tolerance

John Locke (1632–1704) is a pivotal figure in political philosophy, whose ideas have profoundly influenced foundational debates on governance and society. Despite extensive discourse surrounding his theories, the epistemological underpinnings of Locke's thought often remain underexplored. These principles, central to his philosophy, are articulated primarily in his seminal work, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. While a comprehensive examination of the interrelation between Locke’s epistemology and political thought exceeds the scope of this paper, this study aims to investigate the epistemological foundations of his social contract theory. The primary assertion is that Locke’s social contract theory, as the cornerstone of his political philosophy, is inextricably linked to his epistemological framework. To fully understand Locke’s political philosophy, particularly his articulation of the social contract, one must engage deeply with his epistemological premises.

This study employs a descriptive-analytical approach to examine Locke’s epistemological framework in relation to his social contract theory. The analysis is structured around three core epistemological constructs: the tools of knowledge, the types of knowledge, and the possibility of knowledge. These constructs serve as a heuristic framework for interpreting Locke’s philosophical principles. Each construct is analyzed to clarify Locke’s position, followed by an exploration of their implications for the social contract. By tracing these interconnections, this study aims to delineate how Locke’s epistemological commitments inform and underpin his political theorizing. 

Locke begins his inquiry by examining the origin of ideas, asserting that all ideas arise from experience and systematically refuting the concept of innate ideas. He defines knowledge as the agreement or disagreement among ideas, thereby clarifying its nature, scope, and limitations. Locke identifies three primary tools for acquiring knowledge: reason, revelation, and sensory perception, with reason occupying the apex of this hierarchy as the ultimate criterion for evaluating truth claims. He classifies knowledge into three categories: intuitive, demonstrative, and sensory, assigning certainty to the first two while acknowledging the probabilistic nature of sensory knowledge. Although he recognizes the limited scope of certain knowledge, Locke emphasizes the pragmatic importance of probabilistic knowledge, which he argues governs most human endeavors. His epistemological perspective, described as indirect realism, affirms the possibility of attaining certain knowledge within specific constraints.The central question arises: How does Locke’s social contract theory relate to his epistemological framework? This inquiry requires examining how these epistemological principles shape and manifest within the theory itself. Locke’s philosophical approach suggests that political and societal concepts, like those in other domains, originate from experience and adhere to similar epistemological rules. However, his account does not explicitly clarify which type of experience gives rise to these concepts or the specific mechanisms by which they are derived.In Locke’s depiction of the state of nature, human beings are rational agents whose capacity for reason enables peaceful coexistence. This rationalist portrayal is crucial for his social contract theory, as a depiction of the state of nature as brutish and anarchic would contradict Locke’s vision. The assumption of human rationality serves as a necessary precondition for the theory, motivating individuals to form a contract that establishes society and governance.Locke’s rationalist interpretation of the state of nature emphasizes reason as the dominant epistemological element, driving individuals to seek an escape from this condition. The absence of a final arbiter or governing authority in the state of nature makes it precarious and prone to conflict, compelling rational individuals to consent to a social contract that establishes governance based on mutual agreement.For Locke, reason serves as the epistemological foundation of both the social contract and the subsequent formation of government. Political society emerges solely through a consensual social contract rooted in the rationality of individuals in the state of nature. This collective rationality not only facilitates the establishment of government but also underpins the creation of laws after its formation. Consequently, Locke strongly rejects absolutist governance as antithetical to rational principles.While Locke’s political arguments primarily rely on rationalist and demonstrative reasoning, he also invokes scriptural authority (what he terms “revealed revelation”) to critique opposing theories such as divine-right monarchy and to align his ideas with the Protestant ethos of 17th-century England. Nevertheless, the core of Locke’s political philosophy is firmly anchored in rationalist principles, which portray power, governance, and law as secular constructs derived from collective human reason rather than divine ordination.Locke’s emphasis on the epistemological primacy of reason underscores his argument for social contract theory. Reason, as the principal tool of knowledge, clarifies both the state of nature and the necessity of forming a contract to establish governance.Additionally, reason, in conjunction with revealed revelation, forms the epistemological basis for Locke’s critique of Robert Filmer’s patriarchal theory. Following the establishment of government, laws become essential for maintaining social order. Locke limits the authority of religious doctrine while expanding the jurisdiction of human reason, entrusting the creation of laws to the collective rationality of society—a faculty capable of discerning natural law and rights and framing laws for human coexistence.

