Khomeini’s Views on Sunnis: Shocking Fatwas Exposed New

Khomeini’s Rulings on Ahl al-Sunnah: Takfir, Impurity & Enmity Exposed

Views of the Leader of the Iranian Revolution, Khomeini, regarding Ahl al-Sunnah

Written by: Mamoon Rashid bin Haroon Rashid Salafi.

Some self-proclaimed thinkers and preachers of the present era keep crying hoarse about the “unity of the Ummah” and harp on the tune of Shia-Sunni proximity and unity, presenting Khomeini’s Iranian revolution as an exemplary Islamic revolution worthy of emulation. So much so that some of them have even written books titled “Al-Khomeini Al-Hal Al-Islami wal-Badeel” (Khomeini: The Islamic Solution and Alternative). In such a situation, if anyone speaks to them about the polytheistic and disbelief-ridden beliefs and ideologies of the Rafidis (Shias) and quotes their views based on malice and enmity towards Sunnis, these thinkers label it as a product of sectarianism and religious bigotry. They try to convince others that their role model and ideal, Mr. Khomeini, harbors feelings of love for Sunnis and is free from prejudice and sectarianism.

To refute this claim, a few venomous sayings and thoughts of Khomeini regarding “Sunnis” are presented below, please observe:

First of all, let me clarify that among the Rafidis, all sects other than their own are called “Aammah” (the commoners) and “Nawasib” (enemies of Ahl al-Bayt). Therefore, wherever these terms are used in their books, they refer to “Sunnis”.

Rafidi scholar Syed Muhsin al-Amin al-Amili writes: “الخاصة وهذا يطلقه أصحابنا على أنفسهم مقابل العامة الذين يسمون بأهل السنة” Our scholars apply the word “Khaassah” (the elite/special) to themselves, as opposed to the “Aammah” who are called Ahl al-Sunnah. (A’yan al-Shia 1/21)

Rafidi jurist and Muhaddith Husayn Asfoor Bahrani writes: “بل أخبارهم عليهم السلام تنادي بأن الناصب هو ما يقال له عندهم سنيا…ولا كلام في أن المراد بالناصبة فيه هم أهل التسنن” The traditions of the Imams, peace be upon them, clearly indicate that “Nasib” means “Sunni”… and there is no dispute that the word “Nasibah” in their discourse refers to Ahl al-Sunnah. (Al-Mahasin Al-Nafsaniyyah fi Ajwibah al-Masail al-Khorasaniyyah p: 145)

Khomeini himself, while discussing Nawasib, writes: “المسلم الناصب هو غير الشيعي” A Nasibi Muslim is a Muslim who is other than a Shia. (Al-Makasib al-Muharramah 2/149)

Moreover, in numerous places, while mentioning the narrations of Ahl al-Sunnah, Khomeini has written “ومن طريق العامة…” and to differentiate between Shia and Sunni, he has repeatedly used the terminology of “العامة والخاصة” (Al-Aammah and Al-Khaassah).

1- According to Khomeini, opposing Sunnis is obligatory and necessary, rather it is a sign of truth and the reason for preference in times of disagreement. Meaning, if there are several different opinions on an issue or more than one statement is transmitted from the Imams, then in such a case, that opinion and statement will be considered true and preferred which involves opposing Ahl al-Sunnah. Thus, Khomeini has written: “إن المرجح في باب التعارض منحصر بموافقة الكتاب ومخالفة العامة” (Al-Ta’adul wal-Tarjeeh by Khomeini p: 180, 210) that in the chapter of contradiction, the preference is restricted to the agreement with the Quran and the opposition to the Aammah (Sunnis).

