mohammadrasool ahangaran

Forced adultery is one of the crimes that lead to the violation of public modesty and leaves destructive effects on the psyche and health of the victim of this crime. The destructive consequences of this crime are so numerous and unfortunate that the laws have determined severe punishments for it. Criminalization of adultery has been done in our legal laws due to the influence of Islamic jurisprudence. The severity of the reaction to this crime in the laws shows the importance of preventing it. Undoubtedly, it is very important to take preventive measures against rape. These measures can often be realized in two ways: 1. Through criminal solutions, 2. Through social work and action measures. This research is written by examining and comparing researches and other scientific achievements with a descriptive-analytical method, and it tries to identify the most important components of the prevention of forced adultery in the penal policy of Islam and Iran. This research has found that the prevention of forced adultery in Islamic criminal policy and jurisprudence, especially in Iran, has special criminological components that should always be paid attention to, including social and situational prevention, control of potential criminals, protection of criminals and crime targets, educational measures in the family and social environment, reduction of irritants, cultural and socialization measures, promotion of religious values and Islamic hijab, and police measures to prevent the occurrence of this crime of rape.

One of the fundamental principles in various legal systems is the principle of freedom of will and, consequently, freedom of contract. Alongside this, justice and fairness are also considered essential principles in contracts. Sometimes, the stronger party in a contract, abusing their position, imposes unfair terms on the other party, disrupting the balance of the contract and potentially leading to significant harm to the weaker party. One area where this problem is clearly evident is in terms related to compensation for damages. This research, with an analytical-comparative approach and using a descriptive-analytical method, seeks to answer the main question of whether it is possible to invoke strict liability rules in such situations to establish justice and fairness in contracts. The research findings indicate that in cases where contractual terms are unfair, strict liability rules can be used to compensate the injured party. This conclusion is based on various rules and institutions, including the rule of justice and fairness, the rule of no harm, the option of rescission due to fraud, the theory of abuse of rights, and the rule of non-disruption of the system. In fact, these rules and institutions act as tools to control and combat unfair terms and establish justice in contracts. Therefore, invoking strict liability rules in unfair contracts is not only possible but also necessary. This can help establish justice and fairness in contracts and prevent the violation of individuals' rights.

The option condition (Khiyare Shart) is a type of right to terminate a binding contract for a specified period, which is formed based on the consent and will of one or both parties or a third party, as stipulated in Article 396 of the Civil Code. The application of the option condition is valid in many contracts, and most Imami jurists have accepted the permissibility of including the option condition in the mortgage contract. The Iranian Civil Code does not explicitly mention the possibility of including the option condition in the mortgage contract. However, based on Article 456 of the Civil Code, which refers to the application of the option condition in all contracts and only considers the three options of  (Majles), animal, and delay in price (takhire Saman) as exclusive to sale, one can discover the positive view and response of the legislator to this issue. The outcome of the present study, which has been organized using a descriptive-analytical method, is that based on reasons such as the lack of legitimacy of the option condition in the mortgage contract, its contradiction with the nature of the mortgage contract, its contradiction with the imperative rule (Qanune Amereh), and the practice of rational people (Sireh 'oqala) not to include the option condition in the mortgage contract, one can rule that the application of the option condition in the mortgage contract is invalid.

Roads and their legal setbacks constitute vital components of national infrastructure in every country. The entitlement to traverse these roads may arise either organically or through established conventions on private property. This article delves into the regulations governing roads and setbacks for right of way, examining them through the lens of jurists associated with diverse Islamic denominations. Additionally, it scrutinizes the legislative policies of Iranian law, highlighting existing gaps therein. Consequently, the focus lies on delineating specific criteria for classifying road types and their associated regulations. Our research reveals both similarities and disparities among jurists representing various Islamic denominations concerning road rules and classifications. Furthermore, the legislative policies of Iranian law exhibit deficiencies regarding road regulations and setbacks. To address these gaps effectively, leveraging insights from these discussions can serve to refine existing legal frameworks pertaining to roads and right of way.

