• Special Look
  • 428
  • 0

This is ‘fiqh’, what are we doing ?! Seyed Javad Varieh

This is ‘fiqh’, what are we doing ?! Seyed Javad Varieh

During jurisprudence studies, I came across a phrase by Sheikh al-Tusi of the famous Shiite jurisprudents about the “realm of authority” and its related topics, and it is a pity that those interested in such topics would not benefit from it.

  It should be remembered as an introduction that it is one of the arguments of our jurisprudence that, in every field and territory forged by the Almighty God, the guardianship is on the orbit of the ‘Moli’ah expediency. No province has been falsified without credentials against it. The father-and-son guardianship of the child, the guardianship of the guardianship of the guardianship of the child, the guardianship of the minor guardian’s property, the infallible guardianship of his or her community and so on, are all forged within its borders. The Almighty God has not forged any of his servants even the Prophet Khatam with unlimited authority, but has put “public interest” in the province.

  The Islamic Revolution of Iran, which led to the establishment of the Islamic Republic, was based on Islamic principles and jurisprudential rulings. Attempting to abide by the definitive jurisprudential standards and guarantees of “securing the rights of the people” is a prerequisite for the success of the religious system and for its greater influence in the hearts of the people. Addressing this issue on the anniversary of the victory of the revolution and the establishment of the Islamic system is a vital reminder. Neglecting the rights, interests, and interests of the people will lead to a military defeat that has paid a heavy price for its deployment. Sometimes it is necessary to renounce the rights of the state in order to secure the rights of the people and to satisfy them, although the interests of the system are always in the interests of the rights and interests of the people.

  Territory of Authority
  With this introduction, we now quote a phrase from Sheikh al-Ta’ifah, a jurist of the fifth century, who has been considered the founder of the Najaf seminary at Ashraf, and whose position has been at least one hundred years on the history of Shi’a jurisprudence and afterlife. Shadows were cast, calling this period “the era of imitation.” His interpretive, hadith, theological and jurisprudential works are still in use not only in the fields of Shiite theology but also among the Sunnis after thousands of years.

  In his famous work “Extensive”, he has proposed a jurisprudential question and explained its implications. The question is:
• What if a person makes a well and a human or animal falls and dies in it? Its multiple assumptions need to be considered separately. “So, digging the barracks for the sake of the people, and for the sake of the fate, the view”

  The first premise:
  If the well is cut in narrow but narrow passageways, the person is the guarantor and must pay for the blood and damages. It does not matter whether he has excavated with or without the permission of the Imam of the community (responsible government bodies); and he cannot excuse himself if he has been permitted to excavate. The legal institutions of the “liability” government do not allow damages. Because the government cannot allow doing anything to put people in distress and harm them. “Fama surely Fi cavities through the Muslim mind, van Kan verbal After Zyqa roads, cardboard or other Znh Imam Bazin Sva’ sockets, nests La terrier Alazn solicitorship Fierro restriction on Muslim and join me Alzrr”

  The second assumption:
  If the well is dug in a passage of people that is large enough and does not put people in the straits of traffic, and with the intention of serving the people and with the permission of the Imam of the community (legal institutions) also drilled the well. , No guarantor. Because the government can approve such actions without putting people in a straitjacket and harming them. “And Kahn roads Vasa La Yzyq Ali Muslim cavities, and Yqsd Muslim interest cost, van Kan Imam Fela guarantee against Bazin, Lan Llamam lodging it Yazn us Llmslmyn Fierro profit, non-infliction I glued together and restriction peace”

third assumption:
In the second assumption, it is guaranteed to dig a well without the permission of the Imam of the society (the legal institutions of the government), and the aim is to own the well. Because people’s rights have been violated, no one can own public places. “And the sockets, except by permission of Imam Frames acquisition plans and move Balhfr Le Malka, verbal aggression After Balhfr nest and lay terrier to generate Lan La terrier lodging it through the Muslim Ytmlk, Fakkan against bail”

  criteria in terms Sheikh in assumptions Above, there is a lot of public activity and action taken by various agencies, and it answers many questions that arise. Including:

1. What is the scope of government’s authority? In principle, the authority of government is in the realm of public interest, and should not be harmed by the decisions of the government or put under pressure. From his point of view, governments can, within a range of social and economic activities, allow people to be in trouble and not harm them. The permissibility of such consequences is ineffective. And no one can claim responsibility for the damage done to the people by such permission. It is clear from the Sheikh’s statement that the affirmation of the guarantee is not limited to the “fault” assumption;

  On this basis, can government agencies, ministries, departments, city councils and municipalities be allowed to issue permits for example building in cities and in many cases harassing, damaging and degrading neighbors’ rights? Can laws and regulations be issued that authorize the construction of towers and skyscrapers that are harmful to the many citizens living around them? Can we issue a license that violates the rights and privacy of citizens?

  Is it possible to neglect the rights of citizens, put them under pressure, and grant them licenses simply by making money on an economic project for a government entity proposed by an individual or a corporation? Can government agencies define monopolies for themselves or their like-minded streams or issue licenses to companies and individuals that result in losses to or even disadvantage in their activities? Do many of the actions taken today by the Islamic community in law-enforcement agencies but at the expense of the people or at least restrict their powers and freedoms in various social, economic, cultural, and political spheres? Is it fiqh ?!

  Of course, those laws, regulations, and measures that are put in place to provide the public good may be at the expense of a group of people because of the overriding interests and interests of the public. It does, but it still has to be compensated for the damage it has done to the people.  

2. Even if the government has given permission to someone within its jurisdiction, (in the second assumption), although a person who has inflicted further losses without indulgence in his act is not a guarantor, but on the basis of jurisprudential rules, the government In such cases it is the guarantor. The loss of life and personal property of the victim cannot be assumed to be the same. Sheikh al-Tusi’s statement also refers to the affirmation and non-affirmation of a person who drilled a well, and in some cases negates the responsibility of the government.

3. Public places and national resources belong to all peoples and no one has the right to own and own property. Nor can the government provide what is public to the people without standards

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *