The Four Sources of Law in Zoroastrian and Islamic Jurisprudence
Abstract It is "only our lack of familiarity with Sasanian law," von Grunebaum opined (1970: 37), "that prevents us from uncovering its traces in the fiqh". And Joseph Schacht argued that Sasanian law did have an influence on Islamic law. But neither Schacht nor any other modern...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Brill
2005
|
| In: |
Islamic law and society
Year: 2005, Volume: 12, Issue: 3, Pages: 291-332 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Abstract It is "only our lack of familiarity with Sasanian law," von Grunebaum opined (1970: 37), "that prevents us from uncovering its traces in the fiqh". And Joseph Schacht argued that Sasanian law did have an influence on Islamic law. But neither Schacht nor any other modern scholar has provided persuasive evidence for such influence. In this article I argue that the influence of Sasanian legal theory on Islamic legal theory in the formative period was minimal, at best. It is true that, like Islamic law, Sasanian law was based on four sources: (1) The Awesta or holy book of the Zoroastrians; (2) oral law; (3) the consensus of the sages; and (4) the judicial practice of the courts (kardag). However, the possibility of Iranian influence on early Islamic jurisprudence is limited by historical, cultural, geographical and chronological factors, and the evidence of the sources suggests that Sasanian legal thinking was distinctive from that of the Sunni usulis. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1568-5195 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Islamic law and society
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/156851905774608279 |