As much as it's tragic for the Ummah to be divided into sects, but the fact is sects DO exist and amongst them the major ones are Shias and the Sunnis.
What are the fundamental differences between Shias & Sunnis authentic notions? Whether the differences are basic and threatening to faith (Iman) or just trifle? Why do some scholars call them as non-Muslims?
To start with, we should all remind ourselves of this quranic verse and ponder over it: "As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah. He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did. (Al'Anam 6:159)
There are a number of differences in the Shia and the Sunni Juristic opinions. But these differences cannot be termed as the "basic differences" in these two (unfortunately) major sects of Islam. The basic difference in the two sects is that of the Shiite faith of the system of "Imamat". The Shiite faith of "Imamat" implies that after the Prophet (pbuh), there shall be no other prophet, but the only true leader of the Muslims, at a given time, is an "Imam" who, like the prophets of Allah, is directly appointed by Allah. The appointment of the first "Imam" was made by Allah through the last prophet (pbuh) and every subsequent "Imam" is appointed by Allah through the "Imam" who precedes him. Another qualification of the "Imam", according to the Shiite belief is that he shall belong to the family of the last prophet (pbuh). In this category, the khilafat of first, second and third caliphs of Islam are held null and void and done out of treachery to the Ummah. The Shiite belief holds that the "Imams", like the prophets of Allah, are "masoom" (sinless, innocent) and therefore should be obeyed in all matters and under all circumstances. The "Imams", according to the Shiite faith, are thus not just the political leaders of the Muslims but also their religious leaders and clergy. The Sunni school, on the other hand, do not hold any such belief.
This may, at first sight, seem to be a trivial difference between the two schools. But a close analysis reveals that it amounts to a difference of the sources of religion for the two schools. The Sunni school, because of its lack of belief in the institution of "Imamat" holds the last prophet of Allah and the book revealed on him as the two primary sources of Islam, while the Shiite school, because of the importance and position it gives to the "Imams" holds them to be an autonomous source of their religion. Anything that an "Imam" says, any thing that he does and anything that he narrates is "religion" for the Shiite school. Differing with an "Imam" in any matter is of about the same consequence as differing with a prophet. Not submitting to the directions of an "Imam" is as grave a sin as refusing to submit to the directions of a prophet of Allah.
As can be seen from the above explanation, the difference between the Shiite and the Sunni schools are not trivial, rather these differences are "very" basic.
But even so, the best thing to do is not to condemn each other, call each other "Kaafir" (infidel) or non-Muslim", air the fire of hatred and promote each other’s killings, but to try and convince the other person as well as one’s own self to accept whatever is right in the light of the Qur’an and the true teachings of the Prophet (pbuh), to promote empathy for each other’s point of view and to try and stress the common points in each other’s beliefs. The question that whether Shias are Muslims or not is concerned, we strictly believe that it is not the jurisdiction of the scholars of religion to declare an individual or a group “non-Muslim”. The job of the scholars of Islam is to inform people of the true teachings of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Declaring an individual or a group “Muslim” or “non-Muslim” is a legal matter, as far as the life of this world is concerned. Only the legal authorities that are competent for this purpose should therefore, be referred to for such declarations. In my opinion, because this issue pertains to the whole Muslim community, therefore such declaration should be made by the collectivity of the Muslim community. Scholars of Islam should strictly refrain from declaring each other “non-Muslims”, as such actions would only result in breaking the already weakened Muslim community into further smaller pieces. Disregard of this fact shall not only result in the further segmentation of the Muslim Ummah, but shall also present a comic situation as a whole, where each group shall declare the other as non-Muslim and yet all are considered Muslims by the Muslim collectivities and then the members of all groups – non-Muslims in the eyes of one another – shall, for instance, be performing Hajj, in the Bayet Allah together.
"And if two parties or groups among the believers fall to fighting, then make peace between them both, but if one of them rebels against the other, then fight you (all) against the one that which rebels till it complies with the Command of Allah; then if it complies, then make reconciliation between them justly, and be equitable. Verily! Allah loves those who are equitable.” (Qurân 49:9), meaning even if one group rebels the other one, Allah still called them believers, which is better than some Muslim scholars calling or naming the other group as unbeliever.
