Shia vs Sunni

847 Words4 Pages
Throughout history, there have always been two major branches of Islam; Shia and Sunni. Shia's are mostly based in Iraq and Iran, while Sunnis are the mojority in most other muslim countries. As we all acknowledge that there are certain differences in their convictions and the way they viewed the occurences in the prophets time period, it is crucial to analyze how these differences in beliefs originated from an unbiased perspective. Obviously, there are the political and social reasosn that most historians will tell you today, but I also think it is necessary to go into a deep analysis as to the root causes of the spit. IF the prophet did want Ali and his decendants to succed him, then why? Likewise, IF the prophet wanted Abu Bakr, Omar and Osman to be the first three Caliphs, then why? The initial spit between Shia and Sunni happened in the time shortly after The Prophets death. Some muslims believed that Abu Bakr, Omar, and Osman should be the first three Caliphs, while others believed that Ali, the cousin of the prophet, should be the first Caliph disregarding the first three. Although at this period of time, there was no real distinction as far as Sunni as Shia goes, as time progressed followers of Ali and his descendents became known as Shia, while followers of the first three Caliphs became known as Sunni. The justification for the two different sets of following for historians, is mostly political and social reasons. For example, before islam, there were certain arab tribes who already were okay with a devine ruler; A father son dynasty of rulers which had nothing to do with how competent a leader you are. Other arab tribes would do the exact opposite. They would choose their leader based on who was the most qualified. These different beliefs among the arab tribes closely correlated as to who became Shia and who became Sunni. The tribes who

More about Shia vs Sunni

Open Document