فهرست مطالب سید محمدتقی قبولی درافشان

Jurisprudential thematology is one of the most wide-ranging areas of jurisprudential disagreement. This discrepancy has emerged in various ways and in various situations, including the problem of dissolution of transactional issues. This article, based on the descriptive-analytical and exploratory method, presents a picture of the widening disagreement and also explores the causes of the disagreement. Despite the fact that the customary nature of the matter is a maximum agreed subject, but the views in identifying how to arbitrate the custom have been varied and this difference has led to the failure of precise definition of the issue and this difference has led to the inference of the verdict in the next step. In the meantime, the approach to the subject through the ways of the text has not been overlooked by some. The result of the research is that the kind of views of the jurists and the way they deal with textual documents on the one hand and the unregulated effort in discovering the common position in interpreting transactional issues on the other hand has led to inevitable problems in the field of thematology and in this way identifying the areas of disagreement and its origin of disagreement and increasing delay in the thematology criteria helps to reduce the volume of differences and achieve common results.

The difference in the views of the jurists in recognizing the religious ruling is one of the most important areas of disagreement. This diversity of theories has emerged in the recognizing jurisprudential subjects in different positions, including the issue of absence. The viewpoints of the jurists through some brokerage analysis, adoption of foundations in the evaluation of textual documents and differences in role identification and custom arbitration, as well as accepting or not accepting the position of verbal viewpoints, have led to not reaching a precise definition of the subject and, in the next stage, to a disagreement in deriving the religious ruling. Based on the descriptive, analytical and exploratory method, this article has analyzed the arguments for the difference of the jurists’ viewpoints on absence. The finding suggests that the field of subjectology or the ruling does not have a desirable achievement and the role of some jurists must be rethought, and in this regard, the correct identification of the criteria for understanding the subject is effective in reducing the disagreements and achieving the same results.

Using the descriptive analytical method, the present article investigates the jurisprudential role of bribery in the realization of the crime of rent-seeking. According to the definition of bribery and the truth of its application in cases other than rulings and judgments, what a rent-seeker grants another in order to enjoy a series of privileges that he does not deserve is considered bribery and according to the consensus of jurists, it is haram. By following the words of jurists, it becomes clear that the truthfulness of bribery is valid not only for money, but also for word and deed;As a result, whatever the rent-seeking person does to the official in order to benefit from special privileges is a bribe. The person making the rent, who is the "Mortashi" (bribe receiver), is also required to return the bribe money and is a guarantor in this regard. The way to get rid of it is to return the property to the owner.

Undoubtedly, knowing the Usuli opinions of each jurist plays a significant role in understanding his jurisprudential approach. Ayatollah Sayyed Ahmad Khansari, the author of the precious book Jami al-Madarak, is one of the great contemporary jurists. Despite his numerous jurisprudential and theological books, he has left no Usuli book that may be consulted in order to identify his Usuli views. His Usuli views should be investigated in his jurisprudential books and among individual precepts. Among the practical pinciples, Istishab (the principle of continuity of the previous state) has a special position either in terms of its widespread examples or because of being one of the Usul e Muhreze (principles that declare the duty by taking into account the reality). In this paper, by referring to the jurisprudential book Jami al-Madarak, the authors seek to realize his opinion about the nature and characteristics of Istishab. By taking this paper as a model, one may perceive his Usuli views and discover the missing pieces of his Usul al Fiqh.

Jurisprudential rules are general propositions that play a key role in deriving sharia rules. The rule of no-harm is one of these rules, according to which whenever the provisions of Islamic law cause harm to the obligees, it is lifted. An important drawback to the above rule is that in cases of non-legislation of the Holy Shari'a, no-harm did not have the necessary efficiency and accordingly, no rulings can be made to neutralize the loss, because in this case, he is faced with the great obstacle of establishing a new jurisprudence. The above point is the most basic focus of the study in the present study. The author has a serious critique of this theory and in a descriptive-analytical research, while enumerating the proponents and deniers of inclusion on the non-existent matters presented by them, he has put them in the test of jurisprudential criticism. The necessity of the discussion is that, assuming the proof of the rule in non-existent matters, this capacity can be used to respond to emerging issues and various jurisprudential challenges in cases of legal vacuum. The conclusion of the debate is that the establishment of a new jurisprudence in itself cannot be a barrier to proving the verdict with the rule of no-harm. Therefore, no-harm is unconditional and the provisions of the rule are both the negation of the verdict and the proof of the verdict; Therefore, no-harm has the power to veto and neutralize harmful judgments, as well as the power to enact and legislate.

The father, in contrast to all the four Sunni religions, has a consensus on the legitimacy of eating rabbit meat. Therefore, this issue needs to be explored due to the jurisprudential differences between the sects.This research has been carried out with the aim of recognizing the sayings and theories of the jurists of Islamic religions, the limits and limitations of the evidence, explaining the obligatory religious duty and obligation regarding the legal ruling of eating rabbit meat. The present research is a new and fundamental research that has been done in terms of method (descriptive) from the point of view of purpose (applied) and the method of collecting its concepts based on studies (library) and trying to answer, analyze and remove ambiguity in permissions and impermissibility arguments. The meat of animals has the role of the infallible act in society. The necessity of this type of research, considering that in the minds of many people (especially Shiites) the lack of sanctity of rabbit meat has been associated, so it plays an important role in enlightening public opinion and explaining the jurisprudential principles and clarity of the Shari'a ruling on this particular issue.

Jurisprudential rules are general propositions that play a key role in deriving sharia rules. The rule of no-harm is one of these rules, according to which whenever the provisions of Islamic law cause harm to the obligees, it is lifted. An important drawback to the above rule is that in cases of non-legislation of the Holy Shari'a, no-harm did not have the necessary efficiency and accordingly, no rulings can be made to neutralize the loss, because in this case, he is faced with the great obstacle of establishing a new jurisprudence. The above point is the most basic focus of the study in the present study. The author has a serious critique of this theory and in a descriptive-analytical research, while enumerating the proponents and deniers of inclusion on the non-existent matters presented by them, he has put them in the test of jurisprudential criticism. The necessity of the discussion is that, assuming the proof of the rule in non-existent matters, this capacity can be used to respond to emerging issues and various jurisprudential challenges in cases of legal vacuum. The conclusion of the debate is that the establishment of a new jurisprudence in itself cannot be a barrier to proving the verdict with the rule of no-harm. Therefore, no-harm is unconditional and the provisions of the rule are both the negation of the verdict and the proof of the verdict; Therefore, no-harm has the power to veto and neutralize harmful judgments, as well as the power to enact and legislate.

The present article follows the mandatory and status rule of rent-seeking by descriptive-analytical method and with reference to the no-harm (la zarar) rule. The no-harm rule which is one of the indisputable rules of jurisprudence, is the reason for proving the sanctity of rent-seeking in cases that lead to the violation of the rights of others. At the same time, due to application of the no-harm rule in non-existence, as well as the denunciation of criterion (tanghih e manat) and reliance on the wise's procedure (bana e oghala) in arguing through the no-harm rule , since the rent-seeker has deprived others of their entitlement he is obliged to compensate and guarantee the damages he has inflicted on them. Of course, in some cases of political and information rent that no rights are violated, rent-seeking cannot be considered haram based on this rule.

Testifying to a Muslim person for infidelity, including mental and religious infidelity, is one of the controversial topics in the jurisprudence of will. There is a dispute among the Imamiyyah jurists as to whether or not a will is permissible for a Muslim infidel and a disbeliever. Some jurists believe that it is not permissible for a Muslim to testify against an infidel and some believe that it is not permissible for a Muslim to testify against an infidel, each of which has its own proof of the Holy Quran and narrations.However, according to Article 958 of the Civil Code, a will can be considered permissible for an infidel. . There is nothing in the legal texts about the will for the infide In this article, the authors have tried to evaluate the viewpoints of the jurists in a descriptive-analytic way by referring to the library sources in comparison to Imam Khomeini's views on the validity or inaccuracy of the will of the Muslim for the infidel and the infidel. And examine the evidence of each view. The result is that in the matter of will for the infidel and the national apostate, Imam Khomeini believes in the correctness of the will for them, and in the matter of testifying for the infidel, he has chosen the position of silence and made the discussion a reflection.

Interfaith communication and the conversation of followers of religions with each other is one of the most important necessities in the present age. Utilizing the knowledge of jurisprudence as a science expressing the practical duty of those in charge has a great role in explaining the ways of this communication and dialogue. Among the jurisprudential propositions that can be suggested as one of the ways of dialogue between religions, tolerance with religious opponents as gentleness, kindness and softness in relation to them. In the well-known jurisprudential thought of Imami jurists, the legitimacy of tolerant behaviors with opponents has been considered in the form of the doctrine of taqiyyah, and the practice of tolerant behavior has been conditioned by emergency and fear of harm and danger. On the other hand, some other jurists, although they have spoken of the behavior of orphans in the form of taqiyyah, have not considered it harmful and have not even considered the fear of receiving harm in the legitimacy of such behavior. The present article, which is a descriptive-analytical study, while considering the arguments of both views, considered the promotion of tolerant behaviors in the form of taqiyyah as only a temporary and unique emergency tactic and finally the necessity of tolerance and good association with religious opponents as a first principle. And it has resulted in fundamental communication and interfaith dialogue.

