فقه سیاسی

The concept of mental reservation or turiyah, which has been regarded as one of the legal stratagems in numerous jurisprudential writings, does not occupy a specific position in politics, and it is unclear in which cases and instances this legal solution can be employed. Given the special importance of the political realm, the application of turiyyah therein is contingent upon the fulfilment of certain conditions that require profound jurisprudential scrutiny. For the application of turiyyah in both domestic and foreign policy, certain conditions must be met. The most significant of these are that the statement must have the potential for turiyyah and allow for an apparent interpretation, that the use of turiyyah in that specific instance should not be regarded as a lie according to common understanding, and that it should not undermine public trust. Furthermore, the use of turiyyah in politics should be for the sake of the public interest of the country’s citizens, rather than for personal gain. A review of the works of Shiʿa jurists and thinkers indicates that the use of turiyyah is discussed in times of necessity. Therefore, employing turiyyah in politics during non-emergency situations not only lacks justification but also damages public trust; in addition, a society centred around turiyyah is not considered desirable from an Islamic perspective, as the ideal community, according to the perspicuous religion of islam , is one based on honesty – honesty among people and honesty of officials with the public.

The jurisprudence of the objectives, which is opposed to the Akhbari jurisprudents and Sharia-oriented thinkers, is a school of jurisprudence that tries to explain the realization of the main objectives of the Sharia. This approach considers the use of modern thinking as one of the main methods of jurisprudence. Proponents of this school, who are mainly active among Sunnis, consider jurisprudence as merely a tool and consider the goals of jurisprudence (the general principles of Islam) more important. The main question of the current research is what are Shatabi's views on political issues as one of the objective thinkers? The research has been done by analytical and descriptive method and based on library study. The findings of the research show that according to Shatabi, the goal of Sharia is to fulfill the great interests of mankind. With this approach, Islam can preserve the Western democracy system and make this human experience more fruitful by transforming the Islamic principle of "council" as a moral instruction and general principles into a practical system for governance.

Muslim thinkers have proposed various criteria for Abode of Islam (Dār al-Islām). Given the importance of convergence in the Islamic world and the orientation of existing political systems towards union-based approaches, a comparative examination of this concept has gained new significance in order to achieve a shared discoursive reading. The main question of the research is: What is the concept of Dār al-Islām from the perspective of Shiʿa and Sunni thinkers, and how is it possible to reconcile the various and differing criteria they have offered in this regard? 
Drawing upon a descriptive-analytical method, along with a comparative approach and the use of library tools for data collection, this research first presents the views of prominent Shiʿa and Sunni thinkers who have discussed Dār al-Islām and goes on to offer a new interpretation of the concept of Dār al-Islām and considers the possibility of reconciling various criteria around a common axis.

Kāshif al-Ghitāʾ is among the Muslim jurisconsults who have established and elaborated on political rules within his jurisprudential system. Given the fact that he presented the valuable book Kashf al-Ghitāʾ, which contains many political rules, to the Qajar king, he played a significant role in the expansion of governmental jurisprudence and the application of jurisprudential rules to emerging political phenomena. The act of presenting the book Kashf al- Ghitāʾ to the Qajar king carries the essential point that this book and the rules it contains served as guidance for governance, enabling the ruler to act in various governmental arenas, including political decision-making, legislation, and detailed policies based on it. The most important political rules from Kāshif al-Ghitaʾ's perspective include the negation of domination on the faithful by the infidels  [referring to the Quranic verse (4:141): “...and Allah will never provide the faithless any way [to prevail] over the faithful.”], justice, benevolence, legitimate defense, the prohibition of assisting in oppression, and the absence of guardianship. These rules can be processed in Kāshif al-Ghitāʾ’s jurisprudence through the following propositions: the dignity and honor of Muslims is an absolute principle; adherence to contracts, including peace treaties, is obligatory for the Islamic state. Considering human dignity and their equality in creation, no one has the right to dominate another; however, permission from the legislator is the only exception to this principle. Justice, in its social and political context, is a fundamental principle, and guardianship and leadership during the Major Occultation Era belong to the just Imam, and the hands of oppressors are cut off from this esteemed position. If people are deprived from the direct authority of a just jurisconsult, his appointee has legitimacy, but the legitimacy of a government authorized by a jurist is contingent.

