The Masnavi has been read as if Rumi believed either in determination or free will, or he hesitated between the two. Here we reveal a new interpretation that how he avoids both of these. His position is out of this game entirely. We have explained that he thinks of the disputation between two sides as an endless one made by God to cover up a great mystery. As far as we could, we tried to explore the entire Masnavi and interpret all relevant verses in a consistent context, rather than decontextualizing and treating some parts in isolation from the overall flow of the text. Our Assumption, unlike other commentators, is that his perspective deeply (not superficially) differs from that of the philosophers and theologians. We have quoted the commentators wherever necessary and then shown why and how they made mistakes in understanding his words and thought that he believed in determinism or free will.

Some believe that man's choice is the origin of evils; that is, what man conceives as evil and attributes it to God is nothing but acts and deeds resulted from man's choice. Man's transcendence and decadence is contingent upon his choice, which is regarded as the origin of most moral and natural evils.Essentially, the idea that events are evil traces back to man's ignorance and unawareness of hidden expedience of these events on the one hand and is due to choosing man's misuse of his choice, on the other hand. Mawlana's main approach is that absolute good God essentially never emanates something called evil, and that a part of what is called evil is due to man's misuse of his will. He believes that the existence of evils is contrary to the belief in attributes of God such as absolute goodness, because such a God cannot be the origin of evils.

The right to practice religion is one of the fundamental issues at the present time. This study seeks to examine how, if a person is free to choose a religion, this right corresponds with the rulings such as apostasy or primary jihad? The interpretation of some verses, especially the verse «لا إِکْ راهَ فِی الدِّین » "La ikrah fi al-din. . . " indicates that from the perspective of the Holy Qur'an, the right to practice religion is one of the basic human rights. The present study shows that God the Almighty has not forced human to accept a particular religion rather he has given them the right and freedom to choose a religion. There is no contradiction between the freedom of conscience [and the right to exercise religion] and the ruling of apostasy or Primary Jihad. However, a misunderstanding of the real life, in some cases, may seriously stop one from accessing the right to exercise religion.

The Patent Right is a rational validity that is established between a person and an object or a place. There are some arguments and disagreements about the nature of the patent right‒is the financial right considered a kind of possession, kingdom, or priority? Also, there are some disagreements about proving such right and to prove this matter, some reasons such as consensus, narration, associating with someone, and the practice of the wise are cited. Some of the issues about which the Patent Right is considered are as follows: the Patent Right in unclean entities, the decline of entity from taxes and possession and the Patent Right towards entity after compensating the damage (giving substitution), the spiritual ownership, and the priority right. The provision of the realization of the Patent Right is its benefit and the existence of exploitation. The disturbance or seizure of the Patent Right without the permission of its owner is unlawful. Also, the exchange and ownership of the Patent Right freely through gift, will, or devotion is correct. Due to its kind, the end of the Patent Right is different.

In most contemporary legal systems abandonment has been identified as one of the causes for the loss of property rights, and also in comparison with other rights are possible. But in Islamic and Iranian law, were cited as very minor and never has been discussed as independent. Therefore, in this paper we will try to respect the comments and works of early and contemporary scholars, as well as considering the opinion of Iranian lawyers, first the effects of abandonment in corporeal property was evaluated. And then according to these effects, the result of abandonment of intellectual property, especially patent right to be studied. Finally, it was determined, as well as the other right such as easement or profit right, abandon of patent is possible. And then unlike corporeal property, abandoned patents, including the appropriation of public property, and taking possession of it, would be impossible even by the inventor or previous owner.

Right of pre-emption is an exceptional right; and unlike the rule of possession, it constitutes the power to forcibly possess the sold common share. Among the prerequisites for holding pre-emptive right, which is provided for under the article 808 of the Civil Code based on the view of the renowned majority of jurists, is transfer of common share through “ sale” . This paper discusses the opinions on the said condition and analyzes the evidence in its favor, reviewing arguments in favor of such view as well as studying the relevant hadiths as the main relevant evidence. However, strengthening the principles of the non-majority view, this paper found the latter as the preferred opinion; the main finding of this research suggests that review of the relevant hadiths reveals that they don’ t completely indicate the “ validity of limiting of pre-emption right to sale”-the opinion held by the renowned majority of jurists-and that adopting a new view of the relevant hadiths, the limitation of pre-emption right to sale can be removed and the same may be extended to all kinds of non-transaction contracts for transfer of title on the grounds of customary law and public will.

Victim is a person who sustains material or moral harm. Victimology seeks to find ways to improve the rights of the victim, and emphasizes the participation of the victim in the process of criminal justice. Although identification of the victim's right to compensation for the crime and the provision of material and spiritual needs in the criminal process has gradually become a major concern of the victim, Paying attention to the victim's comments and his hearin requests and hearing his/her comments g in the process of determining punishment and the manner of its implementation are controversial issues. An important question is that what is the limitations and scope of this right? Answering to this question in this article Will be analyze from the perspectives of victimization, and also relying upon the iranian’ s rules and jurisprudence, jurisprudential foundations, and a comparative study of some ststes. In general, accepting the victim's right to determine the punishment and the manner of its implementation is relatively acceptable in some countries, including Iran. Althogh this right has some restrictions.

Understanding the fundamental concepts and institutions of criminal law rights is examined from a philosophical-historical perspective. The discussion of the foundations of state punishment and the right to impose penalties on citizens is presented in a precise manner in Thomas Hobbes's philosophy. Throughout his, Leviathan, the right to punish. Stems from the social contract, and is considered a political right rather than a natural or pre-political one, entrusted to the state. Therefore, all citizens, disgusted by the natural state, relinquish the right to self-defence or the possibility of retaliation. This is considered a natural right for them after facing another violent onslaught, entrusting the protection of freedom and social order to the artificial entity known as the state, in order to end interpersonal conflicts and group disorder, leading to the emergence of sustainable peace. The right of the state to punish individuals has significant implications for criminal rights, including the secularization of punishment, state monopoly in punishing criminals, the establishment of legitimate defense institutions in the penal system, and the occurrence of crimes against the state. These issues are addressed with an analytical and interdisciplinary approach in this study.

With ownership of shares in stock companies, shareholders enjoy various rights; one of these rights is the preemptive right to buy new shares due to capital increasing through the issuance of new share. The nature of this right is not consistent with any of the views about the legal nature of shareholders rights. In fact, according to Article 167 and Article 166 of trade act, preemptive right is interruptible, inherently temporary, suspended to capital raising through the issuance of new share, and the legal nature of this right cannot be based on the adoptive concepts of choice in action and choice in possession, since choice in possession is an absolute right and the choice in action is not interruptible on behalf of debtor. The special right theory is also proposed because of the ineffectiveness of the division of financial rights to choice in action and choice in possession. Therefore, considering that the recognition of the attributes and rules of any legal concept is intrinsically relevant to its nature, with a new approach and through a descriptive-analytical study of legal jurisprudential concepts of preemptive right, it has been concluded that the right has the characteristics of a financial right including being waivable, transferable and valuable. This has been stipulated in order to protect the shareholders’ rights and trade according to the prioritization certificate.