Sunnis and Shiite Are Somehow Different IMO

[Mesopotamian]

Today I was revisiting @Leo Gura's video about Content VS Structure, and He presented his understanding for Sunnis and Shiite divisions of Islam, however I do have an opinion about this:

These two factions are not exactly two sects of Islam, as the Shiite is more inferior division, and sort of outsiders. I base this conclusion on the fact that Shiite's only argument goes like this: Muhammed's relatives should inherit the power of the throne just because they are Muhammed's relatives and they base their claim on a quote by Muhammed.

Story began at the moment Muhammed died, and his relatives were there to wash his body and bury him, the rest of Muslims gathered in a place and chose a Caliph different that Muhammed's cousin (Ali Bin Abi Talib) who became the fourth Caliph. Caliph means 'the successor'. Shiite hate Sunnis for this incident, and consider them betrayals.

Then after that, the later's sons (who are also the grandsons of Muhammed from his daughter) were invited by some people in Iraq to come and rule over Iraq. They promised that as soon as they reach Baghdad or whatever they will crown them kings or caliphs, but the (now known) Sunni caliph back then knew about the plot and ordered them to return or he will kill them. They refused to return and he ordered their beheading in a massacre.

Leo claims that the differences between them are minute, but actually Shiite are below Sunnis in their development,  and their teachings are different, even their prophet is now Muhammed's cousin, in addition to Muhammed.

I can easily say they are not even Muslims, and this is how Sunnis view them. Example, they are OK with making portraits of their figures, unlike Sunnis, and they refuse all the Sunni teachings, and have their own 12 Imams, with the 12th one is like Jesus who will return in the later time, they call him "Mahid" sort of the Massaiah, who is also a Shiite!

Reason no. 2 is that Islam IS about it's teachings, and mainly Muhammed's character, but Islam's message and the power of its dogma does transcend Muhammed, and certainly transcends his offsprings, and this is the Shiite's only argument, and I see that as not valid. Sunnis view them outsiders, and I kind of agree on that. I mean what they were trying to preach is baseless within the Islamic teaching itself as received from Muhammed.

This post is sponsored by Modafinil™

Edited January 26, 2021 by Mesopotamian

[Corpus]

Did Muhammad leave clear instructions about who his successor was to be, and if he did, how can we know what the instructions were? Would this be found in the 6 collections of "authentic" hadiths, which were compiled as collections many years after the Prophet passed away, if one is identifying as a Sunni? How reliable are these collections especially when you consider that Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim were compiled by persons whose first language wasn't even Arabic? Would a wise leader omit to leave instructions about his succession? The Quran says nothing about which of the 4 companions was to succeed the Prophet at all.

Islam tends to confer authority for textual interpretation to the scholars and frowns upon one making ones own analysis of the texts (which in terms of Hadith were compiled decades after the events they refer to, making them requiring of questioning); it is interesting to note that it is these same Hadiths which largely state and dictate the need to refer to scholarly interpretation which creates a blind-loop of sorts. The Hadiths, if one does adhere to them, also state categorically that calling one who calls themselves Muslim a Non-Muslim (ie takfir) is again something the scholar only is qualified to do, and not the layman; in fact the layman risks becoming a kafir by making unqualified takfir.

It is interesting how naming a thing and identifying with it produces a conceptual reality with consequences of action and belief made manifest in this worldly experience. 

 

  

 

[Gesundheit]

50 minutes ago, Mesopotamian said:

Story began at the moment Muhammed died, and his relatives were there to wash his body and bury him, the rest of Muslims gathered in a place and chose a Caliph different that Muhammed's cousin (Ali Bin Abi Talib) who became the fourth Caliph. Caliph means 'the successor'. Shiite hate Sunnis for this incident, and consider them betrayals.

The Shiite did not emerge until later when the 3rd Caliph, Uthman, was killed (biggest turning point). Muslims were pretty much in consensus with the first three Caliphs. Not many of them disagreed, and even the ones that disagreed did not have a strong position against them, because they were known to be close to and would have definitely been recommended by Mohammad. When those three Caliphs were all dead, Ali had to rule. But apparently Mouawya had something else to say. Muslims then got divided into two groups, one supporting Ali (Shiite), and the other supporting Mouawya (Sunni). At that point, Ali had the majority to his side. Eventually, he got killed too. And Mouawya ruled after that and started eliminating Muhammad's relatives so that he and his descendants could maintain the caliphate for themselves. That's where the Shiite-Sunni conflict became a real issue, because anyone who supported Mohammad's relatives was perceived as a betrayer and was tracked down and killed.

