نشریه سیاست پژوهی ایرانی
سال دوم شماره 1 (پیاپی 3، بهار 1394)

The present article deals with a number of the methodological issues in the political interpretation of the Holy Qur’an. It seeks to clarify the most prevalent methodological assumptions which are necessary for the political interpretation of the Qur’an. To this end, the article appeals to the means of the “interpretational” methodology and the documentary research method. The article claims that the explanations of the interpreters of the Qur’an about the political subjects follow a number of meta‐commentary assumptions, which have been clarified through the article. The results of this article can facilitate the studies concerning the political interpretation of the Qur’an, methodologies of the sacred texts and the Qur’anic sciences.

Development and modernization have a history as long as the human history; however, the relevant theoretical discussions and theorizations formed mostly after world war the second. Just the same, the relationship and association of these issues with the religious instructions, particularly the Shiite ones, have remained ambiguous. Of course, some suggestions have been presented after the Islamic revolution in this regard; however, they are not enough. Therefore, the questionswhich still remain to be answered are whether there are any views concerning the issue of the theoretical development; and how they differ from the western views. It seems that the development model based on the previous modernization theories, which believed in the principle of the contrast between the traditionalism and modernism, are based on accumulation of wealth, and the first principle to be considered for them is negligence toward justice. However, the Shiite Islamic approach relies on distribution of the wealth and it emphasizes on the flow of the wealth, growth and development. The present article is the report of a comparative study of two development approaches, i.e. distributional and accumulative. The distributional model is based on the divine‐Islamic values; however, the western development model is based on discovering the nature in order to manipulate it, and it is a materialist approach.

There is no universal understanding concerning human being and various schools of thought have presented different views toward human being based on their belief presumptions. Consequently, human rights can be studied based on the kind of the viewpoints toward human being. Although the human rights have always been clarified based on the approved principles and norms, there is no universal understanding in this regard. The materialistic schools, which have a limited background concerning the issue of the human rights in their society, try to globalize their reading of this concept, and they reproach the others who do not follow this western reading.
Beyond the western view, the religion of Islam, which has a long history in considering the human rights, provides a comprehensive view based on human’s material and spiritual needs and makes appropriate recommendations to this end, which naturally differ from the western human rights. Considering the most basic components of the human rights, such as the human dignity, freedom, the right to life, the rights of women and respect for the beliefs of others, Islam has provided solutions for considering the human rights based on recognition of the human needs as stated in the religious instructions. Although, Islam has a similar reading about these elements as the western reading, it suggests different solutions for their realization.

This article considers the theoretical principles of Allameh Tabatabaie’s social‐political thoughts and the position of the social structure of Islam in the configuration of his intellectual system. In his view, Islam has based its foundation on the society and it has not ignored the social considerations in any of the human affairs. Allameh Tabatabaie has written that in Islam there is a real relationship between the individuals and the society, and through the aggregation of the individuals another entity is created which is called society and bears its own particular characteristics. Hence, Islam has based its most important regulations on the societies. These regulations include hajj, jihad, prayers, charity and, in one word, all the religious obligations.It seems that a systematic picture concerning the social system of Islam can be extracted through putting together his views in various fields. In this way, a model is achieved for the recommended society in Islam.

Although in the political and legal discourse the term of political supervision is used repeatedly, there is little discussion available about the analysis of the meaning of this concept and the quality of practicing it through the governmental institutes and also by the people in the political systems. This article emphasizes the position and role of the people in applying this supervision mode in order to control the power, and it tries to provide a clear definition for the political supervision and its features, so that it is clarified that in the current society of Iran, considering the vastness of the society, it is not possible to use the people’s direct supervision for the realization of a favorable control system. Instead, it is inevitable to appeal to modern mechanisms in accordance with the requirements of the current time and also it is necessary to reform the existing mechanisms.

In order to understand the terrorism in the age of globalization and the relationship between the two, one needs to consider the changes in the thought framework of modernity. Modernity is not the only element for the appearance of terrorist groups; rather it is one of the major elements for the manifestation of postmodern terrorism. In a general classification, three kinds of terrorism can be perceived:traditional, modern and postmodern terrorisms. The approach of the traditional terrorism varies from the approaches of the modern and postmodern terrorisms.
The modern and postmodern terrorisms are the result of changes following the growing trend of modernity and hence the globalization. In all of the activities of these two types, one can notice signs of enmity with globalization; however, the traditional terrorists acted differently. The goals of the traditional terrorists have been limited. However, the modern and postmodern terrorists aim at goals which go beyond outstanding governmental characters. This resembles the modernity thought which does not accept anything which brings about limitation. This article intends to show that the modern and postmodern terrorisms are a reaction to the consequences of modernity and globalization. In other words, the modern and postmodern terrorisms are the products of the modern period and are one of the major crises of modernity and globalization.