i

IBN H . AZMS CONCEPT OF IJM

(CONSENSUS).

By

Muhammad Amin A. Samad

ii

PUBLISHERS INTRODUCTION This book is a revision and an edition from a thesis by the author submitted in fulfilment of the reqirements for the degree of Master of Arts in 1984 at the Institute of Islamic Studies, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. It deals with ijm (consensus in Islamic law) which is one of the sources of Islamic law according the the vast majority of Muslim scholars. However, they have different opinions on this subject, including Ibn H . azm, one of the leading Muslim scholars of the distant past in Andalusia (Muslim Spain). For those who are interested in Islam in general and comparative studies of Islamic law this book is highly recommended.

......................

iii

ABSTRACT This book is an attempt to study Ibn H . azms concept of ijm (consensus). Ibn H . azm was a Muslim scholar of Persian origin, who revived the Z .hir school in Andalusia (Muslim Spain) in the fifth/eleventh century. The Z .hir school was founded by Dwd in Iraq in the third/ninth century. This school was known for its insistence on the literal interpretation of the nas .s . (divine text). Ijm is accepted by Muslim jurists en masse as the third source of Islamic law after the Qurn and the Sunnah (practice) of the Prophet. However, these jurists held different concepts on ijm according to the schools to which they belonged. As an exponent of the Z .hir school, Ibn H . azms concept of ijm is quite different from those of other jurists. In defending his concept and refuting those of his opponents, he based his argument upon the literal meaning of the nas .s ..

iv

So, I said: Do they blame me for anything except that I do not uphold ray (personal opinion in religion), as there are discords in their opinion, And that I am in love with nas .s . (divine text), and I do not lean upon other than it, nor shall I be weak in supporting it? I will not incline towards any opinion said in religion; nay, the Qurn and the Sunnah (practices of the Prophet) suffice me.

Ibn H . azm

TABLE OF CONTENTS PUBLISHERS INTRODUCTION ................................ ABSTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS TRANSLITERATION SYSTEM INTRODUCTION Chapter I. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND A. The Background of Ibn H . azm .. 1 1 1 3 ii iii v vii viii ix

1. A Short Synopsis of Ibn H . azms Life 2. Ibn H . azms Contact with Religious Scholars B. The Problems of the Definitions and Occurrence of Ijm 1. The Definitions of Ijm 2. The Occurrence of Ijm Endnotes to Chapter I II. JUDICIAL BACKGROUND . A. Ibn H . azms View of the Basis of Ijm

14 14

28 37 37 45 47 59

1. Qurn 2. Sunnah .. 3. Qiys.. ...

vi

B. Ibn H . azm s View of the Types of Ijm . 1. Ijm on What is Known in Religion by Necessity 2. Ijm of the S .ah .bah .

60 61 63 73 81 85 98 111 115 120 128

3. Ijm of the People of Madnah . 4. Ijm where no Challenge is Known 5. Ijm with One Challenge .. Endnotes to Chapter II CONCLUSION . GLOSSARY BIBLIOGRAPHY

ABOUT THE AUTHOR ......................................................

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Charles J. Adams, the former Director of the Institute of Islamic Studies, McGill University, and Dr. Hermann Landolt, the former professor of this Institute for their support and encouragement in reading the draft of this work. I wish to express my gratitude and appreciation to Dr. Karim Crow for editing and proof-reading and Dr. H. Murtada Naqib for his assistance and advice, especially in writing the second chapter of this work. My thanks also go to Dr. Teddy Mantoro and others who have contributed, in one way or another, to the completion of this study. I sincerely express my deep thanks and appreciation for their support.

Canberra, December, 2011

M.A.S.

viii

TRANSLITERATION SYSTEM

The English transliteration for Arabic names and terms followed in this thesis is as follows: a. Consonants: = a or =dh =z . =n =b =r = =h =t =z =gh =w =y = th =s =j = sh =f =h . =s . =q = kh =d . =k =d = t =m

= (like alif)

b. Vowels: Short: Fathah: Kasrah: ---- = a ---- = i Long: = = =

D .ammah: ---- = u c. T Marbt .ah: ah, e.g., srah ( )

T Marbt .ah in id .fah: at, e.g., srat al-Baqarah ( d. Alif maqs .rah: , e.g., qad . ( ) and shr

ix

INTRODUCTION Ibn H . azm was one of the unique and controversial Muslim scholars in Islamic history. He lived in Andalusia (Muslim Spain) in the 11th century where Mlik school was followed by its rulers and people. After reading Shfi's criticism of Mlik he followed the Shfi school, but through his further research and study of criticism of this school, he finally abandoned it and based his fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) exclusively on the Qurn and the Sunnah of the Prophet. This was also the view of the vanished Zhir school founded by Ab Sulaymn Dd in Iraq about two centuries earlier. He was then reviving this Zhir school which was based on literal interpretation of the divine text (the Qur'n and the Sunnah of the Prophet) among people and scholars who did not share his views. As a Zhir school follower and exponent Ibn H . azm did not give any important value of the third and fourth sources of Islamic law, namely, the ijm (consensus of Muslim scholars) and the qiys (analogy). The ijm of the whole scholars or the whole Muslim ummah (community) could not have taken place in the past nor will be in future, as there were Muslim scholars among jinn whose opinions were unknown. What other scholars call qiys he called it dall (textual evidence). One example is that the killing of one's parents is prohibited based on the prohibition of saying to them a word of disrespect (Qurn 17:23). This qiys was not accepted by Ibn H . azm, although he said the prohibition of killing one's parent but based on the Qurnic verse prohibiting the killing of anyone except in the just cause (Q. 6:151). Ibn H . azm was a judge in Muslim Andalusia and was considered one of the mujtahidn. His views in many Islamic legal issues in general and his concept of ijm in particular are still relevant to our research and study of Islamic legal thinking.

CHAPTER I HISTORICAL BACKGROUND A. The Background of Ibn H . azm 1. Short Synopsis of Ibn H . azms Life Ibn H . azm was born in Cordova (Spain) at the end of Ramad .n 384/7 November 994, and died at Manta Lisham at the end of Shabn 456/15 August 1064. His name was Al ibn (son of) Ah .mad ibn Sad ibn Ghlib ibn S .lih . ibn Khalaf ibn Madn ibn Sufyn ibn Yazd.The conversion of his ancestor Yazd to Islam dates back to the time of the second caliph, Umar ibn al-Khat .t .b. He was a Persian client (mawl) of Yazd (the elder brother of Muwiyah) ibn Ab Sufyn. With the establishment of the Umayyad caliphate in Andalusia (Muslim Spain), Khalaf, one of the distant great grand-fathers of Ibn H . azm, moved to that country with the Umayyad household, and settled at Manta Lisham. Later, Sad, the grand-father of Ibn H . azm, settled in Cordova, where Ibn 1 2 H . azm was born. Ibn H . azms agnomen (kunyah) was Ab Muh .ammad, but he was well-known ( ) as Ibn H . azm. Ibn H . azm was raised in a prosperous and respected family in Cordova. His distant great great grand-fathers had been Umayyad partisans, the rulers of their times. His father Ah .mad was vizier to alMans .r ibn Ab mir and to his son al-Muz .affar. He learned handwriting, was taught and memorized the Qurn and many poems by the womenmaids and relativesin his house. He admitted that the suspicious character of these women had, to some extent, influenced him. He was suspicious of his opponents in general, especially those who attacked his views. This might be one of the causes of the antipathy that

existed between Ibn H . azm and the ulam of his time. This also might be one of the reasons for his leaving politics to write and to teach religion.3 This early phase of Ibn H . azms life lasted until he reached the age of fourteen, when disturbances occurred in the country. There was civil war, a struggle for power between Andalusians, Berbers, and Slavs which started in 398/1008. The Umayyad caliph Hishm II al-Muayyid biAllh was only a nine year boy. The power was in the hands of H . jib al4 Mans .r ibn Ab mir to whom Ibn H . azms father became the vizier. Ibn H . azms family was compelled to move westward for safety, and they moved to their house at Balt . Mughth.Hishm II was overthrown and replaced by Muh .ammad II al-Mahd. Ibn H . azms father, Ah .mad, who had plotted against the Slavs, was imprisoned, and his possessions were confiscated by the Slav general Wd .ih .. Although Muh .ammad II alMahd was later assassinated and Hishm II retained his throne, it did not affect the fate of Ah .mad, who died in 402/1012. A year later, another disaster happened to Ibn H . azm. The house of his family at Balt . Mughth was destroyed by the Berbers. In the next year (404/1013-4) Ibn H . azm took refuge in Almeria. He was then a young man of twenty. Three years later, being suspected of making pro-Umayyad propaganda, he was imprisoned with his friend Muh .ammad ibn Ish .q by the governor of the city, Khayrn. Khayrn and his ally, Al ibn H . ammd, has successfully 5 overthrown the Umayyad caliph, Sulaymn. With his friend Muh .ammad ibn Ish .q, Ibn H . azm then went to a town called H .is .n al-Qas .r. A few months later they learned that Abd alRah .mn IV al-Murtad ., the Umayyad claimant to the caliphate, had been proclaimed caliph of Valencia, and was raising an army against the Berbers in Cordova. As a pro-Umayyad, Ibn H . azm and his friend Muh .ammad ibn Ish .q went to Valencia by sea and joined the army of al-

Murtad . appointed Ibn H . azm as his vizier. The army .. Al-Murtad marched towards Granada. In the battle that ensued between alMurtad .s army and that of the Berbers, Ibn H . azm was taken prisoner 6 and then released. In 409/1018 Ibn H . azm returned to Cordova. The caliph at that time was al-Qsim ibn H . ammd, who was backed by the Berbers. When he was overthrown by Abd al-Rah .mn V al-Mustaz .hir bi-Allh in 414/1023 Ibn H . azm was appointed a vizier. Unfortunately for Ibn H . azm, al-Mustaz .hir was murdered seven weeks later, and he was again imprisoned.7 In 418/1027, at the age of thirty-four, Ibn H . azm appeared at Jativa. He later became vizier again under caliph Hishm III al-Mutadd bi-Allh. But when the Umayyad caliphate lost its power forever in Andalusia in 422/1031 with the assassination of caliph Hishm III Ibn 8 H . azm turned to writing books and teaching religion. He remained occupied with this work, defending his Z .hir school and the Umayyad claim for the caliphate, and attacking his opponents in his writings and teachings, for the rest of his life. More than thirty years later, Ibn H . azm died at the age of seventy-two in 456/1064 at his ancestral village Manta Lisham.9 2. Ibn H . azms Contact with Religious Scholars

Ibn H . azm began studying the religious sciences at an early age. 10 He studied H . adth (Prophetic Tradition) before he reached the age of seventeen. He used to attend the sessions of the ulam, accompanied by 11 his tutor, Ab al-H . usayn ibn Al al-Fris. Since Ibn H . azm lived in Andalusia where the Mlik school was dominant, it was a matter of course that he learned the fiqh (jurisprudence) of the Mlik school. He studied Mliks al-Muwat .t .a under Abd Allh ibn Dah .h .n, a Mlik

jurist in Cordova. Ibn H . azm also studied fiqh from the qd . (judge) of 12 Valencia, Ibn al-Fard .. Ibn H . azm was a truth seeker. He was not satisfied with the teachings of Mlik. We are told that Ibn H . azm said that he loved Mlik, but he loved truth more. This may indicate that Ibn H . azm had read alShfis criticism of Mlik. Gradually, Ibn H . azm began to lean towards the Shfi school, until finally he attached himself to the al-Shfi school.13 Hence he began to differ from the people of Andalusia in general and their ulam in particular. To increase his knowledge of Islamic law, Ibn H . azm read books written by scholars of different schools. He read the book of Ibn Umayyah, a Shfi jurist, on laws of the Qurn ( ), and the Qurnic exegesis ( ) of Ab Abd Abd al-Rah .mn Baq ibn Mukhlad, an lim (a learned man, a scholar) who did not attach himself to any madhhab (school of law). This Qurnic exegesis was considered by Ibn H . azm as the best of its kind. Ibn H . azm also read the Z .hir book on laws of the Qurn by a Z .hir qd ., Ab al-H . akam Mundhir ibn Sad, and studied Z .hir fiqh under the Z .hir jurist Ab al-Khiyr 14 Masd ibn Sulaymn ibn Muflit. Through further reading Ibn H . azm found himself leaning towards fiqh based exclusively on the Qurn and the Sunnah, which was also the fiqh of the Z .hir school. Later on, Ibn H . azm became a Z .hir, reviving a vanished school founded by Ab Sulaymn Dwd in Iraq about two centuries before him. By so doing, Ibn H . azm became a jurist who did not share the opinion of the ulam in his time inside and outside his country.15

There is a similarity between Ibn H . azm and Dwd in their educational studies and in Dwds establishing and Ibn H . azms reviving the Z .hir school. Dwd was born in Kufah in 202/817, where the H . anaf school was dominant. When his family moved to Baghdad, he learned Shfi law as well as the H . anaf. He attended the lectures of many jurists, among whom was the Shfi Ab Thawr (d. 246/860). Dwd became interested in Shfi fiqh, and then shifted from the H . anaf to the Shfi school. Later on, he went to Nishapur and studied under Ibn Rhawayh (d. 237-8/851-2). After a profound study of Shfi fiqh, he became dissatisfied with it. He then founded his own school, i.e., Z .hir, which was based exclusively on the Qurn and the H . adth. Like Dwd, Ibn H . azm also did not follow the dominant school in Andalusia, i.e., the Mlik, but he attached himself to the Shfi, and then to the Z .hir. Both Dwd and Ibn H . azm accepted the ijm of the s .bah and rejected qiys, ray (personal opinion), istih .sn, and taqld .ah (decision based on the authority of preceding generations). Both Dwd and Ibn H . azm were prolific writers. Unfortunately, Dwds works were lost, while some of those of Ibn H . azm have reached us. Ibn H . azm refers to Dwd in his works. The fiqh of Dwd was collected by Muh .ammad al-Shat .t . (d. 1307/1887) based on the works of his (Dwds) followers.16 As a Z .hir jurist, Ibn H . azm was opposed by the ulam in his time. His opponents at the theoretical level were the H . anafs, and to a lesser degree, the Shfis. This is because he attacked the H . anafs upholding of qiys and istih s n (preference, application of discretion in a . legal judgement) as the bases of the sharah (the canonical law of Islam) in addition to the Qurn and the H .adth, and the Shfis assertion of qiys. In theoretical and practical levels, his opponents were the Mliks, the followers of the prevalent madhhab in Andalusia of his time.17 Moreover, he denounced his opponents for their following their imms (leaders), the founders of their schools, as authority instead of the Qurn

and the H . adth. Yet, he praised and prayed for these imms of madhhabs in his writings, though he attacked them on some occasions. He said: Let it be known that anyone who accepts as authoritative, adheres to, or follows MlikAb H . anfah, al-Shfi, Sufyn al-Thawr, al-Awz, Ah .mad, and Dwd, may Allah be pleased with them, they are innocent from him in this world, the Hereafter, and the Day of Judgement where written certification became manifested.18 Ibn H . azm was a notorious opponent. He attacked whoever disagreed with him. He was accused of having an insolent tongue ( ), and of neglecting to examine the truth of the news which reached him. The historian al-Subk (d. 771/1370) denounced him for attacking Ab al-H . asan al-Ashar (d. 323/935), the founder of the Ashar school of theology.20 Ibn H . azm asserted in his book al-Fas .l that Ab al-H . asan al-Ashar believed that mn (faith, belief) was exclusively knowing Allah with ones heart ( ), though one expressed his being a Jew, a Christian, or any other kind of infidelity.21 Ibn H . azms al-Fas .l was considered by al-Subk as one of the worst books which should not be read by people, due to its contempt of the main body of Muslims (
19

), and its referring foolish words to their leaders without any examination. Ibn H . azms rashness in believing the reports which reached him and his immediate denunciation was one of many reasons for his expulsion from his village by Ab al-Wald al-Bj and his fellows,22 23 with whom Ibn H . azm had held a debate. Ibn H . azm attacked his opponents so severely that his harsh 24 language was compared to the sword of al-H . ajjj. However, Ibn H . azm

was not totally wrong in his argument. O.A. Farrukh said about him as follows: Ibn H . azm was a polemist by nature, and often right in his contentions. Yet, he is to blame for the harsh language he used in his attacks on all religions and sects indiscriminately. On some occasions he attacked even some of those who shared with him the same doctrine.25 Though Ibn H . azm was often right in his contentions, he was unable to convince his opponents and to bring them to his side. His teachings remained unpopular in his time.26 We are told that his writings were sufficient to be a heavy camel load ( ),27 but most of them did not go beyond the gate of his village Lablah, due to the aversion of the fuqah (jurisprudents) towards them. Some of these writings were burned and torn to pieces at Seville.28 As a polemic writer who was defending his views, Ibn H . azm often did not mention his opponents by name, but rather the school to which they belonged. Because either he did not know their names, or when he did he was more concerned with refuting their views. Moreover, some of the contentions were merely suppositions raised and answered 29 by Ibn H . azm himself. As a scholar who had studied the different schools and sects of Islam, Ibn H . azm came to the conclusion that the true school was the 30 Z .hir, while the other schools were false. In his assertions, he never doubted the truth of his views and the falsehood of that of his opponents. This attitude was in contrast to that of other scholars who doubted the truth of their views and the falsehood of their opponents.31 Moreover, Ibn H . azms attachment with respect to his own views prevented him from changing his opinion, for he obviously considered himself had found the truth.32 For him, holding any discussion or debate was merely a means to prove the truth of his views and the falsity of that of his opponents, and not a means of reaching the truth.33

Ibn H . azms attachment regarding his Z .hir school did not change his pro-Umayyad attitude. On the contrary, through his Z .hir orientation, he continued to struggle for the return of the Umayyad caliphate. So, although he left politics in his late thirties, he did not altogether abandon it. According to Abd al- L at .f Sharrah, Ibn H . azm never left politics after he became a vizier of al-Mustaz .hir. Sharrah says: The fact which was not noted by those who wrote the biography of Ibn H . azm, and by those who spoke and wrote about him later, was that Ibn H . azm did not leave politics after he had become the vizier of al-Mustaz .hir. He did not stop thinking of it one day, and he never ceased to hope for the return of his family to it, if not himself, and particularly under the sovereignty of the Umayyad throne.34 In Sharrahs view, Ibn H . azms choice of fiqh as his field of work was because he intended to bring back a dynasty afflicted with destruction ( ) through moral social consciousness ( ).35 Sharrah further maintains that Ibn H . azm believed that the weakness of the Umayyad dynasty was due to terrifying moral disintegration and obvious intellectual deviation, then the invented views and interpretations imposed on the Qurn and the H . adth, and lastly, the 36 controversy among religions, sects, and faiths. Ibn H . azm condemns mystics and asserts that religion has no inner meaning or secret. He maintains that the Prophet had never concealed a single word of the sharah to the people. There was never a single person among those who were close to the Prophetas a wife, a daughter, an uncle, a cousin, or a s .ah .b (a companion of the Prophet) who ever concealed what he or she received from him.37 Ibn H . azm rejects the opinion of his opponents that al-rsikhn fl-ilm (those

firmly established in knowledge)38 know the tawl (interpretation, inner meaning) of the mutashbiht (ambiguous verses) in the Qurn. They base their view on the Qurnic verse which they choose to read in the following way: none knoweth its explanation save Allah and those who are of sound instruction. They say: we believe therein, the whole is from our Lord.39 Ibn H . azm refutes their interpretation by the following arguments: a. The word those who are of sound instruction is not connected to the word Allh as asserted by his opponents, but rather it is the subject of a new sentence. The conjunction wa (and) in this verse joins two sentences instead of two nouns. The complete reading and the translation of this verse as maintained by Ibn H . azm as well as the ulam en masse is the following:

He it is He Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture wherein are clear revelationsThey are the substance of the Bookand others (which are) allegorical. But those in whose hearts is doubt pursue, forsooth, that which is allegorical seeking (to cause) dissension by seeking to explain it. None knoweth its explanation save Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein; the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed. (Qurn 3:7)40 b. Allah prohibited people from seeking the tawl of the mutashbiht, asserting that those who seek and follow its tawl are doubters and followers of fitnah (dissension);

11

c. If al-rsikhn fl-ilm had known its tawl, they would have explained it to the people, because they are enjoined by Allah to do so. Ibn H . azm refers to the verse:

Those who hide the proofs and the guidance which We revealed, after We had made it clear in the Scripture: such are accursed of Allah and accursed of those who have the power to curse. (Qurn 2:159).41 If they explained it to the people, Ibn H . azm goes on to say, it would not be ambiguous any longer, so that all people would have the same knowledge. Yet, this is not the case, as mentioned in the verse in question. Should they conceal it, on the other hand, they would be cursed by Allah. d. ishah reported that the Prophet, after reading the verse in question said: If you see people who follow what is ambiguous [in the Qurn], they are those whom Allah called such [i.e., those in whose heart is doubt]. Therefore, beware of them.42 According to Sharrah and Farrukh the emergence of the Z .hir school in Iraq in the third/ninth century may be traced to a reaction to the following movements: the Ismiliyyah and the Mutazilah.43 The Ismiliyyah was an esoteric movement among the Shah which appeared in the second/eighth century. The members of this movement called themselves Ismiliyyah, because they separated themselves from the Twelver Shah in considering Isml (d. 145/762), the eldest son of

11

Jafar al-S .diq (d. 148/765), the sixth imm, as their imm, instead of Ms al-Kz .im (d. 183/799), the seventh imm of the Twelver Shah. This movement had many nicknames. In Iraq it was called al-Bt .iniyyah (the Bt .ins), al-Qarmit .ah (the Qarmatians) and al-Mazdakiyyah (the Mazdaks). In Khurasan it was called al-Talmiyyah (the Talms), and al-Mulh .idah (the Mulh .ids). It was most widely known as the Bt .iniyyah (seekers of the inner or spiritual meaning of the nas .s .), because they asserted that every z .hir (apparent state of a thing) had a bt .in (an inner or secret meaning). One example of this inner meaning was their statement that Allah is neither existent nor non-existent, neither knowing nor ignorant, because, in their view, actual affirmation of the attributes of Allah, like Existence, Knowing and so on, were shared by other existing things, and this was tashbh (anthropomorphization of Allah). Therefore, they did not base their judgement about Allahs attributes on absolute affirmation or absolute negation, but rather between the two. They said that Allah was the God of two opposite things, the Creator of two adversaries, and the Judge between two contradictory things ( ).44 According to the Bt .iniyyah every verse of the Qurn, not only the mutashbiht, but even any object, act, or person in it has an inner meaning. This inner meaning should not be imparted to the awm (laymen), lest it would be misunderstood by them. It should be kept secret by the khaws .s . (the lite who know this inner meaning) themselves. To a lesser degree, beside the Ismilyah, the term bt .inyah was also applied by Sunn writers to those who, in their opinion, rejected the literal meaning of the nas .s . in favour of its inner 45 meaning. Another movement which the Z .hir school was partly a reaction against, was the Mutazil theological school which emerged in the beginning of the second/eighth century. This school applied reason and philosophy in interpreting the nas .s . instead of referring to its traditional 46 interpretation. They called themselves ahl al-adl wa l-tawh .d (the

12

Champions of Divine Justice and Oneness) for their rejection of the doctrine of Divine predestination and His attributes.47 This Mutazil school was adopted by al-Mamn as the official doctrine of the state. In the third/ninth century Dwd founded the Z .hir school in Iraq to counteract the Bt .inyah, the Mutazilah, and those who went beyond the traditional interpretation of the nas .s .. This Z .hir school insisted on the literal meaning of the nas .s . and keeping away from any 48 interpretation of it. Although the Z .hir school was disappearing in the East and was replaced by the H . anbal school in the fifth/eleventh century, Ibn H azm revived it in Andalusia as a reaction against the corruption in . political and judicial fields. The nas .s . was violated and interpreted beyond its true meaning. Qiys, personal opinion, and biased fatw ) ( were being exercised. Ibn H . azm was aware of how the people of Andalusia agreed and pledged allegiance to Hishm alMuayyid bi-Allh in 365/976, who was still a boy of nine years.49 He witnessed how people in 399/1009 agreed to transfer the office of the Caliph to the non-Quraysh Abd al-Rah .r al-mir, while .mn ibn Mans the Prophet had decreed that the immah (leadership) had to be among the Quraysh.50 He realized that all this political instability and legal confusion occurred as the outcome of applying tawl, qiys, ray, and other excesses in the matters of sharah. In his view, the sole remedy for this corruption was to bring people back to the Qurn and the teachings of the Prophet. He maintains that the Qurn is clear, while what is implied in general terms (mujmal) is explained by other verses and by the Prophet himself. Whatever Allah and the Prophet did not pronounce upon is permissible (mubh .). This is the view of Ibn H . azm in upholding what is apparent in the nas .s . without going beyond it is purely Z .hir in nature. In other words, the Z hir school was seen by Ibn H azm to be the only . . solution in saving Andalusia from corruption and destruction. This is the reason for his strong attachment to this school.

13

Ibn H . azms motive for reviving and promoting the Z .hir school was both political and religious. However, in the second half of his life he confined himself to religious activity, for politics was closely related to religion. The establishment of the Islamic society and the appointment of an imm whose duty was to protect Islam and to apply its teachings in all of its aspects were parts of religion. Teaching the Z .hir fiqh to Muslims and their leaders was also a political activity, because through this teaching, they became guided and controlled. They would know their duties in the light of the sharah. Ibn H . azm stressed the importance of fiqh and teaching it to the people, and dedicated his life to this purpose. He said: . And as we are sure that the world is not an everlasting abode, but an abode of trial and testing and a passing way) ( to the abode of eternity, so it is true that there is no benefit ) (in this world and of being in it, except [in] knowing what Allah the Almighty has ordered us, teaching it to the ignorant ones ) ( and acting according to it... 51 Ibn H . azm emphasizes his Z .hir belief, not only in his theological and legal writings, but also in his poetry. This is shown most pointingly in the following lines: * * * * A person blames me about someone whose beauty enchanted me,

14

He prolongs his blame of me for [falling in] love and says: Are you a victim of [love on seeing] a face which shone, [so that] you do not see other than it (the face), [i.e., the rest part of the body], And you do not know how the body is? So, I said to him: You have exaggerated in blaming [me] unjustly, And I have a long answer if you want [it]. Dont you know that I am a Z .hir, And I [judge] Upon what is apparent until a dall (proof, evidence) stands [against it]?52 In propagating and defending the Z .hir view, Ibn H . azms relation with other ulam was not amicable. His school was considered intruding and shdhdh (deviating),53 for it was the revival of a vanished school among people who had already followed the Mlik school. His books were destroyed, burned, or forbidden to be read by common people, due to his attack on leading scholars, like Ab l-H . asan alAshar. Ibn H . azm, on his side, attacked and reproached them for their following their imm instead of the Qurn and the Sunnah.

