1

THE ORIGINS OF THE SHIA

By Mufti Mohammed Sajjad

And say, "The Truth has come, and falsehood has departed. Indeed all falsehood is [by its
nature] bound to vanish" (The Holy Quran 17:81), and
God chooses (and pulls) toward Himself anyone He wills, and guides to Himself anyone who
turns to Him (to seek guidance) (The Holy Quran 42:13).
There are some who assume that if Muslims themselves are divided then that somehow
amounts to evidence that the faith itself is false or deficient. Without inspecting the source of
this division, to make this judgement is similar to passing judgement against a leading
smartphone maker because faulty imitations have flooded the market. A fairer approach
would be to ask how and why such distortions arose and is the faith itself damaged by their
existence? As for why they occur? This can be answered from the angle of human free will.
There is an over-arching wisdom in Gods permitting competing voices to have a stall in the
central square of ideas religious or non-religious. As free agents it forms a test to see if we
truly seek out and embrace the truth of which God has promised is manifestly clear from all
falsehood. Our search should be like our search for the genuine bargain in the marketplace.
We would curse ourselves if having returned home with our goodies clasped tightly in our
hands we discovered that a smooth-talking stallholder had pulled the wool over our eyes. In
the bustling market place of beliefs and ideas, an individual should be even more diligent and
discerning. It should not be the case that one resigns oneself to embracing something merely
because it looks trendy or because of family pressure or because its the most convenient

option. Obviously these consideration having nothing to do with the question of truth and
falsehood and only indicate to a personal weakness made manifest by the test.
One Faith
Historically, there was only one Islam without any branches. This is what later became
defined as Sunni Islam. A historical dispute within the community created the circumstances
conducive for a minor distortion to arise and even today it continues to have a relatively small
following. The Pew Research Center calculated that of the 1.6 billion Muslims, a projection
of their affiliation show that 87% will be Sunni and 13% Shi`a.1 The overwhelming majority
of Muslims have in fact always been Sunni throughout history.
The word Sunni is a helpful starting point for this subject as it reveals the genesis of this
split. It was a term that existed well before this split and meant litrally the way. It was a
word used to describe the way the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did or
instructed something to be done. A muslim would say This is from the Sunna and this is
opposed to the Sunna. So we see that from the beginning, and without denial from the Shi`a,
the Holy Quran was never assumed to be the sole source of Islamic law and teaching. The
Prophets (peace and blessings be upon him) example or Sunna was equally important. The
Holy Quran itself outlined the clarificatory role of the Prophet (peace and blessing be upon
him). It stated: We have sent down the Book to you, only because you may clarify to them
what they differed about, and (so that it may be) guidance and mercy for a people who
believe (The Holy Quran, 16:64).
It is also beyond contention that those who became the means for this second source of
revelation would be the individuals in front of whom it was being articulated, whether by
hearing or seeing the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). These were his deciples and
companions. Appreciating this essential role of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon
him) in ensuring correct appliance of the Holy Quran, the Muslim world diligently went
about to systematically and authoratatively preserve all such reports that described the Sunna.
These were known as Hadith. There are many collections of Hadith like that of the famous
Imam al-Bukhari , entitled Sahih al-Bukhari, which contains over 7,500 such narrations .
Each hadith always comes with a chain of narration to validate its authenticity. This chain are
names of the individuals who related the hadith. At the end of the chain will always be the
name of the eye-witness companion who was the first to transmitt what he saw or heard to the
next generation.2 When the later Shi`a distortion arose, its beliefs clashed fundamentally with
1

