The  Islamic  Reformulations  Project:  

Islamic  Reformulations  is  a  three-­‐year  Global  Uncertainties  Leadership  Fellowship  (GULF),  funded  by  Research  Councils  UK  and  administered  by  the  Economic  and  Social  Research  Council.    The  Fellowship,  awarded  to  Professor  Robert  Gleave  of  the  Institute  of  Arab  and  Islamic  Studies,  University  of  Exeter,  aims  to  explore  how  Muslim  thought  has  developed  in  the  modern  period,  and  how  these  modern  developments  relate  to  the  pre-­‐modern  tradition  of  Islamic  thought.    The  project  focuses  on  the  interlinked  themes  of  belief,  governance  and  violence.  

Beginning  in  September  2012,  Islamic  Reformulations  runs  until  February  2016.    The  project  is  led  by  Robert  Gleave;  the  project's  full-­‐time  research  fellow  was  Dr  Mustafa  Baig.    The  project  continues  and  develops  the  LIVIT  Project  (Legitimate  and  illegitimate  Violence  in  Islamic  Thought),  which  ran  from  2010  to  2013,  and  was  also  funded  under  the  RCUK  Global  Uncertainties  programme.  

This  conference,  a  collaboration  with  Istanbul  University,  forms  the  last  of  its  major  activities.  

For  more  information  see  www.islamicformulations.net  

 

 

The faculty of theology of Istanbul University is located in

Saraçhane which is one of the most central districts of

Istanbul in terms of its historical heritage and the cultural

environment. It is a walking distance to the great libraries

which attract many researchers from various countries of the

world, such as the central library and rare books, library of

Istanbul University, Suleymaniye library, Beyazit state

library and millet library. Besides, the faculty is very close

to many historical, cultural and arts centers such as

Suleymaniye Mosque and complex, Sehzadebasi mosque,

blue mosque, Fatih mosque and comple, Atif efendi library,

Ragip Pasa library, Ottoman archives of the prime ministry,

Grand Bazaa, Topkapi Palace museum, Istanbul Archeology

Museum and Hagia Sophia.

The faculty intertwined with the history, culture and nature

in such a valuable area, welcomes its students with the

modern social facilities that were prepared scrupulously.

The main campus consists of two buildings, one of them is

reserved for the administrative and academic staff, there are

conference hall, office of students representative, students

clubs, study room for turkish religious music branch, office

of guidance and psychological counseling, a snack bar with

sea view and prayer rooms in that building. The other

building consists of the office of student affairs, lecture

halls, classrooms, library, study hall and a conference hall

for 300 people. As a requisite of modern and academic life,

internet facilities and center of informatics are always

served. See for more info http://ilahiyat.istanbul.edu.tr

ReformulationandHermeneutics:ResearchingtheHistoryofIslamicLegalTheory,IstanbulUniversity

21st-24thFebruary2016.

SupportedbyFacultyofTheology,IstanbulUniversity

IslamicReformulationsproject,InstituteofArabandIslamicStudies,UniversityofExeter

ConferenceProgramme

Sunday21stFebruary201619.00WelcomeandEveningMealDaruzziyafeRestaurant,Suleymaniye

Monday22ndFebruary2016

Day1:09.00:OpeningRemarks:ProfessorsMahmutAk(RectorofIstanbulUniversity),MurtezaBedir(DeanoftheFacultyofTheology,IstanbulUniversity)andRobertGleave(DirectoroftheIslamicReformulationsproject,UniversityofExeter)09.30:PanelA:SituatingUṣūl

Zysow,Aron(IndependentScholar,Boston):“Causalanalogy(qiyāsal-ʿilla):ahistoricaloverview.”

2

Reinhart,Kevin(Dartmouth)"PunctualityandLaxity:DeferredPerformanceofRitualObligationsinUṣūlītheory"

11.10:Coffee/tea11.40PanelB:Thescienceofuṣūl

Opwis,Felicitas(Georgetown):BetweenMaqāṣidal-SharīʿaandTashrīʿIslāmī:IbnʿĀshūr’sNavigationoftheSecondaryRulesofLaw,Fatemi,SeyedMohammed(ShahidBeheshtiUniversity,Tehran):“ConjecturalCertainty:ShiiteEpistemicTheoryofInsidādrevisited”

13.20LunchAfternoon:SuleymaniyeManuscriptLibraryTour16.30PanelC:Theemergenceofuṣūl

