| Part ofa series on Sunni Islam |
|---|
 |
In terms ofIhsan: |
 Islam portal |
 | Some of this article'slisted sourcesmay not bereliable. Please help improve this article by looking for better, more reliable sources. Unreliable citations may be challenged and removed.(January 2026) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
TheZahiri school[a] orZahirism is aschool ofIslamic jurisprudence withinSunni Islam. It was named afterDawud al-Zahiri and flourished inSpain during theCaliphate of Córdoba under the leadership ofIbn Hazm. It was also followed by the majority of Muslims inMesopotamia,Portugal,the Balearic Islands, andNorth Africa. The Zahiri school lost its presence around the 14th-century.[1][2][3] The school is considered to be endangered, but it continues to exert influence over legal thought. Today it is followed by minority communities inMorocco andPakistan.
The Zahiri school is characterized by strict adherence to literalism and reliance on the outward (ẓāhir) meaning of expressions in theQuran and a limited amount ofḥadīth literature;[4][5] theconsensus (ijmāʿ) of the first generation ofMuhammad's closest companions (ṣaḥāba) excluding the scholars, for sources ofIslamic law (sharīʿa); and rejection ofanalogical deduction (qiyās) andsocietal custom or knowledge (urf),[5] used by other schools of Islamic jurisprudence, although the anti-Hazm wing of Zahiris usually accept religious inference (istidlāl).[11]
After a limited success and decline in theMiddle East, the Zahiri school flourished inIslamic Iberia, particularly under the leadership of the Andalusian Muslim juristIbn Hazm.[5] The Zahiri school is said to have lingered on in various locations under various manifestations before being superseded by the Hanbali school.[12]
During his formative years, al-Ẓāhirī relocated fromKufa toBaghdad and studied theprophetic traditions (ḥadīth) andQuranic exegesis (tafsīr) with a number of notable Muslim scholars of the time,[13] includingAbū Thawr,Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn, andAḥmad ibn Ḥanbal.[14][15] His study under renowned figures oftraditionalist theology (Atharī) was in contrast to the views of his father, who was a follower of theḤanafī school.[16][17][18][19][20] Indian Muslim reformistChiragh Ali has suggested that Ẓāhirī's school was, like that ofIbn Ḥanbal, actually a direct reaction to the Ḥanafī system of jurisprudence.[21]
The Ẓāhirī school was initially called theDāwūdi school after Dawud al-Ẓāhirī himself, and attracted many adherents, although they felt free to criticize his views, in line with the Ẓāhirī school's rejection oflegal conformity (taqlīd).[22] Alongside theḤanbali jurists, Ẓāhiris constituted one of the major schools that originated from theAhl al-Ḥadīth school,[6] which advocated the superiority of theQuran,ḥadīth literature, andsunnah (accounts of the sayings and living habits attributed to theIslamic prophetMuhammad during his lifetime) in legal jurisdiction, and denied the validity oflogic (‘āql) as an independent source of Islamic law.[23] By the end of the 10th century, members of the madhhab were appointed asjudges (qāḍī) inBaghdad,Shiraz,Isfahan,Firuzabad,Ramla,Damascus,Fustat, andBukhara.[22][24]
Umm al-Qura University professorAbdul Aziz al-Harbi has argued that the first generation ofMuhammad's closest companions (ṣaḥāba) followed the methods and rulings of the Ẓāhirī school, and therefore it can be regarded as "the school of the first generation."[25]
Parallel to the school's development in the east, Ẓāhirī ideas were introduced to North Africa by theologians of theMaliki school who were engaged in lively debates with theHanafi school, and to theIberian Peninsula by one of Dawud al-Ẓāhirī's direct students.[22] UnlikeAbbasid lands, where the Ẓāhirī school developed in parallel and in opposition to other madhhabs (chiefly Hanafi,Shafi‘i, andHanbali), in the West it only had to contend with its Maliki counterpart, which enjoyed official support of theUmayyad rulers.[22] Starting in the late 9th century CE, an increasing number of "hir" scholars emerged in various regions of the Iberian peninsula, but none of their works have survived.[22]
It was not until the rise of theAlmohads that the Ẓāhirī school enjoyed official state sponsorship. While not all of the Almohad political leaders were Ẓāhirīs, a large plurality of them were not only adherents but were well-versed theologians in their own right.[26][not specific enough to verify] Additionally, all Almohad leaders – both the religiously learned and the laymen – were extremely hostile toward the Malikis, giving the Ẓāhirīs and in a few cases the Shafi‘is free rein to author works and run the judiciary. In the late 12th century, any religious material written by non-Ẓāhirīs was at first banned and later burned in the empire under theAlmohad reforms.[27][28]
