نشریه فقه اهل بیت
پیاپی 85-86 (بهار و تابستان 1395)

If Endar, means reducing part of price in exchange for the dish, happens in transaction at the time of delivery and pay for goods, it will not cause any ignorance in exchanges, on this assumption transaction is valid and true. Sometimes the price is reduced to determine the amount of object of sale; since there is not any possibility to weigh content (Mazruf) without container (Zarf), so part of price will be reduced to determine the exact amount of content. On the assumption that one does not the price of container, transaction would be invalid because the object of sale is unknown. If there is a certainty that the amount that has been reduced is equal to weight of container or the difference is so much that people accept it, then the ignorance of the purchaser would not affect the validity of transaction.

The current article deals with the question that according to Shari’ah, whether the state can take the ownership and have same rights and duties the same as the individual ownership which are the subject of imperative and positive rules or not. The article approaches the issue by taking in to consideration that the ownership and rulings are confirmed for the position of "Imam" in jurisprudence which in turn would lead to the ownership of the state and public institutions.

Even though "Enjoining Good" and "Forbidding Evil" are of the common terms in the Quran, traditions and jurisprudence, but there is no agreement on its ruling and lexicons, jurists, and commentators do not reach consensus upon its definition and limitation. Therefore review of these two terms and determination of their span according to the Quran -the most authentic source for Islamic teachings -would be logically superior to any related studies and researches. This article attempts to retrieve the concept of "command", "forbidding", "righteous deed", and "vice" by thinking over related verses and determine span of "enjoining good" and "forbidding evil".

The current article is a critical review of the article "A New Approach to Children’s inheritance in the Qur’an" by Syed Muhammad JawadMusawi, published in the FiqhAhlul Bayt (Persian) Quarterly Journal, 20th version, Vol 77-78. The author has claimed that the children’s inheritance share in the Qur’an has not been taken from the estate (Taraka) of the deceased and it is not intended to be a specified share for them; rather their share would be taken from the remaining properties after the share of other heirs are given, except in the case that the children are the only heirs of the deceased. First, the general difficulties and problems and then the particular difficulties and problems have been examined throughout the article. This research has been done through a descriptive-analytical approach, by taking benefit from affirmative reasons -in accordance with the common Ijtihadi-Usuli approach of jurisprudential arguments. Finally, by rejecting the idea of the respected author which has been mentioned in conclusion or rejecting the method and the approach which have been presented by him, we present our own ideas.

Practical reason as an argument is the revealer of harmonious relationship existed in the genesis, it attributes these harmonious relationships to God through wisdom and gets legitimacy of its own perceptions. Therefore, the reason does not have a decree other than Shariah and is not within Sahriah to have correlation with each other and then to get legitimacy of its own perceptions. This is the basis in all rational decrees and there would not be any difference between intellectual property and nonintellectual one. So this division is not accepted and the legitimacy of intellectual perception is not limited to commonsensical propositions (Mashhurat). The intellect is capable of legitimate participating in jurisprudential issues in a wider arena.

In drafting a claim against deceased, one must prove two points. First, claimant has to prove that he has right over deceased; second, he has to prove the continuity of right until death; since the deceased may paid off before his death or his debt has been forgiven or due to one of reasons of falling obligations, his debt has been fallen out before death. To prove the primary, we apply the arguments of proving the claim and for the latter Yamin al-Istizhar by claimant is required. This article is going to investigate the lawfulness or unlawfulness of proving of financial claims against deceased with a witness and the addition of oath. If it is possible to prove, in this way, then it will discuss that whether the claimant has to do Yamin al-Istizhar in addition to Complementary Oath (Yamin al-Mutammimah) or it would be possible that these two oaths merged into an oath.

There is a relation among all branches of Islamic sciences as far as in some issues one branch is affiliated with another. Since a long time ago there was a relationship between Islamic Theology and Jurisprudential Principles. The connection is such that many issues in jurisprudential principles are based on theological foundations. Jurists have quoted reason and basis from theology and take benefit from theological arguments; therefore some of theological issues are as conceptual and affirmative principles in jurisprudential principles and better and deeper understanding of it necessitates the recognition of conceptual and affirmative principles. Principle of grace is one of the theological principles in jurisprudence. This principle, that is originally theological, is one of the foundations of jurisprudential issues. This article attempts to briefly introduction to the principle of grace and its theological issues, then indicates its usages in jurisprudence; for instance: proof (Hojjat), Taadul, Tar’jih, and Consensus are based on the principle of grace.

Basically, denial after confession does not cancel the punishment and once the person has confessed, one’s denial after such confession is useless since there is no evidence for the validity of such a denial. This has been stipulated at the beginning of article no.13 of Islamic Criminal Law which was ratified in 1392 Sh./2014. In jurisprudential texts, only in two cases of the punishment for adultery and theft, denial after confession has been discussed and analyzed. In jurisprudence, denial after confession can be conceived in two forms: denial before the confession has come into effect and denial after confession has come into effect. For denial after confession in hudud, three cases can be conceived which have been discussed in this article through a jurisprudential and legal approach.

Zakat is one of the most significant issues of economic jurisprudence. Examining the items subject to Zakat is also of the particular importance, regarding which there are two points of view; the first view restricts the items subject to Zakat to the very nine items at the time of the Prophet (saw), while the second view maintains that the items are not restricted to those nine items. The proponents of the second view believe that the scope of these items is changeable due to time, since at the time of Imam Ali (a), it increased to more than those nine items. The argumentations presented by both views have been supported by some authentic (Sahih) narrations which have led to contradiction of the apparent meaning of these narrations. To solve the contradiction of the narrations, jurists have suggested some solutions; in continuation of the discussion, the narrations presented by both groups would be mentioned and examined in details.