View source for Jurisprudence and reason (book)

== Jurisprudence and Reason (book) ==
Author: Alireza Dehqani

The book Jurisprudence and Reason written by [[Abulqasem Alidoust]], in Persian language, has tried to develop the use of reason in deriving Sharia rulings by presenting the features of reason in understanding Islamic rulings. Unlike some contemporary Usulians, Alidoust has accepted the rule of interdependence between the rule of reason and the rule of Sharia.
According to Alidoust, a professor of Kharij Fiqh and Usul Fiqh in Qom seminary, the reason can recognize the meaning of Sharia rulings by observing the frameworks and rules of conventional seminary ijtihad and also discover the purposes of Sharia by using the Quran and Narration. As a result, it is possible to understand the rulings in a system and body whose components are coordinated with each other. The book seeks to expand the accountability of the Sharia to more diverse issues by promoting the independent position of reason in deriving rulings and rereading it in a coherent system.
According to the book of jurisprudence and reason, although the purposes of the Sharia have a strong role in deriving rulings, in this respect one should use reason in a systematic manner and do such a thing according to the texts expressing the purposes in the book and the Sunnah. In this regard, Alidoust believes that neglecting the purposes of the Sharia in deriving rulings causes fatwas to become illegal.
In the current book, Alidoust emphasizes the necessity of simultaneously paying attention to both independent and non-independent applications of reason in deriving rulings. He also disagrees with following all rulings based on real interests and corruptions, and states that sometimes the enactment of a ruling may not be due to expediency or expediency, and that legislation itself causes the creation of posterior expediency. He also explains in detail the rule reason and the rule of Sharia and points out the opposition of jurists such as Seyyyed [[Abulqasem Khoei]] and [[Sheikh Morteza Ansari]] to this principle. Furthermore, he points to cases of the use of reason in discovering the meaning of rulings by them to show that the mentioned jurists relied on it in practice while theoretically opposed to the inherent rule.
== The Author ==
Abulqasem Alidoust is one of the professors of the Kharij Fiqh (since 2003) and the Usul Fiqh (since 1375) in Qom seminary. Some of his books are as follows: [[Jurisprudence and common sense|jurisprudence and common sense]], [[Jurisprudence and custom|jurisprudence and custom]], [[Jurisprudence and expediency|jurisprudence and expediency]], [[Jurisprudence and contract law|jurisprudence and contract law]], [[General Qur'anic evidence|general Qur'anic evidence]], [[Jurisprudence and contract law: general evidence of narration|jurisprudence and contract law: general evidence of narration]] and Salsabil fi Usul al-Tajzyyah wa Irab.
The book of Jurisprudence and Expediency was recognized as the selected work of the Book of the Year Award of the Islamic Republic in 2009. Currently, he is a member of the faculty of the jurisprudence and Law Research Institute of the Islamic Culture and Thought Research Institute, the president of the Qom Seminary Islamic Jurisprudence and Law Scientific Association, a member of the Qom Seminary Teachers' Society and the head of the Transfer Sciences Chair of the Secretariat for theorizing, criticizing and debating chairs.
Besides authoring works that show he pays attention to contemporary jurisprudence issues, Alidoust has been teaching political jurisprudence and judicial jurisprudence for about four years, which, despite the importance of both of them in contemporary jurisprudence, are rarely taught in the fields <ref>Biography of Ayatollah Alidoust", Abolqasem Alidoust website.</ref>.
== The Importance of the Book ==
Contrary to the common view among the jurists who practically leave aside the reason in jurisprudence and consider the Qur'an and the Sunnah to be sufficient, the book Jurisprudence and Reason has tried to revive the place of the reason in the contemporary jurisprudence of the Imamiyyah. The author of Jurisprudence and Reason states in his other works that reason, is the most important element in discovering the laws governing human sciences, in addition to being important in jurisprudential inference.
