Causes of the Multiplicity of Jurisprudential Narratives in Hanafi Fiqh

Abstract

In the Hanafi school of thought, similar to other Islamic jurisprudential schools, there exist multiple narratives and theories. These theories, transmitted from Imam Abu Hanifa and his disciples, sometimes show differences in opinions and perspectives on various issues. The diversity of these narratives is based on the multiplicity of reports from these esteemed imams, which have several underlying causes. These causes can be identified through the texts of jurisprudential and legal theory books and the history of Islamic jurisprudence. Scholars in this field have discussed these topics in their works, attributing the multiplicity of narratives to various factors. Among the first to systematically enumerate these causes was 'Allamah Balyghi. Following him, other scholars such as Ibn Amir al-Hajj, 'Allamah Ibn Abidin al-Shami, and 'Allamah Dehlavi have extensively explained these causes and provided examples. This research aims to investigate the reasons for the multiplicity of jurisprudential narratives in Hanafi Fiqh using a descriptive-analytical method based on library resources. After discussing and examining these causes, four primary reasons for the multiplicity of narratives in the Hanafi school are identified: (1) misunderstandings in the interpretation of the Imam's views, (2) lack of awareness of the Imam's latest and most authoritative opinions, (3) the consideration of Qiyas (analogical reasoning) and Istihsan (juridical preference), and (4) the original intent of the ruling and precautionary measures. These aspects will be addressed in the discussion.