Different usages of the term 'Shia'

Theological Shia or Shia in faith refers to someone who accepts and believes that Ali ibn Abī Talib was chosen as the immediate successor of Prophet Muhammad after his demise and he is the only religious authority among all companions. This concept is the specific meaning of the term Shia.[2]

After the demise of the prophet, there were few who stood with Ali and believed that he had the right to be the successor of the prophet and it was due to the declarations the prophet had. Ibn Athīr in his famous book Al-Kāmil narrates a significant point; after the demise of the prophet, when his household and the other companions were busy with the funeral ceremony, some of the Ansār (people of Medina) gathered in one of their public places to support their head Sa’d bin ‘Ubādah. Abū Bakr heard about it and went to them along with ‘Umar Bin Khattāb and Abu ‘Ubayda Al-Jarrāh. He asked them: “what’s the matter?” They said, “There must be a ruler from us and one from you”.[4] He said, “We are the rulers and you are the consultants. Now you can choose one of these two people who are with me.” Ansār told, “We do not pay allegiance except to Ali.”

The important point is that Ali was not present there and he was not among the nominees. There were Sa’d from Ansār and these three people from Immigrants, then why should the name of Ali be raised there? This fact indicates that there was such a background that Ali was introduced as the successor of the prophet before. Those who stood fast with this view even after Abū Bakr grasped power, were the true Shia whom we call theological Shia.[8] The Twelve Imami Shia that we have today, are the followers of these Shia. As Abān bin Taghlib one of the companions of Imam Ja’far Al-Sādiq elaborated the definition of Shia:

[9] فقال أبان له: يا أبا البلاد تدري من الشيعة الشيعة الذين إذا اختلف الناس عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه و آله أخذوا بقول علي عليه السلام، و إذا اختلف الناس عن علي أخذوا بقول جعفر بن محمد عليه السلام

  “O Abā Al-Bilād! Do you know who Shia is? Shia are those who follow the saying of Ali if people dispute over the saying of the prophet and also they follow Ja’far bin Muhammad if people dispute over the sayings of Ali.”    

This definition given by Abān refers to the religious authority after the prophet, to say that Shia follows Ali after the prophet and if there are disputes among Shia, they follow Ja’far bin Muhammad. It must be noted that at the time of Abān they were living with Imam Ja’far Al-Sādiq. Therefore, he did not mention Imam Musa Al-Kādidhm and the rest of the twelve Imams. Bearing this fact in mind, we see that those who had no dispute over the caliphate of Abū Bakr and ‘Umar and were called Shia for considering Ali prior to ‘Uthmān, they were not theological Shia.[10]

However, in the first century sometimes the term Shia was used with a kind of tolerance and they considered other groups which were not theological Shia to be Shia. There is a narration that a person said, “I was with Musayyib bin Najaba for twenty years, we sat in mosque and there were many Shias and we did not hear anyone of them criticizing the companions of the prophet, they did not have any criticism to the first and second caliph. Their only debate was whether Ali was prior to ‘Uthman.” According to this report, those who were called Shia did not reject the caliphate of the first two caliphs and they were only to consider Ali over ‘Uthman. It is very clear that this group cannot be considered theological Shia. Ibn Taymiyyah says:

[11] وَكَانَتِ الشِّيعَةُ أَصْحَابُ عَلِيٍّ يُقَدِّمُونَ عَلَيْهِ أَبَا بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ، وَإِنَّمَا كَانَ النِّزَاعُ فِي تَقَدُّمِهِ عَلَى عُثْمَانَ

“Shia were companions of Ali who considered Abū Bakr and ‘Umar prior to Ali and their dispute was over his priority over ‘Uthman.”

Certainly, this definition suits more those who are known as Sunni rather than Shia, therefore, them being called Shia is not like the way the term is used for those who theologically differ from Sunnis over the issue of the religious authority after the prophet who only refer to Ali and other Imams of Ahlulbayt. Actually, there being Shia was one of the two following concepts:[11]

Those people who loved Ahlulbayt were generally called Shia. This was opposite to what Umayyads did in spreading hatred against Ali and Ahlulbayt. Naturally, many Sunnis will be considered Shia from this perspective, as the poem is narrated by Imam Shāfi'ī saying that:[12] إِن كَانَ رفضا حب آل مُحَمَّ فليشهد الثَّقَلَان أَنِّي رَافِضِي

“If loving Ahlulbayt is to be Rafidi (a term used for Shia by their opponents) so men and Jinn should bear witness that I am also one of them.”Even some outstanding Sunni scholars were accused of being Shia just because they narrated Hadiths in the virtue of Ali. Hakim Al-Neyshāburī who is a well-known scholar in the Sunni world and he has compiled the book Al-Mustadrak ‘Alā Al-Sahīhayn was also accused to be a Rafidi (Shia) because he expressed love towards the household of the prophet.[13]

The third group of Shia was the political Shia. They were Shias in the sense that they accepted the caliphate of Ali and worked under his banner and supported him against his enemies in the Battles of Camel, Nahrawan, and Siffīn. In this sense, some of them at first were Shia, namely a political Shia, and then turned to be Shia of Mu’āwīya. Also, some of these people became Khārijītes (renegades) and turned to be the enemy of Ali. Shimr bin Di Al-Jaushan who is a key figure among the killers of Husain bin Ali was also one of them.[14]

As it is known, this debate of Ali or ‘Uthman was something that was raised after the killing of ‘Uthman and emphasized by Mu’āwīya who divided Muslims into Alawis and ‘Uthmānīs. He propagated that Ali was involved in killing ‘Uthman and due to this, he was not a legitimate ruler. This propaganda finally resulted in the battle of Siffīn. So, this made the Muslims to be divided, and a group was called Shia because they stood with Ali against Mu’āwīya, while they did not have the belief of the theological Shia about Ali, but according to them Ali was the rightful caliph who was chosen by Muslims and Mu’āwīya was a rebel. This was the essence of their being Shia. The political Shia joined the army of Ali when Talha and Zubayr waged the battle of Camel.[15] Later, some part of these political Shia separated from Ali and formed Khārijītes (renegades), but the rest still stayed with him and also fought for him against Mu’āwīya when the third war was imposed on Ali by him. Even, describing Ziyād bin Abīhi who was an aggressive and harsh enemy towards Shia, Ibn Hajar considers him to be from Shia who joined Mu’āwīya.As it is visible, using the term Shia for a person like Ziyād is in a political sense, i.e. he was in the party Ali and later he changed his party and went to join Mu’āwīya. Al-Tabarānī says: “Ziyād used to chase the Shia of Ali and killed them.” Thus, most of the people who were called Shia at that time were not Shia in faith.[16]