The Islamic Personality

Volume 1 Taqiuddin an-Nabhani

1 The Islamic Personality (Volume 1)

Personality in every man consists of his mentality and his disposition (nafsiyyah). His outward appearance, body, tidiness and all other aspects are irrelevant to his personality. These are only superficial appearances. It would be superfluous for anyone to think that any of them are a factor of personality or that they affect personality. This is because man is distin uished with his mind, and it is his conduct that is indicative of his elevation or de radation. !ince the conduct of man in this life is in accordance with his concepts, his conduct is thus inevitably entwined with his concepts beyond separation. "onduct is the actions of man, which he performs in order to satisfy his instincts and or anic needs. He inevitably acts in accordance with the inclinations that he has towards satisfaction. "onse#uently, his concepts and his inclinations are the backbone of his personality. $ith re ard to the #uestions % $hat are these concepts& $hat makes them& $hat are their results& $hat are these inclinations& $hat causes them, and what effect do they have&% here is the e'planation( "oncepts are the meanin s of thou hts, not the meanin s of statements. ) statement denotes a meanin that may or may not e'ist in reality, *or e'ample when the poet says, %There is amon st men some who, when attacked, are found to be robust and sturdy, but when you throw a truthful ar ument at one of them, he instantly flees the fi ht worn out.% The meanin conveyed by the poet does e'ist in reality and is comprehended throu h sensory perception, thou h comprehendin it demands enli htenment in thinkin . +ut when the poet says( %They wondered does he indeed penetrate two horsemen with one strike of his spear and find this not a rand act&% I answered them, %If his spear was one whole mile lon , the same len th of horsemen he would penetrate with his strike%. The denotation of these lines is absolutely non,e'istent in reality. The warrior praised here never penetrated two horsemen with his spear in one strike- no one asked the #uestion answered by the poet, and the warrior is incapable of penetratin a mile of horsemen with a strike of his spear. The meanin of these sentences and their component words are e'plained. .n the other hand, the meanin of thou ht is as follows( if the meanin denoted by the statement e'ists in reality and is accessible by sensory perception or if it is perceived by the mind as somethin that is sensed and thus believed, then we can say that this meanin is a concept of the person who senses it or the person who visualises it and believes it. It is not a concept of anyone who does not sense it or visualise it, althou h such a person may understand the meanin of the sentence that has been said or that he has read. )ccordin ly, a person must perceive discourse in an intellectual manner, whether it be written or spoken discourse. That is, he must understand the meanin of sentences /ust as those sentences e'press that meanin , not as the producer of these sentences or he himself wants that meanin to be. )t the same time, the person must comprehend the reality of that meanin in such a manner that the reality of the meanin is identified to him, so that the meanin becomes a concept. "oncepts are the meanin s whose reality is 0

comprehended by the mind, whether it be a tan ible reality e'istent outside the mind or a reality that is accepted as e'istent outside it, provided this acceptance is based on tan ible reality. )part from this, the meanin s of words and sentences are not called concepts- they are mere information. The formation of concepts occurs as the result of associatin reality with information or information with reality, and as the result of the crystallisation of this formation accordin to the basis or bases a ainst which information and reality are measured when their association takes place, i.e. accordin to the person1s understandin of the reality and the information when he associates them, i.e. accordin to his comprehension of them. Thus, a person ac#uires a mentality that understands words and sentences and comprehends meanin s and their identified reality, and then it makes its /ud ement on this reality. !o, mentality is the mode of comprehendin thin s or understandin them. In other words, it is the mode in which the reality is associated with information, or in which information is associated with reality by measurin it a ainst one basis or a number of specific bases. *rom this stem the discrepancies between mentalities, such as the Islamic mentality, the communist mentality, the capitalist mentality, the anarchist mentality and the monotonous mentality. )s re ards their results, these concepts determine the conduct of man towards the comprehended reality. They also determine his position in terms of inclination towards the reality turnin towards it or away from it. In addition they provide him with a particular inclination and a specific taste. The inclinations are the drives, which motivate man to seek satisfaction, entwined with concepts he has about the thin s that are assumed to provide satisfaction. These inclinations are the outcome of the vital ener y that pushes him to satisfy his instincts and or anic needs, and the association between this ener y and the concepts. These inclinations alone, i.e. the drives entwined with the concepts about life constitute man1s nafsiyyah (disposition). 2afsiyyah is the mode of satisfyin instincts and or anic needs. In other words, it is the mode in which the drives for satisfaction are entwined with concepts. Thus it is a combination of the inevitable association that takes place naturally within man between his drives and the concepts he has about thin s entwined with his concepts about life. It is of this mentality and this nafsiyyah that personality consists. )lthou h co nition or comprehension is innate in man and is definitely e'istent within every human, the formation of mentality is performed by man. )lthou h inclinations are innate in man and are definitely e'istent within every man, but the formation of disposition (nafsiyyah) is performed by man. !ince the e'istence of a basis or a number of bases a ainst which information and reality are measured in the process of association is what crystallises the meanin so that is becomes a concept- and since the combination that occurs between the drives and the concepts is what crystallises the drive so that it becomes an inclination. Thus the basis or bases a ainst which man measures information and reality in the process of association has the most important influence in effectin a specific formation of personality. If this basis or bases accordin to which mentality is formed is the same basis or bases accordin to which nafsiyyah (disposition) is formed, man 3

achieves a personality that is distin uished with a specific colour. +ut if the basis or bases accordin to which mentality is formed is other than the basis or bases accordin to which disposition is formed, one1s mentality will be different from his disposition. +ecause he would then be measurin his inclinations a ainst a basis or bases that are deep rooted in him. Thus he would be entwinin his drives with concepts other than those which formed his mentality. The result is that he becomes a personality that lacks distinctiveness, a personality with variance and discrepancy, one whose thou hts are different from his inclinations. +ecause he understands words and sentences and comprehends events in a mode different to his inclination. "onse#uently, the treatment of personality and its formation can only be achieved throu h the establishment of one basis for both man1s mentality and disposition. That is, the basis a ainst which he measures information and reality when he associates them should become the same basis accordin to which drives and concepts are associated. Thus, personality is formed accordin to one basis and one criterion, and as a result becomes a distinctive personality.

1.1 The Islamic Personality

Islam has provided a complete treatment for man to form for him a specific personality which is distinct from all others. $ith a#eedah (creed), it treated his thou hts, makin it an intellectual basis on which his thou hts are built and accordin to which his concepts are formed. He distin uishes true thou ht from false when he measures it a ainst the Islamic a#eedah and builds it on the a#eedah in its capacity as an intellectual basis. !o his mentality is formed over this a#eedah. This intellectual basis, the a#eedah thus provides him with a distinct mentality and a true criterion for thou hts. It thus safe uards him a ainst erroneous thou ht- he e'pels false thou ht and remains honest in his thou ht and sound in his comprehension. )t the same time, man1s actions, which stem from his instincts and or anic needs were properly treated by Islam with !hari1a rules, which emanate from the a#eedah itself. The sharia rules re ulate but do not suppress instincts, they harmonise between them, not leavin them free without restriction. They enable him to satisfy all his needs in a harmonious manner that leads to tran#uillity and stability. Islam has made the Islamic a#eedah an intellectual one, thus makin it suitable as an intellectual basis a ainst which thou hts can be measured. It also made its a#eedah a comprehensive idea about man, life, and the universe. This comprehensive idea has solved for him all of his comple'ities whether internal or e'ternal. This made it suitable as a eneral concept, i.e. a criterion that is used naturally when the association between drives and concepts occurs, that is a criterion accordin to which inclinations are formed. !o, Islam provided man with a definite basis, which represented a definite criterion for both concepts and inclinations, that is for mentality and disposition at the same time. Thus Islam formed the personality in such a special way so that it is distinct from other personalities. 4

$e conclude that Islam forms the personality by means of the Islamic creed. +y this Islamic a#eedah both his mentality and disposition are formed. )ccordin ly, the Islamic mentality is the one that thinks on the basis of Islam, i.e. that takes Islam and only Islam as the eneral criterion for thou hts related to life. It is not the mentality that is merely knowled eable or pensive. 5ather, the mere fact that a person actually and practically takes Islam as the criterion for all thou hts makes his mentality Islamic. The Islamic nafsiyyah (disposition) is the one that makes all its inclinations based on Islam, i.e. that makes Islam the only eneral criterion for all satisfactions. It is not the one, which is merely ascetical or strin ent. 5ather, the mere fact that a person actually and practically makes Islam the criterion for all satisfactions makes his disposition Islamic. A person with this mentality and this disposition thus becomes an Islamic personality, irrespective of whether he is knowledgeable or ignorant, and irrespective of whether he confines himself to observing the obligatory (fard) and recommended (mandoub) rules and to refraining from haram (prohibited action), or he observes besides this other recommended acts of obedience and avoidance of suspicious acts. In both cases, a person is an Islamic personality because anyone who thinks on the basis of Islam and makes his desires conform to Islam is an Islamic personality. 6es, indeed Islam did order the 7uslim to learn more Islamic culture, so that this mentality rows and becomes capable of measurin any thou ht. Islam also demanded performin matters beyond the (fard) and demanded the avoidance of matters more than the haram (prohibited actions) in order that this disposition is stren thened, so that it becomes capable of deterrin any inclination that is incompatible with Islam. +ut all this is intended to enhance this personality and to set it to proceed towards a sublime pinnacle. 6et this does not intended to classify as non,Islamic personalities those, which are inferior to this one. 5ather, this is an Islamic personality and those inferior to it of the common knowled eable who act in accordance with Islam and the educated who confine themselves to performin out the fards (compulsory rules) and refrainin from the harams (prohibited actions) are also Islamic personalities. These types of personality only vary in stren th but are all Islamic personalities. $hat matters when /ud in whether someone is an Islamic personality is whether he takes Islam as the basis for his thinkin and inclinations. It is accordin to this that Islamic personalities, mentalities, and nafsiyyahs (dispositions) become disparate. !o those who envisa e an Islamic personality as an an el commit a rave mis/ud ement. Their harm in society is enormous, because they look for an els amon st people and never find them- they do not find an an el even in their own selves. They thus despair and ive up hope for 7uslims. Those idealistic people verily serve as proof that Islam is utopian, impossible to implement, and is a host of admirable ideals that man cannot implement or endure. "onse#uently, they repulse people from Islam and render many people too paralysed to act- althou h Islam came in order to be implemented in practice. Islam is realistic, i.e. it deals with realities and it is not difficult to implement. It is within the potential of every man, no matter how 8

weak his thinkin is and how stron his instincts and needs are. !uch a man can implement Islam upon himself smoothly and easily after he has comprehended the Islamic a#eedah and become an Islamic personality. This is because he definitely becomes an Islamic personality merely by makin the Islamic a#eedah the basis for his concepts and inclinations and maintainin this criterion. The only task that he has to perform afterwards, is to stren then his personality with the Islamic culture in order for his mentality to row, and with recommended acts of obedience to stren then his nafsiyyah, so that he is on the path to a sublime pinnacle, which he would not only reach but also surpass towards ever,elevatin peaks. This is due to the fact that Islam has treated man1s mentality with its a#eedah when it made this a#eedah the intellectual basis on which to build his thou hts about life. !o, he distin uishes true from false thou ht when he measures thou hts a ainst the Islamic a#eedah and builds them on it because it is an intellectual basis. Thus, he safe uards himself a ainst erroneous thou ht, avoids false thou ht and remains true in his thou ht and sound in his comprehension. Islam has treated man1s inclinations with !hari1a rules when it treated his actions, which emanate from his instincts and or anic needs. This treatment is sensitive- it re ulates instincts but does not harm them by attemptin to destroy them. It does not leave them free unrestricted but puts them in harmony. It enables man to satisfy all his needs in a harmonious manner that leads to tran#uillity and stability. !o, a 7uslim who embraces Islam throu h ration and evidence and fully implements Islam upon himself and understands correctly the rules of )llah (swt), this 7uslim is an Islamic personality distinct from all others. He achieves the Islamic mentality when he makes the Islamic a#eedah the basis for his thinkin . )nd he achieves the Islamic nafsiyyah when he makes this a#eedah the basis for his inclinations. Hence, the Islamic personality is characterised with special attributes that distin uish the 7uslim and mark him amon st people- he is as outstandin amon st them as a mole on the face. These attributes that characterise him are an inevitable result of his observance of )llah1s commands and prohibitions and of performin his actions in accordance with these commands and prohibitions as a result of his awareness of his relationship with )llah (swt). Thus, his aim from observin the !hari1a is nothin but to please )llah (swt). )fter a 7uslim has achieved Islamic mentality and nafsiyyah, he becomes #ualified for cadetship and leadership simultaneously. He combines mercy and tou hness, lu'ury and asceticism. He truly understands life, so he sei9es this worldly life, allocatin for it only its due si nificance, and he ains the hereafter by strivin for it. )ccordin ly, he is not dominated by any of the attributes of worldly life worshippers. He does not drift with reli ious monomania or Indian asceticism. !imultaneously, he is a hero of /ihad and a resident of a prayer chamber. He humbles himself when he is a master. He combines within him leadership and /urisprudence, trade and politics. His most sublime attribute is that he is a servant of )llah1s, his "reator. Therefore, you see him humble in his prayer- he refrains from futile talk- he pays his 9akaah- he lowers his a9e- he observes his trusts- he honours his pled e- he keeps his promise- and he performs /ihad. Thus is the 7uslim. Thus is the believer. Thus is the Islamic personality, which Islam forms and by which it makes a person most ri hteous amon st :

people. )llah (swt) described this personality in the Holy ;uran with a number of ayahs (verses) when He described the companions of the Prophet (pbuh) and when he described the servants of )llah 7ost <racious and when He described those who perform /ihad . )llah )lmi hty says, %7uhammad is the 7essen er of )llah- and those who are with him are stron a ainst =nbelievers, but compassionate amon st each other,%>2?(3@A. )nd He says, % The van uard (of Islam), the first of those who forsook (their homes) and of those who ave them aid , and (also) those who follow them in all ood deeds, well,pleased is )llah with them as are they with Him,% >BCC(BCA. )nd He says, %The believers must (eventually) win throu h. Those who humble themselves in their prayers- who avoid vain talk- who are active in deeds of charity%>B,3(20A. )nd He says, %and the servants of )llah 7ost <racious are those who walk on the earth in humility, and when the i norant address them, they say, %PeaceD% Those who spend the ni ht in adoration of their Eord, prostate and standin .% >80,83(24A )nd He says, %+ut the messen er, and those who believe with him strive and fi ht with their wealth and their persons( for them are (all) ood thin s( and it is they who will prosper. )llah has prepared for them <ardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein( that is the supreme felicity,% >@@,@?(?A. )nd He said, %Those that turn to )llah in repentance- that serve Him and praise Him- that wander in devotion to the cause of )llah- that bow down and prostrate themselves in prayer- they en/oin ood and forbid evil- and observe the limits set by )llah- these do re/oice. !o proclaim the lad tidin s to the +elievers.% >BB2(?A

1.2 The Formation of Personality

$hen man co nises or comprehends thin s, i.e. when he comprehends them, in a specific mode, he achieves a specific mentality. $hen the drives for satisfaction, which have crystallised throu h their inevitable association with the concepts about thin s, are entwined by man with specific concepts about life, he achieves a specific nafsiyyah. $hen his concepts about life unite in controllin him when he co nises thin s and when he inclines to thin s as well, he achieves a specific personality. Therefore, personality is makin the direction one has in co nisin thin s and in inclinin to them as one direction built on one basis. Thus the formation of personality is the establishment of one basis for both thinkin and inclinations in man. !uch a basis may be one or multiple, when it is multiple, that is if multiple uidelines were made bases for thinkin and inclinations, one would have a personality, but it would be colourless . If the basis were one, that is if one principle was made the basis for thinkin and inclination, one would have a specific personality of a specific colour. This is how man should be and this also should be tar eted in the process of culturin individuals. )lthou h every eneral idea could be a basis for thinkin and inclination, but such an idea could only be a basis for a limited number of thin s but not for all thin s. 2othin #ualifies for a comprehensive basis for all thin s e'cept a comprehensive idea about man, life and the universe. This is because it is the intellectual basis on which every thou ht is built, and because it determines every viewpoint in life.

)nd because it is only the intellectual creed, which is fit to refer to with re ard to thou hts that re ulate life1s matters and those that affect man1s conduct in life. 2evertheless, the fact that the comprehensive idea, i.e. the intellectual creed is e'clusively fit as a eneral and comprehensive basis for thinkin and inclinations, in no way this means that it is the correct basis. It only means that it is fit to be a basis, irrespective of correctness or incorrectness. $hat indicates the correctness or incorrectness of such a basis is its compatibility with man1s fitrah (innate nature). If an intellectual creed was compatible with man1s fitrah , it would be a correct creed, and , conse#uently, it would be a correct basis for thinkin and inclinations, i.e. for the formation of personality. If it were incompatible with the fitrah, it would be a false creed and thus a false basis. "reed1s compatibility with fitrah means its acknowled ement of the impotence and the need to depend on the "reator (The <overnor) that are in man1s fitrah, in other words its compatibility with the instinct of sanctification. The Islamic a#eedah is the only intellectual creed that acknowled es what is in man1s fitrah, namely sanctification. This is because other creeds are either compatible with the instinct of sanctification by way of emotion not by way of ration, thus bein non,intellectual creeds, or they are intellectual creeds but do not acknowled e what is in man1s fitrah , i.e. they do not acknowled e the instinct of sanctification. Therefore, the Islamic a#eedah is the only correct creed. )nd it is the only creed that is fit to be the correct basis for thinkin and inclinations. Hence, the formation of personality by man should be based on the intellectual creed as a basis for his thinkin and inclinations. !ince the Islamic creed (a#eedah) is the sole correct intellectual creed and thus the sole correct basis, the formation of personality should take place by makin the Islamic a#eedah alone the sole basis for man1s thinkin and inclinations, in order for him to be an Islamic personality, i.e. to be a lofty and distinct personality. Hence formation of the Islamic personality is only accomplished by buildin both the thinkin and the inclinations of the individual on the basis of the Islamic a#eedah. +y so doin , the Islamic personality is formed. 6et this formation is not ever lastin , it is merely formation of the personality. *or this personality to remain based on the Islamic a#eedah, there is no uarantee, since deviation from the a#eedah mi ht occur in man1s thinkin - it mi ht occur in his inclinations as well. This deviation may be in the form of mis uidance (kufr) or in the form of fis# (trans ression). Therefore, a constant observance of buildin the thinkin and inclinations on the basis of the Islamic a#eedah maintained at every moment in life in order for the individual to remain an Islamic personality. )fter the formation of this personality, work is focused on developin it by developin the mentality and by developin the nafsiyyah. )s re ards the nafsiyyah, it is developed throu h worshippin the "reator and drawin nearer to Him throu h acts of obedience, and by constantly buildin every inclination towards any thin on the Islamic a#eedah. Fevelopment of the mentality, on the other hand, is achieved throu h the e'planation of thou hts built on the Islamic a#eedah and conveyin them in Islamic culture. ?

This is the method for formin the Islamic personality and the method for developin it. It is one and the same method employed by the Prophet (saw). He used to call people for Islam by callin them for the Islamic a#eedah. .nce they have embraced Islam, he stren thened this a#eedah in them and ensured that they were committed to buildin their thinkin and inclinations on its basis, as was reported in the )thar (material conveyed by the !ahaabah),%2one of you shall be believer unless his disposition is in accordance with what I brou ht to you,% and %2one of you shall be believer unless I am the intellect with which he comprehends.% He then proceeded to convey the ;uranic ayahs of )llah (swt) that were bein revealed to him and to e'plain the ahkaam (rules) and to teach Islam to the 7uslims. )t his hands, and as a result of followin him and adherin to what he conveyed, lofty Islamic personalities second only to the prophets were formed. $e thus conclude that the startin point with the individual is the establishment within him of the a#eedah- then, thinkin and inclinations are built on it- afterwards, effort is e'erted in performin acts of obedience and ac#uirin thou hts.

1.

!a"s in #onduct

7any 7uslims e'hibit acts that are incompatible with their Islamic a#eedah. 7any Islamic personalities e'hibit some behaviour that contradicts with their Islamic personalities. !ome think that the acts, which are incompatible with the Islamic a#eedah, ostracise the person from Islam, and that the behaviour contradictin the attributes of a committed 7uslim divests him of his Islamic personality. The truth is that aps in the conduct of a 7uslim do not divest him of his Islamic personality. This is because a person may inadvertently fail to associate his concepts with his a#eedah- or he may be i norant of the contradiction between such concepts and his a#eedah or his Islamic personality- or !atan may overwhelm his heart and thus cause him to distance himself from this a#eedah in one of his acts. !o he would act in a manner that is incompatible with his a#eedah or that contradicts the attributes of a 7uslim adherent to his deen or a ainst the commands and prohibitions of )llah (swt). He would do all this or some of it when he still embraces the a#eedah and employs it as the basis for his thinkin and inclinations. Thus it is incorrect in such cases to say that the person has abandoned Islam, or that he has become a non,Islamic personality. +ecause as lon as the Islamic a#eedah is embraced by him, he remains a 7uslim, althou h disobedient in one of his acts. )s lon as one adopts the Islamic a#eedah as the basis for his thinkin and inclinations, he is an Islamic personality, even if he commits fis# (trans ression) in a iven instance of his behaviour. This is because what matters is the embracin of the a#eedah and the adoptin of it as the basis for thinkin and inclinations, even thou h there are aps in acts and behaviour. ) 7uslim is not ostracised from Islam unless he relin#uishes the embracement of the Islamic a#eedah whether by speech or action. He is not divested of his Islamic personality unless he distances himself from the Islamic a#eedah in his thinkin and inclinations, i.e. if he does not take it as a basis for his thinkin and BC

inclinations. If he distances himself from it, he is no lon er a 7uslim. )nd if he does not distance himself from it he remains a 7uslim. Therefore one can be a 7uslim because he does not deny the Islamic a#eedah, but in spite of bein a 7uslim he is not an Islamic personality. This is because despite his embracement of the Islamic a#eedah he does not take it as a basis for his thinkin and inclinations. This is due to the fact that the association of concepts with the Islamic a#eedah is not mechanical in such a way that the concept does not function e'cept in accordance with the a#eedah. 5ather it is a social association that is open to separation and back to restoration. Therefore no wonder that a 7uslim commits a disobedience and violates the commands and prohibitions of )llah in one of his acts. !uch a person mi ht see the reality incompatible with associatin behaviour with the a#eedah. .r he mi ht ima ine that it was in his interest to do what he did but then he repents and comprehends the error of what he did and returns to )llah (swt). !uch a violation of )llah1s commands and prohibitions does not deny him his a#eedah but it does deny him his commitment to the a#eedah in this precise act. Therefore an Gaasi (disobedient person) or a faasi# (perpetrator of trans ression) is not considered a murtadd (apostate), but he is considered a 7uslim Gaasi only in the act in which he was disobedient, and he is punished for this act only. He remains a 7uslim as lon as he embraces the a#eedah of Islam. !o, it should not be said that he is a non,Islamic personality for the mere instance when he erred inadvertently, or when he was overwhelmed by !atan, as lon as his adoption of the Islamic a#eedah as a basis for his thinkin and his inclinations is intact and free of any doubt. The !ahaabah (companions of the prophet) were involved in a number of incidents at the time of the prophet (saw) where a companion of the prophet would violate a command or prohibition. !uch violations did not deny him his bein a 7uslim and it did not compromise his Islamic personality. This is because they were humans not an els. They are /ust like all other people and they are not impeccable because they are not prophets. Hatib ibn )bi +alta1ah conveyed to the Hafirs of ;uraish the news of the prophet1s intention to invade them, althou h the prophet was cautious to maintain the secrecy of the invasion. The prophet twisted the head of )l,*dl Ibn )l,Gabbas when he saw him a9in , in a manner indicatin inclination and desire, at a woman who was talkin to the prophet. In the year of the con#uest (of 7ecca), the )nsar spoke about the prophet and said that he had abandoned them and returned to his kinsfolk despite his vow not to do so. The senior !ahabah fled the fi ht at Hunain and left the prophet with only few of his companions. These were only some of the incidents which the prophet did not consider underminin to the Islam of the perpetrators or blemishin to their Islamic personality. This alone is sufficient evidence that aps in conduct do not ostracise the 7uslim from Islam, nor do they divest him of his Islamic personality. 6et, this does not imply the permissibility of disobeyin )llah1s commands and prohibitions, since it is indisputable that disobeyin them ran es between haraam (prohibited) and makrooh (disliked). 2or does this imply that an Islamic personality is free not to conform to the attributes of a committed 7uslim since all this is indispensable for the formation of an Islamic personality. 6et this does imply that 7uslims are BB

humans and that Islamic personalities are humans not an les. Thus if they erred they would be treated in accordance with the dictates of )llah1s rule if their fault is punishable. +ut it should not be said that they became non,Islamic personalities. The basis for /ud in whether someone is an Islamic personality is the intactness of his Islamic a#eedah and the buildin of his thinkin and inclinations on it. )s lon as the basis is intact and the buildin of thinkin and inclinations is e'clusively on the Islamic a#eedah, rare inadvertent errors, i.e. aps in conduct do not compromise his Islamic personality. +ut if a person1s a#eedah becomes faulty, this person is ostracised from Islam even if his deeds were built on the rules of Islam, because they would not then be built on belief but on somethin other that belief, either on habit, conformity to people, the benefit of such deeds or any other matter. If the buildin process becomes faulty due to his use of benefit as the basis on which to build his behaviour, or the use of the intellect as the basis on which to build his behaviour, the person would remain a 7uslim due to the intactness of his a#eedah. +ut he would no lon er be an Islamic personality, even if he was amon the carriers of the Islamic Fa1wa or if all his behaviour is in conformity to the rules of Islam. This is because the buildin of thinkin and inclinations on the Islamic a#eedah due to belief in it is what makes an Islamic personality. Therefore, those who love Islam and want it to be dominant and victorious but do not build their thinkin on its thou hts and rules but rather on their own minds, interests or desires, they should be wary of such a deed because it distances them from bein Islamic personalities- even if their a#eedah is intact and even if they were hi hly knowled eable of the thou hts and rules of Islam. )ttention should be drawn to the fact that embracin the Islamic a#eedah means belief in all of the prophet1s messa e, as a whole, and belief, in the detailed, matters whose evidence is definite, and that the acceptance of all this be matched with contentment and submission. It should be known that mere knowled e is insufficient and that revolt a ainst a most minor matter proven definitely as part of Islam ostracises the person and detaches him from the a#eedah. Islam is an indivisible whole as far as belief and acceptance is concerned. Thus Islam can only be accepted as a whole- relin#uishment of a fraction of it is kufr (disbelief). Hence the belief in the separation of deen from life or from the state is indisputable kufr. )llah )lmi hty says, %Those who deny )llah and His 7essen ers, and (those who) wish to separate )llah from His 7essen ers, sayin , G$e believe in some but re/ect other1 and those who wish to take a course midway, They are in truth (e#ually) unbelievers%>B4C,B4B( 2 )n,2isa1A.

B2

2 The Islamic $qeedah

The Islamic )#eedah is the imaan (positive belief) in )llah, His )n les, +ooks, 7essen ers and the Fay of 5esurrection and )l,#ada1u wal,;adar (fate and destiny) whether favourable or unfavourable are from )llah (swt). The meanin of imaan is confirmed belief that conforms to reality and results from evidence . A belief, which has no evidence, is not imaan since it cannot be confirmed without evidence. If it does not have evidence, it is not conducive to confirmationit will only be acceptance of a piece of news and thus not considered imaan. Hence, evidence is indispensable for any thin re#uired to be part of imaan, so that acceptance of it becomes imaan. Therefore, the availability of evidence is a precondition for imaan, irrespective of its soundness or faultiness. Ividence is either rational or na#lee (transmitted). $hat determines whether the evidence should be rational or na#lee is the sub/ect to be proved by it, in order to have imaan in the iven sub/ect. If the sub/ect is accessible by the senses and the senses perceive it, the evidence will definitely be rational not na#lee. If it is inaccessible by the senses its evidence will be na#lee. Since the naqlee evidence itself is accessible through the senses, i.e. the fact that is evidence is perceptible and is accessible by the senses . The cate orisation of evidence as a na#lee proof fit for imaan should be dependent upon provin it as evidence via rational proof. =pon e'amination of matters that the Islamic a#eedah demands imaan in, one finds that imaan in )llah (swt) is achieved throu h rational proof. +ecause its sub/ect, which is the e'istence of a creator for the tan ible comprehensible bein s, is perceptible and is accessible by the senses. +ut imaan in an els is achieved throu h na#lee proof because the e'istence of an els is not accessible by the senses, neither the an els themselves nor anythin that indicates their e'istence is perceived by the senses. 5e ardin imaan in the +ooks, they are classified as follows. Imaan in the ;uran is achieved throu h rational evidence because the ;uran is comprehensible and tan ible its miraculousness is comprehensible and tan ible at all a es. .n the other hand, imaan in the other +ooks such as the Tawraah (.ld Testament), the In/eel (2ew Testament) and the Jaboor (The +ook of Psalms) is achieved throu h na#lee evidence. This is because the fact that such +ooks come from )llah is not perceptible at all a es. They were rather perceptible durin the life of the 7essen ers who conveyed them, throu h the miracles that were delivered. Those miracles terminated at the end of their time- thus they are not perceptible after the time of those who delivered them. +ut the information that they were from )llah and that they were delivered by the 7essen ers is reported. !o, their evidence is na#lee not rational, because of the intellect1s inability to comprehend at all a es that they were the speech of )llah, due to the inability to comprehend their miraculousness throu h the senses. Imaan in all of the 7essen ers is comparable to this. Imaan in 7uhammad the 7essen er is reached throu h rational evidence because the fact that the ;uran B0

is the speech of )llah and that it was conveyed to us by 7uhammad is accessible by the senses. Thus one1s perception of the ;uran leads to his realisation that 7uhammad is the 7essen er of )llah. This is feasible at all a es and for all enerations. Imaan in all other Prophets is reached throu h na#lee proof, because the evidence of the prophethood of each of them is his miracle which people other than those who lived at the prophet1s time cannot perceive. )ll those who came later on until the Fay of 5esurrection cannot perceive those miracles. Thus no tan ible proof of their prophethood is available. The proof of their prophethood is not reached by rational but rather by na#lee evidence. The evidence of the prophethood of our 7aster, i.e. his miracle, is available and accessible by the senses- it is the ;uran. Therefore the proof here is rational. The proof of the Fay of 5esurrection is na#lee, because the Fay of 5esurrection is not accessible by the senses- nothin accessible by the senses indicates it. !o no rational proof is available for it but rather a na#lee proof. )l,#ada1u wal #adar (divine fate and destiny) has a rational proof because )l,#adaa1 (fate) is man1s action that issues from him or happens to him a ainst his will. It is accessible by the senses and is sensorially comprehensible- thus its evidence is rational. The ;adar (destiny) is the attributes activated in thin s by man, such as burnin by fire and cuttin by knife. These attributes are accessible by the senses and are sensorially comprehensible. Thus the evidence of )l,;adar is rational. This has been re ardin the type of evidence re#uired for the a#eedah. The specific evidence for each element of the a#eedah is as follows. The evidence of the e'istence of )llah is e'hibited in everythin . The fact that tan ible comprehensible thin s e'ist is definite. The fact that they are dependent on other (thin s) is also definite. !o the fact that they are created by a creator is definite because their need means that they are created, since their need indicates the pre,e'istence of somethin - so they are not eternal. It should not be said here that a thin depended on some other thin not on a %non,thin %, and so thin s are complementary to each other but in their totality they are independent. This should not be said because the sub/ect of the evidence here is any specific thin such as a pen, a /u or a piece of paper, etc. The evidence is intended to prove that this pen or /u or that piece of paper is created by a creator. It will be obvious that this or that thin in itself is dependent on another, irrespective of that %other% on which it depends. This %other% on which a thin depends is definitely other than it, as is sensorially observed. .nce a thin is dependent on some %other%, it is proven as not eternal and thus it is created. It should not be said that a thin consists of matter and is dependent on matter and so dependent on itself not on an %other%, and thus independent. This should not be said because even if we concede that a thin is matter and depends on matter, this dependence by matter is dependence on somethin %other% than matter not dependence on matter itself. This is so because an entity of matter alone cannot complement the dependence of another entity of matter- somethin other that matter is needed for this dependence to be complemented , and thus matter is dependent on somethin else, not on itself. *or e'ample, water needs heat in order to transform into vapour. Iven if we conceded that heat is matter and water is matter, the mere availability of heat is not ade#uate for water to transform- a specific proportion of heat is needed for transformation to take place. !o water is dependent on this B3

specific proportion of heat. !omethin other than matter itself imposes this proportion and compels matter to behave accordin to it. Thus matter is dependent on that who determines the proportion for it and so it is dependent on someone who is not matter. Hence the dependence of matter on non,matter is a definite fact- so it is needy and thus is created by a creator. Thus the tan ible perceptible thin s are created by a creator. The creator has to be eternal with no be innin , since if He was not eternal it would been a creature not a creator. Thus bein a creator necessitates bein eternal. The "reator is eternal by necessity. =pon e'aminin the thin s that mi ht be suspect of bein the "reator, it is concluded that the only candidates are matter, nature or )llah (swt). To say matter is the creator is false because of what has /ust been e'plained, i.e. the fact that matter is dependent on the one who determines for it the proportion in order for the transformation of thin s to happen- hence it is not eternal and that which is not eternal cannot be a creator. To say that nature is the "reator is also false, because nature is the a re ate of thin s and the system that re ulate them such that every thin in the universe behaves in accordance with this system. This re ulation does not come from the system alone, because without the thin s to be re ulated there can be no system. It does not come from the thin s either, because the mere e'istence of thin s does not inevitably and spontaneously produce a system- nor does their e'istence cause them to be re ulated without a re ulator. 2or does it come from the sum of thin s and the system, because re ulation does not happen e'cept in accordance with a specific situation that compels both the system and the thin s. This specific situation of the thin s and the system is what makes re ulation possible. The specific situation is imposed on the thin s and the system and re ulation can happen only in accordance with it. It does not come from the thin s or the system or the sum of both of them- hence it comes from %somethin % other than them. Thus nature, which cannot function e'cept in accordance with a situation that is imposed on it, is dependent, and thus it is not eternal and that which is not eternal cannot be a creator. Thus we conclude that the "reator is that whose attribute is eternality by necessity. That is )llah subhanahu wa ta1ala. The e'istence of )llah is a perceptible and sensorially comprehensible, because the dependence of the tan ible perceptible thin s on an eternal %thin % indicates the e'istence of the "reator. $hen man deeply reflects on the creatures of )llah, and e'amines closely the universe and attempts to comprehend time and place, he will see that he is only a very tiny atom in relation to these ever,movin worlds. He will also see that these many worlds are all functionin in accordance with specific way and fi'ed laws. Thus he will fully realise the e'istence of this "reator and comprehend His oneness and see His randeur and capability. He will realise that all what he sees of the contrast between the day and the ni ht, and the direction of the winds and the e'istence of the seas and the rivers and celestial orbits are indeed rational proofs and e'pressive evidences of the e'istence of )llah and His oneness and capability. )llah )lmi hty says, % Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth; in the alteration of the Night and the Day; in the sailing of the Ships through the Ocean for the profit of mankind; in the rain which Allah sends down from the skies and the life which he gives therewith to an earth that is dead; in the !easts of all kinds that "e scatters through the B4

earth; in the change of the winds and the clouds which they trail like their slaves !etween the sky and the earth #here$ indeed are signs for a people that are wise%%()l,+a#arah B83). )llah )lmi hty also says, &'ere they created of nothing or were they themselves the creators( Or did they create the heavens and the earth( Nay they have not firm !elief%& #Attoor)*+),$% It is throu h the ration that the e'istence of )llah is comprehended, and it is itself that is employed as the method of arrivin at imaan (positive belief). Hence Islam ordered the use of ration and deemed it the evidence re ardin imaan in the e'istence of )llah (swt). Thus the proof of the e'istence of )llah is rational. Those who advocate the timelessness of the world, and that it is eternal with no be innin , and those who claim that matter is eternal, and that it has no be innin - they say that the world is not dependent on anythin but is self, sustained because all the thin s that e'ist in this world are different forms of matter- they are all matter. $hen any of these thin s depends on the other, this is not dependence because when somethin depends on itself, this is not dependence but independence. Thus matter is eternal and has no be innin , because it is self,sustained, i.e. the world is eternal and self,sustained. The answer to this is twofold( first, the thin s that e'ist in this world are incapable of creatin (anythin ) from nothin ness, whether individually or collectively. Iach thin of them is incapable of creatin from nothin ness. If another thin complemented it in one or more aspects, it would still be, to ether with the other thin , incapable of creatin . Its incapability to create from nothin ness is tan ibly conspicuous. This means that it is not eternal, because an eternal (thin ) must not be characterised with incapability- it must be characterised with ability to create from nothin ness, i.e. the effected thin s must depend on it in order for it to be deemed eternal. "onse#uently, the world is not eternal and not timeless because it is incapable of creatin . The incapability of somethin to create from nothin ness is definite evidence that it is not eternal. !econd, is what we have affirmed that a thin is dependent on a proportion that it cannot surpass in the process of complementin any other thin Ks dependence. Here is an e'planation of this. ()) is dependent on (+) and (+) is dependent on (") and (") is dependent on ()). Their dependence on one another is evidence that each one of them is not eternal. he fact that each complements the other or satisfies the need of the other does not happen in an unregulated manner but in accordance with a specific proportion, i.e. in accordance with a specific order. And the fact that it cannot fulfill this complementation e!cept in accordance with this order and that it is incapable of surpassing it, this indicates that the thing which complemented (the other) did not fulfill the complementation solitarily but fulfilled it according to an order that was imposed on it by an "other" and it was compelled to conform to it. Thus the thin which complemented and that which was complemented both depended on that who determined for them the specific order in order for the complementation to happen. +oth of them are incapable of surpassin this order. )nd the satisfyin of the need cannot occur e'cept in accordance with this order. Hence, that who B8

imposed the order on both of them is the one to who is the need. Thus thin s collectively, even thou h each complements another, remain in need for an %other%, i.e. in need to that who compelled them to conform to the specific order. *or e'ample, in order for water to transform into ice, it needs temperature. They say that water is matter, temperature is matter and ice is matter- thus in order to transform into another form, matter needed matter, i.e. needed itself and did not need another thin . +ut the reality is contrary to this. In order for water to transform into ice, it needs a specific temperature not only a temperature. Temperature is one thin and the fact that it does not act e'cept at a certain level is another thin , and this is different from temperature itself. That is, the proportion that is imposed on temperature in order to act and on water to be affected does not come from water- otherwise it would have chosen to be affected as it wanted. It does not come from temperature either- otherwise it would have chosen to act as it wanted. That is, it does not come from matter itself- otherwise it would have chosen to act or be affected as it wanted. It has to come from somethin other than matter. Hence, matter needs that who determines for it the specific proportion that it needs in order to act or be affected. This who determines the proportion for it is one other than them. !o matter needs one other than it. Thus it is not eternal because that who is eternal and not bound by time does not need an other because it is independent of others- all thin s depend on it. The lack of independence of matter is definite evidence that it is not eternal and it is thus created. .ne sin le lance at the world makes any human realise that effectin thin s, whether they be of the type that occupies space or of the ener y type, can only result from tan ible perceptible thin s and a specific order between these tan ible perceptible thin s in order for the effectin of thin s to happen. There is no creation from nothin ness by this world. 2othin is effected in this world without bein re ulated and in conformity with this proportion. That is, nothin in this world is effected from nothin ness or without proportion, i.e. without a specific order. Thus thin s that are effected and those that were effected in this world are not eternal or timeless. )s far as thin s that are affected are concerned, this is obvious in that they are effected from tan ible perceptible thin s and it is obvious that in the process of bein effected, they were submitted to a specific proportion that was imposed on them. "oncernin thin s that were effected, this is obvious in that they are incapable of creatin from nothin ness and also in their submission a ainst their will to a certain order that is imposed on them. This order does not come from them- otherwise they would be capable of departin from it and of not submittin to it- therefore it comes from other than these thin s. The incapability of the tan ible perceptible thin s in the world, i.e. the incapability of the world to create from nothin ness and their submission to a specific order that comes from an other is definite evidence that the world is not eternal or timeless but it is created by the eternal and timeless. "oncernin those who advocate that creatin is proportionin and conditionin and thus deny the e'istence of a creator from nothin ness, their advocacy means that it is the tan ible perceptible thin s and the specific order that is imposed on them are the ones who do the creatin . This is because proportionin and conditionin cannot take place e'cept in the presence of a tan ible perceptible thin and a specific order that comes from B:

someone other than this thin . This entails that creatin comes from these two thin s( the tan ible perceptible thin s and the specific order, and thus they are the creators. This is what is entailed by the advocacy that creatin is proportionin and conditionin - it is definitely false. This is because the specific order does not come from the thin s or from itself, but it is imposed on the tan ible perceptible thin s by another that does not belon to the perceptible tan ible thin s. Thus it is clear that proportionin and conditionin is not creatin , because it is impossible for (thin s) to be effected solely by that. Thus it is necessary that somethin Lsomeone that is not perceptible or tan ible, who imposes a specific order for the tan ible perceptible thin s in order for effectin to take place. This shows that proportionin and conditionin is not creation and that it is impossible for creation to take place with these only. It should be noted that if a creator did not create the tan ible perceptible thin s from nothin ness, he would not be a creator indeed. +ecause he would be incapable of effectin thin s accordin to his will alone- he would rather be sub/ect to somethin in company with which it can effect thin s. He would thus be incapable and not eternal, because he was incapable of effectin (thin s) by himself but needed somethin else. The one who is incapable and who needs (somethin ) is not eternal. In addition, as a matter,of,fact, the meanin of a creator is the one who effects (somethin ) from nothin ness. The meanin of bein a creator is that thin s depend in their e'istence on him, and that he does not depend on anythin . If he did not create thin s from nothin ness, or was incapable of creatin when thin s did not e'ist, he would be dependent on thin s in effectin (thin s), and thin s would not be dependent solely on him. This means that he is not the sole creator and thus not a creator at all. !o, a creator has to create thin s from nothin ness in order for him to be a creator and has to be characterised with capability and will, independent of thin s, He should not depend on anythin , and thin s should depend on him for their e'istence. Hence, effectin (thin s) has to be effectin from nothin ness in order for it to be creation. The one who effects has to effect (thin s) from nothin ness in order for him to be a creator. 5e ardin the evidence of imaan in )n les, it is a na#lee evidence- )llah )lmi hty says, %There is no <od but He( that is the witness of )llah, His )n les, and those endued with knowled e, standin firm on /ustice.%B?( )l =mraan%. )nd He says, %.. but it is ri hteousness to believe in )llah and the East Fay, and the )n les and the +ook, and the 7essen ers-()l,+a#arah(B::). )nd He says, % Iach on (of them) believeth in )llah, His an les, His books, and His 7essen ers,% ()l,+a#arah(2@8). )nd says, % )ny who denies )llah, His an les , His +ooks, His 7essen ers, and the Fay of Mud ement, has one far, far astray.% ()n,nisaaK(B08). 5e ardin the evidence of imaan in the +ooks, the case of ;uran is different from all other revealed +ooks. The evidence that the ;uran is (revealed) from )llah and that it is the speech of )llah is a rational proof. This is because the ;uran is a tan ible perceived reality and the intellect can comprehend the fact that is (revealed) from )llah. The ;uran is an )rabic te't in its words and sentences. The )rabs did produce discourse, includin the various types of poetry and the various B@

types of prose. Te'ts of the discourse of the )rabs is still preserved in books and had been memorised and conveyed from eneration to eneration. The ;uran is either the same as their mode of e'pression, which would indicate that it was uttered by an elo#uent )rab, or it is a different mode of e'pression, which would mean that it was uttered by someone other than the )rabs. The )rabs are either capable of producin the like of it or incapable of this despite the fact that it is an )rabic discourse. If the )rabs produced the like of it, it would be the speech of humans like themselves. If they failed to produce the like of it despite the fact that it is an )rabic discourse and that they were the most elo#uent masters of e'pression, it would not be the speech of humans. =pon e'aminin the ;uran and the discourse of the )rabs, one finds the ;uran to be a uni#ue mode of e'pression, which is unprecedented by anythin the )rabs have said. They never produced anythin that belon ed to the cate ory of the ;uran, neither before nor after it was revealed, not even by way of imitatin it or parodyin its style. This proves that it was not the )rabs who produced this discourse and thus it is the discourse of someone else. It has been proved throu h tawaatur (authoritative chain of reportin whose reports are beyond any doubt) that bespeaks certainty and incontrovertibility that the )rabs were incapable of producin the like of the ;uran althou h it challen ed them to do so. The ;uran addressed them( &And if ye are in dou!t as to what 'e have revealed from time to time to Our servant then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers #if there are any$ !esides Allah if your #dou!ts$ are true% It also said, &Or do they say &"e forged it(& Say- &Bring then a Sura like unto it and call #to your aid$ anyone you can !esides Allah if it !e ye speak the truth!& (6ounus(0@). )nd it said, &Or they may say &"e forged it%& Say &Bring ye then ten Suras forged like unto it and call #to your aid$ whomsoever ye can other than Allah! if ye speak the truth! (Houd(B0). )nd it said, &Say- &If the whole of mankind and .inns were to gather together to produce the like of this /uran they could not produce the like thereof even if they !acked up each other with help and support .()l,israaK(@@).Fespite this stark challen e, they failed to produce the like of it. If it is proved that the ;uran was not produced by the )rabs and that the )rabs failed to produce the like of it, then the ;uran is proved to have come form )llah and that it is the speech of )llah. This is because it is impossible for any one other that the )rabs to have produced, and because it is an )rabic discourse, and because it rendered the )rabs incapable. It is wron to say that it is the speech of 7uhammad because 7uhammad is one of the )rabs, and if the )rabs are proved incapable, then he himself is proved incapable because he is one of the )rabs. 7oreover, everyone is overned by the mode of e'pression with words and sentences prevailin in his a e or by the discourse reported from those who came before him. $hen he bein creative in e'pression, he only uses words and e'pressions to convey novel meanin s or in new fi ures of speech. It is impossible for him to utter (the like of) what he never sensed. It is evident in the enre of the ;uran that the e'pression in it with words and sentences was not known by the )rabs, neither in the time of the prophet nor before his time. )s a human bein , it is impossible for him to have produced the like of somethin that he had not sensed, because this is a rational impossibility. It is impossible for the ;uranic mode of e'pression with respect to words and sentences to have B?

been produced by 7uhammad since he had not sensed it. Hence, the ;uran is the speech of )llah and 7uhammad brou ht it from )llah. This was proved rationally when the ;uran was revealed and it is proved rationally now because it continues to render human bein s incapable of brin in the like of it. This incapability is proved sensorially and is sensorially comprehensible for all mankind. In conclusion, the only conceivable sources of the ;uran is either the )rabs or 7uhammad or )llah, because the ;uran is wholly )rabic and thus cannot have come from any other that these three. 6et it false to say that it was produced by the )rabs because they were incapable of producin the like of it and they confessed to their incapability. They have until this day continued to be incapable of producin the like of it- this proves that it did not come from the )rabs. Thus it would be either form 7uhammad or form )llah. 6et it would be false to say that it is from 7uhammad because 7uhammad himself is an )rab and however enius a person is he can never surpass his a e. Thus if the )rabs are incapable, then 7uhammad is also incapable- he is one of them. 7oreover, the hadith (speech) of 7uhammad was reported throu h tawaatur, for e'ample his sayin (pbuh), %he who intentionally reports somethin false concernin me, let him reside in his place in hellfireN. If the speech of 7uhammad is compared with the ;uran, no similarity whatsoever is seen between the two types of te't. This proves that the ;uran is not the speech of 7uhammad , and this proves that it is the speech of )llah. It is noteworthy that all poets, writers, philosophers and thinkers of mankind commence (their writin ) in a style that is characterised with some weaknesstheir style radually improves until they reach the peak of their potential. Thus their style fluctuates in stren th and weakness, apart from the occurrence of some frivolous thou hts and trite e'pressions in their te'ts. .n the other hand, we find that style of the ;uran from the day of the revelation of the first )yah & 0roclaim! #or 1ead!$ In the name of thy 2ord and 3herisher 'ho created &()l,Kala#(B) until the day of the revelation of the last )yah, &O ye who !elieve! 4ear Allah and give up what remains of your demand for usury #ri!a$ if ye are indeed !elievers%&()l,ba#arah( 2:@), was uniformly at its peak with respect to articulacy and rhetoric and the sublimity of the thou hts therein and the vi our of its e'pressions. 6ou will never find one trite e'pression or one frivolous thou ht in it, but it is one homo eneous piece, to the smallest detail, its entirety is, in respect of style, /ust like one sin le sentence. This is proof that it is not the speech of human bein s, whose speech is susceptible to diver ence in e'pressions and meanin s, but it is indeed the speech of the Eord of the $orlds. This has been re ardin the ;uran as one of the revealed +ooks in which Islam demanded imaan. The proof of the other revealed +ooks is na#lee not rational( )llah )lmi hty says, &O ye who !elieve! Believe in Allah and "is 5essenger and the scripture which "e has sent to "is 5essenger and the scripture which "e sent to those !efore #him$%&#)l,nisaaK(B08). )nd he says, &%%% !ut it is righteousness to !elieve in Allah and the 2ast Day and the Angels and the Book and the 5essengers;&#)l,ba#arah(B::). He also says, & 6o thee 'e sent the Scripture in truth confirming the Scripture that came !efore it and controlling over it%7 #Al+ 2C

ma8idah-9:$% And "e says &And this is a Book which 'e have sent down !ringing !lessings and confirming #the revelations$ which came !efore it& ()l,anKaam(?2). )nd He says & 6his /uran is not such as can !e produced !y other than Allah; on the contrary it is a confirmation of #revelations$ that went !efore it & (6ounus(0:). "oncernin imaan in the 7essen ers, the case of our 7aster 7uhammad is different from that of the other messen ers. The proof of his prophethood is rational not na#lee. This is because the proof of the truth of the claim of someone claimin to be a prophet or a messen er is the miracles that he brin s to support his claim. )nd the !hariKa that he brin s is supported by those miracles. The miracle of our 7aster 7uhammad which proves his prophethood and messa e is the ;uran. The ;uran is itself also the shariKa that he brou ht. It is miraculous and continues, and that it comes to be so. !ince it has been proved throu h tawaatur, which is a definite and decisive proof, that 7uhammad is the one who brou ht the ;uran, and that the ;uran is the !hariKa of )llah from )llah and that none brin s the shariKa of )llah e'cept prophets and messen ers. This is thus a rational evidence that 7uhammad is a prophet and a messen er of )llah. The miracles of the rest of the prophets e'pired and ceased to e'ist. The +ooks we have today lack rational evidence that they come from )llah. +ecause the miracles that prove that they come from )llah have e'pired and ceased to e'ist. There is no rational proof to prove the prophethood of any of the messen ers or prophets e'cept our 7aster 7uhammad (saw). +ut their prophethood is proved throu h na#lee evidence. )llah )lmi hty says( &6he 5essenger !elieves in what has !een revealed to him from his 2ord as do the men of faith% ;ach one #of them$ !elieves in Allah "is angels "is Books and "is 5essengers% 'e make no distinction #they say$ !etween one and another of "is 5essengers%& ()l,+a#arah( 2@4) . )nd He says, &Say ye- &'e !elieve in Allah and the revelation given to us and to A!raham Isma8il Isaac .aco! and the 6ri!es and that given to 5oses and .esus and that given to #all$ 0rophets from their 2ord- we make no difference !etween one and another of them- and we !ow to Allah #in Islam$%& ()l, ba#arah(B08). The proof of imaan in the Fay of Mud ement , the Fay of 5esurrection, is na#lee not rational. +ecause the Fay of Mud ement is not accessible by the mind. )llah )lmi hty says, &%% that you may warn the 5other of 3ities and all around her% 6hose who !elieve in the "ereafter !elieve in this #Book$ &()l,KanKaam(?2). )nd He says, &%%% as to those who !elieve not in the "ereafter their hearts refuse to know and they are arrogant# ()n,nahl(22). )nd He says, O 6o those who !elieve not in the "ereafter applies the similitude of evil%7 ()n,nahl(8C). )nd He says, & And to those who !elieve not in the "ereafter #it announceth$ that 'e have prepared for them a 0enalty <rievous #indeed$7 ()l,israaK(BC). )nd He says, &6hen when one !last is sounded on the 6rumpet And the earth is moved and its mountains and they are crushed to powder at one stroke; On that Day shall the #<reat$ ;vent come to pass% And the sky will !e rent asunder for it will that Day !e flimsy- And the angels will !e on its sides and eight will that Day !ear the 6hrone of thy 2ord a!ove them% 6hat Day shall you !e !rought to .udgement- not an act of yours that ye hide will !e hidden#)l,waa#iKah(B0,B?). The prophet (saw) says, %imaan is to is 2B

to have imaan in )llah, His an les, His +ooks, His summonin you to account, His messen ers and to have imaan in 5esurrection. These have been the matters that one must have imaan in- they are five matters( imaan in )llah, His )n les, His +ooks, His 7essen ers and the Fay of Mud ement , and to have imaan in al,#daaK and #adar ( fate and destiny). 2one is deemed to have belief (imaan) in Islam or to be a 7uslim unless he has imaan in all of these five matters and also in al,#adaaK wal #adar. )llah )lmi hty says, &O ye who !elieve! Believe in Allah and "is 5essenger and the scripture which "e hath sent to "is 5essenger and the scripture which "e sent to those !efore #him$% Any who denies Allah "is angels "is Books "is 5essengers and the Day Of .udgement has gone far far astray7#)n,nisaaK(B08). The ;uran and the Hadith mentions these five issues e'plicitly, unmistakably namin each of them and meanin the referent of each name. Imaan in any other issue e'plicitly named and the referent of the name meant, was not mentioned in any e'plicit and definite te't, as is the case with these issues. The te'ts which are definite (#atKii) both in their chain of reportin (#atKii ath,thubuut) and in their meanin (#atKii ad,dalaalah, i.e. unambi uous) mentioned only these five, none else. It is true that Imaan in al,#adar was mentioned in the Hadith of Mibreel accordin to some versions of it, where it says, % he said Kand that you believe in al,#adar, both ood and bad..1 %. +ut this hadith is Hhabar )ahaad (reportin of sin le individuals- non,mutawaatir). 7oreover, what is intended here by al,#adar is the knowled e of )llah not the controversial issue of al,#adaaK wal,#adar. The issue of imaan in al,#adaaK wal,#adar by this name and with the referent that is a sub/ect of controversy was never mentioned in a #atKii (definite) te't. 6et the referent of the term is part of a#eedah- thus imaan in it is obli atory. It was never known by this name and with this referent at the time of the !ahaabah. 2o !ahiih (authentic) te't mentions it by this name and with this referent. 5ather it became common only at the be innin of the era of the TabiKiin (the *ollowers). It became known and became a sub/ect of discussion since that time. Those who introduced it and made it a sub/ect of discussion are the 7utakallimuun (7uslim theolo ians, 7uslim scholastics). It never e'isted before the emer ence of Islamic !cholasticism, and was never discussed under this name %al,#adaaK wal,#adar and with the same referent e'cept by the 7utakallimuun (7uslim !cholastics) after the end of the first Hi/ri century.

2.1 The %eanin& of 'elie(in& (ha(in& imaan) in the )ay of *ud&ement

Imaan in the Fay of Mud ement is imaan in 5esurrection. It is the time when the life of all creatures in this worldly life terminates. )ll those in it die and then )llah resurrects the dead. He brin back to life their decomposed bones and He restores bodies to their previous state and also brin s the souls back to the bodies. )llah )lmi hty says, &Again on the Day of .udgement will you !e raised up7#)l, muKminuun(B8). )nd He says, &6his is so !ecause Allah is the 1eality- it is "e 'ho gives life to the dead and it is "e who has power over all things% And verily the 22

"our will come- there can !e no dou!t a!out it or a!out #the fact$ that Allah will raise up all who are in the graves7#)l,ha//(8,:). )nd He says, &%% he says &'ho can give life to #dry$ !ones and decomposed ones #at that$(& Say &"e will give them life 'ho created them for the first time! &% )nd He says, & Say- &=ou those of old and those of later times &All will certainly !e gathered together for the meeting appointed for a Day well+known%&()l,waa#iKah(3?,4C). Part of imaan in the Fay of Mud ement is imaan is that people are iven their record books. )llah )lmi hty says &;very man8s fate 'e have fastened on his own neck- on the Day of .udgement 'e shall !ring out for him a scroll which he will see spread open% #It will !e said to him-$ &1ead your #own$ record;&&# )l, israaK(B0,B3). The believers take them with their ri ht hands and the Huffar (unbelievers) take them with their left hands. )llah )lmi hty says, &6hen he who is given his 1ecord in his right hand; Soon will his account !e taken !y an easy reckoning; And he will turn to his people re>oicing! But he who is given his 1ecord !ehind his !ack; Soon will he cry for 0erdition% And he will enter a Bla?ing 4ire7# )l, inshi#aa#(8,B2). )nd He says, & And he that will !e given his 1ecord in his left hand will say- &Ah! 'ould that my record had not !een given to me! &And that I had never realised how my account #stood$!& &Ah! 'ould that #Death$ had made an end of me!& &Of no profit to me has !een my wealth!& &5y power has perished from me!& #6he stern command will say$- &Sei?e you him and !ind you him &And !urn you him in the Bla?ing 4ire% &4urther make him march in a chain whereof the length is seventy cu!its!()l,haa#ah(23,02). Part of imaan in the Fay of Mud ement is imaan that )l,Mannah (Heaven) is true and that )n,2aar (Hellfire) is true. )l,Mannah is abode created for the +elievers that no Haafir (unbeliever) can ever enter. )llah )lmi hty says, & a <arden whose width is that #of the whole$ of the heavens and of the earth prepared for the righteous7#)l,=mraan(00). )nd He says, &6he 3ompanions of the 4ire will call to the 3ompanions of the <arden- &0our down to us water or anything that Allah does provide for your sustenance%& 6hey will say- &Both these things has Allah for!idden to those who re>ected "im%&#)l,aKraaf(4C). )nd He says, &Such is the <arden which 'e give as an inheritance to those of Our Servants who guard against evil7(7aryam(80). )n,naar is a created abode where no believer lives eternally. )llah )l,mi hty says, &None shall reach it !ut those most unfortunate ones who give the lie to 6ruth and turn their !acks% But those most devoted to Allah shall !e removed far from it7 ()l,layl(B4,B:). Those who )llah )lmi hty wills of the 7uslims whose ma/or sins and misdeeds outwei h their minor sins and ood deeds enter )n,2aar, and later they e'it from it and enter the Mannah. )llah )lmi hty says, &If ye #!ut$ eschew the most heinous of the things which ye are for!idden to do 'e shall e@pel out of you all the evil in you and admit you to a <ate of great honour()n,nisaaK( 0B). )nd He says, &But he whose !alance #of good deeds$ will !e #found$ light 'ill have his home in a #!ottomless$ 0it% And what will e@plain to you what this is( #It is$ a 4ire !la?ing fiercely! ()l,#aariKah(@, BB). Part of the imaan in )l,Mannah is the imaan that the deli hts of Mannah are tan ible and that its people eat, drink, copulate, dress, and relish those deli hts. )llah )lmi hty says, &1ound a!out them will #serve$ youths of perpetual #freshness$ 'ith go!lets #shining$ !eakers and cups #filled$ out of 3lear+flowing 20

fountains- No after+ache will they receive therefrom nor will they suffer into@ication- And with fruits any that they may select; And the flesh of fowls any that they may desire% And #there will !e$ 3ompanions with !eautiful !ig and lustrous eyes 2ike unto 0earls well+guarded% A 1eward for the Deeds of their past #2ife$7()l,waa#iKa(B:,23). )nd He says, & and their garments there will !e of silk%& and He says, &Apon them will !e green <arments of fine silk and heavy !rocade and they will !e adorned with Bracelets of silver; and their 2ord will give to them to drink of a 'ine pure and "oly%& ()l,insaan(2B). )nd He says, &As to the 1ighteous% 6hey shall drink of a 3up #of 'ine$ mi@ed with Bafur A 4ountain where the Devotees of Allah do drink making it flow in unstinted a!undance%& ()l, insaan(4,8). )nd he says, &And !ecause they were patient and constant "e will reward them with a <arden and #garments of$ silk% 1eclining in the #<arden$ on raised thrones they will see there neither the sun8s #e@cessive heat$ nor #the moon8s$ e@cessive cold% And the shades of the #<arden$ will come low over them and the !unches #of fruit$ there will hang low in humility% And amongst them will !e passed round vessels of silver and go!lets of crystal 3rystal+clear made of silver- they will determine the measure thereof #according to their wishes$7 ()l, insaan(B2,B8). This is in addition to many other deli hts mentioned e'plicitly in the ;uran. Part of the imaan in )n,2aar is imaan that its torture is tan ible and that its people suffer various types of torture in fire, 9amhareer (severe frost or lowin fire), boilin puss and other forms of torture which were mentioned e'plicitly in the ;uran, such as torture with chains and handcuffs, li#uid pitch, fire pits, the eatin of 9a##oom, and the drinkin of water which is as hot as boilin metal. )llah )lmi hty says, &6heir garments of liCuid pitch"(Ibraahiim(4C). )nd He says, &4or the 1e>ecters 'e have prepared 3hains =okes and a Bla?ing 4ire ()l, insaan(3). )nd He says, &Derily the tree of EaCCum will !e the food of the Sinful &()d,Fukhaan(30,33). )nd He says, &#6hey will !e$ in the midst of a fierce Blast of 4ire and in Boiling 'ater & ()l,waa#iKah(32). )nd He says, &if they implore relief they will !e granted water like melted !rass that will scald their faces- "ow dreadful the drink!&()l,kahf(2?). )nd He says, &Nor has he any food e@cept the corruption from the washing of wounds & ()l,Haa##ah(08). )nd He says, &as often as their skins are roasted through 'e shall change them for fresh skins that they may taste the 0enalty&()n,nisaaK(48). )nd He says, Fno term shall !e determined for them so they should die nor shall its 0enalty !e lightened for them%&(*aatir(08), )nd He says, &6hen will you truly O you that go wrong and treat #6ruth$ as falsehood! =ou will surely taste of the 6ree of EaCCum% 6hen will you fill your insides therewith And drink Boiling 'ater on top of it- Indeed you shall drink like diseased camels raging with thirst!& ()l,waa#iKah(4B,44). )nd He says, &In front of the 4ire will they !e !rought morning and evening7(<haafir(38).

2.2 The +mer&ence of %uslim ,cholastics and Their $""roach

The 7uslims believed in Islam beyond any shred of doubt. Their belief was so stron that it did not result in any #uestions that indicate scepticism. 2or did they discuss the ayahs of the ;uran e'cept in a manner that would enable them to 23

comprehend the reality of the thou ht therein. They did not in#uire into the suppositions that mi ht be drawn from it. !econd part from )bu !alim )pr ?? P38 to :4 The whole of the first Hi/ri century elapsed with current of the Fa1wa overwhelmin everythin that stood in its way. The Islamic thou hts were bein iven to people as intact as it was received by the 7uslims, in a brilliant understandin and a definitive faith and a surprisin ly splendid awareness.6et, the carryin of Fa1wah in the con#uered countries led to an intellectual collision with people of other reli ions who had not yet embraced Islam and those who entered its domain. This intellectual collision was strenuous- the people of other reli ions were ac#uainted with some philosophical thou hts and they had certain viewpoints which they ot from their reli ions. The use to stir skepticism and to debate with 7uslims over )#eedas, because the basis of the Fa1wa is the a#eedah and the related thou hts. The sincerity of 7uslims to the Islamic Fa1wa and their need to ive counter ar umets to their adversaries, led many of them to learn some philosophical thou hts in order for these to be used as a weapon a ainst their adversaries. )part from their sincerity to the carryin of Fa1wa and the refutal of their adversaries1 ar uments, their /ustification and motivation for this learnin lied in two factors( *irstly( The ;uran, besides its call for monotheism and prophethood, tackled the more si nificant sects and reli ions which were widespread at the time of the prophet (pbuh) - it povided counter ar uments and refuted their advocaies. It tackled all types of OshirkN and refuted it. There were amon st the mushrikiin some who took planets for dieties and made them into partner of )llah- the ;uran repudiated their beliefs. !ome of them advocated the worship of idols and made them into partners of )llah- it repudiated their belief- some of them denied prophethood alto ether- the ;uran repudiated their belief- some of them denied the prophethood of 7ohammad and it repudiated their belief- some of them denied resurrection and and the call to account and the ;uran repudiated their belief. !ome of them deified Mesus, peace be upon him, or made him into the son of )llah and the ;uran repudiated this belief. The ;uran did not suffice with this it ordered the prophet , peace be upon him, to en a e in debate with them. Fand argue with them in ways that are !est and most gracious%7 ()n,nahl(B24), FAnd dispute ye not with the 0eople of the Book e@cept with means !etter #than mere disputation7 ()l,Gankaboot (spider)( 38). The life of the prophet was a life of itellectual stru le with all of the kuffar, both mushriks and people of the +ook. 7any incidents were reported about him in 7ecca and 7edinah in which he discussed and debated with the kuffar whther they be individuals, roups, or dele ations. This intellectual stru le which is prominent in the aayahs of the ;uran and the hadiths of the pophet and in his deeds was read and heard by the 7uslims. Thus it was only natural for them to discuss with the people of other reli ions and to en a e in itellectual stru le and ar umentation with them. The rules of their reli ion call for such ar umentation- and the nature of the call for Islam when it collides with kufr make it inevitable for this discussion, 24

ar umentation and stru le. $hat made the stru le take on the intellectual character is that the ;uran itself calls for the use of the mind, and it cited intellectual proof and sensory evidence. The call for its a#eedah is based on nothin but the mind, not on na#lee evidence. Thus it was inevitable for the debate and the stru le to take on the intellectual character and to be marked with it. !econdly( certain philosophical and theolo ian issues had leaked to the 7uslims from the 2estorian "hristians and their likes- the lo ic of )ristotle was known amon st 7uslims- some 7uslims had become familiar with certain books of philosophy . 7any books were translated from <reek into !yriac and then into )rabic- later, translation was made from <reek directly into )rabic. This aided the e'istence of philosophical thou hts. !ome other reli ions had resorted to <reek philosophy as a weapon and brou ht it into the country. )ll of this enerated philosophical thou hts which made it mandatory for the 7uslims to study them. Those two factors, the rules and thou hts of Islam concernin ar umentation and the e'istence of philosophical thou hts, were the factors which pushed the 7uslims to shift to intellectual discussions and philosophical thou hts. They learned these thou hts and used them as material for their discussions and debates, and they /ustified this. 6et all of this was not a comprehensive philosophical study but merely a study of philosophical thou hts to repudiate "hristian and Mewish thou hts, because it would not have been possible for the 7uslims to rebut e'cept after they have familiarised themselves with the ar uments of <reed philosophers, especially those related to lo ic and theolo y. +ecause of this they were ur ed to be well,versed in forei n roups and their ar uments and proofs. Thus the 7uslim land became a round where all opinions and all reli ions are presented and debated. =ndoubtedly, debate provokes ponderin and thinkin and ives rise to multiple issues that provoke meditation and lead each roup to adopt what it deems true. This debate and thinkin were e'tremely instrumental in the emer ence of people who practice a new methodolo y in discussion, ar umentation and debate. The philosophical thou hts which they had learnt influenced them reatly , in their method of provin and in some of their thou hts. )s a result the Oscience of Islamic scholasticismN (Gilm,ul, kalaam) developed and it became a specialised branch of knowled e and the roup of scholastics emer ed in the 7uslim lands. !ince those scholastics were focused on defendin Islam, e'plainin it rules and, and elucidatin the thou hts of the ;uran, they were mostly influenced by the ;uran, and the basis on which they built their discussion was the ;uran as well. 6et, since they had learnt philosophy in order to defend the ;uran and used it as a weapon a ainst their adversaries, a they evolved a special approach in their proof and /ud ement which is different from that of the ;uran, the Hadith and the !ahabah and different from the approach of <reek philosophers to proof and /ud ement. Their difference from the ;uran lies in that the ;uran1s approach bases its call on an instinctive basis- it is based on this instinct (fitrah) and it addresses people in a 28

manner consistent with this fitrah- simultaneously, the ;uran is based on the intellectual basis. It is based on the mind and it addresses the minds- )llah )lmi hty say, OThose on whom, besides )llah, ye call, cannot create (even) a fly, if they all met to ether for the purposeD )nd if the fly should snatch away anythin from them, they would have no power to realise it from the fly. *eeble are those who petition and those whom they petitionD and He says, O2ow let man but think from what he is createdD He is created from a drop emitted, Proceedin from between the backbone and the ribs(N()T,Tari#(3,:) and He says, OThen let man look at his *ood, (and how $e provide it)( *or that $e pour forth water in abundance, )nd $e split the earth in fra ments, )nd produce therein "orn, )nd <rapes and nutritious Plants, )nd .lives and Fates, )nd enclosed <ardens, dense with lofty trees, )nd *ruits and *odder,N()basa(23,0B), and He says, OFo they not look at the "amels, how they are made& )nd at the !ky, how it is raised hi h& )nd at the 7ountains, how they are fi'ed firm& )nd at the Iarth, how it is spread out&N()l, hashiyah(B:,2C), and He says, O)s also in your own selves( will ye not then see&N()th,thariyat(2B), and He says, O.r, who listens to the (soul) distressed when it calls on Him, O()n,naml(82). Thus the ;uran approaches the proof of )llah1s capability , omniscience, and will on the basis of the fitrah and the mind. This approach is consistent with the fitrah and it enerates a feelin within every human bein to listen and respond to it- even an atheist comprehends it and succumbs to it. It is an approach that suits every human bein , with no difference between the elite and the common people or between the educated and the uneducated. 7oreover, polysemous aayahs whose meanin is indefinite and in which a reader may find unclarity are eneral and void of detail- these have come in the form of a eneral depiction of thin s or a reportin of realities where an avoidance of discussion , thorou hness and substantiation is evident. !o, the reader does not re/ect it - he would not comprehend the realities denoted by the aayahs beyond the denotations of the words therein. Therefore, it was only natural that the attitude taken towards it was one of ac#uiescence as is the case towards the depiction of any reality and the reportin of any fact, without any /ustification or substantiation. Thus, certain aayahs depicts one facet of the actions of man and in so doin indicates compulsion- other aayahs depict other facets of the actions of man and in so doin indicates free choice. )ll )lmi hty says, O )llah intends every facility for you- He does not want to put you to difficulties.N()l, ba#arah(B@4), and He says, O but )llah never wishes in/ustice to His !ervants.N(<hafir(0B). +ut on the other hand He says, OThose whom )llah (in His plan) willeth to uide, He openeth their breast to Islam- those whom He willeth to leave strayin , He maketh their breast close and constricted,N ()l,an1aam(B24). .ther aayahs indicate that )llah )lmi hty has a face and a hand and speak of Him as the li ht of the earth and the heavens and state that He is in the heavens OFo ye feel secure that He $ho is in Heaven will not cause you to be swallowed up by the earth when it shakes (as in an earth#uake)&N()l,mulk(B8), O)nd thy Eord cometh, and His an els, rank upon rank,N()l,fa/r(22), O+ut will abide (forever) the *ace of thy Eord,N ()r,rahmaan(2:), O 2ay both His hands are widely outstretchedN()l,ma1idah(83). .ther )ayahs indicate his uni#ueness, Othere is nothin whatever like unto HimN()sh,shuuraa(BB), OThere is not a secret 2:

consultation between three, but He makes the fourth amon them, nor between five but He makes the si'th, nor between fewer nor more, but He is with them, wheresoever they beN()l,mu/aadalah(:), OPraise and lory be to HimD (*or He is) above what they attribute to HimDN()l,an1aam(BCC). Thus certain aayahs came in the ;uran which are seemin ly contradictory. The ;uran called such aayahs mutashabihaat (polysemous Lnot readily intelli ible), )llah )lmi hty says, Oin it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meanin )- they are the foundation of the +ook( others are not readily intelli ible.N()ali =mraan(:). $hen these )ayahs were revealed and the 7essen er conveyed them to the people and the 7uslims memorised them by rote, these aayahs did not enerate any discussion or debate. They did not see in those aayahs any discrepancies that re#uire to be cleared. They understood every aayah with reference to the aspect it came to describe or report. Thus the aayahs were harmonious in reality and in their hears. They believe in them, trusted them and understood them in a eneralised manner, and they sufficed themselves with this understandin - they re arded them as a description of reality or a reportin of facts. 7any the sa acious did not like the discussion concernin the details of the mutashaabihaat and or the debate thereof. They thou ht that such discussion was to the disadvanta e of Islam( for everyone, understandin the eneral meanin , as much as one understands, would be sufficient and would make the discussion of the details and elaborations unnecessary. Thus the 7uslims comprehended the approach of the ;uran and received its aayahs throu hout the time of the Prophet, and so did those who came after them until the entire first century ).H. had elapsed. Their difference from the philosophers lies in that philosophers depend solely on syllo isms- they evolve the proof in a lo ical form includin a ma/or premise, a minor premise and a conclusion. They used terminolo y and /ar on such as essence and accident and the like- they initiated intellectual problems upon which they built lo ical propositions not realistic sensory propositions. The approach of the 7uslim scholastics to discussion diver es from this. The scholastics believed in )llah, His 7essen er and all what his 7essen er brou ht to them- then they wanted to prove this implementin intellectual lo ical evidence. Then, they started to discuss the recency of the world and to cite evidence of the recency of thin s. Then they be an to e'pand this, and thus new issues opened up before them- they pursued the discussion of these and their offshoots to their lo ical end. !o, they did not discuss aayahs in order to understand them as was the approach of the earlier eneration and as is the purpose of the ;uran, but they believed in those aayahs and then be an to cite evidence of what they themselves understand from them. This has is one of the aspects of their discussion. The other aspect is their viewpoint re ardin the mutashabihaat (polysemous aayahs). The scholastics were not content to have imaan in those aayahs in their eneralised sense and without detail. !o, they compiled the aayahs that mi ht seem contradictory, after have pursued them, such as those related to compulsion and free choice and those which mi ht indicate the 2@

incarnation of )llah (ta1aala). They focused their minds on them and they were as presumptuous as none else. Their thinkin led them an opinion on every issue. .nce they have reached their opinion, they addressed themselves to the aayahs which contradict their view and twisted them. Therefore, twistin (of meanin ) was the primary characteristic of scholasticism. Thus if their discussion led them to the conclusion that )llah swt is too sublime (muna99ah) to be characterised with location and direction, they twisted the ayahs which indicate that He ta1aala is in the heavens and also twisted al,istiwaa1 alaa al,Garsh (the establishment of himself on the throne). If their discussion led them to the conclusion that the ne ation of the attribute direction entails that the eyes of people would be incapable of si htin Him, they twisted the reports related to the si htin of )llah by people. Thus, twistin was one of the characteristics of the scholastics and their ma/or distinction form the previous enerations. This methodolo y of ivin the intellect the freedom to discuss every thin ( the comprehensible and the incomprehensible, the natural and the supernatural, the sensorially perceptible and the sensorially imperceptible inevitably makes the intellect the basis of the ;uran not the other way round. Thus it was natural for this approach of twistin to emer e, and it was natural that they would take any direction they opted for on the basis that the intellect opted for it, in their view. This inevitably meant discrepancies between them. If the reasonin of one roup led them to advocate free choice and to twist compulsion, reasonin mi ht lead others to affirm compulsion and to twist the aayahs of free choice- it mi ht lead others to syncreti9e both opinions into a new opinion. )ll scholastics were prominently characterised with two thin s( first, dependence in proof on lo ic and syllo i9ation, not on the sensorially accessible and second dependence of the twistin of the aayahs that contradict the conclusions they had reached.

2.

The Fallacy of the %ethodolo&y of the %uslim ,cholastics

=pon surveyin the methodolo y of the 7uslim scholastics, it becomes evident that it is a fallacious methodolo y and that applyin it does not lead to imaan or the stren thenin of imaan. )pplyin it does not even lead to thinkin or to the stren thenin of thinkin . It only leads to mere knowled e- and knowled e is different from imaan and different from thinkin . The fallacy of this methodolo y is obvious in several ways( *irstly( in this methodolo y, they base their proof on a lo ical basis not on the sensory basis. This is wron because of two reasons. .ne of them is that it makes the 7uslim in need to learn the science of lo ic in order for him to be able to prove the e'istence of )llah- this means that those who are not ac#uainted with lo ic are incapable of provin their a#eedah- it also means that the science of lo ic becomes, in relation to scholasticism, like the science of rammatical synta' in relation to the readin of )rabic after the )rabic ton ue has deteriorated, althou h the science of lo ic is irrelevant to the a#eedah and irrelevant to proof. 2?

