Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:26:29.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Was al-Shafiʿi the Master Architect of Islamic Jurisprudence?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2009

Wael B. Hallaq
Wael B. Hallaq
Affiliation:
Teaches at the Institute of Islamic Studies, McGill University, 3485 McTavish Street, Morrice Hall, Montreal, Quebec H3A 1Y1, Canada.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

During the last three or four decades, modern scholarship has increasingly come to recognize Muhammad Ibn Idris al-Shafiʿi (d. 820) as having played a most central role in the early development of Islamic jurisprudence. It was Joseph Schacht who, more than anyone else, demonstrated Shafiʿi's remarkable success in anchoring the entire edifice of the law not only in the Qurʾan, which by his time was taken for granted, but mainly, and more importantly, in the traditions of the Prophet. Shafiʿi's prominent status has been further bolstered by the fact that he was the first Muslim jurist ever to articulate his legal theory in writing, in what has commonly become known as al-Risāla.

Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Middle East Studies , Volume 25 , Issue 4 , November 1993 , pp. 587 - 605
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

Author's note: This article represents an expanded version of two lectures delivered at the MESA annual meeting in New Orleans (19–22 November 1985) and at the University of Chicago (5 November 1987).

1 See Schacht, Joseph, The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence (Oxford, 1975).Google Scholar

2 Shākir, Aḥmad Muḥammad, ed. (Cairo, 1892).Google Scholar For the original title of the work and the presumed reasons for its composition, see Khadduri, Majid, trans., Al-Imām Muḥammad ibn Idrīs al-Shāfiʿ ī's al-Risālafi Uṣūl al-Fiqh, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1987), 19 ffGoogle Scholar.; al-Dīn, Fakhral-Rāzī, Muḥammad ibn ʿUmar, Irshād al-ṭālibin ilā al-minhāj al-qawim fī bayān manāqib al-imām al-Shāfiʿi, ed. al-Saqqā, Ahmad (Cairo, 1986), 153;Google ScholarMakdisi, George, “The Juridical Theology of Shāfiʿī: Origins and Significance of Uṣūl al-Fiqh” Studia Islamica 59 (1984): 6, 9.Google Scholar

3 See, for example, Goldziher, Ignaz, The ẓāhirīs: Their Doctrine and Their History, trans. Behn, W. (Leiden, 1971), 20–21;Google ScholarCoulson, N. J., A History of Islamic Law (Edinburgh, 1964), 56;Google ScholarSchacht, Joseph, An Introduction to Islamic Law (Oxford, 1979), 48.Google Scholar

4 See Khadduri's, introduction to his translation of the Risāla, 42Google Scholar.

5 See, for example, Rāzī, , Irshād, 156;Google ScholarCoulson, , History, 61Google Scholar

6 Coulson, , History, 53.Google Scholar

7 al-Nadīm, Ibn, Fihrist (Beirut, 1978), 286.Google Scholar

8 Ibid., 287.

9 Ibid., 286, 289.

10 Ibid., 297.

11 al-Subkī, Tāj al-Din, Ṭabaqāt al-shāfiʿiyya al-kubrā, 6 vols., 2nd ed. (repr., Beirut, n.d.), 1:277.Google Scholar

12 See n. 13 as well as Hidāyat, Abū Bakral-Ḥusaynī, Allāh, Ṭabaqāt al-shāfiʿiyya, ed. Nuwayhiḍ, ʿādil (Beirut, 1979), 90Google Scholar, where a reference is made to the chapter on ablution, a chapter that has no place in uṣūl al-fiqh works.

13 Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:227. The work clearly treats positive law because Subki remarks that he has in his possession an incomplete copy of the work “up to the chapter on bankruptcy (taflī)Google Scholar.”

14 Subkī (ibid., 2:226) characterizes the work as one concerned with “fiqh and khilāfiyyāt”; see also Allāh, ʿAbdal-Marāghī, Muṣṭafā, al-Fatḥ al-mubīn fī ṭabaqāt al-uṣūliyyīn, 3 vols. (Cairo, n.d.), 1:177.Google Scholar

15 Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:108.Google Scholar We ought to mention that the term uṣūl is at times used to mean “standard” or “classical” works; see al-Dhahabī, Shams al-Dīn, Siyar aʿlām al-nubalāʾ, ed. al-Arnāʾūt, Shuʿayb and al-Būshī, Akram, 23 vols. (Beirut, 1986), 15:438Google Scholar, who speaks of a certain Abū al-ʿAbbās al-Miṣrī as having usurped 500 uṣūl volumes from the library of a colleague.

