Principles Of Hanafi Fiqh

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#1 [Permalink] Posted on 24th October 2011 09:20

What Is Fiqh?

Fiqh is the understanding and comprehending of the object of nusoos (text). This is something which Allaah Ta'ala had bestowed the pious predecessors with. Imaam Abu Hanifah, Imaam Shaafi (rahmatullah alaihima), etc. were Imaams because of their deep understanding of this knowledge. All the Aimmah-e- Mujtahiddeen excel in this quality and field of knowledge. None (in present times) can ever match them. The question of who is the best of them all should never arise. This discussion should never emerge from our mouths. We are not qualified to grade the Aimmah-e- Mujtahiddeen, because it is beyond our limitations. Secondly, we do not know the proper limits and in lauding the one we are bound to degrade the others.

The Definition Of Fiqh

Imaam Sahib (rahmatullah alayh) has defined Fiqh as follows: "The recognition of the soul (insofar as its objective in life and its journey to Aakhirah)." This is a general definition which encompasses both the external (zaahiri) and internal (baatini). What is then the difference between tasawwuf and fiqh? The predecessors used to combine fiqh and tasawwuf. Amongst the salf, fiqh was not only the knowledge of the zaahiri (external factors), in fact, it was the combination of both the zaahiri and baatini knowledge. This included tasawwuf as well.

The Reality Of Tafaqquh-fi-Deen (In-Depth Understanding In Deen)

Tafaqquh-fi-Deen (understanding in Deen) is not merely the literal understanding of the words (in the kitaabs). The kuffaar also understand written words. So if the mere understanding would be Tafaqquh then the kuffaar would also be amongst the Ahle Khair (chosen, good people). The real meaning of Tafaqquh-fi-Deen is that together with understanding the literal import of the words, it is the recognition of its reality, as well. There are many amongst the Hanafi scholars who qualify. [ibid. page 387, vol.4]

Fiqh Is Amongst The Most Difficult And Delicate From The Other Faculties And Sciences (Of Deen)

Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi (rahmatullah alayh) says that in his opinion, the science of Fiqh is the most difficult. He also humbly states that he does not have much compatibility with this science. He says it renders him helpless. [Majaalis Hakimul Ummat, page 330]

The science of Fiqh is very profound. This is the reason why I do not encourage or compel any student to study other Fiqh kitaabs besides those of the Hanafi Fiqh. [Ashraful Ma`moolaat, page 9]

The science of Fiqh is very subtle. I don't fear anything more than when a ruling or mas`alah is presented before me (to solve or give a ruling). Many thoughts and possibilities conjure up in my mind. This is the reason why nowadays I refer fatwas to others. Some people are more daring in it (i.e. issuing fatwas), whereas there has to be extreme caution in this. [Al-Ifaadhaatul Yoymiya, page 299, vol.8]

Fiqh Is Not The Mere Superficial Reading Of Kitaabs

Fiqh would not be defined as the mere superficial perusing of kitaabs. Fiqh is a celestial light (noor) which subsists in the heart. It is the blessing of this that the holder thereof gains an understanding of Deen. It is this very noor which Allah Ta`ala sometimes snatches away. This is something which is not in the control of man. Now, you can read and study thousands of kitaabs, but because you have no understanding of the Deen, you will never become a Faqeeh.

This noor of fiqh increases with obedience and wanes with sin. That 'Faqeeh' who is not obedient or pious, is a Faqeeh of the kitaabs(and not of the Deen). He is not a haqeeqi (real) Faqeeh and is not included in the class of fuqaha regarding whom Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) gave glad tidings.

And since we are aware that fiqh is the understanding of the Deen, what doubt can there now be that a Faqeeh is also a soofi. All our Fuqaha, as many as there were, were all Sahib-e-Nisbat and Sahib-e-Ma`rifat (i.e. Walis who followed the Path of Tareeqat). The proper and total understanding of the Deen cannot be acquired without nisbat and ma`rifat. This is the reason why it has been mentioned regarding the Fuqaha, "One Faqeeh is harder on shaitaan than a thousand `aabids." The person who understands the Deen well, will be privy to the deceptions and ploys of shaitaan. He will not allow a single trick to entrap him. As for the unlearned `aabid, shaitaan can manoeuvre and manipulate him as he pleases. [At Tableeghul Hajil Mabroor, page 138, vol.2]

The Rank And Acceptance Of The Fuqahaa

The truth of the matter is that the rank and status of the Fuqahaa is the highest, because they have understood and recognised the specialities and meanings of the Deen, contrary to the Hukama, whose knowledge and specialities are only limited to the external body. [Majaalis Hakimul Ummat, page 197, vol. 2]

I always maintain that there are two groups that protect and safeguard the Deen,
1. The Fuqahaa and
2. The Soofiya.

The existence of the Fuqahaa is a great boon and blessing to the Muslim Ummat.

The Ulama have written that no person knows his status by Allaah Ta`ala, as to whether Allaah Ta'ala intends good for him or not, besides the Fuqahaa. Because it is stated in the Hadith, "That person for whom Allaah intends good, He grants him understanding (fiqh) in Deen."

Someone saw Imaam Muhammad (rahmatullah alayh) in his dream, after his demise and asked him what transpired with him. He replied that when he was presented before Allaah Rabbul Izzat, then Allaah Ta'ala asked him, "O Muhammad! Ask whatever you wish for." He responded, "Forgive me." He was told, "If We had not intended forgiveness for you, We would not have blessed you with the knowledge of Fiqh. We have granted you the knowledge of Fiqh because We desired forgiveness for you." However this does not necessitate safety from any reckoning.

It does not mean that there is absolutely no fear of an evil death for a Faqeeh. One should not sit contented with this hope, because if Allaah Ta'ala intends punishment, then He will merely snatch away this knowledge. [Alhajjul Mabroor, page 138, vol.2]

It Is Impermissible To Make Any Criticism On A Mujtahid By Means Of Usool-e-Fiqh

To avoid Ikhtilaaf is difficult. People have formulated laws and rules for its codification (Usool-e-Fiqh), but these laws are not allencompassing. The example of this is like the laws of Arabic grammar, where the laws have been formulated in order to dissect and understand the formation of sentences. This knowledge is very beneficial. The reason for this codification was not so that the people who speak the language adhere to these grammar laws, or that all aspects have been totally encompassed. These laws were formulated for the benefit of the non-Arabic speaking people, to assist them in understanding the language and to be able to converse with the Arabs. Hence, if any type of speech is found amongst the Arab-speaking and this is not listed in the laws of grammar, then it will not be said that this speech is incorrect and the people speaking it are wrong, rather it will be averred that the laws of Arabic grammar which we know are deficient in that it did not encompass this part.

Similarly, it would not be correct to hold a Mujtahid to the Usools of Fiqh. In fact, it may sometimes occur that a statement or ruling of a Mujtahid does not conform to the Usools, in which case we may say that the Usools of Fiqh are deficient. Thereafter, it will be said with difficulty that the Mujtahid did not have any (concrete) proof for his ruling. [Husn Azeez, page 47 and 354]

The Status And Ranking Of Usool-e-Fiqh

To prefer one nass over another in cases where they are conflicting, is the forte of the Mujtahiddeen. As for the Usools of Fiqh which are listed in the various kutub, these were non-existent (in this form) during the era of the Mujtahiddeen. The latter Ulama had in fact, extracted these from the various rulings of the Mujtahiddeen, in order to save this Ummat from mischief and confusion. This was done so that not anyone can have free reign in making Ijtihaad. Hence, it is as if these Usools are the result and consequence of the various Masaa`il, (i.e. they originate from them), and the Masaa`il do not branch out from the Usools. Also, to codify from them is simpler. [Al-Kalaamul Hasan, page 123]

The Difference Between The Usools Of The Earlier Mujtahiddeen And The Latter

One speciality of the Mujtahiddeen is that they would extract such Usools from the Nusoos which could not be disputed or argued away. Whereas those Usools which the latter Ulama have extracted from the definitions of the Mujtahiddeen can be broken up. [Kalaamul Hasan, page 46]

If There Is Any Doubt In The Masaa`il Enumerated By The Mujtahiddeen, Then We Are Not Responsible For It

If there is any doubt or uncertainty in a Mas`alah, then it is not our responsibility to respond or give a reply to it, because we have not formulated the Masaa`il. Like for example, if there is a doubt or misgiving in any law (of a country), then the solution and answer for it is to be given by the Law-Makers of the country, and not the judge or lawyer. [Tarbiyatus Saalik, page13, vol. 1]

The Ruling Regarding The Proclaimed Laws Of The Fuqahaa

If we realise that a ruling or part thereof is contrary to a clear, unambiguous mansoos (divine text), then it will be abandoned. This is not contrary to Taqleed. There were some occasions where the statements of Imaam Sahib were discarded. Yes, if the Hadith has several possibilities (of meanings and practice), we will adopt the practice of the Mujtahid.

In fact, if Imaam Sahib were around, and if it were asked of him, then too, he would advise the same. Hence, it is as though in this abandonment there is obedience. [Al-Kalaamul Hasan, page 65]

The Sufiya do not have the trait of accommodating and catering for the (welfare of the) general public, therefore (with them) many actions pass off as permissible. Whereas, the Fuqahaa have the quality of catering for the general public, hence there are many such actions which may be permissible or even advisable, but because there is a fear of the masses falling into deviation because of it, it is prohibited from. This is the reason why the Fuqahaa have placed a blanket prohibition on Simaa`. [Al-Kalaamul Hasan, page 16]

The Difference Between The Fuqahaa And Muhadditheen

The objective of the Muhadditheen is to narrate (Ahaadith) whereas the Fuqahaa delve into its understanding and import. For example,according to the Muhadditheen, singing is permissible without instruments, because of a technical connotation in the Hadith, whereas, the Fuqahaa opine that singing, even without instruments is impermissible, because they understand the illat (reason/cause for prohibition in Hadith). The illat for this prohibition is fear or fitnah, and this same illat is present in singing as it is in the instruments. The Muhadditheen do not delve further than the literal and external content of the narrations, whereas the Fuqahaa, investigate and probe to the objective and import of the narrations. [Hasnul Azeez, page 345, vol. 4]

The Rank And Status Of The Fuqahaa And Muhaqqiqeen

The Faqeeh is supposed to be an embodiment of many traits. He is a Faqeeh, a Muhaddith, a Mutakallim (expert in Ilm Kalam), he should also have a political mind, in fact, sometimes, there is a need for medical expertise as well, because occasionally there is a need to explain and dilate on such matters.

