فصلنامه فقه
پیاپی 81 (پاییز 1393)

Justice is one of the oldest concepts that humanity is familiar with it and is very common in his life and in religious texts; and it is known as one of the primary purposes of prophets. This concept is pre-religious; but it should not be interpreted without looking at the world, man and his ending. So that in its confirmation with the applications and finding its identities, when it is considered in a system, its effective elements should be considered too - which are present in the system. In terms of opinion and theorizing and thinking by the concept and meaning of justice, there is not appropriate treatment with it; Therefore it is necessary to review its implications in the detection of the rule, so the justice be enforced based it. Justice considered as a evidence, rule and approach in jurisprudence; and it must be realized as a general discourse in the implementation process of detected rules.

Collecting data from the personal privacy of people by the Islamic government in order to protect the security and interests of the society has some forms and rules, which in this paper, three important related points would investigate: 1. Studying that whether all cases of collecting data from personal privacy of people, without suspicion of spying and plotting or the like, involve a violation of privacy? Innovation in this review is importance of distinguishing between brief or detailed procedure of collecting data. 2. Studying the implications of related evidence in respect of prohibition of the government's collecting data, where it is required to break the personal privacy of citizens. Innovation in this review is attention to inclusion and exclusion of denoting verbal arguments in respect to government searching (not searching of people from each other). Most of these arguments do not imply such inclusion; because, firstly, they are about people's personal relationships with each other. Secondly, they are about personal faults and sins. 3. Being related of available evidence about government's collecting data. Innovation in this review is the detailed and accurate explanation for the related evidence.
The method of this paper is descriptive-analytical and data collection method is library.

Due to the acceptance of the principle that punishments are personal, the premeditated murderer death would not violate the punishment of accused or sentenced person. However, about the premeditated murderer, paying of blood money has some disagreements. On the one hand, conversion of punishment to blood money is conditional to the approval of the murderer, that by his/her death, naturally it can not be enforced. On the other hand, the evidence about that Muslim blood should not be wasted, indicate that in the case of murderer death, it is demanding that the blood money should be paid from his/her property. The lack of clear and precise legal views on this issue, has created confusion and inconsistency in the legislation. It seems that if the failure is not due to claiming and executing the sentence, and the murderer is dead by natural causes, the blood money is not payable; but in cases that the fault of murderer or prolongation of procedure are causes of the murderer death, the principle of Muslim blood should not be wasted, make it necessitate to pay blood money.

The present paper has written with historical- analytic approach and with goal of showing general narrative from history and procedure of utilization of disagreement with sunni`s as opposition of traditions’ preferring attribute; and has endeavored during it until be displayed its situation with analyzing of object`s historical process through study remnant records from shiite`s jurisprudence as long as initial usages until nowadays.
Hesitation in different approaches that emerged in be preferring attribute of disagreement with sunnis, conditions and quality of its using among Jurists too ups and downs that appeared in Pass of history, brought the notable results that among them can be mentioned to acknowledging the existence of negative and positive approaches to origin of object, the alteration that occurred in object`s literature after several century, the selection of reservation`s criterion in usage of this preferring attribute and postulate of establishment of concomitance between reservation and disagreement with sunni's from the majority of jurists. Whilst this article has considered some of flaws originated from erroneous analysis and inappropriate percipience from principle of disagreement with sunni`s and conditions of its utilization.

One of most prevalent methods of Shiite jurists toward contradictory traditions has been to consider them as Taqiyya. However, the instructions of this method had serious development during different periods, which one of most important of them, has been the periods of Shaikh Tousi in the fifth century in which several traditions had considered as Taqiyya. This study examines the ratio between the period of Shaikh and the period of earlier jurists before the fifth century and tries to find the main cause of the the reason for developing such a great individually by Shaikh. Whether this multiplicity of Taqiyya in Shaikh’s work is just because of the methodical difference between them, or it’s because of a serious fundamental difference between them. By this study, it will be proved that the difference between this two period isn’t just a methodical one and it is because of a deep fundamental difference.

Throughout the history of Islam, for classifying jurisprudential issues and ordering the systematic jurisprudence, jurisprudents have taken different methods. These methods, which define how to classify the jurisprudential issues, are called structures of jurisprudence. In this article, by studying these structures and due to the new jurisprudential issues and contemporary requirements, it is attempted to offer a new structure for jurisprudence. For this purpose, after defining the structure of jurisprudence and the importance of it, a brief report presented from the existing structures of Shiite jurisprudence, and then shortcomings of these structures are mentioned. Later on, the subject, scope and purpose of jurisprudence, as the theoretical foundations of the proposed structure, are scrutinized and then the suggested structure has been offered. In this proposed structure, jurisprudence initially split into two major branches: personal jurisprudence and governmental jurisprudence. The personal jurisprudence is then divided into six categories, including: provisions of person's duty in relation to self, God, humankind, environment, government, and financial issues. In addition, governmental jurisprudence is separated into four categories, including provisions of the Islamic government in relation God, nation, international organizations and other governments, and issues related to state institutions.