AWADEH RULErs’Financial supports from Shi’i holy cities of Iraq and their shrines, including ‘AWADEH Bequest', or the so-called ‘Indian Money’ (‘Pul-i-Hindi’or 'Fulus ul-Hind’) was in fact one of the financial repercussions of Iranian emigration to India from the fall of the Isfahan to Nasir ud-Din Shah's reign (1135/1722-1264/1848) to an India which was Simultaneous in Moguls recent era. This period of the emigration has not attracted a sufficient scholarly attention due to its nature as transition nature which originated from decline in India traditional RULErs and increasing importance on British influence. It seems that ignoring the history of that transitional period of Iranian emigration and its results as well as its financial, here financial -religious repercussions, more and less, have resulted in some misunderstandings about historical context and process of concepts such as ‘Pul-Hindi'. Available Persian and English narrations of "Indian Money" either did not dealt with what mentioned above, or even some Persianwriters deemed the money a political device devised by the English East Indian Company (EIC) authorities to influence Shi'I 'Ulama in Iran and Iraq.This is the case while we see either the concept of Zar-i-Hind in poems of the poets, like Muhammad Fudhuli (d.970) and Sa’ib Tabrizi (d.1081), permanent and temporal Persian emigrants to India during Safavid period, or mosques such as Hakim ul-Mulk's mosque in today Isfahan; the mosque which built by Hakim's financial support, sent from India, in the same period, i.e. more than several decades before using "Indian Money" by the English as a political device.In the present article, appreciating some valuable researches has been done about the subject, Indian Money has been viewed in the context of Iranian emigration to India, its repercussions in Iran and related centers to it, and its evolutions. Therefore, there has been presented a wider concept of ‘Indian Money', including its precedence, context, and some of its transferors toAtabat before the coming of the British East Indian Company on the scene of the action.It should be added that emphasizing on the role of Iranian emigration in developing ‘Indian Money’does not mean denying the role of other factors in its development.

The formation of Shiite Navab AWADEH RULE in north India in the twelfth century AD has led to the spread of Shi'ism in the area. Spending a lot of money and expenses, Nawab promotee and encouraged Hindus to participate in the rituals of Muharram, and as a result, the Shiite culture and customs, especially the ritual of mourning of Imam Hossein become a general culture and expanded in the vast area of the North India and gradually Sunni Muslims and Hindus also participated in the ceremony. Their participation gradually took it under the effect of local customs and traditions. This article aims to survey the reasons and motives of Hindus participation in Muharram ceremony and its consequences from the formation of Shiite Nawab AWADEH RULE up to British domination in this area.

As a result of RULE of law ideal, judges are required to act in accordance with laws. The ideal is justified by some political values: political liberty, legal liberty, personal liberty and equality. Citizens are subject only to the law not to the arbitrary will or judgment of another who wields coercive government power. But in some cases law is indeterminate. In these cases there is an important question: how can the law command when the law books are silent or unclear or ambiguous? There are three theory in jurisprudence: legal positivism, legal pragmatism and legal interpretivism. I reject positivism and pragmatism and urge interpretivism. I believe that it provides a better account of our law.

When there is an ambiguous contract, it must be interpreted.For the purpose of correct interpretation of a contract, it is necessary to observe some RULEs and principles among which is ' Contra Proferentem RULE'. If the drafter (creator) of a contract also was the obligee of it or the composition of a contract (or clause) wasn' t related to one of the parties, in this case the mentioned RULE to be used in the concept of ' preference of interpretation against obligee'. But if one of the parties draft the contract (a clause of it) and the other party accept it, in this case the ambiguity of the contract will be interpreted against the drafter (composer) whether he is the obligee or not. So in such a case, interpretation against the drafter will be superior to the interpretation against the obligee. Since the.issue has not attracted much attention in Iranian Law, this article will have it as the central point of study. Also the contra proferentem RULE, in line with the protection of consumer rights, is to be used in the intrpretationof non-responsibility clauses in order to give them their proper and just sense.