The 7uslims did not know the science of lo ic at the advent of Islam- they carried the messa e and established conclusive evidence to their creeds without relyin on the science of lo ic whatsoever. This proves the non,e'istence of the science of lo ic in the Islamic culture and its superfluousness to any proof of the Islamic a#eedah. The other reason is that the lo ical basis is susceptible of error unlike the sensory basis, which with re ard to the e'istence or otherwise of thin s is absolutely infallible- what is susceptible to error should not be a basis for imaan. Eo ic is susceptible to speciosity and its conclusions are susceptible to be untrue, because althou h it stipulates that the correctness of the premises and the soundness of their structure is a condition, the fact that it consists in the syllo i9in of one premise on the other make the correctness of the conclusion dependant upon the correctness of these premises. The correctness of these premises is not uaranteed because the conclusion does is not directly founded on sensation- it is founded on the syllo i9in of premises to ether and the correctness of the conclusion is thus not uaranteed. $hat occurs in it is that in combination of premises comprehensibles are syllo i9ed on comprehesibles and comprehensibles are concluded therefrom- also sensorially accessibles are syllo i9ed on sensorially accessibles and sensorially accessibles are concluded therein. 5e ardin the syllo i9in of comprehensibles on comprehensibles and concludin comprehensibles therefrom, it leads to slippin into error and to contradiction of conclusions, and it leads to driftin into series of premises and conclusions which are rational in theory and by assumption not with re ard to its e'istence in reality, so much so that in many of those syllo isms, the end of the road was fantasies and /abberwocky. Thus provin via the syllo i9in of comprehensibles on comprehensibles is susceptible to slippin . *or e'ample, lo ically it is said that( the ;uran is the speech of )llah- it is made up of letters which are arran ed and se#uenced in e'istence, and every speech which is made up of letters which are arran ed and se#uenced in e'istence is recent. The conclusion is that the ;uran is recent and created. This syllo i9in of premises has lead to a conclusion which in inaccessible to the senses- so the intellect is incapable of discussin it or /ud in it. Therefore, it is a hypothetical unrealistic /ud ement, apart from bein one of the issues which the intellect has been prohibited from discussin . This is because a discussion of the attributes of )llah is a discussion of his entity, and in no way is it permissible to discuss the entity of )llah. 6et, it is possible to reach via the same lo ic to a conclusion contradictory to this one. Thus it would be said that( the ;uran is the speech of )llah and it is one of its attributes, and any thin deemed an attribute of )llah is eternal- the conclusion is that the ;uran is eternal and not created. Thus, contradiction in lo ic is evident in one and the same proposition. Eikewise, in many lo ical propositions that are resultant from the syllo i9in of comprehensibles on comprehensibles, a lo ician reaches conclusions which are utterly contradictory and utterly bi9arre. 5e ardin the syllo i9in of the sensorially accessible on the sensorially accessible, if the premises can be traced back to the senses and the conclusion can be traced back to the senses, the result will be correct, because it is based on the senses in the premises and the conclusion not solely on the syllo i9in of 0C

propositions. +ut what occurs indeed is that reliance in arrivin at truths is on the syllo i9in of propositions, and the noticin of the senses is restricted to what the propositions end with. It may happen that a proposition is ima ined to be true to a certain reality but in fact it is not. It may also happen that a proposition which is defined with a eneral demarcation will be true only to certain parts of it, and this truth of certain parts will lead to the deceptive conclusion that it applies to all parts. It may also be that in the proposition there is specious statement, which deceptively means the truth of the proposition. It also may be that the conclusion is true but the premises from which it is concluded are false, which deceptively means the truth of the premisesPand so forth. *or e'ample, it would be said that( !pain is populated by non,7uslims, and every country whose population is of non, 7uslims is not an Islamic country- the conclusion is that !pain is not an Islamic country. This conclusion is false. Its falsehood come from the falsehood of the second premise( the statement that every country whose population is of non, 7uslims is not an Islamic country is false because a country is deemed Islamic if it was once ruled by Islam or if the ma/ority of its population is of 7uslims. This is why the conclusion is false. !pain is indeed an Islamic country. )nother e'ample is that it would be said( 7u1aawiyah Ibn )bu !ufyaan saw the prophet and met with him, and everyone who saw the prophet and met with him is a sahaabii (a companion of the prophet)- the conclusion is that 7u1aawiyah Ibn )bu !ufyaan is a sahaabii. This conclusion is false. 2ot everyone who saw the prophet and met with him is a sahaabii- otherwise )bu Eahab would a sahaabii. Indeed, the sahaabii is everyone in whom the meanin of companionship was realised by, for e'ample, havin accompanied the prophet on one or two military e'peditions (sin ular( ha9wah), or accompanied him for one or two years. )nother e'ample is( )merica is a country of hi h economic standard, and every country of hi h economic standard is a revived country. The conclusion is that )merica is a revived country. This conclusion is true to )merica, althou h one of the two premises is false- not every country with a hi h economic standard is revived- a revived country is one with a hi h intellectual standard. Thus, this syllo ism, whose conclusion is true, deceptively leads one to assume that the premises from which the conclusion was taken- all this leads to the proposition that each of Huwait, ;atar and !audi )rabia is a revived country because each has a hi h economic standard, althou h the truth is that these are not revived countries. Thus, the truth of the conclusions of all syllo isms are dependent on the truth of the premises. The truth of the premises is not uaranteed because they are susceptible to speciosity. Therefore, it is erroneous to depend on the lo ical basis in the establishment of proof. This does not mean that the truths reached via lo ic are false or that the establishment of proof via lo ic is erroneous, but it means that reliance in the establishment of proof on the lo ical basis is erroneous and that takin lo ic as a basis in the establishment of ar uments is erroneous. It is the senses that are to be made the basis for proof and ar ument. )s re ards lo ic, it is valid to use for the establishment of the proof of the truth of a proposition. It would be true, if all the premises are true and if they to ether with the conclusion were traceable back to the senses and if the truth of the conclusion was resultant from the deduction from the premises, not from anythin else. 6et, its susceptibility to the speciosity makes it imperative that it is not made a basis in the establishment of ar ument because as a whole, it is an uncertain basis which 0B

is susceptible to error, althou h proof by means of some forms of it can be conclusive. It is the senses that should be made the basis of proof, because as a whole this basis is a definite basis re ardin the e'istence or otherwise of thin sit is completely invulnerable to error. Secondly$ the scholastics departed from the sensorially accessible- they went beyond it to the sensorially inaccessible- the discussed the supernatural( the entity of )llah and His attributes, the sensorially inaccessible, and they connected this with the discussions related to the sensorially inaccessible. They e'cessively e#uated the unseen with the seen, i.e. e#uate )llah with man- so, they deemed /ustice as envisa ed by man in this worldly life a necessity of )llah1s. They even deemed it necessary that )llah does what is best, because (accordin to them) )llah is $ise and He does not do anythin e'cept for a purpose of a wisdom- an action without a purpose is fatuous and absurd- a wise (bein ) either benefits himself or others, and since )llah )lmi hty is too sublime to benefit himself, the conclusion is that He acts to benefit others. Thus they overstepped into discussions of the sensorially inaccessible and of issues which the intellect is incapable of /ud in , and so they blundered. They missed the point that the sensorially accessible is comprehensible and that the entity of )llah is incomprehensible and that not neither can be compared to the other. They were inattentive to the fact that the Mustice of )llah incomparable to the /ustice of man, and that it is invalid to apply the laws of this world to )llah, who is the creator of this world and who mana es the world accordin to the laws he set for it. If we do witness that when the perspective of man is narrow, he understands matters in a iven way and that once his perspective widens, his view of /ustice chan es and his /ud ement chan es as well- how then do we compare (to ourselves) the Eord of the worlds whose knowled e encompasses everythin and ive His Mustice the meanin of /ustice that we ourselves define& It is observable in this re ard that man can view a iven thin as ood, but once his perspective widens, his view chan es. *or e'ample, the 7uslim world nowadays is Far kufr that has abandoned the rule of Islam- so, all 7uslims view it as a corrupt world and most of them say that it is in need for reform. +ut the aware say that reform means the removal of corruption from the status #uo, and this is erroneous( the 7uslim world in need for a radical and comprehensive chan e that removes the rule of kufr and implements the rule of Islam- any reform leads to the prolon ation of the rei n of corruption. Thus it is seen how the view of man towards what is ood chan es. How then do we sub/ect )llah to the /ud ement of man and deem it necessary for Him to do what we see as ood or better& If we made our mind the /ud e, we would see that )llah did thin s which our minds see no ood whatsoever in it( e. . what ood is there in the creation of Ibliis and the shayaatiin (satans) and ivin them the power to mis uide man- why did )llah ad/ourn Ibliis until the Fay of Mud ement and let our 7aster 7ohammad (peace be upon him)& Is all this better for people& $hy does he allow removal of the rule of Islam from the face of the Iarth and enable the triumph of the rule of kufr and humiliate the 7uslims and enable the dominance of their kafir enemies& Is this better for the His servants& If we proceeded in enumeration of thousands of acts and /ud e them by our mind and our understandin of the meanin of ood and 02

better, we would not find them ood. Therefore it is erroneous to compare )llah to man- nothin is incumbent on )llah %&e cannot be questioned for &is acts, % ()l,anbiyaa1(20), %there is nothing whatever like unto &im, ()sh,shuuraa(BB). Indeed, what made the scholastics slip into all this is there methodolo y or in#uiry and their comparin )llah to man. hirdly$ The approach of the scholastics ive the intellect the freedom of in#uiry in every thin , in the sensorially accessible and the sensorially inaccessible. This inevitably results in the intellect in#uirin into matter that it is incapable of /ud in , and in#uirin into suppositions and ima inations, and establishin evidence to support mere conceptions of thin s that mi ht be e'istent or non,e'istent. This may lead to the denial of thin which are definitely e'istent, of which we were informed by a (source) the truth of whose information is definite for us- but the intellect does not comprehend them. This may also lead to imaan in non,e'istent fantastical thin s but the intellect ima ined its e'istence. *or e'ample, they discussed the entity of )llah and his attributes( some of them said that an attribute is one and the same as the attribute carrier- others said that the attribute is other than the attribute carrier. They said that the knowled e of )llah is the unfoldin of the known as it is- the known chan es from one time to another( the leaf of a tree falls after havin been not fallen and )llah says, %'ot a leaf doth fall but with &is knowledge# ()l,an1aam(4?) and with the knowled e of )llah a thin unfolds as it is- thus )llah knows that a thin will be before it is and He knows that a thin was when it was and He knows that a thin no lon er is when it no lon er is. !o how does the knowled e of )llah chan e with the chan e of thin s, and the knowled e that chan es with the chan e of thin s is a recent knowled e and a recent thin does not lie in )llah because that in which the recent lie is recent itself. .ther scholastics replied to this by sayin ( it is a'iomatic that our knowled e that Jayd will come upon us is other that our knowled e that he has come indeed- this distinction is due to the renewal of the knowled e- but this is applicable to man because it is he whose knowled e is renewed because the source of his knowled e, i.e. sensation and comprehension, is renewed. +ut as re ards )llah, there is no distinction between somethin destined that will be and a realised thin that was and an accomplished thin that occurred and a predicted thin that will occur. Indeed, the information for him is of one condition. .ther scholastics replied( )llah is by his entity is knows all what was and what will be, and all information is known by him in one knowled e, and the difference between what will be and what was stems form the chan e in thin s not in the knowled e of )llah. )ll this discussion deals with matters that are sensorially inaccessible, and the intellect cannot /ud e such realities. !o, it is invalid for the intellect to discuss them. +ut they discussed them and reached these conclusions in pursuit of their methodolo y that ives the intellect the freedom to discuss everythin . They ima ined thin s and discussed them. *or e'ample, they ima ined that the will of )llah associated with the action of the servant (man) when the servant willed the action, i.e. )llah created the action when the servant was capable and willin , not with servant1s capability and will. This sub/ect matter was only ima ined and hypothesised by the scholarssensorilly, it has no reality. +ut they ave the intellect the freedom of in#uiry- it 00

in#uired into it and formed this conception- and thus they deemed it compulsory for one to believe in what they ima ined and called it gaining and choice. Had they restricted the in#uiry of the mind into the sensorially accessible, they would have realised that the action insofar as the creation of all of its materials is concerned, it is only from )llah, because the creation from nothin ness only comes from the creator. +ut the manipulation of these materials and the effectin of the action therefrom come from the servant, /ust like any industry he carries out, e. . like the makin of a chair. Has they restricted the in#uiry of the intellect into the sensorially accessible, they would not have believed in much of the fantasies and theoretical suppositions that they believed in. (ourthly$ the methodolo y of the scholastics makes the intellect the basis of the entire imaan. "onse#uently, they made the intellect the basis for the ;uran- the did not make the ;uran the basis for the intellect. The have structured their interpretation of the ;uran accordin ly on their bases of absolute elevation, the freedom of the will, /ustice and the doin of the better and so on. They made the intellect the arbitrator in the aayahs which are seemin ly contradictory- they made it the ultimate arbitrator between the mutashaabihat (polysemous) and the twisted the aayahs which do not a ree with the view that they opt for, so much so that twistin of te'ts became a method of thiers, 7u1ta9ilah, )hlussunnah, and Mabriyyah alike. This is because the basis for them is not the aayah but the intellect- the aayah suould be twisted to conform with the intellect. Thus the employin of the intellect as a basis for the ;uran resulted in error of in#uiry and error in the sub/ect matter of the in#uiry. Has they employed the ;uran as the basis, and had they built the intellect on the ;uran, they would not have slipped into that. Indeed, the imaan that the ;uran is the speech of )llah is based on the intellect, but the ;uran not the intellect becomes itself the basis for belief in what it contains after imaan in the it has been established. Therefore, when an aayah comes in the ;uran, the intellect should not /ud e the truth or otherwise of its meanin . The aayahs themselves /ud e, and the role of the intellect in this case is only to understand. The scholastics did do this- rather, they made the intellect the basis for the ;uran- it is because of this that their twistin of the aayahs of the ;uran occurred. *ifthly( the scholastics made the anta onism with philosophers the basis of their in#uiry( the 7u1ta9ilah took(material) from the philosophers and ar ued a ainst them- )hlussunnah and the Mabriyyah (fatalists) ar ued a ainst the 7u1ta9ilah- they also took form the philosophers and ar ued a ainst them, whereas the sub/ect for discussion is Islam not the anta onism with the philosophers or any other roup. They should have in#uired into the sub/ect matter of Islam, i.e. what the ;uran brou ht and what the Hadith contained and to restrict their in#uiry to what it and to its discussion, irrespective of any person. +ut they did not do this( they converted the conveyance of Islam and the e'poundin of its a#eedahs into debates and polemics- they de raded it from a drivin force within the heart, from the transparency and the fervour of the a#eedah, to a polemic feature and a rhetorical profession. 03

These have been the ma/or fallacies of the methodolo y of the scholastics. .ne of the conse#uences of this methodolo y was that the discussion of the Islamic a#eedah transformed from bein the means of callin for Islam and e'plainin it for people into a discipline which is tau ht /ust like synta' or any of the disciplines which were born after the con#uests. This was in spite of the fact that if it were at all valid to establish a discipline for any of the branches of knowled e of Islam, it would be invalid to do this with the Islamic a#eedah, because it is itself the sub/ect matter of the da1wah and it is the basis of Islam- it should be iven to people e'actly as it came in the ;uran. The method of the ;uran in conveyin it to people and in e'poundin it to them should be implemented as the method of callin for Islam and e'plainin its thou hts. Therefore, the methodolo y of the scholastics should be abandoned- the methodolo y of the ;uran should be solely reverted to( namely, basin the da1wah on the fiTrah (the instinctive basis) and simultaneously basin it solely on the intellect within the realm of the sensorially accessible.

2.- $l-.ada "./1

In the )rabic lan ua e it is said( ;ada means he ives a /ud ement on the thin , ......he /ud ed between two disputants, he /ud ed and decided upon a matter. The matter, he has e'ecutedLaccomplished itK.The world al,;ada has been mentioned a number of times in the ayas of the ;urKan. )llah (swt) said(K$hen He decrees a matter, He only says to it(%+eD , and it is.K ie when He decides a matter it come into e'istence without any prevention or hesitation >2(BB:A )nd He (swt) said(KHe it is $ho has created you from clay, and then has decreed a stated term (for you to dieK.ie He has made for this creation which He has created from clay a lifespan (a/al) between his comin to e'istence and his deathK>8(2A )nd He (swt) said(K)nd your Eord has decreed that you worship none but HimK. >B:(20A ie He has iven you a definite order that you should not worship anyone but Him (swt) )nd He (swt) said(KIt is not for a believer, man or women,when )llah and His 7essen er have decreed a matter that they should have an option in their decisionK. >00(08A ie he ordered with an order and /ud ed with a /ud ement. )nd He (swt) said(KThen He completed and finished from their creation (as) seven heavensK. >3B(B2A ie He has made the sky by perfectin the .....seven heavensK. )nd He (swt) said(K+ut (you met) that )llah mi ht accomplish a matter already ordained (in His Hnowled e) >@(32A ie that he may accomplish a matter which inevitably has to be done.)nd He (swt) said(K(Then) the case would be already /ud edK.>2(2BCA ie He has completed the matter which the matter of their death and destruction, and He has brou ht it to an end. )nd He (swt) said(KThat a term appointed (your life period) be fulfilledK. >8(8CA ie that he may................)nd He (swt) said(K!ay(If I had that which you are askin for impatiently (the torment), the matter would have been settled at once between me and youK. >8(4@A the the matter would have been finished and I would have destroyed you instantly. )nd He (swt) said(K)nd it is matter (already) decreedK. ie it was a matter decided by )llah and a /ud ment which had already been commanded to e'ist ie an action which will occur from you by force because it is from the ;ada (Fecree) of )llah. 04

>B?(2BA )nd He (swt) said(KThis is with your Eord- a Fecree which must be accomplishedK. >B?(:BA al,Hatm is the verbal noun of Khatama al,amrK when he obli ed himself......ie its presence became bindin on )llah, He himself has obli ed Himself and /ud ed it. Therefore, the word ;ada is a .....which has more than one meanin ( He made the thin with precision( he e'ecuted the matter and made the thin , and he ordered with an order and he completed the matter, he he made the e'istence of a matter definite, he he concluded the matter, he finished the matter and he /ud ed with a matter, and he order a matter to definitely take place. Fespite the multiplicity of meanin s nowhere was it mentioned that al,;ada is the /ud ement of )llah on only the kulliyaat, /ust as nothin has been mentioned that al,#adar is )llahKs /ud ement on the /u9Kiyaaat. Therefore, the word ;ada has lin uistic meanin s used by the ;urKan in these meanin s and there is no disa reement about the meanin s mentioned. These meanin s are but a )rabic e'pression, the mind has nothin to do with it. )nd if al,;ada has a shariKa meanin then this meanin must be mentioned in ahadith or ayah until it can be said that this meanin is a shariKa meanin and no other meanin has been mentioned.Therefore the use of the word al,;ada mentioned in the ayat is not the sub/ect of Kal,;ada wa al,;adar about which the 7utakallimun differed afterwards. These verses have nothin to do with the study of al,;ada wa al,;adar /ust as the verses and ahadith which contain the meanin of al,#adar have nothin to do with the study of al,;ada wa al,;adar. These verses and ahadith discuss the attributes of )llah and the actions of )llah but al,;ada wa al,;adar discusses the action of the servant. The study of these verses are shariKa discussions and their meanin s are lin uistic but the study of al,;ada wa al,;adar for the mutakallimun is rational. These verses and ahadith are e'plained by their lin uistic and shariKa meanin . )nd the study of al,;ada wa al,;adar is a terminolo ical meanin coined by the mutakallimun.

2.0 $l-.ada 1a al-.adar "./

)l,;ada wa al,;adar with this appellation ie by incorporatin the words to ether to form one meanin . +oth words have one desi nation. ie the ;ada that is linked to ;adar by makin them two inseparable matters, one is not detached from the other. It is not correct to include anythin else in it which has not been used by the !ahabah or the TabiKin. +y studyin the shariKah and lin uistic te'ts and studyin the sayin s of the !ahaba, TabiKin and those who came after them from the K=lama- it appears that the terms K al,;ada wa al,;adarK to ether, have not been used as a specific terminolo ical meanin by any of the !ahaba or TabiKin, they have not been mentioned to ether in their specific terminolo ical sense in the ;urKan or the Hadith. Thou h they have been mentioned to ether in their lin uistic meanin like the hadith of Mabir reported by al,+a99ar with a chain that is Hasan on the authority of the Prophet (saw)( He (saw)said(K.......That is why this terminolo ical desi nation is not found which alludes to this name e'cept after the 7utakallimin after the first century had passed and after the translation of the <reek philosophy. It did not e'ist in the time of the !ahabahand nor was there any 08

dispute or discussion of those two terms as one name for a specific terminolo ical desi nation. Throu hout the era of the !ahaba 7uslims did not know of any study called Kal,;ada wa al,;adarK thou h the word #ada had been mentioned on its own. The word ;adar has been mentioned on its own in the ahadith /ust as it has been mentioned to ether in the aforementioned hadith of Mabir, but in all of these cases they have been mentioned in the lin uistic meanin . They have not been mentioned in the terminolo ical meanin . The word ;ada has been mentioned in the hadith of al,;unut. )l,Hasan said( The 7essen er of )llah (saw) tau ht me words which i say in the ;unut of the with prayer, then he mentioned the duKa of #unut( (part of which is)(Ksave me from what 6ou have decreed, for 6ou are the .ne $ho decrees and no one decrees over 6ouK. $hich means(protect me from the evil of what you have decided, for 6ou decide what 6ou wish and no one decides over 6ou. The word #adar has been mentioned in the hadith of Mibreel in some narrations. He said( +elieve in al,#adar whether ood or badK and in his (saw) sayin ( K....and if some (misfortune) befalls you do not say( If only I had done such and such thin but say( )llah has predetermined it (#addara), what He willed He didK. The meanin of the word #adar in those two hadiths is the predetermination (ta#deer) and Hnowled e of )llah. ie that you should believe that thin have been written by )llah in the al,Eawh al,7ahfu9 and He knows them before they come to e'ist, whether they be ood or badK. )nd say )llah has written this in the al,Eawh al,7ahfu9 and he knew it before it came to be and what He willed he did. The word al,;ada in the meanin mentioned in this hadith or were ever else was not disputed by the 7uslims, they did not discuss its wordin or its importLmeanin . )s for the word #adar in the meanin mentioned in those two hadiths, the 7uslims, before the presence of <reek philosophy, did not disa ree about it or discuss its wordin or importLmeanin . +ut after the presence of the <reek philosophy amon st 7uslims, a roup from Hufa said(There is no #adar (predetermination) ie there is no one who predetermines (mu#addir) and everythin takes place without any previous determination and they were called the (;adariyyah. They are the ones who deny #adar and say that )llah (swt) created the fundamentals of thin s and then left it, so He does have knowled e of their partial aspects (/u9Kiyyaat). This is contrary to what has been mentioned in the clear te't of the ;urKan which states that )llah is the "reator of all thin s whether small or bi , whether fundamental or branch, and that He (swt) predetermined everythin before its e'istence ie wrote it in the al,Eawh al,7ahfu9 ie knew it before it came to be. He (swt) said(KHe created all thin s and He is the )ll,Hnower of everythin %>8(BCBA )nd (swt) said(K)nd He knows whatever there is in the earth and in the sea( not a leaf falls, but He knows it. There is not a rain in the darkness of the earth nor anythin fresh or dry, but is written in a "lear 5ecord.K>8(4?A I'cept that this disa reement and discussion is only with respect to the word #adar of )llah in terms of His Hnowled e. !o the ;adariyyah claim that )llah knows the fundamentals of thin s but not their partial aspects. )nd Islam states that )llah (swt) knows the fundamentals of thin s as well as their partial aspects. Thus, the discussion with respect to the #adar of )llah ie His Hnowled e is about the sub/ect 0:

of )llahKs Hnowled e. It is a sub/ect different to that of al,;ada wa al,;adar. It is a different discussion, separate from the discussion of al,;ada wa al,;adar. Its reality that took place is likese the same ie it is a different sub/ect to that of al, ;ada wa al,;adar. Thus, it appears that the words #ada and #adar have each been mentioned on their own with each havin a specific meanin . They do not have any relationship with the study of al,;ada wa al,;adar. In other words, the word #ada in all its lin uistic and !hariKah meanin s mentioned by the Ee islator, and the word #adar in all its lin uistic and !hariKah meanin s mentioned by the Ee islator, have no relationship to any of these terms, whether mentioned alone or to ether, in the discussion of al,;ada wa al,;adar. .................. The verses mentioned in demonstratin the Hnowled e of )llah are ones that indicate that )llahKs Hnowled e encompasses every thin , thus His (swt) sayin (K2o calamity befalls on the earth or in yourselves but is inscribed in the +ook of Fecrees , (al,lawal,7ahfu9), before $e brin it into e'istence. Qerily, that is easy for )llah.K>4:(22A )nd His (swt) sayin (K!ay( %2othin shall ever happen to us e'cept what )llah has ordained for us. He is our 7awla (protector).% )nd in )llah let the believers put their trust.K>?(4BA )nd His (swt) sayin (K2ot even the wei ht of an atom or less than that or reater, escapes from His knowled e in the heavens or in the earth, but it is in a "lear +ook (al,Eaw al,mahfu9).K>03(0A )nd His (swt) sayin (KIt is He, $ho takes your souls by ni ht (when you are asleep), and has knowled e of all that you have done by day, then He raises (wakes) you up a ain that a term appointed be fulfilled, then in the end unto Him will be your return. Then He will inform you what you used to do.K>8(8CA These verses were revealed to the 7essen er (saw) and memorised and understood by the !ahabah, it did not occur to them to discuss al,;ada wa al, ;adar. *urthermore, the wordin , understandin and indication of these verses state that they are a clarification about the Hnowled e of )llah and have no relationship to the study of al,;ada wa al,;adar. The same applies for the ayah( )nd if some ood reaches them, they say,%this is from )llah,%but if some evil befalls them, they say,%This is from you (7uhammad >sawA).% !ay(%)ll thin s are from )llah, so what is wron with these people that they fail to understand any word&K >3(:@A It has nothin to do with the discussion of al,;ada wa al,;adar because it is a refutation of the Huffar who differentiated between bad and ood. Thus, they made bad to come from the 7essen er (saw) and ood from )llah (swt). !o )llah responded by declarin that everythin is from )llah. The discussion is not about the ood that a human bein does and the evil that he purses. 5ather the discussion is about fi htin and death. The ayah before and after clarifies that(KThey say(.ur EordD $hy have you ordained for us fi htin & $ould that you had ranted us respite for short period&% !ay(%!hort is the en/oyment of this world. The Hereafter is (far) better for him who fears )llah, and you shall not be dealt with un/ustly even e#ual to the *ateelah (a scalish thread in the lon slit of the date,stone). %$heresoever you may be, death will overtake you even if you are in fortresses built up stron and hi hD% )nd if some ood reaches them, they say,%this is from )llah,%but if some evil befalls them, they say,%This is 0@

from you (7uhammad >sawA).% !ay(%)ll thin s are from )llah, so what is wron with these people that they fail to understand any word& $hatever of ood reaches you, is from )llah, but whatever of evil befalls you, is from yourself. )nd $e have sent you (. 7uhammad >sawA) as a 7essen er to mankind, and )llah is sufficient as $itness. He who obeys the 7essen er, has indeed obeyed )llah,but he who turns away, then we have not sent you as a watcher over them.K>3(::,@CA !o the sub/ect is what afflictsLbefalls them and not what they are doin . That is why it has nothin to do with the study of al,;ada wa al,;adar. Therefore, everythin that has bee mentioned so far has nothin to do with the study of al,;ada wa al,;adar, they do not come under its meanin and they have no relationship whatsoever with what has come before. 5ather, al,;ada wa al, ;adar as a meanin has come from the <reek philosophy which was transmittedLtransferred by the 7uKta9ila and they ave an opinion re ardin it. )hl as,!unnah and Mabariyyah refuted them and )hl as,sunnah made a refutation of the Mabariyyah. )nd the discussion became restricted to the same meanin and remained in the same sphere. Thus, the issue is a meanin Lsense that has been mentioned in <reek philosophy and it came to the fore in the debate which used to take place between the 7uslims and the Huffar who used to be armed with the <reek philosophy. It is a meanin which has a relevance to the K)#eedah. !o what is desired is to ive IslamKs opinion re ardin this meanin . The 7uKta9ila ave an opinion and the Mbariyyah responded to them and ave another opinion. )hl as, !unnah refuted all of them and ave an opinion. They said that there is a third opinion which has come out from the two opinions and they described it as Kthe pure milk that is sweet to drink that comes out of the e'crement and bloodK. Therefore, the sub/ect of discussion became known, which is the sub/ect that came from the <reek philosophy. )nd since it is related to the K)#eedah, then the 7uslim must state what his belief is re ardin this sub/ect. The 7uslims did actually state their opinion, they formed three schools. "onse#uently, it is not allowed to refer the issue of al,;ada wa al,;adar to what has been mentioned of the meanin of #adar, lin uistically and in the !hariKah. It is not allowed to ima ine or conceive for al,;ada wa al,;adar any meanin brou ht from mere supposition, conceptionLfancy or ima ination. Thus, it is claimed that al,;ada is the universal /ud ement on only the universals (kulliyyaat) and al,;adar is the universal /ud ement on the /u9iyyaat and its details. .r it is said that al,;adar is the eternal plan for thin s and al,;ada is the e'ecutionLperformance and creation accordin to that predetermination and plan. Indeed, that is not allowed because this is mere ima ination, fancy and a false attempt of assumin the task of applyin certain lin uistic and shariKahe'pressions. ....... !imilarly, it is not allowed to claim al,;ada wa al,;adar is one the secrets of )llah and that we have been forbidden to discuss it. $e cannot claim this because there is no !hariKah te't to say that it is one of the secrets of )llah, not to mention the fact that it is a perceptible sub/ect for which an opinion must be iven, so how can we say that it is not to be studied&D In addition to the fact that it is a rational discussion and a sub/ect which relates to matters that are studied by the mind as a reality that is perceptible. )nd since it relates to the belief in )llah, that is why 0?

we must study al,;ada wa al,;adar in the meanin which later became part of the K)#eeda.

placed under discussion and

The meanin of al,;ada wa al,;adar,or in other words, the #uestion of al,;ada wa al,;adar constitutes the actions of the servants and the attributes of thin s.That is because the issue mentioned is the actions of the servant and what arises from these actions ie the attributes brou ht about by the servant in thin s. )re they the creation of )llah, He is the .ne $ho has created them and brou ht them into bein & The 7uKsta9ila, all of them, said that the servant is the one who creates his own actions himself. He is the one who creates the action and brin s it into e'istence. They differed about the attributes. !ome of them said that the servant is the one who creates all of the attributes which is caused by man and he is the one who brin s them into e'istence. !ome differentiated between attributes. ) section of these was said to be created by the servant in thin s and brou ht into e'istence by his and part of them were created by )llah (swt) in thin s and brou ht into e'istence by Him. )s for the Mabariyyah, they said that )llah creates all actions of man and all attributes caused by man in thin s. He ()llah) is the one who brin s them into e'istence, the servant has nothin to do with the creation and ori ination of the action or in causin the attribute in the thin . )hl as,!unnah said that the actions of the servant and the attributes caused in thin s by the servant are created by )llah (swt). +ut they said )llah creates them when the servant performs the action and when the servant causes the attribute. !o )llah (swt) creates them when the servant has the ability and will and not by his ability and will. This is the issue , the issue of , al,;ada wa al,;adar, there are a summary of the opinions cited. )nyone who scrutinises these views must know the basis on which the discussion has been built such that the discussion can be on a common basis. Thus the result re#uired by the basis of the discussion will result and not any result. The basis of the discussion in al,;ada wa al,;adar is not the action of the servant in terms of whether he created the action or )llah created it. )nd nor is it the will of )llah (swt) in that His will is conditional on the action of the servant so it must e'ist with this will. )nd nor is it the Hnowled e of )llah in terms of Him knowin that the servant will do such and such action or that His Hnowled e encompass the servant, or that this action of the servant is written in the al,Eaw al,7ahfu9 so he must act accordin to what has been written. Indeed, the basis of the discussion is definitely none of these thin s, because they have no relationship to the sub/ect from the viewpoint of reward and punishment- they are related to the #uestion from the viewpoint of creation from nothin , omniscience, omniwill, and the Protected Fecree. This is #uite different from the sub/ect of the reward and punishment for an action.The topic of discussion on whose basis the #uestion of al,;ada wa al,;adar is built is the issue of reward and punishment for an action ie( is man obli ed to perform an action, ood or evil, or does he have a choice& )nd, does man have the choice to perform his action, or does he have no choice& The person who scrutinises the actions sees that man lives within two spheres( one which he dominates, seen as the sphere that is present within the re ion of his conduct, and within which his actions happen absolutely by his choice- the other sphere dominates him, he e'ists within its domain, and the 3C

deeds that occur within it happen without his choice, whether they ori inate from him or fall upon him. Thus, the actions that fall within the sphere that dominates man, man has no choice in them or in their e'istence. They can be divided into two kinds( The first bein a re#uirement of the law of the universe, the other concerns those actions which happen beyond manKs control, but which are not necessitated by the universal laws. )s far as the actions necessitated by the laws of the universe are concerned, man submits to them totally. He is obli ed to act accordin to a specific system that is perpetual. !ubse#uently, manKs actions in this sphere occur without his will and he will leave it without his will, i.e. he cannot fly merely by the use of his own body, neither can he walk on water, or choose for himself the colour of his eyes. 7an did not produce the shape of his head nor the si9e of his body. Indeed, it was )llah tKaala who created all of this without any influence or relationship from the created man, because )llah created the laws of the universe, made them re ulate the universe and made the universe act accordin to them without the ability to chan e. )s for the second cate ory, they are actions which happen beyond manKs control, which he cannot re/ect and which are not related to the laws of the universe, are those deterministic actions which happen either unintentionally throu h him or upon him and which he cannot re/ect, such as( If someone falls on a person and thus kills that person, or if someone shoots at a bird and without intent hits a person and kills him, or if a car, train or plane should crash, without any ability to avoid the incidents, and as a result the passen ers die. )ll these e'amples are actions which occurred from a man or upon him , thou h they are bound by the laws of the universe , they happened without his will and outside his ability to control them, and they are within the sphere that dominates man. )ll the actions which occur within the sphere that dominates man are termed fate (#adaa), because )llah alone has decreed them. Therefore, man is not reckoned on these actions, whether ood or bad , althou h )llah alone knows the ood and bad in these actions , because man has no influence on them- he does not know them or how they are brou ht into e'istence, and he is unable to re/ect them. 7an must believe in this fate and that this fate is from )llah subhanahu wa tKaala (the <lorified and !upreme). )s for the sphere that man dominates, it is the sphere in which he proceeds freely accordin to the system he chooses, whether it is the divine law (sharKiyah) or any other. In this sphere actions carried out by man or involvin him occur by his will. *or e'ample, he walks, eats, drinks and travels anytime he likes, likewise he refrains from doin any of these thin s when he likes- he also burns with fire and cuts with a knife when he chooses- and he satisfies the instincts of procreation and ownership and the hun er of the belly as he likes. )ll this he performs or abstains from freely. Therefore, man is reckoned on those deeds which occur within this sphere. Thus, he is rewarded for the action which if it deserves reward and he is punished for it if it deserves punishment. These actions have nothin to do with al,;ada or vice versa. +ecause man is the one who undertook them with his own will and choice. Therefore, actions of choice do not come under the sub/ect of al,;ada. 3B

)s for al,;adar, it relates to actions whether they occur in the sphere which man dominates or in the sphere which dominates him, or whether they occur from or on thin s from the matter of universe, man and life. Thus, this action causes an effect ie somethin results from the action, so this thin that man causes in thin s in terms of attributes, is it created by man or by )llah (swt) /ust as He (swt) has created the thin s themselves. The one scrutinises this issue will find that there matters which are caused in thin s are from the attributes of thin s and not from the action of a man. )s evidenced by the fact that man is not able to make them e'ist in anythin e'cept the thin s for which are from one of its attributes. )s for the thin s which are not from one of their attributes, man is not able to cause in them what he wants. That is why, these matters are not from the actions of man but from the attributes of thin s. Thus, )llah (swt) has created the thin s and created (#addara) in them attributes in manner that nothin else is possible to come from it e'cept what He has cerated in it. !uch as makin the date pit to row date palm from it and not apple, such the human sperm to ori inate only in humans and not the animals. )llah has created specific attributes for thin s, for e'ample, He created in fire the attribute of burnin , in wood the attribute of catchin fire, and in the knife the attribute of cuttin . He made the attributes an inte ral and perpetual part of the ob/ects accordin to the laws of the universe. $hen it appears that the attributes are no lon er present, it means )llah has stripped them off, and such an event would be a unnatural- it only happens to the Prophets as a miracle for them. Eikewise, in the manner that )llah created attributes for the ob/ects, He created in man instincts and or anic needs and, as He created attributes in ob/ects, He created in the instincts and or anic needs specific attributes. Hence, in the procreation instinct )llah created the se'ual inclination, and in the or anic needs He created the attributes of hun er and thirst, etc. He made these attributes adhere to them accordin to the laws of the universe. The particular attributes that )llah subhanahu wa tKaala has created in ob/ects, instincts and or anic needs are called divine destiny, this is because )llah alone created the ob/ects,instincts and or anic needs and ordained in them their attributes. %Ivery soul is a pled e for its deed.% >:3(0@A

2.2 3o1 the Issue of $l-.adaa4 1al .adar +(ol(ed

$ith the e'ception of the issue of the perpetrator of the )l,kabiirah (ma/or sin) over which $aasil Ibn )taa1, the Head of the 7u1ta9ilah, withdrew form the circle of )l,Hasan )l,+asrii, we barely find any issue of the issues of scholasticism which had not stemmed from an issue that had discussed by <reek philosophers. The issue of %Al)qadaa* wal qadar# by this name and in this meanin which they discussed, had been discussed and debated by <reek philosophers. This issue is called the issue of %al)qadaaa* wal)qadarN and is also called %compulsion and free choice#, it is also called the %freedom of will#. )ll these names mean one and the same thin , namely( is man free or compelled to do or to avoid the actions that he does. It never occurred to the minds of the 7uslims, before the translation of the of <reek philosophy, to in#uire into it. It was the <reek 32

philosophers who en a e in in#uiry and controversy over this issue. The Ipicureans believed that the will is free in choice and that man does all of his actions accordin to his will and without compulsion. The !toics on the other hand believed that the will compelled to take the path it takes and that it is incapable of departin from it. 7an, they said, does nothin in accordance with his will- rather he is compelled to do whatever he does- to do or not to do is not within his control. )fter the advent of Islam and the infiltration of philosophical thou hts, one of the ma/or issues was the attribute of /ustice on the with re ard to )llah. That is( )llah is /ust- from this follows the issue of punishment and reward. *rom this followed the issue of the servant1s (man1s) perpetration of his actions, in pursuance of their method of in#uiry also into the offshoots of an issue, due the influence of the philosophers, i.e. the philosophical thou hts that they had studied in relation to the topics they were repudiatin . The most prominent of these was the discussion by the 7u1ta9ilah- it was the prototype in this matter- the discussion of the other scholastics was a response to repudiate the views of the 7u1ta9ilah. Thus the 7u1ta9ilah are considered the pioneers in discussin the issue of al,;adaa1 wal ;adar, and even in all the topics of scholasticism. The 7u1ta9ilah1s view of the /ustice of )llah was one of sublimin above Him above in/ustice. 5e ardin the issue of punishment and reward, they took a stand which was consistent with the sublimin of )llah and with His /ustice. They postulated that the /ustice of )llah would be meanin less without the assumption of the freedom of the will of man and the assumption that he creates his actions and that he is capable of doin or refrainin from doin - thus if he does voluntarily or refrains from doin voluntarily, his punishment or reward will be reasonable and /ust. +ut if the case was that )llah creates man and compels him to act in a iven way by compellin the obedient to obey and the disobedient to disobey and then punishes this and rewards that, this would not be /ust in the least. Thus they compared the unseen to the seen, i.e. compare )llah )lmi hty to man. They applied the laws of this world to )llah )lmi hty precisely as one roup of <reek philosophers did. They deemed /ustice as envisa ed by man incumbent on )llah. The root of ori in of this discussion is the punishment and reward for the servant1s acts by )llah. This is the theme of the discussion which was called Oal,;adaa1 wal ;adarN or Ocompulsion and volitionN or Ofreedom of the willN. Their approach in to the discussion was that of <reek philosophers( they discussed volition and the creation of acts. .n the issue of volition, they said O$e see that one who wills ood is ood himself and one who wills evil is evil himself and one who wills /ustice is /ust himself and one who wills in/ustice is un/ust himself. Thus if the will of )llah was associated to all ood and the evil in the world, ood and evil would be willed by )llah )lmi hty, and thus the one who willed would merit the epithet of ood and evil and /ust and un/ust, and this is an impossibility with re ard to )llah )lmi hty.N They also say that if )llah had willed the kufr of a kaafir and the sins of a sinner, he would not have prohibited them from kufr and sin, and how can it be thinkable that )llah willed that )bu Eahab be kaafir and then ordered him to have imaan and prohibited him from kufr& $hereas if one of the humans did this, he would be deemed mentally deficient, )llah is e'alted hi h above this. If the kufr of a kaafir and the disobedience of the disobedient we willed by )llah, they would not deserve punishment- their acts will be in obedience to his willPP 30

It is thus that proceed with lo ical propositions, and then they cite na#lee proofs from the Holy ;uran- they #uote )llah )lmi hty1s sayin , # but Allah never wishes in+ustice to &is Servants. (<hafir(0B) and His sayin , % hose who give partners (to Allah) will say$ "If Allah had wished, we should not have given partners to &im, nor would our fathers$ nor should we have had any taboos." So did their ancestors argue falsely# ()l,an1aam(B3@) and His sayin , %Say$ ",ith Allah is the argument that reaches home$ if it had been &is ,ill, &e could indeed have guided you all." ()l,an1aam(B3?) and His sayin , %Allah intends every facility for you- &e does not want to put you to difficulties.# ()l,+a#arah(B@4) and His sayin , %&e liketh not ingratitude (kufr) from &is Servants# ()9,9umar(:). They twisted the )ayahs that contradict their viewpoint, for e'ample the sayin of )llah )lmi hty, %As to those who re+ect (aith, it is the same to them whether thou warn them or do not warn them- they will not believe.# ()l,+a#arah(8) and His sayin , %Allah hath set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a veil.#()l,+a#arah(:) and His sayin , %'ay Allah hath set the seal on their hearts for their blasphemy#()n,2isaa1(B44). They concluded from this the opinion that they held and advocated, namely their well,known view that man has the freedom of will to do an act or refrain from doin it- thus if he does, it is accordin to his will and if he refrains from doin , it is also accordin to his will. )s re ard the issue of the creation of acts, the 7u1ta9ilah said that the acts of servants (people) are created by them and they are of their own doin not of )llah1s- it is in their power to do these acts or refrain from them without any intervention of the power of )llah. The proof of this is the difference which man feels between the voluntary and the involuntary movement, such as the movement of a person who voluntarily moves his hand and the movement of a tremblin person, and the difference between the movement of someone oin up a li hthouse and another fallin from it- thus the voluntary movement is in the power of man- it is he who creates it- but he has no role in the involuntary movement- also, if man was not the creator of his acts, the takliif (obli ation to comply with !hari1a) would be invalid, since if he was not capable of doin or refrainin from doin , it would not be rational to ask him to do or to refrain from doin , and this would not have been the sub/ect of punishment and reward. Thus they proceed with the proof of this opinion of theirs via lo ical propositions, and then they anne' to this na#lee proofs- they cite many aayahs to prove their opinion, for e'ample, )llah )lmi hty1s sayin , # hen woe to those who write the .ook with their own hands, and then say$ " his is from Allah,"# ()l, +a#arah(:?) and His sayin ,# /erily never will Allah change the condition of a people until they change it themselves (with their own souls).# ()r, 5a1d(BB) and His sayin , N $hoever works evil, will be re#uited accordin ly.N()n,2isaa1(B20) and His sayin ,N That Fay will every soul be re#uited for what it earned-N(<haafir(B:) and His sayin ,N he says( %. my EordD send me back (to life), %In order that I may work ri hteousnessN()l,7u1munuun(??,BCC). They twisted the aayahs which contradict their view, for e'ample )llah )lmi hty1s sayin ,N %+ut )llah has created you and your handiworkD%()s,!aaffaat(?8) and His sayin ,N )llah is the "reator of all thin s.N()9,Jumar(82). They concluded with the opinioon which they held 33

re ardin the issue of the creation of acts, namely the viewpoint that man creates his own acts and that is capable of doin an act or refrainin from doin it. In pursuance of the methodolo y of the scholastics of which it is typical to discuss the issue and the offshoots of that issue, one of the offshoots of the creation of acts which they discussed was the issue of resultance. )fter the 7u1ta9ilah had determined that the acts of man are created by him, a #uestiond arose from this( $hat about the acts that result from his action& Is created by him as well& .r is it created by )llah, for e'ample the pain felt by a person who has been his, the taste that a thin comes to have as a result of the action of man, the cuttin that occurs from a knife, pleasure, health, lust, heat, coldness, humidness, hardness, cowardice, coura e, hun er, satisfaction, etc.. They said that all these are part of the action of man because it is man who causes them when he performs his acts. Thus they are resultant from his act and conse#uently they are created by him. This has been the issue of )l,;adaa1 wal ;adar and the view of the 7u1ta9ilah re ardin it. The purport of it is that it is the issue of the volition of the act of the servant and the attribute that occur thin s as a result of the action of man. The drift of their view is that the servant has free will in all of his acts and that it is he who creates his acts and the attributes that occur in thin s as a result of his action. This view of the 7u1ta9ilah provoked the 7uslims and it was an unfamiliar view to them- it was a temerarious view in the primary basis of reli ion, namely the a#eedah. This is why they addressed themselves to repudiate their views. ) roup called )l,Mabriyyah mer ed- amon the most famous of them was )l,Mahm Ibn !afwaan. Those Mabriyyah said, O7an is compelled and he does not have free willneither does he have the capability of creatin his own acts- he is /ust like a feather in flyin with the wind or /ust like a piece of wood in the hands of waves. Indeed, )llah creates the acts at man1s hands. The said, OIf we say that man is the creator of his own acts, what follows is the limitin of )llah1s capability and that it does not include all thin s, and that the servant is a partner of )llah1s in the creation of what is in this world. ) sin le thin cannot be effected by two capabilities. If the capability of )llah created it, then man has no role in it, and if the capability of man created it then )llah has no role in it. It is impossible that part of it the result of the capability of )llah and another part is the result of the capability of the servant. That is )llah is the creator of the act of man, and it is accordin to His will that man performs an act.N They postulate that the acts of man happen only via )llah1s capability and that the servant has no influence whatsoever in it- )llah is merely the sub/ect of what )llah conducts at his hands, and he is absolutely compelled- he and the inanimate are e#uals- they only differ in appearances. Thus they proceed in the proof of their view and #uote aayahs of the ;uran to support it, for e'ample )llah )lmi hty1s sayin , # .ut ye will not, e!cept as Allah wills.#()l,insaan(0C) and His sayin , %,hen thou threwest (a handful of dust), it was not thy act, but Allah0s$# ()l,anfaal(B:) and His sayin , %It is true thou wilt not be able to guide every one whom thou lovest- but Allah guides those whom &e wills# ()l,;asas(48) and His sayin , %".ut Allah has created you and your handiwork1" ()s,!aaffaat(?8) and His sayin , %Allah is the 2reator of all things#()9,Jumar(82). They would twist 34

aayahs indicatin the free will of the servant and his creation of the act. )ccordin ly, they say that the attributes of thin s that result from the action of the servant such as pleasure, hun er, coura e, cuttin and burnin etc. are from )llah )lmi hty. )hlussunah wal Mama1ah emer ed and they also addressed themselves to repudiatin the propositions of the 7u1ta9ilah. )hulssunnah postulated that the acts of servants are all by the will and volition of )llah. $ill and volition, they said, mean the same thin , namely, an eternal attribute of the Hayy ()live) that dictates the optin for occurrence of one of two practicables at one specific time while the capability is uniform with re ard to all- the acts of the servants are accordin to his rulin , when He wills somethin He says ObeN and it is R and His ;idyah i.e. His ;adaa1 , which is the act plus conditions - )llah )lmi hty said, %So &e completed (3adaa) them as seven firmaments.#(*ussilat(B2), % hy 4ord hath decreed (3adaa)# ()l,israa1(20)what is intended here by ;adaa1 is the sub/ect effected by ;adaa1 not the attribute of )llah. The act of the servant is accordin to the arran ement (ta#diir) of )llah, i.e. characteri9ation of every created entity with its own specification as re ards oodness, badness, usefulness, harmfulness and the time and place that contain it, and the conse#uent punishment and reward. The intention here is to affirm the enerality of the will and capability of )llah because all (thin s)are created by )llah. This dictates the capability and the will(of )llah) for no compulsion or imposition. They said, OIf it is said that accordin to our view, a kafir would be compelled in his kufr and a faasi# would be compelled in his fis# and thus it would be invalid to order them to have imaan and obedience, we say, G)llah )lmi hty indeed wanted them to be kafir and fasi# accordin to their own volition, and thus there is no compulsion- this is /ust as the )lmi hty foreknew their voluntary kufr and fis#- Thus the incumbency of the impossible does not follow.1 )bout the acts of the servants, they said in response to the 7u1ta9ilah and the Mabriyyah, OThe servants have voluntary acts for which they are rewarded in the case of obedience and for which they are punished in the case of disobedience.N They pointed out how they termed it voluntary, thou h they postulate that )llah is the sole creator and effecter of acts- they said, OThe creator of the act of the servant is )llah )lmi hty. )nd the capability and will of the servant have a role in certain acts, such as the movement of strikin , but not the others, such as the movement of tremblin - )llah verily is the creator of all thin sthe servant is a ainer. The went on and e'plained this by sayin , OThe directin by the servant of his capability and will to the act is ainin . The effectin by )llah of the act thereafter is creation. The same accomplishment is under the two capabilities but in two different directions. The act is accomplished by )llah in the direction of effectin and accomplished by the servant in the direction of ainin . In other words, )llah )lmi hty has consistently created the act upon the capability and willin of the servant but not via the servant1s capability and will- this combination is ainin . The supported they view with the same aayahs that the Mabriyyah cited to prove )llah1s creation of acts and His willin of it. They supported their view concernin the the ainin by the servant with )llah )lmi hty1s sayin , %as a reward for their (good) 5eeds.# ()s,!a/dah(B:) and His sayin , %4et him who will, believe, and let him who will, re+ect (it)# ()l, Hahf(2?) and His sayin , %It gets every good that it earns, and it suffers every ill that it earns.#()l,+a#arah(2@8). They considered themselves as 38

havin repudiated the views of the 7u1ta9ilah and the Mabriyyah. The truth is the they their view and that of the of the Mabriyyah is one and the same view- thus they are Mabris. Their notion of ainin was a total fiasco. It is neither in accordance with the intellect since there is no rational proof of it whatsoever, nor is it in accordance with the na#l since there is no proof of it amon shar1i te'ts whatsoever. It is no more that a failed attempt to reconcile the views of the 7u1ta9ilah and the Mabriyyah. The ist is that the issue of )l,;adaa1 wal ;adar was a ma/or issue of the scholastics, and all of them focused their discussion on the act of the servant and the attributes resultin therefrom, i.e. the attributes which the servant effects as result of his handlin of thin s. Their basis for the discussion was the act of the servant and the attributes which he effects as result of his action( is it )llah who created both (the act and the attributes) or it the servant, and does this occur via the will of )llah or via the will of the servant& The reason which ave rise to this discussion is the borrowin by the 7u1ta9ilah of this issue without any chan e from the <reek philosophy under the same name and in the same meanin O)l,;adaa1 wal ;adarN or Ofreedom of choiceN or Ocompulsion and free choiceN, and their discussion of it from a perspective that they deemed was consistent with the attribute of /ustice necessary for )llah )lmi hty. This led to the emer ence of the Mabriyyah and )hl,us,!unnah to repudiate the views of the 7u1ta9ilah, which they did accordin to the same precepts and on the same basis. )ll of them discussed the issue from the perspective of the attributes of )llah not from the perspective of the it sub/ect only. They applied the will of )llah and His capability to the act of the servant and to the attributes which the servant effects in thin s- their sub/ect of discussion became( are these via the capability and will of )llah or are they via the capability and will of the servant& )l,;adaa1 wal ;adar is , thus, the acts of the servant and the attributes of thin s which man effects in thin s as a result of his action. !o, )l, ;adaa1 is the acts of the servants and the ;adar is the attributes of thin s. The fact that the ;adaa1 is the acts of the servants is evident from their discussion and controversy concernin it. That is, their postulation that the servant carries out the act via his capability and will, and the postulation of their opponents that the act is effected via the capability and will of )llah not the capability and will of the servant, and the postulation of those who opposed both roups that the act of the servant is effected as via the creation of the act by )llah at the time of the availability of the capability and will for the act, not via the capability and will of the servant. This indicate that the meanin of )l,;adaa1 is the acts of the servants. The fact the ;adar is the attributes effected by the servant in thin s is evident from their discussion and controversy concernin it- i.e. when they discussed what results from the acts of the servant, they discussed the attributes that he effects- they said, OIf we added starch to su ar and cooked them, puddin results( is the taste and the colour of puddin from our creation or is it from the creation of )llah& Is the e'it of the ruuh (soul) upon slau hterin , and the movement of a stone upon pushin , and vision upon the openin of one1s eyes, and the breaka e of a le upon fallin down and it intactness upon healin , etc.( are all these from our creation or from the creation of )llah.N This discussion is discussion of the attributes. This is indicated by their debate of these resultants. +ishr Ibn )l,7u1tamir, the chief of the scholastics of +a hdad said, O$hatever 3:

results from our action is created by us. Thus if I opened the eye of a person and he saw a thin , then his si htin of the thin is my action because it is resultant from my action. )lso the colour of the foodstuffs that we make and their taste and aroma are our action. !imilarly, pain, pleasure, health, lust, etc. are all the action of manN. )bu )l,Hudhayl )l,)llaaf, a key scholastic, said there is a difference between resultants( every thin that results from the action of man and whose process is known is from his action- otherwise it is not. Thus the pain which results from beatin and the ascent of a stone when thrown upwards and the descent of it when thrown downwards, and the like are from the action of man. +ut colours, flavours, heat, coldness, humidness, hardness, cowardice, coura e, hun er and satisfaction are all from the action of )llah. )n,2adhdhaam said that what man does is only the movement and thus whatever is not a movement is not from his action- man does not perform movement e'cept in himself- he does not perform it in others. Thus if one moved his hand this would be his action, but if he threw a stone and it move upwards or downwards, the movement of the stone it not from the action of man but from the action of )llah, which means the He made it intrinsic of the stone to move if pushed by someone, etc. Thus the development of colours, flavours, odours, pain and pleasure are not from the action of man because they are not movements. The reality of the controversy re ardin resultance itself indicates that is a controversy re ardin the attributes of thin s( are they from the action of man or are they from )llah& The discussion, thus, and the controversy in this discussion is indeed in the attributes effected by man in thin s. In this way, the discussion was carried out on one and the same topic and accordin to the same precepts by all scholastics. Fue to the fact that the discussion on the resultants from actions, i.e. on the attributes effected in thin s by man was subordinate because it was built on the discussion on the acts of the servant, it was mar inal in the controversy between the 7u1ta9ilah, )l,us,!unnah and the Mabriyyah. The discussion over the act of the servant was predominant amon st the scholastics. Febate and polemics were focused on it more than they were on the attributes. !ince O)l,;adaa1 wal ;adarN is one sin le name of a referent, albeit a compound of two words which are amal amated and one of them is a sub,point of the other, the discussion of the )l,;adaa1 wal ;adar later on focused more on the acts of the servant than it did on the attributes effected by man. The discussion on O)l,;adaa1 wal ;adarN continued and each came to understand it in a way different from the others. )fter the key scholars of the 7u1ta9ilah and the key scholars )hl,us,!unaah came their disciples and their followers- the discussion continued and was renewed in every era. Fue to the diminution of the 7u1ta9ilah and the dominance of )hl,us,!unnah, the debate tilted to the views of )hl,us,!unnah. Febaters, who disa reed over )l,;adaa1 wal ;adar, continued to ascribe to it fancied meanin s of their own to )l,;adaa1 wal ;adar, and to attempt to apply to it lan ua e or !har1i terminolo y. Thus some of them said that )l,;adaa1 wal ;adar is one of the secrets of )llah that no one knows- others said that discussin )l,;adaa1 wal ;adar was absolutely impermissible because the Prophet prohibited this, and they would cite the hadith OIf )l,;adar is mentioned, #uitN- others came to differentiate between )l,;adda1 and )l,;adar- they said that )l,;adaa1 was the rulin s in the eneral and the ;adar was the rulin s in the specific, i.e. in the parts and the details. .thers said that )l,;daa1 was the plannin and )l,;adar was the e'ecution- accordin to this 3@

view )llah plans the act, i.e. He draw it up and produces it desi n and He then is said to have made the ;adar of the act- He )lmi hty e'ecutes the act and accomplishes it , and then is said to have made the ;adaa1 of the act. !ome others said that the meanin of )l,;adar was )l,ta#diir and the meanin of )l, ;daa1 is creation. !ome considered the two words inseparable and said )l,;adaa1 and )l,;adar are two concomitant matters which are inseparable because one of them represents the basis, namely the ;adar and the other represents the buildin , namely the ;adaa1- anyone who seeks to separate them, in do doin so seeks to cause the downfall and demolition of the buildin . !ome others differentiated between them and said that )l,;adaa1 was one thin and )l,;adar was another. Thus the discussion continued on the issue of O)l,;adaa1 wal ;adarN as a specific entity, whether be it amon st those who treated them as separate or those who treated them as inseparable. 6et it had only one referent for all of them and irrespective of the interpretation of it, namely the act of the servant with re ard to its creation( is it created by )llah or is it created by the servant or is it created by )llah at the same time the servant performs it& The discussion crystalli9ed and focused on this referent and continued to accordin to the same precepts. )fter this discussion be an, the issue of )l,;adaa1 wal ;adar came to be classified as a )#eedah topic. It was listed as a si'th issue of )#eedah because it dealt with an issue pertainin to )llah, with re ard to His creation of the acts and His creation of the attributes of thin s, whether the act or the attributes are ood or evil. It thus becomes evident that O)l,;adaa1 wal ;adarN considered as one term referrin to one referent, or in their own words considered as Otwo concomitant mattersN never e'isted in the discussions of the 7uslims e'cept after the emer ence of the scholastics. It also becomes evident that there are only two viewpoints in this re ard i.e concernin )l,;adaa1 wal ;adar ( first, the one advocatin the freedom of choice, which is the viewpoint of the 7u1ta9ilah, and second, the one advocatin compulsion, which is the viewpoint of the Mabriyyah and )hl,us,!unnah, despite the difference between these last two in wordin and the twistin of te't. The 7uslims settled on these two views and were diverted from the viewpoint of the ;uran and the hadith and what the !ahaabah understood from these to a discussion in a new term i.e. O)l,;adaa1 wal ;adarN or Ocompulsion and the freedom of choiceN or Othe freedom of willN, and to a new referent i.e. ( are the acts created by )llah and (happen) via His will or are they created by the servant and (happen) via his will, or are the attributes that man effects in thin s from the action of the servant and his will or are they from )llah )lmi hty& )fter the establishment of this discussion, the issue of )l,;adaa1 wal ;adar came to be included under the discussion of )#eedah- it was made a si'th issue of a#eedah. (To P:4)

2.5 !uidance and %is&uidance ".6Huda lin uistically means rashad and dalala. It is said, he uided him to the deen, 3?

he is uided by a uidance, I showed him the way......... Falal is the opposite of rashad. Hidaya, accordin to the !hariKa, is to be uided to Islam and to believe in it. )nd dalal, accordin to the !hariKa is the deviation from Islam. Pertainin to this is the sayin of the Prophet (saw)( KQerily, )llah will not allow my =mmah to a ree on a dalala.K )llah (swt) has kept the Manna (Paradise) for the muhtadeen (those who have hidaya) and the 2ar (*ire) for the Faallin (those who are on dalal). In other words, )llah will reward the muhtadi (the one who has hidaya) and punish the daal (the one who is on dalal). )ttachin the prospect of reward or punishment to huda and dalal indicates they (huda and dalal) belon to the actions of human bein s and do not pertain to )llah. !ince, if they were from )llah He would not have rewarded people for havin hidaya and punished them for bein on the dalal. !ince when he punishes someone whom He has caused to o astray, He has done in/ustice to him. He is Hi h, above such a thin , I'alted and <reat. He (swt) said( K)nd you Eord is not at all un/ust to (His) slaves.K>3B(38A He (swt) said(K)nd I am not un/ust (to the least) to the slaves.K>4C(2?A However, there are ayaats which su est that hidaya and dalal are to be imputed to )llah (swt). !o it is understood from them that hidaya and dalal do not emanate from the servant but are from )llah taKala. There are other verses which su est that hidaya, dalal and idlal (causin someone to o astray) should be ascribed to the servant. *rom them it is understood that hidaya and dalal are from the servant. These, and other verses, should be understood in a le islative manner. In the sense that one comprehends the le islative reality for which it has been le islated. It appears, then, that the attribution of uidance and mis uidance to )llah has a meanin other than the meanin of attributin uidance and mis uidance to the servant. Iach one is focused on an an le different from the an le on which the other is focused. In this manner the le islative meanin become most evident. Indeed, the verses which attribute mis uidance and uidance to )llah are e'plicit in that it is )llah who uides and it is He $ho causes someone to o astray. He (swt) said(K!ay( %Qerily, )llah sends astray whom He wills and uides unto Himself those who turn to Him in repentance.K>B0(2:A He (swt) said(KQerily, )llah sends astray whom He wills, and uides who He wills.K>04(@A He (swt) said(KThen )llah misleads whom He wills and uides who He wills.K>B3(3A He (swt) said(K+ut He sends astray whom He wills and uides who He wills.K>B8(?0A He (swt) said(K)nd whomsoever )llah wills to uide, He opens his breast to Islam, and whomsoever He willsto send astray, He makes his breast closed and constricted, as if he is climbin up to the sky.K>8(B24A He (swt) said(K)llah sends astray whom He wills and He uides on the !trai ht Path whom He wills.K>8(0?A He (swt) said(K!ay( %It is )llah $ho uides to the truth.K>BC(04A He (swt) said(K)nd they will say( %)ll the praises and thanks be to )llah, $ho has uided us to this, never could we have found uidance, were it not that )llah uided usDK>:(30A He (swt) said(KHe whom )llah uides, is ri htly uided- buthe whom He sends astray, , for him you will not find no wali ( uidin friend) to lead him (to the ri ht Path).K>B@(B:A He (swt) said(KQerilyD 6ou (. 7uhammad >sawA) uide not whom you like, but )llah uides whom He wills.K>2@(48A Thus, in these verses there is a clear indication that the one does the uidin and mis uidin is )llah and not the servant. This means the servant does not find uidance by himslef, rather when )llah uides him he is uided. )nd when )llah sends him 4C

astray he oes astray. However, this wordin has come with indications (#araKin) which divert the meanin from one of considerin the initiation of uidance and mis uidance is from )llah, to another meanin . $hich is- that of considerin the creation of uidance and mis uidance as comin from )llah. The one who initiates uidance, mis uidance and the sendin of someone astray is the servant. )s for these indications (#araKin) they are shariKa and rational indications. )s for the !hariKa indications many ayahs have come attributin uidance, mis uidance and idlal to the servant. He (swt) said(K!o whosoever receives uidance, he does so for the ood of his own self, and whosoever oes astray, he does so to his own loss.K>BC(BC@A He (swt) said(KIf you follow the ri ht uidance no hurt can come to you from those who are in error.K>4(BC4A He (swt) said(K!o whosoever accepts the uidance, it is only for his own self.K>0?(3BA He (swt) said(K)nd it is they who are uided.K>2(B4:A He (swt) said(K)nd those who disbelieve will say( %.ur EordD !how us those amon /inns and men who led us astray.K>3B(2?A He (swt) said(K!ay( %If (even) I o astray, I shall stray only to my own loss.K>03(4CA He (swt) said(KThen who does more wron than one who invents a lie a ainst )llah, to lead mankind astray without knowled e.K>8(B33A He (swt) said(K.ur EordD That they may lead men astray from 6our Path.K>BC(@@A He (swt) said(K)nd none has brou ht us into error e'cept the 7u/rimun.K>28(??A He (swt) said(K)s,!amiri has led them astray.K>2C(@4A He (swt) said(K.ur EordD These misled us.K>:(0@A He (swt) said(K) party of the people of the !cripture (Mews and "hristians) wish to lead you astray. +ut they shall not lead astray anyone e'cept themselves.K>0(8?A He (swt) said(KIf 6ou leave them, they will mislead 6our slaves.K>:B(2:A He (swt) said(K$hosoever follows him, he will mislead him to the torment of the *ire.K>22(3A He (swt) said(K+ut !haytan wishes to lead them astray.K>3(8CA !o, in the wordin (mantu#) of these verses there is a clear indication that the human bein is the one who performs the act of uidance and mis uidance, thus he sends himself astray and he sends others astray and the !haytan also sends people astray. !o uidance and mis uidance has come to be attributed to the human and !haytan and that the human bein uides himself and sends himself astray. This is an indication (#arina) that the attribution of uidance and mis uidance to )llah is not one of intiation (mubashara) but rather it is one of creation. If you place the ayahs to ether and you understood in a le islative manner, then the departure of each verse from the direction of the other becomes clear. Thus the ayah says(K!ay( %It is )llah $ho uides to the truth.K>BC(04A and the other ayah says(K!o whosoever receives uidance, he does so for the ood of his own self.K>BC(BC@A The first indicates that )llah is the one who uides and the second verse indicates that man is the one who uides himself. The uidance of )llah in the first verse is one of creatin the uidance in the humn bein , ie creatin the capacity for uidance. The second ayah indicates that the human beein is the one who intiates what )llah has created in terms of the capacity for uidance and so he uides himself. That is why He (swt) says in the other ayah(K)nd (have $e not) shown him the two ways ( ood and evil).K>?C(BCA ie the path of ood and the path of evil ie $e have iven him the abilityLcapacity for uidance and $e have left him to intiate his own uidance. !o these ayahs which attribute uidance and mis uidance to man are a shariKa indication (#arina sharKiyyah) showin that the intitiation of uidance should be diverted from )llah to the servant. )s for the rational indication (#arinah Ka#liyyah), )llah (swt) takes people to account and so he rewards the one 4B

who is uided and punishes the mis uided and He has preepared the reckonin accordin to the actions of human bein s. He (swt) said(K$hosoever does ri hteous ood deed it is for (the benefit of) his own self, and whosoever does evil, it is a ainst his own self, and your Eord is not at all un/ust to (His) slaves.K>3B(38A He (swt) said(K!o whosoever does ood e#ual to the wei ht of an atom (or a small ant), shall see it. )nd whosoever does evil e#ual to the wei ht of an atom (or a small ant), shall see it.K>??(:A He (swt) said(K)ndhe who works deeds of ri hteousness, while he is a beliver, then he will have no fear of in/ustice, nor of any curtailment (of , his reward.K>2C(BB2A He (swt) said(K$hosoever works evil, will have the recompense thereof.K>3(B20A He (swt) said(K)llah has promised the hypocrites- men and women, and the disbelievers, the *ire of Hell, therein they shall abide.K>?(8@A *or if the meenin of ascribin uidance and mis uidance to )llah is that He (swt) initiates it, then His punishment of the kafir, munafi# and sinful is in/ustice. )nd )llah ...... Then we are obli ed to divertLalter its meanin to somethin other than initiation, which is the creation of uidance from nothin . )nd harmony with this is maintanied if the one who initiates uidance and mis uidance is the servant, and therfore he is accounted for it. This is with respect to the ayahs in which uidance and mis uiadnce is ascribed to )llah. )s re ards verses in which uidance and mis uidance is linked to His wish (masheeKa)(KQerily, )llah sends astray whom He wills, and uides who He wills.K>04(@A The meanin of masheeKa here is irada (will). The meenin of these verses is that no one uides himslef by force a ainst )llahKs wish and nor does he forcibly o astray a ainst His wish. 5ather the one who finds uidance is the one who uides himself by the wish and will of )llah and soemone oes astray when he oes astray by the wish and will of )llah. !till remainin is the #uestion of the ayaat fom which one understands that there are people who will never be uided. !uch as His (swt) sayin (KQerily, those who disbelieve, it is the same to them whether you (. 7uhammad >sawA) warn them or do not warn them, they will not believe. )llah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearin s, (they are closed from acceptin )llahKs <uidance), and on their eyes there is a coverin .K>2(8,:A )nd His (swt) sayin (K2ayD +ut on their hearts is the 5an (coverin of sins and evil deeds.K>@0(B3A He (swt) said(K)nd it was inspired to 2uh( %2one of your people will believe e'cept those who have believed already.K>BB(08A These verses are a notification from )llah to His Prophets about specific people that they will not believe, so this comes under the Hnowled e (KIlm) of )llah. The notification does not mean there is a roup which will believe and a roup which will not believe. 5ather, every human bein has the capacity to a#uire Iman. The 7essen er and the daKwa carrier after him..mukhatib...invitin all the people to Iman. It is not allowed for the 7uslim to despair about anyones iman. )s for what has come before in the Hnowled e of )llah that he will not believe. )llah (swt) knows it because His Hnowled e encompasses everythin . )nd what )llah (swt) has not informed us about what He knows, it is not allowed for us to pass /ud ement. The Prophets did not pass /us ement that someone will not believe e'cept after )llah (saw) had informed them of this.

42

)s for His (swt) sayin (K)nd )llah uides not the people who are *asi#un (the rebellious and disobedient).K>4(BC@A )nd His (swt) sayin (K)nd )llah uides not the people who are Jalimun (wron ,doers).K>0(@8A )nd His (swt) sayin ( K)nd )llah uides not the people who are Hafirun (disbelievers).K>2(283A )nd His (swt) sayin (KIf you (. 7uhammad >sawA) covet for their uidance, then verily )llah uides not those whom He makes to o astray.K>B8(0:A )nd His (swt) sayin (KQerily, )llah uides not one who is a 7usrif (a polytheist, those who commit reat sins), a liarDK>3C(2@A These verses mean that )llah did not rant them uidance since the rantin of uidance comes from )llah. +ecasue the fasi#, 9alim, kafir, daal, musrif and ka99ab, all of them are characterised by attributes which are not consistent with uidance and )llah will not ive uidance to the one who has such an attribute. +ecause uidance is ranted when the human bein is ............!imilar to this is His (swt) sayin (K<uide us to the !trai ht $ay.K>B(8A )nd His sayin (K)nd uide us to the 5i ht $ay.K>0@(22A ie rant us ( uidance) so that we may be uided ie feciltate for us the causes of this uidance.

2./ The termination of life-s"an (a7al) is the only cause of death "66
7any people think that death, even thou h it takes place once, has more than one cause. They say the causes vary but death occurs once. They take the view that death can occur from a terminalLfatal illness such as pestilenceLpla ue. )nd it may occur by the stabbin of a knife or bein hit by a bullet or burned by fire or when some ones head is chopped off etc. *or them these are all direct causes which lead to death. ie death occurs in conse#uence of them. That is why they proclaim these thin s are the causes of death. )ccordin ly, death occurs when these thin s take place, and it does not occur when they do not take place. !o, in their view death has occurred due to the e'istence of these causes and not because their life,span (a/al) has been terminated even thou h with their ton ues they say man dies due to his a/al. The causes of death are these thin s and not )llah (swt) even if their say with their mouths that )llah (swt) is the one who ives life and makes people to die. The truth is that death is one and its cause is also one - which is the termination of the a/al. )nd that it is )llah (swt) alone who causes death and the direct cause brin in about death is )llah (swt). That is because for somethin to be correctly considered as a cause, it must always produce an effect. )nd that the effect cannot be produced e'cept by only its cause. This is contrary to the conditionLcircumstance (hala) which is a particular condition with concomitant circumstances under which somethin usually takes place. However it may also fail to transpire and not take place. *or instance, life is the cause of movement in animals, when life e'ists within him them movement occurs from him. $hen life is absent the movement is absent as well. )lso for e'ample, ener y is the cause of the motor bein set in motion. $hen the ener y is present the motor starts, without ener y there is not motion. This is contrary to the rain in relation to the cultivation of crops. It is one of the conditions in which plants row but it is not the 40

cause. That is because rain allows crops to row, but it may rain but there are no crops. "rops may row due to /ust the moisture bein retained by the land like the cultivation in the summer which rows without any rain. !imilarly, pla ues may e'ist and someone mi ht be shot but death does not occur. )nd death may occur without any of these thin s under which death usually takes place bein present. The one follows the thin s in which death occurs, and the one who follows death itself can be sure of this from the reality. !o he finds that these thin s , in which death normally occurs, are present but death does not occur. .r death mi ht occur without the presence of any of these thin s. *or e'ample, a person mi ht be fatally stabbed with a knife and all the doctors a ree that it is fatal. Then the one stabbed does not die. .n the contrary his wound heals and he ets better. )lso death mi ht occur without any apparent causeLreason, for instance if someones heart suddenly stops beatin without the nature of the condition in which the heart stopped bein clear to the doctors after a detailed investi ation. !uch incidents are many which are known to the doctors. 7any a hospital in the world bears witnessLtestimony to thousands of such incidents. !omethin mi ht happen which usually and definitely leads to death but then the person does not die. )nd death mi ht occur suddenly without any cause leadin to it bein apparent. That is why all the doctors say(for so and so patient nothin can be done for him accordin to medical teachin , however he may et better but this is beyond our knowled e. )lso they say so and so person is not under any risk and he will recover. He passes the dan er period and then his situation deteriorates and he suddenly dies. )ll of these are realities witnessed and sensed by the people and doctors. They clearly indicate that these thin s from which death takes place are not causes of death. !ince if they were the causes of death they would not fail (to cause death consistently) and death would not occur due to any other cause, ie death would not occur without a perceptable cause. +y their mere failure to cause death even if it is once and by the mere occurance of death without these causes even if only once, indicates definitly that they are not causes of death but rather conditionsLcircumstances in which death occurs. The true cause of death which produces the effect is somethin else and not that. It mi ht be said( yes, these thin s which take place and in which death takes place are usually conditionsLcircumstances and not causes because they may fail to result in death. However, there are causes which are seen and sensed from which death definitly takes place and it does not fail to take place, so that is the cause of death. *or e'ample, cuttin the neck and removin the head from it is definetly results in death, and without fail. $hen the heartbeat stops death defintely occurs, without fail. These and other such e'amples are in terms of parts of the human body, from which defintely occurs, are the cause of death. 6es, strikin the neck is one of the conditions of death but not a cause of death, and stabbin the heart with a knife is one of the conditionsLcircumstances of death but it is not the cause of death etc. +ut decapitation and the stoppin of a heart beat is a cause of death. !o why do we not say that this is the cause of death& The answer is that cuttin the neck and removin the head from the body does not occur from the person. It does not occur from the neck itself or the head. It does not happen e'cept by an e'ternal factor. It is then not ri ht to say that severin the neck is a cause. 5ather the thin that did the cuttin is a suspected cause and not the cuttin itself. +ecause 43

the cuttin did not occur from itslef but from an e'ternal factor. !imilarly, the stoppin of the haert beat did not occur from itslef but rather ther must have been an e'ternal factor. It is not correct therfore to say that the stoppoin of the heart beat is a cause, rather what caused the haert to stop is suspected of bein the cause of death and not the stoppin of the haert itself. +ecauase death did not occur from itself but from an e'ternal factor. !o it is not possible that decapitation and the stoppin of the haert beat can themselves be suspected of bein the cause of death. There is no suspected cause of death e'cept the e'ternal factor. *urthermore, )llah (swt) has created attributes in thin s. $hen the attribute is absent then its effect is one. There will be no attribute without the presence of the ob/ect, which is part of its attributes. *or e'ample, )llah created in the eye the attrinute if si ht, and in the ear the attribitue of hearin , and in nerves the attribute of sensation, and in fire the attribute of burnin and in lemon the attribute of sourness and so on and so forth. This attrubute of an ob/ect is the natural result of its e'istence. It is similar to one of characteristicsLfeatures. *or e'ample water, one of its natural charateristics is li#uidity and part of its attribute is that it #uenches thirst. The motor, for e'ample, one of its natural charateristics is motion and part of its attribute is heat. )nd the heart, one of its natural charateristics is palpitation and part of its attribute is life. !o #uenchin thirst, heat and life are the natural charectaristics of the ob/ect thou h they are part of its attributes. The presence of an attribute in an ob/ect is not the cause of the action which is its effect. !o the absence therefore of a attribute is not the cause of the absence of the action which is its effect. This is becasue the presence of the attribute of burin in fire is not sufficient to produce burnin . !o it cannot serve as a cause for burnin since the presence of the attribute of burnin in fire not a cause for brin in about burnin . Therfore, absence of the attribute of burnin in fire is not cause for the absence of burnin . Eikewise, the presence of the attrubute of life in the heart is not enou h to produce life. It is not suitable as a cause for life. !ince the presence of the attribute of life is not a cause for producin life. Then at that moment, the absence of the attribute of life from the heart is not the cause of the absence of life. )ccordin ly, it cannot be said that the disappearnce of an ob/ect is not the cause of the disapperance of its attributes. rather what is the cause of the diassapreace of the ob/ectKs attribute is a thin that is e'ternal to the ob/ect itself. $hich makes its attribute o and retainsLkeeps the ob/ect devoid of its attribute. .r it makes the ob/ect itself oLdisappear and so it makes its attribute oLdispparer with it. !o the thin that made the attribute disappre or the thin which madethe ob/ect disppaer and with it its attrubute. This is the cause of the diasppraence of the attribute and the ob/ect itself is not the cause for the disppareance of its attribute. Therefore, form thin an le also, ie the an le that life is an attribute of the presence of the head on the body and it is an attribute of the haert beat. It should not be said that removin the head from the neck is the caue of death and that the stoppin of the haert beat is the cause of death. 5ather the supected cause is what removed the attribute from the neck by removin it and from the heart by stoppin it. It is not the cuttin off of the neck or the stoppin of the haert. Therefore, dama in a limb ie cuttin the neck or stoppin the heart beat is not the true cause of death. 44

+ecause it is impossible for any dama e to occur to the limb e'cept by an e'trnal factor. )nd because life is one of its attributes , ie the limb , it will not o e'cept by an e'ternal factor which will remove it , ie the attribute , or it will remove the limb and with it its attribute. !imilarly, the cause of death is not the e'ternal factor because it has been proven rationally and from the reality that the e'ternal factor may occur but death does not take place. Feath may occur without this e'ternal factor takin place. The cause must invariabley produce the effect. 2othin remains to be said e'cept that the true cause of death which definitly produces the effect, which is death, is other than these thin s. The mind is not able to be uided to this true cause because it cannot be sensed, therefore )llah (swt) must inform us of it and prove this knowled e about the real cause of death with an evidence which is definite in authenticity and meanin so that we can believe it. +ecause that is from the beliefs which are not proven e'cept by the definite evidence. In numerous ayahs )llah (swt) has informed us that the cause of death is the terminationLe'piration of our life,span (a/al) and that it is )llah (swt) who causes death. !o death occurs inevitabledue to the (termination) of a/al without fail. !o the a/al is the cause of death. The one who causes death is )llah (swt). He is the one who actuatesLinitiates the act of death. This has been mentioned in numerous ayahs. He (swt) said(K)nd no person can ever die e'cept by )llahKs leave and at an appointed term.K>0(B34A ie he has decreed death for an temporary appointed time which is known which cannot be delayed or advanced. )nd He (swt) said(KIt is )llah $ho takes away the souls at the time of their death.K>0?(32A ie He is the one who causes peopleKs death when they die. )nd so He is the one who takes away the thin by which he has life. )nd He (swt) said(K7y Eord ()llah) is He $ho ives life causes death.K >2(24@A ie He is the one who undertakesLinitiates the creation and brin in about of life and He is the one who undertakesLinitiates the act and occurrence of death. He (swt) said(KIt is )llah that ives life and causes death.K>0(B48A )nd )llah (swt) has said this in response to the sayin of those who disbelieved. The ayah states(K. you who believeD +e not like those who disbelieve (hypocrites) and who say to their brethren when they travel throu h the earth or o out to fi ht( %If they had stayed with us, they would not have died or been killed,% so that )llah may make it a cause of re ret in their hearts. It is )llah that ives life and causes death. )nd )llah is )ll,!eer of what you do.K >0(B48A ie the matter is in the hands of )llah. He mi ht allow the traveller or ha9i (one who fi hts in )llahKs path) to live but cause the one residin and sittin in his house to die as He (swt) wills. )nd He (swt) said(K$heresoever you may be, death will overtake you even if you are in fortresses built up stron and hi h.K >3(:@A ie wherever you may be death will catch you even if you are in stron fortresses. )nd He (swt) said(K!ay(%The an el of death, who is set over you, will take your souls%. >02(BBA This is in answer to the Huffar. )llah (swt) is sayin that they will return to their Eord, so He will make themto die when He sends the an el of death to take their ruh (secret of life). The ayah is( K)nd they say( %$hen we are (dead and become) lost in the earth, shall we indeed be recreated anew&% 2ay, but they deny the 7eetin with their EordD !ay(%The an el of death, who is set over you, will take your souls, then you shall be brou ht to your EordD% >02(BC,BBA ie take your ruh, so death takes place when 48

the ruh (secret of life) is taken. )nd He (swt) said(K!ay (to them)( %Qerily, the death from which you flee will surely meet you.%>82(@A ie the death from which you flee and run away from. 6ou do not have the coura e to wish it fearin that you will have to face the evil conse#uences of your disbelief (kufr). 6ou will not elude it but it will definitely meet you. )nd He (swt) said(K$hen their term (a/al) is reached, neither can they delay it nor can they advance it an hour.K>:(03A $hen the life, span which )llah has decreed comes to a stop, it cannot be delayed or advanced for an instant. He (swt) said KhourK (saaKa)as bein e#ual to a momentLinstant. )nd He (swt) said(K)nd $e have decreed death to you all.K>48(8CA ie $e have decreed death for you and divided the allocation of ri9# (provision) between you in different and disparate measures as dictated by our $ill (mashiKa). 6or a es difiired from bein lon , short or medium. These and other verses which are of definite meanin and te't indicate a meanin which is open to only one meanin , which is that )llah is the one who actually ives life and death without the presence of any causes or effects, and that man does not die e'cept when his life, span has been terminated and not due to the conditionLcircumstance in which is occurred, which he thinks is the cause of death. !o the cause of death is the termination of life,span only and not the conditionLcircumstance in which death occurred. It should not be claimed that death should be attributed to )llah in terms of creation. )s for its intiation, that is by human bein s or the causes from which death resulted. !uch as His (swt) sayin (K)nd you (7uhammad >sawA) threw not when you did throw but )llah threw.K>@(B:A )nd like His (swt) sayin (K)nd whomsoever )llah wills to uide, He opens his breast to Islam, and whomsoever He wills to send astray, He makes his breast closed and constricted, as if he is climbin up to the sky.K>8(B24A )nd His (swt) sayin (KQerily, )llah sends astray whom He wills, and uides who He wills.K>04(@A That cannot be claimed, because there are indications (#araKin) which divert the initiation of action from )llah to the human bein . $hcih makes the meanin to be that )llah craeted the throwin , openin of the breast to Islam, the cinstriction of the breast, uidance and mis uidance. +ut the one who actually initiates that is not )llah but the human bein . These indications are rational and te'tual. +ecause of His sayin K6ou threwK (ramayta) it measn that the throwin ori inated from the 7essen er (saw) and because the punishment for oin astray and reward for bein uided by Islam indicates the presence of chioce on the part of the human bein , who can choose Islam or kufr. $hich indicates that the one who intiates action is the huma/ bein . If )llah (swt) was the initiator then He would not have rewrded or punihsed the human bein . )lso, it is sensedand comprehendded that the 7essen er is the one who threw and it is the human beinm who finds uidence by usuin his mind in a correct manner and it is the human bein who oes astray by not usin his mind or usin it in an incorrect manner. This is contrary to death. There is not indication that the intiation of death comes from anyone other than )llah and that death occured wioith the termination of the a/al. It has been proven that there is no sensed cause for death and nor is there a te't diverts the meanin s of verses from their correct meanin . )nd there is not indication whcih showes that the initiator of death is somethin other than )llah. !o the verses reamin on the meanin which was mentioned e'plicitly accordin to the indication of the )rabiclan ua e and the !hariKa. $hcih is that the one who intiates death is )llah (swt). 4:

*rom all of this it becomes clear that the rational evidence indicates the thin in which death usually occurs are circumstances and not causes. The true cause is somethin else and it cannot be sensed. It has been proven by the shariKa evidence that these thin s ifrom which death occurs, they are not what brin s about death and nor are they cause of death. Fecisive verses have shown that the cause of death is the termination of a/al. )nd the one who causes death is )llah subahanhu wa taKala.

