Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Akram's Razor

Home
Muslim
Tearing down Shiahs

Tearing down Shiahs

Last updated on: May 7, 2013 at 6:41 pm by Svend White

Tearing down Shiahs 2013-05-07T18:41:56-05:00 Svend White

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Speaking of SunniPath, we happened to have dinner with a Shiah friend and his wife last night and I was shown some statements posted on there concerning the Shiah tradition that really saddened me.

While I don’t always agree with SP, I’ve always been impressed by the profundity and knowledge of its contributors, and can only pray that I one day attain a fraction of their erudition and insight. So I was quite surprised when I saw a posting that included the following comments:

"…the Shi`a are considered Muslims who are people of innovation (ahl al-bid`a)…"

"The sunna with the people of innovation [i.e., Shiahs] is to avoid keeping their company"

"Their transmissions [that support differences in how Shiah Muslims pray] from Ahl al-Bayt are fabricated. […] Shi`ite methodology in hadith is laughably weak and self-contradictory.".

Now, I concede that I’m not a scholar who’s able to evaluate the substance of these disputes and therefore accept the guidance of those who are. I also believe in honestly acknowledging differences of opinion rather than papering them over for the sake of some nebulous sense of unity (in practice, that kind of "unity" often succeeds in denying others a voice rather than bringing people together), so I’m not at all against Sunnis and Shiahs debating the issues that divide them.

But it seems to me that one can pick a side while acknowledging that there is another side–that there are competing conceptions of Islam–and without needlessly denigrating that other side. After all, the Muslims are instructed in the Quran to refrain from even mocking the gods of idolators:

Revile not ye those whom they call upon besides Allah, lest they out of spite revile Allah in their ignorance. Thus have We made alluring to each people its own doings. In the end will they return to their Lord, and We shall then tell them the truth of all that they did. (6:108)

Even if the evidence is overwhelmingly for the Sunni view, I am surprised by how some Sunni Muslim scholars feel justified in speaking so dismissively of Shiah tradition and practice. I don’t understand it from a factual perspective. If one accepts, as I do, the Sunni stand, does it follow that Shiah scholars’ evidence is "laughably weak and self-contradictory"? (The subtext to such a sweeping declaration is that the whole Shiah scholarly establishment is intellectually, if not morally, bankrupt. That’s pretty problematic, as it seems to validate the worst prejudices and paranoid suspicions about Shiahs being "deviant".) Can’t Shiahs and Sunnis honestly disagree over the historical evidence? Don’t Shiahs have serious counterarguments (e.g., as this article notes, among other things, there is an ayat in the Quran that could be interpreted to support the practice of maatam) that need to be acknowledged and reviewed before coming to such a drastic conclusion?

Were we living in the Abbasid era–when Sunnis and Shiahs were vieing for control of the Ummah–perhaps there’d be a pragmatic argument for taking the low road, trashing your opponents to win the debate on the "street", where scholarly arguments hold less sway than appeals to pride and passion. But do we live in such a time today?

I mean no disrespect to Shiahs when I say this, but I don’t think there’s any danger of Al-Azhar being eclipsed by Qom anytime soon, at least not in terms of power and influence within the Muslim world. Sunni scholars’ hold on the reins
of Islamic orthodoxy in the eyes of most of the world is assured by the
much larger number of Sunnis than Shiahs.

Also, so far as I know there isn’t a significant trend of Sunnis "converting" [sic] to Shiah Islam. Sunnis aren’t struggling to hold their own against Shiah missionaries (as was the case in Muslim India a century ago, when Christian and Hindu missionaries were converting Muslims) .

The borders of these communities are more or less fixed by geography, demographics, and family history, so they’re generally not truly competing.

Given those realities, one would expect the analysis from the Sunni side to be temperate and dignified–in a certain sense, it is coming from a position of strength–but the opposite too often seems to be the case (and, it should be noted, is sometimes seen on the Shiah side, as well).

And you’d think we’d have bigger fish to fry than warning Sunnis to avoid hanging out with Shiahs. Given all the social problems we have in Muslim communities, I’m not sure a typical Sunni’s top priority needs to be avoiding the company of a Shiah. There’s no shortage of fellow Sunnis whose company one probably ought to avoid, to say nothing of how elastic this simple category of "Sunni" is for these purposes in an era of rampant secularism and religious experimentation. One wishes that such statements were contextualized more (e.g., are they referring to hardline Shiahs who vilify highly regarded Sahaba, or all Shiahs regardless of their actions or piety).

