نظرية ولاية الأمة على نفسها عند الشيخ محمد مهدي شمس الدين (دراسة نقدية)

Abstract

Shaykh Shams al-Din adopted the theory of the guardianship of the nation over itself, in contrast to other theories, especially the theory of the general guardianship of the jurist. He was the first among Shiite scholars to propose this theory, even though its roots trace back historically to the post-religious text period among the Sunnis.

Shaykh Muḥammad Mahdī Shams al-Din presented this theory through which he expressed his reformist political-jurisprudential thought aimed at bringing together the two poles of Muslims. He claimed that it is the only solution for a state based on citizenship, equality, securing minority rights, and getting out of the crisis of governance and obedience caused by sectarian disputes between the two sects.

For his theory, he relied on numerous Quranic, hadith-based and rational evidence, beginning his reasoning by relying on the primary principle (no one has authority over another), after he excluded from it the authority of God Almighty and the infallible ones, and then the authority of the nation over itself. The executive and practical framework of this theory, which constitutes its main outcome, is the concept of shūrā (consultation), either direct or indirect through elected and delegated bodies representing the nation.

However, this theory suffers from weak evidence and lacks a fixed and solid scientific methodology. In formulating his theory, he relied on the same jurisprudential and foundational method he criticized, without presenting a new methodology free from its problems or correcting its foundations. Furthermore, the principle on which his theory is based (no one has authority over another) is disputable both in its establishment and accomplishment. His theory also lacks logical coherence. Most significantly, it is based on mixing political concepts, leading to problematic implications such as permitting the establishment of a liberal democratic system while simultaneously deeming the system of the guardianship of the jurist invalid and dictatorial. This prevents it from being accepted as it is now.