The sight of a Muhaqqiq should be very deep. He should stick to the reality and not become involved in vain and useless matters. This was also the quality and trait of the Sahaabah (radhiallahu anhum). [Hasnul Azeez, page 362, vol. 4]

The quality and attribute of the Muhaqqiq should also be that he understands the reality (of matters). There are many sides to the reality (of anything). The encompassing of every side and aspect is the speciality of Allaah Ta'ala. Every aspect has to be studied individually, because there is no uniformity between them. An indepth understanding is realised when he dislikes using large descriptive words for other Muhaqqiqeen. The differences amongst the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen are of this calibre. Another trait of a Muhaqqiq is that he abstains from vain and frivolous discussions. He does not engage in (intellectual) discussions with a non- Muhaqqiq or a person with a dense mind. In fact if any discussion with an inane person commences, then he quickly maintains silence. This is regarded as a sign of defeat by the masses. The reason for this silence is not that the Muhaqqiq has no proof to present, but the fact of the matter is that this type of (intellectual) discussion is difficult for the thick-skulled person to comprehend. [Hisnul Azeez, page 347, vol. 4]

The Comparison Between The Fuqahaa And Us

The Fuqahaa also explains his proofs and codes of law with regard to his research, but the example of these proofs are like the eyes. His walking is not dependant on a walking-stick. Allaah Ta'ala has blessed the Fuqahaa with 'eyes', which is the instrument of Ijtihaad. They are not in need of the walking-sticks, but we are. Our example is like that of the blind person, whose entire trust and reliance is on the stick. If he walks without the stick, the he will fall into a ditch. [Al-Ifaadhaat, page 73, vol. 1]

Some things are (attained) intuition and flair (zawq). Someone asked how is true zawq acquired, the reply was that it is acquired by the company of the Ahle Zawq. [Al-Ifaadhaat, page 174, vol. 1]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Like x 1

Seifeddine-M

11,704

Brother

289

#2 [Permalink] Posted on 24th October 2011 12:32

Seifeddine-M wrote:

What Is Fiqh?

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

Asslamo Allaikum Brother,

Is this complete?

I have another booklet on the subject which needs a little tidying would you be interested in adding it here and then the topic will be complete?

Jazakullah Khairun

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

There is no Plan B!

http://www.central-mosque.com/

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#3 [Permalink] Posted on 24th October 2011 14:26

Wa alaykumus salaam wa rahmatullaah,

Muadh_Khan wrote:

Asslamo Allaikum Brother,

Is this complete? [/quote]
Just the beginning, insha allaah will get the rest up soon.

[quote="Muadh_Khan"]I have another booklet on the subject which needs a little tidying would you be interested in adding it here and then the topic will be complete?

Jazakullah Khairun

Sure, the more the better.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#4 [Permalink] Posted on 25th October 2011 08:28

The Discussion On The Proofs Of The Shari'ah

There are four proofs of the Shari'ah

Kitaabullaah, Sunnat, Ijma of the Ummat and Qiyaas. If any matter complies with one of these four proofs, then it is regarded as being credible and of consideration in the Shariah, if not, it is rejected. It is a grave error not to accept any one of these four proofs, or to pay no heed to them. [Da`wat `Abdiyat, page 119, vol. 15]

Part 1 - Ijmaa'

The Proof and Evidence for Ijmaa'

Someone once asked Imaam Shaafi (rahmatullahi alayh) if Ijma is proven from the Qur`aan Majeed or not. Seeking an answer to this, he completed (scanned through) the Qur`aan Majeed four times. He concluded that the following Aayat provided the relevant proof, "And whoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger after the right path has been shown clearly to him, and follows other than the believers' way..." [Al-Ifaadhaatul Yawmiya, page 371, vol. 9]

The Reality of Ijmaa'

The reality of Ijma is that all the Ulama in a particular era had unanimously agreed on a Deeni ruling. If anyone abstains from this unanimity purposely or mistakenly, then he will not have a suitable and appropriate proof and he will not be excused from having erred also. The general rule is that non-adherence and nonacceptance to the Ijma does not affect the (validity or veracity of) Ijma, otherwise it would be difficult to claim and prove the continuity and immunity of the Qur`aan Majeed, because it is reported in Bukhaari Shareef that Hadhrat Ubai (radhiallahu anhu) opined the abrogated Aayaat as part of the Qur`aan Majeed, and Hadhrat Abu Darda (radhiallahu anhu) regarded the words وما خلق in Surah Lail and Ibn Mas`ood (radhiallahu anhu) the Muawwazatain as being not part of the Qur`aan Majeed.

Not even for a minute does any one aver that the Qur`aan Majeed is un-Protected or changed, in fact, all through the ages it has been accepted as being completely unadulterated. Since these personalities have certainly erred in their proofs, the Ulama of all ages have never regarded these views as being contrary to or even affecting the Ijma. However, because of their doubt, we will excuse them... [Al-Iqtisaad, page 38]

Zanni Ijmaa'

The object of Ijma is either the consensus of the majority of the Ummat or such Ijma is zanni (conjectured). However, for a zanni claim, a zanni proof is sufficient. [Ibid. page 70]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#5 [Permalink] Posted on 31st October 2011 07:25

Part 2 - Qiyaas

Definition Of Qiyaas

"Take lesson, those with insight" - this Aayat shows that Qiyaas is also a proof (in the Shariah). [Da'wat 'Abdiyyat, page 122, vol. 15]

Only Fiqhi Qiyaas is a proof in the Shariah, which is obtained due to a necessity, using a common illat. The maqees alayh is compared to the maqees. Since the original ruling is derived from nass, and the illat us taken from here hence, the ruling in the maqees is also just as authoritative. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 394, vol. 2]

An Example Of Qiyaas

According to the Hadith, "All intoxicants are Haraam." Opium is also an intoxicant, therefore it is also Haraam. Here the prohibition of opium has been established using the nass. [Malhoozaat Jadeed Malfoozaat page 113]

The Ruling Regarding When To Make Qiyaas And When Not

If there is a Fiqhi ruling to be made, then the Aayat, "And take lesson, those who have insight", applies and Qiyaas should be made. If the matter at hand is not a Shar`i one, then the Aayat, "And do not delve in that which you have no knowledge", applies and Qiyaas is prohibited. [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 784, vol. 1]

Do The Angels Also Make Qiyaas?

At first, my opinion was that the angels do not make Qiyaas, and that they only follow the clear-cut rulings, until the following Ahaadith came to my attention: "Indeed he (Jibraeel - alaihis salaam) thrust sand into the mouth of Firoun, fearing that the Mercy will reach him (i.e. that he may recite the Kalima)", and the Hadith where the angels of mercy and punishment differed on the plight of the murdered who repented. These narrations denote that the angels also make Ijtihaad. [Al- Ifaadhaat, page 96, vol. 1]

Regarding the Hadith of the difference of opinion between the angels in respect of the murderer who repented, it is clear that the angels also make Ijtihaad and they can also err in their judgement. This is also apparent that the angels are made aware of the general rules and codes when the occasion of Ijtihaad arises. [Malhoozaat Malfoozaat, page 70]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#6 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd November 2011 07:22

The Reality Of Ilm-e-I`tibaari

The reality of this knowledge is the clarity achieved when one thing (mushab-bah) is compared to another (Mushab-bah Behe). It is not established or proved, in fact, the mushab-bah is established through another proof. This is not included or classified under majaaz, be it majaaz-e-mursal or isti`aara. The reason being that in majaaz there is some contextual factor that indicates to the inappropriateness of the Maudoo` lahu meaning, hence the ghair Maudoo` lahu meaning is taken. Whereas in this case, neither is there contextual evidence indicating to the non-application of the Maudoo` meaning, nor is the ghair Maudoo` meaning implied. This is also not classified under kinaayah, because in kinaayah, the Maudoo` meaning is not discarded, in fact, the actual import of that sentence is the Maudoo`.

Hadhrat Ibn Abbaas (radhiallahu anhu) interpreted the word (earth) in the Aayat, "Know that indeed Allaah revives the earth after its death." This is also from Ilm-e-I`tibaari. He is not contradicting the commonly accepted interpretation that this refers to the earth proper, in fact he is making the listener aware that they must not suffice on only the superficial meaning and that they must look further, just as the earth dies and revives, so too is the condition of the hearts. This full narration is present in my Kitaab, 'Masaailus Sulook'. It has been established from these narrations that Ilm I`tibaar is not a Bid`ah of the Sufiya. Its origin is in the nusoos. Hence those people who label those Sufiya who consider Ilm I`tibaar as zindeeq, are committing a grave error. [At-Tableegh no.12, page 228-239]

This is amongst the lataa`if, nukaat and Ta`weelaat (finer, delicate and deep interpretations). It is not Tafseer and cannot be said to be knowledge of the Qur`aan Majeed. [Ashraful Jawaab, page 314, vol. 2]

The different types of Qiyaas - Tafaawul, I'tibaar Ta'beer

Ilm I'tibaar is more honourable than Ilm-e-Ta'beer (interpretation of dreams) and the reason for its higher rank is that Ta'beer only deals with supernatural affairs whereas Ilm-e-I'tibaar centres around pure Shar'i rulings. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 396, vol.2]

The Difference Between Fiqhi Qiyaas And Qiyaas-e- Tasarrufi And Their Respective Rulings

Ilm I'tibaar is to evaluate some occurrence with one's present situation and derive lesson therefrom. When two things bear a semblance to each other then one can be compared to the other, thereby resulting in a lesson being learnt. [Badaa'i, page 241]

Fiqhi Qiyaas is where something which is not found in nass, is compared with another which is present in the nass and a common ruling is extracted.

The Qur`aanic Proof For Ilm I'tibaar

The origin of both is established from the Qur`aan Majeed. The nomenclature and name for this second type (I'tibaar) is in fact derived directly from the Qur`aan Majeed. It is stated in the Qur`aan Majeed: فا عتبروا يا الابصار This Aayat follows the incident of the expulsion of Banu Nazeer. Allaah Ta'ala is warning the readers that they should take lesson and abstain from the actions of those people who were punished, lest they fall in the same hole. This in essence is Ilm-e-I'tibaar, where two situations are compared to each other and a lesson is derived. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 397, vol.2]

An Example Of Ilm-e-I'tibaar

The sufiya have interpreted the Aayat, "Go to Fir'oun, indeed he has rebelled" , as "Go, oh soul, towards your nafs and strive against it, indeed it has rebelled" The object of the Sufis is not Tafseer, their intention is to make the reader of the Qur`aan Majeed aware that the Qur`aan Majeed is not mere storytelling, in fact lessons are to learned from it. The incidents which are mentioned in the Qur`aan Majeed are actually done so with the intention of learning lessons therefrom. Allah Ta`ala says in the Qur`aan Majeed, "Indeed there is in their stories, a lesson." therefore when you recite the Aayat regarding Hadhrat Moosa's (alayhi salaam) confrontation with Fir'oun then you should realise and take lesson that in you also you have a (similarity to) Moosa (alayhi salaam) and a (similarity to) Fir'oun. That is, your soul is an inviter to good, which is compared to Hadhrat Moosa (alayhi salaam) and your nafs a caller towards evil, like Fir'oun. Hence you are also expected to overpower and overcome your nafs with your soul. Such lessons are learnt and derived through Ilm-e- I'tibaar. [Badaa'i, page 240]

The Proof For Ilm-e-I'tibaar (Qiyaas-e-Tasarrufi)

This question remains that does the nusoos also use Ilm-e-I`tibaar in the same way the Sufis do? I reply that, all praise to Allaah Ta'ala, such examples are to be found in the Qur`aan Majeed, and this is not from my mouth, but Shah Waliullaah (rahmatullah alayh) has also mentioned the same. Such a great sheikh had written two Ahaadith in the Kitaab, Fauzul Kabeer.

Once Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) mentioned regarding the mas`alah of taqdeer, "'There is not anyone of you except that a place in The Fire and Jannat has been reserved for him', The Sahaabah (radhiallahu anhum) asked, 'O Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), should we not then rely on our Kitaab (taqdeer) and abandon (good) deeds?'" Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said, "(Continue to) Do good actions, (because indeed) everything has been made easy for that which has been created for him, for him who is (destined to be) amongst the fortunate ones, good actions have been made easy for him." Thereafter, Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) recited the following Aayat, "As for him who gives (in charity), and keeps his duty to Allaah and fears Him, And believes in Al-Husna (the best/ reward), We will make smooth for him the path of ease (goodness), But he who is greedy...."

Now one may ask: where is mention made of Taqdeer in this Aayat? The import of this Aayat is that The path to Jannat is made easy for the one who gives in charity and is pious, and Jahannum is made accessible to the one who is a miser. The answer to this is given by Shah Sahib, that Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had by means of Ilm-e-I'tibaar, compared this Hadith to this Aayat. This similarity was meant to be demonstrated that just as some good deeds make the path of Jannat easy and other deeds make the path to Jahannum easy, similarly, through Taqdeer, good deeds are made easy for some and evil for others. This similarity is given for purposes of simplification in explaining that the easiness which is created through Taqdeer is like the easiness which is created through the execution of deeds. This dilation is done by means of comparison. Shah Sahib has, through this Hadith, proven the origin of Ilm-e- I'tibaar in the Qur`aan Majeed. [Badaa`i, page 243] Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has used Ilm-e-I'tibaar in the Ahaadith. I am saying this on the strength of a great personality and not on my own. This is a grand claim. If anyone does not accept the statement of Shah Sahib, then I will ask him to comment and explain the Hadith. Indeed the (explanation of) knowledge of these Ahaadith, which was rendered by Shah Sahib, is acquired through a gifted knowledge, otherwise (normally) such things cannot be understood. [Ibid., page 246]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#7 [Permalink] Posted on 9th November 2011 08:22

The Discussion On Illat And Hikmat

To Extract The Illat Of A Ruling Through Ijtihaad And Then To Make It Causative Is Permissible

Just as it is permissible to extract ruling by way of Ijtihaad, is it permissible to extract an illat from the Hadith and practice thereupon. Like the ruling regarding the acts of Ibaadaat, or to make a mutlaq (general ruling) into a Muqayyid (conditional), or not to practice on the literal meaning, etc. Such Ijtihaad is also permissible. [Al-Iqtsaad Fit Taqleed Wal Ijtihaad, page 14]

Who Has The Right To Extract An Illat And On What Occasions?

Every person does not have the right to discuss illats. Only the Mujtahid has this right, and even he does not have the right to do this on just any occasion. He is only allowed to do this when the occasion arises and where there is a need to apply such a ruling. As for those acts of Ibaadat, where Ijtihaad is not occasioned, then he has no right to make Ijtihaad. This is the reason why the Fuqahaa have not discussed illats with regard to Salaat, Zakaat, fasting and Hajj. Since they are acts which are Fardh, they are clear-cut and absolute. [Anfaas `Aini, page 417]

Not Every Person Has The Right To Extract Illats

I had written to them asking what right they have in extracting illats for Shar`i rulings. If such things are done, then Halaal will no longer remain Halaal and Haraam no longer Haraam, because every person will extract an illat to suit him, be it Halaal or Haraam. If for example, someone says that the illat for the Hurmat (prohibition) of adultery is the confusion in lineage, which means that if many men fornicate with one woman and she conceives, then it will be possible that every one of those men wall lay claim to the child (claiming that his lineage applies). There is a real fear of arguments and fights which this will result in. or it is also possible that each one of them refutes fatherhood, then all this will result in great difficulty and strife for the woman and child.

And then I ask you, what if someone devises a plan for the woman not to conceive. Or a person seeks a woman who is barren, or he finds such a group of women from whom there is no fear of fighting and arguments regarding parenthood of the possible offspring. Then in all these cases, fornication will be (Allaah Ta'ala forbid!) permissible, because the illat (which was 'extracted') is no more present. What confusion will reign thereafter!

Will such reasoning ever make fornication Halaal? Never! [Hasnul Azeez, page 99]

It Is Not correct For Every Person To Ask The Illat Of A Ruling

If the Haakim (ruler/governor) issues an instruction, then the illat (reason) for this ruling can never be asked of him, because the Hukkaam (plural for Haakim) enjoy a status and proof is not asked of them. Therefore, when Allaah Rabbul Izzat issues a decree and the illat is asked for that, then a grave doubt regarding that person's respect and awe for Allaah Ta'ala arises. The crux of the matter is that as a subject, to ask for the illat of the decree, is nothing other than foolish and absurd. Yes, to ask it as a learner, who desires this knowledge to further his understanding, it will be in order, but that only applies to the student of Deen.

Consider this, that when a law is proclaimed then no one asks for the illat. What a shame that the Ulama are regarded as even more contemptible than a sweeper or scavenger. The Ulama are in reality the conveyors of the Message, they do not formulate the laws. Therefore, if asking them for the illats (to the various Shar`i laws) is not plain stupidity, then what else is it?

It Is Improper To Discuss The Illats Of The Various Shar`i Laws With The Masses

Hadhrat Moulana says that the discussion on illats should never be made in front of the public, in fact the codes of law should be adhered to, otherwise there is a great fear of mischief. If for example, a judge orders the punishment of a criminal, and the punishment is meted out instantly. Now this criminal cannot, in fact, it would not be proper for him to ask the illat (reason) for the prescribed punishment. If he does, then he will be chastised and told that we do not make the laws, we merely implement them, regardless of whether we are aware of the illat or not.

Is this then justice, that we blindly and readily accept the rulings of a worldly Haakim, and we will never question him, whereas we have thousands of objections to Shar`i laws. This makes it apparent that we do not hold the Shariah in as much esteem as we do worldly Haakims. [Da`wat Abdiyat, page 138, vol. 12]

The Fiqhi Ruling Regarding The Underlying Mysteries Of Rulings

It is Waajib not to adhere to these. However there are some amongst them, which are also indicated towards in the Kitaabullaah and Sunnat. In such cases, it would be permissible to accept them. If they are contrary to the Kitaabullaah and Sunnat, then it is necessary to refute them. If they neither have any effect on the Kitaabullaah and Sunnat nor are they contrary to them, then there is scope in adopting either path (i.e. one may accept or refute them). [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 771, vol. 2]

The Difference Between Illat And Hikmat

Nowadays there is a disease prevalent amongst the masses that they seek the illat of the rulings, and when they fail in finding any illat then they concur that the hikmat (wisdom) is the illat and they present it as an answer. Whereas the reality of the illat is: That upon which the ruling is based, and the reality of hikmat is: That which is based on the ruling.

The pinpointing of the hikmat, since it is mostly not mentioned in nass, and is extracted and deduced by Qiyaas. And there is a possibility of an innovated hikmat being of a doubtful nature, hence this would result in casting doubts in the divine laws. [Da`wat Abdiyat, page 66, vol. 19]

An illat is defined as that upon which the ruling is based and hikmat is itself based on the ruling, hence there is a noted difference between the two. [Da`wat Abdiyat, page 100,vol. 5]

The Proof Of Rulings Not Being Based On The Hikmat

1) The refutation and answer to those people who base acts of Ibaadat on innovated advantages, can be found in the praise Allaah Ta'ala lauds on Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) when he bought Hadhrat Bilaal (radhiallahu anhu) and freed him, "And have in his mind no favour from anyone for which a reward is expected in return, Except only the desire to seek the Countenance of his Rabb, the Most High." In this the reason for the negation and exclusion of his actions is based on the words, "seek the Countenance of his Rabb", whereas there was also the one advantage of sympathy for fellow beings.

