Ibn Hazm Al-Andusi Al-Zahiri (ابن حزم الاندلسی (۴۵۷ھ
Urdu
ابومحمدعلی بن احمد بن حزم فارسی النسل تھے، آباء واجداد اسپین جابسے تھے، ابن حزم سنہ۳۸۴ھ میں قرطبہ میں پیدا ہوئے، پہلے شافعی المذہب تھے؛ پھرداؤد ظاہری کا مسلک اختیار کیا اور قیاس کا سرے سے انکار کیا، حدیث پربڑی گہری نظرتھی؛ مگرفقہ کے انکار سے اس سے کماحقہ استفادہ کرنے کے دروازے خود اپنے آپ پر بند کرچکے تھے؛ تاہم اس سے انکار نہیں کہ ان کے علوم سے ایک عالم مستفید ہوا، امام غزالی نے بھی ان کی کتابوں کا مطالعہ کیا ہے، علوم عربیت پر علماء قرطبہ کوویسے بھی بڑی دسترس ہوتی ہے اور یہ تواس باب میں سباق الغایات تھے۔
ان کی کتابوں میں کتاب الاحکام، المحلی اور "کتاب الفصل فی الملل والنحل" عام ملتی ہیں شیخ عزالدین کہتے ہیں جتنا علم میں نے محلی ابن حزم اور مغنی ابن قدامہ میں دیکھا ہے اتنا کسی اور انسانی کتاب میں نہیں دیکھا، تعجب ہے کہ امام ترمذی (۲۷۹ھ) کوآپ نے مجہول لکھا ہے، بات یہ معلوم ہوتی ہے کہ آپ جامع ترمذی وغیرہ کو آپ دیکھ ہی نہ پائے تھے، المحلی مطبع منیر مصر نے سنہ۱۳۴۷ھ میں ۱۱/ضخیم جلدوں میں شائع کی۔
ان کی کتابوں میں کتاب الاحکام، المحلی اور "کتاب الفصل فی الملل والنحل" عام ملتی ہیں شیخ عزالدین کہتے ہیں جتنا علم میں نے محلی ابن حزم اور مغنی ابن قدامہ میں دیکھا ہے اتنا کسی اور انسانی کتاب میں نہیں دیکھا، تعجب ہے کہ امام ترمذی (۲۷۹ھ) کوآپ نے مجہول لکھا ہے، بات یہ معلوم ہوتی ہے کہ آپ جامع ترمذی وغیرہ کو آپ دیکھ ہی نہ پائے تھے، المحلی مطبع منیر مصر نے سنہ۱۳۴۷ھ میں ۱۱/ضخیم جلدوں میں شائع کی۔
English Biography
(With links to further information from Islamic Encyclopedia for further reading)
Coutesy: http://islamicencyclopedia.org/
(With links to further information from Islamic Encyclopedia for further reading)
Coutesy: http://islamicencyclopedia.org/
Ali b. Sa`eed b. Hazm b. Talib, better known as Imam Ibn Hazm al-Zahiri, lived through a politically unstable era in Andalus (Spain) between the terminal years of fourth century Hijriand the middle of the fifth century Hijri. There were frequent changes at the throne exhibiting a constant procession of kings. Umayyads and `Alawis were engaged in a mutually annihilating war which had turned the Iberian Peninsula into a battlefield.
According to one version, he was of Persian descent and a liberated slave of Yazid b. Sufyan. Some others believe him to be of Spanish descent.
He possessed a sharp intellect. Constant study of scholarly works considerably enhanced his knowledge and intellectual stature. He had several mentors. A few of them are: 1-Yahya b. Mas`ud, 2-Abu `Umar b. Muhammad 3-Yunus b. `Abdullah, 4-Hamam b. Ahmad, 5-Muhammad b. Sayeed, 6-`Abdullah b. Rabi`, 7-Abu `Umar Ahmad b. Muhammad, 8- Ahmad b. Qasim b. Asbagh and several others, quite a few of them justices in the courts. However, his scholarship exceeded that of the best of his times. He turned out to become an outstanding scholar with amazing abilities in every field of learning, so much so that he was able to start a school of Fiqh after him, which, if it did not do well, it was because of the high intellectual demand it makes on the adherent.
Ibn Hazm traveled through the entire Iberian Peninsula for the sake of studies. Having finished his education, he stepped into politics but had to suffer setbacks. He was thrice imprisoned. This frustrated him and he quit politics and again engaged himself in scholarly pursuits.
His doctrine was in conformity with the Qur’an, Hadith and all the righteously guided ancestors. However, later, it became opposed to the current schools due to the amalgamation of elements of philosophy and free-thinking. Dr. Ahmad b. Nasir al-Hamad has elaborated his doctrine in the following manner: Ibn Hazm maintained that Allah should not be attributed with the physical functions among the human beings such as hearing, seeing or speaking even though He is referred to in terms of Sami`, Baseer etc. Instead of the standard practice of not dwelling upon topics such as Allah's Face, Hands, Istawa’ or Nuzul, he offered interpretations, although he follows the line of the pious ancestors in description of Allah's persona, e.g., an-Nafs, al-Dhat etc. as well endorsing their position over Beatific Vision, Allah's Speech etc.
Initially, Ibn Hazm followed the Maliki school of jurisprudence as it was commonly prevalent in Spain. Later, he learnt the Shafe`i principles and began to follow this school. However, as his learning increased, he became what is described as the Zahiri in Madh-hab. He laid down its principles inasmuch as it became part of his name.
As other exegetes, Ibn Hazm deems it valid for the Qurán to be translated into other languages. He produced several Tafsir (exegeses) works and added a book on Qur’anic rhetoric and intonation (Qira’ah).
While discussing the sources of Islamic law, the Qur’an and Sunnah, he discussed some of the key technical terms and gave them new meaning and dimensions. For instance, regardingTa’weel (true interpretation), he maintained that it is of two types:
1-Words whose meanings are evident and the meaning in the dictionary – though different – carry evidence for the departure from the conventional. This may be accepted.
2- Such words whose meanings are evident but the meanings in the dictionary are different but do not carry evidence for the departure from the conventional. Such Ta’weel ought to be rejected.
He believed that deviating from the conventional meaning can be allowed only on three conditions: presence of another text (Nass), wide consensus, and apparent need.
Ibn Hazm was not merely a great Muhaddith, but also an expert critic. Hafiz Dhahabi places him among the 13th category of cross-examiners and says his cross-examination is credible. However, Ibn Hazm differed with other Hadith doctors over some narrators, whom he rejected although they accepted them.
He also differed with others over the evaluation of Hadith works. He placed the books of Hadith in four categories, with Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sahih Ibn al-Sukun, Muntaqa of Ibn al Jarood and Al-Muntaqa of al-Qasim b. Asbagh in the first category, and some 20 others in three other groups. But Dhahabi criticized him for not placing Ibn Majah and Tirmidhi in the first category which they very well deserve. Perhaps this was because these two books reached Spain much after the death of Ibn Hazm. Similarly, Dhahabi thought Imam Malik’s Muwatta’ deserved a place in the first category.
Ibn Hazm indulged in Ijtihad following recognized framework of principles which he laid out in his books, more particularly in the book titled Al-Muhalla. Ibn Hazm exercised Ijtihad on the basis of the Nusoos of the Qur’an (such indispensable commands of the Qur’an in which nobody has any doubt), sound Hadith, and Ijma` (consensus). He declared that it was not fair on anybody’s part to issue a Fatwa, or deliver a judgment, unless he himself practices what he expects of others. He said that the Qur’an must be referred first, then Hadith of theProphet and finally the consensus of the companions of the holy Prophet. Ibn Hazm considered it an integral part of Ijtihad to follow the consensus of the holy companions. In the fourth place, one should also take into account all such evidences that could be explored.
Ibn Hazm rejected Qiyas and Istinbat as invalid. He described Istihsan as an outcome of the third century and that it comprised of only the fiats of the Muftis which people have adopted as good. He rejected them. He does not consider it incumbent upon Muslims to follow the Shari`ah (law code) of the earlier Prophets offering the following verse: Likullin ja`alna minkum shir`atan wa minhaja (Al-Maida: verse 48) which is interpreted as every Ummah had its own Shari`ah.
He disregarded even the practices of the people of Madinah (a principle of great importance for Imam Malik). He thought that it was not necessary for Muslims to follow or emulate what the people of Madinah practiced. He thought that what is obligatory for Muslims is to refer to Qur’an and Hadith whenever they require guidance and not to seek it elsewhere.
About Taqlid, his opinion was that it was prohibited and it is not right for Muslims to follow their ancestors. Nothing should be accepted without arguments and proper reasoning. He also maintained that it is not incumbent upon Muslims to follow the Madh-hab of the Companions of the Prophet. Needless to point out, the great majority of scholars throughout the ages have differed with him, and, interestingly, he is popular with those who have differed with the great majority.
Yet, there have been many followers of Ibn Hazm in marginal issues, such as: Ahmad b. `Abdul Malik b. Abi Marwan Al-Ansari, Bakar b. Khalaf b. Sa`eed b. `Abdul `Aziz Al-Ghifaqi, Tilmiz Al-Hameedi Muhammad b. Abi Nasar, Al-Hafiz Abul Khattab, Yazid al-Razi Muhammad b. `Abbad.
Imam Ibn Taymiyyah rated Ibn Hazm quite highly and said that there is no one who can compete with him in depth of wisdom, arguments and logical reasoning. Similarly, Ibn al-Qayyim, Imam Muhammad b. Isma`il al-San`ani and Imam Muhammad b. `Ali al-Shawkani admired his skills in jurisprudence and Ijtihad.
In history, he adopted his own style of writing. When he wrote biographies of the Caiphsl, he wrote their names, titles, duration of the caliphate, and the important incidents and happenings during the caliphate. He even wrote about the Caliphs who were elected through a consultative process. He described the four brothers who became caliphs. He even wrote about Caliphs who held the caliphate only for a few days. He has compiled the biographies of five women whose sons became Caliphs.
While writing Spain’s history, he made a special mention of all those scholars who worked on jurisprudence, Hadith, Tafsir, literature and history and penned notable works.
Ibn Hazm has widely benefited from the books of Ibn Kamil al-Shajari who was a disciple of Tabari. He has recorded all those incidents that happened during his age and even recorded the verbal accounts. This is one reason why Ibn `Aqeel thinks Ibn Hazm did not refer to original sources of the history.
Ibn Hazm was a great investigator in historical affairs. Translators of his works have rated him highly and opine that he gathered the knowledge of history from both Oriental and Western sources. He authored several books in history.
He wrote several biographies and books on lineage. Following are some of them: Al-Marifata bil-Ansab, Al-Tarikhul `Aam. However, the best known among his books on lineage isJamharatun Ansab al-`Arab. In its preface, he mentions that he has gathered the lineage of every possible tribe of Arabia. This is the best book among his books on records of lineage.
Ibn Hazm’s biography of Prophet Muhammad is a description of the Prophet's miracles, performance of Hajj pilgrimage, battles, and letters and emissaries he sent to several emperors. It was titled Jawame As-Seerah An-Nabawiyya. It is a source book on the life of the Prophet.
He was a poet too. He is described as an expert in etymology, syntax and literature. His poetry is laced with nuggets of wisdom and sound advice. He was a wordsmith and used to put his delicate thoughts in embellished language. He even inducted the terms from Fiqh, philosophy and other disciplines in his poetry. His disciple, Hameedi, compiled these couplets in a book titled Huroof Mu`jam. He was, indeed, a widely respected poet. He composed poetry for several occasions and with varied objectives. Several of his couplets urge one to read them repeatedly.
Even though he indulged in romantic poetry during his youth, he avoided it later and advised others to keep away from it as it inflames lust, incites mental waywardness and erodes moral foundations. He even advised keeping away from poetry that inflames passions and instigates violence such as the poetry of `Antar, `Urwa b. al Ward and Sa`d b. Nashib.
Ibn Hazm stepped into the arena of mentoring too. He wrote several books and essays. Some of his opinions would be instructive: He thought that generally people err while judging men and women. According to him, a righteous woman is one who keeps herself away from evils when asked to do so and would not seek excuses to continue to act according to her own whims and fancies. And a bad woman is one who insists on following her own desires and digs out all kinds of excuses to conform to her own wishes. A gentleman is one who does not sit with evil men, who does not act at the bidding of his own Nafs (ego), keeps away from all places where people indulge in gossip, rumor-mongering, and where they talk ill of others and create noise.
Through his own assessment, Ibn Hazm found that every individual, regardless of his being faithful, non-believer, rich or poor, possessing authority or just ordinary, was in misery. Ibn Hazm would suggest remembrance of God for salvation from all kinds of misery, difficulties, anxiety or travails. He would advise everyone who complained about his difficulties to direct himself to Allah who was the rescuer.
Ibn Hazm used to confess his shortcomings. He said he tried to rectify them in the light of the teachings of Prophets and leading lights of Islam and says this led to a lot of them being checked with the help of God. He said about himself: “I used to express excessive joy when glad, expressed extreme anger, went overboard while indulging in humor and used to be jealous of others and craved fame and publicity. I tried to rectify myself and gradually overcame all of them and developed humility. Now I find joy within myself.”
Ibn Hazm also wrote a few books in the field of comparative religions and held dialogues with members of other faiths. Some of his books in this discipline are: Al-Fasl wa al Ahwa’ wa al Nahl, Izhar Tabdeel al-Yahood wa al Nasara li al-Taurah wa al Injeel, Bayan Tanaqudh ma bi Aidihim min Zalika Mimma la Yahtamal al Ta’weel. Ibn Khallikan says nothing could be further than the last name in the series. Ar-Radd `Al al Anajeel wa al Nasara is also one of his famous works.
Ibn Hazm is one of the earliest followers of the Zahiri Madh-hab which was founded by Imam Da’ud `Ali b. Khalaf Abu Sulayman Al-Zahiri. According to Dr. Muhammad Salam Madhkur, this Madh-hab was named so because the people who followed it were doing so by following the apparent meaning of the Qur’an and Hadith.
Zahiri Madh-hab spread out into the regions of the Orient during the third and fourth century of Hijrah. It drew more supporters than the Maslak of Ahmad b. Hanbal. Abu Zahrah says that a big group of `Ulama spread out of Cordova in the third Hijri century and propagated the Zahiri Maslak. It was only then that Imam Ibn Hazm adopted this Maslak and lent it a further push to its zenith through his scholarship and Ijtihad.
Ibn Hazm was a prolific writer. Hafiz Dhahabi records 76 books authored by Ibn Hazm in his book titled Siyer A`lam al-Nubala’. Dr. Ahmad b. Nasir Al-Hamad has mentioned 136 books. Abu Abdur Rahman b. `Aqeel al-Zahiri mentions 83 books. Some of the noted works are mentioned here:
Al-Isal ila Fahm Kitab al-Jami`ah, Al-Usul wa al-Fru`, Tasmiyah Shuyukh Malik, Al-Ahkam fi l Usul al-Ahkam, Al-Akhlaq wa al-Siyar, Jamhrah Ansab al-`Arab, Jawami` al-Siyar, Hajjat al Wada`, Al-Fasl fi al-Mila wa al-Nahl, Al-Qirat al-Mashhoor fil Amsar, Al-Mujallah, Al-Muhalla and others.
Ameer Abu Nasr Makula says that Ibn Hazm was a jurist, Muhaddith and author and used to judge the jurisprudence by yardsticks of Hadith. Dhahabi says that Ibn Hazm was a jurist,Hafiz (of Hadith), orator, litterateur, minister, author of several books, and a Zahiri.
He possessed a very sharp memory, was extremely quick-witted and highly contemplative. He had abundant courage and patience, was sincere and truthful and was very strict about keeping promises. However, he had a sharp tongue of criticism which earned him many enemies. It is said that his tongue and Hajjaj b. Yusuf’s swords were partitions of one instrument. He debated with many of the Malikiyyah, as well as with Abu al-Walid al-Bajji, resulting in his widespread unpopularity. His books were burned and he declared heretic. During his last years, he had to take refuge in a small village, was struck by leprosy because of his consumption of nothing but dairy products. He died at 72, but has left behind a work that history would like to preserve, Al-Muhalla.
He reported that he was 26 when he attended a burial ceremony. He entered the Mosque and sat down. Someone told him to get up and offer the two Rak`ahs of Tahiyyatu al-Masjid, which he promptly did. After the burial was over, he entered the Mosque and attempted the same two Rak`ah of Tahiyyatu al-Masjid again. Someone prevented him, saying that no prayers were to be offered after `Asr. He felt ashamed and asked a scholar as to who was the most renowned scholar of Fiqh. That incident turned an ignorant man into Ibn Hazm.
