Fatwa No. (1800): Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger, his family, and his Companions:
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Fatwa No. ( 1800 ): Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger, his family, and his Companions: And after: The Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta has reviewed the letter sent by His Royal Highness the Deputy Minister of Interior to His Eminence the Grand President, No. 2 S 5400, dated 15/5/1397 AH, and has reviewed the details of two alleged dialogues contained in the two publications accompanying His Highness’s letter. One took place between a Druze student studying at al-Azhar and the person the Druze called the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of al-Azhar, named Mustafa al-Rafii. The other took place between the person identified in the publication as belonging to the Sunnah, named Shaykh al-Haqq al-Husayni, and the person said to be a Druze professor named Abu Hasan Hani Zaidan. In response to His Highness’s request to review this and provide information, the following was written: First: A brief account of the sect of the Druze that reveals the reality of their matter. Second: A concise explanation of what appeared in the two dialogues, revealing the deception and obfuscation contained therein.
Isma'il al-Darazi , and his name is also narrated as 'Abd Allah al-Darazi, and Durozi ibn Muhammad. It is said that Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Darazi is Hish'takin or Hish'takin al-Darazi. It is said that they are attributed to Tiyruz , one of the lands of Persia . Al-Zabidi states in *al-Taj* that the correct ruling is to pronounce al-Darazi with an open *dāl*, as it is an attribution to the descendants of Darazah, who are the lowly, the tailors, and the weavers. 2 - Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Darazi appeared during the time of al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, Abu Ali al-Mansur ibn al-Aziz , one of the Fatimid kings who ruled Egypt for nearly two hundred years. They falsely and slanderously claimed to be from the Household of the Prophet and to be of the lineage of Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her). Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Darazi was initially from the Isma'ili Batini sect , which claims to be a follower of Muhammad ibn Isma'il ibn Ja'far al-Sadiq . Then he rebelled against them and connected with the Fatimid al-Hakim, agreeing with his claim of divinity. He called people to worship him and to affirm his oneness. He claimed that the deity had entered 'Ali and covered his human nature, and that the spirit of 'Ali transferred to his sons one after another until it transferred to al-Hakim. Al-Hakim delegated the affairs of Egypt to him so that people would obey him in the call. When his matter was exposed, the Muslims in Egypt rebelled against him and killed a group of those with him. When they sought to kill him, he fled and hid with al-Hakim, who gave him money and ordered him to go to the Levant to spread the call there. He went and settled in the Valley of Taym Allah ibn Tha'labah , west of Damascus .
He called them to deify al-Hakim, spread the principles of the Druze among them, and distributed money among them, so they responded to him. Another Persian man, named Hamza ibn Ali ibn Ahmad al-Hakimi al-Druzi , also engaged in the call to deify al-Hakim. He was one of the great ones of the Batiniyyah . He connected with the men of the secret call from al-Hakim’s Shi'ah and called for his deification secretly until he became a pillar of it. Then he declared it and claimed to be the messenger of al-Hakim, and al-Hakim agreed with that. When al-Hakim died and his son Ali, nicknamed al-Zahir li-I'zaz Din Allah, took over and disavowed the call to deify his father, the call was pursued in Egypt . Hamza fled to the Levant , and some of those who had responded to him followed him. Most of them settled in the district later named (Mount of the Druze) in Syria . Their principles: (A) They believe in hulul (incarnation). They believe that Allah incarnated in Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), then incarnated in his sons after him one after another until He incarnated in the Fatimid al-Hakim, Abu Ali al-Mansur ibn al-Aziz . Thus, the divinity incarnated in his human form, and they believe in the return of al-Hakim, that he disappears and reappears. (B) Taqiyyah (dissimulation). They do not clarify the reality of their sect except to those who are of them, and they do not disclose their secret except to those they trust and have confidence in from their group. (C) The infallibility of their Imams. They hold that their Imams are infallible from
error and sins; rather, they deified them and worshipped them besides Allah, as they did with al-Hakim. (D) Their claim of the knowledge of the unseen (batin). They claim that the texts of the Shari'ah have hidden meanings that are intended, rather than their apparent meanings. Based on this, they committed heresy in the texts of the Shari'ah and distorted their reports, commands, and prohibitions. As for their heresy in the reports, they denied the attributes of perfection belonging to Allah, and denied the Last Day and what is in it of reckoning and recompense from Paradise and Hellfire. They substituted for this what is called: tanaasukh (transmigration of souls) or the transfer of the soul of a human or animal upon its death to the body of another human or animal at the beginning of its creation, to live therein in bliss or torment. They said: an eternal age and a standing world, wombs that deliver, and a earth that swallows. They denied the angels and the message of the messengers, and followed the philosophers, the Peripatetics, followers of Aristotle in his principles and theories. As for their heresy in the texts of obligation (commands and prohibitions), they distorted them from their places. They said: prayer is the knowledge of their secrets, not the five prayers performed every day and night; fasting is the concealment of their secrets, not abstaining from things that break the fast from the appearance of dawn to the setting of the sun; and Hajj is visiting the sacred shaykhs in their view. They considered permissible
The open and hidden indecencies, and they deemed permissible the marriage of mothers and daughters... to name but a few of their manipulations of the texts and their denial of what is known by necessity to be the law of Allah, which He made obligatory upon His servants. Therefore, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali and others said: The outward appearance of their school is Rafidah, and its inner reality is pure disbelief. In this regard, they are most like the authors of the Epistles of the Brethren of Purity in their beliefs, actions, and methodology. (H) They speak with the words of the naturalists, saying: "Natures are generated for life, and death arises from the extinction of the natural heat, like the extinguishing of a lamp when the oil runs out, except for one who is killed by accident." (W) Hypocrisy in the call and deception therein: They display Shi'ism and love for the Household of the Prophet to those they call, and if they respond to them, they call them to Rafidah and reveal the faults of the Companions and disparage them. If they accept that from them, they reveal to them the faults of 'Ali and attack him. If they accept that, they move them to attacking the Prophets, saying: "They have inner meanings and secrets that contradict what they called their nations to." They say: "They were intelligent and established legal laws for their nations to achieve worldly interests and objectives..." By what are they judged? The Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked about what ruling applies to the Druze and the Nusayriyyah , so he answered as follows:
These Druze and Nusayriyyah are disbelievers by the consensus of the Muslims. It is not permissible to eat their slaughtered animals or marry their women. Rather, they do not even accept the jizyah, for they are apostates from the religion of Islam; they are not Muslims, nor Jews, nor Christians. They do not accept the obligation of the five daily prayers, the obligation of fasting Ramadan, or the obligation of Hajj, nor the prohibition of what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, such as carrion, intoxicants, and others. Even if they display the two testimonies along with these beliefs, they are disbelievers by the consensus of the Muslims. As for the Nusayriyyah , they are: the followers of Abu Shahib Muhammad ibn Nasir . He was one of the extremists who said that 'Ali is a god, and they recite:
As for the Druze: they are the followers of Hish'takin al-Darazi , who was a client of al-Hakim, meaning the Fatimid, one of the rulers of Egypt . The Batini sent him to the people of the Valley of Taym Allah ibn Tha'labah and called them to the divinity of al-Hakim. They call him "The Pure Boy" and swear by him. They are from the Isma'ilis who claim that Muhammad ibn Isma'il abrogated the Shari'ah of Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah. They are greater in disbelief than the Ghaliyyah. They affirm the pre-eternity of the world, deny the resurrection, and deny the obligations and prohibitions of Islam. They are from the Batini Qarmatians who are more disbelieving than the Jews and the Christians and the polytheists of the Arabs. Their goal is to be philosophers in the
school of Aristotle and his like, or to be Magians. Their statement is a composite of the statements of the philosophers and the Magians . They display Shi'ism out of hypocrisy, and Allah knows best. The Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) also said, in a refutation of the rejection of the sects of the Druze : "The disbelief of these people is a matter in which Muslims do not differ. Indeed, whoever doubts their disbelief is a disbeliever like them. They are not in the position of the People of the Book or the polytheists, but they are the disbelievers who are astray. It is not permissible to eat their food, nor to take their women as captives, nor to take their wealth, for they are heretics and apostates whose repentance is not accepted. Rather, they are to be killed wherever they are found, and cursed as they have described themselves. It is not permissible to employ them for guarding, gatekeeping, or protection. It is obligatory to kill their scholars and their righteous ones so that they do not mislead others. It is forbidden to sleep with them in their houses or in their company, to walk with them, or to follow their funerals if their death is known. It is forbidden for the rulers of the Muslims to neglect what Allah has commanded regarding the establishment of hudud punishments against them, by whatever means the one who establishes it sees fit, not the one against whom it is established. And Allah is the Helper, and upon Him is reliance." And an explanation of the lies, deception, and obfuscation in the first dialogue: 1 - It is stated at the beginning of the first dialogue that it took place between a Druze student in al-Azhar : Shaykh Shawqi Hammada and the Imam of al-Azhar, Shaykh Mustafa al-Raf'i , who was later titled the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of al-Azhar. This contains confusion, obfuscation, lying, and fabrication. As for the confusion and obfuscation,
