Jurisprudence and Government (book)

Line 110:

===Jurisprudential Investigation of Baghy (rebels) and its Relationship with Civil Disobedience===

In this article, Mahdi Pourhossein has first stated two meanings of [[Baghi|Baghy]] (rebels) in the words of jurists. According to jurists including [[Shaykh Tusi|Sheikh Tousi]], [[Ibn Idris al-Hilli|Ibn Idris]] and [[Allamah al-Hilli|Allameh Helli]], a rebel is someone who revolts against the government. According to ~~[[Allamah al-Hilli|~~Allameh Helli]], the [[Zayn al-Din al-Juba'i al'Amili|Shahid Sani]] and the writer of [[Jawaher al-Kalam|Jawaher Al-Kalam]], "departing from obedience to the Imam" means a rebel, and thus [[civil disobedience]] to the view of these three jurists is a rebellion, because [[civil disobedience]] is the same as leaving the Imam's obedience. (p. 193).

In this article, Mahdi Pourhossein has first stated two meanings of [[Baghi|Baghy]] (rebels) in the words of jurists. According to jurists including [[Shaykh Tusi|Sheikh Tousi]], [[Ibn Idris al-Hilli|Ibn Idris]] and [[Allamah al-Hilli|Allameh Helli]], a rebel is someone who revolts against the government. According to Allameh Helli, the [[Zayn al-Din al-Juba'i al'Amili|Shahid Sani]] and the writer of [[Jawaher al-Kalam|Jawaher Al-Kalam]], "departing from obedience to the Imam" means a rebel, and thus [[civil disobedience]] to the view of these three jurists is a rebellion, because [[civil disobedience]] is the same as leaving the Imam's obedience. (p. 193).

However, Pourhossein has clarified that even the jurists who consider [[civil disobedience]] as rebellion have set three conditions for it:

# Rebels must have a numerical plurality (according to this, [[Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam|Abd al-Rahman bin Muljam]] is not a rebel).

Line 118:

==The Place of the People in the Islamic Government==

Three of the lectures mentioned in the book are about the place of the people, the majority and their votes in the [[Islamic government]], which were presented by [[Kazem Qazizadeh]], Abdullah Hajisadeqi and Mohsen Ghoravyan.

Three of the lectures mentioned in the book are about the place of the people, the majority and their votes in the Islamic government, which were presented by Kazem Qazizadeh, Abdullah Hajisadeqi and Mohsen Ghoravyan.

===Discussing the Position of the Majority in the Legitimacy of the Islamic Government===

Abdullah Hajisadeqi believes that although the people do not have a role in the [[legitimacy]] of the [[Islamic government]], they do have a role in accepting, participating and monitoring it (p. 35). Additionally, if the society does not have a desire for a provincial system, it will not be possible to realize the [[guardianship of the jurist|velayat-e-faqih]] (p. 41). Also, according to Hajisadeqi, a non-[[faqih]] cannot be a ruler. (p. 42)

Abdullah Hajisadeqi believes that although the people do not have a role in the [[legitimacy]] of the Islamic government, they do have a role in accepting, participating and monitoring it (p. 35). Additionally, if the society does not have a desire for a provincial system, it will not be possible to realize the [[guardianship of the jurist|velayat-e-faqih]] (p. 41). Also, according to Hajisadeqi, a non-faqih cannot be a ruler. (p. 42)

[[Mohammad Javad Arasta]] emphasized that if the people do not accept the jurist Jame al-Sharaiti, whose accepted example is [[Umar ibn Hanzalah|Umar bin Hanzala]]: “For I have made him a ruler over you ", however, he called the people guilty of sin in this regard (p. 43). He has also expressed a question about the methods of securing acceptance, based on which, what percentage of people's acceptance is necessary for the validity of the [[Islamic government]]? Half plus one? two-thirds? Or is there another criterion? (p. 44) Aristotle is of the opinion that if the general acceptance is lost during the government, the continuation of the acts of guardianship will not be allowed. (p. 46).

