The Madhhab of Imam Ali in Salat al-Janazah: A Critical Refutation of TwelverShia.net
https://www.twelvershia.net/2013/05/02/the-madhab-of-ali-ra-in-salat-al-janazah/
TwelverShia.net claims that Sunni funeral prayer represents the madhhab of Imam Ali, while the Twelver Shia funeral prayer is a “fictional madhhab” based on hatred and cursing.
Its argument fails for several reasons:
It hides the authentic Prophetic basis of five takbirs.
It relies upon Musnad Zayd while concealing that Sunni hadith critics condemned its principal transmitter.
It treats Imam Ali’s special honour for particular veterans of Badr as blanket approval of every Companion and every later political action.
It mixes “believer,” “hypocrite,” “Nasibi,” “mukhalif” and ordinary Sunni Muslims into one category.
It falsely attributes Fiqh al-Rida to Shaykh al-Saduq.
It presents one severe classical juristic position as though no disagreement ever existed among Shia scholars.
The article being answered can be read here in the uploaded text.
Before beginning, an honest admission is necessary:
Some classical Shia jurists genuinely adopted extremely harsh rulings concerning the funeral prayer of non-Imamis. Some prescribed negative supplications rather than prayers for forgiveness. Those passages should not be hidden or dishonestly denied.
But the existence of that juristic trend does not prove the article’s larger claims:
That five takbirs are an invented Shia practice.
That Imam Ali followed only the later four-takbir Sunni format.
That every Shia jurist considered every Sunni a disbeliever.
That every Shia today curses every Sunni deceased.
Or that disputed books and narrations can be quoted without examining their attribution and chains.
1. Five takbirs are authentic Sunnah in Sahih Muslim
The article calls the five-takbir Shia funeral prayer “fictional.”
But Sahih Muslim records:
عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ أَبِي لَيْلَى قَالَ:
كَانَ زَيْدٌ يُكَبِّرُ عَلَى جَنَائِزِنَا أَرْبَعًا، وَإِنَّهُ كَبَّرَ عَلَى جَنَازَةٍ خَمْسًا، فَسَأَلْتُهُ، فَقَالَ:
كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يُكَبِّرُهَا.
English:
Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Layla reported:
“Zayd ibn Arqam used to pronounce four takbirs over our funerals. He then pronounced five takbirs over one funeral, so I asked him about it.
He said:
‘The Messenger of Allah used to pronounce five takbirs.’”
Reference: Sahih Muslim, Book of Funerals, Hadith 957.
The report is in Sahih Muslim. Therefore five takbirs cannot honestly be called a fabricated or fictional Shia ritual. It is an authentically transmitted Prophetic practice even according to Sunni hadith standards.
This single report destroys the article’s central contrast:
“Four takbirs are the way of Ali and Ahl al-Sunnah, while five are the fictional way of the Shia.”
Five takbirs are also from the Prophet.
2. Sunni sources do not establish that Imam Ali always used only four takbirs
The article itself quotes reports attributing four, five, six and seven takbirs to Imam Ali.
One Sunni report states:
كَانَ عَلِيٌّ يُكَبِّرُ عَلَى أَهْلِ بَدْرٍ سِتًّا، وَعَلَى أَصْحَابِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ خَمْسًا، وَعَلَى سَائِرِ النَّاسِ أَرْبَعًا.
English:
“Ali used to pronounce six takbirs over the people of Badr, five over the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, and four over the rest of the people.”
Reference: Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf; al-Tahawi, Sharh Ma‘ani al-Athar; Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Awsat.
The route through Abd Khayr was regarded as sound by the Sunni commentator cited in Sharh Ma‘ani al-Athar.
Another report says:
صَلَّى عَلِيٌّ عَلَى سَهْلِ بْنِ حُنَيْفٍ فَكَبَّرَ عَلَيْهِ سِتًّا.
English:
“Ali prayed over Sahl ibn Hunayf and pronounced six takbirs over him.”