Identity, as that with which individuals and societies are known, has consistently been one of the most significant issues in social studies. The construction of identity arises from a complex set of perceptual, value-based, and behavioral components that interact in a meaningful and coordinated way. Within societies, various identity-forming elements exist, notably the prominent role of knowledge, values, and norms within each society. In Islamic society, religion functions as the primary social factor in defining individual and collective identity. Political jurisprudence, as Islam’s practical framework in the socio-political sphere, embodies the actions and principles guiding individuals, groups, and political structures. Through the articulation of principles and guidelines for religious conduct and citizens' way of life, it shapes the behavior, speech, and even thought of individuals and society, endowing them with a distinctive and distinguished identity. The aim of this article is to examine the role of political jurisprudence in shaping the identity of Islamic society, especially following the Islamic Revolution in Iran. This study seeks to answer the question: What are the fundamental functions of political jurisprudence in constructing the identity of Islamic society? Through the methodology of ijtihad, as well as the description and analysis of relevant data, the hypothesis emphasizes that one of the most critical identity-related functions of political jurisprudence is to elevate wilāya (guardianship or authority) as a unifying and central element within Islamic society. Other identity-related functions, including responsibility, the establishment of divine ordinances, opposition to oppression and tyranny, enforcement of divine law, the creation of a justice-oriented society, and attention to the affairs of Muslims, derive their significance from wilāya. This collective of jurisprudential functions, rooted in the foundation of wilāya, has crafted a unique identity for post-revolutionary Iranian society, establishing clear boundaries with other societies and ideologies.

Undoubtedly, jurisprudence is one of the main cultural and intellectual foundations of Islamic Iran, which has been present and effective in this civilization since the beginning of time. But this constant element is not constant and has experienced its own changes with the change of periods and the necessity of conditions. In this regard, although Shia jurisprudence was developed from fixed foundations and principles, it has undergone significant changes since its emergence until today, especially after the victory of the Islamic Revolution. In order to understand some of these developments, this research focuses its main question on what major changes have occurred in Shia political jurisprudence from the Safavid era to today. The hypothesis of the research is that since political jurisprudence is the reflection of jurisprudence on the political matter, it has always been in relations with power. Therefore, the form and pattern of the relationship with power can be a suitable criterion for examining its major developments. The findings of the research have shown that the Shia political jurisprudence in the previous Safavid period had withdrawn from interfering in the government; During the Safavid and Qajar eras, the jurists brought Shiite political jurisprudence out of isolation by legitimizing the government and holding some government institutions. During the Qajar and Pahlavi eras, by creating political movements and participating in official institutions, they demanded a greater role in political decision-making; And then, in the process of the formation of the Islamic Revolution, and later in the period of its establishment and stabilization, they engaged in politics. The approach of descriptive-historical research, and the method of data collection was library and documentary.

Populism is an ideology or a political strategy in which the opinion of the general public is preferred over all mechanisms of the society, which is fundamentally different from the concept of democracy and populism advocated by Islam. The spread of populist policies in a wrong way in many societies has caused people to easily forgo their long-term interests for short-term gains, and if their demands are not met, mistrust of the government and the system itself is created. Descriptive-analytical method has been employed in this research. The main questions of this article are: What are the approaches of political jurisprudential theories to populism? Can the rulers and statesmen of a religious government turn to populist policies from the viewpoint of political jurisprudence? The findings of the research show that populism, whose main characteristics are relying on the ignorance of the masses of society, gaining support by resorting to general and vague promises, taking actions independent of institutions and parties, and demagoguery, is strictly prohibited by Islamic political jurisprudence. In addition to being prohibited in terms of duty, the people who follow these policies are also responsible for their acts and must compensate for the damages.

