Document Type : Original Article
Ph.D Candidate in Islamic Law & Jurisprudence, Science & Research Branch, Tehran, Iran
Assistant Professor in Islamic Law & Jurisprudence, Science & Research Branch, Tehran, Iran
Professor in Islamic Law & Jurisprudence, Science & Research Branch, Tehran, Iran
Various views have been expressed in the analysis of the nature of Reward. In this paper, the two main views of the mutual contract and unilateral obligation nature of Reward have been aimed to explain by referring to a few points. The supporters of the Reward consider the agreement and acceptance of the worker as a condition for the realization of it. But, according to the view of jurisprudents -who chose the theory of being unilateral obligation of Reward - the acceptance of the worker does not have an effect on the offer (Ijab) of conductor and would not be considered as a pillar in this regard. These jurisprudents regarded being mutual contract of Reward would entail of ignoring the general rules of contracts. In return, some jurisprudents have also cited other ideas such as causation, interval between mutual contract and unilateral obligation, and being requirement of Reward. They believe that Reward is absolutely not a mutual contract or a unilateral obligation. In the midst of this difference of opinions, the present paper, investigating the nature of Reward, follows the theory of being requirement of Reward.