BISM - ILLAH - IR - RAHMAN - IR - RAHEEM
(In the name of God, the most Compassionate, the Merciful)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AL- HAMDU L'ILLAH
(All praise be to God)
Call unto the way of your Lord with wisdom and good exhortation,
and reason with them in the best way. Lo! your Lord best knows those
who go astray from His path, and He knows best those who are rightly
guided.
(Qur'an, 16:125)
It was about two years ago that I received a long letter from an
Iraqi student in Egypt. Briefly speaking, the writer of the letter had
had an exchange of views with some eminent scholars of al-Azhar. Perhaps
they talked about Najaf al-Ashraf, the scholars of that seat of learning
and their ways of studies and also about those devoted to the spiritual
atmosphere at the mausoleum of Hazrat Ali (a.s.).
There is no doubt, of course, that the educated class of Cairo are all
praise for the great seat of learning at Najaf and are also well
impressed with the intellectual advancement of its scholars. In spite of
all this they do not refrain from saying: "Oh! What a pity! They are
Shi'as."
The writer of the letter says that he was very astonished and often used
to plead with them, "Gentlemen! The Shi'as are a Muslim sect and a part
of the Muslim community." But their reply was, "No, Sir! The Shi'as are
not Muslims. What has Shi'ism to do with Islam? It is wrong to count it
as a sect among the sects and a religion among the religions of the
world; it was a plan devised by the Iranians and a political stunt to
overthrow the Umayyad rule and bring about the 'Abbasid Caliphate. What
has it to do with the ways prescribed by God?"
After this, this young man writes. "Respected Sir, at present I am young
and have no knowledge of religions.
I know neither the philosophy of religious growth, nor do I know the
history of its flourishing. Consequently I have entertained some
doubts."
After writing these words this student of the great college at Cairo
desired that I should unveil the truth and rid him of that mental worry.
In this connection he also wrote that if his request proved futile and
he was misled from the right path, I would stand responsible for that.
Accordingly I considered the reply necessary and wrote to him in a
letter answering him according to his intelligence. I must admit,
however, that my own worries were more than the doubts of this youth.
I thought to myself: how is it credible that a cultured country like
Egypt - the cradle of Islamic learning, the centre of the Arabs, nay, of
all the Muslims in such a state of ignorance and hostility among its
intelligentsia!
It was by chance that a book entitled "Farjru 'l-Islam" by the famous
writer Ahmad Amin reached my hands. I started wading it but. when I
reached the place where he wrote about the Shi'as, I felt that the
learned author was not writing a book but building castles in the air.
During the present age, even if a man from the distant regions of China
had written such irresponsible things, he could not be easily forgiven.
Anyhow, I now felt satisfied that all that the Iraqi student had written
was quite correct and instantly it struck me that if the people used to
writing like Ahmad Amin have such a mentality, what can be the condition
of the illiterate or half-literate masses; according to the spirit of
the times, however, every Muslim of today supports unity and brotherhood
among the Muslims and also believes that without such unity our life as
well as death will be without meaning.
In truth, if our Muslim brothers were of the reality of the Shi'a
religion and also proved to be just, such literature which lays the
foundation of mutual enmity and satisfies the cravings of the
Imperialist and irreligious forces would be done away with.
Let us study this passage of "Fajru 'l-Islam" and consider its
repercussions:
"The truth is that Shi'aism was the refuge of the destroyers of Islam."
p. 330.
The writer is not innocent. He knew that the pen of the critics would
pursue him and also knew that his aggressive tendency would injure the
feelings of a nation which comprises tens of millions of people and is a
very great power in the Islamic world.
It was thus quite a surprising event when last year (1349 A.H.), a
cultural delegation from Egypt, comprising thirty members, came here and
included Ahmad Amin himself. All the members of the delegation came to
my residence. It was the month of Ramadan, night time, and the gathering
was large. No sooner had I seen Ahmad Amin than "Fajru 'l-Islam" came to
my mind, since this book had already been seen by a number of our
scholars.
We raised objections, but with respect, in a very mild and soft tone, so
that it might not hurt his feelings. On this occasion the strongest
explanation that Ahmad Amin offered was a lack of information and a
dearth of books. To this we said, "Sir, when someone starts writing on
some topic, he first gathers relevant material and then he fully
examines the matter, otherwise the writer has no right to touch upon the
topic at all."
Consider the libraries of the Shi'as. Row well stocked they are! Examine
our own library. It contains about five thousand volumes and most of the
books are written by Sunnis: this is the collection of books in a small
city like Najaf; strange how Egypt with its many large libraries is
devoid of Shi'a literature!
Of course, these people know nothing about the Shi'as, but never
hesitate in writing anything about them that they wish.
It is even stranger that the fellow Sunni brothers of Iraq living in our
neighborhood are unaware of the Shi'as!
Only a few months ago a promising Shi'a boy of Baghdad wrote in a letter
that recently he happened to go to Dalyam (just adjacent to the Baghdad
district). Most of the people there are Sunnis. The correspondent became
intimate with them and attended their assemblies. Since the people of
Dalyam were unusually impressed by the excellent behaviour and high
morals of the stranger, they warmly welcomed him. But when they came to
know that the person in whom they were taking so much interest was a
Shi'a, their wonder had no bounds. "We were under the impression that
the people of this sect were deprived of even the smallest light of
civilisation and culture - quite wild, totally savage!" Such were their
whims and speculations.
At the end of the letter this young boy appealed to my conscience that,
through the endeavours of my pen, I should remove the misunderstanding
in the minds of such people and introduce a true picture of Shi'aism.
After some time the same youth went to Syria to spend the summer there.
From there he went to Egypt.
From Cairo he wrote another letter, telling me that the condition of
Egypt was not different from that of Dalyam.
He wrote: "Here also the same views about the Shi'as are common. So, it
is requested that you may perform your duty of informing them of the
truth. Believe me, the views that the common people of Islam have formed
about the Shi'as are intolerably obnoxious."
And this is not all. The false imputations, which are being continuously
published in the journals of Egypt, Syria, etc. are no less grievous;
those under attack are as innocent as Joseph, but unfortunately
ignorance and fanaticism have no remedy.
However, silence in the face of transgression is synonymous with the
acceptance of injustice, so I had an obligation to speak out. But it
should be made clear that I do not wish to reply to the slanderers of
the Shi'as but rather to remove that veil of ignorance from the eyes of
the rest of the Muslims so that the truth may be clearly visible to
them; moreover it may serve as the last word to the elements hostile to
Shi'as and as a true picture of Shi'aism. We hope it may also remove the
mutual discord among the Muslims, so that writers like Ahmad Amin may
never get another opportunity to indulge in destructive activities. The
author of "Fajru 'l-Islam" writes "The truth is that Shi'ism was the
refuge of those who wished to destroy Islam through enmity and baseless
talk, and it was the place of shelter for those who wanted to introduce
their ancestral teachings of Israelite, Christian and Zoroastrian
religions into Islam".
Again he writes: "Thus the faith in "raj'at" (the returning) is what the
Isra'elites believe in. The Shi'as believe, moreover, that the fire (of
hell) is "haram" (unlawful) for them.
The Israelites also say that the fire will not touch them except for a
few counted days.
"Christianity's influence appeared likewise in the way in which some of
the Shi'as have given the same relationship for the Imam to God as is
given for Christ to Him.
They also say that the Imam is the confluence of 'Lahut' and 'Nasut'
(where divinity and earthly beings meet). Also, according to their faith
the continuance of prophethood and risalat (messengership) is
unbreakable. They hold the view that he who is absorbed in 'Lahut' is a
prophet. Besides this, transmigration of souls, the physical body of God
and 'hulul' (God's entering another body), which are the old beliefs of
the Brahmins, philosophers and fireworshippers, appeared one by one in
the Shi'a religion . . . ."
For fear of destroying the unity of the Muslim community and inciting
hatred I will refrain from replying.
Otherwise it would be quite easy to show who those people were who
introduced un-Islamic ways into Islam to undermind and divide the Muslim
community'.
Of course I should like to ask the author of 'Fajru 'l Islam": Respected
Sir, which was that group of Shi'as which had decided to destroy Islam?
Was it the first group, which includes the selected companions of the
Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), for instance. Salman Muhammadi, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari,
al-Miqdad, 'Ammar, Khuzayma, Dhu sh Shahadatain, Abu Tihan, Hudhayfah
Yamani, az-Zubayr, al-Fadl ibn al-'Abbas and his respectable brother
'Abdullah, Hashim ibn 'Utbah, al-Marqal, Abu Ayyub al-Ansari, Aban and
also his brother Khalid, the sons of Sa'id ibn al-'As, Ibn Ka'b and Anas
ibn al-Harith who had heard the Holy Prophet saying: "My son Husayn (a.s.)
will be martyred at the place known as Karbala'. So any one of you,
present at the time of that tragedy must go to help him." Accordingly
Anas drank the cup of martyrdom on the 10th of Muharram, (see "al-Isabah
fi ma'rifati' s-sahabah" and "al-Isti'ab fi ma'rifati' s-sahabah". These
two books on the lives of the Companions are the most authentic
compilations of the Sunni community.)
If we were to attempt to compile a list of the Shi'a companions and
begin to prove their Shi'ism, it would require a complete and
volumionous book. And the fact is that the noble efforts of the Shi'a 'ulema
have made it unnecessary to do so: the brilliant masterpiece, "ad-Darajat
'r rafi'h fi tabaqatu 'sh-Shi'a" written by Sayyid 'Ali Khan (the author
of "as-Salafah" and the standard dictionary "Tarazu 'l-Lughan" describes
the eminent personalities of the Banu Hashim family like Hamza and 'Aqil
Sa'id Khudri, Qays ibn Sa'id ibn 'Ubadah, Burayda, Bura' ibn Malik,
Khabab ibn al-Irth, Refa'a ibn Malik, Amir ibn Wa'ila, Hind ibn Abi Hala,
Ju'da ibn Hubayra, Makhzumi and his mother Umm Hani Bint Abi Talib and
Bilal ibn Riyah the mu'adhdhin (caller to prayer) etc.
But I believe that, from the books on the lives of the Sahaba like "Isaba",
"Asadu 'l-ghaba" and "Isti'ab" we have collected the names of about
three hundred distinguished companions and it is possible some scholarly
person may compile a longer list than this.
Were these persons desirous of ruining Islam? If the Imam of the Shi'as,
'Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.), of whom the "Thaqalayn" (the book of God and
the Ahle Bayt) are the witnesses, had not used his sharp-edged sword in
the battles of "Badr" "Uhud", "Hunayn" and " Ahzab" Islam would not have
flourished or attained an imposing height. Abdu 'l-Hamid Mu'tazali
begins his poem of praise : "lla innama al-Islam law la hisamahu…" (if
his sword had not been there, Islam ...)
Yes, if "Zulfiqar" (Hazrat 'Ali's sword) had not been there, if the lion
of God had not taken the lead, as he did before and after the hijrat, if
there had been no sincere help from Hadrat Abu Talib the illustrious
father of 'Ali (a.s.) and if Hazrat 'Ali Murtada (a.s.) had not offered
extraordinary support in the holy lands of Mecca and Medina, the
rebellious group of the Quraysh and the blood-thirsty wolves of Arabia
would have nipped Islam in the bud.
Muslims pay little respect for Abu Talib's (a.s.) services in that they
do not seem prepared to call him a Muslim. On the contrary when they
talk of Abu Sufyan, the root cause of all the troubles of the Holy
Prophet (s.a.w.) they are prompt in endowing him with Islam, although
everyone knows that he had very reluctantly and unwillingly aligned
himself with the Muslims. When Hazrat 'Uthman got the Caliphate, it was
Abu Sufyan, who cried out, "Sons of Umayyah! Just catch hold of the
caliphate as you would a ball. I swear by him by whom Abu Sufyan can
swear that there is neither heaven nor hell!"
In short, according to he verdict of the Sunni majority, Abu Sufyan is a
Muslim and as to Abu Talib the great supporter of Islam (whose beliefs
are apparent from these lines: "In my knowledge the religion of Muhammad
(s.a.w.) is the best of all religions in the world") he is labelled as a
non-Muslim! Was Abu Talib (a.s.) either so helpless or of such a weak
intellect that he knew that Muhammad's (s.a.w.) religion was the best of
all religions and did not follow it for fear of the people? It should be
clearly understood that he was at the center of all Mecca's forces and
strengths.
