The Analysis of the Component of the Political Legitimacy from the Perspective of Islamic-Iranian Intellectual Trends

The study of the component of the political legitimacy in particular from the perspective of Islamic-Iranian intellectual trends during the third to eight centuries A.H. shows the drawing of a pyramid-shape society either from the viewpoint of political philosophy or other trends. In this case, the views of Farabi, Avicenna, Khajeh Nasir and other thinkers can be referred to, such that it will be possible to establish a common attribute among the ideal king society, philosopher king and Imam or Sultan within the framework of Iranian – Islamic political thought. Of course all thinkers consider some distinguishing features for the head and ruler based on their own thoughts and analyses. However, accepting the belief of “Imamate”, [The Shia Islamic Doctrine], the Shiites placed the concept of legitimacy within a specific framework based on the rule of grace and also Qur-anic exact text. Imam is the legitimate ruler and he is the one who has been determined and appointed based on the exact text from the predecessor of Ali (a.s.), from the generation of Fatemeh (s) and from the branch of Hussein ibn Ali, so if it occurs, it is legitimate, i.e. it is based on religious laws.


Introduction
Legitimacy is a justification of sovereignty, i.e. a justification for the right to command and obey.Power will find legitimacy when the command and obedience are considered to be associated with right and rightfulness.Such an issue demands the continuation of power.As power in its essence implies inequality and out of the human inequalities, none of them demands justification as equal as inequality resulting from power and sovereignty.
Legitimacy is a response to this question: why a number of humans have a right to rule and the others have a duty to obey? (Feirahi, 2009, p.21).
Legitimacy humanizes and purifies the power and sovereignty.Its nature makes it to be accepted by rulers and great numbers of those who obey it as a logical and fair principle.(ibid).
From another perspective, legitimacy in political sociology is interpreted as the people satisfaction.Today, the important element in political legitimacy is the people satisfaction and their interpretation of the bases of government obligations.However, political jurisprudence, political discourse and political philosophy have judgment value on legitimacy topic and interpret and define legitimacy in this field as the rational justification of power application.(Haghighat, 2007, p. 72).
Furthermore, based on historical foundation from the viewpoint of followers of tradition and with regard to the position of prophet's companions and close friends, legitimacy was taking shape in agreement with the prophet companions' words and deed and as the prophet's companions had no united standpoint and word on the quality of establishment or continuation of government after the prophet of Islam, so that legitimacy could not take a clear path and route.In other words, the origin of legitimacy of the government was disseminating from the words and deeds of these prophet's companions.In other words it was assumed that these companions, in turn and of course by accepting the difference of viewpoint and understanding, were the sincere followers of the prophet of Islam.In this manner, the legitimacy of the prophet companions' words and deeds and also the close friends were establishing a close link with divine legislator.(Ghaderi, 1996, p 44-45).
Oppositely, accepting the belief of Imamate, the Shiites put the concept of legitimacy within a specific framework based on the rule of favor and exact words of the Qu-ran.Imam is the legitimate ruler and he is the one who has been determined and appointed based on the cleat exact words of the Qur-an is from the predecessor Ali (a.s.), from the generation of the Fatemeh(s) and from the branch of Hussein ib Ali.Hence, his government in case of fulfillment is legitimate, (that is to say) it is based on religious laws.(ibid).

Literature of Review
Islam is indeed a religion of collective morals, but it contains little that is specifically political-that is, the original Islamic sources rarely convey much on how to form states, run governments, and manage organizations.If the rulers of the historical Islamic states were also spiritual leaders of their communities, this was not because Islam required the imām (religious leader) to be also a political ruler, but because-on the contrary-Islam had spread in regions where the modes of production tended to be control-based and where the state had always played a crucial economic and social role.The "monopoly" of a certain religion had always been one of the state 's usual instruments for ensuring ideological hegemony, and the historical Islamic state was heir to this tradition.
The main piece of political literature inherited from the Muḥammadan period is al-ṣaḥīfah, the document often known as the constitution of Medina, the text of which is attributed mostly to the hijrah episode of 622 to 624 CE This constitution speaks of the believers as forming one ummah (community), which also includes the Jews of Medina.Although composed of tribes, each of which is responsible for the conduct of its members, the ummah as a whole is to act collectively in enforcing social order and security and in confronting enemies in times of war and peace.
Given the limited nature of political stipulations in the Qurʿān and the ḥadīths, Muslims have had to borrow and to improvise in developing their political systems.These systems, however, have been inspired by sharīʿah (Islamic law), as represented in the Qurʿān and the sunnah; by Arabian tribal traditions; and by the political heritage of the lands Muslims conquered, especially the Persian and Byzantine traditions.The influence of the first source was more noticeable during the era of the first four rāshidūn (rightly guided) caliphs (632-661 CE), the second during the Umayyad dynasty (661-750 CE), and the third during the ʿAbbāsid (749-1258 CE) and Ottoman (1281-1922 CE) dynasties.

