Best narrator of the Rafidah is an accursed Closet-Christian heretic – ZURARAH

Even the alleged top students of their Imams and narrators were nothing but a bunch of Closet-Zoroastrian and Closet-Christian Zindeeqs (heretics). Take for instance the following Zindeeq named:

Zurārah b. A’yan b. Sunsun al-Shaybānī (a client, Mawla, of the Shaybani tribe, not an actual ‘Arab) al-Kūfī (Arabic: زرارة بن أعین بن سُنسُن الشیباني الکوفي) (b. c 70/690 – d. 150/767)

Zurarah was one of the alleged close companions of Imam al-Baqir and his son al-Sadiq. Shia scholars accept every hadith which has been narrated by him unquestioningly although they themselves have narrated a number of narration from him were he openly and in a rude way opposed the verdicts of the Imam such as Imam al-Sadiq (yet Shia scholars look for 1001 excuses for Zurarah, something they never attempt for the companions of the Prophet!).

The origin of his family

His real name was Abdu Rabbih (Arabic: عبدربه‎‎), and he was titled Abu ‘Ali or Abul Hassan.

زرارة بن أعين من أسرة نصرانية وجده يدعى (سنسن ) كان راهباً في بلاد الروم، وكان أبوه عبداً رومياً لرجل من بني شيبان. الفهرست للطوسي ص 104

Zurarah bin A’yan hailed from a Christian family, his grandfather Sunsun was a monk in the land of Rome and his father was a roman slave of a man from the Bani Shaybah.

. [Fihrist Tusi p:104]

Sayyid Bahr al-‘Ulum, a major Shia Twelver scholar states that the family of A‘yan, of which Zurarah was a scion, was the largest Shia family of Kufa.  [Rijal as-Sayyid Bahr al-‘Ulum, a.k.a al-Fawa’id ar-Rijaliyyah, vol. 1 p. 222]

No Zurarah = No Rafidism

Shia Muhaddith al-Qummi in his book Tuhfah al-Ahbab said about Zurarah that “his excellence and status are too great to mention here”.

Regarding the wealth of narrations which Zurarah reports, Shia Muhaddith al-Kashshi mentions that had it not been for Zurarah, the narrations of al-Baqir would have been lost [Ikhtiyar Ma‘rifat ar-Rijal vol. 1 p. 345]

Gran Ayatullah Abul Qasim al-Khoie has counted 2094 of Zurarah’s narrations in the four main Shia books of Hadith, all of them from the Imams al-Baqir and al-Sadiq, this is almost as many as narrations that the mother of the believers ‘Aishah narrated (around 2200) from her husband, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), with the difference that she lived with him since young age. [al-Khu’i, Mu‘jam Rijal al-Hadith vol. 7 p. 249]

Zurarah according to Ahl al-Sunnah

  • ‘Uqayli (d. 322/933) cites a report from Sufyan (al-Thauri) that Zurarah never met al-Baqir! [Muhammad ibn al-‘Uqayli, Kitab al-Du’afa, 4 vols.]
  • Ibn ‘Adi states that Zurarah and his brothers were extreme in their Shi’ism and that Zurarah was the “most wicked in profession of belief”. [Ibn ‘Adi, Kamil]
  • According to the famous Muslim heresiographer (expert on Zindeeqs),Al-Shahrastani (d. 548/1153), Zurarah maintained that knowledge possessed by an imam is innate and not acquired; this report is not improbable given Zurarah’s belief in the imam’s knowledge as per Twelver beliefs. [Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Karim al-Shahrastani, Muslim Sects and Divisions: The section on Muslims Sects in Kitab al-Milal wa al-Nihal]

Zurarah was completely shunned and delcared a wretched Rafidi who fabricated narrations by most (although some Sunni hadithist scholars who were not aware of his true beliefs and hence did not dismiss him entirely as a narrator) Sunni scholars of rijal/hadith. In fact there is a clear narration in Sunni books about the opinion of the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt with regards to the Zindeeq Zurarah:

حدثنا أبو بكر ، قال : ثنا سفيان ، قال : قال : ابن السماك : أردت الحج ، فقال لي زرارة بن أعين أخو عبد الملك بن أعين : إذا لقيت جعفر بن محمد فأقرئه مني السلام ، وقل له : أخبرني في الجنة أنا أم في النار ؟ قال : فلقيت جعفر بن محمد ، فقلت له : يا ابن رسول الله أتعرف زرارة بن أعين ؟ قال : نعم ، رافضي خبيث.

