مجله پژوهش های فقهی
سال سیزدهم شماره 1 (بهار 1396)

Today, the issue of car accidents and traffic offenses and ever-increasing rates of caused death and injury is of the most important issues of jurisprudential and legal sections, identification of responsible in the accident is significant. However, in the Islamic Penal Code, it has not been studied in detail and mostly pursued in two Articles of 504 & 505 which about Article 504 of Islamic Criminal Law, statement of the legislator is brief in some cases. It is not clear that the said exception is solely on the lack of negligence, or unauthorized presence in the area is also included. Furthermore, the type of death and injury has not been specified in this law. In Article 532 of Islamic Criminal Law, premeditate crimes are accepted in car accident but it is not specified that in what cases is premeditate or in Article 714-719 of Punishment Law (adopted in 1996) that is about car accidents, only Article 714 refer to the punishment of death (Manslaughter).
In this After an introductory note on the basis of jurisprudence, we demonstrate the possibility of pure error and premeditate death in some car accidents and criticize the ambiguity in Article 504 of the Penal Code.

Since the basis for defining the necessary confidence and the obligatory someone else there is, therefore, legal theorists have attempted to correct the image to provide the necessary confidence and the obligatory someone else. The views expressed in this regard include: the obligatory non-obligatory for someone else. The purpose of obligatory extrinsic, the other incumbent is to obligatory someone else, as Hassan does not comply, the obligatory someone else, a verb meaning per se is not a criterion and, finally, we have adopted the view that the obligation of the necessity of introduction for someone else Dhi Al-Muqaddama obligatory, and obligatory soul knows obligatory introduction to another is not obligatory. Comment authors claim, not only bugs on the previous comments but also compatible with its famous phrases.

Water is an example of public property in the Islamic Republic of Iran's law, in the principle 45 of Republic Islamic of Iran’s Constitution and Article 1 of the equitable distribution of waters which is passed in 1361, water is one of the common property that is managed by the government. And use regarding to the public interest. Given that water is part of the lawful and legitimate possession of and is owned by individual or not? regarding to the water law and it nationalism in 1347 the waters turned to be one of the common property that is run by the government some lawyers believe that after passing rules of water nationalism in 1374/04/27 articles 149 of the civil law and so on are obsoleted the management law, the usage of waters needs the government justification. This paper represents some juridical and legal views, regarding to this issue and some solutions to solve common waters legal problems.

Sai (the Ritual running) in the expanded area of the Place of running and its ruling is a new question for the Islamic jurisprudence. With regard to the crosswise doubling of the Running place near the Sacred Mosque in recent years, the jurisprudential ruling of the Ritual running – as one of the pillars of the greater and lesser Pilgrimages – is unclear from the viewpoint of the Islamic denominations. This due to the fact that there hasn’t been any comprehensive and solid study in this regard yet! Consequently, permissibility of the Ritual running in the crosswise expanded area is a topic that is in need of exploration and should be responded with a suitable answer. After a thorough scrutiny of the jurisprudential sources of the Islamic denominations, it was found out that a few thinkers of the jurisprudence domain do not allow for the Ritual running in some newly expanded areas of the Running place and believe that those areas are out of the space between Safa and Marwah hills. However, based on the attestation of the witnesses as well as the historical, geographical, and geological examinations of the committee supervising the Running place expansion project, it is possible to consider the expanded area as a part of the space between Safa and Marwa hills, and therefore, rule for the permissibility of conducting the Ritual running in it. The study at hand set out to disclose the limits and gaps of the already present arguments and to jurisprudentially specify the ruling on permissibility of conducting the Ritual running in the crosswise expanded area of the Running place. To this end, the author used library research as well as fieldwork methods to collect data. The obtained data was then analyzed to extract the jurisprudential stances of the Islamic denominations in this regard. At the end, the conclusion was made that conducting the Ritual running in the expanded area of the Running place is permissible.

Visitation of graves has roots in the Sunna of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), his companions and followers. According to the great Islamic scholars and jurisprudents there is an equal rule for both men and women’s visitation of the graves of their dear ones and the holy shrines in Islam considering the Sunna of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) and his numerous traditions; because Islam has equal rules for both men and woman except in a case where there is a reason for its specification. The Quran, which is generally accepted by all Muslims, has no clear rule about lawfulness or unlawfulness of visitation of the graves, but it generally refers to the lawfulness of women’s visitation of graves. There are several reports on the women’s visitation of graves at the time of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) and after that which may be considered as evidences for its lawfulness; including a report on the method of its performance attributed to Ayesha, one of the Prophet Mohammad’s wives. There is still another report on Hazrat Zahra’s visitation of the graves of hazrat Hamza and other martyrs of Uhud. This article aims to explain and review the jurisprudential principles of women’s visitation of graves in the Quran and Islamic traditions from the viewpoints of the Islamic jurisprudents who not only consider it lawful but also recommended. The innovative aspect of the matter is detailed analysis of the views of four Islamic religions in this regard which can present a clear and exact image of this matter and remove doubts from the people’s minds.

There are many REVAYAT that express that husband permission is necessary in any religious act (MOSTAHAB) and non- religious act. It means done properly of these activities is required to husband permission. But to understand extent of authority for wife in these activities, it is required to study effective commandments related to this subjects, such as quality of Foreman right, quality of permission issuance, duration of permission and kind of marriage contract. It means this commandments cause for limitation or extension of authority for wife in to obey of husband.

Implementation of punishment is the most important issues in Islamic criminal law, but order of some issues have not stated explicitly among them organ transplant about sentenced to retaliation and Hodud after execution the verdict.
The famous Shia jurists believe that the method of penalty enforcement is not matter and organ separation is enough to prove the right of retaliation. In contrast, some other jurists know the amputation is cause of retaliation and believe that equality and dignity in the quality and method of penalty enforcement with the committed crime is required. There are different opinions about the impossibility of transplant of amputated limb in Hodud enforcement, some believe that the object is penalty enforcement so amputated limb is transplantable. In contrast some believe that the object of amputation is a lesson for offender and other people and because it is incompatible with the wisdom of God order, transplant is not acceptable. In this paper with study the juridical and legal aspects, the possibility of organ transplant about sentenced person after execution the verdict.

Liven executed man rarely occur. However, repeating the sentence or otherwise of such complicated and sensitive person.The murder an innocent person is against murder of humanity and human life, like the life of humanitySome of the Grand Ayatollahs jurisprudents in this case warrant in the the survival and the judgment sentence because of such individual's executed. And butternut this Judgement when he researcher that the lack of life and death for sure.Also Shyhhay story of Imam Ali (AS) in the case of someone who still sit in his stoning remaining, the Imam (AS) stoning warrant to have the offender again. In this case the remaining life of the offender, the death must be againrun.The story of AbanibnUthman, fled to repeat the stoning in a condition to moderation as well as evidence of retribution and Dr’ rule prohibiting the the death sentence repetition, is critically examined. In this paper, the resources collected by library and writers have used the The analytic methodology.