There are two different approaches regarding the use of Nahj-ul-Balagha as the source referred to in the inference of religious laws. Some people have questioned the jurisprudential rulings of Nahj-ul-Balagha; the main causes of such a concern are rooted in: 1 - failure to accept Nahj-ul-Balagha for sending a document or being included in one single news item 2 - turning attention to non - juridical aspects of Nahj-ul-Balagha like ethical and literary aspects 3 - existence of clearer and more rigorous narrations in the field of jurisprudential rulings and 4 - well - established methodology of the Jurists referring to particular jurisprudential sources. Some scholars have cited the inference of religious laws like other valid sources of narration, and have cited it in various jurisprudential affairs. Of course, the number of reference to this group is very small and also includes a few jurisprudential affairs. This paper, by analytical - documentary design and collecting data through library study, examines different perspectives on the possibility or impossibility of referring to Nahj-ul-Balagha in the inference of religious laws, and finally, after analyzing and criticizing the reasons for impossibility of citing, the viewpoint of those who are able to cite Nahj-ul-Balagha is offered as a support to the inference of religious laws. The type of research is applied due to the use of created jurisprudential capacities for strengthening the fundamental principles and jurisprudential inferences that are likely to lead to the explanation and development of jurisprudential sources.

Iran's legislator, in  2013, for the first time provided the "conflict of evidences in prove of criminal proceeding" in some articles of Islamic Penal Code. In this respect without mention of occurrence terms, some cases of conflicts of evidences are mentioned, and some measures are provided. Although this matter is applicable as the first step to formalization of this conflict, whether in occurrence term or transitional solutions, it depends on jurisprudential-legal notions about conflict of proofs of inference as the root of conflict principles. So, this research in a descriptive-analytical manner seeks to study these point of views, and their convergence or divergence against conflicts of evidences of substantiation of claim. The findings shows that required terms of this conflict, whether for inference of religious laws or on evidences of substantiation of claims are the same; however solutions need more consideration in proof of criminal claim than procedure of inference of religious laws.

Cruelty and injustice in adjudication mean passing unjust judgement as a result of negligence or destructive intentional conduct, and an unjust judge is the arbiter making mistakes in the court amidst the turbulent atmosphere of passing a verdict. Many components and elements are involved in the judge’s failure, one of which is lack of the capacity for legal reasoning and inference of religious laws in him along with other preconditions for fatwa (a nonbinding legal opinion on a point of Islamic law given by a qualified jurist) and judgment. In the meantime, the role of the government and ruling system in appointing such a judge shall not be ignored either, because in such system, the scare and power with the judge will make all his trials cruel in the end even if he is mujtahid (qualified to exercise ijtihad in interpretation of Islamic law). Unjustness, though, is not exclusive to the government of unjust rulers and it may happen in just governments as well. This paper has been developed according to Imam Khomeini’s fatwa in his Tahrir al-Vassilah in which he says only fully qualified jurists endowed with the capacity of legal reasoning and inference of religious laws and with full knowledge on secondary issues of Islam deserve the right to pass a legal judgement. Upon full study of the issue, the paper has discussed admissibility and inadmissibility of the recourse to such a judge. Therefore, the paper has studied recourse to unjust judge and based on step-by-step arrangement, i.e. from recourse to consorting and finally acting upon the verdict he has passed, all have been considered by Imam Khomeini has religiously forbidden

One of the necessary steps in the expansion of Fiqh is the expansion of its sources. Sources can be expanded qualitatively and quantitatively. Qualitative expansion is concerned with kind of view and conception of sources but quantitative expansion is concerned with the question whether the sources of Fiqh are limited to the present four sources or we can refer to other sources in the inference of religious laws As a long-lasting but neglected companion of intellect, fitrah(nature) is one of the issues that can be considered to find whether or not it can be one of the sources of Fiqh and religious injunctions. The present paper expounds the different scientific and practical functions of fitrah(nature), focusing on three types: anterior, medial and posterior. In anterior function, nature represents a fertile land that prepares the round and foreground for the function and efficacy of the four sources: the Holy Qur’an, the Sunnah of the Prophet, Consensus of fiqhi opinions and Reason. In medial function, nature, inter alia, is placed alongside the mentioned four sources and regarded as a source of understanding some religious teachings. In posterior function, nature is the criterion for the soundness of propositions and inferential religious teachings.