The objective of this study is to answer how can we use the subjects in Haram Businesses (Makaseb-e Moharrameh) as one of the most extensive jurisprudential issues to explain the principles and references in political jurisprudence. In this regard and using descriptive analysis, the present study aims to delve into the potentiality of political jurisprudence in Makaseb-e Moharrameh. Principles and issues as well as Ijtihad refrences in the political jurisprudence recognized by the study of jurists’ approach in inferring the political issues in Makase-e Moharrameh are among the most significant issues in this research. The most important results of this study denote identification of the potentials of in Makaseb-e Moharrameh in order to recognize complementary references for Ijtihad in political jurisprudence such as reason, purposes of shariat, and place and time requirements. Thus the faculty of reason can play an import role in determining the borders of political rules and the criterion for prioritization in overlapping situations in political jurisprudence. The function of religious purposes can also be consiodered in the exegesis of Qur’anic verses in the process of inferring religious rules and prioritization criterion in overlapping situations. In contemporary approaches to political jurisprudence like Imam Khumeini’s approach, time and place requirements as the complementary references in Ijtihad and expediency in political jurisprudential issues are also taken into account.

One of the issues of interest in the noble religion of Islam is the observance and protection of human, animal and plant rights. According to the jurisprudential principle of respect, which is referred to as “respect for property and practice of Islam”, it has been instituted in support of Muslim practice and to prevent the rape of others, and states that acts of a Muslim such as his are respected and respected In fact, the practice of a Muslim is considered equivalent to his property and must be paid in return for the Muslim's practice and others cannot benefit from the service without paying the Muslim's One of the principles of this rule is to obtain a proverb from the Prophet (pbuh), since the Prophet (pbuh) is the guardian of the property of the orphans and is in charge of the care of the orphan, he is respected and therefore can be exonerated. He removes the saying from the orphanage and among the jurisprudents of the Imamiyyah No one denies that the proverb is not permitted. In this descriptive-analytical method, referring to the documents of Imam Khomeini and the well-known jurists in a descriptive-analytical manner, referring to the documentary and library sources, the fact is that Imam Khomeini (RH) absolutely permits. Obtaining the proverb is by the testator, and according to their view there is no difference in obtaining the proverb by the poor and the rich.

The present article seeks to review the legal verdict of the incomes arising from rent. In this article, some types of negative rents, including economic and political rents conforming to falsity, and income arising from rent seeking are considered as false property acquisition in light of interpretive jurisprudential views, and by using an inferential analytical method after examining the concept of rent from one aspect, and by proving the nature of falsity is customary in Tejarat verse. But the conformity of the information rent with the issue of falsity in the glorious Tejarat verse, in some of its examples, is doubted, and it should be detailed that only if the information rent leads to the violation of rights and oppression to others, it is an example of falsity and the incomes arising from it is false property acquisition. Consequently in all cases where it is proved that the incomes arising from rent is false property acquisition, the person will not be the owner of the income and will be the guarantor for it.

An issue that has drawn lesser attention in the field of inheritance is that beside properties, rights (and its different types) too can be a subject of inheritance. However, there are differences among different types of rights. Imam Khomeini maintained that these differences can influence the inheritability of a right or otherwise. The main question of this paper is: What rights are inherited and what are the principles for inheritability of a right? Descriptive and documental methods have been employed in this research to find out a general rule for inheritability of rights based on the viewpoints of the jurisprudents, jurists and Imam Khomeini. The findings of the research indicate that among different types of rights, only financial rights are inheritable, unless in some special cases that non-financial rights too are inheritable.

According to Article 3 of the establishment and the powers of Haj and Endowments and Charity Affairs Organization, endowed property does not cease to property insurancebut after the dedication it is the legal entity endowment which is considered the owner and just the endowments property have the right to exploit it. This new theory provided by legislator is derived from a number of scholars believe that the transfer of ownership endowment is only to God and others including Imam Khomeini had the endowment without its ownership. These two viewpoints, have provided the background formation of theory. The present study is to investigate the background of the provider of this theory, requirements for proving this theory and barriers to scrutinize it. The authors believe that no only these two viewpoints are improbable as background provider of theory for owned legal person but by supporting this theory, it has two obstacles: first in spite of the fact that Imam Khomeini’s issues about rejecting the famous theory of scholars indicating transferring of ownership to endowment property are acceptable, but other reasoning should also be taken into consideration and also it is not possible to accept concubine according to dedicated contract theory.