B. The Problems of the Definition and the Occurrence of Ijm 1. The Definitions of Ijm Ijm is recognized by Muslims as the third source of Islamic jurisprudence. However, Muslim jurists do not agree in what ijm is. They give different definitions and interpretations of ijm. The root meaning of ijm is: to collect, to bring together, and to draw together. means I collected the camels together (taken as booty). The Arabic idiom (falt majmaah, mujmiah or mujammiah) means an open ground where people assembled fearing to be lost or [from] other [danger].54

15

Another root meaning of ijm is to determine, and to decide. means I decide (determine) upon the affair. It is in this meaning that it is mentioned in the Qurn, which means so decide upon your course of action. (Q. 10:71).55 The Prophet meant this root meaning of ijm when he said that fasting was not legal for one who had not decided ) ( to fast the night 56 before. Another root meaning of ijm is: to agree upon. It is an agreement between two or more persons.57 Technically, there are many definitions given by Muslim jurists, based on their conceptions about it. In this section we shall deal with Ibn H . azms definition of ijm and that of his opponents among the majority of jurists, as well as that of al-Naz .z .m (d. 221/836) from the Mutazil theological school and al-T .s (d. 460/1068) among the Sh sect. Ibn H . azm gives the following definition of ijm: Ijm which is based on h .ujjah (proof) in the sharah is the matter in which there is conviction that all the s .ah .bah, may Allah be pleased with them, asserted and adhered to from their Prophet [Muhammad], peace be upon him.58 What Ibn H . azm means by this definition is that ijm is the exclusively the unanimity of the whole Muslim community (laymen as well as jurists) on what the s .ah .bah received and witnessed from the Prophet. In other words, it is ijm based on transmission ) (.59 Ibn H . azm 60 maintains that there is no ijm in religion other than this ijm. In another version of his definition of ijm, Ibn H .azm elaborates his view as follows: Ijm is what is known and asserted with conviction by all the s .ah .bah of the Messenger

16

of Allah, and none of them disagreed. It is like our certainty that they prayed with him the five-daily prayers, as they [i.e., the prayers] are in the number of their ruk (bowing) and sujd (prostration), or that they knew that he prayed with people; likewise is that all of them [i.e., all the s .ah .bah] fasted with him in [the month of] Ramad .n in the city [of Madinah] ) (; and so are the rest of the shari (sing. sharah, canonical laws of Islam) recognized with similar certainty. He who does not affirm them [i.e., the shari] is not among the believers. This is what nobody disagreed on its being ijm. They [i.e., the s .ah .bah] were at that time the whole believers. There are no believers on earth other than they. Whoever claims that other than this is ijm, he has to prove what he claims ) ( and there is no way [for him] to [do] it.61 From these two definitions of ijm given by Ibn H . azm we can draw the following conclusions: a. Ijm is the unanimity of the s .ah .bah on what they saw, heard, knew, and received with certainty from the Prophet. It is the Sunnah itself. According to Ahmad Hasan, roughly until the middle of the second century of the Hijrah, Sunnah remained so close to ijm that both were used interchangeable, rather sometimes they were identified.62 Another contemporary scholar, Mohammad Talaat alGhunaimi sates, Ijm stands on the border line between primary and secondary source in the Islamic law.63 The ijm which is maintained is identical to the Sunnah and stands as the primary source of Islamic law, while that maintained by his opponents, in our view, stands as the second one.

17

b. What the s .ah .bah had unanimously agreed upon should also be accepted by all Muslims in later generations in order for them to remain believers. As this type of ijm is identical to the h .adth of the mutawtir type (see below on khabar al-tawtur), rejecting it would mean denying the Sunnah, and this would lead to infidelity. However, rejecting an ijm which is irrelevant to the Islamic faith, like the fact that the Prophet imposed taxes on the Jews of Khaybar does not lead to infidelity, but rather indicates ones ignorance. c. Ibn H . azm insisted on the unanimity of all Muslims (jurists as well as laymen) in the occurrence of ijm. As the time of the s .ah .bah was the only time accepted by Ibn H . azm for the occurrence of ijm, and as they comprised the totality of Muslims at that time, their unanimity, which was the total ijm, occurred. This is also the view of Ibn H . azms predecessor, al-Shfi (d. 204/820) who maintained the total ijm.64 However, al-Shfi did not restrict ijm to the first generation. We should remember that Ibn H . azm and Dwd, before they became Z .hir, were Shfis. d. Matters agreed upon by the s .ah .bah are necessarily known by them. There is no room for doubt in this matter.65 In the foregoing definitions of ijm Ibn H . azm gave us one type 66 of ijm, i.e., the ijm of the s .ah .bah. However, he mentioned two types of ijm in his writings. The first one is as follows: It is everything which no Muslim doubts that whoever does not assert it is not a Muslim, like: bearing witness that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, the injunction of the five-daily rayers, the fasting in the month of Ramad .n, the prohibition against [eating] corpse, blood, or pork, the affirmation of

18

the Qurn [as revelation], and the zakh (alm tax) in general ) (. These are matters which when they come to someones ears and he does not affirm them, he is not a Muslim. If it is so, then everyone who affirms them is a Muslim. So, it is true that they are ijm of the whole followers of Islam.67 This type of ijm involves itiqdt (articles of religious faith or practice) which should be accepted by Muslims, and things known by necessity ) (. This is also the opinion of al-Shfi who maintained that there was ijm in several ordinance which could not be unknown to Muslims, so that if we said that people agreed upon a particular issue, no Muslim would object to its being ijm. For example, the z .uhr (afternoon) prayer is four rakat (units) and the intoxicant is forbidden.68 These are matters reported by Muslims from the Prophet and transmitted by them from one generation (i.e., that of the s .ah .bah) to another until the present. The other type of ijm asserted by Ibn H . azm is as follows: It is something of the deed of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), witnessed by all of the s .ah .bah, may Allah be pleased with them, or known with conviction y everyone of them, who was absent from him, like: his deed at Khaybar, where he gave it [i.e., the land of Khaybar] to the Jews [to be ultivated] with [the condition to give the Prophet and the uslims] half of its crops or dates; the Muslims were to drive hem [i.e., the Jews from the land of Khaybar] henever they want it [to do so]. There is no doubt for veryone about this [fact], that there would be no Muslim left in Madnah who had not witnessed it, or not reached im. This happened to a group69 of women, children, and

19

weak people. There would be no Muslim left in akkah and the remote land who had not known and spread it out. However, this kind of ijm was hallenged by a group of people after the time of the s .ah .bah, may Allah be pleased with them, due to their misgivings and [despite] their intention towards good, and due to their mistake in their exercising ijtihd (independent judgement in a legal question, based upon the interpretation and application of the Qurn and the Sunnah).70 This type of ijm is not so strong as the first one, for it is liable to be challenged and violated by some people after the time of the s .ah .bah, due to their lack of information, or their wrong judgement drawn from their exercising ijtihd. However, this ijm was adhered to by all of the s .ah .bah, and the majority of people in later generations, and is called ijm of the s .ah .bah. Although this ijm is liable to be challenged by later generations, this challenge will not affect its position as ijm, because the challenger is not a s .ah .b. Otherwise, if the challenger is a s .ah .b, his challenge will be regarded, and the ijm will be invalid, because it lacks the unanimity of the s .ah .bah, which is one of the conditions of ijm laid 71 down by Ibn H . azm. We should bear in mind that the ijm recognized and adhered to by Ibn H . azm and the Z .hir school is the ijm of the s .ah .bah in its broad meaning. It comprises the two types of ijm we are dealing with, because both types require the unanimity of the s .ah .bah, who were the immediate transmitters of the teachings of the Prophet. This unanimity of the s .ah .bah occurred after the death of the Prophet upon the legal judgement of a certain issue they had received from the Prophet.72 Both types involve all Muslims. The first involves the s .ah .bah and all

21

Muslims in all times in later generations. The second type, or the ijm of the s .ah .bah in its narrow meaning, involves the s .ah .bah who were all Muslims in their time. Unlike Ibn H . azms view of ijm, the majority of the fuqah (jurisprudents) assert that ijm is the agreement of all mujtahidn (sing. mujtahid; legists who exercise ijtihd) of the Muslim community in a particular time on the legal judgement of a particular issue based on ijtihd after the death of the Prophet.73 They also maintain that the occurrence of ijm should be in a particular time after the death of the Prophet, including the time of the s .ah .bah. It is because they assert the impossibility of the occurrence of the total agreement of all Muslims in all times (except on the day of Resurrection where all people will gather together and where ijm will not be needed). But like Ibn H . azm they maintain that ijm during the time of the Prophet was not needed, because the Prophet himself was the authority.74 Ijm which is the produce of ijtihd as advocated by the majority of ulam is not accepted by Ibn H . azm, because ijtihd is fallible. The first event which was later considered by Muslim jurists as ijm based on qiys is the election of Ab Bakr as Caliph. As the Prophet had appointed him to lead the prayer during his (the Prophets) illness before his death, Umar nominated him to lead the community as Caliph. This proposal was accepted by the people, and Ab Bakr became Caliph.75 Ibn H . azm counters this view and maintains that the succession of Ab Bakr was based on nas .s .. He cites two h .adths, each with two sanads (chains of narration). One of these h .adths was reported by ishah, and the other from Ibn Abbs. ishah reported the following: The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said to me in his

21

illness: Call Ab Bakr and your brother to me so that I write a letter, for I fear that a wisher will wish and a speaker will speak: I am more appropriate [for the succession], whereas Allah and the prophets reject [anyone for the succession] except Ab Bakr.76 Ibn H . azm argues further that if Ab Bakr was elected Caliph by means of ijm based on qiys, the application of qiys in this case could be invalid. It is because in Ibn H . azms view, the illah of the khilfah (succession) is different from that of the prayer. An Arab, a mawl (a client), a slave, and a man who does not master military and economic administration as well as laws and good conduct, can lead the prayer, while a caliph should be a solid Quraysh, who knows politics and its aspects, even if he is not perfect in reading the Qurn. Ibn H . azm maintains that prayer is subordinate to and a far (a branch, a section) of the immah, and not vice versa. Therefore, according to Ibn H . azm, 77 applying qiys for the succession of Ab Bakr is not permissible. With regard to al-Naz .z .ms view of ijm, he rejects it as h .ujjah. However, we are told that he gives the following definition of ijm: It is every authoritative statement, even of a single person (
78

(.79 The example of ijm as reportedly given by alNaz .z .m himself is that if a person is passing by a house, sees signs of the washing of a dead person, and hears an old woman coming out of the house saying that so-and-so has died, this news (report) is accepted as authoritative, and therefore, as ijm.80 Al-Naz .z .m seems to be contradicting himself when he rejects the authority of ijm, while at the same time he emphasizes its authority. But what he means is that he is rejecting the authority of ijm maintained by the majority of ulam, because it is based on their ijtihd which is, as mentioned before, fallible. In this case, his view is

22

parallel to that of Ibn H . azm. On the other hand, al-Naz .z .ms emphasis on the authority of ijm indicates his skepticism on the occurrence of ijm not based on an authoritative statement. This statement, as we have seen in the above example, is what is known by necessity. Here again, alNaz .z .m has similar views with that of Ibn H . azm. Both al-Naz .z .m and Ibn H . azm reject qiys. However, Al-Naz .z .m differs from Ibn H . azm by 81 asserting that the statement of the infallible imm is a h .ujjah. But for Ibn H . azm, the only authority after the Qurn is that of the Prophet. There is an indication that al-Naz .z .m accepts the ijm of the s ah bah maintained by Ibn H azm, as it is based on nas . . . .s .. Al-Naz .z .m considers the ijm of the s .ah .bah on the penal law of an intoxicant drinker (i.e., eighty lashes) as an error, for he asserts that the consideration should be taken of the nas .s . and the tawqf (the teachings of 82 the Prophet), i.e., forty lashes. That may mean that al-Naz .z .m accepts the ijm of thes .ah .bah based on nas .s . as valid and sound, while ijm based on qiys is rejected by him. This is because, like Ibn H . azm, he rejects qiys. In this case al-Naz .z .m has probably the same view as Ibn H . azms concurring the ijm of the s .ah .bah. According to al-T .s, the ijm of the ummah (Muslim community) is right and h .ujjah, because the opinion of the infallible imm must be included in this ijm. It is because, al-T .s contends, there is not a single period of time which is free from an infallible imm who preserves the sharah. The opinion of this imm is h .ujjah to which Muslims should return, just as they did with that of the Prophet. An opponent may argue that the opinion of the imm might be excluded from this ijm. To this, al-T .s asserts that whenever the opinion of the imm is supposed to be isolated from ijm, then this ijm is not ijm at all, because of the absence of unanimity which is necessary for the occurrence of ijm.83

23

What is the significance of ijm and maintaining that it is h .ujjah? According to al-T .s, the ijm is a means to know the opinion of the imm which is often unknown. However, when the opinion of the imm is known, it is accepted as h .ujjah, while others are disregarded. Ijm is h .ujjah because it embodies the opinion of the imm which is itself 84 h .ujjah. Al-T .s maintains that if time is supposed to be free from an infalible imm, ijm will not become h .ujjah, because there is no dall 85 indicating that it is h .ujjah. The ijm meant by al-T .s is the unanimity of the ulam of the Shah sect. It is because, in al-T .ss view, the opinion of the infallible imm will be identical with theirs. Should they disagree upon the legal judgement of a certain issue and divide themselves into two groups, al-T .s asserts that the opinion of the imm can still be known. It is by finding any dallah (indication) from the Qurn or a decisive Sunnah ( ) which denotes the rightness of one group among them. Once this dallah is found, the opinion of the imm becomes known to be with that of this group. Otherwise, if no dallah is available, the opinion of the members of the group who are known in person and by lineage is rejected, because none of them is the hidden and infallible imm whose opinion should be accepted. If both groups consist of known and unknown ulam, al-T .s chooses any opinion of the two, and treats them like two contradictory khabar, i.e., h .adth on which no preponderance is known. This also indicates the permission to choose any of the two opinions, because the opinion of the imm is not with any of the two. Otherwise, the imm should not remain concealed and silent any longer, for he has to reveal himself and unfold the truth on the issue concerned.86 Even though al-T .s does not give the definition of ijm according to the Shah sect, the definition referred to this sect is: It is

24

the agreement which embodies the views of the infallible imm and not merely the agreement of the ulam on an opinion.87 Unlike Ibn H . azm, al-T .s does not limit the occurrence of ijm to a particular time after the death of the Prophet. However, he asserts that ijm is not h .ujjah per se, and that the only ijm which is h .ujjah is that of the ulam among the Shah sect, because it embodies the opinion of the infallible imm. But like Ibn H . azm, he also rejects 88 qiys. Al-T .s rejects the opinion of al-Naz .z .m in accepting the authority of a single statement. He contends that if we see a man tearing his clothes, slapping his face (in lamentation), and states that the sick man who is with him has been dead, this statement cannot be accepted as something which necessitates knowing ) (. It is because this mans action can be just pretension and was done for many purposes which will be discovered later.89 But al-T .s shared the view of alNaz .z .m in considering the statement of the infallible imm as h .ujjah, as 90 asserted by al-Shahrastn above. 2. The Occurrence of Ijm There is no common agreement among the fuqah regarding the occurrence of ijm, including Ibn H . azm. The majority of the fuqah among the Sunns believe in its occurrence. Ibn H . azm accepts its occurrence exclusively during the time of the s .ah .bah, i.e., after the death of the Prophet while they were all in Madnah.91Outside this context, Ibn H . azm rejects the occurrence of ijm. He bases his argument on the following: 1) Ijm would never and has never occurred other than in that particular age and in that particular place, because he believes that it has been impossible since that time for all Muslim ulam to gather together at the same time and at the same place. Following the death of

25

the Prophet and the time of the s .ah .bah most of the ulam scattered to widely separated points. Since then they have never, and would never, gather together. Some of the were in Yemen, others were in Sind and the Kabul rivers, in the Western part of Berber land and till the frontiers of Armenia.92 2) It is the nature of human beings to differ in their opinions and characters, and this makes the occurrence of ijm impossible. Some people are tender-hearted, others are hard-hearted; some are powerful, others are weak; some incline to softness of life and tend to luxury, others tend to roughness, while some are moderate. Due to the difference of temper, nature and inclination, it would be by no means possible for all of the ulam to agree in making a judgement with their own opinion.93 Because of this Ibn H . azm, like many other fuqah, rejects the occurrence of ijm. The evidence he uses to prove his position is totally different from that used by his opponents.94 While he differs from his opponents in the evidence he gives to support his stand, there is total agreement on the acceptance of ijm. Concerning al-Naz .z .m, he believes in the occurrence of ijm, 95 but not as h .ujjah. This is because, seen from the view-point of personal opinion ) (, he believes in the possibility of ijm of the ummah in error. He asserts that this ijm in error may occur in any period of time.96 Similar to the view of al-Naz .z .m, al-T .s asserts the possibility of the occurrence of ijm, but not as h .ujjah, unless the opinion of the infallible imm is included in the ijm. Like al-Naz .z .m, he also believes in the possibility of the occurrence of ijm in error. His argument is that it is possible that the Muslim community could fall into a shubhah (judicial error) whenever they believe what is not dall as such, and base their ijm on it. This happened to their communities. For the example of the communities who fall into a shubhah as given by al-T .s, is that Jews, Christians, and other non-Muslim communities agree on the nullity of Islam and the falsehood of Prophet Muhammad, in spite of their

26

greatness in number.97 The h .adth dealing with Allahs protecting the Muslim community from error and that His hand is upon them are, in alT ( because they are akhbr h .ss view, undependable, ) .d (sing. khabar wh .id, h .adthsreported by one chain of authority) which do not necessitate knowing it ) ( .98 Ah .mad ibn H . anbal (d. 241/855), the founder of the H . anbal school of law which is close to the Z .hir, maintains in one report from him, that what is claimed to be ijm is a lie, and he who claims it is a liar, because people may disagree, and this disagreement has not reached us. This view is similar to that of Ibn H . azm in rejecting the occurrence of ijm other than that of the s .ah .bah. However, in another report from Ah .mad ibn H . anbal, he accepted the ijm of the majority, which is contrary to Ibn H . azms view. These two views as reported from Ah .mad ibn H . anbal have been reconciled by the new H . anbal scholar, Mukhtr al-Qd ., when he asserts that Ah .mad ibn H . anbal does not make total agreement a condition of ijm, because ordinarily it could not occur, while ijm of the majority without challenge from the minority could happen.99 We have seen in this section that the Z .hir Ibn H . azm, the Mutazil al-Naz .z .m, and the Sh al-T .s, hold similar yet different views on ijm. Ibn H . azm maintains only total ijm which occurred exclusively during the time of the s .ah .bah, and the necessity of basing ijm on nas .s .. Al-Naz .z .m emphasizes the authority of the statement in ijm, while al-T .s insists upon the embodiment of the opinion of the infallible imm in ijm. All three scholars share the same position in considering ijm based on ijtihd as fallible. Ibn H . azm and al-Naz .z .m maintain that since ijtihd is fallible, ijm based on it must also be fallible. Al-T .s contends that Muslims could fall into shubhah which leads them to ijm in error, while h .adths asserting the infallibility of the

27

Muslim community are h .d which do not necessitate knowing them. Al-T .s and al-Naz .z .m hold the same view in considering the statement of the infallible imm as h .ujjah, while Ibn H . azm accepts exclusively only the Qurn and the H .adth as h .ujjah. However, all these scholars share the same view in rejecting qiys .

28

Endnotes to Chapter I Al-Dhahab, Tadhkirat al-H .uffz . (Hyderabad: Hyderabad Printing Press, 1376/957), vol. 3, p. 1146. (Hereafter referred to as Tadhkirat); Ab Zahrah, Ibn H . azm, pp. 22-26. 2 Kunyah is the name consisting of Ab (father) or Umm (mother) followed by the name of the eldest son or daughter. 3 Ab Zahrah, Ibn H . azm, pp. 26-27 quoting Ibn H . azm, T .q al-H .ammah (Cairo: N.p., n.d.), p. 50. 4 Ah .mad had already become the vizier since 381/991. Ignaz Goldziher , The Z .hirs: Their Doctrine and Their History, trans. and ed. Wolfgang Behn (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1971), p. 280. (Hereafter referred to as Z .hirs). 5 C. van Arendonk, Ibn H azm , Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, ed. . H.A.R. Gibb & J.H. Kramers (Leiden: E.J. Brill; London: Luzac & Co., 1961), p. 148. (Hereafter referred to as Ibn H . azm, S.E.I.). R. Arnaldez, Ibn H . azm, E.I.2. Ab Zahrah, Ibn H . azm, pp. 95 ff. 6 Ibid 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 9 It was said that Ibn H . azm died at the desert of Lablah (an old town on the Western part of Andalusia). Al-Dhahab, al-Ibar, ed. Fud Sayyid (Kuwayt: al-Turth al-Arab, 1961), vol. 3, p. 239; Ibn Khallikn, Wafayt alAyn, ed. Muh .ammad Muh .y al-Dn Abd al-H . amd (Cairo: Maktabat alNahd .ah al-Mis .riyyah, 1948), p. 15. 10 H adth literally means speech, narrative, report. The h . .adth of the Prophet is the Prophetic Tradition, i.e., the written expression of the Prophets statements, deeds, and tacit approvals. However, a h .adth (a tradition) with a small h . is also used in this study to indicate the report of a particular saying, deed, or approval of the Prophet. A h .adth is called by Ibn H azm khabar , which literally means a report, a news, an information. . 11 Ab Zahrah, Ibn H . azm, pp. 31-32. It was reported by Ab Muh .ammad Abd Allh ibn al-Arab that Ibn H . azm started learning fiqh at the age of 26,
1

29

because he did not know how to perform tah .iyyat al-masjid prayer, i.e., a prayer performed by a Muslim upon entering a mosque. Al-Dhahab, Tadhkirat, pp. 1150-1151. This report has been rejected by our contemporary scholars, Ab Zahrah and Abd al-Lat .f Sharrah. For their arguments, see Ab Zahrah, Ibn H azm, pp. 3235, 82; A.L. Sharrah, Ibn H . . azm al-Rid, pp. 63-64. 12 Ab Zahrah, Ibn H . azm, p. 82. 13 Ibid., p. 36. 14 Ibid., pp. 82-85. Ibn Muflit (d. 426/1035) was the teacher who had greatest influence on Ibn H . azm. Omar A. Farrukh, Z .hirism, A History of Modern Philosophy, ed. M.M. Sharif (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1963), vol. 1, p. 281. (Hereafter referred to as Z .hirism). 15 A. L. Sharrah, Ibn H azm alRid , p. 65 . 16 O. A. Farrukh, Z .hirism, pp. 176-177. 17 R. Arnaldez, Ibn H . azm, E.I.2, p. 795. 18 Ibn H azm, Ih km , vol. 1, pp. 89-90. See also ibid., p. 160; vol. 4, p. . . 531. 19 The allegation of al-Subk about Ibn H . azms acceptance of reports brought to him without careful examination of the truth of these reports might be true for the following reasons: a) the suspicious character he inherited from women in his house; b) his acceptance of reports related by a single reliable person. 20 st Al-Subk, T .abaqt al-Shfiiyyah al-Kubr, 1 ed. (N.p.: al-Mat .baah al-Mis riyyah, n.d.), vol. 1, p. 43. (Hereafter referred to as T abaqt ). . . 21 Ibid.; see also Ibn H . azm, Kitb al-Fas .l f al-Milal wa l-Ahw wa lNih .al 5 vols. (Baghdad: Maktabat al-Muthann ; Egypt: Muassasat al-Khnj, n.d.), vol. 4, p. 188. (Hereafter referred to as Fas .l). 22 Al-Subk, T .abaqt, vol. 1, p. 43. 23 Al-Dhahab, Tadhkirat, vol. 3, p. 1154. 24 A certain Ab l-Abbs ibn al-Arf said: The tongue of Ibn H . azm and the sword of al- H ), . ajjj were two brothers ( -m (N.p., see al-Dhahab, Tadhkirat, vol. 3, p. 1154; see also al-Zirikl, al-Ala n.d.), vol. 5, 2nd ed. p. 59. All-H . ajjj ibn Ysuf (d. 95/714) was an Umayyad statesman. When he was sent by the Caliph Abd al -Malik as governor to the

31

Iraq, he threatened to cut off the heads of the Kh rij mutineers. He was notorious for his pitilessness; see H. Lammens, H . ajjj ibn Ysuf, Encyclopaedia of Islam, ed. M.Th. Houtsma et al., 1st ed. (Leyden: Late E.J. Brill Ltd.; London: Luzac & Co., 1927), vol. 2, pp. 202-204. 25 O. A. Farrukh, Z .hirism, p. 286. 26 Though some people of Majorca island followed him during his stay there from 430/1039 to 440/1049, the majority of them did not follow him, despite the fact that he was supported by Ab l-Abbs ibn Ah .mad ibn Rashd, the local governor of that island. Ibid., p. 281. 27 Al-Fad .l, Ibn H . azms son, said that his fathers writings reached four hundred books, containing about eighty thousand folios. Al-Dhahab, Tadhkirat, vol. 3, p. 1147. 28 Ibid., p. 1152. 29 The terms often used by Ibn H . azm in raising questions were: (if they say we say); for examples, see Ih .km, vol. 4, pp. 532 line 5, 533 line 9, and 544 line 18), (if they say it is said to them); for examples, see ibid., vol. 1, p. 226 line 21, vol. 5, p. 637 line 5, vol. 8, p. 1152 lines 4-5 and 6), (if he [i.e., the speaker] says it is said to him); for examples, see ibid., vol. 8, p. 1153 lines 8 and 13; idem, Fas .l, vol. 1, p. 107 lines 13-14. This method of raising and answering questions was common among polemic writers. See, for example, Ab Jafar al-T .s, Uddat al-Us l f U s l al-Fiqh, 2 vols. (Bombay: Dutprasad Press, 1318 A.H.), . . vol. 1, pp. 130 lines 19-21, and 136 lines 14-15, in which he used the term (if they say it is said to them). (Hereafter referred to as Uddat al-Us .l). 30 A. L. Sharrah, Ibn H . azm al-Rid, p. 72. 31 Ab H . anfah, for example, after giving his legal judgement on a certain issue, was asked: Is that the truth where there is no doubt of it? He answered: I do not know. Perhaps it is the falsehood where there is no doubt of it. Ab Zahrah, Ibn H . azm, p. 188. 32 Ibid.

