every muslim should know about shia

7/27/2019 Every Muslim Should Know About Shia

1/8

Page 1 of8

Contributed by: whyamisuni

Distributed by: Abu Jaiyana https://www.facebook.com/AbuJaiyana

EVERY MUSLIM SHOULD KNOWOrigins of Shia

Scholars of Usul Al-Fiqh (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence) stated the following rule,One cannot pass a judgment on something unless one has a clear conception of it.

Based on this rule, it is meaningless to pass a judgment on Shia unless you have good

knowledge about them. It is also meaningless to express ones opinion on reconciling the

views of Sunnis and Shiites without recognizing the nature of both sects.

Likewise, it is of no real sense to accept or reject talking about Shia without knowing the

reality of the issue, to what extent it is dangerous, its rank as to our priorities and its relation

to the multiple variables the Ummah is facing.

In short, before we proceed to criticize opponents or proponents of Shia, we should firstunderstand who Shia are, what their origins are, what their theological and Fiqhi

(Jurisprudential) backgrounds are, what their history is about, what their reality is an what

their goals and ambitions are.

Only after doing this, we can express our view foresightedly, especially when we know

how many people changed their long-believed views and give up their ideas after they had

been provided with sound information and clear vision.

Who are Shia?

The issue is not merely that of certain people living in a certain country who have somedisputes with neighboring countries. Rather, it is an issue of theological, historical and Fiqhi

backgrounds that have to be referred to.

Many historians differ on the real beginning of Shia.

What is commonly believed by the masses is that Shia are those people who supported

Àli bin Abu Talib during the caliphate of Muàwiyah bin Abu Sufyan, (may Allah be

pleased with him).

Accordingly, this means that those who supported Àli bin Abu Talib are Shia while those

who supported Muàwiyah are Sunnis. Such a notion has never been accepted by anyone.

Moreover, Sunnis believe with regard to the dispute that arose between the two honorable

Companions that Àli (may Allah be pleased with him) was on the right, while

Muàwiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) exercised Ijtihad (independent judgment) but

did not reach the truth.
https://www.facebook.com/AbuJaiyanahttps://www.facebook.com/AbuJaiyanahttp://whyamisuni.wordpress.com/2008/01/10/11/http://whyamisuni.wordpress.com/2008/01/10/11/http://whyamisuni.wordpress.com/2008/01/10/11/https://www.facebook.com/AbuJaiyana


2/8

Page 2 of8



Thus, Sunnis thought is clearly siding with Àli. Moreover, tenets, doctrines and ideologies

held by Shia are entirely different from those held by Àli bin Abu Talib absolutely.

Therefore, it is incorrect to say that the rise of Shia was at that era.

Some historians say that the rise of Shia was after Al-Hussein (may Allah be pleased with

him) was martyred.

This opinion sounds to be more logical. Actually, Al-Hussein rebelled against the rule of

Yazid bin Muàweiyah and, therefore, headed for Iraq after his followers there had

promised to back him. However, they let him down at the critical time, which led to the

martyrdom of Al-Hussein at Karbala.

The group of people who invited him and failed to support him regretted doing so and

decided to expiate their sin through rebelling against the Umayyad state. They actually

did so and a large number of them were killed and thus were called Shia.

This might explain why we notice that Shia are more attached to Al-Hussein bin Àli than

to Àli bin Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) himself.

They also, as we can see, mark the anniversary of Al-Husseins martyrdom while don not

mark that of Àli bin Abu Talib.

However, this sect only rose as a political one opposing the rule of the Umayyad dynasty

and backed any attempts to rebel against it. Until that time, they did not hold theological

or jurisprudential principles different from those of Sunnis.

We will even come to know that earlier leaders whom Shiites claim to be their earlier Shia

Imams were only Sunni men adopting doctrines and principles of Sunnis.

The situation continued to be stable for months after the martyrdom of Al-Hussein (may

Allah be pleased with him). At this period lived Àli Zainul-Àbdin bin Al- Hussein who

was one of the most righteous personalities and great ascetic scholars.

He has never been reported to have any beliefs or ideologies different from those held by

Companions and later generations.

Ali Zainul-Àbdin had two sons of a high level of piety and purity, namely, Mohammed

Al-Baqir and Zaid, both of whom completely believed in beliefs held by Sunni scholars

including Companions and Successors.

However, Zaid bin Àli (may Allah have mercy on him) differed in viewing that Àli bin

Abu Talib was worthier of assuming caliphate than Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with

him).
https://www.facebook.com/AbuJaiyanahttps://www.facebook.com/AbuJaiyanahttps://www.facebook.com/AbuJaiyana


3/8

Page 3 of8



Although this opinion conflicts with the Ummahs consensus and contradicts many Hadith

that explicitly held Abu Bakr Al-Siddik, Ùmar and Ùthman in a higher rank than Àli

(may Allah be pleased with him), this difference of opinion, however, does not relate to

doctrinal issues.

