Jurisprudential Issues that are Described as Absurd Collection and Study

Abstract

This research is based on the collection of jurisprudential issues that were mentioned in the works of jurists, and were described or judged to be absurd. To know its ruling, I saw that I single it out by researching it under this title: (jurisprudential issues that are described as absurd, collection and study), along with studying and rooting them legally. The importance of the research topic and the reasons for choosing it lie in the lack of a contemporary study on this topic. The research aims at collecting jurisprudential issues that are described as absurd from the books of jurists and their legal rooting. The research employed the inductive tracking approach, followed by discussion of opinions. Among the most prominent findings are: linguistically, absurdity indicates confusion, but what it refers to in this study is: whatever has purpose but illegal; the issues described in jurisprudence as absurd are of two types: issues that are mostly characterized by play and the person charged with it falls into prohibition – and playing may be during worship, or lead to a prohibited act –, and matters of apparent worship, which are performed by the person charged with the intention of worship, desiring remuneration. Absurdity was attributed to matters such as: the "mutayammim" asking for water in the desert when it is clear that there is no water, moving the tongue and lips of the mute in prayer, nodding of the sick with the eyes if he/she cannot nod his head, passing the razor on the head of the bold when dissoluting from "Ihram", and passing the razor on the boy who was born circumcised. Among the results are: the inclusion of some absurd issues in the rule of: whenever the consideration of the purpose falls, the consideration of the means falls, as it is subsidiary, in addition to the ruling of: the one who is able to do part of the worship and is unable to do the rest.