by Behnam Sadeghi

In May 1990, Behnam Sadeghi of Occidental College posted to soc.religion.islam a carefully sourced examination of the Islamic doctrine of taqiyya — the concealment of religious belief or practice under duress. The post was a response to a recurring claim in the group that taqiyya was a distinctively Shia form of deception, and therefore evidence of Shia moral deviance.

Sadeghi systematically dismantled this argument from primary sources. Drawing on Sahih Muslim (one of the two most authoritative Sunni hadith collections), a Sunni commentary by Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, and Allamah Tabatabayi's Shi'ite Islam, he demonstrated that both traditions permit concealment when genuine danger threatens life, honor, or livelihood — and that the Quran itself provides the scriptural basis in sura III:28 and sura XVI:106 (the verse revealed concerning Ammar ibn Yasir, who under torture publicly denied Islam to preserve his life and was retroactively vindicated by revelation).

The post is notable for its tone as much as its scholarship: Sadeghi closes with a lament that Muslims spend energy magnifying small sectarian differences rather than facing external threats together. Written at the beginning of the first Gulf War buildup, during a period of intense sectarian rhetoric on the early internet, it is a document of early Muslim intellectual life online — a scholar arguing for Islamic unity from within the tradition's own texts.

Some time ago, Mr. Omar Stephen M. Dodd (Steve) initiated a discussion in soc.religion.islam about taqiyya, saying that Shias practice "deception." I wasn't going to respond to the original article because I thought it was clear where it came from and what its intentions were.

However, brother Abdennour has been repeating the same thing many times in his postings. I feel compelled to comment on some of the points he raised. First, he stated that taqiyya is simple lying and therefore not permissible under any circumstances. Then somebody quoted a commentary from the Sunni scholar Mawdudi which justified taqiyya. This prompted Abdennour's new opinion that taqiyya is permissible only if applied against non-Moslems and therefore Shias are in the wrong. I am not aware on what basis he believes that taqiyya is prohibited when dealing with Moslems. Insha'allah he will elaborate.

In any case, in this posting, we'll see what some Shias and non-Shias have to say about taqiyya.

Taqiyya in Sahih Muslim

I am copying this hadith from Sahih Muslim:

Humaid b. 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Auf reported that his mother Umm Kulthum daughter of 'Uqba b. Abu Mu'ait, and she was one amongst the first emigrants who pledged allegiance to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him), as saying that she heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A liar is not one who tries to bring reconciliation amongst people and speaks good (in order to avert dispute), or he conveys good. Ibn Shihab said he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them).

The Sunni commentator of my volume of Sahih Muslim, Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, provides the following commentary:

Telling of a lie is a grave sin but a Muslim is permitted to tell a lie in some exceptional cases, and this permission is given especially on three occasions: in case of battle for bringing reconciliation amongst the hostile Muslims and for bringing reconciliation between the husband and the wife. ON THE ANALOGY [QIYAS] OF THESE THREE CASES THE SCHOLARS OF HADITH HAVE POINTED OUT SOME OTHER EXEMPTIONS: FOR SAVING THE LIFE AND HONOUR OF INNOCENT PERSON FROM THE HIGHHANDEDNESS OF TYRANTS AND OPPRESSORS IF ONE FINDS NO OTHER WAY TO SAVE THEM.

Notice that neither the above hadith nor the commentary are concerned with dealing with non-Moslems only. Also, I should mention that I am not quoting from a Sunni book in order to prove that taqiyya is permissible. Shias have their own books of hadith and there is no need to quote Sunni sources. My purpose is to show that the difference of opinion between the Sunnis and Shias on the issue of taqiyya is small.

The Shia Definition — Allamah Tabatabayi

In his book Shi'ite Islam (translated into English by Seyyed Hussein Nasr), great Shi'i scholar Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabatabayi defines taqiyya as the situation where a person "hides his religion or certain of his religious practices in situations that would cause definite or probable danger as a result of the actions of those who are opposed to his religion or particular religious practices." He goes on to define the nature of the danger:

"The exact extent of danger which would make permissible the practice of taqiyah has been debated among different mujtahids of Shi'ism. In our view, the practice of taqiyah is permitted if there is definite danger facing one's own life or the life of one's family, or the possibility of the loss of the honor and virtue of one's wife or of other female members of the family, or the danger of the loss of one's material belongings to such an extent as to cause complete destitution and prevent a man from being able to continue to support himself and his family."

Tabatabayi cites two verses from the Quran in support of taqiyya. One is the verse III:28 whose commentary by the Sunni scholar Mawdudi in support of taqiyya was already cited by another person in soc.culture.arabic. In that verse, the phrase tattaqu minhum, by the way, is of the same root as taqiyya. The second verse is the following:

"Whoso disbelieveth in Allah after his disbelief — save him who is forced thereto and whose heart is still content with Faith — but whoso findeth ease in disbelief: On them is wrath from Allah..." (Quran, XVI, 106)

Tabatabayi explains:

"As mentioned in both Sunni and Shi'ite sources this verse was revealed concerning Ammar ibn Yasir. After the migration (hijrah) of the Prophet the infidels of Mecca imprisoned some of the Muslims of that city and tortured them, forcing them to leave Islam and to return to their former religion of idolatry. Included in this group who were tortured were Ammar and his father and mother. Ammar's parents refused to turn away from Islam and died under torture. But Ammar, in order to escape torture and death, outwardly left Islam and accepted idol worship, thereby escaping from danger. Having become free, he left Mecca secretly for Medina. In Medina he went before the Holy Prophet — upon whom be blessings and peace — and in a state of penitence and distress concerning what he had done asked the Prophet if by acting as he did he had fallen outside the sacred precinct of religion. The Prophet said that his duty was what he had accomplished. The above verse was then revealed."