Absence of a legal framework for resolving commercial disputes and distinguishing them from civil contracts, made it necessary to create solutions to find an effective mechanism. This research aims to examine the structure and importance of commercial courts by using the indicators to distinguish commercial from civil contracts. This research is a descriptive-analytical type and has tried to achieve a coherent understanding of this issue by analyzing the researches related to commercial courts and differentiating them from general-law courts. Since one of the obstacles to foreign investment in Iran is the lack of commercial courts, the role of expert judges in dealing with commercial cases in the development of trade, facilitating investment and improving the economic indicators of today's societies is undeniable. Despite the formation of specialized commercial courts in French, British and American legal system and the emphasis on its legal and economic needs, the creation of these courts is still one of the reforms and necessities of Iran's judicial system. The establishment of these courts, in addition to being specialized aspects, can help speed up, reduce costs and make more reliable the processing of commercial claims that originate from the inherent and unique features of commercial law. Therefore, all efforts should be made to determine the structure and importance of these courts and in this way help the country's business and economy.

The role of the judge's written decisions in Islamic jurisprudence is a complex and nuanced aspect that has found its way into legal discourse in Iran. This paper delves into the intricacies of this subject, focusing on the implications of the judge's writing concerning the delegation of judicial representation and the execution of court judgments within the framework of the Islamic legal system and the specific judicial practices in Iran. While the content of the judge's writing is rooted in legal sources, the extent to which the legislator has considered its relevance in the refinement of laws related to judicial representation and judgment execution remains a matter of debate.

Research QuestionThe central inquiry of this study revolves around the role and acceptance of the judge's writing in Islamic jurisprudence, with a particular emphasis on its application in the delegation of judicial representation and the execution of court judgments. The overarching question seeks to understand the compatibility of current legal provisions with the fundamental principles of Islamic jurisprudence regarding the judge's written decisions. Additionally, the study explores the divergent views on this matter among Sunni and Shia scholars and aims to uncover the common ground that unifies their perspectives.

Research HypothesisBuilding upon existing legal scholarship and the intersection of Islamic jurisprudence and the Iranian judicial system, this study posits that the judge's writing serves as a foundational element for the delegation of judicial representation and the execution of court judgments. The hypothesis suggests that despite the differences between Sunni and Shia perspectives, a unified understanding can be achieved through careful consideration and modification of legal provisions. It anticipates that the judge's writing, when properly contextualized within the principles of Islamic jurisprudence, can provide a robust basis for legal procedures related to judicial representation and judgment execution.

Methodology & Framework, if Applicable:

This research adopts a doctrinal and critical approach to analyze the judicial procedures in Iran, focusing on the judge writing and its implications for the delegation of judicial representation and judgment execution. Drawing from extensive legal literature, including the opinions of Sunni and Shia scholars, the study also examines the relevant laws of Iran, such as Article 290 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Articles 119 and 484 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Islamic Republic of Iran. This examination involves a comprehensive review of legal sources, library resources, and judicial practices in Iran.
     The framework of this study encompasses a thorough exploration of the doctrinal foundations of the judge's writing, considering its reception within the broader context of Islamic jurisprudence. The critical analysis extends to the current legal provisions in Iran, evaluating their alignment with the principles derived from the judge's writing. By adopting a comparative approach, the study seeks to clarify the divergences in views and propose a unified perspective that reconciles the practical aspects of the Iranian legal system with the principles of Islamic jurisprudence.
     This research aspires to contribute valuable insights into the multifaceted relationship between the judge's writing, the delegation of judicial representation, and the execution of court judgments, providing a nuanced understanding for both scholars and legislators, ultimately guiding potential legal refinements in this domain.

