آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 54 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 2,676 |
| تعداد مقالات | 37,768 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 20,841,904 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 9,786,932 |
قراءة في سيرة الإمام علي (عليه السلام) في الحكم من منظور المستشرقين (دراسة مقارنة بين دونالدسون ولورا فيتشيا فاغليري) | ||
| التاریخ والحضارة الاسلامیة رؤیة معاصرة | ||
| مقاله 9، دوره 6، شماره 2، مهر 2026، صفحه 1-33 اصل مقاله (1.14 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: المقالة الأصلية | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22081/ihc.2024.69451.1058 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| ساجد علي تشانديف* 1؛ قاسم رزاقي موسوي2 | ||
| 1طالب في مرحلة الدكتوراه٬ قسم تاريخ أهل البيت (عليه السلام)٬ جامعة المصطفى (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) العالمية.(الکاتب المسؤول) | ||
| 2عضو الهيئة العلمية في أكاديمية العلوم والثقافة الإسلامية | ||
| تاریخ دریافت: 12 آبان 1404، تاریخ بازنگری: 08 اسفند 1404، تاریخ پذیرش: 17 فروردین 1405 | ||
| چکیده | ||
| حظيت سيرة الإمام علي (عليه السلام) في مختلف أبعادها، ومنها سيرته في الحكم، باهتمام الباحثين، بمن فيهم المستشرقون. فقد واجه الإمام (عليه السلام) عند توليه الخلافة تحديات جمة، منها: المظالم الاقتصادية، الانحرافات الدينية، البدع، الفساد الاجتماعي، وركون المجتمع إلى الرفاهية. ومن جهة أخرى، شكلت الحروب مع الناكثين والقاسطين والمارقين عائقًا كبيرًا أمام تنفيذ الإصلاحات التي كان يصبو إليها الإمام. المستشرقان الشهيران: الفرنسي دوايت مارتن دونالدسون (توفي 1976م)، والإيطالية لورا فيتشيا فاغليري (توفيت 1989م)، لهما بحوث في التشيُّع والأئمة (عليهم السلام)، وقد تناولا في مؤلفاتهما سيرة الإمام في الحكم بأسلوب مغرض مع تجاهل تام لتلك التحديات التي واجهت الإمام (عليه السلام) وتأثُّرْ واضح بالمصادر غير الشيعية. فقد اعتبرت "فاغليري" في مقالتها أن اختيار الإمام علي (عليه السلام) للخلافة كان غير شرعي، وسياساته في الحكم متأثرة بالثائرين على عثمان، وأنّ مبادرة الإمام المتسرّعة في إجبار المخالفين على الطاعة كانت تصرّفًا غير صائب، لتستنتج بالتالي "عجز الإمام عن إدارة الحكم". كذلك رأى "دونالدسون" أنّ اختيار الإمام للخلافة بعد مقتل عثمان كان توافقًا غير طبيعي في المجتمع آنذاك، وأشار إلى تأثير المخالفين للإمام (عليه السلام) (عائشة وطلحة والزبير)٬ واستعرض حروب تلك المرحلة، ليصل إلى أنّ تلك المشكلات أدت في النهاية إلى استشهاده. هدف هذه المقالة تقديم دراسة نقدية مقارنة لهاتين الرؤيتين، باستخدام المنهج الوصفي التحليلي المعتمد على تقارير المصادر. وتشير النتائج إلى أنه -خلافًا لتصورات هذين المستشرقين- كان اختيار الإمام علي (عليه السلام) للخلافة متطابقًا مع احتياجات أغلبية المجتمع ولقي ترحيبًا واسعًا، وأنّ سيرته في الحكم لم تكن خاضعة لتأثير مخالفي عثمان أو الحروب التي فرضت عليه، بل كانت قائمة على مبدأ "الجدارة والاستحقاق"، وكان الإمام (عليه السلام) في مواجهته للمعارضين يمارس أقصى درجات ضبط النفس والمداراة والأساليب السلمية، كما برهن على حسن تدبيره وقدرته على إدارة الحكم، ونجاحًا في التعامل مع المشكلات والعوائق. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| الإمام علي (عليه السلام)؛ المستشرقون؛ دوايت مارتن دونالدسون؛ لورا فيتشيا فاغليري؛ سيرة الحكم | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| A Re-examination of the Governing Conduct of Imam Ali (AS) from the Perspective of Orientalist Scholarship | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Sajed Ali Chandio1؛ seyed ghasem razzaghi mosavi2 | ||
| 1PhD Student of History of Ahl al-Bayt (AS), Al-Mustafa International University. (Corresponding Author) | ||
| 2Faculty Member, Islamic Sciences and Culture Academy (ISCA) | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| The governing conduct (sirah) of Imam Ali (AS) has attracted the attention of scholars from various intellectual traditions, including Orientalists. Upon assuming the caliphate, Imam Ali (AS) faced numerous challenges, including economic inequality, religious deviations, and social corruption. At the same time, the conflicts with the Nakithun (the Oath-Breakers), Qasitun (the Transgressors), and Mariqun (the Seceders) constituted major obstacles to the implementation of his reform agenda. This study seeks to examine the approaches and assessments of two Orientalist scholars, namely Donaldson and Vaglieri, regarding the governing conduct of Imam Ali (AS). Employing the historical method, the study argues that both Donaldson and Vaglieri, despite their prominence in Shi‘i studies, approached the subject from a largely unsympathetic perspective, often overlooking the political and social constraints surrounding Imam Ali’s rule and relying heavily on non-Shi‘i historical sources. Vaglieri argues that Imam Ali’s accession to the caliphate was supported only by a minority of the Muslim community and maintains that his governing policies were heavily influenced by the rebels involved in the opposition to Uthman. Furthermore, contrary to widely accepted historical accounts, she claims that supporters of Imam Ali exerted pressure on those who refused to pledge allegiance and considers attempts to compel political opponents into submission to have been premature and politically unwise. By portraying the opponents of Uthman as merely a minority faction and linking Imam Ali’s election exclusively to their support, Vaglieri implicitly lends credibility to Mu‘awiya’s refusal to recognize the legitimacy of the caliphate and ultimately portrays Imam Ali as ineffective in governing the state. Donaldson sought to portray the succession of Imam Ali (AS) primarily as a hereditary matter. He therefore argued that the only plausible explanation for Ali's selection as successor was the expectation that the Prophet's descendants should inherit his position, since the continuation of the Prophet's lineage through his daughter