Study of difference between generality and absolutism in principles of religious jurisprudence

Students have acquired a knowledge about principles of religious jurisprudence matters after studying books in this field. And in some of the issues, not only does ignorance be eliminated, but also a series of bugs and questions remain that can only be solved by studying principle of jurisprudence books, and achieving the decisive answer. One of the topics that can be mentioned is the topic of general and specific. Such issues and issues can be confused beginners of this science, although they would be obvious for many scholars. This paper was made in library method, in which the student and researcher refer to the reference books, and then by listing the resources and the few explanations made the article. If we assume that general and the absolute are different, it can be said that absolute is not conditional upon the word, but it is possible that the singular verb would be absolute and, at the same time, would be special. It is possible that general and specific evidence only exists on the condition of the object from the word, and this is in a state that, in absolute and conditioned terms, is contrary to this principle. To these two differences between the general and the special, the absolute, and the conditioned, it is mentioned in the books of principles of religious jurisprudence that we will discuss it.