This study has aimed to clarify Locke’s epistemological foundations and their relationship with his social contract theory. As a pioneer of empiricism, Locke asserts that all human ideas originate from experience, systematically rejecting the theory of innate ideas. He explores the nature, limitations, and instruments of knowledge, categorizing it into intuitive, demonstrative, and sensory types. Ultimately, Locke’s adherence to the representational theory of knowledge positions him as an epistemological realist who affirms the possibility of certain knowledge.The concept of the social contract emerges as a composite construct with empirical origins, situated within Locke’s classification of relational knowledge. While Locke aligns the theory with demonstrative reasoning, he acknowledges its reliance on probabilistic certainty rather than mathematical precision. The theory is grounded in reason and supplemented by scriptural affirmations that reflect Locke’s socio-political context. His epistemological realism, a unique synthesis of empiricism and rationalism, along with his commitment to probabilistic knowledge, profoundly shapes the contours of his social contract theory. Locke's discussions on the state of nature and the formation of the social contract are firmly rooted in his epistemological realism and rationalist commitment.

AbuSaeed AbulKhair is the greatest mystics of Iran. Philanthropy and love for them can be considered as one of the most obvious personality traits,which is connected with love for all beings and in a word, the whole universe.AbuSaid destroys the system of conventional and idiomatic meanings and reaches a new meaning and a new definition, which is the product of his intellectual influence and the Khorasan school.The school of Khorasan has become famous for a kind of tolerance regarding religion and religious matters due to their lack of respect for the appearances of Sharia,Sekar,Shathiyat and blaming.AbuSaid has a special place as a full-fledged representative of the Khorasan school and the influence of the Khorasan school is evident in his thoughts. The main question of the research is what is the role of interpretations in creating the spirit of tolerance in the intellectual school of AbuSa'id and the school of Khorasan and what are its dimensions. In this research, AbuSaeed's attitude towards man,his way of expressing and dealing with different sections of society, followers of different religions and differences, and on the other hand, his interpretive attitude towards the world, have been investigated. The results obtained from this study indicate that Abu Saeed has interpreted the phenomena of the universe, religious texts and Sufi terms in Asrar al-Tawheed, and according to Mashrab and his school of thought, Khorasan mysticism, which focuses on making others happy and drunkenness. It is emphasized that it is kindness and compassion towards humans, creatures and existence.

"Tolerance" is a well-known and common term in the political, social, cultural and religious discourses of today's society. The correct explanation of the relationship between this term and concepts such as zeal in Islam is considered an important and necessary issue; To the extent that this issue is also questioned in the discussions of the Islamic Revolution and its relationship with "revolutionary zeal" is also questioned. From this approach, the following article tries to answer how "tolerance" is compatible or incompatible with "revolutionary zeal". The findings of this research, based on the theory of "political rationality" and with a comparative method, show that there is a conflict between Western tolerance and revolutionary zeal, as well as what is known as tolerance (dreaming and tolerance towards others) with certain limits and loopholes. In the religion of Islam, it is completely different from tolerance and it is even associated with revolutionary zeal; In such a way that establishing tolerance depends on religious and revolutionary zeal.

The final goal drawn by the leaders of the Islamic Revolution of Iran is the realization of the new Islamic civilization. There are many obstacles to the realization of such a strategic goal. For this reason, research in this field is necessary. At present, intolerance of other people's opinions and opinions in various political, cultural, ideological, economic, etc. dimensions is a dominant phenomenon in the Islamic society. The main question, taking into account the principle of limitation in the research topic, is what role does the lack of patience and tolerance in ideological and knowledge dimensions play in the realization of the new Islamic civilization? To answer this question, the verses of the Holy Qur'an, narrations and historical data have been studied. The proposed hypothesis is that: patience and tolerance in the dimensions of belief and knowledge is one of the requirements for the emergence, dynamism and reliability of modern Islamic civilization. To prove the mentioned hypothesis, a descriptive method is used. An analysis has been used. The available documents indicate that there is a direct and necessary relationship between modern Islamic civilization and patience and tolerance. In the sense that the increase and continuation of patience and tolerance in Islamic society causes the emergence, reliability and dynamism of modern Islamic civilization and intolerance. It will cause stagnation and backwardness of the society in various dimensions, including ideological and knowledge.

