منشا مشروعيت ولايت فقيه از ديگاه امام و رهبري

The Origin of the Legitimacy of the Guardianship of the Muslim Jurist in view of Imam Khomeini and Ayatollah Khamenei, the Grand Leader: Viewpoints and Approaches

نوشتار حاضر، پژوهشي درباره منشا مشروعيت ولايت (و حكومت) فقيه از ديدگاه امام خميني(ره) و رهبر معظم انقلاب اسلامي است. در زمينه مشروعيت ولايت و حكومت فقيه در اسلام، به طوركلي سه قول وجود دارد: 1. مشروعيت مردمي (نظريه انتخاب)؛ 2. مشروعيت الهي ـ مردمي (نظريه تلفيقي)؛ 3. مشروعيت الهي (نظريه انتصاب). گرچه در خلال مجموع بيانات امام و رهبري، برخي تعابير و عباراتي وجود دارد كه مي‌توان از آنها در جهت اثبات و تاييد هر يك از سه نظريه يادشده استفاده كرد و به همين خاطر، برخي‌ها چنين استفاده‌اي كرده و مدعي شده‌اند كه امام و رهبري بر همان عقيده‌اند كه آنها برداشت كرده‌اند، ولي بررسي دقيق نشان مي‌دهد كه به دليل مباني فكري سياسي خويش ـ برآمده از تفكر توحيدي اسلام ناب كه ولايت فقيه را تداوم ولايت و امامت ايمه در عصر غيبت مي‌داند، ـ جز به خاستگاه الهي مشروعيت ولايت فقيه و حكومت اسلامي معتقد نبوده و نيستند و به همين دليل، طرفداران هر دو نظريه مشروعيت مردمي (نظريه انتخاب) و مشروعيت الهي ـ مردمي (نظريه تلفيقي) به خطا رفته‌اند. در اين پژوهش كوشيديم، دو نظريه مشروعيت مردمي يا انتخاب و مشروعيت الهي ـ مردمي يا تلفيقي (تلفيق از مشروعيت الهي و مشروعيت مردمي) را مورد بررسي و نقد قرار دهيم و با ارايه اسناد و مدارك كافي از بيانات امام و رهبري نشان خواهيم داد كه آنان، تنها نظريه مشروعيت الهي يا انتصاب را باور داشته و نظريه ديگري را بر نمي‌پذيرند.

The present article is a research work on the origin of the legitimacy of the guardianship (and rule) of a Muslim Jurist from the viewpoint of Imam Khomeini (may God’s peace be upon him) and that of Ayatollah Khamenei, the Grand Leader of the Islamic revolution. Concerning the idea of the legitimacy of the guardianship and rule of a Muslim jurist in Islam, there have been three claims: 1) popular legitimacy (the “election” thesis); 2) divine-popular legitimacy (the “composite” thesis); and 3) divine legitimacy (the “appointment” thesis). Despite the fact that in the statements made by Imam Khomeini and Ayatollah Khamenei, the Grand Leader, there are some words and expressions which can be used in favor and support of each of the three mentioned theses, as some have done so, thus claiming that what they understood in this regard can be proved to be exactly the case with Imam Khomeini and Ayatollah Khamenei. In other words, they think Imam Khomeini and Ayatollah Khamenei hold the same belief in this regard as they have thought they do. However, a careful study of the issue in question shows that, since both Imam Khomeini and Ayatollah Khamenei’s foundations of political thoughts have originated from this purely Islamic monotheistic thought that the guardianship of the Muslim jurist is actually the continuation of the guardianship and imamate of all the twelve immaculate (infallible) Imams from the first through the last one, who is strongly believed by all Shi?a Muslims to be the Imam of the [present] age, being hidden behind the veil of occultation , have always held the view that the legitimacy of the guardianship of the Muslim jurist and the Islamic government has its origin in the Divine and hence the proponents of the two theses - popular legitimacy (the “election” thesis) and divine-popular legitimacy (the “composite” thesis) have been on the wrong track.In this research work, an attempt has been made to scrutinize and make a critique of the above-mentioned theses, citing ample evidence from the statements made by Imam Khomeini and Ayatollah Khamenei to back up the idea that these two great religious scholars have only believed in the thesis of “divine legitimacy” or “appointment” thesis and have adopted no other theses in this regard.