The Role of Preunderstandings in Islamic Jurisprudence Dissertation

Introduction

People interact with texts in almost every element of life, whether in physical objects or digital platforms. The texts people interact with have meanings derived from how the text is written and, at the same time, possess their metaphorical sense. When one interprets a text, the person apprehends the world and communicates the meaning gotten from it to another person. Consequently, people live in and embrace a text-filled world, making them perceive text and interpretation before their actual theoretical definitions.

Numerous aspects of text and interpretation characterize the legal arena as the professionals in law often attribute interpretation to a rational activity meant to give meaning to any legal text.¹ According to Barak, “interpretation is the process whereby one person gives meaning to the symbols of the expression used by another person.”² Therefore, scholars in law try to get the best meaning to associate with a given meaning since the norm’s content confined by written text depends on a reader’s understanding and interpretation.³ It follows that a reader is at liberty to derive any meaning from a single text, which results in one’s desire to seek to understand and interpret a given text. Moreover, it leads to one’s quest regarding the effect their concept and background has their textual interpretation.

The Reader and Pre-understanding Concept in Interpretation

Various readers have different ways of understanding and interpreting text. Martin Heidegger, one of the prominent philosophers, believes that preconception forms the basis for interpretation and that it is impossible for readers to interpret a text without their pre-understanding. Heidegger argues that a reader always brings their pre-understanding while interpreting a text. A reader should have some background knowledge and experience to understand and interpret a given text. Since people have diverse backgrounds, they can get different meanings from a single text.⁴ According to Gadamer, a reader who tries to understand a given text usually has some initially projected meaning of the text they are reading⁵. Such projected meanings often exist because readers have some pre-made expectations of a particular meaning.⁶ Consequently, the meaning of a text may vary depending on the background of the reader or preconceived ideas, which further makes different readers have a diverse understanding of a simple text.

The interpretation of a text goes through several processes, each depending on several factors. According to Umberto Eco, readers get into any text they are reading, completely immerse themselves in the text, and come with their encyclopedia in addition to their interpretation.⁷ The ideas fronted by Umberto Eco further reveal that understanding a given text and its interpretation depends on a reader’s prior knowledge and pre-understanding. Hierarchically, this can be understood as shown in Figure 1 below. Based on the figure, pre-understanding is crucial in the interpretation process. Even though the cultural, mental, and social background of a reader constitute aspects of prior knowledge, making it the initial point of understanding and interpreting a text, pre-understanding is verifiable and falsifiable. It occupies the horizon of thought obtained from one’s prior knowledge one has at the beginning of the understanding process without having conducted any research or evaluation of the text or its subject.⁸ This reveals the need for scrutinizing a given text before one can reach a point of understanding or interpreting it.

Most readers conclude they understand a text before going through all the steps. According to Barak, a strong connection exists between interpretation and understanding of a text, indicating that for one to understand a text, one must interpret it⁹. However, before they know the text, people must realize the need for evaluation approval or its similar notion of refusal-of-understanding.

Whenever a reader interprets a given text, the person always tends to project their possibilities. According to Gadamer, one cannot cast any possibilities unless the person has some understanding of the matter in question to back up the option¹¹. A reader must have some basis for interpreting a text in case such exposition leads to some projections.¹² Therefore, when someone interprets a given text, the person reveals that they have some understanding of what they interpret.

Before a text is interpreted, it is considered a book or a piece of writing, where the text requiring interpretation is a text for the reader. The book may be written to interpret a particular issue; however, the person reading the work will be first subjected to the text before interpreting it. The text in a work or book then comes into play with the pre-understanding of the person reading it as a factor of interpretation. This also reveals the crucial role of pre-understanding in interpretation as a reader cannot get the meaning of a given text using an open and empty mind. A reader sees a text on the book or a digital panel as merely a series of signs interlinked to create sentences and statements. These signs become meaningful when the reader applies their judgment, past experiences, and intelligence to understand the specific issue contained in the text.¹³ Consequently, readers understand various types of texts, including legal text, after the text has been interpreted and the reader has effectively used their pre-understanding in the entire process.

Since preunderstanding is crucial in interpreting a given text, it follows that it can be applied in law. The interpretation of legal texts is vital for jurists, which makes it essential for one to understand the position hadith interpretation occupies in Islamic Law. A reader must understand how the scholars and the qadis perform the Islamic Law. Moreover, a reader of the Islamic Law with a deep root in the understanding of Hadith should seek to understand how pre-understanding of qadis and scholars affect the ultimate judgment of these texts. Furthermore, one needs to question whether jurists usually make over-interpretations due to their pre-understanding and, consequently, how such over-interpretations can affect the final judgments tied to the interpretation of the text. The discussions below on the role of interpretation in the Islamic Law helps in understanding these concerns and understanding.

Islamic Jurisprudence Interpretation

The interpretation of the Islamic Law is crucial in bringing justice to millions of people worldwide who depend on it. Islamic Law is considered one of the most influential and essential law systems globally, both historically and in the present. According to Baderin, from the 18th century, this law has been subjected to several debates regarding its scope and nature.¹⁴ Some legal scholars have argued that Islamic Law is stable and inflexible because of its divinity.¹⁵ However, the Muslim jurisdiction position is that the Islamic Law requires human jurists to explore and understand and thus address the needs of people and justice. Islamic Law is not given to humans as a finished product as other scholars suggest.¹⁶ Consequently, the dynamism of Islamic Law relies heavily on its flexibility and application derived from interpretation, which is its most important feature.

The concept of “fiqh,” which means understanding, is the basis of Islamic Law. It depicts the need for pious humans to understand and interpret the divine will and make the law helpful for humans. The chosen people with the power and understanding of law help provide in-depth exegesis, analogies, and interpretations of the holy writ to ensure it can be used to give justice where it is due.¹⁷ The outcome of the process that relies heavily on text, one can realize that the Islamic Law is a finished product that has been organized based on different topics and comprises rules worded precisely for ease of interpretation. This makes the Islamic Law flexible and changeable based on the interpretation of the Islamic jurisprudence. Hence, the law comes at the end of the interpretation instead of its beginning.

The flexibility of Islamic Law can also be understood from the notion of “ijtihâd.” The word “ijtihâd” is derived from “aljuhd,” meaning “pain, trouble, exertion, or effort.”¹⁸ It depicts one’s prowess, ability, or strength used for a righteous cause, correctly and respectfully. However, when used jurisprudentially, the word “aljuhd” means the endeavor a jurist employs to create a law or an interpretation of one based on the evidence (dalil) in the text found in Hadiths and Qur’an.¹⁹ According to Schacht, the word also refers to “reconsideration,” while Rahman equates it to independent reason in legal interpretations.²⁰²¹ Weiss reveals that the entire process adopted in deriving rules from independent causes on the texts derived from Hadiths and Qur’an constitutes textual interpretation, making the Islamic Law’s interpretation an exclusively text-only process.²² According to Weiss,

“The theory of ijtihâd presupposes that the process of producing rules is a process of elucidating that which is present but yet is not self-evident. In principle a Muslim jurist never invents rules, he formulates… rules which God has already decreed and which are concealed in the sources.”²³

Weiss (1978) reveals that it is not the law that is interpreted but the sources of such law, mainly the Hadith and Qur’an.

In cases where the Qur’an is clear about a subject, it usually does not require interpretation. There are situations where these two sources of law leave a matter undetermined, hence requiring the interpretation by jurists to help in formulating applicable laws that are necessary to address a particular issue not directly mentioned in the two primary sources of the Islamic Law. According to Abd ar-Rahman, the laws made as a result of the “ijtihâd” of jurists must be subjected to the jurisprudence and legislation of the applicable principles of the Islamic religion.²⁴ Consequently, to qualify as a scholar (Mujtahid) and practice “ijtihâd,” the person must attain some minimum qualifications. According to Hallaq, this question on the person who could become or not become a Mujtahid was subjected to discussions before forming the positive law of Sunni law schools.²⁵ The qualifications were set based on Abu’l-Husayn al-Basri’s “al Mu’tamad fi Usul al-Fiqh“, which summarized that one could become a Mujtahid by being cognizant of sharia’s (law) purpose and how to reference the sources of the law and the methods used in the process.

