Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

---

Human intellect has a criterion presence in all three types of laws, that is, worthy to know the divine law, discover the natural law, and enact the human law. Religious communities practice on the basis of the divine law, whereas; secular communities operate on the basis of custom and human interests. The question is whether a common ground can be reached in the legislation of religious and non-religious communities? This article, in a descriptive-analytical manner, seeks to examine the theoretical foundations of Khajeh Nasir and Thomas Aquinas and attempts to find a solution to the problem in relation to reason and law. The findings of this study show that to Khawjeh and Thomas, law is attached to reason which is common among all human beings. Therefore, it can be a common basis for legislating religious and non-religious people. Contrary to the views of some Christian and Muslim theologians who do not consider reason worthy of legislation, Thomas considers natural law to be the participation of rational creatures in eternal law, and according to Khajeh, divine law is acceptable if it is not contrary to reason. Also, human law is binding only if it is compatible with the law of nature and justice. Thomas clarifies that if law is not in accordance with natural law; it is unjust and could not be considered law at all. Hence, people have right to disregard the law of oppressive rulers. In this regard, the theory of "social contract" and the pros and cons, including the views of Grossius, Rousseau, Hobbes, Fuller, and Finnis are also mentioned.

Keywords: Divine Law, Human Law, Natural Law, Intellect Criterion, Khajeh Nasir Tusi, Thomas Aquinas.

Full-Text [PDF 886 kb]   (635 Downloads)    

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

---

---