Jurisprudential Rules (The Rule of Dignity)

Session Forty-Eight, The Domain of the Inherent Dignity of the Human Being

Session Forty-Eight

The Domain of the Inherent Dignity of the Human Being — Rights Arising from the First Category of Advantages: 1. The Right Arising from Intellect — 2. The Right Arising from Free Will and Choice — 3. The Right Arising from Innate Nature — 4. The Right Arising from the Best Creation — 5. The Right Arising from the Power to Subjugate Creatures — 6. The Right Arising from Human Emotions — The Boundaries of the Six Rights
June 1, 2025

The Domain of the Inherent Dignity of the Human Being

After explaining the foundations of the inherent dignity of the human being and its proofs, which occupied a large portion of our discussions, it is now time to determine the domain of the inherent dignity of the human being. Of course, through past discussions, both in the first chapter on foundations and the second chapter on proofs, one can discern the domain of the inherent dignity of the human being. What can be said in this session in a concise and condensed manner (and naturally, both due to the shortage of time and because of the lack of need for further details, we can explain it in a single session) is that this discussion has been raised in a scattered manner, repeatedly, and from various perspectives in the past—both when speaking of the foundations and in stating and examining the proofs—and the domain has been determined to some extent; here, in truth, we determine these boundaries with greater clarity and transparency. Of course, we shall also have a summary.

In examining the foundations of the inherent dignity of the human being, we stated that the advantages bestowed by God, the Exalted, upon the human being are of two categories:

A category of advantages that God has granted to the human being regardless of gender, belief, color, and race, and we mentioned its signs and contextual clues. This category consists of: intellect, free will and choice, innate nature, the best creation, the power to subjugate creatures, and human emotions. Of course, whether these advantages are in reality six advantages and can be viewed completely independently of one another, or whether some of them can be reduced to others, is open to debate, but this is not very important.
The second category of advantages, which in fact proves acquired dignity in the human being. That is, it shows that the human being possesses the talent and merit to attain those dignities, such as becoming the divine vicegerent, becoming the object of prostration for the angels, and some other matters.

Rights Arising from the First Category of Advantages

The first category of advantages, which we stated consists of six specific advantages, blessings, and dignities bestowed by God upon the human being, is enjoyed by all human beings; they possess intellect, free will and choice, innate nature, have been created in the best manner, have the power to subjugate creatures, and enjoy human emotions—which has resulted in their advantage over other creatures. In our view, each of these advantages is the source of the emergence of a specific right for the human being; just as Shahid Motahhari stated: “Every natural talent is the basis of a natural right and is considered a natural document for it.” His expression is: “The system of creation has placed this document of demand within the existence of the human being and has not placed it within the existence of the sheep.” He gave an example that the human being has the right to study and the talent to study and become knowledgeable, whereas this talent does not exist in the sheep. Because this talent exists, the human being has this right and the sheep does not have this right. Therefore, based on these six matters, we recognize certain rights for the human being as innate and natural rights, which are established for all human beings regardless of faith, belief, Islam, and disbelief.

1. The Right Arising from Intellect

The first case was intellect; we stated that intellect here means the power of thought, the discovery of the unknown from the known, and the source of human thinking. Several rights arise from this dignity, some of which Shahid Motahhari pointed to:

The right to think and ponder; one who possesses intellect has the right to think and ponder.
The right to learn and acquire knowledge; the human being has the right to learn and know.
The right to investigate, research, and question.

These are all arising from intellect. God has given intellect so that the human being learns, thinks, researches, and questions. These are the minimums I am mentioning; if we can enumerate them, we can express some other rights in other terms and expressions.

2. The Right Arising from Free Will and Choice

The second case is free will and choice. We previously stated that free will and choice, in a sense, arise from intellect; for now, we assume this is an independent dignity bestowed by God upon the human being. At any rate, the human being has been created free and possesses free will and choice. This dignity and advantage establishes a right for the human being, which is that no one has the right to impose anything on him; no one has the right to place him in a state of necessity (diḍṭirār) and compulsion (ikrāh) for any purpose; this is unacceptable. We previously stated that obedience and disobedience only make sense in the presence of free will and choice; if free will and choice are not established in the human being, obedience and disobedience have no meaning, responsibility and accountability have no meaning, punishment and reward have no meaning, and penalty has no meaning. Therefore, the right arising from this dignity is that no one can force the human being to believe; this is also established for all human beings.

