Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Alhassanain (p) Network for Islamic Heritage and Thought

Shiism and Its Types during the Early Centuries

Development of the term 'Shi'a'. Iraqi Shi'ism. Shi'ism as the love of the Ahlul Bayt. Creedal Shi'ism.

Authors(s): Rasul Ja'fariyan

www.alhassanain.org/english

Table of Contents

[Introduction] 3

Preface 4

Iraqi Shi ism 8

Shi ism in the Sense of Love of Ahl al-Bayt 13

Creedal Shi`ism 16

Notes 39

[Introduction]

This is the first part, entitled “Gunneh-ha-ye mukhtalif-a Tashayyu'wa `awamil-e gustarish-e an,” from the author's study on the history of Shi`ism in Iran until the Safavid era, Ta'rikh-a Tashayyu' dariran , az aghaz ta qarn-e dahum-e hijri (Qum: Intisharat-a Ansariyan, 1375/ [1996])

Preface

The literal meaning of shi 'ah is follower and supporter, and only when accompanied by a qualifier that does it signify the followers of a certain person. During the days when the word was used only in its common literal sense it was usually used along with the names of Ali (`a), 'Uthman or Mu'awiyah. Hence there would be the “shi'ah of Ali,” the “shi'ah of `Uthman” and the “shi`ah of Mu'awiyah.”

After some time the word shi'ah came to be used specifically as a term for the followers of Imam Ali ( `a) and during this period the article “al' in the word “al-shi`ah” clearly denoted the followers of the Ahl al-Bayt ('a). It is difficult to determine the exact time since when the term al-shi'ah acquired currency as a name for the followers of Imam Ali ('a).

1

Perhaps the letter written, on the occasion martyrdom of Imam Hasan ('a), by the Shi'is of Kufah under the lead of Sulayman ibn Surad as a message of condolence to Imam Husayn ('a) is the earliest documented instance of its use as a term. Ya'qubi has cited the text of this letter. In it the Sh'is of Kufah wrote:

ما أعظم ما أصيب به هذه الأمة عامة و أنت و هذه الشيعة خاصة

“How great is [the calamity] which has struck this ummah in general ('ammah), you, and the Shi'ah in particular (khassah)!”2

Here, one may as well note the use of the word 'ammah as a kind of term used in opposition to khassah as the term for the Shi'ah.

Another point which is important for understanding the development of the term shi'ah is to know whom it excluded. In other words, who were those who stood in contradistinction to the Shi`ah of Ali. There is indisputable evidence provided by older and recent researchthat there existed two distinct factions during the era of the Messenger of God (S). The first consisted of the Quraysh who were not on good terms with the Banu Hashim since before the advent of Islam. The second faction was that of the supporters of Ali consisting of the Hashimis and their supporters from among the Muhajirin and the Ansar, such as Abu Dharr, Ammar, Miqdad and Salman.

Al-Farsi concedes the existence of these two factions before the episode of Saqifah.3 The extent of their political differences, which had religious roots from the very beginning, increased with time. For instance, some of the Companions from the very early days did not recognize a role for the Prophet's Sunnah by the side of the Qur'an.

This belief was the important characteristic of the Qurayshi faction. Denial of the religious authority of the Prophet's prescriptions and prohibition on the writing and narration of hadith are clearly visible elements in the stance of the leaders of this faction right from the Prophet's days.

Without doubt one can say that the Companions of the Prophet (S) formed two different groups from this angle: those who believed in the necessity of following the Prophet (S) in all aspects and those who did not consider it obligatory to follow the Prophet (S) in matters relating to government and political affairs. The pre-Islamic influence of the Quraysh, along with other factors, led the latter group to acquire power.

A little later when Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf laid down the condition that he would deliver the office of the caliphate to the candidate who would follow the practice (sirah) of the Shaykhayn (i.e. Abu Bakr and 'Umar) and Imam Ali insisted that he would base his policy only on the Qur'an, the sirah of the Prophet and his own judgments (ijtihad) it was obvious that the religious difference was gradually expanding.

Until the time when `Umar was in the office of the caliphate, the generality of people, excepting the followers of Imam Ali, followed the decrees (fatwa) of the State, not attaching much significance to the difference that existed at that time between the practice of the Prophet (S) and that of others.