Vishanoff,David(Oklahoma):“TheStructureandCompositionofal-Shāfiʿī’sRisāla:ThreeBooks,ThreeOutlines,ThreeArguments.”Stewart,Devin(Emory):“HadithReportsthatPresentOrderedListsofUṣūlandTheirImplicationsfortheEarlyHistoryofUṣūlal-Fiqh”

18.10Concludingremarks,Day1(RobertGleave):Close20.00AziyadeRestaurant,PierreLotiHill

Tuesday23rdFebruary2016

Day2:09.30:PanelD:Maturinguṣūl

Temel,Ahmet(IstanbulUniversity):MadhhabandUṣūlal-fiqh:DeterminingSchoolIdentityinUṣūlal-fiqhintheExampleofal-Nāṭiq’sal-Mujzī,Morvarid,Mahmoud(IPM,Tehran):"RationalExemptionvs.RationalCaution:OnaContemporaryDebateinShiiteUṣūl"

11.10-11.40:Coffee/tea

3

Bedir,Murteza(Istanbul):“Overemphasizingtheroleofuṣūlal-fiqh:Ijtihāddebatesanduṣūlal-fiqh”

12.30Lunch14.00PanelE:Contestedmodernuṣūlal-fiqh

Ozen,Sukru(IstanbulUniversity):“AbūMansūral-Māturīdī'sConceptoftheBayān"El-Shamsy,Ahmed(Chicago):"Continuityandruptureinfourth/tenth-centurylegaltheory”

15.40Tea/Coffee16.10PanelF:Language

Chaumont,Eric(Aix-Marseilles):"Al-Bāqillānīvs.Taqlīd:Anotherpeculiarityofal-Bāqillānī'slegaltheory"Qazwini,SayedHossein(IslamicSeminary,Karbala):"DidIbnIdrīsal-Hillīendtheeraoftaqlīdafteral-Shaykhal-Ṭūsī?"

1750Concludingremarks,Day2(RobertGleave):Close1900EveningMeal:BaltalimaniRestaurant,Bosphorus

Wednesday24thFebruary2016Day3

0930PanelG:Reason

Gleave,Robert(Exeter):“SomethingandNothing:AssumingNo-assessmentand/orLicitnessinclassicalShīʿīuṣūlal-fiqh"Schwarb,Gregor(Berlin):“Muʿtazilīuṣūlal-fiqhattheserviceofinner-Jewishpolemics."

11.10MuseumTour(includinglunch)14.30PanelH:Language

Adang,Camilla(TelAviv):“IbnḤazm'sdiscussionofDalīlal-khiṭābinal-Iḥkāmfīuṣūlal-aḥkām”Cohen,Mordechai(YeshivaUniversity,NewYork):

4

“Adaptationsofuṣūlal-fiqhbytwoRabbaniteJewishthinkersinal-Andalus,MosesIbnEzra(AbūHārūnMūsābinYaʿaqūbibnEzra)andMosesMaimonides(MūsāibnMaymūn)”

1610:Closingremarks:RobertGleaveandMurtezaBedir16.20Tea/Coffee17.00PublicSession:ThefuturestudyofIslamicLegalTheory18.30Close19.30ConferenceDinner

5

ReformulationandHermeneutics:ResearchingtheHistoryofIslamicLegalTheory,IstanbulUniversity

21st-24thFebruary2016.Supportedby

FacultyofTheology,IstanbulUniversityIslamicReformulationsproject,

InstituteofArabandIslamicStudies,UniversityofExeter

ABSTRACTS(Inalphabeticalorder)

NB:Noattempthasbeenmadetostandardisethetransliterationintheseabstracts.

