Rereading the First Principle in Conflicted Narrationswith an Approach to the Perspective of Optional (From the Point of View of Ayatollah Mohammad Javād Fāzel Lankarāni)

Analyzing the conflict (Tazāhom) between narrations (ahādith) is one of the most important and widely used topics that has been discussed in the science of principles. Scholars of the science of principles (Osuliyyun) have pursued the resolution of the conflict between hadiths from two perspectives: the first principle (Ahle Awwali) derived from reason, and the second principle (Ahle thānawi) based on the authority of the solver narrations (Akhbāre 'alājiyeh).In explanation of the first principle, different opinions have been expressed that "being free (Takhyir) in acting according each of conflicting narrations" is an effort made in order to resolve the conflict between narrations. Due to numerous controversies, this view does not have a place among the Osuliyyun, but a review of the arguments of the theory of optional makes it necessary to read about it.156 Therefore, the present article, which is organized with an analytical-ijtihadi method, has tried to present a justified view of this point of view by rereading the arguments and controversies of the view of optional (Takhyir). The obtained results show that by considering the wording absoluteness of the evidence of the validity of the single narration (Khabare Wāhed) and providing a correct explanation of it in relation to the state of conflict, it is possible to defend the theory of optional as the first principle in conflict narrations.