نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری تخصصی گروه فقه و مبانی حقوق، واحد مشهد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، مشهد، ایران
2 استادیار گروه فقه و مبانی حقوق، واحد مشهد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، مشهد، ایران
3 دانشیار گروه فقه و مبانی حقوق، واحد مشهد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، مشهد، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The topic of governance, leadership, and successorship can be reviewed through different aspects. As this topic is under the Divine attributes and actions, it can be a theological discussion, and by its jurisprudential aspect and obligation of accepting the guardianship of the jurist by the people, it falls within the category of jurisprudence. Therefore the topic of “Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist” is among the most fundamental theological and jurisprudential topics of the Imāmiyya during the time of Occultation, in which there has never been a conflict in accepting it among the scholars. Although the difference of opinion comes to play in regards to the level of authority and examples that will be considered for the Jurist. Among the Imāmiyya scholars, Sheikh Ansari has allowed three positions for the Jurist: Fatwa, Judgment, and Governance. However in regards to the topic of governance, he limits the boundary of the Jurist. In contrary to this view, other scholars such as Ayatullah Borujerdi, have considered a larger scope of authority for the Jurist to a point that they have even assigned him the management of society’s affairs. They believe in the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist during the Occultation time and say that if the circumstances are right, formation of an Islamic Government will become the right of the jurists. This research has reviewed both views comparatively with respect to jurisprudential and theological aspects using a descriptive-analytical approach, and has talked about the reasons of dispute among them while explaining the vastness of similarities.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)