Obedience of people of Sistan has a long history and eminent; Sheikh Koleyni mentioned a letter from Imam Javad to Sistan governor. According to this letter which narrated in different sources, Imam besides accepting intercession of a shia debtor, has advised Sistan governor to be kind with the people. Sistan governor that was Ahl al-Bayt enthusiastic accepted this request and forgave the debt. This survey via analytical-descriptive method in addition to evaluating the document, has analyzed the text. The result shows that despite of document situation, letter has many Quranic evidence and practical validity that shows authenticity, credibility and being issued by Imam. The Axial massage of this letter is that believers should be profit and honest to their brothers and prople when they have power.

Husserl's thoughts and phenomenological method is one of conceptual resources of Derrida and the deconstruction approache. He was strong critic of Husserl and yet he is clearly deeply affected. Derrida's main critique of Husserl challenging the claim that according to it., in the realm of epistemology, all presuppositions should be suspended. The transcendental I is the subject of such an act. So Derrida claims that the phenomenology, the transcendental I remains out of suspension process. In addition, Derrida believes that Husserl is also one of the founders of the metaphysics of presence in twentieth century. Husserl's metaphysics of presence emerged mainly in discussion of signs. Regardless of critical and negative encounter with Husserl. in the development of deconstruction, Derrida both structurally and materially is benefited from phenomenology. This paper consists of two part. First section, Derrida's critique of Husserl is sought and the second section, the impact of the phenomenology and Husserl on deconstruction and Derrida will be examined.

The following article was influenced by field studies about one of the most important causes of disputes leading to divorce, that is, men's sexual dissatisfaction. In jurisprudence and legal works, the minimal concept of "compliance" is mentioned to regulate the marital relationship. Despite this, studies show that according to the current situation and social developments, the concept of "compliance" is often not enough to regulate the marital relationship. Accordingly, a more suitable platform should be sought. The present research has been intended to answer this question by using the descriptive-analytical method and relying on library sources. In this regard, it first reviewed the concept of "compliance" and then examined the concept of "proffering" and the relationship between the two. In the following, it has presented the hypothesis of replacement or obligatoriness of proffering and compliance based on jurisprudential sources. The result of this research is the confirmation of the hypothesis of the article documented in reliable Islamic sources.

Among Middle Eastern religions, Judaism has the most extreme and inflexible Law which can be summarized in the concept of obedience. In Judaism, obedience has an ethnic and individual dimensions. According to this concept, there is a relationship between God and the People, so the obedience that God demands them to do, should be multilateral and complete like the wife’ s obedience to her husband and the children's obedience to their father. However, obedience to God that is manifested originally in the Ten Commandments, has gradually been generalized to a wider range of people such as sages, prophets, parents, etc. Emphasizing on the rigidity of the Jewish law, this article firstly seeks to assert the importance of obedience and its dimensions; and secondly by investigating the Old Testament, as the fundamental document of Judaism, it tries to give a true perception of the Yahweh's tremendousness and His extreme sovereignty over the People. Consequently, it can be said that according to the teachings of the Old Testament, Yahweh’ s sovereignty over the People and the individuals which mostly conduced to some worldly rewards, on top of which their settlement in the Promised Land, is so extreme and inflexible that disobedience from it ended up to a severe punishments throughout the history, such as diaspora, People's dependency to other nation and alteration or even invalidity of their selectness.

"Whether a duty of obedience to law is a moral duty as well" is one of the crucial questions in the field of Philosophy of Law. In this regard three answers are supposed:1- Obedience to law is not a moral duty;2- Obedience to law is an absolute moral duty;3- Obedience to law is a prima facie moral duty.Many of law philosophers (particularly some of the adherents to positivism e.g. Astin) attribute obedience to law to the fear of the sanctions and consider the law and ethics as pertaining to two separate fields. They simply believe that a moral duty to obey a norm cannot be inferred form its legality, as a legal duty to obey a norm, is not inferred from its morality.Some other philosophers including Kant, relying on the benefits of order, believe that, according to the imperatives of practical logic, in necessity of departure from natural status towards the constitution of a civil society, obedience to law is an absolute moral duty, and even if an immoral law is enacted by an evil and oppressive system, it must be obeyed.Another group, giving diverse explanations and reasoning, consider the obedience to law as a prima facie moral duty that may be disregarded if outweighed or balanced by other moral reasons. The latter opinion has attracted more adherents and is considered a moderate opinion. In this regard, the author is of the opinion that the criterion for morality of a social conduct is a social one. Such criterion is determined and confirmed by the society to which the individual, or more accurately, the "person" belongs. Induction in social criteria reveals that, in most democratic societies, they confirm a prima facie moral duty of obedience to law. Such induction is of course, imperfect and does not amount to a general rule. Practically, in most non-democratic societies, it is not the case. It appears that in non-democratic countries, most of the people, only after an examination of content, feel a moral obligation to obey the law; and unless the law is reiteration of a moral duty, only reasons of either utilitarian or prudential character urge them to obey.

