The present study aims to critically analyze the philosophical-jurisprudential foundations of the right of withdrawal for consumers in contracts for purchasing digital cultural goods and to critique Article 37 of Iran's Electronic Commerce Law based on the rule of no harm, the principle of consent, the rule of destruction, and the principle of contract bindingness. This research has been conducted using an analytical-critical method and library resources. The research population includes jurisprudential and legal texts as well as relevant scientific articles published between 2001 and 2023. The research sample was purposefully selected from authoritative sources of Imamiyyah jurisprudence (works of Sheikh Ansari, Khoei, Makarem Shirazi, and Safi Golpayegani), Iranian statutory laws, and EU Directives 2011/83/EU and 2019/770/EU. The data collection tool was note-taking, and its validity and reliability were ensured by referencing primary sources. The findings indicate that the rule of no harm and the principle of consent provide the basis for granting the right of rescission to the consumer, and the rule of destruction justifies the condition for the legitimate exercise of this right (deletion of the digital copy). Article 37 of Iran's Electronic Commerce Law suffers from three fundamental flaws: failure to distinguish between physical and digital goods, ignoring the option of defect (Khiyar al-Ayb), and failing to provide a mechanism for deleting the digital copy. The results show that granting the right of withdrawal to consumers of digital goods does not conflict with the fundamental principles of Imamiyyah jurisprudence, and that amending Article 37 is necessary.