Ravanshenasi & Din

Some therapeutic techniques such as 'thought stopping,' 'exposure and response prevention,' and 'habituation training,' which are used for treating obsessive disorder (OD), may require the deliberate evocation of lustful thoughts. The deliberate recall of arousing lustful thoughts is subject to jurisprudential examination. In this regard, the present study aimed to analyze the intervention process and determine the prescriptive and declaratory rulings of intervention based on the deliberate evocation of such thoughts for therapists, as well as the prescriptive ruling of obeying these methods for clients. This research employed an ijtihad-based method, utilizing authentic sources, religious evidence, and the opinions of jurists. The findings showed that: 1. Only in cases where the resulting arousal is at the highest level of intensity and there is a fear of committing a forbidden act, the ruling of prohibition applies; 2. Given the existence of alternative methods for treating obsessive disorder, the deliberate evocation of arousing lustful thoughts for the purpose of treatment is prohibited if it results in arousal and the commission of a forbidden act by the client; however, the income earned from it, for the therapist is unproblematic. Accordingly, it was concluded that before choosing this method, the therapist must assess the client's level of arousal, using appropriate tools, and if there is a definite or reliable probability of the client committing a forbidden act, alternative treatments should be used.