نوع مقاله : پژوهشی (داوری سریع)
نویسنده
استادیار گروه فقه سیاسی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی تهران و استاد سطوح عالی حوزه علمیه قم
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
One way to rationally question the validity of textual narration when deducing religious rulings is to challenge the interpretations of religious texts. To accurately uncover the legislator's intent, two approaches are essential: identifying the rationale behind Sharia rulings and determining the real subject matter with its specific limitations. This study employs a descriptive-analytical method to examine the foundations and implications of scholars' opinions on jurisprudence principles. It argues for rethinking the role of jurisprudential subjectology in ijtihad by comparing its potential for uncovering true subject matter with its capacity to identify the rationale behind rulings. The primary aim was to highlight how jurisprudential subjectology can enhance ijtihad. The findings reveal that discovering the rationale behind rulings, whether through rational analysis or customary understanding, faces significant challenges. In contrast, relying on customary understanding as a criterion for identifying true subjects, both in conceptual analysis and contextual interpretation (verbal, rational, or customary), offers greater potential for accurately interpreting religious texts. This underscores the need to reassess and elevate the position of jurisprudential subjectology in ijtihad.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)