دلالة مصطلح (ينبغي و لا ينبغي)‎ عند الفقهاء

Abstract EN

The main aim of this research was to investigate one the most commonly used jurisprudential terms related to the mandate provisions in terms of its contextual position or to what is meant deliberately by the person who uttered or said it verbally orbetween what is deemed to be obligatory or forbidden and between prohibition and aversion.

More importantly, the term significance needs to be ruminated and speculated and thought provoking.

Research Subject: The Connotative meaning of the term (Should & Shouldn’t) at the scholars stand points.

Research Objectives: Disambiguating meaning this term to be scrutablefor the purpose of contributing to the debate invoked by the scholars to render it interpretable in their sense.

Setting determinants and constraints conducive to identifying its meaning in each distinct usage.

Research Methodology: Dominant Inductive, Analytical, deductive, and practical Approach The most salient Research Findings: I worked hard and diligently to reach a definite conclusion in tandem with one specific meaning to this term.

However, this pursuit was preposterous for reasons induced as reader progressively reads on and on pervading this research.

Whoever was predisposed to interpret this term and understand the denotation meant by the speaker to scrutinize each detail separately and to be briefed on clues and the teller context and its antecedents and precedents.

People are better to be addressed in teaching and in giving opinions by using the clearest words steering clear away from using the commonly possible shared WORDS which have polysemous meanings.

In conclusion: The researcher recommends the necessity to express meaning by employing the clearest word and phrases and to steer clear away of using the possible denotations.

Furthermore, he recommends the importance of orientating the scientific researches to disambiguate the jurisprudential terms, it denotations and history and impact of that on jurisprudential provisions.