31
33

Yet, this attitude was subjectively justifiable among Muslims when he argued with non-Muslim opponents, for he was defending Islam which he considered the true religion. Ibid., pp. 189-190. 34 A. L. Sharrah, Ibn H . azm al-Rid, p. 64. 35 Ibid. 36 Ibid., p. 65. 37 Ibn H . azm, Fas .l, vol. 2, p. 16. 38 Qurn, 3:7 39 Ibid. The translation is based on the wording of Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, The Meaning of the Glorious Koran (New York and Scarborough: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., n.d.). He translates al-rsikhn f l-ilm as those who are of sound instruction. 40 Ibid. M.M. Pickthall translated the word mutashbiht as allegorical instead of ambiguous. Reference to Qurnic verses and translation relating to them in other places of this book are mostly his. 41 The other verse referred to by Ibn H . azm is: And (remember) when Allah laid a charge on those who had received the Scripture (He said): Ye are to expound it to mankind and not to hide it. (Qurn 3:187). 42 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, pp. 492-493. 43 A. L. Sharrah, Ibn H . azm al-Rid, p. 73. O. A. Farrukh, Z .hirism, p. 275. 44 Al-Shahrastn, al-Milal wa l-Nih .al (in the margin of Ibn H . azms Fas .l), vol. 2, p. 29. B. Carra de Vaux, Bt .iniyya, S.E.I., pp. 60-61. 45 For further details, see M.G.S. Hodgson, Bt .iniyya, E.I.2, vol. 1, pp. 1098-1100. 46 O. A. Farrukh, Z .hirism, p. 275. 47 For further details, see Al-Shahrastn, Milal, vol. 1, pp. 54 ff; Abd al-Qhir ibn T .hir al-Baghdd, al-Farq baynal-Firaq, ed. & comment. Ibn Khallikn, Wafayt al-Ayn, ed., Muh .ammad Muh .y al-Dn Abd al-H . amd (Cairo: Mat .baat al-Madan, n.d.), pp. 114-202. (Hereafter referred to as Farq). 48 O. A. Farrukh, Z .hirism, p. 275; A. L. Sharrah, Ibn H . azm al-Rid, p. 73.

32
49

Ibn H . azm considered the election of a boy for the position of caliph as violation of the sharah. He referred to a h .adth where the Prophet said that a child is lifted from the obligation of Islam until he attains puberty; see Fas . l, vol. 4, p. 166. 50 Ibid.; for further details, see A. L. Sharrah, Ibn H . azm al-Rid, pp. 65-67. 51 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 8. 52 Ibn Khallikn, Wafayt, vol. 3, pp. 14-15. In lyric poetry the poet often uses the masculine gender instead of the feminine in referring to his beloved, as the above poem of Ibn H ( . azm when he put his beauty ) instead of her beauty ) (. 53 This was rejected by Ibn H . azm. For him, shudhdh (deviation) was only being away from the truth, and the true school is the Z .hir; cf. below, pp. 72-73. 54 Ab l-Fad .l ibn Manz .r, Lisn al-Arab, (Beirut: Dr Bayrt lilT ibah wa l -Nashr, 1375/1956), s.v. j-m-; Edward William Lane, Arabic . English Lexicon (London and Edinburg: William and Norgate, 1863), s.v. j-m-. 55 M.M. Pickthall puts it in the verse 72, for he makes at the beginning of the su rah (chapter) as one verse, whereas it is part of a verse, i.e., verse no. 1. Ibn Manz .r, Lisn al-Arab, s.v. j-m-; Majd al-Dn al-Frzbd, Qms al-Muh t (Egypt: Mat .. .baat al-Sadah, 1272/1855-6), s.v. j-m-. 57 Ibid. 58 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol.1, p. 43. 59 Camille Mansour, lAutorit dans la Pense Musulmane: la Concept dIjm (Consensus) et la Problmatique de lAutorit (Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin, 1975), p. 67, n. 2. (Hereafter referred to as Autorit). 60 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol.1, p. 43 61 Idem, al-Muh .all, ed. Ah .mad Muh .ammad Shkir, 11 vols. (Egypt: Mat .baat al- Nahd .ah, 1374 A.H.), vol. 1, p. 54. 62 Ahmad Hasan, Ijm, an Integrating Force in the Muslim Community, Islamic Studies 6 (Dec. 1967), p. 392. (Hereafter referred to as Integrating Force).
56

33
63

Mohamad T. al-Ghunaimi, The Muslim Conception of International Law and the Western Approach (The Hague: Martinus Hijhoff, 1968), p. 117. (Hereafter referred to as Muslim Conception). 64 See N.J. Coulson M.A., A History of Islamic Law (Islamic Surveys), vol. 2 (Edinburg: Edinburg University Press, 1971), p. 59. See also Fazlur Rahman, Islamic Methodology in History (Karachi: Ripon Printing Press, 1965), p. 23. 65 This is one example of Ibn H . azms adherence to the idea of rejecting z ann (doubt, conjecture, uncertainty) in religion, see Ih . .km, vol.4, p. 531. 66 See also Ibn H ( in his . azms view on the nature of ijm ) Martib al-Ijm f l-Ibdt wa l-Mumalt wa l-Itiqdt (Cairo: Maktabat al-Quds, 1357 A.H.), p. 12. (Hereafter refered to as Martib). 67 Idem, Ih .km, vol. 4, pp. 510-511; see also ibid., p. 529. 68 Muh ammad Idrs al-Shfi, Jim al-Ilm, ed. Ah . .mad Muh .ammad Shkir (Egypt: Mat .baat al-Marif, 1359/1940), pp. 65-66. Idem, al-Rislah, st ed. comment. Ah .mad Muh .ammad Shkir, 1 ed. (Cairo: Mat .baat al-Bab alH alab , 1358/1940), no. 1559. . 69 Perhaps the words here should be read as we have translated above to give sense to the sentence. Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol.4, p. 511. 70 Ibid. See also ibid., pp. 530-531. The words on p. 530 line 21 are inverted and should be read to suit the definition given on p. 511. 71 See the definition of the second type of ijm on p. 19 above. The other condition of ijm is that it should be based on nas .s .. 72 Muh y alDn ibn Arab, the second treatise on the Z . .hir school, st Majm Rasil f Us .l al-Fiqh, 1 ed. (Beirut: al-Mat .baah al-Ahliyyah, 1324 A.H.), p. 29. (Hereafter referred to as Majm Rasil). 73 Umar Abd Allh, Sullam al-Wus .l li-Ilm al-Us .l (Egypt: Dr alst Marif, 1956), p. 198; Dr. Mukhtr al-Qd ., al-Ray fl-Fiqh al-Islm, 1 ed. (Cairo: Mat .baat al-Fikrah, 1368/1949), 169. (Hereafter referred to as Ray). The word on line 13 of this page is misprinted and should be read to suit the meaning of the sentence.

34

This ijm, is called ijm us .l. Camille Mansosur, Autorit, p. 67. Ibn H azm, Ih km , vol.7, p. 982; Badrn Ab al-Aynayn Badrn, Us . . .l al-Fiqh ([Egypt]: Dr al-Marif, 1965), p. 216. 76 In another version, instead of and the prophets it reads and the believers, see Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol.7, p. 985. For the other h .adth, see ibid., p. 984. 77 The application of qiys from far to as .l, Ibn H . azm aruges, is itself prohibited by the adherents of qiys. For further details, see, ibid., p. 986 ff. 78 Al-T .s,Uddat al-Us .l, vol. 2, p. 64. Al-Sharastn mentions thirteen views of al-Naz .z .m which differ from those of other Mutazils; among them are his rejection of ijm and his assertion of the immah of Al instead of Ab Bakr. For further details, see Milal, vol. 1, pp. 67-74. 79 st Al-Ghazl, al-Mustas .f min Ilm al-Us .l, 1 ed. (Cairo: al-Maktabah al-Tijriyyah al-Kubr, 1356/1937), vol. 1, p. 173. (Hereafter referred to as Mustas .f). Sayf al-Dn al-mid, al-Ih .km f Us .l al-Ah .km (Cairo: Mat .baat al-Marif, 1914), vol. 1, p. 280. (Hereafter referred to as Ih .km al-mid). 80 Ab Bakr al-Sarakhs. Us .l al-Sarakhs, ed. Ab al-Waf al-Afghn , 2 vols (N.p.: Dr al-Kuttb al-Arab, 1372 A.H.), vol. 1, p. 330. 81 Al-Shahrastn, Milal, vol. 1, p. 72. In this case al-Naz .z .m is leading towards the view of the Shah considering the statement of the imm as h .ujjah. 82 Ibid., pp. 75-76. According to Ibn H . azm both forty and eighty lashes are Sunnah and are ijm of the s .ah .bah based on nas .s .. 83 Al-T s , Uddat al -Us l , vol. 2, p. 64. . . 84 Ibid. 85 For further details on al-T .ss argument in refuting the dalls presented by his opponents among the Sunn jurists for the (the authority of ijm), see ibid., pp. 64-75. 86 Ibid., pp. 75-76; for further details, see ibid., pp. 77 ff. 87 S .ubh . Mah .mas .s .n, Falsafat al-Tashr al-Islm, trans. J. Farhat Ziadeh (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1961), p. 78. Amng the Sh jurists, Al alMushkn al-Ardabl gives us four types of ijm according to the Shah, which are: a) the agreement of the whole ulam including the imm, b) the agreement of some of them including the imm, c) the agreement of all of them
74 75

35

excluding the imm, and d) the opinion of the imm alone; for further details, see al-Ardabl, Kitb Mus .t .alah .t al-Us .l (N.p.; 1383 A.H.), pp. 29 ff. 88 For further details on al-T ss argument in refuting qiys, seeUddat . al-Us .l, vol. 2, pp. 89 ff. 89 Ibid., vol. 1, pp. 41-42. 90 See n. 83 above. 91 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol.4, p. 502. It is possible that people of different nature agree on a matter on which they have the same level of perception, understanding, and being readily grasped, but this, Ibn H . azm believes, is not ijm in the field of the sharah. Ibid. 92 Ibid. 93 Ibid., vol. 4, pp. 502-503. 94 The opponents who accept ijm are the majority of ulam among Sunn Muslims. For their argument in refuting the opinion of Ibn H . azm and those who reject the occurrence of ijm, see Muh .ibb Allh ibn Abd al-Shakr al-Bihr, Musallam al-Thubt, comment. Abd al-Al ibn Niz .m al-Dn alst Ans r as Fawti h Rah mt in the lower part of al-Ghaz l , al-Mustas . . . .f, 1 ed. (Cairo: al-Maktabah al-Tijryah al-Kubr, 1356/1937), vol. 2, pp. 211-212. (Hereafter referred to as Musallam); Muh .ammad ibn Al al-Shawkn, Irshd st al-Fuh .l (Cairo: Mat .baat Mus .t .af al-Bb al-H . alab, 1356/1937), 1 ed., pp. 72-73. (Hereafter referred to as Irshd) 95 Bihr, Musallam, vol. 2, p. 211. Ibn al-Humm (d. 861/1457) asserts that al-Naz .z .m rejects the possibility of the occurrence of ijm, see Kaml alDn ibn al-Humm, al-Tah .rr f Us .l al-Fiqh (Cairo: Mat .baat Mus .t .af al-Bb al-H . alab, 1351 A.H.), p. 399. (Hereafter referred to as Tah .rr). But al-Subk (d. 771/1369-1370) asserts that this is only the view of some of the followers of alNaz .z .m, for he himself believes in the occurrence of ijm, see Al Abd alRziq, al- Ijm f al-Sharah al-Islmiyyah (Cairo: Dr al-Fikr al-Arab, n.d.), p. 10. (Hereafter, referred to as Ijm). 96 Abd al-Qhir ibn T .hir al-Baghdd mentions the view of al-Naz .z .m in the possibility of the occurrence of ijm in error as his 17th scandal, see alFarq, p. 143. 97 For further details, see al-T .s, Uddat al-Us .l, vol. 2, pp. 65 ff. For the Shah, the majority of Muslims had gone away from the true path since the

36

death of the Prophet, when they appointed and obeyed wrong rulers and deprived the rightful ones, the descendants of the Prophet, of their right. This also indicates, according to the Shah point of view, the fallibility of the Muslim ummah, except the Shah community. 98 bid., pp. 74-75; cf. below, pp. 72-74 99 Dr. Mukhtr al-Qd ., al-Ray, pp. 173-174.

73

CHAPTER II JUDICIAL BACKGROUND A. Ibn H . azms View of the Basis of Ijm Before looking into Ibn H ( . azms view of the basis of ijm ) it is necessary to mention that ijm came directly from individual authorities, and was not a controversial issue, until the emergence of rival schools of theology and law, when the ulams assessment of the concept of ijm began to be influenced by the stand taken in accordance with the schools they adhered to. Until then, ijm had been a legal process devised to solve disputed problems caused by the death of the Prophet, who was the ultimate authority on these problems. In this context the aim of ijm was to reach a decision based on the opinion of the community presented by its leaders, who were not divided by legal and theological differences. While ijm during the rule of the Prophet was not a necessary legal process, because he had the final answer to any problem, his death raised the issue, and the Prophets s .ah .bah, tried to solve it by seeking solutions in the Qurn and in the Sunnah, even though some of the problems to which a solution was sought became further complicated by the nature of the new emerging fiqh schools. In addition, once a decision was reached by the authority on a certain problem, this decision did not became an ijm unless it was approved of by the community. Otherwise, the decision stayed at the stage of ijtihd, and the person exercising it was called a mujtahid (pl. mujtahid n). As will be seen, Ibn H . azm declines to accept this kind of ijm, because it is the product of ijtihd which he views as a concept fallible 1 by nature, whereas the genuine ijm, Ibn H . azm contends, is infallible.

73

Because of this stand taken by Ibn H . azm, we need to introduce the Qurn and the Sunnah as sources for the study of ijm. The Qurn for Ibn H . azm is important not only because its texts provide proofs as to the validity of ijm ) (, but also because it provides evidence to refute ijm based on other than nas .s ., save for the ijm which he propagates (i.e., ijm based on nas .s .), whereas his opponents use the Qurnic texts as evidence to justify the validity of ijm upon which they reached a decision. The verses which Ibn H . azm uses to demonstrate his theme of the basis of ijm are numerous, and are preserved in his works entitled al-Ih .km and al-Muh .all. Suffice it to cite a few examples so that we may compare Ibn H . azms stand with that of his opponents, e.g.,

And whoso opposeth the messenger after the guidance (of Allah) hath been manifested unto him, and followeth other than the believers way, We appoint for him that unto which he himself hath turned, and expose him unto hella hapless journeys end. (Qurn, 4:115). One interpretation of this verse is offered by al-Ghazl (d. 505/1111) from the Shfi school. According to him the verse contains Allahs threat against those who follow a path other than that of the believers, and this in turn shows its unlawfulness, because the action is combined with another thing, i.e., opposing the Prophet, which requires a punishment for the individual involved. He considered this verse to be the strongest one in the Qurn to prove the validity of ijm, for the ijm of the Muslim community is the path of the believers. But he and

73

Ibn al-H .jib (d. 646/1248) from the Mlik school believed that this verse was not a decisive textual proof and a positive evidence.2 Ibn H . azms view of this verse is quite different. He says that the verse indicates that Allah did not give His promise (threat) to the follower of other than the believers way, except for his opposition against the Messenger of Allah, and this came after the guidance had been manifested unto him. In addition, there was no other way at all for the believers except to obey the Qurn and the Sunnah of the Prophet, while creating laws (i.e., ijm) without giving nas .s . was the way of 3 infidelity. Another verse cited by the advocates of ijm to justify its validity, but interpreted by Ibn H . azm as ijm based on nas .s ., is as follows:

O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger and those 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. (Qurn, 4:59). Once more al-Ghazl saw the verse as evidence to indicate that the unanimity of the community is right.4 But according to Ibn H . azm this verse also proves that ijm should be based on nas .s .. The community in the verse should obey lal-amr (those who are in authority) if they based their injunction on nas .s . from the Qurn and the Sunnah, like 5 praying and paying zakh. Al-Bas .r, a Mutazil jurist who is also a contemporary of Ibn H . azm, gives us a different interpretation of this

04

verse. According to him, this verse urges the believers to obey l al-amr, i.e., the umar (emirs). But if they see that the l al-amr are mistaken in their consideration upon any matter of religion or worldly matter, they should dispute with them and refer the matter to Allah and His Messenger. The case is similar to when someone says to his servants: Obey the person I have entrusted you with, and when you have any dispute refer it to me.6 Moreover, Ibn H . azm contends, following the l al-amr, if it were accepted as ijm, there are two possibilities: either a) there is disagreement among them, and in this case the opinion of some of them is not more entitled to be accepted than that of others, or b) there is no disagreement among them; in this case Ibn H . azm rejected the assertion of 7 ijm without any basis from nas .s .. Ibn Taymyah (d. 728/1328) who shares Ibn H . azms view in ijm gives his commentary upon this verse. He says that whatever the Muslims agreed upon must have been traced back through divine text ) ( from the Prophet so that disagreeing with it would mean disagreeing with the Prophet, as disagreeing with him would mean disagreeing with Allah.8 If we go back to the sabab al-nuzl (the occasion on which the verse was revealed) of this verse, the believers way means mn, while other than theirs is kufr (infidelity), as the verse was revealed on T .umah ibn Ubayriq who had stolen a coat of mail and joined the idolaters.9 Who are the l al-amr? According to Ibn H . azm, they are the umar (sing. amr, emirs, rulers) as reported from Ab Hurayrah, the fuqah as reported from Mujhid, al-H . asan and Ikrimah, and the ulam who are the authorities among Muslims. They are obeyed because of what Allah and the Prophet enjoined. It is also important to mention here that Ibn H . azm bases his view on the fact that there is no explanation in the Qurn as to who are the l al-amr cited in the two

04

verses involved;10 therefore, according to Ibn H . azm, the ostensible meaning of the verse ) ( should be accepted by the Muslims, i.e., that the l al-amr are the rulers and the ulam. However, Ibn H . azm argues further that since the Qurn does not say that they are the agreeing ulam their agreement is not ijm.11 According to Ah .mad Shkir, if we go back to the sabab al-nuzl of the verse in question the l al-amr are those whom the Muslims give authority for their affairs, i.e., the rulers and judges. Obedience to them is obligatory between Allah and the Muslims themselves of what they command, as long as no nas .s . is available, and as long as they (l alamr) do not order anyone to violate the nas .s .. The reason is that the verse mentioned above was revealed in the case of Abd Allh ibn H . udhfah when he was appointed a chief by the Prophet in a sirryah (a detachment). He was angry with his soldiers in a certain matter and said: Has not the Prophet ordered you to obey me? they answered: Yes, he has. So, he ordered them to collect wood and make a fire and then ordered them to enter into it. One of them argued and told them to ask the opinion of the Prophet. The Prophet said: If you entered the fire you would never come out of it. Obedience is only to the right thing ( ) 12. Another report said that the verse was revealed on the occasion of a dispute between Khlid ibn al-Wald and Ammr ibn Ysir. Khlid at that time was appointed by the Prophet as the leader of an expedition somewhere outside Madnah.13 Ibn H . azm does not cite the argument of his opponents whom he does not mention by name. However, he contends that his opponents stand is invalid if they mean that, should l al-amr be followed exclusively on what they receive from the Prophet, then Allah would mention al-rasl (the messenger) only without mentioning l al-amr. To this, Ibn H . azm replies that if it is so, his opponents should also say that if the Prophet should be followed only on what he received from

04

Allah, He would mention allh (Allah) alone, without mentioning alrasl in the verse mentioned above.14 In this way the opponents are faced with two alternatives because of the foregoing argument: 1) if they reject the above statement, then they contradict themselves; 2) if they agree to it, then Ibn H . azm will accuse them of believing in the possibility of the Prophet bringing laws which Allah has not revealed to him. Ibn H . azm mentions the verses in which Allah confirms that the Prophet says exclusively what has been revealed to him, namely, I follow only what was revealed to me (Qurn 6:50)15 and those in which Allah informs us that the Prophet does not speak of his own desires, such as, Nor doth he speak of (his own) desire, it is naught save an inspiration that is inspired (Qurn 53:3-4) as evidence to justify his opinion.16 One proof which Ibn H . azm utilizes to refute the view of his opponents is the occurrence of the reference to al-rasl and l al-amr, two terms of great importance in understanding Ibn H . azms argument. First of all, Ibn H . azm contends that the significance of mentioning alrasl and l al-amr in the verse mentioned above is that if Allah commanded us to obey Himself alone, some people would think that the only obligation was what had been said by Allah in the Qurn, whereas what was said by the prophet without nas .s . from the Qurn would not be obligatory. Then the injunction to obey the Prophet removes this misunderstanding. Ibn H . azm argues further that if Allah commanded us to obey the Prophetafter obeying Allah without mentioning l al-amr some people would think that it would not be necessary to obey the Prophet except what we heard directly from himself. But as Allah commands us to obey the l al-amr, the necessity to obey what the ulam brought to us from the Prophet becomes clear.17 But this, as mentioned by Ibn H . azm himself, is rejected by his opponents who are not identified. Still, according to him, they argue that

07

if it is were so, what Allah says: and if ye have a dispute concerning any matter, refer it to Allah and the messenger would not have any meaning, as we should accept what is from Allah and the Prophet, no matter whether it is agreed or disagreed. His opponents, in his view, would fail to single out the difference between Allahs command to obey l al-amr and His command to refer to Allah and His Prophet in case of a dispute. Ibn H . azm counters this argument and says that there is no contradiction between the two commands, as both mean to obey Allah and the Prophet. Allah forbids us from following the authority of a particular scholar or school rather than the Qurn and the Sunnah directly.18 If we scrutinized the construction of the words in the verse, the verb at . (obey) is mentioned before both words allh and al-rasl, and not before l alamr. This gives an indication that obeying Allah and His Messenger is without any condition, while obeying l al-amr is on the condition that they order what is not contradictory to the order of Allah and His Messenger. There are many examples which provide us with the same stand taken by Ibn H . azm on the question of the Qurn as one of the bases of ijm. In these two examples we have seen how Ibn H . azm gives us a different interpretation of the verses of the Qurn than that used by his opponents as component elements of their argument. In the first, he rejects ijm based on other than nas .s . and insists that the believers way is following Qurn and the Sunnah. In the second one, he uses the notion l al-amr as the authority who transmits the sharah, and all in all, Ibn H . azm in this context does not accept an ijm other than in his own school, namely, the Z .hir. With regard to the Sunnah referred to by Ibn H . azms opponents to justify ijm based on other than nas .s ., he mentions three h .adths . One of them is as follows:

00

There will remain a t .ifah (a group) among my community who knows the truth and who will not be harmed by those who dessert them, until the decree of Allah comes to pass."19 (Reported by Muslim. Similar hadths are also reported by al-Tirmidh, Ibn Mjah, and Ah .mad) According to Ibn H . azms opponents this h .adth indicates the justification of ijm. On the contrary, Ibn H . azm contends that the h .adth indicates that the community of the Prophet will never agree in error, as there must always be among them those who will uphold the truth. Moreover, in Ibn H . azms view, this h .adth also gives an indication of the 20 existence of disagreement. Ibn H . azm also stipulates that nas .s . as related to the Qurn and the Sunnah must be treated as the sanad of ijm. This position Ibn H . azm shares with the Sh school and Ibn Jarr al-T .abar (d. 310/923). Yet it is contradictory to that of the majority of Sunn jurists, who maintain the possibility of the occurrence of ijm based on ijtihd or qiys, whenever nas .s . is not available. According to Qd Abd al-Jabbr ijm without sanad can occur. In his view, the ulam may agree upon the legal judgement of an issue and can be right in their judgement through the guidance of Allah to choose the right one.21 In order to scrutinize this problem, we shall first deal with Ibn H . azms sanad of ijm, i.e., the Qurn and the Sunnah, and compare it with the view of his opponents among the H . anaf, Mlik, and Shfi schools. Then we shall study Ibn H . azms refutation of qiys, which is advocated by his opponents among the followers of the three above-mentioned schools as one of the bases of ijm. Only then we can understand the nature of the issue and the Z .hir and non-Z .hir positions relating to it, and Ibn H . azm in particular.

04

1. The Qurn The Qurn as defined by Ibn H . azm, is a revelation established in the Scripture ) ( 22 also revelation recited and arranged in such a way to account for its miraculous structure
23

) . The text contains divine laws intended to serve the human race (chiefly the Muslim community), but not all of the verses in the Qurn are fully explained in detail. Some of them are of the mujmal type, that is largely summarized and undefined rules. Mujmal in Ibn azm's definition is a word which needs explanation taken from another one.24 As an illustration, Ibn H . azm notes the injunction to Muslims to pray and to pay zakh. Ibn H . azm contends that these acts require explanation as to how and when the Muslims should perform them.25 But the required explanation is available in the Sunnah.26 This position of Ibn H . azm, that the Qurn is one of the bases of ijm is undisputed among the jurists. The disagreement lies in the matter of the clearness or ambiguity of the verses of the Qurn. According to Ibn H . azm the verses of the Qurn are clear, except for some ambiguous 27 ones. But Ibn H . azm contends that what are considered mutashbiht by the Sunns and the Muazils have been explained either by the Qurn or by the Sunnah, except letters at the beginning of some srahs in the Qurn, like ( alif, lm mm) at the beginning of srat al-Baqarah (chapter 2), and Allahs oaths in the Qurn, like By the morning hours, and by the night when it is stillest at 28 the beginning of srat al-D .uh . (chapter 93:1-2). According to Ibn H . azm, seeking and following the tawl of what he calls mutashbiht is forbidden.29 Ibn H . azm make a distinction between mutashbiht in the Qurn and that in laws. In Ibn H . azms view, seeking the tawl of the mutashbiht in the Qurn (i.e., Allahs oath and letters at the beginning of some srahs) is forbidden. With regard to the mutashbiht in laws,

04

namely, those which are between obviously prohibited )

( and

obviously permitted ( (, seeking their interpretations is enjoined upon Muslims in order to understand their religion.30 The explanation ) ( of the mujmal verses in the Qurn is

either: commentary) (, exception ) (, or specification ) (.31 The examples mentioned by Ibn H . azm, where the mujmal verses in the Qurn are explained by other ones, are those dealing with divorce. 32 These verses are clarified by verses in srat al-T .alq (chapter 65). With regard to the Qurnic verses which are explained by the Sunnah, Ibn H . azm mentioned many examples. One of them is the injunction to pay zakh. The Qurn does mention it several times, but it does not give us any specification or detail. It is the Prophet who teaches us in detail how to pay it, what kinds of property are liable to it, and many questions dealing with it.33 In spite of all these explanations the level of the ulams insight in understanding them differs and depends upon their ability to grasp them and upon the guidance of Allah. A verse might not be clear to one lim while it is clear to others. Among the examples given by Ibn H . azm is the verse dealing with the kallah (a deceased person who has neither parents not children to give his inheritance to), which is understood by 34 the s .ah .bah except Umar. The verse runs as follows:

And if a man or a woman hath a distant heir (having left neither parent nor child), and he (or she)

03

hath a brother or sister (only on the mothers side), then each of them twain (the brother and the sister) the sixth, and if they be more than two, then they shall be sharers in the third, after any legacy that may have been bequeathed or debt (contracted) not injuring (the heirs by willing away more than a third of the heritage) hath been paid. A commandment from Allah. Allah is Knower, Indulgent. (Qurn 4:12). The Prophet reproaches him and tells him that to understand the meaning of kallah it is sufficient to refer to the verse revealed in summer35 which is as follows:

They ask thee for a pronouncement. Say: Allah hath pronounced for you concerning distant kindred. If a man die childless and hath a sister, her is the half the heritage, and he would have inherited from her had she died childless. And if there be two sisters, then theirs are two-thirds of the heritage, and if they be brethren, men and women, unto the male is the equivalent of the share of two females. Allah expounded unto you, so that ye err not. Allah is Knower of all things. (Qurn 4:174). 2. Sunnah Ibn H . azms view of the Sunnah complements his view of the Qurn, although his assessment of the Qurn underlines some parallels with the Sunnah. Like the Qurn, the Sunnah is a revelation, because

03

Ibn H . azm contends that the explanations of the Prophet have a value equal to that of the Qurn on the bases of the evidence contained in the verse: Say (O Muhammad), unto mankind): I warn you only by the inspiration. (Qurn 21:45) and because Allah provides us with the essential details relevant to the injunction which Allah gave to His servants. Ibn H . azm contends that Allah preserves the Sunnah, because it is revelation. Like the Qurn, Sunnah is also a dhikr (a reminder). Allah says: Lo! We, even We, reveal the Reminder, and lo! We verily are is Guardian. (Qurn 15:9).36 But unlike the Qurn, the Sunnah from which the religious laws appear is revelation not established in the Scripture ) ( ,37 because its essence represents basically reports and transmitted prophetic revelation. He defines the Sunnah as an uncomposed text containing no miracles in its structure. Whereas the Qur'n depends on the notion of reciting its verses, the Sunnah lacks this attribute, and revolves around the notion of reading it.38 Ibn H . azm sticks to his stand on the two kinds of text as the sanad of ijm. The division of the Sunnah based on the number of its chains of transmitters into khabar al-tawtur (mutawtir, a h .adth handed down by many chains of unimpeachable transmitters) and khabar al-wh .id (h .d, ah .adth reported by one chain of transmitters) also has a bearing on Ibn H . azms assessment of the sanad of ijm. While there is no dispute on the acceptance of khabar al-tawtur as a reliable h .adth among the ulam, the status of khabar al-wh .id is disputable. While the Mutazils are sceptical of it on the one hand, Ibn H . azm, as a Z .hir, accepts it totally. The Ashar-Sunns stand in the middle. They accept it as a h .ujjah z . azms .annyah (probable evidence). In order to clarify Ibn H position on these two kinds of h .adths and their relation to the sanad of ijm, we shall deal with them in some details.