Website: http://www.pewforum.org/2011/01/27/future-of-the-global-muslim-population-sunni-and-shia/ .
They narrated to the next generation, who memorised what they heard and narrated these same narrations to
the next generation until the 2nd and 3rd centuries when the major collections were compiled that effectively did
away with the need of the oral tradition. It is in fact a testament to the incredible rigour and care taken in relation
to the Sunna that although the books now existed that preserved the hadith/traditions, the scholars kept the
parallel oral tradition alive. Till today there are many scholars who are heirs of this tradition who can, purely
from their memories, relay thousands of hadith mentioning every scholar in the chain from themselves to the
Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). Generally the chain will have 25-30 names who were genuine living
figures who taught hadith somewhere in the Middle East. It is a mighty acheivement and one that is totally
befitting what Muslims consider a source of revelation on par with the Holy Quran.
2

this major source of Islamic guidance. The belief of the Twelver Shi`a made it obligatory for
Ali (the cousin of the Prophet -peace and blessings be upon him- ) to have succeeded the
Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) as leader of the community. Because this of
course did not happen, it led the Shi`a to declare the companions, the very transmitters of the
Sunna, as having become apostates. It was they who after all did not elect Ali. They instead
elected and pledged allegiance to the more senior companion, Abu Bakr. Thus the Sunna
necessarily became not just undermined but entirely rejected. The Shi`a, as we shall show,
went about then creating their own traditions to fill the void. In any case it becomes clear why
later Muslims, those who were heirs of the Prophets legacy via the companions, used the the
term Ahl al-Sunna for themselves. Ahl al-Sunna means the people of Sunna, as opposed to
those who rejected the Sunna. In other words these were those Muslims who, with the text of
the Holy Quran, give primacy to the practice and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (peace
and blessings be upon him) as transmitted by his many companions. The word Shi`a litrally
means a Party of supporters, much like a political group.3 The Shi`a promoted themselves as
the supporters of Ali and his family and used the term to describe themselves. Muslims in the
early years however never called themselves Sunnis and nor did those early moderate Shi`a
call themselves Shi`a for their baisc beliefs did not diverge from those of the Sunnis. What
occurred between these two groups of Muslims was non-doctrinal issue, it was purely
political. Some of those who came under the broad innocent term of Shi`a, however, later
began actively propogating divergent beliefs to bolster their political support of Ali and his
descendants and at the same time called themselves Muslims. This made the scholars of the
community feel it now necessary to use another appropriate qualifier in order to alert the
unwary that this was no longer an innocent affiliation. It was not just being restricted to
believing that Ali was a more preferable leader. It had slowly morphed to well beyond that. It
had become a dangerous and unwarranted innovation that fundamentally attacked the faith.
The Psychology of the Sectarian
Before we understand how this attempt to distort the faith played out in historical terms, it
will be helpful to understand the basic motivation that led some amongst the faithful to
effectively pursue a course of self-harm. It is the same sombre reason that leads a youngster
in love, who is told by his mother that his sweetheart is no good for him to feel incapable of
accepting the motherly advice. He too will make-up tales and fanciful excuses to protect his
love. The distortion was the product of individuals extremely small in number whose love
snowballed into something so excessive that it led them to attempt to recarve an Islam that
reflected their emotions. They felt love, as all believers naturally do, for the noble family of
the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). This love however became so extreme that it
did not matter if teachings were fabricated to enhance the status of the family of the Prophet
(peace and blessings be upon him), specifically by conferring upon them infallibility
(`ismah). This split is nothing more than a human enterprise which cannot be a stain upon the
faiths credentials. Not least because the faith itself warned believers of succumbing to this
distortion and put in place measures to check it. The Holy Quran warned of excessive zeal as
3

The dictionary explanation of Shiah explains, the followers and assistants of a manany people that
have combined in, or for, an affair.Afterwards, Shiah became a name of A particular party [or sect]. See E.
W. Lanes, Arabic-English Lexicon, vol. 2, p. 1633, Islamic Texts Society, 1984.

