الحافظ شمس الدين البرماوي وآراؤه الأصولية من خلال كتابه الفوائد السنية في شرح الألفية

There is no doubt that the science of Usul al-Fiqh (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence) is considered one of the most noble Islamic sciences and has the greatest impact on understanding religious texts and deriving rulings from them. It is the science that clarifies the rules of inference and the principles of understanding. Scholars, both past and present, have given great attention and care to this science. Among the ancient scholars who have extensive expertise in this field is the jurisprudential theorist, meticulous examiner, and verifier, Al-Hafiz Shams al-Din al-Barmawi (may Allah have mercy on him). Based on this, I have selected one of his valuable jurisprudential works for study, namely his book entitled (Al-Fawa'id al-Sunniyyah fi Sharh al-Alfiyyah). The reason for my selection lies in his scholarly status (may Allah have mercy on him), as well as the importance of his book in the field of Usul al-Fiqh. This is with the aim of highlighting the distinguished scholarly position of this eminent scholar and this valuable work, and with the objective of unveiling the hidden scholarly treasures in this valuable scholarly contribution in the field of Usul al-Fiqh. The researcher has followed the analytical methodology in this dissertation, presenting information and opinions and documenting them from their original sources, then analyzing them, clarifying their summaries, explaining their ambiguities, and elucidating their principles. Through this, he presented al-Barmawi's jurisprudential methodology. Due to the size of the aforementioned book, I have divided the research, after the introduction, into five chapters and a conclusion. The first (introductory) chapter is dedicated to al-Barmawi's life and his methodology in (Al-Fawa'id al-Sunniyyah) and the jurisprudential preliminaries and related matters. The second chapter includes the agreed-upon evidences of rulings. The third chapter is dedicated to what inference with evidence depends upon. The fourth chapter is devoted to what the fourth evidence (analogy/qiyas) depends upon and the remaining topics of analogy. The fifth and final chapter is dedicated to discussing the disputed evidences, as well as the conflict of evidences and its ruling, and ijtihad (independent reasoning) and taqlid (following scholarly opinion). In the conclusion, I mentioned the most important findings I reached. The research findings can be summarized as follows: Al-Hafiz al-Barmawi was a jurisprudential theorist following the methodology of the Mutakallimun (theologians/Shafi'is), a jurist following the school of Imam al-Shafi'i, and in creed, he was an Ash'ari following the opinion of Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari's school. He was an encyclopedic scholar in all religious sciences. Moreover, Al-Hafiz al-Barmawi was not merely a transmitter of the statements of predecessors but was a verifying jurisprudential imam, as he critiqued opinions and objected to them. Evidence of this is found in his jurisprudential works, which were distinguished by linking jurisprudential principles with legal issues. His style is also characterized by clarifying what previous jurisprudential theorists had not explained in this manner regarding synonyms, and he branches out into examples. Furthermore, Al-Hafiz al-Barmawi's methodology in his book (Al-Nubdhah al-Zakiyyah) was limited to stating the preponderant opinion and did not address the disagreements among jurisprudential theorists, nor did it address the evidences, objections to them, and responses. He followed this approach in the Alfiyyah. However, in this book - Al-Fawa'id al-Sunniyyah fi Sharh al-Alfiyyah - we find that although he was a jurisprudential theorist following the Mutakallimun methodology, he adopted a comparative approach here. He opposed the statements of previous scholars, presented and discussed evidences, mentioned objections to them, and gave preference while mentioning the reasons for preference. This should not be misunderstood as limiting himself to mentioning Shafi'i principles; therefore, we find him mentioning points of consensus and disagreement with evidence, responding to opponents, then mentioning the preponderant opinion and its evidences. What is noteworthy is that in some places, his style is distinguished by supporting the preference of an issue previously mentioned but in a weakened form, strengthening it with analysis and providing the reason for preference that was not mentioned previously with the preference, or mentioning the preference of a topic with the reason for preference but mentioning it merely as a transmitter, then clarifying that what is preponderant in his view is the opposite of what he transmitted. Additionally, al-Barmawi was the first to deduce the authority of custom ('urf) from Allah's saying: {And We have already sent messengers before you and assigned to them wives and descendants} [Al-Ra'd: 37]. Al-Barmawi disagreed with the majority regarding the principle: "Consideration is given to the generality of the expression, not the specificity of the cause," and giving precedence to general formulations when they contain conditions such as (man) and (ayy) over the negated indefinite, and giving precedence to consensus over text when it equals the text in certainty and probability, as well as giving precedence to what has a single-origin cause over what has a dual-origin or multiple-origin cause. Regarding the researcher's contribution, I have begun with my opinion as much as possible throughout the research on al-Barmawi's opinions, interpretations, observations, objections, and investigations mentioned in the research, whether his opinion was preponderant or outweighed, or whether it agreed with the majority opinion or the opinion of any scholar before him. I expressed my opinion with phrases such as: (what appears to me - or seems to me - or becomes clear to me), or any phrase that expresses my opinion.