The cause of disagreement -- Disagreement over the rulings of the religion -- Against disagreement over the rulings of the religion -- The method of the adherents of the truth when the correct ruling on an issue is not known -- Against arbitrary submission to authority -- The difference between submission to illegitimate authorities and referral to the legitimate authorities -- Against consensus -- Against speculative -- Against analogy -- Against preference -- Against inference -- Against legal interpretation and personal judgment
يتناول البحث مسألة أصولية، وهي العلة القاصرة، وحكم التعليل بها، وذكر الخلاف فيها بين الأصوليين.كما وضح البحث أن الخلاف لم يتوارد على محل واحد، إذ راعى الحنفية عملية القياس، وراعى الجمهور حقيقة العلة، وتبين أنه لا خلاف في عدم إجراء القياس بدون علة متعدية، ولا مانع من إبداء علة الحكم.وناقش الباحثان سبب الخلاف بين الأصوليين، وبينا فوائد التعليل بالعلة القاصرة.وبينا مسالك الأصوليين في الترجيح عند تعارض علتين: إحداهما قاصرة، والأخرى متعدية.وختما البحث بذكر أثر الاختلاف في التعليل بالعلة القاصرة. ; The research deals with a fundamental issue which is the restricted reasoning ; the possibility of using it for reasoning; and the dispute between the fundamentalists concerning it.The research clarified that the disagreement is theoretical, as the Hanafiah scholars took into account the process of measurement, and the majority of scholars took into account the truth of reasoning. It was found that there is no dispute in not making a measurement without a transitive reason, and there is no objection to explaining the reason for judgment.The two researchers discussed the reason for the disagreement between the fundamentalists, and showed the benefits of explaining the restricted reasoning.They showed the methods of the fundamentalists regarding the preference when two reasons conflict: one of them is restricted, and the other transitive.The research concluded by stating the effect of the difference in reasoning using the restricted reasoning