03

a. Khabar al-Tawtur Ibn H . azm defines khabar al-tawtur as a report continuously transmitted by the masses from one generation to another which traces its origin from the prophet ) (. It is a h .adth related by a consecutive testimonies, so that there is no room for doubt, and no Muslim disagrees as to its acceptance; for example, the report that the Qurn was revealed to the Prophet, and that there are five daily prayers enjoined upon Muslims.39 One problem relating to the credibility of this kind of h .adth is the exact number of its chains of transmitters. Ibn H . azm says that Muslims differ in evaluating khabar al-tawtur and the exact number of chains of transmitters relating to it. While some jurists whom Ibn H . azm does not specify say that khabar al-tawtur must be transmitted by numerous people from the East and West, others say that the number of transmitters must be uncountable; this is because it is so well-known. Some say that they must not be less than three hundred or so, as is the case in the example of the number of Muslims who fought at the battle of Badr. Some jurists say that their number must not be less than seventy, sixty, forty, twenty, twelve, five, four, three, and even two transmitters.40 But this opinion as applied to a limited number of transmitters is rejected by Ibn H . azm, because the Qurn does not limit the number of transmitters for the acceptance of a h .adth. Ibn H . azm also contends that it is not reasonable to make a distinction between ah .adth reported by 41 seventy people and that by sixty-nine, so to speak. What Ibn H . azm is concerned about is not the gross number of transmitters. Rather, it is the transmitters action in persisting in forging a h ( .adth which designates it as khabar al-tawtur. Here al-Sarakhs (490/1056) from the H . anaf school shares the view of Ibn H . azm in his rejection of any limitation to the number of transmitters in khabar al-tawtur.42

44

Ibn H . azm thinks that it is highly important to investigate and to verify the credibility of the transmitters as the primary concern of an lim, regardless of the number of transmitters. In addition, a person or a group of people could agree in telling a lie if they had gathered together to fabricate ah .adth if there were any motive behind the act of lying; for example, when the people involved were offered worldly matters ) ( or frightened ) (. Ibn H . azm excludes prophets from the occurrence of such cases. In addition, he thinks that such contemptible means are detectable through the use of (essential grasping of something 43 by means of sense power). However, Ibn H . azm points out that a report given by two or more reliable transmitters can be accepted as khabar al-tawtur on condition that theh .adth had to be thoroughly verified by means of the foregoing investigation. In fact, we should make sure that the persons relating to the chain of transmitters (say two or three) have never met before, and the absence of any indication regarding deception and lying. In addition to that, the transmitters must give their report in different places with long narration, so that no other people can produce any statement similar to it. Ibn H . azm goes on to add that the transmitters must have received the report in the same way they did, as a prevention against the possibility of their receiving false h .adth. Such reports, in a similar way as above, happen in our daily lives. To illustrate this, Ibn H . azm cites several examples, such as the report of somebodys death, birth, marriage, and many others. In all these examples, the number of transmitters involved is two or more.44 b. Khabar al-Wh .id Ibn H . azm defines khabar al-wh .id as a h .adth reported primarily by one transmitter, who traces his hearing of the h .adth to the Prophet

44

himself. But to accept the authority of this kind of h .adth, Ibn H . azm contends that the transmitters must be reliable informants (transmitters). Once this stipulation is fulfilled, then the h .adth, Ibn H . azm contends, is a sound and acceptable one. The Muslims should act according to its content and should know its soundness with certainty ( ) . According to Ibn H . azm, this is also the opinion of Dwd (Ab Sulaymn) ibn Khalaf (d. 270/884), the founder of the Z .hir 45 school, and according to Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (d. 751/1350), a H . anbal jurist, this is also the opinion of al-Qd . Ab Yal (d. 458/1065), the H . anaf school, Mlik ibn Anas, al-Shfi, and many 46 others. Contrary to the opinion of Ibn H . azm, al-Bqilln (d. 403/1013) reports that khabar al-wh .id according to the fuqah and mutakallimn (Muslim theologians) is any h .adth which lacks the necessity of knowing it with certainty, though it is reported by more than one transmitter. Yet, the content is valid and should be acted upon if the transmitter is reliable 47 and if the h .adth itself is not contradictory to any stronger one. Ibn H . azm reproaches those who maintain that the sound khabar al-wh .id does not necessitate knowing it with certainty, though they accept its content as valid. They are, in Ibn H . azms view, the H . anafs, the Shfis, and the Mliks en masse ) (, all Mutazils and 48 Khrijs. They accept khabar al-wh .id as h .ujjah z .annyah, because its transmitter is not free from committing error, though he is reliable. As an example, al-Sarakhs says that khabar al-wh .id does not necessitate convincing knowledge ) (, because of the possibility of the narrators committing error. Nevertheless, its content is valid. The h .ukm contained in this type of h .adth belongs to the category of wjib in H . anaf terms. It is different from fard . which necessitates both knowing

44

and acting upon it. For example, the reading of srat al-Ftih .ah (Qurn, chapter 1) as mentioned in the khabar al-wh .id is wjib in prayer, not 49 fard .. Ibn H . azm contends that it is impossible for the laws of the religion to be lost through the passing of time, so that the h .arim (prohibited) and the fard . (command) will not be known with certainty and that Islamic laws will become mixed up with invented ones.50 He does not accept al-z .ann in religion, because al-z .ann is other than the truth 51 (al-h .aqq), and is prohibited by Allah. Ibn H . azms argument regarding the reliability of the khabar alwh id is based on several Qurnic verses and h . .adths, and though he alludes to the view of his opponents, the nature of their argument is not fully stated. However, Ibn H . azms position is clear, namely that sound h .adth reported by one transmitter is preserved by Allah, because it is part of revelation.52 His argument that khabar al-wh .id is also revelation and is preserved by Allah is that there are many mujmal verses in the Qurn which need the Prophets explanation, like: s .alh, zakh, and h .ajj. If these explanations, i.e., the Sunnah (mutawtir as well as khabar al-wh .id) were not preserved by Allah, the nas .s . as well as most 53 of the laws incumbent on Muslims would be nullified. Ibn H . azms first proof for the reliability of khabar al-wh .id is the following verse of the Qurn:

. A band from each community should stay behind to instruct themselves in religion and admonish their men when they return, so that they may take heed. (Qurn 9:122).

47

According to Ibn H . azm, the word t .ifah (a group, a band, a party) in Arabic applies to one as well as more than one persons, which is also the opinion of al-Sarakhs. Al-Sarakhs mentions four different opinions concerning the meaning of t .ifah. They are the opinions of Muh .ammad ibn Kab, At . (d. d. 115/733), al-Zuhr (d. 124/742), and al-H . asan (d. 204/820) who said that t .ifah means one, two, three, and ten persons 54 respectively. Therefore, Ibn H . azm maintains that the verse above indicates that the warning of those who stay behind, even if it is only one person, should be accepted.55
56 Al-T .s gives us a different view on the verse in question. He maintains that the verse does not indicate that the Muslims should accept the warners warning. Instead, it simply enjoined a group of people to give warning. hose who are warned should investigate the truthfulness of the warners through rational evidence ) (. The case is the same with the injunction to the Prophet to give warning to people. His warning is not to be accepted by them unless they have strong evidence of his truthfulness ) ( . According to al-T .s, the khabar al-wh ( among the .id which necessitates knowledge ) Shah Immyah is the one reported by a reliable reporter and originates -ms. He believes that the khabar from the Prophet or from one of the ima al-wh .id does not have any valid value unless it becomes convincedly known. As khabar al-wh .id, in his view, does not necessitate knowing it authoritativelyexcept the one reported by a person from the above sectit follows that it does not have any valid value. 57 The second proof is based on the Sunnah, namely, the incident relating to the messengers whom the Prophet sent to neighbouring rulers and kings. The Sunnah shows that he sent one envoy to every ruler, whether Christian or Arab.58 Attention should be focused on the dispatching of a single messenger to each corresponding king. To Ibn 59 H . azm it also indicates that a single reliable report should be accepted.

40

The third proof which Ibn H . azm employs to assert the necessity of accepting khabar al-wh .id is the story of Moses as mentioned in the Qurn. When someone running from the other end of the city telling him that the chieftains were plotting to kill him (Moses), he believed him. The Qurnic verses run as follows:

And there came a man, running from the further end of the city. He said: O Moses! The chiefs are talking counsel together about thee, to slay thee. So get thee away, for I do give thee sincere advice. He therefore got away therefrom, looking about, in a state of fear. (Qurn 28:20-1). Also when Moses arrived at Midian, one of the girls whose sheep had been watered by him told him that her father called him to receive a reward, and he believed her. The Qurnic verse runs as follows:

Then there came to him one of the two women, waling shyly. She said: 'Verily, my father calls you that he may reward you for having watered (our flocks) for us' (Qurn 28:25).60 In all these examples, Ibn H . azm points out the necessity of accepting the report of a trustworthy person, especially the h .adth which belongs to khabar al-wh .id. It follows that this kind of h .adth must be 61 known as authoritative and be considered as valid. What gives this kind

44

of h .adth an important status is the fact that Ibn H . azm considers it, as well as the khabar al-tawtur, as part of revelation. To sum up, Ibn H . azms stand in accepting the khabar al-wh .id reported by a reliable person as positive evidence in Islamic law is one of his and the Z .hirs differences from other ulam of other schools and 62 sects. This is because he rejects the occurrence of z .ann in religion. As for the khabar al-tawtur and the khabar al-wh .id, Ibn H . azm accepts both kinds as the second source of Islamic law and as revelation, the first being the Qurn. As a Z .hir, who believes in the literal meaning of the nas s , he believes that the Sunnah is the explanation of the Qurn, and he .. stresses that the loss of any h .adth, either khabar al-tawtur or khabar alwh .id, would mean the loss of part of the nas .s .. This, in Ibn H . azms view, would mean the destruction of religion, which is contrary to Allahs promise, whereas He has promised to make religion of Islam perfect and to guard the nas .s . from being lost. Though Ibn H . azm accepts 63 khabar al-wh .id as sanad of ijm, beside the khabar al-tawtur, khabar al-wh .id cannot be malm bi l-d .arrah except very rarely, when there is an indication of being so. Ibn H . azm gives many examples where a report from a single person becomes malm bi l- d .arrah. Among them are: the report of the death of a person who will be buried, and the report of a postman about the sultans letter which he is carrying.64 This view is identical to that of al-Naz .z .m who maintains that if we are informed by someone about the death of a person whom we 65 know is very ill, this information is malml- d .arrah. Having reviewed Ibn H . azms view of the Sunnah and its types based on transmission, we now mention his view on the types of Sunnah based on its essence. Our purpose in this will be to determine if all these kinds are capable of being considered to be sanad of ijm and we shall see how Ibn H . azm applies his Z .hir views to them. These types of Sunnah are as follows:

44

a. Qawl (the statement) of the Prophet According to Ibn H . am a qawl of the Prophet is a h .ujjah which can serve as sanad of ijm. This is the same view of the leading Sunn jurists. His orders are incumbent upon Muslims, as long as there is no indication that they are outside the category of commandment, like alnadb (recommending).66 This is because he is ordered by Allah to explain what has been revealed to him, for example, the h .adth dealing with zakh, where he explains when and how it should be paid. b. Fil (the deed) of the Prophet Ibn H . azm, as well as the Z .hirs, says that the Prophets deed is not incumbent upon Muslims, but is recommended (mandb). The deed of the Prophet is only a model (uswah) for the Muslims, except if it is accompanied with his qawl, or there is an indication of its being 67 obligatory (wjib). This is also the view of the Sh jurist al-T .s. In this case it becomes h .ujjah. Ibn H . azm explains this view by saying: We are only recommended to perform the deeds of the Prophet as a model, we do not leave it with the notion of disliking it, but [we leave it] as we leave all what is recommended to us in which if we do it we shall be rewarded. If we leave it, we shall neither be sinful nor rewarded, except the Prophets deeds which [serve] to explain an order (amr) or to execute a legal issue (h .ukm). In this case the deeds are obligatory (fard .), for they are preceded by the order. Therefore, they are explanation of the order.68 For example, if a given deed is intended to execute a certain injunction, then it becomes wjib, as it is in the case of the Prophets prayer, for he says: Pray the way you see me praying, and the Prophets intention to

43

burn the houses of those who failed to attend the congregational prayers.69 The view of Ibn H . azm in considering the Prophets deed as uswah is the application of the literal meaning of the Qurnic verse:

Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much. (Qurn, 33:21). Ibn H . azm says that the word lakum (for you, i.e., you have) in the above verse indicates permission to leave it, while if the Prophets deeds were an injunction to the Muslims, the verse would have said alaykum (upon you). The text of the verse says . Ibn H . azm says further that if we say ( this is for you), you may take it or leave it, while if we say (this is [incumbent] upon you) you must do it.70 Ibn H . azm supports this claim by a h .adth mentioned by him, where the Prophet took off his sandals while he was leading a prayer, the s .ah .bah who were praying behind him did the same. After the prayer the Prophet asked them why they had taken off their sandals. When they told him that they thought that taking off the sandals was an injunction during the prayer, the Prophet said that he took his sandals off because Gabriel came to him and told him that his sandals were dirty. This is an indication, Ibn H . azm contends, that the deeds of the Prophet are not enjoined upon the Muslims.71 Ibn H . azm argues further, that if the Prophets deeds were an injunction upon the Muslims, this injunction would be unbearable, as nobody could do the same as the Prophet did in everything; for example, Muslims would have to put their hands, walk, and see in the place, way and direction as the Prophet did respectively.72

43

This view of Ibn H . azm in considering the deeds of the Prophet as merely uswah is parallel to that of some Shfis. However, it is contrary to that of some Mliks, who consider the Prophets deeds stronger than his orders ) (, while some Mliks and H .anafs consider them like his orders ) (. Others among the Mliks and some Shfis believe that these deeds depend on their dall which determines whether they are obligatory (wjib), recommended (mandb), or permissible (mubh .). Among the Shfis who maintain this view are Ab Bakr al- S .ayraf (d. 330/942) and Ibn Frak (d. 406/1015), and this is also the view of al-H . asan al-Karkh (d. 340/952), 73 which we think the right one. c. Taqrr (approval) of the Prophet While Ibn H . azm characterizes the deeds of the Prophet as actions having conditional value, and therefore, not always representative of sanad of ijm, the Prophets taqrr, like his qawl, has an overall value. Still, there is a difference between the two, in that Ibn H . azm considers the qawl as h .ujjah, while he denies taqrr a similar status. In his view, taqrr is no more than permitted act (mubh .), but the act itself implies no h .ujjah at all. This view is contrary to that of the Sunn ulam who contend that taqrr is h .ujjah. By doing so, those ulam related h .ujjah to ijm. Ibn H . azm opposes this view. His argument is that since the duty of the Prophet is tablgh (conveyance of the message), he would never keep silent if he saw or knew of any munkar (reprehensible action).74 This means, in Ibn H . azms view, that anything which the Prophet does not disapprove of is permissible. The example given by Ibn H . azm is the Prophets listening to the singing of two slave girls in his house, and his displeasure with the disapproval of Ab Bakr.75

43

3. Qiys Essentially, Ibn H . azm rejects the idea of qiys on the ground that an act of this nature is false and prohibited.76 Yet, those who apply it in their exercising ijtihd are, in Ibn H . azms view, madhr (excused) and 77 majr (rewarded) as long as no h .ujjah has ever reached them. The proponents of qiys are all of the Shfis, groups among the H . anafs and 78 Mliks, as mentioned by Ibn H . azm. Prior to his conversion to the Z .hir school, Ibn H . azm, let us emphasize, was a member of the Shfi school and studied Shfi fiqh. In rejecting the H . anaf views of istih .sn al-Shfi notes that istih .sn is outside the realm of the Qurn and the Sunnah, and does not have any legal authority. Ibn H . azm in turn uses al-Shfis argument on the question of istih .sn to assert that the same is also true about qiys, namely, like istih .sn, qiys is bound to be out of the realm of the 79 sharah. As we noted above, Ibn H . azm argues at length on this issue, because he regards qiys as an innovation and which therefore needs to be strongly refuted. One of many examples given by Ibn H . azm in refuting qiys is the opinion of Ab H .anfah (d. 150/767) that the flow of blood from the body nullifies wud . (ablution). This opinion is the result of the application of qiys. In Ab H .anfahs view, since the discharge of urine and stool from the body which are two dirty things (najisn) nullify wud ., the 80 flow of blood which is also a dirty thing (najis), according to him, also 81 nullifies wud .. As a Z .hir who refuses qiys as one of the sources of Islamic law, Ibn H . azm rejects this view, because he has never known any 82 nas .s ., ijm or dall stating that the flow of blood nullifies wud .. In spite of Ibn H . azms rejection of qiys, he and his Z .hir school were accused of being obliged to use it and called it dall.83 . For

44

example, the Shfi jurist al-Mward (de. 450/1058) said: . The other category of people does reject analogy, but still uses independent judgement in legal deduction through reliance on the meaning (spirit) of the words and the sense of the address. The ahl al-z .hir bellong to the 84 latter Ibn H . azm denies this accusation and says that his dall is 85 purely based on nas .s .. Another example given by Ibn H . azm to show the fallaciousness of qiys and to prove the non-existence of illah in religion is that if the holiness of the valley of T .uw in Sinai is the illah for Allahs ordering Moses to take off his sandals when he was in that valley (see Qurn 20:7), the Muslims also should take off their sandals when they enter that valley, or any other holy places, like Makkah, Madnah, and Bayt alMaqdis.86 Judging by these examples it is fairly evident that Ibn H . azm wants to prove two things: a) that qiys is not only unnecessary, but even superfluous to religion, because religion has been made complete;87 b) that the application of qiys is wrong, because it is based on the idea of 88 illah, and Ibn H . azm rejects it.

- B. Ibn H . azms View of the Types of Ijma Primarily, ijm can be divided into many types, depending on time, place, and the people who exercise it. Of these types, the most common ones are the following: 1) ijm on what is known in religion by necessity ) (, for example, the injunction of five-daily prayers for Muslims; this type of ijm is as strong as the nas .s . itself, and no Muslim will disagree to its being h .ujjah; 2) ijm of the s .ah .bah is unanimously accepted by the advocates of ijm, and there is no disagreement between Ibn H . azm and his adversaries in its nature, validity

44

and significance; 3) ijm of the people of Madnah is advocated by the Mlik school alone, but it is not so important as the previous type of ijm, and most of the ulam outside this school do not attach any significance to it and so do not consider it ijm; 4) ijm where no challenge is known assumes the status of ijm, because of the absence of any dispute regarding its nature; 5) ijm with one challenge; although this type of ijm is considered by its exponents to have the status of ijm, it lacks unanimity which is one of the basic conditions laid down by Ibn H . azm for judging the validity of ijm. Of these types of ijm Ibn H . azm recognizes only the first and the second ones, and this recognition is in harmony with his view of the Qurn and the Sunnah as the sources of Islamic law. Having outlined Ibn H . azms view of ijm and the definitions covering this concept, we shall focus on each of the above five concepts, analyzing their nature, significance and validity, all within the framework of Ibn H . azms writings. Although Ibn H . azm accepts only two of the above types, his argument in relationship to the remaining types is also important. For this reason we shall study them as well. We shall try, when possible, to elaborate on the view of Ibn H . azms opponents and the evidence used for supporting their argument. 1. Ijm on What is Known in Religion by Necessity This type of ijm is the agreement of all of the Muslims upon what has already been stated by clear nas ( and what is known in .s .) religion by necessity. Ibn H . azm offers many examples for this type of ijm, among which is the Muslims witness that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.89 Beside its being stated by a clear nas .s . this type of ijm is transmitted by the whole Muslim community from one age to another.90 That it is the strongest type of ijm as indicated by the strength of its nas .s . which is derived from evidence preserved in the Qurn and the Sunnah of the mutawtir

44

type. According to Ibn H . azm, anyone who denies it is basically an 91 infidel. However, Ibn Taymiyyah in his naqd (critique) of Ibn H . azms Martib asserts that judging rejecters of ijm as infidels is only valid if they reject the known ijm ) (. Ibn Taymiyyah also asserts that many ijm are unknown by people. Moreover, some ulam consider 92 the nas .s . on which the ijm is based as d .af (weak) or manskh. But this type of ijm is not considered ijm by Ibn H . azms opponents, namely, the jumhr al-ulam (the ulam en masse). They maintain that the ijm on what is known by necessity is no more than a mere agreement on the nas .s . itself. The examples which they cite are not different from those cited by Ibn H . azm, for instance, those given by al93 Shfi. In addition, al-Naz .z .m, who was notorious for his rejection of the occurrence of ijm94 and its validity, is not considered an infidel by 95 Ibn H . azm. Moreover, al-Naz .z .m accepts ijm which is exclusively based on an authoritative statement, like the statement of the woman about the death of a person with some indications of her truthfulness. Obviously, what is known by necessity is itself an authoritative statement. Therefore, this may indicate that al-Naz .z .m accepts this type of ijm. To sum up, the position taken by Ibn H . azm and Ibn Taymiyyah are basically the same, namely, that the agreement on what is known in religion by necessity is ijm, but this position is not in accordance with the view of the jumhr al-ulam because this type of ijm according to them is identical to nas .s .. However, Ibn Taymiyyah considers this type of ijm as a second proof besides the nas .s .. He maintains that sometimes the Prophets legal judgement on a certain issue is known to some people through ijm only.96 This is also the view of the Mutazil Ab lH . usayn al-Bas .r, who maintains that the existence of this type of ijm 97 exempts people from seeking the proof in the nas .s .. However, the fact that Ibn Taymiyyah approves of Ibn H . azms position indicates some

47

common stand among the Z .hirs and the H . anbals regarding the above ijm. But it is not certain whether the position taken by Ibn H . azm and Ibn Taymiyyah reflects the views of the Z .hir and the H . anbal schools as a whole. 2. Ijm of the S .ah .bah This ijm as formulated by Ibn H . azm centers on the conceptual and semantical arguments put forward by the proponents and the opponents of ijm. Among the leading members of the former are Ibn H . azm and the jumhr al-ulam. Two concepts are central to their basic positions, namely, the exact definition of the s .ah .bah and the concept of tawqf (the teaching of the Prophet). Despite the differences, the general trend among both groups is their approval of the concept and its validity. To begin with, Ibn H . azm, as well as the Z .hirschool, links this type of ijm to a particular era, namely, the period covering the lives of 98 the s .ah .bah. Hence the concept centers on the s .ah .bah. This position is accepted by Ibn H . azms opponents, i.e., the jumhr al-ulam, but it is not certain how far they agree on the details of the conditions relating to it. In the instance of Ibn H . azm, he stipulates that such ijm of the s .ah .bah had the status of ijm only when they were living in Madnah and before they had been scattered in the dr al-Islm (Muslim lands). In essence, the s .ah .bah as defined by Ibn H . azm, are the Prophets contemporaries who saw him once or more than once, also any of those who heard him saying something, and neither opposing him nor rejecting his prophethood.99 This is also the opinion of the jumhr al-ulam in which they assert that the s .ah .bah are those who believe in the Prophet and met him, even though the meeting may have lasted only for a short time ) (. Whether they report about him or not is not a condition. Ibn H . azm rejects the opinion of those who maintain that there would be a limit of time and number in seeing the Prophet and being in company

40

with him to qualify as a s .ah .b. Ibn H . azm also maintains that since there is no such limit available, this is crucial to the acceptance of the concept. Moreover, Ibn H . azm argues, the origin of the word al-s .uh .bah relates to anyone with whom somebody has a certain matter and on account of this he is considered to have accompanied him. As for anyone who has seen the Prophet and neither opposes him nor denies his prophethood he 100 deserves to be called a s .ah .b, in Ibn H . azms view. This view of Ibn H . azm is similar to that of Ibn Taymiyyah, Ah .mad ibn H . anbal, and Mlik 101 ibn Anas. On the basis of this argument, Ibn H . azm rejects the view 102 reported by Sad ibn al-Musayyib which imposes the condition of living with the Prophet for at least one year or joining him in one of his 103 campaigns in order to be considered a s .ah .b. According to Ibn H . azm the s .ah .bah include those who heard from the Prophet when they were still infidels, then became Muslims, and gave their reports, if they were persons of good reputation (adl).104 According to Ibn H (sing. , . azm all of the s .ah .bah were honest people), (eminent) and (among the people of Paradise). He bases this view on five Qurnic verses and one h .adth. These Qurnic verses are as follows:

Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him [i.e., the s .ah .bah] are hard

44

against disbelievers and merciful among themselves. Thou (O Muhammad) seest them bowing and falling prostrate (in worship), seeking bounty from Allah and (His) acceptance. The mark of them is on their foreheads from the traces of prostration. Such is their likeness in the Torah and and their likeness in the Gospellike as sown corn that riseth firm upon its stalk, delighting the sowersthat He may enrage the disbelievers with (the sight of) them. Allah has promised, unto such of them as believe and do good works, forgiveness and immense reward. (Qurn 48:29)

Lo! Those unto whom kindness hath gone forth before from Us, they will be far removed from thence. They will not hear the slightest sound thereof, while they abode in that which their souls desire. The Supreme Horror will not grieve them, and the angels will welcome them, (saying): This is your day which ye were promised. (Qurn 21:101-3)

Those who spend and fought before the victory are not upon a level (with the rest of you). Such are greater in rank than those who spent and fought afterwards.

