Usool Shaashi With Arabic Matan PDF

Usool Shaashi
Usool
Shaashi
1
Usool Shaashi
Contents
Introduction.............................................................................. 19
Introduction .......................................................................... 19
The principles of Fiqh .............................................................. 19
The principles of Fiqh ........................................................ 19
The Book of ALLAAH .................................................... 21
Section one ....................................................................... 21
The Book of Allaah ........................................................ 21
Lesson one ............................................................................... 21
Khaas and Aam ........................................................................ 21
Khaas and Aam ........................................................................ 21
The ruling of Khaas ................................................................. 22
The ruling of Khaas ................................................................. 22
Example one ............................................................................ 23
Example one ............................................................................ 23
Example Two ........................................................................... 25
Example Two ........................................................................... 25
Example three .......................................................................... 26
Example three .......................................................................... 26
Definition of Aam .................................................................... 28
Definition of Aam .................................................................... 28
Aam Ghair Makhsoosul Ba'adh ............................................... 28
Aam Ghair Makhsoosul Ba'adh ............................................... 28
Example One ........................................................................... 28
Example One ........................................................................... 28
Proof that '‫ 'ما‬is Aam ................................................................ 29
Proof that '‫ 'ما‬is Aam ................................................................ 29
Example Two ........................................................................... 30
Example Two ........................................................................... 30
Example Three ......................................................................... 31
Example Three ......................................................................... 31
Example Four........................................................................... 32
Example Four........................................................................... 32
2
Usool Shaashi
Aam Makhsoosul Ba'adh ......................................................... 32
Aam Makhsoosul Ba'adh ......................................................... 32
Lesson on Mutlaq and Muqayyad............................................ 34
Lesson on Mutlaq and Muqayyad............................................ 34
Example One ........................................................................... 35
Example One ........................................................................... 35
Example Two ........................................................................... 36
Example Two ........................................................................... 36
Example Three ......................................................................... 37
Example Three ......................................................................... 37
Example four ........................................................................... 38
Example four ........................................................................... 38
A deduction made from the ruling of Mutlaq .......................... 38
A deduction made from the ruling of Mutlaq .......................... 38
Example five ............................................................................ 40
Example five ............................................................................ 40
An objection............................................................................. 41
An objection............................................................................. 41
Lesson on Mushtarak and Mu'awwal ...................................... 43
Lesson on Mushtarak and Mu'awwal ...................................... 43
The ruling of Mushtarak .......................................................... 44
The ruling of Mushtarak .......................................................... 44
Example One ........................................................................... 45
Example One ........................................................................... 45
Example Two ........................................................................... 46
Example Two ........................................................................... 46
Definition of Mu'awwal ........................................................... 47
Definition of Mu'awwal ........................................................... 47
Example One of Mu'awwal ..................................................... 47
Example One of Mu'awwal ..................................................... 47
Example Two ........................................................................... 48
Example Two ........................................................................... 48
Definition of Mufassar ............................................................. 49
Example of Mufassar ............................................................... 49
3
Usool Shaashi
Example of Mufassar ............................................................... 49
Lesson on Haqeeqat and Majaaz ............................................. 50
Lesson on Haqeeqat and Majaaz ............................................. 50
The ruling of Haqeeqat and Majaaz......................................... 50
The ruling of Haqeeqat and Majaaz......................................... 50
Example One ........................................................................... 50
Example One ........................................................................... 50
Other examples based on this principle ................................... 51
Other examples based on this principle ................................... 51
Objection to this rule ............................................................... 53
Objection to this rule ............................................................... 53
Three types of Haqeeqat .......................................................... 55
Three types of Haqeeqat .......................................................... 55
Example of Haqeeqat-Mut'adhirah .......................................... 56
Example of Haqeeqat-Mut'adhirah .......................................... 56
Example of Haqeeqat-Mahjoorah ............................................ 57
Example of Haqeeqat-Mahjoorah ............................................ 57
Another example of Haqeeqat-Mahjoorah .............................. 57
Another example of Haqeeqat-Mahjoorah .............................. 57
Ruling of Haqeeqat-Must'amilah ............................................. 58
Ruling of Haqeeqat-Must'amilah ............................................. 58
Example of Haqeeqat Must'amilah .......................................... 58
Example of Haqeeqat Must'amilah .......................................... 58
Another example of Haqeeqat-Must'amilah ............................ 59
Another example of Haqeeqat-Must'amilah ............................ 59
Difference in opinion regarding the manner in which Majaaz
substitutes Haqeeqat ................................................................ 59
Difference in opinion regarding the manner in which Majaaz
substitutes Haqeeqat ................................................................ 59
Example .................................................................................. 61
A reply to an objection .......................................................... 62
Lesson of the methods of Isti'aarah ......................................... 63
Lesson of the methods of Isti'aarah ......................................... 63
Example of the first type of Isti'aarah ................................. 63
Example of the second type of Isti'aarah ............................. 65
4
Usool Shaashi
Deduction ................................................................................. 66
Deduction ................................................................................. 66
Niyyat is not necessary ............................................................ 67
Niyyat is not necessary ............................................................ 67
An objection............................................................................. 67
An objection............................................................................. 67
Lesson on Sareeh and Kinaayah .............................................. 68
Lesson on Sareeh and Kinaayah .............................................. 68
Deduction ................................................................................ 69
Differences which arise as a result of this ............................... 70
Differences which arise as a result of this ............................... 70
Definition and ruling of Kinaayah ........................................... 72
Definition and ruling of Kinaayah ........................................... 72
Punishments are not established by Kinaayah ......................... 73
Punishments are not established by Kinaayah ......................... 73
Lesson on Mutaqaabalaat ........................................................ 74
Lesson on Mutaqaabalaat ........................................................ 74
Example one of Thaahir and Nas ......................................... 74
Example two of Thaahir and Nas ......................................... 75
Example Three of Thaahir and Nas ..................................... 76
Example Three of Thaahir and Nas ..................................... 76
The ruling of Thaahir and Nas ................................................. 77
The ruling of Thaahir and Nas ................................................. 77
Contradiction between Thaahir and Nas.................................. 78
Contradiction between Thaahir and Nas.................................. 78
Example One .......................................................................... 78
Example two ........................................................................... 78
Example Three ....................................................................... 79
Example of Mufassar ............................................................. 80
Example of Mufassar in the laws of Shari'ah .......................... 80
Example of Mufassar in the laws of Shari'ah .......................... 80
Example One .......................................................................... 80
Example Two .......................................................................... 81
5
Usool Shaashi
Example Three ....................................................................... 81
Definition of Muhkam ............................................................. 82
Definition of Muhkam ............................................................. 82
Example of Muhkam ............................................................. 82
Ruling of Mufassar and Muhkam ............................................ 83
Ruling of Mufassar and Muhkam ............................................ 83
The opposite of Thaahir, Nas, Mufassar, and Muhkam .......... 83
The opposite of Thaahir, Nas, Mufassar, and Muhkam .......... 83
Definition of Khafie ................................................................. 84
Definition of Khafie ................................................................. 84
Example One .......................................................................... 84
Example Two .......................................................................... 84
Example Three ....................................................................... 85
Ruling of Khafie ...................................................................... 85
Ruling of Khafie ...................................................................... 85
Definition of Mushkil .............................................................. 86
Definition of Mushkil .............................................................. 86
Example of Mushkil ............................................................... 86
Definition of Mujmal ............................................................... 86
Definition of Mujmal ............................................................... 86
Example of Mujmal ............................................................... 87
Definition of Mutashaabih ....................................................... 87
Definition of Mutashaabih ....................................................... 87
Ruling of Mujmal and Mutashaabih ........................................ 88
Ruling of Mujmal and Mutashaabih ........................................ 88
Lesson on those instances where the meaning of Haqeeqat is
abandoned ................................................................................ 88
Lesson on those instances where the meaning of Haqeeqat is
abandoned ................................................................................ 88
The first instance: Dalaalatul Urf ........................................ 88
Example of abandoning Haqeeqat for Urf .......................... 89
The second instance: Dalaatu fi nafsil Kalaam ................... 90
Example of abandoning Haqeeqat because 'Dalaatu fi
nafsil Kalaam' ........................................................................ 90
The third instance: Dalaalatu Siyaaqil Kalaam .................. 92
6
Usool Shaashi
Example of abandoning Haqeeqat because of 'Dalaalatu
Siyaaqil Kalaam' ...................................................................... 92
Example of abandoning Haqeeqat because of 'Dalaatu Siyaaqil
Kalaam' .................................................................................... 92
The fourth instance: 'Dalaalatu min qablil Mutakalim' .... 95
min qablil Mutakalim' ........................................................... 95
The fifth instance: Dalaalatu Mahalil Kalaam' .................. 97
Mahalil Kalaam' .................................................................... 97
Lesson on the manner in which rulings are derived ................ 98
Lesson on the manner in which rulings are derived ................ 98
Definition of Ibaaratun Nas ..................................................... 99
Definition of Ibaaratun Nas ..................................................... 99
Definition of Ishaaratun Nas .................................................... 99
Definition of Ishaaratun Nas .................................................... 99
Example of Ibaaratun Nas and Ishaaratun Nas ................. 99
Rulings derived from the above ............................................. 100
Example Two ........................................................................ 101
Definition of Dalaalatun Nas ................................................. 103
Definition of Dalaalatun Nas ................................................. 103
Ruling for Dalaalatun Nas ..................................................... 104
Ruling for Dalaalatun Nas ..................................................... 104
Dalaalatun Nas is the same as Ibaaratun Nas ........................ 104
Dalaalatun Nas is the same as Ibaaratun Nas ........................ 104
Definition of Iqtidha'un Nas .................................................. 107
Definition of Iqtidha'un Nas .................................................. 107
Example of Iqtidha'un Nas ................................................. 108
Ruling of Iqtidha'un Nas ........................................................ 110
Ruling of Iqtidha'un Nas ........................................................ 110
7
Usool Shaashi
Example of Iqtidha'un Nas ................................................. 111
Lesson on Amr ....................................................................... 113
Lesson on Amr ....................................................................... 113
Definition of Amr .................................................................. 113
Definition of Amr .................................................................. 113
Paste ....................................................................................... 113
Lesson on Amr Mutlaq .......................................................... 114
Lesson on Amr Mutlaq .......................................................... 114
Lesson on Taqraar in Amr ..................................................... 117
Lesson on Taqraar in Amr ..................................................... 117
Rulings deduced from the above ........................................... 119
A reply to an objection to this principle ................................ 120
A reply to an objection to this principle ................................ 120
Two types of Ma'moor Bihi ................................................... 122
Two types of Ma'moor Bihi ................................................... 122
Mutlaq anil Waqt is Waajib Kaamil ...................................... 123
Mutlaq anil Waqt is Waajib Kaamil ...................................... 123
Types of Amr-Muqayyad bil Waqt........................................ 124
Types of Amr-Muqayyad bil Waqt........................................ 124
The ruling of the first type ..................................................... 124
The ruling of the first type ..................................................... 124
The second type of Amr-Muqayyad bil Waqt ....................... 125
The second type of Amr-Muqayyad bil Waqt ....................... 125
The ruling of this type............................................................ 126
The ruling of this type............................................................ 126
Amr necessitates Hasan in the Ma'moor Bihi ........................ 129
Amr necessitates Hasan in the Ma'moor Bihi ........................ 129
Two type of Hasan in Ma'moor Bihi ..................................... 129
Two type of Hasan in Ma'moor Bihi ..................................... 129
The ruling of Hasan bi Nafsihi .............................................. 129
8
Usool Shaashi
The ruling of Hasan bi Nafsihi .............................................. 129
Hasan Li-Ghairihi .................................................................. 131
Hasan Li-Ghairihi .................................................................. 131
The ruling of Hasan Li-Ghairihi ............................................ 131
The ruling of Hasan Li-Ghairihi ............................................ 131
Other acts which are Hasan Li-Ghairihi ................................ 132
Other acts which are Hasan Li-Ghairihi ................................ 132
Waajib established by Amr is of two types ........................... 133
Waajib established by Amr is of two types ........................... 133
Examples of Adaa-Kaamil .................................................. 134
The ruling of Adaa-Kaamil .................................................... 134
The ruling of Adaa-Kaamil .................................................... 134
Definition of Adaa- Qaasir .................................................... 135
Definition of Adaa- Qaasir .................................................... 135
The ruling of Adaa- Qaasir .................................................... 136
The ruling of Adaa- Qaasir .................................................... 136
Adaa is the primary choice .................................................... 139
Adaa is the primary choice .................................................... 139
Types of Qadhaa .................................................................... 141
Types of Qadhaa .................................................................... 141
Qadhaa Qaasir ........................................................................ 142
Qadhaa Qaasir ........................................................................ 142
Kaamil is the primary choice in Qadhaa................................ 142
Kaamil is the primary choice in Qadhaa................................ 142
Qadhaa of that which has no equivalent ................................ 143
Qadhaa of that which has no equivalent ................................ 143
An exception to the rule ......................................................... 145
9
Usool Shaashi
An exception to the rule ......................................................... 145
Lesson on Nahy ..................................................................... 146
Lesson on Nahy ..................................................................... 146
Types of Nahy........................................................................ 146
Types of Nahy........................................................................ 146
The ruling of Nahy of Af'aalil Hissiyah ................................ 146
The ruling of Nahy of Af'aalil Hissiyah ................................ 146
The ruling of Nahy of Tasarrufaatish Shari'ah ...................... 147
The ruling of Nahy of Tasarrufaatish Shari'ah ...................... 147
Rulings derived from the above.................................... 147
Rulings ................................................................................... 150
Rulings ................................................................................... 150
Prohibition does not prevent the laws from applying ............ 152
Prohibition does not prevent the laws from applying ............ 152
Lesson on the method in which the implication of speech is
recognised .............................................................................. 154
Lesson on the method in which the implication of speech is
recognised .............................................................................. 154
If a word has the meaning of Haqeeqat and Majaaz ........ 154
If one meaning requires Takhsees and not the other ............. 155
If one meaning requires Takhsees and not the other ............. 155
If a word has two different forms of recitation ...................... 157
If a word has two different forms of recitation ...................... 157
Example Two ........................................................................ 158
Weak methods in which the implication of speech is
recognised .............................................................................. 160
10
Usool Shaashi
Weak methods in which the implication of speech is
recognised .............................................................................. 160
Example Two ........................................................................ 161
Example Three ..................................................................... 161
Example Four ....................................................................... 162
Example Five ........................................................................ 162
Example six........................................................................... 163
Example Seven ..................................................................... 163
Lesson on Huroof-Ma'aani .................................................... 165
Lesson on Huroof-Ma'aani .................................................... 165
The letter '‫'و‬............................................................................ 165
The letter '‫'و‬............................................................................ 165
The letter '‫ 'و‬sometimes denotes Haal .................................... 167
The letter '‫ 'و‬sometimes denotes Haal .................................... 167
Two conditions for the letter '‫ 'و‬to denote Haal ..................... 168
Two conditions for the letter '‫ 'و‬to denote Haal ..................... 168
An example when '‫ 'و‬cannot denote Haal .............................. 169
An example when '‫ 'و‬cannot denote Haal .............................. 169
Ruling derived from the above .............................................. 170
Ruling derived from the above .............................................. 170
The letter '‫ 'ف‬.......................................................................... 171
The letter '‫ 'ف‬.......................................................................... 171
Example Two ........................................................................ 172
Example Three ..................................................................... 172
Example Four ..................................................................... 173
'‫ 'ف‬sometimes describes the Illat............................................ 173
'‫ 'ف‬sometimes describes the Illat............................................ 173
'‫ 'ف‬is sometimes attached to the ruling of the Illat................. 174
'‫ 'ف‬is sometimes attached to the ruling of the Illat................. 174
11
Usool Shaashi
'َّ‫ 'ثُم‬is for suspension ............................................................... 176
'َّ‫ 'َّثُم‬is for suspension ............................................................... 176
'َّ‫ 'بَل‬for correction .................................................................... 179
'َّ‫ 'بَل‬for correction .................................................................... 179
'‫ 'لكن‬is for clarification ............................................................ 181
'‫ 'لكن‬is for clarification ............................................................ 181
Preconditions for it to serve the purpose of clarification ....... 181
Preconditions for it to serve the purpose of clarification ....... 181
Example One ........................................................................ 182
'َّ‫ 'اَو‬is to grant choice ............................................................... 184
'َّ‫ 'اَو‬is to grant choice ............................................................... 184
Example One ........................................................................ 185
Example Two ........................................................................ 185
Example Three ..................................................................... 185
Example Four ....................................................................... 186
Example Five ........................................................................ 187
Example six........................................................................... 187
When 'َّ‫ 'اَو‬is used in negation .................................................. 188
When 'َّ‫ 'اَو‬is used in negation .................................................. 188
The necessity of having choice .............................................. 189
The necessity of having choice .............................................. 189
'َّ‫ 'اَو‬comes with the meaning of "unless" ................................. 189
'َّ‫ 'اَو‬comes with the meaning of "unless\ ................................. 189
Example Two ........................................................................ 190
'‫'حتّى‬ َ indicates limit ................................................................. 190
'‫ ' َحَّتّى‬indicates limit ................................................................. 190
Example Two ........................................................................ 191
If 'Urf' opposes the literal meaning of '‫'حتّى‬ َ ............................ 191
If 'Urf' opposes the literal meaning of '‫'حتّى‬ َ ............................ 191
If the verb cannot be prolonged ............................................. 192
If the verb cannot be prolonged ............................................. 192
'‫ 'اِلَى‬denotes the extremity of the limit .................................... 194
'‫ 'اِلَى‬denotes the extremity of the limit .................................... 194
12
Usool Shaashi
If '‫ 'اِلَى‬indicates that the action is prolonged .......................... 194
If ''‫ "اِلَى‬indicates that the action is prolonge ........................... 194
'‫ 'اِلَى‬can indicate postponement .............................................. 196
'‫ 'اِلَى‬can indicate postponement .............................................. 196
'‫' َعلَى‬is for obligation ............................................................... 197
'‫ ' َعلَى‬is for obligation .............................................................. 197
At times '‫ ' َعلَى‬will have the meaning of the letter '‫ 'ب‬............. 198
At times '‫ ' َعلَى‬will have the meaning of the letter '‫ 'ب‬............. 198
At times '‫ ' َعلَى‬will indicate a condition .................................. 198
At times '‫ ' َعلَى‬will indicate a condition .................................. 198
'َّ‫ 'فِى‬indicates containment ...................................................... 199
'َّ‫ 'فِى‬indicates containment ...................................................... 199
'َّ‫ 'فِى‬is also used to denote place or time ................................. 200
'َّ‫ 'فِى‬is also used to denote place or time ................................. 200
When 'َّ‫ 'فِى‬denotes place ......................................................... 201
When 'َّ‫ 'فِى‬denotes place ......................................................... 201
'َّ‫ 'فِى‬sometimes indicates a condition ...................................... 203
'َّ‫ 'فِى‬sometimes indicates a condition ...................................... 203
The letter '‫ 'ب‬is for correlation ............................................... 205
The letter '‫ 'ب‬is for correlation ............................................... 205
Lesson on the methods of clarification .................................. 208
Lesson on the methods of clarification .................................. 208
'Bayaanut Taqreer' ................................................................. 209
'Bayaanut Taqreer' ................................................................. 209
'Bayaanut Tafseer' .................................................................. 210
'Bayaanut Tafseer' .................................................................. 210
The ruling of 'Bayaanut Taqreer' and 'Bayaanut Tafseer' ...... 210
The ruling of 'Bayaanut Taqreer' and 'Bayaanut Tafseer' ...... 210
'Bayaanut Taghyeer' ............................................................... 211
'Bayaanut Taghyeer' ............................................................... 211
The outcome of this difference of opinion ................. 211
13
Usool Shaashi
When the ruling is affixed to adjective .................................. 214
When the ruling is affixed to a adjective ............................... 214
The second method of Taghyeer; Exception ......................... 215
The second method of Taghyeer; Exception ......................... 215
An example of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer' by way of exception .... 216
An example of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer' by way of exception .... 216
Another form of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer' ................................... 217
Another form of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer' ................................... 217
The ruling of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer'......................................... 217
The ruling of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer'......................................... 217
'Bayaanudh Dharoorah' .......................................................... 218
'Bayaanudh Dharoorah' .......................................................... 218
'Bayaanul Haal' ...................................................................... 221
'Bayaanul Haal' ...................................................................... 221
'Bayaanul Athaf' ..................................................................... 222
'Bayaanul Athaf' ..................................................................... 222
'Bayaanut Tabdeel' ................................................................. 224
'Bayaanu Tabdeel' .................................................................. 224
Exception of all is impermissible .......................................... 224
Exception of all is impermissible .......................................... 224
Rulings derived from the above.................................... 225
Section Two ........................................................................ 226
Sunnat ................................................................................ 226
Sunnat ................................................................................ 226
The types of Ahaadeeth ......................................................... 227
The types of Ahaadeeth ......................................................... 227
Khabar Mutawaatir ................................................................ 228
Khabar Mutawaatir ................................................................ 228
Khabar Mashoor .................................................................... 228
Khabar Mashoor .................................................................... 228
Khabar Wahid ........................................................................ 229
Khabar Wahid ........................................................................ 229
Conditions of narrators .......................................................... 230
Conditions of narrators .......................................................... 230
14
Usool Shaashi
The second type of narrators.................................................. 232
The second type of narrators.................................................. 232
A condition for practicing on Khabar Wahid ........................ 233
A condition for practicing on Khabar Wahid ........................ 233
The substantiation that the conditions of the narrators differ 234
An example of comparing a Hadeeth to the Quraan.............. 235
An example of comparing a Hadeeth to the Quraan.............. 235
When Khabar Wahid contradicts Khabar Mashoor ............... 236
When Khabar Wahid contradicts Khabar Mashoor ............... 236
When Khabar Wahid contradicts the common practice ........ 237
When Khabar Wahid contradicts the common practice ........ 237
An example of Khabar Wahid contradicting the apparent .... 237
An example of Khabar Wahid contradicting the apparent .... 237
Khabar Wahid can be mentioned four instances ................... 239
Khabar Wahid can be mentioned four instances ................... 239
Section Three ..................................................................... 241
Ijmaa ................................................................................... 241
Ijmaa is of four types ............................................................. 242
Ijmaa is of four types ............................................................. 242
Whose Ijmaa will be considered ............................................ 243
Whose Ijmaa will be considered ............................................ 243
Ijmaa is divided into two categories ...................................... 244
Ijmaa is divided into two categories ...................................... 244
Examples of the above ......................................................... 246
Sub-division of Ijmaa ............................................................ 247
Sub-division of Ijmaa ............................................................ 247
The second type of 'Adamu Qaa'il bil Fasl' ........................... 250
The second type of 'Adamu Qaa'il bil Fasl' ........................... 250
Duties of the Mujtahid ........................................................... 251
Duties of the Mujtahid ........................................................... 251
Discretion is weaker than narration ....................................... 252
Discretion is weaker than narration ....................................... 252
When two proofs contradict each other ................................. 253
15
Usool Shaashi
When two proofs contradict each other ................................. 253
Contradiction of two Ahaadeeth ............................................ 253
Contradiction of two Ahaadeeth ............................................ 253
Practising one one's discretion ............................................... 254
Practising one one's discretion ............................................... 254
Section Four ....................................................................... 256
Qiyaas.................................................................................... 257
Conditions for the validity of Qiyaas ..................................... 259
Conditions for the validity of Qiyaas ..................................... 259
Example of Qiyaas contradicting Nas ................................ 260
Example of Qiyaas altering a ruling established by Nas .. 261
Example of Qiyaas based on a ruling contrary to reason 262
Example of Qiyaas whereby the Illat was identified by
diction.................................................................................... 263
Example of Qiyaas wherein the ruling is being sought for
something mentioned in Nas ................................................. 266
Example of Qiyaas wherein the ruling is being sought for
something mentioned in Nas ................................................. 266
Definition of Qiyaas .............................................................. 267
Definition of Qiyaas .............................................................. 267
Ascertaining the Illat.............................................................. 268
Ascertaining the Illat.............................................................. 268
Illat ascertained from the Sunnat ........................................... 270
Illat ascertained from the Sunnat ........................................... 270
Illat ascertained by Ijmaa ....................................................... 271
Illat ascertained by Ijmaa ....................................................... 271
Two types of Qiyaas .............................................................. 271
Two types of Qiyaas .............................................................. 271
Example of ‘Itiehaadul Jins’ .................................................. 273
Example of ‘Itiehaadul Jins’ .................................................. 273
The Illat must be wide-ranging .............................................. 274
The Illat must be wide-ranging .............................................. 274
The ruling of ‘Itiehaadun No’a’ ............................................. 274
The ruling of ‘Itiehaadun No’a’ ............................................. 274
The ruling for 'Itiehaadul Jins' ............................................... 275
16
Usool Shaashi
The ruling for 'Itiehaadul Jins' ............................................... 275
The third type of Qiyaas ........................................................ 275
The third type of Qiyaas ........................................................ 275
The ruling of this type of Qiyaas ........................................... 277
The ruling of this type of Qiyaas ........................................... 277
Objecting to Qiyaas ............................................................... 278
Objecting to Qiyaas ............................................................... 278
Objection through refutation.................................................. 278
Objection through refutation.................................................. 278
Objection to the inference of the Illat .................................... 281
Objection to the inference of the Illat .................................... 281
Objection by reversal ............................................................. 282
Objection by reversal ............................................................. 282
The second type of reversal ................................................... 284
The second type of reversal ................................................... 284
Objection by 'Aks .................................................................. 284
Objection by 'Aks .................................................................. 284
Objection by the Illat being inappropriate for the ruling ....... 285
Objection by the Illat being inappropriate for the ruling ....... 285
Objection by disproval ........................................................... 286
Objection by disproval ........................................................... 286
Objection by counteraction .................................................... 286
Objection by counteraction .................................................... 286
Definition of Sabab, Illat and Sharth ..................................... 287
Definition of Sabab, Illat and Sharth ..................................... 287
The ruling will linked to the Illat ........................................... 288
The ruling will linked to the Illat ........................................... 288
A reply to a misconception .................................................... 289
A reply to a misconception .................................................... 289
Sabab will have the meaning of the Illat ............................... 290
Sabab will have the meaning of the Illat ............................... 290
Sabab will take the place of the Illat ...................................... 292
Sabab will take the place of the Illat ...................................... 292
Other than the Sabab can be called the Sabab ....................... 293
Other than the Sabab can be called the Sabab ....................... 293
17
Usool Shaashi
The laws of Shari'ah are affixed to the Sabab ....................... 294
The laws of Shari'ah are affixed to the Sabab ....................... 294
The second method ................................................................ 298
The second method ................................................................ 298
The Sabab for fasting and Zakaat .......................................... 299
The Sabab for fasting and Zakaat .......................................... 299
The Sabab for Hajj ................................................................. 300
The Sabab for Hajj ................................................................. 300
Sabab for Sadaqaatul Fitr....................................................... 300
Sabab for Sadaqaatul Fitr....................................................... 300
Prevention of the Illat and ruling ........................................... 301
Prevention of the Illat and ruling ........................................... 301
Fardh and Waajib ................................................................... 305
Fardh and Waajib ................................................................... 305
Sunnat and Nafl ..................................................................... 306
Sunnat and Nafl ..................................................................... 306
Definition of Azeemat ........................................................... 307
Definition of Azeemat ........................................................... 307
Definition of Rukhsat ............................................................ 308
Definition of Rukhsat ............................................................ 308
Substantiating without proof.................................................. 309
Substantiating without proof.................................................. 309
18
Usool Shaashi
Introduction
َُُ‫ِللُالَّ لذیُُْاَ ْعلیُُ َم ْن لزلَ ُةَُ ْالم ْؤ لمنلیْنَُُبل َک لری لُْمُ لخطَابل لُهُ َو َرفَ َُعُد ََر َج ُةَُ ْال َعالل لمیْن‬
ُ ‫اَ ْل َح ْمدُُ ل‬
‫صابَ لُةُ َوثَ َوابل لُه‬
َ ‫اال‬‫یُ لکتَابل لُهُ َوخَصَُُّ ْالم ْستَ ْنبل لطیْنَُُ لم ْنه ُْمُبل َم لز ْی لُدُ ل‬ُْ ‫بل َم َعانل‬
All praise belongs to ALLAAH, who has elevated the status

of the Mu'mineen by means of his Noble speech and
elevated the rank of the Ulama by(granting them
understanding of)the meaning of His Book (the Quraan). He
has bestowed upon those who extract rulings (of Shariaat)
from amongst them (the Ulama) with increased favour and
reward.
ُْ ‫َوالصَّلوةُُ َعلَیُالنَّبلیُُ َواَصْ َحابل لُهُ َوال َّسالَمُُعَلیُُاَبل‬

ُ‫یُ َحنل ْیفَ ُةَُ َواَحْ بَابل له‬
May peace descend upon His Nabi (Hadhrat Muhammed )
and his Sahabah, and salutations upon Imaam Abu
Hanifahَّ and his students.
The principles of Fiqh
19
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫للالُتَ َعالیُُ َوسنَّةُُ َرسوْ لل لُهُ َوالجْ َماعُُاأل َّم لُة‬ ُ ُُ‫لُ ْالفل ْق لُهُاَرْ بَ َعةُُ لکتَاب‬
َُ ْ‫نُاصو‬ َُّ ‫َوبَعْدُُفَا ل‬
ُ‫نُه لذ لُہُاالَ ْق َس ل‬
َُُ‫امُللی ْعلَ َُمُبلذللك‬ ُْ ‫احدُُ لم‬
‫یُکلُُ َو ل‬ ُ‫الَُب َّدُ لمنَُُ ْالبَحْ ل‬
ُْ ‫ثُفل‬ ُ َ‫َو ْالقلیَاسُُف‬
ُ‫طَ لریْقُُت َْخ لرُْیجُُاالَحْ َک ل‬
‫ام‬
The Usool(principles)of Fiqh(jurisprudence) are four;
1- The Book of ALLAAH (the Quraan),

2- Sunnat of Rasulullaah  (Hadeeth),
3- Ijmaa(consensus)of the Ummat(of Rasulullaah ),
4- Qiyaas(deduction).
It is necessary to research and discuss each of these

Usool(principles)separately so that one will be able to
understand the method in which the Ahkaam(laws)of
Shariaat are derived.
20
Usool Shaashi
Section One
The Book of ALLAAH
‫للال‬
ُ ُ‫ب‬ ُْ ‫اَ ْلبَحْ ثُُاالاَ َّولُُفل‬
ُ‫یُ لکتَا ل‬
The first section, (deals with the methods in which laws are
derived from the) Book of ALLAAH1.
Lesson one
Khaas and Aam
ُ‫اال ْنفل َرا لُدُ َکقَوْ للنَا‬

‫ض َُعُلل َمعْنیُ َمعْلوْ مُُاوُُْللم َس َّمیُُ َمعْلوْ مُُُ َعلَیُ ل‬ ‫فَ ْالخَ اصُُلَ ْفظُُو ل‬
ُ‫ْص‬
ُ‫صی ل‬ ‫یُت َْخ ل‬ ُ‫ْصُالَّنوْ ل‬
ُْ ‫عُ َرجلُُ َوفل‬ ُ‫صی ل‬ ‫یُت َْخ ل‬ ُْ ‫ْصُ ْالفَرْ لُدُزَ یْدُُ َوفل‬ ‫یُت َْخ ل‬
ُ‫صی ل‬ ُْ ‫فل‬
ُ‫ْال لج ْن ل‬
ُ‫سُال ْن َسان‬
Khaas is a word which refers to a specific meaning or

object without referring to anything else. An example of
Khaas of an individual is the name Zaid (this refers
specifically to the individual whose name is Zaid and negates
all other individuals), in specifying a class is the word Man
1
The Book of ALLAAH is the Quraan which ALLAAH Ta'ala revealed to Rasulullaah ,
which has been recorded and narrated with Tawaatur (i.e. it is reported in every generation by
such a large number of people such that it is inconceivable for it to have been a lie.)
21
Usool Shaashi
(this refers specifically to the male gender and not the female
gender) and an example of specifying a species is the word
human (This refers specifically to the human species and not
other species such as animals, etc).
َُُ‫َو ْال َعامُُکلُُلَ ْفظُُیَ ْنت لَظمُُ َج ْمعاُُ لمنَُُاالَ ْف َرا لُدُال َّماُلَ ْفظاُ َکقَوْ للنَاُم ْسللموْ ن‬
ُْ ‫َوم ْش لرکوْ نَُُ َوال َّماُ َمعْنیُُ َکقَوْ للنَاُ َم‬
‫نُ َو َما‬
Aam is a word which refers to a number of individuals or

items of a group (at the same time), either by the word being
plural such as the word Muslimeen or Mushrikeen (which
refers to all of the Muslims or Mushriks at the same time), or
in meaning such as the words َّ‫( َمن‬whoever) and ‫ََّما‬
(whatever).
The ruling of Khaas
ُُ‫نُقَابَلَهُُٗ َخبْر‬
ُْ ‫الَُ َم َحالَ ُةَُفَا ل‬
ُ ُ‫لُبل لُه‬ُ‫بُوجوْ بُُ ْال َع َم ل‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُُ ْالخَ اصُُ لمنَُُ ْال لکتَا ل‬
ُُ‫یُح ْک لُمُ ْالخَ اص‬ ُْ ‫نُتَ ْغیلیْرُُفل‬ ُ‫نُاَ ْم َکنَُُ ْال َج ْمعُُبَ ْینَه َماُبلدوْ ل‬
ُْ ‫ُالقلیَاسُُفَا ل‬ْ ‫اح لُدُاَ لو‬
‫ْال َو ل‬
‫بُ َوی ْت َركُُ َماُیقَابلله‬ ُ‫الَُّی ْع َملُُبل ْال لکتَا ل‬
ُ ‫ی ْع َملُُبل له َماُ َوُال‬
The ruling of Khaas is to practise upon it entirely without

any doubt. If Khabar Wahid (Hadeeth) or Qiyaas
(deduction) comes in opposition to it (a Khaas word of the
Quraan); if it is possible to practice on both (Khabar Wahid
or Qiyaas and the Khaas of the Quraan) without altering the
ruling of Khaas then we will practice on both (Khabar
Wahid or Qiyaas and the Khaas of the Quraan) and if this (to
practice on both Khabar Wahid or Qiyaas without altering the
ruling of Khaas) is not possible then we will practice upon
the Khaas and disregard the Khabar Wahid or Qiyaas.
22
Usool Shaashi
Example one
ُ‫نُلَ ْفظَ ُةَُالثَّلثَ لُة‬ َُّ ‫نُثَلثَ ُةَُقروْ ئُ}ُفَا ل‬ َُّ ‫یُقَوْ لل لُهُتَ َعالیُُ{یَتَ َرب َّصْ نَُُبل اَ ْنف لس له‬ ُْ ‫لمثَالهُُٗفل‬
ُ‫لُاالَ ْق َرائُُ َعلَی‬ َُ ‫ْفُ َعدَدُُ َمعْلوْ مُُفَیَ لجبُُ ْال َع َملُُبل لُهُ َولَوْ ح لم‬ ُ‫ْری ل‬ ‫یُتَع ل‬ ُْ ‫خَ اصُُفل‬
ُ‫ْضُ َوقَ ُْد‬ ُ‫ْرُم َذ َّکرُُدوْ نَُُ ْال َحی ل‬ َُ ‫نُالطه‬ َُّ َ‫ارا‬‫َبُاللَ ْی لُهُال َّشافل لعیُُبلا ْعتلبَ ل‬ َُ ‫ار َک َماُ َذه‬ ْ َ‫اال‬
‫طهَ ل‬
ُ‫ُوُه َو‬ َ ‫لُعَلیُاَنَّهُُٗ َج ْمعُُ ْالم َذ َّک لر‬ ُ‫َو َر َُدُ ْال لکتَابُُفلیُ ْال َج ْم لُعُبللَ ْف ل‬
ُ‫ظُالتَّانل ْی ل‬
َُّ ‫ثُ َد‬
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ُ‫ْر‬ ُ‫نُ َح َملَهُُٗ َعلَیُالطه ل‬ ُْ ‫نُ َم‬ َُّ ‫لُبلهُذَُٗاُ ْالخَ اص لُال‬ ُ‫الطهْرُُلَ لز َُمُتَرْ كُُ ْال َع َم ل‬
ُُ‫ثُ َوُه َوُالَّ لذیُُْ َوقَ َُعُفل ْی لُهُالطَّالَق‬ ُ‫ْضُالثَّالل ل‬ َُ ‫ْنُ َوبَع‬ ُ‫طهَارُُبَلُُْطه َْری ل‬ ْ َ‫یوْ لجبُُثَلثَ ُةَُا‬
An example of this (disregarding Qiyaas for Khaas) is the

verse of the Quraan;
ُ}‫{یَتَ َربَّصْ نَ ُبل اَ ْنف لس له َّنُثَلثَةَُقروْ ئ‬

"Divorced women should wait (should abstain from
remarrying) for three courses (after divorce, called
Iddah)."(Surah Baqarah: 228)
The word "three" is Khaas, representing a (single and)

specific amount (i.e. Three, no more and no less) and it is
therefore compulsory to practice upon it (completely). If we
were to say that the word '‫( 'قروء‬courses) refers to '‫'طهر‬
(purity), as Imaam Shaafie  has, because the word purity
is masculine plural (whereas the word "three" is feminine and
the rule of Arabic grammar is that if a number is feminine then
its subject will be masculine) and not the word Haidh (which
is feminine in usage). The Quraan has used a plural which is
feminine (the word '‫ 'ثلثة‬- three) which proves that its
subject is masculine plural which is '‫'طهر‬- purity, then we
will have to abandon practicing on the Khaas (if we accept
the opinion of Imaam Shaafie  because those who regard it
('‫'قروء‬-courses) to refer to purity will not be able to complete
23
Usool Shaashi
three complete courses of purity but rather it will be two
and a portion of the third, in which the Talaaq was issued.
ُُ‫ْض لُةُالثَّاللثَ لُةُ َوز ََوالهُُٗ َوتَصْ لحیْح‬ َ ‫فَیخَ رَّجُُعَلیُُه َذاُح ْکمُُالرَّجْ َع لُةُفلیُ ْال َحی‬
ُ‫اال ْنفَ ل‬
ُ‫اق‬ ‫نُ َو ل‬ُ‫قُ َو ْال َم ْس َک ل‬ ْ ‫اال‬
ُ‫طالَ ل‬ ُ‫ْرُ َوال ْبطَالهُُٗ َوح ْکمُُ ْال َحب ل‬
‫ْسُ َو ل‬ ُ‫احُ ْال َغی ل‬
ُ‫نل َک ل‬
ُ‫ث‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫جُبلاختلهَاُ َوارْ بَعُُ لس َواهَاُ َواَحْ َک ل‬
ُ‫امُال لمی َْرا ل‬ ُ‫جُال َّزوْ ل‬ ُ‫َو ْالخ ْل لُعُ َوالطالَ ل‬
ُ‫قُ َوتَزَو ل‬ َّ
‫َم َُعُ َک ْث َر لُةُتَ ْعدَا لدهَا‬
As a result of this (difference of opinion), the rulings differ
with regards to reconciliation (between the spouses) in the
third Haidh (Ahnaaf say the husband has the right to
reconcile as she is still in her Iddah) and its termination
(Imaam Shaafie says they cannot reconcile because her Iddah
has terminated), permissibility of marrying another (in the
third Haidh, which according to Imaam Shaafie َّ is
permissible because her Iddah has terminated)and its
impermissibility (according to Ahnaaf because she is still in
her iddah), the ruling of remaining in the house of iddah
(according to Ahnaaf she cannot leave the house of Iddah as
she is still in her iddah) or leaving (according to Imaam
Shaafie َّher Iddah has terminated and she can therefore leave
the house).(There is also a difference of opinion; whether is it
compulsory to provide)Housing and maintenance (according
to Ahnaaf it is Waajib because she is still in Iddah whereas
Imaam Shaafie says it is not as her Iddah has terminated),
(permissibility of) Khul'a and Talaaq (Ahnaaf say Khul'a can
be made as well as another Talaaq issued as she is still in
Iddah whereas Imaam Shaafie َّ says it is not permissible),
marrying the sister of the wife or a fourth besides her
(Imaam Shaafie َّ says it is permissible as her Iddah has
terminated and as a result is no longer his spouse thus making
it permissible for him to marry her sister and take a fourth wife
as opposed to Ahnaaf who say it is impermissible because she
is still his spouse on account of her Iddah still being
24
Usool Shaashi
incomplete), as well as the many rulings with regards to
inheritance (Ahnaaf say that if anyone of them pass away in
the third Haidh then the other will inherit as before the
termination of the Iddah they remain married whereas Imaam
Shaafie َّ says they will not inherit from each other as her
Iddah has already terminated).
Example Two
ُُ‫اج له ُْم}ُخَ اص‬ ‫َو َکذللكَُُقَوْ لهُُٗتَ َعالیُ{ُقَ ُْدُ َعلل ْمنَاُ َماُفَ َرضْ نَاُ َعلَی لْہ ُْمُفلیُُاَ ْز َو ل‬
ُُ‫ارُاَنَّهُُٗ َع ْقدُُ َماللیُُفَی ْعتَبَر‬ُ‫الَُی ْت َركُُ ْال َع َملُُبل لُهُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬
ُ َ‫ْرُال َّشرْ لعیُُف‬ ُ‫فلیُالتَّ ْق لدی ل‬
ُ‫یُال َّزوْ َجی ل‬
ُ‫ْنُ َک َما‬ ُ‫الُفل ْی لُهُ َموْ کوْ الُُاللیُ َرا ل‬ ُ‫بل ْالعقوْ لُدُ ْال َماللیَّ لُةُفَیَکوْ نُُتَـْ ْق لدیْرُُ ْال َم ل‬
ُ‫َذ َک َرہُُال َّشافل لعیُُ َر لح َمہُُللاُُتَ َعالی‬
Similarly (another example of disregarding Qiyaas for Khaas)
is the verse of the Quraan;
‫{ُقَ ْدُ َعلل ْمنَاُ َماُفَ َرضْ نَاُ َعلَی لْہ ْمُفلیُاَ ْز َو ل‬
}‫اج له ْم‬
"Indeed We are aware of what (injunctions) We have
stipulated (especially) for them (the Mu'mineen) with
regards to their wives."(Surah Ahzaab: 50)
(the words "We have stipulated) is Khaas (specific) in the

stipulation of the amount of Mehr (dowry) and therefore we
will not abandon practicing on it by making Qiyaas
(deducing) that it is the same as a monetary transaction and
thus regard it as such by leaving the stipulation of Mehr to
the opinion of the spouses, as Imaam Shaafie  has.
ُ‫َالُبلالنَّ َک ل‬
ُ‫اح‬ ُ‫ضلُُ لمنَُُ لاال ْشتلغ ل‬ َ ‫لُ ْال لعبَا َد لُةُاَ ْف‬
ُ‫یُللنَ ْف ل‬
َُ ‫انُالتَّخَ ل‬
َُّ ُ‫عُعَلیُُه َذا‬ َُ ‫َُوُفَ َّر‬
َُ َ‫نُ َج ْمعُُ َُّوُتَ ْف لریْقُُ َواَب‬
ُ‫اح‬ ُْ ‫قُ َکیْفَُُ َما َشاُ َُءُال َّزوْ جُُ لم‬ ُ‫احُال ْبطَالَهُُٗبلالطَّالَ ل‬ َُ َ‫َواَب‬
‫ْخُبل ْالخ ْل لُع‬
ُ‫ابالُُلل ْلفَس ل‬
ُ ‫احُقَ ل‬ُ‫لُ َع ْق َُدُالن َک ل‬ َُ ‫احدَةُُ َُوُ َج َع‬‫ثُج ْملَةُُ َو ل‬ ُ‫الُالثَّل ل‬
َُ ‫الرْ َس‬
25
Usool Shaashi
As a result of this (Imaam Shaafie  equating Nikaah to a
monetary transaction he says that)remaining engaged in Nafl
Ibaadat is superior to performing Nikaah, and it is
permissible (for the husband to) terminate the Nikaah with
Talaaq in whichever manner he desires either by issuing
them all at once (in one period of purity as opposed to Ahnaaf
who regard such a Talaaq as Bid'ah) or separate (one in each
consecutive period of purity) or even all three (Talaaq) at
once (is regarded as permissible by Imaam Shaafie َّ as
opposed to Ahnaaf who regard the one who issues such a
Talaaq as a heinous sinner). (In addition since Imaam Shaafie
َّ has equated Nikaah to a monetary transaction he says
that)The contract of Nikaah is annulled by Khul'a (whereas
Ahnaaf say that Khul'a is a Talaaq-Baa'in).
Example three
ُ‫یُوجوْ لُد‬ ُْ ‫حُزَ وْ جاُُ َغی َْرہُٗ}ُخَ اصُُفل‬ َُ ‫َو َکذللكَُُقَوْ لهُُٗتَ َعالیُُ{ َحتیُتَ ْن لک‬
ُ‫َنُالنَّبلیُُ َعلَ ْی لُهُال َّسالَمُُ’’اَی َما‬
ُ‫یُع ل‬ ُ َ‫احُ لمنَُُال َمرْ اَ لُةُف‬
َُ ‫الَُی ْت َركُُ ْال َع َملُُبل َماُر لو‬ ُ‫الن َک ل‬
ُ‫اطل‬
‫اطلُُبَ ل‬‫اطلُُبَ ل‬ ‫نُ َوللیهَاُفَنَ لکاحهَاُبَ ل‬ ْ
ُ‫ْرُالذ ل‬ُ‫تُنَ ْف َسهَاُبل َغی ل‬ َ
ُْ ‫ال ْم َراةُُنَ َک َح‬
Similarly (an example of disregarding Khabar Wahid for
Khaas) is the verse of the Quraan,
‫{حتیُتَ ْن ل‬
}‫ک َحُزَ وْ جاُ َغی َْرہ‬ َ
"(If he divorced her the third time then she is not lawful for
him thereafter) until she marries another husband." (Surah
Baqarah: 230)
(the words "She marries" is Khaas which means that the

person who actually contracts the marriage is the woman)
which is Khaas in Nikaah being correct if carried out by a
woman so we will not abandon acting on it (Khaas) because
of what has been narrated from Rasulullaah , "Whichever
26
Usool Shaashi
women will perform her Nikaah without the permission of
her Walie (father or Shar'ie representative) then her Nikaah
is invalid, invalid, invalid"(as Imaam Shaafie  has).
ُ‫ْرُ َوالنَّفَقَ لُةُ َوالس ْکنی‬ ُ‫یُ َولزوْ لُمُ ْال َمه ل‬ ْ ‫یُ َحلُُ ْال َو‬
ُ‫ط لا‬ ُْ ‫َویَتَفَرَّعُُ لم ْنهُُ ْال لخ َالفُُفل‬
ُ‫َبُاللَ ْی لُهُق َد َما َُء‬
َُ ‫ثُعَلیُ َما َذه‬ ُ‫تُالثَّل ل‬ُ‫حُبَع َُدُالطَّلَقَا ل‬ ُ‫قُ َوالنکا َ ل‬ ُ‫عُالطَّالَ ل‬ ُ‫َو َوقوْ ل‬
ْ
‫َارہُُالمتَاخروْ نَُُ لمنه ُْم‬ْ ْ
َ ‫فُ َماُاخت‬ ُ‫اصْ َحابل لُهُبل لخالَ ل‬ َ
As a result of this (difference of opinion that a woman can

perform her own Nikaah according to Ahnaaf but according to
Imaam Shaafie  the Nikaah is invalid) there is difference of
opinion regarding the permissibility of intercourse (Ahnaaf
say it is permissible as the Nikaah is valid but according to
Imaam Shaafie  intercourse is impermissible as the Nikaah is
invalid), incumbency of Mehr (dowry), maintenance and
housing (Ahnaaf say it is compulsory on account of the Nikaah
being valid and Imaam Shaafie  says it is not as the Nikaah is
invalid), whether Talaaq is valid (according to Ahnaaf it is
valid whereas Imaam Shaafie َّsays it is not as the Nikaah is
invalid), and(if)Nikaah (with the same person is valid) after
issuing three Talaaq(in this Nikaah) according to the
opinion of the earlier Shaafie scholars (Ahnaaf say Nikaah is
only permissible after 'Halalah', i.e. she marries another
person, consummates the marriage and is divorced after which
it will be permissible for her to remarry the first husband,
whereas Imaam Shaafie  and the earlier scholars of the
Shaafie Madhab on account of the Nikaah being invalid say the
three Talaaq did not apply and it is therefore permissible for
her to marry)as opposed to the stance adopted by the latter
Shaafie scholars (who hold the same view as Ahnaaf that it is
only permissible for her to remarry the first husband after
'Halalah').
27
Usool Shaashi
Definition of Aam
ُُ‫َانُعَامُُخصَُُّ َع ْنهُُ ْالبَعْضُُ َوعَامُُلَمُیخَصَُُّ َع ْنهُُ َشئُُفَ ْال َعام‬ ُ‫َواَ َّماُ ْال َعامُُفَنَوْ ع ل‬
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ُ‫لُبل لُه‬ُ‫یُ َحقُُلزوْ لُمُ ْال َع َم ل‬
ُْ ‫الَّ لذیُُْلَ ُْمُیخَصَُُّ َع ْنهُُ َشئُُفَه َُوُبل َم ْن لزلَ لُةُ ْالخَ اصُُفل‬
َُ‫م َحالَ ُة‬
Aam (A word which refers to a number of individuals or items
of a group at the same time) is of two types; (the first is) Aam
in which some of it (the individuals or items of the group)
have been excluded and (the second is) Aam in which
nothing (none of its individuals or items) have been excluded.
Aam Ghair Makhsoosul Ba'adh
ُ‫یُ َحقُُلزوْ لُمُ ْال َع َم ل‬

ُ‫ل‬ ُْ ‫فَ ْال َعامُُالَّ لذیُُْلَ ُْمُیخَصَُُّ َع ْنهُُ َشئُُفَه َُوُبل َم ْن لزلَ لُةُ ْالخَ اصُُفل‬
َُ‫الَُم َحالَ ُة‬ ُ ُ‫بل لُه‬
The(the ruling for) Aam in which nothing has been
excluded(known as 'Aam Ghair Makhsoosul Ba'adh) is the
same as Khaas in that it is incumbent to practise upon it
entirely without any doubt.
Example One
ُُ‫الَُیَ لجب‬ُ ُُٗ‫قُبَ ْع َُدُ َماُهَلَكَُُ ْال َمسْروْ قُُ لع ْندَہ‬ ‫َوعَلیُه َذاُق ْلنَاُال َذاُق لط َُعُیَدُُالس ل‬
ُ‫َّار ل‬
ُ‫نُ َکلل َم ُةَُ َما‬
َُّ ‫َّارقُُفَا ل‬‫ط َُعُ َجزَاءُُ َج لمی لُْعُ َماُا ْکتَ َسبَهُُالس ل‬ ْ َ‫نُ ْالق‬ َّ ‫َعلَ ْی لُهُال‬
َُّ َ‫ض َمانُُال‬
ُُ‫انُیَکوْ ن‬ ُ‫ض َم ل‬ َّ ‫بُال‬ ُ‫قُ َُوُبلتَ ْق لدی ل‬
ُ‫ْرُالی َْجا ل‬ ُ‫َّار ل‬ َ ‫عَا َّمةُُیَتَن‬
‫َاولُُ َج لم ْی َُعُ َماُو لج َُدُ لمنَُُالس ل‬
ُ‫َض ل‬
‫ب‬ ْ
َ ‫اسُ َعلیُالغ‬ َ ْ ْ ْ
ُ‫الَُیت َركُُال َع َملُُبل لُهُبلالقلیَ ل‬ ُ ‫ْال َجزَ اءُُه َُوُال َمجْ موْ عُُ َو‬
ْ
Based upon this (That 'Aam Ghair Makhsoosul Ba'adh' is the

same as Khaas in that it is incumbent to practise upon it
entirely without any doubt) we say, when the hand of a thief
is cut after the stolen item has been lost, then 'Dhamaan (to
claim the value of the stolen goods from the thief) will not be
28
Usool Shaashi
Waajib because cutting the hand of the thief is punishment
for all the crimes the thief has committed as the word '‫'ما‬
(in the verse,
ُ"ُ‫َّارقَةُفَا ْقطَعوْ اُاَ ْی لدیَه َماُ َجزَ اءُُبل َماُ َك َسبَا‬

‫َّارقَُ َوالس ل‬
‫"ُالس ل‬
As for the male and female thief, cut of their (right) hands as
punishment for what (all) they earn {from the sin of stealing})is
Aam and includes all (the crimes) that the thief perpetrated
and in making 'Dhamaan' Waajib, the punishment (instead
of being one) will be increased (as then the punishment will be
two; cutting off the hand and 'Dhamaan'). We will not
abandon practicing on it (the general and comprehensive
nature of Aam, that cutting off the hand is the punishment for
all his crimes) by making Qiyaas (comparing it) to Ghasab
(forceful seizure, hijacking, etc, as Imaam Shaafie has).
Proof that '‫ 'ما‬is Aam
َُ َ‫نُ َکلل َم ُةَُ َماُعَا َُّمةُُ َماُ َذ َک َرہُُٗم َح َّمدُُ َر لح َمهُُللاُُتَ َعالیُال َذاُق‬
ُ‫ال‬ َُّ َ‫َوال َّدللیْلُُعَلیُا‬
َ ْ
ُُ‫َتُغالَما‬ُْ ‫تُحرَّةُُفَ َولَد‬ ُ‫كُغ َالماُفَ ا ْن ل‬ ُ‫یُبَطنل ل‬ُْ ‫نُ َکانَُُ َماُفل‬ ‫ْال َموْ لیُُلل َج ل‬
ُْ ‫اریَتل لُهُال‬
ُُ‫الَُت ْعتَق‬
ُ ُُ‫اریَة‬
‫َو َج ل‬
The proof that the word '‫ 'ما‬is Aam is what Imaam
Muhammed  has mentioned, "If a master tells his female
slave, "If what (all) is in your womb is a boy then you are
free" and then gives birth to (twins) a boy and a girl then
she will not be set free (because the word '‫ 'ما‬includes and
refers to all and everything that is in her womb).
29
Usool Shaashi
Example Two
ُْ ‫آن}ُفَالنَّهُُٗعَامُُفل‬
ُ‫ی‬ ُ‫یُقَوْ لل لُهُتَ َعالیُُ{فَا ْق َراوْ اُ َماُتَیَس ََّر لمنَُُ ْالقرْ ل‬ ُْ ‫َُوُبل لم ْثلل لُهُنَقوْ لُُفل‬
ُ‫ازُعَلیُقل َراَ لُة‬ ُ‫فُ ْال َج َو ل‬ ُ‫ضروْ َرتل لُهُ َع ْدمُُت ََوق ل‬ َ ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫آنُ َو لم‬ُ‫َّرُ لمنَُُ ْالقرْ ل‬
َُ ‫َج لمی لُْعُ َماُتَیَس‬
ْ
ُ‫بُفَ َع لملنَاُبل له َما‬ ْ
ُ‫الَُّبلفَاتل َح لُةُال لکتَا ل‬
ُ ‫صلَوُ ُةَُال‬ َ َُ‫ال‬ َُ َ ‫ْالفَاتل َح لُةُ َو َجاُ َُءُفلیُالخَ بَ لراَن َّ ُهَُقا‬
ُ ُ‫ل‬ ْ
ُ‫ال‬ُ‫یُ ْال َک َم ل‬ ُ‫لُ ْالخَ بَ َُرُعَلیُنَ ْف ل‬ َُ ‫نُنَحْ لم‬ ُْ َ‫بُبل ا‬ ُ‫الَُیَتَ َغیَّرُُبل لُهُح ْکمُُ ْال لکتَا ل‬ ُ ُُ‫عَلیُ َوجْ ه‬
ُ‫اجبَةُُبلح ْک لُم‬ ْ َ
‫بُ َوقل َراةُُالفَاتل َح لُةُ َو ل‬ ْ َ ْ ْ
ُ‫َحتیُیَکوْ نَُُمطلَقُُالقل َرا لُةُفَرْ ضاُبلح ْک لُمُال لکتَا ل‬
‫ْالخَ بَ لُر‬
In a similar manner we say regarding the verse,
ْ َ‫{فَا ْق َراوْ اُ َماُتَیَس ََّر لمن‬

