This thesis examines the role that scholarly digests and commentaries played in the formation of legal rules in the Muslim legal institution known as the madhhab. I posit that a shared approach to legal rule-determination, and the respect of juristic precedent that it entails, underlies the jurisprudential processes of all of the four post-classical Sunni madhhabs (the Ḥanafī, Mālikī, Shāfi'ī, and Ḥanbalī), and unites them in a wider ‘madhhab-law tradition’. Taking the Ḥanafī madhhab as a case study, the thesis analyses a commentary written by the late Mamluk jurist Ibn Quṭlūbughā (d. 879/1474) upon the digest of the celebrated Abbasid-era Abū al-Ḥusayn al-Qudūrī (d. 428/1037). In discussing the madhhab's heritage of precedent, Ibn Quṭlūbughā's commentary weaves an intricate tapestry of quotations and references from previous jurists and works, providing us with insight into how author-scholars reacted to, and interacted with, other jurists over space and time. Chapter 1 provides a short introduction to the lives of Qudūrī and Ibn Quṭlūbughā, and the contexts within which they produced their works. Chapter 2 employs both quantitative and qualitative analysis of the commentary, in order to deduce historical and geographical patterns out of which a periodisation of rule-determination in the Ḥanafī madhhab is proposed. In Chapter 3, Ibn Quṭlūbughā's jurisprudential theory of rule-determination is studied, examining both the justifications and the processes employed by jurists in arriving at a legal rule in the Ḥanafī madhhab. Chapter 4 then turns to the craft of commentary itself, analysing over eighty case examples for the logical relationships, rhetorical devices, and legal arguments that inform the actual practice of rule-determination through commentary. A final chapter then summarises the conclusions, and situates them within a broader discussion as to the nature of the madhhab-law tradition.

Cette thèse analyse la manière dont Ibn ‘Atâ’ Allâh al-Iskandarî aborde, dans son œuvre, la notion du péché, mettant en exergue son aspect positif, voire salvateur, à la lumière des apports d’auteurs soufis précédents qui ont marqué sa formation spirituelle. Après un état des lieux de la situation de l’Égypte au début du règne mamelouk, ce travail tente de dessiner le portrait d’Ibn ‘Atâ Allâh en s’interrogeant sur des dimensions moins connues de sa personnalité et en démontrant l’importance de son œuvre dans la transmission de l’enseignement reçu oralement de ses maîtres, fondateurs de la Shâdhiliyya. Quant à la notion du péché, elle y est d’abord analysée au travers d’une étude lexicographique, avant de retracer les différentes manières dont elle a été évoquée chez Muhâsibî, Makkî, Qushayrî, Ghazâlî et Ibn ‘Arabî. L’influence de ce dernier auteur sur Ibn ‘Atâ Allâh, souvent minimisée dans des travaux plus anciens, est démontrée à plus d’un égard, à la fois dans sa manière de décrire le péché d’Adam et dans l’approche globale tendant à transcender l’existence d’une dualité immuable entre le péché et l’obéissance. / This dissertation analyzes how Ibn 'Atâ' Allâh al-Iskandarî deals, in his writings, with the notion of sin, highlighting its positive, or salvatory, aspect, taking into account the contributions of previous Sufi writers who played a role in his spiritual education. After an overview of the situation in Egypt in the early Mamluk era, this work tries to draw the portrait of Ibn 'Ata Allah by treating some less known dimensions of his personality and demonstrating the importance of his works in transmitting the spiritual teaching he received orally from his masters, the founders of the Shâdhiliyya. Concerning the concept of sin, it is first analyzed through a lexicographical study, before retracing the ways in which it was addressed by Muhâsibî, Makkî Qushayrî, Ghazâlî and Ibn 'Arabî. The latter’s influence on Ibn 'Atâ’ Allâh, often minimized in earlier works, is demonstrated in more than one respect, both in the way he describes Adam’s sin and in his general approach tending to transcend the existence of an immutable duality between sin and obedience.