Do necessity knows no law or sanctioned An Empirical Study fundamentalism | ||
| Journal of The Iraqi University | ||
| Article 1, Volume 1, Issue 36, December 2016, Pages 13-177 | ||
| Author | ||
| O.m.d.sbah Taha Bashir al-Samarrai | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Research Summary The base (necessity knows no law) has always caught my attention and struck me where I find problematic in their formulation, because the permissibility of compelled does not benefit Tmlika - as some people-might think, but benefit the usufruct thing patency of necessity, and the end of the authorization the end of standing is evident does not need a statement. But if lost or consumed by the beneficial thing, however, the beneficiary (distressed), what follows that ?! The answer was that does not result in anything, any fall by the physical and financial punishment, what about the victim?!, But the answer is that which falls about corporal punishment Finance must be on the destitute then the compensation if asked to do so, and in both cases I think it is necessary to study This rule study fundamentalist out with new wording be more convenient for the content, especially if we know the difference between what is permitted and it signifies the meaning of the passport is the sense in which the word permissibility benefit him as we will see that, God willing. Therefore, this paper deals with the problem in the formulation of this rule does is allow the banned act when necessary or permitted ?, meaning Is that necessary permits attacks on other people's money, so drop the financial right to be in it, or that having fallen sin act only, and corporal punishment of the act, without financial right?!. This Masntaraf in this search. | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 59 PDF Download: 4 |
||