Bukhari - Biography and Methodology

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

* This is part of a series on the lives, works, and methodologies of ḥadīth scholars. It is an adapted translation of Al-Ta‘rīf al-Wajīz bi Manāhij Ashhur al-Muṣannifīn fī al-Ḥadīth by Shaykh Syed Abdul Majid Ghouri, faculty of Qur’an and Sunnah Studies, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (USIM). *

Introduction

This book focuses on three areas: methodologies, famous compilers, and ḥadīth.

Methodologies

Manāhij (methodologies; sing. Manhaj) literally means the ‘clear path’. Technically, it is the method a muḥaddith uses to gather, write, classify, apply selection criteria, present, divide according to isnād, grade, and compose their works on ḥadīth.

Famous Compilers

They are the individuals who collected ḥadīth and arranged them in chapters and sections that display their analysis, such as the imams of the major ḥadīth works:

Ḥadīth

A Ḥadīth (statement; plural aḥadīth) is a statement, action, tacit approval, description, character trait, or biographical detail of the Prophet ﷺ. This is the definition according to some of the scholars of ḥadīth; according to others, it also includes what is attributed to the Companion or the Successor.

Other synonyms for ḥadīth are sunnah, khabar, and athar. The word sunnah is only used when the action performed was transmitted from the Prophet ﷺ and his Companions. The word ḥadīth, on the other hand, is used for what is narrated from the Prophet ﷺ and his Companions, in terms of their sayings, actions, and other than them. The words khabar and athar are used to denote Marfūʿ narrations, or both Marfu‘ and Mawqūf narrations.[6] Some have said that khabar is for Marfū‘ narrations and athar is for Mawqūf narrations.

The benefit of learning the methodologies of the ḥadīth compilers is that students develop an understanding of their philosophies on narrating, narrators, and narrations, their approaches to classifying ḥadīth, and their specialized terminologies. Students also explore a significant number of ḥadīth books and gain a thorough understanding of ḥadīth sources, methods, and the goals of the compilers.

Ṣiḥāh Books

Ṣiḥāḥ is the plural of Ṣaḥīḥ (meaning sound or authentic), indicating freedom from defects. In ḥadīth sciences, it refers to books where the authors aimed to compile only authentic ḥadīth. Although many collections of authentic ḥadīth exist, only a few meet the standards of Imam al-Bukhārī and Imam Muslim, as they also include some ḍa‘īf (weak), ḥasan (good), and other types of ḥadīth. Some of the most renowned Ṣiḥāḥ books are the following (in sequential order):

  1. الجامع المسند الصحيح المختصر من أمور رسول الله ﷺ وسننه وأيامه: famously known as Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, authored by Imām Abū ʿAbd Allah Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl al-Bukhārī (d. 256 AH).
  2. المسند الصحيح المختصر من السنن بنقل العدل عن العدل عن رسول الله ﷺ: famously known as Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, authored by Imām Abū l-Ḥusayn Muslim ibn al Ḥajjāj al-Qushayrī al-Naysābūrī (d. 261 AH).
  3. المنتقى المختار من السنن المسندة عن رسول الله ﷺ في الأحكام: authored by Imām Ibn Jārūd Abū Muḥammad ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Alī al-Naysābūrī (d. 307 AH).
  4. مختصر المختصر من المسند الصحيح عن النبي ﷺ: famously known as Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Khuzaymah, authored by Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq al-Naysābūrī (d. 311 AH).
  5. صحيح أبي عوانة: authored by al-Ḥāfiẓ Abū ʿAwānah Yaʿqūb ibn Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm al Isfarāyīnī (d. 316 AH).
  6. صحيح ابن السكن: authored by al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn al-Sakan Abū ʿAlī Saʿīd ibn ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd al-Miṣrī (d. 353 AH).
  7. المسند الصحيح على التقاسيم والأنواع: famously known as Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Ḥibbān, authored by Imām Ibn Ḥibbān Abū Ḥātim Muḥammad ibn Ḥibbān al-Bustī (d. 354 AH).
  8. الإلزامات: authored by Imām al-Dāraquṭnī Abū l-Ḥasan ‘Alī ibn ‘Umar al-Baghdādī (d. 385 AH).
  9. المستدرك على الصحيحين: authored by Al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī Abū ‘Abd Allah Muḥammad ibn ‘Abd Allah al-Ḍabbī (d. 405 AH).
  10. الأحاديث المختارة مما ليس في الصحيحين أو أحدهما: authored by Ḥāfiẓ Ḍiyā’ al-Dīn al-Maqdisī Abū ‘Abd Allah Muḥammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wāḥid al-Dimashqī (d. 643 AH).

Some of these important and famous works will be expanded on later in the series, InshaAllah.

The Ṣaḥīḥ of Imām al-Bukhārī

Biography

His name is Abū ʿAbd Allah Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl ibn Ibrāhīm ibn al-Mughīrah al-Juʿfī al-Bukhārī, ‘Leader of the Faithful’ in ḥadīth, and one of the most outstanding experts in the science. He was born in 194 AH in Bukhārā (modern-day Uzbekistan) and grew up as an orphan. He traveled in pursuit of knowledge to Shām, Miṣr, Jazīrah (Upper Mesopotamia), Baṣrah, and the Ḥijāz, gathering more than 600,000 ḥadīth. He passed away in the year 256 AH and is buried in Khartank (near the city of Bukhārā).

Great imams of ḥadīth, such as Imām Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj al-Qushayrī (the author of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim) and Muḥammad ibn ʿĪsā al-Tirmidhī (the author of Sunan al-Tirmidhī), narrated from Imam al-Bukhārī. Other great ḥadīth scholars acknowledged his preeminence and knowledge. Imām Ibn Khuzaymah said: “I did not see under the sky anyone more knowledgeable and with more memorization of the ḥadīth of the Prophet ﷺ than Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl.”[7] Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalanī said: “Were I to open the doors of praise for Imam al-Bukhārī by those who followed him, the pen and paper would finish, I would run out of breath, for it is an ocean that has no shore.”[8]

The most famous of his works are: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, al-Adab al-Mufrad, al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr, al-Tārīkh al-Awsaṭ, and al-Tārīkh al-Ṣaghīr.

