نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 سطح چهار، رشته کلام اسلامی، موسسه مذاهب اسلامی، قم، ایران
2 سطح سه، موسسه آموزش عالی ائمه اطهار(ع)، قم، ایران
3 استادیار، گروه معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، سیستان و بلوچستان، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
This study develops a strategic governance model for managing sectarian divisions through a comparative analysis of the Prophetic tradition (Sīrah) and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s thought on Islamic unity. It seeks to bridge the gap between normative calls for Muslim unity and practical governance mechanisms by identifying and systematizing strategies derived from these two frameworks. The study addresses a critical contemporary challenge in the Islamic world: the transformation of legitimate religious differences into sectarian conflicts that undermine social cohesion, regional stability, and the prospects for
a New Islamic Civilization. Despite the emphasis on Islamic unity in both the Prophetic tradition and Khamenei’s discourse, existing scholarship has largely focused on descriptive accounts and normative recommendations, devoting limited attention to structured, operational frameworks for managing sectarian divisions. Accordingly, the central research question is: What governance strategies for managing religious differences emerge from a comparative analysis of the Prophetic tradition and Khamenei’s unity-oriented thought, and how can they be integrated into a model for addressing contemporary sectarian challenges? This qualitative study employs thematic analysis with a combined deductive–inductive approach. Its sources comprise two categories: (1) authoritative historical and religious texts documenting the practical Sīrah of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and (2) Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s statements and intellectual works concerning Islamic unity and the management of sectarian divisions. The units of analysis are strategic propositions concerning religious differences, sectarian conflict, and mechanisms for preserving social cohesion. The data were systematically coded, compared, and organized into thematic
categories and conceptual patterns. Data triangulation was employed to enhance analytical validity by comparing themes derived from the Prophetic tradition with those identified in Khamenei’s thought.
92 Islamic Governance Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2026
The findings reveal a three-level governance framework encompassing cognitive–discursive, social–preventive, and managerial–political dimensions. At the cognitive–discursive level, both frameworks distinguish legitimate epistemic and theological differences from social hostility and emphasize the regulation of divisive discourse. Key strategies include managing sectarian narratives, confining scholarly disagreements to appropriate intellectual settings, and emphasizing shared religious foundations, particularly the Qur’an, the Prophet Muhammad, and the Ahl al-Bayt. At the social–preventive level, both frameworks seek to prevent the formation of hostile sectarian identities and broaden the scope for common action. The Prophet’s establishment of brotherhood between the Muhajirun and the Ansar, the Constitution of Medina, and the integrative function of collective religious practices illustrate mechanisms for transforming fragmented identities into broader forms of solidarity. In Khamenei’s thought, comparable strategies include distinguishing authentic religious identities from externally constructed sectarian projects, promoting common causes such as the Palestinian issue, and fostering scientific, economic, technological, and security cooperation among Muslim societies. At the managerial–political level, the findings highlight three major strategies: prioritizing social cohesion and preventing conflict escalation, referring disputes to legitimate sources of authority, and managing actors and discourses that deliberately intensify sectarian divisions. These strategies are reflected, respectively, in the Prophet’s efforts to preserve communal cohesion, his role as the ultimate arbiter of disputes, and his responses to divisive political and religious initiatives. In Khamenei’s thought, these principles are expressed through an emphasis on religious authority, the institutional role of Wilayat al-Faqih, and explicit opposition to currents that promote sectarian polarization. The comparative analysis indicates that the management of religious differences in both frameworks constitutes a coherent, multidimensional governance strategy rather than an ad hoc or exclusively normative approach. The resulting model conceptualizes sectarianism as a sociopolitical phenomenon reproduced across cognitive, social, and institutional levels, requiring rational, preventive, and institutional regulation rather than the elimination or denial of legitimate religious differences. The study therefore proposes a transition from “traditional rapprochement” to “institutional rapprochement,” in which dialogue is complemented by sustained cooperation in scientific, economic, technological, security, and media domains. Its theoretical contribution lies in connecting normative theories of Islamic unity with concrete governance mechanisms and shifting the analytical focus from emotional or symbolic unity to strategic and institutional unity. In practical terms, the proposed model offers policymakers, religious authorities, and social elites an analytical framework for managing religious diversity, identifying critical intervention points, strengthening social cohesion, and transforming sectarian diversity from a source of conflict into a potential foundation for collective civilizational development.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)