Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

دائرة المعارف مهدی(ع)

@MuhammadalMahdi2023

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

436subscribers

+2 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001976662634
TypeChannel
Username@MuhammadalMahdi2023
CreatedBetween 1 April 2023 and 31 October 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live15 August 2026
Measurements held3
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 15 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/MuhammadalMahdi2023

Growth

4344364356 August 2026 — 434 subscribers7 August 2026 — 434 subscribers15 August 2026 — 436 subscribers6 August 202615 August 2026
3 measurements spanning 8 days, net +2. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 434–436 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
15 Aug 2026, 00:25436+2
7 Aug 2026, 05:23434no change
6 Aug 2026, 19:31434first reading

Engagement

19 posts held, back to 5 June 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
9.17%
avg views ÷ 436 subscribers
Avg views / post
40.0
1 post measured
Reaction rate
10.0%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
1
of 19 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 1 August 2026
Posts held19 (5 June 20261 August 2026)
Views total40
Reactions total4
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken6 Aug 2026, 19:31 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

Reaction mix

17 reactions across 5 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 58.8% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍1058.8%
👎317.6%
😁211.8%
15.88%
😢15.88%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 6 of the 19 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 17reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 19 most recent posts we hold, published 5 June 2026 to 1 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Recent posts

1 Aug 2026, 05:00 UTC40 views4 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Forwarded from @dinaznegahidigarPhoto

بر پایهٔ بررسی‌های متعدد و بازخوانی‌های چندجانبهٔ تاریخ و جغرافیای صدر اسلام، به نظر می‌رسد که مدینهٔ کنونی در عربستان، محل واقعی هجرت و استقرار پیامبر اسلام(ص) به عنوان «یثرب تاریخی» نبوده است و انتساب و تثیت این شهر به عنوان «مدینةالنبی»، حاصل فرایندهای تاریخیِ متأخر، به‌ویژه متون دورهٔ عباسی و پس از آن، و در چارچوب شکل‌گیری نوعی «حافظهٔ تاریخی کاذب» بوده است. با توجه به شواهد، قرائن، سرنخ‌های پنهان موجود در متون،

👍2👎1😢1

7 Jul 2026, 15:37 UTC129 views5 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Forwarded from @TafsirHasanAskariUtrush

امام حسن عسکری (رضی الله عنه) یا امام حسن عسکری(علیه‌السلام) . ناصر کبیر، ابومحمد حسن بن علی عسکری، مشهور به ناصر اطروش و ناصر الحق، فقیه، متکلم و امام زیدی طبرستان بوده است که نسب او به امام زین‌العابدین(ع) می‌رسد. وی در جوانی از مدینه رهسپار عراق شد و در سامرا، که در آن روزگار «عسکر» خوانده می‌شد، اقامت گزید. پدرش علی بن حسن نیز به سبب سکونت در همانجا به «عسکری» شهرت داشت. ناصر خود از محضر عالمان زیدی و امامی بهره

👍5

23 Jun 2026, 18:32 UTC≈1,460 views5 reactionsread 6 August 2026

غیبت و بحران جانشینی . پدیدارشناسی تاریخی فرقه‌های شیعه، الگویی تکرارشونده و شگفت‌انگیز را آشکار می‌سازد: هرگاه زنجیرهٔ رهبری کاریزماتیک در بن‌بستِ «فقدان، اختلاف، یا فشار سیاسی» قرار گرفته، مفهومی نجات‌بخش از دل بحران سر برآورده است: «غیبت» و «قائمیت». این مفهوم، که امروزه در الهیات امامیه به پیچیده‌ترین و نهادینه‌شده‌ترین شکل خود رسیده، ریشه در خاکِ تنگناهای مکرر جوامع شیعی دارد. بررسی این ریشه‌ها، نه با نیت تقلیل

👍2👎21

19 Jun 2026, 09:50 UTC149 views2 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Forwarded from @kazemostadiqomFile

نسخهٔ جدید کتاب «دربارهٔ کعبهٔ ابراهیمی» تقدیم می‌شود. (۱۳۹۰ صفحه؛ شامل ۱۱۶۱ صفحه متن اصلی، جلد بنفش؛ و ۲۲۹ صفحه ضمائم، جلد سبز) خرداد ۱۴۰۵ . در این اثر، زیست‌بوم و جغرافیای فعالیت پیامبر اسلام(ص) در منطقهٔ مدین، واقع در شرق خلیج عقبه، بازخوانی و جانمایی شده است. همچنین، اعتبار انتساب کعبهٔ کنونی در حجاز جنوبی به کعبهٔ ابراهیمی، بر پایهٔ شواهد «قرآنی، تاریخی، جغرافیایی و متنی»، مورد نقد و تشکیک بسیار جدی قرار گرفته

😁2

8 Jun 2026, 13:28 UTC984 views1 reactionsread 6 August 2026

«عوامل روانی» و نقش تاریخی مهدی در انسجام امامیه . تبیین پدیده‌های اجتماعی ـ مذهبی پیچیده، مستلزم توجه به تمامی سطوح تأثیرگذار، از جمله سطح روانی ـ جمعی است. فرضیه‌ای که انسجام جامعه امامیه در دوره غیبت صغری را مستقیماً به وجود و هدایت فعال امام دوازدهم(ع) نسبت می‌دهد، با تقلیل این پدیده به یک علت فرضی بیرونی، از تحلیل یکی از قدرتمندترین عوامل درونی شکل‌دهنده به انسجام جوامع دینی غافل مانده است: قدرت خودبسندۀ «باور ج

👍1

8 Jun 2026, 05:11 UTC571 viewsread 6 August 2026

(ادامه از فرسته قبل) . ... خود آن گفتمان هستند، به عنوان دلیل اثبات آن گفتمان به کار گرفته می‌شوند، بدون آن که شاهد مستقلی برای شکستن این چرخه ارائه شود. از سوی دیگر، این فرضیه در توضیح یکی از مهم‌ترین نقاط عطف تاریخی خود، یعنی آغاز غیبت کبری، دچار تناقض می‌شود. گسست ناگهانی سال ۳۲۹ قمری، با تصویر یک امام فعال و هدایتگر که جامعه را به طور منسجم مدیریت می‌کند، همخوانی ندارد و بیشتر با تفسیرهای جامعه‌شناختی از تحول درو

8 Jun 2026, 05:08 UTC465 viewsread 6 August 2026

«ضعف در تحلیل» و نقش تاریخی مهدی در انسجام امامیه . ارزیابی اعتبار هر فرضیۀ تاریخی، به ویژه فرضیه‌هایی که مدعی تبیین رویدادهایی با بار اعتقادی سنگین هستند، در گرو واکاوی دقیق و نقادانۀ شواهد و منابعی است که آن فرضیه بر آنها استوار شده است. فرضیۀ «نقش تاریخی امام مهدی در انسجام امامیه در غیبت صغری» که انسجام جامعۀ شیعی در آن دوره را به هدایت مستقیم امام دوازدهم(ع) نسبت می‌دهد، نه تنها در سطح منطق و تبیین تاریخی، بلکه

7 Jun 2026, 18:56 UTC821 viewsread 6 August 2026

ضعفِ تاریخی و نقش تاریخی مهدی در انسجام امامیه . هر تحلیل تاریخی که بخواهد پدیده‌ای اجتماعی ـ مذهبی مانند انسجام یک فرقه را در دوره‌ای بحرانی تبیین کند، ناگزیر از در نظر گرفتن «بستر پیچیدۀ تاریخی، ساختارهای اجتماعی، و علل چندگانه‌ای» است که فراتر از انگاره‌های صرفاً اعتقادی عمل می‌کنند. فرضیۀ «نقش تاریخی امام مهدی در انسجام امامیه در غیبت صغری» با نسبت دادن این انسجام به هدایت مستقیم و فعال امام دوازدهم، از این الزام

7 Jun 2026, 18:56 UTC873 viewsread 6 August 2026

(ادامه از فرستهٔ قبل) مانایی یک مذهب، محصول عوامل پیچیده‌ای مانند «استحکام نظام اعتقادی، انعطاف‌پذیری تفسیری، قدرت نهاد روحانیت، حمایت‌های سیاسی، و عملکرد آن به عنوان مرکز ثقل هویت جمعی» است. این که امامیه نیز همچون بسیاری جوامع دینی دیگر توانسته قرن‌ها دوام آورد، پدیده‌ای استثنایی نیست که نیاز به توضیحی استثنایی (وجود تاریخی امام غایب) داشته باشد؛ بلکه قاعده‌ای متعارف در تاریخ ادیان است که با علل متعارف تاریخی ـ اج

Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @MuhammadalMahdi2023. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 303,971 of 1,478,351entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Forward network

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Mentions

Named by 6 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 15 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“دائرة المعارف مهدی(ع)” (@MuhammadalMahdi2023), 436 subscribers as measured 15 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/MuhammadalMahdi2023.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.