‫ُالقرْ ل‬
}‫آن‬
"Recite that which is easy."(Surah Muzzammil: 20)
That it is Aam and includes the entire Quraan whichever

may be easy (for the Musallee to read) and from its
requisites (of Aam) the permissibility of Salaah will not be
dependent upon the recitation of Surah Faatihah (as Imaam
Shaafie  has stated, i.e. Surah Faatihah will not be Fardh as
the verse above states that any portion of the Quraan which the
Musallee finds easy to read is Fardh). It has come in Hadeeth
that Rasulullaah has said, "There is no Salaah without
the recitation of Surah Faatihah" which we will practice
upon in conjunction with the verse in a manner that will
not change the order of the Quraan (which permits recitation
of any portion of the Quraan) by concluding that the
Hadeeth negates perfection (that Salaah is not perfect or
complete without Surah Faatihah even though valid) such that
reciting any portion of the Quraan will be Fardh in
accordance with the order of the Quraan and reciting
Surah Faatihah will be Waajib in accordance with the
Hadeeth.
30
Usool Shaashi
Example Three
ُ ُ ُ‫الَُتَ اکلوْ ا ُ لم َّما ُلَ ُْم ُی ْذ َک لر ُاسْم‬

ُُٗ‫للال ُ َعلَ ْی لُه} ُالنَّه‬ ُ ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالیُ{ُ َو‬ ُْ ‫َوق ْلنَا ُ َکذللكَُ ُفل‬
ُُ‫ك ُالتَّ ْس لمیَ لُة ُعَا لمداُ ُ َو َجاُ َُء ُفلی ُ ْالخَ بَ لراَنَّهُٗ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَم‬ ُ‫یوْ لجبُ ُحرْ َم ُةَ ُ َم ْتروْ ل‬
ُ‫ب‬ ْ
ُ‫للال ُتَ َعالیُ ُفلی ُقَل ل‬ُ ُ َ‫ن ُتَ ْس لمیَ ُة‬َُّ ‫ال ُکلوْ ہُ ُفَا ل‬ ُ‫َن ُ َم ْتروْ ل‬
َُ َ‫ك ُالتَّ ْس لمیَ لُة ُعَا لمداُ ُفَق‬ ُْ ‫ل ُع‬ َُ ‫سئل‬
ْ
ُ‫ق ُبَ ْینَه َما ُ لالَنَّهُٗ ُلَوُْ ُثَبَتَُ ُال لحلُ ُبلتَرْ لکهَا‬ َُ ‫الَ ُی ْم لکنُ ُالتَّوْ فل ْی‬ُ َ‫امراُ ُم ْسللمُ ُف‬
َ ُ ُ‫کل‬
ْ
ُ‫بُفَی ْت َركُُالخَ بَر‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫عَا لمداُُلَثَبَتَُُال لحلُُبلتَرْ لکهَاُنَا لسیاُُفَ لح ْینَئلذُُیَرْ تَفلعُُح ْکمُُال لکتَا ل‬
In a similar manner we say regarding the verse,
}‫ُٗ{ُ َوالَُتَ اکلوْ اُ لم َّماُلَ ْمُی ْذ َک لرُاسْمُللالُ َعلَ ْی له‬

"Do not eat from (the meat of) that (animal) on which
ALLAAH's name was not taken (when it was slaughtered)."
(Surah An'aam: 121)
(That it is Aam and) forbids that (all meat) on which
ALLAAH's name was omitted intentionally (even if it is
slaughtered by a Muslim). It has been mentioned in Hadeeth
that Rasulullaah was asked about (the animal on which)
ALLAAH's name (is) not taken intentionally (when
slaughtering) and he replied, "Eat! For undoubtedly Allah's
name is in the heart of every Muslim"(because of which
Imaam Shaafie  says; if a Muslim intentionally omits
Tasmiyyah then too the meat is Halaal). It is not possible to
reconcile between the verse of the Quraan and Hadeeth
because if it is proven that it (the meat) is Halaal when
(Tasmiyyah- Allah's name is) omitted intentionally then it
will (most certainly) be proven to be Halaal when omitted
unintentionally and this would result in the verse of the
Quraan being abandoned (entirely, which is why), the
Hadeeth will be disregarded (and the animal on which
ALLAAH's name has been omitted intentionally will be
regarded as Haraam).
31
Usool Shaashi
Example Four
ُ‫ی ُبلعموْ لم لُه‬ ُْ ‫َض‬ َ ْ‫ی ُاَر‬

‫ض ْعنَک ُْم ُ} ُیَ ْقت ل‬ ُ ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُقَوْ لهُٗ ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{ َواَ َّمهَاتکمُ ُال‬
ُْ ‫الَّ ُتل‬
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫صتَا ل‬ َّ ‫الَُ ْال َم‬
ُ ‫الَُتَحْ لرمُُ ْال َمصَّةُُ َو‬
ُ ُ‫ض َع لُةُ َوقَ ُْدُ َجا َُءُفلیُ ْالخَ بَ لُر‬ ‫احُ ْالمرْ ل‬ ُ‫حرْ َم ُةَُنل َک ل‬
َُّ‫اال ْمالَ َجةُُ َو ُالَُ لاال ْمالَ َجتَا لُنُفَلَ ُْمُی ْم لک لُنُالتَّوْ فل ْی َُقُبَ ْینَه َماُفَی ْت َركُُالخَ بَر‬
ْ ‫الَُ ل‬ ُ ‫َو‬
Similarly is the verse,
َ ْ‫{واَ َّمهَاتکمُالالَُّتل ْیُاَر‬

}ُ‫ض ْعنَک ْم‬ َ
"(Also Haraam for you to marry is) Your suckling mothers
(those women who breastfed you before you turned two years
of age. All the daughters, granddaughters, sisters, aunts,
mothers, and grandmothers of the suckling mother may also
not marry the child she breastfed)." (Surah Nisaa: 23)
The general connotation of which dictates that it is

impermissible for one to marry the woman who breastfed
him (in all circumstances). It has been reported in Hadeeth,
"Sucking once or twice does not establish Hurmat
(impermissibility to marry) nor does inserting (the nipple)
once or twice (in the mouth establish impermissibility to
marry). Since it is not possible to reconcile the verse of the
Quran with the Hadeeth we will disregard the Hadeeth
(and say that it is impermissible to marry one's suckling
mother even if one sucked only once or twice as opposed to
Imaam Shaafie  who says that Hurmat is only established
after drinking five gulps).
Aam Makhsoosul Ba'adh

ْ ‫َوُاَ َّم‬
ُ‫اُال َعامُُالَّ لذیُُْخصَُُّ َع ْنهُُ ْالبَعْضُُفَح ْکمهُُاَنَّهُُٗیَ لجبُُ ْال َع َملُُبل لُهُفلی‬
ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫االحْ تل َما ل‬ ُْ ‫ْالبَاقل‬
‫یُ َم َُعُ ل‬
32
Usool Shaashi
As far as the Aam in which some of it (the individuals or
items of the group) have been excluded (known as Aam
Makhsoosul Ba'adh) its ruling is that it is Waajib to practice
upon it for the rest (of those who have not been excluded)
with the probability that the others may be excluded as
well.
‫صیْصهُٗ ُبلخَ بَ لُر ُ ْال َو ل‬

ُ‫اح لُد‬ ُْ ‫ْص ُ ْالبَاقل‬
‫ی ُیَجوْ زُ ُت َْخ ل‬ ُ‫صی ل‬ ‫فَا ل َذا ُقَا َُم ُال َّدللی َْلُٗ ُعَلی ُت َْخ ل‬
ُ ُ‫الَُیَجوْ زُُفَیَ لجبُُ ْال َع َملُُبل لُه‬ ُْ َ‫اسُاللیُا‬
ُ َُُ‫نُیَّبْقیُالثَّلثُُ َوُُبَ ْع َُدُذللك‬ ُ‫َو ْالقلیَ ل‬
Thus if proof is established which excludes the rest then it

will be permissible to exclude it with Khabar Wahid
(Hadeeth) or Qiyaas as long as three (individuals or items)
are left (under the ruling of Aam) after that is will not be
permissible to exclude any other from it and it will be
Waajib to practice on it (the Aam Makhsoosul Ba'adh in
which its constituents have been removed until only three
remain).
َُ ‫َنُ ْالج ْملَ لُةُلَوُُْاَ ْخ َر‬

ُ‫ج‬ َُ ‫جُ ْالبَع‬
ُ‫ْضُع ل‬ َُ ‫صُالَّ لذیُُْاَ ْخ َر‬َُ ‫نُ ْالمخَص‬ َُّ ‫َوالنَّ َماُ َجازَُُذللكَُُ لال‬
َ
ُُ‫یُکلُُفَرْ دُُم َعیَّنُُفَ َجازَُُانُیَّکوْ نَُُبَاقلیا‬ ُْ ‫االحْ تَ َمالُُفل‬ ‫بَعْضاُ َمجْ هوْ الُُیَ ْثبتُُ ل‬
ُُ‫صُفَا ْستَوی‬ ُ‫ْلُ ْالخصوْ ل‬ ُ‫َاخالُُتَحْ تَُُ َدللی ل‬‫نُیَکوْ نَُُد ل‬ َ
ُْ ‫تَحْ تَُُح ْک لُمُ ْال َعامُُ َُوُ َجازَ ا‬
ُ‫یُ َحقُُ ْالم َعیَّ ل‬
‫ن‬ ُْ ‫انُفل‬ُ‫الطَّرْ فَ ل‬
This exclusion (excluding individuals or items with Khabar
Wahid or Qiyaas after some have been excluded by a Qath'ie
proof- regarding which there is no doubt to its authenticity and
meaning) is permissible because the proof which excluded
some of the unknown constituents (individuals or items that
are included in it) from Aam establishes the probability that
certain known constituents may be excluded as well. (The
explanation of this is) It is permissible that the constituent
(individual or item) is still included under the ruling of Aam
(that the ruling still applies to it as it has not been excluded) or
it is permissible to included the constituent (individual or
33
Usool Shaashi
item) in the proof of exclusion (and say that it too has been
excluded from the ruling). Thus for each known individual
(or item) both sides (i.e. to either remain under Aam or be
excluded by the proof) is the same.
ُ‫لُتَحْ تَُُ َدللی ل‬

ُ‫ْل‬ ُْ ‫فَا َذاُقَا َُمُال َّدللیْلُُال َّشرْ لعیُُعَلیُاَنَّهُُٗ لم‬
َُ َ‫نُج ْملَ لُةُ َماُ َدخ‬
‫ْص لُه‬
‫صی ل‬ ‫َّحُ َجانلبُُت َْخ ل‬ ُ‫ْالخصوْ ل‬
َُ ‫صُت ََرج‬
Thus when a Shar'ie proof has been established that it is

included in the proof which excludes it from the ruling then
the side of exclusion will be given preference (and the
individual or item will be excluded from the ruling of Aam).
َُُ‫ن ُیَکوْ ن‬ُْ َ‫َن ُ ْالج ْملَ لُة ُ َجازَُ ُا‬ ُ‫ج ُبَعْضا ُ َمعْلوْ ماُ ُع ل‬ َُ ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُ ْالمخَ صصُ ُاَ ْخ َر‬ ُْ ‫َوال‬
ُ‫َمعْلوْ الُ ُبل لعلَّةُ ُ ُ َموْ جوْ َُدۃُٗ ُفلی ُه َذا ُ ْالفَرْ لُد ُ ْالم َعی ل‬
ُُ‫َّن ُفَا ل َذا ُقَا َُم ُال َّدللیْلُ ُال َّشرْ لعی‬
‫َّح ُ لجهَةُ ُت َْخ ل‬
ُ‫ص ْی ل‬
ُ‫ص لُه‬ َُ ‫َّن ُت ََرج‬ ُ‫ی ُ َغی لُْر ُه َذا ُ ْالُفَرْ لُد ُ ْالم َعی ل‬ُْ ‫عَلی ُوجوْ لُد ُتل ْلكَُ ُ ْال لعلَّ لُة ُفل‬
‫فَی ْع َملُُبلهُ َم َعُوجوْ لد ْ ل‬
ُ‫ُاالحْ تل َما ل‬
‫ل‬
If the proof which excludes part of its known constituents

(individuals or items) from its ruling then it is possible it is
because of a specific illat (property or characteristic) found
in that individual (or item) and if Shar'ie proof is
established which proves that the very same Illat (property
or characteristic) is found in another besides this specific
individual (in whom the Illat was found) then we will given
preference to it being excluded (i.e. it too does not fall under
the ruling or Aam and has been excluded from its ruling) and
we will practice on (the remaining constituents of) Aam
(Makhsoosul Ba'adh) with the probability that more may be
excluded.
Lesson on Mutlaq and Muqayyad
34
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫للال‬
ُ ُ‫ب‬ ُْ ‫قُ لم‬
ُ‫نُ لکتَا ل‬ ْ ‫نُ ْالم‬
َُ َ‫طل‬ َُّ َ‫َبُاَصْ َحابنَاُاللیُُا‬ َُ ‫فصلُُفیُالمطلقُوالمقیدُ َذه‬
ُ‫اح لُدُ َُوُ ْالقلیَ ل‬
ُ َ ُ‫اس‬
ُ‫ال‬ ْ ‫تَ َعالیُُال َذاُاَ ْم َکنَُُ ْال َع َملُُبلا ل‬
ُ‫ط َالقل لُهُفَالزیَادَةُُ َعلَ ْی لُهُبلخَ بَ لُرُ ْال َو ل‬
ُ‫یَجوْ ز‬
Our scholars (scholars of the Hanafi Madhab) have taken the
stance that if it is possible to practice upon the Mutlaq (a
word having a specific meaning that does not have a restrictive
clause attached to it) of the Quraan unrestrictedly (without
adding any clause to it) then it is not permissible to add to it
(add a clause to it) using Khabar Wahid (Hadeeth) or
Qiyaas.
Note: - Muqayyad is a word having a specific meaning that has

a restrictive clause attached to it.
Example One
ُ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{فَا ْغ لسلوْ اوجوْ هَک ُْم} ُفَ ْال َما ُموْ ر ُبل لُه ُه َُو ُ ْال َغسْلُ ُعَلی‬ ُْ ‫لمثَالهُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ب ُ َو ْالموْ َال لُة ُ َوالتَّ ْس لمیَ لُة ُبل ْال َخبَ لُر‬ ُ‫الَ ُیزَ ادُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُشَرْ طُ ُالنیَّ لُة ُ َوالتَّرْ تل ْی ل‬
ُ َ‫ق ُف‬
ُ‫ط َال ل‬ْ ‫لاال‬
ُُ‫ب ُفَیقَالُ ُ ْال َغسْل‬ ُ‫ال ُیَتَ َغیَّرُ ُبل لُه ُح ْکمُ ُ ْال لکتَا ل‬ ُ َ ُ ُ‫ن ُی ْع َملُ ُبل ْال َخبَ لُر ُعَلی ُ َوجْ ه‬ُْ ‫َول لک‬
‫بُ َوالنیَّةُُسنَّةُُبلح ْک لُمُ ْالخَ بَ لُر‬ ُ‫طلَقُُفَرْ ضُُبلح ْک لُمُ ْال لکتَا ل‬ ْ ‫ْالم‬
An example of this (that it is not permissible to add a clause

to the Mutlaq of the Quraan using Khabar Wahid or Qiyaas
when it is possible to practice on it unrestrictedly) is the verse
(of Wudhu),
}‫{فَا ْغ لسلوْ اوجوْ هَک ْم‬
"Wash your faces" (Surah Maa'idah: 6)
Ghusal with no additional clauses has been ordered in this

verse so we will not add to it the clause of Niyyat (to make
intention for Wudhu as Imaam Shaafie  has), Tarteeb (to
35
Usool Shaashi
make Wudhu in the correct sequence as Imaam Shaafie  has),
Muwaalaat(to wash each part before the previous one dries as
Imaam Maalik  has) and Tasmiyyah(to recite Bismillaah as
Imaam Dawood Thaahirie َّhas , and say they are Fardh when
making wudhu as the Quraan has ordered one to wash without
any additional clauses or restrictions) using Khabar Wahid.
Instead we act upon the Khabar Wahid (Hadeeth) in such a
manner that will not alter the ruling of the Quraan so we
will say that that washing the face, etc is Fardh in
accordance with the ruling of the Quraan and Niyyat (as
well as Tarteeb, Muwaalaat and Tasmiyyah) is Sunnat in
accordance with Khabar Wahid (Hadeeth).
Example Two
َُ‫احدُُم ْنہ َماُ لمائَ ُة‬ ‫لُ َو ل‬ َُّ ‫یُفَاجْ للدوْ اُک‬ ُْ ‫یُقَوْ لل لُهُتَ َعالیُُ{اَل َّزانلیَةُُ َوال َّزانل‬ ُْ ‫َو َکذللكَُُق ْلنَاُفل‬
ُ َ َ‫ل ُ َج ْل َُد ُ ْال لمائَ لُة ُ َحداُ ُلللزنَا ُف‬
ُ‫ال ُیزَ ادُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُالتَّ ْغ لریْبُْ ُ َحدا‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْال لکت‬
َُ ‫َاب ُ َج َع‬ َُّ ‫َج ْلدَةُ}ُال‬
ُ‫للقَوْ لل لُهُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَمُ ُاَ ْلبل ْکرُ ُبل ُْالبل ْک لُر ُ َج ْلدُ ُ لمائَةُُ َُوُتَ ْغ لریْبُُعَامُُبَلُْ ُی ْع َملُ ُبل ْال َخبَ لُر‬
ُ‫ب ُفَیَکوْ نُ ُ ْال َج ْلدُ ُ َحداُ ُشَرْ لعیاُ ُبلح ْک لُم‬ ُ‫الَ ُیَتَ َغیَّرُ ُبل لُه ُح ْکمُ ُ ْال لکتَا ل‬
ُ ُ ُ‫عَلی ُ َوجْ ه‬
‫بُ َوالتَّ ْغ لریْبُُ َم ْشروْ عاُُ لسیَا َسةُُبلح ْک لُمُ ْالخَ بَ لُر‬ ُ‫ْال لکتَا ل‬
Similarly (just as in the example above where the Mutlaq of

the Quraan was not changed by Khabar Wahid) we say
regarding the verse,
}‫ُج ْلدَة‬
َ َ‫احدُم ْنہ َماُ لمائَة‬ َ ‫ُوال َّزانل ْیُفَاجْ للدوْ اُکل‬
‫َُّو ل‬ َ ‫{اَل َّزانلیَة‬
"The (unmarried) female and male who commit fornication
should both be given a hundred lashes (when the act of
fornication is conclusively proven in a court of Shari'ah)."
(Surah Noor: 2)
The Quraan has made one hundred lashes the punishment

for Zinaa (fornication) so we will not add exile to it as a
36
Usool Shaashi
punishment (as the verse is Mutlaq, not having any additional
clauses or restrictions) from the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah ;
"If an unmarried man fornicates with an unmarried
woman then give them both a hundred lashes and exile
them"(as Imaam Shaafie َّَّ has). Instead we will practice on
the Hadeeth in a manner that will not add to the ruling of
the Quraan by one hundred lashes being the Shar'ie
punishment in accordance with the Quraan and exile
permissible under certain circumstances in accordance
with the Hadeeth (thus the Mutlaq of the Quraan will not have
any additional clauses added to it as is the viewpoint of
Ahnaaf).
Example Three
ُ‫ی ُم َس َّمی‬ ُْ ‫طلَقُ ُفل‬ْ ‫ْق} ُم‬ ُ‫ت ُ ْال َعتلی ل‬ُ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُقَوْ لهُٗ ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{ ُ َو ْلیَطَّ َّوفوْ ا ُبل ْالبَ ْی ل‬
ُ‫الَ ُیزَ ادُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُشَرْ طُ ُ ْالوضوُْ لُء ُبل ْال َخبَ لُر ُبَلُْ ُی ْع َملُ ُبل لُه ُعَلی‬ ُ َ‫ت ُف‬ُ‫اف ُبل ْالبَ ْی ل‬
ُ‫الطَّ َو ل‬
ُ‫اف ُفَرْ ضا ُبلح ْک لُم‬ ُ‫طلَقُ ُالطَّ َو ل‬ ْ ‫ن ُیَکوْ نَُ ُم‬ َ
ُْ ‫ب ُبل ا‬ُ‫الَ ُیَتَ َغیَّرُ ُبل لُه ُح ْکمُ ُ ْال لکتَا ل‬ ُ ُ ُ‫َوجْ ه‬
ُ‫ك‬ُ‫صانُ ُالالَّ لزمُ ُبلتَرْ ل‬ َ ‫ب ُ َو ْالوضوُْءُ ُ َوا لجبا ُبلح ْک لُم ُ ْالخَ بَ لُر ُفَیجْ بَرُ ُالن ْق‬ ُ‫ْال لکُتَا ل‬
ُ ‫بُبلال َّد لُم‬
ُ‫اج ل‬ ‫ْالوضوُْ لُءُ ْال َو ل‬
ُ
the Quraan was not changed by Khabar Wahid) is the verse,
}‫ْق‬ ْ ‫ت‬
‫ُال َعتلی ل‬ ‫{ُ َو ْلیَطَّ َّوفوْ اُبل ْالبَ ْی ل‬
"And perform Tawaaf around the Freed House (The
Ka'abah, which has been freed from tyrants)." (Surah Hajj: 29)
Which is Mutlaq (free from any restrictive clauses) in

describing the Tawaaf round the Ka'abah so we will not
add to it the condition (prerequisite) of Wudhu (by making
Wudhu Fardh for Tawaaf as Imaam Shaafie  has) from
Hadeeth but will practice on it in a manner whereby we
37
Usool Shaashi
will not change the ruling of the Quraan by making Tawaaf
itself Fardh in accordance with the Quraan and Wudhu
Waajib in accordance with the Hadeeth and the inevitable
deficiency caused by abandoning Wudhu which is Waajib
is offering Dam(sacrifice).
Example four
ُ‫ی ُم َس َّمی‬ ُْ ‫طلَقُ ُفل‬ ْ ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُقَوْ لهُٗ ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{ َوارْ َکعوْ ا ُ َم َُع ُالرَّا لک لعیْنَُ ُ} ُم‬
ُ‫ن ُی ْع َملُ ُبل ْالخَ بَ لُر‬
ُْ ‫ْل ُبلح ْک لُم ُ ْالخَ بَ لُر ُ َول لک‬ ُ‫الَ ُیزَ ادُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُشَرْ طُ ُالتَّ ْع لدی ل‬
ُ َ‫ع ُف‬ُ‫الرکوْ ل‬
ُُ‫ع ُفرْ ضا‬ َ َ ْ
ُ‫ب ُف َیَٗ َٗ کوْ نُ ُمطلقُ ُالرکوْ ل‬ َ ْ ْ
ُ‫الَ ُیَتَ َغیَّرُ ُبل لُه ُحکمُ ُال لکتَا ل‬ ُ ُ ُ‫عَلی ُ َوجْ ه‬
ْ ْ
‫بُ لوالت ْع لدیْلُُ َوا لجباُُُبلحک لُمُالخَ بَ لُر‬ ُ‫بلح ْک لُمُ ْال لکتَا ل‬

the Quraan was not changed by Khabar Wahid) is the verse,
}ُ َ‫{وارْ َکعوْ اُ َم َُعُالرَّا لک لع ْین‬

َ
Which is Mutlaq (free from any restrictive clauses) in
describing Ruku, so we will not add to it (the ruling of the
Quraan) the condition of Ta'adeel (to carry out all the
postures of patiently and without rushing) from Khabar
Wahid (Hadeeth, as Imaam Shaafie  and Imaam Abu Yusuf 
have) but (instead) will practice on the Khabar Wahid in a
manner where we will not alter the ruling of the Quraan by
making Ruku itself Fardh in accordance with the Quraan
and Ta'adeel Waajib in accordance with the Hadeeth.
A deduction made from the ruling of Mutlaq
ُُٗ‫ان ُُ َوبلکلُ ُ َماءُ ُ ُخَ الَطَه‬ ُْ ‫ُیَجوْ زُ ُالتَّ َوض‬:‫َُو ُعَلیُ ُه َذا ُق ْلنَا‬
ُ‫ی ُبل َما لُء ُال َّز ْعفَ َر ل‬
َ ْ‫َشئُطَا لهرُُفَ َغی ََُّرُُاَ َح َُدُاَو‬
ُ‫صافل لُه‬
38
Usool Shaashi
Based upon this (principle that the Mutlaq of the Quraan will
remain as such and will not have a restrictive clause added to
it) we say it is permissible to perform Wudhu with saffron
water and any (type of) water in which something pure has
been mixed causing one of its (three) qualities (taste, colour,
smell) to change.
ُُ‫طلَقا‬ ْ ‫ی ُ َماءُ ُم‬ َُ ‫ق ُ ْال َما لُء ُ َوه َذا ُقَ ُْد ُبَقل‬ ْ ‫صی لُْر ُاللیُ ُالتَّیلم لُم ُ َع ْدمُ ُم‬
ُ‫طلَ ل‬ ‫طَ ُ ْال َم ل‬
ُ ْ‫ن ُشَر‬ َُّ َ‫لال‬
ُ‫ال ُ َع ْنهُ ُال ْس َُم ُ ْال َما لُء ُبَلُْ ُقَر ََّرہُٗ ُفَیَ ْدخلُ ُتَحْ تَُ ُح ْک لُم‬ َُ َ‫ضافَ لُة ُ َما ُاَز‬
َ ‫اال‬‫ن ُقَ ْی َُد ُ ْ ل‬
َُّ ‫فَا ل‬
ُ‫ل ُ لمنَُ ُال َّس َما لُء ُقَیْداُ ُلله َذا‬ ُ‫صفَ لُة ُ ْالم ْن َّز ل‬‫ق ُ ْال َما لُء ُ َو َكانَُ ُشَرْ طُ ُبَقَائل لُه ُعَلیُ ُ ل‬ ُ‫طلَ ل‬ْ ‫م‬
ُ‫االَُ ْشن ل‬
ُ ُ‫َانُ َواَ ْمثَالل لُه‬ ُ ْ ‫نُ َو‬ُ‫انُ َوالصَّابوْ ل‬ ُ‫قُ َوبل لُهُیخَ رَّجُُح ْکمُُ َما لُءُال َّز ْعفَ َر ل‬ ُ‫طلَ ل‬ْ ‫ْلم‬
The reason for this (permissibility to use such water) is that

the condition for permissibility of Tayammum is the
complete absence of any form of water and this (saffron
water and water in which something pure has been mixed
causing one of its qualities to change) still remains a type of
water as the attached clause (of saffron and of whatever has
been mixed with the water) does not remove the suffix of
water from it (and it is stilled called saffron-water) and
instead establishes that it is water and will therefore fall
under the category of water. To maintain that the water
must remain in the condition it came from the sky (as
Imaam Shaafie  has done) is a restrictive clause for this
Mutlaq (of the Quraan) and in doing so (adding this
restrictive clause) others types of water such as saffron
water, soapy water, perfumed water, etc will be excluded
(and not regarded as water with which Wudhu can be
performed).
ُْ ‫ضیَّ لُة ُ ْال َماءُ ُالنَّ لجسُ ُبلقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{ َول لک‬
ُُ‫ن ُی لریْد‬ ‫َن ُه لذ لُہ ُ ْالقَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ج ُع‬َُ ‫َوخَ َر‬
ْ
َُ ‫ن ُال َحد‬
ُُ‫َث ُشَرْ ط‬ َ
َُّ ‫ار لُة ُعلل َُم ُا‬ ْ
َ ‫اال َش‬
‫ار ُةَ ُ َوبله لذ لُہ ُ ل‬ َّ ُ َ ُ ُ‫للیطَه َرک ُْم} ُ َوالن لجس‬
َ َ‫ال ُیفلیْدُ ُالطہ‬ َّ
ُ ُ‫ثُم َحال‬ ُ‫نُوجوْ لُدُ ْال َح َد ل‬ َ َ‫ْلُالطَّہ‬
ُ‫ار لُةُبلدوْ ل‬ ‫نُتَحْ ل‬
َُ ‫صی‬ َُّ ‫بُ ْالوضوُْ لُءُفَا ل‬
ُ‫للوجوْ ل‬
39
Usool Shaashi
And excluded from this rule (that these waters still remain a
type of water with which wudhu can be made because of it
having the suffix water attached to it) is Najas (impure water)
because of the verse,
}‫{ول لک ْنُی لریْدُللیطَه َرک ْم‬

َ
"But wants to purify you."(Surah Maa'idah: 6)
As Najas (impure water) does not aid in purification. We

also learn from this verse ("but want to purify you") that in
order for Wudhu to be Waajib one must be in a state of
Hadath (lesser impurity) first as purification is impossible
without Hadath.
Example five
ُ‫ل‬ ُْ ‫ال ُاَبوْ َحنل ْیفَ ُةَ ُ َر لح َمہُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی ُاَ ْلمظَا لهر ُال َذا ُ َجا َم َُع ُال ْم َراتَهُٗ ُفل‬
ُ‫ی ُ لخالَ ل‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
ُ َ‫امُف‬
ُُ‫الَُیزَ اد‬ ْ ‫اال‬
ُ‫ط َع ل‬ ‫یُ َحقُُ ل‬ ُْ ‫طلَقُُفل‬ ْ ‫َابُم‬
َُ ‫نُ ْال لکت‬َُّ َ‫ط َعا َُمُالا‬ ْ ‫اال‬ ‫الَُیَ ْستَ انلفُُ ل‬
ُ ُ‫ام‬ُ‫ط َع ل‬ ْ ‫اال‬‫ل‬
ُُ‫طلَقُ ُیَجْ لریُْ ُعَلی‬ ْ ‫ل ُ ْالم‬ ُ‫اس ُعَلی ُالصَّوْ لُم ُبَ ل‬ُ‫ْس ُبل ْالقلیَ ل‬ ُ‫َعلَ ْی لُه ُشَرْ طُ ُ َع ْد لُم ُ ْال َم لسی ل‬
‫طالَقل لُهُ َو ْالمقَیَّدُُعَلیُتَ ْقیل ْی لدلُہ‬ ْ ‫ال‬
Imaam Abu Hanifah  said, "If a Mathaahir1(a man who
compared his wife to one of his blood relatives such as his
mother, sister, daughter, etc) indulges in intercourse with his
wife while feeding (the sixty poor people and before sixty are
fed) then there is no need to restart the feeding again (the
feeding will not be rendered void as in the case with fasting)
1
It is impermissible for such a person to indulge in sexual intercourse or even kiss his wife
after comparing his wife to his blood relatives or any of their limbs. If he wishes to revoke his
statement then he must give a Kaffaarah (penalty) of setting a slave free before he can indulge
in any physical relation with her. If he is unable to do this then he should fast for two
consecutive months before he can indulge in any physical relation with her. If he has
intercourse with his wife before completing the fast of two months then this Kaffaarah will be
rendered void and he will have to fast for another two consecutive months. If this too is not
possible then he should feed sixty poor people, however this does not have the restrictive
clause of having to be before physical action.
40
Usool Shaashi
because the Quraan is Mutlaq with regards to feeding (and
does not have the restrictive clause of having to be before
intercourse) so we will not add the restrictive clause of being
before intercourse by making Qiyaas (comparing it
to)fasting. Instead what is Mutlaq will be kept unrestricted
and what is Muqayyad will be kept restricted (to the clause
attached to it).
ُُ‫الَ ُیزَ ادُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُشَرْ ط‬ ْ ‫ْن ُم‬

ُ َ‫طلَقَةُ ُف‬ ُ‫ار ُ َو ْالیَ لمی ل‬
ُ‫ار لُة ُالظهَ ل‬ َ َّ‫ی ُ َکف‬ُْ ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُق ْلنَا ُاَل َّرقَبَةُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ار لُةُ ْالقَ ْت ل‬
‫ل‬ َ َّ ‫اسُعَلیُ َکف‬ ُ‫انُبل ْالقلیَ ل‬ ُ‫اال ْی َم ل‬
In a similar manner (as the ruling just mentioned above of

feeding the poor being Mutlaq) we say the slave that has to
be set free in the Kaffaarah of Thihaar (when one compares
his wife to a blood relative) and of Yameen (breaking an oath)
is (also) Mutlaq (and does not have any clause attached to it
stipulating that it has to be a Muslim slave) so we will not add
the clause of (the slave) having Imaan to it by making
Qiyaas (comparing it)to Kaffaarah of murder (where the
restrictive clause of the slave being Mu'min was mentioned).
An objection
ُ‫ق ُ ْالبَع ل‬
ُ‫ْض ُ َوقَ ُْد‬ ُ‫طلَ ل‬ْ ‫ْح ُم‬َُ ‫س ُیوْ لجبُ ُ َمس‬ ُ‫ٗ ُال َّر ْا ل‬
ُ‫ْح ل‬
‫ی ُ َمس ل‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْال لکت‬
ُْ ‫َاب ُفل‬ َُّ ‫ْل ُال‬ ُْ ‫فَا ل‬
َُ ‫ن ُقلی‬
ُ‫ی ُال ْنتلهَا لُء ُ ْالحرْ َم لُة‬
ُْ ‫طلَقُ ُفل‬ ْ ‫اصیَ لُة ُبل ْالخَ بَ لُر ُ َو ْال لکتَابُ ُم‬
‫َار ُالنَّ ل‬ ُ‫قَیَّ ُْد ُتموْ ہُ ُبل لم ْقد ل‬
ُ َُ‫ثُال ْم َراَ لُةُ لرفَا َع ُة‬ ُ‫احُ َوقَ ُْدُقَیَّ ْدتموْ ہُُبلالدخوْ ل‬
ُ‫لُبل َح لد ْی ل‬ ُ‫ْال َغلل ْیظَ لُةُبلالن َک ل‬
(Firstly) If anyone were to say (object by saying) that the
Quraan with regards to Masah (passing wet hands) over the
head makes Mutlaq Masah (passing the hands over the head
without specifying any margin) of a small portion Waajib
41
Usool Shaashi
and you (Ahnaaf) have added the clause (to what is Mutlaq in
the Quraan) of the portion equal to the forehead (quarter
head) from Khabar Wahid (Hadeeth). (Secondly if one were
to say that) The Quraan is Mutlaq with regards to Nikaah
reversing the prohibition caused by Talaaq Mughalazah
(that the contract of Nikaah is sufficient to remove the
prohibition of remarriage caused by the issuing of three
Talaaq) but you (Ahnaaf) have added the clause of
intercourse (with the second husband as incumbent to remove
the prohibition caused by the three Talaaq to what is Mutlaq in
the Quraan) from the Hadeeth of the wife of Rifaa'ah.
ُْ َ‫ق ُا‬
َُُ‫ن ُیَکوْ ن‬ ْ ‫ن ُح ْک َُم ُ ْالم‬
ُ‫طلَ ل‬ ُ‫ب ُ ْال َمس ل‬
َُّ ‫ْح ُفَا ل‬ ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫طلَقُ ُفل‬ْ ‫ْس ُبلم‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْال لکت‬
َُ ‫َاب ُلَی‬ َُّ ‫ق ْلنَا ُُال‬
ُُ‫ْسُبلات‬َُ ‫یُبل اَیُُبَعْضُُ َکانَُُههنَاُلَی‬ ُْ ‫یُبلاَیُُفَرْ د َکانَُُاتلیاُُبل ْال َم اموْ لربل لُهُ َواالتل‬ ُْ ‫االتل‬
ْ
ُُ‫الَ ُیَکوْ نُ ُالکل‬ ُ‫ف ُاوُْ ُعَلی ُالثلثَی ل‬
ُ ُ ‫ْن‬ َ ُ‫ح ُعَلی ُالنصْ ل‬ َُ ‫بلاْل َم اموْ لربل لُه ُفَالنَّهُٗ ُلَوْ َم َس‬
ُ ُ‫ل‬ َُ ‫طلَقُُ ْالمجْ َم‬ ْ ‫قُ ْالم‬َُ ‫ار‬َ َ‫فَرْ ضاُُ َوبل لُهُف‬
We would say (in reply to the first objection) that the Quraan
is not Mutlaq with regards to Masah (of the head) because
the ruling of Mutlaq is that if the act (in this case Masah) is
carried out on any part (portion) then one will be fulfilling
what one has been ordered to (meaning that whatever portion
is made Masah of will be regarded as Fardh)and in this case
carrying it out on any part will not be regarded as fulfilling
what one has been ordered to (as all of it will not be
regarded as Fardh) because if one were to make Masah on
half or two thirds (of the head) then all of it will not be
regarded as Fardh (as according to both Imaam Shaafie 
and Imaam Abu Hanifah َّa portion will be regarded as Fardh
and a portion as Sunnah, which would negate the verse being
Mutlaq) and this is what differentiates between Mutlaq and
Mujmal (unclear, and in need of explanation such as the
portion which is Fardh to make Masah of in this verse).
42
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ی‬ ْ ‫لُ َعلَیُ ْال َو‬
ُ‫ط لا‬ َُ ‫احُفلیُالنَّصُُح لم‬ َُ ‫نُالن َک‬ َُّ ‫الُ ْالبَعْضُُال‬ َُ َ‫لُفَقَ ُْدُق‬ ُ‫َوُاَ َّماُقَیْدُُالدخوْ ل‬
ُُ‫ال ُ ْالبَعْضُ ُقَیْد‬ َُ َ‫ج ُ َوبله َذا ُیَزوْ لُ ُالس َوالُ ُ َوق‬ ُ‫ظ ُال َّزوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ال لُذ ُ ْال َع ْقدُ ُم ْستَفَادُ ُ لم‬
ُ‫ن ُلَ ْف ل‬
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْلزَ مہ ُْم ُتَ ْقیلیْدُ ُ ْال لکتَا ل‬
ُ َ‫ُج َعلوْ ہُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َم َشا لهی لْرف‬
َ ‫ل ُثَبَتَُ ُبل ْالخَ بَ لر َو‬ ُ‫الدخوْ ل‬
‫بلخَ بَ لر ْال َو ل‬
‫اح لُدُ۔‬
(And in reply to the second objection we would say)As far as
the clause of intercourse is concerned; some have said
(replied) that (the word) marries mentioned in the verse
("She is not lawful for him thereafter until she marries another
husband." -Surah Baqarah: 230)refers to intercourse because
the contract of Nikaah is already implied by the word
"husband" (as he can only be her husband if the contract of
Nikaah was performed and saying that "marries" also refers to
the contract of Nikaah will either make its usage for repetition
or for emphasis and it is an accepted principle that taking
another meaning in such a case is better than accepting it to be
for repetition or for emphasis) and with this (explanation) the
objection is unfounded. Some (Hanafi scholars) have said
that the clause of intercourse has been proven from
Khabar, which the Muhadditheen have categorised as
Mashoor (a Hadeeth where in any generation, no less than
three people narrate a Hadeeth) which means that Ahnaaf
have not added a clause to the Quraan from Khabar Wahid
(but from Hadeeth- Mashoor with which it is permissible to do
so).
Lesson on Mushtarak and Mu'awwal
ُُْ‫ْن ُاَو‬ ُ‫ْن ُم ْختَللفَی ل‬ ‫فصل ُفی ُالمشترک ُو ُالمؤول ُاَ ْلم ْشت ََركُ ُ َما ُو ل‬
ُ‫ض َُع ُلل َم ْعنَیَی ل‬
َُ‫َاولُ ُاالاَ َم ُةَ ُ َوال َّسفل ْینَ ُة‬ َ ‫اریَةُ ُفَالنَّهُا َُتَتَن‬
‫ق ُ لمثَالهُٗ ُقَوْ لنا ُ َج ل‬ ُ‫ٗ ُ ْال َحقَائل ل‬ ُ‫لل َم َعان ُم ْختَللفَةَ ل‬
ُُ‫ب ُال َّس َماُ لُء ُ َوقَوْ لنَا ُبَائلن‬ ْ ْ َ ‫َو ْالم ْشت لَریُ ُفَالنَّهُٗ ُیَتَن‬
َُ ‫َاولُ ُقَابل‬
َُ ‫ل ُ َعق لُد ُالبَی لُْع ُ َو َکوْ َک‬
ُ َُ‫فَالنَّهُُٗیَحْ تَ لملُُ ْالبَیْنَُُ َو ْالبَیَان‬
43
Usool Shaashi
Mushtarak is a word that has two different meanings or
many meanings with each referring to different objects. An
example (example one) of this is the word '‫'جارية‬- Jaariyah
which refers to a female slave as well as a ship (which are
entirely different from each other) or (example two is) the
word 'َّ‫' ُمشتَ ِرى‬- Mushtaree which refers to the buyer (in a
sale) as well as a star in the sky or (example three is) the
word 'َّ‫'بَائِ ُن‬- Baa'in which means separation as well as
explanation.
The ruling of Mushtarak
‫ك ُاَنَّهُٗ ُال َذا ُتَ َعی َّنَُ ُ ْال َو ل‬

ُ‫احدُ ُم َراداُ ُبل لُه ُ َسقَطَُ ُال ْعتلبَارُ ُال َرا َد لُة ُ َغی لْرلُہ‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُ ُ ْالم ْشت ََر ل‬
ُ‫ن ُلَ ْفظَُ ُ ْالقروُْ لُء ُاَ ْل َمذکوْ لُر ُفی‬ َُّ َ‫لله َذا ُاَجْ َم َُع ُ ْالعلَ َماءُ ُ َر لح َمہمُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالیُ ُعَلی ُا‬
َ
ُ‫ْض ُ َک َما ُه َو ُ َم ْذهَبنَا ُاوُْ ُ َعلَی‬ ُ‫للال ُتَ َعالیُ ُ َمحْ موْ لُ ُال َّما ُعَلی ُ ْال َحی ل‬ ُ ُ‫ب‬ ُ‫لکتَا ل‬
ُ ‫الطه لْر َک َماُه َُوُ َم ْذهَبُُال َّشافل لعیُُ َر لح َمہُُللاُُتَ َعالی‬
َّ
The ruling of Mushtarak is that if one meaning has been
specified (by supporting evidence or proof) then
consideration of the other meanings falls away (and only
that one particular meaning can be implied1).Based upon this
(principle that once one meaning has been specified then
another cannot be considered), the Ulama, may ALLAAH's
mercy be upon them, are in consensus that the word 'َّ‫'القُ ُرو ِء‬-
courses mentioned in the Quraan ("Divorced women should
1
Mushtarak having several meanings implied at the same time is known as 'Umoom
Mushtarak' and according to the Hanafi school of thought is not possible and only one
meaning can be implied as opposed to Imaam Shaafie who says that both meanings can be
implied at the same time.
44
Usool Shaashi
wait (should abstain from remarrying) for three courses.")
refers to either Haidh, as is our (Hanafi) viewpoint, or
(refers to)purity, as is the view of Imaam Shaafie  (and both
cannot be implied at the same time).
Example One
ُُ‫ی ُفالَن‬ ُْ ‫ی ُفالَنُ ُ َوللبَنل‬ ُ‫ُر لح َمہُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالیُ ُال َذا ُاَوْ صیُ ُلل َم َوالل ل‬
ُْ ‫ی ُبَنل‬ َ ‫ال ُم َح َّمد‬ َُ َ‫َوق‬
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُ ْالفَ لر ْیقَ ْی ل‬ ُْ ‫صیَّةُ ُفل‬‫ت ُ ْال َو ل‬ ُ‫ل ُفَ َماتَُ ُبَطَلَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ن ُاَ ْعلی ُ َو لم‬
َُ َ‫ن ُاَ ْسف‬ ُْ ‫َم َوالُ ُ لم‬
ْ
ُ‫لال ْستل َحالَ لُةُال َج ْم لُعُبَ ْینَه َماُ َو َع ْدمُُالرجْ َح ل‬
ُ ‫انُ۔‬
(Based upon the principle, if one meaning has been specified
then consideration of the other meanings fall away)Imaam
Muhammed  said, "If a person makes a Waseeyat
(bequest) for the '‫' َم َوالِى‬- Mawaali (plural of Mowla, which is
Mushtarak and refers to the one who sets a slave free as well
as the slave who was set free) of a certain person's children,
and the children of that person have a Mowla from above
(the person who set the children free) and a Mowla beneath
them (slaves whom the children set free), and then dies then
the Waseeyat (bequest) will be annulled in favour of both
parties (neither the slaves who were set free by the children or
the person who set the children free will inherit because of this
bequest) because it is impossible for both to be implied (at
the same time) and neither can be specified (over the other).
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ُ‫ی‬ ُْ ‫ی ُ لم ْثلُ ُام‬
َُّ َ‫ت ُ َعل‬ َُ َ‫ال ُاَبوْ َحنل ْیفَ ُةَ ُ َر لح َمہُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی ُال َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ال ُللزَ وْ َجتل لُه ُاَ ْن ل‬ َُ َ‫َوق‬
ُُ‫الَُیَتَرجَّحُُ لجهَة‬ُ َ‫النُاللَّ ْفظَُُم ْشت ََركُُبَیْنَُُ ْال َک َرا َم لُةُ َو ْالحرْ َم لُةُف‬
َُّ ُُ‫یَکوْ نُُمظَا لهرا‬
‫ْالحرْ َم لُةُالالَّبلالنیَ لُة‬
(Based upon the principle, if one meaning has been specified
then consideration of the other meanings fall away) Imaam
Abu Hanifah  says that If a person tells his wife, "You are
like my mother to me" he will not be a Mathaahir because
45
Usool Shaashi
the word ("like") is Mushtarak and can imply either respect
(implying that he respects and honours his wife in the same
manner as he does for his mother) or Hurmat (that his wife is
Haraam upon him in the same way that his mother is Haraam
for him) and the meaning of Hurmat cannot be specified
except with intention (thus if his intention was for Hurmat
then only will this meaning be specified over the other).
Example Two
ُُ‫ص ْی لُدُللقَوْ لل لُهُتَ َعالیُ{فَ َجزَ اءُُم ْثل‬ َّ ‫یُ َجزَ ا لُءُال‬ ُْ ‫یجبُُالنَّ لظیْرُُفل‬ ‫َوعَلیُُُه َذاُق ْلنَاُالَ ل‬
ُُ‫لُ َمعْنی‬ ُ‫لُصوْ َرةُُ َوبَیْنَُُ ْال لم ْث ل‬ ُ‫لُم ْشت ََركُُبَیْنَُُ ْال لم ْث ل‬ َُ ‫النُ ْال لم ْث‬
َُّ ُ}‫َماُقَت ََُلُ لمنَُُالنَّ َع لُم‬
ُ‫ل ُ ْال َح َم ل‬
ُ‫ام‬ ُ‫ن ُ َحیْثُ ُ ْال َمعْنی ُبلهَ َذا ُالنَّصُ ُفلی ُقَ ْت ل‬ ُْ ‫ُالقل ْی َمةُ ُ َوقَ ُْد ُا لر ْی َُد ُ ْال لم ْثلُ ُ لم‬
ْ ‫َو ُه َو‬
ُ ُ ‫ن ُ َحیْثُ ُالصوْ َر لُة ُال ُْذ‬
َُ‫ال‬ ُْ ‫الَ ُی َرادُ ُ ْال لم ْثلُ ُ لم‬
ُ َ‫اق ُف‬ُ‫اال ُتفَ ل‬ُ‫َوالعصْ فوْ لُر ُ َونَحْ لو له َما ُبل ل‬
‫كُاَصْ الُُفَیَسْقطُُالعتلبَارُالصوْ َر لُةُال ْستل َحال لُةُال َج ْم لُع‬
ْ َ ْ ُ‫عموْ َُمُلل ْلم ْشت ََر ل‬
Based upon this (principle that if one meaning has been
specified then consideration of the other meaning falls away)
we say that (slaughtering) a similar animal is not Waajib for
hunting (while in Ihraam) because of the verse, "The
penalty for the person (in Ihraam) who intentionally kills
any game is a domestic animal similar to the animal (which
he) killed" (but rather it will be Waajib on him to give the
price of the animal away as Sadaqah). The reason for this
(giving the price of the animal as Sadaqah and not
slaughtering a domestic animal) is that the word "‫"المثل‬-
similar is Mushtarak referring to both 'Mithl Suwarie'
(similar in size) and 'Mithl Ma'aanwi' which is similar in
price and 'Mithl Ma'aanwi' (similar in price) is
unanimously intended by this verse in the killing of
pigeons, sparrows, etc (all Fuqahaa are in agreement that if a
pigeon, sparrow, etc is killed then the price of it will be given
in Sadaqah) so 'Mithl Suwarie' (an animal similar in size)
will not be added to this (and said to be Waajib as well in
46
Usool Shaashi
addition to giving the price) because in reality there is no
'Umoom Mushtarak' (two different meanings cannot be
intended at the same time) so consideration of (the other
meaning which is) 'Mithl Suwarie' will fall away because it
is impossible for both to be implied (at the same time).
Definition of Mu'awwal
ُُ‫صیْر ُمؤَ َّوالُ ُ َوح ْکم‬ ُ‫ب ُال َّر ْا ل‬