Methodology of Resource
Some Muslim researchers believe that Islamic principles and sciences can affect contemporary social sciences; even they raise the possibility of developing Islamic theories for social sciences.Regarding the fact that Islam belongs to about 1400 years ago, a question is raised here on how such a development is possible.If we claim to introduce a general theory for social sciences and a particular theory for political sciences, two important issues need to be cleared: first, how can we claim and justify our method as Islamic; second, what are the methods to prevent misleading notions and false reasoning, avoid extremism in any direction, and circumvent violence and intolerance which is prohibited by Islam.This paper would initially discuss, categorize and introduce the current methods in Islamic political thoughts (shi,is religen) research, special focus to of the political legitimacy from the perspective of Islamic-Iranian intellectual trends (The third to eight centuries A.H.).Then, after a brief analysis of each methodology, it would explain a methodology which would best avoid the above liabilities.The methodologies surveyed here include both ancient methodologies and contemporary methodologies practiced by Islamic philosophers.

4.The Islamic-Iranian Intellectual Trends and Analysis of Political Legitimacy
Basically the component of political legitimacy from the perspective of trend study and within the framework of the political knowledge of the third to eighth centuries A.H. is analyzable within the framework of the main trends such as political philosophy, political letters of admonishment, philosophy of Illuminations, Persian literature and poetry and political jurisprudence of the Shia.

Farabi (257-329 A.H.)
He was the Sheikh and teacher of philosophers in the Islamic age.Historians of philosophy have valued him as the founder of philosophy in Islamic age because he expanded the Greek philosophy in the Islamic civilization.(Tabatabaei, 2010, p. 151).
Of course, Kindī, the first Arab and Muslim philosopher was precedent to him but the expansion and depth of Farabi's philosophy places him higher than Kindi or some other scholars who had tended to philosophy prior to him.Farabi is the most famous Muslim philosopher who has had a special attention towards political philosophy.(Ghaderi, 2003, p. 137).
Farabi believes that only a philosopher-king or at least the association of philosophy with government can guarantee the human full salvation.(Rosental, 2008, p. 117).
He also considers the utopia to be similar to the body.A body which is perfect and correct and also all its different parts do their job properly to continue the animal life and protect it.Also among the members of the body, one is prior to the other.That is the heart which presides over other members.Furthermore, in the utopia, there is one person to preside over others and there are some other members whose position is near to the position of the head and also there are some members of the body who serves other parts and in the utopia, some persons should be servant to others.(Fakhori and Jer 2014, p 437-438).
In a direction opposite to Nietzsche, Farabi invites his fellow humans to build a society not on the basis of jealousy, power and conflict-seeking attitudes but based on rationality, devotedness and affection.Only in such a society, there is a hope in establishing that utopia which has been drawn professionally by Farabi.With the description of different aspects of government in such a utopia, Farbai like Spencer compares it to an organism founded on hierarchy like human body.He further states, "Emir is like the heart and servant is like the agents who in turn are servants to the lower position agents and in this utopia, the intention of integration is the citizens salvation.(Sheikh, 2010, p. 128-129).
Fabari does not consider the head of utopia like Plato as an ordinary citizen but its presiding position in one side is by nature and on other by configuration of the head's will which is specific of individuals who are equipped with that by nature and prepared to preside.Farabi believes the connection to an active rationality which causes the Incorporeal from materials and attaining salvation, as the first condition for the presidency over the utopia and it is this very first head which in the terminology of the previous people termed as the real king, the one who provides a regular arrangement to the utopia based on what he has grasped from connection to the active rationality.(Tabatabaei, 2010, p. 142-144).