2) On the other hand another great harm is that if worldly advantages are found from some other avenue and Islaam is made subservient to this, i.e. Islaam is no longer looked upon with reliance and confidence, because the worldly objective then will now become the real purpose, then this will result in Islaam being ignored and people will seek out and look upon other ways, means and objectives.

3) Thirdly, these advantages which are estimates and conjectures, can very easily (be shown to be) doubtful and if they are ever (proven to be) doubtful and uncertain, then the Shar`i ruling will also be regarded as such, because they have based and regarded the ruling of the Shariah to be on this (innovated advantage).

The Mansoos Hikmat Is Also Not The Basis Of The Ruling

A ruling is not based nor dependant on its hikmat, neither is its (the rulings) existence and execution dependant on the hikmat. For example, the raml in tawaaf had a certain hikmat behind it, but this was not the basis for this ruling. [Bawaadir, page 177, vol. 2]

The Clear Distinction Between Illat And Hikmat With Examples

Together with any Shar`i ruling, if any advantage is stated, then it will either be the illat or the hikmat. The existence and nonexistence of the ruling is centred around the illat, but not around the hikmat. That is, if the hikmat has to be altered, then it will not affect the ruling. The proper understanding of this is the speciality of the Raasikheen fil Ilm. Therefore, in the ruling regarding the beard and moustache, Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) mentioned the part, "to oppose the Mushrikeen" as a hikmat, and not as an illat.

The basis of this prohibition is the altering of the natural state of man, and not (merely and only) to oppose the non-believers. The proof of this lies in the fact that in other Ahaadith where this ruling came, it appeared in general, like, "Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has cursed the Mukhanniseen amongst the men."

An example of this will be if some Haakim has to instruct his people not to create commotion and disorder like such and such nation (i.e. the reason for not creating disorder is to oppose that nation), and then if perchance that other nation abandons their usual trait (and come onto order and peace), does that mean that this opposition must still be in force (and now this Haakim's people must become tumultuous and disorderly)? [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 222, vol. 4]

The Status Of The Illats Mentioned In The Qur`aan Majeed

In the Qur`aan Majeed, wherever a laam-e-ghaayat appears, it is not to show an illat, but rather a hikmat. The object is that this effect is consequential to this ruling. It does not mean that the ruling is based on this. [Anfaas `Aini, page 417, vol. 2]

The Preferred View Regarding Research Into The Underlying Mysteries Of Rulings

There is no doubt that the establishment and proof of the basis of Shar`i rulings lay in the Shar`i nusoos. Nevertheless, there is also no doubt that similarly, notwithstanding this, there are many advantages and mysteries underlying these rulings. But the foundations and essence of the rulings are not based on these. But these have the benefit that they create more reliance and comfort in the rulings. Although the Raasikheen and their likes do not require or depend on these factors, nevertheless, weaklings (like us) take comfort from them. The mysteries and benefits of the various rulings are frequently discussed by great Ulama, the likes of Imaam Ghazaali, Khattaabi, Ibn Abdus Salaam, (rahmatullah alayhim), etc. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 105]

If any hikmat of a ruling is realised, then this should not be understood as being the crux of the ruling. If this is adhered to them there is no harm in studying the hikmats. [Anfaas `Aini, page 417, vol. 3]

A safe path to adopt would be to say that there are most certainly many wisdoms in the various rulings, but to be specific and list all of them, because Allaah Ta'ala has not done so, is not appropriate for us to do also. Our subservience is to the decrees of Allaah Azza Wa Jall, whether we know the underlying wisdoms or not. If there was any need to research into these, then the Sahaabah (radhiallahu anhum) were more worthy of doing it than us. [Da`wat Abdiyat, page 67-9, vol. 19]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#8 [Permalink] Posted on 14th November 2011 08:05

The Discussion On Zann

The Various Meanings Of Zann

The Qur`aan Majeed was revealed in dialogue (format) and it is understood accordingly, so the meaning of zann is not only that which is mentioned in Mullah Hasan, etc. When perusing some junctures in the Qur`aan Majeed, I say that in the dialogue, the meaning of zann is not necessarily confined to the preferred view of the ruling. Allaah Ta'ala says in one Ayah:

"(They are those) who are certain that they are going to meet their Lord, and that unto Him they are going to return." (2:46)

here the word zann (think) means yaqeen (certainty), because the meeting with Allaah Ta`ala is for certain. At another juncture, Allaah Ta`ala states regarding the statement of the kuffaar on the Day of Qiyaamah,

"And when it was said: "Verily! Allah's Promise is the truth, and there is no doubt about the coming of the Hour," you said; "We know not what is the Hour, we do not think it but as a conjecture, and we have no firm convincing belief (therein)." (45:32)

here also, the meaning of zann is not according to its literal and dictionary definition, because the thoughts and doubts of the kuffaar of their being presented at the Final meeting place was not an overwhelming one. They were in fact total deniers and refuters of this event. The Qur`aan Majeed itself states this in the Aayat, "Indeed they (the kuffaar) refute and belie The Final Hour." Hence here the meaning of zann is not doubt, because the kuffaar have no perception or possibility of Qiyaamah.

After reflecting on all this, I reach the conclusion that the meaning of zann in dialogue (context) is notion, whether this notion is true one or a spurious one. If one keeps this in mind, then it will be easy to understand these Aayaat, without laving any misgivings and doubts. However, in the Ayah:

"And most of them follow nothing but conjecture. Certainly, conjecture can be of no avail against the truth. Surely, Allah is All-Aware of what they do." (10:36)

the word zann refers to pure conjecture without proof. [Badaa`i, page 195]

The Shar`i Definition Of Zann And Its Proof

The Shar`i zann because it is beneficial refers to the thought, notion or opinion with proof. It gains the status of being of consideration and a proof owing to its Shar`i proof. Everyone agrees that there are some Aayaat in the Qur`aan Majeed which are brief and difficult (to understand). Every Aayat is not mufassir or muhkam, and since there are some which are brief and complicated, hence their tafseer (interpretation) is not absolute and has to be of zanni category. Now, if zann were not acceptable, then these Aayaat would have to be left alone and without compliance, whereas this is not the case. [Badaa`i, page 196]

Places And Junctures Where Zann Is Taken Into Consideration

Zann is not acceptable or used in matters of Aqaa'id, but in Fiqhi issues, because in fiqh there is a need to execute actions and deeds. The students of Deen should remember this. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 882]

Rulings Can Be Based On Zann-e-Ghaalib And Not On Imagined Issues

If there is an imagined benefit in a certain thing and an overwhelming harm, then such a thing is Haraam. For example, journeying to the moon has imagined benefits and it is unnecessary, but the harms and dangers are real and overwhelming, hence such a trip is Haraam. Allaah Ta`ala says in the Qur`aan Majeed, "And do not kill yourselves." [Anfaas `Aini, page 390, vol. 1]

The Requirement Of Being Zanni

A necessary side to being zanni is that there will always be a doubt on it being otherwise. If you have this doubt, then know that the zanniyat of the mas`alah at hand is confirmed and strengthened. There is no harm in such doubt and uncertainty. [Majaalis Hakimul Ummat, page 172]

The Final State Of Husn-e-Zann (Good Opinion)

The ultimate of husn-e-zann is that a suitable interpretation is found for the act, which conforms to the Shariah, and it is subservient to the Shariah. It should not be such that it alters the Shariah and makes the Shariah subservient to it. [Bawaadir, page 191, vol.1]

The Standard (Yardstick) By Which Zann Is Classified As Praiseworthy Or Censured And Acceptable Or Unacceptable

With regards to the Ayah 10:36, the Ahl-e-Ilm have reservations about the validity and worth of zann in the Shariah. Khabar-e-waahid and Qiyaas are based on zann whose sources and proofs are the related to nass. Khabar-e-waahid is zanni, but its origin is not zanni-us thuboot, the zann factor only came about in the chain of narrations (sanad), otherwise insofar as the actual words being from Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), this is absolute. Similar is the case with Qiyaas, although its formulation is zann, it is not established by itself (alone), in fact it is a muzhir (like a mirror), which gains its rank owing to nass, wherefrom its ruling originates.

Only that zann is liable for criticism which is not proven from nass, and is based on baseless conjecture.

Those conjectures which are not extracted from the valid Shar`i proofs are not endorsed. The Deen is not based on those views which are not proven from the Shariah.

The condition of Deen has been placed on this because it is not necessary that all such conjectures are not beneficial. The science of tibb (medicine), which is not a matter of Deen, is nonetheless, of benefit and consideration.

However, it is impermissible to execute such acts which pertain to worldly matters wherein zann is prohibited. The object is that in Deen matters, conjecture and opinions are irrelevant regardless of how great the status or intelligence of the one tendering these opinions. [Da`wat Abdiyat, page 119]

The Types Of Zann And Their Rulings

Zann has many types. One is Waajib which includes the zann fiqhi ghair mansoos, and to have husne zann about Allaah Ta'ala. Another is Mubaah, like the opinions in social matters. It will be permissible to hold an opinion of fisq of such a person who outwardly displays such traits, like socialising in and around beer-halls and dancingwomen. However one will not be absolute in labelling him a faasiq. It is also not sinful to harbour bad thoughts and opinions which surface involuntary, on the proviso that one does not act on them and tries to eliminate them.

The third type is Haraam. That is to hold opinions on fiqhi matters without absolute proof. It is likewise Haraam to hold the opinion of fisq for the person who does not display such signs and has a pious outward appearance. [Bayanul Qur`aan, page 47, vol. 11]

The Ruling On Having Ill-Feelings In Transactions

To carry out and put in effect an ill-feeling is Haraam. For example to disgrace him or cause him any harm. [Ibid. page 47, vol. 11]

One should have reservations and be suspicious when transacting and have good presumptions in matters of belief. The meaning of having reservations in transactions is that one will not give credit or loan money to someone regarding whom one has no experience (stranger). [Anfaas `Aini, page 619, vol. 2]

The Proof Of Considering Contexts

Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had prohibited from eating the food of haughty people. It is apparent that no one proclaims himself to be haughty. This is deduced by his actions and mannerisms. If this (a person being haughty) was not ascertained by context (of his actions and deeds), then what was the use of Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) saying what he said? It would not have been a practical instruction. This makes it clear that it is permissible, to take into consideration the context and external factors. [Da`wat Abdiyat, page 152, vol. 19]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#9 [Permalink] Posted on 18th November 2011 08:28

The Shar`i Status And Ruling Regarding The Information Given By Witchcraft, Jadoo, Jinnaat, Soothsayers, etc.

