Conceptual Relationship between “Tabador” and “Insiraf” and Its Effect on Understanding Jurisprudential Statements Focusing on Imam Khomeini’s Viewpoints

Abstract

“Tabador” and “Insiraf” are among the outstanding issues in terms of figurative expression and veritative expression as well as “Mutlaq” (a word capable of being thought or conceived by itself) and “Muqayyad” (a word with restrictive clause attached to it) in Islamic jurisprudence. Jurists, including Imam Khomeini, have invoked to these terms in various jurisprudential discussions. Tabador is used when the mind goes directly to one meaning the moment we hear a certain word, thus it has a positive implication. However, Insiraf refers to inferring a specific meaning from a generic word and not to implying the basic meaning which is general, hence it has both a positive and negative implication. Despite wide use of the two words in jurisprudential reasoning and their impacts on inference of Sharia rules, findings of this paper, developed through an analytical-descriptive methodology and based on library sources, indicate a sort of disintegration between theoretical studies and understanding the concepts of these expressions in Islamic jurisprudence and the way jurists use them to define jurisprudential issues. In many cases, the jurists use the words synonymously with toleration, considering no difference in meaning between the two; however, it seems that instead of the word “Tabador”, where its meaning strikes the mind as a result of existential preponderance or overuse, which is inappropriate, the word “Insiraf” must be used. Similarly, when the word does not encompass one of its meanings, the use of Insiraf is inappropriate and it should be replaced with Tabador. Keywords: Tabador, Insiraf, inference of meaning, overuse, figurative expressi

Keywords

• tabador
• insiraf
• inference of meaning
• overuse
• figurative expression and veritative expression
• mutlaq
• muqayyad