I put my trust in the Lord God al-Ḥākim, the Lord of eternity, and seek approach to Him through His Guardian, the standing, guiding Imam, the Cause of causes. From the weak servant, the one possessed by the ranks of the Guardian and seeking their aid in turning toward the divine Kingdom: the sinful servant implores by their dignity and intercession to be counted among those whom the Lord embraces with pardon and good pleasure, and upon whom He bestows the abundance of His favor.
The sincere, possessed servant says: When I examined the religious law of Iblīs, I did not leave its defective and plainly erroneous passages unexamined. I recognized that in this time the exposure of the impostors who misrepresented religion is among the most profitable undertakings and noblest works. Therefore, having completed my earlier work, Pursuit and the Unveiling of Hidden Unbelief, I looked again and reconsidered the statement attributed to God in the chapter of the Table (al-Māʾida), and the alleged revelation invented around it: “Today the good things are lawful for you. The food of those given the Book is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them; and lawful to you are chaste believing women and chaste women of those who received the Book before you.” He thus made these things lawful, and the community practiced the permission for a long period.
Then he returned and overturned the revelation he claimed had been revealed to him, exposing his falsehood and his embellishment against God, exalted is He. In the chapter of the Cow (al-Baqara) he said: “Do not marry women who associate others with God until they believe. A believing slave woman is better than an associating woman, even if she pleases you. Do not give women in marriage to associating men until they believe; a believing slave man is better than an associating man, even if he pleases you. Those people summon to the Fire, while God summons to the Garden and forgiveness by His permission. He makes His signs clear so that they may remember.” Thus the statements contradicted one another, and deeds fell into confusion.
Then the lawgiver listed prohibited family relations, including daughters and mothers, and said: “Nor may you combine two sisters, except for what has already passed. God is forgiving and merciful. Also forbidden are married women, except those your right hands possess. This is God's ordinance upon you.” Thus he forbade what he had previously permitted, abrogated his own ruling, and overturned the conditions he himself had laid down for marriage.
A man comes to a woman and agrees with her upon a known number of months for a known number of dirhams, setting a payment by mutual agreement. When the period ends, he may dismiss her or agree with her upon another period and payment. For this he cited: “You incur no blame for what you mutually agree upon beyond the prescribed due. God is knowing and wise.” In this way he abrogated the marriage ruling and broke all its conditions. Affairs passed into licentiousness and fornication, the sound attribution of children was disturbed, and the genealogies of people became confused.
When the pious Unitarians questioned him about this, disapproved of it, and challenged him while remaining concealed in their cave, he said that God had revealed to him: “Do you wish to question your Messenger as Moses was questioned before? Whoever exchanges faith for unbelief has strayed from the straight path.” He also cited: “Many of the People of the Book would like to turn you back to unbelief after your faith, out of envy from themselves, after the truth has become clear to them.” In this way he answered their challenge with accusations of disbelief instead of establishing the marriage ruling he had altered.
As for the saying: “We offered the Trust to the heavens and the earth, but they refused to bear it; the human being undertook it, for he was unjust and ignorant.” The heavens and earth declined the Trust in its inward meaning of tawḥīd, whereas the human being and others like him bore it in the outward sense of transmigration and embodiment.
His insight was clouded concerning the direction in which he commanded them to pray. At one time he ordered them to face east, at another to face west, because of the limits of his knowledge. He claimed that God revealed to him: “The foolish among the people will say: What has turned them from the direction of prayer they used to face? Say: East and west belong to God. He guides whom He wills to a straight path.” He added: “Thus We have made you a middle community so that you may be witnesses over the people, while the Messenger shall be a witness over you.” The Messenger cannot stand as a witness over the true Imam. The Imam, peace upon him, has no one who witnesses over him; he is the witness over creation, and all the nations depend upon him.
In the truth of religion, it is the Imam of each age who sends messengers carrying the trust of divine unity. Most of the lawgiving messengers disobeyed or acted hypocritically toward that trust. The Imam is the operative command of God, exalted beyond the subordinate ranks of witnesses. Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muḥammad, and those like them have occupied differing religious stations; but the genuine proofs of faith and callers toward it are those who manifest the evidence of divine unity and establish the signs of knowledge and justice, not those who impose invented laws upon peoples.
Consider the stories preserved in the written Scriptures concerning the excellent proofs whose prayers were answered and whose enemies were defeated. Of Ṣāliḥ it is said: “People, this she-camel of God is a sign for you. Let her graze on God's earth and do not harm her, lest a painful punishment take you.” When they harmed her, destruction came upon them: “Those who did wrong were seized by the cry and lay lifeless in their dwellings, as though they had never lived there. Thamūd disbelieved in their Lord; away with Thamūd!” These are signs of a prophet whose proof was confirmed, not of a claimant unable to establish his assertions.