the Imam of al-Azhar is the one who leads people in the five prayers at al-Azhar Mosque and may deliver the Friday sermon there. He is subordinate in his work to the Ministry of Awqaf. As for the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of al-Azhar, he is not the Imam of prayer there nor the preacher of Friday; rather, he is responsible for education at al-Azhar, and his position is higher than that of the one who leads people in prayer. As for the lying and fabrication, it is not known in the history of al-Azhar in any era or on any day that a person named Mustafa al-Raf'i held the position of Shaykh of al-Azhar or was the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of al-Azhar. The historical reality is the most truthful witness to the lie of this claim and the strongest evidence that the writer of this bulletin is not aware of what he writes, and that this dialogue is fabricated. This is not strange, for the Druze are from the Batini, and their affair is obfuscation, lying, and taqiyyah (dissimulation), and one does not find it strange for something to come from its source. 2 - Then the Druze said to the alleged Shaykh Mustafa al-Raf'i : "What is your opinion of the Druze?" The Shaykh al-Raf'i said: "The Druze , in terms of their customs, traditions, and morals, are Muslims, but in terms of religion, we do not consider them Muslims." End of quote. Such an answer does not come from a Muslim who knows the beliefs and rulings of Islam and knows the beliefs, deeds, and conditions of the Druze, let alone from the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of al-Azhar, for the Shari'ahs of Islam and the historical reality
the Druze testify that the Druze are not Muslims, neither in their outward appearance nor in their inner reality. For when the opportunity is given to them, their true nature is revealed, and they declare their atheism and disbelief, and they encroach upon the blood, honor, and wealth of Muslims, and they spread corruption in the land, as happened in the days of al-Hakim al-'Abbasid, one of the 'Abbasid rulers of Egypt . However, when crises surround them and the noose tightens, they adhere to taqiyyah (dissimulation), wear the garment of religion, and display the appearance of zeal and reform out of hypocrisy and heresy. This is their affair with the Muslims. Despite this, the Druze student objected to the answer of the one he called the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of al-Azhar. 3 - He said: "What is the reason?" The alleged Shaykh said: "Because they worship al-Hakim." The Druze student became more angry and accused the Shaykh of being wrong in that, which implies his denial of the existence of the true God, and clearly indicates the disbelief of the Druze and the corruption of their beliefs. He said: "He is wrong who says that we deify a ruler. Rather, we believe that there is no god but Allah, and that He is One, the Unique, the Single, the Eternal. He has not begotten nor been begotten, and there is none comparable to Him. And it is known in our school that there is nothing like Allah, so He is not perceived, nor described, nor is He sitting, nor standing, nor awake, nor sleeping, nor upright, nor sitting. He is free from spirits and numbers. And we also believe that
Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, will manifest Himself to people on the Day of Resurrection and will be apparent to them so that they may believe in Him truly and sincerely. He will draw near to them to establish the proof against them, for they are unable to comprehend His manner and their intellects cannot reach His essence. Indeed, the one who looks at Him is like the one who looks at his own face in a mirror. Do you not see, O His Eminence the Grand Imam, when you look in the mirror, you see an image that resembles your image? The Shaykh said: Yes. The Druze student said: This image is free from all human attributes; it does not eat, drink, or perceive, nor... We believe that just as you look at the mirror and see your image, which is free from all attributes, the image of Allah, who is free from all attributes, appears to us. End of quote. The historical and scientific reality testifies that the Druze worship al-Hakim and deify him, and that al-Hakim al-Abbasid claimed divinity for himself. Those close to him from his inner circle called for his worship. The Druze student is a liar in his denial of this, then he confused and mixed up his speech, bringing forth what is disbelief in his response and denial. He said: "It is an error to say: We deify a ruler," thereby denying a ruler, whereas the matter concerns their worship and deification of al-Hakim al-Abbasid, who was a king over Egypt . He denied all attributes of Allah and likened Him to an image in a mirror, saying: "Indeed, the one who looks at Him is like the one who looks at his image in a mirror," and said: "We believe, O His Eminence the Grand Imam, that just as you look
at the mirror and see your image, which is free from all attributes, the image of Allah, who is free from all attributes, appears to us." By this, he made Him non-existent, having no existence. The Shaykh said: What is your view on transmigration? The student said: We believe in transmigration, and this is an ancient philosophical school that preceded the emergence of the Fatimids , indeed it preceded Islam, for it accompanied humanity from the beginning, and many of the extreme ancient philosophers held to it. It is not strange that the Druze believe in transmigration; rather, the strange and wondrous thing is that Muslims deny transmigration while the Noble Qur'an affirms it by descent. Then he cited as evidence for transmigration the saying of Allah, the Exalted:[Al-Baqarah 2:28], and His saying, the Exalted: [Taha 20:55], and what he attributed to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in his saying: "I have not ceased to move to you from the loins of the believers to the wombs of the believing women until this day..." etc. The Druze student has acknowledged that the Druze believe in transmigration: which is the reincarnation of souls, meaning: the transfer of the soul from a living being upon its death to another body upon its creation, and so on. And it is known that those who believe
by which they do not believe in the Day of Resurrection, which is explicitly stated in the texts of the Book and the Sunnah and upon which the Ummah has reached consensus. They do not believe in what it contains of reckoning and reward by Paradise or by the Fire. They interpret the texts of the Resurrection by the emergence of their Imam, which in the view of the Druze is the return of al-Hakim and his appearance after his disappearance. They say: "When the spirit is purified by abandoning desire and by knowledge and worship, it returns to its original homeland, and it is completed by its death and its release from the shackles and bonds of the body. As for the inverted souls that turn away from seeking their guidance from the infallible Imams, they are tormented by remaining in bodies, transmigrating in them; whenever one exits a body at its death, another receives it." They argued for this with what was mentioned previously and with the saying of the Exalted:[An-Nisa 4:56] . There is no doubt that their interpretation of the Resurrection by the emergence of their Imam is a distortion of the word from its place and a departure of the Qur'an from its meaning in the Arabic language in which it was revealed. It contradicts the explicit verses and opposes the clear, mass-transmitted texts indicating the resurrection, the rising, the reckoning, and the reward by Paradise or the Fire. Their interpretation is clear misguidance and explicit disbelief. Their statement about the transmigration of souls into bodies, as explained previously, is pure guesswork and estimation with no
basis of truth and no support from reason or transmission. Their claim that the Qur'an indicates this is a lie and a fabrication. For the meaning of the saying of the Exalted:[Al-Baqarah 2:28] . The verse. "You were dead before Allah created you in the wombs and breathed into you the spirit, so He gave you life by breathing the spirit into you. Then He will cause you to die by taking your souls when your terms in this world end. Then He will give you life on the Day of Resurrection and rising for the reckoning and reward." This is the explicit meaning of the verse in the Arabic language in which the Qur'an was revealed and which the authentic, explicit Sunnah explained. It does not indicate that when the spirit exits a person at his death, it is placed in another body to be a created being that lives in this world. The same applies to the interpretation of the verse: [Taha 20:55] , for its meaning is: "From the earth We created you, so you were alive in the world, and to the earth you return, so you are buried in it when you die. And from it We will bring you out alive at the resurrection and rising." Interpreting the two verses with what they claim of the transmigration of souls is interpretation by desire and a distortion of them from what they do not indicate in the Arabic language. It contradicts the explicit verses of the Qur'an and the authentic, mass-transmitted hadiths in explaining their meaning, and it contradicts the consensus of the people of knowledge and faith.
As for the hadith they mentioned, it is not found in any of the known collections of the Sunnah. The existence of generations of disbelievers in certain periods of history is evidence of its fabrication. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not pass through the loins of believing fathers and the wombs of believing mothers in every generation of his ancestors; rather, some of them were believers, such as Ibrahim and Isma'il, and some were disbelievers. Therefore, the hadith is fabricated and invented against the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). As for the saying of Allah the Exalted:[An-Nisa 4:56], it is a clear report concerning the people of the Fire from among the disbelievers and an explanation of the continuity of their punishment therein on the Day of Resurrection. It contains no indication, near or far, that when the soul leaves the body at death in this world, it assumes another body to serve as a prison and punishment for it. Interpreting it in this way distorts it from its proper place and plays with the texts of the Qur'an. The Druze concluded the discussion with the admission of the so-called Shaykh al-Rafi'i that the Druze are the best Islamic sect absolutely. There is no doubt that this admission is a delusion, for it comes from a fabricated and imaginary Shaykh. Even if a real Shaykh had debated a Druze student in this discussion and this exchange had taken place between him and the Druze student, that would not indicate the truth of the conclusion. How many are the right ones who are defeated in their argument and debate due to their weakness in knowledge and disputation? Their surrender does not indicate the correctness of their doctrine.
nor the truth of what they claimed and believed. Explanation of the lies, charlatanism, and deception in the second discussion: The pamphlet states that a second discussion took place between one who claimed to be a Sunni scholar, named Shaykh al-Haqq al-Husayni, who holds the position of head of Eastern Sciences in one of the colleges, and a Druze professor named Shaykh Abu Hasan Zaydan . It consists of questions directed from the one said to be Sunni to a Druze, who answers them. It is written in a weak style with weak structures in terms of the Arabic language, and its meanings are shallow, vague, and not refined. This indicates that it is fabricated, or if it did occur, it was between two people who have no standing in knowledge and are not considered in disputation, and no reliance is placed on its results. The following is a detailed discussion of it: The so-called Sunni said: Q1: What is your religion? A1: The Druze answered: Our religion is Islam. End of quote. It was mentioned earlier on pages 2-4 that they are not Muslims, and that they are more disbelieving than the Jews and the Christians , etc. It will come in the Druze's answers and his explanation of the beliefs of the Druze regarding the pillars of Islam and others, what confirms that they are not Muslims.
