This article offers an analysis of the way a number of classical Muslim scholars treated the question of the normative impact of statements in the imperative mood. This question, which was standard in classical works of legal theory, is noteworthy for its direct implication in establishing links between linguistic forms and normative positions. It reveals to us with some clarity the logic of norm-formation in part of the tradition. It will be argued that the debates surrounding the normative impact of the imperative mood reflect a logic of collective deliberation that highlights a reliance on the authority of the community of jurists as a foundation of validity for jurisprudential principles. Establishing the validity of legal norms and processes that lead to their formulation is a common concern among legal systems. In the study of classical Islamic law, it is commonly assumed that the jurists derived substantive norms from revealed sources using the tools and methods of Islamic legal theory. This assumption locates the validity of legal norms and their formulation exclusively in divine will as expressed in revelation. This study suggests that we can view debates in legal theory as efforts in grounding legal validity in various sources of authority, including revealed language and the collective authority of the scholars. This corresponds to what has been described in analytic jurisprudence as a secondary rule of recognition.
Abū al-Baqāʾ Ayyūb b. Musā. al-Kulliyyāt: muʿjam fil-muṣṭalaḥạ̄t wa-l-furūq al-lughawīyya. Adnan Darwish and Muhammad Al-Masri eds. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Risāla 1992.
Ahmad Ahmad Atif. Structural Interrelations of Theory and Practice in Islamic Law: A Study of Six Works of Medieval Islamic Jurisprudence. Leiden; Boston: Brill 2006.
Ali Zain. “Concepts of God in Islam.” PHC3 Philosophy Compass 11 no. 12 (2016): 892–904.
Austin John. The Province of Jurisprudence Determined: And the Uses of the Study of Jurisprudence. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson 1968.
al-Bāqillānī Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn al-Ṭayyib. Al-Taqrīb Wal-Irshād “Al-Ṣaghīr.” Edited by ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd b. ʿAlī Abū Zunayd. 2nd ed. Vol. 2. 3 vols. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Risālah 1998.
Berg Herbert “The Divine Sources.” In Peters Rudolph and P.J. Bearman. The Ashgate Research Companion to Islamic Law. London; New York: Routledge 2016
Charnock Ross. “Lexical Indeterminacy: Contextualism and Rule-Following in Common Law Adjudication” in Anne Wagner et al. Interpretation Law and the Construction of Meaning: Collected Papers on Legal Interpretation in Theory Adjudication and Political Practice. Dordrecht the Netherlands: Springer 2007.
Kramer Matthew. “Of Final Things: Morality as One of the Ultimate Determinants of Legal Validity.” Law and Philosophy: An International Journal for Jurisprudence and Legal Philosophy 24 no. 1 (2005): 47–97.
Lamond Grant. “Legal Systems and the Rule of Recognition: Discussion of Marmor’s Philosophy of Law Book Symposium on Andrei Marmor’s Philosophy of Law.” Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies 10 (2014): 68–80.
Marmor Andrei. Philosophy of Law. Princeton N.J.: Princeton University Press 2011.
Miller Larry B. “Islamic Disputation Theory: A Study of the Development of Dialectic in Islam from the Tenth Through Fourteenth Centuries.” Ph.D. Princeton University 1984.
Murphy L. “Better to See Law This Way.” New York University Law Review. 83 no. 4 (2008): 1088–1108.
Kevin Reinhart “ ‘Like the Difference Between Heaven and Earth’: Ḥanafī and Shāfiʿī Distinction of Farḍ and Wājib in Theology and Uṣūl.” In Bernard G. Weiss ed. Studies in Islamic Legal Theory. Leiden: Brill 2002. 205–234.
Ricœur Paul. Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning. TCU Press 1976.