December 20, 2010
On being a Shia
by Feisal Hussain Naqvi
Being a Shia means different things to different people. In my case, being a Shia means that if I am as professionally successful as I hope to be, someone will want to kill me. Or, to be less melodramatic, it means I can’t play golf on Ashura.
The fact that being a Shia means such wildly divergent and generally irrelevant things to me also indicates that I am not much of a Shia, which I confess to be true. The question then is, why do I feel compelled to identify myself as a Shia.
Before I try to answer, some background is in order. The roots of Shi’ism go deep into Islamic history, more specifically, into the issue of who was to succeed the Prophet as the leader of the Muslim community. Ali, the Prophet’s son in law, was favoured by one group while Abu Bakr, one of the Prophet’s closest companions was favoured by another. Ultimately, the group supporting Abu Bakr prevailed, so much so that Ali did not become Caliph until two other members of the community (Omar and Usman) had preceded him. When Ali did become Caliph, he faced a challenge led by Aisha, one of the Prophet’s wives (and also the daughter of Abu Bakr).
The schism worsened after the assassination of Ali in 661 AD. Ali was succeeded as Caliph by Muawiya, the governor of Syria under Ali. When Muawiya’s son, Yazid, took over as Caliph in 680 AD, the stage was set for another clash.
Shortly after Yazid’s accession to the caliphate, Ali’s son, Hussain, was called to Kufa (a city in present-day Iraq) by leaders of the community there. Hussain set off from Medina with his family and a small group of followers but he never made it to Kufa. Instead, at a place called Karbala, his family and he were surrounded by the armies of Yazid. For three days, Hussain and his family were not allowed access to water. On the 10th day of the Islamic month of Muharram (now called Ashura), Hussain, his family and his followers were slaughtered to a man. The only survivors of the battle were the women of Hussain’s family and his son Zain ul Abedin, who had been too ill to accompany his father into battle.
The Shias, then, are those people who mourn the tragedy of Karbala and who believe that Ali should have succeeded the Prophet. But that is only the simplest aspect of Shi’ism. What Shias also believe is that the Prophet, Ali and his descendants (the Imams) were intrinsically superior to other humans and that they were thus qualified to lead the Muslims in a way that no other Muslim could ever match.
There is, of course, much more to Shi’ism than what I have just outlined. The point I was trying to make though is that mourning the martyrdom of Hussain is essential to the concept of being a Shia. Each community of Shias is different in its mourning rituals, but every year, the first ten days of Muharram bring to a halt the lives of devout Shias.
My father’s family is not just devout in its Shia-ness but “kuttar”, a Punjabi word best translated as “hardcore.” My father’s parents lived in Jhang, then as now, a bucolic slum of no great import in the middle of the Punjab. They lived there because when they had fled the Partition of India in 1947, my grandfather had refused to get off the train at Lahore (he thought he was dying) and instead stayed on until the train came to its final stop (which was Jhang).
By the time I started going to Jhang, my grandfather had passed away and the house there was run by my grandmother. She was a strong-willed lady of extremely firm views whose life essentially revolved around Muharram. Every day during the first ten days of Muharram, there would be a majlis held in the house itself in which a learned female scholar would lecture the assembled mourners on the virtues of the Shia Imams and try to prove that the Shias were right (and that everybody else was wrong). After about an hour or so of heavy theological lifting, she would shift over to a description of the suffering of Hussain and his family during the events of Karbala. During those 15 minutes, the audience would dissolve not just into tears but into loud wails of anguish. The mourning did not stop once the sermon ended. Instead, the mourners would sing elegies to the martyrs and beat their chests with their hands.
As men, we obviously could not attend the majalis in my grandmother’s house. We would therefore leave every afternoon for the Imam Bargah (the Shia house of worship) where a cleric, this time male, would harangue us for an hour on the theological superiorities of Shia’ism followed again by 15 minutes of martyrdom narratives, ending in a chest-beating session. During those last 15 minutes, it was de rigueur for the men present not just to sob loudly but to howl with sorrow. My father, fortunately, was not much given to public displays of emotion and his preferred option was to stare at the floor with a hand over his eyes (an example which I greatly preferred to follow).
All of the majalis though were only a prelude to the events of the 10th of Muharram. On the morning of the 10th, we would troop off to the “Dubkaron ka mohallah”, a locality (mohallah) in the inner reaches of Jhang inhabited by a clan of Shias known for the ferocity of their beliefs (the Dubkars).[i] In contrast to the other Muharram sermons, the sermon on the morning of the 10th was always short; a 15-minute recitation of events in which Hussain says farewell to his family, ventures out alone to face an entire army and perishes heroically, followed by a description of the scene when his riderless horse returns to camp to be confronted by Hussain’s daughter Sakina who wants to know what has happened to her Baba.
By this time, the entire audience would be wailing; an audience, please note, composed not just of males but Punjabi males (a sub-species not normally known for its sensitivity). After a brief pause in which the men present would collect their emotions, the events of the day would truly begin.
The normal routine for Pakistani Shias on the 10th of Muharram is to walk in a procession. The procession is made up of mourners who walk slowly, stopping from time to time to beat themselves, as other mourners chant dirges. The more sedate group of mourners thump their chest with their hands, beating themselves so hard that their chests would become bruised. The less sedate mourners use knives. The knives are razor sharp and attached to chains which in turn attach to a small wooden handle. The mourner thus uses the handle to smack the knives against his back. Most men flail themselves with the knives going over the shoulder but some prefer to raise their hand and go around the side. Either way, there is a fair amount of blood involved.