Another wording adds:
ثُمَّ الْتَفَتَ إِلَيْنَا فَقَالَ:
إِنَّهُ بَدْرِيٌّ.
English:
“Then he turned toward us and said:
‘He was one of the people of Badr.’”
Reference: Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf; Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Awsat; al-Tahawi, Sharh Ma‘ani al-Athar.
Therefore the historical picture preserved in Sunni literature is not:
“Imam Ali’s fixed madhhab was four takbirs.”
It is:
Imam Ali is reported using different numbers on different occasions.
Five and six were certainly part of the early transmitted practice.
Some reports even attribute seven to him.
3. The report about the people of Badr does not prove blanket approval of every Companion
The strongest report concerns Sahl ibn Hunayf.
Imam Ali explained the additional takbirs by saying:
إِنَّهُ بَدْرِيٌّ.
“He was from the people of Badr.”
This proves that Imam Ali recognised the special merit of Sahl ibn Hunayf and the veterans of Badr.
It does not prove:
That every person who ever met the Prophet had the same rank.
That every Companion remained correct in every later conflict.
That Imam Ali approved every political decision made after the Prophet.
That the disputes of Saqifah, Fadak, Jamal and Siffin never occurred.
Or that criticism of any individual Companion is forbidden.
The article takes a report about the special merit of a particular Badri and transforms it into a general endorsement of every Companion and every historical action.
That conclusion is not contained in the narration.
4. One of the article’s five-takbir routes contains a narrator weakened by Sunni critics
The article quotes:
عَنْ يَزِيدَ بْنِ أَبِي زِيَادٍ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مَعْقِلٍ قَالَ:
صَلَّيْتُ مَعَ عَلِيٍّ عَلَى جَنَازَةٍ فَكَبَّرَ عَلَيْهَا خَمْسًا...
English:
“From Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad, from Abdullah ibn Ma‘qil, who said:
‘I prayed with Ali over a funeral, and he pronounced five takbirs…’”
But Sunni critics disputed Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad.
Yahya ibn Ma‘in said:
ضَعِيفُ الْحَدِيثِ.
“Weak in hadith.”
He also said:
لَيْسَ بِالْقَوِيِّ.
“He is not strong.”
Al-Nasa’i said:
لَيْسَ بِالْقَوِيِّ.
“He is not strong.”
Other Sunni critics mentioned his deteriorating memory and said his reports were written for consideration but not relied upon independently as proof.
This does not mean every report about Imam Ali’s additional takbirs is weak. The Abd Khayr route has stronger support.
It means the article is not doing real hadith criticism. It places strong, weak and disputed routes together without informing the reader of their different statuses.
5. The article relies upon Musnad Zayd while hiding the Sunni verdict on its transmitter
Two of the article’s most important quotations come from Musnad Zayd:
The report about where Imam Ali stood in relation to the male or female body;
And the report describing five takbirs followed by taslim.
The article presents these as though they establish Imam Ali’s practice through reliable Sunni standards.
However, the commonly circulated Musnad Zayd is transmitted through Amr ibn Khalid al-Wasiti from Zayd ibn Ali.
Major Sunni critics severely condemned Amr ibn Khalid.
Ahmad ibn Hanbal reportedly said:
كَذَّابٌ، يَرْوِي عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ عَلِيٍّ عَنْ آبَائِهِ أَحَادِيثَ مَوْضُوعَةً.
“He was a liar who narrated fabricated reports from Zayd ibn Ali through his forefathers.”
Yahya ibn Ma‘in said:
كَذَّابٌ غَيْرُ ثِقَةٍ وَلَا مَأْمُونٍ.
“A liar, neither reliable nor trustworthy.”
Al-Bukhari called him:
مُنْكَرُ الْحَدِيثِ.
“Denounced in hadith.”
Abu Hatim said:
مَتْرُوكُ الْحَدِيثِ.
“Abandoned in hadith.”
