Forum Menu - Click/Swipe to open
 

Principles Of Hanafi Fiqh

You have contributed 0.0% of this topic

Thread Tools
Appreciate
Topic Appreciation
Taalibah, Taqwah, abu mohammed, Abu Taalib Deobandi
1 guest appreciates this topic.
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#16 [Permalink] Posted on 19th December 2011 08:12
Explanation Of The Ruling Of


Regarding the fiqhi masa`lah of (The warning is generally applicable and not for the specific occasion), my opinion is that a condition is necessary for the umoom (generality) not to apply further than the import and object of the speaker. The proof of this will be in the following Hadith when Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) once saw a person fainting whilst on journey, he said,"Fasting on a journey is not amongst the virtuous (acts)." The words in this Hadith are general and will be applicable to all travellers, this is what is understood by some. However, some cases where consent was granted for fasting on a journey appear to conflict this Hadith. Looking at the context, a Mujtahid will rule that Nabi's (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) intention here is not general. In fact, the condition that this warning will be applicable to that person whose condition renders it such. This is the ruling of the jamhoor (majority). It therefore appears that this is the view of the majority that in this usooli mas`alah, the speaker's condition of it not being applicable further than the general is taken into consideration, even though they have not mentioned it thus.

I once mentioned this in a lecture, and Moulana Anwar Shah Sahib Kashmeeri (rahmatullah alayh) was also present. After the talk, someone asked Shah Sahib a mas`alah and he said, "Did you not hear just now in the bayaan where he (indicating to Moulana Ashraf Ali Sahib) explained that in this ruling the condition is also applicable." I was pleased that Shah Sahib did not refute what I said, in fact, he conceded to my view.

[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
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#17 [Permalink] Posted on 22nd December 2011 08:04
The Ruling Of


The warning is not for the specific occasion, in fact it applies in general. For example, if any Aayat was revealed for a specific incident, then it's ruling/application will not be specific only to that time, but if any similar occasion arises, then this nass will apply here also. For example the Aayat, "Woe to Al-Mutaffifeen (those who give less in measure or weight), those who when they have to received by measure from men, demand full, and when they have to give by measure or weight to men, give less than due", was revealed regarding a specific group of people, but its message is not specific to them only. Like this there are many Aayaat which are not specific to the occasions they were revealed for.

In effect, an Aayat was revealed for one particular incident but its application is general. Every incident has a particular law applicable to it. So if any law existed before any incident, then that law will apply, but if no law exists, then a law will have to be devised. General Laws need to be devised so that their application can be to a wide set of incidents, so that whenever a need arises a law can be applicable. This now explains the secret behind the ruling of the Fuqahaa that,
This is a logical mas`alah also which requires no much explanation. [Huqooquz Zawjain, page 307-8]

[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
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#18 [Permalink] Posted on 3rd January 2012 08:17
The Explanation Of Intending One Act Of Obedience In Another Act Of Obedience And The Explanation Of The Hadith:


Question: If whilst in Salaat, one thinks of something else, which is not necessarily something that is not an act of ibaadat, in fact, it is also an act of ibaadat (i.e. the thing which one thinks about). For example, whilst engaged in Salaat, a person does not intend show, neither any act which is not classified as ibaadat. However, whilst in Salaat, one reflects on some Shar`i mas`alah, or about undertaking some valid Shar`i journey, etc. Is this then contrary to sincerity or not?

Answer: this mas`alah is very intense. I will present it here listing the rules pertaining to it. Two Ahaadith comes to mind here, the first is a Marfoo` Hadith which has the following part to it, "Perfrom two Rakaats, concentrating your heart on it", and the other which is a mauqoof narration from Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhu) which has the following part to it, "Indeed I prepare my army (i.e. devise battle strategies, etc), whilst I am in Salaat." From these two narrations, we realise the following two states; one is that when a person is engaged in one act of ibaadat, then another act does not intentionally come to mind, even though it may one of ibaadat.