The common ruling regarding all of them is that since a matter is proven in the Shariah via a certain avenue, then as long as that matter is not established through that medium, it will not be permissible to attribute it towards that. It has also been established that the Shariah has not placed any consideration on ilhaam, dreams and kashf or approved of them as a basis or proof for any ruling. Therefore, to label anyone as a thief or sinner based on any of these things, would be a grave sin and Haraam.

To give a ruling or verdict based on those factors which the Shariah has not granted any credence to, is a grave and aggravated sin. Like for example to indulge in useless, fictitious and senseless acts (like witchdoctors do by 'throwing bones', etc) to discover the name of thief, etc. are useless and worthless acts.

Worse than this is to engage in black-magic (sihr), visit a soothsayer, pundit (witchdoctor), etc. and to have faith in whatever they say. This is absolutely Haraam, nay, it is close to kufr. To suspect someone of a crime on the basis of such flimsy claims are totally impermissible. The true and real basis for any Muslims is ilm and amal. Now reflect that since the Shariah has not granted any credence to these things, why should we? [Islaah Inqilaab, pages 397 and 389]

The Ruling Regarding Tasarruf, Sihr, Amaliyaat And Taawizaat

The Shar`i ruling regarding tasarruf is that it is permissible, but it depends on the aim and objective (of practicing these things). If they are carried out for a good and laudable reason, then they will be regarded as such, like the tasarrufaat of the Mashaikh and Sufiya. If it is executed for an evil and malevolent reason, then the sin and gravity of its prohibition will be likened (i.e. in accordance) to the objective. [Bawaadir, page 683]

If any words of kufr, like seeking the aid of a jinn or stars, are used in sihr, then this is clear-cut kufr, regardless of whether this is done to harm or benefit someone.

If the words used are not decipherable or legible, then due to the possibility of it being linked to kufr, it is Waajib to abstain from them. This will be the ruling regarding all such amulets, taweez, etc. [Badaa`i, page 71]

There are two types of aml insofar as their effects are concerned, one is that type which renders a person's mind in control and overpowers the mind. Such amals are not permissible for those things which are not Waajib in the Shariah, like making nikah with a particular man.

The second type is where the person upon whom the amal is done becomes attentive towards the desired objective and not overwhelmed or totally in control. These will be permissible for the desired objective. Ruqiya (taweez) are permissible to use, but are inadvisable. [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 88 and 99, vol. 4]

The Rulings Of Dreams And States Of Ecstasy

Dreams and states of ecstasy are not proofs in the Shariah. It neither confirms the unconfirmed, nor renders the preferred unpreferred nor vice versa. Every ruling remains in its place and unchanged by virtue of these (dreams and ecstasy). However, only that may be considered which conforms to the Shariah and precaution is adhered to. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 771]

It is not permissible to base Masaa`il on dreams. [Anfaas `Aini, page 153, vol. 1]

What consideration can be given to dreams? Firstly it is not established that dreams can be used as proof, and then for its correct interpretation to be understood is also not necessary... Dreams are not illat for any condition. It is type of sign, and signs can sometimes be correct and sometimes incorrect. Therefore one has to look at and study that thing for which it is a sign. [Ifaadhaat, page 208 and 210, vol. 9]

The Ruling Of Kashf

Many things which are merely makshoof (established through kashf) and famous, whereupon their not being a proof is established by valid Shar`i substantiation - to have firm belief in their meaning and import, or to adhere firmly to their practice, or to regard them as being an object in itself, as we see in many matters nowadays, is excessiveness in Deen (Ghuloo fid Deen). If kashf is not conflicting with the Shariah, then it holds two possibilities, either correct or not, regardless of whether this is one's own kashf or that of some Akaabir. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 71]

Two Types Of Kashf-e-Quloob And The Ruling Of Masaa`il-e-Kashfiya

One trait of Masaa`il-e-kashfiya is that it does not conflict the nass. That is, there is no nass which contradicts or negates it. An effort will be made to endorse it with the Shariah. If there is a possibility that it can be accommodated into some nass, then it will remain in the level of being a possibility. If it is regarded as anything more or higher than this, then it will be ghuloo (excessive). If it bears no semblance or finds no endorsement in the nass and then to claim it to be endorsed, will be nothing other than tahreef (altering) the nass. However, if this claim is not done as a tafseer (interpretation) or ta`weel, but rather as a form of Ilm-e-I`tibaari, then if that ruling is endorsed by some other nass, then that i`tibaar will be considered and valid, but if it is not endorsed by another nass, then it will be takalluf (exaggerated). [Al-Bawaadir, page 784]

There are two types of kashf-e-quloob, One which is purposely directed towards another person to ascertain his faults. This is impermissible. It is a form spying, because spying is exactly that, when someone tries to hide his faults and wrongs and you try to divulge and unearth them. The second is when it occurs involuntarily. This is a karaamat (miracle). [Da`wat Abdiyat, page 136, vol. 19]

The Ruling Of Firaasat (Insight/Sagacity/Intuition)

The actual ruling and origin of (the concept of) firaasat lies in the Hadith, "Fear the firaasat of a believer." This is a type of kashf, and just like kashf does not constitute a valid proof in the Shariah.

The Reality Of Ilm-e-Qiyaafah And Its Ruling

Once Moulana Muhammad Ya`qub Sahib gave the gist of Ilm-e-Qiyaafah that this is when Allaah Ta`ala makes apparent or divulges some condition or sign which reveals a hidden shortcoming or evil in someone, so that others may be privy and aware of him, thereby exercising caution. This, in a nutshell, is Ilm-e-Qiyaafah. However such signs and hints do not constitute Shar`i proof. [Al- Ifaadhaat, page 74, vol. 9]

The Ruling Of Ilhaam And Kashf

ssues of kashf are not in any level proof in the Shariah. The only upside of it is that if it does not conflict with the Shariah, then the person upon whom the kashf manifested itself, and his followers, may practice upon it. They cannot be dogged on its execution. Its non-observance may result in worldly harm and not harm in the hereafter. [Husn Azeez, page 520]

To oppose ilhaam may result in some worldly castigation, like illness or some other misfortune, but not so in the hereafter, because ilhaam is not a valid proof for the Shariah, hence its opposition is not a sin, which warrants punishment in the hereafter. However, opposition to wahi (divine revelation to a Nabi) is a punishable offence in the hereafter. [malhoozaat, page 181]

The Ruling Of A Weak Hadith

That which is classified as a weak Hadith according to the Ahle Ilm, cannot be a criterion or proof for a Shar`i ruling. [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 226, vol. 4]

The Ruling Of Idraak

Sheikh Abdul Haq (rahmatullah alayh) has written that there was such a person in their midst that by merely looking at someone's face, he could tell that person's name. Allaah Ta`ala has also bestowed me with this blessing that by engaging in a discourse with someone, I can tell his nature and disposition. However such idraak (perception) without valid Shar`i evidence is not a proof. [Badaa`i, page 251]

The Ruling Regarding The Shariahs Before Us

If anyone has a doubt that the Shariahs before us do not constitute a valid proof for us, then the answer to this is that if any Shariah of the people before is mentioned and no refutation is made of them, then this is a valid proof for us. [Al-Ifaadhaat, page 421, vol. 28]

There is one famous condition for this Usooli ruling that if it is mentioned then its negation is also not made. This much is necessary to know that it is not essential that the negation be done then and there on the same occasion. Any negation in any nass will prove sufficient. Otherwise the Sajdah of respect which was made by the angels for Hadhrat Aadam (alaihis salaam) and by the brothers of Yusuf (alaihis salaam) for him, would have been binding upon us, but these were negated in some other nass. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 108]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#10 [Permalink] Posted on 23rd November 2011 08:31

The Types Of Ahkaam (Rulings)

Insofar As Being Proof And Evidence, There Are Three Types Of Rulings

Mansoos, Ijtihaadi and zawqi. Ijtihaadi refers to that Ijtihaad which the Fuqahaa intend and such Ijtihaad whereby rulings are proven and which are in actual fact, confirmed by nass. These are merely made apparent and perceptible through Ijtihaad. That is why it is said, "Qiyaas is a muzhir (makes apparent) and not a Muthbit (endorser)."

The Difference Between Ahkaam-e-Zawqiya And Ijtihaadiya And Their Respective Rulings

Zawqi are those rulings which are not proven through nass. Neither without medium which is a trait of nass nor with a medium, like Ijtihaadiya. In fact these rulings are intuitive. The difference between zawq and Ijtihaad is that the rulings of Ijtihaad are proven from nass and zawqi are not proven from nass. This is the reason why such rulings are not related by the Mujtahiddeen, nor are such rulings binding upon anyone. The intuitions of the Ahle Zawq are the origins of these rulings. Nevertheless, there are some such rulings which are corroborated by the indications of the Qur`aan Majeed and Sunnat. In such cases their proclamation would be permissible, but if they contradict the Qur`aan Majeed and Sunnat, then their rejection is Waajib. If they are corroborated by the Qur`aan Majeed and Sunnat and not contradictory of them, then there is scope on both fronts, i.e. they can be accepted or rejected.

Ijtihaad is a fiqhi component and zawq a soofi component. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 771, vol. 2]

The Basis Of The Rulings Of Ijtihaad And Zawqiyah

The basis of Ijtihaadi rulings is the illat, which gives rise to the ruling, whereas the basis of zawqiyaat is merely the (underlying) wisdom, and this is also not from nass which naturally does not give rise to a ruling. Neither is the existence and implementation of the rulings centred around it. For example in the raml of tawaaf, there was wisdom behind it, but the ruling is not centred around this wisdom. [Ibid. page 771, vol. 2]

The Second Type Of Ruling

From another angle, rulings are of two types: maqaasid and muqaddamaat. The rulings of zawqiya are amongst the muqaddamaat, and not maqaasid. The maqaasid comprise of only the nusoos or Ijihaadi. The rulings of nusoos and Ijtihaad are the Shariah. The rulings of zawqiya are not classified as Shariah, rather as Asraar-e-Shariah (underlying mysteries of the Shariah). [Ibid.]