One of the famous RULEs of the jurisprudence is the Ferash RULE, which is extracted from a famous Prophetic hadith «الولد للفراش و اللعاهر الحجر» According to this RULE, when there is doubt about the paternal ancestry of a child, it could be confirmed under some conditions. Since, according to the Islamic law, this RULE confirms the legitimate ancestry of a child and the newborn has afamily tie with the spouse, this RULE is called the Ferash RULE. Articles 1158 and 1159 of the Iranian civil law stem from this RULE, and article 1322 of the same considers it precisely among the legitimate proofs. In this article, the jurisprudential evidence of the Ferash RULE, its legal place, the conditions of its realgation, its content, its domain and its ways are clarified. The different aspects of child ancestry relative to this RULE are studied too.

RULE is a proposition having a general subject and a provision that it RULEs all of its applied meaning. As a general state, RULE is dividable to three types: rational, natural and enacted RULE. As a category of the enacted RULE, the Islamic RULE is a general proposition that has been extracted from Al-Shara, containing a provision governing the people behaviors and factual happenings. This RULE is basically divided to principle and jurisprudential RULE. Islamic RULE has three elements: Subject, provision and attribution. Subject is both of fully responsible person and his/her act; provision is the legal description of behaviors and what has named causation condition, hindrance (al-sabab, al-shart, al-manea) and validity or nullity (al-sehhah or al-botlan). Finally attribution is a relation between the subject and the provision. Islamic RULE has the same qualities as legal RULEs. Such as: generality, compulsory and having sanctioned. However, there is some deference between these two RULEs in regard to their sanctions and scope of jurisdiction.

One of the indisputable and important RULEs of jurisprudence is the RULE of Domination. According to this RULE, man has dominion over his property and, consequently, the right to possess. The issue that has been raised in this regard and has caused controversy among jurists as well as jurists is the possibility of recognizing the human right to the body based on the RULE of Domination. The specific question in this regard is whether the human right to one's body can be justified on the basis of the RULE of Domination or whether another approach should be sought? The results of the analysis of this issue in the present paper are that the inference of kingship over the organs of the body, by analogy with the priority of human kingship over rubbing, does not seem correct because our kingship over property is not absolute so that we can By analogy of priority, let us conclude that we have dominion over the organs of the body. Also, the delegation of human affairs to him can not be considered as a reason for man's dominion over his body parts, because the delegation of human affairs to him is only in matters not related to body (blood) and includes political and social issues. It does not enter into the circle of sensitive issues in which the Shari'a procedure is based on excessive precaution. On the contrary, reliance on the RULE and theory of guardianship seems to be a better explanation of the human right to his body.

The aim of this paper is to explore whether the process of innovation can be captured in terms of RULE-following instructions? To this end the views of Paul Thagard will be critically assessed. Thagard has developed a research methodology for innovation within the framework of naturalized epistemology (qua Quine) and by making extensive use of history of ideas (qua Kuhn). The upshot of the arguments of the paper is the position upheld by Thagard and others fellow-travelers who maintain that algorithms and RULEs can be developed for promoting/achieving innovation is untenable. Given the fact that innovation is an emergent property which only emerges when social epistemological systems pass certain threshold of complexity, such an objective can only be attained if ‘proper and optimal Eco niche’ for innovation is in place.

The matter of "honor", even if it is only considered as an important and influential discussion in ethics, needs to be included in the process of issuing a religious and legal ruling in order to be practical. Jurisprudence, as the regulator of the actions of legally competent persons, with its rich resources in this field, [but] has not dealt with this issue independently, thoroughly and coherently. The existing RULEs and regulations of jurisprudence are usually negative and their contents mean minimal dignity and maintaining the status quo. There is no jurisprudential RULE that invites and obliges all individual and social strata of the religious community to strive and take measures to promote dignity in all aspects. Due to this gap, the present fundamental research, with the aim of designing and applying the "RULE of dignity" and by the method of inferring and analyzing the content of evidence, has dealt with four matters of the provisions of the RULE, documents, applications and exceptions of this RULE. According to this RULE, any action that the dignity of the Muslim person and the Islamic society is subject to is obligatory, and in return, any action that leads to their humiliation is forbidden. This RULE, with a wide range of topics, plays a decisive role in the protection of spiritual dignity and also, at the macro level, preserves and promotes the dignity and independence of Muslims and the Islamic community.