A long time ago, in what is now Uzbekistan, three Muslim scholars arrived in the city of Samaraqan.

They differed about who should remain in Samaraqan, so they decided to kill a sheep and cook it after which each one of them, blindfolded, will then dip his hands into the pot and pull out a piece of the sheep and will immediately leave for that city of the Muslim world which that part indicated.

The first scholar pushed his hands into the pot and pulled out the heart of the animal, so he immediately left for Mecca.

The second scholar pushed his hands into the pot and pulled out the head; that indicated that he will be the one to remain in Samaraqan, which was the main city of all Islam at the time. The last scholar then pushed his hands into the pot and pulled out the arse of the sheep; he left immediately for Baghdad.

Whether it is a true story or anecdotal it tells us in a hilarious way how certain cities were regarded in the past. This story came back to me due to the escalating sectarian violence we have been witnessing since the senseless and sacrilegious bombing of the Golden Mosque Shrine of two Imams in Samarra, Iraq (22-02-06). This does not mean that Baghdad as a city never had any merit in terms of civilisation.

In fact the city was once known as Madinat al Khulafa (City of the Khalifs), Madinah al Salaam (City of Peace), which likened it to a virtual paradise on earth, and also as al Zawraa’, because one of its inner gates was askew.

Despite its achievements, it never got rid of a certain abiding underlying attitude, or nature for self-destruction, especially sectarianism between schools of jurisprudence, sects and fractions and as a hub for political intrigue and violence.

It is by this description, al Zawraa’ the askew, slanting, one-sided etc., that it was described by the Prophet Muhammad (S), when he commented on world events, which were to occur after him.

In the abbreviated version of the book, Mukhtasar Kanz al Ummal, Volume 5, Page 38, the Prophet is reported to have said: “There will be a city called Zawraa’ (Baghdad) between the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers.

“There will be a great battle there.

“Women will be taken prisoners and men will have their throats cut like sheep.”

It is unthinkable for me not to refer to such statements by the Prophet because it forms part of our collective spiritual legacy, along with understanding international politics and current affairs.

Our science is not one-dimensional, but holistic; not seeing with one eye of perception, analysis and understanding but with two.

Historically, invasions, natural diasters and violence have all affected this city and the country. Yet, in Islamic history, it is remembered for the scars of sectarianism which appeared not only between different schools of thought of the Sunni school but also between Shi’ahs and Sunnis.

In the 10th Century, the Shi’a Buwayhid came to power as the city’s rulers, which led to sectarian violence leaving 17,000 people dead, 300 shops, 33 mosques and many houses destroyed.

Ayyarun, or gangs, gained control of the city, terrorising people, levying taxes, stealing and spreading havoc by sword and fire. They practically ruled Baghdad for four years (1030-1033) till a Sunni military regime, the Turkish Seljuks in 1050, re-established law and order.

Today, many similar historical forces are gathered on the doorsteps of Baghdad and the entire country.

Sectarianism, described by Muslims as Fitnah or strife, trials, confusion and lawlessness stalk the land, yet some Muslim ideologues want us to continue to consider this situation as one of Jihad.

A Muslim territory being invaded by a non-Muslim army may look so from afar, but upon closer examination the picture is different.

When Saddam Hussein and the Ba’ath party came into power, the first thing they did was to kill all the prominent Sunni Imams and scholars.

Then they went about establishing a secular State out of Churchill’s annexation of three provinces of the Ottoman Empire.

Churchill’s Iraq became the most powerful secular nationalist State in the Arab world.

All outward appearances of Islam, especially by its male population, was forbidden, which included the beard and the gown. Modern Iraq never consider itself as Islamic. In fact, it was an active and brutal opponent.

Yet, when Saddam chosed to disguise himself after the recent Gulf War, he grew a beard and wore a gown in a country which he had made it forbidden. No wonder he was quickly caught because not many people had adopted that style as they have now.

