Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Journal of Fiqh and Usul
?????, ???????
Unknown Affiliation
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
A Study on the Nature of Context from the Perspective of Islamic Jurisprudence and Usul al-Fiqh ????? ?????, ????; ?????, ???????; ?????, ????
??? ? ???? ???? 51 ????? 1: ????? ????? ??6? ???? ???8
Publisher : ???????? ??????? ?????? ????

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (302.828 KB) | DOI: 10.22067/jfu.v51i1.55299

Abstract

Context, as the mental framework and format of speech and the place where evidences are realized, plays a role in understanding the intention of speech and is arranged in the form of either previous or future attached and connected verbal evidences. Detached evidences are considered as attached evidences if applied in the speech of a speaker like the divine lawgiver whose habit is to apply evidences separately and rely on them; hence, attachment in his words constitutes detachment. Textual evidence, due to its closeness and connection to the speech, is considered as attached evidence; even one may say the former is of the latter?s type or identical to it. The intention and termination of the speech, although helpful as an essential element in this regard, lack the necessary capacity to be included into the definition, since they fail to cover all instances of context conveyance including instances not intended by the speaker such as implicit conveyance. In addition, a definition of context which does not include previous verbal evidences or contextual evidences is a strict definition which is in contrast with its wide cases of application. On the other hand, consideration of detached evidences in all speeches even in the divine lawgiver's is an extended and defective definition of context.
THE STATUS OF SIRA (CUSTOM) AMONG THE EVIDENCES OF OPINIONS CONCERNING THE INFANT’S CONTRACTS دوره51 شماره3 سال1398 ????, ?? ?? ?????; ?????, ???? ???; ?????, ???????
??? ? ???? ???? 51 ????? 3: ????? ????? ??8? ????????8
Publisher : ???????? ??????? ?????? ????

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (566.852 KB) | DOI: 10.22067/jfu.v51i4.55570

Abstract

Sira, meaning the continued way and method, is a manifestation of custom which has in contemporary Usuli works gained an unprecedented place in the inference of religious rules and despite all efforts by Usulis to delimit its thematic aspects and the conditions of its authority, there are problems with its accurate and systematic application from the aspect of jurisprudential functions and a sort of diversity of opinions and disagreement is noticeable in this regard. This paper, through a case study method, has studied the status of the conduct of wise and the custom of the people of the religion among the evidences of opinions regarding the infant's contracts and after a quick review of semantics of Sira and infant and an overview of other evidences of opinions regarding the infants contracts, has attempted to give a report on the opinions of a number of Islamic jurists with regard to the status of Sira in declaring validity or invalidity of such contracts. The results of this research show that in applying Sira as evidence, a spectrum of opinions has emerged and their contradiction indicates considerable diversity among the jurisprudential commentators and more than ever, reveals the necessity of regulating the jurisprudential and Usuli thoughts in this regard.  
نقد و تحلیل دیدگاه مشهور در تعیین سال خمسی و دوره زمانی کسر مئونه از ربح دوره51 شماره4 سال1398 ????, ???? ???; ?????, ???????
??? ? ???? ???? 51 ????? 4: ????? ????? ??9? ?????????8
Publisher : ???????? ??????? ?????? ????

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (588.145 KB) | DOI: 10.22067/jfu.v51i4.68818

Abstract

??? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???? ??? ? ????? ???? ??????? ?????? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ???? ? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ????? ????? ???. ????????? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ?????: ?? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ????? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ????? ??? ?? ??????? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ????? ???????? ?? ????? ?? ????? ???? ??? ? ?? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ????. ???? ????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ? ????? ???? ? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? (?) ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ??? ?  ? ?? ???? ??? ?? ??? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???. ????? ??? ????? ?? ???????? ?????? ? ????? ??? ??????? ???.
Co-Authors ????, ?? ?? ????? ????, ???? ??? ????? ?????, ???? ?????, ???? ?????, ???? ???