Abstract:
Judge’s own personal knowledge as one way of substantiation ofclaims has always been emphasized by all jurists especially Shiites onthe basis of some traditions none of which has implication enough inorder to prove that and some may even be used as a basis for lack ofauthority of such a knowledge. Thus, some jurists referred theknowledge in question to necessity of being knowledgeable of juristiccriteria of truth and justice and interpreted those traditions asconformity of trial with juristic criteria. Judge’s personal knowledge ischallenged by later Sunni jurists and in the Iranian juristic system isconsidered refutable through various legal ways which practicallyannounces unauthority of judge’s personal knowledge as a basis forjudgment. Judge’s knowledge of juristic criteria, however, remains anundeniable necessity for judgment
Machine summary:
162) has narrated the opinion of validity and attributed it to Abu al-Abbas and Abu Ali ibn Abi Hurayrah, but he says: The view of most followers of the Sunnah is the invalidity of knowledge in the rights of God. 3-1- Absolute Validity Absolute validity is also an opinion that some great scholars, such as Sheikh Tusi (Al-Khilaf, Vol. 6, p.
Shia jurists, by citing these narrations and some Quranic verses with various justifications, have considered the judge's knowledge valid for issuing a ruling, and some, like Sayyid al-Murtada, have considered the judge's action based on his own knowledge as "obligatory" and have claimed consensus in this regard (al-Intisar, pp.
In evaluating the opinions of jurists, also considering Shia principles regarding the view of the validity of personal knowledge (regardless of the raised objections), it can be considered absolutely valid for the Prophet (saw) and the Imams (as) – which is currently lacking any real-world application – and for others, according to the view of the author of Jawahir (Jawahir al-Kalam, Vol. 40, pp.
This knowledge (knowledge of the nature of the lawsuit) is the very subject of the discussion regarding the validity or invalidity for issuing a judgment, upon which Shia jurists have reached a consensus by relying on consensus and certain narrations, naming Ibn Junayd as the only opponent in this matter, while the Sunnis have challenged this validity and, especially the later scholars, do not accept it.
(
, 
, 
)
