تعارضِ حدیث: نسخ، ترجیح اور توقف کے مابین — اصولِ فقہ میں ایک تحقیقی و منہجی مطالعہ

Conflict of Hadith: Between Abrogation, Preference, and Suspension — A Methodological and Analytical Study in Usul al-Fiqh

Abstract

This analytical article examines the methodology of the Usuli (Hanafi) school of jurisprudence regarding the resolution of apparent contradictions (Ta'arud) in Prophetic Traditions (Hadith). The study focuses on the systematic process established by classical Usuli scholars, particularly Imam al-Sarakhsi, which dictates a strict sequence for conflict resolution: first, investigating Abrogation (Naskh); second, applying Preference (Tarjih); third, attempting Reconciliation (Jam'); and finally, resorting to the Suspension (Tawaqquf) of both conflicting proofs. A key distinction of this approach is the priority given to Tarjih over Jam', reflecting an emphasis on certainty (Wuthuq) in legal rulings. Furthermore, the article analyzes the detailed criteria for Tarjih, which extend beyond merely the chain of narration (Sanad) to include the conformance of the text (Matn) with established legal maxims (Usul) and the use of Qiyas Jali (patent analogy) as a decisive factor in preferring one solitary narration over another, as demonstrated in the legal case of Wudu bi al-Nabidh. The research asserts that this rigorous methodology is designed to ensure the legal coherence and structural integrity of the derived law.