The conflict between the presumption of Ferash and other presumptions from the point of view of comparative jurisprudence and laws of Iran and Egypt

The presumption of Ferash, is considered as one of the oldest and most used presumptions to prove lineage. This presumption is sometimes in conflict with judicial presumptions, such as the opinion of an expert, including the opinion of physiognomist, or the theory of forensic medicine, and sometimes it is in conflict with the same presumption, and it is where the wife had legal intercourse with two men and gave birth to a child who can be attributive to both. In the upcoming research, we are trying to answer this question with descriptive-analytic method which is the favored in the mentioned conflict? The result of the research is that the opinion of a physiognomist is a presumption, Shia jurists have not approved it, and Sunni jurists except Hanafi consider it valid. Both legal systems of Iran and Egypt do not accept the opinion of physiognomist, based on the Holy Sharia. On the other hand, accurate laboratory data in DNA testing is prioritized, because it is science-based and science is superior to suspicion resulting from Ferash presumption. In the conflict of the presumption of wedlock Ferash with another Ferash, the precedence of the second Ferash for attributing the child with the traditions from the Imams, which is the most important reason, and the principle of the delay of the incident has priority in Iranian law and Shia jurisprudence, and in Egyptian law and according to Abu Hanifah, the first Ferash takes precedence over the second Ferash.