According to him, recognizing the concept and function of reason can help both in the understanding of religious texts and the production of Islamic humanities which is one of the concerns of today's researchers supported by the Islamic Republic <ref>Alidoust, "An approach for the production of Islamic humanities...".</ref>. Accordingly, Alidoust believes that due to we can talk about nuclear jurisprudence, art jurisprudence, security jurisprudence and the like to develop the tools of reason in inference. The current book was taught by one of Alidoust's students named Seyyed Mehdi Mousavi in 43 sessions <ref>Channel of reflections on jurisprudence methodology.</ref>.
== The Framework of the Book ==
In addition to the preface and the introduction, the book of jurisprudence and reason has four chapters and a conclusion, which are as follows:
 
1. The generalities of reason: In this chapter, the application of the concept of reason in religious sources (Qur'an and narrations) as well as its use in Islamic sciences (words, ethics, logic, philosophy and jurisprudence) are explained. Then the various divisions of reason, including theoretical and practical reason, have been explained. Then, the influence of reason in the understanding of goodness and ugliness have been examined.
2.  The independent [[Use of reason in deriving the rulings of Sharia|use of reason in deriving the rulings of Sharia]]: In this chapter, the rule of connection between the ruling of reason and the ruling of Sharia is described in two chapters; In the first chapter, the generality and magnitude of the principle of the rule of law have been proven and the intended meaning of Alidoust has been clarified. On the other hand, in the second chapter, the smallness of the rule has been proposed from two perspectives: one from the perspective of the role of reason in the criteria of Sharia rules, and the second from the perspective of the role of reason in the rules of law and rules of Sharia.
3.  Non-independent use of reason: In this chapter, the focus is on the instrumental and non-independent use of reason in three sections: 1. The instrumental use of reason in proving fundamental arguments, interpreting religious evidence, understanding the evidence, forming valid analogies, and examining the documents of narrations, 2. Explaining the application of the clearance and security of reason, and the explanation of the ruling of reason in events without a ruling and unknown events, while discussing the two theories of "Qubhe Iqabe Bela Bayan" and "Haq Al-Ta'a". 3. The uses of reasoning in inference and ijtihad.
4.  Pathology and answers to doubts and questions: In this chapter, firstly, the harms of using reason in inference are investigated and then the ways to deal with these harms are stated. Then doubts have been expressed in order to question the validity of the perceptions of reason and rational judgments. After this, the relationship between the rule of reason and the building of reason has been discussed.
 
5. Conclusion: The mission of the trustees Inference: In this chapter, some points about the necessity of technical and comprehensive ijtihad in the age of absenteeism and avoiding harm have been stated.
== Principles and Assumptions ==
 
=== The need to pay attention to the red lines of conventional ijtihad ===
According to Alidoust, what is meant by the application of reason or the purposes of the Sharia is not that anyone puts his illusions in the name of the purposes of the Sharia next to the appearances of the book and the Sunnah and puts what he thinks is the spirit of the law and the purposes of the Sharia in the place of the text. Accordingly, the jurist should respect the Qur'anic and narrative texts, use the set of religion and Sharia in their understanding, and after considering the intellectual understanding, turn to infer the verdict (pp. 147-148).
=== Characteristics of appropriate inference ===
Based on the current book, as mentioned in the introduction of it, the appropriate and correct inference is an inference that is adorned with the originality of the sources, comprehensive and disciplined research while being free from harms such as mixing with praise and the material of the message. Also, paying attention to sources of jurisprudence and having consistent principles of ijtihad is a necessary condition for ijtihad (p. 18). Based on this fact, in deriving rulings, the collection of Sharia and its general goals should be considered (p. 158).
=== Application of Sharia collection and its purposes in inference ===
The Jurisprudence and Reason book deals with the application of reason in two separate parts which occupies more than half of the work, in order to specify the independent and non-independent uses of reason in order to develop the use of reason in inference and the ability to solve newly emerging jurisprudential issues.