The core problem is political, and the rest is just religious nonsense to further strengthen the beliefs of righteousness. I believe most of it is made-up.

Btw, Mouawya did not accept Mohammad either until he had no other choice. He was a very proud man, and he could not accept any other family to rule him or his family. So he wasn't even Sunni. He invented Sunni vs. Shiite to get to the throne. Furthermore, many Muslims accuse Mouawya of killing Uthman, though indirectly, i.e. by hiring a hitman/giving orders.

50 minutes ago, Mesopotamian said:

I can easily say they are not even Muslims, and this is how Sunnis view them. Example, they are OK with making portraits of their figures, unlike Sunnis, and they refuse all the Sunni teachings, and have their own 12 Imams, with the 12th one is like Jesus who will return in the later time, they call him "Mahid" sort of the Massaiah, who is also a Shiite!

He's called "The Mahdi", and it means The Righteous One. Both Sunni and Shiite believe that he's real. But the difference is that Shiite think that he's one of Ali's offspring, and that he ran away from the swords back then and went off to hide in some cave. They believe that he's alive right now, but waiting for a sign from Allah. Sunnis believe the same thing minus the aliveness. They believe that he's from Mohammad's offspring, but he's unknown and could be living among us right now. But he is just a normal human being with a normal human life duration.

50 minutes ago, Mesopotamian said:

Leo claims that the differences between them are minute, but actually Shiite are below Sunnis in their development,  and their teachings are different, even their prophet is now Muhammed's cousin, not Muhammed himself.

He's on point there, because he is implying the difference between their teachings at the same level. I don't see how they're at different levels because they're both authoritarian and dominated by power. So they're Red/Blue at best. And both of them have Purple beliefs, so I'm not sure how they're different.

Edited January 26, 2021 by Gesundheit

[Mesopotamian]

6 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

He's on point there, because he is implying the difference between their teachings at the same level. I don't see how they're at different levels because they're both authoritarian and dominated by power. So they're Red/Blue at best. And both of them have Purple beliefs, so I'm not sure how they're different.

I guess Shiite have adopt more purple beliefs, and their identity is different. They base their identity around being victimized. They weep and cry their Hassan and Hussain, they are delusional in terms of thinking that it is about Ali, and his sons, while let's face it, Islam is Islam, has nothing to do with Ali or his two sons and all the BS around their story.

Shiite worship tombs of their Imams, this is a more stage-purple approach, while Sunnis at least don't buy into that BS

The Shiite have a distinct identity, less stage blue, more of purple, cuz let's face it they are after the ancestors, they are crying the ancestors, not the message of the religion itself.

[Mesopotamian]

@Gesundheit

This is Shiite's HAj, with blood, trying to experience some of the pain of the ancestors, Screams  PURPLE

 

This is Sunni's Hajj, Very organized and clean. Screams BLUE

[Mesopotamian]

@Gesundheit

Moral of the story: I think that Shiite are inferior to Sunnis on the spiral, and that it is not as Leo has claimed that the differences are minute. Shiite have certainly regressed on the spiral towards Stage-Purple, and that does play a huge role in today's conflict.

[Mesopotamian]

@Mesopotamian I mean how can you ever convince any Sunni that Shiite who believe in worshiping graves, and ancestors and have these kind of blood rallies are even Muslims at all, I am an outsider and it doesn't look to me that they are Muslims at all, but flowing a retarded, regressive cult.

[Corpus]

11 minutes ago, Mesopotamian said:

@Gesundheit

This is Shiite's HAj, with blood, trying to experience some of the pain of the ancestors, Screams  PURPLE

 

This is Sunni's Hajj, Very organized and clean. Screams BLUE

 

Hajj by definition is an obligatory visit to Mecca; Medina is optional. The Shiites depicted above are not in Mecca, ergo the picture is not of Hajj.

[Mesopotamian]

@Corpus

Structure is the same, Most Shiite do their yearly quest to Karbala, it is equivalent to the Meca for them, this is why I refered to it as Haj, which translates to something like "a visit to a far away sacred place"

[Mesopotamian]

46 minutes ago, louhad said:

lol, can I take a wild guess and say that you are sunni?

Not true, My family are Christians, and I am now involved with Actualized teachings. I do believe what I believe though about Sunnis and Shiite. I side with Sunnis if I had to choose.