Literalists (Zahiris( ' Approach and Complications
A Critical Review
By Dr. Wael Shihab (Writer and Muslim Researcher)
Courtesy: http://www.onislam.net/
Literal interpretations of Islam, in the past and present, pose serious complications in introducing Islam and its values.
The problem is even more complex in the modern world of today owing to global complicated conditions, scarce Islamic knowledge resources and institutions, and ineffectiveness or even lack of Muslim-Muslim dialogue to fix such serious problems.
Though modern literalists do not accept to be described as “zahiri”, they rigidly follow the spirit of the zahiri school in confining themselves to literal meanings of texts and disregarding their deeper meanings and objectives. They pay no attention to the fact that the early zahiri school failed to gain proponents and was opposed by leading Muslim jurists and scholars throughout many centuries.
I never doubt the sincerity and faith of the zahiri scholars, nor even of the so-called modern zahirists, as this is known to Allah alone; and my aim here is to objectively study their approach for the benefit of Muslims in particular and all humans in general. I will first trace back the origins of the modernzahirists or neo-literalists by means of studying the early zahiri school, their approach, and scholars’ criticism. Then, I will analyze the new zahiri trend, its approach, its features, and its impacts on day-to-day life. I will critically study some of their juristic views and fatwas in order to present their methods and features through an academic approach. Finally, I will conclude the study by proposing some workable solutions to face some unacceptable methods of interpreting Islam.
The Early Zahiri School: Methodology and Principles
Become a fan of the Shari`ah ZoneEarly zahiri scholars such as Abu Dawud az-Zahiri (d. 270 AH) and Ibn Hazm (d. 456 AH) are known for their vast knowledge of the Qur’an and Sunnah. However, their literal interpretations of Islam has led them to commit grave errors when deducing some Shari`ah rulings.The zahiri school of fiqh is known for its strict adherence to texts and their apparent meanings. They have invalidated qiyas (analogy)—let alone other secondary sources of Shari`ah such as istihsan, al-masalih al-mursalah, `urf, etc.,—on the grounds that qiyas partakes in speculation. According to them, the rules of Shari`ah must be founded on certainty, and this is only true of the clear injunctions of the Qur'an, the Sunnah, and ijma`. Anything other than these is mere speculation, which should be renounced.(1) In this regard, Ibn Hazm (d. 465 AH), one of the founders and pioneers of the zahiri school, says, Allah Almighty says,
"O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger and those of you who are in authority." (An-Nisaa, 4: 59) Therefore, nothing should be declared as obligatory without a text or ijma`. . . . Whoever declares anything as obligatory without nass or ijma` would introduce laws into religion without Allah's permission, which is invalid. Allah says, "And speak not, concerning that which your own tongues qualify (as clean or unclean), the falsehood: 'This is lawful, and this is forbidden,' so that ye invent a lie against Allah." (An-Nisaa, 4: 116) ...(2)
"If any of them is reported to have deduced a ruling by means of reasoning, he should have denounced this later" Ibn HazmMoreover, the zahiri school is very clear in renouncingijtihad on the basis of ra'y (reasoning). Ibn Hazm unequivocally says,It is not permissible for anybody to deduce rulings [in Shari`ah] on the basis of reasoning. Allah Almighty says,
"We have neglected nothing in the Book (of Our decrees)" (Al-An'am, 6: 38), and "O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger and those of you who are in authority; and if ye have a dispute concerning any matter, refer it to Allah and the messenger if ye are (in truth) believers in Allah and the Last Day." (An-Nisaa, 4: 59) . . .
Moreover, `Abd Allah ibn `Amr ibn Al-`Ass said, "I heard Allah's Messenger saying, 'Allah does not take away the knowledge by taking it away from (the hearts of) the people, but He takes it away by the death of the religious learned men till when none of the (religious learned men) remains, people will take as their leaders ignorant persons who, when consulted, will give their verdict without knowledge [on the basis ofra'y]. So they will go astray and will lead the people astray.'" (Bukhari) (3) . . .
So, reasoning [or deducing rulings on the basis of ra'y] is totally unacceptable in religion.(4)
As for the reports that the Companions issued fatawa on the basis of ra'y ormaslahah, Ibn Hazm is categorical in saying that "If any of them is reported to have deduced a ruling by means of reasoning, he should have denounced this later".(5) Also, he argues,
"There is no infallible one except the Prophet (peace be on him). . . There is no authentic report that proves that any of the Companions issued a ruling on the basis of ra'y. Moreover, you will not find any of them give an opinion by means of reasoning but you see another one of them issue that fatwa on the basis of a text" … (6)
It is evident now that the zahiri school confines interpretations of Islam to clear literal meanings of texts of the Qur’an and the Sunnah as well as ijma`. They do not accept qiyas or reasoning in deducing legal rulings from Shari`ah.
Critical Review and Analysis
Confining the deduction of shar`i rulings to literal meanings of texts and ijma` only is in fact against the spirit of Shari`ah itself. In spite of the vast knowledge of the early zahiri scholars, their methodological approach and dependence solely on literal meanings of texts, have caused them to err in deducing many Shari`ah rulings. Ibn Hazm and other leading zahiri scholars have offered wonderful ijtihad to deduce rulings from Shari`ah, which should be appreciated, but their mythological approach has led them to commit serious mistakes in many legal stances and rulings they have adopted.
For instance, Ibn Hazm has deduced odd and unacceptable Shari`ah rulings from the hadith that reads, “You should not urinate in a standing water, then wash (makeghusl) in it,”(7) another version of the hadith reads, “. . . then make wudu’) by it”(8). In Ibn Hazm's opinion it is prohibited for a person to urinate in a stagnant water and then make wudu’ or ghusl using it, while it is not forbidden for another person to wash or make ablution form that water as long as its colour, smell, and taste are not changed by urine. He, thus, confines the prohibition of making wudu’ and ghusl by that water to the person who urinates in it! Apparently, he has extremely stuck to the literal meaning of the hadith.
