THE WORD SHI'AH
Islam is a means of uniting this nation upon the truth, not a means of dividing them into sects and parties. In the era of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, there was no mention of Shīʿah; there was only one theology and that was Islam. The Companions were all one group and there was mutual love and affection between all of them, including ‘Ali and all of the Prophet’s household. There were no Shīʿah in the era of Abū Bakr, ʿUmar and ʿUthmān رضىي الله عنهم. According to Ibn Taymiyyah,
'during the khilāfah of Abū Bakr and ʿUmar رضي الله عنهما, there were no such people who were referred to as Shīʿah, and the word Shīʿah was not attached to any person’s name.' (Minhāj al-Sunnah 2/64).
In fact, records of the initial periods of Islamic history refer to the word Shīʿah in no other sense besides its literal meaning, i.e. helping and following. We find this word being used in the document of the arbitration between ʿAlī and Muʿāwiyah رضي الله عنهما. It is used therein for the supporters of both these luminaries and it is not confined to the supporters of ʿAlī رضي الله عنه. Below is an excerpt from this document:
This is the settlement upon which ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib, Muʿāwiyah ibn Abī Sufyān and their followers (Shīʿah) have agreed upon… (amongst which is that) ʿAlī and his followers (Shīʿah) have chosen ʿAbd Allāh ibn Qays, whilst Muʿāwiyah and his supporters (Shīʿah) have chosen ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ… If any of these intermediaries happen to pass away, then the respective group of supporters (Shīʿah) and helpers will have the right to replace him with a person of their choice… If one of the leaders passes away before the fixed time in this matter, then his supporters (Shīʿah) will have the right to replace him with one whose justice pleases them. [Al-Dīnwarī: Al-Akhbār al-Ṭiwāl pg. 194-196. Refer to Tārīkh al-Ṭabarī 5/53-54, Muḥammad Ḥamīd Allah: Majmūʿat al-Wathā’iq al-Siyāsiyyah pg. 281-282]
Another historical report which proves the argument is the incident when Muʿāwiyah رضي الله عنه sent Busr ibn Arṭāt towards Yemen saying:
Carry on until you reach Ṣanʿā, as we have supporters (Shīʿah) there. (Tārīkh al-Yaʿqūbī 2/197)
Some of the scholars of the Shīʿah were forced to accept this reality; their Ayatollah and mujtahid of his time, Muḥammad Ḥusayn Āl Kāshif al-Ghiṭā says:
There was no scope in that era (the eras of Abū Bakr and ʿUmar رضي الله عنهما) for the Shīʿah to make an appearance, as Islam was upon its correct methodology and path. (Aṣl al-Shīʿah pg. 48)
Thus, it has been proven that until that era, the word Shīʿah was not confined to ʿAlī رضي الله عنه. It seems as if the claimants of Shīʿism did not physically gather and adopt this name formally, to distinguish themselves from the rest until the martyrdom of ʿAlī رضي الله عنه — as stated by some, or the martyrdom of Ḥusayn — as stated by others.
Dr. Abdul Rahman Dimashqiah writes:
Shias prefer to describe themselves with the word shia, which indicates exclusive and sectarian mentality, to the word "Sunnah" which indicates following a constant method among all Muslims, and means to act according to the Prophet's Tradition. [This is despite the fact that ]Shia sources, as well, stress the importance of following the Prophet's Sunnah. Al-Kulayni says in his book, Al-Kâfî that whoever rejects anything from the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of His Prophet has declared his disbelief in Islam. (Al-Kulaynî, Al-Usûl min Al-Kâfî, 1:59, 70.)
The word shia was first used as a description for the two factions that arose because of the dispute between `Ali and Mu`awiyah. These were known as the "shia," or faction of `Ali and the "shia" of Mu`awiyah, in the sense of supporters. The term should have fallen out of use once the conflict between them was resolved.