Q2: What is your madhhab? A2: Our madhhab is the tawhid (oneness of Allah) of Allah the Exalted and the affirmation of the message of the Messenger, and it is one of the madhhabs of taqiyyah (dissimulation) in Islam. End of quote. The Druze admitted in his answer to this question (the second) that the madhhab of the Druze is taqiyyah, and he was truthful in what he admitted about his people. It is known that taqiyyah is deviation, deception, evasion, and hypocrisy in belief, speech, and action. The Druze used it in the answer itself, stating that the madhhab of the Druze is the tawhid of Allah the Exalted and the affirmation of the message of the Messenger, but their God whom they made one and worshipped is al-Hakim al-'Ubaydi, the king of Egypt . And the Messenger they affirm is the Messenger of al-Hakim, whom his da'i (propagator) chose for his worship, Hamzah ibn 'Ali ibn Ahmad al-Farsi al-Hakimi al-Darazi, whom al-Hakim al-Fatimi titled "Messenger of Allah." This style of answer is the clearest explanation and the truest application of taqiyyah, because of the evasion and hypocrisy in it. Q3: Are you Sunni or Shia? A3: Neither Sunni nor Shia, but one of the sects to which the Messenger referred when he said: My Ummah will divide after me into seventy-three sects. The Druze was vague in his answer to this question (the third), denying that the Druze are Sunni or Shia, and not revealing the truth of his sect, but
was ambiguous and said: “They are one of the sects to which the Messenger referred when he said: ‘My Ummah will split after me into seventy-three sects.’” He combined a linguistic error, distortion of the hadith, and deception of the questioner; he did not specify the answer for him nor clarify it. He lied in his statement that they are not Shia, for they are of the Qarmatians, the Batiniyyah, who are among the most wicked sects of the extreme Shia. Q4: Do you pray at the times of prayer? A4: Yes, we pray, because prayer is obligatory upon every believer, for it brings the bond between the servant and his Creator closer. Q5: What is the time of prayer? A5: When we pray for the dead, we face the qiblah, but the ordinary prayer is a circle of dhikr. In the fourth and fifth questions, there is vagueness and brevity, as if it was intended to allow the Druze to be vague in the answer first, and then to escape and distort the meaning of prayer second. And he did so, saying: “We pray, because prayer is obligatory, and because it brings the bond between the servant and his Creator closer.” Then he committed blasphemy regarding the meaning of prayer third, saying: “When we pray for the dead, we face the qiblah.” And he committed blasphemy again by interpreting the ordinary prayer as a circle of dhikr. In this is the denial that there are five prayers in the manner specified by the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), and the falsification of his claim in the answer to the first question that their religion is Islam.
Q6: Do you bow during prayer? A6: Bowing is a voluntary act for us. Q7: Do you prostrate during prayer? A7: Yes, we prostrate at the time of prostration, because it is an obligatory duty to draw near to Allah and to seek nearness to Him. In the sixth and seventh questions, there is also vagueness and brevity. Nevertheless, the Druze denied that bowing is obligatory and mentioned that it is voluntary. As for prostration, he acknowledged its obligatory nature, but he was vague about its manner, as if there was collusion between the questioner and the answerer, or the questioner and the answerer are one person. This contradicts his statement in the answer to the first question that our religion is Islam, because prayer in Islam is not a circle of dhikr, but rather five prayers every day and night in the manner known from the religion by necessity. Therefore, he is a liar by explicit text and scholarly consensus. Q8: Do you fast the month of fasting? A8: Some, especially the shaykhs, fast, but in our custom, outward fasting is voluntary. As for true fasting, it is protecting the self from forbidden things, and in this case, it is a necessary obligation for a lifetime and not at specific times, because we believe that there is no benefit
in outward fasting while violating what Allah and His Messenger forbid. The Druze denied in his answer to the question (the eighth) the obligation of fasting Ramadan, saying: “Outward fasting is voluntary.” He interpreted true fasting for them as protecting the self from forbidden things. This is a denial of what is known from the religion by necessity, and a distortion of the texts that removes from the obligated persons what Allah the Exalted and His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) made obligatory of the rites of Islam. It is explicit disbelief and apostasy from Islam by explicit text and scholarly consensus, and it contradicts his claim that their religion is Islam. Q9: Do you perform Hajj? A9: Hajj is also voluntary in our custom, due to the noble verse:[Ali 'Imran 3:97], so the phrase “whoever is able” is a wide allowance for those who were not able to perform the obligatory Hajj. In the answer to the ninth question, he followed the same path, denying the obligation of Hajj just as he denied the obligation of fasting Ramadan. He said: “Hajj is voluntary in our custom,” thus denying its obligatory nature. This is disbelief, because it is a denial of what is known from the religion by necessity. Then he obscured the matter by citing a clear verse affirming the obligation of Hajj for the able one. The allowance in the verse is for one who is not able to perform it himself or through a representative
rather. This also refutes his claim in the answer to the first question that the religion of the Druze is Islam. Q10: Do any of you perform Hajj to Makkah ? A10: Yes, many of us have visited the Noble Makkah and the Holy Madinah . In the question (the tenth), there is vagueness and brevity that prepares a way of escape for the answerer and paves the path for deviation; therefore, the one asked gave a general answer that can be interpreted as an ordinary trip to Makkah , like a trip to any country for relaxation, for example. He said: Many of us have visited Makkah and the Holy Madinah . This is the habit of the Batiniyyah Qaramitah, for their custom is deception and the use of taqiyyah, as mentioned earlier. Q11: How do you pray over the dead? A11: Our prayer over the dead is according to the Sunni way and according to the Shafi'i method. And to save you the trouble of much research, we present to you this book issued by the venerable Shaykhs of 'Aql (Intellect), which is the highest reference for the Tawhid madhhab with us. From this book, you will know the truth of our sectarian rituals in the prayer over the dead, in writing marriage contracts, in inheritance after death, and other matters. When the questioner browsed the book, he turned to the answerer and said: Are you truly Muslims?!
The answer to this question (the eleventh) is a lie and a contradiction, for he denied in a general denial in the answer to the third question that the Druze are of the people of the Sunnah, and he affirmed here that they pray the funeral prayer according to the school of al-Shafi‘i, and al-Shafi‘i is of the people of the Sunnah. So how did their funeral prayer become according to his school? Then he deviated from clarifying the answer and referred to an ambiguous book without specifying its name so that people could refer to it to know the truth of his claim that their prayer for the dead is according to the Sunnah and the Shafi‘i school? Then the Druze mentioned that the alleged Sunni scholar said after browsing the book: “You are truly Muslims.” It was mentioned before that this admission in such a contrived dialogue has no consideration, but it is mere camouflage, deception, and false propaganda for the school of the Druze. If the school of the Druze agreed with Islam, he would have revealed it and specified the name of the book so that people could refer to it to know the truth. But he feared exposure, so he was ambiguous and did not clarify, as is his custom in what came before and the custom of his people. We ask Allah for refuge from it. Q12: What is the method of dividing inheritance among you? A12: The method of dividing inheritance among us is according to the legal shares if the deceased did not leave a bequest. But if he left a bequest, the inheritance is according to the wording of the bequest, because the bequest is an obligation for us that must be acted upon, in accordance with the noble verse:[An-Nisa 4:11],
, then acting in accordance with the noble verse[An-Nisa 4:11] . Q13: What is the method of bequest with you?A13: The method of bequest is that a person has the full right to bequeath his wealth to whomever he wishes, whether a close relative or a distant one. Q14: The Sunnah school forbids bequeathing to an heir, so why do you bequeath to him?A14: We bequeath to the heir, acting in accordance with the noble verse: [Al-Baqarah 2:180] , so from this noble verse it becomes clearly evident that bequeathing to an heir and to a non-heir is permissible, and we are proceeding according to this method. The Druze mentioned in his answers to these questions (12, 13, 14) that inheritance with them is according to the prescribed legal shares, but he did not specify them. Then he qualified this by saying that this applies if there is no bequest; if there is a bequest of the entire wealth to a non-heir or to an heir, even if it contradicts the prescribed legal shares, the criterion in
distributing the remainder of the estate is what the bequest stipulates, and this contradicts the explicit text of the Islamic Shari'ah that there is no bequest for an heir, and the Muslims have reached consensus on this. By this, his lie in his answer to the first question is known, namely that the religion of the Druze is Islam. Then the verse[An-Nisa 4:11] , and the one following it, contain an explanation of the prescribed legal shares for inheritance, a detailing of the shares of the heirs, and a command from Allah to stand by the limit that Allah has determined for each heir. He did not leave us a choice in whom to bequeath to among those mentioned in the two verses, nor a choice in the amount to bequeath to each of them. Rather, He specified the types of heirs and the share of each type, and obligated us to this. And He, the Exalted, clarified that the division of the estate among them is only to be done after paying off the debts of the deceased and after executing what he bequeathed of his wealth within the limit of one-third for a non-heir, as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) clarified. So the Druze's argumentation with the two verses contains vagueness, deception, and confusion regarding the intended meaning of bequest in the distribution of inheritances and the bequest that is executed before the distribution and division. Then he turned a blind eye to the Sunnah, which must be considered in restricting the bequest, and he ignored the consensus of the Muslims on this. This is the habit of the one who is wrong in his argumentation: vagueness, obfuscation, and likening things to mislead his interlocutor from the truth by beautifying falsehood for him. And by this, their deviation in
the Qur'an and their distortion of it from its true meanings, and their contradiction of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) in word and deed, and of the consensus of the Companions and those after them from the imams of the Muslims, to satisfy their desires and to agree with those of their own kind. Q15: Do you practice plural marriage?A15: No, it is not permissible in our school to practice plural marriage; acting in accordance with the noble verse:[Adh-Dhariyat 51:49][An-Nisa 4:3] , and you will never be just to the women even if you strive hard, and since we believe that justice between two is impossible; what is prescribed has obligated us to marry only one. The Druze denied in his answer to this question (the fifteenth) what is known from the religion by necessity to be permissible, which is the lawfulness of plural marriage, and he tried to argue for his falsehood with what has no evidence in it. So he argued with the saying of Allah the Exalted: , and His saying: [Adh-Dhariyat 51:49] , and it is known that the two verses are in explaining the cosmic law of Allah in the creation of things, and that His wisdom necessitated that He create in every type of living beings male and female animals and plants, and in every two opposing types, so that pollination and offspring occur, and life is established, and benefits and interests are realized. They are not
