Critical Analysis of the Arguments of the Proponents and Opponents of the Authenticity of " Previous Religious Laws"

Some rulings of the “previous religious laws”، both in the Qur’ān and sunna، are related without mentioning the reason for their proof or disproof for the Muslims. Therefore، the scholars of the religious schools are divided as to whether or not this type of rulings are regarded as sharī‘a (religious law) for the Muslim Umma. According to one view، the Ḥanafites، the Mālikits، Muḥammad b. Idrīs Shāfi‘ī، and according to another، a group of the Shāfi’ites and Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal and following him، the majority of the Ḥanbalites believe in the validity of these rulings. The āyas and traditions are regarded as the bases of the arguments of this group. In contrast، the Mu‘tazilites، the Shī‘as، the Ẓahirites، and a group of the Shāfi’ites maintain the non-validity of these rulings; whereas، Ibn Ḥazm، al-Ghazali، al-Āmadī have adopted this view. To prove their theory، this group have also resorted to the āyas، traditions، consensus، non-prevalence of istiṣḥāb (presumption of continuity) of the rulings of previous religious laws، and the intellectual arguments. Nevertheless، since there is no specific practical outcome resulted from the disagreement in question، the disagreement on the validity of the rulings of the previous religious laws seems to be mainly a verbal one. That is because the opponents of validity maintain the continuity of the rulings because of the incorporation of the rulings of the previous religious laws into the Qur’ān and sunna، and act accordingly in respect to the fact that they regard these rulings similar to the previous religious laws and not because the religious laws are previously devised، as the proponents practically abide by the above-mentioned rulings، albeit to the validity of the rulings of the previous religious laws for the Muslim Umma.