But when `Uthman, besides allegations of political and financial misdemeanor, was accused of acts that were considered to be religiously deviant (bid'ah) and he was challenged by a large number of Companions, the problem arose as to whom the people should regard as a competent religious authority. In other words, who were they to emulate?

If we note that it was the opponents of the Qurayshi faction who led the movement against `Uthman, we can understand better the connection between differences on political and religious issues.

'Uthman was killed at the end of 35 H. /656 and Ali assumed the duties of caliphate.Now the leader of the anti-Qurayshi faction, who incidentally had no role in the revolt against `Uthman and whose counsel went unheeded by the extremists, had assumed the office of the caliphate.

From the very beginning, Syria, which led one wing of the Qurayshi faction, did not recognize his caliphate. Other leaders of the Qurayshi faction were Talhah and Zubayr who were also disgruntled with the rule of Imam Ali ('a). They made Basrah their base and as a consequence of this rebellion the Imam was compelled to shift his capital to Kufah. In Madinah itself a number of Companions, albeit very small, refused to give allegiance to the Imam. They were the `neutralists' (Qa'idin).

Aside from political issues, an important problem was the clarification of religious issues concerning controversial matters especially in relation to emergent issues. It was for this reason that two political and, as a consequence, religious factions emerged. There were those who accepted Imam Ali's religious authority and considered it a religious obligation to follow him; they were those who were not acceptable to the `Uthmanid party now represented by Syria and Basrah.

The second group consisted of those who were not prepared to accept the Imam's rule and opposed him with the motive of avenging `Uthman's death. All that which went into forming the attitudes of the opponents, acquiring a more developed form in the course of time, came to be called the `Uthmani creed. This creed stood in contrast to the `Alawid faction to which the term Shi`ah came to be applied shortly afterwards.

During the developments of the period of the Imam's caliphate, a group became the followers and supporters of Imam M and gradually came to be called al-Shi'ah or Shi'is. As against them a group of people became partisans of `Uthman and the `Uthmanid faction and they came to be known as al-'Uthmaniyyah or 'Uthmanis. For this reason the `Uthmaniyyah became the name for the religious approach that opposed Shi`ism.

In the course of time it came to represent the religion of the common people who took their religious beliefs and practices from the Umayyad rulers. The Umayyads considered themselves as the continuation of the earlier caliphs and considered Imam Ali ('a) as standing in contradistinction to them.

During this period, the term shi'ah generally stood in contrast to the term 'Uthmaniyyah. However, the term shi'ah was not used in a univocal sense in all its applications. Among the “Shi`is” there were those who were named so merely because they were against 'Uthman and supported the Imam as the legitimate caliph.Many of them also accepted the preceding caliphs and, as will be seen, they too were called `Shi'is' by extremist `Uthmanis.

However, among these undifferentiated Shi`is there were those who considered the Imamate as the sole right of Imam Ali ('a) as someone who had been appointed by the Prophet (S) to that office which they viewed as vested with a kind of Divine right. They did not consider it necessary to refrain from cooperating with the earlier caliphs, for the Imam himself had maintained silence in those circumstances for the sake of Islam, as was repeatedly pointed out by him.

In the course of their support of the `Uthmani creed, the Umayyads basically did not recognize the caliphate of Imam Ali ('a), and they propagated this notion throughout the greater part of Muslim society. However, this attitude did not find many supporters in Iraq, with the exception of Basrah. On the contrary, whenever there arose any opportunity the Iraqis would display, on the political scene, their belief in the right of the Alawids.

Beside the Shi'i and the 'Uthmani tendencies, there was a third one which related to the so-called Qa'idin, and Nashi' Akbar considers them as consisting of two groups with two different tendencies. According to him, one of them was the Hulaysiyyah, who believed that one should withdraw into political seclusion during tines of social turmoil (fitnah). They considered both the warring groups as misguided and destined for hell, and considered keeping aloof (qu'ud) from war as piety (din) and entry into it as `fitnah.'Abd Allah ibn `Umar, Muhammad ibn Muslimah and Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas belonged to this group.