about the ruling on plural marriage in any way, near or far. So arguing with them to forbid plural marriage is deviation in the Qur'an, and turning it away from what it was intended for. As for His saying:[An-Nisa 4:3] , it is explicit with the beginning of the verse in the permissibility of plural marriage when there is safety from injustice in the division among them in livelihood and maintenance, and this is possible and attainable. As for His saying: [An-Nisa 4:129] , the intended meaning is the negation of the ability to be just in the love of the heart and the inclination of the soul, not the negation of the ability to be just in spending the night and maintenance. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) clarified this and explained it with his saying and his action, for he married wives and was just among them in livelihood and maintenance, and he said: Sunan Abi Dawud 2134 . And the Companions reached consensus on the permissibility of plural marriage and acted upon it, and they were Arabs, and the Qur'an was revealed in their language, and they are more understanding than the Druze and those like him who follow their desires in interpreting the Book of Allah, catering to the Christians and the deviants, and pleasing the fairer sex in their view. And the Druze distorted the wording of the fourth verse, which is the saying of Allah the Exalted:
[An-Nisa 4:129] , and he inserted into it what is not part of it. Q16: Is divorce permissible with you?A16: Yes, divorce is permissible for prescribed reasons. As for the one who divorces for a reason that is not prescribed or without mutual agreement between him and his divorced wife, he must present to her half of what he owns. And as for if she is the one who caused the divorce as a result of a crime she committed, she must pay half of what she owns to the husband. The Druze admitted in his answer to this question (16) that divorce is permissible, but for prescribed reasons, and he was vague about these reasons in adherence to the principle of taqiyyah (dissimulation) in not explaining the truth of the doctrine of the Druze , as is their habit in their speech with those who differ from them. Then he added to that a great calamity and a legislation for which Allah has not sent down any authority, for he obligated the husband to present to his wife half of what he owns if he divorces her for a reason that is not prescribed or without mutual agreement between them, and he obligated her to pay half of what she owns to the husband if he divorced her because of a crime she committed. And this explicitly contradicts what was legislated in Islam regarding the rights of the spouses in divorce, and it is contrary to what he said in his answer to the first question: our religion is Islam.
Q17: We have heard that you believe in transmigration of souls, and on what do you base this?A17: Yes, we believe in transmigration of souls, and we base this belief on two reasons, one transmitted and the other rational. As for the transmitted, it is the saying of the noble verse:[Al-Baqarah 2:28] , so from this noble verse and some verses of others, we interpret according to this belief. And as for what is from the rational, it is that since Allah the Exalted is just in His creation, why did He make this great disparity among them in wealth and poverty, happiness and misery, beauty and ugliness. As long as people are creating something new in this world, from this great disparity and from our firm belief that Allah, Glorious is His Majesty, is the ultimate in justice, and from the noble verse mentioned above, we believe in transmigration of souls. The Druze mentioned transmigration of souls in his answer to this question (17) and its proofs from transmission and reason in the view of the Druze. The explanation of the meaning of transmigration of souls and the discussion of their transmitted proofs against it has already been mentioned in the fourth paragraph of the discussion of the first dialogue, and the clarification that the statement of it is mere guesswork and conjecture. For the detailing of the resurrection and the reward on the Day of Resurrection, and the explanation of its type and how it occurs, are among the matters of revelation for which there is no room for the intellects to determine them.
As for what they argued with rationally regarding the perfection of Allah's justice and wisdom, and the difference of creation in their conduct, morals, deeds, and sustenance, and that the requirement of His justice toward them is that He recompenses every soul for what it has earned by creating them again in this world to give every soul its due, and that this places the soul of one who has died in another body in this world to suffer by its existence therein. It is said: There is no indication in what is mentioned specifically about the return of a soul at the death of its owner to another body in this world; rather, that is mere conjecture. The texts of the Book and the authentic, explicit Sunnah indicate the details of the recompense and its manner, and that it will be on another day after the end of this world, called the Day of Resurrection and Rising, and the Day of Judgment. Allah may hasten some of the recompense for some of His servants in this world as He wills, not as specified by the Druze in transmigration (reincarnation) specifically. Q18: Do you believe that 'Umar, Abu Bakr, and 'Uthman are more entitled to the caliphate after the Prophet than 'Ali , or is A18: This is something Allah the Exalted knows, but we believe that lifespan is decreed, in accordance with the verse:[Al-Munafiqun 63:11], and since Abu Bakr and 'Umar and 'Uthman passed away during the lifetime of 'Ali , if 'Ali had taken the caliphate after the Prophet, then Abu Bakr and 'Umar and 'Uthman would have passed away during his lifetime, and it would not have been possible for them to fulfill their mission to the Ummah. Therefore, the will of Allah the Mighty and Majestic
what it decreed, so that each of them would fulfill his mission at its proper time, serving the Ummah by the decree of Allah, Mighty and Majestic. The Druze deviated from answering this question (18) and said: "Allah knows best," and he adhered to taqiyyah (dissimulation), as is his custom and the custom of his people in concealing the truth of their doctrine from those who are not of them. Then he philosophized about the delay of the caliphate of 'Ali after the three caliphs with a twisted philosophy, stating that Allah knew that the three would die before 'Ali , so He made their caliphate precede his so that each of them would fulfill his mission serving the Ummah. If 'Ali had assumed the caliphate before them, they would not have been able to assume it due to their deaths before him. Thus, the will of Allah required that the reality of the caliphate be in the known order. In this philosophy, there is a deviation from answering what was asked regarding the legal ruling to explaining what he claimed was the wisdom of the cosmic order. Moreover, his answer contradicts their belief in the Rightly Guided Caliphs (may Allah be pleased with them), for they curse the three and deify 'Ali . Thus, the entire answer is a deviation, a evasion, and an application of the principle of taqiyyah. It is understood from his words that the assumption of the caliphate by the three caliphs before 'Ali was not due to their superiority over him, but due to a cosmic matter required by the will of Allah. This is contrary to the consensus of the people of the Sunnah. Q19: Do you prefer Abu Bakr and 'Umar and 'Uthman and 'Ali according to their order in the caliphate? A19: Yes, but at the same time, we do not prefer them in rank
over anyone. Rather, we believe that 'Ali is higher than them, in accordance with the words of the Messenger, where he said on the Day of Farewell Pilgrimage during the sermon: "Whoever I am his mawla, then 'Ali is his mawla. O Allah, be the ally of those who are his allies, and the enemy of those who are his enemies..." The Druze contradicted himself in his answer to this question (19) and denied the three Rightly Guided Caliphs Abu Bakr and 'Umar and 'Uthman their right to superiority. He said: Yes, meaning: We prefer the four caliphs according to their order in the caliphate. Then he said: We do not prefer them in rank over anyone, which is explicit in that they do not prefer them over anyone of creation in general. Then he stated that 'Ali is higher than them (may Allah be pleased with them all), although it is established in authentic hadiths that 'Ali informed that Abu Bakr and 'Umar are better than him (may Allah be pleased with them), and with the consensus of the Ummah that Abu Bakr and 'Umar are better than him, and the majority hold that 'Uthman is better than him (may Allah be pleased with them). Then he cited as evidence for his superiority over them the hadith:Musnad Ahmad 961Hasan because of corroborating evidence, this is a Da'if isnad, because of the weakness of Yazeed bin Abu Ziyad] (Darussalam) The hadith. The Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah responded to it as follows: As for his saying: Musnad Ahmad 961Hasan because of corroborating evidence, this is a Da'if isnad, because of the weakness of Yazeed bin Abu Ziyad] (Darussalam) ... etc., this is not in any of the major collections except in al-Tirmidhi , and it does not contain except Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3713Sahih (Darussalam), and as for the addition, it is not in the hadith. Imam Ahmad was asked about it and said: It is a Kufan addition, and there is no doubt
that it is a lie for several reasons: (The first) is that the truth does not revolve around a specific person except the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him); for if it were so, it would be obligatory to follow him in everything he said. It is known that 'Ali was contested by the Companions and his followers in matters where the text agreed with those who contested him, such as the case of a woman whose husband died while she was pregnant. And his saying: "O Allah, support those who support him..." etc., is contrary to reality. Some people fought against him on the day of (Siffin) , and they did not gain victory. And some people did not fight, and they were not abandoned (such as Sa'd), who conquered Iraq , did not fight with him. Likewise, the companions of Mu'awiyah and the Banu Umayyah who fought him conquered many lands of the disbelievers, and Allah supported them. And likewise, his saying: "O Allah, be the ally of those who are his allies, and the enemy of those who are his enemies" is contrary to the foundation of Islam, for the Qur'an has clarified that the believers are brothers despite their fighting and rebellion against one another. And his saying:Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3713Sahih (Darussalam) Some of the people of hadith have criticized it, such as al-Bukhari and others, and some of them graded it as good. If he said it, he did not intend a specific exclusive authority, but a shared authority, which is the authority of faith that belongs to the believers, and loyalty is the opposite of enmity. There is no doubt that it is obligatory to show loyalty to the believers over others. In it is a refutation of the Nawasib. End of quote. Q20: It is clear from what has preceded that everything in your belief is built either on a noble verse or on a noble hadith? A20: We do not act on opinion or analogical reasoning, but on what we were commanded. There is no value in the admission in this question (20) and its answer
that the Druze build their belief either on a verse or a hadith; due to what has preceded regarding the fact that the debate was fabricated, and even if it has a reality, not every debater from the Muslims represents the people of the Sunnah. The claim of the Druze that the Druze do not act on opinion or analogical reasoning is a claim refuted by reality by his testimony to their deviation and their acting on desire. In it is evasion and taqiyyah, where he said: But we act on what we were commanded. He made the verb passive to achieve deception as to who the commander is: is it the ruler by his command and the other infallible imams as they claim, or someone else? And there is no wonder, for taqiyyah is their banner, and they spare no effort in using it. And success is from Allah. And may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family, and his Companions.