2.6 8i9q is in the hands of $llah (s1t) only

1i?C is not ownership (milkiyya) because ri?C is a ift (Gata). !o the verb ra?aCa means to ive (aHta). )s for ownership it means to possess somethin throu h any of the mediums permitted by the !hari1a in which to own property. The ri?C can be halal (lawful) or haram (forbidden). )ll of it is termed as ri?C. !o the money won by a ambler from another in a amblin match is ri?C. !ince it is money that )llah (swt) ives to each person that pursues any of the situations in which money is obtained. ) view which prevails amon st people that they are the ones who provide for themselves. )nd they consider the circumstances in which they earn wealth , ie money or profit , as the cause of their provision ( ri?C) even if they say by their ton ues that the ra??aC (one who ives sustenance) is )llah (swt). They see the employee who takes home a certain wa e throu h his hard work and effort that he is the one who provides for himself. )nd when he e'erts every effort or tries throu h various means to supplement his wa e, they see that he was the one who procured this raiseLincrease. )nd the businessman who makes profit as a result of his business endeavours, they see that he is the one who provided his own sustenance. )nd the doctor who treats the ill is makin his own livin . In this manner, they see that each person pursues an occupation from which he earns money. He is the one who provides for himself. !o the causes of provision, for those people are perceptible and tan ible, which are the circumstances which lead to the procurement of money. The person who commits himself to these circumstances, he is the one who will earn this money whether he himself or someone else received the provision. People have come to hold this view because they do not rasp the reality of the conditions from which their provision come. They take them to be the cause because of their inability to differentiate between the cause and the condition. The fact is that these circumstances from which the provision comes, are actually conditions in which the ri?C is obtained and not a cause of ri9#. If they were the true causes of ri?C then they should not fail at all in producin that ri?C, but it can clearly be seen that they do fail. These conditions may well e'ist but (we see) no provision comes out of it, and ri?C may be obtained without such conditions e'istin at all. If they were the cause then the result (ie the ri?C) would have been definitely inevitable. !ince, the ri?C is not an inevitable result- it only comes when the condition e'ists or the ri?C mi ht fail to materialise despite their e'istence. 4@

This indicates that they are not the causes but only the conditions under which the ri?C is obtained. )n employee mi ht work for a whole month but he is prevented from his (e'pected) income due to settlin a previous debt, or spendin money on those whose maintenance he is obli ed to provide, or by payin ta'es. In such a situation, the circumstance which brin s the provision (ie the employee1s work), the ri?C was not obtained since he did not et his wa es. (.n the other hand), there mi ht be someone in his house in al,;uds, to whom the postman brin s the news that so and so relative of his in )merica has died, leavin him as the sole inheritor, and that all of his wealth will pass into his hands. !o he should ain possession of it himself or throu h a reco nised a ent. This ri?C came to him and he did not even know it was comin . .r a side of his house mi ht collapse and he finds money hidden there, so he takes it. If the circumstances, which derive from human bein s, are indeed the cause of ri?C then they would not fail. )nd no ri?C would be produced e'cept when these circumstances are present. It is #uite apparent that they do fail, which indicates that they are conditions and not causes of ri?C. The number of incidents, in which ri?C has been obtained without any apparent cause, are innumerable. ......... $hich indicates that the circumstances in which ri9# is obtained are, as a rule, conditions of ri9# and not its causes. *urthermore, it is not possible to consider the conditions ( halaat), in which the ri?C comes (when these conditions are present), as causes of ri?C. )nd nor is it possible to consider the person who en a es in these conditions as bein the medium by which the ri?C was brou ht. !ince that contradicts the te't of the ;ur1an which is definite in meanin and authenticity. $hen anythin contradicts a te't which is definite in meanin and authenticity, one is duty bound to adopt the definite te@t without any hesitation whatsoever. )nd all other opinions are re/ected e'cept the one (correct) opinion. !ince anythin that is proven from a define evidence, it comes from )llah (swt) and one is obli ed to adopt it and re/ect the others. Therefore, the truth to which the 7uslim should submit is that the ri?C is from )llah and not from human bein s. There are many ayahs which clearly show (and they are not open to interpretation) that ri?C is from )llah (swt) only and not from human bein s. This is what makes us absolutely certain that what we see from the styles and means by which the ri?C comes, that they are only conditions which occur so that the ri?C may come. Thus, )llah (swt) says(1)nd eat of the thin s which )llah has provided for you.1 >4(@@A1$ho created you, then provided food for you.1>0C(3CA G!pend of that which )llah has provided you.1>08(3:A GQerily )llah provides sustenance to whom He wills.1>0(0:A G)llah provides for it and for you.1 >2?(8CAG!urely, )llah will provide for them.1>22(4@A G)llah increases the provision for whom He wills.1 >B0(28A G!o seek your provision from )llah ()lone).1>2?(B:A G)nd no (movin ) livin creature is there on earth but its provision in due from )llah.1>BB(8A GQerily, )llah is the )ll,Provider (al,5a99a#).1>4B(4@A These and other such ayahs are many. They are definite in meanin and authenticity, havin only one possible meanin and not open to any interpretation. $hich is that the ri?C is only from )llah who is the 5a99a# (the one who provides sustenance). !o the ri?C is only in the hands of )llah. 4?

However, )llah (swt) has ordered His servants to undertake actions and they have been iven the ability to choose to pursue the conditions in which the ri?C comes. They are the ones who should pursue, in accordance with their choice, all of the conditions in which the ri?C comes. However, these conditions are not the cause of ri?C. )nd nor are the servants the ones who brin forth this ri9#, as clearly stated in the te't of the ayaats. 5ather, )llah is the one who ives them their provision in these conditions irrespective of whether the ri9# was halal or haram. )nd irrespective whether )llah has obli ed, forbade or permitted it. )nd re ardless of whether the ri?C was obtained or not. I'cept that Islam has clarified the manner in which it is allowed or not allowed for the 7uslim to pursue the condition in which the ri?C is obtained. Thus, it clarified the means of ownership and not the causes of ri9#, and restricted ownership to these means. It is no permitted for any 7uslim to possess any provisions e'cept throu h a le al means. !ince it is the lawful ri?C and anythin else is haram even thou h the ri?C , whether halal or haram , is from )llah (swt). .ne issue still remains (unanswered) ( Is the provision of a person everythin that he owns even if he has not made use of it& .r is his provision that which he has only made use of& The answer is that the ayahs of the ;ur1an su est that the provision of human bein s consist of everythin he owns whether he has derived benefit from them or not. )llah (swt) said(1That they may mention the 2ame of )llah over the beast of cattle that He has iven them for food.1 >22(03AG)llah increases the provision for whom He wills.1 >B0(28A GIat of the lawful thin s that $e have provided you.1>2(B:2A G+ut feed and clothe them therewith.1>3(4AG)nd provide its people with fruits.1>2(B28A GIat and drink of that which )llah has provided.1>2(8CA These verses are clear in their use of the noun G ri?C1 for everythin that a person owns. It is, of course, applied to anythin from which benefit is derived. The ri?C has not been specified to that which is only made use of........ +ecause the ayahs are eneral and their indications are eneral. It should not be said when someone takes your money from you, whether throu h stealin , forced appropriation or embe99lement, that he has taken your ri9# from you. 5ather one should say - he took his ri?C from you. !o when a human bein comes to possess wealth, he has taken his ri9#. $hen the wealth is taken from him, he has not taken his ri9#. rather the one who possess the wealth has taken his ri?C from him. 2o one takes the ri?C of someone else, rather the person takes his own ri?C from someone else.

2.1: The $ttributes (sifat) of $llah ".112

+efore the emer ence of the mutakallimin the #uestion of )llahKs attributes was not known. It did not insti ate any studies. The e'pression Kattributes of )llahK (sifat )llah) is not mentioned in the ;urKan and nor in the sacred !unnah. It is not known that any of the !ahaba had mentioned or discussed the term Kattributes of )llahK. Iverythin mentioned in the ;urKan which the mutakallimin say is the Kattributes of )llahK must be understood in the li ht of His (swt) sayin (

8C

K<lorified be your Eord, the Eord of Honour and PowerD (He is free) from what they attribute unto HimDK>0:(B@CA )nd His sayin ( KThere is nothin like unto HimK>32(BBA )nd His sayin ( K2o vision can rasp HimK >8(BC0A Then, the description is taken only from the ;urKan and as it is mentioned in the ;urKan. Thsu, kwnoeld e (Kilm) is taken from........... His (swt) sayin ( K)nd with Him are the keys of the hayb (unseen), none knows them but He. )nd He knows whatever there is in the earth and in the sea-not a leaf falls, but He knows it. There is not a rain in the darkness of the earth nor anythin fresh or dry, but is written in a "lear 5ecordK >8(4?A )nd life (hayat) is taken from......His sayin ( K)llahD 2one has the ri ht to be worshipped e'cept He, the Iver livin , the .ne $ho sustains and protects all that e'istsK>2(244A KHe is the Iver Eivin , none has the ri ht to be worshipped e'cept HeK.>3C(84A )nd power (#udra) is taken from.......His sayin (K!ay(%He has power to send torment on you from above or from under your feet, or to cover you with confusion in party strife%K >8(84A K!ee they not that )llah, $ho created the heavens and the aerth, is )ble to create the like of them.K >B:(??A The attribute of hearin (samK) is taken from......His sayin ( KTruly, )llah is )ll,Hearer, )ll,Hnowin .K>2(B@BA )nd seein (basar) is taken.....from His sayin (K)nd )llah is )ll,Hearer, )ll, HnowerK>0(B2BA K)nd verily, )llah is )ll,Hearer, )ll,!eerK >22(8BA KHe is the )ll,Hearer, the )ll,!eerK>3C(2CA )nd the attribute of speach (kalam) is taken from....His sayin ( K)nd to 7usa )llah spoke directlyK>3(B83A K)nd when 7usa came at the time and place appointed by =s, his Eord spoke to 8B

Him.K>:(B30A )nd the devine $ill (irada) is taken from.... His sayin ( KHe does what He intendsK>@4(B8A KQerily, His "ommand, when He intends a thin , is only that He says to it,%+eD , and it isDK >08(@2A K+ut )llah does what He likesK>2(240A )nd the attribute of creation (khal#) is taken from....His sayin ( K)llah, is the "reator of all thin sK>0?(82A KHe has created everythin , and has measured it e'actly accordin measurementsK >24(2A to its due

These attributes havebeen mentioned in the 2oble ;urKan /ust as other attributes like devine =nity (wahdaniyya) and Iternal Pre,e'istence (#idam) have been mentioned. There was no difference between the 7uslims that )llah is .ne, Iternal, Eivin , )ble and taht He Hears, !ees, !peaks, Hnowin and e'cersiin Fevine $ill. $hen the philosophers came and thou hts of philosophy infiltrated the 7uslims. The disfferences between 7utakallimin about the attributes of )llah crept in. !o, the 7uKta9ila said( The Issence (dhat) of )llah and His attribuites are the same thin . Thus, )llah is Eivin , Hnowled able and )bleLPowerful in His Issence. He does not have Hnowled e, Power, Eife e'ternal to His Issence. +ecause, if )llah was Hnwold able due to a knowled e e'ternal to His Issence, andEivin due to life that is e'ternal to His Issence as is the case with human bein s. Then, this inevitableLdefinietly necessiates that there is a description (sifa) and one described (mawsuf), a hamil and mahmul, and this is the stateLcondition of (corporeal) ob/etsLbodies. )nd )llah is free of all such corporealist anthroporphomismLanthropohormic corporealism (/asmiyya). If we say the attribute e'ists by itself then there will be more than one Iternal Pre,I'istent +ein , in other words there will be more than one od. The )hl al,!unnah said(K)llah !ubhanahu wa taKala has eternal attributes which e'i't in His Issence. They (the attributes) are(K neither He but not other than HeK( la huwa wala haruhu). )s for Him havin attributes. This is due to the fact that it has been proven that He is knowled able, livin , able etc. It is known that knowled e, life and power etc in their entriety, indicate an e'ternal meanin to the concept of )bsolute +ein ($a/ib al,wu/ud). 2ot all the words are synonymous in meanin .It cannot be as the 7uKta9ila say that He is Hnowled able (Klim) without knowled e (Kilm) and )ble (#adir) without power (#uwwa) etc. This is obviously impossibleLobsurd, on the level of usLon par with us sayin that a thin is black without any blackness.The te'ts have stated the evidenve for His Hnowled e, )bility etc. The issuance of e'act and precise actions indicate the presence of His 82

Hlnowled e and Power and not /ust a mere desi nation of knowled able and powerful. )s for His attributed bein eternal. This is due to the impossibility of new entites (haadith) subsistin Le'istin in His Issence. !ince, it is inconceivable that a new entity (haadith) would e'ist in the Pre,I'istent and Iternal +ein (al, ;adim al,)9ali). )s for the attributes e'istin inHis (swt) Issence. That is becaue it is from th neccesary thin s re#uired for e'istence. +ecause there is no meanin to describin the attribute of a thin e'cept if it (the attribute) e'ists in the thin . )s for the attributes bein Kneither He or otherthan HeK. The attributes of )llah are not the Issence itself. +ecause the mind dictates that the descriptionLattribute is other than the thin described. It is a meanin e'ternal to the Issence. +ecause it is an attribute of )llah and not other than )llah.!ince it is not a thin , essence or substance (Kayn) but only a description of the Issence. Thou h it is not the Issence of )llah, it is not other than )llah. 5ather it is an attribute of )llah. )s for the view of the 7uKta9ila- if every attribute was made to e'sit by itslef then there would be more than one Pre,e'istent +ein . This would have ben the case if the attribute was an Issence. )s for when it is a description of the Issence, the description of the Issence by such an attribute does not necettate that there is a plurality of essences. 5ather it necessatates that there are more than one description of the .ne Issence. That does not ne ate )llahKs .neness (wahdaniyyah) or mean a plurality of ods. In this manner the )hl al,!unnah proved rationally that )llah has attributes which are other than His Issence but not other than He. +eacuse the description is other than the thin described but not detached from the thin described. Then they e'plained the meanin of each of these eternal attributes. Thus, they said the attribute of Hnowled e (Kilm) is the eternal attribute which reveals the known thin s (maKlumaaat) that relates to it and the attribute of )bility (#udra) is an eternal attribute which effects the thin s decreed (ma#duraat). )nd Eife (hayah)is an eternal attribute which necettates the sihhat of livin . )nd )bility (#udra) is power (#uwwah). )nd !amK (hearin ) is an eternal attribute that relates to thin s that are heard (masmuKaat). )nd seein Lsi ht (basar) is an eternal attribute relatin to the seen thin s (mubsirat). Throu h them he has a complete understandin , not one that is by way of ima ination or delusion or by way of bein effcted by sensationLfeelin or arrivin at a whim. The KwishK (irada) and KwillK (desire) are both e'pressions of the attribute of life................. )nd speach (kalam) is an eternal attribute which is e'pressed by the composition called the ;urKan. )llah (swt) speaks with words, it is one of His eternal attributes and not from the cata oryLclass of letters and sounds. It is an attribute which ne ates silence and aafa. )llah (swt) speaks with them. He oreders, forbids, informs, and nayone who oerders, forbids and informs...... In this manner the )hl al,!unnah e'plained what the attributes meant after provin that )llah has eternal attributes. However, the 7uKta9ila denied that these meanin s are for the attributes of )llah. !ince they re/ected that )llah has attributes e'ternal to His Issence. They said- since it is proven that )llah is )ble, Hnowld able and )ll,incompassin and that the Issence of )llah and His attributes are not effected by chan e, because chan eis the attribute of newLcreated thin s, and )llah is free of that. )nd since somethin is present and it was non,e'istent before and it will be none'istent after bein present. )nd the 80

)bility and $ill of )llah undertook that. They created somethin which did not e'i't previously and they made it non,e'i'tant after it had e'isted. !o how can the Fevine and Iternal )bility be linked to the created thin , that it (the devine ability) should create it& .........!o for the #udra to initiate a thin which previously it did not intitiate constitues chan e in the #udra. It has been proven that )llah is not effected by chan e, undoubtedly this is the state of the Pree'istent +ein (al, #adeem al,a9ali) !imilarly the view re rdin the $ill (iradah), the same is said for the attribute of Hnowlde e (Klm). Hnowled e is the revealin of the known matter (maKlum) as it is. The known matter chan es from one time to another. ......... Thus, the polemics between the scholastic 7uKta9ila on one side and the people of !unnah on the other flared up re ardin the attributes of )llah, /ust as it flared up in other issues such as ;ada and ;adar. $hat is stran e that the points of disa reement provoked by the mutakallimun, are the same points provoked by the <reek philosophers before. Thus, the <reek philosphers had insti atedL enerated these points in relation to the attributes of the "reator. Then the 7uKta9ila came and responded to them. +ut the response was within the limits of their belief in )llah and within the limits of their views on Tawheed (.neness of )llah). The )hl al,!unnah opposed them to decrease their rushin Lrunnin behind the <eek pholisophers and the specultive asumptions and issues of lo ic reached by them. +ut they fell in the same trap the 7uKta9ila had fallen in. !o they responded on the same level. which is that the mind was made a basis for discussion and dialectices in matters comprehended or not comprehended by him, and in matters sensed or not sensed by human bein s. They made verses of the ;urKand hadiths to support their views. )nd they e'plained away verses and hadith which contradicted their opinions. Thus, all the mutakallimun from the 7uKta9ila, )hl al,!unnah and others came to be on the same level in makin the mind the basis. na dmakin the ayaat of )llah to support what their minds had lead to or interpret away so that they are understood accordin to what the mind of the one comprehendin has lead to. It apprears that what led the mutakallimun to tread this path in study are two factors- *rist, they did not know the definition of the mind. !econd, they did not distu uish between the mothdolo y of the ;urKan in the comprehension of factsLtruths and themethodolo y of the philsophers in comprehendin the factsLtruths. )s for the issue of them not comprehendin the definition of the mind. It is obvious from their own definition of ration. It has been reported about them that they used to say(K5ation is the powerLfaculty of the soel and comprehensionK. $hich accordin to them means Kan instinct which is follewd by knowled e of daruriyyat (thin s known by necessity) when the senses are soundK. .r they say(the mind is the essence with which the unseen thin s are comprehended usin wasait and perceptible thin s by seein K. Ir they say(Kthe mind is the soel itself.K If someones understandin of the mind is such, then it is not stran e for him to ive himself a free rei hn in these matters.!o he arran ed, theoretically, various issues and came out with a result that did not e'ist. )nd he says of himslef that came to comprehend this result with his mindK. "onse#uently, the rational investi ationLstudy for them did not have a limit at which it stopped. 83

They can dive into any studyLinvesti ation and arrive at results they and they called this a rational study and rational results. Therefore, it is not stran e that the 7uKta9ila should say( that connectin the eternal ability of )llah with the decreedLe'istin (ma#dur) created incident (haadith) makes the attribute of #udra (ability) created (haaditha). That considered that to be a rational investi ation and result.....)nd the )hl as,!unnah say at the same time that connectin the ability of )llah with the decreedLe'istin thin (ma#dur) does not make the #udra (ability) chan e and nor does it make it a created thin . +ecause what makes the #udra created is chan e in the #udra and not the chan e in the decreed thin . )nd they considered that to be a rational investi ation and a rational result.....because the mind accordin , to most, was the soel or an instinct followed by knoiwled e of thin s known by necessity (daruriyyat). Therefore the mind investi ated everythin . If they truly understood the meanin of the mind they would not have ot involved in these suppositional investi ations and results which are known not to e'ist. They were /ust thin s from which other thin s followedLresulted and they called these rational truthsLfacts. )nd now, in this a e the meanin of the mind is clear to us. $e realise that as lon as the thin s which are necessary for the mind to studyLinvestia e are not availabe then we cannot call it a rational discussion. )nd it is not allowed to permit ourselves to ....... $e know that the mind is Kthe transmission of the reality via the senses to the brain with previous information which e'plains this realityK. Ivery rationl discussion must have four thin s first, a brain, second a senses, third reality and fourth previous information relatin to this reality. If one of these four thin s is lost, there can be no rational discussion at all. Iventhou h it is possible to have a discussion based on lo ic and it is possible for there to be ima ination and supposition. 2one of this has any value, because it does not come under the comprehension of the mind or the mindKs comprhension of its source. !o the mutakalliminKs lack of understandin of the meanin of the mind made them ive themseves a free rei hn in many discussions which cannot be sensed or they did not have any previous information relatin to them. )s for the 7utakallimin not distuin uishinf between the method of the ;urKan from the method of the philosophers in the rational discussion. This is becausen the ;urKan discussed theolo y and the philosophers discussed theolo y. )s for the theolo ical discussion of the philoshopers, it is that the philosphers looked into the )bsolute +ein (al,wu/ud al,mutla#) and whatever was necessary for its Issence. They did not study the universe but what was beyond the universe. They be an to arran e proofs with their lo ical premises and from these proofs they arrived at results. Then they derived other results from these results. They proccede in this manner until they arrived at what they considered to be the truth of this Issence and the re#uirements of these Issence. )ll of them. despite arrivein at diferent results, in their study they followed one method which is the doscussion of the supernatural, establishin proofs resultin in pseculative assumptions or other proofs and arrivn at results they considered definite and belived.

84

This method of study contradicts the method of the ;urKan because the ;urKan discusses the universe itself, in respect to e'istents (maw/udat)( the earth, sun, moon, stars, animals, human bein , ridin animals, camels, mountains and other such percieved thin s. *rom which the listener arrives at understandin the creator of the universe, creator of e'i'tents and creator of the sun, camel, mointains, humankind etc throu h his comprehension of these e'itent thin s. $hen the ;urKan discusses the supernatural which cannot be senseand cannot be comprehend by comprehendin the e'istent thin s it decribes a reality and ditermines a fact and orders that it be belived as a definite matter without drwin the attention of human bein s to undetrstand it or drawin their attention to somethin from which they should comprehend it. )nd that is like the attributes of )llah, like the Paradise (/annah), Hellfire (nar), Minns, shaytans etc. )nd this is the method understood and followed by the !ahabh who advanced into lands carryin the messa e of Islam to the people in oredr to bless hem with it as they have been blessed by this messa e. The situation remained like this until the elpse of the first century. )nd pholosophic thouhts from <reek philosophy and other philosophies seeped throu h and the mutakallimun came to e'ist. )nd the method of rational studyLinvesti ation became altered and the polemics over the Issence of )llah and the attrubutes of )llah be an. *ar from bein a deep discussio it is not even considered a rational discussion at all because it is the study of a thin that cannot be sensed. )nd anythin that cannot be sensed, it is outside the scope of the mind to study it in any way whatsoever. !ince the disuiion in the attributes of )llah is whether it is the Issence itself or other than the Issence, it is a stud of the Issence and the study of the Issnce is prohibited in ori in and impossible to do. That is why the study of all of the mutakallimun is misplaced and purely mistaken. The attributes of )llah is taw#reefiyya (fi'ed bythe Eaw iver). $hatever has been mentioned in th definite te'ts we have mentioned it accordin to the e'tent mentioned in the definte te'ts and not in anythin else. It is nopt allowed to add an attribute which has not been mentioned and we should not try to e'palin an attribute with anythin other than waht has been mentioned in the definite te't.

2.11 The %uslim Philoso"hers

".121

$hen philosophic issues relatin to theolo y infiltrated the minds of the 7uslims, certain scholars like al,Hasan al,+asri, <haylan al,Fimash#i and Mahm b. !afwan durin the end of the =mmayad rei n and the be innin of )bbasid rule, be an to deal withLaddress some miscellaneous scholasticLtheolo ical issues. Then, after them came =lama who were ac#uainted with )ristotelian lo ic and familiarised themselves with some of the books of philosophy after they had been translated. The studyLinvesti ation of scholasticLtheolo ical issues e'panded and they be an to study the science known as Halam. !uch as $asil b. K)ta, K)mr b. K=bayd, )bu Hudhayl al,K)llaf and al,2a99am. However, the studies of those people were not complete philosophical studies but the e'pandin study of philosophical thou hts until they became well,versed with different views in philosophy, and that of the view of each roup of philosophers in some issues by pursuin them and not all issues. In addition to confinin themselves to some philosophical studies they 88

restricted themselves to their belief in the ;urKan. That is why they did not leave the fold of Islam, ratherthey e'panded in reasonin , and they ave themselves free rei n in the proofs, but only to establish that which will stren then iman and a desire to eliminate anthropomorphic elements from the belief in )llah. )s a result, no deviation occurred in the beliefs despite their deferent do masL views. !o all of them were 7uslims who were defendin Islam. Then after the mutakallimun came individuals who did not reach to the sta e of becomin roups and ma9habs, and none of the 7uslims followed them on mass even thou h individuals preferred their studies. They are the ones who came after the mutakallimun in an a e e'istin amon st 7uslims in the 7uslims countries, they are the 7uslim philosophers. It seems that what allowed them to e'ist amon st 7uslims is that conversanceLknowled e of philosophical thou hts and the books of philosophy which made these studies attractive to the people in that a e. It seems what allowed these people to e'ist amon st the 7uslims is that in that a e the studyLac#uaintance with the philosophical thou hts and books of philosophy, that these studies became endeared to the people. !o some persons took on the responsibility of widenin the study of such thou hts. Thus, they studied these thou hts in a deep and e'tensive way, a study that was comprehensive and unrestricted in everythin and every thou ht. He followed every line (of thou ht) in its entirety. He di estedLabsorbed an appropriate amount of philosophy to #ualify him to think philosophically and produce philosophical output. It was due to these deep and e'tensive studies in philosophy, especially a specific typeLbrand of <reek philosophy that led to the presence of philosophers amon st 7uslim. The first 7uslim philosopher whose presence was known was 6aK#ub al,Hindi (d.28C). Thenthe 7uslim philosophers emer ed one after another. Thus, the philosophers did not emer e e'cept after the presence of the mutakallimun, and after the methodolo y of those philosophers had become prevalent, and it was the sub/ect of study, debate and polemics. In the eyes of many mutakallimun and =lama philosophy became intolerable (kabura). +efore that, there were no philosophers amon st 7uslims. Hence, there were mutakallamin and philosophers amon st the =lama in the 7uslim lands. However, there is a difference between mutakallimun and the philosophers. The mutakallimun were well versed with some philosophical thou hts. )s for the philosophers, they were scholars of philosophy. That is why the philosophers used to look upon the mutakalimun as i norant. The philosophers thou ht the mutakallimun were people of sophistry and polemics. )nd they, ie the philosophers, were the one who rationally studied, in the lo ical issues, the sound philosophical research. )ll the mutakallimun and philosophers studied theolo y, althou h there is a difference between the method of the mutakallimun and that of the philosophers. The difference can be summarised as followsB. The mutakallimun had conviction in the principles of iman and they acknowled ed their correctness and believed in them. Then they used their rational evidences to prove them. !o they proved them rationally with lo ical proofs. They used the rational studyLinvesti ation throu h the styleLmedium of 8:

lo ic as a means to prove their beliefs. +ecause they already believe in the basic principles of Islam and they came to from ar uments and proofs to establish what they believed in. 2. The studies of the mutakallimun were restricted to issues relatin to the defence of their creed and refutation of the ar uments of their opponents whether they were 7uslims , but they disa reed with them in understandin from the 7uKta9ila, mur/iKa, !hiKa, khawari/ and others , or whether they were non,muslims such as the "hristians, Mews, 7a ians and others. Iven thou h the most prominent thin in their discussions was for the purpose of respondin to the 7uslims amon st the mutakallimun and philosophers. 0. The studies of the mutakallimun were Islamic and they, despite their differences and contradiction, are considered as Islamic opinions. )ny 7uslim who is convinced of one of its opinions is considered to have had conviction in an Islamic opinion. )nd whatever he was convinced of was considered as the Islamic creed. This is the methodolo y of the mutakallimun and this is how it is considered. )s for the methodolo y of the philosophers, it can be summarised as follows( B. The philosophers studied the issues for their sake. Their method of study and its pillar is the study of issues as indicated by the demonstrable proof (burhan). )nd their view of theolo y was the view concernin the )bsolute +ein (al,wu/ud al,mutla#)and whatever its essence necessitated. They be in their theoryLphilosophical speculation ...... proceedin step by step until they arrive at the result whatever it may be and have conviction in it. This is the aim and support of philosophy. Their discussions are purely philosophical havin no relationship to Islam in terms of the discussion even thou h one may witness that it has a connection to some sub/ects. They would fre#uently admit te'tual thin s in their discussions for which a rational proof cannot be established for it correctness or invalidity. !uch as the resurrection (baKth wa nushur) and bodily maKad. )nd often they would ......certain opinions of <reek philosophy, effected by their Islamic a#eeda and issuin the /ud ment on the #uestion on its basis. )nd often they would attempt to reconcile certain issues of philosophy with Islamic issues, however this was an addition to, and a result of, them bein 7uslims effected by Islam. +ut it was not an intellectual effect which he made as the basisLpostulate, as was the case with the mutakallimun. 5ather, the effect is akin to a reat e'tent to the effect of "hristianity on the "hristian philosophers, and the effect of Mudaism on the Mewish philosophers, in respect that deep rooted concepts........must continue to reamin duerin the study or had some effect on it. )s for the basisLpostulate on whch they proceeded, it is around the )bsolute +ein (al,wu/ud al,mutla#) and what it necessetated for its Issence. Their true influence was <reek philsopy. Their mentality had become formed accordin to <reek philosophy. !o they wrote about the thou hts of pholosopy after ainin maturyty in the <reek philosophy. There was no relationship between Islam and their pholoshophy. 8@

2. The 7uslim philosophers did not stand in defence of Islam. They only stood to determine facts and furnish proofs for them. )nd nor did they enetre into reportin opposin views and refutin them in IslamKs defence eventou h it may have been influencedby Islam. Therefus, the rational discuyssion is the basis, it is the sub/ect matter, and nothin else is present in theiur discussions. 0. The studies of the 7uslim philosophers are non,islamic studies. 5ather they are purely philosophical discussions and have no relationship to Islam. It has no place for Islam in its discussion. They are not considered islamic opinions and they rae not part of the Ilsmaic culture. Thsi is the diffrence betwen the methodolo y of the miutakallimun and the methododlo y of the muslim philosphers. )nd this is the reality of the muslim philosophers. It is in/ustice, contradiction of the reality and fabrication of Islam to call the philsophy that the likes of al,Hindi, al,*arabi, Ibn !ina and others from the 7uslim philosophers were preoccupied withLpractised, as Islamic philosophy. !ince it has no connection to Islam, rather it totally contradicts Islam whether in terms of the basis or in terms of many of its details. )s for the contradiction it terms of the basis, this philosophy discusses that which is beyond the universeLcreation, ie re ardin the absolute e'istence (al,wu/ud al,mutla#) which is contrary to Islam which discusses what is in the univeres and thin s that can be sensed only. It prohibits discussion about the essence of )llah and that which is beyond the universe. It oreders the 7uslim to submit to it totally and stop at the limit of what iman en/ions without ion further and without allowin the mind to attempt to discuss it. )s for the details, there are many discussions in this philosophy which Islam considers as disbelief (kufr). Ther are discussions which hold the world to be eternally pre,e'istent (#adm al,Kalam) and that it is eternal (a9ali).)nd there arediscussions which assert that the deli htLpleasure of Paradise is spiritual and not corporeal. )nd discussions which maintin that )llah is i norant of detailed aspects (/u9Kiyyat). )nd other such notions which are definitely manifets kufr in the eyes of Islam. How can it be claimed that this philosophy is Islamic iven this claer contradiction & In adition to the fact that there is abolutely no philosophy in Islam because it restricts the rational discussion to the sensibal ob/ects and prohibits the mind from discussin that which is beyond the universe, which makes al its discussions remote from philosophy, follwin a method diffrent to it. There is no possiblity iven in it that there should be any philsophic studies. That is why there is nothin called Islamic philosophy. In I!lam there is the study of the ;urKan and the prophetic sunnah. They are the only basis of Islam in terms of the a#eeda and rules, whther in terms of an order, prohibition or notification.

2.12 The Pro"hets (ambiya) and %essen&ers (rusul)

GProphet1 (na!i) and G7essen er1 (rasul) are two contrastive terms but they share in the respect that that a shari1a is revelaed to both of them. 8?

2.1

The Infallibility of the Pro"hets

$hen it is said that the Islamic Ga#eeda consists of the belief in )llah, His an els, His +ooks, His 7essen ers, the Fay of Mud ement and #adha wa #adar, the ood and bad of which is from )llah (swt). This does not mean that there are other thin s which one is not obli ated to believe in. 5ather, it means that this is the basis. There are other thou hts which relate to the Ga#eeda, such as the infallibility of the Prophets which comes under the belief in the prophets. The evidence of the infallibility of the Prophets is a rational evidence ( daleel GaCli) and not a te'tual evidence (daleel samHi) because the proof of the prophethood of a prophet and the messa e of the messen er to whom he has been sent is rational, established by a perceptible miracle.

2.1- The 8e(elation "1

It is not allowed on the part of the 7essen er (saw) that he be a mu/tahid p.B0@ The opinion that our master 7uhammad (saw) made i/tihad in certain rules and he made an error in his i/tihad which )llah (saw) then corrected means that sayyidina 7uhammad (saw) conveyed the !hariKa to people from his i/tihad and not revelation. )nd thathe is not maKsum (protected from error) in some of what he conveyed to the people from the !hariKa of Islam. )ll of this is invalid (batil) by ration and the shariKa. Indeed our master 7uhammad (saw) is a Prophet (nabiy) and a 7essen er (rasul) like the rest of the Prophets and 7essen ers, protected from committin mistakes in that which he conveyed about )llah (swt), which is a definite protection indicated by therational evidence (daleel Ka#li). *urthermore, there are shariKa evidences that are definite in their meanin that the ProphetKs (saw) conveyance of the 7essa e (risala), in aspects eneral and specific, was only from revelation. )nd the 7essen er (saw) did not convey the ahkam e'cept from revelation. He (swt) said in !ura al,)mbiya( !ay (. 7uhammad !)$)( %I warn you only by the revelation K>2B(34A ie tell them . 7uhammad that I warn you with the revelation that has been revealed to me. In other words my admonitionLwarnin to you is restricted to the revelation. )nd He (swt) said in sura al,2a/m ( K2or does he speak of his own desire. It is only an revelation that is inspiredK. >40(0A The e'pression Kma yanti#uK is from the eneral form (si hat al,Kumum). !o it includes the ;urKan and !unnah. There is nothin in the +ook and !unnah that makes it specific to the ;urKan. !o it remains eneral ie everythin he has pronounced from the shariKa is a revelation that has been revealed. It is not correct thatit be specified to say that what he pronounced is only from the ;urKan. 5ather, it should remain eneral and inclusive of the ;urKan and the hadith. )s for its specification to what he has conveyed about )llah in terms of le islation, :C

and other rules, beliefs, thou hts and storiesLnarratives and its non inclusion of styles and means and affairs of the world such as the actionsLissues of a ricultureLcultivation, industry and sciences etc. This specification has occurred due to two thin s ( *irst, other te'ts have come and specified it to le islation. He 7essen er (saw) said re ardin the sub/ect of pollinatin the date palm (K6ou are more knowled eable in the affairs of your dunyaK. )nd he (saw) told the 7uslims in the battle of +adr when they asked him( Is this revelation from )llah or is it a #uestion of opinion, war and strate y& He replied ( it is a #uestion of opinion, war and strate y. These te'ts have specified the revelation to thin s that are other than the affairs of the world and whatever is by way of war, opinion and strate y. )s for the second thin which has specified revelation to le islation, beliefs and rules etc. It is clear from the topic of discussion. That is because he is a messen er and the discussion is with what he has been sent sent with and not anythin else. !o it is the sub/ect of discussion that has been specified, and the si hat al,Kumum remains eneral, however only in respect to the sub/ect for which the enerality came and it does not brin to ether all sub/ects. 6es, the consideration is for the enerality of the wordin and not for the specificity of the cause (sabab) (al,Kibra bi Kumum al,laf9 la bi khusus al,sabab). However what is meant by the causeLreason (sabab)is the incident for which reason the ;urKan was revealed. The topic is not specific to it rather it is eneral to all the incidents, however in only in the sub/ect of discussion and not in all sub/ects. The sub/ect matter of revelation is the warnin (indhar) ie le islation and rules. He (swt) said( K!ay(%I warn you only by the revelation%K.>2B(34A )nd He (swt) said in sura !ad( K.nly this has been inspired to me, that I am a plain warnerK.>0@(:CA. These verses show that what was intended was what he brou ht of the beliefs and rules and anythin he has been ordered to convey and warn people of. That is why it does not include the means and styles or the actions of his natural disposition, which is how human bein s have been mouldedLfashioned ie fromthe nature of the way in which he has been created. !uch as his manner of walkin , pronunciation, eatin etc..they are distin uished by what relates to beliefs and shariKa rules and not the means and styles and other thin s of such nature which do not come under beliefs and rules. Therefore, whatever the 7essen er (saw) brou ht, re ardin what he has been ordered to convey in all matters that relate to the actions of the servants and thou hts, is a revelation from )llah (swt). The revelation includes the sayin s, actions and silence of the 7essen er (saw). +ecause we have been ordered to follow him. )nd He (swt) said( K$hatsoever the 7essen er >sawA you, abstain from itK.>4?(:A )nd He (swt) said( :B ives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids

KIndeed in the 7essen er of )llah (saw) you have a ood e'ampleK. > 00(2BA. Thus, the speech, action and silence of the 7essen er (saw) is a shariKa evidence. They are all revelation from )llah (swt). The 7essen er of )llah our master 7uhammad (saw) used to receive revelation and convey what he brou ht from )llah (swt), and resolve matters accordin to the revelation and did not deviate fromL o beyond the revelation. He (swt) said in sura al,)h#af(K I only follow that which is revealed to meK.>38(?A )nd He (swt) said in sura al,)Kraf( KI but follow what is revealed to me from my EordK.>:(2C0A .ie I do not follow anythin e'cept what my Eord has revealed to me. <enerally, all of this is e'plicit, clear and evident. Iverythin that relates to the Prophet (saw) in terms of what he has been ordered to convey is only revelation. The le islative life of the Prophet (saw) in clarifyin the rules to the people proceeded on this manner. *or he (saw) used to wait for the revelation in many of the ahkam. !uch as in the case of 9ihar (in/urious comparison,pre,islamic type of divorce), liKan (imprecation) and the like. He did not state a hukm on an issue or do an act of le islation or remain silent le islatively e'cept due to revelation from )llah (swt). !ometimes the !habah used to confuse the rulin on an action of the servants with an opinion concernin a thin , or a means or style. !o they asked the 7essen er (saw)( is that revelation . 7essen er of )llah& .r is it a #uestion of opinion and mashura& If he said it was revelation they would be silent because they knew that it was not from the Prophet himself. +ut if he told them( no, it is an issue of opinion and mashura they would discuss with him and perhaps even follow their own opinion as in +adr, =hud and Hhanda#. )nd in matters other that what he conveyed from )llah he used to say( 6ou are more knowled eable in the affairs of your dunyaK. )s reported in the hadith concernin the pollination of date palm. Had the Prophet said somethin pertainin to le islation withoutrevelation he would not have waited for the revelation to state the hukm. )nd why did the !ahaba ask about a statement whether it was revelation or opinion& .. Therefore, nothin issued from his sayin , action, and silence e'cept if it came via revelation from )llah and not from his own opinion. He (saw) never made i/tihad and i/tihad is not allowed for him accordin to the shariKa and ration. )s for the shariKa, they are the e'plicit verses which indicate that the restriction of everythin that relates to the revelation( K!ay(%I warn you only by the revelation%K.>2B(34A KI only follow that which is revealed to meK.>38(?A K2or does he speak of his own desireK. >40(0A :2

)s for ration, it is because the Prophet (saw) used to wait for the revelation in many rules despite the ur ent need to clarify the hukm of )llah. If i/thad was allowed for him he would not have delayed in ivin the hukm but he would have made i/tihad. +ecause he used to postpone ivin the hukm until the revelation was sent down. This indicates he did not make i/tihad. It also indicates that it was not allowed for him to make i/tihad. +ecause if it was allowed he would not have put off ivin the hukm despite the need to do so. )lso, it is obli atory to follow the Prophet (saw). If he e'ercised i/tihad it would be possible for him to make a mistake. If he made a mistake we would be obli ed to follow him so the matter would necessitateLintail that we follow a mistake which is not valid. +ecause )llah did not order that we follow a mistake.*urthermore, the 7essen er (saw) is protected (maKsum) from makin mistakes in the conveyance of the 7essa e. It is absolutely not possible on his part to make a mistake in the conveyance (tablee h) of ()llahKs 7essa e). !ince allowin the 7essen er to make a mistake ne ates the (concept of) 7essen ership and prophethood. !o the affirmation of 7essne ership and Prophethood determines that the 7essen er is not allowed to make mistakes. 5e ardin tablee h (conveyance of the 7essa e) it necessitates that he is protected from makin mistakes in tablee h. !o it is impossible on the part of the 7essen er (saw) to err in what he conveys from )llah (swt). "onse#uently, it is not allowed on his part to e'ercises i/tihad. Iverythin conveyed by him from the ahkam, with his sayin , action and silence is revelation from )llah (swt) and nothin else. It should not be claimed that )llah will not allow him to remain on the mistake. )nd that he will swiftly clarify it to him. +ecause the mistake in i/tihad when it occurs from the 7essen er (saw) becomes fard on the 7uslims to follow until the clarification comes. Then this clarification would have reestablished another hukm different to that of the first hukm. The 7uslims would be ordered to follow this hukm and leave the former hukm which is a mistake. This is invalid, it is not possible on )llahKs part the He order the people to follow a mistake and then order them to leave it and follow the correct one. !imilarly, it is not allowed on the part of the 7essen er (saw) thathe convey a hukm and then say to them that this hukm is a mistake because it is from me, and the correct hukm is what has come to me from )llah, which is this hukm. )nd inform them that they should leave the first hukm because it is a mistake and inform them of the correct hukm. It should not be said that this is a rational evidence for a shariKa matter, which is not allowed. +ecause the shariKa matter re#uires a shariKa evidence, since the shariKa matter whose daleel has to be only a shariKa evidence is the shariKa rule. )s for beliefs, their evidence can be rational or a shariKa evidence. The sub/ect of whether the Prophet (saw) is a mu/tahid or not is from the beliefs and not from the shariKa rules. !o its evidence can be a rational or shariKa evidence.The fact that it is not allowed for the 7essen er to be a mu/tahid is proven by the rational and shariKa evidence. It is one of the beliefs. It should not be claimed that the 7essen er (saw) actually made i/tihad in various rules and that )llah did not acknowled eLreco nise his i/tihad, and that He :0

corrected the messen er i/tihad and revealed verses which clarified the correct opinion. That should not be claimed because the 7essen er did not e'ercise any i/tihad in conveyin any rule of )llah. 5ather whatis proven by the ;uranic te't and the sound sunnah is that he used to convey to the people from revelation. He did not convey anythin in terms of le islation, beliefs, rules and the like, e'cept if it had come via the revelation. )nd that when the revelation had not been sent down for an incident, he would wait until it was revealed. )s for the verses that are cited by those who say that the 7essen er (saw) actually made i/tihad, and in which they assumeLima ine i/tihad took place. There is not one ayah in which i/tihad took place. *or e'ample, His (swt) sayin ( KIt is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a reat slau hter (amon his enemies) in the landK. >@(8:A )nd such as His (swt) sayin ( K7ay )llah for ive you (. 7uhammad >sawA). $hy did you remain behind)K.>?(30A )nd like His (swt) sayin ( K)nd never (. 7uhammad >sawA) pray (/ana9ah) for any of them (hypocrites) who dies, nor stand at his raveK.>?(@3A )nd like His (swt) sayin (K(The Prophet >sawA) frowned and turned away, because there came to him the blind manK.>@C(B,2A )nd other such ayats and hadith. This is not by way of e'ercisin i/tihad re ardin a hukm and conveyin it to the people. 5ather, it is byway of a mild rebuke for undertakin actions which are contrary to what is more befittin for the 7essen er to do. *or the 7essen er (saw) did not convey a specific hukm to the people and then the ayah came to clarify the error of the hukm which he has conveyed and clarify the mistake in his i/tihad and demand that he convey the correct opinion re ardin this hukm. 5ather the truth of the matter is that the 7essen er (saw) undertook an action in applyin a !hariKa rule from the rules of )llah which had previously been sent down in the revelation (wahy) and the 7essen er (saw) had already conveyed to the people. The 7essen er (saw) acted in a manner contrary to what was more befittin for him to have done in accordance with this hukm. Thus, he was mildly reproached for this contrariety. This mild reproach is not a le islation of a new hukm. !o the hukm has already been revealed, and its application had been ordered and the 7essen er (saw) had already conveyed it. Thus, in these incidents mentioned in these verses he (saw) undertook an action in accordance with what )llah has ordered, e'cept that his performance of this action was contrary to what was best, thus he was mildly rebuked for this. Thus, the verses are verses which mildly rebuke the 7essen er (saw)for undertakin what was contrary to the best action. They are not verses :3 rant them leave (to

which le islate new rules that had not been le islated before. )nd nor do they correct an i/tihad, or le islate another hukm which is at variance with the hukm the 7essen er had already made i/tihad for. It is rationally possible for the Prophets and 7essen ers to do what is contrary to the best because the meanin of doin what is better is that there is permissible (mubah) issue. However, some actions are better than others. .r, there is a matter which is preferable (mandub) but there are actions which are better than others. Thus, is permissible for a person to live in the city or in the villa e. +ut livin in the city is better than livin in the villa e for the one who wishes tosee to the matters of rulin and accountin the rulers. If he lives in the villa e he has done contrary to what is best. <ivin sada#a openly and discreetly is a preferable matter (mandub) but ivin sada#a secretly is better than ivin it publicly. If he ives it in public, he has acted contrary to what is best. !o, it is allowed for the 7essen er (saw) to undertake what is contrary to the best, rather it is allowed for him to do everythin that is not considered to be sinful. He in actual fact undertookwhat was contrary to the best so )llah mildly censured him for it. The one who thinks deeply about these verses that they cite will will find that the wordin of the verse, its understandin and meanin indicates this. Thus, His (swt) sayin (K It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a reat slau hter (amon his enemies) in the landK. >@(8:A indicates that the takin of prisoners had already been le islated on the proviso that a severe slau hter (ithkhan) takes place previously. $hich is supported by the ayah(K !mite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly on them (ie take them prisoners)K.>3:(3A Thus, the hukm of takin prisoners was not revealed in the ayah( KIt is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom)K.>@(8:A 5ather, it was revealed before that in sura 7uhammad which is called the sura of fi htin (sura al,#ital). It was revealed before sura al,)nfal. Thus, it is in this sura of fi htin that the hukm of takin prisoners was revealed. He (swt) said( K!o, when you meet (in /ihad), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly on them (ie take them prisoners) Thereafter (is the time) either for enerosity (ie free therm without ransom), or ransom, until the war lays down its burdenK.>3:(3A !o the rule of takin prisoners had been revealed and was known before the :4

revelation of( KIt is not for a Prophet...K>@(8:A In this verse there is not a sin le le islation for prisoners. )nd in the wordin there is no le islation for prisoners to be found. 5ather, it is only an address to the 7essen er (saw) that he should not have taken prisoners until he had inflicted a severe slau hter (ithkhan). $hat is meant by ithkhan is killin and creatin intense fear. There is no doubt that on the day of +adr the !ahaba killed a reat number of people and that they won the battle. It is not a condition of inflictin a severe slau hter in the land that everyone should be killed. Then after killin a reat number they took a roup as prisoners. This is permitted from the ayah in sura 7uhammad which is the sura of fi htin , and from this ayah itself. They indicate that after inflictin a severe slau hter (ithkhan) it is allowed to take prisoners. !o this verse has come to indicate a clear indication that that capture of prisoners was allowed accordin to the hukm of this ayah. !o it is not correct that the 7essen er (saw) made i/tihad re ardin the hukm of captivesLprisoners when he took prisoners and the verse came to correct his i/tihad. )nd nor is it the case that the capture done by the 7essen er (saw) in +adr was a le islation and the ayah came to clarify his mistake. Eikewise this capture was not a sin or a breach of the hukm that had been revealed. However, it indicates that the 7essen er (saw), in applyin the hukm of takin captives as mentioned in sura 7uhammad(K!mite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of themK.>3:(3A on this incident ie the battle of +adr, that it was better if the killin was reater so that the ithkhan is more evident. Thus, the verse was revealed to mildly reproach the Prophet (saw) for applyin the hukm in a manner which is contrary to what is best. It is the censure of an action undertaken by him to apply a previous hukm, it is not the le islation of a hukm and nor is it the correction of an i/tihad. )s for His (swt) sayin at the end of the ayah( K6ou desire the ood of this world, but )llah desires for you the hereafter. )nd )llah is )ll,7i hty, )ll,$iseK.>@(8:A This is the conclusion of the rebuke in the ayah. ie you have taken prisoners before doin your outmost to inflict a severe slau hter (ithkhan) hopin to et ransom for those prisoners ie by takin captives you desire the transient thin s of the world, from the ransom (fida) which is the resultLconse#uence of takin them captive. )nd )llah wishes to stren then His deen by killin them in the battle, not by takin them prisoners. The issue is the takin of prisoners and desirin the ood of this world is a result of the capture, it is not a mild rebuke for takin ransom. 5ather, it is only a mild rebuke for takin captives before inflictin a severe slau hter. It completes the meanin of the ayah which be an with this meanin from its very be innin ( KIt is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a reat slau hter (amon his enemies) in the land. 6ou desire the ood of this world, but )llah desires for you the hereafter. )nd )llah is )ll,7i hty, )ll,$iseK.>@(8:A :8

)s for His (swt) sayin ( K$ere it not a previous ordainment from )llah, a severe punishment (Ka9aab) would have touched you for what you tookK.>@(8@A It is not a promise of a punishment from )llah for takin ransom as some would ima ine. 5ather, it clarifies the conse#uences that could possibly result from takin prisoners before doin ones outmost to inflict asevere slau hter, such as losin the battle and 7uslims bein killed by the Huffar. This is the reat punishment, it is not the punishment of )llah. ie if it were not that )llah knew that you would be victorious, then for takin prisoners before doin your outmost to slau hter the Huffar, your enemies would haves killed you and defeated you. The ;urKan has used the word Ka9aab (punishment) for killin in war. He (swt) said( K*i ht a ainst them so that )llah will punish them (yuKa99ibihum) by your handsK. >?(B3A It cannot be that it means the punishment of )llah, because the address is eneral to the 7essen er (saw) and the believers. +ecause if the ayah, as they contend, is considered to be correctin an i/tihad. Then it is a mistake that has been for iven for which they do not deserve to be punished by )llah. If it is considered a mild reproach for actin contrary to what is best, as is the reality in this case, then it does not merit any punishment from )llah. It is not at all possible that it means the touchin of a punishment from )llah. 5ather, the meanin is that your enemies would have killed and humiliated you. )s for the hadith reported re ardin the cause of this ayah bein revealed, and re ardin its stories, they are isolated reports (khabar ahad) which are not admissable as evidence for a#eeda. Permittin or not permittin i/tihad on the part of the 7essen er is from the creedal issues. *urthermore, they contradict the definite te't, which is the e'plicit te't mentioned in sura 7uhammad re ardin the hukm of takin prisoners and the fact that it was revealed to the 7essen er (saw). ............................. )lso, the rulin on takin captives is a shariKa rule for which the 7essen er (saw) waited for the revelation. He did not consult his companions and then act upon what they advised and so the revelation had to be sent down to correct it because this means the le esilation of certian rules was by the shura and not revelation. Therefore, all the hadiths reported re ardin those two ayahs are re/ected in terms of meanin (dirayatan) and they are e'empt from bein considered as proof. )s for His (swt) sayin ( K7ay )llah for ive you (. 7uhammad >sawA). $hy did you rant them leave (to remain behind), until those who told the truth were seen by you in clear li ht, and you had known the liars&K.>?(30A The ayah does not indicate the practise of i/tihad becasue it is a rulin to say that it is allowed for the 7essen er to ive permission to whoever he wished. The hukm has already come before the revelation of this ayah. It came in sura al,2ur. He (swt) said( ::

K!o if they ask your permission for some affairs of theirs, ive permission to whom you will of themK.>23(82A This sura was revealed after sura al,Hashr in the battle of Hhanda#. )nd the ayahK7ay )llah for ive you (. 7uhammad >sawA)K.>?(30A came in sura al,Tawbah. It was reveled re ardin the e'pedition of Tabuk in the ninth yaer of the hi/ra. !o the hukm was known and the ayah in sura al,2ur is e'plicit indicatin that it is allowed for the 7essen er (saw) to rant them permission (to remain behind). Howvere, in that incident for which the ayah of sura al,Tawbah was revelaed, ie the e'pedition of Tabuk and the preparation of the army of Kusra (hardship). It would have been better if the 7essen er (saw) did not rant the hypocrites (munafi#in) permission to stay behind. $hen he ave them the permission in that very incident, )llah mildy rebuked him for this action. ie rebuked him for undertakin an action that was contrary to what was better. The ayah does not correct an i/tihad and it does not le islate a hukm which is different to the hukm the 7ssene er had made i/tihad for concernin the same incident. 5ather, it is a mild rebuke for somethin that was conrtrary to what was best. )s for His (swt) sayin ( K)nd never (. 7uhammad >sawA) pray (/ana9ah) for any of them (hypocrites) who dies, nor stand at his rave. "ertainly, they disbelieved in )llah and His 7essen er, and died while they were fasi#un (trans ressors)K.>?(@3A It came after His (swt) sayin (KIf )llah brin s you back to a party of them (the hypocrites), and they ask your permission to o out (to fi ht), say(%2ever shall you o out with me, nor fi ht an enemy with me- you a reed to sit inactive on the first occasion, then you sit (now) with those who la behind. )nd never (. 7uhammad >sawA) pray (/ana9ah) for any of them (hypocrites)...K.>?(@0,@3A )llah (swt) has clarified in the ayahKIf )llah brin s you back to a party of them (the hypocrites)K.>?(@0A that the 7ssenme er (saw) should not allow them to accomany him in his e'pedetions. )nd this was in order to humiliate and dis race them so that they do not et the hounour of makin /ihad and oin out (to fi ht) with the 7essne er (saw). )nd He (swt) in the ayah that comesimmdiatly afterK)nd never (. 7uhammad >sawA) pray (/ana9ah) for any of them (hypocrites)K. >?(@3A announced (/ust) another thin to humiliate them. That took place durin the :@

campai n a ainst them in order to destroy them. !o this ayah, the ayah before it and the ayah after it clarify the rules re ardin the munafi#in and the manner in which they should be treated by showin them contemp, humiliatin them and lowerin them them from the status of the believers. There is nothin in the ayah which indicates that the 7essen er (saw) made i/tihad re ardin a hukm. The verse came showin the contrary. 5ather it is the preliminaryLopenin le islation with respect to the munafi#in. It is in line with the other verses re ardin the munafi#in repeated in the same sure. 2othin appears in it, whether e'plicitly, by way of indication, by wordin or understandin , or ivin cause for any semblence (shubha) (of such a meanin ) that it corrects an i/tihad or draws attention to a mistake. )s for what has been narratedre ardin the reason for revealin this verse in terms of reports, they are solitary reports (akhbar ahad) and are not admissable as evidence for Ka#eeda and nor can they contradict the definite te't which restricts the 7esene erKs convyance of ahkam to that which he brou ht throu h revelation and nothin else. He (saw) did not follow anythin but the revelation. Eet alone that these hadiths should make K=mar b al,Hhattab try to prevent the 7essen er (saw) prayin the /ana9ah. !o eiether he wanted to prevent him from doin an action le islated as a hukm or he wanted to prevent the 7essen er (saw) from undertakin a worship accordin to a le islated shariKa rule and the 7essene re (saw) was silent about it. Then he (saw) reverted to K=marKs opinion after the revelation of this ayah. This is not allowed in respect to the 7essen er (saw). )ctin upon this hadith contradicts the fact the 7esen er is a Prophet, so the hadith is re/ected in terms of meanin (dirayatan). The hadith indicates that the 7essen er (saw) ave his shirt to K)bd )llah b. =bayy and that he tried to pray (/ana9a) for him thou h he was the head of the munafi#in. K)bd )llah b. =bayy was e'posed by )llah (swt) after the ha9wa of +ani al,7ustali#, his son came to the 7essen er (saw) to find out if the 7essen er had taken the desicion to kill him so that he may himself kill his father. )llah (swt) revelaed sura al,7unafi#in after the ha9wa of +ani al,7ustali# and He (swt) said to the 7essen er (saw) re radin it( KThey are the enemies, so beware of them. 7ay )llah curse themD How are they denyin the 5i ht PathK.>80(3A )nd He (swt) told him with respect to it( KTherefore their hearts are sealedK. >80(0A )nd He (swt) told him(K)llah beras witness that the hypocrits are indeed liarsK. >80(BA )nd then the 7essen er (saw) comes after this and ives his shirt to the head of the munafi#in and tries to pray (/ana9a) for the head of the munafi#in and then K=mar prevents him. This contradicts the ayaat. The ayah of sura al,Tawba was revealed in the ninth year ()H) after sura al,7unafi#in by a number of years. !o the hadiths about K=mar and the shirt and other such hadiths contradcit the reality of how the 7unafi# were treated after the ha9wa of +ani al,7ustali#. )nd they contradict the verses whichwere revaled before it re radin the munafi#in. :?

Therefore, they are re/ected also from this an le in terms of their meanin (dirayatan). )s for His (swt) sayin ( K(The Prophet >sawA) frowned and turned away, because there came to him the blind man. +ut what could tell you that per chance that he mi ht become pure (from sins)K.>@C(B,2A and the ayaat that follow. They do not indicate any i/tihad..the 7ssen er (saw) is oerdered to convey the daKwa to all the people and to teach the 7uslims Islam. It is forthe 7essne er to undertake both orders at every timeLinstance. K)bd )llah b. =mm 7aktum became a 7uslim and learnt Islam. He came to the 7essen er of )llah (saw) while he was with the leaders of ;uraysh- K=tbah and !haybah (the two sons of 5abiKah), )bu Mahl b. Hisham, al,K)bbas b. al,7uttalib, =mayyah b. Hhalaf, al,$alid b. al,7u hira. He (saw) was invitin them to Islam in the hope that others would embrace Islam if they entered its fold. Ibn =mm 7aktum said to the Prophet (saw) while he was in this situation( .h 7essener of )llahD Teach me (a#riKni) to read and teach me what )llah has tou ht youK. He repeated this not knowin that the Prophet (saw) was busy (speakin ) with these people. The 7essen er of )llah (saw) did not like the interruption to his conversation and so he frowned and turned away, and so this verse was reveled. The 7essen er (saw) is orederd to convey (the daKwa) and orederd to teach Islam. !o he undertook the convayance of the "all and turned away from teachin the one who asked to be tou ht due bein preoccupied with the convayance of the daKwa (tabli h). It was better for him to teach Ibn =mm 7aktum what he head asked for. +ut he did not do this so )llah (swt) mildly rebuked him for that. !ince his (saw) turnin away from Ibn =mm 7aktum was contrary to the best action, so )llah (swt) mildy rebuked him for undertakin what was contrary to what was best. In this there is no i/tihad concernin a rulin or a correction of an action. It was only the application of )llahKs rulin upon a certian incident which was contrary to the best action for which )llah mildy censured him. Thus, there is no indication in the aforementioned verses on the occurance of i/tihad from the 7essen er (saw). !ince no i/tihad came from him re ardin what he conveyed from )llah, i/tihad is not allowed for him whether accordin to the shariaKa or ration. The 7essen er (saw) was not a mu/tahid and it is not allowed in respect to him that he be a mu/tahid. It was only a revelation revaled to him by )llah (swt) and thisrevelation (wahy) is either by wordin and meanin as in the 2oble ;urKan or it is meanin only which is iven e'pression by the 7essen er either with his own words or by his silence which alludes to a rulin or by doin an action and that, all of it, isthe !unnah.

6.78.7

he 'oble 3ur0an

p.797

The ;urKan was revealed to Prophet 7uhammad (saw) in parts for a period of 20 years. It used to be revealed in various ways. !ometimes revelation would come in (#uick) succession and other times it would take a lon time (tarakhin). The ;urKan was revealed radually and not all at once due to a wisdom (hikma) )llah @C

(swt) has mentioned in the noble ;urKan( K)nd those who disbelieve say(%$hy is not the ;urKan revealed to him all at once&% Thus (it is send down in parts), that $e may stren then your heart thereby.K>24(02A ie thus it has been revealed in parts so that $e may stren then, due to the division, your heart so that you may understand it fully and memorise it. )nd He (swt) said( K)nd (it is) a ;urKan which $e have divided (into parts), in order that you mi ht recite it to men at intervals. )nd $e have revealed it by sta es.K>B:(BC8A ie it is a ;urKan whose revelation $e have made to be in parts and (revealed) radually at intervals ie slowly (mahl), deliberately without haste (tuKadah) and takin care (tahabbut). $e have revealed it in sta es ie accordin to incidentsLevents. !o, inorder to stren then the heart of the 7essen er, and so as to recite it to the people slowly without haste, and also in order to reveal it accordin to incidents and answers to #uestions, the ;urKan was revealed radually and in parts for 20 years. The ;urKan used to be revealed to the 7essen er of )llah (saw) and he used to instruct people to memorise it in their breasts, write it down on piecesLscraps of leather, paper and ka hid (card &), and also write it on scapula (aktaf), palm risp (Kasab) and likhafLlukhaf ie on shoulder blades (Ka9m al,Kareed), leaf stalks of date palm and hi/ara ra#i#a. $hen the ayaat were revealed he used to ive the order that they be placed in their proper place in the sura. Thus, he used to say put this ayah in such and such sura after such and such ayah. !o they sued to put them in their proper place in the sura. It has been narrated by K=thman that he said(KThe ayaat used to be revealed to the Prophet (saw) and so he used to say( Put these ayahs in the sura which mentions such and such thin K. It was done in this manner until the whole ;urKan was revealed and )llah took his (saw) soul after the revelationof the ;urKan was complete. That is why the arran ement of the verses of every sura in the from as it is in now in the present script (mushaf) was, as determined by the revelation (taw#eefan), from the Prophet, transmitted to him (saw) by Mibreel from )llah (swt). )nd accordin to this arran ement the =mmah transmitted the ;urKan from her Prophet (saw) and there is no dispute about this. )nd this verse order of suras was the same form we see today. It is the very form the 7essen er of )llah (saw) ordered. )nd it is the same form that was written on piecesLscraps of shoulder blades, palm risp, likhaf and preserved in the breasts of men. "onse#uently, the arran ement of verses within its chapters is definite in that it is diterminedLfi'ed by revelation (taw#eefi) from the 7essen er of )llah (saw), from Mibreel, from )llah (swt). )s for the chapter arran ement re radin certain chapters (suras) they were put to ether accordin to the i/tihad of !ahaba (may )llah be pleased with them). )hmad and the sunan compilers have reported a hadith by Ibn K)bbas which has been declared sound by Ibn Hibban and al, Hakim, they narrated(KI (Ibn K)bbas) said to K=thman(K$hy have you.....towards sura al,)nfal when it is from the mathani (suras with less than BCC ayahs), and @B

towards al,+araaKah when it is from the miKun (consistin of about BCC ayahs). 6ou have put them to etherLcombined them and you did not write between them the line Kbismillah ar,rahman a,rahimK and you have placed them amon the seven lon (tiwal) suras. !o K=thman said(K.ften a sura would be revealed to the 7essen er of )llah (saw) that would have a number of verses. $hen a somethin was revealed to him , ie verses from it, he used to call someone from amon those who used to write for him and said(%Place these ayaat in the sura, in which this and this is mentioned. !ura al,)nfal was one of the first to be revealed in 7adinah and al,+araaKah was at the end of the ;urKan. Their narrative used to resemble each other so I thou ht )nfal was part of +araaKah.K The 7essen er of )llah (saw) died and he did not clarify to us if anfal was part of baraaKah. Thus, It has been narrated by !aKeed b. Mubayr from Ibn K)bbas who said that(KThe Prophet (saw) did not know the endin of a sura until Kbismillah ar,rahman a,rahimK was revealed. In another narration(K$hen bismillah ar,rahman ar,rahim was revealed they knew that the sura had come to an end. This indicates that the verse order in every sura was dietrmined Lfi'ed by revelation (taw#ifiyyan). )nd since the Prophet (saw) did not elucidate the issue of baraaKah, K=thman added it to al,)nfal accordin to his own i/tihad (may )llah be pleased with him). The author of al, I#naK reportedLtransmitted that the +asmala (abbr. for bismillah ar,rahman ar, rahim) for +araaKah is presentin the mushaf (copyLcollection) of Ibn 7asKud. It has been reported that the !ahaba used to keep copies whose arran ement of suras was different thou h there were no differences in the verse arran ement. !o the mushahf of Ibn 7asKud was compiled in a manner different to the mushaf of K=thman in terms of the arran ement of the suras. It be an with al,fatiha, then al, ba#arah, al,nisa and )ali KImran. "ontrary to the K=thmani mushaf whose arran ement is al,fatiha, al,ba#arah, )ali KImran and then al,nisa. 2one of them were compiled accordin to the order of revelation. It is said that the mushaf of K)li was accordin to the order of revelation, it be an with i#raK, then al, muddaththir, nun wal #alam, al,mu99ammil, tabbat, al,takweer, sabbih, it went on in this manner to the end of the 7akkan suras and then to the 7edinan suras. )ll of this indicates that the sura arran ement in relation to some suras were arran ed accordin to the i/tihad of the !ahaba. That is why maintainin the arran ement of suras in recitation in not obli atory whether in recitin the ;urKan (tilaawah), in the prayer (salah), in a lesson or teachin . )s evidenced by the fact that the Prophet (saw) read sura al,2isa before )ali KImran in his ni ht prayer. )s for what has been reported aboutthe prohibition of recitin the ;urKan in reverse order, what was intended was that an ayah in one sura should not be read in reverse, not the recitation of suras in reverse order. Mibreel used to read once every year all of what had been revealed to the 7essen er (saw) from the ;urKan. )nd in the year in which the 7essen er of )llah (saw) died Mibreel recited the whole of the ;urKan twice to the 7essen er (saw). It has been narrated by K)isha (r.a.) on the authority of *atimah (r.a.) that( The Prophet (saw) confided in me that(%Mibreel used to read the ;urKan to me every year....... It has been narrated about )bu Hurayra that he said( Mibreel used to present the ;urKan to the Prophet once a year, but he presented it twice to him in the year he died. MibreelKs presentation of the ;urKan to the 7essen er (saw) every year means that he presented the arrai nment of its verses in relation to @2

other verses and the arran ement of its verses in their respective chapters because presentin the book means to present its sentences, words and arran ement. He presented it to him twice in the year in which the 7essen er (saw) died. $hich means similrly that the arran ement of its verses in relation to each other was presented and aswell the arrain ment of verses in htierrespictive suras. Eikewise , it is possible to understand the hadith to mean that the sura arran ment in relation to each other was presented. However, ther are other hadith which i'plicitly mention the rran ment of verses. They state the of verses in relation to each other and the rran ment of verses in their respective chapters.( KPlace these verses in such and such sura after such and such ayahK. )nd Kplace those verses in hte sura that mentioned such and such thin K. ) sura would end and another sura would be in as decreed by )llah throu h Mibreel. It has been reported that Ibn K)bbas said(KThe Prophet (saw) would not know the endin of a sura until Kbismillah l,rahman al,raheemK was reveledK. )nd in another narration-K$hen Kbismillah l,rahman al,raheemK is reveled then they would know that the sura has come to an endK. )ll of this definitely indicates that the arran ement of verses in their chapters and the form of the suras in terms of the number of verses and their places, all of that is ditermined (taw#ifi) by )llah (swt). The =mmah transmitted it in this form from her Prophet (saw) and that is proven by tawaatur (recurrent reports). 2arrated by )isha, the mother of the +elievers, that a person from Ira# came to her and asked, K$hat type of shroud is the best&K K)isha said,K7ay )llah be merciful to youD $hat does it matter&K He said, K. mother of the believersD !how me (the copy of) your ;urKan,K !he said,K$hy&% He said, %In order to compile and arran e the ;urKan accordin to it, for people recite it with its suras not in proper order.% K)isha said, %$hat does it matter which part of it you read first& Hnow that the first thin that was revealed thereof was a !ura from )l,7ufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the *ire. $hen the people embraced Islam, the verses re ardin le al and ille al thin s were revealed. If the first thin to be revealed was( KFo not drink alcoholic drinks.K people would have said, K$e will never leave alcoholic drinks,K and if there had been revealed, KFo not commit ille al se'ual intercourse, Kthey would have said, K$e will never ive up ille al se'ual intercourse.K $hile I was a youn irl of playin a e, the followin verse was revealed in 7ecca to 7uhammad( K2ayD +ut the Hour is their appointed time (for their full recompense), and the Hour will be more rievous and more bitter.K>43.38A !ura )l,+a#ara and !ura al,2isa (The $omen) were revealed while I was with him.% Then K)isha took out the copy of the ;urKan for the man and dictated to him the verses of the !uras (in their proper order). This hadith shows that the ;urKan had not been put to ether (in oreder) when we add to that the different arran ment of mashafs of the !ahaba, indicatin that the arran ment of suras in relation to each other was done as a reed by the !ahaba.

6.78.6

he 2ompilation of the 3ur0an

p.79:
@0

It has been proven by decisive and definite evidence that when the Prophet (saw)

died the whole ;urKan had been written on scrapsLpieces of shoulder blades, palm fibreLrisps and likhaf. )ll of it was preserved in the hearts of the !ahaba (may )llah be pleased with them). )n ayah or ayaat would to be revealed and so he used to order that they be written down before him at once. He did not prevent the 7uslims from writin the ;urKan other than what he used to dictate to the scribes who wrote down the revelation. 7uslim reported a hadith from )bu !aKid al,Hhudri that the 7essen er of )llah (saw) said( Fo not write down anythin from me, whosoever writes anythin I have said other than the ;urKan let him erase itK. $hat the scribes used to write of the revelation were collected on sheets (suhuf). He (swt) said(K) 7essen er from )llah, recitin purified pa es (suhuf) (of the ;urKan)K.>?@(2A ie recitin sheets (#irtas) purified from falsehood, honestly handwritten une#uivocally true and /ust. )llah (swt) said( K2ay, indeed it (verses of the ;urKan) are an admonition (ta9kirah). !o whoever wills, let him pay attention to it. (It is) in 5ecords held ( reatly) in honour. I'alted (in di nity), purified. In the hands of scribes. Honourable and obedient.K >@C(BB,B8A ie this admonition (ta9kirah) established in 5ecords held ( reatly) in honour (suhuf mukarramah) from )llah and e'alted in value, free from the hands of those that are corrupt (shayateen). They have beenwritten down by <od fearin (at#iyaa) scribes. He (saw) left written everythin that was between the two covers of the mushaf which had been written down in front of him. K)bd al,K)9i9 b 5ufayyaK narrated( !haddad bin 7aK#il and I entered upon Ibn K)bbas. !haddad bin 7aK#il asked him, KFid the Prophet leave anythin (besides the ;urKan)&K He replied. %He did not leave anythin e'cept what is +etween the two bindin s (of the ;urKan).K Then we visited 7uhammad bin )l,Hanafiyya and asked him (the same #uestion). He replied, KThe Prophet did not leave e'cept what is between the bindin s (of the ;urKan).K )n I/maK (consensus) has taken place on the fact that all of the verses of the ;urKan in their respective chapters (suras) had been written down directly front of the 7essen er (saw) when the revelation used to be revealed to him, and that they were written on sheets (suhuf). The reatest of 7essen ers died content about the ;urKan, his reatest miracle which established the proof for the )rabs and the world.He did not fear for the verses of the ;urKan that they would be lost because )llah has preserved the ;urKan with an e'plicit te't( KQerily $e( It is $e $ho have sent down the Jikr (the ;urKan) and surely, $e will uard it (from corruptionK.>B4(?A +ecause these verses had been preserved permanently via them bein written down before him (saw), and bein preserved in the hearts of the !ahaba and by the permission ranted to the 7uslims to write down the ;urKan. That is why after the death of the 7essen er the !ahaba did not feel the need to compile the ;urKan in one book or need to write it down. =ntil many of the Huffa9 (memorisers of the ;urKan) had been killed in the 5iddah wars. !o due to this K=mr feared for the loss of certain sheets and death of the ;urraK (Those who had committed the whole of the ;urKan to memory), thereby causin some verse to be lost. !o he thou ht about brin in the written sheets to ether (in one compilation). He presented his idea to )bu +akr and so the compilation of the ;urKanwas done. It @3

has been narrated by K=bayd b. al,!iba# that Jayd b al,Thabit )l,)nsari said( )bu +akr sent for me after the (heavy) casualties amon the warriors (of the battle) of 6amama (where a reat number of ;urraK were killed). K=mar was present with )bu +akr who said, K=mar has come to me and said, The people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle of) 6amama, and I am afraid that there will be more casualties amon the ;urraK (those who know the ;urKan by heart) at other battle,fields, whereby a lar e part of the ;urKan may be lost, unless you collect it. )nd I am of the opinion that you should collect the ;urKan.% )bu +akr added, %I said to K=mar, KHow can I do somethin which )llahKs )postle has not done&K K=mar said (to me), K+y )llah, it is (really) a ood thin .K !o K=mar kept on pressin , tryin to persuade me to accept his proposal, till )llah opened my bosom for it and I had the same opinion as K=mar.K (Jayd b al,Thabit added() =mar was sittin with him ()bu +akr) and was not speakin . me). K6ou are a wise youn man and we do not suspect you (of tellin lies or of for etfulness)( and you used to write the revelation (wahy) for )llahKs )postle. Therefore, look for the ;urKan and collect it (in one manuscript). K +y )llah, if he ()bu +akr) had ordered me to shift one of the mountains (from its place) it would not have been harder for me than what he had ordered me concernin the collection of the ;urKan. I said to both of them, %How dare you do a thin which the Prophet has not done&K )bu +akr said, K+y )llah, it is (really) a ood thin . !o I kept on ar uin with him about it till )llah opened my bosom for that which He had opened the bosoms of )bu +akr and =mar. !o I started locatin ;uranic material and collectin it from parchments, scapula, leaf,stalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who knew it by heart). I found with Hhu9aima two Qerses of !ura al,Tawbah which I had not found with anybody else, (and they were)(KQerily, there has come unto you a 7essen er from amon st yourselves. It rieves him that you should receive any in/ury or difficultyK.>?(B2@A until the end of +araKah. The manuscript on which the ;uran was collected, remained with )bu +akr till )llah took him unto Him, and then with K=mar durin his lifetime, and finally it remained with Hafsa (r.a.), =marKs dau hter. JaydKs compilation of the ;urKan did not consist of what he wrote down from the Huffa9. 5ather his compilation assembledLbrou ht to ether what he had written himself in front of the 7essen er of )llah (saw). He did not place one sheetLpa e with another sheet in order to compile them unless two witnesses testified, for this sheet that had been presented to him, that it was written in the presence of the 7essen er of )llah (saw). *urthermore, he did not accept a sheet unless it met two conditions- firstly, that it was present in written form with one of the !ahaba. )nd second, that it has been memorised by one of the !ahaba. $hen the written and memorised forms concurred with the sheet that was intended to be compiled, he took it. .therwise he did not accept it. That is why he refrained from takin the end of sura al,+araKah until he found it in written form with )bu Hhu9ayma even thou h Jayd could himself recall and remember it. It has been narratedvia 6ahya b Kabd al,5ahman b. Hatib that he said( K=mar stood up and said- whosoever has received anythin of the ;urKan from the 7essen er of )llah (saw), let him brin it forth. They used to write that on sheets, tablets and palm risp. Ibn Hatib said( He(Jayd) did not accept anythin from anyone until two witnesses had iven testimony. This shows that Jayd did not used to be satisfied by merely findin somethin in written form until the one who received it testified that he had heard it despite the fact that Jayd already had it memorised. He used @4

to do this due to his e'treme caution.K Thus, the (process) of compilation was nothin other than the brin in to ether of sheets that had already been written in the presence of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) into one book between two coversLbindin s. The ;urKan used to be written down on sheets but they were separately kept. !o )bu +akr assembled them in one place. That is why )bu +akrKs order to compile the ;urKan was not an order to write it down in one mushaf, rather it was an order to brin the sheets that had been written in the 7essen erKs presence to ether in one place and it was an order to make certain- that they are in the same form as they were by supportin it with the testimonies of two witnesses that they had been written in front of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) and that they were in the possession of the !ahaba in written from and they had memorised them. These sheets remained preserved in the possession of )bu +akr durin his life and then with K=mar durin his lifetime and them with Hafsa the dau hter of K=mar, the mother of the +elievers in accordance with K=marKs be#uest. *rom this it becomes clear that )bu +akrKs compilation of the ;urKan constituted only the brin in to ether of sheets that hadbeen written in the presence of )llahKs 7essen er and it was not an actual compilation of the ;urKan. )nd the memorisation was in re ard to these sheets ie on scrapsLpieces which were written in front of the 7essne r of )llah (saw) and not memorisation of the ;urKan. The brin in to ether of such pieces and their preservation was not done e'ept by way of cautiousness and doin ones utmost in e'aminin the meorisation of e'actly what has been reported from the 7essen er of )llah (saw). )s for the ;urKan itself, it was preserved in the haerts of the !ahabah and compiledLput to ether in their memory. In memorisation dpendence was put on a reat multitude of !ahabah because those memorisin it completely or partially were many. This was re ardin the compilation of )bu +akr. )s for the compilation of K=thman, in the third or (some say) the second year of his Hhilafah ie in the year 24 )H Hu9ayfah b. al,6aman approached K=thman in 7adinah at the time when the people of al,!ham and the people of Ira# were wa in war to con#uer )rminya and )dharbi/an. Hudhayfa was afraid of their (people of al,!ham and Ira#) differences in the recitation of the ;urKan. He saw that the people of al,!ham readin accordin to the recitation of =bay b. HaKb, and they were comin with readin s the people of Ira# had not heard of. )lso he saw the people of Ira# readin accordin to the recitation of K)bd )llah b. 7asKud and so they brou ht thin sLreadin the people of al,!ham had not heard of. Thus, they be an to char e each other of kufr(disbelief). They both disa reed about a verse in sura al, +a#arah. .ne read(K)nd perform properly the ha// and K=mra for )llah (wa atimmul ha//a wal Kumrata lillah)K.>2(B?8A )nd the other read(KK)nd perform properly the ha// and K=mra to the House (of )llah)(wa atimmul ha//a wal Kumrata lil bayt)K. !o Hu9ayfah became an ry and his eyes went red with ra e. It has been narrated about Hu9ayfah that he said( The people of Hufah adhere to the recitation of Ibn 7asKud and the people of +asra adhere to the recitation of )bu 7usa. +y )llahD If I o to the Eeader of the +elievers I will order him to make it a sin le recitation. !o he travelled to K=thman. It has been reported by Ibn !hihab that )nas b. 7alik narrated( Hudhaifa bin al,6aman came to =thman at the time when the people of @8

!ham and the people of Ira# were wa in war to con#uer )rminya and )dharbi/an. Hudhayfa was afraid of their (the people of !ham and Ira#) differences in the recitation of the ;urKan, so he said to K=thman, K. chief of the +elieversD !ave this nation before they differ about the +ook (;uran) as Mews and the "hristians did before.K !o K=thman sent a messa e to Hafsa sayin , K!end us the manuscripts of the ;urKan so that we may compile the ;urKanic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you.K Hafsa sent it to K=thman. K=thman then ordered Jaid bin Thabit, K)bd )llah b. al,Jubair, !aid b. al,K)s and K)bd al,5ahman b. Harith b. Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. K=thman said to the three ;uraishi men, KIncase you disa ree with Jaid b. al, Thabit on any point in the ;urKan, then write it in the dialect of ;uraish, the ;urKan was revealed in their ton ue.K They did so, and when they had written many copies, K=thman returned the ori inal manuscripts to Hafsa. K=thman sent to every 7uslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other ;urKanic materials, whether written in fra mentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.K The number of copies made was seven. The seven mushafs were sent to 7akkah, al,!ham, 6emen, +ahrayn, +asra, Hufa, and one copy was kept at 7edinah. Therefore, K=thmanKs action was not the compilation of the ;urKan. 5ather it constituted in only the copyin and transcription of the same thin transcribed from the 7essen er of )llah (saw) as it was. He he did not do anythin other than make seven copies from the preserved copy in the possession of Hafsa, the mother of the +elievers and unite the people on this sin le script and forbade any other script or dictation other than it. The matter became fi'edLsettled on this copy as a script and dictation. It is the same script and dictation in which the sheets were written, which were written in the presence of )llahKs 7essen er (saw) when the revelation was revealed. )nd itis the same copy which )bu +akr had compiled. Then the 7uslims be an to make copies from this copy and not any other copy. 2othin remained e'cept the mushaf of K=thman in its script. $hen printers came about the mushaf was printed from this copy with the same handwritin Lscript and dictation. The difference between the compilation of )bu +akr and that of K=thman is that the compilation of )bu +akr took place due to the fear that somethin would be lost from the ;urKan if any of its carriers (memorisers) were lost. +ecause, even thou h it was written on sheets but it had not been collected in one place like a sin le book. Thus, it was compiled in pa es. the compilation of K=thman took place because differences increased re ardin aspects of the ;urKan when they read it due to the e'pansion of the lan ua e. This led some to accuse others of makin an error. It was feared that the matter would escalateLbecome seriously worse. !o those sheets were copied onto one mushaf. The mushaf that we now have before us is the same mushaf revealed to the 7essen er of )llah (saw) )nd it is the same one which was written in the sheets which were written in the presence of the 7essen er of )llah (saw). )nd it is the same mushaf that )bu +akr brou ht to ether when the sheets were compiled in one place. )nd it is the same one from which K=thman transcribed the seven copies and ordered that the rest be burned. )nd it is the same 2oble ;urKan in its verse arran ement in @:

relation to each other and their arran ment in their respectives suras, script and dictation. )s for the copy dictated by the 7essen er of )llah (saw) from the revelation, whose sheets were compiled to ether and then copied. It remained protected in the possession of Hafsa, the mother of the believers until 7arwan became the $ali ( overnor) of 7adinah and he tore it up. !ince it was not considered bindin because copies of the mushaf had spread everywhere. Ibn !hihab narrated that !alim b. K)bd )llah b. K=mar informed him(That 7arwan used to send for Hafsa , ie when he was the amir of 7adinah via 7uKawiyya , askin her for the sheets from which the ;urKan was written. !he refused to ive him it. !alim said($hen Hafsa died, while we were returnin from her burial 7arwan communicated his firm decision to K)bd )llah b. K=mar that he send him that mushaf. !o K)bd )llah b. K=mar sent it to him. 7arwan ordered it to be destroyed. He said( I did this because I feared that if it remained with people for a lon time then people will have doubts re ardin these sheets.

