2. a classical outline of the emergence of the madhhabs - ts andersson

7/27/2019 2. a Classical Outline of the Emergence of the Madhhabs - TS Andersson

1/14

OFADVANCEDSTU

DIE

S

THEMUS

LIM FACU

LTY

themuslimfaculty.org

1

!---

Title: A Classical Outline of the History of the Madhhabs

Author: Tobias Sahl Andersson

Publication date: 09/02/2013


2/14


2

Lecture II: A Classical Outline of the History of the Madhhabs

!

--- Welcome to the Muslim History Programme of the MFAS. This is the second of 12 sessions

which make up the second module, The Madhhabs of Islam. The lecture will last

approximately 40 minutes during which time you should make a written note of any

questions that may occur to you for clarification afterthe lecture.

Introduction

When approaching the development of the madhhabs from a historical perspective, one might

wonder how the classical Muslim scholars of the first thousand years post Hijra treated the

subject in their times. Some may argue that the questions modern academics ask about the

intellectual history of Islam did not concern the scholars of the classical period, or at least

that these contextual questions were secondary to the transmission of the scholarship itself.

On the other hand, it could be argued, that many aspects of the tradition of fiqh were, in fact,

based on understanding the context of legal judgements and its sources in relation to their

original as well as present-day context. Accordingly, this type of historical analysis was

perhaps an integral part of most sciences and of the scholars understanding, although often

unarticulated.

In order to situate ourselves in the discipline that we are approaching the historical study

of scholarly developments in Islam we will keep in mind the questions proposed in the

previous lecture, which are the type of questions modern academics generally ask. The

purpose of this lecture, however, is to look back to the classical period itself and examine

some of the questions that concerned scholars of that time. That will, hopefully, give us a

picture of how they viewed the subject and provide a perspective on our own historical

position when approaching these issues. The scholar that I have chosen to illustrate a

traditional Muslim scholars view is Ibn Khaldun, whom I mentioned in the previous lecture


3/14

OFADVANCEDSTU

DIE

S

THEMUS

LIM FACU

LTY


3

as one of those who, similarly to ourselves, set out to examine the intellectual developments

in Islam in relation to the larger civilisational history.

In the past, some academics have argued that Ibn Khaldun and his theoretical perspectives

on civilisational developments are unique in the history of Islamic scholarship. It is true that

he was unusual in his systematic and consistent approach. It is also true that he was never

seen as one of the great legal authorities and that his immediate influence in the Muslim

world, despite being the Chief Qadi (qadi al-qudat) in Cairo, never extended beyond the

regions in which he was active. Nevertheless, he clearly represents traditional Muslim

scholarship and its transmission throughout the centuries. Without discrediting the novelty ofIbn Khalduns historical works and theories, they should be viewed as a part of the

transmission of civilisational thought that had taken place in Muslim scholarship for

centuries. As one contemporary academic puts it, the most significant difference between Ibn

Khaldun and his predecessors isformal, rather thansubstantial.1Thus, many of his analytical

views can be traced to great scholars before him, although he certainly was the most

successful in refining and systematising the principles of civilisational analysis, or, as he

names it, ilm al-umran, the science of social organisation. Therefore, the following lecture

will examine Ibn Khalduns views on the history of the sciences offiqh and aqida, which

also includes his analysis of the relationship between these two disciplines, and the larger

political, social and economic history of Muslim civilisations.

Sciences in society

Before examining Ibn Khalduns views, it is useful to look at his general perspective on

knowledge and sciences in relation to the individual human being as well as to society.

Without going into too much detail about his epistemological theories which Zaid Ahmad

treats in his insightful bookThe Epistemology of Ibn Khaldun (2003) his perspective on the

social significance of knowledge can be summarised in a few principle concepts. According

to him, the ability to think (fikr, aql) enables the human being to find ways of making a

living and establish co-operation (tawun), which he regards as the primal stage of

1Mrtensson 2011: 125.


4/14


4

establishing a society (mujtama).2 He also makes clear that the most important form of

knowledge is revelation (wahi), transmitted by prophets, which is the principle source of

guidance for mankind.3 By the faculty offikr, man is prepared for accepting the divine

guidance, and by co-operation (taawun), man is prepared to implement the message socially.

Thus, divine religion, in the view of Ibn Khaldun, is a necessary foundation for sound social

organisation, while nevertheless working by the same basic human conditions that all peoples

and societies share, whether their source of law and moral conduct is revelation or not.

