لطفا منتظر باشید ...
Introduction
Some scholars who study Shiism describe it as a phenomenon
that is incidental to Islamic society. They observe the Shi segment within the
body of the Islamic community precisely in its quality of a segment, one that
first came into being, through the passage of time, as a result of specific
societal events and developments, leading to the intellectual and doctrinal
formation of one part only within the larger body; a part which gradually
broadened later. [4] Beyond this assumption, these scholars differ as to the
particular events and developments that led to the rise of such a phenomenon.
Some assume that Abd Allah b. Saba' [5] and his alleged
political activity were at the origin of the rise of the Shiite bloc. Others
trace the phenomenon of Shiism back to the era of Imam Ali's Caliphate and
whatever political and social circumstances had taken shape within the pale of
events of the time. Still others claim that, within the historical sequence of
the Islamic community, the appearance of the Shiites occurred through still
later events than these. [6]
As far as I can tell, what has prompted many of these
scholars to believe that Shiism was a phenomenon merely incidental to Islamic
society is precisely that the Shiites of early Islam represented but a tiny
portion of the Ummah. This fact may have inspired the feeling that what
was not Shii must have then been the predominant pattern in Islamic society,
and that Shi'ism was the exception, an accidental phenomenon whose causes can
be discovered through developments relating to the opposition to the dominant
order.
But to consider either numerical majority or relative
minority as grounds enough for distinguishing the dominant order from the
exception, or the original root from the schism, lacks logical rigour. It is
incorrect to describe "non-Shi'ism" as dominant simply on the
basis of a numerical majority; and,
based on numerical inferiority, to relegate "Shi'ism" to an incidental
phenomenon and the idea of schism. That would not agree with the nature of
credal divisions, since many divisions can remain within the fold of a single
message and arise only through the differences attending the process of
definining certain of the message's features. No two credal divisions ever have
numerical equivalence, although both sides may at bottom be seeking to express
the same message on whose nature they disagree.
Hence, under no circumstances can we build our conception
upon a credal division between Shi'ism and other currents within the Islamic
Mission [7] based on numbers alone; just as we may not link the birth of the
Shi'i thesis, as it occurs within the framework of the Islamic Mission, with
the advent of the word "Shi'ites" or "Shi'ism" taken as a technical
term or proper noun for a clearly defined group among the Muslims. This is
because the advent of names and technical terms is one thing, and the
development of the content, the actual current and the thesis are another. If
we cannot find the word "Shiites" [8] in current usage at the time of
God's Messenger, or immediately following his death, this does not mean that
the Shiite current and thesis did not exist.
With this frame of mind, then, let us turn to the issue of
"Shiism" and "Shiites" in order to answer the following
two questions:
What is the origin of Shi'ism?
How did the Shi'ites emerge?
[4] See Dr. Kamil Mustafa al-Shaybi, al-Silah bayna al-tasawwuf wal-tashajyu; I:11-14, where he presents the
views of many ancient and contemporary investigators into the origin and
evolution of Shi'ism. He also states that some of them differentiate between
political and spiritual (i.e. doctrinal) Shiism. See Dr. Mustafa al-Shakah,
Islam bila madhahib, p. 153; and
Dr. Diya' al-Din al-Rayyis, al-Nazariyyat
al-siyasiyyah al islamiyyah,
p. 69.
[5] See Dr. Mahmud Jabir Abd al-Al, Harakat al-Shiah al-mutatarrafin
ma atharuhum fi al-hayat al-ijtimiyyah, p. 19. This claim is ascribed to
some Muslim historians. However, al-Al points out that this was rejected
by Bernard Lewis, the well-known Orientalist. Wellhausen and Friedlander,
two of the biggest scholars in the field, are quoted as saying, "Ibn Saba'
was fabricated by those who came later in time." Dr. Taha Husayn, in his al-Fitnah al-kubra, II:327, says: "The Shiites' opponents exaggerated the issue of Ibn
Saba' in order to defame Ali and his followers." He added that We find no
mention of Ibn Saba' in any of the important sources ...He is not mentioned in
Baladhuris Ansab al-ashraf, but
is in Tabari's Tarikh, as reported by
Sayf b. Umar al-Tamimi About this Sayf, though, Ibn Hayyan said that
"He related forgeries and was said to fabricate hadiths himself." Al-Hakim stated that he was accused of
heresy, and that his hadiths were omitted. See Ibn Hajar, Tadhhib al-tadhbib IV:260. Concerning the legend of Abd Allah b. Saba, see Allamah
Murtadha alAskari's book, Abd Allah b.
Saba'.
[6] See al-Shaybi al-Silah
bayna al-tasawwuf wal-tashayyu; Dr. Abd Allah Fayyad, Ta'rikh al-Imamiyyah wa aslafihim min
al-Shi'ah; Dr. Mustafa al-Shakah, Islam bila madhahib, p.
152ff; Dr. Diya' al-Din
al-Rayyis, al Nazarijyat al-siyasiyyah
al-islamiyyah, p. 72ff.
[7] Indeed, it is consistent neither with ordinary logic nor
with the logic of the Holy Qur'an. In numerous places, the Qur'an mostly, if
not always, censures the majority, and praises the few in as many places. For
instance, God says: "And yet most are not wont to be thankful..."
(Qur'an 27:73 "al-Naml"). God also says: "... but a few of
my servants are grateful" (34:13 "al-Saba"); "...and many people are
sinful" (5:52 "al Maidah")...Those
are they who are brought near in the Gardens of Delight, a party from those of
old and a few from those who have come later" (56:11-4 "al-waqiah"). This is one aspect. The other is that
the Holy Qur'an informs us in many places that those who adhere to Truth and to
God's Messengers, and are directed by Divine teachings, are always fewer in
comparison to those who headstrongly resist the truth. God says: "Most of
them dislike the truth..." (23:70 "al-Mu'minun"); "Yet no faith will the greater
part of mankind have, however ardently thou dost desire it" (12:103 "Yusuf"). In every case, there is allusion to the
invalidity of relying on the standards of the majority in order to evaluate the
correctness of a trend or an opinion. See Muhammad Fuad Abd al-Baqi, al-Mujam
al-mufahris li-alfaz al-Qur'an, p. 597ff.
[8] It appears that the Imam is proffering this by way of
humbleness and tolerance; otherwise there are prophetic hadiths which utter the word "Shi'ism" in connection with
Ali. It is said in Ibn Manzur's Mukhtasar
Tar'ikh Ibn Asaki'r (XVII:384) that Ali uttered: "The Prophet
told me [May God bless him and his Household [you and your followers [shiatuka] are in the Garden of Paradise." But there is another account
by Jabir (XVIII:14). Cf. Ibn al-Athir, al-Nihayah IV:106 ("Madat
qamh"): "You and your followers [shiatuka] will be pleased and pleasing..." - addressed to Ali.
