جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « governmental Jurisprudence » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

This article addresses the main question that by using the service provider-served model in interdisciplinary studies, how can we talk about common areas and achievements between discourse studies (service provider) and Fiqh (served) knowledge.Based on this, discourse studies can be effective in the methodological development of the principles of jurisprudence, including in understanding the process of creating knowledge in the logic of understanding religion and the semantic development of the subject of denotation. Discourse studies will enable the development of social jurisprudence by focusing on the recognition of social changes, the development of the knowledge of customs and the development of thematics.This article has discussed the most important achievements of discourse studies in governmental jurisprudence by stating discourse creation in the theory of Guardianship of the  Fiqh (Islamic Jurist).

The systematic jurisprudence has been proposed among the jurists as a jurisprudence that can meet the needs of government and society. Many differences in its definition among thinkers are mostly due to incorrect perception of Islamic humanities and its relationship with jurisprudence. For this reason, by developing a concept of jurisprudence from minor jurisprudence to major jurisprudence, some have tried to put the issues related to humanities in this regard under the umbrella of jurisprudence and call it the systematic jurisprudence. In this article, after reviewing the existing perceptions of the systematic jurisprudence, the systematic jurisprudence is introduced as a jurisprudence whose approach is systematic, it is a subset of government jurisprudence, the division of issues in it is based on social systems and governance, social systems and governance in it are produced by the Islamic humanities, not by itself, it has systematic features such as coherence and interaction between components, and finally, in each of these areas, there is a general unity that acts as the spirit that governs all the rules and identifies them.

nlike non-religious governments, which are only concerned with providing the worldly welfare of their citizens, the Islamic government, in addition to that, has the duty to provide suitable religious atmospheres. Apostasy is a sin that is indirectly criminalized in Iran's laws, and it is necessary to prevent it because it can disrupt social order, weaken the lofty status of religion, and endanger the spiritual well-being of Muslim citizens.
The decisive prevention of the holy Lawgiver from the point of view of punishment for apostasy indicates the tremendous importance of confronting this crime. However,  what can be concluded from the the laws of Islam and the normative conduct of the imams, in order to confront apostasy, is that preventive social and legislative methods should be used first, and finally, if no other measures work to prevent it, the apostate should be subjected to capital punishment. The present article, relying on the library and analytical method, examines the educational duty of the government in this regard, and by highlighting the causes of apostasy under four general categories, it presents eight solutions so that the Islamic government may, by applying them, reduce apostasy and the renunciation of religious beliefs.

The progress and development of human society causes new needs, especially in the field of social issues, the need to meet them while maintaining the purposes of Sharia is accepted by the Sharia, if the expediency is approved. The present study is aimed at answering the basic question that: What is the place of public expediency in the rules of Istislah that result in trans-religious governmental jurisprudence? Research findings show that the expansion of human society requires dealing with emerging issues that are based on the public expediency. Therefore, applying systematic Istislah under the authority of the spirit of Sharia is legal and rational and thus this kind of application of Istislah is from the presumptions of Sunnah or rationality that gives the social rulings based on public expediency a trans-religious character, so although Istislah is an unspecified resource, it is a mechanism generally governed by Sharia. Therefore, some Imami jurisprudents in subjects such as insurance, hoarding and intellectual ownership, and the legislator in  issues like public expediency and emerging legal issues that have a governmental aspect, relying on the public expediency, use Istislah in the form of tradition or reason.

