LĀĀDRĪYAH (لاادرية). A sect of heretics who say it is impossible for mortal man to be certain of any fact, even of man’s own identity.
LABBAIKA (لبيك). [TALBIYAH.]
LABĪD (لبيد). The son of Rabīʿah ibn Jaʿfar al-ʿĀmirī, a celebrated poet in the time of Muḥammad who embraced Islām, and who is said to have died at al-Kūfah at the advanced age of 157 years. The Prophet is related to have said, “The truest words ever uttered by a poet are those of Labīd,—‘Know that everything is vanity but God.’ ” (Mishkāt, book xxxii. ch. x. pt. 1.) [POETRY.]
LAḤD (لحد). The hollow made in a grave on the Qiblah side, in which the corpse is placed. It is made the same length as the grave, and is as high as would allow a person to sit up in it.
LĀHŪT (لاهوت). Lit. “Extinction” or “absorption.” (1) The last stage of the mystic journey. (2) Divinity. (3) Life penetrating all things. [SUFIISM.]
LAḤYĀN (لحيان). A branch of the Huẕail tribe, which inhabited, in the days of Muḥammad, as they still do, the vicinity of Makkah. Muḥammad formed an expedition against them, A.H. 6, on account of their treacherous attack on a small party of Muslims at Rajī.
LAILATU ʾL-BARĀʾAH (ليلة البراءة). [SHAB-I-BARAʾAH.]
AL-LAILATU ʾL-MUBĀRAKAH (الليلة المباركة). Lit. “The Blessed Night.” [LAILATU ʾL-QADR.]
LAILATU ʾL-QADR (ليلة القدر). “The night of power.” A mysterious night, in the month of Ramaẓān, the precise date of which is said to have been known only to the Prophet and a few of the Companions. The following is the allusion to it in the Qurʾān. Sūratu ʾl-Qadr (xcvii.):—
“Verily we have caused it (the Qurʾān) to descend on the Lailatu ʾl-Qadr.
“Who shall teach thee what the Lailatu ʾl-Qadr is?
“The Lailatu ʾl-Qadr excelleth a thousand months:
“Therein descend the angels, and the spirit by permission
“Of their Lord in every matter;
“And all is peace until the breaking of the dawn.”
This night must not be confounded, as it often is, with the Shab-i-Barāʾah, which is generally called Shab-i-Qadr, or the night of power, but which occurs on the 15th of Shaʿbān. [SHAB-I-BARAʾAH.]
The excellences of the Lailatu ʾl-Qadr are said to be innumerable, and it is believed that during its solemn hours the whole animal and vegetable creation bow down in humble adoration to the Almighty.
LAILATU ʾR-RAG͟HĀʾIB (ليلة الرغائب). The “night of supererogatory devotions.” A festival observed on the first Friday in the month Rajab, by certain mystic leaders who affirm that it was established by the Prophet; but it is generally rejected by orthodox Sunnīs. (See Raddu ʾl-Muḥtār, vol. i. p. 717.)
LAIS̤ (ليث). An Arabic tribe descended from Kinānah. Al-Baiẓāwī says they thought it unlawful for a man to eat alone, and were the cause of the verse in the Qurʾān, Sūrah xxiv. 60: “There is no crime in you, whether ye eat together or separately.”
LAMENTATION. [BUKAʾ.]
LAʿNAH (لعنة). “Imprecation; curse; anathema.” A word used thirteen times in the Qurʾān, e.g. Sūrah ii. 83: “The curse of God is on the infidels.”
LAND. Arabic arẓ (ارض), balad (بلد), mulk (ملك).
The following are some of the principal rules of Muslim law relating to land:—
(1) Tithes or Zakāt on lands.—Upon every thing produced from the ground there is due a tenth, or ʿāshir, ʿushr (Heb. מַעֲשֵׂר), whether the soil be watered by the annual overflow of great rivers, or by periodical rains; excepting upon articles of wood, bamboos, and grass, which are not subject to tithe. Land watered by means of buckets or machinery, such as Persian wheels, or by watering camels, are subject to only half tithes. (Hidāyah, vol. i. p. 44.)
(2) Conquered lands become the property of the state. Those of idolaters remain so. Those belonging to Jews, Christians, or Fire worshippers, are secured to the owners on payment of tribute. Those who afterwards embrace Islām recover their property, according to ash-Shāfiʿī, but not according to the Ḥanīfah school. Upon the Muslim army evacuating an enemy’s country, it becomes unlawful for the troops to feed their cattle on the land without due payment. (Hidāyah, vol. ii. p. 170.)
(3) Appropriation for religious uses.—Land may be so appropriated; but if a person appropriate land for such a purpose and it should afterwards be discovered that an indefinite portion of it was the property of another person, the appropriation is void with respect to the remainder also. The appropriation must also be of a perpetual and not of a temporary nature. (Hidāyah, vol. ii. p. 340.)
(4) The sale of land is lawful. In such sales the trees upon the land are included in the sale, whether specified or not; but neither the grain growing on the ground, nor the fruit growing on the trees, are included, unless specified. But in the case of the fruit or corn being purchased with the land, it must be gathered or cleared away at once. In the sale of ground, the seed sown in the ground is not included. Land may be resold previous to seizing or possession, by the first purchaser, according to Abū Ḥanīfah, but the Imām Muḥammad says it is unlawful. Wells and watercourses are not included in the sale of lands unless specified. (Hidāyah, vol. ii. pp. 372, 481, 503.)
(5) Claims against land must be made by the plaintiff, defining the four boundaries and specifying the names of each possessor, and the demand for the land must be made in explicit terms. And if the land has been resold, a decree must be given either for or against the last possessor, according to some doctors. (Hidāyah, vol. iii. p. 65.)
(6) Land can be lent, and the borrower can build upon it, but when the lender receives back his land, he can compel the borrower to remove his houses and trees. Land lent for tillage cannot be resumed by the lender until the crops sown have been reaped. Abū Ḥanīfah maintains that when land is lent to another, the contract should be in these words, “You have given me to eat of this land.” (Hidāyah, vol. iii. p. 284, 288.)
(7) A gift of land which is uncultivated cannot be retracted after houses have been built on it or trees planted. If the donee sell half of the granted land, the donor in that case may, if he wishes, resume the other half. If a person make a gift of land to his relative within the prohibited degrees it is not lawful for him to resume it. (Hidāyah, vol. iii. p. 302.)
(8) The Ijārah, or rental of land, is lawful, but the period must be specified, otherwise the rent may be demanded from day to day. But a lease of land is not lawful unless mention is made of the article to be raised upon it, and at the expiration of the lease the land must be restored in its original state. A hirer of land is not responsible for accidents; for example, if in burning off the stubble he happen to burn other property, he is not responsible for loss incurred. (Hidāyah, vol. iii. p. 314, &c.)
(9) The cultivation of waste and unclaimed lands is lawful, when it is done with the permission of the ruler of the country, and the act of cultivation invests the cultivator with a right of property in them. But if the land be not cultivated for three years after it has been allotted, it may again be claimed by the state. (Hidāyah, vol. iv. p. 128.)
(10) If a person be slain on lands belonging to anyone, and situated near a village, and the proprietor of the land be not an inhabitant of the village, he is responsible for the murder, as the regulation and protection of those lands rest upon him. (Hidāyah, vol. iv. p. 447.)
