Sheikh M. Al-Khatib gave the eight reasons on

why it is impossible to have unity and understanding between Sunnis and Shias.

1. Shias have a different Quran from that of the Sunnis.
   
2. The sources relied upon by Shias in understanding Prophet's Traditions (ahadith) are not the same as those of the Sunnis.
   
3. Shias do not respect the Companions of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.w.; on the contrary they in fact insult and curse them!
   
4. Shias believe in taqiyya, by which they appear to Sunnis "contrary to what they conceal". Therefore one is not in a position to know the truth about them.
   
5. Shias do not recognize the first three Caliphs accepted by Sunnis. They only recognize their twelve Imams.
   
6. On the Uniqueness and Omniscience of Allah, and on whether He can be seen or not, Shias believe differently from the Sunnis.
   
7. Shias‟ principles of religion and jurisprudence are different from Sunnis‟.
   
8. Contrary to the Sunnis, Shias believe in raj‟ah – which means that, while approaching the end of this world, the Mahdi (a.s.) will come and "slaughter all his political opponents" and will consequently restore to the Shias all their rights which were denied them previously by the followers of other sects (madhaahib). 
   

The above were the reasons which prompted Sheikh M. al-Khatib to write his book. His objective was to warn the Sunnis of the impending danger of answering to any call meant to bring about unity and understanding between them and their Shia brothers and sisters. One could safely conclude that his followers too were driven by the same reasons to have his book translated into Kiswahili and English.

 

In replying to these arguments, I shall try to show that:

Some of Sheikh M. al-Khatib's statements go against the very tenets of Shiism;Whatever religious belief the Shias hold is based on the Qur'an and the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w)

Almost all of Sheikh M. al-Khatib's accusations against the Shias could also be made against the Sunnis, based on what is contained in the books relied upon by the latter; and therefore the differences between Sunnis and Shias are not that great as to prevent unity and understanding between the two.

 

WHO IS A SUNNI?

Sheikh M. al-Khatib's objective in writing his book was to warn Sunnis against the dangers of Shiism. I therefore thought that it would be better if a Sunni knew himself or herself first before talking about Shias because, as it has so far transpired, either many Sunnis do not know who they are or, if they do, do so erroneously. For example, some of the learned Sunnis are of the opinion that they have been called so because of the fact that they are the only ones who abide by the sunna of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w.) – as if other Muslim madhaahib, like the Shia Ithnaashari, Zaydis or Ibadhis, do not do so. Others think that it has been so because Sunnism had been in existence from the time of Prophet Muhammad. However, on both beliefs the contrary is the case.

In actual fact a Sunni is one who, when it comes to matters of Islamic jurisprudence, follows the opinion of one of the four imams (Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi or Hanbal) or their students; and in matters of aqida follows the views of Abul Hassan al-Ash'ari. In other words, if one follows the views of others than the above mentioned in those two areas, then one is not regarded to be a Sunni.

In order for one to understand exactly when Sunnism started, it is important to know, at least in brief, the history of those imams:

Imam Abu Hanifa was born in Kufa in the year 80H, and died in Baghdad in 150H. Among his teachers was Imam Jafar as-Sadiq a.s. (who was the sixth Imam of the Shia Ithnaashari). Abu Hanifa is quoted to have said that had it not been for the two years he was the student of Imam Jafar, he (Abu Hanifa) would have perished.

Imam Malik was born in Madina in 93H, and died there in 179H. He, as well, had Imam Jafar among his teachers.

Imam Shafi was born in Gaza in 150H, and died in Egypt in 204H.

Imam Hanbal was born in Baghdad in 164H, where he died in 241H.

The last, Abul Hassan al-Ash'ari, was born in Basra in 260H, and died in Baghdad in 333H.

What the above dates testify to is that the first of them, Abu Hanifa, was born about seventy years after the death of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.w. who died in 10H. Therefore the question which arises here is: Between the death of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.w. and Abu Hanifa becoming an Imam, who did the Muslims, living during that period of more than seventy years, follow? Weren't they Muslims? Or what about those who taught Abu Hanifa; didn't they have followers of their own? If they did, where did those followers disappear to? Is it conceivable that one who follows the views of a teacher cannot be accepted as a Muslim, but he who follows the views of that teacher's student can? If the answer is in the negative, on what grounds is it so? If it is in the positive, then why are the ordinary Sunnis made to believe that they are the only genuine Muslims?

I would like you to do, dear reader, is to ask yourself these questions or ask whomsoever you think knows better than you do – and then ponder over the answers given; because it is only after getting the right answers to them that you will be in a better position to understand this riddle which has caused the friction and misunderstanding between Muslims.

As regards the question of aqida, we have seen that Sunnis follow the opinion of Abul Hassan al-Ash'ari (260H -333H) who, as we can see, was born nineteen years after the death of the last Sunni imam, i.e. Imam Hanbal (164H -241H). Therefore al-Ash'ari never met any of the Sunni imams. That being the case, which aqida did the four imams follow during their lifetime? Was it the one based on the views of al-Ash'ari (who had not been born yet), or a different one which existed before al-Ashari's birth? If it was the latter, which one was that? And were those imams still Muslims despite doing so? If they were – and I don't think that there is anyone who can dare say that they were not – why should this apply only to them? Why should somebody else be regarded as a non-Muslim just because one follows a different aqida from that of al-Ash'ari? Definitely al-Ash'ari was not born with his views. Before forming his own, did he not follow the views of the experts who were in existence in those times? If he did so – and the truth is that he did – was he then not a Muslim? If he was, despite following the views which were not his own, why should one be regarded today as a non-Muslim by doing exactly the same?

These are among the questions which I would like you to ask yourself (or whomsoever is more knowledgeable) and consider the answers very carefully. For the correct answers are the ones that will help you to understand the source of the controversy we are discussing.

 

Reason No.01: Shias have a different Quran from that of the Sunnis.

Allah (s.w.t.) has said:

Verily We are the Ones who revealed (this) Reminder, and verily We are the Ones who will protect it. (Chapter 15:9)

… And verily it is a Book Unassailable. Falsehood shall not come from before it nor from behind it: a revelation from the All-Wise, the Most Praised One.(Chapter 41:41-42)
Those are Allah's words which prove that the Qur'an is a book which is protected against any additions, omissions or alterations. All Muslims – of all times and all countries believe that the Qur'an which we have in this age is the same one as that which existed during the time of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.w., and that it will remain so till the Final Day (Qiyamah). Therefore, whoever believes otherwise is not a Muslim.

This is my request to all my Muslim brothers and sisters that please clear your doubts related to any religion or caste by reading books and asking from scholars of that religion. Do not believe anything before investigating.
If you want to know about what Shias or Sunnis believe then you need to read their books and ask their scholars before accepting anything from other source.

PLEASE WRITE YOUR COMMENTS. BECAUSE YOUR COMMENTS ARE VERY IMPORTANT FOR ME IN MANY WAYS