While Islam accepts the division of individuals in society into Muslims and infidels; however, in important areas, it recognizes rights for infidels; therefore, dividing into Muslims and infidels does not mean ignoring the rights of infidels, even if they are in the minority.

Note: One of the challenges facing emerging jurisprudence is the effectiveness of the current rules of knowledge of the principles of jurisprudence to discover effective propositions from them. Some fundamentalists consider the current propositions of the principles of jurisprudence and the current approach of the fundamentalists to solving jurisprudential issues to be effective, while others consider the production of practical and effective jurisprudential propositions in emerging jurisprudence to require a review of the principles of jurisprudence and the approach of the fundamentalists to this knowledge. In this regard, we sat down to talk with Mr. Sayyid Hamid Jazayeri. This teacher of jurisprudence and principles at the Qum Seminary is known for his accuracy and insight into the knowledge of principles, as well as his interest in new topics and emerging jurisprudence. These characteristics make him one of the best people to discuss this topic. The following is a detailed discussion with this teacher of jurisprudence and principles at the Qum Seminary:

What is the jurisprudence of citizenship rights and what are its requirements?

Mr. Jazayeri: Citizenship rights mean that people who live in a society and in a social environment should enjoy a series of privileges in return for the duties they are responsible for. Of course, these privileges and duties may differ in different legal systems; but the generality of citizenship rights means enjoying the privileges of members of a society in return for the duties they are responsible for; such as: the right to enjoy social peace, the right to education and training, the right to enjoy legitimate freedom without violating the foundations of religion and the freedom of others, and the right to enjoy the public blessings that God has provided for a society. It is one of the important examples of citizenship rights.

Ensuring these rights is, of course, the responsibility of the ruling powers. The ruling power in society must both provide the basis for the exercise of these rights and behave in a way that no one is oppressed in the conflict between the rights of individuals in society. In other words, the ruling power must be careful in recognizing the nuances of these rights; therefore, recognizing and promoting these rights, as well as defending their implementation and determination, is also dependent on the power of the government and the states, and this is one of the most important obligations of citizenship rights.

On the other hand, preventing the fallacies and mistakes that colonial and arrogant powers make in abusing citizenship rights is also an important duty of the government. For example, in the protests of 2022, some European countries included insulting the Qur’an, insulting the prophets, and insulting sacred religious values among citizenship rights, while these are the opposite of citizenship rights.

Citizens have the right not to have their path of guidance and education obscured, and not to have their path of scientific, intellectual, and religious progress blocked; While insulting values is a clear and complete example of creating deviation and creating confusion and darkness, and therefore is considered the opposite of citizenship rights.

Can the paradigm of servant and master be used to analyze citizenship rights propositions for jurisprudential reasons?

Mr. Jazayeri: Some intellectuals raise doubts as to why in jurisprudential works and even in religious and Qur’anic works and texts, the relationship between man and God is perceived as a relationship between servant and master? And considering that, they want to equate the issue of man’s servitude to God Almighty with the issue of slavery, which is again negative and contrary to values in the minds, and thus distort this transcendent relationship between servants and God Almighty.

In response to this doubt, it should be said: verbal commonality is the cause of this corruption. It is true that humans enjoy balanced rights against each other and there is no superiority for one person over another except for criteria such as: knowledge, jihad, self-control and the like; but the relationship of man with God is a completely different and distinct relationship.

God is the Creator, Planner and Lord of humans, and the management and truth of humans depend on the divine essence; therefore, humans are not in front of God. It is not that on one side is God Almighty and on the other side is man; rather, in fact, man is dependent on God. Therefore, to the extent that a person can understand his relationship with God and take the right action in accordance with this understanding, he has performed servitude better.

The highest rank of the prophets was being a servant is for this reason; that is, they understood the reality of their own poverty towards God (you are the pour to God). They realized that man is pure poverty in the face of God and God is pure wealth. The correct understanding of this relationship of poverty and wealth is slavery.

Therefore, if slavery means that a human being is a slave and the property of another human being, it is a different matter; but what is meant by slavery in the relationship between God Almighty and humans is that man is in fact purely dependent on God and in pure need of Him. As a result, the relationship between humans and God Almighty is, in essence, completely different from the relationship between master and slave in human relationships.

Can the current propositions of citizenship rights be deduced from jurisprudence by the approach of dividing humans into Muslims and infidels?

Mr. Jazayeri: Dividing the individuals of society into those who have accepted scientific and real values and persist in those values, whom we interpret as “Muslims,” and those who, for whatever reason, do not believe in and do not adhere to these values; It is a real division, a belief, and it indicates a truth.

But religious thought has the advantage of making rights common to Muslims and infidels; rather, it has even given rights to infidels who are at war with Muslims; such as not poisoning water, not cutting down trees, not harming children and women in war. Of course, some rights are also given to people who believe in that reality and truth and have accepted Islam.

Therefore, while Islam accepts the division of society into Muslims and infidels; it also recognizes rights for infidels in important areas; therefore, dividing into Muslims and infidels does not mean ignoring the rights of infidels, even if they are in the minority.

Islam has approved the rights of intellectual and religious minorities within its own framework; such as their right to life, and therefore their lives are not without value. Also, worshipping in their own way, so they can perform acts of worship in any way that is in their own creed. In eating, in clothing, in the way of living and in their lifestyle, they have the right to act according to their thoughts and tastes.

Of course, it is natural that this use should not become a factor in harming that path of truth and guidance, so the criterion is that they respect the rights of the majority and other citizens. In the rule of the Holy Prophet and the Commander of the Faithful, it was evident that even opponents of the Prophet could live in society and express their opinions. Of course, it is natural that they would not be allowed to destroy and insult religious values.

What are the most important challenges for advancing research in the jurisprudence of civil rights?

Mr. Jazayeri: Combining religious principles and contemporary literature, and explaining and analyzing those facts with literature that contemporary society accepts, is an important challenge. Avoiding exaggeration in explaining and introducing citizenship rights is another challenge.

Trying to extract citizenship rights propositions from verses, narrations, and rational logic and presenting a clear and up-to-date model, in accordance with different thoughts, beliefs, religions, and tastes, is both a need and a necessity. Naturally, if this is accomplished, with its specific difficulties, as the noble narration states: “If people knew the virtues of our words, they would follow us,” many people in the far corners of the world will be interested in it. This task is, of course, difficult and requires a collective andة٠ة٠ة٠ research-based effort.

This interview is part of the electronic magazine “Principles of Jurisprudence of Citizen Rights”, which was produced in collaboration with the Ijtihad Network website.