LAPIDATION. [STONING.]
LAPWING. Arabic hudhud (هدهد). The name in the Qurʾān, Sūrah xxvii. 20, for the bird which carried the letter from King Solomon to the Queen of Sheba. [SOLOMON.] It is the דּוּכִיפַת of the Old Testament, Lev. xi. 19, Deut. xiv. 18. Greek ἔποψ. The modern Hoopoe.
The commentators al-Jalālān and al-Baiẓāwī say that Solomon, having finished the temple of Jerusalem, went in pilgrimage to Makkah, whence, having stayed as long as he pleased, he proceeded towards al-Yaman; leaving Makkah in the morning, he arrived by noon at Ṣanʿāʾ, and being extremely delighted with the country, rested there. But wanting water to make the ablution, he looked among the birds for the lapwing, whose business it was to find it; for it is pretended she was sagacious or sharp-sighted to discover water underground, which the devils used to draw, after she had marked the place by digging with her bill. They add that this bird was then taking a tour in the air, whence, seeing one of her companions alighting, she descended also, and having had a description given her by the other of the city of Sabaʾ, whence she was just arrived, they both went together to take a view of the place, and returned soon after Solomon had made the inquiry given in the Qurʾān: “He reviewed the birds and said, ‘How is it I do not see al-Hudhud? Is he, then, amongst the absent?’ ”
LAQAB (لقب). A surname. Either a title of honour or a nickname; e.g. Al-Ḥusain ibn Masʿūd al-Farrā, “the tanner”; Abū Saʿīd Tāju ʾl-Mulūk, “the crown of kings”; Ibn Muḥammad at-Tag͟hlabī, “of the tribe of Tag͟hlab.” [NAMES.]
LAQĪT̤ (لقيط), in its primitive sense, signifies anything lifted from the ground, but in the language of the law it signifies a child abandoned by those to whom it properly belongs. The person who finds the child is termed the multaqit̤, or the taker up. [FOUNDLING.]
LARCENY. Arabic sariqah (سرقة). In the language of the law, sariqah signifies the taking away the property of another in a secret manner, at a time when such property is in custody. Custody is of two kinds: 1st, by place, for example, a house or a shop; and, 2nd, by personal guard, which is by means of a personal watch over the property. If an adult of sound understanding steal out of undoubted custody ten dirhams, or property to the value of ten dirhams, the Muḥammadan law awards the amputation of a hand, for it is said in the Qurʾān, Sūrah v. 42: “If a man or woman steal, cut off their hands.”
With regard to the amount of the value which constitutes a theft, there is some difference of opinion. According to Abū Ḥanīfah, it is ten dirhams; according to ash-Shāfiʿī, it is the fourth of a dīnār, or twelve dirhams; whilst Mālik holds that the sum is three dirhams.
The freeman and the slave are on equal footing with respect to punishment for theft, and the hand of the slave is to be struck off in the same manner as the hand of a free Muslim.
The theft must be established upon the testimony of two witnesses, but the magistrate must examine the witnesses as to the manner, time, and place of the theft. The thief must also be held in confinement, or suspicion, until the witnesses be fully examined.
If a party commit a theft, and each of the party receive ten dirhams, the hand of each is to be cut off; but if they receive less than ten dirhams each, they are not liable to amputation.
Amputation is not incurred by the theft of anything of a trifling nature, such as wood, bamboos, grass, fish, fowls, and garden stuff.
Amputation is not incurred by the theft of such things as quickly decay and spoil, such as milk or fruit, nor for stealing fruit whilst upon the tree, or grain which has not been reaped, these not being considered as in custody.
The hand of a thief is not struck off for stealing any fermented liquor, because he may explain his intention in taking it, by saying, “I took it with a view to spill it”; and also because some fermented liquors are not lawful property.
The hand is not to be cut off for stealing a guitar or tabor, these being of use merely as idle amusements.
Amputation is not incurred by stealing a Qurʾān, although ash-Shāfiʿī maintains that it is.
There is no amputation for stealing the door of a mosque. Nor is the hand struck off for stealing a crucifix or a chess board, as it is in the thief’s power to excuse himself by saying, “I took them with a view to break and destroy them, as things prohibited.” It is otherwise with a coin bearing the impression of an idol, by the theft of which amputation is incurred; because the money is not an object of worship.
The hand is not to be struck off for stealing a free-born infant, although there be ornaments upon it, because a free person is not property; but amputation is incurred by stealing an infant slave, although the stealing of an adult slave does not incur amputation, as such an act does not come under the description of theft, being an usurpation or a fraud.
Amputation is not incurred for stealing a book, because the object of the thief can only be its contents and not the property.
The hand is not cut off for stealing a cur-dog, because such an animal is common property; nor for stealing utensils made of wood.
There is no amputation for stealing from the public treasury, because everything there is the common property of all Muslims, and in which the thief, as a member of the community has a share. And if a person steal from property of which he is in part owner, amputation is not inflicted. Nor if a creditor steal from his debt is the hand cut off.
The right hand of the thief is to be cut off at the joint of the wrist and the stump afterwards cauterised, and for the second theft the left foot, and for any theft beyond that he must suffer imprisonment.
AL-LĀT (اللات). The name of an idol worshipped by the ancient Arabians, probably the Alilat of Herodotus. The idol Lāt is mentioned in the Qurʾān in conjunction with the two other idols, al-ʿUzzā and Manāt. See Sūrah liii. 19: “What think ye, then, of al-Lāt and al-ʿUzzā, and Manāt, the third idol besides?”
In connection with this verse there is an interesting discussion. (See Muir, new ed. p. 86.) Al-Wāqidī and at̤-T̤abarī both relate that, on a certain day, the chief men of Makkah assembled in a group beside the Kaʿbah, discussed, as was their wont, the affairs of the city, when the Prophet appeared, and seating himself by them in a friendly manner, began to recite the 53rd chapter of the Qurʾān; and when he had reached the verse “What think ye then of al-Lāt, and al-ʿUzzā, and Manāt, the third idol besides?” the Devil suggested words of reconciliation and compromise with idolatry, namely, “These are exalted females, and verily their intercession is to be hoped for.” These words, however, which were received by the idolaters with great delight, were afterwards disavowed by the Prophet, for Gabriel revealed to him the true reading, namely, “What think ye then of al-Lāt, and al-ʿUzzā, and Manāt, the third idol besides? Shall ye have male progeny and God female? This, then, were an unjust partition! Verily, these are mere names which ye and your fathers have given them.”
The narrative thus related by al-Wāqidī and at̤-T̤abarī is given as an explanation of Sūrah xxii. 51: “Nor have we sent any apostle or prophet before thee into whose readings Satan hath not injected some wrong desire.”
AL-LAT̤ĪF (اللطيف). “The Mysterious or the Subtle One.” One of the ninety-nine attributes of God. Sūrah vi. 103: “For He is the Subtle (al-Lat̤īf), the All-informed (al-K͟habīr).
LAT̤ĪFAH (لطيفة). A term used by Ṣūfī mystics for any sign or influence in the soul, derived from God, which has such a mysterious effect on the heart that mortal man cannot express it in language, just as a delicious taste in the mouth cannot be exactly expressed by the tongue. (Kitābu ʾt-Taʿrīfāt, in loco.)
