The choice of the dialogical framework, the termination of jadal session and the aims of qiyās al-ʿilla

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Brief remarks on some relevant terms

In the contexts of Islamic Law, qiyās is a model of parallel reasoning which is employed in order to make legal decisions concerning some issues when lacking scriptural sources. This form of reasoning is composed mainly of four parts: al-aṣl, al-far‘, al-‘illa and al-ḥukm. In order to facilitate the reading, let us first have a very brief introduction of these terms.

On classification of qiyās al-dalāla and qiyās al-shabah

The second alternative to the second step described above is divided in general into two cases: 1) both the root-case and the branch-case share some other juridical ruling which is in parallel with the ruling under consideration; 2) both the root-case and the branch-case share some properties. Al-Shīrāzī calls the first case qiyās al-dalāla (correlational inference of indication) and the second case qiyās al-shabah or (correlational inference of resemblance).
Actually, in his Mulakhkhaṣ, qiyas al-shabah is set as a particular case of qiyās al-dalāla that, in this setting, is understood as the type of qiyās applied generally in the absence of knowledge of the occasioning factor. However, in his further work al-Shīrāzī distinguishes between qiyās al-dalāla and qiyas al-shabah as two separate forms. The distinction deepens in al-Luma‘ (al-Shīrāzī, 2003, pp. 99-101) where clearly he classifies qiyas al-shabah as a third type of qiyās which is considered to be the weakest in terms of the epistemic strength.
In fact, though both qiyās al-dalāla and qiyas al-shabah are based on establishing parallelisms, the notion of resemblance deployed by qiyās al-dalāla is quite different from that one deployed by qiyās al-shabah. Indeed, whereas the notion of resemblance deployed by qiyās al-dalāla requires making it apparent that a root-case and a branch-case share some structural parallelism, in the sense that each of both cases falls under the scope of a pair of rulings linked by some structural relation, the kind of resemblance deployed by qiyas al-shabah amounts to pointing out one or more relevant properties shared by the root-case and the branch-case. In short, whereas the conclusion drawn in an inference of qiyās al-dalāla is based on the parallelism between two rulings, the conclusion drawn by an inference of qiyas al-shabah is based on the resemblance between aṣl and far‘.
We took the option to follow the approach adopted in al-Luma‘ and, therefore, in the present study, we classify qiyās al-shabah as the form of inference different from qiyās al-dalāla. In our view this strategy provides a fertile ground for a close examination of the epistemological notions involved in the systems of qiyas al-dalāla and al-shabah.

Motivating the deployment of a CTT-framework

The expressive power of Per Martin Löf’s Constructive Type Theory3 allows the following features underlying the qiyās to be expressed at the object language level:
The stress on assertions (or judgements) rather than on propositional sentences. The dialectical process underlying correlational inferences is triggered by both an assertion concerning the identification of the factor occasioning the relevant ruling and the process of justifying such an assertion. In the specialized literature these assertions are called ta‘līl (affirmation of the relevance of a particular property for the determination of the ʿilla), or more generally ithbāt (affirmation). The intensional rather than extensional understanding of the sets underlying the semantics of the qiyās.
The deployment of hypothetical judgements. This dovetails with the qiyās-notion of dependence of a given juridical ruling on a particular occasioning factor. The restrictive form of the substitution rules. The last point will be discussed in the next chapter since it relates to correlational inferences by resemblance. Certainly, other formal reconstructions are possible, and in particular, we might not need an intensional framework in order to deal with changing extensions. However, the deployment of intensional frameworks seems to be a natural approach in historical contexts4.

READ  SOCIO-ECONOMIC CLASS AND DIFFERENTIAL RECEPTIVITY TO BUDDHISM 

Table of contents :