Another important feature of Ibn Khalduns view on sciences is that all sciences are crafts

(sana), transmitted by habit (malaka)4

and scientific instruction (talim), which arenecessary features in the process of achieving skill and mastery in any craft. This might

appear to be an obscure detail, but it is, in fact, foundational for the classical view on the

development of the madhhabs. They emerged as guilds offiqh and have remained essential to

the Muslim community by the very nature of their uninterrupted transmission from the

original source. It is in this sense we read the following statement of Ibn Khaldun:

It should be known that a craft is the habit [malaka] of something concerned with action and

thought. Inasmuch as it is concerned with action, it is something corporeal and perceptible to

the senses. Things that are corporeal and perceptible to the senses are transmitted through

direct practice more comprehensively and more perfectly (than otherwise), because direct

practice is more useful with regard to them.

A habit is a firmly rooted quality acquired by doing a certain action and repeating it time after

time until the form of (that action) is firmly fixed. A habit corresponds to the original (action

after which it was formed). The transmission of things one has observed with ones own eyes

is something more comprehensive and complete than the transmission of information of things

one has learned about. A habit that is the result of (personal observation) is more perfect and

more firmly rooted than a habit that is the result of information. The skill the student acquires

in a craft, and the habit he attains, correspond to the quality of instruction and the habit of the

teacher.5

2 Ibn Khaldun 2:411, see also 1: 89-93.3 Ibn Khaldun 1:194-5, 2:422.4 According toLanes Lexicon, the word malaka refers to a quality firmly rooted in the mind.

5 Ibn Khaldun 2:346.


5/14

OFADVANCEDSTU

DIE

S

THEMUS

LIM FACU

LTY


5

He also notes that habit is not synonymous with understanding and appreciation (al-fahm wa-

l-way).6 The transmission of skill and mastery by habit is the exclusive property of scholars,

well-versed in a certain scientific discipline. However, understanding of single problems,

even within advanced sciences, may be shared by people without specialisation in the

discipline.7 Because crafts are transmitted through instruction and personal observation, Ibn

Khaldun emphasises that habits depend on the teaching process (talim) and the continuity of

teaching (as-sanad fit-talim). Thereby leading the authorities of the disciplines establish

their own particular traditions of mastering the craft.8 This development is discernible in the

emergence of the scientific disciplines of Islam, all having their own methodologies andtechnical terminologies. It also exists on a more narrow level within the disciplines, for

instance the madhhabs offiqh, all of which have their own particular methodologies,

terminologies and founding authorities. Despite a science remaining constant throughout the

ages, as in the case offiqh and aqida, its articulated methodologies and technical terms will

have evolved over time.9 In his study of Ibn Khalduns epistemology, Zaid Ahmad writes

about his understanding of science in society:

Science or knowledge has both functions: it is a tool to bring about civilisation and is itself theproduct of civilisation. In other words, civilisation is established as a result of mans

achievement in all aspects of his life including in sciences and crafts, while new sciences and

crafts are the excellent products of civilisation. Along the line there is another factor, which is

of no less importance, that is the process of instruction ( talim). It is by way of instruction that

knowledge and science can be transferred and developed. Members of one generation obtain

the knowledge of their ancestors through the method of instruction, besides at the same time

producing new knowledge through their own intellectual activities and creativity. This process

is considered as natural to humans insofar as the civilisation process is concerned.10

A civilisation or what Ibn Khaldun refers to as sedentary culture (hadra) is thus

characterised by achievements in crafts and sciences, which are both products of civilisation

and producers of its culture. But the role of sciences in society does not end there. At the

6Ibn Khaldun 2:426.7 Ibn Khaldun 2:426.8 Cf. Ibn Khaldun 2:426-7.9 Ibn Khaldun 2:427.

10 Ahmad 2003:20.


6/14


6

establishment of a civilisation, the sciences and crafts become means of maintaining and

developing that state of civilisation. Accordingly, a civilisation can only survive if there is an

establishment and continuity of a strong teaching tradition. Thereby, knowledge of the

sciences are transmitted, developed and activated in society. Although the relationship of

scientific developments to society is more complex than this brief overview can contain, the

basic perspective on sciences as integral parts of society and as products/producers of power

is important to remember. The examination of sciences in relation to the surrounding social

context also implies its fundamental relationship to power. Sciences are representations as

well as producers of social knowledge, which in turn regulates what can be known, thoughtand practiced in certain contexts. This analytical perspective allows for the examination of

political, social, economic and intellectual power relations as expressed through sciences, or

what nowadays would be referred to as discourses of knowledge. Before moving on to the

core subject of this course the schools of law and belief it is also useful to take a brief

look at Ibn Khalduns basic typology of sciences.

