مجله مطالعات فقه امامیه
پیاپی 2 (بهار و تابستان 1393)

It is obligatory for the Muslim ummah [nation] to follow the infallibles (AS) in their conduct simply because they are divine leaders and inerrant. In this article, the concept of following Imam Hussein (AS) who sacrificed his life while fighting an unjust ruler has been discussed. Having studied jurisprudent's viewpoints, we see that their viewpoints in this respect fall within three categories: impermissibility to follow Imam Hussein (AS), permissibility to follow him and necessity to follow him.
Sayings, letters and sermons by Imam Hussein have been studied and the necessity to follow Imam Hussein (PBUH) has been proved. It means Imam's action was completely according to shariah and a political decision to which Imam Hussein (peace be upon him) considered himself religiously obliged. His ultimate goal in his uprising was to fulfill his duty to command the good and forbid the evil, to awaken Muslim ummah and to try to establish an Islamic ruling system. His uprising is a hujjat-e shar’i [authoritative proof] and a jurisprudential as well as practical model for humanity. Imam Hussein (AS) would consider himself victorious under any circumstances; because the criterion for victory is to fulfill your duty, awaken Muslim ummah, fight tyranny and attempt to establish the rule of justice; therefore it is necessary for Muslim ummah to follow Imam Hussein's uprising with conditions described for Islamic ummah by Imam Hussein (AS) himself.

Man's civil and social nature clearly suggests the necessity for the rule of law and a system in his daily life. Therefore, as a comprehensive and complete religion with special foundations of and specific attitude toward political issues, Islam has taken the issue seriously and has defined a political system for an Islamic society corresponding to its religious and Islamic identity. Thus, the current research tries to discuss and analyze one of its aspects namely qualifications needed for a Muslim ruler.
Having explained concepts related to our subject, we have explained opinions and viewpoints of both denominations. First, Sunni point of view has been introduced and qualifications of a ruler has been discussed. According to their viewpoint, a Muslim ruler should have qualifications such as being jurisprudent, just, healthy, capable, from Quraysh tribe etc. These qualifications have been studied and discussed. Then similar and dissimilar viewpoints have been mentioned.
Another section of the research explains the qualifications from Shiite point of view. The author discusses the issue from preceding and contemporary jurisprudent's viewpoint and explains the most important qualifications mentioned in jurisprudent's works and discussions such as being a jurisprudent, being just and having the capability to manage and lead. Rational and narrative reasons have also been explained.

The present article investigates and analyzes cooperation of ulema with unjust rulers. First the terms "jowr" [injustice] and “ja’er" [unjust or oppressive ruler] have been defined in jurisprudential context followed by a clarification on the difference between "jowr" and "zulm" [oppression]. Later different categories of rulers in jurisprudential legacy of Shiism have been mentioned. Having studied cooperation of ulema with unjust rulers in different eras, we see that according to verdicts issued by all Shiite jurisprudents, the primary principle is that cooperation with unjust rulers is haram [forbidden]. However, cooperation of ulema with unjust rulers under special conditions did not in any way mean to legitimize their rule; rather some positive aspects of cooperation such as: taqiyah [the practice of concealing one's beliefs in dangerous circumstances], public interest or good, revival of amr be maroof [commanding the good] and nahy anil munkar [forbidding the evil] made them to cooperate.

According to a classification, the crimes are divided, based on material elements, into tangible and non-tangible crimes. The tangible crimes have been referred to and interpreted in the Islamic law in a variety of ways. However, domestic lawyers have not discussed theMaster of Applied Science, University of Shahrekord nature, elements and other topics related to tangible crimes. Given the fact that comparative studies play a key role in development and perfection of various sciences including law, this research has been conducted in a comparative manner so that various issues pertaining to tangible crimes could be studied and points of weakness and strength be identified. The need for doing quick justice requires all court officials to have special authority in dealing with these crimes but the extent of this authority should be well-defined and clarified not only in accord with the principle of human dignity but also to respect individual rights.
In closing, the conclusion drawn is that the rules regarding tangible crimes do exist with great resemblance to or in most legislations and that, maintaining law, order, and safeguarding public interest justify special procedures for these crimes.

Once the contract of sale is consummated, its results and implications will be binding for both parties. Free will should be considered as the source of these liabilities and implications. By the contract both parties undertake to either perform an action or refrain from an action. Liability of parties to implement the contract is called "contractual liability". How contractual liability is formed and how damages for breach of contract are compensated have been among issues addressed by 0891 Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. Conditions for this liability to take effect are similar to Iranian laws to a great extent; however, some methods to compensate damages caused by breach of contract predicted in this convention (such as payment of the interest of consideration) are not accepted by jurisprudence and consequently in Iranian Laws. In this article data has been collected using library method and direct consultation of resources. Obtained data has been investigated using descriptive analysis.

Hijab or Islamic modest dress and chastity is one of important teachings of Islam rooted in Quran and discussed as haqqullah [God's right]. It has an unequivocal ruling deduced by jurisprudents and presented to mukallafin [duty-bound].
This article tries to prove that the Islamic dress code laid down by the sacred founder of Islam is not in contradiction to women's social and cultural activities rather it paves the way for them to better participate in social activities. Similarly, international documents point out that if hijab and chastity becomes a form of discrimination against women or deprives women of their basic rights or denies them their right to education, occupation and social activities, it will run counter to the contents of human rights documents. Contents of our law also imply that it is unjustifiable for women not to wear hijab.