One of the major problems resulting from the qualifications of the Mujtahid is that all of them rely on human nature, which consequently makes the final decisions rely on jurists’ preunderstandings. This makes the Mujtahid reach different judgments and solutions even though they extract their interpretations from the same texts. Such differences in outcomes are evident in the statement by Abu Hanifah in Hammad, saying, “I believe that my opinions are correct, but I am cognizant of the fact that my opinion may be wrong. Also, I believe that opinions of my opponents are wrong, but I am cognizant of the fact that they may be correct.”²⁶ However, Islamic history reveals that the texts derived from Hadith and Qur’an have never lost their power before the one reads or interprets them to act as their source of reference in the Islamic Law. However, there are times when the textual positions have shifted from subject to object. In most cases, the texts derived from Qur’an and Hadith are usually the primary subject of a believer’s understanding, shaping the mind and behavior of a Muslim. However, when the texts are interpreted, they become objects of the reader’s perception.

The interpretation of the holy writs in the Qur’an and Hadiths may affect the initial position occupied by these texts. According to İbnü’l-Esir, Ali ibn Abu Talib’s response regarding Tahkim (arbitration) given to the Kharijites’ leader, ibn al- Kawwa, reveals that a jurist’s pre-understanding may have a more significant influence that can be thought.²⁷ İbnü’l-Esir reveals that the “Qur’an is a book which is written on pages and does not speak itself; contrarily, people communicate with Quran and they make it to talk for them, also they derive rules from it.”²⁸ This statement by Ali ibn Abu Talib indicates that there is no unidirectional link between the reader and the text. Contrarily, the link is mutual, which allows the text to be considered an object before the reader. Consequently, the issue of interpretation and understanding directly connects with the reader’s position as opposed to the text. This relationship further tries to create discord on whether the reader speaks while the text is silent or whether the reader remains silent as the text says. In whichever case, the reader is always active and does not remain silent, especially in the interpretation process.²⁹

There have been various issues surrounding the interpretation and understanding of the text. According to Coulson, the Quranic verse “…if the deceased has left no children but has parents who are still alive, the mother takes one third… provoked the thoughts on the rights of relatives from the father and mother’s side when the surviving heir is determined to be the spouse relict.³⁰ Ibn Abbas interpreted the text, pointing out that in the case in which the Qur’an talks in this manner, the mother was to be given a Quranic part equivalent to one-third of the deceased husband’s estate. The understanding informed this interpretation of the Qur’an that a mother is entitled to a share of one-third in cases without evidence of lineal collaterals or descendants for an heir. Consequently, Ibn Abbas opined that when the mother competes with the husband in the case of this Qur’anic interpretation, the mother was to take one-third, while the husband was entitled to one-half while the father was entitled to one-sixth. On the other hand, when the competition was with a wife, the wife would take one-quarter of the inheritance, the mother would take one-third, and the father would take five-twelfths as residuary.

The views fronted by Ibn Abbas were discarded by the Sunni jurists entirely because the Sunni Mujtahid and other scholars delighted in interpreting the Qur’an is guided by the customs that make the male agnates superior in succession. The Sunni scholars argue that the mother is not a partaker of the Qur’anic portion but is entitled to sharing in the residue with the father by taking equal portions with him when the spouse relict’s portion has been deducted. Consequently, in a competition with the husband, the Sunnis posit that the mother is apportioned one-sixth while the father one-third of the estate. On the other hand, in competition with the wife, the mother is entitled to one-quarter while the father one-half of the entire inheritance.³¹

These arguments are forced to be comfortable with the Qur’an by the Mujtahid, who interpret the verse and apply it where the parents are considered legal heirs or the mother is entitled to one-third of the residue. None of these interpretations are as apparent as that presented by Ibn Abbas. According to Ibn Qudama “the argument of Ibn Abbas would prevail were it not for the consensus of the Prophet’s companions to the contrary.”³² The forced Quranic interpretation is attributed to the refusal of the scholars to agree to the possibility that the deceased’s mother could take a more significant inheritance than the father’s. According to the Maliki authority al-Adawi:

“The majority felt to give the mother one-third in these two cases would lead to a contradiction of basic principles. For if, competition with

the husband, she takes one-third of the whole estate, she takes twice the share of the father; and there is no parallel case of female, in competition with a male of the same class and degree of relationship, taking double the share of the male.”³³

The understanding derived from this statement is that male heirs are given better portions of the inheritance, which affects the interpretation of the text.

As opposed to the Sunni interpretation, the Shii jurisprudence does not support the portion of considering men as better than women when it comes to the apportioning of inheritance. The Shii scholars argue that would be forcing the Qur’an to conform to the notions of succession based entirely on the human pre-understandings. The Shii insist that every word written in the Qur’an should be taken as such and that women should take one-third of the estate according to the Qur’anic portion even when such means that the father’s portion would be one-sixth.³⁴ The example presented here reveals different interpretations of the Qur’an and how others read it. The determinations show that the significant determinants of these interpretations are associated with scholars’ pre-understandings. One group interprets the Qur’an from the literal perspective, while the other uses logical perspectives to look at the text and use the agnatic system to apply its concepts. Despite reading from the exact text, the interpretations and conclusions are different.

The issue resulting from the interpretation and the effect of pre-understanding made by a given reader is evident in different textual areas, in addition to that of Qur’anic texts. Pre-understanding also affects the interpretation and understanding of Hadith texts. According to Coulson, much of the Islamic Law (fiqh) is found in Hadiths compared to the Qur’an³⁵. The Hadith narrations became the central point of exegesis of the Islamic jurisprudence.³⁶ Consequently, the primary controversy in Islamic Law results from understanding and interpreting the texts from Hadiths. Therefore, it is crucial to explore the effect of pre-understanding of the one reading the text as the person processes the interpretation of the text by focusing on texts on Hadiths. These can be understood by questioning the issue related to text-based pre-understanding and its impacts on judgment and the reader-based pre-understanding issue.

Ḥadīth Narration Interpretation Problem and Its Effects on the Rulings

Telling or narrating an event to someone can happen either through written or oral means, depending on several factors. The comparison between these two methods shows that the method used to transmit a narrative to the audience can result in different meanings, primarily based on the listening skills of the audience and their preunderstanding. For instance, the written narrative often has rich aspects of grammar and logical arrangement of thoughts. However, an oral narrative may have cases of errors in the sentences that can alter the intended meaning.³⁷ Moreover, a written narrative is guided by the structure of the language used to transmit the information. In contrast, an oral one is guided by the context and body language used at any instance of the communication process.³⁸ Based on these differences in the narrative transmission process, textualization of oral narrative may result in several risks, including deletion of meaning from the context of the text. Consequently, it is essential to understand these differences because Hadiths are first narrated to the listeners and, being the source of the Islamic Law, are crucial to the recipient’s future.³⁹ These then affect the listeners’ comprehension, and the future application of the concepts derives from Hadiths in their application in law and judgment.

The best way to clarify the differences between the narrative transmission process is by considering a similar topic narrated and reported by various reporters. For example, one of the Hadiths states that “Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) has forbade leasing of a land“.⁴⁰ On the contrary, the other Hadith narrated by Ahmed ibn Hanbal as presented by Urwa b. Zubayr tends to give the detailed aim of the Prophet Muhammed by stating that: “Zayd b. Sabit said: Two people who fight with each other came to Prophet Muhammed. When he saw their situation, He said: “If your situation is such, do not lease your land.”⁴¹ These two examples show that removing the context of the oral expression used to deliver the narrative to a listener using the copy and paste method results in an issue of understanding. For instance, the two narratives do not give the same understanding derived from the expression of the Prophet Muhammad at the point in which he narrated the Hadith to the listeners. Since the expressions of the Prophet are considered an essential part of the Islamic Law based on the processing skills of the scholars and their approach to the narratives, the final judgment delivered on a given case may change. The Muslim jurists have, in most cases, differed in their final verdict due to these understandings, but their decisions have been considered powerful and guided by the divine power based on the texts.

