حسن مجیدی

The political thought of the contemporary Arab thinkers can be formulated in the relation between tradition and modernity. Struggle with modernity and return to the tradition of the Salafist minds, the possibility of rejuvenation of tradition by some other intellectual thinkers, the acceptance of modernity and putting the tradition aside, and the combination and compromise between tradition and modernity, are various forms of this ratiometric that can be beneficial in understanding the political thought of many contemporary Arab thinkers among the Sunni community. Meanwhile, the Council is a key word considered by many scholars from different Sunni countries, especially in the post-Ottoman Empire era, a good starting point for achieving a desirable political system. The type of impression of these thinkers from the council and the meaning given to this key sign from different perspectives, forms the mindset of many of these thinkers: reducing the meaning of council to the level of consultation and monistic view of it, the unanimity of the council with the resolution and community, the belief in the council as a society of Muslim citizens and the Islamic Ummah, and the promotion of the council from democracy are different aspects of contemporary thinkers. The result of this new look can be found in the neglect of the capacity of tradition, including the council, to systematize politics in the modern era with a thinker such as Ali Abdul Raziq, an attempt to revive the council in the new caliph-lovers, such as young Rashid Reza, and the link between Shura(council) and democracy in the moderate school of eastern scholars such as Rashid Reza Pir, Gharzavin and Ghonoushi, and finally believing in the superiority of the council to democracy under Mohammad Tofigh al-Shavi. This paper, by a documentary method, and expressing conceptual framework and different narrations of the concept of the council, seeks to reconsider the position of the council to the aforementioned thinkers.

In the religious democracy system, the election is the area of power generation and its continual. In the electoral realm, the people fulfill the democracy by choosing the rulers, and since Islam forms the essence and framework of people’s movement and life, in Islamic democracy, the executives, candidates, and supervisors of election, people, and more than others, the electoral candidates must realize the Islamic ethical principles. Politics serves morality and religion in the religious democracy. The present article evaluated some of the coordinates and requirements of electoral ethics in the religious democracy system. Using a descriptive-analytical method, this essay described some basic principles of the electoral ethics charter, which should be considered by those involved in the election process, including voters, candidates, executives, supervisors and observers, and the media.

One of the rules and principles that has long been considered a necessity of human society in the narrations of the Prophet of Islam (PBUH) and the Shiite Imams (AS) and consequently in jurisprudence, is maintaining the system. From the beginning of Islam until now, Muslim leaders and Islamic thinkers have ruled on the prohibition of what causes disruption of the system, and in return, they have considered maintaining the system obligatory, and consequently, have considered what is necessary for maintaining the system obligatory. This ruling has become so widespread among jurists and other Muslim thinkers that it has become a rule; Of course, it is clear that this issue is not one of the founding principles and rules of Islam, but since the most important document of it is reason, in every system and society everyone has been and is seeking to preserve the system of their society, and perhaps it can be said that this need has been felt since the very beginning of human society. In this case, according to the view presented by Imam Khomeini (RA), the obligation to preserve the Islamic system is one of the primary rules and has such a strong interest that it takes precedence over other religious rules. Therefore, if there is a conflict between the interests of the Islamic system and other interests - even if none of the secondary titles exist - the interests of the system take precedence and the other ruling is temporarily suspended. The ruling that the jurist issues in this case is a governmental ruling and is formed based on the interests of the Islamic society - the interests of Islam and Muslims.

The present article seeks to examine the dimensions and reflection of anti-rationalism in the opinions of various Salafi thinkers and movements, mainly anti-rationalists. It does not deny the existence of some Salafis who are not anti-rationalists but do not independently accept the authority of reason, but this article does not address them. The question of the article is: What is the place of anti-rationalism among thinkers of different periods of Salafi thought and what are the manifestations and consequences of anti-rationalism in the opinions and positions of Salafis? The method used in this research is documentary. The findings of the article show that Salafism, with its various approaches in the foundations and components of its thought and strategy, is opposed to reason and rationality. This characteristic, while denying the capacity for civilization and state-building in the face of modernity and even other rationalist religious movements, is unable to stand and is in conflict with the principles and foundations of authentic Islam, which has a great capacity for connection with reason and wisdom. The trajectory of anti-rationalism shows that to the extent that this line of thought increases its opposition to reason and emphasizes superficiality and stratification, it insists on a more jihadist and takfiri policy, and the extent to which the thinkers of this thought movement use othering, violence, and extremism is increasing.