The weighting between the Conflicting Types of Facts among Fundamentalists and their Effect on the Branches

Abstract

The weighting between the types of conflicting facts among the fundamentalists and their effect on the branches. This topic is examined in science of jurisprudence which shows the origins, establishments, knowledge, verbal terms, and metaphor of jurisprudence Some wise local texts may contain words that bear more than one meaning. If the word is issued by the Sharia, it is repeated between the legal and the verbal linguistic truth and the customary truth then is possible to suggest one of these meanings. It is stipulated to explain these facts and their incompatibility and to explain the jurisprudential implications of this conflict. If the legitimate and linguistic truth contradicts, the most likely legal truth is presented, and if the legitimate and customary real contradicts, then the most correct combination of them is achieved because of the legal evidence touches it.