it can corrupt the faith; it was what made some early Christians4 distort the original teaching
of Jesus:
O people of the Book, be not excessive in the matter of your Faith, and do not say about God
anything but the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, is only a Messenger of God, and
His Word that He had delivered to Mary, and a spirit from Him. So, believe in God and His
Messengers. Do not say Three. Desist. That is better for you. God is the only One God. He
is far too pure to have a son. To Him belongs what is in the heavens and what is in the earth.
And God is enough to trust in (4:171).
The Prophet(peace and blessings be upon him) likewise said: Do not eulogise me as the
Christians did with the son of Mary. I am but Gods slave, so say: The slave of God and His
messenger.5
Conspiracy Theories in Islamic History
A string of historical injustices occurred to the family of the Prophet after his (peace and
blessings be upon him) death that enraged all believers. Incredible provocation merged with
profound love and led a small number of individuals to espouse views that elevated the
family of the Prophet beyond anything sanctioned by the texts. Eventually, some of these
emotive voices morphed into a sect. Academics guess it was the beginning of the 10th century
(three centuries after the Prophets death -peace and blessings be upon him- ) that the belief
system promulgated by the Twelver Shi`a we know today surfaced which actually shows
the resilience of the faith to distortion.6 Professor Kennedy writes:
It was in [10th century] Buyid Baghdad that Twelver Shiism (so-called from the fact
that its adherents acknowledge twelve imams, the first of whom was Ali) developed
both as a system of belief and as a religious community.7
For the first few decades after the Prophets (peace and blessings be upon him) death all
Muslims were united. The leadership of the community was decided through a kind of
democractic process based on merit. The first ruler to be elected after the Prophet (peace and
blessings be upon him) was the undisputed closest companion of the Prophet (peace and
blessings be upon him), Abu Bakr (573-634 CE). Virtually all the senior companions in
unison agreed upon his selection. At this point the younger Ali (601-661 CE), the cousin and
son-in-law of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), expressed a contrary belief. He
indicated that had he also been consulted in that first consultation a different result may have
emerged. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in his final illness had not left clear
instructions to decide the matter so a difference of opinion could naturally occur. Eventually,
Ali accepted the choice of Abu Bakr to be the Islamic head of state. The initial friction
between the two ended there. Though in real terms it had been resolved, it continued to exist
in the memories, not of Ali or any of his close confidents, but a faction that continued to
silently harbour resentment for the other companions for their failing to bestow the reins of
4

Indeed, before the conversion of the Roman Empire, and its subsequent support of Pauline doctrine
(Catholicism), most Chrisians, who included the Ebionites, the Nazarenes, the Corinthians, the Basilidians, the
Carpocratians, the Hypsistarians, the Symmachians and the Elkesaites, did not believe that Jesus was God.
5
Al-Bukhari, Muhammad Ismail, Sahih al-Bukhari, p. 580, Hadith no. 3445, Dar al-Salam, 1999.
6
Hodgson, Marshall G. S., How Did The Early Shi`a Become Sectarian, p. 9, vol. 75, Journal of the American
Oriental Society, 1955.
7
Kennedy, Hugh, The Prophet And The Age Of The Caliphates, p. 227, Longman, 1996.

government to Ali. Later, as the Twelver Shi`a retrospectively spun a new narrative upon
historical events to support their innovations, that initial difficult verbal exchange between
Ali and Abu Bakr, was made to appear more sinister. It was said to be evidence of Ali trying
to claim his divine right. Here is the narration and it hardly shows that Ali believed in
hereditary succession. His pledging allegiance to Abu Bakr, a historical fact that the Shi`a are
unable to deny and nor indeed do they attempt to8, only further makes the proposition totally
unsupported:
Ali [after six months] sought to reconcile with Abu Bakr and pledge allegiance. He had not
pledged his allegiance for these months. So he sent a message to Abu Bakr to visit him alone
without anyone else not wanting Umar to be present. Umar advised Abu Bakr: ByAllah do
not go to them by yourself. Abu Bakr said: What can they possibly do to me? By Allah I
will go to them. So Abu Bakr did visit them. Ali began to speak: O Abu Bakr, we recognise
your virtuosity and what Allah bestowed upon you. We would never challenge you for a
goodness Allah brought to you. But you did act in the affair alone whilst we were thinking
that we had a right due to our relationship to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings
be upon him). He continued addressing Abu Bakr until Abu Bakrs eyes filled with tears.
Then when Abu Bakr spoke he said: By the One in whose hand is my soul, maintaining my
relations with the relatives of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is more
important to me than maintaining my relations with my own relatives. Ali said to Abu
Bakr: Tonight is the appointed time for me to pledge allegiance. When Abu Bakr finished
the midday prayer, he ascended the pulpit. He testified that there was no god but Allah and
Muhammad was His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and then explained the
matter of Ali and the reason for his delay in pledging allegiance. He then asked for Allahs
forgveness. [Ali, who was also present, stepped forward] and testified that there was no god
but Allah and Muhammad was His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). He then
emphasised the right of Abu Bakr and his actions were not due to envy nor out of denial of
that which Allah had favoured him with. Rather, [Ali said] it was only that we thought that
we may have a share in the matter [of deciding who the Khalif will be], but the decision took
place without us9 and that upset us. He then went to Abu Bakr and pledged his allegiance to
him. The people then surrounded Ali saying: You did the right thing and how well you
did!10

We can see that at the very beginning there were no Shi`a as they came to be known.
Moreover the palpable non-religious, normal worldly origins of this dispute are clearly
visible. Hence to imply that these differences reflect negatively on the faith itself is
untenable. With this being the situation, decades passsed by and the innocent grievance felt
by some kept simmering. Then some thing happened that created a vicious storm in which
this festering discontent gained a great momentum. In 680 CE Husayn, the son of Ali, left
Madina to travel to Iraq where he had been invited to reside. When his caravan of men,
women and children reached the outskirts of Iraq, they were put under siege by apprehensive
political authorities. Within days, sixty miles south of Baghdad at Kerbala, Husayn and many
of his family were brutally massacred by the same authorities. Sunnis agree that the political
class at this time was no ideal in respect to their piety and Islamic credentials. What
transpired was a gross injustice that revulsed the entire Muslim world. This climate however
provided discontented elements a gust of wind to their sails. Amazingly, even after the
8

The pledging of allegiance to Abu Bakr is such a secure historical fact that it is recorded in numerous Shi`a
books like Furu al-Kafi and Kitab al-Rawda.
9
The unexpected circumstances that arose at the time required a quick resolution to the question of succession.
There were real fears of the community becoming fragmented. No one would have prevented or been undesirous
of Ali partcipating in that meeting, but due to his involvement with the Prophets burial he was not present.
10
Al-Nisapuri, Muslim, Sahih Muslim, p. 780, Hadith nos. 4580 and 4581, Dar al-Salam, 1998.

outrage of Kerbala, the Shi`a system of belief still did not properly emerge. Certainly, one
does find a variety of moderate views emerging around this time. If one combined those who
held this spectrum of views, they still only represented a minority and in most cases the views
they held were not controversial in religious terms. Most of these groups merely emphasised
the special position of the family of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).
Historically, the significant groups among these early Shi`a only suggested that Ali or his
descendant, like Husayn were more preferable candidates to be rulers. They did not challenge
the validity of the first Islamic rulers considered by Sunnis as legitimate (Abu Bakr, Umar,
Uthman radiyallahu anhum) nor did they frame this issue as a theological issue. It was a nonreligious issue arising from a political difference on succession. Nothing more substantial.
Shi`a groups like the Zaydiyya11 were of this category. Such groups are termed by the modern
Shi`a as Shi`a but were to all intents and purposes comfortably within the Sunni
community. They were considered orthodox believers with slight preferences.
However, from among the followers of these groups (especially the extreme among them like
the Qaramita12) an independent innovation evolved into Twelver Shiaism (which is the main
form of Shiaism today). These individual devotees of the family of the Prophet (peace and
blessings be upon him) were tempted to project their partisanship in the more powerful terms
of doctrine and belief. One proof of this is that in the 10th century the Shi`a historian Hasan
Al-Nawbakhtis writes a comprehensive survey of all the various groups known as Shi`a.
His testimony being as it comes from the other camp is very weighty. Of the many groups he
mentions, none of the major Shi`a groups held the belief that it was mandatory to install
one of twelve Imams (i.e. Ali and one his male descendants) as ruler or that the first three
Sunni Khalifs had usurped the right of others (the belief of the modern day Twelvers). AlNawbakhti definitely did not hold this belief. It is here things become really interesting. As
he describes the Shi`a sects one after the other, he makes mention of an insignificant
individual whose beliefs tally the most with the dominent Shi`a theology today. He mentions
that a convert to Islam from Judaism by the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba (d. 7th century circa),
possessed the strangest of beliefs. His beliefs were so bizarre that Ali himself had him severly
chastised. Al-Nawbakhti tells us He was the first to declare that the imamate of Ali was
mandatory.13
This statement is profound in that it categorically shows that this belief was a departure from
the norm even amongt the Shi`a of that time. Its basis was not in the solid sources of the
Holy Quran and Hadith. Had it been the author would have stated it, rather he says this
colourful individual was the first to propogate it. To propose a grander origin for this sect
than this (without indulging in retrospective interpretations) cannot be supported by the
historical record.
After Kerbala, people from the common Muslims who were reeling from the shocking
savagery heaped upon the family of the Prophet became more receptive to hear a message
that honoured the oppressed. This appeal to the emotions of the masses continues to
characterise Shiaism. Every year the tragic events of Kerbala are commemorated by Shi`a as
fervently as a regular religious festival. It took another three centuries, however, before
enough strength and material had coalesced to represent an independent sect. The creators of
11