Also in his book “Al-Ta’adul wal-Tarjeeh”, he has established a complete chapter under the heading “البحث الثاني في حال الأخبار الواردة في مخالفة العامة وهي أيضا طائفتان: إحداهما: ما وردت في خصوص الخبرين المتعارضين، وثانيتهما: ما يظهر منها لزوم مخالفتهم وترك الخبر الموافق لهم مطلقاً” (The Second Discussion: Regarding the condition of the reports narrated about opposing the Aammah, and these are also of two types: The first: What has been narrated specifically regarding two contradictory reports. The second: The reports from which it is apparent that it is obligatory to oppose them and absolutely abandon the report that agrees with them.) Under this, he has cited fabricated narrations attributed to his Imams and used them as evidence, writing:

From Abd al-Rahman bin Abi Abd Allah: “فإن لم تجدوهما في كتاب الله، فأعرضوهما على أخبار العامة، فما وافق أخبارهم فذروه، وما خالف أخبارهم فخذوه” The student of Ja’far al-Sadiq, Abd al-Rahman bin Abi Abd Allah narrates that “If you do not find the two mutually contradictory statements in the Book of Allah, then present them to the narrations of the Aammah! So, whatever statement agrees with their narrations, abandon it, and whatever opposes their narrations, accept it.”

It is narrated from Hasan bin al-Sari, he says Abu Abd Allah (Ja’far al-Sadiq) said: “When you have two mutually contradictory hadiths before you, take the hadith which is contrary to the people (Sunnis).”

It is narrated from Hasan bin Jahm, he says I asked the “Righteous Servant” (Musa al-Kadhim) that regarding the things that have reached us from you, is there any scope for us other than to completely submit to them? So he said: No! By Allah, you have no choice but to accept! Then I said that one thing is narrated from Abu Abd Allah (Ja’far al-Sadiq), peace be upon him, and the exact opposite is also narrated from him, so which of the two should we accept? He said: Accept that which opposes the people (Sunnis) and avoid that which agrees with them!

It is narrated from Muhammad bin Abd Allah, he says I said to (Imam Ali) al-Ridha, peace be upon him: How should we deal with two mutually contradictory narrations? He said: When you have two mutually contradictory narrations before you, see which of the two narrations is against the Aammah, so whatever opposes them, accept it, and whatever agrees with their narrations, leave it!

After mentioning these and some other similar narrations, Khomeini writes: “These reports are absolutely clear and bright evidence that opposing the Aammah (Sunnis) is the reason for preference for one of the mutually contradictory narrations… rather, this very preferrer is common, prevalent, and famous in all chapters of jurisprudence and on the tongues of the jurists.” (Al-Ta’adul wal-Tarjeeh by Khomeini p: 191-194)

After this, Khomeini has quoted narrations indicating the absolute necessity and obligation of opposing Sunnis in every chapter, writing:

It is narrated from Ali bin Asbat, he says I said to al-Ridha, peace be upon him: A problem arises but I fall short in knowing it, and in the city where I live, there is no one from your companions from whom I can ask for a fatwa. He said: Go to the jurist of the city and ask him your problem, whatever fatwa he gives you, you accept the stance contrary to it because the truth lies in that (opposing the Sunnis).

Abu Abd Allah Ja’far al-Sadiq says: “Whatever statements you have heard from me that resemble the statements of the people (Sunnis) are based on Taqiyyah, and the statements you have heard that do not resemble the statements of the people, there is no Taqiyyah in them.”

It is narrated from Abu Ishaq al-Arjani, he says that Abu Abd Allah (Ja’far al-Sadiq) says: “Do you know why you have been ordered to adopt a stance contrary to the statement of the Aammah? I said: I do not know why! He said: Because whatever Ali adopted as religion, the Ummah would leave his statement and accept the statement of another. Behind this, the intention of the people was to declare his command invalid and ineffective. Those people would ask Amir al-Mu’minin about something they did not know, so when he would give them a fatwa, they would invent a contrary stance from themselves in order to involve the people in deception!”

In one narration it is: “Our Shias are those who submit to our command, accept our words, and oppose our enemies. Whoever is not like this is not from us.”

In another narration it is: “By Allah, whatever things those people are upon, you are not upon any of them, and whatever things you people are upon, they are not upon any of them. Therefore, you must oppose them; they are not upon the true Hanifiyyah even an iota.”