There Are Two Types Of Rulings With Regard To Their Order/Arrangement, Asli And Aardhi

The rulings of the Shariah are of two types: asli and aardhi, i.e. the ruling is sometimes applied while looking at the actual issue and sometimes while considering the attributes. The rulings of these two types also differ accordingly. Since a ruling is placed according to the majority, if any person is unique or different, then he will not be considered. Considering these attributes, he will be prevented. [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 246, vol. 4]

The mas`alah regarding naqli and `aqli is a universally accepted one. Rulings are sometimes original and fundamental and sometimes temporary.

For example trading in armour and gunpowder should be, considering all other types of trade, be allowed without any restrictions. This is the actual ruling. However, considering the harms and tumult which may result in this type of free trade (in such types of commodities), the law has placed the restrictions of having a licence to trade in such merchandise. The actual ruling regarding trading in fruits is that in all conditions and places its trade is permissible, but this natural state is prohibited from during times of plague. These respective rulings depend on the external factors and attributes. The harms of free trade in armour and gunpowder is everexistent, hence this restrictions in its trading will be always in force, whereas the restriction in fruit-trading is limited to the season of harm, hence it will not be enforced once the prohibitive factor is removed. [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 194, vol.4]

The Proof Of The Stated Ruling

An example of this is Masjidul Haraam. As long as the mushrikeen of Makkah were controlling it, Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) used to perform Salaat there and also make tawaaf of Baitullaah. The time came when Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) came from Madinah Munawwarah to make Umrah and the mushrikeen prevented him from entering. Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) entered into a treaty with them that he will come the following year and spend three days in Makkah Mukarramah and perform Umrah. Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) signed the treaty and remained there for a time and returned to Madinah Munwwarah. All this happened when Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was not in control of Makkah Mukarramah. Owing to a valid reason, Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) abided to this temporary set-up. When Allaah Ta`ala granted Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) total control over Makkah Mukarramah, then he fulfilled the asl ruling. [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 194, vol. 4]

Two Types Of Masaa`il: Qat`iyah And Zanniyah

Masaa`il are categorised into two types, one type has a side of haqq and another of baatil, whether this is sam`an or aqlan, these are called masaa`il-e-qat`iyah. The second type is that in which both sides have the possibility of haqq and correctness. This is called masaa`il-e-zanniyah. The masaa`il-e-kalaamiyah (regarding aqaa`id) belong mostly to the first type and some to the second, and masaa`il-e-fiqhiyah belong mostly to the second type and some to the first.

Details On The Masaa`il Of Qat`iyah, Zanniyah And Ijtihaadiyah And Their Respective Rulings

Some masaa`il are qat`i. there is no scope for differences in opinions regarding them. Some are ijtihaadi and zanni, and all along, through the ages of salf and khalf, differences of opinions existed in these types of masaa`il between ustaad and student; mureed and peer; small group and big group and between one person and many. The Ulama have never refuted any of them, neither has the one party called the other 'deviant' or 'sinners' and neither has the one forced and compelled the other to accept their view.

The differences of opinions in masaa`il-e-ijtihaadiyah and zanniyah are of two types. One is the difference that exists in the proofs, like that between the Hanafis and Shaafis on the recitation of Surah Faatiha behind the Imaam.

The second is the difference that exits regarding the incidents or attributes, like the difference between Imaam Sahib and Saahibain regarding the mas`alah on nikah saa-ibaat...[Al-Ifaadhaat-e-
Ashrafiya, page 6]

The Aayat, "Whosoever exceeds the limits of Allaah, has indeed oppressed himself", applies to those who accept the view of one side in a masaa`il-e-ijitihaadiya, and criticise the other.

Occasions Where Dalaa`il-e-Sam`iyah And Naqliya Are Applicable

If any action is only intended for a fun (science/study) and not for the Deen, then there is no need for its proof to be sam`i (i.e. a Hadith, etc) any other proof will also suffice, on the proviso that it is not baatil in the Shariah. For example, holding the breath is not a requirement of the Deen, then this practice does not need proof from the Hadith, etc. however it must be established from such source which the Shariah has not negated or refuted. But if it is something which is desired in the Deen, then it must have a sound sam`i proof, like compliance to those actions which are ordered and the abstention from those actions which are prohibited from. [Tajdeed Tasawwuf, page 466]

What Types Of Proofs Are Required For Aqaa`idi-eqat` Iyah And Zanniyah

1. For aqaai`id-e-qat`iyah such proofs are essential which are qat`iyuth thuboot and qat`iyud dalaalat.

2. For aqaa`id-e-zanni, zanni proof is sufficient, provided that it does not conflict with an aqaa`id-e-qat`i. If it does, then the qat`i will be opted for instead of the zanni.

3. The statement of a ghair ma`soom (not innocent person - non Nabi) cannot be used a proof in aqaa`id-e-qat`iyah and the statement of a non-mujtahid cannot be used as a proof in aqaa`id-ezanniyah. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 44]

The Two Types Of Wujoob - Waajib Biz Zaat And Waajib Bil Ghair

A thing can be Waajib or necessary in two ways; one is where an instruction has been specifically encouraged in the Qur`aan Majeed and Hadith, like Salaat, fasting, etc. Such an obligation is called Waajib biz Zaat. The second type is where an action itself has not been instructed or ordered in the Qur`aan Majeed or Hadith, but some other acts have been instructed in the Qur`aan and Hadith, which normally cannot be effected without being coupled to this first act. Hence this act is also now considered necessary. This is what the Ulama actually refer to as Waajib.

Proof And Example

There is no emphasis in the Shariah to compile and write down the Qur`aan Majeed and Hadith, in fact the following Hadith clarifies the fact that kitaabat (writing) is not essential or Waajib, "It has been reported from Ibn Umar (radiallaahu 'anhuma) who said that Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said, 'Indeed we are a nation that does not write...". Now, since general kitaabat is not Waajib, how can it be for special cases. However, we have been instructed and emphasis has been laid on protecting and safeguarding the noble texts, and experience has shown that without writing and recording something down, its protection is difficult, nay almost impossible. This is the reason why it is deemed necessary and compulsory to write down the Qur`aan Majeed and Hadith. This obligation is upon the entire Ummat in all ages to come. Such a necessity is called, Waajib bil Ghair. [Al- Iqtisaad fi Taqleed wal Ijtihaad, page 34]

For it to be Waajib to abandon something, that thing does not have to be necessarily bad or harmful in itself, but it is sufficient if the harm is due to another external factor. This is the reason why the Fuqahaa have on many occasions prevented permissible acts as a means of closing the doors for greater evil and harm. [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 72, vol. 4]

Miscellaneous

1. The Hukm-e-Asli (original ruling) was that all Musaajid must be freely accessible at all times. Nobody can be prevented from performing Salaat in any Musjid whenever he pleases, neither should anyone be prevented from entering a Musjid, etc. This ruling applies at a time when Muslims have control and there is no fear of tumult or fitnah in the Ummat. The temporary ruling will be according to a treaty which was agreed to by the Muslims and this will now be in place until such time that the Muslims have no control to effect the asli ruling. [Malfoozaat Ashrafiyya, page 399]

2. The Fuqahaa have written that the recitation of Durood Shareef by a trader when he opens his wares or sells them and the recitation of tahleel by the guard when he awakens his sleeping companions, are all impermissible. This prohibition lasts for the duration of the said events. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 814, vol. 2]

3. There are certain occasions when the memorisation of the Qur`aan Majeed is prohibited. For example if a person wishes to memorise the Qur`aan Majeed, which is a Mustahab act, but because he is married and there is no other means of support for his wife and children (besides him working), then in such a case, it will be Haraam for him to spend his time in doing hifz, since this is causing a disruption in his Waajib duty (which is to support and maintain his family). [Malhoozaat Jadeed Malfoozaat, page 180]

4. That Sunnat act which prevents or disturbs from a Fardh act is prohibited. [Malhoozaat, page 88]

A Necessary Defence Becomes Waajib

An accepted rule is that any act which is permissible, and a good deed or Waajib need is dependant on it, then that act also becomes a good deed or Waajib. This is the reason why the Ulama-e-Mutakallimeen (Ulama specialising in Aqaa`id) studied Greek philosophy, in order to combat and expound the Knowledge of Aqaa`id in the generally accepted and vogue method (of their time). [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 72, vol. 4]

Proof With Example

The rule is that to defend a Waajib is Waajib. This is an obvious rule which requires no proof, however as a courtesy we will mention one Hadeeth, "It has been reported from Uqbah (radhiallahu anhu) who says that he heard Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) saying, 'Whoever has leant lance-throwing, and then abandoned it, is not from us."

It is clear that lance-throwing is no specific act of Ibaadat, but on the occasion of defence of the Kalimah (jihaad) its use is necessary, hence so much of emphasis has been placed on it. This confirms that a defence of a Waajib becomes Waajib. [Al-Iqtisaad, page 49]

A Ruling Is Based On Greater Circumstances And Not On Unique Ones

Rulings are based on greater possibilities and unique ones are not considered. This is the reason why in times of severe hunger, carrion is permissible, but in severe lust, fornication does not become Halaal. The reason being that there is no fear of loss of life in severe lust, contrary to sever hunger, where the fear of destruction (loss of life) is greater. [Al-Ifaadhaat, page 156, vol. 10]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#11 [Permalink] Posted on 23rd November 2011 08:32

Rulings Are Based On The Greater Consideration

The Majority (Greater) Is Ruled As Being All

The rule regarding organisational rulings (which concern the public at large) is that in order to prevent and safeguard against harms, the welfare of the majority is taken into consideration. This is the meaning of the ruling given by the Fuqahaa that those acts which may lead to fitnah amongst the masses are also Makrooh for the elite (Ulama). In support of this rule, is the following Hadith, "It has been reported by Jaabir (radhiallahu anhu) that Umar came to Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and said, 'We hear narratives from the jews which we find strange (and interesting), what do you advise that we record them..." Because the recording of these things would be detrimental to the Imaan of the Ummat in general, hence Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) prohibited from recording them.

Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhu) was intelligent and considered as amongst the elite amongst the Sahaabah (radhiallahu anhum), but even he was prohibited from recording the incidents of the Jews. This proves that any matter which would result in general mayhem and fitnah is also not permissible for the elite, unless of course it is not a matter which is necessary in the Deen.

In another narration is has been reported that Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Mas`ood (radhiallahu anhu) used to give a lecture every Thursday. Once someone asked him if he could do this every day, and he refused saying that people would get tired and bored. It is clear that not all the people in the audience would tire of a daily lecture. The request from this person attests to this, but nonetheless, the welfare and condition of the majority was taken into consideration.

Hence, the actions of Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah (radhiallahu anhum) confirm this rule. [Ifaaraab Ashrafiyah, page 6]

The actual state of Shar`i rulings
If for example someone snatches some ground from another person
and builds a Musjid thereupon. Now the real owner lays a claim and
is successful, so the Qaadhi will rule that the snatcher return the
ground and break down his 'musjid'. It will not be permissible to
criticise the Qaadhi for his ruling or ordering the breaking down of a
Musjid, because in reality this was not a Musjid, since it was built
on stolen ground.

Rulings in the Shariah are Based On Effects And Not Merely Causes

People look at the asbaab (causes). In reality the causes should not be looked at, rather the effects. For example, it will not be permissible to listen to the recitation of the Qur`aan Majeed or poetry when it has a peculiar effect on the heart, like if a youngster recites the Qur`aan Majeed and this has an effect on someone's (corrupt) heart, then it cannot be said that there is no harm because it is the Qur`aan Majeed which is the cause of this. It is the effect which results in this recitation which renders such listening impermissible and the cause. [Al-Ifaadhaat, page 160, vol. 2]

The Rendering Of An Act Halaal Or Haraam Is Not Only Based On Its Benefits

1. I also say that there are benefits in alcohol and gambling. In fact, their being beneficial is also stated in nass. If their ruling was based on their benefit, then there would be no harm in their indulgence. [Ibid. page 18]

2. That beneficial action wherein there is no worldly harm, which is considered excusable in the Shariah and it has not Deeni harm, then to partake therein would be considered contrary to one's sense of honour, like donations. [Ifaadaat Ashrafiyya, page 14]

Two Stages Of Permissibility

There are two stages of permissibility. One is merely permitted, which has no bearing or rank in the Deen, like treating an illness or abstaining therefrom.

The second is that which has some recognition in Deen and obedience and it is also recommended and it has some virtue stated in the Shariah, like Nikah. Warnings are also issued for purposely and without valid excuse abandoning them. This is ample proof of it being a part of the Deen. The fact that the Fuqahaa have written much about this and laid down regulations for it, also shows that it has the rank of Mubaah . [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 664, vol. 2]

There Is Wujoob In The Asl Ruling

If there is a wujoob (compulsion) in any action then (to do) its opposite would be Haraam. This is an Usooli mas`alah, and it is also logical. For example it is Haraam to oppose the order to lengthen the beard and shorten the moustache. [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 221]

The scale of amr is used to indicate wujoob, even though its implementation may not be immediate. However, this will apply if there is certainty that the ordered act is not required immediately, otherwise an amr would generally require immediate compliance. Hence when the Aayat, "O you who have believed, fear Allah as He should be feared," (3:102) was revealed, the Sahaabah (radhiallahu anhum) understood that total and full taqwa was required of them immediately. They immediately started fearing (knowing that they were incapable of full Taqwa as is worthy of Allaah Ta`ala), when the following Aayat was revealed, "Fear Allaah as you are capable of." That is, they were to adopt Taqwa as they were able to, and then gradually increase it. Hence, this former Aayat, according to the Muhaqqiqeen is not abrogated. [Al-Hajjul Mabroor, page 166]

Regarding Present-Day, Is Permission The Asl Or Hurmat

Previously the Fatwa was that in (general) things there is permission, until and unless Hurmat (prohibition) can be proven. Now the times have become such that one should say that originally there is Hurmat in things until and unless permissibility can be shown. This fatwa should be given to save people from getting involved in Haraam, whereafter mayhem will follow. [Hasnul Azeez, page 430, vol. 4]

Is It Better To Practice On Azeemat Or Rukhsat

When both azeemat and rukhsat (concessions) are practiced in their respective and called for situations, there is equal reward. This is incorrect that some Ulama do not consider rukhsat as an asl Shar`i ruling. They also regard it as having less rewards. On occasions of rukhsat, Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had adopted and practiced on this rukhsat, and he encouraged and instructed the Sahaabah (radhiallahu anhum) to also adopt this way. From this we understand that on occasions of rukhsat this is the asl ruling. [Anfaas, `Aini, page 364]

There is a Hadith which extols the virtue of practicing on rukhsat and there is another which prohibits it. I had deliberated on this matter for many days, and Alhamdulillaah, my mind was cleared in that all those occasions where the Shariah had allowed rukhsat, there it's practicing is virtuous and commendable, and wherever the rukhsat has been concocted as an escape, there it is detestable, because this entails nafsaaniyat and rebellion. No doubt remainedafter this understanding came to mind. [Al-Ifaadhaat, page 421, vol.9]

Two Types Of Opting For Concessions

Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) mentioned in a Hadith that Allaah Ta`ala loves that people practice on those rukhsats which He has granted them and that they practice on the stipulated azeemats as well. Those 'opting for concessions' which the Fuqahaa has prohibited from are not those which are generally granted to the Ummat by the Shariah, rather they refer to those which are concocted in accordance and subservience to the nafs and base desires. [Majaalis Hakimul Ummat, page 321]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#12 [Permalink] Posted on 29th November 2011 07:19

The Discussion On Making Rulings Mukallaf

Every Level Of Intelligence Is Not Sufficient For Takleef (Refers To Persons Being Bound To The Shari'ah)

My opinion is that besides a soul, animals have intelligence also, because the actions of some animals are such that one is constrained to accede to this fact. But this does not make them mukallif because any level of intelligence is not sufficient to make Shar`i obligations binding. Just see, an almost mature person (muraahiq), does have a certain level of intelligence but he/she does not become mukallif. So even if we assume that animals have that much intelligence, then too there can be no objection to it (that why they are not mukallif. From this we can see why some Majzubeen who have an outward semblance of some intelligence, carry out such actions and state such utterances which conflict with the Shariah. They cannot be called kaafir, because it is possible that they have only that much intelligence as the muraahiq. Hence, they will not be considered as mukallif. If we exceed the discussion on animals and venture onto vegetation, there too, we can see some (albeit minimal) signs of intelligence.

You may be bewildered that some people nowadays make the claim that plants have a soul, whereas some of the ancient philosophers also held this view. We cannot now refute their claim. It is possible that inanimate objects also have a soul and intellect, although it may be even lesser than that of plants. Therefore it is possible that inanimate objects can also talk. Those Ahaadith which mention the testimony given by stones and trees, corroborates this view.

Three Categories Of People Insofar As Their Being Mukallif

There are three categories of people, one is with total intelligence, another with deficient intelligence and the third with no intelligence. The first category are mukallif kaamil, the second mukallif naaqis and included under this category is the person who makes a bequest to his children that when he dies they must incinerate his body and throw the ashes in the wind, and the third category are not mukallif.

Takleef Is Based On The Intelligence And Not On Perception

The majzoobeen have no intelligence, like a horse which has no intelligence, but it has excellent perception and senses. Another example is that of a child before maturity. His intelligence is not complete, but his senses are in order. In this regard we cannot claim that a majzoob does not have proper senses.

Salaat, etc. being Fardh is not based on these senses. Intelligence is a condition for the obligation of Salaat. Hence an insane person, similarly a majzoob, is not mukallif, just like a child is not mukallif, because of deficient intellect. [Al-Ifaadhaat Yawmia, page 244, vol. 2]

Regarding The Kuffaar Being Mukallif On The Furoo`aats (Practical Tenets Of Deen)

Are the kuffaar also bound (by the Shari'ah) or not? Before entering the class they are not bound, and only after they enrol will they be also included.

This is the example, assuming in some college there is a certain course, and the students are addressed thus, "O students! Study this." Although this is applicable to the specific students who are enrolled for this course, it does not mean or imply that all other students are excluded from studying this course. The principal is also encouraging all the students who have enrolled in the college to take up this course. So this encouragement is for everyone. But as for those who are not yet students in the college, this should first be said to them that they enrol in the college and after they have enrolled, this encouragement will be applicable to them to take up the course. [Da`wat Abdiyat, page 62, vol. 8]

Will The Kuffaar Be Punished For Leaving Out The Furoo`aat

The following Aayat was revealed for the kuffaar, "Indeed those who do not desire meeting with Us, and are pleased with the worldly life..." According to the Fuqahaa, the kuffaar are not bound by the furoo`, that is why it is said that if a kaafir, performs Salaat, in the state of kufr, his Salaat will not be valid.

Similarly, when a kaafir accepts Islaam, then there is no Qadha binding on him for Salaats not read whilst he was kaafir.

The punishment which will be meted out to the kuffaar will be so due to their act of kufr, contrary to the believer, whose punishment will be due to neglecting the furoo`aat. Yes, the punishment of the kuffaar will be intensified due to their non-compliance to the furoo`aat, but their punishment will not be because of this (their neglecting the furoo`aat). An example of this will be if two people are captured and punished on account of their rebellion and treason. One of these two, together with treason also stirs trouble and causes anarchy, whereas the second person is only guilty of treason. Both will be punished for the crime of treason, but the punishment of the second one may be intensified because of his extra crime. The example of the kaafir is like the first rebel who also commits anarchy. His actual punishment will be due to his kufr, but since he never complied to the furoo`aat his punishment will be intensified.

