Please provide information about “Shia”. They have narrated from Abu Ja‘far Muhammad ibn Ali ibn al-Husain that he said to one of his companions: “Congratulations on this name!” He said: “Which name, may I be sacrificed for you?” He said: “Shia.” He said: “People reproach us because of this name.” He said: “Have you not heard that Allah Almighty said: «وَإِنَّ مِنْ شِيعَتِهِ لَإِبْرَاهِيم»; ‘And indeed, one of his Shias was Ibrahim,’ and said: «فَاسْتَغَاثَهُ الَّذِي مِنْ شِيعَتِهِ عَلَى الَّذِي مِنْ عَدُوِّهِ»; ‘Then the one from among his Shias asked him for help against the one who was among his enemies’? So congratulations on this name.” (Tafsir al-Qomi, vol. 2, p. 223) Is this narration authentic? Are Shias the people of the truth?
Please note the following:
1. The term “Shia” in the Arabic language means “group” and “follower”, and it has been stated in the Book of Allah in this meaning; as He has said: ﴿وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا مِنْ قَبْلِكَ فِي شِيَعِ الْأَوَّلِينَ﴾[1]; “And indeed, We sent (Messengers) before you to the Shias of early people,” meaning “to the groups of early people, and He has said: ﴿ثُمَّ لَنَنْزِعَنَّ مِنْ كُلِّ شِيعَةٍ أَيُّهُمْ أَشَدُّ عَلَى الرَّحْمَنِ عِتِيًّا﴾[2]; “Then We shall certainly drag out from every Shia the most rebellious against the Most Merciful,” meaning “from every group,” and therefore, it does not have a good or bad meaning in itself. Yes, if it is added to one who is deserving of being followed, it carries a good meaning; as in the words of Allah Almighty: ﴿وَإِنَّ مِنْ شِيعَتِهِ لَإِبْرَاهِيمَ﴾[3]; “And indeed, one of his Shias was Ibrahim,” it means one of the followers of Nuh and in His words: ﴿هَذَا مِنْ شِيعَتِهِ﴾[4]; “One of his Shias,” it means one of the followers of Musa
and if it is added to one who is not deserving of being followed, it carries a bad meaning; as in the words of Allah Almighty: ﴿وَلَقَدْ أَهْلَكْنَا أَشْيَاعَكُمْ فَهَلْ مِنْ مُدَّكِرٍ﴾[5]; “And indeed, We have destroyed your Shias. So is there anyone who would take heed?!” it means your group or a group like your group, and in His words: ﴿إِنَّ الَّذِينَ فَرَّقُوا دِينَهُمْ وَكَانُوا شِيَعًا لَسْتَ مِنْهُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ﴾[6]; “Indeed, those who divided their religion and became Shias, you have no concern with them,” it means different groups in religion.
2. The term “Shia” in the terminology of Muslims has been often added to Ali ibn Abi Talib and intended to convey one of two meanings: one is the true linguistic meaning that was intended in the first century, which refers to all those who stood by Ali at the time of conflicts. This meaning has been narrated from the Prophet ; as Umm Salamah, ibn Abbas, Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri, and Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari have narrated that he said: «إِنَّ عَلِيًّا وَشِيعَتَهُ لَهُمُ الْفَائِزُونَ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ»[7]; “Indeed, Ali and his Shias will be saved on the Day of Judgment,” and this refers to his statement about him: «اللَّهُمَّ وَالِ مَنْ وَالَاهُ، وَعَادِ مَنْ عَادَاهُ، وَانْصُرْ مَنْ نَصَرَهُ، وَاخْذُلْ مَنْ خَذَلَهُ، وَأَدِرِ الْحَقَّ مَعَهُ حَيْثُمَا دَارَ»[8]; “O Allah! Take as friends those who take him as a friend, take as enemies those who take him as an enemy, help those who help him, forsake those who forsake him, and make the truth revolve around him wherever it is”; since it is understood from it that the Shias of Ali are all those who took him as a friend and helped him when people took him as an enemy or forsook him. This meaning includes those who refused to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr before Ali pledged allegiance to him, those who suggested pledging allegiance to Ali on the day of the Council before the matter was concluded with Uthman, those who sided with Ali when Uthman was besieged, and all of Ali’s companions in the battles of Jamal, Siffin, and Nahrawan, even though most of them believed in the caliphate of Abu Bakr and Umar before his Caliphate, and the other meaning is the terminological and nominal meaning that has been created in later centuries. It refers to the people of an independent theological and juristic sect that includes a set of correct and incorrect opinions about the Ahl al-Bayt of the Prophet
and is based on defaming and thinking negatively of most of the Sahabah, especially Abu Bakr and Umar, which has been referred to as “Rafd”.
