Jurisprudential feasibility study of transition from corporal punishment

This paper seeks to find jurisprudential foundations that based on them, legal feasibility of transition from corporal punishment as the hodud (determined penalties) or ta`zir (discretionary punishment) can be theorized. Relied on the evidenc such as being confirmative of all the punishments stated in religious texts, lacking importance of the form and method of executing a punishment, being importance of the intended aims in executing a punishment for the wise of the world, non -worshipfulness of the ordinances concerning the kinds of punishments and, consequently, the necessity of understanding the texts related to determining punishment in the light of rational change and development, this paper has justified transition from corporal penalties - whether as hodud or ta`zir- as a jurisprudential theory, though the door of debate is open. Similarly, in this research, transition from corporal penalties has been validated according to the second titles of the precepts, the secondary effects of executing the bodily punishments such as public condemnation in Muslim and global societies, and the broadness of Islamic government jurisdiction. Of course, sometimes some second titles of the precepts are making legality of executing bodily penalties confront to problem. Suggesting the alternatives of the bodily punishments - if they are permitted , is not subject matter of this article, and needs a separate opportunity.