The development of passageways, streets and communication networks are the framework of cities in general. They are one of the main factors shaping the structure of the city that play the role of its vital arteries. There is a clear relationship between the development of the city, the growth of its land price, the dynamics and economy of the city, and all the activities of the inhabitants of the city with the passageways network. The development of societies, the expansion of urbanization, and the emergence of many problems and restrictions in inefficient urban contexts, have created the need for policy-making, planning, and the implementation of public and development projects in the urban context. To solve this challenge, improvement and renovation plansconsider widening the passages as one of the appropriate solutions. Regarding the implementation of the principles and rules of these plans or not, there is a conflict between public rights and interests and private rights and interests of individuals. In this study, the reading of ‘LāḌarar’ maxim with the approach of the governmental jurisprudence of Imam Khomeini and Ayatollah Sistani is introduced as the appropriate criterion for solving this conflict.According to this theory, the maxim of ‘LāḌarar’ represents the authority and duty of the Islamic judge (ḥākim al-sharʻ) in denying harm (ḍarar) to the public.Accordingly, there is no doubt that the municipality has public power, but based on the theory of governmental jurisprudence, the municipality is appointed by the guardian-jurist (walī al-faqīh) as the arm of governing. In the course development process, the municipality does not have the right but the duty to widen the passageways. To resolve the conflict between private rights and public interests, the municipality is obliged to act in favour of public rights and interests wherever the denial of harm (ḍarar) to the public is proven, even if it is to the detriment of private rights and interests. The results of this view provide better and greater protection for the general rights of citizens and in cases of refusal and withdrawal, there is no need for a governmental decree, because the plan approved by the municipality, assuming it has legal conditions and the approval of the highest official of this institution, is the same as the governmental decree of the ruler.
Keywords: Widen the Passageways, Urban Management, Conflict of Rights and Interests, the ‘lā ḍarar’ Maxim, Governmental Decree, Governmental Jurisprudence, Ayatollahs Khomeini and Sistani.

Execution of religious precepts and managing the important and public affairs is among the duties of the sharia ruler or the highly qualified religious jurist and the arbitrary action as to these affairs by members of society without the authorization of sharia ruler is not acceptable. There are precepts in the Islamic jurisprudence including prescribed punishments whose execution by ordinary people, at first sight, appears to be permitted while if they fall within the competence of the public, this leads to chaos in the society and is, apparently, against public order. The present paper, through case studies on a number of such precepts, seeks to answer the question whether assigning them to the public contradicts the public order or not. The conclusion is that such precepts were issued at a time when the Islamic state was not established and the individual jurisprudence prevailed and private interests were preferred over public interests. However, in situations the righteous Islamic state is established and the social and political jurisprudence prevails, the precepts of the governmental jurisprudence are given priority over the above said precepts. Some precepts which contradict the public order and have been issued due to necessity are restricted to exigent circumstances.  Proving the point that whenever the great jurists have mentioned order they have intended public order is also an achievement of this research which has been performed using library tools and through descriptive-analytical method.

Firstly, the theory of "jurisprudence of social systems" was crystallized by Shahid Sadr in the book Iqtisaduna (Our Economics) and has been reported as a new approach in jurisprudence, in which the Islamic mujtahid, different from the micro and individual view, to jurisprudence and the category of ijtihad, with a systematic and comprehensive view seeks to analyze jurisprudential issues. He or she seeks to infer the "social systems" from religious sources. Therefore, as individual jurisprudence is responsible for expressing individual rules and duties and is responsible to religionize the actions and conduct of individuals in the jurisprudence of the system, while relying on the Rationalists' decision and the mantaghat-al-faragh. As one of the main elements of this approach, the jurisprudence of the system is responsible for infering the rules of governmental and social structures and relations in order to administer the religious and divine management of society. Therefore, the jurisprudence of the system is an approach that creates the government, society and sovereignty, and in the field of jurisprudence and ijtihad, it competes with its rivals."Secular jurisprudence" and "social jurisprudence" are considered as the two main approaches in front of the "jurisprudence of the system" approach. This article, by emphasizing the re-reading of these views and proposing the problems and disadvantages of the approach of the jurisprudence of the system in order to violate them, insists on the conclusion that all the opposite approaches are rejected and do not have the power to resist in front of the claimant approach.

How are the social aspects of a school depicted at a historical juncture, and what role can jurists play in these aspects? In order to reach the answer to this question, in the model of juridical school of Hillah, with a descriptive-analytical approach, it examines historical reports and jurisprudential and principled propositions. This essay first depicts the social phenomena that stood in front of the jurists of the Hillah school; Phenomena such as the Mongol War, popular uprisings against the Mongols, saviorism, tribalism, the multiplicity of religions and sects, the political and economic geographical location of Hillah, and the background of the social status of the Hillah jurists. Then he observes the scientific and practical works and activities of the jurists of Hillah in the social aspects with regard to this space. The result of this observation is the inference of the four aspects of "spirituality", "education", "reasoning rationalism" and "social interaction" and their types and varieties. In the final analysis, it is stated that the jurists, according to the principles of Sharia and doctrinal principles, succeeded in reforming and social guidance in a way that was more principled and broader than many rival governmental and social achievements. This success brought with it another double and reciprocal success, and that is the dynamism and development of the branches of jurisprudence, the principles of jurisprudence and the theological(kalam) foundations of Shia jurisprudence.