Now let us again examine the story of the subversion of Islam. Now were
these people (about whom we have just been talking) the persons who
subverted Islam, or it was the later group, which is known as the "tabi'in"
(the followers), in which are included Ahnaf ibn Qays, Suwayd ibn
Ghuflah, Atiyah, Ufi, Hakam ibn Atibah, salim ibn Abi Ju'd, 'Ali Abi
Ju'd, Hasan ibn Salah, Sa'id ibn Jubayr, Sa'id ibn Musayab, Asbagh ibn
Nabatah, Sulayman ibn Mohran, and Yahya ibn Ya'mar 'Adwani'? After them
come the personalities of the "tab'inu 't-tabi'in" (the followers of the
followers) who laid the foundation of Islamic teachings such as Abu 'l-Aswad
Du'ali, the originator of syntax, Khalil ibn Ahmad, the founder of
lexicography and the science of rhyme in poetry, Abu Muslim Ma'adh ibn
Muslim Al-Hira', the founder of grammar, whose Shi'ism has been admitted
even by Siyuti (Al-Muzhir, volume II) and as-Sakit Ya'qub ibn Is'haq,
the master of Arabic literature. Also, in the group of commentators is
the distinguished name of 'Abdullah ibne 'Abbas, who tops the list and
whose Shi'ism is beyond doubt. Next come the names of Jabir ibn
'Abdullah al-Ansari, Abi' ibn Ka'b, Sa'id ibn Musayyab and Muhammad ibn
'Umar Waqidi, who was the first to collect and arrange the Qur'anic
sciences. (Ibn Nadim and others have acknowIedged that they were Shi'as.
"ar-Raghib" is the name of the commentary of Waqidi).
Among those who laid the foundations of the teaching of "Hadith" is Abu
Rafi', who was the freed salve of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) and the
author of the book, "al-Ahkam wa 's-sunan wa 'l-qadaya". He had a
special relationship with Amir al-mu'minin (a.s.); during the caliphate
of the Holy Imam (a.s.) he was in charge of the Treasury at Kufa, his
sons also were both remarkable personalities. 'Ali ibn Rafi' was the
secretary of Amir al-Mu'minin (a..s.) He was the first person after his
father who began writing on "fiqh" (jurisprudence) and his brother,
'Abdullah ibn Rafi' took the lead in the writing of history and the
recording of events in the Muslim community.
Abu Hashim ibn Muhammad ibn Hanafiya was the first to write about the
nature of Islamic beliefs. Many fine books on this topic have been
written by him. We may examine also the works of 'Isa ibn Rawzah who
lived up to the time of Abu Ja'far (Imam Baqir). It should be noted that
the above persons lived before Wasil ibn 'Ata and Abu Hanifah, and that
Siyuti's opinion is correct that the latter were the earliest writers on
the philosophy of Islamic beliefs.
Next we may reflect upon two eminent Shi'as, Qays an-Nasir and Muhammad
ibn 'Ali Ahwal, (known as Mu'min at-Taq"), Hisham ibn al-Hakam and an-Nawbakht.
The latter was an exalted family who continued serving the cause of
Islam for more than a hundred years. Among their works, "Faslu 'l-yaqut",
is of extraordinary importance. Also among the pupils of Hisham Ahwal,
and an-Nasir, the names of Abu Ja'far Sakak Baghdadi, Abu Malik Zuhak
Khazrami, Hisham ibn Salim and Yunus ibn Ya'qub deserve special mention.
These were the persons who undertook masterly debates with sages of
other religions and provided irreputable arguments on topics like the
unity of God and the Imamate.
If all their scholastic subjects of discussion, particularly the debates
of Hisham ibn Hakam, were collected together, it would make an excellent
book. Similarly, if we included all the Shi'a philosophers and scholars,
a great number of voluminous compilations will be required.
I request therefore that the author of "fajru 'l-Islam" tell me whether
these men wanted to ruin the religion of God, or whether they were so
conscientious that they worked day and night to record historical facts
and events and collect together reports of matters relating to the life,
miracles, battles, and the purity of character of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.)
One of the finest scholars in this connection is Aban ibn 'Uthman al-Ahmar
Tabi'i (died 140 A.H.). He was a pupil of Imam Ja'far Sadiq (a.s.).
After him Hisham ibn Muhammad, ibn sa'ib Kalbi, Muhammad ibn Is'haq
Matalabi and Abu Makhnaf Azdi continued in this particular field of
knowledge. All the writers of the later age depended upon them as source
material in historical matters.
If we examine a list of historians, we will find that all the
distinguished writers were Shi'as; for instance, the compiler of Kitab
al-Mahasin, Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid Barqi, Nasr ibn Muzahim
Manqari, Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Sa'd Thaqafi, 'Abdu 'l-'Aziz Juludi
Basri Imami, Ahmad ibn Ya'qub(whose book Tarikhu 'l-Ya'qubi has been
published in Europe), Muhammad ibn Zakariya, Abu 'Abdillah Hakim, al-Ma'sudi,
author of "Muruj adhdhahab" Muhammad ibn 'Ali ibn Taba'taba' the author
of "Adabu 's-sultaniyah" and hundreds of other scholars like them, who
cannot be included here.
Among the men of letters, the Shi'as are also in a majority. The
literary men are of different groups. The first group is that of the
companions. All the famous men of letters belonging to this class are
attached to Shi'ism. Nabigha Ju'di, for instance, took part in the
battle of Siffin on the side of 'Ali (a.s.) and the "Rajaz" (rousing
verses) that he composed for the occasion are very well known; 'Urwah
ibn Zayd al-Khayl was also with the Holy Imam (a.s.) in the battle of
Siffin (see al-Aghani). some people acknowledge that Lubayd ibn Rabi'ah
'Amiri was of the Shi'a faith; Abu Tufayl 'Amir ibn Wa'ilah, Abu 'l-Aswad
Du'uli, and Ka'b ibn Zuhayr, the author of "Banat Sa'id" are likewise
but a few of the Shia' men of letters we have room to mention here.
The second group is contemporary with the Tabi'in. In this class al-Farazdaq,
Kumayt, Kathir, Sayyid Humayri and Qays ibn Dharih . have a very
prominent place.
The third group belongs to the second century of the hijrah: Abu Nawas,
Abu Tamam, Bahtari, Da'bil Khuza'i, Dik al-Jin, 'Abd as-Salam, Abu
sh-Shaysh, Husayn ibn Duhak ibn Rumi, Mansur an-Namri, Ashja' asalmi,
Muhammad ibn Wahib and Sari' al-Ghawani. Morevoer, during the reign of
the 'Abbasid rulers all the prominent literary figures, excluding Marwan
ibn Abi Hafsah and his progeny were Shi'as:
Similarly among the celebrated poets and men of letters of the fourth
hijra century were many Shi'as : Mutanabbi Maghrib ibn Hani Andalusi,
ibn at-Ta'awidhi, Husayn Hajjaj (the author of "al-Majnun"), Mahyar
Daylami, Abu Fads Hamdani, (about whom it has been said that poetry
began and ended with him); we may cite also Kashajum, Nashi' saghir,
Nashi' Kabir, Abu Bakr Khwarizmi, Badi' Hamadani, Tughrai, Ja'far Shams
al-Khilafah, , Ammarah al-Yamani, Wida'i Zahi, ibn Basam Baghdadi, Sibt
ibn Ta'awidhi, Salami, Nami who were all Shi'as.
The fact is that the Shi'as attained such an exalted rank in the field
of literature that experts had to say: 'Is there any literary man who is
not a Shi'a?' It is worth noting that in praising some piece of
composition, there was a common saying that such and such a man writes
like the Shi'as. Some people have written that Mutanabbi and Abu 'l-'ula'
were also Shi'as (please refer to where some of their verses are
quoted).
Shi'a poets of the Quraysh family such as Fadl ibn 'Abbas (whose life
history is given in "al-Aghani"), Abu Dihbai Jamhi, Wahib ibn Rabi'ah
and the literary scholars such as Sharif Radi, Murtada, Sharif Abu'l
Hasan , Ali 'Alawin Jumani son of Sharif Muhammad ibnja'far ibn Muhammad
ibn Zayd ibn 'Ali ibn al-Husayn (a.s.) are also worthy of attention.
Sharif Jumani used to say "I am a poet; my father was a poet; my
grandfather was a poet". Muhammad ibn al-'Alawi was an eminent man of
letters. Writing about him Abu 'l-Faraj Isfahani has made available to
us the valuable pearls of wisdom that he left behind. For further
details it is worth while studying "Nasmatu 's-sahr min tashayyu' wa
shi'r". In this esteemed masterpiece of Sharif Yamani, there is not only
a fair account of the 'Alawimen ofletters, but there is also an account
of the Shi'a poets of the Amawi dynasty. For instance Zamakhshari writes
in his book "Rabi 'al-abrar" about 'Abdu 'r-Rahman ibn Hakam, Khalid ibn
Sa'id ibn 'As and Marwan ibn Muhammad Saruji Amwi; these verses -are
quoted from the latter:
"Oh descendents of Hashim ibn 'Abd Munaf!
wherever I amy be I am yours.
"You are ,God's chosen ones, and Ja'far Tayyar belongs
to your own family.
"Ali, the Lion of God, Hamzah the uncle of the Prophet and
al-Hasan and al-Husayn are the members of your own family.
"Yes, though I am of Amawi lineage, yet I have no
concern with Banu Umayyah."
Similarly, the name of Abu Warda, the well-known author on Najdi and
'Iraqi schools of thought, is also worthy of mention. A part from these
there are also many other notables of this lineage, but since this book
is being written without preparation it is difficult to give details of
all of them.
When we study the history of great kings, distinguished politicians,
statesmen and viziers, we find the Shi'as likewise in prominence also.
Besides the Fatimid and Bawayhid rulers, other kings like the Al Hamdan,
Banu Mazid, Banu Wasis, 'Imran ibn Shahid, Muqallid ibn Musayyab, 'Aqili
and Qarwash ibn Musayyab were all Shi'as. Also the faith in Shi'ism of
Wajihu' d-dawlah Dhu 'l-qarnayn Taghlabi and Tamim ibn Mu'izin the ruler
of Marakish is not a secret thing.
If we now consider the early Muslim viziers (ministers) we find that
nearly all of them are Shi'as.
Ishaq Katib, for example, was perhaps the first person for whom the
appellation of Vizier was formally used. Abu Salmah Khilal al-Kufi was
the vizier of the first 'Abbasid Caliph. In view of his administrative
capability Saffah entrusted him with all the affairs of the State.
Abu Salmah was known as the 'Wazir Al Muhammad and it was because of his
love for Al Muhammad that he was martyred on the order of the same
Saffah.
Abu 'Abdillah Ya'qub ibn Dawud was the Vizier of al-Mahdi al-'Abbasi;
the Caliph confided the entire administration of the state to him. This
verse, "Oh Banu Umayyah! Get up! And arise from your deep slumber!
Ya'qub ibn Dawud is the Caliph", refers to him. He too was to later
suffer captivity for his Shi'a belief.
Al Nawbakht and Banu Sahl are well known as the families of the viziers.
Fadl ibn Sahl and Hasan ibn Sahl were the viziers of Ma'mun ar-Rashid.
Similarly from Banu al-Furat, Hasan ibn 'Ali was thrice made the vizier
of the Caliph Muqtadar. Abu 'l-Fadl Ja'far, Abu 'l-Fath Fadl ibn Ja'far
and , Amid Muhammad ibn Husayn and his eldest son Dhu'l-kifayatayn
Abu'l-Fath 'Ali ibn Muhammad were the viziers of Rukn ad-dawlah.
Banu Tahir Khyza'i was likewise entrusted with minis tership by. Ma'mun.
Other viziers were Mahlabi, Abu Dalf 'Ajalli, Sahib ibn 'Ibad, the great
politician Maghribi and Abu 'Abdillah Husayn ibn Zakariya, who is known
by the epithet "Shi'i".
There are others besides them, such as Ibrahim Suli, Talaya' ibn Zarik,
Afdal, the commander-in-chief of Egypt and his son Ja'far ibn Muhammad
ibn Fatit, Abu'l Mu'ali Habat-ullah, Vizier of Mustazhir and Mu'yad
Muhammad ibn Abd al -Karim Qummi, who first became the vizier of Nasir
and was later offered ministership by Mustazhir.
During the time of "Baramakah" Hasan ibn Sulayman was the Chief
Secretary. He was also widely known as "Shi'i".
Among other Shi'as entrusted with administrative posts we may mention
the author of "al-Awraq", (Suli) Yahya ibn Salamah Hasfaki and ibn Nadim
(the author of "alFihrist"), Abu Ja'far ibn Yusuf and his brother Abu
Muhammad Qasim (whose panegyrics and elegies upon the Ahlu 'l-bayt have
no parallel: see "al-Awraq") were "mu'tamad 'umumi (general secretaries)
during the time of Ma'mun, and even for a considerable time after the
latter's death. Similarly the names of Ibrahim Uysuf and his son, the
master of the Arabic language and author of "al-Mu'jam", Abu 'Abdillah
Muhammad ibn 'Imran Marzbani, are also worth remembering, Sam'ani has
made mention of their Shi'ism. Viewed in the same perspective there are
hundreds of persons whose administrative abilities, political sagacity
and national services would need volumes and volumes to be recorded.
My late father had tried to collect the life histories of different
groups of Shi'as. He classified thirty groups into alphabetical order in
ten volumes, under the titles "'Ulama (scholars), philosophers, kings,
viziers, astronomers and physicians, etc." The name of this collection
is "al-Husun al-Mani'ah fi Tabaqat ash-Shi'a". This voluminous book
despite its nature is not complete.
At this stage we would also like to ask the author of "Fajru 'l-Islam"
whether, in his opinion, these persons who had established the teachings
of Islam and provided the basis for true knowledge and learning, wanted
to ruin our sacred religion.
And again the question arises whether he and his teacher Dr. Taha Husayn
are true supporters of the Islamic religion.
If that is the case, we can bid farewell to Islam, or rather we may
quote the words of a poet, if one calls Hatim Ta'i a stingy person "it
is better to die than to live oneself with such a narrow outlook on
life."
In fact it was not my aim to write at such length but the pen moved on
regardless. We hope that the present-day or future writers might learn
something from it and they may at least be careful in the manner of
their writing and may express their thoughts only after researching into
their subject.
Islam's greatest sage Hadrat 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) says: "A wise
man's tongue is subordinate to his heart, and the heart of an ignorant
person is obedient to his tongue."
Ahmad Amin's opinion that "the belief in Raj'ah" (the return) came from
Judaism among the Shi'as" is extremely deplorable. I wish they would
make it clear whether "raj'ah" is the main element of Shi'ism, whether
it is one of the fundamental beliefs of their religion, so that they may
justify their criticism. If one's knowledge is of this nature, is it not
proper for him to hold his tongue and preserve his dignity?
The fact is that faith in "raj'ah" is not one of the fundamentals of
Shi'ism. Of course recognising its validity is considered necessary,
just as in other Islamic groups one should affirm the events of the
unseen and the signs of doomsday: we may mention for instance, the
coming of Christ and the appearance of the Dajjal, which all the sects
believe in. These are not counted among the principles of Islam nor is
their denial the cause of expulsion from Islam, nor belief in them proof
of one's being a Muslim. The same argument view holds good for faith in
"raj'ah".
Indeed even if it is demonstrated that it relates to the roots of the
faith of the Shi'as, we should ask whether concurrence with any Jewish
belief is the result of Jewish influence. The Muslims believe in the
oneness of God.
The Jews also worship one God. As a result of these shared views, can
anyone have the courage to talk of the influence of Judaism? It would be
interesting to see what these people who indulge in taunts and emotional
slander have to say in this matter.
"God Almighty will give life to a group of people for the second time."
Is it an impossibility? Has this story never been mentioned in the Book
of God ? "Consider, oh Muhammad, Those of a past age who left their
homes in their thousands, fearing death, and God Said to them: Die, and
then be brought back to life." (2:243) Has the following holy verse
never been read by anybody? "And the day on which We shall raise a group
from every "ummah" (27:83). If it means the day of judgement, then on
that day not a group from every ummah but all the ummahs (peoples) will
be restored to life.
This is not a new affair. The 'ulema of the majority community have been
making this matter a target of attack since the very beginning. It has
been noted, in this connection that when they do not find any grounds
for criticising the veracity of an eminent Shi'a reporter of hadith,
they begin taunting the Shi'as about "raj'ah" as if they were accusing
someone of idol-worshipping or polytheism. Relative to this problem in
question is the well known story of Mu'min at-Taq and Abu Hanifah. We
believe, however , that this matter does not merit further argument.
We consider it sufficient to have established the moral perversion of
certain misguided persons.
The author of "Fajru 'l-Islam" says: "The fire of gehennam will not be
allowed to burn the Shi'as, except for a few among them and then only
for a time." Only God knows from which Shi'a book this view has been
taken. I wish the learned writer had some better evidence and could
provide the necessary proof for this view.
The Shi'a books clearly says: "Paradise is the reward for the obedient
servant of God even if he is an Abyssinian slave, and hell is for the
wicked even if he is one of the Sayyids of Quraysh. Traditions on the
above subject have been related by the Holy Imams (a.s.) and they are so
many in number that they can hardly be counted. If the above mentioned
author is referring to the intercession of the Prophet (s.a.w.) or the
Imams (a.s.) then of course the question of intercession is another
matter which all the Muslims believe in. This matter will be dealt with
in more detail in another book.
Suffice it to say that belief in such a matter is hardly a reason to say
that Shi'ism has been taken from Judaism just because the latter shows
this belief.
Abu Hanifah agrees in some questions of marriage (nikah) with the
Zoroastrians, but would it be appropriate to say that the Imam of the
Hanafis had based his 'fiqh' (jurisprudence) on Zoroastrianism? And for
further proof, advantage could be taken of his being a man of Iranian
descent. In short, these are all baseless ways and means through which
the desires of certain Shi'ahs men for mutual confusion and discord
among the various Muslim sects are fulfilled.
The alleged influences of Christianity in the Shi'a religion is another
taunt, which is hardly less painful. Honesty should demand that Ahmad
Amin research his material more carefully. he erroneously considered
sects like the Khitabiyyah, the Gharabiyyah, the Alawiyyah, the
Mukhmasah, the Bazi'iyyah and the Ghullat as Shi'as, although, like the
Qaramitah, they are apostate groups having no real link with the Shi'as.
The Imania Shi'as and their religious leaders are absolutely aloof from
these schools of thought; the aforesaid sects are hardly like
Christians, but they go so far as to believe that the Imam is himself
god in the the form of an incarnation. Their faculty concepts have a
striking resemblance to the faith and beliefs of mystics. It appears
from the statements of well-known mystics like Hallaj, Gilani, Rafa'i
and Badawi, etc. which they thought that they had reached a stage which
was higher than divinity and godhead itself Those who believe in 'wahdat
al-wujud' (pantheism) also have the same conceptions.
But the Imamia Shi'as who number millions in Iraq, Iran and the
subcontinent of India and Afghanistan are, as Shi'a, free from such
beliefs, and regard these conceptions as infidelity and digression from
the right path. Their religion is pure 'tawhid' (Oneness of God).
Neither do they believe that God resembles any created being, nor do
they tolerate that His perfect attributes be considered defective or
comparable to creation's attributes; rather they consider any concept
which is the negation of His eternal existence and attributes utterly
wrong.
The metaphysical beliefs of the shi'as are carefully explained in
numerous books. The smaller "at-Tajrid" of Khwajah Nasiru 'd-dinn at-Tusi,
or the monumental "Kitab al-Asfar" of Sadru 'd-din ash-Shirazi, both
merit study in this subject. There are thousands of other books in which
the theories of metempsychosis, divine union and re-incarnation are
proved erroneous.
However the author of "Fajru 'l-Islam", by levelling utterly false
charges against the Shi'as, has not done any useful service to the
religion of Islam and its ummat (nation). Since we have shown in some
detail that the book "Fajru 'l-Islam" is full of false claims and
accusations unsupported by evidence we will pass on to consider other
areas- of misunderstanding. (We have mentioned this book and its author
as an example, so that the world may know how ignorant the masses must
be if the 'ulema' and authors of the majority community are as we have
described.)
The difficulty is that those who write about the Shi'as, take such
unlikely authors as ibn Khaldun and Ahmad ibn 'Abdi Rabbih Andalusi as
their source. Moreover the present day writers in their show of
liberality regard Professor Wellhausen and Professor Dozy as
authorities. But no one takes the trouble of referring to the scholarly
works of the Shi'as. The result is that when a Shi'a goes through the
books of these scholars he finds in them the same sort of absurdities
about himself to which Raghib Isfahani has referred to in his book "al-Muhadirat".
The author writes: "In the court of Ja'far ibn Sulayman a Muslim was
giving evidence about someone's infidelity. When he was asked what he
knew about the defendant, he said, "This man is Mu'tazili. he is Nasibi;
he is Harwari; he is Jabri; he is Rafzi; he rails at 'Ali ibn Khattab, 'Umar
ibn Abi Qahafah, 'Uthman ibn Abi Talib, and Abu Bakr ibn 'Affan. Also he
abuses Hajjaj, who pulled down Kufah on Abu Sufyan, and on the day of
Qata'if (the day of Tafur 'Ashura') fought against Husayn ibn Mu'awiyah".
Hearing this Ja'far said, "Damn you! I do not know for which branch of
learning I should envy you - historical, religious or geographical
knowledge!"
As regards 'Abdullah ibn Saba, whose name has been associated with the
Shi'as, if one studies any Shi'a book one will find that he is held in
contempt; rather the mildest works about him that are to be found in the
books written by Shi'a authors are: "'Abdullah ibn Saba - curses be upon
him". We should mention that some people hold the view that 'Abdullah
ibn saba, like Majnun, 'Amiri, and Abu Hilal, were in fact only
ficticious heroes of story and legend.
During the middle period of the Umayyah and 'Abbasid rule,
self-indulgence, sport and play, had reached the middle period of the
Umayyah and 'Abbasid rule, self-indulgence, sport and play, had reached
such a height that story-telling had become a part of the life of the
residents of the palace. It was in such an atmosphere that the stories
were contrived.
Our original aim was to dwell on this subject. But considering the
repeated attacks on the authors of the present age, we thought it
necessary to introduce briefly the beliefs and faiths, important
principles and the articles of practice of the Shi'as. It should be
noted that in the Shi'a religion the door of "Ijtihad" (endeavor to
arrive at a conclusion regarding any religious problem) is always open,
and so long as there is no violation of "ijma"' (consensus), the Book
(the Holy Quran), sunnah, and intellectual reasoning, every "mujtahid"
(religious scholar of exceptional merit) is free in his opinion; anyone
who violates these limits and draws his own conclusion will be
considered misguided; the opinion of such a man will be regarded as
purely personal, individual and unfit to be followed.
In these pages it is not possible to deal with all matters in detail, so
only those fundamentals of Shi'ism will be explained in which there is
no room for disagreement.
Not much attention will be paid to arguments and proofs as this is
appropriate only for larger volumes. Our only aim is that all the
Muslims, individually and collectively, may know the real beliefs of the
Shi'as and, by refraining from attributing false beliefs to their
brothers, may not do injustice to themselves. Rather than considering
Shi'ahs as evil spirits, demons, jinn, beasts and monsters, they should
regard them as a special branch of their society, since by the grace of
God the Shi'as of Hadrat 'Ali (a.s.) are adorned with a true Islamic
character, knowledge of and belief in the Holy Quran and Sunnah,
blessings of faith, and kind manners, and live according to principles
which are based on reasoning and certain proofs.
Muhammad Husayn Al-Kashifi 'l-Ghita'
Najaf al-Ashraf
Jamadi 'l-awwal 1350 A.H. (1931 A. D.)
PART I: The Origins of the
Shi'ahs
Shi'ism is not a new religion. It begins with the beginning of Islam.
The embodiment of the code of religion, that is, the seal of the
Prophets (s.a.w.) planted the tree of Shi'ism together with Islam; with
his own hands, he watered it and looked after it. The plant grew up to
be a green tree which began blooming in the life-time of the Holy
Prophet (s.a.w.). But it had not yet born fruit, when the light of
prophethood was put out.
We are not alone in advancing this claim. Even the eminent scholars from
among Sunnis agree with us. For instance, 'Allamah Siyuti in his famous
commentary "ad-Durru l-Manthur" Says in connection with God's words "Hum
khayru l-bariyah" (they are the best of created beings) (Surah: The
Clear Proof: Ayat 7):
"Ibn 'Asakir quotes Jabir ibn Adbillah as saying: "We were present in
the company of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) when 'Ali (a.s.) came towards
us. Seeing 'Ali (a.s.) the Prophet (s.a.w.) said: "I swear by God the
Almighty, who is the Master of my life, that he ('Ali (a.s.)) and his
Shi'ahs shall be successful on the day of judgement."
Ibn 'Adi reports from ibn 'Abbas that when the verse "Inna l-ladhina
amanu wa 'amilu 's-salihat" (Verily these are those who believed and did
good deeds) was revealed, the Holy Prophet (s-a.) said to 'Ali ibn Abi
Talib (a.s.):
"It refers to you and your Shi'as; God will be pleased with them and
they with Him on the Day of Judgement."
Ibn Mardawa'ih quotes Hadrat 'Ali (a.s.) himself as saying: "The Holy
Prophet (s.a.w.) said to me: 'Oh 'Ali, Did you not hear what God said:
'Inna 'l-ladhina amanu wa 'amilu 's-salihat ula'ika hum khayru 'l-bariyyah.'
Verily it means you and your Shi'as. The promise between your people and
me shall be fulfilled at the fountain of Kawthar; there, when all the
nations shall be present to account for their actions, your people will
be called forward, your faces, hands and feet shining with light'."
