عنوان مقاله [English]
From the early periods of fiqh, jurists classified chapters of fiqh based on various approaches and in different manners. These classifications have been often studied from a logical and educational point of view rather than from that of their methodological requirements and impacts. Reviewing the history of the classifications of fiqh briefly, and going beyond their logical and educational consequences, this article studies the classifications of fiqh more from their methodological requirements and differences in the method of ijtihad (legal reasoning) based on the nature of the issues of different chapters. This article also explains that the topography of the domain to which the text and/or the issue are related plays a large role in distinguishing permanent rules from temporary ones. Differentiation between decrees which are simply means (vasail) from those that are the aims of law (maghsad) is another methodological benefit of the jurisprudential classification. The topography of the issue, according to the author, also enables jurists to differentiate between the rules established initially by the holy lawmaker from those previously settled regulations which simply received the ratification of the holy law maker. This article also suggests that differentiation between interpretative methods of texts related to acts of worship (ibadat) and those related to the relationship between humans (muamilat) is very vital. The location of the jurisprudential questions also plays a role in the recognition of the type of religious statement as well as finding a more suitable way for conflict resolution between contradictory texts.