Introduction: The Life and Qiyās of Abū Isḥāq al-Shīrāzī (393H/1003 CE-476H/1083 CE)

Rahman, Shahid; Iqbal, Muhammad; Soufi, Youcef

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-22382-3_1

Shahid Rahman⁶,
Muhammad Iqbal⁶ &
Youcef Soufi⁷

Part of the book series: Logic, Argumentation & Reasoning ((LARI,volume 19))

143 Accesses

Abstract

In the chapters that follow, Shahid Rahman and Muhammad Iqbal provide us with a comprehensive logical analysis of Abū Isḥāq al-Shīrāzī’s two forms of qiyās-based argumentation, which they aptly translate as inference by parallel reasoning. Their painstaking labour is bound to interest both the Islamic studies historian and the contemporary logician. For the former, among whom I include myself, their methodological approach of embedding qiyās argumentation within its proper historical dialectical context sheds new light on Islamic legal argumentation. Building upon Walter Young’s thesis that Islamic legal rules and argumentative principles were “forged” through debate itself, Rahman and Iqbal demonstrate the series of steps al-Shīrāzī deemed necessary to secure a successful deployment of qiyās while in a debate gathering. In marked contrast to typical scholarly treatment of qiyās which (implicitly) assumes a solitary jurist whose monological comparison of like-cases goes unquestioned, they show how the successful deployment of qiyās often depended upon a jurist offering a deeper defense of his background assumptions about two cases. The juristic use of qiyās therefore necessitated a wider exploration of the legal system. For the logician, Rahman and Iqbal suggest that the Islamic tradition can enter into conversation with the modern study of dialectical argumentation. Like Amira Mittermaier, whose study of contemporary dreams in Egypt, argues that Ibn ‘Arabī and al-Ghazālī are just as valuable as Freud or Sartre to our understanding of dreams and the imagination, Rahman and Iqbal show that al-Shīrāzī and the Islamic legal tradition are worthy interlocutors of Wittgenstein and other contemporary logicians. In particular, they show that meaning and knowledge are immanent or internal to dialogical exchanges insofar as the reasons justifying claims depend on a set of propositions embraced by both participants.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

