The feelings of hatred and enmity among the Shiites and the Sunnis have poisoned the atmosphere of our social life. The two groups mobilize their followers to spread hatred and sectarian violence. We don't see any signs of peacemaking in the horizon to end sectarian fighting in the Arab world. On the other hand, the fighting rages whenever religious leaders take the podium. During the past years, men of letters and artists have participated in presenting the conflict between the Shiites and Sunnis as a conflict between Hussein Bin Ali, the grandson of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and Yazid Bin Muawiya, grandson of Abu Sufyan, the leader of the Quraish before the Conquest of Makkah. It was an attempt to belittle the bitter conflict. Experts of jurisprudence were successful in giving it a religious look and present it as the legitimate politics of Islam. Jurisprudence scholars of the past have committed a big mistake by linking religion with politics. As a result we can always hear the Shiites talking about the Shariah-based legal guardianship while the Sunnis talking about Shariah-based politics. This linkage has played a big role in triggering conflicts between the two groups, who continue to present politics within an extremist religious perspective. According to the Shiites, only the descendants of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) from the side of Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her) will have the right to legal guardianship. The Shiites wanted to establish the legal guardianship of Imam Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) on the basis of the Prophet's advice. The black turban, on the other hand, represents the sacred political symbol of the Shiite religious leader, who should be a descendant of Ali Bin Abi Talib. They are given the title of Sayyed and will be considered a source of guidance and reference in Wilayat Al-Faqih. As a result, the Ithna Ashari Shiites believe that Khumaini and Khamnei are Sadat (plural of Sayyed) as the Prophet's blood flow through their veins and have the divine right to hold the legal guardianship of the Wilayat. You can notice some similarity between this system and the blue blood theory of Europe but the latter lacks the system of inheriting the title. Political heritage is considered by many other factors that protect the interests of legal guardianship. In Sunnah (actions attributed to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), things are quite different. Its legal political methodology was drafted at a later stage after the inclusion of certain historical events. Firstly, the legal guardianship was given to individuals who garnered the largest popular support. Secondly, the position was conferred on those who obtain legal advice. Political supremacy or fait accompli was the third factor. Religious texts have been used to impose a state of temporary political stability. If a person is able to take power by force or causing bloodshed people have to declare their allegiance to him and obey him, according to the Sunni political theory. This can be explained as the reason for the emergence of extremist groups getting to the streets to impose obedience through blood and violence. The above discussion shows that the Shia-Sunni conflict is caused by the mixing of politics with religion, making it one of the pillars of the religion. Those who do not believe in Wilayat Al-Faqih would be considered out of religion by the Shiites. According to the Sunnis, those who oppose its politics deserve severe punishment. This discussion will enable us to understand the reasons behind the Shia-Sunni conflicts and the background of parties that believe in Wilayat Al-Faqih and fait accompli. From this bitter reality we can understand the need to separate politics from religion to end the Shia-Sunni conflict and put an end to religious violence and hatred. We should incriminate the use of religion for politics and enforce the mechanisms of democracy and civil society by presenting civilian models for political work. This is essential to stop the hegemony of extremist clericsand religious scholars in politics and their dominance on the minds of common people.