The Ẓāhirī school enjoyed its widest expansion and prestige in the fourth Islamic century, especially through the works ofIbn al-Mughallis, but in the fifth century it lost ground to the Hanbalite school.[29] Even after the Zahiri school became extinct in Baghdad, it continued to have some followers in Shiraz.[30] Ẓāhirism maintained its prestige inSyria until 788 A.H. and had an even longer and deeper impact inEgypt.[29] In the 14th century C.E., theZahiri Revolt marked both a brief rekindling of interest in the school's ideas as well as affirmation of its status as a non-mainstream ideology.[citation needed]Al-Muhalla, a medieval manual on Ẓāhirī jurisprudence, served in part as inspiration for the revolt and as a primary source of the school's positions.[31][failed verification] However, soon afterwards the school ceased to function and in the 14th centuryIbn Khaldun considered it to be extinct.[32][33] With theReconquista and the loss of Iberia to Christian rule, most works of Ẓāhirī law and legal theory were lost as well, with the school only being carried on by individual scholars, once again on the periphery.[citation needed]
Wael Hallaq has argued that the rejection ofqiyas (analogical reasoning) in Ẓāhirī methodology led to exclusion of the school from the Sunni juridical consensus and ultimately its extinction in the pre-modern era.[34]Christopher Melchert suggests that the association of the Ẓāhirī school withMu'tazilite theology, its difficulty in attracting the right patronage, and its reliance on outmoded methods of teaching have all contributed to its decline.[35]
The Zahiri school became extinct around the 14th-century.[1][2][3] It was sometimes characterized as a fifth school of thought (madhhab) within Sunni Islam,[36][37][38] In particular, members of theAhl-i Hadith movement have identified themselves with the Ẓāhirī school of thought.[39][40] In the modern era, the Ẓāhirī school has been described as "somewhat influential", though "not formally operating today".[41] In particular, adherents of the modern-day Ahl-i Hadith movement in India and Pakistan have self-consciously emulated the ideas of the Ẓāhirī school and identified themselves with it.[42][43] The family ofHasan al-Hudaybi reportedly was Zahiri.[44] Modernist revival of the general critique byIbn Hazm – the school's most prominent representative – of Islamic legal theory among Muslim academics has seen several key moments in recent Arab intellectual history, includingAhmad Shakir's republishing of Al-Muhalla,Muhammad Abu Zahra's biography of Ibn Hazm, and the republishing of archived epistles on Ẓāhirī legal theory bySa'id al-Afghani in 1960 andIhsan Abbas between 1980 and 1983.[45] In 2004 theAmman Message recognized the Ẓāhirī school as legitimate, although it did not include it among Sunni madhhabs,[46] and the school also received recognition fromSudan's former Islamist Prime Minister,Sadiq al-Mahdi.[47] The literalist school of thought represented by the Ẓāhirī madhhab remains prominent among many scholars and laymen associated with theSalafi movement,[41] and traces of it can be found in the modern-daySalafi movement.[48] The school experienced a revival in theIslamic State.[49] There have been attempts to revive the school in the mid-20th century.[42][43][47]
Of the utmost importance to the school is an underlying principle attributed to the founderDawud ibn 'Ali; who had robustly denounced the delicacies and ambiguities inFiqh sciences. According to Dawud, the validity of religious issues is only upheld by certainty, and that speculation cannot lead to the truth. This certainty is to be determined by the outward (Zahir) meaning of theQurʾān andHadith.[50][51] Most Ẓāhirī principles return to this overarching maxim. Japanese Islamic scholarKojiro Nakamura defines the Ẓāhirī schools as resting on two presumptions. The first is that if it were possible to draw more general conclusions from the strict reading of the sources of Islamic law, then God certainly would have expressed these conclusions already; thus, all that is necessary lies in the text. The second is that for man to seek the motive behind the commandments of God is not only a fruitless endeavor but a presumptuous one.[52] Another major characteristic was their fierce condemnation ofQiyas (analogical reasoning) as a heresy and distortion ofSharia (Islamic law) but still accept religious inference (istidlāl).[51]
