Understanding the basics of the validity of the appropriate rule and the obstacle

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Department of Jurisprudence and Private Law, Tehran University of Shahid Motahari, Tehran, Iran.

2 Ph.D. student of Jurisprudence and Criminal Law, Tehran University of Shahid Motahari, Tehran, Iran. (Corresponding Author)

3 Master of Science in Islamic Jurisprudence and Law, Islamic Azad University, Shahr-e Ray Branch, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

“Appropriate rule and obstacle”, although it is more or less among the evidences of rulings, has been neglected and has not been addressed by some fundamentalists and jurists, and even in this category, “the appropriate rule and obstacle” has not been mentioned as a rule, but has been examined in the context of the issues that are mainly raised in the discussion of istishab. The main question of the current research is whether the rule of “Appropriate rule and obstacle” is valid and what are the evidences of its validity? Therefore, the present article intends to examine and analyze the authority of “the appropriate rule and the obstacle” and the rule of thumb. According to the findings of the research, the appropriate has an independent status and whenever it is said that the appropriate is achieved, that is, it is proven by its independent nature and will undoubtedly have its own requirement, but sometimes something prevents the proper effect, not prevents the proper effect. On the other hand, the obstacle is not always conditional for the proper effect, but it has an effect as an annoyance and an incident outside the proper status, but the condition of the appropriate requirement is not non-obstruction. For the legitimacy of this rule, important arguments indicate that the non-authority of the rule can not be simply stated, but on the contrary, it has been considered as a rule used by jurists and because it is more valuable than practical principles. Therefore, it should be addressed as a jurisprudential rule.

Keywords


  • Akhund Khorasani (Saheb Kefayeh), Mohammad Kazem ibn Hossein (1409 AH), Kefayah al-Osoul, Ch. 1, Qom: Al-Albayt Institute.
  • Ansari (Sheikh), Morteza ibn Mohammad Amin (1415 AH), Kitab al-Taharat, Vol. 1, Ch. 1, Qom: World Congress in honor of Sheikh Azam Ansari.
  • Ashtiani, Mohammad Hasan (1404 AH), Bahr Al-favaed fi Sharh e Al-faraed, Vol. 3, Qom: Ayatollah Marashi Najafi library Publication.
  • Ayazi, Seyyed Mohammad Ali (2007), The Bases for the Religious Precepts and the Ways to Explore them, Ch. 1, Qom: Research Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture.
  • Behbahani, Seyyed Ali (1405 AH), Al-favaed Al-elliyyah, 1, Ch. 2, Qom: Dar –al-Ilm.
  • Fallah, Mohammad; Zeraat, Abbas; Yazdian Jafari, Jafar (2022), The position of the "rule of causation" with other rules in construction crimes, Journal of Studies in Islamic Law & Jurisprudence, Issue. 26, pp. 225–256.
  • Helli (Mohaghegh), Ja'far ibn Hasan (1403 AH), Maarej Al-Osoul, Qom: Al-Albayt Institute.
  • Hosseini Rouhani, Seyyed Mohammad Sadiq (1412 AH), Zubdah Al-Osoul, Vol. 4, Ch. 1, Qom: Imam Sadiq Institute.
  • Iravani, Ali ibn Abd al-Hossein (1406 AH), Hashiyat Al-Makasib, Vol. 1, Ch. 1, Tehran: Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance.
  • Isfahani (Saheb Fosoul), Mohammad Hossein ibn Abdul Rahim (1404 AH), Al-Fosul Al-Gharaviya Fi Al-Osoul Al-Fiqhiyyah, Ch. 1, Qom: Dar Al-Ahya Al-Uloom Al-Islamiya.
  • Jazayeri, Seyyed Mohammad Ja'far (1415 AH), Montahi al-Derayat fi Tawzih al-kefayah, 7, Ch. 2, Qom: Dar al-Kitab Institute.
  • Mohaghegh Damad, Seyyed Mostafa (1406 AH), Rules of Jurisprudence, Vol. 1, Ch 12, Tehran: Islamic Science Publishing Center.
  • Mousavi Bojnurdi, Seyyed Mohammad Hasan (Bita), Montaha Al-Osoul, Vol. 2, Ch. 2, Qom: Basirati Publications.
  • Mousavi Khoei, Seyyed Abolghasem (1419 AH), Dirasat fi Ilm al-Osoul, Written by: Seyyed Ali Hashemi Shahroudi, Vol. 4, Ch. 1, Qom: Islamic Jurisprudence Encyclopedia.
  • Mousavi Khomeini (Imam), Seyyed Ruhollah (1423 AH), Al-Istishab, Ch. 2, Tehran: Orouj Institute.
  • Muzaffar (Allame), Mohammad Reza (Bita), Osoul Al-fighh, 1, Ch. 5, Qom: Ismailiyan Publications.
  • Naeini, Mirza Mohammad Hossein (1417 AH), Fawaed Al-Osoul, Written by: Mohammad Ali Kazemi Khorasani, Vol. 1 and 4, Ch. 6, Qom: Islamic Publications Office.
  • Najafi Iraqi, Abd Al-Nabi (Bita), Al-Taghrirat Al-Mosamma Be Al-Mohakemat Bain Al-Aelam, Written by: Sheikh Muslim Sarabi Tabrizi, 1, Qom: Qom Printing House.
  • Noroozi, Alireza; Haeri, Mohammad Hasan; Ghabooli Dorafshan, Seyyed Mohammad Taqi (2021), Analysis of Principles in Deploying Intellectual Rules in Jurisprudential Deduction, Journal of Studies in Islamic Law & Jurisprudence, Issue. 24, pp. 485–516.
  • Rouhi Barandagh, Mohammad; Fasih, Mansoura; Keikhay Farzaneh, Mohammad Amin (2016), Genealogy of Custom in Jurisprudence and National Law, Journal of Studies in Islamic Law & Jurisprudence, Issue. 15, pp. 201–224.
  • Saneizadeh, Ali (2005), Examining the validity of Istishab in the case of doubt in the appropriateness, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch, Faculty of Literature and Human Sciences.
  • Shubairi Zanjani, Seyyed Musa (1419 AH), Ketab Nekah, 3, Ch. 1, Qom: Research Institute of Ray Pardaz.
  • Sobhani, Ja’far (1430 AH), Rasael Fiqheyah, Vol. 5, Ch. 1, Qom: Imam Sadiq Institute.
  • Vaez Hosseini Behsudi, Seyyed Mohammad Soroor (1417 AH), Mesbah al-Osoul, Written by: Seyyed Abolghasem Mousavi Khoei, 2 and 3, Qom: Davari Publications.