The Concept of the Social Contract in the Shi'a Gnostic Tradition: A Case Study of Quṭb al-Dīn Nayrīzī.

The 'social contract' is a Modern political term that originated from Enlightenment thought in Europe. According to the Modern interpretation of the theory of the social contract, 1 the function of the government is confined to protecting the rights of individuals. As members of society, individuals are the contracting parties of the social contract. After the contract has been established, the governor will oversee the government's action and the contract outcome, as one side of the contract. By omitting the role of God from the scene of politics, the Modern social contract in the eighteenth century arose as an alternative to the political philosophy of Christian scholars. Modern philosophers who advocated the social contract, such as Thomas Hobbes (d. 1679), John Locke (d. 1704), and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (d. 1778), did not give God a role in their theory of the social contract, as though society had devolved into a sphere empty of God. Contrary to the Medieval notion of politics, the secular concept of the social contract that developed in the Enlightenment Era exiled God to the private sphere, arguing that the public sphere belongs to the will of the individual. The underlying premise was that the will of the individual and divine will could not coexist. Nevertheless, Quṭb al-Dīn Nayrīzī (1688–1759), an ascetic who lived before Hobbes, harmonised divine will, and the will of the individual in his theory of the social contract. He presents a Gnostic social contract in which God continues to exist. Based upon his Gnostic worldview, nowhere in the world and beyond is empty of the presence of God, and an exemplary social contract cannot neglect the role of God. This article aims to evaluate Nayrīzī's position as a Shi'a Gnostic regarding the theory of the social contract. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]