The findings of this study, rooted in Islamic jurisprudence, reveal that providing testimony regarding a prior testimony is permissible under certain conditions within the context of the judge writing. However, the significance lies in the consensus among Shia scholars, indicating that the testimony of two individuals on a written judgment by a judge, verbally elaborated by the judge, holds evidentiary weight. This is due to the stabilizing nature of subsequent testimony over the initial one. Contemporary practices ensure the authenticity of the judge's writing through measures such as guaranteeing the non-distortion of its content or the judge's intent in executing representation. From a legal standpoint, compliance with the judge's representation request is considered obligatory upon the receiving judge.
     As elucidated, the statements of legal scholars accept the judge's writing, whether it be an explicit declaration by the judge or his physical presence while verbally endorsing the written document, but subject to the condition of the second judges’ sufficient knowledge. The analysis of the judge's writing revealed its applicability in both scenarios, aligning with the essence of the discussed principles. In essence, the purpose behind the judge writing is the execution of the judgment and the request made by the issuing judge, exercising control and authority over the involved parties.

In conclusion, the research provides a comprehensive understanding of the judge's writing and its implications for judicial representation and the execution of court judgments in the Islamic legal context. Drawing from Islamic jurisprudence and the Iranian legal system, the study navigates through the intricacies of the judge's writing, revealing its multifaceted role in legal proceedings.
     From a legal perspective, the study suggests two primary objectives. Firstly, it advocates for the codification of regulations in conformity with the nature of the judge's writing in the existing legal frameworks, emphasizing unity of approach. Secondly, the study seeks to address the identified gaps in the current literature on this subject, enriching the scholarly discourse within this domain.
     By aligning with the two stated objectives and harmonizing them with the analyses presented in this research, the final recommendation calls for the amendment or removal of the conclusive clause in Article 290 of the Civil Procedure Code. The requirement for certainty on the part of the representative in verifying the accuracy of the report by the receiving representative contradicts the legal and Sharia purpose of the provision. Additionally, the study clarifies that the judge's writing is not applicable to the execution of Hudud punishments, and current practices fall under the realm of executing the judge's judgment in the same judicial jurisdiction.
     The study hopes that the insights provided will guide legislators and scholars in refining legal provisions related to the judge's writing, judicial representation, and judgment execution. The highlighted issues underscore the need for a nuanced and contextually aligned legal approach, ensuring the compatibility of the legal framework with the principles derived from the judge's writing within the Islamic legal tradition.

 Testimony as a proof of a lawsuit is a common feature of the jurisprudence and law systems of Iran and Egypt. And through the comparative understanding of its jurisprudential, legal and penal works in the Imami jurisprudence systems and the laws of Iran and Egypt and introducing the weaknesses and strengths of each of them, this important goal was achieved.The findings of the present research, which was conducted in a comparative manner for the first time and in a descriptive-analytical method, show that forced martyrdom in Imamiyyah jurisprudence and Iranian and Egyptian law has common effects, which can be used to determine the order of effect before issuing a verdict. It and the punishment of a witness by force and for after the issuance of the verdict, violation of the verdict, compensation for damages, resumption of proceedings and the punishments corresponding to the crime resulting from the witnessing by force, which in Iranian jurisprudence and law are ta'zir, hudud, retribution and diat, and in Egyptian law, the punishments are proportional to It concluded misdemeanor crimes. Another comparative finding of this research is the special attention of Imami jurisprudence to the punishment of defamation as well as dealing with family law issues such as divorce and marriage, which are considered to be one of the strengths of this legal system, and the absence of these positive works in the laws of Iran and Egypt is one of the shortcomings and weaknesses. The two mentioned systems have been concluded.

The central issue of this article is the nature and rationale behind the formality of extra-constitutional principles and cases in the current constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. For this reason, we have discussed and debated using a descriptive and analytical method while adopting a critical approach. According to our research findings, the aforementioned principles and cases are two separate and distinct topics. The identification and formalization of these in the constitution itself is a flaw. In other words, the restriction of such categories is not acceptable and is justified only for the purpose of maintaining stability and ensuring the rule of the constitution, but their expanded scope poses issues. Therefore, the criteria considered by the fundamental legislator of the Islamic Republic of Iran, after reviewing the entry of items with a structural and normative description under Article 177, are criticized from the perspective of this article.
However, it must be acknowledged that the current constitution of the country has solid scholarly and popular foundations, and its orientation in this field seems logical. From our perspective, any form of support for the constitution as the paramount political legal document of the nation and any amendments to its content should be carried out while respecting the principles of republicanism and Islamism, ensuring their maintenance and safeguarding.

