Epistemological Evaluation of the Concept of "the Right of God"in Islamic Jurisprudence

The Right of God is one of the key concepts in Islamic jurisprudence and it is the direct or indirect foundation of all the rules of Islam. This study has not only proven this mentioned fact but has also shown that the “Right” in that phrase has different meanings from “The right of human” phrase; one of them is factual and the other one is metaphorical .These two words are not even literally equivalent; their owners are essentially and fundamentally dual; this has changed the nature of their rights fundamentally. Also this evolution has resulted in grave differences and these differences have separated these two types of “Rights” from one other. The separation is such deep that it cannot be ignored and hence these two words, apart from their distinct instances, cannot be considered as synonyms; thus there is not any theoretical solution unless we consider one of them as factual and the other one as metaphorical. In the second step the study has argued that if the word “right” collocates with God (ALLAH), it is a metaphor and if it collocates with “human” (ALNA: S), it is factual. Furthermore, it has been argued that since “right “stems from need, shortness, and weakness, the right must be useful for its owner and its non-compliance must make him suffer and finally deprivation of any right must be potentially possible; this possibility is the evidence of the weakness of its owner in protecting his right and because of these three reasons, God has not the position of possession of right, so he has not any right legally. At last, it has been proven that because these two rights have different meanings, origins and interpretations, they are not synonyms and, therefore, it is impossible to generalize their rules to each other. These rules and principles cannot be considered in Islamic jurisprudence rules as “The rights of God”. It is 1. 2. clear that since god does not have any rights and the phrase of “right of god” is a metaphor, in spite of correctness or wrongfulness of this argument, a concept that does not have any external manifestation and cannot be imagined in a mind, determination of its character is illogical. This article deals with negative logic before proving that the right of god is a metaphor.