ارسل ملاحظاتك

ارسل ملاحظاتك لنا







الرئيسية > الجذور التاريخية للصراع الشيعي...>الوصف

الجذور التاريخية للصراع الشيعي السني من المنازلات السياسية إلى الاختراق الإعلامي

العنوان بلغة أخرى: The Historical Roots of the Sunni Shiite Conflict from Political Concessions to the Media Penetration
Les Racines Historiques du Conflit Entre Sunnites et Chiites de Conflits Politiques au Percee des Medias
المصدر: مجلة العلوم الاجتماعية والإنسانية
الناشر: جامعة محمد بوضياف المسيلة - كلية العلوم الإنسانية والاجتماعية
المؤلف الرئيسي: عبدالمالك، صاولى (مؤلف)
المجلد/العدد: ع14
محكمة: نعم
الدولة: الجزائر
التاريخ الميلادي: 2018
الشهر: جوان
الصفحات: 85 - 104
ISSN: 2253-010X
رقم MD: 909013
نوع المحتوى: بحوث ومقالات
اللغة: العربية
قواعد المعلومات: EduSearch
مواضيع:
التاريخ الإسلامي | الفرق الإسلامية | أهل السنة والجماعة | المذهب الشيعي | وسائل الإعلام
رابط المحتوى:

الناشر لهذه المادة لم يسمح بإتاحتها.
صورة الغلاف QR قانون
حفظ في:
المستخلص: تناولت في هذا المقال حقيقة الصراع بين الشيعة والسنة، وأن الأمر له جذور تاريخية تمتد إلى الصدر الأول، بدء بخلافات شخصية عشية العودة من غزوة بني المصطلق، والحادثة التي هزت عرش الدولة الإسلامية، يتعلق الأمر بحادثة الإفك، وامتد الخلاف إلى حادثة السقيفة بعد انتقال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى الرفيق الأعلى، فيكون المشكل الأول له بعد اجتماعي، والثاني له بعد سياسي، وتداخل البعدين متوجين بأول منازلة ميدانية بين الفريقين بما يسمى موقعتي الجمل وصفين، واستثمر اليهود السبئيين والمنافقين في الواقعتين منتجا خلافة إسلامية برأسين، حيث تم خلق مذاهب مسايرة لهذا الاختلاف في العقيدة والفقه، وأصبحت هناك قراءتين للتاريخ الإسلامي، وامتد الأمر حتى إلى القرآن والسنة، ومما خلص إليه المقال أن أغلب هذه الخلافات وهمية ومختلقة، بغرض تجسيد البعد السياسي، ومن هو الأحق بالخلافة: الأمويين أم آل البيت، ولماذا يركز الشيعة على أن الخلافة تكون في أل علي رغم أن آل البيت هم آل علي وأل عقيل وآل جعفر وآل عباس -بنص الحديث- ولماذا بالضبط في آل الإمام الحسين -رضي الله عنه- دون آل الحسن وغيرهم من آل علي -كرم الله وجهه- هذا ما سنجيب عنه في هذا المقال -إن شاء الله-

In the name of Allah the Merciful the Compassionate After the victory of the Muslims against the polytheists in the battle of Badr, the social structure changed. There were Muslims, Polytheists, and the Jews. And there appeared another category that didn’t exist previously, the hypocrites. The members of this group were found in the other categories, considering that the leaders of this group hid disbelieving and showed belief. Hence, they interact with other groups and show each group a face. Therefore, we find that this sect included those opportunists. Their leader Abdullah Ibn obey Ibnsaloul accompanied the prophet Mohamed (peace be upon him), but in fact, he was coordinating with the other groups. Eventually, this sect was the most dangerous for Islam and Muslims. The evidence for that was his retaliation from the prophet in the Ifk incident. On the political front, there was Abdullah Ibn Saba (Shiit reference) who was the burner of the alluring, and the one who supported the Caliphate of Ali Ibn Abi Taleb at the expense of Abi Bakr, Omar and Osman (may Allah be pleased with them ). So, he insulted them and all the companions who supported them. He exaggerated in the support of Ali to the point of deification, and he gathered other supporters. And in order to ensure the continuity of this idea, they invented a doctrine in both ideology and jurisprudence and explanation of Koran and they created a new religion in which the most dangerous dogma was mysticism. They believed that there are two meanings for Koran, the surface meaning which is known by all people and a hidden meaning that no one knows it except some limited people who are the twelve Imams who are considered sinless. And the Caliphate should be in the descendants of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), and exactly in the descendants of his son Hussein and his Persian wife from his son Ali Ibn Hussein Zine Elabidine and the last Imam Mohamed Ibn Hussein, the expected “mahdi”; and those are the only men who know the secrets of Koran because they were inspired, and after them the task will be held by what became to be known as the mandate of “Fakih” (the Shiite reference across the different eras). This is the intersection point; the Shiite followed a path and the Sunnis followed another path so that it is impossible to meet even if they tried as there was an imminent disaccording between them in the religion, ideology and what follows. From what has been mentioned earlier, it is possible to consider that the disaccording between the Shiite and the Sunnis at the beginning was political and later, it was covered with religion in order to ensure its continuity; that’s why the disagreement continued and I don’t think that it will meet an end. The only possibility of its end is pawned by the domination of one sect over the other and this is again something of phantasy. The continuity of the disagreement between the Shiite and the Sunnis during fourteen centuries and more proves the deepness of the problem. The reason why the conflict still persists at the level of beliefs, like displaying from the Shiite the opposite of what he hides from the Sunni if he fears on himself, and the dangerous “Fatwa” in which the Shiite permits the killing of the Sunni and takeover his properties, and so on. The differences between the two sides continued at the political level. Historians have counted about nine Shiite countries to preserve these beliefs. But the fact that these ideas were not accepted by many people, they remained weak. And when ever they tried to expand and develop and once people know these doctrinal and jurisprudential problems they withdraw from their affiliation to them, like what happened to the Fatimid state, which is considered the most powerful Shiite state that took control over North Africa and extended its influence to the Middle East, but it was revolted and over thrown nearly two centuries later, after having shown its enemi hood to the companions, and its exaggeration in the sanctification of Imam Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and his descendants especially the Imam Hussein (may Allah be pleased with him). In modern history, the victory of the Iranian revolution is only a return to Shi'ism and revival of these beliefs. Many Muslim thinkers believe that the enemies of Islam have invested in this matter and that they are the reason for the return of the Shiites to the forefront, among them, as an aspect of the confrontation between Muslims and other ideologies of both religions (Christianity and Judaism in particular), and between them and the infidels (atheists) who do not recognize the existence of God. Thus, Islam remains the only force facing all these ideas and ideologies in the world, and how can it be able to cope with this conflict, as its social, intellectual and religious depth is infected as a result of the language imposed by colonialism some two centuries ago? An attempt to disrupt the social structure of the Muslim community by corrupting the social relations between Muslims, corrupting their educational curricula, making political crises, and imposing rulers who carry strange ideas about their societies and end the dominant globalization of all cultures and religions to impose one culture and one religion. At least, to work to distort other cultures and beliefs, there is no way to Muslims but to return to the true religion, and the rejection of all the differences between them, so that they may maintain minimum obligations.

Dans cet article: j'ai discuté de conflit entre chites et sunites et j’ai découvert que ce probleme a des racines historiques. qui s' étendent jusqu' au début de l’islam sous la forme d’affrontements personnels après. Le retour de la bataille de bani elmostalek- où s'est déclarée (hadithete-el -ifke). L’incident qui à secoué l’entité de l’état islamique. ...ceci a une dimension sociale. Le deuxiéme incident a une dimension politique. appelée l'incident _ (essakifa) –(sakifat – beni – saaida). Juste après.. le décés du prophète (Mohamed – salla – ellaho – alaihi – wasallam), la convergence des deux dimensions a pour effet la survenance de deux affrontements entre musulmans (el – JAMEL & SAFIAN) entre notre mère (aicha oume el mouaminune et Ali ben Abi Taleb) et la deuxième entre moaawia -et Ali ben Abi Taleb. Dans cette situation l’intervention étrangère intervient de JUIFs -(Abdellah BEN-SABA’… les juifs ont investis cette situation et les hyppocrites, ... celle qui a divisé le (khilafa) on deux parties: la première: partisans Ali, et la deuxième avec le reste de SAHABA, sa il se devlope et ça tourné au partè de chitese & partè de sunnites, ce conflit devenu au couran cele à provoquée deux lectures coraniques et au sounna aussi, et au domaine de la croyance, et au jurisprudence islamique, et l’histoire islamique …, la question qui se pose à la fin de se article: pour quoi chites concentrent leur destination vers dynastie Ali comme ils sont de la famille de prophète – Mohammed – sella – allaho – alaihi – wasallam- ; mais il y’a aussi AKIL et ses fils, et JAAFAR et ses fils; et el _ Abbas et ses fils; et pluse que sa pourquoi chites considèrent les fils de el- hossein et ne s'interessent pas aux fils d'el hacene, et pour quoi se conflit continu au cours des 14 siècles pour devenir une confrontation mediatique sour -tout entre les chaînes satellitaires islamiques.
ISSN: 2253-010X

عناصر مشابهة


© 2024 المنظومة. جميع الحقوق محفوظة.