‫ی ُی َ ل‬ ُ‫ك ُبلغَالل ل‬ ُ‫َّح ُبَعْضُ ُوجوْ لُہ ُ ْالم ْشت ََر ل‬ َُ ‫ث َُّم ُال َذا ُت ََرج‬
‫الُ ْالخَ طَُال‬ ُ‫لُوجوْ بُُ ْال َع َم ل‬
ُ‫لُبل لُهُ َم َُعُالحْ تل َم ل‬ ُ‫ْالمؤَ َّو ل‬
Then if one of the implications (meanings) of Mushtarak is
given preference (over the other meanings) based on firm
judgement (because of proof or evidence that supports that
meaning) it becomes Mu'awwal1. The ruling of Mu'awwal is
that it is Waajib to act upon it with the possibility of it
being incorrect.
Example One of Mu'awwal
ُ‫بُنَ ْق لُد‬ُ‫قُالثَّ َمنَُُفلیُ ْالبَی لُْعُ َکانَُُعَلیُُغَالل ل‬ ْ َ‫تُ َماُق ْلنَاُال َذاُا‬
َُ َ‫طل‬ ُ‫َو لمثَالهُُفلیُ ْالح ْک لمی َّا ل‬
ُ‫ت ُالنقوْ دُ ُم ْختَللفَةُ ُفَ َس َُد ُ ْالبَیْعُ ُلل َما ُ َذکَرْ نَا‬ ُ‫ْل ُ َولَوْ َکانَ ل‬ ُ‫ْالبَلَ لُد ُ َوذللكَُ ُبلطَ لری ل‬
‫ْق ُالتَّ ْا‬
ُ‫اوی ل‬
ُُ‫ح ْمل‬ َُ ‫ئُُ َو‬ ْ ‫احُفلیُاالیَ لُةُعَلیُ ْال َو‬
ُ‫ط ل‬ ُ‫ْضُ َو َح ْملُُالن َک ل‬ ُ‫َو َح ْملُُاال ْق َرا لُءُ َعلَیُ ْال َحی ل‬
ُ ُ‫ْل‬ُ‫نُه َذاُ ْالقَبلی ل‬ ُ‫قُعَلیُالطَّالَ ل‬
ُْ ‫قُ لم‬ ُ‫الُم َذا َک َر لُةُالطَّالَ ل‬ ُ‫ْال لکنَایَا ل‬
َُ ‫تُ َح‬
An example of this (of Mu'awwal) in Ahkaam is what we
say, "If the price (of an item) in a sale is kept Mutlaq (in that
the currency is not specified) then it (the currency) will be the
prevalent currency of that town. This (specification of the
currency) was made through Ta'weel (deliberation and
deduction, that only the prevalent currency of the town could
be implied). However if there are several currencies
prevalent in that town then the sale will be invalid because
1
In essence Mu'awwal is a word having different meanings in which the intended meaning has
been specified using proof or evidence that supports that meaning.
47
Usool Shaashi
of what we have mentioned (that it is impossible for both to
be implied at the same time and neither can be specified over
the other). Specifying the meaning of "‫"قروء‬- courses to be
Haidh, "marries" in the verse ("She is not lawful for him
thereafter until she marries another husband." -Surah
Baqarah: 230)) to be intercourse and insinuations (hints)
during the discussion of Talaaq on (to mean) Talaaq (thus if
during the discussion of Talaaq one hints at it or says
something which suggests it will be considered to be Talaaq
even if the word Talaaq is not said) are of this variety (where
one of the meanings were given reference over the other using
Ta'weel).
Example Two
َ َ‫ْن ُق‬
ُُ‫ضاء‬ ُ‫َوعَلی ُه َذا ُق ْلنَا ُاَل َّدیْنُ ُ ْال َمانلعُ ُ لمنَُ ُال َّزکو لُة ُیصْ َرفُ ُاللی ُاَ ْی َس لُر ُ ْال َمالَی ل‬
ُُٗ‫صابُ ُ َولَه‬ َ ‫ج ُال ْم َراَةُ ُعَلی ُنل‬ َُ ‫ال ُال َذا ُتَ َّز َو‬
َُ َ‫ع ُم َح َّمد ُعَلی ُه َذا ُفَق‬ َُ ‫ْن ُ َوف َّر‬ ُ‫للل َّدی ل‬
ُ‫صابُ ُ لمنَُ ُال َّد َرا له لُم ُیصْ َرفُ ُال َّدیْنُ ُاللَی ُال َّد َرا له لُم ُ َحتی‬ ْ
َ ‫صابُ ُ لمنَُ ُال َغن لَُم ُ َونل‬ َ ‫نل‬
ُ‫الَُت لَجبُُفلی‬ ْ
ُ ‫بُال َغن لَُمُ َو‬ ُ‫صا ل‬ ْ
َ ‫کوةُُ لعندَہُُٗفلیُنل‬ ْ
َ ‫الُ َعلَ ْی له َماُال َحوْ لُُیَ لجبُُال َّز‬ َُ ‫لَوْ َح‬
‫ال َّد َرا له لُم‬
Based upon this(principle that when a word has many
meanings then one meaning will be given reference using proof
or supporting evidence) we say, "The Debt (one owes to
another) which prevents Zakaat (from becoming Waajib) will
be conferred to that wealth which is easiest of the two to
pay the debt (for example, if Zaid has a debt and possesses
Dirhams equal to the Nisaab of Zakaat as well as forty sheep
on which Zakaat is also Waajib, the debt will be conferred to
the dirhams because it is the easiest of the two (between
dirhams and sheep) with which to pay the debt. Thus after a
year passes the debt will be subtracted from the amount of
dirhams he possesses and Zakaat will not be Waajib on the
Dirhams but will still remain Waajib on the Sheep).
48
Usool Shaashi
Imaam Muhammed has derived from this (the ruling above
that the debt will be conferred to that which is easiest of the
two to pay the debt) that if a man marries a woman on the
Nisaab (of Zakaat that he will give the Nisaab to her as Mehr)
and he has the Nisaab of sheep and the Nisaab of Dirhams
then the debt (of Mehr) will be conferred to the dirhams
such that after a year passes Zakaat will be Waajib on the
sheep he possesses but not on the Dirhams (as the debt
(Mehr) he owes to his wife has been conferred to it).
Definition of Mufassar
ُُ‫لُ ْالمتَ َکل لُمُ َکانَُُمفَسَّرا‬ ُ‫َّحُبَعْضُُوجوْ لُہُ ْالم ْشت ََر ل‬
ُْ ‫كُبلبَیَانُُ لم‬
ُ‫نُقلبَ ل‬ َُ ‫َولَوُُْتَ َرج‬
ُ ُُ‫َوح ْکمهُُٗاَنَّهُُیَ لجبُُ ْال َع َملُُبل لُهُیَقلیْنا‬
If the meaning of Mushtarak has been clarified by the

speaker then it is known as Mufassar. The ruling of
Mufassar is that it is Waajib to act upon it without a doubt.
Example of Mufassar
ُ‫ن ُنَ ْق لُد‬
ُْ ‫ارا ُفَقَوْ لهُٗ ُ لم‬ َ َ‫ن ُنَ ْق لُد ُبخ‬
ُْ ‫ی ُ َع َش َرةُ ُد ََرا له َُم ُ لم‬َُّ َ‫ال ُللفالَنُ ُ َعل‬
َُ َ‫لمثَالهُٗ ُال َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ْق‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫ب ُنَق لُد ُالبَلَ لُد ُبلطَ لری ل‬
ُ‫ص لرفا ُاللی ُغَالل ل‬ ْ
َ ‫ك ُلَ َکانَُ ُمن‬ َُ ‫الَ ُذلل‬ُ ْ‫ارا ُتَ ْف لسیْرُ ُلَهُٗ ُفَلَو‬
َ َ‫بخ‬
ْ ْ
‫الَُیَ لجبُُنَقدُُالبَلَ لُد‬ ْ
ُ َ‫ْلُفَیَت ََرجَّحُُالمفَسَّرُُف‬ ُ‫التَّ ْا لوی ل‬
An example of Mufassar is if one says, "I owe a certain
person ten Dirhams from the currency of Bukhaara." His
statement, "from the currency of Bukhaara" is the
clarification of it (the currency). Were it not for his
clarification then the prevalent currency of the town would
have been specified through Ta'weel (deliberation and
deduction, making it Mu'awwal'). However Mufassar will be
given preference (over Mu'awwal) and the prevalent
currency of the town will not be Waajib (but rather the
49
Usool Shaashi
currency of Bukhaara will be Waajib as this has been clarified
by the speaker).
Lesson on Haqeeqat and Majaaz
ُ ‫فصلُفیُالحقیقةُوالمجاز‬
ُ‫ی‬ َُ ‫ضعُُالل َغ لُةُبلالزَ ا لُءُ َشئُُفَه َو َحقل ْیقَةُُلَهُُٗ َولَ لُوُاسْت ْع لم‬
ُْ ‫لُفل‬ َ ‫کلُُلَ ْفظُُ َو‬
‫ض َعهُُٗ َوا ل‬
ُ ُ‫اُالُ َحقل ْیُقَة‬
َ ‫َغی لْر لُہُیَکوْ نُُ َم َجاز‬
Every word which the grammarian has created for a

certain thing (which implies or refers to certain thing literally)
is called Haqeeqat and if it used for another (it is not used
for its original meaning) then it is Majaaz and not Haqeeqat.
The ruling of Haqeeqat and Majaaz
‫یُ َحالَةُُ َو ل‬
ُ ُُُ‫احدَة‬ ‫نُلَ ْفظُُ َو ل‬
ُْ ‫احدُُفل‬ ُْ ‫انُال َرادَةُُ لم‬
ُ‫الَُیَجْ تَ لم َع ل‬ ُ‫ث َُّمُ ْال َحقل ْیقَةُُ َم َُعُ ْال َم َج ل‬
ُ ُ‫از‬
Then both Haqeeqat and Majaaz cannot be intended at the

same time by the same word (the literal and figurative
meaning cannot be implied by the same word at the same
time).
Example One
ُ‫َولَه َذا ُق ْلنَا ُلَ َّما ُا لر ْی َُد ُ َما ُیَ ْدخلُ ُفلی ُالص ل‬
ُ ُ ُ‫َّاع ُبلقَوْ لل لُه ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَم‬
ُ‫الَ ُتَبلیْعو‬
ُ‫َّاع ُ َحتی‬
ُ‫س ُالص ل‬ ُ‫ْن ُ َسقَطَُ ُال ْعتلبَارُ ُنَ ْف ل‬ َُ ‫الَُالصَّا‬
ُ‫ع ُبلالصَّا َعی ل‬ ُ‫الدرْ هَ َُم ُبلالدرْ هَ َمی ل‬
ُ ‫ْن ُ َو‬
ْ ‫اح لُدُ لم ْنهُُبل‬
ُ‫االثنَ ْی ل‬
‫ن‬ ‫َجازَُُبَیْعُُ ْال َو ل‬
Based upon this (that Haqeeqat and Majaaz cannot be
implied at the same time) we say when that which is
contained in the Saa'a (utensil used for measuring) is implied
by the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "Do not sell one Dirham
in for (in exchange for)two Dirhams nor (should you sell) one
Saa'a (what is contained in one Saa'a) for two (what is
50
Usool Shaashi
contained in two Saa'a)" then the Saa'a (measuring utensil
which is the literal meaning) itself will not be intended (as
Majaaz is implied here of what is contained in the Saa'a) such
that it will be permissible to sell one Saa'a (measuring
utensil) for two (measuring utensils).
ُ‫نُایَ لُةُ ْالمالَ َم َس لُةُ َسقَطَُُال ْعتلبَارُُال َرا َد لُةُ ْال َمسُُبل ْالیَ لد‬
ُْ ‫َولَ َّماُا لر ْی َُدُ ْال لوقَاعُُ لم‬
(In a similar manner) When sexual relations (which is the
Majaaz) is implied by the (word "touching" in the) verse of
Malaamasah (the verse is, "If you are ill, on a journey,
returning from the toilet or from touching (engaging in sexual
relations with) your wives and you do not find water." Surah
Maa'idah: 6) then touching with the hand (which is
Haqeeqat) will not be intended (as the meaning of both
Haqeeqat and Majaaz cannot be implied at the same time).
Other examples based on this principle
ُ‫الُم َح َّمدُُال َذاُاَوْ صیُلل َم َوالل ْی لُهُ َولَهُُٗ َم َوالُُاَ ْعتَقَه ُْمُ َولل َم َوالل ْی لُهُ َم َوالُُاَ ْعتَقوْ ه ُْم‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
ُ ُ‫یُ َم َوالل ْی لُه‬ ‫تُ ْال َو ل‬
ُْ ‫صی َّةُُلل َم َوالل ْی لُهُدوْ نَُُ َم َوالل‬ ُ‫َکانَ ل‬
Imaam Muhammed  says that if a person makes a bequest

for his Mawaali (freed slaves) and he has Mawaali (slaves)
whom he has freed and his Mawaali (freed slaves) have
other slaves whom they have set free(which is Majaaz) then
the bequest will be for his Mawaali only (as this
Haqeeqat)and not the Mawaali of his Mawaali (in other
words the bequest will only be for those slaves whom he had
set free personally and not for both types of Mawaali as in this
case Haqeeqat and Majaaz will be implied at the same time).
ُُ‫ب ُعَلی ُابَائل له ُْم ُالتَ ْدخلُ ُاالاجْ دَاد‬ ُ‫ْر ُلَ لُو ُا ْستَ ا َمنَُ ُاَ ْهلُ ُ ْال َحرْ ل‬
ُ‫َوفلی ُالسیَ لُر ُ ْال َکبلی ل‬
ُْ ‫الَُیَ ْثبتُُاالاَ َمانُُفل‬
ُ‫یُ َحقُُ ْال َج َّدا ل‬
‫ت‬ ُ ُ‫انُ َولَ لُوُا ْستَ ا َمنوْ اُعَلیُا َّمهَاتل له ُْم‬ ُ‫فلیُاالاَ َم ل‬
51
Usool Shaashi
And in 'As-Siyarul Kabeer', (which is a book written by

Imaam Muhammed  he writes) if the enemy in battle seeks
asylum for their fathers then their grandfathers will not be
included (as Haqeeqat refers to fathers only and Majaaz
would imply the grandfathers as well and both cannot be
implied at the same time) and if they seek asylum for their
mothers then their grandmothers will not be included (as
Haqeeqat refers to mothers only and Majaaz would imply the
grandmothers as well and both cannot be implied at the same
time).
ُ‫صابَةُ ُبل ْالفجوْ لُر‬ َ ‫الَ ُتَ ْدخلُ ُ ْالم‬

ُ ُ ُ‫ی ُفالَن‬ ُ‫َوعَلیُ ُه َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُاَوْ صیُ ُال ْب َک ل‬
ُْ ‫ار ُبَنل‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫صی َّ لُة ُ َولَوُْ ُاَوْ صیُ ُللبَنلی ُفالَنُ ُ َولَهُٗ ُبَنوْ نُ ُ َوبَنوُْ ُبَنل ْی لُه ُ َکانَ ل‬ ‫ی ُح ْک لُم ُ ْال َو ل‬ ُْ ‫فل‬
‫یُبَنل ْی لُه‬ ‫ْال َو ل‬
ُْ ‫صیَّةُُللبَنل ْی لُهُدوْ نَُُبَنل‬
Based on this (principle that Haqeeqat and Majaaz cannot be
implied at the same time) we say that if a person makes a
bequest for the Baakirah (virgin) girls of a certain tribe
then those who have committed Zinaa will not be included
(The Haqeeqat of Baakirah refers to that girl who is still a
virgin and Majaaz refers to that girl who is unmarried even if
she committed Zinaa. If those girls who committed Zinaa are
included in this bequest also then Haqeeqat and Majaaz will be
implied at the same time which is impermissible). (In the same
manner) If a person makes a bequest for the children of a
certain person and he has both children and grandchildren
then the bequest will be for his children only and not his
grandchildren (because Haqeeqat refers to his children and
Majaaz to the grandchildren and both cannot be implied at the
same time).
ُ‫ی ُاَجْ نَبلُیَّةُ ُ َکانَُ ُذللكَُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َع ْق لُد‬

َُ ‫الَ ُیَ ْن لکحُ ُفالَُنَةُ ُ َو لُه‬
ُ ُ َُ‫ال ُاَصْ َحابنَا ُلَوُْ ُ َحلَف‬
َُ َ‫ق‬
ُ ُ‫َحتیُلَوُُْزَنیُُبل ُهَا‬
ُ‫الَُیَحْ نَث‬
52
Usool Shaashi
Our scholars (of the Hanafi Madhab) say if a person takes

an oath that he will not make Nikaah with a certain woman
and she is unmarried then this will refer to marriage (which
is Majaaz and his oath would literally mean that he would not
marry that woman) such that if he commits Zinaa with her
(indulges in sexual relations with her, which is the Haqeeqat of
Nikaah, without marrying her) he will not break his oath (as
both Haqeeqat and Majaaz cannot be implied at the same
time).
Objection to this rule
ُُْ‫َارُفالَنُُیَحْ نَثُُلَوُُْ َدخَ لَ ُهَاُ َحافلیاُُاَو‬ ُْ ‫ضعُُقَ َد َُمهُُٗفل‬

ُ‫یُد ل‬ ُ َُُ‫الُال َذاُ َحلَف‬
َ َ‫الَُی‬ َُ َ‫نُق‬ُْ ‫َوللئل‬
ُ‫متَنَعالُُاَوْ َرا لکبا‬
If someone were to say (in objection to the rule that Haqeeqat
and Majaaz cannot be implied at the same time) that if a
person takes an oath that he will not set foot into the house
of a certain person, he will break his oath whether he
enters it barefoot (which is Haqeeqat and what is implied by
setting foot in the house), wearing shoes or riding a horse (or
any other conveyance, which is Majaaz for setting foot in the
house). (In other words Haqeeqat and Majaaz are implied at
the same time as we say that he has broken his oath whether he
enters the house barefoot or any other way.)
ُُ‫ت ُال َّدارُ ُ لم ْلکاُ ُللفالَن‬ُ‫َار ُفالَنُ ُیَحْ نَثُ ُلَوْ َکانَ ل‬ َُ ‫الَ ُیَسْکنُ ُد‬ ُ ُ َُ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُلَوُْ ُ َحلَف‬
ُ‫َارُیَةُُ َوذللكَُُ َج ْمعُُبَیْنَُُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَ لُةُ َو ْال َم َج ل‬ َ ُْ ‫اَوْ َکان‬
ُ‫از‬ ‫َتُبلاجْ رةُُاوُُْع ل‬
(The second objection)In a similar manner (Haqeeqat and
Majaaz are implied at the same time) if a person takes an
oath that he will not stay in a certain person's house, he will
break his oath (if he stays in that house) whether the house
really belongs to the other (which is Haqeeqat) or he is
53
Usool Shaashi
renting it or borrowed it (which is Majaaz) even though this
would mean that Haqeeqat and Majaaz are implied at the
same time.
ُ‫الُ َعبْدہُُٗحریَوْ َُمُیَ ْقدَمُُفالَنُُفَقَ لد َُمُفالَنُُلَیْالُُاَوْ نَ ُهَاراُیَحْ نَث‬

َُ َ‫َو َکذللكَُُلَوُُْق‬
(The third objection) In a similar manner (Haqeeqat and
Majaaz will be implied at the same time) if a person says that
his slave is free the day a certain person arrives then his
slave will be set free whether that person comes in the day
(Haqeeqat) or night (Majaaz).
ُ‫ل ُبلح ْک لُم ُ ْالعرْ ل‬

ُ‫ف ُ َوالدخوْ لُ ُال‬ ُ‫َن ُالدخوْ ل‬
ُ‫ار َم َجازاُ ُع ل‬
َ ‫ص‬َ ُ ‫ق ْلنَا ُ َوضْ عُ ُ ْالقَد لَُم‬
ُ‫یُ ْالفَصْ لَ ْی ل‬
‫ن‬ َ َ‫یَتَف‬
ُْ ‫اوتُُفل‬
We say (in reply to this objection) that setting foot refers to
the Majaaz meaning which has been determined by
common usage to be entry (therefore the oath would mean; if
I enter the house of a certain person) and entry is not absent
in both instances (one will be entering the house whether it be
barefoot or in any other manner).
ُ‫ن‬ ُ ُ َُ‫َن ُدَارُ ُ َمسْکوْ ُنَةُ ُُلَهُٗ ُ َوذللك‬
َ َ‫الَ ُیَتَف‬
ُْ ُ‫اوتُ ُبَیْنَُ ُا‬ ُْ ‫ار ُ َم َجازاُ ُع‬ َ ُ ُ‫َودَارُ ُفالَن‬
َُ ‫ص‬
ْ
ُُٗ‫َتُبلاجْ َُرةُُُلَه‬ َ
ُ ‫یَّکوْ نَُُ لم ْلکاُُُلَهُُٗاوْ َکان‬
(In reply to the second objection we say that) The house of a
certain person is Majaaz for the house in which he lives
and does not change whether he owns the house ort is
renting it (and in both cases will be the house he is living in
and thus entry into it will breaks one's oath).
َُُ‫ضیْف‬ ‫الن ُ ْالیَوْ َُم ُال َذا ُا ل‬ ُ‫ق ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬

َُّ ُ ‫ت‬ ُ‫طلَ ل‬ ْ ‫َن ُم‬ َُ َ‫ی ُ َُم ْسئَُلَ لُة ُ ْالقدوْ لُم ُ لعب‬
ُْ ‫ارةُ ُع‬ ُْ ‫َو ْالیَوْ مُ ُفل‬
ُُ‫ت ُ َک َما ُع لرفَُ ُفَ َکانَُ ُ ْال لح ْنث‬ ُ‫ق ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ ْ ‫َن ُم‬
ُ‫طلَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ارةُ ُع‬
َُ َ‫الَ ُی ْمتَدُ ُیَکوْ نُ ُ لعب‬ ُ ُ ُ‫اللی ُفلعْل‬
‫از‬ ْ ْ ْ ُ‫الَُبلطَ لری ل‬
ُ‫ْقُال َج ْم لُعُبَیْنَُُال َحقل ْیُقَ لُةُ َوال َم َج ل‬ ُ ُ‫ْق‬ُ‫بلهُ َذالطَّ لری ل‬
54
Usool Shaashi
(In reply to the third objection we say that) Day in the matter
of 'Qudoom' (arrival) refers to any time because if the word
'Youm'- Day is attached to a 'Ghair Mumtad' verb (such a
verb which cannot be restricted to a specific time but may be
prolonged or can continue for a lengthy period) then time is
implied (and the sentence would mean the time that a certain
person arrives) as is well known (in the laws of grammar).
Thus the oath will be broken in this manner (by usage of
Umoom Majaaz1) and not by implying Haqeeqat and
Majaaz at the same time.
Three types of Haqeeqat
ُ‫ث َُّم ُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَةُ ُاَ ْن َواعُ ُثَلُثَةُ ُمتَ َعذ َُرةُ ُ َُو ُ َم ُْهجوْ َُرةُ ُ َوم ْستَ ْع َمُلَةُ ُ َوفلی ُ ْالقل ْس َم ْی ل‬
ُُ‫ن‬
ُ‫ازُبلاالتفَ ل‬
‫اق‬ ُ‫لیُ ْال َم َج ل‬
َُ ‫صارُُال‬ َ ‫ْنُی‬ ُ‫االاَ َّولَی ل‬
Haqeeqat is of three types; Mut'adhirah (Haqeeqat or literal
meaning which is difficult or almost impossible to achieve),
Mahjoorah (Haqeeqat or literal meaning which 'Urf' [i.e.
society or common usage] has discarded and does not
consider), Must'amilah (Haqeeqat or literal meaning which is
recognised and commonly used in society, in other words is
neither Haqeeqat-Mut'adhirah nor Haqeeqat-Mahjoorah). In
the first two cases (Mut'adhirah and Mahjoorah) all (i.e.
Imaam Abu Hanifah, Imaam Abu Yusuf and Imaam
Muhammed) are in agreement that Majaaz will be
considered (over Haqeeqat).
1
'Umoom Majaaz' is when a single broad and inclusive meaning is taken
which incorporates both the literal and figurative meaning.
55
Usool Shaashi
Example of Haqeeqat-Mut'adhirah
ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫ن ُهُ لذ لُہ ُال َّش َج َُر لُة ُاَوُْ ُ لم‬

َُّ ‫ن ُهُ لذ لُہ ُ ْالقل ْد لُر ُفَا ل‬ ُْ ‫َونَ لظیْرُ ُ ْالمتَ َعذ َُر لُة ُال َذا ُ َحلَفَُ ُالَیَ اکلُ ُ لم‬
ُ‫ص لرفُ ُذللكَُ ُ لالیُ ُثَ ْم َُر لُة ُال َّش َج َُر لُة ُ َواللیُ ُ َما‬ َ ‫ل ُال َّش َج َُر لُة ُاَ لو ْالقل ْد لُر ُمتَ َعذ َُرةُ ُُفَیَ ْن‬
َُ ‫اَ َک‬
ُ‫ْن ُ ْالقل ْد لُر ُبلنَوْ ل‬
ُ‫ع‬ ُ‫ن ُ َعی ل‬ُْ ‫ْن ُال َّش َج َُرلُة ُاَوْ لم‬ ُ‫ن ُ َعی ل‬ َُ ‫یَحلُ ُفلی ُ ْالقل ْد لُر ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُاَ َک‬
ُْ ‫ل ُ لم‬
ُ ُ‫الَُیَحْ نَث‬ ُ ُُ‫تَ َکلف‬
An example of Mut'adhirah (Haqeeqat or literal meaning
which is difficult or almost impossible to achieve) is when a
person takes an oath that he will not eat this tree or pot.
Since it is impossible (or extremely difficult) to eat the tree or
pot (itself), it will be taken to mean the fruit of the tree (and
not the tree itself which is Majaaz) or contents of the pot (and
not the pot itself which is Majaaz) such that if a person eats
the tree (its bark, leaves, or branches, etc) or pot (or a piece
thereof) with extreme difficulty he will not be breaking his
oath (because the meaning of Majaaz has been taken and
Haqeeqat and Majaaz cannot be intended at the same time)
ُ‫ص لرفُ ُذللكَُ ُاللَی‬ ُ‫ن ُهُ لذ لُہ ُ ْالبلی ل‬

َ ‫ْر ُیَ ْن‬ ُ ُ َُ‫َلی ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُ َحلَف‬
ُْ ‫الَ ُیَ ْش َربُ ُ لم‬ ُ‫َوع ل‬
ُ‫الَُیَحْ نَثُُبلاالتفَ ل‬
‫اق‬ ُ ُُ‫عُبلنَوْ عُُتَ َکلف‬ ُ‫اال ْغتل َر ل‬
َُ ‫افُ َحتیُلَوُُْفَ َرضْ نَاُاَُن َّهُُٗلَوْ َک َر‬
Based upon this (principle that in the case of Haqeeqat
Mut'adhirah and Haqeeqat Mahjoorah the meaning of Majaaz
will be taken) we say that if a person takes an oath that he
will not drink this well then the meaning will be taken to be
draw out water (from it and drink which is Majaaz) such that
if we were to presume that he sipped (directly from the well
by lowering himself into it) with extremely difficulty he will
not be breaking his oath (as the meaning of Majaaz has been
taken and Haqeeqat and Majaaz cannot be intended at the
same time) according to all (Imaam Abu Hanifah, Imaam Abu
Yusuf and Imaam Muhammed).
56
Usool Shaashi
Example of Haqeeqat-Mahjoorah
َُّ ‫َار ُفالَنُ ُفَا ل‬

َُ‫ن ُال َرا َُد ُة‬ ُْ ‫ضعُ ُقَ َد َُمهُٗ ُفل‬
ُ‫ی ُد ل‬ ُ ُ َُ‫َُو ُنَ لظیْرہُٗ ُ ْال َم ُْهجوْ َُرةُ ُلَوْ َحلَف‬
َ َ‫الَ ُی‬
ُ‫َوضْ لُعُ ْالقَد لَُمُ َم ُْهجوْ َُرةُُعَا َُدة‬
An Example of Mahjoorah (Haqeeqat or literal meaning
which 'Urf' [i.e. society or common usage] has discarded and
does not consider) is if a person takes an oath that he will
not set foot into a certain person's house as literally placing
a single foot is not meant generally (which is the Haqeeqat or
literal meaning of "setting foot", instead the meaning of
Majaaz will be taken here which is to enter the house in any
way. Thus if he merely places one foot into the house but does
not enter it then he will not break his oath as Haqeeqat and
Majaaz cannot be intended at the same time. However if his
Niyyat was for only placing a foot then his oath will break1).
Another example of Haqeeqat-Mahjoorah
ُ‫ب‬ ْ ‫ص لرفُ ُاللیُ ُم‬

ُ‫طلَ ل‬
ُ‫ق ُ َج َوا ل‬ َ ‫س ُ ْالخصوْ َُم لُة ُیَ ْن‬ ُ‫َوعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُاَلتَّوْ لکیْلُ ُبلنَ ْف ل‬
َُّ ُ َ‫ال‬
ُ‫الن‬ ُ ‫ْب ُبل‬ ُْ َ‫ْب ُبلنَ ْع ُْم ُ َک َما ُیَ َس َُعهُٗ ُا‬
َُ ‫ن ُی لجی‬ ُْ َ‫ْل ُا‬
َُ ‫ن ُی لجی‬ ُ‫ْالخَ صْ لُم ُ َحتی ُیَ َس َُع ُلل ْل َو لکی ل‬
ُُ‫سُ ْالخصوْ َُم لُةُ َم ُْهجوْ َُرةُُشَرْ عاُُ َوعَا َُدة‬ ُ‫ْلُبلنَ ْف ل‬
َُ ‫التَّوْ لکی‬
Based upon this (principle that in the case of Haqeeqat
Mut'adhirah and Haqeeqat Mahjoorah the meaning of Majaaz
will be taken) we say (as opposed to Imaam Shaafie) that
appointing someone as Wakeel (representative) in a dispute
will taken to be permitting him to reply (on your behalf)to
the disputant such that the Wakeel (representative) is
permitted to reply in the affirmative just as he is permitted
to reply in the negative ( the summary of this case is that
when a person appoints another to be his representative in a
1
'Haashiyah Usool Shaashi'
57
Usool Shaashi
dispute then he is literally only permitting the other to defend
him and if the Wakeel were to affirm the case of the disputant
then he would be acting against his appointment as Wakeel to
defend him. Since this meaning of Haqeeqat is discarded or not
used in Shariaat the meaning of Majaaz will be taken and it
will be said that the Wakeel has been given permission to
reply, whether it be in the affirmative or negative.)
Ruling of Haqeeqat-Must'amilah
ُُ‫ن ُلَ ُهَا ُ َم َجازُ ُمتَ َعا َرفُ ُفَ ْال َحقل ْیُقَةُ ُاَوْ لی‬ ُْ ‫ت ُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَةُ ُم ْستَ ْع َمُلَةُ ُفَان ُلَّ ُْم ُیَک‬
ُ‫َولَوْ َکانَ ل‬
َُ‫ی ُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُة‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ارفُ ُفَال َحقل ْیُقَةُ ُاَوْ لیُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُاَبل‬
َ ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُلَ ُهَا ُ َم َجازُ ُمتَ َع‬ ُْ ‫الَ ُ لخالَفُ ُ َوال‬ ُ ‫بل‬
ُ ُُ‫ازُاَوْ لی‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫َو لع ْندَهُ َماُاَل َع َملُُبلعموْ لُمُال َم َج ل‬
If Haqeeqat-Must'amilah does not have a commonly used

Majaaz then (practicing on the) Haqeeqat is preferred (over
practicing on the Majaaz) according to all (Imaam Abu
Hanifah, Imaam Abu Yusuf, Imaam Muhammed). (However) if
Haqeeqat Must'amilah has a commonly used Majaaz then
according to Imaam Abu Hanifah  the Haqeeqat is
preferred (over Majaaz unless there is evidence that Haqeeqat
has not been intended) whereas according to Imaam Abu
Yusuf  and Imaam Muhammed practicing on 'Umoom
Majaaz' (a single broad and inclusive meaning incorporating
both the literal and figurative meaning) is preferred.
Example of Haqeeqat Must'amilah
ُُٗ‫ص لرفُُذللكَُُاللیُُ َع ْینل ُهَاُ لع ْندَہ‬ ُْ ‫الَُیَ ْاکلُُ لم‬

َ ‫نُهُ لذ لُہُ ْال لح ْنطَُ لُةُیَ ْن‬ ُ َُُ‫لمثَالُهُُٗلَوُُْ َحلَف‬
ُُ‫ص لرف‬ َ ‫الَُیَحْ نَثُ ُ لع ْندَہُٗ ُ َو لع ْندَهُ َما ُیَ ْن‬ُ ُ ‫ل ُ لم ْن ُهَا‬ ‫ْز ُ ْال َح ل‬
ُ‫اص ل‬ ُ‫ل ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالخب ل‬
َُ ‫َحتی ُلَوْ اَ َک‬
58
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫از ُفَیَحْ نَثُ ُبل اَ ْکللهَا ُ ُ َوبل اَ ْک ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫ْق ُعموْ لُم ُ ْال َم َج ل‬ ُ ‫َض َّمنهُ ُ ْال لح ْن‬
ُ‫طَةُ ُبلطَ لری ل‬ َ ‫اللیُ ُ َما ُتَت‬
‫لُ لم ْن ُهَا‬ ‫ْزُ ْال َح ل‬
ُ‫اص ل‬ ُ‫ْالخب ل‬
An example of this (where a commonly used Majaaz is
present with Haqeeqat-Must'amilah) is if a person takes an
oath that he will not eat from this wheat then this will be
taken to refer to the wheat (itself, which is Haqeeqat-
Must'amilah) according to Imaam Abu Hanifah such that
if he eats from the bread made from the wheat then he will
not be breaking his oath, whereas according to Imaam Abu
Yusuf  and Imaam Muhammed  it will refer to anything
comprising of that wheat using 'Umoom Majaaz' so he will
break his oath if he eats the wheat itself or anything made
from it.
Another example of Haqeeqat-Must'amilah
ُُ‫ب ُ لم ْن ُهَا ُکَرْ عا‬

ُ‫ص لرفُ ُاللَی ُالشرْ ل‬ َ ‫ت ُیَ ْن‬ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْش َربُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالف َرا ل‬
ُ ُ َُ‫َو َک َذا ُلَوْ َحلَف‬
َُ‫فُ َوهُ َُوُشرْ بُُ َمائل ُهَاُبل اَیُُطَ لریْقُُ َکان‬ُ‫ار ل‬ َ ‫ازُ ْالمتَ َع‬
ُ‫لع ْندَہُُٗ َو لع ْندَهُ َماُاللَیُ ْال َم َج ل‬
Similarly (as the above example where a commonly used
Majaaz was present with Haqeeqat-Must'amilah) if a person
takes an oath that he will not drink from the River
Euphrates then according to Imaam Abu Hanifah  it will
mean to sip directly from it (as this is the literal meaning of it
and it is possible) whereas according to Imaam Abu Yusuf 
and Imaam Muhammed the commonly used Majaaz will
be considered which is to drink its water in whatever way.
Difference in opinion regarding the manner in

which Majaaz substitutes Haqeeqat
59
Usool Shaashi
ُُ‫ظُ َو لع ْندَهُ َماُخَ ْلف‬ ُ‫َنُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَ لُةُفلیُ َحقُُاللَّ ْف ل‬
ُ‫خَلفُُع ل‬ ْ َُ‫یُ َحنلُْیُفَ ُة‬
ُْ ‫ث َُّمُ ْال َم َجازُُ لع ْن َُدُاَبل‬
ُ ‫ی ُنَ ْف لس ُهَا ُال‬
َُّ ‫ال‬ ُْ ‫ت ُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَةُ ُُم ْم لکُنَةُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُ َکانَ ل‬ ُْ ‫َن ُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَ لُة ُفل‬
ُ‫ع ل‬
ْ َ َ
ُُ‫ار ُالکالمُ ُلغوا‬ َ ْ َُ ‫ص‬ َّ
َ ‫از ُ َوالال‬ ْ َ
ُ‫صارُ ُاللی ُال َم َج ل‬ ْ
َ ‫اَُنَّهُٗ ُال ْمتن َُع ُال َع َملُ ُبل ُهَا ُلل َمانلعُ ُی‬
َ َ
‫یُنَ ْف لس ُهَا‬ُْ ‫نُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَةُُم ْم لکُنَةُُفل‬
ُ‫نُُلَّ ُْمُتَک ل‬ ُ‫صارُُاللَیُ ْال َم َج ل‬
ُْ ‫ازُ َوال‬ َ ‫َو لع ْندَہُُٗی‬
Then Majaaz is regarded as a substitute for Majaaz in
speech and according to Imaam Abu Yusuf  and Imaam
Muhammed  it is a substitute for the ruling such that if
the (meaning of) Haqeeqat is possible (to apply) but cannot
be applied due to an impediment (difficulty in applying the
ruling) then (only) Majaaz will be taken. If (the meaning of
Haqeeqat is) not (possible to apply from the beginning) then
the speech will be meaningless. (However) According to
Imaam Abu Hanifah  we will take Majaaz even if the
(meaning of) Haqeeqat is not possible in itself.
ُ‫صارُ ُاللَی ُ ْال َم َج ل‬

ُ‫از‬ َ ‫الَ ُی‬
ُ ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫ال ُلل َع ْب لد لُہ ُ َوهُ َُو ُاَ ْکبَرُ ُ لسنا ُ لم ْنهُ ُهُ َذا ُال ْبنل‬
َُ َ‫لمثَالهُ ُال َذا ُق‬
ُ‫قُ ْال َعبْد‬ ُ‫صارُُاللَیُ ْال َم َج ل‬
َُ َ‫ازُ َحتیُی ُْعت‬ َ ‫لع ْندَهُ َماُال ْستل َحاُلَ لُةُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَ لُةُ َو لع ْندَہُُٗی‬
An example of this (difference of opinion between Imaam Abu
Hanifah and his two students; Imaam Abu Yusuf and Imaam
Muhammed) is when a person tells his slave, who is elder
than him, "This is my son." (In this case) Imaam Abu
Yusuf  and Imaam Muhammed  will not take (the
meaning of) Majaaz because the (meaning of) Haqeeqat is
not possible (and in order for something to be a substitute, in
this case Majaaz, it is necessary for the primary ruling to be
applicable first. Since the ruling is not possible here because
the slave is elder then the master, making it impossible for the
slave to be the son of the master, the statement will be taken to
be meaningless). According to Imaam Abu Hanifah 
Majaaz will be taken (even though the literal meaning is not

possible because Majaaz is a substitute for the speech and not
60
Usool Shaashi
the ruling. Thus it is not necessary for the ruling to be
applicable first) such that the slave will be set free (because
if one becomes master of his own son then his son will be set
free automatically, thus the saying of the master, "This is my
son." Is the equivalent of saying, "I set you free").
Example
َُ ‫ی ُاَ ْلفُ ُاَوُْ ُعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُ ْال لجد‬

ُ‫َار ُ َُو‬ ُْ ‫َوعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُیخَ رَّجُ ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُفل‬
َُّ َ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُُُلَهُٗ ُ َعل‬
َ
ُ‫اریُُْحر‬ ‫قَوْ لُهُُٗ َع ْب لدیُُْاوُُْ لح َم ل‬
Based upon this (principle that Imaam Abu Hanifah says
Majaaz is a substitute for Haqeeqat in speech and Imaam Abu
Yusuf and Imaam Muhammed say it is a substitute for the
ruling) the rulings are deduced for the saying "I owe or this
wall owes a certain person one thousand" (Imaam Abu Yusuf
and Imaam Muhammed say that since the meaning of
Haqeeqat is not possible, as it is impossible for the wall to owe
anyone a thousand, Majaaz cannot be taken, thus the sentence
will be futile and a thousand will not be incumbent on anyone.
Imaam Abu Hanifah on the other hand says that Haqeeqat
does not have to be possible for Majaaz to be taken and
therefore the meaning of Majaaz is intended here, thus a
thousand will be incumbent on anyone of the two who can take
responsibility for the debt, which is the speaker in this case)
and "My slave or my donkey is free"(Imaam Abu Yusuf and
Imaam Muhammed say that since the meaning of Haqeeqat is
not possible, as it is impossible for the donkey to be set free,
Majaaz cannot be taken, thus the sentence will be futile and
neither the donkey nor the slave will be set free. Imaam Abu
Hanifah on the other hand says that Haqeeqat does not have to
be possible for Majaaz to be taken and therefore the meaning
of Majaaz is intended here, thus either one of the two will be
set free who is eligible to be set free, which is the slave in this
case).
61
Usool Shaashi
A reply to an objection
ُ‫ن‬ُْ ‫ی ُ َولَ ُهَا ُنَ َسبُ ُ َمعْروْ فُ ُ لم‬ ُْ ‫ال ُال ْم َراَتل لُه ُهُ َذا ُبل ْنتل‬
َُ َ‫الَ ُیَ ْلزَمُ ُعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُال َذا ُق‬ ُ ‫َو‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫قُ َس َواءُُ َکانَ ل‬ َّ
ُ‫َنُالطالَ ل‬ ُ‫الَُیجْ َعلُُذللكَُُ َم َجازاُُع ل‬ ُ ‫الَُتَحْ رمُُ َعلَ ْی لُهُ َو‬ ُ ُُ‫َغی لْر لُہُ َحیْث‬
ُ‫ح ُ َم ْعنَاہُ ُلَ َکانَُ ُمنَافلیا‬ َُّ ‫ص‬ ْ َّ
َ ُ ُْ‫الن ُهُ َذا ُاللفظَُ ُلَو‬ َ
َُّ ُ ‫ْال َمرْ اُةُ ُص ْغریُ ُ لسنا ُاوُْ ُک ْب َری‬
ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫ار ُةَُ َم َُع ُوجوْ لُد ُالتَّنَافل‬ ُ ‫اح ُفَیَکوْ نُ ُمنَافلیاُ ُللح ْک لم لُهُ َوهُ َُو ُالطَّالَقُ ُ َو‬
َُ ‫الَُال ْستل َع‬ ُ‫لللن َک ل‬
ْ
ُُ‫ب ُبَلُْ ُیَثبت‬ َ
ُ‫ك ُللالا ل‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫ی ُثبوْ تَُ ُال لمل ل‬ ُْ ‫الَ ُتنَافل‬ ْ
ُ ُ َ‫ن ُالبن َُّو ُة‬ ُْ ‫ف ُقَوْ لل لُه ُهُ َذا ُال ْبنل‬
َُّ ‫ی ُفَا ل‬ ُ‫بل لخالَ ل‬
‫ْال لم ْلكُُلَهُُث َُّمُی ْعتَقُُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬
(An objection on Imaam Abu Hanifah's principle that Majaaz
is a substitute for Haqeeqat in speech and not in ruling is if a
person says regarding his wife, "This is my daughter", even
though her parentage from another is well-known or she is
elder than him, then according to the principle of Imaam Abu
Hanifah the meaning of Majaaz should be taken and it will be
taken to be Talaaq. The reply to this objection is that) It does
not become necessary as a result of this (principle of Imaam
Abu Hanifah) that when a person tells his wife, "This is my
daughter" and her parentage from another is well-known
for her to be Haraam upon him (the ruling of Thihaar will
not apply) nor will it be taken to be Majaaz of Talaaq
whether she (his wife) be younger or elder than him. The
reason for this is that if the meaning of this word (daughter)
is correct (and it is taken literally to mean his blood-daughter)
then it will oppose (the validity of) Nikaah (as it is impossible
for Nikaah to exist between them when she is his daughter) and
therefore will oppose the ruling of Nikaah (when there is no
Nikaah then Talaaq cannot be issued). Isti'aarah (taking an
alternate meaning for a word) cannot be taken when two
things opposing each other (which is this case is Nikaah and
being his daughter) as opposed to the saying (to one's slave),
"This is my son" as being his son does not oppose him
being the owner (of his son). In fact ownership will first be
62
Usool Shaashi
established for the father and (only) thereafter (will the) the
son will be set free.
Lesson of the methods of Isti'aarah
ُ‫ع‬ ُ‫ام ُال َّشرْ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُاَحْ َک ل‬ ُْ ‫ار ُةَ ُفل‬ َُ ‫ن ُاال ْستل َع‬ َُّ َ‫ار لُة ُال ْعلَ ُْم ُا‬
َُ ‫ْق ُاال ْستل َع‬ ُ‫ْف ُطَ لری ل‬ ُ‫ْری ل‬‫فلی ُتَع ل‬
ُ‫ی‬ ُْ ‫ال ُبَیْنَُ ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ َو ْالح ْک لُم ُ َوالثَّانل‬ ُ‫ص ل‬َ ‫ْن ُاَ َحدهُ َما ُللوجوْ لُد ُاالت‬ ُ‫مطَّ لر َُدةُ ُبلطَ لر ْیقَی ل‬
َُ‫ح ُة‬ ‫ضُ َو ْالح ْک لُمُفَاالاَ َّولُُ لم ْنهُ َماُیوْ لجبُُ ل‬
َُّ ‫ص‬ ُ‫بُ ْال َمحْ ل‬ ُ‫الُبَیْنَُُال َّسبَ ل‬ ُ‫ص ل‬ َ ‫للوجوْ لُدُاالت‬
ُ‫ْن ُ َوهُ َُو‬ ُ‫ن ُاَ َح لُد ُالطَّ َرفَی ل‬ ُْ ‫ص َّحتَ ُهَا ُ لم‬ ‫ی ُیوْ لجبُ ُ ل‬ ُْ ‫ْن ُ َوالثَّانل‬ُ‫ار لُة ُ لمنَُ ُالطَّ َرفَی ل‬َُ ‫اال ْستل َع‬
ُ‫لُلل ْلفَرْ ل‬
‫ع‬ ُ‫ارةُُاالاَصْ ل‬ َُ ‫ال ْستل َع‬
Understand that Isti'aarah (taking an alternate meaning for
a word) in the rulings of Shari'ah are possible in two ways.
The first is when there is a relationship between the illat
(principal cause of the Hukam) and Hukam (ruling) and the
second is when there is a relationship between the Sabab
(method of deriving the Hukam) and Hukam. The ruling of
the first case (where there is a relationship between the Illat
and Hukam) is that Isti'aarah is permissible for both (the
Illat can be said referring to the Hukam and the Hukam can be
said referring to the Illat) and the ruling for the second case
(where there is a relationship between the Sabab and Hukam)
is that Isti'aarah is permissible for one and that is
Isti'aarah of the Asal(Sabab) with the Far'a (Hukam, that is
one can say the Sabab referring to the Hukam but not the other
way.)
Example of the first type of Isti'aarah
ُ‫ن ُ َملَ ْکتُ ُ َعبْداُ ُفَهُ َوحرُ ُفَ َملَكَُ ُنلصْ فَُ ُ ْال َع ْب لُد‬ َُ َ‫ل ُفل ْی َما ُال َذا ُق‬
ُْ ‫ال ُال‬ ُ‫لمثَالُ ُاالاَ َّو ل‬
ُ‫ی ُ لم ْل لک لُه ُکلُ ُ ْال َع ْب لُد‬ ُْ ‫ق ُال ُْذ ُلَ ُْم ُیَجْ تَ لم ُْع ُفل‬
ُْ َ‫عهُٗ ُث َُّم ُ َملَكَُ ُالنصْ فَُ ُاالخَ َرلَ ُْم ُی ْعت‬ َُ ‫فَبَا‬
ُ‫عهُٗ ُث َُّم‬ َُ ‫ن ُا ْشت ََریْتُ ُ َعبْداُ ُفَهُ َُو ُحرُ ُفَا ْشتَریُ ُنلصْ فَُ ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُفَبَا‬ ُ‫ل ُال ل‬ َُ ‫َولَوُْ ُقَا‬
ُ‫ك ُالش َرا َُء ُ َُو‬ ُ‫ی ُ َولَوُْ ُعَنی ُبل ْال لم ْل ل‬ ُْ ‫ق ُالنصْ فُ ُالثَّانل‬ َُ ‫ا ْشت ََریُ ُالنصْ فَُ ُاالخَ َُر ُعتل‬
63
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ك‬ ُ‫الن ُالش َرا َُء ُ لعُلَّةُ ُ ْال لم ْل ل‬
َُّ ُ ‫از‬ ُ‫ْق ُ ْال َم َج ل‬ ُ‫َّت ُنلیَّتُهُٗ ُبلطَ لری ل‬ ُْ ‫صح‬ َ ُ َُ‫بلالش َرا لُء ُ ْال لم ْلك‬
َُّ ‫ال‬
ُ ‫ْن ُال‬ ُ‫ل ُ لمنَُ ُالطَّ َرفَی ل‬ ُ‫ارةُ ُبَیْنَُ ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ َو ْال َمعْلوْ ل‬
َُ ‫ت ُاال ْستل َع‬ ُ‫َو ْال لم ْلكُ ُح ْکمهُ ُفَ َع َّم ل‬
ُ‫صةُُلل َمعْنی‬ َُّ ‫ضا لُءُخَ ا‬َ َ‫یُ َحقُُ ْالق‬ ُْ ‫ص َّدقُُفل‬ َ ‫الَُی‬ُ ُ‫یُ َحق لُه‬ ُْ ‫اَُنَّهُُٗفل ْی َماُیَکوْ نُُت َْخفلیْفاُفل‬
َُ ‫ح لُةُاال ْستل َع‬
ُ ‫ار لُة‬ َُّ ‫ص‬‫الَُلل َع ْد لُمُ ل‬
ُ ُ‫الت ُْه َُم لُة‬
An example of the first case (where there is a relationship
between the illat and Hukam) is when a person says, "If I
become owner of a slave then he is free" and then (later)
becomes owner of half a (share of a) slave which he then
sells and then later becomes owner of the other half then (in
this case) the slave will not be set free as he did not become
owner of the entire slave (at one time, which is the common
meaning of ownership). (However) If he were to say, "If I
purchase a slave then he is free" and then purchases half a
(a share of) slave which he then sells and then (later)
purchases the other half, then the second half will be set
free (because purchase in common usage does not mean that
one has to purchase the entire slave at one time but will be true
even purchased in shares. Once he purchases the second half
then it will be said that he has purchased the entire slave and
the slave will be set free but since the first half was sold and
now belongs to another, only the share which he owns will be
set free). If(in these two scenarios of ownership and
purchasing) ownership is taken to mean purchasing and
purchasing to mean ownership then his Niyyat (intention)
will be correct according to the method of Majaaz because
purchasing is the Illat (principal cause) for ownership and
ownership is its Hukam (ruling which applies on
purchasing), thus Isti'aarah is permissible for both (become
owner can mean purchase in the first statement and purchase
can mean become owner in the second statement) except that
the easier scenario (of the two) for him will not be accepted
in court because of 'Tuhmat' (suspicion that he may be lying
to for his own benefit) and not that the method of Isti'aarah
is incorrect.
64
Usool Shaashi
Example of the second type of Isti'aarah

ُُ‫صحُ ُالن‬ ‫ق ُی َ ل‬ َُ َ‫ك ُ َونَوی ُبل لُه ُالطَّال‬ ُ‫ال ُال ْم َراَتل لُه ُ َحرَّرْ ت ل‬ َُ َ‫ی ُال َذا ُق‬ ُْ ‫َو لمثَالُ ُالثَّانل‬
ُ‫ك ُال َّرقَُبَ لُة‬ُ‫ال ُ لم ْل ل‬
ُ‫طَ لُة ُزَ َو ل‬
ُ ‫اس‬ ‫ك ُ ْالبضْ لُع ُبل َو ل‬ ُ‫ال ُ لم ْل ل‬َُ ‫ْر ُبل َحقلیقَتل لُه ُیوْ لجبُ ُزَ َو‬ َُ ‫التَّحْ لری‬
ُُْ‫ق ُالَّ لذی‬ ُ َّ‫ن ُالط‬
ُ‫الَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ك ُ ْالم ْت َُع لُة ُفَ َجازَُ ُُا‬
ُ‫ن ُی ْستَ َعا َُر ُ َع ل‬ ُ‫ال ُ لم ْل ل‬
ُ‫فَ َکانَُ ُ َسبَباُ ُ َمحْ ضاُ ُللز ََو ل‬
‫كُ ْالم ْت َُع لُة‬
ُ‫هُ َوم لزیْلُُلل لم ْل ل‬
The example of the second type (of Isti'aarah where there is
a relationship between the Sabab an Hukam) is when a person
says to his wife, "I set you free" with the intention of
Talaaq, the Talaaq will apply because (the term) "setting
free" in reality absolve ones right to sexual relations by
means of one absolving his ownership thus "setting free" is
the Sabab (method of deriving the Hukam) for absolving
oneself from the right to sexual relations. Thus it is
permissible to take it (the term, "setting free") to mean
Talaaq which (also) absolves oneself from the right to
sexual relations (in other words one can say the Sabab and
refer to the Hukam).
ُ‫ن ُیَّکوْ نَُ ُالطَّالَقُ ُ ْال َواقلعُ ُبل لُه‬ ُْ َ‫ب ُا‬ ُ‫َن ُالطَّالَ ل‬
َُ ‫ق ُلَ َو َج‬ ُ‫ل ُ َم َجازاُ ُع ل‬ َُ ‫الَ ُیقَالُ ُلَوُْ ُج لع‬ ُ ‫َو‬
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫قُبَلُُْ َع ل‬ ُ‫َنُالطَّالَ ل‬ ُ‫الَُنَجْ َعلُهُُٗ َم َجازاُُع ل‬ ُ ُُ‫قُالاَنَّاُنَقوْ ل‬ ُ‫ْحُالطَّالَ ل‬ ُ‫ص لری ل‬ َ ‫َرجْ لعیاُُ َک‬
ُ‫الَ ُی لزیْلُ ُ لم ْلكَُ ُ ْالم ْت َُع لُة‬ ُ‫ی ُ ْالبَائل ل‬
ُ ُ ُ‫ن ُال لذالرَّجْ لعی‬ ُْ ‫ك ُفل‬
َُ ‫ٗ ُ َوذلل‬ُ‫ك ُ ْالم ْت َُعة ل‬ُ‫ْل ُلل لم ْل ل‬
ُ‫ْالم لزی ل‬
ُ‫لع ْن َدنَا‬
We will not say (regarding the ruling above) that if it is the
Majaaz of Talaaq then a Talaaq Raj'ie(revocable Talaaq)
should apply by it (the statement, "I set you free") in the
same manner as a Sareeh (clear, unambiguous)Talaaq
because we say that we have not made it the Majaaz of
Talaaq but rather (it is Majaaz) for absolvement from the
right to sexual intercourse and this (absolving one from
sexual intercourse) is only possible with (Talaaq) Baa'in
because (Talaaq) Raj'ie does not disallow one the right to
intercourse according to us (the Hanafi school of thought).
65
Usool Shaashi
ُْ َ‫ل ُ َجازَُ ُا‬

ُ‫ن‬ َُ ْ‫الن ُاالاُص‬ ‫الَ ُیَ ل‬
َُّ ُ ُ‫صح‬ َُ ‫ك ُ َونَوی ُبل لُه ُالتَّحُْ لری‬
ُ ُ ‫ْر‬ ُ‫ال ُال َمتل لُه ُطَل َّ ْقت ل‬
َُ َ‫َولَوُْ ُق‬
ُ ُ‫الاصل‬ ْ
ُ ‫نُیَّثبتَُُبل لُهُا‬ َ
ُْ ‫یَ ْثبتَُُبل لُهُالفَرْ عُُ َوُاُ َّماُالفَرْ عُُفَالَیَجوْ زُُا‬
ْ ْ
(Continuing with the example of the second type of Isti'aarah

where the Sabab can refer to the Hukam but the Hukam cannot
refer to the Sabab) If one says to his female slave, "I give
you Talaaq", with the intention to set her free then it is
incorrect (and the slave will not be freed) because it is
permissible to say the Sabab (setting free) and apply the
Hukam (Talaaq) but not permissible to (to say the Hukam,
which is Talaaq, and) apply the Sabab (setting free).
Deduction
َُ‫الن ُ ْال لُهُبَ ُة‬

َُّ ُ ‫ْك ُ َو ْالبَی لُْع‬ُ‫ظ ُ ْال لُهُبَ لُة ُ َوالتَّ ْمللی ل‬
ُ‫َوعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُنَقوْ لُ ُیَ ْن َعقلدُ ُالن َکاحُ ُ ُبللَ ْف ل‬
ُ‫بل َحقل ْیقَتل ُهَا ُتوْ لجبُ ُ لم ْلكَُ ُال َّرقَُبَ لُة ُ َو لم ْلكُ ُال َّرقَُبَ لُة ُیوْ لجبُ ُ لم ْلكَُ ُ ْالم ْت َُع لُة ُفلی ُاالَ َماُ لُء‬
ُ‫اح‬ُ‫َنُالن َک ل‬ ُ‫ارُع ل‬ َُ ‫نُی ْستَ َع‬ ُْ ُ‫كُ ْالم ْت َُع لُةُفَ َجازَُُا‬ ُ‫تُ لم ْل ل‬
ُ‫تُ ْال لُهُبَةُُ َسبَباُُ َمحْ ضاُُللثبوْ ل‬ ُ‫فَ َکانَ ل‬
ُ‫ظ‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْن َعقلدُ ُالبَیْعُ ُ َوال لُهُبَةُ ُبللَ ْف ل‬
ُ ُ ‫الَ ُیَ ْن َع لکسُ ُ َحتی‬ ْ ُ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُلَ ْفظُ ُالتَّ ْمللی ل‬
ُ ‫ْك ُ َوالبَی لُْع ُ َو‬
ُ‫الن َک ل‬
‫اح‬
Based upon this (principle that the Sabab can refer to the
Hukam but the Hukam cannot refer to the Sabab) we say,
Nikaah will be complete with the words of Hibah (if the
woman says; I gift myself to you, in the presence of two
witnesses and the man accepts), Tamleek (if the woman says; I
give ownership of myself to you, in the presence of two
witnesses and the man accepts), and Bay'a (if the woman says;
I sell myself to you, in the presence of two witnesses and the
man accepts) because Hibah (to gift) in reality establishes
ownership and ownership establishes the right to sexual
intercourse in female slaves, thus Hibah is a Sabab for
establishing the right to sexual intercourse and it will
therefore be correct for it (the words of Hibah, "I gift myself
66
Usool Shaashi
to you") to refer to Nikaah (because the words of Hibah
establish the right to sexual intercourse just as Nikaah does).
The same goes for the words of Tamleek (I give ownership of
myself to you) and Bay'a (I sell myself to you, because these
words after establishing ownership, establish the right to
sexual intercourse in female slaves and it will therefore be
correct for it to refer to Nikaah as it establishes the same right
as Nikaah). (However) the opposite is impermissible such
that Hibah and Bay'a will not be complete using the words
of Nikaah (one cannot gift something to another saying, I
marry this to you", in such a case ownership will not be
transferred. The same goes for Bay'a, i.e. one cannot sell
something to another with the words, "I marry this to you" and
the transaction will be invalid.)
Niyyat is not necessary
ُ‫ضعُُیَکوْ نُُ ْال َم َحلُُمتَ َعیناُُللنَوْ عُُ لمنَُُ ْال َم َج ل‬

