Discovering the Jurists' Preconception Regarding the Impurity of Wine Using the Rules of Followership and Inversion in Purifiers مقاله

خلاصه ماشینی:

This research, with the aim of re-examining the phenomenon of scholars' consensus (Irtikaz) in solving jurisprudential issues and using a library-based method, has reached the following finding: The words of the jurists and the implications of their views regarding followership and inversion in the subject of purifiers show that the consensus of jurists on the impurity of wine was definite, or that this consensus strengthens the claimed consensus on the impurity of wine, which has been questioned due to the opposition of a few jurists. 320) But in the terminology of jurists, it means that sometimes a truth, whether a ruling or a concept, becomes so ingrained in the minds of the common custom or specific custom—such as jurists and traditionists—in any field, including jurisprudence and Islamic sciences, that no need for any evidence to convey and present that truth explicitly in its clear view is seen; it is possible that an issue is Irtikazi (based on ingrained consensus) at a time necessarily close to the era of the Infallible, but in subsequent centuries, it may not possess that degree of clarity; with the discovery that Irtikaz in the statements of the scholars of the era of the Infallible or the era connected to it, we become independent of the statement of other evidences which, in terms of their discoverability, possess validity in subsequent degrees from the blessed perspective of the Infallible.