The term Shi’a has been used on countless occasions in the Qur’an, Hadeeth and the books of history.
The literal meaning of Shi’a; The scholars of Arabic lexicon via two methods:
1. The literal meaning of Shi’a
2. The Arabic meaning to which the term is commonly associated
al Qamoos:
“Shi’a refers to the helper of another”
Mufaridaat al Qur’an:
“Amongst the followers [Shi'a] of Nuh was Ibrahim”
Tafseer Ma’arif ul Qur’an:
“The plural of al Shi’i is Shi’a which means to follow and support someone”.
Muqaddimah:
“Shi’a refers to a follower”
Whilst on its own, the term Shi’a means very little and doesn’t have any positive or negative meaning literally, when this word is used for a particular individual who is linked to a group that is led by a person of high moral excellence, then certainly the individual would benefit from it and will have the morals that the leader possesses, whom he follows, and to whom he is linked. Alternatively when a Leader is a man of ill repute / bad character, his adherents will likewise be frowned upon.
In the Qur’an, the term Shi’a has been used on several occasions in the context of groups, on some occasions negatively, and it is these verses that the Nasibi author picked up on.
Let us analyse his opening shot in his magnificent article:
The word Shia, Shiah, Shiite, or Shi’ah was used many times in the Holy Quran. It means sect or band but it mostly has a negative meaning. Let’s see:
“As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects (Shiites), you have no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.”
(6:159)In this verse, God warns us not to divide ourselves into Shiites and declare people who do so as people who don’t belong to the prophet Muhammad (p).
Whilst there is no doubt that the term Shi’a used in this verse means to split into Sects, that is indeed the literal meaning but no logical person can use this to concluded that this is the exclusive term for the Kuffar and Mushrikeen. If we are to apply this approach then we should point out to the Nasibi author that the word ‘Deen’ is also used for the Kaafirs in the same verse, so is the word Deen also unacceptable (God forbid)?
In the Quran the terms ‘Ummat’ and ‘Millat’ have also been used for past nations and for the nation of hell, does that mean that these terms are also not allowed for Muslims to use?
We read the word ‘Ummat’ has been used for the people of hell fire in Quran.
He will say: Enter into fire among the nations that have passed away before you from among jinn and men; whenever a nation (Ummat) shall enter, it shall curse its sister, until when they have all come up with one another into it; the last of them shall say with regard to the foremost of them: Our Lord! these led us astray therefore give them a double chastisement of the fire. He will say: Every one shall have double but you do not know.
Quran 7:38
But Quran also informs us about the prayers of Prophet Ibrahim [as] and Ismail [as] wherein they used word Ummat:
And when Ibrahim and Ismail raised the foundations of the House: Our Lord! accept from us; surely Thou art the Hearing, the Knowing:
Our Lord! and make us both submissive to Thee and (raise) from our offspring a nation (Ummat) submitting to Thee, and show us our ways of devotion and turn to us (mercifully), surely Thou art the Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful.
Quran 2: 217-128
There are numerous terms that have been used for the pagans, Christians and Jews, in this Glorious Book, are all of these terms condemnable?
Any logical, rational and sane person will have to accept that the usage of term ‘Shi’a’ for Jews, Christians and Pagans (specifically) is wrong and baseless.
If its just about the arguments for the sake of arguments, and keeping in view the approach, attitude and pattern of this Nasibi, if we say that the words even used occasionally for the misguided is a term that should generate hate and should be completely abandoned, then would the Salafis (known as Ahl’ul Hadeeth) kindly shed some light on the below on Surah Luqman, verse 6:
“YUSUFALI: But there are, among men, those who purchase idle tales, without knowledge (or meaning), to mislead (men) from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a Humiliating Penalty.”
This Nasibi author should know the term Hadeeth has been associated with misguidance, so where has the term Ahl’ul Hadeeth come from? Nasibis should either stop calling themselves Ahl’ul Hadeeth or remove this rubbish article from their site.
Also in the Qur’an, the term Aima has been used for misguided people as well.
In Surah Qasas, verses 41 – 42, the following is said about Kufr Imams:
“And we declared them Imams who invite you to Hell fire, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall not be helped. And we caused to be followed in this world by a curse; and on the Day of Resurrection they shall be of the loathed ones”.
The Salafis clearly need to abandon those with the title Imam, starting with their Imam Muhammad Ismael Bukhari, and the other Imams.