The Ẓāhirī school of thought generally recognizes three sources ofIslamic law within theprinciples ofIslamic jurisprudence. The first is the Qur'an, considered by Muslims to be the verbatim word ofGod (Arabic: اللهAllah); the second consists of theSunnah derived fromhadith literature its adherents deem authentic, these consist of the sayings and actions of theIslamic prophetMuhammad; the third isabsolute consensus of theSahabah.[53]Certain followers of the Ẓāhirī school include religiousinference (istidlāl) as a fourth source of Islamic law.[54][verification needed]
The school differs from the more prolific schools of Islamic thought in that it restricts valid consensus in jurisprudence to the consensus of the first generation of Muslims who lived alongside Muhammad only.[55][21] WhileAbu Hanifa andAhmad ibn Hanbal agreed with them in this,[56][57] most followers of the Hanafi andHanbali schools generally do not, nor do the other two Sunni schools.
Additionally, the Ẓāhirī school does not acceptanalogical reasoning as a source of Islamic law,[58] nor do they accept the practice ofjuristic discretion, pointing to a verse in the Qur'an which declares that nothing has been neglected in the Muslim scriptures.[59] Whileal-Shafi‘i and followers of his school agree with the Ẓāhirīs in rejecting the juristic discretion,[60] all other Sunni schools accept the analogical reasoning, though at varying levels.[61][citation needed]
Ẓāhirīs accept deriving rulings based on general, encompassing texts in theQuran andSunnah as long as it is based on what a general ruling/statement in the textual sources necessarily encompasses and not based on makingQiyas, which Ẓāhirīs firmly reject.[62][63]
Like its founder Dawud, the Ẓāhirī school has been controversial since its inception.[68] Due to their some so-called rejection of intellectual principles considered staples of other strains within Sunni Islam, adherents to the school have been described as displaying non-conformist attitudes.[69]
The Ẓāhirī school has often been criticized by other schools within Sunni Islam. While this is true of all schools, relations between the Hanafis, Shafi‘is and Malikis have warmed to each other over the centuries; this has not always been the case with the Ẓāhirīs.
Not surprisingly given the conflict over al-Andalus, Maliki scholars have often expressed negative feelings regarding the Ẓāhirī school.Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi, whose father was a Ẓāhirī, nevertheless considered Ẓāhirī law to be absurd.[65]Ibn 'Abd al-Barr, himself a former Ẓāhirī, excluded Dawud al-Ẓāhirī along withAhmad ibn Hanbal from his book on Sunni Islam's greatest jurists,[70] thoughIgnác Goldziher has suggested that Ibn Abdul-Barr remained Ẓāhirī privately and outwardly manifested Maliki ideas due to prevailing pressures at the time. At least with al-Ballūṭī, one example of a Ẓāhirī jurist applying Maliki law due to official enforcement is known. Ẓāhirīs such as Ibn Hazm were challenged and attacked by Maliki jurists after their deaths.[65]
Followers of the Shafi‘i school within Sunni Islam have historically been involved in intellectual conflict with Ẓāhirīs.[71] This may be due to Al-Shafi'i being a major proponent of the principle of Qiyas; rejected by the Zahiris.[72][73][74][75][76]
Hanbali scholarIbn al-Qayyim, while himself a critic of the Ẓāhirī outlook, defended the school's legitimacy in Islam, stating rhetorically that their only sin was "following the book of theirLord and example of their Prophet."[77]
The position adopted by the most exacting of scholars is that those who deny analogy are not considered scholars of the Umma or conveyers of the Shari‘a, because they oppose out of mere obstinacy and exchange calumnies about things established by an overwhelming preponderance of the evidence, conveyed by whole groups from whole groups back to their prophetic origin (tawatur). For most of the Shari‘a proceeds from ijtihad, and the unequivocal statements from the Qur’an and hadith do not deal [n: in specific particulars by name] with even a tenth of the Shari‘a [n: as most of Islamic life is covered by general principles given by Allah to guide Muslims in every culture and time, and by analogy (qiyas) from established rulings], so these [Dhahiris] are considered like unlearned, common people.”