He, moreover, allows a person who urinates in a stagnant water to drink, not to wash or make wudu', from it as long as its colour, smell, and taste are not changed by urine. He, therefore, has not drawn an analogy (qiyas) between wudu’ or ghusland drinking.
The Prophet’s Companions generally considered both the apparent meanings of texts and their deeper meanings in their actions and ijtihadMore strange, he has confined the prohibition of making ghusl and wudu’ to the case of direct urination in a stagnant water; so he does not forbid a person who urinates in a jar, and then pours it in a stagnant water, from making ghusl and wudu’ with that water.(9)The above zahiri legal ruling and other similar ones, which are caused by extreme confinement to literal meanings of texts and rejection of qiyas and reasoning, have been disapproved by leading Muslim scholars throughout centuries. Ibn Al-Qayyim, for example, says,
Confinement to literal meanings of texts or reasoning (ar-ra’y) alone is extremely wrong. . . . [The zahiriyyah mistakenly says that] direct urination—even few drops—in a stagnant water renders it impure, while pouring a big amount of urine that fills a jar into water doesn’t contaminate it.(10)
Zahiri approach does not give solutions to new issues that have no specific textual evidence in the Qur’an or the Sunnah, or ijma`.Ibn Hazm’s argument that the Companions did not consider the deeper meanings of texts and did not apply reasoning to reach legal rulings is not passable. The fact is that the Prophet’s Companions generally considered both the apparent meanings of texts and their deeper meanings in their actions and ijtihad. The practice of the Companions tends to suggest that they enacted laws and took measures in pursuance of maslahah despite the lack of a particular textual authority to validate it. In this context, the prominent scholar Al-Qarafi says,The Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) actually enacted laws and took measures on the basis of al-masalih al-mursalah and they reached ijma` regarding them. Among those issues are . . . the compilation of the Qur'an . . . and the introduction of the second adhan for the jumu`ah in the time of the rule of `Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him).(11)
Al-Ghazali reports Imam Ash-Shafi`i's observation regarding the Companions’ijtihad, saying,
Ash-Shafi`i assures that the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) resorted to istirsal in issuing fatawa. They did not confine themselves [to texts], as texts and their indications do not cover all questions. Issuing fatawa on the basis of al-maslahah is needed.(12)
One of the complications of the zahiri approach is, as Al-Ghazali has pointed out above, that it does not give solutions to new issues that have no specific textual evidence in the Qur’an or the Sunnah, or ijma`. By such a literal methodology, the well-established principle of applicability of Shari`ah to all times and places may be questioned by those who are not well-acquainted with Shari`ah and its objectives. Ibn `Ashûr, thus, warns,
"If one looks at the methodological principles of the Zahiris, one finds that they almost deny that the Shari`ah associates its commands with any deeper wisdom (hikmah). This is because they rejected deduction by analogy and the consideration of deeper meanings (ma`ani) and, therefore, stopped at the level of the apparent meanings (zawahir) of the texts. This also explains why their argumentation and polemics do not go beyond the letter of the Traditions and the actions of God’s Messenger and his Companions. This attitude is clearly manifested in Ibn Hazm’s book al-I`rab `an al-Hayrah wa al-Iltibas al-Waqi`ayn fi Madhahib Ahl al-Ra’y wa al-Qiyas, for this was the axis of his debates with the proponents of deduction by analogy.
Indeed, by following this course, the Zahiris ran the risk of suspending the Shari`ah commands concerning the situations and cases about which the Lawgiver has mentioned no specific rules. This is a dangerous attitude, for there is the real risk that one who wavers about this issue might eventually deny the relevance and applicability of the Islamic Shari`ah at every time and in every place. In conjunction with his discussion of the Tradition concerning the splitting of the Muslim community in his book al-`Aridah, Abu Bakr ibn Al-`Arabi aptly summarized the Zahiri’s position in poetry:
They (the Zahiris) said: zawahir are a rule that we must
not depart from to any kind of opinion or reflection
[We say:] zawahir are limited in number and occurrence:
how then can they provide rules for people’s changing condition?(13)
Also, the zahiriyyah’s denial of qiyas (analogy) goes against the vastness and flexibility of Shari`ah that enables it to cover the ever-emerging problems that result from the change of time, place, and circumstances. Imam Al-Juwayni (b. 419 AH – d. 487 AH), who is known as Imam Al-Haramayn, says,
The position adopted by the most exacting of scholars is that those who deny analogy (qiyas) are not considered scholars of the Ummah or conveyers of the Shari`ah, because they oppose out of mere obstinacy and exchange calumnies about things established by an overwhelming preponderance of the evidence, conveyed by tawatur (uninterrupted transmission). For most of the Shari`ah proceeds from ijtihad, and the unequivocal statements from the Qur'an and Hadith do not deal [in specific particulars by name] with even a tenth of the Shari`ah [as most of Islamic life is covered by general principles given by Allah to guide Muslims in every culture and time], so they [the literalists] are not considered of the learned.(14)
To conclude this section, I should emphasize that it is the literal interpretation of Islam that has led Ibn Hazm and other early zahiri scholars to commit such grave mistakes when deducing Shari`ah rulings. This, however, does not underestimate their scholarship or juristic and usuli works. They have offered wonderful ijtihad in the past to serve Islam and Muslim communities.