قال : قلت : إنه يقرئك السلام ، ويقول : أخبرني في الجنة أنا أم في النار ؟ قال : فأخبره أنه في النار ، ثم قال : وتعلم من أين علمت أنه رافضي؟ إنه يزعم أني أعلم الغيب ، ومن زعم أن أحدا يعلم الغيب ، إلا الله عز وجل فهو كافر ، والكافر في النار.

قال : فلما قدمت الكوفة جاءني مع الناس يسلمون علي ، فقال : ما فعلت في حاجتي ؟ فأخبرته بما قال : فقال : فإن ابن رسول الله اتقى

المعرفه والتاريخ 3-33

Zurarah asked someone who was on his way to the Hajj (Zurarah lived in Kufa): “If you see Ja’far bin Muhammad (al-Sadiq) send him my Salam, and ask him if I am from the people of Paradise or Hell.” The narrator says: “I met Ja’far bin Muhammad (al-Sadiq) and asked him: “O son of the Messenger of Allah, do you know Zurarah bin A’yan?” He replied: “Yes, he is a wretched (Khabith) Rafidi!

I replied: “He sends you his Salam and asks if you regard him as the people of Paradise or Hell.” He (al-Sadiq) replied: “Tell him he is of the people of Hell.” Then he (al-Sadiq) said: “Do you know how I know that he’s a Rafidi? This is because he claims I know the unseen (Ghayb), and whoever claims that anybody besides Allah knows the unseen is a kafir, and the kafir is in Hell.”

The narrator says: “When I got back to Kufa, he (Zurarah) and the people greeted me and he (Zurarah) asked: “Did you do what I asked you to do?” I (the narrator) informed him (of what al-Sadiq) said, he (Zurarah) replied: “The son of the Messenger of Allah did Taqiyyah!” [Al-Ma’rifah fi al-Tarikh by Ya’qub bin Sufyan bin Jawan al-Farsi al-Fasawi, Abu Yusuf, 277 AH]

The narrators are all reliable:

  • Abu Bakr Abdallah al-Humaydi, the great Imam and Shaykh of Imam al-Bukhari
  • Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah, one of the most reliable narrators of hadith
  • Ibn al-Sammak Muhammad bin Sabih al-‘Ijli, he is thiqah (trustworthy narrator)

(Note how this wretched Zindeeq had no reply but to accuse al-Sadiq of doing Taqiyyah!)

He didn’t know the Imam of his time

According to the bizarre beliefs of the Rafidah, the twelve selective Imams are superior to all Prophets and believing in them is an obligation as the belief in the Prophets. Now the Imam after al-Sadiq was his son al-Kazim according to the Rafidah, yet Zurarah himself wasn’t sure about that!

There are 0 hadeeth that Zurarah narrates from the 7th Imam (al-Kazim), that should raise some eyebrows on how come Zurarah hasn’t narrated anything in from the 7th Imam, and he had his Imamah for 2 years.

There are different reports in Al-Kashee’s rijaal from pg. 154 – 156 that states that Zurarah sent his son, `Ubaydah, to Madinah to inquire on who is the next Imam (which itself disproves the lie that the so called 12 caliph narration and other misused narrations by the Rafidah have always been clear evidence to everybody who the 12 Imams are!), and before `Ubaydah returned Zurarah got extremely sick and died. Once again it shouldn’t take 2 years for his son `Ubaydah to go to Madinah and come back to his father, Zurarah, to deliver the news.

