چکیده:
The Relation Change Theory is one of the most important theo-ries of principles of jurisprudence which has been rejected by some scholars for raising the major problem of prioritizing the relation among some indications which could be disadvantageous due to the existence of other possibilities. Other Osūli scholars are of the opin-ion that the preferable possibilities are merely acceptable in certain countenances. The present paper is to study and analyze eight differ-ent criteria for solving the problem of preferring the disadvantageous upon which one might standardize and approve the relation change theory. These criteria are as follows: presentation based on the gener-al and absolute relation, presentation based on the connectivity and separation, presentation based on the traditions’ dates of issuance, presentation of the relation of two issues over the dependent, pres-entation with respect to the strength of indication and emergence, presentation based on transformation and badness of dedicating one indication, presentation due to the definitiveness of dedication, and presentation based on the agreement or disagreement of the specific and general indications.
خلاصه ماشینی:
(see: Tabrizi, 1369, 618) As an example, one can refer to the words of Sheikh Ansari in Al-Makasib; although he, in Usul, has given an opinion on the invalidity of the theory of revolution of proportion, he nonetheless applies reconciliation between three groups of narrations: "indicating the prohibition of accepting the authority of an unjust ruler," "the obligation of commanding good and forbidding evil," and "the recommendation of accepting the authority of an unjust ruler for the interests of the servants," whereby the relationship between the two groups related to the authority of the unjust ruler is first weighed, and its result is then weighed against the evidences of commanding good and forbidding evil (see: Ansari, 1415, 2/82-83).
The Main Objection to the Theory of Revolution of Proportion Regarding the theory of revolution of proportion, many arguments, criticisms, and reviews have been cited in Usul books, 2 but among the objections raised, only one objection is considered as To observe various opinions and details regarding the theory of revolution of proportion, see: Hashemi Shahroudi, 1431, 3/458; Bojnurdi, 1377, 7/23; Haeri Yazdi, 1418, 682; Bahr al-Ulum, 1403, 3/100; Khoei, 1352, 2/519 and 522; Mousavi Zanjani, 1308, 114; Araki, 1375, 2/472; Qodsi, 1428, 3/511; Tabrizi, 1387, 6/179; Ashtiani, 1429, 8/289; Irwani, 1422, 2/454; Kamarei, n.
To observe various types of arguments and objections to the theory of revolution of proportion, see: Hashemi Shahroudi, 1419, 4/375-377; Hashemi Shahroudi, 1417, 7/288-290; Tabataba'i Qomi, 1371, 3/198-199 and 204-207; Mo'men Qomi, 1419, 2/508-509; Kazemi Khorasani, 1376, 4/747; Hosseini Shirazi, 1427, 9/191 and 197-200; Farahi, 1386, 436-438; Rouhani, 1382, 6/380 and 385-386; Haeri Yazdi, 1418, 682; Ashtiani, n.
(
, 
, 
)