ُ‫ازُالَُٗ َُٗیحْ تَاجُُفل ْی لُه‬ ‫یُکلُُ َموْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ث َُّمُفل‬
‫اللَیُالنُیَ لُة‬
Then in every instance in which (the meaning of) any type of
Majaaz can fit, Niyyat is not necessary (in every instance
where the meaning of Haqeeqat cannot apply the meaning of
Majaaz will be taken automatically and will not be dependent
on one's Niyyat- intention)
An objection
ُ‫ازُالَُٗ َُٗیحْ تَاجُُفل ْی لُه‬ ُ‫ضعُُیَکوْ نُُ ْال َم َحلُُمتَ َعیناُُللنَوْ عُُ لمنَُُ ْال َم َج ل‬ ‫یُکلُُ َموْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ث َُّمُفل‬
ْ
ُ‫از ُ لعندَهُ َما‬ ْ
ُ‫ح لُة ُال َم َج ل‬ َُّ ‫ص‬ َ ْ َ َ َ َ
َ ‫ال ُیقالُ ُ َول َّما ُکانَُ ُال ْمکانُ ُال َحقل ْیُق لُة ُشَرْ طاُ ُلل‬ َ ُ ‫اللَی ُالنُیَ لُة‬
َُُ‫ن ُتَ ْمللیْك‬َُّ ‫ظ ُ ْال لُهُبَ لُة ُ َم َُع ُُا‬
ُ‫اح ُبللَ ْف ل‬
ُ‫ی ُصوْ َُر لُة ُالن َک ل‬ُْ ‫از ُفل‬ ُ‫صارُ ُاللَی ُ ْال َم َج ل‬ َ ‫َکیْفَُ ُی‬
ُ ‫ْالح َُّر لُةُبل ْالبَی لُْعُ َو ْال لُهُبَ لُةُ َم َحالُُالنَّاُنَقوْ لُُذللكَُُال َّس َماُ لُءُ َواَخَ َواتل لُه‬
67
Usool Shaashi
(The author now mentions an objection on the standpoint of
Imaam Abu Yusuf and Imaam Muhammed regarding Majaaz.)
it will not be said that when practicing on the meaning of
Haqeeqat must be possible (but difficult due to exterior
factors) before Majaaz can be taken according to Imaam
Abu Yusuf  and Imaam Muhammed , so how can the
meaning of Nikaah be taken with the words of Hibah when
becoming owner of a free woman is impossible through
Hibah and Bay'a (sale, in other words the since meaning of
Haqeeqat is not possible, i.e. one cannot become owner of a
free woman through these transactions, so how can the
meaning of Majaaz, i.e. Nikaah, be taken by Imaam Abu Yusuf
and Imaam Muhammed) because we will say (in reply to this
objection) this (becoming owner of a free woman through
Hibah or sale) is possible in one way and that is if she
becomes Murtad (abandons Islaam), flees to the land of the
disbelievers and is then caught (and brought back to the
lands of Islaam as a slave where it is now possible to transfer
ownership of her through Hibah or sale). This has become an
example of touching the sky (taking an oath to touch the sky)
and other similar cases (where an oath was taken on a
seemingly impossible act, which should render the statement
futile because of its impossibility but is still regarded as valid
because of it being possible through a miracle).
Lesson on Sareeh and Kinaayah
ُ‫ْحُ َُوُ ْال لکنَاُیَ لة‬

ُ‫َّری ل‬
‫فصل فلیُالص ل‬
ُ‫َّریْحُ ُلَ ْفظُ ُیَکوْ نُ ُ ْالم َرادُ ُبل لُه ُظَا لُهراُ ُ َکقَوْ لل لُه ُبلعْتُ ُ َُو ُالشت ََریْتُ ُ َُو ُا ْمثالل لُه‬
َ َ ْ ‫ُاَلص ل‬
ُُ‫ن ُاَ ْخبَارُ ُاَوُُْنَعْت‬ ُْ ‫َوح ْکمُهُٗ ُاَُنَّهُٗ ُیوْ لجبُ ُثبوْ تَُ ُ َم ْعنَاہُٗ ُبَ اَیُ ُطَ لریْقُ ُ َکانَُ ُ لم‬
ُ‫ال ُال ْم َرَُا‬ َُ َ‫َن ُالنُیَّ لُة ُ َوعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُق‬ ُْ ‫اَوُْ ُنلدَاءُ ُ َو لم‬
ُْ ‫ن ُح ْک لم لُه ُاُُنَّهُٗ ُیَ ْستَ ْغنل‬
ُ‫ی ُع ل‬
ُ‫كُاَوُُْیَاطَاللقُُیَقَعُُالطَّالَقُُنَویُبل لُهُالطَّالَقُاَوُُْلَ ُْمُیَ ْن لُو‬ ُ‫تُطَاللقُُاَوُُْطَل َّ ْقت ل‬ ُ‫تل لُهُاَ ْن ل‬
ُ‫الُلل َع ْب لد لُہُاَ ْنتَُُحرُُاوُُْ َحرَّرْ تكَُُاَوُُْیَاُحر‬ َُ َ‫َو َک َذاُلَوُُْق‬
68
Usool Shaashi
Sareeh is a word the meaning of which is clear (transparent
and unambiguous, with no need for further clarification) such
as the words 'ُ‫'بلعْت‬- "I sold" and 'ُ‫'ال ْشتَ َریْت‬- "I bought", etc.
The ruling of Sareeh is that its (apparent) meaning will be
established (adhered to) regardless of the manner it has
been mentioned in, whether it be Khabar (information),
sifat (adjective) or Nidaa (title or label). Another ruling of
Sareeh is that it is not dependent upon Niyyat (intention,
since its meaning is apparent and clear there will be no need to
determine the intention of the speaker before applying the
Hukam to his speech). Based upon this (that Niyyat is not
necessary in Sareeh speech) we say if a person tells his wife,
"You are divorced" (an example where a Sareeh word has
been used as sifat- adjective), "I gave you Talaaq" (an
example where a Sareeh word was used as Khabar- to give
information) or (addressing his wife, he says,) "O Divorced
one!" (An example where a Sareeh word was used as a title for
another), the Talaaq will apply whether the person had the
intention for Talaaq or not. In a similar manner (intention
will not be taken into account) when one tells his slave, "You
are free" (example of Sifat), "I set you free" (example of
Khabar), or "O free one!" (example of Nidaa, and in all three
cases the free will be set free whether the speaker had the
intention to set the slave free or not).
Deduction
ُُ‫الن ُقَوْ ُلَهُٗ ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{ َول لکن ُی لریْد‬ َُّ ُ َ‫ار ُة‬ َُ َ‫ن ُالتَّیَم َُم ُیفلیْدُ ُالطَّ ُه‬َُّ ‫َُو ُعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال‬
ُ‫ن ُاَ َحدهُ َما‬ َُ َ‫ل ُالطَّ ُه‬
ُ‫ار لُة ُُبل لُه ُ َوللل َّشافل لعیُ ُفل ْی لُه ُقَوْ الَ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُحصوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ص لریْحُ ُفل‬ َ }‫للیطَهُ َرک ُْم‬
ُ‫ث‬ُ‫ارةُُبَلُُْهُ َُوُ َساتلرُُلل ْل َح َد ل‬ َُ َ‫ْسُبلطَ ُه‬ َُ ‫ضروْ لرُیَّةُُ َواالخَرُُاَُنَّهُُٗلَی‬ َ ُُ‫ارة‬ َُ َ‫اَُنَّهُُٗطَ ُه‬
Based upon this (principle that Sareeh is a word with a clear
meaning, which will be established regardless of the manner it
was mentioned in) we say that Tayammum promotes
69
Usool Shaashi
Tahaarat (is complete purity without restriction) because the
verse of ALLAAH Ta'ala,
}‫َ{وٰل ِکن ی ُّ ِریْدُ ِل ُی َطه َِرُ ُْک‬

"But wants to purify you."(Surah Maa'idah: 6)
is Sareeh (clear and unambiguous) in obtaining Tahaarat

with it (Tayammum). Imaam Shaafie  (however) has two
opinions; one is that it is 'Tahaarat-Dharooriyah' (Tahaarat
only out of necessity and will there for apply as long as the
necessity remains) and the other is that it is not Tahaarat
but 'Saatirul Hadath' (conceals impurity for the period
during which one performs his ibaadat and after completion no
longer does so).
Differences which arise as a result of this
ُ‫ت ُ َواَدَا لُء‬ ُ‫ْل ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬

َُ ‫از لُہ ُقَب‬
‫ْن ُ لمن ُ َج َو ل‬ُ‫َوعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُیخَ رَّجُ ُ ْال َم َسائللُ ُعَلی ُ َم ْذ ُهَبَی ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫احدُ ُ َُو ُال َما َُمةُ ُ ْالمتَیَم لُم ُلل ْلمتَ َوضئلیْنَُ ُ َو َج َوازہُٗ ُبلدوْ ل‬ ‫ن ُبلتَیَممُ ُ َو ل‬ َ ‫ْالفَ لری‬
ُ‫ْضتَ ْی ل‬
ُ‫س ُاُ لُو ُ ْال َعضْ لُو ُبل ْالوضوُْ لُء ُ َو َج َوازہُٗ ُلل ْل لع ْی لُد ُ َُو ُ ْال َجنَازَُ لُة‬ ُ‫ف ُالنَّ ْف ل‬ ُ‫ف ُت َْل ل‬ ُ‫خَ وْ ل‬
‫ار لُة‬ َّ
َُ َ‫َو َج َوازہُُٗبلنلُی َّ لُةُالط ُه‬
Based upon this (difference of opinion amongst Imaam
Abu Hanifah and Imaam Shaafie, whereby Imaam Abu Hanifah
says that Tayammum is unrestricted Tahaarat and Imaam
Shaafie says that it is Tahaarat out of necessity) extraction of
Masaa'il (rulings) between the two Mathaahib (between the
Hanafi and Shaafie Madhab) differ with regards to
performing Tayammum before the time of Salaah sets in
(Imaam Abu Hanifah says that it is permissible to perform
70
Usool Shaashi
Salaah with that Tayammum because it is complete Tahaarat
without restriction whereas the Imaam Shaafie says that it is
impermissible to perform Tayammum with that Tayammum as
it is a Tahaarat out of necessity and there is no necessity
before the time of Salaah sets in),to perform two Fardh
Salaah with the same Tayammum (Imaam Abu Hanifah says
that it is permissible to perform two Fardh Salaah with the
same Tayammum because it is complete Tahaarat without
restriction, whereas Imaam Shaafie says it is impermissible to
perform two Fardh Salaah with the same Tayammum as it is
Tahaarat out of necessity and the necessity ended after the
performance of the first Fardh Salaah), the Imaamat of one
who performed Tayammum over those who performed
Wudhu (Imaam Abu Hanifah says it is permissible as
Tayammum is complete Tahaarat without restriction, whereas
Imaam Shaafie says it is impermissible because it is Tahaarat
out of necessity as opposed to Wudhu which is real Tahaarat.
Thus the condition of the Musallees is above that of the Imaam,
which makes it impermissible for him to make Imaamat over
them), performing Tayammum when one does not have fear
for his life or (of losing) a limb (Imaam Abu Hanifah says that
Tayammum is permissible even if one only fears that his illness
will increase, whereas Imaam Shaafie says it is only
permissible if he has fear for his life or of losing a limb as then
only will there be a necessity and Tayammum is only Tahaarat
out of necessity), permissibility of Tayammum for Eid
salaah and Janaazah Salaah(Imaam Abu Hanifah says that it
is permissible to make Tayammum for these Salaah if one fears
that he will miss the Salaah if he proceeds to perform Wudhu
as there is no Qadhaa for these two Salaah, whereas Imaam
Shaafie says one cannot perform Tayammum for these two
Salaah but one should perform Wudhu then he should make
Qadhaa), as well as its permissibility with the intention of
Tahaarat(since Imaam Abu Hanifah regards Tayammum as a
complete Tahaarat without restriction, he says it is permissible
71
Usool Shaashi
to perform Tayammum with the intention of obtaining
Tahaarat. Imaam Shaafie on the other hand, according to one
opinion states that Tayammum is not Tahaarat at all and
according to his other opinion is Tahaarat out of necessity,
thus according to him Tayammum will not be valid with the
intention of Tahaarat but instead one must make the intention
that he is performing Tayammum to read Salaah).
Definition and ruling of Kinaayah
ُ‫ارفاُ ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة‬

‫ْر ُمتَ َع ل‬ َُ ‫صی‬‫ن ُیَّ ل‬ َُ ‫ی ُ َما ُا ْستَت ََُر ُ َم ْعنَاہُ ُ َو ْال َم َجازُ ُقَب‬
ُْ ‫ْل ُُا‬ َُ ‫َو ْال لکنَاُیَةُ ُ لُه‬
ُ‫ل‬ َ
ُ‫ْال لکنَاُیَ لُة ُ َوح ْکمُ ُ ْال لکنَاُیَ لُة ُثبوْ تُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُبل ُهَا ُ لع ْن َُد ُوجوْ لُد ُالنُیَ لُة ُاوُْ ُبلدَالُلَ لُة ُ ْال َحا ل‬
ُ‫ن ُ َدللیْلُ ُیَزوْ لُ ُبل لُه ُالتَّ َرددُ ُ َویَت ََرجَّحُ ُبل لُه ُبَعْضُ ُ ْالوجوْ لُہ ُ َوللهُ َذا‬ ُ ُ ‫ال ْذا‬
ُْ ‫الَ ُب َُّد ُُلَهُٗ ُ لم‬
ُ‫ق ُلل َمعْنیُ ُالتَّ َرد لُد‬ ُ‫ب ُالطَّالَ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ُْ ‫ی ُلَ ْفظُ ُ ْالبَیْنوْ ُنَ لُة ُ َوالتَّحْ لری لُْم ُ لکنَاُیَةُ ُفل‬ َُ ‫ْال َمعْنی ُسم‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫ق ُ َُو ُیَتَفَرَّعُ ُ لم ْنهُ ُح ْکمُ ُ ْال لکنَایَا ل‬ ُ‫ل ُالطَّالَ ل‬ َُ ‫الَ ُاَُنَّهُٗ ُیَ ْع َملُ ُ َع َم‬ ُ ُ ‫َار ْالم َرا لُد‬
‫َوا ْستلت ل‬
‫یُ َحقُُ َع ْد لُمُ لوالَُیَ لُةُالرَّجْ َُع لُة‬ ُْ ‫فل‬
Kinaayah is a word whose meaning is obscure and Majaaz,

before it (its intended meaning) becomes known is the same
as Kinaayah (as either the literal meaning or figurative
meaning can be implied). The ruling of Kinaayah is that the
apparent meaning will be applied when the (speaker's)
intention (objective) was for it or (the intention is made clear)
by the occasion (condition or context in which the statement
was said). The reason for this (the need for the intention of
the speaker to be known or the meaning determined by the
occasion or context in which it was said) is that it is necessary
for (such) proof to exist which will remove any doubt (with
regards to its intended meaning) and one meaning be given
preference (over another). As a result of this (that the
meaning of Kinaayah is obscure) the words of
'Baynoonah'(by saying, "You are separated from me") and
'Tahreem' (by saying, "You are forbidden to me") are
classified as Kinaayah in the chapter of Talaaq because of
72
Usool Shaashi
doubt (in its intended meaning) and because its purport
(meaning) is hidden, and (it is) not (classified as Kinaayah
because) that they serve the same purpose as (the words of)
Talaaq(thus concluding that a Talaaq Raj'ie will apply as is
the opinion of Imaam Shaafie).
Punishments are not established by Kinaayah
ُ‫الَ ُیقَامُ ُبل ُهَا ُ ْالعقوْ بَاتُ ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُاَقَ َُّر ُعَلی‬ ُ ُ ‫َوللوجوْ لُد ُ َم ْعنَی ُالتَّ َرد لُد ُفلی ُ ْال لکنَاُیَ لُة‬
‫الَ ُیقَامُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُ ْال َحدُ ُ َمالَ ُْم ُیُ ْذ َک لُر ُاللَّ ْفظُ ُالص ل‬
ُُ‫َّریْح‬ ُ ُ ‫ب ُالزنَا ُ َوالس لَّرُقَ لُة‬ ُْ ‫نَ ْف لس لُه ُفل‬
ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬
ُ‫ار لُةُ َولَوُْ ُقَ َذفَُ ُ َرجُالُ ُبلالزنَا‬ َُ ‫س ُبلاال َش‬ ُ‫الَُیقَامُ ُ ْال َحدُ ُ َعلَی ُاالاُ ْخ َر ل‬ ُ ُ ‫َوللهُ َذا ُ ْال َمعْنی‬
ُ‫الُالتَّصْ لدی ل‬
ُْ ‫ْقُُلَهُُٗفل‬
‫یُ َغی لْرلُہ‬ ُ‫الَُیَ لجبُُ ْال َحدُُ َعلَ ْی لُهُالحْ تل َم ل‬ ُ َُُ‫ص َد ْقت‬َ ُُ‫الُاالخَ ر‬ َُ َ‫فَق‬
Based upon this (principle that words of Kinaayah are
obscure and unclear) punishments (Shar'ie punishments and
sentences) will not be executed by it (by Kinaayah) such that
if one admits to committing Zinaa (fornication) or stealing
the (Shar'ie) punishment will not be executed until he uses
(admits it using) Sareeh (clear and unambiguous words). As a
result of this (that Shar'ie punishments are not executed by
testimonies in Kinaayah) the (Shar'ie) punishment will not
carried out on a dumb person (if he confesses to a crime
using sign language). (In the same manner) If a person falsely
accuses another of Zinaa (fornication) and another says (in
corroboration with the accuser), "You have spoken the
truth" then the punishment (of false accusation) will not be
executed on him (the corroborated who said, "You have
spoken the truth") because there is a possibility that he may
be affirming something else that the accuser said (and not
corroborating his false testimony for Zinaa).
73
Usool Shaashi
Lesson on Mutaqaabalaat1
‫فصل‬
ْ ْ
َُ ‫ی ُُبل ُهَا ُالظَّا لُه َُر ُ َوالنَّصَُّ ُ َوالمفَس‬
ُ‫َّر ُ َوالمحْ َک َُم ُ َم َُع ُیقَابلل ُهَا‬ ُ‫ُفلی ُ ْالمتَقَابلالَ ل‬
ُْ ‫ت ُنَ ْعنل‬
‫لُ َو ْالمتَ َشابل لُه‬
ُ‫لُ َو ْالمجْ َم ل‬ ُ‫لمنَُُ ْالخَ فلیُُ َو ْالم ْش َک ل‬
By Mutaqaabalaat we refer to the terms Thaahir, Nas,

Mufassar, and Muhkam and their opposites of Khafie,
Mushkil, Mujmal, and Mutashaabih.
ُْ ‫اع ُ لم‬
ُ‫ن ُ َغی لُْر‬ ُ‫فَالظَّا لُهرُ ُالسْمُ ُللکلُ ُ َکالَمُ ُظَ ُهَ َُر ُ ْالم َرادُ ُبل لُه ُلللسَّا لم لُع ُبلنَ ْف ل‬
ُ‫س ُالس َم ل‬
ُ‫تَ اَمل‬
Thaahir is a word, which the listener understands its

meaning by merely listening to it, without any reflection or
contemplation.
ُ‫قُ ْال َکالَمُُالاَجْ لل له‬

َُ ‫َوالنَّصُُ َماُ لس ْی‬
Nas is the crux and object of the speech.
Example one of Thaahir and Nas
ُ‫ن‬ ُْ َ‫لُللاُُ ْالبَ ْی َُعُ َو َح َّر َُمُالربوُ}ُفَاالُیَةُُ لس ْیق‬

ُ‫تُللبَیَا ل‬ َُّ ‫یُقَوْ لل لُهُتَ َعالیُُ{اَ َح‬
ُْ ‫َو لمثَالُهُُٗفل‬
ُُ‫التَّ ْف لرُقَ لُة ُبَیْنَُ ُ ْالبَی لُْع ُ َوالربوُ ُ َردا ُلل َما ُا َّدعَاہُ ُ ْالکفَّارُ ُ لمنَُ ُالتَّس لْوُیَ لُة ُبَ ْینَهُ َما ُ َحیْث‬
ُ‫س‬ُ‫قَالوْ ا ُ{النَّ َما ُ ْالبَیْعُ ُ لم ْثلُ ُالربوُ} ُ َوقَ ُْد ُعلل َُم ُ لحلُ ُ ْالبَی لُْع ُ َوحرْ َُمةُ ُالربوا ُبلنَ ْف ل‬
‫یُ لحلُُ ْالبَی لُْعُ َوحرْ َُم لُةُالربوا‬ ُْ ‫ارُذللكَُُنَصافلیُالتَّ ْف لرُقَ لُةُظَا لُهراُُفل‬ َُ ‫ص‬ َ َ‫اعُف‬ُ‫الس َم ل‬
An example of this (of Thaahir and Nas) is the verse of
ALLAAH Ta'ala,
1
Mutaqaabalaat refers to those terms which have opposites, such as Thaahir is the opposite of
Khafie, Nas is the opposite of Mushkil, Mufassar is the opposite of Mujmal, and Muhkam is
the opposite of Mutashaabih.
74
Usool Shaashi
}‫ہللا الْ َب ْی َع َو َح َّر َم ِالر ٰبو‬
ُ ‫{ َا َح َّل‬
"ALLAAH has permitted trade and forbidden interest."

(Surah Baqarah: 275)
The crux or object of this verse is to differentiate between

trade and interest, and refute the claim of the Kuffaar of
them (trade and interest) being the same when they said,
}‫{ ِان َّ َما الْ َب ْی ُع ِمثْلُ ِالر ٰبو‬
"Trade is just like interest." (Surah Baqarah: 275)
We learn from this (verse) the permissibility of trade and

the prohibition of interest by merely listening to this verse
(without the need for further explanation or clarification), thus
differentiation between trade and interest (which is the
object of this sentence) will be Nas, and permissibility of
trade and prohibition of interest (which we understand by
merely listening to this verse) is Thaahir.
Example two of Thaahir and Nas
َُ ‫اب ُلَک ُْم ُمنَُ ُالن َساُ لُء ُ َم ْثنی ُ َوثل‬

ُ‫ث ُ َُو‬ َُ َ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُقَوْ لهُ ُتَ َعالی{ ُفَا ْن لکحوْ ا ُ َما ُط‬
ُ‫اع‬
ُ‫س ُالس َم ل‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫ان ُ ْال َع َد لُد ُ َوقَ ُْد ُعلل َُم ُاالطالَقُ ُ َواال َجا َُزةُ ُبلنَف ل‬
ُ‫ق ُ ْال َکالَمُ ُللبَیَ ل‬
َُ ‫رب َُع} لس ْی‬
ْ
‫انُال َع َد لُد‬
ُ‫یُبَیَ ل‬
ُْ ‫قُنَصاُفل‬ ْ
ُ‫یُ َحقُُاالطالَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ارُذللكَُُظَا لُهراُُفل‬ َُ ‫ص‬َ َ‫ف‬
Similarly, the verse,
}‫اب لَ ُ ُْک ِم َن ِالن َسا ِء َمث ْٰٰن َوثُ ٰل َث َو ُربٰ َع‬

َ ‫{ فَا ْن ِک ُح ْوا َما َط‬
"Then marry two, three, or four women with whom you

are pleased (to have as your wives)." (Surah Nisaa: 3)
75
Usool Shaashi
Has been mentioned with the purpose (objective) of
explaining the number (of wives one can be married to at one
time, which is four). We learn of the permissibility of
marriage itself by merely listening to the verse (as giving the
order to marry would obviously imply that marriage is
permissible), thus permissibility to marry will be Thaahir
and the number (of wives one can marry at one time) will be
Nas.
Example Three of Thaahir and Nas
ُُْ‫نُاَو‬
َُّ ُ‫نُطَلَّ ْقتمُُالن َساُ َُءُ َمالَ ُْمُتَ َمسوْ ه‬ُْ ‫َاحُ َعلَیْک ُْمُال‬
َُ ‫الَُجن‬ ُ {ُُ‫ُُ َو َکذللكَُُقَوْ لُهُُٗتَ َعالی‬
ْ َّ
ُْ ‫ی ُح ْک لُم ُ َمن ُل ُْم ُی َسمُ ُلَ ُهَا ُال َم ُْهرُ ُ َوظَا لُهرُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ی‬ ُْ ‫ْضةُ}ُنَصُ ُفل‬ َُّ ُ‫تَ ْف لرضوْ ا ُلَه‬
َُ ‫ن ُفَ لری‬
ُ‫صح‬ ‫نُ لذ ْک لُرُ ْال َم ُْه لُرُیَ ل‬ َُ ‫نُالن َک‬
ُ‫احُبلدوْ ل‬ َُّ َ‫ارةُُاللیُا‬ ُ‫جُبلالطَّالَ ل‬
َُ ‫قُ َوال َش‬ ُ‫ال ْستل ْبدَا لُدُال َّزوْ ل‬
Similarly in the verse,
}‫{ َال ُجنَ َاح عَلَ ْی ُ ُْک ِا ْن َطل َّ ْق ُ ُُت ِالن َسا َء َمالَ ْم تَ َم ُّس ْوه َُّن َٔا ْو تَ ْف ِرضُ ْوا لَه َُّن فَ ِریْضَ ًة‬
"There is no sin on you if you divorce women while you

have not touched them (not yet met with them in privacy) nor
fixed a dowry for them." (Surah Baqarah: 236)
explaining the laws with regards to that woman whose

Mehr (dowry) has not been mentioned (and then divorced
before the marriage can be consummated) is Nas (the object
and purpose of the verse) and (since we learn) that men have
the right of issuing Talaaq (by merely listening to the verse it)
is (will be) Thaahir and indicates that Nikaah without
mentioning the Mehr is valid.
Example Three of Thaahir and Nas
76
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ی‬ َُ ‫ارحْ مُُ َمحْ َرمُُ لم ْنهُُعتل‬
ُْ ‫قُ َعلَ ْی لُهُنَصُُفل‬ َ ‫نُ َّملَكَُُ َذ‬
ُْ ‫َو َکذللكَُُقَوْ لُهُُٗ َعلَ ْی لُهُال َّسالَمُ َم‬
ُ‫تُ ْال لم ْل ل‬
‫كُُلَه‬ ُ‫یُثبوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫بُ َوظَا لُهرُُفل‬ ُ‫قُلل ْلقَ لر ْی ل‬
ُ‫اقُ ْال لع ْت ل‬
ُ‫ال ْستلحْ قَ ل‬
Similarly in the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah  , "Whoever

becomes owner of his immediate relative (son, father,
daughter, mother, etc), (the slave/immediate relative) will be
set free", freedom for one's blood relative is Nas (the
objective or purpose of this Hadeeth) and establishing
ownership is Thaahir (we learn by merely listening to the
words, "becomes owner", that ownership is first established
and thereafter the slave will be set free).
The ruling of Thaahir and Nas
ُ‫ْن ُ َم َُع‬ َّ ‫ْن ُ َکانَا ُاُوْ خَ ا‬

ُ‫صی ل‬ ُ‫ل ُبل لُه َما ُعَا َّمی ل‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُ ُالظَّا لُه لُر ُ َوالنَّصُ ُوجوْ بُ ُ ْال َع َم ل‬
ُ‫ازُ َم َُعُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَ لُة‬
ُ‫ْرُ َوذللكَُُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُةُ ْال َم َج ل‬
ُ‫الُال َرا َُد لُةُ ْال َغی ل‬
ُ‫الحْ تل َم ل‬
The ruling of Thaahir and Nas is that it is Waajib to

practice on it whether they be Aam or Khaas with the
possibility that another (meaning) could be intended. This
(that another meaning could be intended) is the same as (that)
Majaaz with (which has the possibility that) Haqeeqat (could
be implied).
َُ ‫َوعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُا ْشتَری ُقَ لر ْیُبَهُٗ ُ َحتی ُعتل‬
ُُ‫ق ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُیَکوْ نُ ُهُ َُو ُم ْعتلقا‬
ُ ‫َویَکوْ نُُ ْال َو‬
‫الَءُُُلَه‬
Based upon this (ruling that it is waajib to act upon Thaahir
and Nas) we say; if a person purchases his blood relative
such that they are set free, he (the purchaser) will be the
Mu'tiq (the one who set him free) and will also have the right
of Walaa' (the right to inherit if the deceased has no Dhawil
Furoodh or Asabah Nasabi).
77
Usool Shaashi
Contradiction between Thaahir and Nas
Example One
ُ‫ی ُنَ ْف َس ل‬
ُُ‫ك‬ ُْ ‫ال ُلَ ُهَا ُطَلقل‬ ْ َ‫َُو ُالنَّ َما ُی‬
َُ َ‫ظ ُهَرُ ُالتَّفَاوتُ ُبَ ْینَهُ َما ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْالمقَابَُلَ لُة ُ َوللهُ َذا ُلَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫قُظَا لُهرُُفلی‬ ُ‫النُهُ َذاُنَصُُفلیُالطَّالَ ل‬ َُّ ُ‫یُیَقَعُُالطَّالَقُُ َرجْ لعیا‬ ُْ ‫تُاَبَ ْنتُُنَ ْف لس‬ ُْ َ‫فَقَال‬
ُ‫ْالبَیْنوْ ُنَ لُةُفَیَت ََرجَّحُُ ْال َع َملُُبلالنَّص‬
The difference between Thaahir and Nas becomes clear
when they contradict each other (and in such a case Nas will
be given preference over Thaahir). Based upon this (rule that
Nas will be given preference over Thaahir when they
apparently contradict each other) if a person says to his wife,
"Give yourself Talaaq" and she then says, "I separate
myself from you" (which is Talaaq-Kinaayah and should
result in a Talaaq Baa'in- irrevocable Talaaq) then a Talaaq
Raj'ie (revocable Talaaq) will fall because issuing of Talaaq
is Nas (the object and purpose of this speech) and Thaahir
(what we understand by merely listening) is Baynoonah
(separation, i.e. Talaaq-Kinaayah), so practicing on Nas will
be given preference (because Nas is the actual object and
purpose of the speech).
Example two
ُُ‫ن ُاَب َْوالل ُهَا ُ َواَ ْلبَانل ُهَا ُنَص‬

ُْ ‫ل ُع َر ْیُنَ ُةَ ُال ْش َربوْ ا ُ لم‬ ُ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُقَوْ لُهُٗ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَمُ ُال ُْه ل‬
ُ‫ل ُ َوقَوْ لُهُٗ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬ ْ
ُ‫ب ُالبَوْ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُال َجازَُ لُة ُشرْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ب ُالشفَا لُء ُ َوظَا لُهرُ ُفل‬ ُ‫ان ُ َسبَ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُبَیَ ل‬ُْ ‫فل‬
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫ی ُوجوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ْر ُ َع ْنهُ ُنَصُ ُفل‬ ْ
ُ‫ب ُالقَب ل‬ُ‫ن ُعَا َُّم ُةَ ُ َع َذا ل‬ َُّ ‫ل ُفَا ل‬ ْ
ُ‫ال َّسالَم ُال ْستَ ْن لزهُوْ ا ُ لمنَُ ُالبَوْ ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ ْ
ُ‫الَ ُیَ لحلُ ُشرْ بُ ُالبَوْ ل‬ َّ
ُ َ‫ل ُفَیَت ََرجَّحُ ُالنَّصُ ُ َعلَی ُالظا لُه لُر ُف‬ ُ‫َن ُ ْالبَوْ ل‬
ُ‫از ُع ل‬ُ‫االحْ تل َر ل‬
ُ‫اَصْ ال‬
Similarly in the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah  to the people of

Uraynah, "Drink from its (camel's) urine and milk",
explaining the cure (treatment with urine) is Nas (the object
78
Usool Shaashi
and purpose of this Hadeeth) and permissibility to drink
(camel) urine is Thaahir (what we learn by merely listening to
the speech, whereas) in another Hadeeth of Rasulullaah ,
"Safeguard yourself from urine for undoubtedly generally
punishment in the grave is a result of it (not safeguarding
oneself from urine)", abstaining from urine being Waajib is
Nas, so Nas will be given preference over Thaahir and
drinking urine will not be permissible at all.
Example Three
ُ‫ن ُ ْالع ْش لُر‬

ُ‫ی ُبَیَا ل‬ ُْ ‫َوقَوْ لُهُٗ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَمُ ُ َما ُ َسقَ ْتهُ ُال َّس َماُءُ ُفَفل ْی لُه ُ ْالع ْشرُ ُنَصُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ی ُ ْالع ْش لُر‬
ُ‫ی ُنَ ْف ل‬
ُْ ‫ص َدُقَةُ ُم َؤ َّولُ ُفل‬
َ ُ‫ت‬ ُ‫ْس ُفلی ُ ْالخَ ضْ َر َوا ل‬ َُ ‫َوقَوْ لهُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَمُ ُلَی‬
‫ی‬ َ
ُْ ‫ص َدُقَ ُةَُتَحْ تَ لملُُوجوْ هاُُفَیَت ََرجَّحُُاالا َّولُُ َعلَیُالثَّانل‬ َُّ
َّ ‫النُال‬
And the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "That which has been

irrigated by the sky (rainwater), Ushr (one tenth)is due from
it" regarding giving one tenth in charity is Nas(the object
and purpose of this Hadeeth is to state that one tenth of any
produce which has been irrigated by the rain must be given as
Sadaqah) and the Hadeeth, "There is no Sadaqah due on
vegetables" is Mu'awwal (the word Sadaqah could refer to
many things; Zakaat, charity, Ushr, etc and through Ta'weel it
has been determined that it refers to Ushr) in the exclusion of
Ushr(thus Hadeeth has been said to mean, "There is no Ushr
due on vegetables") because Sadaqah has many meanings.
Thus the first (Nas) will be given preference over the
second (Mu'awwal and Ushr will be due on vegetables).
Definition of Mufassar
ُُ‫ْلُ ْالمتَکلل لُمُبل َحیْث‬

ُ‫نُقَب ل‬
ُْ ‫انُ لم‬ ُ‫َواَ َّماُ ْالمفَسَّرُُفَهُ َو َماُظَ ُهَ َُرُ ْالم َرادُُبل لُهُ لمنَُُاللَّ ْف ل‬
ُ‫ظُبلبَیَ ل‬
ُ‫صی ل‬
‫ْص‬ ‫ْلُ َوالتَّ ْخ ل‬ ‫الَُیَبْقیُ َم َُعهُُٗالحْ تل َمالُُالتَّ ل‬
ُ‫اوی ل‬ ُ
79
Usool Shaashi
Mufassar is a word the meaning of which has been clarified
by the speaker such that there remains no possibility of
Ta'weel (alternate interpretation) or Takhsees (exclusion of
part of its constituents).
Example of Mufassar
ُ‫ک لُة‬َُ ‫کةُ ُکلهُ ُْم ُاَجْ َمعوْ نَُ}فَالسْمُ ُ ْال َمالَئل‬ َُ ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{فَ َس َج َُد ُ ْال َمالَئل‬ ُْ ‫لمثَالُهُٗ ُفل‬
ُ‫ْص‬
ُ‫صی ل‬ ‫ْص ُقَائلمُ ُفَا ْن َس َُّد ُبَابُ ُالتَّ ْخ ل‬
ُ‫صی ل‬ ‫ال ُالتَّ ْخ ل‬َُ ‫ن ُالحْ تل َم‬ ُ ‫ظَا لُهرُ ُفلی ُ ْالعموْ لُم ُال‬
َُّ َ‫الَُّا‬
ُ‫ْل ُبلقَوْ لل لُه‬ ‫ی ُالحْ تل َمالُ ُالتَّ ْف لرُقَ لُة ُفلی ُالسجوْ لُد ُفَا ْن َس َُّد ُبَابُ ُالتَّ ل‬
ُ‫اوی ل‬ َُ ‫بلقَوْ لل لُه ُکلهُ ُْم ُث َُّم ُبَقل‬
َُُ‫اَجْ َمعوْ ن‬
An example (of Mufassar) is the verse of ALLAAH Ta'ala,
َُ ‫{فَ َس َج َُدُ ْال َمالَئل‬

}َُ‫کةُُکلهُ ُْمُاَجْ َمعوْ ن‬
"So (when ALLAAH issued the command to bow down) every
single one of the angels bowed down to him together..."
(Surah Saad: 73)
The word angles is Thaahir in being general (that all the

angles are being referred to) but it has the possibility of
Takhsees (such that some angels may be excluded) but the
possibility of Takhsees was closed with the words, "ُ‫ كله ْم‬-
every single one". The possibility of difference in (the
manner or time they took to make) Sajdah still remained and
so the Ta'weel (interpreting it that they all made Sajdah
separately at different times) was closed by the words"‫اَجْ َمعوْ ن‬-
together" (which indicates that all the angels performed
Sajdah together at the same time).
Example of Mufassar in the laws of Shari'ah
Example One
80
Usool Shaashi
ُُ‫الُتَزَ َّوجْ تُُفالَُنَةُُ َش ُْهراُُبل َک َذاُفَقَوْ لُهُُٗتَزَ َّوجْ تُُظَا لُهر‬ َُ َ‫تُال َذاُق‬ ُ‫َوفلیُال َّشرْ لعیَا ل‬
ْ ْ ْ
َُ ‫ال ُالم ْت َُع لُة ُقَائلمُ ُفَبلقَوْ لل لُه ُ َش ُْهراُ ُفَس‬
ُ‫َّر ُالم َرا َُد ُبل لُه ُفَقلنَا‬ َُّ َ‫الَّ ُا‬
َُ ‫ن ُالحْ تل َم‬ ُ‫فلی ُالن َک ل‬
ُ ‫اح ُال‬
ُُ‫ْسُبلنل َکاح‬ َُ ‫هُ َذاُم ْت َُعةُُ َولَی‬
(An example of Mufassar) In (laws of) Shari'ah is when a
person says, "I married a certain person for a month in lieu
of this (Mehr)." His saying, "I married" is Thaahir for
(clear and understood by merely listening to refer to) Nikaah
except that it has the possibility of referring to Mut'aa
(temporary marriage, which is Haraam) and by saying, "for a
month" clarifies his meaning. We therefore say that this is
Mut'aa (and Haraam) and is not Nikaah.
Example Two
ُُٗ‫َاع ُفَقَوْ لُه‬ ْ ‫ن ُهُ َذ‬

ُ‫اال َمت ل‬ ُْ ‫ن ُهُ َذا ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُاَ َو لم‬
ُ‫ن ُثَ َم ل‬ ُ‫ن ُثَ َم ل‬ُْ ‫ی ُاَ ْلفُ ُ لم‬
َُّ َ‫ال ُللفالَنُ ُ َعل‬َُ َ‫َولَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫ن‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ال ُالتَّف لسی لُْر ُبَاقُ ُفَبلقَوْ لل لُه ُ لم‬ َُ ‫ن ُالحْ تل َم‬ َُّ َ‫الَّ ُا‬ ْ َ
ُ‫ی ُُلزوْ لُم ُاالال ل‬
ُ ‫ف ُال‬ ُْ ‫ی ُاَ ْلفُ ُنَصُ ُفل‬ َُّ َ‫َعل‬
ْ
ُ‫َاعُبَی َّنَُُالم َرا َُدُبل لُهُفَیَت ََرجَّحُُالمفَسَّرُُ َعلَی‬ْ ْ
ُ‫نُهُ َذاُال َمت ل‬ ُ‫نُثَ َم ل‬ َ ْ
ُْ ‫نُهُ َذاُال َع ْب لُدُاوُُْ لم‬ ُ‫ثَ َم ل‬
ُ ُ‫َاع‬ ْ َ ْ
ُ‫ْضُال َع ْب لُدُا لُوُال َمت ل‬ ُ‫الَُّ لع ْن َُدُقَب ل‬ ْ ْ
ُ ‫الَُیَلزَ مهُُال َمالُُال‬ ُ ُ‫النَّصُُ َحتی‬
If a person says to another, "A thousand is due on me for

the price of this slave or price of this goods", then his
saying, "A thousand is due on me" in making a thousand
incumbent (as debt) upon himself is Nas (the object and
purpose of this statement) although the possibility of Tafseer
still remains and by saying, "for the price of this slave or
price of this goods" his intention is made clear. Thus
Mufassar will be given preference over Nas such that the
money (thousand) will not be incumbent upon him until he
takes possession of the slave or goods.
Example Three
81
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ن ُنَ ْق لُد‬ َُ َ‫ی ُنَ ْق لُد ُ ْالبَلَ لُد ُفَا َذا ُق‬
ُْ ‫ال ُ لم‬ ُ‫ی ُاَ ْلفُ ُظَا لُهرُ ُفلی ُاال ْق َر ل‬
ُْ ‫ار ُنَصُ ُفل‬ َُّ َ‫َوقَوْ لُهُٗ ُ َعل‬
ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْلزَ مُهُٗ ُنَ ْقدُ ُ ْالبَلَ لُد ُبَلُْ ُنَ ْقدُ ُبَلَدُ ُ َک َذا‬
ُ َ‫بَلَدُ ُ َک َذا ُیَت ََرجَّحُ ُ ْالمفَسَّرُ ُ َعلَی ُالنَّصُ ُف‬
‫َوعَلیُهُ َذاُنَظَائلرہ‬
If a person says to another, "I owe a thousand" then this is

Thaahir (what we understand by merely listening to the
statement) for confessing (to owing a debt) and (making) the
currency of the town (incumbent himself) is Nas (the
objective of his statement). If he were to say,"from the
currency of this certain town" (then this would be clarifying
his intention and become Mufassar) then Mufassar will be
given preference over Nas, such that the currency of the
town will not be incumbent upon him but (rather) the
currency of the town which was mentioned. So too will
similar scenarios be decided (that whenever Nas or Thaahir
contradicts Mufassar then Mufassar will be given preference).
Definition of Muhkam
ُُٗ‫الَ ُیَجوْ زُ ُ لخالَفُه‬ ُ‫ازدَا َُد ُق َُّوةُ ُعَلی ُ ْالمفَس ل‬

ُ ُ ُ‫َّر ُبل َحیْث‬ ْ ُ ‫َواَ َّما ُ ْالمحْ َکمُ ُفَه َُو ُ َما‬
ُ‫اَصْ ال‬
Muhkam is (a word) which stronger then Mufassar (in that
Ta'weel, Takhsees and Naskh- Abrogation is not possible in
Muhkam as opposed to Mufassar in which Ta'weel and
Takhsees is not possible but the possibility of Naskh-
Abrogation still remains) such that acting contrary to it is
not permissible at all.
Example of Muhkam
82
Usool Shaashi
َُ َّ‫ظللمُ ُالن‬
ُ‫اس‬ ْ َ‫الَ ُی‬
ُ ُ َ‫للا‬
ُ ُ‫ن‬ َُّ ‫ن ُللا ُبلکلُ ُ َشئُ ُ َعللیْمُ} ُ{ َُو ُال‬ َُّ ‫ب ُ{ال‬ ُ‫لمثَالهُ ُفلی ُ ْال لکتَا ل‬
ُْ ‫ی ُاَ ْلفُ ُ لم‬
ُ‫ن ُثَ َم ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫ت ُ َما ُق ْلنَا ُفلی ُاال ْق َر ل‬
َُّ َ‫ار ُالُنَّهُٗ ُللفالَنُ ُ َعل‬ ُ‫َش ْیئَا}ُ َوفلی ُ ْالح ْک لمیَّا ل‬
‫ظَُمحْ َکمُُفلیُلزوْ لم لُهُبَدَالُُ َع ْنهُُ َوعَلیُُهُ َذاُنَظَائلرہ‬ ُ ‫نُهُ َذاُاللَّ ْف‬ َُّ ‫هُ َذاُ ْال َع ْب لُدُفَا ل‬
An example of Muhkam in The Quraan is (the verses),
"Undoubtedly ALLAAH has knowledge over everything"
(such that it is impossible to deny ALLAAH's attribute of Ilm or
even limit it in the least) and "Undoubtedly ALLAAH does
not oppress people in the least" (such that it is impossible to
claim that ALLAAH has oppressed anyone or anything even in
the slightest). An example of it (Muhkam) in Hukmiyaat
(laws of Shari'ah) is what we say when a person confesses,
"Undoubtedly I owe a certain person one thousand in lieu
of the price of this slave". As Undoubtedly these words (in
lieu f this slave) are Muhkam in it being in exchange for it
(claries that the thousand is in exchange for the slave). So too
will similar scenarios be decided.
Ruling of Mufassar and Muhkam
َ‫الَُم َحاُلَ ُة‬ ُ‫َّرُ َُوُ ْالمحْ َک لُمُلزوْ مُُ ْال َع َم ل‬

ُ ُ‫لُبل لُه َما‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُُ ْالمفَس ل‬
The ruling of Mufassar and Muhkam is that it compulsory

to act on it without any doubt (in its purport and
application).
The opposite of Thaahir, Nas, Mufassar, and

Muhkam
‫ث َُّم ُللهُ لذ لُہ ُاالاَرْ بَ َُع لُة ُاَرْ بَ َُعةُ ُا ْخریُ ُتقَابلل ُهَا ُفَ ل‬
‫ضدُ ُالظَّا لُه لُر ُ ْالخَ فلیُ ُ َو ل‬
ُُ‫ضدُ ُالنَّص‬
َّ ُ‫ُضدُالمحْ َک لمُالمتَ َشاُبله‬ ‫َّرُ ْالمجْ َملُ َو ل‬ُ‫ضدُُ ْالمفَس ل‬ ‫اَ ْلم ْش لکلُُ َو ل‬
Then each of these four (Thaahir, Nas, Mufassar, and
Muhkam) have another four which are opposite to them.
83
Usool Shaashi
The opposite of Thaahir is Khafie, the opposite of Nas is
Mushkil, the opposite of Mufassar is Mujmal, and the
opposite of Muhkam is Mutashaabih.
Definition of Khafie
‫یُ ْالم َرادُُبل لُهُبل َع ل‬

ُْ ‫ارضُُالَ لم‬
ُ ‫نُ َحیْثُُالص ْی َُغ لُة‬ َُ ‫فَ ْالخَ فلیُُ َماُخَ فل‬
Khafie is a word whose meaning is obscured (unclear)
because of external factors (the intention of the speaker is
unclear) and not because of the word itself (being unclear in
its meaning and connotation).
Example One
ُُٗ‫َّارُقَةُ ُفَا ْقطَعوْ ا ُاَ ْی لدیَهُ َما} ُفَا لُنَّه‬ ُْ ‫لمثَالُهُٗ ُفل‬
‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{ َوالس ل‬
‫َّارقُ ُ َوالس ل‬
ُ‫َّارُ َوالنَّب ل‬
‫َّاش‬ َّ ُْ ‫قُخَ فلیُُفل‬
ُ‫یُ َحقُُالطر ل‬ ‫ظَا لُهرُُفلیُ َحقُُالس ل‬
ُ‫َّار ل‬
An example of Khafie is the verse,
}‫َّارُقَةُُفَا ْقطَعوْ اُاَ ْی لدیَهُ َما‬

‫َّارقُُ َوالس ل‬
‫{ َوالس ل‬
"As for the male and female thief, cut off their (right)
hands." (Surah Maa'idah: 28)
Which is Thaahir (clear in its implication) with regards to a

'Saariq' (a thief who steals quietly and in secrecy in the dead
of night without being seen) but obscure (unclear) with
regards to a Tharraar (pickpocket) and Nabbaash (grave-
robber).
Example Two
84
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ی‬ ُْ ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُال َّزانل‬

ُْ ‫ی ُ َوخَفیُ ُفل‬ ُْ ‫ی}ُظَا لُهرُ ُفل‬
ُْ ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُقَوْ لهُ ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{اَل َّزانلُیَةُ ُ َوال َّزانل‬
ُ‫َحقُُاللوْ لطی‬
Similarly (another example of Khafie) is the verse,
ُْ ‫{اَل َّزانلُیَةُُ َوال َّزانل‬

}‫ی‬
"The (unmarried) female and male who commit fornication
(should both be given a hundred lashes)." (Surah Noor: 2)
Is Thaahir (clear in its meaning) with regards to one who
commits fornication but Khafie (unclear) with regards to
sodomy (homosexuality).
Example Three
ُ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُ ْال لعنَ ل‬

ُ‫ب‬ ُْ ‫الَ ُیَ اکلُ ُفَا لک ُهَةُ ُ َکانَُ ُظَا لُهراُ ُفل ْی َما ُیَتفَ َّکهُ ُبل لُه ُخَ فلیا ُفل‬
ُ ُ َُ‫َولَوُْ ُ َحلَف‬
ُ‫َوالر َّما ل‬
‫ن‬
(Another example of Khafie is) If a person takes an oath that
he will not eat fruit, then this is Thaahir (clear in its
meaning) with regards to that eaten as an entrée (as a side
dish or as afters) but Khafie (unclear) with regards to grapes
and pomegranate (as grapes and pomegranates are eaten as a
meal as well and not only as a side dish).
Ruling of Khafie
ُ‫لُ َع ْنهُُُ ْال لخفَاء‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُُ ْالخَ فلیُُ َوجوْ بُُالطَّلَ ل‬
َُ ْ‫بُ َحتیُیَزو‬
The ruling of Khafie is that it is Waajib to seek out (its
implication) such that its obscurity (vagueness, uncertainty)
is removed (after which its ruling will be the same as
Thaahir).
85
Usool Shaashi
Definition of Mushkil
ُ‫ی ُ َعلَی‬َُ ‫ازدَا َُد ُ لخفَاءُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْالخَ فلیُ ُ َک انَّهُ ُبَ ْع َُد ُ َما ُخَ فل‬ ْ ُ ‫َواَ َّما ُ ْالم ْش لکلُ ُفَهُ َُو ُ َما‬
ُ‫ب‬ ُ ‫الَُیَنَالُُ ْالم َرادُُال‬
ُ‫الَُّبلالطَّلَ ل‬ ُ ُ‫یُاَ ْش َکالل لُهُ َُوُاَ ْمثَالل لُهُ َحتی‬ َُ َ‫السَّا لم لُعُ َحقل ْیقَتُهُُٗ َدخ‬
ُْ ‫لُفل‬
‫َنُاَ ْمثَالل لُه‬
ُْ ‫لُ َحتیُیَتَ َمیَّزَُُع‬ ُ‫ث َُّمُبلالتَُّام ل‬
Mushkil is that (word) which is more obscure (unclear) than

Khafie that is to say after its intended meaning (implication)
has been obscured (because the meaning of the word itself is
unclear) it resembles (other) words similar to it such that its
implication cannot be ascertained except through
investigation and deliberation until it (its meaning) is
distinguished from others (other words) similar to it.
Example of Mushkil
ُ‫الَُیَ ْاتَ لدمُُفَا لُنَّهُُٗظَا لُهرُُفلیُ ْالخَلُُ َوال َّدب ل‬
ُ‫ْسُ َوالنَّ َما‬ ُ‫َونَ لظیْرہُُٗفلیُاالاَحْ َک ل‬
ُ َُُ‫امُ َحلَف‬
ُ‫ی ُ َم ْعنَی ُاال ْیتلد ل‬
ُ‫َام ُث َُّم‬ ُْ ‫ب ُفل‬ ْ ‫ْن ُ َحتی ُی‬
َُ َ‫طل‬ ُ‫ْض ُ َو ْالجب ل‬
ُ‫هُ َُو ُم ْش لکلُ ُُفلی ُاللَّحْ لُم ُ َو ْالبَی ل‬
َ ُ‫ْضُ َو ْالجب ل‬
ُ ُ‫ْنُا ُْم‬
َ‫ال‬ ُ‫نُذللكَُُ ْال َمعْنیُ ُهَلُُْیوْ َجدُُفلیُاللَّحْ لُمُ َو ْالبَی ل‬ َُّ َ‫یتَ اَ َّملُُا‬
An example of Mushkil in Ahkaam (laws of Shari'ah) is if a
person takes an oath that he will not eat 'Iedaam' (a
condiment, any item or food used to improve or add flavour),
which is Thaahir (clear in its implication) with regards to
vinegar and juice (as they are definitely condiments used to
improve or add flavour) but Mushkil (obscure and unclear)
with regards to (curry prepared with) meat, eggs or cheese
(as these are not condiments but rather the main course) such
that the meaning of 'Iedaam' needs to be sought out and
deliberated upon until one is able distinguish whether the
meaning of 'Iedaam' is found in them (meat, eggs and
cheese) or not.
Definition of Mujmal
86
Usool Shaashi
ُُ‫الَ ُیوْ قَف‬
ُ ُ ُ‫ار ُبل َحال‬ َُ ‫ل ُ ْالمجْ َملُ ُ َوهُ َُو ُ َما ُاحْ تَ َم‬
َ َ‫ل ُوجوْ هاُ ُف‬
َُ ‫ص‬ ُ‫ق ُ ْالم ْش لک ل‬ َُ ْ‫ث َُّم ُفَو‬
‫لُ ْالمتَ َکل لُم‬ ُْ ‫َعلَیُ ْالم َرا لُدُبل لُهُالالَّبلبَیَانُ لم‬
ُ‫نُقلبَ ل‬
Then above Mushkil (more unclear and obscure) is Mujmal.
Mujmal is a word having many implications such that none
(no implication) can be specified except if clarified by the
speaker (and in the case Shari'ah clarified or explained by
ALLAAH Ta'ala in the Quraan or by Rasulullaah ).
Example of Mujmal
َُُ‫ن ُ ْال َم ْفهُوْ َُم ُ لمن‬َُّ ‫ت ُقَوْ لُهُٗ ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{ َح َّر َُم ُالربو} ُفَا ل‬ ُ‫ی ُال َّشرْ لعیَّا ل‬ ُْ ‫َونَ لظیْرہُٗ ُفل‬
ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫لُ ْالم َرادُُاَلزیَا َُدةُُ ْالخَ اللُیَةُُ َع ل‬
ُ‫یُ َغیْرُُم َرادُُبَ ل‬ ْ ‫الربواُهُ َُوُالزیَا َُدةُُ ْالم‬
َُ ‫طلَُقَةُُ َوُ لُه‬
َُ ‫ت ُ ْالمت ََجانل‬
ُ ُ ُ‫س لُة ُ َُو ُاللَّ ْفظ‬
َُُ‫الَ ُ َدالَُلَ ُةَ ُُلَهُٗ ُعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُفَال‬ ُ‫ی ُبَی لُْع ُ ْالمقَ َّد َرا ل‬ ُ‫ْال لع َو ل‬
ُْ ‫ض ُفل‬
ُ‫یَنَالُُ ْالم َرادُُبلالتَُّام ل‬
‫ل‬
An example of Mujmal is Shari'ah is the verse, "And

prohibited Riba" as the meaning of Riba refers to any form
of excess (gain or profit), which is not implied but rather
that excess (gain or profit is implied) which has no item is
exchange for it in the sale of like items having the same
scale of measurement. The word (Riba) does not indicate
(or specify) this nor can this meaning be ascertained
through deliberation (instead Rasulullaah  explained its
meaning to the Sahabah).
Definition of Mutashaabih
ُُ‫ل ُفلی ُ ْال لخفَا لُء ُاَ ْلمتَ َشابلهُ ُ لمثَالُ ُ ْالمتَ َشابل لُه ُ ْالحروْ فُ ُ ْالمقَطَّ َعات‬ ُ‫ق ُ ْالمجْ َم ل‬َُ ْ‫ث َُّم ُفَو‬
‫لُالس َو لُر‬ ُ‫یُاَ َوائل ل‬
ُْ ‫فل‬
Then more obscure and unclear than Mujmal is

