Risk in the economic activities has forced the capital owners to guarantee the security of their principal. This fact holds more significance for the owners of micro assets like bank depositors [and investors]. Keeping in view the prohibition of Riba (usury) in Islam, the idea of including the Stipulation of guaranteeing the capital in economic contracts, and in particular the Stipulation of manager's guarantee in Mudaraba contracts, has been under study of the Islamic intellectuals and financial designers. Although some of the jurists consider the Stipulation of manager-guarantee as to be valid, others believe this condition is against the nature of the contract and is therefore invalid. Furthermore some of the jurists believe that this clause leads to a transformation of the contract from Mudaraba to loan. So they consider the owner's share in profits as riba (usury).Keeping in view the importance and application of the condition of manager's guarantee and difference of opinion among the jurists regarding this matter, this research tries to review and discuss the arguments of both the supporters and opposers. Our hypothesis was that the guarantee Stipulation is against the contract nature and transforms Mozarebah into a loan, but the results show that:1- Although the Stipulation of guarantee brings the agreement of Mudaraba close to a loan, but due to some fundamental differences between these two, does not transform it into a loan.2- The most important argument on invalidity of the guarantee Stipulation in a Mudaraba contract, are the specific traditions (hadith) narrated regarding this issue, whereas all the other arguments are not strong enough.

Article 1069 of the Iranian civil code has voided Stipulation of the right of recession in marriage contract but it is silent about the effect of void of Stipulation on contract, while in theImamiyyah jurisprudence in addition to the void of Stipulation of the right of recession in marriage contract, the famous maintain such Stipulation as void. However the question is whether the void of Stipulation is based on the strong reasons and whether the aforementioned Stipulation must be considered merely as a void Stipulation or the void of marriage contract is necessary too? Moreover, is the void of Stipulation appertained to perpetual marriage or is it also true in temporary marriage? The present study, taking a descriptive-analytical method of research, has reinvestigated the subject from juridical and legal viewpoint. Analyzing the different reasons, it concludes that from jurisprudential view as a whole, the stronger opinion is void of perpetual marriage contract (not temporary marriage). Principally, this Stipulation does not render marriage contract void. The silence of the legislator on the void of marriage contract also depends on the acceptance of validity of marriage contract. Of course not distinguishing between the perpetual and temporary contract as to the void of Stipulation of the right of recession deserves criticism and amendment.

Bail (Kafala) is an irrevocable contract. Although under the principles applicable to irrevocable contracts, Stipulation of option in these contracts is permitted, the legislator has not declared whether such Stipulation is valid or void. Therefore, the main question remains what is the remedy of Stipulation of option in bail contract? Different opinions have been suggested by Islamic jurists and it is necessary to determine the valid opinion and accordingly, the legal status through comparative study and criticizing the suggested opinions. The purpose of the present paper is to determine whether Stipulation of option in bail contract is valid or void according to valid fatawi (verdicts) through descriptive method and destruction of valid jurisprudence sources and library tools. As the most important result of this research we can say that Stipulation of option in bail contract is valid and in addition to the Stipulation, the contract is valid as well. Therefore, the legislator is recommended to enact an article and declare the validity of Stipulation of option in bail contract and end the current controversies.

There is no doubt that the existence of inflation will cause a depreciation of the currency. The question arises here: if one person lends another a certain amount, should the debtor in agreed time only return the same amount (nominal value) or if he or she is also the guarantor of the depreciation of the money. In this regard, some have considered the necessity of the guarantee of depreciation of the currency and some do not accept the guarantee of currency depreciation and some have differentiated between the case of high inflation and low inflation and others have detailed between usurpation and non-usurpation. It has been concluded in this article, while analyzing the nature of money and emphasizing the credibility of the value of money that if a person lends an amount to another and during the contract stipulates that the debtor must calculate and pay the depreciation of the money in addition to the nominal value according to inflation, complying with this condition is required and paying the amount equivalent to the amount of depreciation of the money is not considered augmentation in debt contract and it is not usury, but if the condition for the reduction of the value of the currency has not been fulfilled in the debt contract, it is not necessary to compensate for the depreciation of the currency (whether in the case of low or high inflation).

Since the aim of translating religious texts is to explain religious and Islamic concepts for ordinary people and to make them clear for public, translators of religious texts must do their jobs very meticulously and with extreme care in order to respond to the needs of people. In this way, they can offer an equivalent translation of original religious texts. To achieve this objective, translators must do some modifications in their texts. In this way, they can present an understandable text to their readers. Stipulation in the process of translation is one of such modifications. This technique was initially employed by Viney and Darblenet. This type of modification is completely done by translators. This is a strategy that is intentionally employed by translators in order to disambiguate the translated text. Fizol-Islam was a religious scholar who translated a lot of religious texts, including the Quran, the Nahjolbalagheh, and the Sahifato al-Sajadieh. This study was a descriptive-analytical research that was conducted on the basis of a linguistic approach. The aim was to examine “Stipulation” as one of the main characteristics of Fizol-Islam’s translations, and to show how it can improve the translation of religious texts. Using this technique, he managed to explain the meaning of unfamiliar and culturally-based words for readers. He used a number of techniques such as “deletion”, “replacement”, and “reference” to offer a coherent translation to the readers. This makes his translations understandable for readers and paves the way for them to obtain a clear understanding of the original texts. Also, this creates a coherent and disambiguated text for interested readers without being challenged by any serious complexity in the translated text. It must be added that his translations of religious texts have special characteristics. He opened new horizons in the field of translating religious texts. This can be called a “Theory of Elaboration”. In fact, his method is somewhere between Stipulation and interpretation of religious texts.

After accepting that the requirement of the essence of marriage contract is not marital relation and sexual intercourse, one of its related branches is the state of dowry therein stability and instability in the supposition of stipulating not engaging in sexual intercourse if in the mentioned situation also like the cases of divorce, after the marriage contract, the ownership of wife to the half of the dowry is established and to the other half is not firmed up or her possession to all of dowry for just the marriage contract is established. After analyzing and studying evidences and the opinions of Islamic jurists and law scholars and with the documentary-analytic method the authors he problem of the realm of fiqh relates with an extensive network of subjects which each has been propounded in its specific area. One of the effective subjects to solve this problem is to extract the quiddity of legal rules to get its range. Explaining the quiddity of permissibility (Arabic: اباحه ibahah) and mentioning the have accepted that the sexual intercourse is a precondition and restrictive factor for the establishment of dowry and although there have been aspects for establishing the total of dowry in the condition of not engaging in sexual intercourse but these aspects are disputable and in contrast the aspects such as the stipulated benefit in the case of the benefit of condition, the validity of the title of the wife who are not engaged in sexual intercourse in the situation of divorce, the possibility of tanqih al-manat (extraction of the underlying reason) being of the cases of establishing half of dowry in the situation of the annulment of marriage before sexual intercourse indicate the division of the value of dowry in half. Therefore, the opinion of dividing the dowry in half has been justified and substantiated.

The necessity of Calling People to the Goodness and Preventing People from Evil is subjected to some conditions which one of them is the effect possibility. The most jurists believe that Calling People to the Goodness and Preventing People from Evil shall have the "suspended and conditional necessity" proportionate to the effect possibility clause so that the necessity of Calling People to the Goodness and Preventing People from Evil shall become void, if we know that it is ineffective. The authors, while revising the issue, chose another word and believed that such condition was not accurate and Calling People to the Goodness and Preventing People from Evil is indispensable even if it is ineffective. The present article shall defend the opinion of authors and in line with the clarification of their option, verify and criticize the famous opinions and documents and submit an addendum based on non-Stipulation.

A popular theory of Imami jurists is the condition of paying all prices at the assembly of the short sale contract before the parties to the contract are divided. If this condition is violated, they have ruled that the transaction is corrupt, but on the other hand, this condition does not apply Forward contract. Basically, the idea of this type of contract (pre-sale / pre-purchase contract) today is that customers cannot pay full price and negotiate in installments. This research is written with a descriptive analysis method to test the hypothesis that it is not necessary to pay the entire price at the contract meeting, the client can pay part or all of the price after the contract meeting and any financial agreement on paying feesin installmentsdoes not violate the short sale nature of the transaction, in the author's opinion, the lawyer argued that the situation was distorted.

A popular theory of Imami jurists is the condition of paying all prices at the assembly of the short sale contract before the parties to the contract are divided. If this condition is violated, they have ruled that the transaction is corrupt, but on the other hand, this condition does not apply Forward contract. Basically, the idea of this type of contract (pre-sale / pre-purchase contract) today is that customers cannot pay full price and negotiate in installments. This research is written with a descriptive analysis method to test the hypothesis that it is not necessary to pay the entire price at the contract meeting, the client can pay part or all of the price after the contract meeting and any financial agreement on paying feesin installmentsdoes not violate the short sale nature of the transaction, in the author's opinion, the lawyer argued that the situation was distorted.

Unlawful proft (usury) transaction is one of the types of usages that the famous jurists consider the three conditions of being: 1-module (measurement) and being weighty, 2-obtaining excess and 3-consideration in kind. The meaning of the same objects in the jurisprudence words is that if the custom carries a particular word on two identical objects, the two cannot be traded with one another in subtraction and must be equal in quantity. This jurists’ word is while people’ s custom for two similar goods but with different traits, differ different trading values and reason also dictates that the taking of excess is not only permissible, but will require the transaction. The jurists referring to the traditions mentioned in this regard have assumed this condition as a unchallengeable and binding (canon law) and have all ruled on it consensus. In this research, while examining the reasons, we conclude that the traditions of this subject do not imply the necessity of being the objects similarity in the interpretation which the jurists have and the criterion of “ being equal” can be substituted for being the objects similarity. Thus, if the value of the two commodities were not the same, it would be not only the taking of excessis permissible, but also the taking of excess is the exact unlawful proft.