Analytical Reading in Rule: Lack of Knowledge is Not a Knowledge of Nothingness, Followed by a Rule: The Denial of the Wing Proof of Legalization

Abstract

Research in jurisprudence and fundamentalist rules is one of the important matters for the development of the jurisprudential mind. The research deals with talking about two important bases; They are the rule: (lack of knowledge is not knowledge of nothingness), which is one of the methodological rules that are specific to the rational and logical rules that are widely used by the fundamentalists, and it has important practical implications, branches and applications, followed by the rule: (the negation of the wing is evidence of the permissibility of the mandate rules).

The study aims to identify the rule "lack of knowledge is not knowledge of nothingness", as well as the rule of "negating the wing is evidence of permissibility", with the aim of providing a clearer vision to understand these two rules. It is related to the rule studied, 3- Explanation of the words of the rule with giving the overall meaning, 4- Presenting evidence that shows the validity of the rule, 5- Giving appropriate applications to the rule, 6- If the rule has clear exceptions. The research also relied on Zayed's parameter of jurisprudence and fundamentalism, with reference to some sources and references referred to by the teacher's authors.