خلاصه ماشینی:
“ From this, especially considering Shaybanfs al- Siyar al—KabFr is lost,” it is understood that Sarakhsi, in his Bab al-Muwciclrizz, uses the doctrine of juristic preference as a methodological approach on the basis of its ‘illa which is of entirely different nature from that of the doctrine of systematic reasoning.
Section II: ‘Illa (Effective Reasoning) as The Basis for the Differences Between the Doctrines of Systematic Reasoning and Juristic Preference In his Usiil, Sarakhsi, while discussing the nature of ‘illa as employed in the doctrines of systematic reasoning and juristic preference, first subsumes both of them under the general category of ijtihad (exercise of legal reasoning) and brings out support for the use of qiyfzs (systematic reasoning) and ra *'y (opinion) or what he later calls it as istihsan (iuristic preference in the technical sense) from several traditions.
Thus, Saiakhsi quite successfully clears the way against Shafi‘i’s position, as once it is established that the ‘illa (effective reasoning) employed in the doctrine of juristic preference is based upon the evidence from the origin (asl) and in no case is it arbitrary, contrary to what sham maintains against the doctrine of juristic preference.
“ Thus,Sarakhsi expounds on these various factors throughout his Bizb al-Muwfzdaizz of Shark al-Siyar at-Kabir as constituting the ‘illa (effective reasoning) for the employment of the doctrine of juristic preference and shows in his systematic analyses how they are employed in mutual relations arising due to treaties between the territory of Muslims and other territories.