16 It is to be noted here that Shāfiʿī does not know the designation uṣūl al-fiqh, and his use of the term aṣl or uṣūl does not carry the connotation attached to it later. He seems to have given his treatise the title al-Kitāb. Only later did it come to be known as al-Risāla, probably going through a period of transition in which it was known as Kitāb al-risāla. For evidence of the original title of the work, see Khadduri, , trans., Risala, pars, 96, 332, 573, passimGoogle Scholar.

17 Ikhtilāf uṣūl al-madhāhib, ed. Ghālib, Muṣṭafā (Beirut, 1973).Google Scholar

18 al-Nadīm, Ibn, Fihrist, 289.Google Scholar

19 Subki, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:78.Google Scholar

20 Goldziher, , ẓāhirīs, 34–35.Google Scholar

21 al-Nadīm, Ibn, Fihrist, 303Google Scholar

22 Ibid., 306; see also Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:46.Google Scholar

23 The exception is the case of Ḥusayn ibnʿAli al-Karābisī (d. 859 or 862) who is described by al-ʿAbbādī, Abū ʿāṣim in Ṭabaqāt al-fuqahāʾ al-shāfiʿiyya (ed. Vitestam, Gästa [Leiden, 1964], 24–25)Google Scholar as “one of the early jurists who was knowledgeable in uṣūl” and by al-Shīrāzī, Abū Isḥāq in Ṭabaqat al-fuqahāʾ (ed. ʿAbbās, Iḥsān [Beirut, 1970], 102)Google Scholar as having “written many works on uṣūl al-fiqh and furūʿ”; see also Dhahabī, , Siyar, 12:79–81.Google Scholar It is to be noted, however, that later sources report no work written by Kārābīsī on the subject. In fact, the most detailed biographical account on Kārabīsī provided by Subkī, (Ṭabaqāt, 1:251–56)Google Scholar does not associate him with uṣūl al-fiqh, either as an author or as a scholar.

24 Abī, Muḥammad ibnal-Rāzi, Ḥātim, ādāb al-Shāfiʿi wa-manāqibuhu, ed. al-Khāliq, ʿAbd al-Ghanī ʿAbd (Cairo, 1953), 61–62.Google Scholar

25 Abī, Muḥammad ibnal-Farrāʾ, Yaʿlā Ibn, Ṭabaqāt al-ḥanābila, ed. Fiqī, M. H., 2 vols. (Cairo, 1952), 1:57.Google Scholar

26 Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 1:250–1.Google Scholar

27 See, for example, al-Ḥusayn, Ahmad ibnal-Bayhaqī, Abū Bakr, Manaqib al-Shāfīʿi, ed. Ṣaqr, Aḥmad, 2 vols. (Cairo, 1971), 1:236;Google ScholarSubkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 1:242.Google Scholar

28 Muzanī's, commentary is edited and translated by Brunschvig, Robert in “Le livre de l'ordre et de la défense d'al-Muzani,” Bulletin d'études orientates 11 (1945–1946):145–94; Arabic text, 153–63.Google Scholar

29 Najjār, Mzuḥammad Zahrī, ed., 8 vols. (Cairo, 1961), 7:291–92.Google Scholar

30 Only pp. 153–56 (line 4) of Kitāb al-amr wa-al-nahy treat the purported meaning (ʿalā maʿnā) of Shāfiʿ ī's doctrine, although it is highly likely that even pp. 153 (line 20)–56 represent Muzanī's own views, not those of ShāfiʿīGoogle Scholar.

31 On the traditionalists (ahl al-ḥadīth) and the rationalists (ahl al-raʾy), see Goldziher, , ẓāhirīs, 6–19;Google ScholarSchacht, , Origins, 36–81, 253–57, passim.Google Scholar

32 al-Dīn, ZaynQuṭlūbughā, Qāsim ibn, Tāj al-tarājim fī ṭabaqāt al-ḥanafiyya (Baghdad, 1962), 19–20.Google Scholar

33 Dhahabī, , Siyar, 12:500;Google ScholarSubkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 1:224.Google Scholar Most biographical works attribute al-Miṣrī's critical attitude toward Shāfiʿī to a personal conflict between the two.

