فصلنامه فقه
پیاپی 103 (پاییز 1399)

The principle of intention is considered as one of the most widely used jurisprudential principles. Despite its prominent presence in various jurisprudential areas, its project as a jurisprudential principle with mentioning various aspects and its applications has been less carried out. The current paper seeks to introduce the principle and express the arguments that can be used to prove the principle. These arguments include the book (the Qur'an), tradition, and reason. Unlike some who basically consider intention to be specific to worship, not only intention but, consequently, the principle of intention also applies to non-worships. Therefore, intention as a principle is not devoted to the intention of proximity (to Allah). In addition, intention include the meanings of the intention of title, the intention of the speaker of the word and its effect and purpose, the word intention and the principle of motivation and purpose, and practically it has been used in all these meanings. The jurisprudential application of the principle along with the principle of narratives in different areas is a proof of this generalization. Contrary to some people's beliefs, the word "intention" still has the meaning of its word. The former jurists in various cases have easily used some verses and hadiths to prove the principle and the necessity of intention, but gradually some of the late jurists have questioned the arguments of these verses. Even, they have not accepted the arguments and evidence of some narratives to prove the principle.

The theory of conflict of conditional obligations in legislation is a theory on the scope and criteria of legislation based on the secondary topics (in jurisprudence). According to this theory, it is obligatory to observe the rulings of Islam (including permissible, obligatory, and status rulings) and the goals of religion and the purposes of Sharia in legislation, i.e., the condition for the correctness of legislation and the conditional obligation in legislation. If the obligation to observe one religious ruling in the legislation contradicts the obligation to comply with another religious ruling, or the obligation to observe a purpose of religion or a purpose of Sharia in the legislation, and the legislator considers the other party important, then, the law must be enacted according to the important party. The focus of discussion of this theory is in the position of the legislator against the unimportant ruling. According to this theory, he should ignore the law that is related to the unimportant ruling or enact the law in contradiction with it and appropriate to the important ruling. Since the permissible, obligatory and status rulings, as well as the aims of the religion and the purposes of the Sharia, are the subjects of this conditional obligation, it can be considered as the party to be conflicted. The criterion for permissibility of the law to be ignored, as well as legislation that is contrary to the religious ruling, is to observe the preferred principles of this conflict. In the present paper, the pillars of this theory are explained and proved in a jurisprudential way, to the extent of the capacity of a paper. This theory is related to the discourse of absolute Wilayat Faqih (Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist) and is based on it. The findings of this study are related to the duties of the Expediency Discernment Council (of Iran) in deciding on resolutions of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, which are introduced by the Guardian Council as illegal.

One of the most frequent institutions that is considered in various jurisprudential subjects is the institution of "Wilayat (guardianship) ". Among the examples of guardianship, "customary guardianship" has been less discussed and studied, and in addition to the need to explain the nature, it is necessary to examine the arguments for the legitimacy of its guardianship. Accordingly, the major question of the study is "What are the principles of legitimacy of customary guardian?". The research hypothesis is that blood relatives (other than father and paternal grandfather) are the customary guardians and narrative and rational arguments can be used for the legitimacy of their guardianship. The method of this study is descriptive-analytical and the religious arguments are analyzed in it. The finding of the current study suggests that by analyzing and scrutinizing the primary and secondary arguments of the guardian, the customary guardian can be accepted as a constrained guardian. Accepting the legitimacy of guardianship of a customary guardian will have many effects on individual and social life. In addition, it can reduce some of the responsibilities of the government and the judiciary system, and manage affairs more easily and by the people themselves.

