ARAB MODERNISTS AGAINST IMĀM ASH-SHĀFI‘Ī: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS

Abstract

The Companions of the Prophet ﷺ established the methods of understanding and interpreting divine texts, as they formed the foundations of Ijtihād. However, Imām Ash-Shāfi‘ī  was the first Muslim scholar to write the principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usūl al-Fiqh). Yet, Arab modernists in their attempts to devalue the rules of reading, understanding and interpreting divine texts, attack Imām Ash-Shāfi‘ī  and accuse him of “innovating” in the religion by “inventing” Usūl al-Fiqh. Likewise, they have accused him of “imprisoning” the Muslim intellect and mind regarding the authority of the divine texts as he bound it to methodology. Moreover, they accused him of having cooperated with the Umayyads. By attacking Imām Ash-Shāfi‘ī, Arab modernists seek to create an epistemological divide with the heritage of Usūl al-Fiqh as well with semantics and the rules governing the Arabic language. They aim to radically change the interpretation of the Qur’ān and Sunnah in order to get a free and fluid “modern Islamic jurisprudence”. This study uses inductive, comparative and critical analysis methods to assess the credibility of these allegations against Imām Ash-Shāfi‘ī and to evaluate their scientific basis.  This study proves that these allegations are unfounded. It demonstrates first that Imām Ash-Shāfi‘ī did not innovate in religion. Second, it reveals that the Companions themselves established the rules of Usūl al-Fiqh, the hierarchy of sources, rules of interpretation (Dalīl) and shaped the conditions of Ijtihād. Third, this study proves that Imām Ash-Shāfi‘ī did not achieve an epistemological move from the reasoning of the Arabic rhetoric of Ijtihād and its cognitive system. Fourth, this study verifies that Imām Ash-Shāfi‘ī did not cooperate with the Umayyads. On the other hand, this study exposes the Arab modernists who, by accusing and devaluing Imām Ash-Shāfi‘ī and his contributions, are subjective and have transgressed the scientific methods and ethics.