The politics of friendship comes directly from discussing the conditions of human beings with one another.Living and communicating with others is important and undeniable based on human social nature.Now a day,with the expansion of private space, as opposed to the narrowing of the circle of human common space, friendships have faded. The issue of violence and enmity in the Islamic world has gained particular prominence with the rise of jihadi takfiri groups, as often theorized and elaborated by scientific and academic research.However, the issue of friendship, which is otherwise a political issue from Schmidt's point of view, has been less addressed, especially in domestic research and especially in political philosophy. Contemporary Muslims have not been followed.Therefore, the present study seeks to discover indicators of friendship in the political thought of Imam Khomeini as a contemporary Muslim thinker and leader of the Islamic Revolution based on the theories of Hanna Arendt and Jacques Derrida (with emphasis and adjustment). To accomplish this, it is important to use the approach Schleiermacher's hermeneutics used qualitative content analysis, indentation and inference method. On this basis, the main question of the research is “How does the concept of friendship in Imam Khomeini's thought make sense of politics and politics in the Islamic world?” and its hypothesis is that categories such as vows and covenants, power, acceptance of differences, acceptance of differences, acceptance The other is that forgiveness, responsible friendship, and negative self-negation are decisive in the form of friendship politics in their thinking system.

Critical discourse analysis, as a method of text analysis, tries to identify the inner layers of the elements in it and analyze the relationship between them in order to reach the deep meanings of the text. This method is considered a tool for text analysis and worldview of texts, especially in religious studies. Although Jews are the most hostile people towards Muslims (Al-Maidah: 82), but in the verses of the Holy Qur'an, tolerant behavior and forgiveness towards them is expressed. In this article, the ideology of the divine discourse of these verses has been analyzed based on Fairclough's critical discourse analysis method. The findings of the research indicate that ideological constructions at the level of description, including the empirical value of words, semantic similarity, and syntactic constructions, have been used in expressing tolerance towards people of the book. Forgiveness, forgiveness, patience and piety are the components of discourse, tolerance with people of the book. These components are in close interaction with discourse ideology and power relations. The analysis of the context of the situation at the level of interpretation revealed that the style of speaking in the text layer is completely consistent with the social and time conditions of the revelation of the verses. The analysis of the level of explanation shows the desirable life pattern in the society and shows that the tolerance towards the people of the book is for the preservation of social interests, and it appears in the fields that do not lead to the dominance of conspiracy-oriented thoughts.

Liberalism, as a term of political thought, has many meanings. The main reason for this research was that what is the relationship between the concept of tolerance in the school of liberalism and tolerance among religious intellectuals in Iran? In this regard, it was assumed that the framework and intellectual characteristics of Iranian religious modernists have profound differences in the field of values and moral education with liberal ideas. This research is applied in terms of purpose and descriptive research in terms of correlational research, which has studied the subject by relying on the library function. Studies have shown that this value has the same meaning in the two schools. But there is also a subtle difference in this value. If tolerance is used as a moral attribute meaning easy-going, tolerance, chivalry, foresight and freedom, it is approved by Islam. But tolerance means complete indifference to the moral beliefs and behaviors of individuals and groups leading to moral relativity. Accordingly, anyone can have any kind of moral beliefs and behavior.

Political tolerance and interaction in the Qur'an and Hadith can be considered as one of the important tasks of governments and politicians to achieve national unity and the growth of various social ideas. Relying on the manners of the infallibles and the institutionalization of the elements of Sadrism, Muslim political rulers consider tolerance in social interactions as one of the main factors in reducing and controlling the level of confrontation and conflict among groups, guilds and individuals in society. This research seeks the role and effects of political tolerance from the perspective of the Qur'an and the tradition and manners of the Imams. And how and based on what strategies the interactions between the government and the nation as well as formal and informal individuals, parties, groups and organizations can be optimally managed and violent clashes can be prevented. This article provides a detailed picture of the position and role of this element in socio-political engineering by descriptive-analytical method and by analyzing the perspective of Quran and Hadith. Different areas and relations of governments and interaction of cultures, how to deal with religious minorities in Islamic countries has become doubly important. Therefore, identifying Islamic commands and rules in the field of interaction and tolerance with others and other countries in the contemporary world is very helpful and effective.

The purpose of the present study is to review the political role of “refq” (tolerance) and “khorq” (ignorance) in the political idea of Imam Khomeyni. The method of study is descriptive-analytic and the model under discussion is presented based on the theory of two natures and with an emphasis on the theoretical framework of the four causes. The research relies on the hypothesis that since “refq” is related to makhmourah nature and is considered as one of the soldiers of reason and belongs to the transcendental philosophical school; and “khorq” is related to Mahjoubah nature and is considered as one the soldiers of ignorance and belongs to the mundane philosophical school, they can lead to the formation of an either transcendental legitimizing or mundane society. The results showed that based on the viewpoint of Imam Khomeyni, the actualization of moral politics refers to opening of hearts and that the governments and societies need to actualize tolerance and avoid violence. Therefore, such governments consider power as a means to serve the society and make it achieve prosperity.

Political conflict in the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) should be viewed as a complex and destructive type of social conflicts, which are one of the strategic obstacles to political development.  Furthermore, these conflicts contribute to instability, reduce the threshold of tolerance of the political system, threaten national interests, and finally create systemic imbalance leading to the escalation of crises in the country. The research questions are as follows: 1. What are the effective mechanisms for resolving political conflicts? 2. How can the strategy of tolerance be effectively used to resolve political conflicts in order to develop and improve the capacity of the IRI’s political system? With the use of Sarantakos’s cyclical process of analysis and a qualitative approach, the authors try to find reasonable answers to these questions, and test a hypothesis in which it is postulated that the institutionalization of tolerance in Iranian society today can be effective in managing and resolving political conflicts, and consequently help the decision-makers to improve political capacity and efficiency of the IRI’s political system to confront social challenges.The authors argue that tolerance and forbearance can be traced back to different historical periods from the Achaemenid rule onwards, and were often used in connection with religion. The constructive approach to tolerance helped the Achaemenian Empire to become one of the greatest empires in the world. In the contemporary era, the Iranian constitution adopted after the Constitutional Revolution as a key legal instrument—in addition to the attitude of the legislators towards the West and human rights issues— influenced moderation and tolerance towards religious minorities. In the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Constitution and the Charter of Citizen Rights, there are no direct reference to tolerance, but there are certainl concepts, , which  are linked to tolerance. For instance, a number of articles specify the dynamic and extensive participation and involvement of all individuals in Iranian society in the process of development within the framework of national unity. The importance of tolerance in the political thoughts of the key leaders of the Islamic revolution are also examined. Since their viewpoints are based on Islam and religious theology, they largely advocate tolerance as long as it is not in conflict with the religious nature of Iran’s political system and national security. They have cautioned that this principle should not provide the basis for the intervention of the enemies and foreign domination. The most serious obstacles and challenges of institutionalizing the culture of tolerance in Iran as well as the role of  universities, laws, political parties, civil society, seminaries, and elite are also discussed. The findings of the research have been presented in the form of a proposed model that confirms the positive and effective role of the policy of tolerance as one of the principles of good governance in resolving political conflicts and dealing with the existing vulnerabilities in Iran’s political system.

