16
[Response to his statement: “They paid no heed to opinion and independent legal reasoning, and they prohibited recourse to legal analogy and juristic preference”]
Chapter
As for his statement(1): “They paid no heed to opinion and independent legal reasoning, and they prohibited recourse to legal analogy and juristic preference.”
The response to this may be given on several grounds:
First: In this regard, the Shia are no different from others. Ahl al-Sunnah differ among themselves concerning opinion, independent legal reasoning, legal analogy, and juristic preference, just as the Shia do. The Zaydis accept these methods and transmit reports concerning them from the Imams(2).
Second: Many adherents of Ahl al-Sunnah—from both the general populace and the elite—do not accept legal analogy. Thus, not everyone who affirmed the imamate of the three caliphs accepted legal analogy. Indeed, the Baghdadi Mu'tazilites do not accept legal analogy(3),
(1) The following passage previously appeared in (K), 1/83 (M). It forms the end of the first section of Ibn al-Mutahhar’s discussion under the first argument of the second chapter of *Minhāj al-Karāma*. It also appeared earlier in this volume, p. [0–9]9. Ibn Taymiyya responded to part of this section on pp. 102–288, and then addressed the remaining parts from p. 288 to the present page, where he responds to the final part. His response concludes on p. [0–9]81.
(2) The Zaydis accept *qiyās* (legal analogy), but disagree concerning *ijtihād al-ra’y* (independent reasoning based on opinion). In *al-Maqālāt*, 1/141, al-Ash'arī states that the Zaydis are divided into two groups on this question: the first permits such reasoning in legal rulings, whereas the second rejects it. On the Zaydi acceptance of legal analogy, see Shaykh Muhammad Abū Zahra, *al-Imām Zayd*, p. [0–9]22 ff. (Dār al-Fikr al-'Arabī, 1378/1959).
(3) Al-Āmidī states in *al-Ihkām fī Usūl al-Ahkām*, 4/6 (Dār al-Kutub ed., 1332/1914): “The Shia, al-Nazzām, and a group of the Baghdad Mu'tazilites—such as Yahyā al-Iskāfī, Ja'far ibn Mubashshir, and Ja'far ibn Harb—held it rationally impossible that its use (legal analogy) could be prescribed as a religious obligation, although they differed over the grounds for this rational impossibility.” See also *al-Farq bayn al-Firaq*, pp. [0–9]7, 101; Ibn Tāhir, *Usūl al-Dīn*, pp. [0–9]9–20; 'Īsā Manūn, *Nibrās al-'Uqūl fī Tahqīq al-Qiyās 'inda 'Ulamā' al-Usūl*, 1/57–62 (al-Munīriyya ed.); and Siddīq Hasan Khān, *Husūl al-Ma'mūl*, p. 159 (Istanbul ed., 1926).
[الرد على قوله وَلَمْ يَلْتَفِتُوا إِلَى الْقَوْلِ بِالرَّأْيِ وَالِاجْتِهَادِ وَحَرَّمُوا الْأَخْذَ بِالْقِيَاسِ وَالِاسْتِحْسَانِ]
فَصْلٌ
وَأَمَّا قَوْلُهُ
(١)
:
" وَلَمْ يَلْتَفِتُوا إِلَى الْقَوْلِ بِالرَّأْيِ وَالِاجْتِهَادِ، وَحَرَّمُوا الْأَخْذَ بِالْقِيَاسِ وَالِاسْتِحْسَانِ "
.
فَالْكَلَامُ عَلَى هَذَا مِنْ وُجُوهٍ:
أَحَدُهُمَا: أَنَّ الشِّيعَةَ فِي هَذَا مِثْلُ غَيْرِهِمْ، فَفِي أَهْلِ السُّنَّةِ فِي الرَّأْيِ وَالِاجْتِهَادِ وَالْقِيَاسِ وَالِاسْتِحْسَانِ كَمَا فِي الشِّيعَةِ النِّزَاعُ فِي ذَلِكَ، فَالزَّيْدِيَّةُ تَقُولُ بِذَلِكَ وَتَرْوِي فِيهِ الرِّوَايَاتِ عَنِ الْأَئِمَّةِ
(٢)
.