6.78.;

he 3uranic Script

p.7:;

The ;uranic script is taw#eefi and it is not allowed to o a ainst it. The evidence for this is that the Prophet (saw) use to have scribes who wrote down the revelation. They actually wrote the ;urKan down accordin to this script and the 7essen er (saw) approved of their writin . His (saw) period came to an end while the ;urKan was in this writin (kataba & is it pl. scribes or like kitabah&) , in which no chan e or alteration occured. Iven thou h the !ahaba wrote the ;urKan, it has notbeen reported from anyone that he differed with this writin until K=thman came durin his caliphate and transcibed the sheets preserved with Hafsa, the mother of the believers into mushafs accordin to that writin . )nd orederd than any other remainin mushafs be burned. )swell it has been reported that the screipt of the ;urKan was different to that of the script of )rabic writin . There is not reason for such deviations e'cept that their writin was fi'ed by revelation (taw#eefiyyan) and not by customary usa eLconvention. That is why it is not aked why was the word S...T U in the ;urKan written with a waw and alif S...U and why was it not written with ya and alif. It si not asked what is the reason from the additional alif in S....U instead of S.....U and the additional ya in S....U and S....U and the e'tra alif in S...U in sura al,Ha// but absent from S...U in sura al,!abaK. )nd its addition to S...U thou h it is lackin from S....U in sura al,*ur#an and its addition to S....U but ommited from S....U S....U S.....U in sura +a#ara. Its addtion to S...U but absent from S....U in sura al,2isa. Eikewise, it should not be said that ................. Eike ommittin the alif from S...U in sura 6usuf and al,Jukhruf but intromittin it in other places. )nd insertin the alif after waw S...U in sura *ussilat but ommitin it in others. Insertin the alif in KmiKaadK but ommittin it from the place in sura al,)nfal. !o this difference in writin a sin le word between one sura and another in terms of the script despite thou h there is no diffrence in the meenin and wordin , this is an evidence to say that it is an action attributable to hearin them and not i/tihad or understandin . )nd anythin attributable to hearin is taw#eefi. !o the 7essen erKs acknoeld ment ofthis writin and the !ahabaKs i/maK (consensus) on it and the reality of differences in writin a sin le word between one sura and anbother despite the unity of meanin and wordin . )ll of this is a claer evidence to prove that this script in which the mushaf has been written is a taw#eefi script which must be adhered to e'clusively. $ritin the @@

mushaf in a script other than this script is prohibited. It is not allowed to deviate from it at all. It should not be said that the 7essen er (saw) was inlliterate,so his desicion re ardin it is not considered for he had scribes who knew how to write, and they used to describe it to him, not to mention the fact that he (saw) used to know the forms of letters as reported in some hadiths. )nd let alone the fact thathis scribes wrote letters, which used to be sent to kin s and leaders, that were written accordin to the normal script and they were different from the script used in writin the sheets on which the ;urKan was written while it was bein revealed. )nd eventhou h the one who dictated the ;urKan was one and the scribes were the same. Thou h the obli ation to follow the uthmani script of the ;urKan is only specififc to writin the whole mushaf. )s for writin the ;urKan by way of #outation or writin it on blackboards for the purpose of teachin and other such writin which are not written on mushafs, it is allowed becsue the 7essen erKs approval and the !habaKs i/maK (consensus) has taken place on only the mushaf and not on anythin else. 2o analo y (#iyas)is made to it because it is a matter fi'ed by the revelation without an Killah (le al cause). !o there is no ;iyas for it.

6.78.8

he <iracle of the 3ur0an

p.7::

The ;urKan is the e'pression revaled to our master 7uhammad (saw) with what indicates of its meanin s. !o the ;urKan is the wordin (laf9) and meanin (maKna) to ether. The meanin on its own is not called ;urKan. )nd the wordin cannot possibly have anymeanin becasue the basis of composin e'pressions is to indicate a certainLspecific menin . That is why the ;urKan has been described by a describtion of its wordin . Thus, )llah (swt) said aboit it that it is in )rabic when He said( KQerily, $e have sent it down as an )rabic ;urKanK.>B2(2A )nd He (swt) said( K) +ook whereof the Qerses are e'plained in detail-, ) ;urKan in )rabicK.>3B(0A )nd He (swt) said( K)n )rabic ;urKan, without any crookednessK.>0?(2@A K$e have revealed unto you (. 7uhammad>sawA) a ;urKan in )rabic.K>32(:A $e verily, have made it a ;urKan in )rabic.K>30(0A )rabic is a description of the ;urKanKs wordin Le'pression and not a description of its emanin s, because its meanin s are human meanin s and not )rabic meanin s. They are for humankind and not for the )rabs only. )s for His sayin ( K)nd thus have $e sent it down (the ;urKan) down to be an )rabic /ud ement(hukman Karabiyyan)K.>B0(0:A It means that the wisdom has been translated in the ton ue of the )rabs and not that it is an arabic wisdom. !o the word K)rabicK is a description of its e'pression and not anythin else. It wordin is not to be described e'cept only as )rabic. It has no other desi anation other than arabic, whether literally or metaphorically. That is why it is not correct to say that the writin of some of its meanin s in another lan ua e is ;urKan. The arabic lan ua e of the ;urKan is definiteLindisputable, it is arabic in wordin only. The @?

;urKan is the miracle of the Prophet 7uhammad (saw). Iven thou h there are other miracles of the Prophet (saw) which took place at his hands different to that of the ;urKan, as mentioned in the ;urKan itslef and the sahih works on the !unnah, the he (saw) did not challen e the people with them. .n the contrary, the challen e was only with the ;urKan. That is why we say that the ;urKan was the miracle of the Prophet 7uhammad (saw) with which his 7essen ership has been proven even since the ;urKan was revelaed until the Fay of Musd ement. The ;urKan made the )rabs incapble of brin in somethibn like it, and it challen ed them to berin somethibn like it. He (swt) said in His challen e to them( K)nd if you are in doubt concernin that which $e have sent down to .ur slave, then produce a sura of the like thereof and call your witnesses besides )llah, if you are truthful.K>2(20A )nd He (swt) said( K!ay(%+rin then a sura like unto it, and call upon whomsoever you can, besides )llah, if you are truthfulK.>BC(0@AK.r they say,%He (the Prophet) for ed it (;urKan). !ay( %+rin you then ten for ed suras like unto it, and call whomsoever you can, other than )llah (to your help), if you speak the truthK.>BB(B0A His challen e to them reached the point where He (swt) told them that you will not be able to brin somethin like it. He (swt) said( K!ay( %If the mankind and the /inns were to ether to produce the like of this ;urKan, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one anotherK. >B:(@@A !o those addressed by the ;urKan were unable to bein somethibn like the ;urKan.. This inibility to meet the challen e has been proven via recurrent eports (mutawatir). History has no knowled e of, and nor has anybody narrated a report, that they (the ;uraysh) did brin somethun like it. This challen e is not specicif c to those who were addressed, rather it is an open challen e until the day of Mud ement. +ecause the consideration is for the enerality of the wordin (laf9) and not the spicificity of the cause (sabab). !o the ;urKan challen es the whole of mankind since it was revealed and until the Fay of Mud ement to brin somehtin like it. that is why the ;urKan is not a miraclefor the )rabs who lived in the days of the 7essen her (saw) only, and nor is it for only the )rabs in all time and place, rather it is a miracle for the whole of mankind. In this re ard there is no difference between one tribe and another because he address is to the whole of mankind. He (swt) said( K$e have not sent you (. 7uhammad >sawA), e'cept to all of mankindK.>03(2@A )ns because the verses of the challen e are eneral (Kamma), they say( K)nd call upon whomsoever you can, besides )llahK.>BC(0@A It includes the whole of mankind, because the ;urKan informes us of the inibility of mankind and /inn. He (swt) said( ?C

K!ay( %If the mankind and the /inns were to ether to produce the like of this ;urKan, they could not produce the like thereofK.>B:(@@A The )rabKs inibility to brin like that of this ;urKan, and all the peopleKs inibility to brin somithin like it is a matter itrinsicLinherent in the ;urKan itself. The )rabs, when they used to listen to the ;urKan, they approached it and they were taken by the ma ic of its elo#uence until al,$alid b. al,7u hira, who had heard the Prophet (saw) recitin the ;urKan, said to the people( +y )llahD There is not a man amon st you who is more well,versed in poetry than me, or has more knowled e of its poetic meter (ra/a9ihi) or #asida >ancient )rabic poem with ri id tripartite structureA than meD. I swaerD In the sayin that he says there is a sweetness and beauty (halaawa) and in it there is race and ele ence (talaawa). )t its hi hest it is fresh reen and leefy and at its lowest it is copiuos and abundant (with rain). Qerily it is the hi hest and nothin is hi her than itK. Iven thou h this al,$alid did not believe and persisted with his kufr. !o the aspects of the miracle are from the nature of the ;urKan itself because those who have heard it and those who will hear it until the Fay of Mus emnet are baffled and bewildered by the power of its effect and force of its elo#uence by merly /ust listenin to it, even if it is /ust one sentence( K)nd whose is the kin dom this day&K.>3C(B8A K.n the Fay of 5esurrection the whole of the earth will be >0?(8:A rasped by His HandK.

KIf you fear treachery from any people throw back (their covenant) to them (so as to be) on e#ual termsK.>@(4@A K. mankindD *ear your Eord and be dutiful to HimD Qerily, the earth#uake of the Hour (of Mud ement) is a terrible thin . The Fay you shall see it, every nursin mother will for et her nurselin , and every pre nant one will drop her load, and you shall see mankind as in a drunken state, yet they will not be drunken, but severe will be the Torment of )llahK.>22(BA )nd thus an ayah or ayaat of the ;urKan would be recited. Its words, style and purpose completely en rosses the feelin s a human bein and sei9es them. The miracle of the ;urKan is most evident in in its fluencyLpurity, elo#uence and its elevation to an astonishin level. This manifetst itself in the miracilous style of the ;urKan. Its style has clarity (wuduh), force (#uwwah) and beauty (/amal) which makes the human bein incapable of achievin it. !tyle (uslub)( is the arran ement of meanin s in coredinated words. .r the manner of e'pression to envision meanin s with lin usitic e'pressions. )nd the clarity of style comes from the prominence of the meanin s intended to be e'pressed in the phrase with which they are e'pressed( K)nd those who disbelieve say(%Eisten not to this ;urKan, and make noise in the midst of its (recitation) that you may overcomeK.>3B(28A ?B

The force (#uwwah) of the style is represented by the chioce of words which ive the meanein that is consonant with the meanin . Thus, the delicate meanin is e'pressed with the delicate word, and the elo#uentLlucid meanin is e'pressed with the elo#uentLlucid word and the oddLstran e meanin is e'pressed with the oddLstran e word and so on and so forth... K)nd they will be iven to drink there a cup (of wine) mi'ed with Jan/abil ( in er, etc), and a sprin there, called !alsabilK.>:8(B:,B@A KTruly, Hell is a place of ambush, a dwellin place for the Ta hun (Those who trans ress the limits set by )llah). They will abide therein for a esK.>:@(2B,20A KThat indeed is a division most unfairK.>40(22A KQerily, the harshest of all voices is the voice (brayin ) of the assK.>0B(B?A )s for the stylistic beacuty (/amaal), this is to be found in the chioce of the most pure and fittin e'pressions in the meanin one intends to e'press. )nd by selectin words and meanin s which are to ether with these pure and fittin meanin s in a sentence or sentences( KPerhaps (often) will those who disbelieve wish that they were 7uslims. Eeave them to eat and en/oy, and let them be preoccupied with (false) hope. They will come to know.K>B4(2,0A The one who e'amines the ;urKan will find a lofty elevation with which the style of the ;urKan is characterised in terms of its clarity, force and beauty. Eisten to the clarity, force and beauty( K)nd amon men is he who disputes about )llah, without knowled e or uidance, or a +ook ivin li ht (from )llah,, +endin his neck in pride, and leadin (others) too (far) astray from the Path of )llahK.>22(@,?A KThese two opponents (believers and disbelievers) dispute with each other about their Eord- then as for those who disbelieve, arments of fire will be cut out for them, boilin water will be poured down over their heads. $ith it will melt or vanish away what is within their bellies, as well as their skins. )nd for them are hooked rods of iron (to punish them). Ivery time they seek to et away therefrom, from an uish, they will be driven back therein, and (itwill be) said to them(%Taste the torment of burnin %K.>22(B?,22A K. mankindD ) similitude has been coined, so listen to it (carefully)( QerilyD Those on whom you call besides )llah, cannot create (even) a fly, even thou h they combine to ether for the purpose. )nd if the fly snatched away a thin from them, they wouldhave no power to release it from the fly. !o weak are (both) the seeker and the sou htK.>22(:0A The ;urKan is a special enreLstyle (tira9) of e'pression. Its word arran ement ?2

(na9m) is notaccordin to the method of metrical and rythmic poetry (as,shiKr al, maw9un al,mu#affa) and nor is it accordin to the method of free prose (an,nathr al,mursal). )nd nor is it on the method of an,nathr al,mu/dawi/ (has dual resemblance to rhymed and freeprose) or rhymed prose. It is a method which stands on its own, the )rabs did not have any a#uaintence or knowled e of it before. The )rabs, due to the e'traordinary effect the ;urKan had on them, did not know from which an le it had reached this level of incapacitation (iK/a9). !o they started to say( KThis is indeed clear ma icK.>BC(:8A )nd they be an to say that it is the word of a poet and that he is a soothsayer. That is why )llah (swt) replied to them. He (swt) said( KIt is not the word of a poet, little is that you beliveD 2or is it the word of a soothsayer, little is that you rememberDK.>8?(3B,32A The fact that the ;urKan is of a spec'ial enreLstyle and a uni#ue structure is clear in every respect. !o while you find the ;urKan sayin ( K()llah) will dis race them and ive you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believin peopleK.>?(B3A )nd it says( K+y no means shall you attain peity (al,birr) unless you spend (in )llahKs "ause) of that which you loveK.>0(?2A $hich is prose that is close to peotry, for if the two verses were arrain ed then they would be two versesLlines of poetry in the followin manner( ( put in )rabic) However they are not peotry, but rather a type of prose which is uni#ue. )t a time when you find the ;urKan sayin this type of prose, you find it sayin ( K+y the heaven, and at,Tari# (the ni ht,comer, ie the bri ht star)- and what will make you to know what at,Tari# (ni ht,comer) is& (It is) the star of piercin bri htness-There is no human bein but has a protector over him (or her). !o let man see from what he is createdD He is created from a water ushin forth , . Proceedin from between the back,bone and the ribsK.>@8(B,:A $hich is prose, and far from poetry in every respect. 6ou also find it syin ( K$e sent no 7essen er, but to be obeyed by )llahKs leaveK.>3(83A KIf they (hypocrites), when they had been un/ust to themselves, had come to you (7uhammad >sawA) and be ed )llahKs for iveness, and the 7essen er had ?0

be ed for iveness for them( indeed, they would have found )llah )ll,*or ivin , 7ost 7ercifulK.>3(83A K+ut no, by your Eord, they can have no iman, until they make you the /ud e in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance a ainst your decisions, and accept them with full submission.K>3(84A !o it len thens the passa e and style (nafas) in prose. 6ou find it sayin ( K)nd by the sun and its bri htness- )nd by the moon as it follows the sun- )nd by the day as it shows up (the sunKs) bri htness- )nd by the ni ht as it conceals it (the sun)K.>?B(B,3A It shortens the passa e and style (nafas) in prose. Iventhou both areprose from passa e to passa e. $hilst you will find it innovatin in free prose, thus it will be free in speach. !o it says( K. 7essen erD Eet not those who hurry to fall into disbelief rieve you, of such who say(%$e belive% with their mouths but their hearts have no faith. )nd of the Mews are men who listen much and ea erly to lies , listen to others who have not come to you. They chan e the words from their places- they say,%If you are iven thsi, take it, but if you are not iven thsi, then bewareD% )nd whomsoever )llah wants put in fitna (error), you can do nothin for him a isnt )llah. Those are the ones whose hearts )llah does not want to purify- for them there is a dis race in this world, and in the Hereafter a reat tormentK.>4(3BA 6ou will find it innovatin in rhymed prose, thus it will speak in rymed prose. !o it says( K. you (7uhammad >sawA) enveloped (in arments)D )rise and warnD )nd your Eord ()llah) ma nifyD )nd your arments purifyD )nd keep away from ar,ru/9 (the idols)D )nd ive not a thin in oreder to have more (or consider not your deeds of )llahKs obedienceas a favour to )llah). )nd be patient for the sake of your EordK. >:3(B,:A 6ou will find it superioir in i/diwa/ (prose which resembles rhymed or free prose) so it says( KThe mutual rivalry for pilin up of wordly thin s diverts you. =ntil you visit the raves. 2ayD 6ou shall come to knowD ) ain, 2ayD 6ou shall come to knowD 2ayD If you knew with a sure knowled e. Qerily, you shall see bla9in fireDK.>BC2(B,8A 6ou will find it len thenin the i9diwa/, so it will say( K+e cursed (the disbelievin ) manD How un rateful he isD *rom what thin did He create him& *rom nutfa (semen) He craeted them, and then set him due proportion- Then He makes the Path easy for him- Then He causes him to die, and puts him in a rave- Then, when it is His $ill, He will resurrect him (a ain). 2ay, but (man) has not done what He commanded him. Then let man look at his food. ?3

That $e pour forth water in abundance, and $e split he earth in clefts, and $e cause therin the rain to row. )nd rapes and clover plants ( reen fodder for the cattle). )nd olives and date,palms. )nd ardens, dense with many trees. )nd fruits and )bba (herba e etc)K.>@C(B:,0BA $hilst proceedin on a certain rhymed prose it will move to another type of ruymed prose. !o while prooceedin in rymed prose in the followin ( KThen, when the Trumpet is sounded- Truly, that Fay will be Hard Fay. *ra from easy for the disbelieversK.>:3(@,BCA It will abndon it in the verse immedaitly after it, so it says( KEeave 7e )lone (to deal) with whom I created )lone (ie al,walid b. al,7u hira al, 7akh9umi)D )nd then ranted him resources in abundance. )nd children to be by his sideD )nd made life smooth and comfortable for himD )fter all that he desires , that I should ive more- 2ayD Qerily, he has been stubborn and opposin .ur )yat (si nsLproofs). I shall obli e him to face a severe tormentDK.>:3(BB,B:A Then it will move from this rymed prose to another type in the verse that immediatley follows it, so it says( KQerily, he thou ht and plotted- !o let him be cursed, how he plottedD Then he thou ht-Then he frowned and he looked in bad tempered way- Then he turned back and he was proudK.>:3(B@,20A In this manner e'amine the whole ;urKan, you will not find it adherin to anytin from the style of the )rabs in terms of peotry or prose in their various types, and nor does it resemble any sayin from the sayin s of the )rabs or any sayin from humankind. Then you will indeed find its style is claer, forceful and beatiful which renders meanin s in a manner of e'pression whcih depicts the meanin s in the most accurate of depictions. $hen the meanin is delicate you find it sayin ( KQerily, for the 7utta#un (<odfearin ), there will be a success (Paradise)-<ardens and rapeyards. )nd maidens of e#ual a e. )nd a full cup (of wine)K.>:@,0B,03A usin delacate words and soft, flowin sentences. )nd when the meain is pureLelo#uent it says( KTruly, Hell is a place of ambush, a dwellin place for the Ta hun (Those who trans ress the limits set by )llah). They will abide therein for a e, nothin cool shall they taste therin, nor any drink. I'cept boilin water, and dirty wound dischar es. )n e'act recompense (accordin to their evil crimes)K.>:@(2B,28A usin rand words and pure sentences. )nd whne the meanin is pleasant it brin s a pleasnt words, so it says(

?4

K)nd he raised his parents to the throne and they fell down before him prostrateK. >B2(BCCA )nd when the meanin is ob/ectionable it comes with the appropriate word for this meanin , so it says( KIs it for you the males and for Him the females& That indeed is a division most unfairK.>40(22A )nd it says( K)nd lower your voice. Qerily, the harshest of all voices is the voice (brayin ) of the assK.>0B(B?A The renderin of meanin had been accompanied with this manner of e'pression which depicts the meanin s, ivin attention to words which have the soundLtones which moves the soul, when ima ini them, towards these meanin s and their comprehension. That is why it used to evoke in the listener who comprehends, due to the depth of its meanin s and the elo#uence of its e'pression, a tremendous humility until some of the )rab thinkers who were well versed in elo#uence almost prostated before it despite their disbelief and obstinacy. Then, indeed the one who scrutinises the words of the ;urKan and its sentences will find that the ;urKan ives attention to, when placin letters to ether, the sounds that come out from their places of articulation. !o the letters close to each other in articulation are placed close to each other in a word or sentence. )nd when there is a distance betwen the places of articulation, they are separated witha letter which eliminates the stran eness of the transition. )nd at the same time it makes a letter pleasant in articulation and li ht on the ears to be repeated like the refrain in music. It does not say Kkal baKi# a,mudfi#K but KkasayyibK. )nd nor doesit say Kal,huKkhuKK but Ksundusu khudrinK. )nd when it is necessary to use letters which are placed distanced from each other in a meanin which befits it and nothin else ives that meanin like the word Kdee9aK. There is no point in usin the word K9alimaK or K/aKiraK in its place even thou h the meanin is one. In additon to this precision in usa e, the letter which makes .......is claerly found in verses with some fre#uency. The Qerse of the Throne (ayatul kursiyy) for e'ample has the letter lam repeated in it 20 times in a pleasant manner which has an impact on the hearin such that it makes people prick up thier ears and want to hear more. In this manner, you will find that the ;urKan is a special enre. )nd you will find it reveals all of its meanin ss in the e'pression that befits it, in the words around it and the menin s with it. 6ou will not find that lackin in any of its verses. Its incapacitation (iK/a9) is claer in its style in terms of bein a special enre of speach which does not resembleany speach of human bein s or vise versa, and in terms of the application of meanin s in words and sentences which befit them and in terms of the effectLimpression of the words on the hearin of the one who comprehends its elo#uence and looks deeply intoits meanin s, so he becomes humble to the point of almost prostatin to it. )nd the effect it has on the hearin ?8

of the one who does not comprehend that, the rin and sound of these words captivate him and hold him spellbound in an incapacitatin manner towhich the listner humbles himslef by force even thou h he may not understand its meanin s. Therefore, it is a miracle which will remain a miracle until the *inal Hour.

6.78.9

he Sunnah

p.7=;

!unnah and hadith have the same meanin . $hat is intended by the word !unnah is what has been reported about the 7essen er of )llah (saw) from his sayin , action and consent. $hat has been reported about the !ahaba is also considered part of the !unnah because they used to live with the Prophet (peace and blessin s be upon him), listen to his sayin , witness his actions and narrate what they saw and heard. The hadith is considered a shariKa te't because )llah (swt) said( K$hatsoever the 7essen er >sawA you, abstain from itK.>4?(:A )nd He said( K2or does he speak of his own desire. It is only an revelation that is inspiredK.>40(0, 3A. 7any verses of the ;urKan have come as mu/mal (ambivalent) which the hadith has provided the details. !o prayer, for e'ample, has come as mu/mal (ambivalent), but it is the action of the Prophet (saw) that has clarified the times and manner of prayer. Inthis manner, many of the ahkams in the ;urKan used to come as mu/mal (ambivalent) and the 7essen er (saw) used to e'plain them. He (swt) said( K)nd $e have sent down unto you (. 7uhammad >sawA) the 5eminder so that you may e'plain to people what has been sent down to themK.>B8(33A. The !ahaba ( may )llah be pleased with all of them) were the ones who heard the sayin s of the Prophet (saw) and they saw his actions and condition. $hen they came across a problem in understandin an ayah or they disa reed about its tafseer or a rulin from it, they used to refer to the prophetic hadiths for clarification. In the be innin , the 7uslims used to rely on memory and accurate transmission without lookin at what they have written, by memorisin this knowled e like their memorisation of the +ook of )llah. $hen Islam had spread and the cities had e'panded, and the !ahaba were dispersedLscattered across the re ions and most of them had died and accuracy in transmission diminished. It became necessary to document the hadith and record it in writin . The a e of compilin the hadith oes back to the a e of the !ahaba. There were a number of persons amon st them who used to write and narrate from what they have written. It has been narrated about )bu Hurayra that he said( from the companions of the Prophet (saw) no one narrated more hadiths than me e'cept ?: ives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids

)bd )llah b. =mar. +ut he used to write them down, I did not. However, those sahaba who did write down the hadiths were scarce due to them bein few in number. 7ost of the !ahaba used to that in their hearts since they were forbidden from writin hadith in the be innin of Islam. 7uslim reported in his !ahih on the authority of )bu !aKeed al,Hhudri that he said that the 7essen er of )llah (saw) said(Fo not write down anythin from me. $hosoever writes down anythin from me other than ;urKan, let him erase it. 2arrate about me, there is no ob/ection.$hosoever deliberately lies about me, let him reserve his place in the hell,fire. That is why the !ahaba desistedLrefrained from writin down hadiths, rather they were content /ust to rely on memory and bein careful. The !ahaba ave stron attention to learnin the hadith. It has been provenLestablished that many !ahaba refrained from acceptin numerous reports. Ibn !hihab narrated from ;abisa that her randmother came to )bu +akr (r.a.), seekin her inheritance. He said( I did not find anythin mentioned in the ;urKan for you and I do not know that the 7essen er of )llah (saw) mentioned anythin for you Then he asked the people. )l,7u hira stood up and said( the 7essen er of )llah (saw) used to ive her a si'th. He said( Fo you have anyone who can corroborate this& !o 7uhammad b. 7aslama bore witness to the same thin so )bu +akr implemented this rulin for her. )l,Mariri narrated from )bu 2adra who narrated from )bu !aKeed that )bu 7usa ave salamLsalutations to =mar three times behind the door but he was not iven permission to enter. !o he turned back. =mar sent ..why did you returnLturn back& He said( I heard the 7essen er of )llah (saw) say( $hen one of you ives salam three times and you are not answered, then let him turn back. *rom this we see the cautiousnessLcarefulness of the !ahaba (may )llah be pleased with them) in the narration of hadith and their precautions in acceptin reports. It has even been narrated that =mar (r.a.) did not ive much attention to the narration of *atimah b. ;ays (which states) that there is no maintenance (nafa#a) or lod in (sukna) for the woman who has been irrevocably divorced (mabtuta) with three pronouncements. He said( $e shall not abandon the +ook of our Eord or the !unnah of our Prophet (saw) for the speech of a women we do notknow if she has memorised it or for ot it. This does not mean (that =mar left her hadith because) she is a woman, rather what it means is that we will not leave the +ook and !unnah for the speech of someone for whom it is not known whether she has memorised it or for ot it. The illah (reason) is whether she memorised it or not, and not because she is a woman. $hen the fitna (civil war) ensued after the murder of =thman (r.a.) and 7uslims started to disa ree amon themselves and parties came forth from them. The attention of every party was devoted to deducin evidences and reportin hadiths which supported their claims. !ome of them, when they needed a hadith to support a sayin or establish the proof for somethin , they would themselves concoct a hadith. There was a proliferation of such fabrications durin this period of disorder. )fter the fitna (civil war) had abated the 7uslims embarked upon checkin the hadith, they found that ?@

those fabrications had become widespraed. !o they laboured to separate the fabrications from the sound (sahih) hadiths. )nd when the a e of the !ahaba had come to an end and the TabiKun came after them. They proceeded on the same method and they followed the noble !ahaba in their attention to the hadith and its spread throu h the medium of narration. =ntil the rei ns of the Hhilafah were placed in the hands of the /ust Hhalifah K=mar b. K)bd al,K)9i9. He ordered the hadith to be written down at ther turn of the first century. +ukhari said in his !ahih in the kitab al,Kilm (The +ook of Hnowled e) that K=mar b. K)bd al,K)9i9 wrote to )bu +akr b. Ha9m (KEook for what you can find of the hadiths of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) and write them down. I fear for the lessons of knowled e and lossKdwindlin of scholars. Fo not accept anythin other than the hadith of the Prophet (saw) so that you may dissiminate knowled e and sit doewn to teach those who do not have knbowld e until they have knowld e. Qerily, knowld e is does not perish unless it is secretK Eikewise, he wrote to his K)mils (district overnors) to pursue the ahadith in the town centres (ummahat) of the 7uslim cities. The first one to record the hadith in accordance with the order of K=mar b. K)bd al,K)9i9 was 7uhammad b. 7uslim b.K=bayd )llah b. K)bd )llah b. !hihab a9,Juhri. He learned knowled e from a roup of youn !ahaba and senior TabiKin. Then the recordin of hadith became widespread in the eneration which followed the eneration of a9,Juhri. *rom amon those who collected the hadith they were Ibn Muray/ in 7akkah, 7alik in 7adinah, Hammad b. !alama in +asra , in Hufa !ufyan al,Thawri, in the al,!ham re ion al,)wa9aKi and others in the various Islamic lands. The hadith collections of those people were mi'ed with the sayin s of !ahaba and the fatwas (le al verdicts) of the TabiKin. )ll this was in the second century ).H. Then the transmitters of hadith be an to write their own compilations and compositionsLworks in the be innin of the third century. "ompilation of hadith continued consecutively until the appearance of Imam +ukhari. He was distin uished in the science of hadith and he wrote his renowned book - !ihih al, +ukhari in which he #uoted those hadith which he perceived to be authentic. He was followed in his tracks by 7uslim b. al,Ha//a/ who was a student of +ukhari. He wrote his famous book( !ihih 7uslim. Those two works are desi nated as the K!ahihaynK (the two sahih works). $hen the imams of hadith be an to record the hadith, they recorded them in the manner in which they found them. They did not omit anythin that reached them in the ma/ority of cases e'cept what was known to be fabricated and concocted. They compiled them with their isnads with they found in them, then they ri orously investi ated the statesLcondition of the transmitters until they knew whose narration can be accepted, and whose narration is to be re/ected and whose narration one should stopLdesist from acceptin . They followed that up with a study of the report and the state of the narration.!ince not everythin that is narrated by a transmitter who is characterised with trustworthiness and accuracy can be taken because he is susceptible to absent,mindednessLfor etfulness or error. ??

The hadith was a broad topic which encompassed all the Islamic disciplines. It used to include tafseer (;urKanic e'e esis), le islation and the !ira. The hadith transmitter used to narrate a hadith which would include the tafseer of an ayah of the 2oble ;urKan, or a hadith which contained a rulin on an incidentLevent, or he would narrate a hadith which would mention one of the battles, and so on and so forth... $hen the 7uslims be an to brin to etherLcollect all the hadiths and the hadith came to be put down in writin , the compilation of hadith be an in the various citiesLcapitals of the state. The compilation of hadith sin led out the hadith of the 7essen er (saw) from everythin other than it. Fue to this the hadith became independent from the fi#h /ust as it became independent from the tafseer. This was at the end of the first two hundred years. )fterwards the movement for the collection of hadith was active and it separated the sound hadith from the weak ones, describin the men (transmitters) and ave a rulin whether for or a ainst them.

6.78.:

he Sunnah is a Shari0a >vidence like the 3ur0an

p.7=?

The !unnah is a !hariKa Ividence (daleel !harKi) like the ;urKan. It is revelation from )llah (swt). "onfinin oneself to the ;urKan and leavin the !unnah is kufr buwah (manifest disbelief). It is the opinion of those outside the fold of Islam. )s for the !unnah bein revelation from )llah (swt), it is e'plicit from the ;urKan al, Hareem. He (swt) said( K!ay(%I warn you only by the revelation%K.>2B(34A )nd He (swt) said( K.nly this has been inspired to me, that I am a plain warnerK.>0@(:CA )nd He (swt) said( KI only follow that which is revealed to meK.>38(?A )nd He (swt) said( KI but follow what is revealed to me from my EordK.>:(2C0A These verses are definite in authenticity and definite in their meanin of restrictin what the 7essen er (saw) has brou ht, warned people of, and pronounced as comin from the revelation which is not open to any interpretation. Thus, the !unnah is revelation like the ;urKan. )s for the obli ation of followin the !unnah like the ;urKan al,Hareem, it is also e'plicitly stated in the ;urKan. )nd He (swt) said( K$hatsoever the 7essen er >sawA you, abstain from itK.>4?(:A )nd He (swt) said( BCC ives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids

KHe who obeys the 7essen er (saw), has indeed obeyed )llahK. >3(@CA )nd He (swt) said( K)nd let those who oppose the 7essen erKs commandment beware, lest some fitna (affliction) befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on themK.>23(80A )nd He (swt) said( KIt is not for a believer, man or woman, when )llah and His 7essen er have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decisionK.>00(08A )nd He (swt) said( K+ut no, by your Eord, they can have no iman, until they make you (. 7uhammad) /ud e in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance a ainst your decisions, and accept them with full submissionK.>3(84A )nd He (swt) said(K.bey )llah and obey the 7essen erK.>3(4?A He (swt) said( K!ay (. 7uhammad)(If you (really) love )llah then follow meK.>0(0BA !o, all of these ayahs are e'plicit and clear in the obli ation of followin 7essen er (saw) with re ards to what he has brou ht. )nd in considerin obedience to the 7essen er as obedience to )llah (swt). the the

!o the ;urKan and hadith are shariKa evidences in terms of the obli ation of followin what has come thereinL what has been mentioned in them. The hadith is like the ;urKan in this respect. Therefore, it is not allowed for someone to say( we have the +ook of )llah from which we will take (rulin s), because what one understands from this statement is that the hadith has been abandoned. 5ather, it is imperative that the !unnah is mentioned to ether with the +ook. !o the hadith is taken as a shariKa evidence /ust as it is taken from the ;urKan. It is not allowed for anythin to ensue from a 7uslim which is perceived to mean that the ;urKan is sufficient, e'cludin the !unnah. The 7essen er (saw) has alluded to this. It has been reported that the Prophet (saw) said( 6ou may alsmost find a man amon st you who sits on his bed narratin my hadith sayin (+tween me and you is the +ook of )llah. $hat we find halan in the ;urKan we will make halal and what we find haram in it we will make haram. )s for what the 7essen er of )llah forbade, it is like what )llah has forbiddenK )nd in the narrationof Mabir, which oes back to the Prophet, he (saw) said( $hosoever comes to know a hadith about me and he re/ects it. He has re/ected three ( )llah, His 7essen er and the one who informed him of the hadithK. Therefore, it is wron to measureLcompare the ;urKan with the hadith, if the hadith does not a ree with it we abandon it. +ecause this leads to abandonin the !unnah if it came to specify the ;urKan, restrict it or elaborate its ambivalent (mu/mal) parts, since it appears that what the hadith states doesnot accord with the ;urKan or it is not found in the ;urKan. Eike the BCB

hadiths which addLattach branches to the foundation (asl). Indeed, the rules mentioned in the hadith have not been mentioned in the ;urKan. Ispecially, many of the detailed rules whichhave not been brou ht by the ;urKan but mentioned by only the hadith. That is why the hadith is not compared to the ;urKan. $hat the hadith has mentioned is accepted and anythin other than it is re/ected. Indeed, the order re ardin this is that when a hadith mentions somethin which contradicts what has come in the ;urKan as definite meanin , then the hadith is re/ected by on the basis of its meanin ie the te't (matn). +ecause its meanin contradicts the ;urKan. That is like what has been narrated about*atimah bint ;ays that she said(K7y husband divorced me three times in the time of the 7essen er of )llah (saw). !o I went to the Prophet (saw) but he did not allow me to et lod in (sukna) or maintenance (nafa#ah). This hadith is re/ected because it contradicts the ;urKan. It contradicts His (swt) sayin ( KEod e them (the divorced women) where you dwell, accordin >84(8A to your meansK.

Therefore, the hadith is re/ected because it has contradicted definite te't and definite meanin of the ;urKan. )s for when the hadith does not contradict the ;urKan since it includes thin s not brou ht by the ;urKan or it is an addition to what is in the ;urKan, then the hadith is taken /ust like the ;urKan. It should not be said - the ;urKan and whay has been ,mentioned in it suffices for us since )llah has ordered us to (follow) them both to ether and it is obli atory to believe in them both to ether.

6.78.= >ducing proofs using the Sunnah@>ducing Sunnah as proof p.7A6

It is known that the !unnah is the speech, actions and silence of the 7essen er (saw). )nd that it is obli atory to follow the sunnah like the ;urKan. However, it has to be established that the 7essen er (saw) is the one who has said this sayin , that he(saw) did this action or was silent over this sayin oraction. )nd when the !unnah has been proven, then it is correct to educe it for the shariKa rules and beliefs. It is a proof to say that this thin established by the !unnah is a !hariKa rule or one of the articles of belief. However, the authenticity ofthe !unnah is either definite (#atKi), such as when a roup of tabi,tabiKin transmit from a roup of tabiKin from a roup of sahaba who narrated it about the Prophet (saw) on the condition that each roup is of a sufficient number such as to preclude thepossibility of an a reement on a lie. This is the mutawatir !unnah (recurrently transmitted sunnah) or the mutawatir report. )s for when the !unnahKs authenticity is speculative (9anni), such as when a sin le narrator or separate sin le narrators transmit from a tabiKi,tabiKin from a sin le tabiKi or separate sin le tabiKiKs from a sin le sahaba or separate sin le sahabas who narrated from the Prophet (saw). "onse#uently, the !unnah, with respect to its eduction, comprises of two cate ories - the mutawatirreport and the solitary report (khabar al,ahad). )s for the mashur or mustafid, it is the report transmitted via sin le narrators who narrated from them Prophet (saw), then the report became widely known in the a e of the tabiKin or the tabi,tabiKin. !o itis one of the solitary reports (khabar al, BC2

ahad), and it is not a third cate ory. +ecause in eduction it is not hi her than the level of a khabar al,ahad. It definitely does not reach the level of mutawatir. )s lon as the transmission is open to the presence of solitary transmitters in any tier whether amon the !ahaba, TabiKin or Tabi TabiKin, then it is considered a solitary report even if the last two tiers composed of roups. Thus, the !unnah is either mutawatir (recurrect) or ahad (solitary), there isnot third cate ory. The khabar al,ahad, if it is sahih (sound) or hasan ( ood), is considered a proof for all of the shariKa rules and it is obli atory to act upon them. $hether the rules pertain to Kibadat (worships), muKamalat (transactions) or punishments (Ku#ubat). Iducin it as proof is correct. The use of solitary reports in establishin shariKa rules is proven, on which the !ahaba (r.a.) have a concensus (i/maK). The evidence for that is that the !hariKa has reco nised testimony in establishin a le al case, which is a solitary report. !o acceptin the narration of a !unnah and acceptin the solitary report is compared with the acceptance of a testimony. That is because it has been proven by the te't of the 2oble ;urKan that a rulin can be passed onthe basis- of two male witnesses or one man and two female witnesses re radin money, on the basis of testimonies by four witnesses in 9ina and two witnesses for hadd punishments and e#ual retribution (#isaas). The 7essen er of )llah passed /ud ement on the basis of a testimony by one witness and the oath of the sahib al,ha##, and he accepted the testimony of one woman re ardin sucklin and all of these are solitary reports. )ll the !ahaba proceeded on this and no one nrrated from them anythin that is tothe contrary. The /ud ment is bindin by the preponderance of the truth over the lie as lon as the uncertainties which make the report to be suspected as a lie are absent or not proven. This bindin (rulin ) is nothin other than actin upon the solitary report. It is obli ated by #iyas that we act upon the solitary report narrated about the Prophet (saw) to outwei h the truth as lon as the narrator is /ust (Kadl), trustworthy (thi#a) and accurate (dabit) and he has met the person from which he has narrated the report. Then the doubt of suspected lyin is absent and this doubt is not proven. !o the acceptance of the solitary report about the 7essen er (saw) and educin it as proof for a hukm is like the acceptance of a testimony and ivin the rulin accordin to the /ud ement that has been passed. Therefore, the solitary report is a proof as evidenced by what the ;urKan has uided us to. 2ot to mention that the 7essen er (saw) said(K7ay )llah make a servant radiant, the one who hears my sayin and memorises it and deliverLtransmits it. Perhaps the one carryin the knowled e is not a fa#ih and perhaps he will carry the knowled e to someone who is more knowled eable than himK. The 7essen er (saw) says Kmay )llah make a servant radiantK and not KservantsK. K a servantK (Kabdan) is eneric applicable to one or more persons. !o he is praisin the sin le and other sin le persons for transmittin his hadith. 7oreover, the Prophet (saw) is callin people to memorise his sayin and transmit it. !o it is fard on every 7uslim who hears it (whether one or more persons) to transmit it, and his delivery and transmission of the ProphetKs sayin to others will have no effect if his statement is not accepted. !o the call of the Prophet (saw) to transmit his sayin s is acall for it to be accepted as lon as the person to whom BC0

the hadith is transmitted believes that this is the speech of the 7essen er. ie as lon as the transmitter is trustworthy, honest, <od fearin , accurate and he knows what he is conveyin and what he is leavin out, until the suspicion of lyin is one and the truth is preponderant. This shows that the solitary report is a proof from the e'plicit te't of the !unnah and accordin to what the !unnah has indicated. In addition to this, the Prophet (saw) sent at one time twelve messen ers to twelve kin s invitin them to Islam. Ivery messen er constituted one person to the direction he was sent. If the conveyance (tabli h) of the daKwa was not obli atory to follow throu h a solitary report then the 7essen er (saw) would not be content to send one person to convey Islam. !o this is a e'plicit evidence from the action of the 7essen er (saw) to say that the solitary report is a proof in the conveyance of Islam. The 7essen er (saw) used to send letters to overnors in the hand of solitary messen ers, it did not occur to to any of his overnors to abandone implementin his order because the messen er was a sin le person. 5ather they adhered to what the messen er brou ht from the Prophet (saw) in terms of rulin sand orders. That is also an e'plicit evidence from the action of the 7essen er (saw) for the fact that the solitary report is a proof to obli e us to act upon the shariKa rules and it is proof for for the orders and prohibitions of the Prophet (saw). .therwise the 7essen er (saw) would not be content to send /ust one person to the overnor. $hat is proven about the !ahaba in what has become well known about them and what has been narrated about them is that they used to take the solitary report when they trusted the narrator. The proven facts in this matter e'emptLe'clude any limitation or restriction and nor has anythin been reported about any one of them that they re/ected a solitary report because it has been narrated by a sin le narrator. 5ather theyused to re/ect the solitary report because they did not trust its narrator. Therefore, the solitary report is a proof for shari rules and in conveyin Islam as evidenced by the Hitab, !unnah, I/maK (consensus) of the !ahaba (may )llah be pleased with them).

6.78.A he solitary report (khabar al)ahad) is not a proof for beliefs p.7A:
The belief in the 7essen er 7uhammad (saw) obli ed that we obey and follow him. )nd it obli es us to educe Islam, in terms of a#eeda and rules, from his !unnah. )llah (swt) said( KIt is not for a believer, man or woman, when )llah and His 7essen er have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. )nd whosoever disobeys )llah and His 7essen er, he has indeed strayed in a plain mannerK.>00(08A )nd He (swt) said(K.bey )llah and obey the 7essen erK.>3(4?A

BC3

)nd He (swt) said( K$hatsoever the 7essen er >sawA you, abstain from itK.>4?(:A ives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids

)llah (swt) in the 2oble ;urKan has censuredLrebuked the followin knowled e (9ann). He (swt) said( KThey have no (certain) knowled e, they follow nothin >3(B4:A )nd He (swt) said(

of speculative

but con/ecture (9ann)K.

K)nd most of them follow nothin but con/ecture. "ertainly, con/ecture (9ann) can be of no avail a ainst the truthK.>BC(08A )nd He (swt) said( K)nd if you obey most of those on earth, they will mislead you far away from )llahKs Path. They follow nothin but con/ecture (9ann)K.>8(BB8A )nd He (swt) said( KThey follow but a uess (9ann) and that which they themselves desireK. >40(20A )nd He (swt) said( K$hile they have no knowled e thereof. They follow but a uess (9ann), and verily, uess (9ann) is no substitute for the truthK.>40(2@A He (swt) said( KThey follow but a uess (9ann) and that which they themselves desireK. >40(20A KHave you then considered al,Eat and al,K=99a. )nd 7anat, the other third& Is it for you the males and for Him the females& That indeed is a division most unfairD They are but names which you have named, , you and your fathers, , for which )llah has sentdown no authority. They follow but a uess (9ann)...K >40(B?,20A K)nd if you obey most of those on earth, they will mislead you far away from )llahKs Path. They follow nothin but con/ecture (9ann)K.>8(BB8A )s for what has been reported about the Prophet (saw) that he sent one messen er to the kin s and one messen er to his K)mils. )lso what has been reported that the !ahaba used to accept the sayin of a sin le 7essen er in informin them of the shariKa rule such as (the oredr to) face the HaKba, the order BC4

prohibitin alcohol, the 7essen erKs sendin of K)li (r.a.) to the people to read to them sura Kal,TawbahK, he was one person etc etc. This does not indicate the acceptance of the khabar al,wahid in K)#eeda. 5ather they indicate the acceptance of khabar al,wahid in conveyance (tabli h), whether in conveyin the shariKa rules or conveyin Islam. It should not be claimed that acceptin the conveyance of Islam is a conveyance of the )#eeda. +ecause acceptin the conveyance of Islam is an acceptance of a report and not the acceptance of K)#eeda. )s evidenced by the fact that the one to whom a report is conveyed must use his intellect re ardin that which has reached him. If the decisive evidence is established for him, he shouldbelieve it and he will be accounted if he disbelieves in it. Thus, the re/ection of a report about Islam is not considered kufr, but the re/ection of Islam for which the decisive evidence has been established for him is what is considered to be kufr. Therefore, conveyin Islam is not considered part of K)#eeda. There is no dispute about the acceptance of a report of a sin le person in conveyance. )ll the reported incidents indicate that conveyance constituted either the conveyance of Islam, ;urKan or rules. )s for the conveyance of K)#eeda, there is not a sin le evidence for aducin a belief with the khabar al, ahad. Therefore, the evidence of K)#eeda must be certain, ie a definite evidence. +ecause the K)#eeda is definite, cate orical and decisive. It is not definite, cate orical or decisive unless it is a definite evidence. Therefore, the evidence must be ;urKan orhadith mutawatir such that both are definite in meanin . It has to be taken in K)#eeda and !hariKa rules. The one who re/ects it is char ed with kufr as well as the one who denies what it indicates, whether it is a belief or a !hariKa rule.

6.78.? he difference between the 0Aqeeda and the Shari0a rule (hukm Shar0i) p.7?7
Ein uistically, a#eeda means the matter on which then heart has tied a knot. The meanin of tyin a knot is to make up ones mind ie believe it decisively. This is eneral, it includes belief in everythin . However, the belief in a thin is e'amined in terms of the thin in which conviction has taken place. If it was a fundamental matter or branchin out from a fundamental matter then it is correct to call it an a#eeda and it is correct for one to take it as a fundamental criterion for other beliefs. +y the heart tyin a knot on it there will be clear effect. If the thin in which one has conviction is not a fundamental matter or branchin out from a fundamental matter then it will not be part of the beliefs. +ecause the heart tyin a knot around it will not have a clear effect. In believin in it one will not find in it any realityof benefit. )s for when the heartKs tyin a knot on it has an effect, it will push him to specify his stance towards it in terms of belief and denial, then it will be part of Ka#eeda. The Ka#eeda is a comprehensive thou ht concernin the universe, man and life, BC8

what preceded this life of the world and what is to follow it, and the relationship of this life with what preceded it and what is to follow it. This is the definition of everyKa#eeda and it applies to the Islamic Ka#eeda. Included in it are the unseen matters. !o the belief in )llah, His an els, His books, His 7essen ers, the East Fay, divine fate and destiny (#ada wal #adar), that ood and bad is from )llah (swt) is the Islamic Ka#eeda. The belief in Paradise (/annah), Hellfire (nar), an els, shaytans etc is from the Islamic Ka#eeda, thou hts and whatever relates to it. )lso reports and the non,sensibleLperceptible unseen thin s that relate to them are considered from Ka#eeda. )s for the !hariKa rules- it is the address of the Ee islatorLEaw iver relatin to the actions of servants. In other words they are thou hts relatin to an action or description of the human bein as part of his actions. Thus, leasin , sellin , dealin with usury, custody, representation (wikala), prayer (salah), establishin a khalifah or the Hudud (punishments) of )llah, the fact that the khalifah should be a 7uslim and the witness be /ust and the ruler be a man etc )ll of these are considered to be from the !hariKa rules. Tawheed (.neness of )llah), 7essa e (5isalah), resurrection (baKth), truthfulness of the 7essen er, infallibility of the Prophets, that fact that the ;urKan is )llahKs speech (kalam), reckonin (hisab) and torment (Ka9aab) etc. )ll of this is considered part of the K)#eeda.Thus, the articles of belief (a#aid) are thou hts that are believed. )nd the shariKa rules are the address which relates to the action of the human bein . Thus, the two rakats of fa/r is a !hariKa rule in terms of prayin them. )nd the belief that they are from )llah constitutes K)#eeda.!o prayin the two rakats !unnah of fa/r is !unnah. If one does not pray it he is not blamed. If he prays it he will et the reward like the two rakats of 7a hrib prayer, both of which are the same in terms of the !hariKa rule. )s for in terms of the K)#eeda, belief in the two rakats of fa/r is definiteLinevitable matter, re/ectin them is disbelief (kufr). +ecause they have been proven by way of mutawatir (recurrent lines of transmission). )s for belief in the two rakats of ma hrib, it is re#uested but if one re/ects them it is not considered kufr because they have been proven by a speculative evidence, which is the khabar al,ahad (solitary report). The solitary report is not a proof in articles of belief (Ka#aid). "uttin the hand of the thief is a shariKa rule but the fact that it is from )llah and believin it is from the K)#eeda. The prohibition of usury is a !hari-a rule. +ut, believin that it is rule from )llah (swt) is K)#eeda etc. Therefore, there is a difference between K)#eeda and the !hariKa rule. K)#eeda is Iman, which is the definite belief which is in a reement with the reality based on an evidence. In this decisiveness and certainty is re#uired. The shariKa rule is the address of the Ee islatorLlaw iver pertainin to the actions of the servants. In this speculative knowled e (9ann) is sufficient. Thus, comprehension of the thou ht and the belief in whether it has a reality or not is K)#eeda. )nd the comprehension of a thou ht and considerin it or not considerin it a solution for an action of a human bein is a !hariKa rule. In order to consider the thou ht as a solution the speculative evidence is sufficient. )s for in order to believe in the presence of a reality of a thou ht, one must to have a definite evidence (daleel #atKi). *rom P B8: BC:

I7tihad and Taqleed

)llah (swt) addressed the whole of mankind throu h the Prophethood of our master 7uhammad (saw) He (swt) said( G. mankind D Qerily, I am sent you all as the 7essen er of )llah.1>:(B4@A )nd He (swt) said ( G . mankind D Qerily, there has come to you a convincin proof (7uhammad >sawA) from your Eord.1>3(B:3A)nd He (swt) said ( G. mankind D Qerily, there has come to you the 7essen er (7uhammad >sawA) with the truth from your Eord.1>3(B:CA )nd He addressed the people and the 7uslims with his ahkam. He (swt) said ( G. mankindD *ear your Eord and be dutiful to Him D Qerily, the earth#uake of the Hour (of /ud ment) is a terrible thin .1>22(BA He said (G. mankind D +e dutiful to your Eord, $ho created you from a sin le person1. >3(BA He said ( G . you who believe D *i ht those of the disbelievers who are close to you and let them find harshness in you.1.>?(B20A )nd He said ( G. you who believe D )pproach not the prayer when you are in a state of into'ication.1 >3(30A )nd He said ( G . you who believe D $hen you o to (fi ht) in the Path of )llah, verify (the truth).1>3(?3A )nd He said ( . you who believe D !tand out firmly for /ustice, as witnesses to )llah, even thou h it be a ainst yourselves.1 >3(B04A !o for the one who has heard the address it became incumbent on him to understand it and believe it. )nd the one believed in it became incumbant on him to understand it and act upon it, because it is a Hukm !har1i (!hari1a rule). !o the basis for a 7uslim is that he himself should understand the Hukm (rule) of )llah from the address of the Ee islator. !ince, the address has been aimed directly at the people by the Ee islator and not aimed only at the 7u/tahidin or the G=lama but to all the mukallafin (le ally responsibleLcapable). Thus it became an obli ation on the mukallafin to understand this address until they are able to practise it since it is impossible to act accordin to the address without comprehendin it. Thus, the inference (istinbat) of )llah1s hukm became fard on all the mukallifin. ie i/tihad became fard on all the mukallafin (le ally responsible). "onse#uently, the basis of a mukallaf (le ally responsible) is that he adopts the Hukm of )llah himself from the address of the Ee islator because he has been addressed by this speech, which is the hukm of )llah. However, the reality of the mukallifin (le ally responsible) is that there is a disparity in their understandin and comprehension and in their (aptitude to) learn. )nd they differ in terms of knowled e and i norance. Therefore, it is impossible for all of them to deduce all the !hari1a rules from the evidences. ie it is impossible for all the mukallafin to be mu/tahidin. !ince the ob/ective is to understand the address and act upon it then the understandin of the address ie i/tihad is fard on all the mukallafin (le ally responsible). )nd since it is impossible for all the mukallafin to understand the address for themselves due to the disparity of their understandin and comprehension and the disparity in learnin . Then the obli ation of i/tihad becomes one of sufficiency (Gala al,Hifaya). If some undertake it the rest are absolved of the sin. Therefore, it became obli atory on the le ally responsible 7uslims that there should be 7u/tahidin amon st them who will derive the !hari1a rulin s. BC@

Therefore, the reality of the mukallafin and that of the Hukm !har1i means that there would be amon st the 7uslims only the cata ories of mu/tahidin and mu#allidin. +ecause, the one who adopts the hukm himself directly from the evidence is a mu/tahid, and the one who #uestions the mu/tahid about a hukm !har1i1 is a mu#allid irrespective of whether the #uestioner asked in order - to learn and act upon it, to learn and teach it to others or to learn it only. He mu#allid is considered a mu#allid when he asks someone who is not a mu/tahid but knows the hukm !har1i and is able to tell others, whether the one who was asked was a learned person or a layman. Thus, they are all followers (mu#allid) of others in this hukm even if he did not know the one who deduced it, because the mukallaf is re#uired to adopt the hukm !har1i and not follow any particular person. +ein a mu#allid means that he has adopted a hukm !hari, via a person, which he has not deduced himself. It does not mean he followed a particular person because the issueLsub/ect matter is the hukm !hari and not the person. The difference between the mu#allid and the mu/tahid is that the mu/tahid deduces the Hukm !hari from the shari1a evidence himself and the mu#allid is the one who adopts the hukm !hari which has been deduced by someone other than him whether he knew the one who derived it or not, as lon as he trusts that this is a shari1a rule. It is not lawful ta#leed to adopt the opinion of any ordinary person >9ayd min nasA which ori inates from him or from such and such scholar, thinker or philosopher. 2on of this is le itimate ta#leed. 5ather it is tantamount to adoptin somethin which is other than Islam and it has been prohibited by the !hari1a. It is not allowed for the 7uslim to do that since )llah has ordered us to adopt from the 7essen er 7uhammad (saw) and not from anybody else whoever he may be. He (swt) said ( G )nd whatsoever the 7essen er (saw) ives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it).1 >4?(:A ) prohibition has been mentioned with re ards to adoptin an opinion which ori inates from the people. !o in the hadith ( G)llah will not deprive you of knowled e after he has iven it to you, but it will be taken away throu h the death of the reli ious learned men with their knowled e. Then there will remain i norant people who, when consulted, will ive verdicts accordin to their opinions whereby they will mislead others and o astray.1 ie they ive fatwa accordin to their own opinions which emanate from them. The opinion which has been deduced is not considered as an opinion ori inatin from the one who deduced it. .n the contrary it is (considered) a hukm !hari. )s for what is re arded as a (mere) opinion, it is the opinion which emanates from a person. That is why the 7essen er (saw) called it a bid1a (innovation). )nd so in the authentic hadith the Prophet (saw) said ( GThe best speech is the +ook of )llah and the best uidance is the uidance of 7uhammad (saw). )nd the evil matter are the newly invented issues and every bida (innovation) is a mis uidance.1 The Gnewly invented issues1 are the innovations. They are whatever contradicts the Hitab, !unnah, I/ma1 in terms of the ahkam whether by action or speech. )s for what is other than the ahkam such as actions and thin s it does not fall under the word Ginnovation (bid1a)1.

BC?

.1 I7tihad

".165

Ein uistically i/tihad is the e'ertion of ones utmost to realise a matter which entails a measure of discomfort and difficulty. )s for the definition of the =suli scholars, it is specifically the e'penditure of ones ener ies in seekin a preponderant opinion (9ann) about a thin from the !hari1a rules in a manner the mu/tahid feels unable to e'ert any more. I/tihad is proven by the te't of the hadith. It has been narrated about the Prophet (saw) that he said to )bu 7usa when he sent him to 6emen ( GMud e by the book of )llah and if you do not find (solution there) then by the !unnah of the 7essen er of )llah. )nd if you do not find it there then e'ercise your own I/tihad.1 )nd it has been narrated about him (saw) that he said to 7u1a9 and )bu 7usa al,)sh1ari havin dispatched them to 6emen ( G +y what will you /ud e &1 They said ( If we do not find the hukm in the Hitab and the !unnah we will make analo y between two issues. $hatever is closer to the truth we will act upon that. This analo y (#iyas) by them is i/tihad by derivin the hukm. The Prophet (saw) accepted that from them. It has been reported about him (saw) that he said to 7u1a9 when he sent as $ali ( overnor) to 6emen ( G +y what will you pass Mud ement &1 He said ( +y the +ook of )llah. The Prophet (saw) said ( If you do not find it there & He said ( +y the sunnah of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) .He said ( )nd if you do not find it & He said( GI will e'ercise my own i/tihad1 He (saw) said( GPraise be to )llah who has made the messen er of the 7essene er of )llah to accord with what )llah and His 7essen er loves.1 This is clear in the Prophet1s acceptance of 7u1a9 to practise i/tihad. .ne cannot find anyone who disputes the le ality of i/tihad. )n i/ma1 (consensus) of the !ahaba has taken place on the #uestion of /ud in by an opinion which has been deduced from the !hari1a evidence ie they have a reed on the use of i/tihad on any incidents that take place for which no (clear) te't has been found. )nd this is what has reached us in successive reports in which there is no doubt. .ne such report is the sayin of )bu +akr when he was asked about the Halala. He said ( GI will speak about it accordin to my opinion. If it is correct then it is from )llah. If it is a mistake then it is from me and from !haytan and )llah has nothin to do with it. Halala is the one who has no children or parents left.1 His statement (GI will speak about it accordin to my opinion1 does not mean this opinion is from him. 5ather it means I will say accordin to what I understand from the e'pression GHalala1 in the verse. Halala in the )rabic lan ua e applies to three people- the one who did not leave a child or parent >....A , and the relatives from other than the direction of the child or father. $hich id these menain s apply to the word kalala in the verse & )bu +akr (r.a.) understood it to have one of those meanin s in His (swt) sayin ( GIf the man or woman whose in hereitence is in #uestion has left niether ascendents or descendents.1>3(B2A kalala is the predicate (khabar) of the verb Gto be1 (kana). ie if the man leaves no ascendents or descendents to inherit after him. He probably understtod this also from the second verse ( G !ay ( O )llah directs (thus) about al,Halala (those who leave niether descendents nor ascendents as heirs). If it is a man that dies leavin no child.1>3(B:8A )nd also from the hadith which has been reported about the cause of the verse ( G !ay ( O )llah directs (thus).N >3(B:8A It has been reported that the 7essen er (saw) visited Mabir b. G)bd )llah who was ill. He said ( I leave no BBC

ascendents or discents (inni kalala). $hat shall I do with my wealth & Thus the verse ( GIf it is a man that dies1 > >3(B:8A was revealed. This opinion which )bu +akr stated is an i/tihad and it does not emenate from himself. )nd from that i/tihad also )bu +akr made the mother1s mother inherit to the e'clusion of the father1s mother.1 The application of the hukm on issues which are classified under it are not considered part of i/tihad but only as the comprehension of the !hari1a rule. !ince i/tihad is the inference of a hukm from the te't whether from its wordin , understandin , from its indication or from the Gillah which has been mentioned in the te't. $hether the inference was an inference of a eneral hukm (hukm kulli) from a eneral evidence (daleel kulli) - such as the inference that a punishment should be imposed on the looterLplunderer since the le islator made the cuttin of the hand a hadd punishment for theft. .r if it was a inference of a partialLdetailed hukm (hukm /u91i) from a partialLdetailed evidence (daleel /u91i) - such as the deductionLderivation of the hukm of employmentLhirin since the Prophet hiredLemployed a worker from +ani al,Fu1l as an e'perienced uide and from His (swt) sayin ( G Then if they ive suck to the children for you, ive them their due payment.1 >84(8A .r like the inference of the hukm of ivin the worker his wa e after he has finished his work due to the Prophet1s (saw) sayin ( G<ive the worker his wa e before his sweat dries.1 It is a detailed evidence for a detailed hukm. !o this inference of a eneral hukm from a eneral evidence and the inference of a detailed hukm from a detailed evidence, all of this is considered i/tihad because it is the adoption of a hukm from a daleel whether the hukm was eneral which was e'tracted from a eneral evidence or the hukm was specific which was e'tracted from a specific evidence. )ll of it constitutes e'ertin one1s outmost in understandin the hukm from the evidence. )s for the application of the hukm on new issues which fall within its meanin or is classified under it bein one of its constituents, this is not re arded as i/tihad. *or e'ample, )llah has forbidden carrion. $hen a cow is killed by strikin a blow to its head until it dies, its meat is not eaten because it has died as carrion and it was not lawfully slau htered and the flesh of carrion is haram. )nd the hukm of tinned meat, which comes from the cow which has not been slau htered lawfully, is that eatin and sellin it is haram in the !hari1a. This hukm has not been deduced yet it is classified under the word Gcarrion1. *or e'ample, the slau htered animals of the Fruse is not eaten because it has not been slau htered by 7uslim or someone from the people of the book. !o this hukm, ie the prohibition of eatin the slau hter animal of the Fruse, has not been deduced. 5ather a hukm which is already known has been applied on it, which is the prohibition of eatin the slau hter animals of disbelieves who are not from the people of the +ook. *or instance, the permissibility of a woman bein a member of the ma/lis al,!hura is a !hari1a rule. This hukm has not been deduced, rather the hukm of $ikala (representation) has been applied to it. The membership of the ma/lis al,shura is the representation of an opinion. It is allowed for the woman to dele ate others to put forward opinions and she can represent others in their opinion. *or e'ample, Jakat is not iven to anyone other than the 1 please note - half of p. B?? and p.2CC will be submitted later. I wish to check some aspects relatin to the translation of these passa es. BBB

one who is poor and his poverty is ascertained by speculative indications for which evidence has been furnished for its le alLlawful consideration. Mud ement is not passed without the statement of a /ust person (Gadl) and his trustworthiness (Gadala) is known by (least amount of ) doubt. )nd similarly, someone makin in#uiries to find out the #ibla (direction of prayer) until the #ibla is known after the investi ation and others such e'amples. These thin s are not arrived at by way of i/tihad which is the inference of rules from the !hari1a evidences but by way of applyin the rules on the detailedLpartial issues (/u91iyyat) or, by understandin the detailedLpartial issues and the applyin the rulin s on them. This practise falls under the scope of the /udiciary (#ada) and does not come under i/tihad. This practise is not considered i/tihad because it does not determine a specific shari1a rule but only applies a !hari1a rule on an incident which has already been decided and understood, when another incident came which is of the same type as the initial incident itself. $hat is applied on it is that which was applied on the initial incident and so it is not considered i/tihad. )fter understandin them from the evidence the shari1a rules re#uire application and not i/tihad, which is contrary to the !hari1a te'ts which re#uire i/tihad in order to adopt the hukm !hari. Therefore, the le itimate i/tihad which is re arded as such, is e'ertion of ones utmost to understand the shari1a te'ts in order to deduce the rulin from it. It is not the e'ertion of ones utmost in applyin the !hari1a rules on the issues that are classified under it. The te'ts of the Islamic !hari1a re#uire the 7uslims to perform i/tihad. This is because the shari1a te'ts have not come in a detailed manner but have come as eneral which are applicable to all incidents resultin from human kind. =nderstandin them and deducin the hukm of )llah from them re#uire the e'pendin of effort to adopt the hukm !har1i for each incident. Iven the te'ts which have come in an elaborate manner and deal with details, they are in fact eneral (Gamm) and ambivalentLe#uivocal (mu/mal). *or e'ample, the verses of inheritance have come in a elucidatory manner and deal with minute details, despite that in terms of the partial rules they still re#uire comprehension and deduction in many issues such as the issue of kalala and issues of disinheritance (ha/ab). )ll the 7u/tahidun take the view that the child (walad) >yuh/ab al,ikhwaA whether it be a male or female because the word Gwalad1(child) refers to all children, boy or irl. Ibn G)bbas holds the view that the irl is not disinherited because the word Gwalad1 refers to a male only. This shows that even the te'ts which treat details have come as ambivalentLe#uivocal (mu/mal), and understandin and deducin a hukm from them re#uires i/tihad. However, these te'ts which deal with details re#uire application to newly occurrin incidents. This application however is not what is meant by i/tihad. $hat is intended is the inference of a hukm from its >ambivalent import,mu/malihaA even if they deal with details. They are eneral (Gamm) and ambivalentLe#uivocal (mu/mal) and they the are le islative te'ts. It is the nature of le islative te'ts to be eneral and ambivalentLe#uivocal even if they touch on details. The shari1a te'ts, whether they are from the +ook or from the !unnah are - the best shari1a te'ts for the field of thou ht, the widest of scope for eneralisation, and the most fertile round to cultivate eneral principles. )nd in themselves they are suitable BB2

as le islative te'ts for all peoples and nations. )s for bein the best te'ts for the field of thou ht that is observable from the way in which they encompass all types of relationships. This is because relationships of all types, whether relationships between individuals or relationships between the state and citi9ens or relationships between states, peoples and nations. However new and multifarious these relationships may be, the thou ht is able to deduce rulin s for them from those !hari1a te'ts.They are the best te'ts for the field of thou ht from all the !hari1a te'ts. )s for it havin the best scope for eneralisation, that is clear from its sentences, words, style of formulatin (e'pressions) in terms of its encompassment of the wordin (mantu#), understandin (mafhum), meanin Lindication (dalala) and /ustification (ta1leel) and analo y to the Gillah which makes the inference for every action feasible, permanent and inclusive. This insures that it is able to encompass everythin , bein complete and eneral. )s for it bein the the most fertile round to cultivate eneral principles, that is apparent from the plenitude of eneral meanin s which these te'ts contain. It is apparent from the nature of the eneral meanin s. That is because the ;ur1an and the hadith have come alon broad lines even when touchin on details. The nature of these broad lines is that they ive the Hitab and !unnah eneral meanin s under which eneral and specific issues can be classified. )nd it is from this the plenitude of eneral meanin s come. In addition, these eneral meanin s contain real and perceptible issues and not hypothetical issues that have been arrived at theoretically or lo ically. )nd at the same time they are there to solve the problems of man and not only for specific individuals ie to clarify the rulin for the action of human bein s, whatever instinctual manifestation may have pushed them to this action. That is why they are applicable to diverse meanin s and many rulin s. Thus, the !hari1a te'ts are the most fertile round for cultivatin eneral principles. This is the reality of the !hari1a te'ts from the an le of le islation. )nd when we include also that they have come for human kind in their capacity as human bein s and that they are le islation for all nations and peoples, it becomes clear that the presence of 7u/tahidin is essential - to understand these te'ts le islatively and apply them in all a es and to adopt the shari1a rule for each incident. 2ew events take place every day and they are innumerable. The mu/tahid must deduce the rulin of )llah for each event that takes place otherwise the events will remain as they are without knowled e of the rulin of )llah with re ards to them, and this is not allowed. I/tihad is a fard of sufficiency (fard Gala al,kifaya) on the 7uslims. If some undertake it then the rest are absolved from the sin. If no one performs it then all of the 7uslims are sinful in the period in which there were no mu/tahids. Therefore, it is absolutely not allowed for any a e to be devoid of a mu/tahid because understandin the deen and i/tihad is a fard of sufficiency, where if everybody a ree to leave it they will be sinful. Iven if it was allowed for an a e to be devoid of someone who will undertake it, then the people of that time will have to a ree on mis uidance ie on the abandonment of adoptin the rules of )llah and BB0

that is not allowed. 2ot to mention the fact that the method of knowin the shari1a rules is only via i/tihad. If an a e is devoid of a mu/tahid it is possible that the reliance put on him to ain knowled e of the rules will lead to the suspension of the !hari1a and effacementLwipin out of the rules, and that is not allowed. The mu/tahid e'erts his utmost to derive the rule. If he is correct in his I/tihad then he has two rewards and if he makes a mistake he will have one. He (saw) said ( GIf a /ud e passes /ud ment and makes i/tihad and he is ri ht then he will have two rewards. )nd if he makes a mistake he will have one.1 The !ahaba have formed an i/ma1 (consensus) that the sin is taken off from the 7u/tahidin in the shari1a rules in terms of the speculative fi#hi (/urisprudential) issues. )s for the definite issues such as the obli ation of the worships, prohibition of fornication and murder. There is no i/tihad or dispute with respect to them. That is why the !ahaba disa reed on the speculative issues and not on the definite issues. The mu/tahid in the speculative issues is correct in what he has arrived at by his i/tihad even if he is liable to make a mistake in his opinion. However, bein correct does not mean that he has hit the true tar et because this does not a ree with the reality of a speculative rule since the 7essen er (saw) called him a mukhti1 (one who has made a mistake). 5ather what is meant by sayin that the mu/tahid is ri ht is in terms that do not ne ateLrule out mistake and not in terms of hittin the true tar et (isaba) which is the opposite of mistake. !o describin someone who makes a mistake in i/tihad as ri ht (musib) is in the meanin that the te't rewards the mu/tahid even when he makes a mistake and not in the sense that he did not make a mistake. Therefore, every mu/tahid is ri ht accordin to what he thinks is ri ht which does not rule out mistake. It is in terms of ettin it ri ht and not in terms of hittin the true tar et.

;.7.7

he 2onditions (shurut) of I+tihad

p.6B=

I/tihad has been defined as the e'penditure of effort, seekin the (preponderate) opinion about a thin , from the !hari1a rules in a manner in which the mu/tahid feels unable to e'ert any more ie it is the comprehension of the !hari1a te't from the Hitab and the !unnah after e'ertin ones outmost in arrivin at this comprehension in order to ain co ni9ance of the shari1a rule. This means three issues need to be fulfilled in the inference 2 (istinbat) of the shari1a rule until it can be said he has made the inference with a le itimate i/tihad ie three issues have to be met until the action can be called a i/tihad ( *irst, e'ertin effort in a manner he feels himself unable to e'ert any more. !econd, this e'ertion should be in search for a preponderate opinion about an issue from the shari1a rules. )nd third, this opinion about an issue should be from the shari1a te'ts because seekin a thin from the shari1a rules is not possible if it is not from the shari1a te'ts. +ecause, the hukm !har1i is the address of the Ee islator relatin to the actions of the servants. This means the one who does not e'ert effort he is not considered a mu/tahid. )nd whoever e'erts effort seekin the (preponderate) opinion in other 2 deduction and inference have been used interchan eably for Gistinbat1 BB3

than the shari1a rules from disciplines and views, he is not considered a mu/tahid. )nd whoever seeks an opinion from the shari1a rules from other than the shari1a te'ts he is not considered a mu/tahid. !o the mu/tahid is restricted in what he e'erts his utmost effort in understandin the shari1a te'ts on order to know the hukm of )llah. )nythin other than that in terms of the =lama - who e'plain the sayin s of the imam of their ma9habLschool, attempt to comprehend his sayin s and deduce rulin s from it, or outwei h the opinion of some =lama over the opinion of others without the medium of the shari1a evidences etc. 2one of them are considered mu/tahids accordin to this definition. The order of i/tihad is restricted to the comprehension of the shari1a te'ts after e'ertin the utmost effort in the path of arrivin at this comprehension in order to know the hukm of )llah. !o the shari1a te'ts are the ob/ect of comprehension and they are the ob/ect of seekin the opinion about a thin from the shari1a rules. $hat should be clear is that the !hari1a te'ts are the Hitab and !unnah and none other. )ny other te't is not considered a !hari1a te't whatever the statusLposition of the one who said it. !o the sayin s of )bu +akr, G=mar, )li or any other !ahaba are not considered as shari1a te'ts in any way whatsoever. Eikewise the statements of 7u/tahidin such as Ma1far, al,!hafi1i, 7alik and other 7u/tahidin are not considered shari1a te'ts at all. !o e'ertin effort in deducin a rule, from the statements of those people or any other human bein whoever they may be, is not considered i/tihad. 5ather it is considered as the opinion of the person himself who made the inference and it has no value in the !hari1a. 2ot to mention that the deduction of a hukm from the sayin of any individual from the !ahaba, Tabi1in, 7u/tahidin and others is not allowed by the shari1a since it is an inference of a shari1a rule from a source other than the Hitab and !unnah. This is haram in the !hari1a because it is /ud in by other than what )llah has revealed. )nd since what )llah has revealed is restricted to the Hitab and !unnah. )ny thin other than the Hitab and !unnah, )llah has not revealed it. !o adoptin a hukm from it is nothin more than adoptin somethin )llah has not revealed. )nd a hukm which is not accordin to what )llah has revealed is definitely haram. The Hitab and !unnah are in the )rabic ton ue. The Hitab and !unnah have come as revelation from )llah either in e'pression and meanin , such as the ;ur1an or in meanin only. The 7essen er (saw) e'pressed this meanin in his own words which is the hadith. In any case they ,ie the Hitab and !unnah, are in the )rabic lan ua e in which the 7essen er of )llah (saw) spoke. It is ,ie the speech, either it has a lin uistic meanin only such as Gmutrafin1(affluent ones), or it has a !hari1a meanin only then the lin uistic meanin is for otten 3 as with the word G ha1it1, or it has a lin uistic and !hari1a meanin like the word Gtahara1 in e'amples of Gtahhara1 (to purify) and Gmutahhirun1 (the purified ones). !o, to understand it one has to depend on the lin uistic and !hari1a disciplines until it is possible to understand the te't and arrive at an understandin of the hukm of )llah. "onse#uently, all conditions of i/tihad revolve around those two thin s and they are ( the availability of the lin uistic and !hari1a disciplines. !ince the dawn 3 I think the word is tunsi from ansa. tanwassa is probably a misprint. please check. p. 2C?. BB4

of Islam until the end of the second century the 7uslims did not need specific principles to understand the !hari1a te'ts, not from the lin uistic or !hari1a perspective, because of the closeness of their time to the 7essen er of )llah (saw) and because their only concern in life was the deen. This was also owin to the soundness of their lin uistic disposition and the purity of their lan ua e. Therefore, there were no known conditions for i/tihad. +ut i/tihad as an issue was well known. )nd mu/tahidin could be counted by the thousands. )ll of the !ahaba were mu/tahidin and nearly most of the rulers, walis and /ud es were from the mu/tahidin. However, when the )rabic lan ua e became corrupted and specific principles were laid down to rectify it. )nd when the people became occupied by the dunya and the number of people devoted to (the study) of the deen decreased and mendacity in attributin hadiths to the ton ue of the 7essen er (saw) became widespread. )nd principles were set down for abro ation (nasikh and mansukh), for the acceptance or re/ection of ahadith, to understand the manner of deducin the rule from the ayah and hadith. $hen all of this happened the number of mu/tahids decreased and the mu/tahid be an to proceed in his i/tihad accordin to specific principles throu h which he arrived at specific inferences which differed with the principles of others. )nd these principles came to be established either throu h a lot of practise in deducin rules from the te'ts. )s thou h they were set down for him to proceed only accordin to one path. .r he used to follow certain principles and then he be an to deduce (rules) accordin to them. This resulted in the mu/tahid e'ercisin i/tihad accordin to a specific methodolo y in understandin the !hari1a te'ts and in adoptin the !hari1a rule from the !hari1a te'ts. )nd some mu/tahids came to imitate a person in his method of i/tihad but they did not imitate them in rules but they deduced the rules themselves accordin to that persons methodolo y. )nd some 7uslims became well versed about a certain thin from the !hari1a disciplines and they e'erted effort in seekin a opinion from the !hari1a rules in specific issues that were presented to them and not in all the issues. In reality due to this we find three types of mu/tahidin amon st 7uslims ( mu/tahid mutla# (one who performed absolute i/tihad), mu/tahid ma9hab (mu/tahid in certain school of thou ht) and mu/tahid mas1ala (mu/tahid in a sin le issue). )s for the mu/tahid ma9hab he is someone who follows other 7u/tahidin in their methodolo y of i/tihad, however he e'ercises i/tihad in ahkam but does not imitate the imam of his school. There are conditions for the mu/tahid ma9hab e'cept havin knowled e of the rules and evidences of the ma9hab. He is able to follow the rules of the ma9hab or disa ree with them with his own opinion within the same ma9hab. Fue to this, it is allowed for the one who follows a ma9hab to e'ercise i/tihad within this ma9hab and disa ree with the imam of the ma9hab in some rules and issues if an evidence appears to him to be stron er. It has been reported about the imams that they used to say ( If a hadith is found to be authentic, that is my ma9hab and discardLthrow my sayin at the wall.1 .ne of the clearest e'ample for this is that of imam <ha99ali who was a follower of the !hafi1i ma9hab, but he had i/tihads in the ma9hab of !hafi1i which contradicted the i/tihads of al,!hafi1i himself. The second is the mu/tahid mas1ala. He has no specific conditions or method. However, it is allowed for whoever has knowled e of some of the !hari1a and lin uistic disciples which enables him to understand BB8

the !hari1a te'ts, to e'ercise i/tihad in a sin le issue. !o it is allowed for him, in a sin le issue, to study the views and evidences of mu/tahidin, and their line of reasonin Lar umentation. )nd from that he reaches a specific understandin of the hukm !har1i which he presumes with the least amount of doubtL with all probability to be the hukm !har1i whether it a rees with the opinion of the 7u/tahidin or disa rees with it. In a sin le issues it is allowed for him to study the shari1a evidences and understand from it what he deems with least amount of doubtL with a de ree of probability to be the hukm !har1i whether this issue has been previously studied by the 7u/tahidin or not. It suffices for the mu/tahid in a sin le issue to be knowled able about whatever relates to that issue, and it is essential that he is co ni9ant of that, but there is no harm if he is unaware of whatever does not relate to it, from what relates to foundational and /urisprudential issues and so forth. )nd besides the state of affairs that took place in the days of the !ahaba and Tabi1in and what happened after the ma9habs and imams. There are people who used to understand the !hari1a te'ts and deduce rules from them directly without any conditions as was the case in the time of the !ahaba. There are people who continued as followers of a specific ma9hab but they had i/tihads that went a ainst the opinion of their imam. !o the reality of what happened meant that the mu/tahid ma9hab and mu/tahid mas1ala did have a presence. This is in terms of the reality of what happened. )s for the i/tihad itself , it can be divided into sectionsLparts. It is possible, therefore, for someone to be a mu/tahid in some te'ts and not in others. )s for the opinion of some people who say that the capacity for i/tihad is obtained when the person is co ni9ant of all the reco nised disciplines. There is no basis for this definition and it does not accord with the reality. !ince a person may ac#uire the capacity but not be a mu/tahid because he has not set himself the hardship of studyin the issue because capacityLaptitude (malaka) denotes the stren th of understandin and linka e. This can be obtained by someone who is e'ceptionally intelli ent with some knowled e of the lin uistic and !hari1a disciplines and does not need to encompass the lin uistic and !hari1a disciplines. ) rasp of the !hari1a and lin uistic disciplines may be present as knowled e due to study and instruction but the aptitude (malaka) is not present in this scholar because of the absence of thinkin . However, i/tihad is a tan ible process with tan ible results ie e'ertin effort practically in arrivin at a hukm. )s for the presence of aptitude it is not desi nated as i/tihad. Thus, a person is able to perform i/tihad in some issues and not in others. He may be able to make i/tihad in the branches (furu1) but not in other areas. Therefore, it is clear that i/tihad is divided into partsLsections but sectionin of i/tihad does not mean the divisibility if i/tihad (ta/9i1a al,i/tihad) in that a mu/tahid is able to perform i/tihad in some sub/ect areas of Islamic lawL/urisprudence but not able in others. 5ather the meanin of dividin (tab1id) i/tihad is the possibility of comprehendin some evidences due to their clarity and absence of va ueness. )nd the inability of understandin evidences is due to their depth and comple'ity and the presence of various evidences which seem contradictory. They may happen in the /urisprudentialLfoundational principles (#awa1id usuliyya) or in the !hari1a rules. !o the division of I/tihad is with respect to the ability to deduce and not with re ards to the sub/ect areas of /urisprudence (fi#h). BB:

)ll of this is with re ards to the mu/tahid ma9hab and mu/tahid mas1ala. )s for the mu/tahid mutla#, he is anyone who performs i/tihad in the shari1a rules and in the method of his inference of the shari1a rules whether he had a specific method, as it is the case in some schools, or not. +ut he proceeds naturally in a specific manner of comprehension to deduce rules as was the case of the mu/tahidin in the time of the !ahaba. Iver since the )rabic lan ua e became corrupted and people ceased to devote themselves to understandin the deen, it became inevitable that the mu/tahid mutla# fulfil conditions in order to become a mu/tahid mutla#. "onse#uently, they took the opinion that the mu/tahid mutla# does have conditions and the most important of which are the followin two conditions ( *irst ( knowled e of te'tual evidences (adilla sam1iyya) from which principles and rules have been e'tracted. !econd ( knowled e of aspects of te'tual implication (dalala al,laf9) which are relied upon in the )rabic ton ue and in the usa e of the people of elo#uence (bula ha). )s for te'tual evidences, their consideration are referable to the Hitab and !unnah and I/ma1, and to the ability to compare and reconcile (/am1) evidences and outwei h the stron er evidence over other evidences when they contradict. That is because the evidences may seem competin to the mu/tahid and he sees them all mentioned as re ardin the same issue, and each of them demands a hukm other than what the other evidence demands. !o he is re#uired to e'amine the aspects by which a facet of one of the evidences is outwei hed in order to rely upon it in decidin the hukm. *or e'ample He (swt) said ( G )nd take for witness two /ust persons from amon you (7uslims).1 >84(2A )nd He (swt) said ( G Then take the testimony of two /ust men of your folk or two others from outside.1 >4(BC8A +oth ayahs are about ivin testimony. The first states that the witnesses should be from the 7uslims. The second states that they should be from 7uslims and from non,muslims. ie the first ayah stipulates that the witness be a 7uslim while the latter permits the witness to be a non,muslim. It is essential to know the way in which they are reconciled ie it is essential to know that the first ayah is unrestricted (mutla#) with re ards to testimony and the second restricts (mu#ayyad) the testimony of be#uests (wasiyya) on /ourneys. It must be known that the second verse permits the testimony of non,muslims at the time of the be#uest and the like in terms of commercial transactions. It is by reater reason that this should be the case in other thin s. )s well, those two verses indicate that the evidenceLproof (bayyina) should be (from) two /ust witnesses. It is supported by another verse which is the sayin of )llah (swt) ( G )nd et two witnesses out of your own men. )nd if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women.1>2(2@2A How does that fit in with what has been established in the !ahih (of +ukhari) about the Prophet (saw) that he accepted the testimony of one woman in re ard to fostera e (rada1a) & )nd that he accepted the testimony of a sin le witness with an oath of the plaintiff & 2arrated by Ibn G)bbas ( GThat the 7essen er of )llah (saw) pronounced /ud ement on the basis of an oath alon with a sin le witness.1 2arrated by Mabir ( GThat the prophet (saw) pronounced BB@

Mud ement on the basis of an oath alon with a sin le witness.1 )nd narrated by )mir al,7u1minin G)li b. )bi Talib ( G That the Prophet (saw) passed /ud ement on the basis of a testimony of a sin le witness and an oath of the plaintiff (sahib al, Ha##).1 It seems that there is a contradiction between the evidences. However the mu/tahid who scrutinises the issue finds that what the ayah mentions is the most complete number in testimony. If the complete number is not met it does not mean any other number is not accepted, since the nisab (number) concerns takin up the responsibility of testimony. )s for the /ud e1s dischar in of his duty and rulin , the number of witnesses has not been stipulated but what is stipulated is the proof, which is whatever will demonstrate the truth even by the testimony of a sin le woman or sin le man alon with the oath of the plaintiff (sahib al, ha##). However, if the !hari1a te't has come specifyin the number of witnesses as in the testimony for fornication, then it is restricted by the te't. )lso, the Prophet (saw) re/ected the 7ushrikin at the battle of =hud. He did not accept them to participate with the 7uslims in the battle. He (saw) said ( G$e do not seek the help of the disbelievers.1 +ut he accepted the help of the 7ushrikin at Hunayn. How are those two evidences to be reconciled & The mu/tahid should know that the 7essen er (saw) did not accept the 7ushrikin at =hud and refused to seek their help because they wished to fi ht under their own banner since they came distin uishin themselves with it >muta99in bihaA. !o his refusal has an Gillah, which is that they were fi htin under their own banner and state. He accepted and sou ht their help in Hunayn because they fou ht under the banner of the 7essen er. The Gillah of refusin to seek help from them is absent so seekin help is allowed. )nd with this clarification and other such e'amples the conflict (ta9ahum) of evidences cease. !o the ability to comprehend the te'tual evidences and to compare them is a basic condition. "onse#uently, the mu/tahid mutla# must be conversant with discernment of the shari1a rules and their divisions, ways of establishin them, aspects of their te'tual implications from their meanin s >wu/uh dalalatiha ala madlulatiha,A difference of levels and reco nised conditions. )nd he must know the an les of outwei hin them when they contradict. This obli es him to be ac#uainted with transmitters (ruwwa), methods of invalidation and attestation (/arh wa ta1deel), and he should be familiar with the causes of revelation (asbab nu9ul) and abro ation (nasikh wa mansukh) in the te'ts. )s for knowin the aspects of te'tual implications (dalala al,laf9), this re#uires knowled e of the )rabic lan ua e. Throu h the knowled e of )rabic one is able know the meanin of e'pressions, and aspects of their elo#uence and implications, and knowled e of the current disa reement over the same word until it is referred to trustworthy narrators and to what the le'ico raphersLphilolo ists say about it. It is not sufficient to know from the dictionary that #ur1 indicates a state of purity and menstruation and that nikah denotes intercourse and contract of marria e. He should have knowled e of the )rabic lan ua e in a eneral manner in terms of the rammar, inflection, rhetoric and idiom etc. Hnowled e of that will enable him to study the indication of a sin le e'pression and sentence accordin to the lan ua e of the )rabs and usa e of the people of elo#uence, which will enable him to check books about the )rabic BB?

lan ua e and understand from it what he needs to understand. However this does not mean he should be a mu/tahid in the branchesLminutiae of the lan ua e. It is not stipulated that he be proficient in lan ua e like al,)sma1i and proficient in rammar as !ibawayh. 5ather it is sufficient for him to be knowled eable about lin uistic style so that he can distin uish between indications of e'pressions (dalala al,alfa9), sentences and style such as mutabi#a (conformityLharmony), tadmin ( ) ha#i#a (literal), ma/a9 (metaphorical), kinaya (metonymy), mushtarak (homonym, mutaradif (synonym) etc In a word, the level of absolute i/tihad (i/tihad mutla#) cannot be attained e'cept by someone who is characterised by two attributes ( *irst, comprehension of the ob/ectives (ma#asid) of the !hari1a by understandin the te'tual evidences. !econd, comprehension of the )rabic lan ua e and indicationsLimplications of its e'pressions, sentences and styles. +y that means, it is possible deduce rulin s based on its understandin . +ein mu/tahid does not mean he should encompass every te't and able to deduce any hukm, since the mu/tahid mutal# may be a mu/tahid in many issues reachin the level of absolute i/tihad. )nd even if he does not know some issues e'ternal to it, it is not a condition of the mu/tahid mutla# that he should be co ni9ant of all issues, all rules of issues and their discernment. "onse#uently, so the presence of a mu/tahid mutla# is not a difficult matter rather it is possible and feasible if one is truly determined. The level of mu/tahid mas1ala is possible for all to attain after learnin what is essential from the lin uistic and !hari1a disciplines.

