Abstract
Ijtimāʾ al-amr wal-nahī (combining command and prohibition in a single case from a single
standpoint) is one of the important discussions in uṣūl al-fiqh (the science of the principles of
jurisprudence): Can a single case have two different rulings of wujūb (obligation) and ḥurmah
(prohibited) in two different ways and be both amr (commanded) and nahī (prohibited)? A wellknown example of this is performing prayer in a usurped house, which is prayer in one regard
and usury in another. Is it permissible to combine command and prohibition in this prayer?
Āyatullāh Sayyid Muḥammad-Kāẓim Ṭabāṭabāʾī-Yazdī, the author of the book, al-ʿUrwat alWuthqā, although he holds to the famous Imāmī perspective regarding the prohibition of
combining command and prohibition, he himself believes in the permissibility of combining the
commanded and the prohibited and seeks to respond to the arguments of those who deny this. In
this article, we will criticize the responses of Āyatullāh Ṭabāṭabāʾī-Yazdī to the arguments of the
deniers and it seems that his responses have problems and are not sufficient to reject the
arguments of the deniers of combining command and prohibition.
Keywords: Sayyid Muḥammad-Kāẓim Ṭabāṭabāʾī-Yazdī, the author of al-ʿUrwat al-Wuthqā,
principles of jurisprudence, combining command and prohibition, prayer in a usurped house