اختلاف الأصوليين في دلالة النهي على الفساد المنهي عنه و أثره على فروعهم الفقهية

Abstract EN

This study tackles the different views of the jurists that concern the degeneration negation evidences and its impact on the jurisprudent branches.

This study defines the forbiddance linguistically and legally, in addition it demonstrates the creeds that for proofing a certain forbiddance formula in which the absolute forbiddance is used.

This formulation chides impermissible things, hatred, intimidation and the like.

This study explains the jurists creeds and their opinions, and views about the evidences of which is legitimate and an illegitimate things and the legitimacy.

They are different some say that degeneration is in worship not in transaction s, others say that the degeneration is a partially evidence.

The jurists differences produce an influence, impact on the their prudence in applying these differences in their prudence branches for example Abu hanifa was a little big exaggerating in extending in its application.

On the other hand Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal completely rejects these prudents views, the other two Imams use and apply these creeds views in some branches.

This study also tackles the creeds and its evidences that with full explanation and discussion the researcher concludes by say that Mediation creeds is the closest for sharia justice and its supreme intentions