Islamic Propagation Office of Qom Seminary, Khorasan Razavi Branch Journal of Islamic Law and Jurisprudence 2476-7565 11 2 2025 08 23 Evaluation of the verbal documentation of the rule of non-existence of the event from the verdict Evaluation of the verbal documentation of the rule of non-existence of the event from the verdict 7 32 77302 10.22034/jrj.2025.70598.2926 FA Seyyed Mojtaba Mirdamadi Assistant Professor, Faculty of Education and Islamic Thought, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran AmirMohammad Zanganeh Zave Fourth-Level Student Jurisprudence and Principles, Qom Seminary, Qom, Iran. Journal Article 2025 01 18 Rational evidence consistently influences the semantic interpretation of textual sources. Consequently, an awareness of the historical context in which <em>ḥadīth</em> were issued, as well as the prevailing social conditions, can provide critical insight for accurately understanding narrations. Some scholars, emphasizing the role of transmission contexts, argue that Sunnī jurisprudential doctrines influenced the formation of Imāmī narrations, thereby framing Imāmī jurisprudence as a derivative commentary on Sunnī jurisprudence. Conversely, others entirely reject the notion that Sunnī thought shaped the interpretation of Shīʿah traditions.<br />This study employs an analytical-critical methodology, examining textual sources and expert opinions to demonstrate that neither of these two positions is entirely defensible. Historical evidence, along with the practical approaches of jurists throughout Islamic legal history—reflecting their established intellectual traditions—suggests that recourse to Sunnī jurisprudence is necessary only in cases where an Imāmī narration is ambiguous or excessively concise, and where such reference may resolve interpretive difficulties. However, when a narration possesses an independent and coherent apparent meaning (<em>ẓāhir</em>), external reference becomes unnecessary. This perspective is grounded in the principle recognized by rational thinkers (<em>ʿuqalāʾ</em>) that the mere possibility of an alternative interpretation does not invalidate the prima facie meaning of a text. Rational evidence consistently influences the semantic interpretation of textual sources. Consequently, an awareness of the historical context in which <em>ḥadīth</em> were issued, as well as the prevailing social conditions, can provide critical insight for accurately understanding narrations. Some scholars, emphasizing the role of transmission contexts, argue that Sunnī jurisprudential doctrines influenced the formation of Imāmī narrations, thereby framing Imāmī jurisprudence as a derivative commentary on Sunnī jurisprudence. Conversely, others entirely reject the notion that Sunnī thought shaped the interpretation of Shīʿah traditions.<br />This study employs an analytical-critical methodology, examining textual sources and expert opinions to demonstrate that neither of these two positions is entirely defensible. Historical evidence, along with the practical approaches of jurists throughout Islamic legal history—reflecting their established intellectual traditions—suggests that recourse to Sunnī jurisprudence is necessary only in cases where an Imāmī narration is ambiguous or excessively concise, and where such reference may resolve interpretive difficulties. However, when a narration possesses an independent and coherent apparent meaning (<em>ẓāhir</em>), external reference becomes unnecessary. This perspective is grounded in the principle recognized by rational thinkers (<em>ʿuqalāʾ</em>) that the mere possibility of an alternative interpretation does not invalidate the prima facie meaning of a text. http://jostar-fiqh.maalem.ir/article_77302_c8bb4095c636aa64060531e924ee5b70.pdf