چکیده:
the jurists have voted that "Al-Taziri al-Ijtihade al-Amami". But it is necessary to know the meaning of "ijtihad in ta'zir" in order to distinguish it from the term ijtihad in the sense of acquiring jurisprudence for the Shari'a ruling or knowing the Shari'a.Research Questions: 1- Does ijtihad in ta'zir mean knowing the Shari'a law or acquiring it? 2- What is the relationship between ijtihad in Ta'zir and the infallibility of the infallible Imam(AS)?According to the results, in the traditions and the sayings of the jurisprudents, there is no transgression in the ijtihadism of Ta'zir, as some have stated it, some have pointed it out. In this essay, it is argued that ijtihad in ta'zir does not mean ijtihad in terms of (knowledge of the law or acquiring jurisprudence for it), but rather, the expediency of the jurisprudence. Confirmation of this result is the narrations and the words of the jurisprudents in which the ijtihadites have been determined to determine the amount of Jizah, Raza, Abdul's price, etc. in the sense of expediency.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Re-examining the Theory of Ijtihad in Ta'zir Mohammad Ali Talebi Ashtiani Abstract Based on the narrations of the chapter of Ta'zir, jurists have opined that "التَّعزيرُِ بمَاَ يرَاهُ الإمَام" and have considered it a rule for determining the obligation regarding the Ta'zir or non-Ta'zir of a sinner and have issued fatwas accordingly; they have even explicitly stated that "التَّعزِيرُ إَلي اجتِهَادِ الإمَاِ".
Regarding the ijtihadi nature of Ta'zir, it can be said that by examining the narrations and the words of jurists in the chapter of Ta'zirat, it is clearly seen that the amount of Ta'zir is indeterminate and depends on the committed sin and the physical strength of the perpetrator, and it has been left to the opinion and discretion of the Imam.
Sheikh Tusi also explicitly states in the following words that Ta'zir is subject to the ijtihad of the Imam and according to his opinion: If it is certainly proven that the testimony is false, its punishment is Ta'zir, which is of course less than Hadd and public defamation.
(Tusi, 1387, Vol. 8: 164) Other jurists have also explicitly stated the ijtihadi nature of Ta'zir; Fakhr al-Muhaqqiqin, in explaining his father's opinion (and anyone who dies as a result of Hadd or Ta'zir, no blood money is the responsibility of the ruler, and it has been said that the blood money is the responsibility of the Bait al-Mal)1, regarding the liability or non-liability of someone who dies as a result of punishment, says: 1 1.
(
, 
, 
)
