A Critique of the Theory “Reconciliation between Muftaraqāt and Differentiation between Mujtama‘āt”
Journal Title: فقه و اصول - Year 2013, Vol 45, Issue 94
Abstract
In Sunnī and Imāmī jurisprudence, some have said that the legal base in devising rulings is founded on “differentiation between similarities (mutimāthilāt)” and “reconciliation between differences (mutafarriqāt)” and in other words, the legal basis is on the notion of considering the ruling of the similar subjects as different and the ruling of the different subjects as similar. Most of those maintaining the existence of this basis in legal law have stated it as a reason for the invalidity of analogy (qiyās); and some have resorted to it for solving the problems of the rulings that are apparently inconsistent with intellect. The only reason of those maintaining this view is the examples in which the ruling for the similar subjects is apparently considered as different and the ruling of the different subjects as similar. Some jurists have rejected the existence of such basis in legal law and have mentioned some responses to the claims of its proponents, most of which indicate the legal laws as having a cause (mu‘allal) and that it is not possible to consider the ruling of the similar subjects as different. In this writing, we examine the origin of this rule and the arguments of its believers and deniers. What is obtained as a conclusion from the examination of this claim and its responses is that whether the basis is on judicial doctrine, which regards the rulings as centered around the interests (masāliḥ) and abuses (mafāsid), or based on the Ash‘rite doctrine that does not regard the rulings subject to specific reasons, such a proposition is not resolute.
Authors and Affiliations
ḤUsayn ṢāBirī, MūSā Zarqī
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP184021
- DOI 10.22067/fiqh.v0i0.11844
- Views 112
- Downloads 0
An Inquiry into the Issue of "Prohibition of Lahw" as a Jurisprudential Rule
This article is a research concerning the issue of lahw (vain pursuits) from the jurisprudential point of view to answer the question as to whether it is possible to prove the prohibition of lahw as a jurisprudential rul...
Reviewing the impact of abuse and wastage in the lent (trust), a comparative study in Islamic jurisprudence and civil law
Imamiyah jurists have had different views regarding the rights of the trustee in terms of abuse and wastage in the lent (trust); from the known theory of the claim for damages not being associated with the abuses and was...
Semantics of Refinement of the Basis of a Ruling, Comparison with Similar Concepts and its Methodology
Refinement of the basis of a ruling (tanqīḥ al-manāṭ) is one of the rules of principles of jurisprudence, which is applied to the process of inference and for achieving the basis of a ruling (manāṭ). In general, it is a...
Critique of the Authenticity of the Evidences on Couple’s Deprivation from the Right to Qiṣāṣ in Jurisprudential Texts and Statutes
Right to qiṣāṣ belongs to the heirs of the deceased, that is to those who are regarded as the legal heir of the murdered and the principle is: “Whoever inherits the property of the deceased, inherits the right to qiṣāṣ,...
Halving of Dowry upon Death of Husband before Consummation
One of the issues related to dowry (mahr) in permanent marriage is its being halved in some cases. Once, in a permanent marriage, a dowry is set for the wife but the marriage leads to divorce before consummation, the wif...