The issue of opening (infitāḥ) or closure (insidād) of the doors of legal reasoning (ijthād) has been one of the age-old and wide-ranging questions with the Sunnis that has been prevalent through history with each one of the opening and closure having found their own advocates and each having brought up their arguments to prove their claim. A group of the earlier and later Sunni jurists have inclined toward closure and most of the contemporaries have accepted this perspective too and have come to believe in closure of the door of ijtihād, especially the absolute independent ijtihād. In contrast, this
theory has not been accepted by a group of the earlier and later jurists and they have opined for the permissibility and even the obligation of ijtihād upon the qualified, while the later jurists have made the most attempts to prove the opening. The present article has undertaken to explore the course of opinions in this respect and has concluded through comparative study and by critique, analysis, and examining that from among the above-mentioned theories what seems to be more logical and appropriate is the opening of the door of ijtihād.

The Shari`ah`s purposes are one of the blessed and newfangled discussions that the various functions are stated for them. In addition to the effect of these aims on correcting the Ijtehadi (legal reasoning) approach and aspect, making appearance and disappearance of it, whether the these aims and purposes of the shari`ah are to be regarded as the legal evidence or not, several practices have been created. Of course, most of the jurisprudents have doubtfully looked at this issue.
This paper has considered the Shari`ah`s purposes according to an another trapdoor, and from an angle of predominance in the conflicted ordinances section. After explaining the background of the Shari`ah`s purposes, this article tries to specify the more significant aims and their linear relationship, and similarly to consider the situation of conflictions among some of Islamic ordinances in accordance with the light of utilizing Islamic legal aims as a definite or probable predominant. Some tangible and functional results are acquired by this study too.

Weighted and scale are a couple of clear concept in Imamieh jurisprudence but it has changed in different era and place in examples; so Imamieh jurisprudents are divide in criterion. Most of them believe that the criterion of weighted and scales are equal to the holy prophet era. This article by Analytical – Descriptive method and whit desk research type of studying analysed these viewpoints and Checked out the validity of that and Concluded that these viewpoints all aren’t able to prove the imamieh jurisprudent viewpoint. It shows that because the main reason for weighted and scales is a Verity Proposition or god accepted roles that god accepting means that in every era and every places weighted and scale are available and it may become new and different in every era so in each case that criterion founded taking usuries happened.

The issue of closing of the gate and opening up of ijtihad’ (insidad and infitah bab al-ijtihad) is of the important issues in the Sunni jurisprudence (fiqh). This matter is of the long time and vast issue which has been continued during the period of history and both attitudes have their special proponents. Some of the prior and recent Islamic Sunni jurists (fuqaha) have accepted closing of the gate and opening up of ijtihad’ (insidad) and also the most of the contemporary Islamic sunni have accepted this attitude and they believe that the stipulations of ijtihad in the contemporary time (present time) is impossible. The insidad proponents do not have the same (identical) opinion (a consensus view) about the concept of insidad and time limit. The examination of the prior and contemporary Sunni scholars of the principles of jurisprudence (usul aI-fiqh) shows that the backgrounds (bases) of closing of the gate of ijtihad’ (insidad) are: 1. liar/ false ijtihad claimants 2. the birth of different parties and isms 3. the emergence of the branches and divisions among Mujtahidin (expert scholars) 4. Political factors 5. the discipline of ijtihad methods and attitudes 6. concealment of religious opinions, dissemblance of one’s faith or dissimulation (Taqiya) in ijtihad declaration 7. tendency to Taqlīd. They have also mentioned proofs for insidad which they can be categorized to six groups: 1. Sadd al Dharai (Blocking the means) 2. the propagation and codification of the four Sunni schools 3. researchers’ consensus (ijma) 4. the impossibility of occurrence of ijtihad conditions for the Later Islamic Scholars 5. the impossibility of hadith correction at the time of the later Islamic Scholars 6. the problem of the absence of mujtahid at the present time. The issue of insidad has not been accepted by some of the former and later Islamic jurists and they have commented the authorization and even obligation of ijtihad for those who have the stipulations and the possibility of its occurrence. Among this, the most attempts have been done by the later Islamic scholars in recent centuries for proving infitah. The present paper is going to analyze the process of opinions and thoughts through the comparative study and with analyzing and criticizing them it has achieved that among the mentioned attitudes what is more logical and correct is opening up of ijtihad and possibility to happen its conditions.

