The Manners Of Difference of Opinions In dedective Problems: A Comparative Study Of The Approaches And Styles Of Imam Qurtubi And Mulla Jeevan

اجتہادی مسائل میں ادب الاختلاف:امام قرطبیؒ اور ملاجیونؒ کے مناہج واسالیب کا تقابلی جائزہ

Abstract

In Islamic Fiqh, the freedom to have a different opinion is based on strong arguments that are backed by knowledge-based research. Difference of opinion is a natural phenomenon because Allah Almighty has bestowed man with the faculties of contemplation, research and inquisitiveness. A Scholar carefully observes his surroundings and then analyses it. Finally, he reaches to a conclusion and then forms an opinion after contemplation. This is called a point of view. There are many religious issues that have not been conclusively decided by the Quran and Sunnah. Instead, these have been left at the discretion of scholars and jurists. This means that Holy Quran and Sunnah not only give the freedom to have difference of opinion on some matters of law, but also encourages jurists to undertake such research. This has not been denied that freedom of speech naturally gives rise to difference of opinion Even the Prophet's companions held different opinions on many religious matters. This article presents a comparative analysis of the approaches and styles adopted by two prominent Islamic scholars, Imam Qurtubi and Mulla Jeewan, in addressing juristic differences within Islamic jurisprudence. While both scholars belonged to different historical and geographical contexts—Ibn Qurtubi from the Andalusian Maliki tradition and Mulla Jeewan from the Indian Hanafi context—they shared a commitment to scholarly integrity and respectful engagement with divergent legal opinions. The study explores their methodologies in interpreting legal texts, their use of sources such as the Qur'an, Hadith, and scholarly consensus, as well as their tone and rhetorical strategies in dealing with disagreement. By examining selected passages from Tafsir al-Qurtubi and Tafsirat-e. Ahmadiah, the paper highlights how each scholar exemplifies adab al-ikhtilaf (etiquette of disagreement) in Islamic legal discourse. The findings underscore the relevance of their balanced and respectful methods for contemporary Muslim scholarship and legal pluralism, offering a model for navigating differences in a constructive and principled manner.