheless, the Shi’a has never accused their Sunni brothers of believing in a different Qur’an. Surely, had it not been the necessity of repelling the accusation of the Wahhabis we would have not opened this chapter, albeit for those who need to be educated about the true meanings of these narrations.
The late Mirza Husain Noori known as ‘al-Mohaddeth al-Noor’ died in 1320 (1902 AD) was one of the Shi’a scholars of al-Akhbari school. He has written a book called ‘Faslul-Khetab Fi Ethbat Tahrife Ketabe Rabbul-Arbab’ (Sound judgment in proving distortion of the Book of the Lord of the lords). In this book the author has relied on many narrations to prove his claim that many Ayaat or even Surahs are deleted from the original Qur’an or even something is added to the Qur’an.
Since its publication the book has equipped the Wahhabis with enough ammunition to attack the Shi’a. They have even kindly sponsored the republication of the book! Ironically most of the narrations that Noori has relied on are from the Sunni sources! To find out the truth about the contents of the book of Noori I would like to invite our fair readers to the study of the following pages.
We shall skim through the Sunni narrations about the distortion of the Qur’an. Then I will quote the testimony of some of the most outstanding Shi’a scholars concerning the distortion of the Qur’an. Then will skim similarly through the Shi’a narrations that seem to mean the distortion of the Qur’an. Finally I shall suggest some sound explanations about the meanings of those narrations which at the same time clarify most of the Sunni narrations on the subject.
Before we embark on the dissuasion I shall warn my dear readers that the best understanding of this lesson requires ability to read the Arabic text of the Qur’an, or else most of the discussions would sound meaningless. However, to simplify the discussion I have noted most of the quotes in English transliteration.
Studying the sources of the narrations with regards to the distortion of the Qur’an leaves us with no doubt that the myth of the distortion of the Qur’an more than being a Shi’a issue is a Sunni phenomenon. Many Sunni books of Hadith including their authentic books whereat the beliefs of the Sunnis are driven contain many narrations that mean nothing other than distortion of the Qur’an. Keep your sound judgment on and follow me:
Nearly all Sunni scholars agree that –based on their historical reports- the copy of the Qur’an of the Companions of the Prophet (S) were not the same. They mention many examples to show the Qur’an of Obbay Ibn Ka’b, for instance was different from that of Ibn Mas’oud or Zaid Ibn Thabet, etc.
The famous Sunni scholar ‘Ibn Abi-Sajestani has compiled a book named ‘Masaahef’ (The Qur’ans!) published by Darul-Kotobel-Elmeiyah’ in Beirut to show hundreds of differences between those copies of the so-called Qur’an. The followings are only a few examples:
1/1: Many Sunni narrations indicate that Omar Ibn Khattab was reciting the last Ayaat of the Surah al-Hamd (Chapter 1) like this: "Serata Man An’amta Alayhem Ghayrel Maghdoube Alayhem Wa Ghayre-Dalleen."
Similarly, in the same Qur’an of Ibn Mas’oud, Surah 103 is so read: "Wal-Asr. Ennal Ensana Lafi Khosr.Wa Ennahu Fihe Ela Aakhered-Dahr. Ellalatheena Aamanoo.." the underlined section is not found in the Qur’an.
Are the different versions of the Qur’an of the Companions not an indication of distortion of the Qur’an?
Sunni scholars in response say the differences are in fact the interpretation of the Qur’an added amidst the Words of the Qur’an.
Firstly, we ask why then you don’t suggest the same justification for the Shi’a narrations? Secondly, the justification does not apply to all examples. For instance, the Sunni narrators narrated that the Qur’an of Ibn Mas’oud lacked the last two Surahs of the Qur’an!
As we learned in lesson three, the absolute majority of the Sunni scholars believe that the Qur’an was compiled after the demise of the Prophet (S). Stories they have filled up their books with, clearly indicate that the Qur’an –according to their narrations- have been compiled by the testimony of only two people or sometimes even with the testimony of one person with the excuse that the Prophet (S) considered his testimony as the testimony of two people such as in the case of Khozaima. Thus, when Omar Ibn Khattab brought the so-called Ayah of Rajm (stoning to death) for Zaid (the compiler of the Qur’an!) he refused to accept it not because it was not part of the Qur’an, but merely because he did not have anyone else to support his claim. In other occasions we read in the Sunni sources that the Qur’an was sometimes registered by a threat.
