According to the Research Institute for Contemporary Jurisprudence Studies, the 265th academic session of this institute, titled “The Relationship Between the Jurisprudence of Ethics and the Jurisprudence of Education,” was held on Thursday, 1 January 2026, at the institute. This session, organized by the Social Jurisprudence, Ethics, and Education Group of the Research Institute for Contemporary Jurisprudence Studies, featured a presentation by Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Qadir Ali Shams, professor of advanced lectures in the jurisprudence of education, and was scientifically moderated by Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Hasan Bosliki, a member of the group’s scientific council.
At the beginning of the session, Dr. Bosliki, while congratulating the auspicious days of the birth of the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him), referring to the historical focus of seminaries on the jurisprudence of rulings, stated: “For years, it was criticized that the activities of the seminaries were more concentrated on practical treatises, and the extensive needs of society in areas such as economy and culture were less addressed. Fortunately, in the past two decades, attention to the domains of ethics and education has increased.”
The scientific moderator of the session, while outlining two approaches to the jurisprudence of ethics—one involving the extraction of the fivefold rulings for ethical topics such as truthfulness and fulfillment of covenants, and the other deducing the ethical system of religion—enumerated three conceptions of educational jurisprudence:
Extraction of the fivefold rulings for educational actions.
Presenting fundamental educational questions to religion in order to discover the educational system.
Deducing common jurisprudential rulings while taking educational considerations into account.
Subsequently, Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Qadir Ali Shams, professor of advanced lectures in the jurisprudence of education, while congratulating the births of Imam Jawad (peace be upon him) and the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him), declared: “The jurisprudence of ethics and the jurisprudence of education are two terms with two different conceptions in the seminary; some adopt the conventional jurisprudential perspective, while others adopt an instructive and epistemological approach. Both perspectives are necessary, and the seminary must address both.”
The professor of advanced lectures in the jurisprudence of education, in defining the jurisprudence of ethics, explained that ethics consists of a collection of virtues and vices of the soul and the actions arising from them, and reminded: “If we consider this collection as the actions of obligated persons, examining the religious rulings on virtues, vices, and ethical actions is precisely what is discussed under the title of the jurisprudence of ethics.”
He further stated regarding the jurisprudence of education: “Education consists of a set of actions that the educator performs for the growth of the educand. If we wish to extract the religious rulings for these actions, this is precisely the jurisprudence of education; from the duties of parents and teachers to the role of the Islamic government.”
Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Qadir Ali Shams also pointed to the differences between these two domains and explained that the subject of the jurisprudence of ethics is virtues, vices, and ethical actions, whereas the subject of the jurisprudence of education is the behaviors of the educator aimed at the growth of the educand. He added that the evidences and sources of these two are different, each requiring specific methods of ijtihad and deduction, and these sciences may share in defining concepts, but their boundaries are clear.
During the academic session, questions and points from the attendees and professors were raised, enriching the discussion.
One of the attendees, referring to the broad definition of ethics, asked whether all human actions could not be considered influenced by soul traits, thereby making the subject of ethics encompass both traits and actions.
Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Shams, in response, stated: “This is one of the serious challenges we have faced in categorizing topics in the jurisprudence of ethics. We have placed actions that have a close connection with dispositions and traits under the title of ethics, and for a positive criterion, we have relied on the titles discussed in ethical books. We have also added social etiquettes such as maintaining kinship ties and greeting to the jurisprudence of ethics.”
Subsequently, the scientific moderator of the session, by posing a question about the objectives of the jurisprudence of ethics and the jurisprudence of education, said: “Ethics is a normative knowledge that evaluates values, but education seeks efficacy; that is, it wants methods that in practice instill virtues in the soul of the educand. The question is: in the jurisprudence of education, does the religious duty take precedence, or educational efficacy?”
The professor of advanced lectures in the jurisprudence of education, in response to this point, emphasized: “The task of the jurist is to identify the duty, but he cannot remain unaware of the effects and outcomes. The conditions of time and place influence the fatwa; a method that was effective in the past may yield reverse results today. Therefore, attention to functionality alongside duty is essential.”
In another part of the question-and-answer section, one of the virtual participants asked whether the jurisprudence of education could be based on virtue ethics and the jurisprudence of ethics on deontology.
Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Shams, in response, said: “In conventional jurisprudence, both are deontological. The jurist specifies the duty of the obligated person, whether in ethical titles or educational ones. Of course, the primary goal of jurisprudence is to identify the real duty; if definitive evidences are not accessible, recourse is made to valid presumptive evidences and ultimately to practical principles.”
He, in explaining the difference between the jurisprudential and educational perspectives, added: “In jurisprudence, duty-orientation is the principle, but in the science of education and ethics, the efficacy of methods is important. Each must properly fulfill its responsibility in its own domain; the jurist determines the duty, and the educator provides effective methods.”
The session continued with the scientific moderator presenting examples regarding the integration of the duty-oriented jurisprudential perspective with the efficacy-oriented educational perspective; including the example of a father who considered his religious duty in waking his child for prayer to involve physical punishment, but the practical result was the child’s alienation from prayer and religion.
The academic session of the Research Institute for Contemporary Jurisprudence Studies demonstrated that although the jurisprudence of ethics and the jurisprudence of education differ in subject and method, they ultimately complement each other. The jurisprudence of ethics examines the religious rulings on virtues, vices, and ethical actions, while the jurisprudence of education oversees the behaviors of the educator aimed at the growth of the educand.
In the question-and-answer sections, it also became clear that jurisprudential duty-orientation without attention to educational efficacy can yield reverse results. Therefore, the session’s conclusion emphasized that combining the duty-oriented jurisprudential perspective with the efficacy-oriented educational perspective is not only necessary but also a path toward producing more effective and responsive knowledge in the domains of ethics and education.