[Mesopotamian]

27 minutes ago, louhad said:

Using that picture of the blood to generalize that shiaa Islam "less developed" or "less Muslim" is like using a picture of an extremist white nationalist Christian in America to say that Protestantism is less developed than catholicism and then creating some historical narrative to say that it is less "Christian"

These rituals are entrenched in the Shiite doctrine. Variants of it is practiced by all shitte period. 

If you can whit yourself with a knife then you should beat your chest. I think you need to read more about this subject, which BTW seen us utter craziness by Sunnis. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mourning_of_Muharram

It is certainly not Muslim rituals, but rather an ugly diversion of Islam as I understand it. 

 

[Mesopotamian]

@louhad this is the developed community of Iran perhaps? 

Gen. Suleimani and the Supreme leader practicing a version of the mourning while the singer singing about "the evil of Israel". 

[Vrubel]

@Mesopotamian Whether someone is Shia or Sunni, it says nothing about his spiral development. There are purple, red, blue, and even orange manifestations of both of these streams within Islam. Iran's aggressive behavior in the region has nothing to do with their Shia faith. Both Iran and Saudi officially deny that their conflict has anything to do with this divide, It's just a power struggle for influence. And when people struggle against each other they also start to demonize and dehumanize each other. I think a huge part of the dysfunction in the Middle east is because societies/peoples hold on too tightly to age-old resentment and hatred of other groups. 

Edited January 26, 2021 by Vrubel

[snowyowl]

Islam is itself a child of Judaism, Sunni & Shia are two of Islam's children. Wow, family feuds can be the worst can't they? Why not just live and let live? @Mesopotamian you have your own faith, Shia's have theirs, covering themselves in blood and flagellation is a bit hard core I'll admit, but it doesn't hurt anyone else. 

[lmfao]

Surprise surprise, this is about the 10th dog shit thread you've posted. Nothing you've posted here is in the least bit enlightening or informative. Just using inflammatory caricatures for the sake of justifying whatever prejudices you have. 

[Gesundheit]

@Mesopotamian It's just different contents due to different beliefs.

Any rituals are in fact Purple. Sunnis have lots of Purple beliefs and practices too. For God's sake, what's all the HAJJ (pilgrimage) thing about? People circling around a black cube. And then they go and stone a piece of wood as if it represents the devil. And people celebrating the holidays by slaughtering sheep as sacrifice for Allah. Why would anyone "rational" do any of that?

[jonabark]

All fundamentalisms gravitate to murdering their 'enemies', especially when their 'enemies are on land they want, or have power they want, or resources they want.  Many muslims of both shia and sunni heritage are not fundamentalists and don't want to force conversion on anyone. Many are only nominally and culturally religious. Some are wildly open to various mystical paths. The Sufis are probably, like most humans, a mixed bag, but they steer away from war and toward friendlier forms of spirituality, singing like celestial thrushes and spinning gracefully like planets among the stars.

[Mesopotamian]

8 hours ago, louhad said:

Who are you to say what is a Muslim ritual or what isn't? do you think there is only a set amount of ways that Islam can be practiced and interpreted? If so, who gives you the authority to decide that??

I've lived among Sunnis for most of my life, like 99.8% of my life probably. I know how Islam works, and Muhammed has set a rigors rules to sort of define the spirit of Islam. Had Muhammed been here, he would have Sufis for example executed, the same Sufis you consider them now a part of the developed Islam, they are NOT. It is just insulting that a western guy like yourself sir is trying to define what Islam is and isn't, probably you haven't even lived among Muslims before.

8 hours ago, louhad said:

Literally no modern Muslim practices the same exact way that a Muslim in the 8th century did. Just like how modern Christianity would be absolutely unrecognizable to an early Christian... does that mean you can point fingers at every living Christian and say that they are practicing a worthless diversion of Christianity???? 

You can't be further than the truth here. When it comes to Islam, well it qualifies that Today's Muslims do live, and exactly have same mindset as Muslims from the time of Muhammed's era. Your comparison to today's Christians is baseless in my opinion.

Islam is more strong of a dogma, and its instructions as per how a Muslim should live and behave are well-kept accurately. The way a Muslim's body is supposed to move during daily 5 times prayers are for example described thoroughly, and had been documented and followed in an accurate way for the past 1000+ years or so. A similar approach is applies to each and every aspect of a Muslim's. Through thousands of Muslim scholars documenting the way a Muslim should be, and behave, I think today's Muslim lives a life that's an accurate representation of a Muslim who was living during the inception of Islam. Shiite are a diversion of that, they are not Muslims. They are more like Kafirs, or infidels according to the recorded Sunni doctrine.

