علی خلف خانی

Shiite jurisprudence despite the profoundness of various subjects and different spheres of human life, in comparison with Sunni jurisprudence, has always been far from social positions and has grown on the margins of the political and social life of the society. If this issue considered from its sociological effects aspect on the nature of sciences,  indicates the fact that Shiite jurisprudence is essentially individual and partial in nature In addition to the external supporting points, jurisprudence in its internal aspects, the stage of recognizing the creed and subject, and then, applying the creeds to the subjects based on partial logic, which are the result of the basic and philosophical roots of this knowledge based on Aristotelian logic. In this article, we attempt to explain this methodology by analyzing this kind of methodological individualism in Shiite jurisprudence. In contrast, the authors argue that the theory of legal edict provides a capacity in the field of social and governmental jurisprudence, which can be said of social duties and obligations.

Premium contracts recently entered in to the transaction trends of the Iran Mercantile Exchange, therefore, reviewing the conditions and elements of this agreement in the form of Sale contract or other legal forms it is very important. In the current process, these transactions are carried out in the form of obligation against the obligation. The clearinghouse monitors the Measures of Parties of the Contract and after the promised deadline a deal is done at the maturity date. In the present paper, the question of validity or nullity of this contract has been paid under the sale contract. This is because some jurisprudence errors have been introduced to the validity of future contracts at the beginning of the agreement which are; 1. Ka’li against ka’li 2. Qa-Rar. The authors, using the descriptive - analytical method, concluded that none of the drawbacks errors abound in the accuracy of premium contracts in the form of sale contracts. This is because of there is no mentioned in the shi’a narrations to invalidation of Ka’li against ka’li contract especially when it consuls after the main contract. So the Premium contracts are the same. Furthermore there is no Qa-Rar in Premium contracts because the the scale of Qa-Rar is the ignorance that lead to loss and danger about the cost of contract. But the Qa-Rar, in the Premium contracts, is the essential Qa-Rar of Neglected contracts which is normal and forgiveness. So it is correct that the both sides of the contract, in the first time, could insert the Premium contract under the sale contract.

Fiqh is a systematic discipline which is used as a means of deducing canonic rules from religious sources for a social life of a person who is subject to legal obligation (mukallaf ). The idea that the discipline of fiqh is of some effects on the social life of people can be studied under two views based on Islamic jurisprudence and principles of Islamic jurisprudence. The first view is widely accepted by the scholars of the Principles of Jurisprudence and is known among them as the dissolutionist theory of legal addresses of the legislator. According to this theory, the particular or singular as well as the general or universal addresses of the legislator can be dissolved or disintegrated into addresses equal to the number of legally obliged people. It seems that this idea is led to individual jurisprudence in terms of its subject and judgement (ruling). In contrast, Imam Khomeini's theory of legal addresses cannot be dissolved or disintegrated into individual or singular addresses in proportion to the number of people subject to legal obligation, but the addresses have remained as general or universal. However, what can be counted as having the real multiplicity or numerous instances is the object of legal addresses. This theory is of many consequences, including the disappearance of the relation between the servant (Ýabd ) and Master (MawlÁ ) in social matters, serving the interests of the human beings in line with requirements of time and place, the legislator's mawlavi's will in relation to the issues of addresses is directed to the will to lay down laws and not to the will to motivate somebody to act on the laws (baÝth), the idea that deducing "power" in fulfilling an obligation is not a stipulation and that all the parties of indefinite knowledge(Ýilm-e ijmÁli ) of obligation are to be involved in thinking whether an obligation is a categorical imperative or not. The writers of the article hold that the theory of legal addresses provides a capacity in the field of governmental and social fiqh which allows for speaking of obligation and the social obligated people.

Social sciences as humanistic Knowledge manage and regulate the human social life. The jurisprudence also deals with the study of the requirements and the results of the holy legislator contingents. From this perspective, the jurisprudence can be founding models for managing Muslim community. According to the studies, Insistence on individual Jurisprudence and Lack of reviewing in it, will not work for social management. Maximalist means the maximum citing personal issues, public management and governance issues into religious texts and rules. Reaching to this point of view about Jurisprudence indebting to an expansion occurred in Shia’s Jurisprudential system through a special method which called “Ijtihad”. Maximalist with its three forms had been the mainstream in the history of Shia Jurisprudence. The first form of maximalist accepts religious texts as a main source of knowledge and discovers individual duties and social rules from them. The second stream of Maximalist, focuses into systematic deduce from texts. The third form of maximization, with the advent of the civilization of modernity and the ultimate goal of human development through the rule of humans, is to seek to cope with it through the supervision of social evolution, backed by the theory of the rule of the jurisprudent and the organization of jurisprudence. This theory reached maturity in political and juridical practice of Imam Khomeini.

Governmental jurisprudence arises from a social need in the field of governance. Opinions about the nature of government jurisprudence, despite its wide extension, have been divided into three main approaches; methodological, thematic and fundamentalist theories. Each of these definitions is about the importance and the nature of government jurisprudence. First theories believe that the governmental jurisprudence refers to systematic developments in the field of jurisprudence and jurisprudence. The second theory with emphasis on the common paradigm advert new topics in the area of Governing. The second theories with emphasis on the common paradigm, basically looking for change in its methodology.
The present research is the result of the study in the scientific works of governmental jurisprudence. In this article, the author attempts to categorize the views of governmental jurisprudence theories and examined and analyzed the components of each one.

Baiiene (two witnesses) is one of the important ways to proving the criminal conflicts such as murder or injuries. To such a point, Baiiene needs to eight conditions to get together. These eight terms are; 1. Two witnesses or more, 2. To be man not woman, 3. To be Muslim, 4. To be just, 5. To be wise and mature, 6. Confidence to visible objects, 7. Not exposing to the charge, 8. To be original testify. Each of the religions of Islamic jurisprudence has fundamental differences based on hadith and narrative arguments about factors that was said, which necessitates a comparative review of these views, particularly in criminal cases. Therefore, the authors, relying on a descriptive-analytical method and using library resources and through a comparative study intend to analyses the Baiiene conditions in murder crimes and injuries.

Common jurisprudence is a methodological knowledge in order to infer religious terms of ruling. The nature of this method is based on dissolution and decomposition logic. On the other hand, government jurisprudence that derives from a social need, believes in the evolution of the method of discovery of a ruling, the recognition of subjects and the conformity of sentences to matters based on compilation logic. The result of these two looks is methodological differences between individual and government jurisprudence. The authors in the present study, with a quadratic and methodological study, seek to analyze and express triple Difference between individual and governmental jurisprudence.