In the present era, when social justice has become one of the fundamental concerns of societies, re-examining legal concepts with a comparative approach has become an undeniable necessity; one of these concepts is the "right to social dignity", which has a special place in both Islamic jurisprudence and modern theories of social justice. With the aim of comparative examination of this concept, the present study attempts to explain its foundations, conceptual structure, and implementation consequences in two different intellectual systems using a descriptive-analytical method and a comparative approach. In the Islamic jurisprudence section, reliable Shiite and Sunni sources are examined, and in the social justice theories section, the opinions of thinkers such as John Rawls, Michael Walzer, and Robert Nozick are analyzed. The findings of the study show that Islamic jurisprudence, emphasizing the inherent dignity of man, considers social dignity to be a divine, fixed, and inalienable right, the preservation of which is entrusted to the individual and society through moral and legal duties; While social justice theories consider dignity to be a relative matter arising from social structures, distribution of resources, and equality of opportunity, and consider its realization to be dependent on legal institutions and public policies. The conclusion of the research indicates that combining the moral and divine elements of Islamic jurisprudence with the institutional mechanisms of modern theories can pave the way for the development of a more comprehensive legal system in Islamic societies that is both loyal to human dignity and pays attention to structural justice.