In cases where the blood money for the killer exceeds that of the victim, and the avengers of blood demand Qisas (retaliation), attaining the right of Qisas requires restitution of the difference in Diyeh to the person being avenged. The responsibility for paying the difference in Diyeh varies depending on the circumstances. It can be the responsibility of the owner of the right of retribution (the victim or the avengers of blood), the person or persons who are not avenged against, or the avenge (one administering retaliation) and their accomplice(s). However, if the issue of complicity in an intentional crime is not raised, the payment of Diyeh is solely the responsibility of the owner of the right of retribution. For example, when a man knowingly and intentionally kills a woman, the avengers of blood must pay him half of the killer's Diyeh.Despite the jurisprudential background and legislative history of Diyeh, the Iranian legislator has not stated its specific provisions in an independent chapter in the new Islamic criminal code approved in 2013, instead allocating various provisions to scattered sections. As a result, new issues in the judicial procedure face unresolved challenges due to the lack of a definitive text. One objective and factual issue that arises in a criminal case is when a third party (not the avenger of blood), without the permission of the avengers of blood, pays the difference in the killer's Diyeh during the execution of criminal sentences in the judicial fund. In such cases, questions arise regarding the approach to be adopted and the nature of this legal action. According to Article 427 of the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2013, the nature of the payment of Diyeh by the avengers of blood is to compensate for the damage caused, create balance and equality between the killer and the victim, and it is an imperative rule, not a condition for the emergence of the right to retribution (not a favorable rule). For this reason, as soon as the crime occurs, the avenger of blood has the right to retaliation, but the retaliation depends on the payment of the difference in Diyeh. If the right of retribution were based on the payment of the difference, and the guardian retaliated without paying, he would also be retaliated against. However, according to the rule of 427, he commits ta'zeer. Legislators have remained silent about the nature of payment of the difference by a third party in the Islamic criminal Code, leading to challenges and fundamental differences of opinion among lawyers and within the judicial procedure of criminal courts. One of these challenges is whether, by paying the difference in Diyeh through a third party, there is a possibility of retaliation for the avengers of blood. Additionally, once Diyeh is paid, does the third party become a stranger without rights to it? Do the rules of debt apply, or can a third party or the avengers of blood go directly to the criminal enforcement unit for reimbursement? Does the difference in Diyeh become the property of the killer or their heirs, allowing any interference, or is it solely for the fulfillment of the killer's retaliation, refundable by the third party before the retaliation? The answer to all these challenges depends on explaining the nature and examining the legal effects of this act, specifically the third-party payment of the difference in Diyeh. The importance of this matter goes beyond the presentation of a legal theory, and adhering to one of the proposed views on the nature of the third-party payment of the difference in Diyeh can ultimately determine whether the killer faces retaliation or is released from it until another time.The present research, which is novel in its kind, after explaining the basic concepts of the research, separates the nature of the Diyeh from the difference in the Diyeh and then examines the nature of the difference in the Diyeh paid by the third party from the perspective of jurists and judicial procedure and while criticizing the views of the opponents, tries to present a theory in accordance with the foundations of Islamic jurisprudence and law and their principles and rules.

