In the recent decades, many Muslim intellectuals have devoted their intellectual efforts to reconstructing the jurisprudence through a new interpretation of Islam in order to solve the problem of human rights. While they have mostly tried to find a solution based on Ijtihad in derivation of Shari’a, Mahmoud Mohammad Taha and Mohsen Kadivar have asked for structural Ijtihad, presenting reversed and rational abrogation theories. In the current article, the researcher aims to focus on three main questions: Why do they believe that traditional jurisprudence and Ijtihad in derivatives are not able to solve the conflict between Islam and human rights? What are the most important governing principles in the corrective theory of each thinker, and how can their proposed theories lead to the reconciliation of Islam and human rights? And finally, what are the most fundamental principles and common features that lie in the theory of the two thinkers?

在最近的几十年中，许多穆斯林知识分子致力于知识分子的努力，通过对伊斯兰的新解释重建法学，以解决人权问题。尽管他们主要试图找到基于伊斯兰教法的伊斯兰教法解决方案，但马哈茂德·穆罕默德·塔哈（Mohmad Mohammad Taha）和莫森·卡迪瓦（Mohsen Kadivar）却要求结构化的伊斯兰教法，提出了反向和合理的废除理论。在当前的文章中，研究人员旨在关注三个主要问题：为什么他们认为衍生品中的传统法理学和《法学》无法解决伊斯兰与人权之间的冲突？每个思想家的矫正理论中最重要的指导原则是什么？他们提出的理论如何导致伊斯兰与人权的和解？最后，