14.01.2014 Views

Baber Johansen

Baber Johansen

Baber Johansen

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

29<br />

As to the consensus: it is the agreement (ittifÁq) of the jurists of<br />

the epoch on the legal qualification of an event. Some say:<br />

‘scholars’ [instead of jurists]. That is a definition through that<br />

what is common [to many types of scholars]. Truly, the<br />

agreement of the grammarians, the philologists, and the exegetes<br />

is not an authoritative legal argument, even though they are<br />

scholars. Their assertions do not count when [the legal<br />

qualification of an event] is concerned. What is unanimously<br />

agreed upon as consensus is [a statement on a legal qualification]<br />

on which their formal legal opinion [i.e., the formal legal opinion<br />

of the jurists] concords in clear language. [In case] the scholars<br />

disagreed on the formal legal opinion of one of them or on his<br />

act, and the others remained silent without disapproving it in spite<br />

of the fact that [the information about it] was spread among them,<br />

then it is said: this is [still] an authoritative legal argument, but it<br />

is not a consensus. It is also said: it is a consensus. 83<br />

He returns to the same problem in his Book on Dissent (KitÁb al-khilÁf).<br />

Here he defends the right of the specialists to decide the cases that fall in<br />

their competency:<br />

One does not take into account the dissent of the scholars of the<br />

fundamentals [of religion] and they are the theologians, and not<br />

[the dissent] of the transmitters of ÎadÐth, and the grammarians,<br />

the philologists, those who study arithmetic and geometry, as long<br />

as they do not belong to those who are knowledgeable in the<br />

foundations and the branches of Islamic jurisprudence (bi-uÒÙl alfiqh<br />

wa-furÙÝihi). AÎmad [Ibn Íanbal, d. 855 in Baghdad,<br />

eponym of the Íanbalī school of law] said: ‘The choice [between<br />

options] are admissible only for a man who knows the Book and<br />

[the Prophet’s] normative practice (sunna), [if he is] among those<br />

who, if a problem is raised before them, look into the matter and<br />

compare it to the Book and the [Prophet’s] normative practice<br />

(sunna).’ A group of theologians held that no consensus is<br />

complete except with their concord (muwÁfaqa).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!