Talk:Sources of Sharia/GA2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

OK, I am by no means an expert in any sort of law, let alone Islamic law, but I think that will give me a great "outsider" perspective - helpful in an encylopedia aimed at ordinary people rather than scholars! :) As such, please excuse my ignorance about things that might be obvious to those familiar with the subject. I see good article reviews as a collaboration between the article editors, who know a lot about the subject, and reviewers like me who aren't experts but want to help the article be the best it can.

Overall, the prose needs improvement. Sentences need to be clarified and shortened where possible. You need to check WP:MOSISLAM to see if italics are necessary and use terms and formatting consistently throughout the article. Make sure you link the names of notable figures, and you don't need to include death dates.

Lead[edit]

  • According to WP:LEAD, since the title of this article is simply descriptive, there's no need to put it in boldface.
  • I don't understand why sharia is the "dynamic" body of the law - what does dynamic mean in this context?
    • "Dynamic" would mean subject to interpretation. I've changed it accordingly.
  • I would replace "believed by them to be..." with "believed to be...".
  • Should be "The Sunnah are", if referring to multiple traditions? Will accept your opinion on this one.
    • I'm not sure myself, but Encarta treats it as a singular,[3] when it says " The Sunna complements and often explains..." as opposed to "The Sunna complement and often explain..."
  • No need for the colon before "ijma, qiyas" etc. I think this paragraph needs rewriting as it doesn't flow well.
    • Colon has been removed.[4]
  • The lead needs expansion. Currently it's serving more as a definition or introduction, when it needs to be a summary of the article. For example, you could include more information about the juristic doctrines, rather than a simple definition of each. I would also like to see more information about sharia and the situations where it's applied. I know that's covered in its own article, but a brief mention here would help provide context to the reader.
    • If we include the Sharia it would be under a section called "overview" or "background" not the lead.Bless sins (talk) 03:13, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Due to several technical problems in the lead, I've proposed an alternative lead here.--Seyyed(t-c) 04:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources[edit]

Qur’an[edit]

  • Some more clarification about how the Qur’an is not a legal code in the modern sense would be helpful. How is it not?
    • It's not completely a legal code as it contains legal instructions as well as ethical guidance and discussions on theological matters. I've changed the statement to "is not a legal code in its entirety".Bless sins (talk) 03:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • There are about 500 verses out of more than 6000 which explain laws. These verses are known as Ayat al-Ahkam(verses of law). For example the forth Surah, The Women, describs matrimonial laws and the laws of inheritance. It also touches some other matters, e.g., some rules of prayer, jihad, evidence, commerce, etc.[5] However it's not a book of law. The issues dispersed through some Surahs. There are warnings and some ethical debates beside some of the laws. Some of the cases need to be interpreted by Sunnah. For example there's some verses about contraction[6] but it doesn't explain all of the conditions. Thus Qur'an is not a book of law whether traditional or modern. --Seyyed(t-c) 13:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you could combine the last two paragraphs and it would flow better.

Sunnah[edit]

  • Would replace "commonly defined as "tradition..." with "commonly defined as the "tradition..."
    •  Done
  • I need some clarification here, because I don't understand what you mean by Muhammad's "acts" and "tacit consent".
    • "acts" means an action. Muhammad's brushing his teeth, selling goods, and preaching Islam are all part of the "sunnah", as they are acts committed by Muhammad.
    • "tacit consent" means something that Muhammad consented to by having knowledge on it but being silent about it. One such example may be coitus interuptus, a form of birth control practiced in Arabia. Muhammad knew about it but didn't prohibit it.[8] This is considered "tacit consent" or "silent consent".
  • I think some of these paragraphs could be combined too and it would reduce the "choppiness" of the text.
  • The bulleted list should be formatted: "1. Undubitable hadith (mutawatir): very widely known, and backed up by numerous references" - should start with a capital letter and not end in punctuation unless a complete sentence, per WP:LIST.
  • I added some information about Science of hadith and Ilm ar-Rijal.--Seyyed(t-c) 14:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Juristic doctrines[edit]