The second group of the Qa'idin was that of the “Mu'tazilah” who believed that one of the two warring groups was in the right but it could not be clearly identified. Abu Musa Ash'ari, Abu Said Khudri and Abu Mas'ud Ansari belonged to this group. According to Nashi' Akbar, they were the ones who were known as Mu'tazilah, and later on Wasil ibn Ata' and Amr ibn `Ubayd had a similar attitude regarding Talhah and Zubayr.4

An important concept employed by these two groups in their analysis of the state of affairs was that of fttnah, and they believed that during times of fitnah “it is better for one to be among those who get killed rather than being one of the killers.”5 The Hijaz did not take sides in the conflict between the pro-Alid and pro-Umayyad parties, but it staged a movement which may be called “the movement of the Companion's descendants” (abna' al-sahabah).

Iraqi Shi ism

With attention to what has been stated it may be said that in the early Islamic centuries the term Shi'ism (tashayyu') had a wider meaning than is current today. The term ‘tashayyu' today would be referred to in the old jargon of the `Uthmanis as `Rafd.' In that period the term Shi `ah in its general use was applied to those who preferred Imam Ali ('a) to `Uthman.

In addition those who preferred him to the other two caliphs or basically believed in his Imamate and that of his descendants were also called `Shi`ah.' In the sense of a general tendency a `Shi'ah' was someone who preferred Imam 'Ali to the other caliphs, while a `Rafidi' was someone who rejected the caliphate of Abu Bakr and `Umar and believed in the Imamate of Imam 'Ali ('a) as something ordained by God. `Shi`ism' in the above sense of a general tendency may be called `Iraqi Shi'ism.'

The Sunni’s viewpoint is, giving preference to Imam Ali ('a) over `Uthman which has been considered a heretical belief (bid'ah).6 Some extreme Sunnis are even of the view that such a preference of the Imam over `Uthman is rafd. Hence they have said, `Someone who says, “Abu Bakr, `Umar, Ali and then `Uthman” (in a descending order or merit) is a rafidi or a heretic (mubtadi).7

The people of Kufah were Shi'ah as they accepted this descending order of merit for the caliphs (Ahl al-Kufah yaqulun: Abu Bakrwa 'Umar wa 'Ali).8 It was said about the people of Wasit that they were Shi'ah (kana 'ammatu ahl a-Wasit yatashayyi'un).9 It is stated in Masail al-Imamah that the Ahl al-Hadith from among the Kufans, such as Waki' ibn Jarrah and Fadl ibn Dukayn, were `Shi'is' because they believed in Ali's merit over `Uthman and considered Ali's caliphate to be legitimate (Yaz'amuna anna afdal al-nas bad al-Nabi [s] Abu Bakr thummah 'Umar thumma 'Ali, thumma 'Uthman, yuqaddimuna Aliyan 'ala 'Uthman wa hadha tashayyu' ashab al-hadith min al-Kufiyyin wa yuthbituna imamata 'Ali).

As against this viewpoint was that of the Ahl al-Hadith of Basrah who preferred `Uthman to Imam Ali, followed by the rest of the participants of the council (shura) constituted by 'Umar (afdal al-ummah bad al-Nabi [s] Abu Bakr, thumma 'Umar thumma 'Uthman, thumma 'Ali, thumma yasuwwuna bayna baqiyyat al-shura). This was the case at a time when the leading scholars (mashayiq) of Ahl al-Hadith at Baghdad basically did not accept the caliphate of Imam Ali ('a) (wa amma mashayikh: ashab al-hadith min al-Baghdaiyyin fa innahum la yuthbituna imamata 'Ali; minhum Ibn Main wa Abu Khaythamah, wa Muhammad ibn Hanbal, kanu yahdhifuna Aliyan min al-imamah wa yaz'amuna anna wilayatahu kanat ftnah).10

Another witness is that of Yahya ibn Main, one of the prominent figures of the Ahl al-Hadith during the 3rd/9th century: He is cited as having said: “I say: Abu Bakr, `Umar,then `Uthman.”11 Ahmadibn Hanbal was somewhat moderate and he would say “We do not find fault with someone who considers Ali as the fourth caliph” (la nu'ibu man rabba'a bi Ali).12 In this regard there were many who were opposed to Ahmad ibn Hanba1.13

It appears that towards the end of his life Ahmad ibn Hanbal had become firmer in his belief in the legitimacy of the caliphate of Ali ('a) as the fourth caliph, and accordingly he would say that someone who did hot consider Ali as the fourth caliph was more is error than an. ass (man lam yurabbi' bi Aliyin fa-huwa adallu min himari ahlih).14 Someone who found fault with Mu'awiyah and Amr ibn `As was presumed to be a rafidi.15 Ahmad ibn Hanbal was told about someone who preferred Ali ('a) to Abu Bakr and `Umar.

He disapproved of such a belief and said, “I fear that he might be a rafidi” (Akhshaan yakuna rafidiyan).16 Ahmad ibn Hanbal's son says, “I asked my father as to who the rafidis were. He replied, `It is someone who abuses and curses Abu Bakr and `Umar (al-ladhi yashtumuwa yasubbu Aba Bakrin wa 'Umar).' “17 In connection with the meaning of rafd one may refer to the forgeries that have been attributed to the Prophet (S) concerning the rawafid.18

An important term that must be considered for explanation of a significant part of Shi'i inclinations during this period is that of “Iraqi Shi'is.” This name applies to those who despite their Shi`i inclinations and their narration of the virtues and merits (fada'il) of the Ahl al-Bayt and hostility towards the Umayyads-and later on towards the Abbasids-do not belong to any of the Shi'i sects, including Zaydi, Imami and the Isma'ili sects.

Certainly individuals of this type could be Mu`tazilites, but this name does not describe all of them and it might be said that there were those who were `Iraqi Shi'is' without being Mu'tazilis. In view of the large number of this type of persons among Iraqi traditionists (muhaddithin) it must be said that this is an acceptable name for them which solves the problem of explaining the religious tendency of this type of individuals.

In any case, it should be noted that while referring to Shi`ism of Kufah, or basically to that of Iraq, it must be made clear whether the individual or tendency concerned is of the type associated with mere preference (tafdil) for Imam Ali ('a) over `Uthman or that of Shi'ism in its doctrinal Imami sense.

There were many in Kufah who were Shi'is only in the former sense and were very attached to the Ahl al-Bayt and many of them were narrators of the fada'il of Imam Ali and other figures of the Ahl al-Bayt. These persons must not be considered Sunnis in its technical sense although many of them consider the first two caliphs to have been legitimate. In other words, their narrations must be studied with attention to their strong Shi'i inclinations.

Naturally, the `Uthmaniyyah, who were the progenitors of the later Sunnis, had a character different from that of this group and they were not on good terms with one another. It is for this reason that in rijal works of the Ahl al-Hadith and the Hanbalis the allegation of tashayyu', in the sense of narration of the fada'il of the Ahl al-Bayt, is considered one of the marks of discredit (qadh). They are “Iraqi Shi`is” whose names are not mentioned in Shi`i works of rijal.

Nevertheless, many of these persons have been considered trustworthy (thiqah) narrators by staunch Hanbalis and writers belonging to Ahl al-Hadith. For instance, concerning Dawud ibn Abi Awf, who has been considered a thiqah narrator by Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Yahya ibn Main, it has been said: “He is a Shi`i, and most of what he narrates is concerning the fada'il of the Ahl al-Bayt” (Shi'i, 'ammatu ma yarwihi fi fadi'il Ahl al-Bayt). Thereafter Dhahabi cites an example of his narrations which is a hadith of the Prophet (S) addressed to Ali ('a):

اما انك يابن ابي طالب و شيعتك في الجنه

“O Ibn Abi Talib, indeed you and your shi'ah shall be in paradise.”

Following this hadith is a statement against the rafidis attributed to the Prophet (S).19

Examples of the phrases and statements concerning Shi'is and cited by al-Dhahabi from experts of rijal of early centuries will serve to elucidate the use of the terms shi'ah and rafidi during that era. These expressions become harsher in accordance with the higher degree of the Shi'i tendency of the individual concerned. The expressions cited here are from Dhahabi's Mizan al-i.'tidal and are cited with the related volume and page number.

Concerning 'Ubayd Allah ibn Musa, who was also one of al-Bukhari's teachers (mashayikh), it is said: “a fiery Shi`i” (kana Shi'i mutaharriqa) (iii, 16).

About Adi ibn Thabit it is said, “An extremist Shi`i, an extremist rafidi” (Shi'i mufrit, rafidiyun ghali) (iii, 62).

