I’ve only ever written one blog before,
and that was on the Hijab. You may have already read it. If you have, you will
notice that it was fairly structured, and hopefully, informative. For this one,
I cannot guarantee anything; what you are about to read may end up being a mere
rant. Khair, let’s see what happens.
Amidst the recent conflict in Iraq – in
particular, the emergence of the terrorist group, ISIS – the controversies
regarding Sunnism and Shi’ism has intensified. First, let me state that ISIS
are not Sunni, they are not even human beings in my eyes, but that is a
separate issue. However, the media has wrongly labelled this a sectarian
conflict and thus, it is no surprise that I have come across more Muslims
begrudging the need to associate with a sect. The phrase, ‘I am not Sunni, I am
not Shi’a, but I’m Muslim’, is rife; too rife, if you ask me. The concept of
being a ‘SuShi’, that is, associating partly with both Sunnism and Shi’ism’,
undoubtedly arises with clean intentions. It is a lovely idea which preaches
that Muslims shouldn’t have differences in school of thought, as it simply
creates evil, and is not really worth it. On paper, it is a beautiful notion.
It’s just a shame that it is a mere fantasy and is simply not a viable option.
Do not get me wrong, unity in terms of
social and political factors is very much possible – vital, in fact. The plight
of the Ummah is visible to everyone, and the only way to resolve this is
through social unity. Shi’as should be praying and aiding the majority Sunni
Muslims suffering in Palestine, whilst Sunnis should be attending to the needs
of the Shi’as suffering in Iraq and Pakistan, as they have been. In fact, the
Sunni response to ISIS has thoroughly impressed me. However, uniting on beliefs
is 100% impossible. I will look to justify this through predominantly using
events in Islamic history,
‘I am not Sunni, I am not Shia, but I’m
Muslim.’ This phrase bothers me a lot. Agreed, RasulAllah (SAW) is common to
both sects; both believe he is the final messenger of God, both believe in
monotheism, and both subscribe to the idea of the Day of Judgement. This is
what makes them Muslim. However, you cannot claim to belong to both sects when
there are substantial differences between them – perhaps not spiritually as
such, but most definitely historically. Let me take you back a while to around
the time of the Prophet’s (SAW) death. We are in Ghadeer, where there are in
excess of 70,000 people awaiting RasulAllah’s (SAW) significant announcement.
Beside him is Ali ibn Abu Talib (as), the subject of this major event in
Islamic history. The Holy Prophet (SAW) takes Ali’s (as) hand and says: For
whoever I am his master, Ali is also his master. On the same day this famous
line was given, the Qur’anic ayat, "Today I have perfected your religion and completed my
favour upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion" (Qur'an
5:3), was revealed to the Holy Prophet of Islam (SAW). Both of these events are
prominent in books of both schools of thought. For example, it is narrated in
Tabari, Abu Naim, Al-Bayhaqqi, to name a few Sunni books.
Now I
fast-forward to the death of Prophet Muhammad (SAW); this is when the
differences begin to prevail. Whilst Imam Ali (as) is burying the Prophet of
Islam, an election is taking place in Saqifah, as to who will succeed the
Prophet (SAW) as leader of the Muslims. As is common knowledge, Abu Bakr is
selected, despite the events that took place in Ghadeer. Anyway, Sunnis believe
that Abu Bakr is the rightfully guided successor, whilst Shi’as claim this
position is held by none other than Imam Ali (as). I ask the SuShi, seeing as
you are both Sunni and Shi’a, does that mean Ali (as) and Abu Bakr are both the
rightfully appointed successor? Did the Prophet choose them both? It is like
saying, Liverpool and Man City both won the league last year. It is a ludicrous
statement, something mathematically, conceptually and physically impossible.
Further
historical events such as the Battle of Uhud shed light on the status of the
companions of the Holy Prophet (SAW). As you may recollect, the Prophet’s order
to all soldiers was to stay in their respective positions, despite the enemies
retreating. However, all but three men disobeyed in search of war booty. Furthermore,
in the ayat of Tatheer, Allah ‘intends only to
remove from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the [Prophet's] household,
and to purify you with [extensive] purification’
(33:33). These examples explain the Shi’a perspective of there being a
hierarchy with regard to the status of the Prophet’s (SAW) companions. On the
other hand, Sunnis reject this idea, maintaining that all companions of the
Prophet (SAW) should be held in equal weighting. My challenge to Sushis is thus
the following: if you follow both Sunnism and Shi’ism together, your Sunni
ideology dictates that all companions cannot be differentiated between.
However, your Shi’a side simultaneously informs you that some companions were
better than the others. So which one do you follow? By taking both sides, you
ultimately don’t take any side. What is the truth if no side is taken?
The
examples I have briefly explained clearly highlight the contrasting
interpretations of historical events in Islamic history. One thing I read
whilst researching the viewpoints of SuShis was, ‘is the difference between Sunni and Shi'a even worth shouting
over?’ I struggle to fathom how anyone can ignore the events in the past, as
these heavily contribute in shaping a Muslim’s beliefs. When the very essence
of being a Shi’a is loving the Ahlul Bayt (as) and accepting the Wilayah of
Ameerul Mu’mineen, Ali ibn Abu Talib (as), it is impossible to even be ‘part
Shia’ if this is something that you do not subscribe to with full commitment. Following
the death of RasulAllah (SAW), Imam Ali (as) is either the first successor, or
the fourth. There is absolutely no middle ground. Moreover, you either testify to the
superiority of some companions over the others, or you believe they are equal
in status. These are but a few examples on the flaws that being impartial can
cause.
Therefore, I would urge every SuShi to
pick a side. As the saying goes, sitting on the fence causes a sore backside.
The ideology of a SuShi causes me far greater pain than that.
