نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
سطح چهار حوزه علمیه، دکترای فقه از جامعة المصطفی، قم، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
This article examines the foundations of divergent opinions among Shiite jurists. Employing an analytical-deductive approach, it treats this phenomenon not as a flaw, but as a factor for dynamism, intellectual richness, and the flexibility of jurisprudence (Fiqh) in addressing contemporary issues and governmental crises. While emphasizing the unity of the sources of legal deduction (Ijtihad), the present study traces the primary causes of disagreement to varying levels of understanding and interpretation of Sharia texts. It further elucidates the religious authority (Hujjiyyah) of a Mujtahid’s opinion for himself and his followers (Muqallids). Finally, by highlighting the role of "Shadh" (rare) fatwas throughout different historical eras, it analyzes the capacity of these opinions to guide the Islamic system out of complex contemporary deadlocks. The central question is: what functions can rare fatwas and the divergence of legal opinions serve within the jurisprudential framework and, consequently, within the system of Islamic governance? The key finding of this article is that both the plurality of legal opinions and the emergence of rare (Shadh) views represent a jurisprudential opportunity rather than a threat. Under the framework of the Wilayah system, these can serve as primary resources for generating solutions to overcome governmental crises. "Shadh" fatwas from various historical periods of jurisprudence can function as innovative mechanisms for addressing complex administrative deadlocks in the modern era.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)