LAUGHING. Arabic ẓaḥk, ẓiḥk (ضحك). Heb. צָחַק. (Gen. xviii. 13.) Immoderate laughing is generally condemned by Muḥammadan teachers, for ʿĀyishah relates that Muḥammad “never laughed a full laugh so that the inside of his mouth could be seen; he only smiled.” (Mishkāt, book xxii. ch. vii.)
AL-LAUḤU ʾL-MAḤFŪZ̤ (اللوح المحفوظ). “The preserved tablet.”
In the Ḥadīs̤ and in theological works it is used to denote the tablet on which the decrees of God were recorded with reference to mankind. In the Qurʾān it only occurs once, when it refers to the Qurʾān itself. Sūrah lxxxv. 21, 22: “It is a glorious Qurʾān written on the preserved table.” The plural alwāḥ occurs in Sūrah vii. 142, for the tables of the law given to Moses.
LAW, The. The words used by Muslims to express “the law,” are ash-Sharīʿah (الشريعة) and ash-Sharʿ (الشرع), the meaning of which is “the way.” The compiler of the G͟hiyās̤u ʾl-Lug͟hah defines it as “the way or road in the religion of Muḥammad, which God has established for the guidance of His people, both for the worship of God and for the duties of life.” The term ash-Sharīʿah occurs once in the Qurʾān, Sūrah xlv. 17: “We (God) put thee (Muḥammad) in the right way concerning the affair.” The term ash-Shirʿah is almost obsolete in books on Muslim theology, but it occurs once in the Qurʾān, Sūrah v. 52: “To every one have we given a right way.”
In the Traditions and theological works, the word ash-Sharʿ is generally used to express the law of Muḥammad. The Hebrew תּוֹרָה occurs in the Qurʾān as Taurāt, and is always used for the law of Moses. [TAURAT.]
According to Muslim doctors, ash-Sharʿ, or “the Law,” may be divided into five sections: Iʿtiqādāt, “belief”; Ādāb, “moralities”; ʿIbādāt, “devotions”; Muʿāmalāt, “transactions”; and ʿUqūbāt, “punishments.”
(1) Iʿtiqādāt, embraces all that is contained in the six articles of the Muslim faith, namely, Belief in (a) God; (b) His angels; (c) His Books; (d) His Prophets; (e) The Day of Judgment; (f) The Decrees of God. This section of Muslim law is termed ʿIlmu ʾl-ʿAqāʾid, or, “The Science of the Articles of Belief,” and includes all branches of scholastic theology. The books chiefly consulted on this subject in the present work are the Sharḥu ʾl-Muwāqif, by Saiyid Sharīf-al-Jurjānī, and the Sharḥu ʾl-ʿAqāʾid, by Masʿūd Saʿdu ʾd-dīn at-Taftāzānī.
(2) Ādāb embraces the consideration of all those moral excellences which are enjoined in the Qurʾān and Traditions, as Ik͟hlāṣ, “sincerity”; Tawwakkul, “confidence in God”; Tawāz̤uʿ, “humility”; Tafwīẓ, “resignation”; Qaṣru ʾl-ʿAmal, “keeping down one’s expectation”; Zuhd fī ʾd-dunyā, “renunciation of the world”; Naṣīḥah, “giving good counsel and advice”; Qanāʿah, “contentment”; Sak͟hāwah, “liberality”; Ḥubb, “love to God and man”; Ṣabr, “patience”; &c. (See Majmaʿu ʾl-Biḥār, vol. ii. p. 422.)
(3) ʿIbādāt, includes all acts of devotion to God, such as are included in the five pillars of practice: (a) Recital of the Creed; (b) Prayer; (c) Zakāt, or “legal alms”; (d) Ṣaum, or “fasting”; (e) The pilgrimage to Makkah. It will also embrace such religious acts as Jihād, or warfare for the propagation of the religion of Islām.
(4) Muʿāmalāt, includes such duties as are required between man and man, and is divided into Muk͟hāṣamāt, “altercations”; Munākaḥāt, “nuptials”; Amānāt, “securities.” Under these three heads are embraced all the various sections of civil jurisprudence such as barter, sale, agency, larceny, marriage, divorce, dower, partnership, claims, &c.
(5) ʿUqūbāt, denotes the punishments instituted in the Qurʾān and Traditions, namely, (a) Qiṣāṣ, “retaliation”; (b) Ḥaddu ʾs-sariqah, punishment for theft by the loss of a hand; (c) Ḥaddu ʾz-zināʾ, punishment for fornication and adultery, stoning for a married person and one hundred lashes for an unmarried person; (e) Ḥaddu ʾl-qazf, or punishment of eighty lashes for slander; Ḥaddu ʾr-riddah, or punishment by death for apostasy; Ḥaddu ʾsh-shurb, or punishment with eighty lashes for wine-drinking.
The two common divisions of Muḥammadan law are ʿIlmu ʾl-Kalām, or ʿAqāʾid, embracing all matters of faith; and ʿIlmu ʾl-Fiqh, which includes all matters of practice as distinguished from articles of faith.
Muslim law is also divided into two great distinctions of Mashrūʿ, “lawful,” and G͟hairu ʾl-mashrūʿ, “unlawful,” or, as it is expressed in Persian, Rawā and Nārawā.
That which is lawful is graded into five classes. (1) Farẓ, that which is proved beyond all doubt to have been enjoined either in the Qurʾān or in a tradition of undoubted authority, and the denial or disobedience of which is positive infidelity. (2) Wājib, that which is obligatory, but of which there is some doubt whether or not it was enjoined in the Qurʾān or in a tradition of undoubted authority. (3) Sunnah, that which was practised by Muḥammad; (4) Mustāḥabb, that which Muḥammad and his Companions sometimes did and sometimes omitted; (5) Mubāḥ, that which is desirable, but which may be omitted without fear of sin.
Things which are unlawful are graded into three classes: (1) Mufsid, that which is most vicious and corrupting, a mortal sin; (2) Ḥarām, that which is distinctly forbidden; (3) Makrūh, that which is generally held to be unclean.
These distinctions of lawful and unlawful, with their various subdivisions, apply to all branches of Muslim law, whether it relate to ordinary duties of life, or of devotion to God.
It will be seen how important a place the example, practices, and sayings of Muḥammad occupy in the moral law of Islām. This branch of Muslim law is called as-Sunnah, or the custom of Muḥammad, and is distinguished as—
(1) Sunnatu ʾl-ʿfilī, that which Muḥammad himself did.
(2) Sunnatu ʾl-qaulī, that which Muḥammad said should be practised.
(3) Sunnatu ʾt-taqrīrī, that which was done in the presence of Muḥammad, and which he appears to have sanctioned.
It is therefore a serious mistake to suppose that the Qurʾān contains all that is esteemed necessary for faith and practice in Islām; the example of Muḥammad is as binding upon the Muslim as any injunction contained in the Qurʾān itself, for neither that which is Farẓ nor that which is Sunnah can be omitted without sin.
The true origin and fountain of all law is the Qurʾān and the Traditions, and no Muslim school of theology has ever rejected the Traditions. They are binding upon Sunnī, and Shīʿah, and Wahhābī; the only difference between the Sunnī and Shīʿah being that they receive different collections of Traditions. The Wahhābīs receive those of the Sunnīs, and call themselves Muḥaddis̤in, or traditionists.