[[Mohammad Javad Arasta]] emphasized that if the people do not accept the jurist Jame al-Sharaiti, whose accepted example is [[Umar ibn Hanzalah|Umar bin Hanzala]]: “For I have made him a ruler over you ", however, he called the people guilty of sin in this regard (p. 43). He has also expressed a question about the methods of securing acceptance, based on which, what percentage of people's acceptance is necessary for the validity of the Islamic government? Half plus one? two-thirds? Or is there another criterion? (p. 44) Aristotle is of the opinion that if the general acceptance is lost during the government, the continuation of the acts of guardianship will not be allowed. (p. 46).

===Discussing the Place of People's Vote in Islamic Government===

Line 129:

===The Place of People's Vote in Islamic Government===

[[Kazem Qazizadeh]] has stated with a historical perspective that the Shiites first considered all jurists to be authorized to act as guardians. Then, in order to solve the problem of conflict between jurists, [[Imam Khomeini]] believed in the velayat of the faqih, which according to Qazizadeh, is the first stage of the beginning of the theory of the [[guardianship of the jurist]]. After the formation of the [[Islamic government]] and the need to manage the society and the government, it led to the formation of the next stage in the theory of ~~[[guardianship of the jurist|~~velayat-e-faqih]], which is the ~~[[guardianship of the jurist|~~velayat-e-faqih]] of the most learned. He considered the next stages to be the appropriate jurisprudence, and after that, the elected jurisprudence, which is both correct and elected by the people. (pp. 90-91).

[[Kazem Qazizadeh]] has stated with a historical perspective that the Shiites first considered all jurists to be authorized to act as guardians. Then, in order to solve the problem of conflict between jurists, [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini|Imam Khomeini]] believed in the velayat of the faqih, which according to Qazizadeh, is the first stage of the beginning of the theory of the [[guardianship of the jurist]]. After the formation of the Islamic government and the need to manage the society and the government, it led to the formation of the next stage in the theory of velayat-e-faqih, which is the velayat-e-faqih of the most learned. He considered the next stages to be the appropriate jurisprudence, and after that, the elected jurisprudence, which is both correct and elected by the people. (pp. 90-91).

Qazizadeh then expressed three views about the position of people's vote:

Line 141:

===The Relationship between the Media and Government===

[[Mohammad Javad Fakhkhar Tousi]] first proposed different theories about the relationship between the media and government

Mohammad Javad Fakhkhar Tousi first proposed different theories about the relationship between the media and government

# The media under the supervision of the Muslim Leader: This theory was proposed in the book of [[Hossein-Ali Montazeri]]'s studies based on two reasons: First, the Governor is responsible for managing the society and , second, all institutions are tools of the Governor for managing the society. (pp. 315-316)

Line 148:

# National media and private media should be monitored, as well (p. 325). According to Fakhkhar Tousi, there is no fulfilment of the conditions of the prohibition of evil against the Muslim commander because the occurrence of negativity must be evident. Therefore, when we assume that someone has an excuse based on [[ijtihad]] or [[taqlid]], it is not permissible to prohibit negativity, and the Imam of Muslims has these conditions, and such a possibility is always given. Even if we are sure of the occurrence of negativity such a supposition leads to the fall of the Imam from the condition of command, it is not an example of [[enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil|enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong]]. (pp. 336-334)

Accordingly, he believes that the narrations indicating the permissibility of criticism refer to private criticism and the narrations regarding the sanctity of criticism refer to its public and public design. (p. 341) Fakhkhar Tousi also stated in response to a documented question about the life of ~~[[Imam Ali (AS)|~~Imam Ali (PBUH)]] in dealing with critics that we cannot necessarily follow the example of imams since maybe the Imam was in the position of teaching or had another direction. (p. 346)

Accordingly, he believes that the narrations indicating the permissibility of criticism refer to private criticism and the narrations regarding the sanctity of criticism refer to its public and public design. (p. 341) Fakhkhar Tousi also stated in response to a documented question about the life of Imam Ali (PBUH) in dealing with critics that we cannot necessarily follow the example of imams since maybe the Imam was in the position of teaching or had another direction. (p. 346)

