The writer has not given the real ideology of both Sunni and Shia on the leadership issue. Shias believe that successor of the prophet should be appointed by the prophet on the commands of Allah which the Holy Prophet did in Ghadeer Khum.
On the other hand Sunnis believe that successor of the prophet is appointed by election, selection or even on the basis of military might. Consensus was never there. In Saqifa, Abu Bakr was appointed by 50 odd people while muslims were busy in burial of the prophet. Umar was appointed by Abubakr in a will. Usman was appointed by council of 6 people formed by Umar. There was not consensus or free elections at any point of time for any caliph of Muslims. Yazid, a wretched person, became caliph. Then after him despotic rulers, one after another, assumed the title of caliph. Is this consensus? Democracy?
Daesh in planned and supported by United States. They cannot bear the loss of their coveted destabilising force in Middle East
The writer has not given the real ideology of both Sunni and Shia on the leadership issue. Shias believe that successor of the prophet should be appointed by the prophet on the commands of Allah which the Holy Prophet did in Ghadeer Khum.
On the other hand Sunnis believe that successor of the prophet is appointed by election, selection or even on the basis of military might. Consensus was never there. In Saqifa, Abu Bakr was appointed by 50 odd people while muslims were busy in burial of the prophet. Umar was appointed by Abubakr in a will. Usman was appointed by council of 6 people formed by Umar. There was not consensus or free elections at any point of time for any caliph of Muslims. Yazid, a wretched person, became caliph. Then after him despotic rulers, one after another, assumed the title of caliph. Is this consensus? Democracy?