Ibn Sina (370-428 A.H.)
In the beginning it is necessary to refer to the two important differences between Ibn Sina and Farabi: Firstly, in the rational justification of prophecy, Ibn Sina clearly considers the position of the prophet and his link with sacred intellect higher than blessings directed at philosophers, thus, his political views take shape in line with prophecy and religious laws find significance for where there is no indication of it in Farabi's philosophical system.Secondly, Ibn Sina believes in a public eternal self.Opposite to Farabi, he justifies and accepts eternity in full enjoyment of intellect and emphasizes on the eternity of the public self.(Ghaderi, 2003, p. 157).
Ibn Sina considers the kings as the best and most merit humans in learning wisdom and policies to administer the universe: " Kings are those that God has entrusted them to keep the servants.They have been given authority to administrate the cities' and peoples' affairs and manage the public.Then, Ibn Sina enumerates the hierarchy of people from the highest to the lowest in an order ‫مثل[‬ ‫فاال‬ ‫مثل‬ ‫]اال‬ and emphasizes that though each individual is like a shepherd to the subordinates but at the same time they are servants to their seniors.He adds that the circle of custodianship or obedience for each person is as much as the ray of the capabilities which have been placed in his own nature.(Feirahi, 2009, p. 342).
In other words, Ibn Sina's political thought is a non-existential idea and indicating a refusal to development of a political idea based on the infrastructure of a theology which had been developed by him.Ibn Sina converted policies into a secondary topic from prophecy and put forth the prophecy as one of the theology topics.(Tabatabaei, 2010, p. 247-248).

Ghazālī (450-550 A.H.)
Within the framework of political component of legitimacy, Imam Muhammad Ghazali believes that the religion good system is fulfilled only through an obeyed Imam.In fact, the good system of religion is only possible through goodness of the world and that is also in turn dependent on obeyed Imam.He means power through Sultan and not a person in power, i.e ruler and authority.It is obvious from the tradition which he quotes on confirmation: "Religion and power (material power) are twin and continues: So that, it is said that religion is the base and also the Sultan is the guard.(Rosental,ibid,p. 35).
By the first category, it means the sciences which are changed into practice after knowledge.The job of policy is to study this type of science.As humans is comprised of two dimensions of outward and inner side, so sciences are divided into outwards (organs) and the inward (heart).Outward science may be divided into prayers and habits and inward sciences into saviors and serious offenses.(Haghighat, 2010,p. 14).
Ghazali has introduced to us two types of policies: One is the basic policy which helps humans to strengthen and the other is the policy of correction which is at the service of their enhancement.The policy of Ghazali practically allocates four ranks to itself: In the first rank, there comes the prophets' policy.The prophet's policy is the policy which helps to orient and train humans and it should not be interpreted within the limit of power policy of this world.In the second rank, there comes the policy belonging to caliphs and kings which is in principle a worldly and outward policy.In the third rank, there comes the scholar's.In practice, if scholars are righteous, in practice they will become those who are merit to be called the inheritors of the prophet and finally, in the fourth rank, there are preachers which are at a lower point as compared with scholars but as a result of understanding their words by the public, they are dealing with orienting the inward of the public.(Ghaderi, 2013, p. 246-249).
In defining and objective of policies, Ghazali considers the correction of the people such that their worldly and hereafter salvation could be supplied.This term takes a practical form in two dimensions of outwards and organs on one side and inners and souls on the other side.On this basis, there is a need to administrators in both dimensions to prevent from the discontinuity of the job and to have the policy fulfilled.(Ghaderi, 1991, p. 150).
Ghazali considers people and their views as a standard to distinguish between good and bad governance.Thus, people could detect the failures of the ruler (and his government) and their detection is important to the ruler and should be aware of this detection and view.(Alikhani et al, 2015, p. 6).

