6,633
edits
Madh'hab: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
==The nature of the schools of law== | ==The nature of the schools of law== | ||
The schools of law differ primarily in the authentication and interpretive methodologies they employ to firstly determine which scriptures ([[ | The schools of law differ primarily in the authentication and interpretive methodologies they employ to firstly determine which scriptures ([[hadith]], for the most part, since the [[Qur'an]] is considered [[Corruption of Qur'an|authentic]] by consensus) are soundly attributable to [[Muhammad]] and to secondly determine how these scriptures should be understood and reconciled with one other in such a manner as to allow the derivation of legal rulings. | ||
It should be noted that the schools of law are in themselves neither static nor homogeneous, as they have each developed and formalized a great deal since the times of their eponymous founders and consist internally of a diverse variety of opinions. As such, the schools of law are perhaps better characterized as enclosed arenas of debate wherein a common set of rules are followed. When it comes to inter-madh'hab debate, there is no common set of rules that is obliged beyond the thinly theological (such as the divinity of the Qur'an) and, as such, the topic of debate is frequently the rules themselves rather than the substantive rulings they give rise to. | It should be noted that the schools of law are in themselves neither static nor homogeneous, as they have each developed and formalized a great deal since the times of their eponymous founders and consist internally of a diverse variety of opinions. As such, the schools of law are perhaps better characterized as enclosed arenas of debate wherein a common set of rules are followed. When it comes to inter-madh'hab debate, there is no common set of rules that is obliged beyond the thinly theological (such as the divinity of the Qur'an) and, as such, the topic of debate is frequently the rules themselves rather than the substantive rulings they give rise to. | ||