"The two verses cited above were revealed concerning particular cases but their meaning is such that they embrace all situations in which the outward expression of doctrinal belief and religious practice might bring about a dangerous situation. Besides these verses, there exist many traditions from the members of the Household of the Prophet ordering taqiyah when there is fear of danger."

"Some have criticized Shi'ism by saying that to employ the practice of taqiyah in religion is opposed to the virtues of courage and bravery. The least amount of thought about this accusation will bring to light its invalidity, for taqiyah must be practiced in a situation where man faces a danger which he cannot resist and against which he cannot fight. Resistance to such a danger and failure to practice taqiyah in such circumstances shows rashness and foolhardiness, not courage and bravery. The qualities of courage and bravery can be applied only when there is at least the possibility of success in man's efforts. But before a definite or probable danger against which there is no possibility of victory — such as drinking water in which there is probably poison or throwing oneself before a cannon that is being fired or lying down on the tracks before an onrushing train — any action of this kind is nothing but a form of madness contrary to logic and common sense. Therefore, we can summarize by saying that taqiyah must be practiced only when there is a definite danger which cannot be avoided and against which there is no hope of a successful struggle and victory."

The Historical Development — Moojan Momen

The following is from Moojan Momen's An Introduction to Shi'i Islam: History and Doctrines of Twelver Shi'ism. When discussing the sixth imam, Imam Ja'far Sadiq, he writes: "The doctrine of taqiyya (religious dissimulation) was also developed at this time. It served to protect the followers of as-Sadiq at a time when al-Mansur [the caliph] was conducting a brutally oppressive campaign against 'Alids and their supporters."

The Limits of Taqiyya — Imam Khomeini

The following is Imam Khomeini's view on taqiyya, quoted from his Islamic Government. He believes that dissimulation is permitted only when one's life is endangered. But in cases where Islam itself is in danger, it is not permitted even if it leads to one's death:

"The Imams, may peace be upon them, imposed on the jurisprudents very important ordinances and committed them to shouldering and preserving the trust. It is not right to resort to dissimulation on every issue, small and big. DISSIMULATION WAS LEGISLATED TO PRESERVE ONE'S LIFE OR OTHERS FROM DAMAGE ON SUBSIDIARY ISSUES OF THE LAWS. But if Islam in its entirety is in danger, then there is no place for dissimulation and for silence. What do you think a jurisprudent should do if they force him to legislate or innovate? Do you think that he is permitted to cling to the imam's words 'dissimulation is my religion and the religion of my fathers!' This is no place or situation for dissimulation. If dissimulation forces on us to jump on the sultan's bandwagon then it should not be resorted to EVEN IF SUCH REFRAINMENT LEADS TO THE DEATH OF THE PERSON CONCERNED, unless his jumping on the bandwagon constitutes a real victory for Islam and the Moslems, as in the case of 'Ali ibn Yaqtin and Nasir-al-Din al-Tusi, may God have mercy upon their souls."

"Naturally, our jurisprudents since the onset of Islam and until this day have been, as you know, above stooping to this level. The jurisprudents of the sultans were always from outside our group and always disagreed with us in opinion. Throughout the ages, our jurisprudents have been exposed to the ugliest forms of cruelty, persecution, annihilation and pursuit everywhere."

I think it is rather sad that today, as always, we Moslems are so plagued with internal rivalries and sectarian fanaticism that we do our utmost to magnify even some of the very small and negligible differences (such as taqiyya) that exist among us.

Colophon

Written by Behnam Sadeghi, Occidental College, Los Angeles. Posted to soc.religion.islam on May 30, 1990.

Sadeghi's post is a model of cross-sectarian argumentation: he uses Sunni hadith to establish the shared Sunni–Shia ground on religious dissimulation, then Shia authorities to clarify the doctrine's scope and limits. The primary sources cited are Sahih Muslim (Bukhari's companion as one of the two most authoritative Sunni hadith collections), with commentary by Abdul Hamid Siddiqi; Allamah Tabatabayi's Shi'ite Islam (trans. Seyyed Hussein Nasr); Moojan Momen's An Introduction to Shi'i Islam; and Imam Khomeini's Islamic Government. The Quranic basis rests on sura III:28 and sura XVI:106, with the latter connected to the historical case of Ammar ibn Yasir, a companion of the Prophet who publicly recanted under torture and was vindicated by revelation.

Preserved from the Usenet archive for the Good Work Library by the New Tianmu Anglican Church, 2026. Original Message-ID: [email protected].

🌲