Abstract
The research study aims to clarify the most important ambiguous views and opinions of the four imams (Abu Hanifa, Malik, Al-Shafie and Ahmed) in relation to fundamentalist jurisprudence issues by tracing the attribution of that view or opinion to the Imam to demonstrate the aspects of ambiguity in them, and the most important interpretations, which scholars said of that view or opinion, in addition to explaining the chosen opinion. There is no doubt that demonstrating the Imam's intent of the expressions that provoke argument among scholars will contribute to the defense of the Imam against any attempts of tarnishing his reputation because of poor understanding of some of the expressions that were attributed to him. A Muslim is ordained to think highly of all people, The same could be said of the Imams who dedicated their life to the cause of this magnanimous religion.
It is therefore a must to ascertain first of the truthfulness of what has been conveyed from them. If it is true, then it becomes a must to take their view, as far as possible, to the best of intentions, and to what is in line with the fundamentals of their jurisprudence and their other views.
The views of the Imams explain and interpret each other. It is therefore not right to convey them in isolation of the context under which these views and opinions were expressed. It is not permissible also to interpret them in contravention with the fundamentals that are established for them.
The research study is not intended to demonstrate all opinions and views of this nature, but to demonstrate the most important and the most famous among them, and the methodology which should be followed in this regard.
Recommended Citation
Al-Dweihi, Ahmed Abdullah
(2007)
"Ambiguous ( ) Views and Opinions of the Four Imams in Issues of the Fundamentals of Jurisprudence,"
UAEU Law Journal: Vol. 2007:
No.
30, Article 1.
Available at:
https://scholarworks.uaeu.ac.ae/sharia_and_law/vol2007/iss30/1