The present article compares the ideas of Imam Khomeini and Herbert Marcuse regarding liberal tolerance with the aim of showing how two thinkers with completely different and even conflicting principles may reach the same conclusion. The present article discusses the question of what Imam Khomeini and Marcuse's views on liberal tolerance have in common, and tests the hypothesis that they both believe that the concept of tolerance in liberalism prevents the emergence and continuation of revolutionary ideology. The method of the descriptive article is comparative and the approach of the article is philosophical-political, and in terms of subject matter, it is new and has no study history with this kind of attitude. The innovative aspect of the article is the comparison of the ideas of two thinkers who seem incomparable. The conclusion of the article is that when studying non-Islamic theories, in addition to reviewing and criticizing, one should look for lessons from that theory that can be used to enrich theorizing in the second step of the revolution. According to the authors, this kind of attitude will pave the way for learning between Islamic and secular views.

Lack of peaceful coexistence and lack of tolerance are among the negative characteristics that are sometimes attributed to Iranian society as a historical and cultural issue. In some of the works related to the Iranian temperament, it is often said that the Iranian man lacked the spirit of dialogue and interaction and in the face of another, he always had a hostile and non-peaceful spirit. This article bases its claim on the critique of this image of Iranian national identity and tries to show that tolerance, especially in the face of religious minorities, is one of the special features of Iranian society. This research is a descriptive and analytical study and in collecting data, the method of documentary study has been used with emphasis on foreign travelogues of Safavid and Qajar periods. Based on the research findings, it can be said that from the point of view of foreign travel writers, although in some cases there have been some restrictions on some religious minorities, but Muslim Iranians based on Shiite culture throughout history. Religious minorities have always been treated with tolerance and moderation. And a lot of evidence and reports from tourists show the favorable situation of religious minorities in Iranian society and their enjoyment of citizenship rights and religious freedoms

Mystical texts are an important part of the intellectual heritage of Iran and Islamic World. In spite of the differences of opinion between scholars about the history of political thought in Iran, there is no doubt that mystical tradition was rich and influential in medieval Islamic period. However, most of the research conducted on these texts are in the form of biographies and had almost exclusively concentrated on the literary aspects and moral teachings of these texts. Little attention has been paid to the intellectual themes and implications of these texts for politics and civic engagement in public life in society. A critical reading for the purpose of gaining a deeper and more accurate understanding of  the political value of these texts can be useful in the analyses of the historical development of Iranian-Islamic thought. Furthermore, by doing so, we might find appropriate answers to the challenges of today's Iranian society. Abu’l-maʿālī ʿabdallāh Bin Abībakr Mohammad Mayānejī Known as Ein Al-Qozāt Hamedāni is one of the incomparable thinkers in Iranian-Islamic thought. He was considered one of the Sufi sheikhs of his time and had many disciples, some of whom had political influence and positions in the Seljuk political system. He died at the young age of thirty-three when the Seljuk executed him in 1131, but his works secured him a place in the history of Iran as a mystical philosopher. Henry Corbin, a French theologian and Iranologist with renowned expertise in Islamic philosophy and Sufism, has referred to him as a jurist, mystic, philosopher, and mathematician, but he is better known as a mystic among the Iranian scholars of Islamic-Iranian thought. Ein Al-Qozāt has not been recognized as a politicalthinker in the literal sense or a writer who has directly been interested in politics, and thus his works have seldom been evaluated from this perspective. Indeed, some scholars have argued that “mysticism never seeks to add, know, rearrange or improve anything in the earthly world”, and mysticism as an independent epistemological realm is in conflict with politics as a science that is responsible for organizing the public arenas.In the present study, the authors use certain components of Leo Strauss and Quentin Skinner's methodology to analyze important writings of Ein Al-Qozāt Hamedāni, particularly his letters in order to reveal the civic virtues and capacities of thought of this famous mystic, and find political significance not previously traced. The main research question to be answered is: How can civic life be organized by relying on the basic concepts of the mystical thought of Ein Al-Qozāt Hamedāni.By civic implications, we mean virtues such as justice, love, friendship, and tolerance, which being at the junction of mystical thought and political thought, strengthen social relations and create the desired political order. In the view of Ein Al-Qozāt Hamedāni, justice is considered as an element that provides a basis for welfare for all members of society.Ein Al-Qozāt Hamedāni considered love as an inherent thing and believed that the love of God is hidden in the human nature, and wrote that the love of a human being to another human being is useful in moving towards transcendental love. He described love as the cause of moral strength, the promoter of friendship, and the basis for the movement toward true love leading to public good and eternal bliss. By his attention to love, Ein Al-Qozāt Hamedāni rejected prejudice and called on different societies to nurture friendship. He considered all religions as being equal and worthy of respect, and saw all religions and sects on the path to love. In fact, he considered love as the basis for tolerance, acceptance of pluralism and reconciliation of societies. In spite of the unsettled situation of his time, which was full of prejudice and rage, he insisted on the solidarity and reconciliation of religions. He showed his conviction that the observance of the principle of tolerance is a necessity in society. In conclusion, the authors’ comprehensive analysis of Ein Al-Qozāt Hamedāni’s writings show a kind of systematic interactions between the various aspects of his thought, which was ultimately aimed at establishing a well-organized and just society free from crises, moral disorders and social conflicts. Introducing Ein Al-Qozāt Hamedāni as a great thinker in the mystical tradition with no interest in politics is an example of a contradiction in the narratives that have defined mystical thought in fundamental conflict with politics and political action, because of the characterization of mysticism as a promoter of apostasy and isolationism.

