الاختلاف في اقتضاء النهي الحرمة و أثره في الفروع الفقهية

الملخص EN

This research, which evokes the effect of the disagreement in whether forbid means inhibition in the disagreement in the branches of jurisprudence, tries to free some necessary notions related to forbid; as it talks about where are the disagreement and agreement between the order and forbid.

Also, weigthing changing the expression of forbid without context to inhibition; where it comes clear that the forbid means inhibition is the right choice despite that some smart scholars of the assets and speech choose to stop saying the requirement to forbid since it is common connotation between forbid and inhibition.

The study evoked some jurisprudential disagreement in some branches of the jurisprudence in which the source of the disagreement was the disagreement of whether forbid means inhibition or not; so it gave samples on that, for instance forbiding the prayer in time of meal and in race with urine based on the disagreement in the requirement to forbid in that issue.

Also the disagreement in the forbid of the prophet (pray and peace on him) to eat every predator with fangs based on the disagreement in the requirement to forbid it.