Commenting on these two narrations, Khomeini writes: “It is known from these two narrations that they will be opposed in their beliefs, matters of Imamate, and affairs related to Imamate… As for his (Ja’far al-Sadiq’s) statement which is in the authentic (hadith) of Muhammad bin Isma’il bin Bazi’ that ‘When you see people paying attention to something, avoid it’, it indicates that their (Sunnis’) giving special attention to something and insisting on it is proof of it being false.”

“Anyway, there is no problem in the fact that opposing the Aammah is one of the preferrers in the chapter of contradiction. Therefore, the summary of whatever we have mentioned from the beginning of the discussion until here is that the textually stated preferrer is restricted to two things: agreement with the Book and Sunnah, and opposition to the Aammah (Ahl al-Sunnah).” (Al-Ta’adul wal-Tarjeeh by Khomeini p: 194-197) (Book implies: the Quran that Ali compiled, and Sunnah implies: some fabricated narrations attributed to the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, narrated through the chains of Shia narrators, and the sayings and traditions of the infallible Imams).

In one place, after quoting a few statements of the Imams that are contrary to their Rafidi principles and beliefs and in agreement with the Sunnis, he writes: “Within these narrations themselves lies the proof that these narrations were not issued by the Imams… and it is not far-fetched that these narrations were spread by opponents to distort the image of the Imams.” (Al-Bay’ 5/354)

“Narrations agreeing with the Aammah (Sunnis) might very well not have been issued by the Imams at all, but conspirators might have inserted them into their hadiths, and it is also possible that they were issued by them by way of Taqiyyah. Therefore, none of them is pure and stable in terms of substantiation.” (Al-Ta’adul wal-Tarjeeh p: 215)

Here, Khomeini has made several points:

First: If there is no statement of the infallible Imams available on an issue, and there is no reliable Rafidi scholar or jurist in the city to seek a fatwa from, then in such a situation, the issue should be asked of the Sunni jurist of the city, and whatever fatwa he gives, the stance contrary to it will be accepted because the truth is always in opposing the Sunnis.

Second: If more than one mutually contradictory statement and narration is transmitted from the Imams regarding an issue, and one of them is contrary to the narrations and school of thought of the Sunnis, then that statement will be accepted which is contrary to the Sunnis, because in the chapter of contradiction, opposing the Sunnis is among the textually stated preferrers.

Third: If only one statement is transmitted from the Imams regarding an issue and it is contrary to the Sunnis, then it will undoubtedly be the truth. But if it agrees with the Sunnis, it will be considered based on Taqiyyah, and it is also possible that it is actually not the statement of the Imams at all, but opponents have attributed it to them to distort the image of the Imams and inserted it into our sources. However, Khomeini has also clarified that in such a case where there is no contradiction in the statements of the Imams, the statements of the Imams will not be abandoned solely because of their agreement with the Sunnis.

Fourth: It is mandatory to avoid the things that Ahl al-Sunnah pay special attention to, because their giving special attention to something and insisting on it is proof of its falsehood.

Fifth: Khomeini believes that Ahl al-Sunnah are followers of a religion other than Islam, and anyone who is not a follower of the religion of Islam is a disbeliever. But he does not explicitly announce this; rather, he tries to convey his intent through veiled words and ambiguous styles, just as he has tried to do by citing Ja’far al-Sadiq’s statement, “By Allah, whatever things those people are upon, you are not upon any of them, and whatever things you people are upon, they are not upon any of them. Therefore, you must oppose them; they are not upon the true Hanifiyyah even an iota.”

(2) Khomeini has tried to establish through his compilations and articles that the religion of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah is defective and unprotected. He claims that they did not even try to acquire and preserve the original religion because their goal was only to attain the world, seize the throne of power, rule, and gather wealth. He writes: “There are many reasons for the differences in rulings between the Aammah (Ahl al-Sunnah) and the Khaassah (Shia Rafidis), and for the religious rulings being hidden from the Aammah, and for them being left behind from the specific details:

