Sunni-Shia relations: Friction in context

Last updated on: January 21, 2008 at 6:00 pm by Guest Contributor

Sunni-Shia relations: Friction in context 2008-01-21T18:00:01-04:00 Guest Contributor

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.

Can’t we all get along?

The popular explanation of the Sunni-Shii friction is that it is a matter of sectarian religious difference. In reality, there are three fault lines trigger friction between Sunnis and Shiis: the fiqhi line, the mental image of history, and folkways. Gripped by group identity conflict, Sunni and Shii forget the ample common ground between them at the level of values and ultimate socioeconomic aims.

To the average Muslim, fiqh stands for Islam itself as it represents an easy-to-understand template of the good conduct. Most people become troubled by minor fiqhi disagreements because they are not fully aware of the extent to which there are acceptable fiqhi variations within the corpus of ulama’s work. When it comes to the Sunni-Shii divide, the average person would interpret such fiqhi variation as a deviation from Sharia itself. Interestingly, the fiqhi gap among some of the major Sunni schools is larger than the gap between the Jaafari Shii school on one hand and some Sunni schools on the other. Few may know that Jaafar al-Sadiq (the principal figure of the Jaafari school) was the teacher of Abu Hanifa, the famous Sunni scholar. He was also the son of Abu Bakr’s granddaughter.

This aspect of disagreement becomes further problematized when cast as a creedal disagreement, as a matter of aqidah, citing some offshoot ideas that were associated with Shiism. However, this is a gross miscategorization since Sunnis and Shiis mainlines totally agree on the creedal basis of Islam: oneness of Allah, the prophethood of Muhammad, the Quran as the final revealed book, etc. Notably, Imam Ashari, the foremost authoritative source of Sunni creedal issues says clearly that “we do not ascribe ‘kufr’ to any of the people of the qiblah.” It is well-known that one of the unique characteristics of Islam is that it has no institutional basis for validating the faith of people. Common sense says that Shii scholars carry the responsibility of making clear their rejection of the offshoot ideas ascribed to them and that Sunni scholars should not get hooked on historical debates.

The history image fault line

Despite the fact that Sunnis and Shiis share the same Muslim history, they have radically different constructions of such a history. The root of such disagreement does not lie simply in the differing interpretations of historical events but in the focus on different aspects of it. While the Sunni perspective is aware of the deviations that occurred in realm of politics, they focus their attention on the civilizational achievements of Muslims. Shiis, on the other hand, focus on the problem of a “stolen” leadership from those who deserve it. Such position from the Shiis enrages Sunnis as it trumps marvelous Muslim civilizational achievements, acknowledged by Muslim as well as non-Muslim scholars.

Shiis avoid talking about civilizational achievements and insist on focusing on the downside aspects: political domination and repressing Shii radical groups. For Sunnis, the claims of historical repression that are popular in Shii stories resemble urban legends that cannot stand the scrutiny of historical-scientific research. Furthermore, when Shiis gained political control in Muslim history, they were not less royal than the Sunni rulers that Shiis disparage.

In the Savadi era (1501-1722), Shiism constructed many of its customs and popular myths as an ideology to buttress political control. However, in doing so, the Shii Savadis were not very different from the Sunni Ottomans who were mustering their political control through sponsoring Sufism. It is much more defensible to relate the contemporary Shii revival to the Qajari period (1799-1925) rather to the Savadis.

The Qajari period was marked by political instability, which prompted Shii clerics to overcome their dominant norm of quietism and to get engaged in politics. In contrast, the Sunni ulama of this period had a state that spoke on their behalf and did not feel the need to be as politically engaged. Ironically, the contemporary political fragmentation in today’s Muslim countries resemble a Sunni Qajari period where Sunni clerics are showing more interest in, and willingness to engage in, politics.

The customs fault line

Muslims have lived their history in highly pluralistic settings. Therefore, different groupings of people maintained their local cultural practices, which intermixed with Islamic elements. For the average person, the folkways that are imbued with an Islamic spirit replace the root ideas of religion itself. For example, both the Sunni and the Shii go to the mosque and get a spiritual lift through listening to preaching and stories, but such preaching is of different genres and invokes the memories of different personalities. Shiis feel that Sunnis do not give due respect to ahl al-bayt, the progeny of Prophet Muhammad. Sunnis on the other hand are troubled by the thick rituals of Shiism that have the cult of saint’s properties. Sunnis have their myths too, but mainly housed in Sufism which, despite its widespread, does not represent the mainstream.

