Jump to content

Principle of Firash

Add links
From wikishia

The Principle of Firāsh (Arabic: قاعدة الفراش, lit. the child belongs to the [marital] bed) is a jurisprudential rule derived from the Prophetic hadith "the child belongs to the bed and for the fornicator is the stone" (al-walad li-l-Firāsh wa li-l-ʿāhir al-ḥajar). It is applied in the chapter on lineage (nasab) in Islamic jurisprudence. This rule states that in cases of doubt concerning the paternity of a child—such as the possibility of adultery (Zina) or the persistence of sperm from a previous husband—the child is attributed to the legal husband. Jurists have identified the basis of the farash rule as an authentic narration, the established practice of Muslims (al-sira al-mutasharri'a) , and the consensus of jurists.

In Islamic jurisprudence, the Principle of Firash is discussed with three main conditions for attributing a child to a husband: the minimum and maximum duration of pregnancy, and the existence of a marital relationship. Jurists generally consider the minimum duration of pregnancy to be six lunar months; a child born before this period is not attributed to the owner of the bed (the husband), although there is a difference of opinion regarding the permissibility or obligation of negating the lineage. Regarding the maximum duration of pregnancy, there is no consensus among jurists; the well-known opinion accepts nine months, but some consider up to ten months or even one year valid. Regarding the condition of a marital relationship, jurists believe that the possibility of intercourse between the couple must exist; some have conditioned it on the realization of actual intercourse.

In Shi'a jurisprudence, if the conditions of the Principle of Firash are not met, the child is not attributed to the legal husband of the mother, and there is no need for Li'an (mutual imprecation). Some researchers believe that with the attainment of definitive knowledge regarding lineage (through scientific means), the Principle of Firash and Li'an would no longer be applicable.

Jurists have stated that medical evidence, such as genetic testing, does not have intrinsic religious authority (Hujjiyya) in Islamic jurisprudence; however, if they produce certainty (Yaqin), they can be the basis for the action of an individual or the judgment of a judge. In the conflict between this evidence and the Principle of Firash, jurists maintain the precedence of the Principle of Firash, prioritizing the preservation of the family's interest and reputation over scientific proof of lineage.

Concept and Role in Resolving Doubts about Lineage

The farash rule is one of the legal maxims in Islamic jurisprudence related to lineage (nasab) and the attribution of parentage.[1] According to this rule, whenever a legal marital relationship exists between a man and a woman and a child is born from this union, if a doubt arises regarding the attribution of the child to the father[2]—due to reasons such as the possibility of adultery or the remaining sperm of a former spouse in the womb—the Principle of Firash is cited to resolve this doubt,[3] and the Shari'a attributes the child to the husband of the woman (Sahib al-Firash, lit. the owner of the bed).[4]

This rule is derived from the hadith of the Prophet (s): "The child belongs to the bed and for the fornicator is the stone" (Arabic: ٱلْوَلَدُ لِلْفِرَاشِ وَلِلْعَاهِرِ ٱلْحَجَرُ),[5] meaning that the child belongs to the husband and the adulterer has no right to this lineage.[6] This hadith appears in Shi'a hadith sources[7] and Sunni sources (Sihah Sitta)[8] and is agreed upon by all Muslim jurists.[9] It is said that there is no disagreement among Islamic sects regarding the correctness of its chain of transmission.[10]

Jurists have stated that if certainty regarding lineage is obtained, this jurisprudential rule can no longer be invoked.[11] According to Abu l-Qasim al-Khoei (d. 1992), this rule does not intend to state the real and factual lineage, but merely states an apparent ruling (al-ḥukm al-ẓāhirī) in cases of doubt.[12]

Meaning of the Hadith of Firash

Muhammad Muhsin Fayd al-Kashani, a Shi'a muhaddith and jurist of the 11th/17th century, writes in the commentary of the hadith "al-walad li-l-Firash": The meaning of "Owner of the Bed" (Ṣāḥib al-Firash) is the husband of the woman or the owner of the slave-girl, and the word "Firash" (bed) is a metonym for the woman due to cohabitation. The phrase "wa li-l-ʿāhir al-ḥajar" (and for the fornicator is the stone) means the fornicator has no share in the child;[13] it is also said that this phrase means disappointment and deprivation,[14] and such a claim [of paternity by the adulterer] is rejected.[15] Some, like al-Sharif al-Murtada, an Imami jurist, considered "stone" in its literal sense, referring to stoning,[16] but most linguists[17] and muhaddiths[18] have not accepted this interpretation.

