The International Journal Of Humanities & Social Studies (ISSN 2321 - 9203) www.theijhss.com THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES & SOCIAL STUDIES Points of Difference and Resolution in an Islamic State: A Study of Amin Ahsan Islahi Khalida Majid Senior Research Fellow, Department of Islamic Studies, University of Kashmir, Jammu & Kashmir, India Abstract: Mawlana Isl aŬhi brings about histrionically point of discussion “how did differences Emerged”? In harmony via elucidating it, he gives two factors responsible for fermenting differences in Islamic fiqh. resulted in the ر ﷲ and Hadrat Ali ر ﷲ Firstly, the assassination of Khulafa-e-Rashidin Hadrat Uthman .1 coming of regime which no doubt managed a strongly grip over the masses through their political might but could never win full confidence of the Muslims in general in regard to their ability to guide the later in matters of Shar’iah people depended on ‘ Ulama and there was no longer any institution available to them for converting their differences into harmony. 1 2. Secondly, there appeared different centers of fiqh with the expansion of Islamic state, as Madinah, Makkah, Kufa, Basra, Yaman, Sham, during the period of Taba’in . Then he gives the characteristic differences between these schools of fiqh .2 After Taba’in , he takes up the Fuqaha of the later periods that at the one hand they started freely accepting all sorts of Mauguf and Mussul Ahadith and on the second side they used to scrutinize different Ahadith on the particular issue. 3. Thirdly, they would also prefer the local school of thought if incase they found any differences in the observations of the companions, and thus there were three schools of Fiqh : i. Maliki fiqh : - founded by Hadrat Imam Malik who was the greatest authority on the knowledge and practice of the and on the sayings of and judgments of , ر ﷲ people of Madinahhh, on the judgments delivered by Hadrat Umar and other eminent companions. 3 ر ﷲ Hadrat A’isha , ر ﷲ Hadrat Abdullah b. Umar ii. Hanafi fiqh : - founded by Hadrat Abu Hanifah who was a great scholar of the school of Ibrahim Nakhi and his comrades. His famous disciples Hadrat Qadi Abu Yousuf and Imam Muhammad are themselves the scholars of Ijtihad . However, they too did not make a departure from the creed and methodology of Imam Nakhi, and his comrades. 4 iii. Shafi’i fiqh : - founded by Imam Shafi, he improved the first two schools and laid down fresh rules and regulations for the sciences of Ijtihad and derivation. He raised his voice against the Istihsan 5, arrested the freedom of acceptance of Mursal and Munqata traditions, prescribed rules and regulations for collection and reconciliation of traditions etc. 6 1. Introduction Actually, the role of Imam Shafi’ihas been that of a comprehensive coordinator when he observed that these schools of Fiqh had clipped the wings of their own thought and functioned within narrow alleys confining themselves to ‘ Ulama and Jurists of their own towns he tried hard to guide them, so that with the spread of traditions and sayings, these schools should make full use of collective treasure of tradition and sayings rather than be tied down to the Ulama of their respective regions and following the example of the revered predecessors, give up their own Ijtihad and opinions as soon as tradition came to light. Mawlana Isl aŬhi wants to highlighted the efforts of Imam Shafi’i to; unite the Muslim Ummah , and also to harmonize and reconcile the knowledge of the Din .7 1 Ibid., p.47. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid., p.54. 4 Ibid., p.55. is an Arabic term for juristic "preference". In its literal sense it means "to consider something ( ا ن) 5Istihsan good". Muslim scholars may use it to express their preference for particularjudgments in Islamic law over other possibilities. It is one of the principles of legal thought underlying personal interpretation or Ijtihad. 6 Amin Ahsan Mawlana Isla ̅hi, Islami Riyasat Main Fiqhi Ikhtilafat , op.cit., p.56. 7 Ibid., pp. 57-61. 198 Vol 4 Issue 3 March, 2016 The International Journal Of Humanities & Social Studies (ISSN 2321 - 9203) www.theijhss.com 2. Ahl-i-Hadith and their differences with Jurists of Fiqh Mawlana Isl aŬhi puts heads together and discourses about the establishment of Ahl-i-Hadith 8. This group continued the movement of Imam Shafi’i to search for Hadith . Ahl-i-hadith developed the science of narration and classification of hadith . Thereafter they turned their attention to Fiqh . 