12-25-2003, 02:10 PM
We recognise Ibn Hazm was one of the greatest scholars of this Ummah. When al-Imaam ash-Shawkaani was asked about the greatest of scholars, he mentioned that throughout Islaamic history he sees no greater after Ibn Hazm, than Ibn Taymiyyah.
Ibn Hazm's works are works that no student of knowledge can go without. His books on usool, logic, language, fiqh and Islaamic politics are necessary for the student of knowledge at all levels.
He rejected qiyaas, and provided strong evidence for that, but as some scholars have noted - ash-Shaykh Muhammed al-Ameen ash-Shinqeeti (author of Adwaa` al-Bayaan), and ash-Shaykh Abu Qataadah al-Philisteeni, may Allah hasten his release being from them - Ibn Hazm himself used qiyaas when he needed it at times, and the latter was in the process
Ibn Hazm is not the first to reject Qiyaas. Actually, al-Bukhaaree rejected using Qiyaas as a proof. If you read the chapter "Kitaab al-I3tisaam bil-Kitaab was-Sunnah" from his Saheeh, it is very apparent. Also, after Ibn Hazm, ash-Shawkaani rejected Qiyaas as a proof, as is found in his book Irshaad al-Fuhool.
As for his mistakes in 'Aqeedah, many scholars had similar mistakes in the issues of Asmaa' and Sifaat. Yet this does not mean we can not benefit from their great works.
Ibn Hazm is a genius in Fiqh and its Usool. Yes, he has mistakes. I don't agree with his complete rejection of Qiyaas and some of the results of that rejection, but he is a genius no doubt. It is very clear in his books like al-Muhallaa. One of the scholars (I think it was al-'Izz bin 'Abdis-Salaam, will double check later) said "I never felt comfortable to give Fataawaa until I got a copy of al-Mughnee by Ibn Qudaamah and al-Mu7allaa by Ibn Hazm."