eBook: USD 16.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 16.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 54.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Young (2017, p. 1).
2.
Mittermaier (2010).
3.
Peacock (2015); Talas (1939).
4.
See for instance Brinkley Messick’s study of modern-day Yemeni legal scholars (Messick 1996).
5.
The most comprehensive biography of al-Shīrāzī is found in al-Subkī (1964, p. 4:215–256). See also Ibn Khallikān (1978, pp. 1:29–31), Ibn-Qāḍī Shuhba (1987, pp. 1:238–240), Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ al-Shahrazūrī, al-Nawawī, and al-Mizzī (1992, pp. 1:302–10), Ibn Kathīr (2002, pp. 430–442) and Hītū (1980).
6.
Al-Subkī (1964, p. 4:227).
7.
Ephrat (2000, p. 51).
8.
All biographical entries agree that al-Shīrāzī’s study period with al-Bayḍāwī was in Shiraz. I follow them within this biographical sketch. However, the critical historian should know that this might actually be mistaken as al-Shīrāzī himself notes that al-Bayḍāwī lived in Baghdad and biographical sources on al-Bayḍāwī do not place him in Shiraz, see for instance Ibn Qāḍī Shuhba (1987, p. 1:177).
9.
For more on al-Dārakī, see al-Shīrāzī (1970, p. 117).
10.
Al-Subkī (1964, p. 3:22).
11.
Al-Shīrāzī (1970, p. 109).
12.
Al-Shīrāzī often speaks of jurists’ preserving school opinions (ḥāfizan li’l-madhhab), al-Shīrāzī (1970, pp. 130–131).
13.
Al-Juwaynī (2007), Al-Subkī (1964, pp. 5:165–172).
14.
According to biographers, al-Shīrāzī studied with Ibn Rāmīn in Shiraz. This appears improbable since Shīrāzī himself tells us that Ibn Rāmīn was a Basran jurist, al-Shīrāzī (1970 p. 125). Al-Shīrāzī apparently also studied under a jurist named al-Kharazī but al-Shīrāzī does not mention him in his own biographical dictionary (1970).
15.
Al-Subkī (1964, p. 3:62).
16.
The Nukat is among the few texts al-Shīrāzī authored which is still only available in manuscript form, currently in the Princeton collection. It is available online at http://pudl.princeton.edu/objects/sb397b864 (accessed October 16, 2018).
17.
See Turkī’s introduction in the Sharḥ al-Luma‘(1987, p. 44).
18.
Ibn Athīr (2012, p. 8: 212).
19.
Ibn Athīr (2012, pp. 8:283–284); al-Subkī (1967, p. 4:219); Ibn al-Jawzī (1992, p. 16:227).
20.
Al-Subkī (1964, p. 216).
21.
Al-Shīrāzī (1988, p.788).
22.
See debate transcripts in al-Subkī (1967, pp. 4:237–256).
23.
J. Schacht (1959) effectuated the early research on qiyās, see chap. 9.
24.
For instance, Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal had no compunction about including dubiously transmitted ḥadīth within his collection Al-Musnad. For more on the ahl al-ḥadīth methodology, see Lucas (2010) and Spectorsky (1982).
25.
El Shamsy (2007).
26.
Shāfi‘ī (2005 p. 24); for secondary literature on the topic, see Lowry (2007).
27.
El Shamsy has shown the prayer direction to be an enduring metaphor for ijtihād within Shāfi‘ī juristic thought (2008). See also Soufi (2017).
28.
For instance, al-Jaṣṣāṣ (2000), al-Bāqillānī (2012), Qāḍī Abū Ya‘lā (1990), al-Juwaynī (1997).
29.
Al-Shīrāzī also mentions some Shi‘ī groups, al-Shīrāzī (1988, p. 760) and (1980, p. 419).
30.
Al-Shīrāzī (1988, pp. 762–763).
31.
Al-Shīrāzī (1988, p. 767).
32.
Al-Shīrāzī (p. 768).
33.
For more on the Ẓāhirīs, see Osman (2014).
34.
Al-Shīrāzī (p. 779). The translation of Qur’anic verses is taken from Abdel Haleem (Oxford: Oxford World Classics).
35.
See e.g., (1997, p. 8).
36.
Al-Shīrāzī (1988, p.869) and (1980, p. 425).
37.
Al-Shīrāzī (1988, p.869).
38.
Al-Bājī (2004), Al-Jaṣṣāṣ (2000), Ibn al-Farrāʼ (1990).
39.
E.g. Al-Baṣrī (1995, p. 2:215).
40.
Hallaq (1997, p. 127).
41.
Young (2017, pp. 491–492).
42.
As al-Shīrāzī would explain, a jurist learnt the craft of legal argumentation through his exposure to legal debates (1988, 161–162).
43.
Al-Subkī attributes to Ibn Surayj the honour of having been the first to teach the Shāfi‘īs the “way of [doing] jadal ”, Al-Subkī, (1964, p. 22); Al-Shīrāzī tells us his student al-Qaffāl al-Shāshī was the first to write a book of “good jadal ” (al-jadal al-ḥasan) (1970, p. 112).
44.