The Book

Imam al-Bukhārī named his book الجامع المسند الصحيح المختصر من أمور رسول الله ﷺ وسننه وأيامه (The Comprehensive, Musnad, Authentic, Abridged, from the Matters of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and his Sunan and his Days).” It is part of the Jāmi‘ genre, a book that contains ḥadīth from eight topics (not exhaustively, but rather a selection):

1. Beliefs (ʿaqāʾid) 5. Exegesis (tafsīr)

2. Rulings (aḥkām) 6. History (tārīkh)

3. ‘Heart Softeners’ (raqāi’q) 7. Trials (fitan)

4. Etiquettes (ādāb) 8. Virtues (manāqib)

This book is considered the first work solely authored with authentic ḥadīth. Imam al-Bukhārī began compiling his Ṣaḥīḥ in Masjid al-Nabawī and continued working on it for 16 years. After completing it, he presented it to the scholars of his era, who agreed upon its authenticity and considered his book the most authentic after the Qur’an itself. The Ummah also received it with acceptance, generation after generation. Al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Kathīr (d. 774 AH) said: “The recitation of this book gives the clouds water, and the Ummah has consensus upon its authenticity and acceptance.”[9]

Number of Hadīth, its Sections, and Chapters

The Ṣaḥīḥ contains 7563 ḥadīth with repetition; 2607 ḥadīth without repetition. It has 98 ‘Books’ (kutub), the first of which is the ‘Book of the Beginning of Revelation’ and the last is the ‘Book of Tawḥīd’ and comprises 3,451 individual chapters.

Methodology

Condition of Accepting Hadīth

Arrangement of ‘Books’

Methodology in Chapter Headings

The chapter headings are of three types:

The Clear Headings

where the ḥadīth clearly matches the chapter heading without requiring explanation, and the reader can easily understand the relation between them without contemplation.

Example: Chapter: The Signs of Faith, where Imām al-Bukhārī brings the ḥadīth of Anas (R): “The sign of faith is love of the Anṣār, and the sign of hypocrisy is hatred of the Anṣār.”

The Inferred Headings

where the ḥadīth is connected to the chapter heading through inference, and the reader can discern the relation between them only through contemplation.

Example: Chapter: The People of Knowledge and Virtue are More Rightful to be the Imam, where Imām al-Bukhārī brings multiple narrations about the illness of the Prophet ﷺ and his appointing of Abū Bakr (R) to lead the prayer. He mentions the statement of ‘Āisha (R), where she said that her father was a gentle person and would be unable to lead the people in prayer from his place, yet the Prophet ﷺ still put him forward. He did so despite the availability of other Companions who had louder voices or were stronger, and Imām al-Bukhārī infers through this that precedence in leading the prayer should be given to those of knowledge and virtue.

The Unrestricted Headings

where Imām al-Bukhārī says “Chapter” without any qualification or explanation, and he deploys this category for two reasons:

  1. Headings that are Connected to a Previous Chapter
    • The contents are related to the previous chapter, such that they could be included within it without a separate heading. It serves as an addendum, and Imām al-Bukhārī separates the ḥadīth either to mention a point of benefit related to the second narration or to alert the reader to the importance of the chapter.Example: Chapter: Tayammum is a (single) strike, where Imām al-Bukhārī mentions the ḥadīth of the Prophet ﷺ in which he says, “‘This will suffice you’, and he wiped his face and arms once.” Imām al-Bukhārī then says “Chapter” and mentions the ḥadīth of ‘Imrān ibn Ḥuṣayn (R), where the Prophet ﷺ saw a person who did not pray with the people. He asked him: ‘O so-and so! What prevented you from praying with the people? The person replied: ‘O Messenger of Allah, I am in the state of impurity and do not have any water’. The Prophet ﷺ then told him: ‘Upon you is the earth, and it is sufficient for you.’ Now, Imām al-Bukhārī mentions this ḥadīth after a chapter about performing tayammum with one strike, which the second ḥadīth does not say; instead, it mentions using the earth to perform tayammum. Since the least necessary number of strikes is one, which is also enough (i.e., not required to do multiple strikes), the point of relation between the two chapters would be the topic of tayammum, with the first ḥadīth mentioning the number of strikes and the second implying that information.An alternative explanation is that Imām al-Bukhārī mentions the second ḥadīth to corroborate the first but does not include it in the same chapter because it does not explicitly mention tayammum being a single strike. That is only understood through inference, which Imām al-Bukhārī hints at through a separate chapter that is still topically related to the first.
  2. Headings that are Connected to the ‘Book’
    • The content of this section includes a benefit that is related to the overall topic and not to a previous section.Example: Chapter: Bringing a camel into the Masjid for an excuse, which Imām al-Bukhārī brings in the Book of Prayer. He mentions in this chapter a ḥadīth from Umm Salamah (R) where she said: “I complained to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ about an illness, so he said: ‘Do ṭawāf behind the people while riding (on a camel).’ So, I did ṭawāf and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ prayed next to the Ka‘ba…”)Then Imam al-Bukhārī presents an untitled chapter following this one where he mentions the ḥadīth of Anas ibn Mālik (R) who said that “two companions of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ departed from him on a dark night and were led by two (miraculous) lamp-like lights lighting the way in front of them. When they parted, each of them was accompanied by one light until they reached their families (i.e., houses).”As can be observed, there is no (apparent) connection between the two chapters. Since Imām al-Bukhārī left this chapter untitled, it can be surmised that the two ḥadīth are related to the Masjid in general, with the second ḥadīth highlighting the virtue of going to the Masjid in the dark.

Method of Mentioning Muʿallaq Ḥadīth

The Muʿallaq is a ḥadīth where one or more narrators are omitted by the author, meaning the author omits their direct link and begins the chain from the next transmitter.

The Muʿallaqāt in this book are 1,341, with many of them ‘connected’ in other places in the Ṣaḥīḥ. As for their ruling: if the (narration) wording is decisive, then it is considered authentic. But if the (narration) wording is uncertain, it will not be regarded as authentic, as Imām al-Bukhārī did not stipulate the same conditions for the Muʿallaq as he did for the Musnad. The Muʿallaq are not the primary focus of his book, but he includes them for additional benefits.

Method of Mentioning Mursal Hadīth

The Mursal is a ḥadīth that a Tābiʿī narrates from the Prophet ﷺ without mentioning the intermediary (i.e., the companion) between them.

Now, one of the conditions of the isnād for Imām al-Bukhārī in his Ṣaḥīḥ is connectivity. Therefore, the Mursal ḥadīth which he brings is not based on his conditions, but as supporting evidence, testimony, and corroboration.

His method of presenting the Mursal ḥadīth is as follows: he presents the ḥadīth in both forms, the Mawṣūl (connected) and the Mursal (interrupted), or the Mawqūf (stopped) and the Marfū‘ (elevated). He brings the ḥadīth with a complete authentic chain first, then mentions the Mursal ḥadīth as corroboration and support, which serves as a detailed proof for the first report.

Method of Mentioning Mawqūf Hadīth

The Mawqūf is a ḥadīth attributed to the companion only, from his statement, action, tacit approval, or description, and it is not ‘raised’ (i.e., connected) to the Prophet ﷺ.

Imām al-Bukhārī presents the Mawqūf ḥadīth from the fatāwā of the Companions (R) and Successors, and their exegesis of many verses, as a means of familiarizing and strengthening what Imām al-Bukhārī prefers in cases of disagreement among the scholars. He rules definitively on what he considers authentic from the Mawqūf ḥadīth, even if it is not based on his (usual) conditions.