The above mentioned differences stay mute in peaceful times. However, in times of extreme uncertainty and political agitation, they intensify the conflict. Furthermore, when political violence targets venerated symbols, revenge becomes sadistic, justified on the basis of denigrating the sacred.

The Shiis of Iraq (in addition to Iraqi Kurds) carried the brunt of Saddam’s regime repression. That in turn re-enlivened the Shii identity. With the rise of political sectarianism after the fall of regime, disagreement flared on what to do with the new situation. Identities were further polarized, and each group accuses the other of being a traitor: a traitor at the time of Saddam’s regime or a contemporary traitor.

However, there is no quarrel that the Baathi regime of Saddam was a nationalistic, leftist, secular, areligious, equal-opportunity oppressor. Kurds and Shiis received most of the repression because of the degree of threat each posed to the regime, not because of creed and sect; indeed, the Kurds are overwhelming Sunnis. Yet, afterwards, identities clashed on the Sunni-Shii divide. A political conflict stemming from the disagreement on how to manage the country after the invasion has been turned into a sectarian one. Shiis cries what they label as “the silence of the majority” regarding the recent events in Iraq and the fatal aggression against Shii markets and religious sites. The Sunnis get puzzled as the perpetrators do not represent them nor do they come from its mainstream. And when Shii bandits sought revenge, they were as immoral as Sunni bandits.

The common ground

It does not take a learned person to recognize the both Sunnis and Shiis share an Islamic outlook based on the values of Islam and its social orientation. The very logic of Islam is rooted in the idea of unity of the creator and the centrality of the transcendental guidance in refining human conduct. Sunni as well as Shii lines consider that the righteous deeds of taqwa are the basis of individuals’ worth, upon which they will be responsible at the Day of Judgment. Furthermore, both lines assert collective responsibility in seeking truth at the cultural level and fighting taghoot (oppression) at the sociopolitical level. Sunni and Shii traditions revere personal purity, the family institution, and the role of motherhood. Furthermore, they converge on the centrality of the concepts of justice, mercy, and moderation, considering them as the cornerstone of the moral social order.

The Sunni-Shii historical political disagreement was, at its roots, a disagreement on the political arrangement that would preserve the values of Islam. Muslims today have the option of recognizing the common ground on which their different factions draw or to plunge into sectarian rivalry.

Mazen Hashem holds a doctoral degree in sociology. His research focuses on the Muslim communities in North America.

Commentary

Previous Post

January 17, 2008

Journalist Seymour Hersh: “We did more for Osama than he could do for himself”

Next Post

January 23, 2008 Crisis in Gaza: Turning out the lights

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2012 Elections 30 Dayd 30 Writers (2017) 30 Days 30 Writers 30 Days 30 Writers (2015) 30 Days 30 Writers (2016) 30 Days 30 Writers (2018) 30 Days 30 Writers 2017 Ali Asadullah Ali Eteraz Alper Bilgili Arthur Richards Asides Asma Uddin Black History Month Briefings Charles Turner Commentary Cyrus McGoldrick Eman H Aly Fatimah Popal Hajj Hajj and Dhul Hijjah Hesham Hassaballa Hisham Hellyer Ibrahim Abusharif Inas Younis Irfan Yusuf Jalal Baig Junaid Afeef Laila Alawa Laila Alwala Mas'ood Cajee Muqtedar Khan Nakia Jackson Newsmakers Parvez Ahmed Podcasts Rabia Chaudry Rafia Zakaria Ramadan Reviews Safiyyah Ally Saud Inam Shahed Amanullah Svend White The Opinionated Oncologist Visions Wajahat Ali Zahed Amanullah Zahir Janmohamed Zainab Khan

Select a Month November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 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 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 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 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which Christian denomination follows the teachings of John Wesley?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Lutheran Baptist Catholic Methodist