The biggest irony is that Zurarah most likely died with a pure Sunni belief, namely that our Imam as in guidance is the Qur’an first and foremost. Al-Kashi, Ikhtiyar, hadith # 252 mentions that Zurarah took the Qur’an as his Imam as he wasn’t even sure who the next Imam is after Al-Sadiq! His words were “This is my imam” (other versions say “This mashaf is my Imam”). So he clearly took the Quran as his Imam.

The Rafidah have other fabricated and kufri narrations such as:

  1. A report that says that Zurarah took the Imam that is mentioned in the Qur’an (aka Musa al-Kazim) (Al-Kashi, Ikhtiyar, hadith # 252). Only Allah knows what Qur’an the Rafidah are talking about, as not a single of their Imams are mentioned in the Qur’an, let alone the later ones.
  2. And there is another report that says he doubted in the Imam of al-Kazim (Al-Kashi, Ikhtiyar, hadith # 253). Imam al-Kazim is quoted in Al-Kashi as saying that Zurarah had expressd doubts about his Imamite, but that he had sought forgiveness for him from God [Kashi, Rijal, 155].

According Imamite Shiism the Imamah of the Twelve Imams is not just a fundamental belief, but a belief superior and more essential than Prophethood,. Imagine a Muslim doubting in one of the Prophets mentioned in the Qur’an! Yet in Rafidism you find their top narrator doubting in an Imam (who is superior than Prophets as per Rafidi belief) and the “infallible” Imam ask God for forgiveness for him. This alone proves that the misuse of 12 caliphs (and not Taqiyyah mongering house dwelling Imams) hadith and other narrations do not constitute any proof whatsoever, for even the allegeded closest companions of the Imams were confused about their Imam! How can the rest of the Ummah be blamed them and on on earth can one have the audacity to call this mess the true sect and their Imams “Hujjajullah” (the absolute clear signs of Allah!)? This confusion was even confessed by the biggest scholars of the Imamite sect:

The Persian Tusi, known as Shaykh al-Taʾifah (“Shaykh of the sect (shaikh al-ta’ifah),” who is believed to have founded the Hawza and also counts as the founder of Shia jurisprudence says in his Tahdhib al-Ahkam:

. ويقول شيخ الطائفة الطوسي في تهذيبه: إن أحاديث أصحابنا فيها من الاختلاف والتباين والمنافاة والتضاد حتى لا يكاد يتفق خبر إلا وبإزائه ما يضاده، ولا يسلم حديث إلا وفي مقابلته ما ينافيه حتي جعل مخالفونا ذلك من أعظم الطعون على مذهبنا وتطرقوا بذلك إلى إبطال معتقدنا، إلى أن قال: أنه بسبب ذلك رجع جماعة عن اعتقاد الحق ومنهم أبوالحسين الهاروني العلوي حيث كان يعتقد الحق ويدين بالإمامة فرجع عنها لما إلتبس عليه الأمر في اختلاف الأحاديث وترك المذهب ودان بغيره لما لم يتبين له وجوه المعاني فيها، وهذا يدل على أنه دخل فيه على غير بصيرة واعتقد المذهب من جهة التقليد تهديب الأحكام،1/2

And among the hadiths narrated by our companions (Shia scholars/companions of the Imams) are so many disparities, contrast, contravening and contradictions that you will not find a single report that we agree upon which doesn’t have another that contradicts it, and not a single hadith is safe from another which denies it. These (contradictions) are to such an extent that our opponents (the Muslims/Ahl Al-Sunnah) have used it as the biggest accusation/attack against our school and as a proof for the falsehood of our creed.

Their best narrator is dubios to the degree that Shias themselves have narrations of the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt cursing him!