The second state is when another act if ibaadat comes to mind involuntarily. There is no intention to think about this second act of ibaadat whilst engaged in the first. For example, one does not envisage that during Salaat one will plan and devise the battle strategy, etc. Therefore the sincerity in both are equal. There is no doubt in this, however, owing to certain attributes, the first instance will be more complete and the second, if it is done without valid purpose and excuse, it will not be complete/perfect. If it is does with valid cause, then it will also be complete. Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhu) had a valid cause and excuse The criterion for this is ijtihaad, but every situation is not in opposition to ikhlaas (sincerity). Nevertheless, what has to be looked into is whether it affects and is opposed to khushoo (concentration). My opinion is that in the case of having valid cause, it will not even be contrary to khushoo, if there is a need.

The summary is this, if such a thought enters the mind, whose permission is granted by The Beloved, i.e. it is a Deeni issue, and also if it is of a necessary nature, then it will not be nugatory of khalwat (isolation). [Anfaas Isaa, page 268, vol. 1]

An example of this will be the statement of Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhu) who said, "Indeed I prepare my army (i.e. devise battle strategies, etc), whilst I am in Salaat." The reason is, that this is also a Deeni duty, which was necessary and it incorporates the remembrance of Allaah Ta`ala. Another point is that he would not get enough time to do this on other occasions when he was out of Salaat. In Salaat he was alone, and this type of task requires solitude.

This is the reason why Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhu) used to, with permission from Allaah Ta`ala, execute this task in Salaat, hence it was not nugatory of khalwat and khushoo. [Anfaas Isa, page 87, vol. 1]

Question: If someone performs Salaat with this in mind that perchance someone who does know the proper procedure of Salaat looks at me, he will benefit and correct his Salaat. Is the intention of such an ibaadat, a hindrance to the ikhlaas of Salaat?

Answer: The intention in this Salaat is something other than Salaat. This appears to be contrary to ikhlaas, but my opinion is that there is some explanation to this. According to the Shaari` this is not contrary to ikhlaas, because it can be classified as propagating, but according to a non-Shaari` this act is contrary to precaution in objective ibaadat of Salaat.

There is no harm in performing a Salaat specifically for ta`leem (purposes of teaching). [Ibid. page 669, 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
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#19 [Permalink] Posted on 6th January 2012 08:10
To Make An Act Of Ibaadat A Means Of Worldly Benefit


Question: If someone through experience shows that in Witr Salaat, if Surahs Qadr, Kaafiroon and Ikhlaas are recited regularly, then it will aid in the ailment of piles. Is there any harm in this or not?

Answer: The object of this question is that is one allowed to perform an act of ibaadat for some worldly benefit. This requires some dilation. In making an act of ibaadat achieve some worldly means, there are two types. One is to do so without any medium, like that of an aamil, where they use duas and words to achieve some specific worldly benefit.

And the second method is to use a medium of Deeni blessing, where this act will primarily bring in Deeni benefit, and this in turn will be effective in some worldly thing. Those specific acts of ibaadat which are enumerated in the Ahaadith that also have some worldly benefit for the executor thereof, fall in this second category. For example, it is mentioned in the Hadith that the person who recites Surah Waaqiyah regularly will not experience poverty. Such worldly advantages are either realised through wahi or ilhaam. Therefore, regarding the question at hand, if it is categorised under the first type, then it will be contrary to the objective of the Salaat and if it is classified under the second type, then there will be no harm in it. [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 453, vol. 1]

"He who performs two Rakaats of Salaat and no worldly matter enters his mind, all his past sins will be forgiven." [Ibn Abi Shayba]

Note: That which enters the mind and interferes with the (perfection) of Salaat, is that which is done intentionally, as is indicated to in the usage of the words (of the Hadith). However, that which is not intentional, is not censured, if it concerns a worldly matter. However as for that (thought) which concerns a laudable act, (of the Deen), this is indeed not censured, especially if it is a matter of necessity. This is derived from the statement of Hadhrat Umar (radhiallahu anhu) that, "Indeed I prepare my army (i.e. devise battle strategies, etc), whilst I am in Salaat." [Majaalis Hakimul Ummat, page 152]

[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
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#20 [Permalink] Posted on 9th January 2012 08:02
The Ruling of Daf`e Mudharrat wa Jalb-e-Manfa`at (Avoid Harm And Attract Benefit)


That benefit which is worthy of consideration is the one which overshadows the harm and similarly that harm is considered which overshadows the benefit. The benefits of the hereafter are more significant than those of this world. The same applies to the harms.

The Ruling Regarding Choosing Between Ahwanud Dararain (The Lesser Of The Harms)


This ruling is logical that when one is faced with two harmful things, where the one is of greater intensity than the other, one will opt for the lesser of the two harms. For example, a father punishes his child for some wrong committed by him. Now this hiding is a type of harm for the child, but the wrong which the child committed is an even worse harm. So to save the child from committing this wrong again the option of punishment was adopted by the father. If the child persists in his evil ways, then he may fall into very serious harm later in life, so to save him from this, the father's hiding, which is the lesser of the two harms is better.

The Difference Between No Benefit And Harm


Harm is one thing and non-benefit is another. Understand this by the following example, say you have a R100 note in your pocket, and someone snatches it away from you, this will result in a harm for you. Alternatively if you wished to give this note, but someone prevented you from doing this, then there will be no harm in it for you, it will just be unbeneficial. [Tarteebus saalik, page 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
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#21 [Permalink] Posted on 17th January 2012 08:29
The Ruling Regarding Choosing The Lighter Of The Two Evils (Akhafful Mufsadatain)


This rule is also logical. It is also a Shar`i ruling. When one is faced with two evils (destructive things), and the one of the two is more grave than the other, so in order to save oneself from the worse of the two, one opts for the lesser one. [Ifaadaat-e-Ashrafiya, page 33]

The Shar`i ruling is that in order to avoid a greater evil/harm, the one with the lesser evil/harm is opted for. It is also a ruling that a Deeni harm will not be realised in order to gain some benefit. [Imdaadul Fataawa, page 430, vol.3]

It is logical that when one is faced with two harmful options, where the one is greater than the other, then the lesser of the two will be chosen. An example will be as mentioned above where the father would rather punish his child instead of allowing him to fall into worse evil. [Kamaalaat Ashrafiya, page 115]

As it is said, "Whoever is faced with two evils, he will choose the lighter".

In order to remove the worse of the evils, the lighter one will be opted for. To explain this I will cite an example - it was known regarding some villages that the Muslims there were becoming Aryans (Hindus). Many Ulama visited the place. I also went there and met a man who was on the verge of converting into a Hindu.

Upon enquiring it was realised that these people liked some custom of the Hindus. I gave them consent to make ta`ziyah (a Bid`ah custom). In reality I did not give them permission to carry out a bid`ah, I had in fact saved them from kufr. I chose for them the lesser of the two evils. On the one hand you have kufr and on the other bid`ah, which is the lesser one. Similarly, I once gave a lecture stating that bribery is a sin. If due to a weak disposition people may say that it is a necessity, then you may take, but always keep in mind that it is evil and have a concern about heating Halaal. [Hasnul Azeez, page 159, vol. 3]


The Combination Of Halaal And Haraam Is Haraam


This ruling of the Fuqahaa is well-accepted, and it is logical as well.


[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi رحمه الله]
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#22 [Permalink] Posted on 23rd January 2012 08:19
It Is Impermissible To Thwart One Sin With Another


It is certainly not permissible to choose a sin in an effort to leave out another, in fact from the very outset that sin was to have been avoided. For example the cure of nazar-e-bad (evil eye) is not that the stomach be filled once, in fact the need was that the gaze be lowered (in the first place), although this is difficult. [Anfaas `Aini, page 176, vol.1]

There was once a learned person who used to practice daswi during the month of Muharram (a Bid`ah practice celebrated on the 10th of the month). He gave his reasoning that this was a way in which people did not attend the Shia celebrations (during this time and they attended his function). A ghair-muqallid molvi gave him a fitting reply that he should keep the same on the Hindu diwali and holi celebrations, with this intention of his, so that people don't attend them, because insofar as the sin involved in both (this persons functions and that of the Hindus or Shiahs) are the same. [Hasnul Azeez, page 229, vol. 2]


It Is Permissible To Make One Act Of Obedience A Means For Another Act Of Obedience


Will it be permissible to recite the Qur`aan Majeed in (rigid) sequence (i.e. for learning and memorising hifz), in Sunnat Salaats? The reason for this doubt is that in this method the Sunnat act, which is an objective Ibaadat in itself, appears now to become a means for carrying out another act of ibaadat.

