Medical Figh

Vol. 17 No. 47 (1404)

A Comparative Study of the Jurisprudential Rule of Qur‘ah in Imamiyyah Jurisprudence and the Principle of Lottery in Biomedical ethics

Medical Figh, Vol. 17 No. 47 (1404), 5 April 2025 , Page 1-16
https://doi.org/10.22037/mfj.v17i47.48692

Abstract

Background and Aim: The rule of qur‘a in Imami jurisprudence and the principle of lottery in biomedical ethics each provide a mechanism for dealing with situations in which no action can be decisively preferred over others, making decision-making difficult. The present study aims to examine the degree of conceptual compatibility and practical applicability of the juristic rule of qur‘a and the lottery principle in medical ethics, in order to utilize the potential of each in resolving clinical dilemmas.

Materials and Methods: This study used a descriptive–analytical, comparative approach. Drawing on Imami jurisprudential sources (the Qur’an, hadiths, jurisprudential rules and principles) and biomedical ethics literature related to theories of procedural justice, impartiality, and equality of opportunity, it investigates the issue of lottery from both jurisprudential and biomedical-ethical perspectives.

Conclusion: The findings indicate that the qur‘a in Imami jurisprudence—beyond its traditional application in deciding cases of uncertainty—can also be employed in situations involving conflicting rights. In biomedical ethics, although there are differing views on the fairness of using a lottery, this article, drawing on theories of procedural justice and impartiality, recognises the lottery as a legitimate method for allocating scarce healthcare resources. Therefore, there is no fundamental or significant conceptual or practical difference between the jurisprudential rule of qur‘a and the lottery principle in biomedical ethics.

Keywords:
  • Jurisprudential rule
  • qur‘a rule
  • Imami jurisprudence
  • lottery
  • biomedical ethics

How to Cite

Mohammadzadeh, Z. (2025). A Comparative Study of the Jurisprudential Rule of Qur‘ah in Imamiyyah Jurisprudence and the Principle of Lottery in Biomedical ethics. Medical Figh, 17(47), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.22037/mfj.v17i47.48692

References

1. Ibn Manẓūr, M. Lisān al-ʿArab. 3rd ed. Beirut: Dār Ṣādir. 1994(1414). 8:262. [In Arabic]

2. Majmūʿih Muʾallifīn. al-Muʿjam al-Wasīṭ. Cairo: Dār al-Daʿwat. Nd. 2:728. [In Arabic]

3. Fayyūmī, AM. al-Miṣbāḥ al-Munīr. 2nd ed. Beirut: al-Maktabat al-ʿAṣrīyyah. 1997 (1418). 153. [In Arabic]

4. Narāqī, AM. ʿAwāʾid al-Ayyām fī Bayān Qawāʿid al-Aḥkām. Qum: Daftar Tablīghāt Islāmī Ḥawzat ʿIlmīyyat. 1996 (1417). 1: 668 & 658 & 658-659.

[In Arabic]

5. Zāriʿī Sabziwārī, A. al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhīyyat fī Fiqh al-Imāmīyyat. Qum: Nashr Islāmī. 2009 (1430). 9: 66-67. [ In Arabic]

6. Q. 37: 141.

7. Q. 3: 44.

8. Maghribī, NM. Daʿāʾim al-Islām. 2nd ed. Qum: Āl al-Bayt (ʿAlayhim al-Salām). 1965 (1385). 2:522.

[In Arabic]

9. Ṣadūq, M. Man lā Yaḥḍuruh al-Faqīh. 2nd ed. Qum: Daftar Nashr Islāmī. 1992 (1413). 3:92. [In Arabic]

10. Ibn Shuʿbah Ḥarrānī, H. Tuḥaf al-ʿUqūl ʿAn Āl al-Rasūl. 2nd ed. Qum: Nashr Islāmī. 1984 (1404). 480. [In Arabic]

11. Makārim Shīrāzī, N. al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhīyyat. 3rd ed. Qum: Madrisat al-Imām ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib. 1991 (1370). 1:353-356 & 369 & 365. [In Arabic]

12. Karīmī Qummī, H. Qāʿidih Qurʿah. Qum: Markaz Fiqhī Aʾimmat Aṭhār. 1999 (1420). 86-87 & 33 & 86. [In Arabic]

13. Ṭūsī, M. al-Mabsūṭ fī Fiqh al-Imāmīyyat. 3rd ed. Tehran: al-Maktabat al-Murtaḍawīyyat li-Iḥyāʾ al-Āthār al-Jaʿfarīyyat. 1968 (1387). 8:262. [In Arabic]

14. Ḥillī, H. Tadhkirat al-Fuqahāʾ. Qum: Muʾassisat Āl al-Bayt li-Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth. 1993 (1414). 4:311 & 12:245. [In Arabic]