Mutashaabih (a word that is so unclear and obscure that
87
Usool Shaashi
there is no hope of meaning being clarified in this worldly life).
An example of Mutashaabih is the Huroof-Muqathi'aat in
the beginning of (certain) Surahs.
Ruling of Mujmal and Mutashaabih
َُ ‫لُ َو ْالمتَ َشابل لُهُال ْعتلقَادُُ َحقل ْیُقَ لُةُ ْالم َرا لُدُبل لُهُ َحتیُیَ ْاتل‬
ُ‫یُ ْالبَیَان‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُُ ْالمجْ َم ل‬
The ruling of Mujmal and Mutashaabih is that we believe

its meaning (and implication) is correct until it is explained.
Lesson on those instances where the meaning

of Haqeeqat is abandoned
‫فصل‬
ُ ‫سةُُاَ ْن َو‬
‫اع‬ ْ َّ ُ‫ُفل ْی َماُی ْت َركُُبل لُهُ َحقَائلقُُاالاُ ْلفَ ل‬
ُ‫اظُ َو َماُی ْت َُركُُبل لُهُ َحقل ْیُقَةُُاللف ل‬
َُ ‫ظُخَ ْم‬
There are five instances where the meaning of Haqeeqat is

abandoned.
The first instance: Dalaalatul Urf
ُ‫ام ُبلاالاُ ْلفَا ل‬

ُ‫ظ ُالنَّ َما َکانَُ ُلل َدالَُلَ لُة‬ ُ‫الن ُثبوْ تَُ ُاالاُحْ َک ل‬
َُّ ُ َُ‫ف ُ َوذللك‬ ُ‫اَ َحد ُهَا ُ َدالَُلَةُ ُ ْالعرْ ل‬
َُُ‫اس ُ َکانَُ ُذللك‬ ُ‫ارفاُ ُبَیْنَُ ُالنَّ ل‬ ‫ظ ُعَلی ُم َرا لُد ُ ْالمتَ َکل لُم ُفَا ل َذا ُ َکانَُ ُ ْال َمعْنیُ ُمتَ َع ل‬ ُ‫اللَّ ْف ل‬
ُ‫ارفُ ُ َدللیْالُ ُ َعلَی ُاَنَّهُ ُهُ َُو ُ ْالم َرادُ ُبل لُه ُظَا لُهراُ ُفَیَت ََرتَّبُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬ َ ‫ْال َمعْنی ُ ْالمتَ َع‬
ُ‫ْالح ْکم‬
One of them (the five instances where the meaning of
Haqeeqat is abandoned is) 'Dalaalatul Urf' (when a word has
a common and known meaning in society) and the reason for
this is that Ahkaam (laws of Shari'ah) are established by the
intention with which the speaker says (or utters) the word.
When a meaning is well-known (common) amongst people
88
Usool Shaashi
then this known meaning will be proof that this was the
apparent intention (or implication of the speaker) and the
ruling will be based upon it (the common and known
meaning).
Example of abandoning Haqeeqat for Urf
ُُ‫الَ ُیَحْ نَث‬ َ ‫الَ ُیَ ْشت لَری ُ َر ْاسا ُفَهُ َُو ُعَلی ُ َما ُتَ َع‬
ُ َ‫ارفَهُ ُالنَّاسُ ُف‬ ُ ُ َُ‫لمثَالُهُٗ ُلَوْ َحلَف‬
‫سُ ْالعصْ فوْ لُرُ َو ْال َح َما َُم لُة‬
ُ‫بل َرا ل‬
If a person takes an oath that he will not buy a head then
this will refer to that which is known (and common)
amongst people. Thus he will not be breaking be breaking
his oath if he buys the head of a sparrow or pigeon (as head
commonly refers to the head of a sheep, cow, or goat).
ُ َ‫ف ُف‬
ُ‫الَُیَحْ نَثُ ُبلتَنَاو ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ َ ‫الَُیَ اکلُ ُبَیْضاُ ُ َکانَُ ُذللكَُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْالمتَ َع‬
ُ‫ار ل‬ ُ ُ َُ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُلَوْ َحلَف‬
ُ‫ْضُ ْالعصْ فوْ لُرُ َوال َح َما َُم لُة‬
ْ ُ‫بَی ل‬
Similarly (another example of abandoning the meaning of
Haqeeqat for the commonly used meaning of Urf is) if a
person takes an oath that he will not eat eggs then this will
be based upon the commonly used meaning (for eggs) and
he will not be break his oath by eating the eggs of sparrows
or pigeons (if that is not the commonly used meaning of eggs
in society).
ُْ َ‫از ُبَلُْ ُ َجازَُ ُا‬

ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫ْر ُاللَی ُ ْال َم َج ل‬ ‫الَ ُیوْ لجبُ ُ ْال َم ل‬
َُ ‫صی‬ ُ ُ ‫ن ُتَرْ كَُ ُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَ لُة‬
َُّ َ‫َوبلهُ َذا ُظَ ُهَ َُر ُا‬
ْ ْ ْ
ُ‫اص َُرةُُ َو لمثَالُهُُٗتَقیلیْدُُال َعامُُبلالبَع ل‬
ُ‫ْض‬ ‫ت َْثبتَُُبل لُهُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَةُُالقَ ل‬
ْ
From this (the above mentioned examples) we learn that

abandoning Haqeeqat does not make taking the meaning of
Majaaz compulsory but it is permissible to award it a lesser
meaning of Haqeeqat (known as Haqeeqat-Qaasirah). An
example of this (Haqeeqat-Qaasirah) is applying a general
89
Usool Shaashi
ruling on only some of its constituents (such as in the above
example where the word eggs, which is general, was taken to
refer to only those types of eggs which are commonly referred
to by the word).
ُ‫ب ُبلثَوْ بل لُه‬ ُْ ُ‫للال ُتَ َعالیُ ُاُوُْ ُا‬

َُ ‫ن ُیَضْ لر‬ ُ ُ‫ت‬ُ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُلَوُْ ُنَ َذ َُر ُ َحجا ُاَوُْ ُ َم ْشیاُ ُاللی ُبَ ْی ل‬
ُ‫َح لط ْی َُمُ ْال َک ْعُبَ لُةُیَ ْلزَ مهُُ ْال َحجُُبل اَ ْف َعالُُ َمعْلوْ َُمةُُللوجوْ لُدُ ْالعرْ ل‬
‫ف‬
Similarly (another example of abandoning the meaning of
Haqeeqat for the commonly used meaning of Urf is) if a
person makes a vow for Hajj or that he will walk to the
Baitullaah or that he will touch the Hateem of the Ka'abah
with his cloth then performing Hajj in the known manner
will become incumbent upon him because of Urf (since this
is the commonly understood meaning of Hajj in society).
The second instance: Dalaalatufi nafsil Kalaam
ُ‫سُ ْال َکالَ لُم‬ ُْ ‫یُقَ ُْدُت ْت َركُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَةُُبل َدالَُلَةُُفل‬
ُ‫یُنَ ْف ل‬ ُْ ‫َوالثَّانل‬
The second instance where (the meaning of) Haqeeqat is
abandoned is because of 'Dalaalatu fi nafsil Kalaam'
(wherein the words of the speaker suggest that the meaning of
Haqeeqat is not implied).
Example of abandoning Haqeeqat because

'Dalaalatu fi nafsil Kalaam'
ُ‫ق‬َُ ‫ن ُا ْعتل‬ ُْ ‫الَ ُ َم‬
ُ ‫ق ُم َکاتَبوْ ہُ ُ َو‬ ُْ َ‫ی ُفَهُ َُو ُحرُ ُلَ ُْم ُی ْعت‬ ُْ ‫ال ُکلُ ُ َم ْملوْ كُ ُ لل‬ َُ َ‫لمثَالُهُٗ ُال َذا ُق‬
ُُ‫ن ُکل‬ ُْ ‫َاولُ ُ ْال َم ْملوْ كَُ ُ لم‬ َ ‫ك ُیَتَن‬ ُ‫الن ُلَ ْفظَُ ُ ْال َم ْملوْ ل‬
َُّ ُ ‫الَّ ُال َذا ُنَ َویُ ُدخوْ لَهُ ُْم‬ ُ ‫بَعْضُهُٗ ُال‬
ُ‫َصرفُهُٗ ُفل ْی لُه‬ َ ‫ن ُکلُ ُ َوجْ هُ ُ َوللهُ َذا ُلَ ُْم ُیَج ُْز ُت‬ ُْ ‫ْس ُبل َم ْملوْ كُ ُ لم‬ َُ ‫َوجْ هُ ُ َو ْالم َکاتَبُ ُلَی‬
َُُ‫ج ُ ْالم َکاتَبُ ُبل ْنتَُ ُ َموْ الَہُ ُث َُّم ُ َمات‬ َُ ‫طئُ ُ ْالم َکاتَُبَ لُة ُ َولَوُْ ُتَزَ َّو‬ ْ ‫الَ ُیَ لحلُ ُلَهُ ُ َو‬ُ ‫َو‬
َُ‫ال‬ ْ‫ج‬
ُ ُُ‫نُکلُُ َو ہ‬ ْ
ُ ‫نُ َم ْملوْ کاُُ لم‬ ُ ‫ْال َموْ لیُ َو َو َرثتهُُالبلنتُُل ُْمُیَفس لُدُالن لکاحُُ َوالذاُل ُْمُیَک‬
ْ َ َ ْ َ ْ ْ ْ َ
ُ‫ن‬َُّ ‫ف ُ ْالم َدب لَُّر ُ َوامُ ُ ْال َولَ لُد ُفَا ل‬
ُ‫ق ُ َوهُ َذا ُبل لخالَ ل‬ ُ‫طلَ ل‬ْ ‫ك ُ ْالم‬ ُ‫ظ ُ ْال َم ْملوْ ل‬ ُ‫یَ ْدخلُ ُتَحْ تَُ ُلَ ْف ل‬
90
Usool Shaashi
َ ‫طئُ ُ ْالم َدب ََُّر لُة ُ َوامُ ُ ْال َولَ لُد ُ َوالن َّ َما ُالن ْق‬
ُ‫صانُ ُفلی‬ ْ ‫ل ُ َو‬ َُّ ‫ْال لم ْلكَُ ُفل ْی ُهَا ُ َکا لملُ ُ َولل َذا ُ َح‬
َ‫الَُ َم َحاُلَ ُة‬
ُ ُ‫ت‬ ُ‫نُ َحیْثُُاَُنَّهُُٗیَزوْ لُُبل ْال َموْ ل‬ ُْ ‫الرقُُ لم‬
If a person says, "Every slave that I own is free" then his

Makaatab (slave with whom the master has made an
agreement that if they pay him a stipulated amount they will be
set free) and such a slave whom a part (share) has been set
free will not be freed except if he made the intention for
them (to be included in his statement). The reason for this
(the above mentioned slaves not being included) is that the
word 'Mamlook'- owned slave is Mutlaq (free from any
restriction or clause) and refers to that slave who is owned
entirely, and a Makaatab is not owned entirely, which is
why it is not permissible for one to execute any transaction
on him nor is it permissible to indulge in intercourse with a
female Makaatab (because one does not have complete
ownership of such a slave). (Another proof that one does not
have complete ownership of a Makaatab is)If a Makaatab
marries the daughter of his master and the master then
dies resulting in the daughter inheriting the slave then the
Nikaah will not be invalidated (as she does not have
complete ownership over which would otherwise invalidate the
Nikaah). Since he (the Makaatab) is not owned entirely he
will not be included under the word 'Mamlook'- owned
slave. This ruling is contrary to that regarding a Mudabbar
(a slave whom the master has told will be free on his death) or
Umie Walad (a slave who gave birth to the child of her
master) as ownership in them is complete and therefore
(since ownership is complete) it would be permissible to have
intercourse with both a female Mudabbar and Umie
Walad. The defect in reality is in her slavery as it will
terminate on the death of her master without any doubt.
ُ َ ‫ارہُُٗ َجازَُُ َو‬

ُ‫ال‬ ُ‫َنُ َُکفَّ ل‬
‫ار لُةُیَ لم ْیُنلهُُٗاَوْ لظ ُهَ ل‬ ُْ ‫َبُع‬ َُ ‫قُ ْالم َکات‬ َُ َ‫َوعَلیُهُ َذاُق ْلنَاُال َذاُاَ ْعت‬
ُُ‫بُهُ َُوُالتَّحْ لریْرُُ َوهُ َُوُال ْثبَات‬
َُ ‫اج‬ ‫نُ ْال َو ل‬ َُّ َ‫یَجوْ زُُفل ْی لُه َماُال ْعتَاقُُ ْالم َدب لَُّرُ َوامُُ ْال َولَ لُدُ لال‬
91
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ْالحرُیَّ لُة ُبلالزَ اُلَ لُة ُالرقُ ُفَا ل َذا ُ َکانَُ ُالرقُ ُفلی ُ ْالم َکاتَ ل‬
ُُٗ‫ب ُ َکا لمالُ ُ َکانَُ ُتَحْ لریْرہ‬
ُ ُ‫ن ُ َج لمی لُْع ُ ْالوجوْ لُہُ َُوُفلی ُ ْالم َدب لَُّر ُ َوامُ ُ ْال َولَ لُد ُلَ َّما ُ َکانَُُالرقُ ُنَاقلصا‬
َُ‫ال‬ ُْ ‫تَحْ لریْرا ُم‬
‫نُکلُُ ْالوجوْ لُہ‬ ُْ ‫یَکوْ نُُالتَّحْ لریْرُُتَحْ لریْراُم‬
Based upon this (difference between a Makaatab and a
Mudabbar, Umie Walad such that in the Makaatab) we say
that if a Makaatab is set free for his Kaffaarah for
breaking an oath or for Thihaar (when one compared his
wife to a blood relative) it is permissible (and his Kaffaarah
will be fulfilled). However to set a Mudabbar and Umie
Walad free will not be permissible because to set (a slave)
free is Waajib, which literally means establishing freedom
by removing (the quality of) slavery and since slavery in the
Makaatab is complete, setting him free will be 'setting free'
in totality whereas in the Mudabbar and Umie Walad,
since the slavery is defective, setting them free will not be
'setting free' in totality.
The third instance: Dalaalatu Siyaaqil Kalaam
ُ‫اقُ ْال َکالَ لم‬ ُ ‫َوالثَّاللثُُقَ ُْدُی ْت َركُُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَةُُبل َد‬
ُ‫الَُُلَ لُةُ لسیَ ل‬
The third instance where (the meaning of) Haqeeqat is
abandoned is because of 'Dalaalatul Siyaaqil Kalaam'
(when the preceding or forthcoming speech suggests that the
meaning of Haqeeqat is not implied).
Example of abandoning Haqeeqat because of

'Dalaalatu Siyaaqil Kalaam'
َُ ‫ال ُ ْالم ْسللمُ ُلل ْل َحرْ بلیُ ُال ْن لزلُْ ُفَنَز‬

ُُْ‫َل ُ َکانَُ ُا لمناُ ُ َولَو‬ ُ‫ال ُفلی ُالسیَ لُر ُ ْال َکبلی ل‬
َُ َ‫ْر ُال َذا ُق‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
َُُ‫ال َمان‬ ْ ْ
ْ ‫ل ُال َحرْ بلیُ ُا‬ َُ ‫ال ُیَکوْ نَُ ُا لمناُ ُ َولَوُْ ُقَا‬ َُ ُ ‫ل‬ َُ َ‫ن ُک ْنتَُ ُ َرجالُ ُفَنَز‬ ُْ ‫ال ُال ْن لزلُْ ُال‬
َُ َ‫ق‬
ْ
ُ‫الُاَ ْالَ َمانُُ َستَ ْعلَمُُ َماُتَلقی‬ َُ َ‫الُالم ْسللمُُاَ ْالَ َمانُُاَ ْالَ َمانُُ َکانَُُا لمناُُ َولَوُُُْق‬ ْ َُ َ‫ال َمانَُُفَق‬ ْ َ‫ا‬
ُُُ‫الُیَکوْ نُُا لمنا‬ ُ َ ُ‫َل‬َُ ‫ْجلُُْ َحتیُتَریُفَنَز‬ َ ‫الَُتَع‬ ُ ‫غَداُ َو‬
92
Usool Shaashi
It is mentioned in 'As-Siyarul Kabeer' (of Imaam

Muhammed), when a Muslim tells an enemy combatant,
"Step down!" then he will be given sanctuary. (However) If
he says, "Step down, if you are a man" and the enemy then
steps down, he (the enemy) will not be given sanctuary
(because the second statement, "If you are a man", is a threat
more than a promise of sanctuary). If the enemy combatant
says, "(Give me) Sanctuary! (Give me) Sanctuary!" and the
Muslim replies, "(I give) Sanctuary! (I give) Sanctuary!"
then he will be given sanctuary. (However) if the Muslim
replies (by saying), "Sanctuary, you will see what will
happen tomorrow, so do not be hasty until you see" and the
enemy then steps down, he will not be given sanctuary.
ُ َ ُ ‫ی ُفَا ْشتَ َری ُ ْال َع ْمیَا َُء ُاَ لُو ُال َّشالَّ َُء‬
ُُ‫ال ُیَجوْ ز‬ ُْ ‫ارُیَةُ ُللت َْخ لُد ُ َمنل‬ ُْ ‫ال ُال ْشت لَرلل‬
‫ی ُ َج ل‬ َُ َ‫َولَوُْ ُق‬
ُُ‫اعُالَیَکوْ ن‬ُ‫َّض ل‬ َ ‫ارُیَةُُ َحتیُاَطَا ُهَاُفَا ْشت ََریُُا ْخُتَهُُٗ لمنَُُالر‬ ‫یُ َج ل‬ ُْ ‫الُال ْشت لَرلل‬
َُ َ‫َولَوُُْق‬
ُ‫َنُ ْالمؤَ ک ل‬
‫ل‬ ُ‫ع ل‬
If a person says (to another), "Purchase a slave for me, who

will be of service to me" and the latter (the Wakeel) then
buys a blind or disabled, it will not be permissible (and the
loss will be borne by the Wakeel and the slave will be his). If
he said, "Purchase a slave for me, so that I may have
intercourse with her" and the latter (Wakeel) purchases the
foster-sister of the former (Muwakkil) then the slave will not
belong to the Muwakkil (but rather the loss will be borne by
the Wakeel and the slave will be his).
ُ‫ی ُطَ َع ل‬
ُ‫ام ُاَ َح لُد ُک ُْم‬ ُْ ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَمُ ُال َذا ُ َوقَ َُع ُالذبَابُ ُفل‬ ُْ ‫َوعَلیُ ُهُذا ُق ْلنَا ُفل‬
ُُٗ‫ی ُالحْ دیُ ُ َجنَا َح ْی لُه ُدَاءُ ُ َوفلی ُ ْاال ْخریُ ُد ََواءُ ُ َوالُنَّه‬ ُْ ‫ن ُفل‬ َُّ ‫فَا ْمقلوْ ہُ ُث َُّم ُا ْنقلوْ ہُٗ ُفَا ل‬
َُ ‫نُ ْال َم ْق‬
ُ ُ‫لُلل َد ْف لُعُ ْاالَ َذیُُ َعنَّا‬
َُ‫ال‬ َُّ َ‫لُ لسیَاقُُ ُْال َکالَ لُمُعَلیُا‬ َُّ ‫لَیقَد َُمُال َّدا َُءُ َعلَیُال َّد َوا لُءُ َد‬
‫الَُیَکوْ نُُلل ْ ل‬
ُ‫ال ْی َجا ل‬
‫ب‬ ُ َ‫عُف‬ ُ‫لالَ ْم لرتَ َعب لدیُُ َحقاُللل َّشرْ ل‬
93
Usool Shaashi
Based upon this (that the meaning of Haqeeqat is abandoned
because of the preceding or forthcoming speech) we say in the
Hadeeth, "If a fly falls into food, push it in (immerse it into
the food) and then remove it because one of its wings carries
disease and the other the cure and the disease precedes the
cure" latter statement (of Rasulullaah  that the wings
contain a disease and cure) establishes that the order to push
the fly in (immerse it) is to save us from harm not (that it is)
an act of Ibaadat in Shari'ah and it (to immerse the fly) will
therefore not be Waajib.
ُ‫ن‬ َُ ‫ص َدقَاتُ ُلل ْلفقَ َرا لُء ُ َعقلی‬

ُْ ‫ْب ُقَوْ ُللهُٗ ُتَ َعالی ُ َُو ُ لم ْنهُ ُْم ُ َّم‬ َّ ‫َُو ُقَوْ لُهُٗ ُتَ َعالی ُالنَّ َما ُال‬
َُُ‫ط لُع ُطَ ْم لع لُه ُْم ُ لمن‬ ْ َ‫َاف ُللق‬
ُ‫ن ُ لذ ْک َُر ُ ْاالَصْ ن ل‬ َُّ َ‫ت ُیَدلُ ُعَلی ُا‬ ُ‫ص َدقَا ل‬ َّ ‫ی َّْل لمزكَُ ُفلی ُال‬
ُ‫َن ُ ْالع ُْه َُد لُة ُ َعلَی‬ُ‫الَ ُیَت ََوقَّفُ ُ ْالخروْ جُ ُع ل‬ ُ َ‫ف ُلَ ُهَا ُف‬
ُ‫ار ل‬ َ ‫ان ُ ْال َم‬
‫ص ل‬ ُ‫ص َدقَا ل‬
ُ‫ت ُبلبَیَ ل‬ َّ ‫ال‬
ْ
ُ‫ْاالَدَا لُءُاللیُالکل‬
َ
And the verse,
ُ‫ص َدقَاتُُلل ْلفقَ َرا لء‬

َّ ‫النَّ َماُال‬
"Alms (Zakaah) are only for the poor..." (Surah Taubah: 60)
Being mentioned after the verse,
َّ ‫نُی َّْل لمزكَُُفلیُال‬

‫ص َدقَا ل‬
ُ‫ت‬ ُْ ‫َُوُ لم ْنهُ ُْمُ َّم‬
"Among them (Munafiqeen) are (also) those who mock you
concerning (the distribution of) charity." (Surah Taubah: 58)
establishes that mentioning those upon whom Zakaat

should be spent was to put end to the greed (of the
Munafiqeen) for Zakaat, thus absolving oneself from (the
fulfilment of) Zakaat is not dependant on distributing
94
Usool Shaashi
Zakaat to all (eight categories mentioned in the verse above,
as is the opinion of Imaam Shaafie).
The fourth instance: 'Dalaalatu min Qibalil

Mutakalim'
ُ‫لُ ْالمتَ َکل لم‬ ُْ ‫َوالرَّابلعُُقَ ُْدُت ْت َركُُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَةُُبلد ََالُلَةُُم‬
ُ‫نُقلبَ ل‬
The fourth instance where (the meaning of) Haqeeqat is
abandoned is because of 'Dalaalatu min Qibalil
Mutakalim'(when the condition of the speaker suggests that
the meaning of Haqeeqat is not implied)

'Dalaalatu min Qibalil Mutakalim'
َُّ َ‫ن ُ َشا َُء ُفَ ْلیَ ْکفرُْ }ُ َوذللكَُ ُ لال‬

ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫ن ُ َشاُ َُء ُفَ ْلی ْؤ لم‬
ُْ ‫ن ُ َّو َم‬ ُْ ‫لمثَالُهُٗ ُفل‬
ُْ ‫ی ُقَوْ ُلله ُتَ َعالی ُ{فَ َم‬
ُ‫ال ُیَاْمرُ ُُبلهُٗ ُفَی ْت َركُ ُد ََالُلَةُ ُاللَّ ْف ل‬
ُ‫ظ‬ ُ َ ُ ُ‫للاَ ُتَ َعالی ُ َح لکیْمُ ُ َو ْالک ْفرُ ُقَبلیْحُ ُ َو ْال َح لکیْم‬
ُ
ْ ْ ْ
ُ ُ‫َعلَیُاال ْم لُرُبلحک لُم‬
‫اال لم لُر‬ َ
An example (where the meaning of Haqeeqat is abandoned

because the condition of the speaker suggests that Haqeeqat is
not implied) is the verse,
} ُْ‫نُ َشا َُءُفَ ْلیَ ْکفر‬ ُْ ‫نُ َشاُ َُءُفَ ْلی ْؤ لم‬
ُْ ‫نُ َّو َم‬ ُْ ‫{فَ َم‬
"So whoever desires, believe (bring Imaan) and whoever

desires, disbelieve (make Kufr)."
The reason for this (why the meaning of Haqeeqat, to resort

to Kufr if one so desires, is not implied here) is that ALLAAH
Ta'ala is Most Wise (has the most perfect wisdom) and Kufr
(disbelief) is abhorred (detested and disliked by ALLAAH),
and (ALLAAH) the Most Wise will never instruct such an
95
Usool Shaashi
act (which is abhorred and disliked by ALLAAH). Thus the
Haqeeqat (literal meaning) will be disregarded here because
of the Wisdom of ALLAAH.
ُ‫لُ َعلَیُالطَّ لری ل‬

ُ‫ْق‬ َُ َ‫نُ َکانَُُم َسافلراُنَز‬ َُ ‫َُوُعَلیُهُ َذاُق ْلنَاُال َذاُ َو َّک‬
ُْ ‫لُبل لش َرا لُءُاللَّحْ لُمُفَا ل‬
ُ‫ب ُ َم ْن لزلُ ُفَهُ َُو ُ َعلَی‬
َُ ‫اح‬
‫ص ل‬ ُْ ‫خ ُاَوُْ ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َم ْش لویُ ُ َوال‬
َ ُ َُ‫ن ُ َکان‬ ُ‫طبوْ ل‬ ْ ‫فَهُ َُو ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َم‬
ُ ُ‫النَّی‬
Based upon this (principle that the meaning of Haqeeqat will
be abandoned because of the condition of the speaker) we say
that if a person (Muwakkil) appoints another (makes another
Wakeel) to purchase meat and he (i.e. the Muwakkil or
speaker) is a Musaafir (traveller), who has stopped on the
road, then it will refer to cooked meat (as utensils for
cooking are usually not available during a journey thus the
condition of the speaker; being a traveller, dictates that it
refers to cooked meat) and if he (the speaker) is at home then
it will refer to raw meat (as the utensils for cooking are
present when one is at home).
ُ َ ُ ‫للال‬
ُ‫ال‬ َُ َ‫ی ُفَق‬
ُ ‫ال ُ َو‬ َُ َ‫ع ُیَ لمیْنُ ُ ْالفَوْ لُر ُ لمثَالُهُٗ ُال َذا ُق‬
ُْ ‫ال ُتَ َعالُْ ُتَ َغ َُّد ُ َم لع‬ ُ‫ن ُهُ َذا ُالنَّوْ ل‬
ُْ ‫َو لم‬
ُْ ‫ص لرفُ ُذُللكَُ ُاللَی ُ ْال َغدَا لُء ُ ْال َم ْدعواللَ ْی لُه ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُتَغَدی ُبَ ْع َُد ُذللكَُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ی‬ َ ‫اَتَغَدی ُیَ ْن‬
ُ‫الُیَحْ نَث‬ ُ َ ُ‫یُذللكَُُ ْالیَوْ لُم‬
ُْ ‫َم ْن لزُللهُُٗ َم َُعهُُٗاَوُُْ َم َُعُ َغی لْرہُُٗفل‬
Also from this category (where Haqeeqat is abandoned
because of the condition of the speaker) is 'Yameenul For'
(immediate oath, which refers to a situation or scenario
occurring at that particular time). For example, if a person
says, "Come have breakfast with me" and the latter replies,
"I take an oath by ALLAAH I will not have breakfast",
then this will refer to the breakfast to which he was invited
(at that moment) such that if he ever has breakfast with him
(the one who invited him) in his home thereafter (on another
96
Usool Shaashi
day) or even with another person on that same day, he will
not be breaking his oath.
ُ‫ت ُفَا َ ْن ل‬
ُ‫ت ُ َک َذا‬ ُ‫ن ُخ ََرجْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ل ُال َّزوْ جُ ُال‬ َُ ْ‫ت ُ ْال َمرْ ُاَةُ ُت لریْدُ ُ ْالخرو‬
َُ ‫ج ُفَقَا‬ ُ‫َو َک َذا ُال َذا ُقَا َم ل‬
ُ ُ‫الُیَحْ نَث‬ ُْ ‫الُ َحتیُلَوُُْخَ َر َج‬
ُ َ َُُ‫تُبَ ْع َُدُذللك‬ ُ‫َکانَُُ ْالح ْکمُُ َم ْقصوْ راُ َعلَیُ ْال َح ل‬
In the same manner (as the ruling for 'Yameenul-for') is if a

woman stands to leave and her husband tells her, "If you
leave then you are... (divorced, or whatever repercussion is
mentioned)" then this statement will be restricted to that
moment such that if she leaves later (at a later time or on
another day) the decree husband will apply (a divorce, etc
she will occur).
The fifth instance: Dalaalatu Mahallil Kalaam'
ُ َ ُ ُ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُ ْال َم َحل‬

ُُ‫ال ُیَ ْقبَل‬ ُْ َ ‫َو ْالخَ ا لمسُ ُقَ ُْد ُت ْت َركُ ُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَةُ ُبلد ََالُلَ لُة ُ َم َحلُ ُ ْال َک َال لُم ُبلا‬
ُ‫َحقل ْیُقَ ُةَُاللَّ ْف ل‬
‫ظ‬
The fifth instance where (the meaning of) Haqeeqat is
abandoned is because of 'Dalaalatu Mahallil Kalaam', such
that the (meaning of) Haqeeqat will does not fit on that
Mahal (time, place or person).

'Dalaalatu Mahallil Kalaam'
ُ‫ص َدُقَ لة‬ ُ‫ظُ ْالبَی لُْعُ َو ْال لُهُبَ لُةُ َوالتَّ ْمللی ل‬
َّ ‫ْكُ َوال‬ ُ‫احُ ْالح َُّر لُةُبللَ ْف ل‬
ُ‫َُوُ لمثَالُهُُٗال ْن لعقَادُُنل َک ل‬
An Example (of abandoning Haqeeqat because the meaning
of Haqeeqat cannot apply to that person, place or time) is
contracting a Nikaah with a free woman using the words of
Bay'a (saying "sell yourself to me"), Hibah (saying "gift
yourself to me"), Tamleek (saying, "Give ownership of
97
Usool Shaashi
yourself to me"), or Sadaqah (since the literal meaning is
impossible to apply here, we say that it refers to Nikaah).
ُ‫نُ َغی لْرہُُٗهُ َذاُال ْبنل ْی‬ ُ‫َُوُقَوْ لُهُُٗلل َع ْب لدہُُٗ َوهُ َُوُ َمعْروْ فُُالنَّ َس ل‬
ُْ ‫بُ لم‬
And saying to one's slave, whose lineage to another is well-

known, "This is my son" (since the literal meaning is
impossible to apply here, we say the slave will be set free).
ُ‫ی ُ َکانَُ ُ َم َجازا ُ َع ل‬

ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫ال ُلل َع ْب لدہُٗ ُ َوهُ َُو ُاَ ْکبَرُ ُ لسنا ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َموْ لی ُهُ َذا ُال ْبنل‬
َُ َ‫َو َک َذا ُال َذا ُق‬
ْ ْ
ُ‫نُال َم َجازَُُخَ لفُُ َع ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ َُّ َ‫یُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَُ لخ َالفاُُلَهُ َماُبلنَاءُُعَلیُ َماُ َذکَرْ نَاُا‬ ُ‫ْال لع ْت ل‬
ُْ ‫قُ لع ْن َُدُاَبل‬
ُ ُ‫یُ َحقُُ ْالح ْک لُمُ لع ْندَهُ َما‬ ُْ ‫ظُ لع ْندَہُُٗ َوفل‬ ُ‫یُ َحقُُاللَّ ْف ل‬ ُْ ‫ْال َحقل ْیُقَ لُةُفل‬
Similarly if he says to a slave who is elder than him, "This

is my son" it will be Majaaz for setting the slave free
according to Imaam Abu Hanifah  as opposed to Imaam
Abu Yusuf  and Imaam Muhammed  as we have already
discussed (in the discussion of Haqeeqat and Majaaz) that
Majaaz is a substitute for Haqeeqat in speech according to
Imaam Abu Hanifah  and according to Imaam Abu Yusuf
and Imaam Muhammed a substitute for the ruling.
Lesson on the manner in which rulings are

derived
‫فصلُفیُمتعلقاتُالنصوص‬
َ ‫ارُتَهُُٗ َُوُد ََاللَُتَهُُٗ َوال ْقتل‬
‫ضاُئَه‬ َ ‫ار ُةَُالنَّصُُ َُوُال َش‬ ُْ ‫نَ ْعنل‬
َُ َ‫یُبل ُهَاُ لعب‬
This is a lesson on the manner in which rulings are derived

(by examining the meaning of words), that is by Ibaaratun
Nas, Ishaaratun Nas, Dalaalatun Nas, and Iqtidha'un Nas.
98
‫‪Usool Shaashi‬‬
‫‪Definition of Ibaaratun Nas‬‬
‫قُ ْال َکالَمُُ لالَ َجُللهُُٗ َوا لر ْی َُدُُبلهُُٗقَصْ دا‬

‫فَا َ َّماُ لعبَا َُرةُُالنَّصُُفَهُ َُوُ َماُ لس ْی َُ‬
‫‪Ibaaratun Nas is (refers to) the purpose for which the‬‬
‫‪speech was intended and (or what is) intentionally implied.‬‬
‫‪Definition of Ishaaratun Nas‬‬
‫ْر ُ لزیَا َُدةُ ُ َُو ُهُ َُو ُ َغیْرُُ‬

‫ن ُ َغی لُ‬ ‫ی ُ َما ُثَبَتَُ ُبلن ْ‬
‫َظ لُم ُالنَّصُ ُ لم ُْ‬ ‫ارةُ ُالنَّصُ ُفَ لُه َُ‬
‫َواَ َّما ُال َش َُ‬
‫قُ ْال َکالَمُُ لالَ َجُلله‬ ‫نُکلُُ َوجْ هُُ َو َ ُ‬
‫الُ لس ْی َُ‬ ‫ظَا لُهرُُ لم ُْ‬
‫‪Ishaaratun Nas is (refers to) the ruling which a word of the‬‬
‫‪speech proves without (any) addition (of text or speech), is‬‬
‫‪not entirely clear (but reflection and contemplation is‬‬
‫‪required), nor was it (this meaning) the purpose of the‬‬
‫‪speech.‬‬
‫‪Example of Ibaaratun Nas and Ishaaratun Nas‬‬
‫نُ‬‫اج لریْنَُ ُالَّ لذیْنَُ ُا ْخ لرجوْ ا ُ لم ُْ‬ ‫ی ُقَوْ ُللهُٗ ُتَ َعالی ُ{لل ْلفقَ َراُ لُء ُ ْالم ُهَ ل‬ ‫لمثَالُهُٗ ُفل ُْ‬
‫یُذللكَُُ َوقَ ُْدُ‬ ‫ارنَصاُفل ُْ‬ ‫ص َ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫اقُال َغنل ْی َُم لُةُفَ َ‬‫انُال ْستلحْ قَ لُ‬ ‫قُللبَیَ لُ‬ ‫ار لُه ُْم}ُاَ ْ ُ‬
‫الُیَةُُفَا لُنَّهُُٗ لس ْی َُ‬ ‫لدیَ ل‬
‫لُ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ْال َُء ُال َکافل لُر ُعَلیُ ُ َما لُ‬‫ن ُال ْستلی َ ُ‬ ‫ارةُ ُاللیُ ُاَ َُّ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ثَبَتَُ ُفَ ْقرهُ ُْم ُبلنَظ لُم ُالنَّصُ ُفَ َکانَُ ُال َش َُ‬
‫ْ‬
‫تُ ْاالَ ْم َوالُُبَاقلُیَةُُعَلیُُ لمل لک لُه ُْمُ َ ُ‬
‫الُ‬ ‫كُلَ ْل َکافل لرال ُْذُلَوُُْ َکانَ لُ‬‫تُ ْال لم ْل لُ‬
‫ْالم ْسلل لُمُ َسبَبُُللثبوْ لُ‬
‫یَ ْثبتُُفَ ْقرهُ ُْم‬
‫‪An example of (Ibaaratun Nas and Ishaaratun Nas) is the‬‬
‫‪verse,‬‬
‫ار لُه ُْم}‬

‫نُ لدیَ ل‬ ‫{لل ْلفقَ َراُ لُءُ ْالم ُهَ ل‬
‫اج لریْنَُُالَّ لذیْنَُُا ْخ لرجوْ اُ لم ُْ‬
‫‪99‬‬
Usool Shaashi
"(A share of the booty received without a fight is also
reserved) For the poor Muhaajireen who were removed
from their and their possessions." (Surah Hashar: 8)
As the purpose of this verse was to mention that those who

have a right to the booty (namely the poor Muhaajireen) and
is therefore the Ibaaratun Nas (the purpose intended by this
speech) and them being poor is proven by a word in the
speech (the word 'ُ‫'فقَ َرا لء‬- poor, refers to that person who has no
wealth or wealth less than the Nisaab of Zakaat) which
indicates that ownership is transferred to a Kaafir if they
(Kuffaar)seize the belongings of Muslims(which is Ishaaratun
Nas) as (the reason for this substantiation that ownership is
transferred in such a case is that) they would not be poor if
their (the Muslim's) property still remained in their
possession (and did not transfer to the Kuffaar).
Rulings derived from the above
‫ك ُلللتَّ ل‬
ُ‫اج لُر‬ ُ‫ت ُ ْال لُم ْل ل‬ُ‫اال ْستل ْیالَ لُء ُ َُو ُح ْکمُ ُثبوْ ل‬ ‫ی ُ َم ْسئَُلَ لُة ُ ْ ل‬ُْ ‫یَ ْخرجُ ُ لم ْنهُ ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫َاق ُ َُو ُح ْکمُ ُثبوْ ل‬ ُ‫اال ُ ْعت ل‬ُ‫َصرفَاُتلهُٗ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالبَی لُْع ُ َو ْال لُهُبَ لُة ُ َو ْ ل‬ َ ‫بلالش َرا لُء ُ لم ْنهُ ُْم ُ َُو ُت‬
ُُٗ‫نُیَ لدہ‬ ُْ ‫عهُُٗ لم‬ ُ‫َنُال ْنتَزَا ل‬
ُْ ‫كُُع‬ ُ‫َازیُُْ َُوُ لعجْ لُزُ ْال َمالل ل‬ ‫كُلل ْلغ ل‬ ُ‫تُ ْال لم ْل ل‬
ُ‫َامُ َُوُثبوْ ل‬ ُ‫اال ْستل ْغن ل‬ ‫ْل‬
‫َُوُتَ ْف لر ْی َعاُتله‬
(As a result of the Ishaaratun Nas of this verse) the ruling
with regards to Kuffaar seizing the belongings of a
Muslim(that the Kuffaar become owners of it), establishing
ownership for the trader by purchasing it from them (since
ownership has been established for the Kuffaar, if any person
purchases it from them he will become the owner), his
transactions of sale, Hibah, setting free (will all be correct
and whoever purchases it from the trader or the person to
whom it is gifted will become owner and if it was a slave and
the trader set it free, the slave will become free), the right to it
in booty and transfer of ownership to the Mujaahid (if the
100
Usool Shaashi
Muslims gain that same property back as booty it will be
distributed in accordance to the laws of booty and ownership
will be established for the Mujaahid who gains it) as well as
the impermissibility of the first owner to reclaim it from
him (once it is given to a Mujaahid as part of the booty, the
original owner cannot claim that it is and confiscate it from the
Mujaahid), including other related rulings, are derived.
Example Two
ُُ‫ام ُال َّرفَثُ ُاللیُ ُنل َسائلک ُْم} ُاللی‬ ُ‫ل ُ ُلَک ُْم ُلَ ْیُلَ ُةَ ُالصیَ ل‬ َُّ ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُقَوْ لُهُٗ ُتَ َعالیُ{ ُا لح‬
ُُ‫ْحُیَت ََحقَّق‬
ُ‫لُالصب ل‬ ُ‫یُُاَ َّو ل‬ ُْ ‫اال ْم َساكُُفل‬ ‫ْل}فَ ْ ل‬ ُ‫قَوْ لل لُهُتَ َعالیُ{ث َُّمُاَتلموْ اُالصیَا َُمُاللیُاللَّی ل‬
ُُ‫ن ُیَکوْ نَُ ُ ْالج ُْزء‬ ُ‫ضروْ َُرلُة ُ لحلُ ُ ْالمبَا َش َُر لُة ُُاللَی ُالصب ل‬
ُْ َ‫ْح ُا‬ َ ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫ن ُ لم‬َُّ َ‫َم َُع ُ ْال َجنَاُبَ لُة ُ لال‬
ُ‫صوْ مُُا لم َُر‬ َ ُ‫یُذللكَُ ُ ْالج ُْز لُء‬ ُْ ‫االُ ْم َساكُُفل‬ ُ‫ارُ َم َُعُوجوْ لُدُ ْال َجنَاُبَ لُةُ َو ْ ل‬ُ‫ْاالَ َّولُُ لمنَُُالنَّ ُهَ ل‬
‫الَُتنَافلیُالصَّوْ َُم‬ ُ َُ‫نُ ْال َجنَاُبَ ُة‬ َُ ‫ْال َعبْدُُبلا ل ْت َما لم لُهُفَ َکانَُُهُذاُال َش‬
َُّ َ‫ارةُُاللیُُا‬
ُ‫لُُلَک ُْمُلَ ْیُلَ ُةَُالصیَ ل‬

}‫امُال َّرفَثُُاللیُُنل َسائلک ُْم‬ َُّ ‫{ُا لح‬
"Permission has been granted for you to have sexual

relations with your wives...
Until,
ُ‫{ث َُّمُاَتلموْ اُالصیَا َُمُاللیُاللَّی ل‬

}‫ْل‬
Then complete the fasts until nightfall. (Surah Baqarah: 187)
Abstention (Fasting, i.e. refraining from eating, drinking and

sexual relations) began in a state of Janaabat (higher
impurity) because permissibility of indulging in sexual
relations (which is the Ibaaratun Nas) until dawn (as
permitted in this verse) would mean that the first portion of
101
Usool Shaashi
the day would be spent in a state of Janaabat (higher
impurity) and abstention in this portion (is a part) of the fast
(of that day) which one has been ordered to keep. Thus this
will suggest that (being in a state of) Janaabat does not
nullify the fast. (A person has been ordered to fast from
sunrise to sunset and when ALLAAH Ta'ala has permitted
sexual relations until dawn, which would result in a person
being in a state of Janaabat in the first portion, it would mean
that being in a state of Janaabat when the fast begins will not
invalidate the fast.)
ُ‫ی ُبَقَا َُء ُالصَّوْ لُم ُ َُو‬
ُْ ‫الَ ُینَا ُفل‬ُ ُ‫ق‬ ُ‫ض ُةَ ُ َو ْ ل‬
َُ ‫اال ُ ْستل ْن َشا‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْال َمضْ َم‬ َُّ َ‫ن ُذللكَُ ُا‬ ُْ ‫َولَ لز َُم ُ لم‬
ْ
ُُ‫صوْ مُهُٗ ُفَا لُنَّهُٗ ُلَوُْ ُ َکانَُ ُال َماء‬ ْ
َ ُ ‫ق ُ َشیْئاُ ُبلفَ لم لُه ُلَ ُْم ُیَفس ُْد‬
َُ ‫ن ُ َذا‬
ُْ ‫ن ُ َم‬َُّ َ‫یَتَفَرَّعُ ُ لم ْنهُ ُا‬
ْ
ُ‫الَُیَفسدُُبل لُهُالصَّوْ م‬ ُ ُ‫ض لُة‬ ْ
َُ ‫َماللحاُُیَ لجدُُط ْع َُمهُُٗ لع ْن َُدُال َمضْ َم‬
This (fasting not being invalid if one is in a state of Janaabat
in the first part of the day which is the Ishaaratun Nas)
necessitates that gargling and rinsing the nose will not
affect the continuation of the fast. (It is further) Derived
from this that if one tastes something (without swallowing)
his fast will not break because if one gargles his mouth
(which does not break the fast) and the water is salty such
that he can taste (its saltiness) when gargling, his fast does
not break (thus we can conclude that tasting something will
also not break the fast).
ُ‫َاب ُلَ َّما َس َّمی‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْال لکت‬ َُّ َ‫َان ُ لال‬

ُ‫االده ل‬ ‫ام ُ َو ْ ل‬ُ‫االحْ تل َج ل‬‫االحْ تلالَ لُم ُ َو ْ ل‬‫َُو ُعلل َُم ُ لم ْنهُ ُح ْکمُ ُ ْ ل‬
ُْ ‫اال ْنتلهَا لُء ُ لمنَُ ُ ْاالَ ْشیَا لُء ُُالثَّالَُثَ لُة ُ ْال َم ْذکوْ َُر لُة ُفل‬
ُ‫ی ُاَ َّو ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ ‫طَ لُة ُ ْ ل‬
ُ ‫اس‬ ‫اال ْم َساكَُ ُ ْالالَ لز َُم ُبل َو ل‬
‫ْل‬
‫َنُ ْاالَ ْشیَا لُءُالثَّلُثَ لُة‬ُ‫اال ْنتلهَا لُءُع ل‬‫نُر ْکنَُُالصَّوْ لُمُیتلمُُبل ْ ل‬ َُّ َ‫صوْ ماُُفَعلل َُمُا‬ َ ُ‫ْح‬ ُ‫الصب ل‬
We learn from this (verse, "Then complete the fasts until
nightfall") the ruling of wet dreams (if a person ejaculates
while sleeping), cupping (drawing blood), and applying oil
(that all three are permissible while fasting and will not nullify
the fast) because when abstention from (only) three things
102
Usool Shaashi
(eating, drinking and sexual relations) during the day has
been called fasting (in the verse, "Then complete the fasts
until nightfall") we learn that it (fasting) is complete by
abstention from these three things (only).
ُ‫انُبل ْال َماُموْ لُرُبل لُه‬ ‫نُقَصْ َُدُ ْ ل‬

ُ‫اال ْتیَ ل‬ ُ‫یُ َم ْسئَُلَ لُةُالتَّ ْبیل ْی ل‬
َُّ ‫تُفَا ل‬ ُْ ‫َوعَلیُُهُذاُیخَ رَّجُُ ْالح ْکمُُفل‬
ُ‫النَّ َما ُیَ ْلزَ مُهُٗ ُ لع ْن َُد ُت ََوج لُه ُ ْاالَ ْم لُر ُ َو ْاالَ ْمرُ ُالنَّ َما ُیَت ََوجَّهُ ُبَ ْع َُد ُ ْالج ُْز لُء ُ ْاالَ َّو ل‬
ُ‫ل ُللقَوْ لل لُه‬
ُ‫تَ َعالیُُثُ َُّمُاَتلموْ الصیَا َُمُاللَیُاللَّی ل‬
‫ْل‬
Based upon this (verse mentioned above) the ruling of
having the intention for fasting from the night is derived
(such that according to Imaam Abu Hanifah it is not necessary
to have the intention to fast for Ramadaan from the night but
can be made before midday) because the intention for what
one has been ordered to fulfil (which is fasting in this case)
will only become necessary when beginning the act, which
only begins (in this case) in the first portion of the day
(which is until midday).
Definition of Dalaalatun Nas
ُ‫َواَ َّما ُ َدالَُلَةُ ُالنَّصُ ُفَهُ َُو ُ َما ُعلل َُم ُ لم ْنهُ ُ لعُلَّةُ ُا ُ ْلح ْک لُم ُ ْال َم ْنصوْ ل‬
ُ ُ ُ‫ص ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُل َُغة‬
َُ‫ال‬
ُُ‫الَُال ْستل ْنبَاطا‬
ُ ‫الجْ تل ُهَاداُُ َو‬
Dalaalatun Nas is that which is learnt to be the Illat

(principal cause) for the ruling, through diction (from the
meaning of the speech) and not Ijtihaad or extraction.
ُُ‫الَ ُتَ ْن ُهَرُْ ُهُ َما} ُفَ ْال َعاللم‬ ُ ‫الَ ُتَقلُْ ُلَهُ َماُ ُافُ ُ َّو‬ ُ ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{ َو‬ ُْ ‫لمثَالُهُٗ ُفل‬
ُ‫ْفُلل َد ْف لُعُاالاَ َذیُُ َع ْنهُ َما‬ َُّ َ‫اعُا‬
ُ‫نُتَحْ لر ْی َُمُالتَّافلی ل‬ ُ‫لُالس َم ل‬ُ‫اعُالل َُغ لُةُیَ ْف ُهَمُُبل اَ َّو ل‬
ُ‫ض ل‬َ ْ‫بلاَو‬
103
Usool Shaashi
An example of this (Dalaalatun Nas) is the verse,
}‫الَُتَ ْن ُهَرُُْهُ َما‬

ُ ‫الَُتَقلُُْلَهُ َماُُافُُ َّو‬
ُ ‫{ َو‬
"Do not even tell them "Oof!" and do not rebuke them."
(Surah Bani Israa'eel: 23)
As one who is acquainted with Arabic language and its

usage will understand immediately on hearing it that the
prohibition of saying "Oof!" is so that one will not cause
harm to them (thus causing harm to them will be the principal
cause for the prohibition).
Ruling for Dalaalatun Nas
ُ‫ع ُعموْ مُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُ ْال َم ْنصوْ ل‬

ُ‫ص ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُ ُللعموْ لُم ُ لعلَّتل لُه ُ َوللهُ َذا‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُ ُهُ َذا ُالنَّوْ ل‬
ُ‫ْال َمعْنی‬
The ruling for this category (Dalaalatun Nas) is the ruling
will be that wherever the Illat (principal cause) is found the
ruling will apply.
ُ‫االجا َُرلُة‬
َ ُ ُ‫ب‬ ‫الَ ل‬
‫بُ ُبل َسبل ل‬ ُ‫شت لَُم ُ َواال ْستل ْخد لَامُ ُع ل‬
‫َن ُا ا‬ َّ ‫ب ُ َوال‬ ُ‫ق ْلنَا ُبلتَحْ لری لُْم ُالضَّرْ ل‬
ُ‫صاصا‬ َ ‫لُقل‬ ُ‫ْنُاَ لو ْالقَ ْت ل‬
ُ‫بُال َّدی ل‬
ُ‫سبل ل‬
َُ ‫ْسُبل‬ َُ ‫َو ْال‬
ُ‫حب ل‬
Therefore (because the ruling will apply wherever the Illat is
found) we say that beating, swearing, to hire the service of
one's father, imprisoning them for debt (if they owe you
money) or even killing them in Qisaas (Shar'ie penalty) is
Haraam (forbidden).
Dalaalatun Nas is the same as Ibaaratun Nas
104
Usool Shaashi
َُ َ‫ح ُال ْثبَاتُ ُ ْالعقوْ ُبَ لُة ُبل َدالَُلَ لُة ُالنَّصُ ُق‬
ُ‫ال‬ َ ُ ‫ث َُّم ُ َدالَُلَةُ ُالنَّصُ ُبل َمُْن لزُلَ لُة ُالنَّصُ ُ َحتی‬
َُّ ‫ص‬
ُ‫بُبل َدالَُلَ لُةُالنَّص‬ُ‫لُ َوالشرْ ل‬ ُ‫اعُبلالنَّصُُ َوبلاالاَ ْک ل‬
ُ‫ارةُُبل ْال لوقَ ل‬
َُ َّ‫تُ ْال َکف‬
ُ‫اَصْ َحابنَاُ َو َجبَ ل‬
Then Dalaalatun Nas is the same as Ibaaratun Nas (in its
implication/ruling being absolute and having no doubt) such
that it is permissible to execute punishments (penalties)
based on Dalaalatun Nas. Our scholars (of the Hanafi school
of thought) say (with regards to this) that Kaffaarah will be
Waajib for sexual relations (while fasting as prove) by
Ibaaratun Nas and for eating and drinking by Dalaalatun
Nas.
ُ ‫لُیدَار ْالح ْکمُُعَلیُتلُْلكَُُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة‬

