Main Article Content
In an exchange preserved in al-Subkī’s (d . 771/1370) Ṭabaqāt al-shāfiʿiyya, the jurists al-Juwaynī (d . 478/1085) and al-Shīrāzī (d . 476/1083) debate equating prayer time to prayer direction in regard to the validity of prayer, and the adult virgin to the adult nonvirgin in regard to consent . While the dispute between the two scholars is on seemingly innocuous legal issues, it reveals that despite adherence to the same Shāfiʿī legal school, the two hold contrasting positions on the specifics of analogical reasoning (qiyās) . By examining the differences in their doctrines on qiyās and their approaches to dialectics (jadal), this article demonstrates that al-Juwaynī is more willing to use qiyās, especially its weaker forms, and make nontextual legal arguments, while al-Shīrāzī is more wary in his use of qiyās, leading him to reject its weaker forms and nontextual arguments . By tracing the differences in their qiyās doctrines through their works on jadal and exploring the differing dialectics used in the two debates, this article examines the connection between qiyās and jadal, intra-school jadal, and the various approaches to qiyās in the fifth/eleventh century .