Comparative study of Islamic and non-Islamic thinkers
Mona Hamidinasab; Mohammadali Tavana
Abstract
Theories of justice in contemporary Islamic political thought—particularly among Shiʿi scholars—remain relatively underdeveloped. Much of the existing literature either reiterates classical formulations or seeks to reconcile Islamic teachings with dominant Western theories of justice. Mohammad-Reza ...
Read More
Theories of justice in contemporary Islamic political thought—particularly among Shiʿi scholars—remain relatively underdeveloped. Much of the existing literature either reiterates classical formulations or seeks to reconcile Islamic teachings with dominant Western theories of justice. Mohammad-Reza Hakimi, however, advances a distinctive approach by mobilizing religious and normative vocabulary in the service of social justice, grounded in the cultural and socio-historical context of Iranian society. Drawing on John Searle’s theory of speech acts, this article examines the assertive, directive, and perlocutionary dimensions embedded in Hakimi’s normative language of justice. Methodologically, the study employs qualitative content analysis of Hakimi’s theological and socio-intellectual writings in order to trace how concepts such as justice, tawḥīd (monotheism), and human dignity are transformed into mobilizing elements of discourse. The findings demonstrate that Hakimi articulates his vision of justice through a conscious distancing from both conservative religious interpretations and capitalist social relations, thereby positioning social justice at the center of his intellectual project. Normative concepts such as enjoining good and forbidding wrong (amr bi’l-maʿrūf wa nahy ʿan al-munkar), divine justice (ʿadl-i ilāhī), and tawḥīd provide the linguistic and conceptual foundations for linking faith to active social engagement aimed at eradicating poverty and oppression. By situating Hakimi’s thought within Islamic intellectual traditions and contemporary socio-political challenges, this article highlights his contribution to a renewed conception of Islamic social justice and underscores the significance of linguistic analysis for bridging theology and social praxis.
Intellectual, historical and civilizational traditions of Muslim social thought
yazdan hashemi; mohammad ali tavana
Abstract
The confrontation between Islamic and Western civilizations has several turning points: 1. the translation movement in the seventh century AD, 2. the outbreak of the Crusades from the late eleventh to late thirteenth centuries, and 3. the colonial era from the eighteenth century onward. This article ...
Read More
The confrontation between Islamic and Western civilizations has several turning points: 1. the translation movement in the seventh century AD, 2. the outbreak of the Crusades from the late eleventh to late thirteenth centuries, and 3. the colonial era from the eighteenth century onward. This article examines the intellectual developments of the eighteenth century and beyond, as well as their effects on Muslim civilization. During this time period, the identity and lived experience of Muslims (Eastern, Islamic, and modern identities) were heavily influenced by the West; to the point where it sparked a tide of diverse thought patterns in Islamic societies. These schools of thought have developed in response to two major issues: first, modernity implies the abandonment or reinterpretation of religion, which necessitated the determination of religion’s position in the sociopolitical life of Muslims. Second, is secularization the prerequisite for development and progress, or, more philosophically, is the nature of development secular? What effect has confrontation with the West had on Muslim civilization, is the central query of the article. It appears that Muslims not only perceived and conceptualized each other (the West) differently, but also discovered distinct identities in another mirror. Faced with the West, various currents of thought have emerged in the Islamic world since the eighteenth century, which can be categorized into five distinct groups. 1) Following the Western direction; 2) Religious reform; 3) Nationalistic sentiments; 4) TraditionalismIslam; 5) Rethinking. In the era of multiculturalism, a rethinking approach based on critical acceptance rather than just confrontation or acceptance is one of the sensible ways to preserve the identity of Muslims. Consequently, reading the Islamic tradition and rebuilding its epistemological foundation, maintaining interactions in the field of needs without further rejection, and strengthening the foundations of understanding and thought can be a means of escaping the crises resulting from the confrontation between Islam and the West. The present investigation will employ qualitative content analysis.
mohammad ali tavana; yazdan hashemi; javad jarideh
Abstract
Ibn Khaldun seems to be the first Muslim thinker to look at the phenomenon of war from the sociological-anthropological point of view. This article raises the following questions: 1- What explanation does Ibn Khaldun give of war? 2. What are the most important factors in the sociology-anthropology of ...