The answer is that it is permissible, because hifz of Qur`aan Majeed is also an act of ibaadat and it is permissible to make one act of ibaadat a means for another. [Da`wat Abdiyat, page 150]


Can Something Which Is Not Recorded Be Used As A Proof Or Not?


A Mufti Sahib had averred that something which is not recorded cannot be used as a proof. I say that in such an important issue, nonrecording of it can also be a proof. There are many occasions where the Fuqahaa and Muhadditheen have said in negation of a mas`alah, lam yuthbit (not established). [Husn Azeez, page 51, vol.4]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Tahaanwi رحمه الله]
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#23 [Permalink] Posted on 27th January 2012 09:26
The Explanation Of The Ruling That The More Difficult A Thing Is, The More Rewarding It Will Be


Some people are of the opinion that the more difficult an act of ibaadat is, so much more will be the reward. However, in my opinion there is some dilation needed here. In acts of ibaadat-emaqsooda like Salaat, fasting, wudhu, tahaarat, etc. this will be applicable. For example, to make wudhu in cold weather or under difficult circumstances, will be more rewarding. Fasting in summer is more rewarding. However, with regard to those acts of Ibaadat which are not maqsood, to experience difficulty in them will not be overly rewarding. Example, the water for wudhu may be available, now to leave this and walk three miles to fetch other water and make wudhu will not warrant extra reward. After considering the Aayat, "It has not been made difficult upon you, matters of Deen", and the Hadith, "Deen is easy," if a person still considers such acts (in Ibaadat ghair maqsooda) as more rewarding then it will be as though he is opposing the nass (Nauthubillah). [Majaalis Hakeem Ummat, page 312]

To undergo difficulty in maqsooda Ibaadat is worthy of more reward, however to opt for an easier way (if possible) is preferable. In this regard it is stated in the Hadith that whenever Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was faced with two options then he would choose the easier of the two. This is also a natural disposition. For example, a person needs to perform wudhu and a hawd (water pond) is closeby, now one is to make wudhu here and another option is to walk a small distance to another place where wudhu can be made and make wudhu there. Now since wudhu is not maqsood in itself, the actual maqsood being Salaat, however in this instance the extra mile will not warrant extra reward. It would be preferable to choose the easier option.

Contrary to Salaat where recitation of a longer Surah will be more difficult than reciting a smaller Surah. In this case reciting the longer Surah will warrant extra reward, because Salaat is a maqsad in itself, however there are limits in this as well. Hence a person performs Nafl Salaat the entire night and sleeps for a short while in which his eyes cannot open for Fajr Salaat, and this results in him missing Jamaat Salaat. This is forbidden.


[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Tahaanwi رحمه الله]
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#24 [Permalink] Posted on 31st January 2012 07:51
A Sabab (Cause) Is Sometimes The Result Of A Musabbab


Just as the musabbab gives rise to the sabab, sometimes the
converse is true. Just as it sometimes occurs in the sensory
perceptions.


Is Nafa` Laazim (Necessary Benefit) Better Or Nafa` Muta`Addi (Causative Benefit)?


Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) used to sometimes execute some things as a means of explaining/teaching. This may appear to be an act of riya (show), but in reality it was not. A nafa` muta`addi is more virtuous than a nafa` laazim, because for islaah (reformation) this is a preferred method that whatever work one wishes someone else to do, it is best to do it oneself (as a demonstration and encouragement). [Hasnul Azeez, page 161, vol. 2]

Nafa` muta`addi is more virtuous than nafa` laazim. This will apply to a person who is complete with a nafa` laazim, and thereafter wishes to get engaged in a nafa` muta`addi. In this way there will be no interference in his nafa` laazim. For example, teaching will be preferable for that person who is complete with his own studies/ learning. The virtue of nafa` muta`addi is owing to the fact that it is done through the medium of a nafa` laazim. This is the reason why if a nafa` muta`addi is not done hoping on a nafa` laazim to be a medium, then the nafa` muta`addi should be abandoned. The actual and true maqsad (objective) is a nafa` laazim and the nafa` muta`addi is not an objective in itself, in fact, it is a means of the objective. [Anfaas Isa, page 318, vol. 1]