When transmitting oral or written text, the expression is essential and gives value to the statement being passed to the audience or an event. However, such expressions also come with varied risks attached to the change of meaning of the original statement as narrated by the subsequent recipients.⁴² This reveals that mistakes in comprehension can occur even in cases where the people relaying the message are considered experts or the style used to convey the text is the best alternative available. The understanding derived from the text changes sharply based on these possible textual meanings.⁴³ Therefore, the meaning derived from the text depends on the style used to narrate it and the method employed by the narrator to pass the intended message. Moreover, transferring one’s thoughts to another person is guided by several factors and structures. In written language, for instance, various narration styles have resulted due to the absence of language structures essential to facilitate the passage of the intended meaning.⁴⁴ These differences in the textual presentation have resulted in different acceptable ways of understanding and interpreting Islamic Law.

A written text is either given as a direct or indirect narration, which may contribute to all the issues mentioned. In a direct speech or narration, the person passing the message mostly attempts as much as possible to maintain the original syntax and the word structure as provided by the speaker and tries to give the Hadith without changing the expression of the initial speaker.⁴⁵ Contrarily, when the narrator uses a reported speech to account for someone’s statements or events, the subsequent speaker may have interruptions and personal opinions due to attempting to express the statement in their words. Moreover, sometimes such narrators try to summarize the words of the original speakers or extract rules from them, thus truncating much of the information contained in the authentic narration.⁴⁶ Consequently, the differences between direct and indirect speeches occur due to the subsequent effect on the transmitter of the Hadith and the text. Such various occur due to the interaction between the narrator and the source of the Hadith, the level of comprehension of the narrator, and the style the speaker prefers in communicating with the listeners.

The style used to transmit the narrative affect the written text more, especially when the effect is more on the rules the speaker extracts from the Hadiths. Similarly, such effects extend to the interpretations the narrators get from the text, thus affecting their final verdict in a case. In a direct speech, the speaker tries to transfer whatever they heard or saw from the original narrator and maintains the events and words as they were without interfering with the information. This can be equated with taking a video of an event, whether directly from the screen or from another screen. In this case, the original picture and detailed events are visible, but at the same time, the audio is clear and untainted. On the other hand, an indirect narration involves passing the message that one understands from several events or speeches given in different contexts, and the meaning one gathers given in a form convenient to the subsequent speaker. Consequently, indirect speech does not provide the actual event or statement but is the collective reflection and understanding of the speaker.

Since direct and indirect speeches are permitted ways of passing Hadiths from one generation to another, it has been considered the best method to convey the information. In most cases, scholars have regarded the indirect speech as the essential method of passing the information because the speaker is interested in passing the law to the listener instead of giving its details. Thus, it is vital to discuss the styles used and provide examples in each case, and consequently examine their effects on a reader’s pre-understanding in the process of extracting rules from such texts.

Ḥadīth Texts Direct Narrations

The direction narration of Hadiths refers to the transfer of speech or statements, actions, or events with the original and historical context with the primary intention of giving complete information about the event. The primary role of the narrator in this context is to provide the exact copy of what happened at the time of the event without interfering with any information. This choice of style shapes the narration, the message given to the audience, and the subsequent understanding of the text passed from one generation to another. Some of the most common directly narrated Hadiths are grouped into various fields such as practical religious knowledge, socio-cultural knowledge, and historical knowledge, as discussed in the sections below.

Direction Narrations Essential for Practical Religious Knowledge

Direct narrations are mainly intense in Hadiths that have practical religious knowledge. These Hadiths were given to guide the life of a believer and address real-life issues from the spiritual perspective. Such direct narrations in this context are intended to provide the subsequent listeners the pure and undefiled detailed information for the benefit of all Muslims. In most cases, such narrations are checked against the structure adopted by Marston Speight for examining Hadith texts. Speight grouped narrations into two, three, and four-part narratives and what became known as story-type narratives, also known as (qissa).⁴⁷ Speight argued that the simplest form of a narrative comprises two parts: action and reaction. A three-part narrative would have a statement, a question, and an answer. A four-part narrative would include the initial statement or action, the following action or reaction eliciting a response, a reaction, and a final response. Speight further reiterated that “qisas” result from collecting all the above types of narratives. Consequently, it is essential to examine the direct narratives based on the structural approach used by the Prophet Muhammed when he performed an ablution:

Once the Prophet was offering prayers at the Ka’ba. Abu Jahl was sitting with some of his companions. One of them said to the others, “Who amongst you will bring the abdominal contents (intestines, etc.) of a camel of Bani so and so and put it on the back of Muhammad, when he prostrates?” The most unfortunate of them got up and brought it. He waited till the Prophet prostrated and then placed it on his back between his shoulders. I was watching but could not do any thing. I wish I had some people with me to hold out against them. They started laughing and falling on one another. Allah’s Apostle was in prostration and he did not lift his head up till Fatima (Prophet’s daughter) came and threw that (camel’s abdominal contents) away from his back. He raised his head and said thrice, “O Allah! Punish Quraish.” So it was hard for Abu Jahl and his companions when the Prophet invoked Allah against them as they had a conviction that the prayers and invocations were accepted in this city (Mecca). The Prophet said, “O Allah! Punish Abu Jahl, ‘Utba bin Rabi’a, Shaiba bin Rabi’a, Al-Walid bin ‘Utba, Umaiya bin Khalaf, and ‘Uqba bin Al Mu’it (and he mentioned the seventh whose name I cannot recall). By Allah in Whose Hands my life is, I saw the dead bodies of those persons who were counted by Allah’s Apostle in the Qalib (one of the wells) of Badr.⁴⁸

Upon examining the above structure of the ablution, a three-narrative part takes the form of an initial statement or action. In this case, the initial statement reads: “Once the Prophet was offering prayers at the Ka’ba. Abu Jahl was sitting with some of his companions.” In this case, the statement gives a prerequisite to the events that would follow and contain the weight of the statements given. The second part provides a question that sets the stage for the remaining portion of the narration. It says, “One of them said to the others, “Who amongst you will bring the abdominal contents (intestines, etc.) of a camel of Bani so and so and put it on the back of Muhammad, when he prostrates?” Here, the question is meant to elicit a form of reaction which was expected from the companions mentioned in the statement. The third part constitutes the response to the question with a detailed explanation of the event: “The most unfortunate of them got up and brought it. He waited till the Prophet prostrated and then placed it on his back between his shoulders. I was watching but could not do anything. I wish I had some people with me to hold out against them. They started laughing and falling on one another. Allah’s Apostle was in prostration, and he did not lift his head till Fatima (Prophet’s daughter) came and threw that (camel’s abdominal contents) away from his back. He raised his head and said thrice, “O Allah! Punish Quraish.” So it was hard for Abu Jahl and his companions when the Prophet invoked Allah against them as they had a conviction that the prayers and invocations were accepted in this city (Mecca). The Prophet said, “O Allah! Punish Abu Jahl, ‘Utba bin Rabi’a, Shaiba bin Rabi’a, Al-Walid bin ‘Utba, Umaiya bin Khalaf, and ‘Uqba bin Al Mu’it (and he mentioned the seventh whose name I cannot recall). By Allah in Whose Hands my life is, I saw the dead bodies of those persons counted by Allah’s Apostle in the Qalib (one of the wells) of Badr.” The textual structure given by Speight is thus complete for the three-part narration provided by the Prophet in this case.