As for the kaafir who used to comply to some of the furoo`aat which are attached to Imaan, like giving charity, kindness, humility, etc. is like the rebel who did not commit any other crime.

The punishment of the believer is like the punishment and crime of the person who does not commit treason, but petty crime. He will receive punishment but not to the extent of a rebel.

This aforementioned Aayat also confirms that the kuffaar are not bound to the furoo`aat, but they will be punished for not having executed them. As a matter of fact, even the believers are warned in this Aayat, in that if the kuffaar who are not bound by the furoo`aat will be punished for not having complied to them, the believers will, all the more be liable for punishment because they are bound and they neglect them. [Da`wat Abdiyat, page 188, vol. 7]

Are The Kuffaar Mukallif Of The Prohibitions Or Not? What If A Kaafir Touches The Qur`aan Majeed Without Wudhu?

Apparently there will be no harm in this, because they are not bound by the furoo`aat. But this will be contrary to adab (respect and etiquette). [Husnul Azeez, page 275, vol. 4]

It is not permissible to direct others towards those things which you are prohibited from (including the kuffaar). This rule, specifically has led some Fuqahaa to opine that the kuffaar are mukallif to the prohibitions and not others acts. [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 205, vol. 4]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#13 [Permalink] Posted on 5th December 2011 08:32

The Types And The Rulings Regarding Tawakkul (Trust In Allaah Ta`ala) And Asbaab (Opting For The Means)

The Two Types Of Tawakkul

Tawakkul is of two types, ilman and amalan.

Ilman - this is to understand that every matter is in the control of True Controller, Allaah Ta'ala, and that we rely and depend on Him for every thing. This type of Tawakkul is Fardh in every matter and is an essential constituent of Islaamic beliefs.

Amalan - The reality of this is to discard and abandon all means (and have total reliance in Allaah Ta`ala).

The Two Types Of Asbaab

There are two types of asbaab, asbaab-e-deeniya and asbaab-edunyawi.The former is when a Deeni benefit is realised when opting for it. To abandon it is unadvisable and perhaps even sinful or harmful. According to the Shariah, this is not tawakkul. If this is classified literally as tawakkul, then this type of 'tawakkul' is reviled.

As far as the asbaab of the world is concerned, there are two types of benefits which can be realised - Halaal or Haraam. If it is Haraam, then it will be necessary to abandon it, and this type of tawakkul is Fardh. If it is Halaal, then this is further divided into three parts, yaqeeni, zanni and wahmi. The asbaab-e-wahmiya, which the people of greed and avarice opt for, that is also known as toolul amal (long hopes and aspirations). It is necessary to abandon them and this tawakkul is Fardh and Waajib.

Asbaab-e-Yaqeeniya

This refers to those things whose benefit is naturally and essentially realised, like a person is comforted or satisfied after a meal, or one's thirst is quenched after drinking water, etc. It is not permissible to abandon it and neither will this be regarded as tawakkul in the Shariah. If it is classified as tawakkul in the dictionary, then it will be impermissible to practice it.

Asbaab-e-Zanniya

Those things which have an apparent benefit, like recovering after medical treatment or receiving payment after working or labouring. To abandon these things, which in normal terminology would be regarded as tawakkul has some explanation attached to it. For a weak-natured person this is not permissible and permissible for a strong (in Imaan) person. However, specifically for a person who has strong (Imaan) nature and who is engaged in the service of the Deen, it would be Mustahab, in fact greatly encouraged to adopt this type of tawakkul. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 267]

The Types And Rulings Regarding Tadbeer

Tadbeer has two stages, one is beneficial and the other permissible. As for being beneficial, if it conforms to taqdeer, then it will be beneficial, otherwise not.

With regard to its being permissible, there are two states, the one regards belief, that to accept asbaab (means) like the atheists do, that the asbaab has full effect, this is Haraam and spurious. The second state is amal, that is one uses the asbaab in order to achieve the aims. The ruling of this will depend on the objective. There are three options here, whether the objective is worldly or Deeni or sinful. If the objective is sinful, then this will naturally be Haraam. If it is Deeni then we will see whether this Deeni matter is Waajib or Mustahab. If it is Waajib, then to opt for this asbaab would be Mustahab and if it is worldly then we will see whether this worldly matter is of a necessary nature or unnecessary. If it is necessary, then we will look at the asbaab. If it is yaqeeni or not. If it is yaqeeni, then it would be Waajib to opt for the asbaab and if it not yaqeeni, then its adoption for the weak ones would be Waajib and permissible for the strong ones, however to abandon it (for the strong ones) is preferable.

If the worldly asbaab is not necessary, and if in opting for them is harmful to the Deen, then it will not be permissible otherwise it will be permissible. However to abandon it would be preferable. [Bawaadirun Nawaadir, page 265]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#14 [Permalink] Posted on 9th December 2011 07:49

Miscellaneous Laws

The Ruling And Explanation Of Alaahum Falaahum

The Fuqahaa have written that it is Waajib to consider the rule of alaahum falaahum. That is, it is Waajib to execute an important task immediately, and it is Waajib to abandon that thing which interferes.

Therefore, if it is Salaat time and Jamaat is standing up, and at that moment a kaafir tells you to make him a Muslim, then it is Waajib to make him a Muslim and if you miss the Jamaat, then you should not be concerned about it, whereas Salaat with Jamaat is also Waajib.

When the Shariah has placed so much stress and importance on this rule that in lieu of one important task, it is Waajib to sacrifice a Waajib or Nafl duty, then tell us, when an important duty like the reformation of your Deen comes up and some (frivolous or other mundane) journey impedes your attending your muslih (sheikh), because besides this free time you have no other, how then can this journey be permissible for you to undertake? How can this (normally) permissible act not become prohibited for you because you are sacrificing an important Deeni task because of it?

I ask you what Fatwa can be ruled for such a person who is very hungry and has not yet eaten, but he wiles away his time and squanders his money whiles loitering around the bazaars? Even if the whole world of Fuqahaa have to get together and unanimously rule the prohibition of strolling around the market-place, they will not be successful in proving this. But I can tell you with certainty, that if this person persists in this action, then he will certainly die of starvation.

Why is this, when he has not committed any impermissible act? Both actions are permissible according to the Shariah - eating and strolling the bazaar. Nevertheless, if this act is censured, then the reason will be that whilst both acts are permissible, there has to be some order in executing them. The more important one will have to be granted preference over the other. Since this person has not granted preference to the more important task, he will destroy himself. This is a simple matter which does not require a fatwa or any explanation. Even the most simple-minded person will not contradict this, most obvious issue. [At-Tabligh, page 84, vol. 1]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

London

4,762

Brother

4,174

#15 [Permalink] Posted on 14th December 2011 08:02

Huqooqul Ibaad (Rights Of People) Precedes Huqooqullaah (Rights Of Allaah Ta'ala

Explanation Of This Rule

The Fuqahaa have stated (The right of the servants (of Allah Ta`ala) come before the rights of Allaah. The object and import of this is that the servants of Allaah Ta`ala are in need whereas Allaah Ta`ala is not. However, this does not mean that one should leave out the rights of Allaah Ta`ala and solely concentrate on the rights of people. Instead it means that wherever there is a clash between the two, then the rights of people will be granted preference. This is also a requirement of the Shariah and in itself a right of Allaah Ta'ala. Wherever there is no conflict between the two, each will have to be fulfilled accordingly. For example, what conflict can there be between Salaat and repayment of a debt? Nothing at all! One should perform his Salaat on time and also duly pay his debts. A case of conflict will be as follows, if a person has R1000 on which Zakaat is payable and he also has a debt owing to someone. In this case, Allaah Ta`ala says that he should first pay off his debt, and Zakaat will be waived.

In this scenario, the Fuqahaa say that the rights of man have preference over the right of Allaah Ta`ala. In reality this is also a right of Allaah Ta'ala, because it is in accordance to His Command. Allaah Ta`ala Himself says that we should fulfil the rights of our fellowmen. In this case we can say that one right of Allaah Ta`ala has been granted preference over another right of Allaah Ta'ala, hence there is really no conflict between Haqqullaah and Haqqulabd, but because there is apparently this conflict, hence it will be said as such.

There is also a way where this apparent preference is relinquished, based on a certain reality. This reality has been inspired into my heart by Allaah Ta`ala. In reality haqqullaah is haqqun-nafs, because those acts which are regarded as haqqullaah, are acts of obedience and Ibaadat, and it is clear that no act of man benefits or harms Allaah Azza Wa Jall. In fact whatever harm or benefit there is, will be to the person himself. Hence whatever is attached to haqqullaah insofar as benefit and harm, is not that in reality, like it will be in the case of haqqul abd, where the harm or benefit will be experienced by the person whose right is fulfilled or disregarded. In this way, it cannot be averred here that the fulfilment or non-fulfilment of haqqullaah will cause benefit or harm to Allaah Ta`ala (nauthubillaah!).

Therefore, in my opinion haqqullaah means haqqun-nafs and haqqul abd means haqqul ghair (the rights of others). In view of this discussion, the inferring (of harm and benefit) will be the same. That is, in all cases there will be a matter of harm or benefit. Hence, insofar as haqqullaah is concerned, fulfilment will result in benefit to oneself and non-fulfilment will result in harm to oneself, and fulfilment of haqqul abd will result in benefit to someone else and non-fulfilment will result harm to someone else.

Therefore, in this explanation there will be no conflict between haqqullaah and haqqul abd. Whatever objections there may be in the precept that haqqul abd precedes haqqullaah will fall on thewayside because in reality haqqullaah is haqqun-nafs and haqqul abd is haqqul ghair.

Therefore wherever haqqul abd is granted preference to haqqullaah, it is a case of haqqul ghair being granted preference to haqqun-nafs. There can be no objection to this, in fact it is a matter of giving preference. As Allaah Ta`ala says in the Qur`aan Majeed, "And they give preference (of others) over themselves, even though it may destructive to them."

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi rahmatullaahi 'alaih]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Seifeddine-M

Principles Of Hanafi Fiqh

Font Size

Font Weight