Method of Repeating Hadīth

Takrār is the re-mentioning of a ḥadīth in one chapter or more, either with the exact wording, with an addition, or with a reduction, in one way or more.

Imām al-Bukhārī repeats a ḥadīth many times for academic purposes. He divides a single ḥadīth among multiple chapters and derives benefits, explicit or subtle rulings, through each mention, and repeats the ḥadīth based on its appropriateness with a chapter.

The repetition may seem like mere repetition at first, but it is not. Because each time Imām al-Bukhārī brings a (repeated) ḥadīth in a chapter, he does not mention the complete chain or text; instead, he mentions a new benefit about the chain, text, or both. If there is a need for repetition but no new benefit to add, then he suffices by referring to it. The repeated ḥādīth, with both the chain and text, are only 23.

Method of Grouping the Teachers and the Isnād

Grouping the Teachers through ‘Atf

When the authors of ḥādīth works wish to reference a ḥādīth through multiple chains, they group their teachers sometimes through ‘atf with the conjunction letter wāw. They then mention the shared part of the isnād fully, so two or more chains are gathered in a single sequence.

Imam al-Bukhārī uses this method in his book. For example, he said: “Aḥmad ibn Yūnus and Mūsā ibn Ismāʿīl related to us, (and) they both said: Ibrāhīm ibn Sa‘d related to us, who said: Ibn Shihāb related to us, from Sa‘īd ibn al-Musayyib, from Abū Hurayrah (R), who said that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said…” So, Imām al-Bukhārī grouped at the beginning of the chain Aḥmad ibn Yūnus and Mūsā ibn Ismāʿīl with the conjunction letter wāw.

Grouping the Isnād by Taḥwīl

When the authors of ḥādīth works wish to group various transmission chains, they do so through the letter ḥā to indicate Taḥwīl, i.e., to indicate transition from one chain to another. It aims to shorten all the isnād that meet at a specific narrator without repeating the shared chain between them. They do so by placing the letter ḥā next to the name of the narrator, where the transmission chains meet.

Imām al-Bukhārī uses this method in several places throughout his book, and the number of ḥadīth where he does Taḥwīl is 151. For example, he said: “Muḥammad ibn ‘Ubayd ibn Maymūn narrated to us, ‘Īsā ibn Yūnus narrated to us, from ‘Ubayd Allah, from Nāfi‘, from ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar (R): ‘The Prophet ﷺ authorized…’”

Another narration: “Yaḥyā ibn Mūsā narrated to us, Muḥammad ibn Bakr narrated to us, Ibn Jurayj informed us, ‘Ubayd Allah informed me, from Nāfi‘, from ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar (R): ‘The Prophet ﷺ permitted…’”

Another narration: “Muḥammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Numayr narrated to us, my father narrated to us, ʿUbayd Allah narrated to us, who said: Nāfi‘ narrated to me, from Ibn ‘Umar (R): “‘Abbas (R) asked for permission from the Prophet ﷺ to spend the nights of Mina in Makkah because of his camel, so the Prophet ﷺ permitted him.”

So, the common narrator in all three chains is ‘Ubayd Allah, and the three who narrate from him are ‘Īsā ibn Yūnus, Ibn Jurayj, and Ibn Numayr. They all narrate using different terminologies, so Imām al-Bukhārī combines them and places a ḥā before the common narrator to indicate Taḥwīl.

Method of Abbreviating the Routes

If the ḥadīth has more than one isnād or matn, then Imām al-Bukhārī may mention some of them and indicate the rest without mentioning them entirely. For example, he will say “and so-and-so also narrated it from so-and-so”, or “it was narrated in another way from so-and-so”, or “like it” (mithlihī), or “similar to it” (naḥwihī), or “with this isnād”, or “like the ḥadīth of so-and-so”, or “he added to the ḥadīth like so”, or “with its meaning”, or “so-and-so said in such-and-such place”, or “so-and-so corroborated (agreed with) him”, or with other phrasing.

Example: Imām al-Bukhārī states in this book: “Qabīṣah ibn ʿUqbah narrated to us, he said: Sufyān narrated to us, from al-Aʿmash, from ‘Abd Allah ibn Murrah, from Masrūq, from ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr (R) that the Prophet ﷺ said: “Whoever has the following four will be a pure hypocrite, and whoever has one of them will have a characteristic of hypocrisy until he gives it up: when he is entrusted, he betrays; when he speaks, he tells a lie; when he makes a covenant, he is treacherous; when he argues, he behaves in an imprudent manner.” And Shu‘bah (also) narrates it from al-A‘mash.

Imām al-Bukhārī in another ḥadīth said: “ʿUthmān al-Mu’addhin corroborated him and said: ‘Auf narrated to us, from Muḥammad, from Abū Hurayrah (R) from the Prophet ﷺ similar to it.”

Unique Terminologies

Some ḥadīth authors use technical terms in their books with precision, which students must be familiar with to understand their intended meanings. Imām al-Bukhārī uses a term that is not found elsewhere, and it is his saying: “qāla baʿḍ al-nās” (‘some people said’). He repeats it about 25 times after the chapter heading, responding to views other than his own on those issues or chapters. Some baseless opinions suggest that Imām al-Bukhārī was reacting only to Imām Abū Ḥanīfah with this phrase, which is incorrect; instead, he was also responding to Imām al-Shāfi‘ī, Imām Muḥammad, and others.

Most Prominent Methodology Features

Other well-known methodology features are the following:

  1. His condition was not to bring a ḥadīth unless the meeting between the transmitter and the one from whom they narrated it was established.
  2. He has the strictest criteria for assessing the reliability of narrators.
  3. He paid great attention to the wording of the chapter headings, which also frequently mention suitable Qurʾan verses; their exactness demonstrates his deep understanding.
  4. He clarified ḥādīth that contained jurisprudential benefits, with precise reasoning.
  5. When he gathered multiple chains for a narration, he indicated the final one in wording.
  6. He included many Muʿallaq narrations.
  7. He included the statements of the Companions (R) and others.

Some ḥadīth authors use technical terms in their books with precision, which students must be familiar with to understand their intended meanings. Imām al-Bukhārī uses a term that is not found elsewhere, and it is his saying: “qāla baʿḍ al-nās” (‘some people said’). He repeats it about 25 times after the chapter heading, responding to views other than his own on those issues or chapters. Some baseless opinions suggest that Imām al-Bukhārī was reacting only to Imām Abū Ḥanīfah with this phrase, which is incorrect; instead, he was also responding to Imām al-Shāfi‘ī, Imām Muḥammad, and others.

Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī’s Most Important Transmissions, Commentaries, and Abridgments

Most Important Transmissions

The most important transmission of this book is by Imām Abū ‘Abd Allah Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf ibn Maṭar al-Farabrī (d. 320 AH), who heard the Ṣaḥīḥ from Imām al-Bukhārī himself twice. Abū al-Haytham Muḥammad ibn Makkī ibn Muḥammad al-Marwazī al-Kushmīhanī (d. 389 AH) and Abū Zayd al-Marwazī Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad ibn ‘Abd Allah (d. 371 AH) heard the Ṣaḥīḥ from Imām al-Farabrī, and the narration of this book spread through them.

