سید محمدرضا احمدی طباطبایی

The Constitutional Revolution that restricted political power for the first time in Iran can be considered as one of the turning points in the history of political developments in Iran and the growth of political thought based on Shiite religious teaching. In fact, although constitutionalism began in the West, it soon influenced Islamic states, including Iran, and challenged the authoritarian monarchies. Meanwhile, the support of religious and leading scholars of The Najaf Seminary, especially Akhund Khorasani and Allameh Naeini from this socio-political movement in Iran played an important role in the relative victory of the Constitutional Revolution, otherwise the signing of the constitutional decree and the establishment of parliament and emergence of a new form of political system in Iran didn’t seem possible. Accordingly, despite the dichotomy of muslim scholars in favoring and opposing the constitutional movement, the great influence of the top scholars of Najaf, especially Allameh Naeini in supporting and theorizing about the superiority of the constitutional government over the authoritarian monarchy, paved the way for the victory of this movement. This article, by direct reference to the important work of Allama Naini called “Tanbih al-Umma Wa Tanzih al-Milla" has been attemped to analyze the rational and narrative teachings that has caused him to the preference of the constitutional government instead of the absolute monarchy in the era of Absence.

Toleration is a salient characteristic of thoughts and teachings of “Ekhvanossafa and Khellanolvafa” (sincere and loyal friends) community, who emerged about two thousand years ago during the flowering time of Islamic civilization. Their tolerance and forbearance have been observed in some studies conduced about them inside and outside our country, while the roots of their approach, which was put forward centuries before emergence of these themes in the West, have been neglected. This research was conducted with the aim to recognize the roots and destiny of their salient thought characteristic. Meanwhile, it was tried to, beside briefly introducing this thinking way, answer the innovative question of where the roots and factors of toleration of Ekhvanossafa have originated from. It should be noted that to do this research, the descriptive method and interpretation of texts were employed. 

One of the most fundamental subjects relating to humankind’s social life is justice. From the early days of human civilization, this topic has been intertwined with the most basic philosophical and sociological thoughts developed by the human mind. The great intellectuals of human history-whose contributions in the field of knowledge should truly be viewed as humankind’s collective heritage, not merely tied to the pride of a particular region or nationality-have all sought to address this topic in some way-in view, of course, of their peculiar social, ethical, philosophical, and political considerations-in an attempt to offer a precise definition of it and an accurate description of its role in the general arena of the human being’s social life. Divine and monotheistic religions have also been champions of justice in human societies. The Qur’an-as the final heavenly book revealed to God’s final prophet-enumerates three objectives in Surah Jum‘ah for which God appointed His prophets: to purify the human being’s soul from vice, to teach him God’s decrees and signs, and to edify him with knowledge and wisdom so as to enable him to uphold social justice. This demonstrates clearly that, in their religious endeavors, all the prophets pursued the same end, for the above-cited Surah does not restrict these objectives to Prophet Muhammad’s ministry; they are put forth as the objectives of all previous prophets as well.In this light, the comparative study of the principles that the monotheistic and Abrahamic faiths-particularly the two great faiths of Islam and Christianity-share in common or at least come very close to sharing is an especially important interdisciplinary field of study. In this article, I attempt to examine, in summary fashion of course, the tenets Islam and Christianity posit with regard to the concept of justice. (I should note in advance that my study of the Christian doctrine rests mainly on the thought and works of Saint Augustine.) This article should be viewed as a preliminary work, an introduction to a more extensive study on the principles these two faiths define regarding justice and, more particularly, social justice.

There has been a close interaction between post-Islamic Iranian philosophical, ethical, as well as political wisdom and Greek philosophy especially Platonic and Aristotelian trends of thought. Muslim Philosophers such as Farabi and Ibn Rushd have been among the major interpreters and commentators of the works of great Greek philosophers particularly Aristotle’s. Hence Aristotle was given the title of "the First Teacher” and Farabi that of “the Second Teacher". A main topic of discussion among Muslim scholars has been the great work of Aristotle, the Nichomachean Ethics, which addressed the author's son. The Arabic version of this book had a great impact on the ethical and civil heritage of Muslim scholars, since there was some closeness between those precepts and the Islamic ones. The present article discusses traces of this impact.

Attention to the human environment is essential in an age when human with irregular exploitation try to destroy and waste it. In between, the methodical attention to indigenous thinker’s perspective can be useful and practical. In this paper by using the prominent Traditional thinker’s perspective at the present time, Dr Nasr, has been tried to answer “How should be the desirable interaction between man and nature?” which it is in the field of environment with a political approach to this topic. This study has allocated to the environmental issue by using the framework of Ferkellaf discourse analysis in three levels of description, interpretation and explanation. As described level in Nasr’s view, there are three signifies of meaning as the religious values, traditional values and values of human dignity which signifies traditional value has been as central signifier. In the interpretation level, three factors as de sanctity of nature and knowledge, rationalism and humanism has been affected on how to formulate Nasr’s ecological discourse. As well as on the explanation level on his social function view, we can cite his criticism on single discourse; also we can cite his criticism on flawed religious approach and revival of scared knowledge of nature.