أساليب التوسعة والتضييق في الخطاب الشرعي دراسة مقارنة بين الأصـوليين والمفسـرين

Methods of expansion and narrowing in the legal discourse, a comparative study between fundamentalists and interpreters

Conclusion
The researcher made an extrapolation of the different methods of dialogue used in the legal discourse, and after part of it was what the fundamentalists meant, and another part was studied by the interpreters, and the third was the subject of research and attention of both the fundamentalists and the interpreters. This prompted the researcher to review the legal discourse methods of each team separately, and then shed light on what they participated in studying it, while directing the compass towards the issue of expanding the discourse by introducing extra individuals or credentials, as well as narrowing it by removing an individual or credibility from it, to clarify the legal position on the individual. The repetitive or probable, and this was done by editing the research topics first, with a brief mention of the most important issues related to it from the introduction to the one with the introduction, and then indicating the location of that method in terms of expanding or narrowing the legal discourse with a request to apply it or more to determine the requirement and bring it closer.
The researcher chose this study for many reasons, the foremost of which was what the research entails of great importance, especially in clarifying the limits of the wills of the Holy Lawgiver, in addition to the virginity of this study, especially when comparing two important sciences concerned with the significance of the legal discourse represented by the verses and hadiths of rulings. .
There were problems and questions raised by the research in order to reach its answers and reveal its implications, and it was among that, for example – the question about the reasons for the expansion and narrowing of the legal discourse? And
the realization of the saying about the possibility of expansion or narrowing in the circles of discourse, and what is the difference between what the fundamentalist informs of what the interpreter informs about the pseudo-idea, and what is the ratio between the methods of discourse and the argument of expansion and narrowing??
These questions and others like them, the research reached an answer to them by explaining what the style is, with a brief mention of the most important issues related to it from the introduction to the one with the introduction, and then proceeding to explain the location of the expansion or narrowing with the help of the opinions of the two teams with citing a verse or a narration.
And what the researcher found through this journey: is the relationship of the research to cases of conflict that occur between legal discourses.
And if this is the case, then such a study is one of the tasks of research in these forensic sciences. Because of the results it achieves, it flows into the knowledge of what is inside and outside the holy street, especially if it is met between the science of origins and interpretation.