189

Origins of Muḥammadan jurisprudence

Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence

Publisher

Oxford At The Clarendon Press

Publication Year

1950 AH

178 THE ORIGIN OF LEGAL TRADITIONS IN THE

This effort to change the doctrines of the ancient schools of law by means of traditions is typical of the traditionists in the second century A.H.1 We have noticed a Nāfi‘—Ibn ‘Umar tradition which expressed their attitude explicitly.2 There is also external evidence. Shāfi‘ī himself stated that the khiyār al-majlis, which was prescribed in a Nāfi‘ tradition but not recognized by the Medinese, was accepted by the traditionists.3 Furthermore, there are two traditions with the isnād Mālik—Nāfi‘—Ibn ‘Umar, according to which the Prophet prohibited underbidding and overbidding, and certain practices which might create an artificial rise or fall in prices.4 The traditions were obviously intended to make these practices illegal in the same way as, say, the taking of interest is illegal, so that contracts concluded in defiance of the prohibition would be invalid. With regard to the second of these two closely connected traditions, Ṭaḥāwī, ii. 199, states that this was indeed the doctrine of ‘some’, and Ibn Mundhir (quoted in Comm. Muw. Shaib. 333) identifies these as the traditionists. But again the traditions did not prevail with the Medinese; they, in common with the Iraqians, minimized them by interpretation, and Shāfi‘ī distinguished clearly between the legal and the moral aspect. There exists a late counter-tradition, also with the isnād Nāfi‘—Ibn ‘Umar (Ṭaḥāwī, loc. cit.).

We have noticed the gradual appearance of Nāfi‘ traditions in several cases,5 and seen that existing traditions acquired isnāds with Nāfi‘ in them.6 It is also not rare to find Nāfi‘ traditions advocating opposite doctrines, even at the beginning of the literary period.7 In the time of Abū Ḥanīfa, Nāfi‘—Ibn ‘Umar traditions were imitated in Iraq.8 The Nāfi‘ traditions are not uniform, and “Nāfi‘” is a label which was used for various purposes over a considerable period. It is certain that even the group of Nāfi‘ traditions in Mālik’s Muwaṭṭa’ represents the result of gradual growth. The historical Nāfi‘ was

1 See below, pp. 249, 255.

2 See above, p. 114.

3 See above, p. 160.

4 Muw. iii. 148, 152; Muw. Shaib. 333, 337: Ikh. 185 ff.

5 See above, pp. 144, 148, 150, 160.

6 See above, p. 139, n. 4, 158 f.

7 See above, p. 150, and further: Mme. i. 245 f. with Zurqānī, ad loc.; Muw. Shaib. 126; Mud. i. 121 (= Tr. III, 117) and 172 (= Muw. ii. 253).

8 See above, p. 32.

178