The Qatiyyât-Zanniyyât Distinction in al-Juwaynîs al-Ghyâthî and its Modern Interpretations
This article discusses how Imâm al-Haramayn al-Juwaynî evaluates the question of politico-juridical ahkâm within his Giyâth al-Umam and it criticizes Wael B. Hallaq and Patricia Crones arguments about al-Juwaynîs ideas that dwells on that distinction. In the aforementioned book al-Juwaynî differentiates the politico-juridical ahkâm into two depending on whether they are certain (qatî) or impressionistic (zannî) in terms of their attainment. The certain rules include the issues that directly concern the ummah, while the impressionistic rulings are those that are left to the ijtihâd of the scholars because of the lack of a definitive evidence (dalîl) about them. Grounded theoretically in the literature on the jurisprudential methodology, the seperation between the qatî and zannî rules is also introduced in the al-Giyâthî depending on which the issues in the book are discussed. Yet, Hallaq and Crone view this differentiation as an alternative to al-Mâwardîs theory of caliphate and they accuse al-Juwaynî for secularizing the caliphate through enabling powerful military leaders to assume the position of caliphate.
Yorum yapmak için giriş yapın.