  • I would title this section "Secondary sources", just to tie in with the previous section. Then the section can start with something like "Secondary sources, known as juristic doctrines...". Is it possible to expand the concept of juristic doctrines before breaking it down into types?
    •  Done[10].
    • I've tried looking for material, but didn't find too much. IMHO, such an expansion would be a feature of an FA class article.Bless sins (talk) 03:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ijma[edit]

  • Has an apostrophe before "ijma" in its first appearance, then after the word from that point on. There were no apostrophes in the lead section. Be consistent. According to how I'm reading WP:MOSISLAM, "ijma" should appear in italics.
  • "Muhammad himself said:[9][7]" - the references should appear after the individual quotes below, not here.
  • "In history, it has been the most important factor in defining the meaning of the other sources" - how?
    • I've tried to explain it,[13] but I'm not sure whether that answers your question.
  • Remove extra blank line between paragraphs.
  • "Ijma was always used to refer to agreement reached in the past, either remote or near" - please rewrite sentence as it's unclear.
  • I would prefer to see the table represented in prose with some further explanations.
    • I respectfully disagree. I think the table explains this concept more clearly, which is otherwise a bit confusing. The table compares and contrasts the views in a very obvious manner.Bless sins (talk) 03:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Analogical deduction[edit]

  • I think according to WP:MOSISLAM, "qiyas" should appear in italics.
  • "Shiites don't accept qiyas" - no contractions in articles except for direct quotes - replace with "do not".
  • "Qiyas is the process by of legal deduction according to which the jurist, confronted with an unprecedented case, bases his or her argument on the logic used in the Qur'an and Sunnah" - rewrite sentence and clarify.
  • "With such contact, emerged new problems for Islamic law to tackle" - grammatically incorrect, please rewrite.
  • "the concept of Qiyas was abused by the" - remove capitalisation from "qiyas".
  • "The general principle behind the process of qiyas is based on the understanding that every legal injunction guarantees a beneficial and welfare satisfying objective." - unclear.
  • You should link "Abu Hanifa".
  • "but also what he believed to be the in spirit of and beneficial to the objectives of Islam" - please reword, too complicated.
  • Link "Shafi'i".
  • "adverse effects. One such effect could be variety of different rulings in the same subject. Such an effect," - too much repetition of "effect".
  • Link "Malik".

Preference[edit]

  • Remove death date from Abu Hanifa. Incorporate list into prose.
  • Link "Abu Yusuf".
  • "This doctrine was especially applied in the new lands Islam spread to where it encountered new environments" - please reword and clarify.
    • Attempted to clarify.[21]
  • I don't understand the example of istihsan. Does this mean the public can use the well?

Textual indication[edit]

  • "There are three kinds of istidlal" - convert to prose.

Reason[edit]

  • "can't be found" - change to "cannot".
  • "The process, whereby rational efforts are made by the jurist to arrive at an appropriate ruling is applied is called ijtihad" missing a second comma.
  • "They, however, announced an end to its practice during the thirteenth century. The reason for this was that centers of Islamic learning" - too wordy.
  • "Later in Sunni history, however, there were notable instances..." - why are these notable? Expand.
  • "replied that he'd refer first to the Qur'an" - replace with "he would".
  • This whole section needs a rewrite to make sure it flows well and clearly states the points it's trying to make.

Common practice[edit]

  • "were not abrogated" - I would be tempted to replace "abrogated" by a more common word such as "annulled".
  • "According to some sources" - what sources?
    • I don't recall them being specified by the source. In this case should the sentence be removed?
  • "But it was considered part" - do not start a sentence with "But".

Other[edit]

  • Please expand. I'd suggest changing the section title to "Other sources".
    • Section removed.[] It had no sources. In addition we've covered all the major sources, as well a couple of minor ones. Most sources I've seen don't cover any sources past the ones this article already does.[26]Bless sins (talk) 04:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further reading[edit]

Overall[edit]

I have placed the article on hold for one week to give you time to address these suggestions. I will notify the original reviewer of my review and ask them to add any further suggestions they may have. Best of luck with improving the article further. :) Somno (talk) 07:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Technical review[edit]

This article is a technical issue which should also be reviewed from technical viewpoints.

