A Comparative Survey of the Conflict between Principle and Apparent Condition in Imāmiyah versus ‘Āmmah Fiqh

Subject Areas : فقه و مبانی حقوق

mahdi abdar esfahani ¹ (Department of Theology, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran)
ehsan aliakbari ² (Department of Theology, Faculty of Ahl al-Bayt, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran)
mohammad ali heidari ³ (Department of Theology, Najafabad Azad University. Najaf Abad. ایران)

Received: 2021-02-08 Accepted : 2021-04-18 Published : 2021-09-23

Keywords: Circumstantial Condition, Conflict, Apparent Condition, Expansion, principle, ‘Āmmah Fiqh, Imāmiyah Fiqh, Hinderance, Absolute Hunch,

Abstract :

The purpose of the present study is the comparative survey of the conflictic between principle and apparent condition from the view of Imāmiyah versus Sunni jurists. The method of study is descriptive-analytic and it aims to find an answer for this question: In the conflict between principle and apparent condition in Islamic sects, does the first or the latter overrule? Considering different theories from Islamic jurists regarding the priority of either principle or apparent condition, this study has attempted to state the best theory through logical reasoning in this conflict. The main problem in this research is to reach the point that if apparent in apparent condition denotes circumstances and situations, it would not have the potency to overrule the principle because it is the evidence of absolute hunch and so apparent condition is left behind unless that is recognized as valid by religion. Thus, the view of some Shi’ite and Sunni jurists denoting the priority of apparent condition, in terms of expansion and justification of conjecture is nullified. The results indicate that most of Islamic jurists maintain principle overrules apparent condition although some scholars of the religious sects, based on the theory of hindrance, give priority to apparent circumstances.