Note: The “Methodology Sundays” sessions, periodically organized by the Institute for Contemporary Jurisprudential Studies and the Office of Islamic Propagation, focused this week on the role of the theory of justice in transferring and transforming Islamic knowledge into public culture, addressing a key and timely issue in Islamic sciences. Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Mahdi Shajarian, in his presentation, focused on the concepts of rationality and justice, examining methodological challenges in deriving social rulings, while Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Hassanali Aliakbarian, as the critic, presented differing perspectives and critiques.
The Institute for Contemporary Jurisprudential Studies, in collaboration with the Office of Islamic Propagation’s Desk for the Development and Empowerment of Islamic Sciences, held the 55th session of the summer series of “Methodology Sundays” on Sunday, August 31, 2025, on the topic of “The Impact of the Theory of Justice on the Methodology of Transforming Islamic Knowledge into Public Culture.”
Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Haqqani Fazl, the session’s moderator, opened the meeting by offering condolences for the martyrdom anniversary of Imam Hassan Askari (peace be upon him) and introduced the topic of this specialized session. The presenter, Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Mahdi Shajarian, Assistant Professor in the Social Justice Studies Department at the Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture, began by emphasizing the breadth and importance of the theory of justice in Islamic sciences, noting that the topic would be examined in a more specialized and focused manner during the session.
Dr. Shajarian pointed to a fundamental challenge in contemporary societies: the deep gap between jurisprudential norms, especially social rulings, and public culture. He clarified that this phenomenon is not exclusive to any single society and is a product of the complexities of the modern world.
Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Shajarian further explained that one of the key factors contributing to this gap is the differing perspectives on rationality in jurisprudence and the derivation of religious rulings. In Islamic jurisprudence, rationality is “narrow” (aql-e maziq), limited to certainty and generality in derivation, meaning that rationality must issue rulings on broad concepts such as justice and oppression but lacks the capacity to make decisions on specific cases or practical interests. According to him, this narrow rationality limits the ability to transform jurisprudential norms into public culture.
From his perspective, one of the key factors contributing to this gap is the differing views on rationality in jurisprudence and the derivation of religious rulings. In Islamic jurisprudence, rationality is “narrow” (aql-e maziq), limited to certainty and generality in derivation, meaning that rationality must issue rulings on broad concepts such as justice and oppression but lacks the capacity to make decisions on specific cases or practical interests. This narrow rationality, he argued, limits the ability to transform jurisprudential norms into public culture.
Dr. Shajarian proposed that to address this issue, there should be a shift toward an “expansive” rationality (aql-e mowsa‘) that is closer to psychological certainty and capable of issuing rulings on specific cases. He believed that expansive rationality could serve as a guarantor for transforming jurisprudential norms into public culture, provided its legitimacy is established.
To establish the legitimacy of expansive rationality, he presented the following arguments:
- Rational Argument: Rationality is inherently authoritative, and it cannot be negated unless stronger evidence is provided.
- Textual Argument: The Quran and numerous narrations emphasize the importance and authority of rationality.
- Historical Practice: Historical experience demonstrates that rationality has a credible and accepted role in determining ethical and behavioral norms.
In another part of the session, Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Mahdi Shajarian raised an important discussion about the criterion of justice, asking whether the criterion for justice is “religious,” “customary,” or “real.” He referred to two perspectives:
- Religious Justice Perspective: Justice is defined in accordance with religious texts.
- Customary Justice Perspective: Justice is defined based on the understanding of the customs of a given time and place.
Transforming Religious Norms into Social Norms: Two Perspectives
Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Aliakbarian then critiqued and analyzed Dr. Shajarian’s views. He argued that efforts should not focus on reconstructing religious norms to align with contemporary social perceptions. Instead, through explanation, promotion, and dialogue, the public should be familiarized with religious norms, moving social norms closer to religious ones.
As the critic, Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Aliakbarian explained the concept of the “rule of correlation” (qa’idat al-mulazima), stating that in jurisprudence, rationality must issue rulings with certainty and generality to be valid. This rule limits the role of independent rationality in Islamic jurisprudence, rendering it insufficient for explaining or transforming public culture.
In his concluding remarks, he noted that one of the challenges in presenting scholarly content is the use of unfamiliar terminology, which can lead to a lack of engagement with research and academic projects.