Aun Hasan Ali & Hassan Ansari, From ḥadīth to fiqh: a study of the history of the use of Ḥadīth in Imāmī law from al-Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī (d. 1277) to Abu-l Qāsim al-Khūʾī (d. 1992).

Hassan Ansari and I have completed the first draft of a book tentatively titled From ḥadīth to fiqh: a study of the history of the use of ḥadīth in Imāmī law from al-Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī (d. 1277) to al-Sayyid al-Khūʾī (d. 1992). Here is a short passage from the first chapter:

One reason why Imāmīs before the time of al-Ṭūsī did not accept akhbār al-āḥād is because they were contesting Sunnī claims. When Sunnīs adduced ḥadīth to justify, for example, the caliphate of Abū Bakr, Shīʿīs countered by noting that such ḥadīth were akhbār al-āḥād, and akhbār al-āḥād are unacceptable as evidence. Shīʿīs, on the other hand, claimed that they could justify their candidate’s right on the basis of reason and mutawātir reports alone. The denial of akhbār al-āḥād, therefore, undergirded an important counterargument against Sunnī claims. As early controversies developed into distinct religiopolitical identities, other concerns became paramount. Al-Ṭūsī revisited the question of akhbār al-āḥād because, to put it simply, akhbār al-āḥād are the engine for creativity in law. Without such reports, there simply is not enough information available to build a body of substantive law. In other words, akhbār al-āḥād are they key that opens the gate of ijtihād. As one moves further and further away from the time of the Imams and new situations arise, the need for ijtihād is felt more strongly. Al-Murtaḍá’s rejection of akhbār al-āḥād created some difficulties for him; his solution was to claim that most of the akhbār al-āḥād recorded in reliable sources actually belong to a class of reports on which there is widespread agreement (al-mujmaʿ ʿalayh). This solution was, however, unacceptable to al-Ṭūsī. He understood that, if Imāmism was to be a school alongside Ḥanafism or Shāfiʿism, Imāmīs could not afford to reject akhbār al-āḥād outright. It is only by reclaiming the evidentiary value of akhbār al-āḥād that al-Ṭūsī was able to write al-Mabsūṭ and put Imāmī law on an equal footing with Sunnī law.
Aun Hasan Ali has been working with Hassan Ansari (Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton) on a study that examines the use of hadith in Shi’i law from the late 13th century to the late 20th century. The study covers a range of issues related to the use of hadith, including the transmission of early sources, the compilation of large collections of hadith, and conflicting views on the value of hadith in the shariah. The study explains why there was a renewed interest in hadith in the 16th century, and how this movement led to deeper discussions in jurisprudence about the value of uncertainty in the 18th and 19th centuries.