The validity of the established schools of law (sing. madhhab ) is a major bone of contention between contemporary Salafis and Traditionalists. The controversy reached its peak around 1970 in a famous exchange between Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī, who called for direct reliance on authenticated hadith, and Muḥammad Saʽīd Ramaḍān al-Būṭī, who favored the jurists’ legal expertise. In this essay, I chart the course of the lā madhhabiyya debate in Syria by analyzing the polemical writings of three generations of Syrian ulama from 1870 to 1970. I argue that the seeds of the controversy were sown in the late Ottoman period in the Salafi challenge to taqlīd . I also uncover the central role of the Indian Ahl-i Hadith in mediating the anti -madhhabī position to the core Arab lands, and the part of Syrian Ḥanafī-Naqshbandī ʽulamāʼ in defending the madhhab s. Finally, I allude to the political split among the Traditionalist ʽulamāʼ between the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood and the Baʽth regime.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Itzchak Weismann (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: