State theories in Shiite jurisprudence (book): Difference between revisions
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 108: | Line 108: | ||
According to Kadivar, in this theory, the unelected jurist does not have actual guardianship, and more rights have been predicted for the people than in the theory of Naeeni and Sayyid Muhammad Baqir Sadr. Human experience can be used to manage the society in different time and place conditions, and finally the Islam of the state will be ensured by observing the conditions of the Islamic ruler. (p. 158) | According to Kadivar, in this theory, the unelected jurist does not have actual guardianship, and more rights have been predicted for the people than in the theory of Naeeni and Sayyid Muhammad Baqir Sadr. Human experience can be used to manage the society in different time and place conditions, and finally the Islam of the state will be ensured by observing the conditions of the Islamic ruler. (p. 158) | ||
=== Restricting the jurist (wali al-faqih) of jurists in the theory of Islamic elected state === | === Restricting the jurist (wali al-faqih) of jurists in the theory of Islamic elected state === | ||
The theory of Islamic elected state was presented by three Iraqi and Lebanese jurists, Seyyed Mohammad Baqer Sayyid Muhammad Baqir Sadr, Mohammad Javad Mughniyeh and Mohammad Mahdi Shams Al-din. (p. 159). According to Mohsen Kadivar, this theory does not give any special political privileges to the jurists and their duties are limited to judging and | The theory of Islamic elected state was presented by three Iraqi and Lebanese jurists, Seyyed Mohammad Baqer Sayyid Muhammad Baqir Sadr, Mohammad Javad Mughniyeh and Mohammad Mahdi Shams Al-din. (p. 159). According to Mohsen Kadivar, this theory does not give any special political privileges to the jurists and their duties are limited to judging and enjoining what is right. Also, this theory of the Islamic state based on direct divine legitimacy is specific to the time of the infallible. According to him, in this theory, the management of political affairs during occultation is left to the people themselves. To be sure, the fixed rules of Sharia must be observed and the changing rules must not be inconsistent with the fixed rules. Finally, this theory considers the form of the Islamic state to be a council, and its being Islamic is due to the Islamic laws. (p.173-174) | ||
=== The impact of jurisprudential rules of ownership and representation on the political life of society === | === The impact of jurisprudential rules of ownership and representation on the political life of society === | ||
The theory of the representation of common private owners regarding the state in Shiite jurisprudence was presented by Mahdi Haeri Yazdi in his book Wisdom and Government (p. 175). The establishing political legitimacy on the jurisprudential rule of ownership and the issue of choice based on the jurisprudential rule of representation, and finally specifying the place of religion and jurisprudence in the politics and planning of society have been reviewed. (p. 175) | The theory of the representation of common private owners regarding the state in Shiite jurisprudence was presented by Mahdi Haeri Yazdi in his book Wisdom and Government (p. 175). The establishing political legitimacy on the jurisprudential rule of ownership and the issue of choice based on the jurisprudential rule of representation, and finally specifying the place of religion and jurisprudence in the politics and planning of society have been reviewed. (p. 175) | ||
| Line 114: | Line 114: | ||
== Criticism and evaluation of the book == | == Criticism and evaluation of the book == | ||
After its publication, the book Theories of State in Shiite Jurisprudence was criticized and evaluated by some political jurisprudence researchers, including | After its publication, the book Theories of State in Shiite Jurisprudence was criticized and evaluated by some political jurisprudence researchers, including [[Sayyid Sadeq Haghighat]]. According to him, the prominent feature of the book is that for the first time, it has comprehensively classified the theories of Shiite political jurisprudence. Moreover, by distinguishing between the principles, foundations, and interpretations, it has made possible a precise understanding of the theories, and it has shown well that there is only one reading in Shiite jurisprudence. <ref>Haqiqat, "Examination and criticism of state theories in Shiite jurisprudence", p. 181.</ref>. Of course, according to him, this book collects the theories of sovereignty or the foundations of legitimacy, not the state theories. <ref>Haqiqat, "Examination and criticism of the state theories in Shiite jurisprudence", p. 182.</ref>. Another point is that the book is neither analytical nor critical in the strict sense, but the level of this writing is description and classification. The other point is that the theories presented are in the field of political thought, not only in political jurisprudence.<ref>Haqiqat, "Examination and criticism of state theories in Shiite jurisprudence", p. 182.</ref>. The lack of comprehensiveness in collecting theories related to the state is another criticism that has been made to the book.<ref>Haqiqat, "Examination and criticism of state theories in Shiite jurisprudence", p. 183.</ref>. | ||
Hamze Ali Vahidimanesh, in his review of the book Theories of State in Shiite Jurisprudence, believes that this book ignored the common positions of the jurists on the issue of guardianship of the Islamic Jurist and tried to highlight the differences.<ref>Vahidimanesh, "Criticism on the book on state theories in Shiite jurisprudence", p. 180.</ref>. He did not take into account the works of theoreticians and studied only a part of the works that would satisfy his goals.<ref>Vahidimanesh, "Criticism on the book of State theories in Shiite jurisprudence", p. 210.</ref>. | Hamze Ali Vahidimanesh, in his review of the book Theories of State in Shiite Jurisprudence, believes that this book ignored the common positions of the jurists on the issue of guardianship of the Islamic Jurist and tried to highlight the differences.<ref>Vahidimanesh, "Criticism on the book on state theories in Shiite jurisprudence", p. 180.</ref>. He did not take into account the works of theoreticians and studied only a part of the works that would satisfy his goals.<ref>Vahidimanesh, "Criticism on the book of State theories in Shiite jurisprudence", p. 210.</ref>. | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
{{References}} | {{References}} | ||