According to Sayyid Hasan Musawi Bujnurdi, a jurist of the 14th/20th century, the Hadith of Firash is not exclusive to a married adulterer (Zānī al-Muḥṣan), but includes any person without a "bed" (legal bond) who claims paternity of a child.[19] It is also said that this hadith expresses a legal ruling (Shar'i),[20] not a report of reality, because the Prophet (s) was in the position of legislating the law of lineage.[21]

Evidence for the Principle

Jurists have cited the following reasons for the validity and citation of the Principle of Firash, in addition to the famous narration which some believe reaches the level of Tawatur:[22]

  • The Practice of the Pious (al-sira al-mutasharri'a): According to jurists, the behavior and practice of religious believers has been such that whenever a doubt arose regarding the attribution of a child to a woman's legal husband, they disregarded this doubt and confirmed the attribution to the legal husband.[23]
  • Consensus (Ijma'): It is said that there is consensus among jurists regarding the purport of the Principle of Firash,[24] but citing consensus has been criticized and called "consensus with known origins" (al-Ijma' al-Madraki), because with the existence of the valid hadith "The child belongs to the bed...", consensus is not considered an independent proof.[25]

Conditions for Realization

In numerous jurisprudential books, three conditions are listed as necessary for the realization of the Principle of Firash and the attribution of the child to the husband,[26] and these three conditions are said to be consensual:[27]

Minimum Duration of Pregnancy

One of the conditions for the application of the Principle of Firash is the passing of at least six lunar months from the time of intercourse.[28] If a woman marries another man after divorce and gives birth to a child after six months from the second marriage, the child belongs to the second husband.[29] However, if the child is born before six months, the former husband constitutes the father of the child.[30] Based on this, some jurists consider the negation of lineage (Nafy al-Nasab) obligatory in this assumption[31] and believe that failure to negate it is in fact an admission of lineage, which is a prohibited (haram) act.[32] Others do not consider the negation of lineage necessary, but consider it permissible, giving the man the choice to acknowledge or negate the lineage.[33]However, the view that allows choice and permissibility is rare.[34] Nevertheless, if the child is born dead or with birth defects before this period and experts consider such a birth possible, his attachment to the owner of the bed is possible; this affects financial rulings such as preparation of the deceased (Tajhiz al-Mayyit) or Diyah (blood money).[35]

Maximum Duration of Pregnancy

Jurists agree[36] that for the Principle of Firash to apply, the birth of the child must occur within the maximum duration of pregnancy after the intercourse of the husband and wife. If born after this period, the child is not attributed to the owner of the bed.[37] However, there is disagreement regarding the maximum duration: most narrations state this period as 9 months,[38] and many jurists consider this the famous opinion.[39] Some jurists have proposed a period of 10 months,[40] but this view has been criticized due to lack of definitive evidence.[41] Another group,[42] citing certain narrations, considered the maximum duration to be one year,[43] and some jurists have deemed this view acceptable.[44]

Marital Relationship

According to jurists, for the attribution of a child to a husband based on the marital relationship, two conditions must be met: rational possibility (including the husband not being infertile)[45] and the legal possibility of attribution.[46] There is a difference of opinion as to whether the mere contract of marriage is sufficient for the realization of the Principle of Firash or if actual intercourse is required. Most jurists consider intercourse a condition and do not consider the contract alone sufficient.[47] Ibn Hamza believes that Firash is also realized through sexual intercourse with a non-mahram woman under the assumption that it is lawful (Waty bi-l-shubha). [48] According to jurists, although a woman in temporary marriage is not considered a "Firash" in the precise terminological sense, she is treated as such, and the jurisprudential rulings of Firash apply to her as well.[49]

Relationship between Firash and Li'an

Jurists have stated that in the absence of conditions for the implementation of the Principle of Firash, the child is negated from the mother's legal husband without the need for Li'an.[50] However, if the child is born during the marriage and with the realization of the conditions of attribution, his negation from the legal husband is only possible through Li'an,[51] and the physical resemblance of the child to the adulterer does not affect this ruling.[52] Al-Muhaqqiq al-Hilli, a Shi'a jurist of the 7th/13th century, emphasizes in the book Shara'i' al-Islam that "the child is not negated from the father except by Li'an,"[53] and al-A'raji, a jurist and scholar of the 8th/14th century, in the book Kanz al-Fawa'id, while explaining the words of al-Allama al-Hilli in Qawa'id al-ahkam,[54] mentions this same rule.[55]

Medical Evidence and Lineage

Jurists have two different views regarding the religious validity of medical evidence for proving heredity[56]: The first view believes that if the test leads to personal certainty, the individual or the judge can act based on his knowledge, although the test itself is not considered an independent religious proof.[57] For example, Lutfullah Safi Gulpaygani (d. 2022) stated that "Lineage is not religiously proven based on the mentioned tests, but if someone personally obtains knowledge of the lineage, he himself is obliged to arrange the effects thereof."[58] In contrast, the second view considers these tests to lack religious authority due to the possibility of error in scientific results and considers the knowledge of the judge valid only when obtained through the senses or principles close to the senses.[59] Accordingly, the Jurisprudential Research Center of the Judiciary of Iran, citing inquiries made from Marjas, reported that most Marja's do not consider precise scientific tests as valid evidence for proving lineage unless they result in certainty.[60]

