Shia - Sunni issue.

[Mystic]

Honestly, this issue, it was something I was obsessed with.

I honestly believe that there is good arguments on both sides.

The Good arguments on Sunni Side is the following:

1) No super ultra clear mention of Imamate of Ali, Hassan and Hussain in Quran or the 12 Imams.
2) Praise of majority of companions in Quran, general praise they will be going to paradise, goes against them almost all turning on their backs after the Prophet.
3) Ali not going to war with Abu Baker and Umar and settling for bad rulers...that were imposed by a few over the rest.
4) Lack of knock out proof in either Quran or Mutuwatir hadiths.

The Good arguments for Shiism:

1) The wage verses, 42:23 combined with 25:57, make it as if the Al-Qurba are the path to God. al-Qurba then obviously means a family of exlated chosen ones.
2) Leaving Two weighty things - Quran and his family, if they hold on to, they will not be misguided, and then in this context states whomever he is Mawla of, then so is Ali. The context is guidance, so Authority makes more sense to mean Mawla. And family is said never to separate from Quran, therefore seem to be sinless (don't disobey God).
3) Hadiths there will be Successors, while only a person inheriting the Guidance position and authority of a Prophet can be a true successor, not just a secular ruler.
4) "We then inherited the book to those whom we chosen of our servants..." in Suratal Fatir.

It seems to me Quran and hadiths give both the impression of Shiism to some, and to others, it gives the impression of Sunnism.

Has anyone here studied the Shia - Sunni dispute and seen arguments on both sides?

Whom do you feel has the better rationalization assuming Islam is true?

[Minimalist]

It was 1300 years ago.... who gives a shit.

Is it really worth slaughtering each other about?

[Pope Alfred]

They're both wrong.

[Angrboda]

It was 1300 years ago.... who gives a shit.

Is it really worth slaughtering each other about?

In the religious mindset, authority of a source is an important criterion in evaluating the validity of its pronouncements.

So in that worldview, I would say, yes, it matters.

[Mister Agenda]

I'll say one thing for the Shia: they don't think their prophet was a pedophile. I've heard them estimate Aisha's age at up to nineteen when her marriage was consummated. The Sunni consider her a 'channel' for Qu'ranic teachings and the younger she was the better for purposes of her being innocent and miraculously impressive as a teacher.

[Mystic]

Shias believed in rising up against oppressors and oppression. Imam Hussain vs Yazeed.

Sunnis believed you must obey rulers, be they good or bad, just or oppressive.

But most Sunnis don't know that their hadiths teach you must obey bad rulers as well.

[Anomalocaris]

I'll say one thing for the Shia: they don't think their prophet was a pedophile. I've heard them estimate Aisha's age at up to nineteen when her marriage was consummated. The Sunni consider her a 'channel' for Qu'ranic teachings and the younger she was the better for purposes of her being innocent and miraculously impressive as a teacher.

That humans world wide typically reach puberty by 12 is pretty good evidence large percentage of humans in our evolutionary history first experienced sex around that age. Does that make their partners all pedophiles?

That we have an age of consent is an artifact of the sensibilities born of our particular cultural tradition. It makes no sense to assume other people who have never heard of us should be deemed morally suspect for ignoring our cultural tradition.

[Thor]

These assholes kill people who don't believe their religion because unbelievers are "infidels". They also kill EACH OTHER because of slight differences of opinion.

This only illustrates why Islam is a pox on humanity and the world would be better off without it. Even if Islam took over the world, everyone would end up dead because they'd just start killing each other.

[Anomalocaris]

These assholes kill people who don't believe their religion because unbelievers are "infidels". They also kill EACH OTHER because of slight differences of opinion.

This only illustrates why Islam is a pox on humanity and the world would be better off without it. Even if Islam took over the world, everyone would end up dead because they'd just start killing each other.

Christian very likely killed many more of each other because of slight differences of opinion.

I think Islam is disadvantaged in comparison with christianity because christianity has put on sheep's clothing and therefore Islam now seems alien and conflicts more glaringly with our more superficial cultural sensibilities. But I think Christianity is at its heart more adaptable, more unscrupulous, and more focused on flanking attacks upon the fruits of enlightenment, and is therefore a more dangerous threat to progress and enlightenment than more brutal, more ugly, but less cunning and effective Islam.

[Minimalist]

So in that worldview, I would say, yes, it matters.

I can't see where blowing up a market and killing 50 people solves much of anything.

Let's face it. These fuckers simply hate each other for the stupidest of reasons and it isn't something that can be undone.