َُ ‫ارُهُ َذاُ ْال َمعْنیُقل ْی‬
ُ‫َوعَلیُال ْعتلبَ ل‬
Based upon this (that the implication/ruling of Dalaalatun
Nas is absolute and has no doubt) it is said that the ruling
will be based on (the presence or absence) that Illat (whereby
the ruling will apply only when that Illat is found).
ُُ‫الَ ُیَحْ رم‬ َُّ َ‫ی ُاَبوُْ ُ َزیْدُ ُلَوْ ا‬

ُ ُ ُ‫ن ُقَوْ ماُ ُیَعدوْ نَُ ُالتَّافلیْفَُ ُ َک َرا َُمة‬ ُْ ‫اض‬ ‫ال ُاال َمامُ ُ ْالقَ ل‬ َُ َ‫َوق‬
ُ‫َعلَ ْی لُه ُْمُتَافلیْفُُاالاَبَ َو ْی ل‬
‫ن‬
Imaam Qaadhi Abu Zaid said, "If a nation regards the

word "Oof!" as a gesture of respect then it will not be
Haraam for them to say "Oof!" to their parents (since the
Illat, of causing harm to one's parents is absent, the ruling of
Hurmat- prohibition will not apply).
ُُْ‫ی} ُاالیة ُ َولَو‬ َُ ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالی ُ{یَا ُاَی ُهَا ُالَّ لذیْنَُ ُا َمنوْ اُ ُال َذا ُنوْ لد‬ ُْ ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُق ْلنَا ُفل‬
ُْ َ‫ْی ُاللَی ُ ْالجم َُع لُة ُبل ا‬
ُْ ‫ن ُ َکانَا ُفل‬
ُُ‫ی ُ َسفل ْیُنَة‬ ُ‫َن ُال َّسع ل‬ ُ‫ن ُع ل‬ ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْمنَعُ ُ ْال َعاقل َد ْی ل‬
ُ ُ ‫فَ َرضْ نَا ُبَیْعا‬
ُ‫الَُیَ ْک َرہُُالبَیْع‬ ُ ُ‫تَجْ لریُُْاللَیُ ْال َجا لم لُع‬
105
Usool Shaashi
Similarly (another example of when the Illat is absent the
ruling will not apply) is the verse,
َُ ‫{یَاُاَی ُهَاُالَّ لذیْنَُُا َمنوْ اُُال َذاُنوْ لد‬

}‫ی‬
"O you who have Imaan! When the call (Adhaan) is made
for (the Jumu'ah) salaah on the day of Jumu'ah (Friday),
then hasten towards ALLAAH's remembrance (towards the
Jumu'ah Salaah to take place in the Masjid) and leave
trading." (Surah Jumu'ah: 9)
(The Illat for the prohibition of trade is that it hinders

hastening towards Salaah) If we were to assume
(hypothetically) that trade will not prevent the parties (buyer
and seller) from hastening towards Jumu'ah (for example)
by them being on a ship already headed towards the Masjid
then it will not be prohibited.
ُُْ‫ض ُهَا ُاَو‬

َّ ‫الَ ُیَضْ لربُ ُال ْم َراَتَهُ ُفَ َم َُّد ُ َشع َْر ُهَا ُاَوُْ ُ َع‬ ُ ُ َُ‫َوعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُ َحلَف‬
ُ‫ب ُ َو َمدال َّشع ل‬
ُ‫ْر‬ ُ‫ج َُد ُصوْ َُرةُ ُالضَّرْ ل‬ ُ‫خَ نَقَ ُهَا ُیَحْ نَثُ ُال َذا ُ َکانَُ ُبل َوجْ لُه ُاال ْیالَ لُم ُ َولَوُْ ُو ل‬
ُ ُ‫لع ْن َُدُ ْالمالَ َعُبَ لُةُدوْ نَُُاال ْیالَ لُم‬
ُ‫الَُیَحْ نَث‬
Similarly (another example of when the Illat is absent the
ruling will not apply) is if a person takes an oath that he will
not hit his wife (which means that he will not inflict harm to
her) and then pulls her hair, bites her or chocks her such
that it causes her pain then his oath will break (even though
he might not have hit her). (However) If he strikes her
(gently) or pulls her hair while playing with her, without
harming her, then his oath will not break (even though he
appears to have struck her).
ُ‫الَ ُیَحْ نَثُ ُال ْن لعد ل‬

ُ‫َام ُ َم ْعنَی‬ َ َ‫الَ ُیَضْ لربُ ُفالَنا ُف‬
ُ ُ ‫ض َرُبَهُٗ ُبَ ْع َُد ُ َموْ تل لُه‬ ُ ُ َُ‫ن ُ َحلَف‬ُْ ‫َو َم‬
ُ‫بُ َوهُ َُوُاال ْیالَم‬
ُ‫الضَّرْ ل‬
106
Usool Shaashi
If a person takes an oath that he will not hit a certain
person (which means that he will not harm him) and then hits
him after his death, his oath will not break as the meaning
of hitting, which is to cause pain, is not found here (as the
deceased person cannot feel pain).
ُ ُ‫الَُیَتَ َکلَّمُُفالَناُفَ َکلَّ َُمهُُٗبَ ْع َُدُ َموْ تل لُه‬

ُ‫الَُیَحْ نَثُُلل َع ْد لُمُاال ْف ُهَ لام‬ ُ َُُ‫َو َک َذاُلَوُُْ َحلَف‬
Similarly if a person takes an oath that he will not talk to a

certain person and then does so after his death, his oath
will not break as the deceased person cannot understand
him.
ُ‫ك‬ َُ ‫الَ ُیَ اکلُ ُلَحْ ماُ ُفَ اَ َک‬

ُ‫ل ُلَحْ َُم ُال َّس َم ل‬ ُ ُ َُ‫ارهُ َذا ُ ْال َمعْنی ُیقَالُ ُال َذا ُ َحلَف‬ ‫َوبلا ْعتلبَ ل‬
ْ َُّ ُ ُ‫ان ُیَحْ نَث‬
ُ‫الن ُال َعالل َُم‬ ْ
ُ‫ل ُلَحْ َُم ُال لخ ْن لزُْی لُر ُاَ لواال ْن َس ل‬َُ ‫ال َُُٗیحْ نَثُ ُ َولَوُْ ُاَ َک‬ ُ َ ُ ‫اَ لو ْال َج َرا لُد‬
ُُُ‫ْن ُالن َّ َما ُهُ َُو ُاالحْ تل َراز‬ُ‫ل ُعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُ ْالیَ لمی ل‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْال َحا لم‬َُّ َ‫ل ُالس َماع ُا‬ ُ‫ت ُیَ ْعلَمُ ُبلا َ َّو ل‬ُ‫بلاللغَا ل‬
ُ َُ‫تُفَیدَارالح ْکمُُعَلیُُذللك‬ ْ ُ‫لُال َّد َم لویَّا ل‬ ُ‫َنُتَنَاو ل‬ ُْ ‫ع‬
Based upon this (that the ruling will apply only when the Illat
is found) it has been said that if a person takes an oath that
he will not eat meat and then eats fish or locust, his oath
will not break but if he eats pork or human flesh, his oath
will break. The reason for this is that one acquainted with
the Arabic language and its usage immediately on hearing
it will understand that he is taking an oath that he will not
eat meat which has been created from (or made from) blood,
which would mean that he is abstaining from all types of
flesh and the ruling will be based on it (such that his oath
will only break if he consumes meat created from blood, which
is not present in fish or locusts).
Definition of Iqtidha'un Nas
ُ ُ ُ‫االم ْقتَضُی ُفَهُ َُو ُ لزیَا َُدةُ ُ َعلَی ُالنَّص‬

ُ ‫الَ ُیَتَ َحقَّقُ ُ َم ْعنَی ُالنَّصُ ُال‬
َُّ ‫الَّ ُبل لُه ُ َک‬
ُ‫ان‬ ْ ‫َواَ َّم‬
ُ‫یُنَ ْف لس لُهُ َم ْعنَاہ‬
ُْ ‫حُفل‬
َُّ ‫ص‬ َ ‫النَّصَُُّال ْقت‬
‫َضاہُُللیَ ل‬
107
Usool Shaashi
Iqtidha'un Nas is an addition to the speech (a meaning

beyond What is actually said) without which the meaning of
the speech will not be correct (the implication of the speech
cannot be applied without it), that is to say the speech
requires it in order for its meaning to be correct.
Example of Iqtidha'un Nas
ُ‫ن‬ ُ ‫ن ُهُ َذا ُنَعْتُ ُ ْال َمرْ ُاَ لُة ُال‬

َُّ َ‫الَّ ُا‬ ُ‫ت ُقَوْ لُهُٗ ُاَ ْن ل‬
َُّ ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُفَا ل‬ ُ‫لمثَالُهُٗ ُفلی ُال َّشرْ لعیَّا ل‬
ُ‫ضا لُء‬ ُ‫َرُفَ َکانَُُ ْال َمصْ دَرُُ َموْ جوْ دُُبلطَ لری ل‬
َ ‫ْقُاال ْقتل‬ َُ ‫ضیُ ْال َمصْ د‬ ‫النَّعْتَُُیَ ْقتَ ل‬
An example of this (Dalaalatun Nas) in (the laws of)
Shari'ah is the term, "You are divorced". This (being
divorced) is a characteristic (Sifat, which is a derivative of a
verb) of the woman, however in order for it (divorced) to be
the characteristic (Sifat, which is a derivative of a verb) the
Masdar (root word, or verb in this case, from which words are
derived) has to be present1. In other words it can be said
that the meaning of the Masdar is present because it is
required (for the meaning of the speech to be correct).
ُ‫َن ُاالاَ ْم لُر‬

ُ‫ال ُاَ ْعتَ ْقتُ ُیَقَعُ ُ ْال لع ْتقُ ُع ل‬ َُ َ‫ف ُ لدرْ ُهَمُ ُفَق‬ ُ‫ی ُبلا َ ْل ل‬ ُْ ‫ق ُ َعبْدكَُ ُعَن‬ ُْ َ‫ال ُا‬
ُْ ‫عتل‬ َُ َ‫َوال َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ك‬ َُ َّ‫فَیَ لجبُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُاالاَ ْلفُ ُ َولَوُْ ُ َکانَُ ُاالاَ ْمرُ ُن ََویُ ُبل لُه ُ ْال َکف‬
َُ ‫ار ُةَ ُیَقَعُ ُ َع َّما ُنَ َویُ ُ َو َذلل‬
ُ‫یُبلا َ ْلفُُث َُّم‬
ُْ ‫یُ َم ْعنَیُقَوْ لل لُهُبلعْهُُعَن‬ ‫فُ لدرْ ُهَمُُیَ ْقت ل‬
ُْ ‫َض‬ ُ‫یُبلا َ ْل ل‬
ُْ ‫النُقَوْ ُلَهُُٗاَ ْعتل ْقهُُعَن‬ َُّ
ْ
ُُ‫ضا لُء ُفَیَثبت‬ ْ
َ ‫ْق ُاالقتل‬ َ ْ
ُ‫ی ُفَیَثبتُ ُالبَیْعُ ُبلط لری ل‬ ْ ْ
ُْ ‫َاق ُفَا ْعتلقهُ ُعَن‬ ُ‫ی ُبلاال ْعت ل‬ ُْ ‫ن ُ َو لک ْیلل‬ ُْ ‫ک‬
ْ
ُ‫بُالبَی لُْع‬ُ‫یُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫ْالقبوْ لُُ َکذللكَُُالنہُُٗرکنُُفل‬
ْ َّ
1
If a sifat (quality, attribute or characteristic) is ascribed to a person it will necessitate that the
person carry out the action or in other words was the doer of the verb, e.g. if a person is called
a helper. It would mean that he carried out the action of helping. Similarly in this instance
when the woman has been called divorced, it would mean that the action of being divorce was
carried out on her.
108
Usool Shaashi
(The second example of Dalaalatun Nas is) If a person tells
another, "Set your slave free on my behalf in lieu of one
thousand dirhams" and the owner then says that he set the
slave free, the act of setting free will be attributed to the
one who gave the order and a thousand Dirhams will
become Waajib on him (to give to the owner of the slave). If
the person who gave the order had the intention of
Kaffaarah (that he is setting this slave free in payment for his
Kaffaarah) then it will be in accordance with his intention
(and his Kaffaarah will be fulfilled). The reason for this is
that saying, "Set your slave free on my behalf in lieu of one
thousand dirhams" necessitates the meaning of "Sell this
slave to me for one thousand dirhams ant then be my
representative (Wakeel) in setting him free and set him free
on my behalf.". Thus a sale (transaction of sale between the
two) has been established by Iqtidha'un Nas (that in order
for the meaning of the speech to be correct, a sale transaction
is required) and acceptance (of the sale) will also be
established in a similar manner (by Dalaalatun Nas).
ُُ‫الُاَ ْعتَ ْقتُُیَقَع‬َُ َ‫ْرُ َشئُُفَق‬ ُ‫یُبل َغی ل‬

ُْ ‫قُ َع ْبدَكَُُعَن‬ ُْ ‫الُاَ ْعتل‬
َُ َ‫الُاَبوُُْیوْ سفَُُال َذاُق‬ َُ َ‫َوُللهُ َذاُق‬
ُ‫الَ ُیَحْ تَاجُ ُفل ْی لُه ُاللَی‬ ُ‫ضیا ُلل ْل لُهُبَ لُة ُ َوالتَّوْ لکی ل‬
ُ ‫ْل ُ َو‬ ُ‫َن ُاال لم لُر ُ َویَکوْ نُ ُهُ َذا ُم ْقتَ ل‬ ُ‫ْال لع ْتقُ ُع ل‬
‫بُ ْالبَی لُْع‬
ُ‫یُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫لُفل‬ُ‫ْضُالُن َّهُُٗبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُةُ ْالقَبوْ ل‬ُ‫ْالقَب ل‬
Because of this (that a sale transaction has been established in
the above example by Dalaalatun Nas) Imaam Abu Yusuf
says that if a person says to another, "Set your slave free on
my behalf in exchange for nothing" and he (the owner) then
says, "I set him free" the act of setting free will be ascribed
to the one who gave the order and Hibah (transferring
ownership to the other by gifting it to him) and
'Towkeel'(appointing another as his representative to act on
his behalf)will be established Iqtidha'un Nas and taking
possession will not be necessary (for the one who gave the
order) as it (taking possession) is the same as acceptance in
109
Usool Shaashi
the example of sale (mentioned above where acceptance was
established also through Dalaalatun Nas).
ُ‫ضاءُ ُاَ ْثبَ ْتنَا‬ َ ‫ب ُ ْالبَی لُْع ُفَا ل َذا ُاَ ْثبَ ْتنَا ُ ْالبَ ْی َُع ُال ْقتل‬ ُْ ‫َول لکنَّا ُنَقوْ لُ ُاَ ْلقبوْ لُ ُر ْکنُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬
ُ‫ْس ُبلر ْکنُ ُفلی ُ ْال لُهُبَ لُة‬ َُ ‫ب ُ ْال لُهُبَ لُة ُفَالنَّهُ ُلَی‬ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ ُ‫ف ُ ْالقَب ل‬
ُْ ‫ْض ُفل‬ ُ‫ضروْ َُرةُ ُبل لخالَ ل‬ َ ُ‫ل‬ َُ ْ‫ْالقبو‬
ُ‫ضا لُءُح ْکماُُبل ْالقَب ل‬
ُ‫ْض‬ َ ‫ْقُاال ْقتل‬ُ‫للیَکوْ نَُُ ْالح ْکمُُُبل ْال لُهُبَ لُةُبلطَ لری ل‬
However (in disagreement to this ruling of Imaam Abu Yusuf)
we say (i.e. Imaam Abu Hanifah and Imaam Muhammed) that
acceptance is a Rukan (fundamental element) of a sale thus if
a sale has been established (to have occurred) by Iqtidha'un
Nas then it would dictate that acceptance also definitely
occurred (as a sale is only complete with a proposal of sale
and acceptance of the offer, thus when we say a sale took place
it would naturally mean that a proposal and acceptance
occurred) as opposed to taking possession in Hibah as it
(taking possession) is not a Rukan (but rather a condition for
the transfer of ownership) such that we can say that when
Hibah is proven by Iqtidha'un Nas, taking possession also
definitely occurred (as the act of Hibah can take place,
without the other taking possession, such that ownership will
only be transferred once the other takes possession of the item,
even though it has already been gifted to him. This is contrary
to a sale, as a sale is only complete and called a sale once both
a proposal and acceptance takes place).
Ruling of Iqtidha'un Nas
ُ‫َوح ْکمُُ ْالم ْقتَضیُاَُنَّهُُٗیَ ْثبتُُبلطَ لری ل‬

‫ْقُالضَّروْ َُر لُةُفَیقَ َّدرُُبلقَ ْد لُرُالضَّروْ َُرة‬
The ruling of Iqtidha'un Nas is that it is established out of

necessity and will therefore be restricted to its necessity
(such that only that amount of it will be applied which can
fulfill the requirement of Iqtidha'un Nas).
110
Usool Shaashi
Example of Iqtidha'un Nas
َُ َ‫الن ُالطَّال‬
ُُ‫ق ُیقَ َّدر‬ َُّ ُ ُ‫صح‬ ‫الَ ُیَ ل‬
ُ ُ‫ث‬َُ ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُ َونَوی ُبل لُه ُالثَّل‬ َُ َ‫َوللهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ال ُاَ ْن ل‬
َ ‫ْق ُاال ْقتل‬
ُُ‫ضا لُء ُفَیقَ َّدرُ ُبلقَ ْد لُر ُالضَّروْ َُر لُة ُ َوالضَّروْ َُرةُ ُتَرْ تَفلع‬ ُ‫َم ْذکوْ راُ ُبلطَ لری ل‬
ُ ‫اح لُد‬ ْ ‫بل ْال َُواحُْ لُدُفَیقَ َّدرُُ َم ْذکوْ راُُفل ْیُ َحق‬
‫ُال َو ل‬
As a result of this (that Iqtidha'un Nas is restricted to its
necessity) we say that if a person tells his wife "You are
divorced" with the intention of three Talaaq, it will not be
correct (and only one Talaaq will apply). The reason for this
is that Talaaq has been regarded to have been issued by
Iqtidha'un Nas (as was discussed that ascribing a sifat
necessitates the occurrence of the action; being divorced
necessitates that a divorce was issued) and will therefore be
restricted to necessity and the necessity is fulfilled with one
thus it will be established that only one Talaaq was issued.
ُ‫ُو ُنَویُُبل لُه ُطَ َعاماُدوْ نَ ُطَ َعام‬ َ ‫ُالح ْکم ُفل ْی ُقَوْ ُلل لُه ُال ْن ُاَ َک ْلت‬ْ ‫َو ُعَلیُهُ َذاُیخَ رَّج‬
َ ‫ُاال ْقتل‬
ُ‫ضا لء‬ ‫ْق ْ ل‬
‫ض ْی ُطَ َعاما ُفَ َکانَ ُذُللكَُ ُثَابلتا ُبلطَ لری ل‬ ‫ُاالَ ْک َل ُیَ ْقتَ ل‬
ْ ‫صح لُالَ َّن‬ ‫َال ُیَ ل‬
ُ‫ْص‬َ ‫صی‬ ‫ُو ُالَ ُت َْخ ل‬
َ ‫ق‬ ْ ْ ْ
‫فَیقَ َّدر ُبلقَ ْد لر ُالضَّروْ َُر لُة ُ َو ُالضَّروْ َُرةُ ُتَرْ تَفلع ُبلالُفَرْ لد ُالمطلَ ل‬
ْ ‫ْصُیَ ْعتَ لمد‬
ُ ‫ُالعموْ َُم‬ َ ‫صی‬ ‫ق لُالَ َّنُالتَّ ْخ ل‬ ْ ‫ُالم‬
‫طلَ ل‬ ْ ‫یُالفَرْ لد‬
ْ ‫فل‬
As a result of this (that Iqtidha'un Nas is restricted to

necessity) the ruling is derived for the statement (if a person
takes an oath saying), "If I eat...(Then my wife is divorced,
slave set free, or any other condition)" whereby he makes the
intention for one type of food (the intention that if I eat this
specific type of food then only will the condition be fulfilled)
and excludes others, it will not be correct (and his oath will
break with the consumption of any type of food). The reason
111
Usool Shaashi
for this (why the oath breaks even though he might have been
referring to a specific food) is that eating necessitates food,
thus it (consumption of food) has been established by
Iqtidha'un Nas which will be restricted to necessity and the
necessity will only be fulfilled by 'Fard Mutlaq' (an
unrestricted clause). 'Fard Mutlaq' cannot be specified (have
its implication restricted) as 'Takhsees' (to restrict) requires
Umoom (generality, which means it can only occur where an
item is Aam and Iqtidha'un Nas is not Aam).
َُّ ُ ُ‫ضاء‬
ُ‫الن‬ َ ‫ق ُفَیَقَعُ ُالطَّالَقُ ُال ْقتل‬
َُ َ‫ل ُال ْعتَدیُْ ُ َونَوی ُبل لُه ُالطَّال‬ َُ َ‫َولَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫ال ُبَ ْع َُد ُالدخوْ ل‬
ُ‫ضروْ َُرةُ ُ َوللهُ َذا‬ َّ
َ ُ ُ‫ق ُفَیقَ َّدرُ ُالطالَقُ ُ َموْ جوْ دا‬ َّ
ُ‫ی ُوجوْ َُد ُالطالَ ل‬ ْ
‫اال ْعتلدَا َُد ُیَقت ل‬
ُْ ‫َض‬
ْ
ُ َ‫صُفَ ُةَ ُالبَیْنوْ ُنَ لُة ُزَ ائل َُدةُ ُعَلی ُقَ ْد لُر ُالضَّروْ َُر لُة ُف‬
َُ‫ال‬ َُّ ُ ‫َکانَُ ُ ْال َواقلعُ ُبل لُه ُ َرجْ لعیا‬
‫الن ُ ل‬
ُ ‫احدُُلل َماُ َذکَرْ نَا‬ ‫الَُّ َو ل‬
ُ ‫الَُیَقَعُُال‬
ُ ‫ضا لُءُ َو‬ ُ‫یَ ْثبتُُبلطَ لری ل‬
َ ‫ْقُاال ْقتل‬
If a person tells his wife after consummating the marriage,
"Start your Iddah (period of waiting after Talaaq)" with the
intention of Talaaq the Talaaq will be applied through
Iqtidha'un Nas. The reason for this is that Iddah requires
the issuing of a Talaaq, thus it will be established that a
Talaaq was issued (because of which he is instructing her to
start her Iddah) according to necessity (will be restricted to
only that amount which will fulfill the requirement of
Iqtidha'un Nas), which is possible through a Raj'ie
(revocable) Talaaq. The reason for this (why it will be a
Talaaq Raj'ie) is that Talaaq Baa'inah (irrevocable Talaaq)
exceeds the necessity and therefore cannot be established
through Iqtidha'un Nas. Thus only one Talaaq (Raj'ie) will
apply, as we have explained.
112
‫‪Lesson on Amr‬‬
‫‪Definition of Amr‬‬
‫‪Paste‬‬
‫فصلُفیُاالمر ُ‬
‫ْ‬
‫َصرفُ ُاللزَ لُ‬
‫امُ‬ ‫ْرہ ُ’’ال ْف َعلُْ‘‘ ُ َوفلی ُالشرْ لُ‬
‫ع ُت َ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ال ْمرُ ُفلی ُالل َُغ لُة ُقَوْ لُ ُ ْالقَائل لُ‬
‫ل ُلل َغی لُ‬ ‫ُاَ ْ اُ‬
‫ْلُ َعلَیُ ْال َغی لُْر‬
‫ْالفلع لُ‬
‫‪The literal meaning of Amr is when a person orders‬‬
‫‪’- Do (this)! In‬افعل’ ‪another to do something using the words‬‬
‫‪Shari’ah (it means), making something (an act) compulsory‬‬
‫‪on another.‬‬
‫نُ‬‫ال ُُا ُْ‬‫االَ ْم لُر ُیَ ْختَصُُبلهُ لذ لُہ ُالص ْی َُغ لُة‪َ ُ ،‬وا ْست ََح َُ‬ ‫ن ُ ْالم َرا َُد ُبل ْ ا‬ ‫َو َذ َک َُر ُبَعْضُ ُ ْاالاَئل َُّم لُة ُاَ َُّ‬
‫للاَ ُتَ َعالی ُمتَ َکلمُُ‬ ‫نُ ُ‬ ‫االَ ْم لُر ُیَ ْختَصُ ُبلهُ لذ لُہ ُالص ْی َُغ لُة ُُفَا ل َُّ‬ ‫ن ُ َحقل ْیُقَ ُةَ ُ ْ ا‬ ‫یَّکوْ نَُ ُ َم ْعنَاہُ ُاَ َُّ‬
‫لُ‬‫ل ُ لع ْن َدنَا‪َُ ُ ،‬و ُ َکالَمُه ُاَ ْمر َونَ ُْهیُ ُ َُو ُال ْخبَارُ ُ َُو ُال ْستل ْخبَار‪َُ ُ ،‬و ُال ْست ََحا َُ‬ ‫فلی ُ ْ اُ‬
‫االزَ لُ‬
‫نُالم َرا َُدُ‬‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬
‫نُیَّکوْ نَُُ َم ْعنَاہُُا َُّ‬ ‫َ‬
‫الُایْضاُُا ُْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫االزَ لل‪َ ُ،‬وال ْست ََح َُ‬ ‫وجوْ دُُهُ لذ لُہُالص ْی َُغ لُةُفلیُ ْ اُ‬
‫اال ْم لُر ُوجوْ بُُ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ع ُب ل ْ ا‬‫ار لُ‬ ‫ن ُ ْالم َرا َُد ُللل َّش ل‬ ‫ال لم لُر ُیَ ْختَصُ ُبلهُ لذ لُہ ُالص ْی َُغ لُة ُفَا ل َُّ‬ ‫االَ ْم لُر ُلل ْ ُ‬
‫بل ْ ا‬
‫نُهُ لذ لُہُ‬ ‫ال لُءُ لع ْن َدنَا‪َ ُ،‬وقَ ُْد ُثَبَتَُ ُ ْالوجوْ بُ ُبلدوْ لُ‬ ‫ْل ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُ َوهُ َُو ُ َم ْعنَیُ ْ ل‬
‫اال ْبتل َ ُ‬ ‫ْالفلع لُ‬
‫ن ُوروْ لُدُ‬ ‫ن ُلَّ ُْم ُتَبْل ْغهُ ُال َّد ْع َُوةُ ُبلدوْ لُ‬ ‫اال ْی َمانُ ُعَلی ُ َم ُْ‬ ‫بُ ْ ل‬ ‫ْس ُاُُنَّه ُ َو َج َُ‬ ‫الص ْی َُغ لُة‪ُ ،‬اُلَی َُ‬
‫ْرفَتُهُ‬ ‫ـال لُءُ َمع ل‬ ‫بُ َعلَیُ ْالعقَ َ ُ‬ ‫ثُللاُُ َر ْس َوالُُلَ َو َج َُ‬ ‫الُاَبوُُْ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَُلَوُُُْلَ ُْمُیَ ْب َع لُ‬ ‫ال َّس ْم لع؟قَ َُ‬
‫یُ‬‫االَ ْم لُر ُیَ ْختَصُ ُبلهُ لذ لُہ ُالص ْی َُغ لُة ُفل ُْ‬ ‫ن ُ ْالم َرا َُد ُبل ْ ُ‬ ‫بلعقوْ لل لُه ْم‪ُ ،‬فَیحْ َملُ ُذللكَُ ُعَلی ُُاَ َُّ‬
‫ل ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُقَوْ ُللهُ‬ ‫ال ُیَکوْ نَُ ُفلعْلُ ُالرَّسوْ لُ‬ ‫ت ُ َحتی ُ َ ُ‬ ‫َحقُ ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُفلی ُال َّشرْ لعیَّا لُ‬
‫ی ُُاَ ْف َعاُلله ُ َعلَیْهُ‬ ‫ب ُُبله‪َ ُ ،‬و ْالمتَابَ َُعةُ ُفل ُْ‬ ‫الَ ُیَ ْلزَ مُ ُال ْعتلقَادُ ُ ْالوجوْ لُ‬ ‫’’ال ْف َعلوْ ا‘‘‪َ ُ ،‬و ُ‬
‫ص لُ‬
‫اص‬ ‫اال ْختل َ‬ ‫الس ََّال لُمُالنَّ َماُت لَجبُُ لع ْن َُدُ ْالم َواظَُبَ لُةُ َوال ْنتلفَا َُءُ َدللی لُ‬
‫ْلُ ْ ل‬
‫‪Some Aimah have mentioned that Amr is restricted to this‬‬
‫‪).()It is impossible that they could have‬افعل( ‪expression‬‬
‫‪implied that the reality of Amr is restricted to this‬‬
‫‪expression only because according to us ALLAAH Ta’ala is‬‬
‫‪the Speaker since eternity and his speech comprises of Amr‬‬
‫‪113‬‬
Usool Shaashi
(ordering), Nahee (prohibiting), Ikhbaar (informing),
Istikhbaar (questioning) and it is impossible that this
expression could have existed since eternity (as any
expression or term is momentary because of it comprising of
sound, letters and words, whereas ALLAAH’s speech does not
comprise of these and is therefore eternal). At the same time
it is impossible that this (the statement of some Aimah that
Amr is restricted to this expression only) means that the
objective of the one giving the order (which is to make an act
Waajib on another) can only be attained with this expression
because the purpose of Amr from the Shar'ie(the one who
stipulates the laws of Shari’ah) is to make an act Waajib on
the servant, which gives the meaning of ‘Ibti’laa’ (to put to
trial), and Wujoob can be established without this
expression. (For example) Is Imaan not Waajib on those
whom the message of Islaam has not reached? Imaam Abu
Hanifah says, “Had ALLAAH Ta’ala not sent any Nabi
then (too) it would be compulsory upon the intellectuals to
use their intellect to recognise ALLAAH Ta’ala. Thus the
statement of the Aimah (mentioned above) will mean that
the Ahkaam of Shari’ah with regards to (ALLAAH’s)
servants is restricted to this expression such that the actions
of Rasulullaah  will not have the same status as the
expression of Rasulullaah  ‘‫’افعلوا‬- You all Do! (this) and it
will not be necessary to regard the action of Rasulullaah 
as Waajib (in the same manner as his order will be regarded).
Following the actions of Rasulullaah  will only be Waajib
when it is proven that Rasulullaah  habitually performed
that act or (it is proven) that it was not specific to
Rasulullaah  only.
Lesson on Amr Mutlaq
ُ ‫فصل‬
114
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫َن ُ ْالقَ لر ْیُنَ لُة ُال َّداُلَّ لُة ُ َعلَی‬
ُ‫ق ُاَیُْ ُاَ ْلم َج َّر لُد ُع ل‬ ُ‫طلَ ل‬ْ ‫االَ ْم لُر ُ ْالم‬ ُ ْ ُ ‫ال ْختَلَفَُ ُالنَّاسُ ُفلی‬
ُ‫اللزوْ لُم ُ َُو ُ َع ْد لُم ُاللزوْ لم ُنَحْ وُ ُقَوْ ُلله ُتَ َعالی ُ{ َوال َذا ُق لُر َُء ُ ْالقرْ آنُ ُفَا ْستَ لمعوْ ا ُُلَی‬
ُ‫الَ ُتَ ْق َربَا ُهُ لذ لُہ ُال َّش َج َُر ُةَ ُفَتَکوْ نَا‬ ُ ‫صتوْ ا ُلَ َعلَّک ُْم ُترْ َحموْ نَُ}ُ َُو ُقَوْ ُلله ُتَ َعالی ُ{ َو‬ ‫َوُاَ ْن ل‬
ُ َّ ‫ن ُ َُموْ َجبَهُ ُ ْالوجوْ بُ ُال‬
ُ‫ال ُال َذا ُقَا َُم‬ ُ‫ص لحیْحُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َم ْذ ُهَ ل‬
َُّ َ‫ب ُُا‬ َّ ‫لمنَُ ُالظَّالل لمیْنَُ} ُ َوال‬
ُ‫ل‬َُ ‫ ُقَا‬،ُ‫عة‬ َُ ‫ار ُطَا‬ ‫نُ ْ ل‬
َُ ‫اال ْیتل َم‬ َُّ َ‫ْصُیَةُ ُ َک َما ُا‬ ‫الَ ْم لُر ُ َمع ل‬ ُ ‫ك ُا‬ َُّ ‫ال‬
َُ ْ‫ن ُتَر‬ ُ‫ال َّدللیْلُ ُعَلی ُ لخ َالُفله ُ ل ا‬
ُ :‫اسی‬ ‫ْال َح َم ل‬
ُ ‫ی ُاَ لحبَّتل لُه ُْمُ بل َذاك‬ ُْ ‫ی م لر ْی لُه ُْم ُفل‬ ُْ ‫صرْ لُمُ َح ْبلل‬ َ ‫ْك ُبل‬ ُ‫ال لُم لری ل‬ ُ‫ُاَطَ ْع ل‬
ُ‫ت ُ ل‬
ُ ‫َصاك‬ َ ‫نُع‬ ُْ ‫یُ َم‬ُْ ‫ص‬ ‫كُفَا ْع ل‬ ُ‫َاصوْ ل‬
َ ‫نُع‬ ُْ ‫َوال‬ ‫كُفَطَ ل‬
‫او لع ْی لُه ُْم‬ ُ‫نُطَا َوعوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫فَهُ ُْمُال‬
ُ‫عُ َسبَبُُلل ْل لعقَا ل‬
‫ب‬ ُ‫َو ْال لعصْ یَانُُفل ْی َماُیَرْ لجعُُاللیُ َحقُُال َّشرْ ل‬
The scholars have differed regarding Amr Mutlaq; i.e.

(such an Amr which is) free from any indication whether it is
for compulsion or not for compulsion (this means that there
is a difference of opinion regarding the expression of Amr
which does not indicate whether it is Waajib or not Waajib).
For example, the verses, “When the Quraan is recited, then
listen attentively to it (stop talking) and remain silent so that
mercy may be shown to you” and “But do not approach
this tree, for then (if you eat from it) you will be of the
wrong-doers”(there is nothing in these verses which indicate
whether the order given in these verses are for Wujoob or not).
The Saheeh (correct and authentic) view is that it (Amr
Mutlaq) is for Wujoob except if proof is established against
it (if there is proof that Wujoob is not implied then the act will
not be considered Waajib) because discarding Amr is
disobedience and acting in accordance to it is obedience.
Allaamah Humaasi said,
“In severing relations with me you have obeyed those who

order you.
You too order them to do the same to their beloveds.
115
Usool Shaashi
If they obey you (and sever ties with those they love), then
obey them (and sever relations with me).
If they disobey you (and do not sever relations with those they
love), then disobey those who disobey you (and maintain
relations with me).”
Disobedience with regards to matters of Shari’ah is a cause

for punishment.
ُ،‫ب‬ ‫اال لم لُرُ َعلَیُ ْالمخَ اطَ ل‬ ُ ْ ُ‫ارُالن َّ َماُیَکوْ نُُبلقَ ْد لُرُ لو َالُیَ لُة‬ ُ‫اال ْیتل َم ل‬ ‫نُلزوْ َُمُ ْ ل‬ َُّ َ‫َُوُتَحْ قلیْقُهُُا‬
ُُ‫الَ ُیَکوْ ن‬ ُ ُ ُ‫الَ ُیَلزَ مُه ُطَاعَتكَُ ُُاَصْ ال‬ ْ ُ ُ‫ن‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ص ْی َُغ ُةَ ُاالَ ْم لُر ُاللی ُ َم‬ ‫َوللهُ َذا ُال َذا ُ َو َّج ُْهتَُ ُ ل‬
ْ
ُ‫ن ُیَلزَ مُه ُطَاعَتكَُ ُ لمنَُ ُال َعبل ْی لُد‬ ْ ُْ ‫ ُ َُو ُال َذا ُ َو َّج ْهتَ ُهَا ُاللی ُ َم‬،‫ار‬ ‫ذللكَُ ُموْ لجباُ ُلل ْ ل‬
‫ال ْیتل َم ل‬
ُ‫اب ُعرْ فاُ ُ َُو‬ ْ
َُ َ‫الَ ُم َحاُلَةُ ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُت ََر َُکه ُال ْختلیَارا ُیَ ْستَ لحقُ ُال لعق‬ ُ ُ ُ‫اال ْیتل َمار‬ ‫لَ لز َمهُ ُ ْ ل‬
ُ‫ ُال َذا ُثَبَتَُ ُهُ َذا‬،‫اال لم لر‬ ‫ار ُبلقَ ْد لُر ُ لوالَُیَ لُة ُ ْ ا‬ ُ‫ن ُلزوْ َُم ُ ْ ل‬
ُ‫اال ُ ْیتل َم ل‬ ْ
َُّ َ‫شَرْ عاُفَ َعلی ُهُ َذا ُع ََرفنَا ُُا‬
ُُ‫صرف‬ ْ
َ َّ‫ن ُاَجْ زَ ا لُء ُال َعالَ لُم ُ َولَهُ ُالت‬ ُْ ‫ی ُکلُ ُج ُْزءُ ُ لم‬ ُْ ‫ِلَ ُ لم ْلکاُ ُ َکا لمالُ ُفل‬ ُ ‫نُ ل‬ َُّ ‫فَنَقوْ لُ ُال‬
ْ
َُُ‫اصرُ ُفلی ُال َع ْب لُد ُ َکان‬ ْ ْ
‫ن ُلَهُ ُال لملكُ ُالقَ ل‬ ْ َُّ َ‫ ُ َوال َذا ُثَبَتَُ ُُا‬،َ‫َکیْفَُ ُ َما ُ َشا َُء ُ َوُاَ َراد‬
ُْ ‫ن ُ َم‬
ْ
ُ‫ن ُاَوْ َجدَكَُ ُ لمنَُ ُال َع ْد لُم‬ ُْ ‫ك ُُاَ ْم لُر ُ َم‬ ُ‫ی ُتَرْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ب ُفَ َما ُظَنكَُ ُفل‬ ُ‫ار ُ َسبَبا ُلل ْل لعقَا ل‬ ُ‫اال ْیتل َم ل‬ ‫تَرْ كَُ ُ ْ ل‬
‫ْبُالن َع لُم‬ َُ ‫َوُاَ َد َُّرُ َعلَیْكَُُ َشابلی‬
The rationale behind this (that disregarding Amr is
disobedience) is that compulsion to perform (an Amr) is
based upon the authority one has over the addressee (the
one to whom the Amr is directed). As a result of this (that
compulsion is based upon the authority one has over the
addressee) if the expression of Amr (an order) is directed to
a person upon whom it is not compulsory to obey you then
it will not be Waajib (for him) to carry it (the ordered task)
out and if it is directed to a person upon whom it is
compulsory to obey you then it will be compulsory for him
to carry it out without any doubt. If he were to disregard it
intentionally then he will be deserving of punishment
logically and according to Shari’ah. According to this we
learn that the level of compulsion will be based upon the
authority of the one issuing the order (over those being
116
Usool Shaashi
ordered, such that if he has authority over them then it will be
compulsory for them to obey it and if he has no authority over
them then it will not be compulsory for them to obey it). Once
this has been established (that the level of compulsion will be
based upon the authority of the one issuing the order) we say
that ALLAAH Ta’ala is Supreme Master of every inch of
the universe and can do as He so pleases and intends (thus
ALLAAH Ta’ala has authority over everything and his orders
are compulsory on His creation). When it has been
established that disregarding an order of one who has a
slight authority over a person (by being his master and the
latter being his slave) is deserving of punishment, what is
your opinion about disregarding the order of One who
brought you into existence from nothing and showered His
bounties upon you (how much more incumbent will
ALLAAH’s order be)?
Lesson on Taqraar in Amr
‫الَُیَ ْقتَ ل‬
َ ‫ضیُالتَّ ْک َر‬
ُ‫ار‬ ُ‫الَ ْمرُُبل ْالفلع ل‬
ُ ُ‫ْل‬ ُ ْ َ‫فصل ا‬
This lesson discusses that Amr-bil-Fi’l (ordering a specific
act) does not necessitate repetition (such that carry out once
will fulfil the requisite of the order).
ُُ‫ج ُهَا ُ ْال َم َوکل‬

َُ ‫ی‘‘ ُفَطَلَّقَ ُهَا ُ ْال َو لکیْلُ ُث َُّم ُتَزَ َّو‬ ُْ ‫ق ُال ْم َرُاَتل‬ُْ ‫ال ُ’’طَل‬ َُ َ‫َوللهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُلَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫لُثَانلیا‬ ُ ْ ُ‫االَ ْم لُر‬
ُ‫االَ َّو ل‬ ُ ْ ‫نُیطَلقَ ُهَاُبل‬ ُ‫ْسُلل ْل َو لکی ل‬
ُْ َ‫ْلُُا‬ َُ ‫لَی‬
As a result of this (that Amr does not necessitate repetition)
we say that if a person orders another saying, “Divorce my
wife (on my behalf)” and the Wakeel (appointee) divorces
117
Usool Shaashi
her, and thereafter the Muwakkil (the appointer) then
remarries her, the Wakeel will not have the right to divorce
her a second time with the first Amr (when he divorced her
the first time he fulfilled the Amr and will not have the right to
continually issue divorces).
َُ ‫ ُ َولَوُْ ُقَا‬،‫َاولُ ُهُ َذا ُت َْز لویْجا ُ َم َُّرةُ ُبَ ْع َُد ُاُ ْخری‬
ُ‫ل‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ی ُال ْم َرُاَة‬
َ ‫الَ ُیَتَن‬ َُ َ‫َولَوُْ ُق‬
ُْ ‫ال ُزَوجْ نل‬
‫الَُّ َم َُّرةُُ َو ل‬
ُ‫اح َُدة‬ ُ ‫َاولُُذللكَُُال‬َ ‫الَُیَتَن‬ ُ ُ‘‘ُْ‫لل َع ْب لدہُ’’تَزَ َّوج‬
If a person orders another saying, “Marry me to a woman”

then this will give him the right to perform his marriage
again and again. If a person orders his slave, “Get
married!” then this will permit him to get married only
once (and he will not be allowed to marry again).
ُ‫ن ُقَوْ ُلَه‬ َُّ ‫ار ُفَا ل‬ُ‫ص ل‬َ ‫اال ْختل‬ ‫ْل ُ ْ ل‬
ُ‫ْل ُعَلی ُ َسبلی ل‬ ُ‫ْق ُ ْالفلع ل‬
ُ‫ْل ُطَلَبُ ُتَحْ قلی ل‬ ُ‫االَ ْم َُر ُبل ْالفلع ل‬
ُْ ُ ‫ن‬
َُّ َ‫ال‬
ُ‫ل‬
ُ‫َصرُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َکالَ لُم‬ َ ‫ب ُ َو ْالم ْخت‬ ُ‫ْل ُالضَّرْ ل‬ َُ ‫ن ُقَوْ ُلله ُال ْف َعلُْ ُفلع‬ُْ ‫َصرُ ُ لم‬َ ‫الضْ لربُْ ُم ْخت‬
ُُ‫َصرفُ ُ َمعْلوْ م‬ َ ‫س ُت‬ ُ‫ب ُُاَ ْمرُ ُبل لج ْن ل‬
ُ‫االَ ْمرُ ُبلالضَّرْ ل‬ ُ ْ ُ ‫َو ْالمطَ َّولُ ُ َس َواءُ ُفلی ُ ْالح ْک لُم ث َُّم‬
ُ‫لُ ْال لج ْن ل‬
‫س‬ َُّ ‫لُک‬ َُ ‫قُ َُوُیَحْ تَ لم‬ُ‫طالَ ل‬ْ ‫اال‬
‫االَ ْدنیُ لع ْن َُدُ ْ ل‬ُ ْ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫َُوُح ْکمُُالس لُْمُ ْال لج ْن ل‬
ُْ َ‫سُُا‬
َُ ‫نُیَتَنَا َو‬
The reason for this (why Amr does not necessitate repetition)
is that Amr calls for that action in a concise manner
(meaning it is an abbreviation of a lengthy statement) as
‘ُْ‫’الضْ لرب‬- You Hit! is short for ‘Perform the action of
hitting’, and the concise and extended form are both the
same in its ruling. Then (thus the above order to hit would
imply that one must strike once because) the order to hit is an
order to carry out a type of action (in this case hitting) in a
known manner and when a known type is ordered then it
will refer to the bare minimum when Mutlaq (with no
clauses or restrictions) or the maximum (if he has the
intention for it, either one can be implied and there is no in-
between).
118
Usool Shaashi
Rulings deduced from the above
ْ َ‫ب ُاَ ْدنی ُق‬
ُُ‫ط َُرةُ ُ لم ْنه‬ ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْش َربُ ُ ْال َما َُء ُیَحْ نَثُ ُبلشرْ ل‬
ُ ُ َُ‫َُو ُعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُ َحلَف‬
ُْ ‫صح‬
‫َّتُنلیَّتُه‬ َ ُ‫َولَوُُْنَویُبل لُهُ َج لم ْی َُعُ لمیَا لُہُ ْال َعالَ لُم‬
As a result of this (that Amr-Mutlaq will refer to either the
minimum or maximum) we say if a person takes an oath that
he will not drink water, then his oath will break even if he
drinks a drop. (However) If he has the intention for the
water of the entire world (meaning he takes an oath that he
will not drink all the water of the entire world) then his
intention will be correct (because Amr-Mutlaq can refer to
the minimum or maximum, and in this case his oath will only
break if he drinks all the water of the entire world and not if he
drinks a drop).
‫ت ُطَُلَّ ْقتُ ُیَقَعُ ُ ْال َو ل‬

ُ‫اح َُدةُ ُ َولَوُْ ُنَ َوی‬ ُ‫ی ُنَ ْف َس ل‬
ُْ َ‫ك ُفَقَال‬ َُ َ‫َوللهُ َذا ُق ْلُنَا ُال َذاق‬
ُْ ‫ال ُلَ ُهَا ُطَلقل‬
ُْ ‫صح‬
‫َّتُنلیَّتُه‬ َ ُ‫ث‬ َُ ‫الثَّل‬
As a result of this (that Amr-Mutlaq will refer to either the

minimum or maximum) we say that if a person orders his
wife to divorce herself and she then says, “I divorced
myself” then one Talaaq will apply but if he had the
intention for three then his intention will be correct (and
three will apply because Amr-Mutlaq will refer to either the
minimum or maximum, thus it can refer to either one Talaaq or
three).
ُ‫ث‬ َُ ‫ق ُ َولَوُْ ُنَ َوی ُالثَّل‬ ْ ‫اال‬

ُ‫ط َال ل‬ ‫َاولُ ُ ْال َو ل‬
‫اح َُد ُةَ ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْ ل‬ َ ‫الخَ َُر ُطَل ْق ُهَا ُیَتَن‬ َُ َ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُلَوُْ ُق‬
ُ ‫ال ُ ل‬
َُّ ‫حةُُاَ َُمةُُفَا ل‬
َُ‫نُنلُی َّ ُة‬ ْ
َُ ْ‫تُال َم ْنکو‬ُ‫الُال َذاُ َکانَ ل‬ ُ َّ ‫صحُُال‬
‫الَُیَ ل‬
ُ ُ‫ن‬ُ‫َّتُنلی َّتُهُ َولَوُُْن ََویُالث ْنتَ ْی ل‬
ُْ ‫صح‬ َ
‫س‬ ْ
ُ‫یُ َحق ُهَاُنلُیَّةُُبلکلُُال لج ْن ل‬ ُْ ‫ْنُفل‬ ُ‫الث ْنتَی ل‬
Similarly (Amr-Mutlaq can refer to either the minimum or
maximum)if a person orders another to divorce his wife,
119
Usool Shaashi
then this will refer to one when Amr is Mutlaq and if he
had the intention for three then his intention will be correct
(and three Talaaq will apply). (However) If he had the
intention for two then it will not be correct (and only one
will apply) except if his wife was a female slave because the
intention of two in her favour is the intention of the
maximum.
ُ‫اح َُدةُ ُ َولَوُْ ُن ََوی ُالث ْنتَیْ ل‬

ُ‫ن‬ ‫ج ُال ْم َرُاَةُ ُ َو ل‬ ُ‫ال ُلل َع ْب لدہ ُتَ َز َّوجُْ ُیَقَعُ ُعَلی ُتَزَ و ل‬َُ َ‫َولَوُْ ُق‬
ْ
‫یُ َحقُُال َع ْب لُد‬ ُْ ‫سُفل‬ ْ
ُ‫نُذللكَُُکلُُال لجُْن ل‬ ُْ ‫صح‬
َُّ َ‫َّتُنلی َّتُهُ لال‬ َ
If a person tells his slave, “Get married!” then it will
permit him to marry one woman but if he had the intention
of (permitting him to marry) two women then his intention
will be correct (and he will be permitted to marry two women)
as two is the maximum (amount wives he can take at one
time) for a slave.
A reply to an objection to this principle
ُُْ‫ت ُبل ْاالَ ْم لُر ُبَل‬ ُْ ‫ن ُذُللكَُ ُلَ ُْم ُیَ ْثب‬ َُّ ‫ت ُفَا ل‬ ُ‫ار ُ ْال لعبَادَا ل‬
ُ‫ال ُیَتَاَتی ُعَلی ُهُ َذا ُفَصْ لُ ُتَ ْک َر ل‬ ُ َ ‫َو‬
ُ‫ب ُفلی‬ َُ ‫ب ُاَدَا لُء ُ َما ُ َو َج‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫ی ُیَثبتُ ُبل ُهَا ُالوجوْ بُ َواالَ ْمرُ ُللطَلَ ل‬ ْ َّ
ُْ ‫ار ُاَ ْسبَابل ُهَا ُالتل‬ ُ‫بلتَ ْک َر ل‬
ُُ‫ل ُاَد‬ُ‫ل ُالرَّج ل‬ ُ‫ب ُ َوهُ َذا ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُقَوْ ل‬ ُ‫ل ُ ْالوجوْ ل‬ ُ‫ت ُاَصْ ل‬ ُ‫الَ ُ ل لال ْثبَا ل‬
ُ ُ ُ‫الذ َُّم لُة ُبل َسبَبُ ُ َسابلق‬
ْ
ُ‫تُال لعبَا َُدةُُبل َسبَبل ُهَاُفَتَ َو َّج ُهَُاالَ ْمرُُ لالَدَا لُء‬ ْ َُ ْ‫ثَ َمنَُُ ْال َمبلی لُْعُ َواَدُُنَفَُقَ ُةَُال َّزو‬
ُ‫ج لُةُفَا ل َذاُ َو َجبَ ل‬
ُ‫س ُ َما‬ َُ ‫َاولُ ُ لج ْن‬ َ ‫س ُیَتَن‬ َُ ‫َاولُ ُ ْال لج ْن‬ َ ‫ب ُ لم ْن ُهَا ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُث َُّم ُ ْاالَ ْمرُ ُلَ َّما ُ َکانَُ ُیَتَن‬ َُ ‫َما ُ َو َج‬
‫بُ َعلَُْی لُه‬َُ ‫َو َج‬
Based upon this principle (that Amr does not necessitate
repetition) there will no objection to repetition in Ibaadaat
(whereby one can say that since there is no repetition in Amr it
is not necessary to perform acts of Ibaadaat, such as Salaah,
etc, repeatedly but merely performing them once will suffice)
because they are not established (made Waajib repeatedly)
by Amr (necessitating repetition) but rather (they become
120
Usool Shaashi
Waajib repeatedly) because of repetition of the Asbaab (the
principal cause) which causes it to become Waajib. The
Amr seeks to make Waajib performance of that, which is
already incumbent on a person and not to establish
compulsion in essence (the Amr does not make the act Waajib
but merely orders one to perform that which is Waajib on that
person at that particular time). This (making performance of
something incumbent, which was already Waajib on a person
before this) is similar to a person telling another, "Pay the
price of the goods" (the Amr to pay the price in actual fact is
ordering one to pay that amount that has become Waajib on
him as a result of the transaction which he contracted
previously and the Amr to pay itself did not make it Waajib)or
"Pay maintenance to your wife" (the Amr to pay the price in
actual fact is ordering one to pay that amount that has become
Waajib on him as a result of the transaction which he
contracted previously and the Amr to pay itself did not make it
Waajib). Thus when Ibaadaat become Waajib because of
their Asbaab and the Amr will only seek performance of
that which is already Waajib upon him. Then when Amr
refers to a specific class (category) then it will refer to that
(entire) class which is Waajib upon him (whenever Amr is
used it will refer all that is Waajib upon him, for example the
order to perform Salaah is an order to perform all the Salaah
which is Waajib on a person in his entire life).
ُُ‫ت ُالظ ُْه لُر ُهُ َُو ُالظ ُْهرُ ُفَت ََو َّج ُهَ ُ ْاالَ ْمر‬ ُ‫ی ُ َو ْق ل‬ ُْ ‫ب ُفل‬ ‫ن ُ ْال َو ل‬
َُ ‫اج‬ َُّ ‫َُو ُ لمثَالُه ُ َما ُیقَالُ ُال‬
ُ‫ك‬َُ ‫ل ُ ْاالَ ْمرُ ُذلل‬ َُ ‫اجبُ ُفَتَنا َ َو‬ ‫َّر ْال َو ل‬
َُ ‫َّر ُ ْال َو ْقتُ ُتَ َکر‬َُ ‫ب ُث َُّم ُال َذا ُتَ َکر‬ُ‫اج ل‬ ‫لالَدَا لُء ُذللكَُ ُ ْال َو ل‬
ُُْ‫صوْ ماُ ُ َکانَُ ُاَو‬ َ ُ ‫ب ُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬
ُ‫اج ل‬ ‫س ُ ْال َو ل‬
ُ‫ل ُ ْال لج ْن ل‬
َُّ ‫ضروْ َُر ُةَ ُتَنَاولل لُه ُک‬ َ ُ ‫ب ُاالخَ َُر‬ َُ ‫اج‬ ‫ْال َو ل‬
ُ‫نُاالَ ْم َُر‬ ُ‫الَُبلطَ لری ل‬
َُّ َ‫ْقُا‬ ُ‫ُٗبلهُ َذاُالطَّ لری ل‬
ُ ُ‫ْق‬ َُ ‫صلوةُُفَ َکاَنَُُتَ ْک َرارُُ ْال لعبَا َُد لُةُ ْالمتَ َکر‬
ُ‫َّرة ل‬ َ
‫َضیُالتَّ ْک َرا َُر‬ ‫یَ ْق ل‬
‫ت‬
An example of this (that Amr will refer to the entire class
which is Waajib on a person) is what is said that (all the)
Zuhr Salaah (incumbent on a person in his life) is what is
121
Usool Shaashi
Waajib in the time of Zuhr, thus the Amr will be directed
to the performance of what is Waajib on him (which is the
Zuhr Salaah incumbent upon him) then when the time (of
Zuhr Salaah) is repeated so too will its compulsion. Thus the
Amr will include whatever is Waajib upon him (such as the
Zuhr of the next day as well) as it refers to the entire class of
what is Waajib on him, whether it be fasting or Salaah.
Thus the repetition of Ibaadaat is (Waajib) in this manner
and not that Amr necessitates repetition.
Two types of Ma'moor Bihi