“One of them is that although the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, conveyed all the general rulings to the Ummah, but since the means of preservation were not strong in the early periods of the Shari’ah and the beginning of Islam, only those individuals who were his confidants and Ahl al-Bayt could retain the complete Shari’ah with all its specifics. And there was no one in the Ummah more attentive and a better preserver than Amir al-Mu’minin (Ali), peace be upon him. So, due to his intense dedication, he retained all the rulings and all the specifics of the Book of Allah, its exegesis and interpretation, matters aiding in the understanding of Quranic verses, and the principles of the Prophetic Sunnah. Perhaps the Quran which he compiled and wished to propagate after the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, was the Quran which contained all the specifics aiding in the understanding of the Quran, which he had retained according to the teachings of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him. In summary, even though the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, propagated the rulings, even mentioning the blood money for wounds inflicted on the face, the one who did not miss a single ruling and retained all the rulings of the Book and the Sunnah was Amir al-Mu’minin Ali, peace be upon him. Whereas, due to their lack of attention, many rulings were missed by the people; numerous narrations indicate this.

“One of these reasons is also that the Imams, peace be upon them, along with other perfections, understood all the branches derived from the general principles established by the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and mentioned in the Book of Allah, due to their inherent distinctions in understanding the Book and Sunnah compared to other people. Thus, where the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, opened one door, they opened a thousand doors for the Ummah, while others remained incapable of this. Therefore, the Book and Sunnah and the academic branches emanating from them, and the subtle points of revelation, passed down generation after generation, are exclusively their inheritance, while other people are deprived of it… So those directives that flowed upon the tongues of these Imams, peace be upon them, it is possible that many of those things were issued by the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, separate from the generalities and absolutes, and they were retained in their original state only by the treasurer of his knowledge, Amir al-Mu’minin Ali, and he deposited those things to the Imams, peace be upon them…!!!” (Al-Rasail by Khomeini with appendices by Mojtaba Tehrani 2/26-27)

Here, Khomeini has stated several reasons for the religion of Ahl al-Sunnah being defective:

First: In that era, the means and requirements for preserving the religion were not present with any of the Companions other than Ali, because their focus was only on acquiring worldly wealth and governance, as is the belief of common Rafidis.

Second: The complete religion and Shari’ah were retained only by Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, while all other people were deprived of it.

Third: The Quran which Ali had compiled and wished to propagate was different from our present Quran, because that Quran contained all the specifics aiding in the understanding of the Quran, which he had retained according to the teachings of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him.

Fourth: The noble Imams, due to their inherent distinctions, understood all the branches derived from the general principles established by the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and mentioned in the Book of Allah. Thus, where the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, opened one door, they opened a thousand doors for the Ummah, while others remained incapable of this. Consequently, those who did not accept the teachings of the noble Imams, their religion remained defective because they were deprived of the derivations of the Imams.

(3) According to Khomeini, Ahl al-Sunnah are his religious enemies, disbelievers, and polytheists, and are worse than Jews and Christians. He writes: “كل مخالف لنا في ديننا فهو عدونا في الدين” Every opponent of ours in our religion is our enemy in religion. (Al-Makasib al-Muharramah by Khomeini 1/250) It is clear from Khomeini’s writings that when he uses the word “opponent”, he means Ahl al-Sunnah.

He also writes: “The intended meaning of a ‘Mu’min’ is the Twelver Imami Shias. Thus, the narrations in which the believer is mentioned carry this very meaning, and the narrations in which ‘Akh’ (brother) is mentioned also do not include them (Sunnis), because after the obligation of disassociation from them, their religion, and their Imams, the bond of brotherhood does not remain between us and them, as the narrations indicate this and the principles of the school of thought demand it.” (Al-Makasib al-Muharramah by Khomeini 1/250)

“Whatever it may be, it is not appropriate to cast doubt upon the disbelief and impurity of both groups, because the disbelief of both well-known groups, Nawasib and Khawarij, is certainly agreed upon.” (Al-Taharah by Khomeini 3/336)

“In short, there is no evidence for the impurity of the Nasibis and Kharijites other than consensus and some reports, and some of these reports are such that they are not capable of proving the absolute impurity of the Nasibi and Kharijite, even though we absolutely excommunicate them, and sometimes even deem their killing obligatory.” (Al-Taharah by Khomeini 3/338)

