Bibliographic record
Abstract
Companions of the Prophet of Islam who endowed with Ijtihād abilities guided the Muslim community in Sharīʻah related issues. After the companions, different Muslim Jurists presented solutions to the problems of their times. This article studies the methodologies of Ijtihād in Ḥanafī and Jaʻfarī schools of law. It finds that to all jurists, Quran and Sunnah are the main sources of law. Jurists of both the schools are also in agreement regarding Ijmāʻ. However, according to the Ḥanafīs, the fourth source is Qiyās and to the Jaʻfarīs ʻql. Qiyās and ʻql are basically the same things. Thus the study shows that, in spite of some differences, both the schools are very close to each other in terms of methodology of Ijtihād. It also makes clear that Islam is not a static religion; Muslim Jurists having the qualification of Ijtihād can solve the Sharīʻah related problems of Muslim community in all the eras and circumstances.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.966 | 0.949 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".