These three hadith are to be found in as-Suyuti's "ad-Durr al-manthur".
Ibn Hajar has also reported some of these traditions in his as-Sawa'iq)
from Darqutni- He quotes Umm Salamah as saying: "Oh Ali, You and your
shi'as shall attain Paradise." Ibn Athir writes in connection with the
word "qumh." that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) said to Hadrat 'Ali (a-s.):
"When people come into the presence of God, your Shi'as will be there
content with God and He with them, and your enemies shall be subjected
to God's wrath and their hands shall be tied to their necks." The Holy
Prophet (s.a.w.) demonstrated this by putting his hands behind his neck,
and said: "See, they shall be tied up in this way."
Probably this tradition has been reported by Ibn Hajar also in his as-Sawa'iq"
and other 'ulama' have also reported it in different ways, showing that
it is among the well known hadith.
In az-Zamakhshari's "Rabi' al-Abrar" the following statement of the Holy
Prophet (s.a.w.) has been recorded:
"Oh 'Ali, On the Day of Judgement the skirt of God's mercy will be in my
hand and my skirt will be in your hand and your skirt will beheld by
your descendants and the Shi'as of your descendants will be hanging on
to their skirt. Then you will see where we will be taken (i.e.
Paradise)." For further satisfaction, it will be useful to study Ahmad
ibn Hanbal's "al-Musnad" and an-NaSa'i's "Khasa'is" etc., which contain
a number of such traditions.
These traditions show that the Prophet of Islam (s.a.w.) spoke a number
of times about the Shi'as of 'Ali (a.s.) and pointed out that on the Day
of Judgement they, in particular, shall be safe and successful, God
being pleased with them and they with Him.
Everyone who believes that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) was the embodiment
of truthfulness and that the verse which begins "ma yantiqu 'an il-hawa
. . . " (He does not speak of himself unless 'why' is revealed to him)
refers to the Prophet himself, realise that these hadith must be true.
Those people however who understand the above hadith as referring to all
the companions of the prophet, have failed to recognise their real inner
meaning.
We find that during the days of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) a group of
outstanding companions was attached to Hadrat 'Ali (a.s.). Not only did
every man in this group acknowledge the Holy Imam (a.s.) to be his
spiritual leader, the real transmitter of the Holy Prophet's teachings,
but they also acknowledged him as the true interpreter and commentator
of the orders and secrets of the Prophet (s.a.w.). It is this group
which is popularly known as the Shi'a. Even the lexicographers support
this truth. If you refer to the famous dictionaries "an-Nihayah" and "Lisan
ul-'Arab", you will find the meaning of "shi'a" as "one who loves and
follows 'Ali (a.s.) and his descendants."
If however we are to understand that "shi'a" means any person who loves
'Ali (a.s.) or is not his enemy, then the use of this word would be
inappropriate, because only loving, or at least, not being an enemy of
him, does not mean that a person is a Shi'a; if however, he has the
characteristic of persistent following and obedience then the word Shi'a
would apply; this is crystal clear to those who have an understanding of
Arabic and a notion of the relationship between word, meaning and
context.
In view of these realities, it is unlikely that any sensible man, after
studying the appropriate traditions, could draw the conclusion that the
word shi'a means the Muslims in general, but will understand that it
refers to a particular class which has a special attachment to 'Ali (a.s.).
Hopefully, after this explanation, no fair-minded man will try to
conclude that the above quoted traditions do not prove the existence of
a group who, because of their special relation with the master of the
pious, 'Ali (a.s.) were superior to all the Muslims of that time, and
who all expressed their love for him.
Personally, I do not agree with the assumption that the Caliphs, who
could not accept this fact, consciously violated the words of the Holy
Prophet (s.a.w.). It is possible many of them did not hear his edicts,
or that those who heard them were unable to follow his directions.
Moreover, if the Statements of the Prophet (s.a.w.) in which he
announced the rank and high position of Amiru 'l-Mu'minin (a.s.) and the
Ahlu 'l-bayt (a.s.) are studied with an open mind, it will be seen that
these reports do not only show merits of a general nature, but also
contain clear indications of how to recognise the status and capability
of the Leader of Shi'ism, and of how to contribute to the establishment
and justness of that school of thought. The following traditions may be
cited as examples.
"'Ali (a.s.) bears the same relationship to me as Harun (Aaron) had to
Musa (Moses)".
"Oh 'Ali, only those with faith (iman) are your friends, and only the
hypocrites (munafiqin) are your enemies."
"Oh people of my ummah. I leave behind two things worthy of great esteem
- the Book of God and my progeny, my Ahlu 'l-bayt."
"According to the tradition of at-Tayr, the prophet made the following
prayer: "Oh God. Send to me your most beloved slave", and immediately
Ali entered his presence.
"Tomorrow I will give this standard to the man who loves God and His
Prophet (s.a.w.) and whom God and His Prophet (s.a.w.) also love."
"'Ali is with the Truth and the Truth is with 'Ali."
These traditions are mostly taken from "Sahih al-Bukhari" and "Sahi'h
al-Muslim", and there are thousands of such authentic reports. This
small booklet cannot accommodate details of them. Those who are fond of
research work can study the famous book "Abiqat al-Anwar" by Allama'
Sayyid Hamid Husayn, which is ten times as voluminous as "Sahih al-Bukhari"
and is a master-piece of research in the field of hadiths.
When the light of prophethood was extinguished, a group of the "sahaba"
started to act to prevent the Caliphate from passing to 'Ali.
The cause of this opposition might have been the young age of the holy
Imam, or the feeling among the Quraysh that the prophethood and the
imamate should not be combined in the house of Banu Hashim; there might
have been other causes, we do not have the space to discuss them here.
Both the Sunni and the Shi'a sects Wee however that, when allegiance was
being taken from the Muslims, 'Ali (a.s.) did not accept the authority
of Abu Bakr, and, according to the learned al-Bukhari ("Sahih"', see the
chapter on the victory at Khaybar), he did not pay allegiance until six
months had passed. Some of the eminent companions, like az-Zubayr, 'Ammar
and Miqdad and others, also refused to pay homage to Abu Bakr.
The fact is that 'Ali (a.s.) had no craving for political power, nor
desire to rule, other than in his capacity as Imam.
The talk that he had with ibn , Abbas at Dhiqar clearly proves which way
the son of Abu Talib (a.s.) was going. Amiru 'l-Mu'minin (a.s.) had only
one purpose in view, and it was that "religion" might remain safe,
"right" might prevail and "wrong" might be exterminated. Imbued with
these high feelings, 'Ali (a.s.) resorted to protest only. He did not
adopt any plans to overthrow the caliphs. Rather, in order to lead and
guide the people to the right path he always cooperated with the
government; his wise suggestions enabled Islam to flourish and meant
that religious commands were made known to all. If Ali (a.s.) had not
adopted this course of action, not only would Islamic unity have been
shattered, but the people also would have been lost in the labyrinth of
ignorance.
The Shi'as too continued to follow their leader; the spirit of the time
demanded that differences should be ignored. For this very reason, they
did not try to establish themselves as a sect during the regime of the
first caliphs. Of course Ali's friends silently observed the modus
operandi of every ruler and the changing conditions till at last the
nation itself selected Ali (a.s.) as its leader. When Amiru 'l-Mu'minin
(a.s.) took the seat of the caliphate, Mu'awiyah revolted and sent out a
large number of forces to Siffin.
A group of the "sahaba" (companions) remained from the very beginning
with 'Ali (a.s.). The rest of the companions also sided with the Holy
Imam. Eighty prominent companions, like 'Ammar ibn Yasir, Khuzaymah Dhu
'sh Shahadatayn and Abu Ayub al-Ansari, nearly all of whom were either
Badri (from the battle of Badr) or 'Aqb (Bay'atu 'l-'Aqbi - the pledge
of 'Aqbi), joined 'Ali's party. Most of them sacrificed their lives for
the Holy Imam (a.s.).
The fighting continued however, and Mu'awiyah's intriguings also
increased. When Hadrat , Ali (a.s.) was martyred, the ruler of Damascus
gave a sight of relief Islam disappeared from Mu'awiyah's royal courts
and he began to revive all the tyrannical traditions of the past kings.
'Ali's (a.s.) pious way of life, devout manners and exalted character
contrasted sharply with Mu'awiy ah's corrupt morals and his dealings
with 'Amr b. al-'As, with the Governorship of Egypt, Yazid and his
despotic caliphate, and Ziyad ibn Abih and his activity against Islam.
Mu'awiyah's notorious over-indulgence and passion for revelry clearly
demonstrated the depraved condition of his mind and of the court
surrounding him. We have thus before us the simple way of living taught
by Islam, and on the other side the pomp and vanity of the son of Abu
Sufyan. Mu'awiyah's kingly aspirations were fulfilled with the
hard-earned money of the Muslims.
The dining cloth of the Amawi palace was always laid with the daintiest
of foods. The vizier, Abu Sa'id al-Mansur ibn al-Husayn al-Abi (died 422
A-H.) recorded an event in his work "Nathr ad-Dur". He writes: "Ahnaf
ibn Qays used to say that one day when he went to Mu'awiyah, the latter
put before him such a large variety of food that it was difficult to
count the different dishes. He was bewildered when Mu'awiyah extended
towards him one of the dishes which he did not recognise. He asked what
it was. The answer was . . . the stomach of duck filled with sheep's
brain, fried in pistachio oil and sprinkled with spices." Ahnaf said
that on hearing this he began to weep. Mu'awiyah said: "Why do you
weep?" He replied: "At this time 'Ali (a.s.) has come to my mind. One
day I was sitting with the Holy Imam (a.s.); the time for breaking the
fast approached. The Imam (a.s.) ordered me to stay. Meanwhile a sealed
bag was brought. I asked: "O Imam, what does it contain?" The Imam (a.s)
said: "Powdered barley". I said: "Was there any fear of theft, O Amiru
l-Mu'minin, or is it because of financial stringency that it has been
sealed?" "It is for none of these reasons," he said, "the reason for
this care is only the thought that my sons al-Hasan (a.s.) and al-Husayn
(a.s.) might mix this powdered barley with butter or olive oil." Again I
asked: "Is butter or olive oil unlawful?" The Holy Imam said: "It is not
unlawful, but for the true Imams it is necessary that they remain
attached to the ranks of the poor, so that indigence and want may not
make the poverty stricken rebellious." Mu'awiyah said: "Ahnaf, you have
reminded me of a person whose supreme merits are difficult to be
denied."In az-Zamakshari's "Rabi' al-Abrar", and in other compilations,
many such events are related.
Mu'awiyah's bad nature was inextricably linked with these unlawful
actions; he had an inner desire to reach the height of wickedness. So he
broke all the promises that he had made to Imam al-Hasan (a.s.) and in
the end had the Prophet's grandson poisoned. As a result of this state
of affairs and these events, the Muslims began to look at Syria's
politics with scorn and contempt; the true believers realised that
Mu'awiyah was only a man of this world, and he himself acknowledged this
truth. In az-Zamakhshari's "Rabi' al-Abrar", the following statement is
narrated from the ruler of Syria: "Abu Bakr wanted to keep aloof from
the world and the world kept aloof from him. 'Umar tested the world and
the world tested him. As to 'Uthman, he took hold of the world and the
world also madly pursued him; and I at every step tried with my heart
and soul to make it a bed of roses- The result was that I became of the
world and the world became mine."
Gradually, the people's opinion was changing; the close companions of
the Prophet (s.a.w.) were letting the ordinary Muslims know about the
superior merits, virtues and character of 'Ali (a.s.) and his
descendants, which they had seen with their own eyes. Who cannot be
moved when he recalls the sight of the Prophet of God (s.a.w.) lifting
his loving grandsons onto his back and saying: "What do you think of
your mount, it is not the best mount; and as for you, you are the best
rifers." And do not these words, full of the purity of revelation, "al-Hasan
and al-Husayn (a.s.) are the leaders of the youth of Paradise", demand
to be known by all. Truth has a right to spread, and those who have a
sense of truth in them are desirous of spreading it. The result of this
desire for truth was that the common Muslims began inclining towards
Shi'ism and opportunities were created for the advancement of this sect.
The greatest cause of the advancement of Shi'ism, however, was that
bloody event which revolutionzed the Islamic world. This painful event
of 61 A.H. which is known as the tragedy of Karbala' was the most
momentous of its kind. The effects of the martyrdom of al-Husayn (a.s.)
were felt by all, even those living in the most distant regions of the
Muslim territory. Companions like Zayd ibn Arqam, Jabir ibn 'Abdillah
al-Ansari, Sahl ibn Sa'd as-Sa'idi and Anas ibn Malik survived Karbala'.
