Third alleged contradiction
"Abu Ishaq Ibn al-Nadim, a famous Shi''i writer, did not agree to neither of the above theories and wrote in his al-Fihrist that Shi''ism started at the Battle of Jamel"
Now these are the comments of Ehsan Ellahi NOT al-Nadim. Did he state he DID not agree with the above named scholars? He continues:
"thus explained: "When Talha and Az-Zubair disagreed with Ali and accepted no less than the revenge for the blood of Othman, and Ali mobilized his forces to fight them, those who followed him were then given the title, Shi''ites." [al-Fihrist, Ibn al-Nadim: p.249, from Ash-Shi''ati wat-Tashayyu'' by Ehsan Elahi Zaheer, p.25
Nadim is stating:
Those that sided with Ali (as) at Jamal were called Shi''a
Since Elahi is deceased could the scholar who copied this unashamedly show us the words where the author states that this was the FIRST time that the words Shi''a was used? Nadim is stating that during the period leading up to the Battle of Jamal, the word Shi''a of ''Ali became absolutely prevalent, not according to divine sanction but according to the opinions of the people. Hence this was based on political affiliation, those that sided with Ali were his Shi''a - his political allies, it DOES NOT mean that Shi''as never existed before that! It was here that the title became absolutely clear cut, those individuals who fought with khalifa Ali (as) were called his Shi''a. How is this inconsistent with the previous narrations?
Adapted from the book: "Historic Background of Shiism"
Share this article