The authority of the contradictories as to reject a third verdict
Journal Title: فقه و اصول - Year 2015, Vol 47, Issue 101
Abstract
One of the issues raised in jurisprudence is that two reasons are terminated if they are contradictory. However, as regards the rejection of a third verdict in concomitance with those two reasons: in case of its authority a referral to generalities and predications and practical principles is not possible, while in the absence of its authority, it is possible to refer to these issues. This paper examines the foundations of authority and non-authority as to reject a third verdict, and analyzes the practical implications of either choice in jurisprudential discussions. The most important reason highlighted by those supporting the authority to reject a third verdict is the independence of implicit (subjunctive) indication from explicit (corroborative) indication in the context of authority, while those who advocate its non-authority emphasize the dependence and compliance of implicit indication with explicit one as regards authority. In this article, we find the notion of non-authority as to reject a third verdict effectively challenged and ultimately prefer the idea of authority. Indeed, this shall not be in terms of implicit indication and its independence from explicit one as proposed by most of the Usulites; instead, this is because of the shared unity of two contradictories in their rejection of a third. This last issue will be achieved only if the contradiction of two reasons is inherently essential; whereas in cases of cross-sectional contradiction, two conflicting reasons shall not be united or unanimous in their rejection of a third, and as a result, there will be authority for this rejection.
Authors and Affiliations
Sajedeh Eslami Mahdi Abadi, Ali Tavallaee
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP190127
- DOI 10.22067/fiqh.v47i21.28230
- Views 165
- Downloads 0
The Role of Referring Pronoun to some Common Individuals
Sometimes there comes a pronoun after a common [individual], which has apparently been used as the object of a legal decision (ḥukm), and by means of external evidence, the certainty is achieved that this pronoun refers...
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...
Examination of the Concept of Ta‘līl (Causal Inference)
What is meant by ta‘līl is that if in a reason the cause of the judgment has been mentioned, the denial of the judgment can been concluded from the lack of that judgment; in such a way that from the denial of restriction...
Semantic Principles of Islamic Law
Paying attention to the lingual analysis of the legal concepts and propositions is one of the most important sections studied in philosophy of law. The nature of the science of law necessitates its intermingling with wor...
Reciprocal duties and rights of owner and usurper after delivering the alternate of usurped property
Alternate of the usurped property is a compensation paid to the owner after unavailability of usurped property. The Iranian Civil Code, following the Islamic scholars' famous view, has principally accepted the payment of...