Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

• javad sarkhosh ¹
• Hannane Nosrat kharazmi ²

¹ Associate Professor of Jurisprudence and Islamic Law Department of Jurisprudence and fundamentals of islamic law, Faculty of Theology and Islamic Sciences Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran.

² MA, Jurisprudence and Islamic Law, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

In Islamic jurisprudence, one of the conditions for the Qisas sentence is the equality of criminal and victim in religion. In Imami jurisprudence, there are two general views in this field; Most Imami jurists believe in the non-retaliation of Muslims for murder of Dhimma. Therefore, according to the well-known opinion of the Imami jurists, a Muslim will not be sentenced to Qisas for murder of Dhimma, Unless he/she has a habit of doing this, in which case he/she will be sentenced to death. In contrast to this view, there is the theory of Sheikh Sadouq, who believes that the Qisas sentence for Muslims owing to murder of Dhimma is permissible. Proponents of each point of view have cited evidence such as the book (Qur'an), Sunnah (tradition ), and consensus to prove their theory, but the reason that has provoked the most discussion and disagreement in this field is the existence of conflicting narrations on this issue. In this article, while dealing with other evidences, the document and content of conflicting narrations have been examined and finally the second category of narrations which was also approved by Sheikh Sadouq has been accepted

Keywords

• Qisas
• Muslim
• Ahl al-Dhimma
• jurisprudence

Main Subjects

• Islamic jurisprudence