Practice among Islamic Jurists and Its Impact on Legal Preference and Textual Understanding: A Comparative Applied Usuli Study

Abstract

This study examines the impact of practice (ʿamal) on the understanding of Islamic legal texts and the process of weighing conflicting evidence. It explores the concept, forms, and evidentiary status of practice, its role in the methods of legal reasoning adopted by the four Sunni schools, and its significance in selected jurisprudential applications. The study seeks to move beyond the simplistic assumption that text and practice necessarily stand in opposition, demonstrating instead that practice has diverse forms and functions whose evidentiary value varies according to its source, transmission, connection to the text, and position within the legal methodology. The study adopts an inductive, analytical, and comparative approach, supported by selected jurisprudential applications that illustrate the practical role of practice in legal reasoning. It concludes that practice may reveal a transmitter’s understanding of a text, contribute to determining its scope, assist in reconciling apparently conflicting reports, or function as a corroborating factor in preference, without necessarily constituting an independent source against an established text. The study also demonstrates that the four schools differ in the scope and function they assign to practice, while sharing the centrality of the revealed text. The study concludes that the probative value of practice cannot be established merely by its existence or prevalence; rather, it depends on its authenticity, source, status, continuity, connection toقة the formative period of Islamic law, relationship to the relevant text, and function in legal reasoning.