The present research has a main concern and it is to study the relation of consent and obedience from the viewpoint of the question of law. In a political theory like Locke’s, there is a fundamental complexity and that is believing in free equal men while justifying law as something which requires obedience. For Locke, law is the place of balance of consent and obedience. On this basis Locke tries to show that law is something of the kind of contract in which people consent to be subjects of a politico-legal order. According to Locke, human being is an entity which has self-governing in a fundamental way. In political society, this capacity appears in the Legislative and therefore it is the basis of political society. Hence Locke places the Legislative at the top of the political order. However, there are limits and conditions that shouldn’t be exceeded or violated by law and the Legislative. On the other side, although law should always be in the direction of public good, what makes law valid and legitimate is the bond of law and people’s consent. The lack of the bond abolishes the legality of law. There can be drawn no distinction between a law without consent and command of a bandit. So patriarchal expediency and discerning the good of the people are not sufficient grounds to justify law and political subjection.

In June 2014, Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani issued a fatwa mandating Iraqis to volunteer in the security forces to fight against ISIS. Consequently, the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), otherwise called Alhashd Alshabi, were formed primarily from these volunteers, most of whom were Shias. In December 2016, the Iraqi Parliament issued a law that granted full legal status to the PMF. However, the PMF continued to face accusations of disobedience to the laws of the Iraqi state and the orders of the Commander-in-Chief of the Iraqi Armed Forces, raising concerns about its impact on the state's stability. This article aims to examine the nature of some PMF violations of the rule of law, explore the root causes of this phenomenon, and assess the possibility of eliminating or mitigating it. It argues that this phenomenon has social, historical, and religious origins tied to the relationship between the Shia in Iraq and the state. In particular, the internal divisions within the PMF stem from differences in perspectives regarding the rule of law. Thus, the article suggests that addressing this problem requires a long-term strategy beyond mere legal transformations. The article adopts a qualitative approach, which relies on the collection and analysis of data from the literature.

Obviously, in all jurisdictions it is required for the people to observe the laws and regulations; however, at the same time they need to have convincing reasons to obey laws and regulation. Seeking their different interests, people sometimes may break laws. However, sometimes people believe that there are morally justifiable reasons to break laws.   As a matter of fact, the research question of this paper is as follow: what is the nature of reasons that required people to observe the laws and regulations?  Generally, natural lawyers stress on the strong relationships between law and morality and they stress on moral (Not legal) reasons. Despite that, as it will be shown, natural lawyers (Specially modern ones) and positivists have similar justification regarding the observing laws and regulations, in that both of them recognizing legal reasons for observing  laws and regulations and denying the necessity and Sufficiency of moral reasons.

The permission of husband has been always an important subject among the Islamic jurists. The principle of necessity of wife's permission for exit from the house has been accepted by the jurists based on traditions. The main question on this subject is about the boundaries of permission. So many Imami jurists (senior and recent) such as Sheikh Mofid, Sheikh Toosi, Abossalah Halabi, Allama Helli, Imam Khomayni and Ayatollah Sistani have explained the necessity of unconditional permission and some contemporaneous jurists such as Ayatollah Khoyi, Sheikh Mohammad Mahdi Shamsoddin, Sayyed Mohammad Hosayn Fazlollah, Ayatollah Mohammad Mousavi Bojnordi and Ayatollah Jannati have explained the necessity of conditional permission. Some of the Quranic verses refer to the principle of wife's permission indirectly, but we did not find any frank verse about the permission; so we will study some traditions on this subject from A'emma.

Obedience and disobedience are basic concepts of governance. These two concepts, from an affirmative perspective, provide a set of obligations for the citizens, and from a negative perspective, introduce a set of dos and don'ts. Therefore, understanding the meta-theory and the fundamental basis in different governance systems can formulate the philosophy of dos and don'ts in obedience and disobedience. In this article, the meaning of "religious construction of Qur'anic politics and governance" is the set of requirements and tasks that the Holy Qur'an has presented in the field of politics and governance and has asked believers to adhere to these requirements and tasks in this arena. The main concern of this article is to present the religious boundaries of obedience and disobedience in Qur'anic governance. The findings of the article suggest that in the light of Qur'anic governance, it is possible to infer the necessity of obeying God, the Prophet and Ulu al-Amr (Those vested with authority) in legislation and governance from an affirmative point of view and present its political requirements. From a negative point of view, obeying groups such as heedless, infidels, hypocrites, corruptors, etc. as an act of haram (forbidden), can be deduced and presented in Qur'anic governance, so that in the light of these dos and don'ts, the religious boundaries of politics based on the Quran are extracted and become the basis of action.