In another article, Abulqasem Alidoust also valued the possible uses of reason and said that the best use of reason is to discover the meaning of rulings, and the other use is unruly and distasteful expedients, which are called Istislah in Sunnis. According him, although the importance of the purposes of the Sharia in deriving rulings is undeniable, in discovering the purposes of the Sharia and the meaning of the rulings, reason must be used systematically. That is, according to the texts showing the purposes in the books and the Sunnah, he achieved the purposes and evidence <ref>Alidoust, "Capacities of jurisprudence in facing the problems of the contemporary world".</ref>.
=== The Necessity to know the Purposes of Sharia ===
According to the book, it is necessary for the jurist to be familiar with the purposes of the Sharia. Furthermore, the jurist should not ignore the purposes and goals of the Sharia in deriving rulings from the evidence, and examine the evidence by neglecting it. Therefore, ijtihad requires, in addition to prerequisites such as familiarity with Arabic literature, Rijal and Usul, theological prerequisites such as recognizing the truth of man from the perspective of religion, expecting religion from mankind, knowledge of the essence and complex of religion, and awareness of the purpose of the Sharia, and neglecting these matters causes illegalization becomes a fatwa (p. 17).
=== The Results of Paying Attention to the Goals of Sharia ===
In the chapter on the independent use of reason in deriving the rulings of Sharia, the book has provided evidence from Quranic texts and narrations to make it clear how important it is to pay attention to the goals and purposes of Sharia. It includes the following issues.Orphans' property: Abulqasem Alidoust, referring to the revelation of verses 10 of Surah Nisa and 152 of Surah An'am in the prohibition of losing the property of orphans, pointed out the behavior of some Muslims who, after the revelation of these verses, were motivated to escape from the responsibility of taking care of orphans, their food separated from their lives. This caused the revelation of verse 220 of Surah Al-Baqarah, according to which God's will is placed on it to take care of orphans and their property in the best way. Based on this, although God deems it necessary to respect the interests of orphans, this caution should never lead to the weakening of the guardians' motivation. Therefore, the mentioned verses indicate that the Holy Quran has paid attention to both the spirit and the truth of the ruling, that is, the duty of guardianship of orphans, and the collection of Sharia and rulings. According to Alidoust, neglecting the simultaneous observance of the two mentioned aspects can lead to the issuance of strict and burdensome rulings.
=== Classification of Religious Texts ===
In the book, Alidoust has divided religious texts, i.e. the verses of the Qur'an and the traditions of the infallible, into two parts: Shari'a rulings, as well as purposes and wisdom.
Rulings: Texts that express the Shari'a and state the status or obligations.
The general purposes of the Sharia and the wisdom of rulings: texts that do not express the ruling and the law, but rather express the general purposes of the Sharia or the wisdom of rulings. <ref>Alidoust, "Jurisprudence and objectives of Sharia law".</ref>
==  Claims and Evidence ==
=== The need to simultaneously pay attention to both applications of reason in inference ===
 
Based on what is stated in the book of Jurisprudence and Reason, in a general division, the use of reason in deriving the ruling can be divided into two independent and non-independent categories:
 
* Independent: In this application, reason is an independent source of the Quran and Narration. When reason finds it definitely expedient, it can be considered obligatory by religion, and on the other hand, by recognizing the definite corruption of reason, it can be declared unlawful by religion.
 
* Non-independent: In this application, the reason is at the service of other sources and is a tool that can be used to deduce the religious ruling from sources such as the Qur'an and Narration. For example, the jurist takes help from his reason when faced with the "leader of prayer" and obtains the sharia obligation of prayer from the appearance of the command form in the obligation and the evidence of appearances (p. 24-25).
* 
=== Opposing the obedience of all the rulings of real interests and corruptions ===
According to him, examining the issue of following rulings from the real benefits and corruptions is not so difficult from the point of view of reason. Because the certain reason knows that religion and Sharia have sacred and real goals that can be seen in the form of expediency and corruption. However, before the judgment is assigned to a matter, it is not necessary that there be expediency or corruption in it, because it is possible only There should be an expedient ruling in the legislation (p. 106-107).