In the above Hadith, the speaker (Rawi) tries as much as possible to pass detailed information using the direct narration method. The narrator thus pays close attention to how the Prophet ordered his ablution and gives every detailed information, including how the Prophet prayed about what should happen to the companions who had wished bad for him at the time of receiving the Hadith during his prayer time. In this case, the narrator does not only focus on the words passed in the event but also on the actions that occurred in the process. The rawi tries as much as possible to give the original picture of the event to help maintain the intended message, which comes with actions. The narrator could use director translation and say, “when the Prophet Muhammed was prostrating and some companions tried to scorn him, he prayed for Allah to kill the seven friends.” This would have created an understanding of the necessity for convenience but failed to pass the original information as it would not have had its clarity and effect as the direct narrative. Consequently, the direct speech above has shown the effectiveness of using direct narration to pass untainted information from the original speaker, which in this case, gives the knowledge regarding the conduct necessary during prayer.

Direction Narrations Essential for Socio-Cultural Knowledge

Muslims live in a dynamic world filled with different social and cultural issues and thus need some divine guidance to live peacefully with each other. As noted earlier, direct narrations have weight when passing crucial information to the subsequent listeners. One of the most common direct narrations for passing socio-cultural knowledge was one of the lizard eating, which was given as:

There was a Jew in Medina who used to lend me money up to the season of plucking dates. (Jabir had a piece of land which was on the way to Ruma). That year the land was not promising, so the payment of the debt was delayed one year. The Jew came to me at the time of plucking, but gathered nothing from my land. I asked him to give me one year respite, but he refused. This news reached the Prophet whereupon he said to his companions, “Let us go and ask the Jew for respite for Jabir.” All of them came to me in my garden, and the Prophet started speaking to the Jew, but he Jew said, “O Abu Qasim! I will not grant him respite.” When the Prophet saw the Jew’s attitude, he stood up and walked all around the garden and came again and talked to the Jew, but the Jew refused his request. I got up and brought some ripe fresh dates and put it in front of the Prophet. He ate and then said to me, “Where is your hut, O Jabir?” I informed him, and he said, “Spread out a bed for me in it.” I spread out a bed, and he entered and slept. When he woke up, I brought some dates to him again and he ate of it and then got up and talked to the Jew again, but the Jew again refused his request. Then the Prophet got up for the second time amidst the palm trees loaded with fresh dates, and said, “O Jabir! Pluck dates to repay your debt.” The Jew remained with me while I was plucking the dates, till I paid him all his right, yet there remained extra quantity of dates. So I went out and proceeded till I reached the Prophet and informed him of the good news, whereupon he said, “I testify that I am Allah’s Apostle.⁴⁹

Examining the exemplary structure of the above text reveals that the narrative has four parts according to the model given by Speight. The first part of the narration, which is the initial action or statement, reads: “There was a Jew in Medina who used to lend me money up to the season of plucking dates. (Jabir had a piece of land on the way to Ruma). That year the land was not promising, so the debt payment was delayed one year. The Jew came to me at the time of plucking, but gathered nothing from my land. I asked him to give me one year respite, but he refused. This news reached the Prophet whereupon he said to his companions, “Let us go and ask the Jew for respite for Jabir.” All of them came to me in my garden, and the Prophet started speaking to the Jew, but the Jew said, “O Abu Qasim! I will not grant him respite.” When the Prophet saw the Jew’s attitude, he stood up and walked all around the garden and came again and talked to the Jew, but the Jew refused his request. I got up and brought some ripe fresh dates and put it in front of the Prophet.” This statement gives the prerequisite to what the speaker intends to pass to the listener. The second part of the narration, which is the statement or action that elicits a response, reads: “He ate and then said to me, “Where is your hut, O Jabir?” This statement gives a precursor to an expected response from the listener. The third part of the narration is the reaction from the listener, and it says, “I informed him, and he said, “Spread out a bed for me in it.” I spread out a bed, and he entered and slept.” In this case, the speaker’s response is response involving spreading the bed for the Prophet and himself sleeping for the night. The fourth part of the narration is a narrates what happened after the response given by the narrator where it reads, “Then the Prophet got up for the second time amidst the palm trees loaded with fresh dates, and said, “O Jabir! Pluck dates to repay your debt.” The Jew remained with me while I was plucking the dates till I paid him all his right, yet there remained an extra quantity of dates. So I went out and proceeded till I reached the Prophet and informed him of the good news, whereupon he said, “I testify that I am Allah’s Apostle.”

The above Hadith narration given in the context of socio-cultural knowledge tries to pass critical information regarding how Muslims should behave regarding their money-lending, food, and living. According to the narrator, he was lent money by a Jew in Medina up to when the narrator was supposed to pluck his dates. The narrator reveals that the year was not productive, which may have affected the yield, such that when the Jew came to collect his money, he did not find enough, thus delaying the repayment of the debt by one year. The Jew refused to give the narrator an additional year, wherefore the news reached the Prophet. The narration also reveals that the narrator was kind; thus, when he fed and gave the Prophet a place to sleep, his garden yielded much that was enough to repay the debt. The Prophet did not blame the Jew for seeking what was rightly his but provided a way for the narrator to repay his debt in time.

The reaction of the Prophet, in this case, gives a significant insight regarding his position on the money lending and repayment agreement based on the context of the narration. The direction of the narrative style adopted has given detailed information regarding the words and events during the prophecy. If the narrator had chosen to use a reported speech, this Hadith would have been presented that it is acceptable to push someone who cannot repay debt at an appointed time to the extent that the person must repay such debts. The narration does not present the idea of lending money and the returns associated with such money. The detailed information in this case by Jabir bin ‘Abdullah shows the need for a contextual understanding of the text. This reveals the effect associated with information narration and how the meaning can change due to the choice of style and pre-understanding of the reader and speaker. Moreover, the style used to pass information to another person can make one understand the narration text without the speaker’s context. Therefore, a text needs to have a clearly defined context for it to make complete sense to the recipients of such information.

Direction Narrations Essential for Historical Knowledge

Direct narrations have been used to pass critical information on historical events and knowledge. In the examination of the justification for killing people found guilty of breaching their fellows’ trust, making them surrender on the arbitration of a just person, A’isha narrates the following:

It has been narrated on the authority of A’isha who said: Sa’d was wounded on the day of the Battle of the Ditch. A man from the Quraish called Ibn al-Ariqah shot at him an arrow which pierced the artery in the middle of his forearm. The Messenger of Allah (may peacce be upon him) pitched a tent for him in the mosque and would inquire after him being in close proximity. When he returned from the Ditch and laid down his arms and took a bath, the angel Gabriel appeared to him and he was removing dust from his hair (as if he had just returned from the battle). The latter said: You have laid down arms. By God, we haven’t (yet) laid them down. So march against them. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) asked: Where? He poirftad to Banu Quraiza. So the Messenger of Allah (may peace he upon him) fought against them. They surrendered at the command of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), but he referred the decision about them to Sa’d who said: I decide about them that those of them who can fight be killed, their women and children taken prisoners and their properties distributed (among the Muslims).⁵⁰

The examination of this structure reveals that it has four parts. The first part of the narration is an action where the narrator says, “Sa’d was wounded on the day of the Battle of the Ditch. A man from the Quraish called Ibn al-Ariqah shot at him an arrow which pierced the artery in the middle of his forearm.” This accounts for what happened during the battle and detailed acts that prompted action. In the second part, the action called for a response based on what the prophet was supposed to do. It reads: “The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) pitched a tent for him in the mosque and would inquire after him being in close proximity. When he returned from the Ditch and laid down his arms and took a bath, the angel Gabriel appeared to him and he was removing dust from his hair (as if he had just returned from the battle). The latter said: You have laid down arms. By God, we haven’t (yet) laid them down. So march against them.” The third part of the narration shows the prophet’s reaction to what was reported: “The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) asked: Where? He poirftad to Banu Quraiza.” The prophet’s reaction resulted in the final response, which was the prophet fighting them: “So the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) fought against them. They surrendered at the command of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), but he referred the decision about them to Sa’d who said: I decide about them that those of them who can fight be killed, their women and children taken prisoners and their properties distributed (among the Muslims).”

