چکیده:
Legitimacy is the justification of government and sovereignty. Regarding legitimacy, generally, there are two major perspectives: A) The theory of ultimate legitimacy, which focuses on the ultimate goal and purpose of the state, and B) The theory of actor-based or contractual legitimacy, which considers the origin and form of the state. The former thought has had undisputed dominance over the minds of Muslims, from the rise of Islamic civilization in the Middle Ages to the formation of Islamic modernism. However, the second perspective (the theory of actor legitimacy) was often considered to have no significant relationship with the sources or texts of Shia Islam. This article, while critically examining the above claim, emphasizes the relationship between Shia texts - especially the works and actions of Imam Ali (AS) - and the theory of actor/contractual legitimacy, and has recently expanded this hypothesis.
خلاصه ماشینی:
The theory of ultimate legitimacy, like Greece and Christianity, also has a long history in the Islamic world; the idea of the Islamic Caliphate, ignoring the evaluation of the origin of the state and not preferring any of the patterns of appointment and election; and even dominance, justifies the legitimacy of political power solely based on the implementation of Sharia and ensuring security and public order.
He writes: has a long history; the idea of the Islamic Caliphate, ignoring the evaluation of the origin of the state and not preferring any of the patterns of appointment and election; and even dominance, justifies the legitimacy of political power solely based on the implementation of Sharia and ensuring security and public order.
The above statement may need explanation; Shiite political theories, especially in the analysis of the speeches and political behavior of Imam Ali (AS), have always been in a special situation; firstly, Shiite thought, especially in recent times, is generally hesitant and oscillating between the two patterns of designation and election; secondly, adherence to each of the two patterns of legitimacy leads to the marginalization of the evidence and texts of the rival theory; thirdly, given that the evidence and texts of both theories are somewhat sufficient in themselves, the criterion for preferring the evidence and texts of one theory is not in the essence of the text itself, but based on external clues, including theoretical-kalam credits.
(14) In any case, interpretations based on the idea of designation and election, each in analyzing the issue of legitimacy, refer to numerous narrations from Ali (AS) that have been quoted in Nahj al-Balagha and other narrative sources.
(
, 
, 
)