The word shia applies today to a group who are independent of the Sunnis in terms of doctrines, jurisprudence, principles of Islamic jurisprudence, and the way of understanding Islam. The original "shia of `Ali" were in fact Sunnis in terms of doctrine and religion. (A Calm Dialogue between Sunni and Shia, p. 24)
SHI'ISM AS A CHANGING SET OF BELIEFS
Shīʿism as a separate ideology and set of beliefs did not come into being all of a sudden. It went through different stages and transformed over a period of time. Shīʿī beliefs are constantly changed and modified. This is why the Shīʿah of the first century have almost nothing in common with those who succeeded them. In the first century, Shīʿah were those who believed that ʿAlī رضي الله عنه deserved precedence over ʿUthmān رضي الله عنه. Ibn Taymiyyah stated that the former Shīʿah, who lived during the khilāfah of ʿAlī رضي الله عنه, would grant precedence to Abū Bakr and ʿUmar رضي الله عنهما. (
Minhāj al-Sunnah 2/60).
Sharīk ibn ʿAbd Allāh — who was considered a Shīʿī — refused to refer to those who grant precedence to ʿAlī over Abū Bakr and ʿUmar رضىي الله عنهم as Shīʿah. He knew that this belief was in stark contradiction to that which was unambiguously and undeniably established from ʿAlī رضي الله عنه, since Tashayyuʿ means “obedience and support”, not opposition and disregard (for the opinions of the one who is to be followed). He is quoted to have said,
“yes, whoever says otherwise is not a Shīʿī. By the oath of Allah, ʿAlī ascended these steps and then announced, ‘listen well! Indeed the best of this ummah after its Nabī is Abū Bakr and thereafter ʿUmar!’ Thus, how can we reject his statement and belie him? By the oath of Allah, he was not a liar!” (Minhāj al-Sunnah 1/7-8).
Ibn Baṭṭah reports from his teacher, who was well-known as Abū al-ʿAbbās ibn Masrūq:
Reported to us by Muḥammad ibn Ḥumayd — Jarīr —Sufyān — from ʿAbd Allāh ibn Ziyād ibn Jadīr who said, “Abū Isḥāq al-Subayʿī came to Kūfah, so Shimr ibn ʿAṭiyyah said to us, ‘go to him!’ Thereupon we went to sit with him and they began speaking. Abū Isḥāq said: When I left Kūfah, not a single soul doubted the virtue of Abū Bakr and ʿUmar رضي الله عنهما and that they should be granted precedence. This time when I came they saying this and that and I do not know, by the oath of Allah, what they are saying! (Al-Muntaqā pg. 360)
Muḥibb al-Dīn al-Khaṭīb explains:
This is clear historical evidence which highlights the transformation of Shīʿism. Abū Isḥāq al-Subayʿī was the leading and most prominent scholar of Kūfah. He was born during the khilāfah of ʿUthmān رضي الله عنه (three years before he was martyred) and he lived until the year 127 A.H. He was still a child during the Khilāfah of ʿAlī رضي الله عنه. He spoke about himself saying, “my father lifted me up so I could see ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib delivering a sermon. The hair of his head and beard was white.”… (Ḥāshiyat al-Muntaqā pg. 360-361)
Layth ibn Abī Salīm said:
I met the very first group of Shīʿah. They would not grant superiority to anyone over Abū Bakr and ʿUmar. (Al-Muntaqā pg. 360-361)
Dr. Abdul Rahman Dimashqiah writes:
The conflict between `Ali and Mu`awiyah was purely political, yet afterwards it began to take the form of doctrinal deviations. The Shias finally formed an independent sect and split themselves away from the main body of the Muslims. They developed their own approaches to the study of the principles and branches of the Sharî`ah, Fiqh, Creed, and rules of inheritance.