In this narration, the narrator could use direct speech and say that the prophet fought and killed people. However, this would not have given the exact message and understanding of what happened, eliciting the prophet’s reaction to fight back and capture and kill the fighters. The narrator opted to use direct speech to help transfer all the information with the exact details of the event through the direct narrative method. Using direct narration, in this case, helps to give both the historical context and religious knowledge regarding personal protection and jihad. This allows the Muslims to understand in detail what transpired in the event and how to apply the knowledge in the current situations. The statement regarding the capture and killing of those participating in the war shows that Muslims are permitted to attack and kill anyone who tries to kill them as a basis of self-defense and defense of others while keeping the lives of those who are vulnerable because of war.

Ḥadīth Texts Indirect Narrations

An indirect narration occurs when narrators decide to use their statements and expressions instead of using the original words. The narrator integrates personal thoughts, opinions, and expressions into the initial statement, thus acting as an interpreter of the statements made by the original speaker.⁵¹ When such a style is used in the narrative of a Hadith, it will be prone to errors associated with the misunderstanding of the original message intended by the Prophet. The Islamic Law scholars often aim at reaching all the variations of the narrations to address possible instances of understanding issues. This helps them to target understanding the Prophet’s original message.⁵² The following illustrations expound on the differences between direct and indirect speech in reporting a similar occurrence:

The indirect narrative by Abdullah ibn Umar states: The deceased person suffers because of people’s wailing over him.⁵³

The direct narration is: “Aisha (the wife of the Prophet Muhammed) said: The funeral of a Jewish lady passed by Rasulullah, and he saw her people crying and said: They are crying over her and she is being punished in her grave.⁵⁴

The two narratives try to convey a similar event in the best language possible. However, the two accounts convey different meanings due to their approach and style. The indirectly presented narrative summarizes the original message based on what the narrator understood from the event and words of the Prophet. On the contrary, the direct narration gives a detailed account of the event, giving an almost pictorial representation of the scenario and narratives of the statements associated with the context of the incidence. Based on the indirect narration provided in this context, one can understand that a deceased person suffers the consequences of the sorrows of their relatives. On the other hand, the understanding gathered from a direct narration is that a dead person does not suffer from the consequences of his actions rather than that of his relatives.

Another example of narration in both direct and indirect speech also shows why it is crucial to narrate events from the first person’s perspective. For instance, the reported narration by Urwa b. al-Zubayr based on what Aisha received from the Prophet says, “Whoever is tried by having daughters and preserves them, they will veil him from the Hellfire (on the Day of Judgement).”⁵⁵ This narration can make one understand that having daughters is not a good idea. Contrarily, the direct narration gives it the intended meaning:

“Aisha recounts, “A woman entered asking me (for food) and hadtwo daughters with her. But all I had with me was a date, so I gave it to her, and she split it between her two daughters without eating any herself. When the Prophet came I told him of this, and he said, “Whoever is tried by these daughters, they will be a veil from Hellfire (on the day of judgment).⁵⁶

The examples above reveal why it is crucial to use narratives to help formulate rules. At the same time, while indirect narrative gives a different meaning, it does not mislead one from the text’s spiritual power. It is vital to use both narrative styles to help in the understanding of concepts and applying them from the legal perspective. Consequently, it is vital to understand how the adopted narration style determines a judge’s pre-understanding in a jurisprudence decision.

From Ḥadīth Narrations to Jurisprudence Decision

Every part of a sentence is essential in understanding the meaning of a text. These parts include verbs, nouns, objects, and subjects. Reported speech sentences may result in a new determinant of purpose, which is the transmitter’s narration. As discussed earlier, the styles used to narrate a Hadith impact the reader’s mind when they interpret the text to determine a case. Since a transmitter conveys what they understand from a speaker’s sentence, they decant the information and give the audience a personal understanding of the text. On the other hand, a direct speech gives the exact events and context of the text.

In this case, one of the primary texts worthy of comparing is on drinking and getting drunk. For instance, an indirect narration in Nasâî, Kitab al-Janaiz stating that, “Drink from containers and do not get drunk“⁵⁷ can show that it is okay to take alcohol, whereas it is not permitted to get drunk. While this understanding is clear, it may leave questions such as what is to get drunk and to what extent one would be considered intoxicated. At the same time, scholars can argue that different people can get to different levels of drunkenness without exhibiting similar behaviors. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the direct narration and compare the two versions. The direction narration by the prophet as given by Ibn Burayda is:

“I had banned you from visiting graves, but now you can visit them. I have prevented you from keeping meats of sacrificial animals for more than three days. However, you can store them. I had prohibited you from drinking nabidh (a kind of beverage) from containers other than leather, now, you can drink it from all the cupp. Nevertheless, do not drink, which intoxicates. (Wala tuskiru muskiran).”⁵⁸ The two narrations would give different meanings, hence diverse conclusions if used in the legal area to determine a case. The direct narrative carries with it the context of the speech, while reported narration only summarizes the text according to the narrator’s understanding.

The divergence in meaning based on the style of narration used above can affect the judgment based on the jurist’s approach. For instance, it is not easy to find jurists who apply the direct narration of this message because it contradicts the principles of shared knowledge upon which the Islamic Law scholars are built. However, this does not happen all the time in judicial justice. For example, issues have arisen regarding the maintenance rights of a divorced woman, which according to the narration by Fatima bnt. Qais says, “The thrice-divorced woman is not entitled to provision and shelter.”⁵⁹ Another indirect narration from the prophet, as given by the same scholar, says, “Messenger (may peace be upon him) that there is no lodging and maintenance allowance for a woman who has been given irrevocable divorce.”⁶⁰ These narrations make one conclude that a divorced woman in this context has no right to lodging and maintenance. However, in certain instances, the prophet reveals that this understanding should only be applicable in the decision of Fatima bnt. Qais and that such a verdict should not apply in all the cases. A direct narration gives a different understanding and judgment: “My husband has divorced me irrevocably, and Allah’s Messenger did not determine housing and maintenance for me“⁶¹ The latter verdict applies the result to a context, thus preventing the outcome of the case from being generalized.

The direct narrations by Aisha give a clearer understanding of the issue than the indirect reports by Fatima bnt. Qais. According to the speaker’s words as narrated by Qasim:

Ursa said to Aisha, “Do you know so-and-so, the daughter of Al-Hakam? Her husband divorced her irrevocably and she left (her husband’s house).” ‘Aisha said, “What a bad thing she has done!” ‘Ursa said (to ‘Aisha), “Haven’t you heard the statement of Fatima?” ‘Aisha replied, “It is not in her favor to mention.” ‘Ursa added, ‘Aisha reproached (Fatima) severely and said, “Fatima was in a lonely place, and she was proned to danger, so the Prophet allowed her (to go out of her husband’s house).”⁶²

Examining the direct speech above reveals that the prophet declared that it is crucial to consider specific circumstances of Fatima bnt. Qais. The prophet reiterates that the woman does not have rights to lodging and maintenance because she went back to her father’s house after she was divorced. This implies that if in another case, a divorced woman decides to remain as a single woman fending for herself, then she would be entitled to lodging and maintenance by her former husband. Moreover, Omar b. Khattab enhances this understanding, further challenging the verdict by Fatima bnt. Qais, saying, “We cannot abandon the Qur’an and the sunnah of the Prophet just considering the statement of a woman which we cannot know exactly whether she has memorized the hadith exactly or not.”⁶³ Therefore, scholars reach different understandings regarding the lodging and maintenance of a divorced woman.

Based on the outcomes from the styles of narrations used in the cases above, it is evident that the accounts of a text can affect the judgment delivered by a jurist. This further reveals that giving the context of narration is as important as the summary of the message intended by the speaker. Moreover, pre-understanding of the reader or judge based on a given Hadith can affect their judgment of a particular case due to the transmission method used to convey the Hadith as mainly used to determine the subject in question.