Likewise the story of Lot in the chapter of Hūd includes his warning to his people, their contempt for his protection, and the divine reversal of their dwellings: “When Our command came, We turned its highest part into its lowest and rained upon it stones of baked clay, marked by your Lord.” The chapter of al-Ḥijr says also that the last of those people would be cut off by morning and describes their refusal of the guests Lot had taken under his protection. These accounts display the answered appeals of righteous persons and the punishment of those who opposed them.
Of Shuʿayb, the chapter of Hūd relates: “My people, act according to your standing; I am acting. You will learn who will be visited by a humiliating punishment, and who is the liar. Watch, and I watch with you.” When the command came, Shuʿayb and those who believed with him were delivered, while the wrongdoers were seized by a cry and lay prostrate in their homes. It was as though they had never dwelt there; Midian was removed like Thamūd before it. The true Scriptures also show that Shuʿayb received Moses and imparted knowledge to him, whereas Moses subsequently opposed and acted hypocritically toward him.
Such examples distinguish the honest friends of the divine Call from the lawgivers who forced bodily rituals upon their communities while disregarding the knowledge of the divine command. These Qurʾānic words condemn those lawgivers themselves. In al-Māʾida: “For each of you We have appointed a law and a way. Had God willed, He would have made you one community, but He tests you concerning what He has given you. Race toward good things; to God is your return, and He will tell you about that in which you differed.”
The disagreement must be the disagreement of the lawgivers, since each prescribed conflict against the followers of the others, making their peoples fight one another. If an opponent insists that the passage addresses ordinary communities rather than the makers of religious laws, another problem follows: to grant all communities freedom to choose among different laws would deny the exclusive validity of each lawgiver's claims. In particular, it would contradict the prohibition of departing from the law of Muḥammad, the force used to impose that law, and the claim that earlier religions were superseded. Therefore this is a rebuke to the lawgivers whose institutions divided humanity, not an endorsement of their separate systems.
This too is among the accounts of the lawgiver of Islam, when his community asked him for miracles and for clear proofs and signs. This was his answer to them in al-Anʿām: “Say: I stand upon a clear proof from my Lord, but you have called it false. What you seek to hasten is not in my possession. Judgment belongs only to God, who declares the truth and is the best of judges. Say: If I possessed what you seek to hasten, the matter between me and you would already have been decided.” This response admits that no manifest proof had been produced, especially when compared with the signs described in the earlier stories. Another passage says: “They swore by God with their strongest oaths that if a sign came they would believe. Say: The signs are with God. And what makes you know that, even if a sign came, they would believe?” This evasive answer is deceitful, and so is its speaker.
The unbelieving opponents had asked: “God, if this is the truth from You, then rain stones upon us from heaven or bring us a painful punishment.” He answered with the assertion: “God would not punish them while you are among them,” and elsewhere: “Why should God not punish them when they keep people from the Sacred Mosque?” These passages contradict one another, unlike the immediate punishments attributed to the prayers of genuine prophets and proofs.
Then consider Moses and his companion in the chapter of the Cave. Moses tells his young attendant to bring their meal because the journey has exhausted them. The attendant recalls the fish that took its way into the sea, and they retrace their steps. They encounter a servant of God's servants upon whom mercy and direct knowledge had been bestowed. Moses asks, “May I follow you, so that you teach me some of the sound judgment you have been taught?” He is warned: “You will not be able to remain patient with me. How could you be patient concerning something that you have not encompassed in knowledge?” Moses promises patience and obedience. The righteous servant, knowing the difference between his own knowledge and Moses' limited understanding, tells him not to ask questions until an explanation is provided.
As for what is reported of Moses and the righteous servant, the account is well known, circulating on people's tongues and set down in books: the boat was damaged, and Moses protested; he withdrew his objection, but then protested when the young man was killed: 'Have you killed a pure soul without another soul?' He declared someone innocent before knowing the cause hidden from him. When the wall was repaired, the righteous servant said, 'This is the parting between me and you,' and disclosed the reasons for the deeds Moses had condemned. Consider how the lawgiver judged by outward appearances while the righteous servant possessed knowledge he had not yet received.
Another chapter addresses the messengers: “Eat of the good things and do righteous deeds. I know what you do. This community of yours is a single community, and I am your Lord, so fear Me. But they divided their affair among themselves into writings; each party rejoices in what it possesses.” “Writings” here means books of religious law by which separate parties established permissions and prohibitions, incited their peoples to combat, and imposed invented restrictions. The actual peoples did not compose these different systems; their leaders did. The following words, “Leave them in their confusion for a time,” are accordingly interpreted as a condemnation of those founders of religious division.
As for Muḥammad's night journey: Muḥammad claimed to have been carried through the night, to have reached the heavens, and to have heard celestial voices. When the people of Quraysh doubted this and asked for proof, he asserted that a revelation had vindicated him: “Glory to the One who carried His servant by night from the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest Mosque, whose surroundings We have blessed.” According to the polemical story, a Jewish man then challenged him: “Rise a single cubit above the ground before us, and we shall believe you. We will not substitute a distant report for something seen with our own eyes.” Muḥammad could not satisfy the challenge, and his opponents judged his narrative an invention.
He also exploited claims of revelation for financial gain. First came the warning to those who hoard gold and silver: “Give them news of a painful punishment, on a day when these treasures are heated in Hellfire and their foreheads, sides, and backs are branded: 'This is what you hoarded for yourselves; taste what you used to hoard.'” Then came the command: “Take from their wealth a charitable offering by which you purify and cleanse them; pray for them, for your prayer is reassurance to them, and God is hearing and knowing.” These are cited as instances in which the supposed revelation both threatened possession of wealth and provided a way for its collection.
The chapter of the Confederates likewise says: “It is not for a believing man or woman, when God and His Messenger decide a matter, to have any choice in their affair; whoever disobeys God and His Messenger has gone plainly astray.” Consider then the episode of Zayd and his wife. The scriptural account tells how Muḥammad addressed the man whom God and the Messenger had favored, saying, “Keep your wife and fear God,” while concealing in his own soul what God would make public and fearing people when God had greater claim to be feared. When Zayd had finished with her, the verse says, “We married her to you so that believers should suffer no restriction concerning the wives of their adopted sons when those sons have ended their union with them.” It adds that the Prophet incurs no blame in what God prescribes for him and that this was the custom of earlier messengers. Thus he made mention of Zayd’s wife a matter for which God calls His servants to account. He claimed that God had commanded and revealed this and similar things to him. I have explained this in Unveiling Hidden Unbelief and Refuting the False Religious Law and Code.
By contrast, examine the merits attributed to Jesus son of Mary in the account of al-Māʾida. God says: “Remember My favor upon you and your mother, when I supported you with the Holy Spirit, so that you spoke to people in the cradle and in maturity; and when I taught you the Scripture, wisdom, Torah, and Gospel; and when you formed from clay the shape of a bird by My permission and breathed into it, and it became a bird by My permission; when you healed the person born blind and the leper by My permission, and brought forth the dead by My permission; and when I restrained the Children of Israel from you as you came to them with clear proofs.” It continues with the inspiration of the disciples to believe. These are examples of the authenticated acts of divine proofs, not merely of persons who imposed law.
Let us also consider the Qurʾān itself. Its claimant asserted that it was the revealed speech of God, neither created nor fabricated, and that “falsehood cannot approach it from before or behind.” Yet Muslims recognize and authorize differing ways of reciting it. The seven celebrated reciters are Abū ʿAmr ibn al-ʿAlāʾ, Ḥamza, al-Kisāʾī, ʿĀṣim, Nāfiʿ, Ibn Kathīr, and Ibn ʿĀmir. Each had transmitters who explained and defended his readings, such as al-Yazīdī's transmission from Abū ʿAmr and Warsh's transmission from Nāfiʿ. These traditions multiplied into distinct accounts of particular letters and meanings.
Consider also the variant readings of the verse, ‘God brought you forth from your mothers’ wombs, not knowing anything.’ Some read the crucial words with ẓāʾ and rāʾ, making them ‘from your mothers’ clitorises’ (min buẓūr ummahātikum) instead of ‘from your mothers’ wombs’ (min buṭūn ummahātikum); This is nonsense and foolishness. There is also Ibn Mujāhid's reading from ʿAlī and other disagreements among the reciters. How could speech described as protected from all falsehood need correction by grammarians, philologists, and rival reciters? The very existence of disputed readings defeats the claim that the text is perfect.
Such people attribute the speech of the Worshipped One to the products of ordinary human expression and fail to recognize the command that governs the worlds, the promise of the appointed day, and the true speech by which the Guardian supports the ranks of his Call. Such corrupt speech cannot be attributed to the Worshipped One. Rather, the command operative throughout the world and the promised day support the words of the Guardian. He undertakes this clarification to declare the Creator transcendent and to make the reality of existence clear.
The true Guardian has thus been established in his own person, and I have pointed to him and made clear the error of those who mislead the worlds. This sincere servant has achieved part of his aim and discharged, through his effort, part of the duty that lies upon him; let him acknowledge what remains of his shortcomings. Praise belongs to our Lord, and thanks to the Guardian of the Age, the just Imam, the Qāʾim of the Resurrection and abrogator of the religions. He is the means by which the nations approach the Creator in their cycles, the highest path to worship of the Lord God al-Ḥākim, transcendent beyond limits and signs. He suffices the weak servant who seeks salvation through his Master, the Qāʾim of Truth, on the Day of the Appointment. This writing was composed on the thirteenth day of Dhū al-Qaʿda, in the twenty-first year of the Qāʾim of Religion, the avenger against covenant-breakers, associators, unjust rulers, apostates, and renegades, through the sword and authority of our Lord al-Ḥākim, God of the worlds.
Completed, with praise to God and His favor.