Federal Lezgin national-cultural autonomy. Shiites and Sunnis... Who is further from common sense?...

The influential British publication “The Independent” believes that the civil war in Syria has ethno-religious roots going back 1,400 years, that is, since the death of the Prophet Muhammad. To confirm its message, the newspaper conducts a historical excursion, and based on it, it points to the long-hidden and now emerging antagonism between the ruling elite of Syria, belonging to the small Shiite Alawite community, and the Sunnis who make up the majority of the country's population.

This conflict, according to editorial scholars of the East and Islam, is the main source of violence and tension within the Muslim world, ranging from Iraq and Egypt to Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Pakistan and Afghanistan. It is based on a long-standing and irreconcilable enmity between the two main Muslim religious movements.

The newspaper writes that the leading expert on Muslim politics in Great Britain, Baroness Warsi, spoke about this on February 18 in her speech in one of the strategically important countries of the Persian Gulf - Oman. She emphasized that the religious tolerance present in Oman can serve good example For others Muslim countries.

However, “The Independent” notes that in Oman, unlike other Muslim countries, along with two main movements - Shiism and Sunnism - there is a third sect - the Ibadis, who make up the majority and occupy a dominant position. In other countries where there are conflict processes, Shiites and Sunnis are in a balanced state. Of the one and a half million Muslims, approximately 10-20% are Shiites and in many countries they are a minority. However, in Iraq, Iran, Bahrain and Azerbaijan, the Shiites have an advantage.

Today, the confrontation between these two currents is becoming a fundamental factor in determining future fate countries of the Middle East. Supporters of both movements from many countries are fighting in Syria. Their civil war involves Al-Qaeda jihadists and Sunni volunteers on one side, and Hizbullah militants on the other.

Syria is an exceptional situation, with a Sunni majority ruled by a Shiite minority. President Bashar al-Assad himself and most of his army officers belong to the Shiite Alawite community. A similar situation occurred in Iraq during the reign of Saddam Hussein. However, there the Sunni minority ruled over the Shia majority. After the US military intervention, the situation there changed, the leadership of the country passed into the hands of the Shiites, which further aggravated the situation and led to chaos.

It should be noted that the contradictions between the two movements of Islam are deeper than between Catholics and Protestants. At the time of the conflict, Christianity already had a 1,500-year history, and contradictions in Islam began immediately after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, at the beginning of the 7th century.

Over the years, the split deepened even more, although both sides referred to the Holy Quran. There was an ambiguous, different attitude towards the hadiths written by the followers of the Prophet and Islamic traditions. Soon the rules of prayer began to be interpreted differently. A hierarchy of imams and ayatullahs appeared in Shiism, while the Sunnis refused to recognize intermediaries between themselves and Allah. The result was the emergence of extremist fanatics such as members of Al-Qaeda. The Sunnis advocated state control over their supporters.

Various sub-currents appeared in Shiism, including fanatics, and in Syria - Alawites and Ismailis. Many mystical Sufi movements were able to create bridges between Sunnis and Shiites, but irreconcilable Sunnis considered Shiites visiting sacred places as blasphemy, which is why Sunni extremists bombed the sacred land of Shiites in Iraq - Karbala.

At the same time, for 1400 years after the death of the Prophet, most Shiites and Sunnis did not want the conflict to deepen. Although many Sunnis cursed the Shiites in their prayers, during for long years these two currents preferred peaceful coexistence. However, conflicts accompanied by violence periodically broke out, as a result of which the Shiites were brutally exterminated. So, in 1514, the Ottoman Sultan gave the order to exterminate 40 thousand Shiites, in India the Mughal Empire in XV-XIX centuries periodically persecuted the Shiites and destroyed their shrines; there were also clashes in Pakistan involving members of these movements.

At the same time, there were countries where a truce was observed. In 1959, in Cairo, which is considered the center of the Sunni ulema, Shiism even began to be taught at Al-Azhar University, and in some mosques in Azerbaijan, Shiites and Sunnis perform namaz prayer together.

However, at the beginning of the 20th century The Royal Family Saudi Arabia pursued a policy of discrimination against officials adhering to Shiism and destroyed most their shrines. With the strengthening of the position of Wahhabism there, strict sanctions began to be applied to adherents of Shiism, including the arrest of their leaders. To this day, many Saudi religious leaders consider Shiism “worse than Christianity and Judaism” and “blasphemy.” Even Al-Qaeda fanatics were raised on the ideology of Wahhabism. Many of them believe in killing Shiites.