الثَّانِي:
أَنَّ كَثِيرًا مِنْ أَهْلِ السُّنَّةِ - الْعَامَّةِ وَالْخَاصَّةِ - لَا تَقُولُ بِالْقِيَاسِ، فَلَيْسَ كُلُّ مَنْ قَالَ بِإِمَامَةِ الْخُلَفَاءِ الثَّلَاثَةِ قَالَ بِالْقِيَاسِ، بَلِ الْمُعْتَزِلَةُ الْبَغْدَادِيُّونَ لَا يَقُولُونَ بِالْقِيَاسِ
(٣)
،
(١) الْكَلَامُ التَّالِي سَبَقَ وُرُودُهُ فِي (ك) ١/٨٣ (م) . وَهُوَ آخِرُ الْقِسْمِ الْأَوَّلِ مِنْ كَلَامِ ابْنِ الْمُطَهَّرِ فِي الْوَجْهِ الْأَوَّلِ مِنَ الْفَصْلِ الثَّانِي مِنْ كِتَابِ " مِنْهَاجِ الْكَرَامَةِ "، وَسَبَقَ وُرُودُهُ فِي هَذَا الْجُزْءِ، ص [٠ - ٩] ٩. وَقَدْ تَنَاوَلَ ابْنُ تَيْمِيَّةَ الرَّدَّ عَلَى جُزْءٍ مِنْ هَذَا الْقِسْمِ فِي الصَّفَحَاتِ ١٠٢ - ٢٨٨، ثُمَّ رَدَّ عَلَى سَائِرِ الْأَجْزَاءِ فِي الصَّفَحَاتِ ٢٨٨ إِلَى هَذِهِ الصَّفْحَةِ حَيْثُ يَرُدُّ عَلَى الْجُزْءِ الْأَخِيرِ وَيَنْتَهِي رَدُّهُ ص [٠ - ٩] ٨١.
(٢) يَقُولُ الزَّيْدِيَّةُ بِالْقِيَاسِ، وَيَخْتَلِفُونَ فِي اجْتِهَادِ الرَّأْيِ، وَيَذْكُرُ الْأَشْعَرِيُّ فِي الْمَقَالَاتِ ١/١٤١ أَنَّ الزَّيْدِيَّةَ يَنْقَسِمُونَ فِي اجْتِهَادِ الرَّأْيِ إِلَى فِرْقَتَيْنِ: الْأُولَى تُجِيزُ هَذَا الِاجْتِهَادَ فِي الْأَحْكَامِ وَالثَّانِيَةِ تُنْكِرُهُ. وَانْظُرْ عَنْ قَوْلِ الزَّيْدِيَّةِ بِالْقِيَاسِ كِتَابَ " الْإِمَامِ زَيْدٍ " لِلشَّيْخِ مُحَمَّد أَبِي زَهْرَةَ، ص [٠ - ٩] ٢٢ وَمَا بَعْدَهَا (ط. دَارِ الْفِكْرِ الْعَرَبِيِّ، ١٣٧٨/١٩٥٩) .
(٣) قَالَ الْآمِدِيُّ فِي " الْإِحْكَامِ فِي أُصُولِ الْأَحْكَامِ " ٤/٦ (ط. دَارِ الْكُتُبِ، ١٣٣٢/١٩١٤) : " وَقَالَتِ الشِّيعَةُ وَالنَّظَّامُ وَجَمَاعَةٌ مِنْ مُعْتَزِلَةِ بَغْدَادَ كَيَحْيَى الْإِسْكَافِيِّ وَجَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُبَشِّرٍ وَجَعْفَرِ بْنِ حَرْبٍ بِإِحَالَةِ وُرُودِ التَّعَبُّدِ بِهِ (الْقِيَاسِ) عَقْلًا، وَإِنِ اخْتَلَفُوا فِي مَأْخَذِ الْإِحَالَةِ الْعَقْلِيَّةِ " وَانْظُرِ: الْفَرْقَ بَيْنَ الْفِرَقِ، ص [٠ - ٩] ٧، ١٠١ ; أُصُولَ الدِّينِ لِابْنِ طَاهِرٍ، ص [٠ - ٩] ٩ - ٢٠ ; عِيسَى مَنُونَ: نِبْرَاسَ الْعُقُولِ فِي تَحْقِيقِ الْقِيَاسِ عِنْدَ عُلَمَاءِ الْأُصُولِ (ط. الْمُنِيرِيَّةِ) ١/٥٧ - ٦٢ ; صِدِّيق حَسَن خَان: حُصُولَ الْمَأْمُولِ (ط. اسْتَانْبُولَ، ١٩٢٦) ، ص ١٥٩.