"Hadith" as the narrator of the tradition, is one of the most important main sources in the inference of religious Laws and Islamic teachings. In the process of transmitting the narrative heritage up to the present day, some hadiths have undergone different defects, such as interpolations into their text. The number of such texts is low. Still, the researcher has to detect them in the validation process of the hadith, as well as its understanding and admission as authoritative. This paper seeks to answer the question, what are the ways of detecting interpolations into the hadiths? So, through a descriptive-analytical method and using written sources and existing documents, it tries to identify the main ways of detecting interpolations into the hadiths. Some of these ways are: using manuscripts, analyzing research text, employing the science of Takhrij and identifying references of the narration, and considering the role of the narrator in the process of transmission of narrative heritage.

One of the basic principles in the inference of religious rules in Shia jurisprudence is the principle of expediency. The justification of expediency as the source of the inference of religious law is based on the verbal foundations of this principle. This paper examines the place of interest in ijtihad and the inference of religious judgments with the Shiite theological approach. This research is a descriptive-adaptive research that has been conducted in a librarian way based on the analysis of documents of Shiite theological and jurisprudential sources on the basis of the principle of expediency. Theological foundations of expediency in the system of the Shi'a from the Shia point of view include the elements of perfection and prosperity, divine knowledge, divine justice, divine wisdom, rationality and goodness. The element of expediency is not merely considered in the system of the Transcendental God and in the process of the codification of the heavenly laws, the process of governing the Islamic ruler in the age of presence and absence is also in the circle of this discussion, precisely for this reason, its importance becomes twofold. In the study of the Shi'i theological approach it is expedient to conclude that the adherence to the rules of the material and the corruptions of al-Amri is one of the results of the famous theological statement in the Shiite language, which states: God's transcendental actions are purposeful and superstitious (unwittingly, unpardonable) It is impossible.

Governmental fiqh (jurisprudence) is defined as an approach in deducing rulings for the ideal administration of the government. This term is distinguished from the term 'political fiqh' which is applied as a particular course of study in jurisprudence in matters related to political issues and 'governmental jurisprudence'. The latter is a particular part of political science concerned with the issues such as the institution of 'government'. Concerning the question of government, the effective and ideal administration in line with the Islamic jurisprudential doctrines has been taken into consideration and the Muslim jurist, faqih, too, makes inferences from religious laws in order to provide the authorities with the means to administrate the affairs of the society in the best manner. This jurisprudential approach, as distinct from the individualistic jurisprudential approach, in terms of making jurisprudential inferences, is characterized as having certain characteristics which do not allow for speaking of governmental jurisprudence, though some of which can be applied in individualistic jurisprudence. Among these characteristics, one can refer to such issues as the 'belief in the comprehensiveness or universality of Islamic religion and its capability to meet the governmental requirements", "its scope extending to cover not only individualistic jurisprudence but also the jurisprudential issues concerned with all citizens in a society, all areas of a country, and those which are needed to run the social affairs ideally, "its possibility of making systematic inferences, considerations of the constants and variables in making inferences, the possibility of transforming jurisprudence into laws and regulations, and the possibility of imposing obligation on legal entity", " having an efficient approach to the administration of people's social affairs and making personal judgements on the basis of the requirements in running a society ideally".

