نشریه حکومت اسلامی
سال بیست و هشتم شماره 1 (پیاپی 107، بهار 1402)

Behavioral secularism is the most important cause of economic corruption and the axis of creating oppression and social forms of injustic in the Islamic regime. In solving this problem, internal and external supervision in the form of measures such as drafting laws, putting into effect the supervision of the parliament and the establishment of judicial institutions and centers have always been taken into consideration. However, taking such measures are a fight against what we may call the ‘effect’ and thus not being essential. The present article deals with the question of the source of economic corruption of the governmental agents drawing upon the discretional and the descriptive-analytical method. It also considers the basic strategy to fundamentally confront this devastating corruption possible by re-reading the jurisprudence developed by the Ahl al-Bait. And from the perspective of governmental jurisprudence and of Imam Ali’s method of governance, it regards the prohibition of the economic activities of govrmental agents as a fundamental strategy for fighting against economic corruption, and, accordingly, he believes that the measures taken by the government to prevent its agents from financial activities, which naturally and usually lead to economic rent, and to create a gap between governmental positions and the economic activity of the agents are necessary.

Authority, capability, security and immunity are said to be the essential constituent elements which ensure the survival and continuity of the political system, whose creation and maintenance is dependent on various factors. Drawing upon a descriptive-analytical method, this research seeks to answer the question of what role ‘enjoining good and forbidding evil’ plays in providing power and security for a religious society. The findings of the research show that ‘enjoining good and forbidding evil’ forms one of the bases and foundations of the soft power of the political system in the Islamic society by playing a role in facing the threats of enemies against the cultural foundations of the Islamic society. Through the practice of ‘enjoining good and forbidding evil’, the Islamic society will be alive, alert, invulnerable, hopeful, ready to resist, ready to strike a blow, as a resistant living being; In the light of the strict and extensive implementation of what is good and what is forbidden in all aspects of human life, by making use of the proper methods, one can witness the purest kind of power and soft security and enjoy its countless benefits. Considering the effectiveness of the obligation of enjoining good and forbidding evil, if the religious society and the Islamic government want to remain safe and preserved from social, moral and cultural dangers and harms (which lead to the decline of civilizations), it should make plans to expand the culture of this obligation and try to institutionalize it in all aspects of society.

Has Mullā Ṣadrā, the author of the Transcendental Philosophy, made an effort to represent the authority of the religious scholars and explain its foundations and principles? This article has extracted its data by analyzing and examining Mullā Ṣadrā's books, coming to the realization that with some preliminary preparations, Mullā Ṣadrā identified the planning of a society as one of the responsibilities of theologians after the Imams: 1. vision of God, as the ultimate perfection of creation; 2. the monotheistic worldview is a prerequisite for achieving the ultimate goal; 3. human tendency towards collectivism; 4. the necessity of laws; 5. the revealed laws are the only providers of happiness; 6. angels are mediators between God and the prophets; 7. the need for prophets to receive and implement laws; 8. miracles, proof of the truthfulness of divine messengers; 9. infallible Imams are mediators between the Prophet and scholars; and 10. religious scholars (theologians) are mediators between Imams and people.Having stated the above subjects, Mullā Ṣadrā emphasized that during the time of the Imam's occultation, religious scholars are obliged to communicate to the people what they have received from reliable sources, and in addition to that, like the Prophet  and the infallible Imams, they are ordained to implement the ultimate motive of creation which is man’s achievement of eternal happiness. Undoubtedly, the execution and implementation of many decrees depends on the formation and  power of the government.