The current age is full of regional wars in the Middle East and defending the land and frontiers of Islamic Republic of Iran based on geostrategic theories is not restricted to the national geography of this country. The question of how to defend the country at this juncture is an issue of contemplation by the legal and political circles and thinkers, i.e. diplomacy and action. This paper, developed through an analytical-descriptive method and by using library tools has come to the conclusion that a glance at the jurisprudential fundamentals indicates that self-defense, i.e. use of force to avoid damage is obligatory. A clear example of this is the use of force for defense as exception to the principle of prohibition of resorting to force. Of course, jurisprudential approaches toward the issue are sometimes accompanied by differences. The necessity of jihad for defense is not conditional to the decision of the infallible leader or his private or public vicegerent. However, with the presumption of formation of a powerful Islamic rule headed by just and obedient leader, if possible and in case of lack of serious damage for delay in defense until legal permission, defense at the permission and based on the decision of a legitimate leader will be permissible upon his discernment. This paper, reviewing differences in opinions over the issue, intends to clarify self-defense in view of Islam as well as its jurisprudential fundamentals, the extent of jihad for defense, including defense of Islam against conspiracies of the enemies, defending the land and territory of Islam, defending Islamic states, defending Muslim citizens of Islamic states and other believers, and finally terms and restrictions of jihad for defense, concentrating discussion of the issue on Imam Khomeini’s viewpoints.

Since the beginning of the formation of the principles of jurisprudence, the conflict of evidence has been discussed and paid attention to due to its great application and efficiency in the process of deriving rulings and interpreting Islamic regulations, responding to incidents and solving new problems. Among other things, in the current social situation, economic contracts affected by severe economic fluctuations caused by various causes and factors have caused difficulties for the contracting parties in the implementation of the contract and caused one party severe hardship and embarrassment, and on the other hand, non-implementation of the contract also caused The other side is harmed and in this case, a harmless and embarrassing conflict occurs. Therefore, the present article with a descriptive-analytical method, while explaining the basics of these two rules, has reached these results that what is beyond human capacity and in which there is narrowness, hardship, difficulty, and difficulty is the ruling, both obligatory and situational. It is ruled out. On the other hand, jurists and lawyers should consider difficult conditions in contracts and include them in the text of the contract, pay special attention to the conditions of force majeure, and predict what is likely to happen and may affect contractual relations. . Also, until the adoption of a law on the acceptance of the "change of circumstances" theory, the honorable community of judges can issue a verdict based on the following evidence using authentic Islamic sources or authentic fatwas.

Qunut is one of the components of prayer that has been constantly disputed in Imami and Sunni jurisprudence. Imami jurists until the early eleventh century A.H., relying on the generality of the narrations, unanimously accepted the recommendation of Qunut in all prayers, but since then, some jurists predicated on the narration of Abdullah ibn Sinan believed that Qunut is not recommended in prayer. In contrast, Sunni jurists only consider Qunut legitimate in certain cases. For the first time, the present article seeks to critique the views of different denominations in this field by abandoning religious prejudices and using credible sources. In this descriptive-analytical study, using library data, the documents of different sects were examined and it became clear that from the Imami point of view, Qunut is recommended in all prayers including the shaf’ prayer and that furthermore, the narration of ‘Abdullah ibn Sinan cannot specify the generality of the recommendation of Qunut. In Sunni jurisprudence, it has also been proven that Qunut is absolutely recommended without any conditions or exemptions in the Morning Prayer, the watr prayer, and when disasters occur, and there is no valid reason to limit these three Qunut to a few specific cases.

The study of diseases prevention is considered as an important factor and a cheap method to control a variety of infectious diseases such as coronavirus (Covid 19). Due to comprehensiveness of Islam, it has preventive hygienic teachings, that in many religious teachings, the infectious diseases such as plague and cholera were mentioned, and by revising its basis, some strategies can be provided to combat the coronavirus. The present study seeks to provide preventive strategies to combat infectious diseases from a religious perspective and its compliance with medical guidelines in both personal and public health, and emphasizes the role of these strategies in adhering to health practices to combat Corona by the religious people.

This research is a descriptive-analytical library study that extracts hygienic preventive strategic components by studying religious teachings and has compliance each of these strategies to the preventive guidelines of medical science.

