جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « generality » در نشریات گروه « علوم انسانی »

Each special phenomenon requires its own jurisprudential rules. With the completion of religion, new narrative premises are not issued in Shari'a, however, in order to determine the jurisprudential ruling of new phenomena, religious scholars must place it in the subject of one of the Shari'a cases and then face the question of whether they can relay on the application or generality of the subject of ruling of that jurisprudential premise. Also, the question that must be answered before is what is the criterion of the novelty of the phenomenon and the emergence of the feature?In this article, which is a library in terms of data collection and a descriptive analytic in terms of method and developing in terms of purpose, two types of emerging issues are introduced. In the first place, the new phenomenon is such that it makes the implementation of at least one of the religious cases difficult. Secondly, when corresponding the tittle of the subject of the Shari'a case on a new phenomenon, we encounter the problem that the correspondence of the Shari'a issue on the new phenomenon is doubtful and sometimes the character or activity of the phenomenon is new despite its correspondence on the new phenomenon and sometimes new phenomenon appears in the religious subject. Reliance on these species is definitely faced with theoretical forms of the feature and follows the ruling expressed in this article.

The fact that the generalities and absolutes of the Quran and Sunnah are the primary sources in inferencing jurisprudential matters is a unanimously agreed-upon principle among jurists. However, resorting to generalities and absolutes in addressing the newly emerged issues faces some challenges, as they have been used in the early days of Islam when today’s topics were either very different or never existed at all. Therefore, as there is no agreement on whether those words that have been articulated in proportionate to the conventions of that time are inclusive of today’s problems or not, and taking into account the fact that their inclusiveness concerning contemporary examples has, in some cases, even been denied, the issue needs to be studied methodicallyaccording to Fiqh and Usul. This article, thus, set out to examine the challenges and obstacles of using generalities and absolutes for resolving new issues. Providing and analyzing fourteen examples of the existing or discussible obstacles in making use of legal generalities and absolutes is the achievement of this study. Keywords: Generalities, Absolutes, New Issues, Absoluteness, Generality, Obstacles of inclusiveness.

Well-known Imami jurists, citing the absolute or general arguments that are in favor of marriage, consider the audience to be Muslims. On the other hand, a group of great jurists of Jafari (AS) such as Sheikh Tusi, Ibn Hamza, Ravandi and Hali, citing arguments such as praising Hazrat Yahya (AS) in the Holy Quran as "Hasour", condemning the love of children and women, in Following sedition, sorrow and grief and deviating from the main ideal of creation, which is caused by marriage believed that the acceptance of marriage belongs to two groups; First: those who have the financial means to prepare for marriage and the second group, those who have sexual desire for marital relations, and otherwise, marriage is not only undesirable but also disgusting and should be restrained.  In this study, while criticizing the arguments of the opponents, citing the general narrated arguments of the legitimacy of marriage and rational arguments such as the necessity of the obligatory introduction and the connection between the rule of reason and sharia, the desirability of marriage has been proved.

The function of Generalities and Absolutes of the Qur’an and the Sunna in resolving jurisprudential matters is among the common principles used by the jurists. However, the method of applying them with the new issues and conditions of their usage is among the high demand topics within the modern jurisprudence matters. This article is responsible to elucidate a primary step in using the Generalities and the Absolutes in resolving new issues; meaning learning various types of the Generalities and the Absolutes completely when faced with new issues and the method of using them in various situations. The innovation of this article, aside from using two methods of rational and common knowledge, is providing all of the various forms of the Generalities and the Absolutes in regards to the new issues within a logical structure along with proper method to apply in every case.

One of the issues raised by constitutional jurists, and scientific circles is the question of the generality and jurisdiction? of the constitutional legislator, so that some people, relying on certain principles, believe in the limitation of the functions duties and jurisdiction of the cases considered by law; therefore, they reject the idea of generality of guardianship, where as some others believe in the generality of guardianship and inclination of the institution of the supreme leader to solve the problems and further the interests of society. This study evaluates the arguments of both parties by checking the fiqh-legal issue and expounds the held view. The hypothesis is that the constitution legislator holds that the plan and approval of the generality of guardianship are based on its ancient fiqh origin and, has acted with caution and intelligence and given special attention to national sovereignty in this respect.

This research seeks to answer the question with reference to the fundamental position of definition in Socrates and Aristotle's thought: what are the characteristics and components of the definition for these two philosophers? As the research is a fundamental one, this paper examines the features and components of this essay by referring to the main sources of the two philosophers in response to this fundamental question. Therefore, at first, the authors bring into consideration the most prominent feature of a logical definition, that is "generality", and, then, examines the components of the definition as viewed by the two thinkers. Ultimately, the two thinkers` views on the fundamental component of definition among the four causes have been studied. And finally, with regard to the Socrates` differences of words in Plato`s various dialogues, his disagreement with Aristotle has been surveyed and criticized.

The Holy Qur'an and the reported religious traditions from Infallible Imams is full of words that emphasize and encourage the people to observe the religious obligation of the Calling the people to the goods and preventing the people from evils. Some conditions have been stipulated for the necessity of this ruling in the words of the jurisprudents. One of them which is a matter of controversy is that whether the possibility of effect is a conditional or unconditional clause. Some of the jurisprudents believe that it is absolutely evil, some others believe that it is conditional at the verbal and practical stage. A group of them holds that it is unconditional. The present research, analyzing the Holy verses of the Qur'an and considering the generalities of the verses on the one hand and the weakness of the isnad and inadequate evidences for the validity of the above-mentioned condition on the other hand and after evaluating other evidences concludes that it must be fulfilled even if it doesn’t effect. Therefore, the third view is approved and even considering the extent of the impact, whether overall or partial, it becomes obvious that the ruling of the conditionality of the possibility of effect is a baseless and unreasonable verdict and the dispute over this matter will be fruitless and impractical.