The use of the Jurists’ Conventional Status In Jurisprudence

The jurists have various statuses and can perform various functions, among which legal reasoning is the main one. For their status of legal reasoning – which is nothing except understanding religious laws and proofs – they also have a good command of Arabic literature, principles of jurisprudence, jurisprudence, dirāya, and rijāl sciences. However, in the path of inferring laws, they need others’ information and have to refer to ‘public convention’ or ‘experts’ or solve the problems with their ‘conventional status’. In answering the question of ‘how much do the jurists use their own conventional status in legal reasoning?’, we may conclude, through a descriptive-analysis method, that the jurists have to recognize the rational conventions and foundations for knowing the apparent meanings of the Legislator’s addresses and being informed of the Legislator’s contemporary convention; and they must insert those opinion and procedure in legal reasoning. They use their conventional status in all those cases, not their jurisprudential expertise. If groups of particular and general convention are formed, showing the conventional opinions and foundations, it will be possible for the jurists to refer to them in all conventional affairs effective in understanding the Legislator’s purpose, not giving opinions instead of the convention.