In addition to the Qurʾān and Ḥadīs̤ (or Traditions), both Sunnī and Shīʿah Muslims acknowledge the concurrence of the learned, called Ijmāʿ, the Shīʿahs believing that they still possess Mujtahids capable of giving an infallible interpretation of the law; the Sunnīs, on the other hand, confessing that, since the days of the four great doctors (Abū Ḥanīfah, Mālik, ash-Shāfiʿī, and Ibn Ḥanbal), Ijmāʿ has not been possible; whilst the Wahhābīs accept only the Ijmāʿ of those who conversed with the Prophet himself. The fourth foundation of orthodoxy in both Sunnī and Shīʿah schools is the system of interpretation called Qiyās, or ratiocination.
I. The Sunnīs all receive the same collections of traditions, especially those which are known as the “six correct books,” the Ṣaḥīḥu ʾl-Buk͟hārī, the Ṣaḥīḥu Muslim, the Sunanu ʾt-Tirmiẓī, Sunanu Abī Dāʾūd, Sunanu an-Nasafī, and Sunanu Ibn Mājah. The compilation by the Imām Mālik, which is first in order of date, is also a collection of traditions of very great authority. [TRADITIONS.]
These different sects of Sunnīs do not differ in uṣūl, or fundamentals of religious belief, but in minor rules of practice, and in certain legal interpretations; but being of different opinions and broaching in some respects separate doctrines, four schools of jurisprudence have been established, known as Ḥanafī, Shāfiʿī, Ḥanbalī, and Mālikī.
The differences amongst these four Sunnī schools are based either upon different traditions or upon different interpretations of the same traditions, also upon the various ways in which the liberty of qiyās, or ratiocination, has been exercised. Consequently the number of works which have appeared on the subjects of scholastic science and jurisprudence, has been very great indeed.
We are indebted to Mr. Shama Churun Sircar, the learned and able Tagore Professor of Law in Calcutta, for the following résumé of the principal Sunnī writings on ash-Sharʿ.
“The chief works that treat generally of the doctrines of the four principal sects of the Sunnís, are mentioned by Hájí Khalífah to be the Jámi-ul-Mazáhib (Jāmiʿu ʾl-Maẕāhib), the Majmaa-ul-Khiláfíyat, the Yanábiya-ul-Ahkám (Yanābīʿu ʾl-Aḥkām), the Uyúm, and the Zubdat-ul-Ahkám. The Kanz-ud-Dakáïk (Kanzu ʾd-Daqāʾiq), by An-Nasafí, is a book of great reputation, principally derived from the Wáfí; and containing questions and decisions according to the doctrines of Abú-Hanífah, Abú-Yusuf, Imám Muhammad, Zufar, Sháfií, Málik, and others. Many commentaries have been written on the last mentioned work; the most famous of them is the Bahr-ur-Ráïk (al-Baḥru ʾr-Rāʾiq), which may, indeed, almost be said to have superseded its original, at least in India. The Bahr-ur-Ráïk is by Zainu-ul-Aábidín Bin Nujaim-ul Misrí (Ibn Najīm), A.H. 970. The Multaka-al-Abhár (Multaqa ʾl-Abḥār), by Shaikh Ibráhím Bin Muhammad al-Halabí, who died A.H. 956, is a universal code of Muhammadan law. It gives the different opinions or doctrines of Abú Hanífah, Málik, Sháfií, and Hanbal, the chief Mujtahid Imáms and the founders of the four great sects of Sunnís, and illustrates them by those of the principal jurisconsults of the school of Abú Hanífah. It is more frequently referred to as an authority throughout Turkey, than any other treatise on jurisprudence.
“The digests inculcating exclusively the doctrines of each of the said four great sects are, indeed, numerous, though a very few of them which maintain the doctrines of the Málikí, or Sháfií, or Hanbalí sects are used in India. Digests written by Málik or any of his followers are scarcely found in India.
“Of the digests maintaining the Málikí doctrines, two have lately appeared in France (by M. Vincent, 1842; M. Perron, 1843). The first work of Sháfií, entitled the Usúl (Uṣūl), or fundamentals, which contains the principles of the Muhammadan civil and canon law, may be classed as a digest. The Muk͟htasar, the Mansúr, the Rasáïl-ul-Muatabirah (ar-Rasāʾilu ʾl-Muʿtabarah), and the Kitáb-ul-Wasáïk, are amongst the other works written by Abú Ibráhím Bin Yahiyá-al-Muzani, a distinguished disciple of Sháfií, and a native of Egypt (A.H. 264), and are according to the doctrines of Sháfií. The works by Ibnu Hambal and his followers are few in number, and rare.
“The followers of the Hanífí sect, which obtains most commonly amongst the Muhammadans of India, have, like others, divided their law into two general branches or parts, respectively called the Fikah (law, religious and secular), and Faráïz (the succession to, and division of, inheritance).
“The works which are on Fikah (Fiqh), and which are considered as the chief authorities of the Hanífí sect, are the following:—Abú Hanífah’s own digest of law, entitled the Fikah-ul-Akbar (al-Fiqhu ʾl-Akbar). This is the first in rank, and has been commented upon by various writers, many of whom are mentioned by Hájí Khalífah. The doctrines of that great lawyer, however, are sometimes qualified or dissented from by his two famous pupils, Abú Yusuf and Imám Muhammad. The work entitled Adab-ul-Kází, which treats of the duties of a magistrate, is known to have been written by Abú Yusuf. Save and except this, no other work appears to have been composed by him. He, however, is said to have supplied his notes to his pupil Imám Muhammad, who made use of them in the composition of his own works. The works of Imám Muhammad are six in number, five of which are, in common, entitled the Záhir-ur-Rawáyát (Z̤āhiru ʾr-Rawāyāt, conspicuous traditions or reports). They are: 1. The Jámi-ul-Kabír (al-Jāmiʿu ʾl-Kabīr); 2. Jámi-us-Saghír (al-Jāmiʿu ʾṣ-Ṣag͟hīr); 3. Mabsút fí Farú-ul-Hanífiyát; 4. Ziyádát fí Farú-ul-Hanífiyát; and 5. Siyar al-Kabír wa Saghír. The Nawádir, the sixth and last of the known compositions of Imám Muhammad, though not so highly esteemed as the others, is still greatly respected as an authority.
“The next authorities among the Hanafís, after the founder of their sect and his two disciples, are the Imám Zufar Bin al-Hazíl who was chief judge at Basrah, where he died (A.H. 158), and Hasan Bin Ziyád. These lawyers are said to have been contemporaries, friends, and scholars of Abú-Hanífah, and their works are quoted here as authorities for Abú Hanífah’s doctrines, more especially when the two disciples are silent. The most celebrated of the several treatises known by the name of Adáb-ul Kází was written by Abú Bakr Ahmad Bin ʿUmar ul-Khassáf (A.H. 261). An abridgement of the Hanafí doctrines, called the Mukhtasar ut-Tahaví, was written by Abú Jaafar Ahmad Bin Muhammad at-Tahaví (A.H. 331), who wrote also a commentary on the Jámi us-Saghír of Imám Muhammad.