Al-Nawbakhti, Al-Hasan (Translated by Abbas Kadhim), Shia Sects, p. 65, ICAS Press, 2007.
Al-Nawbakhti, Al-Hasan (Translated by Abbas Kadhim), Shia Sects, pp. 127-131, ICAS Press, 2007. This
was a bona fide sect and believed in seven Imams. They held that the Prophet had transferred the Prophethood
and the Message to Ali at Ghadir Khum (a lake located north of Mecca) in 632 CE.
13
Al-Nawbakhti, Musa, Kitab Firaq al-Shia, pp. 32-33, Dar alrashad, Cairo, 2010. See also Shia Sects (Kitab
Firaq al-Shia) by al-Hasan ibn Musa Nawbakhti, page 68-69, (transl.) Abbas K. Khadim, ICAS, London, 2007.
12

this new theology can be likened to the conspiracy theorists that arise in all civilisations. At a
time of a major crisis they voice strange opinions the majority simply ignore. In the case of
these theo-conspiracy theorists, there is an added dimension. The temptation to fabricate
narrations and provide false interpretations of established texts to support their cause.14 This
dimension makes it more difficult for emotionally involved individuals, who often lack the
tools of the scholar, to sift through fact and fiction. The fabricators of narrations supporting a
revisionist version of Islamic history often did this believing that because their goal was
noble it absolved them of wrongdoing. Even leading non-Muslim academics, who provide an
outsiders view on this dispute, are taken aback by how matter-of-factly individuals went
about concocting a brand new body of traditions to support their new belief. Professor W.
M.Watt writes:
Yet it is amazing how much sheer invention eventually came to be accepted after it had been
sufficiently often repeated. The assertion that Ali had been designated by Muhammad as his
successor was, in the eyes of non-Muslim historians, one such invention. What is not so
clearly realised is that the Imamites and other Shites, besides repeating the basic assertion,
gradually constructed a vast corpus of material to support it.15

