shariati

The impact of modernity on non-western societies has forced them to redefine their traditions and related institutions. Islamic societies have not been immune to the influence of modernity, and Muslim intellectuals have been deeply involved in the concepts of modernity; Concepts such as: rationality, science, progress and secularism, individual freedom, social equality and democracy. Ali Shariati was also in such a field of thought. The main question of the article is what is the relationship between tradition and modernism in Shariati's thought. The hypothesis of the research is that Shariati, like most Islamic intellectuals, was in the confrontation between tradition and modernity. Due to facing the social issues arising from this encounter, he has definitely proposed some ideas regarding these two.The background of research in this topic is very rich, the most important of which have been reviewed. The article "Analysis of the position of religion in interaction with modernity in the thought of religious intellectuals of the second Pahlavi period" tried to examine the relationship between religion and modernity (case study: Shariati and Bazargan). The article "Shariati, Political Modernity and the Islamic Revolution" tried to "evaluate some modern concepts in Shariati's thought in relation to political modernity and examine its impact on the Islamic Revolution". Also, the article "A reflection on Shariati's political thought; Unsuccessful attempt to combine tradition and modernity" has been searching for an answer to this question: "What is the most important Sharia reason for creating a dialogue between tradition and modernity and what was the result of this attempt?" The article "Meaning of the West and Modernity in Shariati's Thought" tried to explain Shariati's view of the West and modernity. These researches are important works, but they only deal with the political aspect. The innovation of this research is the attention to epistemological dimensions.

The methodology of this article is an interpretive approach. This interpretive approach has been textual. But this interpretive approach has been based on a theoretical framework. This theoretical framework has been a critical reading of the relationship between tradition and modernity. This critical reading, by distancing itself from the common theory of the antagonistic conflict between tradition and modernity, has sought to understand the connection between the two. Therefore, the emphasis on the critical reading of Ali Shariati's original texts has been based on that theoretical framework.

While Ali Shariati had a deep look at the historical features of the tradition system and was aware of the weight of the heritage of the tradition, at the same time, he also paid attention to the effects of modernity and knew that neither of these two could be ignored. Therefore, he never wanted neither tradition to overcome modernity nor modernity to marginalize tradition. He tried to open a third way by criticizing both modernity and tradition. His third way is a critical reconstruction or in other words a kind of renaissance or religious renaissance. A renaissance that enabled the system of tradition (at the heart of which was the collection of religious teachings) to face modernity and accept it critically. To open such a way, Shariati considers a vital role for intellectuals. Shariati emphatically condemned the fanatical and irrational nature of traditional concepts and expressed his dissatisfaction with modernity based on blind imitation of the West, the spirit of capitalism and modern scientism. With such presuppositions, Shariati criticized the modernity, and by distinguishing between good and bad, he chose what he needed. Then he started the same interaction with the tradition system. Then he puts his selected components together to present a new architecture. Modern building with traditional materials.Finally, it can be said that Shariati's approach to tradition and modernity was a type of "selective modernity". Shariati saw modernity not as a whole and a unified nature, but as a multifaceted collection that, instead of accepting such a collection at once, should be carefully selected in its parts. It means that Shariati approached the tradition with a critical ruler from the point of view of modernity and its requirements and "selected" the necessary components, and had a "selective" approach to modernity itself. In the end, he passed both of these through the sieve of his critical view, so that instead of "rejecting modernity" (hostility to modernity) or "praising modernity" (immersing in modernity), he chose "selective modernity". In this view, there is neither blind hostility nor unconditional surrender; But a critical and conscious choice!

As one of the most prominent thinkers of the twentieth century, Martin Heidegger has made fundamental criticisms of the subjectivism of the modern world. He critically examines the 2,500-year history of the West as a manifestation of metaphysical rationality. Heidegger contrasts with the Cartesian and Kantian calculus thinking, the profound thinking based on the metaphysics of the carpenter. Heidegger believes that with Descartes as the creator of the paradigm of modernity, subjectivism is spreading in the world. One of the inevitable consequences of the supremacy of subjectivism is the dominance of technological rationality over the world. For Heidegger, technology is not a mere tool; instead, it is a special kind of development and way of thinking that imposes its possessive and calculating logic on everything and everyone. In other words, in the paradigm of knowledge of the modern foundation, existence is manifested technologically, which has created a special kind of rationality called technological rationality. The premise of this article is based on the fact that although Ali Shariati, as a critic of the modern world, criticizes scientism and mechanism, his critique of technology and mechanism is more political and sociological. Also, like Heidegger, he never could critique the philosophical, theological, and ontological subjectivism and technological rationality of the modern world.

