Ikkinchi usul esa Abu Hanifa rahimahullohning ashoblari o‘z mazhablarining usul al-fiqhini tuzishda rioya qilgan "al-Fuqaha" tariqasidir. Ular bu usulda furu‘ (tarmoq masalalar) ta’sirlariga qarab ish tutdilar va usul al-fiqhning vazifasi furu‘ masalalarga xizmat qilish hamda ularda qilingan ijtihodning to‘g‘riligini tasdiqlashdan iborat ekanini bayon qildilar. Bu tariqa al-qawa‘id al-usuliyyani o‘z imomlaridan naql qilingan furu‘ masalalar asosida belgilaydi va bu qoidalar o‘sha imomlar Shar‘iy hukmlarni chiqarish va istidlol qilishda e’tibor bergan qoidalardir, deb da’vo qiladi. Demak, bu usullar Shar‘iy hukmlar mavjud bo‘lganidan keyin paydo bo‘lgan va furu‘ masalalardan qilingan istidlol natijasida vujudga kelgan qoidalardir.

As for the second methodology then it is the Tareeqah of Al Fuqahaa’ which the followers of Al-Imaam Abu Haneefah followed when placing down the Usool ul-Fiqh of their Madh’hab. They proceeded upon this method by looking at the effects of the Furoo’ (branches) and by explaining that Usool ul-Fiqh is to serve the branches and to affirm the soundness of the Ijtihaad in them. This Tareeqah establish the Qawaa’id Al-Usooliyah in light of what has been transmitted from the branches from their A’immah (Imaams) whilst claiming that these represent the Qawaa’id (principles) which those A’immah paid regard to when they extracted and deduced the branches which represent the Ahkaam Ash-Shar’iyah. The principles therefore represent Usool which came after the presence of the Ahkaam Ash-Shar’iyah and which came as a result of deduction made from the branches.

Shu tarzda Hanafiya usuli Shofi'iya usulidan farq qiladi, chunki Shofi'iya usuli istinbot (hukm chiqarish) uchun metodologiya bo'lib, unga hokim edi. Hanafiya metodiga kelsak, u tarmoqlarni yozib bo'lingandan keyin ularga hokim bo'lmagan. Ya'ni ular o'z mazhablari asoslangan qoidalar (qawoid)ni istinbot qilib, ularni himoya qildilar. Shuning uchun ular muqarrar (belgilangan) o'lchovlarni (maqoyis) ifodalaydi, hokima (boshqaruvchi) o'lchovlarni emas.

The following was mentioned in the book of Usool ul-Fiqh by Al Imam Abu Zahrah: “In this way the Hanafiyah Usool differs from the Shaafi’iyah Usool as the Usool Ash-Shaafi’iyah was a methodology for Istinbaat (deduction) and was controlling over it. As for the method of the Hanafiyah then it was not controlling over the branches after it was were recorded. This means that they deduced the Qawaa’id (principles) upon which their Madh’hab had been built upon and defended them. They therefore represent measures (Maqaayees) that have been established (Muqarrarah) and not measures that are controlling (Haakimah)”.

Shu sababli ular o‘z kitoblarida ko‘pincha Furu’ (tarmoqlar)ni ko‘p zikr qiladilar, chunki ko‘p hollarda Usuliy Qawoid’ni shu tarmoqlarga mos keladigan narsalar asosida shakllantiradilar. Shundan so‘ng ular bu Qawoid’lar (qoidalar)dan yangi paydo bo‘layotgan masalalar uchun yangi Ahkom’larni chiqarishda foydalanishni boshladilar.

For this reason, they mention the Furoo’ (Branches) a lot in their books because in most cases they formulate the Usooliy Qawaa’id in accordance to what agrees to these branches. However, they then began to utilise these Qawaa’id (principles) to extract new Ahkaam for newly occurring problems.

Fuqahoning uslubi yetilib, to‘liq shakllangandan so‘ng, boshqa mazhablarning izdoshlari ham ularga amal qilib, usul al-fiqhda ularning yo‘lini tutishni boshladilar va hukmlarni istinbot qilishda shu usulni qabul qila boshladilar. Hatto Shia Imomiya va Zaydiya ham fiqh usullarini bayon etishda Hanafiyadan keyin fuqahoning uslubiga ergashdilar. Hijriy 656-yilda vafot etgan Shihob ud-Din Az-Zanjoniy Ash-Shofi‘iy ushbu uslub metodologiyasi haqida kitob yozdi va uni «Takhrij al-Furu‘ ‘ala l-Usul» deb nomladi. Misol:

After the Tareeqah of the Fuqahaa’ matured and became complete the followers of the other Madhaahib began to proceed in accordance to them in respect to their Usool ul-Fiqh and began to adopt this Usool for the deduction of the Ahkaam. Even the Shee’ah Al Imaamiyah and Zaidiyah followed the ‘Fuqahaa’ method after the Hanafiyah in respect to putting down the Usool of their Fiqh. Shihaab ud-Deen Az-Zanjaani Ash-Shaafi’iy who passed away in the year 656 AH wrote a book upon the methodology of this Tareeqah which he called: ‘Takhreej Al-Furoo’ ‘Alaa l-Usool’ Example:

Quyidagi – Usuliy qoidaning Fuqaho tariqasiga ko‘ra qanday bayon etilishiga misol: «Hanafiylarning tariqasi».

The following is an example of how an Usooliy principle is put down upon the Tareeqah of the Fuqahaa ‘The Tareeqah of the Hanafiyah’:

Fuqaha aniq dalillaridan quyidagi shar'iy hukmlarga kelganlar: 1) O'lik hayvonning (murdorning) terisi oshlangan taqdirda pok bo'ladi. Bu hukm Payg'ambar ﷺ ning quyidagi hadislaridan chiqarilgan: "Rasulullah ﷺ o'lik qo'y yonidan o'tib, so'ng dedilar: "Agar bu teri oshlansa, u pok bo'ladi", deb Imom Muslim o'zining "Sahih" kitobida rivoyat qilgan.

