ائمہ اربعہ کے مابین اختلاف کی نوعیت و اسباب کا تجزیاتی مطالعہ

Abstract

Disagreement is not only a manifest reality in human society but also an intrinsic aspect of human nature. Variations in intellect and comprehension, differences in temperament and capacity, as well as diversity in educational backgrounds and lived experiences, are all factors that naturally lead to differing perspectives among individuals. When such diversity extends into the realm of religious understanding and legal reasoning (ijtihād), it gives rise to scholarly differences. The Islamic Sharī‘ah, which remains applicable until the end of time, possesses an inherent elasticity and expansiveness that allows for contextual ijtihād across varying temporal and spatial circumstances. Consequently, such ijtihād may yield divergent but valid outcomes. Disagreement, therefore, is not inherently negative or blameworthy. When rooted in sincerity, grounded in knowledge, guided by piety, and conducted within the framework of established Sharī‘ah principles, scholarly disagreement becomes a sign of intellectual richness and a manifestation of divine mercy within the religion. The jurisprudential divergences among the four Imams, as well as among jurists, hadith scholars, and legal theorists, are prime examples of such constructive and principled differences. Conversely, disagreement that emerges from personal bias, egotism, or a disregard for scholarly methodology is what leads to discord, animosity, and deviation. Throughout Islamic history, the existence of differences in subsidiary (furūʿ) and ijtihād-based matters among scholars, jurists, and exegetes has not been indicative of error or malice, but rather a reflection of diverse interpretive frameworks, understandings of scriptural texts, and methodological approaches to legal reasoning.