A Critical-Analytical Reflection on the Theoretical Basis of Pending Contract with Special Reference to Imam Khomeini's Approach

There are two major approaches among jurisprudents to pending contract. Some consider it valid and some invalid. Both rely on rational and jurisprudential reasons in their arguments. The opponents of the validity of pending contract rely on consensus as the most important reason. The advocates of the validity of pending contract, mainly contemporary jurisprudents including Imam Khomeini, while rejecting consensus, challenge tanjis in contract. Among the jurists, the predominant approach belongs to the advocates of the validity of pending contract while invalidity of pending contract according to them refers exclusively to those mentioned in the civil code such as Articles 1068 and 699. In critical approach to the theory of suspension in forging and in basis, it is argued that suspension in forging is fundamentally baseless because in suspension in forging the contract is not formed to talk about its validity or invalidity. In fact validity or invalidity belongs to the situational decrees which require an external subject. On the other hand, it is argued that contracts and transactions are not canonical truth and the sharia, except in few cases, does not interfere in the precept of the rational and the issue belongs to the commonsense and is valid.