Each procession or jaloos is accompanied by various symbols or tokens. The most common symbol is the alam or banner (in other words, a pole with a black flag on it). The alam represents Abbas, the standard bearer of Hussain’s army who died at Karbala trying to get water for Hussain’s family. Then there is the zuljinah, or the horse of Hussain (normally white, but any colour works in a pinch). The zuljinah sometimes bears a turban on its saddle to represent its rider but most often is draped in black harness with black cloths tied to its bridle and reins.
[The photo at the top of this article is of a jaloos on Park Avenue in NYC with a tazia at the front, taken by Abbas Raza, and included in a short article of his which also has more photos.]
In Jhang, the one addition to the normal jaloos procedure was the tazias. The tazias are large wooden models of the tomb of Hussain made out of wood, normally all painted in gold. The tazia of the Dubkar Mohallah was a particular beauty, rising about 30 feet high from a base about seven feet by seven feet. It was also extremely heavy and needed to be carried by a team of 10-12 men who would heave it onto their shoulders using the thick bamboo poles running along the bottom of the tazia.
The tazia was thus the focus of the mini procession which would emerge from the Dubkar mohallah. It would rise amidst a crescendo of wails and be carried down narrow alleyways in short bursts of a few hundred yards till, like a stream joining a river, it would merge with the main jaloos. All along the way, the mourners would beat themselves and the sides of the street would be packed with women and watchers.
By mid-afternoon, the jaloos would reach its destination, a large open field where the Dubkar Tazia would be joined by a number of other tazias. There, the assembled mourners would be addressed by another cleric. Tradition has it that the battle of Karbala reached its climax at the time of the zuhr prayer (early afternoon) and as the call to prayer would ring out across the open field of mourners, a fresh burst of crying would break out. At the end of the majlis, the different processions would break up and head back to their neighbourhoods, carrying their tazias along.
After one returned from the jaloos, the hours till evening were normally quiet. The last event of Ashura is a special majlis called Majlis-e-Shaam-e-Gharibaan held late at night. The phrase “Shaam e Gharibaan” means literally “the night of the destitute” and it marks the formal end of the mourning cycle. For some reason, we never attended the majlis in person but instead used to listen to the one on PTV.
In those days, PTV was the only television channel in Pakistan and so, appearing on it was quite a big deal. The Majlis-e-Shaam-Gharibaan was delivered every year before a studio audience by a cleric of formidable intellect – and even more formidable vocabulary – called Allama Naseer ul Ijtehadi. For most of the allotted hour, he would lead his listeners into ever more elaborate loops of logic and rhetoric. Then as the hour grew to a close, he would remove his turban and shift from high jurisprudential theory to the story of Hussain, concentrating not on the martyrdom of Hussain but on the small community of women and children left behind, beleaguered and helpless, soon to be paraded through the bazaars of Damascus by the forces of Yazid. The camera would then slowly fade to black over the cries of the audience and then focus on a spare set, all draped in black. In the middle of that set would be a man, Syed Nasir Jehan, who would sing two final dirges. The first one was called “Ghabraye gi Zainab” (meaning “Zainab will worry”)[ii] while the second is best translated as “The Last Salute.” And after that last mournful song, Muharram was over for us.[iii]
My parents left Pakistan when I was 11 and I spent the next three years in boarding school. There, Shias were treated very much as a breed apart. Every sunset, we would line up and troop off to say our prayers at the school mosque. The Sunnis would pray as part of a large congregation while the Shias and Ahmedis would line up separately at the back. During Muharram, the Shia boarders would get bused out to majalis where we would sit in the back row of a desultory audience and pick our noses while surreptitiously telling dirty jokes to each other.
When I was 15, I left Pakistan to join my parents overseas, first in London and Belgium and then in Singapore. From there, it was onwards to the US to attend college and law school. When I finally returned to Pakistan in 1996, more than a decade had passed.
The Pakistan I came back to was a different place. Shias had gone from being a minority to being a targeted minority. Prominent Shias now had to contend with the fact that the very fact of their success – professional, political or otherwise –meant that someone would be happy to kill them. Karachi was ground zero for the target killings – with Shia doctors and lawyers being particularly favoured – but the rest of the country was not far behind. Jhang, in particular, became a focal point of sectarianism. My first visit there after my return to Pakistan was to attend the funeral of a cousin and his father who had been machine-gunned outside their house.
I, too, had changed. The first majlis I attended after coming back was also my last. Where I had once been content to listen to the clerics blather on, I could now no longer stand bad arguments; at least, not without wanting to get my two cents in. I remember the cleric recounting a conversation between God and the Angel Gabriel about the merits of the Shia perspective and it was all I could to stop myself from shouting “Objection, hearsay!”
It wasn’t only that I had learned to construct arguments in the meantime. At college, I had majored in Islamic studies. My introduction to the subject was fortuitous, the product of a spur of the moment decision to study Persian. But the study of Persian led to a survey course in Islamic history. And that course led to a multitude of others.
What Islamic history teaches its students is the contingency of events. The four schools of Islamic law are today the only recognised schools of Sunni law. But there were once more, whose names are now remembered by very few. And even the four schools trace back their differences not just to theological issues but also to the fact that they were originally based in different cities and hence had different legal traditions to work with.
The Shi’ism that I had grown up with was the product of a closed environment. One listened to the clerics and one howled because that is one had always done. More importantly, that is all there was to do. In the Jhang of my childhood, there was nothing else to do besides mourn, nothing else to see and nothing else to do.
In the world that I live in now, I have 81 channels to choose from. On Ashura, PTV offers nothing but mourning as do all the other Pakistani channels. But, as I type this column on the evening of the 10th of Muharram, Star World is showing the final episode of America’s Next Top Model, another channel is showing a kung fu movie while Channel V is doing a special on Robbie Williams. And all this is besides the distractions that a broadband connection can offer!
I have therefore reached the point where Shi’ism doesn’t make any sense to me. To the extent the essence of my sect is the remembrance of a historical tragedy, I fail to see why this particular tragedy should be remembered above all else or why it should define my life. To the extent Shi’ism is a belief in charismatic legality, I don’t believe in it. This is not to say that I am irreligious: I just don’t believe that access to God is dependent upon the intercession of intermediaries.
At the same time, I cannot reject the faith of my fathers. To begin with, it defines me. Given my name, I could not be more identifiably Shia than if I had the word “Shia” tattooed on my forehead. More importantly, my name defines me as a Syed, a descendant of the Prophet, a designation which rightly or wrongly fetches me an enormous amount of respect from people who care about these things. Above all, there is the fact that my head does not control my heart. The mere fact that something does not make logical sense does not mean one stops feeling. For better or for worse, I cannot listen to “Ghabraye gi Zainab” without being emotionally overwhelmed.
What then is a Shia who cannot reconcile his head and his heart supposed to do? Like others in my position, I draw arbitrary distinctions. I play golf in Muharram but not on Ashura. I don’t go to majalis but I don’t party either. I don’t listen to vocal music but I figure Bach’s cello concertos are ok.
There is one last ritual though which I still observe religiously. Tonight, after the Majlis e Shaam e Gharibaan finishes on PTV, I will listen to the son of Nasir Jehan sing the songs his father made famous. I will get teary-eyed. But I will then pack up my Muharram dilemmas and put them away for another year.
[i] The Dubkars were famous for putting ash in their hair and for turning their beds upside down on the night of 9th of Muharram (which symbolised – and ensured – that they would not sleep that night but spend it in prayer).
[ii] Zainab was the sister of Hussain. After his martyrdom, she became the de facto leader of the Shia community.
[iii] My grandmother, of course, was not party to such wimpy behaviour. Her Muharram lasted not just the first ten days but till the 9th day of the Islamic month of Rabi ul Awwal (two months later). Till that day, she would not wear red and would remain very much in mourning.
Posted by Feisal Naqvi at 12:35 AM | Permalink






















Comments
"For better or for worse, I cannot listen to “Ghabraye gi Zainab” without being emotionally overwhelmed."
Me too, Feisal, me too. And even as the hardened atheist that I am, having given up all religious belief for good at the age of puberty.
My childhood was much the same as yours if I substitute my mother for your grandmother (she was a zakira and the founder of her own imambara for women), and I am just old enough to remember when the Sham-e-Ghareeban majlis was recited on PTV not by Naseer Ijtihadi but by the infinitely superior orator Rashid Turabi.
But I nodded my head in personal recognition of your feelings throughout as I read this piece.
Posted by: Abbas Raza | Dec 20, 2010 4:40:57 AM
@Abbas -- I think we need to set up a home for lapsed Shias:)
Posted by: Feisal Naqvi | Dec 20, 2010 4:49:35 AM
So very interesting. Great read, thank you.
Posted by: Sabbah Haji | Dec 20, 2010 7:36:12 AM
Very interesting. Great to read this kind of perspective, though it does make me wonder why more modern moslems just don't realize that religion is just so much hogwash, and some religions are even more so than others, but why quibble. Why don't modern secular moslems just openly express their de-facto aethiesm while embracing the culture of Islam secularly while expressing their doubt that ancient scribblings are the product of some delusion, mass halucination, and fear of saying what one really believes.
Posted by: doug l | Dec 20, 2010 8:17:32 AM
@doug -- actually, I wouldn't say I'm an atheist. My point was more along the lines that I couldn't make sense of the shi'ism I had grown up with, not that Islam per se makes no sense. So, to answer your question, modern secular Muslims don't declare themselves to be atheists because they feel that they can be modern and secular and Muslim without necessarily being an atheist.
Posted by: Feisal Naqvi | Dec 20, 2010 8:34:33 AM
I also grew up in a religion-flooded culture, and I wish I hadn't. But then maybe it was better than growing up in a videogame-flooded culture. Our stories were more interesting. Like the ones you grew up with. I wonder why some religions have so much pain and horrific-ness attached to them. All the wailing. So operatic.
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Dec 20, 2010 9:10:24 AM
Naqvi Sahib,
I being a shia have been told since the beginning that the line which separated shia and sunnis was the issue over Ali being the righteous successor. I disagree with this simplification. The issue in my opinion was that, people (ummah) can pick a "khalifa" from the few front runners (widely held early sunni belief) OR continue a "succession" in the form of an imam (divinely guided by something remotely related to the word of God, shia believe in it till this day).
Posted by: Tehseen Raza | Dec 20, 2010 10:09:10 AM
Having grown up a Shia in a family just like yours and having given up practice of religion many years ago, I had the same question: why do I still like to identify myself as a Shia (and with some pride)? The answer I have come to believe is that Imam Hussains and his families murder in Karbala at the hands of the large army of Yazid represented the fight between good and evil. And even though the good men perished, it is important to remember the sacrifice and teach our children that if there was a fight between good and evil in our own times, we would side with the good, even if it meant personal sacrifices. After all living a moral life is larger than any religion and Imam Hussain's sacrifice in Karbala is a symbol of good versus evil to many religions of the world. And of course being a Syed means we have to carry the burden of this responsibility more seriously. So, while I am not religious, I remain a Shia.
Posted by: Tasnim | Dec 20, 2010 11:22:17 AM
Nasir Jahan has many Sunni admirers (myself among them). He is just amazing.
As an Islamic studies major, you may have read Tabari's description of the events leading up to Karbala. If not, I highly highly recommend it. Its dramatic storytelling at its best. I have read a few Shia chronicles of the same events and it seems to me that by now the exaggeration and hagiography has reached such proportions that its hard to digest for me. Tabari is nominally Sunni, but somewhat sympathetic to the ahl e bait; well worth reading (I dont know of any online source, but his work has been translated into English by UNESCO in a multi-volume set and any good University should have it, I read mine at UCLA).
Now that Shias are not just a minority (that used to be privileged enough to get full recognition for their particular rituals and viewpoints on National TV in a Sunni-majority land), but a targeted minority, they are also "objectively liberal" in Pakistan. I always say to my Shia friends that I never find their religiosity problematic because on most political issues (except blasphemy law, where they can be as rabid as any Sunnis) they tend to have liberal or even "objectively left wing" positions.
Posted by: omar | Dec 20, 2010 11:28:46 AM
Feisal,
Enjoyed reading this post. I've been working on a similar piece but from the point of view of being raised in a religon-lite --poetry heavy family. Yet here I am the weepy Shi'a--who cringes at all the other weepy Shi'as. I love the nohas and the marsiyas and salaams. And for several years now Youtube brings it all to me in a way that I never had access to before. But all my life every Moharram--while the descriptions of the battle can be too much----Gabraiye ge Zainab can put me into a sobbing fit. The relevance of the sentiment every year makes me want to believe that if I'd been there I would have stayed put on the right side of the Euphrates in Kerbela once the lamps were extinguished by Imam Hussain. I tried to post a comment earlier---sorry if this appears as a repeat post
Posted by: maniza | Dec 20, 2010 12:24:42 PM
Wow, there are so many of us :-) Very well-written piece.
My story is almost exactly like yours, just change the name of the place. At the start of every Muharram I have the urge to listen to the noha / marsiya, may be partly to remind me of my early days and remember my parents, and may be subconsciously to let me kids know about their heritage. They can themselves figure out the relevance of religion in their lives as they grow up.
Posted by: Haider | Dec 20, 2010 8:25:39 PM
Thank you all for your kind words. Yes, it does appear as if there are more than a few of us lost Shias floating out there. And as we each struggle to find our own indivdiual balance, it's good too know that.
Posted by: Feisal Naqvi | Dec 20, 2010 10:51:59 PM
I love the way you write, you have a knack of capturing the reader. You could be a great fictional writer. On your piece, I can relate to your mixed feelings about your faith, even though I am a sunni Muslim (I haven't said that to anyone in a long time but because it is relevant here I will say it), I can empathise with being taught certain rituals and beliefs that you question later on. I also believe that the reason why we identify with something we partly or no longer believe in is because of our emotional attachments and the feelings that it brings out in us. It has perhaps more to do with our emotional state rather than our logical and analytical side. Today I don't do a lot of things that I was taught to do but I also respect people who do. I suppose it is called 'growing up'.
Posted by: Nadia | Dec 21, 2010 4:34:59 AM
Feisal, I wanted to add that this was another brilliantly written piece. Very nicely done.
btw, I notice that the armor and weapons developed over 1400 years of Shia history have not proved a match for protestant/wahabi/modern ideas("direct access to the divine")...tsk tsk..
Posted by: omar | Dec 21, 2010 10:58:54 AM
"Being a Shia ...... means that if I am as professionally successful as I hope to be, someone will want to kill me.>
This is just the view of people with very shallow thinking in today world.
You should be proud be a human either been Muslim or other religions.
As Muslim you should show the world what Islam gives you and let the world judge you by your merits of your religion.
The problem with Muslims these days they forgot the the basic of Islam and they start scattered from real goal of Islam:
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
كنتم خير امة اخرجت للناس
Where are you from this Allah words?
Posted by: Sam | Dec 21, 2010 12:08:15 PM
I am not of your faith, but I have observed it. Shi'a is the hope of the Muslim world that it may pass through a Muslim Age of Enlightenment nd create Muslim philosophers on the order of John Locke who with others created the basis of the Judeo Christian society which found flower in the Republic which we call the United States and in which the religious is personal rather than dictatorial as it is and always will be in the Sunni world.
In those nation ruled by the Sunni there is to the fear of its rulers a large Shi'a underclass whose promotion to equality will always be denied. Fanaticism and the protection of the upper class, the suppression of a middle class while the Imams proclamations of the status quo and the protection of the rulers is the order of the day.
And yet, in the single nation ruled by Shi'a -- Iran -- we have seen its corruption. Not in the revolution that overthrew the Shah, but in the retention of power by the Mullahs of Qom and the attempts to assassinate the Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani in Najif in Iraq.
As revolutionary cycles go we see now the weakness of the current Supreme leader and the transfer of power to the secular Revolutionary Guard Guard Corps which controls the levers of power, a separate military and commercial enterprises.
Iran is now ruled by the secular IRGC which puts down with brutal force and the basiji. The hope for a new true Republic with the work of the late Grand Ayatollah Khomeini done and a return to the development of a secular led Muslim Republic is still faint but living. Power once attained, is a drug, the withdrawal from which is hard.
The days of the Age of Muslim enlightenment let by Shi'a are yet to be seen. We in the West await them.
Posted by: Pete | Dec 21, 2010 3:28:22 PM
2/2 quarks - You write so well, Feisal. Thank you for sharing your experience & thoughts. If you haven't already, you should come across to India & see the jaloos, Imam baras & taazias of Delhi, Fatehpur Sikri/ Agra, Hyderabad (Andhra) & Chinsurah (near Kolkata) - would love to read your insights/ comparisons of this side of that partition fence. Of course, dont miss the golf, concerts & food on your roots journey (train recommended). Look forward to your next post.
Posted by: Ratnesh | Dec 22, 2010 12:10:59 AM
Sir,
This piece resonated with me on many levels; a very thought provoking read. As Tennessee Williams once said, "..we can never know or understand anyone completely; including ourselves." I think one could co-relate this to the ambivalence we at times feel towards our faiths and our views on life in general.
Look forward to your next piece.
Posted by: Ayesha Khan | Dec 23, 2010 1:29:57 AM
Sir,
in your article you discused a debate by Shia zakir about Hazrat Jibrael a.s regarding importance of shiaism. You refused to believe it because you heard it from Shia's. Let me prove it from Sunni books .The word Shi'a, to quote Ibn
Manzur(1), means "those people
who love what the Prophet's
Progeny loves, and they are
loyal to such Progeny" .
Hameedullah Khan(2) states "Shiat
Ali means specifically that party
which, after the death of the
Prophet Muhammed (PBUH)
attached itself to Hazrat
Ali...considering him the
successor of the Prophet (PBUH)
both in temporal and religious
matters".
1. Lisan al-'Arab, by Ibn Manzur,
vol. 8, p189
2. Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence,
by Hameedullah Khan p121
The term Shi'a in fact derives its
actual origin from the Qur'an, in
which Allah (swt) calls Prophet
Ibrahim (as) a Shi'a of Prophet Nuh
(as) (1). In another verse Allah
(swt) informs us of a fight between
two men, one was a Shi'a of
Prophet Musa (as) and the other
was an enemy of Musa(as) (2).
1. The Holy Qur'an 37:83
2. The Holy Qur'an 28:15
It is in praise of the Shi'a of Ali that
Allah (swt) sent down the following
revelation: "Those who believe
and do righteous deeds are the
best of the creatures. Their
reward from their Lord shall be
everlasting gardens, below
which flow rivers, they will
abide there forever. Well
pleased is God with them and
they are well pleased with Him.
The Holy Qur'an 98:7
Numerous recognised Sunni
scholars have in their
commentaries recorded that
following the descent of this verse
the Prophet (s) declared: "I swear
by the one who controls my life
that this man (Ali) and his Shi'a
shall secure deliverance on the
day of resurrection".
Tafsir Ibne Jarir, Volume 33 page
146 (Cairo edition) narrated from
Hadhrath Muhammad bin Ali (as);
Tafsir Durre Manthur by Jalaladeen
Suyuti, Volume 6 page 379 -3
separate chains; Tafsir Fatha ul
bayan Volume 10 page 333 (Egypt
edition)
If the Prophet (s)'s said the best of
creations are Hadhrath Ali (as) and
his Shi'a, then in the same way that
this verse is applicable until the end
of the world, Ali (as)'s Shi'a will
likewise exist to provide a practical
commentary to it. The Ahl'ul
Sunnah believe that 70,000
Muslims will enter paradise without
answering any questions (1) and
Anas bin Malik, narrates that the
Prophet (s) said that the 70,000
were Ali and his Shi'a (2). There are
no traditions, in which the Prophet
(s) guaranteed paradise for any
other companion and his followers.
These hadith prove that the Shi'a
were not a Sect founded by
fictitious Abdullah bin Saba but
were adherents to Ali (as) who
existed during the lifetime of the
Prophet (s).
1. Islam: The Basic Articles of Faith -
According to the Beliefs of the Ahl
al Sunna wa al Jama'a - a Modern
English translation of Bahar-e-
Shariat Part One (Unnamed author)
page 67 - quoting a hadith to this
effect
2. Manaqib Ali al Murtaza, page 184
by al Maghazli (An ancient Shafi
scholar)
Unable to refute the hadith the
tendency has been to provide an
'alternative' explanation. The
highly respected Sunni scholar Al
Muhaddith Shah 'Abd al-'Aziz
Dehlavi in his discussion of hadith
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"
(NB: 37 Hijri -the year Imam Ali (as)
fought Mu'awiya at Sifeen).
Tuhfa Ithna 'Ashariyyah, (Gift to
the Twelvers) (Farsi edition p 18,
publishers Sohail Academy, Lahore,
Pakistan)
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 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:
Pledged their allegiance to Ali (as)
Remained close to him
Followed his orders
Fought his enemies
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. We reject claims that we
have gone astray having failed to
take our teachings of the Qur'an
and Sunnah from the Sahaba. As
Shi'a we follow Ali (as) and take the
Sunnah from him in accordance
with the dictates of the Prophet (s)
who said to Ali (as) in the presence
of the Sahaba:
"You are my brother and
inheritor", when the
Companions asked what
previous Prophets had left as
inheritance, he replied "The
Book of God and his Sunnah the
teachings of that Prophet".