The origin of the Druze is a secret sect among the sects of the Batini Qarmatians . They are characterized by taqiyyah (dissimulation) and keeping their matter secret from those who are not of them. They sometimes wear the garb of piety, asceticism, and scrupulousness, and display false religious zeal. They assume various forms of Rafidi (Shi'ah) rejection, Sufism, and love for the Household of the Prophet . They claim to be the bearers of the banner of reform among people and the unifiers of their ranks, in order to confuse people and deceive them regarding their religion. When the opportunity arises, their power strengthens, and they find rulers who support and aid them, they reveal their true nature, declare their beliefs, and expose their objectives. They were callers to evil and corruption, and destroyers of religions, beliefs, and morals.
This becomes clear to one who follows their history and knows their conduct from the day Abdullah ibn Saba' the Jewish Hamiri established their foundations and sowed their seeds, which their successors inherited from their predecessors, advised one another to uphold, and perfected their application, and this continued until our present time. The Druze , although they are a branch of the branches of the Batini Qarmatians , have their own distinctive features regarding their lineage, their claim of descent from the Hawa (a specific lineage), the time in which they appeared, and the circumstances that aided their emergence. We mention below a summary of this, examples thereof, and the ruling of the scholars regarding them: 1 - The Druze are named after a Druze, who is: Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibnIsma'il al-Darazi , and his name is also narrated as 'Abd Allah al-Darazi, and Durozi ibn Muhammad. It is said that Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Darazi is Hish'takin or Hish'takin al-Darazi. It is said that they are attributed to Tiyruz , one of the lands of Persia . Al-Zabidi states in *al-Taj* that the correct ruling is to pronounce al-Darazi with an open *dāl*, as it is an attribution to the descendants of Darazah, who are the lowly, the tailors, and the weavers. 2 - Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Darazi appeared during the time of al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, Abu Ali al-Mansur ibn al-Aziz , one of the Fatimid kings who ruled Egypt for nearly two hundred years. They falsely and slanderously claimed to be from the Household of the Prophet and to be of the lineage of Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her). Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Darazi was initially from the Isma'ili Batini sect , which claims to be a follower of Muhammad ibn Isma'il ibn Ja'far al-Sadiq . Then he rebelled against them and connected with the Fatimid al-Hakim, agreeing with his claim of divinity. He called people to worship him and to affirm his oneness. He claimed that the deity had entered 'Ali and covered his human nature, and that the spirit of 'Ali transferred to his sons one after another until it transferred to al-Hakim. Al-Hakim delegated the affairs of Egypt to him so that people would obey him in the call. When his matter was exposed, the Muslims in Egypt rebelled against him and killed a group of those with him. When they sought to kill him, he fled and hid with al-Hakim, who gave him money and ordered him to go to the Levant to spread the call there. He went and settled in the Valley of Taym Allah ibn Tha'labah , west of Damascus .
He called them to deify al-Hakim, spread the principles of the Druze among them, and distributed money among them, so they responded to him. Another Persian man, named Hamza ibn Ali ibn Ahmad al-Hakimi al-Druzi , also engaged in the call to deify al-Hakim. He was one of the great ones of the Batiniyyah . He connected with the men of the secret call from al-Hakim’s Shi'ah and called for his deification secretly until he became a pillar of it. Then he declared it and claimed to be the messenger of al-Hakim, and al-Hakim agreed with that. When al-Hakim died and his son Ali, nicknamed al-Zahir li-I'zaz Din Allah, took over and disavowed the call to deify his father, the call was pursued in Egypt . Hamza fled to the Levant , and some of those who had responded to him followed him. Most of them settled in the district later named (Mount of the Druze) in Syria . Their principles: (A) They believe in hulul (incarnation). They believe that Allah incarnated in Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), then incarnated in his sons after him one after another until He incarnated in the Fatimid al-Hakim, Abu Ali al-Mansur ibn al-Aziz . Thus, the divinity incarnated in his human form, and they believe in the return of al-Hakim, that he disappears and reappears. (B) Taqiyyah (dissimulation). They do not clarify the reality of their sect except to those who are of them, and they do not disclose their secret except to those they trust and have confidence in from their group. (C) The infallibility of their Imams. They hold that their Imams are infallible from
error and sins; rather, they deified them and worshipped them besides Allah, as they did with al-Hakim. (D) Their claim of the knowledge of the unseen (batin). They claim that the texts of the Shari'ah have hidden meanings that are intended, rather than their apparent meanings. Based on this, they committed heresy in the texts of the Shari'ah and distorted their reports, commands, and prohibitions. As for their heresy in the reports, they denied the attributes of perfection belonging to Allah, and denied the Last Day and what is in it of reckoning and recompense from Paradise and Hellfire. They substituted for this what is called: tanaasukh (transmigration of souls) or the transfer of the soul of a human or animal upon its death to the body of another human or animal at the beginning of its creation, to live therein in bliss or torment. They said: an eternal age and a standing world, wombs that deliver, and a earth that swallows. They denied the angels and the message of the messengers, and followed the philosophers, the Peripatetics, followers of Aristotle in his principles and theories. As for their heresy in the texts of obligation (commands and prohibitions), they distorted them from their places. They said: prayer is the knowledge of their secrets, not the five prayers performed every day and night; fasting is the concealment of their secrets, not abstaining from things that break the fast from the appearance of dawn to the setting of the sun; and Hajj is visiting the sacred shaykhs in their view. They considered permissible
The open and hidden indecencies, and they deemed permissible the marriage of mothers and daughters... to name but a few of their manipulations of the texts and their denial of what is known by necessity to be the law of Allah, which He made obligatory upon His servants. Therefore, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali and others said: The outward appearance of their school is Rafidah, and its inner reality is pure disbelief. In this regard, they are most like the authors of the Epistles of the Brethren of Purity in their beliefs, actions, and methodology. (H) They speak with the words of the naturalists, saying: "Natures are generated for life, and death arises from the extinction of the natural heat, like the extinguishing of a lamp when the oil runs out, except for one who is killed by accident." (W) Hypocrisy in the call and deception therein: They display Shi'ism and love for the Household of the Prophet to those they call, and if they respond to them, they call them to Rafidah and reveal the faults of the Companions and disparage them. If they accept that from them, they reveal to them the faults of 'Ali and attack him. If they accept that, they move them to attacking the Prophets, saying: "They have inner meanings and secrets that contradict what they called their nations to." They say: "They were intelligent and established legal laws for their nations to achieve worldly interests and objectives..." By what are they judged? The Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked about what ruling applies to the Druze and the Nusayriyyah , so he answered as follows:
These Druze and Nusayriyyah are disbelievers by the consensus of the Muslims. It is not permissible to eat their slaughtered animals or marry their women. Rather, they do not even accept the jizyah, for they are apostates from the religion of Islam; they are not Muslims, nor Jews, nor Christians. They do not accept the obligation of the five daily prayers, the obligation of fasting Ramadan, or the obligation of Hajj, nor the prohibition of what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, such as carrion, intoxicants, and others. Even if they display the two testimonies along with these beliefs, they are disbelievers by the consensus of the Muslims. As for the Nusayriyyah , they are: the followers of Abu Shahib Muhammad ibn Nasir . He was one of the extremists who said that 'Ali is a god, and they recite:
As for the Druze: they are the followers of Hish'takin al-Darazi , who was a client of al-Hakim, meaning the Fatimid, one of the rulers of Egypt . The Batini sent him to the people of the Valley of Taym Allah ibn Tha'labah and called them to the divinity of al-Hakim. They call him "The Pure Boy" and swear by him. They are from the Isma'ilis who claim that Muhammad ibn Isma'il abrogated the Shari'ah of Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah. They are greater in disbelief than the Ghaliyyah. They affirm the pre-eternity of the world, deny the resurrection, and deny the obligations and prohibitions of Islam. They are from the Batini Qarmatians who are more disbelieving than the Jews and the Christians and the polytheists of the Arabs. Their goal is to be philosophers in the