Conflict with the Principle of Firash

Based on jurisprudential research, evidence such as physiognomy or genetic testing, although they may create a suspicion regarding the attribution or non-attribution of a child to a father, lack religious validity when opposed to the Principle of Firash.[61] The Principle of Firash was established with the aim of preserving chastity, reputation, and family cohesion, and accepting new scientific methods could weaken this social and moral interest.[62]

In the case of a conflict between the Principle of Firash and the result of a genetic test, there is a difference of opinion among jurists: Jurists such as Lutfallah Safi Gulpayigani and Nasir Makarem Shirazi (b. 1926) believe that genetic testing is not a reason to set aside the religious rule. In contrast, jurists such as Mirza Jawad Tabrizi (d. 2006) believe that if certain knowledge is obtained for the jurist through these tests, acting upon it is permissible.[63]

Instances of Application

Some of the rulings that jurists have stated based on the hadith of the Principle of Firash include:

  • Jurists, based on the hadith of the Principle of Firash, believe that a child born of adultery does not inherit from the adulterous parents because they are not his legal parents.[64]
  • If a dispute arises between two people regarding the lineage of a child, and the claimant claims mistaken intercourse while the woman's husband denies it, the husband's word takes precedence; just as in the absence of a dispute, the child belongs to the owner of the bed, and his denial of lineage is not accepted.[65]
  • According to jurists, a child born from temporary marriage belongs to the owner of the bed, even if the man practiced coitus interruptus during intercourse.[66]
  • According to jurists, if a man commits adultery with another man's wife, the child belongs to the husband, and the adulterer has no right to the child. Also, the husband does not have the right to negate the child from himself due to suspicion of adultery, because according to the Principle of Firash, the child is religiously attached to the husband, even if the child resembles the adulterer in appearance. If the husband wishes to negate the child from himself, it is only possible through Li'an with the mother; otherwise, he will be punished for falsely accusing someone of adultery. (Qadhf).[67]
  • Jurisprudential researchers, in examining the issue of artificial insemination with sperm and eggs of strangers, citing the Principle of Firash, believe that if this embryo is implanted in a woman's womb, that woman is considered the mother of the child religiously; because based on the Qur'anic verse, the criterion for motherhood is giving birth. However, the child is not attached to the woman's husband, because the Principle of Firash does not apply here as there is certainty that the sperm is not his. Conversely, the sperm donor is not considered an adulterer, but the lineage of the child goes back to him.[68]