Islamicweb.com states:
“Say: “He has power to send calamities on you, from above and below, or to cover you with confusion in party strife (make you Shiites), giving you a taste of mutual vengeance – each from the other.” See how We explain the Signs by various (symbols); that they may understand.”(6:65)
In this verse, God warns us that he can let us become Shiites as a great punishment to us.
“Turn you in repentance to Him, and fear Him: establish regular prayers, and be not you among those who join gods with Allah, those who splite up their religion, and become (mere) Sects (Shiites), each party rejoicing in that which is with itself!” (30:31-32)
In this verse, God associates the word Shiites with polytheist pagans who join gods with Allah!
“Then shall We certainly drag out from every sect (Shiites) all those who were worst in obstinate rebellion against (Allah) Most Gracious.” (Qur’an Mariam:69)
In this verse, God associates the word Shiites with those who are worst in obstinate rebellion against Him.
“Truly Pharaoh elated himself in the land and broke up its people into sections (Shiites), depressing a small group among them: their sons he slew, but he kept alive their females: for he was indeed a maker of mischief.” (28:4)
As far as Pharaoh is concerned, he proclaimed himself to be god. He divided his people into groups and parties so that he will be able to rule them easily. Each group is called Shi’ah.
So this Nasibi basically is saying that the term Shi’a is used for the adherents of Pharaoh, rebels, polytheists and Hell Bound. We have already disproved this false approach by citing the first verse. Whilst the term Shi’a is expressed in the Qur’an, what this Nasibi author needs to recognise, whilst the terms Sunni, Ahl’ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah, Salafi and Ahl’ul Hadeeth are mentioned nowhere in the Qur’an. Any sect that has no mention in the Qur’an cannot be the saved one, since Allah (swt) did not revel any such terms in the Qur’an. The truth lies with that Sect that Allah (swt) refers to in the Qur’an in a positive manner, Alhamdolillah other than the Shi’a no other Sect can rely on any Qur’anic evidence.
al Nihaya:
وأصل الشيعة الفرقة من الناس وتقع على الواحد والاثنين والجمع والمذكر والمؤنث بلفظ واحد ومعنى واحد وقد غلب الاسم على من يزعم أنه يتولى عليا رضي الله عنه وأهل بيته
“Shia is a group of people, this name can be used for singular and plural, for male and female, and this name is used for those who claim that they follow Ali (ra) and his Ahlulbayt”
Lisan Al-Arab:
وأصل الشيعة الفرقة من الناس ويقع على الواحد والاثنين والجمع والمذكر والمؤنث بلفظ واحد ومعنى واحد وقد غلب هذا الاسم على من يتوالى عليا وأهل بيته
“Shia is a group of people, can be used for singular and plural, for male and female, this name is used for those who follow Ali and his Ahlulbayt”
Darr al Maarif:
“Shi’a refers to the lovers of ‘Ali. They believe that Imamate is restricted to the family of ‘Ali”
Islamic Encyclopaedia:
“Shi’a is a big Islamic Sect from amongst the Sects they believe that after the Prophet (s), ‘Ali was the immediate successor and after him Imamate was the exclusive right of his family”
al Qamoos:
وشيعة الرجل بالكسر أتباعه وأنصاره والفرقة على حدة ويقع الواحد والاثنين والجمع والمذكر والمؤنث وقد غلب هذا الأسم على كل من يتولى عليا وأهل بيته
“Shia means a follower and it can be used for singular or plural, for male and female and this term is used for those who follow Ali and his Ahlulbayt”
al-Mawaqif by Eji:
من كبار الفرق الإسلامية الشيعة أي الذين شايعوا عليا وقالوا إنه الإمام بعد رسول الله بالنص إما جليا وإما خفيا واعتقدوا أن الإمامة لا تخرج عنه وعن أولاده
“Shia is one of the largest Islamic sects, they are those who follow Ali and believe that he is the Imam right after Allah’s apostle by text, whether it’s a clear or unclear text, and they believe that Imamate is for his progeny”.
al Mihal:
“Shi’a are those who follow ‘Ali, they believe that after the death of the Prophet (s) the rightful Imam was ‘Ali”.
Sharh Fiqh Akbar:
“Shi’a believe after the death of the Prophet (s) the rightful Imam was ‘Ali”.
Sharh Aqaid Nafsee:
“Shi’a believe after the death of the Prophet (s) the rightful Imam was ‘Ali, then Hasan and Husayn up till Mahdi”
Al Munjud:
“The Shi’a of any person is he who will help him and follow him, the plural of Shia or Ashi’a. The word is generally used for more than one it can be used for masculine and feminine tense In this day and age it has become exclusively associated with those who love ‘Ali and his household, although it has become their specific name, the literal meaning of Shi’a is Sect”.
Lughaat ul Hadeeth:
“In principles Shi’a refers to a group. In this day and age it refers to those that love ‘Ali and his descendants”
Lughaat al Hadeeth, Vol 2 page 162, letter ‘Sheen’ (published by Mir Muhammad Kutub Khana Karachi)
Verily the definition of Shi’a may indeed mean party, but in Islamic terminology it is associated with those that love ‘Ali (as) and deem him the rightful Imam, and believe in his infallible descendants after him. They have taken these teaching from the Qur’an and Sunnah of the Prophet (s).
The highly respected Sunni scholar Al Muhaddith Shah ‘Abd al-’Aziz Dehlavi in his discussion of Hadeeth relating to Ali and his Shi’a writes:
“The title Shi’a was first given to those Muhajireen and Ansar who gave allegiance (bay’ah) to Ali (may Allah enlighten his face). They were his steadfast faithful followers during his (Ali’s) caliphate. They remained close to him, they always fought his enemies, and kept on following Ali’s commands and prohibitions. The true Shi’a are these who came in 37 Hijri”
Tauhfa Ithna Ashari (Urdu) page 27, published in Karachi
Note: 37 Hijri -the year Imam Ali (as) fought Mu’awiya at Sifeen.
The reference proves that the term ‘Ahl ‘ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah’ was conceived later, after 37 Hijri. Although we believe that the title Shi’a goes back before this date, as this book is a ‘revered anti Shi’a masterpiece’, we will gladly accept this definition. Dehlavi states that the first Shi’a were the Muhajirun and Ansar, in other words they were the Prophet (s)’s Sahaba who sided with Ali (as) against Mu’awiya.
Now let us break down that definition in to point form. The Shi’a were those who:
Alhamdullillah that is exactly the same definition of the Shi’a today. All the above attributes of the Shi’a then, are still inherent in the Shi’a today. When the Sahaba were Shi’a then this Nasibi author should have been ashamed for proving Shi’as misguided Kaafirs through Verses. By doing this, this Nasibi author has attacked the Sahaba he venerates; after all if the term Shi’a from Qur’an refers to negative terms such as ‘adherents of Pharaoh, rebels, polytheists and Hell Bound’, did the Shi’a Sahaba possess all of these attributes? Clearly an author from a site that professes undying love for the Sahaba should have some shame. The Nasibi has unwittingly heaped Kufr Fatwas on thousands of Prophetic companions!
According to Shah Abdul Aziz:
“It should be known that the initial Shi’as (who are the Sunnis and the Tafdiliyyah) in old days were known as Shi’as. When the Ghulat and the Rawafid Zaydiyyah and Ismailiyyah used the name for themselves, Sunnis and Tafdiliyyah did not like this name for themselves and so they took the name of Ahlu’s-Sunnah wa l Jamaah.”
