Differences in the interpretation of the classical period ahkām commentaries -In the context of Surah Nisa-

The content of the Holy Qur'an, which is suitable for disagreement in terms of its wording, is a proof of the legitimacy of the madhhabs, which are the result of jurisprudential disagreements. The uncertainty in the ayāt al-aḥkām, which paves the way for the emergence of different judgements, has shown that jurisprudential sects have emerged as a necessity of the nature of religious scriptures that constitute the basis of the religion. Even if there are contradictions in the views of the sects, it can be said that they are the product of a coherent process and have integrity when evaluated within the framework of the procedural background on which they are based. Although there were disagreements in the interpretation of the Holy Qur'an based on sectarian systematics in the classical period, these disagreements were in consistency with the core dynamics of religion, since they emerged in an institutional structure rather than individual and were based on a solid procedural ground. Although different results were obtained from the interpretation of the Holy Qur'an in this regard, the consistency provided has given the expressed interpretations respectability in the Muslim society. The disagreements that emerged were not seen as a form of dissension, on the contrary, they constituted a source of alternative applications of practical nature and were characterised as mercy in this respect. The correct interpretation of the Holy Qur'an, especially in practical matters, is one of the issues on which the overwhelming majority of Muslims agree. If this activity is not carried out on a well-established procedural basis, then each interpreter of the Holy Qur'an will act with an individual understanding, which will lead to the divergence and even deviation of Muslims in the practical dimension rather than unification under the Holy Qur'an. In this sense, since consistency in the interpretation of the Holy Qur'an can only be achieved by following the method of usul al-fiqh, it can be said that it should be the first method to be applied in Qur'anic exegesis today. Since the early periods of Islam, different opinions have emerged in areas that are open to ijtihad due to reasons such as differences in understanding and the probabilistic nature of the scriptures. This issue manifested itself in the jurisprudence of the Companions both during the lifetime of the Prophet (PBUH) and after his death. Especially since the second Hijri century, the works of ahkām al-Qur'an, which were written for the understanding of the Qur'ānic ayāt al-aḥkām, explain the legal aspect of the Qur'ānic nass. Mujtahids interpreted the ahkām verses within the framework of the principles of maqāṣid al-sharī'ah and on the theoretical ground formed by usūl al-fiqh. in This context, this study conveys the jurisprudential situation within each jurisprudential period, attempts to introduce the works of ahkām al-Qur'an within their periods, investigates in terms of method and sources three of the works accepted as the main works of Hanafī, Shāfi'i and Mālikī sects, and analyses the disputes arising in the Surah Nisā in terms of usul al-fiqh.