6

Adang,CamillaIbnḤazm'sdiscussionofDalīlal-khiṭābinal-Iḥkāmfīuṣūlal-aḥkām

Inhismajorworkofuṣūlal-fiqh,al-Iḥkāmfīuṣūlal-aḥkām--whichsofarhasnotreceivedthescholarlyattentionitdeserves--the well-known Ẓāhirī legal scholar and theologian Ibn Ḥazm ofCordoba (d. 456/1064) presents a detailed refutation ofhermeneuticmechanismslikeqiyās,raʾy,istiḥsān,taʿlīlandtaqlīd,all of which he rejects as arbitrary methods that cannot lead tocertainknowledgeofGod'slaw.Asubstantialsectionoftheworkisdevotedtoacritiqueofdalīlal-khiṭāb,alsoknownasmafhūmal-mukhālafa or counterimplication, which can be defined as "theimplicationofameaningthatrepresentstheconverseofanexplicitmeaning"(Weiss2010:482).Regardedasakindofqiyās,itiseasytoseewhythismethodwouldbeunacceptabletoIbnḤazm,whosemainguidingprinciplewashiscommitment,whereverpossible,totheexternalsenseoftBedirherevealedtext.Thepaperwilldiscussa number of examples ofdalīl al-khiṭāb andhighlight IbnḤazm'smethodofinvalidatingit.

*********

Bedir,MürtezaOver-EmphasizingtheRoleofUsulal-fiqh:ANewUsulal-fiqh?19thCenturyReformsinMuslimSocietiestransformedthemethodoffiqhinaradicalway.BeginningwithMecellethemethodoffiqhincreasingly put the emphasis on changing circumstances andexigenciesofmodernage.Onparticiparthechallengesofmodernityaltered theway theMuslim juristsdealwith theopinionsofpastmasters. The thousand year-old madhhab-based approach wasabandonedforabroaderandmoreinclusiveapproachthatusedtheopinions of the past masters as an open source for solving

7

contemporaryproblems.Usulal-fiqhrespondingtothischangeinlegal practice has been conceived as a forward-lookingmethodologicaldisciplinethatwouldenableanewijtihadinordertomeetthechallengesofmodernity,justasitdidintheformativeperiodoffiqh.Thispapershallhighlightthechanges inthewaythenewusulal-fiqh is perceived by the modern Muslim legal thought. Morespecifically it is argued newusul al-fiqh is designed toprovide abasisforthenewfiqhbyshiftingtheemphasisfromthehukm-partofamas’alahash-shar‘iyyatoitsdalil-part.

Cohen,MordechaiAdaptationsofuṣūlal-fiqhbytwoRabbaniteJewishthinkersinal-Andalus,MosesIbnEzra(AbūHārūnMūsābinYaʿaqūbibnEzra)andMosesMaimonides(MūsāibnMaymūn)

Recent scholarship reveals the extent to which MosesMaimonides(1138-1204)drewuponMuslimjurisprudence(uṣūlal-fiqh) to develop his bold halakhic hermeneutical model thatintegrates Bible exegesis and talmudic halakhah. Given itssophistication,itisnotunreasonabletosupposethatprecedentsforMaimonides’ hermeneutical system had been circulating amongearlierAndalusianJewishscholarswhoadaptedMuslimtheoreticallegaltermsandconceptstodescribethehalakhicprocess.Todate,briefdiscussionsofthisnaturehavebeenidentifiedinthewritingsofBahyaIbnPaquda,Judahha-Leviand,mostrecently,inthenewlydiscovered fragmentarywritingsof theeleventh-centuryGranadadayyanDavidbenSaadiaha-Ger.InthispaperIwouldliketobringtolightsomerelevantremarksbythepoetandliterarycriticMoses

8

IbnEzra(c.1055-1138).InhisPoetics,TheBookofDiscussionandConversation, Ibn Ezra compares the intellectual creativity ofprophets and legal scholars. While the prophets employ theiringenuitytorenderGod’smessageinthemostexcellentpoeticandrhetorical format, the legal scholarsactuallyaugment the Lawbyextrapolating new conclusions from what is stated explicitly inscripture—a concept he describes in terms borrow from Islamiclegal theory. In my paper I aim to explore the unique literaryperspectiveonthissubjectbrought tobearbyMoses IbnEzrabycontrastwiththelegal-philosophicalvantagepointofMaimonidesandhishalakhically-orientedAndalusianpredecessors.

*********

ElShamsy,AhmedContinuityandruptureinfourth/tenth-centurylegaltheory

This paper seeks to make a concrete contribution tobridgingthegapbetweenformativeera legal theoryandclassicaluṣūl al-fiqh by presenting two hitherto little known, very earlytreatisesonlegaltheorywrittenbyIbnSurayj(d.306/918)andal-Khaffāf (fl. fourth/tenth century), respectively.Anexaminationoftheir contents—the topics they cover and the terminology theyuse—shedsnewlightonthecontinuitiesanddiscontinuitiesinthedisciplineoflegaltheoryinitsearlieststages.