One of the advantages of Shiite jurisprudence is its comprehensiveness, accountability, and providing solutions to solve the problems and difficulties of human societies. One of the problems of Islamic societies in the present era is the import of consuming goods from non-Islamic countries, which from the perspective of Islamic jurisprudence is considered as Najis and Haram. This paper aims to provide a solution to the problem of food products under the title of transformation (Istihaleh). The paper continues with some introductory topics such as an examination of the viewpoints, the background, the description of the place of the conflict, and the lexical and idiomatic conceptology. Then, while explaining the arguments of purity for the transformation, the study is followed in two main topics. In the first topic, the viewpoint about explaining upon najis and najis maker objects has been criticized, and the viewpoint about the purity of absolute transformation in najis and najis maker objects has been proved. In the second topic, the ruling of doubtful cases is examined and after criticizing the viewpoint of explaining the conceptual and sample doubts as well as lack of correctness of purity in the first viewpoint and accepting correctness of purity in the second viewpoint, the theory of correctness of purity is absolutely proved in the conceptual and sample doubts and it is also forcibly considered as Halal.

The ruling on shaking hands with female non-Muslim foreigners in the process of welcoming and escorting them in the arena of international, diplomatic, and non-diplomatic ceremonies is an issue that needs to be explored until finding a good answer, since no comprehensive and integrated research has been carried out on this field. Denying the handshake as a haram (forbidden) action by some thinkers in the field of jurisprudence, with the condition of lack of interest and pleasure, especially in international relations, considering doubt in its being haram to some scholars in the field of jurisprudence, and lack of the generality of the arguments as being haram about its ruling and topic, will double the need to question the ruling of shaking hand with female non-Muslim foreigners in the arena of common international ceremonies. In addition to the fact that some authors referred to some expediencies in the handshake and tried to crystallize the secondary title and resort to the secondary ruling of permission in the issue, the current study has been carried out with the aim of identifying the limits and boundaries of arguments for shaking hands with female non-Muslim foreigners, explaining the generality or non-generality of its ruling and subject in the process of international ceremonies, and analyzing the resort as a secondary "expediency" for permissibility of the handshake, if the first ruling as a haram action is accepted. Achieving this aim is possible by describing and analyzing jurisprudential propositions through collecting library data, the result of which is the explanation and analysis of the first and second rulings of shaking hands with female non-Muslim foreigners in the process of welcoming and escorting them in the arena of international ceremonies.

In civil law and Imamiyah jurisprudence, based on the theory of narration and basis of the contract of guarantee on the institution of Dhimmah, the subject of this contract is limited to the fixed religion in Dhimmah and existing at the time of the contract, to the extent that most of the jurists have considered the absence of these two aforementioned conditions as the cause of the invalidity of this contract. However, the subject of guaranteed and common contracts cannot be limited to these conditions. The adequacy of the existence of the cause is not enough to solve the issue. Therefore, it is necessary to correctly identify the subject of the contract, the conditions, and its effects on these conditions, based on the nature of this type of guarantee and appropriate techniques related to this nature, in the guarantees that are used in society. The current paper, in addition to proposing a general theory in the realm of guarantee, it has broken the monopoly of the subject on religion and made obligations in its broadest sense the subject of this contract, with a descriptive-analytical method and focusing on the customary approach to the guarantee contract, by analyzing the nature of the customary guarantee and its profound difference with the narrative guarantee, and using the responsible institution instead of the institution of dhimmah in explaining the subject of the contract.

Most of contemporary authorities have considered the presence of Junub person and menstruating women as well as leaving women alone with the Muhtadar (A person who is about to die and whose soul is about to leave his body) as Makruh. These fatwas are always followed by the legislators, and therefore, women are sometimes prevented from appearing next to a Muhtadar. Since no extensive research has been carried out on this, then, the question of examining the jurisprudential ruling on the presence of a woman next to a Muhtadar is an issue that needs to be explored until the answer stage. It is necessary to study the jurisprudential principles of these rulings in the sense that in addition to practical fruits, it can express a kind of attitude towards women. Achieving this goal is possible in the shadow of describing and analyzing jurisprudential propositions by collecting library data. The findings of this study suggest that, even if the presence of a menstruating woman next to a Muhtadar is accepted based on the principle of Tasamoh (laxity) in the arguments of Sunnah, but undoubtedly this ruling is only for the time of Talqin (some phrases regarding Islamic beliefs that are recited for the deceased before burying his or her corpse) and does not cover the whole period of Ihtidar. The ruling of leaving women alone with the Muhtadar as makruh also lacks religious support and fatwas.