نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران.
2 دانشیار، گروه فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران.
3 استاد، گروه فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
This comparative study examines the pivotal role of the "Definite Core" (Qaṭʿ al-Mūṭmin) in deducing rulings on acts of worship from the perspectives of Muḥaqqiq Nāʾīnī and Ṣāḥib al-Jawāhir. Nāʾīnī, with his principled (Uṣūlī) approach, argues that the "Definite Core" restricts the expansion of textual evidence only in cases of "linguistic specification" (inṣirāf lafẓī). Otherwise, one can rely on the "absolute meaning" (iṭlāq) to extend the scope of a ruling. In contrast, Ṣāḥib al-Jawāhir, prioritizing "caution in worship" (iḥtiyāṭ fī al-ʿibādāt) and an inductive jurisprudential approach, holds that the mere existence of a "Definite Core" in communicative discourse prevents reliance on the absolute meaning, thus confining rulings to matters of certainty.
This divergence manifests in practical issues such as the method of performing dry ablution (tayammum) and the scope of ritual purity (ṭahārah) evidence. It demonstrates that choosing between these two frameworks directly impacts the outcome of legal deduction, determining whether rulings on acts of worship are broadened or restricted.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)