==Footnotes==

@@ Line 110: / Line 110: @@
 ===Jurisprudential Investigation of Baghy (rebels) and its Relationship with Civil Disobedience===
-In this article, Mahdi Pourhossein has first stated two meanings of [[Baghi|Baghy]] (rebels) in the words of jurists. According to jurists including [[Shaykh Tusi|Sheikh Tousi]], [[Ibn Idris al-Hilli|Ibn Idris]] and [[Allamah al-Hilli|Allameh Helli]], a rebel is someone who revolts against the government. According to [[Allamah al-Hilli|Allameh Helli]], the [[Zayn al-Din al-Juba'i al'Amili|Shahid Sani]] and the writer of [[Jawaher al-Kalam|Jawaher Al-Kalam]], "departing from obedience to the Imam" means a rebel, and thus [[civil disobedience]] to the view of these three jurists is a rebellion, because [[civil disobedience]] is the same as leaving the Imam's obedience. (p. 193).
+In this article, Mahdi Pourhossein has first stated two meanings of [[Baghi|Baghy]] (rebels) in the words of jurists. According to jurists including [[Shaykh Tusi|Sheikh Tousi]], [[Ibn Idris al-Hilli|Ibn Idris]] and [[Allamah al-Hilli|Allameh Helli]], a rebel is someone who revolts against the government. According to Allameh Helli, the [[Zayn al-Din al-Juba'i al'Amili|Shahid Sani]] and the writer of [[Jawaher al-Kalam|Jawaher Al-Kalam]], "departing from obedience to the Imam" means a rebel, and thus [[civil disobedience]] to the view of these three jurists is a rebellion, because [[civil disobedience]] is the same as leaving the Imam's obedience. (p. 193).
 However, Pourhossein has clarified that even the jurists who consider [[civil disobedience]] as rebellion have set three conditions for it:
 # Rebels must have a numerical plurality (according to this, [[Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam|Abd al-Rahman bin Muljam]] is not a rebel).
@@ Line 118: / Line 118: @@
 ==The Place of the People in the Islamic Government==
-Three of the lectures mentioned in the book are about the place of the people, the majority and their votes in the [[Islamic government]], which were presented by [[Kazem Qazizadeh]], Abdullah Hajisadeqi and Mohsen Ghoravyan.
+Three of the lectures mentioned in the book are about the place of the people, the majority and their votes in the Islamic government, which were presented by Kazem Qazizadeh, Abdullah Hajisadeqi and Mohsen Ghoravyan.
 ===Discussing the Position of the Majority in the Legitimacy of the Islamic Government===
-Abdullah Hajisadeqi believes that although the people do not have a role in the [[legitimacy]] of the [[Islamic government]], they do have a role in accepting, participating and monitoring it (p. 35). Additionally, if the society does not have a desire for a provincial system, it will not be possible to realize the [[guardianship of the jurist|velayat-e-faqih]] (p. 41). Also, according to Hajisadeqi, a non-[[faqih]] cannot be a ruler. (p. 42)
+Abdullah Hajisadeqi believes that although the people do not have a role in the [[legitimacy]] of the Islamic government, they do have a role in accepting, participating and monitoring it (p. 35). Additionally, if the society does not have a desire for a provincial system, it will not be possible to realize the [[guardianship of the jurist|velayat-e-faqih]] (p. 41). Also, according to Hajisadeqi, a non-faqih cannot be a ruler. (p. 42)
-[[Mohammad Javad Arasta]] emphasized that if the people do not accept the jurist Jame al-Sharaiti, whose accepted example is [[Umar ibn Hanzalah|Umar bin Hanzala]]: “For I have made him a ruler over you ", however, he called the people guilty of sin in this regard (p. 43). He has also expressed a question about the methods of securing acceptance, based on which, what percentage of people's acceptance is necessary for the validity of the [[Islamic government]]? Half plus one? two-thirds? Or is there another criterion? (p. 44) Aristotle is of the opinion that if the general acceptance is lost during the government, the continuation of the acts of guardianship will not be allowed. (p. 46).
+[[Mohammad Javad Arasta]] emphasized that if the people do not accept the jurist Jame al-Sharaiti, whose accepted example is [[Umar ibn Hanzalah|Umar bin Hanzala]]: “For I have made him a ruler over you ", however, he called the people guilty of sin in this regard (p. 43). He has also expressed a question about the methods of securing acceptance, based on which, what percentage of people's acceptance is necessary for the validity of the Islamic government? Half plus one? two-thirds? Or is there another criterion? (p. 44) Aristotle is of the opinion that if the general acceptance is lost during the government, the continuation of the acts of guardianship will not be allowed. (p. 46).
