مجله مطالعات فقه امامیه
پیاپی 10 (بهار و تابستان 1397)

The subject of the article is "Ritual Purity and Impurity of People of the Book according to Imam Khomeini, Khoei, Hakim and Sheikh Ansari" and the main purpose of this article is to explain and clarify the Islamic law concerning the ritual purity or impurity of the People of the Book so that some Muslims may not have problem in their interaction with them. Based on the findings of this study, Sheikh Ansari maintains that the People of the Book are ritually pure. However, Ayatollah Hakim and Imam Khomeini (ra) maintain that their ritual purity is not established and that the narrations concerning their impurity are insufficient and, at the most, indicate karahat or undesirability. Ayatollah Khoei exercises precaution about the People of the Book. Nonetheless, he says that the proofs and narrations concerning the purity of the People of the Book take precedence over other evidences and narrations. *

One of the four categories of penal reaction in the criminal policy of Islam are discretionary punishments which are highly important in terms of how they are determined and executed. Among the subject-matters that need to be studied meticulously in connection with discretionary punishments is the fact that physical punishments constitute the common form of punishment in Arab and non-Arab societies but the Lawgiver has also emphasized on the necessity of executing other forms of punishments such as financial penalties and restriction of freedom. The present article adopting an analytical – descriptive method discusses this issue from the point of view of discretionary punishment, and it concludes that discretionary punishments are not confined to flogging; rather it includes any form of punishments and reactions that help prevent a delinquent from committing a felony. It is therefore not proper to restrict punishments to one or several punishments; rather the Muslim judge or ruler i

There are a lot of restrictions in well-known juridical views of Imamiyyah school of law with regards to eating seafood and aquatic animals. The common and unanimous view of Shia scholars is that sea creatures are forbidden to eat except for shrimps and fish that have scales. The main reason that justifies this position originates in the narrations that deal mainly with the permissibility or impermissibility of fish that have or do not have scales. But these narrations have poor chain of transmission and therefore cannot be considered as authentic. This article seeks to study the permissibility or impermissibility of eating seafood trying to conclude that having scales cannot be a definite permissibility criterion. So what is the legal or juridical criterion for permissibility of sea creatures especially fish? Who determines the criterion for what is halal or haram sea creature? Is it the common custom or particular custom that determines the manifestation? In their writings, jurists have not discussed the rules concerning shrubs and insects found in water. When it comes ot sea creatures, they have confined their discussions to fish stating that only fish that have scales are halal to eat which, by itself, gives rise to serious questions.

Ta'sib is one of the contentious issues among both Sunni and Shia jurists. In regards to inheritance, the relationship of the deceased person's bequest and estate with the six suppositions mentioned in the Quran can take three forms: equality of the shares and inheritance, the shares being less than the inheritance and the shares exceeding the inheritance in which case the total shares exceed the whole estate. In jurisprudential terminology, this scenario is called ta'sib. When it comes to who the excess in the shares belongs to, there are differences of opinion among Shia and Sunni jurists. In this article, we have reached, after studying the arguments presented by both branches of faith, the conclusion that the Quran has mentioned the principle that both man and woman have a share in the inheritance. Ta'sib is in contravention with the verses and traditions. The main reason the heirs receive their share of inheritance is blood relationship or causes of inheritances. If the deceased person leaves behind a supposed heir, in this case, this heir takes preference over the close relatives and therefore he takes out his share before everyone else.

The medical treatments carried out by a doctor are studied from criminal and civil perspectives. These surgical and medical conducts will not be considered to be crimes if they meet the conditions adopted in article 158 of Iran's Islamic penal code. As for civil liability, despite the fact that this issue is one of the doctors' important civil responsibilities, there is no special rule in civil law and civil liability law. These rules are silent about it. In articles 495-497 of Islamic penal code, medical responsibility is recognized among the manifestations of negligence-based responsibilities. That is because in Islamic penal code approved in 1991 doctor's responsibility is considered to be among the manifestations of absolute (pure) responsibility. Therefore, in the Islamic penal code approved in 2013, the legislator has left his former position and principle which was based on the widely-held opinion of jurists and, in a praiseworthy action, adopted a less known legal position. In this study, doctor's civil and criminal liabilities are studied in Iran's legal system with a view to the new Islamic penal code.

When a new topic or issue emerges or arises, the jurists of that particular era are duty-bound to study it from various angles as well as to derive its legal rulings with reliance on the Quran and prophetic traditions. One of the current-day issues that need to be dealt with is human cloning. Human cloning is the creation of a genetically identical copy of an existing, or previously existing, human being or growing cloned tissue from that individual without having to insert male or female sexual cells into one another. Human cloning is a highly controversial issue. The proponents of cloning take recourse to arguments such as the following: 1- There is no legal proof to oppose cloning. 2- Cloning has great positive impacts on humanity such as diagnosing cancerous diseases, causes of abortion, immunity against illnesses, fertility of infertile couples and helping future generations to live better lives. The opponents also resort to certain arguments. For example, they say that cloning leads to amalgamation of the parentage; it is a kind of intervention in the affairs of God and it is tantamount to creating a change in God's creation. Furthermore, inheritance related problems will arise.