— Dhia' ul-Dīn 'Abd al-Malik ibn Yūsuf al-Juwaynī al-Shafi'ī,Dhahabi, Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala’ [Beirut: Mu’assasa al-Risala], 13.105 (1984)
The relationship between Ẓāhirism andSufism has been complicated. Throughout the school's history, its adherents have always included both Sufis as well as harsh critics of Sufism. Many practitioners of Sufism, which often emphasizes detachment from the material world, have been attracted to the Ẓāhirī combination of strict ritualism and lack of emphasis on dogmatics.[78][79]
Discerning who exactly is an adherent to the Ẓāhirī school of thought can be difficult. Harbi has claimed that most Muslim scholars who practiced independent reasoning and based their judgment only on the Qur'an and Sunnah, or Muslim prophetic tradition, were Ẓāhirīs.[25] Followers of other schools of thought may have adopted certain viewpoints of the Ẓāhirīs, holding Ẓāhirī leanings without actually adopting the Ẓāhirī school; often, these individuals were erroneously referred to as Ẓāhirīs despite contrary evidence.[80]
Additionally, historians would often refer to any individual who praised the Ẓāhirīs as being from them. SufimysticIbn Arabi has most often been referred to as a Ẓāhirī because of a commentary on one of Ibn Hazm's works, despite having stated twice that he isn't a follower of the Ẓāhirī school of thought.[81] Similarly,Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari would include Ẓāhirī opinions when comparing differing views of Sunni Muslims, yet he founded a distinct school of his own.[82] The case of Muslim figures who have mixed between different schools have proven to be more problematic.Muhammad Nasiruddin al-Albani, for example, referred to himself as a Ẓāhirī when pressed on the matter.[83] When Ibn Hazm listed the most important leaders of the school, he listed known Ẓāhiralh bin Qasim, al-Balluti, Ibn al-Mughallis, al-Dibaji and Ruwaym, but then also mentionedAbu Bakr al-Khallal,[84] who despite his Ẓāhirī leanings is almost universally recognized as a Hanbalite.[85]
Scott Lucas states "The most controversial aspect of al-Bukhari's legal principles is his disapproval of qiyas" and "A modern study of personal status laws in the Arab world by Jamal J. Nasir contains one sentence that explicitly mentions that the Ẓāhirīs and al-Bukhari rejected qiyas..."[86][87]
Lucas also points out that the legal methodology of Bukhari is very similar to that of Ibn Hazm.[88][89]
Ibn Hanbal's reliance on theexplicit import of the text (naṣṣ) was exceeded only by theliteralism of theẒāhirī school, founded by his student, thePersianDawud al-Zahiri (c. 815–883), and later popularized by Andalusian juristAli Ibn Hazm (994–1064). The Zahiris would outright rejectanalogical reasoning (qiyās) as a method for deducing jurisprudential rulings while consideringconsensus (ijmāʿ) to be binding only when comprising a first-generation consensus of theCompanions of the Prophet.
Siyar a`lam al-nubala., v.13, Entry 55, pp. 97–108We may guess at some of the reasons for the demise of the original Zahiri school. [...] This is roughly the explanation of Wael B. Hallaq: that the juridical theory of Sunnism recognized qiyas and therefore excluded Zahirism.
Ahl-i-Hadith [...] consciously identified themselves with Zahiri doctrine.
Siyar a`lam al-nubala., v.13, Entry 55, pp. 97–108| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