*********

9

Fatemi,SayedConjecturalcertainty:ShiiteEpistemictheoryofInsidādrevisited1

Introducing insidad argument as an original epistemictheory inShiiteusul,aswellas itshermeneutical implications isthemaintaskofthisarticle.Mystartingpointinitsexaminationis Abulqasem al-Qummi’s proposal, who argues that sinceepistemiccertaintycannotbeobtainedtojustifyShariahnorms,jurists are left with no alternative but to rely upon epistemicconjecture. Ansaari is the most distinguished post Qummiopponentofthe insidadargument;whobelievesinexistenceofsufficient quantity of reliable textual evidences, some ofwhichenjoysstatusofepistemiccertainty,andtherestenjoysupportofcertainty for their validity.Qummi’s ultimate aim is to offer anepistemic justification for reliability of such Shariah sources askhabar al-wahid, as he seems not to be convinced with otherarguments. Yet, the hermeneutical potentials of his theory forreconstruction of Islamic thought seem to be much moreappealing to be ignored by contemporary Shiite reformistthinkers.

*********

Gleave,RobertSomethingandNothing:AssumingNo-assessmentand/orLicitnessinclassicalShīʿīuṣūlal-fiqh1 S. Mohammad Ghari S. Fatemi, professor of comparative human rights and Islamic legal theory, faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti university, Tehran, Iran, m-fatemi@sbu.ac.ir

10

Thenotionthatanyaction ispermitteduntilhere isan indication(dalīl)indicatingitisforbidden,orthataobjectispureuntilthereisindicationthatitisrituallyimpure,hasbeenacanonicalelementofuṣūldiscussion.InlateShīʿīuṣūltherewasextensivedebateastowhetherthisprinciple,knownasal-barāʾaal-aṣliyya,constitutedanindication in itself. The famous division was between Akhbārīscholarswho rejected theprinciple, andUṣūlīswhopromoted it.This paper will examine some of the salient themes in thesediscussions up to, and perhaps including, the thought ofMuḥammadBāqiral-Bihbihānī.

*********Morvarid,MahmoudRationalExemptionvs.RationalCaution:OnaContemporaryDebateinShiiteUṣūlal-Fiqh

Theideaofproceduralprinciples(al-uṣūlal-‘amaliyya)hasbeenconsiderablydevelopedinthecontemporaryShiiteuṣūl.Afterexplainingtheideaitself,Ishallproceedtointroduceawell-knowndistinctionbetweentheprimary(orrational)proceduralprinciples,ontheonehand,andthesecondary(orshar‘ī)proceduralprinciples,on the other. In this presentation, I am only concernedwith theformer, that is, primary or rational procedural principles. Thequestionsuchprinciplesareconcernedwithisthat,intheabsenceofanyrelevantḥojja,whichpracticalstanceshouldanagentadoptvis-a-visagivenaction.Twomainanswershavebeenofferedtothisquestion.Mostcontemporaryuṣūlīsadvocatetheso-calledprincipleofrationalexemption(al-barā’atal-‘aqliyya)accordingtowhichtheagentisexemptedfromcomplyingwithadivineobligationwhenhehas no ḥojja for that obligation. The other answer, given byMuḥammadBāqirṢadr,appealstotheideathatGod'srightfulclaim

11

toobedienceisextremelyextensive.Consequently,Ṣadrarrivesatthe so-called principle of rational caution (al-iḥtiyāṭ al-‘aqlī)accordingtowhichwheneveranagentlacksanyrelevantḥojja,heought to exercise caution with respect to possible obligations.Recently,ṢādiqLārījānīhascriticizedṢadr'sviewonthegroundthatitsuffersfromaninternalinconsistency.IshallarguethatLārījānī'scriticism fails, although his observations might provide anotherbasisforcriticizingṢadr'sargument.