Notes

  1. ↑ Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, al-Qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 4, pp. 23-25; Muṣṭafawī, al-Qawāʿid: Miʾat qāʿida fiqhiyya, p. 184.
  2. ↑ Khūʾī, Aḥkām al-raḍāʿ, p. 78.
  3. ↑ Shahīd al-Thānī, Masālik al-afhām, vol. 8, p. 381; Iṣfahānī, Wasīlat al-najāt, p. 757.
  4. ↑ Iṣfahānī, Wasīlat al-najāt, p. 757.
  5. ↑ Ḥurr al-ʿĀmilī, Tafṣīl Wasāʾil al-Shīʿa, vol. 21, p. 173.
  6. ↑ Īrawānī, Durūs tamhīdiyya fī l-qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 2, p. 185.
  7. ↑ Kulaynī, al-Kāfī, vol. 7, p. 163, hadith 8; Ṣadūq, Man lā yaḥḍuruhu al-faqīh, vol. 4, p. 380, hadith 11; Ṭūsī, al-Istibṣār, vol. 4, p. 183, hadith 61; Ṭūsī, Tahdhīb al-aḥkām, vol. 9, p. 344, hadith 91.
  8. ↑ Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, vol. 2, p. 199, hadith 1345; Qushayrī Nīshābūrī, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, vol. 1, p. 471, hadith 142; Ibn Māja, Sunan Ibn Māja, vol. 1, p. 150, hadith 150; Nasāʾī, Sunan al-Nasāʾī, vol. 2, p. 110, hadith 1911; Bayhaqī, Sunan al-Bayhaqī, vol. 7, pp. 402, 412, hadith 101, 910.
  9. ↑ Najafī, Jawāhir al-kalām, vol. 31, p. 232; Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, al-Qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 4, pp. 23-25; Muṣṭafawī, al-Qawāʿid: Miʾat qāʿida fiqhiyya, p. 184.
  10. ↑ Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, al-Qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 4, p. 23; Muṣṭafawī, al-Qawāʿid: Miʾat qāʿida fiqhiyya, p. 184; Īrawānī, Durūs tamhīdiyya fī l-qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 2, pp. 185-190.
  11. ↑ Īrawānī, Durūs tamhīdiyya fī l-qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 2, p. 187.
  12. ↑ Khūʾī, Aḥkām al-raḍāʿ, p. 78.
  13. ↑ Fayḍ al-Kāshānī, al-Shāfī, vol. 2, p. 1564.
  14. ↑ Īrawānī, Durūs tamhīdiyya fī l-qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 2, p. 190.
  15. ↑ Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, al-Qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 4, p. 31.
  16. ↑ Sharīf al-Murtaḍā, al-, Rasāʾil al-Sharīf al-Murtaḍā, vol. 3, p. 125.
  17. ↑ Ibn Manẓūr, Lisān al-ʿArab, vol. 4, p. 166; Murtaḍā al-Zabīdī, Tāj al-ʿarūs, vol. 6, p. 250.
  18. ↑ Majlisī, Mirʾāt al-ʿuqūl, vol. 20, p. 298; Majlisī, Malādh al-akhyār, vol. 13, p. 326.
  19. ↑ Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, al-Qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 4, p. 31.
  20. ↑ Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, al-Qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 4, pp. 27-28; Īrawānī, Durūs tamhīdiyya fī l-qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 2, p. 190.
  21. ↑ Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, al-Qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 4, pp. 27-28.
  22. ↑ Muṣṭafawī, al-Qawāʿid: Miʾat qāʿida fiqhiyya, p. 184.
  23. ↑ Muṣṭafawī, al-Qawāʿid: Miʾat qāʿida fiqhiyya, p. 185.
  24. ↑ Muṣṭafawī, al-Qawāʿid: Miʾat qāʿida fiqhiyya, p. 185.
  25. ↑ Īrawānī, Durūs tamhīdiyya fī l-qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 2, p. 190.
  26. ↑ For example, see: ʿAllāma al-Ḥillī, Qawāʿid al-aḥkām, vol. 3, p. 98; ʿAllāma al-Ḥillī, Taḥrīr al-aḥkām, vol. 4, p. 18; Fāḍil al-Hindī, Kashf al-lithām, vol. 7, p. 532; Khwānsārī, Jāmiʿ al-madārik, vol. 4, p. 443.
  27. ↑ Sabziwārī, Muhadhab al-aḥkām, vol. 25, p. 237.
  28. ↑ Najafī, Jawāhir al-kalām, vol. 31, p. 224.
  29. ↑ ʿAllāma al-Ḥillī, Tabṣirat al-mutaʿallimīn, pp. 142-143.
  30. ↑ Sīstānī, Minhāj al-ṣāliḥīn, vol. 3, p. 112; Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, al-Qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 4, p. 34.
  31. ↑ Khumaynī, Taḥrīr al-wasīla, vol. 2, p. 308.
  32. ↑ Subḥānī, Niẓām al-nikāḥ, vol. 2, p. 314.
  33. ↑ Mufīd, al-Muqniʿa, p. 537; Ṭūsī, al-Nihāya, p. 505.
  34. ↑ Najafī, Jawāhir al-kalām, vol. 31, p. 222; Shahīd al-Thānī, Masālik al-afhām, vol. 8, p. 378.
  35. ↑ Shahīd al-Thānī, Masālik al-afhām, vol. 8, p. 337.
  36. ↑ Sabziwārī, Kifāyat al-aḥkām, vol. 2, p. 275.
