Rule-Formulation and Binding Precedent in the Madhhab-Law Tradition

Ibn Quṭlūbughā’s Commentary on The Compendium of Qudūrī

Häftad, Engelska, 2023

AvTalal Al-Azem

1 049 kr

Beställningsvara. Skickas inom 5-8 vardagar. Fri frakt för medlemmar vid köp för minst 249 kr.

Finns i fler format (1)

Inbunden

2 549 kr

Skickas inom 5-8 vardagar

In Rule-Formulation and Binding Precedent in the Madhhab-Law Tradition, Talal Al-Azem argues for the existence of a madhhab-law tradition’ of jurisprudence underpinning the four post-classical Sunni schools of law. This tradition celebrated polyvalence by preserving the multiplicity of conflicting opinions within each school, while simultaneously providing a process of rule formulation (tarjīḥ) by which one opinion is chosen as the binding precedent (taqlīd). The predominant forum of both activities, he shows, was the legal commentary.Through a careful reading of Ibn Quṭlūbughā's (d. 879/1474) al-Taṣḥīḥ wa-al-tarjīḥ, Al-Azem presents a new periodisation of the Ḥanafī madhhab, analyses the theory of rule formulation, and demonstrates how this madhhab-law tradition facilitated both continuity and legal change while serving as the basis of a pluralistic Mamluk judicial system.

Produktinformation

Utgivningsdatum2023-02-09
Mått155 x 235 x 16 mm
Vikt469 g
FormatHäftad
SpråkEngelska
Antal sidor258
FörlagBrill
ISBN9789004544239

Tillhör följande kategorier

Mellanösterns historia inom Historia och arkeologi
Islam inom Filosofi och religion
Rättssystem inom Juridik
Rättshistoria inom Juridik

CO N T E N T SIntroduction 1Chapter 1 Authors 23A The compendium author: Qudūrī . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24B The commentator: Ibn Quṭlūbughā . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Chapter 2 History 51A Ibn Quṭlūbughā’s sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51B Periodisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Period 1: Foundational ‘Ḥanafī’ opinions (ca. 150–200) . . . 57Period 2: Formative transmission (ca. 200–300) . . . . . . 58Period 3: Classical consolidation (ca. 300–400) . . . . . . 60Period 4: Tarjīḥ (ca. 400–650) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63Period 5: Taṣḥīḥ (ca. 650–870) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79Who are the ‘latter-day jurists’ (al-muta’akhkhirūn)? . . . . 87C Historical geographical patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90D Periodisation and the typologies of jurists (ṭabaqāt al-fuqahā’) 96Chapter 3 Theory 105A Ibn Quṭlūbughā’s introduction to al-Taṣḥīḥ wa-al-tarjīḥ . . 108B Analysis of the topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1181 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1182 The procedures of rule-determinacy . . . . . . . . . . 1253 Judicial discretion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134C Arguments for binding precedent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1371 The ethico-religious argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1382 The argument from legal-system consistency . . . . . 1393 The argument from legal-system coherence . . . . . . 1434 The argument from strengthened decision-making . . 1455 The argument from predictability . . . . . . . . . . . 145viii CO N T E N T S6 The argument from historical determinism . . . . . . 146D Historical developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1491 Target audiences: muftis and muftis . . . . . . . . . . 1492 Rule-determination (tarjīḥ) vs. rule-review (taṣḥīḥ) . . 1503 From monist to pluralistic legal systems . . . . . . . . 1534 Madhhab-law: tradition, system, concurrent jurisdictions 154E The (lack of) definition of ẓāhir al-riwāya . . . . . . . . . . 157Chapter 4 Practice 163A Ibn Quṭlūbughā’s practice of rule-review . . . . . . . . . . 163B The functional relationships of commentary . . . . . . . . 166To resolve a juristic dispute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169To clarify a point of ambiguity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174To identify the opinion or the transmission used in the rule formulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177To further expand upon the passage . . . . . . . . . . . . 179To identify an editorial problem in the passage itself . . . . 187C Employed legal rhetorical reasoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1891 Arguments of juristic evidence (dalīl) . . . . . . . . . 1902 Arguments of transmission (riwāya) . . . . . . . . . . 1923 Arguments of language and logic . . . . . . . . . . . . 1954 Arguments from revelation and the early Muslim community. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1975 Arguments from scholarship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 Justifications from juristic considerations . . . . . . . 2027 Justifications from context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2078 Justifications from exigencies of change and necessity . 2099 Justifications of lifting difficulty and facilitating ease . 21210 Justifications of preceding juristic authority . . . . . . 214D Operative principles of rule-determination . . . . . . . . . 218E The degree of congruence between theory and practice . . 229Conclusion 235Appendices 243A The Writings of Qudūrī 245B Jurists cited by Ibn Quṭlūbughā 249C Works cited by Ibn Quṭlubughā 255CO N T E N T S ixWorks Cited 259Index 271