Ulamolar Shar'u Min Qablinaa ning hujjiyati (dalil sifatida kuchga egaligi) to'g'risida ixtilof qilganlar. Bu, shariatimizda inkor etilmasdan va tasdiqlanmasdan zikr qilingan hukmlardir. Biz ularga xitob qilinganmizmi yoki yo'qmi? Bu borada ularning fikrlari quyidagicha:

The ‘Ulamaa have differed in respect to the Hujjiyah (legal validity as a source) of the Shar’u Min Qablinaa that has been mentioned in our Share’ah without denial or affirmation (support). Are we addressed by it or not? Their opinions in regards to this are as follows:

1 – Hanafiylarning ko‘pchiligi, Molikiylar va Shofiiylarning ba’zilari, shuningdek Ahmadga bir rivoyatda nisbat berilgan qarashga ko‘ra, bizning Shariatimizda inkor (rad etish yoki qoralash) va ta’yid (qo‘llab-quvvatlash) bo‘lmagan holda zikr qilingan Shar’u man qablana ham bizning uchun shariat hisoblanadi va biz unga amal qilishga majburmiz. O‘z fikrini isbotlash uchun ular Allohning Taolo ushbu so‘zini dalil qilib keltiradilar:

1 – The majority of the Ahnaaf, the Maalikiyah and some of the Shaafi’iyah in addition to Ahmad in one view attributed to him, upheld that the Shar’u Min Qablinaa that is mentioned in our Sharee’ah without Inkaar (denial or rebuke) and without Ta’yeed (support) is also a Shar’a for us and that we are bound to follow it. To support their opinion, they used the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa as evidence:

Uning Qavli (SWT) ga qo‘shimcha ravishda:

In addition to His Qawl (swt):

Va Rasulullohning ﷺ qavli bo'yicha:

And by the Qawl of the Messenger (saw):

Bunday deganidan so'ng u zot ﷺ Allohning (SWT) qavlini o'qidi:

As after stating this he (saw) recited the Qawl of Allah (swt):

Bu Muso (a.s.) ga qaratilgan xitob edi.

Which was an address to Mousaa (as).

Shu sababli Hanafiylar kofirni musulmon uchun o'ldirish hukmini Allohning (SWT) quyidagi so'zidan istidlol qilganlar:

It is for that reason that the Hanafiyah deduced the killing of the Muslim for the non-Muslim based on His Qawl (swt):

Bu oyat yahudiylar haqida gap ketayotgan paytda, ularga Tavrotda Alloh (SWT) tomonidan farz qilingan narsalar haqida. Qo‘shimcha ravishda, Ibn Kasir o‘zining tafsirida ushbu oyatning hukmlariga amal qilish borasidagi ijmo’ (konsensus) haqida so‘zlagan.

This is whilst the Aayah is discussing the Yahood and what Allah (swt) had made obligatory upon them in the Tawrah. In addition, Ibn Katheer spoke in his Tafseer about the Ijmaa’ (consensus) upon acting in accordance to the dictates of this Aayah.

2 – Boshqa guruh, jumladan Ash'ariylar, Mu'tazilalar, Shia'lar, Ahmadning unga nisbat berilgan boshqa bir qarashi, Ibn Hazm, ba'zi Hanafiylar va Shofi'iylarning ko'pchiligi, jumladan Al-G'azzoliy, Al-Omidiy va Ar-Roziy, shuningdek usul olimlarining boshqa vakillari, "Bizdan oldingilarning shariati bizning uchun shariat emas, hatto u Qur'onda zikr qilingan bo'lsa ham" degan fikrda bo'lganlar. Ular buni Allohning (SWT) quyidagi so'zidan dalil qilib olganlar:

2 – Another group including the Ashaa’irah, Mu’tazilah, Shee’ah, Ahmad in another opinion attributed to him, Ibn Hazm, some of the Ahnaaf and the majority of the Shaafi’iyah including Al-Ghazaaliy, Al-Aamadiy and Ar-Raaziy in addition to others from the scholars of Usool, held that the Shar’u Min Qablinaa is not a Shar’a for us and even if it has been mentioned in the Qur’aan. They deduced that from the Qawl of Allah (swt):

Shuning uchun har bir ummatning o‘ziga xos mustaqil shariati va alohida minhaji (yo‘li, usuli) bor. Avvalgi ummatlarning shariatlari bizning shariatimizdagidek umumiylik yoki keng qamrovlilik xususiyatiga ega bo‘lmagan. Ularning har biri o‘z shariati nozil qilingan qavm (xalq) uchun xos bo‘lgan va shuning uchun biz uchun shariat bo‘lib xizmat qilmagan.

Therefore, every Ummah has an independent Sharee’ah and specific Minhaaj (method/way) and the Sharee’ahs of the previous nations did not possess the attribute of generalness or comprehensiveness like our Sharee’ah. Each of them had been specific to the Qawm (people) that their Sharee’ah had been revealed upon and as such they did not represent a Shar’a for us.

Ular, shuningdek, Allohning Elchisi (ﷺ) Muoz ibn Jabalni Yamanga qozi qilib yuborganida unga bergan tasdiqini dalil sifatida keltirdilar. Chunki u (ﷺ) unga Kitob va Sunnatda hukm topilmagan holda avvalgi shariatlardan biror narsani olishni buyurmagan. Aksincha, u (ﷺ) ijtihod qilishni ma'qulladi va shu yo'nalishni tutgani uchun uni maqtadi.

They also used as evidence the approval of the Messenger of Allah (saw) provided to Mu’aadh Ibn Jabal when he sent him as a judge to Al-Yaman (Yemen). That is because he did not instruct him to take anything from the previous Sharaa’i in the case where he did not find the Hukm in the Kitaab and the Sunnah. Rather he approved of the undertaking of Ijtihaad and commended him in respect to taking this direction.