Notes
(1) See abû Muhammad `Alî ibn Ahmad ibn Sa`îd ibn Hazm, al-Ihkâm fî Usûl al-Âhkam, 8 vols., (Bruit: Dar al-Âfâq al-Jadîdah, nd), 7: pp. 55-56.; ibn Hazm, an-Nubaz fî Usûl al-Fiqh, ed. Muhammad Ahmad `abd al-`Azîz (Bruit: Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmîyyah, 1405 AH), pp. 16-17 & 62-67.
(2) Ibn Hazm, an-Nubaz, p. 52.
(3) Al-Bukhârî, al-Jâmi` as-Sahîh, vol. 1, part 1: pp. 31-32.
(4) Ibn Hazm, an-Nubaz, pp. 59-60.
(5) Ibid, p. 62.
(6) Ibn Hazm, al-Ihkâm, 6: p. 18.
(7) Al-Bukhârî, al-Jâmi` as-Sahîh, hadîth no. 239; Muslim, as-Sahîh, hadîth no. 282.
(8) At-Tirmidhî, as-Sunnan, hadîth no. 68; An-Nasâ’î, as-Sunnan, hadîth no.
(9) Ibn Hazm, al-Muhalâ, 11 vols. (Cairo: Dar Al-Fikr, n.d.), 1: pp. 135-140.
(10) Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawzîyyah, I`lâm al-Mûwaq`în `an Rabb al-`Ålamîn, 4 vols., ed. Ta-ha `abder-Ra’ûf Sa`ad (Cairo: Maktabat al-Kuliyyât al-Azhariyyah, 1388 AH – 1968 AC), 1: p. 265.
(11) Shihâb ad-Dîn Ahmad ibn Idrîs al-Qarâfî, Nafâ'is al-Usûl fî Sharh al-Mahsûl, 9 vols., ed. `Adil Ahmad `Abd al-Mawjûd and `Alî Muhammad Mu`awd (Makkah: Maktabit Nazâr Mustafâ al-Bâz, 1416 AH – 1995 AC), 9: p. 4087.
(12) Abû Hâmid al-Ghazâlî, al-Mankhûl fî Ta`liqât al-Usûl, ed. Dr. Muhammad Hasan Hîtû, (Damascus, Dar al-Fikr, 1400 AH), p. 357.
(13) Muhammad at-Tâhir ibn `Âshûr, Treatise on Maqâsid al-Sharî`ah, annotated and trans. Mohamed el-Tahir el-Mesawi (Herndon: The International Institute of Islamic Thought, 1427 AH – 2006 AC), p. 61.
(14) Abû `abd Allah Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn `Uthmân adh-Dhahabî, Siyâr A`lâm an-Nubalâ’, 23 vols., ed. a group of editors supervised by Shu`ayb al-Arnâ’ût (n.p.: Mu’assasat ar-Risâlah, n.d.), 25: pp. 97-98.
Dr. Wael Shihab holds a PhD in Islamic Studies from Al-Azhar University and is the Head of the Shari`ah and Fatwa sections at the English website of Onislam.net.
By Dr. Wael Shihab (Writer and Muslim Researcher)
Courtesy: http://www.onislam.net/
Literal interpretations of Islam, in the past and present, pose serious complications in introducing Islam and its values.
The problem is even more complex in the modern world of today owing to global complicated conditions, scarce Islamic knowledge resources and institutions, and ineffectiveness or even lack of Muslim-Muslim dialogue to fix such serious problems.
Though modern literalists do not accept to be described as “zahiri”, they rigidly follow the spirit of the zahiri school in confining themselves to literal meanings of texts and disregarding their deeper meanings and objectives. They pay no attention to the fact that the early zahiri school failed to gain proponents and was opposed by leading Muslim jurists and scholars throughout many centuries.
I never doubt the sincerity and faith of the zahiri scholars, nor even of the so-called modern zahirists, as this is known to Allah alone; and my aim here is to objectively study their approach for the benefit of Muslims in particular and all humans in general. I will first trace back the origins of the modernzahirists or neo-literalists by means of studying the early zahiri school, their approach, and scholars’ criticism. Then, I will analyze the new zahiri trend, its approach, its features, and its impacts on day-to-day life. I will critically study some of their juristic views and fatwas in order to present their methods and features through an academic approach. Finally, I will conclude the study by proposing some workable solutions to face some unacceptable methods of interpreting Islam.
The Early Zahiri School: Methodology and Principles
Become a fan of the Shari`ah ZoneEarly zahiri scholars such as Abu Dawud az-Zahiri (d. 270 AH) and Ibn Hazm (d. 456 AH) are known for their vast knowledge of the Qur’an and Sunnah. However, their literal interpretations of Islam has led them to commit grave errors when deducing some Shari`ah rulings.The zahiri school of fiqh is known for its strict adherence to texts and their apparent meanings. They have invalidated qiyas (analogy)—let alone other secondary sources of Shari`ah such as istihsan, al-masalih al-mursalah, `urf, etc.,—on the grounds that qiyas partakes in speculation. According to them, the rules of Shari`ah must be founded on certainty, and this is only true of the clear injunctions of the Qur'an, the Sunnah, and ijma`. Anything other than these is mere speculation, which should be renounced.(1) In this regard, Ibn Hazm (d. 465 AH), one of the founders and pioneers of the zahiri school, says, Allah Almighty says,
"O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger and those of you who are in authority." (An-Nisaa, 4: 59) Therefore, nothing should be declared as obligatory without a text or ijma`. . . . Whoever declares anything as obligatory without nass or ijma` would introduce laws into religion without Allah's permission, which is invalid. Allah says, "And speak not, concerning that which your own tongues qualify (as clean or unclean), the falsehood: 'This is lawful, and this is forbidden,' so that ye invent a lie against Allah." (An-Nisaa, 4: 116) ...(2)
"If any of them is reported to have deduced a ruling by means of reasoning, he should have denounced this later" Ibn HazmMoreover, the zahiri school is very clear in renouncingijtihad on the basis of ra'y (reasoning). Ibn Hazm unequivocally says,It is not permissible for anybody to deduce rulings [in Shari`ah] on the basis of reasoning. Allah Almighty says,
"We have neglected nothing in the Book (of Our decrees)" (Al-An'am, 6: 38), and "O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger and those of you who are in authority; and if ye have a dispute concerning any matter, refer it to Allah and the messenger if ye are (in truth) believers in Allah and the Last Day." (An-Nisaa, 4: 59) . . .
Moreover, `Abd Allah ibn `Amr ibn Al-`Ass said, "I heard Allah's Messenger saying, 'Allah does not take away the knowledge by taking it away from (the hearts of) the people, but He takes it away by the death of the religious learned men till when none of the (religious learned men) remains, people will take as their leaders ignorant persons who, when consulted, will give their verdict without knowledge [on the basis ofra'y]. So they will go astray and will lead the people astray.'" (Bukhari) (3) . . .
So, reasoning [or deducing rulings on the basis of ra'y] is totally unacceptable in religion.(4)
As for the reports that the Companions issued fatawa on the basis of ra'y ormaslahah, Ibn Hazm is categorical in saying that "If any of them is reported to have deduced a ruling by means of reasoning, he should have denounced this later".(5) Also, he argues,
"There is no infallible one except the Prophet (peace be on him). . . There is no authentic report that proves that any of the Companions issued a ruling on the basis of ra'y. Moreover, you will not find any of them give an opinion by means of reasoning but you see another one of them issue that fatwa on the basis of a text" … (6)
It is evident now that the zahiri school confines interpretations of Islam to clear literal meanings of texts of the Qur’an and the Sunnah as well as ijma`. They do not accept qiyas or reasoning in deducing legal rulings from Shari`ah.
Critical Review and Analysis
Confining the deduction of shar`i rulings to literal meanings of texts and ijma` only is in fact against the spirit of Shari`ah itself. In spite of the vast knowledge of the early zahiri scholars, their methodological approach and dependence solely on literal meanings of texts, have caused them to err in deducing many Shari`ah rulings. Ibn Hazm and other leading zahiri scholars have offered wonderful ijtihad to deduce rulings from Shari`ah, which should be appreciated, but their mythological approach has led them to commit serious mistakes in many legal stances and rulings they have adopted.
For instance, Ibn Hazm has deduced odd and unacceptable Shari`ah rulings from the hadith that reads, “You should not urinate in a standing water, then wash (makeghusl) in it,”(7) another version of the hadith reads, “. . . then make wudu’) by it”(8). In Ibn Hazm's opinion it is prohibited for a person to urinate in a stagnant water and then make wudu’ or ghusl using it, while it is not forbidden for another person to wash or make ablution form that water as long as its colour, smell, and taste are not changed by urine. He, thus, confines the prohibition of making wudu’ and ghusl by that water to the person who urinates in it! Apparently, he has extremely stuck to the literal meaning of the hadith.
He, moreover, allows a person who urinates in a stagnant water to drink, not to wash or make wudu', from it as long as its colour, smell, and taste are not changed by urine. He, therefore, has not drawn an analogy (qiyas) between wudu’ or ghusland drinking.
The Prophet’s Companions generally considered both the apparent meanings of texts and their deeper meanings in their actions and ijtihadMore strange, he has confined the prohibition of making ghusl and wudu’ to the case of direct urination in a stagnant water; so he does not forbid a person who urinates in a jar, and then pours it in a stagnant water, from making ghusl and wudu’ with that water.(9)The above zahiri legal ruling and other similar ones, which are caused by extreme confinement to literal meanings of texts and rejection of qiyas and reasoning, have been disapproved by leading Muslim scholars throughout centuries. Ibn Al-Qayyim, for example, says,
Confinement to literal meanings of texts or reasoning (ar-ra’y) alone is extremely wrong. . . . [The zahiriyyah mistakenly says that] direct urination—even few drops—in a stagnant water renders it impure, while pouring a big amount of urine that fills a jar into water doesn’t contaminate it.(10)
Zahiri approach does not give solutions to new issues that have no specific textual evidence in the Qur’an or the Sunnah, or ijma`.Ibn Hazm’s argument that the Companions did not consider the deeper meanings of texts and did not apply reasoning to reach legal rulings is not passable. The fact is that the Prophet’s Companions generally considered both the apparent meanings of texts and their deeper meanings in their actions and ijtihad. The practice of the Companions tends to suggest that they enacted laws and took measures in pursuance of maslahah despite the lack of a particular textual authority to validate it. In this context, the prominent scholar Al-Qarafi says,The Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) actually enacted laws and took measures on the basis of al-masalih al-mursalah and they reached ijma` regarding them. Among those issues are . . . the compilation of the Qur'an . . . and the introduction of the second adhan for the jumu`ah in the time of the rule of `Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him).(11)
Al-Ghazali reports Imam Ash-Shafi`i's observation regarding the Companions’ijtihad, saying,
Ash-Shafi`i assures that the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) resorted to istirsal in issuing fatawa. They did not confine themselves [to texts], as texts and their indications do not cover all questions. Issuing fatawa on the basis of al-maslahah is needed.(12)
One of the complications of the zahiri approach is, as Al-Ghazali has pointed out above, that it does not give solutions to new issues that have no specific textual evidence in the Qur’an or the Sunnah, or ijma`. By such a literal methodology, the well-established principle of applicability of Shari`ah to all times and places may be questioned by those who are not well-acquainted with Shari`ah and its objectives. Ibn `Ashûr, thus, warns,
"If one looks at the methodological principles of the Zahiris, one finds that they almost deny that the Shari`ah associates its commands with any deeper wisdom (hikmah). This is because they rejected deduction by analogy and the consideration of deeper meanings (ma`ani) and, therefore, stopped at the level of the apparent meanings (zawahir) of the texts. This also explains why their argumentation and polemics do not go beyond the letter of the Traditions and the actions of God’s Messenger and his Companions. This attitude is clearly manifested in Ibn Hazm’s book al-I`rab `an al-Hayrah wa al-Iltibas al-Waqi`ayn fi Madhahib Ahl al-Ra’y wa al-Qiyas, for this was the axis of his debates with the proponents of deduction by analogy.
