Unwanted effects of parallel review of jurisprudential issues in two fields of alimony (woman's Nafagheh) and wife's disobedience (Noshooz); a case study about wife disobedience (Noshooz)

Among the issues raised about the approach of the early jurists, which led to the emergence of some problems and ambiguities in jurisprudential rulings are the main and minor issues presented simultaneously on two different jurisprudential positions and subjects. One of the most complete examples of this issue has come about the issue of wife's disobedience (Noshooz), which two positions in the works by the Companions were examined in parallel: the first is in the topic of alimony cancellation, which includes one of the minor discussions of alimony, and the second in the argument of wife's disobedience (Noshooz), which was discussed at the end of the field relating marriage or the beginning of the other field on divorce. The differences in looking at the problem and the distinction of these two topics in the works of the Companions has led to the emergence of differences in dealing with minor issues and the dimensions of some of the issues raised in this discussion. In this study, differences existing in these two topic's investigations on the problem of wife's disobedience (Noshooz) were considered both in terms of "rulings" (jurisprudential judgements) and "subject". And attempts to illustrate the results of this inconsistency in the rulings concerning the problem, as well as presenting an account of why this happened, while taking into account the differences of opinion and developments during different periods.