The present paper is an attempt to study the concept of amr (order) from four perspectives. In the first place, the etymology of amr (in Arabic a m r) is discussed. Order has two usages: one material and one extractable, but one cannot categorically say that there is commonality between the truth and metaphorical references of the word amr. If there are contradictions in understanding the objective of the Legislator, one should refer to the practical principle.
Secondly, this concept should be studied in the light of credibility of superiority in amr (order). Asking in general is divided into two kinds: one is commandment and order and another is request. What changes request into an order is a psychological or carnal condition, which is created in the psyche of the seeker and conditions his psychological request or demand. This condition is seeking superiority. Therefore, superiority, which is an external evolutionary reality, has no role in conditioning carnal request. Hence, if seeking is without the condition of superiority, it is a request, but if it is conditioned with superiority it is an order.
In the third section, attempts have been made to find answer to the following question: is the gamut of the concept order truth of obligation? It is argued that it has been coined for ordering. Moreover, ordering means a demand whose object is superior and entails implementation.
Finally, the experts of principles of jurisprudence, besides discussing the abovementioned issues, also discuss request (demand) and will and their differences through a theological approach. However, this issue is not analyzed in this paper, rather the issue is explained without offering the viewpoints of the author of this paper.