Over the years, outside forces have tried to exploit this confrontation between the two sects of Islam for their own purposes. In the 1920s, British colonists in Iraq used the Sunni officer elite to suppress Shia uprisings, thereby opening the way for the rule of Saddam's Sunni minority. The result of this policy was the extermination of many thousands of Shiites, which continues to this day. Last year alone, more than 6 thousand Shiites and Sunnis combined were killed in Baghdad. And now this brutal sectarian war is being waged in Syria.

In recent times, two major events have occurred in the world that have increased tensions between Shiites and Sunnis. One of them is the Islamic revolution of 1979 in Iran, as a result of which the pro-Western Shah Reza Pahlavi was overthrown, and power passed to the Shiite theocracy led by Ayatollah Khomeini. And although he did everything possible to improve relations between Shiites and Sunnis in his country, between Islamic leaders and the heads of Islamic states remained difficult relationship. From the very beginning of his reign, Khomeini called Saudi Arabia's Sunni aristocracy "servants of America" ​​and "corrupt dictators."

And today in Iran there are no mosques for millions of Sunnis, although they function Christian churches. There is no place for Sunnis in the highest echelons of power, it is difficult for Sunni businessmen to obtain licenses to carry out export and import transactions, and most ordinary Sunnis are unemployed.

But in Saudi Arabia the situation is exactly the opposite - Shiites are subject to discrimination there.

Leaders of Islamic countries whose leadership is represented by representatives various trends, periodically make attempts to improve relations and want to show that the tension is not of a religious nature. In 2007, King Abdullah warmly welcomed Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and tried to convince the world that relations between the countries had improved, even criticizing those who promote hostility between Shiites and Sunnis. However, the actual policy has not changed. Each of the two oil giants continues to see the other as a danger to its interests.

The confrontation between Sunnis and Shiites was further deepened by the war in Iraq launched in 2003 by George Bush and Tony Blair, as a result of which the Sunni elite and the power of Saddam Hussein were overthrown, and the new government, the majority of which were Shiites, contributed to the flourishing of state terror. It should be recalled here that it was the United States that incited Saddam to war with Iran in the 80s.

Only after the events of September 11, 2001, the United States changed its attitude towards Saddam Hussein, overthrew him and brought democracy to Iraq. As a result of the elections, the Shiites came to power and began to discriminate against the Sunnis, who responded by choosing the method of terror, as a result of which thousands of ordinary people die every year.

And now this hostility has spread to Syria. In 2011, at the height of " Arab spring", the protests in Syria were anti-corruption, anti-clan in nature. People demanded democracy, respect for rights and freedoms. However, over the course of two years, the protest movement grew into an armed confrontation, and the political opposition, supported by the West, began to lose its position in front of Islamic radicals. Today, as part of a group called “ Islamic State Iraq and Sham” are fought by radicals from many countries of the world, but they are financed by Saudi Arabia.

And recently Hezbollah militants arrived in Syria from Lebanon, fighting on Assad’s side. The result is a full-scale civil war.

All this suggests that Sunnis and Shiites from all countries are embroiled in conflict throughout the Middle East. Each side strengthens its position opposite side sees this as a threat to itself, and the Sunni-Shiite confrontation has already become a source of tension that endangers the whole world.

Zahiraddin Ibrahimi

On May 20, Ilham Aliyev hastily flew to Riyadh. Why so hastily?.. Although he could well have avoided this event, citing the closure of the same Islamiad, which took place on the 22nd in Baku, especially since none of the leaders of Islamic countries deigned to appear at the opening of these games and send instead of himself, someone else from the ruling elite. And especially since this meeting, which took place on May 21 in Saudi Arabia, called the Arab-Islamic-American Summit, was initially clear that it had an open anti-Iranian orientation, which was fully proven both by the speeches at this meeting and accepted final declaration. But it turns out that Aliyev himself had to show up at this summit and let him know where he stands.

The issue that the Baku authorities want to Sunnize Azerbaijan has long been discussed within Azerbaijan and beyond its borders. Work in in this direction has been carried out since the first days of the return of the now departed worldly life Aliyev Sr. to power. All these years, the most favorable conditions were created in the country for pan-Turkists, Nursists and Wahhabis, and the Shiite clergy and activists were repressed by all possible methods, including physical elimination.

