عبدالرحمان باقرزاده - استادیار گروه معارف اسلامی دانشگاه مازندران
عزالدین رضانژاد - عضو هیات علمی جامعه المصطفی العالمیه

A number of the fundamental discrepancies amongst the ideologies of Ahl al-Bait and the Saghifah, are their point of view of the history of Islam’s incipience, the function of companions and the incidents occurred during that period. Shiites hold the view that those events are obliged to be scrutinized impartially considering the available criteria, and those companions who had enormous faith in the holy Quran and the prophet as well as giving them obedience, deserve respect. By contrast, those who do not enjoy this property and conducted delicts are identical to the vulgar and were criticized and opposed. However, Sunnis believe in the theory of the companions’ full justice and are profoundly disagree with any criticisms of them. Consequently, they have embarked upon the invention of a theological principle which considers the silence against the disputes of the companions as a religious essence. Now the question is, does this principle match the holy Quran and the tradition of the prophet? This article, applying the descriptive-analytical method and employing verified sources, surveys the mentioned principle and proves its falsity.

اهل سنت, مشاجرات بین صحابه, قاعده امساک, عدالت صحابه, اجتهاد