Saddam became a Sunni champion by writing Allahu Akbar (God is the Greatest) between the two stars of the Iraqi flag, which represent Iraq and Syria, the two Arab nationalist States founded on Ba’athism; and because he fought at the instigation of America and coward Arab regimes in the region who were extremely anxious about their thrones and presidency, due to the success of the Iranian Islamic Revolution.

Now, he and his cronies appear beared or in traditional dress in court as a public display of their Islam and Arab affiliation.

The Iran-Iraq war led to a breakdown between Sunnis and Shi’ahs, who were Ba’athist Arab nationalists.

The Shi’ahs broke rank and were dissatisfied with the Iraq-Iranian war, favouring their co-religionist but not agreeing doctrinally with Khomeini’s “Guardianship of the Jurist” (Wilayat al Faqeeh) thesis for renewed Shi’ah political action in the modern world (see my article, First American Islamic State).

The Ba’ath Party (Resurrection Party) was founded by Michael Aflaq, a Christian, on the basis of Secularism Arab Nationalism and a strange socialist tenor. Since the founding of the party, it has received yearly congratulations on its anniversary from succeeding Popes, until Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait.

The golden domed shrine held the graves and possessions of two Imams who were direct grandsons of the Prophet Muhammad (S), who Shi’ahs claim to have a special relationship with and partisanship to as the only lawful rulers and inheritors of leadership from the Prophet.

They claim that early Sunni leadership amongst the Prophet’s companions usurped that leadership from Ali, his son-in-law and cousin.

As years and centuries passed doctrines, festivals and beliefs grew, forcing a bigger wedge between the two groups which was most times accompanied by violence, carried out by regimes eager to stamp out any rivals, or by Shi’ah rebels bent on establishing their claim.

The Shi’ahs of Iraq, however, are Twelvers (Ithna ashariyyah) who are doctrinally opposed to Sunnis but are apolitical in regards to the establishment of the Islamic State. Instead, they favour recognition of the validity of Shariah, but do not demand an Islamic State that the political leadership be established by a jurist (Faqih) because just Islamic rule is left for a future Imam, the 12th Imam, al Mahdi (The guided one) when he makes his appearance.

’Till then, any rule is considered as usurping that right which they claim belongs to that Imam. In this doctrinal matter, they differ with Khomeini ’till this day, who saw the establishing of the Islamic State as a precursor and as paving the way towards a future rule under al Mahdi.

Sunnis revere and respect the family and descendants of the Prophet (S).

Although I am not totally convinced, as yet, that it was the work of al Qaidah, even the current Iraqi Administration is holding the Shi’ah shrine guards as suspects because they were just tied up and not executed by whoever planted the bombs.

Therefore, I will wait to examine the evidence when it is eventually presented.

But, I cannot ignore that in the doctrinal background of the people who make up al Qaidah, there is a doctrine which considers that erecting large shrines over the graves of pious peoples, or visiting these places for worship as a forbidden act (Haram), and since in Islam political, military and ideological positions etc. are inexorably linked to doctrine, we cannot exclude them in this analysis.

Hence, it is understandable why fingers are pointing to al Qaidah in Iraq and its turbulent leader Abu Musa al Zaqqawi as being responsible.

Recently, he was publicly chastised by Dr. Zawwahiri, Bin Ladin’s deputy, for pursuing a military policy of killing civilians, especially Shi’ahs.

However, Sunnis in Iraq are claiming that the Shi’ah majority and its Kurdish allies and their militias who form the army and the police are carrying out violence against Sunnis, a claim which seems to be supported by observers on the ground.

Al Qaidah and other insurgent groupings have cited this as justification for attacking military, police and civilian Shi’ah targets, who they consider as allies to and extension of the US-led occupying forces.

Iraq may well descend into sectarianism, which I predicted in an earlier article in this space (First American Islamic State), because it has always exhibited social strains connected to the artificial nature of its creation.

There are many small ethnic and religious groups of Christians but the larger groups are the Arab Shi’ah, Kurds, Arab Sunnis and Turkoman.

The Sunni-Kurds in the north, ruled their entity under the Ottoman and were connected to their tribesmen in Turkey, Iran, and Syria.

The so-called great Arab hero, liberator of Jerusalem, Salahuddin, was in fact a Kurd. The Iraqi Sunni-Turkoman under whose territory lies large deposits of oil, are a minority amongst the Kurds, who want to take control of the resources, they are related to Turkey who have threatened nationalist Kurds for stiring rebellion in Turkey and are protective regarding their Iraqi cousins.

The Sunni-Arabs of Iraq having lost power due to Saddam’s downfall have not been able to capitalise on their Sunni religious affilation with the Turkoman and Kurd because of Arab nationalism and racism against these two peoples, so they are considered as a Arab Sunni minority fighting a rear guard battle for their anthropological, economical and political survival.

The Arab Shi’ah are arabs and arabised persians who are the majority, that is if you don’t count the Sunni Kurds and Turkoman.

They are the guardians of Shi’ah legacy, many of their shrines and places of historical and doctrinal signifigance dot the Iraqi landscape.

Doctrine apart, they share the same beliefs and practices of their co-religionists in Iran, who also exert influence over Muqtada Sadar, the current Prime Minister, his group, other groups and militias.

They are intent on holding power but the State will not be like Iran; the jurists will not assume rule although Sadar is influenced by Khomeini and desires this.

Ayatullah Sistiani, the senior jurist, currently holds the check and balance to prevent Muqtada, but when he dies things may change.

Under the Ottoman, these groups were given wide ambit to develop their own way of life as long as they were faithful to their pledge to the Khalif in Istanbul and committed to preserving the unity of the Muslim Ummah (World Community of Islam).

Churchill dismantled that in favour of controlling the oil resources and formed modern-day Iraq. When the Kurds rebelled, he gassed them (sound familar?). The Shi’ahs were kept out mostly by doctrine and because of Sunni dominance in the wider region. Sunnis were allowed to rule and England even gave them a king who was eventually removed.

Iraq was, therefore, always in some level of conflict associated with its origin.

Even Saddam claimed that he had to resort to dictatorship to ensure the survival of the State because of its historical origin. In another narration from Ali, the Companion of Prophet, found in Tadhkira of al Qurtubi, Page 619: “O leader of the Believers, why did the Messenger of Allah (S) call it Zawraa’? So he said: It is called Zawraa’ because the war surrounds it expanding out to the borders.”

An indication of the potentials of this sectarian conflict to embroil the entire region.

This sectarian violence will become useful as a tool in those countries which have marginalised its Shi’ah or Sunni minorities.

Shi’ahs in Arabia occupy the most oil rich areas and are inspired by Iran and their Shi’ah brothers in Iraq.

The Shi’ah minority who rules Syria have a problem with its Sunni majority who actively support their Sunni brothers in Iraq against the US, its allies and the Shi’ah government. Kuwait’s sizable Shi’ah minority supports their Shi’ah cousins in Iraq against the Sunni insurgency.

Bahraini Shi’ahs also support Iran and Iraqi Shi’ahs.

This spark could inflame the immediate region and far afield as Pakistan and other Muslim countries with sizeable Shi’ah minorities.

Since the world Muslim community is not guaranteed divine protection from sectarianism which the Quran affirms can engulf the body politic of Islam as an indication of God’s displeasure, in the Chapter of the Cattle (6):65: “Say: “He (Allah) has power to send upon you punishment from above you or from under your feet (to overwhelm you), or to cover you with confusion and sectarian strife and to make you taste the violence of one another” -- a matter which has already clearly befallen the hapless Iraqi nation.

Although there are not many Shi’ahs in TnT, maybe a few families of mostly Afro-Trinbingonians who switched sides after the success of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, we can still be affected.

The majority of Muslims in this country are Sunnis and followers of Imam Abu Hanifah, in jurisprudence. In spiritual training they belong to the Qadiriyyah Tariqa (Gnostic path).

Both of these Imams’ shrines were also threatened in Iraq as part of a Shi’ah backlash. If these places were to be attacked or destroyed, Hanafis and Qadiriyys in this country and in other parts of the Muslim world will not be pleased.