Now hailing from a Christian family like Zurarah is no reason to attack him, many of the greatest Muslims in the past and today are Ex-Christians. However, hailing from Rome and from a family of Monks, and then being responsible for thousands of narrations in the name of the Ahl al-Bayt, narrations full of hatred against the Sahabah (who defeated the Romans) and narrations full of exaggeration with the status of the Ahl al-Bayt (exactly how the Romans have distorted Jesus’, peace be upon him, teachings) does put a question mark after the name of Zurarah,

Zurarah doubted the knowledge of Imam Ja’far

Al-Kashshī has reported (page 158 sub-note: 261): حدثني محمد بن مسعود قال حدثني جبرئيل بن أحمد قال : حدثني محمد بن عيسى عن يونس عن ابن مسكان قال سمعت زرارة يقول : كنت أرى جعفراً أعلم ممن هو وذاك يزعم إنه سأل أبا عبد الله عن رجل من أصحابنا مختفٍ من غرامه فقال : أصلحك الله أن رج من أصحابنا كان مختفياً من غرامه فإن كان هذا الأمر قريباً صبر حتى يخرج مع القائم وإن كان فيه تأخير صالح غرامه فقال أبو عبد الله يكون إن شاء الله تعالى فقال زرارة : يكون إلى سنة ؟ فقال أبو عبد الله: يكون إن شاء الله فقال زرارة : فيكون إلى سنتين ؟ فقال: أبو عبد الله: يكون إن شاء الله، فخرج زرارة فوطن نفسه على أن يكون إلى سنتين فلم يكن فقال: ما كنت أرى جعفراً إلا أعلم مما هو

Ibn Maskān narrates that he heard Zurārah say: “I used to regard Jaʿfar to be more knowledgeable than what he actually is.” The reason for this is that he once asked Imām Jaʿfar about one of our companions, who had concealed himself on account of his fines. He asked: “May Allah elevate you! One of our companions has concealed himself on account of his fines; if this matter will be resolved quickly then he will be patient and come forth with al-Qāʼim and if this matter is going to be delayed then attend to his fines.” Imām Jaʿfar replied: “It will happen, Allah willing.” Zurārah asked: “Will it happen in a year?” Imām Jaʿfar replied: “It will happen, Allah willing.” Zurārah asked: “Will it happen in two years?” Imām Jaʿfar again replied: “It will happen, Allah willing.” Zurārah then left and decided for himself that it will happen in two years but it did not, he thus said: “I used to regard Jaʿfar to be more knowledgeable than what he actually is.”

Zurarah use to belie Imam Ja’far:

On page 158 (sub-note 262) of Rijāl al-Kashshī it is mentioned: محمد بن مسعود قال : كتب إليه الفضل بن شاذان يذكر عن ابن أبي عمير عن إبراهيم بن عبد الحميد عن عيسى بن أبي منصور وأبي أسامة الشحام ويعقوب الأحمر قالوا : كنا جلوساً عند أبي عبد الله )ع( فدخل عليه زرارة فقال : إن الحكم بن عيينة حدث عن أبيك إنه قال : “ صل المغرب دون المزدلفة فقال له أبو عبد الله أنا تأملته: ما قال أبي هذا قط كذب الحكم على أبي قال : فخرج زرارة وهو يقول: ما أرى الحكم كذب على أبيه

ʿĪsā ibn Abī Manṣūr, Abū Usāmah al-Shiḥām and Yaʿqūb al-Aḥmar narrated that they were sitting with Imām Jaʿfar, when Zurārah entered and said: “Al-Ḥakam ibn ʿUyaynah has reported that your father said: “Perform your Maghrib ṣalāh elsewhere than Muzdalifah.” Imām Jaʿfar replied: “I have reflected upon this; my father has never said this. al-Ḥakam has lied upon my father.” Zurārah then left and he was saying: “I do not see that al-Ḥakam has lied upon his father.” Most certainly Imām Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq has spoken the truth when he said: We the Ahl al-Bayt are all truthful and have not been spared from liars who fabricated against us and tarnish our honesty with their falsehood. And amongst those guilty of this, is this narrator (Zurārah).

