Sunni faqt board top people
![sunni faqt board top people sunni faqt board top people](https://www2.renesas.cn/sites/default/files/isl68201-99140demo1z-board-top.jpg)
The Shi'ism we know today originated around 600 years later, with the Saffavid dynasty.Īlso the reason why Sunni's have more rules is because of the fact that the Sunni's have a larger collection of hadith, whereas the modern Shi'a reject a number of the narrators of the hadith as they view them to be non Muslims. Original Shi'ism was noted as just extreme love for the Ahlul Bayt - the Prohetic household, and most of the 11 (Edit: The 12th one doesn't exist) Imams were actually Sunni Muslims. The Shi'a have the view that all but around less than 20 of the Prophets companions became disbelievers after his death. We believe that both Muawiyah and Ali had their ijtihad, and Ali's was correct. But what we (Sunnis) don't do is accuse the Muawiyah of being a disbeliever like the Shi'a do. However they differ in their doctrine of Imams - as you mentioned, the leaders. Just a note here, the Sunni's take the side of Ali in the conflict (due to the Prophet foretelling that Ammar bin Yasir will be killed by the transgressing side, he was killed by Muawiyah's troops)
![sunni faqt board top people sunni faqt board top people](https://www.kwentongofw.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Iah-Seraspi-1.jpg)
who are the future Sunnis, are who are the future Shi'ites in that story? So his grandson is revolting against his uncle or father? Or are they revolting together against the traditionalists who want to have elective leadership? i.e. So, Muawiyah passes the leadership onto his son, and his grandson revolts. I want to check if you made a mistake, or if there's something counterintuitive going on there. When Muawiyah decided to pass on leadership to his son, thus instituting a monarchial caliphate instead of an elective one (which was how it was for the first 4 caliphs), his grandson Hussein lead a revolt, and his small band of followers were killed in what amounted to a heroic and tragic last stand, which is the core of the Shia religious ceremonies of mourning.įrom then on, the split continued as the Shia continued to believe the blood descendants/relatives of Muhammad and Ali should lead Islam, where as the Sunni's viewed Ali was a good muslim and a good leader, but that "bloodline" was not the only criteria for leadership of the community. There's an argument that the continued existence of Shia-ism is because legalistic Sunnism lacked a personal connection with the experience of God, as exemplified by Muhammad's night journey to Jerusalem, which was not seen in the context of "rules set down by god" but "something mystical experienced." The biggest Shia nation is Persia, which as a separate ethnic group from the Arabs creates the question of whether Shia preferences are inevitably tied to Persian influence.Īfter a certain point, it ceases to be purely about the original cause, and is as much about overarching geo-socio-political factors as anything else. For example, Sunni is more "legalistic," Shia more "experiential" (loosely framed, not hard and fast rules). In reality, there's various ethnic and philosophical concerns that exacerbate the Sunni/Shia split beyond just leadership. I'm out of my depth here with regard to the Sunni perspective on leadership, given the rise of (and toleration?) of the Ummayad Caliphate, so someone else help me out please. When Muawiyah decided to pass on leadership to his son, thus instituting a monarchial caliphate instead of an elective one (which was how it was for the first 4 caliphs), his Muhammad's grandson Hussein lead a revolt, and his small band of followers were killed in what amounted to a heroic and tragic last stand, which is the core of the Shia religious ceremonies of mourning.įrom then on, the split continued as the Shia continued to believe the blood descendants/relatives of Muhammad and Ali should lead Islam, where as the Sunni's viewed Ali was a good muslim and a good leader, but that "bloodline" was not the only criteria for leadership of the community. He was passed over for leadership 3 times before finally becoming the 4th Caliph.Īfter he was assassinated, leadership of the Islamic community fell to Muawiyah, who was considered a questionable Caliph. "Technically", it stems from who should be the leader of the Muslim community in the aftermath of Muhammad's death.Īfter Muhammad died, some people believe leadership should've passed to Ali, Muhammad's cousin and son-in-law, who was considered by some to be the first as well as a righteous and brave follower of Muhammad and Islam.