“All sects of Muslims, whether they are followers of truth or followers of falsehood, are equal in blood money, except for those upon whom the ruling of disbelief has been applied, like the Nawasib and Khawarij.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/559)

“Muslims will inherit from one another, even if their schools of thought, principles, and beliefs are different… Yes, extremist followers of falsehood who have been excommunicated, and the Khawarij and Nawasib… who are disbelievers or fall under the ruling of disbelievers, Muslims will inherit from them, but they will not inherit from Muslims.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/394)

Rather, in some places, releasing a new contradiction, he has declared Ahl al-Sunnah, whom he calls Nasibis, as Muslims—which a person becomes by testifying to Monotheism and Prophethood—but he has negated faith from them. Thus, he says that Nawasib are Muslims, not Mu’mins, because to become a Mu’min, along with acknowledging the articles of faith, it is also mandatory to testify to the Wilayah of Ali, because acknowledging Ali’s Wilayah is a pillar of faith. He has also clarified that the title of “Iman” is exclusively restricted to the Twelver Shias, and the word “Mu’min” refers only to the Twelver Imami Shias. (See: Al-Waseelah 2/63, Al-Makasib al-Muharramah 1/250, Al-Taharah 3/323). And then he has differentiated between a Mu’min and a Muslim in numerous matters just as it is done between a Muslim and a disbeliever, and has specifically stipulated the condition of Iman for many acts of worship.

He writes: “For the one washing the deceased, the condition of Islam, rather the condition of Iman in a state of free will, is obligatory to consider.” (Zubdat al-Ahkam p: 59, Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/61)

“Being a Mu’min is a condition for those offering the funeral prayer of the deceased. Thus, the prayer of an opponent (Sunni) will not suffice, let alone that of the disbelievers.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/79)

“Conditions for the Imam of the congregational (prayer): There are several conditions in it: Iman…” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/249)

“The conditions for the Imam of the Friday prayer are the same as the conditions for the Imam of the congregational prayer, meaning Iman…” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/271)

“The conditions for the validity of fasting are several matters: Islam, Iman.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/267) Its necessary consequence is that the fast of anyone other than the Twelver Imami Shias will not be valid because, according to Khomeini, only Shias are Mu’mins.

“Attributes of a witness: … The third attribute is that the witness must be a Mu’min. Thus, the testimony of a non-Mu’min will not be accepted, let alone that of a non-Muslim…” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/398)

(4) According to Khomeini, Ahl al-Sunnah are impure and unclean. He writes: “أما النواصب والخوارج لعنهم الله تعالى، فهما نجسان من غير توقف” “As for the Nawasib and Khawarij, may Allah the Exalted curse them, both groups are impure without any hesitation.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/118)

“As for the Nawasib and Khawarij, may Allah rain curses upon them, both groups are impure.” (Zubdat al-Ahkam p: 52)

“Whatever it may be, it is not appropriate to cast doubt upon the disbelief and impurity of both groups, because the disbelief of both well-known groups, Nawasib and Khawarij, is certainly agreed upon.” (Al-Taharah by Khomeini 3/336)

“In short, there is no evidence for the impurity of the Nasibis and Kharijites other than consensus and some reports, and some of these reports are such that they are not capable of proving the absolute impurity of the Nasibi and Kharijite.” (Al-Taharah by Khomeini 3/338)

“As for both groups (Nawasib and Khawarij), their impurity is apparent, as consensus has been transmitted, and there is no disagreement of any kind regarding this, and the totality of the great scholars have not debated it and have left it as an indisputable fact.”

And he has reasoned this with a narration that indicates that Nawasib are worse than Jews, Christians, and Magians, and that Allah the Exalted has not created any creature more impure than a dog, and Nawasib are even more impure than a dog.