While he viewed that Àli was the best, he, however, admitted the high rank of the fi rstthree caliphs. He also believed in the permissibility of one less in rank assuming imamate

despite the existence of those higher in rank.

Accordingly, he did not deny the imamate of Abu Bakr, Ùmar and Ùthman (may Allah

be pleased with them). Apart from this view, he concurred with Sunnis in theology,

principles and Fiqh.

Repeating the attempt of his grandfather Al-Hussein bin Àli (may Allah be pleased with

them both), Zaid bin Àli rebelled against the Umayyad caliph Hisham bin Abdul-Malik,

which ended up with his being killed in 122 A.H. His followers then founded a sect based

on his ideas, known in history as Zaydiyyah, named after Zaid bin Àli.

Though considered to be a Shia-based sect, Zaydiyyah agrees with Sunnis in everything

except in holding Àli in a higher position than the first three Caliphs.

The followers of this sect are mainly in Yemen and they are the nearest Shia sects to Sunnis

even one can hardly distinguish them from Sunnis in most respects.

It is worth mentioning that a group of the followers of Zaid bin Àli asked him about his

opinion on Abu Bakr and Ùmar. In reply, he supplicated Allah to show mercy to both of

them, but those who asked him refused to do the same and seceded from his sect.

Therefore, they were known in the history as Rafidah (lit. dissenters) because they rejectedthe caliphate of Abu Bakr and Ùmar on one hand, and rejected Zaids opinion on the

other. Subsequent generations of such a group founded a sect which was later known as

Ithna Àshriyyah (Imamiyyah) to turn into Shias largest sect.

Mohammed Al-Baqir, Zaid bin Àlis brother, died eight years before his brother (in 114

A.H.) leaving behind a son who became the reverend scholar Ja`far Al-Sadiq. The latter

was a prominent scholar and a proficient Faqih (Jurisprudent), who held the same theology

believed in by Companions, Successors and Muslim scholars in general.

Late at the era of the Umayyad caliphate, the Abbasid movement started activities aiming

at rallying people against the Umayyad caliphate. The movement collaborated with the

groups which seceded from Zeid bin Àli and both toppled the Umayyad caliphate in 132

A.H.


4/8


5/8

Page 5 of8



Some of them even showed deep adherence to their Persian roots, lock, stock and barrel,

even the fire which they once worshiped.

As they were not powerful enough to rebel against the Islamic state, and being Muslims

for decades, they found the Al-Talibiyuns revolutions a way through which they would

seek to topple the Islamic caliphate which toppled their Persian state before.

In the same time, they did not want to forsake Islam which they embraced for many years.

They, however, decided to interpolate it through injecting into it the heritage of the Persian

state so as to secure instability within the Muslim Ummah.

They kept a low profile, while Al-Talibiyu maintained the high profile. Bearing in mind

that Al-Talibiyun are affiliated to Àli bin Abu Talib, are a part of the Prophets Household

and thus held in a high esteem by people, such people secured continuation of there

mission.

Thus, attempts of Persophils united with those of Al-Talibiyyun belonging to the Prophets

Household to form a new independent, not only political but also religious, entity.

Back to Al-Talibiyyun, we can see that after the death of Ali Al-Rida whom Abbasid Caliph

Al-Mamun nominated as the crown prince, he was succeeded by his son Mohammed Al-

Jawad who died in 220 A.H. The latter was also succeeded by his son Àli bin Mohammed

Al-Hadi who died in 254 A.H.

Finally, the latter was succeeded by Al-Hassan bin Àli called Al-Àskary who also died

suddenly in 260 A.H. leaving behind a young 5-year-old son, Mohammed.

Throughout previous years, separatist movements, which consisted of some of the

Prophets Household and Persophils, would swear allegiance to the elder son of Al-Talibiyyuns leader, starting with Àli Al-Rida and ending with Al-Hassan Al-Àskary.

Concerning the ascendants of Àli Al-Rida, such as his father Musa Al-Kazim or his

grandfather Ja`far Al-Sadik or his grandfathers father Mohammed Al-Baqir, they did not

assume the revolutionary leadership against Umayyad or Abbasid rule.

However, after Al-Hassan Al-Àskary had died in 260 A.H., revolutionists got totally

confused as to who is to assume leadership when Al-Hassan Al-Àskary left behind a young

son. They even got more confused after the sudden death of that young son.

This resulted in dividing such revolutionary groups into many sects each different from theother in terms of principles and ideas as well as even in laws and beliefs.

The most famous among such sects is Ithna Àshriyyah (Imamiyyah), now prevailing in

Iran, Iraq and Lebanon. It is the biggest Shiite sect at present.


6/8

Page 6 of8



The leaders of this sect started to add to Islam ideas that would work best for situations

they are exposed to currently and that may ensure the continuation of their sect despite

the absence of their leader.