Muslims have historically seen al-Shāfi‘ī as the founder of the Islamic legal tradition, but contemporary historians have increasingly seen his seminal text Al-Risāla as belonging to a different genre than later mature uṣūl al-fiqh texts (Hallaq 1993, 1997; Lowry 2007; Stewart 2016). For more on the subject, see Soufi (2018).
45.
Another representative text, albeit of the tenth rather than the eleventh century, is Ibn al-Qaṣṣ’s al-Talkhīs (1999).
46.
E.g. al-Shīrāzī (1995, p. 44).
47.
Al-Shīrāzī (1988, p. 813).
48.
Some of al-Ash‘arī’s uṣūl al-fiqh positions are relayed by Ibn Fūrak’s Mujarrad Maqalāt (1987).
49.
Al-Juwaynī (2003) and al-Bāqillānī (2012).
50.
He adds that he also taught them theology (al-kalām), al-Shīrāzī (1970, pp. 126–127).
51.
Al-Ghazālī (1993).
52.
Al-Shīrāzī (1970, p. 126)
53.
Chaumont (1991), Makdisi (1984a, pp. 26–27)
54.
Al-Shāfi‘ī (2005, p. 477).
55.
Al-Shīrāzī (1988, p.755). Although al-Shīrāzī clearly departs from al-Shāfi‘ī at times, he never explicitly says that he is rejecting his school master. Instead, he tends to present his departures as interpretations, see the Sharḥ (1988, p. 814). In fact he ascribes a ruling by mere resemblance mujarrad al-shabah to the Ḥanafī jurists within the Tabṣira rather than his Shāfi‘ī colleagues, (1980 pp. 458–459).
56.
Al-Shāfi‘ī (2005, p. 479). We might also add the a fortiori argument among the list of types of qiyās al-Shāfi‘ī recognized, see p. 513; see also Lowry’s discussion (2007, p.158) and al-Ghazālī (1970, p. 334). Al-Shīrāzī rejected the a fortiori as a type of qiyās, seeing it instead as a linguistic argument (1988, p. 428).
57.
Al-Ghazālī (1970, p. 334).
58.
Lowry (2007, p. 334).
59.
Al-Shīrāzī (1988, p. 813). For English and French language sources on al-Shīrāzī’s qiyās, refer to Young (2017), especially section 4.1, and to Chaumont’s translation and detailed commentary of al-Shīrāzī’s Kitāb al-Luma‘(1999).
60.
In fact, al-Juwaynī saw the qiyās al-dalāla as a form of qiyās al-shabah (1997, p. 2: 39). It is difficult to determine whether al-Shīrāzī was the first to posit the concept of al-qiyās al-dalāla. It could certainly have been other Baghdad contemporaries such as his teacher al-Ṭabarī, who, like al-Shīrāzī, rejected qiyās al-shabah al-mujarrad, or Abū Ḥāmid al-Isfarāyinī, who is known to have had a wide influence among Shāfi‘ī Baghdad juristic thought. However, we can say with some certainty that the concept did not exist, or at least, it did not have wide currency, before al-Shīrāzī’s generation and that later Shāfi‘īs would single out al-Shīrāzī when introducing the concept, see al-Zarkashī (1992, p. 5:40).
61.
Al-Shīrāzī (1988, p. 812). In the Ma‘ūna fī al-Jadal, al-Shīrāzī explains this qiyās by stating that the jurist proceeds by “inferring [his ruling] based on some common point of resemblance” between cases (an yastadill bi-ḍarb min al-shabah) (1987, p. 38).
62.
Al-Shīrāzī (1988, pp. 809–10), where he says that there are three types of qiyās al-dalāla . See also al-Shīrāzī (1987, pp. 37–38).
63.
Al-Zarkashī (1992, p. 5:40). Post-Shīrāzī scholars who accepted the qiyās al-dalāla were found in the Mālikī and Ḥanbalī schools (e.g. Ibn Qudāma, 2002, p. 2:246).
64.
Part of what supports the possibility that al-Shīrāzī was the first to posit the term, or at least give it great prominence, is its complete absence from al-Shīrāzī’s earlier work of uṣūl al-fiqh , Al-Tabṣira (1980).
65.
Hallaq (1997), Schacht (1959).
66.
Al-Shīrāzī (1992, p. 119).
67.
Al-Marghīnānī (2000, pp. 476–477).
68.
Al-Marghīnānī (2000, p. 2:81).
69.
Makdisi (1984b, p. 134).
70.
Al-Subkī (1964, pp. 3:23–24) where al-Subkī presents Ibn Surayj and Ibn Dāwud al-Ẓāhirī debating in the home of a judge.
71.
He was called “a lion (ghaḍanfar)” in debate, al-Subkī (1964, p. 4:222).
72.
See al-Shīrāzī (1988, pp. 806–814).
73.
Other jurists deployed their own theorizations of qiyās in the debate arena. See for instance, al-Juwaynī’s differing manner of identifying the ‘illa of a qiyās in his debate with al-Shīrāzī, al-Subkī (1964, pp. 5:214–218).
74.
Bernard Weiss (2010) provides a brilliant overview of one of the most important texts of the Shāfi‘ī-Ash‘arī line of uṣūl al-fiqh ; and Zysow (2013) is likewise an essential reference for anyone interested in the Ḥanafī line of uṣūl al-fiqh.
75.
Ahmed (2012).