ُ ‫فصل‬
ْ ‫ت ُ َوم ْقیَّدُ ُبل لُه ُ َوح ْکمُ ُ ْالم‬
ُ‫طلَ ل‬
ُْ ‫ق ُا‬
َُُ‫ن ُیَّکوْ ن‬ ُ‫َن ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ ْ ‫َان ُم‬
ُ‫طلَقُ ُع ل‬ ُ‫اَ ْل َماموْ رُ ُبل لُه ُنَوْ ع ل‬
‫الَُیَفوْ ُتَهُفلیُ ْالع ْم لُر‬ ُ ُ‫ن‬ ُْ َ‫طُُا‬
ُ‫یُبلشَرْ ل‬ ‫اجباُُ َعلَیُالتَّ َر ل‬
ُْ ‫اخ‬ ‫االَدَاءُُ َو ل‬
Ma'moor Bihi (the act which one has been ordered to
perform) is of two types; Mutlaq anil Waqt (not restricted to
a specific time) and Muqayyad bil Waqt (restricted to a
specific time). The ruling of Mutlaq anil Waqt is that it is
Waajib with 'Taraakhee' (even though Waajib it does not
need to be performed immediately) as long as it is performed
before one's death (thus once will not be regarded as sinful in
delaying its performance as long as one carries it out before
one's death. If one passes away without performing it then he
will be sinful).
َُُ‫ن ُیَّ ْعتَ لکف‬ ُْ َ‫ن ُیَّ ْعتَ لکفَُ ُ َش ُْهرا ُُلَه ُُا‬ ُْ َ‫ال ُم َح َّمدُ ُفلی ُ ْال َجا لم لُع ُلَوُْ ُنَ َذ َُر ُا‬ َُ َ‫َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ی ُ َش ُْهرُ ُ َشآ َُء ُ َوفلی‬ َُّ َ‫ن ُی َّصوْ َُم ُُا‬
ُْ َ‫ن ُُی َّصوْ َُم ُ َش ُْہراُ ُُلَه ُُا‬ ُْ َ‫ی ُ َش ُْهرُ ُ َشا َُء ُ َولَوُْ ُنَ َذ َُر ُا‬
َُّ ‫ا‬
ُ‫صیْربلالتَّا لخی لُْر‬ ‫الَ ُیَ ل‬ُ ُ ‫ط لُر ُ َو ْالع ْش لُر ُاَ ْل َم ْذ ُهَبُ ُ ْال َمعْلوْ مُ ُاَُنَّه‬ ْ ‫ص َدُقَ لُة ُ ْالفل‬َ ‫ال َّزکو لُة ُ َو‬
ُ‫ب ُ َمالُه‬ َُ َ‫اجبُ ُ َو ْال َحانلثُ ُال َذا ُ َذ ُه‬ ‫طَ ُ ْال َو ل‬ ُ َ‫صابُ ُ َسق‬ َ ‫م ْف لرطاُ ُفَا لُنَّه ُلَوُْ ُهَلَكَُ ُالن‬
‫ارُفَقلیْراُُ َکفَّ َُرُبلالصَّوْ لُم‬ َُ ‫ص‬َ ‫َو‬
Based upon this (that the performance of Amr-Mutlaq anil
Waqt can be delayed) Imam Muhammed  has said in 'Al-
Jaami'ul Kabeer' that if a person vows to perform I'etikaaf
122
Usool Shaashi
for a month, then he may perform this I'etikaaf in any
month he desires and (in a similar manner) if he vows to fast
for a month then he may fast in any month he desires. The
well-known verdict (Shar'ie stance) with regards to Zakaat,
Sadaqaatul- Fitr and Ushr is that one does not become
sinful in delaying its fulfilment because if he loses the
Nisaab (the amount on which Zakaat or Sadaqah becomes
Waajib) then it will no longer be Waajib (to pay the Zakaat
or Sadaqah) and if one who broke his oath loses his wealth
and becomes destitute then he will complete the Kaffaarah
through fasting.
Mutlaq anil Waqt is Waajib Kaamil
ُ‫ب‬َُ ‫تُ ْال َم ْکروْ ُهَ لُةُالَُن َّهُلَ َّماُ َو َج‬ ُ‫ضاءُُالصَّلو لُةُفلیُاالَوْ قَا ل‬ َ َ‫الَُیَجوْ زُُق‬ ُ ُ‫َوعَلیُهُ َذا‬
ُُ‫ص ُفَیَجوْ زُ ُ ْال َعصْ ر‬ ُ‫َن ُ ْالع ُْه َُد لُة ُبلاَدَا لُء ُالنَّاقل ل‬ ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْخرجُ ُع ل‬
ُ َ‫ب ُ َکا لمالُ ُف‬ ْ ‫م‬
َُ ‫طلَقاُ ُ َو َج‬
ُ‫ب ُاالَ ْم لُر‬
َُ ‫ن ُموْ َج‬ َُّ َ‫َن ُ ْالکَرْ لخیُ ُا‬ ُ‫ضاءُ ُ َوع ل‬ َ َ‫الَ ُیَجوْ زُ ُق‬ُ ‫ار اَدَاءُ ُ َو‬ ُ‫َاالحْ لم َر ل‬‫لع ْند ل‬
ُ‫الَ ُ لخالَفَُ ُفلی‬ ُ ‫ب ُ َو‬ ُ‫ق ُ ْالوجوْ بُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْالفَوْ لُر ُ َو ْال لخالَفُ ُ َم َُعه ُفلی ُ ْالوجوْ ل‬ ْ ‫ْالم‬
ُ‫طلَ ل‬
‫ارُ َم ْندوْ بُُاللَ ْی ُهَا‬
ُ‫ع ُةَُاللَیُ لاال ْیتل َم ل‬ َ ‫نُ ْالم َس‬
َُ ‫ار‬ َُّ َ‫ُا‬
Based upon this (that one will not be sinful for delaying the
performance of Amr-Mutlaq anil Waqt) it is not permissible to
perform Qadhaa Salaah (the missed Salaah, which is not
restricted to time and may be performed at any time) in the
(three) forbidden times (sunrise, sunset, midday) because
when it is Waajib Mutlaqan (without restriction) it is (still)
Waajib Kaamil (perfectly) and one will not be absolved of it
by performing it defective (and since these three times are
defective times the Qadhaa Salaah performed in this time will
be defective). Performance of (that days) Asr Salaah is
permissible close to Sunset but Qadhaa Salaah is not (as the
Sabab for the Wujoob of Asr performed close to sunset is
defective thus performing it in a defective manner/time is also
permissible). Imaam Karkhi  is of the opinion that Amr-
123
Usool Shaashi
Mutlaq anil Waqt is Waajib immediately (such that one who
delays in performing it will be sinful). Our disagreement with
him is with regards to it being Waajib (he regards it as
Waajib immediately and we regard say that even though it is
waajib it is not compulsory to perform it immediately) and we
do not disagree that performing it as soon as possible is
Mustahab.
Types of Amr-Muqayyad bil Waqt
ُُ‫الَ ُیَ ْشت لَرط‬ ُ‫َان ُنَوْ عُ ُیَکوْ نُ ُ ْال َو ْقتُ ُظَرْ فُا ُلل ْلفلع ل‬
ُ ُ ‫ْل ُ َحتی‬ ُ‫َوُاَ َّما ُ ْال َو ْقتُ ُفَنَوْ ع ل‬
ُ‫تُبل ْالفلع ل‬
ُ‫ْلُ َکالصَّل لُو لُة‬ ُ‫ال ْستل ْی َعابُُکلُُ ْال َو ْق ل‬
Amr-Muqayyad bil Waqt is of two types; (the first is) where
(a specific) time is the period in which the act can be
carried out such that it is not necessary that the entire
period be spent in that act, for example Salaah (the various
Salaah are compulsory in their designated times but it is not
necessary for one to spend the entire time, for example the time
of Zuhr, engaged in the Salaat of Zuhr).
The ruling of the first type
ُ‫ب ُفلعْلُ ُاخَ َُر ُفل ْی لُه‬

َُ ْ‫ی ُوجو‬ ُْ ‫الَُینَافل‬ ُ‫ب ُ ْالفلع ل‬
ُ ُ‫ْل ُفل ْی لُه‬ َُ ْ‫ن ُوجو‬ ُ‫نُح ْک لُمُهُ َذا ُالنَّوْ ل‬
َُّ َ‫ع ُا‬ ُْ ‫َو لم‬
‫تُالظ ُْه لُرُلَ لز َُمه‬ُ‫یُ َو ْق ل‬
ُْ ‫یُ َک َذاُ َُوُ َک َذاُ َر ْک َُعةُُفل‬َُ ‫صل‬ ُْ َ‫نُ لج ْن لس لُهُ َحتیُلَوُُْنَ َذ َُرُا‬
َ ‫نُی‬ ُْ ‫لم‬
The ruling of this type (where a specific time is the period in
which the act can be carried out) is that an act being Waajib
in that time (period) does not oppose another act similar to
it being waajib in that same time, such that if a person
makes a vow to perform a certain Salaah in the time of
Zuhr, it (the Salaah which one vowed to perform) will be
compulsory (to perform).
124
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫صلوةُُا ْخریُفل ْی لُهُ َحتی‬
َ َُ‫ح ُة‬
َُّ ‫ص‬
‫یُ ل‬ ُْ ‫الَُینَافل‬
ُ ُ‫بُالصَّلو ُةَُفل ْی لُه‬ َُ ْ‫نُوجو‬ َُّ َ‫نُح ْک لم لُهُُا‬ ُْ ‫َو لم‬
ُ‫ْرُالظ ُْه لُرُیَجوْ ز‬ ُ‫تُالظ ُْه لُرُبل َغی ل‬ُ‫َلُ َج لم ْی َُعُ َو ْق ل‬ َُ ‫لَوُُْ َشغ‬
The ruling of this type (is also) that Salaah being Waajib in
it will not negate the permissibility of (performing) other
Salaah in it (that time period) such that if a person spends
the entire time of Zuhr engaged in other Salaah it will be
permissible.
َُُ‫الن ُ َغی َْرہ ُلَ َّما ُ َکان‬ ُ ‫الَ ُیَتَُا َ َّدی ُ ْال َم اموْ رُ ُبل لُه ُال‬
َُّ ُ ُ‫الَّ ُبلنلُیَّةُ ُم َعیَُّنَة‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ن ُح ْک لم لُه ُاَنَّه‬ُْ ‫َو لم‬
ُ‫ن ُال ْعتلبَا َُر‬ ْ ْ
َُّ َ‫ق ُال َوقتُ ُ لال‬ َُ ‫ضا‬َ ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫ْل ُ َُو ُال‬ ْ
ُ‫الَ ُیَُتَ َعیَّنُ ُهُ َُو ُبلالفلع ل‬
ُ ُ‫ت‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫ی ُال َوق ل‬ ُْ ‫َم ْشروْ عاُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ْقُ ْال َو ْق ل‬
‫ت‬ ُ‫ضی ل‬َ ُ‫اح َُمةُُ لع ْن َُد‬َ َ‫تُ ْالمز‬ ُ‫ارُالمزَ ا لح لُمُ َوقَ ُْدُبَقلیَ ل‬ ُ‫النُیَّ لُةُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬
The ruling of this type (is also) that the Ma'moor Bihi (what
has been made Waajib by the Amr) will not be fulfilled except
with a specific intention for it (one must make the intention to
perform it before beginning, in order for it to be fulfilled)
because when it is permissible to perform acts similar to it
in the same time period it cannot be specified by mere
action only (but intention will be necessary for specification)
even if the time is short (mere action will not suffice but the
Salaah will have to be specified by intention). The reason for
this is that Niyyat is necessary because of the time being
crowded (with the permissibility to perform any Salaah) and
this crowdedness still remains when the time is short.
The second type of Amr-Muqayyad bil Waqt
ُُ‫ی ُ َما ُیَکوْ نُ ُ ْال َو ْقتُ ُ لم ْعیَارا ُُلَه ُ َوذللكَُ ُ لم ْثلُ ُالصَّوْ لُم ُفَا لُنَّه ُیَتَقَ َّدر‬ ُْ ‫َوالنَّوْ عُ ُالثَّانل‬
ُ‫تُ َوُهُ َُوُ ْالیَوْ م‬ُ‫بل ْال َو ْق ل‬
125
Usool Shaashi
The second type (of Amr-Muqayyad bil Waqt) is where (a
specific) time is the period in which the act needs to be
carried out (such that the act needs to be performed in that
entire period). An example of this is Fasting, which is
performed throughout the day.
The ruling of this type
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ‫تُ َو‬ ُ‫یُذللكَُُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ ُْ ‫الَُیَ لجبُُ َغیْرہُفل‬ ُ ُُ‫عُال َذاُ َعیَّنَُُُلَهُ َو ْقتا‬ َُ ْ‫نُال َّشر‬ َُّ َ‫نُح ْک لم لُهُا‬ ُْ ‫َُوُ لم‬
ُ‫ی‬ َ َ
ُْ ‫ح ُالمقل ْی َُم ُلوُْ ُاوْ قَ َُع ُال ْم َسا َُکه ُفل‬ ْ َُ ‫ص لح ْی‬ َّ ‫ن ُال‬ َ
َُّ ‫یَجوْ زُ ُادَاءُ ُ َغی لْر لُہ ُفل ْی لُه ُ َحتی ُا‬ َ
ْ َ
ُ‫الَ ُ َع َّما ُنَوی َُو ُالذا ُالن َدفَ َُع‬ ُ ُ َُ‫ضان‬ َ ‫َن ُ َر َم‬ ُْ ‫ب ُاخَ َُر ُیَقَعُ ُع‬ ُ‫اج ل‬ ‫َن ُ َو ل‬ ُْ ‫ضانَُ ُع‬ َ ‫َر َم‬
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ‫اح َُم لُة ُ َو‬ ْ ْ
َ َ‫ن ُذللكَُ ُللقَط لُع ُالمز‬ َُّ ‫ْن ُفَا ل‬ َّ ْ
ُ‫ط ُالشتل َراطُ ُالت ْعیلی ل‬ َ ُ َ‫ت ُ َسق‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫احمُ ُفلی ُال َوق ل‬ ‫ْالمزَ ل‬
ُ‫ن ُالصَّوْ َُم‬ َُّ ‫الَّ ُبلالنُیَّ لُة ُفَا ل‬
ُ ‫صوْ ماُ ُال‬ َ ُ ُ‫صیْر‬ ‫الَ ُیَ ل‬ ‫نُ ْ ل‬
ُ ُ َُ‫اال ْم َساك‬ َُّ َ‫یَسْقطُ ُاَصْ لُ ُالنُیَّ لُة ُ لال‬
ُ‫اعُنَ ُهَاراُ َم َُعُالنُیَّ لُة‬ ْ
ُ‫بُ َوال لج َم ل‬ ُ‫لُ َوالشرْ ل‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫َنُاالَک ل‬ ُ‫اال ْم َساكُُع ل‬ ُ‫شَرْ عاُُهُ َُوُ ْ ل‬
The ruling of this type (where a specific time is the period in
which the act needs to be carried out) is that wherever the
Shari'ah has specified a time (period in which the act needs
to be performed) another act (similar in nature) cannot be
Waajib in that time nor is it permissible to perform
another (act similar in nature) in that time such that if a
healthy resident makes the intention for his fast in
Ramadaan for another Waajib fast, his fast will be for
Ramadaan and not for what he intended. Since the time
period is not crowded (by similar acts being permissible in
that same time period) the condition of specifying (with
intention) falls away as it (specifying with intention) was to
remove the crowdedness (caused by other similar acts being
permissible in that time). However Niyyat (to make the
intention of fasting) itself will not fall away as abstaining will
only become fasting with intention (of fasting) as fasting
according to Shari'ah is abstaining from eating, drinking
and sexual relations during the day with intention (of
fasting).
126
Usool Shaashi
ُُْ‫ْنُ ْال َع ْب لُدُ َحتیُلَو‬

ُ‫الَُیَتَ َعی َّنُُ ْال َو ْقتُُُلَهُبلتَ ْعیلی ل‬
ُ ُ‫نُال َّشرْ عُُُلَهُ َو ْقتاُفَا لُنَّه‬ ُ‫نُلَ ُْمُی َعی ل‬ ُْ ‫َُوُال‬
ُُ‫صوْ م‬َ ُ‫ضا لُءُ َُوُیَجوْ زُُفل ْی ُهَا‬ ْ
َ َ‫یُلللق‬ َُ ‫الَُتَُتَ َعی َّنُُ لُه‬
ُ َُُ‫ضان‬ َ ‫ضا لُءُ َر َم‬ ْ
َ َ‫َعی َّنَُُال َعبْدُُُاَیَّاماُُللق‬
ُ‫ع‬ُ‫نُح ْک لُمُهُ َذاُالنَّوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ضانَُُفل ْی ُهَاُ َو َغی لْر ُهَاُ َو لم‬ َ ‫ضاءُُ َر َم‬ َ َ‫لُ َویَجوْ زُُق‬ ُ‫ار لُةُ َوالن َّ ْف ل‬َُ َّ‫ْال َکف‬
‫ْنُالنُیَّ لُةُللوجوْ لُدُ ْالمزَ ل‬
ُ‫اح لُم‬ ُ‫ال ْشتل َراطُُتَ ْعُیلی ل‬
If the Shari'ah has not specified a time then it cannot be

specified by man such that if a person specifies a certain
day for the Qadhaa fast of Ramadaan then it will not be
taken to be specified and it will be permissible to keep the
fasts of Kaffaarah, Nafl (optional) fasts as well as the
Qadhaa fasts of Ramadaan and others. The ruling of this
type (where the Shari'ah has not specified a time) is that
Niyyat (to specify the fast one is keeping through intention) is
necessary because of it being crowded (by acts similar in
nature all being permissible in that same time).
َُ ‫ْر ُم َوقَّتُ ُ َولَی‬
ُُ‫ْس ُُلَه ُتَ ْغیلیْر‬ َُ ُ ُْ‫ب ُ َشیْئاُ ُعَلی ُنَ ْف لس لُه ُم َوقَّتا ُُاَو‬
َُ ‫غی‬ َُ ‫ن ُیوْ لج‬ُْ َ‫ث َُّم ُلل ْل َع ْب لُد ُا‬
ُ‫ح ْک لُمُال َّشرْ ل‬
‫ع‬
Then it is permissible for a person to make something

Waajib upon himself, restricted to a certain time or
unrestricted, but he cannot change the ruling of Shari'ah.
ُ‫ضا لُء‬ َ َ‫َن ُق‬ ُْ ‫صا َُمه ُع‬ َ ُ ُْ‫ن ُیَصوْ َُم ُیَوْ ما ُبل َع ْینل لُه ُلَ لز َُمه ُذللكَُ ُ َولَو‬ ُْ َ‫لمثَالُه ُال َذا ُنَ َذ َُر ُا‬
َُ‫ال‬ ْ
ُ َ‫ضا َُء ُمطلَقاُ ُف‬ َ َ‫ل ُالق‬ْ َّ
َُ ْ‫الن ُالشر‬
َُ ‫ع ُ َج َع‬ َُّ ُ َُ‫ار لُة ُیَ لم ْینل لُه ُ َجاز‬ َّ
َُ ‫َن ُ َکف‬ ُْ ‫ضانَُ ُُاَوُْ ُع‬ َ ‫َر َم‬
ُ‫الَُیَلزَ مُُعَلیُهُ َذاُ َماُال َذا‬ ْ ْ ْ ْ
ُ ‫نُتَغیلی لْر لُہُبلالتَّقیل ْی لُدُبل َغی لْر لُہُذللكَُُالیَوْ لُمُ َو‬ ْ
ُْ ‫یَتَ َم َّکنُُال َعبْدُُ لم‬
ُ‫لُ َحقُُ ْال َع ْب لُدُال ُْذ‬َُ ‫النُالن َّ ْف‬
َُّ ُ‫الَُ َع َّماُنَوی‬ ُ ُ‫نُ ْال َم ْنذوْ لُر‬ ُ‫َنُنَ ْفلُُ َحیْثُُیَقَعُُ َع ل‬ ُْ ‫صا َمهُُع‬ َ
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ُ ‫ن ُی اوثل َُر ُفلعْلُه ُفل ْی َما ُهُ َو َحقُه‬ ُْ َ‫ن ُتَرْ لک لُه ُ َوتَحْ قل ْیُقله ُفَ َجازَُ ُُا‬ ْ
ُْ ‫هُ َُو ُیَ ْستَبلدُ ُبلنَف لس لُه ُ لم‬
ُ‫فل ْی َماُهُ َُوُ َحقُُال َّشرْ ل‬
‫ع‬
An example of this (that a person can make something Waajib
upon himself but cannot change the ruling of Shari'ah)is when
a person vows to fast on a specific day, making it
compulsory to keep that fast. If he were to then keep a
127
Usool Shaashi
Qadhaa fast of Ramadaan or fast for his Kaffaarah for
breaking an oath then it will be permissible. The reason for
this is that the Shari'ah has made keeping Qadhaa Mutlaq
(not restricted to a time and can be kept or made at any time)
thus it is not possible for a person to specify it to another
day besides that day. This (ruling above that) does not apply
to when a person keeps a Nafl fast (on the day he made a
vow to keep a fast) such that it will fulfil his vow and will not
be for the intention he kept it because Nafl is the right of
the person as one was the choice to leave it or complete it,
thus it will be permissible to give preference to his own
actions (the vow he made) over his own rights (the Nafl fast)
and not the rights of Shari'ah.
ُ‫الَُنَفَُقَ ُةَُلَ ُهَا‬ ُْ َ‫الُ َم َشائلخنَاُال َذاُ َش َرطَاُفلیُ ْالخ ْل لُعُُا‬

ُ ُ‫ن‬ َُ َ‫ارُهُ َذاُ ْال َمعْنیُق‬ ُ‫َوعَلیُال ْعتلبَ ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ُْ ‫الَ ُیَتَ َم َّکنَُ ُال َّزوْ جُ ُ لم‬ ُ ُ ‫ت ُالنَّفَُقَةُ ُدوْ نَُ ُالس ْکنی ُ َحتی‬ ُ‫الَ ُس ْکنی ُ َسقَطَ ل‬ ُ ‫َو‬
ُ َ‫ع ُف‬
َُ‫ال‬ ْ ُ‫الن ُالس ْکنی ُفلی ُبَ ْی ل‬
ُ‫ت ُال لع َُّد لُة ُ َحقُ ُال َّشرْ ل‬ ْ
َُّ ُ ‫ت ُال لع َُّد لُة‬ُ‫َن ُبَ ْی ل‬ُْ ‫اج ُهَا ُع‬ ‫ال ْخ َر ل‬
‫فُالنَّفَُقَ لُة‬
ُ‫نُال ْسقَا لط لُهُبل لخالَ ل‬ ْ
ُْ ‫یَتَ َم َّکنُُال َعبْدُُ لم‬
Based upon this (that a person actions will given preference
over his rights and not the rights stipulated by Shari'ah) our
scholars say that if a couple stipulate the condition when
making Khul'aa (when the husbands concedes to issuing a
Talaaq in exchange for recompense) that no maintenance will
be given nor living quarters provided(during the period of
Iddah) then (the right to) maintenance will be ceded (and the
husband will not need to provide maintenance) but living
quarters will not such that it is not possible (not permissible)
for the husband to expel her from the house during the
Iddah. The reason for this (why maintenance will be ceded
and not living quarters) is that the right to living quarters in
the house of Iddah is a right of Shari'ah and it is not
128
Usool Shaashi
possible for a person to cede such a right as opposed to
maintenance (which is the right of the woman).
Amr necessitates Hasan in the Ma'moor Bihi
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُ‫الَ ْم َُر‬ َُّ ُ‫نُ ْال َماموْ لُرُبل لُهُال َذاُ َکانَُُاالا لمرُُ َح لکیْما‬
ُ ‫النُا‬ ُ‫ئُیَدلُُعَلیُح ْس ل‬ ُ‫الَ ْمرُُبلال َّش ل‬ُ َ‫ا‬
ُ‫نُیوْ َج َُدُفَا ْقتَضیُذللكَُُح ْسُنَه‬ ُْ ‫نُ ْال َماموْ َُرُبل لُهُ لم َّماُیَ ْنبَ لغ‬
ُْ َ‫یُُا‬ َُّ َ‫انُُا‬
ُ‫للبَیَ ل‬
Amr of an act necessitates that the Ma'moor Bihi (the act

being ordered) is Hasan (is good/virtuous) if the one giving
the Amr is Hakeem (Wise). The reason for this is that Amr
is to point out that the Ma'moor Bihi is amongst those
things which are appropriate to do, thus necessitating that
they be Hassan (as ALLAAH Ta'ala would never order the
perpetration of immorality or futility).
Two type of Hasan in Ma'moor Bihi
ُُ‫ن ُ َح َسنُ ُبلنَ ْف لس لُه ُ َو َح َسنُ ُلل َغی لْرلُہ ُفَ ْال َح َسن‬ ُ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُ ْالحس ل‬
ُ‫ْن ُنَوْ عَا ل‬ ُْ ‫ث َُّم ُ ْال َماموْ رُ ُبل لُه ُفل‬
ُ‫ل ُ َوالصَّلولُة‬ ُ‫ق ُ َو ْال َع ْد ل‬
ُ‫ِلل ُتَ َعالی ُ َُو ُش ْک لُر ُ ْالم ْن لع لُم ُ َوالص ْد ل‬ ُ‫بلنَ ْف لس لُه ُ لم ْثل ُاال ْی َم ل‬
ُ ‫ان ُبلا‬
َُ ‫تُ ْالخَ الل‬
‫ص لُة‬ ُ‫نَحْ لو ُهَاُ لمنَُُ ْال لعبَادَا ل‬
Then Hasan in the Ma'moor Bihi is divided into two types;

Hasan bi Nafsihi and Hasan Li-Ghairihi. Examples of
Hasan bi Nafsihi (where the goodness is in the act itself)is
Imaan in ALLAAH, gratitude for the bounties (ALLAAH
has showered on a person), truthfulness, justice, Salaah, etc,
from the acts of worship.
The ruling of Hasan bi Nafsihi
129
Usool Shaashi
ُ ‫الَُّبلا‬
ُ‫الَدَا لُءُ َوُهُ َذا‬ ُ ُ‫بُ َعلَیُ ْال َع ْب لُدُاَدَائُه‬
ُ ‫الَُیَسْقطُُال‬ ُ‫فَح ْکمُُهُ َذاُالنَّوْ ل‬
َُ ‫عُاَنَّهُُال َذاُ َو َج‬
ُ ‫ِللُتَ َعالی‬ ُ ‫انُبلا‬ُ‫طَُ لم ْثلُُاال ْی َم ل‬
ُ ْ‫الَُیَحْ تَ لملُُالسقو‬ ُ ُ‫فل ْی َما‬
The ruling of this category (that Ma'moor Bihi-Hasan bi
Nafsihi which never falls away and has to be performed at all
times) is that if performance is Waajib on a person then one
will not be absolved from it except by fulfilling it
(perpetually, acting on it at all times), this is the ruling for
that Amr which never falls away such as Imaam in
ALLAAH (one has to have Imaan at every moment and one is
never excused or absolved from it).
‫اطُ ْ ا‬
ُ ‫اال لم لُر‬ ُ‫َُوُاَ َّماُ َماُیَحْ تَ لملُُالسقوْ طَُُفَهُ َُوُیَسْقطُُبلاالادَا لُءُُاَوُُْبلا ْسقَ ل‬
(The ruling for the second type of Hasan bi Nafsihi, namely)
That which does fall away (one is absolved of it after
performing it) is that it falls away by performance (of the
act) or if the one who issued the order cancels the order.
ُ ْ ‫اجبُُُبل‬
ُُْ‫االَ َُدا لُءُاُو‬ ُ‫تُ َسقَطَُ ُْال َُو ل‬ ُ‫لُ ُْال َُوُْق ل‬ُ‫یُُاَ َُّو ل‬
ُْ ‫صلوةُُُفل‬ َُّ ‫تُال‬ ُ‫جُبَ ل‬ َُ ‫علیُهُ َُذاُقُُْلُنَاُُال َُذاُ َُو‬ َُ ‫َُو‬
ُ‫ن‬َُّ َ‫ار ُُا‬
ُ‫عُتلُبَ ل‬ُْ ‫ت ُُبلُا ل‬ُ‫خ لُر ُ ُْال َُوُْق ل‬
ُ‫اس ُُفلی ُا ل‬ ُ‫ض ُ َُو ُالنُُفَ ل‬ ُ‫حُْی ل‬ َُ ‫ن ُ َُو ُ ُْال‬ ُ‫اض ُ ُْالجُنُوُْ ل‬
ُ‫عُتل َُر ل‬ ُْ ‫ُبلُا ل‬
ُ‫ع َُد لُم‬
َُ ُ‫تُ َُو‬ ُ‫قُ ُْال َُوُْق ل‬ ُ‫ضُْی ل‬
ُ‫سقُطُُُبل ل‬ ُ َ ُ‫ضُ َُو‬
ُْ َ‫الُُی‬ ُ‫ار ل‬ ُ‫عُْن َُدُهُ لُذ لُہُ ُْال َُع َُو ل‬
ُ‫عُاَ ْسقَطَ ُهَاُ َع ْنهُُ ل‬ َُ ُْ‫شر‬َُّ ‫ال‬
ُ‫ُْال َُما لُءُ َُوُاللُُبَ ل‬
‫اسُ َُوُنَحُْ لُولُہ‬
Based upon this (principle; that which does fall away, falls
away by its performance or if the one who issued the order
cancels the order) we say that if Salaah became Waajib
when the time set in then one will be absolved of it through
performance (of the Salaah) or if one went into a state of
insanity, Haidh (menstruation) or Nifaas (post natal
bleeding) after the time set in because (the reason for
absolving a person of this Waajib because of insanity, Haidh
or Nifaas) the Shari'ah has absolved one from this duty
130
Usool Shaashi
when in such a state (of insanity, Haidh, or Nifaas).
(However) It will not fall away because of insufficient time,
lack of water or clothing, etc (as Salaah can still be
performed after the time has expired as Qadhaa Salaah, or
with Tayammum if no water is available or naked if one does
not have clothing).
Hasan Li-Ghairihi
ُ‫ی ُُالُلَی‬ َُّ ‫طَ لُة ُ ُْال َُغُْی لُر ُ َو ُذللكَُ ُ لُمُْثلُ ُال‬
ُ‫س ُْع ل‬ ُ ‫اس‬ ُ‫سنا ُُبل َُو ل‬ َُ ‫ی ُ َُما ُُیَکُوُْنُ ُ َح‬ ُْ ‫ُاَلُنَّوُْعُ ُالُثَّاُنل‬
ُ‫ضیا ُُاللُی‬ُ‫طَ لُة ُ َُکوُُْنل لُه ُمُُْف ل‬
ُ ‫اس‬
ُ‫سنُ ُُبل َُو ل‬
َُ ‫ح‬ َُ ُ ‫ی‬ َُ ‫س ُْع‬َُّ ‫ن ُال‬ َُّ ‫صلو لُة ُُفَُا ل‬َُّ ‫ُْالجُ ُْم َُع لُة ُ َُو ُ ُْالوُضُوُْءُ ُُللل‬
‫صلولُة‬ َُّ ‫اسطَُ لُةُ َُکوُُْنل لُهُ لُمُْفُتَاحاُُللل‬ ُ‫سنُُُبل َُو ل‬ َُ ُُ‫ُاَ َُدا لُءُ ُْالجُ ُْم َُع لُةُ َُوُ ُْالوُضُوُْء‬
َُ ‫ح‬
The second type (of Hasan in the Ma'moor Bihi) is that which
is Hasan (good/virtuous) because of something else (the
objective behind the act is what makes the act itself Hasan).
An example of this (Hasan Li-Ghairihi) is hurrying towards
the Jumu'ah Salaah and (performing) Wudhu for Salaah, as
hurrying (even though it might not be considered good by
itself) is Hasan because of it taking one towards the
performance of Jumu'ah Salaah and Wudhu is Hasan
because of it being the key (prerequisite) to (of) Salaah.
The ruling of Hasan Li-Ghairihi
ُُ‫جب‬ ُ‫الُُیَ ل‬ ُ َ ُ‫ی‬ َُ ‫س ُْع‬ َُّ ‫حتیُُاَنُُال‬ َُ ُ‫اسطَُ لُة‬ُ‫طُُتلُْلكَُُ ُْال َُو ل‬
ُ‫سقُطُُُبلسُقُوُْ ل‬ ُْ َ‫عُُاَُنَّهُُُی‬ ُ‫کمُُهُ َُذاُالُنَّوُْ ل‬ ُْ ُ‫َُوح‬
ُُْ‫عُلَُْی لُهُ َُو ُُلَو‬
َُ َُ‫صلو ُة‬ َُ ُ‫ال‬ ُ َ ُ‫ن‬ُْ ‫علی ُ َُم‬ َُ ُ ُ‫جبُ ُ ُْالوُضُوُْء‬ ُ َ ‫عُلَُْی لُه ُ َُو‬
ُ‫الُُیَ ل‬ َُ َُ‫ال ُجُ ُْم َُع ُة‬
ُ َ ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫علی ُ َُم‬ َُ
ُُ‫جب‬ ْ َ
ُ‫لُُالُقا َُم لُةُ ُالجُ ُْم َُع لُةُُیَ ل‬ ْ َ
َُ ‫ضعُُاخَُ َُرُُقُب‬ َُ ُْ‫ک َُرهُاُُاللیُ َُمو‬ ْ
ُ ُ‫لُم‬ ْ
َُ ‫سعُیُُالُلیُ ُالجُ ُْم َُع لُةُفحُ لُم‬ َ َُ
ُ‫عُنهُُ َُو‬ ْ َُ ُ‫ساُقلطُا‬ َُ ُُ‫س ُعی‬ ْ َُّ ‫جا لُم لُعُُیَکُوُْنُُال‬ ْ
َُ ‫کفُاُُفلیُ ُال‬ َ ْ َ َ
ُ‫س ُعیُُُثاُنلیُاُ َُوُلوُُْ ُکانَُُمُ ُعُت ل‬ َ ْ ْ
َُّ ‫عُلُی لُهُال‬ َ َُ
131
Usool Shaashi
ُُْ‫عُلَُْی لُه ُ ُْالوُضُوُْءُ ُُثَاُنلیُا ُ َُو ُُلَو‬َُ ُ ُ‫جب‬ ُ‫صلو لُة ُُیَ ل‬ َُّ ‫ل ُُاَ َُدا لُء ُال‬ َُ ‫ضُا ُُفَُا َحُْ َُد‬
َُ ‫ث ُُقَُْب‬ َُ ‫َُکذُللكَُ ُُلَوُْ ُُتَ َُّو‬
‫عُلَُْی لُهُُتَجُْ لُدُْیدُُ ُْالوُضُوُْ لُء‬َُ ُُ‫جب‬ ُ َ ُ‫صلو لُة‬
ُ‫الُُیَ ل‬ َُّ ‫بُال‬ ُ‫عُْن َُدُوُجُوُْ ل‬ ُ‫َُکانَُُمُُتَ لُوضُیاُ ل‬
The ruling of this category (Hasan Li-Ghairihi) is that it (its
necessity) falls away if its cause (that which makes it Hasan)
falls away such that hurrying towards Jumu'ah Salaah will
not be Waajib on that person upon whom Jumu'ah Salaah
is not Waajib nor will Wudhu be Waajib upon that person
upon Wudhu is not Waajib. (However)If a person hurries
towards Jumu'ah Salaah but is then forcefully taken
elsewhere, it will Waajib upon him to hurry towards the
Jumu'ah Salaah a second time (as the Jumu'ah Salaah is still
Waajib on him and has not fallen away). If a person is
performing I'etikaaf in a Jaamie Masjid then hurrying
towards Jumu'ah Salaah will fall away (as he is already
present for the Jumu'ah Salaah which is the purpose of
rushing). In a similar manner (to the two rulings mentioned
above) if a person performs Wudhu but his Wudhu breaks
before performing Salaah, it will be Waajib for him to
perform Wudhu a second time (as the Salaah is till Waajib
on him) and if he already is in a state of Wudhu when
Salaah begins, it will not be Waajib for him to make
Wudhu a second time (as he is already in a state of purity
which is the purpose of making Wudhu before Salaah).
Other acts which are Hasan Li-Ghairihi
ُُ‫ن ُ ْال َح َُّد ُ َح َسن‬َُّ ‫صاصُ ُ َو ْال لج ُهَادُ ُفَا ل‬ َ ‫ع ُاَ ْلحدوْ دُ ُ َُو ُ ْالقل‬ ُ‫ن ُهُ َذا ُالنَّوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫َُو ُ ْالقَ لریْبُ ُ لم‬
ُ‫طَ لُة ُ َد ْف لُع ُ َشرُ ُ ْال َکفَ َُر لُة‬ ‫َن ُ ْال لجنَاُیَ لُة ُ َو ْال لج ُهَادُ ُ َح َسنُ ُبل َو ل‬
ُ ‫اس‬ ُ‫طَ لُة ُال َّزجْ لُر ُع ل‬ ُ ‫اس‬ ‫بل َو ل‬
ْ
‫ا‬
ُ‫ال ُیَبْقی ُذللكَُ ُ َم موْ راُ ُبل لُه‬ َ َ
ُ ُ ‫ط لُة‬ ُ ‫اس‬ ْ ْ ْ‫ض‬ َ َ ْ
‫ال لُء ُکلل َُم لُة ُال َحقُ ُ َولوُْ ُف َر نَا ُ َعد َُم ُال َو ل‬ َ َ ُ ‫َوال ْع‬
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ُ‫ب‬ ُ‫ضیُ ُاللَی ُ ْال َحرْ ل‬ ‫الَ ُ ْالک ْفرُ ُ ْالم ْف ل‬ُ ُ ُْ‫الَ ُیَ لجبُ ُ ْال َحدُ ُ َُو ُلَو‬ُ ُ ُ‫الَ ُ ْال لجنَاُیَة‬ ُ ْ‫فَا لُنَّه ُلَو‬
ُ‫یَ لجبُُ َعلَ ْی لُهُ ْال لج ُهَاد‬
132
Usool Shaashi
Close to this category (of Hasan Li-Ghairihi) is Hudood,
Qisaas (the Shar'ie punishments and penalties for various
crimes), and Jihaad as punishments are good because of it
preventing crime and Jihaad is good because it eliminates
the evils of the Kuffaar and establishes the word (laws) of
ALLAAH. If we were to say (hypothetically) that the reason
which makes it good does not exist then it would no longer
be the Ma'moor Bihi (that is the order to carry it out would
no longer apply) because if there is no crime then
punishment will not be Waajib and if there is no Kufr
which leads to battle then Jihaad would not be Waajib.
Waajib established by Amr is of two types
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُْ ‫ارةُ ُع‬
ُ‫َن ُتَ ْسللی لُْم ُ َع ْی ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ َُ َ‫ضاءُ ُفَاالَدَاءُ ُ لعب‬ َ َ‫ن ُاَدَاءُ ُ َوق‬ ُ ‫اجبُ ُبلح ْک لُم ُا‬
ُ‫الَ ْم لُر ُنَوْ عَا ل‬ ‫اَ ْل َو ل‬
ُ‫ب ُاللی‬ ُ‫اج ل‬ ‫ل ُ ْال َو ل‬
ُ‫َن ُتَ ْسللی لُْم ُ لم ْث ل‬
ُْ ‫ارةُ ُع‬
َُ َ‫ضاءُ ُ لعب‬ َ َ‫ب ُاللی ُم ْستَ لحق لُه ُ َو ْالق‬ ‫ْال َو ل‬
ُ‫اج ل‬
‫م ْست لَحق لُه‬
Waajib which has been established by Amr is of two types;

Adaa and Qadhaa. Adaa is fulfilling the Waajib precisely
to in the manner ordained (for example performing Salaah in
its appropriate time). Qadhaa is fulfilling similar to the
Waajib similar to what has been ordained (for example
performing Salaah after its time has expired).
‫َانُ َکا لملُُ َوقَا ل‬

ُ ُ‫صر‬ ُ‫ث َُّمُاالَدَاءُُنَوْ ع ل‬
Then Adaa is divided (further) into two types; Kaamil (to
perform the act in the manner and with the same
characteristics as it was made Waajib on a person) and
Qaasir (to perform the act with a slight defect in the
characteristics prescribed).
133
Usool Shaashi
Examples of Adaa-Kaamil
ُ‫ع لُة ُاَ لُو ُالطَّ َو ل‬

ُُ‫اف ُمت ََوضیا‬ َُ ‫ی ُ َو ْقتل ُهَا ُبل ْال َج َما‬
ُْ ‫فَ ْال َکا لملُ ُ لم ْثلُ ُاَدَا لُء ُالصَّلولُة ُفل‬
ُ‫ب‬ ‫َضاہُ ُ ْال َع ْقدُ ُاللَی ُ ْالم ْشت لَریُْ ُ َوتَ ْسللی لُْم ُ ْالغ ل‬
ُ‫َاص ل‬ َ ‫َوتَ ْسللی لُْم ُ ْال َمبلی لُْع ُ َسللیْما ُ َک َما ُا ْقت‬
َ ‫ْال َعیْنَُُ ْال َم ْغصوْ ُبَ ُةَُ َک َماُغ‬
‫َصبَ ُهَا‬
An example of Adaa-Kaamil is performing Salaah in its

proper time with Jamaat or performing Tawaaf with
Wudhu and handing over the purchased item undamaged
as was contracted with the buyer and a bandit handing
over the seized property in the very same condition it was
seized.
The ruling of Adaa-Kaamil
ُ‫َنُ ْالع ُْه َُد لُةُبل له‬ ُ‫نُیحْ َک َُمُبل ْالخروْ ل‬

ُ‫جُع ل‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُُهُ َذاُالنَّوْ ل‬
ُْ َ‫عُُا‬
The ruling of this category (Adaa-Kaamil) is that one will be
absolved (entirely) of his duty (responsibility) by performing
it (in a perfect manner).
ُ‫ب ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َمالل ل‬

ُُْ‫ك ُُاَوُْ ُ َر لُهُنَه ُ لع ْندَہ ُُاَو‬ َُ ْ‫ع ُ ْال َم ْغصو‬ َُ ‫َاصبُ ُال َذا ُبَا‬ ‫َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُاَ ْلغ ل‬
ُ‫َن ُ ْالع ُْه َُد لُة ُ َویَکوْ نُ ُذللكَُ ُاَدَاءُ ُلل َحق لُه ُ َویَ ْلغوُْ ُ َما‬ ُ‫َو ُهَُبَه ُُلَه ُ َو َسلَّ َُمه ُاللَ ْی لُه ُیَ ْخرجُ ُع ل‬
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ُ ‫ط َع َمهُ ُ َماللکه ُ َو ُهُ َُو‬ ْ َ ‫ب ُطَ َعاماُ ُفَا‬ َُ ‫َص‬َ ‫َّح ُبل لُه ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالبَی لُْع ُ َو ْال لُهُبَ لُة َولَوْ غ‬
َُ ‫صر‬َ
ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْد لریُْ ُاَُنَّه ُثَوْ بُه‬ُ ُ ‫که ُ َو ُهُ َُو‬ ْ
َُ َ‫ب ُثَوْ باُ ُفَُالب‬
َُ ‫سه ُ َمالل‬ َُ ‫َص‬ َ ‫یَ ْد لریُْ ُاَُنَّه ُطَ َعامُه ُُاَوُْ ُغ‬
‫یَکوْ نُُذللكَُُاَدَاءُُلل َحق لُه‬
134
Usool Shaashi
Based upon this (principle mentioned above that one will be
absolved entirely by performing it in a perfect manner) we say
that if the person who forcefully seized another's property
sells it back to the owner or left it as guarantee (for
payment) with him (known as Rahan) or gifted it to him (the
owner) and then hands it over to him then he will no longer
be liable for it and this (handing over of the property) will be
taken as Adaa- Kaamil (fulfilling his right perfectly). The
conditions stipulated by the sale or gift (as well as Rahan)
will be void (and the original owner can take possession of it
without recompense). (Similarly) If a person forcefully seizes
food and feeds the owner such that the owner does not
know that it is the food that was taken from him, or clothes
are seized and given to the owner to wear such that he does
not know that it is his clothes, then this will be taken to be
Adaa- Kaamil (fulfilling his right perfectly and in all the cases
mentioned above nothing further will be levied upon the one
who seized the items).
ُُْ‫َار ُ ْال َمبل ْی َُع ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالبَائل لُع ُُاَوُْ ُ َر لُهُنَه ُ لع ْندَہ ُُاَو‬ ‫ٗ ُ ْالفَ ل‬
َُ ‫اس لُد ُلَوُْ ُاَع‬ ُ‫َو ْالم ْشت لَریُْ ُفلی ُ ْالبَی لْع ل‬
ُ‫بُُلَهُ َو َسلَّ َُمهُیَکوْ نُُذاللكَُُاَدَاءُُلل َحق لُهُ َویَ ْلغوُُْ َما‬ َُ َ‫عهُ لم ْنهُُُاَوُُْ َو ُه‬ َُ ‫ا َج َرہُ لم ْنهُُُاَوُُْبَا‬
‫َّحُبل لُهُ لمنَُُ ْالبَی لُْعُ َوال لُهُبَ لُةُ َونَحْ لوہ‬
ْ َُ ‫صر‬َ
(Similarly) If the purchaser in an illegitimate sales
transaction (in which it is compulsory for the purchaser to
return the goods back to the seller)lends the seller the
purchased item, leaves it as guarantee with the buyer, rents
it to him, sells it (back) to him, or gifts it to him and then
hands it over to the buyer then this will be considered to be
Adaa-Kaamil (fulfilling the right perfectly) and the
conditions (of sale, rent, lending, etc) will all be void.
Definition of Adaa- Qaasir
135
Usool Shaashi
ُُ‫صفَتل لُه ُنَحْ و‬ ‫یُ ل‬ ُْ ‫ان ُفل‬ ُ‫ص ل‬ َ ‫ب ُ َم َُع ُالن ْق‬
ُ‫اج ل‬ ‫ْن ُ ْال َو ل‬
ُ‫اصرُ ُفَهُ َُو ُتَ ْسللیْمُ ُ َعی ل‬ ‫الَدَاءُ ُ ْالقَ ل‬
ُ ‫َوُاَ َّما ُا‬
ُُ‫اف ُمحْ لدثاُ ُ َو َردُ ُ ْال َمبلی لُْع ُ َم ْشغوْ ال‬ ُ‫ان ُُاَ لوالطَّ َو ل‬ُ‫الَرْ َک ل‬ ُ ‫ْل ُا‬ ُ‫ن ُتَ ْع لدی ل‬
ُ‫الصَّلوةُ ُبلدوْ ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ َّ
ُ‫ل ُ َمشغوْ الُ ُبلالد ْی ل‬ ْ ْ َ ْ َّ
ُ‫اح ُالد لُم ُبلالقت ل‬ َُ َ‫ب ُمب‬ ُ‫ْن ُُاَوُْ ُبل ْال لجنَاُیَ لُة ُ َو َردُ ُال َمغصوْ ل‬
ْ ْ ُ‫بلال َّدی ل‬
ُ‫ف ُ َم َکانَُ ُ ْال لجیَا لُد ُال َذا ُلَ ُْم ُیَ ْعلَ لُم‬ ُ‫ب ُ َواَدَا لُء ُالزیوْ ل‬ ُ‫ص ل‬ ‫ُاَ لو ْال لجنَاُیَ لُة ُبل َسبَبُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْالغَا ل‬
ُ َُ‫ال َّدائلنُُذلك‬
Adaa- Qaasir is to perform the act with a slight defect in
the characteristics prescribed such as (for example)
performing Salaah hastily (rushing thus abandoning
Ta'adeel) or performing Tawaaf without Wudhu or
handing over the purchased item (such as a slave) such that
it is deep in debt or has been sentenced for punishment
(whereas this was not the state when the transaction was
made) or returning the seized item (such as a slave) such
that it has been sentenced to death (for having committed
murder) or is deep in debt or sentenced for punishment for
something it did while in the possession of the one who
seized it(in all the above cases the act has been performed or
item returned with defect). (Another example of Adaa- Qaasir
is)Paying with defective currency in place of genuine when
the creditor is unaware of it.
The ruling of Adaa- Qaasir
ُُ‫الَُّیَسْقط‬ ُ‫ان ُبل ْال لم ْث ل‬

ُ ‫ل ُیَ ْن َجبلرُ ُبل لُه ُ َوال‬ َ ‫ن ُُاَ ْم َکنَُ ُ َجبْرُ ُالن ْق‬
ُ‫ص ل‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُُهُ َذا ُالنَّوْ ل‬
ُْ ‫ع ُاَُنَّه ُال‬
ْ ُ‫الَُّفلی‬
‫االث لُم‬ ُ ‫انُال‬
ُ‫ص ل‬ َ ‫ح ْکمُُالن ْق‬
The ruling of this category (Adaa- Qaasir) is that if it is
possible to compensate for the fault in a like manner then it
will be offset by it (the compensation) and if not (it cannot be
compensated for in a like manner) then the fault will be
excused but not the sin (even though one will not have to
compensate for the fault, he will still be regarded as sinful).
136
Usool Shaashi
ُُ‫الَ ُی ْم لکنُ ُتَدَارکه‬ ُ ُ ‫ب ُالصَّلو لُة‬ ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ ُ‫الَرْ َک ل‬

ُْ ‫ان ُفل‬ ُ ‫ْل ُا‬ َُ ‫َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُال َذا ُت ََركَُ ُتَ ْع لدی‬
ُ‫َّام ُالتَّ ْش لری ل‬
ُ‫ْق‬ ُْ ‫ل ُُلَه ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُفَیَسْقطُ ُ َولَوُْ ُت ََركَُ ُالصَّلو ُةَ ُفل‬
ُ‫ی ُُاَی ل‬ َُ ‫الَ ُ لم ْث‬
ُ ُ ‫ل ُال ُْذ‬
ُ‫بل ْال لم ْث ل‬
ُ‫ْس ُلَهُ ُالتَّ ْکبلیْرُ ُبل ْال َج ُْه لُر‬ َُ ‫الَ ُی َکبرُ ُالُن َّه ُلَی‬ ُ ُ ‫ْق‬ُ‫َّام ُالتَّ ْش لری ل‬ ُ‫ْر ُُاَی ل‬
ُ‫ی ُ َغی ل‬ ُْ ‫ضا ُهَا ُفل‬ َ َ‫فَق‬
ُ‫ن‬ ْ
ُ‫تُال لع ْی َد ْی ل‬ُ‫تُ َوالتَّ َشه لُدُ َوتَ ْکبلی َْرا ل‬ ْ ْ
َُ ‫كُقل َراُئَ لُةُالفَاتل‬
ُ‫ح لُةُ َوالقنوْ ل‬ ُ‫یُتَرْ ل‬ ْ
ُْ ‫شَرْ عاُُ َُوُقلنَاُفل‬
ُ‫ض ُمحْ لدثا ُیَ ْن َجبلرُ ُذللكَُ ُ َوهُ َُو ُبلال َّد لُم‬ ْ
ُ‫اَُنَّه ُیَ ْن َجبلرُ ُبلال َّس ُْه لُو ُ َولَوْ طَافَُ ُطَ َوافَُ ُالفَرْ ل‬
ُ ‫َوهُ َُوُ لم ْثلُُُلَهُشَرْ عا‬
Based upon this (that in Adaa-Qaasir, if the fault can be
compensated for in a like manner then it will be offset by it and
if not then the fault will be excused) we say since there is no
like compensation if a person performs Salaah hastily
(without Ta'adeel) there will be no compensation for it and it
(the fault caused by performing Salaah hastily) will be
excused (but he will still be sinful for doing so). If a person
did not perform his Salaah during the days of Tashreek
and then performed Qadhaa of those (missed) Salaah on
some other day, then he will not make Takbeer (Takbeer-
Tashreek) as according to Shari'ah there is Takbeer
Tashreek on those days (since there is no compensation for
the missed Takbeer it will be excused). We say that not
reciting Surah Faatihah, Dua-Qunoot, Tashahud and the
Takbeeraat of the two Eid Salaah will be compensated for
with Sajdah Sahw and if one performed Fardh Tawaaf
without Wudhu then it will be compensated for with
sacrifice (of a sheep) as this is the like compensation (for
these faults) as stipulated by Shari'ah.
ُ‫ی ُلَهُ ُ َعلَی‬ َُ‫الَ ُ َش ا‬