*********Opwis,FelicitasBetweenMaqāṣidal-SharīʿaandTashrīʿIslāmī:IbnʿĀshūr’sNavigationoftheSecondaryRulesofLaw

The rapidly changing modern environment challengesIslamic lawto incorporate legalchangewithout losing the Islamiccharacter of the law. This challenge involves ensuring that theIslamicprinciplesandmethodsof law-findingareable toaddressunprecedented situations on a larger scale than previously.Furthermore,jurisprudentsfacethequestionofintegratingIslamiclaw into the legal systemof themodern nation-state in order toretain its relevance. The 20th century Tunisian scholar-jurist IbnʿĀshūraddressesthesechallengesbyre-interpretingthesecondaryrules of law, particularly those that determine the correctprocedures of law-finding (rules of recognition). He turns to the‘Purposes of the Law’, the maqāṣid al-sharīʿa, to address bothchallenges.Bysubsumingtheprinciplesoflaw-finding(uṣūlal-fiqh)underthePurposesoftheLaw,healterstheepistemologicalstatusof rulings (aḥkām) and objectives (maqāṣid) and expands theacceptable modes of analogical reasoning. Importantly, he re-definesthescopeofhumanlegalresponsibilitytoexcludethemoraldimension from the legal, thereby envisioning Islamic law to

12

functionakintoapositivist legalsystem.Theresult isasystemof‘Islamic legislation’thatemploystraditionalmodesof Islamic law-findinginafashionthatembracesthevaluesofmodernity.

*********

Özen,ŞükrüAbūManṣūral-Māturīdī’sConceptofBayān

al-Māturīdī (d. 333/944) has come into prominence inrecent timesmoreoften in respect tohisworksand thoughtsontheology(kalām)andQuranicexegesis(tafsīr),andinthathisideaswereelaboratedinmanyworks.However,hewasalsowell-knowninhis timeasal-faqîh, and lateron referred to as ra'īsmashāikhSamarkand, i.e.theleaderofthescholarsinSamarkand,aphrasethat expresses the community of local jurists from Samarkand.Furthermore, al-Māturīdī's tafsīr, Ta'wīlāt al-Qur'ān, serves as animportantsourceforhislegalandmethodologicalthoughtsaswellashistheologicalideas.Thusitwouldbemisleadingtoperceivehimonlyasaprominenttheologian(mutakallim)ormufassir.Oneofthepurposesofthisstudyistocorrectthiscommonmisperception.

Sinceduringtheal-Māturīdī'sera,lotsofconceptswerenotdefinedasinthelaterperiods,hetoucheduponmostofthemintheconceptual level in a descriptive manner some of which can berestatedwiththetermsemergedlater.Actually,hewasoneofthepioneerswhopaved theway for the followingHanafi scholars tosystematizetheSchool'sperceptionofjurisprudentialmethodologyingeneral,andtheconceptofbayāninparticular.

Wecanfindal-Māturīdī'sviewsanddiscussionsabouttheconcept of bayān disseminated in his tafsīr especially during hiscommentaryon theverse89ofal-Nahl, the sixteenth chapterofQuran.al-Māturīdīdealswiththeconceptofbayānfromdifferentaspects. He defines and categorizes it as well as criticizes someviews of earlier scholars such as Imām al-Shāfiī and the Zāhirī

13

School. He also deals with the problems that emerged from histheoryofbayān.Nevertheless,wecannotsaythatthesepassagesrepresent all his views on the subject, but comparing to the al-Shāfiī's accounts in the al-Risāla, we can safely argue that al-Māturīdī'saccountsarericherintheircontent.

In this paper, I will try to shed light on the al-Māturīdī'sconcept of bayān analyzing his views in the historical context ofIslamic jurisprudentialmethodologyespeciallywithinthe limitsofhispolemicswithal-ShāfiīandtheZāhirīSchool.Qazwini,SayedHosseinDidIbnIdrisAlHilliendtheeraoftaqlidafterShaykhAlTusi?

ThehundredyearsafterthedeathofShaykhMohammadIbnAlHassanAlTusi iscommonlyknownastheeraoftaqlid,thereason being that this era did not produce innovativemujtahids;rathertheywereallemulatorsofTusi'susuliopinions.

Several reasons have been stated for the academicstagnation inthisperiod.Was it theauthoritativepersonaofTusithatcausedthisdecline inscholarship,orwas itpolitical tensionsandunrest?Werethereotherreasons?Oristhenotionoftaqlidinthis period exaggerated, and that therewere, indeed, innovativemujtahidsinthisperiod?Ourpaperexaminesthisaspect.

Furthermore,whyisIbnIdrisAlHilliconsideredamujadidandwhyisthehonorofendingtheeraoftaqlidascribedtohim?Didheintroducenewusulitheories?Orwashesimplyoutspokenbut not innovative? Perhaps Ibn Idris's role has also beenexaggerated?Ourpaperexaminesthisaspectaswell.

