Al-Fuqahāʾ al-Sab'a and the Proof Value of 'Amal of Medinese

Al-Fuqahāʾ al-sab’a is a concept that used to refer to the seven famous scholars from Medina who lived in the era of tābiūn (successors). Different opinions have been proposed regarding who these seven faqihs are. However, this difference was only on the seventh name and an consensus was reached on the other six names. Accordingly, the six names accepted by the union; Saʿīd b. al-Musayyab (d. 94/713), ‘Urwa b. al-Zubayr (d. 94/713), Qāsim b. Muḥammad (d. 107/725), Kharija b. Zayd (d. 100/718), ʿUbaydallāh b. ʿAbdallāh (d. 98/716) and Sulaymān b. Yasār (d. 107/725). For the seventh scholar, three different names were mentioned: Abū Bakr b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān (d. 94/713), Abū Salama b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān (d. 94/713) and Sālim b. ʿAbdallāh (d. 106/725). In this research, the seventh name, Abū Bakr b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, was acknowledged. Because this is the adoption of Abū l-Zinād (d. 130/748) and the first traces of the concept are found in his use. The ‘amal of Medinese (the judicial practice of Medinese), which is accepted as a binding evidence for Mālikī sect and frequently referred by Mālikī, is used to express the judicial practice and consensus of the people of Medina on a religious issue. Imām Mālik’s compilation of the judicial practice of the people of Medina and the follow-up of a method that takes into consideration the judicial practice in his fatwas led to the concept rather being associated with Imām Mālik. However, the ‘amal of Medinese is also used both as a concept and method before him. Although it is possible to determine the tradition of pointing to the consensus and common practices of the past from the first period, after a certain period, especially from the second half of the first century, in the era of tābiūn (Successors), of which al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a belonged, it can be said that this attitude gained widespread popularity during that period. Al-Fuqahāʾ al-sab’a, which pioneered the conduct of the fiqh activities in Medina during the tābiūn period, accepted the ‘amal of Medinese as a proof and made judgements based on it using concept that points to the judicial practice. Saʿīd b. al-Musayyab’s statement “ajma’a ahl al-Medina (consensus of people of Medina reached)”, his meaning by the concept of “sunna” as views and practices that are generally based on the Prophet (pbuh) but which are alos later accepted, his knowledge of sunna maḍiya (the well-established precedent) and the praises about him in this field; examples that are shown in the ‘Urwa b. al-Zubayr and Qāsim b. Muḥammad as “al-amr (the practice)”, and the phrases, that are used by almost all of them and reflect some kind of common acceptance, like “people I lived in the same era”, “the people” indicate to the ‘amal of Medinese. It is quite difficult to determine exactly who al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a caste are by phrase “people I lived in the same era”. These statements may include the whole of the people of Madina, as well as those who are either fuqahās or scholars, or teachers who his opnion conveyed, or a much more limited group. Similar concepts have also been used more systematically by Imām Mālik. However, it was not determined exactly what he meant by these concepts and it was the subject of discussion between the scholars. Another issue that can be evaluated within the scope of ‘amal of Medinese is the transfers made regarding the practices of Caliph ʿUmar and acceptance of these convenctions as a relatively powerful evidence. It was seen as a sign of competence during the period of al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a to be a aware of to the practices of Caliph ‘Umar. It can be said that the basis of this such importance of Caliph ‘Umar’s practices is the idea of some kind of consensus (ijmāʿ). Because Caliph ‘Umar did not allow the major companions to leave from Medina, he often consulted them in his decisions and thus some kind of consensus was reached. This approach also gives ideas about the essence of judicial practice in one aspect. Relation with the judicial practice for al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a, who plays an important role in the formation, detection and transfer of the judicial practice in Medina, was also investigated in the latter periods and a number of claims were made in this context. One of them is the claim that the consensuses in Imām Mālik’s Muwattaʾ were “the consensuses of al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a” or “the consensuses of a group of ten people, including al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a”. However, this claim was rejected and was not found to be reputable in the eyes of the Mālikīs. Another claim on the subject is orientalist Schacht’s (d. 1969) thesis that “transformation from anonymous schools to personal schools”. According to Schacht, the consensus of the scholars was anonymous. However, since the middle of the second century, this anonymous consensus has been credited to the great personalities of the past in order to give theoretical legitimacy to this tradition based on the idea of continuity at the core of the concept of sunna. In this context, the people of Medina grounded their doctrines on some ancient authorities who died at the end of the first or early second century. In a later period, seven of these authorities were elected and seven lawyers from Medina (al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a) were referred to as. This retrospective attribution process was not limited to these scholars, and each region based its doctrine on a local companion of the prophet. The Medinaians accepted Caliph ʿUmar and his son ʿAbdallāh Ibn ʿUmar as two important authorities. Schacht says that any doctrine based on these ancient authorities cannot be considered authentic. Because according to him, this attribution process was attached later and it is unfounded. Schacht’s thesis of “transformation of personal schools from regional schools” was rejected by another orientalist, Hallaq. One of the Islamic scholars, Muṣṭafā al-A’zamī (d. 2017), presented his rejection of Schacht’s claims against Islamic sciences and criticized the aforementioned claim. This article focuses on al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a’s approach to the judicial practice and tries to point out the roles it takes in the formation, determination and transfer of ‘amal of Medinese and discusses the aforementioned claims