  • Sharia,Islamic divine law, or Fiqh,Islamic juriceprodence, which one should be mentioned in the lead? I think we can mention both of them to clarify the issue. You can use the sources which I have added in the talk page to verify the text.
  • Ijtihad is not a source. Ijtihad is a technical term of Islamic law that describes the process of making a legal decision by independent interpretation of the legal sources, the Qur'an and the Sunnah. The opposite of ijtihad is taqlid, Arabic for "imitation". There is another similar term. Mutahhari says:"The Sunnis place ijtihad, which is the ijtihad al­ra'y explained above, on the same level as the Book and the Sunna... Sunni Muslims say that the commands which are given in the shari`a from the Book and the Sunna are limited and finite, whereas circumstances and events which occur are not, so another source in addition to the Book and the Sunna must be appointed for the legislation of Divine commands - and that source is the very same as we have defined as ijtihad al­ra'y."[28] However this has been abandoned by Sunnis since Al-Ghazali era. You can find more information about this term in Sunni and Shia Fiqh [29]. Nowadays Ijtihad used with different connotation. So I think it's better to use Ijtihad al-­ra'y or add all of these explanation to your article.
  • Analogical deduction:Shia doesn't reject deduction completely. According to Shia there are two types of deduction. First, the deduction on the basis of what has mentioned in Quran and Sunnah clearly, which mean Qiyas Mansus al-ellah(Deduction with mentioned cause). For example it's written in Hadith that whatever make people drunk is Haram. This form is acceptable. The other form is deduction on the basis of the similarity and guess. This is known as Analogical deduction or Qiyas Mustanbit al-ellah which is rejected by Shia. Mutahhari says Amongst the 'ulema of our Sunni brothers, Abu Hanifa considered analogy (qiyas) to be the fourth proof, and thus in the view of the Hanifa sect, the sources of jurisprudence are four: the Book, the Sunnah, consensus and analogy. The Maliki and Hanbali Sunnis, especially the Hanbalis, pay no heed whatever to analogy. The Shaf'i Muslims, following their leader, Muhammad ibn Idris Shaf'i, pay more attention to Traditions than the Hanafis and also more attention to analogy than the Maliki and Hanbali Musl ims. The view of the Shi'ite 'ulema, however, is that because analogy is pure conjecture and surmissal, and because the total of what has been received from the Holy Prophet and the Imams is sufficient for our responsibility, the referral to analogy is strictly forbidden. [30]
  • Shia conditions for Consensus:First, in the Shi'ite view, only the consensus of the 'ulema of the same period as the Prophet or Imams is binding. So, if in these times of ours a consensus occurs about something between all the 'ulema with no exception, this is in no way binding for subsequent 'ulema. Second, in the Shi'ite view, consensus is not genuinely binding in its own right, rather it is binding in as much as it is a means of discovering the Sunnah.[31]
  • Juristic principles or doctrines should be clarified. Do you mean Usul al-fiqh?--Seyyed(t-c) 14:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal[edit]

I propose this lead:

Sources of Islamic law are various sources which are used in Islamic jurisprudence to discover the Islamic law, a set of divine unchanging laws that order life in accordance with God’s will.(Mutahhari, Feldman) There are different school of jurisprudence which rely on various sources and uses different methodologies to use them. The sources are not at the same level of authenticity. The primary and main sources of Islamic law, accepted universally by all Muslims, are the Qur'an and Sunnah. The Qur'an is holy scripture of Muslims, believed to be the direct and unaltered word of God. The Sunnah means those religious actions and quotations that were instituted by the Islamic prophet Muhammad and narrated through Companions and Shia Imams.(Mutahhari) According to Sunnis schools of law secondary sources of the Islamic law, also called Islamic juristic doctrines, are consensus among Muslims jurists, Analogical deduction and independent reasoning. However the different schools have not the same positions toward them. Hanafi school relies on Analogical deduction and independent reasoning frequently, while Maliki and Hanbali, especially the latter, don't usually rely on them, but use the hadith instead. Shafi'i school uses Sunnah more than Hanafi and analogy more than two others.(Mutahhari) The Shia school use ijma under especial conditions. Usuli Jafaris rely on aql(intellect) to find general principles on the basis of Quran and Sunnah and Usul al-fiqh as the methodology of understanding and interpreting of Qur'an and Sunnah to find the law in different circumstances, while Akhbari Jafaris don't use aql and ijma as the sources, rely more on Hadith and reject Ijtihad as methodology . Finally, According to Momen, despite very considerable differences in the principles of jurisprudence between Shia and all four of Sunni schools of law, there are fewer differences in the practical application of jurisprudence to ritual observances and social transactions.(Momen, p.185-188 and 223-234)