A typology of sciencesWithin the context of the eight/fourteenth century, Ibn Khaldun (d. 808/1406) classified the

sciences of his time into two broad categories: the philosophical sciences (al-ulum al-

hikmiyya al-falsafiyya) and the transmitted traditional sciences (al-ulm an-naqliyya al-wa

diyya). These two categories are sometimes referred to as aqliyya sciences and naqliyya

sciences, i.e. sciences based on reasoning and sciences based on transmission. He writes:

It should be known that the sciences with which people concern themselves in cities and which

they acquire and pass on through instruction, are of two kinds; one that is natural to man and

to which he is guided by his own ability to think and a traditional kind that he learns from

those who invented it.11

The first category includes sciences with which man can become acquainted through the

very nature of his ability to think.12 The second category includes sciences ultimately based

on revelation and its transmission within the religious communities throughout history.13

11 Ibn Khaldun 2: 436.12 Ibn Khaldun 2: 436.

13 Ibn Khaldun 2: 436.


7/14

OFADVANCEDSTU

DIE

S

THEMUS

LIM FACU

LTY


7

Although many sciences within the categories overlap and share certain methodologies, he

nevertheless classifies them as either belonging to the aqliyya or naqliyya sciences

depending on their foundational epistemology, methodology, purpose and transmission. Other

scholars have suggested additional categories, such as spiritual sciences or experiential

sciences (which would include tasawwuf). Although those discussions are interesting and

worthy of closer examination, this brief mention of the classification and its relevance to the

history of the schools of law and belief, will suffice for our present purposes.

When discussing the traditional sciences, Ibn Khaldun mentions the science of tafsir,

qiraa (readings of the Quran), hadith, usul al-fiqh, fiqh and kalam. He also notes thatunderstanding these sciences requires knowledge of the philological sciences (al-ulum al-

lisaniyya) pertaining to the Arabic language.14 He makes clear that these naqliyya sciences, in

their proper form, are ultimately derived from the Quran and Sunna. They are, therefore,

restricted to the Muslim Community, since the traditional sciences of all former religious

communities were abrogated with the arrival of Islam.15 Although, as Ibn Khaldun notes, the

ilm al-kalam as a scientific discipline originated when scholars began to use logical or

rational arguments in addition to the traditional material, it is a discipline that ultimately

refers back to the Quran and Sunna, despite its varying degrees of philosophical

methodology.

Following from Ibn Khalduns general perspective on sciences in society, it may be argued

that because of the naqliyya foundation of the sciences of law and belief, alongside their

aqliyya methodologies and continuous extrapolation in relation to the present age, these two

sciences are the most indicative of the surrounding historical developments in historical

Muslim societies. Thus, when Ibn Khaldun examines the historical development of these two

sciences, he also points out the importance of understanding their origins, developments and

contemporary functions within the context of the wider civilisational history.

The history of the schools of fiqh

After the sciences directly related to the Quran and hadith, Ibn Khaldun turns his attention to

the sciences of usul al-fiqh and fiqh, which includes their origins and developments. As

14 Ibn Khaldun 2: 437, 438.

15 Ibn Khaldun 2: 438.


8/14


8

Ahmad Zaid suggests, Ibn Khalduns view on the development offiqh can be divided into at

least five distinct phases: (1) the phase of ikhtilaf, (2) the pre-scientific phase (i.e. pre-

madhhab), (3) the phase of three madhhabs, (4) the emergence of four madhhabs and the

outgrowth of taqlid, and (5) the geography and achievement of the four remaining

madhhabs.16

Firstly, Ibn Khaldun traces the origins of the madhhabs to the natural existence of

differences of opinion (ikhtilaf) among the people of knowledge qualified to make

judgements after the death of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Some of

the reasons given for the ikhtilafamong the first generations are the multiple meanings of thetransmitted texts, differences in the transmission of the Sunna, non-textual evidence and new

events or circumstances (al-waqi al-mutajaddida) that required new judgements.17 At this

time,fiqh was not a specialised science. The people with knowledge of the Quran along with

its meanings and legal rulings were referred to as al-qurr, literally the readers. But when

literacy and scholarship spread within Muslim civilisation, there was a transition from qurr

tofuqaha and ulama,in the specific meaning of jurists and scholars of the religious sciences.

