State theories in Shiite jurisprudence (book): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
== Formation of political theory in Shiite jurisprudence == | == Formation of political theory in Shiite jurisprudence == | ||
The author believes that from the 4th century to the 10th century, apart from brief references to state issues, no political theory was provided by Shiite jurists. The jurists in the Safavid and Qajar eras, with the works of jurists such as Mohaqeq Karaki and Mullah Ahmad Naraqi, the signs of the formation of political theories in Shiite jurisprudence were gradually revealed (pp. 14-18). According to him, in this period, we are witnessing the development of the appointment [[Theory of guardianship of the Islamic Jurist|theory of guardianship of the Islamic Jurist]] alongside the elective guardianship of the Islamic Jurist in probate matters and the authority of the Muslims of having splendor in conversion customs (19). | The author believes that from the 4th century to the 10th century, apart from brief references to state issues, no political theory was provided by Shiite jurists. The jurists in the Safavid and Qajar eras, with the works of jurists such as Mohaqeq Karaki and Mullah Ahmad Naraqi, the signs of the formation of political theories in Shiite jurisprudence were gradually revealed (pp. 14-18). According to him, in this period, we are witnessing the development of the appointment [[Theory of guardianship of the Islamic Jurist|theory of guardianship of the Islamic Jurist]] alongside the elective guardianship of the Islamic Jurist in probate matters and the authority of the Muslims of having splendor in conversion customs (19). | ||
The encounter of Shiite jurists with concepts_ such as [[People's rights|people's rights]], [[Freedom|freedom]], justice, separation of powers, [[Law|law]], [[Equality|equality]] and [[Tyranny|tyranny]] in the constitutional era, and from the author's point of view _made us aware of two different jurisprudential approaches. One approach emphasized on the previous course and the dual theory of the appointment of jurists and the authority of Muslims with the title of legitimate state, and on the other hand, the reformist approach presented the theory of the constitutional state, following the compatibility of the two categories of tradition and modernity (pp. 19-21). The code of Shiite political thought during the period of the Islamic Republic moved towards the formation of the state with the thoughts of [[Imam Khomeini]] and the founders of the Islamic Republic. This course has been introduced by the author as the most fruitful stages of political jurisprudence in terms of theory and practice. (pp. 21-28) | The encounter of Shiite jurists with concepts_ such as [[People's rights|people's rights]], [[Freedom|freedom]], justice, separation of powers, [[Law|law]], [[Equality|equality]] and [[Tyranny|tyranny]] in the constitutional era, and from the author's point of view _made us aware of two different jurisprudential approaches. One approach emphasized on the previous course and the dual theory of the appointment of jurists and the authority of Muslims with the title of legitimate state, and on the other hand, the reformist approach presented the theory of the constitutional state, following the compatibility of the two categories of tradition and modernity (pp. 19-21). The code of Shiite political thought during the period of the Islamic Republic moved towards the formation of the state with the thoughts of [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini|Imam Khomeini]] and the founders of the Islamic Republic. This course has been introduced by the author as the most fruitful stages of political jurisprudence in terms of theory and practice. (pp. 21-28) | ||
== Appointment theories == | == Appointment theories == | ||
After the introduction, the author introduced nine extractive opinions. He has included four theories of [[Legitimate monarchy|legitimate monarchy]], [[The public appointment of jurists|the public appointment of jurists]], [[The public appointment of the Council of religious authorities|the public appointment of the Council of religious authorities]] and [[The absolute appointment of jurists|the absolute appointment of jurists]] under the theories of appointment. Under each theory, he examines the principles, foundations and interpretations of each of these issues. | After the introduction, the author introduced nine extractive opinions. He has included four theories of [[Legitimate monarchy|legitimate monarchy]], [[The public appointment of jurists|the public appointment of jurists]], [[The public appointment of the Council of religious authorities|the public appointment of the Council of religious authorities]] and [[The absolute appointment of jurists|the absolute appointment of jurists]] under the theories of appointment. Under each theory, he examines the principles, foundations and interpretations of each of these issues. | ||
| Line 70: | Line 71: | ||
=== The difference of appointment theories === | === The difference of appointment theories === | ||
According to the author, in addition to having commonalities in the foundations and principles, the theories of appointment also have some specific features for themselves. Among other things, in the theory of the appointment of public jurists, the ruler has no authority beyond the Sharia rulings. Accordingly, the ruler is not bound by the probate affairs and the primary and secondary recommendations of God and the laws of human affairs. On the other hand, this velayat is bound by the interest of the Islamic society, public affairs, state and politics. (pp. 107-108). This is a new theory which represents jurisprudence, some of its features include paying attention to the expedients of the state and society in jurisprudence, paying attention to the role of time and place in ijtihad and the ability to solve the political, and, finally, economic and cultural problems of society. (p. 109) | According to the author, in addition to having commonalities in the foundations and principles, the theories of appointment also have some specific features for themselves. Among other things, in the theory of the appointment of public jurists, the ruler has no authority beyond the Sharia rulings. Accordingly, the ruler is not bound by the probate affairs and the primary and secondary recommendations of God and the laws of human affairs. On the other hand, this velayat is bound by the interest of the Islamic society, public affairs, state and politics. (pp. 107-108). This is a new theory which represents jurisprudence, some of its features include paying attention to the expedients of the state and society in jurisprudence, paying attention to the role of time and place in ijtihad and the ability to solve the political, and, finally, economic and cultural problems of society. (p. 109) | ||
The difference between the theory of public appointing authority of the Council of religious authority and the two theories of public appointing authority of the jurists and absolute authority is that instead of one person at the top of the pyramid of power, a council of authorities takes over the affairs of the nation (p. 97). Meanwhile, according to the previous two theories, if a righteous jurist exercises guardianship, no more jurists are allowed to exercise guardianship (p. 88. So, the guardian of the matter is determined from among the righteous jurists who have the current guardianship (p. 89). | The difference between the theory of public appointing authority of the Council of religious authority and the two theories of public appointing authority of the jurists and absolute authority is that instead of one person at the top of the pyramid of power, a council of authorities takes over the affairs of the nation (p. 97). Meanwhile, according to the previous two theories, if a righteous jurist exercises guardianship, no more jurists are allowed to exercise guardianship (p. 88. So, the guardian of the matter is determined from among the righteous jurists who have the current guardianship (p. 89). | ||
=== Functional duality in the theory of legitimate monarchy === | === Functional duality in the theory of legitimate monarchy === | ||
| Line 77: | Line 79: | ||
=== Limitation of power under the theory of constitutional state === | === Limitation of power under the theory of constitutional state === | ||
Kadivar considers the theory of constitutional state with the permission and supervision of jurists with its two readings (legitimate and constitutional) to be the fruit of the constitutional revolution and in response to the questions and demands raised at that time (pp. 112-115). The most prominent feature is restricting the power by the constitution and the separation of powers (p. 112). According to him, These two interpretations according to the constitutional state have the commonalities and differences. Both of them acknowledge the maintaining the principles of religion, Islamic splendor, observance of justice, consultation and performing the state in the occultation era. However, they differ in the way of managing public affairs during absence, the relationship between law and legislation and the perception of equality and freedom. (p. 118-117) | Kadivar considers the theory of constitutional state with the permission and supervision of jurists with its two readings (legitimate and constitutional) to be the fruit of the constitutional revolution and in response to the questions and demands raised at that time (pp. 112-115). The most prominent feature is restricting the power by the constitution and the separation of powers (p. 112). According to him, These two interpretations according to the constitutional state have the commonalities and differences. Both of them acknowledge the maintaining the principles of religion, Islamic splendor, observance of justice, consultation and performing the state in the occultation era. However, they differ in the way of managing public affairs during absence, the relationship between law and legislation and the perception of equality and freedom. (p. 118-117) | ||
The author summarizes the principles of this theory based on the opinions of Mirza Naeeni as follows: (a) taking the foundations of the constitutional state from the book of God and Sunnah; (b) maintaining internal systems and protection from foreign interference by the constitutional state; (c) managing accounting affairs by competent authorities with the permission of jurists; (d) drafting a constitution; (e) monitoring the performance of the state by the parliament; (f) taking charge of unwritten affairs in consultation with the people's intellectuals; and (g) observing equality and freedom (p. 119-121). | The author summarizes the principles of this theory based on the opinions of Mirza Naeeni as follows: (a) taking the foundations of the constitutional state from the book of God and Sunnah; (b) maintaining internal systems and protection from foreign interference by the constitutional state; (c) managing accounting affairs by competent authorities with the permission of jurists; (d) drafting a constitution; (e) monitoring the performance of the state by the parliament; (f) taking charge of unwritten affairs in consultation with the people's intellectuals; and (g) observing equality and freedom (p. 119-121). | ||
=== People's guardianship over each other in the theory of people's caliphate with the supervision of authority === | === People's guardianship over each other in the theory of people's caliphate with the supervision of authority === | ||
| Line 82: | Line 85: | ||
=== The possibility of benefiting from human experiences in the theory of the selective guardianship of constrained jurist === | === The possibility of benefiting from human experiences in the theory of the selective guardianship of constrained jurist === | ||
The author of the book considers the theory of the selective guardianship of the jurist as the first attempt of the jurists of the Qom seminary regarding the state based on divine-popular legitimacy and is a combination of the traditional theory of the authority of the jurist and national sovereignty. (p. 141). In Derasat fi Velayat al-Faqih by Hossein Ali Montazeri the following issues have been discussed: (a) the jurisprudence of the Islamic ruler; (b) electing the ruler by the people; and (c) restricting the powers of the ruler to the constitution. (pp. 148-149) | The author of the book considers the theory of the selective guardianship of the jurist as the first attempt of the jurists of the Qom seminary regarding the state based on divine-popular legitimacy and is a combination of the traditional theory of the authority of the jurist and national sovereignty. (p. 141). In Derasat fi Velayat al-Faqih by Hossein Ali Montazeri the following issues have been discussed: (a) the jurisprudence of the Islamic ruler; (b) electing the ruler by the people; and (c) restricting the powers of the ruler to the constitution. (pp. 148-149) | ||
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 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 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 authority of jurists in the theory of Islamic elected state === | === Restricting the authority of jurists in the theory of Islamic elected state === | ||
| Line 89: | Line 93: | ||
== 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 Seyyed Sadeq Haqiqat. 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>. | After its publication, the book Theories of State in Shiite Jurisprudence was criticized and evaluated by some political jurisprudence researchers, including Seyyed Sadeq Haqiqat. 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 == | ||