Jurisprudence and reason (book)

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 135:

Line 136:

=== 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.

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).

@@ 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 135: / Line 136: @@
 === 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.
 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).

Jurisprudence and reason (book): Difference between revisions