This paper presents the author’s ideas about a possibility of questioning consensus (ijmā’) of Islamic scholars, validity of those consensuses and authenticity of statements found in Islamic writings. In that sense, broad guidelines are presented at the end of the paper. Those guidelines can be of great help to contemporary Islamic scholars for building their relationship with the third source of Shari´ah and for using that source in a quality manner for argumentation and solving contemporary legal issues.
Keywords: consensus (ijmā’), Shari’ah, ijtihād
References
1.
Iršād el-fuhūl ilā tahqīqi ’ilmi-l-usūl.
2.
Nudžejm I. Zejnuddīn (bez godine izdanja.
3.
4.
5.
El-Qurtubī. Ebū El-Velīd Muhammed ibn Ahmed ibn Muhammed ibn Rušd (1982) Bidājetu-l-mudžtehid ve nihājetu-l-muqtesid.
6.
Es-San’ānī. Ebū Bekr ’Abdurrezzāq ibn Humām.
7.
Es-Serakhsi. Šemsu El-E’immeti Ebū Bekr ibn Muhammed ibn Ahmed ibn Ebī Sehl, El-Mebsūt, Dāru-l-ma’rife, Bejrut, bez godinje izdanja.
8.
9.
Eš-Šāšī A ibn M ibn I.
10.
En-Nevevī EZJ ibn Š. Sahīhu Muslim biš-šerh En-Nevevī, El-Matba’a el-Misrijje bi El-Ezher, Kairo.
11.
Nejlu-l-evtār šerhu Munteqā-l-ahbār, Dāru-l-džīl.
12.
13.
Štulanović dr M. ’Urf – Običaj kao pomoćni izvor šerijatskog prava s osvrtom na Bosnu i Hercegovinu, Islamska pedagoška akademija, Bihać.
14.
Tejmijje I. Ebū el-’Abās Ahmed ibn ’Abdu-l-Halīm (bez godine izdanja) Medžmū’u el-fetāvī, Posebno izdanje kralja Fahda.
15.
Naqdu Merātibi-l-idžmā’, Dāru Ibn Hazm littibā’ati ven-nešri vet-tevzī’. Bejrut.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.