34 TRADITIONS IN THE ANCIENT SCHOOLS OF LAW

technical interest in traditions is attested by his edition of Mālik's Muwatta', and his habitual formula 'We follow this' shows the degree to which he is, at least formally, under the influence of traditions. Again we find that he changes the doctrine on account of traditions, particularly those from the Prophet.¹ This does not prevent his being inconsistent and eclectic, thereby laying himself open to Shāfi'ī's constant criticism of the representatives of the ancient schools. As Abū Ḥanīfa before him, Shaibānī takes the doctrine of Medinese Successors into account.

C. THE SYRIANS

Auzā'ī is the only representative of the Syrians on whom we have authentic information in Tr. IX and in Ṭabarī, and his attitude to traditions is essentially the same as that of the Medinese and the Iraqians. Practically all his statements of doctrine are concerned with the law of war, for which narratives on the expeditions of the Prophet of primarily historical import and usually lacking an isnād provide a background of precedents sensibly different in character from the legal traditions proper. If, therefore, references to the action of the Prophet occur frequently in Auzā'ī, similar references are not less frequent in Iraqian texts on the same subject. (It happens that the law of war is only very succinctly treated in Muw. and Muw. Shaib.).

Auzā'ī states, quoting Koran xxxiii. 21, that 'the Prophet is a good example' (Tr. IX. 23), and that 'the Prophet deserves most to be followed and to have his sunna observed' (§ 50), but in order to establish the practice of the Prophet he refers to 'what happened at the time of the Prophet and afterwards' (§ 26 and elsewhere). He refers to Ibn 'Umar beside the Prophet (§ 31), and to Abū Bakr, 'Umar, and the Umaiyad Caliph 'Umar b. 'Abdal'azīz by themselves.² The usual argument of the ancient schools in favour of the authority of the Companions occurs in Ṭabarī, 103: Auzā'ī cannot imagine that anyone could be so bold as to doubt that Abū Bakr and his companions knew the interpretation of the Koran better than Abū Ḥanīfa. In Tr. IX, 15, Auzā'ī refers to 'the scholars our predecessors', and in Ṭabarī, 70, he regards the opinion of the