44

Unto each hath Allah promised good. And Allah is Informed of what you do. (Qurn, 57:10).105 The h .adth upon which Ibn H . azm bases his view of the good reputation and eminence of the s .ah .bah is that the Prophet said:

Leave for me my s .ah .bah. For if any of you had gold as big as Mt. Uh .ud and you spent it in the path of Allah, it would not reach [the reward or the merit of] one mudd (about 1.053 liter) [of barley or dates] or a half of it [spent by them in the path of Allah]. 106 As the s .ah .bah are the only people whose salvation was guaranteed by Allah, Ibn H . azm contends that they are reliable people. Their adlah (honesty, honourable record) does not need investigation, and their reports should be accepted without any condition. Unlike the s .ah .bah, people of the following generation (tbin) and of further generations do not have such a guarantee of salvation, and therefore, in 107 Ibn H . azms view, their adlah should be investigated. There are five views on the adlah of the s .ah .bah. These views are as follows: a. The view of many ulam which is similar to that of Ibn H . azm. Ibn al-H .jib from the Mlik school maintains that many ulam accept the report of the s .ah .bah without investigating their (the s .ah .bahs) conditions. This view, according to the Shfi qd . Ab Bakr alBqilln is that of the salaf (the first generation of the s .ah .bah) and the jumhr al-khalaf (the tbin and other generations en masse).

43

According to the Shfi jurist Imm al-H . aramayn al-Juwayn (d. 478/1085), the adlah of the s .ah .bah is ijm. He bases his view on certain Qurnic verses and h .adths, among which are those 108 mentioned by Ibn H . azm above. . b. The view of Ab l-H . usayn ibn al-Qat .t .n (d. 359/970), and al-Naz .z .m is that the adlah of the s .ah .bah, like that of other people, should be investigated. Ibn al-Qat .t .n gives the examples of the s .ah .bah whose adlah is rejected, like Wahsh who killed H . amzah, and al-Wald who drank intoxicants (khamr). Al-Naz .z .m among the Mutazils gives the example of a s .ah .b who slandered another s .ah .b. If the slanderer was right, al-Naz .z .m contends, the slandered would not be adl. Yet, if the slanderer was wrong, he would not be adl. c. The view of the Mutazil Amr ibn Ubayd (d. 142/760) who maintains that the s .ah .bah were all udl, before the fitan (sing. fitnah, dissentions), i.e., the civil wars, e.g., the battles of S .iffn and al-Jamal. After these fitan, the adlah of the s .ah .bah should be investigated. d. The view of a group among the Mutazils and the Shs who maintain that all of the s .ah .bah were udl. e. The view of al-Mward (d. 450/1058) who maintains that a s .ah .b who was known for his keeping company with the Prophet was adl; otherwise, his adlah should be investigated. Like Ibn H . azm, Shawkn (d. 1255/1839) accepts the first view and rejects the four others. Ibn H . azm does not mention the other views about the adlah of the s ah bah . However, he asserts that the s . . .ah .bah include the infidel who heard the Prophet and later became a Muslim. He was then also adl.

43

According to Ibn H . azm the adlah of a person in the time of the s .ah .bah became a condition only during the time he was giving the warning and the report ) (, not when he was witnessing what he had reported ) (. This is because there were hypocrites in Madnah during the time of the Prophet, as well as people whose conditions were unfavourable. There were also an unidentified man who falsely claimed to have been sent and authorized by the Prophet to rule the people of an area at Ban l-Layth, two miles outside of Madnah. With his trick he intended to marry a girl who had rejected him in the time of the Jhilyah (pre-Islamic paganism). But his scheme was discovered when people came to the Prophet. This man, and any person who deceived the Prophet, was not considered a s .ah .b. Ibn H . azm contends further that reports are accepted only from respectable persons whose merit was known109. This statement seems to contradict the previous one where Ibn H . azm maintained that all the s .ah .bah were udl. What Ibn H . azm meant was that if a person is known to be a s .ah .b he is adl. There are many ways to know whether a person is a s .ah .b, among which are: his participation in one of the Prophets campaigns and battles, e.g., the battles of Badr, Uh .ud, H . unayn, etc., his participation in one of the two pledges of Aqabah, and his participation as a member of the envoys from the Arab tribes which visited the Prophet. On the other hand, there were only 130 and some s .ah .bah who reported fatw (sing.fatw, futw or .futy, formal legal opinions) in matters of ibdt (acts of devotion) and ah .km (sing. h .ukm, laws, legal judgements). Ibn H . azm mentions them by name in his 110 writings. Ibn H . azm asserts that the s .ah .bah included those who fought Al ibn Ab T .lib in the battle of S .iffn, where the army of Al and that of Muwiyah ibn Ab Sufyn were engaged, and in the battle of al-

43

Jamal, where ishah, T .alh .ah, and al-Zubayr fought Al and his partisans. According to Ibn H . azm, neither Al nor his partisans, nor his opponents intended to fight at the battle of al-Jamal. But rather, both parties met together in Bas .rah to discuss the assassination of Uthmn and to apply the Islamic penal law upon the assassins. But the assassins, who were almost thousands in number, were afraid of the punishment. Therefore, they secretly incited people to fight, so that both parties were compelled to defend themselves, and the battle occurred.111 With regard to the battle of S .iffn, Ibn H . azm contends that Al fought Muwiyah, not because of Muwiyahs rejection to pledge allegiance to Al as a caliph, but rather because of his rejection to carry out his orders in the entire land of Shm (Syria), while Al as Caliph, should be obeyed. Ibn H . azm asserts that Al was right, and Muwiyah did not deny the merit and the right of Al for the post of the caliph. It was Muwiyahs ijtihd which led him to give priority to taking retaliation ) ( for the assassins of Uthmn over the bayah (the pledge of allegiance). According to Ibn H . azm, Muwiyah was 112 wrong in this ijtihd. Another concept which is essential for the assessment of ijm of the s .azm alled tawqf which means teaching .ah .bah is what Ibn H from the Prophet,113 namely, that they are in constant contact with the Prophet and fully aware of his intentions.114 It is directly received by the s .ah .bah alone, and this is the ijm of the s .ah .bah, in Ibn H . azms 115 view. To this, the jumhr al-ulam are in agreement with Ibn H . azms opinion. The disagreement lies in the jumhrs insistence on the ijm of the s .ah .bah beyond the tawqf, i.e., ijm based on qiys and ijtihd. They contend that there are many examples where the s .ah .bah exercise 116 their ijm based on ijtihd. One of these examples cited by the jumhr is the agreement of the s ah . .bah upon the election of Ab Bakr through ijtihd and ray. The jumhr add that the s .ah .bah maintain that

34

as the Prophet was pleased with him for the sake of their religion, they should be pleased with him for the sake of their worldly matters. This opinion was rejected by Ibn H . azm on two points: a. He maintains that the election of Ab Bakr as khalfah (caliph) through qiys was never held by anyone at that time, but this opinion is adhered to by people of a later generation among the followers of qiys who used whatever they could find to defend their opinions. b. Even if qiys is supposed to be valid, its application in this case is false, because the illah of khilfah, as Ibn H . azm argues, is different from that of prayer. This is because an Arab, whether a master or a slave, who has knowledge of the military policy or of ruling the country can lead a prayer, while the man who takes the position of khalfah must be of the Quraysh tribe. Furthermore, immah, i.e., khilfah is an as .l (basis), while prayer is one of the fur 117 (branches). Ab Bakr was elected, in Ibn H . azms view, through nas .s . from the Prophet. Ibn H . azm refers to a h .adth where the Prophet in his illness before his death asked ishah to call Ab Bakr and her brother, so that he might write a kitb (a document, a message) for the succession of Ab Bakr.118 However, some modern scholars disagree with Ibn azm in this matter. Among those who disagree with Ibn H . azm is Ahmad Hasan, who maintains that the election of Ab Bakr was initiated by people who were present in the mosque. Later on, this election was justified on the basis of ijm.119 Another example cited is the agreement of the s .ah .bah, through the exercise of ijtihd during the khilfah of Umar, on the punishment of an intoxicant drinker with eighty lashes, while it was forty lashes during the time of the Prophet and Ab Bakr. On this, Al says that if someone drinks, he would be drunk; if he was drunk, he would talk irrationally; if he did so, he would slander. Therefore, Al would apply to him the legal punishment of slanderers, i.e., eighty lashes. Abd al-Rah .mn ibn Awf,

34

another s .ah .b says the minimum h .add (fixed punishment) is eighty 120 lashes. Ibn H . azm maintains that Umar would not establish a penal law without any basis from the nas .s .. The additional forty lashes, in Ibn H . azms view, is tazr (discretionary punishment), for it is legal for one who continually drinks to be punish with eighty lashes, while the one who drinks at first sight is punished with forty lashes. Therefore, Ibn H . azm denies the existence of ijm based on ijtihd in this case, i.e., the eighty lashes for the punishment of an intoxicant drinker. Ibn H . azm refers to the report that when Abd Allh ibn Jafar was flogging an intoxicant drinker Al counted until forty and said: Stop, the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him flogged with forty, Ab Bakr with forty, and Umar with eighty [lashes], and all are Sunnah. According to Ibn H . azm all are Sunnah means tazr is also Sunnah. This is rejected by his opponents, because tazr is with ten lashes only. To this, Ibn H . azm replies that Umar might punish with ten lashes for every cup drunk by the intoxicant drinker.121 In accepting the two kinds of h .add (i.e., forty and eighty lashes), Ibn H . azm maintains that the ulam (among the s .ah .bah) agree to this view as ijm of the s .ah .bah (i.e., based on nas .s .) 122 and that the h .add should not exceed eighty lashes. According to alSarakhs, the eighty lashes is Sunnah, because, through investigation, the number of people who were ordered by the Prophet to beat the intoxicant drinker with their pairs of sandals were forty. Therefore, the jurists agree that the punishment of the intoxicant drinkers is eighty lashes.123 In fact, Ibn H . azm sometimes mentions only one type of ijm which he advocates, namely; ijm in what is confirmed that the whole s .ah .bah say, know, and have no disagreement about. The example given by Ibn H . azm are things known in religion by necessity, e.g., that the s .ah .bah prayed with the Prophet, or that they knew that the Prophet prayed with the people. Ijm also includes things which no Muslim would remain a believer if he does not believe in it, e.g., the five-daily prayers. Ab Zahrah apparently bases his view on this when he mentions

34

only one ijm advocated by Ibn H . azm, and when he says that the essence of ijm in Ibn H . azms view is what is known in religion by necessity, while the occurrence of ijm is only during the period of the 124 s .ah .bah. What makes us divide the ijm propagated by Ibn H . azm into two types is that: a) in other places in his books, Ibn H . azm himself mentions two types of ijm; Ibn H . azm mentions three ways of the transmission of laws of religion, which include ijm. They are: 1) laws transmitted by the whole community from one age to another, like: belief (mn), prayers, and fasting. Ibn H . azm maintains that there is nothing disagreed upon in this category. This we call what is known in religion by necessity, and we put it as the first type of ijm. 2) laws transmitted by way of tawtur, like many Sunan (practices) of the Prophet, some of which are agreed upon and others are disagreed upon. However, the disagreement does not come from the s .ah .bah, but rather, from people of later generations. The examples are: the prayer of the Prophet in sitting, witnessed by the s .ah .bah, who were present at that time, and that the Prophet levied tax on the Jews of Khaybar, for half of the crops of the land they were cultivating. These deeds of the Prophet are legal actions, as they are the execution of certain injunctions, i.e., prayer and the tax levied to the Jews of Khaybar. Therefore, they are h .ujjah, and sanad of ijm. This we call ijm of the s .ah .bah, and we put it as the second type of ijm advocated by Ibn H . azm; 3) laws which are transmitted by one reliable person on the authority of another, ) ( i.e., khabar alwh .id. Some of these laws are also disagreed`upon by people in later generations. Ijm of this type is very rare.125 Apart from these two types of ijm, i.e., the ijm on what is known in religion by necessity and the ijm of the s .ah .bah, Ibn H . azm does not see any reason to call the remaining types ijm, because they are based upon other than nas .s ., and occurred at an era other than that of

37

the s .ah .bah. We shall discuss briefly some of these remaining types of ijm, focusing on the reason why Ibn H . azm refutes the legal arguments of those who adhere to them. 3. Ijm of the Peoples of Madnah Ibn H . azm was a leading opponent of this type of ijm which had been primarily advocated by Mlik jurists. Although Ibn H . azm was a leading opponent of this type of ijm, he was not the first to reject it. Several leading ulam, such as al-Shfi126 and al-Layth ibn Sad127 preceded him in this respect. This ijm was also attacked by the H . anaf jurist al-Sarakhs. The legal history of this ijm and the arguments supporting it need not be studied here in detail, as long as the notion has been disapproved by Ibn H . azm. Rather, we shall concentrate on why Ibn H . azm rejects this type of ijm, accounting simultaneously for the opponents arguments. It is not known whether Ibn H . azms rejection of this ijm was influenced by the view of his predecessors in this field. We know only that he refused the ijm of the people of Madnah and virtually any ijm agreed upon by scholars of a given Muslim city. The Mliks, as we know from Ibn H . azm, propagate the ijm of the people of Madnah, and their arguments presented by Ibn H . azm are as follows: a. They maintain that Madnah is the best city in dr al-Islm by virtue 128 of several h .adths mentioning the merits of that city. They also maintain that Madnah is the place of the descent of revelations, the land of migration, the gathering place of the s .ah .bah, and the residence-place of the Prophet. Since other rival cities had no such status, they do not hesitate to single out Madnah with the privilege of ijm.

30

b. They also claim that the people of Madnah have more knowledge and are more familiar with the ah .km (laws) of the Prophet than the people of any other city. c. The people of Madnah were eye-witnesses of the last deeds of the Prophet, and they know the nsikh (abrogative) from manskh (abrogated). Such knowledge, according to the Mliks, is important because it gives us information about the latest laws from the Prophet which should be followed by Muslims. d. The h .ukm of the Prophet is known by the majority rather than the minority of the s .ah .bah. Since the majority in this instance are the people of Madnah, and since there are few followers of the Prophet in other cities, they (the majority) had a better knowledge of the h .ukm and its implication. On the basis of these four arguments they claim the ijm of the people of 129 Madnah as h .ujjah. Ibn H . azm rejects all these arguments. Regarding Madnah and its status, he disputes the uniqueness of the city and contrary to this, he 130 maintains that Makkah is the best city, because it is confirmed by nas .s .. If Madnah were the best city, Ibn H . azm would say that there will be no way to assume that the agreement of its people is ijm. To support this view, he cites two Qurnic verses which mention the existence of hypocrites in Madnah and that the hypocrites will be in the lowest deeps of Hell. They are:

And among those around you of

34

the wandering Arabs there are hypocrites, and among the townspeople of Al-Madnah (there are some who) persist in hypocrisy whom thou (O Muhammad) knowest not. We, We know them, and We shall chastise them twice; then they will be relegated to a painful doom. (Qurn 9:101), and

Lo! The hypocrites (will be) in the lowest deep of the fire, and thou wilt find no helper for them (Qurn 4:145).

; and if ye have a dispute concerning any matter, refer it to Allah and the messenger (Qurn 4:59). Furthermore, Ibn H . azm contends that there are bad people in Madnah as well as in other cities. For instance, he maintains that in his time Madnah 132 was inhibited by the extremist Rawfid . (Deserters). Based on this contention, the agreement of this kind of people could not be accepted, in Ibn H . azms view, in spite of their living in Madnah. As for the validity of good people living in Madnah, whom the Mliks claim to have special privilege, Ibn H . azm refuses this stand and wonders where they got this privilege which was not available to the people of other cities. 127 Just as he refutes the first argument advanced

34

by the Mliks, so he does with the remaining arguments. Ibn H . azm maintains that the s .ah .bah knew more about the ah .km (sing. h .ukm) put forward by the Prophet than the people of Madnah. They knew the Prophets last deeds, they knew the nsikh and manskh without any preference whether they lived inside or outside Madnah. To refute the idea that any h .ukm could not be unknown to the people of Madnah who were the majority of the s.ah .bah, Ibn H . azm contends that this could only occur if his opponents find an issue reported by all of the s .ah .bah who were in Madnah, and every one of them gave his legal opinion on it. This, in Ibn H . azms view, did not happen. There were legal opinions given by some of them. In this case, it is possible, according to Ibn H . azm, that a h .ukm given by the Prophet was not known by a group of s .ah .bah, but known by one or more among them. This is significant, because the element of majority is not actualized and cannot be applied to Madnah alone. Moreover, the s .ah .bah might stay in or leave 128 Madnah. Ibn H . azm contends further that the above ijm is based either on ijtihd or tawqf from the Prophet. If it were ijtihd of the s .ah .bah or the people of Madnah, Ibn H . azm rejected ijm based on ijtihd; if it were based on tawqf, Ibn H . azm argues that should a h .ukm be known by some s ah bah inside Mad nah, they must have informed . . people outside the city, so that the knowledge of people inside and outside Madnah becomes equal. Had not they done so, then their adlah would become nullified, and they would become subject to the curse of Allah. Ibn H . azm is referring to the Qurnic verse:

33

Those who hide the proofs and the guidance which We revealed, after We had made it clear in the Scripture, such are accursed of Allah and accursed of those who have power to curse. (Qurn 2:159). Since Allah protects them from this character, Ibn H . azm contends the necessity of ijm of the people of Madnah becomes void.129 Ibn H . azm rejects the argument of the Mliks and maintains that the Mliks are at fault because they adhere blindly to the opinion of their imm, i.e., Mlik ibn Anas (d. 179/795). One of many examples given by Ibn H . azm is that Umar read (chapter 84) and (chapter 32) of the Qurn while he was delivering his khut .bah (Friday sermon), and then he descended from the minbar (pulpit) and prostrated, followed by the people of Madnah. This practice, according to Ibn H . azm, was not followed by the Mliks.130 Moreover, Ibn H azm argues, most of the forty issues which . are considered by Mlik as the ijm of people of Madnah are disputable among the people of that city themselves.131 It should be noted that al-Sarakhs, like Ibn H . azm, rejects the position taken by the Mliks on the same ground. Though al-Sarakhs accepts the merits of Madnah, yet he maintains that these h .adths apply exclusively to the age of the Prophet. As for the other ages, al-Sarakhs rejects the merits of its people. He maintains that in his time there is no place in the Muslim lands where people have so less knowledge, are so ignorant, and so far removed from the motive of goodness than that of Madnah. The h .adths mentioning the merits of Madnah, in al-Sarakhss view, refer to its condition in the time of the Prophet when the pilgrimage was enjoined, where Muslims gathered in the city, while bad people and apostates did not settle there. Al-Sarakhs argued further, that the place could be protected though the people who were living in it were not on

33

the right way. The example given by al-Sarakhs was the condition of Makkah during the Year of the Elephant, when Allah protected the city from the invasion of Abrahah and his troops, though its inhabitants were idolaters.132 In spite of Ibn H . azms attack on this type of ijm, the opinion of the people of Madnah on the exact measure of mudd and s . is accepted 133 unanimously by the whole ulam. The Madnian mudd in the early period of Islam is 1.053 liter, if we estimate that 77 kg wheat equals 100 liters. The Madnian s ., which equals four mudd is 4.2125 liters. However, the measurement of mudd in other Muslim cities is different.134 Ibn H . azm contends that it is not the ijm of the people of Madnah which is accepted in this case, but the h .adth which goes back to the Prophet transmitted successively ) ( upon which there is also disagreement among them. A Madinese, Ms ibn T .alh .ah ibn Abd Allh was reported to have a different opinion on this issue. On the other hand, Ibn H . azm contends that if the acceptance of this issue should be extended to others, the opinion of the people of Makkah would more deserve to be accepted. This is because the whole Muslim community agree to accept their opinion upon the locations of Arafah, Muzdalifah, Mina, etc.135 Moreover, the opinion of the people of Madnah on the measure of mudd and s .is accepted by Ibn H . azm, not because it is the opinion of the people of Madnah, but because it is the minimum measure mentioned in the controversy. Some people, whom Ibn H . azm did not name, held the opinion that one s .equals eight pounds, others assume that it is more than that, while the people of Madnah maintain that it is five pounds and more. Therefore, there is no disagreement among the ulam in the acceptance of this minimum measure of s .. We do not agree with Ibn H . azm in assuming that the measure of the Madinian s .is accepted by Muslims because it is the minimum measure in the controversy. It is true that s .equals 5 1/3 pounds in

33

Madnah and 8 pounds in Baghdad, but the measure of the s .is still the 136 same, i.e., 4.2125 liters. This is because one Madnian pound (rat .l) equals 1.5 Baghddian one. The measurement of pound is also different in other Muslim countries For example, one pound in Madnah, Iraq (as well as Yemen), and Andalusia is respectively equals 609.375 g, 406.25 g, and 453.3 g. 137 Although Ibn H . azm does not give us any details on the measure of mudd, his opinion in this issue and of the s .is not different from any other school. This is because this issue is accepted as a mutawtir report by the people of Madnah, handed down from the Prophet. An issue of this kind is considered h .ujjah by the four Sunn schools. Ab Ysuf from the H . anaf school, after receiving the explanation of this matter from Mlik, said that had this mutawtir report reached Ab H . anfah, he would have accepted it. This report of the people of Madnah is considered by Ibn Taymiyyah as the first category of ijm of the people of that city, which is, in Ibn Taymyahs view, accepted by Muslims as h .ujjah. The second category of this type of ijm is the earlier practice of the people of Madnah before the assassination of Uthmn. According to Ibn Taymiyyah, this practice is accepted as h .ujjah by the Mliks, the Shfis, the H anaf s, and apparently also H anbal s, as they accepted the . . practice of the rightly-guided caliphs as h .ujjah. The third category of this type of ijm is that in case two dalls contradicted one another in a certain issue, for example, two h .adths or two qiyses, and it is not known which of the two h .adths or qiyses is arjah . (preponderant), but one of them is practised by the people of Madnah, the Mliks and the Shfis choose the practice of the people of Madnah. Ab H .anfah does not have any preference for the practice of the people of Madnah. In the H . anbal school, Ibn Taymiyyah gives two views: a) al-Qd . Ab Yal and Ibn Aql (d. 513/1119) do not choose the practice of the people of Madnah; b) Ab l-Khat .t .b (d. 138/755-6) does, which is also the view Ah .mad ibn H . anbal. Generally speaking, these three categories of ijm

34

are accepted by the jumhr al-ulam. The fourth category of ijm mentioned by Ibn Taymiyyah is the late practice of the people of Madnah. This is not h .ujjah according to the H . anafs, Shfis, and H . anbals. This is also the view of the effective defenders of Mliks doctrines. Ibn Taymiyyah assumes that some Mliks in North Africa (alMaghrib) consider it as h .ujjah. If this assumption is true, this might also 138 be true for the Mliks in Andalusia whom Ibn H . azm attacks severely. In summary, the Mliks as we have seen are the advocates of this type of ijm, and the position to which they adheres is in sharp contrast with Ibn H . azms. Since Spain during Ibn H . azms time adhered dominantly to the Mlik school why does Ibn H . azm reject the Mlik position? The answer to this question lies in the doctrinal and political rivalries between the Z .hir and Mlikdoctors. Doctrinal rivalry, because Ibn H . azm represents the Z .hir school, and it is known that the Z .hirs adhere to the nas .s . as the only source of law in religion. Political rivalry, because his motive is to demonstrate to the people and rulers in his time the falsehood of the Mlik jurists in following their imm Mlik ibn Anas, instead of the Qurn and the Sunnah. This criticism can be interpreted to mean that Ibn H . azm was actually denouncing Mlik judges and rulers themselves. In Spain the position of wazr (vizier, minister) and qd . were important ones and the Mlik jurists did indeed occupy these positions. This was because the official madhhab to which the rulers of Spain adhered during Ibn H . azms time was the Mlik madhhab. In the meantime, the rulers prevented Z .hir jurists like Ibn H . azm from occupying judicial and non-judicial positions in the government, because the Z .hir madhhab was strange to them. By so doing, Ibn H . azm was expressing his criticism against the religious orientation of his contemporary rulers and the Mlik jurists who exercised taqld139 instead of ijtihd.