References

Ahmed, R. (2012). Narratives of Islamic legal theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Al-Bājī, Abū al-Walīd. (2004). Al-Minhāj fī tartīb al-ḥijāj. Riyadh: Maktabat al-Rushd.
Google Scholar
Al-Bāqillānī, Abū Bakr. (2012). Al-Taqrīb wa’l-irshād fī uṣūl al-fiqh. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmiyya.
Google Scholar
Al-Baṣrī, Abū al-Husayn. (1995). Al-Muʻtamad fī uṣūl al-fiqh. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmiyya.
Google Scholar
Al-Ghazālī, Abū Ḥāmid. (1970). Al-Mankhūl min taʻlīqāt al-uṣūl. (ʻAbd al-Malik Ibn ʻAbd Allāh, Ed.). Damascus.
Google Scholar
Al-Ghazālī, Abū Ḥāmid. (1993). Al-Mustaṣfā fī ʻilm al-uṣūl. (Ḥamzah ibn Zuhayr Ḥāfiẓ, Ed.). Medina: Ḥamzah ibn Zuhayr Ḥāfiẓ.
Google Scholar
Al-Jaṣṣāṣ, Abū Bakr. (2000). Uṣūl al-Jaṣṣāṣ al-musammā al-fuṣūl fī al-uṣūl. Beirut: Manshūrāt Muḥammad ʻAlī Bayḍūn.
Google Scholar
Al-Juwaynī, ʻAbd al-Malik ibn ʻAbd Allāh. (1997). Al-Burhān fī uṣūl al-fiqh. (Ṣalāh ibn Muḥammad ibn ‘Awīḍa, Ed.). Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya.
Google Scholar
Al-Juwaynī, ʻAbd al-Malik ibn ʻAbd Allāh. (2003). Al-Talkhīs fī uṣūl al-fiqh. (Muḥammad Ḥasan Ismāʻīl Shāfiʻī, Ed.). Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyya.
Google Scholar
Al-Juwaynī, ʻAbd al-Malik ibn ʻAbd Allāh. (2007). Nihāyat al-maṭlab fī dirāyat al-madhhab. Jeddah: Dār al-Minhāj.
Google Scholar
Al-Marghīnānī, ʻAlī ibn Abī Bakr. (2000). Al-Hidāya : Sharḥ bidāyat al-mubtadī. Cairo: Dār al-Salām lil-Ṭibaʻa wa'l-Nashr.
Google Scholar
Al-Shīrāzī, Abū Isḥāq. (1970). Ṭabaqāt al-fuqahā. Beirut: Dār al-Rā’id al-ʻArabī.
Google Scholar
Al-Shīrāzī, Abū Isḥāq. (1980). Al-Tabṣira fī usūl al-fiqh. (Muḥammad Ḥasan Hītū, Ed.). Damascus: Dār al-Fikr.
Google Scholar
Al-Shīrāzī, Abū Isḥāq. (1987). Al-Maʻūna fī al-jadal. (ʻAlī ibn ʻAbd al-ʻAzīz al-ʻUmayrīnī, Ed.). Kuwait City: Manshūrāt Markaz al-Makhṭūṭāt wa-al-Turāth, 1987.
Google Scholar
Al-Shīrāzī, Abū Isḥāq. (1988). Sharḥ al-lumaʻ fī uṣūl al-fiqh. (ʻAbd al-Majīd Turkī, Ed.). Beirut: Dār al-Gharb al-Islāmī.
Google Scholar
Al-Shīrāzī, Abū Isḥāq. (1992). Al-Muhadhdhab fī fiqh al-Imām al-Shāfiʻī. (Muḥammad al-Zuhaylī, Ed.). Damascus: Dār al-Qalam.
Google Scholar
Al-Shīrāzī, Abū Isḥāq. (1995). Al-Lumaʻ fī uṣūl al-fiqh. Beirut: Dār Ibn Kathīr.
Google Scholar
Al-Shīrāzī, Abū Isḥāq (1999) Kitāb al-lumaʻ fī uṣūl al-fiqh; Le livre des rais illuminant les fondements de la compréhension de la loi: traité de théorie légale musulmane. (E. Chaumont Trans. & Ed.). Berkeley: Robbin.
Google Scholar
Al-Subkī, Tāj al-Dīn. (1964). Ṭabaqāt al-shāfiʻiyya al-kubrā. (Maḥmūd Muḥammad Ṭanāḥī & ‘Abd al-Fattāḥ Muḥammad al-Ḥulū eds.). Cairo: ʻIsā al-Babīb al-Halabī.
Google Scholar
Al-Zarkashī, Badr al-Dīn (1992). Al-Baḥr al-muḥīt fī uṣūl al-fiqh. (ʻAbd al-Qādir Al- ʻĀnī, Ed.). Kuwait: Wizārat al-Awqāf wa’l-Shu’ūn al-Islāmiyya.
Google Scholar
Chaumont, E. (1991). Encore au sujet de l’Ashʿarisme d’Abū Isḥāq al-Shīrāzī. Studia Islamica, (74), 167–177.
Google Scholar
