The Feasibility of Applying the Conceptual Metaphor Theory in the Analysis of Usul al-Fiqh Issues

From the viewpoint of Uslu al-Fiqh scholars, divine precepts are fixed and actual in the sight of Allah and the verdicts inferred by jurists are apparent and in case of their inconsistence with the actual rules, make no change to them. However, the question arises what causes jurists to infer different verdicts as to the same subjects and by referring to similar sources? Although most of the answers to this question concern the influence of time and place and the change in subject matters of the verdicts, it seems that one of the factors affecting the change in the religious verdicts is the difference in the “metaphor-theory” system. According to the achievements of contemporary cognitive linguists, the process of human thought is of a metaphorical nature and most of the linguistic metaphors are due to the existence of metaphors in the conceptual structure of human mind. Accordingly, all abstract concepts become conceptual through the process of visualizing a known and objective matter. The findings of the present study which has been done by analytical-descriptive method and based on library resources show that the difference in the verdicts is due to the difference in the Usuli theories and the difference in the Usuli theories stems from metamorphosis of the supporting and internal metaphors of these theories. For example, the two metaphors “slave and master” and “legislator and law-abiding” which have evolved over time and based on the abstract concept of duty- as the most important and influential abstract concept in Usul al-Fiqh- have led to different theories in this science and subsequently, have also affected the jurists' inference from jurisprudential sources (the Holy Book and Sunna).