Sheikh M. al-Khatib's objective in writing his book was to warn Sunnis against the dangers of Shiism. I therefore thought that it would be better if a Sunni knew himself or herself first before talking about Shias because, as it has so far transpired, either many Sunnis do not know who they are or, if they do, do so erroneously. For example, some of the learned Sunnis are of the opinion that they have been called so because of the fact that they are the only ones who abide by the sunna of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w.) - as if other Muslim madhaahib, like the Shia Ithnaashari, Zaydis or Ibadhis, do not do so. Others think that it has been so because Sunnism had been in existence from the time of Prophet Muhammad. However, on both beliefs the contrary is the case.

In actual fact a Sunni is one who, when it comes to matters of Islamic jurisprudence, follows the opinion of one of the four imams (Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi or Hanbal) or their students; and in matters of aqida follows the views of Abul Hassan al-Ash'ari. In other words, if one follows the views of others than the above mentioned in those two areas, then one is not regarded to be a Sunni.

In order for one to understand exactly when Sunnism started, it is important to know, at least in brief, the history of those imams:
Imam Abu Hanifa was born in Kufa in the year 80H, and died in Baghdad in 150H. Among his teachers was Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq a.s. (who was the sixth Imam of the Shia Ithnaashari). Abu Hanifa is quoted to have said that had it not been for the two years he was the student of Imam Ja'far, he (Abu Hanifa) would have perished (lahalaka).

Imam Malik was born in Madina in 93H, and died there in 179H. He, as well, had Imam Ja'far among his teachers.

Imam Shafi was born in Gaza in 150H, and died in Egypt in 204H.

Imam Hanbal was born in Baghdad in 164H, where he died in 241H.

The last, Abul Hassan al-Ash'ari, was born in Basra in 260H, and died in Baghdad in 333H.

What the above dates testify to is that the first of them, Abu Hanifa, was born about seventy years after the death of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.w. who died in 10H. Therefore the question which arises here is: Between the death of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.w. and Abu Hanifa becoming an Imam, who did the Muslims, living during that period of more than seventy years, follow? Weren't they Muslims? Or what about those who taught Abu Hanifa; didn't they have followers of their own? If they did, where did those followers disappear to? Is it conceivable that one who follows the views of a teacher cannot be accepted as a Muslim, but he who follows the views of that teacher's student can? If the answer is in the negative, on what grounds is it so? If it is in the positive, then why are the ordinary Sunnis made to believe that they are the only genuine Muslims?

To answer the above questions in a detailed manner, a separate book will be needed as there is a lot to be said on this matter. Meanwhile, what I would like you to do, dear reader, is to ask yourself these questions - or ask whomsoever you think knows better than you do - and then ponder over the answers given; because it is only after getting the right answers to them that you will be in a better position to understand this riddle which has caused the friction and misunderstanding between Muslims.

As regards the question of aqida, we have seen that Sunnis follow the opinion of Abul Hassan al-Ash'ari (260H - 333H) who, as we can see, was born nineteen years after the death of the last Sunni imam, i.e. Imam Hanbal (164H - 241H). Therefore al-Ash'ari never met any of the Sunni imams. That being the case, which aqida did the four imams follow during their lifetime? Was it the one based on the views of al-Ash'ari (who had not been born yet), or a different one which existed before al-Ash'ari's birth? If it was the latter, which one was that? And were those imams still Muslims despite doing so? If they were - and I don't think that there is anyone who can dare say that they were not - why should this apply only to them? Why should somebody else be regarded as a non-Muslim just because one follows a different aqida from that of al-Ash'ari? Definitely al-Ash'ari was not born with his views. Before forming his own, did he not follow the views of the experts who were in existence in those times? If he did so - and the truth is that he did - was he then not a Muslim? If he was, despite following the views which were not his own, why should one be regarded today as a non-Muslim by doing exactly the same?

These are among the questions which I would like you to ask yourself (or whomsoever is more knowledgeable) and consider the answers very carefully. For the correct answers are the ones that will help you to understand the source of the controversy we are discussing in this series.

It is my hope, inshaa Allah, that the brief explanation given above, and the correct answers one will get to the few questions we have posed, will enable a Sunni to understand who he or she is. And it is from Allah that we should seek help.