ABSTRACT
RÉSUMÉ
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
References
CHAPTER 2 A GENERAL VIEW OF QIYĀS: A DIALECTICAL READING
2.1. Brief remarks on some relevant terms
2.1.1. On al-aṣl, al-far‘ and al-‘illa
2.1.2. On ḥukm
2.2.3. Qiyās al-dalāla
2.2.4. Qiyās al-shabah
References
CHAPTER 3 DIALECTICAL SYSTEM OF QIYĀS AL-ʿILLA
3.1. Motivating the deployment of a CTT-framework
3.1.1. The meaning-explanation of juridical rulings in qiyās al-ʿilla
3.1.1.1. Elements of CTT in the context of qiyās al-ʿilla: the specificity of waṣf
3.1.1.2. More elements of CTT in the context of qiyās al-ʿilla: on taʾthīr, ṭard and ʿaks
3.2. Towards the interactive stance
3.2.1. Epistemic-assumptions, the formal rule and epistemic strength
3.2.2. The choice of the dialogical framework, the termination of jadal session and the aims of qiyās al-ʿilla
3.2.3. Dialectical elements of qiyās al-‘illa
3.2.3.1. Requiring justification: muṭālaba
3.2.3.2. Mu‘āraḍa
3.2.3.3. Forms of destructive criticism
3.3.1. The dialogical approach to logic
3.3.2. Local meaning
3.3.3. Global meaning
3.3.3.1. Structural rules
3.3.3.2. The constitution of strategies
3.3.4. Examples of dialogues for qiyās al-‘illa
3.3.4.1. Example of a qiyās al-ʿilla (al-jalī bi-al-naṣṣ)
3.3.4.2. Examples of qiyās al-ʿilla al-khafī
References
CHAPTER 4 DIALECTICAL SYSTEM OF QIYĀS AL-DALĀLA AND QIYĀS AL-SHABAH
4.1. Qiyās al-dalāla
4.1.1. Qiyās al-dalāla I
4.1.1.1. Shahādat al-uṣūl for qiyās al-dalāla I
4.1.2. Qiyās al-dalāla II
4.1.2.1. Shahādat al-uṣūl for qiyās al-dalāla II
4.2. Qiyās al-shabah
4.2.1. The inferential structure of qiyās al-shabah
4.3. A dialogical framework for qiyās al-dalāla and qiyās al-shabah
4.3.1. The dialogical approach to logic
4.3.2. Local Meaning
4.3.3. Global meaning
4.3.3.1. Structural rules
4.3.4. Examples of dialogues for qiyās al-dalāla and al-shabah
4.3.4.1. A dialogue for qiyās al-dalāla I : the deployment of khaṣīṣa
4.3.4.2. A dialogue for qiyās al-dalāla II : the deployment of naẓīr
4.3.4.3. A dialogue for qiyās al-shabah
References
CHAPTER 5 ARSYAD AL-BANJARI: A BANJARESE SHĀFI‘Ī SCHOLAR
5.1. Banjar and Islam
5.2. Arsyad al-Banjari’s life and journey with the Shāfi‘ī School
5.2.1. Arsyad al-Banjari’s studies in Mecca: jurisprudence, transmitted and rational sciences
5.2.2. Arsyad al-Banjari’s studies in Medina: sufism, religious thought and practice, and further studies on Shāfi‘ī thought.
5.3. Re-Islamization of Banjar and the employment of qiyās
References
CHAPTER 6 SYSTEMS OF QIYĀS IN ARSYAD AL-BANJARI’S WORKS
6.1. A general overview of the system of qiyās implemented in Arsyad al-Banjari’s works
6.2. Qiyās in Kitāb al-Nikāḥ
6.3. Qiyās in Luqṭa al-‘Ajlān
6.4. Qiyās in Sabīl al-Muhtadīn
6.4.1. Example of qiyās al-‘illa
6.4.2. Example of qiyās al-dalālā
6.4.3. Example of qiyās al-shabah
6.4.4. Two non-canonical forms of qiyās
6.4.4.1. Non-canonical qiyās type A
6.4.4.2. Non-canonical qiyās type B
References
CHAPTER 7 ARSYAD AL-BANJARI’S QIYĀS FOR INTEGRATING BANJARESE TRADITIONS INTO ISLAMIC LAW
7.3. Qiyās al-shabah on manyanggar and mambuang pasilih
7.3.1. Brief remarks on the cultural and philosophical background
7.3.2. An overall view of the argument
7.3.3. The dialogue on manyanggar and mambuang pasilih
7.3.4. Elements for a dialectical analysis of the argument
7.4.1. An overall view of the argument
7.4.2. The dialogue on fermented lahang
7.4.3. Elements for a dialectical analysis of the argument
7.5. Qiyās al-shabah on harta perpantangan
7.5.1. Brief remarks on the background of harta perpantangan
7.5.2. An overall view of the argument
7.5.3. The dialogue on harta perpantangan
7.5.4. Elements for a dialectical analysis of the argument
Appendix 7.A. The original texts
References
CHAPTER 8 CONCLUDING REMARKS
8.1. Arsyad al-Banjari’s qiyās: between argumentation and Sharia
8.2. The forms of qiyās deployed in Arsyad al-Banjari’s work
8.3. Dialogical framework
8.4. Beyond the legal context: Articulation Model of qiyās?
8.5. Toward a general reasoning schema for parallel reasoning in law
8.5.1. Qiyās and two contemporary accounts of parallel reasoning in law
8.5.2. Analogy-warranting rule and ta’thīr
8.5.3. Dialectical approach to parallel reasoning: a lesson of the Elders
Refrences
BIBLIOGRAPHY

GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT

Related Posts