Most Important Commentaries and Marginalia

Shurūḥ (commentaries; sing. Sharḥ) are books where authors comment on the text (matn) of the ḥādīth, explain its unfamiliar words, clarify its meanings, speak about its chains, and discuss its derived rulings and benefits.

Hāwāshī (marginalia; sing. Hāshiyah) are annotations written on the side of the page or between the lines. They usually clarify unclear words in the text and can also include notes, objections, viewpoints, and additions from the annotator.

Some of the most important commentaries and marginalia of this book are:

  1. Fatḥ al-Bārī Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī by al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī Zayn al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Aḥmad al-Dimashqī (d. 795 AH).
    • It is one of the best and most beneficial commentaries on the Ṣaḥīḥ. It includes many jurisprudential, linguistic, and ḥādīth insights. The author explains the variances between the different versions of a ḥādīth and gives a preference based on the method of the early scholars. He also paid attention to the sourcing of ḥādīth and mentioned the different opinions among the Companions, the Successors, and the jurists who followed them, without showing partiality. However, he did not complete his commentary, writing only until the Book of Funerals.
  2. Al-Tawḍīḥ li-Sharḥ al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ by al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn al-Mulaqqin Abū Ḥafṣ Sirāj al-Dīn ʿUmar ibn ʿAlī al-Anṣārī (d. 804 AH).
    • It is a 26-volume commentary on the Ṣaḥīḥ and is considered one of the most important. The author devoted considerable attention to explaining the derivation of jurisprudential rulings from their evidence, citing the narrations of the Companions, Successors, and jurists. He also took great care in describing the chapter headings and their connections to the ḥādīth, giving much attention to sourcing the ḥādīth from Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim and the Four Sunan.
  3. Fatḥ al-Bārī Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī by al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī (d. 852 AH).
    • It is among the most comprehensive, significant, and prevalent commentaries on the Ṣaḥīḥ. The author devoted considerable attention to the technical aspects of ḥadīth, jurisprudential viewpoints, and the explanation of words and their grammar. He mentioned rulings and beneficial details of ḥadīth, engaging in macro-level (uṣūlī) discussions. He also focused on collecting the different routes (ṭuruq) of the ḥadīth and explaining their narrations in other books. He cites shawāhid (supporting, corroborating) narrations extensively and judges many of their isnād as well. The introduction to this commentary, named Hadya al-Sārī, is also extremely valuable.
  4. ‘Umdat al-Qārī Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī by ‘Allāmah al-‘Ainī Badr al-Dīn Maḥmūd ibn Aḥmad (d. 855 AH).
    • Considered like Ibn Ḥajar’s Fatḥ al-Bārī in importance and fame, it contains many discussions across various subjects, particularly on jurisprudential narrations that are subjects of debate between the madhāhib. Given that the author himself is ḥanafī, he, like other commentators, advocates for his madhhab. This commentary also expands on technical terms and discussions; however, the author does not do so consistently throughout the work, with the first four volumes being the longest compared to the remaining volumes.
  5. Irshād al-Sārī ilā Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī by Imām al-Qaṣṭallānī Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad al-Khaṭīb (d. 923 AH).
    • It is concise, highly beneficial, and indispensable for students. The author placed great importance on explaining terminologies and grammar, as well as mentioning and comparing the differences between the narrations.
  6. Iʿlām al-Sunan Fī Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī by Imām al-Khaṭṭābī Abū Sulaymān Ḥamd ibn Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm al-Būstī (d. 388 AH).
    • This commentary is considered one of the earliest commentaries of the Ṣaḥīḥ.
      1. Al-Kawākib al-Darārī Fī Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī by Imām al-Kirmānī Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf ibn ʿAlī al-Baghdādī (d. 786 AH).
      2. ʿAwn al-Bārī li-Ḥal Adillat al-Bukhārī by Shaykh Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān al-Qinnūjī (d. 1307 AH).
      3. Lāmiʿ al-Dararī ʿalā Jāmiʿ al-Bukhārī by Shaykh Rashīd Aḥmad Gangohī (d. 1323 AH). It is a collection of his dictated lessons on the Ṣaḥīḥ.
      4. Fayḍ al-Bārī ʿalā Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī by Shaykh Muḥammad Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī (d. 1352 AH). It is a collection of his dictated lessons on the Ṣaḥīḥ.
      5. Minḥat al-Malik al-Jalīl Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl by Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Rājiḥī.

Most Important Abridgments

Abridgments are books in which scholars summarize and abbreviate the books of ḥadīth to make them accessible to the ummah and to memorize. The summarization is usually limited to the most vital ḥadīth, especially those considered foundational to the Dīn.

A few important abridgments of this book are:

  1. Al-Tajrīd al-Ṣarīḥ li-Aḥādīth al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ by Shaykh al-Zabīdī Abū al-ʿAbbās Aḥmad ibn ʿAbd al-Laṭīf al-Sharjī (d. 893 AH).
    • It is one of the most famous abridgments of the Ṣaḥīḥ, known as Mukhtaṣar al-Zabīdī. In it, the author omitted repeated ḥadīth, gathered dispersed narrations, and omitted the chains except for the name of the Companion.
  2. Mukhtaṣar Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī by Shaykh al-Albānī, Muḥammad Nāṣir al-Dīn (d. 1420 AH).
    • He summarized the chains, omitted repeated ḥadīth, and gathered the dispersed narrations.
  3. Mukhtaṣar Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī by Dr. Saʿd ibn Nāṣir al-Shathrī.
    • He omitted the chains, the statements of the Companions and Successors, the Muʿallaq narrations, gathered the various fragments of a ḥadīth where it is first mentioned, and explained some unfamiliar words.

Footnotes

  1. Ṣiḥāḥ works are where the authors aimed to compile only authentic ḥadīth. ↑
  2. The Sunan is a ḥadīth collection organized according to the well-known chapters of fiqh, for example Ṭahārah, which would then have separate subchapters for wuḍū, tayammum, and ghusl. These works consist of ḥādīth that are used to derive legal rulings, and this genre became popular in the 3rd century AH. ↑
  3. The Muṣannaf is considered as the first organized work of ḥadīth scholarship. They include ḥādīth of the Prophet ﷺ and sayings and rulings of Companions and some Successors. They are organized according to themes and arranged under separate titles and chapters. This genre of ḥadīth literature started around the middle of the 2nd century AH. ↑
  4. The Musnad is a collection of ḥadīth organized according to isnād, where all the ḥādīth of a Companion are in one chapter, regardless of subject matter. The main purpose of the Musnad was to compile the largest amount of ḥadīth for the sake of preservation and record. This genre of ḥadīth literature started during the latter half of the 2nd century AH. ↑
  5. The Muʿjam is a ḥadīth collection where the contents are organized in alphabetical order under the names of the narrators, their teachers, or the cities and tribes to which the narrators belong. This genre of ḥadīth literature appeared after the Sunan in the late 3rd century AH. ↑
  6. Marfūʿ is defined as a saying, action, tacit approval, description, or character trait attributed to the Prophet ﷺ. Mawqūf is a statement, action, or tacit approval attributed to a Companion (R). ↑
  7. Dhahabī, Siyar A‘lām al-Nubalā’, 12/432. ↑
  8. Ibn Ḥahaj, Hadiy al-Sārī, 2/258. ↑
  9. Ibn Kathīr, Al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah, 14/527. ↑
  10. Qasṭallānī, Irshād al-Sārī ilā Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 1/29. ↑

The Great Synthesis or a Gradual Convergence? Rethinking the Origins of Islamic Legal Theory Part 1

Part 1 – The Conventional Story: Raʾy vs. Ḥadīth.