As discussed in lesson three the story of the compilation of the Qur’an after the Prophet (S) is either a myth or it was meant for collection with the interpretation.
In the coming lessons we will learn about the science of abrogation of the Qur’an. Most of the Sunni scholars acknowledge a type of abrogation that they call "abrogation of recitation". The abrogation of recitation according to them is sometimes coupled with the abrogation of the rule or without it. The meaning of the abrogation of the recitation according to them is that some of the Ayaat of the Qur’an are deleted and are no longer recited and hence they don’t exist any longer in the Qur’an. Sometimes the rules of those deleted Ayaat are still in order such as the Ayaat of Rajm (stoning to death) and sometimes even the rules are abrogated such as many Ayaat that are possibly deleted along with the rules and we have no knowledge about them.
The reason because of which the Sunni scholars have come up with the myth of the abrogation of recitation is the numerous narrations they have in their books which indicate that many Ayaat of the Qur’an are deleted. In order for them to justify those narrations yet avoid the expression of the distortion of the Qur’an, they have come up with the innovated name of abrogation of recitation. It is obvious that change of the name does not solve any problem and in reality there is no difference between distortion of the Qur’an by omission and the abrogation of recitation. The followings are only a few examples of their so called abrogation of recitation;
3-1: The Surahs of Al-Hafd and Al-Khal’: They narrate that the following two Surahs were existing in the version of the Qur’an of Obey Ibn Ka’b and Ibn Abbas as well as Zaid Ibn Thabet ;
1) "Bismillah Rahmane Raheem. Allahumma Eyyaka Na’bodo Wa Laka Nosalli Wa NasjodoWa Elayka Nas’a Wa Nahfad. Narjoo Rahmatak Wa Nakhsha Azabakal-Jad. Enna Azabaka Bel-Kafereena Molhaq".
2) Bimillah Rahmane Raheem. Enna Nasta’eenoka Wa Nastaghferoka Wa Nothnee Alaykal-Khayra Kollahoo Wa La Nokaferoka Wa Nakhla’o Wa Natroko Man Yafjorok.
Professor Al-Tijani in his book "With the truthful" page 204 asserted: "The Sunnis recite these two Surahs in the Qunoot of their morning prayers and I also used to recite it- prior to my conversion to Shi’sm- in my Qunoot as I knew it by heart."
3-2: Abu Harb Ibn Abilaswad narrated from his father that Abu Musa Al-Asha’ri called upon the reciters of Basra. Three hundred of the reciters of the Qur’an attended his court. Abu Musa said to them: "You are the righteous people of Basra and its reciters. Recite the Qur’an and avoid the long wishes or else your hearts will be hardened the same as the hearts of people before you. Verily we used to recite a Surah that in the sense of its length and severity was similar to the Surah Al-Bara’a (ch 9). I have forgotten it but I only remember this part; ‘Lau Kana Libne Adam Wadian Min Maal Labtagha Wadian Thaalitha Wa La Yamlao Jofa Ibne Adam Ilaturab’. Similarly we used to recite a Surah that was similar to one of the Musabahat. I have forgotten it except I remember this part; Ya Ayuhaladhina Amanu Lima Taquluna Mala Taf’alun Fatuktab Shahadatun Fe A’naqakum Fatosa’luna Anha Yomal Qiyama."
The above narration that is narrated in one of the most authentic Sunni books of Hadith clearly indicates that at least two Surahs from the Qur’an are deleted. One of them being as long as Surah Al-Bara’a which has 129 Aya and another one being as long as one of the Musabahat (ch 17,57, 59, 61, 62, 64 and 87) which its shortest Surah has 11 Aya (ch 62) and the longest one has 111 Aya (ch 17).
It is really amazing that our Sunni brothers accuse the Shia’ that they believe in a Surah such as the so called Surat Al-Welayat or An-Nurain whilst in their most authentic books of Hadith such as Sahih Muslim they narrated deletion of long Surahs.
3-3: Malik narrated; "When the beginning of Surah Al-Bara’a (ch. 9) was deleted its Bismillah was also deleted for surely that Surah (ch. 9) was as long as Surah Al-Baqarah (ch. 2)!"
3-4: Numerous narrations in Sunni books of Hadith narrated that Omar Ibn Khattab said: "Had people not said that Omar added in the Book of God I would have included the Aya of the stoning to death (Aya of Rajm)".
Al-Bukhari in a long Hadith quoted from Omar that during his reign he ascended the pulpit and during his sermon said: "Verily Allah dispatched Muhammad (S) with truth and He revealed to him the Book. Then among what was revealed to him was Aya of Rajm. So we recited it, we understood it and we comprehended it. Thus the Messenger of God stoned to death and so we stoned to death after him. I am concerned now should the time prolong that someone may say by Allah we did not find Aya of Rajm in the Book of Allah."
The Aya for the stoning according to Omar is "al-sheikh wa al-sheikha itha zanaya farjumuhoma al batta Nakalan Min Allah"
Firstly, it is so obvious that the above sentence is not the word of God. Secondly, the ruling of stoning to death was not limited to the old man or old woman. It is for the married men and women whether young or old. Thirdly, nowhere in the Qur’an ever the term Al-Batta (of course) is mentioned.
Fourthly, the ruling of stoning to death is mentioned in the Old Testament in chapter 20 of the book of Leviticus. Thus, since the rule was not abrogated in Islam, it was executed at the time of the Prophet of Islam. Finally Imam Ali (a.s) executed the ruling of stoning to death against Shuraiha Al-Hamdaniya according to the tradition of Rajm not the Aya of Rajm. This means unlike Omar, Imam Ali was certain of the rule of stoning to death was the tradition of the Prophet not an Aya from the Qur’an. Ironically Ibn Maje narrated from Aishe: "The Aya of Rajm was revealed and it used to exist in my version of the Qur’an that I used to keep under my bed. However, after the demise of the Prophet (S) when we were busy with his funeral our pets ate it all!"
The so called Aya of stoning to death is so certain in the eyes of the Sunnis that the famous Sunni scientist of the sciences of the Qur’an; Al-Suyouti in justification of why the so called Aya is not in the Qur’an says: "A point has crossed my mind and that is because the ruling of stoning to death is a harsh rule its recitation is abrogated from the Qur’an."
This justification cannot be accepted for so far as the rule of stoning to death is in order there is no reduction of harshness by a mere abrogation of its recitation. In addition the Almighty God states in the Qur’an: "Whatever an Aya do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it" (2: 106). Thus, if the so called Aya of stoning to death was abrogated why it was not replaced by another Aya?
Another way to prove that the ‘abrogation of the recitation’ is but an example of distortion of the Qur’an by deletion is to say that the abrogation of recitation has either occurred during the time of the Prophet (S) and by his command or after his demise. Undoubtedly it did not occur at the time of the Prophet (S) for firstly there is no valid proof for that and secondly the Sunni narrations asserted that the deletion of the Ayaat as well their consumption by the pets! occured after the demise of the Prophet (S). According to Al-Bukhari, Omar explicitly claimed that the Aya of Rajm was part of the Qur’an at the time of the Prophet (S) yet Zaid refused to register it in the Qur’an (during the so called compilation of the Qur’an) only because Omar did not have anyone to second his testimony. Therefore, if the Sunni scholars acknowledge the abrogation of the recitation they in fact acknowledge the distortion of the Qur’an without naming it.
The outstanding Shi’a scholars from the early days till date explicitly and without any ambiguity have denoted the claim of all different types of the verbal distortion of the Qur’an. They have always asserted that the present Qur’an is exactly the same as the Qur’an of the time of the Prophet (S).
In the following I shall mention the name of some of the most outstanding Shi’a scholars who have affirmed that the Qur’an was never distorted:
1. Fadl Ibn Shaathaan in his book (Al-Eidhah): He is one of the Shi’a scholars of the 3rd Century A.H. He has strongly reproached some of the Sunni sects (such as Al-Hashwiya) who believed in the distortion of the Qur’an.
2. Al-Shaikh Al-Saduq (Muhammad Ibn Ali) died in 381 A.H. In his book Al-E’tiqadat (The Shi’a Beliefs) pages 92-93 he stated: "Our belief is that the Qur’an that the Almighty God revealed to the Messenger (S) is what is between the covers and it is what is in our hands today (full stop). The end of its chapters is Surah Al-Naas (ch.114)…and whoever relates to us that we believe the Qur’an was more than that, he is a liar"
3. Al-Sheikh Al-Mufid died in 413 A.H. He said: "A group of the Shi’a said that no word or Aya or Surah is deleted from the Qur’an. What is deleted is what was registered in the Qur’an of Imam Ali (a.s) about the interpretation and explanation of its meanings and about whom it was revealed. In my opinion this is better than the claim of those who said some words are deleted from the actual Qur’an not its interpretation."
4. Al-Sayyed Al-Mourtadha died in 436 A.H. According to al-Shaikh al-Tabrasi he has also stated that the Shi’a believe that the Qur’an is not distorted.
5. Al-Shaikh Al-Tusi died in 461 A.H. In the introduction of his Tafsir named Al-Tebyan he denotes the distortion of the Qur’an.
6. Al-Shaik Al-Tabrasi died in 548 A.H. In the introduction of his Tafsir named Majmau’l Bayaan he also denotes the myth.
7. Al Shaikh Abdul Jalil Al-Qazwini Al-Razi of the 6th Century the author of "Naqdh" has explicitly denoted the accusation of the distortion of the Qur’an. For instance he mentions if anyone believes that the word "Fe Ali" (Concerning Ali) is the middle of the Aya "O you the Messenger convey what is revealed to you (Concerning Ali) from your Lord" he has gone astray.
8. Sayyed Ibn Tawous died in 664 AH. In his book Sa’d As Saoud said: "The opinion of Imamiah (the Shia’) is the non-distortion (of the Qur’an)."
9. Al-Allamah Al-Hilli who died in 726AH, said "The truth is that there is no change nor any bringing forward or backword in it (the Qur’an) and that nothing is added or omitted. We seek refuge with the Almighty Allah in believing in things like that (distortion of the Qur’an) for it would lead to denying the miracle of the Messenger (S) which is narrated to us by numerous narrators."
10. Al-Shaikh al-Bahaei who died in 1030 AH said, "And they disagreed whether there is any addition or omission in it (the Qur’an). The correct opinion is that the Glorious Qur’an is safeguarded from any addition or omission. The proof for that is the Word of the Almighty ‘and surely, We will guard it.’ Thus, what is known among people that the name of Imam Ali (a.s) is deleted in some parts such as in ‘O you the Messenger convey what is revealed to you from your Lord (concerning Ali)’ and similar places it is unacceptable by the scholars."
11. Mowla Mohsin al-Faydh al-Kashani who died in 1091 in the introduction of his Tafseer al-Safee and also in his book Al-Wafi asserted that the Qur’an was not distorted.
12. Al-Shaikh al-Hur al-Amili who died in 1104 has written a thesis proving that the Qur’an is not distorted. A part of his thesis reads, "And whoever has researched in history and the narrations as well as the opinion of the scholars should know with certainty that the Qur’an is registered with utmost numerous narrations and by quotations from thousands of the Companions and that the Qur’an was collected and compiled at the time of the Messenger of Allah (S)."
The abovementioned scholars are just some of the hundreds of the Shia’ scholars who have asserted that the Qur’an is not distorted. Many Shia’ scholars have compiled books concerning the non-distortion of the Qur’an such as contemporary Scholar Ayatullah Sayyed Ja’far Murtadha al-Amili in Haqa’iqun Hamma Howlal Qur’an (Important Realities Concerning the Qur’an) and my learned teacher Ayatullah Hasanzadeh (may God protect his life) in Fadhlul Khitab Fi Adame Tahrife Kitabeh Rabbul Arbab (The Preferred Talk in the Non-Distortion of the Book of the Lord of the Lords). This book is a critical commentary on the book of Nouri and hence the name sounds similar to it.