Professor Golziher considered the early Shi`a attempt at superimposing their new doctrines
on to sacred texts whose meanings were already firmly established and understood the
pinnacle of arbitrary and forced interpretation.16 The frenetic activity of fabricating
statements to suppport doctrine was enveloping early Shiasm as a whole. No one could
stop it. When many of the Imams passed away a group of sects would arise to debate and
contest who should be the successor Imam. Just to take one important example, the death of
the eleventh Imam, Hasan al-Askari (846-874 CE), is said to have caused some fifteen sects to
come into existence. Each sect would try to back up their preferred successor by selfconcocting religious texts. Here is Ibn Qibah (d. 927 CE), another early Shi`a scholar of the
10th Century, throwing his hands up at the state of the shenanigans of various different Shi`a
groups. Note that he clearly states that even the Imams (that is the eleven Imams who were
of course Sunni in terms of their own belief) themselves were powerless to stop the rogue
individuals who were creating the outlandish doctrines and reports. They counselled that the
safest route is to only accept narrations that have been transmitted by mutiple authorities
(tawatur), basically what Sunnis were doing:
(Ibn Qibah) I say - And upon Allah is reliance The difference of opinion found amongst the
Imamiyah [Shi`a] is only due to the fabricators (kadhdhboon) who deceivingly entered
amongst them from time to time and from era to era until the affliction became immense
(azuma al-bala). And their predecessors were a people who were scrupulous, diligent and of
sound disposition, they were not people of scholarship (ashab al-nazar) and judgement. Thus,
when they saw an unverified narrator (mastoor) relating a narration, they held a good opinion
regarding him and accepted it. So when this mounted up, a complaint was raised with their
Imams -upon them be peace- who commanded them to accept that which there is consensus
on, they did not adhere and continued in their customary manner. Thus the deceit (khiyanah)
was due to them rather than their Imams. The Imam also did not know of all these false

14

The Shi`a have created their own religious lore. The most famous Shi`a source book in this regard is Usul alKafi of Muhammad ibn Yaqub al-Kulayni (864-941 CE). One can actually spot the deficiency in the reports it
narrates by the fact, unlike in the major Sunni sources such as Sahih al-Bukhari, there are chasms in its chains of
narration. This is a clear indication that many reports cannot be authentically ascribed to the original speaker. In
fact, the Shi`a themselves recognise there is a big question mark over its authenticity, but are unperturbed by it.
15
Watt, Montgomery, The Formative Period of Islamic Thought, p. 169, Oneworld Publications, 2009.
16
Goldziher, Ignaz, Introduction to Islamic Theology and Law, p. 179, Princeton University press, 1981.

8
reports which were narrated, as he cannot see the unseen; he is only an upright servant who
knows the Book and the Sunnah and knows of the reports of his partisans which reach him.17

The Four Proofs

[1] Ghayba (Occultation)
The fundamental Shi`a belief that had finally become settled upon by the 10th century was
that Ali and his male descendents, twelve in all (living between 670-874 CE), had a divinely
appointed special status (Al-Imamah or Al-Wilayah). There was a reason that the pioneers of
Shi`a theology only spoke of twelve Imams. They believed that the world would end after the
last of these hereditary Imams. To their shock after the eleventh Imam, Hasan al-Askari (846-874
CE), no male child was born to foist upon him the title of the twelfth Imam. The line of hereditary
Imams had it itself naturally come to an end, but it was still the ninth century. The last Imam was
supposed to come at the end of time. This led to a bizzare situation. Because only one of the Imams
could be the leader of the believers, it meant that the Umma was to be leaderless for the next thousand
plus years till the twelfth Imam appeared.
Most Shi`as of the time could no longer keep up with this undeniable exposure of falsehood and
dissappeared (presumably many just returned to becoming Sunnis). The majority of the Shi`a sects
accepted that Imam Hasan al-Askari did not leave any progeny, up to the point that two thirds of the
Shia sects ten of the fifteen sects were of this view, as documented in Maqalaat al-Firaq by
Sa`d al-Qummi (d. 913 CE).18 If those for whom Shi`a doctrine is the touchstone of truth , and