The current article assuming that the theory of tolerance is a fundamental solution to achieve the goals of the political system and civil mutual acceptance, and also has a special place in the works of Imam Khomeini, intends to follow and highlight it in the Imam's thought by examining the theoretical support of tolerance in Islamic and Western civilization. The rights of individuals and how to interact with others is one of the aspects of Imam Khomeini's thought, which is manifested by observing and recognizing civil rights and freedoms in his speech and actions. The study of the works of Imam Khomeini (ra) shows that in his views he has explained the need for tolerant interaction in a society and its effects on social and religious life, and also with his political tradition of behavior has shown that violent behavior not only is not effective in Individual and social reform, but it is also the source of larger and more complex corruptions. In Imam Khomeini's thought, tolerance is a paradigmatic concept extracted from religious texts and from the perspective of political ethics and political philosophy, it is an integral part of religious sovereignty and a moral virtue and legal-political principle that in practice leads to The peaceful life of individuals and groups with beliefs. A different and distinct way of acting allows for the emergence and emergence within a given society; Therefore, it is a good way to establish social capital in society and reduce social and political tensions between groups. The research method in this article is a comparative-analytical one that by historically examining the course of the concept in both Islamic and Western civilizations and then analyzing it in Imam's thought, finally came to the conclusion that resorting to Imam's thought and political action can be a suitable solution for many The current problems of Islamic-Iranian civilization.

The issue of tolerance and intra-religious lenity is one of the issues that play an important role in more cohesion of different Islamic groups and currents, and it is also of great importance in the present age due to the widespread violence arising from religious understanding. This doubles the need to study the viewpoints of famous scholars and Islamologists who have taken a special approach in this regard. One of these scholars and scientists is Imam Abu Hanifa, the famous jurist and theologian of Kufa and the founder of the Hanafi religion, one of the four religions of the Sunnis. The present study examines tolerance in Abu Hanifa's political thought. This research is of descriptive-analytical type in terms of nature and it has collected information using the library method. The results showed that in addition to the importance of intra-religious tolerance in Abu Hanifa's political thought is important, his approaches in the field of faith, rationalism, Morjea’s theory, custom and free-thinking idea have played an effective role on tolerance and intra-religious lenity. In fact, Abu Hanifa's interpretation of the concept of faith was different from the one given by violent groups such as the Khawarij. On the other hand, his views on the concept of opinion, the use of reason, the emphasis on rationalism, attention to reasoning in thought, as well as attention to custom and its effect on inference from jurisprudence, formed a kind of tolerance in his thought, which has been influential on the Muslims consensus.