Although the sources of inference in Islamic jurisprudence are limited to books, traditions, consensus and reason, the rules and principles of inference and jurisprudence can be many. The jurisprudents of Imamiyyah have paid special attention to jurisprudential rules and have authored numerous works in this field. However, some of the jurisprudential rules, which are, of course, crucial to the inference, have not attracted the jurists' opinion as a rule. Although these rules have been widely used in the light of fatwas and jurisprudential arguments, they have not been codified as a rule and their boundaries have not been clearly elucidated. These are the rules of justice, the rule of equality, the principle of equality, and so on. Justice can be applied to jurisprudence as a comprehensive jurisprudential rule and eliminate the challenges of executing sentences and organize the inference of religious law based on it. In this article, to answer the question of whether the jurisprudent or jurist, especially in cases of silence, flaws, conflict of laws, or in the disagreement of scholars, can he invoke the rule of justice?, which states that there are about eighty fatwas or legal opinions in which the jurisprudent or jurist issues a "rule of justice" by issuing " Fatwa.

The effect of the circumstances at any age on the inference of religious laws is an indisputable fact according to the Sharia law presented by the Prophet (PBUH). The reality has been also reflected in the works of some jurists, among whom, Imam Khomeini introduced the theory of the decisiveness of the two elements of time and place in Ijtihad. The issue of the obedience of wife is among the religiously obligatory issues and the refusal of wife to fulfil her marital duties or her disobedience (nashuz) is among the variable regulations. It shall be considered among the changing rules as affected by time and place components such as common law, practice of the rational people, interests and corruptions, change in the subject, and object of a legal relation. Time and place can play a key role in it. This is because the examples of obedience and disobedience have not been clarified well in fiqh and there are only a few cases on this. In other cases, the common rule and social mores should be taken as criteria for practice. Moreover, in this field, the religious rules are to confirm previous laws and usages. Therefore, there is the possibility of understanding part of the interests and corruption for the intellect. The enforceability of the disobedience of the spouse alters with the change in time and place conditions within different cultures. Therefore, in determining the details of the disobedience by the spouse and its enforceability various components are involved and no clear-cut criterion can be ever introduced.

The nature of Qarīnat al-Irtikāz, its effect on verbal signification, and its role in solving the fiqhi (jurisprudential) issues are one of the most important uṣūlī topics. The first question is that, how is such symmetry recognized, how does it differ from other symmetries such as Qarīnat al-Inṣirā and Qarīnat al-Munāsibat, and how the various kind of Sīrat al-ʿAmalīyyah (practical attitudes) form based on mental irtikāz (fixed way). The next question is that, how such symmetry can be used to solve newly-raised fiqhi issues. Thus, the position of Qarīnat al-Irtikāz in the inference of religious law is the fundamental question before us. If we consider Qarīnat al-Irtikāz as any meaning that penetrates the mind, does not independently garner much attention, and its origin remains unknown, we should consider it as nonverbal-connected symmetries that always does not refer to a definite rational symmetry and is itself the origin of symmetry of Qarīnat al-Inṣirāf and Qarīnat al-Munāsibat of a rule and a subject. Thus, a special longitudinal system forms between these three types of symmetries, and originality and adherence to the symmetries will be adaptive. By searching for uṣūlī sources, two types of efficiency can be imagined for Qarīnat al-Irtikāz: first, efficiency in determining the literal meaning and second, efficiency in the shaping of attitudes of the wise people and jurists. Considering the position of the wise people and jurists’ attitudes in recognizing the ḥukm (rule) and the subject of the ḥukm, and also the implication of the verbal evidence on ḥukm or subject, we can understand the importance of intervention of irtikāzāt in shaping the attitudes and their role in discovering the ḥukm or the subject of the ḥukm.By examining three examples of newly-raised issues, first, based on implicit stipulation whether the woman’s services at home is free or transactional, second, bank liability in its new form, third, local anesthesia at the site of ḥadd (legal punishment) and retribution with medical tools, we conclude that Qarīnat al-Irtikāz has a decisive role in understanding the verbal evidence, in generalizing or narrowing verbal signification, and in conclusion or non-conclusion of iṭlāq (inclusiveness).