  37. ↑ Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, al-Qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 4, p. 35.
  38. ↑ For example, see: Ḥurr al-ʿĀmilī, Wasāʾil al-Shīʿa, vol. 15, p. 479, hadith 3.
  39. ↑ Mufīd, al-Muqniʿa, p. 539; Najafī, Jawāhir al-kalām, vol. 31, p. 224; Ṭabāṭabāʾī al-Ḥāʾirī, Riyāḍ al-masāʾil, vol. 12, p. 104; Sallār al-Daylamī, al-Marāsim al-ʿAlawiyya, p. 156; Khwānsārī, Jāmiʿ al-madārik, vol. 4, p. 444.
  40. ↑ Ḥusaynī, al-Taʿlīqāt ʿalā Sharāʾiʿ al-Islām, vol. 1, p. 578; Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī, al-Mukhtaṣar al-nāfiʿ, vol. 1, p. 192; Yūsufī, Kashf al-rumūz, vol. 2, p. 195; Ḥillī, Maʿālim al-dīn, vol. 2, p. 45; Fāḍil al-Miqdād, al-Tanqīḥ al-rāʾiʿ, vol. 3, p. 261; Ṣaymarī, Ghāyat al-marām, vol. 3, p. 243.
  41. ↑ Ḥusaynī, al-Taʿlīqāt ʿalā Sharāʾiʿ al-Islām, vol. 1, p. 578; Sabziwārī, Muhadhab al-aḥkām, vol. 25, p. 239.
  42. ↑ Ibn Zuhra, Ghunyat al-nuzūʿ, p. 387; Āl ʿUṣfūr, al-Anwār al-lawāmiʿ, vol. 10, p. 307; Khumaynī, Taḥrīr al-wasīla, vol. 2, p. 292; Khūʾī, Minhāj al-ṣāliḥīn, vol. 2, p. 288; Sīstānī, Minhāj al-ṣāliḥīn, vol. 3, p. 112; Subḥānī, Niẓām al-nikāḥ, vol. 2, p. 315.
  43. ↑ Ḥurr al-ʿĀmilī, Wasāʾil al-Shīʿa, vol. 15, p. 442, hadith 3.
  44. ↑ Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī, Sharāʾiʿ al-Islām, vol. 2, p. 340; Fāḍil al-Miqdād, al-Tanqīḥ al-rāʾiʿ, vol. 3, p. 263; Fāḍil al-Ābī, Kashf al-rumūz, vol. 2, p. 96.
  45. ↑ Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, al-Qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya, vol. 4, p. 32.
  46. ↑ Mughniyya, Fiqh al-Imām al-Ṣādiq, vol. 5, p. 290.
  47. ↑ Najafī, Jawāhir al-kalām, vol. 31, p. 223.
  48. ↑ Ibn Ḥamza, al-Wasīla, p. 317.
  49. ↑ ʿAllāma al-Ḥillī, Qawāʿid al-aḥkām, vol. 3, p. 187; Shahīd al-Thānī, Masālik al-afhām, vol. 10, p. 227.
  50. ↑ Ṭūsī, al-Mabsūṭ, vol. 5, p. 185; Bayhaqī al-Kaydarī, Iṣbāḥ al-Shīʿa, p. 461; Shahīd al-Thānī, Masālik al-afhām, vol. 10, p. 189.
  51. ↑ Muḥsinī, al-Fiqh wa masāʾil ṭibbiyya, vol. 2, p. 233.
  52. ↑ For example, see: Ṭabāṭabāʾī al-Ḥāʾirī, Riyāḍ al-masāʾil, vol. 12, p. 109.
  53. ↑ Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī, Sharāʾiʿ al-Islām, vol. 3, p. 71.
  54. ↑ ʿAllāma al-Ḥillī, Qawāʿid al-aḥkām, vol. 3, p. 184.
  55. ↑ Aʿrajī, Kanz al-fawāʾid, vol. 2, p. 672.
  56. ↑ Scientific researchers believe that methods such as blood tests, HLA, and especially DNA can verify the genetic relationship between father and child with high accuracy (Khāwarī, Tawāruth-i ʿumūmī, vol. 1, p. 199, 1350). In blood tests, the incompatibility of the child's blood type with the man's blood type, according to the laws of inheritance, definitively rejects paternal attribution (Khāwarī, Tawāruth-i ʿumūmī, vol. 1, p. 199, 1350). Among these methods, DNA testing is known to be the most accurate, because if the child's genetic pattern does not match the individual in question, the lineage is considered negated. Also, HLA examinations and protein and enzyme polymorphisms play a role in confirming or rejecting genetic relationships (Ashrafiyān Bunāb, Ḍarūriyyāt-i pizishkī-yi qānūnī, p. 51).
  57. ↑ Markaz-i Taḥqīqāt-i Fiqhī-yi Quwwa-yi Qaḍāʾiyya, Majmūʿa naẓariyyāt-i mashwaratī-yi fiqhī, vol. 3, p. 80.
  58. ↑ Markaz-i Taḥqīqāt-i Fiqhī-yi Quwwa-yi Qaḍāʾiyya, Majmūʿa naẓariyyāt-i mashwaratī-yi fiqhī, vol. 3, p. 80.
  59. ↑ Markaz-i Taḥqīqāt-i Fiqhī-yi Quwwa-yi Qaḍāʾiyya, Majmūʿa naẓariyyāt-i mashwaratī-yi fiqhī, vol. 3, p. 80.
  60. ↑ Markaz-i Taḥqīqāt-i Fiqhī-yi Quwwa-yi Qaḍāʾiyya, Majmūʿa naẓariyyāt-i mashwaratī-yi fiqhī, vol. 3, pp. 80-81.
  61. ↑ Luṭfī, "Qāʿida-yi Firash", p. 259.
  62. ↑ Bāqirī, "Bāz-pazhūhī-yi qāʿida-yi Firash", p. 92.
  63. ↑ Markaz-i Taḥqīqāt-i Fiqhī-yi Quwwa-yi Qaḍāʾiyya, Majmūʿa naẓariyyāt-i mashwaratī-yi fiqhī, pp. 80–81.
  64. ↑ Ibn Idrīs al-Ḥillī, al-Sarāʾir, vol. 3, p. 276.
  65. ↑ Ṭabāṭabāʾī al-Yazdī, Takmilat al-ʿUrwat al-wuthqā, vol. 2, p. 197.
  66. ↑ Baḥrānī, al-Ḥadāʾiq al-nāḍira, vol. 24, p. 171.
  67. ↑ Shahīd al-Thānī, al-Rawḍat al-bahiyya, vol. 2, p. 135.
  68. ↑ Ḥaram-panāhī, "Talqīḥ-i maṣnūʿī", p. 166.