The pain they felt had no bounds, and, remembering their duty towards,
and love for, the Prophet and his progeny, they intensified their
efforts to make known the superior merits of Ahlu 'l-bayt (a.s.). The
Umayyad tyrants pursued them and these remaining sahaba were finally
also victims of the sword and poison. But the cry of the oppressed is
not made in vain. These events were not such that the nation of the
Muslims were unaware of them. Indeed, they keenly observed them, with
the result that a great many groups of people began to declare their
love for 'Ali (a.s.). and his descendants; the numerical strength of the
Shi'as increased dramatically. With the same rapidity with which the
tyranny of Banu Umayyah was increasing, the love for Ahlu 'l-bayt was
also increasing in the hearts of the common people. The descendants of
the Umayyids tortured and tyrannized to the extreme, but every action
has its reaction. It is related that Shu'abi said to his son: "Oh my
son, the world cannot harm the values which religion has brought, but
those things which were made and adorned by the world can all be
destroyed by religion. Just reflect upon 'Ali (a.s.) and his affairs.
Did the descendants of the Umayyids ever relinquish their oppression?
They concealed the merits of Ahlu 'l-bayt. They tried to hide the
realities of the situation and never left off singing the praises of
their ancestors.
But all their plans were reversed: the Umayyids were humbled to dust and
the name of Al Muhammad grew brighter and brighter". Though Shu'abi was
known as an enemy of 'Ali (a.s.), these words of truth came from his
tongue and have been preserved in history.
az-Zamakhshari in his 'Rabi' al-Abrar" reports this statement of Shu'abi:
"Our condition was very perplexing if we loved 'Ali (a.s.) there was
fear of murder, and if we became enemies to him, our ruin was certain."
The troubles and worries for the Ahlu 'l-bayt did not cease when the
Sufyani throne came under the control of the Marwanid ruIer 'Abdu 'l-Malik.
'Abdu 'l-Malik Was a monster of a man by whose order Hajjaj razed the
Holy House of the Ka'ba to the ground and mercilessly put the residents
of that sacred place to the sword; having killed 'Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr
in the Mosque of al-Haram, he desecrated the holy place and finally
killed his cousin Sa'id ibn Ashdaq, who had been his former ally.
We must ask ourselves whether the perpetrator of such heinous crimes be
called a Muslim. What should we think of his being called "Khalifatu 'l-Muslimin"
(the Caliph of the Muslims)?
In truth, the entire government of the Marwanids Was run on the same
lines, and, with the exception of. Umar ibn 'Abdu 'l-'Aziz, every ruler
showed the same Outrageous tendencies. Thereafter followed the rule of
the 'Abbasids.
During their period the height of tyranny far exceeded that of the
Marwanids. A poet of that time said: We would have preferred to suffer
the Marwanids oppression forever. May the justice and equity of the
'Abbasids go to hell."
How mercilessly the blood of the descendants of the Prophet (s.a.w.) was
spilled, what strange ways were adopted to annihilate them! The
literature of that time presents us with a picture of life at that time.
The poets have, in different ways, described the tyrannical acts of
these people. How true indeed is the picture drawn by a poet of al-Mutawakkil's
age who says: "God be my witness that, if the descendants of the
Umayyids have so cruelly martyred the grandson of the Prophet (s.a.w.),
these 'Abbasids, who call themselves the descendants of the Prophet's
uncle, in no way lag behind the Umayyid family in oppression and
tyranny. Just see, these tyrants have even demolished the grave of
al-Imam al-Husayn. The Banu 'Abbas are repentant, however, for they feel
regret over one thing, that they did not take part in spilling the
spotless blood of al-Imam al-Husayn (a.s.) along with Banu Umayyah; they
have tried to make amends by pulling down the grave of the Imam (a.s.)."
These are just a few examples of the character of Banu Umayyah and the
Marwanid and 'Abbasid kings.
Now, on the other hand, if you reflect upon the life of Ali (a.s.) and
his descendants, you will come to know why Shi'ism spread and how it
spread; moreover the truth will be revealed as to whether Shi'ism was
the innovation of the Iranians, or the ingenuity of the Sabeans, or
whether it was the simple and straight way of Islam as shown by Muhammad
(s.a.w.).
After the martyrdom of Sayyid ash-Shuhadah (the Leader of the Martyrs)
Imam al-Husayn (a.s.), Imam Zayb al-'Abidin (a.s.) became the head of
the 'Alawi family After the tragedy of Karbala', the Holy Imam lived a
secluded life, mostly spent either in worship of God or in giving moral
teachings and spiritual guidance to the people.
Highly pious and devout persons like Hasan al-Basri, Tawus al-Yamani,
ibn Sirin and Amr ibn al-'Ubayd were products of this very school.
The Muslims received great instruction and knowledge from the Sayyid
as-Sajjad (a.s.) at a time when the common people had been driven far
off the paths of reality.
Imam Zayn ul-'Abidin (a.s.) was succeeded by Imam Muhammad al-Baqir
(a.s.) who was also a shining example of the same noble character. His
legacy was handed down to Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (a.s.).
The age of Imam as-Sadiq (a.s.) was comparatively more favourable to the
Shi'as because the Umayyid and 'Abbasid powers had been exhausted; open
tyranny and oppression became rare. Accordingly the previously
Suppressed truths and hidden realities rose like the sun and diffused
like the light. Those who had been living in 'taqiyyah', hiding their
beliefs on account of fear and danger to their lives, also disclosed
their identity. The atmosphere was well-disposed to the expansion of
Shi'ism. The Holy Imam (a.s.) spent day and night preaching; his sermons
explained the teachings of Muhammad and Al Muhammad (s.a.w.). The
teachings of the truth were now within the reach of every common man;
larger and larger groups of people began to accept the 'Ja'fari'
religion. This age was called the golden age for the propagation of
Shi'ism, because before this the Muslims could not openly profess
Shi'ism, nor even find out about its teachings.
This academy of learning was Iike a flowing river where people in quest
of knowledge came to quench their thirst and later quenched the thirst
of others. According to Abu 'l-Hasan al-Washsha'. "I personally saw a
crowd of four thousand 'Ulama' (scholars) in the Mosque of Kufah and
heard all of them saying: 'This tradition was related to us by Ja'far
as-Sadiq (a.s.).'"
Banu Umayyah and Banu 'Abbas's wanton love for power, their stormy
violence, extreme worldliness and unlimited indulgence in luxuries,
contrasted sharply with the love for knowledge of the descendants of
'Ali (a.s.), their devotion to God, their truthfulness and their
abstention from corrupt politics, and it was this obvious contrast which
showed people the truth of Shi'ism and led to the rapid expansion of
this sect.
It goes without saying that many people's spiritual lives are ruined by
their attachment to the world. Nevertheless they too have a natural
feeling for the different branches of learning and the validity of
religious matters.
The period about which we are talking was not only close to the period
of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), but also the mind of the common Muslims
were imbued with the conviction that the Islamic way of life was endowed
with countless blessings. The Quranic teachings gave them rights which
they had never imagined existed. It was Islam which conquered the
Caesars of Rome and the Emperors of Iran; it was in the name of Islam
alone that they were the rulers of the east and the west; they also knew
that there was sufficient liberality within the laws of this religion to
enable all to accept it without hardship. If the modus operandi is
lawful, it does not restrain anybody from gaining worldly wealth. This
religion is, in fact, pure mercy.
These inner feelings were the hidden motives which made the masses
incline towards a religious way of life.
There always exist men who know that they should mould their social life
according to the light of religious commandment. There are always men
who desire that their entire culture be completely Islamic. But where
could they pin the necessary learning from? Could they get it from the
despots, who claimed to be "khulafa'u 'l-muslimin" (Caliphs of the
Muslims) but did not live accordingly?
Of course, the desire for knowledge was fulfilled by the descendants of
Muhammad (s.a.w.) who were the treasure houses of the Quran and the
repositories of knowledge, and a vivid impression of their superiority
was stamped on the minds of the common people; gradually the Muslims
began to believe that it was these persons who were the true heirs to
the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), and that the right of the Imamate must be
theirs alone.
The Shi'as grew so firm that they were ready to undergo anything to
protect their faith. Most of the Shi'as proved to be immeasurably brave,
valiant and inspired with the spirit of sacrifice; Hajar ibn 'Adi
al-Kindi, 'Amr ibn Himq al-Khuza'i, Rushayd al-Hajari and 'Abdullah ibn
Afif al-Azdi to name but a few, were stalwart Shi'as who, on various
occasions, confronted the antagonists; they triumphed despite the fact
that the opposite group was always materially more powerful. The moral
strength of these people showed the weakness of the apparently strong
armies of the enemy; their sacrifices, on the one hand, shook the
governments of the oppressors to their foundations, and, on the other,
awakened the intellect of the elite and changed the way of thinking of
the masses.
We must ask why these chivalrous men played with death in this way. Did
they expect any worldly gain from the descendants of Muhammad (s.a.w.)?
Were they afraid of loss of life and property? History has answered both
these questions in the negative; the sons of 'Ali (a.s.), it is true,
were bereft of material means, but they had no interest in this world.
What had they to give? They gave Islam to those thirsty for the truth;
the luminous hearts of these fighters were filled with strong faith and
perfect sincerity and it was these very sentiments which drove them to
do battle against tyranny and corruption.
If one considers the literary men of the first and second century of the
hijrah, we will find that, in spite of the atmosphere of fear and
despair, the poets of the time expressed their aversion towards the
kings of their age and their misdeeds and praised the Ahlu 'l-bayt of
Muhammad al-Mustafa (s.a.w.).
Numerous men of letters have testified against the ruling Caliphs and in
favour of the true Imams (a.s.) in their works. Farazdaq, Kumayt, Sayyid
al-Humayri, Du'bil, Diku'l-Jin, Abu Tamam al-Balarri'and Abu Faras
al-Hamdani are full of praise for the holy progeny. The following
couplet of Abu Faras clearly shows how the poets of that age felt at
that time.
"Religion has been shattered to pieces. Truth has be come the victim of
oppression and the share of the descendants of the Prophet of God has
been usurped."
Du'bil says: "I have been courting death for forty years, but no one has
yet accepted to be the killer." Du'bil railed at Harun ar-Rashid,
al-Ma'mun and al-Mu'tasim, and yet composed a great many famous
panegyrics in praise of Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (a.s.), Imam Musa al-Kazim
(a.s.) and Imam ar-Rida (a.s.) in the most colourful verse.
We must ask whether the Shi'as endangered their lives in vain? Did they
give up their ease and comfort without any rhyme or reason? When we
examine the causes and motives for their sacrifices, we find that it was
only the truthfulness of the descendants of the Prophet (s.a.w.) which
made them despise the sky-high golden palaces and attracted their
attention towards the miracle of the Quran.
We could pursue this discussion further but the aim of the introduction
was merely to outline the origin and rise of Shi'ism. We hope nothing
has been left ambiguous despite the brevity of this account. We can only
emphasize that Shi'ism was started by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) himself,
and its spread and propagation is a historical fact. We may observe the
series of causes and motives, connected in a regular sequence, which
gave rise to the separation of Shi'a Islam from the Islam of the rest of
the community.
PART II: The Fundamentals of the Religion
Before we deal with the roots and the articles of faith in detail, we
may divide our study of the Shi'a religion according to five principles:
1. Knowledge of God.
2. Identification of His Prophet
3. How to worship.
4. Doing good actions and refraining from bad ones.
5. Belief in ma'ad (the Day of Judgement), and punishment and reward
There are two parts to religion - theoretical and practical - or, more
precisely, belief or faith in God and the unseen, and daily action based
on this belief.
Tawhid (monotheism), Prophethood and ma'ad (the Day of Judgement) are
the three basic arkan (pillars) of Islam. If anyone denies one of the
arkan, he is neither a Muslim nor a believer (u'min); if he does believe
in them he will be counted among the Muslims according to God Almighty
(refer to the following words which have been taken from the Quranic
text: "He who believes in God, His Prophet and the Day of Judgement"),
and shall be entitled to all the rights of the Muslims. According to the
holy verse the Muslim is the "one who believes in God, His Prophet and
also performs good actions"; the "iman" (faith) of a Muslim refers to
"belief in his heart, verbal acknowledgment and performance of
fundamental acts".
One may add another "rukn" (pillar) to these three, which is the
obligatory acts on which the entire Islamic way of life depends. These
obligatory acts are of five kinds: (1) salat (prayers), (2) fasting, (3)
zakat (generally speaking, the Islamic system of taxation), (4) hajj and
(5) jihad (strivin or exerting oneself (even to the ex tent of fighting)
for Islam).
We may explain the difference between Islam and iman as a matter-of
degree. This difference is based on the words of God Almighty in the
surah "al-Hujurat", "The Arabs say: 'We have iman!' Say (to them, O
Muhammad): 'You do not have iman; but say "we have accepted Islam (aslamna:
lit. we have submitted)", for iman has not yet entered your hearts.'"