Zurarah used to spy on Imam Muhammad Al-Baqir (Al-Sadiq’s father)

In Kashi’s book, on page 140, it is reported that Hishām ibn Sālim said: حمدويه بن نصير قال : حدثنا محمد بن عيسى عن الوشا عن هشام بن سالم عن زرارة قال : سألت أبا جعفر عن جوائز العمال ؟ فقال : لا بأس به قال ثم قال : إنما أراد زرارة أن يبلغ هشاماً إني أحرم أعمال السلطان

Zurārah said that he asked Imām al-Bāqir about the stipends of those who perform tasks for the government and he said it is not a problem.” Imām al-Bāqir then said: “Zurārah’s intention is to inform Hishām (who was the khalīfah) that I have ruled the stipends of the khalīfah to be ḥarām.”

Zurarah has always posed a problem in Shi‘ism, because while he is on the one hand regarded as the most prolific narrator from the Imams al-Baqir and as-Sadiq, the Imams are also recorded as having cursed and excommunicated him. The Shi‘ah attempt to reconcile these two contradictory attitudes through the dubious and completely unconvincing explanation of taqiyyah (as usual) by the Imams.

Court scholar of the Safavids Majlisi says that Zurarah was frequently vilified by the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt:

ولا شك في حصول الجزم بأن أبا عبد الله عليه السلام كان يذم زرارة . روضة المتقين

14 : 279

“There is no doubt that Abi ‘Abdillah (al-Sadiq) used to frequently vilify Zurarah.” [Rauda al-Muttaqin 279 : 14]

The following are all narrations from the earliest Shia books of Rijal about the dubios character of Zurarah:

Zurarah lied upon the Ahl al-Bayt:

وقال أبو عبد الله عن زرارة : كذب علي والله كذب علي والله ، لعن الله زرارة لعن الله زرارة لعن الله زرارة “

“By Allah, he has ascribed lies to me! By Allah, he has ascribed lies to me! By Allah, he has ascribed lies to me! May Allah curse Zurarah! May Allah curse Zurarah! May Allah curse Zurarah!”. [Ikhtiyar Ma‘`rifat ar-Rijal, vol. 1 p. 361, Rijal Al-Kashi p.133]

ليس هكذا سألني ولا هكذا قلت: كذب علي والله كذب علي والله لعن الله زرارة لعن الله زرارة، لعن الله زرارة

“He didn’t ask me in this way, and I didn’t answer like this, by Allah he lied upon me, by Allah he lied upon me, May Allah curse Zurarah, May Allah curse Zurarah, May Allah curse Zurarah, May Allah curse Zurarah. [Ihtiyar marifatul rijal p.168]

Ja’far Al-Sadiq exposed Zurarah:

In Rijal of Kashi, page 145 sub-note: 228:

حدثنا محمد بن مسعود قال:حدثنا جبرئيل بن أحمد الفاريابي قال:حدثني العبيدي محمد بن عيسى عن
يونس بن عبد الرحمن عن ابن مسكان قال : سمعت زرارة يقول: رحم الله أبا جعفر وأما جعفر فإن في
قلبي عليه لفتة فقلت له: وما حمل زرارة على هذا ؟ قال : حمله على هذا أن أبا عبد الله أخرج مخازيه

Ibn Maskān narrates that heard Zurārah saying: “May Allah have mercy upon Abū Jaʿfar (Imām al-Bāqir)! As for Jaʿfar, verily my heart has turned away from him.” I asked what has caused Zurārah to make such a statement and I was told: “Abū ʿAbd Allāh (Jaʿfar) has exposed his lies, this is what has
prompted him to say this.”

Zurarah died as a Kafir:

عن ليث المرادي قال: سمعت ابا عبد الله عليه السلام يقول: لا يموت زرارة الا تائها.

