Document Details

Document Type : Thesis 
Document Title :
The impact of fundamental differences in the study of legitimate judgment of variances between the jurists (Islamic Religious Scholars)
أثر الفروق الأصولية في مبحث الحكم الشرعي في اختلاف الفقهاء
 
Subject : Faculty of Arts - Department of Islamic law and Studies 
Document Language : Arabic 
Abstract : This study is considered a fundamental juristic research (an applied theory). It aims to highlight the fundamental differences in the topic of legitimate ruling, which had been a cause for differences among scholars. It also presents a number of juristic issues where the debate based on such fundamental differences is highlighted. This study includes a preamble, an introduction, three chapters, conclusion and references. The preamble of this study provides the causes of differences among juristic scholars. Chapter I provides definition of the science of fundamental differences as well as the juristic ruling. Chapter II highlights the fundamental differences in the assignment ruling and its impact over differences among juristic scholars. Chapter II includes four topics. The First topic handles the difference between ordinance and obligation and its impact over the differences among juristic scholars. Several issues such as Opening of Glorification (Takbirat Al-Ihram), Prayer of the Two Feasts, and the Sacrifice have been presented in the second claim. The second topic has shed light on the difference between widen and tightened obligation and its impact over the differences among juristic scholars. Two issues – namely, preference between Al-Taghlees and Al-Issfar in the Dawn Prayer; performance of missed prayer by the woman who menstruated upon prayer time have also been presented in the second claim. The third topic highlights the difference between physical obligations and financial ones and its impact over the differences among juristic scholars. Several issues such as damage of origin after elapse of a year, delegation in pilgrimage (Hajj) have also been tackled in the second claim. The fourth topic handles the difference between the self-prohibited and that prohibited for other and its impact over the differences among juristic scholars. Several issues such as sale of sample and marriage of Al-Muhallal (time-fixed marriage) have been tackled in the second claim. Chapter III handles the fundamental differences in the positivistic ruling and its impact over the differences in juristic scholars. Chapter III provides two topics. The first topic highlights the difference between nullity and corruptness and its impact over differences among juristic scholars. Two issues have been presented in the second claim as follows: the ruling of fastening Al-Tashreeq Days and the prohibited sales. The second topic provides difference between the license and the permanent ruling unlike the common and its impact over differences among juristic scholars. Two issues have been provided in the second claim as follows: sale of stripped palms and father’s restoration of the donation given to his son. Approach of the Study: In this study, reliance has been made on stating the fundamental differences compared to the main fundamental sources. Also, the study has employed a number of special sources with respect to the differences and contemporary references. The study has also been committed to mention the differences at all four doctrines through referring to the accredited sources in each and every doctrine alongside with commitment to the chronological order of doctrines. The study has also been limited to mention the fundamental differences in the topic of ruling that had been considered a cause for differences among juristic scholars. The study has provided juristic issues in each and every topic, where the debate raised on basis of fundamental differences is highlighted. Evidences related to the topic of study has also been mentioned without conducting any probe into the rest of evidences. Findings of the Study: This study highlights the importance of science of fundamental differences since it helps the learner manage accurately understand the fundamentals of jurisprudence; and further improve the faculty of ruling inference. Differences among juristic scholars are based on academic principles and inference approaches. Fundamental differences are considered one of the causes affecting differences among juristic scholar. Recommendations: The researcher recommends attention be given to researches concerned with fundamental differences. The culture concerned with necessity for evaluating scholars and juristic scholars shall be enhanced and further improved. Also, differences among juristic scholars shall be evaluated on academic basis. 
Supervisor : prof.Samyh Abdalla Bokhary 
Thesis Type : Master Thesis 
Publishing Year : 1437 AH
2016 AD 
Added Date : Monday, May 2, 2016 

Researchers

Researcher Name (Arabic)Researcher Name (English)Researcher TypeDr GradeEmail
سمية عدنان كعكيKaki, Somaiyh AdnanResearcherMaster 

Files

File NameTypeDescription
 38790.pdf pdf 

Back To Researches Page