 ===Discussing the Place of People's Vote in Islamic Government===
@@ Line 129: / Line 129: @@
 ===The Place of People's Vote in Islamic Government===
-[[Kazem Qazizadeh]] has stated with a historical perspective that the Shiites first considered all jurists to be authorized to act as guardians. Then, in order to solve the problem of conflict between jurists, [[Imam Khomeini]] believed in the velayat of the faqih, which according to Qazizadeh, is the first stage of the beginning of the theory of the [[guardianship of the jurist]]. After the formation of the [[Islamic government]] and the need to manage the society and the government, it led to the formation of the next stage in the theory of [[guardianship of the jurist|velayat-e-faqih]], which is the [[guardianship of the jurist|velayat-e-faqih]] of the most learned. He considered the next stages to be the appropriate jurisprudence, and after that, the elected jurisprudence, which is both correct and elected by the people. (pp. 90-91).
+[[Kazem Qazizadeh]] has stated with a historical perspective that the Shiites first considered all jurists to be authorized to act as guardians. Then, in order to solve the problem of conflict between jurists, [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini|Imam Khomeini]] believed in the velayat of the faqih, which according to Qazizadeh, is the first stage of the beginning of the theory of the [[guardianship of the jurist]]. After the formation of the Islamic government and the need to manage the society and the government, it led to the formation of the next stage in the theory of velayat-e-faqih, which is the velayat-e-faqih of the most learned. He considered the next stages to be the appropriate jurisprudence, and after that, the elected jurisprudence, which is both correct and elected by the people. (pp. 90-91).
 Qazizadeh then expressed three views about the position of people's vote:
 {{column|2}}
@@ Line 141: / Line 141: @@
 ===The Relationship between the Media and Government===
-[[Mohammad Javad Fakhkhar Tousi]] first proposed different theories about the relationship between the media and government
+Mohammad Javad Fakhkhar Tousi first proposed different theories about the relationship between the media and government
 {{column|2}}
 # The media under the supervision of the Muslim Leader: This theory was proposed in the book of [[Hossein-Ali Montazeri]]'s studies based on two reasons: First, the Governor is responsible for managing the society and , second, all institutions are tools of the Governor for managing the society. (pp. 315-316)
@@ Line 148: / Line 148: @@
 # National media and private media should be monitored, as well (p. 325). According to Fakhkhar Tousi, there is no fulfilment of the conditions of the prohibition of evil against the Muslim commander because the occurrence of negativity must be evident. Therefore, when we assume that someone has an excuse based on [[ijtihad]] or [[taqlid]], it is not permissible to prohibit negativity, and the Imam of Muslims has these conditions, and such a possibility is always given. Even if we are sure of the occurrence of negativity such a supposition leads to the fall of the Imam from the condition of command, it is not an example of [[enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil|enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong]]. (pp. 336-334)
 {{end}}
-Accordingly, he believes that the narrations indicating the permissibility of criticism refer to private criticism and the narrations regarding the sanctity of criticism refer to its public and public design. (p. 341) Fakhkhar Tousi also stated in response to a documented question about the life of [[Imam Ali (AS)|Imam Ali (PBUH)]] in dealing with critics that we cannot necessarily follow the example of imams since maybe the Imam was in the position of teaching or had another direction. (p. 346)
+Accordingly, he believes that the narrations indicating the permissibility of criticism refer to private criticism and the narrations regarding the sanctity of criticism refer to its public and public design. (p. 341) Fakhkhar Tousi also stated in response to a documented question about the life of Imam Ali (PBUH) in dealing with critics that we cannot necessarily follow the example of imams since maybe the Imam was in the position of teaching or had another direction. (p. 346)
 ==Footnotes==

Jurisprudence and Government (book): Difference between revisions