Customer Reviews

After the Prophet: The Epic Story of the Shia-Sunni Split in Islam

5 star:		(19)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

As a Sunni Muslim, I feel that I have been privileged to re-learn some history from a more objective viewpoint. Hazleton has written an educational, yet engrossing account of the 50 years following the death of Prophet Muhammad. Her sympathetic treatment of the main characters relies on historical accounts by the famed Islamic historian al-Tabari who died in 923AD, while her deft treatment of the implications of the Sunni-Shia split offer valid lessons to anyone interested in current events. Highly recommended to all who desire to delve deeper into history than the media soundbites of today - should be required reading for all reporters & journalists covering the Middle East!

When Muhammed lay dying a fight was about to be born in Islam...the fight for who would have the legitimate right to succeed him as leader of both the new religion and his new community.

The story of Muhammed's final days and the beginning of this fight are told with flourish and immediacy by Lesley Hazelton, who's brought those self same qualities to the life of Mary of Magdelen and also Old Testament Queen Jezebel. As with her other works, Hazelton deftly avoids taking sides while giving a fair synopsis of all the various aspects of the matter.

In the case of the Sunni/Shia split, her writing also has an added degree of immediacy owing to the significance of the tensions which still brew in the Muslim world between the Sunni and Shia communities.

This book also sheds light on historical factors which had a role in creating Islam's current view on the role of women in religion and society. Significantly, with respect to both this view and also the Sunni/Shia split this book covers territory covered by the Muslim author who wrote The First Muslims but does so in a more readable fashion.

As with all her writing I would highly recommend this book. Lesley Hazelton is emerging as a leader in writing readable ancient history probably by understanding the not so ancient motivations of the characters and their still powerful effect on modern day life.

In The Ayatollah Begs to Differ: The Paradox of Modern Iran Hooman Majd describes the Rosah which are annually performed by Iran's Shi'a to commemorate the Battle of Karbala. These are retellings or recreations of events that continue to inspire. People cry and shiver in sadness at these performances year after year as they remember and relive the suffering of the Prophet's grandson and his supporters. If you don't know the background of the Sunni-Shi'a split, it seems to be a strange custom.

The reasons cannot be told in sound bites. Their sadness results from the disrespectful treatment of the Prophet's family for two generations. The complex series of events culminates in extreme cruetly at Karbala.

Leslie Hazelton makes the history and its participants come alive. She gives the people character and shading so that you can understand what they do and possibly why. Barnaby Rogerson in The Heirs of Muhammad Islam's First Century and the Origins of the Sunni-Shia Split tells the same story but not in a way that helped me to understand the passion of the Shi'a. Now, through Hazelton, I finally understand the split and passion of the Shi'a and why, even today, why this story remains so stirring.

This telling of the story is favorable to Ali and his children and suggests there is an alternative Sunni interpretation.

This is an excellent book and I highly recommend it for anyone who wants to really understand the story.

overall, i would give it 4. If there was an option I would have given it a 3.5.

What I like:
1. Unlike Martin Ling, she question things. In majority of instances, she acknowledges that the incidents she is quoting are not unanimous. She questions things. For example, if Ali was known for his depth of character, tolerance and spirituality, how can he give a mean-spirited advice. At many places, she tries to use logic and makes the reader think.
2. She discusses an often overlooked topic - a topic that majority of Sunni Muslims don't want to confront. This is difficult as it makes question so many beliefs and assumption on which an ideal is built about so much of the history.
3. Her background in psychology helps her examine the human dimension in these epoch historical events.
4. The root of sunni extremism - Kharjjis - I found it very interesting and made me think about irony of slef-righteousness and holier than thou attitude. It is so much easier to understand wahab's progenies who are spreading their terror today.
5. some people have commented that after talking about all the rifts she says what unites them is much more than what divides muslims. The readers have argued her comments to be unqualified. However, I disagree with those readers. A writer cannot spell out every thing. She mentioned at plenty of places that how the prophet and quran is the common link. she also mentioned constantly how unity was the key factor in making decisions to fight or make peace. I guess she thought these accounts qualify her statement without one last spelling out the reason why she thinks so.

What I don't like
1. Try as we may, we are humans and our endeavors will never be 100% objective and she picks and choose stuff. This is understandable keeping in view that it was a short book and she could not discuss everything.

2. Her main source remains a Sunni scholar Turabi. This causes problems of its own. For example, she fails to mention that how Ummayid and Abbasid propaganda machine was used to create scandals about Hassan the second imam and other ahl-bait. Surprisingly, she is content with those weak accounts, and does not use her typical logic at this instance, and fails to even mention the battle that Hasan had with Muawiya (mentioned even in sunni books) and choses to go with the propganda accounts which were created to smear the spiritual figure. It is much easier to smear Hasan as he was in background unlike Ali and Hussein. Maybe as a writer she was hedging her bets that "well, I can't paint all of Imams as good, some of them must be bad." Or maybe it was too much research and she had to decide what to research further and what to not.If Hasan was the way she depicted, that would have been it for Ali and Hussein. The spiritual respect that they command even from sunnis would never have been possible. If this was true, Muawiya would had a ball using this weak link to smear even an inch of respect and love that these men of god commanded while they were living. It is much easier to spread lies, when one is not living to defend. whatever she said about Hasan can be easily traced back to have been originated by later monarchs specially Mansoor - an abbasid caliph with an axe to grind. These accounts are weak an absurd but she does not take the effort to comment on the reliability of these accounts.

3. Her account of "cloak incidence" is also very biased. She fails to mention that how her version is not the only version. She also gives her personal view that it basically was a clearly planned drama. Well as an author she has the right to give her opinion but leaves one wondering why at some places her biases are much stronger and at others she seems to be more balanced.

4. Her depiction of Fatima (daughter of prophet) is also a completely sunni version. The account of her relationship with prophet also suffers from typical sunni version. Basically, she relies on the accounts that paint this godly woman as weak insignificant woman who was manipulated by prophet's wives to complain about his favoritism. Although, there are plenty of evidence - mostly shia and some sunni as well - to suggest how much prophet loved her and how she was an embodiment of grace, patience, and generosity.

5. Also, her account of Yazid freeing prophets daughter is gross misrepresentation. These women were kept incarcerated for 2 years. Zainab was eventually banished from medina cause Ummayid were afraid that her constant mourning may encourage a revolt. Post Karbala is an epoch story in its own right.

6. She also misunderstood that karbala fight was fought over 10 days. Maybe she got confused cause in shia celebration each day is fixed for mourning one of the key figures. All men fought on 10th of muharrum. I found this mistake to be very surprising showing that at many places she didnt simply do her homework.

Hazleton's book is a very well-written history of the events that led to the Sunni-Shia divide in Islam. She traces these events from their origins in personal conflicts between various relatives and companions of the Prophet Muhammad, as well as different understandings of the station of the Prophet and how his successor should be appointed. It is incredibly easy to read, and flows so easy that this book can easily be finished in one reading. This book will give you a brief introduction to all of the major personnages involved in the formative years of Islam.

However, I had some serious problems with this book. The author apparently cannot read Arabic, and therefore her research was limited solely to histories and biographies available in English translation, and therefore obviously could not read many possible sources. She is also not a serious scholar of Islam and this is her first book on Islam. While Hazleton is not a Muslim (nor am I), it appeared to me that she was somewhat sympathetic to the Shia side, and she portrays Aisha, the first 3 caliphs, and the Umayyads in a rather negative light. Like any historian, she obviously has the right to portray characters in whatever light she feels warranted. But I felt after reading the book that Aisha in particular was portrayed as a villain, and that her side was not given adequate coverage.

Hazleton notes that much of her source material was written long after the events in question and may have been spin. But the author would have been well-placed to indicate just how accurate/well-supported some of the events and words described were. I often wondered at just how real some speeches or other sayings by the various personnages were, especially given their alleged battlefield or other turbulent setting. When differing accounts are provided, the author does not attempt to indicate which she considers more probable. As she is not a scholar of Islam, perhaps she just didn't have enough background or source material to say.

While I understand that Hazleton wanted this book to be a history rather than a book on Islam, her failure to highlight some of the relevant theological differences between the two sects is rather bizarre. She does note that Abu Bakr and the early Sunnis viewed the power of leadership as being in the whole Islamic "ummah", while the Shias believed that it passed from Muhammad to Ali. But this is about all you'll understand of the numerous distinctions between the two sides. The modern Sunni spin on the question, i.e. should leadership be inherited due to divine right, or be earned, is not mentioned, nor are the alleged Zoroastrian or other pre-Islamic influences on modern Shia Islam. Hossein's legendary marriage to Shahrbanu is curiously not mentioned at all.

But with these caveats in mind, I recommend this book for anyone looking for a very basic introductory book on the history of the Sunni/Shia split. However, for anyone who is seriously interested in the history of Islam or the Sunni/Shia schism more detailed histories are necessary.

Although a very interesting book and almost a page-turner, reflecting on the book afterward, I was somewhat dismayed and disillusioned. She had masterfully broken down the divinity of the characters, into mere humans with real emotions, real political and real environments. But I felt that at some points, she took it too far and tried too hard. She made complex situations simple, taking into account only a few factors and often inserting her own opinion. I was often torn between fact, fiction and opinion. I would definitely recommend this book, but I would caution the reader to keep an open mind and take into account the authors perception of history into account as well.

What an outstanding story. Having lived in Egypt for 7 years this book brings together the pieces I saw, heard and experienced. Now I have a better understanding of the religion, the people and culture. This book should be required reading for Americans who little understanding of this part of the world. College religion courses should add to their source list.
The sources at the end of the book provide additional materials to read and digest.

I found reading this book to be a somewhat frustrating experience, but it may have suffered in comparison with Mir Tamim Ansary's "Destiny Disrupted," which I'd read immediately prior to picking this one up.

In describing the origins of the Shia/Sunni split the author indulges in what I felt to be some rather highly colored speculation on (for example) how Aisha, as "a spirited city teenager," "must have savored every detail" of discovering "the fabled purity of the desert" (page 20). I've no idea whether Hazleton's projections of the emotions or reactions of the actors, especially Aisha, are grounded in the lore surrounding them, and how much may be creative synthesis on the part of the writer. This fictionalized the story for me to an extent and decreased my willingness to "follow along."

In contrast, some of the discussion in the later portion of the book about specific ways in which this history's emotional resonance is engaged in motivating current political thinking in the Middle East I found to be interesting and informative.

Over-all, my feeling is that this book could be usefully placed in high school libraries as a "young adult" introduction/overview.

Too often we hear about Sunni and Shia in the news, but don't know or remember the difference between them. This book is great for summarizing the history of early Islam. You will find it hard not to take sides with the Sunni or Shia as the story unfolds and this is why the conflict is so powerful even today. More books like this should be presented to better understand the people of the middle east and the conflict that divides. There may never be a resolution to unify Islam, but if there is sensitivity to the claims that may help.

A competent basic introduction, in the form of a narrative telling of what happened in the years, mostly post-Uthman pre-Umayyad happenings that sealed the Shiite's cause, but not enough to chronicle the developments after Karbala that led to the Shia branching off definitively into a parallel religion of sorts. Since the author was grounded in journalism (thereby the anecdotal approach is better suited for current affairs reporting), rather than a religious historian, the book seem somewhat ... lacking. Furthermore the scope is a little too narrow for this kind of scholarship, as the Sunni-Shia development also took place in the eras following the events that most defined the split. I would highly recommend Tamim Ansary's Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes for a broader scope examining the entire millenia of Islamic history. Not to mention Ansary's prose is extremely humorous, quirky, and readable, in addition to having keen insight on historical developments.