El Shamsy, A. (2007). The first Shāfiʻī: The traditionalist legal thought of Abū Yaʻqūb al-Buwaytī (d. 231/846). Islamic Law and Society, 14(3), 301–341.
Article Google Scholar
Ephrat, D. (2000). A learned society in a period of transition : The Sunni ʻUlamaʼ of Eleventh-Century Baghdad. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Google Scholar
Hallaq, W. B. (1993). Was al-Shāfiʻī the master architect of Islamic jurisprudence? International Journal of Middle East Studies, 25(4), 587–605.
Article Google Scholar
Hallaq, W. B. (1997). A history of Islamic legal theories : An introduction to Sunnī Uṣūl al-Fiqh. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Book Google Scholar
Hītū, Muḥammad Ḥasan. (1980). Al-Imām al-Shīrāzī : Ḥayātuhu wa-arāʼuhu al-uṣūliyya. Damascus: Dār al-Fikr.
Google Scholar
Ibn al-Farrāʼ, Abū Yaʻlā. (1990). Al-ʻUdda fī uṣūl al-fiqh. Riyadh: Sayr al-Mubārakī.
Google Scholar
Ibn al-Jawzī, Abū al-Faraj. (1992). Al-Muntaẓam fī tārīkh al-mulūk wa’l-umam. (Muḥammad ʻAbd al-Qādir ʻAṭā & Muṣṭafā ʻAbd al-Qādir ʻAṭā, eds.). Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmiyya.
Google Scholar
Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ, al-Nawawī, and al-Mizzī. (1992). Ṭabaqāt al-fuqahāʼ al-shāfiʻiyya. (Muḥyī al-Dīn ʻAlī Najīb, Ed.). Beirut: Dār al-Bashāʼir al-Islāmiyya.
Google Scholar
Ibn al-Qāṣṣ. (1999). Al-Talkhīṣ. (ʻĀdil Aḥmad ʻAbd al-Mawjūd & ʻAlī Muḥammad Muʻawwaḍ, eds.). Mecca: Maktabat Nizār Muṣṭafā al-Bāz.
Google Scholar
Ibn Fūrak, Abū Bakr. (1987). Mujarrad maqālāt al-Shaykh Abī al-Ḥasan al-Ashʻarī : Min imlāʼ al-Shaykh al-Imām Abī Bakr Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan ibn Fūrak (t. 406/1015). Beirut: Al-Tawzīʻ al-Maktaba al-Sharqiyya.
Google Scholar
Ibn Kathīr, Ismaīl ibn ʻUmar. (2002). Ṭabaqāt al-shāfiʻiyya. (ʻAbd al-Ḥafīz Manṣūr, Ed.). Beirut: Dār al-Madār al-Islāmī.
Google Scholar
Ibn Khallikān, Abū al-ʻAbbās. (1978). Wafayāt al-aʻyān. (Iḥsān ʻAbbās, Ed.). Beirut: Dār al-Ṣādir.
Google Scholar
Ibn Qāḍī Shuhba. (1987). Ṭabaqāt al-shāfiʻiyya. (ʻAbd al-ʻAlīm Khān & ʻAbdallāh Anīs al-Ṭabbāʻ, eds.). Beirut: ʻĀlam al-Kutub.
Google Scholar
Ibn Qudāma, Muwaffaq al-Dīn. (2002). Rawḍāt al-nāẓir wa-jannat al-munāẓir. Beirut: Muʼassasa al-Rayyān.
Google Scholar
Lowry, J. E. (2007). Early Islamic legal theory : The Risāla of Muḥammad ibn Idrīs al-Shāfiʻī. Leiden; Boston: Brill.
Book Google Scholar
Lucas, S. (2010). Principles of traditionist jurisprudence reconsidered. The Muslim World, 100(1), 145–156.
Article Google Scholar
Makdisi, G. (1984a). The juridical theology of Shāfiʻī: Origins and significance of Uṣūl al-Fiqh. Studia Islamica, (59), 5–47.
Google Scholar
Makdisi, G. (1984b). The rise of colleges: Institutions of learning in Islam and the west. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Google Scholar
Messick, B. (1996). The calligraphic state: Textual domination and history in a Muslim society. University of California Press.
Google Scholar