15. Anṣārī, M. Farāʾid al-Uṣūl. Qum: Majmaʿ al-Fikr al-Islāmī. 1998 (1419). 3:385. [In Arabic]

16. Khomeini, SR. Taḥrīr al-Wasīlat. Tehran: ʿUrūj. 2013 (1434). 1:381 & 673 & 2:430. [In Arabic]

17. Ibn Idrīs Ḥillī, M. al-Sarāʾir al-Ḥāwī li-Taḥrīr al-Fatāwī. 2nd ed. Qum: al-Nashr al-Islāmī. 1990 (1410). 1:87 & 3:282. [In Arabic]

18. ʿĀmilī, M. al-Qawāʿid wa al-Fawāʾid. Qum: Maktabat al-Mufīd. Nd. 2:183. [In Arabic]

19. Lankarānī, M. al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhīyyat. Qum: Fiqh Aʾimmih Aṭhār. 2004 (1383). 430-433 & 434 & 441. [In Arabic]

20. Nāʾīnī, MH. Fawāʾid al-Uṣūl. Qum: Jāmiʿat Mudarrisīn Ḥawzat ʿIlmīyyah-yi Qum. 1997 (1376). 4:680. [In Arabic]

21. ʿIrāqī, ḌA. Nihāyat al-Afkār. Qum: Muʾassisat al-Nashr al-Islāmī. 1941 (1360). 4:104-106. [In Arabic]

22. Persad G, Wertheimer A, Emanuel EJ. “Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions”. The Lancet. 2009 (1388). 373(9661): 423 & 428 & 429 & 423. [In English]

23. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 7th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2013. 265-266. [In English]

24. Bond K, Sandman L, Gustavsson E. “Using a lottery to resolve indeterminacy when allocating resources for drugs for rare diseases”. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2025. Advance online publication. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2023-109723. [In English]

25. Emanuel EJ, Persad G, Upshur R, Thom B, Parker M, Glickman A, Zhang C, Boyle C, Smith M, Phillips JP. “Fair allocation of scarce medical resources in the time of Covid-19”. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2020. 382(21):2053. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsb2005114. [In English]

26. Stone P. The luck of the draw: the role of lotteries in decision making. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2011. 65-85 & 85. [In English]

27. Wang X. “Intentions, impartiality, and the fairness of lotteries”. Philosophia. 2023. 51(4):1796-1797 & 1807-1808. [In English]

28. Childress JF. “Who shall live when not all can live?”. Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 2013. 96(3):245-248. [In English]

29. Gopinathan U, Dale E, Evans DB. “Procedural fairness in health financing for universal health coverage: why, what and how”. Health Policy and Planning. 2023. 38(1):2. [In English]

30. Rawls J. A theory of justice. Rev. ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1999. 63 & 53 & 137 & 102,118. [In English]

31. Harris J. “The survival lottery”. Philosophy. 1975. 50(191):81-87. [In English]

32. Daniels N. Just health care. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1985. 83-85. [In English]

33. Singer P. “Utility and the survival lottery”. Philosophy. 1977. 52(201):218-222. [In English]

34. Bond K, Sandman L, Gustavsson E. “137: Oral-Taking a chance on health: the lottery principle, healthcare resource allocation, and orphan drugs”. BMJ Global Health. 2022. 7(2): 21-22. [In English]

35. Sandel, MJ. Justice: what’s the right thing to do? New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2009. 19-20.

[In English]

36. Callahan, D. Setting limits: medical goals in an aging society. New York: Simon & Schuster. 1987. 130-135. [In English]

37. Daniels, N. Just health: meeting health needs fairly. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2008. 1:177-181. [In English]

38. Leiman, S. The ethics of lottery. Kennedy Institute Quarterly Report. 1978. 4: 9. [In English]

39. Fienberg, SE. “Randomization and social affairs: the 1970 draft lottery-randomization is not easily achieved by the mixing of capsules in a bowl”. Science. 1971. 171(3968):255. [In English]

40. John, TM & Millum, J. “First come, first served?”. Ethics. 2020. 130(2):204-205. [In English]

41. Sommersguter-Reichmann, M & Reichmann, G. “Untangling the corruption maze: exploring the complexity of corruption in the health sector”. Health Economics Review. 2024. 14(50): 6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-024-00530-6. [In English]

42. Robertson, A & Kerridge, I. “Ethical considerations regarding allocation of ICU beds”. Macquarie University & University of Wollongong. 2020. 3. Available from: https://documents.uow. edu.au/content/groups/public/@web/@socs/documents/doc/uow264048.pdf

  • Abstract Viewed: 87 times
  • pdf (فارسی) Downloaded: 21 times

Download Statastics

Information

Language