However, was the conflict between `Ali and Mu`awiyah about these things? Or Did both parties share a single belief they both had taken from the Prophet?... (A Calm Dialogue between Sunni and Shia, p. 64)
The Shi'a were not all the same:
...Although this was the basis of their position, the Shi‘a were not all the same. Some were excessive in their esteem for ‘Ali and his descendants and some were more balanced. The balanced ones were content to prefer ‘Ali to the other Companions without declaring anyone an unbeliever, whereas the excessive sects of the Shi‘a elevated ‘Ali to the rank of prophethood and some of them even went so far as to deify him. Some of them claimed that God was incarnate in the Imams, ‘Ali and his sons, espousing a doctrine similar to Christian incarnation. Some of them believed that every Imam had divinity incarnate in him which then transmigrated to the next Imam.
https://notesonshiism.wordpress.com/category/origins-of-shiism/
Another aspect which illustrates the evolving nature of Shi’ism is differences in how the term has been defined by Shi’i scholars themselves. The definition of the word Shīʿah in the most important and the earliest book of the Shīʿah regarding sects mentions, ‘…T
he Shīʿah of ʿAlī were known for confining themselves to him and claiming his Imāmah…’ (Al-Maqālāt wa l-Firaq pg. 15)
This definition was given by Al-Qummī, a great and very knowledgeable scholar according to the Shīʿah. He authored many books and he is considered reliable by them. His definition does not indicate towards any core beliefs and principles of the Shīʿah, such as the belief that ʿAlī and his sons رضىي الله عنهم were divinely appointed or the condition of the belief in infallibility (the only mention of their beliefs is the words “the Imāmah of ʿAlī”). The
Ithnā ʿAshariyyah (Twelver Shi’a) do not accept this as the correct definition of Shīʿism, even though al-Qummī and al-Nowbakhtī (another Shi’i scholar who agreed with his definition) were of the Ithnā ʿAshariyyah.
The Ithnā ʿAshariyyah (Twelver Shi’a) do not accept that merely believing that Ali was superior to everyone else is enough to be called a Shīʿī. It is incumbent, according to them, to believe that he was divinely appointed as the khalīfah and that this began as soon as the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم passed away. It is for this very reason that their scholars, al-Ṭūsī and al-Mufīd, excluded some of the Zaydiyyah from the boundaries of Shīʿism.
Indeed, their number of sects is an outstanding calamity for the Shi'a. After the death of each of their Imāms, a new set of sects emerged, and each sect had a unique methodology by which they would appoint the next Imām. Similarly, each sect would invent a unique set of beliefs and thereafter claim that they alone were on the correct path.
ORIGINS OF SHI'ISM
How did the mere granting of precedence to ʿAlī turn into claims that he was divinely appointed and infallible? Many classical and modern-day researchers have insisted that the foundation and the first brick in the building of Shīʿism was a Jew by the name of Abdullah ibn Saba', who portrayed himself to be a Muslim. Ibn Taymiyyah, for example, is of the view that Abdullah ibn Saba’ was the first person to claim that ʿAlī was infallible and his appointment to Imāmah was divine. He wished to pollute Islam, just as Paulus polluted Christianity. (Majmūʿ Fatāwā 4/518). His motive was the destruction and eradication of Islam, which he intended to achieve by creating disunity and sowing discord amongst the Muslims.
It is also admitted in the books of the Shīʿah that Ibn Saba’ was the first person to claim that ʿAlī رضي الله عنه was divinely appointed, he will be reincarnated and he was also the first person to revile the first three khulafā’ and the Companions of Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم. These are ideas and beliefs which later became the foundation of Shīʿism, as they, as well as other beliefs were given the form of narrations and aḥādīth and they were falsely, deceptively and shamelessly attributed to the Ahl al-Bayt. This duped many of the ignorant masses, non-Arabs and others into accepting them.
