Jurisprudence and Government (book)

Line 95:

===Examining the Scope of Privacy based on Political Jurisprudence===

Referring to the theological foundations of Shia, including the opposition to al-ja'a and its incompatibility with duty, [[Mohammad Soroush Mahallati]] talked about the conflict of rulings such as elementary [[jihad]] and [[apostasy]] with the theological perspective of Shia. At the same time, it was clarified that the jurists pay attention to the theological foundations in issuing fatwas and they do not oppose the al-ja'a (p. 122-124). He has also pointed out the contradiction of the mentioned principle with the third stage of commanding good and forbidding evil, that is, practical enjoining and forbidding. (p. 125)

Referring to the theological foundations of Shia, including the opposition to al-ja'a and its incompatibility with duty, Mohammad Soroush Mahallati talked about the conflict of rulings such as elementary [[jihad]] and [[apostasy]] with the theological perspective of Shia. At the same time, it was clarified that the jurists pay attention to the theological foundations in issuing fatwas and they do not oppose the al-ja'a (p. 122-124). He has also pointed out the contradiction of the mentioned principle with the third stage of commanding good and forbidding evil, that is, practical enjoining and forbidding. (p. 125)

Soroush Mahallati then expressed the opinions of [[Imam Khomeini]] and Ali Ahmadi Mianeji, and arued the possibility that [[enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil|enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong]] language may be a form of violation of the dignity of individuals and therefore an invasion of privacy. (p. 128). Thus, he believes that if [[enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil|enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong]] requires harm, there is no obstacle to doing it, but if we doubt about this, we cannot enjoin or forbid (p. 143).

Soroush Mahallati then expressed the opinions of [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini|Imam Khomeini]] and Ali Ahmadi Mianeji, and arued the possibility that [[enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil|enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong]] language may be a form of violation of the dignity of individuals and therefore an invasion of privacy. (p. 128). Thus, he believes that if [[enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil|enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong]] requires harm, there is no obstacle to doing it, but if we doubt about this, we cannot enjoin or forbid (p. 143).

===Civil Obedience in Shia Jurisprudence===

@@ Line 95: / Line 95: @@
 ===Examining the Scope of Privacy based on Political Jurisprudence===
-Referring to the theological foundations of Shia, including the opposition to al-ja'a and its incompatibility with duty, [[Mohammad Soroush Mahallati]] talked about the conflict of rulings such as elementary [[jihad]] and [[apostasy]] with the theological perspective of Shia. At the same time, it was clarified that the jurists pay attention to the theological foundations in issuing fatwas and they do not oppose the al-ja'a (p. 122-124). He has also pointed out the contradiction of the mentioned principle with the third stage of commanding good and forbidding evil, that is, practical enjoining and forbidding. (p. 125)
+Referring to the theological foundations of Shia, including the opposition to al-ja'a and its incompatibility with duty, Mohammad Soroush Mahallati talked about the conflict of rulings such as elementary [[jihad]] and [[apostasy]] with the theological perspective of Shia. At the same time, it was clarified that the jurists pay attention to the theological foundations in issuing fatwas and they do not oppose the al-ja'a (p. 122-124). He has also pointed out the contradiction of the mentioned principle with the third stage of commanding good and forbidding evil, that is, practical enjoining and forbidding. (p. 125)
-Soroush Mahallati then expressed the opinions of [[Imam Khomeini]] and Ali Ahmadi Mianeji, and arued the possibility that [[enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil|enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong]] language may be a form of violation of the dignity of individuals and therefore an invasion of privacy. (p. 128). Thus, he believes that if [[enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil|enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong]] requires harm, there is no obstacle to doing it, but if we doubt about this, we cannot enjoin or forbid (p. 143).
+Soroush Mahallati then expressed the opinions of [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini|Imam Khomeini]] and Ali Ahmadi Mianeji, and arued the possibility that [[enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil|enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong]] language may be a form of violation of the dignity of individuals and therefore an invasion of privacy. (p. 128). Thus, he believes that if [[enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil|enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong]] requires harm, there is no obstacle to doing it, but if we doubt about this, we cannot enjoin or forbid (p. 143).
 ===Civil Obedience in Shia Jurisprudence===

Jurisprudence and Government (book): Difference between revisions