Riyad al-Nadira, by Muhibbuddin al
Tabari, Vol 3 p 123
Ali (as) inherited the Qur'an and
Sunnah and his Shi'a have likewise
taken their knowledge of the
Qur'an and Sunnah from him. We
are Shi'a because we see no other
Hadi (guide) which will lead us to
the right path.
Allah (swt) says about the Prophet
(s): "Verily you are a Warner and
for every nation there is a
Guide" (1). Numerous Sunni
authorities of Tafsir (2) in their
commentary of this verse have
recorded that the Prophet (s) said:
"I am Warner and Ali is the
guide, he (s) then turned to Ali
and said 'Ali people will be
guided through you'" . Other
Sunni scholars have also recorded
this hadith (3).
1. The Holy Qur'an Surah Ra'd verse
7
2. Tafsir Durr al-Manthur by Suyuti
Vol4 p 45; Tafsir al Kabir, by
Fakhruddin Razi in the commentary
of the verse; Tafsir Ruh al Ma'ani,
by Allamah Alusi
3. Mustadrak, by al Hakim, Vol 3
hadith 129 & 130
We view Imam Ali as our guide,
Hadhrath Abu Bakr does not come
within this definition in his inaugural
speech he indicated that he would
be turning to others for guidance:
"Now then: O people, I have
been put in charge of you,
although I am not the best of
you. Help me if I do well; rectify
me if I do wrong"
Tarikh al-Tabari, English translation
Volume 9 p 201
Compare these words to the
challenge of Imam Ali (as) related
by Sa'id ibn al-Musayyab who said:
"None of the Companions say,
Ask me (about anything you
like)! except for Ali".
History of the Khalifas who took
the right way, by Suyuti, translated
by Abdassamad Clarke, p178 (Taha
Publishers)
Ali (as) also acted as source of
guidance for the second Khalifa, to
quote the Wahhabi scholar Nadwi
"Umar was often exacerbated if
Ali was not available to solve an
entangled problem. He often
used to say: 'Umar would have
been ruined if Ali was not
there'.."
The life of Caliph Ali, by Abul Hasan
Nadvi, page 202
When there exist clear hadith
guaranteeing salvation for Ali (as)'s
Shi'a on the Day of Judgement,
why should we seek alternative
groups to affiliate ourselves with?
Our view is strengthened yet
further when we read that
Hadhrath Abu Bakr narrates that he
heard the Prophet (s) say that: "No
one will be able to cross the
Sirat (Path) leading to Heaven on
the Day of Judgement unless he
gets the stamp of Ali".
Al Sawaiq al Muhriqa, by Ahmad
Ibn Hajar al Makki, page 126 (A
book written against the Shi'a)
How can we turn to others, when
Allah (swt) says in His Glorious
Book: "On the Day when some
faces will be bright and some
faces will be black, And as for
those whose faces will have
turned black, it will be said
'What did you disbelieve after
believing, taste the
chastisement for your disbelief'.
And as for those whose faces
are white, they shall be in the
Mercy of God, they shall abide
therein forever".
The Holy Qur'an 3:106-107
It is clear from this verse that the
successful Party on the Day of
Judgement will be those, whose
faces are bright. Now apply this
verse to the following hadith, taken
from two recognised Sunni works:
"Three things have been
revealed to me about Ali: That
he is the Sayyid al Muslimeen
(Chief of Muslims), Imam-ul-
Muttaqeen (Imam of the Pious),
and wa Qa'id ul Ghurrul
Muhajj'ileen (Leader of the
bright) face people on Yaum al
Qiyamah".
Al Mustadrak, by Imam Hakim, p
137 & 138
Riyad al Nadira, by Mohibbudin al
Tabari, Vol 2, p 122
So Ali (as) will be the leader of the
bright face people, the bright face
people will follow him i.e. they will
be his Shi'a and it is this group
which will attain Paradise. The
Prophet (s) said in a Sahih hadith
that Muslims would be divided into
73 sects of which only one would
attain paradise. It is for this sole
reason that we connect ourselves
with Ali (as). Our Sunni brothers
ascribe to the view that "Prophet
Muhammad (PBUH) did not
nominate his successor nor left
any explicit an instruction on
the question of selection or
appointment of his successor".
An introduction to Islamic State and
Government, by Muhammad Sharif
Chaudhry, p 56, (Islamic Bk
Publishers, Kuwait).
They believe that it is the duty of
the public appoint an Imam and
that it is so important that "the
companions preferred it to
attending the Prophet's
funeral" (1). The Shi'a believe that
it was incumbent upon the Prophet
(s) to appoint a successor. Even the
least enlightened leader dies with
at least indicating his preferred
choice of successor. There is always
a deputy to the Premier in case the
Premier dies or is killed. The
primary motive here is of course to
ensure that in the event of war
that the nation is not left leaderless
with no commander-in-chief, for
even the smallest time interval. Did
the Prophet not care, about what
would happen to his followers after
his death?
Sharh Fiqh Akbar, by Mulla Ali Qari,
p 175 (publishers Muhammad
Sa'eed and son, Qur'an Muhall,
Karachi)
In the same way that the role of a
GP is to identify the condition of his
patients and potential risks to their
health we can point to the fact that
the Prophet (s) did just that. He told
the companions not to become
kaffirs by killing each other (1) and
predicted that afflictions would fall
on to their homes in the same way
that rain drops fall (2) and that
some would become apostates
after him (3) with the majority
perishing in the fire (4).