Iranian thinkers, befitting to the time and context, each chose a different approach in dealing with the West and modernity. The purpose of this study is to understand Shariati's attitude towards the West and modernity and by using qualitative content analysis method and quoting his works and based on the theoretical framework of the Frankfurt School, this research seeks to achieve this goal and answer the question: what is Shariati's position and view on the essence of the West and modernity? He seems to have taken a selective and critical look at the essence of the West and modernity, insisting on the need to use modernity properly and maintain an identity against the essence of the West. According to the evidence, Shariati's view of the essence of the West is from the perspective of civilization and colonialism. He was interested in the positive and scientific aspects of Western civilization because of its relevance to Third World societies and had a critical view of colonialism because it imposed alienation on the societies of the Third World. His view of modernity is also divided into two aspects of civilization and modernity. Although he saw civilization as a positive thing, he attacked modernity that imitated and consumed us.

Examining the relation of religion with cosmology and ideology is regarded as an interesting and challangable discussion in religious studies. This study, with a theoric and analytic approach, has intended to explaining such problem as religion`s position to ideology, validity or invalidity of religion`s ideologizing, consequences of ideologic religion and reconsidering Dr. Shari`ati`s opinions has been performed. Muslim and western scholar`s interpretation of ideology and Shariat`s idea with regard to the interpretation of Islamic ideology as well as consequences of ideologic religion have been discussed in the paper. It has been understood that: 1. In one phrase, religion is more than ideology, though it may be of ideologic aspect also; 2. In some cases as Shariati`s thought, religion is not identical to ideology, it has been changed to institution; 3. One may not necessarily count ideology religious as is seen in Marx that is irreligious; 4. Though religion is not identical to ideology, Divine religions have been of ideologic message.

In analyzing and explaining seal of prophethood as a doctrine, almost all scholars who have dealt with this issue considerhuman intellectual maturityas the main criterion and the secret of the emergent finality.The present article explains and analyzes the proposed approaches and perceptions regarding intellectual maturity and thus aims toreview this idea critically.As a result,the study shows that the idea of human intellectual maturity is merely a subjective theorization intended to organize the philosophy of seal of prophethood. Hence, no clear reason or objective piece of evidence can be discerned in the context of its external reality that will however support or confirm it. A more fundamental critique targeted at the idea of human intellectual maturity in this regard is that accepting this notion on the basis of the various analyses given so far will lead to the termination of religiosity or to the finality and rejection of imamate; and these two conclusions are to be rejected and denied based on clear and unmistakable evidencesforthe philosophy of prophethood and imamate. In the final part of this study, after an analysis and examination of four approaches to the relationship between seal of prophethood and imamate, a fifth approach is introduced: imamate as the main secret of the seal of prophethood. According to this perspective, imamate is not considered as a marginal complementary doctrine side by side the seal of prophethood, but as providing the basic foundations of belief in the seal of prophethood and as the criterion for it. Therefore, the article finds the notion of the seal of prophethood as only understandable on the basis of the imamate doctrine, rather than the intellectual maturity of humanity or his capabilities with regard to ihtihād in religion. This idea is founded on a specific reading of the revelational scriptures (Holy texts) especially the Glorious Qur’an as the Final Revelation. In addition, the author believes that this new understanding can be supported and confirmed through all rational and scriptural arguments and historical and objectiveevidences.

Using an analytical and documentary approach, this paper aims to explore the views of social thinkers and religious scholars and to investigate the origin of religions and the early stages of human’s religion. Through analyzing and studying the views of Shariati in this field, the paper extracts his religious theory and its alignment with the prevailing religious view taken from the pure teachings of Quran and Ahlol-beit. With regard to the theories about the advent of religions, theories of fear, ignorance, economy, animism, and nature worshipping, innate nature are put forward and some points which are worth considering are proposed in each theory. Shariati discusses all the views in this regard and considers human society as equivalent to "worship”. He does not prefer any particular theory; but he regards "polytheism" as the beginning stage of human religion in which the prophets are sent to awaken the human’s God-given nature and to invite people to monotheism. This understanding is not in line with the current religious theory derived from the Qur’anic teachings.

In this essay، positivism is briefly introduced. Furthermore، Shariati’s opinion about positivists’ thought is expressed. In the first part، similarities between Shariati and positivism are probed. These similarities include scientific method، objectivity of natural science، accuracy and credibility of natural science and relying on it، utilization of natural science methods in human science and distinguishing between identification and judgement. In the second part، differences between Shariati and positivism are probed. These differences include role of culture in science، critisizing scientific abstinence and the idea of “science for science”، efffect of individual and society on science (subjectivism)، the difference between natural science and human science in accuracy and credibility، critisizing scientism، necessity of philosophy and metaphysics (refutation of empricism) and science need to identify human correctly. At the end، we conclude that Shariati is not compeletly a positivist and also is not compeletly against positivists.