| المستخلص: |
The subject of this study is an exposition of Oriental¬ists' and Occidentalists' perspective on the develop¬ment of Usui al-Fiqh (Principles of jurisprudence) and a refutation of their opinions. Orientalists and their followers were keen on refuting this discipline and challenging its scholars. Their claims assumed the guise of scientific theory when in fact it was far from being so. A group of Middle Eastern schol¬ars, who studied under the Orientalists, reiterated the latter's views and propagated them in our society. This study focuses on the opinions of four scholars who specialized in criticizing religious thought. They taught those who came after them from among both Orien¬talists and Occidenatalists. Two of the leading Orien¬talists are Joseph Schacht and Noel Coulson while the Occidentalists include Abdul Majeed al-Sagheer and Dr. Wagih Kawtharani. The study begins with an explication of the concept of Usul al-Fiqh according to Joseph Schacht which is er¬roneous and indicates his misunderstanding of the dis¬cipline. If this is so, then how can he write its history? In the course of his argument, Schacht sought to as¬sert the impracticable and incomprehensive nature of the primary texts. He maintained that the rulings de¬rived from them do not cover all of man's actions. This, in his view, was the impetus behind the development and codification of this discipline. According to Sahcht, Usul al-Fiqh evolved to compensate for the exiguity of legal rulings found in Primary texts and fill the gap cre¬ated by this deficiency. It was therefore necessary to base such rulings on proofs.
|
