Jurisprudence and Law (book)

(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)

Line 70:

===Types of relationship between jurisprudence and law===

The examination of different forms of the relationship between [[jurisprudence]] and [[law]] was done by [[Khaled al-Ghafouri]], a member of the academic staff of [[Al-Mustafa International University|Al-Mustafa University]] and the editor-in-chief of the [[Ahl al-Bayt Jurisprudence Quarterly]], and by [[Ahmad Moballeghi]], a lecturer of [[Kharij Fiqh|Karej Feqh]] and [[Usul al-fiqh|Osoul]]. In the article "Is it necessary for the law to be in accordance with [[jurisprudence]] or is it sufficient not to disagree with it?", [[Khaled al-Ghafouri]] refers to three forms of complete compliance (p. 168), non-conflict (p. 170) and harmony between [[jurisprudence]] and law (p. 173). After examining the problems and answering them in all three forms, he accepts the relationship of coordination (p. 185).

The examination of different forms of the relationship between jurisprudence and [[law]] was done by [[Khaled al-Ghafouri]], a member of the academic staff of [[Al-Mustafa International University|Al-Mustafa University]] and the editor-in-chief of the [[Ahl al-Bayt Jurisprudence Quarterly]], and by [[Ahmad Moballeghi]], a lecturer of [[Kharij Fiqh|Karej Feqh]] and [[Usul al-fiqh|Osoul]]. In the article "Is it necessary for the law to be in accordance with jurisprudence or is it sufficient not to disagree with it?", [[Khaled al-Ghafouri]] refers to three forms of complete compliance (p. 168), non-conflict (p. 170) and harmony between jurisprudence and law (p. 173). After examining the problems and answering them in all three forms, he accepts the relationship of coordination (p. 185).

By extracting the concepts found in [[jurisprudence]] books, [[Ahmad Moballeghi]] achieves six types of relationship between [[jurisprudence]] and [[law]], which extends from the originality of jurisprudence to the originality of law. Law being a vessel for [[jurisprudence]], the union and annihilation of [[jurisprudence]] and law in each other, determination of limits and boundaries by [[jurisprudence]], [[jurisprudence]] as the spirit of law, [[jurisprudence]] as a source of law, and the guarantee of [[jurisprudence]] in law are among these relationships (pp. 197-192).

By extracting the concepts found in jurisprudence books, [[Ahmad Moballeghi]] achieves six types of relationship between jurisprudence and [[law]], which extends from the originality of jurisprudence to the originality of law. Law being a vessel for jurisprudence, the union and annihilation of jurisprudence and law in each other, determination of limits and boundaries by jurisprudence, jurisprudence as the spirit of law, jurisprudence as a source of law, and the guarantee of jurisprudence in law are among these relationships (pp. 197-192).

===Converting jurisprudence into law===

Line 79:

===The role of social interest in law===

According to [[Abdullah bin Hamoud al-Azzi]], [[Maslaha|jurisprudence of social expediency]] is effective in the two areas of [[legislation]] of jurisprudence and executive and formal [[legislation]] (p. 373-380). According to him, [[Maslaha|social expediency]] affects the formulation of law through general jurisprudential rules such as "[[Rule of no hardship|negation of hardship]]", "non-observance of [[Sharia]] rulings from real benefits and corruptions", and "observance of servants' duties from their interests" and... (p.359).

Also, according to [[Ahmad Hendi]], a professor at [[Alexandria University|Alexandria University in Egypt]], ~~[[Maslaha|~~expediency]] is the basis and criterion of everything, and the legislator must act on the basis of securing the interests of the people of the society in all laws. Therefore, it is expedient to approve or not to approve the circular law (p. 403-404). In the article "Social Interest in Executive Laws", he believes that all judicial actions must be beneficial in order to be accepted, and there is no difference between requesting these actions from a civil, criminal or administrative court (p. 404).

Also, according to [[Ahmad Hendi]], a professor at [[Alexandria University|Alexandria University in Egypt]], expediency is the basis and criterion of everything, and the legislator must act on the basis of securing the interests of the people of the society in all laws. Therefore, it is expedient to approve or not to approve the circular law (p. 403-404). In the article "Social Interest in Executive Laws", he believes that all judicial actions must be beneficial in order to be accepted, and there is no difference between requesting these actions from a civil, criminal or administrative court (p. 404).

