كليدواژه :
انتصاب , اشكال ثبوتي , مشروعيت , انتخاب
چكيده لاتين :
The term "legitimacy" means popular acceptance in the political sociology; but in philosophy and the Islamic political theology, it means justification. The philosophical legitimacy of a State lies in the justification of ʹwielding power by authoritiesʹ and ʹsubmission by peopleʹ.
The popular view in the Shiʹi political thinking on the legitimacy of the Islamic State during the period of Occultation is the hypothesis of ʹappointmentʹ according to which, the justification of the juristʹs government stems from the Almighty Godʹs will and the general appointment by the infallible Imams. In the last century, however, another hypothesis has been put forward according to which, the justification of the Juristʹs government lies in both Godʹs will and the peopleʹs vote. According to this hypothesis, known as the hypothesis of ʹelectionʹ, in order for a juristʹs government to be legitimate, both of the above mentioned conditions must be met.
The reason for the emergence of this new hypothesis is that its advocates hold that ʹthe hypothesis of the general appointment of the juristsʹ is positively impossible. Thus, it must be put aside.The advocates of the hypothesis of appointment have variously replied to this objection; the strongest among them, based on the rational and traditional evidences, seems to be the following one: during the period of Occupation, a jurist who is altogether more qualified than other jurists for leadership - that is, more knowledgeable, brave, pious, and managerially competent than others - has been designated by the infallible Imams as the leader of Islamic society.
