Jurisprudence and reason (book)

(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)

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.

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.

Line 115:

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).

=== 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 abominations and evil deeds ~~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).

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 ===

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 132:

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.

=== 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).

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 ===

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).

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 ~~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.

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.

~~The mistake of~~ the wisdom of the ruling with the subject 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).

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 ==

@@ 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.
 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.
@@ Line 115: / 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).
 === 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 abominations and evil deeds 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).
+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 ===
 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 132: / 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.
 === 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).
+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 ===
 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).
+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 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.
+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.
-The mistake of the wisdom of the ruling with the subject 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).
+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}}

Jurisprudence and reason (book): Difference between revisions