Jurisprudence and reason (book): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| (17 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
The book Jurisprudence and Reason (in persian: [https://ency.feqhemoaser.com/fa/view/%D9%81%D9%82%D9%87_%D9%88_%D8%B9%D9%82%D9%84_(%DA%A9%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%A8) فقه و عقل]) written by [[Abulqasem Alidoost|Abolqassem Alidoost]], 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 scholars of Usul al-fiqh, Abolqassem Alidoost has accepted the rule of interdependence between the rule of reason and the rule of Sharia. | The book Jurisprudence and Reason (in persian: [https://ency.feqhemoaser.com/fa/view/%D9%81%D9%82%D9%87_%D9%88_%D8%B9%D9%82%D9%84_(%DA%A9%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%A8) فقه و عقل]) written by [[Abulqasem Alidoost|Abolqassem Alidoost]], 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 scholars of Usul al-fiqh, Abolqassem Alidoost has accepted the rule of interdependence between the rule of reason and the rule of Sharia. | ||
According to Abolqassem Alidoost, a professor of Advanced Jurisprudence (Kharij) and Usul al-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 Abolqassem Alidoost, a professor of Advanced Jurisprudence (Kharij) and Usul al-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, Abolqassem Alidoost believes that neglecting the purposes of the Sharia in deriving rulings causes fatwas to become invalid. | 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, Abolqassem Alidoost believes that neglecting the purposes of the Sharia in deriving rulings causes fatwas to become invalid. | ||
| Line 58: | Line 59: | ||
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. | 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, Abolqassem Alidoost 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 Abulqasem Alidoost", Abulqasem Alidoost website.</ref>. | Besides authoring works that show he pays attention to contemporary jurisprudence issues, Abolqassem Alidoost 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 Abulqasem Alidoost", Abulqasem Alidoost website.</ref>. | ||
| Line 72: | Line 75: | ||
In addition to the preface and the introduction, the book of jurisprudence and reason has four chapters and a conclusion, which are as follows: | 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 ( | 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 (theology, 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 (husn) and ugliness (qubh)]] have been examined. | ||
2. The independent [[ | |||
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 | 2. The independent [[use of reason in deriving the rulings of Sharia]]: In this chapter, the [[principle of interdependence]] between the ruling of reason and the ruling of Sharia is described in two chapters; In the first chapter, the [[principle of interdependence at the macro level]] have been proven and the intended meaning of Abolqassem Alidoost has been clarified. On the other hand, in the second chapter, the principle at the micro level 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 [[rational innocence]] and [[rational precaution]], and the explanation of the ruling of reason in events without a ruling and unknown events, while discussing the two theories of the [[repugnance of punishment without warning (qubh al-'iqab bila bayan)]] and the [[right of obedience (haqq al-ta'ah)]]. 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. | 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 | 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 occultation (ghaybah)]] and avoiding harm have been stated. | ||
== Principles and Assumptions == | == Principles and Assumptions == | ||
=== The need to pay attention to the | === The need to pay attention to the fundamental boundaries of conventional ijtihad === | ||
According to Abolqassem Alidoost, 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). | According to Abolqassem Alidoost, 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 === | === Characteristics of appropriate inference === | ||
| Line 95: | Line 103: | ||
Rulings: Texts that express the Shari'a and state the status or obligations. | 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>Abulqasem Alidoost, "Jurisprudence and objectives of Sharia law".</ref> | 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>Abulqasem Alidoost, "Jurisprudence and objectives of Sharia law".</ref> | ||
== Claims and Evidence == | == Claims and Evidence == | ||
=== The need to simultaneously pay attention to both applications of reason in inference === | === The need to simultaneously pay attention to both applications of reason in inference === | ||
| Line 107: | Line 116: | ||
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). | 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 === | === Reasons and evidence of the rule of compliance with real interests and corruptions === | ||
In his book Jurisprudence and Reason, Abolqassem Alidoost 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 | In his book Jurisprudence and Reason, Abolqassem Alidoost 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 abominations and evil deeds, on the one hand. In the Holy Qur'an, the reason for banning certain foods upon 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 === | === 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, Abolqassem Alidoost 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). | After mentioning some problems with the famous theory of justice about expediency and expediency, Abolqassem Alidoost 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). | ||
| Line 124: | Line 133: | ||
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, Abolqassem Alidoost has also listed examples of these harms. | 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, Abolqassem Alidoost has also listed examples of these harms. | ||
=== The origin of harms in inference === | === 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 | The origin of the harm related to the use of reason in inference is divided into two categories; 1. unnecessary rigidity concerning words, and 2. Intellectualism and disengagement (pp. 226-227). | ||
=== Harms of using reason in deriving rulings === | === Harms of using reason in deriving rulings === | ||
In this context, the book mentions three harms that jurists should avoid: | In this context, the book mentions three harms that jurists should avoid: | ||
unreliable conjecture (zann) 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 | Improper use of reason: To distinguish the subjects of rulings such as water and blood or instances of subjects such as pure water (mutlaq) and mixed water (mudaf), 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. | ||
confusing the wisdom (hikmah) of the ruling with the subject (mawdu') of the ruling: According to Abolqassem Alidoost, 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). | |||
== references == | == references == | ||
{{references}} | {{references}} | ||