Contemporary Jurisprudence

Al-Mustafa University Research Vice President, in an exclusive interview with the Center for Contemporary Jurisprudence Studies:

Global macro-managements create problems for humanity; that is, the problem is that in the context of a global capitalist system, a series of problems are produced and disseminated, and in the context of the realization of Islamic civilization, a series of other problems are produced and disseminated. Given this assumption, when we want to address energy jurisprudence and other contemporary jurisprudence, the debate is whether we want to address these problems solely or not, do we see the steps and solve the problems facing us?

Energy jurisprudence has not even been worked on enough to properly refine the network of issues, approaches, and theories surrounding it, let alone examine its foundations and assumptions. Hujjat al-lslam wa al-Muslimin Aminreza Abedinejad, a PhD student in philosophy at the Imam Khumayni Educational and Research Institute, has repeatedly taken a broad and interdisciplinary look at the science of jurisprudence. On this pretext, we talked to him about the foundations and assumptions of energy jurisprudence. The author of the book “Jurisprudence of Progress” believes that belief or disbelief in a spiritual civilization completely changes the propositions of energy jurisprudence. The following is a detailed and fascinating conversation about contemporary jurisprudence with the research assistant of the Mustafa University:

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What is Energy Jurisprudence and What Are Its Requirements?

Abedinejad: The definition of energy jurisprudence is to some extent dependent on its subject, which is energy. Today, in the industrial and service sectors and the production sector, especially with the emergence of new technologies, energy plays a decisive role for humanity. The issue of energy can be considered from several aspects. The first aspect is energy sources. Energy sources in our jurisprudence refer to mining issues. The largest part of energy in the world today also refers to mines; because it is either oil or gas. Even according to our definition of mining, we can refer new energies to mining; that is, we consider an expansion in the meaning of mining that also includes new energies such as solar energy and wind energy. Our main issue in the energy discussion has three aspects. 1) The issue of ownership of energy resources; 2) The issue of management and policy-making; 3) The issue of energy distribution and consumption.  Therefore, energy jurisprudence is a science that discusses these three issues with a civilizational approach to achieve its religious rulings, not with the approach that energy jurisprudence deals with these issues solely in order to solve contemporary problems.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What are the foundations and assumptions of energy jurisprudence?

Abedinejad: The most important basis of energy jurisprudence is the belief in a spiritual civilization that is fundamentally different and contradictory to the material civilization that dominates the current world. Belief in such a civilization naturally has a series of requirements and implications, of which the knowledge of jurisprudence can be one of them or in line with the realization of those requirements. According to this basis, civilizational jurisprudence is a knowledge with its own foundations, principles, and issues that shapes all practical issues, both individual and social, in a civilizational and civilization-building order, which is different from jurisprudence that merely solves the issues raised in the capitalist system. For instance, problems related to banking, environmental, energy, and countless other issues that the capitalist order has created and placed before individuals and societies and that are completely consistent with the rules of supply and demand of the capital market are not resolved in this knowledge; rather, this knowledge, as civilizational jurisprudence, changes the principle of the macro-issue and transforms our perspective in relation to the issues and provides a new definition of the issues. For instance, why have energy or environmental issues been raised in our time? What has caused societies to face these issues? Is it simply necessity that has caused these requirements, or is there something more to it?

In the civilizational perspective, the main role in creating problems is attributed to global macro-management. Global macro-management produces problems for humanity; that is, the problem is that in the context of a global capitalist system, a series of problems are produced and disseminated, and in the context of the realization of Islamic civilization, a series of other problems are produced and disseminated. Given this assumption, when we want to address energy jurisprudence and other contemporary jurisprudence, the debate is whether we want to address these problems only or not, do we see the steps and solve the problems facing us? We must find our own logic so that in the light of that logic, the development of the issues also makes sense. Therefore, energy jurisprudence can fulfill its role correctly when it creates the logic of developing its issues with regard to its civilizational role, rather than reproducing the problems overflowing from the global capitalist order.

The second basis is to have a spiritual, not a capitalist, economic system, which the jurisprudence of the economic system must be responsible for. In the jurisprudence of the economic system, the most important issue is property relations. Part of the property relations is related to the ownership of pre-production resources, which include mines and energy carriers.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: With a minimal approach to jurisprudence, can we basically create a jurisprudential chapter or a section called “Energy Jurisprudence”?

Abedinejad: If we demote ourselves from civilizational jurisprudence, for whatever reason or title, jurisprudence becomes the tailor of the body of the capitalist or socialist system. At best, as Martyr Sayyid Muh. Baqir al-Sadr says, the justification of reality corrupts nothing more; That is, you discuss and examine the issues raised in this system in discussions of energy jurisprudence and you also boast that our jurisprudence is dynamic and contemporary, but you are unaware that this jurisprudence plays on the ground of others and justifies facts that are undoubtedly corrupt. Well, if we have this approach, we can still raise and pursue issues of energy jurisprudence in the discussion of mining jurisprudence; because, according to the jurists, there are two types of mines: one is apparent mines and the other is esoteric mines. Apparent mines refer to mines that do not require processing to use; that is, the essential truth that exists is used and the essence of the mineral is evident in them.

Esoteric mines refer to mines in which the essence of the mine is not evident; rather, it requires processing and extraction of the essence of the mine so that we can use them. Secondary energies, such as minerals, are esoteric and can be discussed and debated in the context of minerals.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: To what extent does the type of approach of jurists to future generations and the environment influence the inference of propositions of energy jurisprudence?

Abedinejad: When our view is not civilizational jurisprudence, the approach we want to have to future generations or environmental issues will be neutral at best, if not passive. Where do the issues of future generations come from? Who created environmental issues? It is certain that the source of all these issues is the capitalist order and the system of domination, and this order itself is problematic. If energy jurisprudence and other emerging jurisprudence do not pay attention to the contemporary macro-issue, naturally the efforts it makes will not be successful, even if it believes it can solve some issues.