stoning (rajm) in the critiques’ criterion “a deliberation on the theory of negating the legitimacy of stoning in terms of confirmation and verification”

there is no doubt that expressing new ideas, exchange of opinions, and criticism of the scholars’ ideas are among the scholarly traditions that are influential in purification as well as dynamic and sublime development of any science. the science of jurisprudence and the jurisprudential opinions of jurists are not apart from this rule, either. hence, in a fundamental research and through a descriptive-analytical procedure, the present writing undertakes to critically review the jurisprudential opinion of professor muhammad ibrahim jannati concerning the jurisprudential principles of stoning and tries to figure out to what degree the above jurisprudential opinion are compatible and consistent with the selected jurisprudential principles of that respectful scholar and the sources and evidences of shī‘ī jurisprudential ijtahād (individual reasoning).