.2 Taqleed ".215
Ta#leed lin uistically is followin others without scrutiny. It is said Ghe imitated him in such and such1 ie he followed him without scrutiny or e'amination. Ee ally, ta#leed is actin accordin to the statements of others without bindin proofLar ument. !uch as the layman1s adoption of the opinion of a mu/tahid. .r the mu/tahid1s adoption of the opinion of someone same as him. Ta#leed (imitation) in G)#eeda (creed) is not allowed because )llah has censured the mu#allids (imitators) in G)#eeda. He (swt) said ( G $hen it is said to them ( O *ollow what )llah has sent down.N They say ( O 2ayD $e shall follow what we found our fathers followin .N ($ould they do that D) Iven thou h their fathers did not understand anythin nor were they uided &1>2(B:CA )nd He (swt) said ( G $hen it is said to them ( O"ome to what )llah has revealed and unto the 7essen er (7uhammad >sawA for the verdict of that which you have made unlawful).NThey say (O Inou h for us is that which we found our fathers followin ,N even thou h their fathers had no knowled e whatsoever and no uidance.1>4(BC3A )s for ta#leed in the !hari1a rules it is le ally permitted for very 7uslim. He (swt) said (G!o ask the people of the 5eminder if you do not know.1>2B(:A He subhanahu wa ta1ala has ordered the one who does not have the knowled e to ask the one who is more knowled eable than him. Iven thou h it is in the position of a refutation of the 7ushrikin for their re/ection of the 7essen er bein a human bein . However, its wordin is eneral and the consideration is for the enerality of the wordin and not the specificity of the cause (al,1ibra bi Gumum al,laf9 laa bi khususiyyat al,sabab). It is not about a specific sub/ect such that it is said it is B2C

specific to this sub/ect. It is eneral about the re#uest from those who do not know to ask those who do know. !ince it re#uests the mushrikin to ask the people of the +ook, to teach them that )llah has not sent to the precedin nations messen ers who were not human bein s. They used to be i norant of this information so He (swt) ordered them to ask those who know. The ayah says ( G)nd $e sent not before you (. 7uhammad (saw) ) but men to whom $e inspired, so ask the people of the 5eminder if you do not know.1>2B(:A The word Gfas1alu1 (ask D) has come with a eneral import ie ask in order to learn that )llah has not sent anyone to the precedin nations other than human bein s. It is related to knowled e and not to belief (iman). The people of 9ikr, even thou h the aforementioned in the verse are the people of the book, but the term has also come in a eneral manner and it includes all people of 9ikr. The 7uslims are the people of Jikr because the ;ur1an is a Jikr. He ta1ala said ( >B8(33A !o those who know the !hari1a rules they are the people of Jikr whether they had knowled e of i/tihad or ac#uired knowled e. The mu#allid only asks for the rulin of )llah in an issue or issues. Therefore, the ayah indicates the permissibility of practisin ta#leed. )lso, it has been narrated on the authority of Mabir (r.a.) ( That a man was struck by a stone which fractured his skull. Then he had a wet dream. He asked his companions - do you know of a permit (rukhsa) for me to perform tayammam (dry ablution). They said - we do not find for you any permit and you are able to use water. He then had a bath and died. The Prophet (saw) said ( GQerily, it would suffice for him to make tayammum, tie a piece of cloth around his head and wipe over it and wash the rest of his body.1 )nd he said, ie the prophet (saw) ( G$hy did they not ask when they did not know. Indeed, the cure for inabilityLincompetence is to ask.1 The 7essen er instructed them to ask about the hukm !har1i. It has been authentically reported that al,!ha1bi said ( There were si' companions of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) who used to deliver le al opinions to the people. Ibn 7as1ud, G=mar b. al,Hhattab, G)li b. )bi Talib, Jayd b. Thabit, =bayy b. Ha1b, and )bu 7usa. Three used to leave their opinion for the opinion of the other three. G)bd )llah used to leave his opinion for G=mar1s opinion and )bu 7usa used to leave his opinion for the opinion of G)li. This also indicates that the 7uslims used to imitate the !ahaba and some of them used to imitate each other. )s for what has been mentioned in the ;ur1an in terms of the censure for ta#leed. This is a censure for imitation in belief and not in the adoption of the !hari1a rules. +ecause, the sub/ect matter of the verses is belief. Its te't is specific to the sub/ect of belief and they have no Gilla. !o the sayin of )llah ta1ala ( G )nd similarly, $e sent not a warner before you (. 7uhammad >sawA) to any town (people) but the lu'urious ones amon them said ( O$e found our fathers followin a certain way and reli ion, and indeed we will indeed follow their footsteps.N (The warner) said (O Iven if I brin you better uidance than that which you found your fathers followin &N >30(20,23A )nd His ta1ala1s sayin ( G $hen those who were followed, disown (declare themselves innocent of ) those who followed (them) , and they see the torment, then all their relations will be cut off from them. $hen those who followed will say ( OIf only we had one more chance to return (to the worldly life), we would disown (declare themselves B2B

ourselves as innocent from) them as they have disowned (declared themselves as innocent from) us.N Thus )llah will show them their deeds as re rets for them. )nd they will never et out of the *ire.1 >2(B88,B8:A )nd His ta1ala1s sayin ( G $hat are these ima es, to which you are devoted& They said ( O$e found our fathers worshippin them.N1 >2B(42A These verses are te'ts about the sub/ect of belief (iman) and disbelief (kufr) and not eneral to all thin s. ) te't which still does not include any Gillah and nor is there any /ustification found in any other te't. Therefore, it should not be said that the consideration is for the enerality of the wordin and not for the specificity of the cause. This (principle) is correct with respect to the cause (sabab). It is the event which was the cause of revelation. but it is not correct in re ard to the sub/ect matter of the verse. The consideration is for the sub/ect of the verse. )nd the enerality (Gumum) is restricted to the sub/ect of the verse only. It is eneral to everythin that the meanin of the verse includes in terms of the sub/ect. It is not eneral to everythin that the verse does not include. 2or should it be said it is re ardin belief and disbelief, but it is proper to interpret it as applicable to the mu#allidin considerin that the hukm revolves around an illah whether it was present or absent. This cannot be claimed since no Gillah can be found in the ayah and no Gillah can be found for the ayah. +ecause it does not include any /ustification and nor has there any /ustification come for it in any one of the te'ts of the Hitab and !unnah. Therefore no no te't can be found which prohibits ta#leed. 5ather the te'ts and the reality of the 7uslims in the time of the 7essen er and !ahaba and the reality of the !hahaba all indicate the permissibility of practisin ta#leed. Ta#leed is applicable to the follower (muttabi1) and to the layman (Gammi) irrespectively. That is because )llah has defined ta#leed as followin the opinion of someone else. He (swt) said ( G $hen those who were followed, disown (declare themselves innocent of ) those who followed (them).1 >2(B88A )nd since the hukm !har1i that a person adopts, either he has deduced it himself or it has been deduced by someone else. If he himself deduces it then he is a mu/tahid and if someone else deduces it and he adopts it then he has adopted the opinion of someone else ie followed the opinion of someone else. )nd followin the opinion of someone else is ta#leed whether he adopted without a proof or with a non, bindin proof The muttabi1 (follower) therefore is a mu#allid. )s well, ittiba1 (followin someone else) means that you follow the opinion of a mu/tahid based on what has become clear to you in terms of evidence without you passin /ud ement on this evidence ie without you bein bound by this proof. If you pass /ud ement on the evidence and you know the manner of deducin the hukm from it and you a ree to the inference of the hukm and the hukm itself then the proof on which the hukm rests has become bindin on you. Then you opinion has become like the opinion of the mu/tahid. 6ou are in this case a mu/tahid and not a mu#allid. *rom this it becomes clear that ittiba1 (followin ) is ta#leed and that the follower (muttabi1) is a mu#allid even thou h he knows the evidence.

B22

;.6.7

he reality of aqleed p.667

The definition of ta#leed, lin uistically and le ally, indicates that anyone who follows others in a matter will be a mu#allid. !o the consideration is followin others. Therefore, there are two types of people with respect to the knowled e of the !hari1a rules ( The first is the mu/tahid and the second is the mu#allid and there is no third. !ince, the reality of the man is that he either adopts what he has arrived at himself by his i/tihad or what the other has arrived at by his i/tihad. The issue is limited to those two cases. Therefore, anyone who is not a mu/tahid is a mu#allid of whatever cate ory. The issue in ta#leed is the adoption of the rule from others irrespective of whether the one who adopted is a mu/tahid or not a mu/tahid. It is allowed for the mu/tahid to imitate in a sin le issue other 7u/tahidin even if he himself was #ualified to do i/tihad. Then, he will be considered a mu#allid in this issue. Thus, in a sin le hukm the imitator (mu#allid) may or may not be a mu/tahid. The same person may be a mu/tahid and he may be a mu#allid at the same time.The mu/tahid when he comes to obtain a complete competence (ahliyya) for i/tihad in one of the issues, if he performs i/tihad on it and his i/tihad leads him to the hukm, he is not allowed to allowed to imitate other mu/tahidin in a matter contrary to what his i/tihad has led him to. It is not allowed for him to leave his opinion in this matter e'cept in four cases( p. 222 *irst( $hen it appears that the evidence on which he relied in his i>tihad is weak (daHif) and the evidence of another mu>tahid is stron er than the evidence he used. In such a case he is obli ed to leave forthwith the rule to which his i>tihad had led and adopt the rule which is evidentially stron er. It is forbidden for him to continue on the first rule which he had reached by his i>tihad. He should not be prevented from adoptin the new rule simply because the new mu>tahid was the only one to hold such an opinion, or because this rule has not been espoused by anyone before. That oes a ainst taCwa (the fear of )llah >swtA), because what matters is the stren th of the evidence and not the number of people that have held it or how ancient they are. How many an i>tihad of the !ahaba there were whose error later became apparent to the 6a!iHin or 6a!iH+6a!iHin. $hen the weakness of the mu>tahidHs evidence, and the stren th of someone else evidence becomes apparent throu h outwei hin (tara>>uh), without considerin all of the evidences and the inference from them, then in such a situation, he will be considered a muCallid, because he has adopted the opinion of someone else by outwei hin (tar>eeh). His e'ample is that of the muCallid who is confronted with two rules, so he ave preponderance to one of them accordin to a !hari1a #ualification (mura>>ih SharHi). If the weakness of his evidence, and the stren th of someone else1s evidence becomes apparent throu h /ud ement ( muhakama), and pursuance (tata!!uH) of evidences and inference ( istin!at). )nd throu h this he arrives at an opinion which is the opinion of another person. In that case he is not a muCallid but a mu>tahid to whom the incorrectness of the first i>tihad became apparent. !o he retracts from it to another opinion which he has deduced himself as happened with al,!hafi1i in a number of times. !econd( $hen it appears to a mu>tahid that another mu>tahid has a reater capacity to link or has better awareness of the reality, or stron er comprehension B20

of the evidences or is more ac#uainted with the te'tual evidences ( adilla samHiyya) etc. )nd it became preponderate to him that the other mu>tahid is closer to the truth in understandin a specific issue or issues as they are. It is allowed for him in this case to leave the rule he has reached throu h his i>tihad and follow the other mu>tahid in whose i>tihad he has more confidence than his own. It has been correctly reported on the authority of al,!ha1bi that )bu 7usa used to leave his opinion for the opinion of G)li. )nd that Jayd used to leave his opinion for =bay b. Ha1b1s opinion, and that )bdullah used to leave his opinion for the opinion of G=mar. Incidents have been reported about )bu +akr and G=mar that they used to leave their opinion for the opinion of G)li. This indicates the retraction of a mu>tahid from his opinion for the opinion of someone else based on his trust in the i>tihad of the other mu>tahid. However, this is permitted for the mu>tahid and not obli atory. Third( If the Hhalifah adopts a rule which conflicts with the rule arrived at throu h his i>tihad. In such an event he is obli ed to leave the rule reached at by his i>tihad and take the rule which the imam (leader) has adopted. +ecause the I>maH of the !ahaba has been concluded that Cthe decree of the imam raises the disputes* and that his decree is to be implemented on all 7uslims. *ourth( If there is an opinion by which it is intended to unify the 7uslims, for the ood of the 7uslims. In such a situation it is allowed for the mu>tahid to leave what he reached by his i>tihad, as happened with =thman (r.a.) when he was iven the !ayHa. It has been reported that )bdur,5ahman b. G)wf, after he had consulted the people individually and in twos, to ether and separately, secretly and openly, he athered the people in the 7os#ue, ascended the minbar and made a lon supplication. He then called G)li and took hold of his hand and said( Fo you pled e to me that you will rule accordin to the +ook of )llah and the !unnah of His 7essen er (saw) and the opinions held after him (saw) by )bu +akr )nd G=mar& )li said( I pled e to you on the basis of the +ook of )llah and the !unnah of His 7essen er, but I will e'ercise my own i>tihad. !o he let o of his hand and called for G=thman and said to him( Fo you pled e to me that you will rule accordin to the +ook of )llah and the !unnah of His 7essen er and the opinions held after him (saw) by )bu +akr )nd G=mar& G=thman said( +y )llah, 6esD !o )bdur,5ahman raised his head towards the roof of the 7os#ue, his hand in =thman1s hand, and said three times( . )llah, hear and bear witnessD Then he ave him the pled e and the people thron ed to the mos#ue to ive !ayHa to him makin )li havin to push his way throu h the people until he ave his pled e to G=thman. Thus, )bdur,5ahman demanded from a mu>tahid, G)li and G=thman, to leave his i>tihad and follow the i>tihad of )bu +akr and G=mar in all issues, whether he has e'ercised his own i>tihad re ardin them and has an opinion which contradicts the opinion of both or one of them, or he has not e'ercised i>tihad yet. The !ahaba concurred with this and they ave !ayHa to G=thman on that basis. Iven G)li who refused to leave his i>tihad, ave !ayHa to G=thman on that basis. However, this is permitted for the mu>tahid and not obli atory, as evidenced by G)li refusal to leave his i>tihad for the i>tihad of )bu +akr and G=mar. 2o one rebuked him for that, which indicates that it is permitted and not obli atory. B23

)ll of this is with respect to the mu>tahid who has actually e'ercised i>tihad and his i>tihad has led him to a rule on an issue. )s for the mu>tahid who has not e'orcised i>tihad on an issue, it is allowed for him to follow other mu>tahidin and not make i>tihad on the issue, since i>tihad is an obli ation of sufficiency (fard Gala al+kifaya) and not an individual obli ation (fard Gayn). If he knows the rule of )llah on an issue, then it is not an obli ation on the mu>tahid to make i>tihad with re ards to it. It has been correctly reported about G=mar that he said to )bu +akr( G$e hold opinions in accordance with your opinion.1 It has also been correctly reported about G=mar that when he found himself completely at a loss to find in the ;ur1an and !unnah what was needed when two disputin parties come to him, that he would see if )bu +akr had a decision in the matter. If he found that )bu +akr had passed a certain /ud ement on the issue he would pass the same /ud ement. It has been authentically reported about Ibn 7as1ud (r.a.) that he used to adopt the opinion of G=mar (r.a.). That used to take place before the eyes and ears of the !ahaba in numerous incidents and no one ob/ected. Thus, it became a tacit i>maH(i>maH sukuti). This is the reality of the mu>tahidHs practise of taCleed. )s for the taCleed of the non,mu>tahid whether he is a learned person or a layman, when an issue presents itself to him, on the whole, he is not permitted to do anythin other than ask about it. !ince )llah did not enslave (make them to worship him) the creation throu h i norance, rather, He enslaved them (made them worship him) throu h knowled e. He ta1ala said( G!o fear )llah- and )llah teaches you.1 >2(2@2A i.e. )llah teaches you whatever the case may be, so fear Him. !o the knowled e comes before the taCwa (fear of )llah), since the order to fear )llah follows from the ac#uisition of knowled e in a natural order. This means that knowled e is ac#uired before involvement in the action. Must as when He (swt) said( G*ear )llah.1, it comes to the mind the question of how is the taqwa. Thus, He (swt) said( )nd )llah teaches you so fear Him. Therefore, knowled e must come before action. Thus, it is fard on the 7uslim to learn the rules of )llah which are necessary for action before he acts, since it is not possible for him to act upon it without knowled e. )nd this knowled e of the rules re#uires of people to ask about them in order to adopt the rules and act upon them. )nd throu h this knowled e, he will follow that rule. He (swt) said( G!o ask the people of the 5eminder (thikr) if you do not know.1 >2B(:A It is a eneral instruction to all the addressees (mukhata!in). )nd He (saw) said in the hadith about the person whose skull was fractured( GIndeed, the cure for incompetence is to ask.1 This instruction continued to be eneral durin the time of the !ahaba, where the mu>tahidun used to be asked for le al opinions and followed in the !hari1a rules. They used to undertake the answerin of #uestions without mentionin the evidence, and no one forbade them from doin that. )ll of this took place without any ob/ection from anyone. Thus it was an i>maH. It was commonly practised by the 7uslims also in the time of the ta!iHin and ta!i+ta!iHin, and thousands of incidents have been reported to that effect. Must as it is allowed for the learned person or layman to follow others in the !hari1a rule i.e. it is permitted to ask others. Eikewise, it is permitted for him to teach this !hari1a rule to others as he understands it, when he is sure that he has B24

understood it correctly, and he has adopted this !hari1a rule to act upon it himself i.e. he is sure that it is a !hari1a rule. )s for if he does not trust this rule due to his lack of confidence in the authenticity of the evidence or lack of trust in the character (deen) of the one who has tau ht it to him. Then it is not allowed for him to teach it to others in order to act upon it. If he had to say it, he had to say what he knows about it (rule). It is permitted for the one who learns a rule to teach it to others because anyone who has knowled e even of a sin le issue he is considered to be knowled eable about that issue, when he has trust in his knowled e of the rule and in the truthfulness of what he has said about the issue. The concealment of knowled e is forbidden. He (saw) said( G $hosoever hides the knowled e which he knows, he will be restrained on the day of /ud ement with a bridle of fire.1 this is eneral and applicable to knowled e of a sin le or many issues. However, the learned person (mutaHallim) is not considered to be a follower of the one who has tau ht him the rule. 5ather he is the muCallid of the mu>tahid who has deduced the !hari1a rule. )nd the learnin of this rule is considered only as learnin . !ince taCleed can only be made to a mu>tahid and not to someone who has only knowled e of a rule. However much a non, mu>tahid attains in terms of knowled e, it is not permitted to make taCleed to him in his capacity as learned person, because it is only permitted to learn from him, not make taCleed to him. The muCallid is not iven a choice when a difference of opinion arises, when for instance the mu>tahidun differ on two opinions. !o the different opinions reached the muCallid, i.e. the divine rule reached the muCallid as two opinions. !ome people think that the two opinions with respect to a muCallid is tantamount to one opinion. They think he has the ri ht to choose between them, so he follows his whims and desires and whatever serves his purpose and not the opinion that oes a ainst it. However, the situation is not like that, since the 7uslim is ordered to adopt the hukm ShariH. The hukm SharHi is the speech of the Ee islator. There is only one speech, there cannot be more than one. $hen there is more than one understandin of the speech then each understandin constitutes a shari1a rule with respect to the one who understands it and the one who makes taCleed to him. )nythin other than that is not considered a hukm SharHi with respect to him. !o how is it possible then for him to adopt two different opinions& $hen a muCallid finds two opinions from the mu>tahidin which conflict with each other, then each mu>tahid is a follower of an evidence which demands the opposite of what the evidence of the other mu>tahid demands. They possess two conflictin evidences. *ollowin one of them accordin to one1s whims is nothin short of followin one1s whims and desires and this is forbidden. He (swt) said( G*ollow not the lusts (of your hearts.1 >3(B04A Thus, the muCallid has no option but to make taCleed. Two mu>tahids with respect to the layman (Gammi) are like two evidences with respect to the mu>tahid. Must as it is obli ed on the 5u>tahid to outwei h two conflictin evidences, likewise it is incumbent on the muCallid to outwei h two contradictory rules. If whims and motives were allowed to arbitrate in somethin like this then it would have been allowed for the /ud e. It is invalid accordin to the i>maH of the !ahaba. )lso, in the issues of the ;ur1an there is a eneral rule which alto ether disallows the followin of the whims and desires, as in His (swt1s) B28

sayin ( G()nd) if you differ in anythin amon st yourselves, refer it to )llah and His 7essen er (saw).1 >3(4?A This muCallid in whose issue two mu>tahids differ, he must refer it (the issue) to )llah and the 7essen er (saw), which is done by referrin it to a preponderant which, for the muCallid, )llah and the 7essen er are pleased with. Must as the mu>tahid returns to the +ook of )llah and the !unnah of His 7essen er (saw). )nd returnin to what )llah and His 7essen er are pleased with is far from followin one1s whims and desires. The muCallid must choose one of the two opinions, and this choice must be based on the preponderant which )llah and His 7essen er (saw) are pleased with. It is not possible for the muCallid to act upon both opinions since they conflict. )nd his choice of one of the two ma?ha!s, or one of the two different rules without a preponderant is a choice based on whims and desires. It is contrary to returnin to )llah and the 7essen er (saw). The preponderants (mura>>ahat) by which the muCallid prefers a mu>tahid over another, or one rule over many other rules, the first and foremost of them are( the #uestion of best knowled e ( aHlamiyya) and understandin (fahm). It has come in the hadith of Ibn 7as1ud that he (saw) said( G. )bdullah b. 7as1ud. I said at your service. He (saw) said( GFo you know who are the most knowled eable of people&1 I said( )llah and His 7essen er (saw) know best. He said( GThe most knowled eable of people is the one most aware of the truth when people differ, even if he is deficient in deeds, and even if he crawls on his bottom.1 Therefore, the muCallid outwei hs what he knows of the mu>tahidHs knowled e and trustworthiness (Gadala) because trustworthiness is a condition in acceptin the testimony of a witness. "onveyin a hukm !har1i throu h teachin is a testification that this is a hukm SharHi. !o for acceptin the rule, the inte rity of the teacher who teaches it is essential. So the integrity of the one who deduces it is by greater reason. !o the aGadala (inte rity) is a condition which the person from whom we take the hukm SharHi must #ualify for, whether he is a mu>tahid or a teacher. It is definite. )s for knowled e it is the preponderant. $hoever believes that !hafi1i was more knowled eable, and his ma?ha! is more likely to be correct, then he does not have the ri ht to adopt a ma?ha! accordin to his whims and desires which contradicts it. )nd whoever believes that Ma1far al, sadi# is more knowled eable and his ma?ha! is more likely to be correct, then he does not have the ri ht to o a ainst it based on his whims. He has the ri ht, rather it is obli atory upon him to adopt what conflicts with his ma?ha! when the preponderant opinion becomes apparent after outwei hin the evidence. 6ar>eeh (outwei h) is necessary. That this outwei hin should not be based on whims and desires is also necessary. The muCallid does not have the ri ht to pick and choose from the ma?ha!s issues which are more a reeable to him. 5ather this type of outwei hin is like the outwei hin of two conflictin evidences for the mu>tahid. To perform tar>eeh (outwei hin ) he relies on the veracity of the information which comes with the CaraHin (indications). This is the case when outwei hin for adoptin in total not for every sin le rule. The preponderant in taCleed is two( *irst( a eneral preponderant, which relates to the the person he wishes to follow such as Ma1far al,!adi# and 7alik b. )nas for e'ample. )nd second, the specific preponderant which is with re ards to one hukm SharHi which he wishes to follow. The #uestion of best knowled e (aHlamiyya) comes in the second cate ory. If an incident had taken place in B2:

7edina in the time of 7alik, then he is re arded as more knowled eable about it than )bu 6usuf. )nd the incident which took place in Hufa in the time of Ma1far, he is considered more knowled eable about it than )hmad b. Hanbal. !o the information which reaches the muCallid about the mu>tahid is what is referred to. Havin the best knowled e ( aHlamiyya) is not the only preponderant and nor is it the preponderant for taCleed in itself. 5ather it is the eneral #ualification for the one who wishes to make taCleed. )nd in eneral terms for the rule which is intended to be followed. )s for the true #ualification with re ards to the rule, it is the stren th of the evidence on which reliance is put. However, because the muCallid cannot understand the evidence, then the criterion of best knowled e (aHlamiyya) is considered instead. There are many reco nised preponderants which vary accordin to the states of the muCallids.

;.6.6 he states of muqallidin qualifications p.66?

and

their

preponderant

6aCleed is the adoption of another person1s opinion without a bindin proof ( hu>>a mul?ima). !o the acceptance of another person1s opinion without a bindin proof is considered taCleed /ust as actin accordin to the opinion of another without a bindin proof is considered taCleed. That is like the layman1s adoption of the opinion of a mu>tahid, or the adoption of the mu>tahid of an opinion from someone like him. 5eferrin to the 7essen er (saw) is not taCleed to him and nor referrin to the i>maH of the !ahaba is taCleed to them. +ecause, that constitutes referrin to the evidence itself and not adoptin the opinion of another. Eikewise, the laymen1s reference to a mufti is not considered ta#leed to him, rather it constitutes seekin a le al opinion and learnin and not adoption. !o he either refers to him, to seek a le al verdict ( fatwa) or to learn, i.e. the reference of a layman to a learned person is not considered taCleed to him because it constitutes either in#uirin about a hukm !har1i or learnin it. )s for the adoption of an opinion with knowled e of its evidence, it will be looked into. If the knowled e of the evidence is mere knowled e, like knowin that visitin the raves is permitted because the 7essen er (saw) said( G I used to forbid you from visitin the raves, (but now) visit them.1 Then in this situation he is considered a muCallid because he has adopted the opinion of another without a bindin proof even if he knew the evidence. However, he himself did not use this evidence as proof so it is not a bindin proof with respect to him. )s for if an understandin of the evidence was arrived at after /ud in it and deducin the hukm from it, it is then re arded as an i>tihad which a rees with the i>tihad of the one who initially held this opinion. +ecause /ud in the evidence and deducin the hukm from it can only be done by the mu>tahid since this depends on the knowled e of it bein free from conflict accordin to the necessity of studyin it. This also depends on the scrutiny of the evidences. 2o one has the ability to do this e'cept the mu>tahid. Therefore, the muCallid is not a mu>tahid. People with re ards to the hukm !har1i are either mu>tahid or muCallid and none other. i.e. either he deduces the hukm himself whether some one else had deduced it before or he himself deduced it from the onset. .r he adopts the deduction of another mu>tahid. Therefore, whoever does not have the capacity ( ahliyya) for i>tihad he is a B2@

muCallid irrespective of whether he had knowled e of some of the le ally reco nised disciplines in i>tihad or not. !o he falls under the cate ory of muCallid Gammi (layman) or mutta!iH. However, the muttabi1 imitates on condition that he knows the evidence of the mu>tahid. $hile the Gammi he imitates without any condition. It is permitted for the muCallid, whether follower or Gammi to adopt the opinion of any mu>tahid once it is established that this opinion of his is an i>tihad, even if it was established by a solitary narration ( kha!ar ahad). $hen he is confronted with an issue and he has not ac#uainted himself with the opinions of the mu>tahidin but he knows the opinion of a sin le mu>tahid. It is permitted for him to adopt the shari1a rule which this mu>tahid had deduced because what is re#uired from him is the adoption of a shari1a rule in an issue and not the pursuance of the opinions of mu>tahids. In such an instance outwei hin is not re#uired from him. )s for if he is familiar with the opinions of the mu>tahidin and he wishes to adopt one of them then it will not be correct for him to do anythin other than perform tar>eeh (outwei hin ). )nd this tar>eeh (outwei hin ) should not be accordin to the conformity of the hukm to his whims or apparent benefit. !ince the intention of the !hari1a is to take the mukallaf (le ally responsible) from the motive of his whims and desires so as to become a true servant of )llah. Indeed, the tar>eeh should be accordin to a !hari1a preponderant #ualification i.e. the #ualification should be linked to )llah and the 7essen er of )llah (saw). He (swt) said( G()nd) if you differ in anythin amon st yourselves, refer it to )llah and His 7essen er (saw).1 >3(4?A 5eferrin to )llah and to His 7essen er (saw) is either to the word of )llah or the !unnah of His 7essen er (saw) i.e. to the shari1a evidence, either to what )llah or His 7essen er (saw) has ordered. "onse#uently, the preponderant #ualifications differ accordin to the different states of the muCallids. 6es, the eneral preponderant #ualification for the layman is, subse#uent to the evidence, the one who has the best knowled e ( aHlamiyya) and comprehension (fahm). )nd this is the primary preponderant #ualifications for all muCallids. However, there are different preponderant #ualifications which people use to outwei h, with or without the preponderant #ualification of best knowled e (aHlamiyya). !o the layman follows a mu>tahid accordin to his trust of the understandin and taCwa (<od fearin ) of the ones who follow him, from the people he knows, like when he trusts his father or one of the G=lama, so he follows the ones who follow him. This outwei hin ( tar>eeh) for the Gammi (layman) is from the perspective of the deen and not the perspective of his whims. .r, another preponderant #ualification is that the layman knows the shari1a rules and the evidences by attendin lessons on fi#h, hadith etc. )t that point he is able to distin uish between rules and their evidences. This person outwei hs in taCleed accordin to his ac#uaintance with the evidence. !o he follows the hukm the evidence for which he is familiar with, when it contradicts a hukm the evidence for which he is not ac#uainted with. He will, then, have a hukm which is linked to an evidence which is preferable to a hukm which is not linked to an evidence. Those two situations apply to the layman- who is anyone who does not have knowled e of some of the reco nised disciplines in i>tihad. Therefore, the layman in all of these situations, when an evidence becomes manifest to him, he must leave the taCleed that is based on his trust of the knowled e and taCwa of those who follow B2?

the mu>tahid whom he follows. )nd adopt the hukm which is linked to an evidence, because now he has a stron er preponderant #ualification. !o whoever used to follow !hafi1i or others because his father used to follow him, when the evidence of a hukm SharHi, which had been deduced by a mu>tahid other than the one he followed, becomes manifest to him and he believed in it. Then he must adopt that hukm due to the presence of a stron er preponderant #ualification which is the !hari1a evidence. )s for if he did not believe in it, then he does not have the ri ht to leave the hukm he has been followin since he has no preponderant #ualification to warrant it. In the outwei hin (tar>eeh), he relies on the hearin of indications (CaraHin). He does not have the ri ht , i.e. the layman , to adopt different ma?ha!s based on whims. )nd nor does he have the ri ht to follow the ma?ha!s in every issue which is easier for him, rather he must seek a preponderant #ualification when there is more than one understandin for the ahkam.

;.6.; <oving (tanaqqul) from one mujtahid to another p.6;6

)llah has not ordered us to follow any mu>tahid, imam or ma?ha!. 5ather He ordered us to adopt the hukm SharHi. He ordered us to adopt what the 7essen er (saw) brou ht and to abstain from what he has forbidden us. He (swt) said( G)nd whatsoever the 7essen er (saw) ives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it).1 >4?(:A Therefore, the !hari1a does not deem it ri ht for us e'cept to follow the rules of )llah and not the people. However, the reality of taCleed has led the 7uslims to follow the rules of certain mu>tahids whom they have assi ned as imams for themselves, and they made the rules these mu>tahids have deduced by their i>tihad, as a ma?ha! for themselves. !o the !hafi1is, Hanafis, 7alikis, Hanbalis, Ma1faris and Jaids etc have an actual presence amon st the 7uslims. Iven thou h these people follow the shari1a rules which have been deduced by these mu>tahids, their action is le itimate because it constitutes followin a !hari1a rule. )s for if they followed the mu>tahid as person and not his deduction, then their action is not lawful and what they follow is not considered a shari1a rule. +ecause is a statement of a person which is not from the orders and prohibitions of )llah which have been brou ht to us by the 7essen er of )llah 7uhammad (saw). "onse#uently, all those who follow ma?ha!s must understand that they are followin only the rules of )llah which have been deduced by those imams. If they have a contrary understandin , then they will be answerable to )llah for leavin the rules of )llah and followin people who are themselves the servants of )llah. This is from the perspective of followin the rules of a ma?ha!. )s for the perspective of leavin these rules, it has to be e'amined. If someone adopted a hukm but has not acted upon it yet, then he has the ri ht to leave it and adopt another hukm based on one of the preponderant #ualifications which is linked to seekin the pleasure of )llah. If he, in actuality, practised it then this hukm has become the rule of )llah with respect to him. It is not permitted for him to leave it and adopt another hukm e'cept when the second hukm is linked with an evidence and the first hukm is not linked to an evidence. .r if it was proven to him by way of learnin that the evidence of the second hukm is stron er than the first and he is convinced of that. Then it is incumbent on him to leave the first hukm. +ecause B0C

his conviction and trust in the shari1a evidence has made it the rule of )llah with respect to him. $hich is analo ous to the mu>tahid, when he finds an evidence stron er than the evidence from which he deduced the hukm. Then he must leave the previous opinion and adopt the new opinion due to the stren th of the evidence. In any other situation, it is not allowed for the muCallid to leave the hukm he had followed and adopt a different hukm after he had already acted accordin to the first hukm. )s for makin taCleed to another mu>tahid for another hukm that is permitted due to the i>maH of the !ahaba which has taken place on allowin the muCallid to seek le al verdicts from any learned person in an issue. )s for when the muCallid selects a ma?ha! such as the ma?ha! of !hafi1i or Ma1far for e'ample, and he saysI follow his ma?ha! and adhere to it, there are some details for this( he is not allowed to follow any other mu>tahid in a #uestion he has already practised accordin to the ma?ha! he is followin - while any #uestions he had not acted upon before, he is allowed to follow other mu>tahidin in those #uestions. &owever, it should be made clear that the question which is allowed for him to leave it hukm that he has been followin for another hukm, it is stipulated that the #uestion should be separate from other #uestions, and that leavin it does not entail infrin ement of other !hari1a rules. )s for when the #uestion is connected to other #uestions then it is not allowed for him to leave it unless he leaves all the #uestions connected to it, because they are all considered as one #uestion. *or instance- if the #uestion was a condition in another hukm, or one of the pillars (arkan) of a complete action such as the prayer (salah), wudu (ablution) and pillars (arkan) of the !alah. Thus, it is not correct for a !hafi1i to follow )bu Hanifah1s opinion that touchin the women does not invalidate the wudu and continue prayin accordin to the ma?ha! of al,!hafi1i. It is not ri ht for him to follow the one who takes the opinion that constantly movin in prayer (to whatever e'tent this may be) does not invalidate the prayer. .r that the recitation of the *atihah is not one of the pillars of prayer and then he continues to pray as a muCallid of the one who holds the opinion that constantly movin in prayer does invalidate it or that the *atihah is one of the pillars of the prayer. The hukm which is allowed to leave is that hukm whose relin#uishment does not affect the actions which are undertaken accordin to other shari1a rules.

;earnin& the ,hari4a 8ule

The one who seeks a le al verdict ( mustafti) is not a muCallid, because the muCallid is the one who adopts the !hari1a rule and acts upon it. )s for the mustafti (one who seeks a le al verdict), he is the one who learns the hukm !har1i from a person who knows this hukm, whether that person was a mu>tahid or not, and whether the mustafti learned it in order to practise it or /ust for the sake of knowled e. The mustafti is anyone who seeks to know the rule of )llah pertainin to an issue. !o anyone who is not a mu>tahid with re ard to a hukm is seeker of a le al verdict in re ard to that hukm. Thus the one who is not a mu>tahid in any issue he is a mustafti (seeker of a le al verdict) in all issues. $hoever is a B0B

mu>tahid in certain issues he is a mustafti in the issues he has not e'ercised i>tihad in. )s for the one who e'plains the rule of )llah to a mustafti (seeker of a le al verdict) he is a mufti. It is said in the )rabic lan ua e( He ave a le al verdict pertainin to an issue( he e'plained its rule. )nd he sou ht a le al opinion from an Galim re ardin an issue means he re#uested him to ive a le al opinion about it. The le al opinions of the !ahaba and the Tabi1in are the rules they clarified to the people. )nd since havin knowled e of )llah1s rule is fard, there must be people, whether mu>tahids or not, who can teach the !hari1a rules to others, irrespective of whether they teach the people the rules with or without the evidences. !ince it is not stipulated that the one who teaches the rules should be a mu>tahid, /ust as it is not stipulated for the 7uslim who teaches others to clarify the evidences. It is allowed for someone who knows a hukm to teach it to others when he becomes conversant about that hukm. !ince it is not stipulated for the one who ives le al opinions to people re ardin the shari1a rules or teaches them himself to be a mu>tahid. .n the contrary this is permitted for a non, mu>tahid. It is allowed for a non, mu>tahid who is ac#uainted with the shari1a rule of a mu>tahid to deliver a le al opinion usin that hukm because he is a carrier of the hukm even if he did not make that known. In performin this action there is no deference between an e'pert and others, such as in the reportin of ahadith. Must as it is not stipulated that the transmitter of a hadith be an e'pert it is not stipulated either for the one who conveys a hukm !har1i to others to be an e'pert. !o it is by reater reason (min !a! awla) that there should be no stipulation for him be a mu>tahid. Iven thou h it is stipulated that he should know, the hukm that he conveys, in a clear and accurate manner since he cannot convey it to others if he is not precise and unable to convey it properly. Eikewise, it is not stipulated for the person who teaches people the hukm !har1i or ives them le al opinions to teach them the evidence or convey it to them. 5ather it is allowed for him to limit himself /ust to conveyin the hukm !har1i without #uotin the evidence. i.e. it is permitted for him to ive fatwa with the hukm !har1i and teach it to people without clarifyin to them the evidence. However, he is re#uired to e'plain to them that what he transmits to them is a hukm !har1i or the inference (istin!at) of someone else i.e. of a certain mu>tahid. However if he conveys an opinion and he says to them( GThis is my opinion1 or he conveys to them an opinion and says( GThis is the hukm because so,and,so mu>tahid said such and such thin 1. $hat he imparts is not considered a shari1a rule since the statement of a mu>tahid is not a shari1a evidence. =sin their speech as an evidence for a hukm invalidates its status as a hukm !har1i. However, if he ascribes the hukm to a mu>tahidHs deduction. It is a hukm a !har1i even if he does not e'pound the evidence. This was common practise in the time of the !ahaba. The people used to seek le al opinions from the mu>tahidin and follow them in the shari1a rules. The learned amon them used to respond to their #uestions without alludin to the evidence and they were not forbidden from doin that. 2ot one !ahaba ob/ected. Thus it became an i>maH (consensus) on the le ality of a layman followin a mu>tahid without mentionin the evidence. It was also an i>maH on the permissibility of learnin the rules of )llah and teachin them without learnin or teachin the evidence. The layman (G ammi) and the follower (mutta!iH) are the B02

same with re ards to that. It is allowed for any one of them to seek verdicts from the other and teach the hukm sharKi he correctly understands to the other. $hether he knew the evidence or not. That is because anyone who ains knowled e of a hukm he is considered to be knowled eable about that hukm. !o it is allowed for him to teach it to others. However, the layman (G ammi) limits himself to conveyin what he knows e'actly as he learnt it. )s for the follower (mutta!iH) he teaches what he knows and he ives verdicts accordin to what he knows because he possess some of the reco nised disciplines in i>tihad. He comprehends the rules and he knows how to teach them and how to ive le al opinions with them. However, learnin the rules and ivin opinions with them does not constitute makin taCleed to the teacher or the mufti. This is considered only as the ivin of opinions or learnin a hukm. 6aCleed should be made to the one who deduced the hukm and not the one who teaches it or ives verdicts by it. However, it has been stipulated that the teacher, in analo y to the witness, be /ust ie without manifestin any trans ressions of the !hari1a. !ince the witness informs about an incident and the teacher also informs about the hukm of )llah. !o both inform about somethin , for which trustworthiness (G adala) is a stipulation. )lso, )llah has forbidden the 7uslims to accept the statement of a fasiC (trans ression) and ordered them to check it. He (swt) said( FO you who !elieve! If a fasiC #re!ellious person$ comes to you with a news verify it7 >3?(8A The use of the word GfasiCH (trans ressor) and Gnews1 (na!aH) in their indefinite (verbal noun) forms indicate that when any fasiC (trans ressor) comes with any news, the people should desist from adoptin what he says and seek to verify the matter and discover the true reality and not simply accept what he says. The opposite meanin (mafhum al+mukhalafa) of this verse is that the statement of the upri ht and /ust person is taken whether for the purpose of ivin le al opinions or learnin etc.

.- The stren&th of the +(idence (qu11a al-daleel)

The !hari1a evidence is a proof that the hukm it denotes is a hukm shar1i. Therefore, the consideration of a hukm as a !hari1a rule depends on the consideration of its evidence. "onse#uently, the discussion about the /ud ement of an evidence is the basis in considerin the !hari1a rules. $hen there is a suitable evidence for an incident to prove its hukm is such and such. Then this hukm is considered a !hari1a rule for that incident based on the consideration of its evidence. However, if there are two appropriate evidences for an incident- one indicates a certain hukm, a prohibition ( hurma) for e'ample and the other indicates a different hukm such as permissibility ( i!aha). Then we must outwei h (tar>eeh) one of the evidences over the other until it becomes possible to adopt a hukm on the premise that its evidence is stron er than the other. Therefore, one must know the an les of outwei hin ( tar>eeh) the appropriate evidences that are used as proof so as to facilitate adoptin the stron est evidence by outwei hin it over other evidences. The evidence for the obli ation of outwei hin and actin upon the preponderant evidence, i.e. the stron est evidence, is the i>maH of the !ahaba (7ay )llah be pleased with them for that). !o, they (the !ahaba) outwei hed the report of G)Kisha with re ards to the touchin of the two B00

circumcised parts. Her statement( F'hen the circumcised part touches the circumcised part ghusl is o!ligatory% I and the 5essenger of Allah #saw$ did this so we made ghusl%7 They outwei hed her sayin over the report of )bu !a1id al, Hhudri who said that the Prophet (saw) said( FIt is with the seminal emission that ghusl !ecomes o!ligatory%7 This is because the wives of the Prophet (saw) were more versed about these matters than the men. )s well they outwei hed the report of one of his wives who narrated that he used to wake up in the mornin in a state of >ana!a (ma/or ritual impurity) over what )bu Hurayra reported from al, *adl b. G)bbas that the Prophet (saw) said( G'hoever wakes up in a state of ma>or impurity there is not fast for him%H Must as G)li b. )bi Talib found the report of )bu +akr stron er. Thus he did not put him to oath but someone else. )nd /ust as )bu +akr found the report of al,7u hira about the inheritance of the randmother stron er due to what was narrated in addition to it by 7uhammad b. 7aslama. )lso, /ust as G=mar found the report of )bu 7usa al,)sh1ari about the istiH?an (seekin permission) stron er after it has been corroborated by )bu !a1id al, Hhudri1s narration. The !ahaba used not to outwei h opinions and analo ies e'cept after studyin the te'ts up to the point that it was not possible to o (in study) any further. $hoever scrutinises their situation and observes the facts of their i>tihadat will come to be aware, without any doubt whatsoever, that they used to obli e the use of a preponderant evidence as opposed to a weaker one from two speculative (?anni) evidences. That is also indicated by the Prophet1s (saw) acceptance of 7u1a9, when he sent to 6emen as /ud e, on the order of evidences and the precedence of one evidence over the other. However, when two evidences conflict it will not be correct to resort to the outwei hin of one evidence over the other e'cept in the event when it not possible to use both of them to ether. If it is possible to act upon both of them that is better, since it is better to act upon both evidences than to disre ard one of them alto ether. +ecause an evidence in principle is to act upon it and not disre ard it. )lthou h it is not correct to act upon both evidences throu h e'cuses and prete'ts but accordin to the indication of the te't. )n e'ample of usin two conflictin evidences is the sayin of the Prophet (saw)( FShall I tell you who are the !est of witnesses( "e is the one who comes with his testimony !efore he is asked to do so%7 )nd his sayin (saw)( F6hen lies will !ecome widespread until a man will take an oath without !eing asked and will give witness without !eing asked to give witness%7 !o the 7essen er (saw) praised the one who ave witness before he was called to ive testimony, and he (saw) criticised the one who ave witness before he was called to ive testimony. Thus, the Prophet1s praise of the one who ave witness before he was asked to ive it indicates that it has been ordered by the Ee islator. )nd the Prophet1s (saw) criticism of the one who ave witness before he was asked to ive testimony indicates that it has been prohibited by the Ee islator. This is a contradiction between the two evidences, and their reconciliation is( that ivin testimony re ardin a ri ht of )llah, the !hari1a has ordered to be provided without bein re#uested to do so. )nd ivin testimony re ardin a ri ht of the servant, the !hari1a has forbade that the witness testifies before he is asked to do so. Eike his sayin (saw)( F6here is no prayer for the one who lives ne@t to a mosCue e@cept in the mosCue%7 +ut the 7essen er1s (saw) acceptance of the prayer to be performed in other than a B03

mos#ue has been established. .ne evidence contradicts the other. The reconciliation is that the hadith is taken to mean the ne ation of the perfection of the prayer. The 7essen er1s (saw) acceptance of the prayer to be performed in other than a mos#ue is taken to mean that such a prayer is correct (sahih). It is absolutely essential that one attempts to act upon both evidences. If it is not possible to practise them both to ether and they contradict despite bein e#ual in stren th and enerality, then it must be looked into. If the later evidence is known then it abro ates the earlier one whether both evidences were definite ( CatHi) or speculative (?anni), whether from the Hitab or !unnah. +oth evidences cannot be from the Hitab and !unnah at the same time because the !unnah does not abro ate the Hitab, even if it is mutawatir (recurrent report). )s for when the later evidence is unknown- then both of them must be speculative ( ?anni) because definite evidences (CatHi) do not contradict each other. If they are speculative (?anni), then one must return to outwei hin them. )nd so the stron er evidence is used. The stren th of the evidence means its stren th in terms of the order of the evidences, and in terms of the level of considerin the deduction in each type of the speculative evidences. )s for the order of the evidences- the Hitab is stron er than the !unnah even if the !unnah is mutawatir (recurrent). The recurrent (mutawatir) !unnah is stron er than the i>maH (consensus). )nd the i>maH which has been transmitted recurrently is stron er than the isolated hadith (kha!ar al+ahad). The isolated hadith (kha!ar al+ahad) is stron er than the Ciyas (analo y) if its Gillah was taken by way of indication (dalala), deduction or analo y. )s for when its Gillah is taken e'plicitly, it is treated as the te't which has indicated the Gillah e'plicitly, and it takes its rule in terms of the stren th of the evidence. If the te't was ;ur1anic then its hukm is that of the ;ur1an, and if it was the !unnah then its hukm is that of the !unnah. If it is indicated by the i>maH then the rule of the i>maH is taken. In terms of considerin the deduction in each type of the speculative evidences. The speculative evidences are two evidences- the first is the !unnah and the second is the analo y ( Ciyas). Iach one has specific considerations in the outwei hin of evidences. i.e. considerin the stren th of the evidence. )s for the !unnah, the stren th of the evidence with respect to it means its stren th in terms of the chain (sanad) of transmission, its stren th in terms of the te't, and its stren th in terms of the meanin . )s for the stren th of the !unnah evidence in terms of the chain ( sanad) they will be from the followin issues( *irst( pertainin to the transmitter (rawi). The transmitter who was in direct contact is preferred to the transmitter who was not in direct contact. +ecause the former is more aware of what he narrates. That is like the narration of )bu 5afi1 that the Prophet (saw) married 7aymuna when he broke his state of ritual consecration. It is preferred to the narration of Ibn G)bbas that he (saw) married her when he was in a state of ritual consecration. +ecause, )bu 5afi1 was the mediator between them and he was the representative of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) in her marria e to him. )nd the hadith is outwei hed accordin to the le al comprehension of the transmitter. The report of a transmitter who is a faCih (/urist) is preferable over the report of a transmitter who is not a faCih (/urist). The hadith which has been transmitted by a rawi throu h memorisation is preferred to B04

the hadith which has been transmitted by a rawi throu h the medium of written materials. !o when one of the two transmitters relies on his memorisation of the hadith and the other relies on written materials. The one who has committed it to memory is more preferable because he is more free from suspicion. The hadith narrated by a well known transmitter is preferred to the hadith narrated by a lesser known transmitter. !econd( Pertainin to the same report. The recurrent hadith ( kha!ar mutawatir) is preferred to the isolated hadith (kha!ar al+ahad). The report which has a complete chain (musnad) is preferred to a mursal4 report because we know the transmitter of the musnad and we do not know the transmitter of the mursal. Third( Pertainin to the time of transmission. The transmitter who narrated the hadith in his adolescence is preferred to the hadith which has been narrated by a transmitter at the time of his childhood i.e. when he was a child. *ourth( Pertainin to the manner of transmission. The report on which there is a reement over its continuous link ( rafHihi) to the Prophet (saw) is preferred to the report about which there is disa reement over its continuous link to the Prophet (saw). The report which cites the actual words ( kha!ar mahki) of the 7essen er (saw) is better than the report which has been transmitted by meanin . *ifth( Pertainin to the time in which the hadith was mentioned. !o that hadith which has been transmitted enerally without a date is preferred to a hadith which is dated as early, because the eneral hadith is more similar to the later hadith. The report which is mentioned in the last days of the Prophet (saw) is preferred. !o the report mentioned durin the illness when he died is preferred to the eneral report. !i'th( Pertainin to the words of the report. The report whose words indicate reality (haCiCa) is preferred to the one whose words indicate metaphor ( ma>a?). The report which contains (includes) the divine reality (haCiCa shariHa) is preferred to the one which includes the lin uistic reality ( haqiqa inghawiya) or the traditional reality (haCiCa urfiya). +ecause the Prophet (saw) was sent to e'plain the divine (facts). The report which includes a reason (G illah) for the hukm, whether it was e'plicit, indicative or deduced is preferred to the one which does not point to a reason (Gillah) for the hukm. +ecause the reasoned hukm is stron er from the le islative point of view. )s for the stren th of the evidence in terms of the matn (te't) they are from the followin issues( *irst( If one of the reports is a command and the other is a prohibition. The prohibition is preferred to the command. +ecause the predominant situation of the prohibition is to seek the repulsion of an evil ( mafsada). )nd the predominant 4 it is pointless to try and translate hadith classifications such as these. +etter to ive their meanin s in the lossary. B08

situation of the command is to obtain a benefit ( maslaha). )nd avertin (mafasid) is more preferable to the ac#uisition of benefits (masalih).

evils

!econd( If the one of the reports commands a thin and the other permits a thin . The hadith which permits is preferred to the one that commands. +ecause actin upon the hadith of permission necessitates the interpretation of the command by divertin it from the command to act to a permitted action, which is one of its established meanin s. )ctin upon the command necessitates the suspension of the entire hadith of permission. )ctin upon both evidences is better than suspendin one of them. Third( $hen one of them is a command and the other is > kha!arA. !o the >kha!arA is preferred to the order, because the > kha!arA is stron er in meanin than the command. Therefore, abro ation of the > kha!arA is prevented as opposed to the command which can be abro ated. *ourth( If one of them forbids and the other permits. The one that permits is preferred to the one that forbids due to the same reason of preferrin the hadith of permission to the hadith of command. *ifth( $hen one of them is a prohibition and the other is a > kha!arA. The >kha!arA is preferred to the prohibition for the same reason the > kha!arA is preferred to the order. )s for the stren th of the report in terms of the meanin they are in the followin issues( *irst( If one of the reports conveys ease ( takhfif) and the other conveys harshness (taghlee?). Then the report which includes ease is preferred to the report which includes harshness due to His (swt) sayin ( FAllah intends for you ease and "e does not want to make things difficult for you%7 >2(B@4A )nd His (swt) sayin ( FAnd "e has not laid upon you in religion any hardship%7 >22(:@A )nd due to his (saw) sayin ( FIslam is easy%7 )nd his (saw) sayin ( F6here is no harm or reciprocating harm in Islam%7 !econd( If one of the reports conveys a prohibition and the other conveys a permission. The report which indicates a prohibition is preferred to the report which indicates a permission due to his (saw) sayin ( F6he lawful and the unlawful do not come together e@cept that unlawful prevails over the lawful%7 )nd his (saw) sayin ( F2eave what you dou!t for that which you do not dou!t%7 Third( If one of the reports conveys a prohibition and the other conveys an obli ation. The report which indicates a prohibition is preferred to the report which indicates an obli ation. +ecause, in most cases a prohibition repulses an evil and an obli ation in most cases obtains a benefit. The repulsion of evils takes precedence over the ac#uisition of benefits.

B0:

*ourth( If one of the reports conveys an obli ation and the other conveys a permissibility. The report which indicates an obli ation is preferred to the report which indicates a permissibility. +ecause leavin an obli ation entails a sin and leavin a permissibility does not entail anythin . !o, bein further from the sin is more proper than bein further from a thin that does not entail anythin . +ecause, the report which indicates an obli ation has a decisive re#uest and the report which indicates a permissibility is either a re#uest ivin choice or it is itself a choice. The decisive re#uest is preferred to other re#uests. This is with respect to the considerations of tar>eeh in the !unnah. )s for the considerations of tar>eeh in analo y (Ciyas). They are accordin to the evidence of the reason (Gillah). !o the analo y (Ciyas) whose reasonin of its description (Gillayat wasfihi) is proved by the definite te't is preferred to the one whose reasonin of its description is established by non definite te't. +ecause the definite te't is inconceivable to indicate other than reasonin (G illah), while the indefinite te't is not. The analo y whose G illah is proved e'plicitly (sarahatan) is preferred to the one whose G illah is established throu h induction, deduction or analo y. That whose Gillah is established by deduction is preferred to that whose Gillah is established by analo y. Thus the outwei hin ( tar>eeh) of analo y is accordin to the Gillah and its evidence. These, briefly, are the preponderant #ualifications. Throu h them the stron er evidence is known so that the !hari1a rule is outwei hed. This is possible in two cases( firstly, in the case of the mutta!iH (follower) in his /ud ement of two evidences without possessin the ability to deduce ( istin!at) due to the absence of e'ertin the effort seekin the preponderant opinion. !econdly, in the case of the mu>tahid when he is confronted with two evidences. In both cases, when there are two evidences then one must be outwei hed over the other. $hen one evidence is outwei hed he is obli ed to adopt the hukm whose evidence is stron er and act upon it, and leave the hukm whose evidence is proven to be weak.

.0 al-,hura < The ado"tion of an o"inion in Islam

The shura, or the adoption of an opinion can be undertaken by the Hhalifah, ameer, or anyone who has authority whether he is a chief, leader or official, as they are all ameers. .r, it can take place between spouses due to His (swt) sayin ( FIf they !oth decide on weaning !y mutual consent and after due consultation%7 >2(200A )s for puttin forth an opinion to a person in authority, whether he was a /ud e, leader etc, this is #uite obvious. It was performed by way of ivin advise (nasiha), which is a le itimate matter (amr mashruH) that is presented to the leaders of the 7uslims and the masses. )s for the referrin of a person in authority to adopt an opinion of the people, whether he was a /ud e, ameer, or president. That is an ob/ect of ambi uity especially after concepts of democracy have spread and have almost chan ed the mentality of many 7uslims. The seekin of an opinion is what is termed in Islam as( G Shura1 and Gtashawur1. !ince it is permitted to listen to an opinion e'pressed by 7uslims and non,7uslims B0@

because the 7essen er (saw) accepted the opinion that was included in the hilf al+fudul (fudul confederacy), where he said( FIf I were invited I would respond for I do not like to !reak an agreement which is more appealing to me than herds of cattle%7 Iven thou h it was an opinion of the 7ushrikin. 6et seekin of an opinion cannot be for anyone e'cept for the 7uslims i.e. shura is not a ri ht of anyone e'cept the 7uslims. +ecause )llah (swt) addressed the 7essen er sayin ( FAnd consult them in their affairs%7 >0(B4?A i.e. the 7uslims. )nd He (swt) says( FAnd who conduct their affairs !y mutual consultation%7 >32(0@A i.e. the 7uslims. +ecause the first verse says( FAnd !y the 5ercy of Allah you dealt with them gently% And had you !een severe and harsh+hearted they would have !roken away from a!out you; so pass over #their faults$ and ask #AllahHs$ 4orgiveness for them; and consult them in their affairs%7 >0(B4?A This consultation by the 7essen er (saw) cannot be for anyone e'cept the 7uslims. The second verse says( FAnd those who answer to the 3all of their 2ord and esta!lish the prayer and who conduct their affairs !y mutual consultation%7 >32(0@A This cannot be a description of anyone other than the 7uslims. Therefore shura is specific to 7uslims with each other. Practisin shura amon st 7uslims is a well,known matter. It has been mentioned in the noble ;ur1an and sacred hadith and in the sayin s of the 7uslims. It has been narrated that )bu Hurayra (r.a.) said( FI have not seen anyone more willing to consult others than the 5essenger of AllahHs #saw$ consultation of his companions%7 It has been narrated also that al,Hasan (r.a.) said( F6here is not a people who consult each other e@cept that they are guided to the !est decision in their affairs%7 !o seekin of an opinion is tashawur or shura which is proven in the te't of the ;ur1an and the hadith. However what many people do not know is- in which opinion can there be a shura or tashawur& i.e. in which issue is an opinion adopted& Then, what is the rule on this opinion. !hould it be adopted accordin to the opinion of the ma/ority irrespective of ri ht or wron & .r, is he obli ed to adopt the correct opinion irrespective of whether it is the opinion of the ma/ority or minority or a sin le person& In order to comprehend the answer, it is inevitable that we should understand the reality of the opinion as it is and what it is& )nd understand the detailed !hari1a evidences mentioned about seekin of opinions and apply these evidences on the reality of an opinion from a le islative perspective. )s for the reality of opinions e'istent in the world they do not number more than four types only. )ny opinion in the world, is either one of these opinions or it has branched out from or classified under one of them. The four types of opinions are( *irst( either the hukm is a !hari1a rule i.e. le islative opinion. !econd( +ein the definition of a certain issue. Iither a !hari1a definition such as the definition of what a hukm shar1i is or the definition of a reality, such as the definition of the Gmind1, Gsociety1 and other such thin s. Third( it is an opinion which indicates a thou ht in a sub/ect or it indicates a thou ht in a technical matter which is understood by specialist people. B0?

*ourth( )n opinion which indicates an action that needs to be undertaken. These are the opinions e'istent in the world and this is their reality. !o is shura (seekin of an opinion) is carried out in all of these opinions or only in some of them& Is the opinion of the ma/ority preferred irrespective of bein ri ht or wron & .r is the opinion preferred in terms of its correctness without takin notice of the ma/ority& In order to arrive at an answer, we must e'amine the evidences mentioned in the ;ur1an and hadith first. )nd then apply these evidences on these opinions. )s re ards shura the te't of the ;ur1an indicates that shura applies to all types of opinions because the verse says( FAnd who conduct their matters #affairs$ !y mutual consultation%7 >32(0@A )nd says( FAnd consult them in the matter%7 >0(B4?A The speech here is eneral. !o the word Gmatter1 means the affairs of the 7uslims, which is a eneral desi nation for all affairs. )nd in the word G al+amr1 (the matter), the definite article (alif lam) is eneric i.e. to the cate ory of affairs. The eneral thin remains eneral as lon as there is no evidence to specify it. )nd here there is no evidence to specify shura to anythin . Therefore, it remains of eneral desi nation for all affairs. )s re ards the abidement by an opinion which is sou ht by the Shura i.e. whether the ma/ority opinion is preferred irrespective of ri ht or wron or the opinion is preferred in terms of its correctness without takin notice of the ma/ority bein iven any consideration. "ertainly, there are te'ts which indicate that the opinion of the ma/ority should be adopted and complied with. )nd there are te'ts which indicate that the opinion of the ma/ority should not be adopted. 5ather it ives the person in authority the ri ht to e'ecute what he has decided irrespective of the ma/ority position. The 7essen er (saw) said to )bu +akr and G=mar- FIf !oth of you agree on a mashura I will not go against it%7 )nd he complied with the opinion of the ma/ority in =hud. )llah (swt) says to the 7essen er (saw)( FAnd consult them in the matter% 6hen when you have taken a decision put your trust in Allah7 >0(B4?A In order to arrive at an understandin of when it is bindin to adopt the opinion of the ma/ority and when it is not bindin . $e must e'amine the evidences which are mentioned in the ;urKan and hadith first, and then apply these evidences on the e'istin opinions in the world. )s for the evidences mentioned in the ;ur1an, there are two ayats. The first is His (swt) sayin ( FAnd consult them in the matter%7 >0(B4?A It is an order from )llah (swt) to His 7essen er (saw) to refer to the 7uslims to obtain their opinion. However, )llah (swt) ave him (saw) the ri ht to choose the opinion. !o He (swt) said in completion of the same verse( F6hen when you have taken a decision put your trust in Allah7. >0(B4?A i.e. after you have decided on a matter after consultation (shura), then put your trust in )llah in carryin out your matter in the most sensible and appropriate manner. )nd He (swt) said( F'hen you #singular$ took a decision7 (Ga?amta) and not when Fyou #plural$ took a decision7 (Ga?amtum). )s for the second verse, His (swt) sayin ( FAnd their matter is run !y B3C

mutual consultation%7 >32(0@A It is a commendation from )llah (swt) for the 7uslims because they do not adopt an opinion on their own but consult each other about it. It encoura es the practise of consultation ( shura). The sayin is also ambivalent (mu>mal). Therefore, we need to refer to the !unnah to see if there is anythin there in terms of the sayin s and actions of the 7essen er (saw) which will elucidate the ambivalent meanin (mu>mal). +y referrin to the sayin s and actions of the 7essen er (saw) we find that he (saw) said to )bu +akr and G=mar( FIf !oth of you agree on a mashura I will not go against it%7 He (saw) is obli in himself not to o a ainst what they have a reed upon, thou h he restricted their a reement to the mashura. He (saw) said( FIf !oth of you agree on a mashura7 The word Gmashura1 is a description which serves as a restriction and it has an opposite understandin ( mafhum mukhalafa). $hich means that if they made an a reement on anythin other than mashura it will not be bindin to refrain from oin a ainst it. !o here the 7essen er (saw) demonstrated that the opinion of the ma/ority should not be opposed when they are two persons and he is one. $e also find that the 7essen er (saw), on the day of the battle of =hud, brou ht to ether the people of opinion, those amon st the 7uslims and those who pretended Islam and they started to consult each other. The Prophet (saw) took the opinion that they should take sie e in 7adina and force the ;uraysh to stay outside. The head of the 5unafiCin (hypocrites) G)bdullah b. =bay b. !alul was of this opinion. )nd this was the opinion of the senior companions. The opinion of the 9ealous youth who had not witnessed +adr was to o out to confront the enemy. The ma/ority then appeared to be on the side of the youth. !o the 7essen er of )llah (saw) yielded to their opinion and followed the opinion of the ma/ority. !o this incident indicates that he (saw) ave in to the opinion of the ma/ority and acted accordin to their opinion and he left his own opinion and that of the senior companions because they were the minority. !o when the people be an to feel remorse and say( F'e have forced the 5essenger of Allah #saw$ to follow our opinion and we do not have that right%7 They went to him (saw) and said( F'e have compelled you !ut we do not have that right% If you wish you may remain #in 5adinah$% 5ay Allah !less you%7 The Prophet (saw) refused their re#uest to o back to his opinion and that of the senior companions and he continued to insist on compliance with the opinion of the ma/ority. However, we see him (saw) also in +adr where he complied with the correct opinion and he was satisfied with a sin le opinion when he found the opinion to be true. $hen the 7essen er of )llah (saw) and the 7uslims with him came down at the nearest sprin of +adr, al,Habbab b. al,7un9ir did not like that place. He said to the Prophet (saw)( FO 5essenger of Allah% "as Allah inspired you to choose this spot over which we have no say or is it an opinion war and strategy(7 The Prophet (saw) replied( FIt is a matter of opinion war and strategy%7 !o he said( FO 5essenger of Allah% 6his is not a good place%7 Then he pointed to another place. The Prophet (saw) and those with him lost no time in followin the opinion of al, Habab. In this hadith the Prophet (saw) left his opinion and he did not refer to the opinion of the ma/ority but followed the correct opinion. He was content to adopt B3B

it from one person about a sub/ect the 7essen er (saw) himself said was( Fa matter of opinion war and strategy%7 Then we find the 7essen er (saw), in e'pedition ( gha?wa) of Hudaybiya, that he stuck to his opinion sin le handily and he re/ected the opinion of )bu +akr and G=mar. *urthermore, he re/ected the opinion of the 7uslims and forced them to comply with his opinion despite their an er and rievances. He told them( FI am the 5essenger of Allah #saw$% I will not diso!ey "im and "e will not neglect me%7 *rom these four hadiths we find that the 7essen er (saw) held on to his opinion solely and re/ected all other opinions. $e also find him referrin to the correct opinion and adoptin the opinion of a sin le person alone whilst leavin his own opinion and not referrin to the opinion of the people. $e find him also complyin with the ma/ority opinion and makin a statement which indicates that the opinion of the ma/ority should be referred to and not opposed. If we scrutinise these hadiths and the conte't in which they came. $e find that the Prophet (saw) referred to the !hari1a evidence, i.e. the wahy (revelation), in Hudaybiya. )nd that he referred to the correct opinion in the battle of +adr, but referred to the ma/ority in =hud, and his compliance with )bu +akr and G=mar. $hat the action and sayin of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) indicates is no more than three situations( *irst, referrin to the stren th of the evidence as perceived by the one who deduces from it and not how the people perceive it. !econd, referrin to what is correct irrespective of the opinion of the ma/ority and not even ivin it any consideration at all. Third, referrin to the ma/ority opinion re ardless of whether it was ri ht, and not D giving it any consideration at all. $hen we apply these three rules, which have been deduced from the action and sayin of the Prophet (saw), on the reality of the e'istin opinions in the world we find the followin ( *irstly, The !hari1a rule is outwei hed only on the basis of the stren th of the evidence. *or, the 7essen er (saw) only preferred what was sent down by revelation and absolutely re/ected everythin else. Therefore, he said( FI am the 5essenger of Allah #saw$% I will not diso!ey "im and "e will not neglect me%7 The !hari1a evidence is only the Hitab and !unnah and whatever the Hitab and !unnah indicate as an evidence. +ecause, it is the matter upon which the order or prohibition of )llah applies. The stren th of the evidence is not what the people perceive or what they define and understand it to be. 5ather, the stren th of the evidence is only accordin to what the one who educes ( mustadill) perceives it. Iven if the sense of deduction was his own understandin and the definition was his own, as lon as he relied on the semblance of an evidence ( shu!hat daleel). This is because how the stren th of the evidence is perceived differs from people to people due to their disparate perceptions of the shari1a evidence itself and due to the manner by which they understand the )rabic lan ua e and the !hari1a. The stren th of the evidence does not mean the stren th (authenticity) of the hadith only. 5ather, the stren th of the evidence, whether it be the Hitab or the !unnah, is in terms of the meanin (diraya), narration (riwaya), understandin (fahm) and consideration (iHti!ar). )nd there is no difference amon the 7uslims about this. B32

!econdly , The opinion which indicates a thou ht about a sub/ect, is outwei hed from the an le of what is ri ht. !uch as the issue of revival. $ill it be realised by an intellectual elevation or throu h an economic one& .r, is the international situation favourable to the side of this or that state& Is the internal and international situation suitable for the undertakin of political actions or military actions in addition to the political action or are they not suitable. In all of these thin s what is referred to is the correct opinion. +ecause, whatever cate ory they may be, they fall under the sayin of the 7essen er (saw)( FIt is a matter of opinion war and strategy%7 The correct opinion is referred to /ust as the Prophet (saw) referred to the opinion of al,Habbab b. al,7un9ir. )l,Habbab was familiar with that place, so the Prophet (saw) referred to his e'perience. !o in the technical opinion reference is made to the correct opinion. Thirdly , The opinion which leads to undertakin an action, the opinion of the ma/ority is preferred. +ecause he (saw) complied with the ma/ority opinion in =hud and he went outside of 7adina even thou h he saw this opinion as mistaken. Eikewise, the senior companions took a contrary view because they held the Prophet1s view that they should remain in 7adinah. Fespite this, the Prophet (saw) acted accordin to this opinion, which is to o outside of 7adinah because the ma/ority had taken this opinion. !o this action of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) clarifies the meanin of his statement to )bu +akr (r.a.) and G=mar (r.a.)( FIf !oth of you agree on a mashura I will not go against it%7 This is re ardin the opinion over the same cate ory as in the case =hud i.e. an opinion which leads to the undertakin of an action. !o in any opinion which leads to the undertakin of an action the ma/ority is preferred such as in the election of a leader, or deposition of a overnor ( wali) or to decide on a pro/ect etc. It is incumbent that the ma/ority opinion is adopted and that it is bindin irrespective of whether it was ri ht or wron . )fter the application of the evidences on the reality of opinions in the world, it becomes clear that the bindin opinion, i.e. in which the ma/ority is preferred, is of the same cate ory as in the case of =hud. It falls under the G al+mashura1 mentioned in his (saw) sayin ( FIf !oth of you agree on a mashura%%%7 It is the opinion which leads to the undertakin of an action. )nythin besides that is not bindin and it is not obli atory to act upon it based on the view of the ma/ority. Thus, the bindin opinion i.e. in which the ma/ority opinion is preferred, is restricted to one type of the actions that e'ist in the world, which is the opinion that discusses the action which needs to be performed. Fue to this application it also becomes clear that for the !hari1a rule and the opinion which leads to a thou ht or technical matter no attention is iven, in both cases, to the ma/ority opinion. *or the !hari1a rule, only the stren th of the evidence is taken into account. )nd in the opinion which leads to a thou ht or technical matter, i.e. which is of the type of opinion, war or strate y, only the correct opinion is iven attention and nothin else Therefore, definition is an opinion which is not bindin i.e. the ma/ority opinion is not followed, since in no way does it fall under G mashura1, because the incident of B30

=hud does not apply to it. However, the #uestion of definition also belon s to the opinion which indicates a thou ht. +ecause the study of the hukm shar1i in order to define it and the study of the mind to define it- is the study of an actual thin in order to arrive at understandin of its reality i.e. understandin of its true nature. $henever it is in a reement with reality then that is what is preferred. Therefore, in definin a thin what is preferred is the correct opinion. In this the shari1a rule is not studied and nor is any importance attached to the opinion of the ma/ority. There is no difference between the shari1a definition and the definition of any other thin . !o when the definition is inclusive ( >amiH) of all components of the ob/ect bein defined, without e'ception or e'clusion of any components of the definition. )nd it restricts (maniH) the inclusion of any component which is does not come under the meanin of the definition. Then this definition is preferred over other definitions i.e. the correct opinion is preferred. +ecause it a rees with the reality of the ob/ect bein defined, and ives true description of this reality. This is the hukm of shura in Islam and it is clear from the te'ts of the ;ur1an and hadith and it has been elaborately described in the actions of the 7essen er of )llah (saw). However, for the purpose of ainin a precise understandin , someone may become confused, when discussin the reality of opinions, about the difference between an opinion throu h which a thou ht is reached and the opinion throu h which one arrives at an action. The #uestion of the difference between the incident of +adr and the incident of =hud in applyin the evidences on the opinions prevalent in the world may also become confused. It mi ht be said, when discussin the reality of opinions, that there is no difference between the opinion which leads to an action and the opinion which leads to a thou ht. In the end, all of them revert back to an action. !o from where does this difference arise& The answer to that #uestion is that there is a subtle difference between them. $ith respect to the opinion which leads to a thou ht, only the sub/ect matter is discussed without considerin the action. !o the area of discussion is the sub/ect and not the action. $hat is intended from the discussion is to arrive at a thou ht over a sub/ect which is studied without considerin the action irrespective of whatever this thou ht may entail in terms of actions. *or e'ample, the 7uslims oin forth in the apostasy (ridda$ wars was discussed by )bu +akr as bein in the sphere that a faction under his rule had rebelled a ainst the implementation of the laws of the !hari1a. G=mar discussed it in the sphere that it constitutes fi htin a faction which is stron and is challen in the state and the state may not be able to fi ht them. Thus, )bu +akr said( O+y )llahD If they withhold from me the cord of a camel which they used to ive to the 7essen er of )llah (saw) I will fi ht themDN $hen the issue became clear to him G=mar had no choice but to retract from his previous opinion and follow the correct opinion, which was the opinion of )bu +akr. +ecause, in reality, the issue was that a faction under the Islamic rule had rebelled. The issue was not that a lar e faction was challen in the state. The real discussion is not about oin out to war or not oin out as was the case in =hud. 5ather it is about whether the bedouin1s refusal to pay Jakah after the death of the 7essen er (saw) and their challen e to state constitutes rebellion a ainst the !hari1a rule or a challen e to the state by a lar e faction. This is the actual discussion. Therefore, it was a discussion about an opinion which leads to a thou ht, for which reference is only made to the correct opinion. The correct B33

opinion is that a faction under the rule of the Islamic state had rebelled a ainst the implementation of the !hari1a rules. *or e'ample, 7u1awiyya1s re#uest for the arbitration (tahkeem) of the ;ur1an between him and sayyidina G)li by raisin aloft the mushafs( was that a true arbitration of the ;ur1an or was it a ploy a ainst sayyidina G)li & G)li (r.a.) saw it as a ploy and many people with him viewed it as an arbitration of the ;ur1an. !o, this sub/ectLissue should be studied in order to arrive at the true si nificance of raisin the mashafs (scripts)- which constitutes an opinion that leads to a thou ht. !o the correct opinion is referred to which is that it was a ploy a ainst sayyidina G)li. *or e'ample, does the increase in the number of rulers weaken a state or stren then it& In other words, as the number of rulers decreases, does the state become stron er, or whenever their numbers decrease does the state become weaker, and whenever their number increases the state become stron er& In other words, does the cabinet in the democratic system become stron er whenever its members decrease and weaken whenever its members increase or is it the opposite& Foes the state in the Islamic system become stron er whenever the number of the khalifah1s assistants ( muHawwinin) decrease and weaken whenever their numbers increase, or is it the opposite& This issue is studied in order to arrive at the true reality. !o it is an opinion which leads to a thou ht, and in this sub/ect the correct opinion is accredited. $hich is that whenever the number of rulers increases the state becomes weaker and whenever their number decreases the state becomes stron er. These are three e'amples of the opinion which leads to a thou ht. It is clear from this that the area of discussion is the sub/ect and not the action. Thou h the discussion in the sub/ect would ensure actions, yet the discussion is not focussed on the action but on a thou ht which, upon becomin clear, entails the undertakin or non,undertakin of an action. .r, undertakin an action in a manner which is necessitated by the thou ht which has been discussed. !o the discussion is for the purpose of arrivin at an opinion in a sub/ect i.e. to a thou ht. $hen a thou ht is reached a decision will be made on the sub/ect of the action, in li ht of the thou ht arrived at after study. This opinion which is studied will not lead directly to an action, rather it will only lead to a thou ht. The thou ht which is reached may entail the undertakin of an action or it may not. "onse#uently, it is an opinion which leads to a thou ht. )s for the opinion which leads to an action, the undertakin of an action is discussed, considerin the sub/ect upon which this action depends. !o the area of discussion is the undertakin of an action and not the sub/ect. The purpose of discussion is to determine whether or not to undertake an action or to undertake an action in a specific manner. The purpose is not to discuss a sub/ect. !o when it is intended to elect a Hhalifah and ive BayHa to him the sub/ect of Hhilafah is not discussed. $hether this is obli atory ( fard) or preferred (mandu!). )nd nor is the discussion- should we elect a president (of a republic) or a khalifah& $hat should be discussed is( should so,and,so be elected and iven BayHa or should a different person be elected and iven BayHa& $hen the state1s action of takin out a loan is discussed, the discussion should not be the issue of whether or not it is allowed to take the loan. +ut rather what should be discussed is( whether the loan is to be taken or not. )nd when the openin of a certain road is discussed, it should not be discussed whether or not it is allowed to open this road due to the presence of another road takin its place. +ut what is B34

discussed( is whether the road should be opened or not. i.e. the action itself is discussed in terms of whether or not to undertake it. The sub/ect which is entailed by this action is not discussed. The discussion of a sub/ect is an opinion which leads to a thou ht. +ut the sub/ect is not the area of discussion. 5ather the sub/ect under the area of discussion is whether to undertake an action. Then it will be considered a discussion about an opinion which leads to an action. !o the opinion will be put forward in order to undertake an action. *or e'ample, when )bu +akr consulted the 7uslims with re ards to who will be khalifah after him, it was a discussion about the election of a khalifah ie should so,and,so or so,and,so person be elected. Fefinitely, the discussion was not about the issue of Hhilafah. It was a discussion about an opinion which leads to an action. *or e'ample when the a reement of arbitration (tahkeem) between 7u1awiyya and sayyidina G)li took was finalised. ) discussion took place about selectin an arbiter ( hakam) on the side of G)li (r.a.). G)li (r.a.) chose G)bdullah b. G)bbas (r.a.) but most of the people with him chose )bu 7usa al,)sh1ari. This discussion was about who will be the arbiter (hakam) and not about the issue of acceptin arbitration. !o it was a discussion about an opinion which leads to an action. *or e'ample, if the 7uslim populace take the view that they should establish heavy industry to manufacture all types of machinery and e#uipment in order to fulfil the elements necessary for the state to carry the 7essa e (of Islam). +ut their rulers take the view that they should establish dams and encoura e a riculture in order to improve the livelihood of the farmer. This discussion is about whether to pursue heavy industry or to undertake the construction of dams. The discussion should not be whether the state should carry the 7essa e (of Islam) or not. !o the discussion is about an opinion which leads to an action. These are three e'amples of the opinion which leads to an action, and it is clear that the area of discussion is the action and not the sub/ect. These actions, even if they depend on certain issues, their discussion, however is not focused on these issues, rather on the undertakin of the action. !o the discussion is about the action and not about the opinion. *rom this discussion and from the above e'amples, it is clear that there is a difference between the opinion which leads to a thou ht and the opinion which leads to an action. Iven thou h this subtle difference re#uires reflection and scrutiny. )ll this is in relation to the confusion that can occur with respect to the difference between an opinion which leads to a thou ht and the opinion which leads to an action. )s for the confusion that may occur with re ards to the difference between the incident of +adr and the incident of =hud- it mi ht be claimed that there is no difference between the incident of +adr and the incident of =hud. $hy should the incident of +adr be considered as an opinion which leads to a thou ht and the incident of =hud be considered as an opinion which leads to an action when both involve oin into battle and there is no difference between them& The answer to that is that there is a clear distinction between the two incidents since the reality of the incident of +adr is different to that of =hud. The issue in =hud was( !hould they o out or remain in 7adina& It was to do with 9eal and cautiousness. The discussion was not about a (strate ic) position in war. That is why we find the Prophet (saw), when he came to or anise the army in a B38

strate ic position on the mountain of =hud, that he assumed the task of or anisin them himself. He made the marksmen wait in the rear and ordered them not to attack. *or this action he did not refer to the opinion of the people. )s for the reality of +adr the issue was purely the #uestion of arran in the army in a strate ic position. !o for this action the 7essen er of )llah (saw) referred to the correct opinion. This is from one an le. *rom another an le, the evidence for this is not /ust the action of the 7essen er (saw) but it is his action and his sayin as well. !o the 7essen er1s (saw) sayin , FIt a matter of opinion war and strategy 7 is also an evidence. .ne issue still remains- who will be the one to e'pound what is ri ht, while his opinion is considered to be the preponderant& $e have e'plained that in the !hari1a rules the stren th of the evidence is preferred, and in the opinion which leads to an action, the view of the ma/ority is preferred. )nd that in the opinion which leads to a thou ht, the technical matters and #uestions of definition, in all these matters the correct opinion is preferred. It remains for us to identify who will e'pound the ri ht opinion and whose opinion will be preponderant. The answer is that the one who outwei hs the correct opinion is the one who has /urisdiction over that thin in #uestion. He is the one who leads the people i.e. their leader, since he is the one who assumes the task of consultin the people. $hen the community consults each other, it only does that to reach an opinion so as to proceed accordin to it. To proceed accordin to it as a community, it becomes necessary to have a leader over them. !o only he should have the authority over the matter for which the consultation took place. The one to outwei h the correct opinion should be only him, the one who leads the people. The evidence for this is the verse which states( FAnd consult them in the matter% 6hen when you have taken a decision put your trust in Allah7 >0(B4?A !o the shura was performed by the 7essen er (saw) and he was the leader of the 7uslims. )llah ave him the ri ht to decide, to implement what he decides after the consultation. i.e. what he views as bein correct. !o he was the one who outwei hed what was correct. Eikewise, it is the same situation with any leader of a people, since this is not special to the 7essen er (saw) but eneral to all 7uslims. That is because the speech of the 7essen er (saw) is a speech to his =mmah as lon as there is no evidence to specify it to him. )nd here, there are no evidences to make it specific to the 7essen er (saw). !o it is eneral (Gamm). )s for when the community does not have a leader and it wishes to select some one who will have the ri ht to outwei h the correct opinion. In this situation the community should choose a sin le person only so that he will have the ri ht to outwei h the correct opinion. The community is not allowed to choose more than one person. That is because outwei hin the correct opinion cannot be embarked to other than one person. 6es, the ma/ority mi ht state the correct opinion and the correct opinion mi ht lie more with two persons as opposed to one. +ut the issue is not the possibility of with whom the correct opinion lies, but rather who will outwei h the correct opinion. Is it one person or two& That cannot be possible for the ma/ority, because followin the ma/ority (opinion) is contrary to adoptin the correct opinion. They are two opposite issues. Thus, the ma/ority is adhered to B3:

irrespective of the correct opinion, and the correct opinion is adhered to irrespective of the ma/ority. )s for the fact that only one person should outwei h the correct opinion, and that it is not permitted for more than one person to do so. This is obli atory due to a number of reasons( *irst( That reality of the correct opinion makes it inevitable that there should be one person because if the outwei hin is left to two, three or more persons they will only disa ree. )nd this disa reement of theirs will force them to refer to an arbitration (tahkeem). If they appoint two people as arbitrators they will only disa ree so the /ud ement will have to o to one of them. Then the ri ht to /ud e will have been referred to only one person. If they appoint three arbitrators then their disa reement will be unavoidable. Then the /ud ement will be iven either to one or two persons. If they refer to two persons then they would have referred to the ma/ority opinion, when it is re#uired that they refer the correct opinion. Then it becomes necessary to refer to one person. Therefore it is imperative, that from the be innin , the /ud ement is iven to only one person. i.e. the one who outwei hs the correct opinion should be one person only. The disa reement that occurs between two or three persons occurs between people of reater number than that. !o passin /ud ement should not be iven to more than one person. +ecause, when more than one person are iven the ri ht to pass /ud ement, the /ud ement oes to the ma/ority and not to what is ri ht. $hat is intended is the arbitration of the correct opinion and not the ma/ority. !econd( The basis in outwei hin the correct opinion is that it should only be for the one in authority, and he can only be one person. +ecause if he is ameer i.e. leader then he can only be one person. )nd if he is implementin the thin for which consultation took place then he can only be one person. !ince two persons will unavoidably disa ree about of styles of implementation. Then their disa reement will obstruct the implementation. !o the person in authority should only be one. "onse#uently, the person who outwei hs the correct opinion should be only one person. Third( *or the 7uslims the post of the Hhilafah is the reatest thin . The Islamic Eaw has ranted the Hhalifah the sole authority to outwei h one rule over another in the adoption of rules. )nd it has iven him the ri ht to be alone in his adoption based on the stren th of the evidence. )nd it has iven him the sole ri ht to outwei h the correct opinion. He has the sole ri ht to declare war, conclude a treaty, define the relationship with the Hafir nations and anythin else that comes under the authority of the khalifah. The lookin after of the affairs has been made sub/ect only to his opinion, accordin to what he sees as bein correct to undertake. The i>maH of the !ahaba has taken place on this. The opinion of the Hhalifah is the opinion of one person only. !o by reater reason ( min !a! awla), for thin s of lesser importance than that rave task , i.e. the /ob of the khalifah, the correct opinion should be outwei hed by a sin le person.