===Variable materials, the axis of political laws===

Political rulings cannot have a fixed and unchangeable ruling due to their flexible nature in different time and place conditions, for this reason they left it to [[The Fourteen Infallibles|innocent Imam]] to issue rulings based on [[Maslaha|public interest]] (p. 399). This sentence is the main contention of [[Sayyid Javad Varai|Seyyed Javad Warei]], a member of the academic staff of the Seminary and University Research Institute, in the article "Variable Materials, the Axis of Political Laws". According to him, these matters do not have a fixed ruling, and when the [[Maslaha|public interests]] change, the rulings also change. He also points out to the several distinctions between the criterion [[Maslaha|expediency]] in [[Sharia]] rulings and the criterion ~~[[Maslaha|~~expediency]] in [[Governmental ruling|government rulings]] including: (a) The [[Maslaha|expediency]] of [[Sharia]] rulings is recognized by God, and the [[Maslaha|expediency]] of [[Governmental ruling|government rulings]] is recognized by the ruler of society; and (b)The ~~[[Maslaha|~~expediency]] of the first type is fixed and the ~~[[Maslaha|~~expediency]] of the second type is subject to different time conditions (p. 386).

Political rulings cannot have a fixed and unchangeable ruling due to their flexible nature in different time and place conditions, for this reason they left it to [[The Fourteen Infallibles|innocent Imam]] to issue rulings based on [[Maslaha|public interest]] (p. 399). This sentence is the main contention of [[Sayyid Javad Varai|Seyyed Javad Warei]], a member of the academic staff of the Seminary and University Research Institute, in the article "Variable Materials, the Axis of Political Laws". According to him, these matters do not have a fixed ruling, and when the [[Maslaha|public interests]] change, the rulings also change. He also points out to the several distinctions between the criterion [[Maslaha|expediency]] in [[Sharia]] rulings and the criterion expediency in [[Governmental ruling|government rulings]] including: (a) The [[Maslaha|expediency]] of [[Sharia]] rulings is recognized by God, and the [[Maslaha|expediency]] of [[Governmental ruling|government rulings]] is recognized by the ruler of society; and (b)The expediency of the first type is fixed and the expediency of the second type is subject to different time conditions (p. 386).

===Solving the problem of law and jurisprudence===

[[Seyfullah Sorami|Saifullah Sarami]], a faculty member of the scientific [[Research Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture]], believes that in the [[Islamic government]] and in the legislative process, the issue of [[jurisprudence]] and law has a fundamental problem. Because jurisprudential rulings have characteristics such as devotion and stability, and it is in contrast to law, it is temporary and can be revoked according to the conditions and requirements of time and place (p. 607). Accordingly, in order to solve this problem, we should go back to before the law was approved, explaining that we are faced with interests and interests at the legislative stage. On the other hand, securing the hereafter and worldly happiness of mankind depends on the compliance with the demands of [[Sharia]]. Now, if we can create a logical and valid combination between the purposes of [[legislation]] and the demands of [[Sharia]] law before approving the law, the approved law will also be the sum of them. In addition, the problem of the relationship between [[jurisprudence]] and the law will be solved before it arises so the approved law will be the answer. It is according to the demands of Islam and also responds to the needs of time and place (p. 623-624).

[[Seyfullah Sorami|Saifullah Sarami]], a faculty member of the scientific [[Research Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture]], believes that in the [[Islamic government]] and in the legislative process, the issue of jurisprudence and law has a fundamental problem. Because jurisprudential rulings have characteristics such as devotion and stability, and it is in contrast to law, it is temporary and can be revoked according to the conditions and requirements of time and place (p. 607). Accordingly, in order to solve this problem, we should go back to before the law was approved, explaining that we are faced with interests and interests at the legislative stage. On the other hand, securing the hereafter and worldly happiness of mankind depends on the compliance with the demands of [[Sharia]]. Now, if we can create a logical and valid combination between the purposes of [[legislation]] and the demands of Sharia law before approving the law, the approved law will also be the sum of them. In addition, the problem of the relationship between jurisprudence and the law will be solved before it arises so the approved law will be the answer. It is according to the demands of Islam and also responds to the needs of time and place (p. 623-624).