1. Tauhfa Ithna Ashari, Nawalkishor Press, Lucknow, n.d; pp. 4, 11, 59
2. Tauhfa Ithna Ashari (Urdu) page 19, published in Karachi
This proves that the Sunni Sect originally kept the name Shi’a, and they changed it later on to Ahl’ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah. The Shah displayed dishonesty with regard to the reasons for the change. If a good man is called Abdullah and then he finds out a bad person called Abdullah, he won’t change his name. Whilst according to Dehlavi this second group named itself Ahl’ul Sunnah at about 150 AH (following Zaid bin Ali (as)’s martyrdom) it is interesting that their ideology existed long before that. What ideology was that? Well let us see the comments of Mulla ‘Ali Qari:
“The belief in the eyes of Ahl’ul Sunnah and Muttazalis is that the duty to appoint an Imam is a duty of the public. In terms of hadith and logic this is a duty of the public. In accordance with this belief, there is a hadith in Sahih Muslim, narrated by Abdullah ibne Umar ‘He who dies without giving bayah to an Imam dies the death of one belonging to the days of jahiliyya’. This is why the Sahaba viewed the appointment of the Imam as so important that they preferred it to attending the Prophet’s funeral, because the Muslims need an Imam so that orders can be made on Jihad, and so that Islamic Laws can be implemented”
Sharah Fiqah Akbar, by Mulla Ali Qari, p 175 (publishers Muhammad Saeed and son, Qur’an Muhalla
The foundation stone of Sunni aqeedah is set out here. The Imam is appointed by the public, individual character is of no relevance. Once ijma takes place, the khalifa is the legitimate Head of State. Once the people give bayya to the khalifa, ijma is obtained hence the ‘Jama’ah’. So when did we have the first declaration of this Jama’ah? This concept developed from the Shi’a of Uthman, when their Imam Mu’awiyah used his legendary intimidation to take the reigns of power he declared the year to the year of Jama’ah when the people gathered under the single leader. As evidence we will cite Tareekh Khamees Volume 2 page 290:
“When Mu’awiyah and Hasan stopped fighting, and made peace, Mu’awiyah entered Kufah, and declared it the year of Jamaah”.
al-Tabari recorded that:
“Sajah remained with Banu Taghlib until Mu’awiya transferred them in his days on the “year of the union (al-Jama’ah)”. When the people of Iraq agreed [to recognize] Mu’awiyah [as caliph] after Ali, Mu’awiyah took to expelling from al-Kufa those who had been vehement in the cause of Ali, and to settle in their homes those people of Syria and al-Basrah and the Jazirah who were most vehement in his own cause; it was they who were called the “transfers” in the garrison towns”
[The translator of the work writes in reference to the year of the union as follows: ] Aam al-Jama’ah the year 40 A.H/A.D 660-661, so called because the Muslim Community came together in recognizing Mu’awiyah, ending the political division of the first civil war. Pace Caetani, 648; see Abu Zahra al-Damishqi, Tarikh, 188 (no. 101) and 190 (no. 105)
History of al-Tabari, English version, v10, p97
Jalaluddin al-Suyuti mentions this very fact, with the utmost clarity in his work, History of the Caliphs (Tarikh ul Khulafa) with the following words:
al-Dhahabi says that Ka’ab died before Mu’awiyah was made caliph, and that Ka’ab was right in what he said, for Mu’awiyah continued for twenty years, and none of the princes of the earth contended with him, unlike others who came after him, for they had opponents and portions of their dominions passed out of their sway. Mu’awiyah went forth against Ali as has preceded, and assumed the title of Caliph. Then he marched against al-Hasan, who abdicated in his favour. He therefore became firmly established in his Caliphate from Rabi’ul Akhir or Jamadi al-Awwal 41 AH. The year was therefore called the Year of the Union (al-Jama’ah), on account of the gathering of the people under one Caliph. During this year Mu’awiyah appointed Marwan Ibn al-Hakam over Medina.
History of the Caliphs, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, English version, p204 (Chapter of Mu’awiyah Ibn Abi Sufyan)
In Tauhfa, Shah Abdul Aziz also refer Sunnis as Ahl’ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah. ‘Sunn’ commonly means ‘year’, the term Sunni comes from it. The rebellious group were those who in the year 40 Hijri unanimously endorsed the Khilafath of Mu’awiyah ibn Hind, and then changed their name to Ahl’ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah. After that the influence of Mu’awiyah loving and Yazeed pruning led them developing into Nasibis [Nawasib].
The Nasibi author vigorously asserted in the introduction of his article:
The word Shia, Shiah, Shiite, or Shi’ah was used many times in the Holy Quran. It means sect or band but it mostly has a negative meaning.
The Nasibi has himself admitted that ‘it mostly has a negative meaning’. Through this admission at least he has acknowledged that it cannot automatically be equated with something bad, this being the case why has he only focussed on the negative usage of Shi’a to prove his point? His failure to cite the positive usage of Shi’a serves as evidence that this follower of Mu’awiya is adhering to shameless dishonestly in order to prove his point. Had this Nasibi possessed even an ounce of integrity he would have also mentioned the fact that the same term that ‘mostly has a negative meaning’ has been used in a positive light by Allah (swt) while referring to His blessed Prophets.