From the religious teachings in facing infectious diseases in the two areas of personal and public health, four strategies are approached: the strategy of purity and cleanliness; environmental health; Social distance; quarantine. These four strategies are in full compliance with the guidelines and findings of medical science regarding corona virus and include the religious obligation to all obligees, which motivate more religious people than others to adhere to the preventive health guidelines against Corona

The discussion of the miracle of the Qur'an is one of the "posterior" discussions of the Holy Qur'an; In the sense that in the Qur'an itself and even in the tradition of the Prophet, there is no explicitness in the word miracle. Undoubtedly, the presentation of a miracle is one of the necessities of a prophet's claim that he was sent by God. But what miracles the Prophet of Islam performed was disputed by Muslim scholars; Let alone the Orientalists. What is common among Muslims is that, apart from the other miracles of the Prophet of Islam, the Holy Quran is his eternal miracle. One of the later greats who tried to prove the miracle of the Qur'an by mentioning the preliminaries and presenting narrative and rational reasons is Ayatollah Seyyed Abolghasem Khoy rzwan Allah Alayh, who has dealt with this issue in his book "Al-Bayan Fi Tafsir Al-Quran". In this article, an attempt has been made to explain their introductions, methodology, and rational and narrative arguments in the discussion of the miracle of the Qur'an and to criticize them in a descriptive and analytical manner; As a result, it turned out that most of his arguments were either far-fetched or incomplete; And this finding does not contradict the proof of the miracle of the Qur'an in other ways, nor does it contradict the unreasonable position of Ayatollah Khoi.

One of the divisions of contract in Imamiyah jurisprudence and Iranian law is covenant or possession, which is divided into continuous and immediate by considering the time in the definition of contract. A continuous contract is a covenant contract that is opposed to an immediate contract and its fulfillment becomes possible with the passage of time. The difference between continuous and immediate contract is in the covenant or possession nature of the contract and the relationship between the subject of the contract and the element of time. In the laws of some western countries, the contract of renting is considered as a covenant that the contract itself and the obligation resulting from it is continuous, but in the laws of Iran, based on Imamiyah jurisprudence, this contract is a possession contract. This article evaluates the concept of continuous and immediate contract in Imamiyah jurisprudence and the laws of Iran and other countries with a descriptive-analytical method. The result of the present article is that due to the lack of jurisprudential background for the existence of a continuous contract and according to the definition of the Imamiyah jurists and civil law of the contract of renting, the element of time has been considered in the contract of renting. In addition, based on the result according to the third paragraph of the article 490 of Civil Law, the authors believe that the contract of renting is immediate. The most important effect of immediacy is the possibility of lien in this contract, because in continuous contracts, due to the fact that the performance of the resulting obligation over time is not the same as the compensation received by the obligee, it cannot be assumed that there is a lien in continuous contracts.

The different applications of the words of the Qurʾān sometimes provide different meanings. This applications sometimes do not change the general meaning of the Quranic verses; But they make it difficult to understand the subtleties of the Qurʾān's meanings and reveal weak points in understanding the meaning. One of the roots of words whose different meanings have sometimes created far-fetched translations and interpretations is root <ʿJB> (usually means amazing), which can be seen in several verses of the Qurʾān. Most Arabic and Persian commentators and translators have interpreted it as “surprise”. A small number of commentators have also tried to interpret some of the usages of this root as “pleasant” and the like by distinguishing between different passages. This latter understanding is usually seen among the translators of the Qurʾān in European languages. The lack of a clear rule to distinguish the meaning of this root in its various applications has caused confusion. The present study is devoted to the analysis of the meaning of words derived from this root, and it is based on a descriptive-analytical method to examine this article lexically and morphologically, and by reviewing the commentators' opinions about the verses containing this article, its correct meaning in each explains its application. The achievement of this study is to evaluate this rule: the root <ʿjb> in all of it's application as an abstracted triple verb (al-Thulāthī al-Mujarrad) only means “surprise”; but in the case of Mazīd verbs, it is possible to have both meanings: pleasant and unpleasant, which of course, according to the context of the verse, the correct meaning is extracted.

