Description
Since the early days of “scientific” Orientalism in the late 18th century, the Shia were portraited based on dominant Sunni textual representations. This Sunni centric approach to the study of Islam continued, even after the translations of Shia texts and their self-representations into European languages. This paper explores the legacy of this epistemic inequality in the depiction of Sunni and Shia which continues to various degrees to inform contemporary Islamic Studies. In this paper, I will debate this epistemic inequality through Derridean différance. Différance deconstructs the privileged ontology of Sunni and Shia social actors as the centres of meaning-making. It turns the gaze of the researcher to the role of the Shia subaltern in the formations of the dominant Sunni discourses of Islam. The aftermath of 9/11 terrorist attacks brought the questions of the relationship between “Islam” and the “West”, the compatibility of “Islam” with democracy, and the integration of “Muslim” communities in “Western” societies to the forefront of academic and public debates. This epistemic inequality in Islamic Studies in which “Islam” by default seems to mean Sunnism, further reinforces the construction of “Islam” as one huge entity; with one singular and recognisable will, monothetic lived expression and one grand narrative of history. This paper aims to offer a post-structuralist framework to deconstruct this epistemic inequality.
