An Analysis of Ibn Hazm's Methodology in Proving Sleep as an Invalidator of Wudu (Structure and Comparison of Foundations)

With its detailed and problem-oriented procedures, the comparative methodology is among the most important issues in methodology. It is also one of the most recent topics in the field of Islamic jurisprudence and, until the contemporary age, had been almost completely neglected by jurisprudents. Comparing issues in the philosophy of jurisprudents such as Ibn Hazm, who both experienced a religious conversion and was the leader of a religious sect, can contain critical methodological implications. In this study, we aim to analyze the issue of sleep as an invalidator of Wudu (ablution) which is a disputed issue and over which Ibn Hazm argues against all Sunni jurisprudents. In this light, we consider possible methodological implications for jurisprudential interpretation and the quality of interacting with the text. From among the important points that can be extracted from the methodological discussion on this issue, we can point out the quality of understanding and interpreting the literal meaning of texts; the process of discarding impossible meanings; historical analysis, its use in ruling out contradictory meanings and its effect on solving intertextual conflicts; and the Role of extracting the denotations of texts in confirming jurisprudential orders.