I have made an attempt to clarify and simplify some of it below, please let me know if I have misinterpreted anything! :) It is not necessary to use the exact phrase "Sources of Islamic law" at the start of the article, as it is a general explanatory title and not a set term. Somno (talk) 02:57, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic law uses various sources in Islamic jurisprudence to discover the set of divine unchanging laws that order life in accordance with God's will.(Mutahhari, Feldman) Different schools of jurisprudence use separate methods to judge sources’ level of authenticity. The primary sources of Islamic law, accepted universally by all Muslims, are the Qur'an and Sunnah. The Qur'an is holy scripture of Muslims, believed to be the direct and unaltered word of God. The Sunnah means those religious actions and quotations instituted by the Islamic prophet Muhammad and narrated through Companions and Shia Imams.(Mutahhari) According to Sunni schools of law, secondary sources of the Islamic law are consensus among Muslims jurists, analogical deduction and independent reasoning. Hanafi school frequently relies on analogical deduction and independent reasoning, and Maliki and Hanbali generally use the hadith instead. Shafi'i school uses Sunnah more than Hanafi and analogy more than two others.(Mutahhari) The Shia school uses ijma under special conditions. Usuli Jafaris rely on aql (intellect) to find general principles based on the Qur'an and Sunnah and usul al-fiqh to interpret the Qur'an and Sunnah in different circumstances, and Akhbari Jafaris rely more on hadith and reject ijtihad. Despite considerable differences in the principles of jurisprudence between Shia and the four Sunni schools of law, there are fewer differences in the practical application of jurisprudence to ritual observances and social transactions.(Momen, p.185-188 and 223-234)

I've made little change:

Islamic jurisprudents uses various sources in Islamic jurisprudence to discover the Sharia,set of divine unchanging laws that order life in accordance with God's will.(Mutahhari, Feldman) Different schools of jurisprudence use separate methods to judge sources’ level of authenticity. The primary sources of Islamic law, accepted universally by all Muslims, are the Qur'an and Sunnah. The Qur'an is holy scripture of Muslims, believed to be the direct and unaltered word of God. The Sunnah means those religious actions and quotations instituted by the Islamic prophet Muhammad and narrated through Companions and Shia Imams.(Mutahhari) According to Sunni schools of law, secondary sources of the Islamic law are consensus among Muslims jurists, analogical deduction and independent reasoning. Hanafi school frequently relies on analogical deduction and independent reasoning, and Maliki and Hanbali generally use the hadith instead. Shafi'i school uses Sunnah more than Hanafi and analogy more than two others.(Mutahhari) The Shia school uses ijma under special conditions. Usuli Jafaris rely on aql (intellect) to find general principles based on the Qur'an and Sunnah and use usul al-fiqh as methodology to interpret the Qur'an and Sunnah in different circumstances, and Akhbari Jafaris rely more on hadith and reject ijtihad. Despite considerable differences in the principles of jurisprudence between Shia and the four Sunni schools of law, there are fewer differences in the practical application of jurisprudence to ritual observances and social transactions.(Momen, p.185-188 and 223-234)

Result[edit]