[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Tahaanwi رحمه الله]
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#25 [Permalink] Posted on 7th February 2012 07:55
Nafa` laazim is in itself an objective and the nafa` muta`addi is an objective by request (secondary)


The asl (original) is that a nafa` laazim is more virtuous than the nafa` muta`addi, because Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is instructed in the Aayat that when he is completed with the nafa` mat`addi, i.e. propagation, then he must engage in the nafa` laazim, which is casting his gaze and full attention towards Allaah Ta'ala. This context clearly illustrates that nafa` laazim is more virtuous than nafa` muta`addi, since the completion of the muta`addi is sought and the laazim. Thereafter the instruction for engaging in the nafa` laazim is issued, and also that it must be maintained and no distraction must be entertained. For example the Aayat, "Have an inclination towards your Rabb", necessitates and is clear that if the nafa` muta`addi was more virtuous then its completion would not have been sought.

The nafa` muta`addi is the secondary objective, whilst the nafa` laazim is the primary and main objective. This assertion may be contrary to the mainstream view, but it is the reality anyhow.

I ask you, that if nafa` muta`addi was the objective in itself (primary objective), then what would be the plight of the harbi (one at war aginst Muslims) in daarul harb (area of those against Islaam) who accepts Islaam? If he is unable to carry out the nafa` muta`addi (propagation), what can he do? Must he hold on firm to the nafa` laazim (incline towards Allaah Ta`ala) or to nafa` muta`addi (propagation)? If carrying out the nafa` muta`addi was necessary then he would be faced with a dilemma which he would be unable to bear. And if he were to be instructed with the nafa` laazim, then it is clear that the nafa` muta`addi is not the objective in itself, because no Muslim will be deprived of (having to practice) something which is a maqsood biz zaat (objective in itself). Hence, the nafa` muta`addi is not the maqsood biz zaat, in fact it is the secondary objective (maqsood bil `ardh). A maqsood biz zaat is more virtuous than a maqsood bil `ardh. [Asgraful Jawaab, page 301, vol. 2]


A verbal form of reformation (islaah) is not sufficient for an active (practical) fasaad (act of immorality/mischief), in fact practical reformatory steps and propagation are essential


Only verbal islaah is not sufficient, in fact, practical (amali) islaah is necessary. Initially I had reservations regarding Nikah to widows, and why the Ulama were making an exerted effort at it. A second Nikah is not Waajib, or Fardh, it is only Sunnat. The Ulama say that it is Waajib to consider it as Sunnat. Why then were they so intent on being practical on this. For many years this doubt remained. Those were the days of youth, but Alhamdulillah, the understanding has dawned on me. Since this fasaad (misconception, in this case) was a practical one, the islaah for it also had to be amali. [Hasnul Azeez, page 678, vol.1]

The Medium And Cause Of Sin Is Also Sinful


Those things which are a medium to sin are also classified as sin. This is the reason why (unnecessary) speaking after Esha Salaat is forbidden in the Hadith Shareef. The reason for this, as recorded by the commentators, is that this will cause an interference in one's (awakening for) Tahajjud and Fajr Salaat.

Those things which are ambiguous and unclear, leave them as ambiguous


One person asked whether the isaal-e-thawaab of Qur`aan Majeed will reach all the deceased in equal proportions (i.e. will all get the full reward) or will it be divided amongst them. The reply was that in ambiguous aqaaid matters, there is no need to give absolute or clear-cut answers. The method and system of the Sahaabah (radhiallahu anhum) was perfect, where they would leave ambiguous matters as they are. The Shariah has not deemed it necessary to dilate or expound on them (so why should we delve into them).

Similarly, Salaat and wudhu have been labelled mukaffirus sayyi`aat (compensators of sins)in the nass, so we need not delve into what extent they compensate for sins, etc. This is ambiguous in the nass, so we should leave them as such. They should not be clarified based purely on conjecture. Such things will be asked by those who wish to (Nauthubillah) question Allaah Ta`ala.