*********

14

Schwarb,GregorMuʿtazilīuṣūlal-fiqhattheserviceofinner-Jewishpolemics

In the late 10th and throughout the eleventh centuriesMuʿtazilī kalām provided the common conceptual andterminological framework for major exponents of Jewish andSamaritanreligiousthought.GiventheirintimateacquaintancewithMuʿtazilite works, doctrines and nomenclature, it is perfectlyappropriate to relate to these figures as representatives of a‘Jewish/SamaritanMuʿtazilism’. Their extantworks cover amuchwiderspectrumofgenresanddisciplinesthanthosebytheirMuslimpeersandallowustoexploretheapplicationofMuʿtazilitethoughtinsettingswhicharelessfamiliarfromextantMuslimsourcetexts.

In the present paper Iwill allege a few examples of howRabbaniteandQaraite JewsandSamaritansemployed termsandconcepts of Muʿtazilī uṣūl al-fiqh in internal controversies tobuttresstheirparticulartheologicalandlegalviewsortounderminethoseoftheopposingcamp.ThemaintextstobeconsideredareananonymousQaraitepolemicagainsttheSamaritans(al-Naqḍʿ alāal-Sāmira)andarefutationbytheQaraiteYūsufal-BaṣīrofaworkbySamuelbenḤofnīGaon(al-NaqḍʿalāŠemuʾel,raʾsal-maṯība).

*********Stewart,DevinḤadīthReportsThatPresentOrderedListsofUṣūlandTheirImplicationsfortheEarlyHistoryofUṣūlal-Fiqh

A well-known ḥadīth report that portrays the ProphetcommissioningtheCompanionMuʿādhb.Jabaltoserveasajudgein Yemen is cited frequently inmanuals ofuṣūl al-fiqh andotherworksasaprooftextforijtihādorqiyās.Intheaccount,theProphetasksMuʿādhonwhatbasishewilljudge,andMuʿādhrepliesbythe

15

Book,meaningtheQurʾān.TheProphetthenasksonwhatbasishewilljudgeifhedoesnotfindtheanswerintheQurʾān,andMuʿādhrepliesbytheSunnah.TheprophetthenasksonwhatbasishewilljudgeifhedoesnotfindtheanswerintheQurʾānorintheSunnah,andhereplies,ajtahiduraʾyīwa-lāālū“Iwillexertmyopinionandspare no effort.” Despite wide awareness that the chain oftransmission of this report is suspect, for the transmitters fromMuʿādhare simply termed “men fromHoms,” the report is citedwidelywithapprovalbylegaltheorists.Ibnal-Jawzī(d.597/1201)writesinal-ʿIlalal-mutanāhiyah:hādhāḥadīthlāyaʾiḥḥwa-inkānaal-fuqahāʾyadhkurūnahufīkutubihimwa-yaʿtamidūnaʿalayhiwa-la-ʿamrī in kāna maʿnāhu ṣaḥīḥan innama thubūtuhu lā yuʿraf.”“This is anunsoundḥadīth, even though the juristsmention it intheirbooksanddependonit.Forthelifeofme,evenifitssenseiscorrect,thereisnowaytoestablishitssoundness.”

Thisḥadīthwasfabricated,asmanymedievalscholarsandasJosephSchachtrealized.Itappearswidelyinworksofthe3rd/9thcentury,andwasprobablyfabricatedinthelate2nd/8thcentury.Itwas fabricated specifically to make a point about legalhermeneutics, and was intended to present and sanction anorderedlistofuṣūl.Becauseoflaterdevelopmentsinjurisprudenceand because of shared assumptions on the part of later legaltheorists, the implicationsofthereporthaveoftennotbeenfullyrealized.The reportpresentsanordered listof threeuṣūl: 1) theQurʾān;2)theSunnahoftheProphet;and3)Raʾy“soundjudgment”or “considered opinion.” The report thus remarkably omits ijmāʿ“consensus.” The original focus was on raʾy, and not on ijtihād,somethingthatindicatesitwasfabricatedtosupporttheviewsofahlal-raʾy, something that isobscuredby later interpretation.Asraʾy became less popular as an independent hermeneuticalprinciple,theemphasisshifted:raʾybecamesoftenedtoijtihādal-raʾy [perhaps because of the wording of the report itself], andfurther to ijtihād tout court, and then al-Shāfiʿī andahl al-ḥadīthweakened it further by equating ijtihādwithqiyās. Such ordered