About Ali' ibn Salih al Taymi al-Kufi: “A mellowed Shi`i” (kana min 'atq al-shi'ah) (iii, 101).

Concerning Ala' ibn Abi al-Abbas it is said: “An extreme Shi`i” (Shi'i ghali) (iii, 102).

Concerning Ali ibn Thabit al-Jazari it is said: “He was one of the confirmed Shi'is, but does not go to the extremes” (kana min man yaskunu fi tashyyu'ihiwa la yaghlu) (iii, 116).

Concerning Ali ibn Musa al-Simsar it is said: “In him are Shi'i leanings tending towards rafd” (fihi tashayyu' yafdiila al-rafd) (iii, 158).

Concerning Ali ibn Hashim ibn Burayd it is said: “He was extreme in his Shi`i leanings” (kana mufritan fi al-tashayyu) (iii, 160).

About Amr ibn Shamir al-Ju`fi it is said: “a rafidi who reviles the Companions” (rafidiyyun yashtammu al-sahabah) (iii, 368).

About `Isa ibn Qirtas it is said, “He was one of the extremists in rafd' (kana min al-ghulat fi al-rafd) (iii, 322).

About `Isa ibn Mihran al-Musta'tif it is said, “a rafidi, a monstrous liar, fiery in his rafd, was one of tile devils of the rafidis and their leaders” (rafidi, kadhdhab jabal, muhtariq fi al-rafd, kana min shayatin al-rafidah wa maraddatihim) (iii, 324). Najashi has also mentioned him.20

Concerning Fudayl ibn Marzuq al-Kufi it is said: “He possessed Shi'i leanings but did not revile [the three caliphs” (kana yatashayyi ' min ghayri sabb) (iii, 362).

Concerning Fitr ibn Khalifah it is said, “Fitr was considered trustworthy by Yahya ibn Main, but he was an extreme khashabi.21 “ ( kana Fitru 'inda Yahya thiqah, wa lakinnahu khashabiyyun mufrit) (iii, 364).

Concerning Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, the famous historian, it is said: “He had mild Shi'i leanings and an attachment for the Ahl al-Bayt which is not harmful” (fihi tashayyu' yasirwa muwalat la tadur) (iii, 498).

Sunni scholars and traditionalists were accused of Shi'i tendencies on the slightest grounds. For instance, Daraqutni was accused of Shi'i inclinations merely for collecting the diwans of poets including that of Sayyid Himyari.22

The following remark is made about Sayyid Murtada, the great Shi'i scholar: “A staunch rafidi” (Shi'i jald) (iii, 523).

Concerning Zurarah ibn Ayan, an eminent Shi'i figure, it is said: “He practised rafd” (kana yatrafad) (ii, 68).

Of Salim ibn Abi Hafasah, an Imami, it is said, 'An extremist in tashayyu', he used to say, “O assassin of Na'thal (i.e. `Uthman), I am at your service! O destroyer of Banu Umayyah, I am at your service!” He was one of the leaders of the detractors of Abu Bakr and `Umar” (mufrit fi al-tashayyu' yaqul: Labbayka qatila Na'thal, labbayka muhlik Bani Umayyah,wa kana min ru'us man yatanaqqasu Aba Bakr wa 'Umar) (ii, 110).

Concerning Abbad ibn Abd al-Samad, who is referred to as ghali fi al-tashayyu', it is stated, “Most of his narrations are about the fada'il' ('ammatu and yarwihi fi al fada'il) (ii, 369).

Concerning Abbad ibn Ya'qub it is stated, “He is one of exreme Shi'is, a leader of heresy”. He would abuse the forebears and `Uthman and he would say, `God is too just to let Talhah and Zubayr into paradise: they went to war against Ali after having sworn allegiance to him' (ii, 379).

