عنوان مقاله [English]
This paper discuses the differences between ethics and jurisprudence. they are as follows:
1- The predicate of jurisprudential statements is one of the five commands of religion and the predicate of ethical statements is good/bad, required/non-required, correct/incorrect.
2- Jurisprudential commands highlight deserving reward or punishment while ethical commands highlight salvation.
3- Jurisprudential statements are legally validated by God while ethical statements do not have Divine validity or legal legitimacy.
A jurist highlights executing God's commands, acquittal, removal of an obligation, Bringing accountability and bringing excusability (Mo'azzeriah and Monajjeziah), obedience, disobedience, and thus escape from punishment while an ethical scholar highlights salvation, perfection, transcendence, development, existential advancement and felicity.
4- Jurisprudential commands have dual values and are mutīvaṭī (the same or univocal) while ethical commands have vertical hierarchical; for this reason jurisprudential commands are more general and are removed only in exigency situations but ethical values are personal and are flexible with situation and people.
5- Every jurisprudential statement implies obligatory commands while its cannotation implication (delālah Iltizamī) is ethical good or bad and real expediencies or inexpediencies. However discovering real expediencies or inexpediencies is not enough for achieving a Jurisprudential command and a legal validity.
6- It is possible to find a legal desire in some matters; these matters generally facilitate the path to religious goals. Therefore it is not hard to understand their goodness or badness considering the general expediency or inexpediency; but it is hard to declare a legal command which results in God's reward or punishment. In these cases ethical commands are used.