Reader Based Interpretation Problem of Ḥadīth Texts and Its Effects on the Judgement

The Hadith narrations are considered crucial in Islamic Law after the Qur’anic verses. The Hadiths are applied contextually due to the differences resulting from interpretations by Muslim scholars. Various scholars such as al-Shafii have used and applied Hadiths as essential sources of Islamic Law. Such applications have affected the outcomes of multiple cases throughout the history of Islam. However, it is vital not to overlook the issues resulting from using narrations to support judicial outcomes, as they sometimes lead to challenges in reaching a direct conclusion and determining a case. This can affect the administration of justice to different people at different times. Moreover, Hadith texts are associated with over-interpretation based on the scholars’ juristic opinions, which results from the atomic approach to the narrations. For instance, Al-Hudarî reveals that Muslim scholars do not accept texts that do not follow the opinions of Islamic schools are abrogated.⁶⁴ In other words, such opinions are unwelcome and are not used in administering justice in Islamic Law. Scholars take such positions to prevent instances in which the views and pre-understanding of scholars do not go beyond the acceptable limits of the Islamic Law and beliefs but confine the thought within the holy texts. This concept can be further understood by giving examples in which the Hadiths are applied in judicial systems to pass judgment or punishment of offenders, as discussed below.

Punishment of the Person who Abandons Daily Prayer

Even though Hadiths are used as sources of judicial information, relying on them may sometimes cause issues, primarily due to evaluating their meaning and viewpoints in legal contexts. One of the best ways to understand this text is by examining the narration used to ensure that Muslims follow regular prayer times (salat). Such narrations come with some interpretations, which, when used together with judicial pre-understanding, would be interpreted as killing someone who abandons to follow the regular prayer practices. A wrong interpretation may result in the execution of the judgment that may lead to destruction rather than enrichment. Abdullah b. Burayda recounted what he had from the prophet, saying, “The difference between us and them is prayer (salat). Who abandons prayer, becomes infidel.”⁶⁵ Most scholars, such as Hanbali, have used this narration to pass hush judgments on their followers based on an associated text saying, “anyone who converts kill him.”⁶⁶ Thus, these scholars apply these texts together and equate one who has abandoned prayer to an infidel or someone who has been converted to another religion. According to the second narration, one who converts is supposed to die at the hands of the believers.

The most crucial concept in this regard is to understand how the understanding of texts can be used by jurists rather than the understanding of scholars. According to another narration by Ummu Aiman, the scholar says, “Do not abandon prayer intentionally. Allah’s and His Messenger’s protection removed from the one who abandons the prayer intentionally.”⁶⁷ This narration gives a different idea regarding the one who abandons prayer intentionally as it reveals that the person becomes deprived of the protection of Allah and the Prophet. The examination of the two texts would make a jurist consider “ta’zir” instead of terminating a Muslim’s life.⁶⁸ This latter understanding presents the challenge of reaching a final verdict by a jurist and gives the essence of considering different narrations of the exact text to get the complete interpretation. Consequently, it reveals that using a single narration can also result in a jurist’s pre-understanding, which may cloud judgment. Therefore, while daily prayer is an essential part of the life of a Muslim, killing someone who abandons salat may contract the principles laid out in the Hadiths.

Punishment of the Person Who Watches Someone’s House Without Permission

The problem associated with the interpretation of the Hadith can also be explored by considering the verdict issued in the case in which a person looks inside another’s house without permission. While peeping into the inner courts of someone’s house is ethically wrong, the judicial aspect of the act may bear much weight. Islam provides rules and principles that affect the lives of believers at any point. It emphasizes the need to ask for permission before entering someone’s house. While it is expressly provided in the Qur’an, similar texts are also available in Hadiths through narrations that aim to protect a believer’s privacy. Muslim scholars in law have interpreted such texts and applied them in criminal law, thus have become the basis for punishing offenders.

It is crucial to explore examples of narrations and how they have been used in the justice system in Islam. According to Ubaydullah ibn Abi Bakr ibn Anas, “A man looked into one of the rooms of the Prophet, may Alllah bless him and grant him peace, and he went for him for a sharp arrow, or stick and made to seathily poke him with it.”⁶⁹ Some scholars applied this ruling the judged that it is okay for a host to harm a peeker unintentionally, and even if such harm results in death, it is not counted sin on the host. The verdict shows that it is okay for one to assume danger if the harmed person gets or looks into another person’s house without direct permission. However, the evaluation of the above narration and the verdict may make a reader interpret them, concluding that it is acceptable to kill someone who peeps into someone else’s house, and such an act is counted righteous in the account of the owner of the house.

While it is ethically wrong in the social perspective to look inside someone else’s house, thus depriving them of their privacy, removing the person’s eye or killing them for that offense is not justice. Such hash verdicts may not reflect the balance of the penalty associated with the Islamic Law.⁷⁰ Therefore, these evaluations reveal that a jurist can reach a certain understanding and hold a specific perspective regarding a Hadith to discourage some harmful social conduct. This further shows that the reader’s perspective may interfere with the personal judgment and can use the advice given in Hadith as the law text.

Conclusion

The law (Shariah), as found in the Qur’an and the Hadith, is used to administer God’s justice to people and creatures. It represents God in the cosmic world and helps to give people divine wisdom regarding how to conduct themselves in different spaces. Moreover, the words of the prophets, when used to guide the legal minds, become an affirmation of the Messager of God. No authority exists in the Islamic jurisprudence other than that obtained from God and the prophet. Their words in the Qur’an and the Hadith are represented by texts from which people read, understand, and interpret. Consequently, the Islamic Law is in text, and thus its effect and authority on the life of a believer in Islam way of life. The interpretations and understanding of the exact text by jurists make them reach different verdicts due to various underlying factors, such as pre-understanding, source of information, the aspect that determines the meaning of a text, and the position of the reader and text in the interpretation process.

The current research has attempted to collect various views on textual interpretation, especially the use of Hadiths as a source of Islamic Law, and has addressed critical concerns. Consequently, the study has considered the position of text as applied in the law and discussed how Hadith texts are effective and crucial in jurists’ interpretation process. Therefore, the present concludes the following:

1. In Islamic Jurisprudence, “the text” has the main authority in terms of its effect on Muslim life. Muslims live by the rules and laws written in the Qur’an primarily, and the Hadith. Scholars maintain that the verdict reached by jurists in their interpretation must always be guided by the Islamic text, contrary to which such judgments are abrogated.
2. The most important difficulty with the text is the interpretation problem, which is shaped by the reader’s mind. The text gives the space for divergent opinions are readers’ activities involving understanding and interpretation may result in divergent opinions.
3. Text and its interpreter constitute Islamic Jurisprudence together. The reader interacts with the law, making the two coexists especially in the interpretation process. The text shapes the jurists’ understanding while the jurists form the meaning of the text, which is considered the readers’ pre-understandings.
4. Depending on text-based pre-understandings, the reader’s mind has been shaped by the structure of the text. The styles used to narrate Hadiths impact how readers interpret the texts and their judgement process. The same text may have diverse views or verdicts, which may cause disagreements between scholars and jurists.

The Islamic Law constitutes scholarly interpretations and thus may result in diverse opinions from time to time. Therefore, even though the Islamic Law is referred to as the Law of God or Divine Law, there are instances in which the administration of justice deviates from the Islamic Law. Therefore, one should understand that the pre-understanding by various Islamic communities, scholars, or even faiths, can interpret the same texts differently. Consequently, judging all Muslims with the same beliefs held by others is unfair. One must understand that pre-understandings are shaped by cultures, education systems, and traditions of a given community, and such circumstances lead them to interpret texts in a way that best address their specific contexts.