B3@

This is the issue of shura (consultation) and tashawur (mutual consultation) i.e. the adoption of opinions and this is the rule of the !hari1a with re ards it. This rule differs completely with the democratic rule. This rule of )llah concernin the adoption of opinions is the only true one. )nythin else emanatin from democracy is false and it is not permitted to adopt it.

B3?

- ,cience and #ulture

In )rabic ton ue it is said( the man (alima) has obtained knowled e (Gilm). This means that the true reality of knowled e occurred to him. He ained knowled e of a thin means he became co nisant of it, i.e. he became informed of a matter or ac#uainted with it. )lso in the lan ua e it is said( He (thaCifa) has ained comprehension, which means that he has become proficient, thus he is clever and adroit (thaCif). He has understood >thaCifaIthaCufaA a lan ua e, (means) he has mastered and understood it swiftly. These lin uistic meanin s are the basis of the use of words. However if these words were used to indicate other meanin s that relate to the lin uistic meanin - that is permitted, such as, the adoption of the word faHil (sub/ect) in rammar for e'ample. The lin uistic meanin (of the words) was prevailin , and that is why the ancients used to apply the word G ilm on all forms of knowled e without differentiatin between the sciences and disciplines. Then, people be an to consider intellectual and natural disciplines as bein eneral to all peoples whilst other traditional (te'tual) disciplines were considered specific to the nation from which it was transferred. !ubse#uently, each of science (Gilm) and culture (thaCafa) be an to be defined accordin to different specific disciplines, ac#uirin terminolo ical meanin s which were different to their lin uistic meanin s. )ccordin to this terminolo y they have the followin meanin ( !o, science (Gilm)( is the knowled e which is ac#uired throu h observation, e'perimentation and education, as in physics, chemistry and the rest of the empirical sciences. )nd culture ( thaCafa)( is the knowled e which is ac#uired by way of transmission, learnin and deduction as in (the study of) history, lan ua es, /urisprudence (fiCh), philosophy and the rest of the non, empirical disciplines. )nd there are other non,empirical disciplines which are included as sciences (Gilm) even thou h they come within culture such as arithmetic, en ineerin and industry. Iven thou h they come under culture (thaCafa) they are re arded as part of science because they are universal to all peoples and not specific to any one nation. )s well anythin from the culture relatin to crafts which resemble industry such as trade and shippin - they are considered as part of science and they are universal. )s for the arts such aspaintin , sculpture and music they are part of culture. They follow a particular viewpoint- which is a specific culture. The difference between culture and science is( that science is universal to all nations and not specific to any nation to the e'clusion of another nation. )s for culture it mi ht be specific, bein ascribed to the nation from which it resulted or it may be part of the nation1s specific and particular characteristics. !uch as literature and bio raphies of heroes, and their philosophy concernin life. .r they may be universal such as trade, shippin etc. Therefore, science is adopted universally i.e. from all nations because it is universal and not specific to any particular nation. )s for culture, the nation should be in with its own culture, when she has studied it and is co nisant of it until it becomes focused in their minds, then she can study other cultures.5

5 please check B4C

The 7uslims used to differentiate between the sciences which a person used to attain by himself and the sciences he used to receive from others. Ibn Hhaldun says in his al+5uCaddima( OThe sciences are of two types( ) natural type which is for man to arrive at throu h his thinkin . )nd a te'tual type which he takes from the one who authored it. The first( are the philosophical and aphoristic sciences which he can seek by the nature of his thou ht and be uided, throu h the human faculties, to its sub/ects and issues and all its decisive proofs and aspects of its teachin s. !o as in his discernment and study, he attains the correct (opinion) from the incorrect, in his capacity as a human bein possessin the faculty of thou ht. The second( are the te'tual and written sciences (G ulum naCliyya wadHiyya). They depend on the report comin from a shar1i source. In this re ard, the mind has no scope e'cept to relate the branch issues to the usul (foundation).N He also said OThe rational or natural sciences are common to all nations since man arrives at them throu h the natural (disposition) of his thou ht. )s for the te'tual sciences they are specific to the 7uslim reli ion ( millah islamiyyah) and its adherents.N It appears that what Ibn Hhaldun meant by specifyin the te'tual sciences with the Islamic millah is was only by way of e'ample. .r else other nations other than the Islamic nation have te'tual sciences specific to them such as their le islation and lan ua e. Ibn Hhaldun1s statement does not indicate that he distin uished between science and culture. It only indicates that he distin uished between te'tual and rational sciences. His comments are not an evidence to say that the 7uslims used to differentiate between science and culture. 5ather they are an evidence to prove that the 7uslims used only to differentiate between disciplines. Thus, they divided them into two sections. However their division was in terms of their eneral ac#uisition and not in terms of the manner of ac#uisition. !o they desi nated them as rational sciences i.e. ac#uired via the mind. )nd te'tual sciences ac#uired from the te't. However, people today differentiate between disciplines in terms of the manner in which they were received. Thus, they apply the term Gscience1 (G ilm) on anythin that is ac#uired throu h the empirical method and they apply the term Gculture1 (thaCafa) on anythin ac#uired by means other than the empirical method.

-.1 The Islamic #ulture

The Islamic culture( is the disciplines the study of which was occasioned by the Islamic a#eeda. $hether these disciplines included the Islamic a#eeda and were studied such as theolo y (ilm al+6awheed) or they are based on the Islamic a#eeda such as fiCh (/urisprudence), tafseer and hadith. .r, whatever became necessary for the comprehension of rules emanatin from the Islamic a#eeda such as the sciences of the )rabic lan ua e, terminolo ical classification of hadith (mustalah al+hadith) and science of the foundations of /urisprudence (Gilm al+usul). )ll of the Islamic culture is referable to the Hitab and !unnah. )nd it is from them, and throu h their comprehension, and accordin to them that all the branches of the Islamic culture have been ac#uired. They (kitab and !unnah) are also from the Islamic culture because the Islamic a#eeda obli es their adoption and adherence B4B

to whatever has been mentioned in them. The ;ur1an has been revealed to the 7essen er (saw) so that he may clarify it to the people. )llah (swt) said( FAnd we have sent down unto you #5uhammad JsawK$ the reminder and the advice #/urHan$ that you may clearly e@plain to men what was sent down to them%7 >B8(33A )nd He ordered the 7uslims to take whatever the 7essen er (saw) brou ht. He (swt) said( FAnd whatsoever the 5essenger #saw$ gave you take it and whatsoever he for!ade you a!stain #from it$%7 >4?(:A )doptin whatever the 7essen er (saw) has brou ht cannot be possible without comprehendin and learnin it. .win to presence of disciplines which were re#uired to understand the Hitab and !unnah- many types of Islamic disciplines arose. )nd the Islamic culture came to have a specific meanin which included( the Hitab, !unnah, )rabic lan ua e, con/u ation (sarf), rammar, rhetoric (!alagha), tafseer, hadith, classification of hadith, foundations of /urisprudence ( usul), tawheed (theolo y) and other Islamic culture disciplines 2o *H check from here yet.

-.2 The %ethod of ,tudy in Islam

The Islamic culture has a method of study, and this method is summarised in three issues ( *irstly ( That you should study thin s deeply until you correctly comprehend their true state. +ecause this culture is conceptually deep rooted, and its study re#uires patience and forbearance. !ince culturin oneself with it is an intellectual process, which re#uires mental e'ertion to comprehend them because it re#uires the comprehension of its sentences, co ni9ance of its reality and its linka e with information throu h which this reality is understood. That is why it is essential to ac#uire it intellectually. *or instance, the 7uslim is obli ed to adopt his creed throu h ration and not by un#uestionin submission. !o, the study of whatever relates to the basis of the creed inevitably re#uires an intellectual process at the time of study. The !hari1a rules have been addressed in the ;ur1an and hadith. !o, to deduce the !hari1a rules the use of the intellectual process is imperative. Throu h it the problem, the relevant te't and its application on the problem is understood. *or this the intellectual process is indispensable. Iven the layman, who adopts the hukm without knowled e of its evidence, needs to understand the problem. )nd understand the hukm which has been brou ht to solve it. !o that he does not adopt the hukm which is for another problem, other than the problem to which the hukm applies. It is imperative that he utilises the intellectual process. Therefore, to culture oneself with the Islamic culture, whether he is a mu/tahid or layman, he must receive the culture intellectually. This will not be possible e'cept throu h the intellectual process and by e'ertin of ones utmost. !econd ( The student should believe in what he studies so that he acts upon it. ie he definitely believes the truths he is studyin without any doubts creepin in, if it relates to the aCeeda. )nd he should have least amount of doubt that it applies to the realty, if it is from the non,a#eeda issues such as rulin s and morals. +ut they B42

must be founded on a basis in which he believes definitely, admittin no doubt. $hatever the case, belief in what the student adopts from what he studies is a condition. +elief, either in what he adopts or in the ori in of what he adopts. The adoption of culture in any other manner is not permitted. It is throu h makin the belief the basis of adoptin culture that the Islamic culture is found to be set down in an e'cellent and distin uished manner. It is deep and at the same time stimulatin and effective, ivin the student a bla9in ener y thereby i nitin a fire which devours corruption and emits a li ht which illuminates the path to well, bein . The definite belief in these thou hts ensures a definite linka e, which naturally takes place within man, between his reality and the concepts has has about thin s which are linked to these thou hts in their capacity as meanin s about life. !o with these thou hts he moves with ea erness and 9eal, towards action. This e'traordinary effect of the culture on peoples minds will take place when the emotions (contained by the thou ht) move towards the reality. +ecause, to believe in it constitutes the linka e of emotions with their concepts, then the movement (towards action) takes place. Third ( The student should study the process of treatin the reality that is comprehended and perceptible. It should not be a study based on a theoretical suppositions, so that he describes thin s as they are in their true form, in order to treat it and chan e it. He should take the e'istin facts about man, life and universe which he senses or he can sense, and study them in order to treat them and ive the rulin with re ards to them, until he can determine his position re ardin it in terms of whether to adopt it, leavin it or have the choice whether to adopt or leave it. Thus, Islam does not allow people to follow theoretical assumptions. *or e'ample ( $hat if people live on mars, how can they fast the month of 5amadhan there & There is no moon there so as to have the month of 5amadhanD .nly the person on earth he is sub/ect to the address ( khita!), and he must witness the month of 5amadhan and he must fast that month. However, the cloud mi ht prevent the people from seein the moon so he passes a /ud ement for this event when it occurs. Hence, the 7essen er (saw) said( G$hen you see the crescent (of the month of 5amadhan), start fastin , and when you see the crescent (of the month of Shawwal), stop fastin - and if the sky is overcast (and you canKt see It) then re ard the crescent (month) of 5amadhan (as of 0C days).1 Therefore, it is stipulated in adoptin the culture that it be real and not fanciful or theoretical. )nd that it should be studied in order to act upon it when its reality occurs in his life, not for the purpose of knowin its beauty or for the sake of mere intellectual ratification. This is the method of Islam in study, which is( an in,depth study and belief in what is arrived at by study or belief in what is bein studied. )nd realistically adoptin that to apply it in the battlefield of life. If the conditions of the method of study are met then the 7uslim who has cultured himself with the Islamic culture will have deep thinkin , with a sharpened sensitivity and be able to solve lifes problems. This ensures the 7uslim naturally follows the path of perfection, willin ly and with choice. He is unable to deviate from this method as lon as he proceeds accordin to this method because the Islamic thou hts he adopts from this culture are stimulatin , effective, based on reality, true and effective B40

solutions for problems. In addition to settin the one cultured by it aflame with 9eal, it ives the 7uslim an e'traordinary ability to face the problems of life with solutions however reat or small, easy or difficult they may be. Thus, a mentality (GaCliyya) forms within him which can only be content when the mind is convinced and the heart is filled with tran#uillity. )t the same time an Islamic disposition (nafsiyya) forms within him filled with a belief which is consummate. )nd throu h this mentality (GaCliyya) and disposition (nafsiyya) the person is characterised by e'cellent #ualities which Islam demands from the 7uslim. )nd throu h this mentality (GaCliyya) and disposition (nafsiyya) he overcomes all the difficulties that stand as obstacles in his way. This is due to what we see in the substance of this Islamic culture in terms of deep and enli htened thou hts and due to them bein based on the a#eeda which represents man1s comprehension of his relationship with )llah (swt). !o, the Islamic culture is either from )llah (swt) or deduced from that which is from )llah in terms of the Hitab and !unnah. It has an intellectual aspect in terms of it bein a thou ht, and at the same time it has spirit (ruh) in terms of realisin the relationship with )llah when he adopts the culture in its capacity as comin from )llah. Thus, it ensures that anyone cultured by it has deep and enli htened thou ht with a burnin , fiery enthusiasm. He sells himself to )llah in the path of Islam, seekin the <ood Pleasure of )llah. )lso, you will find that the one cultured by the Islamic culture knows what he wants and knows how to solve the problems of life because he has learnt the truth with which he faces the battlefield of life. Thus, he plun es into the trials and tribulations of life. He has been endowed with the best of provisions which is the enli htened thou ht, ta#wa (fear of )llah), and knowled e which solves all problems. This is the culture which brin s to ether all that is ood.

-.

$cquisition of #ulture and ,ciences

Incoura in the study of Islamic culture does not mean restrictin the 7uslims only to its study. 5ather, what is meant is that it should be made the basis for culturin , teachin , and the basis for the permissibility of studyin other cultures and sciences. The 7uslim has the ri ht to learn whatever he wants from the cultures and learn the sciences that appeal to him. However, the Islamic personality (shakhsiyya islamiyya) must be the basic premise around which the ac#uisition of any culture revolves. The 7uslims endeavoured to teach their sons the Islamic culture first, and only after they were assured that this cultured was consolidated in their minds did they open the doors to the study of other cultures. )nd it is only this method of learnin which keeps the Islamic personality Islamic and none other, havin specific attributes which distin uishes it from the remainin personalities of humankind. $hat has been stipulated in takin from non,Islamic cultures is that it is not taken e'cept after becomin satisfied that the Islamic culture has been consolidated and has become deep rootedLentrenched in the minds. This is not stipulated for sciences, because sciences do not have a bearin on the Islamic culture since they are universal. It is essential that 7uslims continue to persevere with utmost effort in the path of learnin sciences since they are of the means of life. It should B43

be noted however, with re ards to the teachin of sconces, that its results should concur with the viewpoint of Islam so that it stren thens the a#eeda and not shake peoples conviction in it. $hen a scientific theory or law contradicts the te't of the ;ur1an which is definite in meanin and authenticity, then it is not taken and nor is any topic of learnin adopted, since it is speculative ( ?anni) and the ;ur1an is definite (CatHi). *or e'ample, the theory of Farwin re ardin the ori in of human bein s contradicts the te't of the ;ur1an with respect to the creation of )dam (a.s). Therefore, this theory is re/ected because it contradicts the ;ur1an. Iven thou h Islam did not make the ;ur1an a basis of ac#uirin scientific knowled e, however it must be noted that these sciences should not contradict the Islamic a#eeda. In short, the Islamic a#eeda must be adhered to completely when provided with cultures and sciences by makin this Islamic personality the basic premise in ac#uirin any culture, makin sure that the sciences do not contradict the Islamic personality when ac#uirin scientific knowled e. It is this adherence which will maintain the presence of the Islamic personality in the 7uslims and make the Islamic culture effect other cultures. )nd ensure its continuation as an Islamic culture which is distin uished from the rest of the cultures of the world. )nd when this adherence vanishes and the 7uslims become ne li ent re ardin it, they will ac#uire other cultures on a basis other than Islam. They did not heed the Islamic a#eeda when takin the sciences. This led to the presence of an evident dan er on the Islamic personality. 2ay, on the whole 7uslim =mmah when it oes on for a lon period and it continues for a eneration or more.

-.- The #ultural %o(ement

The 7uslims used to open up lands in order to carry the Islamic da1wa to its peoples. The nature of carryin the Islamic "all necessitates the presence of a cultural movement. !ince Islam is a messa e which re#uires study, research and readin . )nd since its very nature necessitates that it is studied and understood. It re#uires the one who has conviction in it to study anythin that has an effect in elevatin the standard of life. Thus, many of those people who opened up lands were scholars (ulama), proficient in the recitation of the ;ur1an (#ari1een), and those who could write (katibeen). They were accompanied by the scholars, reciters and scribes so as to teach in the newly con#uered lands. +ecause, in every con#uered land a mos#ue would be built for prayer and for the purpose of teachin men, women and children. The =lama were the ones who assumed the responsibility of teachin the people the ;ur1an, hadith and ahkam. They also assumed the responsibility of spreadin Islam. Thus, the cultural movement aimed at teachin and spreadin Islam. It was an Islamic cultural movement. However, in addition to that it also used to include historical, lin uistic and literary aspects.

B44

-.0 The "osition of %uslims 1ith re&ards to non- %uslim cultures

The 7uslims con#uered Persia, Ira#, the !ham re ion, I ypt, north )frica and !pain. These countries had different lan ua es, nationalities, cultural norms, laws and traditions. They also used to have different cultures ( thaCafat). $hen the 7uslims entered these lands they carried to them the Islamic daHwa and they applied on them the system of Islam. However, they did not coerce people until they became believers but the stren th of the Islamic ideolo y, its truthfulness, simplicity of its creed and nature had effected them. !o they entered into the deen of )llah in crowds. 2ot to mention that the understandin of Islam was easily accessible to all. The =lama used to accompany the armies in the state of war and travel to the newly con#uered country to teach the people the deen. .win to this a stron Islamic cultural movement took form in the con#uered country. This had a bi effect on people1s understandin of the realityLtruth of the deen and its culture. Islam effected the thou hts and also effected the cultures which were present in the con#uered countries. )ll the mentalities were fused to ether and made into one Islamic mentality (GaCliyya islamiyya). )lthou h Islam assumes the role of the universal intellectual leadership and works to save mankind, it does not however impose itself on the people by force, even thou h it does prepare the power to protect its daHwa ("all) and to carry it to the people. Eikewise, it prepares the minds and intellects of people with the Islamic culture so that they are able to comprehend the truth of Islam. Thus, its attitude with people re ardin its culture was in a definite manner. The 7uslims understood this when they emer ed from the )rabian peninsula to spread Islam throu h con#uest. They entered these lands and carried Islam to them ( they carried to them the ;ur1an, the Prophet1s !unnah and the )rabic lan ua e. They used to teach the people the ;ur1an, hadith, the rules of the deen and they used to teach them the )rabic lan ua e also. They used to restrict their attention the Islamic culture. That is why the period of rule over these countries did not continue until the old culture of the con#uered countries be an to disappear and die away. The Islamic culture became the sole culture of the country. )nd the )rabic lan ua e became the sole lan ua e of the Islam. It was the only lan ua e used by the state. Therefore, the culture of all the Islamic lands, despite the disparity in their peoples and lan ua es, became one culture which is the Islamic culture. )nd this after the sons of Persia had culture different to that of the sons of al,!ham. )nd the sons of )frica had a different culture to that of the sons of Ira#. )nd the culture of the sons of 6emen was different to that of the sons of I ypt. )ll of their mentalities became one mentality which is the Islamic mentality. )nd their culture became one which is the Islamic culture. Fue to this, all the con#uered countries alon with the )rab countries became one country, the Islamic country after they had been different countries. )nd these different peoples became one =mmah which is the 7uslim =mmah after bein different and scattered peoples. The orientalists rely on a dis raceful error, and some 7uslim scholars themselves have fallen prey to it, when they claim that forei n cultures such as the Persian, 5oman, <reek and Hindu cultures etc had an effect on the Islamic culture. )nd the /ustification is a manifest mis uidance when they claim that many of these forei n B48

cultures had penetrated the Islamic culture. The reality is that the Islamic culture entered the con#uered countries and, in its capacity as the culture of that country, it completely effected the (indi enous) culture such that these cultures enerally ceased to e'ist. It assumed the place of the ori inal culture and became the sole culture of the country. )s for the suspicion that the Islamic culture was effected by the non,Islamic cultures. This suspicion comes from the intentional distortion on which the non, 7uslims depend when chan in the concepts about thin s It also comes from the shortsi htedness of some researchers. 6es, the Islamic culture did benefit from, and make use of, the forei n cultures. It made them a means for its own productivity and rowth. However, this does not constitute effect ( taHaththur) but rather benefitin (intifaH) from them. This is necessary for all cultures. The difference between effect and derivin benefit from somethin is ( that bein effected by the culture is to study it and adopt the thou hts that it contains and incorporate them into the thou hts of the first culture due to the mere presence of a similarity between them and due to the mere preference for these thou hts. +ein effected by a culture leads to believin in its thou hts. If the 7uslims were to be effected by the forei n culture in the be innin of the con#uests then they would have transferred, translated and incorporated 5oman Eaw into the Islamic Eaw considerin it as a part of Islam. They would have also made <reek philosophy a part of their beliefs and in their lives the would have followed the way of the Persian and 5omans by allowin the affairs of the state to be uided by what they saw as beneficial to them. If they did that then Islam would have followed a disorderly and confused course from the be innin of its emer ence from the )rabian peninsula and its thou hts would have become completely mi'ed up, causin it to cease bein Islamic. This is what it means to be effected by another culture, if indeed that is what happened. )s for benefitin from another culture, it constitutes the deep study of another culture and knowled e of the difference between its thou hts and the thou hts of the Islamic culture. Then takin the meanin s in that culture and the similarities that it contains and enrichin the literary culture, and improvin the rendition of these meanin s and similesLalle ories without allowin any contradiction to enter the thou hts of Islam. )nd without takin any thou hts from its concepts about life, le islation, aCeeda. The restriction of benefitin from the culture and not bein effected by it means that its study constitutes only information which does not effect the viewpoint about life. !ince the be innin of the Islamic con#uests until the era of decline in which the cultural and missionary campai n took place durin the middle of the ei hth century ).H. The 7uslims used to make the Islamic culture the basis of their culture and they used to study the non,Islamic cultures to benefit from them in terms of the meanin s about thin s in life. 2ot to have conviction in their thou hts and that is why they were not effected by them. 5ather, they only benefited from them. $hich is contrary to the situation of the 7uslims after the western cultural onslau ht a ainst them. They studied the western culture and they came to like its thou hts. )mon st them there were those who came to be convinced of such thou hts and abandoned the Islamic culture...and those who liked these thou hts and included them in the Islamic B4:

culture as bein part of it, and some of which came to be considered as Islamic thou hts even thou h they contradict Islam. 7any of them, for e'ample, used to consider the well known democratic principle G the =mmah is the source of authority1 as an Islamic principle even thou h it meant that the soverei nty would be for the people and that the =mmah would pass le islation and enacts canons. This contradicts Islam because the soverei nty is only for the !hari1a and not the =mmah and the laws are from )llah and not from the people. There were many who tried to make Islam democratic, socialist or communist. Iven thou h Islam contradicts democracy because the ruler only implements the !hari1a and he is restricted by it. He is not employed by the =mmah and nor does he implement their will. 5ather, he looks after their interests accordin to the !hari1a. Eikewise, Islam contradicts socialism because for it ownership is restricted to the mode and not restricted by the amount. )lso, it contradicts with communism because Islam makes the belief in )llah the basis of life and advocates private ownership and acts to protect it. 7akin Islam democratic, socialist or communist by preferrin those thou hts constitutes bein effected by the forei n culture and not benefitin from it. $hat is worse, is that the western intellectual leadership is a creed which contradicts the creed of Islam. !ome were effected by it and the educated amon st them be an to say that reli ion should be separate from the stateD )nd the uneducated amon st them would say reli ion is contrary to politics DD )nd do not enter politics into the reli ion...which indicates that the 7uslims, in the era of decline after the cultural invasion, had studied the non,Islamic culture and were effected by it contrary to the situation of the 7uslims before who studied the non,Islamic cultures and benefited from them but were not effected by their thou hts. +y e'aminin the manner in which the 7uslims studied the non,Islamic culture and the manner in which they used to adopt it, the nature of benefitin from it and becomin effected by it becomes clear. !omeone who scrutinises the Islamic culture will find that it has !hari1a disciplines like tafseer (;uranic e'e esis), hadith, /urisprudence etc, and it has disciplines relatin to the )rabic lan ua e in terms of rammar, declension, literature and rhetorics ( !alagha) etc. )nd it has rational disciplines such as lo ic (mantiC) and theolo y (tawheed). The Islamic culture does not o beyond these three cate ories. )s for the !hari1a disciplines, they were not effected by the non,Islamic cultures and nor did they benefit from them at all. !ince their basis is restricted to the Hitab and !unnah. The *u#aha (/urists) did not benefit from the non,Islamic cultures and nor did they study them because the Islamic Eaw has abro ated all the previous shari1as and their adherents have been ordered to leave them and follow the !hari1a of Islam and if they did not do that they will be considered as disbelievers. Therefore, the shari1a does not permit the 7uslims to adopt those !hari1as or to be effected by those cultures because they are restricted to adoptin the rules of Islam only, because anythin else is considered kufr (disbelief) and it is forbidden to adopt it. However, Islam has a sin le method in adoptin rules which cannot be surpassed. This method involves the understandin of the e'istin problem and the inference of a rulin for it from the !hari1a evidences. Therefore, there is no scope for studyin any /urisprudential culture in relation to the 7uslims adoptin rules. Thus, the 7uslims were not effected by 5oman Eaw or any other law. They B4@

definitely did not adopt from it and nor did they study it. Iven thou h the 7uslims did translate philosophical and some scientific works, but they did not translate anythin from the non,Islamic /urisprudence or le islation whether 5oman or anythin else. $hich indicates decisively that the non,Islamic cultures did not have a presence amon st the *u#aha (/urists), whether for the purpose of study or benefitin from them. Indeed, the law did row and e'pand. Its rowth and e'pansion is attributable to what took place in front of the 7uslims in terms of problems which needed a solution. The e'tensive economic problems faced by the Islamic state and the issues occurrin in different aspects relatin to this state pushed the 7uslims, by virtue of their deen, to perform i>tihad re radin these issues accordin to the principles of Islam and pushed them to deduce rules, to solve these problem, from the Hitab and !unnah or whatever the Hitab and !unnah allude to in terms of evidences. This is what their deen ordered them to do and this is what our 7aster 7uhammad, the 7essen er of )llah (saw) made clear to them. It has been narrated about him (saw) that when he sent 7u1a9 to 6emen he said to him ( G +y what will you pass /ud ement &1 He said ( +y the +ook of )llah. The Prophet (saw) said ( If you do not find it there & He said ( +y the !unnah of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) .He said ( )nd if you do not find it & He said( GI will e'ercise my own i>tihad1 He (saw) said( GPraise be to )llah who has made the messen er of the 7essen er of )llah to accord with what )llah and His 7essen er loves.1 Thus, it was fard on the 7uslims to perform i>tihad to deduce the !hari1a rule for each issue that occurred. )nd the rules that were deduced were Islamic !hari1a rules, deduced from the Hitab and !unnah or whatever the Hitab and !unnah alluded to in terms of evidences. )s for tafseer (;uranic e'e esis), they used to e'plain the verses of the ;ur1an and attempted to e'pound the meanin s of verses. Iither accordin to what was indicated by the words and sentences, in terms of the lin uistic and !hari1a meanin s or by admittin thin s occurrin which fell within the meanin s of those words and sentences. Iven thou h the tafseer be an to e'pand and the clarification of the meanin s of verses became more detailed, but 5oman and <reek concepts relatin to the viewpoint about life or le islation,considerin them as comin from non,Islamic cultures, were not inserted into the tafseer literature.6es, there were fabricated and weak hadiths used by some 7ufassirun. They inserted their meanin s into the tafseer of the ;ur1an even thou h they were not Islamic. However, that is not to be considered as an e'ample of bein effected by non,Islamic culture but as interpolation of the Islamic culture, such as the interpolation of hadiths the 7essen er (saw) did not actually utter. There is a difference between interpolatin somethin in Islam with respect to the fabrication of ahadith and bein effected by a non,Islamic culture by adoptin its thou hts and insertin them into Islam as part of Islam. In a word, the !hari1a disciplines were not effected by non,Islamic cultures. )s for the literary and lin uistic disciplines etc, the influence of the )rabic lan ua e on the rest of the lan ua es in the con#uered lands was stron until the other lan ua es disappeared from common usa e in lifes affairs. The )rabic lan ua e was the only dominant lan ua e over all affairs of life in its capacity as a political component in the understandin of Islam, because it is the lan ua e of the ;ur1an. That is why you will find that the con#uered nations, after havin conviction in Islam, participated in stren thenin this influence because it was one of the B4?

re#uirements of Islam, the deen they came to profess. Therefore, the )rabic lan ua e was not effected by the lan ua es and culture of the con#uered countries. .n the contrary, the lan ua e itself influenced the country that was con#uered and weakened its ori inal lan ua es until some of them disappeared alto ether or almost disappeared with the )rabic lan ua e remainin as the only lan ua e of Islam, the only lan ua e used by the state, the common lan ua e, the lan ua e of culture, science and politics. Thou h, )rabic literature came across material forms in the con#uered countries such as ardens, palaces, seas, rivers, scenery etc. It rew with the increase in its meanin s, ima ination, similesLalle ories and topics. It benefited from that but it did not become effected by thou hts which contradicted Islam. Thus, we find the sections which relate to the creed and contradict Islam, not one of the 7uslim literate was effected by them, rather they completely opposed them. )lthou h the <reek philosophy was translated and attention was iven to it, however the <reek literature which professed belief in a plurality of ods and ave them anthropomorphic attributes did not ain much currency amon st the 7uslims, in fact they did not ive it any attention at all. 6es, some individualsLpersonalities did overstep the re#uirements of what was befittin the Islamic culture. They became vulnerableLsusceptible to meanin s not reco nised by Islam. Must as the morally depraved amon st the writers and poets did, they included meanin s in their poetry which Islam did not a ree with. +ut those were an insi nificant few who are not worth mentionin in relation to the Islamic society. However much their literature may have been effected by meanin s forbidden by Islam, this was not an influence that effected the Islamic culture. 5ather, the Islamic culture continued as did the )rabic culture and the )rabic lan ua e free from any suspicion. )s for the rational disciplines, the 7uslims due to the nature of their ori inal missionLduty in life, which is the daHwa to Islam, used to clash with the people of other reli ions and cultures, who used to arm themselves with <reek philosophy. 5efutin and destroyin their beliefs and demonstratin their fallacy was imperative. They had to e'plain the Islamic a#eeda in styleLmanner those people would understand. That is why the 7uslims instituted the science of Tawheed (belief in the oneness of )llah) in order to clarify the Islamic a#eeda and e'plain it to the people. Thus, Gilm al+tawheed (science of Tawheed) came to e'ist. Iven thou h it comes under the !hari1a disciplines in terms of the sub/ect, which is the Islamic aCeeda, but it is considered part of the rational disciplines in terms of form and delivery. The 7uslims benefited from mantiC (lo ic) and they translated it into )rabic. "onse#uently, it is clear that the forei n cultures did not effect the Islamic culture, whether in the shari1a disciplines, )rabic lan ua e or rational disciplines. .nly the Islamic culture remained, until the end of the period of decline, as a purely Islamic culture. )s for the 7uslims, they also were not effected by any other culture, not in terms of their way of thinkin or in their understandin of Islam. The mentality of the 7uslims continued purely as an Islamic mentality. However, there were some individuals who were effected by the forei n rational disciplines. !o, new thou hts arose amon st them. )nd there were individuals for whom the study of forei n philosophies was initiated as a veil over their minds which led them to fall into error in understandin some of the thou hts of Islam or led them to fallin into mis uidance in their intellectual discussions. They B8C

attempted to understand some of the thou hts without restrictin themselves to the Islamic a#eeda and the thou hts of Islam. They are two roups ( The first roup, it was the error in their understandin which caused them to fall into the situation they found themselves in, but they continued to have an Islamic mentality (GaCliyya islamiyya) and Islamic disposition ( nafsiyya islamiyya). Therefore, their intellectual contribution is considered part of the Islamic culture even thou h it contained erroneous thou hts, but it was a misunderstandin . The second roup, the mis uidance in their comprehension was what cause them to fall into the situation they found themselves in. They had completely deviated from the Islamic a#eeda and came to carry a non,Islamic mentality ( GaCliyya). Therefore, their intellectual contribution is not considered to be part of the Islamic culture. )s for the first roup, the effect of the Hindu philosophy was the reason for their error in their understandin . That is because the Hindu philosophy advocates ascetism and renunciation of the world. !ome 7uslims became confused and thou ht ascetism was the same as ?uhd (pious austerity) which has been reported in some hadiths. It is from this understandin that the !ufis arose. This effected the understandin of what it means to take or renounce the world. Iven thou h, ?uhd (livin an austere life) in this world means that one should not take the world as ones oal in life, for e'ample makin the procurement of wealth for its own sake the hi hest oal. It does not mean however that one should not en/oy the ood and halal thin s in life. $hich is contrary to ascetism and the renunciation of the world, both of which mean the abandonment of pleasures and deli hts (tayyi!at) in life despite havin the ability to attain them. This contradicts Islam. This erroneous understandin ori inates due to the veil that covered the minds of some 7uslims owin to their study of the Hindu philosophy. )s for the second roup, their becomin effected by the <reek philosophy was the reason for their mis uided understandin . That is because the <reek philosophy came with thou hts and discussions about thin s that were beyond the natural world. It set out to discuss the e'istence of <od and His attributes ( sifat). Those well,versed in it amon st the non,7uslims in the con#uered lands attacked Islam which led some 7uslims to translate their works and study them so as to respond to those attackin Islam.The tried to reconcile philosophy with Islam. This led to debates whose proponents were effected by the <reek philosophy such as the debate about the creation of the ;ur1an ( khalC al+/urHan). )nd such as the debate about whether the attribute (sifa) was the same as the ob/ect bein described or e'ternal to the thin described, and other such discussions. +ut these discussions stopped at the limits of the Islamic a#eeda. Their proponents adhered to the creed and restricted themselves to its thou hts. The reasons for their discussions was the Islamic a#eeda, they did not deviate from it. They did not proceed blindly into philosophy outside the applicability of the a#eeda. Their thou hts were Islamic thou hts and their discussions are considered part of the Islamic culture. That is why they did not deviate or become mis uided. Their adherence to the Islamic a#eeda protected them from becomin mis uided. I'amples of such people are the 7u1ta9ila from scholars of tawheed. +ut there were a small number of people who plun ed headlon into <reek philosophy without restrictin themselves to the B8B

Islamic a#eeda. They studied the <reek philosophy on a purely rational basis without adherin to Islam. They delved into the study of <reek philosophy and be an to imitate and emulate it. )s well they had be un to initiate their own philosophy based on their very own brand of philosophy. They did not permit the Islamic a#eeda to have any effect on their discussions and nor did they acknowled e its presence. 5ather their discussion was a purely philosophical discussion. Iven thou h in their capacity as 7uslims certain Islamic aspects did appear in their discussions. +ut that was due to the deep,rooted Islamic concepts they held as was the case with some of the Mewish philosophers. This does not take their philosophy a sin le step closer to Islam. 5ather it is a rational philosophy proceedin accordin to the methodolo y of <reek philosophy. They are the 7uslim philosophers such as Ibn !ina, al,*arabi, Ibn 5ushd and their likes. This philosophy of theirs was not Islamic and nor was it the philosophy of Islam concernin life, indeed it had no relationship to Islam. It is not considered as Islamic culture because the Islamic creed was not a part of its study. 5ather, when they discussed it they did not ive Islam any attention. .nly <reek philosophy was the ob/ect of study. It had no relationship to Islam or the Islamic a#eeda. This, briefly, is the position of 7uslims with re ards the non,Islamic cultures. !o, the 7uslims were not effected by it, they did benefit from it, and they definitely did not study the forei n cultures relatin to le al rulin s. In the !hari1a disciplines nothin can be found relatin to the non,Islamic cultures. They benefited from the meanin s, alle ories and creativity present in the forei n cultures. +ut that had no effect on the )rabic lan ua e or )rabic literature. !o, from this perspective their study of non,Islamic cultures was by way of benefit and not effect. )s for the rational disciplines, they studied them and benefited from them in terms of the style of delivery in lo ic (mantiC) and in Gilm al+tawheed. However, Islam and the thou hts of Islam were not effected. +ut some 7uslims were effected in their understandin of Islam and this showed in their behaviour and writin s but not in the Islamic culture or Islamic thou hts. )s with the !ufis and 7uslim philosophers. This is with respect to the culture, as re ards the sciences such as the natural sciences, mathematics, astronomy, medicine etc. The 7uslims studied them and adopted them universally. They do not fall under culture which actually effects the viewpoint about life. They are e'perimentalLempirical sciences only and eneral to all people. They are universal, not specific to any particular nation to the e'clusion of others. Therefore, the 7uslims took from them and benefited from them. )s for the manner of compilin the sciences and Islamic culture. It rew naturally until it was or anised. The Islamic culture be an orally, the people transmitted it to each other throu h hearin , they did not devote themselves to writin down anythin other than the ;ur1an until the area of the state had e'panded and there arose an ur ent need to have the sciences and disciplines written down. Then, radually the practise of writin increased thou h it was not accordin to any specific system. They would write about an issue in tafseer, hadith, /urisprudence, history, literature etc all in one book without arran ement or division into chapters because it all constituted knowled e in their view. There was no difference between one science and another or between one piece of knowled e B82

and another. 5ather, all were one science. ) scholar was not distin uished by any particular science. Then there was a concentration on writin when the scope of the disciplines widenedLe'panded and most became unable to encompass it all. !o a specific inclination towards one type of science and discipline prevailed amon st each roup. Thus, similar issues came to be athered to ether. )nd the sciences and disciplines became more distinct and the =lama be an to slowly arran e it in an or anised manner. Fue to this the thou hts took the course of bein arran ed and written down until we have e'amples of such works as the 5uwatta in hadith, Balila wa Dimna in )rabic literature, al+1isala in foundations of /urisprudence (usul), the books of 7uhammad in /urisprudence ( fiCh), the book al+HAyn in )rabic lan ua e, and the book of !ibawayh in rammar, the book of Ibn Hisham in !ira, the book of Tabari in history and so on and so forth....rather there were books for each branch of fiCh (Islamic /urisprudence). Eike the e'ample of Bita! al+Bhara> of )bu 6usuf re ardin economics, and the book al+Ahkam al+ Sultaniyya of al,7awardi in rulin . Then the compilations included all branches of sciences and disciplines and the arran ement of issues ( masaHil)and chapters radually pro ressed until it came to include all the sciences and disciplines. Then in writin culture (thaCafa) became separated from science in the classes of hi her education in the universities and so forth... $hat is worth mentionin is that the 7uslims took the style of compilation from others because the style of compilation is like science and not specific but eneral.

B80

0 The Islamic )isci"lines

".2/5

The 7uslims saw their lives as only for the Islam. )nd their e'istence was only for the purpose of carryin the Islamic "all. Islam was the only basis for their unity and reason for their revival. It is the only source of their di nity, lory and hope. That is why their souls and minds became possessed by it, so they devote themselves to it and embark upon studyin it and understandin it. They dedicated themselves to the ;urKan, to its understandin and e'planation. They devoted themselves to the ahadith, to its transmission and collection. )nd they be an to deduce rules which solved the problems of people. )nd they followedLpursued reports about the Prophet (saw) and his campai ns, memorisin them and transmittin them. They ave their attention to the militarye'peditions (ma ha9i), con#uests, by documentin them and transmittin them. !ince the ;urKan cannot be understood without the )rabic lan ua e, due to the mi'in of )rabs with non,)rabs in the con#uests which led to a corruption in the pronunciation of )rabic by the )rabi9ed population and by the )rabs. The 7uslims devoted themselves to the )rabic lan ua e, studyin it, e'plainin it and puttin down principles (for rammar). )nd studyin the /ahili poetry and the traditions of the )rabs, their speeches and times in order to understand the +ook of )llah and the !unnah of the 7essen er of )llah (saw). Then, when the people of other reli ions entered into Islam, who still possessed intellectual cultures and carried traces of kufr thou hts. It was due to the 7uslims carryin the Islamic daKwa that the intellectual stru le between them and the enemies of Islam took place. They dedicated themselves to the rational sciences, studyin them to e'plain the a#eeda of Islam to the people and demonstrate it with the rational evidence. The types of disciplines 7uslims had came to be divided into branches and the Islamic disciplines became diversified as a result. They dealt with many thin s and came to be enriched every time the con#uests e'panded even further and developed each time people embraced the deen of )llah. $hen the Islamic state became vast and the aspect of concentratin on the countries that had been opened was preferred over the aspect of con#uest, many 7uslims be an to devote themselves in research to the disciplines, sciences, lessons and in,depth study. ) multi, faceted Islamic culture took shape with the 7uslims, the people dedicated themselves to learnin it so lon as it served Islam and elevated the position of 7uslims. <enerally, the 7uslims were only interested in this culture and not in other cultures despite their interest in the universe in terms of science and industryLcrafts. Iach scholar whatever type of culture he specialised in, and every writer whatever his literary orientationLapproach, and even every mathematician, scientist or craftsman whatever his path, they most definitely cultured first by the Islamic culture, then they learnt other thin s. )s for some scholars who became famous for science like 7uhammad b. al,Hasan in mathematics, Ibn+atuta in eo raphy, Ibn al,)thir in history, )bu 2uwas in poetry etc.This fame does not imply that they only studied the science for which they became famous. 5ather, they and others like them studied all of the Islamic culture and then turned to a branchof knowled e and became famous for it even thou h they had rasped the rest of the branches of Islamic culture as well. )s for this Islamic culture, it B83

contained topics that were fundamental to the culture because the meanin s mentioned in them is what was intended for the 7uslim, like tafseer, hadith, sira, history, /urisprudence (fi#h), foundations of /urisprudence (usul al,fi#h) and tawheed. )nd it contains what are actually tools for understandin those topics that are fundamental, like the sciences ofthe )rabic lan ua e and lo ic (manti#). The 7uslims used to devote themselves to all of them. )nd since the sciences servin as tools are a means of understandin the intended fundamental meanin s, then the knowled e of the intended meanin s is what should be intended. Therefore, we shall restrict ourselves to presentin a limpse of the tafseer, hadith, sira, history, /urisprudence (fi#h), foundations of /urisprudence (usul al,fi#h) and tawheed in order to ive a brief illustration of each.

0.1 Tafseer (.uranic +=e&esis) ".26:

The word tafseer is the form tafKeel from the word al,fasr which means to e'plain (bayan). 6ou say I e'plained the thin (without pronouncin the tashdeed) Kafsuruhu fasranK, and I e'plained it (with the tashdeed) - Kufassiruhu tafseeranK when I e'plained it. The difference between tafseer and taKweel is that tafseer is the e'planation of what is intended by the wordin and taKweel is the e'planation of what is intended by the meanin . The word tafseer has chosen when applyin to thee'planation of the verses of the ;urKan. The ;urKan has been revealed in the )rabic lan ua e. !o, its e'pressions are )rabic, even the e'pressions which are of a forei n ori in like istabra# (brocade). It is has been )rabi9ed accordin to the principles of )rabic and it become part of the )rabic e'pressions. The style of the ;urKan is the style of the )rabs in their speech. He (swt) said (K)n )rabic ;urKan.K>0?(2@A The )rabs used to reciteLread it, comprehend the stren th of its elo#uence and understand its meanin s. +ut not all of the ;urKan can be approached by all )rabs who would understand it enerally and specifically /ust by merely listenin to it. !ince, by revealin the ;urKan in the lan ua e of the )rabs does not mean that all )rabs will understand its words and phrases. !ince not every book written in a certain lan ua e can be understood by the people of that lan ua e. +ecause, understandin the book does not re#uire lan ua e only but also a level of intellect in understandin and comprehension which a rees with the level and elevation of the book. The reality of the )rabs when the ;urKan was bein revealed was that not all of them were able to understand the ;urKan enerally and specifically. 5ather, they used to differ in their understandin accordin to their intellectual elevation. +ecause of that reason the !ahabahKs ability to e'plain and understand the ;urKan was at variance due to the disparity of their understandin of the )rabic lan ua e and also due to the disparity in their intelli enceand comprehension. Thou h, the ;uranic e'pressions themselves, and their meanin s were not all understood by all )rabs. )nas b. 7alik narrated that a man asked K=mar b. al,Hhattab about His (swt) sayin (K)nd fruits and abba (herba e, etc).K>@C(0BA $hat isthe abb& K=mar replied ( $e have been forbidden from over,burdenin ourselves and oin e'cessively deeply into thin s. It has also been narrated about K=mar that he was on the minbar and he read (K .r that He that he may catch them with takhawwuf ( radual wastin of their and health).K>B8(3:A Then he in#uired about the meanin of takhawwuf& ) man from B84

Hu9ayl said ( takhawwuf for us is the radual decrease (tana##us). *urthermore, there are many verses in the ;urKan for whose understandin knowled e of lin uistic e'pressions and styles is not sufficient. 5ather, they re#uire information about certain e'pressions because these e'pressions point to specific meanin s such as in His (swt) sayin (K +y (the winds) that scatter dust.K >4B(BAK +y the (steeds) that run, with pantin (breath).K >BCC(BAK Qerily D $e have sent it (this ;urKan) down in the ni ht of al,#adr (decree).K >?:(BAK +y the dawn - by the ten ni hts ( i.e. the first ten days of the month of Fhul,hi//a).K >@?(B,2A )nd other such verses which point to well known meanin s. )lso there are verses whose understandin re#uires knowled e of the causes of revelation. There are verses in the ;urKan which are muhkama (e'plicit) and clear in meanin . They are the verses, especially the 7akkan verses, which pertain to the fundamentals of the deen in terms of the a#eeda, and the verses which pertain to the fundamentals of the rules which are the 7adinan verses, especially those relatin to transactions (muKamalat), punishments (Ku#ubat) and testimonies (bayyinat). )s well, there are mutashabihat (non,e'plicitLambi uous) verses in the ;urKan which are ambi uous in meanin for many people, especially the verses that are open to a number of meanin s or necessitates leavin the obviousLapparent meanin for another meanin because of the contradiction with the creed which should be free of anthropomorphic elements. Iven thou h the !ahaba were the most competent in understandin the ;urKan because they were the most knowled eable in the )rabic lan ua e and because they witnessed the circumstances and events around which the ;urKan was revealed. However, they differed in their understandin and they differed in their ability to e'plain (tafseer) the ;urKan due to the disparity in the level of their familiarity with the )rabic lan ua e, and due to the disparity in their closeness to the 7essen er (saw). The most famous 7ufassirun from the !ahaba were K)li b. )bi Talib, K)bd )llah b. K)bbas, K)bd )llah b. 7asKud and =bay b. HaKb. They are the four who fed the most amount of e'e etical material to the different 7uslim cities. $hat enabled them to have such a deep knowled e of tafseer was their stron understandin of the )rabic lan ua e, their rasp of its rhetorical form and styles, their mi'in with the Prophet (saw) andbein close to him which enabled them to know the events for which verses of the ;urKan were revealed, and their faculty of intellect and intelli ence, a faculty which enabled them to link meanin s to ether in the best manner and come out with correct results. That is why they did not refrain from makin i/tihad in understandin the ;urKan accordin to what the mind demanded. 5ather, they made i/tihad in tafseer and spoke about it within their own opinions (i/tihads) and they made decisions based what they had arrived at by their understandin and i/tihad. Therefore, the tafseers of those people are considered as one of the hi hest forms of tafseer. +ut, many have lied about them and sayin s have been insertedLinterpolated in their tafseer which they did not say. That is why you will find many fabrications in their tafseer. $hat has been authenticated by trustworthy narrators is one the stron est of tafseers. )s for the everythin else from the fabricated reports, it is not permitted to take them since ithas not been proven that they said them. However, the warnin Lcaution of takin fabricated tafseers of those four does not mean it is a warnin Lcaution for B88

readin their tafseers. 5ather, it is a caution a ainst takin them and practisin them iven the consideration that these are fabrications. )s for readin them and determinin a correct understandin by the lan ua e, !hariKa and intellect with what has been mentioned in them. That is a useful thin . +ecause there are valuable e'planations (tafseers) inthese fabricated reports in terms of understandin even thou h their chains of transmission are weak in terms of their ascription to the !ahaba. )fter the !ahaba came the TibiKun. !ome of them became famous for transmittin from the !ahaba, from the four mentioned above and from others. The most famous from those TabiKun are 7u/ahid, K)ta b. )bi 5abah, KIkrama freedman of Ibn K)bbas and !aKid b. Mubayr. The K=lama have differed on the de ree of trust put on those 7ufassirun from the TabiKun. !o, 7u/ahid isthe most reliable even thou h he had the fewest narrations and some imams and muhaddithun like !hafiKi and +ukhari rely on his tafseer. However, some of them observed that 7u/ahid used to ask the People of the +ook. !o from this perspective they would ive his sayin s thorou h consideration before takin them thou h they are a reed on his honesty. +oth K)ta and !aKid were trustworthy and honest and no one has #uestioned their honesty. )s for KIkrama, most scholars trust him and believe him. )nd +ukhari transmits from him but others view him as takin risks in tafseer thinkin that he knows everythin about the ;urKan. )nd that was due to the hu e amount of ;uranic tafseer he has narrated from the !ahaba. *rom the four KIkrama was the one who transmitted mostly from Ibn K)bbas. There are those who used to narrate from rest of the !ahaba like 7asru# b. al,)/daK the student of K)bd )llah b. 7asKud, he used to narrate tafseer from him. *rom the TabiKun, ;atada b. FaKama >..suddus akmaA also became well known fortafseer. He had an e'tensive knowled e of the )rabic lan ua e and well versed in )rabic poetry, the era of the )rabs and their enealo y. )fter the end of the era of the TabiKun, the K=lama be an to compile books of tafseer followin a specific method, which is to mention the verse and then #uote what has been reported from the tafseers of the !ahaba and the TabiKun alon with their chains. !ome of them who were famous for this method were !ufyan b. K=yayna, $akiK b. al,Marrah, K)bd al,5a99a# and others.Thou h the tafseers of those people have not reached us in their entirety. 5ather what has reached us are statements found in some of the books of tafseer like the tafseer of al,Tabari. Then after them came al,*arraK and then came al,Tabari. Then scholars of tafseer came one after another in every a e until our time.

9.7.7

he >!egetical Approaches of <ufassirun

p.6?8

The !ahaba made tafseer for the verses of the 2oble ;urKan either as their own i/tihad in tafseer or from hearin it from the 7essen er of )llah(saw). 7any a time they would e'plain the cause of revelation for a verse or e'plain with respect to whom it had been revealed. In e'plainin a verse they would restrict themselves to elucidatin the lin uistic meanin which they understood from the verse with the most concise of words like their sayin ( hayr muta/anif li ithm (not inclined to sin) ie not liableLpredisposed to sin ( hayr mutaKarrid li maKsiyya). Eike their statement re ardin His (swt) sayin (K(*orbidden) also is to use arrows seekin luck or decision.K>4(0A ( The people of /ahiliyya when one of them wanted to o out (on a /ourney) he would take an arrow and say ( This one orders me to B8:

o out. !o if he oes out on his /ourney will meet ood luck. )nd he will take another arrow and say (This one orders me to stay, so he will not be lucky in his /ourney. The unlucky arrow is one of the two arrows. !o )llah forbade them from this practice. If they added anythin to that it would be what has been narrated about the cause of revelation and with re ards to whom the verse in #uestion was revealed. )n e'ample would be what has been narrated about Ibn K)bbas (r.a.) re ardin His (swt) sayin (K He will surly brin you back to the maKad (place of return).K >2@(@4A He said ( to 7akkah. It has been narrated about )bu Hurayra (r.a.) re ardin His (swt) sayin (K Qerily D 6ou (. 7uhammad >sawA) uide not whom you like.K >2@(48A that he said the verse had been revealed concernin the 7essen er of )llah (saw) when he tried to win over his uncle )bu Talib to Islam. Then came the TabiKun after the !ahaba who reported everythin the !ahaba mentioned in this manner. *rom amon the TabiKun themselves there were those who e'plained the verses of the 2oble ;urKan or stated the cause of revelation, either as their own i/tihad in tafseer or by hearin it from (other authorities). )fter the TabiKun the K=lama came and e'panded the tafseer and #uoted reports from the Mews and "hristians. The mufassirun succeeded one after another in every a e and eneration, who e'plained the ;urKan and e'panded the tafseer in each a e on what had come before. The mufassirun be an to ive their attention to the verses to deduce rulin s from them and e'plain their schools of thou ht in terms of freewill (ikhtiyar) and predestination (/abr). )nd they be an to e'plain verses provin their opinions accordin to their inclinations in le islation, theolo yLscholasticism (Kilm al,Halam), rhetoricsLelo#uence (bala ha), declension (sarf) and rammar etc. $hat is apparent from an e'amination ofthe tafaseers, throu h the different a es since the time of the !ahaba until now, is that the tafseer of the ;urKan in every a e was influenced by the scholarly movement of the time. ) picture which reflected the views, theories and schools of thou ht of the time. !eldom were there tafseers that were free from the influence of opinions, thou hts and rules of the time. However, all of these tafseers were not compiled in books from the first day mufassirun came to e'ist ie from the time of the !ahaba. 5ather, they chan ed from situation to situation throu h the a es. In the be innin , the tafseer used to be a part of the hadith and one of its chapters. The hadith was the all,e'tensive topic which encompassed all the Islamic disciplines. !o the transmitter ofa hadith, /ust as he would narrate a hadith containin a le al rulin , he would also narrate a hadith which contained the tafseer of a ;uranic verse. Then writers, in the be innin of the )bbasid era and towards the end of the =mayyad era ie in the be innin of the second century hi/ri, be an to brin to ether all the similar and relevant hadiths inLunder a topic and separate them from other topics. !o the disciplines such as tafseer and fi#h which the hadith contains were separated from each other. $hat resulted from the sciences is what resulted in terms of hadith, sira, /urisprudence and tafseer. Thus, the science of tafseer came to e'ist and it became an independent science which was studied on its own. However, the tafseers did not take any or anised form, in that verses of ;urKan were not mentioned in an ordered manner like the arran ement found in the mushaf (;urKan) and then followed by their tafseer. 5ather, the tafseers narrated were scattered here and there. They were tafseer for miscellaneous verses as was the B8@

case with the hadith. This situation continued until the tafseer became separated from the hadith and be an to stand up as a science in its own ri ht. Tafseer was iven for each ayah of the ;urKan or part of an ayah, arran in these verses accordin to the order in mushaf. The fist one to undertake the tafseer of the ;urKan #uotin ayah after ayah and e'plain them one after another was al,*arraK (d.2C: ).H.). Ibn al,2adim reports in his *ihrist that(K K=mar b. +akirL+ukayr wrote to al,*arraK that al,Hasan b. !ahl perhaps may ask me one thin after another from the ;urKan but I will not be able to recall al the answers. I think you should brin to ether the essential points and compile them in a book I will refer to... >faKaltuA !o al,*arraK said to his students - ather to ether so that I can dictate to you a book about the ;urKan. He ave them a day. $hen they came he went to them. In the mos#ue there was man ivin a9an and recitin the ;urKan with the people in prayer. )l,*arraK tuned to himand said ( recite the openin chapter of the ;urKan (fatihatul kitab), we will e'plain it and then we will speak fully about the whole book. The man recited and al,*arraK made tafseer. )bu al,K)bbas said ( no one did anythin like him before and I donKt think anyone can add to that.K Then, after him came Ibn Marir al,Tabari (d.0BC ).H.) and wrote his famous tafseer. ) number of tafseers before the tafseer of Ibn Marir became well known. !uch as the tafseer of Ibn Muray/. His situation was the situation of the first muhaddithin who compiled everythin that reached them without differentiatin between the correct (sahih) and incorrect reports. They said Kthat Ibn Muray/Ks aim was not authenticity, rather he reported everythin that was reported about every ayah whether it was correct (sahih) or weak (sa#im).K )lso from these tafseers is the tafseer of al,!uddi (d.B2: ).H.) and the tafseer of 7u#atil (d.B4C ).H.). K)bd )llah b. al,7ubarak said about the tafseer of 7u#atil ( How e'cellent is his tafseer, if only itLhe were reliable (thi#a).K )mon st them is also the tafseer of 7uhammad b. Isha#. He used to transmit from the Mews and "hristians and he used to #uote sayin s of $ahb b. 7unabbih, HaKb al,)hbar and others, who reported thin from the Torah, +ible and their commentaries. These tafseers have not reached us. )lthou h Ibn Marir al,Tabari has collected most of it and included it in his book. Then came mufassirun one after another e'plainin the ;urKan in an complete and well,ordered manner in books that were complete and systematicLwell, arran ed. However, anyone who inspects the tafaseer will find that the mufassirun approached the tafseer from various perspectivesLan les. !ome were interested in lookin at the styles and meanin s of the +ook and whatever it included in terms of the forms of rhetorics (bala ha) to know the hi hest and distin uished forms of speech as compared to other types of speech. !o the the rhetorical aspect prevailed in their tafseers. .ne of those people is 7uhammad b. al,Jamakhshari in his tafseer entitled al,Hashaf. There were those who looked into the foundations of belief, the fi htin of 9aifeen and debatin the those who disa reed (with Islam) like *akhr al,Fin al,5a9i in his famous tafseer ( al,Tafseer al,Habir. )nd some of them studied the !hariKa rules and were interested in deducin them from the verses. !o they channelled their interest towards the verses of ahkam like )bu +akr al,5a9i commonly known as al,Massas in his well known tafseer )hkam al, ;urKan. There were those who went after stories and added to the ;uranic stories from the books of history and israilyyat (Mudaica) and be an to collect everythin B8?

they heard however mea re or abundant without editin Lrevisin the thin s that contradicted the !hariKa, did not a ree with the mind and contradicted ;urKanic ayahs which are definite in meanin . .ne such person is K)laK al,Fin K)li b. 7uhammad al,+a hdadi the sufi otherwise known as al,Hha9in who did this in his tafseer +ab al,taKweel fi maKani al,tan9eel. )nd there were those that concerned themselves with supportin their ma9hab (school) and e'plainin the verses in accordance with whatever supports their faction like the tafseer al,+ayan of al, !haykh al,Tibrisi and the tafseer al,Tibyan of al,!haykh al,Tusi. +oth of them supported the views of the !hiKa and their ma9hab re ardin belief (Ka#aid) and ahkam. )nd there were those that were only concerned with the tafseer in order to e'plain the verses and rulin s of the ;urKan re ardless of any perspective. They are the mufassirun whose tafseers are considered the coreLessence of the books of tafseer. )nd they are considered the imams of tafseer and other topics. Eike the tafseer of Ibn Marir al,Tabari, the tafseer of )bu K)bd )llah 7uhammad al, ;urtubi, and the tafseer ofal,2asafi and others. )s for the tafseers written in this day and a e and towards the end of the period of decline, like the tafseer of 7uhammad K)bduh, the tafseer of Tantawi Mawhari, and the tafseer of )hmad 7ustafa al,7ura hi and others. They are not considered part of the tafseer literature and nor is there any trust put on them. That is because there is a risk to the deen of )llah in the e'planation of many verses like 7uhammad K)bduhKs tafseer of the verse (K)nd whosoever does not /ud e by what )llahhas revealed, such are the *asi#un (trans ressors).K>4(33A He permitted the 7uslims of India to adopt In lish laws and submit to the rulin s of In lish /ud es. !haykh 7uhammad K)bduh mentioned in volume si' from the Tafseer of the $ise ;urKan widely known as al,7anar in the tafseer of sura al,7aida when he e'plained His (swt) sayin (K)nd whosoever does not /ud e by what )llah has revealed, such are the *asi#un (trans ressors).K>4(33A $hen in pa es 3C8,3C? he was asked ( Is it permitted for a 7uslim to be employed by the In lish to rule by In lish laws some of which constitutes rulin by other than what )llah has revealed & He ave lon reply( KIn short, the abode of war (dar al,harb) is not a place for the establishment of the rules of Islam, therefore it is obli atory to make hi/ra unless there is an e'cuse or benefit for the 7uslims due to which he will be safe from the fitna (test) on his deen. It is incumbent on the one who resides (in India) to serve the 7uslims accordin to the best of his abilities andto stren then the rules of Islam as much as he can. )nd there is no means of stren thenin the influence of Islam and protectin the interests of the 7uslims like the assumin of overnment posts especially if the if the overnment is lenient and fairly /ust between all nations and reli ions like the In lish overnment. It is well known that the laws of this country is closer to the Islamic !hariKa more than others because it dele ates most matters to the i/tihad of /ud es. !o whoever is #ualified to be a /ud e in Islam and takes up a post in the /udiciary in India with the correct aim and ood intention, it is possible for him to do a reat service for the 7uslims. It is obvious that the abandonment of the /udiciary and other overnment posts, by the people of knowled e and insi ht due to bein sinful for workin accordin to their laws, will forfeit the interests of the 7uslims in their deen and dunya.K Then he said ( K It is obvious from all of this that the 7uslimKs acceptance to work in the In lish overnment in India Kand any other similar workK and his rulin accordin to their laws is a dispensation (rukhsa) which comes under the principle of doin the B:C

lesser of two evils if there is no Ka9eema by which support of Islam and protectin the interests of 7uslims is intendedK )nd also like the tafseer of Tantawi Mawhari where he mentioned that there are modern sciences and disciplines in the ;urKan and he filled his tafseer with pictures of birds and animals to demonstrate that the ;urKan did e'plain such thin s. )nd like the tafseer of 7ustafa Jayd who re/ected the e'istence of an els and !hayateen which he interpreted (away). !o he committed kufr by his tafseer and took himself outside of Islam. These tafseers and their likes are not considered books of tafseer by the 7uslims and nor are their e'planations iven any consideration.

9.7.6 Sources of afseer p.;BB

$hat the mufassirun used to rely on when e'plainin the ;urKan accordin to the idea they carried such as tawheed, /urisprudence (fi#h), rhetorics (bala ha), history etc. is not what is meant by the term Ksources of tafseerK (masadir al, tafseer) These are not sources of tafseer. 5ather, they are matters which had an effect on the mufassir which led him to lean towards a specific thin in tafseer. $hat is intended by Ksources of tafseerK are the authoritative sources that the mufassirun #outed. $hat they #uoted they wrote down in their tafseers, irrespective of their orientation in tafseer. If we study the sources of tafseer we find that they are confined to three ( *irst ( tafseer which has been transmitted from the 7essen er of )llah (saw) such as the narration that the 7essen er (saw) said ( The median prayer (salat al, wusta) is the afternoon prayer (salat al,Kasr). *or instance what has been narrated by K)li that he said ( I asked the 7essen er of )llah (saw) about the reat day of Ha// (yawm al,ha// al,akbar). He said (it is) the day of sacrifice (yawm al,nahr). )nd what has been reported - K.f the two a/als (fi'ed life,span) whose a/al did 7usa take. He (saw) said ( He killed the one who had the lon est and best a/al.K However this enre of tafseer cannot be relied upon as a source of transmission save what has been reported in the books of !ihah (books of hadith such as +ukhari and 7uslim) because the storytellers and fabricators ave reatly added to the material. That is why this type of source material has to be investi ated due to the reat number of lies a ainst the 7essen er of )llah (saw). The scrutiny of the !alaf (early enerations of scholars) of this enre of tafseer reached the point where many of them re/ected the whole enre alto ether...They held that no tafseer had been transmitted from the 7essen er of )llah (saw). It has been reported about )hmad b. Hanbal that he said(KThree (cate ories of reports) have no basis- tafseer, battles (malahim)and military campai ns (ma ha9i).K That is why we find the mufassirun due to their lack of trust for what is mentioned did not stop at the limit of what has been reported. 5ather, they followed that with what they reached throu h their own i/tihad. They did not stop at the limit of the te't. $hat has been mentioned about the !ahaba in terms of tafseer was added to the hadiths about the 7essen er of )llah (saw). It be an with the transmitted tafseer and likewise with the tafseer of the tabiKun. This enreLcate ory of transmitted tafseer became hu e and it be an to include what has been transmitted about the 7essen er of )llah (saw), the !ahaba and TabiKun. Iach one came to be suffice as a tafseer. 2early all the books of tafseer written in the early a es were restricted to this manner of tafseer. B:B

!econd ( .ne the sources of tafseer is the opinion (raKy). .r what is termed as i/tihad in tafseer. That is because the mufassir knows the speech of the )rabs and their mannerisms in the spoken lan ua e. He knows the )rabic e'pressions and their meanin sby bein ac#uainted with the same thin in /ahili poetry, prose etc. )nd he familiarises himself with what he finds to be correct from the cause of revelation of a verse. =sin these tools he e'plains the ;urKanic verses in accordance with what he has reached throu h his i/tihad. Tafseer by opinion does not mean sayin whatever one likes about the verse or whatever our own desires demand. 5ather, the opinion,accordin to which the tafseer takes place, depends on the /ahili literature in terms of poetry, prose, the customs and speech of the )rabs. )t the same time it relies on the events that took place in the days of the 7essen er (saw) and whatever the Prophet (saw) faced in terms of hostility, conflicts, mi ration (hi/ra), wars and afflictions. )nd whatever happened durin that period which re#uired hukms and demanded the revelation of the ;urKan. Therefore, what is meant by makin tafseer by opinion is to understand the sentences by understandin its meanin s which are indicated by the information the mufassir has at his disposal in terms of the lan ua e and events. )s for what has been narrated about siyyidina K)li b. )bi Talib (r.a.) that he said(KThe ;urKan is open to (many) viewpointsK. This does not mean that the ;urKan is open to any viewpoint you wish to e'plain from it. 5ather, what is meant is that any one e'pression or sentence is open to a number of viewpoints in tafseer but the viewpoints are restricted to the meanin s the e'pression or sentence is open to, which does not overstep that limit. "onse#uently, tafseer by opinion means the understandin of a sentence within the limits of the meanin s its e'pressions are open to. That is why they calledit tafseer by i/tihad. The reat ma/ority of the mufassirun from the !ahaba used to e'plain the ;urKan by opinion and rely on it in the first de ree when makin tafseer. They used to disa ree in tafseer even in the e'planation of a sin le word which indicates that they used torely on their own particular understandin like much of what has been reported about Ibn K)bbas, Ibn 7asKud, 7u/ahid and others. *or e'ample they used to e'plain the word tur in His (swt) sayin (K)nd (. "hildren of Israel, remember) when $e took your covenant and $e raised above you the Tur.K>2(80A with different e'planations. 7u/ahid e'plained tur as a mountain, Ibn K)bbas e'plained it as the mountain itself and another person said that tur is what spreads (lava &) from mountains andas for what does not spread, it is not tur. This difference in tafseer is a result of a difference of opinion and not attributable to the difference in what has been transmitted. )lthou h the e'pression is lin uistic so what about when the opinion concerns the meanin of the sentence and not the meanin of an e'pression. That is why in addition to their disa reement with the meanin s of e'pressions, they also disa reed with re ards to the meanin s of verses. It is apparent from studyin the tafseers of the !ahaba, especially the well known mufassirin, that on the whole they would rely on (individual) opinion when makin tafseer. )s for what has been narrated about some of them that they would refrain from makin tafseer by opinion and confined themselves tomakin tafseer by what has been transmitted (man#ul). It is taken to refer to the opinion of somebody who has not ac#uired the tools of tafseer such as havin knowled e B:2

of the )rabic e'pression he wishes to clarify and knowled e of the events pertainin to which verses were revealed. It is not taken to mean that one should refrain from understandin the ;urKan, since it has been revealed so that people may understand it and not so that they restrict themselves to the limit of the transmitted tafseer. +y oin back to the te'ts with re ardin this, the reason for why they refrained becomes clear. It has been reported about !aKid b. al, 7usayyab that when he was asked about somethin from the ;urKan he said( KI will not say anythin about the ;urKan.K He declined to say anythin about the ;urKan but he did not say he would decline to say anythin about the ;urKan by opinion. Ibn !irin said ( I asked )bu K=bayda about somethin in the ;urKan. He said(K *ear )llah and stick to what is correct. *or those who knew the events surroundin which the ;urKan was revealed have all one.K It is well known that )bu K=bayda was on of the eminentLsenior !ahaba, he is re#uestin that people adhere to what is correct and have knowled e of the events re ardin which the ;urKan was revealed. The reason for this cautiousness and reluctance to speak about the ;urKan is made clear by his statement(K*or those who knew the events surroundin which the ;urKan was revealed have all oneK. $hen someone is able to e'amine the correct opinion and knows the events for which the ;urKan was revealed, then there is not doubt that he should speak about the ;urKan with this own opinion and i/tihad. Therefore, we cannot say that the !ahaba were divided into two roups. .ne roup refrainin from sayin anythin about the ;urKan by opinion and the other speakin about the ;urKan accordin to their opinion. 5ather, all of them used to speak about the ;urKan with their opinion. They used to be wary of someone sayin anythin about the ;urKan by his opinion without havin sure knowled e of the e'pression bein e'plained and the sentence bein elucidated from the ayahs of the ;urKan. )lso, this was the position of the TabiKun. However, after them there were people who came to know about these sayin s and understood them as admonition for speakin about the ;urKan with ones own opinion, so they avoided sayin anythin about the ;urKan from their own opinion. )nd there also people who became ac#uainted with the the tafseer of the !ahaba by opinion and they advocated tafseer by opinion. That is why later scholars became divided into two roups re ardin the tafseer. .ne roup would avoid sayin anythin with their own opinion and restrict themselves to what has been transmitted and a roup that would ive itsown opinions. )s for the !ahaba and the TabiKun they were not two roups. 5ather, they used to speak about the ;urKan with what they knew in terms of the narrations and opinion, and they refrained from that which they did not know and they warned people from speakin about the ;urKan with their own opinions without havin knowled e. Third ( The israiliyyat. This is because certain Mews and "hristians had entered the fold of Islam. )mon them were scholars of the Torah and +ible. )mon st them most of the Mews that entered were dishonest because the Mews hated and loathed the 7uslims more than the "hristians. *rom the Mews many scholars of Mewish fables infiltrated the 7uslims. It entered the tafseer of the ;urKan to supplement the e'planation of the ;urKan. That is because the mind and its inclinations are fond of in#uiry which invited it, when listenin to many verses of the ;urKan, to in#uire about thin s surroundin them. $hen they heard the story about the do and the companions of the cave they asked what colour was the do & $hen they B:0

heard(K !o $e said ( !trike him (dead man) with a piece of it.K>2(:0A They in#uired as to what was that piece with which they struck the dead man& $hen they read(K Then they found one of .ur slaves, unto whom $e had bestowedmercy from =s, and whom $e had tau ht knowled e from =s.K>B@(84A They asked who is this ri hteous servant that 7usa met, whom he asked to teach him. *rom here the story of Hhidr arose. 6ou find them askin about the boy the ri hteous servant had killed and the boat he had scuttled. )nd about the villa e that did not entertain him. They in#uired about the story of 7usa and !huKayb and the si9e of 2oahKs ark etc. $hat answered these #uestions and satiated their reed for this kind of information was the Torah and its commentaries and e'position. )nd whatever fablesLle ends were inserted which were transmitted to them by the Mews whether throu h ood or bad intention. !ome "hristians who had embraced Islam inserted certain stories and reports from the +ible but that was little compared to what the Mews had interpolated. In this manner the volume of stories and reports e'panded reatly until it e'ceeded the reports of the transmitted tafseer. =ntil many books of tafseer came to be loaded with this hu e amountof israilyyat, stories and other reports. The one who inserted the reatest amount of israilyyat, and the most famous were HaKb al,)hbar, $ahb b. 7unabbih, K)bd )llah b. !alam and many others. Fue to this activity these israilyyyat, stories and other reports became one of the sources of tafseer for the mufasssrun.

