نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
مدرس سطوح عالی حوزه علمیه مشهد و عضو هیئت علمی مرکز تخصصی آخوند خراسانی ره
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
In a conflict between evidence, a conflict of more than two reasons is one of the most difficult cases to resolve. In such cases, such as the conflict of two reasons, the most famous Uṣūlīyīn have evaluated the relationships in pairs. Some Scholars, such as Mullā Aḥmad Narāqī, have considered the evaluation of conflicting evidence based on the method known as Inqlilāb-e Nisbat and have considered various types of relationships in resolving conflicts. By examining, analyzing, and comparing these two methods in a jurisprudential issue that is affected by five different categories of narrations, the present study has been shown that both methods face problems. The famous method faces two major problems, conflict of results and sequence. The Inqlilāb-e Nisbat also faces two problems, conflict of results and Tarjīḥ Bilā Murajjaḥ. To address these problems, a multifaceted conflict resolution theory has been proposed, which, by identifying specific criteria and a logical process in their implementation, it has been able to resolve conflicts between multiple conflicting evidence and avoid the problems raised. This method of conflict resolution has also been fully applied to the jurisprudential issue raised.
کلیدواژهها [English]
در دست اقدام ...
)