Mittermaier, A. (2010). Dreams that matter: Egyptian landscapes of the imagination. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Google Scholar
Osman, A. (2014). The Ẓāhirī Madhhab (3rd/9th–10th/16th Century): A textualist theory of Islamic law. Leiden: Brill.
Google Scholar
Peacock, A. C. S. (2015). Great Seljuk Empire. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Google Scholar
Schacht, J. (1959). The origins of Muhammadan jurisprudence. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Google Scholar
Soufi, Y. (2017). Pious critique: Abū Isḥāq al-Shīrāzī and the 11th century practice of juristic disputation (Munāẓara). Toronto: University of Toronto. (Unpublished dissertation).
Google Scholar
Soufi, Y. (2018). The historiography of Uṣūl al-Fiqh. In A. Emon & R. Ahmed (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Islamic law (pp. 249–267). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Spectorsky, S. A. (1982). Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal’s Fiqh. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 102(3), 461–465.
Article Google Scholar
Stewart, D. (2016). Muḥammad B. Dā’ūd al-Zāhirī’s manual of jurisprudence, al-Wuṣūl ilā Maʻrifat al-Uṣūl. In W. B. Hallaq (Ed.), The formation of Islamic law (pp. 277–315). New York and London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Talas, A. (1939). L’enseignement chez les Arabes: La madrasa Niẓāmiyya et son histoire. Paris: P. Geuthner.
Google Scholar
Weiss, B. (2010). The search for God’s law: Islamic jurisprudence in the writings of Sayf al-Dīn al-Āmidī (revised edition). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Google Scholar
Young, W. E. (2017). The dialectical forge: Juridical disputation and the evolution of Islamic law. Dordrecht: Springer.
Google Scholar
Zysow, A. (2013). The economy of certainty: An introduction to the typology of Islamic legal theory. Atlanta: Lockwood Press.
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Department of philosophy, Université de Lille, Lille, France
Shahid Rahman & Muhammad Iqbal
Department of Classical, Near Eastern, and Religious Studies, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
Youcef Soufi

Authors

Shahid Rahman
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Muhammad Iqbal
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Youcef Soufi
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rahman, S., Iqbal, M., Soufi, Y. (2019). Introduction: The Life and Qiyās of Abū Isḥāq al-Shīrāzī (393H/1003 CE-476H/1083 CE). In: Inferences by Parallel Reasoning in Islamic Jurisprudence. Logic, Argumentation & Reasoning, vol 19. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22382-3_1

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22382-3_1
Published: 14 January 2020
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-22381-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-22382-3
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Introduction: The Life and Qiyās of Abū Isḥāq al-Shīrāzī (393H/1003 CE-476H/1083 CE)