The Islam religion had no divisions before the death of Prophet Muhammad in the year 632 A.D. It is believed that the Prophet Muhammad had prophesied that upon his death there would emerge more than 72 Muslim sects (Friedman 128) but only one of them would not go to hell (Mervin 11). The biggest cause of the split was the lack of and/or the failure by Prophet Muhammad to name his successor before his death.
Conventionally, his successor would have been his eldest son or a male relative. The problem was that all his three sons who were the likely successors had already predeceased Prophet Muhammad. His other son (adopted) had also died in the year 629 A.D. in a war with the Byzantines (Friedman 128). As such, the lack of successor led to the split among the Muslim faithful.
Upon the demise of Muhammad, his followers were left without a distinct leader. The first hurdle that the Muslims faced was how and from where the successor would be named. One group opined that the successor should be named by an elderly cleric (this group later became the Sunni), while another group (Shias) was of the opinion that the successor, as per tradition, should be a male relative from the family of Prophet Muhammad (Hazleton 26). It is imperative to note that the followers were not looking for someone to succeed Prophet Muhammad as a prophet, but rather a leader of the community of believers (amir al-mu’ mimin) (Esposito 14).
The group favoring the appointed of a successor by the elderly clerics (Sunnis) argued that Prophet Muhammad had not advocated for a political system but a religious one. This meant that leadership was not necessarily hereditary as with political systems (Sonn 32). The other Shias however felt that they owed their allegiance only to Prophet Muhammad hence the role of leadership and the successor must be from the Prophet’s family (Sonn 32).
The Sunni who were the majority chose Abu Bakr, Prophet Muhammad’s father in law and companion, as the leader of the community of believers. This group was largely drawn from the tribe of Prophet Muhammad, the Quraysh (Esposito 15). The Shias on the other hand considered Ali, Prophet Muhammad’s son in law, as their leader, and referred to themselves as the ‘partisans of Ali’ or shi’at Ali. This is how the name Shia originated.
Some Sunni believers tried to convince the Shias to acknowledge Abu Bakr as Prophet Muhammad’s successor pointing out that he was not only the prophet’s closest companion but also the father of the prophet’s favorite wife, Aishah. The Shias subsequently contended that Ali was not only a cousin to the prophet, but also the husband of Prophet Muhammad’s only daughter, Fatimah, and therefore Ali was the closest link to the Prophet. Accordingly, each of the two groups strongly felt that their choice was the best and that both Allah and Prophet Muhammad had chosen their successive leader.
The Sunni later referred to Abu Bakr as khalifah to show that he was Prophet Muhammad’s representative (Sonn 33). The term later transformed to caliph, the title that the Sunni used to refer to their leader. Initially, the Caliph was chosen by a council of elders (shura) but the position later became hereditary. The Shias on the other hand referred to Ali as the Imamah or A’immah, also a title they use to refer to their leader. For the Shias the position of Imamah is hereditary.
For some time, the two groups co-existed peacefully with the Caliph being the overall leader, even though the Shias regarded the Imamah as their leader. This however changed in the year 656 A.D. when a Caliph was murdered. The murder had been preceded by dissensions and uprisings owing to the manner in which the then Caliph, Uthman, was leading. There were concerns that he was favoring his kin (Esposito 15) and also faced other accusations. The murder precipitated the first Civil War that lasted from the 656 – 661 A.D. During that period there was a struggle for leadership especially within the Quraysh.
Ali was then poised to become the next Caliph. This was strongly opposed by the prominent Quraysh families’ key among them the Uthman’s Umayyad clan who fronted Talha and al-Zubayr as the possible successors. It is worth noting that Aishah, Prophet Muhammad’s wife, supported the group led by Talha and al-Zubayr (Esposito 15). This group was later defeated by the Shias in what was referred to as the ‘battle of camel’, which was fought in the contemporary Iraq (Esposito 15). The Shias having gained an important victory established a base at the Kufa region.
They later expanded northward and the expansion led to a confrontation between them and the Sunni, then led by Muawiyah. However each side was reluctant to fight since they considered each other as comrades at arms (Esposito 16). Accordingly, Ali and Muawiyah decided that the differences between themselves would be settled through arbitration. The arbitration process was however not successful in solving the matters as both sides were unsatisfied with the results. This prompted another series of confrontations that culminated in the death of Ali. Upon Ali’s demise, Muawiyah was regarded as the Caliph.