Sunni hadith researchers consequently regarded the attribution and contents of this Musnad as deeply problematic under Sunni rijal standards.
This creates a serious double standard.
The article says:
“This is the madhhab of Ali in the books of Ahl al-Sunnah.”
But when convenient, it relies upon a Zaydi compilation transmitted through a man whom leading Sunni critics accused of lying and fabricating reports from Zayd ibn Ali.
It cannot reject Shia reports using Sunni rijal standards and then suspend those standards when Musnad Zayd supports its argument.
6. Early Imami hadith independently teaches five takbirs
Al-Kafi records:
عَنْ أَبِي بَكْرٍ الْحَضْرَمِيِّ قَالَ:
قَالَ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ:
يَا أَبَا بَكْرٍ، تَدْرِي كَمِ الصَّلَاةُ عَلَى الْمَيِّتِ؟
قُلْتُ:
لَا.
قَالَ:
خَمْسُ تَكْبِيرَاتٍ.
فَتَدْرِي مِنْ أَيْنَ أُخِذَتِ الْخَمْسُ؟
قُلْتُ:
لَا.
قَالَ:
أُخِذَتِ الْخَمْسُ تَكْبِيرَاتٍ مِنَ الْخَمْسِ صَلَوَاتٍ، مِنْ كُلِّ صَلَاةٍ تَكْبِيرَةٌ.
English:
Abu Bakr al-Hadrami reported that Imam al-Baqir said:
“O Abu Bakr, do you know how many takbirs are in the funeral prayer?”
I said:
“No.”
He said:
“Five takbirs.
Do you know from where the five were taken?”
I said:
“No.”
He said:
“The five takbirs were taken from the five daily prayers—one takbir from each prayer.”
Reference: Al-Kulayni, al-Kafi, vol. 3, p. 182.
Whether one individually grades every route sahih or otherwise, this proves that the five-takbir funeral prayer is found in early Imami hadith literature.
It was not invented by a modern Shia jurist.
More importantly, Sahih Muslim independently establishes that the Prophet himself pronounced five takbirs.
7. The basic Shia structure closely resembles the structure quoted by the article from Imam Ali
The article quotes the following teaching from Musnad Zayd:
تَبْدَأُ فِي التَّكْبِيرَةِ الْأُولَى بِالْحَمْدِ وَالثَّنَاءِ عَلَى اللَّهِ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى، وَفِي الثَّانِيَةِ الصَّلَاةَ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ، وَفِي الثَّالِثَةِ الدُّعَاءَ لِنَفْسِكَ وَلِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ، وَفِي الرَّابِعَةِ الدُّعَاءَ لِلْمَيِّتِ وَالِاسْتِغْفَارَ لَهُ، وَفِي الْخَامِسَةِ تُكَبِّرُ ثُمَّ تُسَلِّمُ.
English:
“You begin after the first takbir by praising Allah. After the second, you send blessings upon the Prophet. After the third, you pray for yourself and the believing men and women. After the fourth, you pray for the deceased and seek forgiveness for him. After the fifth, you pronounce the takbir and then give salam.”
Now compare that with the contemporary Twelver structure:
First takbir: the two testimonies.
Second: blessings upon Muhammad and the family of Muhammad.
Third: prayer for the believing men and women.
Fourth: prayer for the deceased.
Fifth: conclusion.
Sayyid al-Sistani’s official ruling states:
وَكَيْفِيَّةُ الصَّلَاةِ عَلَى الْمَيِّتِ: أَنْ يُكَبِّرَ الْمُصَلِّي عَلَى الْمَيِّتِ خَمْسَ تَكْبِيرَاتٍ...
“Funeral prayer is performed by pronouncing five takbirs…”
He then gives the same broad order: testimony, salawat, prayer for believers, prayer for the deceased and the fifth takbir.
The article therefore quotes a report attributed to Imam Ali containing almost the same five-stage structure as the Twelver funeral prayer, and then calls the Twelver structure fictional.
That is self-refutation.