From al-Layth al-Mardi: I heard Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) said: “Zurarah wouldn’t die except as a lost one”. [Ihtiyar marifatul rijal p.170]

Zurarah is a cursed innovater (Mubtadi’):

: قال أبو عبد الله : (ما أحدث أحد في الإسلام ما أحدث زرارة بن أعين من البدع عليه لعنة الله. رجال الكشي ص 149

Imam al-Sadiq says: “No one has brought innovation to Islam like Zurarah did, may Allah curse him.” [Rijal Al-Kashi p:149]

Zurarah has nothing to do with Islam:

قال إن ذا من مسائل آل أعين ليس من ديني و لا دين آبائي

Imam al-Sadiq said: “This issue is the work of Aal A’yun (referring to Zurarah ibn A’yun), it has nothing to do with my religion and the religion of my father. [Rijal Kashi, p. 137]

Zurarah is ruined:

حدثني محمد بن مسعود قال حدثني جبريل بن أحمد عن محمد بن عيسى بن عبيد عن يونس عن أبي الصباح قال : سمعت أبا عبد الله (ع) يقول يا أبا الصباح هلك المترئسون في أديانهم منهم زرارة و بريد و محمد بن مسلم و إسماعيل الجعفي

Imam al-Sadiq said: “O Abu Sabah! those who doubted in their religion are ruined, amongst them are Zurarah and Buraidah and Muhammad bin Muslim and Ismail al-Ju’fi.[Tanqih al maqal, Vol. 3 ,p. 186]

Zurarah is worse than Jews and Christians:

عن أبي عبد الله ع قال: دخلت عليه فقال: متى عهدك بزرارة؟ قال قلت ما رأيته منذ أيام قال: لا تبال وان مرض فلا تعده وان مات فلا تشهد جنازته قال قلت زرارة؟ متعجبا مما قال قال : نعم زرارة زرارة شر من اليهود والنصارى

Imam al-Sadiq asked the narrator : “When was the last time you have seen Zurarah?” Narrator says: “I haven’t seen him from some days, Imam said: “Don’t care about him , and if he becomes ill, don’t visit him, and if he dies, don’t join his funeral prayer. The narrator said: “You mean Zurarah?” He said it while he was surprised. Imam said: “Yes, Zurarah, for Zurarah is worse than Jews and Christians.”[Rijal Kashi, p. 142]

Similar narration: زرارة شر من اليهود والنصارى، ومن قال: إن مع الله ثالث ثلاثة ) (رجال الكشي: ص160. رواية رقم 267)

“Zurarah is worse than Jews and Christians, and those who say: with Allah is three of three. [Rijal Kashi p:160]

Zurarah, the con artist and dilemma for the Rafidah

Wakeels of the so called Imams can be compared to modern day Shia Maraji’ (Grand Ayatullats), both collected and collect Khums money for themselves, claiming it for the Imams, to this very day, in the name of the hidden Imam and his “representatives” (Iranian Ayatullats of Qom and elsewhere). But when the Imams themselves found out about this fraud, they took punitive action against these fraudsters.

Zurarah was one such self-appointed Wakeel of the Imams and claimed to be the Wakeel of Imam Jafar as-Sadiq and he collected Khums money in his name, yet despite all the condemning narrations in Sunni and Shia books, which including Imam Ja‘far al-Sadiq frequently cursing of Zurarah, he is still accepted by the Shi‘ah as the most prolific and reliable authority for the ahadith of the Imams.