9.7.; he Emmah0s (incomplete)

need

today

for

<ufassirun

p;B:

The science of tafseer (;uranic e'e esis) in its capacity as a discipline from the prominent !hariKa disciplines is one of the most important of !hariKa sciences. Therefore, it is imperative that attention is iven to it in every a e and in every eneration. The =mmah today is in need of 7ufassirun because new thin s have come up which did not e'ist before. They must be understood if they come under comprehensive and eneral principles mentioned in the ;urKan or if it is possible to apply detailedLpartialLelaborate rulin s on them. However, the style of the classical tafseers in its capacity as a collection of tafseers is one enre of writin in terms of form and presentation. It is like the style of the classical works which the sons of this eneration do not have a desire or love to read these tafseers e'cept by those accustomed to readin classical books. )nd they are very few indeed. Therefore, the style has to be such that it awakens desire and love in the 7uslims first, let alone in anyone else, for readin tafaseers as an intellectual book which is deep and enli htened. In addition to that, the path followed by mufasssirun in the a ewhich followed the translation of the books of philosophy and bein effected by them, and in the a e of decline which came after the "rusades, led to the presence of tafseers for which much effort was e'pended in ivin attention to thin s which did not constitute tafseer and had no relationship to the verses of the ;urKan. 2ot to mention the israliiyyat that accumulated until it became a third source of tafseer for the mufassirin. It is imperative that the tafseer of the ;urKan should proceed accordin to the !ahabaKs ways of tafseer in terms of i/tihad in understandin the ;urKan seekin the aid of the tafseers of the !ahaba that have been transmitted. )s for the tafseer transmitted about the 7essen er (saw), even if it is authentic it is considered part of the hadith. It is not B:3

considered as tafseer since then it is a le islative te't like the ;urKan which is not counted amon the tafseers. )s of the style accordin to which the mufassir should proceed. That depends on his creativity. !ince it is in one form or one enreLcate ory of compilation each mufassir chooses accordin what he sees as a medium of renderin the tafseer in terms of the arran ement, chapters and presentation. That is why it is not correct to clarify the style of writin the tafseer. )s for the methodolo y of tafseer that re#uires clarification. )fter study, research and thou ht we have found a method for tafseer. $e shall present it here so that tafseer of the ;urKan can take place accordin to its methodolo y (minha/). It is a method necessitated by the reality of the ;urKan. $e only call it a method for anythin that is decided and permanent, we do not call it a style (uslub). +ecause it is like the method of tafseer which is understood from the reality of the te'ts and from the evidences the ;urKan has uided to. Eikewise, tafseer is the same. It is a method in terms adherin to it and not in terms of it bein a !hariKa rule. +ecause the method is not by way ahkam. )s for this method which we deem proper to proceed on in the tafseer of the 2oble ;urKan. They are summarised in the followin ( Tafseer of the ;urKan is the clarification of the meanin s of its vocabulary in its synta'Lconstruction (tarakib) and the meanin of its synta' in itself. To know the method of its tafseer we must present the reality of the ;urKan first and study it comprehensively by which the truthLnature of this reality becomes apparent. Then study whatever applies to this reality in terms its words and meanin s and then study what is the sub/ect matterLcontents that it has brou ht. $ith this knowled e of the reality and whatever applies to it, and knowled e of the sub/ect of discussion brou ht by the ;urKan, the method that should be followed in makin tafseer of the ;urKan becomes clear. Thus, he is uidedto the ri ht path on whose methodolo y the tafseer should proceed. )s for the reality of the ;urKan, it is in the )rabic ton ue, its reality in its capacity as the )rabic lan ua e has to be understood. !ince we must comprehend its vocabulary as bein in )rabic and its synta' must be understood in terms of an )rabic synta' consistin of )rabic words. )nd the reality of the usa e of vocabulary in its synta' must be understood in its capacity as synta' only, and in terms of bein an )rabic usa e of )rabic vocabulary in )rabic synta' or )rabic usa e in )rabic synta' in terms of the synta' enerally. )nd in addition to that comprehend the hi her appreciationLsense of the manner of address and speech in the ;urKan in terms of the )rabic method of hi her appreciation of the manner of address and speech in the lan ua e of the )rabs. $hen all of that has been comprehended ie the reality of the ;urKan on this )rabic basis has been comprehended in a detailed fashion then it is possible to make tafseer, or else it is not possible. +ecause the whole of the ;urKan in its words and e'pressions proceeds accordin to the words,e'pressions and customary usa e in the lan ua e of the )rabs. The ;urKan does not overstep that by a hairbreadth. .ne cannot make its tafseer e'cept with this comprehension and accordin to this reality. )s lon as that is not fulfilled, the ;urKan cannot be e'plained correctly at all. Therefore, tafseer of the ;urKan in its capacity as an )rabic speech and te't, B:4

depends on the comprehension of its )rabic reality in terms of the lan ua e(K )nd thus $e have sent it down as a ;urKan in )rabic.K>2C(BB0AK )nd thus have $e sent it (the ;urKan) down to be a /ud ement of authority in )rabic.K>B0(0:A This is in terms of the reality of the ;urKan and whatever applies to the reality in terms of its e'pressions and meanin s ie from the perspective of the lan ua e. )s for in terms of the sub/ect matter that the ;urKan brou ht, it is a 7essa e from )llah (swt) for humankind conveyed by the messen er from )llah. It contains everythin relatin to the 7essa e ( in terms of beliefs, ahkam, lad tidin s, admonitions and stories for the purpose of e'hortation and remembrance. )nd description to the one who observes the day of /ud ement, al,Manna (Paradise), Hellfire in order to rebuke and incite desire (for Paradise). It contains rational issues to be comprehended and perceptible and non,perceptible issues founded on a rational basis. *or iman and action. )nd whatever else a universal messa e to mankind necessitates. .ne cannot be correctly ac#uainted with this sub/ect e'cept by the way of the 7essen er (saw) who actually brou ht it. 2ot least when )llah (swt)has clarified that He revealed it to the 7essen er (saw) so that he may e'plain it to the people. He (swt) said(K )nd $e have also sent down unto you (. 7uhammad >sawA) the reminder and the advice (the ;urKan), that you may e'plain clearly what is sent down to them.K>B8(33A The way of the 7essen er (saw) is his !unnah. ie whatever has been correctly narrated about his sayin s, actions and consent. "onse#uently, it is necessary to be ac#uainted with the !unnah of the 7essen er (saw) before the be innin and durin the tafseer of the ;urKan. !ince the contentLsub/ect matter of the ;urKan cannot be understood without bein ac#uainted with the !unnah of the 7essen er (saw). Thou h this ac#uaintance should be one of awareness of the te't of the !unnah irrespective of ones ac#uaintance with the sanad. ie the ac#uaintance should be one of awareness of thinkin about its thou hts in their capacity as concepts and not one of memorisin its words. ie it does not harm the mufassir not to concern himself with the memori9ation of words or have knowled e of the sanad (chain) and transmitters so lon as he trusts the authentcity of the hadith from /ust the referenceLsourceLe'trapolation (takhri/) of the hadith. 5ather it is incumbent on him to comprehend the meanin s of the hadith. !ince, tafseer is relates to the the meanin s of the !unnah and not to its words, sanad or transmitters. Therefore, he must have sufficient awareness of the !unnah so that he can e'plain the ;urKan. "oense#uently, it becomes clear that one must first, before anythin else, make a detailed study of the reality of the ;urKan and study whatever applies to this relaity in terms of the words and meanin s, and then understand the sub/ect of discussion. It should be known that a eneral understandin is not suffiecint, rather a detailed understandin of the eneral (kulliyat) and elborate (/u9Kiyyat) issues is essentialeven if it is in a eneral manner. In order to visualise this detailed understandin we shall present a limpse or indication of the nature of this detailed understandin of the reality of the ;urKan interms of its vocabulary and synta', and usa eLinflection (tasarruf) of the vocabulary and synta' in terms of #uality literature in spaech and discourse from the lin uistic perspective and in terms of the idioms and common usa es of the )rabs in their spaech. B:8

)s for the reality of the ;urKan in terms of its vocabulary. $e see that it contains vocabulary on which the lin uistic meanin applies literally (ha#i#atan) and the lin uistic meanin apllies metaphorocally (ma/a9an). The lin usitic and methapohorcal meanain may continue to be used to ether. The intended meanin is known by the #arina (indication) in each synta'Lsyntactic construction. The lin usitic meanin may be intentially for otted with the metaphorical meanin continuin . !o, that becomes what is intended and not the lin usitic meanin . $e also notice vocabulary on which only the lin uistic meanin applies. It is not used in the metaphorical sense due to the absence of any #arina (indication) which would divert us from the lin usitic meanin . )nd there is vocabulary on which the lin usitic meanin and the new !hariKa menain applies to the e'clusion of the literal and metaphoircal menain s. Qocabulary in the lin usitic and !hariKa sense is used in various verses. $hat ditermines any menain which is intended is the synta' of the ayah. .r, only the !hariKa meanin s apply to it and it is not used in the lin uistic sense. *or e'ample, the word #arya (townLvilla e), is used in the li uistic sense only. He (swt) taKala said(K Till, when they came to the people of the town.K>B@(::A, K5escue us from this town.K>3(:4A It is used in its metaphorical sense. He (swt) said(K)nd ask ( the people of ) the town where we have been.K>B2(@2A The town is not #uestioned but rather those intended are the people of the town. This meanin is metaphorical. )nd He (swt) said(K)nd many a town (population) revolted a ainst the "ommand of its Eord.K>84(@A The people of the town are intended. *or e'apmle in His(swt) sayin (K.r any of you comes from answerin the call of nature ( hait).K>4(8A The hait is the place which is low, it is used metaphorically with respect to answerin the call of nature. +ecaue the one who answers the call of natutre oes to the low place so the use of the metaphorical menain prevailed and the literal menain was intentuioanlly for otten. *or e'amplein His (swt) sayin (KMud e with /ustice (#ist)between them.K>4(32A and His (swt) sayin (K)nd observe the wei ht with e#uity (#ist).K>44(?A Its intended meainin is lin usitic, no other meanin can be found for it. *or e'ample in His (swt) sayin (K)nd your arments purify DK>:3(3A It is the lin uistic menain which is intended, which is the puryfication of clothes from dirt becaue purity (tuhr) lin uistically is tahara (purification which is opposite of dirt. Purifyin somethin with water meanins to wash it. )nd tatahhara and athara is bein free from filth. )nd His (swt) sayin (KIf you are in a state of /anaba (i.e. had a se'ual dischar e) purify yourself (fattahhiru).K>4(8AK $hich (that +ook) none can touch but the purified (mutahhirun).K>48(:?A The lin uistic meanin here, which is the removal of impurity, is not possible becaue the believer does not become impure. !o only the other meanin remains which is removal of impurity. !o KfattahhiruK means( remove the impurity. )nd the KmutahhirunK are( the onesfree from impurity becaue the removal of the reater and lesser impurity is called tahara in the !hariKa. He (saw) said(K)llah does not accept the prayer (salah) without purification.K ie removal of impurity. )nd for e'ample in His (swt) sayin (KHave you(. 7uhammad >sawA) seen him (i.e. )bu Mahl) who prevents, a slave (7uhammad >sawA) when he prays &K>?8( ?,BCA $hat is intended is the !hariKa meanin ( )nd His (swt) sayin (K His an els too ask )llah to bless and for ive the Prophet (saw).K>00(48A $hat is intendde is the lin usitic menain which is the duKa (supplication). )nd for e'ample in His (swt) satin (K Then when the B::

(/umKa) salat (prayer) is finished.K>82(BCA )nd His (swt) sayin (K . my son D Istablish the salat (prayer).K>0B(B:A )ll the ayahs in which salah is mentioned, they have only been used in the !hariKa meanin . This is in terms of the vocabulary. )s for the synta'. The )rabic lan ua e as such ( is composed of) words which indicate meanin s. $hen we e'amine thses words in terms of thier syntactic presence whetner in terms of its isolated meanin in the synta' oror its enral syntactic meanin . It does not e'ceed two viwponts. *irst, they should be view from the an le of bein absoluteL eneral words and e'pressions which indicate eneral meanin s, which is the ori inal meanin . !econdly, from the an le bein words and e'pressions which indicate menain s which serve eneral words and e'pressions which is the secondary menain . In relation to the first cate ory, which is when the synta' is composed of eneral words and e'pressions indcatin eneralmeanin s. In the )rabic lan ua e, in trems of the vocabulary, there are words which are homonymous such as the word Kayn (lit.eye), #adar, ruh etc )nd there are words which are syinonimous such as /aK and ata (to come), asad and #aswara (lion), 9ann and 9aKm (contention) etc. )nd there are words which have opposite meanin s sucha s the word #uruK for bein in a mensrtual or pure state, and Ka9r for help and support, like wise the words lawm and tankeel etc. =nderstanin of the intended meanin of the word re#ired the understandin of the synta'. It is not pssible to understand its meanin simply by referin to dictionaries. rather, it is essential that the synta'Lword order in which the word was mentioned is understood. +ecaue it is the synta'Lword order that diternines the intended meanin . Must as we say this with respect to the vocabulary in the synta' we also say this this with respect to the synta' itself. It is, in its capacity, as eneral words and e'pressions which indicate eneral meanin s. )nd this is their ori inal meanin . )s lon as no #arina (indication) can be found indicatin otherwise. The eneral menain is what is intended. )nd e'amples of this is abundant in the ;urKan, ther is not need to ive e'amples becaue it is the ori inal meanin . )s for the second cate ory, which is the word orderLsynta' bein composed of words and e'pressions indicatin meanin which serve eneral words and e'pressions. Ivery peice of information stated in the sentence necettates the clarification of what is inetnded in the sentence in relation to this piece of information. !o the sentence is written in amanner which leads to the intention accordin to the informant and the one who is bein informed of it. )nd the same notification in the state in which it e'isted and in the conte't in whcih the sentence cites. nad in the type of style in terms of clarity, ambi uty, succinctness and vorbosity etc. 6ou say at the be inin of notification ( #ama 9ayd, if the concern is not with the one who is bein informed but the report. If the concern is the one bein informed you would say ( 9ayd #am. )nd in response to a#uestion or somethin on the level of a #uention you would say( Indeed 9ayd did stand up (inna 9aydan #am).)nd in respose to someone who refuses to believe( +y <odD Indeed 9ayd did stand up (wallai inna 9aydan #am). )nd in notifyin someone who e'pects Jayd to stand up( 9ayd has stood up (#ad #ama 9ayd) and other such issues which should be considered in )rabicte'ts. That ;urKan has come fulfillin those two viewpoints. !o in it eneral words and e'pressions indicatin eneral B:@

meanin s have come. )nd in it restricted words and e'pressions have come servin eneral meanin s in various rehetorical aspects. .ne of.....!imilarly stories and sentences which are repeated in the ;urKan in one or different suras....... This in terms of the foundations of speach in the )rabic lan ua e as bein words which indicate meanin s. )nd in terms of the foundations of speach in the ;urKan in terms of words which indicate meanin s whther in terms of the viewpoibt of vocabulary in their synta' or in terms of the syta' enerally. K The .nly .wner (maalik) of the Fay of 5ecompense.K>B(3A K The .nly .wner (malik) of the Fay of 5ecompense.K>B(3A K They only deceive (yakhdaKuna) themselves.K>2(?A K They only deceive (yakhadiKuna) themselves.K>2(?A K To them $e shall surely ive (li nubawwiKannahum) lofty dwellin s in Paradise>2?(4@A K To them $e shall surely ive (li nubawwiyannahum) lofty dwellin s in Paradise>2?(4@A K That indeed is a division most unfair DK>40(22A K Qerily, the harshest of all voices is the voice (brayin ) of the ass.K>0B(B?A K)nd fruits and abba (herba e, etc).K>@C(0BA K .r that He that he may catch them with radual wastin (takhawwuf) (of their and health).K>B8(3:A

7orover, the ;urKan when speakin adheres to e'pression with which it intends to adhere to hi hL ood literature whether as a narrationLnarrtive or instructionLteachin . Thus, when it used the vocative from )llah to the servantit came with vocative particle necessary for the servant, fi'ed and not ommitted o that the servant feels his distance from )llah such as in His (swt) sayin (K . 7y slaves who believe D "ertainly, spacious is 7y earth.K>2?(48AK!ay ( . Kibadi (7y slave) who have trans ressed a ainst themselves.K>0?(40AK !ay (. 7uhammad >sawA ( . mankind D Qerily, I am sent you all as the 7essen er of )llah.K>:(B4@AK . mankind DK>:(B4@AK . you who believe DK>2(B40A This is with re ards to when )llah calls His servant. )s for when the servat calls )llah, it came with the vocative which is free of the yaa, like His (swt) sayin (K .ur Eord D Punish us not if we for et or fall into error, our Eord D Eay not on us a burden like that which 6ou did layon those before us (Mews and "hristians) - our Eord D Put not on us a burden reater than we have stren th to bear.K>2(2@8AK.ur EordD Qerily, we have heard the call of the one (7uhammad >sawA) callin to Iman (belief).K >0(B?0AK .ur Eord D Eet not our hearts deviate (from the truth) after 6ou have uided us.K>0(@AK KIsa (Mesus), the son of 7aryam (7ary), said ( . )llah, .ur Eord D !end us from heaven a table spread (with food).K>4(BB3A )ll of these are free from the yaa which you feel remote, so B:?

that the servant feels that )llah is close to Him and alos becaue the yaa denotes callin for attention, thus the servantKs attention needs to be drwan when he is called, but that is not the case for )llah.

K They are your arments and you are their arments.K >2(B@:A K )nd do not have se'ual relations with them (your wives) while you are in IKtikaf (i.e. confinin oneself in a mos#ue for prayers and invocations leavin the worldly activities) in the mos#ues.K>2(B@:A K They both used to eat food (as any other human bein , while )llah does not eat).K>4(:4A K )ll the praise and thanks be to )llah, the Eord of the worlds. The 7ost +eneficent, the 7ost 7erciful. The .nly .wner of the Fay of 5ecompense.K>B( 2,3A K 6ou ()lone) we worship, and you ()lone) we ask for help.K>B(4A K He it is $ho enables you to travel throu h land and sea, till when you are in the ships and they sail with them with a favourable wind.K>BC(22A K (The Prophet >sawA) frowned and turned away, because there came to him the blind man (Ibn =mm 7aktum).K >@C(B,2A K +ut what could tell you that perchance he mi ht become pure (from sins) &K>@C(0A K In 6our Hand is the ood (khair).K>0(28A He (swt) did not say ( K In 6our Hand is the evil (sharr)K. K !ay (. 7uhammad >sawA) ( % . )llah D Possessor of the Power, 6ou ive the Power to whom 6ou will, and 6ou take the Power from whom 6ou will, and 6ou endue with honour whom 6ou will, and you humiliate whom 6ou will. In 6our Hand is the ood. Qerily, 6ouare )ble to do all thin s.K>0(28A K Qerily, 6ou are )ble to do all thin s.K>0(28A Thus, the tafseer of vocabulary and synta' as words and e'pressions is restricted only to the )rabic lan ua e, it is prohibited that one makes tafsser with anythin other than it. This is what its reality necessitates from this an leLdirection. )s for its reality in terms of shariKa meanin s like prayer (salah) and fastin , and sahriKa rules such as the prohibition of usury, permissibility of trade and the thou hts which have a shariKa reality such as an els and shayateen. It has been established that the ;urKan has come, in many of its verses, as ambivalent (mu/mal). )nd the 7essen er has come and elaborated on it. It has come eneral and the 7essen er (saw) has specified it. It came as absolute (mutala#) and the 7essen er (saw) came and restricted it (mu#ayyad). In the ;urKan )llah has clarified that it is the 7essen er who will e'plain the ;urKan. He (swt) said( K)nd $e have also sent down unto you (. 7uhammad >sawA) the reminder and the advice (the ;urKan), that you may e'plain clearly what is sent down to them.K>B8(33A !o the ;urKan from this directionLan le, in oredr to be understood needs familiarrty with what the 7essen er has e'lained in terms of the meanin s of the vocabulary and synta' of the ;urKan. $hether this e'planation is a B@C

psecification, restriction, elaboration or anythin else. Therefore, to understand the ;urKan it is imperative that one studiesLfamiliarises oneself with the sunnah relatin to the ;urKan ie the sunnah unrestrcitedly. because it is an e'planation of the ;urKan until one knows from this sunnah the meanin s, rules and thou hts in the ;urKan. That is why the restriction in undertsndin the ;urKan in terms of a complete understandin is not sufficient to restrict oneself only to the )rabic lan ua e, rather with the knowled e of the )rabic lan ua e ther mus be knowled e of the sunnah. Ivevn thou h the )rabic lan ua e is the only source refered to in oredr to understand the indic'ations of vocabulary and synta'.V, in terms of its words and e'pressions.However to understand the whole ;urKan one must make the ;urKan and sunnah as two indispensible matters. It is inevitable that they both proceed to ether to understand the ;urKan and that these two thin s are available in whoever wishes to make tafseer ofthe ;urKan. )nd they they both are made the medium by which the ;urKan is understood and e'plained. )s for the stroies mentioned in it of the Prophets and 7essen ers and the events it has narrated about the nations of ancient times. If a sound (sahih) hadith is narrated about it, it is taken. .therwise one should confine onself to what has been reported in the ;urKan in a roup of ayahs. It is not correct that anythin should be known e'cept throu h those two ways. +ecause, from the an le of vocabulary andsynta' there is no path to the Torah and +ible to understand the vocabulary and synta' narrated by the stories. There is no relevance to the Torah and +ible in understandin these vocabulary and synta'. )s for in terms of the meanin , the one who e'plains it is the 7essen er by the e'plicit (te't) of the ;urKan and not the Torah or the +ible. Therefore, there is no patrh to the Torah and the +ible in understandin the meanin s of the ;urKan because )llah has orederd us to refer to the ;urKan and clarified to us that the 7essen er (saw) has e'plained the ;urKan. He (swt) did not oredr us to refer to the Torah and the +ible. It is not allowd for us to refer to the Torah and the +ible to understand the stories of the ;urKan and the reports of by one nations. !imilarly, there is no path to sources other than the Torah and +ible like books of history and the like. +ecause the issue is not the e'planation of a story until we can say that this is a more e'tensive source assumin that it is authentic, rather it is the e'planation of specific te'ts w ich we belive are the words of the Eord of the worlds (rabbu al,Kalamin). Therfore we must stop at the meanin s of these te'ts in terms of the )rabic lan ua e in which the ;urKan came and whatever this lan ua es dictatesand also in trems of the shariKa defionition from the one who the authority to ive the definition, who is the 7essen er (saw) about whome )llah (saw) said that the ;urKan has been revealed to him so that he may e'plain it to the people. "onse#uently, we must ne ateLre/ect any tafseer which comes from the Torah, +ible, historical works etc It will be a fabriction a inst )llah if we think that these are the meanin s of )llahKs words while there is not the semblence of a daleel that they have any relationship to the meanin s of the words of 5abb al,K)lamin. )s for what many people claim, in the past and in modern times, that the ;urKan contains sciences, industry, inventions etc. They ascribe to the ;urKan every science, mentioned by the ancient and modern authors, in terms of the natural and chemical sciences, lo ic and other sub/ects. It has not basis and the reality of B@B

the ;urKan refutes them. The ;urKan did not intend to establish any of the thin s they claim. )ll ayahs of the ;urKan is are but - thou hts demonstratin the reatness of )llah (swt) and ahkam to treat the actions of the servants of )llah (swt). )s for what took place in terms of the sciences there is not a sin le ayah or part of an ayah (let alone verses) with the sli htest indication of any one of the sciences.)s for the ayahs which can be applied to theories or facts like the verse(K )llah is He $ho sends the winds, so they raise clouds.K>0C(3@A The ayah has come to demonstrate the power and ability of )llah (swt) not to prove scientific viewpoints. )s for His (swt) sayin (K )nd $e have sent down to you the +ook (the ;urKan) as an e'position (tibyan) of everythin .K >B8(@?A $hat is intended is everythin from the obli ations and worships and whatever relates to that as evidenced by the te't of the verse. It pertains to the sub/ect of obli ations which the 7essen ers conveyed to the people. )nd the te't of the ayah is(K )nd (remember) the Fay when $e shall raise up from every nation a witness a ainst them from amon st themselves. )nd $e shall brin you (. 7uhammad >sawA) as a witness a ainst these. )nd $e have sent down to you the +ook (the ;urKan) as an e'position (tibyan) of everythin , a uidance, a mercy, and lad tidin s for those who have submitted themselves (to )llah as 7uslims).K >B8(@?A )llah (swt) brin in a 7essen er as a witness over his =mmah means he is a witness over them re ardin that which he conveyed to them. )nd the fact that he revealed the ;urKan to clarify everythin means it is a uidance, mercy and lad tidin s for the 7uslims. $hich definitely means that the thin is not natural science, lo ic or eo raphy or any other sub/ect. +ut it is a thin that relates to the 7essa e. ie that the +ook is an e'position of their ahkams, worships and beliefs (a#aKid). ) uidance by which people are uided and a mercy for them which saves them from mis uidance and lad tidin s for the 7uslims of /anna (Paradise) and the <ood Pleasure of )llah (swt). It has no relationship to anythin other than the deen and its obli ations. !o the meanin of Ke'position (tibyan) of everythin K ( is desi nated as any issues of Islam. )s for His (swt) sayin (K $e have ne lected nothin in the +ook.K>8(0@A $hat is meant by K+ookK is the preserved tablet (al, lawh al,mahfu9) which is the knowled e of )llah taKala. The word KkitabK (book) is a homonym which is e'plained by the settin in which it came. !o, when )llah (swt) says(K This is the +ook (the ;urKan), whereof there is no doubt.K>2(2A it is the ;urKan that is meant. )nd when He (swt) says(K 6ou knew not what is the +ook.K>32(42A ie how to write. +ut when He (swt) said(K )nd with Him is the 7other of the +ook.K>B0(0?A)nd He (swt) says(K That is written in the +ook (of our decrees).K>B:(4@AK $e have ne lected nothin in the +ook.K>8(0@AK $ere it not a previous ordainment from )llah.K>@(8@AK +ut is written in a "lear 5ecord (kitab mubin).K>8(4?AK )ll is in a "lear 5ecord (kitab mubin).K>BB(8AK 2or is a part cut off from his life but is in a +ook.K>04(BBA )ll of this mean the knowled e of )llah (swt). )nd His (swt) sayin (K )nd He has knowled e of the 5ecord (wa Kindahu Kilm al, kitab).K(".=EF 2.T *I2F 5I*I5I2"I) ie the preserved tablet (al,lawh al,mahfu9) which means His (swt) knowled e. )nd His (swt) sayin (K $ritten in the +ook (of our decrees).K>B:(4@A ie the preserved tablet (al,lawh al,mahfu9) which means His (swt) knowled e. )nd His (swt) sayin (K$e have ne lected nothin in the +ook.K>8(0@A has come clearly as the knowled e of )llah (swt). !ince the complete ayah says(K There is not a movin (livin ) creature on earth, nor a bird that flies with its two win s, but are communities like you. $e have ne lected nothin in B@2

the +ook.K>8(0@A !imilar to His (swt) sayin (K $hat sort of +ook is this that leaves neither a small thin nor a bi thin .K >B@(3?A )s evidenced by the second ayah which came in the same sura (chapter) , sura al, )nKam , which is( Ke'cept it is written in a "lear 5ecord (kitab mubin).K>8(4?A !o the verse came(K )nd with Him are the keys of the hayb (all that is hidden), none knows them but He. )nd He knows whatever there is in (or on) the earth and in the sea - not a leaf falls, but he knows it. There is not a rain in the darkness of the earth nor anythin fresh or dry, e'cept it is written in a "lear 5ecord (kitab mubin).K>8(4?A )ll of this indicates in this verse the word KkitabK does not mean ;urKan. 5ather, it means the preserved tablet (al,lawh al,mahfu9) which tantamount to the knowled e of )llah (swt). Thus, there is no indication in the ayah that the ;urKan contains sciences and other such topics. The ;urKan is devoid of any discussions about science because its vocabulary and construction (idioms) and also because the 7essen er (saw) did not e'plain it and so it has no relationship to him. This is the reality of the ;urKan. It indicates e'plicitly and clearly that it consists of )rabic te'ts brou ht by the 7essen er (saw) from )llah (swt) which are not e'plained e'cept without the )rabic lan ua e and the !unnah of the 7essen er of )llah (saw). )s for its tafseer based on a shariKa evidence mentioned re ardin a manner of tafseer. It is not real and it is without basis. +ecause the ;urKan itself did not clarify to us the manner in which its verses should be e'plained. )nd the 7essen er (saw) has not been authentically reported to have clarified a specific way of tafseer. )nd the !ahaba (may )llah be pleased with them) even thou h what they e'plained was the causes of revelation, but that was by way of a maw#uf hadith and not by way of tafseer. even if it was by way of e'planation and clarification they differed on the ayaats. Iach one spoke accordin to his view which indicates that an i/maK (consensus) on a specific manner of tafseer did not take place. )mon them there were those who used to take from then people of the +ook certain israliKyyat which were narrated by the TabiKun. )nd some used to re/ect their use. However, all of them used to understand the ;urKan accordin what they had in terms of knowled e of the )rabic lan ua e, and with what they understood from the !unnah of the7essen er of )llah (saw). In terms of the sayin , action, consentLsilence, attribute of creation and moral character of the 7essen er of )llah (saw). )nd this is a well known fact about all of them. $hoever used to refrain from e'plainin certain words andverses their restraint was due to their certainty of the meanin and not as a restriction to what the te't has mentioned till he did not ive an opinion e'cept if he had reliable knowled e. +ut that is not called i/maK (consensus) because it does not reveal an evidence about the 7essen er (saw) because the clarification of the 7essen er (saw) constitutes a sunnah and not tafseer. However, since the !ahaba are the closest people to the correct opinion in the tafseer of the ;urKan due to their hi h rank in the )rabic lan ua e and their closeness to the one on whom the ;urKan was revealed. In what they used to a ree on his (saw) behaviour, in terms of makin the )rabic lan ua e such as the /ahili poetry, speeches in /ahiliyya and others as the only tool for understandin the vocabulary and construction of the ;urKan, and in terms of stoppin at the limits of what has been mentioned about the 7essen er (saw), and in terms of openin their minds in understandin the ;urKan accordin to those two tools. This is the best method to follow in understandin the ;urKan. B@0

Therefore, we find that the method of e'plainin the ;urKan is that the )rabic lan ua e and the ProphetKs (saw) !unnah should be adopted as the only tool in understandin the ;urKan and its tafseer in terms of its vocabulary and construction, in terms of the !hariKa meanin s, !hariKa rules, and the thou hts that have a le al reality. The method of e'plainin the ;urKan is that open our minds to understand the the te'ts to the e'tent that is indicated bythe speech of the )rabs and their customary usa es. )nd whatever the wordsLe'pressions indicate in terms of !hariKa meanin s mentioned in a !hariKa te't of the ;urKan or !unnah which is not restricted to the understandin of the previous forebears whether K=lama, TabiKun or even the !ahaba. )ll of these are i/tihads which may be mistaken or correct. 7aybe the mind is uided to the understandin of an ayah whose reality becomes conspicuous to the mufassir durin an e'tensive perusal of the )rabic lan ua e or it becomes apparent to him durin the chan in of thin s, pro ress of material forms (ashkal madaniyya), realities, events. +y openin the mind to creativity, by understandin not invention. The creativity in tafseer takes place within the limits demandedby the word KtafseerK while at the same time protectin oneself from mis uided invention of meanin s which has absolutely no relationship to the te't bein e'plained. This conformity in understandin and ivin the mind free rei n by what his best understandin of the te't, without restriction to the understandin of any human bein e'cept the person on whom the ;urKan was revealed, necessitates that all israiliyyat are re/ected restrictin oneself only to the stories mentioned in the ;urKan and re/ectin what they claim to be sciences contained in the ;urKan and stoppin at the limit of what the structures of the ;urKan means in terms of the ayaats which discuss the universe and whatever is intended by them in terms of clarifyin the reatness of )llah (swt). This is the method of e'plainin the ;urKan, the mufassir has to adhere to it, and its burdens must be borne by whoever wishes to make tafseer of the ;urKan.

0.2 The ,cience of 3adith ". 20

It is the science by whose laws the condition of the sanad and matn are known. ItKs aim is to know the correct (sahih) hadith from others. The science is in two parts ( knowled e of the hadith pertainin to transmission (riwaya) and knowled e of the hadith pertainin to meanin (diraya). )s for the one pertainin to transmission (riwaya) it includes the transmission of the sayin s, actions, consent and attributes of the Prophet (saw), and their narration, accuracy and writin down of words. )s for the one pertainin to transmission (riwaya), the reality,conditions (shurut), cate ories and rules of transmission are known throu h it. Firaya includes knowled e of meanin contained by the hadith in terms of whether it contradicts the definite te't.

9.6.7

he &adith p.;6:

.ne should be familiar with the meanin s of terms that are fre#uently used by the muhaddithin. They are ( Hadith, khabar, athar and sunnah. These are eneral terms. )nd matn, sanad, isnad, musnad (with fatha on nun), musnid (with kasra under nun) are from the perspective of the terms of hadith and its transmission. B@3

)nd muhaddith, hafi9, hu//a, hakim are from the perspective of the transmitters. )s for the clarification of the meanin s of these words in the terminolo y of hadith ( B. Hadith ( $hatever has been attributed to the Prophet (saw) in terms of his sayin , action, consent or physical attribute (ie relatin to his creation (saw) such as his bein of medium hei ht), or his character ie relatin to his morals such as his notcounterin anyone with anythin makruh. Hhabar and sunnah has this meanin also. They are synonymous terms for the term hadith. )ll of them ie hadith, khabar and sunnah have the same meanin . )s for athar it is the hadith stoppin at the !ahaba (may )llah be pleased with them). 2. 7atn ( is the speech which comes at the end of the hi hest part of the sanad. The sanad is the line of transmission leadin to the matn ie the men (transmitters) who lead to the matn. The isnad is the attribution of the hadith to the one who said it.7usnad (with fatha on the nun) is the chain which is continuous from its be innin until the end even if it stops at the sahabi (maw#uf). The word musnad is also applied to a book in which reports of the !ahaba are compiled. )s for musnid (with kasra below nun) it is the person who narrates the hadithwith its isnad. 0. 7uhaddith ( !omeone who carries the hadith and devotes his attention to it in terms of narration (riwaya) and meanin (diraya). The hafi9( is someone who has committed to memory a hundred thousand hadiths with the matn and sanad even iftheir are throu h various lines of transmission and he is aware of what he re#uires. The hu//a ( is someone who is thorou hly ac#uainted with three hundred thousand hadiths. )nd hakim is someone who is familiar with the entirety of the sunnah.

9.6.6

he ransmitters of &adith p.;6A

The narration of hadith came to an end after the writin down of ahadith in books. )fter the a e of the recordin of hadith there is no narration of hadiths, which was the a e of +ukhari, 7uslim and the compilers of the books of !unan. +ecause, narration of hadith is tantamount to transmission and this transmission has ended. The transmitters of ahadith are the !ahaba, TabiKin and others after them.The K=lama of hadith have said that whoever saw the Prophet (saw) and believed in him,he is !ahabi. However, the truth is that the !ahabi is whoever has actually realised the meanin of companionship. It has been narrated about !aKid b. al,7usayyab( It is essential that someone has companionship with the Prophet (saw) for one or two years, or has one out with him on one or two battles.K !huKba reported from 7usa al,!ibillani , whom he spoke appreciatively about , that he said( I said to )nas b. 7alik. )re there any companions of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) left other than you& He said( There are still many )rabs who saw him. )s for his companions, noD. )ll of the !ahaba are trustworthy because )llah has praised them in his holy +ook and due to the commendation of their morals and actions stated in the prophetic sunnah. )s for the TabiKin.)TabiKin is desi nated as the one who met a !ahabi and transmitted from even if has not had companionship with him. Eike !aKid b. al,7usayyab, ;ays b. )bi Ha9im, ;ays b. B@4

K=bad and )bu !asan Husayn b. al,7un9ir. The history of the transmitters of hadith have been written and each one had been identified. The !ahaba are not protected from mistakes. Hafi9 al,Jahabi al,Fimash#i said( )s for the !ahaba (r.a.) their matter has been settled despite what happed, even thou h they made mistakes as other trustworthy people did. +arely a sin le one of them is immune from mistakes but the mistakes are rare which do no harm. !ince it is on the basis of their trustworthiness and acceptance of what they transmit that we act. )nd since it is throu h what they transmit thatwe obey )llah taKala. )s for the TabiKin. Those who would intentionally lie are almost non,e'i'tent.However they made mistakes and errors. The one whose mistakes were rare........ )nd whoever made many mistakes and was of wide knowled e he was for ivenalso. His hadith is transmitted and acted upon throu h the hesitancy of the imams and establishin ............. !uch as al,Harith al,)Kwar, K)sim b. Hanbal, !alih the freedman of al,TawKama, K)ta b. al,!aKib and their likes. The one who makes terrible mistakes and has many tafarrud, his hadith is not relied upon. This hardly happens with the early TabiKis thou h it was present amon the less senior TabiKin those who came after them. )s for the students of the Tabinin like al,)w9aKi and others they are on the aforementioned levels. In their a e there were those who would intentionally lie and would many mistakes, his hadith would be disre arded. .................

9.6.; he one whose narration is accepted and the one whose narration is not accepted$
The e'position of (the science of) invalidation and attestation of reliability (/arh wa taKdeel) p.00C It is stipulated concernin someone whose narration is used as proof, that he be /ustLupri ht (Kadl) and accurate (dabit) in that which he narrates. )s for the upri ht transmitter ( he should be 7uslim, mature, sane , safe from the causes of fis# (trans ression) and khawarim sense of honour. )s for the one who is dabit (accurate)( He is the one who is aware and not inattentive. He should be some one who has memorisedhis narration (well) if he narrates from memory, and precise in his writin if he narrates from a book, and knowled eable about what he transmits and what will chan e the intended meanin if he narrates by meanin . The trustworthiness of a transmitters is established throu h his becomin known for bein upri ht and the praise iven to him. !o whoever becomes well known for his trustworthiness amon the people of transmission and their likes from the people of knowled e and praise for his reliability and trustworthiness become widely known, then due to that he is no need of any testimonial proof of his honesty tansisan. The probity of a transmitters is established likewise by the attestation of the imams, or by one of them if his trustworthiness and scholarKs approval of him is not well known. ) transmitters accuracy (dabt) is known by considerin Lcomparin his narrations with that of trustworthy narrators who are known for their accuracy and B@8

precisionLe'actitude. If his narrations are found to accord with their narration (even in meanin ) or they are in a reement in the ma/ority of cases and his diver ences are rare, then at that time his accuracy is established. )ttestation (taKdeel) of a transmitterKs reliability is accepted whether the reason was mentioned or not. $hich is contrary to the invalidationLdispara ement (/arh). It is not accepted e'cept when the reason has been e'plained and clarified due to peopleKs diver ent views of the causes of mafsa#a (trans ression). The one who invalidatesLdispara es (/arih) a transmitter may believe somethin to be a trans ression (mafsa#a) so he brands the transmitter as weak but in reality it may not be so, or it mi ht not be so accordin to the views of others. In other words, someone mi ht term somethin as aninvalidation based on what he believes to be an invalidation, which in reality is not a (le itimate) invalidation (/arh). That is why clarification of the reason for invalidation has been stipulated so that one can look into whether it is a le itimate invalidation or not. The invalidation can be established by one person, there is no stipulation on the number. !ince one person is sufficient in attestin (taKdeel) or invalidatin (ta/reeh) a transmitterKs probity because it constitutes the notification of anews for which one person is sufficient. Must as the number is not stipulated in acceptin a report, rather one person is sufficient. !imilarly, the number is also not stipulated in invalidatin or attestin a transmitters honesty. 5ather, one person is sufficient for the purpose of invalidation and attestation of someones character. $hen there is an invalidation and attestation for a person at the same time, then the invalidation is iven precedence even if there are many people attestin someones reliability. +ecause the one who attests (muKaddil) a transmitters reliability informs of what is apparent from the transmitters condition but the one who invalidates (/arih) informs of what is hidden and concealed from the one who validates (muKaddil). )s for thenumber of those validatin bein reater, that is of no value. *or that is not the reason for acceptin the report. 5ather, rather the reason is whether someone is familiar or not familiar with the condition of a transmitter. The fu#aha restricted that to when the validator (muKaddil) does not say( I know the reason mentioned by the one who invalidated (so and so) but he has since repented and his condition has improved. $hen the one who invaliadtes mentions a specific reason for invalidation, the muKaddilcan nullify it if he knows anythin that indicates definitely that the reason has been cancelled. Fispara ement of a transmitter can take place with ten thin s. *ive relate to the trustworthiness (Kadala) and five relate to accuracy (dabt) (in retention and reproduction of reports). )s for the five which relate to the Kadala they are ( mendacity (kidhb), accusation (of any impropriety), any manifestations of fis# (trans ression), i norance or innovations (bidKa). )s for the five which relate to accuracy (dabt) they are( serious mistakes, fla rant ne li ence and delusion, contradictin reports of reliable transmitters, and bad memoryLretentive ability. )s for the transmitter whose condition is not known, there are cate ories( B. ) transmitter whose apparent or hidden probity is not known. This transmitterKs narration is not accepted. 2. ) transmitter whose hidden condition is not known but he is upri ht on the B@:

surface. He is a narrator with a blameless record (mastur).This transmitterKs narration is used. 0. ) transmitter who is completely unknown (ma/hul al,Kayn). He is every transmitter not known to the K=lama. )nd he is someone whose hadith is known only throu h one transmitter...............

9.6.8 'arrations of the <uslim Sects p.;;;

)ll of the !ahaba are trustworthy (Kudul). That is why people did not ask about the isnad in the time of the Prophet (saw) and after him, until the fitna (civil war) took place then they asked about the isnad. The !ahaba and others (after them) encoura ed people to e'amine the one from whom the hadith is taken. It has been narrated by )bu !akina 7a/ashiK b. *atina that he said( I heard the K)li b. )bu Talib (may )llah be pleased with him) that he was in the mos#ue of Hufa that he said( Kscrutinise the person from whom you take you this knowled e for it is the deen.K al,Fahhak b.7u9ahim said( Indeed this knowled e is the deen so consider the person from whom you take the knowled e.K )nd 7uhammad b. !irin said(KIndeed this hadith is deen so consider from whom you take it.K )fter the fitna (civil war) Islamic sects came about believin inLespousin novel opinions. The followers of these sects used to claim that they deduced these opinions, which they came to profess, from the !hariKa te'ts until they became Islamic opinions. )nd whensome of them re#uired a proof but did not find the evidence, in the !hariKa te'ts, for the opinion he holds. Then he would fabricate a hadith which supports his opinion. )nd he would attribute it to the 7essen er (saw). )nd some of them use to carry the call to his sect and incitation to it or daKwa to their opinions and incitation to fabricate the ahadiths....... . These new opinions were termed as bidKas (innovations) and the people who did this were called mubtadiKa (innovators). That is why hearin hadiths from these people is sub/ect to scrutiny. )nd their narration of hadith used a sub/ect of debate. There are detailed clarifications re ardin their situation. Thus, the mubtadiK (innovator) who is char ed with kufr due to his bidKa (innovation) thereare no problems in re/ectin his narration. If he is not char ed with kufr, if he permits lyin then his narration is re/ected also. )s for if he does not permit lyin then his narration is accepted on the proviso that he does not call to his sect or school (ma9hab). If he calls to his sect then his narration is re/ected. )nd his reports are not advanced as proofs. In short, any 7uslim who meets the conditions for the acceptance of a narration, if he is /ust (Kadl) and precise (dabit) then his narration is is accepted irrespective of his ma9hab or sect as lon as he does not call to his sect or ma9hab. +ecause invitin people to the sect or ma9hab is not allowed. )s for if he invited people to Islam and e'plained the thou hts he has adopted with their evidences, then his narration is accepted. because then he is callin people to Islam. )nd this personKs narration is not impu ned.

B@@

9.6.9 'arration by meaning and abridgement of the hadith p.;;9

It is permitted to narrate hadith by meanin . +ecause, we do not worship )llah by the words of a hadith but by its meanin because the wahy (revelation) is the meanin of the hadith and not its words. However, it has been stipulated that the narrator be knowled eable about anythin that can chan e the meanin . If he is not knowled eable or co ni9ant of that, it is not allowed to narrate hadith by meanin . )s for the abrid ment of the hadith, it is allowed. It is not improper if a hadith is narrated in an abrid ed form, with a part omitted and a part mentioned on the proviso that the omitted part does not relate to the part mentioned. However, it is not allowed to commit or e'clude the aim and other such thin s which would make the meanin deficient or make the part of the hadith which has been mentioned lead to a meanin which is completely contrary to the (actual) meanin of the hadith. ..............

9.6.: 5ivisions@categories of hadith p.;;:

The khabar (report) which is synonymous to the terms hadith and sunnah, in terms of the line of transmission, is divided into the khabar mutawatir (continuously recurrent report) and khabar ahad (isolated report). The mutawatir which comprises of four issues, they are ( B. The number of transmitters should be such that they are a roup and not be restricted to any specific number. !o whatevernumber proves to be a roup, that is considered mutawatir. However, it is not allowed to be below five. *our is not enou h because four are in need of another to attest their inte rity (ta9kiya) if nothin is known about them when they ive testimony for9ina. The roup accredited for tawatur (continuous transmission) is that it should need any attestation (ta9kiya) until it is definite by the mere notification of the report. 2.It should preclude the collusion on a lie. It differs accordin to the difference of persons and places. !o five people like K)li b. )bi Talib is sufficient to consider the report as mutawatir. Probably with other people five may not be sufficient. *ive transmitters, who have not met, from five different countries may be enou h for the report to be considered as mutawatir. !ince they did not meet in one place for collusion to be possible. Probably a notification by the same number of people in one country may not suffice. 0. That the same number transmit the report from the be in until the end of the transmission in precludin the collusion on a lie. If their numbers do not reach that amount ie the first two conditions should be met in every tier of transmitters. 3. The basis of their conclusion should be sense perception. +y hearin and other such senses. 2ot what the pure reason establishes because it can make mistakes if it is not based on sense perception. It does not amount to certainty. The value (hukm) of the mutawatir report is that it yields positive knowled e (Kilm daruri). It is what man is compelled to accept such that he is unable to confute it. It is inescapable because it does not re#uire study. ie the the mutawatir report imparts certainty (ya#in). The mutawatir report is divided into two cate ories( verbal B@?

(laf9an) mutawatir like the hadith (K$hosoever intentionally lies about me, let him reserve his place in the Hellfire.K )nd the hadith of wipin on the leather socks, hadith of hawd (river in paradise), hadith of intercession (shafaKa) and the hadith of raisin the hands (rafK al,yadayn) in prayer. )nd the mutawatir by meanin (maKna) such as when the transmitters concur on a matter occurrin in difference incidents such as the sunnah of the mornin prayer bein two rakats. It does e'ist. 2umerous mutawatir hadiths have been reported even thou h the K=lama differ on what constitutes mutawatir accordin to their different views about the mutawatir report. )s for the isolated report (khabar al,ahad). It is the report whose narrators have not reached the number re#uired for the mutawatir. $hether it was reported by one or four narrators ie it is the report which falls short of the precedin four conditions for the mutawatir report. It is divided, in terms of the number of narrators, into three cate ories( B. <harib ( it is the report narrated by a sin le transmitter..... ie there is a sin le narrator throu hout the narration at any sta e in the isnad. It is divided into ( harib in isnad only, and harib in isnad and matn to ether. There is nothin called harib only inmatn. The harib in matn and isnad is the narration by a sin le narrator. !uch as the hadith prohibitin the sale of wala (patrona e)and its ifts. The harib in isnad and not in matn is the matn which has been narrated by a roup of !ahaba but a transmitter has sin le narration form another !ahaba like the hadith( )ctions are /ud es accordin to intentions.K 2. )9i9 ( It is a report transmitted by more than one narrator but less than four.ie what two or three narrators have transmitted even if they are of the same rank. It is called a9i9 (scarce) due to its rarity. 0. 7ashur( ) report which has been narrated by more than three narrators but but it did not reach the level of mutawatir. It is called mashur due to it bein clear and widely mentioned on the lips of people. $hether a sanad (chain) was found for it or was not found ori inally. It is also the mustafid. It has two cate ories( mashur accordin to the scholars of hadith and mashur for the eneral public. The first is like the hadith of )nas ( Thatthe Prophet (saw) ........... )nd the second cate ory is like the hadith ( ) 7uslim is someone from whose (sharp) ton ue and hands other 7uslims are safeK. 2ot every mashur report amon people is sahih. "ertain hadith may become famous amon st people which do not have any basis or are entirely fabricated. Theses are many, .like the hadith ( the day of you fast is the day of your sacrificeK It is devoid of any basis. )nd the Hhabar al,ahad also, whether it is harib, a9i9 or mashur, the isnad has a termination point. either it ends with the Prophet (saw) or with a !ahabi or tabiKi. In terms of the end of the chain there are three types( B. marfuK ( It is a report which has been specifically ascribed to the Prophet in terms of his action, sayin , consent or attribute. $hether the one who attributed it to the Prophet (saw) was a !ahabi. tabiKi or someone after them. *rom this is when the !ahabi says ( we use to do or say such and such thin durin the life time of the 7essen er (saw) , or he was amon us, orhe was in front of us, or we B?C

did not see anythin wron with such and such thin , or they (!ahaba) used to do or say such and such thin or such and such thin was said durin the lifetime of the 7essen er (saw). *rom this also when the !ahabi says( $e were ordered to do such and such thin , or we were forbidden from doin such and such thin or such and such thin wa from the !unnah. It is also considered a marfuK report when the !ahabi says( $e used to do or say such and such thin even if they did not attribute it to the Prophet (saw) because it indicates a consent. Eikewise, the sayin of )nas b. 7alik is considered as a marfuK report when he said( The ProphetKs doors used to be knocked usin the fin ernailsK and when )nas said +ilal was ordered to double the a9an and make one i#ama K. !imilarly the tafseer of the !ahaba concernin the cause of revelation comes under the rule of marfuK. )nythin other than that from the tafseer of the !ahaba is not considered part of the hadith. That is because the !ahaba performed many i/tihads in e'plainin the ;urKan and they disa reed as result. )lso we find many of them used to narrate israilyyat from the people of the +ook. That is why their tafseer is not considered part of the hadith let alone be considered asa marfuK hadith. 2. maw#uf ( It is the narration from the !ahaba in terms of their sayin and action. Its application is specific to the !ahabi. Its isnad can be continuous or broken. It is the report many of the *u#aha and muhaddithun also call athar. The maw#uf does not establish a proof because )llah (swt) said(K)nd whatsoever the 7essen er (saw) ives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it).K >4?(:A The understandin is ( whatever brou ht to us from other than the 7essen er (saw) do not take it. Therefore, it is not a proof for anyone e'cept when it is from the 7essen er of )llah (saw). It is not permitted to ascribe it to the 7essen er of )llah (saw) because it is a mere possibility and not a preponderant opinion (9ann), and possibilities are not reco nised. 0. ma#tuK ( It is not the same as mun#atiK. The chain stops at the TabiKi-i in terms of his sayin and action. ) proof is not established by it, it is weaker than the maw#uf.

9.6.= 2ategories of the Fhabar al)Ahad p.;8B

The khabar al,ahad (isolated report) in its three forms ( harib, Ka9i9 or mashur, whether marfuK, maw#uf or ma#tuK is divided by the scholars of hadith, in terms of its acceptance or re/ection, into three cate ories( sahih, hasan, daKeef. The followin is an clarification of each cate ory( B. sahih - it is the hadith whose isnad is linked by the transmission of an upri ht (Kadl) narrator whose retention is accurate (dabit) from an another upri ht transmitter whose has an accurate retentive ability until the end of the chain, and is not shadh (irre ular) or muKallal (defective). ie the isnad of the hadith is linked by the transmission of an upri ht (Kadl) and accurate (dabit) narrator from another same as him until it end with the 7essen er of )llah (saw) or ends with a !ahabi or someone else. The statement of the scholars of hadith that the K the isnad of the hadith is linked by the transmission of an upri ht (Kadl) and accurate (dabit) narrator from another same as himK e'cludes it from the mursal, mun#atiK andmuKdal hadiths, which are not from the cate ory of sahih. +ecause, the mursal B?B

is what the TabiKin has narrated about the Prophet (saw) without mentionin the !ahabi. The mun#atiK is when a sin le narrator is missin Lomitted in one or more places in the isnad. The muKdal has two or more narrators missin from one or more places in the isnad. )ll of them, ie mursal, mun#atiK and muKdal have discontinued isnads which takes it out of the sahih cate ory. )nd their statement that - the ahadith should not be shadh (irre ular) e'cludes the sahih hadith from the shadh report where a trustworthy narrator oes a ainst the transmissions of narrators who are more reliable than him. )nd their statement ( It should not be muKallal (defective) e'cludes the sahih ahadith from the muKallal report which has a defect. The Killah (defect) consists of a deni ratory thin in the hadith, effectin its re/ection, which appears to the ri/al critics when collectin and collatin the the various transmission routes of the hadith. !uch as the chain of a narrator bein continuous while a roup has transmitted as maw#ufL attributed it to a !ahaba. )nd their statement ( +y the transmission of an upri ht narrator, it e'cludes the report narrated by a transmitter whose apparent and hidden condition is not known, ma/hul al,Kayn, and the transmitter known to be weak. !uch as hadith is not considered as sahih. )nd their statement ( by the transmission of a narrator who has accurate retentive ability (dabit) which e'cludes what has been narrated by someone who has memorised a hadith, aware that his transmission is ne li ent and full of mistakes, this report is not considered a sahih hadith. 5ather, all the conditions which have been clarified should bet met in the sahih ahadith. If one condition is not met then the ahadith is not sahih. 2. Hasan ( It is a report defined by the one who recorded it and its transmitters became well known and conse#uently it is the core of most of the hadith. It is a ahadith most scholars accept and it is used by the fu#aha enerally. ie that in the isnad there are no narrators that have been char ed with lyin and it is not a shadh (irre ular) hadith. There are two types ( *irst ( a hadith whose isnad is not free from transmitters who are mastur (transmitters who have a blameless record because their hidden condition is not known), whose capacity is not realised. However they are not ne li ent and are not prone to make mistakes and nor are they char ed with mendacity. The matn of the hadith may have been narrated by someone similar level to him due to which it will not be included as shadh or munkar (re/ected). !econd( The narrators must be known for their honesty and trustworthiness but they do not attain the level of the transmitters of the sahih cate ory in retention and e'actitude. ) narrator who is alone in transmittin a report is not considered as munkar (re/ected). )nd nor is the matn irre ular (shadh)or defective (muKallal). !o the hasan ahadith is the report transmitted by an upri ht (Kadl) narrator who is oflesser retentive capacity, whose isnad is continuous and not irre ular (shadh) or defective (muKallal). The hasan hadith is used as proof e'actly as the sahih hadith is used. 0. FaKeef ( It is the hadith which does not have the #ualifications of the sahih or hasan hadiths. The weak hadith is not used as evidence at all. It is a mistake to say that when a daKeef hadith comes via numerous lines of transmission then it rises to the level of hasan or sahih. *or when the hadith is weak this means the B?2

narrators have actually committed trans ressions or have been accused of lyin . Then the hadith has come throu h other lines of transmission which are of this type, then it has increased in its weakness. )s for when the meanin contained in the daKeef hadith is also contained in the sahih ahadith, then the sahih hadith is cited and the daKeef hadith is disre arded. Therefore, the daKeef hadith is not educed in any way whatsoever.

9.6.A he accepted hadith (maqbul) and the re+ected hadith (mardud) p.;8;
It becomes clear from dividin the hadith into sahih, hasan and daKeef, that the hadith hasan and sahih are both advanced as proof and the daKeef hadith is not. $hat makes the hadith acceptable or re/ectable is the consideration of the sanad, transmitter and matn. If a narrator is not ommited fron the sanad whose ommision will lead to the inibility to attest the reliablity of the ommitted narrator, and the narratorKs probity is not impu hned, and the matn is not weak and does not contradict certian parts of the ;urKan or sunnah mutawatir or definite i/maK. then in this case the hadith is accepted, acted upon and adopted as a shariKa evidenc whether it was sahih or hasan. )s for when the hadith is contrary to these #ulaifications, it is re/ected and not educed as proof. Therfore, the re/ected hadith is the hadith which is re/ected due to the ommison from the sanad of a nrrator which results in the inabiulity to attest the reliabilty of this narrator or, due to a narratorKs probity bein impu hned, or due to the weaknes of the (matn) of the hadith or its contradiction to the ;urKan, hadith and i/maKwhich are definite. Qarious types of hadith come under the hadith mardud (re/ected) which do not e'ceed the followin discriptions( B.7uKalla# ( when there is one or more narrators are conse#uitively missin from the be in of the sanad in a manner that is #uite obvious. The term KmoreK is more enreal to include the whole or part of the isnad. )lso included, is the ommision of the whole chain by hte muhaddith or the hadith compiler, such as when he says( The 7essne er of )llah (saw) siad por did such and such thin . 2.7uKdal( Is a chain in which two or more narrators are missin from one or more places. It includes when the tabi at,tabiKi omits a tabiKi and sahabi from the isnad. +utit does not include the statement of authors from the fu#aha when they say( The mesene er of )llah (saw) saidK. .r their statement Kabout the 7essne er of )llah (saw). It is not muKdal becaue that is not trasnmision, rether it constitues #outin and educin a proof which is correct. 0.7un#atiK( $hen a sin le narrator is missin before the !ahabi in one place whetherever that was. If there is more than one place such that, the narrator who ommits, does not ommit more than one narrator from each place. so it will be mun#atiK in these places. )lso considered to be mun#atiK is the chain in which there is a nondesrciptLobscure narrator (mubahm). )nd e'ample of atransmitter bein ommitted is what habeen narrated by K)bd al,5assa# W al,Thawri W )bu Isha# W Jayd b. 6athiK W Hudhayfa, which oes back to the Prophet (saw) that he said( ........................... The isna has breaks in two places. *irst, is that K)bd al, 5assa# did not hear from al,Thawri but rather narrated it from al,2uKman Ibn )bi !hayba al,Mundiwho narrated from al,Thawri. )nd second, al,Thawri did not hear from )bu Isha# but rather narrated it from !hurayk who narrated from )bu Isha#. B?0

The hadith, therefore, is re/ected. )n e'ample of a transmitter bein nondescriptLobscure is what is narrated by)bu al,K)la b. K)bd )llah b. !hu/ayr W two men W !haddad b. )ws ( the hadith (K . EordD I ask you to make me staedfast in the matter.KTherfore, the hadith is re/ected due to the presence of unkown (ma/hul) narrators in the transmisiion. 3. !hadh ( It is when a reliable transmitter narrates a hadith which condradicts what others have narrated. It is not shadh if a reliable narrator transmitts somethin no one lese has narrated. +ecaue the narration of a reliable transmitter is accepted even if others have not narrated it, and it ias used as proof. That is like the hadith ( )ctions are /ud ed accordin to intentionsK. .nly K=mar narrated it andfrom him only K)l#ama narrated it. ) sin le narrator 7uhammad b. Ibrahim al, Tamimi narrated from him, from who only6ahya b. !aid al,)nsari narrated. *rom 6ahya b. !aid there was a proliferation of transmission routes. Therfore, the shadh is only when a reliable narrator transmitts somthi n whcih contradicts what has been narrated by others. ie when the accepted narrator transmits a report which oes a inst the report of those more likely to be correct in their transmission. 4. 7uKallal( It is a hadith which has a defect (Killah). It is the ahdith which is discovered to have a defect which impairs its authenticity whi'h apparently seems to be sound. That is pursued in the isnad whose trabnsmitters are reliable and which apparently includes the conditions of authenticy. 8. 7unkar ( $hat a sin le unreliable transmitter narrates alone. The munkar is the narration of a weak narrator which contradicts the report of a transmitter who is less weak. :. 7awduK( The hadith mawduK is the spurios and fabricated hadith. The fabricated hadith is the evil of the weak hadiths. The narration of anyone whose condition is known is not allowed e'cept when it is linked to clarifyin its fabricated status. ) hadith is known to be fabricated when the for er acknowled es its fabrication or somethin which is tantamount toLtakes the position of a confession. The fabrication can be understood from the indication of the transmitterKs condition, such as the narrator followin the whims of certian leaders in his lies. .r while he is attributin the hadith he is cau ht as a consummate liar, becasue that report is not to come from any direction otherthan him. 2oone a reed with him and he has not witness. Ior we can discern mendacity from the condition of what has been narrated. ie from the state of the matn, if its is weakLinadua#uate in its wordin or meanin or it constradicts some of the ;urKan, mutawatir sunnah and definite i/maK.There are diffent types of hadith fabricators. The ones causin most harm are those associated with 9uhd (pious ascetism). They fabricated hopin to et reward for what they alle ed. The dan er is that people accepted theirfabrications, trustin and dependin Lrelyin on them. Then, maybe a for er fabricated a sayin comin from hisself so they narrated it. Probably, he took a sayin from the sa es or others and falsly ascribed it to the 7essene r of )llah (saw). *rom the fabricated hadiths are the hadiths about the meritsLe'cellence of the ;urKan sura by sura especially narrations (alle edly)on the authroity of K=bay b. HaKb and the isnad ( )bu KIsma W KIkrama W Ibn K)bbas. Its spuriousness has been established from the study (cross refrences) of scholars and by the confession of )bu KIsma. It has been narrated that he said( I saw that the people had turned away from the ;urKan and occupied themsellves with the fi#h of )bu Haniofah and the ma ha9i of 7uhammad b. Isha#, so I for ed these hadiths B?3

seekin reward in the Hereafter.K These are a selection of the types of re/ected hadiths but they are not all the possible types that could be mentioned. +ut, there are many types of re/ected hadiths for which mentionin a part is suffient as a principle by which the acceptable and re/ected hadith is known. ) hadith is not re/ected because it does not meet the conitions for the cata ory of sahih as lon as its sanad, transmitters and matn are acceptable. ie when it is hasan since the narrators are of lesser reliability than the narrators of the sahih hadith. or if there was a mustur (a transmitter whose record is apprently blameless) or he had a bad memory, or it has been strne thend by a #arina (indication) or its acceptance is prep>odentarent such as when it is stranthened by another narrator a reein with it or there is a witness. ............... .ne should not be overstrict in re/ectin a hadith as lon as it is possible to accept it accordi n to the re#uirements of the sanad, tarnsmitters and matn. Ispceally when the ma/ority of the %ulama have accepted it and the fu#aha have enrally used it, then it is worthy to be accepted even if id dod not meet the conditions of the sahih because it comes under hasan. Must as one should not be overstrict in re/ectin a hadith, at the same time it is not allowed to ne le entLlenient with respect to the hadith, acceptin the hadith which is re/ected due to the sanad, transmitter or matn.

9.6.?

he <ursal &adith p.;8=

The mursal hadith is the hadith from which the !ahabi has been omitted. !uch as when the TabiKin says that the 7essen er of )llah (saw) said or did such and such thin , or such and such thin was done in his presence. ) representative e'ample would be the hadith of a tabiKi who has met anumber of companions and has sat down to learn from them like K=bayd )llah b. KIddi b. al,HhiyarLkhayyar, then !aKid b. al,7usayyab and their likes when they say (directly) that ( Kthe messen er of )llah (saw) saidK. It is well known that all of the TabiKin are treated e#ually. ie what the tabiKi narrated about the Prophet (saw) without mentionin the !ahaba. There is not difference between the seniorLolder or /uniorLyoun er tabiKi because it is well known that they are treated e#ually. The muhaddithin, scholars of usul (usuliyyin) and the imams have differed over the use of the mursal hadith as proof. There were those who did not use it and considered it to be re/ected like the munatiK hadith and there were those who did accept its use. Those who do not accept it re/ect it for a reason. $hich is that a transmitter who is not known has been omitted form the isnad, who mi ht be trustworthy. The consideration in narration is reliability and certainty, an unknown transmitter is not proof. This is the reason for re/ectin the mursal ahadith. The reason is correct and the re/ection of a hadith accordin to it is correct but it does not apply to the mursal hadith. +ecause the transmitter who has been omitted is a !ahabi. Iven thou h he is not known in terms of his identity, but he is known as a !ahabi. )nd the !ahaba are all trustworthy (Kudul). They cannot be unreliable. 5ather, they are definitely trustworthy. Thus, the reason by which they re/ect the hadith does not apply to the mursal. )nd nor is there any other reason to re/ect it. )nd since he fulfils the condition of the matn, sanad and narrator, no harm is done by omittin the !ahabi as lon as it is known that he is a !ahabi, and so he is trustworthy. That indicates that the mursal hadith is a proof and should be educed as an evidence. It mi ht B?4

be said that the reason is that there is a possibility that a tabiKi narrated from a tabiKi like himself who narrated for the !ahaba. The ommision of a !ahabi does not mean the ommision of only one narrator. +ut thebreak in the chain means that it is possible that two narrators have been omitted, one of them satisfies the condition of inte rity, which is the !ahabi and the case of the other narrator is dubious, who is a tabiKi. There is a possibility in the hadith ofa /arh (invalidation) or lackLabsence of accuracy (dabt), and therefore it is re/ected. !uch a thin mi ht be said. The response is that the definition of the mursal hadith is that ( it is a report narrated by a tabiKi from the Prophet (saw) without mentionin the !ahabiK. The narration of a TabiKin form a TabiKin who is not known does not come under this definition. Iven if we accept this illustrationLdepiction, it is a the possibility of the TabiKiKs ommision without mentionin the !ahabi. The possibility of his ommision is by way of suspicion. 5ather it is a suspicion which does not reach the level of possibility. +ecause he suspects the tabiKi of narratin from another tabiKi who he did not mention and nor did he mention the !ahabi. ie he supposesLassumes that a TabiKi has been ommited. There is no evidence for this hypothetical assumption. It is merely a suspicion. ) suspicion has no value and the hukm (value) of hadith is not based on it. It should not be said that an unknown narrator (ma/hul) has transmitted itsince the narration is not predicated on anythin such that it can be said that the narrator is a ma/hul (unknown). Therefore, the mursal hadith is not cosidered to be from the re/ected hdiths, rather it is accepted and used as proof.

9.6.7B

he hadith 3udsi p.;8?

The hadith #udsi is what has been transmitted to us as isolated reports about him (saw), with its isnad oin back to his Eord. It is His (swt) speech for it is attributed to Him, which is present in the ma/ority of cases. The attribution to Him, then,is an attrubutiuon of compositionLori ination becasue he is the one who spoke it first. It is attributed to the Prophet (saw) becue he is the one informin about )llah (swt). $hich is contrary to the ;urKan which is attributed to no one e'cept to Him (swt). !o it is said( )llah (swt) saidK. )nd in the hadith #udsi it is said( The 7essne er of )llah (saw) said about what he narrated from his EordK. The narrator of the hadith #udsi has two characteristics, fits is that he may say (The 7essne er of )llah (saw) said about what he narrated from his Eord. !econdly, he will say ( )llah (swt) siad concernn that which the 7essne er of )llah narrated from HimK. They have the same meanin . The difference between the ;urKan and the hadith #udsi is that the wordin and the menain are from )llah which has come via the clear revelation. )s for the hadith #udsi, the wordin is from the 7essne er (saw), and the meanin is from )llah throu h ilham (inspiration) or sleep. The ;urKanKs wordin is a miracle, revelaed via the medium of Mibreel. The hadith #udsi is not a miracle without any medium. The difference between the ;urKan, hadith #udsi and hadiths which are not ahdith #udsi( is that the ;urKan is the wordin brou h down by Mibreel to the Prophet (saw).The hadith #udsi is the meanin of notification of )llah throu h ilham (inspiration) or sleep. !o the Porphet (saw) informed people of it with his own words. )s for the rest of the hadiths they rae like the hadith #udsi in that ht emeanin is from )llah and the wordin is from the 7essne er (saw) but it is not B?8

attributed to )llah (swt). The desi natuon of the hadith attributed to )llah (swt) as the hadith #udsi is a terminilo ical desi nation. The inability to prove the authenticity of a hadith from its sanad does not indicate that it is a weak hadith p.04B The stren th of the sanad is considered a condition in acceptin a hadith. However it should be known that /ud in the sanad of a specific adith as weak does not necessarily mean the hadith is weak in itself. !ince it mi ht have another isnad thou h an imam mi ht state that it has not been seen e'cept from this lien of transmission. !o, whoever finds a hadith with a weak isnad, it is more inclusive to say that it is weak with this isnad but the te't is not /ud ed as weak without #ualification. Therefore the re/ection of the isnad does not necessitate the re/ection of the hadith. However, there are hadiths which are not proved from the perspective of the isnad but when it is received from people to people they are satisfied with its authenticity and are in no need to ask for the isnad. There are many e'ample for this such as the hadith( KThere shall be no be#uest (wasiyya) to an heirK and the hadith( the blood money (diyya) is for the a natic blood relatives (Ka#ila)K. !uch e'amples are many......

9.6.77 2onsideration of the hadith as an evidence in the Shari0a Gules p.;96

The evidence for the a#eeda must be definite and of un#uestionableLincontrovertible authenticity. That is why the isolated report (khabar al,ahad) is not fit to be an evidence for a#eeda. Iven if it is a sound hadith (hadith sahih) in its meanin and transmission. )s for the !hariKa rule, it suffices for its evidence to be speculative (9anni). Therefore, /ust as the mutawatir hadith suffices as anevidence for the !hariKa rule, likewise the isolated report (khabar al,ahad) suffices as an evidence for the shariKa rule. however, the khabar al,ahad which is suitable to be a evidence for the shariKa rule is the hadith sahih and hadith hasan. )s for the week hadith (hadith daKeef) it cannot serve as a shariKa evidence at all. )nyone who educes it, he will not be considered to have educed a shariKa evidence. However the consideration of a hadith as sahih (sound) or hasan ( ood) is accordin to the one whoeduces it, if he is #ualified to understand the hadith, which may not be so for the rest of the muhadithin. That is because there are transmitters who are trustworthy (thi#a) for some muhadithin but not so for some other muhaddithin, but are well known to others. There are hadiths which are not sound from one line of transmission but are from another. )nd there are lines of transmission which correct for some but not for others. )nd there are hadiths which are not reco nised by some muhaddithin and are impu ned by them, but they are reco nised by other muhaddithin who advance them as proof. )nd there are hadiths which some of the )hl al,hadith discredited but fu#aha in eneral accepted them and used then a proof. PeopleKs adherence to the consideration of a hadith as sahih or hasan accordin to a particular opinion or all of the opinions constitutes an incorrect adherence and contradicts the reality of the hadith. *or /ust is it is not allowed to hastily accept a hadith without due consideration of its authenticity, likewise it is not allowed to hastily discredit a hadith as re/ect it merely because one of the muahddithin has #uestioned the B?:

probity of a transmitter, due to the possibility that it mi ht be acceptable forLwith another transmitter. )nd one should not re/ect a hadith purely because one muhaddith has re/ected it because of the possibility that it mi ht be accepted by another muhaddith, or re/ect it because the muhaddithin (in eneral) have re/ected it because of the possibility that it mi ht havebeen used as proof by the imams and eneral body of fu#aha (/urists). .ne should not be rash in discreditin or re/ectin a hadith e'cept if its transmitter is known by all to be dispara ed, or the hadith is re/ected by everyone, or no one advanced it as aproof e'cept some of the fu#aha who lacked knowled e of the hadith. It is then that the hadith is discredited and re/ected. .ne should be careful and ive it thou ht before one calls a hadith into #uestion or re/ect it. )nyone who scrutinises the transmitters and and hadiths he will find many differences re ardin them between the muhaddithin. )nd the e'amples are many. *or e'ample( )bu Fawud narrated on the authority of K)mr b. !huKayb who narrated from his father, who narrated from his randfather that the 7essen er of )llah (saw) said( 7uslims are e#ual in respect of blood. The lowest of them is entitled to ive protection on behalf of them, and the one residin far away may ive protection on behalf of them. They are like one hand over a ainst all thosewho are outside the community. Those who have #uick mounts should return to those who have slow mounts, and those who ot out alon with a detachment (should return) to those who are stationed.K The transmitter of this hadith is K)mr b. !huKayb. )nd the K)mr b. !huKayb W father W randfather line of transmission is famous. Fespite that many have used his hadith as proof and others have re/ected it. )l,Tirmidhi said( 7uhammad b. IsmaKil said( I saw )hmad and Isha# (and he mentioned others) who used the hadith of K)mr b. !huKayb as proof. He said( K)mr b. !huKayb heard hadiths from K)bd )llah b. K=mar. )bu KIsa said( whoever spoke about the hadith of K)mr b. !huKayb branded him as weak because he used to #uote hadiths from his randfathers books. )s if they held him not to have heard these hadiths directly from his randfather. K)li b. )bi K)bd )llah al,7adini said that 6ahya b. !aKid said( The hadith of K)mr b. !huKayb for us is unfounded. Fespite this, if someone establishes a shariKa rule with the hadith ofK)mr b. !huKayb, his evidence will be considered a shariKa evidence because K)mr b. !huKayb is one of those people whose hadith the muhaddithin cite as an evidence. *or e'ample, in al,Far#utni, al,Hasan narrated on authority of K=bada and )nas b. 7alik that the Prophet (saw) said( ............. In the isnad of this hadith there is al,5abiK b. !ubayhL!abih, )bu JurKa has verified him as trustworthy but another roup has weekend him. )l,+a99ar has recorded this hadith also and it is considered as a sound (sahih) hadith. $hen someone educes this hadith or a hadith whose isnad contains al,5abiK b. !ubayhL!abih, then he has educed a shariKa evidence because this hadith is sound accordin to one roup (of ri/al scholars), and because al,5abiK is trustworthy (thi#a) for another roup (of ri/al critics). It should not be said here that when a person is declared trustworthy and also dispara edLinvalidated that the invalidation (/arh) takes precedence over the attestation of reliability. !ince, that can only be whenthey are reported about one person accordin to the view of one person. )s for when they are reported by two persons and one considers it as a impu hnation (taKn) and the other does not, then it is allowed. It is from here that some scholars have reco nised certain transmitters (as reliable) and others have not. B?@

*or e'ample( )bu Fawud, )hmad, al,2asaKi, Ibn 7a/a and al,Tirmidhi narrated on the authority of )bu Hurayra that( ) man asked the 7essen er of )llah (saw)( . 7essen er of )llah, we travel on the sea and take a small #uantity of water with us. If we use this for ablution, we would suffer from thirst. "an we perform ablution with sea water& The 7essen er (saw) replied( Its water is pure and what dies in it is lawful food. )l,Tirmidhi has reported that +ukhari verified the soundness of this hadith. )nd Ibn K)bd al,+arr /ud ed it as sound because the K=lama have accepted it. )nd it has been authenticated by Ibn al,7un9ir. Ibn al, )sir said( !harh al,7usnad ( This hadith is sahih and mashur, the imams recorded it in their books. They used it as proof, its transmitters are trustworthy. )l,!hafiKi said that there is a transmitter in the isnad (chain) of this hadith Kwhom I do not knowK. Ibn Fa#i# al,K)yyid mentioned the aspects of /ustification by which he /ustifies this hadith. .ne of them is the lack of knowled e surroundin !aKid b. !alama and al,7u hira b. )bi +urda, both of whom are mentioned in the isnad, whereas some muhaddithin have said these two transmitters are indeed known. )bu Fawud said al,7u hira is known and his reliability is attested by al,2asaKi. Ibn K)bd al,Hakam said the people of )frica........... *or e'ample( )hmad narrated that !aKd b. )bi $a##as said( I heard the Prophet (saw) was asked about the purchase of ripe dates. He asked the people who moveLpick them ( Fo ripe dates o bad if they become dry& They said( yes. so he forbade that. This hadith has been authenticatedLvalidated by al, Tirmidhi................ *or e'ample( )hmad, )bu Fawud and Ibn 7a/a narrated that )bu !aKid al,Hhudri said( I heard the 7essen er of )llah (saw) say( $hen two persons o to ether for relievin themselves uncoverin their private parts and talkin to ether, )llah, the <reat and 7a/estic, becomes wrathful at this (action). *or e'ample( )hmad, )bu Fawud, al,2asaKi, Ibn 7a/a and al,Tirmidhi narrated on the authority of 6usra bint. !afwan that the Prophet (saw) said( K$hosoever touches his se'ual or anL enitalia he should not pray until he makes wudu (ablution).K This hadith has been recorded by 7alik, al,!hafiKi, Ibn Hhu9ayma, Ibn Hayyan, al,Hakim and Ibn al,Marud. )bu dawud said( I said to )hmad ( the hadith of 6usra is not sound. He said( 2o, it is sound. )l,+ayha#i said( Iven thou h the shaykhayn (ie two shhaykhs, +ukhari and 7uslim) did not record this hadith due to disa reements about whether the samaK (hearin of hadith) took place from K=rwa or 7arwan. +ut they have used all of its transmitters (elsewhere as reliable transmitters). If someone uses this hadith as proof, it is a shariKa evidence even if +ukhari and 7uslim did not record it. If a hadith is not advanced as proof by +ukhari and 7uslims that is (not to be taken) as a deni ration of the hadith. *or e'ample( The hadith ( Kkhamar has been forbidden for itselfK and the hadith K7y companions are like the stars, whichever you follow you will be uidedK The eneral body of fu#aha have used both hadiths and some have contested their authenticity. If one of them used them as proof then he is considered to have educed a shariKa evidence. B??

Thus many of the differences in hadith, transmitters and the lines of transmission between muhaddithin becomes clear. 7any disa reements between muhaddthin, the eneral fu#aha and certain mu/tahidin do take place. $hen a hadith is re/ected due this this disa reement then many hadiths considered to be sahih or hasan have been re/ected. )nd many shariKa evidences are lostLeliminated and this is not allowed. That is why a hadith should not be re/ected e'cept for the correct reason, which mi ht be reco nised by the ma/ority of the muhaddithin or it mi ht not satisfy the necessary conditions for the sahih and hasan hadith. It is permitted to educe any hadith when it is reco nised by some of the muhaddithin and it fulfils the conditions of the hadith sahih and hasan. It isconsidered as shariKa evidence in that the hukm is a shariKa rule.

0.

,ira and 3istory ". 0/

The first and foremost thin that Islamic history concerned itself with was the !ira of the Prophet (saw) and the subse#uent military campai ns (ma ha9i) that followed. *or this, relince was put on ahadith narrated by the !ahaba, TabiKun and those who came after them concernin the life of the Prophet - from his birth, his early life, and his "all to Islam to the Mihad and military e'peditions a ainst the 7ushrikin.. In a word, reports concernin the Prophet ( saw) from his birth till his death. The history of the ProphetKs life (saw) was a part of the reported hadiths. !uch hadiths used to be miscellaneous in the days when a traditionalist would compile all the reports that reached him and learn them without any order or arran ement. $hen hadiths came to be arran ed accordin to chapters the military campai ns were brou ht to ether in separate chapters. These then became separated from the hadith and specific books were written on them thou h traditionalists continued to include them within their chapters. !o, in +ukhari there is the +ook of 7ilitary I'peditions (kitab al,7a ha9i) and in 7uslim the +ook of Mihad and 7ilitary "ampai ns (kitab al,/ihad wa al,siyar). Thou h many have written about the !ira the first book that is e'tent from amon st the two early compilers is the kitab al,7a ha9i of Ibn Isha#. Its author, 7uhammad b. Isha# b. 6asar (d.B40 ).H.) is considered the most well known of the ones who were associated with the ma ha9i, to the e'tent that !hafiKi is reported to have said ( K $hosoever wishes to be an e'pert in the ma ha9i, he is totally dependent on 7uhammad b. Isha#K. )fter Ibn Isha#, the second early author is al,$a#idi. 7uhammad b. K=mar b. $a#id al,$a#idi (d.2C? ).H.) was considered to have an e'tensive knowled e of the ma ha9i which appro'imated to that of Ibn Isha#. He was very knowled able in history and hadith thou h it is reported about him that in later years he be an to et his reports muddled. That is why many traditionalists have branded him weak, +ukhari says of him ( K His hadiths are to be re/ected(munkar al,hadith)K. However they did not impu n the depth of his knowled e concernin the ma ha9i. Thus, )hmad b. Hanbal says about him ( K He is well,informed about the ma ha9iK. He has compiled a book on 2CC

ma ha9i from which Ibn !aKd #uotes in his book al,Taba#at ( The <enerations) in his discussion of the !ira. Eikewise, Tabari also #uotes from it. Two of the most famous compilers of the !ira are Ibn Hisham (d.2B@ ).H.) and 7uhammad b. !aKd (d.20C ).H.). To this day 7uslims have continued to devote their attention to the !ira. The !ira is considered one of the most important thin s to which 7uslims should attend to because it contains reports concernin the 7essen er in terms of his actions, sayin s, silence and description- like the ;urKan all of this is le islation. Therefore the !ira is one of the constituent elements of le islation and that is why it is considered part of the hadith (literature). $hatever is proven to be authentic from it concernin the Prophet (saw), in terms of its transmission and meanin , that is considered as a !hariKa evidence because it is from the !unna, not to speak of the fact that we are commanded by )llah to emulate the 7essen er. )llah TKala said ( KIndeed in the 7essen er of )llah (saw) you have a ood e'ampleK. > 00(2BA. Therefore, devotin ones attention to the !ira and its pursuance is a !hariKa matter. However, the difference between the method employed in compilin the !ira by the ancients and those who came in later periods is that( the method of the ancients in compilation of the !ira and history used to depend on the narration of reports. The historians started with the oral transmission- the first eneration which witnessed the actions of the 7essen er or heard about it and transmitted it, be an to transmit it to others, the burden of which was assumed by the eneration that came after. )nd some of them wrote down hadiths in a miscellaneous manner which can be seen in the books of hadith even today. 2ot till the advent of the second century do we see some scholars be innin to compile and put to ether the bio raphical reports and put them down in writin accordin to the method of narration, by mentionin the name of the transmitter and the one who transmitted from him, e'actly as it was done in the (transmission) of hadith. Thus, hadith scholars and critics are able to know the authentic and acceptable bio raphical reports from the weak and inadmissible ones due to their knowled e of the transmitters and the chain of transmission. )nd this is the procedure which is relied upon when #uotin from the !ira, as lon as it is authentic, contrary to the modern authors of the !ira who only enumerate events without mentionin their transmitters. That is why their books are not relied upon as a source of !ira e'cept when the author verifies at the time of writin , that the transmitted reports are indeed from the !ira reports and are trustworthy. If he does not, then his statement is not #uoted but the event which he mentions is traced back to the books of !ira which have been transmitted accordin to the method of narration or to the books of hadith. This is because reports concernin the Prophet from the !unna are not taken e'cept when they are authentic. There is a second approach historians have followed in addition to their approach to the !ira and that is the historio raphy of Islamic events in relation to wars between some 7uslims and wars between the 7uslims and other nations, and the subse#uent con#uests and events that followed. ) roup of historians became well known (for this approach), the foremost amon st them bein )bu 7ikhnaf Eut 2CB

b. 6ahya b. !aKid b. 7ikhnaf b. !alim al,I9di (d.B:C).H.). !ome of the most famous books written by him are - The "on#uest of al,!ham, "on#uest of Ira#, al,Mamal, !iffin and the murder of Hussayn. It is apparent that each book is a commentary of a particular issue. 2othin remains from the books that have been correctly attributed to him e'cept that which Tabari has transmitted in his Tarikh. 7any traditionalists have discredited him by sayin that he used to narrate from a roup of unknown transmitters (ma/hulin). )mon the famous historians al, 7adaKiniis one such person. He is K)li b. 7uhammad al,7adaKini (d.224 ).H.), a prolific author. He wrote books concernin reports about the Prophet (saw) and ;uraysh. He also wrote books about reports concernin women and about the Hhulafa. ThaKlab al,2ahawi described him thus ( K$hosoever wishes to know the reports concernin the Fays of I norance he should consult the books of )bu K=bayda, and whosoever wishes to know about the reports concernin Islam let him consult the books of al,7adaKiniK. )lso, the traditionalists have not #uestioned his probity. 6ahya b. 7aKin, one of the most famous ri/al critics says he is trustworthy (thi#a). The writin of history be an much the same way as the !ira, with oral reports the first eneration which witnessed and participated in the events be an to transmit (the reports to the ne't), the burden of which was assumed by the followin eneration until the events came to be written down. Historians proceeded in Islamic history e'actly as they did with the !ira in terms of the narration of reports. Thus, you will find in the old books of history ,such as Tabari for e'ample, that an event is reported on the authority of such and such person, sometimes from varyin lines of transmission, because, their method of writin history was by narration only. There is another approach which emer ed amon st 7uslims since the earliest times. )nd that is the historio raphy of other nations such as the Persians and 5omans and the historio raphy of other reli ions from the Mews and "hristians. However this form of history writin was less accurate in (comparison) to the !ira and the history of Islamic events. )nd this is because historians used to rely on transmitters from the people of other nations. This section of history came to be filled with le ends due to the remoteness of the period of the transmitters (from the events) and due to the inaccuracy in transmission and because every nation tended to inflate its reports. In short, 7uslims did not have a criterion (baK)T for (/ud in ) history, whether in Islamic history or the history of other peoples, even thou h they employed the correct method in writin history- that is the narration of a report from the one who witnessed it or narration of a book on the authority of the one who narrated the report from the one who witnessed it. However in writin the history of other nations they relied on weak reports and so it became filled with stories and le ends. )nd in the history of Islam they did not carefully scrutinise the transmitters in the !ira and hadith but restricted themselves to reports about the Hhulafa and $alis and did not ive attention to reports about the society and conditions of people. 2C2

That is why Islamic history does not present a complete picture of the society or state. This can only be obtained from the !ira after it has been checked, and from the hadith works in which reports concernin the "ompanions and !uccessors have been narrated. In fact, Islamic history is in need of a re,e'amination of the events founds in the books of history by scrutinisin the transmitters who narrated them and their lines of transmission and by scrutinisin and /ud in the same events in the li ht of (known) facts and accounts. However, what took place after the time of the "ompanions is of no importance. )s for what ori inated from the "ompanions- that is the sub/ect of study, because the i/maK of the "ompanions is a !hariKa evidence. )nd because there are many newly adopted rules (ahkam) for the ever,emer in new (problems) of life, problems which were solved by the "ompanions and must be understood from a le islative perspective. Thus, the history of the "ompanions is one of the constituent elements of le islation. Indeed, many issues relatin to Mihad, treatment of non,7uslims ()hl al,Fhimma), Hhara/ , K=shr, knowled e of whether a land is K=shri or Hhara/i i.e. whether it was con#uered by way of a treaty or force, and issues relatin to asylum,(al,)man), armistice (hudna) and rules pertainin to booty, feyK and provision of the army...etc, all of them are incidents and rules which were applied in the state. They must be understood in order to take as !hariKa evidence that which the "ompanions a reed upon and to consider that which a "ompanion adopted alone, as a !hariKa rule of one of the mu/tahidin. )nd as well to become ac#uainted with actions of the "ompanions, especially the 5i htly <uided "aliphs, in terms of their handlin and mana ement of rulin , administration and policy. This is because they are the best of those to whom )llah has ranted the mentality of rulin , and they understood best how to apply the rules in the state, on the citi9ens (of the state), be they 7uslims or dhimmis. *or that reason we are obli ed to know the history of the Islamic !tate durin the period of the "ompanions, (thou h) there is no harm in ainin knowled e of its authentic history after that (period). 7uslims have (at their disposal) sources for reports about the "ompanions other than the history books - books such as the al,)mwal (The Treasury) of )bu K=bayd, the 7uwatta of 7alik and books of hadith which narrate sahih (correct) and hasan ( ood) reports. )s for the history of others save the "ompanions there is no harm in knowin them simply as reports and information, but not to emulate them or to take lessons from what was mentioned in them. 6es, the ;urKan does relate the history of some of the (previous) Prophets and peoples for the sake of e'hortation with re ards to belief, to obey )llah, and to clarify the fate of those who disobey Him, but not so that we can take their reports and actions as a method accordin to which we should proceed. It is a common mistake that many people make when they assume that history is of utmost importance for the revival of nations, and that knowled e of the past throws li ht on the present and opens the way to the future. This is fanciful and insane. It is an analo y of the perceptible reality by the imperceptible unknown and an analo y of the definite and indisputable (reality) which we observe, by the speculative (reality) which we are informed of, which may be ri ht or wron , true or false.

