Birinchi bo‘lib bu usulning asoslarini qat’iy belgilab bergan zot Imom Ash-Shofi’iy bo‘lib, u o‘zining «Ar-Risola» asarida, uni Usul ul-fiqh sohasida yozgan. Bu usul Qawoid al-Usuliyya (usuliy qoidalar)ni o‘rnatishi, ularni sof nazariy yo‘l bilan tekshirishi, ularga kiruvchi ixtilof va farqlarni hech qanday mazhabga e’tibor bermasdan chuqur tahlil qilishi bilan ajralib turadi. Uning maqsadi shuning uchun eng kuchli qoidalarni chiqarishdir, bu qoidalar biror mazhabning xizmatida bo‘lsinmi yoki unga qarshi bo‘lsinmi, farqi yo‘q. Chunki u fiqhdan ustun turadi va unga bo‘ysunmaydi. Bu yo‘lni tutganlar tarmoqlar bilan shug‘ullanishlari kam uchragan, faqat aniqlik kiritish yoki misollar keltirish uchun bundan mustasno bo‘lgan («Mabaahith Fee Usool ul-Fiqh», Dr. Al-‘Abd Khaleel Abu ‘Eid, 26-bet).

The first one to firmly lay down the pillars of this method was Al Imaam Ash-Shaafi’iy in his Risaalah which was written in the subject area of Usool ul-Fiqh. This method is distinguished in respect to establishing the Qawaa’id Al-Usooliyah, verifying them in a purely theoretical manner, conducting a thorough examination of what they include in terms of disagreement or difference without paying consideration to any Madh’hab. The aim of it is therefore to produce the strongest principles whether that would be in service of a particular Madh’hab or was in opposition to it. That is because it dominates over the Fiqh and is not subservient to it. It was rare that those following this Tareeqah would preoccupy themselves with the branches unless this was to provide further clarity or provide examples (‘Mabaahith Fee Usool ul-Fiqh’ by Dr. Al-‘Abd Khaleel Abu ‘Eid p26).

Shunga ko'ra, bu tariqaga mansub ba'zi kishilar Ash-Shofi'iyning mazhabiga ergashgan bo'lsalar ham, ba'zi masalalarda undan ixtilof qilganlar. Masalan, Ash-Shofi'iy as-Sukutiy ijmo'ini qabul qilmagan, holbuki shofi'iy mazhabidan bo'lgan al-Omadiy as-Sukutiy ijmo'ining hujjat (dalil va manba) ekanini tarjih qilgan.

Consequently, there were those of this Tareeqah who disagreed with Ash-Shaafi’iy (in areas) even if they were followers of his Madh’hab. So for instance we saw that Ash-Shaafi’iy did not take Al-Ijmaa’ As Sukootiy whilst Al-Aamadi who was of the Shaaf’iy Madh’hab outweighed that Al-Ijmaa’ As-Sukootiy is a Hujjah (proof and source).

Bu uslub Usul al-fiqh ilmiga foyda keltirdi, va usuliy qoidalar mazhabparvarlikka bo‘ysunmadi. Aksincha, ular ilmiy va chuqur tarzda o‘rganildi hamda aniqlik va puxta tekshirishga bo‘ysundirildi. Shu sababli, aniq va ravshan dalillar (baraahin) asosida qurilgan to‘g‘ri va kuchli qoidalar vujudga keldi.

This Tareeqah (method) benefited Usool ul-Fiqh and the Usooli principles were not subservient to partisanship to the Madh’hab. Rather it was studied in a ‘Ilmiy and deep manner and was subservient to precision and thorough examination. As such correct and strong principles resulted from that built upon definite clear evidences or proofs (Baraaheen).

Misol:

Example:

Endi men sizga "Raudat an-Nazhar wa Jannat ul-Manaazhir" kitobidan, Usul ul-fiqh bo‘yicha Hanbaliylarning qoidalarni isbotlash va tasdiqlash usulini, Mutakallimin tariqasiga ko‘ra bayon qilaman. Bu kitobni 630 hijriy yilda vafot etgan Imom Muvaffaq ud-Din Abdulloh ibn Ahmad ibn Qudoma al-Maqdisiy yozgan.

