Bismika Alllahuma

1. Il est important de se rendre compte que, tout malheureux qu'il peut être, ce soit une division qui a été déjà faite et acceptée par les musulmans et par les adhérents de ces sections. Il, dans les circonstances, serait peu réaliste de réfuter l'existence de ces sects. Ces sections existent, même si leur existence est contre les enseignements du Qur' et du Sunnah du prophète (p), mais ce serait aveuglement pour supposer qu'elles cesseront d'exister dans un avenir proche.

2. Il y a une tradition qui déclare que l'Islam a 72 (73, selon une autre version) sects.¹ On lui discute habituellement que ce récit patronne ou même encourage la formation des sects dans l'Islam. Quoique son sanad n'ait aucune paille, mais sa signification n'est pas habituellement compris.

Son arrangement correct peut être l'une ou l'autre de ce qui suit :

[a] que la figure mentionnée dans ce récit ne représente pas un nombre réel, mais est juste une métaphore. En outre, le modèle du matn de ce récit est non une description de ces sects, mais plutôt un avertissement de leur apparition possible. Ainsi, ce hadith décrit un avertissement du prophète (p) qu'un grand nombre de sects pourraient apparaître dans l'Ummah si le peuple n'observait pas les enseignements de Qur', comme :

« … la prise jeûnent, tout le toi ensemble, au câble d'Allah, et ne séparent pas… » [Qur'an, 3:103] (le TR de Pickthall.)

Par conséquent à la lumière de cette manière d'explication, il est clair que ce récit n'encourage pas la formation des sects, mais, d'une part, avertit les musulmans de se maintenir partis de ces activités, qui mènent à la formation des sects.

[b] Une autre explication de ce récit a été donnée par Goldziher. Il croit que ce récit a à l'origine signifié que l'Islam a eu 73 vertus (pas sects) par comparaison avec les 71 vertus du judaïsme et de 72 de christianisme. Les vertus de limite ont été mal comprises et transformées en branches ou sects.²

3. From the basic definition of a “Sect” in Islam, we may regard as real sects in Islam as only those groups, whose members departed from the Sunnah on essential issues of fundamental importance for Islam, and who, on such issues, contradict the Ijma’.

Ash-Shahrastani in his famous al-Milal wan-Nihal (1:4) writes that the faith of Sunni Muslims was nothing else but the principles of Islam set forth by the Prophet(P) himself, and the “Sects” in Islam were outside of the Sunni faith, and were four only: al-Qadriya, As-Sifatiya, al-Khawarij and Shi’a.

Division of this kind dates back to the early days of Islam and was not (initially) caused by questions of religion, but by the questions of the constitution of the new state. Since politics is but a part of the “Deen” of Islam, therefore these political questions were blended very soon with the religious backing, and thus the sectarianism became sound and permanent.

Ash-Shahrastani in al-Milal wan-Nihal writes:

In every age, the greatest number of times the swords were drawn was on the issue of Imamate, rather than on any other issue.³

Ash-Shahrastani has mentioned the following events to be the causes⁴ of true sectarianism in Islam:

• The differences between Ali (K) and Mu’awiya (R) on the Caliphate.
• The disobedience of Kharijites.
• The persistence of She’aan-e-Haydar-e-Karrar on the exclusive claim of Caliphate (Imamate) for Ali (K) and his progeny.
• The (theological) debates of Jabr-o-Qadr and their political relevance to imply that a incompetent Caliph was the will of the God and thus could not be replaced except by God Himself.

4. From today’s perspective, the differences in the various Muslim groups are of the following nature:

[a] Basic Differences: These are the same differences, which originated sectarianism in the first place, and exist only between Sunni and Shi’a Muslims. Thus there are only 2 “sects” (in the true sense of this word) in Islam.

[b] Secondary Differences: These differences are related to the subordinate and minor issues of prayer, zakat, interpretation of Qur’an, etc. These differences exist among the Sunnis, between Ahl-e-Hadith, the four fiqahs, etc.

Now, differences of type [b] can be eliminated to a reasonably acceptable degree by permitting the respective group to follow its own set of inheritance or family etc. Laws (which will be called its “Personal Law”), but restricting all the groups to follow the Civil & the Criminal Law of that Group, whose adherents are in majority in the area in question.

So, in Pakistan, for example, the Law of the Land is the Hanafi interpretation of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, while all other groups are free to follow their respective Personal Law.

1. Ibn Majah, Kitab al-Fitn, Chapter 17: Iftaraq al-Umam [back]
2. To support this statement of his, Goldziher has provided a reference to one of his own articles, which, in addition to being in the most difficult German, was published in Vienna in 1874. It is safe to say that it is impossible to obtain in this part of the world. Thus, I have no idea of what the intellectual basis of his above statement about this narration was. [back]
3. Ash-Shahrastani, al-Milal wan-Nihal, 1:16 (Cairo, 1948) [back]
4. ibid. [back]