If we have already touched on the topic of the Islamiada, which ended in Baku, then it is worth noting some details... It is interesting that the Islamiada was supposed to open with the sound of the Sunni azan, in a country where the majority of the population is Shiites. But after this became known to the Directorate of Muslims of the Caucasus, the leadership of the said organization immediately contacted the organizing committee of the games and the authorities, demanding that they abandon this idea. The UMC’s argument was: you are putting us in a very difficult position in front of believers and Iran. The authorities refused this not very good-naturedly, making it clear that these are precisely the goals they are pursuing, giving a kind of mess to all parties.

But at the end they voiced the Sunni kyalmaye-shahadat (making a confession of faith), without mentioning the name of the first Shiite imam - Ali ibn Abu Talib, as is customary among Shiites. Another interesting point was Ilgam Aliyev’s message on the occasion of the opening of the games, in which he explained his love and loyalty to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey, allegedly because of their position on the issue of the Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict, and there was a subtle hint that such feelings Iran does not apply.

Well, the Azerbaijani authorities made their choice, and made it a long time ago. And all these years they have repeatedly confirmed their choice and worked with all their might in this direction. And what about the believers of Azerbaijan themselves?.. The Azerbaijani Shiites have committed a number of serious mistakes, which led them to today’s difficult, but not hopeless, situation.

The first, the Shiite clergy, graduates of Iranian religious universities, rushed into the political struggle in the country without having the necessary political education for this, and, most importantly, ahead of time, when society was not yet ready to support their ideas. In a sense, there were also manipulations on the part of the Baku services, as well as the work of agents embedded in the Islamic movement. Over time, it became clear that such a policy was not coordinated with the Iranian leadership, and even Tehran refused to support some activists, calling it an internal matter of Azerbaijan. That is, there was either the initiative of these activists, or, as we indicated above, skillful manipulation of them by third forces.

Secondly, flirting with the Islamist circles of Turkey, attempts to become on par with the Islamist movement of Turkey, faith in Erdogan, point blank not noticing Turkey’s policy of supporting Pan-Turkism, Nursism and Wahhabism, which in the end did not even want to engage in repressions against believers in Azerbaijan, and according to the reliable information we have, for his part he also demanded that Baku begin repressions against the Shiites.

Third, the organizational work was not carried out at the required level among the Azerbaijani believers, the lack of unity of both ordinary believers and the clergy themselves, which led to the fact that when some rushed into battle, others remained on the sidelines, and some even opposed first.

Fourth, the position taken by believers on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, which was partly more radical than even the position of the Baku authorities and the pro-Western opposition. As we have emphasized repeatedly, the “Karabakh issue” was initially a matter of manipulation within Azerbaijan political struggle, to come to power and retain it. Political Islam, unfortunately, followed the same path, naively believing that by taking an even more radical position on this issue than the authorities themselves, it would be able to insure itself from the repressions of the regime. Not fully understanding how ruling clan has become dependent on centers that despise any manifestation of Iranian influence, be it religious, national, etc. Believers in this matter did not take into account the very position of Iran, which is clearly against the start of new clashes on the Karabakh front, and regards this as nothing other than a provocation.

And also the interests of Russia, which cannot simply abandon its only military ally in the South Caucasus to the mercy of fate. And given this set of circumstances, for Russia today’s authorities in Baku look much more preferable than an unbridled crowd of fanatics who can seize power and create much more headaches than the ruling tribe. The latter skillfully took advantage of this state of affairs and began comprehensive repressions against Shiite activists and the clergy, while Iran, busy on several fronts and lacking sufficient leverage on Baku, is simply forced to contemplate what is happening under its nose in relation to its coreligionists.

And lastly, fifthly, Russia’s national interests lie not only in peace and security in the entire Caucasus, but the entire Caucasus is still included in the sphere national interests Russia, and believers should this fact fully take into account and give the right signals regarding Moscow, find ways to reach it, and build your policy taking into account the interests of Russian state. And this should not be a humiliation, but look around - then they will notice that all anti-imperialist movements are trying to achieve the political patronage of the Kremlin in their struggle.