The administrative authorities deal with the mistakes and dispute in Registration of Documents and Estate, namely, the supervisory boards and the Supreme Council, including administrative courts that play an essential and important role in the outcome of the records. In this research , the current status of these references has been investigated and the reasons their inefficiencies are: Prolongation Checking the Files Send, Ignoring the principles of independence and impartiality, Disregard of producer tools and control tools in Impartiality in the said discretion ago, Lack of access to court for reasons such as lack of attention to the principle of the right to be heard, Has been analyzed and Finally, the necessity of reviewing the jurisdiction and scope of these authorities has been concluded the most important of these is the establishment of a Supervisory Board in all Registry Units, The creation of a new authority known as the Provincial Supreme Council of Document Records in the Provincial Document Records's General Offices and delegating the current powers of the Supreme Council of Document Record to the This Council and expanding the jurisdiction and duties of the Supreme Council of Document Records established by the State Register of Property and Documents.

One of the most important common issues between criminal jurisprudence and Iranian penal law is the issue of blood money. Determining the amount of blood money and Arsh through forensic expertise in the field of the type and amount of crimes and their effects is one of the basic issues related to blood money law.Therefore, relying on advances in medical sciences and technology as a bridge, forensic medicine connects experts and judges in the field of criminology and truth discovery in order to achieve the rights and administrate the justice, and thus be effective in the work of the judiciary and How-ness of judgment and sentencing. However, in this way, we dealt with the challenging issues between law and forensic medicine based on jurisprudential documents and with emphasis on the expertise of forensic physicians, which is influenced by the advances of medical sciences and technology and cultural and social developments in society.The present study, using a descriptive-analytical method to investigate and analyze these challenging cases in three fields of fractures and bone injuries, beauty, injuries and limb injuries, at first, examined the relationship among forensic medicine, law and jurisprudence and then, introduced and analyzed some examples of challenges of determining of the amount of blood money and Arsh. Finally, reviewing the laws of blood money as well as updating the jurisprudential rules based on the requirements of time in order to solve the existing challenges revealed themselves of great necessity

As the outcome of human endeavors, the human knowledge is not free from mistake and error. The more the human moves in the path of science, the more the unavoidable events might happen, events that lead to mistakes with numerous grave consequences. As humanities are concentrated on the human, they are more prone to mistakes. The reason is that the topic of these sciences has the highest complexity. Just like other disciplines of humanities, economics is not free from mistakes. As a comprehensive plan for the guidance of the human in various aspects and backgrounds, the sacred religion of Islam expresses facts from various perspectives the consideration of which would be useful for the worldly and otherworldly lives of the human. One of the advantages that Islam offers is the expression of precious points that, if noted by economists, can be thought provoking and helpful for them and can be useful in decreasing the mistakes in studies related to economics. The study at hand focused on some critical thoughts about the philosophy of economics based on Islamic viewpoints. It was carried out via a descriptive-analytical method using library research data to explicate the criticisms against the philosophy of economics expressed from the religious outlook.

Qisas (Retaliation) and the owners of the right to Qisas is one of the important issues of jurisprudence and criminal law, which encompasses an important part of the topics related to punishments. According to the importance and determining role of Muoghaddas Ardabili in Shia jurisprudence on one hand and the issues related to Qisas on the other hand, in this paper, an attempt is made to address this important question that how is Qisas from the viewpoint of Muoghaddas Ardabili's and the Islamic Penal Law, especially regarding owners of the right to Qisas? This paper is descriptive and analytical, and the mentioned question is investigated using the library method. The findings indicate that the viewpoint of Muoghaddas Ardabili regarding Qisas and the owners of the right to Qisas is mostly consistent with the famous and dominant view of the jurists and since the Islamic Penal Law has also been compiled in accordance with the dominant and famous view of the jurists, therefore there is a kind of compatibility between his point of view and the Islamic Penal Law.

The principle of Lā Ta‘ād is one of the most important jurisprudential principles in the subject of ṣalāh (prayer) and it is supported by authentic narrations. The mentioned principle has been examined from several aspects among the jurists, one of which is the examination of the scope of this principle according to the perceptual states of knowledge, ignorance, and oblivion of mukallaf (the one charged with a duty) towards the ruling. One of the jurists who discussed and commented on this issue was Muḥaqqiq al-Hā’irī. He finally denied the inclusion of this principle in the three cases mentioned above, while the renowned majority of the jurists have not accepted the inclusion of this principle only for the first two states. The result of the present study, after examining and criticizing the reasons presented by him and other jurists, is that the main criterion for the inclusion or exclusion of this principle is holding the title of the excuse. Since this issue is excluded in the case of the two states of knowledge and ignorance of fault toward the ḥukm (ruling), therefore the two mentioned states are out of the scope of the principle. However, due to the cases of ignorance of fault and obliviousness, the ḥukm will be within the scope of this principle. The present study was written using the descriptive-analytical method and library information.

Background and The right of every person to his own body and the limits of his authority is one of the important issues that is discussed in every legal system. The purpose of the current research is to examine intentional crime and wrongdoing against oneself in the framework of Imamiyyah and Sunni jurisprudence.
This research is of theoretical type and the research method is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection is library and has been done by referring to documents, books and articles.
Ethical considerations: In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and fidelity have been observed.
  According to religious teachings, the true ownership of the world and everything in it belongs to the Almighty And he is the supreme owner of the universe, which is interpreted as the highest level of ownership, and the lowest level of ownership is the credit ownership of individuals over objects outside of their nature, such as houses, cars, and other properties.
The perspective of the Qur'an, Qur'anic verses and traditions emphasize that self-indulgence, whether it is suicide or other killing, is absolutely considered a great sin and is forbidden. Whether this work is voluntary or in cases of emergency and necessity such as incurable diseases and so on.

The Islamic penalty code of 2012 considered the realization of the title of a Rebel subject to armed uprising and the use of guns. This article tries to cite the definitions and other statements of the jurists on this subject (despite the lack of an independent plan related to the aforementioned conditionality in the works of the jurists and as a result the difficulty of discovering their views), by referring to the Sharia evidence, including the verses of the Holy Quran and The narrations of Ahl al-Bayt (pbuh) should prove the theory of non-stipulation and thus, prove the distortion of the legislator's point of view in this field. The inaccuracy of making the crime dependent on the use of weapons becomes clearer when we consider the advancement of technology and today's facilities, and that it is possible to achieve the same results as weapon as the use of new tools and even with simple actions such as spreading lies in the cyber space. The present research was done using descriptive analytical method and library data.

Real estate aggregation is one of registration operations which is neglected in property registration law and its regulations, meanwhile lots of owners demanded for it. Because of that the property and deeds registration office has declared a circular of conditions and method of real estate aggregation which one of its conditions is the equality of common ownership shares in all aggregated units. In this research we have investigated based on analytical descriptive  method, accorded to existed sources and practical method of registration units. We have concluded that it's possible to issue title deed for common owners of aggregated unit by adjusting formal declaration for portions of owners regardless of difference in ownership of each part of aggregated unit contrary to routine of registration units and we proved to jurisprudential rule of domination, harmless juris prudential rule, duty of notary public in confirmation of conditions, not being against the rule of formal declaration for aggregation, being of confession on the top of other proves in legal affairs and not being against the principle of aggregation.

In the Iranian legal system, according to Article 685 and Article 627 of the Civil Code, citing the opinions of contemporary jurists, the financial obligation to pay the debt owed in the form of a guarantee contract or the payment of the debt has not ceased with the consent of the subject owed or indebted; This is while the forthcoming research, by criticizing the above-mentioned evidences, has considered the application of the word as impaired and, following the steps of Imami jurisprudence, has considered the satisfaction of the content as the condition for establishing a guarantee contract; In other words, if the donation guarantee violates human rights and imposes an obligation on the subject of the guarantee, his denial and obstruction will prevent the conclusion of the guarantee contract and will invalidate the agreement between the guarantor and the subject; As a result, we have inevitably interpreted the appearance of legal material; In this way, the application of the mentioned materials in the position of expressing the common person from paying the debt means assuming the debtor's request or not preventing and denying him; In other words, the appearance of legal materials is silent on the presumption of prohibition and denial of the debtor and the content or condition of the establishment of our contract, and in this case it is necessary to refer to the general rules and protect the mentioned human rights.