A reflection on the political thought of Grand Ayatollah Mohammad Ali ArakiAbstract :Considering the nature of Islam's religion , Islamic thinkers in general and especially Shi’a jurists have addressed the field of politics and more or less focused on the issues of " government " and " guardianship of the jurist ( Wilāyat al – Faqīh ) " in their discussions . The examination of the political views of Mohammad Ali Araki due to his very close relationship with Ayatollah Sheikh Abdul Karim Haeri , his long life of more than a century , and his witnessing of important events such as the establishment of the institution of religious teaching and guidance ( Ḥawza - ye ʿelmiya ) in Qom , the first and second Pahlavi eras , and the Islamic Revolution , is of special importance and helps to clarify the historical course of Shi’a political thoughts . This article is of the " descriptive – analytical " type , and in it , by relying on written sources and reliable websites to obtain information , the sources are described and analyzed , and the views and political positions of Ayatollah Araki are explained . By organizing the political issues raised by Ayatollah Araki along with the political positions , it is possible to achieve the structure of his political thinking and action , and in this regard , the purpose of the research is to show his cataphatic view of the field of politics , despite his narrow view of the scope of guardianship of the jurist ( Wilāyat al –Faqīh ) , and clarify the wrong thinking concerning the conflict between the two .

From the beginning of Islam until now, the foreign relations of the Islamic state have been the focus of religious leaders and Islamic jurists, and the inference of rulings on the foreign relations of Muslims with non-Muslims has been mentioned in their jurisprudence discussions. In the current era, with the victory of the revolution and the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran based on Shia jurisprudence, one of the challenges facing this government has always been and is the way and scope of establishing foreign relations with other governments in the new world order. Especially in cases where communication with some hostile governments is necessary. Now, the question of the current research is that based on the jurisprudential conclusions of contemporary jurists, especially the late Imam (RA), what is the position of the principle of expediency in establishing military relations with infidels (military and non-military) and enemies of religion? The hypothesis of the research is that based on the dynamic jurisprudence of the Imam (RA) and some other contemporary jurists, new inferences and new interpretations of jurisprudential sources can be presented that facilitate the decision-making and decision-making of the Islamic government in establishing relations with governments, even hostile governments. Shows Based on this, the present study analyzed the Shia jurisprudential sources and the opinions of contemporary jurists, especially the jurisprudential opinions of Hazrat Imam Khomeini (RA) using a descriptive-analytical research method. The result is that according to the jurisprudence opinions of Hazrat Imam (RA) in the definition of absolute jurisprudence and the principle of expediency, basically the rulings of foreign relations (including military relations with the enemy) are in the scope of government decisions and do not have a definite and fixed ruling, and considering the expediency of the country and People, you can even give a preliminary order to establish some special relations, such as military relations with hostile states.

Among the political crises that exist in the Islamic world, the lack of democracy and the desire for authoritarianism are at the top of them. Apart from the causes and sociological factors that they mention about it, it seems that the lack of analysis of its essence in the shadow of religious thought has become an additional cause. Democracy belongs to the West and its acceptance in the Islamic world requires its reconstruction on the basis of text. It is important that the structure should be removed from authoritarianism and the role of the people in political life should be increased, but what was neglected is dealing with the essence of democracy, i.e. political competition, without which democracy basically becomes meaningless. What gives democracy an identity and separates it from the structure of authoritarianism is political competition and not political participation; In an authoritarian system, participation may increase and the government with a high vote will remain in power, but it will still remain authoritarian. Since the 1920s, which is called the spring of welcoming democracy in the Islamic world, there have been many reflections on the various aspects of democracy from an Islamic perspective, but less attention has been paid to its essence, which is political competition. What is the position of religious thought regarding this concept? And which of the chapters of jurisprudence is able to regulate it within a political system? ( Issue ) . From the point of view of this article, the chapter on lessons learned can clarify the path of such a competition and explain its Islamic rules. (hypothesis). The methodology of this article is the common method of new jurisprudential subjects, which is based on the ijtihad of the seminary. (Methodology) This review shows that jurisprudence accepts political competition and assigns rules to it that can justify such competition. (findings)