34 So must we take Abū Zakiriyyāʾ al-Kinānī's (d. 902) al-Ḥujja fi al-radd ʿalā al-Shāfiʿi; see Sezgin, Fuat, Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, 9 vols. (Leiden, 1967–), 1:475, 485.Google Scholar

35 It is interesting to note the change in the title of Khadduri's translation of the Risalā. When it was first published in 1961, the title read Islamic Jurisprudence: Shāfiʿi's Risāla. In the 1987 edition, however, it was entitled, significantly, Al-Shāfiʿi's Risāla fī Uṣūl al-Fiqh: Treatise on the Foundations of Islamic Jurisprudence.

36 Khadduri, , al-Risāla, 41.Google Scholar

37 Cairo, 1969.

38 In his Irshād, 157, al-Fakhr al-Rāzī apologizes for the defects in Shāfiʿī's Risāla, saying in effect that all pioneering works entail some shortcomings.

39 ʿAlī, Muḥammad Amjad, trans. (Karachi, 1968).Google Scholar

40 See n. 23.

41 al-Nadīm, Ibn, Fihrist, 295:Google Scholar “al-Shāfiʿl was a staunch advocate of Shīʿism” (wa-kāna al-Shāfiʿiyyu shadīdan fi al-tashayyuʿ).

42 Rāzī, , Irshād, 44, 104;Google Scholar on 66, Rāzī speaks of Shāfiʿi's outstanding knowledge of dialectic, speculation and disputation-qualities that were entirely absent in the camp of the traditionalists. See also Yaḥyā, Aḥmad ibnal-Murtaḍā, Ibn, Ṭabaqāt al-muʿtazila, ed. Diwald-Wilzer, S. (Wiesbaden, 1961), 43.Google Scholar

43 Rāzī, , Irshād, 44.Google Scholar

44 Cited in Subkī, , Ṭabaqat, 2:149.Google Scholar

45 Ibid., 1:222.

46 Rāzī, , Irshād, 228–29.Google Scholar

47 Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:4;Google ScholarRāzī, , Irshād, 230.Google Scholar

48 Rāzī, , Irshād, 230.Google Scholar

49 al-Farrāʿ, Ibn, Ṭabaqāt, 1:38.Google Scholar

50 On Shāfiʿ'ī's opposition to the traditionalists, see Schacht, , Origins, 128–29.Google Scholar

51 Qutayba, ʿAbd Allāh Ibn, al-Maʿārif (Karachi, 1976), 216–30.Google Scholar

52 See n. 53.

53 Rāzī, , Irshād, 138.Google Scholar Also, alludes, Subkī to Muʿtazilite, Muzanī's tendency (Ṭabaqāt, 1:241).Google Scholar On his kill as a dialectician and lack of qualifications as a traditionist, see Dhahabī, , Siyar, 12:492–93; 14:371. That he was not, strictly speaking, a Muʿtazilite is evidenced by the fact that he is not included in Muʿtazilite biographical works. See, for example, Ibn al-Murtaḍā, Ṭabaqāt al-muʿtazilaGoogle Scholar.

54 See n. 23.

55 Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 1:251–55.Google Scholar

56 Shīrāzī, , Ṭabaqāt, 102.Google Scholar

57 Reported by Subkī on the authority of al-Baghdādī, al-Khaṭīb (Ṭabaqāt, 1:252).Google Scholar

58 It is significant that at this time titles carrying the term furūʿ also begin to appear, furūʿ and uṣūl being now dichotomous; see, for example, Kitāb al-furūʿ by Ibn al-Ḥaddād al-Miṣrī, who died in 956; Dhahabī, , Siyar, 15:446.Google Scholar

The evidence in our sources thus indicates that the appearance of the designation uṣūl al-fiqh as well as of complete works on the subject belongs to the beginning of the 10th century, not to the end of it, as Makdisi seems to suggest; see his “Juridical Theology of Shāfiʿ ī,” 5, 13–14.