34

4. Ijm where no Challenge is Known According to Ibn H . azm, this type of ijm was advocated by the followers of the H . anaf, Mlik, and Shfi schools. Unknown leaders of these schools maintain that if a legal judgement of a particular issue was put forward by a t .ifah of ulam, it becomes ijm, provided that no lim has ever challenged its legal authority.140 Ibn H . azm cites two reasons for its legality: 1) the attribute of virtue, i.e., ulam involved in the legal judgement belong to the people of grace and religion whom Allah enjoins the believers to obey; 2) the ulams acceptance of the decision of the jurists involved in the judgement. Therefore, the advocates of this type of ijm, as stated by Ibn H . azm, maintain that the absence of any challenge indicates common agreement.141 But Ibn H . azm refuses to interpret the absence of challenge of an lim to the judgement of the ulam involved as an indication of common agreement. There are grounds for thinking that Ibn H . azm totally rejected the legality of this type of ijm, i.e. the ijm where no challenge is known. The grounds for this are comprised of historical precedent, the use of nas .s . as the basis of ijm, and the tendency among mankind to disagree in their daily life. Ibn H . azm is also uncertain whether the legal judgement involved, in effect, spread out among the ulam, because they have been scattered through dr al-Islm. Since this is the case, the absence of challenge, Ibn H . azm contends, is highly unlikely to occur. Moreover, Ibn H . azm is also uncertain whether the absence of disagreement can be interpreted as positive agreement among the involved ulam. Ibn H . azm also contends that there are ulam among jinn (demons, genii), whom we do not know whether the legal judgement concerned reaches them or not.142 For Ibn H . azm, the absence of disagreement in a legal context can also be viewed as a legitimate disagreement in the same context. One historical precedent which Ibn

34

H . azm cites is the example concerning the experience of the s .ah .b, Ab 143 Ayyb al-Ans During the caliphate of Umar he stopped .r. performing two rakah after the as .r (late afternoon prayer), while prior to that caliphate, he had been consistently performing these two rakahs. But after the death of Umar he returned to his previous practice. When he was asked why he stopped practising the two rakahs during the time of Umar, but resumed it later on, he said that he did so because Umar beat people who performed it.144 Ibn H . azm interpreted this example as a proof that the fear caused by Umars beating was responsible for Ab Ayybs suspension of that prayer, and with the absence of such fear, he resumed it. It follows that his fear is also the cause of his silence in concealing his disagreement with Umar in the matter of the two rakah prayer. In addition to fear, Ibn H . azm mentions other reasons, among which is that the lim may maintain silence, because the side of the truth is not yet visible to him. In other words, he does not know whether the legal judgement of the ulam which reaches him is right or wrong, and therefore, he cannot challenge it. His silence, then, d145oes not mean his agreement. Another reason for maintaining silence of the ulam is that they actually give their disagreement, but they do not reach us, though they reach other people in other parts of Muslim countries. Therefore, we think that they are silent, while actually they are not.This argument of Ibn H . azm also indicates his rejection of the ijm sukt (tacit ijm), though he does not deal with it in a special chapter in his book al-Ih .km. Ibn H . azm also disputes the meaning of agreement or disagreement on the basis of textual consideration. In his view, a nas .s . is the key for deciding whether or not the ijm has any validity of its own. According to Ibn H . azm an ijm on nas .s . is undoubtedly a valid one, because it involves yaqn (certitude). Other than the element of yaqn, any ijm based on any notion such as z .ann and ray has to be rejected.

37

Ibn H . azm cited verses from the Qurn which indicate the invalidity of z .ann, such as the following verses:

When ye welcomed it with your tongues, and uttered it with your mouths that whereof ye had no knowledge, ye counted it a trifle. In the sight of Allah it is very great.: (Qurn 24:15, italics mine);

Lo! ye are those who argue about that whereof ye have some knowledge. Why then ye argue concerning that whereof ye have no knowledge? Allah knoweth. Ye know not. (Qurn 3:66, italics mine). Ibn H azm contends that assuming the occurrence of ijm on a particular . issue simply because no challenge is known is a kind of z .ann. Therefore, ijm based on z .ann is also based on what someone has no knowledge of. This practice is forbidden by Allah, and therefore, this type of ijm has no legal value.146 In addition, the same thing is true about human nature and its tendency to disagree on a common issue. In Ibn H . azms view,

30

disagreement is inherent in man and more dominant in him than agreement is. This means that Ibn H . azm does not wholly believe in the absence of disagreement in the ijm where no challenge is known. To support this belief Ibn H . azm cites the following Qurnic verses:

, yet, they (mankind) cease not differing Save him on whom their Lord hath mercy; and for that He did create them... (Qurn 11:118-119). These verses indicate the natural tendency of mankind to disagree with others. So far, Ibn H . azms belief in the nature of disagreement among mankind leads him to reject ijm based on other than nas .s .. The reason for this thinking is that a Muslim cannot disagree to the nas s . .147. Ibn H . azms argument in refuting ijm where no challenge is known indicates that he consistently takes into account the nas .s . as the only basis of ijm and that he insists on rejecting anything in religion based on z .ann. Moreover, through his observation of mans psychology and the Qurnic verses dealing with human nature, he is convinced that there is not a single agreement without any challenge except ijm based on nas .s ., because disagreement is natural in man. As a historian, he gives us examples which prove the invalidity of his opponents argument. So far, we have been discussing Ibn H . azms view of ijm where no challenge is known. Now we shall look into his view of ijm where one challenge is known. This type of ijm is considered as ijm by its advocates, in spite of the existence of a challenge to it. Ibn H . azm opposes this type of ijm. Compared to the previous type of ijm this type is

34

less important, due to the existence of one challenge. However, it had been dealt with and rejected by leading ulam before Ibn H . azm, like alShfi (d. 204/820). But it is still important to know the argument of rejecting this type of ijm from the Z .hir point of view as presented by Ibn H . azm. 5. Ijm with One Challenge The advocates of this type of ijm disregard the challenger and insist on its legality, because they consider the one challenger as an isolated instance from the opinion of the ulam in general. Ibn H . azm, it will be seen, rejects this opinion and insists that a single challenge is itself a disagreement on the ground that there is no unanimity of opinion which constitutes the ijm. Moreover, the challenger, contrary to the emerging view of the ulam, might very well be on the true side, for Ibn H . azm contends that religious truth does not depend on the number or numbers of its adherence. To begin with, Ibn H . azm raises the problem of this type of ijm in the context of a statement by the H . anaf qd . Ab H . zim Abd al148 Azz ibn Abd al-H . amd and the historian Ab Jafar Muh .ammad ibn 149 Jarr al-T .abar on the disa greement of the s .ah .b Zayd ibn Thbit with the first four caliphs as to what to do with the remainder of the inheritance left by a dead person. Unlike the four caliphs, Zayd ibn Thbit thinks that this remainder of the deceased should go to bayt al-ml (public treasury). But Ab H . zim disregards this view because he abolishes the law of giving the bayt al-ml a share in inheritance and adheres to the opinion of the caliphs, namely, the remainder of inheritance should go to the deceaseds relatives on the maternal side ) (.150Al-T .abars view is not stated. We only know that he disregards a single challenger in ijm.151Since Ibn H . azm treats the two

34

eminent scholars together, we assume that al-T .abar probably shared with Ab H . zim the same view. Ibn H . azm does not tell us his view on the issue of the remainder of the inheritance. Nevertheless, there is enough evidence to indicate that he disagrees with Ab H . zim and al-T .abar and those who disregard a single challenge in the occurrence of ijm. He offers us three arguments by his opponents defending this type of ijm. 152 One, the opponents of Ibn H . azm claim that a single challenge of ijm is shudhdh (deviation) and madhmm (reprehensible), while following the opinion of the community is desirable. Two, a good number of h .adths indicate the infallibility of the Muslim ummah (nation, people) and the injunction to the Muslims to adhere to the majority. Three, through the application of reason they (i.e., the opponents of Ibn H . azm) are uncertain whether or not a single challenger of ijm belongs to the jam ah (community). While they do not doubt that those who are challenged by the single challenger belong to the jamah, it is reasonable for them to follow the majority whom they are sure belong to the jamah rather than the single challenger, who has no such distinction. This is because they cannot accept the idea that a single person could constitute a jamah. Why is a single challenge shudhdh and madhmm? According to Ibn H . azms opponents who advocate this type of ijm, an lim who stands alone in challenging the jam ah is considered by them as deviating from it. Therefore, a single opinion which challenges that of the jamah, which is considered deviation and something reprehensible, as shudhdh in religious definition is meant to embrace deviation from the jamah, which is forbidden in matters relevant to the sharah.153 Ibn H . azm rejects this view by stating that the shudhdh is not altogether a matter of deviation from the jam ah. Rather, it means disagreement at the expense of religious truth ) (, and anyone who disagrees in the realm of religious truth is himself shdhdh (a

33

deviated opponent). Ibn H . azm differs from Ab Sulaymn Dwd ibn Khalaf, the founder of the Z .hir school, and the jumhr of Z .hir ulam on the occurrence of shudhdh. According to Ab Sulaymn and the jumhr of his school, shudhdh occurs when the ulam agreed upon an issue, and having done so, one of them challenged the agreement after he had agreed to it.154 Why does Ibn H . azm see shudhdh in the context of truth alone? For him, the justification for not defining shudhdh merely as the deviation of one lim from the rest of ulam arises from the idea that the one lim might be correct, and truth cannot be shdhdh. He contends that if shudhdh is defined as the separation of one lim from the rest of ulam this is not acceptable for him, because if the lim mentioned above is true in his opinion he will become mah .md (praised) and mamdh . (laudable). As shudhdh is madhmm (reprehensible) it should be impossible for a person to be mah .md and madhmm at the same time. As an example, Ibn H . azm mentions that all the s .ah .bah disagreed with Ab Bakr in his intention to fight the apostates, while he alone was 155 right and the whole s .ah .bah were wrong. Ibn H . azms contention that the one lim might be correct, and truth cannot be shdhdh is also indicated by his rejection of the claim made by his opponents in the context of a series of unlimited numbers of shudhdh, suggesting that either they should stick to the provision of limitation, or they should not give such limitation. Ibn H . azm contends that if it were the former, then they would give false statement without introducing any dall, so that they themselves would become shdhdh from the truth. On the other hand, if it were the latter, then the number of shudhdh would be extended until they turn away from al-maql (the reasonable) and the ijm of the community; again they themselves would become shdhdh from the truth. 156

33

This view of Ibn H . azm on the position taken by his opponents is linked with another consideration, i.e., the use of h .adths as reliable grounds to prove the infallibility of the Muslim community, plus the injunction of the Prophet to the Muslims to adhere to the majority. So important is this consideration that it largely accounts for Ibn H . azms challenge to his opponents in this matter. As illustrative examples we shall mention two h .adths. The first h .adth says:

The community of Muhammad will never agree on an error. Follow the majority. He who goes his own way will also go his own way to hell. 157 The component element of the h .adth focus on the relationship of shudhdh to the overriding nature of errors and judgement by the majority. The opponents of Ibn H . azm judge the contents of this h .adth by responding that the h .adth actually refers to the infallibility of the community. This community by inference represents the majority of its members, whose agreement is in effect an ijm.158 Any opinion which isolates itself from that of the majority (which is infallible) is automatically wrong and should be disregarded. One view which agrees to the interpretation of Ibn H . azms opponents for the h .adth is preserved by al-mid. They give an example that if we say that Ban Tamm protect their neighbours and give hospitality to their guests this statement is to be interpreted to indicate that the majority of the Tamms follow this practice, and this by inference applies to the Tamm tribe as a whole.159 This view is not accepted by Ibn H . azm, because he throws doubt upon the veracity of the h .adth by disputing the reliability of one of its

33

chain of narrators, al-Musayyib ibn Wd .ih . by name. Ibn H . azm contends that al-Musayyib is not a reliable transmitter, because he falls into the category of munkar al-h .adth (a traditionist whose h .adth gains no 160 recognition). Ibn H . azm asserts that even if the above h .adth were sound, it would be irrelevant to the issue of an ijm based on the opinion of the majority, so long as it indicates the necessity for Muslims to follow the truth. The reason for underlining the truth as the h .adths implication, is that Ibn H (whoever deviates) in the . azm interprets the words h (whoever deviates from the truth), though the .adth as 161 truth embraces one person. But the first part of this h .adth which has a similar verse and constitutes a h .adth in itself (i.e., My community will not agree on an error) has been rejected by several leading Orientalists, on the ground that al-Shfi did not cite it as an argument for the validity of ijm. Al-Shfi did not cite it either because he did not know it (as assumed by Schacht), or he knew it, but he did not consider it genuine.162 Watt asserts that some Western critics consider it to be a forged h .adth 163 intended to justify the validity of ijm. In this instance Ibn H . azms judgement in doubting the authenticity of the above h .adth cannot be totally ignored. The second h .adth cited by Ibn H . azms opponents says:

O people, honour my s .ah .bah, then the following generation

34

[i.e., the tbin], then the following of the following generation [i.e., the tbi al-tbin]; afterwards falsehood will appear, so that a man would swear before being asked and would bear witness before being asked; whoever among you seeks the pleasure of Paradise, he should follow the community; a man should not be alone with a woman, for Satan would be the third of the two; Satan can pursue one person, but stands far away from two; whoever is displeased with his bad deeds and pleased with his good ones is a believer.164 According to Ibn H . azms opponents, this h .adth justifies the validity of ijm with one challenge, because it enjoined the Muslims to follow the jamah. Moreover, one challenge in ijm comes from one person whom Satan can pursue, while the jamah is protected by Allah, because His hand is upon them. Again, Ibn H . azm is not sure of the soundness of this h .adth, because he asserts that it has not been reported by any traditionist who makes the soundness of a h .adth as the condition of reporting it ( (. But Ah .mad hmad Shkir, the Egyptian qd ., asserts that Ibn H . azms contention is false, and claims 165 that the narrators of this h .adth were thiqt (reliable authorities). Like to foregoing example, Ibn H . azm sees no relationship between the implication of the h adth and the acceptance of ijm under . discussion. Moreover, the above h .adth has no bearing on religious 166 questions and should not be taken in its wider context . Ibn H . azm adheres to this view, because he argues that by the reference to Satan in the above h .adth the Prophet would not mean that a person who resides alone at home would be accompanied by Satan. He contends that if the above h .adth were relevant to religion and were accepted in its general meaning, falsehood could be changed into truth. A person whose opinion differed from that of other people, his opinion would be false, because as the h .adth says,

34

Satan can pursue him. But if his opinion was backed by another one, this false opinion would turn into truth, because Satan is away from the two. This is not the nature of religion, because false remains false even though it is backed by thousands of people. Ibn H . azm contends further that the Prophet would not have meant that Satan was away from infidels like the Jews, the Christians, or Muslim heretics, because they were more than one person, or that they constitute the majority of people. On the contrary, in Ibn H . azms view, the more they are in number, the stronger is Satan with them than with one person.167 Ibn H . azm was probably right in considering that the above h .adths have nothing to do with ijm, but his views are exaggerated. There is an indication that the Prophet warns his followers of separation from the Muslim community which actually happened later. Every member of the community has the right to express his opinion, but it does not mean that he has to leave the community. Moreover, difference of opinion is in the nature of human beings. The solution is that everyone among the community explains his argument honestly, for the sake of finding the truth, so that opponents can be convinced. Otherwise, the opinion of the majority is to be accepted by all as ijtihd of the ulam, not as ijm. Furthermore, Ibn H . azm interprets the word jamah in the h .adth as reference to the jamatu l-h .aqq (the community of the truth). This jamatu l-h .aqq, in Ibn H . azms view, has no relation with the strength of its numerical order. In equating the jamah with jamatu l-h .aqq, Ibn H . azm insists that they constitute the minority of people. He cements his argument with: 1) historical evidence, like the conversion of the Prophets wife Khadjah to Islam; 2) nas .s . as based on the Qurn and the Sunnah, all indicating that the believers constitute a minority and that though they are small in number, they belong to the jamatu l-h .aqq; 3) reason as exemplified by the non-believing community, or by the Prophets relationship to his own community.

34

To be precise, the historical evidence cited by Ibn H . azm to prove that the jamah intended in the second h .adth is the jamatu l-h .aqq and that they belong to minority is the state of the Prophet just after he was chosen as a prophet by Allah. At this time he was the only person who belonged to the truth. The rest of the world were in falsehood. In this case it was the Prophet alone whom people should follow, although the people of his community were unbelievers and constituted the majority of people. When Khadjah converted to Islam she and the Prophet belonged to the truth, because of his prophethood and Khadjahs acceptance of his message, while the majority of people opposing them were in falsehood. Similar evidence mentioned by Ibn H . azm is the case of Zayd ibn Amr ibn Nufayl, who lived in pre-Islamic Arabia, and who refused to worship idols instead of Allah. Because of this attitude he was the only person in his time who belonged to the truth, and according to a h .adth, he would be raised on the Judgement Day as an ummah (a nation, a community, people) in itself.168 It was narrated by Jbir ibn Abd Allh that the Messenger of Allah was asked about the case of Zayd ibn Amr ibn Nufayl who faced the Kabah and said:

O Allah, my god is the god of Abraham, and my religion of the religion of Abraham, peace be upon him, then prayed and prostrated. The Prophet said:

This [person] is a nation by himself, he will be assembled [in the Resurrection Day] between me and Isa ibn Maryam, peace be upon him.169

37

He was said to have been seen by the Prophet plunging in the rivers of Paradise.170 There are a good number of Qurnic verses and prophetic traditions which Ibn H . azm uses to support his contention that the jamatu l-h .aqq belongs to minority. In the course of his presentation Ibn H . azm cites four verses and seven h .adths. Of this total, the verses revolving around the term muminn (believers) and the h .adth equally relating to it constitute the focus of this argument. We shall first cite two nas .s .es and then present the analysis. One Qurnic verse occurs in srat Ysuf (chapter 12) verse 103, which belongs to the Makkan period and relates a group of people (ns) to the term muminn, and does not refer to jamatu l-h .aqq. This verse runs as follows:

And although thou try much, most men will not believe. (Qurn 12:103).171 Ibn H . azms comment on this verse is limited in two points: 1) that the believers are meant to be the jamatu l-h .aqq; 2) that the latter, in turn, constitutes a minority. This view of Ibn H . azm is shared by qd . Abd al-Jabbr (d. 415/1025) who maintains that the greatness in number of the upholders of an opinion does not indicate that it is true, nor that the smallness in number indicates its falsehood.172 Ibn H . azm defines jamatu l-h .aqq as people who follow the Qurn and the genuine h (. Ibn H .adth of the Prophet ) . azm means that believers who mistakenly follow a forged or an unsound h .adth do not belong the

30

jamatu l-h .aqq, and therefore, they should not be followed by other 173 believers. The other verses quoted by Ibn H . azm to indicate that the jamatu l-h .aqq belong to minority are as follows:

, save such as believe and do good works, and they are few. (Qurn 73:40).

but most of mankind know not. (Qurn 12:21, 40, and 68).

If thou obeyedst most of those on earth they would mislead thee ... (Qurn 6:116). The h .adths which Ibn H . azm cites as a proof to support his stand revolves around the key-word muminn and jamatu l-h .aqq. Moreover, Ibn H . azm believes that the h .adths as nas .s .es give vidence to the meaning derived from the verse. Among these h .adths are as follows:

The Doomsday will not come upon

34

someone who says there is no god but Allah [i.e., a believer].

Verily, the Doomsday will not come except upon those who have no good with them. From these h .adths Ibn H . azm extracts two points: 1) a believer belongs to jamatu l-h .aqq, and 2) this jamah belongs to a minority, as the number of believers will diminish before Doomsday; and during that day, there would be no believer. As for his reasons, Ibn H . azm argues that the only possible meaning of the jamah whom the Muslims should follow is the jamatu l-h .aqq, i.e., the Muslim community in its general meaning, because non-believers which are also jamt (sing. jamah) should not be followed by Muslims, though they constitute the majority of people. In its particular meaning, jamatu l-h .aqq means any group that follows the Qurn and the genuine h .adths of the Prophet, because Muslims themselves are divided into jamt. The heretics among them are excluded from the jamatu l-h .aqq, while the Sunns are divided into jamt, i.e., the H . anaf, Mlik, Shfi, and H . anbal schools, as well as the people (followers) of Tradition ) ( , and none of them deserves more to be jamatu l-h .aqq than the others, because of their 174 equality in authenticity. For evidence by reason, Ibn H . azm states the view of his opponents on the issue whether the one challenger of ijm belongs to the Muslim ummah. Dissociating with this one challenger, they assert that those who participate in ijm belong to the Muslim ummah whom every

34

Muslim should follow. With regard to the one challenger, they doubt he belongs to that ummah. They contend that it is reasonable to follow those whom they are sure belong to the Muslim ummah rather than those whom they doubt belong to it.175 But Ibn H . azm rejects this view, because he maintains that it is disobedience to Allah, who enjoins Muslims to refer to the Qurn and the Sunnah whenever a dispute arises. He is referring to the Qurnic verse which reads:

; and if ye have a dispute concerning any matter, refer it to Allah and the messenger (Qurn 4:59). The existence of one challenge is a legal and binding dispute according to Ibn H . azm and it cannot be disregarded. To sum up, what Ibn H . azm wants to prove is that the notion of religious truth in Islam has noting to do with the number of people who adhere to it. While his proofs are largely a combination of Qurnic verses and Prophetic traditions, and while reference to the Z .hir school is not evident, this may be because he found that the true madhhab corresponds with the Z .hir to which he belongs and represents. Hence, his strong attempt at propagating and defending it is obvious. It should be recalled that this school applies the nas .s . of the Qurn and the Sunnah as proofs to implement sharah and reason. It is nas .s . which guides reason to find the religious truth. Reason alone is unreliable in its judgement, because it is merely a worker, and not a ruler. The difference between this type of ijm and the previous one is that this type of ijm is less important than ijm where no challenge is known, because the existence of one challenge in ijm causes the loss of

33

its unanimity, which is a condition for the agreement in the occurrence of ijm brought about by the majority of ulam. We have discussed and anylized Ibn H . azms argument in refuting ijm with one challenge. We have also discussed Ibn H . azms view about ijm on what is known by necessity, ijm of the s .ah .bah, ijm of the people of Madnah, and ijm where no challenge is known. Ijm on what is known by necessity is the strongest one in Ibn H . azms view, as no Muslim will remain Muslim if he denies it. Ijm of the s .ah .bah is the second ijm accepted by Ibn H . azm, where no s .ah .b denies it. Ijm of the people of Madnah is rejected by Ibn H azm, because, in his view, the . people of that city have no privilege over other people in other cities. Ijm where no challenge is known is also rejected by Ibn H . azm on the basis that knowing the opinion of the whole ulam other than the s .ah .bah in a certain issue is impossible due to their greatness in number. Likewise, knowing the existence or non-existence of any challenge to this type of ijm is also impossible.

33

ENDNOTES TO CHAPER II This is also the opinion of al-Naz .z .m who argues that if ijm is based on positive evidence ) (, i.e., the Qurn and the Sunnah, it would be the
1

h (, i.e., .ujjah by itself; but if ijm is based on probable evidence ) reasoning, the ijm would not occur due to the difference of mens nature. Dr. st S .ubh . al- S .lih ., al-Nuz .um al-Islmiyyah: Nashatuh wa Tat .awwuruh, 1 ed. (Beirut: Dr al-Ilm lil-Malyn, 1385/1965), p. 236. 2 Al-Ghazl, al-Mustas .f, vol. 1, p. 175. Al- T . abar did not apply this verse to support ijm. George F. Hourani, The Basis of Authority of Consensus in Sunnite Islam, Studia Islamica xxi (1964), p. 26, quoting al- T . abar, Tafsr al- T abar, e d. M. Sh kir (Cairo: Ma rif Press, n.d.), vol. 7, pp. . 204-205. (Hereafter refereed to as Basis of Authority). The debate between the defenders and the opposers of ijm about the verse in question can be traced in the books of Islamic jurisprudence, e.g., Ab l- H . usayn al-Bas .r (d. 436/1044), Kitb al-Mutamad f Us .l al-Fiqh, ed. Muh .ammad H . amd Allh et st al. 1 ed. (Damascus: al-Mahad al-Ilm al-Farans lil-Dirst al-Arabyah, 1385/1965), vol.2, pp. 462-469; (hereafter referred to as Mutamad); Sayf alDn al-mid, Ih .km al-mid, vol. 1, pp. 286-298; al-Shawkn, Irshd, pp. 7477. 3 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 497. 4 Al-Ghazl, al-Mustas .f, vol. 1, pp. 174-175. 5 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 498. 6 Mutamad, vol. 2, p. 471. 7 This is one of many ways of Ibn H . azm in arguing with his adversaries. He gives them two alternatives in order to bring them to a deadlock and then to overcome them. Ih .km, vol. 6, p. 772. 8 Ibn Taymiyyah, Marij al-Wus .l (Cairo: Dr al-Zayn lil-T .ibah wa l-Nashr, n.d.), pp. 38-39. (Hereafter referred to as Marij).

33

See Al Abd al-Rziq, al-Ijm fl-Sharah al-Islmiyyah (Cairo: Dr al-Fikr al-Arab, n.d.), p. 27. 44 The second verse meant by Ibn H . azm is:
9

. Whereas if they had referred it to the messenger and such of them as are in authority, those among them who are able to think out the matter would have known it. (Qurn, 4:83). 11 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, pp. 497-498. 12 Ibid., vol. 4, p. 500, n. 1 13 Ahmad Hasan,The Political Role of Ijm, Islamic Studies 8 (June, 1969), p. 143 (hereafter referred to as Political Role), quoting al-T .abar, Jmi al-Bayn an Tawl y al-Qur an, ed. Shkir (Cairo: n.p., n.d.), vol. 7, pp. 345-346. With regard to l al-amr many commentators of the Qurn said that they are: leaders, commanders of the expeditions, scholars and jurists, the s .ah .bah, Ab Bakr, Umar, and the sult .n, see A. Hasan, Political Role, p. 143. 14 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 498 15 For verses of similar meaning, see Qurn 10:16, 46:9, 7:203, 10:109, and 33:2. 16 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, pp. 498-499. 17 Ibid., p. 499. 18 Ibid., and vol. 6, p. 808; for the example given by Ibn H . azm to support his view, see ibid., vol. 4, pp. 499-500. In fact, the verse above represents Ibn H . azms view of the source of Islamic jurisprudence, i.e., the Qurn, the Sunnah, and ijm based on nas .s .. Ibid., vol. 1, p. 87. 19 Ibid., vol. 4, p. 497. 20 Ibid. 21 Al Abd al-Rziq, Ijm, p. 101. 22 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 503. 23 Ibid., vol. 1, p. 87. 24 Ibn H . azm gives the definition of mujmal as follows: (It is a word which needs explanation taken from another one.) Ibid., p. 39.

444
25

Another example is the act of performing the h .ajj (pilgrimage). Ibid.,

p. 110. Ibid., p. 93. Both Ashars and Mutazils say that the mutashbiht are explained by muh .kamt. Each of these theological schools argue that the verses which agree with their school are muh .kamt, while those which agree with the school of their opponents are mutashbiht. For example, the verse:
27 26

Then whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, let him disbelieve. (Qurn, 18:29) and Yet, ye will not, unless Allah willeth. (Qurn 76:30 and 81:29). According to the Ashars, the first verse is mutashbihah (ambiguous), while the second one is muh .kamah (clear). The Mutazils have the opposite view. 28 Ibid., p. 44. According to Ab Bakr al-Sarakhs, this opinion of Ibn H azm is also the opinion of the experts on Qurnic exegesis ) ( . See al. Sarakhs, Us .l al-Sarakhs, ed. Ab l-Waf al-Afghn (N.p.: Mat .bi Dr alKuttb al-Arab, 1372 A.H.), vol. 1, p. 16. 29 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 44 30 Ibid., vol. 4, pp. 490 ff. 31 Ibid., vol. 1, p. 71. 32 Ibid., p. 73. For other examples, see ibid., pp. 72-73, vol. 4, p. 491. Ibn H azm does not give us the verses in question, but through our investigation . their location is in srat al-Baqarah (chapter 2):226 & ff passim. 33 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 72. Again Ibn H . azm does not give us any verse from the Qurn or h .adth concerning zakh. Zakh, the third pillar of Islam, is often mentioned after s .alh (prayer), the second pillar. Qurn, 2:43; 5:55; 9:18; 22:78; 24:56; and 27:3. 34 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 78. 35 Ibid., p. 79. 36 See Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, pp. 87-88. 37 bn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 505.