One of the distinctive features of contemporary political jurisprudence is the detection of new concepts in the jurisprudence heritage and their re-evaluation according to current requirements. Allegiance is one of the basic concepts and the most important element in the contemporary Sunni political jurisprudence system, which according to them, has a special place due to its harmony with modern ideas, as well as evidence in Islamic texts, as well as public and elite acceptance. . By explaining the concept of allegiance to the democratic ruler, they referred it to the contract between the ruler and the people and presented two interpretations of representation and representation of the Ummah. The current research, using the method of content analysis with the approach of developmental research, while ignoring the historical background of the fulfillment of allegiance, aims to answer the question of how the conceptual capacity and potential of allegiance in enduring the democratic tendency can be evaluated and explained. ? The finding of the research is that in terms of analyzing the degree of resilience of this concept in relation to the democratic trend, some challenges and bottlenecks such as the validity of the pledge of allegiance, the incompatibility of this analysis with the Quranic application and also the ambiguity among the people of marriage and marriage, the number And there are conditions that come close to the attitude of elitism and elite domination.

One of the challenging issues after the Islamic revolution is the place of human knowledge and expertise in the administration of the Islamic system. Some consider jurisprudential management to be in contrast with scientific management, while others consider the consideration of society's interests and attention to human experience as the secularization of government. The purpose of this article is to explain the position of expertise in the administration of the Islamic system based on the methodology of jurisprudence with an emphasis on the opinions of Imam Khomeini (RA), and the claim of this article is that according to Imam Khomeini (RA), jurisprudential management is not in contrast with scientific management, and referring to reason and human experience in the administration of Islamic society does not mean the secularization of religion, but the necessity of Implementation of Sharia law.To prove this claim, first by describing the opinions of the Scholars of principles of jurisprudence regarding the authority of human knowledge in this field; Then, by examining the areas of administration of the Islamic society, we have analyzed the essentials of these basics in the administration of the Islamic system.

The right to self-determination is a crucial political right that is acknowledged in numerous international legal documents and the constitutions of many countries. In recent decades, it has also become a topic of discussion among Shia jurists in Islamic jurisprudence. Within Imami Shia jurisprudence, the Quran, Tradition (hadiths), and certain rational arguments are referenced to support the existence of this right. This research takes an analytical and critical approach, employing the principles of jurisprudential inference to evaluate the rational (or speculative) arguments within Islamic jurisprudence regarding the right to self-determination. The main focus of this research is to examine how independent reason or intellect can indicate the political right of self-determination, and to identify any deficiencies or problems that may arise when relying on rational or reason-based arguments. The findings of this study reveal that several rational arguments have been put forth to support human self-determination, including the principle of human autonomy or self-guardianship, the necessity of adhering to social contracts, the argument from hisbah (community morals or maintenance of public order), and the principle of shared ownership of citizens over their country. However, it will be argued that, apart from the self-evident principle of human autonomy or self-guardianship, these arguments have certain shortcomings. The principle of human guardianship over one's own fate (self-determination) is considered valid unless there is an explicit religious text that contradicts it.

The history of Iraq's imposed war against Iran has witnessed numerous resolutions from the Security Council, which did not get the approval of the officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran due to ignoring the rights of the Iranian people, but due to the time conditions and the different provisions of Resolution 598, this resolution was accepted. Achieving the reasons for the acceptance of the resolution by the Imam (RA) and understanding his political strategies at that time is based on knowing the model of foreign policy he intended; Therefore, it is inevitable to explain the principles and foundations of Imam's foreign policy from the point of view of political jurisprudence. The current research, which is written in a documentary-library method and is descriptive-analytical with a qualitative method, has investigated the fixed principles and rules that were the basis of the foreign policy of the Imam (RA) in accepting the resolution; In this regard, it is possible to point out such things as duty orientation and action to the best of one's ability, the expediency of Islam and Muslims, the expansion of the influence of Islam, the negation of foreign interference, prioritizing the most important over the important, consulting and referring to experts, and the need to act on commitments and adhere to international agreements.