Coexistence is an issue that has always existed throughout history, and human beings have always sought to find ways and means of living peacefully together. In past societies, the diversity of cultures, languages, ethnicities, as well as other elements of social life was less, and tolerating each other's differences and beliefs was not an important issue; But with the growth and expansion of communication in all fields, on the one hand, cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious diversity has increased, and on the other hand, the amount of interactions and attitudes of individuals has doubled. Therefore, tolerating the beliefs, customs and cultures of other groups will be of great importance. The present study has been done with a descriptive and analytical approach with a documentary-library method and the results show that political, social and moral-behavioral tolerance are the most important in society. The relationship between religiosity and social tolerance has also been examined.

Civilization means physical progress and manifestations of social welfare, born of human need, rationality and creativity, and culture, ie a set of beliefs, values ​​and traditions, in addition to giving direction, can be an effective factor in promoting and perpetuating that civilization and society. In the meantime, the character of the rulers and their moral performance are very influential in the progress or backwardness of human society and civilization. According to the Qur'anic teachings and narrations, the leaders and agents of Islamic societies, if the creators are familiar with human morality and divine values ​​and adhere to their bad people in their dealings, are citizens full of peace of mind, empathy and cooperation, have legitimate rights and They will be prone to material and spiritual growth and perfection, and the continuity of these healthy and dynamic societies will bring about a glorious and lasting civilization. The Qur'anic interpretation of "Wilayah" about sovereignty and the interpretation of "Wali" about the ruler is a proof of the fact that the genuine rulers of Islamic societies, in addition to practical and executive competencies, must also have a kind of charisma among the citizens of their society. This spiritual influence will not be achieved except by adorning them with moral values.

The 1979 revolution is called Islamic because the main current in its leadership, ideology and organization were religious forces. The purpose of this article is to examine the type of confrontation between the Pahlavi government and this large current present in the revolution. Accordingly, the question we addressed in this article is: What position did the second Pahlavi government take towards the religious opposition in order to ensure its survival? The method of this article is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection is library. Theoretically, this article uses the three conceptual frameworks (repression, facilitation, and tolerance) that Charles Tilly discusses in From Basij to Revolution. In the research literature of this article, we emphasize that the Charles Tilly trilogy has not been used specifically and focused on the Islamic Revolution, and most of the research has used Tilly's "mobilization of resources" theory "in general" about the Islamic Revolution. The time frame of this research is 40s and 50s. Analysis of numerous historical data shows that in the Pahlavi regime, the scope of "repression" of religious forces was extensive, "tolerance" was low, and "facilitation" was far less. The Pahlavi government made little use of the facilities provided for the moderate opposition. Tilly divides political systems into four categories: oppressive, totalitarian, tolerant, and weak. Based on the available historical evidence from the Pahlavi government's position on religious dissidents, this government should be called a repressive system.

If we call politics civilization or governance and governance, then the brief period of Imam Ali (PBUH) after the Islamic Revolution (PBUH) is undoubtedly the most valuable theoretical and precious theoretical experience in the field of political thought and action. Following the death of the Prophet (PBUH), as well as observer, for twenty five years, he has observed the issues of the Islamic society in its internal and external dimensions, and then, with a great deal of experience and recognition, has been entrusted with the administration of the people of the Islamic community. His term, though short-lived and less than five years old, however, met the full meaning of political morality in the various dimensions of his practical and behavioral governance. Tolerance in Islam is one of the things that are defined in political ethics and is divided into the political thought of Islam in three areas of political ethics, political behavior, legislative, and procedural law.

Tolerance, through time, especially since the times of religious wars of the 17th and 18th century, has been one of the most important and challenging philosophical, political and religious issues. Tolerance is intertwined with other components of modern life such as democracy, civil society, and freedom of speech, and it has become an inseparable part of it. Regardless of public and academic interest in this subject, however, tolerance is still an underdeveloped subject-when it comes to its definition and typography. This research was conducted with a comparative-analytical approach, and, after a brief discussion of its terminology, offers a comprehensive exploration of tolerance. In this article, according to different eras of thinking and religion, a new compartmentalization for tolerance is offered. Furthermore, this article examines the vague status of tolerance in political and social context of Iranian society, and, consequently, puts forth the claim that this ambivalence in the definition of tolerance leads to scientific impreciseness in its application.