东方主义对伊斯兰法律发展的比较(Goldziher, Joseph Schacht和James Norman)

Syahran Syahran, Abd. Raziq
{"title":"东方主义对伊斯兰法律发展的比较(Goldziher, Joseph Schacht和James Norman)","authors":"Syahran Syahran, Abd. Raziq","doi":"10.37146/ailrev.v4i2.185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to reveal the history of the development of Islamic law according to the orientalists. This study uses the Library Research method with a juridical analysis approach to obtain accurate results from various books written by oreantists. The results of this study indicate that Schacht and Goldziher stated that from the time of the Prophet until the first century of hijrah, Islamic law as we know it today has not been formed. Although the Qur'an has laid the foundations of family law, inheritance and ritual worship, so that in many cases, legal practice in early Islam has deviated from the literal provisions of the Qur'an. But what distinguishes the two originalist thinking. Goldziher prefers to compare the methods of hadith criticism used by orthodox Muslim hadith experts with the \"modern\" hadith criticism method, where a hadith that is said to be authentic by classical Muslim methods, its authenticity is doubted by the \"modern\" hadith criticism method, while Schacth considers that the classical schools focuses more on the study of hadith as a source of law and tends to ignore the Koran as the main source in the study of Islamic law, in contrast to the two orientalists James Norman argues that human reason is the most authoritative source of law to regulate social life, not sourced from the Koran. and hadith as in the concept of Islamic law, the concept of Islamic law according to Norman James is no longer relevant to be applied to modern society.","PeriodicalId":360273,"journal":{"name":"Al-Azhar Islamic Law Review","volume":"602 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Komparasi Pemikiran Orientalis Tentang Perkembangan Hukum Islam (Goldziher, Joseph Schacht, Dan James Norman)\",\"authors\":\"Syahran Syahran, Abd. Raziq\",\"doi\":\"10.37146/ailrev.v4i2.185\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aims to reveal the history of the development of Islamic law according to the orientalists. This study uses the Library Research method with a juridical analysis approach to obtain accurate results from various books written by oreantists. The results of this study indicate that Schacht and Goldziher stated that from the time of the Prophet until the first century of hijrah, Islamic law as we know it today has not been formed. Although the Qur'an has laid the foundations of family law, inheritance and ritual worship, so that in many cases, legal practice in early Islam has deviated from the literal provisions of the Qur'an. But what distinguishes the two originalist thinking. Goldziher prefers to compare the methods of hadith criticism used by orthodox Muslim hadith experts with the \\\"modern\\\" hadith criticism method, where a hadith that is said to be authentic by classical Muslim methods, its authenticity is doubted by the \\\"modern\\\" hadith criticism method, while Schacth considers that the classical schools focuses more on the study of hadith as a source of law and tends to ignore the Koran as the main source in the study of Islamic law, in contrast to the two orientalists James Norman argues that human reason is the most authoritative source of law to regulate social life, not sourced from the Koran. and hadith as in the concept of Islamic law, the concept of Islamic law according to Norman James is no longer relevant to be applied to modern society.\",\"PeriodicalId\":360273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Al-Azhar Islamic Law Review\",\"volume\":\"602 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Al-Azhar Islamic Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37146/ailrev.v4i2.185\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Al-Azhar Islamic Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37146/ailrev.v4i2.185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本研究旨在以东方学家的观点来揭示伊斯兰教法的发展历史。本研究采用图书馆研究的方法,结合司法分析的方法,从各学者的著作中获得准确的结果。这项研究的结果表明,Schacht和Goldziher指出,从先知时代到第一世纪的hijrah,我们今天所知道的伊斯兰法律还没有形成。虽然《古兰经》奠定了家庭法、继承和仪式崇拜的基础,但在许多情况下,早期伊斯兰教的法律实践偏离了《古兰经》的字面规定。但区分这两种原旨主义思想的是。Goldziher更倾向于将正统穆斯林圣训专家使用的圣训批评方法与“现代”圣训批评方法进行比较,在“现代”圣训批评方法中,被经典穆斯林方法认为是真实的圣训,其真实性受到“现代”圣训批评方法的怀疑,而Schacth认为古典学派更多地关注将圣训作为法律来源的研究,而倾向于忽视古兰经作为伊斯兰法律研究的主要来源。与这两位东方学家相反,詹姆斯·诺曼认为人类理性是规范社会生活的最权威的法律来源,而不是来自《古兰经》。和圣训就像伊斯兰法律的概念一样,根据诺曼·詹姆斯的说法,伊斯兰法律的概念不再适用于现代社会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Komparasi Pemikiran Orientalis Tentang Perkembangan Hukum Islam (Goldziher, Joseph Schacht, Dan James Norman)
This study aims to reveal the history of the development of Islamic law according to the orientalists. This study uses the Library Research method with a juridical analysis approach to obtain accurate results from various books written by oreantists. The results of this study indicate that Schacht and Goldziher stated that from the time of the Prophet until the first century of hijrah, Islamic law as we know it today has not been formed. Although the Qur'an has laid the foundations of family law, inheritance and ritual worship, so that in many cases, legal practice in early Islam has deviated from the literal provisions of the Qur'an. But what distinguishes the two originalist thinking. Goldziher prefers to compare the methods of hadith criticism used by orthodox Muslim hadith experts with the "modern" hadith criticism method, where a hadith that is said to be authentic by classical Muslim methods, its authenticity is doubted by the "modern" hadith criticism method, while Schacth considers that the classical schools focuses more on the study of hadith as a source of law and tends to ignore the Koran as the main source in the study of Islamic law, in contrast to the two orientalists James Norman argues that human reason is the most authoritative source of law to regulate social life, not sourced from the Koran. and hadith as in the concept of Islamic law, the concept of Islamic law according to Norman James is no longer relevant to be applied to modern society.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信