What an amusing situation the Imami Shia found themselves in, whereby their own Wakeel had been condemned and cursed by the same man he claimed to be representing! But Fear not, for the Shia always had the safety net of Taqiyyah to resort to! And what an utterly convenient excuse that became. To explain away the actions of Imam Jafar al-Sadiq, the Imami Shia claim that Imam Jafar was simply acting under Taqiyyah! These Shia claimed that the condemnation and cursing of Zurarah and calling him worse than Jews and Christians was just some act designed to save Zurarah’s life. What another masterful lie that could be fed to the gullible Shia masses! We read from their very own book which is also referenced on

It seems that because of his vehement activities in the cause of Jafar, Zurara met with some difficulties and even dangers. Thus, to spare him hardships, (Imam) Jafar, resorting to the principle of Taqiya, apparently disavowed him and even cursed him…[it was] in order to save Zurara… [The Origins and Early Development of Shi’a Islam, by Dr. S.H.M. Jafri, p.306]

So we see that Imam Jafar denounced and even cursed Zurarah, and this was the case not only with this one particular Wakeel but many other Wakeels as well. Yet, the Imami Shia insulated themselves from the insults of their own Imams by coming up with the masterful idea that the Imams were actually under Taqiyyah! This thereby curtailed the ability of the eleven Imams to stop these fraudsters, because they (the fraudsters) would simply forge many more Hadith and letters in the name of the Infallible Imams claiming that what they had just said in public was simply under Taqiyyah for fear of being apprehended by the Sunni government. These Wakeels would forge letters and hadith in the name of their Imams.

The Shia orchestrated countless rebellions against the Abbasid Caliphs, and yet we find that the Imams themselves always condemned them and distanced themselves from the Shia rebels. We read: (Imam) Al-Sadiq’s quiescent policy did not satisfy a considerable body of his adherents. Their political movement caused schism amongst the Imamites. The instigator of this political movement was called Abu al-Khattab…but (Imam) al-Sadiq then repudiated and denounced him… [The Occultation of the Twelfth Imam, by Dr. Jassim Hussain, p.33] Abu al-Khattab was yet another self-appointed Wakeel who was repudiated and denounced by the Imam of his time. These Wakeels routinely forged letters in the name of the Imams, and when the Imams found out of this, they would always condemn these Wakeels.

There are countless such examples, all explained away by the Shia as being “Taqiyyah” only. In fact, the Imams even told their companions to work in the Sunni administration of the Abbasids, which is a clear proof of the Sunni-ness of the Imams. We read: “(Imam) al-Kazim permitted a few of his adherents to work in the Abbasid administration, especially in the offices of al-wizaara and al-bareed (government mail)” [The Occultation of the Twelfth Imam, by Dr. Jassim Hussain, p.36] The Shia once again explain this away by claiming that these adherents were under Taqiyyah and were simply working for the Abbasid administration to spy on them. How superb are the Shia excuses to explain away all facts that do not jive with the Shia paradigm!

The Shia base their entire ideology on conspiracy theories, whereby the Imams were actually under Taqiyyah. But this flouts the actual recorded history in which the Imams never claimed to be Infallible Imams or a part of the sect and cult known as Imamiyyah.

While Taqiyyah may help to explain some unfavorable remarks, it does not resolve issue with the numerous accounts where Imam al-Sadiq harshly and repeatedly not just cursed Zurarah but also declared him a non-Muslim i.e made Takfir on him! In addition, many curses issued by al-Sadiq appear in the form of responses to Zurarah’s distortions of the Imam’s teachings rather than general public censure to appease the evil authorities as claimed by Shia apologists; that is it was only when people coming from Kufah had informed al-Sadiq of Zurarah’s statements and teachings that the curses were issued and not when so called opponents/opposers (‘Aaammah/Sunnis in Shia theology) approached the Imams. The Shia argument that Al-Sadiq said all those harsh words+Takfir “in order  that Zurarah could be removed from the State surveillance radar” makes hence no sense.

Al-Sadiq’s utterances have been aimed at cautioning everybody against referring to Zurarah in their religious rulings or to consider him a Muslim at all! argues:

Imam (as) was not preaching during an era of Government transparency wherein subjects were afforded the freedom of expression and the freedom to promote religious thoughts. The Imam (as) lived during the reign of a brutal tyrannical dictatorship that ruled through fear and intimidation. Imam Sadiq (as) as the legitimate heir to the seat of Caliphate was seen as a threat to the Head of State and his cronies. Recognising this threat the Sunni state always had officials surveying the speeches and activities of the Imam (as) and his supporters.

Yet it is the Shia who (correctly) state that Al-Sadiq had freedom to sit and teach his fellow Sunni students. It is Shia who (correctly) state that Al-Sadiq had the freedom of teaching thousands of students in the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) Mosque. What was he teaching thousands of people? Of course traditional Sunni Islam. If his so called followers claim that he had no choice but to employ Taqiyyah (denying all so called essential Shia beliefs that will allegedly lead us to Paradise!), then we ask why he accepted to misguide the masses in the first place? Nobody forced him to teach thousands of students nor can Shias prove that he did teach them Shiism but they rejected it (that would have been mass-narrated, but it isn’t, Al-Sadiq is praised as a Sunni Imam in Sunni literature).

We further read on the website:

Imam Sadiq (as) as the legitimate heir to the seat of Caliphate was seen as a threat to the Head of State and his cronies.

A threat who taught thousands of students in the Prophet’s Mosque? A threat who never, not with a single word, supported a single uprising by ‘Alid Hashimites (his own people) Shias act like their Imams and their students were the only ones who faced hardship during this era. That is a dishonest distortion of history at best.

  • Imam Malik got  his arms pulled out of his sockets
  • Abu Hanifa due to his support for the Ahl al-Bayt was tortured to death in prison
  • Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal did not compromise when most scholars in his time did Taqiyyah and refuted the belief in the creation of the Qur’an openly and in public and was almost lashed to death!

And there are many other examples. Yet we don’t see the great Sunni scholars doing “taqiyyah” (an excuse to cover up contradicting reports and outright fabrications) to save themselves. If the scholars are doing taqiyyah, then how can the common people know the truth (Imam Ahmad’s famous statement)? Much less Allah’s  supposed representatives on earth?

Maybe such conspiracy theories satisfy Shias, but to Muslims, this man and his heritage make it clear why he was indeed accursed and worse than the Jews and Christians.

Whitewashing of a Zindeeq (heretic)

Shia scholars such as Tusi and Najashi tried to restore Zurarah’s reputation by simply omitting mention of any negative reports. Tusi only notes that Zurarah was a grammarian, adding that he composed books on Istita’ah (man’s capacity to perform acts) and jabr (determinism), Najashi merely praises him, stating that he was  a Qari (Qur’an reciter), faqih (jurist), theologian, poet, man of letters (Adib), and truthful in what he reported. Zurarah was, remarks Najashi, “Shaykh Ashabina Fi Zamanih” (the eminent teacher among our companions in his time).

Contemporary Twelver biographical works also tend to idealize Zurarah. Ayatollah Khoie (teacher of Ali Sistani), until his death in 1992 one of the supreme religious authorities of the Shia community, attempts to completely exonerate Zurarah and portray him as an exemplary disciple.

Evidently, Twelver authors are more concerned with preserving Zurarah’s image as a faithful and reliable Companions (of the Imams) than providing a substantive analysis of the differences between him and al-Sadiq. In fact, much effort is directed by later Twelver biographers at rehabilitating disciples such as Zurarah, raising them, at times, to levels higher than those accorded them in the earlier works. The reasons for this idealization is that to Twelvers, Zurarah, is seen as an indispensable source upon whom many hadiths depend and if he collapses, then at least half of Twelver Shiism will collapse.


Zurarah hails from Kufa, the centre of the successors of Ibn Saba; he is cursed by the Imam as Ibn Saba was cursed by Sayyiduna ‘Ali; and yet he is respected as a trustworthy and reliable narrator of the ahadith which form the basis of Shi‘ism! The narrations that criticise him are numerous in Shia books and similar narrations can be found in Sunni books. How can someone take his religion from this heretic who is responsible for thousands of fabrications in the name of the Ahl al-Bayt?