For further elucidation, He says in another verse: "Verily, the
believers (mu'minin) are those who accepted faith in God and His Prophet
and never after that entertained any doubt; also they performed jihad
with their life and wealth in the way of God - they alone are the true
believers." "Iman" thus means the combination of testifying one's
belief, and of acting in accordance with it. These are the basic beliefs
of all the Muslim. The Shi'as have another "rukn" thus bringing the
total to five principles. This fifth pillar is faith in the imamate.
According to the Shi'a point of view, the Imamate, like Prophethood, is
divine vicegerency. Just as it is God Almighty Who chose one from
amongst His servants for the rank of Prophethood or Messengership, in
the same way it is God Who chooses the Imams. God Almighty Himself
commanded His Prophet to announce the Imamate (spiritual leadership) of
the selected person before his death.
The Prophet, according to divine command, chose a leader for mankind to
protect and complete the religious code. The only difference between a
Prophet and an Imam is that the Prophet receives "wahy" (revelation)
from God, while the Imam, through a special blessing, receives commands
from the prophet. So the prophet is the messenger of God and the Imam is
the messenger of the Prophet.
The Imamate comprises twelve perfect persons, and every Imam appoints
his successor by a specific indication (nass). Like all Prophets, the
Imams are also infallible; there is no possibility of their committing
any sin. The infallibility of the Imam is clearly proved from what God
Almighty says in the Holy Quran: "Verily, I make you an Imam for
mankind. He (Abraham) said: "And of my offspring?" He said: "My covenant
does not reach to the unjust."
Moreover, an Imam is superior to all men in all matters of knowledge and
character, since the very purpose of the Imamate is that humanity may be
exalted to the highest stage and may be adorned with knowledge and good
actions through the imitation of the Imam. What has been said in the
Holy Quran about Prophethood (that the Prophets have been sent to people
as His signs, to teach them the Book and Wisdom), is equally applicable
to an Imam too, because an imperfect person cannot make mother person
perfect. What can someone give to another, when he does not possess
anything himself? A misguided man cannot guide another man. Judged
accordingly, an Imam is a little below the Prophet, but over every human
being.
Anyone who believes in the Imam is called, according to the Shi'a
terminology, a "mu'min" (a man of faith and trust) in the special sense.
Anyone who acknowledges the four fundamentals, which are the centre of
faith of all the Muslims, is called a "Muslim" and a "mu'min" in a
general sense; as has been said earlier, all Islamic laws apply to him:
the protection of his life, property, respect and honour is obligatory.
By only refusing to acknowledge the Imamate, a person cannot be excluded
from the Islamic fold. Of course, on the Day of Judgement, and in the
stages of nearness to God and "karamat" (miraculous signs), the Shi'a
faith will reveal its excellence over the Islam of the majority.
All Muslims are equal in the world and are brothers, but in the next
world there will certainly be a difference of ranks. People will be
accorded positions according to their performance and intention. The
final decision is in God's hands in these matters, and it is therefore
better for us not to involve ourselves.
We have explained that that which distinguishes the Shi'a from the Sunni
Muslims is their belief in the Imamate of the Twelve Imams, and it is
for this reason that this sect is called "Imamiyah". It should be noted
that all Shi'as are not Imamiyah, because the word Shi'a applies to the
Zaydiyah, the Isma'iliyah, the Waqifiyah and the Fathiyah as well. These
are sects which are counted as Muslim. But a more careful study of other
sects will show that there are many which are totally excluded from
Islam, but which, nevertheless, are sometimes still called Shi'a as, for
instance, the Khitabiyah, who are an example of the hundred or more
sects which cannot be regarded as Muslim.
At the present time, however, the word of Shi'a specifically refers to
the Imamiyah sect; which is the biggest body of Muslims in the world of
Islam after the Sunnis.
In Islamic learning, faith in the twelve imams is not anything new; it
is referred to in all reliable and authentic books by Muslim authors.
The Imams Muslim and al-Bukhari narrated traditions concerning the
twelve Imams in their Sahihs in different ways. A few of them are given
here:
1. Jabir ibn Samrah says, "One day when I went to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.)
along with my father, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) said: 'The universe
shall not come to an end until all the twelve caliphs have appeared.'
After this the Prophet (s.a.w.) said something silently, which I could
not hear. I asked my father what the Prophet of Islam (s.a.w.) had said.
He said: "The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) says that all of them shall be from
the Quraysh."
2. Another tradition says: "So long as there are the twelve authorities,
the Muslims will continue to exist."
3. Again: "So long as there are the twelve caliphs, the grandeur and
majesty of Islam shall live on.
4. God knows who these twelve caliphs are. The Holy Prophet's statement
that "after me the caliphate shall remain for thirty years, then it will
become the object of deceit and fraud" is well known to all Muslims both
Shi'a and Sunni.
We do not want to enter into discussion and arguments concerning this
topic. If anyone seeks a complete proof of the existence of the twelve
Imams, he can study the thousands of volumes devoted to this subject.
The Fundamental Beliefs
From the Shi'a point of view, the religion is divided into two sections:
knowledge and practice. That is, matters concerning the intellect, and
matters relating to the human body. Those matters which concern
knowledge or wisdom, are called "Usul ad-din" (fundamentals of religion)
and they are five: (1) tawhid (monotheism), (2) nubuwah (Prophethood),
(3) the Imamate (Vicegerency), (4) 'adl (Justice) and (5) ma'ad (the Day
of Judgement). We shall explain each topic separately.
Tawhid (monotheism):
According to the Imamiyah faith, every sane thinking person has a moral
duty to know his Creator. He should believe in His Oneness and Divinity,
and should ascribe no partner to Him in His Actions. He should also
believe that creation, sustenance, life and death are governed by Him
alone. He is the All-pervading, and if somebody ascribes sustenance,
creation, or the giving of life and death to anyone else except God, he
will be considered an unbeliever (kafir), someone who ascribes partners
to God in His work (mushrik) and will be excluded from the Islamic fold.
Similarly, in obedience and worship of God sincerity is necessary. That
is, if somebody worships anything else other than God Almighty, or
adores someone or something else, or considers worship of something
other than Him as a means of nearness to Him, he also, according to the
Imamiyah faith, shall be regarded as an unbeliever.
Worship of anyone except God, the One without any partner, is not
lawful. Obedience to anybody except God the Almighty, the Holy Prophets,
and the Holy Imams is also not permissible.
Obedience to the Prophets and the Imams is indirectly obedience to God,
because they are the ones who proclaim of the divine command; but to
obey them with the idea that it is worship of God is unlawful and purely
a satanic deceit. To seek blessings from these revered persons, to make
them a means of intervention between ourselves and God, and also to
offer certain prayers at their graves is lawful because this is worship
of God and not worship of them. This is quite an obvious difference.
According to the Holy words of God the Almighty, "in houses which God
has permitted to be raised to honour, for the celebration in them of his
name", it is lawful to offer prayers to God in these sacred places. This
is the faith of "tawhid" of
the Imamiyah sect, which is unanimously supported by all our 'ulama'.
The subject of the monotheism has been divided into several types: "tawhid
ad-hdhat" (the Essence of the one God), "tawhid as-siffat" (the
Attributes of the One God), "tawhid al-af'al" (the Actions of the One
God). For the sake of brevity we will not dwell on this topic.
Prophethood:
Imamiyah Shi'as believe that all the Prophets were appointed by God; all
of them were sent by Him and they are all His exalted servants. Hadrat
Muhammad al-Mustafa (s.a.w.) is both the "Seal of the Prophets" (the
final prophet) and the Chief of all the Prophets. He was perfectly
infallible, free from sin and deviation. All his life the Holy Prophet
acted according to the will of God Almighty; God enabled him to travel
from Masjid al-Haram to Masjid al-Aqsa, from where he went bodily to
al-'Arsh and al-Kursi (the throne and the footstool) and even beyond the
"hujub" (the veils) and the "suradiq" (the highest point beyond the
heaven of heavens); he finally came to within two bow spans or less of
the presence of God.
It is the firm faith of the Imamiyah Shi'as that whoever claims
prophethood or revelation after Hadrat Muhammad al-Mustafa (s.a.w.) is
an unbeliever and liable to be put to death.
The Quran which today is in the hands of the Muslims is the same text of
guidance and religious commands which God the Almighty revealed as a
miracle. There has been no addition to, or subtraction from, it. Muslims
believe in "tahrif" (changes in the original) ,are wrong, because it
violates the Quranic declaration: "We have revealed the Book and We are
its Protector". All the 'ulama' (religious scholars) are unanimous on
this point, and if there is any tradition against it, it is unauthentic;
any tradition which has come down to us through imperfect chains of
transmission cannot be relied upon as source of knowledge and cannot
thus be acted upon.
The Imamate:
It is the question of the Imamate which distinguishes the Shi'a sect
from all other sects; it is the basic and fundamental difference which
separates this school from other schools of thought. Other differences
are not fundamental; they are "furu'i" (that is they are concerned with
the details of the code of writing and action). Such differences of
secondary importance are present between the views of the Imams
(religious heads) of the majority community of the Muslims. For
instance, a large number of the Hanafi laws do not correspond with the
laws of Shafi'is- According to the Imamiyah sect, the Imamate is the
rank of the Perfect Man; like prophethood it is sustained by Almighty
God for the guidance of the people. The Shi'as believe that Almighty God
ordered His Prophet (s.a.w.) to appoint 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) as his
successor, so that after the end of Prophethood the mission of spreading
Islam might be continued. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) knew that this
appointment would be looked at with displeasure by others. Many of them
would think that it was due merely to brotherly love or undue regard for
his son-in-law.
It is quite obvious that from the beginning of the Islamic era until the
present age the Muslims have in general not truly followed the Holy
Prophet's guidance. The All powerful declared in very clear words: "Oh
Prophet, deliver immediately what you have been commanded to from your
Lord and if you do it not, then (it will be as in you have not delivered
His message (at all)". Accordingly after his last hajj the Holy Prophet
(s.a.w.) gathered the people at "Ghadir al-Khum" and addressed them
thus: "Am I not better than every believer present here?" Then all of
them said with one voice: "Certainly, O Prophet of God. You are superior
to all of us."
After this testimony of allegiance the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) said:
"Whoever has accepted me as his master, then 'Ali is his master . . . "
Moreover, on various other occasions, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) clearly
explained the reality of the Imamate, sometimes by implication and
sometimes quite openly. The Prophet thus performed his duty and God 's
command was carried out. As soon as the Holy Prophet had breathed his
last breath some Muslims presumptuously tried to hide the reality of the
Imamate. They misconstrued the open declaration, and through their
personal interpretation began to make changes in the religious commands.
The result is well known as we have seen.
However 'Ali (a.s.) and his group, which comprised high-ranking sahaba
(companions) kept aloof from this selfish struggle for power and refused
to offer allegiance.
Amir al-Mu'minin (a.s.) remained silent for some time; out of
consideration for Islamic unity, but when Mu'awiyah tried to bring the
Islamic rule and authority under his subjugation and started destructive
activities, Amir al-Mu'minin set himself against him; supporting a man
like Mu'awiyah and tolerating his wrong policies would have been a
deadly poison for Islam, and it was the foremost duty of Hadrat, Ali (a.s.)
to protect the divine religion.
The Imamiyah believe that spiritually they are with 'Ali (a.s.) and are
his followers; anyone who takes 'Ali as a friend, we too are friends of
that person, and of whoever takes 'Ali (a.s.) as an enemy, we also are
his enemy.
This faith is based on the Holy Prophet's words: "Oh God, be a friend of
the one who loves 'Ali (a.s.) and be an enemy of the one who is an enemy
of 'Ali (a.s.)."
The Imamiyah Shi'as believe that Almighty God never leaves the world
without a Prophet or an Imam whether this "proof of God" is apparent or
hidden. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), through an explicit ordinance, made
'Ali al-Murtada (a.s.) his successor. 'Ali (a.s.) made al-Hasan (a.s.)
his successor, and Imam al-Hasan (a.s.) made his brother Imam al-Husayn
(a.s.) his successor. In this way this chain continued until the
eleventh Imam. The Eleventh spiritual guide Imam al-Hasan al-' Askari (a.s.)
was succeeded by his son the twelfth Imam, the Imam of the Age, the
Awaited One (a.s.), vicegerent of God. This belief is not an innovation
of the Shi'as, rather it is a divine practice, which started with Adam (a.s.)
and continued until the last Prophet (s.a.w.).
There are innumerable books written by eminent 'ulama' on this topic. We
give below the names of some 'ulama' of early centuries who have written
on the topic of "wasiyah" (succession).
1). Hisham ibn al-Hakam.
2). Husayn ibn Sa'id
3). 'Ali ibn Miskini
4). 'Aliibn al-Mughirah
5). 'Aliibn Husayn ibn Fadl.
6). Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Sa'id
7). Ahmad ibn Muhammad Khalid al-Barqi, the author of "al-Mahasin".
