A Comparative Study of the Principles of Political Legitimacy and Characteristics of a Ruler from the perspective of Imāmiah, Ashāi’rah, and Mo’tazilah

One of the important discussions in Islamic political Kalām is related to principles of political legitimacy. Imāmiah, Ashāi’rah, and Mo’tazilah are three important Islamic sects which have their own different political ideas in this regard. The present research conducted by descriptive analysis, deals with the comparative study of principles of the Imām’s political legitimacy, methodology and characteristics of a ruler from the view of the abovementioned sects in order to display their commonalities and differences. To this aim, after explaining the methodology of each of the sects, their most important principles in the realm of political legitimacy were comparatively studied. Further, the most significant features effective on the legitimacy of Imām were elucidated. The research results showed that in terms of methodology, Imāmiah follows rational and occasionally narrative methods, Mo’tazilah uses just rational methods, while Ashāi’rah follows the moderation between the extremism of Mu'tazila and those of Ahl al-Hadith with the tendency to quote. In terms of principles of political legitimacy, all three tendencies have a common perspective in the issue of monotheism. In the discussion of the authenticity of word and deed, the Companions of the Imāmiah do not consider it as the basis of legitimacy. Mo’tazilah believes in detailed accounts while Ashāi’rah believes in authenticity. With respect to the characteristics of the ruler, all three tendencies consider general conditions. Imāmiah believes in infallibility, knowledge, and superiority, whereas Mo’tazilah and Ashāi’rah do not regard infallibility as a requirement.