“The Mukhtasar lil-Kudúrí, by Abú ul-Husain Ahmad Bin Muhammad al-Kudúrí (A.H. 228) is among the most esteemed of the works which follow the doctrines of Abú Hanífah. There is a well-known commentary on the Mukhtasar lil-Kudúrí, entitled Al-Jauharat un-Nayyirah, which is sometimes called Al-Jauharat ul-Munírah. The digest, entitled the Mabsút (al-Mabsūt̤), was composed by Shams-ul-Aïmmah Abú Bakr Muhammad as-Sarakhsi whilst in prison at Uʾzjand. This is a work of great extent and authority. He was also the author of the most celebrated work entitled Al-Muhít (al-Muḥīt̤), which is derived in a great measure from the Mabsút, the Ziyádát, and the Nawádir of Imám Muhammad. The work entitled the Muhít, by Burhán-ud-dín Mahmúd Bin Ahmad, already spoken of, is not so greatly esteemed as the Muhít as-Sarakhsi (Muḥīt̤u ʾṣ-Ṣarak͟hsī). A compendium of Al-Kudúrí’s Mukhtasar, which he entitled the Tuhfat-ul-Fukahá (Tuḥfatu ʾl-Fuqahāʾ), was composed by Shaikh Alá-ud-dín Muhammad as-Samarkandí. The work of Alá-ud-dín was commented upon by his pupil Abú Bakr Bin Masuúd.
“There are several Arabic works on philosophical and theological subjects which bear the name of Al-Hidáyah (the guide). The work entitled Al-Hidáyah fí-al-Farú, or the guide in particular points, is a digest of law according to the doctrines of Abú Hanífah and his disciples Abú Yusuf and Imám Muhammad. The author of this work is Shaikh Burhán-ud-dín Alí (A.H. 593), whose reputation as a lawyer was beyond that of all his contemporaries. This Hidáyah is a commentary on the Badáya-ul-Mubtadá, an introduction to the study of law, written by the same author in a style exceedingly concise and close. In praise of the Hidáyah, Hájí Khalífah says, ‘It has been declared, like the Kurán, to have superseded all previous books on the law; that all persons should remember the rules prescribed in it, and that it should be followed as a guide through life.’ The Hidáyah has, besides the Kifáyah, many other commentaries, as a work of so great celebrity and authority is expected to have. The principal ones are the Ináyah (ʿInāyah), the Niháyah, and the Fath-ul-Kabír.
“The name Ináyah, however, is given to two commentaries on the Hidáyah. Of these, the one composed by Shaikh Kamál-ud-dín Muhammad Bin Mahmúd, who died A.H. 786, is highly esteemed and useful. Supplying by way of innuendoes what was omitted or left to implication, also expressing what was understood in the Hidáyah, and explaining the words and expounding the passages of the original by the insertion of explanatory phrases, the author of the Ináyah has rendered the work such as to be considered of itself one of his own principal works, with citations of passages from the Hidáyah.
“The Niháyah is composed by Husám-ud-dín Husain Bin Alí, who is said to have been a pupil of Burhán-ud-dín Alí. This is said to be the first commentary composed on the Hidáyah; and it is important for having added the law of inheritance to the Hidáyah, which treats only of the Fikah. The commentary, entitled the Kifáyah, is by Imám-ud-dín Amír Kátib Bin Amír Umar, who had previously written another explanatory gloss of the same work, and entitled it the Gháyat-ul-Bayán. The Kifáyah was finished A.H. 747, and, besides the author’s own observations, it gives concisely the substance of other commentaries.
“The Fath-ul-Kabír lil-Aájiz ul-Fakír, by Kamál-ud-dín Muhammad as-Siwásí, commonly called Ibnu Hammám, who died A.H. 861, is the most comprehensive of all the comments on the Hidáyah, and includes a collection of decisions which render it extremely useful. The short commentary entitled the Fawáid, written by Hamíd-ud-dín Alí, Al-Buk͟hárí, who died A.H. 667, is said to be the first of all the commentaries on the Hidáyah. The Wáfí, by Abú-ul-Barakát Abd ullah Bin Ahmad, commonly called Háfiz-ud-dín an-Nasafí, and its commentary the Káfí, by the same author, are works of authority. An-Nasafí died A.H. 710.
“The Vikáyah (al-Wiqāyah), which was written in the seventh century of the Hijrah by Burhán ash-Shariyat Mahmúd, is an elementary work to enable the student to study and understand the Hidáyah. The Vikáyah is printed, and invariably studied, with its celebrated commentary, the Sharh ul-Vikáyah, written by Ubaidullah Bin Masuúd, who died A.H. 745. The Sharh-ul-Vikáyah contains the text of the Vikáyah, with a gloss most perspicuously explanatory and illustrative; so much so, that those chapters of it which treat of marriage, dower, and divorce, are studied in the Madrassahs of India in preference to the Hidáyah itself. There are also other commentaries on the Vikáyah, but not so useful as the above. On the Sharh-ul-Vikáyah, again, there is an excellent commentary, entitled the Chalpí, written by Akhí Yusuf Bin Juníd, who was one of the then eight professors at Constantinople. This work was commenced to be written about A.H. 891, and completed A.H. 901; and the whole of it was published in Calcutta A.H. 1245, and extracts therefrom have been printed.
“The Nikáyah (an-Niqāyah), another elementary law book, is the work of the author of the Sharh-ul-Vikáyah. It is sometimes called the Mukhtasar ul-Vikáyah, being, in fact, an abridgment of that work. Three comments on the Nikáyah are much esteemed: they were written respectively by Abú ul-Makárim Bin Abd-ullah (A.H. 907), Abú Alí Bin Muhammad al-Birjindí (A.H. 935), and Shams ud-dín Muhammad al-Khurásání Al-Kohistání (A.H. 941). The last commentary is entitled the Jámi-ur-Rumúz (Jāmiʿu ʾr-Rumūz), which is the fullest and the clearest of the lot, as well as one of the most useful law books.
“The Ashbah wa an-Nazáïr (al-Ashbāh wa ʾn-Naz̤āʾir) is also an elementary work of great reputation. It was composed by Zain-al-Aábidín, the author of the Bahr-ur-Ráïk already mentioned. Hájí Khalífah speaks of this work in high terms, and enumerates several appendices to it that have been composed at different times. The treatise on exegesis entitled the Núr-ul-Anwár fí Sharah ul-Manár (Nūru ʾl-Anwār fī Sharḥi ʾl-Manār), by Shaikh Jún Bin Abú Sayyid Al-Makkí (Shaik͟h Jīwan ibn Abū Saʿīd), was printed in Calcutta (A.D. 1819), and is frequently referred to as a book of authority. A small tract on the sources of the Sharaa, entitled the Usúl-ush-Sháshí, together with an explanatory commentary, was printed in lithography, at Delhi, in the year A.D. 1847.
“The Tanvír-ul-Absár (Tanwīru ʾl-Abṣār), composed by Shaikh Shams-ud-dín Muhammad Bin Abd-ullah-al-Ghazzí (A.H. 995), is one of the most celebrated and useful books according to the Hanífí doctrines. This work has many commentaries. One of them, entitled the Manh-ul-Ghaffár (Manḥu ʾl-G͟haffār), which is written by the author himself, is a work of considerable extent.
