A History of Islamic Legal Theories: An Introduction to Sunni Usul Al-Fiqh

TLDR: A History of Islamic Legal Theories: an Introduction to Sunni usul al-fiqh, by Wael Hallaq as discussed by the authors is a fine introduction to the most important sources of Islamic jurisprudence.

Abstract: A History of Islamic Legal Theories: an Introduction to Sunni usul al-fiqh, by Wael Hallaq. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1997. ix + 262 pages. Refs. to p. 287. Index to p. 294. $59.95. Reviewed by Jonathan E. Brockopp As one of the leading figures in the academic study of Islamic law, Wael Hallaq has been working on the logical structure of Islamic jurisprudence for many years and has produced a series of important articles on al-Shafi'i. alGhazali, Abu Husayn al-Basri, and others, looking at central issues such as ijtihad, consensus and analogy. Many of these articles are usefully reprinted in Law and Legal Theory in Classical and Medieval Islam (Brookfield, VT: Variorum, 1994). Hallaq's other book, Ibn Taymiyya against the Greek Logicians (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993) is a close study of this important jurist. Islamic Legal Theories is Hallaq's first statement as a mature, established scholar, and is a fine introduction to the most important sources of Islamic jurisprudence. After covering the first four centuries of Islamic law in chapter one, Hallaq moves to the heart of this book: a two-chapter summary of the development of Islamic legal theory since the Sth/il th century. Hallaq argues that there arose a common theoretical legal structure incorporating specific and limited variations. The remaining chapters build on this foundation in various ways. Chapter four addresses both the structural variations in Islamic legal theory and the various influences on the development of that theory. Chapter five looks particularly at the theoretical works of al-Shatibi (d. 790/1388), and chapter six addresses certain modern trends in Islamic legal theory. This final chapter, while restricted in its scope, offers some important new insights on the way some modern thinkers have struggled with their own tradition. A list of references and an index complete the book. Hallaq intends this book "to appeal to a wide readership both within and without the field of Islamic studies" (p. viii), yet certain decisions taken by the author severely limit its usefulness as an introduction. First, students of religion and comparative legal studies will be disappointed that the comparative aspects of Islamic legal theory are totally neglected in the text as well as in the apparatus. Second, the decision by the author (p. ix) to limit footnotes to an absolute minimum is problematic. In recent years, there has been extensive scholarship on subjects such as abrogation, ijtihad, and Rashid Rida. Some of this scholarship is found in the good. but by no means exhaustive, bibliography, but within the text itself the unsuspecting reader is often referred only to Hallaq's own works.' Undoubtedly, Hallaq knows the secondary literature; however, the lack of references may prove frustrating to the uninitiated. The first chapter is a very cursory overview of the formative period in Islamic law-the subject of much recent scholarship. Hallaq takes a surprisingly apologetic tone, accepting as self-evident what scholarship is only now struggling to understand. For instance, he writes that "the importance of the Qur'an and its injunctions for the early Muslims can hardly be overstated" (p. 7), and proves this by quoting an early Monophysite source wherein Abu Bakr paraphrases the Qur'an. That parts of the Qur'an were known and used in the first century is beyond dispute, but this does not prove that the Qur'an was understood as a legal book. Recent analysis of second-century legal documents demonstrates that the Qur'an provided neither the categories nor the content for early law. Furthermore, Hallaq refers to Andrew Rippin, Patricia Crone and Martin Hinds to support his contention that the early Caliphs used the Qur'an and the sunny in their legal rulings. Yet, these authors were much more circumspect in their claims than Hallaq suggests.2 Chapter one, therefore, presents a somewhat idiosyncratic view of early Islamic jurisprudence which does not advance our understanding of this period. …