The Fuqahaa arrived at the following Ahkaam Ash-Shar’iyah from their detailed evidences: 1) The skin of the dead animal (carrion) is purified if it is tanned. This Hukm was extracted from the Hadeeth of the Messenger (saw): “The Messenger of Allah (saw) passed by a dead sheep and then said: “If this hide is tanned (then) it has been purified” as related by Al Imaam Muslim in his Saheeh.

2) Allohning quyidagi qavlidan chiqarilgan o‘g‘rining qo‘lini kesish hukmi:

2) The Hukm of cutting the hand of the thief which was deduced from the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa:

Bu oyat Safvon (roziyallohu anhu)ning qalqoni yoki ridosi o'g'irlanishi voqeasi munosabati bilan nozil bo'lgan.

And this was revealed in relation to the incident of the theft of the shield or cloak of Safwaan.

3) Zihorning kaffarati — ozod qilish: qul ozod qilinadi, va bunga qodir bo'lmagan kishi ketma-ket ikki oy ro'za tutadi. Bu hukm Allohning quyidagi Qavlidan olingan:

3) The Kaffaarah (expiation) of Azh-Zhihaar being the freeing of a slave and for the one who does not have that at his disposal, then fasting for two consecutive months. The Hukm for this was taken from the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa:

Oyatgacha, Al-Mujodala surasining to'rtinchi oyati. Bu oyat Maslama ibn Sahr haqida nozil bo'lgan.

Until Aayah four from Soorah Al-Mujaadalah. And this was revealed in relation to Maslamah Bin Sakhr.

4) Bir-birini la'natlash (al-Mulaa'anah yoki li'an) erning va xotinning o'rtasida bo'ladigan, hukmi Allohning Qavli bilan olinadigan:

4) Mutual cursing (Al-Mulaa’anah or Li’aan) between a husband and wife, the Hukm of which is taken from the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa:

"9-oyatgacha, Nur surasidan. Bu oyat Hilol ibn Umayya haqida nozil bo'lgan."

Until Aayah 9 of Soorah An-Noor. This was revealed in relation to Hilaal Bin Umayyah.

Ahkomlar uchun dalillar umumiy lafzlar bilan kelgan, ular quyidagi tartibda: "Agar teri oshlangan bo'lsa..." "Erkak o'g'ri va ayol o'g'ri..." "Zihor qiladiganlar..." "Xotinlariga tuhmat qiladiganlar..." Biroq har bir dalil muayyan sabab bilan nozil bo'lgan, bu sabablar esa quyidagi tartibda edi: "Maymuna (roziyallohu anho)ning qo'yi..." "Safvon ning ridosi..." "Maslama ibn Sahr..." "Hilol ibn Umayya..." Ammo sahobalar va ulardan keyin kelgan tobeinlar bu ahkomlarning barchasini Muslimlar qilgan har bir amalga tatbiq etdilar. Shu tariqa ular quyidagi usuliy qoidani belgiladilar:

The Adillah (evidences) for these Ahkaam came in general Alfaazh (worded expressions) in the order of: If the hide is tanned... And the male thief and female thief... Those who do Zhihaar... Those who accuse their wives...’ However, each Daleel (evidence) was revealed for a specific Sabab (cause) and these Asbaab (causes) were in the order of: ‘The sheep of Maymoonah (ra)... The cloak of Safwaan... Maslamah Bin Sakhr... Hilaal Bin Umayyah...’ However, the Sahaabah and the Taabi’een who came after them applied all of these Ahkaam upon every action (of these) that the Muslims did. As such they put down the Qaa’idah Al-Usooliyah (Usooli principle) of:

Ulamolar bu qoidaga fuqahoning uslubi bilan, shar'iy hukmlarni tekshirish orqali yetib kelganlar. Ularning batafsil dalillari muayyan sabab bilan nozil bo'lgan, ammo dalilning lafziy ifodasi umumiylikni ko'rsatgan.

The ‘Ulamaa arrived at this Qaa’idah (principle) through the Tareeqah (method) of the Fuqahaa by examining the Ahkaam Ash Shar’iyah, the detailed evidences of which, were revealed for a specific cause but the worded expressions of the Daleel indicated generality.

Shunga ko'ra, Allohning Elchisi ﷺ hadisi munosabati bilan:

Therefore, in relation to the Hadeeth of the Messenger of Allah (saw):

Agar kimdir buni Payg'ambar (saw) zamonida otasidan keyin Forsning hukmronligini egallagan Kisroning qizi haqida xos deb aytsa, biz unga shunday javob beramiz: "Mulohaza (Al-'Ibrah) sabab xosligida emas, balki iboralarning umumiyligidadir". Chunki "Hech qachon bir qavm muvaffaqiyatga erishmaydi" degan ibora nafy (inkor) kontekstida kelgan nakirah (noaniq) bo'lgani uchun umumiylikni bildiradi. Shu sababli, Islomda ayol xalifa yoki voliy bo'lib hokimiyat lavozimini egallashi joiz emas.

If someone was to say that this is specific to the daughter of Kisraa who took over the Persian rule after her father in the time of the Messenger (saw) then we would say in response that: ‘The consideration (Al-‘Ibrah) is in the generality of the expressions and not the specificity of the cause’. That is because the expression: ‘Never will a nation succeed’ indicates generality because it is Nakirah (indefinite) in the context of negation (Nafy). Therefore, it is not permissible for a woman to assume any position of ruling in Islaam so as to become the Khalifah or a Waali.