Juridical interpretation is one of the oldest and most useful Methods of interpretation of the Quran that commentator is extracted juridical sentences from the Jurisprudential Verses. So many interpretations have been written with different viewpoints and methods which knowing them helps to more understanding of God's intention. We can find these interpretations not only in interpretative books or Jurisprudential Verses but also in juridical or narrative ones. One of these sources is Allame Majlisi’s one hundred and ten volumes Bihar al-Anwar. Although this book is a hadith collection but valuable comments about the verses and ahadis makes it as a Shia Encyclopedia. In this paper, with descriptive and analytical way and information which is collected through documents and books, at first a definition of Jurisprudential Verses is mentioned and went on to explain about the history, famous Jurisprudential Verses books and the way which has been written. Finally some points about him and his interpretative method with the views of other Shia scholars are expressed.

Nowadays, life and living insurances are most effective and applied evidences in the economic and social realm. Within these typicals of insurances, individuals are able to provide the capitals by economizing on the costs and monthly continuous repayments, b which they can supply the schooling costs of persons, marriage, dowry, housing construction. Although, the legal and jurisprudential faults and doubts within this context cause the insurance not to able to grasp its outstanding and real position in Islamic countries. Therefore, from this regard, contemporary Islamic lawyers and jurists have various viewsabout the truth and legitimacy of insurance in such away, some of them regard them unlawful and like as usury, restitution, compensation, gambling, bailment, confinement transaction, and entrench the property in unlawful. And some others confirm the life insurance license in the form of transaction based onthe peace, cooperation, pledge and trust and a typical loan and byreferring to the legal reasons and rationality, freedom principle of treaties, and license and legitimacy of all kinds of life insurance based on the jurisprudential foundations of five-fold sects (Imamyeh) Shafei, Hanafi, Hanbali, Maleki and Iranian law as well as delineating the opinions of contemporary Islamic jurists and lawyers, they are quite taken into account.

In Islamic penal law، most of the crimes against national and social security are gathered under the title muḥāriba (waging war); whereas، in jurisprudence، there is disagreement about the nature and criteria of muḥāriba and the concept of arms in muḥāriba. However، by research and delving into evidences derived from jurisprudential texts، a true definition of this category can be achieved، according to which muḥāriba would be the intention to intimidate people by using whatever that frightens and panics them، causing disorder in society. According to this viewpoint، the title muḥāriba، is semantically expanded to include armed and unarmed، contrary to the fact that according to article 183 of Islamic Penal Law، the legislator has regarded muḥāriba as subject to be armed. Nevertheless، there are certain crimes among those against public security that according to the jurisprudential evidences، are true instances of the crime of muḥāriba and the basic components and elements of this group of crimes fully conform to the crime of muḥāriba. However، in crimes against public security، the legislator has considered only a limited number of these crimes as muḥāriba; in some he has not made any reference to the crime perpetrated as being muḥāriba، and in others has looked at this title with suspicion. Similarly، in some cases، he has set the anti-government activities and the intention to confront the ruling system as the criterion for judging as muḥāriba.

One of the provision should be examined in the validity of contracts is the fulfillment (tanjiz) of the provision. If it is accepted, the result will be the invalidity of the suspension (taliq) and the invalidity of contracts and if it is not the provision, the suspension will not makes the contracts be void. There is a debate between the Islamic jurists without any separation between the suspension in the creating the contracts and the origination of the proposition before sheikh Ansari. But from the time of the Sheikh, the suspension in the contracts has divided to the suspension of establishing the contracts and the suspension of the origination and from that time till now, Imami jurisprudence scholars have presented detailed and accurate discussions about the validity and invalidity of the different types of the suspensions. The famous Islamic jurists and law scholars have commented the validity of the suspension contracts in the origination mood and the invalidity of the suspension contracts with the suspension in establishing, while some great Imami jurists and civil law professors strongly defend the opinion of the validity of suspended contracts with the suspension in establishing and have presented considerable reasons. With the importance of the suspended contracts in the field of law contracts and especially with a look to the suspension in establishing like the suspension in origination, there are no united opinions between the Islamic jurists and law scholars and the civil code is silent. The present research aims to determine, criticize and explore the stated reasons to the validity and invalidity of this type of suspension and it is most acceptable the invalid theory from the perspective of argumentative jurisprudence and the case law.