When I want to relax, I watch movies. Since I just want to relax, my favorite
movies tend to be the senseless ones, especially starred by Clint Eastwood. I especially like Clint Eastwood because he
is the type who would shoot first, asks later.
One of Clint Eastwood’s movies that I like is “The
Good, The Bad, The Ugly.” If you're used to
watch this movie, then you would probably agree that this is quite a senseless
movie. But I like it because the movie is
full of intrigues, betrayals and violence.
In many ways, the history of Shia and Shiism is
pretty much like this movie. It is full
of intrigues, betrayals and violence.
Furthermore, some of the ideas being promoted are quite senseless. Like the title of this movie, one would see that
among the Shias, there are The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.
Let’s see which one is which.
There are many variations among the Shias, but we
can simply categorize them into three main categories: Zaydiyah, Imamiyah and Ismailiyah.
Shia Zaydiyah gets their name from Zayd bin Ali
Zaynal Abidin, the grandson of Al-Husayn.
As Zayd is considered as their fifth and last Imam, this Shia sect is
also known as the Fivers. Shia Imamiyah
is the term given to those who believe in the twelve rightful Imams. For that reason, they are also known as the Twelvers. Shia Ismailiyah is also known as the Seveners,
because their last Imam, Ismail bin Jaafar Sadiq, was the seventh.
All Shia groups, including these three which have
survived until our times, formulate the concept of Imamate as their central doctrine. Imamate is the concept of rightful Imams or
successors to the Prophet. In other
words, they believe that after the death of the Prophets, the Muslim Ummah
should be ruled by these respective Imams.
These three groups agree on the first four Imams,
but after that they diverge. The first
four are Ali bin Abu Talib, Al-Hassan and Al-Husayn (both the sons of Ali), and
Ali Zaynal Abidin, the son of Al-Husayn.
Although all of them are known as Shias, they are
quite a pole apart in their outlooks.
Zaydiyah is the closest to the Sunnis in every
aspect. They differ only with the Sunnis
in the matter of leadership. While the
Sunnis believe that any pious, knowledgeable and capable Muslim can be the
leader or the caliph, the Shia Zaydiyah believe that he has to come from Ahl al
Bayt (The Household of the Prophet), especially from the House of Ali. They, however, do not revile the caliphs who
came before Ali, such as Abu Bakar, Umar and Uthman. They do not even consider these three caliphs
as usurpers, but instead hold them in highest regard.
As we have seen in the last entry, Zayd had led the revolt against the House of
Umayyah. Many of his followers, however,
were either cowards or extremists. The
cowards left him and joined the House of Umayyah. The
extremists, on the other hand, had demanded him to renounce and curse the
companions whom they claimed had denied Ali from his Imamate, especially Abu
Bakar and Umar.
Zayd, however, had refused to curse the Two
Chiefs (Abu Bakar and Umar) as well as other companions, because he held all of
them in high regard. They betrayed and rejected him for his refusal. In return, he called them Rafidis, or the
Rejecters. Zayd called them Rafidis not
so much because they had rejected him, but because they had rejected the
majority of the Companions.
It should also be mentioned that the revolt led
by Zayd was supported by many leading personalities at that time, including the
celebrated Abu Hanifah, the founder of Hanafi’s School of Thought (Mazhab).
Abu Hanifah was jailed for that support.
After Zayd was killed in 740 CE, his followers,
known as the Shias, continued their opposition until the House of Umayyah was
finally toppled in 750 CE. The seat of
power, however, was snatched by their cousins from the House of Abbas
(Abbasiyah). They continued the
struggle and often gained sympathy and support from the leading personalities
of those times, including As-Shafie, the founder of Shafie’s Mazhab and the
first to develop the Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence (Usul Fiqh).
Many other scholars in those days also had a Shi’ite
tendency, supporting the struggle of the Shias and giving prominent to Ali as
compared to other companions. Many of
their views have reached us, giving the impression that the Shias are the good
guys.
The fact of the matter is that these Shias were
the good guys. They had the tendency to
uphold justice and fight against tyranny.
While others in their days went with the motto that the leader has the
right to be obeyed, even if he is a tyrant, these Shias considered a tyrannical
leader is to be opposed and ousted.
In other aspects, they were pretty much like the
Sunnis. They essentially believe in what
the Sunnis believe, and adopt the Sunni’s School of Thoughts for their Sharia
(Islamic Law), although most of them nowadays belong to Hanafi’s Mazhab.
Due to their similarity with the Sunnis, they constitute only the small
minority among those we call Shias, numbering perhaps not more than five
percent of the total Shias. They are not
even considered as Shias by the majority of the Shias, but a branch of Sunni.
For the reasons enumerated above, the Zaydiyah
are considered as the acceptable Shias.
They are The Good.
Those who had rejected Zayd and the majority
of the Companions, the Rafidis, as we have narrated, went looking for other
descendants of Ali to be their Imams.