The concept of Shari’a was first propagated by Hadhrat Nuh (as). The followers of Hadhrat Nuh (as) were referred to as Shi’a. This is clear from the fact that we read when referring to Hadhrat Ibraheem (as) Allah (swt) says that he was following the religion of Hadhrat Nuh (as).
We read in Surah as Saffat verse 83:
“Verily Ibraheem was a Shi’a of Nuh”.
The Deobandi scholar Mufti Muhammad Shaafi in his commentary of this verse in his Tafseer Maarif ul Qur’an Volume 7 page 447 states:
“Shi’a in Arabic means that groups whose core beliefs are based upon the teachings of another, in this case it refers to the fact that Hadhrat Ibraheem (as) was a follower of his predecessor Nuh (as)”
Similarly Deobandi bulwarks Shah Rafiudeen and Maulana Waheed uz Zaman in their combined commentaries, published as Tafseer Ashraf under this verse have their explanation of Shi’a as ‘follower’ and the other ‘follower of a way’. Shams’ul Hind Hafiz Nazeer Ahmed in his transliteration of the Qur’an page 1340 defines Shi’a as ‘Follower of a path’.
The Prophet (s) was likewise from the people of Ibraheem, that is because Allah (swt) says in Surah al Baqarah verse 134:
“They say: “Become Jews or Christians and you would be guided (To salvation).” Say No (I would rather) follow the Religion of Abraham”
Therefore this means that Hadhrat Muhammad (saww) was a Shi’a of Hadhrat Ibraheem (as) – who was a Shi’a of Hadhrat Nuh (as). The term Shi’a, should therefore not be viewed with hostility rather previous Prophets and their adherents were Shi’a.
We appeal to justice. We will all have to answer our Creator one day. The term Nabi is a pure esteemed word. When Allah (swt) refers to one Nabi as a Shi’a can you only imagine how pure that name must be in the eyes of Allah (swt), and how pure are those who call themselves by this name? One should also point out that we are not referring to an ordinary Nabi here, the infallible Prophet being referred to, is the one whom Allah (swt) refers to as ‘Khaleel’. The Nasibi author cites verses that associate the term Shi’a with Kaafirs to prove that today’s adherents of Maula ‘Ali (as) are Kafirs, we will ask this product of Halala two questions:
Is this Nasibi not insulting the Prophets in the process?
We leave it to those with open minds, one can either accept the pure word that Allah (swt) links positively to Prophet Ibraheem (as) or accept this Nasibi author’s dishonest usage of Qur’anic verses which seems to suggest that the term Shi’a is always used in a negative manner.
“And he entered the City at a time when its people were not watching: and he found there two men fighting, – one of his Shi’a, and the other, of his enemies”.
Quran 28:15
In this verse, Hadhrat Musa (as)’s party are referred to as Shi’a because Hadhrat Musa (as) was Shi’a. His followers were Shi’a as declared by the Holy Qur’an. This fact is acknowledged by the scholars of Ahl’ul Sunnah.
We read in Tafsir Baydhawi Volume 4 page 125 (Publised in Egypt):
“One was his Shi’a in others, one that followed his path”.
Allamah Farah Baghawi in his “Mu’allim ul Tanzil” Volume 3 page 175 (India, Bombay edition) writes:
هذا من شيعته وهذا من عدوه أي هذا مؤمن وهذا كافر
“The fighter was a Shi’a – a momin, his enemy was a Kaffir”.
The Deobandi scholar Mufti Muhammad Shaafi in his commentary of this verse in his Tafseer Maarif ul Qur’an Volume 6 page 622 states:
“This was a time when Musa (as) began Prophethood and the truth, and people began to follow him, they were his Followers [Tabieen) and the word “min Shi’at” refers to this”.
The comments of this esteemed Deobandi Mullah confirm that the followers of Prophet Musa (as) were called his ‘Shi’a’. We appeal to justice one who fights an enemy is a friend; we can conclude that Allah (swt) has deemed the friend of a Prophet (s) to be a Shi’a.
The Qur’an refers to Prophet Ibraheem (as) as a Shi’a. We appeal to this Nasibi cut and paste author, God forbid was he (Hadhrat Ibraheem (as)) also a rebellious, Hell bound adherent of Pharoah? If in accordance with the verse cited by this Nasibi the Shi’a of ‘Ali are , Hell bound adherent of Pharaoh, then why did the Salaf and Tabieen call themselves Shi’a. Were they ignorant of the verses cited by this Nasibi author?