Document Type : Original Article

Author

• hossainali saadi

Professor of the Department of Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Islamic Law, Faculty of Theology, Islamic Education and Guidance, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

The theory of the right to obey is one of the innovative theories of the thinker Martyr Sadr (may Allah have mercy on him), which was designed and presented against the famous Usuli theory based on the ugliness of the eagle of the eagle of the eagle. The rule of the ugliness of the eagle of the eagle of the eagle is based on the central point that the duty does not require incitement and the creation of the Ba'ath until it is definitely or scientifically communicated to the one who is obligated, and the eagle on inaction where there is no need for incitement will be ugly according to the rule of reason. By raising the issue that the scope of fulfillment depends on the maulavit and the right to obey, Martyr Sadr (may Allah have mercy on him) believes that maulavit is a dubious fact and that no matter how strong the maulavit of the master is, the circle of fulfillment also expands. The famous error of the Usuli is that in maulavit, they have equated the conventional master with the true master and just as in conventional masters the possible fulfillment of the duty is not possible, in true masters they have also raised the possibility of the non-fulfillment of the possible fulfillment of the duties. The essence and essence of the opinion of Martyr Sadr (may God have mercy on him) is the existence of the requirement of initiation and incitement in the revealed duties, possibly in the true master. This theory has been criticized by some as internal inconsistency. The critic claims that in the possibility of the master's obligatory duty, there is also the possibility of release and permission, and the right to obey the master, just as it requires the observance of maulavit in obligatory rulings, it also requires the observance of maulavit in dispensational rulings, and in the event of conflict between the aspects of obligation and release, there is no aspect that gives preference to one side over the other. Therefore, the theory of Martyr Sadr (may God have mercy on him) is plagued by internal inconsistency. This article has attempted to clarify the absence of these problems in the theory. The claim of Martyr Sadr (may God have mercy on him) is that there is a necessity for incitement in the possible duties of the true master, and the critic considers the theory incomplete because the right to obedience in the area of ​​obligatory duties is hindered and interfered with by the duties of release, rather than criticizing the principle of the claim, which is the necessity for the resurrection. This is the main error of the criticism; although it also faces problems in other areas, which have also been addressed.