After this he has written: “After the impurity of the three sects (Jews, Christians, and Magians) is established, as has been exhaustively mentioned earlier, He has made this filthy sect their companion, which indicates its impurity, and in it is also the explicit statement that they are more impure than a dog. In terms of the correspondence between the ruling and the subject, apparently, this preference is in outward impurity.” (Al-Taharah by Khomeini 3/335-336)

(5) It is not permissible for Shias to offer the funeral prayer of any Sunni Muslim. He writes: “يجب الصلاة على كل مسلم وإن كان مخالفا للحق على الأصح، ولا يجوز على الكافر بأقسامه حتى المرتد ومن حكم بكفره ممن انتحل الإسلام كالنواصب والخوارج “

“According to the most correct opinion, it is obligatory to offer the funeral prayer for every Muslim, even if he is an opponent of the truth. And it is not permissible for disbelievers of all types, even the apostate, and those upon whom the ruling of disbelief has been passed among those who affiliate themselves with Islam, such as the Nawasib and Khawarij.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/79)

(6) Khomeini says that if a Sunni offers the funeral prayer for a deceased Shia, it will not suffice. Also, it is not permissible to bury Sunnis in a Shia graveyard, and if buried, they will be dug out and thrown away.

He writes: “Being a Mu’min is a condition for those offering the funeral prayer of the deceased. Thus, the prayer of an opponent (Sunni) will not suffice, let alone that of the disbelievers.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/79)

“لا يجوز أن يدفن الكفار وأولادهم في مقبرة المسلمين، بل لو دفنوا نبشوا”

“It is not permissible to bury disbelievers and their children in the graveyard of Muslims; rather, if they are buried, they will be exhumed.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/89, Zubdat al-Ahkam p: 44)

It has been stated above that Khomeini excommunicates Ahl al-Sunnah and treats them like disbelievers. Therefore, Ahl al-Sunnah are also included in this phrase.

(7) Khomeini’s fatwa is that “All sects of Muslims, whether they are followers of truth or followers of falsehood, are equal in blood money, except for those upon whom the ruling of disbelief has been applied, like the Nawasib and Khawarij.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/559) Meaning, the blood money of Sunnis is not like the blood money of common Muslims, because Khomeini considers their life and wealth to be lawful.

(8) According to Khomeini, Ahl al-Sunnah are Harbis (enemies at war), and their wealth is spoils of war for the Shias. Therefore, it is permissible to take their wealth wherever and however it is found, whether by stealing, snatching, through usurious business, or by making a false claim. He writes: “Wealth that is forcefully taken as spoils, or rather obtained by stealing or snatching—provided these two things are during war and its conditions, and are from Harbis… And what is obtained from them by stealing and snatching outside the aforementioned condition, similarly taken through interest and false claims etc., the more cautious approach is to consider it spoils of war and extract Khums from it… The strongest stance is to include the Nawasib in the category of Harbis regarding the permissibility and lawfulness of the spoils obtained from them and the issue of extracting Khums from it. Rather, it is apparent that it is permissible to take the wealth of a Nasibi wherever and however it is found, and it is obligatory to extract its Khums.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/352)

Meaning, just as taking the wealth of Harbis by stealing and snatching is permissible according to Khomeini, similarly taking the wealth of Nawasib, i.e., Sunnis, by stealing and looting is also permissible.

(9) It is not permissible to give charity to Sunnis even if they are relatives, whereas it is permissible to give charity to common disbelievers. He writes: “When giving recommended charity, conditions such as poverty, Iman, and Islam will not be considered for the recipient. Rather, it is permissible to give recommended charity to a wealthy person, a Dhimmi, and an opponent, even if he is a stranger. Yes, however, it is not permissible to give to a Nasibi and a Harbi even if he is a relative.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/91)

Similarly, he has also written that the rightful recipient of obligatory Zakat is only the Twelver Imami Shia. Opponents of the truth, even if they belong to the Shia sect, are not deserving of Zakat. Non-Imamis can only be given from the share of ‘Mu’allafati Quloobuhum’ (those whose hearts are to be reconciled). (Zubdat al-Ahkam p: 200, Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/310)

The recipient of Khums is also only the Imamis. (Zubdat al-Ahkam p: 224, Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/334)

For the needy receiving wealth from expiations, he has also laid down the condition that they must be Imamis. (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/115)

(10) The slaughtered animal of Sunnis is not lawful, whereas the slaughtered animal of individuals belonging to all other Islamic sects is lawful. He writes: “The slaughtered animal of a disbeliever is not lawful, whether he is a polytheist or not, even according to the stronger stance, the slaughtered animal of the People of the Book is also not lawful. And for this, being a Mu’min is not a condition; therefore, the slaughtered animals of all Islamic sects will be lawful except the Nawasib. Even if they profess Islam, still their slaughtered animal will not be lawful.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/146)

“There are several conditions for the prey of a hunting dog to be lawful: … The one releasing the dog for hunting must be a Muslim or under the ruling of a Muslim… Thus, if the dog is released by any type of disbeliever or someone who is under the ruling of a disbeliever—like the Nawasib, may Allah rain curses upon them—then the animal hunted by it will not be lawful to eat.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/120)

Similarly, he also holds the view that if a sacrificial animal is slaughtered by a non-Twelver Imami, it is obligatory to slaughter it again. He writes: “Obligatorily, the more cautious approach is that the slaughterer must be a Mu’min… If the slaughterer is a non-Mu’min, it will not suffice and it will be obligatory to slaughter again.” (Manasik al-Hajj by Khomeini p: 223)

(11) The testimony of Sunnis has no credibility, because one of the conditions for a witness is that he must be a Mu’min, and only Twelver Shias who believe in the Wilayah of Ali are Mu’mins. He writes: “Attributes of a witness: … The third attribute is that the witness must be a Mu’min. Thus, the testimony of a non-Mu’min will not be accepted, let alone that of a non-Muslim…” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/398)

12- It is not permissible to bathe a deceased Sunni. He writes: “It is not permissible to bathe disbelievers. Similarly, among Muslims, those who have been excommunicated, such as the Nawasib and Khawarij, etc., it is also not permissible to bathe them.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 1/58)

12- Sunnis will not inherit from Shias, whereas Shias will inherit from Sunnis and take a share of their properties. He writes: “Muslims will inherit from one another, even if their schools of thought, principles, and beliefs are different… Yes, extremist followers of falsehood who have been excommunicated, and the Khawarij and Nawasib… who are disbelievers or fall under the ruling of disbelievers, then Muslims will inherit from them, but they will not inherit from Muslims.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/394)

13- It is permissible to backbite Sunnis, curse them, trample their honor, and revile them. He writes: “It is absolutely clear that prohibition is only specific to backbiting a Mu’min (meaning only backbiting an Imami Shia is forbidden). Therefore, backbiting an opponent (Ahl al-Sunnah, etc.) is permissible, unless Taqiyyah etc. dictates refraining from it. The reason for this is that the evidences for the prohibition of backbiting do not prove the prohibition of backbiting them.” (Al-Makasib al-Muharramah by Khomeini 1/249)

After this, Khomeini mentioned some narrations in support of his stance and said: “One who ponders over the numerous narrations in various chapters will not have the slightest doubt regarding the permissibility of trampling their (Sunnis’) honor and reviling them; rather, the infallible Imams themselves have cursed them immensely and spoken much ill of them.” (Al-Makasib al-Muharramah by Khomeini 1/251)

Then he mentioned this narration: “Abu Hamzah narrated from Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, saying: I said to Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, that some of our companions fabricate lies against their opponents and falsely accuse them. He said: It is better not to do so. Then he said: O Abu Hamzah! Everyone other than our Shias are children of fornicators.” Commenting on this, he wrote: “This narration clearly indicates the permissibility of levelling accusations and falsely charging them (Sunnis). However, it is superior and better not to do so, but except for sometimes, it is difficult to restrain.” (Al-Makasib al-Muharramah by Khomeini 1/252)

