92 MOHAMMAD HASHIM KAMALI

Another maxim has it that “question and answer proceed on that which is widespread and common and not on what is unfamiliar and rare”. Once again, if we were to interpret a speech and enquire into its implications, we should proceed on that which is widespread and commonly understood, as opposed to what might be said to be a rare understanding and interpretation. Another maxim, to which a reference has already been made, has it that “prevention of harm takes priority over the attraction of benefit” (dar’ al-mafāsid awlā min jalb al-manāfi‘). The earliest collection of maxims also included the five leading maxims that were discussed above.²⁹

Al-Karkhi’s collection, which is one of the earliest on record, is not necessarily articulated in the incisive and eloquent style that is typically associated with maxims.³⁰ Many scholars from various schools added to these over time, and the total number of qawā‘id and ḍawābit eventually exceeded 1200.

Next to the Hanafis, the Shāfi‘īs, and then following them, the Hanbalis, then the Mālikīs, in this order, as al-Zarqā has noted, added their contributions to the literature on legal maxims. The leading Shāfi‘ī scholar, ‘Izz al-Dīn ‘Abd al-Sulami’s (d. 660/1262), Qawā‘id al-Ahkām fī Maṣāli al-Anām, is noted as one of the salient contributions to this field, and so is ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Rajab al-Hanbalī’s (d. 795/1393) work Taqrīr Al-Qawā‘id wa Taḥrīr al-Fawā‘id, both of which have been highly acclaimed. Yet, in terms of conciseness and style, the Mejelle Ahkam Adliyye, an Islamic law code, written by a group of Turkish scholars under the supervision of Ahmed Cevdet Pasha (d. 1895) the then Minister of Justice in the 1870s, is said to represent the most advanced stage in the compilation of legal maxims. The introductory section of the Mejelle only records ninety-nine legal maxims, which have in turn been elaborated in many other works. One such work was authored by Muhammad al-Zarqā, bearing the title Sharḥ al-Qawā‘id al-Fiqhiyya (1403/1983). The son of this author, and also his commentator, Muṣtafā al-Zarqā, has noted, however, that the Mejelle selection does not necessarily represent a self-contained collection of all the leading maxims. Whereas many fall in that category, there are some which are decidedly subsidiary. The Mejelle selection is also not systematic, in that maxims which relate to one another do not appear in clusters, but tend to appear on a stand-alone kind of arrangement.³¹