موجبات ایجاد، نقل و سقوط ملکیت در حقوق اسلامی

علاقۀ بشر به «مال» وی را وامی‌دارد آن را به «استخدام» درآورد؛ عاملی که موجب می‌شود در رئوس مسائل حقوق مدنی بابی تحت عنوان «کتاب اموال» به این امر اختصاص یابد. پرسش اصلی مقاله آن است که چه عاملی موجب ارتباط بین دسته‌های حیازت، عقود و ضمانات قهری، اخذ به شفعه و ارث در زیرمجموعۀ کتاب اموال می‌شود. بازخوانی مسئله نشان می‌دهد مبتنی بر «فطری» و «اعتباری بودن» مالکیت خصوصی و «کرامت ذاتی انسان» آنچه بین دسته‌های زیرمجموعۀ باب اموال ارتباط برقرار می‌کند و آن را به شکل مجموعه‌ای منظومه‌وار و هماهنگ پیوند می‌دهد، عنوان ملکیت است که به‌واسطۀ آن بین شخص و مال بدون واسطه تعهدات «اضافه ملکیت» حاصل می‌شود؛ بنابراین این دسته‌ها که ذیل باب اموال می‌آید، به مجموعه‌ای از قواعد و اصولی اطلاق می‌شوند که ناظر بر ملکیت است. قانون مدنی ما همسو با حقوق اسلامی این مباحث را درهم آمیخته و جملگی آنها را به‌عنوان منبعی از منابع «ملکیت» قرار داده است. بر اساس اینکه این مباحث ذیل ملکیت قرار می‌گیرند و مال به دسته‌های عین و منفعت تقسیم می‌شود، نظریۀ ملکیت مشخص می‌کند چگونه و در چه شرایطی مال به ملکیت درمی‌آید و سپس منتقل، تسلیم و ساقط می‌شود.

causes of create, transfer, and loss of wnership in islamic law

in general, our legal scholars have integrated the theory of general obligations from french law into our civil law. according to their belief, what connects the subsets within the category of property is an obligation. these subsets are subjected to a set of rules and principles governing how obligations are created, transformed, and terminated. in contrast, our civil law, with substantial modifications in content and a clear departure from its western origins, classifies these subsets under the category of property as means of ownership.the research methodology employed in the article is fundamental and descriptive. the authors aim to explore the differences in the relationship between property subsets in french and iranian civil law, seeking to identify the nature of legal relationships concerning property in islamic law. the research scope is limited to the property subsets, which are further categorized into discussions on possession, contractual and tortious obligations, the right of pre-emption, and inheritance in subsequent sections. the question raised is about the differences between these two legal systems that lead to one categorizing property under the title of obligation while the other categorizes it under the title of ownership. the authors believe that what has led our civil law to classify these property subsets under the title means of ownership, with significant modifications in content and a clear departure from its western origins, is the theory of ownership. this theory is the prevailing discourse in the islamic legal system regarding property. what enables the establishment of a systematic relationship between these subsets under the category of property is the concept of ownership. therefore, discussions on possession, contractual and tortious obligations, the right of pre-emption, and inheritance under the category of property are subject to a set of rules and principles governing ownership, including how ownership is created, transferred, and terminated. as a result, the theory of ownership can be viewed as a four-lane road that most legal issues related to property categories necessitate crossing. it underscores the need to present it within the framework of a specific general theory. property, which falls under the general concept of economic value in various forms, including tangible and intangible assets, without relying on obligations in personal ownership, will vary depending on the nature of the property, the method of transfer, and the guarantee of enforcing ownership rights in case of violation.