نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری رشته فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی دانشگاه فردوسی دانشکده الهیات گروه آموزشی فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی
2 عضو هیئت علمی دانشگاه فردوسی
3 دانشیار دانشگاه فردوسی
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Abstract
One of the most widespread areas of disagreement among jurists is the difference of views in recognizing jurisprudential issues. This difference in the recognition of transaction issues has manifested itself in various ways and in various positions, including the issue of liquidity of issues.
Relying on a descriptive analytical-exploratory method, this paper examines how and why the jurists disagree on the issue of solubility. Despite the fact that the conventionality of the subject is the maximum agreed upon, but the views in identifying the role and judgment of custom are different and this difference has led to not reaching a precise definition of the subject and in the next step to the differences of jurists in deriving the Shari'a ruling. In the meantime, the angle of view through the text of the text has not been neglected by some. The result of the research is that the field of jurisprudential thematics does not contain acceptable achievements and some reflections are made on the performance of jurists, and of course identifying the areas of dispute and its origins helps to reduce the volume of differences and reach common results.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)