3. There is no doubt that Shia in the first meaning was right; because no one opposed Ali except that the truth was with Ali, and therefore, those who took him as a friend and helped him were on the right path, and those who took him as an enemy or forsook him were on the wrong path. However, Shia in the second meaning does not have such simplicity, but rather it is composed of many beliefs and deeds, some of which are correct and some are incorrect, and therefore, it cannot be considered entirely true or false. In other words, Shi‘ism as a theological and juristic sect is a newly-created thing, and like all other newly-created sects, it cannot be generally affirmed or refuted, but rather each of its beliefs and deeds must be examined individually to determine which ones are true and which one are false. However, Shi‘ism as a political approach is something old and authentic, which emerged on the day of Saqifah Banu Sa‘idah or before that on the last Thursday of the life of the Prophet . It did not have any specific theological or juristic boundaries and included all the helpers of the Ahl al-Bayt in the face of their enemies, regardless of their different beliefs and deeds. Therefore, most of the Shias in the early Islamic periods do not fall within the framework of Shia in the later periods and are not considered Shias in the terminological and nominal meaning; because although they helped the Ahl al-Bayt in the face of their enemies with their wealth and lives, they did not believe in some of the principles and branches of Shias in later periods, in such a manner that if they were alive today, they might not be considered Shias. For this reason, His Eminence Allamah Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani
has explicitly stated in his book Return to Islam that, despite his global invitation toward the Ahl al-Bayt, he is not a Shia in the prevailing meaning[9]; because Shias in the prevailing meaning, with the beliefs and deeds they are known for today, are not equal to Shias who lived during the time of the Prophet
and the time of Ali ibn Abi Talib, but rather they are sometimes more specific than them and sometimes different from them.
4. The axis of the truth and the indicator of guidance in every time is the Caliph of Allah in it. Therefore, the only thing that can divide Muslims into two groups is their approach toward him; meaning that every Muslim who stands by the Caliph of Allah in his time is one of his Shias, and every Muslim who does not stand by the Caliph of Allah in his time is not one of his Shias. The Caliph of Allah in every time is the greatest one of the Ahl al-Bayt in it, and his Shias are the people of the truth and guidance in it, as affirmed by the widely-transmitted statement of the Prophet : «إِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمُ خَلِيفَتَيْنِ: كِتَابَ اللَّهِ وَأَهْلَ بَيْتِي، إِنْ تَمَسَّكْتُمْ بِهِمَا لَنْ تَضِلُّوا بَعْدِي»[10]; “I will leave among you two Caliphs: the Book of Allah and my Ahl al-Bayt; if you hold firmly to them, you will never go astray after me.” Based on this, Shias, who are generally considered the people of the truth and guidance, are all Muslims who stand by the Ahl al-Bayt in the face of their opponents, regardless of their opinions or deeds. In other words, whenever there is a conflict between the Ahl al-Bayt and others, whoever stands by the Ahl al-Bayt is counted as a Shia, and whoever stands by others is counted as a non-Shia. This is an extremely important point that His Eminence Mansoor
has explained in his words; as one of his companions informed us, he said:
«كُنَّا عِنْدَ الْمَنْصُورِ، فَجَرَى ذِكْرُ الشِّيعَةِ، فَقَالَ: لَيْسَ شِيعَةُ أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ مَنْ يَسُبُّ أَبَا بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ، وَلَكِنَّ شِيعَةَ أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ مَنْ إِذَا دُعِيَ إِلَى رَجُلَيْنِ أَحَدُهُمَا مِنْهُمْ وَالْآخَرُ مِنْ غَيْرِهِمْ، مَالَ إِلَى الَّذِي هُوَ مِنْهُمْ وَتَرَكَ الْآخَرَ، ثُمَّ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ: ”اللَّهُمَّ أَهْلُ بَيْتِي أَحَقُّ“»[11]; “We were with Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani, then the Shias were mentioned, so he said: ‘A Shia of the Ahl al-Bayt is not one who reviles Abu Bakr and Umar, but a Shia of the Ahl al-Bayt is one who, whenever he is invited toward two men that one of them is from the Ahl al-Bayt and the other is from other than them, turns to the one who is from them and leaves the other.’ Then he said: ‘The Messenger of Allah said: O Allah! My Ahl al-Bayt are the worthiest.’”
Also, one of his companions informed us, he said:
«سَمِعْتُ الْمَنْصُورَ يَقُولُ: مَنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ مِنْ شِيعَةِ أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ فَلَيْسَ بِمُؤْمِنٍ، قُلْتُ: الشِّيعَةُ؟! وَهَلْ لَقِيتَ مِنْ أَحَدٍ مَا لَقِيتَ مِنَ الشِّيعَةِ؟! فَقَالَ: لَعَلَّكَ تَرَى أَنِّي أُرِيدُ هَؤُلَاءِ السَّفْلَةَ؟! لَا وَاللَّهِ، وَهَلْ هَؤُلَاءِ السَّفْلَةُ إِلَّا قَطِيعٌ مِنَ الثَّعَالِبِ؟! إِنَّمَا شِيعَةُ أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ مَنْ إِذَا صَارَ النَّاسُ حِزْبَيْنِ دَخَلَ فِي حِزْبِ أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ»[12]; “I heard Mansoor say: ‘Whoever is not one the Shias of the Ahl al-Bayt is not a believer.’ I said: ‘The Shias?! And have you faced from anyone what you have faced from the Shias?!’ So he said: ‘Perhaps you think I mean these lowly people?! No, I swear to Allah, and are these lowly people but a flock of foxes?! Indeed, a Shia of the Ahl al-Bayt is one who joins the party of the Ahl al-Bayt when people become two parties.’”
Therefore, all those who stood by Ali during his conflict with Abu Bakr, his conflicts with Talha, Zubair, and Aisha, his conflict with Mu‘awiyah, or his conflict with the Khawarij were Shias, and all those who stood by Hasan ibn Ali during his conflict with Mu‘awiyah were Shias, and all those who stood by Husain ibn Ali during his conflict with Yazid ibn Mu‘awiyah were Shias, and all those who stood by the rest of the Imams from the Ahl al-Bayt during their conflicts with the rulers of their time were Shias, even though they had different opinions regarding their infallibility, the extent of their knowledge and guardianship, their appointment by Allah and His Messenger, or the manner of their acts of worship; because their differences of opinion on these matters after their agreement on standing by them are similar to differences of opinion of scholars from the same sect on scholarly matters, and refer to the difference in their levels of knowledge; as Allah Almighty has said: ﴿نَرْفَعُ دَرَجَاتٍ مَنْ نَشَاءُ ۗ وَفَوْقَ كُلِّ ذِي عِلْمٍ عَلِيمٌ﴾[13]; “We raise in rank whomever We will, and there exists a more knowledgeable person above every possessor of knowledge.” This is what His Eminence Mansoor has explained; as one of his companions informed us, he said:
«سَمِعْتُ الْمَنْصُورَ يَقُولُ: لَيْسَ شِيعَةُ أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ مَنْ يَمْسَحُ رِجْلَيْهِ فِي الْوُضُوءِ وَيُرْسِلُ يَدَيْهِ فِي الصَّلَاةِ، وَلَكِنَّ شِيعَةَ أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ مَنْ إِذَا دُعِيَ إِلَى إِمَامٍ عَادِلٍ مِنْهُمْ لِيَنْصُرَهُ أَجَابَ، وَإِنْ غَسَلَ رِجْلَيْهِ فِي الْوُضُوءِ وَقَبَضَ يَدَيْهِ فِي الصَّلَاةِ»[14]; “I heard Mansoor say: ‘A Shia of the Ahl al-Bayt is not one who wipes his feet in wudu and puts his hands by his sides in prayer, but a Shia of the Ahl al-Bayt is one who, when he is invited toward a just Imam from among them to help him, accepts it, even if he washes his feet in wudu and places one hand on the other in prayer.’”
This means that Shi‘ism, in fact, is not a sect alongside other sects, but rather an umbrella under which each sect can find shelter by giving preference to the Imam of its time from the Ahl al-Bayt over others. Based on this, some of the Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama‘ah in the prevailing meaning may be Shias if they stand by the Imam from the Ahl al-Bayt in their time; such as most of the companions of Ali in the battles of Jamal, Siffin, and Nahrawan, and many of the companions of Husain ibn Ali in Karbala, including Zuhair ibn Qayn who was a follower of Uthman and then joined Husain on his way to Karbala; as a man from the enemies of Husain said to him on the day of Ashura: «مَا كُنْتَ عِنْدَنَا مِنْ شِيعَةِ أَهْلِ هَذَا الْبَيْتِ، إِنَّمَا كُنْتَ عُثْمَانِيًّا، فَمَا لَكَ؟!»; “You were not one of the followers of the people of this house in our opinion. You were a follower of Uthman. What is the matter with you?!” He said: «أَفَلَسْتَ تَسْتَدِلُّ بِمَوْقِفِي هَذَا أَنِّي مِنْهُمْ؟! أَمَا وَاللَّهِ مَا كَتَبْتُ إِلَى الْحُسَيْنِ، وَلَا أَرْسَلْتُ إِلَيْهِ رَسُولًا، وَلَكِنَّ الطَّرِيقَ جَمَعَنِي وَإِيَّاهُ، فَلَمَّا رَأَيْتُهُ ذَكَرْتُ بِهِ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ، وَعَرَفْتُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ غَدْرِكُمْ وَنَكْثِكُمْ وَمَيْلِكُمْ إِلَى الدُّنْيَا، فَرَأَيْتُ أَنْ أَنْصُرَهُ وَأَكُونَ فِي حِزْبِهِ، حِفْظًا لِمَا ضَيَّعْتُمْ مِنْ حَقِّ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ»; “Can you not understand from this approach of mine that I am one of them?! By Allah, I did not write to Husain, nor did I send him a messenger, but the path brought me together with him. When I saw him, I was reminded of the Messenger of Allah and I knew that he [Husain] was heading toward your treachery, your breach of promise, and your inclination toward the world. So I decided to help him and be in his party to preserve the right of the Messenger of Allah that you have violated.’”[15] Therefore, he was undoubtedly a Shia of the Ahl al-Bayt, as he helped Husain and was in his party, even though he was not counted as one of the Shias in the prevailing meaning because of his opinion of Uthman. Also, some of the Shias in the prevailing meaning may not be Shias if they do not stand by the Imam from the Ahl al-Bayt in their time; such as many of the people of Kufa in the time of Hasan and Husain who forsook them, and most of those who claim to be Shias in our time while they do not answer Mansoor’s invitation toward the Mahdi and stand by their rulers and elders; as His Eminence Mansoor
has explained it in one of his sayings and said: «كَذَبَ مَنْ زَعَمَ أَنَّهُ مِنْ شِيعَةِ عَلِيٍّ وَهُوَ يَتَشَيَّعُ لِغَيْرِ الْمَهْدِيِّ»[16]; “He who claims that he is one of the Shias of Ali while he sides with anyone other than the Mahdi is lying!” Also, one of his companions informed us, he said:
«دَخَلْتُ عَلَى الْمَنْصُورِ مَسَاءَ يَوْمٍ، فَسَأَلْتُهُ عَنِ الْمَهْدِيِّ كَيْفَ أَمْسَى؟ فَقَالَ: أَلَا وَاللَّهِ لَقَدْ أَمْسَى وَمَا أَحَدٌ أَعْدَى لَهُ مِمَّنْ يَنْتَحِلُ مَوَدَّتَهُ! ثُمَّ قَالَ: إِنَّ مِنَ الْمُتَشَيِّعِينَ لَمَنْ هُوَ شَرٌّ مِنَ الْيَهُودِ وَالنَّصَارَى وَالْمَجُوسِ وَالَّذِينَ أَشْرَكُوا، قُلْتُ: وَالَّذِينَ أَشْرَكُوا؟! قَالَ: نَعَمْ وَاللَّهِ، وَهُمُ الَّذِينَ يَسُبُّونَ الْمَهْدِيَّ! قُلْتُ: سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ! وَمَنْ يَسُبُّ مِنْهُمُ الْمَهْدِيَّ؟! قَالَ: الَّذِينَ يَسُبُّونَنِي وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ أَنِّي أَدْعُوهُمْ إِلَى الْمَهْدِيِّ، فَيَسُبُّونَ بِذَلِكَ الْمَهْدِيَّ»[17]; “I came to Mansoor on the evening of one day, then I asked him about the Mahdi, ‘How has he reached the evening?’ So he said: ‘Know that, I swear to Allah, he has reached the evening while no one is more hostile toward him than one who attributes affection for him to himself!’ Then he said: ‘Indeed, among those who claim to be the Shias there are some who are more evil than Jews, Christians, Magians, and polytheists.’ I said: ‘And polytheists?!’ He said: ‘Yes, I swear to Allah, and they are those who revile the Mahdi!’ I said: ‘Glory be to Allah! Who among them reviles the Mahdi?!’ He said: ‘Those who revile me while they know that I invite them toward the Mahdi, so they revile the Mahdi by doing so.’”
It is understood from here that clinging to the narrations that mention the virtues of Shias to justify whoever is called a Shia today is just an equivocation fallacy, as is clinging to the narrations that reproach Shias to reject whoever is called a Shia; because Shi‘ism in the sense of taking the the Ahl al-Bayt as friends and helping them against their enemies is a true way explained by the Quran and the Sunnah. Whoever is not a Shia in this sense is in manifest error and may even be considered a hypocrite. However, Shi‘ism in the sense of a theological and juristic sect that has specific principles and branches is not something simple and fixed so that it would require a simple and fixed judgment, but rather it is something complex that has changed over the centuries and its people have differed greatly in it. Therefore, it cannot be considered entirely true or false.
For more information on this, refer to “Ten sayings from His Eminence about sects and the fact that he is a true Muslim and is not considered a Shia or Sunni in the common meanings”, “Twelve sayings from His Eminence about the Shias,” and “Ten sayings from His Eminence about putting the Ahl al-Bayt first and stating that putting them first is not rafd, but rafd is charging the Sahabah with disbelief or reviling them”.