school of Aristotle and his like, or to be Magians. Their statement is a composite of the statements of the philosophers and the Magians . They display Shi'ism out of hypocrisy, and Allah knows best. The Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) also said, in a refutation of the rejection of the sects of the Druze : "The disbelief of these people is a matter in which Muslims do not differ. Indeed, whoever doubts their disbelief is a disbeliever like them. They are not in the position of the People of the Book or the polytheists, but they are the disbelievers who are astray. It is not permissible to eat their food, nor to take their women as captives, nor to take their wealth, for they are heretics and apostates whose repentance is not accepted. Rather, they are to be killed wherever they are found, and cursed as they have described themselves. It is not permissible to employ them for guarding, gatekeeping, or protection. It is obligatory to kill their scholars and their righteous ones so that they do not mislead others. It is forbidden to sleep with them in their houses or in their company, to walk with them, or to follow their funerals if their death is known. It is forbidden for the rulers of the Muslims to neglect what Allah has commanded regarding the establishment of hudud punishments against them, by whatever means the one who establishes it sees fit, not the one against whom it is established. And Allah is the Helper, and upon Him is reliance." And an explanation of the lies, deception, and obfuscation in the first dialogue: 1 - It is stated at the beginning of the first dialogue that it took place between a Druze student in al-Azhar : Shaykh Shawqi Hammada and the Imam of al-Azhar, Shaykh Mustafa al-Raf'i , who was later titled the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of al-Azhar. This contains confusion, obfuscation, lying, and fabrication. As for the confusion and obfuscation,
the Imam of al-Azhar is the one who leads people in the five prayers at al-Azhar Mosque and may deliver the Friday sermon there. He is subordinate in his work to the Ministry of Awqaf. As for the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of al-Azhar, he is not the Imam of prayer there nor the preacher of Friday; rather, he is responsible for education at al-Azhar, and his position is higher than that of the one who leads people in prayer. As for the lying and fabrication, it is not known in the history of al-Azhar in any era or on any day that a person named Mustafa al-Raf'i held the position of Shaykh of al-Azhar or was the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of al-Azhar. The historical reality is the most truthful witness to the lie of this claim and the strongest evidence that the writer of this bulletin is not aware of what he writes, and that this dialogue is fabricated. This is not strange, for the Druze are from the Batini, and their affair is obfuscation, lying, and taqiyyah (dissimulation), and one does not find it strange for something to come from its source. 2 - Then the Druze said to the alleged Shaykh Mustafa al-Raf'i : "What is your opinion of the Druze?" The Shaykh al-Raf'i said: "The Druze , in terms of their customs, traditions, and morals, are Muslims, but in terms of religion, we do not consider them Muslims." End of quote. Such an answer does not come from a Muslim who knows the beliefs and rulings of Islam and knows the beliefs, deeds, and conditions of the Druze, let alone from the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of al-Azhar, for the Shari'ahs of Islam and the historical reality
the Druze testify that the Druze are not Muslims, neither in their outward appearance nor in their inner reality. For when the opportunity is given to them, their true nature is revealed, and they declare their atheism and disbelief, and they encroach upon the blood, honor, and wealth of Muslims, and they spread corruption in the land, as happened in the days of al-Hakim al-'Abbasid, one of the 'Abbasid rulers of Egypt . However, when crises surround them and the noose tightens, they adhere to taqiyyah (dissimulation), wear the garment of religion, and display the appearance of zeal and reform out of hypocrisy and heresy. This is their affair with the Muslims. Despite this, the Druze student objected to the answer of the one he called the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of al-Azhar. 3 - He said: "What is the reason?" The alleged Shaykh said: "Because they worship al-Hakim." The Druze student became more angry and accused the Shaykh of being wrong in that, which implies his denial of the existence of the true God, and clearly indicates the disbelief of the Druze and the corruption of their beliefs. He said: "He is wrong who says that we deify a ruler. Rather, we believe that there is no god but Allah, and that He is One, the Unique, the Single, the Eternal. He has not begotten nor been begotten, and there is none comparable to Him. And it is known in our school that there is nothing like Allah, so He is not perceived, nor described, nor is He sitting, nor standing, nor awake, nor sleeping, nor upright, nor sitting. He is free from spirits and numbers. And we also believe that
Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, will manifest Himself to people on the Day of Resurrection and will be apparent to them so that they may believe in Him truly and sincerely. He will draw near to them to establish the proof against them, for they are unable to comprehend His manner and their intellects cannot reach His essence. Indeed, the one who looks at Him is like the one who looks at his own face in a mirror. Do you not see, O His Eminence the Grand Imam, when you look in the mirror, you see an image that resembles your image? The Shaykh said: Yes. The Druze student said: This image is free from all human attributes; it does not eat, drink, or perceive, nor... We believe that just as you look at the mirror and see your image, which is free from all attributes, the image of Allah, who is free from all attributes, appears to us. End of quote. The historical and scientific reality testifies that the Druze worship al-Hakim and deify him, and that al-Hakim al-Abbasid claimed divinity for himself. Those close to him from his inner circle called for his worship. The Druze student is a liar in his denial of this, then he confused and mixed up his speech, bringing forth what is disbelief in his response and denial. He said: "It is an error to say: We deify a ruler," thereby denying a ruler, whereas the matter concerns their worship and deification of al-Hakim al-Abbasid, who was a king over Egypt . He denied all attributes of Allah and likened Him to an image in a mirror, saying: "Indeed, the one who looks at Him is like the one who looks at his image in a mirror," and said: "We believe, O His Eminence the Grand Imam, that just as you look
at the mirror and see your image, which is free from all attributes, the image of Allah, who is free from all attributes, appears to us." By this, he made Him non-existent, having no existence. The Shaykh said: What is your view on transmigration? The student said: We believe in transmigration, and this is an ancient philosophical school that preceded the emergence of the Fatimids , indeed it preceded Islam, for it accompanied humanity from the beginning, and many of the extreme ancient philosophers held to it. It is not strange that the Druze believe in transmigration; rather, the strange and wondrous thing is that Muslims deny transmigration while the Noble Qur'an affirms it by descent. Then he cited as evidence for transmigration the saying of Allah, the Exalted:
How can you disbelieve in Allah when you were lifeless and He brought you to life; then He will cause you to die, then He will bring you [back] to life, and then to Him you will be returned.
كَيْفَ تَكْفُرُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَكُنْتُمْ أَمْوَاتًا فَأَحْيَاكُمْ ثُمَّ يُمِيتُكُمْ ثُمَّ يُحْيِيكُمْ ثُمَّ إِلَيْهِ تُرْجَعُونَFrom the earth We created you, and into it We will return you, and from it We will extract you another time.
مِنْهَا خَلَقْنَاكُمْ وَفِيهَا نُعِيدُكُمْ وَمِنْهَا نُخْرِجُكُمْ تَارَةً أُخْرَىby which they do not believe in the Day of Resurrection, which is explicitly stated in the texts of the Book and the Sunnah and upon which the Ummah has reached consensus. They do not believe in what it contains of reckoning and reward by Paradise or by the Fire. They interpret the texts of the Resurrection by the emergence of their Imam, which in the view of the Druze is the return of al-Hakim and his appearance after his disappearance. They say: "When the spirit is purified by abandoning desire and by knowledge and worship, it returns to its original homeland, and it is completed by its death and its release from the shackles and bonds of the body. As for the inverted souls that turn away from seeking their guidance from the infallible Imams, they are tormented by remaining in bodies, transmigrating in them; whenever one exits a body at its death, another receives it." They argued for this with what was mentioned previously and with the saying of the Exalted:
Every time their skins are roasted through We will replace them with other skins so they may taste the punishment
كُلَّمَا نَضِجَتْ جُلُودُهُمْ بَدَّلْنَاهُمْ جُلُودًا غَيْرَهَا لِيَذُوقُوا الْعَذَابَbasis of truth and no support from reason or transmission. Their claim that the Qur'an indicates this is a lie and a fabrication. For the meaning of the saying of the Exalted:
How can you disbelieve in Allah when you were lifeless and He brought you to life
كَيْفَ تَكْفُرُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَكُنْتُمْ أَمْوَاتًا فَأَحْيَاكُمْFrom the earth We created you, and into it We will return you, and from it We will extract you another time.