Resistance is an obligatory doctrine in regulating and managing how to face non-Muslims whose arrogant and exploitative nature involves oppression and dominance on the one hand, and enmity with Islam, Muslims and the Islamic State on the other. Despite the reflection of its principles in scientific circles, resistance, as a strategy in the arena of international confrontations with arrogant and exploitative non-Islamic countries, is a problem that needs to be explored until an appropriate response is found. As an idea and theory, resistance was first proposed by the Supreme Leader on the anniversary of Imam Khomeini’s demise in 2018,  after the term “Khomeini’s doctrine of resistance” in Western think tanks gained popularity and its components were stated in general.This research has been conducted with the aim of explaining the nature of resistance as a strategy in the arena of international confrontations with the mentioned countries and its components in the thought of Imam Khomeini. In addition, it aims to analyse the rational principles of resistance from the perspective of political jurisprudence. To achieve this aim, one has to make a careful study on Imam Khomeini’s opinions and statements, and goes on to categorize and summarize them with the slightest alteration in such a way that it makes it possible to reflect the same key words and analysis of the intellectual perceptions of the found components, and the result is to provide the best description of the resistance strategy in the eyes of ImamKhomeini. Its rational analysis is also the only main principle that should always be considered by the statesmen and politicians of the Islamic State, so that the algorithm and methods of confronting with the mentioned countries are set to preserve this strategy and the ways to achieve it are regulated and managed.

Ahmed Raza Khan Barelvi was the founder of a major intellectual school within the Maturidi Hanafi denomination in the Indian Subcontinent. The school is known as the Barelvi School, having more followers than its rivals in India. It has even spread to Africa and Europe. However, apartment from Ahmed Raza Khan’s beliefs, which distinguish him from the rival school of Deobandi, his political positions are very controversial. Some people believe that he was an agent of the British colonists, and others take his positions as signs of his foresight. This article studies his most important political fatwas, which can be viewed as Ahmed Raza Khan’s political jurisprudence, trying to decode the real grounds on which such fatwas were issued. We tackle five main fatwas issued by Ahmed Raza Khan on the land of Islam and the land of disbelief, non-cooperation (tark muwalat), caliphate movement, Indian National Congress, and two-nation theory. We show that Ahmed Raza’s positions on all of these issues were contrary to those of the majority of Muslims in the Indian subcontinent. It seems that his political positions were more influenced by rivalries with Deobandis (leaders of political movements in India at the time) than being rooted in his jurisprudential thoughts.

Among the basic methods and tools in achieving the goals of diplomacy is having the capacity of "media" in foreign policy, and this is important based on jurisprudence teachings; As an integral element of intellectual foundations in Islamic governance, it is of great importance and necessity. Because cultural diplomacy and the media, as the most important means of exercising soft (cultural) power in global politics, have a tremendous impact on advancing the goals and national interests of countries. Therefore, in the current research, the subject of "the role and position of media diplomacy in Islamic governance" has been discussed. In the current research, which was carried out in a descriptive-analytical way and by using library sources and texts and various jurisprudential and political opinions and thoughts, with the aim of explaining and describing media diplomacy in Islamic governance, we sought to answer this main question: What is the position, role, goals and dimensions of media diplomacy from the perspective of jurisprudence and Islamic government in Kharchi politics? The conducted studies show that these results have been obtained that media diplomacy can be investigated in the field of political jurisprudence and its dimensions are influenced by Imamiyyah jurisprudence in various relations and cultural, political, etc. dimensions can be drawn and the general spirit of basic jurisprudence relations, It is cooperation, dialogue, peaceful coexistence, advance invitation, etc. Therefore, it should be acknowledged that the comprehensive model of sovereign jurisprudence for media diplomacy is the principles and general ideas of jurisprudence.

The problem of the modern state has occupied the mind and conscience of many contemporary Iranian thinkers, including the seminary neo-thinkers. Meanwhile, due to the wide range and diversity of his works and the wide influence of his words, Davood Feirahi is the most famous seminarian thinker who has pondered in this field and has created valid and worthy works. With a glance at Feirahi's works, it can be seen that the modern state and its challenges in Iran are among his main concerns throughout his research life, and in a way, all the works of him were written in this direction. The main issue of this article is what kind of idea Feirahi had of the modern state and what model of it he considered feasible for Iran. In response to this question, the article comes to the conclusion that despite serious reflections on the concept of the modern state and the examination of its challenges in Iran, Feirahi lacked a coherent and independent theory in this matter and did not provide a detailed explanation of his desired model in Iran.