It is possible that today Russia is not yet ready to agree to the establishment of Islamic rule in Azerbaijan, but in fairness it should be noted that the Azerbaijani society itself is not yet ready for this, and this is not expected in the near future, and fortunately, the majority of Shiite activists themselves confirm they state that they do not set such goals, and on the other hand, Islamic Iran itself declares that the Velayat-Faqih system is an exclusively Iranian phenomenon, other Islamic countries should build systems suitable for their society, but the states themselves should take anti-imperialist positions against US hegemony, West and NATO.

Russia does not want the weakening of traditional Islam and the strengthening of such sectarians and radicals as the Nursists and Wahhabis, who have a terrorist underground in the North Caucasus, and, undoubtedly, remembers that these terrorists were provided with military and financial assistance through the territory of Aliyev’s Azerbaijan, and wounded terrorists were treated in Baku hospitals. Moscow is clearly monitoring the constant and consistent inclinations of the Aliyev clan towards Turkey and Saudi Arabia, and their overseas masters, and the tilt towards the Sunnization, Nursification and Wahhabization of Azerbaijan.

And in the end... All traditional Islamic movements, which, like Russia, are fighting for a multipolar world that would balance the geopolitical thicket and create safe conditions for progress for all peoples, are simply obliged to support the Russian world in this fight so So that Russia does not fear new “stabs in the back”, it could continue this fight without looking back. And for this you need to be not in front of Russia, and not behind Russia, but next to Russia, together with Russia! Russia, in turn, through the mouth of its first person, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, has repeatedly stated that Islamic countries can always find in Russia their reliable support and patron in the struggle for a multipolar world, without dictate and hegemony of one side. Moreover, this favor should be taken advantage of by Azerbaijani believers, who are also at the forefront of the struggle against imperialism, and in front of the repressive apparatus of the Nakhichevan clan, which has long been in line with Riyadh.

The Muslim Ummah has been divided into many different currents and directions for 1,400 years. And this despite the fact that Holy Quran The Almighty tells us:

“Hold onto the rope of Allah and do not be separated” (3:103)

The Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) warned about the division of the Muslim community, saying that the ummah would be divided into 73 movements.

In modern Muslim world we can distinguish the two largest and most influential directions of Islam that formed after the death of the Messenger of Allah (s.w.w.) - Sunnis and Shiites.

History of the schism

The death of the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) raised the question of a possible successor to the Muslim ummah as the ruler of the Muslim state, as well as the spiritual leader of the believers. The majority of Muslims supported the candidacy of the closest companion of the Messenger of Allah (s.g.w.) - (r.a.), who was one of the first to accept Islam and was a companion of the Messenger of Allah (s.g.w.) throughout his entire prophetic mission. In addition, during the life of Muhammad (s.g.w.), Abu Bakr replaced him as imam with collective prayers when he wasn't feeling well.

However, a small part of the believers saw his son-in-law and cousin Ali ibn Abu Talib (ra) as the successor of the Final Prophet (s.a.w.). In their opinion, Ali, who grew up in the house of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and was his relative, has more rights to become their ruler than Abu Bakr.

Subsequently, that part of the believers who came out in support of Abu Bakr began to be called Sunnis, and those who supported Ali - Shiites. As you know, Abu Bakr was chosen as the successor of the Messenger of God (s.g.w.), who became the first righteous caliph in the history of Islam.

Features of Sunnism

Sunnis (full name - Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama'a - “People of the Sunnah and Community Harmony”) are the largest and most influential movement in the Islamic world. The term comes from the Arabic "sunnah", which refers to the life of the Prophet Muhammad (s.g.w.), and means following the path of God's Messenger (s.g.w.). That is, the main sources of knowledge for Sunni Muslims are the Koran and the Sunnah.

Currently, Sunnis make up about 90% of Muslims and live in most countries of the world.

In Sunni Islam, there are many different theological and legal schools, the largest of which are 4 madhhabs: Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and Hanbali. In general, the Sunni madhhabs do not contradict each other, since the founders of these legal schools lived at approximately the same time and were students and teachers of each other, and therefore the Sunni madhhabs rather complement each other.

There are some minor disagreements between madhhabs on certain issues, which are related to the specifics of each legal school. In particular, these disagreements can be examined using the example of the permissibility of eating the meat of certain animals from the point of view of various Sunni legal schools. For example, eating horse meat, according to the Hanafi madhhab, belongs to the category of undesirable actions (makrooh), according to the Maliki madhhab - forbidden acts (haram), and according to the Shafi'i and Hanbali madhhabs, this meat is permitted (halal).