Most of Somno's concerns have been addressed. The lead is now based on consensus amongst editors. So does this article pass the GA nomination?Bless sins (talk) 11:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Had a cursory glance, it looks much better. I will give it a thorough look when I have more time, about 10-12 hours from now. :) Somno (talk) 00:53, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you are going to fail it, can you please leave a notice here and give me a chance to respond (about 12 hours) before failing it? Thanks.Bless sins (talk) 04:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The article has greatly improved from my point of view - it makes more sense to an outsider now, the prose is clearer and it follows the Manual of Style as far as GA is concerned. I would like Seyyed's opinion from a technical viewpoint before passing the article, to make sure those issues have also been fixed. Somno (talk) 14:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is Itaqallah view[32]:The terms Shari'ah and Fiqh are often confused. In short, fiqh involves the employment of the four aforementioned sources to obtain a Shari' verdict. "Islamic law" can actualy connote several things, so a better title might be "Sources of Islamic jurisprudence." But it's not a significant problem IMO. Ijtihad isn't a source, it's a process which mostly uses qiyas. I wouldn't say that aql has traditionally been considered a source. Urf is not really a significant consideration either. ITAQALLAH 16:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
In my view there are few points which should be clarified:
  • In the Reason section methodology, Ijtihad, and source has been merged. Also Shia term, definition and usage for reason, Aql, and Sunni one, R'ay, are completely different. Thus I prefer to split it into two different sections.
  • As I know Textual indication is not an independent source and we can merge it in the relevant section.
  • Common practice needs more expansion and clarification. This sentence is not correct since Islamic tradition says what the people, in general, consider good is also considered as such by God. This is just correct among pious Muslim community. --Seyyed(t-c) 02:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to the sources I used, Textual indication is a subcategory of qiyas, which is where it is.
Yes, you're right. I didn't pay attention to it.--Seyyed(t-c) 09:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Common practice is not one of the major sources. I agree that it would need expansion for an FA nomination, but not for a GA one.
There are some sentences like what I mentioned above, which is incorrect or need clarification.--Seyyed(t-c) 09:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Incorrect" as in contradicted by other reliable sources? In that case we should note the differences in scholarly opinion.Bless sins (talk) 22:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding ijtihad. It's a bit of a complicated issue. However, I assure you: the sources that I used for the Sunni viewpoints specifically said "ijtihad". Therefore the Sunni points are quite relevant according to the sources.Bless sins (talk) 03:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please read this Sunni source[33] especially the last chapter of it. On the other hand Mutahhari's articles ([34],[35])clarify the different views between Shia and Sunnis. However as I understood and Itaqallah's quotation which I mentioned above shows Ijtihad as we use today among Muslims is not a source, but it's a metodology. --Seyyed(t-c) 09:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well the "sunni" source calls it "SOURCE METHODOLOGY", so it appears to be a source. Maybe we should clarify in the lead what we mean by "source".Bless sins (talk) 22:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think Itaqallah can better judge about the problems. I put a comment on his page to join us. Due to the fact that the problems relate to Sunni Fiqh and I'm not knowledgeable in this field, if he accepts your answers, I'll change my opinion. --Seyyed(t-c) 01:27, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Source methodology would mean the technique used to understand and apply the sources. Ijtihad would fit in with that, but it's not a source itself. If you need a reliable source, refer to the EoI document on Shari'ah:"Works of usul usually contain four broad areas of discussion: the categories of the law; the sources of the law; the hermeneutical rules that permit extrapolation of norms from sources; and an elaboration of the theory of ijtihad... ...The body of hermeneutical principles leads to conflicting possibilities (ta`arud) and to the exercise of preference (tardjih), the methodology of which is explained under the heading ijtihad. Ijtihad literally means effort. Technically, it means the exertion of the utmost possible effort by a trained jurist, taking into account all the relevant texts and principles of interpretation, to discover, for a particular human situation, a rule of law." So it separates ijtihad from the general legal sources and clarifies it as an exertion of effort by a jurist (thus it's an action, a process). The article also does a good job on explaining the difference between fiqh and Shari'ah. ITAQALLAH 11:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Itaqallah. Shia considers Aql as a source and Ijtihad as a process or method. --Seyyed(t-c) 05:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One of the first sources I found tended to simplify things and jsut call it a "source". the other comprehensive source called it "juristic principle". Anyways, eoI is more reliable than both of those. So are you guys suggesting we should remove most of the Ijtihad section?Bless sins (talk) 21:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It should move to related article.--Seyyed(t-c) 01:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Which related article do you have in mind?Bless sins (talk) 22:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fiqh or Ijtihad.--Seyyed(t-c) 01:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Pass[edit]

Hi, sorry for the delay in finishing my review. The article looks great to me and passes the GA criteria. Congrats to all those who worked on the article! Somno (talk) 05:06, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sources_of_Sharia/GA2&oldid=1141742558"