قاعدة : الحرام المخير فيه : دراسة أصولية تطبيقية

Abstract EN

This research aims to clarify the fundamentalist disagreement in the rule: the forbidden has the choice in it and its jurisprudential applications, so that the reality of this fundamentalist rule is manifested in an integrated objective and application unit.

It may seem that the title of this research contains a kind of contradiction, as the choice is often only in what is obligatory or delegated to it, or in what is at least legitimate in the sentence.

The fundamentalist rule known as: prohibition of one, not one.

The truth is that most of the fundamentalists did not deal with this issue in detail as they did in the duty of choice, but rather referred it to it, and said: it is like it in difference, evidence, suspicion and answer.

In this research, i relied, with the help of god - almighty - on the following two approaches: - the inductive approach: by collecting and selecting texts related to the subject, and using them in determining the parameters of the research.

- analytical method: by examining those texts and their explanations after collecting them, and clarifying and analyzing the relationships.

The results of this research showed the extent of interest of islamic sharia in many matters, the most important of which are: facilitating and facilitating the taxpayers, removing embarrassment from them by giving them the opportunity, giving them space, instilling a spirit of peace and comfort in their souls, not confiscating their freedom of choice, and activating their role in life by involving them in decision-making.

All this in the light of the rule: the forbidden has the choice in it, the fundamentalist disagreement about it, and its jurisprudential applications