چکیده:
Modernity is one of the key concepts discussed by Professor Morteza Motahari. Of course, modernity has various aspects and in this study, we will focus on the collective issue or narrative of Iranian nationalism and Motahari's criticisms on it. Motahari does not narrate the concept of Iranianness in the form of "Aryan race" and says that the conceptualization of Iranianness in the form of Aryanism alienates the majority of the Iranian nation and this alienation is against the real national interests of Iran. Why does Motahari say this? What is Motahari's basis for this conceptualization? Does he not pay attention to the fact that his words are against the discourse of extreme nationalism? Does he not think about Iranian nationality? What are the Motahari's reasons who is a first class philosopher? Professor Motahari's answer is very surprising. It is true that he is not an anthropologist in the academic sense of the word. However, his answer is derived from a deep anthropology and his experimental understanding of Iran's pluralistic society, which is rooted in his philosophical worldview and this worldview, formulates the problem of society under historical developments and sees the relationship between religion and society as heavily involved in the construction of national affairs and national identity. The research method in this article is based on critical content analysis method.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Research Article Rereading Professor Motahhari's Wisdom-based Reading of Nationalism as a Component of Iranian Modernity Seyed Javad Miri 1 Received Date: 16/04/1400 Acceptance Date: 03/09/1400 Abstract The issue of modernity is one of the most key concepts discussed by Professor Morteza Motahhari.
It is true that he is not an anthropologist2 in the academic sense of the word; but his answer stems from a deep anthropology and his empirical understanding of the pluralistic society of Iran, which is rooted in his wisdom-based worldview that formulates the issue of society under historical transformations and sees the relationship between religion and society as deeply involved in the construction of the national matter and national identity.
By referring to the text of "Iranian Identity and the Persian Language," it can be understood that Maskoub believes Professor Motahhari does not have a correct understanding of the concept of nationalism.
" In other words, I think Maskoub has not only failed to read "The Mutual Services of Islam and Iran" correctly, but he has also failed to take Motahhari's approach within his intellectual system into account; instead, he has taken a "look" at Motahhari's book without regard for Motahhari's conceptual framework regarding Iranianness and his understanding of nationality.
Of course, in the book *Iranian Identity and the Persian Language*, Maskoub, without any conceptual discussion, accuses Motahhari of being ideological in the sense of "false consciousness," but the reality of the matter in my reading of Motahhari is that he is closer to Antoine Destutt de Tracy's (Head, 1985) view of "ideology," but has Maskoub overlooked or ignored this fact?
(
, 
, 
)
