خلاصة:
The Practice of Reasonable Persons is a universal behavior or mentality that, under identical circumstances and conditions, is adopted by erudite minds, regardless of their doctrinal and intellectual inclinations. This concept, which has gained a special status among scholars of the science of jurisprudence in the past two centuries, has sparked numerous discussions regarding its legitimacy and classifications. Among the foremost jurisprudents, discrepancies can be observed regarding the identification of instances of the Practice of Reasonable Persons. Understanding these instances must be considered as an inimitable simple task. This article aims to introduce and evaluate potential methodologies for identifying instances of the Practice of Reasonable Persons. Various approaches, such as referencing foreign legal systems, uniform and model laws, general principles of law, and the opinions of parliamentary representatives, have been scrutinized in this paper. Absolute rejection or endorsement of any one of these methods is a mistake. Instead, one can utilize the culmination of all these methods as a means to identify instances of Wisdom Praxis.
ملخص الجهاز:
Given the breadth of the science of jurisprudence and the existence of various considerations in the manner of citing rational consensus in deducing Sharia rulings, in this article, specifically, examples from the field of contract law _as a primary branch of declaratory rulings (ahkam imda'i)_ have been presented.
" (Nayini, 1406: 3/ 192) title exists, and the following points can be mentioned: Custom (Urf) is necessarily a behavior that has taken shape and been implemented among the general public, but rational consensus (Bina al-Uqala) may be hypothetical or may have taken shape in response of rational people to a scientific question.
For example, reason does not have a specific ruling regarding whether the transaction cost should be borne by the buyer or the seller, but at the same time, the custom of any place, time, or profession may have a different ruling; however, the ruling arising from rational consensus is not like this, but rather is based on thought or a scientific or theoretical foundation that causes rational people to exhibit the same behavior under identical conditions.
(Minni, 1395: 144) The mapping of various branches and the explanation of the difference between each hypothesis and another by the researcher Hill in Shara'i al-Islam, Sheikh Ansari in Makasib, or Sayyid Muhammad Kazim Yazdi in al-Urwa al-Wuthqa has caused many jurists after them to express opinions regarding the aforementioned branches and propose new branches by using their books as a standard, thereby increasing the richness of the content; however, despite this, the issues and subjects of contract law possess great breadth and diversity.
(
, 
, 
)