Fatima (AS) stood in tension with prevailing Arab notions of patrilineal descent. In this way, Donaldson reduced the question of the Imamate and caliphate to a familial and dynastic issue rather than viewing it as a divinely ordained institution grounded in spiritual and moral qualifications. In discussing the events following the Prophet's death and the gathering of the Ansar at Saqifah, followed by the arrival of Abu Bakr, Umar, and Abu Ubaydah al-Jarrah and the subsequent deliberations, Donaldson adopts a skeptical tone toward the position of some supporters of Imam Ali (AS). Referring to the statement reportedly made by certain members of the Ansar that "we shall pledge allegiance to none but Ali," he remarks that it remains unclear why the Ansar abandoned their own candidate, Sa'd b. Ubadah, and instead proposed a compromise in favor of Ali, who belonged to the Quraysh. With regard to the pledge of allegiance to Imam Ali (AS), Donaldson makes little mention of the widespread public demand for his leadership or the large crowds that gathered to offer their allegiance. Rather, he portrays the process as being secured through the support of several influential individuals: al-Ashtar allegedly guaranteed the support of the people of Kufa, Talhah and al-Zubayr assured the backing of the Muhajirun, while Abu al-Haytham, Uqbah, and Abu Ayyub declared the support of the Ansar. At the same time, he emphasizes that three prominent members of the Quraysh—Marwan b. al-Hakam, Sa'id b. al-'As, and al-Walid b. Uqbah—refused to pledge allegiance to the Imam. According to Donaldson, their opposition stemmed from personal grievances, including the fact that Imam Ali (AS) had killed the fathers of two of them at the Battle of Badr and had criticized the policies of Uthman, including his association with al-Hakam b. al-'As, who had previously been exiled by the Prophet. Donaldson further presents these three individuals as representative voices of the Quraysh and concludes that the Quraysh as a whole were dissatisfied with the caliphate of Imam Ali (AS). He likewise notes that Talhah and al-Zubayr later joined this opposition and claimed that their pledge of allegiance had been given under duress, while making no reference to the historical circumstances and political motivations that contributed to their subsequent breach of allegiance. An examination of the historical sources, however, reveals a picture significantly different from that presented by these Orientalist interpretations concerning both the legitimacy of Imam Ali's caliphate and the circumstances of the pledge of allegiance. Imam Ali (AS) himself vividly described the extraordinary public enthusiasm that accompanied his accession to power, stating that the crowds surged around him "like the thick mane of a hyena," pressing upon him from every direction until Hasan and Husayn (AS) were nearly trampled underfoot and his cloak was torn from both sides, while the people gathered around him like dense flocks of sheep. This depiction is corroborated by numerous historical accounts, while Shi'i sources in particular emphasize the unprecedented scale of public participation and even preserve the names of many of those who pledged allegiance. Orientalist scholarship has also addressed Imam Ali's administrative policies, especially his dismissal and appointment of provincial governors. Although these changes were largely based upon principles of meritocracy and administrative reform, Vaglieri accuses the Imam of acting under the influence of opponents of Uthman and argues that the removal of certain governors was undertaken in response to their demands. She writes that despite Ibn Abbas advising Ali to proceed cautiously, he immediately implemented measures that had been requested by anti-Uthman groups by dismissing governors appointed by Uthman and replacing them, whenever possible, with members of his own circle. Even with regard to Mu'awiyah, Imam Ali (AS) refused to engage in political compromise, reportedly declaring that he was unwilling to leave Mu'awiyah in office even for a single moment. Nevertheless, Vaglieri portrays the Imam's policy toward his opponents, particularly Mu'awiyah, as hasty and confrontational. Without reference to the prior correspondence and negotiations that had taken place between the two sides, she writes that Ali hastily assembled an army in order to compel Mu'awiyah's submission, but that another major rebellion forced him to postpone military operations in Syria, whereas Mu'awiyah, for his part, pursued a policy of caution and delay. She subsequently discusses the major conflicts of the Imam's reign and the influential opposition movements that confronted him, ultimately presenting these difficulties as contributing factors to his martyrdom. The findings indicate that, contrary to the assumptions advanced by these two Orientalist scholars, Imam Ali's accession to the caliphate was met with broad support from the majority of the Muslim community. His model of governance was firmly grounded in the principle of meritocracy, and his approach toward political opponents was characterized by remarkable forbearance and restraint. Despite the numerous challenges and obstacles confronting his administration, the Imam demonstrated prudence, competence, and effective leadership in governing the Islamic polity. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Keywords: Imam Ali (peace be upon him), Orientalists, Dwight Martin Donaldson, Laura Veccia Vaglieri, Sira of the Wisdom (or Biography of the Wisdom) | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 136 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 151 |
||