The Proportion Origin of Subject and Ruling through Inferring Jurisprudential Rulings

An essential principle that constantly implies a two-way relationship between subject and rule is the proportion principle of the subject and commandment that is obtained as a result of mental concentrations and traditions of understanding. The wise legislator, in the position of expressing rulings in common and understandable language has expressed its instructions in terms of the proportion of the subject and ruling as a proof and validity of the legislator, has created this capacity for jurisprudential rulings to maintain their effectiveness over time. As a method of inference, this principle has also been considered by jurists. Several articles have been written on the proportion principle. The main question is that are there any reasons that have led to the discussion on the proportion of the subject and ruling? What has happened in our religious literature in the context of time that we have been allowed to enter the discussion of the proportion of the subject and ruling? In this paper, the origin of the proportion of jurisprudential subject or ruling is discussed. The openness of this discussion has been presented in our jurisprudential, principled and sometimes legal assemblies to factors such as the passage of time and the semantic evolution of evidence words of rulings, separation in jurisprudence as an example of "it is up to us to state the principles for you and it is up to you to extract the branches, the presence of clues generating evidence rulings, the existence of a free area in evidence of rulings, especially in governmental political rulings and the accuracy and depth of Shiite jurisprudence through inference.