Within the past decade, cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, have been among the resultants of information technology development in the international and even internal financial system which have had benefits such as the expansion of international currency exchanges and cheeping against challenges like increase in a number of crimes like money laundering and violations of financial and economic order of the countries. From the individual jurisprudence point of view, the cryptocurrencies are considered as a kind of property and their transactions are not usorious and uncertain (Gharar); therefore, if the trading base of cryptocurrencies is correct from the jurisprudential point of view, the exchange of cryptocurrencies is permissible in legal terms. But if the trade base of cryptocurrencies is not legitimate, their trade is void and forbidden. From the point of view of governmental jurisprudence, however, the status of cryptocurrencies exchanges is different.  In accordance with no harm, respect, government system maintannace, action (Iqdam), and justice principles, all of which prevent the implementation of inappropriate monetary policies and the excessive increase in the amount of money in the Islamic economic system, it is essential that their trading is prevented until a legal system for the control of cryptocurrencies have been created by the government in the economy of the country.

It is necessary for social jurisprudence to have a coherent intellectual system, since we are facing various needs and questions in the field of government and Islamic society today. Ignoring jurisprudential organization in this arena will make jurisprudence passive in the new world, subject to existing structures and strategies. In this paper, through organizing the issues, predicates, approaches, and ijtihad methods of social jurisprudence, an attempt has been made to give a proper discipline to this effective part of the jurisprudence. Accordingly, the organization of social jurisprudence in the field of scope and methodology and the process of forming social jurisprudence based on the mandatory-ijtihad model and the relation of principles, goals, social principles and Islamic social sciences with the jurisprudence of society and the jurisprudence of the social system of Islam have been explained. Some of the most important features of an ideal social jurisprudence are, development in the subject in the sense of the obligation of society, government, and history in religious discourses, development in judgment in the sense of the generality of the rulings in relation to behaviors, strategies and structures along with reforming governmental approach to jurisprudence in the sense of interest of Islam and Muslims, and finally explaining a mandatory-ijtihad model to discover the social rulings of Islam in its various behavioral, strategic, and structural aspects.

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.

This article wants to make clear the Viewpoints of theorists in governmental jurisprudence and evaluate them. It also categorizes the conclusions of governmental jurisprudence in 3 subject-oriented jurisprudence, System-oriented jurisprudence, Guardian jurisprudence.Governmental jurisprudence wants to answer the new issues caused by the government. Subject-oriented jurisprudence was the method of the old jurisprudents and until now has been the common method of religious schools. It wants to introduce God's statement to religiously duty-bound in format of jurisprudential ruling. System-driven jurisprudence wants to derive the rules of social system from the religious source that is different from individual jurisprudence. It wants by using a Collective logic to make a new society that solves the problems interacting with each other. Foundations, system, goals and school are the Effective Factors in methodology of this kind of jurisprudence. Guardian jurisprudence is responsible for human's Authority Growing in three aspects i.e. individual, social and historical ones. It also introduces the jurisprudence as a Supervisor of social dignity. So the method of governmental jurisprudence cussed by developing in three categories of foundations i.e. those of theology, Philosophy of jurisprudence and Principles of Philosophy.Consequently, by attending to the basic indices of the principal definition the governmental jurisprudence -the Necessity, object of the religious ruling, one under obligation of the religious ruling, religious duty, the range of the obligated, result and method of deduction of religious ruling- are different in each of the methods.

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.

Nowadays, protection, conservation, rehabilitation and restoration of cultural heritage have a great importance for communities in the economic, cultural, and social dimensions. In this paper we attempt to analysis some of these approaches. The basic hypothesis of this research is based on the belief that the jurisprudential approaches to cultural heritage in order to best protection of it needs a fundamental change. So in the first section we refer to the importance and situation of cultural heritage in jurisprudential and legal theory of Islam. Then we attempt to criticize and introduce the current jurisprudential approaches to cultural heritage context.

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.