The differences in one’s pre-understanding have affected the legal interpretation of texts in many Islamic legal areas. The diverse opinions and understanding of the scholars are based on textual interpretations, hence cannot be equated to personal faults. Moreover, since different scholars agree on one or two of these differences, it makes sense for diversity to occur. Such diverse opinions also give the Islamic Law its authentic application and dynamism to respond to real-life situations. Moreover, the various views of jurists make it possible to apply the law in different contexts, thus addressing specific issues affecting society and religion.

Since various scholars’ opinions are weighed against the strict standards, the judgment made by one jurist is considered applicable and bears its spiritual power in its specific context. However, it is also crucial to take precautions regarding the approach used to interpret a text. For instance, a scholar’s opinion is likely affected by their setting, which may impact the overall view of people who watch the Islamic way of life as a test of faith. Such people or societies must understand that the interpretation a scholar gives to a text may differ based on the person’s background and context; however, it does not deviate from the holy writ.

It is also crucial not to overlook the instances of extremism due to the diversity in the interpretation of the Qur’an and the Hadith. While such occur in a few cases, it is essential to note that there is no fault with the text. For instance, when the Quranic and Hadith texts are used as the reference for formulating a particular law, the jurists bear the full responsibility of giving the verdict from the interpretation. This makes the text remain pure from fault and can be used by other scholars to turn around some notions that deviate from the accepted way of life. As the evaluation has revealed, the styles used in narrations contribute immensely to these differences. The direct narrations give undiluted information of the original text free from the reporter’s opinion, providing the reader with a complete perspective. Therefore, it is crucial to stick to the original text’s context to help the reader understand and correctly interpret the Hadith.

Bibliography

Abd ar-Rahman I. Doi, Shari’ah: The Islamic Law, London: 2008, p.78.

Abou El-Fadl, Khaled, Speaking in God’s Name Islamic Law, Authority and Women, Oxford: Oneworld, 2001

Ahmed Zeki Hammad, Islamic Law: Understanding Juristic Differences, Indianapolis: American Trust Publications, 1992, p.44.

Al-Aynî, Badruddîn Ebû Muhammed Mahmud b. Ahmed b.Musa al-Hanefi Umdetu’l-Kâri, (I-XX), Kahire: 1972.

Ali b. Ahmed b. Mukerremillah al-Saidi al-Adawi, al-Hâshiyetu al-Adevi ala Kifayeti’tTalibi al-Rabbani, (I-II), Beirut: Dâru’l-Fikr, n.d., v.II, p.346.

Azami, M. M., Studies in Early Hadith Literature, American Trust Publications, 2001.

Baderin, Mashood, International Human Rights Law and Islamic Law, Oxford, 2009., “Historical and Evolutional Perceptions of Islamic Law in a Continually Changing World” The Middle East in London.

Barak, Aharon. “Purposive interpretation in law.” In Purposive Interpretation in Law. Princeton University Press, 2011.

Bardakoğlu, Ali “ceza”/”punishment”, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi, İstanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Yayınları, 1993.

C. Ogden and I. Richards, The Meaning of Meaning, (10th edition) 1956; Aharon Ba-rak, Purposive Interpretation in Law, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2005, p.3; Ronald Dworkin, Law as Interpretation, Texas Law Review, vol.60, (1982), pp.527-550, p.529)

Coulson, N. J., Succession in the Muslim Family, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971

Gadamer, Hans Georg, Truth and Method, London : Sheed and Ward, n.d._______, The Universality of the Hermeneutical Problem (1966), in: David E. Linge (edt.), Philosophical Hermeneutics, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1977.

Gül, Münteha. “Söz ve düşünce aktarımı.” Turkish Studies/Türkoloji Araştırmaları 2, no. 2, 2007: 239-256.

Hallaq Wael B., “Was the Gate of Ijtihâd Closed?”, International Journal of Middle East Studies, (1984) xvi, 1, pp.3-41, p.30.

Hallaq, Wael B. Sharī’a: theory, practice, transformations. Cambridge University Press, 2009.

Heidegger, Martin. “Being and Time (1927), trans. j. Macquarrie and E. robinson.” New York: Harper and Collins Publishers 2008 (1962): 185-86.

Ibn Esir, Abu’l-Hasan Izzaddin Ali b. Muhammed b. Abdulkarim, el-Kamil fi’tTarih, (I-IX), Beirut: Dâru’l-Ma’rife, 2002.

Ibn Hanbel, Ahmed, al-Musnad, Beyrut: Mektebu’l-İslâmî, 1993. p.469

Ibn Qudama, Abdullah b. Ahmad Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi, al-Mughni, (vol:I-IX), Beirut : Daru’l-Kitabi’l-Arabi, 1972, p. 180.

Kesgin, Salih. “Hadith and Islamic Law The Role of Preunderstandings in Hadith Interpretation.” Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 33, no. 33 (2012): 67-100.

Leech, Geoffrey N. – Short, Michael H., Style in Fiction, Newyork: Longman, 1981.

Lonergan, Bernard J. F., Method in Theology, London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1972.

Mohammad Hashim Kamali, Shariah Law: An Introduction, Oxford: Oneworld, 2008, pp.102-107

Muhammed b. Afifi al-Bacuri al-Hudarî, al-Târih al-Teşrîi al-Islâmî, Beirût: 1960, p.323.

Peters, Rudolph. “Divine Law or Man-Made Law? Egypt and the Application of the sharî’a.” Arab Law Quarterly 3, no. 3 (1988): 231-253.

Ragib al-Isfehânî, “j-h-d,” Mufradâtu Alfâz al-Qur’ân, Dimashk: Daru’l-Kalem, Beirut: alDâru al-Shâmiyya, 1992, p.208; Ibn anzûr, Muhammed b. Mukrim, “J-h-d,” Lisânu’lArab, Beirut: al-Dâru al-Sâdır, n.d., v.III, pp.133-134; Molla Fenârî, Muhammed b. Hamza, al–Fusûlu’l-Badâyi’, Istanbul: Şeyh Yahyâ Efendi Matbaasi, 1289, (vols:I-II), v.II, p.415.

Rahman, Fazlur, “Post-Formative Developments in IsIam”, Islamic Studies, Karachi, 1, 4 (1962).

Ricour, Paul, From Text to Action, translated by: Kathleen Blamey and John B. Thompson, London: Northwestern University Press, 1991.

Sanʻani, Abd al-Razzaq ibn Hammam, al-Mus annaf, Beirut: al-Majlis al-Ilmi, 1970, v.3, p.124.

Schacht, Joseph, An Introduction to Islamic Law, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982.

Sözen, Edibe. “Söylem.” İstanbul: Paradigma Yayınları, 1999.

Speight, Marston, “Narrative Structures in the Hadith”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies, v.59/4 y.2000, pp.265-271.

Umberto Eco, Interpretation and Over-Interpretation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.45-89.

Unal, Yavuz, Hadis Geleneğinde Metin Bilinci, Samsun: Etüt Yayınları, 2008.

Weiss, Bernard, “Exotericism and Objectivity in Islamic Jurisprudence”, içinde: Heer, Nicholas, Islamic Law and Jurisprudunce, London: University of Washington Press, 1990, pp.53-71

Weiss, Bernard, “Interpretation in Islamic Law: The Theory of Ijtihâd”, American Journal of Comparative Law, 1978, vol.26, no.2, pp.199-212.

Weiss, Bernard, The Spirit of Islamic Law, Athens:The University of Georgia Press, 1998.

Zubaida, Sami, Law and Power in the Islamic World, Tauris, 2003.