References

  • Āl ʿUṣfūr, Ḥusayn b. Muḥammad. al-Anwār al-lawāmiʿ fī sharḥ Mafātīḥ al-sharāʾiʿ. Qom, Majmaʿ al-Buḥūth al-ʿIlmiyya, 1372 Sh.
  • Aʿrajī, ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib b. Muḥammad al-. Kanz al-fawāʾid fī ḥall mushkilāt al-qawāʿid. Qom, Muʾassasat al-Nashr al-Islāmī, 1416 AH.
  • Ashrafiyān Bunāb, Māziyār et al. Ḍarūriyyāt-i pizishkī-yi qānūnī. Tehran, Tīmūrzāda, 1380 Sh.
  • Baḥrānī, Yūsuf b. Aḥmed al-. al-Ḥadāʾiq al-nāḍira fī aḥkām al-ʿitra al-ṭāhira. Edited by Muḥammad Taqī al-Īrawānī. Qom, Jamāʿat al-Mudarrisīn, 1363 Sh.
  • Bāqirī, Aḥmad & Rayḥāna Āyatullāh Shīrāzī. "Bāz-pazhūhī-yi qāʿida-yi Firash bā rūykardī intiqādī bih ravesh-hā-yi novīn-i ithbāt-i nasab" (Re-examination of the Rule of Firash with a Critical Approach to Modern Methods of Proving Lineage). Faṣlnāma-yi Qaḍāwat. No. 82, Summer 1394 Sh.
  • Bayhaqī al-Kaydarī, Muḥammad b. Ḥusayn. Iṣbāḥ al-Shīʿa bi-miṣbāḥ al-sharīʿa. Edited by Ibrāhīm Bahādurī. Qom, Muʾassasat al-Imām al-Ṣādiq, 1374 Sh.
  • Bayhaqī, Aḥmad b. Ḥusayn al-. Sunan al-Bayhaqī (al-Sunan al-kubrā). Beirut, Dār al-Maʿrifa, n.d.
  • Bukhārī, Muḥammad b. Ismāʿīl al-. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Cairo, Wizārat al-Awqāf, 1410 AH.
  • Fāḍil al-Ābī, Ḥasan b. Abī Ṭālib. Kashf al-rumūz fī sharḥ al-Mukhtaṣar al-nāfiʿ. Qom, Daftar-i Intishārāt-i Islāmī, 3rd ed., 1417 AH.
  • Fāḍil al-Hindī, Muḥammad b. Ḥasan al-. Kashf al-lithām ʿan qawāʿid al-aḥkām. Qom, Muʾassasat al-Nashr al-Islāmī, 1416 AH.
  • Fāḍil al-Miqdād, Miqdād b. ʿAbd Allāh al-. al-Tanqīḥ al-rāʾiʿ li-Mukhtaṣar al-sharāʾiʿ. Edited by ʿAbd al-Laṭīf al-Kūhkamarī. Qom, Maktabat Āyatillāh al-Marʿashī al-Najafī, 1404 AH.
  • Fayḍ al-Kāshānī, Muḥammad Muḥsin. al-Shāfī fī l-ʿaqāʾid wa l-akhlāq wa l-aḥkām. Tehran, Lawḥ-i Maḥfūẓ, 1383 Sh.
  • Ḥaram-panāhī, Muḥsin. "Talqīḥ-i maṣnūʿī" (Artificial Insemination). Faṣlnāma-yi Fiqh-i Ahl-i Bayt. No. 10, Summer 1376 Sh.
  • Ḥillī, Ḥasan b. Yūsuf al- (al-ʿAllāma). Qawāʿid al-aḥkām fī maʿrifat al-ḥalāl wa l-ḥarām. Qom, Jamāʿat al-Mudarrisīn, 1413 AH.
  • Ḥillī, Ḥasan b. Yūsuf al- (al-ʿAllāma). Tabṣirat al-mutaʿallimīn fī aḥkām al-dīn. Edited by Muḥammad Hādī al-Yūsufī al-Gharawī. Tehran, Wizārat-i Farhang wa Irshād, 1411 AH.
  • Ḥillī, Ḥasan b. Yūsuf al- (al-ʿAllāma). Taḥrīr al-aḥkām al-sharʿiyya ʿalā madhhab al-Imāmiyya. Edited by Jaʿfar al-Subḥānī. Qom, Muʾassasat al-Imām al-Ṣādiq, 1420 AH.
  • Ḥillī, Muḥammad b. Idrīs al-. al-Sarāʾir al-ḥāwī li-taḥrīr al-fatāwā. Qom, Muʾassasat al-Nashr al-Islāmī, 1410 AH.
  • Ḥillī, Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad al-. Maʿālim al-dīn fī fiqh Āl Yāsīn. Qom, Muʾassasat al-Imām al-Ṣādiq, 1424 AH.
  • Ḥurr al-ʿĀmilī, Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-. Tafṣīl Wasāʾil al-Shīʿa ilā taḥṣīl masāʾil al-sharīʿa. Edited by Muḥammad Riḍā al-Ḥusaynī al-Jalālī. Qom, Muʾassasat Āl al-Bayt, 1416 AH.
  • Ḥusaynī, Sayyid Ṣādiq. al-Taʿlīqāt ʿalā Sharāʾiʿ al-Islām. Qom, Istiqlāl, 1425 AH.
