Codification or Discovery of the Ruling System and its Jurisprudential Consequences

Codification or Discovery of the Ruling System and its Jurisprudential ConsequencesSome scholars believe that different political, economic, etc. systems should be inferred like a Sharʻī (legal) ruling, on the other hand, some consider the inference of the system to be out of the realm of Sharʻ and a vague matter. At the beginning of this study, a distinction is made between several things: firstly, between a descriptive review and a recommended review; secondly, between the inference of all the fixed components of the system in a specific structure and the inference of only the fixed dimensions of the system and the determination of its variable dimensions according to various conditions; thirdly, between Inferring the system and codification the system. Then it is said that from a descriptive point of view, common jurisprudence was not and is not in charge of inferring the system, and from a recommendation point of view, no valid reason has been presented so far that jurisprudence should basically addresses the inference of the system. Because the system has variable dimensions. From a recommendation point of view, it can be said that jurisprudence must infer the fixed dimensions of the system, and after that a system should be codified based on the different characteristics of each society, not to infer a fixed system for all societies and for all times with different characteristics. In conclusion of this study, some differences and jurisprudential consequences between systematization and inference of system have been explained.