Read More
Ibn Khaldun seems to be the first Muslim thinker to look at the phenomenon of war from the sociological-anthropological point of view. This article raises the following questions: 1- What explanation does Ibn Khaldun give of war? 2. What are the most important factors in the sociology-anthropology of Ibn Khaldun's beginning and end of the war? 3) What factors influence the outcome of the war?. The findings of this study show that Ibn Khaldun regards war as a natural phenomenon in human relations. He divides wars into legitimate and illegitimate on the basis of primitive or civilized; in Ibn Khaldun's view, wars based on primitive values are illegitimate and wars that order Are civil, legitimate. Ibn Khaldun considers the most important elements of sociology-anthropology as the initiator of illegitimate wars as the natural excess of mankind, the struggle for mere power, and the most important factors of sociology-anthropology as the initiation of war, tribal loyalty social order and the spread of religious beliefs. At the same time, he focuses on the sociological-anthropological factors of legitimate wars and illicit wars with realistic factors (such as military might) and extraneous factors (such as fortunes and secrecy);. The present paper uses text-based reading method.
Rereading and interpreting the ideas of leading Muslim thinkers
mohammad amin mirzaey; mohammad ali tavana
Abstract
The concept of freedom dates back to the constitutional era in the Iranian intellectual arena; nevertheless, the philosophical reflection on it among Iranian thinkers is a more recent phenomenon. Among recent Iranian thinkers, particularly Morteza Motahari and AbdolKareem Soroush, there have been deeper ...
Read More
The concept of freedom dates back to the constitutional era in the Iranian intellectual arena; nevertheless, the philosophical reflection on it among Iranian thinkers is a more recent phenomenon. Among recent Iranian thinkers, particularly Morteza Motahari and AbdolKareem Soroush, there have been deeper intellectual conflicts in terms of the issue of freedom. What are the similarities and differences between the two thinkers regarding freedom question? How Motahari and Soroush define freedom? What are dimensions and limits of freedom from the perspective of these two thinkers? The findings of this article suggest that Motahari is confronted with the issue of freedom with theological assumptions, and therefore, he considers freedom as the existence of freedom and will in the human being, which is necessary for human spiritual excellence. The other thinker, Soroush, considers modern liberal assumptions (in particular favoring a positivist methodology and pluralistic ontology) and distinguishes freedom as the highest human value. At the same time, both thinkers, under the influence of Islamic and mystical beliefs, identify two dimensions for freedom: internal freedom and external freedom. Evidently, Motahari emphasizes more on internal freedom while Soroush's emphasis is on external freedom. Meanwhile, both thinkers believe, Sharia (Islamic law) and morality limit freedom.
Rereading and interpreting the ideas of leading Muslim thinkers
mohammad ali tavana; mohammad kamkari; mohammad kamkari
Abstract
Mortaza Motahari and Fatemeh Marneisi have put the issue of the Muslim woman in a modern situation in the spotlight; from a Shi'i political jurisprudence perspective and from another Islamic feminist perspective. The present paper examines the views of these two thinkers on the rights of Muslim women, ...
Read More
Mortaza Motahari and Fatemeh Marneisi have put the issue of the Muslim woman in a modern situation in the spotlight; from a Shi'i political jurisprudence perspective and from another Islamic feminist perspective. The present paper examines the views of these two thinkers on the rights of Muslim women, and sets out questions that Motahari and Marannis regard as civil, political, and social rights for Muslim women.What are the similarities and differences between these two thinkers? Research findings show Motahhari considers a woman to be the same as the man in terms of being, thus the right to freedom of conscience and religion, the right to property, the right to education, and equal security (from social rights) and equal suffrage (from Political rights) for women with men, but due to differences in the nature of men and women, different rights with men in the field of inheritance, coverage and divorce law, the right to work (from social rights) and the right to choose The political will (for political rights) is for women. In contrast to Merannis, there is an inseparable equality between men and women, as a result of which all Muslim, social and political rights that can be given to Muslim men are also considered by Muslim women. The basis for the difference between Motahari and Maranni's views can be attributed to their different attitudes toward Islam.