The complexity of the world of today makes it necessary to change the jurisprudential approach from an individual perspective to a systemic perspective. Shiʿa jurists have felt this necessity and sought to find a solution for it by making special studies and presenting ideas in this realm. Meanwhile, each of the theories of “jurisprudence of the system”, “guardianship jurisprudence” and “jurisprudence of guardianship system” have expressed a new approach. The third theory can show great efficiency due to its countless capacities. By referring to the author’s written and oral works and explaining each of the abovementioned forms of jurisprudence and explaining the textual (narrative) evidence, this research shows preference for the last form, i.e., the “jurisprudence of the guardianship system”  and specifies four chapter headings for it. One of them is the question of the nature of jurisprudence of the guardianship system. This sort of jurisprudence is divided into two parts: epistemic and objective.The first part, which is also called ideology, seeks to prove two types of general and specific principles and the way to reach them by applying rational and discretional (ijtihādi) methods, and the second part, which is called governance, is the process of policy making, making regulation and providing services. The epistemological field of governance also consists of four parts: the first is the philosophy of governance, the second is the governance jurisprudence, the third is the governance ethics , and the fourth is the science of governance.

Management, as a discipline in contemporary world, is one of the most important branches of human sciences with its own approach, goals and principles, which has undergone an evolutionary course over two centuries. After the Islamic revolution gained victory in Iran, the issue of Islamic management received considerable attention. In Iran, there were different reactions to this category, among which one can refer to various types of denials and also the approach to Islamizing management, which was favored by many in practice. In the meantime, the late Ayatollāh Miṣbāh Yazdi presented a different theory, which was the result of combining inferences from various sources such as the Qur’ān and traditions by means of philosophical methods and careful deliberation on the evolution and fundamental changes in the attitude towards man during the post-Renaissance centuries. One of the most fundamental features of Ayatollāh Miṣbah’s point of view is his attention to the non-organizational aspects of a person in his material and non-material life. The most important question in this regard was that what prerequisites should be achieved in order to realize the management model considered by Ayatollāh Miṣbāh Yazdi? Drawing upon the comparative library research method, and by making references to the lectures delivered by Ayatollāh Miṣbāh Yazdi, in this article attempts have been made to extract  and represent the foundations and prerequisites for the realization of the ideal model of Islamic management from his perspective while briefly explaining the competing approaches.

In examining the desirability of a government headed by a group over the one which is run by one person, two main views can be obtained from Islamic thinkers. The first point of view (taken from al-Farabi) recommends the rule of a group of people who are collectively qualified, assuming that a fully competent (qualified) person is not easily accessible. The opposite point of view (taken from Āmiri) recommends the rule of a lower individual in the absence of a qualified person and warns against any rule by a group.The examination of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, before and after its revision in 1368, as well as the detailed review of the negotiations of the legislators, shows that the Constitutioal Council of the Assembly Experts, with an explanation close to al-Farābi's view, has prescribed a council leadership in the event of emergency and on the assumption that there would be no access to a qualified person, and the Council for Review of the Constitution has not considered the possibility of council leadership by demonstrating preference for arguments in favor of Āmeri's view. In this way, the lack of consideration of council leadership in the constitutional amendment process is not a theoretical change (development), but rather an accompaniment to the judgment that Islamic thinkers have made about a rule by a group from the past until now. The only difference was in the preference of one of the two famous views in 1358 and the preference of the other view in 1368; the two viewpoints that none of which recommends a rule by a group per se and jointly seek the rule of a “qualified person”.

One of the doubts that are widely levelled against the intellectual foundations of the Islamic government, especially the issue of the guardianship of the Muslim jurisconsult, is that the formation of the government during the Period of Occultation causes people to be pessimistic about Islam and such pessimism about Islam carries with it a massive corruption. Because in this period, due to the absence of Infallible Imam, with the establishment of a religious government, mistakes are made by government officials, and people tend to ascribe their mistakes to Islam and become pessimistic about Islam. In addition to the fact that the mentioned doubt does not correspond to any of the Four Proofs, it is also against the life-style of the Infallibles and some realities in the period when the Infallibles were present, and even run contrary to some rules of the principles of jurisprudence, for example, with the rule “المیسورلایسقط بالمعسور” which says “that which is easy should not be abandoned due to what is difficult”. The mentioned doubt has been analyzed and criticized based on the above evidence.