Criticizing the Jurisprudential Prohibition of High-Rise Construction

One of the problems that cities of the world today face, especially large cities, is high-rise construction. High-rise construction, as a set of advantages and disadvantages, has proponents and opponents with various and sometimes corresponding arguments. A review of these advantages and disadvantages also provides a comprehensive view of the jurisprudential study of this issue. The main question of the present article is “what is the primary ruling of high-rise construction in an Islamic city.” To answer this question, the opinion of Āyatollāh Moḥsin Arākī will be examined and criticized. From the jurisprudential arguments including the maxim of Lā Ḍirār (“do not inflict injury”), the following five basic rules can be mentioned: the necessity of human use, the proportionality of the height of the building with the level of religious places, attention to religious identity and aspect, non-destruction of cultural heritage, and attention to the right of tranquillity for high-rise construction. By observing these rules, high-rise construction is jurisprudentially permissible and also preferable if the quality of life is improved and citizenship rights are preserved.