عنوان مقاله [English]
There are disagreements about the issue of the “liability of human lost interests” in Imamiyyah jurisprudence, despite the consensus of the majority of jurists on the principle of the necessity of compensating for unjust losses and its reasonableness, which can be rooted in the difference between the approach of jurists in the jurisprudential principles of “liability”. Therefore, one of the remarkable jurisprudential proofs (evidence) of the necessity of compensation (liability) is the rule of “prohibition of detriment (Arabic: لا ضَرَرَ, principle of harm)”, which has been accepted by a number of jurists, especially a group of Imami jurists. The question of this research is whether it is possible to consider “the necessity of compensating for the loss caused by the lost interests of human” within the rule of the “prohibition of detriment” and the jurisprudential views about it? There are two different jurisprudential views in this regard based on the findings of this study, which have been accomplished in descriptive-analytical method and by referring to reliable sources of jurisprudence. The authors, by defending the view of expanding the rule of “prohibition of detriment” and the evidence of reason, has proved the jurisprudential view that believes in the “liability of human lost interests”.