It should be interesting to note here that although these two sects have co-existed for centuries now, the extent and gravity of sectarian violence has never been felt more than in the present times, especially in Muslim countries of Pakistan and Iraq. The basic reason for this change in the situation is that a number of prominent scholars and knowledgeable personalities of both these sects have changed the roles that they played in the past. In the past, the differences of both the sects were a matter of intellectual debate between the scholars of these sects. The gravity of these differences was also fully known, but the scholars never promoted violence against each other. But now the situation is completely different. The scholars of these sects now sit on their respective pulpits and use these differences as fire to burn the emotions and feelings of their addressees against the people of the other sects. They promote the killings of the followers of other sects by labeling these followers with various derogatory terms. They call such killings a part of Jihad and they promise their followers the everlasting bliss of jannah (paradise) if they take part in such killings. None of them can attain paradise this way, if they believe in the this authentic of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh): Abdullah b. (Mas'ud) reported Allah's Messenger (on whom be peace ) as saying: The first (thing) that will be decided amongst people on the Day of Judgment, will pertain to bloodshed. [Book 016, Number 4158 (Muslim)] A Muslim killing another innocent human being, be it a Hindu, Muslim, Christian or a Jew, will have to answer for the blood of the innocent or the murder he committed. How can any group of Muslim, claim to enter paradise by flowing the blood of another Muslim who ( at least) believed in the Unity of Allah(swt) and Prophethood of Muhammad (saw), is beyond my senses.
Yes, I do agree that the difference in the Shiite and the Sunni sects are quite basic and not trivial, but I think there is still no need to fire each other’s emotions to such great extents, even on differences that are so grave.We Muslims must be united. We must be one hand, one body, one heart, one mind and one word. We have the same God, the same Prophet (SAW), the same Mecca, the same prayers, the same Ramadan, the same goals, the same destiny and the same enemy. True Muslims do not allow anything to create disunity among them, because Allah (SWT) Has repeatedly prohibited divisions among believers.
"Do not be like those who are divided among themselves and fall into disputations after receiving clear evidence; for those (who are divided) will be a great punishment" Holy Quran 30:31, 32
"Be united by holding onto God's Covenant, and do not be divided" Holy Quran 8:46
"Obey Allah and his Messenger, and fall into no disputes, losing your heart and your power, and be patient, surely Allah is with those who are patient" Holy Quran 6:159
"The believers are brothers, make peace between your brothers, and beaware of Allah, that you may receive mercey" Holy Quran 59:10
"O Lord, forgive us, and our brothers who came before us into the faith, and leave no, in our hearts, any animosity against the believers"
"The beleivers, men and women, are Auliya (friends) of one another" Holy Quran 9:71
"The believers are nothng else than brothers" Holy Quran 49:10
The Prophet Mohammed (SAW) said: "A Muslim is the brother of every other Muslim; he doesn't do him wrong and does not abandon him. Whomsoever comes to the aid of his brother at the time of need, Allah will aid him at his time of need. Whomsoever lifts a burden off of his brother, Allah will remove from upon him a burden from burdens of the day of judgment".
Reader 1 comments: Having read all this, my belief is still that, Shias are not true Muslims which by the way is also supported by Sunni scholars let alone those who can rule by virtue of 'Fatwa'. Your position is that it is a duty of a state to make such a declaration. I think you probably may not want to get involved in such a controversy which may take a big bite of your time and efforts which you may rather like to use for what you have been doing?
Where do you stand in matter of theology of the two sects?
I really see no benefits accruing from such an act. I am sure you would agree with me that the position of an individual in the hereafter is not affected by yours or my opinion about his or her being a Muslim or a non-Muslim. Allah(swt) shall decide about that position on the basis of His own absolute knowledge, obviously, not on the basis of my or any one else’s opinion about that individual. As far as the worldly benefits of our declaring someone a non-Muslim are concerned, I am completely unaware of any that are likely to follow such a declaration, except for creating an obvious aversion in the hearts of such individual's against prophet's call to the path of Allah(swt).
Some people point out that if such a declaration is made, it would result in spreading the knowledge that the beliefs of such and such group are not a part of Islam. I do not agree with this opinion. In my opinion, this advantage can more effectively be enjoyed by merely presenting the true beliefs of Islam in an effective and consistent manner. In view of the above details, I really do not think that it is in our jurisdiction to declare any group or individual non-Muslim. Our work should be, to primarily understand and secondly to present the call of Islam in a manner that is effective and one, which creates no aversion in the hearts and minds of my addressees.
Therefore, even though I consider the Shiite beliefs to be against the teachings of the Qur’an, as otherwise I would, obviously, have been a Shiite myself, yet I am not prepared to call them non-Muslims as I do not consider such an act to be within anyone's jurisdiction.
