نشریه آموزه های فقه عبادی
پیاپی 4 (بهار و تابستان 1401)

Giving a share of Khums to the holy prophet’s family and allocating half of Khums to the poor and orphans and Bani Hashim Ibn Sabil (travellers in need) has stablished the specious argument of injustice specially Khums from the view of Shi'a includes an enormous properties whereas Zakāt (Arabic: زکاه) includes a narrow property. This paper which has been conducted in a descriptive-analytic method and library method aims to answer this specious argument. Findings show that Khums categorically including the share of Imam and al-sādat or Share of needy Sayyids (Arabic: سهم السادات) belongs to Bayt al-Mal (Arabic: بیت المال the public treasury of Islamic state) and the budget being directed by the religious leader of the community and Imam and governor (leader) only can take possession of it. by this source needy Sayyids are financially supported and the rest is paid for Islam and the benefits of Islamic society (because of being Islamic society). Therefore, the problem “discrimination for allocating half of Khums to Bani Hashim” is not true. The predicated part providing for the needy and poor Sayyids merely is given to the needy and poor Sayyids within the normal range and the amount of their need. There is The ambiguity in discrimination for allocating a share of Khums to the family of the holy prophet that one share of khums belonging to the whole family of the prophet but according to Shi'a fiqh this share belongs to twelve Imams (Arabic: ائمه) and it is a kind of the government budget. the evidences of the generalization which states that half of Khums belongs to the poor (both Sayyids and non-Sayyids) all are criticizable and the unconditionality of verse (ayah) is conditioned by hadiths and the unconditional hadiths which are in this ground like the verse are interpretated to be conditional.

In Shiite fiqh, the matter of wearing hijab before Maharem (it is an Islamic term meaning “those who are not allowed to marry”) has been propounded alongside non-maharem (a person with whom it is lawful for a Muslim woman to marry) and there are attitudes among Islamic jurists. The boundary of covering in Shiite fiqh sources have been mentioned as the boundary of 'awrah (Arabic: عوره) which parts of the body that are obligatory to be covered before non-maharem and also maharem. For the realization of the measure of the boundary of covering before maharem it is necessary to study the evidences of fuqaha (Islamic jurists and experts). The aim of examining and studying the opinions and evidences of Shi'a jurists about the boundary of 'awrah is to review scientifically one of verdict which is involved with. The basic question is what the principle and base of determining the boundary of 'awrah (Arabic: عوره) is. This paper which has been written in documentary-analytic method is going to study the opinions and views of Shi'a jurists about the boundary of 'awrah. The result has proved that the well-known opinion of Shi'a jurists states that it is lawful or permitted to watch all body of maharem except 'awratain (intimate parts). It is formed based on the correlation between watching and the consideration of covering and belief in covering more than 'awratain is because of Ihtiyaat (Arabic: احتیاط precaution, taking precautionary measures). Besides the knowledge of the jurisprudential verdict between maharem The effect of studying these opinions helps largely to observe the moral and training issues, too.‬‬‬‬‬

Based on the Islamic jurisprudential sources non-Muslims have right to accept the agreement of dhimmah (Arabic: الذمه) and to become citizens of the Islamic state and attain Civil rights of citizens. There are obvious disagreements between the jurists of Islamic schools about the possibility of the obligation of Zakat upon Non-Muslim Religious Minorities .As the well-known Imāmīyyah jurists and Mālikī jurists accept the obligation of Zakat whereas other schools and a few of Imāmīyyah jurists have disagreed with any obligation (Arabic: تکلیف taklif; commission) for furu’ al-fiqh (branches of jurisprudence) for infidels. The author with classifying the opinions and with applying the generalities and particularities of evidences has studied their opinions and after balancing the opinions has evaluated that the claim of any group faces with problems and the answer is a middle ground. It requires Islamic law proof Alongside Jizya Islamic state obliges infidels to pay Zakat. But approving some jurists’ opinions needs to prove Jizya for Zakat does not indicate to be disagreed with the opinions of those who agree with the obligation of Zakat on infidels before Allah almighty, Although the obligation or commission over infidels depends on their knowledge. But all roots of Islam and practical laws are obligatory over infidels.

