نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
The reconciliation of tradition and modernity, particularly in the realm of jurisprudential teachings, has been a fundamental concern for contemporary Iranian religious modernists. Employing the method of "content analysis of texts" and aiming to present a structured model of their approaches, this research categorizes and analyzes the proposed models for modernizing Quranic rulings into two overarching types: "Subjectivist" and "Objectivist." The subjectivist model, considering the majority of rulings as secular and historical, emphasizes the autonomous agency of reason (whether definitive or conjectural) and the deterministic influence of spatio-temporal exigencies in abrogating and replacing inefficient rulings. In contrast, the objectivist model, while preserving the sanctity of transmitted texts, permits changes in rulings only in light of changed circumstances or through the application of overarching principles established by the Sacred Lawgiver, and deems reason incapable of evaluating the efficacy of textually-established rulings. The findings of the study indicate that despite sharing some common foundations, such as the dichotomous classification of rulings, these two models differ fundamentally in their nature, foundations, and mechanisms for change.
کلیدواژهها English
