Analyzing the obstacle of conflict in the validity of the positive principle

Doubts about the "Taklifee" ruling and not finding the "Amareh" is the way to adhere to the practical principle in order to remove the surprise in the position of action. Subjects of practical principles may be accompanied by necessary, accompanying or required, whether Sharee or non-Shariee and whether direct or indirect. The scope and validity of each of these are examined in the principles of jurisprudence under the title of "Mosbet" principle. Regarding the validity of the "Mosbet" principle, there is a difference of opinion among the scholars. The scholars of the principles that do not consider the "Mosbet"  principle to be a proof have insisted on it for reasons, the most important of which is the existence of conflict; This means that the "Mosbet"  principle can prove non-Sharee works (rational or normal works) for  what it  indicates, which in this case, is in conflict with the principle of the absence of said works. Some scholars do not consider the "Mosbet"  principle to be valid and authentic due to the existence of such an obstacle. On the other hand, some like Sheikh Ansari believe in the "Hokumat". From his point of view, basically, there is no conflict in the issue that can be used to invalidate the " Mosbet" principle. In this article, while examining and criticizing the existing views with an analytical method, the conclusion has been reached that the issue under discussion cannot be definitively considered as an example of conflict or "Hokumat", but in a new classification," Tafsi"  must be belived; In this way, some examples of it are examples of conflict according to some bases, and some examples are examples of "Hokumat" based on other bases. Therefore, it is not possible to deny the validity of the "Mosbet" principle by insisting on the problem of conflict.