Nasiruldin Toosi (597-672 A.H.)
Khajeh says, "Humans are divided into two groups in confronting with the God political obligations.A group like any other obligation revolt and the other group, intend to perform religious, political obligations and obey the God's commandments.But this very second group grasps some of the issues by their intellect and in some other issues, they face perplexity and doubt.So, it is necessary for the wise God to appoint an Imam and move out these kinds of people who seek a guide.The appointment is made by God but obeying an Imam (a.s.) is a part of authorities of people.They can obey and receive rewards and can disagree and to be punished.In any case, though appointment of Imam is necessary by God, but the fulfillment of Imam depends on the peoples will and decision.
Khajeh Nasiruldin Toosi in response to the question which says: If we consider the appointment of Imam as a grace and obligatory, but people do not obey him, then what is the benefit of such an appointment?, he writes,"Obeying an Imam (a.s.) is not one of the Almighty God's deeds and obeying an Imam (a.s) by people, so that the disagreement and revolt of people in obeying an Imam (a.s.) will not make any disruption in the obligation of the God.People's obey or disobey toward Imam (a.s.) based on the time demands an obligation which is undertaken by God.That is to say, first the God should introduce His proof, then obeying or disobeying in the side of people will be known.(Feirahi,ibid,. Also such that to annihilate any kind of rights and leave no right by which it could be identified and says and does that things which could be heard by ear and makes everybody to obey it.One of their words is this.. there is difficulty after difficulty and hidden behind and toughness after toughness, that is to say nobody could understand to guess and test, with the exception of Archangel and prophet or monotheist faithful believer whose heart has been tested by the Almighty God.(Tabatabaei, 2010, p. 270).
Khajeh refers to four types of policy.The first type is the policy of land which is considered the same policy of scholars and fulfillment of virtues.He calls this type of policy as the policy of policies which indicate its significance.This policy is in fact the same policy of utopia which is only one type, because each right is free from multiplicity.The second type of policy is the policy of dominancy which is the lower type of policy.The third type is the policy of dignity.The fourth type of policy in the view of Khajeh is called "congregation".By this type of policy he means the administration of different sects based on divine laws.He also enumerates the organs of utopia which includes five pillars: -The first pillar are the people of administration in utopia, i.e. the learned people and it is obvious that their head in the event of presence is the absolute possessor of the land.
-The second pillar are those who call people towards the views of the first group, i.e. jurisprudents, poets which are called "holders of speech" by Khajeh -The third pillar includes the protectors of justice in the scene of science and calculations such as accountants, physicians and astronomers -The fourth pillar is strugglers whose existential objective is clear -The fifth pillar are financial people, i.e. the holders of professions and industries (Ghaderi 2003, p. 179-180).
It seems that with the two concepts of head of tradition and presidency of the holder of traditions, Khajeh tries to explain the specific situation which had been created as result of forces array in Islamic civilization.(Feirahi, 2009, p. 91-92).

Nezam al Mulk (408-485 A.H.)
The most important motif of Iranshahr in Siyāsatnāma[Book of Government]= in particular in Siyasatnama by Khajeh Nezam al Mulk is the concept of Fareh Izadi[Divine Glory] which has a special position in the history of Iranian political thought.Glory in the Iranian political idea is a divine light and if it sheds on the heart of anybody, that person will find a superiority position towards the public.It is in the light of this glory that a person reaches to the position of kingdom and merit to hold the throne and crown.He can spread welfare and become justice and is always successful.Also from this light, that a person in a full spiritual and physical perfections by the God is directed to orient the people and reaches to the position of prophecy and worth to receive the divine inspiration.The concept of Glory in the Iranashahri view is in a way expressing a link between the ruler and the God.The ruler receives this feature from the God and the survival of this feature depends on performing some duties which the ruler has towards the God.(Alikhani et al,ibid,p. 568).
Khaje Nezam al Mulk, under the influence of kingdom view of the ancient Iran, considers the legitimacy and power of the king as a result of divine confirmation.(Ghaderi, 2003, p. 126).
The infrastructure of political analysis of the treatise by Khajeh is the theory of Iranshahr ideal kingdom.King is selected by the Izad [God] and not by caliph and successor of the God prophet or an Imam who has been selected by people alliance to be bound to perform religious laws.The first attribute of such a kingdom is justice which is itself secondary to kingdom Glory.Thus, order and security exists in a country as long as a just king with a divine Glory rules over it and with the annihilation of a good kingdom, order will be disrupted and there will rise a plague from any side and innocent and criminal people both are afflicted with an ill-fate.(Tabatabaei, 2009, p. 86).

