نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی - پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 مجتمع آموزش عالی فقه
2 دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد قم
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The legitimacy of governance and the authority of an Imam, as to whether it is appointed or elected, is a matter where Sunni Muslims advocate for the selection of an Imam by the community. However, there is a dispute over who the selector should be, leading to two main theories: 1. The Majority Theory, which consists of three subcategories: selection of an Imam by the people of resolution and contract (‘Ahl al-Hall wal-‘Aqd), selection by the preceding Imam, or appointment by force and autocracy; 2. The Sanhuri Theory (selection of an Imam by public vote). This research examines the claim’s consistency with the content of the selection theory to uncover and explain the compatibility or incompatibility of the concept and reality of selection with the Sunni claim in the theory of Imam selection. The study utilizes a qualitative methodology and relies on Quranic verses, traditions, historical events of early Islam, and Sunni scholars’ views. The research concludes that while the Majority Theory is internally conflicted and its claim does not align with the content, the Sanhuri Theory, albeit not internally conflicted, is incompatible with the events of early Islam and the jurists’ and scholars’ views forming the basis of the selection theory. Nonetheless, the Sanhuri Theory can be substantiated and argued based on the initiation of independent reasoning (ijtihad) and the jurisprudence sources of Sunni Islam, and utilized to illustrate the Sunni Islamic political system.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)