1. Sahih al Bukhari Arabic - English,
Volume 9 hadith number 198 - 200
2. Sahih al Bukhari Arabic - English,
Volume 9 hadith number 182
3. Sahih al Bukhari Arabic - English,
Volume 8 hadith number 586
4. Sahih al Bukhari Arabic - English,
Volume 8 hadith number 587
At the same time the Prophet (s)
was fully aware of the threat
imposed by the neighbouring
Byzantine and Persian empires,
what better time would there have
been to attack the Muslims when
their Prophet (s) had died. In the
same way that a GP after
identifying a condition prescribes
medication for his patient, we
believe that the Prophet (s) was
fully aware of the risks facing the
nascent Ummah and provided a
remedy by fixing in to position an
Imam (Leader) to guide the
Muslims after him. This is clear from
the hadith of our Prophet (s)
recorded by the renowned
Wahhabi scholar Shah Isma'il
Shaheed (1): "If you make Ali
your Khalifa, although I do not
think you will, you will find him
to be a Guide (Hadi), one who is
Guided (Mahdi), and one who
will take you to the Right Path
(Siratul Mustaqim)" (2).
1. About Shah Isma'il, the editor of
the English translation of
Taqwiyatul Iman (Strengthening
the faith) page 9 writes "The
services which he has rendered for
the reformation of Ummah (the
mission of propagating Islam);
especially after the previous works
of Shaykhul Islam Imam Ibn
Taymiyyah and Muhammad bin
Abdul Wahab are absolutely
unforgettable". In his book 'Muslim
heroes of the world' the Sunni
scholar Muhammad Atiqul Haque
quotes Allamah Iqbal on page 117
as saying "India has so far
produced one great 'alim and his
name is Isma'il".
2. Mansab-e-Imamat, by Shah
Isma'il Shaheed, p 46
We rely on an event that took
following the completion of the
Final Hajj when the Prophet (s)
stopped at a place called Ghadhir
Khumm, and addressed the
companions "Do I have more
authority over you than you
have over yourselves? To which
the people said 'Yes'. He then
said Of whomsoever I am Mawla
Ali is his Mawla" (1). There is no
doubting the authenticity of this
narration it is a Mutawatir tradition
(2) narrated by 110 Companions,
the difference is over the word
'Mawla'. Those who define Mawla
as 'friend' and hence view Ghadhir
Khumm as an event in which the
Prophet (s) reaffirmed Ali (as) was
his friend are Sunni Muslims. Those
who define Mawla as Master and
assert that Ali (as) was declared the
Master / Imam over the Muslims
are Shi'a Muslims.
1. Musnad, by Ahmad bin Hanbal
Vol 3 p116 Sader Printing 1969
2. Mutawatir means it has
numerous chains of narrators
It is the issue of Imamate
(Leadership) which is the key
difference between the two
schools, we however are yet to find
a better explanation of the position
of an Imam than that offered by
Shah Isma'il Shaheed:
"The Imam is the Prophet's
successor, the Imam has the
same relations with Allah as the
Prophet had with Allah. The
Imam is the leader, in the same
way the Prophet had the right
to lead the people, the Imam
also has the same rights over
the people. We read in Surah
Azhab 'The Prophet is awla
(authority) to the believers', and
the Prophet will be a witness to
this fact on the Day of
Judgement. The Prophet has
rights over the people, as does
the Imam, both in this world
and the next, which is why the
Prophet said 'Don't I have more
authority over the people than
they have over themselves, to
which the people replied 'Yes'.
The Prophet then said 'Of
whomsoever I am Mawla, Ali is
his Mawla'. This is why Allah
says in the Qur'an that on the
Day of Judgement you will be
called according to your Imam
(3:17), and why when Allah says
'And stop they are to be
questioned' (37:24), we will be
asked about the Wilayat (The
Mastership) of Ali on the Day of
Judgement"
Mansab-e-Imamat, by Shah Isma'il
Shaheed, p 71
Posted by: Farhan virk | Dec 26, 2010 12:01:28 PM
The sad part is despite being born in a shia family. You failed to understand the concept of Shiaism, it is totally wrong to say it is based upon tragedy and matam. Totally wrong. The basic facts given by one of your great grand fathers Imam Jafar Sadiq a.s is that don't preach such things of which you've little or less knowledge. If you'd have been following your ancestors you had gone through this fact. This post of yours makes a question mark on their religion from a person belonging to their progeny. That's sad.
Shiaism isn't based upon matam or taziya, in fact majority of Shia alims still declare matam haram. And call it barbaric act of violence. But they allow it because we want to show our protest against evil forces of yazid.
I reiterate no alim ever called matam compulsory for being a shia. It's just plain mythology. Matam is just a type of protest. If you do it you record it but even if you don't nothing happens! Please try reading original texts before writing such articles sir, sunni's follow one of four school of thoughts while shia follow only one school of thought and that school comes from Prophet to Ali and then to his progeny. It's upto you to chose which one is more pure.
Posted by: Farhan virk | Dec 26, 2010 1:20:52 PM
It is always a delight when the theologians step in to straighten things out. Unfortunately, very few wahabis are likely to be reading this site, so we may be deprived of a proper rebuttal..
Posted by: omar | Dec 26, 2010 6:21:25 PM
Feisal,
I belonged to a (sectarian-wise) complex family, where my Mum was Sunni and Father a Shia. Now they have changed positions, whereby Mum became Shia and Dad a rationalist
I obediently followed both my parents, first being a sunni, like mum and then a rationalist, like dad.
