| المستخلص: |
Praise be to Allah who revealed the Quran, in which there is detailed explanation for everything and clarification. And may the most perfect and complete blessings and peace be upon the one who brought the complete Sharia extending throughout time, encompassing everything that is new and existing, and fulfilling the needs of people in different eras and times. History is the best witness to this and the most authentic evidence. To proceed: The legal texts found in the Quran and the Sunnah can be divided, in terms of their implications for derived rulings, into two categories: those with clear and definitive implications, where there is no dispute among jurists regarding their rulings, such as texts that indicate the obligation of prayer, almsgiving (zakat), texts that prohibit adultery, and alcohol, among others. The second category includes texts with implications that are subject to interpretation, where jurists had to exert effort in understanding what they imply, accepting possibilities other than definitiveness. This is the focus of our research, God willing. It elucidates the impact of assumptions on the meaning of legal texts (probabilistic implications) that can render the wording of these texts ambiguous, leading to multiple interpretations. This, in turn, affects the derivation of legal rulings from them. It also influences the jurist's attachment to one of these assumptions, supported by evidence, making it a basis and reference for deriving legal rulings. The research also delves into changes in grammatical analysis and verb conjugation as an example of these assumptions affecting the meaning of legal texts (probabilistic implications). This has resulted in differences among jurists in legal rulings based on their assumed implications. Jurists made efforts to identify what these texts imply, relying on their knowledge of Arabic language rules and methods. However, despite their linguistic expertise and studies, as well as consultation with experts in language and sight, they reached different conclusions and conflicting principles.
|