Footnotes

• 1 C. Ogden and I. Richards, The Meaning of Meaning, (10th edition) 1956; Aharon Ba-rak, Purposive Interpretation in Law, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2005, p.3; Ronald Dworkin, Law as Interpretation, Texas Law Review, vol.60, (1982), pp.527-550, p.529)
• 2 Barak, Aharon. “Purposive interpretation in law.” In Purposive Interpretation in Law. Princeton University Press, 2011.
• 3 Peters, Rudolph. “Divine Law or Man-Made Law? Egypt and the Application of the sharî’a.” Arab Law Quarterly 3, no. 3 (1988): 231-253.
• 4 Heidegger, Martin. “Being and Time (1927), trans. j. Macquarrie and E. robinson.” New York: Harper and Collins Publishers 2008 (1962): 185-86.
• 5 Gadamer, Hans Georg, Truth and Method, London : Sheed and Ward, n.d._______, The Universality of the Hermeneutical Problem (1966), in: David E. Linge (edt.), Philosophical Hermeneutics, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1977.
• 6 Ibid
• 7 Umberto Eco, Interpretation and Over-Interpretation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.45-89.
• 8 Gadamer, Hans Georg, Truth and Method, London : Sheed and Ward, n.d._______, The Universality of the Hermeneutical Problem (1966), in: David E. Linge (edt.), Philosophical Hermeneutics, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1977.
• 9 Barak, Aharon. “Purposive interpretation in law.” In Purposive Interpretation in Law. Princeton University Press, 2011.
• 10 As presented by Kesgin, Salih. “Hadith and Islamic Law The Role of Preunderstandings in Hadith Interpretation.” Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 33, no. 33 (2012): 67-100.
• 11 Ibid
• 12 Heidegger, Martin. “Being and Time (1927), trans. j. Macquarrie and E. robinson.” New York: Harper and Collins Publishers 2008 (1962): 185-86.
• 13 Lonergan, Bernard J. F., Method in Theology, London: Darton, Longman and Todd,
• 1972.
• 14 Baderin, Mashood, International Human Rights Law and Islamic Law, Oxford, 2009., “Historical and Evolutional Perceptions of Islamic Law in a Continually Changing World” The Middle East in London, July-August 2009.
• 15 Ibid
• 16 Weiss, Bernard, “Exotericism and Objectivity in Islamic Jurisprudence”, içinde: Heer, Nicholas, Islamic Law and Jurisprudunce, London: University of Washington Press, 1990, pp.53-71
• 17 Zubaida, Sami, Law and Power in the Islamic World, Tauris, 2003.
• 18 Ragib al-Isfehânî, “j-h-d,” Mufradâtu Alfâz al-Qur’ân, Dimashk: Daru’l-Kalem, Beirut: alDâru al-Shâmiyya, 1992, p.208; Ibn anzûr, Muhammed b. Mukrim, “J-h-d,” Lisânu’lArab, Beirut: al-Dâru al-Sâdır, n.d., v.III, pp.133-134; Molla Fenârî, Muhammed b. Hamza, al–Fusûlu’l-Badâyi’, Istanbul: Şeyh Yahyâ Efendi Matbaasi, 1289, (vols:I-II), v.II, p.415.
• 19 Peters, Rudolph. “Divine Law or Man-Made Law? Egypt and the Application of the sharî’a.” Arab Law Quarterly 3, no. 3 (1988): 231-253.
• 20 Schacht, Joseph, An Introduction to Islamic Law, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982.
• 21 Rahman, Fazlur, “Post-Formative Developments in IsIam”, Islamic Studies, Karachi, 1, 4 (1962).
• 22 Weiss, Bernard, “Interpretation in Islamic Law: The Theory of Ijtihâd”, American Journal of Comparative Law, 1978, vol.26, no.2, pp.199-212.
• 23 Ibid
• 24 Abd ar-Rahman I. Doi, Shari’ah: The Islamic Law, London: 2008, p.78.
• 25 Hallaq Wael B., “Was the Gate of Ijtihâd Closed?”, International Journal of Middle East Studies, (1984) xvi, 1, pp.3-41, p.30.
• 26 Ahmed Zeki Hammad, Islamic Law: Understanding Juristic Differences, Indianapolis: American Trust Publications, 1992, p.44.
• 27 Ibn Esir, Abu’l-Hasan Izzaddin Ali b. Muhammed b. Abdulkarim, el-Kamil fi’tTarih, (I-IX), Beirut: Dâru’l-Ma’rife, 2002.
• 28 Ibid
• 29 Abou El-Fadl, Khaled, Speaking in God’s Name Islamic Law, Authority and Women, Oxford: Oneworld, 2001
• 30 Coulson, N. J., Succession in the Muslim Family, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971
• 31 Ibid
• 32 Ibn Qudama, Abdullah b. Ahmad Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi, al-Mughni, (vol:I-IX), Beirut : Daru’l-Kitabi’l-Arabi, 1972, p. 180.
• 33 Ali b. Ahmed b. Mukerremillah al-Saidi al-Adawi, al-Hâshiyetu al-Adevi ala Kifayeti’tTalibi al-Rabbani, (I-II), Beirut: Dâru’l-Fikr, n.d., v.II, p.346.
• 34 Coulson, N. J., Succession in the Muslim Family, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971.
• 35 Ibid
• 36 Weiss, Bernard, The Spirit of Islamic Law, Athens:The University of Georgia Press, 1998.
• 37 Sözen, Edibe. “Söylem.” İstanbul: Paradigma Yayınları, 1999.
• 38 Ricour, Paul, From Text to Action, translated by: Kathleen Blamey and John B. Thompson, London: Northwestern University Press, 1991.
• 39 Azami, M. M., Studies in Early Hadith Literature, American Trust Publications, 2001.
• 40 Muslim, Kitab al-Buyû, 4/49.
• 41 Ahmad b. Hanbal, al-Musnad, v.1, p.178
• 42 Hallaq, Wael B. Sharī’a: theory, practice, transformations. Cambridge University Press, 2009.
• 43 Unal, Yavuz, Hadis Geleneğinde Metin Bilinci, Samsun: Etüt Yayınları, 2008.
• 44 Gül, Münteha. “Söz ve düşünce aktarımı.” Turkish Studies/Türkoloji Araştırmaları 2, no. 2, 2007: 239-256.
• 45 Leech, Geoffrey N. – Short, Michael H., Style in Fiction, Newyork: Longman, 1981.
• 46 Ibid
• 47 Speight, Marston, “Narrative Structures in the Hadith”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies, v.59/4 y.2000, pp.265-271.
• 48 Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 4: Volume 1, Book 4, Number 241.
• 49 Volume 7, Book 65, Number 354: Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah
• 50 Sahih Muslim 1769a, Book 32, Hadith 79
• 51 Leech-Short, a.g.e., p.320.
• 52 Mohammad Hashim Kamali, Shariah Law: An Introduction, Oxford: Oneworld, 2008, pp.102-107
• 53 Nasâî, Kitab-al Janâiz 15; Muslim, Kitab al-Janâiz, 9.
• 54 Ibid
• 55 Tirmidhi, Kitab al-Birr va’s-Sıla, 13
• 56 Ibid
• 57 Nasâî, Kitab al-Janaiz, 100.
• 58 Nasâî, Kitab al-Ashriba, 40
• 59 Muslim, Kitab al-Birr, 47
• 60 Muslim, Kitabu’t-Talak, 9
• 61 Ebu Davud, Kitab al-Talak, 39
• 62 Al-Bukhari, Kitab al-Talaq, 63
• 63 Tirmidhi, Kitab al-Talak, 5
• 64 Muhammed b. Afifi al-Bacuri al-Hudarî, al-Târih al-Teşrîi al-Islâmî, Beirût: 1960, p.323.
• 65 Sanʻani, Abd al-Razzaq ibn Hammam, al-Mus annaf, Beirut: al-Majlis al-Ilmi, 1970, v.3, p.124.
• 66 Bukhari, Kitab-al-Jihad, 149
• 67 Ibn Hanbel, Ahmed, al-Musnad, Beyrut: Mektebu’l-İslâmî, 1993. p.469
• 68 Al-Aynî, Badruddîn Ebû Muhammed Mahmud b. Ahmed b.Musa al-Hanefi Umdetu’l-Kâri, (I-XX), Kahire: 1972.
• 69 Bukhari, Kitab al-Diyât, 23
• 70 Bardakoğlu, Ali “ceza”/”punishment”, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi, İstanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Yayınları, 1993.