Features of Shiism

Shiism is an Islamic movement in which, together with their descendants, they are recognized as the only legitimate successors of the Messenger of Allah Muhammad (s.w.). The term "Shiite" itself comes from Arabic word“shi`a” (translated as “followers”). This group of Muslims consider themselves followers of Imam Ali (r.a.) and his righteous descendants.

Now the number of Shiites is estimated at approximately 10% of all Muslims in the world. Shiite communities operate in most states, and in some of them they constitute an absolute majority. These countries include: Iran, Azerbaijan, Bahrain. In addition, quite large Shiite communities live in Iraq, Yemen, Kuwait, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.

Within Shiism today there are many trends, the largest of which are: Jafarism, Ismailism, Alawism and Zaydism. Relations between their representatives cannot always be called close, since on some issues they take opposing positions. The main point of disagreement between Shiite movements is the issue of recognizing certain descendants of Ali ibn Abu Talib (ra) as immaculate imams. In particular, the Jafarites (Twelver Shiites) recognize 12 righteous imams, the final one of which is Imam Muhammad al-Mahdi, according to Jafarite teaching, who went into “concealment” as a child. In the future, Imam Mahdi will have to fulfill the role of the Messiah. The Ismailis, in turn, recognize only seven imams, since this part The Shiites are recognized by the imamate of the first six imams, as are the Jafarites, and they recognized the eldest son of the sixth imam, Jafar al-Sadiq, Imam Ismail, who died before his father, as the seventh imam. Ismailis believe that it was the seventh Imam Ismail who went into hiding and that he will become the Messiah in the future. The situation is similar with the Zaydis, who recognize only five righteous imams, the final of which is Zeid ibn Ali.

Main differences between Sunnis and Shiites

Sunnis believe that Muslims who have the necessary level of knowledge and unquestioned authority in the Muslim environment have the right to be the ruler of the faithful and their spiritual mentor. In turn, from the point of view of the Shiites, only the direct descendants of Muhammad (s.g.w.) have such a right. In this regard, the legitimacy of the rise to power of the first three righteous caliphs - Abu Bakr (r.a.), Umar (r.a.) and Uthman (r.a.), recognized along with Ali (r.a.) is not recognized with them .), in the Sunni world. For Shiites, only the authority of immaculate imams, who, in their opinion, are sinless, is authoritative.

2. The special role of Imam Ali (r.a.)

Sunnis revere the Prophet Muhammad (s.g.w.) as the Messenger of the Almighty (s.g.w.), sent by the Lord as a mercy for the worlds. Shiites, along with Muhammad (s.g.w.), equally reverence Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (r.a.). When pronouncing the azan - the call to prayer - Shiites even pronounce his name, indicating that Ali is a ruler from the Almighty. In addition, some extreme Shiite movements even recognize this companion as an incarnation of a deity.

3. Approach to considering the Sunnah of the Prophet (s.a.w.)

Sunnis recognize the authenticity of those hadiths of the Prophet (s.a.w.) contained in 6 collections: Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Abu Daud, Nasai, Ibn Majah. For Shiites, such an indisputable source is the hadiths from the so-called “Quadrateuch”. That is, those hadiths that were transmitted by representatives of the family of the Prophet (s.g.w.). For Sunnis, the criterion for the reliability of hadiths is the compliance of the chain of transmitters with the requirements of honesty and truthfulness.

Point of view
The well-known Dagestani Islamic scholar Ruslan Gereev contacted the site’s editors with a request to publish his concerns about the growing interfaith confrontation in Azerbaijan.

The text is published without editorial intervention

The Milli Majlis of Azerbaijan, at the end of February 2013, amended Article 22 of the Law “On Freedom of Religion”: “Literature with religious content (on paper and electronic media), audio and video materials, goods, products, and other information materials with religious content.” Now, citizens and religious organizations can purchase and use only materials labeled by the relevant executive control bodies.

The deputies who spoke in support of the changes to the legal act do not hide that this amendment is aimed at isolating long-bearded people with short trousers from society in Azerbaijan. Noting the importance of additions to the basic law of the country in the field of regulation of religions, deputy Gudrat Hasanguliyev noted: “Azerbaijan is full of bearded and non-bearded mullahs. Now we must wait for extremism to spread in Azerbaijan, and then start fighting it?!” Deputy Ilham Aliyev, who spoke at a parliamentary meeting, also supported changes to the Law: “I support changes to this Law. Because, we must try to isolate society from people with long beards and short trousers. Walking along the boulevard in the evenings, seeing such people, you feel hatred for their appearance.”