Qabus Nameh(4-5 centuries A.H.)
Qabus Nameh written by Amir ʿOnṣor-al-Maʿāli KAYKĀVUS ibn Eskandar ibn Qabus ibn Woshmgir Ziyar, one of the princes and emirs of Ale Ziyar dynasty who were ruling in the Iranian northern part at that time.Qabus Nameh is a letter of admonishment which has been written on rituals of life.Qabus has written this book for Guilan Shah, his son in 44 chapters with this intention that if he wants to rule after him and administrate the affairs, he could know how to do his duties.Also it has discussed many topics on training a child, methods of campaigns, administration of a government, social rites and prevailing techniques and skills.In addition, as he teaches him various professions to Guilan Shah, his son, it seems that he had not expected a ruling for his son, so that he has taught him various ways to provide his livelihood.(Alikhani,ibid,. Anyway, if we intend to speak about the titles of the chapters in Qabus Nameh on administrating a government and policies, we may pay our attention to the Chapters 37 to 42 which are on (serving to a king ), (rituals of companionship to a king ) (rituals of secretariat) , (rituals of ruling as a minister), (rituals of being an army commander) and finally (ritual of kingdom ).The hidden strain of Qabus Nameh is an effort for culture awareness and breeding culture among the ruling households.(Ghaderi, 2013, p. 273-274).

Marzubannama (4 century A.H.)
This book has been written in Tabari language by Espahbod Marzban ibn Rostam ibn Shervin Prim one of the princes of Ale Bavand in Tabrstan at the end of 4th century A.H..In the 7th century A.H., it was translated from Tabri into Persian by Sa'ad ad-Din Varavini.The style of this book, is similar to Kelileh va Demneh.That is to say, in this book, the story telling method through the language of animals and plants have been employed.At the same time, the book contains some points which can be significant to the politicians and to be used to administrate the country.The despotic manner of kings made the authors of this text to express their own admonishments within the mask of children stories.On the other hand, this issue with examples in it made the stories more sweet and understandable.(Alikhani,ibid,p. 576).

Suhrawardī (549-587)
The illumination wisdom made a tie between intellect and heart or philosophy and mysticism.He tied the wisdom of the ancient Greece which believed it has been conveyed to mystics such as Zolnoon Mesri and Sahle Tastary and the wisdom of ancient Iran which he believed it has been conveyed to mystics such as Bayazid Bastami, Halaj and Aboulhasan Kharghani with the illumination wisdom.(Pournamdariyan, 2010, p. 439).
Henry Corbin considers the return of Sheikh Eshraq to the sources of Iranian ancient wisdom and revival of that wisdom not in conflict with the history of change in the Iranian philosophical thought in the Islamic period, but explains it as passing and continuation of the tradition of ancient wisdom in the idea of Islamic period as passing from athletic epic to mystical epic.From this aspect, in fact Sheikh Eshraq is like an intermediary who has tied the Iranian ancient period to its Islamic period and has made the transfer from this to that philosophical viewpoint possible.With Sheikh Eshraq, the continuity of Iranian history not in form of athletic epic but like a mystical epic has been understood.(Tabatabaea, 2009, p.230).

Saadi (606-691 A.H.)
Apart from the book of Nasayeh al Muluk which is fully admonishments addressed to kings and the method of correct governance, in both first chapters f Bustan and Golestan, three comes talk about the character of kings and their expediency and treatment with the public and elites.In these three lasting sources, Saadi has professionally, beautifully and understandably drawn the policies, i.e. the principle to administrate the land, principles of the administration of city and principles of ethic purification and has presented them in the most eloquent phrases and in unmatchable weight.In the awareness system of Saadi, as it is prevailing in the philosophical, social tradition of politicians, the main and basic question is that what kind of characteristics should rulers have to administrate the country?By what methods and instruments are they able to maintain the power?And How can they stand a salvation society with empathy and cooperation ?In fact, the main preoccupation of Saadi's mentality is not to achieve a utopia but his concern is observing the principles and rites of governance and presenting methods to maintain the power.(Azghandi, 2012, p. 3).

Ferdowsi(329-411 A.H.)
Fredowsi not only is unique in epic poetry in Iran and in the views of many European critics in the world, but also his lyric lofty thoughts and his wise admonishments and skill in depiction and image building makes him incomparable from other aspects among the Iranian poets.(Safa, 2013, p. 266).
Basically, in the ideal system of Ferdowsi and in the athletic promises and other promises, the stability of the world is subject to having a just, knowledgeable king and in a sense the one who is merit to divine glory and the athletes stand to fight in service of establishment of such a kingdom.(Ghaderi, 2013, p. 163).
In Iran there was no registered tradition or law to make the forecast of a successor possible or before fulfillment to give it legitimacy.What had a basic role was divine glory or divine grace.One who was enjoying this glorycould attain crown and throne through succession or directly and thus his government could find legitimacy.(Katouzian, 2012, p. 46-47).

Molavi(604-672 A.H.)
The idea of Molavi is a mystical anthropology but it is also rightfully a blessing ram in which it is possible to plant thousands seeds of knowledge.Human in his idea is a great creature and there is no limit imaginable for his evolution and if he intends to do a thing, no factor or force can overcome him.(Soroush, 2008, p. 146-147).
According to Molavi, people instead of tending towards the real sweetheart and the one who gives peace, tend to things which are hallucinatory and by scarifying their intellect and will, they guess that they have found tranquility.But no matter where they direct at, they would not find it free of suffering but only in the arms of the Lord who is the resort and venue of all peace.(Ibid, 151).
Justice, according to the well-known definition is granting as equal as affordability and based on this very definition, and in an rejecting way, states that if a grant is precedent to an ability, that ability (which is a grant) will be precedent to another ability and this will lead to impossible continuity or stops in a place.That stoppage will be where a grace has been granted without observing and history of affordability and that is the ideal.(Soroush, 2009, p. 287).

Bayhaqi(385-470 A.H.)
Beyhaqi compares the rulers with prophets and God messengers who are two selected groups by the God to rule over the people and direct them.(Katuzian,ibid,p. 61).
'Know that Almighty God has granted a strength to the prophets (peace be upon them) totally and another strength to the kings.He has made it obligatory for servants to purse these two strengths and consider it the right divine path.. then the strength of prophets (peach be upon them) was displayed through miracles, i.e. the same things which the creatures are unable to present it and the strength of the kings is in their delicate ideas and generosity and victory over enemies and judgment in agreement with the divine commandments'.

Nāser Khusrow (394-481 A.H.)
Considering allegiance, Nasir Khusraw states (Ghaderi, 2013, p. 213-214).+ One day I read the verse of allegiance in the Qur-an Where God said to the Qur-an to take an oath of allegiance with me He is referring to the oath of allegiance and promise which was done under the tree with the prophet (p.b.u.h.) : How is now that tree and hand Where can I search for that hand, that allegiance and presence?
The question which is put by Naser Khursaw is that whether or not this upper divine hand is related to that very specific incident or it is an issue continuing in the heart of the time?
In fact, Naser Khursow with a question and answer he puts describes his historical-religious ground which indicates the constant grace and constant flow of Imamate.

Obeid Zakani (710-722 A.H.)
The treatise of Akhlaq al Ashraf by Obeid is a type of bitter and destructive satire toward the rituals and aristocracy of his own age.The four chapters of this treatise basically is a process of the traditional (classic) fourfold virtues of wisdom, bravery, self-restraint and justice which has been matter of discussion among political and ethical philosophers.In the second chapter and on religion of bravery, after mentioning the significance of bravery -which was a shape of faculty of anger being considered by the past scholars for the soul-, he writes, "the scholars has termed a person as a brave person who has the features of lofty braveness and ambition, the inertia of self, stability, endurance, boldness, humility and tenderness".In the fourth chapter, Obeid deals with justice and on a regular basis, first explains the failures of the abolished religion on admiration of justice and strengthening it and then on describing the free-willed religion and in the words of the great men of his age writes, " the base of the work of monarchy, commanding and village head position is on presidency.As long as there is no fear in connection with a person, that command of that person is not obeyed and everybody is the same and then the base of jobs will be shaky and arrangement of system will be disrupted.(ibid, p. 375-379).

