وجوه اختلاف دیدگاه‌های مطلقه و مقیده، در اختیارات ولی فقیه در عصر غیبت

One of the central issues in the theory of Wilayat al-Faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist) is the precise determination of the scope and limits of the authority exercised by the Islamic ruler during the period of the Major Occultation. With the commencement of the Occultation, the administration of public affairs and the protection of the interests of the Muslim community became among the most significant concerns of Shi‘i political jurisprudence. Within this framework, two major approaches emerged regarding the powers of the qualified jurist (faqih jāmiʿ al-sharāʾiṭ): the theory of Absolute Guardianship of the Jurist (Wilayat al-Faqih al-Mutlaqah) and the theory of Restricted Guardianship of the Jurist (Wilayat al-Faqih al-Muqayyadah). Each approach carries distinct implications for governance, legislation, and the exercise of political authority. Given the diversity of interpretations concerning the meaning of “absoluteness” (itlāq), the present study seeks to clarify the precise meaning of this concept and to identify the foundational distinctions between these two theories. The research addresses the following question: What is meant by “absoluteness” in the theory of Absolute Guardianship of the Jurist, and how does it differ from the theory of Restricted Guardianship? The study adopts a descriptive-analytical methodology and relies on library-based research and documentary sources. The findings indicate that Absolute Guardianship, or what earlier jurists often referred to as General Guardianship, denotes the jurist’s unrestricted authority in matters relating to the administration of society and the implementation of Islamic law. In contrast, Restricted Guardianship limits the authority of the jurist primarily to hisbah matters (public-interest duties lacking a specific administrator) and cases of necessity. Furthermore, an examination of the views of Ruhollah Khomeini before and after the Islamic Revolution—particularly as expressed in his work Wilayat al-Faqih and in his governmental positions—demonstrates a clear commitment to the theory of Absolute Guardianship as the most effective foundation for the Islamic political system.
The study concludes that the differences between these two approaches can be explained through five principal dimensions:

The scope of the jurist’s authority.
The temporal extent of authority during the periods of the Presence and Occultation of the Imam.
The legitimacy of establishing an Islamic government.
The status and authority of governmental decrees (ahkam hukūmiyyah).
The legal form and framework of the jurist’s powers.

The originality of this research lies in its analytical and comparative approach, which not only clarifies the meaning of absoluteness (itlāq) but also systematically identifies the points of divergence between the two theories and demonstrates their relationship to the foundations of Islamic governance and the function of governmental rulings during the period of Occultation.