چکیده:
The science of jurisprudence dates back to the
earliest Islamic era. It deals with an array of problems
confronting society based on Islamic principles, morals, and
practical laws. These precepts are manifested in the Qur’an and
tradition as these are the main sources in which legal rulings
derive from, and these rules are firmly abided by without
exercising one’s own opinion. In this article, the stages of the
development of jurisprudence will be clarified, along with
revealing its prominent authors, major collections of narrations,
and the notions that drove scholars to enhance jurisprudential
progress.
خلاصه ماشینی:
"After the completion of the compilation of noble narrations and literatures on Islamic law, the graduation of many great scholars and jurists under the Imams, the high reception of the school of the Ahlul Bayt (a) by the people, as well as the spread of the ShT‹a faith in every corner of Muslim countries, the later Imams began to make preparations for the independence of fiqh and scholars.
This era, the era of the issuance of Islamic precepts, where it was possible to contact an Infallible (a) and attain knowledge and narrations from him directly or indirectly through one of his special deputies, ended in the year 329 AH, marking the beginning of the second fiqhi stage, the jurisprudential fiqh period.
The compilation of two books in the field of ‘Principles of Jurisprudence’ (U l al-Fiqh), al-Tadhkirah bi-U l al-Fiqh (by al- Sheikh al-MufTd) and al-Dhar ah il U l al-Shari ah (by al-Seyyid al-MurtadhE), marked the beginning of the formation of the science of ‘Principles of Jurisprudence’ (U l al-Fiqh) and the isolation of its rules (literary, rational, and legal) from fiqhi issues, making this yet another development in this period.
In this period, jurisprudence was characterized by the study, memorization, and transmission of hadiths as well as issuing verdicts; the Prophet and Imams were present, making it obligatory upon all to obey and refer to them, as well as enabling people to reach actual legal rulings of issues; exercising opinion against their word was impermissible; jurists claiming any type of position was impermissible; and scholars initially referring to general principles and rules was unacceptable."