3. The Right Arising from Innate Nature

The third case is innate nature; with the interpretation we gave, we stated that innate nature is other than intellect. Innate nature is an internal pull, an internal voice, and an internal understanding. This is because both some insights are innate and some pulls are innate; it has both inclination and insight. God has placed a foundation within the existence of the human being for his knowledge, and He has placed an inclination toward Himself in all human beings. Its goal is also clear: felicity and bringing the human being to the ultimate destination of creation. This advantage and dignity is also specific to the human being, and a right arises from it, which I call the right to benefit from guidance and direction. On this basis, the human being has the right to be placed under training, guidance, and direction.

4. The Right Arising from the Best Creation

The fourth case is the best creation. Regarding the best creation, we stated that from one perspective, it can be placed in the first category of advantages, and from another perspective, it can be placed in the second category of advantages. If the best creation refers to the station of proximity, felicity, becoming the object of prostration for the angels, and the station of divine vicegerency, this is an acquired dignity; meaning he has the talent for the best creation. However, in a sense, the best creation itself possesses actuality, rather than meaning he can be the best creature. We stated that this itself points to an actuality and a specific advantage for the human being; if we mention this meaning, it is not unlikely that it reduces to innate nature, in which case the right arising from it is known. However, if it is neither of these two, the best creation means that we created the human being in the best manner, whether from a physical or spiritual perspective, and whether from a material or spiritual perspective; the foundation of human creation was as such. However, when he was placed in the material world, by virtue of his presence in the world of nature and intimacy with nature, he was afflicted with veils and darknesses that distanced him from his own reality, yet he must return to his origin. This is also for everyone; both the disbeliever and the Muslim, all have been created in the best manner (أَحْسَنِ تَقْوِيمٍ) and have come down to the lowest of the low (أَسْفَلَ سَافِلِينَ). This itself necessitates a right, which is the right to grow and transcend.

5. The Right Arising from the Power to Subjugate Creatures

The fifth advantage is the power to subjugate creatures. This power of subjugation perhaps arises from intellect, free will, and choice, but we mentioned this independently. The right arising from this power is utilizing the God-given blessings in this world and benefiting from natural resources, whether directly and without the mixture of these blessings, or with their mixture and combination. That God, the Exalted, states: We have subjected these for you, means you can take action to fulfill your needs by utilizing them—of course, within the framework of existing rules and regulations. This right exists for the human being to live in this world and utilize these resources for his life.

Question:

Professor: This is specifically here: both the essence of human life itself and that he can benefit from them in the best manner, by combining the elements of this world and subjugating the creatures of this world.

6. The Right Arising from Human Emotions

The sixth advantage is human emotions. God has created humanity with feelings and emotions, and this does not exist in any other creature. This advantage and dignity is followed by a right; a right arises from this, which is the right of the impermissibility of injustice, harm, harassment, humiliation, and insult. The human being is created in such a manner that emotionally and feelingly, his sanctuary must be respected. Yes, someone might say that one must not oppress animals either. Yes, one must not oppress animals either, but insult and humiliation have no meaning for animals; an animal does not understand what humiliation is. It is the human being for whom humiliation and insult are perhaps much harder than physical beating. These human emotions and feelings establish a right for him, which is that no one can oppress him, humiliate him, or insult him.

The Boundaries of the Six Rights

Therefore, following these six dignities, certain rights are established, which are proven for the human being qua human being—the human being with faith or without faith. The Muslim and the disbeliever do not differ in this aspect; all human beings possess the right to think, ponder, learn, acquire knowledge, investigate, research, and question. All human beings are outside the scope of imposition, compulsion, and coercion; all human beings have the right to be guided until the end of their lives; all human beings have the right to utilize natural blessings and resources; all human beings suffer from insult, humiliation, and injustice, and no one can oppress them. These rights are established for everyone; however, proving these rights does not mean that there are no boundaries or limits for them. As pointed out in the previous session, all the rights that have become known as human rights and are mentioned in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights face boundaries and limits. It is impossible for us to establish these rights absolutely for the human being, because its necessity is conflict, chaos, dispute, and war, especially where a conflict of rights arises; this would cause life to fall apart and the Earth to no longer be habitable. In social life, after all, conflict and contradiction arise between the interests of individuals and society, and to control it, public interests take precedence over personal interests, and this is accepted in the entire world and among all people. In the entire world, for anyone who exceeds his limit, they designate a punishment and maintain limits and deprivations.

