Considering the Legislation of Previous Nations in Deriving Islamic Rulings

Abstract
This research discusses one of the sources of Islamic jurisprudence that scholars of Usul (principles of Islamic jurisprudence) have differed upon regarding its validity as a source for deriving rulings: Shar‘ man qablana (the legislation revealed to previous nations).
The term refers to the laws that Allah prescribed to earlier nations through the prophets He sent to them. These transmitted laws from previous legislations fall into four categories:

1. Rulings not mentioned in our Shari‘ah: There is consensus that these are not binding for us.
2. Rulings mentioned in our Shari‘ah but clearly abrogated: These too, by agreement, are not binding.
3. Rulings affirmed in our Shari‘ah by clear evidence: These are considered part of our Shari‘ah and must be followed.
4. Rulings narrated in the Qur’an or Sunnah without affirmation or rejection, and without any evidence of abrogation: This type is the subject of scholarly disagreement.

There are two main views on the fourth category:

• First opinion: These rulings are binding and constitute part of our Shari‘ah.
• Second opinion: They are not binding and do not constitute part of our Shari‘ah. The study concludes that the first opinion is the stronger of the two, on the condition that the ruling is authentically established, due to the strength of the evidence supporting this view.