Indeed, by following this course, the Zahiris ran the risk of suspending the Shari`ah commands concerning the situations and cases about which the Lawgiver has mentioned no specific rules. This is a dangerous attitude, for there is the real risk that one who wavers about this issue might eventually deny the relevance and applicability of the Islamic Shari`ah at every time and in every place. In conjunction with his discussion of the Tradition concerning the splitting of the Muslim community in his book al-`Aridah, Abu Bakr ibn Al-`Arabi aptly summarized the Zahiri’s position in poetry:
They (the Zahiris) said: zawahir are a rule that we must
not depart from to any kind of opinion or reflection
[We say:] zawahir are limited in number and occurrence:
how then can they provide rules for people’s changing condition?(13)
Also, the zahiriyyah’s denial of qiyas (analogy) goes against the vastness and flexibility of Shari`ah that enables it to cover the ever-emerging problems that result from the change of time, place, and circumstances. Imam Al-Juwayni (b. 419 AH – d. 487 AH), who is known as Imam Al-Haramayn, says,
The position adopted by the most exacting of scholars is that those who deny analogy (qiyas) are not considered scholars of the Ummah or conveyers of the Shari`ah, because they oppose out of mere obstinacy and exchange calumnies about things established by an overwhelming preponderance of the evidence, conveyed by tawatur (uninterrupted transmission). For most of the Shari`ah proceeds from ijtihad, and the unequivocal statements from the Qur'an and Hadith do not deal [in specific particulars by name] with even a tenth of the Shari`ah [as most of Islamic life is covered by general principles given by Allah to guide Muslims in every culture and time], so they [the literalists] are not considered of the learned.(14)
To conclude this section, I should emphasize that it is the literal interpretation of Islam that has led Ibn Hazm and other early zahiri scholars to commit such grave mistakes when deducing Shari`ah rulings. This, however, does not underestimate their scholarship or juristic and usuli works. They have offered wonderful ijtihad in the past to serve Islam and Muslim communities.
Notes
(1) See abû Muhammad `Alî ibn Ahmad ibn Sa`îd ibn Hazm, al-Ihkâm fî Usûl al-Âhkam, 8 vols., (Bruit: Dar al-Âfâq al-Jadîdah, nd), 7: pp. 55-56.; ibn Hazm, an-Nubaz fî Usûl al-Fiqh, ed. Muhammad Ahmad `abd al-`Azîz (Bruit: Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmîyyah, 1405 AH), pp. 16-17 & 62-67.
(2) Ibn Hazm, an-Nubaz, p. 52.
(3) Al-Bukhârî, al-Jâmi` as-Sahîh, vol. 1, part 1: pp. 31-32.
(4) Ibn Hazm, an-Nubaz, pp. 59-60.
(5) Ibid, p. 62.
(6) Ibn Hazm, al-Ihkâm, 6: p. 18.
(7) Al-Bukhârî, al-Jâmi` as-Sahîh, hadîth no. 239; Muslim, as-Sahîh, hadîth no. 282.
(8) At-Tirmidhî, as-Sunnan, hadîth no. 68; An-Nasâ’î, as-Sunnan, hadîth no.
(9) Ibn Hazm, al-Muhalâ, 11 vols. (Cairo: Dar Al-Fikr, n.d.), 1: pp. 135-140.
(10) Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawzîyyah, I`lâm al-Mûwaq`în `an Rabb al-`Ålamîn, 4 vols., ed. Ta-ha `abder-Ra’ûf Sa`ad (Cairo: Maktabat al-Kuliyyât al-Azhariyyah, 1388 AH – 1968 AC), 1: p. 265.
(11) Shihâb ad-Dîn Ahmad ibn Idrîs al-Qarâfî, Nafâ'is al-Usûl fî Sharh al-Mahsûl, 9 vols., ed. `Adil Ahmad `Abd al-Mawjûd and `Alî Muhammad Mu`awd (Makkah: Maktabit Nazâr Mustafâ al-Bâz, 1416 AH – 1995 AC), 9: p. 4087.
(12) Abû Hâmid al-Ghazâlî, al-Mankhûl fî Ta`liqât al-Usûl, ed. Dr. Muhammad Hasan Hîtû, (Damascus, Dar al-Fikr, 1400 AH), p. 357.
(13) Muhammad at-Tâhir ibn `Âshûr, Treatise on Maqâsid al-Sharî`ah, annotated and trans. Mohamed el-Tahir el-Mesawi (Herndon: The International Institute of Islamic Thought, 1427 AH – 2006 AC), p. 61.
(14) Abû `abd Allah Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn `Uthmân adh-Dhahabî, Siyâr A`lâm an-Nubalâ’, 23 vols., ed. a group of editors supervised by Shu`ayb al-Arnâ’ût (n.p.: Mu’assasat ar-Risâlah, n.d.), 25: pp. 97-98.
Dr. Wael Shihab holds a PhD in Islamic Studies from Al-Azhar University and is the Head of the Shari`ah and Fatwa sections at the English website of Onislam.net.