About Abd al-Ralunan ibn Yusuf ibn Kharash it is stated, “He practised Shi'ism, and narrated the vices of the Shaykhayn and was a rafidi” and Abdan says, `I asked Ibn Kharash concerning the hadith, “We [prophets] do not leave any inheritance, whatever we leave behind is charity (sadaqah).” He said, `It is false (batil).”( ii , 600)

The following passage from Dhahabi also helps define `mild' Shi'i leanings. After denying that Muhammad ibn Ziyad, one of the shaykhs of Bukhari who has been accused of hostility (nasb) towards the Ahl al-Bayt, was a nasibi, he says:

“It is usual among the Syrians to exclude [from the list of legitimate caliphs] Amir al-Mu`minin Ali, may God be pleased with him, since the days of Siffin, in the same way that among the Kufans there is an antipathy toward `Uthman and a love for Ali, and their forebears used to be his shi'ah and his partisans. Furthermore, there is a group among the Shi`is of Iraq who befriend Ali as well as `Uthman but they prefer Ali to `Uthman and do not have friendly feelings towards those who fought 'Ali, though they do invoke God's forgiveness for them. That is a light form of tashayyu.”23

He also considers the term “extremist Shi'i” (Shi'i ghali) to have had a different sense formerly He writes:

In former days “Shi'i ghali” used to mean someone who finds fault with `Uthman, Zubayr, Talhah, Mu'awiyah and those who fought against 'Ali, may God be pleased with him, and someone who abuses them. And in our times and in our usage a ghali is someone who considers those figures to be unbelievers and disowns the Shaykhayn i.e. Abu Bakr and `Umar).24

It may be said that basically one rarely finds a Kufan without “Shi`i” leanings.25 That which is meant by this term is a general sense covering a range from the lowest to the highest degree.

Yahya ibn Main cites Abd Allah ibn Mubarak as having said, “Anyone who desires martyrdom should enter the Dar al-Bittikh in Kufah and invoke God's mercy for `Uthman.”26 According to another report some Kufans professed their superiority over the Basrans in these words in al-Ma'mun's presence:

قد علم الناس انه ليس في الأرض بلد اجمع أهله على حب بني هاشم إلا الكوفه و ما قتل احد من بني هاشم في شرق و لا غرب إلا و حوله قتلى من اهل الكوفه تختلط دمائهم بدمه

“Everyone knows that aside from Kufah there is no town on earth's surface whose people should be united in their love of Banu Hashim, and no individual belonging to Banu Hashim has ever been slain in the east or the west without the corpses of Kufans lying about him with their blood mingling with his blood.”27

In a tradition narrated from Imam Sadiq ('a) it is said:

ان الله عرض ولايتنا على أهل الامصار فلم يقبلها الا أهل الكوفه

“Indeed God presented our wilayah to the people of every town but none of them accepted it except the people of Kufah.”28

Sa'id ibn Abi Arubah says, “I arrived in Baghdad and sat in a session of Abu Hanifah's lectures. One day he had mentioned `Uthman and invoked God's mercy for him. I said to him, `May Godhave mercy on you to’. I have not heard anyone except you invoking mercy upon `Uthman in this city.”'29

There were so many virtues (fada'il) recounted concerning Kufah, and later on Qum, that Sa'd ibn Abd Allah al-Ash`ari compiled a book named Fadl Qum wa al-Kufah.30

Shi ism in the Sense of Love of Ahl al-Bayt

There is another form of Shi`ism which led to allegations of Shi'i leanings due to the attachment for the Ahl al-Bayt. In this regard the preference for Ali (tafdil) might also be sometimes present, but in general an attachment is professed for the Ahl al-Bayt on account of the existing traditions which stress the necessity of loving the Ahl al-Bayt ('a), the Prophet's family.

Such an inclination is also called tashayyu' by the followers of the `Uthmani creed, even if there were no trace of tafdil or any other tendency in a person's religious attitude. There is a tradition narrated from Imam Hasan al-Askari ('a) concerning the difference between creedal Shi`ism and Shi`ism in the sense of attachment and love for the Ahl al-Bayt ('a). When asked about the difference between the `Shi'ah' and the 'Muhibbin' (those who love die Ahl al-Bayt), the Imam replied:

ما الفرق بين الشيعة و المحبين؟ قال: شيعتنا هم الذين يتَّبِعونَ آثارنا و يطيعون في جميع أوامرنا و نواهينا و من خالفنا في كثير مما فرضه الله فليس من شيعتنا

“Our shi'ahare those who follow in our steps and obey us in all things that we command or forbid, and anyone who opposes us in many of the things that God has made obligatory is not one of our shi'ah.”31