The contemporary researcher and historian Shaikh Rasool Ja’farian in his book Okthubat Tahriful Qur’an (Accusations of Distortion of the Qur’an) has compiled a concise yet very useful book in proving that the Qur’an is not distorted. Is it then not unfair to disregard the opinion of absolute majority of the Shi’a scholars and highlight and manoeuvre around the opinion of one scholar who in fact is one of the traditionalists and does not enjoy a highly regarded scholarly status in the eyes of the Shia’ Scholars.
c) The Late Mohadeth Noori in his book ‘Sound Reasoning’ has categorised the narrations that he has relied on into 12 categories. Ironically, the narrations of 9 of the 12 categories are from Sunni sources. Before analysis of the narrations he has relied on, it is worthy to mention that Shaikh Noori is one of the Traditionalists (Akhbarioun) and what he has concluded in his book expresses solely his personal opinion not the belief of the Shi’a.
My learned teacher the Grand Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi (may God protect his life) in his advanced lessons of ‘the Principles of Jurisprudence’ divided all the narrations of the book of Noori into 7 categories and responded to all of them. The following is a brief version of my notes from his lessons.
An example of such fabricated narrations are what Tabrasi in Al-Ehtejaj (The Argument) quoted that between the Word of God "Concerning the Orphans" and "Then marry them" (4:3) there has been many Ayaat and stories that contained one third of the Qur’an. They were all deleted by the hypocrites!
The fabrication of this Hadith is so obvious for surely if any one claims that any part of the Qur’an is deleted there must be a limit for the deletion not that only between a if-clause and the main clausetwo to three thousand Ayaat are deleted!
Narrations from Ahmad Ibn Mohammad AsSayyari.
Shaikh Noori has narrated more than 320 narrations from AsSayyari. Experts in Ilmul Rejal (The Science of Analytical Biography) have said with regards to AsSayyari: "His faith is wrong, he is an exaggerator and his opinion is far from the right path."
For instance, Noori in his third category of narrations quoted from Al-Mustadrak (a well-known Sunni book of Hadith) that Abu Musa al Ash’ari said to the reciters of Basra "We used to recite at the time of the Prophet a Surah that in terms of its length and severity was similar to Surat al-Bara’a (chapter 9) and I have forgotten it. Yet I remember only this part ‘Had there been for the children of Adam two valleys of wealth he would have surely sought a third one and nothing would fill the hollow inside man except soil.’" Noori also quotes from the Sunni sources the so-called Surah al-Hafd and al-Khal’ as mentioned earlier. Obviously these so-called Ayaat and Surahs – if to be authentic- are no more than Hadith al-Qudsi not the Qur’an.
There are many narrations in the both the Shia’ and the Sunni books of Hadith that the interpretation of the Qur’an is mixed with the text of the Qur’an. For instance, Nouri narrated from As Sounan compiled by Al-Beyhaqqi (a famous Sunni scholar) who quoted from Hafsa: "Guard strictly the Prayers especially the Middle Prayer and the Asr prayer and stand before God with obedience." (2:238) Hafsa said ‘I bear witness that I so heard it from the Messenger of God."
The expression of ‘and the Asr prayers’ is not part of the Qur’an and hence what Hafsa meant is that the Asr prayer was expressed by the Prophet (S) as an interpretation for the Middle Prayer. Similarly, the phrase "concerning Ali" in the Aya ‘O you the Messenger convey what is revealed to you’concerning Ali ‘from your Lord:’(5:67) in both the Shia and Sunni narrations is in fact the interpretation of the Ayah.
All the narrations concerning the differences between the Qur’an of Ibn Mas’oud and other companions mostly fits under this category of mixing the interpretation of the Qur’an with the actual Qur’an. The Qur’an of Imam Ali (S) that Abu Bakr and Omar refused to accept was also the Qur’an with its interpretation which was dictated by the Prophet (S) and written by Imam Ali (a.s). This type of interpretation of the Qur’an and any other text to mix the text with the explanation has been a common method among the scholars of the past and the present. Tafseer Al-shubbar and Tafseer Al-Asfa (of the Shia’ scholars) and Tafseer Jalallain (of the Sunni Scholars) are examples of this type of mixing the explanation and the text.
