In history, we read about the famous ‘Crusades’ in which forces and volunteers, mostly including of religious fanatics from different European kingdoms of that time carried out attacks on the Muslim states of the Middle East in order to capture the city of Jerusalem which was and is considered a holy city for Christians, Muslims and Jews alike.

Then we read about the storming invasions of Mongols, lead by Genghis Khan and then by his sons and grandsons. According to Islamic historians, Mongols were the most destructive to Islam as they not only finished the biggest and central caliphate of that time ‘Abbasside Caliphate’ but also destroyed large number of libraries found in Baghdad and some other cities of the Islamic world and it was such a blow that threw the Muslims into the darkness of illiteracy and lack of interest in scientific studies with a result that the Muslim world could not recover the loss and is still struggling to compete with the rest of the world in the field of science and technology.

Then we read about the conflicts between different kings and kingdoms of Islamic world that were mostly directed for expansion in their territories and it was the common trait of the history, be it in the East or the West. A powerful and strong king always attacked and occupied the country or state of a weaker king in order to add more territory in his kingdom and to become eternal in the pages of history.

But the pages of history are silent about any Sunni-Shia conflict. It only became known during the British rule of India when the Shia proceedings and rituals in the month of Muharram were taken much seriously by the British administration so that there should not be any problem of law and order in the holy month. In his famous book ‘Passage to India’ E. M. Forster has mentioned the Muharram proceedings but not as something that should be a matter of conflict between the two prime religious sects of Islam. Yes, it must be mentioned here that many books written at the end of 19th and beginning of 20th century in the Indian Sub-continent narrate the enthusiastic participation of both Sunni and Shia sects in the proceedings and gatherings arranged in the month of Muharram. About the decades of 80s and 90s, same stories are told by the people of Quetta which is a city in Pakistan shared equally by Sunnis and Shias. However, at present, this city has become the bloodiest city in terms of killings of Shia members by the Sunni extremists.

According to my knowledge, the differences between the two sects were first noted in the 80s of last century that got slowly and gradually intensified. In 90s, these differences and resultant hatred became known publicly and then came the time when Sunni and Shia scholars were killed in Pakistan where the problem exists in its worst form. Then came the turn of common people who were targeted on the basis of religious differences. Now, the problem has reached to its climax; the countries are fighting in Syria and Iraq on the basis of sectarian differences.

International media has been unanimously blaming Saudi Arabia of financially and morally supporting the public uprising to oust the Shia leaders in a number of Arab countries like Syria and Iraq. Syria, a country with almost equal proportions of Sunni and Shia population has long been ruled by a Shia family, the Assad family. In the same way, Saudi Arabia is also not happy with the present Iraqi government mostly governed by its Shia Prime Minister, Al-Maliki and also the strong influence of Muqtada-as-Sadr, the influential Shia cleric of Baghdad.

On the other hand, Iran has also been blamed of many conspiracies undertaken against the Sunni population in order to increase its own influence and promote Shia school of thought. It is blamed of funding the publications distributed freely in different parts of the world that is against the Sunni teachings and beliefs. Iran is also accused of financing the deadly attacks in which large numbers of Sunni scholars have been killed. In the same way, Saudi Arabia has continuously being accused of doing similar things in order to promote Sunni teachings or harm the Shia thoughts.

However, the above accusations are all based on the perceptions found generally in the media and the public and I have not seen any tangible evidence against either of these countries. But it is also a fact that these accusations may be based on truth when they are so much repeated and agreed upon in general.

Ignoring the health of these accusations, the question arises as why these two countries entered this dirty business. According to the experts studying these issues, the reason was the fear of promotion and dominance of other sect. Saudis feared that if they did not work, Shias may considerably increase in number and threaten the present position of Sunnis when they enjoy the status of being in majority in Muslim population. For this reason, they started working on two grounds; one was to promote the Sunni teachings and understanding by freely distributing books and literature in this regard. To this extent, it seems quite harmless and natural. Secondly, they also started working as how Sunnis can be kept away from Shias so that they should not be get influenced from them and this was done by propagation and literature distribution that the relations between Sunnis and Shias is not good and Sunnis should hate Shias. Undeniably, that was a destructive approach.

On the other hand, same fears were reared by Iran and almost same strategies were put in practice. It was feared that if Shia thought was not protected, they may altogether finish under the influence of majority Sunnis and thus it was necessary that Shia thought should be promoted and Sunni thought to be degraded. This war, which was once limited to the minds of some scholars from both the sides, got so much intensified that it was poured like a poison into the minds of every single Sunni and Shia child and the resultant hatred is now bearing its fruit.

It looks as if it all started with the arrival of religiously conservative government in Iran that alarmed the religiously conservative Saudis and then started the rope pulling between these two governments in which the followers and supporters of both the sides were gradually dragged.

Here, so many interesting questions arise and some of them are really childish. The first question arises that, if all the religious scholars and the great caliphs and kings of our history were not aware of these differences before the governments of Iran and Saudi started this noble service of religion? Have they done any kind of service to Islam by dividing the Muslims into two groups and weakening them politically and economically in different parts of the world? When Quran calls all the Muslims as the brothers of each other, have they neglected this golden rule to make the brothers grab the collars of each other? Is religion not a work of person’s own choice which cannot be forced on someone so why not let the people choose on their own if they would like to be a Sunni or Shia?

When I look at our society, I see the same alarming situation that our youth knows less about the religion and more about the differences between Sunnis and Shias which are based to hate the follower of the opposite sect. If Iran and Saudi can work to promote hatred and bloodshed, there should be some among us to work in the opposite direction to bring the Sunnis and Shias close to each other.

Famous Turkish scholar and champion of dialogue between the religious beliefs, M. Fethullah Gulen shares with us some golden rules in this regard. He advises us to have meals with each other, talk and discover the similarities, read the books belonging to both the sects approved by the scholars of both the sides to discover that we have more similarities than the differences, and to open our hearts and arms to our Muslim brothers which is the way of our Holy Prophet (PBUH), if we claim to be His followers.