This was the beginning of the second phase, referred to as the pre-madhhab phase. As Zaid

Ahmad sums up Ibn Khalduns view on the emergence of the sciences: People found it

necessary to protect religious knowledge from corruption, thus inventing methods of

knowing and assessing chains of transmitters.18

Again, according to Ibn Khaldun, sciences (as crafts) are the property of sedentary

culture. Because this did not exist, or at least was uncommon among the majority in the Arab

society, it was largely non-Arabs who excelled in the development of the early sciences,

including fiqh.19 He exemplifies his theory by referring to the early grammarians of Persian

decent, such as Sbawayh, al-Fris and az-Zajjj.20 A similar situation can likewise be said

about the early scholars of tafsir, hadith, fiqh and kalam. Another sociological insight of Ibn

Khaldun, is the fact that many of the Arabs who left the bedouin culture were from the

16 Ahmad 2003: 43-4.17 Ahmad 2003: 44.

18 Ahmad 2003: 125.

19Ibn Khaldun 3:311-15.

20Ibn Khaldun 3:313, 3:361.


9/14


10/14


10

people to attain the level of independent judgement (ijtihad). That is, according to him, the

reason why the ulama no longer admit of any differences of opinion (khilaf) arising from

outside of these four madhhabs.24 The fourth period is therefore characterised by taqlid(lit.

imitation), since most scholars admitted their inability to make independent judgements

(ijtihad). Instead, they referred their judgements to existing authorities, usually within one of

the four remaining madhhabs. When Ibn Khaldun mentions the closing of the door ofkhilaf

and its methods (wa-sadda an-nsu bb al-khilf wa-turuqahu), he is thus referring to the

impermissibility and impossibility of creating a new madhhab after the four.25 Sincefiqh had

become a craft, the guild structure of the madhhabs transmitted those firmly rooted habits(malaka) that were required for a person to undertake legal analysis and to apply the methods

of a particular madhhab.26

Finally, Ibn Khaldun notes the geographical spread of the four schools and their later

political contexts. He mentions, for instance, the Hanbalis in Syria and Iraq, noting their clash

with the Shias in Baghdad. He mentions the wide geographical spread of the Hanafis and

their excellent ability in dealing with the controversial questions that came up in the East.

Likewise, he notes the spread of the Shafii madhhab in Egypt and Iraq, Khorasan and

Transoxania, before it was interrupted by the Fatimid dynasty in Egypt and the Mongol

invasions from the East. He also analyses why the Madinan madhhab of Imam Malik spread

westwards. Besides the fact that the western scholars travelled mostly to al-Hijaz to study

under Imam Malik and his students, he also notes that the desert attitude (badwa) was

predominant among the western people. They were not interested in the sedentary culture of

the Iraqis, but inclined towards the people of al-Hijaz. Therefore, Ibn Khaldun argues, the

Maliki madhhab among the western people retained its simplicity and was not affected by

the refinement and improvement of sedentary culture that took effect in other schools.27

Whether or not the later Maliki scholars actually retained the original bedouin attitude could

be discussed. But this way of analysing the socio-political factors involved in the

24 Ibn Khaldun 3:8-9.25 Ibn Khaldun 3:8.26 Ibn Khaldun 3:13.27 Ibn Khaldun 3:12-13, see also 3:13-20 for a further discussion about the relationship between the different

madhabs and the development of different Maliki schools.


11/14

OFADVANCEDSTU

DIE

S

THEMUS

LIM FACU

LTY


11

development of the madhhabs is nevertheless a clear example of how classical scholars

approached similar questions to the ones that confronts modern historians.

The history of the schools ofkalam

A fundamental insight from theMuqaddima is that a science, similarly to any craft in society,

develops when there is a need for it. The emergence and formalisation of the sciences of

hadith, fiqhand sufism (tasawwuf)are thereby explained with reference to the demand for

such sciences at certain times.28 From that basis, Ibn Khaldun sets out to explain the

emergence of the schools of belief, represented by the followers of Abu al-Hasan al-Ashari

and Abu Mansur al-Maturidi. After identifying tawhidas the core (sirr) of the discipline, he

defines kalam as a science based on logical proofs in defense of the articles of faith and

refuting innovators (mubtadia) who deviate in their dogmas from the early Muslims and

Muslim orthodoxy (as-salaf wa-ahl as-sunna).29 The articles of faith (al-aqid al-

imniyya) are thus, prior to the science, not its result. This indicates the originally defensive

nature ofkalam and its historical emergence when innovators challenged the beliefs of the

ahl as-sunna. Similarly to the emergence of sufism (tasawwuf) as a formal and structured

science, the science of belief developed alongside other advanced crafts at the advent of

sedentary culture (hadra) in the Muslim lands. Therefore, kalam took the shape of its

scientific environment and addressed the needs of the Muslim community according to the

intellectual discourse of the time.