=== Reasons and evidence of the rule of compliance with real interests and corruptions ===
In his book Jurisprudence and Reason, Alidoust has stated some of the Qur'anic verses and the traditions of the innocents in the direction of following the rulings from the real interests and corruptions. He has also stated evidence against it. Among these, according to the Holy Qur'an, the law of prayer is based on a real expediency and in the direction of preventing them from doing ugly and obscene things, on the one hand. In the Holy Qur'an, the reason for banning certain foods on the Jews was to punish them for their obscene deeds, not because there has been corruption in eating those foods, on the other hand. He also referred to a tradition of Imam Sadiq (PBUH), according to which whatever God has forbidden or commanded has a divine test (p. 108-111).
=== Explaining the meaning of obeying the rules of benefits and corruptions ===
After mentioning some problems with the famous theory of justice about expediency and expediency, Abulqasem Alidoust states that the rule of following rulings from expediency and expediency is not a well-known and accepted rule among late Shia fundamentalists. According to what is stated in the book of jurisprudence and reason, it is difficult to accept the following of rulings from the interests and corruptions of the past, and as a result, it should be said that rulings are sometimes due to expediency and corruption existing in the ruling, and sometimes due to the expediency hidden in the legislation and its implementation and it is obligatory (p. 118).
=== The concept and arguments rule of correlation between reason and law ===
The present book considers the rule of correlation between reason and law to be provable by rational and narrative reasons. In the chapter related to the rule of correlation between reason and law, first of all, it defines the concept of this rule by explaining each of the terms, including ruling, rule of reason, and correlation between reason and law. Then, he examines the reasons that prove this rule. According to Alidoust, regarding the rule "All of us are ruled by the Sharia, the rule is by the reason" (whenever the Sharia rules on a subject, the reason also rules on it), it should be said that the reason is general, according to the understanding of the Sharia. He acknowledges the Shari’a rulings and issues judgments about them, but it is not the case that reason understands all the Shari’a rulings without paying attention to his words and rules accordingly (p. 119).
In order to strengthen his opinion, the book of jurisprudence and reason also states and answers the problems of the rule of correlation between reason and law. Among other things, by referring to the verse " And We will not punish until We send a messenger " (Isra', 15), he clarifies that contrary to the opinion of the claimants, this verse does not imply the negation of the rule. The claimants believe that the negation of punishment in the verse was stated after the sending of the prophets, and thus there is no room left for the understanding of reason. Alidoust believes that if a messenger was sent and used reason as a proof, and then someone opposed the verdict of reason, this the chastisement is after the sending of the messenger and therefore does not contradict the verse (p. 81).
=== Reasons and evidence ===
According to Alidoust, if we don't accept the rule of correlation between reason and law, the shari'a obligation of justice and the shari'a sanctity of injustice are not proven by understanding the goodness of justice and the ugliness of injustice by reason (p. 70). He also relies on the fact that "Alaf and Lam" in "Al-Aql" are "Alaf and Lam" of the genus, he believes that this rule includes the reason of everyone and it cannot be considered specific to the reason of some reasons or properties such as prophets and saints. (p. 71).
Abulqasem Alidoust then proved the rule of correlation between reason and law by relying on rational and narrative reasons. In the chapter on rational reason, he has stated that when the theoretical reason finds the connection between two matters such as the necessity of the preamble and the preamble to be correct and real, and finds an end to it, he considers the connection to be inevitable and believes that every wise legislator should distinguish between these two. (pp. 94-95)
In addition, according to the book, it is possible to use the reason of narration for the benefit of the rule of correlation between reason and law. Referring to religious texts and its incomplete induction leaves no doubt that the understanding of reason is proof. It is also proved by the implication of obligation, the connection between its understanding and the ruling of Shari’a. To strengthen his opinion, the book mentions three narrations as examples. Alidoust has also presented three narrations, based on which, the connection between the rule of reason and Sharia is proved by means of conformity and commitment (pp. 96-97).