Jurisprudence of Shiah and Issue of Political Legitimacy
Considering the importance of the position of Imamate in Shia which is considered as a divine position and continuity of prophecy, the Shiite believe that it is necessary for Imam to have exceptional attributes and something beyond the features of ordinary people.(Feirahi, 2009, p. 41).
In the course of history, the Shiite jurisprudents, have discussed about the source of power and legitimacy of Islamic government and creditable attributes in Islamic ruler.Amid these, there have constantly been questions being put forth such as the type of legitimate power, their connection with dominancy, connection of scholars with the despotic governments and limits of guardianship of the ruler.(Haghighat, 2010, p. 53).
The Shiite thought was perfected in line and in the direction of people of views and holders of Hadith from the people of Sunnah and under specific historical and political conditions in the early centuries of the middle period and thus, it found a twofold family.This duality which was expanded in its evolutional trend under the title of Akhbari and Usuli, mainly was relied upon a detrimental conflict on identifying Imam and position of reasoning.(Feirahi, 2009, p. 272).

Heli (648-726)
He is in the opinion that Ijtihad is based on theoretical credits which mostly is not received from the appearance of the exact words.Almaeh Heli, was the first Shiite scholar with the title of Ayatollah who provided a theoretical confirmation for the principle of religious governance based on Ijtihad which was a matter of dispute by that time.By implementing this principle that the jurisprudent's intellect can present a creditable judgments even in religious subject-matters, he paved the way for playing the following roles and still political roles of the Shiite scholars.(Halem, 2010, p. 130).Now, for the possible reduction of any kind of error and neglecters by humans, it was necessary for the God to put infallible Imams among them to direct the pure believers and those interested in God to refer to them.Of course, the appointment of the infallible Imam (a.s.) did not mean imposing his government on people but it is merely a proof which in case of interest and proceeding by people, he could be at their disposal and they will not have any excuse for their own possible error.(Feirahi, 2011, p. 93).

Sheikh al Tayefah (385 -460 A.H.)
He moderated the Shiite pen and jurisprudence and not like Akhbari advocates to refer merely to news as the base of inference and not also like the previous scholars adhering to the people of opinion, but proportionally, he used the appearances of the book and tradition and in the event of lack of them, he used the rational evidences.In fact, in the expansion of his own special methodology, which later on was known as " Ijtihad al Zan", as he refers to it in Almabsooth, Sheikh Toosi uses the approach of the jurisprudent of the Sunnah.(Ibid,2009, p. 267-268).

Hydar Amoli (720-782)
He says that the absolute prophecy and perfection of human is in need of full knowledge.Basically, when a perfect human is the symbol of all divine names and learned all His manifestations and names, no error will find a way on it.(Alikhani, 2015,p. 154)., Hydar Amoli established a link between Shiah and mystical theology.The theory of monotheism of Hydar Amoli has been based on the unity of being of Ibn Arabi.There is a theologian and apparent monotheism which attests to the unity of God and it is the same monotheism by which the prophets have called people toward it.Also there is an inner and being monotheism which confirms the unity of being and it is the same monotheism by which the saints call people towards it.(Corbin, 1994, p. 471).
Like the attitude of Ibn Arabi towards the Jesus Christ, the twelve Imam also in the book of " Jame al Asrar" by Hydar Amoli have the roles of conveyors and intercessors of divine light which is manifested in Muhammadian light.Thus they are instruments for the enlightenment of mystical thoughts.Thus, mysticism and Shi'sm are united and the inner aspect of Islam forms the divine wisdom.(Halem,ibid,p. 141).

Sheikh Mofid (336-413 A.H.)
The methodology of Shiekh Mofid which was expanded later under the title of Usuli[fundamental] school of thought, stabilized intellect in the position of one of the evidence for the religious decrees and as a general rule, it judged on the inherence of intellect and religious law.The most basic scientific effort of individualists of Shia in the middle period is the rational interpretation of the idea of Imamate and also the explanation of the relationship between intellect and Imamate in the political life of Shia.In this discourse, the issue of Imamate, beyond a pure religious or political theory, has a specific epistemological base and places the knowledge of Imam at the center of any kind of theoretical deliberation about the political life.Sheikh Mofid says, "Indeed, Imams who are successor to the prophets in execution of decrees and performing the prescribed punishments and also maintaining religious laws and correction of people are innocent like the prophets".
The political knowledge of Shia, with such a viewpoint in placed in a position that in addition to the necessity of infallibles (a), in the political life emphasizes on the necessity of superior Imam in political idea and for this reason, that from the epistemological viewpoint, it is believed that each individual or a group of the Ummah are subject to degradation.It provides conditions for the possibility of the plan -theory of appointment of ruler inside its discourse and from this aspect; it deals with the basic criticism on Sunni caliphate.(Feirahi, 2009, p. 278-280).