I will now relate to you the manner of establishing or affirming a Qaa’idah (principle) from the Qawaa’id of Usool ul-Fiqh undertaken by the Hanaabilah taken from the book ‘Raudat An-Nazhar Wa Jannat ul-Manaazhir’ in Usool ul-Fiqh authored by Al-Imaam Muwaffiq ud-Deen Abdullah Ibn Ahmad Ibn Qudaamah Al Maqdasiy who passed away in the year 630 AH. This was upon the Tareeqah (methodology) of the Mutakallimeen:

Ahli Madina (Madina aholisi)ning ijmo’si hujjat (dalil/shar’iy manba) emas.

The Ijmaa’ of Ahl-ul-Madinah (the people of Madinah) is not a Hujjah (proof/source of evidence).

“Ahl-ul-Madinah ijmoi hujjat emas, Molik esa uni hujjat deb aytgan, chunki u ilm manbai, Vahiy uyi bo‘lgan joy va Sahobalarning avlodlari shu yerda yashagan. Shunday ekan, ularning kelishuvi (ya’ni Islom)dan boshqasida bo‘lishi mumkin emas va ular o‘zlari turgan narsadan chiqib ketishlari mumkin emas...” Keyin u shunday deydi: “Ularning haqiqatni (to‘g‘rini) tark etishi mumkin emas, degan gaplari baholanadi (ko‘rib chiqiladi). Bu hol, odam Nabiy ﷺ dan hadisni safarda yoki Madinada eshitib, uni boshqalarga rivoyat qilishdan oldin tark etishi mumkin bo‘lmagan holatga taalluqlidir. Madinaning fazilatlari uning aholisini ijmo’ (konsensus) tuzishga majbur qilmaydi. Chunki Makka undan afzal, va u ijmo’ jihatidan hech qanday ta’sirga ega emas. Agar ularning ijmo’i hujjat deb hisoblanganida, u barcha zamonlarda hujjat bo‘lishi kerak edi. Holbuki, bizning hozirgi zamonimizda ularning gapiga tayanilmasligi haqida hech qanday ixtilof yo‘q, ijmo’ deb hisoblanishi haqida esa gap bo‘lishi mumkin emas”.

“The Ijmaa’ of Ahl-ul-Madinah is not a Hujjah and Maalik said that it is a Hujjah because it represents the source of knowledge (‘Ilm), the home of the Wahi and the children of the Sahaabah resided within it. As such it is impossible for their agreement to be upon other than it (i.e. Islaam) and for them to go outside from what they were upon...” He then says: “And their statement that it is impossible for the Haqq (truth) to leave them is judged (evaluated). This is in the case where it is not impossible for a man to hear a Hadeeth from the Nabi (saw) whilst travelling or in Al-Madinah and then leave it before transmitting it to others and the merits of Al-Madinah do not oblige the convening of an Ijmaa’ (consensus) by its people. For verily Makkah is better than it and it has no trace (or impact) in respect to the Ijmaa’ and their Ijmaa’, if it was to be considered a Hujjah, would have been obliged to represent a Hujjah in all times. This is whilst there is no difference or disagreement in respect to their statement not being relied upon in this current time of ours let alone it being regarded as an Ijmaa”.

Shunday qilib, bu misolda Ibn Qudoma aqliy yoki ijtihodiy xulosaga tayanib, Ahl-ul Madina ijmoʻi hujjat emasligini tasdiqlagan yoki isbotlagan. Holbuki, bu ijmoʻni hujjat deb olgan kishilar Molikiy mazhabining tarafdorlari edi.

In this example Ibn Qudaamah therefore used rational or an intellectual judgement to affirm or establish that the Ijmaa’ of Ahl-ul Madinah is not a Hujjah which had been taken by the followers or proponents of the Maaliki Madh’hab as a Hujjah.