Then there’s the eerily familiar ring this kind of talk has. There’s a certain irony to Sufi scholars making categorical declarations that deny any intellectual legitimacy or dignity to Shiah beliefs, given how they were until quite recently on the receiving end of this phenonmenon at the hands of Wahhabis in many places. The confidence with which these declarations about the self-evident illegitimacy of maatam reminds me of the way all these vowel-heavy websites (i.e., those that assault native English speakers’ aesthetic sense by insisting on using unsightly transliterations such as "Islaam", "Qur’aan", …) discuss tawassul (e.g., this rant on the appropriately voweled http://www.allaahuakbar.net). For decades, Wahhabis (and the Wahhabized) defined Sufis and just about everybody else as outside the Ahl Sunnah wa Jama’at, and now that the tide is turning and Sufis are regaining their rightful voice within the community, some are taking a page from the Wahhabis and labeling Shiahs as being Ahl Bida etc. It seems like some us nodded off during class and missed the most important lesson of all.

Again, for me the point isn’t that we should become relativists who shy away from open debate, but that we should engage in such discussions with a sense of mutual respect and an awareness that there are competing paradigms (even when we think the evidence is clearly on our side). Also, nuances in the other side’s beliefs and practices need to be acknowledged (e.g., Sunni polemicists tend talk as if all Shiahs maim themselves, when the truth is that maatam takes many different forms with varying degrees of intensity and physicality).

I make these comments not to attack anybody–not that a critique from a lay person like me is terribly important in the grand scheme of things, anyway–but because I think that public statements denigrating a whole Muslim community need to be publicly challenged within the larger Muslim community because of the harm they do to us all. There are real world consequences to such offhand statements–including loss of life–in some parts of the Muslim world (e.g., Pakistan, Iraq) where Sunnis and Sunnis clash needlessly.

Finally, as a Muslim and a Sunni, I want these issues to be discussed seriously and in a way that results in increased clarity and understanding for Sunni and Shiah alike. I think a respectful and objective analysis would be far more effective towards this end. It would ultimately be more convincing, as well, I believe.

Allahu a`lam.

Update (2005-12-09):
SunniPath has since updated the webpage in question and rephrased the response I commented on in what I think is a balanced and respectful manner. I’m relieved to see that they also take these concerns seriously and are receptive to constructive criticism.

Update (2005-12-11):
Sh. Faraz has been kind enough to refer visitors to this posting from his blog, SeekersDigest.org.

*As he succinctly noted, "*The comments are fascinating… " I agree, and have learned a lot from these exchanges.

Boy, did my hits jump! SeekersDigest clearly has a lot of readers, which makes a dialogue like this all the more important. SunniPath obviously has a lot of influence. Insha’Allah, this discussion will contribute to improved understanding and mutual respect.

Islamic Thought

Previous Post

December 2, 2005

SunniPath.com on Tariq Ramadan and reformists

Next Post

December 10, 2005 The joys of interfaith (and intra-faith) dialogue

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category American Politics Animals in Islam Anti-Semitism Christian Jihadism Christianity Culture & the Arts Current Affairs Denmark Dogs in Islam Family life Film Gender Great MP3s Hate in America Imam W.D. Mohammed Interfaith Dialogue International Affairs Islam and the Left Islamic Thought Islamophobia Jihad Judaism Legos Link of the Day Marriage Misc Modernity/Post-Modernity Mormonism Multiculturalism Music Muslims in the Melting Pot Must-Listen Podcasts Non-Muslims and Islam Pakistan Pictures Pigs in Islam Polygamy Pork Progressive Muslims Race Relations Really Important Stuff Religion Required Reading Robert Spencer Scandinavia Science Science Fiction Sex in Islam So-called Globalization South Asia Star Trek Strange but True Studying Arabic Stupid Muslim Tricks Sufism/Tasawwuf Television The "Miami 7" hoopla The Corporate Media The Danish cartoons The GWOT The Jihad against Islam The Middle East Vikings! Wahhabism/Salafism Washington and the Middle East Web/Tech Women in Islam

Select a Month March 2014 February 2014 November 2013 September 2013 July 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 September 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many people did Jesus feed with five loaves and two fish?

Select your answer to see how you score.

About 12 About 7000 About 100 About 5000 men