Quote:
Originally Posted by rahma
I've often wondered is how the hanafi school in Turkey differs from the whole Deobandi vs. Barelvi subcontinent hanafi schools. I'm suprised the article didn't mention that both countries follow the same madhab, but that they interpret it differently.
|
Ottoman fiqh was pretty advanced for its time. One of the notable differences is that in India, their was a huge revival of the science of hadeeth in the 1600s and that caused a lot of reinterpretations of rulings.
In terms of Turkey today, I don't know if its still representative of Ottoman Fiqh due to the coercion that the government places on Islam there. I'd be curious to know the key differences in fiqh as well, not just between Turkish and Indian fiqh, but also in terms of the transformation of scholarship from the Ottoman era (classical and during the Tanzimat period) and after the destruction of the Khalifate.