Adopting Non-Reliance Opinions in the Shafi'i Madhhab and Their Applications in Financial Transactions: An Applied Original Study

Abstract

This study addresses an important topic that is increasingly necessary and needed, both in personal practice, judicial rulings and legal opinions (fatwas): Unreliable statements in Shafi'i Jurisprudence. This study aims to establish legal rulings to applicate unreliable statements. Using the descriptive method, the study clarifies the key terms of the research. Through the inductive method, it surveys the views of the Shafi'i scholars on the matter, which branch into two main opinions: The first opinion holds that it is permissible to applicate unconditionally unreliable statements in personal matters whether out of necessity, need, or mere preference while it is strictly prohibited to applicate in judiciary and fatwa. The second opinion allows to applicate unconditionally unreliable statements in personal matters while it permits using it in judiciary and fatwa in cases of benefit or necessity. The researcher also employed the analytical method to discuss these two opinions. The study demonstrates that unreliable statements include: (1) weak or less preferred statements which are both relatively weak and weak of cause, and (2) anomalous (shādhdh) statements. It clarifies the distinction between weak and anomalous statements, emphasizing that applying anomalous statements is impermissible neither in personal practice nor even more so in judiciary or fatw. Using the inductive method, the study explores several legal issues in financial transactions over which early and later Shafi'i scholars have disagreed. It assesses through a dialogical (discursive) approach the extent to which unreliable statements discussed align with the rulings issued by contemporary Fiqh academies and fatwa institutions.