71

Происхождение Исламской юриспруденции

Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence

Издатель

Oxford At The Clarendon Press

Год публикации

1950 AH

60 SUNNA, 'PRACTICE' AND 'LIVING TRADITION'

We now realize that the arguments, which were adduced by the ancient schools of law against traditions from the Prophet, for instance, the assumption of repeal and the consideration that the Companions would not have been unaware of the Prophet's decisions, were directed against traditions from the Prophet, not as such but only in so far as by their recent growth they tended to disrupt the 'living tradition' of the schools. This explains the apparent inconsistency of sometimes referring to traditions from the Prophet, and sometimes rejecting them in favour of the established doctrine.

Among the earliest authentic illustrations of the ancient attitude to practice are two statements of Ibrāhīm Nakha'i. Ibrāhīm is aware that the imprecation against political enemies during the ritual prayer is an innovation introduced only under 'Ali and Mu'āwiya some considerable time after the Prophet. He confirms this by pointing out the absence of any information on the matter from the Prophet, Abū Bakr and 'Umar.1 It follows that the tradition, which claims the Prophet's example for this addition to the ritual and which Shāfi'ī of course accepts,2 must be later than Ibrāhīm.3 On another point of ritual, Ibrāhīm refers to the varying practice during the life of the Prophet and under Abū Bakr and 'Umar, and to the Companions' adoption, under 'Umar, of an agreed ruling with reference to the alleged practice of the Prophet on the latest relevant occasion.4 This story of an agreed ruling is obviously not historical and merely tends to invest the doctrine with the authority of the Companions. But in so far as they relate to Ibrāhīm Nakha'i, both reports seem to be authentic.

Contrary to the historical development, Shāfi'ī charges the adherents of the old idea of sunna as something which takes its highest authority from Companions, with following an innovation (muhdath) of 'Umar,5 or even flings at them the opprobrious term bid'a, that is, a reprehensible innovation.6 In this connexion (Ikh. 36) Shāfi'ī states that the followers of the ancient schools themselves, and the Kufians and Basrians in particular, reproach those who differ from one of them.

1 Āthār A.Y. 349-52; Āthār Shaib. 37; Tr. I, 157 (b).

2 Tr. III, 119; Ikh. 285 ff.

3 The same applies to the corresponding information on Abū Bakr, 'Umar, and 'Uthmān to which Shāfi'ī refers, as well as to the pointed counter-statements concerning several Companions, particularly Ibn 'Umar, statements which appear from Abū Hanīfa onwards (Tr. I, 157 (b); Muw. i. 286; Muw. Shaib. 140; Āthār Shaib. 37).

4 Āthār A.Y. 390; Āthār Shaib. 40.

5 Tr. IX, 4. This is directed against Abū Yūsuf who had taken into account the existence of the state register (diwān), an essential feature of Islamic administration the foundation of which was ascribed to 'Umar.

6 Ikh. 34 explicitly directed against both Iraqians and Medinese.

60