2C0

In fact, it is not possible to take history as a basis for revival nor indeed as a basis for study. .nly the reality which we wish to treat is made the ob/ect of study because it is perceptible and tan ible and so it is studied until it is understood. Then a solution is iven for it, either from the !hariKa if it relates to the !hariKa rules or from the re#uirements of that reality pertainin to the solution if it is from the means and styles. It is of little benefit for a 7uslim to busy himself with reports about +ismarck or even Harun al,5ashid but definitely he should preoccupy himself with the Islamic !hariKa as (a body of) thou hts and rules and also with the real and practical life from the viewpoint of elevatin the situation of Islam and 7uslims and takin every opportunity to propa ate Islam and carry its call to the world. )nd since we must study reports about people let us study, as a reality, reports concernin the present societies in order to treat it, or study, as a reality, reports about other nations to determine our position with re ards to them, as we are in a state of constant stru le in the path of propa atin Islam and carryin its call to those nations.

0.- The Princi"les of Islamic *uris"rudence (>sul al-Fiqh)

al,!hafi1i is reputed to be the one who delineated the principles of deduction ( usul al+istin!at) and re ulated it with eneral comprehensive principles. Thus, he was the ori inator of the science of usul al+fiCh (principles of /urisprudence), even thou h many people came after him who were more knowled eable about usul al+ fiCh and its definitions. The 4uCaha (/urists) before al,!hafi1i used to perform i>tihad without havin defined limitsLparameters for i>tihad. 5ather, they used to depend on their understandin of the !hari1a meanin s and purpose of the ahkam, their aims, whatever its te'ts point to and whatever its ob/ectives (maCasid) indicated. Fue to the e'perience of those 4uCaha (/urists) in their study of the !hari1a and their thorou h familiarity with the )rabic lan ua e, this has caused them to be ac#uainted with their meanin s, and to comprehend their aims (ghayat) and ob/ectives (maCasid). They used to reconcile its concepts and ob/ectives in deducin rules from the te'ts without havin any recorded defined parameters. 6es, the 4uCaha before al,!hafi1i, from the time of Saha!a, 6a!iHun and those after them, did used to deal with issues of usul al+fiCh and educe and oppose (evidences). !uch as the narration about G)li b1 )bi Talib (r.a.) that he spoke about the mutlaC (absolute), muCayyad (restricted), khas (specific), Gamm ( eneral), abro ator (nasikh) and the abro ated (mansukh). However, that was not in a defined or set out manner. )nd those 4uCaha who dealt with certain issues of usul al+fiCh did not possess eneral and comprehensive principles to which they referred, in order to understand the indication of the !hari1a or to know how to oppose or outwei h them. +ut when al,!hafi1i came, he derived the science of usul al+fiCh. )nd he laid down comprehensive laws to which reference was made in knowin the levels of the !hari1a evidences. It has become widely known to people that al,!hafi1i set out the science of usul in his book entitled al+ 1isala, a work which is famous. +ut the reality is that the al+1isala contains only a portionLpart of the science of usul outlined by al,!hafi1i. )nyone who e'amines the books of al,!hafi1i will find that al+1isala contains only some of the topics in the science of usul al+fiCh, but it does not contain all of al,!hafi1i1s discussions on usul. 2C3

)l,!hafi1i has other books which contain discussions (on usul), such as 6he Book of the 1efutation of Istihsan and the book .ammaH al+Hilm. Iven the book al+Amm within its pa es there are discussion on the science of usul. In these he has mentioned comprehensive principles amidst the detailed rules. $hat helped al,!hafi1i to lay down the science of usul was that he came at a time when Islamic /urisprudence had started to reatly flourish. In the Islamic lands /uristical roups of mu>tahidin be an to take shape and they be an to form into ma?ha!s (schools). The debate between the 7u/tahidin and the proponents of ma9ahibs took various perspectives in fiCh and the evidences. !o he plun ed into debates with those who en a ed in the debate, these discussions were what uided him to think about eneral and comprehensive principles, as re ulatory criterions which should be the basis of study and inference. He brou ht to ether these principles as one body of knowled e which was the science of usul al+fiCh. The wonderfulLimpressive thin about the usul of al,!hafi1i is that he proceeds, in the discussion of usul, in a le islative and not in a lo ical manner. +ecause, one of the reatest dan ers for study, but rather for the =mmah1s revival especially in fiCh and usul, is the courseLpath of lo ic. )l,!hafi1i clearly distanced himself from the course of lo ic and adhered to the le islative course. He was not interested in theoretical methods or suppositions. He wanted to re ulate real and e'istin issues ie he took the !hari1a te'ts and stopped at the limit of the te't and at the limit of the reality which the te't indicated and the people themselves witnessed. 5e ardin the issue of abro ation (nasikh wal mansukh), he established the principles of abro ation from the issues which, for him, had been proven to contain abro ations, taken from what has been mentioned in the ayah or hadith itself, or from the indication (dilala) of abro ation, or what has been narrated about the 7essen er (saw) in terms of hadith which indicate abro ation, or whatever has been reported about the "ompanions of the 7essen er of )llah in terms of reports and /ud ements. 2ot like many who came after him, when they saw a contradiction between two verses or hadiths, they immediately moved to say that one has abro ated the other. To the point they ended up makin terrible errorsLblunders. $hen al,!ahfi1i came with a principle he did not brin it from a lo ical premise (muCaddima mantiCiyya), rather he showed you the sources from which he took it. Iither from a report about the Prophet (saw) or from le al verdicts (fatwas) of the Saha!a. His approach in derivin Le'tractin re ulatory (CawaHd da!ita) principles was a practical one, in which he relied on the reality, the evidences, and on the application of those thin s on tan ible facts. The most prominent aspect by which !hafi1is usul is distin uished, is that it contains eneral principles for the deduction ( istin!at) of rules, re ardless of what his specific methodolo y was. 5ather, his usul is suitable for any methodolo y however different they may be. Thus, it is a measure by which one can know which opinions are correct and which are not correct. It is a comprehensive law which must be adhered to when deducin new rules, whatever methodolo y a person may set himself, in order to measureL/ud e opinions and re ulate the inference of rules by a comprehensive law. The usul of al,!hafi1i was not intended to be an usul for his ma?ha! (school) only, even thou h the ma9hab adhered to it. It was not written to defend his ma?ha! and clarify its viewpoint. 5ather, it contains eneral and comprehensive principles for istin!at (inference). The motive was not 2C4

a tend towards a particular ma?ha! but rather it was a wishLdesire to re ulate the procedures of i>tihad and put in place limits and uidelines for the mu>tahidin. He was sincere in his intentions and he had the correct understandin when devisin the science of usul al+fiCh, thereby influencin , without e'ception, those mu>tahidin and Alama that came after al,!hafi1i, whether they opposed or supported his opinions. =ntil, despite their different tendencies, they saw themselves proceedin accordin to the path al,!hafi1i had taken, in terms of settin out comprehensive principles (CawaHid kulliyya) and proceedin in fiCh and istin!at (inference) in a re ulated manner accordin to comprehensive laws and eneral principles. 4iCh (Islamic /urisprudence) after him came to be based on established foundations not as an assortment of fatwas and individual /ud ements (aCdiya) as was the case before him. Iven thou h all of the G=lama proceed in the footsteps of al,!hafi1i in terms of the notion of usul al+fiCh however the way in which they received what al,!hafi1 had arrived at was different accordin to their different /uristic approaches. !ome followed his opinions and be an to e'plain and e'pand on them and disa ree with them, like the followers of al,!hafi1i himself. )nd some took the ma/or part of what al,!hafi1i had brou ht despite their disa reement with certain details of usul and but not the actual body of usul. !ince they had no disa reements in terms of the body, frameworkLstructure and course of al,!hafi1is usul, like the Hanafis and those who followed their method. )nd there were those who disa reed with al,!hafi1i in this usul, like the Jahiris and !hi1a. Those who followed al,!hafi1i in his opinions were( the Hanbalis. They adopted the usul of al,!hafi1i even thou h they said the only (reco nised) i>maH (consensus) is that of the !ahaba. The 7alikis who came after al,!hafi1i combined their methodolo y with much of what was in al,!hafi1is usul thou h they took the practise of the people of 7adina as proof and differed with him in certain details. )s for those who proceeded accordin to his method and embraced his opinions. They are the followers of his ma9hab, who were very active in the (study of) the science of usul al+fiCh and wrote prolifically about the sub/ect. +ooks were written accordin to the methodolo y of al,!hafi1i in usul al+fiCh which were, and still are, the pillars and support of this science. .f the most important three books that are known to be written by the ancients( *irst, the book al+5uHtamad of )bu al,Husayn 7uhammad b. al,+asri (d.3B0 ).H.). !econd, the book al+Burhan of G)bd al,7alik b.1)bd )llah al,Muwayni commonly known as imam al+"aramayn (d.3:@ ).H.). )nd third, the book al,7ustasfa of )bu Hamid al,<ha9ali (d.3:@ ).H.) (PEI)!I "HI"H, )"".5FI2< T. 76 H2.$EIF<I <H)J)EI FIIF I2 34C )H) )fter them came )bu al,Husayn G)li otherwise known as al,)midi. He brou ht to ether all three books and e'panded on them in his book al+ihkam fi usul al+ahkam, which was one of the most important works written on usul al+fiCh. )s for those who adopted the ma/or part of what al,!hafi1i brou ht and differed in some of the details, they are the Hanafis. That is because their method of istin!at (inference) a reed with the usul of al,!hafi1i, thou h the way in which they approached the science of usul was influenced by the furuH (branches of fiCh). They studied the principles of usul in order to support the furuH. !o they made the furuH the basis. The eneral principles were based on it and made to support it. Perhaps what pushed them towards this approach was that their study of usul was for the purpose of supportin their ma?ha! and not in order to produce principles accordin to which their school should deduce rules. That is because )bu Hanifa, who had preceded 2C8

al,!hafi1i, died the year in which al,!hafi1i was born. )nd his inferences were not accordin to eneral and comprehensive principles. Eikewise after him came his students )bu 6usuf, 7uhammad and Jufar. They did not concern themselves with writin about usul al+fiCh but it fell to the scholars of the Hanafi ma?ha! afterwards to pursue the inference of principles which would serve the furuH of the Hanafi ma?ha!. The principles came later than the furuH and did not precede it. 2evertheless, the Hanafi usul, on the whole, has been e'tracted from the usul of al,!hafi1i. )nd what they differed on with the !hafi1is in terms of the Gamm ( eneral) bein CatHi (definite) like the khas (specific), and the consideration is not for the understandin of the condition (shart) and description (wasf), and that there is no tar>eeh (outwei hin ) due to the reat number of transmitters. They are detailed issues and not comprehensive principles. That is why it is possible to consider the Hanafi and !hafi1i usuls as one usul for fiCh. Its approach towards the furuH and disa reements in certain details is not another usul but they are one usul in its comprehensivity, enerality and principles . 6ou hardly ever see any difference between a book in shafi1i usul and a book in Hanafi usul. 5ather, all of them are a study of the same principles ( usul) of fiCh. .ne of the most important books of usul for the Hanafis is the usul al+Ba?dawi compiled by *akhr al,Islam G)li b. 7uhammad al,+a9dawi (d.3@0 ).H.) )s for those who disa reed with al,!hafi1i in his usul, they are the Jahiris and !hi1a. They disa reed with al,!hafi1is usul in some of its basic elements and not /ust in the details. )s for the Jahiris, they completely re/ected ;iyas (analo ical deduction) and depended solely on the apparent ( ?ahir) (meanin ) of the te'ts. Iven what is termed as the Ciyas >ali (clear analo y) was not consider as a part of ;iyas but as te't. Their consideration of the te't is nothin other than a consideration of the apparent (?ahir) (meanin ) of the te't. The imam of this ma?ha! is )bu !ulayman Fawud b. Hhalaf al,Isfahani (d.2:C ).H.) He was from the !hafi1iyya. He learnt fiCh from the students of al,!hafi1i. Then he left the ma9hab of al,!hafi1i and chose a special ma?ha! for himself where he would only rely on the te't. It is called the Jahiri ma?ha! (literalists). Ibn Ha9m is one of them. "ertain people made him popular and ave a lowin description about him until people became interested in his books even thou h they were below the level of the books of fi#h and other usuls in terms of the /urisprudential discussion and an le of educin evidences. )s for the !hi1a, they disa reed with al,!hafi1is usul in a substantiveLsi nificant way. *or they made the sayin s of their imams a !hari1a daleel like the Hitab and !unnah. *or them it is considered a proof which follows the proof of the Hitab and that of the !unnah at the very least. They permitted the speech of the imams to specify the !unnah. They say(1The wisdom (hikma) of le islation demands the e'position of a body of ahkam and re#uires the concealment of a body of ahkam. +ut he ()llah1s peace be upon him) entrusted (the body of ahkam that is concealed) to his uardians ( awsiya). Iach uardian (wasi) dele ates the other to spread it when it is appropriate for him, accordin to "ikma (wisdom), in terms of an Gamm ( eneral) which is specified (mukhassas), a mutlaC (absolute) which is restricted (muCayyad) or a mu>mal (ambivalent) which is clarified (mu!ayyan). !o the Prophet (saw) may mention somethin which is Gamm ( eneral) and mentions the specific after a while in his life. .r, he may not mention it ori inally, rather leavin his uardian ( wasi) to do it on his behalf.1 The 2C:

Imami !hi1as place their imams in a position close to the !unnah. I>tihad for them is restricted to the ma?ha!. It is not permitted for the mu/tahid to contradict the views of the ma?ha! ie it is not permitted for the mu/tahid to make i>tihad with what contradicts the sayin s of the imam al,!adi#. The re/ected hadiths e'cept if it came via their imams. They do not take ;iyas. It has been recurrently reported (tawatara) about their imams, as they have narrated in their books, that when analo y is made to the !hari1a the deen is destroyed. This is the situation of the course of 7uslim =lama in the science of usul al+fiCh after al,!hafi1i in terms of their a reement or opposition to him. )s for the science itself, after al,!hafi1i, it was discussed at reat len th and it had many commentators and writers. It is stran e that in the a es that followed the a e al, !hafi1i, i>tihad diminished and there was a scarcity of mu/tahidin. )nd in the a es that followed that a e, the door of i/tihad was closed. However, the science of usul al+fiCh thrived and flourished, the studyLscrutiny of its principles increased and its issues became more elaborate. +ut all of this was from a theoretical and not practical perspective. )s a result, it was ineffective in creatin mu/tahidin and breakin the notion of the closin of the door of i/tihad and brin in it to an end. Perhaps the reason for that is that usul al+fiCh, durin those later periods, took a purely theoretical approach, where the theoretical discussion prevailed, and studies were inserted into it that had no relationship to usul al+fiCh. The attention of researchers was directed to e'aminin and revisin the principles, supportin them with evidences, and selectin the one with the stron est evidence re ardless of whether there was a reality for it or not. Their theoretical assumptions multiplied and they studied the (concept of) dalala (te'tual implications) and classified it accordin to the classifications of the scholars of mantiC (lo ic). They raised discussions which had nothin to do with usul al+fiCh like husn (pretty) and Cu!h (u ly), or are they rational or le al& .r discussion such as- is thankin (shukr) the benefactor (munHim) an obli ation due to the !hari1a or the mind. They initiated studies that were from the science of Halam (theolo yLdo matics) and not from usul al+fiCh. !uch as the infallibility of the Prophets, permissibility of the Prophets to make mistakes or for et in issues relatin to (conveyin ) the 7essa e. They made studies relatin to the )rabic lan ua e and not to usul al+fiCh. They studied the ori in of lan ua es and studied particles (huruf) and nouns (asma). In that manner they made the science of usul al+fiCh ri id and transformed it from its le islative aspect, which produced mu/tahidin and enriched fiCh, into a theoretical and philosophical study in which the scholar is unable to deduce the simplest of rules. =ntil, its usefulness was almost lost and it had no effect in le islation or deduction of rules ( istin!at). )nd since the science of usul al+fiCh is indispensable, in relation to the deduction of rules and the rowth of the le islative aspect. That is why it is essential to attend to the study of usul al+fiCh as a study which is based on reality and not theoretical. It is sufficint /ust to undertake studies that relate to the deduction of rules, which are studied accompanied by evidences indicatin the rules, and realities which apply to their meanin s until mu/tahidin are produced and a le islative wealth is enerated to treat new issues which come up each day, in the 7uslim world and in the rest of the world. 2C@

9.8.7 (iqh (+urisprudence)

4iCh lin uistically means understandin as in His (swt) sayin (1$e do not comprehend (la nafCahu) much of what you say.1>BB(?BA ie we do not understand. )ccordin to the definition of the le ists fiCh is desi nated as the knowled e of a body of subsidiary (furuHiyya) !hari1a rules ac#uired throu h study and eduction (istidlal). Hnowled e of the !hari1a rules (ahkam sharHiyya) be an the day these !hari1a rules came to e'ist. )nd that was after the mi ration ( hi>ra) from 7akkah to 7adina. That is because the 7essen er of )llah (saw) was sent and he stayed in 7akkah for thirteen years, then he resided in 7adina for about ten years and the ;ur1an used to be revealed throu hout this period, thou h the verses of ahkam used to be revealed in 7adina. In this period the ;ur1an used to be revealed and the 7essen er (saw) used to talk about the ahkam relatin to whatever they included in terms of events and relatin to the solution for whatever problems that arose. The portion that was revealed in 7akkah appro'imates to about two thirds of the ;ur1an and they are desi nated as the 7akkan verses ( makkiyy). In their totality they barely deal with a sin le hukm, rather they are confined to e'plainin the fundamentalsLfoundations of the deen and callin people to them, such as the belief in )llah and His 7essen er, the Fay of Mud ement, the command to perform Salah, characterisation by moral attributes such as honesty, trust, and forbiddin evil actions such as fornication, murder, buryin irls alive, deficiency in the measure and scales etc. The second portion that was revealed in 7adina is close to a third of the ;ur1an and they are desi nated as the 7adinan verses (madaniyy). They are verses of muHamalat (transactions) such as sellin , rentin and usury. )nd from the hudud, such as the hadd of ?ina (fornication) and stealin . *rom the >inayat (capital punishments) such as killin the one who killed someone intentionally or punishment of hi hway robbers. )nd from the !ayyinat (testimonial evidences) such as the testimony of ?ina and the rest of the testimonies. )s well the remainin rules concernin the worships ( Gi!adat) such as fastin , ?akah, ha>> and >ihad were revealed. *rom this it becomes clear that even thou h rules of prayer were revealed in 7akkah they do not form a body of rules but knowled e of a type of rule. )s for what was revealed in 7adina, they consisted of all the ahkam. That is why knowled e of such rules is considered fiCh. Therefore, is is more accurate for us to say that fiCh be an in 7adina. )nd since fiCh constitutes practical rules, they have been revealed to treat incidents that have taken place. The verses of ahkam, more often than not, were in connection to events that had taken place. !o the disputants would refer /ud ement to the 7essen er of )llah (saw) and he would /ud e between them accordin to the rules )llah has revealed to him, or on the occasion of problems re#uirin solutions, so an ayah or ayaats statin the hukm would be revealed. This is what it means for the ;ur1an to be revealed radually ( muna>>aman). Therefore, the le islative aspect used to be #uite evident in the revelation of the ;ur1an. The ayaats did not treat assumptions that may happen. 5ather, they treated issues that actually took place and problems that really do take place between people. The ;ur1an continued to be revealed until the year in which the 7essen er of )llah (saw) /oined the !ublime "ompanion ( al+rafiC al+aHla). !o, )llah perfected 2C?

and completed the deen and He revealed to him the last ayah which is His (swt) sayin in sura al,+a#ara(1 . you who believeD +e afraid of )llah and ive up what remains (due to you) from ri!a (usury).1>2(2:@A $ith that, the ahkam were completed in their capacity as ahkam. The ;ur1an and the actions, sayin s and consent of the 7essen er (saw) contain the rulin s for all the types of actions that ensue from human bein s- from the worships ( Gi!adat) like prayer (salah) and ?akat, from the morals such as honesty and trust, from the societal transactions (muHamalat) such as murder and theft, from the testimonial evidences ( !ayyinat) such as the rules of testimonies and the rules of written documents, and from the political affairs relatin to the internalLdomestic policy such as the rules of the khalifah and the rules of the /udiciary, or relatin to the forei n policy such as the rules of combatants and treaties. Throu h this Islamic /urisprudence ( fiCh) e'isted due to the presence of the !hari1a rules, because the fiCh is the knowled e of a body of !hari1a rules.

9.8.6

he 5evelopment of (iqh

4iCh is one of the most important Islamic disciplines havin the reatest effect on society. It is one of the most important branches of the Islamic culture. That is because the Islamic culture is the Hitab and !unnah whatever is relied upon and laid down in order to understand the Hitab and !unnah. Iven thou h the Islamic culture includes the sciences of the )rabic lan ua e, hadith and tafseer, the most prominent thin that appears from it are the thou hts which relate to the viewpoint about life and the solutions which treat the problems of life. In other words, it appears in the beliefs (GaCaid) and !hari1a rules because they are a practical culture adopted to face lifes problems which, in most cases, contains thou hts about beliefs and solutions ie the rules. 4iCh is nothin other than the knowled e of these rules. The Islamic culture and the learnin of !hari1a rules be an from the time the 7essen er (saw) was sent. The 7essen er (saw) was the only reference point for the shari1a rules, because he was sent to teach people )llah1s deen. He (swt) said(1. 7essen er (saw)D Proclaim (the 7essa e) which has been sent down to you from your Eord. )nd if you do not, then you have not conveyed His 7essa e.1>4(8:AHe (swt) said(1)nd $e have also sent down unto you (. 7uhammad>sawA) the reminder and the advice (the ;ur1an), that you may e'plain clearly to them.1>B8(33A $ith the e'ception of the 7essen er (saw), no 7uslim has the ri ht to independently put forward an opinion re ardin any viewpoint or rulin . Fue to the 7essen er1s (saw) presence amon them, referrin to him re ardin anythin they came across was easy. It was not permitted for any of them to ive his own opinion re ardin any event. That is why, when they came across an event or a dispute arose or one of them had an idea, they would refer to the 7essen er (saw). )nd he (saw) would ive an opinion, settle their disputes and answer their #uestions, sometimes with an ayah and sometimes with a hadith. )s for what has been reported that certain !ahaba e'ercised i>tihad in the time of the 7essen er (saw) and pronounced /ud ements accordin to their own i>tihad in certain disputes or that they deduced, throu h their own i>tihad, the rule re ardin certain events. This does not make these i>tihads a source for shari1a rules. 5ather they constitute an understandin of the !hari1a, in accordance with 2BC

the order of the 7essen er (saw). They constitute the application of the !hari1a, relyin on the Hitab and !unnah as understood by those mu/tahidin. This is demonstrated by the circumstance in which these i>tihads took place. It has been reported that the Prophet (saw) sent G)li b. )bi Talib (r.a.) to 6emen as a /ud e. He (saw) told him( G7ay )llah uide your heart and affirm your ton ue. $hen two disputants sit before you, do not pronounce /ud ment until you have listened to the latter /ust as you did with the former. It is more proper ( for you to does this) so that the /ud ment becomes manifest to you.1 It has been reported that the Prophet (saw) sent 7u1a9 b. Mabal to 6emen and he (saw) said to him(1$ith what will you /ud e when you come upon a /ud ement which you do not find in the +ook of )llah or the !unnah of His 7essen er. $hat /ud ment will you ive& 7u1a9 said( GI will e'ercise my own i>tihad. The 7essen er (saw) said(1GPraise be to )llah who has made the messen er of the 7essen er of )llah to accord with what )llah and His 7essen er are pleased with1. It is reported that some people were disputin over a hut between themselves. !o Hudhayfa was sent to /ud e between them. )nd he (saw) said to G)mr b. al,1)s(16ou ive /ud ement for this issue1. !o G)mr said( !hall I e'ercise i>tihad while you are present& He said( 6es. If you are ri ht you will et two rewards and if you make a mistake you will et one.1 )ll of these reports and other such e'amples indicate that the i>tihadats takin place in the days of the 7essen er (saw), from the 7uslims in his time, were in accordance with his order. Therefore, he was their source. Thus, the time of the 7essen er (saw) was a time in which the source of the entire Islamic culture e'isted. That continued ever since he was sent until his death, within a period of time not e'ceedin twenty two years and a few months, in which the whole ;ur1an was revealed and the sublime !unnah was made complete. They are the only te'ts considered as the source of thou hts, rules and culture in Islam. $ith the death of the 7essen er (saw), in the eleventh year of the Hi/ra, be an the a e of the !ahaba. It is an a e of tafseer and the openin of the doors of deduction (istin!at) for issues that did not possess a (clear) te't. The !ahaba saw that not all of the te'ts of the ;ur1an and the !unnah were disseminated widely amon st the people such that they are accessible to each and every person. +ecause the te'ts of the ;ur1an were written down on special parchments preserved in the house of the 7essen er (saw) and preserved in the houses of certain !ahaba. )nd the !unnah had not been written down yet. They saw that the te'ts of the Hitab and !unnah le islated rules for events and issues which took place at the time of le islation. 5ules were not le islated for events and issues that had only a possibility of takin place. 2eeds, events and issues took place amidst the 7uslims which did not take place durin the time of the 7essen er (saw). There were no te'ts for the the problems arisin later which would state their rulin . Eikewise, they saw that not every 7uslim was #ualified to refer to the te'ts of the Hitab and !unnah for himself and understand the rulin indicated by them. !ince the masses cannot understand the te'ts e'cepts by means of someone who will make them understand the rules of Islam. Therefore, they realised that it was incumbent on them to disseminate the 2oble ;ur1an and the hadiths of the 7essen er (saw) amon the 7uslims. !o, they undertook the responsibility of compilin the ;ur1an and from this compilation they made many 2BB

copies which they circulated amon st the 7uslims. )nd they took precautions ensurin the trustworthiness of the narration of the !unnah and the trust in the scrutiny of the narrators. They also realised that it was incumbent on them to demonstrate to the 7uslims the necessary clarification and e'planation of the te'ts of the Hitab and !unnah. !o they be an to teach people the deen. Then they took the view that they should provide people with le al verdicts for the events and issues happenin to them for which there was no (clear) te't. Thus, they be an to deduce rules which were necessary for the issues that took place. Fue to this they undertook the obli ation of the deen in the best manner possible. The methodolo y accordin to which the !ahaba proceeded in the !hari1a rules is that when they found a te't (nass) in the ;ur1an or !unnah which indicates the rulin on an incident that has happened, they stopped at the limit of this te't, and they confined their efforts to understandin the te't and becomin ac#uainted with what is intended in it, in order to attain its correct application on the reality. If they did not find a te't in the ;ur1an and the !unnah indicatin the rulin on incidents that they are confronted with, they made i>tihad to deduce its rulin . In their i>tihad they used to rely on their own understandin of the te'ts of the !hari1a, and their knowled e of the !hari1a that they leanedLobtained from directly speakin to the 7essen er (saw) and witnessin the revelation of the verses and their application on incidents. +y studyin the incidents for which they made i>tihad one notices that they used to make analo y between (an incident) which had a te't with one that did not have a te't, and they use to consider the ac#uisition of a benefit (maslaha) and repulsion of a harm (mafsada) as an Gillah (le al cause) for rulin s. )nd they used to consider the benefit ( maslaha) indicated by the !hari1a as the true benefit ( maslaha). They used to make analo y between the benefit (maslaha) (for which no te't was mentioned) with a benefit for which a te't was mentioned. They did not hold their on opinion about a maslaha (benefit) because holdin an opinion (which is from oneself) is forbidden. The historians, muhaddithun and fu#aha (/urists) transmitted many i>tihadats of the !ahaba. +y studyin these i>tihadats the e'tent of their adherence to the !hari1a and the e'tent of their advancement in understandin the !hari1a becomes clear. ) story was brou ht to the attention of =mar, about a man who was killed by his stepmother and her loverLfriend. G=mar hesitated( are many people to be killed for the murder of one person& G)li said to him( $hat do you think if a roup participatedLcollaborated in the theft of a slau hter camel. !o this one took a part and that one took another part. $ould you cut their hands& He said( 6es. )li said( well it is the same thin . !o =mar acted upon )li1s opinion and wrote to his G)mil (1 kill them both for if the peopleLwhole population of !an1aa participated I would have had them killed. )nd when they disa reed about the #uestion of /oint share, when a woman died leavin a husband, mother, uterine brothers and full brothers. =mar used to ive the husband half, the mother a si'th, and the uterine brothers a third. !o nothin remained for the full brothers. It was said to him( !uppose our father was a donkey. )re we not from one mother& !o he chan ed his view and ave them a share. They used to ac#uaint themselves with the maslaha (benefit) for which the te't came, if it was understood from the te't. )nother e'ample is when )llah (swt) said(G As+sadaCat (9akat) are only for the 4uCara (poor), and al+masakin (needy) and those 2B2

employed to collect (the funds)- and for to attract the hearts of those who have been inclined (towards Islam).1>?(8CA !o )llah made those whose hearts have been reconciled to Islam a source of e'penditure from the sources of 9akat. It has been established that the Prophet (saw) used to ive money to people whose hearts had been reconciled to Islam. )fter the death of the 7essen er (saw) it is narrated about G=mar that he forbade the payment of those whose hearts had been reconciled (al+muHallaftu Culu!uhum). He told them ()llah has made Islam stron and so Islam has no need of you, either you stick to Islam or else between you and us is the sword. G=mar was of the view that the inclinin of hearts towards Islam was there because the state was weak because the e'pression Greconcilin hearts1 (taHleeful al+Culu!) indicates this. *or when are hearts reconciled e'cept when you are in a state of need& =mar took the opinion that the need to reconcile hearts ended when Islam became stron . )nd without the need to reconcile hearts the Gillah (le al cause) oes. Fue to this the hukm also oes. The !ahaba used to investi ate and ask the people about the !hari1a te'ts re ardin matters they did not know. )nd they (may )llah be pleased with them) used to be all athered to ether in the Hi/a9, discussin the Hitab and !unnah. If they did not find a hukm in the Hitab and !unnah for the issue they are lookin for, they would ask 7uslims if any of them knows that the 7essen er of )llah (saw) passed a /ud ement for this issue. That is why they used to refer to each other and et to ether to discuss its issue and ive an opinion for it. )bu +akr and G=mar used to deduce rules and refer to the people. )l,+a hawi has narrated in his 5asa!ih al+Sunnah( $hen a dispute was reported to )bu +akr he used to look into the +ook of )llah. If he found somethin to /ud e between them, he ave that /ud ement. )nd if it is not found in the +ook. )nd he knew a sunnah from the 7essen er of )llah re ardin that matter, he would ive /ud ement by it. *ailin that he would o out and ask the 7uslims - such and such matter has come to me, do you know of any /ud ement iven by the 7essen er of )llah (saw) pertainin to this &1 Probably the whole roup would a ree mentionin a /ud ment by the 7essen er of )llah (saw). )bu +akr would say(GPraise be to )llah $ho has made people amon st us memorise (issues) concernin our Prophet (saw).1 If he failed to find a sunnah of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) he athered the heads of people and the best amon st them and consulted them. If they had a consensus on a matter he would /ud e with that. It has been reported that G=mar used to consult the !ahaba despite his knowled e of fiCh. To the point when an incident would be refered to him he would say( "all G)li for me, call Jayd. He used to consult them and settle the dispute with whatever they were a reed upon. Fue to the !ahaba1s reference to each other, differences of opinion between them were rare because each !ahabi e'pressed to another !ahabi his own perspective and the evidences he educed. Their view on the whole was true and correct and each one referred to each other. )nd even thou h their views differed in certain rules, but their differences were rare and it was in understandin and not in the method of understandin . $hen the con#uests e'panded and the !ahaba became separated in various cities and it became difficult for those !ahaba to meet, every time an incident presented itself which had not te't. Iach !ahaba ave his own opinion without 2B0

e'pressin it to others or referrin to others due to the difficulty of meetin , since the cities were distant from each other. )nd also due to the need to ive an opinion on an incident occurrin in the city in order to ive /ud ement by it. In every 7uslim city there was one or more !ahaba. They were the reference point for rulin s. They used to deduce rules which had no te't and assume the task of clarifyin and e'plainin the te't /ust as they took the responsibility of teachin the people the Hitab and !unnah. The !unnah had still not been written down, therefore the opinions of !ahaba differed about a sin le incident and each one had an evidence for the opinion he had educed and ave le al verdicts with. However, all of these opinions were !hari1a rules and were acceptable to all of them, since their disa reement was only in their understandin . )s for their method of i>tihad, it was one. $hich is to consider the te't of the ;ur1an and hadith and e'amine the te'ts, and insure that the accredited maslahas (benefit) are the ones only indicated by the !hari1a, and make analo y to issues and maslahas. The unity of the methodolo y in i>tihad did not allow the difference in understandin to have any effect. .n the contrary, it was one of the reasons for the rowth and e'pansion of fiCh. Their le al verdicts (fatwas) were accordin to the incidents and issues that took place. The ran e of their disa reement did not widen and nor did it overstep the furuH (branches ofLsubsidiary fiCh). The disa reement of the !ahaba in furuH is attributable to two reasons( *irst( That most of the te'ts of the ;ur1an and !unnah are not definite in indicatin what is meant rather they are of speculative meanin ( ?anniyya al+ dalala). )lso, they are liable to indicate this or that meanin due to the te't sharin two or more lin uistic meanin s or the te't bein eneral such that it is open to specification. Iach 7u/tahid attempted to understand the te't accordin to what was preponderant from the CaraHin (indications). !econd( The sunnah had not yet been recorded in written form. There was no unanimity on the body of hadith which had spread amon 7uslims so as to be a common reference. 5ather, the hadith was circulated via transmission and memory. Perhaps a mu/tahid in I ypt would know a hadith but a mu/tahid in Famascus did not know it. 7any a time certain mu/tahidin would retract from another mu/tahid1s fatwa when they came to know that someone else knew of a sunnah that they did not know. This led to disa reements in furuH (branches of fiCh) but the evidences and principles concernin them did not differ, therefore their method of i/tihad did not differ. In short, the !ahaba (may )llah be pleased with them) were scholars of the !hari1a. They learnt the ;ur1an and ac#uired the hadith. )nd took it upon themselves to implement the rules of Islam by mi'in with the one responsible for the 7essa e, our master 7uhammad (peace and blessin s on him). They used to rule the people, /ud e between them and teach them their deen. They used to be a li ht for the inhabitants of the country who lived there and trustees of the !hari1a, and in callin people to Islam they were true believers. 5ecitin the ;ur1an to people and teachin them the laws and rules. In teachin people Islam they use to follow a practical course. !o they tau ht the people the Islam and its rules and the method by which they would benefit in solvin the problems of life 2B3

with those rules. They were rulers and at the same time they were teachers. The people approached the !ahaba and receivin the culture from them, takin Islam and understandin the rules. The opinions in ahkam that they clarified were termed as Gle al verdicts1 (fatawa) The fatwa of about one hundred and thirty companions of the 7essen er of )llah (saw) (amon which there are men and women) have been preserved. There were seven out of these who were the most knowled eable and ave the most opinions. They have been called the al+ mukaththirun (those who were prolific in ivin opinions). )nd they are( G=mar, G)li, Ibn 7as1ud, G)1isha, Jayd b. Thabit, Ibn G)bbas and Ibn G=mar. The Hhalifahs, $alis and the rest of the rulers were fu#aha in ahkam, scholars of the !hari1a and busy with fatwa. That is why Islam was embodied in them. Their minds were filled with its culture and their thou hts ori inated from this culture........ They are the ones who implemented these orders, prohibition and rules. !o the Hhalifah and the $ali were the same people who thou ht, acted, understood and ruled. That is why their actions used to be correct, and their affairs were on the ri ht path, and their lives were elevated, and their manner of speakin with the people was honest, and their rules adherent to the courseLpath of Islam with e'treme precision. ) roup from the Tabi1un stuck to the !ahaba and learnt ;ur1an from them, reported the !unnah from them, memorised their le al verdicts and underwood their methods of deduction of ahkam. There were those who used to ive le al verdicts in the lifetime of the !ahaba like !aid b. al,7usayyab in 7adinah and !aid b. Mubayr in Hufa. Thus, we find after all the !ahaba had one, the Tabi1un succeeded them in fiCh and istin!at (inference of rules). They used to deduce rules accordin to their own i/tihad. They used to first look to the +ook of )llah and the !unnah of the 7essen er of )llah (saw), if they did not find anythin there they would study the fatwa (le al verdicts) of the !ahaba. They used to have opinions concernin the *atwas of !ahaba from a /urisprudential perspective and they used to outwei h one statement over another. They used to take the opinions of some of them or they mi ht even differ with the !ahaba. The Tabiuns method of inferrin rules was the same method of the !ahaba. That is why their fatwas were accordin to the incidents and issues that took place without the presence of any assumptions. 5ather it is accordin to the incident that you will find the fatwas. The ran e of disa reement did not become wide between them and nor did the reasons for disa reement on which the !ahaba disa reed overstep the mark, which used to relate to the understandin of the te't and not to the !hari1a evidences. Therefore, there were no disa reements amon st 7uslims which effected life.

9.8.; he effect +urisprudence

of

disputes

and

debates

on

Islamic

Two events took place durin the time of the !ahaba( The first is the civil war (fitna) re ardin G=thman. )nd the second is the debates which took place between the G=lama. This resulted in disa reements over the types of !hari1a evidences, which led to the presence of new political roups, which in turn led to the presence of various /uristicalLle al school of thou ht. That is because after G=thman (r.a.) was murdered and the !ayHa (pled e) of the Hhilafah was iven to G)li b. )bi Talib with whom 7u1awiyya b. )bu !ufyan disputed, and war broke out 2B4

between the two factions and ended with the /ud ement of the two arbitrators. This resulted in the formationLcreation of new political roups which had not e'isted before. These roups came to have new opinions. The opinion be an politically concernin the Hhalifah and the Hhilafah. Then it included most of the remainin ahkam. ) roup of 7uslims arose who loathed =thman for his policies durin his Bhilafah and they resented )li1s acceptance of arbitration ( tahkeem). )nd they were an ry over 7u1awiyyah for sei9in the Hhilafah by force. !o they rebelled a ainst all of them. Their view was that 7uslims should ive pled e to the Hhalifah of the 7uslims purely accordin to their choice without coercion or force. )nd that whoever #ualifies for the Hhilafah he is eli ible to be khalifah. 7uslims should ive bay1a to him and the Hhilafah will be contracted to him by the pled e as lon as he is a man, 7uslim and /ust even if he was a Ithiopian slave. )nd that obedience to the Hhalifah is not obli ed e'cept if his matter was within the limits of the Hitab and !unnah. These people did not take rulin s reported in hadith narrated by G=thman, )li, 7u1awiyya or if a hadith was narrated by a !ahaba who supported any one of them. They re/ected all of their hadiths, opinions and le al verdicts. )nd they outwei hed what was narrated by those they approved of. They only considered their opinions and their own scholars to the e'clusion of others. They had their own fiCh, and they are the Hhawari/. )nother roup from the 7uslim arose which adored G)li b. )bi Talib (r.a.) and loved his decedentsLoffsprin . They took the view that he and his descendants had reater ri ht to the Hhilafah over anyone else. )nd they believed he was the wasi (trustee) to whom the 7essen er be#ueathed the Hhilafah after him. They re/ected many hadiths narrated about the 7essen er (saw) by the ma/ority of the !ahaba. They did not depend on the views of he !ahaba and their le al verdicts. They only relied on the hadiths narrated by their imams and the family of the Prophet (saw). )nd relied on the le al verdicts ori inatin from them. They had their own fiCh, and they are the !hi1a. )s for the ma/ority of the 7uslims they did not adopt the opinions adopted by the aforementioned roups. They took the view that the pled e should be iven to a Hhalifah from ;uraysh, if such a person was found, and they conveyed, without a sin le e'ception, reat respect, affection and loyalty to all the !ahaba. )nd they interpreted the disputes between them as bein i>tihad in speculative shari1a rules which were not linked to belief ( iman) or disbelief (kufr). They used to use as proof every authentic hadith narrated by a !ahabi without any discrimination between the !ahaba. !ince, for them, all the of the !ahaba were trustworthy. )nd they took all the fatwas and opinions of the !ahaba. Fue to this their ahkam did not accord with the ahkam of the other political roups in a number of topics due to their disa reement re ardin rulin , method of istin!at (inference of rules) and in the types of evidences. *rom this it becomes clear that the civil war ( fitna) when it happened, it created a /urisprudential and political condition which led to disa reements which had an impact on history. However the disa reement was not over the shari1a but concerned the understandin of the !hari1a. That is why all of the people who disa reed were 7uslim even thou h their disa reement e'ceeded the furuH and rules to the foundations, evidences and the method of inference.

2B8

)s for the debates which took place between the G=lama. It led to /uristic disa reements but did not lead to political disa reements. +ecause the disa reement was not over the khalifah, the Hhilafah or the rulin system. It was over the rules and their deduction. The basis of that was that debates and disa reements took place between the certain mu/tahidin which led to a disa reement over the method of inference (istin!at). In 7adina Islamic discussions concernin the deduction of rules took place between 5abi1a b. )bi G)bd al,5ahman and 7uhammad b. !hihab al,Juhri. $hich led many fu#aha (/urists) of 7adina to withdraw from 5abi1a1s sessions until they came to ive him the title of G5abi1at ar,ra1i1. ) similar thin also happened in Hufa between Ibrahim al,2akha1i and al,!ha1bi. *rom these debates a number of opinions came to be formed about the method of deducin rules until the 7u/tahidin came to have difference methodolo ies in i/tihad. In the middle of the 2nd century ).H. These different methods of i>tihad became apparent and so did the disa reements concernin them, and various views were formed. The Tabi1un used to be close to a roup of G=lama and mu/tahidin, so they came to follow their method. Thou h, for those who came after them the scope of the disa reement became wider. The reasons for their disa reement did not stop at the understandin but e'tended to reasons linked to !hari1a evidences and lin uistic meanin s. It was in this manner that their disa reements took place in the furuH (branches of fi#h) and usul (principles of /urisprudence). They came to form factions, each faction had its own school (ma?ha!). .win to this the ma9habs were formed. The schools were many, more than four, five si' and more. The disa reement of the mu/tahidin over the method of i>tihad is attributable to their disa reement around three issues( first the sources from which the shari1a rules are deduced. !econd, the perception of the !hari1a te't. )nd third, disa reement over certain lin uistic meanin s which are applied in understandin the te't. )s for the first it is attributable to four issues( B. the method of authenticatin the !unnah and the criterion by which one narration is preferred over another. That is because the authentication of the !unnah assumes the task of authenticatin its narration and the manner of narration. The muhtahidun differed on the method of authentication. !ome of them advanced the mutawatir (concurrent) and mashur sunnah as proof and outwei hed whatever was narrated by the trustworthy amon st the fu#aha. This meant that they ave the mashur hadith the same hukm (value) of the mutawatir and they used it to specify the Gamm ( eneral) in the ;ur1an. There were those who ave preponderance to what the people of 7adina were unanimously a reed upon and disre arded the isolated hadiths ( kha!ar al+ahad) which went a ainst it. )nd there were those who advanced as evidence what upri ht ( Gudul) and trustworthy (thiCat) transmitters narrated whether they were from the fuCaha or not, whether they were from the family of the Prophet (saw) or not, and whether it a reed with the people of 7adina or went a ainst it. )mon st them there were those who took the view that hadith transmitters are not to be considered e'cept if they are from their imams. They had a specific method in transmittin the hadith, in its consideration and use. )nd they had specific transmitters on which they relied but did not rely on others. !ome mu/tahidin differed with re ards to 2B:

the mursal hadith. $hich is what a Tabi1i narrates directly from the Prophet (saw) while omittin the sahaba. )mon st the mu/tahidin there were those who would use the mursal hadith as proof and there were those who did not. !o this disa reement re ardin the method of authenticatin the sunnah led to some of them usin a sunnah as proof which the other did not use. )nd some of them ave preference to a sunnah which was of lesser preference to others. )nd this took the disa reement to the manner in which the !unnah is taken as a !hari1a evidence. !o the disa reement in the !hari1a evidences took place. 0. Fisa reement re ardin the le al verdicts of !ahaba and their valueLevaluation. The mu/tahididn and the imams differed with re ards to the /urisprudential le al verdicts which came from individual !ahabas. There were those who took any one of these fatwas and did not restrict themselves to any particular one but did not turn away from all of them either. )nd there were those who took the view that they constituted only individual /urisprudential le al verdicts ensuin from people who are not infallible, so the scholar has the ri ht to take any one of the fatwas or ive le al verdicts which o a ainst all of them. They viewed them as !hari1a rules which have been deduced and not as !hari1a evidences. )nd there were those who took the view that certain !ahaba were infallible (maHsum) and his view is to be takes as a !hari1a evidence. !o his sayin s constitute the sayin s of the Prophet (saw) and his actions constitute the actions of the Prophet (saw), and his consent constitutes the consent of the Prophet (saw). )s for other !ahaba they are not infallible ( maHsum) so their views are not to be taken at all, not in the capacity of a !hari1a evidence and not in the capacity of a !hari1a rule. )lso, there were those who took the view that one should not take from certain !ahaba because of their participation in the civil war (fitna) and those who did not participate, one can take from them. "onse#uently, another facet of this difference of opinion arose about evidences. 0. Fisa reement in Ciyas (analo ical deduction). !ome mu/thahdidn re/ected the use of Ciyas as an evidence and they disclaimed its status as a !hari1a evidence. )mon them there were those who advanced Ciyas as a proof and considered it a !hari1a evidence after the ;ur1an, !unnah and i>maH (consensus). However, despite their a reement that it constitutes a proof, they disa reed as to what #ualifies as an Gillah (le al cause) for the hukm, and on what Ciyas is based. )s a result the difference of opinion surroundin evidences arose. 3. Fisa reement over i>maH (consensus). The 7uslims a reed on the consideration that i>maH is a proof. !ome of them viewed the i/ma1 of the !ahaba as a proof and some of them saw the i>maH of the Prophet1s family as proof. !ome saw the i>maH of the ahl halli wal GaCd (the influential and leadin fi ures) as proof and some saw the i>maH of the 7uslims as proof. There were those who viewed i>maH as a proof because it constituted an a reement on an opinion, therefore, if they a reed on a matter and advanced a view then it is considered an i>maH which is used as an evidence. )nd there were those who viewed the reco nised i>maH as a proof not because it constitutes an a reement on an opinion but because it reveals an evidence. !o the !ahaba, family of the Prophet (saw) and the people of 7adina 2B@

had companionship with the 7essen er (saw) and saw him. )nd they are trustworthy (Gudul). $hen they hold a !hari1a opinion but do not cite its evidence, their opinion is considered as disclosin the opinion as havin been stated by the 7essen er (saw), or he acted upon it or was silent overLabout it. Thus, they reported a hukm but did not report its evidence due to it bein widely known amon st them. Therefore, the meanin of i>maH constitutin a proof for them is that it reveals an evidence.That is why their a reement and remindin each other, and then ivin their opinion, is not considered an i/ma1 5ather the i>ma- is that they should ive an opinion without reachin an a reement on it. Therefore another difference of opinion came re ardin the evidences. These four issues have widened the rift of disa reement between the mu/tahidin. They are not considered as disa reements over the understandin of the te't as was the case in the time of the !ahaba and Tabi1in, but it passed that and became a disa reement over the method of comprehension. In other words, it is not considered as a disa reement over the rules but it surpassed that and became a disa reement over the method of deducin rules. That is why we find some mu/tahidin takin the view that the !hari1a evidences are the Hitab, !unnah, sayin of Imam G)li (r.a.), i>maH of the family of the Prophet (saw) and the mind. !ome of them took the view that the !hari1a evidences are the Hitab, !unnah, i>maH, Ciyas, istihsan (/uristic preference), the opinionLfatwa of the !ahabi (ma?ha! al+saha!i), and the !hari1a of the people of before ( shariH min Ca!lina). !ome of them were of the opinion that the evidences were the Hitab, !unnah and i>maH. )nd there were those who held that the evidences were the Hitab, !unnah, i>maH, Ciyas, al+masalih al+mursala (considerations of public interest) etc... That is why they disa reed about the !hari1a evidences. This led to the differences in the methodolo y of i>tihad. )s for the second issue to which differences in the method of i>tihad is attributed, it is how the !hari1a te't is viewed. !ome of the mu/tahidin restricted themselves to the understandin of the e'pression mentioned in the !hari1a te't. )nd they stopped at the limits of the meanin s they indicated and confined themselves to these meanin s. They have been called the Ahl al+hadith. ....... It is from here that many have said that the mu/tahidin are divided into two roups( Ahl al+hadith and Ahl al+raHi. This division does not mean that the Ahl al+raHi in their le islation they do not refer to the hadith and that the Ahl al+hadith in their le islation they do not refer to raHi (opinion). 5ather, all of them take hadith and raHi (opinion) because all of them a ree that hadith is a !hari1a proof, and that i>tihad usin raHi in understandin the intelli ible aspect of the te't is a !hari1a proof. $hat becomes apparent to anyone who scrutinises this, is that the issue is not the proponents of hadith or raHi themselves. 5ather, the issue is the evidence on which the !hari1a evidence depends. That is because the 7uslims relied on the +ook of )llah and the !unnah of His 7essen er (saw), if they did not find that clearly stated they operated their own opinion in deducin that from them. !o the rule which is clearly stated like (1)llah has permitted tradin and forbidden ri!a (usury)1 >2(2:4A its evidence is considered the +ook of )llah. )nd anythin clearly stated in the hadith such as (1 Eet not a man conduct a transaction a ainst the transaction of his brother1, its evidence is considered the hadith. )s for anythin other than this 2B?

like the prohibition of leasin property due to the a9an of Mum1a prayer or such as the con#uered land comin under the control of the !ayt al+mal (treasury) and its use by all the people etc. It is considered an opinion ( raHi) even if it is based on the Hitab and !unnah. !o they called everythin that did not have a clear te't an opinion (raHi) even if they acted upon due to a comprehensive rule (hukm kulliy) or it was deduced from the Hitab and !unnah. The truth is that this raHi which is acted upon via a comprehensive rule ( hukm kulliy) or eneral principle or it has been deduced from an understandin of the te't mentioned in the Hitab and !unnah it is not called an opinion but rather it is a !hari1a rule ( hukm sharHi) since it is a statementLview based on an evidence, it constitutes adherence to the evidence. The basis of dividin the mu/tahididn into Ahl al+hadith and Ahl al+raHi stems from the fact that some fu#aha scrutinised the basesLfoundations on which the inference (istin!at) had been built. It became clear to them that the meanin s of the shari1a rules are comprehensible, and they were revealed to solve the problems of people and to obtain benefits (masalih) for them and avert harms (mafasid) that come their way. Therefore, it is essential to understand the te'ts as widely as possible, encompassin everythin indicated by the e'pression.. .n this basis they came to understand and outwei h one te't over another and make deductions for issues that did not have a (clear) te't. "ertain fu#aha devoted their attention to the memorisationLpreservation of the isolated hadith ( kha!ar al+ hadith) and the fatwas of the !ahaba. In their inferences they they took the path of understandin these isolated hadiths and reports about the !ahaba within the limits of its te'ts, and they applied them on events that occurred. )s a conse#uence, disa reement arose concernin the consideration of te'ts as shari1a evidences and whether to consider the Gillah (le al cause) or not. The ori in of the #uestion surroundin the use of raHi is that there are evidences which prohibit its use. !o in the !ahih of +ukhari, on the authority of G=rwa b. al, Jubayr who said( G)bd )llah b. G)mr b. al,1)s overcame us with proof. I heard him say(G)llah will not deprive you of knowled e after he has iven it to you, but it will be taken away throu h the death of the reli ious learned men with their knowled e. Then there will remain i norant people who, when consulted, will ive verdicts accordin to their opinions whereby they will mislead others and o astray.1 G)wf b. 7alik al,)sh/a1i narrated that the 7essen er of )llah (saw) said(17y =mmah will become divided into some seventy sects, the reatest will be the test of the people who make analo y to the deen with their own opinions, with it forbiddin what )llah has permitted and permittin what )llah has forbidden.1 Ibn G)bbas said that the 7essen er of )llah (saw) said( G$hoever speaks about the ;ur1an with his own opinion, let him reserve his place in the fire1. These hadiths are e'plicit in their censure of the use of raHi. However, the raHi is not the same raHi employed by the scholars of raHi like the Hanafis. 5ather the blameworthy raHi is that of speakin about the !hari1a without any authority. )s for the raHi which is premised on a shari1a basis, the hadiths and reports about the !ahaba ( athar) indicate that it is a shari1a rule not to be considered as a takin a blameworthyLob/ectionable raHi. The Prophet (saw) has permitted the /ud e to e'ercise his own i>tihad and awards him, despite makin a mistake in e'ercisin 22C

his own opinion, one reward, if his aim was to ain knowled e of the truth and follow it. The Prophet (saw) ordered the !ahaba on the day of the (battle of) )h9ab (the confederates) to pray the mid,day (Gasr) prayer in +ani ;uray9a. !ome e'ercised their own i>tihad and prayed on the way, they said it does not mention any delay rather what he meant was to advance #uickly, thus they looked into the meanin Lsense. The others e'ercised their i>tihad and delayed the prayer until +ani ;uray9a. They prayed the Gasr prayer at ni ht, thus they looked at the wordin . The 7essen er (saw) accepted both roups, each one on his own opinion. 7u1a9 narrated Gthat when the 7essen er of )llah (saw) sent him to 6emen he said(1$hat will you do when a /ud ement presents itself. 7u1a9 said( GI will /ud e by what is in the +ook of )llah. He said( +ut what if it is not in the +ook of )llah& He said(I will /ud e by what is in the !unnah of the 7essen er of )llah (saw). He said( +ut what if it is not in the !unnah of the 7essen er of )llah & He replied( I will e'ercise my own i/tihad, it does not bother me He said( !o the 7essen er of )llah beat my chest and said(GPraise be to )llah who has made the messen er of the 7essen er of )llah to accord with what pleases the 7essen er of )llah1. !o this is the raHi on which the fu#aha, and the mu/tahidin proponents of raHi proceeded on in actin upon the sunnah. It is the raHi which is based on the te't. They are also the Ahl al+hadith even if they were called the Ahl al+raHi. Iven the Hanafis who have become famous as Ahl al+raHi are a reed that the opinion of )bu Hanifah is that the hadith other than the sahih, i.e. the hasan, is more entitled to be followed than Ciyas or raHi. !o he ave precedence to the hadith of CahCaha (loud lau hterLlau hin aloud), even thou h it is hasan, over Ciyas and raHi. )nd he prevented the hand of a thief to be cut for a theft whose value is less than ten dirhams but the hadith did not reach the level of sahih, rather it is hasan which indicates that raHi for them is an understandin of the te't. They ave Ciyas a rankLstatus lower than the hasan hadith let alone the hadith which is sahih. This indicates that what is intended by raHi is the understandin of the te't and the raHi which is based on the te't. !o the Ahl al+raHi are Ahl al+hadith also. )s for the third issue which led to disa reements over the method of deducin rules, it concerns certain lin uistic meanin which are applied in understandin the te't. The disa reement between the mu/tahididn arose from the styles of the )rabic lan ua e and whatever they indicated. There were those who took the view that the te't was a proof for establishin the hukm from its wordin (mantuC), and for provin the opposite of this hukm from the opposite understandin (mafhum al+mukhalif). )nd there were those who view the unspecified Gamm ( eneral) as definite (CatHy) in dealin with all its parts, and there those who saw it as speculative (?anni). )nd there were those who viewed the eneral order as tantamount to an obli ation, they did not deviate from this e'cept when there was a Carina (indication) to the contrary. !o the order obli es an action. )nd some of them used to take the view that an order was merely a re#uest to do an action. It is the the Carina (indication) which clarifies whether it is an obli ation or otherwise. )s a result, disa reements arose concernin the understandin of the te'ts and let to disa reements in the method of i>tihad. Thus, in this manner the disa reement between the eneration of the Tabi1in arose in the methodolo y of deducin ahkam and each mu/tahid came to have his 22B

own special methodolo y. *rom this disa reement over the method of deducin rules arose various /uristic schools which led to the rowth of the /urisprudential wealth and made fiCh flourish in its entirety. This is because differences in understandin is natural and it assists the development of thou ht. The !ahaba used to disa ree amon st themselves. G)bd )llah b. G)bbas disa reed with G)li, G=mar, Jayd b. Thabit even thou h he had learnt from them. 7any of the Tabi1un disa reed with certain !ahaba yet they took knowled e from them. 7alik went a ainst many of his !haykhs and )bu Hanifah disa reed with Ma1far al,!adi# concernin certain issues despite learnin from him. )l,!hafi1i disa reed with 7alik in many issues even thou h he had learnt from him. Thus, the G=lama used to disa ree with each other, and students disa reed with their shaykhs and teachersLmasters. They did not consider that as bad manners or rebellion a ainst their shaykhs. This is because Islam encoura es people to do i>tihad. Ivery scholar has the ri ht to comprehend and make i>tihad and not be confined to the view of a !ahabi or Tabi1i and nor to be confined to the opinion of a shaykh or teacherLmasters.

9.8.8

he (lourishing of Islamic Hurisprudence

The 7uslims enerally used to make taCleed to the mu/tahidin despite their disa reements, since the basis of their disa reements was the !hari1a evidence. !o the understandin of every mu/tahid of the address of the Ee islator ( khita! al+ shaariH) is considered a !hari1a rule with respect to him and with respect to the one who makes taCleed to him. +ecause, the address of the Ee islator is the hukm sharHi (shari1a rule) and the understandin of the Ee islator1s address is a !hari1a rule, but in respect to the one who understood it and in respect to the one who follows him in this understandin . Those who attained the understandin of the Ee islator1s address used to make i>tihad. Those who did not reach the level of i>tihad used to follow, in ahkams, those who had reached the level of i>tiahd and practised i>tihad. The issue was not that of followin the faCih personally /ust as the issue is not one of makin taCleed to a ma?ha!. 5ather, the issue is about adoptin the hukm sharHi deduced by the faCih and actin upon it. !ince, the 7uslim is ordered to follow the !hari1a rule only and act upon it and not follow a ma?ha! or person, or act accordin to any particular ma?ha! or follow any particular person. $hen he is able to reach the hukm sharHi throu h his own i>tihad he should do that, if not he should adopt a hukm deduced by someone else. In the early a es the mu/tahidun could be counted by the thousands. That is why we find that the mu>tahidun whom the 7uslims used to follow were not restricted to four, five, si' or any number of ma?ha!s. 6et there were many ma?ha!s and numerous mu/tahidun. Iach roup used to follow ruled deduced by each mu/tahid whether he was from a ma9hab or not. *or e'ample, the eneral population of Hufa acted upon the fatwa of )bu Hanifah and !ufyan al,Thawri but the !hi1a used to act upon the ma9hab of Ma1far al,!adi#. The practise of the people of 7akkah used to be accordin to the fatwa of Ibn Muray/ and the people of 7adina on the fatwas of 7alik. )nd the people of +asra on the fatwas of G=thman. )nd the people of al,!ham on the fatwas of al,)w9a1i and the people of I ypt on the fatwas of Ibn !a1d, and the people of Hhurasan on the fatwas of G)bd )llah b. al,7ubarak, some of the people of 6emen on the fatwas of Jayd b. al,Husayn. 7any of the 7uslims used to follow the fatwas of !a1id b. al,7usayyab, Ibn )bi 222

Eayla, GIkrama, 5abi not turn away from all of them either. )nd there were those who took the view that they constituted only individual /urisprudential le al verdicts ensuin from people who are not infallible, so the scholar has the ri ht to take any one of the fatwas or in ahkam. Iach one /ud ed with his own opinion or accordin to the opinion of a faCih whose opinion he holds. This resulted in the presence of different /ud ements in the state, due to this there were G=lama who were obviously inclined towards unifyin the rulin by which /ud ement is iven and wanted the Hhalifah to issue an order for people to adhere to it. )t that time, certain people who knew about the situation of the society took the view that a comprehensive book should be written to which /ud es and other will refer, to li hten the burden of the /ud es and make it easy for the liti ants. Ibn al,7u#affa1 wrote a letter to the Hhalifah al,7ansur re ardin this matter, in which it was mentioned( G $hat the )meer al,mu1minin sees, re ardin the matter of those two cities - +asra and Hufa and other cities and re ions, of the differences of these contradictory rulin s which has reached reat proportions re ardin rulin s relatin to life, chastity and property. The rules concernin life and chastity allowed in +asra is forbidden in Hufa, such disa reements are takin place in the heart of Hufa, somethin is allowed in one area but not in another. ................... However, al,7ansur did not act accordin to this letter althou h he was influenced by it. His influence made him to make the *u#aha and the muhaddithun to record what has reached them until people had references to which they could refer. The reason for al,7ansur not actin upon the opinion of Ibn al,7u#affa1 in layin down a constitution and canons for the state, which would have brou ht the people to to ether on specific ahkams was what happened between him and 7alik. Ibn !a1d narrated in al,Taba#at that 7alik b )nas said( when al,7ansur made ha// he said to me( I have taken the decision to order people to follow the books which you have written. They will be copied, then I will send a copy to every 7uslim city and and I will order them to act upon them and not refer to any other works. !o I said . )meer al,7u1mininD Fo not do this. The people already hold opinions, and they have heard hadiths and narrated reports, each people took what it already had followed it, leave the people, let the people of each country chose for themselves.1 .win to this, the ma9habs and opinions were not unified and i>tihad and raHi remained with the people in adoptin the hukm they deemed correct. )nd the choice remained for /ud es and rulers to /ud e with what they deemed as appropriate. Fue to this, each imam of fiCh has students who came to study their opinions and e'plain his school. )nd the outlook towards this disa reement which took place chan ed and it became a science on its own ri ht, they called it the science of disa reement (Gilm al+khilaf). They studied it /ust as they studied usul al+fiCh. They said that the disa reements of the imams was a mercy. The student of each imam used to e'pand on the furuH (branches of fi#h). It was this e'pansion which preserved the ma9habs of certain mu/tahidin and but was the reason for the e'tinction of others. )l,)w9a1i, al,Hasan al,+asri, al,Thawri and Ibn Marir al, Tabari are some of the reatest imams in terms of their breadth of knowled e and i/tihad. However they did not e'pand in furuH but confined themselves to the usul, and they did not have students who would e'pound the position of their ma9hab, that is why they were not acted upon and they did not spread. )s for the rest of the imams such as )bu Hanifah, Ma1far al,!adi#, Jayd b. al,Husayn, al,!hafi1i, )hmad b. Hanbal and 7alik, they had students and followers, so their ma9habs 220

were recorded and continued to e'ist. Fespite the oppressionLrestrictions imposed by )bu Ma1far al,7ansur on Ma1far al,!adi# and others from the family of G)li, he deduced rules and he had students from the !hi1a and others. They recorded his opinions and looked upon them as somethin akin to the sunnah. His ma9hab spread in many re ions of the world. )bu Hanifah used to have many students, the most well known are )bu 6usuf, 7uhammad b. al,Hasan al,!haybani and Jufar. They were all mu/tahids like )bu Hanifah. )lthou h they mi'ed their opinions with his, the credit oes to them for recordin the ma9hab of )bu Hanifah. It is the same for imam 7alik. He used to reside in 7adinah, he had many students who were widely known, especially for scrutinisin the hadith and transmitters of hadith, especially in re ard to the book al+5uwatta. His students after him used to record his fatwas and e'pand on the furuH and ive their views on issues. Fespite 7alik1s fame the credit for spreadin his ma9hab oes to his students. )s for al,!hafi1i he had established his towerin fame by his own hands in usul al+fiCh. $hich is indicated by what comes in the lar e work al,=mm which alon with al+1isala and I!tal al+Istihsan are the reatest samples of intellectual awakenin in that a e. His students, such as al,5abi1 and al,7u9ani, who proceeded accordin this method and studied his opinions and e'panded his ma9hab and so it spread far and wide. Eikewise for )hmad b. Hanbal. Fespite the dominant prevalence of hadith in his ma9hab, he had students who e'panded his ma9hab for him and studied his opinions. The credit first and foremost oes to those students, not only for spreadin the ma9hab of their teachers and imams but also for the e'position of the fiCh and ensurin that it flourished, until their a e was considered more radiant than the a e of the imams. !ince, it was in this a e that the commentaries of ahkam and clarification of evidences took place. Thus, the fu#aha rushed ahead in studyin fi#h and e'plainin it especially the science of usul al+fiCh which is the true basis of fi#h. The situation of fiCh continued to spread until it flourished reatly. The pinnacle of its bloom, after the century in which the ma9habs were formed, was in the fourth century ).H.

9.8.9

he 5ecline of Islamic Hurisprudence

)fter the era of the students of mu/tahidin came the adherents and followers of the ma9ahib. They did not continue on the path which the imams and scholars of ma9ahib followed in i/tihad and in the inference ( istin!at) of rules. )nd nor did they continue on the path taken by the students of the mu/tahidin in terms of studyin the evidence, clarifyin the an le of eduction and the branchin out of the rules, and e'position of issues. The followers of each imam or the scholars of each ma9hab were only concerned about takin the side of their own ma9hab, supportin its furuH and usul in all of the issues. They were not interested in studyin the soundness of the daleel and outwei hin the preponderant evidence over the weaker evidence even if it went a ainst their ma9hab. !ometimes they were concerned to establish the proofs for the correctness of the view they have taken and invalidate the proofs a ainst it. )nd at other times their interest was devoted to e'tollin the imams and the scholars of the ma9ahib. This preoccupied the scholars of the ma9ahib and distractedLalienated them from the primary source which is the ;ur1an and !unnah. ) person, amon them, did not refer to the te't of the ;ur1an or !unnah, e'cept for the purposes of findin anythin that will support the ma9hab of his imam. )ccordin ly, their studies were confined to 223

their ma9habs. )nd their 9eal for absolute i/tihad and reference to the primary sources in order to derive rules from them became weak. Their ea erness for i/tihad was restricted to their ma9hab or to one issue, or simply to make ta#leed without scrutiny. Their dependence on ta#leed reached the point where they said ( any ayah or hadith which oes a ainst what out scholars have said , ie our ma9hab, it is to be interpreted (to accord with what we say) or it has been abro ated. They made the followin of a ma9hab an obli ation on the 7uslim. )nd they be an to study, in Islamic institutions such as al,)9har, the sayin of the author of .awhara al+6awheed fi wu>u! al+taCleed ( )n obli ation it is to follow the learned amon st them. Thus the people spoke in a lan ua e understood by them. 5ather, they believed that the door of i/tihad should be closed for the 7uslims. They held that i/tihad was not permitted, until many of the G=lama, from amon st those who were #ualified for i/tihad and who had the capacityLaptitude for i/tihad, did not dare to perform i/tiahd or say that they were mu/tahids. This decline started towards the end of the 3th century ).H. althou h in the be innin , until the end of the 8th century and the be innin of the :th there was some elevationLpro ress. 7u/tahidun and scholars were present at a time when the likes of al,;affal were advocatin the closin of the door of i/tihad. However, from the be in of the :th century until the end of the B0th century ).H. the decline was complete but it was within the limits of Islam. The decline was in thou ht but the /urisprudential opinions remained Islamic. )s for after the B0th century ie from B2:3 ).H. till now, the decline has reached the point where the shari1a rules have become mi'ed with unIslamic laws and the situation reached the worst possible state of decline. It was due to this /urisprudential decline that it made it difficult for people to act upon the shari1a rules. !o after the Islamic !hari1a had been sufficientLsuitable for the entire world, they made it difficult even for its adherents until they were forced to take in other laws .... 7any pious 7uslims be an to ar ue about a shari1a which was not the Islamic !hari1a. Towards the end of the G=thmani state it was the i norance of Islam and the i norant fu#aha which was the principle reason for the backwardness of the 7uslims and the end of their state. There were fu#aha who were ri id and always ready to ive fatwa forbiddin anythin new and forbid the thou hts of any thinker. The curiously ludicrous and lamentable thin that happened was that when coffee appeared some scholars ave fatwa forbiddin it, and when smokin appeared they ave the fatwa of prohibition, and when people wore the fe9 the fu#aha ave the fatwa that it was forbidden to wear it, and when the printin press appeared and the state decided to print copies of the ;ur1an, some fu#aha forbade it to be printed. The telephone appeared and some fu#aha forbade people to speak throu h it, and many other issues followed. =ntil the conse#uence in Islamic /urisprudence was that the 7uslims became completely i norant of it. The issue chan ed from studyin the !hari1a rules to studyin western laws. )nd law schools were founded, those schools whose presence in the 7uslims countries was shameful blot for them. )nd towards the end of the G=thmani state , the Islamic state and its leader the Hhalifah of the 224

7uslims , decided to imitate western /urisprudence in the codification of law. Thus they introduced the 7a/alla in B2@2 ).H. as a civil law and a rand edict was issued in B2?0 ).H. to put it into effect. )nd before they had drawn up the .ttoman penal code in B2:3 ).H. They introduced that in place of the hudud, criminal (>inayat) and discretionary punishments (ta19eer). )nd in B2:8 ).H. they introduced the Eaw of 5i hts and "ommerce in B2:8 ).H. Then they introduced the constitution in order to abolish the Hhilafah system in its entirety in B2?3 ).H. However, it was abolished and then reinstituted in B028 ).H. (B?C: ".I.). However, they tried to make it a ree with Islam and kept the Hhilafah system. In this way, fi#h (comprehension) declined and became laws and the !hari1a rules were abandoned and rules other than from Islam were adopted under the prete't that they a reed with Islam. )n erroneous notion became prevalent that whatever a rees with Islam it is taken from any human bein . )nd the 9eal of the G=lama waned and they, all of them, became mu#allidin (followers). However, that was seen as comin under the shadow of Islam. +ut after the end of the Hhilafah and the kuffar1s occupation, from the In lish and *rench, of the country. Then the 7uslims countries came be states founded on a nationalistic basis whether )rab, Turk or Iranian etc. The Islamic fi#h was wiped out from e'istence from the relationships of people, and from education and learnin . It was not studied e'cept in certain countries, such as al,)9har in I ypt, 2a/af in Ira#, Jaytuna in Tunisia, however they were studied in the same manner as <reek philosophy was studied. The decline reached shockin levels since the Islamic fi#h vanished from e'istence from people1s relationships.

9.8.: he fallacy@myth of the influence of Goman 4aw on Islamic Hurisprudence

!ome orientalists, who hate Islam and detest the 7uslims, claim that Islamic /urisprudence has been reatly influenced by 5oman /urisprudence and law, when in the early a es the 7uslims had rushed forth with the con#uests. They said that this 5oman law was one of the sources of Islamic law and that some of its ahkam have been borrowed form this source. This means that in the time of the Tabi1un and after them, that 7uslims had adopted 5oman laws from 5oman /urisprudence. They educe evidence for their view by claimin that at the time of the Islamic con#uest there were schools of 5oman law present in the !ham re ion, in ;aysariyya and on the coasts of Palestine and +eirut. )lso in the !ham re ion there were courts which in their systems and laws proceeded accordin to 5oman law. )nd these courts inside the country continued for a time after the Islamic con#uest which indicates that 7uslims approved and adopted them and proceeded accordin to their laws and system. They supported this viewpoint with assumptions. They said, it is natural for a people who did not adopt much of a sedentary life like the 7uslims, when they con#uered an urbanised country such as the !ham re ion which was under 5oman rule, that they should consider what they should do& $hat shall they rule them with& Thereafter, they borrowed their laws. Then they said that a comparison between certain sections of Islamic law and certain sections of 5oman /urisprudence and law, demonstrate the similarity between the two. They also show that certain laws have been copiedLtransferred /ustLe'actly they are from the 5oman law, like ( The burden of proof rests on the 228

one makes the claim and on the one who re/ects is the oath1, and like the words fiCh and faCih. 5ather those orientalists maintained that the Islamic law took from rules from the Talmud which had been taken by the Talmud from 5oman /urisprudence. )ccordin to their claim Islamic /urisprudence took 5oman /urisprudence directly from schools and courts in !ham. )nd it took it via the Talmud when it took it from the Talmud. This is what the .rientalists claim without furnishin any proof other than mere assumptions. The statements of these orientalists are wron for a number of reasons( *irst( 2o one reported about the 7uslims, whether orientalist or others, that one 7uslim, whether he was a fa#ih or not, that he alluded to 5oman /urisprudence or law, either by way of criticism, support or with intention to borrow. 2o one has mentioned anythin whatsoever, which indicates that 5oman law was not a sub/ect of discussion let alone a sub/ect of study. !ome 7uslims did translate works of <reek philosophy but they did not translate a sin le word or sentence from the 5oman /urisprudence let alone translate a book. $hich stren thens the /ud ement that they were abolished and effacedLwiped out from the country by merely bein con#uered. !econd( )t the time when the orientalists alle e that there were schools of 5oman /urisprudence and courts which ruled accordin to 5oman law in the !ham re ion, the !ham was full of mu/tahidin from the G=lama, /ud es and rulers. It is natural that if any influence took place then it would have happened amon those fu#aha (/urists). However, the reality is that we do not find in the fi#h of those people which has been preserved for us of any influence by 5oman /urisprudence or any mention of it. 5ather their /urisprudence and ahkam were based on the Hitab, !unnah and the i/ma1 of the !ahaba. .ne of the most famous from those mu/tahidin is al,)w9a1i. He used to live in +eirut, where the .rientalists alle e was the site of the lar est 5oman schools in the !ham. He spent his entire life there and died there. His opinions have been recorded in many of the reco nised books of fi#h. Thus, in volume vii of al,!hafi1i1s al,=mm there are numerous ahkams of al,)w9a1i. It becomes clear to anybody who reads them the e'tent of al,)w9a1i1s remoteness from 5oman /urisprudence, like the remoteness of the earth from the sky. Iven, the ma9hab of al,)w9a1i, as it becomes clear from his fi#h itself and what has been reported about him, was that of the )hl al,hadith. He relied upon hadith more than he relied upon raHi. The e'ample of al,)w9a1i is that same as that of other fu#aha (/urists). If there were any influences they would have emer ed amid those fu#aha. Third( The 7uslims believed that )llah (swt) addressed the whole of mankind in the Islamic !hari1a. )nd He sent our master 7uhammad (saw) to all the people (1$e have not sent you (. 7uhammad >sawA) e'cept as a iver of lad tidin s and a warner.1>03(2@> They considered anyone who did not believe in the Islamic !hari1a as a disbeliever. )nd they believed that any hukm which is other than the hukm is Islam is a hukm of kufr (disbelief) whose adoption is forbidden. 22:

$hoever believes in such a belief and acts upon it, he cannot take other than the hukm of Islam especially in the early period, in the time of the con#uests. $here the 7uslims used to be the carriers of the Islamic 7essa e, openin other countries to carry the da1wa of Islam to them. They con#uered other countries to saveLrescue the people from the rule of kufr (disbelief). !o how can they con#uer a country only to take the rule of kufr for they have come to destroy and put the rule of Islam in its place&& *ourth( It is not correct that the 7uslims, when they con#uered countries, they used to be of a lesser civilisation than the con#uered country. If that was correct they would have abandoned their civilisation and adopted the civilisation of the con#uered countries. The observable and perceptible reality is that the countries, which the 5omans used to rule, carried thou hts about life which contradicted Islam. $hen the 7uslims con#uered them they did not force the inhabitants to profess Islam. 5ather they were content /ust to take the /i9ya from the people. +ut it did not take lon before the stren th of the Islamic thou ht and the sublimity of the Islamic civilisationLculture prevailed over the 5oman thou hts and 5oman cultureLcivilisation and made it e'tinct. The inhabitants of the country became 7uslims professin Islam and livin accordin to it path with contentment and tran#uillity. which indicates that the thou hts of Islam had wiped out the 5oman /urisprudence and 5oman thou hts and had taken its place. This reality which speaks for itself refutes the assertion of the orientalists that the 5oman cultureLcivilisation was stron er than the Islamic cultureLcivilisation. )nd it refuted their assertion that the Islamic /urisprudence was influenced by the 5oman /urisprudence. *ifth( the word GfiCh1 and GfaCih1 have been mentioned in the 2oble ;ur1an and in the sacred hadith. They did not know of any le islative contacts with 5ome. He (swt) said(1.f every troop of them, a party should only o forth, that they (who are left behind) may et instructions in reli ion.1>?(B22A )nd he (saw) said(1 $hosoever from whom )llah wishes ood, He makes him to comprehend the deen.1 )nd the #uestion of the 7essen er (saw) to 7u1a9 when he sent him to 6emen( $ith what will you /ud e& 7u1a9 replied( with the +ook of )llah, then with the !unnah of the 7essen er of )llah (saw), then I will e'ercise my own opinion which is the fiCh. !imilarly, sendin the rest of the $alis to other re ions, and the le al /ud ements of the !ahaba accounts for more than a #uarter of a century, that constituted fi#h. !o how can they assume that the word Gfi#h1 and Gfa#ih1 was taken from the 5emans& )s for the dictumLma'im ( The burden of proof rests on the one makes the claim and on the one who re/ects is the oath1 It is hadith of the 7essen er (saw) which he stated before any le islative contact with the 5emans. The ma'im has been mentioned in the letter of G=mar to )bu 7usa in +asra. It is well known that no le islative contact took place between G=mar and the 5emans. !o how can they maintain that the 7uslims took the term fi#h, fa#ih and the principle(The burden of proof rests on the one makes the claim and on the one who re/ects is the oath1 from the 5emans when they themselves have said these thin s and they had them before the dawn of Islam.

22@

*rom this it becomes clear that the myth of the influence of 5oman law on Islamic /urisprudence has absolutely no basis whatsoever. It is an interpolationLfabrication of the orientalists who are hostile to Islam, who fill their hearts with hatred for the 7uslims.......... )s for the issue of Islamic /urisprudence takin from the Talmud, its fallacy is evident from the ;ur1an1s attack on the Mews, for fabricatin the Tawrah and In/eel which were revealed to sayyidna 7usa and sayidina GIsa, and that what they have before them has been written by their own hands, it is from them and not from )llah. It is a lie, a distortion of the Tawrah and In/eel. This attack includes the attack on the Talmud, that is from their writin s and not from )llah. This contradicts the notion of 7uslims takin from them let alone the fact that the Mews used to be separate tribes from the 7uslims. They did not live with the 7uslim, they did not even mi' with them, not to speak of the constant animosity between them and the 7uslims, and the unremittin wars wa ed on them by the 7uslims until they e'pelled them from their midst. This contradict the idea of 7uslims takin from them. The truth, and the perceptible reality is that Islamic /urisprudence constitutes rules deduced from the Hitab and !unnah or to what the Hitab and !unnah alluded to in terms of evidence, and that if the rule is not based, in its ori ins, on a shari1a evidence, it is not considered as part of the rules of Islam and nor is it considered part of Islamic /urisprudence. please note - half of p. B?? and p.2CC will be submitted later. I wish to check some aspects relatin to the translation of these passa es. deduction and inference have been used interchan eably for Gistinbat1 I think the word is tunsi from ansa. tanwassa is probably a misprint. please check. p. 2C?. it is pointless to try and translate hadith classifications such as these. +etter to ive their meanin s in the lossary. please check

22?