Writing about certain verses of Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Husayn Hamdan, known as Khabbaz Baldi, which indicate his Shi'i leanings, Afandi writes: “It is clear that which can be inferred from his verses is only his love (tawalla) and attachment [for the Ahl al-Bayt], but there is no indication of hostility and disavowal (tabarra) [in relation to the caliphs] which is the main characteristic of tashayyu' (wa huwa al-'umdah fi al-tashayyu')”32

Shi'ism in this sense is found in plenty in the sources and here we may mention some examples of it. Perhaps the most prominent of such cases is that of Muhammad ibn Idris al-Shafi'i (150-204/767-819). Verses have been narrated from him which confirm such an inclination and it appears that he was accused not only of tashayyu' but also rafd for his religious attitude. Among his verses that relate to this topic are the following:

قالوا ترفَّضْتَ، قلتُ: كلا ما الرفض ديني و لا اعتقادي

لاكــن توليـت غيــر شك خيــر إمــامٍ و خيــــر هــــادي

إن كـان حُـبُّ الولي رفْضاً فـــإنَّ رفــضــي الــى العـبــــاد

“They say, 'You have become a rafidi,' and I say, `No, not at all. Rafd is neither my religion nor my creed. But I am devoted to the best of the Imams and the best of guides, and should the love of the Wali be rafd, then indeed my rafd is”33

In other verses he declares:

إذا نحـن فضَّلنـا عليِّـــاً فإننـــا روافض بالتفضيل عند ذوي الجهل

وفضــل أبي بكر إذا ما ذكرتُهُ رُمِيـــتُ بِنَصْــب عنــد ذكــري للفضل

فلا زِلتُ ذا رفضٍ ونَصْبٍ كلاهما بِحُبَيْهُمـا حتَّـى أُوسَّــد في الرَّمْـــلِ

“When we prefer Ali we are called rafidis by the ignorant for our favouring him (tafdil),

And when I mention the virtues of Abu Bakr, I am accused of nasb for my mention of virtue.

So shall I abide in rafd and nasb for the love of those two, until I am laid to rest in mygrave. ”

In some other verses he says:

يا آل بيت رسول الله حبكم فرض من الله في القرآن أنزله

يكفيكم من عظيم الفخر أنكم من لم يصل عليكم لا صلاة له

“O Progeny of the Messenger of Allah, God has made your love an obligation in the Qur'an that He has revealed.

The great honor suffices you that prayers made without invoking blessings on you are invalid”.34

These verses disclose a kind of “tafdili rafd” in the words of Shafi'i himself.

Yet their import is not contrary to his Sunnism (tasannun) which is something different from the `Uthmani creed. At the same time certain verses have been attributed to him whose authenticity needs to be established. One of them is as follows:

رضيتُ علياً لي إماماً و نسلِهِ

“Happy am I with Ali and his descendants as my Imams.” 35

In the same diwan there are verses in eulogy of the four caliphs.36 Also elegiac verses about Imam Husayn ('a) have been narrated from him, among which are the following:

تزلزلـت الدنيـا لآل محمـدٍ و كادت لهم صمّ الجبال تذوبُ

لئن كان ذنبي حب آل محمد فذلـك ذنب لست منه اتوب

هم شفعائي يوم حشري و موقفي اذا كثرتني يوم ذاك ذنوبي

“The earth quaked for the sake of the Progeny of Muhammad,And the mountains almost melted in grief for them. If the love of the Progeny of Muhammad is my sin,It is a sin for which I am never going to repent.

They are my intercessors on my resurrection and in the halts of the Hereafter, when my sins overwhelm me by their great number”37

Badi` Hamadani had a similar tendency and as cited by Abd al-Jalil Razi he recited the following verse at the tomb of Ali ibn Musa al-Rida ('a):

أنا مع اعتقاداي في التسنن رافضي في ولائك و اشتغلت بهؤلاء الناس فلستُ اغفل عن أولئك

“Despite my belief in tasannun, I am a rafidi in my attachment (wila) to you,

And my devotion to these does not make me neglect those.”38

This inclination continued to grow during the 5th/11th century and afterwards, and even among the Hanbalis, who had a strong 'Uthmani bias during the 3rd/9th and 4th/10th centuries, one finds those who were strongly attached to the Ahl al-Bayt. That which is important is, that this attachment opened the door to Shi'ism and it could pave the way for the spread of Shi`ism in the long run. Elsewhere we have discussed this issue.