444
38

bn H . azm also defines the Sunnah as

("revelation reported, transmitted with no arranged and miraculous structure, and not recited but read"). Ibid., vol. 1, p. 87. 39 Ibid., pp. 93-94. 40 Ibid. See also Al Abd al-Rziq, Ijm, p. 14, n. 2. 44 For further details, see Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 95. 44 Ibid. Al-Sarakhs, Us l alSarakhs , vol. 1, p. 294. . 47 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 96. 44 Ibid., pp. 96-97. 45 Ibid., p. 97. 46 See Ibn Qayyim al-Jawzyah, al-S .awiq al Mursalah al lJahmyah wa l-Muat .t .ilah, summar. Muh .ammad ibn al-Maws .il and rev. Zakary Al Ysuf (Egypt: Mat baat al -Im m, n.d.), pp. 474-475. (Hereafter . referred to as S .awiq). 47 Muh .ammad ibn al-T .ayyib al-Bqilln was an Ashar-Sunn jurist and one of the early contemporaries and opponents of Ibn H . azm. He does not specify the fuqah and mutakallimn who uphold this view. See al-Bqilln, - l-Mulhidah wa l-Rfidah wa l-Khawrij wa lal-Tamhd fi l-Radd ala . . Mutazilah, ed. & comment. Mah Muh .md .ammad al-Khayd .ar and Muh ammad Abd al -H d Ab Raydah (Cairo: Mat baat Lajnat al Talf wa l. . Tarjamah wa l-Nashr, 1366/1947), p. 164. (Hereafter referred to as alTamhd). 48 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 107. 49 For further details, see Us .l al-Sarakhs, vol. 1, pp. 111-113. 50 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 110. 51 Ibn H azm mentions many Qurnic verses as evidence, see ibid., vol. . 4, p. 531. For Ibn H . azms argument in rejecting al-z .ann, see ibid., vol. 1, pp. 110 ff. 52 Ibid., p. 109. 53 Ibid., p. 110. See also idem, al-Fas .l, vol. 5, p. 114. 54 Us .l al-Sarakhs, vol. 1, p. 323. 55 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, pp. 98, 100-101.

444

Ab Jafar Muh .ammad al-T .s was the shaykh (leader, master) of the Shah Immiyyah sect, and was one of Ibn H . azms contemporaries. The Immiyyah believed in the succession of Al, instead of Ab Bakr, with clear nas .s .. For further details, see al-Shahrastn, Milal, vol. 1, pp. 218-224. According to Abd al-Qhir ibn T .hir al-Baghdd (d. 349/1037) there are fifteen sub-divisions of the Immiyyah, among which are the Twelver Shah and the Ismiliyyah. Farq, p. 23. 57 Al-T .s, Uddat al-Us .l, vol. 1, pp. 47 ff. 58 Ibn H azm, Ih km , vol. 1, p. 98. Al-Shfi called this kind of h . . .adth khabar khs .s .ah (a special report), see Rislah, p. 369. 59 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, pp. 97-98; idem, Muhall, vol. 1, p. 52. 60 Ibn H azm, Ih . .km, vol. 1, pp. 106, 123-444. 61 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 107. 62 Ibn H . azm attacks the Mutazils in their acceptance of the matter of beliefs exclusively through khabar al-tawtur. For further details, see ibid., pp. 119 ff. The Mutazil qd . Ab l-H . asan Abd al-Jabbr maintains that matter of beliefs should not be accepted through khabar al-wh .id. Sharh . al-Us .l alKhamsah, ed. Dr. Abd al-Karm Uthmn, comment. al-Imm Ah .mad ibn alst H . usayn ibn Ab Hshim, 1 ed. (Cairo: Mat .baat al-Istiqll al-Kubr, 1384/1965), p.769. (Hereafter referred to as Sharh al-Us . .l). 63 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 506. 64 Ibn H . azm, Fas .l, vol. 5, p. 118. 65 Qd Abd al -Jabb r, al-Mughn, 20 vols (Cairo: Mat . .baat s al-Bb al-H . alab, 1385/19650, vol 15, p. 393. 66 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 138. Ab Zahrah, Ibn H . azm , pp. 298300. 67 Al-T .s, Uddat al-Us .l, vol. 2, pp. 3, 53 ff. 68 Ibn H azm, Ih km , vol. 4, p. 422. . . 69 For further examples, see Ibid., p. 431; see also idem, Muh .all, vol. 1, p. 101.
56

447

Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 140. Ibn H . azm reproaches some Mliks who neglect many deeds of the Prophet which, in his view, indicate injunction. For details, see ibid., vol. 1, pp. 141-142. 71 Ibid., vol. 4, p. 430. 72 Ibid., p. 435. 73 Ibid., p. 422; al-T .s,Uddat al-Us .l, vol. 2, p.55. 74 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 139. 75 For more examples, see ibid., vol. 4, p. 436. According to Ah .mad Shkir the Prophet tolerated the singing because it was performed by two little girls only; see ibid., n. 1. 76 Ibid., vol. 8, pp. 1055-1056, 1065. 77 Ibid, p. 1166. 78 Ibid., vol.7, p.929. 79 Ab Zahrah, Ibn H . azm, p. 37. 80 The Qurn does mention the prohibition of blood poured forth as well as carrion and swine-flesh for food, as they are foul, but it does not state whether blood nullify wud . or not. Qurn, 6:146; see aloso ibid., 2:173 and 15:115. 81 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 1, p. 930. The application of qiys among the H anaf s in this matter is not recommended according to Ab Ysuf (d. 182/798) . as reported by Ab al-H .. Ab Ysuf does not like the use of . asan al-Karkh qiys in this matter, since the nullification of wud . with the existence of a clot of blood on the head of the wound is also the opinion of the s .ah .b, Ibn Abbs. Ab Ysuf gives priority to the opinion of a s .ah .b over the application of qiys, whereas al-Karkh prefers qiys to the opinion of a s .ah .b. Us .l alSarakhs, vol. 2, pp. 105-446. 82 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 7, p. 931. 83 I. Goldziher, Z .hirs, p. 35 n., quoting Ab l-Fid, Annales, II (n.p., n.d.), p. 262. 80 I See ibid., quoting Constitutiones Political, ed. Enger (N.p., n.d.), p. 111. 84 I For further details, see Ih .km, vol. 5, pp. 676-438. 86 Ibid., pp. 929 ff.
70

440

Ibid., vol. 8, pp. 1049 ff. For Ibn H . azms argument in refuting qiys, see ibid., vol. 7, pp.929 ff. 88 For further details, arguments and examples, see ibid., vol. 8, pp. 1138 ff. 89 Other examples given by Ibn H . azm involve the other pillars of Islam, such as the injunction of fasting in Ramad .n. Ibid., vol. 4, pp.529-531. 90 Ibid., p. 505 91 Idem. Martib, pp. 7 and 10. 92 Ibn Taymiyyah, Naqd Martib al-Ijm (in the lower part of Ibn H . azms Martib al-Ijm) (Cairo: Maktabat al-Quds, 1357 A.H.), pp. 7, 10-11, and 16. (Hereafter referred to as Naqd). 93 Examples given by al-Shfi are: the injunction of five-daily prayers, fasting in Ramad .n, pilgrimage to Makkah for those who can afford it, zakt, the prohibition of adultery, killing, stealing, intoxicants, etc. These things belong to the category of what al-Shfi calls ilm mmah (knowledge known by public), where no one who reaches adulthood and has sound mind can be ignorant of it. See Rislah, pp. 357-358. 94 Kaml al-Dn Ibn al-Humm, al-Tah .rr f Us .l al-Fiqh (Cairo: Mat .baat Mus .t .af al-Bab al-H . alab, 1351 A.H.), p. 399. 95 Ibn Taymyah, Naqd, p. 11. 96 Idem, Marij al-Wus .l, p. 38. 97 Al-Bas .r, Mutamad, vol. 2, p. 521. 98 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 509. 99 The s ah bah include free people as well as slaves, even children, like . . the Prophets grand-son al-H . asan and al-H . usayn. Ibn H . azm argues further that the s .ah .bah exclude the hypocrites of Madnah, and those whose conditions are unfavourable, like Ht the effeminate, whom the Prophet ordered to be banished, and the expelled al-H . akam. Ibid., vol. 2, p. 203; vol. 5, pp. 663-444. Al-Qd . Iyd (d. 554/1149, the M lik jurist and historian who became q d of Cordova . . in 531/1136-1137), reported that the historian al-Wqid (d. 206/822, who became qd . of Baghdad) excluded children from being s .ah .bah, but this opinion was rejected by the jumhr al-ulam. Al-Shawkn, Irshd, p. 70. 100 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 5, p. 665.
87

444

Ibn Taymiyyah, S .ih .h .at Us .l Madhhab Ahl al-Madnah, ed. & comment. Zakary Al Ysuf (Citadel [Cairo]: Mat .baat al-Imm, n.d.), p. 19. (Hereafter referred to as S .ih .h .at Us .l). 102 Sad ibn al-Musayyib was one of the tbin (the generation following that of the s .ah .bah) who lived in Madnah. Ibn H . azm, Jawmi alSrah wa Khams Rasil Ukhr, ed. Dr. Ih sn Abbs and Dr. Ns . .ir al-Dn alAsad, rev. Ah .mad Muh .ammad Shkir (Egypt: Dr al-Marif, n.d.), p. 325. (Hereafter referred to as Jawmi); idem, Ih .km, vol. 5, p. 668, line 17. 103 Al-Shawkn, Irshd, p. 70. 104 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 2, p. 203. 105 Ibn H azm, Ih . .km, vol. 5, p. 664. 106 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 5, pp. 664-665; idem, Fas .l, vol. 4, p. 114. 107 Idem, Ih .km, vol.5, p. 665. 108 Al-Shawkn, Irshd, p. 69. 109 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 2, p. 303. 110 Ibid., vol.5, pp. 665-667; idem, Jawmi, pp. 319-323. 111 Idem, Ih .km, vol. 2, p. 204; for further details, see idem, Fas .l, vol. 4, pp. 156-159. 112 For further details, see idem, Fas .l, vol. 4, pp. 159-163. 113 We use here talm (teaching) as the meaning of tawqf, which is the interpretation of Ab Zahrah. This is the only meaning which we know is appropriate for the context. Ab Zahrah, Ibn H . azm, p. 357. 114 O.A. Farrukh, Z .hirism, p. 277. 115 According to al-Sarakhs, the chief merit of thes .ah .bah is not their precedence of the witness, but to be believers, though he accepts the ijm of the s .ah .bah as the strongest one. Us .l al-Sarakhs, vol. 1, pp. 313 and 318. 116 Beside the occurrence of ijm among the s .ah .bah, disagreement among them also occurred. One example is their disagreement over the issue of umm al-walad (a slave-girl who has borne her master a child). According to Umar, she could not be sold unless to set her free. Ibn Masd, Ibn Abbs, and Ibn al-Zubayr, however, asserted that she could be sold by her master, but if her child is alive when her master dies, she is set free at the expense of her childs share in the inheritance. Joseph Schacht, Umm al -Walad, S.E.I., pp.
101

444

601-603. Ibn H . azm mentions the report of Jbir ibn Abd Allh who asserts that umm al-walad was sold during the time of the Prophet and Ab Bakr, while Umar prohibited her being sold. Another report mentioned by Ibn H . azm is that Al, during his rule, asserted that he followed Umar and Uthmn in their rulings on setting free umm al-walad. According to Ibn H . azm, the right view is setting her free. He bases his view on a h .adth which states that when Mriyah, the Prophets concubine, bore Ibrhm, the Prophet said: She is set free by her child. Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 520. For other examples of disagreements among the s ah bah , see Ibn Qayyim al-Jawzyah, Ilm al-Mqin an Rabb al-lamn . . (in the lower part of his H .d l-Arwh .), 3 vols. (Egypt: Mat .baat al-Nl, n.d.), vol. 2, p. 327. (Hereafter referred to as Ilm al-Mqin). 117 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 7, pp. 982-987; see also idem, Fas .l, vol. 4, p. 109. 118 For further details on Ibn H . azms argument on the issue of the succession of Ab Bakr, see idem, Ih km , vol. 7, pp. 982-987. . 119 Ahmad Hasan, The Political Role of Ijm, Islamic Studies 6 (June, 1973), p. 139. 120 Al-mid, Ih .km al-mid, pp. 379-380; al-Sarakhs, Us .l alSarakhs, vol. 1, p. 301. 121 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, pp. 516-517. 122 Idem, Martib, p. 133. 123 Us .l al-Sarakhs, vol. 1, p. 301. 124 Ab Zahrah, Ibn H . azm, pp. 354-358. 125 Ibn H azm, Ih km , vol. 4, pp. 505-506; see also idem, Fas . . .l, vol. 2, pp. 81-82. Khabar al-wh .id can be known by necessity. In being so, ijm based on it can occur. 126 Al-Shfi, al-Rislah, pp. 533-535. 127 Ab Zahrah, Ibn H . azm, p. 362; al-Layth ibn Sad was one of the tbi tbin (the following of the following generation of the s .ah .bah), who lived in Egypt. See Ibn H azm, Jawmi , p. 332. . 128 Ibn H azm does not offer details, because the h . .adths involved have been dealt by him in his book al-s .l which is not extant, see Ih .km, vol. 4, pp. 552-553. Nonetheless, al-mid of the Shfi school does mention the h .adths

443

used by the proponents of this type of ijm, among which is: Verily, Madnah is pure, it removes its dirt like a pair of bellows remove the dirt of iron. Ih .km al-mid, vol. 1, p. 349. 129 For further details of the position of the Mliks, see Ibn H . azm, Ih km , vol. 4, pp. 552-553. . 130 Ibn H . azm does not give us any nas .s . to prove that Makkah is the best city. However, the position of Makkah as the holiest city in Islam is indisputable. 132 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, pp. 554. The Rawfid . (sing. Rfid .ah) was originally applied to groups of soldiers who have deserted their leader. It was applied to a certain sect of the Shah of Kfah who deserted Zayd ibn Al ibn al-H . usayn ibn Al when he refused to speak against Ab Bakr and Umar, for he said: Both were ministers of my grand-father Muhammad. The term Rawfid . is also applied by Sunn Muslims to any sect of Shah. Finally, it is applied to apostates or schismatics who speak against the s .ah .bah.
127

Ibid., pp. 554-555 Ibid., pp. 558-559. 130 Ibid., pp. 556-557; vol. 6, p. 878. 131 Ibid.. vol. 4, p. 558; vol. 6, p. 879. 132 For further details, see al-Sarakhs, Us .l al-Sarakhs, vol. 1, pp. 314 ff. Unlike al-Sarakhs, Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah from the H . anbal school lean to the Mlik position. As for the argument of Ibn Taymiyyah for the ijm of the people of Madnah, see S .ih .h .at Us .l, pp. 17 ff; for the opinion of Ibn Qayyyim al-Jawziyyah, see, Ilm al- Mqin, vol. 2, pp. 434 ff. 133 Ibn Taymiyyah, S .ih .h .at Us .l, p. 23. 134 For further details, see Walther Hinz, Islamische Masse und Gewichte, Handbuch der Orientalistik, ed. Bertold Spuler, suppl. Vol. 1, book 1 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1955), pp. 45-47 and 51. (Hereafter referred to as Islamische Masse). 135 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 6, p 876 136 W. Hinz, Islamische Masse, p. 51 137 For further details on pound (rat .l ), see ibid., pp. 28-33.
129

128

443

Fur further details, see Ibn Taymiyyah, S .ih .h .at Us .l, pp. 23-27; see th also Muh ammad al-Khud ar, Us l al-Fiqh, 4 ed. (Cairo: Mat . . . .baat al-Sadah, 1382/1962), pp. 304-307. 139 Ibn H . azm denounces taqld. For his arguments against taqld, see Ih .km, vol. 6, pp. 793 ff. 140 Ibid., vol. 4, p. 531. This type of ijm had been alluded by al-Shfi, see Jim al-Ilm, pp. 60-64. 141 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 531. 142 Ibid., p. 535. 143 Ab Ayyb was one of the s .ah .bah, who gave their futy (fatw, formal legal opinion in one or two issues only. Ibid., vol. 5, p. 666 line 21; idem, Jawmi, p. 320. 144 It is important to remember that the Prophet recommended that people perform sunnah prayers at home. Moreover, when his house and mosque were being built in Madnah he lived temporarily in the house of Ab Ayyb. Idem, Jawmi, p. 95. Perhaps during this time he saw the Prophet performing this two rakah prayer. For further details, see idem, Ih .km, vol. 4, pp. 536-537. 145 For further details, see ibid., p. 537. 146 Ibid., pp. 533-534. For further arguments of Ibn H . azm in refuting alz .ann, see ibid., vol. 1, pp. 117 ff passim. 147 Ibid., vol. 4, pp. 502-503. 148 It is probable that instead of Abd al-Azz ibn Abd al-H . amd, the correct name of this H anaf qad was Ab H zim (or Ab Kh zim) Abd al. . . H . amd ibn Abd al-Azz. He died in 292/904. See Ab Ish .q al-Shrz, T .abaqt al-Fuqah, ed. Dr. Ih .sn Abbs (Cairo: Dr al-Rid al-Arab, 1970, p. 141. 149 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 544; vol. 1, p. 180. 150 Ibid., vol. 4, p. 544 151 Ibid. 152 Ibn H . azm does not give us the argument of Zayd ibn Thbit, but he does criticize his opponents among the Mliks and Shfis for following Zayd ibn Thbit. Ibn H . azm does not believe in the soundness of the h .adth claiming that Zayd is the most learned man among you on the law of inheritance
138

443

) ). Ibn H . azm contends that if this h .adth were sound it would be against his opponents themselves, because it goes on with and Mudh is the most learned among you in Islamic jurisprudence ) (. This is because they do not follow Mudh in his fatw dealing with the penalty of death upon apostates (without asking them to repent) and the legality of inherited property by a believer from a non-believer. Ibid., vol. 6, pp. 819-820. 153 Ibid., vol. 4, p. 544; vol. 5, p. 661. 154 Ibid., vol. 5, p. 661. 155 Ibid. 156 Ibid., p. 622. This is in the main the style of Ibn H . azm. He cites other examples, too. For details, see his arguments on the issue regarding the number of chains of transmitters in the khabar al-tawtur. Ibid., vol. 1, p. 95. 157 This h .adth is a combination of three of h .adths, totally cited by a single chain of narration, see ibid., vol. 4, p. 545. The first one, The community of Muhammad will never agree on an error was cited by many h .adth collectors, but with different versions, (i.e., My community instead of The community of Muhammad), among which are al- Bukhr in his alJmi al-S .ah .h . (Kitb al-Fitan), al-Tirmidhis al-Jmi, (the chapter dealing with Fitan), Ibn Mjahs Sunan (chapter Mansik Fitan), Ah .mad ibn H . anbals Musnad, IV, 101 and V, 145; another version was also cited by al-Ghazl, alMust .ass .f, vol. 1, p. 175. The second h .adth was cited by Ibn Mjah in his chapter on the nature of Fitan. The third h .adth with a similar version was cited by al-Ghazl, see ibid. 158 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 545. 159 Al-mid, Ih .km al-mid, vol. 1, p. 339. 160 Ibn H azm, Ih . .km, vol. 4, p. 545. 161 Ibid. 162 Joseph Schact, The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1950), p. 91; George F. Hourani, Basis of Authority, pp. 157-158. W. Montgomery Watt, Islam and the Integration of Society (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, [c. 1961]), p. 204 as quoted by A. Hasan, The Early Development of Islamic Jurisprudence (Islamabad: Islamic Research Institute, 1970), p. 157.

444
163

W. Montgomery Watt, Islam and the Integration of Society (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, [c. 1961]), p. 204 as quoted by A. Hasan, The Early Development of Islamic Jurisprudence (Islamabad: Islamic Research Institute, 1970), p. 157. 164 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 545. 165 Ibid., p. 546. This is one of many sound h .adths which is considered weak by Ibn H . azm. Sound h .adths are disputed by Ibn H . azm, either through finding weak narrators in their sanad, or through his investigation on the matn (text) of h .adths, like the one mentioned above. For sound h .adths which are doubted by Ibn H . azm, see ibid., vol. 5, p. 702; vol. 6, pp. 764, 809, 820, 1003, and 1015. 166 Ibid., vol. 4, pp. 548-549. Notice that Ibn H . azm repeats the words three times during the course of his argument, see ibid., pp. 548 (line 26) and 549 (lines 18 and 26). 167 Ibid 168 Ibid., pp. 546-547. Another proof to justify the possibility of considering a person who belongs to the truth as an ummah which is not used by Ibn H . azm is the following Qurnic verse, Lo! Abraham was a nation (ummah), obedient to Allah, by nature upright, and he was not of the idolaters. (Qurn 16:120). Ibn Ban s .im, al-h .d wa l-Mathn, vol. 2, p. 363 (al-Maktabah al-Shmilah). 170 Qurt .ub, Ab Abd Allh Muh .ammad ibn Ah .mad al-Ans .r al-. AlJmi li Ah .km al-Qurn. 20 vols in 10 bindings. (Beirut: Dr Ih .y al-Turth al-Arab, 1967), vol. 10, p. 172 (al-Maktabah al-Shmilah).
169

Ibn H . azm, Ih .km, vol. 4, p. 547. Abd al-Jabbr, Sharh . al-Us .l, pp. 61-62. 173 Ibn H . azm, Ih .km , vol. 4, p. 548. 174 Ibid 175 Ibid., p. 550.
171 172

111

CONCLUSION Ibn H .azm, who revived the Z .hir school in the fifth/eleventh century in Andalusia, faced severe reaction from his contemporary ulam and rulers, who considered the Z .hir school as an intruding one, for they had already followed the Mlik school. His motive for propagating and defending this school, which he considers the right one, is political and religious. Political, because, as a pro-Umayyad, he intends to keep the Umayyad caliphate from losing its control in Andalusia. Religious, because he intends to bring the people of Andalusia in general, and its ulam and rulers in particular, back to the pure Islamic teaching. He believes that the political instability and the corruption in the country are due to the peoples deviation from and violation of the nas .s ., i.e., the Qurn and the Sunnah of the Prophet. Because Ibn H . azm believes that politics and religion are inseparable, he confines himself to teaching people the Z .hir fiqh to achieve his goal. Ibn H . azm insists upon the total agreement of Muslims for the occurrence of ijm . Due to the existence of natural and inherent disagreements and divergences in the human kind, Ibn H . azm insists on nas .s . as the only basis of ijm, for no Muslim should deny its authority. The ijm maintained by Ibn H . azm is that of the s .ah .bah in its broad meaning. It comprises two types: a) ijm on what is known in religion by necessity, like the injunction of five-daily prayers, and b) ijm of the s .ah .bah in its narrow meaning, i.e., on what the s .ah .bah witnessed and heard from the Prophet, like the tax he imposed on the Jews of Khaybar. However, the ulam en masse do not consider this ijm as such, for it is not more than the transmission of the nas .s . by the s .ah .bah from the Prophet to their following generation. Although to some extent there is a similarity of view on ijm between Ibn H . azm and al-Naz .z .m as well as al-T .s, this similarity is merely accidental, caused by different motivations and backgrounds. Ibn H . azm, al-Naz .z .m and al-T .s belong to the Z .hir school of law, the

111

Mutazil school of theology, and the Shah sect respectively. However, we know that the Mutazilah and the Shah have similar view on the createdness of the Qurn as well as on the names and attributes of Allah. Basing ijm on nas .s . alone, i.e., the Qurn and the Sunnah, Ibn H . azm asserts that, like the Qurn, the Sunnah of the Prophet is also a wah .y and preserved by Allah. The loss of the Sunnah, mutawtir as well as h .d,would cause the destruction of religion, because Sunnah provides us with essential details on Allahs statements and instructions in the Qurn for human beings. However, Ibn H . azm maintains that unlike the Qurn, the Sunnah is not an established text in the Scripture, and contains no miracle in its structure. Unlike to opinion of the majority of ulam in accepting khabar al-wh .id as probable evidence Ibn H . azm considers it as convincing evidence, provided that it was reported by a reliable transmitter, who traced his hearing to the Prophet through reliable transmitters. Ibn H . azm does not accept the validity of z .ann in religion, because he asserts that z .ann is other than the truth and is prohibited by Allah. Contrary to the opinion of the majority of ulam, Ibn H . azm does not accept the taqrr of the Prophet as h .ujjah, because he contends that whatever the Prophet did not disapprove of is permissible. The Prophets fil is considered as mandb and uswah for Muslims, unless there is an indication of its being wjib, like his execution of a certain injunction. It is the qawl of the Prophet which is accepted by Ibn H . azm as a h .ujjah by itself, while the majority of ulam consider qawl, fil, and taqrr of the Prophet together as h .ujjah. Qiys is rejected by Ibn H . azm as one of the sources of Islamic law or as sanad of ijm, for he considers it as an innovation and superfluous to religion. He maintains that whatever Allah does not state as something enjoined or prohibited is permissible, and as Allah has perfected the religion of Islam, any law based on other than nas .s ., is to be

111

rejected. The existence of an illah upon which qiys is based, is rejected by Ibn H . azm. Although al-T .s and al-Naz .z .m share the view of Ibn H . azm in rejecting qiys, they differ in their solving an emerging issue, which is usually solved by the majority of ulam by applying qiys. Ibn H . azm will exercise ijtihd to find its legal judgement based on nas .s .. If he does not find any dall in the nas .s ., the issue is considered permissible, which is the basic legal judgement of everything. Al-T .s will try to find the opinion of the hidden imm on the issue. But if it is still unknown, it will be revealed in the ijm of the ulam of the Shah. If no agreement has been reached, the opinion of the imm will be with one which has dallah from the nas .s .. If no dallah is available, the opinion of those who are unknown in person and by lineage is with that of the imm. If the groups of disagreeing ulam consist of both known and unknown ulam, the opinion of any group is accepted. Although the opinion of the imm is not with any of the disagreeing groups, their opinions are permitted. Otherwise, if they are not permitted, the imm should not remain silent any longer. The opinion of al-Naz .z .m on this issue is unknown. However, he accepts the statements of the hidden imm as h .ujjah, as asserted by al-Shahrastn. Other than the ijm which he advocates, i.e., ijm of the s.ah .bah based on nas . azm rejects ijm and its authority. .s ., Ibn H Dealing with ijm of the people of Madnah, he asserts that ijm of the people of Makkah is more deserving of acceptance than that of Madnah, if the ijm of the people of Madnah should be accepted. Moreover, Ibn H . azm protests that there were hypocrites and Raw fid . in Madnah. Asserting the occurrence of ijm merely because no challenge is known is also rejected by Ibn H . azm. For him, the absence of challenge in ijm does not necessarily indicate ones agreement, but it may indicate his fear. Furthermore, a challenge might not reach the ulam in their ijm, so that they assume its absence. Ibn H . azm reminds his opponents of the

111

existence of ulam among jinn whose agreement or challenge has never been known to them. Knowing the opinions of all the ulam of Islam is impossible due to their greatness in number, except those of the s .ah .bah before they scattered to different points outside Mad nah. Like the opinion of the majority of ulam, Ibn H . azm also rejects ijm with one challenge. The idea that a single challenge must be shudhdh is rejected by Ibn H . azm, for the truth might be with the single challenger. The shudhdh which is intended in the h .adth cited by his opponents, if that h .adth should be accepted, is understood by him to be disagreeing with the truth. But he doubts the soundness of that h .adth as well as another h adth which orders the believers to follow the jamah cited by his . opponents. However, he contends that the jamah intended in the h .adth is jamatul -h .aqq . In its general meaning, jamatul -h .aqq denotes the Muslim community as the opposite of the non-Muslim community. In its particular meaning, it means any group among the Muslim community who follow the Qurn and h .adths of the Prophet in contrast to Muslim heretics and those who follow fabricated h .adths. To what extent is the Z .hirsm of Ibn H . azm similar to that of its founder, Ab Sulaymn Dwd, is beyond the scope of this study. However, we know that Ibn H . azm follows Dwd in rejecting qiys, ray, istih sn, and taqld, and in accepting the ijm of the s . .ah .bah. This type of ijm which is considered the third source of Islamic law, is of minor importance. His opponents do not even consider it as ijm, but rather as the nas .s . itself. The dall, the fourth source of Islamic law in the Z .hir school, is considered by Ibn H . azms opponents as qiys in disguise, although it is also based on nas .s .. In this instance we may say that Ibn H . azm, as a Z .hir, sticks to the nas .s . alone. In one of his poems he said: I will not incline towards any opinion in religion; nay, the Qurn and the Sunan [of the Prophet] suffice me, as we have cited on the front page of this book.

