Sünniler ve Şiiler: Bir İhtilafın Siyasi Tarihi

by Laurence Louër, Barış Özkul (Translator)

“Sünnilerle Şiiler arasındaki çatışma, asla İslâm peygamberinin halefi etrafındaki basit tartışmadan ibaret olmamıştır. Zira çok geçmeden meşru siyasi otoritenin doğasına dair temel sorular gündeme gelmiştir: Müslüman devlet başkanı hangi vasıflara sahip olmalıydı? Sıradan bir insan evladı olabilir miydi, yoksa ilahî bir vasıf mı taşımalıydı? Nasıl seçilmeliydi ve bununla bağlantılı olarak en meşru siyasi rejim tipi neydi?”

Sünni-Şii ilişkilerinin tarihi, nereden bakılırsa bakılsın bin yılı aşkın süredir devam eden kesintisiz bir çatışmanın hikâyesidir. Bu bitimsiz mücadele, Hz. Muhammed’in halefi etrafındaki anlaşmazlıklardan doğan kadim nefrete bağlansa da, aradan geçen yüzyıllar, mevcut ihtilafın siyasi bağlama göre kâh canlanıp kâh sönümlendiğine işaret eder. Bu iniş çıkışlar çoğu zaman hükmeden ile hükmedilen grupların ihtiyaçlarına göre şekillenirken, bazen siyasi elitlerin meşruiyet kazanmasına yaramış, bazen de isyancıların başkaldırısının veya din adamlarının nüfuz kazanma çabasının aracı olmuştur. Sünniler ve Şiiler - Bir İhtilafın Siyasi Tarihi bugün hâlâ devam eden bu gerilimin tarihteki izini sürerken, İslâm’ın iki büyük mezhebi arasındaki süreklilik ve kopuşları da araştırıyor. Ortadoğu üzerine çalışmalarıyla tanınan siyaset bilimci Laurence Louër, uluslararası camiada başvuru kaynağı olarak kabul gören kitabında Irak, Pakistan, Suudi Arabistan, İran, Yemen ve Lübnan gibi farklı ülkelerin kendilerine has siyasi koşullarını ve toplumsal yapılarını göz ardı etmeden, serinkanlı bir Ortadoğu panoraması ortaya koyuyor.

Genres: History, Islam, Religion, Nonfiction, Politics, Middle East, Biography

253 pages, Paperback

Published June 1, 2022

Reviews

[Derek · Rating 5 out of 5]

This short but relatively dense book was tremendously helpful to me. I learned a great deal about Islam and Arab and/or Iranian politics on nearly every page. The book gives a lot of great historical and theological context to events throughout the Middle East and India, with special attention given to the Gulf countries, Lebanon, Pakistan and India. The author’s objectivity is commendable.

[Nudrat Afzal · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the finest book, I have read so far on Shia Sunni conflicts. The division of States to the present day Palestinian issue, Laurence Louer has beautifully elucidated the entire phenomenon in her book. A must read for all who want to know what happened after the death of Usman (R.A) the third caliph of Muslims.

[John Daley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Louër offers a powerful framework for understanding the contemporary Islamic world in this scholarly yet accessible analysis of the historical and contemporary relations between Sunni and Shi'a. Professor Louër skillfully captures how sectarianism has been amplified or subdued at various times in response to exogenous political, national and economic interests of competing parties.

The sectarian divide arose from a dispute regarding legitimacy, legacy and control in a fused political and religious figure following the death of Muhammad - oligarchy or hereditary dynasty, essentially. But, from the beginning, pragmatic or strident approaches to the conflict have been adopted by parties when it best suited their political, economic and/or national aspirations. Indeed, the sectarian schism only crystallized after a series of politically motivated assassinations culminating in the Battle of Siffin (657). Today, the sectarian fault line is deep because it has hardened around political and social conflicts in the Persian Gulf and broader Middle East dating to (at least) the Iranian Revolution of 1979. In the long history of Sunni-Shi'a relations, we are at a moment of heightened political and religious rivalry that is driving sectarian divergence. Louër demonstrates why and how the Islamic world moved increasingly towards sectarianism after 1979 and how local conflicts since then, including Afghanistan, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Iraq (x2), have exacerbated the divide.

Louër's treatment of Islamism is sophisticated and helpful in bridging the gap between its anti-colonial roots, through its development in competition and coordination with Pan-Islamic, Pan-Arab and nationalist movements in the mid-20th century. This historical trajectory allows her to contextualize the rise of the radical and violent Islamist movements from the mid-80s onward, including how they have exploited sectarianism in conflicts across the region to fuel their growth.

She also offers the non-expert useful summaries of the major religious questions that underlie the sectarian divide, including the mechanics of succession, textual interpretation and exegesis, and the role of the companions of Muhammad. Yet the strength of the book lies in her careful exposition of how these religious debates were either smoothed over or hardened as part of broader conflicts. While the book is relatively light on comparative analysis, readers with some historic knowledge of the rise of development of Christianity in Europe will find many similarities in the power struggles between political and religious authorities.

[Osama · Rating 4 out of 5]

أود قراءة المزيد من الكتب لهذه المؤلفة.

[Karen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm not sure if you can contain more information in fewer pages than this book does. Not an easy read by any means, it took me some effort to get into it, and I frequently found myself having to re-read sentences and paragraphs for comprehension. That said, it was well worth the effort, as I learned a lot about Islam and the politics and recent history of the Middle East. I might have liked a glossary so that I didn't need to flip around to assure I was understanding terminology correctly, but otherwise this is a dense, thorough, and unbiased account of an important subject. 3.5 to 3.75 stars rounded up to 4.

[Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had thought I was getting a more of a history of the early Islamic world and the origins of the divide, but that turns out to be covered briefly in just the first couple chapters. The rest, however, was a very interesting overview of the development of both Sunni and Shi'a Islam in the 19th and 20th centuries. The last few chapters of the book talked more about modern relations, running down the ways that different majority-Muslim countries deal with diversity inside their own populations. Not what I was expecting, but very interesting all the same.

[Jesse · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not gonna lie, as my students say--not the most pleasurable or easy read, but a smart, dense, informed and reasonably engaging, in relative terms, exploration of the at once changing and consistent dynamic between Sunni and Shi'a over time. What's most surprising, especially given the long history of sectarian violence and persecution, are the symmetries and homologies he notes, the ways that Sunnis aspire to the unity they attribute to Shi'a, and that Shi'a often accommodate themselves quite comfortably to the existing order despite a theological/political vision of themselves as always speaking truth to power.

He notes that the vision of Shi'ism a la Ali Shariati, say, whose Marxist/liberation-theology composite that saw Shi'ism as literally the most liberatory force in human history was left behind by the mullahs' ideological determination in 1980s Iran, as in fact representing an entirely modern strain rather than some timeless essence. In that it reminds me of those takes on the supposed ageless hatreds of the Balkans that closer, and less exoticizing, study, revealed to be entirely historically contingent. Same here--the number of these stories that highlight the pressure of external events in fragmenting a situation where coexistence had been at least possible is quite large; the other thread is the general majoritarian problem of Sunnis' essentially seeing themselves as the norm, as in Pakistan, and thus being unable to truly conceive of a pluralistic country where Shi'a perspectives were also honored. Not sure that I would recommend this as, like, leisure reading, but it was quite informative and confirms the sense I'm getting of how much history reflects the existence of so many "Islams" in so many places at so many times.