=== Confusion in the words of opposing jurists ===
After explaining the major premise of the rule of correlation between reason and law, the book goes to the minor premise of rule of correlation between reason and law to clarify to what extent the reason can discover the meaning and reason of the rulings of Sharia. Alidoust mentions some examples of the fundamentalists who deny the principle of rule of correlation between reason and law to show that the opponents of the rule of rule of correlation between reason and law who believe that reason is absolutely unable to understand the meaning of rulings, have not fully adhered to this opinion. Finally, he concluded that the practice of jurists shows that, in short, reason is the source that they have made an inference. This means that the jurist has reached the criteria of the religious ruling with his reason and then derives the ruling (pp. 125-127); Some of these jurists are:
# In some cases, Seyyed Abulqasem Khoei considers it probable that the reason reaches the rulings and sometimes gives fatwas with trust in the reason. For example, regarding the permissibility or impermissibility of delaying the expiation of fasting, the delay is not permissible, unless he is sure that he will be able to perform it in the future. Then he considers reason as the only source of this ruling.
# Sheikh Ansari sometimes relied solely on reason in deriving the religious ruling. For example, when he wants to prove the permissibility of dealing with property that the owner did not allow, he considers small possessions of property belonging to others to be permissible as a definite ruling of reason.
== Pathology of inference using reason ==
In the fourth and last part of the book, together with the conclusion, it mentions the source of the harms in inference and then the harms of referring to reason and its application in the inference of Sharia rulings. It has been clarified that this process may cause abuse by the enemies of Sharia in the contemporary world and this illusion It showed that the Shari’a was limited to a certain time and place, and as a result, in the present era, the thoughts that fit the conditions of the new age should be replaced with the Sharia. In this regard, while paying attention to the origin of the harms related to the use of reason in inference, Alidoust has also listed examples of these harms.
=== The origin of harms in inference ===
The origin of the harm related to the use of reason in inference is divided into two categories; 1. unnecessary stagnation on words, and 2. Intellectualism and lack of devotion (pp. 226-227).
=== Harms of using reason in deriving rulings ===
In this context, the book mentions three harms that jurists should avoid:
Unreliable suspicion and Istihsan: The book of Jurisprudence and Reason considers approval to be the imposition of personal tastes in the name of reason and on the enemies of reason which should be avoided. For example, some researchers have been criticized for considering that the child is directly related to the mother and indirectly to the grandfather, and that the guardianship of the child after the death of the father is with the mother (p. 189).
Improper use of reason: To distinguish the subjects of rulings such as water and blood or instances of subjects such as absolute and added water, one must refer to custom, not reason (p. 190). Because there is a strong possibility that reason will make mistakes in recognizing things that are common in nature.
The mistake of the wisdom of the ruling with the subject of the ruling: According to Alidoust, every ruling has a subject on which the ruling is made, and it has a wisdom that is assigned to that subject because of that ruling. For example, prayer is the subject of the ruling on the obligation of prayer, and its wisdom is to prevent fornication and malevolence. Therefore, it is not possible to cancel the nature of the obligation of prayer and consider any act that prohibits fornication and malevolence as obligatory (pp. 191-192).
== refrences ==
# Alidoust, Abulqasem, "Jurisprudence capacities in a dream with contemporary world issues", Abolqasem Alidoust website, date of entry: August 7, 2016, visited date: December 2, 2021.
#  Alidoust, Abulqasem, "An approach for the production of Islamic humanities in the context of the interaction of jurisprudence with customs, reason and expediency", Abolqasem Alidoust website, November 12, 2018, December 2, 2021.
# Alidoust, Abolqasem, juriprudence and reason, 9th edition, Tehran, Islamic Culture and Thought Research Organization, 2016
== footnotes ==