New Rules for the People of the Sunnah

Of course, we are talking, first of all, about stopping the rapid spread of Sunni Islam in the Republic of Azerbaijan. The activities of Islamic preachers from foreign Muslim countries who lead daawa - a call to faith in Azerbaijan are causing concern to the official authorities of this country. This was recently stated by the head of the youth forum of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Elchin Askerov. He emphasized that the ideas of radicalism and extremism in Azerbaijan are spread mainly by emissaries from some foreign Muslim countries, who for this purpose take representatives of Azerbaijani youth abroad for appropriate training, and huge sums are allocated for propaganda in the country.

Askerov expressed hope that the preaching of pure Islam in Azerbaijan will not find a response among young people, but on the contrary will cause public censure. Any attempts are doomed and do not win support among the population, Askerov believes. However, analysts and observers testify that the position of the head of the youth forum of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation does not at all coincide with reality.

Jamestown Foundation

The American organization Jamestown Foundation, which analyzes problems in the Caucasus, wrote that cases of Shiites converting to Sunnism are becoming increasingly common among young people in Azerbaijan, and that is why the authorities equate this with “radicalization” and “extremism.”

Jamestown analysts came to the conclusion that, despite the large income from oil and gas exports, which create the external attractiveness of Azerbaijan, the official authorities are experiencing serious problems, one of which is the Sunnis, and the growth of Sunni communities. Researchers at the Jamestown Foundation who study the problems of jihadism note that the Sumgayit jamaats are the most active in this regard. This second largest Azerbaijani city is practically already a springboard for Sunnism in Azerbaijan. Although greatest number Sunnis live in the north of Azerbaijan; mass cases of Shiites converting to Sunnism are common among young people in Baku, Ganja, and Gakhe. In addition, cases of oppression of Muslims in the cities of Ganja, Baku, Sumgait, Quba, Zagatala are increasing, and the increasing frequency of special services operations against “radical” Muslims in the northwestern part of Azerbaijan is increasingly attracting the attention of the world community. These cities have already seen mass arrests of Muslims suspected of sympathizing with pure Islam, and Muslims seen as loyal to “Sunni” Islam were persecuted throughout Azerbaijan, charged with various crimes and imprisoned for long periods.

At the same time, according to Jamestown, there are militant jamaats in Azerbaijan that work closely with the mujahideen of the Caucasus Emirate. One of these jamaats was founded in Sumgait by field commander Ildar Mollachiev (Amir Abdul Majid), who commanded the armed underground in Dagestan. As is known, he was from the city of Zagatala in northern Azerbaijan. “Sumgayit Jamaat” was created back in 2007, when Ildar Mollachiev was appointed Emir of the southern sector of the Emirate, Supreme Amir Doku Umarov.

According to the Jamestown Foundation, the Sumgait Jamaat is very dynamic and has structures not only in the north of the country, but also directly in Baku, Sumgait, and Ganja. This community also interacts with radical Muslims in Dagestan, Ingushetia, Chechnya, Ossetia and other regions of the North Caucasus.

Ruslan GEREEV
especially for the site

In the photo: Lezgi - a mosque in Baku does not accommodate Sunni believers

R The division of Muslims into Shiites and Sunnis dates back to early history Islam. Immediately after the death of the Prophet Muhammad in the 7th century, a dispute arose over who should lead the Muslim community in the Arab Caliphate. Some believers advocated for elected caliphs, while others advocated for the rights of Muhammad's beloved son-in-law Ali ibn Abu Talib. This is how Islam was first divided.There was also a direct testament of the prophet, according to which Ali was to become his successor, but, as often happens, the authority of Muhammad, unshakable during life, did not play a decisive role after death. Supporters of his will believed that the ummah (community) should be led by imams “appointed by God” - Ali and his descendants from Fatima, and believed that the power of Ali and his heirs was from God. Ali's supporters began to be called Shiites, which literally means “supporters, adherents.”

