The Fundamental dispute in assigning drinker and its impact on Sharia rules

Abstract

This research is marked by (the fundamental dispute in assigning drinker and its impact on Sharia rules), it deals with an important issue, which is the assignment of drinker among the fundamentalists through extrapolating and following their opinions and directions and directing them, and weighing them according to the conditions of drinker, and the reason that leads to the drunkenness. The research aims to know the meaning of the drinker, the conditions, the drunkenness and its types, and to explain the doctrines of the fundamentalists and their directions in the commission of the drinker and their evidence for what they have become, and to explain the most correct of them, and the difference that resulted from the fundamentalist dispute in deriving the legal rulings related to the actions of the drinker and his crime. The research has reached a number of results, including: The fundamentalists agree that the mind and understanding are a necessary condition for the validity of the assignment. And the fundamentalists distinguish between drinker in a permissible way, and drinker in a forbidden way. The first, the fundamentalists agreed that the drinker not to make him obligated, so it is subject to agreement. As for the second, which is drinker in a forbidden way, there is detail, if he can distinguish, understand the speech and know what he says, he is assignment by the agreement. But if he cannot distinguish (The absence of the mind), there is dispute among the fundamentalists, the correct saying, he is not assignment because there is no condition of assignment and the actions of the drinker are also subject to controversy, and it is more likely that his verbal actions are not correct at all, unlike his felonies, because he is held accountable for them in full, such as the discourse of status, which is linking judgments to their causes, not such as the speech of assignment.