59 ʿAbbādī, , Ṭabaqāt, 55;Google ScholarSubkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:242–43.Google Scholar

60 Dhahabī, , Siyar, 15:217–18;Google Scholaral-Nadīm, Ibn (Fihrist, 245–46) states that the author did not complete the work.Google Scholar

61 al-Nadīm, Ibn, Fihrist, 300;Google Scholaral-Ḥayy, ʿAbdal-ʿImād, Ibn, Shadharāt al-dhahab fī akhbār man dhahab, 8 vols. (Cairo, 1931–1932), 2:325;Google ScholarʿAbbādī, , Ṭabaqāt, 69;Google ScholarAbbās, Abū al-ʿibn, AḥmadKhallikān, Muḥammad Ibn, Wafayāt al-aʿyān wa-anbāʾ abnāʾ al-zamān, ed. Abbās, Iḥsān ʿ, 8 vols. (Beirut, 1977), 4:199;Google ScholarShīrāzī, , Ṭabaqāt, 111.Google Scholar

62 al-Nadīm, Ibn, Fihrist, 283.Google Scholar

63 Quṭlūbughā, Ibn, Tāj al-tarājim, 59.Google Scholar

64 Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:103;Google ScholarShīrāzī, , Ṭabaqāt, 111.Google Scholar

65 Shīrāzī, , Ṭabaqāt, 112;Google ScholarSubkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:176 ff.;Google ScholarKhallikān, Ibn, Wafayāt, 4:200–201.Google Scholar

66 Quṭlūbughā, Ibn, Taj al-tarājim, 86.Google Scholar

67 Shīrāzī, , Ṭabaqāt, 112.Google Scholar

68 Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:159.Google Scholar

69 al-Nadīm, Ibn, Fihrist, 330.Google Scholar

70 al-Dīn, Jamālal-Rahīm, ʿAbdal-Asnawī, , Ṭabaqāt al-shāfīʿyya, ed. al-Jubūrī, ʿAbd Allāh, 2 vols. (Baghdad, 1970–1971), 2:123;Google ScholarSubki, , Tabaqat, 2:81–82Google Scholar.

71 Beirut, 1982.

72 Shīrāzī, , Ṭabaqāt, 115;Google ScholarSubkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:217.Google Scholar

73 al-Murtadā, Ibn, Ṭabaqāt, 102.Google Scholar

74 Ibid., 109.

75 ʿAbbādī, , Ṭabaqāt, 69.Google Scholar

76 Shīrazī, , Ṭabaqāt, 112.Google Scholar

77 Asnawī, , Ṭabaqāt 2:472;Google ScholarḤusaynī, , Ṭabaqāt, 245–46.Google Scholar

78 Khadduri, , al-Risāla, 42.Google Scholar

79 Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 3:186, 208.Google Scholar

80 Khallikān, Ibn, Wafayāt, 3:219 ff.Google Scholar

81 Dhahabī, , Siyar, 15:328.Google Scholar

82 Ṣayrafī not only commented on the Risāla but also wrote a rebuttal against al-Kātib's refutation of the work; see al-Nadīm, Ibn, Fihrist, 300.Google Scholar It was not possible to establish al-Kātib's identity. We must note that the sources report at least three other critiques of Shāfiʿī by two Mālikites and a Ḥanbalite. The two Mālikites are Bakr ibn MuḤammad al-Qushayrī (d. 955) and Abū Bakr al-Dīnawarī (d. after 940); see Dhahabī, , Siyar, 4:427, 537.Google Scholar The Ḥanbalite is Ghulām al-Khallāl (d. 947); see al-Farrāʾ, IbnṬabaqāt, 2:119–20.Google Scholar However, it cannot be established whether the object of these critiques was Shāfiʿī's positive law or legal theory.

83 Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:241.Google Scholar

84 On Ibn Surayj, see ibid., 2:87–96; Dhahabī, , Siyar, 14:201–4;Google ScholarKhallikān, Ibn, Wafayāt, 1:66–67;Google ScholarʿAbbādī, , Ṭabaqāt, 62–63;Google Scholaral-ʿImād, Ibn, Shadharāt, 2:247–48.Google Scholar

85 Reported, by Subkī, (Ṭabaqāt, 2:307)Google Scholar on the authority of the historian ʿAlī ibn Ḥusayn al-Masʿūdī. Subkī had in his possession a copy of the epistle.