who would have spared no effort to inform the world of the birth of a child, say Imam Hasan
al-Askari had no son it is safe to say there was no son. Indeed they were merely
acknowledging a historical reality the rest of the community likewise did.
The die-hard devotees a minority amongst the Shi`a of the time however clearly would
not accept defeat and quickly papered over this chasm of a crack by creating another doctrine
known as ghayba (occultation). They taught that there was a child born in secrecy (even
though no one saw him in reality) and that he is very much alive. Where was he, because no
one saw this child? The reply comes he entered a cave and remains there till this day. It does
not matter to these Shi`as that over a thousand years have no elapsed as he remains in this
case. For the outsider, however, this is evidence of blatant invention, for in addition to it
being shockingly irrational (what would be the purpose of such a majestic leader whilst
being in the world and of the world to hide in a cave as the world falls apart on the
outside?), it is neither supported by religious texts or the historical reality.
[2] Alis Endorsement and Approval of the Leadership of
Those Who Had Supposedly Corrupted the Faith
Then of course there is the other major problem with the scheme of succession proposed by
the Shi`a conspiracy theorists. It clashes with the real historical scheme that had the support
of the companions, the general body of Muslims and the very historical figures the Shi`a
claim should have been the rightful Imams. One can guage how uncontroversial the historical
scheme of succession was to these figures by the example of Ali. It is undisputed that Ali
17

Ibn Babawayh, Abu Ja`far (923-991 CE), Kamal al-din wa tamam al-nima fi ithbat al-ghaybah wa kashf alhayra, vol. 1, pp. 109-112, Tehran, 1971.
18
Al-Qummi, Sa`d, Kitab al-Maqalaat wa al-firaq, p. 115.

never initiated a civil war, or the beginnings of such, during the reigns of Abu Bakr (and after
him Umar and Uthman). There was not so much as a falling out between them. Yet by
appointing anyone other than Ali (thereby opposing what was divinely ordained according to
the Shi`a) was nothing less than heresy and rebellion of the highest order. But on the ground,
the historical record makes no mention of what would have undoubtedly caused an
unprecedented conflict. Recall the verbal exchange between Ali and Abu Bakr cited earlier.
Other immutable facts refute this supposed derailment of the faith. If these companions were
opposing the divine decree it would mean that (as Shi`a scholars like Kulayni do say) they
had left Islam. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), however, himself (with the
admittance of the Shi`a) considered these companions to be the best and most virtuous of the
believers at the time his soul left this world.19 Ali lived contentedly under the rulers who were
at the helm of government in his time. His complete recognition of their authority can be also
gauged from the fact that he married one of his daughters (Umm Kulthum) to the second of
these Khalifs (Umar). It is explicable that if these succeeding rulers had indeed distorted the
real faith and usurped authority from its religiously legitimate heir, that Ali would have been
not just silent regarding it, but unambiguously showing of his approval.
[3] No Mention of the Special Leadership of the Twelve Imams
The above proofs are clearly insurmountable. However they are minor in comparison to
another flaw. Shi`a belief is not only that rulership could only be for one of the twelve
Imams, but that each one of them is infallible (ma`soom). This means, theoretically at least,
their pronouncements could abolish the orders of the Holy Quran and the Prophets example
(Sunna) (peace and blessings be upon him). It also shows how thoroughly the Shia are
opposed to the Sunna. It is not just that their belief demolishes the vast corpus of Hadith that
was meticulously gathered by thousands of scholars, it diminishes the legal status of the
Sunna.
Clearly, it is a doctrine of epic theological proportions. It is therefore difficult to explain why
there is not a single verse in the Holy Quran that remotely supports it. Yet the Holy Quran,
by consensus of all Muslims, is the basic source of evidence for the faith. Indeed it contains
verses that prove doctrines of a much lesser importance than this one. It is an universal axiom
that the greater the claim, the greater the burden of proof. The belief in the angels, the
hereafter, belief in pre-destination, etc., are repeatedly mentioned in the Holy Quran.
According to the Shi`a, belief in the twelve Imams is right up there amongst the most
fundamental Islamic beliefs. Shi`a scholars list the basic beliefs as: (1) Belief in One God (2)
Messengership of the Prophet Muhammad (3) The Hereafter (4) Imamship of the Twelve
19

