Why did the logic of victory and victory prevail over the adult caliphs?

The differences that occurred early between Muslims - and had tragic consequences and consequences - can be explained by two basic things: the absence of socially accepted political mechanisms that are due to them in evaluating the ruler's behavior and holding him accountable, and perhaps even isolating him if necessary; and the continuation of the rule of fork and dominance logic as a culture rooted before Islam, He had not had enough time to recover her.

This logic was one of the pests that remained inherent in Islamic society, despite the cultural revolution and the qualitative shift that the new religion brought to the Arabs of the island. Indeed, what was promoted about "permissions" of our master Osman does not reach to the extent that justifies departing from it, and permitting its blood and "straightening it with the edge of the sword."

This resulted in a chaotic behavior in the opposition's practice that went beyond the legitimate limit of being aware of the ruler, and alerting him to the shortcomings of his policy, and he produced - from there - a bloody revolution that ended with Othman's killing and bloodshed on the Mus-haf.

On the other hand, poverty in the constitutional codification, weakness in peaceful civil behavior, the dominance of the culture of fork and dominance and the "calendar with the edge of the sword" opened the door to the emergence of an intellectual and conceptual slippage that the nation is still suffering from its legacies and effects, which is reading the policy in the terms of belief and the transmission of issues Political difference from the field of legitimate juristic difference to the field of doctrinal difference, the language of atonement, loyalty and innocence.

Instead of Islamic thinking going in this case to seek ways for peaceful reform and developing mechanisms for monitoring the rulers, the heart’s logic of the relationship between faith and politics has led the ummah - or some of its divisions - to the paths of atonement and coup.

If political oppression and conquest - in our time - are primarily responsible for takfiri and revolutionary thought; it is worth noting that the absence of immunity against coup behavior and the weak political culture based on legalizing political discord and its disposal within institutions is what made this "possible".

The logic of predominance and thorn appeared in the behavior of the governed (the behavior of the revolutionaries against Othman) before it appeared in the behavior of the rulers (the Umayyad state), but the former was established for the second.

Among the narrations that we learned and preserved - and we are students - in the history lesson, especially the history of the rightly guided caliphs, is the well-known sermon given by Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq after he was sold as a successor to Muslims at the Saqifat Bani Sa’idah meeting. What we preserve and shade, we cherish, Abu Bakr said: “But after that, I have come to you, and I am not good for you, and if I were injured, then help me, and if I happened (= I have deviated), then rise to me, and a man rose, and he said: God, if we find in you a warp for you, the people of the sword.”

The strange thing is that nothing was found in historical narratives that shows that there was an objection to this logic that summoned the sword and its language at the moment of the first caliph’s assumption of the Muslims: and it indicates that the culture of prick and predominance was rooted in the Arab culture at the time, and that it was she who ultimately triumphed over the guidance of adults. From the caliphs.

One of the results of her victory was that three of these caliphs were killed Ghila: our master Umar, and he did not know what Omar had modified; and our master Uthman who told the Prophet that he was ashamed of him because the angels were ashamed of him, and what more was spent on Islam and Muslims of his own money; and our master Ali cousin of the Messenger of God Who sacrificed himself the night the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, went out to thwart the Quraysh plot to kill him.

The society had a subjective ability to transfer to the rule of dominance and thorn, as evidence that civil society (relative to Medina) at that time had a negative attitude towards the behavior of revolutionaries in the city, and it was not strong in calling for Othman’s protection and in the application of the rule of Sharia in them (tolerated Ali, may God be pleased with him in Accepting the presence of some revolutionaries on Uthman’s side).

It is true that the Right Caliph Uthman, may God be pleased with him, refused to provide protection for him, but the issue was not the issue of Uthman the person, but rather the issue of the Caliphate Foundation, which put the logic of victory and fork at the revolutionaries beginning of its end before the Umayyads put it.

Caring to rebuild Islamic culture, training young women on a culture of dialogue and coexistence with violators, and clearly distinguishing between the field of belief and the field of politics, and transferring issues of political difference from the field of belief to the field of sent interests; one of the most important actions that will redirect the efforts of Muslims and their youth to areas Comprehensive reform, and returning the role of the state and political power to their normal size.

Contemporary history shows that the Islamic nation in the present era has suffered again from the resurgence of the culture of thorn and dominance, the thought of atonement and exit, and the reduction of Islam in a distorted perception of the concept of the Islamic state; ".