×
Home Current Archive Editorial board
News Contact
Review paper

UTJECAJ ŠAZZ – NEAUTENTIČ NIH KIRA’ETA NA IZVOĐENJE ŠERIJATSKIH PROPISA

By
Safet Husejnović
Safet Husejnović
Contact Safet Husejnović

Islamic pedagogical faculty in Zenica,

Abstract

Qira’ats are not just strict, patterned forms of reading and writing of the Qur’anic text. On the contrary, qira’ats play an important role in studying the semantics of the Qur’an, its words and expressions. At the level of Islamic law, tafsir and qira’ats have played a decisive role in theoretical concretization of Shariah norms contained in the text of the Qur’an, as well as in the establishment of methodological and legal principles by which their derivation was conducted. The commentators of the Qur’an have been responsible towards qira’ats, in ways that that they examined their authenticity and the mode of transmission very carefully, because not all qira’ats are transferred via mutawātir transmission. Consequently, not all of them can be an expression of the Qur’an by which worship can be performed or an expression that can be uttered in a prayer. Islamic scholars do not have the same opinion on the use of Shazz - inauthentic qira’ats in proving shari’a legal regulations. Most commentators of the Qur’an allow the use of Sazz qira’at provided that: a) they have a degree of shuhr - popularity, reputation, b) they are not in conflict with qiyas-analogy of authentic qira’at variants c) they do not oppose the authentic traditions of the Prophet of Allah Muhammad, saws. This paper aims to present Shazz - inauthentic qira’ats and their impact on the derivation of Shariah law regulations.

Citation

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

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.