16

listsofuṣūlwereanimportantfoundationforthegenreofmanualsonuṣūlal-fiqh,andthebeginningsofgenremaygobacktothelate2nd/8thcentury,whenthisreportwasforged.Al-Shāfiʿī’sRisālahdidnot inauguratethegenreofuṣūlal-fiqhbutratherarguedagainstan already existing genre, written bymembers of the ahl al-raʾycamp,thatwasbasedonaconceptionofuṣūlsimilartothatwhichisevidentinthereportofMuʿādh.Hisworkshouldbeseenasanefforttorestrictthesourcesofthelawtotwo“scriptural”sources,the Qurʾān and ḥadīth, arguing against hermeneutic approachesthatadmittedextra-textualprinciples.

*********Temel,AhmetMadhhabandUṣūlal-fiqh:DeterminingSchoolIdentityinUṣūlal-fiqhintheExampleofal-Nāṭiqbi-al-ḥaqq’sal-Mujzī Thispaperexplorestheroleofschoolaffiliationandthewaysofidentifyingitinuṣūlal-fiqhbyofferingamethodtofollowincorrectlyassigningaschoolaffiliationtoparticularscholars.Itbeginswithdeconstructingthehithertoknowndivisionofmutakallimūn,fuqahā,andmamzūjbyarguingthatthedivisionofmutakallimūnandfuqahāexistedbutjustasanarbitrarygroupingofmultiplegroupsandthatmamzūjisfarfromareconciliationofthesetwogroups.Thenitprovidesamodelforidentifyingschoolaffiliationinthetextsofuṣūlal-fiqhthroughanalysisonthenetworkofauthoritativescholarsinthetexts.Itusesthetextofal-MujzītodemonstratedifferentstepsofthismethodandconcludesthatthistextwasactuallyproducedaccordingtotheestablishedschoolofMu‘tazilīuṣūlal-fiqhdespitewrittenbyaZaydīimām,ratherthanaZaydīuṣūlal-fiqhasarguedbycontemporaryZaydīsandthosewhofollowtheminthisregard.

17

Vishanoff,DavidTheStructureandCompositionofal-Shāfiʿī’sRisāla:ThreeBooks,ThreeOutlines,ThreeArguments

Thepuzzlingstyleandstructureofal-Shāfiʿī’sfamousEpistleon Legal Theory, al-Risāla, have elicited clarificatory glosses andheadings ever since the work was copied in the ninth century.Scholarsarestillproposingwidelydivergentreadings,outlines,andevenreorderingsofthetext.ThispaperarguesthattheRisālaisbestreadasasequenceofthreedistinctbutrelatedcompositions,eachwithitsownthesis,argument,andoutline.BookOnewaswrittentoshowthattheQur’an,whenunderstoodinlightofnaturalevidenceand the Prophet’s Sunna, is a clear statement of the entire law.Following discussions with opponents, al-Shāfiʿī appended BookTwotorefutetheobjectionthathehadusedḥadīthcapriciouslyinBookOne,andthenaddedBookThreetojustifythesubjectivityanduncertainty of his interpretive methods. This paper points outstylistictracesofthiscompositionalprocess;itnoteshowcopyists,editors,andmodernscholarshaveattemptedtosqueezetheworkintoasingleoutlineoflegaltheorytopics;anditdemonstratesthatthework’slegalcasestudiesandtheoreticalstatementsaremorereadilyunderstandableandmorecompellingwhenreadasstepsinasequenceofthreedistinctbutrelatedarguments.

*********Zysow,AronCausalanalogy(qiyāsal-`illa):ahistoricaloverview

Theanalysisofanalogy (qiyās) in termsof fourelements,aṣl,far`,`illa,andḥukm,isamongthemostfamiliarfeaturesofuṣūl

18

al-fiqh,sofamiliarastoseemvirtually inevitable. Butthere is,ofcourse,no inevitabilityhere.Thispaper seeks to sketch theearlydevelopment of causal analogy as well as to touch upon a fewrepresentativecontroversiesthat illustrate itssubsequenthistory.The resources forwriting an account of the beginnings of causalanalogyarebrieflysurveyedandsomeof theproblemsattendingtheuseofthesesourcesareaddressed.