Therefore, it is a rational matter that even if we consider the scope of the inherent dignity of the human being to be as broad as it is imagined today, it is not absolute; all of these dignities and rights arising from dignities are limited by certain matters. Of course, we are currently in the process of stating limitations generally, and case-by-case what is raised in jurisprudence or in some traditions is not our focus. These limiting factors are:

Public interests and the rights of society, which take precedence over the interests of the individual and the right of the individual.
Preserving the social order and preventing chaos; this is a rule and standard that governs all of these rights.
Punishing transgressors and violators of the rights of others; punishing transgressors is a principle, but at the same time, the proportion between the crime and the punishment must be observed. That is, it is not the case that if someone did something by his own hand that forced them to punish him and strip him of some rights—for example, he does not have the right to learn, or he does not have the right to choose for a year—other punishments beyond his crime are also permissible for him; rather, proportion between the crime and the punishment is necessary. That is, if we deprive him of some rights or designate punishments for him due to committing certain crimes, and force him to live in a prison or force him to live in a town by way of exile, this does not mean that he is deprived of other rights as well. Therefore, these limits do not conflict in any way with the mentioned rights; meaning, both these rights are established for the human being qua human being, and the society, legislator, ruler, executor, and government can deprive him of some of these rights by virtue of some behaviors.

If we say there is no difference between a Muslim and a disbeliever in terms of dignity, and that what is established for a Muslim as a right is also established for a disbeliever, we do not mean that this is so in all rights. We favor neither that extreme view nor this conservative view; not like some who believe that any dignity established for the human being is by virtue of faith and servitude to God, and fundamentally, the human being minus faith and minus servitude to God possesses no dignity and no right is established for him, and is like an animal or more astray than an animal; and not like the view that has fallen into the other extreme and believes that the human being qua human being, regardless of faith and servitude to God, possesses all rights—meaning there is no difference between Muslims and non-Muslims in rights. Therefore, for example, they see no obstacle for a Muslim to marry a disbeliever, and they say a disbeliever inherits from a Muslim, and in retaliation (qiṣāṣ) and many other matters… both of these are incorrect. We say that the inherent dignities of the human being consist of these matters, and based on them, certain rights are established for him. We also used the term “inherent dignity” here with the very meaning we explained; meaning honoring, respecting, and paying regard to the human being qua human being. These blessings have been given to him and are also actual, and none of them is a potentiality or talent. These blessings are also considered a type of honoring and respecting him, and certain rights also arise from them, which all human beings enjoy. These rights must be observed. However, other rights established for some human beings arise from acquired dignities. Therefore, the difference in rights arising from those dignities is also acceptable. We can accept these differences.

Thus, in the first stage, the domain of human rights by virtue of humanity and human life lies within the scope of those very inherent dignities. These rights are recognized everywhere, except when that human being—whether Muslim or disbeliever—acts contrary to the public interest and the interest of society, or violates the rights and freedoms of others, in which case limitations and deprivations are created for him, and that too as a punishment. In addition, the proportion between the crime and the punishment must be observed. Other than this, he enjoys his other rights. For example, if he is thrown into prison, this does not mean that other problems and limitations should be created for him.

On this basis, most cases in jurisprudence that might be raised as instances of violating dignity can be resolved with this explanation; of course, some cases still remain that are open to question, but we can reconsider them by examining and re-reading them and observing this principle and rule. You observed that the popular opinion has specific fatwas in some cases that are incompatible with this rule; for example, regarding a captive, fatwas have perhaps been issued permitting harm and harassment; the author of al-Jawāhir interpreted the traditions indicating kindness to a captive, feeding him, and treating him well to indicate recommendation (istiḥbāb); whereas the apparent meaning of these traditions is not recommendation, but rather a duty and obligation. However, we are not obliged to follow the popular opinion; we can reconsider what interferes with and conflicts with the mentioned rights. We mentioned certain rights as rights arising from these dignities and we say that any ruling that conflicts with these rights must be reconsidered. It is obvious that some cases are also punishments and deprivations arising from the actions of the individuals themselves.