The four schools agreed on the Qur’an, Sunnah, Ijmaa of the Companions,
Qiyas, and Urf, yet there were differences. These differences weren’t a product of mere fancies, there were solid
academic reasons for them.
However, It does go back to individual Ijtihad. We also have cases where the
companions differed over the instruction of the Prophet:
The Prophet gave a seal of approval to both judgments, because what he said carried the possibility of both.
- Narrated Ibn Umar: "On the day of Al-Ahzab, the Prophet said, "None of you Muslims should offer the 'Asr prayer but at Banu Quraitha's place." The 'Asr prayer became due for some of them on the way. Some of those said, "We will not offer it till we reach it, the place of Banu Quraitha," while some others said, "No, we will pray at this spot, for the Prophet did not mean that for us." Later on it was mentioned to the Prophet and he did not berate any of the two groups." (Bukhari)
The Prophet gave a seal of approval to both judgments, because what he said carried the possibility of both.
What were the reasons for conflicting rulings?
1) The Interpretation of Word Meanings and Grammatical Constructions
a) Shared literal meanings
E.g. In (2:228):
The schools divided into two groups concerning the ruling of this verse, as it can be translated to both the time of her period and the time of purity between it.
In the case of the scholars who favoured the former view (Malik, Ash-Shafi'i, Ahmed ibn Hanbal), the divorce will not be finalized until the woman ends her third period.
In the case of the latter view (Abu Hanifa), the divorce is finalized as soon as she begins her third period.
We solve this difference by studying the evidence. When doing so, we find that it supports the latter view, thus showing us that we can't always go with the majority. We only do so when there's lack of evidence.
We understand the meaning of the word through the context. For example, if someone said, "The man shot an an arrow from his bow" we assume that it wasn't the kind of bow a girl puts in her hair. It isn't totally impossible, but it's certainly not the first idea that would come to mind.
b) Literal and Figurative Meanings
E.g. As in the case of Imam Shafi'i's ruling that touching a woman breaks Wudhoo, due to his literal interpretation of the verse in the Qur'an.
c) Different Grammatical Usages
In (2:187) "Ila" means 'up to but not including', whereas in (19:86) it means 'up to and including'. This is why scholars differed over its meaning in (5:6):
The four Imams all agreed that it meant 'up to and including', supported by the narrations which describe the Prophets method of performing Wudhoo. However one of Abu Hanifahs students, Imam Dawud Ath-Thahiree, and some of Maliks students interpreted it to mean 'up to and not including'.
a) Shared literal meanings
E.g. In (2:228):
The schools divided into two groups concerning the ruling of this verse, as it can be translated to both the time of her period and the time of purity between it.
In the case of the scholars who favoured the former view (Malik, Ash-Shafi'i, Ahmed ibn Hanbal), the divorce will not be finalized until the woman ends her third period.
In the case of the latter view (Abu Hanifa), the divorce is finalized as soon as she begins her third period.
We solve this difference by studying the evidence. When doing so, we find that it supports the latter view, thus showing us that we can't always go with the majority. We only do so when there's lack of evidence.
We understand the meaning of the word through the context. For example, if someone said, "The man shot an an arrow from his bow" we assume that it wasn't the kind of bow a girl puts in her hair. It isn't totally impossible, but it's certainly not the first idea that would come to mind.
b) Literal and Figurative Meanings
E.g. As in the case of Imam Shafi'i's ruling that touching a woman breaks Wudhoo, due to his literal interpretation of the verse in the Qur'an.
c) Different Grammatical Usages
In (2:187) "Ila" means 'up to but not including', whereas in (19:86) it means 'up to and including'. This is why scholars differed over its meaning in (5:6):
The four Imams all agreed that it meant 'up to and including', supported by the narrations which describe the Prophets method of performing Wudhoo. However one of Abu Hanifahs students, Imam Dawud Ath-Thahiree, and some of Maliks students interpreted it to mean 'up to and not including'.
2) Hadith Narrations
a) The level of Hadith availability
The scholars would make judgements based on the Hadiths available to them, and not necessarily the correct Hadiths. When they couldn't find Hadith they would make Qiyas.
E.g. Abu Hanifa ruled that Istisqa didn't include a formal congregation prayer, basing his position on the Hadith of Anas ibn Malik in which the Prophet made a dua for rain without praying. His students and the rest of the Imams, however, ruled that it was correct, as there is a narration which shows us that the Prophet did in fact pray. They left his stance when they came across the evidence which proved contrary.
b) Weak Narrators of Hadith
Some jurists based their rulings on weak Hadiths, either because they were unaware it was weak, or as Imam Ahmed chose – they would prefer making a ruling based on a weak Hadith over Qiyas.
c) When some aspects of the Hadith contained defects, some held that it would automatically cancel out the Hadith, while others didnt.
d) How preference was given to conflicting narrations.
When two Hadiths appeared to contradict each other, the scholars took two different approaches:
-> Tarjeeh: Choosing what he considered the best and rejecting the rest
-> Jama': Combining apparently contradictory Hadith by declaring one general and another more specific (e.g. Forbiddance to pray after ‘Aṣr vs. obligation of praying two Rak`âh when entering the masjid). We interpret the general according to the specific.
Imam Abu Hanifa gave preference to the first Hadith and ruled that all forms of prayer were forbidden during the forbidden times.
The other Imams held that the first Hadith was general and agreed that it referred to prayers done without a specific cause or instruction. So the general statement was interpreted according to the specific.
a) The level of Hadith availability
The scholars would make judgements based on the Hadiths available to them, and not necessarily the correct Hadiths. When they couldn't find Hadith they would make Qiyas.
E.g. Abu Hanifa ruled that Istisqa didn't include a formal congregation prayer, basing his position on the Hadith of Anas ibn Malik in which the Prophet made a dua for rain without praying. His students and the rest of the Imams, however, ruled that it was correct, as there is a narration which shows us that the Prophet did in fact pray. They left his stance when they came across the evidence which proved contrary.
b) Weak Narrators of Hadith
Some jurists based their rulings on weak Hadiths, either because they were unaware it was weak, or as Imam Ahmed chose – they would prefer making a ruling based on a weak Hadith over Qiyas.
c) When some aspects of the Hadith contained defects, some held that it would automatically cancel out the Hadith, while others didnt.
d) How preference was given to conflicting narrations.
When two Hadiths appeared to contradict each other, the scholars took two different approaches:
-> Tarjeeh: Choosing what he considered the best and rejecting the rest
-> Jama': Combining apparently contradictory Hadith by declaring one general and another more specific (e.g. Forbiddance to pray after ‘Aṣr vs. obligation of praying two Rak`âh when entering the masjid). We interpret the general according to the specific.
Imam Abu Hanifa gave preference to the first Hadith and ruled that all forms of prayer were forbidden during the forbidden times.
The other Imams held that the first Hadith was general and agreed that it referred to prayers done without a specific cause or instruction. So the general statement was interpreted according to the specific.
3) The Principles the Imams used
Imam Abu Hanifa
placed the condition that the Hadith would have to be authentic and well known
before using it as a proof, whereas it being authentic was sufficient for the other scholars.
The Maliki
school included the common actions of the Madeenites, and it became a source of
Islamic law for them. The other scholars didn’t accept this.
4) Qiyas
This relied on
scholars being able to see connections between what is ruled on and known, and different people had different levels of insight. What might have appeared to
one scholar may have not to another.
The greatest differences tended to be in this area.
good work but more evidence needed... may Allah bless your effort.
ReplyDelete