9In regard to Fiqh , they laid down conclusively that out of the different schools of Fiqh , so far, there was hardly on one problem or the other. It ﷺ any which did not reveal contradictions when compared with traditions and sayings of the prophet was therefore not proper to constantly follow on particular person. According, in all matters this group used to look for guidance to the and to the sayings of the companions and their successors. For this purpose, they had laid down ﷺ Ahadith of the Holy Prophet some principles which are almost same as those of others schools of Fiqh the author then by himself questions about the differences of the three schools of thought. 10 Now-a- days, it has been widened. He himself answers the reason. That the differences did not spring from any disagreement on the fundamental principles of each on the contrary, they thrived because the followers of each sect deviated from their own basic principles and indulged in frivolous polemics, gradually widening the unfortunate gap. 11 Mawlana Isl aŬhi scrutinizes the blind following i.e.; Taqlid of the fourth century earlier and fourth century after by saying sectarianism had not so far wrought mischief to the extent which was experienced subsequently. The religious scholars and layman of the days earlier to the fourth century were completely different in their approach to the problems as compared with the religious scholars and the layman of today. Every Muslim child of today opens his eyes in the world either as a born Hanafi, or an Ahl-e-Hadith an Orthodox follower of a particular sect-(Muqallid ) or one of the independent views ( GhairMuqullid ). 12 He staunches to individualize the attitude of the ‘Ulama of the earlier and later periods. In the earlier periods, two types of ‘ Ulama were seen. One who carried Ijtihad Mutlaq and the other were Mujtahid fil madhhab . In earlier periods, there did not exist the types of muqallid that we find today. After the fourth century, conditions gradually changed. In place of the ‘ Ulama of a high order appeared those who competed for religious leadership and worldly status, and for this end in the luxury of polemics in the matters of religion as an art. 13 Mawlana Isl aŬhi turnover effective verdict of the Imams against the blind following by quoting Hadrat Imam Malki’s views who in the light of their own understanding and insight. Here ﷺ deeply appreciated that people who act upon the Sunnah of the Prophet further mentions other Imams and compares them with the Ulama of today who regard the sayings of their respective Imams as absolutely infallible and beyond criticism. However, the Imams beared the broad minded attitude towards each other, they did not believe the truth lay in their own conviction. 3. Points of Differences According to the Amin Ahsan Mawlana Isla ̅hi Mawlana Isl aŬhi accords the peculiarity of the causes of differences among the schools after discussing the true character of these differences, in the sense that whatever tenets of the Din stand out as fundamentals for one school, are reckoned as fundamentals for other school. He checks out the first thing which encouraged differences were the trend towards preference for the local ‘ Ulama . The detailed account of this very first difference in his words is as: “The very first thing which encouraged differences was the trend towards preference for the local ‘Ulama’, Saeed bin Musayyib preferred the people of the Madinah, whereas Ibrahim Nakha’i preferred the people of the Kufa. This trend gained strength with the passage of time. In the initial stages this trend had limited effect. Only in such cases in which people found differences in the views of the companions of the Prophet they approached the ‘Ulama’ of their respective towns to seek their opinion which they preferred and accepted. So far there was nothing wrong with it. However, over’s the years this trend transgressed reasonable limits and assumed alarming proportions of prejudice in favour of one’s own town or province. This attitude changed the direction of thinking of the people. While deliberating over a new problem instead of concentrating over the strong and weak aspects of the arguments being advanced on the issue, and scrutinizing it on its merits, the people were now eager simply to know what opinion the elders of their own town or province held in that matter. This prejudice went so far that the people of a particular town on occasions refused to accept certain Ah ͕Ŭdith just because those Ah ͕Ŭdith had not gained popularity with the ‘Ulama’ of their own town. In the olden days even the distance between Kufa and Madinahhh was indeed considered something to reckon with- a real hard journey. The people of two adjacent towns could neither get to know each other well enough, nor could they fully benefit from each other’s knowledge of learning. Moreover, till then complete record of the Prophet’s Ah ͕Ŭdith had not yet been brought to light and complied, nor again were the sayings and traditions of the companions and of the Tabi’in (successors to the companions), available in a complied form.