چکیده:
Psychoanalysis is one of the prominent approaches in psychotherapy. One of the important elements of treatment in this approach is the patient's free association. In this method, by recounting whatever passes through their mind, the individual creates the ground for recognizing unconscious parts and subsequently for treatment. In this process, the individual sometimes also recounts their criminal or sinful behaviors. The question is whether free association is compatible with the jurisprudential ruling of confessing sin? To answer this question, in the first step, the basis and scope of the ruling on confessing sin are explained based on Shia jurisprudence sources, and then the quality of applying this ruling in the psychoanalysis process is examined. Jurisprudential studies indicate that the title of confessing sin has not been separately subject to religious prohibition. It will only be forbidden if this act falls under one of the titles of self-humiliation, spreading immorality, or aiding in sin. The result is that confessing sin in psychoanalysis sessions does not fall under any of the three mentioned titles; therefore, it lacks prohibition according to the primary ruling. Furthermore, in conditions where continuing life without undergoing psychoanalysis causes harm or hardship to the patient, entering this process and recounting criminal and sinful behaviors to the psychoanalyst will be permissible according to the secondary ruling.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Consequently, since recounting sin in psychoanalysis sessions does not fall under any of the three aforementioned categories, it lacks prohibition according to the primary ruling.
Furthermore, in conditions where continuing life without undergoing psychoanalysis would cause harm or hardship for the patient, entering into this process and recounting criminal and sinful behaviors to the psychoanalyst will be permissible according to the secondary ruling.
The Concern of the Conflict Between Free Association and the Sanctity of Recounting Sin Part of what comes to the patient's mind during a psychoanalysis session, which they must express based on the rule of "free association," are behaviors that occurred in the distant or recent past and were contrary to religious and moral standards.
Therefore, it is necessary, by reviewing jurisprudential sources, to first clarify the basis and scope of the ruling on "the sanctity of not recounting sin" and then, based on what has been said about psychoanalysis, match the obtained result with the subject of psychoanalysis.
If the lack of prohibition regarding self-humiliation, spreading indecency, and assisting in sin is not accepted as a primary ruling, the non-prohibition of these titles in the case of psychoanalysis can be proven by citing the principle of necessity (idhtirar) and the negation of hardship (nafy al-haraj).
4. The recounting of sin itself is not an independent prohibition in Sharia; rather, it only carries the ruling of prohibition if the titles of self-humiliation, spreading indecency, or assisting in sin are applied to it.
(
, 
, 
)
