Requirement For Vaccination In The Scope Of Shia Jurisprudence Principles And Rules

With the spread of coronavirus and causing a global pandemic within a short period, various topics were raised about vaccination as one of the ways to prevent it. One of these topics was the requirement for vaccination, which has resulted in many Islamic jurisprudential, legal, and ethical discussions. This paper aims to examine this issue in the scope of Shia jurisprudence principles.

The present study aimed to describe and analyze the views and the evidence and the technique of collecting information is library research.

 The rules against requirement for vaccination include the rules of reluctance, the obligation to avoid possible harm, caution, respect, the negation of hardship and embarrassment, the sovereignty and the principle of non-wilaya, and the rules in favor of the requirement for vaccination, including the principle of public interest, the obligation to avoid possible harm, the principle of the priority of the right to life, and the rule of maintaining the universal system and preventing its disruption.

The arguments in favor of mandatory vaccination considerations are more reasonable and stronger and have a more comprehensive view of the problem, and there is also no legal or religious obstacle.