فصلنامه فقه و اصول
پیاپی 132 (بهار 1402)

One of the important and practical topics in Imamiyyah jurisprudence is the discussion of Sharia tricks including the temporary marriage of a minor or infant girl in order to create privacy with her mother, without any serious intention of marriage, neither by the minor's guardian nor by the person who wants to become "mahram" with the minor's mother. In this regard, opinions have been raised by jurists. Famous jurists have considered it as valid, permissible, and effective, and have issued a fatwa for the realization of privacy, and for this reason, it is popular among religious people and is easily performed. Famous jurists have considered it as valid, permissible, and effective, and have issued a fatwa for the realization of "Mahramiat", and for this reason, it is popular among religious people and is easily performed. However, some jurists, doubting its authenticity, have considered such a contract to be a problem and ruled that the marriage is not fulfilled. The writer has investigated this issue by descriptive and analytical method and using library tools and by analyzing the evidence and stating the problems of the popular view, he has come to the conclusion that the use of such an incorrect trick and the realization of privacy with it are faced with serious and fundamental doubts.

One of the problems of the tradition of "Lazarar and Lazerar" is to plan and examine the effect of the presence or absence of the phrase " in Islam"  in deducing its jurisprudential issues. In this regard, a comprehensive and independent research has not been done, and the present research is trying to do this and answer this main question and the related sub-questions by analytical reference and library method in such a way that the presence or absence of the phrase in Islam has a direct effect on the inference of the jurisprudential issues of this tradition..This article has sought the effect of the presence of the phrase "in Islam" in the narration of "La zarar and La zarar" in the establishing  nature of the verdict that is deduced from the tradition, as well as the negation of harm from the legal harmful relations  between people, as well as compliance with the Shari'a rulings. Such a ruling is unprecedented in human legal schools.

Every legal act requires distinction and will, and someone can have the will to perform legal acts that can distinguish different things from each other. Today, many mental disorders are spreading, which have a direct effect on people's will and discernment and affect their social and economic activities.The basic question raised in this article is, what is the state of growth and, accordingly, the state of transactions of mania? Are the deals of these people "Safhi" (naïve) or not?The result of this research, using a descriptive-analytical method and library tools, is that mania in crucial degrees (mania) creates a disorder and the affected person loses his power of recognition and distinguishing in the state of mania and turns to harmful transactions or irrational indulgences. ; Therefore, according to experts' verification of the lack of growth of those affected in the state of mania, the transactions of this category of people in this state are invalid, and if this disease exists before the time of puberty and continues after that, the permission of the guardian is necessary, and if it happens after the time of maturity, it is necessary to determine and appoint a guardian by the court to protect his rights.

Exchange value is one of the most important issues in economics, which is also considered in jurisprudence under the title of being property by jurists, and in both sciences, various theories about its origin have been presented. The study of common theories of value shows that in these theories, exchange value is looked at with a static view and it is referred to as a point result that is due to causes and factors that are the origin of value at a point in time.In this article, we are trying to prove that the value of exchange is the result of a dynamic, linear and flowing process, which reaches actuality  from potentiality over time through different stages. In this regard, with the introduction of two types of property and exchange value, potential and current, and as a result, the distinction between potential and current property, it is clear that the neglect of the types of value on the one hand and the lack of accurate analysis of the process of value formation on the other hand, have become the source of differences and mistakes in value theories. .

Using the descriptive analytical method, the present article investigates the jurisprudential role of bribery in the realization of the crime of rent-seeking. According to the definition of bribery and the truth of its application in cases other than rulings and judgments, what a rent-seeker grants another in order to enjoy a series of privileges that he does not deserve is considered bribery and according to the consensus of jurists, it is haram. By following the words of jurists, it becomes clear that the truthfulness of bribery is valid not only for money, but also for word and deed;As a result, whatever the rent-seeking person does to the official in order to benefit from special privileges is a bribe. The person making the rent, who is the "Mortashi" (bribe receiver), is also required to return the bribe money and is a guarantor in this regard. The way to get rid of it is to return the property to the owner.

From the perspective of Imami jurisprudence and Iranian law, a pregnant woman whose husband has died or divorced her cannot marry anyone other than her ex-husband during pregnancy and must wait until childbirth; However, it has been seen in some cases that a woman without a husband who got pregnant through illegitimate means was married to  an adulterer or none adulterer at the time of pregnancy; Even in some cases, the couple finds out after marriage that the woman is pregnant by someone else. The verdict of these examples is not very clear. The question of the verdict of marrying a pregnant woman from an illegitimate relationship from the point of view of jurisprudence and Iranian law is an issue that needs to be explored until reaching a suitable answer. There are three opinions about the marriage of a pregnant adulteress: famous jurists believe that it is permissible, some jurists believe that it is not permissible, and some others believe "Tafsil" that is differrentiating. In this way, marriage is considered permissible, but intercourse and cohabitation during pregnancy are not permissible.This research shows in a descriptive and analytical way that the famous evidence is incomplete and the "tafsil" view based on the principle of innocence is a problem, because despite the generality of the chapter, it does not come to the flow of the principle. As a result, according to the weakness of the evidence of the first and third views, using the generality of the evidences of the obligation of Idah( a period of   time that a woman cannot marry after divorce or her husband's  death) and in order to preserve "Miah" (sperms) and lineage from mixing, marriage during pregnancy is not permissible. From the medical point of view, there is also the possibility of a pregnant woman getting pregnant again during pregnancy, which is called double pregnancy.