Ibn Khaldun notes that the first generations adopted the articles of faith without question,

but that differences later appeared. For instance, regarding the ambiguous verses

(mutashbiht) in the Quran. Many scholars found it necessary to employ logical arguments

and proofs in defence of the original beliefs, which laid the foundations for the science of

kalam.30 Some of the innovators that the early scholars encountered were the Mutazila,

Mujassima and the Mushabbiha. There were also the various Khawarij and Shia groupings,

although their innovations initially were political in nature. Most important, however, was the

challenge from the Mutazila.

28 Ibn Khaldun 2:447-463, 3:3-20, 3:76-8229 Ibn Khaldun 3:34.

30 Ibn Khaldun 3:34.


12/14


12

Without going into detail about the theological debates, we note that the discipline of

kalam first of all emerged in response to intellectual challenges. It did, however, also include

responses to political challenges such as the doctrine of the Imamate (al-imma) adopted by

the Shia. As Ibn Khaldun notes, the discussion of the Imamate is, at best a matter of public

interest and social organisation. It is not an article of faith. But because of the Shia

doctrines, the question was added to the discipline in order to defend the original positions

regarding leadership and caliphate. This is particularly clear in the texts of Western

representatives of the Ashari school, many of whom were forced to deal with the presence of

the Fatimid dynasty and their Ismaili doctrines.Interestingly, Ibn Khaldun argues that the science of kalam is no longer necessary or

required by students of his day, because the innovators no longer exist. One might wonder

what he would have said about our times, when the agreed-upon articles of faith once again

are being challenged by Muslim movements as well as scientific doctrines from outside the

Muslim community. He does, in fact, acknowledge the usefulness of knowledge ofkalam for

certain students who might benefit from its style of argumentation. As he concludes his

chapter on kalam, the carriers of the Sunna (hamil as-sunna) i.e. the leading ulama

should not be ignorant of the theoretical proofs of its articles of faith.31

Concluding discussion

Without drawing sweeping conclusions from our discussion of material from al-Muqaddima,

we can probably confirm that Ibn Khalduns analysis of the emergence of the madhhabs in

substance represents the majority view of the ulama throughout history, although the form

and details might have differed depending on scholarly and political context. We find that

classical scholars were, in fact, concerned with how, why and when the madhhabs developed.

Similar issues that concerned Ibn Khaldun, still concern Muslims today. By seeking to

understand how classical scholars handled these historical questions and related them to their

own context, we are able to improve our apprehension of past dynamics between intellectual

and socio-political history. Knowledge of this classical scholarship might also furnish us with

31 Ibn Khaldun 3:54-55.


13/14

OFADVANCEDSTU

DIE

S

THEMUS

LIM FACU

LTY


13

the opportunity in the present time to understand and reflect upon the challenges that face the

Muslim community.

That brings us to the end of todays lecture. Next weeks lecture is entitled Pre-

Madhhab Fiqh and will be delivered by Hajja Aisha Bewley. Recommended reading in

relation to this lecture include the sections referred to above in Ibn Khalduns Muqaddima

(first sections of chapter 6) and the other book that I have made repeated reference to

throughout this lecture, Zaid Ahmads The Epistemology of Ibn Khaldun (2003). For the up-

coming lecture, we recommend Shaykh Abdalhaqq Bewleys The Four Madhhabs of Islam

(2013). It is also recommended to look at part one of Yasin Duttons The Origins of Islamic

Law (1999) and the sections in Abu Zahras The Four Imams that concern the teachers of the

four imams. More reading material and advice for further exploration will, however, be

provided by our next lecturer. Thank you for your attention.


14/14


14

References

Ahmad, Zaid 2003. The epistemology of Ibn Khaldun. London: Routledge/Curzon.

Ibn Khaldun 1980. The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History. Vol 1-3. Trans. Franz

Rosenthal. New York: Princeton University.

Ibn Khaldun 1867-1868. Tarikh. Vol 1 [al-Muqaddima]. Ed. Nasr al-Hurini. Cairo: Bulaq.

Mrtensson, Ulrika 2011. Introduction: Materialist Approaches to Islamic History in

Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient54 (2011) 117-131.

2. a classical outline of the emergence of the madhhabs - ts andersson

Documents