8. The difference over taslim has an early Shia hadith basis
The article argues that Imam Ali gave one taslim at the end, whereas Twelver Shia jurisprudence generally concludes the funeral prayer without taslim.
But early Imami reports state:
عَنْ الْحَلَبِيِّ، عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ قَالَ:
لَيْسَ فِي الصَّلَاةِ عَلَى الْمَيِّتِ تَسْلِيمٌ.
English:
Imam al-Sadiq said:
“There is no taslim in the funeral prayer.”
Another route from al-Halabi and Zurarah reports from Imam al-Baqir and Imam al-Sadiq:
لَيْسَ فِي الصَّلَاةِ عَلَى الْمَيِّتِ تَسْلِيمٌ.
“There is no taslim in the funeral prayer.”
Another report from Imam al-Rida says:
لَا سَلَامَ فِيهَا.
“There is no salam in it.”
Al-Tusi also recorded a conflicting report that mentioned taslim, but interpreted it as taqiyyah because it agreed with the common non-Imami practice.
Therefore the Twelver absence of taslim is not arbitrary. It comes from a body of Imami narrations.
A Sunni may disagree with the Shia evaluation of those reports, but disagreement does not make the ruling fictional.
9. “Hypocrite,” “Nasibi,” “mukhalif” and ordinary Sunni are not automatically identical categories
One Shia report says:
أَمَّا الْمُؤْمِنُ فَخَمْسُ تَكْبِيرَاتٍ، وَأَمَّا الْمُنَافِقُ فَأَرْبَعٌ، وَلَا سَلَامَ فِيهَا.
English:
“As for the believer, there are five takbirs. As for the hypocrite, four, and there is no salam in it.”
Reference: Al-Tusi, al-Istibsar, vol. 1, p. 478.
The term used is:
الْمُنَافِقُ
“The hypocrite.”
The article quietly turns this into:
“Every Sunni.”
But Sayyid al-Khoei explicitly distinguished a hypocrite from a non-Imami Muslim:
لِأَنَّ الْمُنَافِقَ غَيْرُ الْمُخَالِفِ، فَإِنَّ الْمُنَافِقَ هُوَ الْمُضْمِرُ لِلْكُفْرِ وَالْمُظْهِرُ لِلْإِسْلَامِ كَذِبًا، وَالْمُخَالِفُ مُسْلِمٌ...
English:
“The hypocrite is different from the non-Imami opponent. The hypocrite conceals disbelief and falsely displays Islam, whereas the non-Imami is a Muslim…”
He also rejected the view that a non-Imami is legally treated as a disbeliever:
وَهَذَا مِمَّا لَا يُمْكِنُ الْمُسَاعَدَةُ عَلَيْهِ، لِمَا قَدَّمْنَاهُ فِي مَحَلِّهِ مِنْ أَنَّ الْمُخَالِفَ مُسْلِمٌ مَحْكُومٌ بِالطَّهَارَةِ، وَيَتَرَتَّبُ عَلَيْهِ مَا يَتَرَتَّبُ عَلَى الْمُسْلِمِ مِنَ الْآثَارِ، الَّتِي مِنْهَا وُجُوبُ الصَّلَاةِ عَلَيْهِ بِخَمْسِ تَكْبِيرَاتٍ.
English:
“This position cannot be accepted, because we have already explained that the non-Imami is a Muslim, is legally pure and receives the legal rulings of a Muslim, including the obligation to perform his funeral prayer with five takbirs.”
This directly refutes the article’s claim that there was no disagreement and that the universal Shia position is:
Every Sunni is a disbeliever.
No funeral prayer is offered over him except through taqiyyah.
Even a major Shia authority rejected that position.
10. The harsh classical rulings are real—but they were juristic opinions, not unanimous revelation
The passages quoted from al-Mufid, al-Tusi, Abu al-Salah al-Halabi, al-Bahrani and al-Majlisi should not be erased.
Some of these scholars genuinely classified non-Imamis very harshly and prescribed a negative supplication in their funeral prayer.
