A Comparative Study of Tajarri from Muhaqeq Khorāsāni’s and Imam Khomeini’s Perspectives

Alimohammadi, Taher; Zarei, Mohammad Mehdi; Nazarpour, Hamzeh

doi:10.22034/jrj.2018.66145

A Comparative Study of Tajarri from Muhaqeq Khorāsāni’s and Imam Khomeini’s Perspectives

Document Type : Research (Normal Review)

Authors

¹ Associate Professor at Ilam University

² Assistant Professor at Mazandaran University

³ Ph.D. student of jurisprudence and the basics of Islamic law of Mazandaran University

10.22034/jrj.2018.66145

Abstract

Tajarri means disagreement with legal or intellectual proofs without any disagreement with the fact. Tajarri is among the subject that finds different entities based on the approach taken to it, but as this subject is discussed in the principle of jurisprudence, there might be different views and rulings by the Osūli scholars on that. Muhaqeq Khorāsāni maintains that tajjari is illegal and the one who does so deserves punishment. To support his claim, he mentions some proofs and believes that the motejarri is obliged to do so and Muhaqeq examines the arbitrariness of freewill and determination and he also studies the dimensions of human’s proximity and distance to his lord to shed more lights on this issue. On the contrary to what Muhaqeq has mentioned, having examined the nature of tajarri, Imam Khomeini is of the opinion that motejarri has committed no illegal act and does not deserve any punishment. Thus, he has criticized Muhaqeq by proposing this criterion. Deploying a descriptive-analytical method, the authors have approved the jurisprudential nature
of tajarri and approved that Imam Khomeini’s approach to this issue is more authentic on his dispute with Muhaqeq Khorāsāni.
Key words: Tajarri, freewill, authority, multiplicity of punishments, Muhaqeq Khorāsāni, Imam Khomeini

Keywords

Main Subjects

Practical Principles and Jurisprudential Evidences

Article Title [العربیة]

قراءة نقدیة فی رؤیة المحقق الخراسانی عن التجری علی أساس آراء الإمام الخمینی ره

Abstract [العربیة]

التجری‌هو‌مخالفة‌الحجة‌الشرعیة‌أو‌العقلیة‌دون‌مخالفة‌الواقع وهو‌من‌المسائل‌التی‌لها‌ماهیة‌مختلفة‌ ً اعتمادا‌علی‌طبیعة‌النظر‌الیها،‌لکن‌بما‌أنها‌
ُیتطرق‌إلیها‌فی‌علم‌أصول‌الفقه،‌فقد‌اختلف‌الاصولیون‌فی‌حکمها.
فقد‌یری‌المحقق‌الخراسانی‌ بحرمته‌واستحقاق‌العقاب‌لمن‌ارتکبه‌ ً استنادا‌بأدلة‌
متعددة.‌ویشیر‌إلی‌المباحث‌الدخیلة‌والمرتبطة‌فی‌هذا‌البحث‌کمسألة‌عدم‌اختیاریة‌
الفعل‌المتجری،‌دراســـة‌اختیاریة‌مسألة‌الإرادة‌أو‌عدمها،‌وکذلک‌دراسة‌مسألة‌قرب‌
الإنسان‌أو‌بعده‌عن‌ساحة‌المولی‌.
وعلی‌النقیض‌من‌هذا‌الرأی،‌یری‌الإمام‌الخمینی‌بعد‌التدقیق‌فی‌ماهیة‌التجری،‌
بعدم‌حرمة‌التجری‌وعدم‌استحقاق‌العذاب‌للفرد‌المتجری،‌منتقدا‌بذلک‌رأی‌المحقق‌
الخراسانی‌فی‌المسألة.
یؤید‌المقالی‌فی‌دراسته‌هذه‌التی‌کتبها‌بطریقة‌توصیفیة‌–‌تحلیلیة،‌صحة‌رأی‌الإمام‌
الخمینی‌وإمعانه‌فی‌المسألة،‌مع‌قبوله‌بأن‌ماهیة‌التجری‌فقهیة‌ولا‌الصولیة.

Keywords [العربیة]