A study of the three proposed structures of jurisprudence after Shahid Sadr

In Imami jurisprudence, less attention has been paid to the study of jurisprudential structures. Some thinkers have studied a number of jurisprudential structures; But these studies face three challenges: selective structure selection, overview and transience, and poverty in analysis. The necessity and purpose of this research are two things: first, achieving the characteristics of structures, second, re-reading the proposed jurisprudential structures and criticizing them to determine the advantages and disadvantages of these structures and by comparing previous structures to open comprehensive structures tailored to the nowdays needs. The theory that this article seeks to prove is that most early jurists have structured jurisprudence based on its issues and provided an intra-scientific structure, unlike later jurists who have proposed more extra-scientific structure and jurisprudence for the science of jurisprudence. This article examines and evaluates the proposed structures. These structures are characterized by independence from jurisprudence. According to induction, the five proposed structures before Shahid Sadr are: Ibn Baraj's structure in Al-Mohadhab, the Shahid Avval in al-Qawaid va al-Fawaid, Sivari in Nazd al-Qawaid, Fayz Kashani in Wafi and Nokhbe and Amili in the Miftah al-Karama.