===Legislation in the Permissible Zone===

@@ Line 70: / Line 70: @@
 ===Types of relationship between jurisprudence and law===
-The examination of different forms of the relationship between [[jurisprudence]] and [[law]] was done by [[Khaled al-Ghafouri]], a member of the academic staff of [[Al-Mustafa International University|Al-Mustafa University]] and the editor-in-chief of the [[Ahl al-Bayt Jurisprudence Quarterly]], and by [[Ahmad Moballeghi]], a lecturer of [[Kharij Fiqh|Karej Feqh]] and [[Usul al-fiqh|Osoul]]. In the article "Is it necessary for the law to be in accordance with [[jurisprudence]] or is it sufficient not to disagree with it?", [[Khaled al-Ghafouri]] refers to three forms of complete compliance (p. 168), non-conflict (p. 170) and harmony between [[jurisprudence]] and law (p. 173). After examining the problems and answering them in all three forms, he accepts the relationship of coordination (p. 185).
+The examination of different forms of the relationship between jurisprudence and [[law]] was done by [[Khaled al-Ghafouri]], a member of the academic staff of [[Al-Mustafa International University|Al-Mustafa University]] and the editor-in-chief of the [[Ahl al-Bayt Jurisprudence Quarterly]], and by [[Ahmad Moballeghi]], a lecturer of [[Kharij Fiqh|Karej Feqh]] and [[Usul al-fiqh|Osoul]]. In the article "Is it necessary for the law to be in accordance with jurisprudence or is it sufficient not to disagree with it?", [[Khaled al-Ghafouri]] refers to three forms of complete compliance (p. 168), non-conflict (p. 170) and harmony between jurisprudence and law (p. 173). After examining the problems and answering them in all three forms, he accepts the relationship of coordination (p. 185).
-By extracting the concepts found in [[jurisprudence]] books, [[Ahmad Moballeghi]] achieves six types of relationship between [[jurisprudence]] and [[law]], which extends from the originality of jurisprudence to the originality of law. Law being a vessel for [[jurisprudence]], the union and annihilation of [[jurisprudence]] and law in each other, determination of limits and boundaries by [[jurisprudence]], [[jurisprudence]] as the spirit of law, [[jurisprudence]] as a source of law, and the guarantee of [[jurisprudence]] in law are among these relationships (pp. 197-192).
+By extracting the concepts found in jurisprudence books, [[Ahmad Moballeghi]] achieves six types of relationship between jurisprudence and [[law]], which extends from the originality of jurisprudence to the originality of law. Law being a vessel for jurisprudence, the union and annihilation of jurisprudence and law in each other, determination of limits and boundaries by jurisprudence, jurisprudence as the spirit of law, jurisprudence as a source of law, and the guarantee of jurisprudence in law are among these relationships (pp. 197-192).
 ===Converting jurisprudence into law===
@@ Line 79: / Line 79: @@
 ===The role of social interest in law===
 According to [[Abdullah bin Hamoud al-Azzi]], [[Maslaha|jurisprudence of social expediency]] is effective in the two areas of [[legislation]] of jurisprudence and executive and formal [[legislation]] (p. 373-380). According to him, [[Maslaha|social expediency]] affects the formulation of law through general jurisprudential rules such as "[[Rule of no hardship|negation of hardship]]", "non-observance of [[Sharia]] rulings from real benefits and corruptions", and "observance of servants' duties from their interests" and... (p.359).
-Also, according to [[Ahmad Hendi]], a professor at [[Alexandria University|Alexandria University in Egypt]], [[Maslaha|expediency]] is the basis and criterion of everything, and the legislator must act on the basis of securing the interests of the people of the society in all laws. Therefore, it is expedient to approve or not to approve the circular law (p. 403-404). In the article "Social Interest in Executive Laws", he believes that all judicial actions must be beneficial in order to be accepted, and there is no difference between requesting these actions from a civil, criminal or administrative court (p. 404).
+Also, according to [[Ahmad Hendi]], a professor at [[Alexandria University|Alexandria University in Egypt]], expediency is the basis and criterion of everything, and the legislator must act on the basis of securing the interests of the people of the society in all laws. Therefore, it is expedient to approve or not to approve the circular law (p. 403-404). In the article "Social Interest in Executive Laws", he believes that all judicial actions must be beneficial in order to be accepted, and there is no difference between requesting these actions from a civil, criminal or administrative court (p. 404).
 ===Variable materials, the axis of political laws===
