JURISPRUDENCE AND POLITICS
Year:2020 | Volume:1 | Issue:1 (1)|Papers Count:6

The purpose of this article is to analyze the condition of being a man for the presidency based on the principles of jurisprudence and the constitution; therefore, jurisprudential arguments have been studied in this regard by adopting the method of content analysis. The necessity and importance of paying attention to this issue is due to the fact that in the past, based on the logic of reason, the manners of the Ahl al-Bayt and verses and narrations, have ruled to deny women's tenure in the general affairs of society. Matters such as differences of opinion of jurists, the emergence of the presidency, a different understanding of its nature (province or power of attorney) and the requirements and conditions of society, led to the legislators in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, instead of state that the president is a man, have used the term "politicians" that according to some interpretations, it is not in conflict with the being woman a president. Therefore, the most important achievement of this article is that based on the constitution and jurisprudential principles and arguments, can be concluded that women's tenure is preferable to a macro-socio-political one such as the presidency.

Given the spread of terror and terrorism, as one of the most important examples of violence in some Islamic countries in recent years, the present article examines the concept of violence and religious violence and tries to examine the presented jurisprudential arguments about terrorism. The main claim of the article is that although some extremist currents and groups try to justify assassination by presenting some jurisprudential arguments, such a view has no jurisprudential background, and the above arguments also fail to prove the legitimacy of assassination. The proof of this claim clearly shows that, contrary to some views of Orientalists, it is not possible to accept the inherent harshness of Islam by relying on such views. Contrary to what seems logical, misconceptions about religious teachings that have been perpetuated by some extremist groups have produced violence in certain circumstances and contexts.

The model of Guardianship which is the product of Shiite jurisprudential-political thought, it has been one of the most important topics in political thought for the past four decades which today has crossed the geographical borders of Iran and it is now being proposed as an alternative theory of government in research circles. The question of this research which has done in citation analysis method is what are the key elements and variables of the Islamic Guardianship? How can its internal structure and network be characterized? The hypothesis of this paper is that the Islamic government is an interconnected system and set that with the help of the model and method of the system, its conceptual, normative, structural and functional elements can be extracted and its internal network can be explained and characterize in a logical communication action. According to the method and system framework, the research findings are: In its historical course, the «theory of Guardianship" has nourished and gained experience from the two important components of «text" and «time and place". In this sense, this theory is not merely an «ideal, " but an ideal that polished in the context of «historical facts. " In other words, the structure of the Islamic Guardianship from the perspective of Imam Khomeini and Imam Khamenei is subject to two categories of fixed and variable criteria. On the one hand, the political structure and the way its institutions are arranged, is subject to the requirements of the time and in accordance with the latest achievements of human political knowledge, and on the other hand, it is based on «fixed Islamic rules and standards". Also, in a systematic, transnational and broader view, it can be said that the Islamic political system is composed of a set of social and political institutions that organize the structure of the Shiite Guardianship in a network of legitimate and participatory communication.

Velayat-e-Faqih is a pillar and basic basis in the field of Islamic politics and in fact a universal element of the "Islamic political system". This research, by using the desk research in collecting information and descriptive-analytical method in inferring views and ijtihad method in functions and outcomes answered this questionn that Is Velayat-e-Faqih merely a jurisprudential discussion or should it be considered as an interdisciplinary matter, some aspects of which should be pursued in theology? If the latter possibility is true, what is the interaction between the science of jurisprudence and theology in the issue of Velayat-e-Faqih? The result of examining the aspects of the interaction of theology and jurisprudence in the three areas of the principles of imagination, affirmation and justification has led to the following results: A) In the field of principles, the concept of guardianship in theology is different from guardianship in jurisprudence; also, according to theological and jurisprudential issues, the correct meaning of Velayat-e-Faqih can be provided. B) In the field of the principles of affirmation, the principle and legitimacy of Velayat-e-Faqih is subject to the acceptance of the comprehensiveness of religion and the theory of appointment or totality. Although the explanation of one pillar in the theory of the whole is the responsibility of jurisprudence, the explanation of the other pillar in the recent theory or the whole pillar in the theory of appointment is the responsibility of theology. C) In the field of justification, the role of theology and jurisprudence is obserbale. Theology by referring to the principle of divine forgery and jurisprudence, and jurisprudence (Fiqh) by referring to the actions of the obligees, which are of the do's and don'ts, can use these reasons.

Ayatollah Sheikh Mohammad Yaqoubi is the most prominent student of Ayatollah Seyyed Mohammad Sadegh Sadr, known as Sadr II, who has taken over the leadership of part of the Sadr movement since Sadr's martyrdom in 1999. Ya'qubi, like his teacher, believes in the public authority of the jurists. In theory, he, like Imam Khomeini, considered that the only jurist is to be the legitimate ruler in the age of occultation. Reading this theory in the context of Iraq, where the jurisprudent is not practically as extensive as in Iran, can introduce newer dimensions of the theory of Velayat-e-Faqih. Ayatollah Yaghoubi had dealt with the government in two ways: One negative and the other positive. Negative discussion refers to taking a negative stance against undesirable governments, which is almost similar to the arguments of other jurists in this regard. Although in a positive discussion, like some jurists, he defended the theory of the popular guardianship of the jurists, he tried to redefine it in relation to some new concepts such as partisanship and the specific circumstances of Iraq. Undoubtedly, the theory of the popular guardianship of the jurists in Iran can be different from what is happening in Iraq. Understanding environmental differences can be valuable in the diverse analysis of the theory of Velayat-e-Faqih. The purpose of this article is to explain the theory of Velayat-e-Faqih in a different environment from Iraq that its capacities and possibilities in that society should be examined. The method of this article is descriptive; that is why it seeks to present a detailed and structured report and narration of Ayatollah Yaghoubi's view about the Islamic ruler. The results of this study showed that His appointive theory of Velayat-e-Faqih is reduced to spiritual supervision in practice, and the special circumstances of Iraq make him more realistic.

One of the most important topics in the science of the principles of jurisprudence is the tradition or the construction of reason; because it is both a way to prove the most important arguments of jurisprudence, such as the news of individuals and appearances, and it is also directly in the path of jurisprudential inference; therefore, over time, Its place in jurisprudence, and especially in political jurisprudence, has become more prominent. However, due to the widespread effects of operationalizing the products of political jurisprudence on society and citizens, if the use of the building of reason in political jurisprudence is not methodical, its corruptions will be more pronounced than individual jurisprudence and will lead to accuse jurisprudence of inefficiency. Therefore, it is necessary to study the position of the rational building in political jurisprudence and refine its validity, and the starting point is to study the heritage of the scholars of the science of principles in the field of rational construction and the capacity of their opinions in discussing the rational building for political jurisprudence. The purpose of this article is to extract the capacities of Imam Khomeini's methodological foundations as a political jurist. Accreditation of political jurisprudential arguments, both directly and as an independent or nonindependent argument, has significant potential for inferring rulings in the field of political jurisprudence and can alleviate some of the poverty of narrative arguments or the weakness of the method in using narrative arguments.