  • Ibn Ḥamza, Muḥammad b. ʿAlī. al-Wasīla ilā nayl al-faḍīla. Edited by Muḥammad Ḥassūn. Qom, Maktabat Āyatillāh al-Marʿashī al-Najafī, 1408 AH.
  • Ibn Māja, Muḥammad b. Yazīd. Sunan Ibn Māja. Edited by Muḥammad Fuʾād ʿAbd al-Bāqī. Jeddah, Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Kutub al-ʿArabiyya, n.d.
  • Ibn Manẓūr, Jamāl al-Dīn. Lisān al-ʿArab. Beirut, Dār Ṣādir, 1414 AH.
  • Ibn Zuhra, Ḥamza b. ʿAlī. Ghunyat al-nuzūʿ ilā ʿilmay al-uṣūl wa l-furūʿ. Qom, Muʾassasat al-Imām al-Ṣādiq, 1417 AH.
  • Īrawānī, Muḥammad Bāqir al-. Durūs tamhīdiyya fī l-qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya. Qom, Dār al-Fiqh, 5th ed., 1432 AH.
  • Iṣfahānī, Sayyid Abū l-Ḥasan. Wasīlat al-najāt maʿa taʿālīq al-Imām al-Khumaynī. Tehran, Muʾassasat Tanẓīm wa Nashr-i Āthār-i Imām Khumaynī, 1424 AH.
  • Khāwarī, Hūshang & Manūchihr Sharīʿatī. Tawāruth-i ʿumūmī; asās wa chigūnigī-yi tawāruth. Tehran, Āsiyā, 1363 Sh.
  • Khumaynī, Sayyid Rūḥallāh al-. Taḥrīr al-wasīla. Tehran, Muʾassasat Tanẓīm wa Nashr-i Āthār-i Imām Khumaynī, 1392 Sh.
  • Khūʾī, Sayyid Abū l-Qāsim al-. Aḥkām al-raḍāʿ fī fiqh al-Shīʿa. Qom, al-Munīr, 1417 AH.
  • Khūʾī, Sayyid Abū l-Qāsim al-. Minhāj al-ṣāliḥīn. Qom, Madīnat al-ʿIlm, 1410 AH.
  • Khwānsārī, Sayyid Aḥmad al-. Jāmiʿ al-madārik fī sharḥ al-Mukhtaṣar al-nāfiʿ. Qom, Muʾassasat Ismāʿīliyyān, 2nd ed., 1405 AH.
  • Kulaynī, Muḥammad b. Yaʿqūb al-. al-Kāfī. Edited by ʿAlī Akbar al-Ghaffārī. Tehran, Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyya, 4th ed., 1407 AH.
  • Luṭfī, Asadullāh. "Qāʿida-yi Firash" (The Rule of Firash). Faṣlnāma-yi ʿulūm-i insānī-yi Dānishgāh-i al-Zahrā. No. 41, Spring 1381 Sh.
  • Majlisī, Muḥammad Bāqir al-. Malādh al-akhyār fī fahm Tahdhīb al-akhbār. Qom, Maktabat Āyatillāh al-Marʿashī al-Najafī, 1406 AH.
  • Majlisī, Muḥammad Bāqir al-. Mirʾāt al-ʿuqūl fī sharḥ akhbār Āl al-Rasūl. Tehran, Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyya, 1404 AH.
  • Markaz-i Taḥqīqāt-i Fiqhī-yi Quwwa-yi Qaḍāʾiyya. Majmūʿa naẓariyyāt-i mashwaratī-yi fiqhī dar umūr-i ḥuqūqī. Tehran, Markaz-i Taḥqīqāt-i Fiqhī, 1388 Sh.
  • Mufīd, Muḥammad b. Muḥammad al-. al-Muqniʿa. Qom, al-Muʾtamar al-ʿĀlamī li-Alfiyyat al-Shaykh al-Mufīd, 1413 AH.
  • Mughniyya, Muḥammad Jawād. Fiqh al-Imām al-Ṣādiq ʿalayh al-salām. Qom, Anṣāriyān, 1421 AH.
  • Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī, Jaʿfar b. al-Ḥasan al-. al-Mukhtaṣar al-nāfiʿ fī fiqh al-Imāmiyya. Qom, Maṭbūʿāt-i Dīnī, 1418 AH.
  • Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī, Jaʿfar b. al-Ḥasan al-. Sharāʾiʿ al-Islām fī masāʾil al-ḥalāl wa l-ḥarām. Edited by ʿAbd al-Ḥusayn Muḥammad ʿAlī al-Baqqāl. Qom, Ismāʿīliyyān, 2nd ed., 1408 AH.
  • Muḥsinī, Muḥammad Āṣif. al-Fiqh wa masāʾil ṭibbiyya. Qom, Daftar-i Tablīghāt-i Islāmī, 1426 AH.
  • Murtaḍā al-Zabīdī, Muḥammad b. Muḥammad al-. Tāj al-ʿarūs min jawāhir al-qāmūs. Beirut, Dār al-Fikr, 1414 AH.
  • Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, Sayyid Ḥasan. al-Qawāʿid al-fiqhiyya. Edited by Muḥammad Ḥusayn al-Dirāyatī. Qom, al-Hādī, 1377 Sh.