مِنْهَا خَلَقْنَاكُمْ وَفِيهَا نُعِيدُكُمْ وَمِنْهَا نُخْرِجُكُمْ تَارَةً أُخْرَىAs for the hadith they mentioned, it is not found in any of the known collections of the Sunnah. The existence of generations of disbelievers in certain periods of history is evidence of its fabrication. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not pass through the loins of believing fathers and the wombs of believing mothers in every generation of his ancestors; rather, some of them were believers, such as Ibrahim and Isma'il, and some were disbelievers. Therefore, the hadith is fabricated and invented against the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). As for the saying of Allah the Exalted:
Every time their skins are roasted through We will replace them with other skins so they may taste the punishment
كُلَّمَا نَضِجَتْ جُلُودُهُمْ بَدَّلْنَاهُمْ جُلُودًا غَيْرَهَا لِيَذُوقُوا الْعَذَابَnor the truth of what they claimed and believed. Explanation of the lies, charlatanism, and deception in the second discussion: The pamphlet states that a second discussion took place between one who claimed to be a Sunni scholar, named Shaykh al-Haqq al-Husayni, who holds the position of head of Eastern Sciences in one of the colleges, and a Druze professor named Shaykh Abu Hasan Zaydan . It consists of questions directed from the one said to be Sunni to a Druze, who answers them. It is written in a weak style with weak structures in terms of the Arabic language, and its meanings are shallow, vague, and not refined. This indicates that it is fabricated, or if it did occur, it was between two people who have no standing in knowledge and are not considered in disputation, and no reliance is placed on its results. The following is a detailed discussion of it: The so-called Sunni said: Q1: What is your religion? A1: The Druze answered: Our religion is Islam. End of quote. It was mentioned earlier on pages 2-4 that they are not Muslims, and that they are more disbelieving than the Jews and the Christians , etc. It will come in the Druze's answers and his explanation of the beliefs of the Druze regarding the pillars of Islam and others, what confirms that they are not Muslims.
Q2: What is your madhhab? A2: Our madhhab is the tawhid (oneness of Allah) of Allah the Exalted and the affirmation of the message of the Messenger, and it is one of the madhhabs of taqiyyah (dissimulation) in Islam. End of quote. The Druze admitted in his answer to this question (the second) that the madhhab of the Druze is taqiyyah, and he was truthful in what he admitted about his people. It is known that taqiyyah is deviation, deception, evasion, and hypocrisy in belief, speech, and action. The Druze used it in the answer itself, stating that the madhhab of the Druze is the tawhid of Allah the Exalted and the affirmation of the message of the Messenger, but their God whom they made one and worshipped is al-Hakim al-'Ubaydi, the king of Egypt . And the Messenger they affirm is the Messenger of al-Hakim, whom his da'i (propagator) chose for his worship, Hamzah ibn 'Ali ibn Ahmad al-Farsi al-Hakimi al-Darazi, whom al-Hakim al-Fatimi titled "Messenger of Allah." This style of answer is the clearest explanation and the truest application of taqiyyah, because of the evasion and hypocrisy in it. Q3: Are you Sunni or Shia? A3: Neither Sunni nor Shia, but one of the sects to which the Messenger referred when he said: My Ummah will divide after me into seventy-three sects. The Druze was vague in his answer to this question (the third), denying that the Druze are Sunni or Shia, and not revealing the truth of his sect, but
was ambiguous and said: “They are one of the sects to which the Messenger referred when he said: ‘My Ummah will split after me into seventy-three sects.’” He combined a linguistic error, distortion of the hadith, and deception of the questioner; he did not specify the answer for him nor clarify it. He lied in his statement that they are not Shia, for they are of the Qarmatians, the Batiniyyah, who are among the most wicked sects of the extreme Shia. Q4: Do you pray at the times of prayer? A4: Yes, we pray, because prayer is obligatory upon every believer, for it brings the bond between the servant and his Creator closer. Q5: What is the time of prayer? A5: When we pray for the dead, we face the qiblah, but the ordinary prayer is a circle of dhikr. In the fourth and fifth questions, there is vagueness and brevity, as if it was intended to allow the Druze to be vague in the answer first, and then to escape and distort the meaning of prayer second. And he did so, saying: “We pray, because prayer is obligatory, and because it brings the bond between the servant and his Creator closer.” Then he committed blasphemy regarding the meaning of prayer third, saying: “When we pray for the dead, we face the qiblah.” And he committed blasphemy again by interpreting the ordinary prayer as a circle of dhikr. In this is the denial that there are five prayers in the manner specified by the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), and the falsification of his claim in the answer to the first question that their religion is Islam.
Q6: Do you bow during prayer? A6: Bowing is a voluntary act for us. Q7: Do you prostrate during prayer? A7: Yes, we prostrate at the time of prostration, because it is an obligatory duty to draw near to Allah and to seek nearness to Him. In the sixth and seventh questions, there is also vagueness and brevity. Nevertheless, the Druze denied that bowing is obligatory and mentioned that it is voluntary. As for prostration, he acknowledged its obligatory nature, but he was vague about its manner, as if there was collusion between the questioner and the answerer, or the questioner and the answerer are one person. This contradicts his statement in the answer to the first question that our religion is Islam, because prayer in Islam is not a circle of dhikr, but rather five prayers every day and night in the manner known from the religion by necessity. Therefore, he is a liar by explicit text and scholarly consensus. Q8: Do you fast the month of fasting? A8: Some, especially the shaykhs, fast, but in our custom, outward fasting is voluntary. As for true fasting, it is protecting the self from forbidden things, and in this case, it is a necessary obligation for a lifetime and not at specific times, because we believe that there is no benefit
in outward fasting while violating what Allah and His Messenger forbid. The Druze denied in his answer to the question (the eighth) the obligation of fasting Ramadan, saying: “Outward fasting is voluntary.” He interpreted true fasting for them as protecting the self from forbidden things. This is a denial of what is known from the religion by necessity, and a distortion of the texts that removes from the obligated persons what Allah the Exalted and His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) made obligatory of the rites of Islam. It is explicit disbelief and apostasy from Islam by explicit text and scholarly consensus, and it contradicts his claim that their religion is Islam. Q9: Do you perform Hajj? A9: Hajj is also voluntary in our custom, due to the noble verse:
And [due] to Allah from the people is a pilgrimage to the House - for whoever is able to find thereto a way
وَلِلَّهِ عَلَى النَّاسِ حِجُّ الْبَيْتِ مَنِ اسْتَطَاعَ إِلَيْهِ سَبِيلاrather. This also refutes his claim in the answer to the first question that the religion of the Druze is Islam. Q10: Do any of you perform Hajj to Makkah ? A10: Yes, many of us have visited the Noble Makkah and the Holy Madinah . In the question (the tenth), there is vagueness and brevity that prepares a way of escape for the answerer and paves the path for deviation; therefore, the one asked gave a general answer that can be interpreted as an ordinary trip to Makkah , like a trip to any country for relaxation, for example. He said: Many of us have visited Makkah and the Holy Madinah . This is the habit of the Batiniyyah Qaramitah, for their custom is deception and the use of taqiyyah, as mentioned earlier. Q11: How do you pray over the dead? A11: Our prayer over the dead is according to the Sunni way and according to the Shafi'i method. And to save you the trouble of much research, we present to you this book issued by the venerable Shaykhs of 'Aql (Intellect), which is the highest reference for the Tawhid madhhab with us. From this book, you will know the truth of our sectarian rituals in the prayer over the dead, in writing marriage contracts, in inheritance after death, and other matters. When the questioner browsed the book, he turned to the answerer and said: Are you truly Muslims?!
The answer to this question (the eleventh) is a lie and a contradiction, for he denied in a general denial in the answer to the third question that the Druze are of the people of the Sunnah, and he affirmed here that they pray the funeral prayer according to the school of al-Shafi‘i, and al-Shafi‘i is of the people of the Sunnah. So how did their funeral prayer become according to his school? Then he deviated from clarifying the answer and referred to an ambiguous book without specifying its name so that people could refer to it to know the truth of his claim that their prayer for the dead is according to the Sunnah and the Shafi‘i school? Then the Druze mentioned that the alleged Sunni scholar said after browsing the book: “You are truly Muslims.” It was mentioned before that this admission in such a contrived dialogue has no consideration, but it is mere camouflage, deception, and false propaganda for the school of the Druze. If the school of the Druze agreed with Islam, he would have revealed it and specified the name of the book so that people could refer to it to know the truth. But he feared exposure, so he was ambiguous and did not clarify, as is his custom in what came before and the custom of his people. We ask Allah for refuge from it. Q12: What is the method of dividing inheritance among you? A12: The method of dividing inheritance among us is according to the legal shares if the deceased did not leave a bequest. But if he left a bequest, the inheritance is according to the wording of the bequest, because the bequest is an obligation for us that must be acted upon, in accordance with the noble verse:
Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male, what is equal to the share of two females
يُوصِيكُمُ اللَّهُ فِي أَوْلادِكُمْ لِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الأُنْثَيَيْنِ, then acting in accordance with the noble verse
after any bequest he [may have] made or debt
مِنْ بَعْدِ وَصِيَّةٍ يُوصِي بِهَا أَوْ دَيْنٍPrescribed for you when death approaches [any] one of you if he leaves wealth [is that he should make] a bequest for the parents and near relatives
كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذَا حَضَرَ أَحَدَكُمُ الْمَوْتُ إِنْ تَرَكَ خَيْرًا الْوَصِيَّةُ لِلْوَالِدَيْنِ وَالأَقْرَبِينَdistributing the remainder of the estate is what the bequest stipulates, and this contradicts the explicit text of the Islamic Shari'ah that there is no bequest for an heir, and the Muslims have reached consensus on this. By this, his lie in his answer to the first question is known, namely that the religion of the Druze is Islam. Then the verse
Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male, what is equal to the share of two females
يُوصِيكُمُ اللَّهُ فِي أَوْلادِكُمْ لِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الأُنْثَيَيْنِthe Qur'an and their distortion of it from its true meanings, and their contradiction of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) in word and deed, and of the consensus of the Companions and those after them from the imams of the Muslims, to satisfy their desires and to agree with those of their own kind. Q15: Do you practice plural marriage?A15: No, it is not permissible in our school to practice plural marriage; acting in accordance with the noble verse:
And We created you in pairs.