They added many serious Bidahs (innovations in religion) to the religion of Islam, claiming

them to be part and parcel of Islam.

Thus, such Bidahs, with the passage of time, became a key component of their ideology

and thought. Some of such Bidahs relate to Imamate (caliphate).

Seeking a justification for the lack of a current imam, they argued that Imams are twelve

only, arranging them in the following order: 1- Àli bin Abu Talib, 2- Al-Hassan bin Àli,

3- Al-Hussein bin Àli, 4- Àli Zainul-Àbidin bin Al-Hussein, 5- Mohammed Al-Baqir bin

Zainul-Àbidin, 6- Ja`far Al-Sadik bin Mohammed Al-Baqir, 7- Musa Al-Kazim, 8- Àli Al-

Rida, 9- Mohammed Al-Jawad, 10- Àli Al-Hadi, 11- Mohammed Al-Mahdi and 12- Al-

Hassan Al-Àskary.

That is why this sect is called Ithna Àshriyyah. Seeking to justify why the Imam succession

came to an end, they claimed that the young child Muhammad bin Al-Hassan Al-Àskary

has not died yet, and that, according to them, he has disappeared in a mountain cave and

that he is still alive (over one thousand years now).

They further claim that he will be back one day to rule the world. They also believe him

to be the Awaited Mahdi (Righteous Imam).

They also claimed that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) bequeathed Imamate

to those twelve names but Companions withheld such information.

This is why they judge Companions in general to be disbelievers (however, some of themjudge Companions to be only profligate) as they concealed such a bequeath.

Influenced by the Persian system of rule, they introduced the inevitability of the

monarchical system believing that the Imam must be the elder son of Àli bin Abu Talib

and likewise all succeeding Imams.

As known to all, this notion is not Islamic at all. Even Sunni Islamic states based on a

monarchical system, such as Umayad, Abbasid, Seljuk, Ayyubi and Ottoman caliphates,

never considered the monarchical system to be a part of religion or that ruling must be

on a dynasty basis.

Influenced also by Persia, they introduced sanctification of the ruling dynasty.

Accordingly, they believed in the infallibility of the aforementioned Imams and thus

considered their sayings to be as holy as the Quran and Prophetic Hadith.


7/8

Page 7 of8



Moreover, most of their Fiqhi (jurisprudential) rules are even derived from the sayings of

Imams, regardless of whether these sayings are authentically or falsely attributed to them.

Furthermore, in his book Islamic Government, Khomeini, the leader of the Iranian

revolution, stated, One of the fundamentals of our ideology is that our Imams are higher

in rank than devoted angels and prophets. Hence, this explains their bitter hostility to allCompanions (except for a few of them who do not exceed thirteen).

They also show hostility to even some of the Prophets Household, such as Al-Àbbas (may

Allah be pleased with him), Allahs Messengers uncle, and his son Abdullah bin Àbbas

(may Allah be pleased with him), the great scholar of the Ummah.

Unarguably, hostility to these two figures and judging them to be disbelievers is due to the

historical conflict between Ithna Àshriyyah and Abbasid caliphate.

Among their Bidàhs also is that they consider most Muslim countries to be Darul-Kufr

(House of disbelief). They also judge the people of Medina, Mecca, Egypt and Levant to

be disbelievers, falsely reporting the Messenger of Allah to have said something in this

regard and thus believe it to be a part of their religion.

You can refer to such ideas in their original resources, such as Al-Kafy, Bihar Al-Anwar and

Tafsir Al-Qummi, Tafsir Al-Àyyashi, Al-Burhan and other books.

Consequently, they do not acknowledge any Sunni scholars and all the authentic Hadith

books, such as Al-Bukhari, Muslim, Al-Tirmidhi and Al-Nasai. They also deny the authority

of Abu Hanifah, Malik, Al-Shafiì and Ibn Hanbal.

They also do not admit the excellence of Khalid bin Al-Walid or Sa`d bin Abu Waqqas,

Ùmar bin Abdul-Àziz,, Musa bin Nusair, Nourul-Din Mahmoud, Salahud-Din, Qutuz andMuhammad Al-Fatih.

As a result of their non-recognition of Companions, Successors and books of Hadith and

Tafsir (exegesis of the Quran), they depended largely on sayings attributed to their Imams

through very weak chains of narrators.

Consequently, many abhorred Bidahs took place regarding their doctrines, acts of

worship, transactions and other wakes of life. In this article, I do not intend to give a list

of their Bidahs; actually, such a goal requires composing many books.

I only refer here to the origin of the problem so that we may understand its consequences.

However, it requires a lengthy talk to speak about such Bidahs as Taqiyyah (a dispensation

allowing Shiites to conceal their faith when under threat, persecution or compulsion) and

Raja (the second coming or the return to life of their Imams after death), viewing that the

Quran was interpolated, misbelieving in Allah, Bidahs committed at the shrines, building


8/8

every muslim should know about shia

Documents