Alam al Hoda (355-436 A.H.)
He is the greatest theoretician of consensus in Shiah jurisprudence.Consensus in his view does not have an absolute validity, but in some cases it is referred to when a decree from the outward of the book (the Qur-an) does not exist through various chains of narrators and sciences.He adds that whenever there is a consensus in the Shia right sect, such a consensus is a proof and it is not necessary for us to know the reason put forth by those who made the consensus or need not to search for it.Because what is our proof and we trust in it is their consensus not the reason of their consensus.The word of Alam al Hoda is equal to this phrase: Whatever is agreed upon and consensual by the Ummah or the Shiites or scholars, is inevitably in agreement with the views of the infallibles (a.s.).Otherwise it is necessary for the Imam (a.s.) to reveal his view.(ibid, p. 286).

5.
In the Iranian attitude and even jurisprudential with the Ijtihadic method of jurisprudents in particular based on the analysis of the component of political legitimacy, the standard which has existed for the classification of political system, is a view to an ideal model.On this basis, they were starting from different presumptions and when they wanted to classify the political system, they were looking at that ideal model.On the basis of data of this research, their ideal model is either ultra-God or Imamate.
If we start the discussion from the Farabi, the founder of the Islamic political philosophy, then to reach other intellectual trends, we will see that one of their constant concerns is the classification of political systems based on some standards.Basically, they divided the political system into utopia and non-utopia.That is to say that their classification is based on being utopia or not to be a utopia.In this view, one person has been placed at the top of the political system and the political system has had an ultimate goal and on this basis, the society and political system has become utopia or non-utopia.Depending to the issue that who is the head of the political system and what goal has been pursued by the members of this political system, the system was becoming utopia or non-utopia.
In this philosophical tradition, merely there is difference in the features of this head.The features which are mentioned by Farabi is somehow different from Ibn Sina.This difference becomes more serious with Sheikh Eshraq and school of illumination and once again, in other intellectual trends, there are some differences with these features.But their methods and attitudes are similar.Their city is either utopia or non-utopia and of course utopia and non-utopia has various divisions.For this very reason, when in the philosophical tradition, the political system and the city is divided into utopia and non-utopia and one of the features of being utopia is in the head and the characteristics of the head, so that their view is a pyramid shape view.That is to say they see the structure as pyramid such that in the base of this pyramid, there are people and at the top, there is the first head or the second head with the same features which exist in the topics of political philosophy.
Thus, from a perspective, it can be said: the preoccupation of a philosopher is not to prove the legitimacy or the prove the truthfulness in jurisprudential sense.Whereas in theologian and jurisprudent, there is a concern to defend the religious teachings.They have different presumptions.Of course it is right that this philosophical intellect and rational method based on the adaptability which were being established between the intellect and divine inspiration by the Muslim philosophers, cannot be in conflict with religion.But in jurisprudential discussions, there should be exactly a believer jurisprudent towards divine inspirational reasons, even if they are in disagreement with rationality, of course intellect as an independent source.The intellect which we know in the jurisprudential discussions is only limited to independents and rational axioms.
On the basis of the same rule it is put forth that: whatever is commanded by religious laws is confirmed by the intellect and whatever is commanded by intellect is confirmed by religious laws".But intellect in the philosophical discussions becomes broader and larger.Since Ibn Sina onwards, a change has occurred in the political philosophy of Islam and then Shia in Iran.That is to say, philosophy puts itself at the service of proving theology, Shariah, prophecy and Imamate.Furthermore, Ibn Sina employs the philosophical reasoning to prove prophecy and Imamate.However, when we reach to other intellectual trends, in addition that philosophy is put at the service of proving prophecy and Imamate; grounds are prepared for guardianship and jurisprudent guardianship in this theory.
The main and common question of the old theories in the political system is that who has the right of sovereignty?Who can rule and his government has legitimacy?For example in the jurisprudential tradition, does a jurisprudent have a right to govern or the Sultan?And/or in the philosophical tradition, what are the features and indicators of the first head who has the right to govern?