چکیده:
According to the famous view of jurists, whenever a man commits the illicit act of adultery with a married woman or a woman undergoing the waiting period of a revocable divorce, the adulterer and the adulteress become eternally forbidden to each other. The main evidence for this ruling is parts of narrations and the alleged consensus by Sayyid Murtada. In contrast to the famous view, there are also non-famous theories that lack a unified foundation. In the present essay, while re-reading the famous jurisprudential theory, the relevant documents are critiqued and examined, and finally, while raising doubts about the famous opinion, by citing certain Quranic verses and also authentic narrations, the theory of the permissibility of marriage between the adulterer and the adulteress and the lawfulness of intimacy is accepted.
خلاصه ماشینی:
In the book Al-Intisar, it is also stated: «إنّ ممّا انفردت به الإمامیّة، القول بأنّ من زنی بامرأة ولها بعل، حرم علیه نکاحها أبدًا» (Sayyid Murtada Alam al-Huda, 1415: 262); among the rulings considered exclusive to the Imamiye, is that if someone commits adultery with a married woman, marriage to this woman becomes forbidden for that man forever.
' Although this narration, in terms of subject matter, shares unity with the issue under discussion and explicitly states the ruling of eternal prohibition in adultery with a married woman, it suffers from a very important flaw, which is that the original attribution of this book to Imam al-Rida (as) is unknown, and one cannot rely on this book for dealing with narrations.
One of the contemporary jurists who considers documentary consensus to be authoritative under certain conditions says, according to his own basis in the book of Nikah and under this very issue: In any case, we cannot discover a valid consensus in this matter; because although it seems to us that, in terms of establishment (thubutan), certainty regarding the document does not harm the validity of the consensus, let alone the mere possibility of a document, but since we consider the verification of its connection to the time of the Infallible as a condition for the validity of consensus, and we establish the correctness of the fatwa itself (and not the reasoning of the muftis) through the declaration of the Infallible, and with the possibility of a document, it is often impossible to verify this condition, in our issue too, considering the existence of narrations regarding marriage to a woman who has a husband and the adherence to these narrations in the words of a number of great jurists, the connection of the consensus in the issue of adultery with a woman who has a husband to the time of the Infallible has not been verified, and consequently, it cannot be the document for the ruling of eternal prohibition (Shubayri Zanjani, 1419: 7/2174).
(
, 
, 
)
