I am aware that we should draw a line between what the fact is and what it should be. Therefore, I will try to write about not only what occurred in the past and today but also what is ideal in Islam and the practices of its exemplary communities.

Islam forbids its adherents from imitation on beliefs and thoughts as well as on the interpretation of the divine revelation. The ideal is that every believer should think what and why they believe. By doing so, they should interpret the revelation and must be content in their heart and mind and thus, they should accept it after that. They should check the instructive book of God and his prophet"s sunnah in order to understand what and why they do something.

The telling revelation is the book of God and the feature of understanding belongs to the human. Even though when the method of understanding by the Prophet and his first students (companions) is applied, there are differences of knowledge, customary habits, differences of insight and need have occurred in history and will continue to be. Despite their compatibility with the methodological thinking, interpretation and decisional law (ijtihad) we call differences of opinions a sect.

Not all believers were able to understand the religion –directly- from its source of revelation; therefore, they asked things from their credited scholars to what to believe and what to do. They adopted the things they witnessed in their own society. This method of learning is called "imitation". When a group of people habitually followed a scholar in a region, apparently a religious-social institution as a "sect" emerged.

Believers had founded the opportunity to ask about issues to many mujtahids (a legal decider) at the same time. There has been no forcing to follow all ijtihads (legal decision) of a mujtahid. However, in the later periods, unisectarinism and fanaticism arose for various reasons.

The ideal is that believers who belong to different sects and practice groups must consider each other as brothers. They must respect to each other"s sect and practice. They must pray in congregation in the mosque behind the same Imam. They must never use the phrase "difference of a sect" as an instrument or a reason for separation and conflict.

When these things occur, and of course there are regions with such experience, unfortunately believers ranging from Islamic theology sects to Islamic law sects such as "hanafis, shaafis, hanbalis" fought against each other.

In history, Khawarej approved of killing Ali bin Abu Talib and whomever gave allegiance to him. There were also who rejected to give allegiance to him and went on a riot against Ali bin Abu Talib. For both groups, Ali bin Abu Talib made this announcement:

"Our brothers rebelled against us; however, we may not call them kaafer (infidels) nor faajer (sinners); because they are acting this way based on a certain interpretation."

"They are welcome to pray with us in our mosque. If they go for a jihad with us, they have the same rights as we do. But if they pull out their sword against us, so will we."

If only Ali"s groundbreaking call had founded audience, there would be no hostility nor conflict among sects. Then the sectarian differences would not have split the ummah into pieces. Unfortunately, on one side ignorance, fanatism and on the other side spy-hypocrites as well as enemies" trick and provocations obstructed that beautiful message. They drowned the message in the noise. Believers coming from different sects slaughtered each other with takbeers and they are still performing this.

I am leaving here and will take a historical glance at the relationship between shiism and sunnism today, alevism and sunnism briefly.