Note: In this scientific seminar, Dr. Fayyazi reviewed the history and philosophy of hermeneutics, explaining the significance of understanding the “author’s individuality” and the necessity of considering historical and cultural contexts in interpreting religious texts. Additionally, Dr. Haghighat highlighted the critical role of context in interpreting jurisprudential verses, particularly those related to jihad, emphasizing the need for a systemic approach to jurisprudence.
The Political Jurisprudence and International Relations Group of the Research Institute of Contemporary Jurisprudence Studies, as part of its series of specialized seminars in the field of political jurisprudence and international relations, held the scientific seminar “The Application of Methodological Hermeneutics in Political Jurisprudence” on Thursday, 2 October 2025. This seminar, the third session in the series “The Application of Hermeneutical Methods in Political Jurisprudence,” featured a presentation by Dr. Masoud Fayyazi, a faculty member of the Research Institute of Culture and Thought. Dr. Seyyed Sadegh Haghighat, a faculty member of the Imam Khomeini Research Institute, participated as a critic, and the session was moderated by Dr. Abdulwahab Ferati.
In this specialized seminar, Dr. Fayyazi provided a detailed explanation of “methodological hermeneutics” and distinguished it from methodical hermeneutics. Referring to the historical and philosophical evolution of hermeneutics, particularly Schleiermacher’s hermeneutical theory, he elaborated on the role of this approach in deeply understanding religious and political texts. He emphasized that methodological hermeneutics goes beyond mere interpretive methods and focuses on reconstructing the “author’s individuality” in the interpreter’s mind, enabling a precise understanding of the author’s intent despite historical and cultural distances.
Key points from the presentation included distinguishing two types of hermeneutics:
- Methodical hermeneutics, which relies on a set of interpretive techniques and methods.
- Methodological hermeneutics, which addresses the philosophy of method and provides a coherent theory for evaluating the accuracy of interpretive approaches.
A faculty member of the Research Institute of Culture and Thought, Dr. Fayyazi explained Schleiermacher’s two important interpretive principles: the grammatical rule and the psychological rule, which together lead to a deeper understanding of the author’s intent. He also referred to the “hermeneutical circle of part and whole,” emphasizing the necessity of repeatedly moving between the parts and the whole of a text to accurately grasp the author’s intent.
One of the topics discussed in the seminar was the difference between Schleiermacher’s and Gadamer’s views on the possibility of fully understanding the author’s intent. Schleiermacher believed it was possible to understand the author’s intent, while Gadamer held that absolute access to it is unattainable. The evolution of hermeneutical theory up to the twentieth century and the contributions of thinkers such as Emilio Betti and E.D. Hirsch were also examined, as they sought to establish hermeneutics as a scientific discipline with validity criteria.
Furthermore, the influence of Romanticism and aesthetics on the formation of methodological hermeneutical theory and the importance of applying this approach to understanding political jurisprudence texts were discussed in detail. Using a precise analogy, Dr. Fayyazi described the “context” of a text as akin to a computer’s motherboard CPU, playing a vital role in the accurate transmission and understanding of information.
Another notable point of the seminar was the explanation of the anthropological and cosmological foundations of Schleiermacher’s theory, which refers to three types of “wholeness”: the wholeness of the author’s personality, the wholeness of the environment in which the author lived, and the wholeness of the world of that era. The interaction of these three wholes is crucial for understanding the author’s intent, showing that the author can speak beyond their time but remains bound by the “context” of their era.
In the concluding section, Dr. Fayyazi addressed criticisms of Schleiermacher’s theory, noting challenges such as an unknown author or a supreme author like God, and emphasized the importance of the emergence of discourse and relying on it as the central axis of the interpretive process. He also highlighted the need to teach methods for understanding “context” and the author’s style in the science of jurisprudential principles to expand the scope of understanding the meaning of jurisprudential texts.
He stressed that methodological hermeneutics, with its philosophical and scientific approach, can pave the way for a deeper and more scientific understanding of religious and political jurisprudence texts, and attention to its foundations and methods is essential for researchers in the field of contemporary jurisprudence.
Continuing the seminar, Dr. Seyyed Sadegh Haghighat, emphasizing the role of context in interpreting religious texts, stated: “However, context is only one of the factors influencing interpretation. If a theory suggests that ten factors play a role in interpretation, none of these factors should be overlooked in favor of another.”
A faculty member of the Imam Khomeini Research Institute, he added: “The systemic approach to jurisprudence (systemic jurisprudence) is a correct approach. The flaw in our jurisprudence is not the absence of a systemic perspective; rather, one of its problems is the lack of attention to the contexts and backgrounds of issuing rulings. Hermeneutics shows that a text can only be interpreted within a context, which is a key point for transformation in the science of principles.”
Dr. Haghighat referred to Allameh Tabatabaei’s view on jihad verses, stating: “He explains that there are absolute and qualified verses about war in the Quran. According to the jurisprudential principle, the absolute is interpreted in light of the qualified; therefore, war is permissible only in cases of defense. This foundation is based on distinguishing between absolute and qualified. However, some jurists do not accept this distinction at all and advocate for the theory of the supreme individual.”
He added: “If the verses related to war are examined in light of their context of issuance, we may realize that the verse ‘fight’ was revealed in a specific context, and the verse ‘if you are attacked, fight’ in another context. This means that traditional principles must be reevaluated, and context should be incorporated as a key element in the rule of interpreting the absolute in light of the qualified.”
He emphasized: “This perspective should become a topic in the teaching of the science of principles, as the absolute and qualified may pertain to different contexts, and thus, interpreting one in light of the other may be incorrect.”
The discussions in this seminar indicate that new hermeneutical approaches can contribute to a deeper and more scientific understanding of religious and political jurisprudence texts. Emphasizing the importance of context and integrating it with a systemic approach represents an effective step in advancing the science of principles and contemporary jurisprudence, highlighting the increasing need to teach these methods to researchers in the field of contemporary jurisprudence.