In fact, Sunni is not a division of Islam, Sunnah (the source of the name) means something like "the true way that Muhammed practiced ISlam, through is accurately recorded quotes and stories). Sunnis do a form of science to prove the validity of Muhammed's life stores, and try to reproduce as much accurate set of guidelines similar to how Muhammed lived his life, and Muhammed's vision of how a Muslim should lead his/her life.

Again Shiite are a diversion of that, they do not accept Sunni doctrine, which is as I said, the most accurate, and"scientifically based" method of practicing Islam the way its founder intended it to be practiced.

 

Islam is all about order, while in Christianity, the interpretation has been left open as there's a decentralization of power and authority, i mean for God's sake, they have 12 disciples ! This will greatly diminish any chance to establish an order in a Christian's life, thus you see the transformation. Don't fall in the trap of generalizing. In Islam there's one prophet, once source for a Muslim's lifestyle, and everything about Muhammed's life is recorded accurately, I won't exaggerate if I said even the way he pisses or shit has been recorded, and Muslims follow that to the point.

 

Just have a look on this, it is a scientific research by Dr. Damanhuri !! About the stories of Muhammed's style in peeing! an exciting subject

Quote

Hadith abouttheProphet Muhammad Pbuh Own Pee Standing in Simultaneous ResearchDr.Damanhuri

http://oaji.net/articles/2016/1115-1470131881.pdf

 

[Mesopotamian]

6 hours ago, Gesundheit said:

@Mesopotamian It's just different contents due to different beliefs.

Any rituals are in fact Purple. Sunnis have lots of Purple beliefs and practices too. For God's sake, what's all the HAJJ (pilgrimage) thing about? People circling around a black cube. And then they go and stone a piece of wood as if it represents the devil. And people celebrating the holidays by slaughtering sheep as sacrifice for Allah. Why would anyone "rational" do any of that?

I think there's a difference. Circling of the Ka'ba by Sunnis is nothing like Shitte's blood ralies. The Ka'ba is just a place to practice these rituals, and the rituals seem to be civilized in its nature even with geometric shapes, like the cube, and the circles around it, and don't forget, these are part of the core of the doctrine itself. On the other hand, we have Shitt's blood rallies, they are not a part of the doctrine of Islam, but alien practices, and just the idea of self-torture is regressed and retarded, or in our language (lower on the stages), but somehow, people like yourself would like to see it similar to Sunnis.

Sunnis is the only pure Islam by the way. it is NOT a division of Islam, but Sunni doctrine is all about being as accurate as possible to how Muhammed wanted the Islam to be, it is more of a "scientific approach" to achieve the purest form of Islam as intended to be practiced by its founder. Anything rather than that is a diversion and a hoax. How can anybody gives themselves a right to say what, while ignoring what in our hand of heritage by thousands of Muslim scholars that spans over a millennia about the subject !

You ever bothered to read the Sunni heritage? hundreds or even thousands of books that try to keep Islam pure using a scientific based approach. (If Leo considers shamons of 40000 years back as doing a form of science, the Sunnis also have done a great deal of science to define what Islam is and what it isn't)

Edited January 27, 2021 by Mesopotamian

[Mesopotamian]

13 minutes ago, louhad said:

if you interpret the quran from a sunni lens,

Sunnah is the "snapshot" of Muhammed's life. It makes sense that combining Quran with Muhammed's own personal life, the founder and probably the inventor of Islam, will make this version more true than id you say combine a Sufi's life with the Quran's teaching. Remember, Quran and Muhammed is one, cuz litteraly the Quran came from Muhammed's own mind, and dictated through his own mouth cavity, using his own vocal chords.

In theory, everyone can has his own interpretation Quran, but then if you do so, you're implying that Quran and Muhammed are seperate, are you trying to say that Quran is from God herself?

The moral of the story, DO NOT make a new duality by claiming that Quran and Muhammed's life  (AKA Prophet's Sunnah) are separate, cuz it is as clear as F*** probably that only during this approach you are able to say there are other also true and valid versions of Islam.

Shiite are only valid if:

Step one: Seperate Quran from Sunnah.

Step two: Claiming that every interpretation of the book can be valid.

 

Again: Truth is that Quran and Sunnah (Prophet's life) ARE ONE. They complete each other, and they are litteraly about the life and what came out of the mouth of the same person, Muhammed.

I believe I am hereby challenging you with valid arguments here, so show me your mental muscles, HABIBI