چکیده:
Human political rights are an important part of human rights that today, in declarations and texts related to human rights, are recognized as a natural and inalienable right and have become the basis of legitimacy for political systems in many countries and democratic systems. In the Islamic tradition, there are different approaches to this modern concept, each of which is based on its own specific epistemological foundations. Some religious scholars and modern jurists, in facing this issue, have presented a new formulation of the relations between the people and the government and have justified human political rights by utilizing jurisprudential resources and referring to religious sources. The main question of this writing is: 'On which epistemological foundations does "modern jurisprudence" prove human political rights, and in arguing for them, which rules and principles of the Islamic tradition does it cite?' The research results show that 'belief in the divine origin of rights,' 'belief in innate rights,' 'belief in the inherent dignity of man,' 'the authority of religion in political life,' and 'emphasis on reason and certain rational propositions' are the most important theoretical foundations of political rights in the tradition of jurisprudential modernism, upon which the thought of modern jurists regarding human political rights is based.
خلاصه ماشینی:
The main question of this writing is: "On which epistemological foundations does neo-traditional jurisprudence prove human political rights, and in arguing for them, which rules and principles of the Islamic tradition does it cite?" The research results show that "belief in the divine origin of rights," "belief in innate rights," "belief in the inherent dignity of man," "the authority of religion in political life," and "emphasis on reason and certain rational propositions" are the most important theoretical foundations of political rights in the neo-traditional jurisprudential tradition, upon which the thought of neo-traditional jurists regarding human political rights is based.
Unlike some traditionalist thinkers who are attached to the previous authoritarian order and emphasize the incompatibility of many modern political rights with religious teachings, and unlike many contemporary intellectuals who consider the issue of human political rights to be an extra-religious matter and rely on extra-religious foundations and concepts to prove it, (Soroush, 1380: 200) many neo-traditional jurists think that the Islamic intellectual tradition possesses such potential and latent capabilities that modern categories such as political rights can be extracted from it.
Accordingly, the main question is: "How does neo-traditional jurisprudence prove human political rights based on which epistemological foundations, and in arguing for them, which rules and principles of the Islamic tradition does it cite?" Reflection on the works of many neo-traditional jurists shows that "belief in the divine origin of rights," "belief in innate rights," "belief in the inherent dignity of man," "the authority of religion in political life," and emphasis on reason and certain rational propositions, are the most important theoretical foundations of political rights in the neo-traditional jurisprudential tradition upon which the thought of neo-traditional jurists regarding human political rights is based.
(
, 
, 
)
