چکیده:
Constitutionalism created new concepts in the legal thought system in Iran to establish its own foundations. These concepts had to clarify their relationship with similar and adjacent concepts. The adjacency of this concept to concepts such as 'wakala' (agency) and 'wilayah' (guardianship) in the jurisprudential heritage was one of the issues for which constitutionalist thought had to prepare a response. With the introduction of this concept, different stances regarding its relationship with other jurisprudential-legal concepts began, and a dispute among jurists regarding the concept of representation ensued. In this writing, we will explain the stances of the jurists of the Najaf seminary regarding the concept of representation. We will see that jurisprudential concepts played an essential role in the evolution of constitutionalist thought. In this writing, we will explain on what basis the thinking of this concept became possible for Akhund Khorasani, Na'ini, and Mahallati in comparison to Fazlullah Nuri. How, in the thought of the jurists of the Najaf seminary, representatives were recognized among the 'rational Muslims and trustworthy believers' so that the delegation of customary matters and 'umur hasbiya' (public interests) to them would be made possible. Khorasani and his intellectual sphere went beyond all the jurists of the era in recognizing the concept of representation when he considers the 'reins of all state affairs' to be 'independently and originally' from the 'nation itself' and considers the nation to be the 'owner' of these affairs, who can 'delegate' this right and this 'ownership' to representatives 'within the prescribed period'.
خلاصه ماشینی:
In expressing his most important dispute, which the constitutionalists had made regarding the concept of representation, he says: "The general nation, according to the Sacred Sharia, has no right in sovereignty to appoint someone as their deputy, because sovereignty is a divine right that is established for the Infallible and whoever is authorized by him, and it has nothing to do with the people.
Mohammad Kazem Khorasani Mohammad Kazem Khorasani, the author of Kifayat al-Usul and the head of the jurists of the Constitutional era, in comparison to Mahallati, who did not recognize any right for the people in the monarchy and considered it in the era of Occultation to be within the jurisdiction of the Imam's authorized deputy, and also Na'ini, who considered the "matching" of the concept of representation with the chapter of Sharia wakalat to be "possible"; at a time when he considers government in the era of Occultation to belong to the Muslim public, presents a theory more coherent than others regarding the concept of representation.
Mahallati, in his further explanations regarding the concept of representation, says: "You see that the trustees of the nation are called wakil (agent); thus, this expression is not according to the language of the jurists and the taste of Sharia, and no one wants to attribute it to Sharia or consider their agency as Sharia-based, but rather it is according to the language of custom and the taste of the common people from the intelligence of the masses" (Zargari-Nejad, 1377: 529).
(
, 
, 
)
