حجية القواعد الفقهية وصلاحيتها للاستدلال بها قراءة تحليلية لكتابات المعاصرين

The Authoritativeness of Legal Maxims and Their Validity as Evidential Reasoning: An Analytical Study of Contemporary Writings

Abstract

The science of legal maxims (al-qawāʿid al-fiqhiyyah) is among the most significant disciplines in Islamic jurisprudence, as it organizes subsidiary rulings, facilitates their retrieval, and aids in deriving judgments for contemporary issues. It also contributes to developing juristic aptitude and deepening the understanding of methods of legal reasoning and the objectives of Sharīʿah. In this context, a central question arises: to what extent is it legitimate to treat legal maxims as independent evidences from which rulings may be derived, particularly in addressing new and emerging cases? This study investigates the views of contemporary scholars on the authoritativeness of legal maxims and compares them with the approaches of classical jurists. The scope of the research is limited to examining the probative value of legal maxims and their validity as tools of legal reasoning in relation to contemporary issues, excluding other aspects of the discipline. The study adopts a descriptive, analytical, and critical methodology, based on collecting, analyzing, and evaluating the arguments and positions advanced by both classical and modern scholars. The paper is structured into four main sections: an introduction to legal maxims, a survey and analysis of scholarly opinions, a critical discussion of their evidence and arguments, and a comparative evaluation leading to a reasoned preference, along with outlining the conditions and parameters governing their use in legal reasoning. The study concludes that it is permissible to employ legal maxims as evidentiary tools under specific conditions, particularly when they are rooted in explicit scriptural texts, widely accepted among scholars, or formally adopted within legal frameworks.