Conflict in Shar‘i Rulings: An Intellectual Analysis of Its Causes, Conditions, and Preference in Light of Generality and Specification

احکامِ شرعیہ میں تعارض: اسباب، شرائط اور اطلاق و تقیید کی روشنی میں ترجیح کا فکری تجزیہ

Abstract

In the process of interpreting and applying Shar‘i rulings within Islamic jurisprudence, scholars frequently encounter textual evidences or arguments that appear, at first glance, to be in conflict with one another. The nature of this apparent contradiction, along with its causes, conditions, and the principles for resolving it, has long been one of the most critical subjects in the science of Usul al-Fiqh (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence). Classical jurists have generally viewed such conflicts as only apparent differences, not real contradictions, and have thus sought to clarify the true essence of these differences to determine whether an actual contradiction exists or whether it is merely a matter of interpretation and understanding of the textual implications.The present study, titled "Conflict in Shar‘i Rulings: An Intellectual Analysis of Its Causes, Conditions, and Preference in Light of Generality and Specification," aims to provide a scholarly examination of these issues. It begins by elucidating the definitions and conceptual frameworks of ta‘āruḍ (conflict) and tarjīḥ (preference), thereby removing any ambiguity and delineating their technical scope. The study then explores the underlying causes that may lead to perceived contradictions between textual evidences—such as the relationship between general and specific texts (ʿumūm wa khuṣūṣ), absolute and qualified statements (iṭlāq wa taqyīd), or the principle of abrogation (naskh).Furthermore, the research discusses the necessary conditions under which the claim of contradiction is considered valid. If these conditions are not met, then any assertion of contradiction is deemed unfounded. In its final section, the study addresses the standards and methodologies of preference (tarjīḥ) that are employed to determine which of the conflicting evidences should be given precedence. This analytical and research-based inquiry not only contributes to a deeper understanding of Usul al-Fiqh but also provides practical guidance for juristic reasoning (ijtihād) and the process of legal deduction (istinbāṭ) in contemporary Islamic legal discourse.