The Methodology of Comparative Jurisprudence in Tibyān al-Qur’ān (In the light of Injunctions for Mehar)

Abstract

The exegetical literature which has been written since the era of its compilation exhibits various methodologies and approaches.  An important methodology is the interpretation of juristic injunctions. The exegetes especially considered their juristic and rationalistic school of thoughts and preferred their opinions by logical reasoning in interpreting the verses of injunctions. Some commentators expanded the vision of such exegeses by quoting the opinions of scholars, not only belonging to their own sect, but also citing the opinions of scholars of other sects. They endeavored to present relatively detailed comparative study of different school of thoughts which is called Comparative Jurisprudence (Fiqh al-Muqāran). The most prominent example of this methodology in Urdu exegetical literature is Ghulām Rasūl Sa‘īdī’s Qur’ānic Commentary “Tibyān al-Qur’ān”. This exegesis is basically a representative of Fiqh al-Ḥanfī. One of the juristic issues discussed in this commentary is the issue of Mehar (Groom’s gift to bride). He cited the dissenting opinions of various jurists about what is Mehar; what should be the amount of Mehar; which commodities can be used as Mehar; in which conditions the amount of Mahar can be changed etc. He tried to prefer a certain opinion out of many. Tibyān al-Qur’ān is a significant addition to Urdu exegetical literature. This article would analyze the injunctions of Mehar in the light of the most prominent attribute of this exegesis which is Comparative Fiqh.