The subsequent death of Muawiyah reignited the debate of how the leaders were to be chosen and a second Civil War began. During this period the Shias had strengthened their position and strongly opposed the leadership of the Umayyad clan (Esposito 17). The Umayyad would later quash all uprisings regaining control over the community of believers. The victory however came at a cost as Ali’s son was slaughtered together with his family. As a result of his murder, the Shias regarded him as a martyr their hatred for the Umayyad intensified (Esposito18).
The Shias maintained that leadership was genealogical, and was legitimized by being a descendant of the prophet. The Sunnis on the other hand maintained that legitimacy of leadership was established by the acceptance of such leadership by the community of believers. They further argued that their ascension to power was evidence that Allah willed that they lead the community of believers and that Prophet Muhammad was also in agreement. Each group justified their position with varied interpretations of the Quran. Consequently, both groups later adopted different interpretations of the Quran and this aspect led to the emergence of distinct doctrines and ideologies.
In justifying their position on successive leadership, the Shias quoted the Quran especially at 2:30, which refers to Allah making a successive authority on earth, and also Quran 38:26. For them, the Quran clearly stipulated that only Allah had authority to select or choose a leader. The Sunni on the other hand referred to Quran 3:153 and 42:36, which they argued gave the shura authority to appoint a leader.
The divide between the Sunni and the Shia was compounded by the fact that the Sunni were the majority and most of them were well off within the society. Shias on the other hand were a minority and relatively poor. This led to a view among the Shia that the Sunni were oppressors, mainly because their Imams were either killed or imprisoned by the ruling class to avert uprisings and dissension. The Sunni on the other hand regarded the Shia to some extent as heretics. Accordingly, the divide over leadership later culminated to a divide in the beliefs and doctrines among the Sunni and the Shia. It is noteworthy that notwithstanding the divide, both groups abide by the basic tenets of the Muslim faith.
The historical divide still subsists among the two groups. For instance, when it comes to leadership, the Sunni basically believe that the Imam should be chosen by consensus through the prevalent political order and on the consideration of a person’s character among other qualities. For the Sunni, the Imam is more of a political leader than a spiritual leader. This is due to the fact that historically the caliph was more of a political leader than a religious one considering that the Sunni were invariably in power. However, in some instances the Sunni do not follow this belief.
The Shias believe that the Imams are descendants of Prophet Muhammad, and should be appointed and this is regarded as an indirect appointment by Allah. The Shias believe that the Imam passes spiritual knowledge to his successor. As such, under the Shia beliefs the Imam serves more of a religious/spiritual role than a political role. This is due to the fact that historically the Shias have not been in positions of power. Shias also have a category of spiritual leaders referred to as mujtahids who interpret religious, legal, and mystical knowledge. The most erudite mujtahids is referred to as ayatollah. In most instances the Imam does not actively engage in politics, and only offers advice guidance and advice to the political leader. It is worth noting that the Twelve Shi'ism believe that the twelfth Imam who disappeared will later return to take a more political role.
The two groups also differ when it comes to rituals and practices. For instance, the Shias normally join the second and third prayer, as well as the fourth and fifth with only the first prayer being conducted alone. However the Sunni say each of the five prayers distinctively. There are other differences relating to the manner of praying. For example, the Shias do genuflecting on part of earth or on a stone whereas the Sunni do it on the floor or on a carpet.
Other differences in practices relate to foods that are forbidden and regarded as taboo. Majority of the Sunni allow the consumption of any kind of seafood. On the other hand, the Shias only permit the eating of seafood only if such food has fins and scales, which is basically the qualification in the Old Testament of the Bible.
In conclusion, the divide between the Shias and Sunni is primarily attributable to the succession contentions regarding Prophet Muhammad. As the two groups expanded other divisions came up mainly due to social, political, and religious reasons. All the groups including the Sunni and Shias agree on the basic tenets of the Islamic faith. There are also sects within the two groups, especially among the Shias.
Works Cited
Esposito, John, L. (Ed.). The Oxford History of Islam. NY: Oxford University Press, 1999. Print.
Friedman, Saul. A History of the Middle East. NC: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers,
2006. Print.
Hazleton, Lesley. After the Prophet: The Epic Story of the Shia-Sunni Split in Islam. NY: Knopf
Doubleday Publishing Group, 2009. Print.
Sonn, Tamara. Islam: A Brief History (Second Edition). MA: Wiley – Blackwell, 2010. Print.
