عنوان مقاله [English]
Principle of no Harm is one the most important and useful principles in deducing precepts. Likewise other scholar, Akhund has discussed this principle in Kifayeh. This study has criticized Kifayah’s author opinion about the well-known Principle of no Harm by emphasizing the spiritual seizure of the tradition. The author of the present paper believes that Akhund’s viewpoint in explaining the Principle of no Harm is in contradiction with literary and verbal principles, the jurisprudential effect influences on this principle, the linguists’ sayings, the scholars of rhetorics ideas, as well as the interpreters’ standpoints and their verbal manner. The conclusion shows that not only the does Principle of no Harm bear a kind of rhetorical succinctness, but also it demonstrates a developed skill of law setting, and unlike Akhund’s viewpoint, its two dependents of lā zarar and lā zerār bear two different meanings and are included among two jurisprudential effects under the title of positive and imperative rules.
Key words: Principle of no Harm, irony, Akhund-e Khorasani, positive rule, imperative rule.