The effects of hanafi and zahiri methodists' opinions about the indication of general utterances in Qur'an and the subject of their specification by al-khabar al-wahid on islamic law regulations

Abstract

The subject of general utterances (al-lafdh al-amm) being certain or presumptive in their usage as an indication to all their members is controversial amongst the methodists. Hanafi methodists suggest that the indication of general utterances to all of their members as certain and unless they are specified with a certain evidence, they can't be specified with a presumptive evidence. Like the hanafi methodists, the zahiri methodists also suggest that the general utterance is certain indicant for all of its members and can be specified only with an-other evidence in the same rank. The main difference between the two groups focuses on whether al-khabar al-wahid (single prophetic narration) is a certain or a presumptive evi-dence in terms of certitude. According to hanafis, al-khabar al-wahid is a presumptive evi-dence and unless the general utterances in Qur'an are specified initially with another certain evidence, they can't be specified with al-khabar al-wahid. However, al-khabar al-wahid is a certain evidence according to zahiris and it can specify general utterances in Qur'an. In this study, the comparison of the views of the methodists of two schools regarding the indication of general utterances in Quran and their specification (takhsis) with al-akhbar al-wahid is made and their influence on Islamic Law regulations is studied afterwards. In this study, the two sect's approaches are compared over the provision of reading al-Fatehah during prayer, the number of milk sucking to establish the kinship, the rights of women divorced with bain talaq and the execution of the death penalty in the Harem region. © Published by Sivas Cumhuriyet Universitesi, Ilahiyat Fakultesi / Sivas Cumhuriyet University, Faculty of Theology, Sivas, 58140 Turkey.