Beyond the myth of opposites: how raʾy and ḥadīth shaped the law together

 

Series Introduction

This four-part series, “The Great Synthesis or a Gradual Convergence? Rethinking the Origins of Islamic Legal Theory,” revisits a familiar narrative in the history of Islamic law. For decades, scholars have told the story of two rival camps—the ahl al-raʾy (the “people of reason”) and the ahl al-ḥadīth (the “people of tradition”)—locked in intellectual battle until al-Shāfiʿī (d. 204/820) brokered a decisive compromise, a “Great Synthesis” that shaped the foundations of Islamic jurisprudence.

But was the divide really so sharp? Were these groups as polarized as later accounts suggest, or were they always closer in practice? By examining both classical doctrines and modern scholarship, this series argues for a more nuanced view: one of proximity, overlap, and gradual convergence rather than stark opposition.

A “War” in Early Islamic Law?

When students first encounter the history of Islamic law, they often hear of a fierce intellectual battle between two rival camps: the ahl al-raʾy and the ahl al-ḥadīth. The ahl al-raʾy are usually identified with the scholars of Kufa and Iraq, who emphasized reasoned opinion, analogy (qiyās), and systematic principles to extend the law to new cases. The ahl al-ḥadīth, based largely in Medina, are portrayed as textualists who insisted on grounding the law directly in transmitted reports from the Prophet.

The Encyclopaedia of Islam frames this divide as one between jurists who “promoted the use of independent legal reasoning to arrive at legal decisions” (ahl al-raʾy) and those who held that “only traditions from the Prophet be used for the law” (ahl al-ḥadīth). In this telling, the two camps were so different that their approaches were fundamentally irreconcilable.

This is where al-Shāfiʿī (d. 204/820) enters the story. He is said to have resolved the conflict by synthesizing the two approaches into a unified legal theory. By requiring that reasoning be anchored in Qurʾān and authentic hadith, and by laying down systematic principles (uṣūl al-fiqh) to govern interpretation, al-Shāfiʿī created a new scholarly consensus. This achievement has been described by Wael Hallaq as nothing less than a “Great Synthesis” (Origins and Evolution of Islamic Law, 7).

Hallaq’s Dramatic Narrative

Hallaq is one of the most influential voices in framing the origins of Islamic legal theory. In The Origins and Evolution of Islamic Law (2005), he describes the history of Islam between 150/767 and 350/961 as marked by conflict between these two groups, culminating in their reconciliation. For him, the “Great Synthesis” was not only a legal turning point but also a cultural one: it reflected a broader social transformation in which hadith gained unrivaled authority.

His portrayal is dramatic. He speaks of a “war” between rationalists and traditionalists, of repeated “battles” in which one side gained the upper hand, and of the eventual victory of a middle ground. The ahl al-raʾy, he says, were “too libertarian” to survive on their own. By the third/ninth century, hadith had become indispensable. At the other pole, the radical traditionalism of figures like Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal was “too austere and rigid” to last, and had to moderate.

This kind of story has a certain dialectical flavor: conflict, tension, and then reconciliation into something new. It’s not Hallaq’s own language, but his framing echoes familiar intellectual patterns that resemble a thesis–antithesis–synthesis arc often associated with Hegelian thought.

The Problem with the “Great Synthesis”

Critics argue this story is too neat. One problem is methodological: Hallaq relies heavily on biographical dictionaries, which record teachers and reputations, but tell us little about doctrines. A jurist could study with a traditionist and still employ reasoning, or cite hadith extensively while also using analogy.

This risks exaggerating polarity. The terms ahl al-raʾy and ahl al-ḥadīth may reflect polemical labels, not solid identities. Joseph Schacht suggested that “ahl al-raʾy” was never a self-designated school but a term used by critics. Moreover, Hallaq’s portrayal of figures like Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal as purely anti-reason seems overstated. Evidence from his students shows that Aḥmad often extrapolated principles from hadith and applied them analogically—showing flexibility.

Why the Drama Persists

So why has the “Great Synthesis” story lasted? Partly because it gives a clear origin story for uṣūl al-fiqh and casts al-Shāfiʿī as a unifying genius. It also mirrors familiar intellectual patterns: conflict followed by reconciliation is a compelling narrative arc. But intellectual history is often messier. Evidence suggests both groups were already closer in practice: both used hadith and reasoning, differing only in emphasis.

Why This Matters

This debate shapes how we understand Islamic law’s character. If it was born out of conflict, then its systemization was a fragile truce. If the divide was never so sharp, then Islamic law emerges as a tradition of spectrum, overlap, and negotiation from the start. That difference matters for how Muslims today view their legal heritage—whether as polarized or as organically plural.

Looking Ahead

In the next installment, we turn to Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, often seen as the archetypal traditionalist hostile to reason. Yet a closer look reveals a jurist who employed analogy and reasoning in subtle ways. If even Aḥmad used raʾy-like methods, then perhaps the gulf between ahl al-raʾy and ahl al-ḥadīth was never as wide as supposed.

References

- Wael B. Hallaq, The Origins and Evolution of Islamic Law (Cambridge University Press, 2005)
- Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., s.v. “Ahl al-Raʾy”
- Christopher Melchert, “Traditionist-Jurisprudents and the Framing of Islamic Law,” Islamic Law and Society 8, no. 3 (2001): 383–406
- Joseph Schacht, The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence (Oxford University Press, 1950)

History and Development of Fiqh

The history and development of Uṣūl al-Fiqh and Fiqh in general passed through four primary eras: 1) The Era of the Prophet  2) The Era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs 3) The Era of the Companions and elder Successors and 4) The Era of Codification.

2.1: The Era of the Prophet ﷺ

This era begins with Muḥammad ﷺ being appointed as the last and final messenger,  thirteen years before the migration to Madīnah, and ends with his leaving this world in the 11th year after migration. This era is considered to be the most important time in the development of Fiqh and Uṣūl al-Fiqh simply because this was the era of divine revelation.

