Abstract
Abstract This essay compares patterns in Ḥanafī and Mālikī rulings about marital annulments and shows how they are connected to differences in how these two schools treated the relationships between marriage, sales, and worship law. Drawing on a variety of jurisprudential texts from the 5th/11th to the 9th/15th centuries, including Ibn Rushd’s (d. 595/1198) Bidāyat al-Mujtahid and Burhān al-Dīn al-Farghānī al-Marghīnānī’s (d. 593/1197) al-Hidāyah, we first show that Ḥanafī and Mālikī rulings on annulments were consistently inconsistent: when they differed, Mālikīs consistently ruled to permit annulments that Ḥanafīs prohibited. Focusing then on annulments based on defects in dower and maintenance, we show how Mālikī rulings manifest a comparatively stronger emphasis on the analogy between marriage and sale, while Ḥanafī rulings manifest a comparatively stronger emphasis on the analogy between marriage and worship. Finally, we discuss how these differences in emphases may help explain the schools’ other divergent rulings on annulments.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
