مجله مطالعات فقه معاصر
سال دوم شماره 1 (بهار و تابستان 1396)

In this paper, the issue of the independence or dependence of the virgin girl in marriage has been investigated. After quoting eight theories in this issue and related principles and rules, then the threefold aspect of the Islamic traditions concerning this topic are deliberated and their implications are carefully discussed. Islamic narratives that recognize the permission and consent of the father and grandfather in the marriage of the virgin girl valid, narratives that are against them, and ultimately, there are narratives that are evidence of an agreement between the two categories of conflicting narratives. The result of this study is the establishment of the view that accepts "the lack of authority of the father and the paternal ancestor and the independence of the virgin girl in marriage." However, in the following, caution in obtaining the permission of father and paternal ancestor is explained and strengthened. But, assuming the parent's unreasonable prohibition and infeasibility and difficulty of finding or accessing to them, their authority is removed by the rule of La-Haraj "no difficulty in religion" and the rule of La-Zarar "no harm".

Human life is constantly at risk; sometimes the actions of others pose a danger to our lives, and sometimes our actions have such an effect for us. In the latter case, the task of preserving the self deprives us of such behaviors. But is there still religious prohibition in cases where this work has rational justification, such as the relief efforts of firefighters and the salvation of others? Also, risk taking across enemies in order to fight against them includes prohibition reasons? The answer to such questions needs to review the rational and traditional proofs relating the verdict of "self-murder." And then, with the assumption of prohibition, it should be examined whether there is a more important criterion for prescribing? This article has shown that in what cases there are moral and religious justification for self-murder? And in what cases its justification is difficult.

This article deals with the relationship between Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) and psychology and raises some questions and challenges in this area. The purpose of this study is to open up dialogue and interaction between two areas of psychology and Fiqh. The research method in this discussion is an analytical study and critical analysis of psychological and jurisprudential texts with a comparative approach. The findings of this research are presented in two sections of the effects of Fiqh on psychology and the effects of psychology on Fiqh which are based on the four axes of creating the subject of research for psychology, the expression of rulings on issues raised in psychology, a better understanding of some jurisprudential subjects, and finally justification and explanation of some of the judgments with the help of psychology. Examples of questions and challenges are as follows: the obligation of alimony (woman's Nafagheh) to a man in marriage, Istihbab (recommendation) of white paint coating, consultation with the opposite sex, running some psychological tests, age of discretion, Kathir Al–Shak (one who doubts too much), obsession, insanity, inclemency and idiotism, men are in charge of women in the family and the right to divorce is in men's hand. The result of this study indicates the need for greater communication and interaction between Islamic jurisprudence and psychology.

In examining the civil liability of the government against the losses caused by government employees to the citizens, we first have to wonder whether such damages are fundamentally causing liability. Or because it is believed that the state sovereignty is absolute and that the government is at the service position, recognizing the state or its components liable is incorrect? And should not the actions of the government and its staff be considered as a pillar of other harmful measures? The second question is who is responsible for these kinds of losses: is the government or the cause of the damage? In examining the first question, we are faced with two categories of reason: a category of general rules and other specific arguments, which are special for these kinds of losses; as there are some arguments, which at first glance can be seen as an evidence for the lack of responsibility of the state. Each of these three categories requires separate review. What follows in this article is limited to the first category. This paper that examines some of the main principles from the standpoint of credibility of the document, the domain of its implication, and its implication on the basis of the guarantee of liability and liability in the assumed losses is an emphasis on the principle of non-immunity of states and their peers against their actions, including the need to adhere to the rights of citizens and in particular the liability for damages. And an introduction to the guaranty of liability and civil liability of the government against employee actions that are considered as an independent question.

In this paper, first of all, the importance of marriage and family formation and mutually, the disadvantage of divorce in Islamic culture have been discussed and alimony as the right of women and the commitment of man in life has been discussed from the jurisprudential and legal point of view. Also, referring to the laws and regulations that have been laid down for the consolidation and solidarity of the family, the Islamic State's duty in this area are designed and some strategies for providing the livelihoods of families that are at risk of disintegration are suggested. Accordingly, the Islamic State has a duty to prevent, in the field of policy making, legislation, planning and implementation, the emergence of divorces that caused by economic deterioration, such as couple's inability to pay alimony.

Among the issues raised about the approach of the early jurists, which led to the emergence of some problems and ambiguities in jurisprudential rulings are the main and minor issues presented simultaneously on two different jurisprudential positions and subjects. One of the most complete examples of this issue has come about the issue of wife's disobedience (Noshooz), which two positions in the works by the Companions were examined in parallel: the first is in the topic of alimony cancellation, which includes one of the minor discussions of alimony, and the second in the argument of wife's disobedience (Noshooz), which was discussed at the end of the field relating marriage or the beginning of the other field on divorce. The differences in looking at the problem and the distinction of these two topics in the works of the Companions has led to the emergence of differences in dealing with minor issues and the dimensions of some of the issues raised in this discussion. In this study, differences existing in these two topic's investigations on the problem of wife's disobedience (Noshooz) were considered both in terms of "rulings" (jurisprudential judgements) and "subject". And attempts to illustrate the results of this inconsistency in the rulings concerning the problem, as well as presenting an account of why this happened, while taking into account the differences of opinion and developments during different periods.

The session on reviewing and criticism of the book "the jurisprudential survey of civil obedience and disobedience" was held at Iran's Islamic Human Rights Commission with the presence of the author Hojjatoleslam Seyyed Javad Varaee and professors of the university: Dr. Seyyed Mohammad Reza Beheshti, Dr. Mohammad Hasan Ziaaeifar, Dr. Reza Eslami, Dr. Mohammad Hossein Mozaffari, and Dr. Mostafa Mir Ahmadi. In the following report, the author's description of the stages of the writing of the work, and detailed comments and views of the invited professors on various aspects of the topic of "civil disobedience" are presented. In addition to expressing "the privileges and positive achievements of the above mentioned jurisprudential book" the professors emphasized "the need for research on the subject of civil disobedience by scholars of various scientific fields" regarding the interdisciplinary nature of the issue. From the critic's point of view, "the opening of discussions on new social and political issues, problems and affairs," "addressing the issues of present time," and "pursuit of various aspects of the subject" are among the advantages of this work. "Failing to address the foundations of the problem, such as being result-oriented or task-directed," "inconsistency between the chapters of the book in terms of volume," "addressing a subject such as the relationship of crime and sin in the middle of discussion, and leaving the reader waiting to achieve the result," "lack of transparency of the exceptions to disobedience that leads to misuse "includes reviews and critiques of the book.