111

G LOSSARY
adlah, honesty, honourable record adl, (pl. udl), an honest man, a person with an honourable record h .d (khabarul-wh .id), a h .adth (tradition) reported by one chain of authority ah km , (sing. h ukm ), laws, legal judgements. . . lim (pr. ulam), a scholar, a learned man, a savant amr (pl. umar), an emir, a ruler Andalsia, al-Andalus, Muslim Spain arjah ., preponderant asbb al-nuzl (sing. sabab al-nuzl, see below) as .l (pl. us .l), basis, principle, theory (of divine law) awm, laymen bt .in, an inner or secret meaning Bt .inyah, seekers of the inner or spiritual meaning of the nas .s .. Bayah, the pledge of allegiance bayt al-ml, public treasury d .af, weak dallah, indication dall, prove, evidence dhikr, a reminder; it also means remembering and mentioning, which is a technical term for the ritual recitations of the dervishes and their services fd il (pl. fud . .l), eminent faqh (pl. fuqah), a jurisprudent, a jurist whose professional interest is in fiqh far (pl. fur), branch, section, positive or substantive law fard ., command, an incumbent duty of religion the performance of which is obligatory fatw (sing. fatw, futw, or futy), the formal legal opinions of a canon lawyer (in matters of ibdt and ah .km) .fatw (see fatw above) fiqh, jurisprudence in Islam fitan, (sing. fitnah), dissension, civil strife, discord fitnah, (see fitan above) fud .l (see.fd .il above)

111

fuqah (see faqh above) fur , (see far above) futw, (see.fatw above) futy, (see.fatw above) h .add, fixed punishment; punishment indicated in the nas .s . h .adth, news, a story, and finally a technical term for the tradition of what he Prophet said, did, or approved h .ajj, pilgrimage (to Makkah) h .arm, prohibited, forbidden, unlawful, sinful h .ujjah, proof, evidence h .ujjah z .annyah (probable evidence). h ukm, (pl. ah . .km), legal judgement, law ibdt (sing. ibdah), acts of devotion, religious observances ijm, the consensus of the Muslim community ijtihd, independent judgement in a legal question, based upon the interpretation and application of the Qurn and the Sunnah illah, cause, reason Imm, leader. It is used in a general sense, e.g., the leader in prayer, and in the particular sense of a community leader. Among the Shah the imms take the place that the caliphs have among the Sunn Muslims Immah, leadership mn, faith, belief istih .sn, preference, the application of discretion in a legal judgement istithn, exception itiqdt, articles of religious faith or practice Jhiliyyah, pre-Islamic paganism, (lit. state of ignorance) jamah (pl. jamt), group, community jamt (see jamaah above) jamtul-h .aqq, the community of the truth. It is used by Ibn H . azm in a general sense as the Muslism community, and in the particular sense of the followers of the Qurn and the genuine H .adth jinn, demons, genii, intelligent creatures of air and fire jumhr, mass jumhr al-ulam , the ulam en masse (in the mass)

111

kallah, a deceased person who has neither parents nor children to give his inheritance to khabar, news, report khabar khs .s .ah, a special report khabar al-wh .id (h .d ), a h .adth reported by one chain of transmitters khabar al-tawtur (mutawtir), a h .adth handed down by many chains of unimpeachable transmitters khalaf, the tbin and other generations khalfah, caliph khamr, intoxicant, wine, liquor khaws .s ., the lite who know the inner meaning of the nas .s . khut .bah, sermon, especially the Friday sermon kitb, document, message kufr, infidelity kunyah, the name consisting of Ab (Father) or Umm (mother) followed usually by the name of the eldest son or daughter madhhab, a school of law among Sunn Muslims madhr, excused madhmm, reprehensible mah .md, praised majr, rewarded malm bil-d .arrah, known by necessity mamdh ., laudable mandb, recommended manskh, abrogated matn, text, the subject-matter of a h .adth mawl , , client minbar, pulpit muh .kamah (pl. muh .kamt), precise, clear verse of the Qurn mujmal, a word which needs explanation taken from another one; what is implied in general terms or expressed by implication mujtahid (pl. mujtahidn), a legist who exercises ijtihd mujtahidn, (see mujtahid above) munkar, reprehensible action mutakallimn (sing. mutakallim), Muslim theologians mutashbiht (sing. mutashbih), ambiguous verses of the Qurn

111

mutawtir, (see khabar al-tawtur above) nadb, recommending naqd, critique nsikh, abrogative nas .s ., the divine text qd ., judge qiys, analogy, especially in jurisprudence rakah (pl. rakat), unit in prayer, bowing rasl, messenger ray, personal opinion sabab al-nuzl, the occasion on which the verse was revealed s .ah .bah, (sing. s .ah .b), companions of the Prophet s ah b , (see s ah bah above) . . . . salaf, the first generation of the s .ah .bah s .alh, prayer sanad, chain of narration shdhdh, deviating sharah (pl. shari), the canonical law of Islam; the body of regulations which makes up the religious law shaykh, old man, leader of a tribe or a group, master, a title of respect shubhah, judicial error shudhdh, deviation sirriyyah, detachment Sunnah (pl. sunan), properly a custom or practice, and later narrowed down to the practice of the Prophet or a h .adth recording the same. Sunnah includes the Prophets sayings, deeds and tacit approval. In this respect often synonymous with adth. Sunnah also means meritorious. srah, a chapter or a section of the Qurn tbi (pl. tbin), a person succeeding the generation of the s .ah .bah tbi tbin, the following of the following generation of the s .ah .bah tablgh, conveyance of the message, religious instruction tafsr, commentary of the Qurn t .ifah, group, band, party takhs .s ., specification taqld, decision based on the authority of preceding generations tawl, interpretation, inner meaning

111

tawqf, the teaching of the Prophet tazr, discretionary punishment thiqah (thiqt), reliable authority udl, (see adl above) ulam, (see lim above) l l-amr, those who are in autority umar, (see amr above) ummah, nation, people, party, community ummul-walad, a slave-girl who has borne her master a child us .l, (see as .l above) uswah, model wjib, obligatory wazr, vizier, minister wud ., ablution, the lesser cleansing necessary before prayers yaqn, certitude z .hir, apparent state of a thing z .akh, alms tax z .ann, doubt, conjecture, uncertainty (in religion)

121

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abd al-Jabbr, al-Qd . Ab l-H . asan. Al-Mughn, 20 vols. Cairo: Mat .baat s al-Bb al-H . alab, 1385/1965. ________. Sharh . Us .l al-Khamsah. Edited by Dr. Abd al-Karm Uthmn. Commented by al-Imm Ah .mad ibn al-H . usayn ibn Ab Hshim. First edition. Cairo: Mat .baat al-Istiqll alKubr, 1384/ 1965. Abd Allh, Umar. Sullam al-Wus .l li-Ilm al-Us .l. First edition. Egypt: Dr al-Marif, 1956. Abd al-Qdir, Dr. Al H . asan. Naz .rah mmah f Tarkh al-Fiqh alIslm. Second edition. Cairo: Mat .baat al-Qhirah, n.d. Abd al-Rziq, Al. Al-Ijm fl-Sharah al-Islmiyyah. Cairo: Dr alFikr al-Arab, n.d. Ab Zahrah, Muh .ammad. Ibn H . azm: H . aytuhu wa As .ruhu, ruhu wa Fiqhuhu. Cairo: Dr al-Fikr al-Arab, n.d. Afghn, Sad al-. Ibn H . azm f Siyar al-Nubal Majallat al-Majma al-Ilm al-Arab. Vol. 16 (Damascus: 1360/1941). : ________. Ibn H . azm al-Andalus wa Rislatuhu fl-Mufd .alah bayna lS ah bah . Damascus: al-Mat baah al -Hshimiyyah, . . . 1359/1940. mid, Sayf al-Dn al-. Al-Ih .km f Us .l al-Ah .km. vol. 1. Cairo: Mat .baat al-Marif, 1914 Ardabl, Al al-Mushkn al-. Kitb Mus .t .alah .t al-Us .l. N.p.: 1383 A.H. Arendonk, C. van. Ibn H . azm, Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by H.A.R. Gibb & J.H. Kramers. Leiden: E.J. Brill; London: Luzac & Co., 1961. Arnaldez, Roger. Ibn H . azm, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second edition. Leiden: E.J. Brill; London: Luzac & Co., 1971

121

________. Grammaire et Thologie chez Ibn Hazm de Cordoue. Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin, 1956. Badrn, Badrn Ab l-Aynayn. Us .l al-Fiqh. N.p.: Dr al-Marif, 1965. Baghdd, Abd al-Qhir ibn T .hir al-. Al-Farq bayna l-Firaq. Edited and commented by Muh .ammad Muh . amd. .y al-Dn Abd al-H Cairo: Mat .baat al-Madan, n.d Bqilln, Ab Bakr Muh .ammad ibn al-T .ayyib al-. Al-Tamhd f l-Radd al l-Mulh .idah wa l-Muat .t .ilah wa l-Rfid .ah walKhawrij wal-Mutazilah. Edited and commented by Mah .md Muh .a mmad al-Khud .a mmad Abd al.ar and Muh Hd Ab Raydah. Cairo: Mat .baat Lajnat al-Talf wa lTarjamah wa l-Nashr, 1366/1947. Bas r, Ab l-H . usayn al-. Kitb al-Mutamad f Us .l al-Fiqh. Edited by . Muh .ammad H . amd Allh et al. vol. 2. Damascus: al-Mahad al-Ilm al-Farans lil-Dirst al-Arabiyyah, 1385/1965. Bernard, M. Ijm, Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam. Second edition. Leoden: E.J. Brill; London: Luzac & Co., 1971. Bihr, Muh .ibb Allhibn Abd al-Shakr al-. Musallam al-Thubt. Commented by Abd al-Al ibn Niz .r as .m al-Dn al-Ans Fawtih as . Rah .mt (in the lower part of al-Ghazl, al-Must .f. First edition. Cairo: al-Maktabah al-Tijriyyah al-Kubr, 1356/ 1937 Coulson, N.J. A History of Islamic Law (Islamic Surveys 2). Edinburg: Edinburg University Press, 1971. Dhahab, Ab Abd Allh al. Al-Ibar. Edited by Fud Sayyid. Vol. 3. Kuwayt: al-Turth al-Arab, 1961. ________. Tadhkirat al-H . uffz .. Vol. 3. Hyderabad: Hyderabad Printing Press, 1376/1957, Farrukh, Omar A. Z .hirism A History of Muslim Philosophy. Edited by M.M. Sharif. Vol. 1. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1963.

122

Fs,Alll al-. Maqas .id al-Sharah al-Islmiyyah wa Makrimuh. Casablanca: Maktabat al-Nahd .ah al-Arabiyyah, 1963. Frzbd, Majd al-Dn al-. Qms al-Muh .t .. Egypt: Mat .baat alSadah, 1272/1855-1856. Ghazl, Ab H . mid al. Al-Mustas .f min Ilm al-Us .l. First edition. Vol. 1. Cairo: al-Maktabah al-Tijriyyah al-Kubr, 1356/1937. Ghunaimi, Mohammad Talaat al-. The Muslim Conception of International Law and the Western Approach. The Hague: Martinus Mijhoff, 1968. Goldziher,Ignaz. Al-Aqdah wal-Sharah fl-Islm.Translated and edited by Dr. Muh .ammad Ysuf Ms et al. Second edition. Al-Rawd .ah [Cairo]: Mat .bi Dr al-Kuttb al-Arab, 1378/1959. ________. Muslim Studies. Translated from German by C.R. Barber and S.M. Stern. Edited by S.M. Stern. 2 vols. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1971. ________. The Zhirs:Their Doctrine and Their History. Translated and edited by Wolfgang Behn. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1971. Hasan, Ahmad. The Early Development of Islamic Jurisprudence. Islamabad: Islamic Research Institute, 1970. ________. Ijm, in the Early Schools. Islamic Studies 6 (June, 1967). ________. Ijm, an Integrating Force in the Muslim Community. Islamic Studies 6 (Dec. 1967. ________. Modern Trends in Ijm. Islamic Studies 12 (1973). ________. The Political Role of Ijm. Islamic Studies 6 (June,1973). Hinz, Walther. Islamische Masse und Gewichte, Handbuch der Orientalistik. Edited by Bertold Spuler, Supplementary Vol. 1, Book 1. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1955. Hitti, Philip M. History of the Arabs. Fifth edition. London: McMillan & Co. Ltd., 1953. Hodgson, M.G.S. Bt .iniyya. Encyclopedia of Islam. Second edition. Leiden: E.J. Brill; London: Luzac & Co., 1971

121

Hourani, George F. The Basis of Authority of Consensus in Sunnite Islam, Studia Islamica xxi (1964). Ibn Ban s .im. Al-ih .d wa l-Mathn, vol. 2 (al-Maktabah alShmilah). Ibn Arab, Muh .y al-Dn. Majm Rasil fUs .l al-Fiqh. First edition. Beirut: al-Mat .baah al-Ahliyyah, 1324 A.H. Ibn al-Athr. Al-Kmil f l-Tarkh, Vol. 9 Beirut: Dr Sadr Dr Bayrt, 1965. Ibn Bashkuwl, Ab l-Qsim. Kitbul-S .ilah f Tarkh Aimmati lAndalus wa Umarihim wa Udabihim. Edited by Sayyid Izzat al-At .t .r al-H . usayn. Np., 1374/1955. Ibn H . ajar al-Asqaln. Lisn al-Mzn. First edition. Vol. 4 Hyderabad Deccan: Mat .baat Majlis Dirat al-Niz .miyyah, 1330 A.H. Ibn H . azm, Ab Muh .ammad Al. Kitb al- Fas .l fl-Milal wa l-Ahw wa l-Nih .al, 5 vols. Baghdad: Maktabat al-Muthann. Egypt: Muassasat al-Khnj, n.d ________. Al-Ih .km f Us .l al-Ah .km, 8 vols. Cairo: Mat .baat alImm, n.d. ________. Jawmi al-Srah wa Khams Rasil Ukhr .. Edited by Dr. Ih .sn Abbs and Dr. Ns .ir al-Dn al-Asad. Revised by Ah mad Muh a mmad Shkir. Egypt: : Dr al-Marif, n.d. . . ________. Martib al-Ijm fl-Ibdt wa l-Mumalt wal-Itiqdt. Cairo: Maktabat al-Quds, 1357 A.H. ________. Al-Muh .mad Muh .a mmad Shkir, 11 vols. .all. Edited by Ah Egypt: Mat .baat al-Nahd .ah, 1374 A.H. ________. T .q al-H . ammah. Cairo: N.p., n.d.. Ibn al-Humm, Kaml al-Dn. Al-Tah .rr f Us .l al-Fiqh. Cairo: Mat .baat Mus .t .af al-Bb al-H . alab, 1351 A.H. Ibn Khaldn. Muqaddimah. Egypt: al-Mat .baah al-Bahiyyah, n.d.

121

Ibn Khallikn, Ab l-Abbs. Wafayt al-Ayn. Edited by Muh .ammad Muh .y al-Dn Abd al-H . amd. 3 vols. Cairo: Maktabat alNahd .ah al-Mis .riyyah, 1948. Ibn al-Malak, Izz al-Dn. Sharh .awshh min Ilm al. al-Manr wa H Us .fiz .l. Commentary on H . al-Dn al-Nasaf, Us .l al-Fiqh. N.p.: Mat .baat al-Uthmniyyah, 1315 A.H. Ibn Manz .r, Ab l-Fad .l. Lisn al-Arab. Beirut: Dr Bayrt lil-T .ibah wa l-Nashr, 1375/1956. Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, Ilm al-Mqin an Rabbi l-lamn. In the lower part of his Hdl-Arwh .. 3 vols. Egypt: Mat .baat alNl, n.d . ________. Al-S .awiq al-Mursalahal l-Jahmiyyah wa l-Muat .t .ilah. Summarized by Muh .ammad ibn al-Maws .il, and revised by Zakary Al Ysuf. Egypt: Mat .baat al-Imm, n.d. Ibn Taymiyyah, Taqy al-Dn. Marij al-Wus .l. Madnah: al-Maktabah al-Ilmiyyah; Cairo: Dr al-Zayn lil-T .ibah wa l-Nashr, n.d ________. Naqd Martib al-Ijm. In the lower part of Ibn H . azms Martib al-Ijm. Cairo: Maktabat al-Quds, 1357 A.H. ________. S .ih .h .at Us .l Madhhab Ahl al-Madnah. Edited and commented by Zakary Al Ysuf. Citadel [Cairo]: Mat baat al Imm, n.d. . Ibrhm, Dr. Zakarya. Ibn H . azm al-Andalus: al-Mufakkir al-Z .hir alMaws. Cairo: al-Dr al-Mis .riyyah lil-Talf wa lTarjamah, n.d. Juwayn, Imm al-H . aramayn al-. Al-Waraqt. In the margin of Shawkn, Irshd al-Fuh .l. First edition. Cairo: Mat .baat Mus .t .af al-Bb al-H . alab, 1356/1937. Kz .im, Asad Allh al-. Kashf al-Qin an Wujh H . ujjyat al-Ijm. N.p., 1316 A.H.

121

Khallf, Abd al-Wahhb. Mas .bi .adir al-Tashr al-Islm. Egypt: Mat Dr al-Kuttb al-Arab, 1954.. Khud .ar, Muh .ammad al-. Us .l al-Fiqh. Fourth edition. Cairo: Mat .baat al-Sadah, 1382/1962. Lammens, H. H . ajjj ibn Ysuf. Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by M.Th. Houtsma et al., First edition. Leyden: Late E.J. Brill Ltd.; London: Luzac & Co., 1927. Lane, Edward William. Arabic English Lexicon. London and Edinburg: William and Norgate, 1863 Lane-Pole, Stanley. The Mohammadan Dynasties. Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1925. Macdonald, D.B. Ijm. Encyclopedia of Islam. First edition. Leiden: Late E.J. Brill Ltd.; London: Luzac, 1927. Mah .mas .s .n, S .ubh .. Falsafat al-Tashr f al-Islm. Second edition. Beirut: Dr al-Kashshf lil-Nashr wa l-T .ibah wa l-Tawz, 1952. ________. Falsafat al-Tashr f al-Islm. Translated by J. Farhat Ziadeh. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1961. Makdisi, George. Ibn Aql et la Resurgence de lIslam Traditionaliste au XIe Sicle (Ve Sicle de lHgire). Damascus: Instut de Damas, 1963. Mansour, Camille. LAutorit dans la Pense Musulmane: la Concept dIjm (Consensus) et la Problmatique de lAutorit. Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin, 1975. Mas .m,M.S.H. Ibn H . azms Allegations against the Leading Imms.. Islamic Studies 7 (1968). Mujam Fiqh Ibn H . azm al-Z .hir. Damascus: Mat .baat Jmiat Dimashq, 1385/1966. Pickthall, Mohammed Marmaduke. The Meaning of the Glorious Koran. New York and Scarborough: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., n.d. Qd ., Dr. Mukhtr al-. Al-Ray fl-Fiqh al-Islm. First edition. Cairo: Mat .baat al-Fikrah, 1368/1949.

121

Qadri, Anwar Ahmad. Islamic Jurisprudence in the Modern World. Lahore: N.p., 1973. Rahman, Fazlul. Islamic Methodology in History. Karachi: Ripon Printing Press, 1965. Rm, Yqt al-. Mujam al-Udab. Edited by D.S. Margoliouth. Second edition.Vol. 5. N.p., n.d. S .adr, Muh .ammad S .diq al-. Al-Ijm fl-Tashr al-Islm. Beirut: Manshrt Uwaydt, 1969. S li h , Dr. S . . .ubh . al-. Al-Nuz .um al-Islmiyyah: Nashatuh wa Tat .awwuruh. First edition. Beirut: Dr al-Ilm lilMalyn, 1385/1965. Sarakhs, Ab Bakr al-. Us .l al-Sarakhs. Edited by Ab l-Waf alAfghn . Vol. N.p.: Mat .bi Dr al-Kuttb al-Arab, 1372 A.H Schact, Joseph. An Introduction to Islamic Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964. ________. The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1950. Shabn, Zak al-Dn. Us .l al-Fiqh al-Islm. Egypt: Mat .baat Dr alTalf, 1964. Shfi, Muh .a mmad Idrs al-. Jim al-Ilm. Edited by Ah .mad Muh .a mmad Shkir. Egypt: Mat .baat al-Marif, 1359/1940. ________. Al-Rislah. Edited and commented by Ah .mad Muh .ammad Shkir. First edition. Cairo: Mat .baat al-Bab al-H . alab, 1358/ 1940. Shrz, Ab Ish .q al-. T .abaqt al-Fuqah, Edited by. Dr. Ih .sn Abbs. Cairo: Dr al-Rid al-Arab, 1970. Shahrastn, Ab l-Fath . Abd al-Karm al-. Kitb al-Milal wa l-Nih .al. In the margin of Ibn H . azms Kitb al-Fas .l f l-Milal wa lAhw wa l-Nih .al. 5 vols. Baghdad: Maktabat al-Muthann. Egypt: Muassasat al-Khnj, n.d

121

Shalab, Muh .ammad Mus .t .af. Tall al-Ah .km. N.p.: Mat .baat al-Azhar, 1947. Sharrah, Abd al-Lat .f. Ibn H . azm: Rid al-Fikr al-Ilm. Beirut: Manshrt al-Maktab al-Tijr lil-Tibah wa l-Nashr wa lTawz, n.d. Sht ib , Ab Ish . .q al-. Al-Muwaffaqt f Us .l al-Ah .km. Edited by Muh .y al-Dn Abd al-H . amd. First edition. 4 vols. Cairo: Mat .baat Muh .ammad Al S .ubayh . , n.d. Shawkn, Muh .ammad ibn Al al-. Irshd al-Fuh .l. First edition. Cairo: Mat .baat Mus .t .af al-Bb al-H . alab, 1356/1937. Shrz, Ab Ish .q al-. T .abaqt al-Fuqah. Edited by Dr. Ih .sn Abbs. Cairo: Dr al-Rid al-Arab, 1970. Subk, al-. T .abaqt al-Shfiiyyah al-Kubr. First edition. Vol.1. N.p.: alMat .baah al-Mis .riyyah, n.d. T .abt .ab, al-. Mafth . al-Us .l. N.p., n.d. Tritton, A.S. Ibn H azm: the Man and the Thinker. Islamic Studies 3 . (1964). T .s, Ab Jafar al-. Uddat al-Us .l f Us .l al-Fiqh, 2 vols. Bombay: Dutprasad Press, 1318 A.H. Vaux, B.Carra de. Bt .iniyya, Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by H.A.R. Gibb & J.H. Kramers. Leiden: E.J. Brill; London: Luzac & Co., 1961. Watt, W. Montsgomery. Islam and the Integration of Society. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, [c. 1961] Williams, John Alden, ed. Themes of Islamic Civilization. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1971. Yfi, Muh .ammad Abd Allh al-. Mirt al-Jinn. First edition. Vol. 3. Beirut: Manshrt Muassasat al-Alam lil-Mat .bt, 1338 A.H. Zanbaur, E.D. Manul de Gnologie et de Chronologie pour lHistoire de lIslam. Berlin: Thormann & Goetsch, 1927. Zirikl, Khayr al-Dn al-. Al-Alm. Second edition. Vol. 5 N.p., n.d.

121

About the Author

Muhammad Amin Abdul Samad was born in 1938 at Sengkang, South Sulawesi, Indonesia. He obtained his Ph.D. degree in Islamic Studies with a dissertation on Quranic studies at the University of Melbourne, Australia, and his M.A. degree in the field of Islamic thought at McGill University, Montreal, Canada, where he served as an assistant lecturer of Arabic for one year. He obtained his Diploma at the Institute of Islamic Studies, and B.A. in Cairo University in Cairo, Egypt. He served as an imam and taught Arabic and Islamics at Lac la Biche Muslim Association, Lac la Biche, Alberta, Canada, and as a secretary and an assistant-imam at al-Rasheed Mosque, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. He also assisted the lecturer and the students learning his mother tongue Buginese (Bugis) language at the Department of Linguistics at the University of Melbourne. From 1996 till 1998 he was Assistant Professor in the Sciences of the Qurn and H .adth at the International Islamic University, Petaling Jaya (before it moved to Gombak campus, Kuala Lumpur), Selangor, Malaysia. In 2004 he went overseas and visited Europe (France, Spain, Italy, Monaco and Switzerland), Morocco, Malta, Egypt, Turkey and Canada. He plans to write about these travels. Presently, he settles in Canberra, Australia.