وَخَلَقْنَاكُمْ أَزْوَاجًاAnd of all things We created two mates
وَمِنْ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ خَلَقْنَا زَوْجَيْنِBut if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one
فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلا تَعْدِلُوا فَوَاحِدَةًAnd We created you in pairs.
وَخَلَقْنَاكُمْ أَزْوَاجًاAnd of all things We created two mates
وَمِنْ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ خَلَقْنَا زَوْجَيْنِabout the ruling on plural marriage in any way, near or far. So arguing with them to forbid plural marriage is deviation in the Qur'an, and turning it away from what it was intended for. As for His saying:
But if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one or those your right hand possesses
فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلا تَعْدِلُوا فَوَاحِدَةً أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْAnd you will never be able to be equal [in feeling] between wives, even if you should strive [to do so]. So do not incline completely [toward one] and leave another hanging
وَلَنْ تَسْتَطِيعُوا أَنْ تَعْدِلُوا بَيْنَ النِّسَاءِ وَلَوْ حَرَصْتُمْ فَلا تَمِيلُوا كُلَّ الْمَيْلِ فَتَذَرُوهَا كَالْمُعَلَّقَةِO Allah, this is my division concerning what I control, so do not blame me concerning what You control and I do not.
اللهم هذا قسمي فيما أملك فلا تلمني فيما تملك ولا أملكAnd you will never be able to be equal [in feeling] between wives, even if you should strive [to do so]
وَلَنْ تَسْتَطِيعُوا أَنْ تَعْدِلُوا بَيْنَ النِّسَاءِ وَلَوْ حَرَصْتُمْQ17: We have heard that you believe in transmigration of souls, and on what do you base this?A17: Yes, we believe in transmigration of souls, and we base this belief on two reasons, one transmitted and the other rational. As for the transmitted, it is the saying of the noble verse:
How can you disbelieve in Allah when you were lifeless and He brought you to life; then He will cause you to die, then He will bring you [back] to life, and then to Him you will be returned.
كَيْفَ تَكْفُرُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَكُنْتُمْ أَمْوَاتًا فَأَحْيَاكُمْ ثُمَّ يُمِيتُكُمْ ثُمَّ يُحْيِيكُمْ ثُمَّ إِلَيْهِ تُرْجَعُونَAs for what they argued with rationally regarding the perfection of Allah's justice and wisdom, and the difference of creation in their conduct, morals, deeds, and sustenance, and that the requirement of His justice toward them is that He recompenses every soul for what it has earned by creating them again in this world to give every soul its due, and that this places the soul of one who has died in another body in this world to suffer by its existence therein. It is said: There is no indication in what is mentioned specifically about the return of a soul at the death of its owner to another body in this world; rather, that is mere conjecture. The texts of the Book and the authentic, explicit Sunnah indicate the details of the recompense and its manner, and that it will be on another day after the end of this world, called the Day of Resurrection and Rising, and the Day of Judgment. Allah may hasten some of the recompense for some of His servants in this world as He wills, not as specified by the Druze in transmigration (reincarnation) specifically. Q18: Do you believe that 'Umar, Abu Bakr, and 'Uthman are more entitled to the caliphate after the Prophet than 'Ali , or is A18: This is something Allah the Exalted knows, but we believe that lifespan is decreed, in accordance with the verse:
But never will Allah delay a soul when its time has come
وَلَنْ يُؤَخِّرَ اللَّهُ نَفْسًا إِذَا جَاءَ أَجَلُهَاwhat it decreed, so that each of them would fulfill his mission at its proper time, serving the Ummah by the decree of Allah, Mighty and Majestic. The Druze deviated from answering this question (18) and said: "Allah knows best," and he adhered to taqiyyah (dissimulation), as is his custom and the custom of his people in concealing the truth of their doctrine from those who are not of them. Then he philosophized about the delay of the caliphate of 'Ali after the three caliphs with a twisted philosophy, stating that Allah knew that the three would die before 'Ali , so He made their caliphate precede his so that each of them would fulfill his mission serving the Ummah. If 'Ali had assumed the caliphate before them, they would not have been able to assume it due to their deaths before him. Thus, the will of Allah required that the reality of the caliphate be in the known order. In this philosophy, there is a deviation from answering what was asked regarding the legal ruling to explaining what he claimed was the wisdom of the cosmic order. Moreover, his answer contradicts their belief in the Rightly Guided Caliphs (may Allah be pleased with them), for they curse the three and deify 'Ali . Thus, the entire answer is a deviation, a evasion, and an application of the principle of taqiyyah. It is understood from his words that the assumption of the caliphate by the three caliphs before 'Ali was not due to their superiority over him, but due to a cosmic matter required by the will of Allah. This is contrary to the consensus of the people of the Sunnah. Q19: Do you prefer Abu Bakr and 'Umar and 'Uthman and 'Ali according to their order in the caliphate? A19: Yes, but at the same time, we do not prefer them in rank
over anyone. Rather, we believe that 'Ali is higher than them, in accordance with the words of the Messenger, where he said on the Day of Farewell Pilgrimage during the sermon: "Whoever I am his mawla, then 'Ali is his mawla. O Allah, be the ally of those who are his allies, and the enemy of those who are his enemies..." The Druze contradicted himself in his answer to this question (19) and denied the three Rightly Guided Caliphs Abu Bakr and 'Umar and 'Uthman their right to superiority. He said: Yes, meaning: We prefer the four caliphs according to their order in the caliphate. Then he said: We do not prefer them in rank over anyone, which is explicit in that they do not prefer them over anyone of creation in general. Then he stated that 'Ali is higher than them (may Allah be pleased with them all), although it is established in authentic hadiths that 'Ali informed that Abu Bakr and 'Umar are better than him (may Allah be pleased with them), and with the consensus of the Ummah that Abu Bakr and 'Umar are better than him, and the majority hold that 'Uthman is better than him (may Allah be pleased with them). Then he cited as evidence for his superiority over them the hadith:
If I am a person`s mawla (friend and supporter) then `Ali is also his mawla; O Allah, take as friends those who take him as a friend, and take as enemies those who take him as an enemy.”
من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه، اللهم وال من والاه، وعاد من عاداهIf I am a person`s mawla (friend and supporter) then `Ali is also his mawla; O Allah, take as friends those who take him
من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه، اللهم وال من والاهFor whomever I am his Mawla then 'Ali is his Mawla.
من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاهthat it is a lie for several reasons: (The first) is that the truth does not revolve around a specific person except the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him); for if it were so, it would be obligatory to follow him in everything he said. It is known that 'Ali was contested by the Companions and his followers in matters where the text agreed with those who contested him, such as the case of a woman whose husband died while she was pregnant. And his saying: "O Allah, support those who support him..." etc., is contrary to reality. Some people fought against him on the day of (Siffin) , and they did not gain victory. And some people did not fight, and they were not abandoned (such as Sa'd), who conquered Iraq , did not fight with him. Likewise, the companions of Mu'awiyah and the Banu Umayyah who fought him conquered many lands of the disbelievers, and Allah supported them. And likewise, his saying: "O Allah, be the ally of those who are his allies, and the enemy of those who are his enemies" is contrary to the foundation of Islam, for the Qur'an has clarified that the believers are brothers despite their fighting and rebellion against one another. And his saying:
For whomever I am his Mawla then 'Ali is his Mawla.
من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاهthat the Druze build their belief either on a verse or a hadith; due to what has preceded regarding the fact that the debate was fabricated, and even if it has a reality, not every debater from the Muslims represents the people of the Sunnah. The claim of the Druze that the Druze do not act on opinion or analogical reasoning is a claim refuted by reality by his testimony to their deviation and their acting on desire. In it is evasion and taqiyyah, where he said: But we act on what we were commanded. He made the verb passive to achieve deception as to who the commander is: is it the ruler by his command and the other infallible imams as they claim, or someone else? And there is no wonder, for taqiyyah is their banner, and they spare no effort in using it. And success is from Allah. And may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family, and his Companions.
Source
www.alifta.gov.sa
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.