  • Muṣṭafawī, Sayyid Muḥammad Kāẓim. al-Qawāʿid: Miʾat qāʿida fiqhiyya maʿnan wa madrakan wa mawridan. Qom, Jamāʿat al-Mudarrisīn, 1421 AH.
  • Najafī, Muḥammad Ḥasan al-. Jawāhir al-kalām fī sharḥ Sharāʾiʿ al-Islām. Edited by ʿAbbās al-Qūchānī. Beirut, Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, 7th ed., 1404 AH.
  • Nasāʾī, Aḥmad b. ʿAlī. Sunan al-Nasāʾī (al-Mujtabā). Beirut, Dār al-Fikr, 1420 AH.
  • Qushayrī Nīshābūrī, Muslim b. al-Ḥajjāj al-. Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Edited by Muḥammad Fuʾād ʿAbd al-Bāqī. Beirut, Dār al-Fikr, 1398 AH.
  • Sabziwārī, Sayyid ʿAbd al-Aʿlā. Muhadhab al-aḥkām fī bayān al-ḥalāl wa l-ḥarām. Qom, al-Manār, 1413 AH.
  • Ṣadūq, Muḥammad b. ʿAlī al-. Man lā yaḥḍuruhu al-faqīh. Edited by ʿAlī Akbar al-Ghaffārī. Qom, Daftar-i Intishārāt-i Islāmī, 2nd ed., 1413 AH.
  • Sallār al-Daylamī, Ḥamza b. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz. al-Marāsim al-ʿAlawiyya fī l-aḥkām al-nabawiyya. Edited by Muḥsin al-Ḥusaynī al-Amīnī. N.p., Majmaʿ al-Buḥūth al-Islāmiyya, 1414 AH.
  • Ṣaymarī, Mufliḥ b. al-Ḥasan al-. Ghāyat al-marām fī sharḥ Sharāʾiʿ al-Islām. Edited by Jaʿfar al-Kawtharī. Beirut, Dār al-Hādī, 1420 AH.
  • Shahīd al-Thānī, Zayn al-Dīn b. ʿAlī al-. al-Rawḍat al-bahiyya fī sharḥ al-Lumʿat al-Dimashqiyya. Qom, Daftar-i Tablīghāt-i Islāmī, 1412 AH.
  • Shahīd al-Thānī, Zayn al-Dīn b. ʿAlī al-. Masālik al-afhām ilā tanqīḥ Sharāʾiʿ al-Islām. Qom, Muʾassasat al-Maʿārif al-Islāmiyya, 1419 AH.
  • Sharīf al-Murtaḍā, ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn al-. Rasāʾil al-Sharīf al-Murtaḍā. Edited by Mahdī al-Rajāʾī. Qom, Dār al-Qurʾān al-Karīm, 1405 AH.
  • Sīstānī, Sayyid ʿAlī al-. Minhāj al-ṣāliḥīn. Qom, Maktabat al-Sayyid al-Sīstānī, 1416 AH.
  • Subḥānī, Jaʿfar. Niẓām al-nikāḥ fī al-sharīʿat al-Islāmiyyat al-gharrāʾ. Qom, Muʾassasat al-Imām al-Ṣādiq, 1416 AH.
  • Ṭabāṭabāʾī al-Ḥāʾirī, Sayyid ʿAlī. Riyāḍ al-masāʾil fī taḥqīq al-aḥkām bi-l-dalāʾil. Qom, Āl al-Bayt, 1418 AH.
  • Ṭabāṭabāʾī al-Yazdī, Sayyid Muḥammad Kāẓim. Takmilat al-ʿUrwat al-wuthqā. Edited by Sayyid Muḥsin al-Ṭabāṭabāʾī. Tehran, Maṭbaʿat al-Ḥaydarī, 1378 Sh.
  • Ṭūsī, Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-. al-Istibṣār fīmā ukhtulifa min al-akhbār. Tehran, Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyya, 3rd ed., 1390 Sh.
  • Ṭūsī, Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-. al-Mabsūṭ fī fiqh al-Imāmiyya. Tehran, al-Maktabat al-Murtaḍawiyya, 3rd ed., 1387 AH.
  • Ṭūsī, Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-. al-Nihāya fī mujarrad al-fiqh wa l-fatāwā. Beirut, Dār al-Kutub al-ʿArabī, 1400 AH.
  • Ṭūsī, Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-. Tahdhīb al-aḥkām. Tehran, Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyya, 4th ed., 1407 AH.
  • Yūsufī, Ḥasan b. Abī Ṭālib. Kashf al-rumūz fī sharḥ al-Mukhtaṣar al-nāfiʿ. Qom, Muʾassasat al-Nashr al-Islāmī, 1408 AH.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikishia.net/w/index.php?title=Principle_of_Firash&oldid=200265"