86 Shīrāzī, , Ṭabaqāt, 109.Google Scholar

87 On Ibn Ḥaykuwayh, see Dhahabī, , Siyar, 15:379.Google Scholar On al-Marwazī, Ibn al-Qāṣṣ, Ṣayrafī, and Shāshī, see Shīrazī, , Ṭabaqāt, 111–12;Google Scholaral-ʿImād, Ibn, Shadharāt, 2:339;Google ScholarKhallikān, Ibn, Wafayāt, 4:199.Google Scholar On Abū Bakr al-Fārisī, see al-Murtaḍā, Ibn, Ṭabaqāt, 102.Google Scholar

88 Khallikān, Ibn, Wafayāt, 4:199;Google ScholarSubkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 2:170.Google Scholar

89 Khallikān, Ibn, Wafayāt, 4:200–201.Google Scholar

90 Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 3:208;Google Scholaral-ʿImād, Ibn, Shadharāt, 3:261–62.Google Scholar

91 That a jurist of the 10th century combined a proficient knowledge of rationalist and traditionalist disciplines was still considered remarkable even in the 14th century. Subkī, for instance, clearly makes a point of mentioning such a combination; see his Ṭabaqāt, 2:79, 81.

92 Spectorsky, Susan, “Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal's Fiqh,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 102 (1982): 461–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

93 For a brief account of Dawūd's teachings, see Goldziher, , ẓāhirīs, 27–39.Google Scholar

94 See Hallaq, W. B., “Was the Gate of Ijtihad Closed?” International Journal of Middle East Studies 16 (1984): 7–10.Google Scholar On the Ḥashwiyya, see Halkin, A. S., “The Ḥashwiyya,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 54 (1934):12.Google Scholar

95 Subkī, admits (Ṭabaqāt, 1:285, 2:18–20Google Scholar) that he includes the biographies of those who are worthy of mention because “there is no sense in mentioning the others, for it would be a waste of ink.”

96 Ibid., 1:186–285. On Ibn al-Ḥakam, Abū Thawr, and Ibn Rāhawayh, see ibid., 1:223–24, 227 ff.,232 ff. For more on Abū Thawr, see al-Nadīm, Ibn, Fihrist, 297.Google Scholar

97 Subkī, , Ṭabaqāt, 1:285–301; 2:2–79.Google Scholar

98 Ibid., 2:79–322. The rapid increase in the number of Shāfiʿites during the 10th century must be ingood part attributed to Ibn Surayj, under whom, as we have seen (section IV), the major figures of the Shāfiʿite school have studied. Ibn Surayj's numerous students have in turn become influential and have attracted, in various parts of the Muslim world, a great number of disciples; see sources cited in nn. 86–89.

99 ibid., 1:244, 247; Asnawī, , Ṭabaqāt, 1:34–35.Google Scholar

100 Muzanīs position vis-à-vis Shāfiʿi's doctrine is well illustrated in an anecdote that, even if notgenuine, also portrays Ibn Surayj's attitude towards Muzanī as Shafiʿ ī 's chief student. Ibn Surayj isreported to have said that “on the Day of Judgment Shāfiʿ īwill appear [before God] and Muzan ī will follow on his heel. Shāfiʿ ī will say: O God, this man [Muzan ī] has corrupted my sciences (ʿulūmī).Thereupon, I (Ibn Surayj) shall say to him: Go easy on Abū Ibrāh ī m [al-Muzan ī] for I have mendedwhat he had adulterated.” If this anecdote truly illustrates Ibn Surayj's view of Muzan ī, it must be takento refer to Muzan ī 's rationalist inclination on certain matters of u ṣ ū l, not fur ū ʿ, because we know thatIbn Surayj admired his works on positive law and, in fact, wrote in verse to extol them; see Subkī, , Ṭ abaqāt, 2:87, 92–93.Google Scholar

101 ʿAbbādī, , Ṭabaqāt, 62.Google Scholar

102 See Makdisi, , “Juridicial Theology of Shāfiʿi,” 6–7.Google Scholar

103 Rāzī, , Ādāb al-Shāfiʿī, 231–37.Google Scholar

104 Ibid., 62, 63.

105 Bayhaqī, , Manāqib, 1:368–84.Google Scholar

106 Ibid., 1:230–36.

107 Ibid., 1:368.

108 Rāzī, , lrshād, 153–88, 189–268.Google Scholar

109 See n. 79.