Conceptology and the correct understanding of words is a scientific discussion because understanding concepts plays a major role in judging scientific evaluations. The word "Tasalom" is one of the most widely used words in contemporary jurisprudential texts that identifying its position and how to use it can play an important role in understanding jurisprudential content and valuing it. In this article, in a descriptive and analytical way, we have tried to identify this concept and examine its relationship with other similar concepts such as consensus, non-contradiction, agreement, fatwa reputation, and necessity. According to research findings," Tasalom" in terms of burden of jurisprudential concept is different from all seemingly similar words.Consensus requires the discovery of the infallible's opinion, and whether or not there is proof of the consensus is effective in its validity. Agreement and non-contradiction are either lower levels than consensus in the words of jurists, or a word synonymous with consensus that must meet the conditions of consensus. Fatwa reputation is also out of comparison with "Tasalom" due to the fact that its validity is lower than non-contradiction. The relationship between peace and jurisprudential necessity is also different, despite being more similar than others; Including in terms of comparative detail and inclusiveness in relation to all branches, the fact that the issue is certain in the eyes of the jurist who claimed "tasalom", and also its inclusiveness in relation to principle issues of principle in addition to jurisprudence. As a result, "tasalom" has no semantic affinity or synonymy with any of the mentioned concepts

The legal literature regarding "Ehsani" (benevolence) legal acts is not very strong and there is no complete definition about them, and their nature is not properly identified. In this article, by stating the elements of benevolence of a legal act, it has been concluded that benevolent legal acts are a group of legal acts that bring benefits to the other party without any consideration or guarantee. It seems that the right way to know the nature of legal acts is to analyze the nature of offer and acceptance. Offer and acceptance in a bargain (exchange contract), involves the transfer of the ownership of considerations. Therefore, most of jurists have considered offer and acceptance as "Inshaee" (creative) . But acceptance in benevolence legal acts is simply the possession of the property from the other party. In these acts, acceptance does not involve the transfer of ownership and it is  only consent to the requirements of the offer; As a result, benevolence legal actions consist of a request and consent to it. Consent to a legal act is a legal event that is realized without the need for an "Insha" and with silence and non-refusal; Therefore, the nature of benevolence legal acts is the offer based on none refusal.

The most important and widely used source of inference of Shari'a rulings is "Sunnah". In the definition of " Sunnah ” the three forms of the word, the act and taghrir of infallible Imam are acceptable to the scholars of jurisprudence and principles. However, some have characterized and restricted these three forms as "abnormal". Such a restriction is to avoid some aspects of the life of the Infallibles (as), which are referred to as "sho'un". The number and names of these aspects or " sho'un" are usually discussed .On the other hand, we must find the " Sunnah" of the infallibles from the traditions. But not all traditions express " Sunnah".These traditions indicate the various "sho'un" of the Shar' or the Infallibles. Therefore, in order to deduce the fixed and permanent rules of Sharia, we must separate the traditions containing these rules from others. One of the ways to separate the traditions containing the rulings of shar' from others than that is to recognize the status of the basis of that traditions. The most important solution to this is to get help from contexts and evidence. In this article, an attempt has been made to state the "sho'un" of the Shar' based on the verses of the Qur'an. And also to present the various evidences in distinguishing the " sho'un" of the Shar' by mentioning examples from the jurists. Also, we try to answer these two questions:  if the evidence does not help us, how do we find the " sho'un" of the basis of the tradition? Also, what is the validity and authenticity of these tradition?

Doubts about the "Taklifee" ruling and not finding the "Amareh" is the way to adhere to the practical principle in order to remove the surprise in the position of action. Subjects of practical principles may be accompanied by necessary, accompanying or required, whether Sharee or non-Shariee and whether direct or indirect. The scope and validity of each of these are examined in the principles of jurisprudence under the title of "Mosbet" principle. Regarding the validity of the "Mosbet" principle, there is a difference of opinion among the scholars. The scholars of the principles that do not consider the "Mosbet"  principle to be a proof have insisted on it for reasons, the most important of which is the existence of conflict; This means that the "Mosbet"  principle can prove non-Sharee works (rational or normal works) for  what it  indicates, which in this case, is in conflict with the principle of the absence of said works. Some scholars do not consider the "Mosbet"  principle to be valid and authentic due to the existence of such an obstacle. On the other hand, some like Sheikh Ansari believe in the "Hokumat". From his point of view, basically, there is no conflict in the issue that can be used to invalidate the " Mosbet" principle. In this article, while examining and criticizing the existing views with an analytical method, the conclusion has been reached that the issue under discussion cannot be definitively considered as an example of conflict or "Hokumat", but in a new classification," Tafsi"  must be belived; In this way, some examples of it are examples of conflict according to some bases, and some examples are examples of "Hokumat" based on other bases. Therefore, it is not possible to deny the validity of the "Mosbet" principle by insisting on the problem of conflict.