Non-Mujtahid Judgment in Imami Jurisprudence with an Approach to the Opinion of Imam Khomeini (RA) مقاله

چکیده:

Given that judgment is considered one of the important and essential topics of jurisprudence and law, the conditions of the judge are also of high importance. Among the conditions considered important for the competence of a judge, especially in jurisprudence, is ijtihad, which is also a matter of dispute. The majority of jurists believe in the necessity of ijtihad in judgment, and Imam Khomeini shares this view. In contrast, a group of jurists, most of whom are contemporaries, contrary to the majority view, do not consider ijtihad a condition in judgment. Apparently, their evidence is stronger than the evidence of the majority of jurists, and it proves the non-necessity of ijtihad in judgment—provided that the follower (muqallid) is authorized (ma'dhun), aware of the rulings, and possesses other conditions. Assuming the necessity of ijtihad, the judgment of an appointed follower (muqallid) acting as an agent of a mujtahid is not permissible; however, according to the view that ijtihad is not necessary, the appointment and agency of a follower in the position of judgment is permissible. It seems that even if we exercise caution and consider ijtihad a necessary condition due to Islam's strict recommendation regarding the life, property, and honor of people, in cases of necessity and lack of access to a mujtahid judge, the judgment of a follower is valid to prevent disruption of the system and hardship for the people.