“The Durr-ul-Mukhtár, which is another commentary on the Tanvír-ul-Absár, is a work of great celebrity. This work was written (A.H. 1071) by Muhammad Alá-ud-Dín Bin Shaikh Alí al-Hiskafí. Though a commentary, it is virtually a digest, which of itself has several commentaries, the most celebrated of them is the Tahtáví, a work used in India. Another commentary on the Durr-ul-Mukhtár is the Radd-ul-Muhtár. This is a very copious work, comprising an immense number of cases and decisions illustrative of the principles contained in the principal work. The Durr-ul-Mukhtár treats not only of the Fikah but also of the Faráïz. It is used by the followers of the Hanífí doctrines whereever they are, but it is most highly esteemed in Arabia, where it is studied and referred to in preference to other books of law.
“Many works have been written according to the doctrines of Abú Hanífah in the Turkish Empire, and are received there as authorities. The most celebrated of those is the Multaka-ul-Abhár, by Shaikh Ibráhím Bin Muhammad al-Halabí, the Durr-ul-Hukkám, by Mullah Khusrú, Kánún-námai-Jazá, a tract on penal laws, &c.
“The treatises on the laws of inheritance, according to the doctrines of Sháfií, are the Faráïz-ul-Mutawallí, by Abú Sayíd Abd-ur-Rahmán Bin Mamun-ul-Mutawalli (who died A.H. 478), the Faráïz-ul-Mukuddasí, by Abú-ul-Fazl Abd-ul-Malik Bin Ibráhím al-Hamadání Al-Mukuddasí, and Abú Munsúr Abd-ul-Kahír Al-Baghdádí (who died respectively A.H. 489 and 429); Al-Faráïz-ul-Fazárí, by Burhán-ud-dín Abú Isháq Al-Fazárí, commonly called Ibnu Firkáh (who died in A.H. 729), and Al-Faráïz ul-Farikiyah, by Shams-ud-dín Muhammad Bin Killáyí (who died A.H. 777).
“Of the books on the law of inheritance according to the Hanífí doctrines, the most celebrated, and the one invariably consulted in India, is the Sirájiyyah (as-Sirājīyah), which is also called the Faráïz-us-Sajáwandí, being, as it is, composed by Siráj-ud-Dín Muhammad bin Abd-ur-Rashíd as-Sajáwandí. This work has been commented upon by a vast number of writers, upwards of forty being enumerated in the Kashf-uz-Zunún by Hájí Khalífah. The most celebrated of these commentaries, and the most generally used to explain the text of the Sirájiyyah, is the Sharífiyyah (ash-Sharīfīyah), by Sayyid Sharif Ali Bin Muhammad Al-Jurjání (who died A.H. 814).
“There is another kind of digest which treats of the Ilm-ul-Fatáwá (the science of decisions). The works of this nature are also very numerous, and are, for the most part, called Fatáwá (decisions), with the names of their authors; and, though called Fatáwá, most of them contain also the rules of law as well as legal decisions. Of those again, some treat of the Fikah alone, others of the Faráïz (inheritance) also; some of them, moreover, treat of the decisions of particular lawyers, or those found in particular books; others treat of those which tend to illustrate the doctrines of the several sects; whilst the rest of them are devoted to recording the opinions of learned jurists.
“There are several collections of decisions, according to the doctrines of Sháfií. The one most esteemed seems to be the Fatáwá Ibn us-Saláh, by Abú Amru-Usmán Bin Abd-ur Rahmán ash-Sháhrazúrí, commonly called Ibn us-Saláh, who died in A.H. 642. Ibnu Firkáh, the author of the Faráïz-ul-Fazárí (a treatise on inheritance), also made a collection of decisions according to the same doctrines, which is called, after his name, the Fatáwá-i-Ibnu Firkáh.
“Of the Fatáwás of the Hanífí doctrines the following are generally known in India. The Khulásat ul-Fatáwá (K͟hulāṣatu ʾl-Fatāwā), by Imám Iftikhar-ud-Dín Tahir Bin Ahmad Al-Bukhárí, who died A.H. 542, is a select collection of decisions of great authority. The Zakhírat-ul-Fatáwá (Ẕak͟hīratu ʾl-Fatāwā), sometimes called the Zakhírat-ul-Burhániyah, by Burhán-ud-Dín Bin Mázah al-Bukhárí, the author of the Muhít-ul-Burhání, is also a celebrated, though not a large, collection of decisions, principally taken from the Muhít. The Fatáwá-i-Kází Khán, by Imám Fakhr-ud-Dín Hasan Bin Mansúr al-Uʾzjandí al-Farghání, commonly called Kází Khán, who died A.H. 592, is a work held in very high authority. It is replete with cases of common occurrence, and is, therefore, of great practical utility, more especially as many of the decisions are illustrated by proofs and reasoning on which they are founded. The two works entitled the Fusúl-ul-Isturúshí and Fusúl-ul-Imádíah, were incorporated in a collection entitled the Jámi-ul-Fusúlain, which is a work of some celebrity. It was compiled by Badr-ud-Dín Muhammad, known by the name of Ibn-ul-Kází Simáwanah (A.H. 823). The Fatáwá az-Zahíriyah, which contains decisions collected partly from the Khizánat-ul-Wákiyát, was written by Jahír-ud-Dín Abú Bakr Muhammad Bin Ahmad al-Bukhárí (A.H. 619). The Kuniyat-ul-Muniyat is a collection of decisions of considerable authority by Mukhtár Bin Mahmúd Bin Muhammad as-Záhidí Abú-ur-Rijá al-Ghazmíní, surnamed Najm-ud-Dín, who died A.H. 658. An-Navaví, the author of the biographical dictionary entitled the Tahzíb-ul-Asmá (Tahẕību ʾl-Asmāʾ), who died A.H. 677, made a collection of decisions of some note, which is called the Fatáwá an-Navaví. He also composed a smaller work of the same nature, entitled al-Masáïl-ul-Muhimmat (ʿUyūn al-Masāʾili ʾl-Muhimmah), arranged in the manner of question and answer. The Khizánat-ul-Muftiyín, by Imám Husain Bin Muhammad as-Samaání, who completed his work in A.H. 740, contains a large collection of decisions, and is a book of some authority in India. The Khizánat-ul-Fatáwá, by Ahmad Bin Muhammad Abú Bakr al-Hanafí, is a collection of decisions made towards the end of the eighth century of the Hijrah, and comprises questions of rare occurrence. The Fatáwá Tátár-Khániyah was originally a large collection of Fatáwás, in several volumes, by Imám Aálim Bin Alá al-Hanafí, taken from the Muhít-ul-Burhání, the Zakhírat, the Khániyah, and the Zahíriyah. Afterwards, however, a selection was made from these decisions by Imám Ibráhím Bin Muhammad al-Halabí, who died A.H. 956, and an epitome was thus formed, which is in one volume, and still retains the title of Tátár-Khániyah. The Fatáwá-i-Ahl-us-Samarkand, is a collection of the decisions of those learned men of the city of Samarkand who are omitted, or lightly passed over, in the Fatáwá-Tátár Khániyah and the Jámi-ul-Fusúlain, to both of which works it may be considered a supplement. The Fatáwá az-Zainíyah contains decisions by Zain ul-Aabidín Ibrahím Bin Nujaim al-Misrí, the author of the Bahr-ur-Ráïk and the Ashbah wa-an-Nazáïr. They were collected by his son Ahmad (about A.H. 970). The Fatáwá al-Ankiraví, a collection of decisions of al-Ankiraví by Shaikh-ul-Islám Muhammad Bin al-Husain, who died A.H. 1098, is a work of authority. The Fatáwá Hammádiyah, though it seems to be a modern compilation, is a work of considerable authority.
