This chapter shows how the Persian Ḥanafīs in Khurasan and Transoxania in the ninth and tenth centuries AD developed their own opinions about the composition of the ‘āqila, questioning the hegemony of the standard Ḥanafī law, which developed in Iraq. Three unique Persian opinions, which seem to reflect the reality of life in eastern Iran, are presented. The first one extends the ‘āqila beyond the military dīwān, claiming that the dīwān whose members serve as an ‘āqila may also be a civilian institution, whose members receive regular remuneration. According to the second opinion, the ‘āqila of those who do not receive a salary from the government is not necessarily their tribesmen, as ruled the Iraqī Ḥanafīs, but can be any solidarity group, such as the residents of the same quarter, or men of the same occupation. The third opinion rejects the ‘āqila, contending that this institution does not exist among Persian Muslims, because the structure of their society does not allow for solidarity groups.

Against the historical and literary background of the Ḥanafī opinions from eastern Iran as discussed Chapter 8, this chapter deals with the three distinctive opinions regarding the ‘āqila that developed there, as presented in Chapter 7. It tries both to reconstruct the historical context within which each of the opinions came into being, and to follow their path in the legal literature. This route starts from the fatwā collections in which they were first compiled and preserved, and continues to the standard literature into which they were eventually incorporated. This chapter also touches upon the evolution of the ‘āqila over the last few centuries, a process that reflects the weakening of social solidarity and of clan loyalties in Muslim societies.