There is no scope for conjecture (zann) in matters of aqaaid. Yes, in fiqhi matters there can be, because fiqhi matters deal with deeds and actions. Students of Deen should remember this well. [Kalimatul Haqq, page 335]


[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Tahaanwi رحمه الله]
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#26 [Permalink] Posted on 14th February 2012 07:22
The Ruling And Explanations Of Two Qiraats (Modes Of Recitation) Being Deemed As Two Separate Aayats


Qiraats are on the same level as Aayats. It is necessary to understand the import of each one of them. To practice on (the meaning of) two qiraats of one Aayat has been established from the Fuqahaa. In this regard the Fuqahaa have joined the qiraats of the Aayat and deduced a ruling. Similarly have they combined the qiraats in the Aayat and deduced the ruling that during wudhu the feet must be washed by rubbing them with the hands, because mere pouring of water over them is insufficient. This is the reason why the Fuqahaa have made rubbing the feet especially a Mustahab. Similarly in the Aayat, they have combined the meanings to be kingship and ownership. This means that Allaah Ta`ala is the King and Owner of the Day of Qiyaamah. [At-Tableegh, page 107, vol. 17]

The Ruling of (A thing, when it is established, then it is established with its corollaries - necessary attachments)


This is an accepted ruling. No intelligent person needs to question or ask about this, it is an abundantly obvious and clear matter. I have cited many examples explaining this, and once again I will present an example. For example, if someone intends making Nikah, and it is asked of him if he accepts a certain girl in lieu of x-amount of dowry? He says that he accepts. Without doubt this acceptance also means that he has accepted to accommodate her, feed and clothe her. This meaning is included under the ruling of Now after a few days, when this newly married man moves away from his parent's home and is told to go and earn and support his family, and his wife will ask for butter, flour, etc., etc. He says, "Since when was I to bring this and that. All this was not included and I did not consent to agree to all this!"

I ask you, what if this young man's case was brought before you and you were to be judge over it? Naturally, you will rule that all these responsibilities are necessarily his. Obviously when a man agrees to Nikah with any woman, then it necessitates that he provide the flour, food, clothes, home, etc.,etc. All these corollaries go together with and are part and parcel of Nikah.

The same applies to accepting the Kalimah Laa Ilaha Illallahu, because together with accepting this Kalimah, the duties of Salaat, fasting, etc. incumbently follow. The acceptance of all the Shar`i duties are also accepted together with accepting this Kalimah (even though they may not be mentioned verbally). [Huqooquz zaujain, page 318]


[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Tahaanwi رحمه الله]
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#27 [Permalink] Posted on 21st February 2012 11:00
The Ruling Of Hasanaatul Abraar Sayyi`aatul Muqarrabeen (The Good Actions Of The Pious Are "Sins" For Those Very Close To Allaah Ta`ala)


All the slips and mistakes committed by the Anbiyaa (عليهم الصلاة والسلام) are all acts of obedience, but because they outwardly and apparently looked like "sins", therefore they are called so. The mistakes and slips of the Anbiyaa (عليهم الصلاة والسلام) are not in reality sins, because all Ambiyaa (عليهم الصلاة والسلام) are ma`soom (sinless).

In summary, there are two types of sins. The first are those which are recognised after a ruling has been stipulated, like the ruling of fornication being Haraam. Now after this decree has been passed, we know that fornication is sinful. This is a sin, in reality. The Anbiyaa (عليهم الصلاة والسلام) are free from this type of sin.

Another is that type regarding which no ruling has been passed and only after its censure, is it realised thus. This type of sin is superficial. In fact, it is also not really superficial, rather in majaazi terms it would be of a very low category of sin. This is the meaning of the Aayat, "Allaah has forgiven all that has passed of your sins", that no wasaawis (evil inspirations) need now enter Nabi's (صلى الله عليه وسلم) mind. He is completely and totally free from all sin.

This doubt remains that if these were not sins, then why was Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) censured and warned harshly regarding the incident where the Aayats of "(The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم)) frowned and turned away," (80:1) were revealed?

The answer to this is that the Beloved can censure His muhib for doing anything contrary to His Greatness However, one who is a non-beloved does not have this authority or power to (censure the muhib), hence Allaah Ta`ala says in the Aayat, addressing the pure and chaste wives رضى الله عنهنّ of Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم), "O wives (رضى الله عنهنّ) of the Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم, whichever of you comes with clear disobedience (i.e. whichever of you troubles and causes hurt to Nabi - صلى الله عليه وسلم), her punishment will be double." Further on Allaah Ta`ala says to them, "O wives (رضى الله عنهنّ) of the Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم, You are unlike other women."

Similarly, the muqarrabeen (close ones) receive double reward. In this regard Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said that he is inflicted with fever which is equal to the fever of two people, because Allaah Ta`ala intends greater reward for him.

Nevertheless, owing to the great status, such things which are also not apparently sins, are censured. [At-Tableegh, page 191, vol. 17]


[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Tahaanwi رحمه الله]
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#28 [Permalink] Posted on 27th February 2012 06:57
Those Acts Which Are A Result Of Some (Esoteric) State Brought On By (Ensues From) Shaari` Are Not Mashroo` -- Such States Were Also Experienced By The Anbiyaa (عليهم الصلاة والسلام) And Kaamileen (Perfect Ones)

Those actions which do not ensue from Allaah Ta'ala in the Shariah, but from ghalba-e-haal (esoteric state) are not ordered or decreed. For example, the number of rukus in Salaatul Kusoof, these were the result of a state of refulgence which overcame Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Sometimes one state would overcome Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) where he would make a long qiyaam (standing) and sometimes anther state would overcome him, which would result in his going into ruku and extending it. Upon completion of the ruku another state would overcome him (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and he would go into qiyaam, and then another state would make him go again into ruku, etc., etc. In this Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) made quite a number of rukus and qiyaams which were not ordered by Allaah Ta'ala, rather they were brought upon by ghalba-e-haal. Therefore, in Salaatul Kusoof, so many rukus are not instructed in the Shariah. [At-Tableegh, page 260, vol. 17]

Sometimes the kaamileen are also overcome by such states. Previously also, I was of the opinion that the kaamileen are not affected by such states, but now, Alhamdulillah, my opinion has changed and my research has shown that they also undergo such states. In this regard, Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) made the following dua on the occasion of Badr, "O Allaah! If You destroythis little group, none will worship You after today." If one inspects the rank and stage of Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم), then it is obvious that such words are not expected from him. The underlying secret is the excellence of the Kaamileen that they are privy of the temperament of Allaah Ta'ala. Allaah Ta`ala is free from temperament, but those who recognise Allaah Ta`ala, recognise the occasions and their actions and speech conform to the occasion. At the time of making that dua, Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) was overcome with a state of love and the refulgence of mahboobiyat (love) overcame him. He understood that Allah Ta`ala desired a display of coquetry from him at that time, hence he reciprocated accordingly. [At-Tableegh, page 253, vol. 17]

Similarly with Hadrat Ayoob (عليه السلام) who, after falling ill did not make dua for recovery for a long while, until his wife one day told him that his sickness has gone on for a long time and that he should make dua for recovery. He said that so many years of illness must pass as many as he had enjoyed good health. What was the hurry now? His condition at that time was that he felt Allaah Ta`ala wanted to test his patience so he exercised full patience, to such an extent that he did not even make dua for recovery, whereas to make dua is no contradictory to patience. It is however, an outward sign of displeasure and discontent. This is the reason why he did not make dua, but as soon as he realised that Allaah Ta`ala desired that he display his bondsmanship and servitude, he immediately made dua for recovery. In his dua he attributed the sickness to shaitaan. [At Tableegh, page 254]


[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Tahaanwi رحمه الله]
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Seifeddine-M's avatar
London
4,762
Brother
4,175
Seifeddine-M's avatar
#29 [Permalink] Posted on 12th March 2012 06:49
An Important Fiqhi Rule


It was the noble habit of Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) that he would spend the entire night in Ibaadat, to such an extent that his blessed feet would swell up, due to the excessive standing. This he (صلى الله عليه وسلم) did this even though Allaah Ta`ala had stated that he had forgiven all his sins, past and future. Some Sahaabah (رضي الله عنهم) were of the opinion that Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) reduce this excessiveness, because since Allaah Ta`ala had forgiven his sins, what need was there for this extreme? They presented their view to Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم), who replied, "Should I not then be a grateful slave?" [Ibid, page 187, vol. 2]

The objective of Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) was that even though all his sins were forgiven did not mean that he should reduce his ibaadat and subservience to Allaah Ta`ala. In fact, this meant that he should be even more diligent in ibaadat, and be ever grateful to Allaah Ta'ala. The one need and objective of ibaadat, i.e. seeking forgiveness, may be unnecessary for him, but the other, i.e. being a grateful servant of Allaah Ta`ala, still remained.

One general ruling is deduced from this Hadith, and that is - if any act of ibaadat is carried out for some objective, and that objective is attained before the act of ibaadat is accomplished, that ibaadat should not be abandoned, but must still be completed. The Fuqahaa have ruled, based on this Hadith, that if a community intendedSalaatul Istisqaa and it starts raining before the Salaat is performed, then it should still be completed and not be left out altogether. [At- Tableegh, page 229, vol. 17]

My aim here is to explain the asl of the ruling of the Fuqahaa. They have explained, in the chapter regarding Salaatul Istisqaa, that if the intention was made to perform Salaatul Istisqaa, and it starts raining before the Salaat is begun, then too, the Salaat must be performed, as a token of Shukr (thanks to Allaah Ta`ala).

This does not mean that after every Salaatul Istisqaa another be made as a form of shukr. If this is done, then the Fuqahaa will undoubtedly brand this act a Bid`ah.


Another example


There is also a similarity to this in (deeds of) actions. When Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) came to Makkah Shareef to conquer it, the Sahaabah (رضي الله عنهم) were getting fever in Madinah Munawwarah due to the atmosphere there. They recovered with the barkat of Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and when the time for Umrah came, the kuffaar of Makkah said that the air in Yathrib (Madinah Munawwarah) had weakened them. There was still some signs of illness evident on the Sahaabah (رضي الله عنهم). Whilst making tawaaaf, Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) told the Sahaabah (رضي الله عنهم) to lift their chests and walk, which is called raml. This was done so as to display to the kuffaar the bravery of the Muslims.

Although this was an occasion of ibaadat, nevertheless, the occasion called for this action of Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم). There was a reason and wisdom underlying the lifting of the chests and brisk walking of the Muslims on that occasion. It was an instruction from the Shariah as well. This ruling remained even after Makkah was conquered. This ruling will remain until the Day of Qiyaamah. At the time when this instruction was revealed there was a reason and wisdom for it, but theimplementation of this remained even after (the original reason was no more).

The Qur`aan Majeed and Ahaadith Shareef confirm this fact that even after a fulfilment of some desire (for which an act of ibaadat was to be made), this act should not be abandoned. When a general ruling has been extracted from the nusoos, then a corollary follows that when a firm intention has been made (to perform Salaatul Istisqaa) and thereafter it rains (before performing the Salaat), then Salaatul Istisqaa should still be made as a form of gratitude unto Allaah Ta`ala.

However, if the gratitude is to be a general one, then it will not be carried out in the form of Istisqaa, but in some other form. To express gratitude in such cases as expressed above is one thing and to always do it in the form of an ibaadat is another. Nevertheless, this much should be understood that after a desire has been granted, I should not be forgotten and gratitude should be expressed. [At- Tableegh, page 186 and 229]


Further Dilation And Proofs


I will now dilate on the support/proofs (for the above). For example, in the Aayat, "O our Rabb, do not reckon us for what we have forgotten or (done by) mistake", the issues asked for, i.e. forgiveness for mistakes, etc., have already been assured from before, and the Aayat preceding this one, "If you display what is in your bosoms or hide it, Allaah will reckon you for it", has been abrogated. Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم) even mentioned in a Hadith that the (sins committed in) forgetfulness and errors of this Ummat have been forgiven, still too, we have been instructed to make dua in this way. Although this was the case previously and applies no more, since the Aayat was abrogated, we are instructed with making dua in this way as a form of gratitude for this bounty. Just as we were in need before being forgiven (for mistakes and forgetting), we are still always in need for forgiveness. [Ibid. page 231, vol. 17]

[The Principles And Codes Of Law In Hanafi Fiqh, Moulana Ashraf Ali Tahaanwi رحمه الله]
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Online
UK
11,855
Brother
333
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#30 [Permalink] Posted on 12th March 2012 17:39

Asslamo Allaikum Brother,

Please let us know when your thread has completed.

Jazakullah Khairun

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top