Though I have never been a shia, I regularly observe Muharam - For me Muharam is one of the most brilliant example of community cohesion.
I agree most of the arguments are half baked but still are important.
Its at least a tradition of asking questions, and having theological debates.
No other sect, AFAIK, has such debates, no matter if they are as rhetorical monologues.
Further through Muharam, people in places like Karachi and Lahore, where otherwise no one talks to another, build up acquaintances.
As a religious exercise, your opinion may vary, depending who are... But as a Sociological and communitarian event, I feel, it is something that we need more of ...
Posted by: ST | Dec 26, 2010 7:05:12 PM
@Nadia -- Thank you. I retain some vestiges of a dream about writing a crime thriller set in Thana Tibbi Galli (in Lahore's Old City) but other that, have never come near writing fiction. The compliment still makes me feel good though:)
Posted by: Feisal Naqvi | Dec 26, 2010 11:25:27 PM
@Omar -- agar Sayyedon kay liyay direct access nahin hoga to phir kis kay liyay?! BTW, there was a whole gaggle of Abdalians in town yesterday along with my brother; you would have enjoyed the meeting
Posted by: Feisal Naqvi | Dec 26, 2010 11:27:14 PM
@Sam -- Please explain first why should one be proud of one's religion? Is it a competition of sorts as to which religion has produced what? Your faith is something that you believe in, not a credential to be waved at others.
On the other hand, if what you are implying is that I should not be ashamed to be a Muslim (or a Shia), then you have misread my article. I am not ashamed of my faith. I am just saying that there are elements of my religious identity which do not make sense to me any more but are too deeply embedded in my psyche to be discarded. Note, elements; not the whole.
Posted by: Feisal Naqvi | Dec 26, 2010 11:33:33 PM
@Pete -- I don't see why enlightenment in Islam has to come from the Shia. What Islam needs, in my view, is not an Enlightenment so much as a Renaissance. Muslims have a rich intellectual history of Rationalism which has been largely lost and which is now being willfully destroyed by the Wahabis and their cohorts. It is that tradition to which I feel we need to return.
Posted by: Feisal Naqvi | Dec 26, 2010 11:37:30 PM
@Ratnesh -- I have been to Delhi several times (and even got to visit Srinagar last year). Each visit has been truly wonderful. There is a half-baked plan at the moment for me to make a golfing trip in the Spring but that is nowhere near finalisation. Give me a buzz if you are ever in Lahore though; we've got some good courses here now.
Posted by: Feisal Naqvi | Dec 26, 2010 11:40:36 PM
@ Farhan Virk -- Virk sahib, my point was that no human being could have been present as a witness to a conversation between God and an angel. Any reports of such a conversation would therefore be hearsay (i.e. information presented without direct personal experience). As for your other points, I wish you good luck with your evangelical endeavours.
Posted by: Feisal Naqvi | Dec 26, 2010 11:44:18 PM
@ST -- Muharram certainly used to be an example of community cohesion and, I am sure, is still in many countries. Unfortunately, it is not so in Pakistan because Muharram processions are a prime terrorist target (see eg Karachi last year). However, leaving aside the crazies, the vast majority of non-Shia Muslims do observe Muharram with considerable dignity and to that extent, it is a good thing.
Let me just add that I have no problem with Shiaism in general or Muharram in particular. This was just a personal essay about my particular experience. I can't make sense of either my Shia experience or my Muharram experience because I experienced an extremely emotional form of Shi'ism growing up (what Shariati would call "Black Shia'ism") and cannot reconcile it with my subsequent education. Many people (most of my siblings included) are able to reconcile their views and I wish them well. I just happen not to be one of them.
Posted by: Feisal Naqvi | Dec 26, 2010 11:50:24 PM
Janab i never meant to say that discussion of angel about Shias was real. I just said that even if it was wrong many sunni texts prove the Concept of Shiaism, as i mentioned earlier.
You should try reading ulema like Allama Tejani Samawi etc. They show real face of Shiaism. Zakireen etc just find ways to earn more money by half baked stuff. You've not yet understood Shiaism, it's not related to matam or taziya! It is far superior to that. Please try reading it's basic aqaid. You'll know what's right what's wrong. Just like i changed my sect.
Posted by: Farhan virk | Dec 27, 2010 1:29:47 PM
“Objection, hearsay!” - Classic
Posted by: Tiny Tim | Jan 16, 2011 6:35:39 PM
What a shallow knowledge you have of islam and shiaism. This article is not even worth commenting. Get your DNA checked if you are true descendant or one of the ladies has been cheating!!!!
Posted by: Ahmed | Nov 25, 2012 9:07:45 AM
Excellent article. As many before me have said this article could well describe my own family. My 74 year old mother who recently retired after teaching english for over five decades here in the states and elsewhere could only say "I hope he is married to a nice shia syed najeeb ul turfain girl". This is a huge compliment if you know her. By the way, we too are Naqvi's and Syeds. We are probably related so send money :). Drop me a line. I think we can be good friends.
Posted by: SS | Mar 3, 2013 8:08:36 PM
At least the apologists for Islamic fundamentalism can't use the same excuses that they pull out when the targets of Islamic fundamentalist violence are western.
Posted by: Arun | Mar 4, 2013 2:56:13 AM
Excellent Koranic Exegisis by Farhan Virk. I was completely convinced. I wish he had not stopped his analysis when he did. He left me hangig in suspense with the question of "Wilayat"
Posted by: Sundar | Mar 4, 2013 7:23:56 AM
Post a comment