“Tipú Sultán ordered a collection of Fatáwás to be made in Persian by a society of the learned of Mysore. It comprises three hundred and thirteen chapters, and is entitled the Fatáwá-i-Muhummadí.
“Mr. Harrington, in his analysis (vol. i. 2nd ed.), mentions a few other books of Fatáwá, viz. the Fatáwá Bazázíah, the Fatáwá Nakshbandiyah, the Mukhtár-ul-Fatáwá, and the Fatáwá Karákhání. The last of these he describes to be a Persian compilation, the cases included in which were collected by Mullah Sadar-ud-Dín Bin Yákúb, and arranged some years after his death by Kará Khán, in the reign of Sultán Alá-ud-Dín.
“The following works of the present class, published at Constantinople, and containing decisions according to the doctrines of Abú Hanífah, may be noticed. A collection of Fatwás in the Turkish and Arabic languages, entitled the Kitáb fí al-Fikah al-Kadúsí, composed by Hafiz Muhammad Bin Ahmad al-Kadúsí A.H. 1226. The Fatáwá-i-Abd-ur-Rahím Effendí, is a collection of judgments pronounced at various times in Turkey, and collected by the Muftí Abd-ur-Rahím. It was printed in the year 1827. Dabagzadeh Nuamán Effendí is the author of a collection of six hundred and seventy decisions, which is entitled the Tuhfat us-Sukúk, and was published in the year 1832.
“The Jámi-ul-Ijáratín (Jāmiʿu ʾl-Ijārāt) is a collection of decisions relating to the law of farming and the tenure of land, by Muhammad Aarif. It was printed in the year 1836.
“A collection of Fatwás relating to leases was published at Constantinople by M. D’Adelbourg, in the year 1838. Prefixed to this collection are the principles of the law of lease, according to the Multaka; and it is followed by an analytical table, facilitating reference to the various decisions.
“Of the Fatwás which treat both of the Fikah and Faráïz, two are most generally used in India. These are the Fatáwá Sirájiyyah and Fatáwá Alamgírí. The Fatáwá Sirájiyyah, with some principles, contains a collection of decisions on cases which do not generally occur in other books. The Fatáwá Alamgírí, with opinions and precepts of law, contains an immense number of law cases. This work, from its comprehensive nature, is applicable to almost every case that arises involving points of the Hanífí doctrines. Although opinions of modern compilers are not esteemed as of equal authority with those of the older writers on jurisprudence, yet being composed by a great number of the most learned lawyers of the age, and by order of the then greatest person of the realm, the Emperor Aurungzeb Alamgír (by whose name the book is designated), the Fatáwá Alamgírí is esteemed as a very high authority in India; and containing, as it does, decisions on cases of any shape based upon unquestionable authorities, this book is here referred to more frequently than any other work of a similar nature, and has not up to this day been surpassed by any work, except perhaps, by the Radd-ul-Muhtár, already spoken of. During the long rule of the Muhammadans in India, the Fatáwá Alamgírí alone appears to have been translated into Persian, by order of Zéb-un-nisá, daughter of the Emperor Aurungzeb Alamgír. Since the establishment of the British Government in India, the books of Jináyah and Hudúd from the Fatáwá Alamgírí were translated into Persian, under the direction of the Council of the College of Fort William in Calcutta, by the then Kází-ul-Kuzzát, Muhammad Najm ud-Dín Khán, and were published in the year 1813, together with a Persian treatise on Tázírát, by the same author.
“In the same year the book on Tázírát from the Durr-ul-Mukhtár was translated, printed, and published, by Moulavi Muhammad Khalíl-ud-Dín, under the orders of Mr. Harrington, the then Chief Judge of the late Sudder Dewany Adawlut.
“The Hidáyah was translated into Persian by four of the most learned Moulavis of that time and of this country (India). Unfortunately, however, the learned translators have, in the body of the book, inserted many things by way of explanatory remarks and illustrative expositions, instead of subjoining them in the form of notes. Furthermore, they have, in a considerable degree, deviated from the original. For all these reasons, we are warranted to say, that the Persian version of the Hidáyah does not represent a true picture of the original.
“Macnaghten’s Principles of Muhammadan Law were translated into Urdu and lithographed, many years ago, in Delhi. Another translation of the same work was made and published in Calcutta a few years ago.
“The work entitled the Bighyat-i-Báhis, by Al-Mutakannah, which is a tract treating of Zaid’s system of Faráïz, was translated into English by Sir William Jones. A translation of the Sirájiyyah also was made by Sir William Jones, who at the same time made an abstract translation of its celebrated commentary (the Sharífiyyah), with the addition of illustrations and exemplifications from his own brain and pen. A translation of the selected portions from the two books of the Fatáwá-i-Alamgírí, which comprise the subject of sale, was published by Mr. Neil Baillie.
“The Persian version of the Hidáyah, already noticed, was, by order of Warren Hastings, commenced to be translated into English by Mr. James Anderson, but shortly after, he being engaged in an important foreign employment, the translation was finished, and revised by his colleague, Mr. Charles Hamilton. It is a matter of regret that the translation in question was not executed from the original Hidáyah itself, instead of from its Persian translation, which contains frequent explanatory remarks and illustrative expositions interpolated in the book itself, instead of being subjoined by way of notes. Added to this, the Persian translators have, in a considerable degree, deviated from the original.
“Of the digests of Muhammadan law in English, the first appears to be the chapter on criminal law of the Muhammadans as modified by regulations. This is incorporated in Harrington’s Analysis of Bengal Regulations. An abstract of Muhammadan law, which is from the pen of Lieutenant-Colonel Vans Kennedy, will be found in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society. ‘This work,’ says Mr. Morley, ‘is well worthy the attention of the student.’ The work entitled the Principles and Precedents of Muhammadan Law, written by Mr. (afterwards Sir) William Hay Macnaghten, is the clearest or easiest, if not the amplest or sufficient, work on that law hitherto written in English. Mr. Neil Baillie’s Muhammadan Law of Inheritance, according to Abú Hanífah and his followers, with appendix containing authorities from the original Arabic, is an excellent work of the kind. The treatise on inheritance, gift, will, sale, and mortgage, compiled by Mr. F. E. Elberling, a Danish judge at Serampore, in the year 1844, contains principles of Muhammadan law, with those of the other laws, as used in India.
“In the year 1865, Mr. Neil Baillie, the author of the work already mentioned, completed and published a digest of Muhammadan law on all the subjects to which the Muhammadan law is usually applied by the British Courts of Justice in India. It gives translations of almost all the principles and some of the cases contained in the Fatáwá Alamgírí, the great digest of Muhammadan law in India, and quotes occasionally other available authorities. Being generally close to the original, and fully dealing with the subjects it treats of, this work must be said to be authentic, as well as the amplest of the digests of Muhammadan law hitherto written in English according to the doctrines of the Hanífí sect.” (See the Tagore Law Lectures, 1873, by Shama Churun Sircar; Thacker, Spink & Co., Calcutta.)
II.—The Shīʿahs, although they are divided amongst themselves into numerous sects which differ from each other in various points of religious belief, are unanimous in rejecting the collections of Traditions of the Sunnīs. The Sunnīs arrogate to themselves the title of Traditionists, but this does not imply that the Shīʿahs do not receive the Ḥadīs̤, but merely that they reject the “six correct books” of their opponents.
The works on Ḥadīs̤ compiled by the Shīʿahs are very numerous, and they maintain that they have earlier and more authentic collections than those of the Sunnīs. They say that in the time of al-Ḥasan and al-Ḥusain, a certain person who was grandfather to ʿAbdu ʾllāh ibn ʿAlī ibn Abī Shuʿbah al-Ḥalabī, collected traditions and gave them to his grandson for careful record. This record was verified and corrected by Imām Jaʿfar aṣ-Ṣadīq. The Sunnī doctor, Abū Ḥanīfah, was a pupil of this distinguished personage in his earlier days, but afterwards separated from him and established a school of his own.
There are four books of traditions, known as the Kutub-i-Arbaʿah, which seem to be held in the same estimation by the Shīʿahs, as the six Ṣaḥīḥs of the Sunnīs. They are entitled the Tahẕīb, the Istibṣār, the Kāfi, and Man lā Yastaḥẓirah al-Faqīh. [TRADITIONS.]
Mr. Shama Churun Sircar, Tagore Professor of Law, has also reviewed the Shīʿah, or Imamīyah, law books, and we are indebted to him for the following résumé:—
“One of the earliest works on civil and criminal laws was written by Abdullah Bin Alí al Halabí. But it does not appear that any of his legal compositions are extant.
“A number of law-treatises of the present class was composed by Yunas Bin Abd ur-Rahmán (already spoken of as a writer on traditions). The most famous of these treatises is entitled the Jámi-ul-Kabír.
“Several works on law were written by Abú al-Hasan Alí Bin al-Hasan al-Kumí, commonly called Ibnu Bábavaih, one of which works is entitled the Kitábu ash-Sharáyah. The Maknaa fí al-Fikah (Maqnaʿ fī ʾl-Fiqh) is the best known of the law books of the present class composed by Abú Jaafar.
“Abú Abdullah Muhammad an-Nuamání, surnamed the Shaikh Mufíd, and Ibnu Muallim, a renowned Shíah lawyer, is stated to have written two hundred works, amongst which one called the Irshád is well known. When Shaikh Mufíd is quoted in conjunction with Abú Jaafar at-Túsí, they also are spoken of as ‘the two Shaikhs’ (Shaikhain).
“The chief works on law, written by Abú Jaafar Muhammad at-Túsí (Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad at̤-T̤ūsī), are the Mabsút, the Khiláf, the Niháyah, and the Muhít. These works are held in great estimation, and he is considered one of the highest authorities in law. The Risálat-i-Jaafariyah is likewise a legal treatise by at-Túsí, which is frequently quoted.
“The Sharáya ul-Islám, written by Shaikh Najm ud-dín Abú ul-Kásim Jaafar Bin Muayyid al-Hillí, commonly called Shaikh Muayyid, is a work of the highest authority, at least in India, and is more universally referred to than any other Shíah law book, and is the chief authority for the law of the Shíahs in India. A copious and valuable commentary upon the Sharáya ul-Islám, entitled the Masálik ul-Afhám, was written by Zayin-ud-dín Alí as-Sáilí, commonly called the ‘Shahíd-i-Sání’ (second martyr). There are two other commentaries on the Sharáya ul-Islám, respectively entitled the Madár ul-Ahkám and Jawáhir ul-Kalám, the latter of which was written by Shaikh Muhammad Hasan an-Najafí.
“Of the works on jurisprudence written by Yahiyah Bin Ahmad al-Hillí, who was celebrated for his knowledge of traditions, and is well known amongst the Imámiyah sects for his works, the Jámi ash-Sharáya and the Mudkhal dar Usúl-i-Fikah are held in the greatest repute.
“Of the numerous law books written by Shaikh Allámah Jamál-ud-dín Hasan Bin Yusuf Bin al-Mutahhir al-Hillí, who is called the chief of the lawyers of Hilliah, and whose works are frequently referred to as authorities of undisputed merit, the most famous are the Talkhís ul-Marám, the Gháyit ul-Ahkám, and the Tahrír ul-Ahkám, which last is a justly celebrated work. The Mukhtalaf-ush-Shíah is also a well-known composition of this great lawyer, and his Irshád ul-Azhán is constantly quoted as an authority under the name of the Irshád-i-Allámáh.
“The Jámi-ul-Abbási is a concise and comprehensive treatise on Shíah law, in twenty books or chapters. It is generally considered as the work of Bahá-ud-dín Muhammad Aámilí, who died A.H. 1031.
“The Mafátíh, by Muhammad Bin Murtazá, surnamed Muhsan, and the commentary on the book by his nephew, who was of the same name, but surnamed Hádí, are modern works deserving of notice.
“The Rouzat ul-Ahkám, written in Persian by the third Mujtahid of Oudh, consists of four chapters. The first of these is on Inheritance, which is treated of therein most fully and perspicuously. This work was lithographed at Lucknow, first in A.H. 1257, and again in A.H. 1264.
“A general digest of the Imámiyah law in temporal matters was compiled under the superintendence of Sir William Jones. This book is composed of extracts from the work called the Káfí, which is a commentary on the Mafátíh, as well as from the Sharáya ul-Islám. The manuscript of this digest still remains in the possession of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta.
“The earliest treatises on the Faráïz, or Inheritance, of the Shíahs appear to have been written by Abdul Azíz Bin Ahmad al-Azádí, and Abú Muhammad al-Kindí, the latter of whom is said to have lived in the reign of Hárún ur-Rashíd.
“A work on the law of inheritance, entitled the al-Ijáz fí al-Faráïz has been left by Abú Jaafar Muhammad at-Túsí in addition to his general works on the Kurán, the Hadís and jurisprudence.
“The best known and most esteemed works on the law of inheritance are the Ihtijáj ush-Shíah, by Saád Bin Abd-ullah al-Asharí, the Kitáb ul-Mawáris, by Abú al-Hasan Alí Bábavaih; the Hamal ul-Faráïz and the Faráïz ush-Shariyah, by Shaikh Mufíd. The Sharáya ul-Islám, which, as already stated, is one of the highest authorities on the Shíah law, contains also a chapter on Inheritance.
Of all the above-mentioned books on civil and criminal laws, those that are commonly referred to in India are the following: The Sharáya ul-Islám, Rouzat-ul-Ahkám, Sharah-i-Lumá, Mafátíh, Tahrír, and Irshád ul-Azhán.
“Of the books on this branch of Muhammadan law, only that part of the Sharáya ul-Islám which treats of the forensic law has been translated, though not fully, by Mr. Neil Baillie. A considerable part of the digest compiled under the superintendence of Sir William Jones (as already noticed) was translated by Colonel Baillie, out of which the chapter on Inheritance has been printed by Mr. Neil Baillie at the end of the second part of his digest of Muhammadan law. Although the chapter above alluded to is copious, yet it must be remarked that it is not so clear and useful as the Sharáya-ul-Islám and Rouzat ul-Ahkám.” (See Tagore Law Lectures, 1874, the Imámiyah Code, by Shama Churun Sircar; Thacker, Spink and Co., Calcutta.)