Based on the primary maxim it is necessary that the Islamic devotional practice to be done by the accountable person himself and a proxy to do those practices for someone else is not allowed. One of these devotional practice is i'tikaf (Arabic: اعتکاف Islamic Ritual Retreat) which is not an exceptional. Sometimes this devotion (Islamic worship) as Nazr (Arabic: نذر a vow or commitment to carry out an act) and like it has been obliged on the accountable and he does not do it and dies and owes a duty to do that. Now the question is if it is allowed (lawful) to the authority to perform for this missed i'tikaf as a proxy for him and in this case, the dead obligation (duty) has been fulfilled by this proxy. From the point of view of Imāmīyyah (Arabic: إمامیه) there are two opinions: an opinion which has not accepted this proxy and an opinion which has agreed to take this proxy that this opinion seems to be more appropriate in line with evidences. there are different opinions in four schools of Sunni Islam. From the view of Ḥanbalī if this missed i'tikaf is because of the obliged vow the dead authority must perform it as a proxy for the dead. Ḥanafī and Mālikī believe that the proxy for the dead is not valid and for it the food should be provided for the poor and Shafi'i has two opinions: the old opinion believes the validity of the authority to be a proxy for the dead and the modern attitude which believes that the food should be provided for the poor. Observing the few hadiths for the lack of validity and the multiplicity of hadiths and being on firm ground for the validity and of the authority i'tikaf, the opinion of the validity in Sunni school seems more acceptable and reasonable.

Based on the primary maxim it is necessary that the Islamic devotional practice to be done by the accountable person himself and a proxy to do those practices for someone else is not allowed. One of these devotional practice is i'tikaf (Arabic: اعتکاف Islamic Ritual Retreat) which is not an exceptional. Sometimes this devotion (Islamic worship) as Nazr (Arabic: نذر a vow or commitment to carry out an act) and like it has been obliged on the accountable and he does not do it and dies and owes a duty to do that. Now the question is if it is allowed (lawful) to the authority to perform for this missed i'tikaf as a proxy for him and in this case, the dead obligation (duty) has been fulfilled by this proxy. From the point of view of Imāmīyyah (Arabic: إمامیه) there are two opinions: an opinion which has not accepted this proxy and an opinion which has agreed to take this proxy that this opinion seems to be more appropriate in line with evidences. there are different opinions in four schools of Sunni Islam. From the view of Ḥanbalī if this missed i'tikaf is because of the obliged vow the dead authority must perform it as a proxy for the dead. Ḥanafī and Mālikī believe that the proxy for the dead is not valid and for it the food should be provided for the poor and Shafi'i has two opinions: the old opinion believes the validity of the authority to be a proxy for the dead and the modern attitude which believes that the food should be provided for the poor. Observing the few hadiths for the lack of validity and the multiplicity of hadiths and being on firm ground for the validity and of the authority i'tikaf, the opinion of the validity in Sunni school seems more acceptable and reasonable.

One of the most extensive Jurisprudential chapters is Hajj chapter. Within the several hadiths in this chapter , part of hadiths indicates obligation creating rules (hukm taklifi) for the wealthy who are financially capable to perform more than one time. According to some hadiths, wealth makes Hajj to be compulsory in the same year whereas some other states that to fulfil once in a lifetime is enough. Muslim scholars have selected different approaches in confronting these traditions . It shows that putting aside the first category of hadiths and conveying them to the following aspects: mandatory, alternative obligation, collective obligation, purifying the pre-Islam belief of Nasī’ (i.e. postponement of months; Arabic: النسی ء), confronting the false belief of the limitation of the obligation of Hajj in the first year, the obligation of the predicable (genus) of the wealthy and purifying the belief of the class Hajj. This note with descriptive-analytic method aims to evaluate the truthfulness of these inferences. At the last step after mentioning criticisms on each of these approaches, the selected attitude with utilizing the components such as the indication of verse 97 of surah Āl `Imrān (Arabic: آل عمران‎), the maxim “لو کان لبان” (If there were such a ruling, it should have been revealed or known), the well-known fuqaha giving it up (have not acted based on it) and the manner and conduct of Shi'a intellectuals it is achieved that the first category of hadiths are invalid.