-Political rulings cannot have a fixed and unchangeable ruling due to their flexible nature in different time and place conditions, for this reason they left it to [[The Fourteen Infallibles|innocent Imam]] to issue rulings based on [[Maslaha|public interest]] (p. 399). This sentence is the main contention of [[Sayyid Javad Varai|Seyyed Javad Warei]], a member of the academic staff of the Seminary and University Research Institute, in the article "Variable Materials, the Axis of Political Laws". According to him, these matters do not have a fixed ruling, and when the [[Maslaha|public interests]] change, the rulings also change. He also points out to the several distinctions between the criterion [[Maslaha|expediency]] in [[Sharia]] rulings and the criterion [[Maslaha|expediency]] in [[Governmental ruling|government rulings]] including: (a) The [[Maslaha|expediency]] of [[Sharia]] rulings is recognized by God, and the [[Maslaha|expediency]] of [[Governmental ruling|government rulings]] is recognized by the ruler of society; and (b)The [[Maslaha|expediency]] of the first type is fixed and the [[Maslaha|expediency]] of the second type is subject to different time conditions (p. 386).
+Political rulings cannot have a fixed and unchangeable ruling due to their flexible nature in different time and place conditions, for this reason they left it to [[The Fourteen Infallibles|innocent Imam]] to issue rulings based on [[Maslaha|public interest]] (p. 399). This sentence is the main contention of [[Sayyid Javad Varai|Seyyed Javad Warei]], a member of the academic staff of the Seminary and University Research Institute, in the article "Variable Materials, the Axis of Political Laws". According to him, these matters do not have a fixed ruling, and when the [[Maslaha|public interests]] change, the rulings also change. He also points out to the several distinctions between the criterion [[Maslaha|expediency]] in [[Sharia]] rulings and the criterion expediency in [[Governmental ruling|government rulings]] including: (a) The [[Maslaha|expediency]] of [[Sharia]] rulings is recognized by God, and the [[Maslaha|expediency]] of [[Governmental ruling|government rulings]] is recognized by the ruler of society; and (b)The expediency of the first type is fixed and the expediency of the second type is subject to different time conditions (p. 386).
 ===Solving the problem of law and jurisprudence===
-[[Seyfullah Sorami|Saifullah Sarami]], a faculty member of the scientific [[Research Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture]], believes that in the [[Islamic government]] and in the legislative process, the issue of [[jurisprudence]] and law has a fundamental problem. Because jurisprudential rulings have characteristics such as devotion and stability, and it is in contrast to law, it is temporary and can be revoked according to the conditions and requirements of time and place (p. 607). Accordingly, in order to solve this problem, we should go back to before the law was approved, explaining that we are faced with interests and interests at the legislative stage. On the other hand, securing the hereafter and worldly happiness of mankind depends on the compliance with the demands of [[Sharia]]. Now, if we can create a logical and valid combination between the purposes of [[legislation]] and the demands of [[Sharia]] law before approving the law, the approved law will also be the sum of them. In addition, the problem of the relationship between [[jurisprudence]] and the law will be solved before it arises so the approved law will be the answer. It is according to the demands of Islam and also responds to the needs of time and place (p. 623-624).
+[[Seyfullah Sorami|Saifullah Sarami]], a faculty member of the scientific [[Research Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture]], believes that in the [[Islamic government]] and in the legislative process, the issue of jurisprudence and law has a fundamental problem. Because jurisprudential rulings have characteristics such as devotion and stability, and it is in contrast to law, it is temporary and can be revoked according to the conditions and requirements of time and place (p. 607). Accordingly, in order to solve this problem, we should go back to before the law was approved, explaining that we are faced with interests and interests at the legislative stage. On the other hand, securing the hereafter and worldly happiness of mankind depends on the compliance with the demands of [[Sharia]]. Now, if we can create a logical and valid combination between the purposes of [[legislation]] and the demands of Sharia law before approving the law, the approved law will also be the sum of them. In addition, the problem of the relationship between jurisprudence and the law will be solved before it arises so the approved law will be the answer. It is according to the demands of Islam and also responds to the needs of time and place (p. 623-624).
 ===Legislation in the Permissible Zone===

Jurisprudence and Law (book): Difference between revisions