Divine legislation, the law as revealed by Allah ﷻ and explained by His Messenger ﷺ was completed during the lifetime of the Prophet ﷺ. As Allah ﷻ says in Sūrah al-Mā’idah, “This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion.” The foundation of Fiqh throughout history has always been and will always be revelation, which is made up of both the Qur’ān and Sunnah. There were only two sources of law or legislation; the Quran and the Sunnah.

The nature of revealed law in Makkah was very different than the nature of revealed law in Madinah. During the Makkan period, the first 13 years of the Prophet’s mission, revelation focused primarily on what is known as uṣūl al-dīn, principles of religion. These are the fundamental aspects of belief; belief in the oneness of Allah ﷻ (tawḥīd), the concept of prophethood, and life after death. It also includes morals, values, and character. For example, justice, fairness, excellence, gratitude, honesty, modesty, humility, patience, forbearance, and integrity. Makkan law focused on building the individual in terms of faith and character. During this time only a few practical legal rulings were revealed and not in great detail. For example, prayer and zakāh were legislated in Makkah but the specific rulings regarding them were not detailed.

The nature of revelation changed after migration. Madani revelation focused heavily on detailed legal rulings of human actions. Verses were revealed regarding:

  1. acts of worship such as prayer, zakāh, fasting, and ḥajj
  2. transactions such as sales, lease, other contracts, and the prohibition of interest
  3. crimes such as murder theft, adultery, and false accusations
  4. family law such as marriage, divorce, and inheritance
  5. politics such as international relations and treaties.

The Quran would lay down general principles for all these rulings and then the Prophet ﷺ would explain the particular details through his speech, actions, or approvals.

However, the Prophet ﷺ would not explain every minute detail as is done today in the books of Fiqh. He would not say that the farā’iḍ of wuḍū’ are four and these are the sunnan and these are the mustaḥabbāt. Rather, the Companions (ra) would see him perform wuḍū’ and do it exactly as he did. They would observe his prayer and then pray just like him. They performed ḥajj with him and learned the rites of ḥajj through observation.

Another unique feature of this era is that the law was not revealed all at once. It was revealed gradually over a period of 23 years taking shape slowly. For example, initially prayer was an obligation in the morning and the evening and later on it was made obligatory five times a day. Initially the amount of zakāh was not set; it was up to the individual to pay how much they were able to or wanted to. Similarly, alcohol was not outright forbidden; rather, the prohibition went through a gradual process. Some laws were revealed in response to certain things that took place or questions posed to the Prophet ﷺ. Others were revealed without a specific cause or question. The main point to remember is that the source of all these laws was revelation; either directly through the Qur’ān or indirectly through the Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ.

During this time the Prophet ﷺ also exercised his own ijtihād as did some of his companions (ra). Muʿādh ibn Jabal (ra) narrated that when the Prophet ﷺ sent him to Yemen he asked, “How will you judge when the occasion of deciding a case arises?” He replied, “I shall judge in accordance with Allah's Book.” He asked, “(What will you do) if you do not find any guidance in Allah's Book?” He replied, “(I shall act) in accordance with the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ).” He asked, “(What will you do) if you do not find any guidance in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and in Allah's Book?” He replied, “I shall do my best to form an opinion and I shall spare no effort.” The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) then patted him on the breast and said, “Praise be to Allah Who has helped the messenger of the Messenger of Allah to find something which pleases the Messenger of Allah.”

Ijtihād in this period was still considered to be a part of revelation. Whenever the Prophet ﷺ exercised his own judgment Allah ﷻ would either affirm it or guide him to something better. Allah ﷻ would reveal that the better solution was other than that which he had adopted.

As for the Companions (ra), they would make ijtihād in response to situations that they faced in the absence of the Prophet ﷺ. Later, when they met the Prophet ﷺ they would explain what happened and tell him what they had decided. Sometimes the Prophet ﷺ would approve their conclusions, in which case they would become part of the Sunnah. If he did not approve their conclusion he would explain what was better and that would become a part of the Sunnah.

In summary, it can be said that during this time legislation depended on two forms of divine revelation: 1) Recited Revelation (Qur’ān) and 2) Non-recited Revelation (Sunnah).

In terms of codification, the Qur’ān was recorded in its entirety during the life of the Prophet ﷺ; however, it was not compiled into a single book. Some of the Companions (ra) used to write down aḥādīth of the Prophet ﷺ, but it would be their own personal notes or collections.

2.2: The Era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs

This era started after the Prophet ﷺ left this world in the year 11 A.H. and lasted for about 30 years, until 40 A.H. As mentioned earlier, divine revelation was complete during the time of the Prophet ﷺ in the form of the Qur’ān and Sunnah and they served as the primary sources for the legal judgments and rulings of the jurists among the Companions. During this era the primary sources of Islamic Law were: 1) The Qur’ān, 2) The Sunnah, 3) Ijmāʿ (Consensus) and 4) Ijtihād (Personal Opinion).

During this era two new sources of Islamic Law naturally evolved and developed. As Muslim society progressed and expanded, the companions faced situations and problems that they did not face during the time of the Prophet ﷺ and it was necessary for them to determine the legal rulings for them. The jurists (fuqahāʾa) amongst the companions took on the responsibility of determining the rulings of these new issues and occurrences, using their skills of reason in the light of the Qur’ān and Sunnah.

Their methodology was straight forward and built upon the methodology that the Prophet ﷺ approved for Muʿādh (ra) when he sent him to Yemen. If something new came up they would first look to the Qur’ān. If they could not find the ruling in the Qur’ān they would turn to the Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ. If they could not find the ruling in the aḥādīth then they would gather the companions and try to reach a collective decision. If no collective decision were reached, the jurist companion would give their own opinion.

This methodology was captured by Maymūn ibn Mahrān when he summarized Abū Bakr’s (ra) methodology of arriving at legal judgments. “Whenever a dispute was referred to him, Abū Bakr used to look in the Qur’ān; if he found something according to which he could pass a judgment, he did so. If he could not find a solution in the Qur’ān, but remembered some relevant aspect of the Prophet's Sunnah, he would judge according to that. If he could find nothing in the Sunnah, he would go and say to the Muslims: 'Such and such a dispute has been referred to me. Do any of you know anything in the Prophet's Sunnah according to which judgment may be passed?' If someone was able to answer his question and provide relevant information, Abū Bakr would say: 'Praise be to Allah Who has enabled some of us to remember what they have learnt from our Prophet.' If he could not find any solution in the Sunnah, then he would gather the leaders and elite of the people and consult with them. If they agreed on a matter then he passed judgment on that basis. If none of the above resulted in a satisfactory answer he would then do ijtihad and form his own opinion. When Abu Bakr (ra) would form his own opinion he would say, ‘This is my opinion. If it is correct then it is from Allah and if it is wrong then it is from me and I seek forgiveness from Allah.’” From this quote we can see that his methodology was Qur’ān, Sunnah, Ijmāʿ, and exercising personal opinion (raʾy) based off legal reasoning (qiyās) or benefit (maṣlaḥah).

ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb (ra) followed pretty much the exact same methodology in arriving at rulings and judgments. He wrote to one of his judges, Shurayḥ, “If you find something in the book of Allah then judge according to it and do not turn towards anything else. If something comes to you that is not in the book of Allah then judge according to what the Messenger of Allah ﷺ established as a Sunnah. If something comes to you that is not in the book of Allah or the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ then judge according to what the people have agreed upon. If something comes to you that is not in the book of Allah, nor in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ nor has anyone spoken about it before you, then if you want exercise your own judgment do so and if you want to refrain then refrain. And refraining is better for you.” Something very similar is also narrated from ibn Masʿūd (ra) and ibn ʿAbbās (ra).

It can be seen from these narrations that the jurists amongst the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ pretty much followed the same methodology in deriving rulings for new issues that they faced.

Here it is important to understand what exactly is meant by ra’y, or their personal opinion. Ra’y is inclusive of many things that were given very specific technical names later on like analogical reasoning (qiyās), public benefit (maṣlaḥah) and blocking the means (sad al-dharāʿi). The Companions of the Prophet ﷺ had a very clear methodology that they adopted in order to issue legal verdicts (fatāwā). Sometimes they were based on public interest or taking precautions to prevent wrongdoing.

Not all the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ were considered to be jurists or qualified to give legal rulings. There are about 130 Companions, both male and female, who were known to have given fatwā. There were seven who gave more fatāwā than others: 1) ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb, 2) ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib, 3) ʿAbdullāhibn Masʿūd, 4) ʿĀ’ishah, 5) Zaid ibn Thābit, 6) ʿAbdullāhibn ʿAbbās and 7) ʿAbdullāhibn ʿUmar (ra). Then there were others who gave less such as Abū Bakr, ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān, and Abū Mūsā al-Ashʿarī (ra).

Amongst the Companions (ra) there were two inclinations or tendencies towards using ra’y; those who employed it frequently and those who employed it sparingly. It can be said that this was the initial foundation of the two main schools of thought or legal methodology that emerged in the third era, the School of Ḥadīth and the School of Ra’y. This attitude was not necessarily related to how they viewed ra’y, it was more of a personal choice.

This difference in approach was even seen during the time of the Prophet ﷺ. There is the famous ḥadīth of Banū Qurayẓah. The Prophet ﷺ told his Companions, “Do not pray ʿaṣr prayer until you reach Banū Qurayẓah [a village near Madīnah].” A group of them were delayed on the way and the time for ʿasr prayer was almost finished. Some of them decided not to pray until they arrived, taking the Prophet’s words literally. Others from the group insisted: “We will pray. The Prophet ﷺ didn’t mean that we should skip the prayer.” After they arrived, they informed the Prophet what had happened, and he didn’t criticize either of them for what they did.

Whenever there is ijtihād it is natural for there to be disagreements. Another jurist will either agree with the conclusion or disagree with it. It should not be surprising that there were differences of opinion amongst the companions (ra), but their differences were few and rare.

During this time period the Qur’ān was compiled into a single book and copies of it were made to send across the Muslim world, which had expanded well beyond the Arabian Peninsula. The aḥādīth of the Prophet ﷺ were still not formally codified and compiled at this time.

2.3: The Era of the Companions and the Elder Successors

This era began after the time of the Rightly Guided Caliphs, around the year 41 A.H and lasted until the beginning of the second century A.H., right before the fall of the Umayyad Dynasty. Legislation during this time period was very similar to what it was during the time of the Companions (ra). Meaning, the methodology of the Companions (ra) and their students, the Tābiʿūn (r), in deriving legal rulings was very similar. They would first look to the Qur’ān, then the Sunnah, then Ijmāʿ and lastly Qiyās.

During this time period Muslim society progressed and expanded even more bringing about many unprecedented issues and cases that needed to have legal rulings. With the growth and expansion of Islamic lands there was a need for individuals to go to these new places to teach people their new religion.

During and after the time of ʿUthmān (ra) many of the jurists amongst the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ were sent to different parts of the Islamic world as teachers and judges. There were six major centers of the Islamic world:

1) Makkah: ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbbās (ra)

2) Madinah: ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿUmar (ra), Mujāhid ibn Jabr (r), ʿAṭā’ ibn Abī Rabāḥ (r), and Ṭāwūs ibn Kaysān (r).

3) Kufa: ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd (ra), ʿAlqamah al-Nakhaʿī (r), al-Aswad ibn Yazīd (r) and Ibrāhīm al-Nakhaʿī (r).

4) Basra: Abū Mūsā al-Ashʿarī (ra), Anas ibn Mālik (ra), Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn (r).

5) Sham: Muʿādh ibn Jabal (ra), ʿUbādah ibn al-Ṣāmit (ra), Abū Idrīs al-Khawlānī (r) and ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz (r).

6) Misr: ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ.

The development of fiqh and legislation and its expansion during this era can be attributed to three main factors:

1) Widening of the scope and application of fiqh and increase of disagreements

The scope of fiqh expands and grows with the occurrence of new events, incidents, and circumstances and these constantly change depending on the time and place. In addition to that Islam had spread to foreign lands that had their own unique customs, traditions, societal, and economic practices. Every jurist takes into consideration the circumstances and society they live in when giving rulings as long as it does not go against the Sharīʿah. 1) Spreading out of the Fuqaha 2) Difficult to establish Ijma’ 3) Every city learned fiqh from its Faqih.

2) Spreading of the Narration of Hadith

During the time of the Prophet ﷺ and the Rightly Guided Caliphs the narration of aḥādīth was limited because there was not a great need for it. As the companions (ra) spread across the Muslim world so too did the narration of aḥādīth. Not every Companion was equal when it came to aḥādīth, some had memorized more than others. Some had heard more than others and some narrated more than others. The increase in narration of hadith had a huge influence on fiqh. Narrations were being used more often to derive and establish rulings.

3) The emergence of the Traditionalists and the Rationalists

As mentioned earlier, the jurists amongst the Companions (ra) can be divided into two broad categories; those who were extremely hesitant in doing their own ijtihād and expressing their own personal opinion so used it sparingly and those who would do their own ijtihād whenever the need would arise. The first group feared contradicting the letter of the Qur’ān and Sunnah so they were hesitant in going beyond what the text said.

During this time period both of these tendencies became more defined and their methodologies started to become more refined. This led to the emergence of two informal schools of legal thought or methodology, the Rationalists (Ahl al-Ra’y) and the Traditionalists (Ahl al-Ḥadīth). There were differences between them concerning source methodology and issues of case law. Both of these schools had their origins in the approaches of the Companions (ra), but it was during this time that their differences in matters of fiqh became clear. Slowly, people started grouping themselves on the basis of their differences in deriving legal rulings from their sources.

Historians write that the Traditionalist school was a continuation of those Companions whose fear of contradicting the letter of the Qur’ān and Sunnah made them circumspect to the point where they very rarely went beyond the text itself. For example, ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿUmar (ra) and ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbbās (ra). The Traditionalist school became widespread in the ḥijāz and specifically Madīnah. It can be said that the Traditionalist School organically developed and evolved into the School of Madīnah, which then developed into the School of Imām Mālik. One of the reasons why it became widespread in Madīnah is because of the abundance of aḥādīth and familiarity with the fatāwā of a number of Companions.

The leading scholar of this camp was al-Imām Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyab (r) (94). There were seven successors who are considered to be the seven jurists of Madinah who carried on the teachings of the Companions from that area: 1) ʿUrwah ibn Zubair (94) 2) Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyab (94) 3) al-Qasim ibn Muḥammad (94) 4) Abū Bakr ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn al-Ḥārith (94) 5) ʿUbaydullāh ibn ʿAbdillah ibn ʿUtbah ibn Masʿūd (98) 6) Khārijah ibn Zaid (99) and 7) Sulaymān ibn Yasār (107). They were known as the Seven Jurists (al-Fuqahāʾa al-Sabʿah). As mentioned above their methodology and approach continues to evolve and develop culminating in the School of Imām Mālik (r).

The Rationalist school was an extension of the school of ʿUmar and ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd (ra), who were the most wide ranging in their use of ijtihād. ʿAlqamah ibn Qays al-Nakhaʿī (62) was influenced by them, the uncle and teacher of Ibrāhīm al-Nakhaʿī, who taught Ḥammād ibn Abī Sulaymān, who was the teacher of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah (r). The rationalist school gained popularity in Iraq and organically developed into what is known as the School of Kūfah. The School of Kūfah was the foundation for the School of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah (r).

The jurists in this camp felt that legal interpretations should not be limited to the letter of the texts but also the spirit. They felt it was their responsibility to uncover the higher meanings and wisdoms behind the laws and to make connections between them. The reason why this methodology became popular in Iraq is because of the number of Companions who were influenced by ʿUmar (ra).

Both of these informal schools agreed on the importance and status of aḥādīth within the framework of Islamic Law and accepted that it was the most important source of law after the Qur’ān. At the same time, the traditionalists also agreed with the rationalists on the need for having recourse to reason and ijtihād for those issues that were not explicitly mentioned in the Qur’ān and ḥadīth.

2.4: The Era of the Mujtahid Imams and Codification

This era started in the beginning of the second century A.H. and lasted till about the middle of the 4th century A.H. During this time period Fiqh as a discipline went through expansive growth and refinement. It flourished and developed into an independent discipline. This was the era of expert jurists, the great mujtahids, who laid down the foundations of their respective schools of thought. Every school of thought in reality is a juristic methodology of approaching the Qur’ān and Sunnah and extracting rules from them. This was also the era of the great scholars of ḥadīth. Both the study of fiqh and ḥadīth were codified and became disciplines that were taught and studied. Books were compiled and written. Because of all this advancement in the field of Islamic Studies this is era is known as the Golden Era of Fiqh, the Era of Codification, and the Era of the Mujtahidūn.

This expansive growth and development can be attributed to a number of different factors:

1) The ʿAbbāsid Caliphs gave a lot of care and importance to fiqh and fuqahā’.

The ʿAbbāsid Caliphs were fond of jurists and would consult them fairly often. For example, the Caliph Rashīd had asked Imām Abū Yūsuf (r), the famous student of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah (r), to establish a system of laws for the financial affairs of the state. In response he wrote his famous book al-Kharaj. The Caliph Manṣūr tried to convince Imām Mālik (r) to make his Muwaṭṭa’ the official book of law for the Caliphate as did Hārūn al-Rashīd after him. This care and importance from the government level allowed the jurists to flourish.

2) The expansiveness of the Muslim State

Muslim rule stretched all the way from Spain to China. This added a lot of richness to fiqh. Each area faced its own unique circumstances, issues, conditions, and culture that played a role in the development and advancement of Fiqh.

3) The work of the great Mujtahid Imāms; Imām Abū Ḥanīfah, Imām Mālik, Imām al-Shāfiʿī, and Imām Aḥmad (r).

4) The codification of Ḥadīth

By this time a number of the most famous collections of ḥadīth had been compiled and authored. One of the earlier works is the Muwaṭṭaʾ of Imām Mālik (r). This era marked a new phase in the development and documentation of ḥadīth. One of the most distinctive features of this period was to separate the aḥadīth of the Prophet ﷺ from the sayings of the Companions and Successors. The ḥadīth compilers of this era on the whole observed the principles of Uṣūl al-Ḥadīth that had already gained recognition and the methodological guidelines that were developed. This was the era in which Ḥadīth Studies flourished and books on different disciplines were written.

It was in the second half of this century that the six most famous and well-recognized books of ḥadīth were compiled: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, Jāmiʿ al-Tirmidhī, Sunan Abī Dāwūd, Sunan ibn Mājah, and Sunan al-Nasāʾī. These books make up the six canonical books of ḥadīth known as al-Ṣiḥaḥ al-Sittah (The Six Authentic Books) or al-Kutub al-Sittah (The Six Books).

Through the tireless effort of the luminaries of the first three centuries of Islam, the Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ was gathered, analyzed, organized, codified, and preserved for future generations. Many of these works have been passed on from generation to generation and are still read, studied, explained, and commented on in seminaries and universities throughout the world.

5) The emergence of the formal legal schools of thought.

As mentioned earlier, the School of Abū Ḥānīfah emerged from the School of Kūfah, and the School of Imām Mālik (r) was born out of the School of Madīnah. Imām al-Shāfiʿī (r) was influenced heavily by both schools, being a student of both Imām Mālik (r) and Imām Muḥammad ibn Ḥasan al-Shaybānī (r), one of the foremost students of Abū Ḥanīfah (r). He then developed his own methodology and framework for deriving Fiqh from its sources. As a matter of fact, the first person to write a book on Uṣūl al-Fiqh is Imām al-Shāfiʿī (r). That is why he is considered to be the father of Uṣūl al-Fiqh. The School of Imām Aḥmad (r) was born from the School of Ḥadīth or the Traditionalists.

Each school of thought produced its own jurists who would then produce works that served as the basis of future works within the same school. Each school specified its methodology for interpreting texts and deriving legal rulings from them. Each school developed an independent set of principles and methodology that it used to derive legal rulings from the Quran, Sunnah, Ijmāʿ, and Qiyās. Because of several factors four schools of thought gained widespread acceptance and prominence: 1) Ḥanafī, 2) Mālikī, 3) Shāfiʿī, and 4) Ḥanbalī. It is through the tireless efforts of these amazing jurists that Fiqh was codified, organized, and preserved for future generations. Many of these works have been passed on from generation to generation and are still read, studied, explained, and commented on till this day.