Al-Kashshī, who is regarded by the Shi’ah as reliable and well-versed with narrations and narrators, reports six narrations regarding Ibn Saba’ in his famous book
Rijāl al-Kashshī. This book is the oldest and most reliable book of the Shīʿah on the science of narrators. Those narrations imply that Ibn Saba’ claimed nubuwwah and that Amīr al-Mu’minīn is Allah — Allah is exalted and pure of these allegations! (
Rijāl al-Kashshī pg. 106-108, 305)
Dr. Nasir al-Qaffari writes,
… These are the most important beliefs of the Shīʿah, which were traced immediately after the martyrdom of ʿUthmān رضي الله عنه, in the era of ʿAlī رضي الله عنه . However, they were not accepted in the form of a set of beliefs by any specific and known sect. In fact, he Saba’iyyah did not raise their heads, except that ʿAlī رضي الله عنه fought against them.
Unfortunately, the events that took place after this (the Battle of Ṣiffīn, the incident of the arbitration that followed it, the assassination of ʿAlī رضي الله عنه and the killing of Ḥusayn رضي الله عنه created a perfect environment for these ideas to be propagated and kept up by a specific group and sect. All of these incidents stirred up the emotions of people and prompted them to support the Ahl al-Bayt. Therefore, the idea of supporting ʿAlī رضي الله عنه and his household began penetrating the hearts of people, but it was then hijacked and misused by all those who wanted to destroy Islam, whether they were irreligious, hypocrites or satanic. In this manner, the infiltration of foreign ideas and beliefs into the Muslims took place, all under the guise of support for ʿAlī رضي الله عنه, as it was the easiest path. Thereafter, with the passing of time, this innovation began spreading and its danger thereof was intensified, as Ibn Saba’ now had many successors…
Among their ‘achievements’ thereafter was that they split the ranks of the ummah and they managed to achieve, through plotting and planning, that which they failed to achieve by means of weapons and arms. Shīʿism was the realisation of the dream of all those who longed for the downfall of Islam and conspired against it. This is why it also attracted many conspirators of other religions. Once they managed to form a sect, they began laying down the ‘inspired and revealed’ principles of their religion, and they attributed it to Islam. (A Comprehensive Study of the Shi'ah Creed, p. 99-101)
He also adds an important clarification:
It is important to take note that the strong link between the inception of Shīʿism and Ibn Saba’ are confined to the extremist Shīʿah (who are the majority in this era). As for the moderate Shīʿism which merely grants precedence to ʿAlī رضي الله عنه and this type of beliefs, this was not started by the irreligious ones, as opposed to the sect that claims he was divinely appointed and he was infallible.
Some have stated that Shi’ism has Persian origins, whilst others say it was the home of old Asian beliefs such as Buddhism. There are other views as well. Ibn Taymiyyah accurately stated that those who claim to be adherents of Shīʿism composed their religion from the beliefs of the Persians, Romans, Greeks, Christians, Jews and others. They added all of these to Shīʿism. Thereafter, he says that this is the realisation of the information passed on to us by Nabī صلى الله عليه وسلم, that this ummah will follow in the footsteps of the people before them, and he quotes the relative aḥādīth. He says that this the exact condition of the Shīʿah. (
Minhāj al-Sunnah 4/147)
KEY POINTS
The terms Sunni and Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah refer to an ascription to the Sunnah, the very thing the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم commanded us to follow and highlighted as a distinguishing feature of the saved sect. We find the terms 'Sunnah' and 'Jama'ah' in the actual words of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. The theology of this group is the same as that of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and his Companions, which was perfected in his lifetime.
In contrast, the concept of Shi’ism did not arise until many years after the death of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. It was/is a constantly changing theology and one which, as we shall see إن شاء الله, bears little resemblance to that of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and his Companions.
More information about Abdullah ibn Saba':
[Sectarian Article] Shee'ahs - Is Abdullah bin Sabaa a Myth?
http://www.twelvershia.net/2013/05/...ather-of-the-rafidha-an-unquestionable-truth/
https://notesonshiism.wordpress.com/category/origins-of-shiism/
