International University of Islamic Denominations Fiqhe Moqaran 2322-1976 12 23 2024 06 21 The Scope of Preferential Juristic Reasoning (Istihsānāt Tarjīḥī), Its Criteria, and Standards in the Views of Jurists of the Islamic Denominations The Scope of Preferential Juristic Reasoning (Istihsānāt Tarjīḥī), Its Criteria, and Standards in the Views of Jurists of the Islamic Denominations 87 106 190679 10.22034/fm.2024.405993.2055 FA Ayoob Ghaedi PhD student, Faculty of Islamic Jurisprudence and Law, International University of Islamic Denominations, Tehran, Iran 0009-0001-6886-8629 Mahmood Veisi Assistant Professor, Department of Shafi'i Jurisprudence and Law, Faculty of Islamic Jurisprudence and Law, International University of Islamic Denominations, Tehran, Iran 0000-0002-7915-2853 Shakiba Amirkhani Assistant Professor, Department of Imami Jurisprudence and Law, Faculty of Islamic Jurisprudence and Law, International University of Islamic Denominations, Tehran, Iran Journal Article 2023 09 09 Islamic jurists, in their effort to arrive at the divine rulings intended by the Sacred Lawgiver, have identified certain criteria and standards using preferential juristic reasoning (Istihsān Tarjīḥī). Over time, this practice has contributed to the expansion and development of this field of jurisprudence. Accordingly, the central question of this study is: what constitutes preferential juristic reasoning, what are its underlying criteria, and what are the governing rules of Istihsān Tarjīḥī within each of the four Sunni denominations? Based on this framework, the present research first introduces preferential juristic reasoning and its foundational criteria—namely, public interest (Maṣlaḥa), legal concession (rukhṣa), and necessity (Ḍarūra). It then examines the rules governing Istihsān Tarjīḥī in two distinct categories, general and specialized, within each of the four Sunni denominations: the Ḥanafī, Mālikī, Shāfiʿī, and Ḥanbalī Denominations, through a separate and detailed analysis. Using a descriptive–analytical method and relying on library-based sources, the study explores the view that when a qualified jurist gives due consideration to the criteria of public interest, necessity, and legal concession—the three foundational elements of this process—and defines their scope, he or she can effectively benefit from this preferential method of legal reasoning. Islamic jurists, in their effort to arrive at the divine rulings intended by the Sacred Lawgiver, have identified certain criteria and standards using preferential juristic reasoning (Istihsān Tarjīḥī). Over time, this practice has contributed to the expansion and development of this field of jurisprudence. Accordingly, the central question of this study is: what constitutes preferential juristic reasoning, what are its underlying criteria, and what are the governing rules of Istihsān Tarjīḥī within each of the four Sunni denominations? Based on this framework, the present research first introduces preferential juristic reasoning and its foundational criteria—namely, public interest (Maṣlaḥa), legal concession (rukhṣa), and necessity (Ḍarūra). It then examines the rules governing Istihsān Tarjīḥī in two distinct categories, general and specialized, within each of the four Sunni denominations: the Ḥanafī, Mālikī, Shāfiʿī, and Ḥanbalī Denominations, through a separate and detailed analysis. Using a descriptive–analytical method and relying on library-based sources, the study explores the view that when a qualified jurist gives due consideration to the criteria of public interest, necessity, and legal concession—the three foundational elements of this process—and defines their scope, he or she can effectively benefit from this preferential method of legal reasoning. https://fiqhemoqaran.mazaheb.ac.ir/article_190679_ea63c32a53405039bfd6f9390f57314d.pdf