Their opponents objected that neither the Koran nor the second most important Sunnah (a set of rules and principles supplementing the Koran, based on examples from the life of Muhammad, his actions, statements in the form in which they were transmitted by his companions) says nothing about imams and about the divine rights to power of the Ali clan. The prophet himself did not say anything about this. The Shiites responded that the prophet's instructions were subject to interpretation - but only by those who had a special right to do so. Opponents considered such views to be heresy and said that the Sunnah should be taken in the form in which the companions of the prophet compiled it, without any changes or interpretations. This direction of adherents of strict adherence to the Sunnah is called “Sunnism”.

In 632, just two years after his election, Caliph Abu Bakr died, appointing Umar ibn Khattab as his successor. Twelve years later, in 644, Umar was killed in Medina and was succeeded by Uthman ibn Affan from the influential Arab Umayyad family. Another 12 years later, in 656, he was killed, and that same Ali was elected the fourth caliph. But the ruler of Syria and a relative of Umar, Muawiya, accused Ali of involvement in the murder of the former caliph, and he was supported by the noble families of the young empire. A long civil war and a split in the Caliphate began. In 661, Ali was stabbed to death with a poisoned dagger in the Kufa mosque.

After Ali's death, Muawiyah seized power. He concluded a peace treaty with Ali's son, Imam Hassan, according to which, after his death, power was to pass to Hassan. A few years later, Hasan died and he became the new imam. younger brother Hussein. And in 680 Muawiyah died. He transferred the throne to his son Yazid, abolishing the election of caliphs and turning this institution into a regular hereditary monarchy. Imam Hussein did not recognize Yazid's authority. The confrontation did not last long and ended in disaster for Hussein and his supporters. In the same year 680, on October 10, he and his family and closest supporters, after a grueling siege, were attacked in Karbala (Iraq) by the troops of the caliph under the command of a former supporter of Ali, a certain Shimr. In this battle, Hussein himself, his two sons, including a six-month-old baby, several relatives and almost all his supporters were killed.

The Karbala massacre outraged the entire ummah. And for the Shiites, Imam Hussein became a martyr for the faith and the most revered of the imams. The city of Karbala, where the imam is buried, is considered the most sacred place for Shiites after Mecca and Medina. Every year, Shiites honor his memory during the Ashura mourning ceremonies. The shocking custom “Shakhsey Vakhsey” is known. Funeral processions take place through the streets, men taking part in them are under drum roll They beat themselves with chains as a sign of grief. The scars and wounds received in this case are considered a sign of religious piety. Dressed in black women standing along the road, screaming and beating their chests. In old Iran, it was customary to carry a stuffed lion through the streets. Moved by the actor, the effigy would from time to time, with a clumsy movement, scoop up straw and pour it on its head, symbolizing a saddened nation sprinkling ashes on its head. However, from the European point of view, a very comic effect was achieved.

In Iran, during the days of Ashura, taziye are still presented in squares - unique religious mysteries dedicated to both the death of Imam Hussein and the events that preceded it. This tradition is more than a thousand years old, and the taziye have become the same national symbol for Iran, as Kabuki theater is for Japan. Each character is given a costume and image that has not changed over the centuries. Imam Hussein is dressed in green - a symbol of holiness, like other "holy" heroes, and his face is covered with a veil. The main negative character Shimr is dressed in red - a symbol of death and betrayal. In taziyya, the actor does not act, but “portrays” his character. This is not an acting performance, but work for the glory of God, in memory and for the glory of deceased saints. That is why the actor playing Shimr can, during the course of the mystery, curse the villainy of his hero and complain that he has to play such a terrible role.

As Evgeniy Bertels wrote in his book “The Persian Theater,” “a significant difficulty is finding actors to play the roles of villains. The public no longer distinguishes between theatrical performances and everyday life, and intervenes in the performance, wanting to give historical events a new turn. Because of this, the performers of some roles have a very hard time; they are often beaten to the point that at the end of the celebrations they for a long time have to wait. Anticipating such a sad outcome, they try to prevent it and try to play the role as less realistically as possible, interrupting speeches with various exclamations and showering curses on their own atrocities. But this doesn’t help much, the energy accumulated in the hall seeks an outcome and, in the absence of another object, involuntarily falls on the unfortunate Omars and Shimrs.”

