Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
PhD Student, Department of Shafi’i Jurisprudence, Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
2
Associate Professor, Department of Shafi’i Jurisprudence, Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
3
Associate Professor of Shafe'e Jurisprudence and Law, Humanities and Social Sciences Faculty, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran.
4
Azad University Research Branch
10.22034/mfu.2025.142792.1509
Abstract
The Iraqi and Khurᾱsᾱnī approaches are two jurisprudential methods in the Shafi'i school. Jurisprudential approaches refer to the differences in methods used by jurists in narrating and transmitting the school's doctrine. From the fourth century onwards, most of the differences reported in Shafi'i jurisprudential texts have been attributed to the Iraqi method, led by Abu Hamid al-Isfarᾱyinī, and the Khurᾱsᾱnī method, led by al-Qaffᾱl al-Marwazī, known as al-Saghīr. The multiplicity and abundance of narrations have led to a lack of organization and, consequently, difficulty in understanding and using them to state the school's authoritative opinion and for issuing fatwas. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the possibility of organizing the types of jurisprudential differences between these two methods and to discover the reasons for their emergence to facilitate understanding, preservation, and comprehension of these differences. Thus, this research seeks to answer the question: "What were the types of differences in the methods of narrating the school's doctrine and the reasons for their emergence?" The results, conducted through descriptive and analytical methods and based on library data, are that the differences between these two methods include five cases: differences in the existence or non-existence of disagreement, differences in quantity, differences in the extent of opinions, differences in attributing narrated opinions to Imam Shafi'i or to derived opinions (wujūh takhrīj), and differences in the basis of opinions. Additionally, the reasons for the differences between the two methods can be inferred in the following cases: differences due to interpretation and reasoning of Imam Shafi'i's opinions, differences due to various methods of dealing with conflicting opinions of Imam Shafi'i, and differences due to acceptance or rejection of narrated methods and opinions in the school.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)