A Study on the Nature of the Term Aṣl and Functions of Uṣûl in al-Jaṣṣāṣ’s Sharḥu Muḫtaṣar al-Taḥâvî

Abstract

Aṣl (plural: uṣûl) is one of the central terms used in Islamic Law with different meanings and purposes. The first works identifying and compiling the uṣûl accepted as the basis of the provisions of the Hanafi madhhab began to appear in the 4th/10th century. The first work we have on this subject is Abû al-Ḥasan al-Karkhî’s Riṣâla fi’l-Uṣûl, which contains some general principles regarding uṣûl and furû. It is seen that determining the uṣul is a central issue in the works of Jaṣṣāṣ, who was a student of al-Karkhî. His work al-Fuṣûl fi’l-uṣûl is the first book to identify the uṣul of the Hanafi madhhab in the context of islamic legal methodology. Jaṣṣāṣ gave great importance to determine the uṣûl of the madhhab in his works on furû, for example, he used the “aṣl” effectively and intensively in Sharḥu Muḫtaṣar al-Taḥâvî. It is important to identify the uṣûl that are influential in a Hanafi madh-hab one by one, and it is also important to determine the nature and function of these uṣûl. Because obtaining a holistic knowledge about the uṣûl, depen-ds on knowing their nature and function. In this study, the nature of term aṣl that used in Sharḥu Muḫtaṣar al-Taḥâvî and the functions of uṣûl are exa-mined. Jaṣṣāṣ uses the aṣl in the sense of sharia evidence, the main evidence (râjih) that is preferred in case of conflict of evidences, maqîsun ‘aleyh, ‘illa, legal provision, legal maxims of fiqh and uṣûl al-fiqh. Most of the aṣl in the meaning of uṣûl al-fiqh’s legal maxims are related to conflict and preference between proofs, the conditions of accepting the hadiths and qiyas. Sometimes it is also possible to mean more than one of these meanings of the term aṣl at the same time. The term uṣûl which is the plural form of the aṣl, is often used in the sense of fiqh rule, and sometimes in the sense of nas and ijma. It is seen that the term uṣûl, which means fiqh rule, is used for the basic issues of fiqh and the provisions related to them, which Hanafi jurists or jurists in general are allied with. It is seen that the uṣûl in Jaṣṣāṣ’ mentioned work have different functions. The first of these is to justify the legal provision adopted and to prove that the opposing view is wrong. Sometimes multiple aṣl are operated together to justify a judgment. The uṣûl are a criterion for the acceptance of the hadith. Jaṣṣāṣ presents the contradiction to the aṣl as the reason for rejecting the hadiths, on the other hand, he draws attention to the difference between “conformity with the uṣûl” and “conformity to the qiyas al-uṣûl” in accepting hadiths. Li-kewise, “witness of the uṣûl/” is used when choosing between the hadiths that are in conflict. It is seen that the uṣûl whose testimonies are consulted are the sharia evidences about particular issues or the provisions derived from these evidences rather than general principles. Another purpose of the uṣûl in the aforementioned book is to establish the connection between particular provisions and general principles by pointing out the general principles underlying the particular provisions. In this way, it is revealed that sectarian accumulation is a consistent and holistic struc-ture built on some general principles. Identifying the origins of the disputes among the jurists and also explaining why the provisions of similar issues are different are important functions of the uṣûl. The uṣûl are also operated in intra-madhhab preferences and also when determining who an opinion belongs to.