Abstract
The Ashura movement, as an eternal model, has provoked different and sometimes distinct readings in the thoughts of contemporary Iranian thinkers. The central question is that despite the common belief in the revolutionary and social role of Ashura, what factors and intellectual foundations of society play a role in their conceptualization of martyrdom. Their theories, with the dominance of the interpretation implicit in the revolutionary-critical, introduced martyrdom as a weapon of uprising and the driving force of revolution against the system and seriously discussed its function in popular awakening. However, they placed it under a fundamental concept such as the revival of religion and justice and avoided the dominance of a purely revolutionary interpretation.
Keywords: Ashura, martyrdom, Morteza Motahari, Ali Shariati, comparative analysis, discourse analysis.
 
Introduction
The Ashura movement, as a revivalist uprising and a history-making model, has always been at the center of reflection and reinterpretation by Islamic thinkers. Among them, two seemingly conflicting readings, the philosophical-theological reading of Morteza Motahari and the sociological-ideological reading of Ali Shariati, have been influential and influential. The central issue of this research is not simply to describe these two readings, but rather to answer the question of how a single movement can lead to two such different discursive formulations of a key concept in the intellectual and historical context of contemporary Iran? The reading of Ashura in the contemporary era should be considered a response to specific historical needs. In contrast to the mournful and identity-building reading of the Safavid era, contemporary thinkers sought to create a dynamic and problem-oriented reading that would be able to respond to the challenges of the new world.
Materials & Methods
This research is a type of historical study that uses a descriptive-analytical method to collect information using primary sources and then formulates the topic.
Discussion and Results
contemporary thinkers sought to create a dynamic and problem-oriented reading that could respond to the challenges of the new world. In this intellectual atmosphere, Shariati stepped forward with a revolutionary approach and aimed to transform Ashura into an "ideology of action" to mobilize the people against tyranny and colonialism. In contrast, Motahari, concerned with the authenticity and systematization of Islamic thought, sought to infer the deep and constructive teachings of Ashura to protect it from distortion and also to strengthen the ideological foundations of society. This confrontation ultimately led to a confrontation in the meaning and position of the concept of martyrdom. From an awareness-raising weapon and the driving force of the revolution to divine proximity and the culmination of a test of wisdom. This research, by applying the concepts of discourse analysis such as formulation, central signifier, and othering, seeks to discover the inner logic of each reading and the roots of Their opposition. A review of the research literature shows that although separate studies have addressed the Ashura readings of each of these two thinkers and a few have pointed to a general comparison of their views, there is a serious gap in the systematic comparative analysis of the two based on a specific theoretical framework (such as discourse analysis) and focusing on the key concept of "martyrdom". Most previous studies have limited themselves to describing the opinions and have neglected to explain the discursive roots and historical contexts of the formation of this distinction. This study seeks to fill this ga.
Conclusion
The research findings clearly show that despite the fact that these two thinkers share a belief in the revolutionary and anti-authoritarian aspect of Ashura, their formulation of the fundamental concept of martyrdom falls into two completely distinct discourses. Shariati, relying on sociological foundations and overcoming a critical approach, formulated martyrdom as an awareness-raising weapon and the driving force of revolution. In his discourse, martyrdom was a socio-political action whose ultimate goal is to mobilize people to overthrow oppressive and colonial systems. His metaphors of martyrdom, such as explosions and weapons, emphasize the function of this concept in the historical battle of classes. Motahari, however, within the framework of a coherent intellectual system and relying on Islamic philosophy and theology, places martyrdom under fundamental concepts such as religious revivalism and divine justice. In Motahari's discourse, although martyrdom is a revolutionary and social act, it is above all a spiritual, transcendent, and reviving act whose origin goes back to the divine intention of the martyr. Thus, in response to the main question of the research, it can be said that the fundamental distinction in the prioritization and theoretical position of the concept of martyrdom is: for Shariati, martyrdom is in the service of ideology and struggle, while for Motahari, struggle is understood under religious revivalism and wisdom, philosophy, and the effort to restore divine justice. From a theoretical perspective, this research shows how a single historical text can become a platform for the formulation of a completely different discourse in different intellectual contexts. From a historical perspective, understanding these two is essential for the formation of the dominant discourse of the Islamic Revolution, which included both of these currents. Each of these readings of Ashura, in some way, responded to part of the needs of the society of that time. The findings showed that Motahari's and Shariati's discursive formulation of martyrdom stems from a pre-existing The assumptions and social functions of these two discourses have been different in the contemporary historical context of Iran.