A fair Shia response should say:
Those rulings represent a severe classical juristic trend.
They can be examined, criticised or rejected through later ijtihad.
They are not Qur’anic verses.
They are not all sound narrations from Imam Ali.
They do not establish that every Shia scholar agreed.
They do not establish that every Shia today acts upon them.
And they do not change the fact that five takbirs are authentically traced to the Prophet.
The article’s dishonesty is not necessarily that every quotation was fabricated.
Its dishonesty is that it turns disputed juristic positions into an eternal, unanimous and universal definition of every Shia Muslim.
11. Contemporary Shia law does not say that funeral prayer is forbidden over every Sunni
Sayyid al-Sistani’s official ruling says:
تَجِبُ الصَّلَاةُ عَلَى كُلِّ مُسْلِمٍ مَيِّتٍ وَإِنْ كَانَ فَاسِقًا.
English:
“Funeral prayer is obligatory over every deceased Muslim, even if he was sinful.”
He also states:
يَجِبُ فِي الصَّلَاةِ عَلَى الْمَيِّتِ خَمْسُ تَكْبِيرَاتٍ.
“Five takbirs are required in the funeral prayer.”
For a mustad‘af deceased, his official manual gives the Qur’anic supplication:
اللَّهُمَّ اغْفِرْ لِلَّذِينَ تَابُوا وَاتَّبَعُوا سَبِيلَكَ وَقِهِمْ عَذَابَ الْجَحِيمِ، رَبَّنَا وَأَدْخِلْهُمْ جَنَّاتِ عَدْنٍ الَّتِي وَعَدْتَهُمْ...
English:
“O Allah, forgive those who repented and followed Your path, protect them from the punishment of Hell, and admit them into the Gardens of Eden that You promised them…”
For someone whose condition is unknown, it gives:
اللَّهُمَّ إِنْ كَانَ يُحِبُّ الْخَيْرَ وَأَهْلَهُ فَاغْفِرْ لَهُ وَارْحَمْهُ وَتَجَاوَزْ عَنْهُ.
English:
“O Allah, if he loved goodness and its people, forgive him, have mercy upon him and overlook his faults.”
Whatever one thinks of every detail of modern Shia classifications, this is plainly not the picture painted by the article:
“Shias merely stand over every Sunni corpse and curse it.”
12. The article falsely attributes Fiqh al-Rida to Shaykh al-Saduq
The article writes:
“Al-Qummi al-Saduq says in Fiqh al-Rida…”
This is a major attribution error.
Fiqh al-Rida is not an established book of Shaykh al-Saduq.
Its attribution is heavily disputed within Shia scholarship.
The published introduction to the work lists numerous theories:
That it was written by Imam al-Rida.
That it was the Shara’i‘ of Ali ibn Babawayh, the father of al-Saduq.
That all or part of it was falsely attributed to Imam al-Rida.
That it was written by one of the Imam’s descendants or companions.
That judgment should be suspended.
Or that it was Kitab al-Taklif by al-Shalmaghani.
Shia researchers explicitly state:
لَمْ تَثْبُتْ نِسْبَةُ الْكِتَابِ إِلَى الْإِمَامِ الرِّضَا عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ.
“The attribution of the book to Imam al-Rida has not been established.”
Some scholars argued that the work was actually Kitab al-Taklif of al-Shalmaghani.
Therefore the article commits two separate errors:
It calls the book a work of al-Saduq.
Then it treats its contents as an unquestionable teaching of Imam al-Rida.
Neither claim is established.
13. The existence of legal exclusions is not unique to Shia jurisprudence
Sahih Muslim records:
أُتِيَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ بِرَجُلٍ قَتَلَ نَفْسَهُ بِمَشَاقِصَ، فَلَمْ يُصَلِّ عَلَيْهِ.
English:
“A man who had killed himself with broad-headed arrows was brought to the Prophet, and he did not perform the funeral prayer over him.”
Reference: Sahih Muslim, Hadith 978.
This does not mean that Sunni Islam has no mercy for every person who commits suicide.
Sunni scholars explain the report through legal and disciplinary considerations, while other Muslims may still perform the funeral prayer.
Similarly, the mere existence of severe Shia rulings concerning hypocrites, enemies of Ahl al-Bayt or particular theological categories does not by itself prove that all Shias hate every Sunni Muslim.
Each legal category must be defined and each juristic view must be examined separately.
14. Funeral prayer is not a declaration that every act of the deceased was correct
The article repeatedly argues:
Imam Ali prayed over certain Companions.
Therefore he honoured them.
Therefore every Shia criticism of any Companion must be false.
This reasoning is invalid.
A funeral prayer can establish:
That the deceased was treated as a Muslim.
That prayer was performed for him.
That he possessed a particular merit, such as participation in Badr.
It does not automatically establish:
That every legal opinion he ever held was correct.
That every political action he ever took was approved by Imam Ali.
That every dispute recorded in history disappears.
Or that all Companions were equal in rank and conduct.
Imam Ali’s six takbirs over Sahl ibn Hunayf prove the merit of Sahl and Badr.
They do not settle every dispute regarding every person who lived during the Prophet’s lifetime.
15. The article’s real contradiction
The article quotes Imam Ali allegedly teaching:
First: praise Allah.
Second: bless the Prophet.
Third: pray for the believers.
Fourth: pray for the deceased.
Fifth: pronounce the final takbir.
That is substantially the same order used in Twelver Shia funeral prayer.
It then says:
“The Shia madhhab is fictional.”
The article quotes Sunni reports establishing that Imam Ali used five and six takbirs.
It then acts as though only four takbirs can represent Imam Ali.
It quotes Musnad Zayd but conceals the Sunni verdict on its principal transmitter.
It quotes Fiqh al-Rida but falsely calls it a work of al-Saduq and ignores the disputed attribution.
It quotes one severe Shia juristic trend but suppresses later Shia authorities who explicitly declared non-Imamis Muslims and required funeral prayer over them.
It turns special honour for Sahl ibn Hunayf and the people of Badr into universal political endorsement of every Companion.
That is not neutral research.
It is selective polemics.
Final Verdict
The evidence proves:
Five funeral takbirs are authentically established from the Prophet in Sahih Muslim.
Early Sunni sources attribute four, five, six and seven takbirs to Imam Ali in different circumstances.
The strongest additional-takbir report concerns Sahl ibn Hunayf and his special status as a veteran of Badr.
One of the article’s routes passes through Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad, whom Sunni critics weakened.
The Musnad Zayd reports relied upon by the article pass through a transmitter accused by leading Sunni critics of lying and fabricating reports from Zayd ibn Ali.
Early Imami hadith independently teaches five takbirs.
Early Imami reports also provide the basis for concluding without taslim.
The article wrongly equates hypocrites, Nasibis, non-Imamis and every ordinary Sunni Muslim.
Some classical Shia jurists did hold genuinely harsh positions, but there was no uncontested consensus.
Sayyid al-Khoei explicitly declared the non-Imami a Muslim and required five takbirs over him.
Sayyid al-Sistani’s official law requires funeral prayer over every Muslim deceased and provides prayers of forgiveness and mercy for several relevant categories.
Fiqh al-Rida is neither an established work of Shaykh al-Saduq nor unquestionably attributable to Imam al-Rida.
Therefore the claim that “the way of Ahl al-Bayt is Sunni, while the Shia funeral prayer is fictional” collapses.
The five-takbir funeral prayer has both a Sahih Muslim foundation and an early Imami foundation.
The real issue is not whether Shia jurisprudence contains harsh historical rulings. Some such rulings exist.
The real issue is whether TwelverShia.net represented the evidence honestly.
It did not.
The Funeral Prayer of Imam Ali Examined
Primary Category :
Secondary Category :
Loading comments...