The fourth category are narrations that speak about the distortion of the Qur’an without specifying whether verbal or contextual distortion. Noori has interpreted all these narrations to mean the verbal distortion of the Qur’an. For instance, Al-Shaikh Al-Sadooq in his ‘al-Khesal’ (a Shi’a source) quoted via Jaber from the Prophet (S) that one the Day of Judgment the Qur’an will complain and will say: "O my Lord! They distorted me and tore me apart."
The above Hadith can only mean the contextual distortion of the Qur’an, or else it will contradict the divine promise of safeguarding the Qur’an. Moreover, al-Shaikh al-Sadooq as mentioned earlier is amongst many Shi’a scholars who denoted the verbal distortion of the Qur’an. Thus, he could not have narrated the above Hadith in his books unless he too understood the Hadith to mean contextual distortion.
Another proof of Noori is his reliance on the numbers of narrations that indicate a big portion of the Qur’an is revealed about the Ahlul Bayt (a.s) or their enemies. Al-Kolaini in al-Kaafi (a Shi’a source) narrated via Asbagh Ibn Nobate from Imam Ali (a.s): "The Qur’an is in three sections; one third of it is about us and our enemies, another third is about the traditions and the examples (of the previous nations) and the third part is about the obligations and statutes." Noori after quoting such narrations conclude that as we cannot find the third of the present Qur’an talking about Ahlul Bayt (a.s), then it must be deleted from the original Qur’an.
The answer to this claim is obvious. The above narration is a deep interpretation of the Qur’an (al-Ta’wil). Anywhere in the Qur’an that the believers are addressed or praised, it is firstly meant for Ahlul Bayt (a.s), for they are the best examples of the believers and the pious people. Thus, the above narration means that the deep interpretation of one third of the Qur’an applies to Ahlul Bayt (a.s).
Shaikh Noori in his last category of his proofs has relied on the issue of different recitations of the Qur’an to prove his claim for verbal distortion of the Qur’an.
The answer is firstly there is a difference between the different recitations and that of verbal distortion. Secondly, as I shall explain in the nest lesson the story of different recitations and revelation of the Qur’an according to seven or ten recitations is no more than a myth created by the Sunni scholars. The Imams of Ahlul Bayt (a.s) have explicitly denoted the myth.
The last category is of the narrations that do not fit into any of the above categories. Such narrations are very few and at least for two reasons they must be rejected: firstly, they contradict the Qur’an and secondly the Shi’a scholars have disregarded them.
The unauthentic narrations concerning the distortion of the Qur’an have been a good excuse for the anti-Muslim writers to attack Islam in general and the Holy Qur’an in particular. For instance, Garcin de Tassy in 1842 after 18 years of hard work (as he claimed) published his collection of so called omitted Surahs in his article. His article was later translated into German language and in 1913 was translated into English by W. St. Clair Tisdall and published in "The Muslim World", vol. III July 1913, no. 3 pp.236
The main source of these works was the book of ‘Dabestan Mazaheb’ (The primary school of the sects) by an anonymous writer. This book is in Farsi language and was first printed in Bombay-India in 1262 A.H.. Sir John Milkom in ‘the History of Iran’ presumed that the book was compiled by ‘Mohsen Keshmiri’ known as ‘Fani’. He then assumed that the man was one of the tourists of the 11th century A.H. There are other possibilities about the author of the book. For further information you may refer to ‘al-Thari’a’ vol.8.p.48 by Agha Bozorg Tehrani.
In the recent years two Anti-Islamic American companies published a fake Qur’an called ‘the true furqan’claiming that they are challenging the Qur’an after fourteen hundred years. Its 77 chapters begin with ‘in the name of the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit!"J This so called Qur’an considers polygamy fornication, divorce as being impermissible and that Jihad is Haram. Reading one sentence of this book is sufficient for anyone who is acquainted with the alphabets of the Qur’an to laugh at its contents and style.
Looking forwards for a day that Muslims whether Shi’a or Sunni do not accuse each other at the cost of providing ammunitions to the enemies of Islam, there we remain.