8). The great historian 'Abdu 'l-'Aziz ibn Yahya al-Judi.
Most of these writers belong to the first and second centuries, but the
number of writings from authors of the third century hijri is also
large:
1). Yahya ibn Mustafad.
2). Muhammad ibn Ahmad as-Sabuni
3). 'Ali ibn Ra'ab
4). Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ibn Farukh
5). The well known historian, Ali ibn al-Husayn alMas'udi, the author of
"Muruj adh-Dhahab".
6). Shaykh at-Ta'ifah Muhammad ibn al-Hasan at-Tusi
7). Muhammad ibn, Ali ash-Shalmaghani
8). Musa ibn al-Hasan ibn, Amir
Books written after the fourth century can hardly be counted.
al-Mas'udi wrote in his famous book "Ithbatu 'l-wasiyah". "Every prophet
had twelve successors". The writer also gave the names of all of them,
and wrote brief life-sketches of each; at the end of the work he writes
in more detail about the twelve Imams.
The Shi'as have been the target of attack from both Muslim and
non-Muslim groups concerning the existence of the twelfth Imam. We
should thus like to explain the reality of this belief in a few words.
Those who object think that the Shi'as believe in a baseless and
ridiculous thing.
When we examine the view-point of these critics however we find that it
is based on two rather naive doubts; the first being "How can a person
naturally live for more than a thousand years?" and the second, "What
advantage is gained from his disappearance?" or "What is the use of a
hidden Imam whose existence and non-existence are both equal?" As to the
first doubt, we should like to draw the reader's attention to the
prophet Nuh's age. According to clear Qur'anic statements the prophet
Nuh lived for nine hundred and fifty years, calling the people to God
among his nation; according to the opinion stated by the 'ulama' his age
was at least one thousand six hundred years, and a number of other
scholars have gone so far as to say that he lived to be three thousand
years old. The scholars of hadith of the majority community also
acknowledge the longevity of other persons besides Nuh (a.s.). The great
scholar an-Nuwi in his book "Tahdhibu 'l-Asma"' writes: "Though there is
a difference of opinion among the 'ulama' about the age and the
Prophethood of Hadrat Khidr (a.s.), the majority of scholars admit that
Khidr is still present with us. The Sufis, moreover, unanimously declare
that he is still alive, and innumerable stories about his meetings with
people, and about what was said at these meetings, are quite
well-known."
Shaykh Abu 'Umar ibn Salah writes in his "Fatawa": "The majority of the
'ulama' decided that Hadrat Khidr is alive, but some of the scholars of
hadith do not accept it." I seem to recall that in another work Shaykh
Abu 'Umar wrote (and az-Zamakhshari also has written this in his Rabi'u
'l-abrar) that the Muslims are unanimous in their belief that four
prophets (a.s.) are still alive among us. Two of them are in the sky,
that is 'Isa (a.s.) and Idris (a.s.), and two are on the earth and these
are Khidr and Ilyas. Hadrat Khidr was born in the time of Ibrahim
Khalilu 'llah (a.s.). Thus we have clear proof of the existence of
persons who lived for hundreds of years. 'Allamah as-Sayyid al-Murtada
has written in his "Imali" about persons who have lived to a great age
and as-Shaykh as-Saduq has given an even a longer list in his "Kamal
ad-Din". Even in the present age we find some people who have lived for
a hundred and thirty years, and some for even longer.
Logically we may pose the question: "If someone is capable of living to
an abnormal age, say a hundred and thirty, then is it possible that in
extraordinary conditions a man may live to be a thousand?" At the most
you can call it something super-normal. Moreover, is super-normality in
the case of Prophets and the "awliyah" (those near to God) a
particularly strange thing?
If one turns over the pages of the old volumes of "Majallatu 'l-Muqtatif",
you will find that they are full of articles written by western scholars
who have scientifically proved that man can theoretically attain eternal
life in this world. Some western thinkers even say. "If Ibn Muljim's
sword had not struck 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.), he would have lived
forever. We are justified in this supposition because the Holy Imam was
endowed with such qualities of excellence and healthy liying." Much
could be added on this topic but the scope of this book does not allow
further discussion.
Concerning the second objection, we might ask whether it is fitting that
the Muslim nation should know every detail of divine will and intention.
Is it necessary to know all the secrets of the world and of the
religious commands?
Before demanding such knowledge we must carefully think whether under
the screen of some outwardly incomprehensible divine command there is
also hidden some other secret. For example, a stone, in itself, neither
benefits nor harms man. Nevertheless, we kiss the Hajaru 'l-Aswad (the
black stone in the Ka'bah). What is the wisdom hidden behind that, we
may ask.
The "maghrib" prayers are offered in three rak'ahs (units); the "isha''
prayers are performed in four units. The morning prayers consist of only
two units. What expediency is there in this difference of units?
Rather we must realise that there are a large number of matters of which
neither archangel nor prophet has any knowledge; concerning the
knowledge of the last hour, God, the Almighty says: "Verily God alone
has knowledge of the Hour, the Day of Judgement and when it will rain."
A part from this, there are many other things which have been kept
secret from us and their justification is unknown; we may refer, for
example, to "ismu 'l-'azam" (the Greatest Name), "laylatu 'l-qadr" (the
time for the acceptance of Invocation). We would like to make clear by
the above examples that one need not be amazed at those divine matters
whose wisdom is not apparent. Rather, we should recognise that an order
or action exists, and act accordingly as believing Muslims.
If something is proved by the authentic statements of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.)
and his infallible successors, we must accept it. There is no other
option: to enter into an argument about the nature of wisdom and man's
obligation to find a reason for everything would be in vain. As far as
possible we have deliberately not provided arguments and proofs in this
small booklet; there are already large volumes in which these points
have been discussed in detail; likewise we examine the "Qa'im
Al-Muhammad", the presently existing descendant of Muhammad (s.a.w.).
There are a great number of authentic traditions concerning the "qiyam"
of al-Mahdi (the rising of the twelfth Imam) in books of knowledge of
both sects.
Though we acknowledge the fact that God knows better the wisdom about
the occultation of Imam al-Mahdi, we would nevertheless point out that a
number of rational proofs have already been given in reply to some Shi'a
questionners. The decisive fact to bear in mind is that in every age the
existence of an Imam is necessary; the world cannot remain without a
divinely appointed guide; his very existence is a blessing for mankind,
and his authority over us is also a blessing. The question of the wisdom
hidden in this action of God's is thus invalid (a blessing cannot be
rationalised) and acknowledgment of the "ghaybah" (occultation) is a
necessary duty of every obedient Muslim.
'Adl (Justice)
God the Almighty is not unjust to anybody, nor does He commit any action
which could be considered bad by man's primordial sense- This is what is
known as'adl (justice). Justice is one of the attributes of Almighty God
, existence of which is necessary. It is essential, like all the other
attributes of Oneness. The Ash'arites differ greatly in their beliefs
from the Imamiyah and the Mu'tazilah (the Imamiyah and the Mu'tazilah
are both called "'Adliyah") The reason for this opposition is that the
Ash'arites reject "goodness and badness" as rational concepts, and
affirm rather that "goodness" is that which is called "good" by
religion, and "badness" that which the code of religion calls "bad".
They regard knowledge of the Creator and recognition of the prophets as
being outside the scope of the intellect; they accept miracles according
to the dictates of religion, and they completely discard the dictates of
wisdom. Consequently they are in perplexity.
The '"Adliyah" (that is, the Imamiyah and the Mu'tazilah) maintain that
Islam is in accordance with reason.
Reason considers some actions good and some actions bad, and it is
reason too which considers a bad act to be impossible for God the
Almighty. He is All-wise and a bad action would be contrary to the
dictates of His wisdom.
To chastise an obedient person is unjust, and injustice is a bad action;
reason assures us that the Creator of the world could not unjustly
chastise obedient Muslims as this would be a bad action.
The Imamiyah sect have paid special attention to the problem of 'adl and
have included this attribute among the fundamentals of religion. (It is
worthy of note here that the Ash'arites do not themselves deny justice;
their faith in this respect is that whatever God the Almighty does
cannot affect justice and goodness; they are of the view that wisdom is
so insignificant that it cannot decide as to whether one thing is
appropriate for God and another thing inappropriate.) The Imamiyah have
clearly demonstrated that the best criterion for testing goodness and
badness is wisdom. It is through this means that we have come to the
conclusion that the All-perfect Being (God) must have all good
attributes and be free from all imperfections.
On the basis of this view of goodness and badness, and faith in the
justice of God, certain other beliefs have formed: the notion of "lutf"
(God's all-permeating benevolence and blessing), and the belief that it
is the duty of a Muslim to thank God, Who has given him everything. The
notions of "jabr" and "iktiyar" (the coercion of man by God and the
freedom of man to act as he wishes respectively) are closely connected
to the ideas of goodness and badness.
Absolute destiny and freewill have always been a major subject of
discussion in every philosophy or religion. The Ash'arites believed in
"jabr", and the Mu'tazilah and the Imamiyah held and still hold the view
that every man is free and independent: he can do everything
voluntarily, and perform all his actions with his own will; Like the
existence of self, the faculty of volition is also a gift from God. The
Creator of the universe created people and gave them freedom of action;
absolute authority is God's alone, but in his day-to-day speech and
actions man is quite independent. God, the Almighty, neither forces
anyone to some action, nor restrains him from doing it; the sons of Adam
do as they please. It is for the same reason that the intellect demands
that a crime be punished and a good act rewarded or praised.
If we do not follow this basic rule, reward and punishment, the sending
of the prophets, the revelation of the Books, and the promise of Gehenna
or Paradise in the hereafter becomes meaningless.
There is, unfortunately, no further room for discussion within the
restricted framework of this book. We would refer the reader to part I
of our book "ad-Din wa 'l-Islam".
In short the Imamiyah religion believes that God is "adil" (just) and
that man is independent and free to act Ma'ad (the Day of Judgement)
Like all Muslims, the Shi'as believe that Almighty God will bring all
people to life again for accountability, punishment and reward on the
Day of Judgement. Ma'ad involves the appearance of every person before
his Lord in exactly the same human bodily form he had while on earth. It
is not necessary to know in what way the return will be effected;
suffice it to say that whatever has been stated about final requital and
accountability in the Book of God and the authentic traditions is a part
of our faith, namely, belief in hell or paradise, comfort or pain in
"al-barzakh" (i.e. purgatory), "al-mizan" (the balance), "'as-sirat"
(the path), "'al-a'raf" ("the heights", a place situated between
paradise and hell), and "kitabu 'l-a'mal" (the record of deeds) which
will show all the deeds one has done in one's life. The Shi'as therefore
finally believe that every one shall be entitled to receive punishment
or reward according to his deeds. Good actions shall be rewarded and bad
actions shall entail punishment: God says in the glorious Qur'an:
"Whoever does an atoms weight of goodness will see it on the last day,
and whoever does an atom's weight of bad will see it on the last day."
PART III: The Shi'ah - The Divine Code of
Living
The Imamiyah Shi'as believe that an ordinance or order of the Islamic
code exists for every matter of life. The Divine Law has not even
ignored the "diyat" (conciliation money) for injury of a very minor
nature. There is no action of a "mukallaf" (a sane, adult person) which
does not come under the scope of the following definitions: "wajib"
(compulsory); "haram" (unlawful); mustahabb (desirable); makruh
(undesirable) and mubah (lawful). Whether it is a matter of mutual
transactions, trade, marriage or a promise and a pledge, the religious
code will certainly guide us as to whether it is right or wrong.
The personality of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) was the fountainhead of all
divine orders. God the Almighty conveyed these orders to the last
Prophet (s.a.w.) through "wahy" (revelation through Jibril) or "ilham"
(divine inspiration). The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) communicated them to the
people according to the circumstances prevailing, particularly to those
companions who had been close to him at all times, so that they might
carry on the mission of preaching throughout the whole world. There were
many ordinances however which could not be taught, because the time for
them was not opportune, or because there was no need for them during the
time of the Prophet (it is also possible that they could not be
promulgated for some particular reason known only to God). Hence some
orders were known while some remained secret. The Holy Prophet entrusted
these secret ordinances to his (divinely appointed) vicegerents. Later
every "wasi" (vicegerent) communicated them to his successor, so that,
according to the need of the hour and the spirit of the time, they might
be made public.
The Holy Prophet taught as much as he thought proper for the situation
and as much as the companions could understand according to their
intellect. The recipients of this teaching were blessed according to
their own capacity. It also happened that one companion received a
positive order concerning a certain matter, and others heard a negative
order in a matter resembling the former. The result was that the act was
one but orders were (seemingly) two.