With the death of Imam Hussein, the institution of imams did not disappear. His son Zain al Abidin survived the massacre at Karbala, recognized the Umayyad rule and continued the dynasty. Imams did not have political power, but had enormous spiritual influence on the Shiites. The last, eleventh Imam, Hasan al Askari, died in 873, and the “Muslim Megovings” ceased to exist. According to Shia tradition, Hasan left behind a son, Muhammad, the “twelfth imam,” who was hidden by God at the age of five and still exists today. This hidden imam must appear as the Messiah (Mahdi); some Shiites (the so-called Twelvers) are still waiting for his return. The imam was popularly called Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of the Iranian revolution of 1979, which established a Shiite theocratic regime in the country.

For Sunnis, the Shiite understanding of the function of the imam as a mediator between God and man is a heresy, since they adhere to the concept of direct worship of Allah, without intermediaries. Imam - from their point of view, ordinary religious figure, who has earned authority with his theological knowledge, is the head of the mosque, and their institution of clergy is devoid of a mystical aura. Sunnis revere the first four "Rightly Guided Caliphs" and do not recognize the Ali dynasty. Shiites recognize only Ali. Shiites revere the sayings of imams along with the Koran and Sunnah.

Differences persist in Sunni and Shiite interpretations of Sharia (Islamic law). For example, Shiites do not adhere to the Sunni rule of considering a divorce valid from the moment it is declared by the husband. In turn, Sunnis do not accept the Shiite practice of temporary marriage.

IN modern world Sunnis make up the majority of Muslims, Shiites make up just over ten percent. Shiites are widespread in Iran, Azerbaijan, some areas of Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, Tajikistan and Arab countries(except North Africa). The main Shiite state and the spiritual center of this direction of Islam is Iran.

Conflicts between Shiites and Sunnis still occur, but nowadays they are more often of a political nature. With rare exceptions (Iran, Azerbaijan, Syria), in countries inhabited by Shiites, all political and economic power belongs to Sunnis. Shiites feel offended, their discontent is taken advantage of by radical Islamic groups, Iran and Western countries, who have long mastered the science of pitting Muslims against each other and supporting radical Islam for the sake of the “victory of democracy.” Shiites have vigorously fought for power in Lebanon and last year rebelled in Bahrain to protest the Sunni minority's usurpation of political power and oil revenues.

In Iraq, after the armed intervention of the United States, the Shiites came to power, a civil war began in the country between them and the former owners - the Sunnis, and the secular regime gave way to obscurantism. In Syria, the situation is the opposite - power there belongs to the Alawites, one of the directions of Shiism. Under the pretext of fighting the dominance of the Shiites in the late 70s, the terrorist group “Muslim Brotherhood” launched a war against the ruling regime; in 1982, the rebels captured the city of Hama. The rebellion was crushed and thousands of people died. Now the war has resumed - but only now, as in Libya, the bandits are called rebels, they are openly supported by all progressive Western humanity, led by the United States.

IN former USSR Shiites live mainly in Azerbaijan. In Russia they are represented by the same Azerbaijanis, as well as a small number of Tats and Lezgins in Dagestan.

There are no serious conflicts in the post-Soviet space yet. Most Muslims have a very vague idea of ​​the difference between Shiites and Sunnis, and Azerbaijanis living in Russia, in the absence of Shiite mosques, often visit Sunni ones.

In 2010, there was a conflict between the chairman of the presidium Spiritual Administration Muslims of the European part of Russia, the chairman of the Council of Muftis of Russia, Sunni Ravil Gainutdin and the head of the Office of Muslims of the Caucasus, Shiite Allahshukur Pashazade. The latter was accused of being a Shiite, and the majority of Muslims in Russia and the CIS are Sunnis, therefore, a Shiite should not rule the Sunnis. The Council of Muftis of Russia frightened the Sunnis with “Shiite revenge” and accused Pashazade of working against Russia and supporting Chechen militants, excessively close relations with the Russian Orthodox Church and the oppression of Sunnis in Azerbaijan. In response, the Caucasus Muslim Board accused the Mufti Council of attempting to disrupt the Interreligious Summit in Baku and of inciting discord between Sunnis and Shiites.

Experts believe that the roots of the conflict lie in the founding congress of the CIS Muslim Advisory Council in Moscow in 2009, at which Allahshukur Pashazade was elected head of a new alliance of traditional Muslims. The initiative was highly praised by the Russian President, and the Council of Muftis, which demonstratively boycotted it, was a loser. Western intelligence agencies are also suspected of inciting the conflict...

Mariam Akhundova

http://www.pravda.ru/faith/religions/islam/