Regarding my personal stand on this issue, then according to the Shias claim, there were 125,000 followers of Islam present at Gadhir-al-Khum and around Mount of Arafat, the site of the last Sermon. It was here, that Prophet (pbuh) declared Ali(ra) as Muslims 'mawla', then how come each and everyone of the 125,000 disobeyed the Prophet for the first voting, for the second voting and even for the third voting for the appointment of the THREE Khalifs? I hate to think that the followers of Prophet of that generation were that COWARD, so as not to raise their voices for all these years when Abu Bakr(ra) mischievously declared himself as Khalifa of the Ummah despite prophet's clear indications? Finally, the religion is for ALLAH ALONE and not for any individual, be it Ali or Abu Bakr or Umar or Uthman(pbut) or current Shia Ismaili Imam - Karim Agha Khan.
We're against the hereditary (generation after generation) Imamat of Ali's descendants. Also, never did either Prophet (pbuh) or even Ali(ra) say that Ali's son or sons were to be the next Imam or mawla. A Khalifa's son or Minister's Son or Pope's son does not become the next Khalifa or Minister or Pope. I once asked a question to myself as to, "on what basis have we decided to be called as Muslims and who are our primary sources for guidance mentioned in Qur'an? From what I have read till now, the ONLY reason of us having opted to be called as Muslims is because we believe in Allah(swt) and ALL his prophets, including the last one, Muhammad (pbuh).
Did we become Muslims because Ali(as) or Fatima(as) were the 'infallible' ones and Ayesha(ra) was taking the wrong side of Islamic forces? Are we commanded by Allah(swt) to follow ONLY the ahl-a-Bait (they are most definitely an important source of our guidance alongside the Qur'an but NOT where Qura'nic verses are self sufficient, unambiguous and explicit in themselves.) and start criticizing all the others based on some hadiths which might have been borne out of political compulsions of those times. (Not to mention that some hadeeths have been proven to contain some malicious writings added during the course of time).
Lets all ask ourselves one simple question, "Have we been commanded by Allah(swt) in Qur'an to respect ALL the companions including Ali(as) and ALL the wives of the prophet are mothers of the believers, irrespective of what they might have done during their lifetimes...for their case rests with HIM and HIM alone? " If the answer is Yes!, then it absolves them of every curse or condemnation and we lose the right to even criticize them in the light of these Quranic verses...
Allah bears witness in the Qur'an that Abu Bakr is a close companion to the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) by his saying:
"If ye help not (Muhammad (pbuh)), (it is no matter): for Allah did indeed help him, when the Unbelievers drove him out: he had no more than one companion (Abu Bakr): they two were in the Cave, and he said to his companion, Have no fear for Allah is with [us]." (Quran 9:40)
[An argument that some companions were good Muslims and they went astray after his death can be attributed to abandonment from Allah to his messenger since He did not tell him what would happen in the future to warn the Muslim Ummah. How come Allah who promised to support his religion and his messenger, make the closest companions to his prophet, a group of renegades and hypocrites?!]
Aisha (ra), had a whole sura revealed defending her and this sura is sura An-Nor in this Surah Allah forbids us from speaking badly about her, He says: "Allah forbids you from it and warns you not to repeat the [like of it forever], if you are believers. (Qur'an 24:17), and she was praised in other suras. Like all the other wives of the Prophet, she was also given the choice either to remain with the Prophet or have worldly enjoyments instead and she chose Allah and His Prophet without a blink of thinking. See verses (33:28-34).
[Imam Malik stated that anyone who slanders her should be killed right away because Allah forbids us (in the Qur'an) from it forever and because anyone who curses the Prophet (p) or any member of this family should be killed too. This fatwa was also issued by his teacher Imam Ja'far al-Saadiq. All members of Ahl-ul-Bayt (the family of the Holy Prophet) belong to Sunni Muslims. Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq for instance, is the teacher of Imam Malik and Imam Abu-Hanifa.]
The prophet(saw) also said of Ali(ra) : "Loving Ali is the sign of belief, and hating Ali is the sign of hypocrisy." (Sahih Muslim )
Bearing these verses and hadeeths in mind, I personally believe that those who follow the four Sunni schools of thought, are closest to Qur'an and it's teachings and more than this, I can only say that Allah(swt) knows best. May He accept all our prayers and dua's and bring about Unity amongst the Muslims.
Reader 2 comments: Let me ask you this: Have you recited the following verse of the Qur’an? Please do explain to your readership what you understand from this:- Yauma nad’u kulla unasin bi imami-him… (and the day when We will call every people with their respective Imam….) Qur'an .17:71
You would notice that the reader/ scholar has quoted a *fragmented portion* of verse 17:71 from the Qur'an. The reason for fragmentation is obvious if you were to read the *entire verse* that is quoted below:-
Translation by M. M. Pickthall of verse 17:71:
"On the day when We shall summon all men with their record, whoso is given his book in his right hand -- such will read their book and they will not be wronged a shred."
Translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali of verse 17:71:
"One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams: those who are given their record in their right hand will read it (with pleasure) and they will not be dealt with unjustly in the least."
Transliteration of verse 17:71:
Yawma nad'uu kulla 'unaasim bi- 'Imaam -him fa- man 'uutiya kitaaba -hu bi- yamiini -hi fa- 'ulaa'ika yaqra'uuna kitaaba -hum wa-yuz-lamuuna fatiil(an)
One would notice that Pickthall has translated the word "Imaam" as "record" (of deeds), whereas Yusuf Ali has left this word non-translated and given his comments. However, upon reading the ENTIRE VERSE, the true meaning of this word "Imaam" as the "record of deeds" is very clear and needs no further comments. Secondly, there are many human beings upon this earth (e.g. Atheists), who have no "Leaders", whereas the verse specifically relates to **all human beings**. However, the deeds of all human beings are recorded as mentioned in verse 36:12 of the Holy Qur'an, quoted below. One may also notice that Yusuf Ali has translated below the same word "Imaam" as the "Book of (recorded) evidence". This verse 36:12 compliments verse 17:71.
I hope that answers the Rebuttal of the Shi'a scholar.
Translation by Yusuf Ali of verse 36:12:
Verily We shall give life to the dead and We record that which they sent before and that which they leave behind and of all things have We taken account in a clear Book (of evidence)
Transliteration of verse 36:12:
'In(na) -naa Nah.nu nuh.yil- mawtaa wa- naktubu maa qaddamuu wa- 'aathaar -hum wa- kulla shay'in ah-saynaa -hu fii 'Imaamim mubiin.
Note: In verse 46:12 the "Book of Moses" is also called ""Imaam".
Readers 3 Comments: Now consider this hadeeth report recorded by Mulla Ali Qari in his Sharh-i-fiqh-i-Akbar (Mulla Ali Qari is a Sunni Alim and this book is a commentary on Imam Abu Hanifa’s book of Islamic laws FIQH AKBAR), “man mata wa lam y’arif Imam-i-zamanihi, faqad mata meetat-al-Jahiliyya.” (one who dies without knowing the Imam of his time, dies the death of Jahiliyya).
How could the Prophet (peace be upon him), have spoken the above text of the Hadeeth, recorded by Mulla Ali Qari or by anyone for that matter, when the actual "Concept of The Imamah" and/or the very perception of "The Imam of his time" was not even known by the Ummah, that lived during the life of the Prophet? The Concepts of the Khilaphat and the Imamat were developed *after* the passing away of the Prophet. Even at the Ghadir-e-Khumn, in accordance with the Shiah Traditions and Riwayats, the Prophet did not declare Hadhrat Ali as the "Imaam" of the Ummah. He just called him as their 'mawla'.
Same reader 3, further writes : The hadeeth report from the Prophet about the Muslims having twelve Imams is so strongly vouched by Isnaad that it is really impossible to deny it. Consequently, Muslims had to invent at least twelve names to fit that hadeeth. However, in every century and every generation the list of the names has been changing, depending upon who was running the government. It is only the Shi'a Ithna Ashari who have maintained the list of the twelve Imams from day one and it has not changed.
There is a serious problem of reconciliation within these two Ahadith. In the earlier Hadith, recorded by Mulla Ali Qari, the Prophet is supposed to have said (one who dies without knowing the **Imam of his time**, dies the death of Jahiliyya). In the later, so called as the strongly vouched Hadith, the Prophet is supposed to have said (the Muslims having **twelve Imams**).
These two statements contradict each other. IF the Prophet knew the future and he also knew it for sure that there were not going to be any more Imams (Leaders) after the twelfth Imam, he could not have made the earlier statement asking the Muslim Ummah that it was imperative to know the Leaders (Imams) of "their own times". How could those that were to be born after the twelfth Imam, know the "Imams of their own times" when there were going to be none, during their life time? The earlier statement in effect acknowledges the perpetually of the Leadership (Imams), which the later statement NEGATES. Here is one more reason why each and every narration that is in circulation could not be recognized as the authentic narration. Some are, others are not.
Reader 4 comments: Do you sunnis know what? Bibi Fatima cursed both Abu Bakr and Umar after her prayers till the day she died. Abu Bakr and Umar displeased Allah. They burned the house of Fatima, attacked Ali, broke Zubair's sword, and smashed the door of the house so that Fatima was squeezed between it and her baby miscarriaged. Doesn't your blood boil with this? Also the Holy prophet had predicted that the people of his faith will be divided into 73 groups of which only one will be on the right and will be saved, and the
rest will be on the wrong and will go astray. Finally, to establish the authenticity of Ahl-e-Bait amongst the Prophet's household, take a close look at the verse: "3:61 If any one disputes in this matter with thee, now after (full) knowledge Hath come to thee, say: "Come! let us gather together,- our sons and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves: Then let us earnestly pray, and invoke the curse of Allah on those who lie!" (Yusuf Ali translation). The people who followed Prophet for this 'Muhabila' were Ali(as), Fatimah(ra), Hassan and Hussian (pbut). It was thus ordained indirectly by Allah(swt) in this verse that ONLY these were the true family members and descendents of Prophet.
The above story about accidental miscarriage of Bibi Fatima(ra) may be TRUE OR TOTALLY FALSE. We all have not joined Islam because of the THREE Khaliphs or because of ALI(as) or Fatimah(ra) and their actions or deeds. Their history is with them. I have entered Islam after hearing and believing the Words of Allah written in Qur'an. I follow the clear sunnah of the Prophet because that is what the Quran tells us to do. Regarding the hadith about Prophet predicting the division amongst his Ummah, it can also be debated because it seems to go against the verse of Qur'an which talks about 'only Allah has the knowledge of the future (30:4). Even if Allah(swt) imparted this knowledge to His prophet through angels, then this Hadith is being quoted now by every member or leader of the 70 odd sects in Islam today. Who all can we deny? Finally from my side, regarding the issue of the TRUE descendents of Prophet then I fail to understand this Quranic verse and it's meaning: "Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets, and Allah has full knowledge of all things." Qur'an 33:40 "...And whose word can be truer than Allah's?" Qur'an 4:87. From a genealogical point of view Imam Hussain was the Direct Descendant of: Hadhrat 'Ali ibn Abi Talib ibn 'Abd al-Muttalib ibn Hashim. If you were to ask yourself, whose Direct Descendant are you? The obvious and honest answer would be the Direct Descendant of your father and grandfather. BUT, not of your mother's father or your maternal grandfather. These were surely the family members of the Prophet and I don't disagree but to say that Hassan and Hussain (pbut) were true descendents of holy Prophet. It's also a known and agreed fact that Ali(ra) did marry one of his daughters to Caliph Umar(ra) and named his sons as those of the prominent companions of his times. I am aware that few traditions speak of Ali(as) doing it under compulsion but I am not ready to believe that, knowing the steadfastness and strength of Ali(ra) character and ;lastly from your basis of finding this in the verse you had quoted above, then I can only quote another ayah from the same Surah Al-Imran:
"He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding." (Quran 03:7) (Yusuf Ali's translation)
Let's all, for our own sake, UNITE and do away with our sectarian mindset, lest we suffer and die in the hands of unbelievers for being the followers of one true God - Allah (swt). When Zionists in Israel or communists in China or Shiv Sainiks in India, goes hunting for Muslims and rampaging their homes, they don't demarcate between Shias or Sunnis. Sunnah and Shi`a are Muslims who pray to the same God. Both believe in the same Qur'an, have faith in the same message of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and you are recommended to pray with the Iranian Muslims in their mosques sticking to your Sunni understanding of Islam as it is high time for the Muslim Ummah to appreciate all the segments of this Ummah and to have common understanding and appreciation of the Islamic faith. The Qur'an calls us to unite and cooperate and avoid causes of dissent. Allah Almighty says: " And hold fast, all of you together, to the cable of Allah, and do not separate. And remember Allah's favor unto you: how ye were enemies and He made friendship between your hearts so that ye became as brothers by His grace; and (how) ye were upon the brink of an abyss of fire, and He did save you from it. Thus Allah maketh clear His revelations unto you, that haply ye may be guided.” (Al `Imran: 103)
It does not mean that you are required to relax your understanding of the principles of Islam for the sake of unity of others but to live with them and appreciate what they have. Let's try to cooperate on our common interpretations and excuse each other in case of difference.”
ليست هناك تعليقات :
إرسال تعليق