14- On the Day of Resurrection, the good deeds of Sunnis will be given to Shias, and the sins of Shias will be thrust upon the heads of Sunnis. Accordingly, Khomeini has quoted a narration attributed to Abu Ja’far Muhammad al-Baqir, which explicitly states that “On the Day of Judgment, all the sins of the Mu’min will be taken and put upon the responsibility of the Nasibi, and all the good deeds, acts of virtue, and worship and austerity of the Nasibi will be taken from him and bestowed upon the Mu’min.” Then, commenting on it, he wrote: “On this basis, what will happen to the disbelievers, hypocrites, and people like them?!… Is their recompense not what has been mentioned in this noble narration?! That their good deeds will be snatched away and given to the Mu’mins, and the sins of the Mu’mins will be taken and thrust upon them! This just ruling has also been pointed out both interpretatively and explicitly in many places.” (Al-Adab al-Ma’nawiyyah lil-Salat 1/122)

Consider how Khomeini has bestowed the title of “noble narration” upon this false and fabricated narration, and has declared the oppressive ruling present in it as a just ruling!!!

15- It is forbidden for Shia men to marry Sunni women and for Shia women to marry Sunni men. Even Mut’ah (temporary marriage) with Sunni women is not permissible. He writes: “It is not permissible for a Mu’minah (believing) woman to marry a Nasibi man… Similarly, it is not permissible for a Mu’min man to marry a Nasibi woman. Because they both fall under the ruling of disbelievers, even if they outwardly profess the religion of Islam.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/256, Zubdat al-Ahkam p: 327)

“It is not permissible for any Muslim to perform Mut’ah with any type of disbelieving women except a woman from the People of the Book, neither with an apostate woman nor with a Nasibah…” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/258)

16- Khomeini’s stance is that praying behind Sunnis is fundamentally not permissible. However, performing prayer behind them while practicing Taqiyyah and for the sake of protecting the “secrecy” of one’s school of thought is permissible, rather it is equal to praying behind the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him. (Al-Taqiyyah by Khomeini p: 100, 199, 198, 63, 66, 70)

17- It is forbidden to go to Sunni judges for the settlement of issues, because they are Taghut. Therefore, whoever goes to them goes to Taghut, and seeking judgment from Taghut is disbelief. Thus, after mentioning a narration attributed to Ja’far al-Sadiq which states that “whoever seeks judgment from Sunni judges seeks judgment from Taghut, whereas Allah has commanded to reject Taghut,” he writes that “The Imam, while answering the questioner’s query, absolutely forbade turning to unjust rulers for the settlement of civil or criminal issues. This means that whoever turns to them turns to Taghut for his judgment, whereas Allah has commanded to disbelieve in it.” (Al-Hukumah al-Islamiyyah by Khomeini p: 87)

“Turning to the judges of the Aammah (Sunnis) is necessarily impermissible.” (Al-Ijtihad wal-Taqlid p: 116)

“Taking a case to unjust judges is forbidden, meaning those in whom the conditions for judging are not complete. If someone takes a matter to them, he will be a sinner, and whatever he takes as a result of their judgment will be Haram.” (Tahreer al-Waseelah 2/365)

“The Imam, peace be upon him, in his answer forbids turning to un-Islamic courts, whether they are administrative or judicial, and says that the Muslim masses should not turn to kings, unjust rulers, and the judges working for them to resolve their affairs, even if the person seeking recourse has an established right and he wants to go to acquire it. Consequently, if a Muslim’s son is killed or his house is looted, he still does not have the right to go and file a case with unjust rulers. Whoever goes to them in matters like these goes to Taghut, meaning un-Islamic powers, and whatever right he takes through them, he takes as Haram. And if it is his established right, that too is Haram and he has no right to dispose of it.” (Al-Hukumah al-Islamiyyah p: 136)

Regarding the famous judge of the era of the Rightly Guided Caliphate—the periods of Umar, Uthman, and Ali—Judge Shurayh, he writes: “This Shurayh remained appointed to the post of judge for approximately fifty years. He was a sycophant of Mu’awiyah, used to praise and extol him, and used to say things about him that he did not deserve. This attitude of his was tantamount to demolishing the principles established by the government of Amir al-Mu’minin Ali.” (Al-Hukumah al-Islamiyyah p: 74)