Since they carried with them the concept of Imamate, and since the Imam
can only come from the House of Ali, many Rafidi groups were then created,
based on which descendants of Ali they chose as their Imams. The most important and the lasting ones are
the Twelvers and the Seveners, or Imamiyah and Ismailiyah, respectively.
It should be mentioned that Zayd and those who had
supported him simply said that the Imamate or Caliphate should be from the
House of Ali, but they did not denounce the Rightly Guided Caliphs, nor the
Companions. The Rafidis, however, had gone
to the extreme.
The Imamiyah, or the Twelvers, claimed that the
Imams were divinely appointed by God, as told in the Quran, according to their
warp interpretation. They claimed that
the names of these Imams had been communicated by the Prophet to Ali
privately. This succession of Imamate,
starting from Ali to the Twelfth Imam, had occurred continuously, one after
another.
It may be pointed out that their Twelfth Imam,
Muhammad Al-Mahdi, the son of Hassan Al-Askari, had died young; or according to
them, Al-Mahdi had disappeared. Because
he died or disappeared during his youth, he had no progeny, being unmarried
while he was alive. From this, we can
see why the number of their Imams had to be twelve. If Muhammad Al-Mahdi had left a son, the
number of their Imams would have been more.
Since Al-Mahdi had died young, these Rafidis had
to develop the theory of his disappearance.
They said he did not die, but lived in occultation (ghayb), pretty much like Jesus Christ. He would come back and rule the world as the
much awaited Imam Mahdi. In the
meantime, in his occultation, he deputized the Imamate to whoever was leading
the group at that moment in time (including our time, since he does not yet
appear).
Furthermore, since they rejected the majority of
the Companions, they likewise had to reject most of the ahadith (Prophetic Traditions) that came to us. This is only logical, because those ahadith came to us through the
Companions. Since the details of Sharia came
from ahadith or the Sunnah of the
Prophet, they had to make one to replace what they had rejected. Thus they concocted a list of ahadith and attributed these to the
Imams of their choice especially Imam Jaafar Sadiq. Imam Jaafar Sadiq was the son of Muhammad
Al-Baqir. He was the great grandson of
Al-Husayn as well as the nephew of Zayd bin Zaynal Abidin, the founder of Shia
Zaydiyah.
Thus, while Zaydiyah can hardly be distinguished
from the Sunnis, the Imamiyah tend to have their own somewhat distinct
feature. While outwardly they still
retain most of Islamic beliefs and rituals, the Imamiyah mix these with their
own peculiar set of beliefs and rituals, which make them problematic.
All in all, they are The Bad.
Another group of Shia that lasted until our time
is the Ismailiyah. This group gets their
name from Ismail, the son of Jaafar Sadiq.
They are noted for their peculiar belief in Ali’s divinity,
esoteric interpretation of the Quran, and the mystical outlook on just about everything. They branched off into many sects and
denominations, among the prominent ones that lasted until our times are the Alawid,
the Druze and the Nizari.
Their beliefs are mystical and strange. It is difficult to consider them Muslims at
all. For instance, their belief in Ali’s
Divinity is pretty much the way the Christians believe about Jesus. Most of them also believe in reincarnation
like the Hindus. They also have traces
of Zoroaster’s beliefs, in addition to the mythical Greek or European belief in
demigod. In general, their ideas are so heretical
that they would probably not constitute much of a threat to the Muslims at
large, except to those with heretical leaning.
In short, they are The Ugly.
To recap, we have among the Shias those who are
acceptable, problematic and heretical.
Borrowing the Clint Eastwood’s movie, there are The Good, The Bad and
The Ugly among them.
Shia Zaydiyah are largely acceptable; they are
The Good. Shia Imamiyah are more
problematic; they are The Bad. Shia
Ismailiyah meanwhile border on heresy; they are the Ugly.
Nowadays, when we talk about Shia and Shiism, we
generally refer to Imamiyah, for they constitute the majority, about 80 percent
or more of them. Ismailiyah come a far
second while Zaydiyah constitute only a tiny minority.
In the beginning, the Zaydiyah actually
constituted the majority among the Shias.
It is not difficult to see why they are the tiny minority now. Being largely indistinguishable from the
majority of the Ummah who followed the Sunnah of the Prophet and his Companions,
most of them returned to the fold of Ahl al Sunnah (Sunnis). Some of them were forced to follow the
Imamiyah while the few who still feel nostalgic about the right of Ali and his
descendants continue to remain as Shias.
Being the dominant group, and due to their missionary
nature, the threat of Shiism largely comes from Shia Imamiyah. They make it their habit to actively propagate
their ideas to unsuspecting but ignorant Muslims all over the world. For that reason, there is a need to know who and
what their teachings are. Without
knowing who they are and what are their teachings, one could fall into their
propaganda, as many already do.
In the next few installments, I shall try to highlight
some of their teachings, insyaAllah.
Stay tuned.
A very good info! Syabas!
ReplyDelete