Examining Religious Governance in the Views of Mohammad Taqi Mesbah Yazdi and Mohammad Mojtahed Shabestari

Abstract

The objective of this article is to analyze and compare religious governance, its legitimacy, and acceptance in the political views of Mohammad Mojtahed Shabestari and Mohammad Taqi Mesbah Yazdi. The central question that this article seeks to answer is: What are the points of divergence and similarity between the thoughts of Mesbah Yazdi and Shabestari regarding religious governance? The research hypothesis suggests that different temporal and spatial conditions, as well as distinct ideological perspectives, have led to differing interpretations of religion and religious governance in the views of Mesbah Yazdi and Shabestari. This study has been conducted using a comparative approach and Skinner’s intentionalist hermeneutics method. The data collection method in this research is documentary and library-based. The findings of the study indicate that, from Shabestari’s perspective, legitimacy and acceptance are derived from the people's choice and the implementation of the rights of all members of society. He considers democracy to be a system of governance based on the rule of law. In contrast, Mesbah Yazdi views legitimacy and acceptance as originating from the sacred lawgiver and endorses Islamic democracy. Both scholars believe in the concept of Velayat-e Faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist).