عنوان مقاله [English]
Causality, which is one of the principles of existence and thought, is one of the important issues in the field of religious knowledge (studies). Shiite thinkers, as a rationalist current, have always defended the principle of causality and explained its rulings and types. Division of cause into complete (perfect), incomplete (partial), real, preparing, simple, compound (composite), proximate, remote, etc. in philosophy and division into cause, condition, appropriateness (necessary), hindrance (hindering) and preparer, etc. in the knowledge of principles of jurisprudence, is one of the common topics between these two studies. Philosophers have done this division mostly by the method of dichotomy exclusion, and the scholars of the knowledge of principles have presented multiple divisions according to the jurisprudential and practical credentials. In this article, we have comparatively studied the divisions of cause in these two sciences by an analytical method, and by criticizing of the explanation principally, we have shown that the division of causes in the dichotomy method is more coherent and convincing and faces fewer problems. In addition, some divisions of motive (reason) in the knowledge of principles can be interpreted based on the common division in philosophy.