نشریه حکومت اسلامی
سال بیست و یکم شماره 3 (پیاپی 81، پاییز 1395)

In the realm of politics, the issue of the legitimacy and appointment of a Muslim ruler is one of the most fundamental challenging issue between the ShiÝi political thought and the western thought. Belief in the divine appointment of a Muslim ruler can make dramatic changes in the fiqhi (jurisprudential) statements in the realm of politics. In this article, the writer tries to make a contrastive analysis of various views of the issue in question and explain what important consequences may follow from this in the political thought. The necessity of political revolution and the establishment of government, the obligation of the appointment of someone as a ruler and the duty of people in following and assisting him, the illegal acts of opposition to the appointed ruler and the acceptance of the authority of infidels, delegation of all powers and authorities to a Muslim ruler and illegitimacy of any intervention in social affairs without his permission, the necessity of basing all governmental policies on the Islamic laws, the duty of Islamic government to make plans and legislate laws for the sake of the spiritual guidance of society and, last but not least, determining the position of ‘allegiance’ and ‘ national poll’ can be said to be the consequences of this view in the political thought of Islam. The way in which these statements have relations with the ‘idea of appointing a Muslim ruler’ has also been explained in the article.

The verse 33 of al-Ma’idah in the Holy Qur’an is considered to be one of the most important verses that deals with a certain criminal act, muÎÁribah. This verse describes in detail the judgement against those who wage war against Allah and His Apostle. Numerous questions have been raised as to the meaning of the term ‘muhÁrib’ and a person or persons to which the term can be applied. In answering the above question, there have been serious disagreements among the Twelver ShiÝi scholars in the two realms of economic and social security. The present research seeks to examine the differences of opinion among the early and late faqihs and Qur’anic exegetes, trying to make clear the root meaning of the word muhÁribah, the occasion of revelation of the verse in which the mentioned term finds its expression and the traditions received from the Ahl al-bayt (the Prophet Muhammad’s progeny) which serve as interpretations of the verse in question. Basing the arguments on ample evidence in this regard, the article comes to this conclusion that the term ‘muharibah’ ,as used in the verse, can be taken to mean ‘endangering the security of the Muslim society with the intention of taking possessions of the things belonging to others’. This definition, in addition to being in line with the ‘occasion of revelation’ of the verse, is consistent with the root meaning of war or ‘Îarb’, and the interpretations offered based on the views of the infallible Imams.

Islam have issued different verdicts regarding the relations between Muslims and non-Muslims. On the one hand, Islam has not permitted infidels and polytheists to have power and authority (dominance) over any Muslim individuals, and considered benevolence and good conduct towards non-Muslims who do not wish to go to war against Muslims as something ideal on the other. Nevertheless, it urges Muslims to go to holy war against those enemies who violate any agreements and treaties, asking them not to show any respect to their agreements and treaties anymore thereof, and to declare repudiation to them. This declaration of repudiation to polytheists as well as the holy war (jihÁd) is one of the Divine Commandments that is recounted as one of the principles of the Islamic government’s foreign policy. The fact is that the issue of the declaration of repudiation to the infidels and enemies of Islam is the one which has been neglected in the history of Islam, but it was revived when the Islamic Revolution gained victory especially with respect to the approach Imam Khomeini developed towards it. This verdict is supported strongly by numerous jurisprudential arguments based on the Qur’anic verses of which one can refer to the ones purporting to suggest repudiating polytheists, staying clear of the worship of the Rebel, the necessity of preparing against the enemies of Allah, arousing their anger, and raising petition. The concept of polytheism, and the idea of treating a polytheistic system of government as the one which rises against or opposes Islam are among the issues which have escaped notice and which the present article seeks to explain; for repudiating polytheists is often interpreted from a narrow view of repudiating personal and creedal polytheism and the duty of the Islamic government is overshadowed in this regard.

The relation between man and God and, therefore, the relation between man and the society in which he lives is the most important human relation which constitutes a large portion of his beliefs, conducts and functions during his life. The Prophetic society or the last religious and social paradigm of humanity has taken form under the direct guidance of God and has passed through four stages of development according to the verse 29 in Sura al-FatÎ,: [ Like a tillage] sending out shoots, being built up, growing stout and settling on their stalks. Given the fact the guidance and training of human beings as well as building models for a Prophetic society are the main aims perused by the Holy Qur’Án, the Holy Qur’Án has provided people with certain guidelines to form such a society and paved the way for its progress and passed it safely through perilous roads by timely diagnosis of problematic situations. In the meantime, Sura al-Baqarah as the first Medinan Sura, in a period of strengthening the Prophetic society, has played its role in the third stage of growing stout. Considering the particular circumstance surrounding the Prophet Muhammad’s arrival in Medina, the official formation of society, and the drawing up of divine laws are determined by the revelation of the Sura al-Baqarah. In this Sura, the great emphasis is placed on the believers’ faithful adherence to the divine covenants while mentioning certain instances of violations of covenants and agreements in earlier times. The integrity and strength of the newly-established religious society and the believers’ successful efforts in improving social relations on the one hand and the non-existence of violations of communal agreements and breach of contracts as a social pathology or the most important harm inflicted on the Prophetic society in the third period of its formation is taken to be conditioned on the extent to which the individuals in that society adhered to the divine covenant.

Mutual rights and responsibilities of the people and the government in classical political philosophy is formulated on the basis of natural rights. Modern political philosophy does not believe that there are such natural rights and takes social contract to be the foundation of citizenship. The contextualism existing in this view constitutes a relationship between citizenship and nationalism. Islamic political philosophy does not believe in naturalism and considers social contract to be insufficient in organizing the mutual rights and duties of the government and the people. Citizenship in the Islamic political thought has its roots in virtue which seeks to attain the truth and displays commitment to it. Utopia or the ideal city is a city where virtue is being sought through perusing the truth and making commitments to it as well as promoting the welfare of all citizens.

Making changes in the world is one of the chief desires of the modern man. This cannot be achieved unless one has an interpretation of the world, the man who lives in it, and the relevant facts. Even the organization of human life cannot be made possible without that interpretation. It means that every substantial change based on practical philosophy in such realms as morality, domestic economy (household management), and politics is linked to the theoretical conceptions in relation to theoretical philosophy. MullÁ ÑadrÁ’s theory of the trans-substantial motion in the Transcendent Philosophy is concerned with a particular conception or interpretation of change which takes the world and man as two immutable (constant) entities, thereby leading one to make various educational and political inferences about it. Having explained the inferences at issue, the present article seeks to explore the capacity of the theory of the trans-substantial motion in the Transcendent Philosophy to formulate transcendent political philosophy of certain kind.

Discussions on the way in which someone is appointed as a ruler has been one of the challenging discussions among Muslim scholars. Various schools and denominations have thought of and prescribed different way or ways due to their acceptance of orthodox or unorthodox principles and fundamentals. One theory which is widely supported by the Sunni scholars is the theory of ‘election’ according to which the appointment of a ruler is considered to be the people’s right, and their right to vote and election their own ruler is deemed very crucial. In this research work, the researcher seeks to scrutinize the argumentation offered by Muhammad ÝAmmÁreh, distinguished neo-MuÝtazilite scholar, and his reliance on the words of Amir al-Mu’menin Ali (may Allah’s peace be upon him) to establish his claim. The writer holds the view that what Muhammad ÝAmmÁrah brings as evidence based on these reports and ascribe them to the Imam to establish the theory of ‘election and allegiance’ is incomplete, or rather, insufficient.