We must ask what the cause of this difference was. The reality of the
situation was such that each matter was slightly different from the
other: each had a particular distinguishing aspect. Those present who
reported what happened at the scene, either did not pay attention to
this or that peculiarity, or, if they did recognise it, did not mention
this or that particular aspect. Because of inaccurate description of the
circumstances, traditions may appear to contradict each other, but in
reality they each apply to different circumstances. This inaccuracy
caused difficulties in recognising the exact meaning of an instruction
given to us by the Prophet. Accordingly, the companions who had the
honour of close companionship with the Prophet supported "ijtihad". That
is they realised the necessity for a thorough investigation of the text
of the hadith and the situation in which it occurred. The different
aspects of the hadith were probed, since the apparent meaning of the
tradition is often different from the real aim of the codifier. It has
been pointed out earlier, that these difference were largely due to
faulty copying or shortcomings on the part of the reporters.
Those companions of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) who were just and
trustworthy and who were also reporters of traditions sometimes
reproduced the statement of the Prophet (s.a.w.) in exactly the same
words in which they had heard it, while sometimes, in place of the text
of the tradition, they would state the order or commandment which was
inferred from the tradition in question. In the first instance their
position is that of a reporter or traditionalist, and in the second they
have the position of learned scholars who declare their opinion about
the meaning of the hadiths; the latter are also called "mujtihids".
All Muslims who do not have this ability and so therefore follow the
opinion of the mujtahid, are called "muqallid". The act of acting on the
verdicts of a mujtahid is called "taqlid".
After a thorough examination of this matter we find that during the time
of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), the door of ijtihad was open and the
companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.) themselves acted upon it; of course
at that time ijtihad was not so strong as it is today, because the
people could ask the Prophet (s.a.w.) directly about any matter they
were not sure of.
As time passed, however, and relations between the Arabs and non-Arabs
increased, there were difficulties in understanding the correct meanings
of the Arabic language. The number of traditions and reports became
larger.
Among them were very many doubtful and fabricated traditions. At this
stage it was not easy to test the validity of the religious orders.
Accordingly "ijtihad" grew stronger and the modes of analysis of hadith
were refined: scholars began to distinguish between correct and the
faulty statements. The principle of preference was put into practice
after a thorough investigation of two conflicting hadiths. Among the
Imamiyah sect this blessing still exists.
We may observe, moreover, that all people are from one of two groups
according to whether they have knowledge or not. Those without knowledge
have to seek the help of the other group in all matters of which they
are ignorant. Similarly in the religious world there are also two
classes: the learned mujtahid and the ignorant muqallid.
As a matter of principle, the people of the second class should turn to
the people of the first class in order to learn what they themselves do
not know. Like all other Muslims the Shi'a believe that all religious
orders are based upon the "kitab" (Qur'an), and the "sunnah" (the
sayings, practise or approval of the Prophet, and, in Shi'ite Islam, the
Imams). They add to these "aql" (intellectual reasoning) and "ijma"
(consensus of opinion). The Imamiyah sect do not agree with others in
the following matters.
Firstly, the Shi'as never act upon "qiyas" (arrival at decisions through
analogy and reasoned supposition) because their Imams have on many
occasions said that if supposition is allowed in religious matters the
entire structure of religion will be dashed to the ground. We would have
stated in detail the evils of such a method had not the aim of this book
been merely to outline the fundamentals of Shi'a beliefs.
Secondly, if a tradition of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) comes through the
Ahlu 'l-bayt (a.s.) it is reliable, otherwise it is unacceptable. The
unauthentic traditions, reported by persons like Abu Hurayrah, Samrah
ibn Jundub, Marwan ibn Hakam, 'Imran ibn Hattan al-Kharji and 'Amr ibn
al-'As for example, have no value in our eyes. Even the Sunni 'ulama'
have strongly condemned these reporters, and have revealed the selfish
or political motives for their reporting false hadiths.
Thirdly, as we have seen, the door of "ijtihad" is still open and shall
remain open forever. Among the majority community, however, the doors of
ijtihad are locked. When and on what basis this practice started cannot
perhaps be adequately answered even by their 'ulama' themselves.
Besides these three matters, all other differences pertain to the
articles of practice.
One who, by reasoning and logic, gains the power of drawing conclusions
and making inferences can be said to have reached the rank of being able
to do ijtihad; the mujtahid however should possess certain other
qualities if we are to accept what he says about the divine code to be
followed. The most important quality is that he possess a sense of "adalah''
(justice). "Adalah'' means that quality of the inner spirit with which a
man can abstain from carnal desires and can develop a command over the
correct performance of compulsory acts. In other words it is the state
of fear of God which always permeates the just man's mind. It is of
several degrees, the highest being the degree of "ismah" (infallibility)
which is a condition for the Imamate.
Besides this there are necessary or obvious matters (those matters which
pertain to sure knowledge in which there is neither "taqlid" nor "ijtihad",
for instance the compulsion to "sawm" (fasting) and "salat" (prayers).
Similarly the fundamentals of religion are also beyond the sphere of "taqlid",
because they are matters for personal investigation on the part of every
adult person: this search to determine for oneself the truth and reality
of the fundamentals of Islam depends on the corresponding sagacity,
understanding and cognition of each individual and cannot be left to the
opinion of others. All other matters concerning the articles of practice
come under the scope of "ijtihad" and "taqlid". indeed every action of
man is encompassed by this code of religion. Hence to know the
corresponding law for each action is very necessary. There are only two
ways of arriving at this knowledge: taqlid or ijtihad. It should be
remembered that it is incumbent on each Muslim to make use of one of
these two ways; if not, he will have to suffer punishment on the Day of
Judgement. We may describe a Muslim's actions in the following way:
a) Some actions are concerned with God and His servants. These are
called "ibadat" (acts of service or slavery). Their correctness depends
upon one's making the intention of coming closer to God. "Ibadat" may be
either physical, like "salat" (prayer), "sawm" (fasting) and "hajj"
(making the pilgrimage to Makkah), or financial like "khums" (a giving
of one-fifth of certain commodities: e.g. booty of war, treasure-trove,
wealth from mineral desposits), "zakat", "kaffarat" (fines or
penalties).
b) Some actions pertain to the individual and his relations with
society. They are of two kinds: involving agreement between two persons
(such as mutual transactions and marriage), and others involving the
decision of just one party (for instance "talaq" (divorce) and "itq"
(the setting free of a slave).
c) Some actions are purely individual and personal; for example, eating,
drinking and the clothes one chooses to wear.
Fiqh (Jurisprudence)
Fiqh deals with all the orders and commandments which govern the
previously mentioned actions. The most important acts of 'ibadat are six
in number: two are purely physical ("salat" and "sawm"), two are purely
"financial" ("khums" and "zakat"), and two are common to each category
("hajj" and "jihad"). God, the Almighty, says:
"You should perform jihad with your wealth and yourselves." (jahidu bi
amwalikum wa anfusikum). Finally, "kaffarat" (penalties) are special
kinds of punishments for particular crimes.
1. Salat (prayer)
Like all other Muslims, the Shi'as too regard "salat" as one of the
pillars of religion. This prayer is a means of bringing God's servant
near to Him. If one does not perform the prayer, the relation between
God and His servant is broken. That is why the traditions of Ahlu 'l-bayt
(a.s.) say that not offering the prayer even once or twice is the
distinguishing mark between infidelity and Islam.
According to the religious code "salat" has great importance. No other
act of worship can bear comparison with it. The Imamiyah sect
unanimously believe that anyone who does not perform "salat" is a great
sinner: moreover he has no place in Islamic society. He is neither
credible nor trustworthy- One is even permitted to criticize him behind
his back. There are very strict orders about "salat"; five kinds of "salat"
are compulsory;
1. The five daily prayers.
2. The "salatu 'l-jum'ah" (the Friday prayers)
3. "Salatu 'l-ayat" (on the occasion of a solar or lunar eclipse, an
earthquake, or any frightening natural event).
4. "Salatu 'l-'idayn" (the salat of 'idu 'l-fitr and 'idu'l-azhar).
5. "Salatu Ka'bah).
In addition, an adult person may make "salat" compulsory for himself by
making a promise or taking an oath to perform a certain number of
prayers or by accepting a reward for performing prayers under certain
conditions.
Besides these, all other kinds of salat are "nawafil" (supererogatory
prayers). The most important "nawafil" am those attached to the five
daily prayers, which are twice the number of units of the compulsory
prayers (that is thirty four units). The total number of units of both "nawafil"
and compulsory prayers is thus fifty one.
Here we remember an interesting incident which Raghib al-Isfahani wrote
about in his distinguished book "al-Muhadirat". We learn that during the
days of Ahmad ibn 'Abdu 'l-'Aziz there was a man named Kanani in Isfahan.
Ahmad was learning the correct way to do the prayers and the basic Shi'a
beliefs from Kawani. one day Ahmad's mother happened to see them during
a lesson and she said to Kanani: "Oh master, you have made my son a
Rafidi! (one of the Rafidah - i.e. a particularly zealous Shi'a). Kanani
immediately retorted: "Foolish woman! The Rafidah perform fifty one
units of prayer daily, and your son does not perform even one unit out
of the fifty one. How can he be one of the Rafidah?"
The "nawafil" of the month of Ramadan are of great blessing and
significance. Their number is one thousand. Our Sunni brothers also
perform these prayers, but in congregation (jama'ah), and they are known
among them as "tarawih" from the Shi'a point of view these prayers are
not permissible in congregation (jama'ah), because only the Friday
prayer is a compulsory congregational prayer. For details one can refer
to the tens of thousands books which contain elaborate and explicit
descriptions of the correct way to perform the various compulsory or
recommended prayers, and the numerous recitations and invocations which
are especially associated with each prayer.
According to the religious code correct "salat" depends upon three
things. Firstly, there are certain conditions which have be to be
fulfilled before the actual performance of the prayers, although they
are not included in the salat itself; these conditions are so important
that salat becomes absolutely void if they are not attended to. They are
six in number. (1) 'Taharah' (one must be in state of ritual purity);
(2) Time (each compulsory prayer, and most ofthe recommended prayers,
are to be performed. "at a particular time); (3) Qiblah (that is one
should face the'Ka'bah); (4) Covering (dress); (5) Intention (one must
make the intention to perform the prayer according to that particular
prayer); (6) Place (it must be lawfully occupied; and the place for
prostration must be pure and clean).
Secondly, the constituent parts of salat are of two kinds: they are
either considered to be a fundamental part of the prayer and thus
absolutely compulsory, or not. There are four compulsory actions. (1)
Takbiratu 'lihram (that is the initial "allahu akbar"); (2) qiyam
(standing to perform the prayer); (3) ruku' (bending for ward) and
finally sujud (prostration on the ground). Likewise there are four
conditions which are compulsory but do not make the salat void if, for
example, one unintentionally does not fulfill them: (1) qira'ah (the
reading of Surah al-Hamd and one other complete surah); (2) dhikr,
tashahud and the final salam. One must be Still and in a state of
remembrance throughout the prayer. Adhan and iqamah before the start of
the prayer are both strongly desirable (indeed almost compulsory).
The following invalidate the prayer: anything which breaks one's state
of wudu', turning one's back on the qiblah, and excessive movement. Any
other action (which is not a fundamental part of the prayer) such as
talking, laughing, weeping, looking to the right or left, eating or
drinking invalidate the prayer if done intentionally.
To purify oneself, ready for any act of 'ibadat (such as prayer), one
must make either wudu' (the minor purification) or ghusl (the major
purification). In case of absence of water, or for some other reason
like illness, unbearable cold, shortness of time, when it is not
possible to do either of these two acts of purification, their
substitute is "tayammum" (cf. the Qur'an which indicates this method of
purification: fa tayammamu sa'idan tayyiban - so perform tayammum on
pure earth - Surah al-Ma'idah). The scholars of jurisprudence and the
lexicographers give various meanings for the word "sa'id". Some of them
say it only means dust, and some say. that it means all kinds of pound
(including sand, fragments of rocks, stones, and mineral substances). We
have limited our ascription of salat to fundamentals: more detailed
studies may be found in numerous other works.
2. Sawm (Fasting)
According to the Shi'a faith, sawm (plural siyam), fasting, is a pillar
of the Islamic code. There are four kinds of siyam: wajib (compulsory),
mustahabb (recommended), haram (forbidden) or makruh (undesirable). The
fasts made incumbent by the shari'ah (code of religion) are those of the
Holy month of Ramadan. Other fasts become incumbent for some specific
reason, for instance "sawm kaffarah" (the penalty fast), "badal"(in lieu
of sacrificing an animal), in lieu of someone else, "nadr" (as a vow, or
oath). The fasts of the months of Rajab and Sha'ban are desirable as
well as other fasts too numerous to mention in this brief work. Fasting
on the two 'id days and "ayyam at-tashiq" (the three days after hajj) is
forbidden; to fast on the days of 'Ashurah and 'Arafat are undesirable
(according to many the 'Ashurah day fast is strictly forbidden).
Details concerning the conditions an