For example, it is undisputed, that when in his final illness the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him
became so weak that he was unable to lead the congregational prayer, he insisted that Abu Bakr should lead the
believers, which he did. The Imam of the congregational prayer is a role only to be given to the most pious in
the community. Uthman was so trustworthy for the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him that he wed two
of his daughters to him. It is inconceviable that these senior companions who sacrificed so much for the Prophet
would have been the ones to distort their beloved Prophets peace and blessings be upon him teachings after his
death. There are so many verses and hadith, found both in Sunni and Shi`a sources, that praise these companions
that it would require a large volume to enunciate them. The Shi`a also seem unperturbed at how strange their
narrative sits with any outside observer, for it means that the foremost and majority of the followers of the
Prophet peace and blessings be upon him, left Islam with the selection of Abu Bakr. It jars with, amongst the
many verses, the verse that tells the believers that with the conquest of Mecca (at the end of the Prophets
mission), rather than Islam experiencing a collapse and all-round desintigration, it would herald a golden age
with mass conversions and the faiths growth: When comes the Help of God, and Victory, and you see the
people enter Gods Religion in crowds, celebrate the praises of thy Lord, and seek His Forgiveness: For He is
the Most-Forgiving (Chapter 110).

10

Imams.20 Kulayni, the premier Shi`a scholar, likewise states that hereditary rulership of the
twelve (al-wilayah) is a cornerstone belief much like prayer (al-salah) and poor-tax (alzakah): Islam is built on five pillars: al-Wilayah, al-Salah, al-Zakah, fasting in the month of
Ramadhan and the Hajj.21
It is inexplicable then how such a major belief that was to rock the Islamic community to its
core, causing the most lasting devison amongst Muslims, is not mentioned in a single verse of
the Holy Quran. It is inexplicable why the Holy Quran considered important to mention
another ancient scheme of leadership, yet this scheme which was comparatively more
important was considered (if we follow Shi`a belief) unimportant. The Holy Quran speaks of
how God raised up twelve leaders for the Jewish nation:
Allah made a covenant of old with the Children of Israel, and We raised amongst them twelve
leaders, and Allah said: I am with you (5:12).
This verse is speaking of events that occurred centuries before the time of the Prophet (peace
and blessings be upon him). It is patently obvious that if there was a divine scheme of
leadership that the Muslims were obligated to follow, as claimed by the Shi`a, it would have
more urgency to be mentioned in the Holy Quran. God in His perfect knowledge would have
been aware that a huge dispute regarding the mandatory nature of this scheme would arise.
The umma would suffer a terrible division due to it. Yet there is not a single verse in the Holy
Quran that speaks of the appointment of the twelve Shi`a Imams. Why would twelve leaders
from a bygone age be deserving of mention but not the doctrine of the twelve Imams who
Shi`as consider the only rightful leaders of the Muslim community? A doctrine which led
them to declare as disbelievers the closest companions of the Prophet peace and blessings be
upon him.
[4] Caste
Another definitive proof for the baselessness of Twelver Imamship is that this belief
effectively means that Government and rank in society is a thing that can be inherited and not
based upon merit. This opposes a vast number of texts that negate discrimination based upon
a caste or bloodline. Islam indeed came to dismantle the belief in special privilege based on
caste and lineage. Indeed our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) took pains to
equalise mankind. The Holy Quran states:
O mankind, We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nation and
tribes, so that you may know each other. Surely the noblest of you, in Gods sight, is the one
who is most pious of you. Surely God is All-Knowing, All-Aware. (49:13)

More details on this subject can be found in THE PEOPLE OF THE HOUSE:
Ahl al-Sunnah & its relationship with ahl al-Bayt, A Sunni Shia Dialogue, which represents a
comprehensive overview.
Mohammed Sajjad
[Version 2 1/7/16]
[email protected]
This document may be reproduced, translated, shared, printed and published provided it is
not altered in any way.
20
21

Khomeini, Rohullah, Kashf al-Asrar (Arabic), p. 115, printed in Jordon.

al-Kulayni, Muhammad, Al-Kafi, Chapter on the Pillars of Islam, p. 349, vol. 2, narration: 1496.

11