ُ ُ‫ض‬ُ‫َو َعلَی ُهُ َذا ُلَوُْ ُُاَدی ُزَیفا ُ َم َکانَُ ُ َجیدُ ُفَهَلَكَُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْالقَابل ل‬
َُُ‫صُفَ لُة ُ ْال َجوْ َُد لُة ُم ْنفَ لر َُدةُ ُ َحتی ُی ْم لکن‬ ‫ل ُلل ل‬ َُ ‫الَ ُ لم ْث‬
ُ ُ ُ‫ی ُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُالنَّه‬ ُْ ‫ن ُ لع ْن َُد ُاَبل‬ ُ‫ْال َم ْدیوْ ل‬
ُ‫بُُاَوُُْ لع ْن َُدُ ْالبَائل لُع‬ ‫احُال َّد لُمُبل لجنَاُیَةُُ لع ْن َُدُ ْالغ ل‬
ُ‫َاص ل‬ َُ َ‫لُ َولَوُُْ َسلَّ َُمُ ْال َع ْب َُدُمب‬ ُ‫َجبْر ُهَاُبل ْال لم ْث ل‬
ُ‫ی‬ َُ ‫ك ُُاَ لُو ُ ْالم ْشت لَریُْ ُقَب‬
َُ ‫ْل ُال َّد ْف لُع ُلَ لز َمهُ ُالثَّ َمنُ ُ َوبَ لر‬ ُ‫ن ُهَلَكَُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْال َمالل ل‬ ُْ ‫بَ ْع َُد ُ ْالبَی لُْع ُفَا ل‬
137
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ل ُبلتل ْلكَُ ُ ْال لجنَاُیَ لُة ُال ْستَنَ َُد ُ ْالهَالَكُ ُاللی‬ ُْ ‫الَدَا لُء ُ َوال‬
َُ ‫ن ُقتل‬ ُ ‫ل ُا‬ُ‫ار ُاَصْ ل‬ ُ‫َاصبُ ُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬‫ْالغ ل‬
ُ‫ی ُ َحُنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی‬ ُْ ‫الَدَاءُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُُاَبل‬
ُ ‫ار ُ َکُا َُنَّه ُلَ ُْم ُیوْ َج لُد ُا‬
َ ‫ص‬َ َ‫ل ُ َسبَبل لُه ُف‬ ُ‫ُاَ َّو ل‬
ُ‫َت ُبل ْال لوالَ َُد لُة ُ لع ْن َُد‬
ُْ ‫ب ُفَ َمات‬ ‫ت ُ َحا لمالُ ُبلفلعْلُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْالغ ل‬
ُ‫َاص ل‬ ُْ ‫َو ْال َم ْغصوْ ُبَةُ ُال َذا ُر َّد‬
‫یُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَُرحمهُللاُتعالی‬ ُْ ‫انُ لع ْن َُدُُابل‬ُ‫ض َم ل‬ َّ ‫َنُال‬ ُ‫َاصبُُع ل‬ ‫ْرءُُ ْالغ ل‬ َُ ‫الَُیَب‬
ُ ُ‫ك‬ُ‫ْالماَلل ل‬
Based upon this (that in Adaa-Qaasir, if the fault can be
compensated for in a like manner then it will be offset by it and
if not then the fault will be excused)if a person pays with
counterfeit currency in place of genuine and the currency is
then lost by the one who took possession of it (the creditor
losses it) then according to Imaam Abu Hanifah nothing
(no compensation) will be incumbent upon the debtor as
there is no like compensation for the counterfeit currency
itself such that the fault may be overcome with a like
compensation.
(Similarly another ruling derived from the above is)If the slave
who has been sentenced to death (for committing murder) for
a crime committed while in the possession of the one who
seized him is returned (back to the original owner) or(the
slave who has been sentenced to death for committing murder
for a crime committed)while in the possession the seller after
the sale was concluded is handed over to the buyer, and the
slave dies after being returned to the owner or after being
handed over to the buyer then the price will be incumbent
(upon the buyer to pay the seller) and the one who seized it
will be free from his obligation as Adaa has occurred (even
though Qaasir, and compensation in a like manner is
impossible since the slave has died). (However) If the slave is
killed because of that crime (which he committed while in the
possession of the seller or the one who seized it) then the loss
(death) will be assigned to the cause of death (the death will
be said to have occurred when the crime was committed, which
would mean that the slave died while in the possession of the
seller or seizer), thus it would be as if Adaa did not take
138
Usool Shaashi
place at all, according to the opinion of Imaam Abu
Hanifah .
If a female slave is returned pregnant to her owner, when

she conceived while in the possession of the one who seized
her, and then later dies during childbirth in the possession
of her owner, then the one who seized will not be absolved
of recompense according to Imaam Abu Hanifah  (and he
will have to pay the owner for the loss of his slave).
Adaa is the primary choice
ُ‫صارُُاللَی‬ ُ‫یُهُ َذاُ ْالبَا ل‬

َ ‫بُهُ َُوُاالَدَاءُُ َکا لمالُُ َکانَُُُاَوُُْنَاقلصاُُ َُوُالنَّ َماُی‬ ُْ ‫الَصْ لُُفل‬ ُ ‫ث َُّمُا‬
َ ْ
ُ ‫ضا لُءُ لعن َُدُتَ َعذ لراالدَا لُء‬َ َ‫ْالق‬
The primary choice in this section (the first method of
fulfilling the Ma'moor Bihi) is Adaa, whether it be Kaamil or
Qaasir. Qadhaa will only be resorted to when Adaa is not
possible.
ُُ‫ب ُ َولَوُْ ُُاَ َرا َُد ُ ْالموْ دَع‬

ُ‫َص ل‬ َ ‫َُو ُللهُ َذا ُیَتَ َعی َّنُ ُ ْال َمالُ ُفلی ُ ْال َو لد ْی َُع لُة ُ َو ْال َو َکاُلَ لُة ُ َو ْالغ‬
ُ‫ع‬َُ ‫ْسُُلَهُذللكَُُ َولَوُُْبَا‬ َُ ‫كُ ْال َعیْنَُُ َویَ ْدفَ َُعُ َماُی َماثللُهُلَی‬ ‫َو ْال َو لکیْلُُ َو ْالغ ل‬
َُ ‫َاصبُُُاَنُی ْم لس‬
ُ‫الا ْخ لُذُ َوالتَّرْ ل‬
ُ ‫کُفل ْی لُه‬ ُ‫َشیْئاُُ َو َسلَّ َمهُُفَظَ ُهَ َُرُبل لُهُ َعیْبُُ َکانَُُ ْالم ْشت لَریُُْبل ْال لخیَ ل‬
ُ ‫ارُبَیْنَُُا‬
Based upon this (that Adaa is the primary choice) the
merchandise (which was left in trust, seized or one deputed to
purchase) will be fixed when placing something in trust,
appointing someone to purchase on one's behalf, or when
an item is unlawfully seized (and the exact same item has to
be returned or handed over because Adaa is resorted to first).
If the trustee, Wakeel or seizer desires to keep the original
merchandise and pay in kind, it will be impermissible to do
so.
139
Usool Shaashi
If a person a person sells something, hands it over and
thereafter a fault is seen in the item, then the buyer has the
choice to either keep it as is or return it (and be refunded).
ُُ‫بُ َرد‬ ‫اجبُُ َعلَیُ ْالغ ل‬

ُ‫َاص ل‬ ‫لُهُ َُوُاالَدَاءُُیَقوْ لُُال َّشافل لعیُُاَ ْل َو ل‬ َُ ْ‫الَص‬ ُ ‫نُا‬ َُّ َ‫ارُُا‬
ُ‫َُوُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬
ُُ‫احشاُ ُ َُو ُیَ لجب‬ ‫ب ُتَغَیراُ ُفَ ل‬ ُ‫َاص ل‬‫ی ُیَ لُد ُ ْالغ ل‬ ُْ ‫ت ُفل‬ ُْ ‫ْن ُ ْال َم ْغصوْ ُبَ لُة ُ َُو ُال‬
ُْ ‫ن ُتَ َغی ََّر‬ ُ‫ْال َعی ل‬
ُُ‫جة‬ َُ ‫ب ُ لح ْنطَُةُ ُفَطَ َحنَ ُهَا ُُاَوُْ ُ َسا‬ َُ ‫َص‬َ ‫ان ُ َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُلَوُْ ُغ‬ ‫ص ل‬ َ ‫ب ُالن ْق‬ ُ‫االرْ شُ ُبل َسبَ ل‬ ُ‫ل‬
ُُ‫ص َر ُهَا ُاُوْ لح ْنطَُة‬ َ ‫فَبَنی ُ َعلَ ْی ُهَا ُدَاراُ ُُاَوُْ ُ َشاةُ ُفَ َذبَ َح ُهَا ُ َو َش َّوا ُهَا ُاوُْ ُ لعنَبا ُفَ َع‬
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫َاص ل‬‫ك ُ لع ْندَہ ُ َوق ْلنَا ُ َج لم ْی َع ُهَا ُلل ْلغ ل‬
ُ‫فَزَ َر َع ُهَا ُ َونَبَتَُ ُال َّزرْ عُ ُ َکانَُ ُذللكَُ ُ لم ْلكُا ُلل ْل َمالل ل‬
‫َویَ لجبُُ َعلَ ْی لُهُ َردُُ ْالقل ْی َُم لُة‬
Based upon this principle that the first choice is that of

Adaa (and Qadhaa is only permitted when Adaa is impossible)
Imaam Shaafie  says that it is Waajib for the one who
(unlawfully) seized another's property to return the very
same seized item, even if it has been changed (or damaged)
drastically while in the hands of the seizer, and
compensation for the damage will be Waajib upon one who
seized it. Based upon this (that Imaam Shaafie says it is
Waajib to return the very same seized item) if a person seizes
wheat and grinds it, (seizes) property and builds a house on
it, (seizes) a sheep, slaughters it and cooks it, (seizes) grapes
and squeezes it (extracts its juice) or (seizes) wheat, planting
it and causing it to grow then according to Imaam Shaafie
 this all (the grounded wheat, house, cooked meat, grape
juice, etc) is the property of the (original) owner. We say
(scholars of the Hanafi School of jurisprudence) that it all
belongs to the one who seized it and (in such instances) he
will have to pay the price of the seized item.
َُ‫ال‬ َُ ‫ض َربَ ُهَاُد ََرا لُه َُمُاوُُْتلبْراُُفَاتَّخَ َذ ُهَاُ َدنَانلی‬

ُ ُ‫ْرُُاوُُْ َشاةُُفَ َذبَ َح ُهَا‬ َ َ‫ضةُُف‬ َُّ ‫َصبُفل‬ َ ‫َولَوْ غ‬
ْ ‫ب ُق‬
ُُْ‫طناُ ُفَغَزَ ُلَه ُُاَو‬ َُ ‫ص‬ َ ‫ی ُظَا لُه لُر ُالر َواُیَ لُة ُ َو َکذللكَُ ُلَوُْ ُ َغ‬ ُ‫یَ ْنقَ لطعُ ُ َحقُ ُ ْال َمالل ل‬
ُْ ‫ك ُفل‬
‫یُظَا لُه لُرُالر َواُیَ لُة‬ ُْ ‫كُفل‬ُ‫الَُیَ ْنقَ لطعُُ َحقُُ ْال َمالل ل‬ُ ُُ‫غَزَ الُُفَنَ َس َجه‬
140
Usool Shaashi
(However) If a person seizes silver and makes Dirhams
(silver coins) with it, (seizes) gold and makes Dinaars (gold
coins) with it or (seizes) a sheep and (only) slaughters it then
according to the favoured opinion (preferred ruling in the
Hanafi Madhab) the right of the owner will not be lost (and
it will still belong to him). Similarly if a person seizes cotton
and spins it into yarn or (seizes) yarn and sows it into cloth
then according to the favoured opinion (preferred ruling in
the Hanafi Madhab) the right of the owner will not be lost
(and it will still belong to him).
ُُ‫ال ُلَوُْ ُظَ ُهَ َُر ُ ْال َعبْدُ ُال َم ْغصوْ ب‬ َُ َ‫ت ُ َُو ُلل َذا ُق‬ ُ‫ن ُهُ َذا ُ َم ْسئَُلَةُ ُ ْال َمضْ موْ نَا ل‬ ُْ ‫َویَتَفَرَّعُ ُ لم‬
ُُ‫اجب‬‫ك ُ َو ْال َو ل‬
ُ‫ب ُ َکانَُ ُ ْال َعبْدُ ُ لم ْلکا ُلل ْل َمالل ل‬ُ‫َاص ل‬‫ض َماُنَه ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالغ ل‬ َ ُ ُ‫بَ ْع َُد ُ َما ُاَخَ َُذ ُ ْال َماللك‬
‫كُ َردُُ َماُاَخَ َُذُ لمنُقل ْی َُم لُةُ ْال َع ْب لُد‬ُ‫َعلَیُ ْال َمالل ل‬
The ruling of recompense is derived from the above

(mentioned difference of opinion) that if the unlawfully seized
slave is discovered after the owner has been compensated
for its loss by the one who seized it, the slave will still
belong to the owner and it will be Waajib for the owner to
return the price of the slave which he claimed from the one
who seized it (according to Imaam Shaafie).
Types of Qadhaa
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫اج ل‬ ‫ل ُ ْال َو ل‬ُ‫اصرفَ ْال َکا لملُ ُ لم ْنهُ ُتَ ْسللیْمُ ُ لم ْث ل‬ ‫َان ُ َکا لملُ ُ َوقَ ل‬ ُ‫ضاءُ ُفَنَوْ ع ل‬ َ َ‫َُو ُُاَ َّما ُ ْالق‬
ُُ‫ض لمنَُ ُقَفلیْزَُ ُ لح ْنطَُة‬ َ ُ ‫ب ُقَفلیْزَُ ُ لح ْنطَُةُ ُُفَا ْستَ ْهلَ َک ُهَا‬
َُ ‫َص‬ َ ‫ن ُغ‬ ُْ ‫صوْ َُرةُ ُ َو َمعْنیُ ُ َک َم‬
ُ‫ی ُ َج لمی لُْع‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ل ُصوْ َُرةُ ُ َو َمعْنیُ ُ َو َکذللكَُ ُالح ْکمُ ُفل‬ ُ‫َویَکوْ نَُ ُ ْالم َودی ُ لم ْثالُ ُللالاُ َّو ل‬
ُ‫ْال لم ْثلَیَا ل‬
‫ت‬
Qadhaa is of two types; Kaamil and Qaasir. Qadhaa

Kaamil is to present that which is similar to what is Waajib
(on a person) in both composition (meaning that it is exactly
the same in its make-up and structure) and meaning (the
141
Usool Shaashi
price/value is the same as what is Waajib, in other words
Qadhaa Kaamil is when the exact act cannot be performed or
exact item cannot be returned but an act or item resembling
and identical to it, but another, is performed or handed over)
such as when a person forcefully seizes a bag of wheat and
then loses (it is destroyed or used up) then a (another) bag of
wheat (similar to the one which was lost will be Waajib upon
him) thus (in this manner) what is handed over will resemble
the first in both composition and meaning. The ruling is the
same in all those items which resemble each other.
Qadhaa Qaasir
ُ‫ب‬َُ ‫َص‬
َ ‫ن ُغ‬ ُْ ‫ب ُصوْ َُرةُ ُ َوی َماثللُ ُ َمعْنیُ ُ َک َم‬ َُ ‫اج‬ ‫الَ ُی َماثللُ ُ ْال َو ل‬ ُ ‫اصرُ ُفَهُ َُو ُ َما‬‫َوُاَ َّما ُ ْالقَ ل‬
ُْ ‫نُ َحیْثُُ ْال َمعْنیُالَ لم‬
ُُ‫نُ َحیْث‬ َُ ‫ض لمنَُُقل ْی َمتَ ُهَاُ َو ْالقل ْی َُمةُُ لم ْث‬
ُْ ‫لُال َّشا لُةُ لم‬ َ ُ‫ت‬ ُْ ‫َشاةُُفَ ُهَلَ َک‬
‫الصوْ َُرلُة‬
Qadhaa Qaasir is that which is not similar to what is

Waajib in composition but similar in meaning (it has the
same value as what is Waajib) such as when a person
forcefully seizes a sheep which he then loses (slaughters,
cooks and consumes it); the price of it will be Waajib (upon
the seizer). (Handing over) The price is the same as the sheep
in meaning but is not the same in composition (the value of
the Sheep and the price paid for seizing it is the same but they
are not the same in composition as the money obviously differs
greatly from that of a sheep it its make up).
Kaamil is the primary choice in Qadhaa
ُ‫ب ُ لم ْثللیا‬َُ ‫َص‬ َُ َ‫ضا لُء ُاَ ْل َکا لملُ ُ َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق‬
َ ‫ال ُاُبوْ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُال َذا ُغ‬ َ َ‫َواالاصْ لُ ُفلی ُالق‬
ْ
ُ‫ض لمنَُ ُقل ْی َمُتَه ُیَوْ َُم ُالخصوْ َُم لُة‬ َ ُ ‫اس‬ ُ‫َن ُاُ ْی لدی ُالنَّ ل‬ ُْ ‫ی ُیَ لد لُہ ُ َوا ْنقَطَ َُع ُذللكَُ ُع‬ ُْ ‫فَهَلَكَُ ُفل‬
ْ ْ
َُ ‫ل ُالنَّ َما ُیَظ ُهَرُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُالخصوْ َُم لُة ُفَُا َّما ُقَب‬
ُ‫ْل‬ ْ
ُ‫ل ُال َکا لم ل‬ ْ ْ ُْ ‫الن ُ ْال لعجْ زَُ ُع‬
ُ‫َن ُتَ ْسللی لُْم ُال لمث ل‬ َُّ
ُ‫نُکلُُ َوجْ ه‬ ُْ ‫لُ لم‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫لُال لمث ل‬ ُ‫صو لرحصوْ ل‬ ُ َ‫ْالخصوْ َُم لُةُف‬
َ َ‫الَُللت‬
142
Usool Shaashi
The primary choice in Qadhaa is Qadhaa-Kaamil (and

Qadhaa-Qaasir will only be resorted to when Qadhaa-Kaamil
is not possible). Based upon this (that the primary choice in
Qadhaa is Qadhaa-Kaamil) Imaam Abu Hanifah  says that
if a person seizes something which has its equivalent (items
which are all identical in structure and make-up) and then
loses it but that (item which has an equivalent)is unattainable
from people (at that time as it is out of stock or inaccessible)
then its price on the day of the court case will be made
Waajib because his inability to perform Qadhaa Kaamil
was made apparent on that day (thus the value of the item on
the day that it became apparent he is unable to handover its
equivalent will be considered) but not before the court case
(such that we can say that the value of the item on the day it
was stolen is Waajib as is the opinion of Imaam Yusuf) as the
possibility existed (before the court case) to hand over its
equivalent completely (Qadhaa-Kaamil could have been
possible then and the value of the item would not be made
Waajib on him then, as Qadhaa-Qaasir is only resorted to
when Qadhaa-Kaamil is not possible).
Qadhaa of that which has no equivalent
ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫ضا لُءُفل ْی لُهُبل ْال لم ْث ل‬ َ َ‫کنُُال ْی َجابُُ ْالق‬ ‫الَُی ْم ل‬ُ ُُ‫الَُ َمعْنی‬ ُ ‫الَُصوْ َُرةُُ َو‬ ُ ُ‫لُُلَه‬ َُ ‫الَُ لم ْث‬
ُ ‫فَُا َّماُ َما‬
ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫ض َما ل‬ َّ ‫اب ُال‬ َُّ ُ ‫ف‬
َُ ‫الن ُالی َْج‬ ُ‫الَ ُتضْ َمنُ ُبلاال ْتالَ ل‬ ُ ُ ‫ن ُ ْال َمنَافل َُع‬َُّ ‫َوللهُ َذا ُ ْال َمعْنی ُق ْلنَا ُال‬
َُ‫ال‬ُ ُ َ‫الَ ُت َماثللُ ُ ْال َم ْنفَ َُع ُة‬ ُ ُ َُ‫الن ُ ْال َعیْن‬
َُّ ُ َُ‫ْن ُ َک َذاللك‬ ُ‫ل ُمتَ َع َّذرُ ُ َُو ُالی َْجابَهُ ُبل ْال َعی ل‬ ُ‫بل ْال لم ْث ل‬
َُُ‫ب ُ َعبْداُ ُفَا ْست َْخ َد َُمه ُ َش ُْهرا ُُاوُْ ُدَارا ُفَ َس َکن‬ َُ ‫َص‬ َ ‫الَ ُ َمعْنیُ ُ َک َما ُال َذا ُغ‬ ُ ‫صوْ َُرةُ ُ َو‬
ْ
ُ‫ض َمانُ ُال َمنَافل لُع‬ َ
َ ُ ‫ال ُیَ لجبُ ُ َعل ْی لُه‬ َ ُ ُ‫ك‬ ْ
ُ‫ب ُاللی ُال َمالل ل‬ َ ْ ْ َّ
َُ ْ‫فل ْی ُهَا ُ َش ُْهراُ ُث َُّم ُ َر ُد ُال َمغصو‬
‫َارُاال لخ َُر لُة‬
ُ‫اوہُاللیُد ل‬ ُ‫لُ َجزَ ا‬ َُ َ‫االثمُُح ْکماُُلَهُ َوا ْنتَق‬ ْ ُ‫ی‬ َُ ‫لخالَفاُُللل َّشافل لعیُُفَبَقل‬
As far as that which has no equivalent, neither in

composition nor meaning, it is not possible to make Qadhaa
Waajib by its equivalent. And because of this (that Qadhaa
143
Usool Shaashi
is not Waajib on that which has no equivalent) we say that
recompense for benefit (which was derived from an item)will
not be Waajib if the item is lost because (in this case)
making recompense Waajib with its equivalent is not
possible (since there is no equivalent for benefit, thus Qadhaa-
Qaasir is not possible) and making the exact same (the
equivalent value of the benefit) Waajib is also not possible
because the exact same (equivalent value of the benefit) is
neither the same as benefit in composition nor in meaning.
For example if a person seizes a slave and takes service
(derives benefit) from him for one month or (seizes) a house
and stays in it (drives benefit from it) for a month and
thereafter returns the seized items to its owner,
recompensing (the owner) for the benefit derived will not be
Waajib (according to Ahnaaf) as opposed to Imaam Shaafie
 (who says recompense is Waajib). The sin of his crime will
remain (the sin of deriving benefit from the slave unlawfully
will remain) and its penalty will be decided in the Aakhirah.
ُ‫ق‬ ‫َوللهُ َذا ُ ْال َمعْنی ُق ْلنَا ُال ُتضْ َمنُ ُ َمنَافلعُ ُ ْالبضْ لُع ُبلال َّش ُهَا َُد لُة ُ ْالبَ ل‬
ُ‫اطُلَ لُة ُ َعلَی ُالطَّالَ ل‬
ُ ُ ُ‫ج ُةَ ُال ْن َسان‬
َُ‫ال‬ ُ‫ی ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُ َو لط ا‬
َُ ْ‫ی ُزَ و‬ ْ ‫الَ ُبل ْال َو‬
ُ‫ط لا‬ ُ‫ح لُة ُ ْال َغی ل‬
ُ ‫ْر ُ َو‬ َُ ْ‫ل ُ َم ْنکو‬ُ‫الَ ُبلقَ ْت ل‬
ُ ‫َو‬
ُ‫یَضْ َمنُُللل َّزوْ ل‬
ُ ُ‫جُ َشُْیئا‬
Based upon this (that if an item has no equivalent, neither in
composition or meaning, then it is not possible to make
Qadhaa Waajib) we say that there is no recompense for the
benefit of sexual relations (which was lost) by a false
testimony of Talaaq (if two people falsely testify that he
issued Talaaq to his wife, resulting in the Qaadhi separating
them, and then later they confess to giving false testimony and
the couple is reunited, then the witnesses will be punished for
giving false testimony but recompense for the benefit which he
lost from his wife during their period of separation will not be
144
Usool Shaashi
made Waajib on them), nor (will recompense be made Waajib)
for killing the wife of another (if a person kills another's wife
then the Shar'ie punishment will be meted out but recompense
for the benefit which he lost from his wife by her death will not
be made Waajib on him) nor will recompense be taken for
sexual relations, such that if a person commits adultery
with another person wife then the adulterer will not
recompense the husband for anything (as in all of the above
cases there is no equivalent for the benefit of sexual relations
such that it can be made Waajib, thus the perpetrator will be
sinful and its penalty decided in the Aakhirah).
An exception to the rule
ُُ‫الَُ َمعْنیُُفَیلکوْ نُُ لم ْثال‬ ُ ‫الَُی َماثللُهُصوْ َُرةُُ َو‬ ُ ُ‫لُ َم ُْعُاَُنَّه‬ ُ‫الَُّال َذاُ َو َر َُدُال َّشرْ عُُبل ْال لم ْث ل‬
ُ ‫ال‬
ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫ن ُ ْالفل ْدُیَ ُةَ ُفل‬
َُّ ‫ل ُال َّشرْ لعیُ ُ َُو ُنَ لظیْرہ ُ َما ُق ْلنَا ُال‬ ُ‫اوہ ُبل ْال لم ْث ل‬ ُ‫ض ا‬ َ َ‫ُلَه ُشَرْ عاُ ُفَیَ لجبُ ُق‬
ُ‫س ُ َم َُع ُُاُنَّه‬ُ‫ل ُخَ طَاءُ ُ لم ْثلُ ُالنَّ ْف ل‬ ُ‫ی ُ لم ْثلُ ُالصَّوْ لُم ُ َوالدُیَ ُةَ ُفلی ُ ْالقَ ْت ل‬ ُْ ‫ْخ ُ ْالفَانل‬
ُ‫َحقُ ُال َّشی ل‬
‫الَُم َشاُبَ ُهَةُبَ ْینَهُ َما‬
ُ
(If an item has no equivalent, neither in composition nor

meaning, then it is not possible to make Qadhaa Waajib)
Except if the Shari'ah has stipulated an equivalent for it
despite it having no equivalent in composition or meaning.
Thus this will be considered its Shar'ie equivalent and it
will be Waajib to fulfil it (the usurped right or benefit) with
the Shar'ie equivalent.
An example of this is what we say that Fidya in respect of a

Sheikh Faani (a person who is incapable of fasting) is the
equivalent of fasting and the Diyyah (monetary
compensation) in inadvertent murder is the same as a life (is
the equivalent of the life taken) even though they ((the missed
fasts with Fidya and the life taken with Diyyah) have no
similarity whatsoever.
145
Usool Shaashi
Lesson on Nahy
Types of Nahy
ُ ‫فصلُفیُالنهی‬
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫ک ُذ ل‬ ْ ْ ْ
ُ‫ب ُ ُالخَُ ُْم لُر ُ َُو ُال ل‬ ُ‫حسُُیَّ لُة ُ َُکالزُُنَا ُ َُوشُرُْ ل‬ ُ‫ال ُ ُْال ل‬
ُ‫االَُْف َُع ل‬
ُْ ُ ‫ن‬ُ‫ع ل‬ َُ ُ ُ‫ان ُنَ ُْهی‬
ُ‫ع ل‬ َُ ُْ‫ُاَلنَّ ُْهیُ ُُنَو‬
ُ‫ی ُُیَوُْ لُم‬ ُْ ‫صُوُْ لُم ُُفل‬ َّ ‫ن ُال‬ ُ‫ع ل‬
َُ ُ ‫ی‬ ُ‫عُیَّ لُة ُ َکالنَّ ُْه ل‬ َُّ ‫ت ُال‬
ُ‫شرُْ ل‬ ُ‫صرُُفَا ل‬ َُ َّ ‫ن ُالُت‬ َُ ُ ُ‫َُوالظُُْل لُم ُ َُو ُنَ ُْهی‬
ُ‫ع ل‬
ُ‫کرُوُْهَ لُةُ َُوُبَُْی لُعُالدرْ ُهَ لُمُبلالدرْ ُهَ َُمُْی ل‬
‫ن‬ ُْ ‫تُ ُْال َُم‬ ُ ْ ُ‫صلو لُةُُفلی‬
ُ‫االاوُُْقَا ل‬ َُّ ‫الُنَّحُْ لُرُ َُوال‬
Nahy (is to prohibit or forbid something) is of two types;
Nahy of Af'aalil Hissiyah (those acts, the meaning and evil of
which was known before the coming of revelation) such as
Zinaa (fornication), consuming wine, deceit, and oppression
(the meaning of these acts was known even before the
revelation of Shari'ah). (The second type of Nahy is) Nahy of
Tasarrufaatish Shari'ah (those acts, the meaning and evil of
which only became known after revelation) such as the
prohibition of fasting on the Day of Nahr (10 Dhul-Hijjah),
Salaah in the forbidden times (sunrise, midday, sunset), and
selling one dirham for two dirhams (which is termed as Riba
and forbidden by Shari'ah).
The ruling of Nahy of Af'aalil Hissiyah

َُ ُ ‫ن ُُیَّکُوُْنَُ ُ ْال َم ْن لُهیُ ُ َع ْنهُ ُهُ َُو‬
ُُ‫عُْینُ ُ َُما ُ َُو َُر َُد ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُالنَّ ُْهی‬ ُْ َ‫ل ُُا‬ ُْ ُ‫ع‬
ُ‫االا َُّو ل‬ ُْ ُ‫َُوح‬
ُ‫کمُ ُالُن َّوُْ ل‬
ُ‫شرُوُْعُاُُاَصُْال‬ ُْ ‫الُُیَکُوُْنُُ َُم‬ ُ َ َ‫ُفَُیَکُوُْنُُ َعیْنهُُُقَُبلُْیحُاُُف‬
The ruling of the first category (Nahy of Af'aalil Hissiyah) is
that the prohibition is a result of the act itself, thus it (the
146
Usool Shaashi
prohibited act) will be evil itself (Qabeeh-Li-Ainihi) and
never permitted (in any circumstances, as ALLAAH Ta'ala
will never permit or instruct evil and wickedness).
The ruling of Nahy of Tasarrufaatish Shari'ah
ُُ‫ضُْیفَُ ُاللَ ْی لُه ُالنَّ ُْهی‬ َُ ُ ُ‫ن ُُیَّکُوُْنَُ ُ ْال َم ْن لُهیُ ُ َع ْنه‬
ُ‫غُْی َُر ُ َُما ُاُ ل‬ ُْ َ‫ی ُُا‬ ُْ ‫ع ُالُثَّاُنل‬ ُ‫کمُ ُالُنَّوُْ ل‬ ُْ ُ‫َُوح‬
ُ َ ُ‫ام ُُلل َُغُْی لُر لُہ‬
ُ‫ال‬ َُ ‫کبُا ُُللُْل‬
ُ‫ح َُر ل‬ ُ‫اشرُ ُمُرُُْتَ ل‬ُ‫س لُه ُُقَُبلُْیحُا ُُلل َُغُْی لُر لُہ ُ َُوُیَکُوُْنُ ُ ُْالمُُبَ ل‬
ُ‫سنُا ُُبلُنَُْف ل‬
َُ ‫ح‬ َُ ُ ُ‫ُفَُیَکُوُْن‬
‫س لُه‬ُ‫ُللُنَُْف ل‬
The ruling of the second category (Nahy of Tasarrufaatish

Shari'ah) is that the prohibit is a result of exterior factors
and not the act itself, thus it (the prohibited act) good in
itself but evil because of exterior factors (Hasan bi-Nafsihi
but Qabeeh Li-Ghairihi). The one who perpetrates such an
act (an act falling under Nahy of Tasarrufaatish Shari'ah)
perpetrates Haraam because of exterior factors (governing
the prohibition at that time) and not because of the act itself.
ُ‫یُتَ ْق لری َْر ُهَا‬ ُْ ‫َض‬ ‫تُال َّشرْ لعُیَّ لُةُیَ ْقت ل‬ ُ‫صرفَا ل‬ َ َّ ‫َنُالت‬ ُ‫الُاَصْ َحابنَاُاَلنَّ ُْهیُُع ل‬ َُ َ‫َوعَلیُُهُ َذاُق‬
ُ‫ی ُیَبْقی ُ َم ْشروْ عاُ ُ َک َما ُ َکانَُ ُالُن َّه ُلَوُْ ُلَ ُْم‬ ُ‫ت ُبَ ْع َُد ُالنَّ ُْه ل‬
ُ‫صرفَا ل‬ َ َّ‫ن ُالت‬َُّ َ‫َوی َرادُ ُبلذللكَُ ُا‬
ُ‫ك‬َُ ‫ع ُ َو لح ْینَئلذُ ُ َکانَُ ُذلل‬ ْ
ُ‫ْل ُال َم ْشروْ ل‬ ُ‫صی ل‬‫َن ُتَحْ ل‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ق ُ َم ْشروْ عاُ ُ َکانَُ ُال َعبْدعَا لجزا ُع‬ َُ ‫یَ ْب‬
ْ ْ
ُ‫ق ُاالاُف َعالُ ُال لح لسُیَّةُ ُالُن َّه‬ َُ ‫ار‬َ َ‫ع ُ َم َحالُ ُ َوبل لُه ُف‬ ُ‫ار ل‬ ‫اج لُز ُ َوذللكَُ ُ لمنَُ ُال َّش ل‬ ْ
‫نَ ُْهیاُ ُللل َع ل‬
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ُ‫ف‬ ْ
ُ‫اج لُز ُالنَّهُ ُبلهُ َذا ُال َوصْ ل‬ ْ
‫ی ُال َع ل‬ ُ‫لَوْ َکانَُ ُ َعیْن ُهَا ُقَبلیْحاُ ُال ُی اُودیُْ ُذللكَُ ُاللَی ُنَ ُْه ل‬
ُ‫ی‬ ُ‫ْلُ ْال لحس ل‬
ُ‫َنُ ْالفلع ل‬
ُ‫ْجزُُ ْال َعبْدُُع ل‬ ‫یَع ل‬
Based upon this (that Nahy of Tasarrufaatish Shari'ah is
Hasan bi Nafsihi but Qabeeh Li-Ghairihi) our scholars (of the
Hanafi school of thought) say that Nahy of Tasarrufaatish
Shari'ah requires that it (the prohibited act) still be valid
(after the prohibition in the same manner as before its
prohibition). What is meant by this (that Nahy of
Tasarrufaatish Shari'ah requires the prohibited act still to be
valid) is that the act itself will still remain permissible after
the prohibition as it was before being prohibited. The
147
Usool Shaashi
reason for this (why it is permissible after the prohibition as it
was before the prohibition) is because if it is not valid (after
the prohibition) then a person would be incapable of
performing it and in this case the prohibition would be
directed towards one who is incapable of performing it
(making the Nahy redundant as one can only be prohibited
from something he is capable of doing), which is impossible
for the one creating the laws of Shari'ah to do. This
differentiates it (Tasarrufaatish Shari'ah) from Af'aalil
Hissiyah because even if it is evil itself it would not
necessitate the prohibition being directed towards one who
is incapable of doing it, as an act being evil does not make
one incapable of perpetrating it.
َ ‫اس َُد لُة ُ َوالنَّ ْذ لُر ُبل‬

ُ‫صوْ لُم ُیَوْ لُم‬ ‫ار لُة ُ ْالفَ ل‬
َُ ‫االج‬
َ ‫اس لُد ُ َو‬‫ن ُهُ َذا ُح ْکمُ ُ ْالبَی لُْع ُ ْالفَ ل‬ ُْ ‫َُو ُیَتَفَرَّعُ ُ لم‬
ُ‫ی ُ َع ْن ُهَا ُفَق ْلنَا‬
ُ‫ت ُال َّشرْ لعُیَّ لُة ُ َم َُع ُوروْ لُد ُالن َّ ُْه ل‬
ُ‫صرفَا ل‬ َ َّ ‫النَّحْ لُر ُ َو َج لمی لُْع ُص َو لُر ُالت‬
ُُ‫ار ُاَُنَّه ُبَیْعُ ُ َویَ لجبُ ُنَ ْقضه‬ ُ‫ْض ُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬ُ‫اسدُ ُیفلیْدُ ُ ْال لم ْلكَُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْالقَب ل‬ ‫اَ ْلبَیْعُ ُ ْالفَ ل‬
‫بلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬
‫ار َکوْ نل لُهُ َح َراماُُلل َغی لْرلُہ‬
Derived from this (principle that Nahy of Tasarrufaatish
Shari'ah requires the prohibited act still to be valid) is the
ruling of invalid sales transactions (Bay'a Faasid), invalid
rental transactions (Ijaarah Faasidah), vowing to fast on the
day of Nahr (10 Dhul-Hijjah), and all those acts of Shari'ah
(that are normally permitted) which have been prohibited
(due to external factors). We say that an invalid sales
transaction (Bay'a Faasid) will cause the transfer ownership
to take place (from the seller to the buyer) when the buyer
takes possession of the item because of it being a sales
transaction which is Waajib to reverse because of it being
Haraam due to external factors (and it can only be reversed
if it was completed in the first place by ownership being
transferred).
148
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ْر ُ َو َم ْنکوْ َحتل لُه‬ ُ‫ب ُ َوم ْعتَ َُّد لُة ُ ْال َغی ل‬
ُ‫الا ل‬ ُ ‫ح لُة ُا‬ َُ ْ‫ت ُ َو َم ْنکو‬ ُ‫اح ُ ْالم ْش لر َکا ل‬ُ‫ف ُنل َک ل‬ ُ‫َوهُ َذا ُبل لخالَ ل‬
ُ‫ف‬ُ‫َصر ل‬ َ ‫اح ُ لحلُ ُالت‬ ُ‫ب ُالن َک ل‬ َُ ‫الن ُموْ َج‬ َُّ ُ ُ‫اح ُبل َغی لُْر ُشهُوْ د‬ ‫اح ُ ْال َم َح ل‬
ُ‫ار لُم ُ َوالن َک ل‬ ُ‫َونل َک ل‬
ُُ‫ال ُ ْال َج ْمعُ ُبَ ْینَهُ َما ُفَیحْ َملُ ُالنَّ ُْهی‬ َُ ‫ف ُفَا ْست ََح‬ ُ‫صر ل‬ َ َّ‫ی ُحرْ َُمةُ ُالت‬ ُ‫ب ُالنَّ ُْه ل‬ َُ ‫َوموْ َج‬
ُُ‫ی ُحرْ َُمة‬ َّ
ُ‫ك ُ َوموْ َجبُ ُالن ُْه ل‬ ْ ْ ْ
ُ‫ی ُفُ َّما ُموْ َجبُ ُالبَی لُْع ُثبوْ تُ ُال لمل ل‬ ‫ا‬ َ ْ َّ
ُ‫َعلَی ُالنف ل‬
ُُ‫صرف‬ َ َّ‫ن ُیَ ْثبتَُ ُ ْال لم ْلكُ ُ َویَحْ ر َُم ُالت‬ ُْ َ ‫ف ُ َوقَ ُْد ُا ْم َکنَُ ُ ْال َج ْمعُ ُبَ ْینَهُ َما ُبلُا‬ ُ‫صر ل‬ َ َّ‫الت‬
ُُ‫ك ُ ْالم ْسلل لُم ُیَبْقی ُ لم ْلکُه ُفل ْی ُهَا ُ َویَحْ رم‬ ُ‫ی ُ لم ْل ل‬ُْ ‫صیْرُ ُفل‬ ‫ْس ُاَُنَّه ُلَوُْ ُتَخَ َّم َُر ُ ْال َع ل‬ َُ ‫ُالَی‬
ُ‫صرف‬ َ َّ‫الت‬
(If someone were to object saying that marriage to a
Mushrikah, father's wife, etc, which is prohibited by Shari'ah
should also remain valid after the prohibition as in the case of
Bay'a Faasid then we would say) This (principle that Nahy of
Tasarrufaatish Shari'ah requires the prohibited act still to be
valid) is different from marrying a Mushrikah, fathers
wife, another's wife still in Iddah, wife of another, one's
blood relatives as well as marrying without witnesses
because Nikaah dictates the permissibility of action (such as
sexual relations, etc) and the Nahy dictates the
impermissibility of action, making reconciliation between
the two impossible (as both require the total opposite), so the
Nahy (of the above mentioned Nikaah) will have the meaning
of Nafee1. Whereas a sales transaction dictates that
ownership be transferred (from the seller to the buyer) and
the Nahy (of invalid sales transactions) dictates that action
(transacting in the purchased item) is impermissible, and (in
this scenario) reconciliation between the two is possible by
establishing the transfer of ownership and transacting
1
The difference between Nahy and Nafee: In Nahy a person has the choice to either abstain or
perpetrate the act, whereby he will be rewarded for abstaining and punished for perpetrating it;
in Nafee a person does not have the choice to abstain or perpetrate it, but instead has to abstain
from it absolutely.
149
Usool Shaashi
being Haraam. (A scenario similar to this whereby ownership
remains but transacting is Haraam)Is it not such that if grape
juice ferments and turns into wine while in the possession
of a Muslim it still remains in his ownership but
transacting with it is Haraam.
Rulings
ُُ‫صح‬ ُ‫َّام ُالتَّ ْش لری ل‬

‫ْق ُیَ ل‬ ُ‫صوْ لُم ُیَوْ لُم ُالنَّحْ لُر ُ َوای ل‬ َ ‫ال ُاَصْ َحابنَا ُال َذا ُنَ َذ َُر ُبل‬ َُ َ‫َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫صوْ مُ ُ َم ْشروْ عُ ُ َو َکذللكَُ ُلَوُْ ُنَ َذ َُر ُبلالصَّلو لُة ُفلی ُاالاُوْ قَا ل‬ َ ‫ن َْذرہ ُالُن َّه ُنَ َذ َُر ُبل‬
ُُ‫ی ُیوْ لجب‬ َُ ‫ن ُالنَّ ُْه‬َُّ َ‫عةُ ُلل َما ُ َذکَرْ نَا ُا‬ َُ ْ‫صحُ ُالُنَّه ُنَ َذرُ ُبل لعبَا َُدةُ ُ َم ْشرو‬ ‫ْال َم ْکروْ ُهَ لُة ُیَ ل‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫ی ُهُ لذ لُہ ُاالاُوْ قَا ل‬ ُْ ‫ل ُفل‬ ُ‫ع ُفلی ُالنَّ ْف ل‬ َُ ‫ف ُ َم ْشروْ عاُ ُ َوللهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُلَوُْ ُ َش َر‬ ُ‫صر ل‬ َ َّ‫بَقَا َُء ُالت‬
ُ‫صبَ َُر‬َ ُُْ‫امُفَا لُنَّهُلَو‬ ُ‫ْسُبلالَ لزمُُلللزوْ لُمُا لال ْت َم ل‬ َُ ‫امُلَی‬ ُ‫عُ َُوُالرْ تل َکابُُ ْال َح َر ل‬ ُ‫لَ لز َُمهُبلالشروْ ل‬
ْ
ُُ‫س ُ َوغروْ بل ُهَا ُ َودلوْ لک ُهَا ُاَ ْم َکنَهُ ُاالت َمام‬ َّ
ُ‫اع ُالش ْم ل‬ ُ‫ت ُالصَّلوةُ ُبلالرْ تلفَ ل‬ ُ‫َحتی ُ َحلَّ ل‬
ُُ‫الَ ُیَ ْلزَ مه‬
ُ ُ ‫ع ُفل ْی لُه‬ َُ ‫صوْ مُ ُیَوْ لُم ُ ْال لع ْی لُد ُفَا لُنَّه ُلَوُْ ُ َش َر‬َ ُ‫ق‬ َ َ‫ن ُ ْال َک َرا ُهَ لُة ُ َوبل لُه ُف‬
َُ ‫ار‬ ُ‫بلدوْ ل‬
ْ
ُْ ‫الَُیَنفَكُُع‬
ُ‫َن‬ ْ
ُ ُ‫النُاالت َما َُم‬ َُّ ُ‫یُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَُ َوم َح َّمدُُ َر لح َمهُ َماُللاُُتَ َعالی‬ ُْ ‫اال ْت َمامُُ لعن َُدُاُبل‬
ْ
ُ‫بُ ْال َح َر ل‬
‫ام‬ ُ‫الرْ تل َکا ل‬
Based upon this (principle that Nahy of Tasarrufaatish
Shari'ah requires the prohibited act still to be valid) our
scholars (of the Hanafi school of thought) say that if a person
makes o vow to fast on the Day of Nahr (10 Dhul-Hijjah) or
the days of Tashreek (11, 12, 13 Dhul-Hijjah) then his vow is
correct as it is a vow to fast, which is permitted in Shari'ah.
In a similar manner (as vowing to fast on the Day of Nahr is)
if a person makes a vow to perform Salaah in the
prohibited times, then it will be correct as he has made a
vow to perform an Ibaadat permitted by Shari'ah as we
have mentioned previously that the Nahy requires the
prohibited act still to be valid. As a result of this (that the
act is still valid after it has been prohibited) we say that if a
person begins performing Nafl Salaah in these (prohibited)
times then it will be incumbent upon him (to perform this
Salaah) by beginning it. Perpetration of Haraam will not
150
Usool Shaashi
become inevitable by making completion of the Nafl Salaah
incumbent as he can wait until Salaah is permissible after
sunrise, sunset or midday and then complete it. This (not
perpetrating Haraam in its completion) is what differentiates
the fast on the day of Eid (from Nafl Salaah) as completion
is not incumbent upon one who begins fasting (on the day of
Eid) according to Imaam Abu Hanifah  and Imaam
Muhammed as completion (of the fast) will not be free
from the perpetration of Haraam.
ُ‫ار ُاالاُذی‬ ُ‫َن ُقربَانل ُهَا ُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ی ُع‬ َُ ‫ن ُالنَّ ُْه‬ َُّ ‫ض ُفَا ل‬ ُ‫طئُ ُ ْال َحائل ل‬ ْ ‫ع ُ َو‬ ُ‫ن ُهُ َذا ُالنَّوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫َو لم‬
ُ‫ْض ُقلُْ ُهُ َُو ُاَذی ُفَا ْعت لَزلوا ُالن َسآ َُء ُفلی‬ ُ‫َن ُال َم لحی ل‬ ْ ُ‫للقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالی ُ{یَ ْسئَلوْ نَكَُ ُع ل‬
ْ
ُ‫ن ُ َحتی ُیَطهُرْ نَُ} ُ َوللهُ َذا ُقلنَا ُیَتَ َرتَّبُ ُاالاُحْ َکامُ ُعَلی‬ ْ َُّ ُ‫الَ ُتَ ْق َربوْ ه‬ ُ ‫ْض ُ َو‬ ُ‫ْال َم لحی ل‬
ُُ‫ل ُ َویَ ْثبت‬ ُ‫اطئُ ُ َوت لَحلُ ُ ْال َمرْ اُةُ ُللل َّزوْ ل‬
ُ‫ج ُاالاُ َّو ل‬ ‫صانُ ُ ُْال َو ل‬ َ ْ‫ئ ُفَیَ ْثبُتُ ُبل لُه ُالح‬ ُ‫ط ل‬ ْ ‫هُ َذا ُ ْال َو‬
ُ‫َاق‬
‫صد ل‬ َّ ‫ت ُع لَن ُالتَّ ْم لک ْی لن لُالَجْ لل ُال‬ ْ ‫بل لُه ُح ْکمُ ُ ْال َم ُْه لُر ُ َوال لع َُد لُة ُ َوالنَّفَُقَ لُة ُ َو ُلَوْ ُال ْمتَنَ َع‬
ُ َ‫َاشزَُةُُ لع ْن َُدهُ َماُفَالَُتَ ْست لَحقُالنَّ ْفُقَ ُة‬ ‫َتُن ل‬ ْ ‫َکان‬
Also from this category (of acts which are Qabeeh Li-
Ghairihi) is sexual relations with one's wife while she is
menstruating as the prohibition is a result of the (state of)
impurity (she is in) in accordance with the verse,
"They ask you (O Muhammed ) concerning menstruation.
Say, "It is impure so leave (intercourse with) women during
(their period of) menstruation and do not go unto them (do
not have sexual relations with your wives) until they are
cleansed (their menstrual cycle is complete)."
(Surah Baqarah: 222)
As a result of this (that sexual relations with one's wife during

menstruation is Qabeeh Li-Ghairihi) we say that the laws of
Shari'ah will apply to this sexual relations (during
menstruation) such that the marriage will be consummated,
she will become Halaal for her first husband (Halalah will
valid with this), the laws of Mehr, Iddah, and maintenance
will apply. If she refuses him permission for sexual
151
Usool Shaashi
intercourse (after indulging in sexual relations while
menstruating) because of her Mehr1 then she will be
regarded as Naashizah (disobedient) and she will not be
entitled to maintenance (because of her disobedience).
Prohibition does not prevent the laws from

applying
ُ‫ُو ُالوضوْ لء‬ َ ‫ض‬ ‫ُال َحائل ل‬ ْ ‫ق‬ ْ ‫ب‬

‫ُاالَحْ َک لام ُ َکطَ َال ل‬ َ ‫َو ُحرْ َُمةُ ُ ْالفلع لْل َُال ُتنَافل ْی ُتَ َرت‬
ُُ‫ْحُبل لسکیْنُ َم ْغصوْ ُبَة‬ ‫ُاالصْ لطیَا لدُبلقَوْ سُ َم ْغصوْ ُبَةُُ َوُال َّذب ل‬ ‫بل ْال لمیَا لُہُ ْال َم ْغصوْ ُبَ لُةُ َو ْ ل‬
‫ُو ْق ل‬
ُ‫ت ُالندَا لء ُفَا لُنَّهُ ُیَت ََرتَّب‬ ْ ‫ض ُ ْال َم ْغصوْ ُبَةُ ُ َو‬
َ ‫ُالبَی لْع ُفل ْی‬ ‫ُاالَرْ ل‬ ْ ‫َو ُالصَّلو لُة ُفلی‬
ْ َ‫تُ َم َعُال ْشتل َماُلل ُهَاُ َعل‬
ُ ‫یُالحرْ َُم لُة‬ ‫صرفَا ل‬ َ َّ‫ْالح ْکمُعَلیُهُ لُذ لُہُالت‬
An act being Haraam does not prevent its laws from
applying such as issuing of Talaaq while a woman is
menstruating (even though it is Haraam to do so the Talaaq
will still apply), performing Wudhu with illegally seized
water (even though usage of that water is Haraam, the Wudhu
will still be valid), hunting with an illegally seized bow (even
though it is Haraam to use that bow the animal hunted with it
will be Halaal when Tasmiyyah is recited), slaughtering with
an illegally seized knife (even though usage of that knife is
Haraam the animal slaughtered with it will be Halaal when
Tasmiyyah is recited), performance of Salaah on illegally
seized land (even though usage of that land is Haraam the
Salaah performed on it will be valid) and trade during the
time of Jumu'ah (even though trade is Haraam during this
time, the transaction will still be valid), as the ruling of these
actions will still apply despite them being prohibited.
1
The law is that a woman has the right to refuse her husband sexual intercourse until he hands
over her Mehr. However if she indulges in intercourse with him once without demanding her
Mehr then she does not have the right to deny him thereafter.
152
Usool Shaashi
َُّ ‫الَُتَ ْقبَلوْ اُلَهُ ُْمُ َش ُهَا َُدةُُاُبَداُ}ُال‬

ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫لُق ْلنَاُفل‬
ُ ‫یُقَوْ لل لُهُتَ َعالیُ{ َو‬ ُ‫ارُهُ َذاُاالاُصْ ل‬ ُ‫َُوُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬
ُْ ‫ی ُع‬
ُ‫َن‬ َُ ‫الن ُالنَّ ُْه‬
َُّ ُ ‫َّاق‬ ْ
ُ‫ل ُال َّش ُهَا َُد لُة ُفَیَ ْن َعقلدُ ُالن َکاحُ ُبل َش ُهَا لُد لُة ُالفس ل‬
ُ‫ن ُاَ ُْه ل‬ ُْ ‫ق ُ لم‬ َُ ‫اس‬‫ْالفَ ل‬
ُ‫ن ُال َّش ُهَا َُدلُة ُ َم َحالُ ُ َُو ُالنَّ َما ُلَ ُْم ُت ْقبَلُْ ُ َشهَادَتهُ ُْم ُللفَ َسادُ ُفلی‬ ُ‫ل ُال َّش ُهَا َُد لُة ُبلدوْ ل‬ُ‫قبوْ ل‬
ُ‫ك‬ َُّ ُ ُ‫الَ ُیَ لجبُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُهمُ ُالل َعان‬
َُ ‫الن ُذلل‬ ُ ُ ‫االادَا لُء ُالَلل َعد لَُم ُال َّش ُهَا َُد لُة ُاُصْ الُ ُ َُو ُعَلی ُهُ َذا‬
ُ‫الَُاَدَا َُءُ َم َُعُ ْال لفس ل‬
ُ ‫ْق‬ ُ ‫اَدَاءُُال َّش ُهَا َُد لُةُ َو‬
Based upon this principle (that prohibition does not prevent
the laws from applying and Nahy of Tasarrufaatish Shari'ah
requires the prohibited act still to be valid)) we say from the
verse,
}ُ‫الَُتَ ْقبَلوْ اُلَهُ ُْمُ َش ُهَا َُدةُُاُبَدا‬

ُ ‫{ َو‬
"And never accept their testimony (in a court hearing) ever
again." (Surah Noor: 4)
That a Faasiq (open sinner) can be a witness and a Nikaah

will be valid with the Fussaaq (open sinners) as witnesses as
the Nahy of accepting their testimony is impossible without
them being witnesses (in order for their testimony not to be
accepted we will have to accept that they have the right to be a
witness, only their testimony will not be accepted). The reason
why we will not accept their testimony is because of its
defect (there is doubt in their testimony because of their
perpetration of sin) and not because they are not eligible as
witnesses. Based upon this (that the testimony of open sinners
is not accepted because of doubt in their testimony and not that
they are not eligible as witnesses) Li'aan1 will not be Waajib
1
When a husband accuses his wife of unfaithfulness and she denies it, the Qaadhi will order
Li'aan to be performed whereby the husband will take an oath four times that he is true in what
he says and then say the curse (La'nat from which the word Li'aan is derived) of ALLAAH be
upon me if I am lying. Thereafter the wife will say four times that his accusation is false and
then say the curse of ALLAAH be upon me if he is speaking the truth. The Qaadhi will then
order them to be separated and a Talaaq Baa'inah will apply.
153
Usool Shaashi
upon them, as this is to give testimony and one cannot give
testimony if (deemed) a Faasiq.
Lesson on the method in which the implication

of speech is recognised
If a word has the meaning of Haqeeqat and

Majaaz
ُ ‫فصلُفیُتعریفُطریقُالمرادُبالنصوص‬
ُُ‫ن ُاللَّ ْفظَُ ُال َذا ُ َکانَُ ُ َحقل ْیُقَة‬
َُّ َ‫ص ُطرقاُ ُ لم ْن ُهَا ُا‬ ُ‫ْرُفَ لُة ُ ْالم َرا لُد ُبلالنصوْ ل‬ ‫ن ُلل َمع ل‬ َُّ َ‫ال ْعلَ ُْم ُا‬
ْ ْ
ُُ‫الُعلَ َمائنَاُاَلبل ْنتُُال َم ْخلوْ ُقَة‬ ْ
َُ َ‫لل َمعْنیُُ َُوُ َم َجازاُُآلخَ َُرُفَال َحقل ْیُقَةُُاُوْ لیُ لمثَالُهُ َماُق‬
ُُ‫َّحیْح‬ ‫ال ُال َّشافل لعیُ ُیَ لحلُ ُ َوالص ل‬ َُ َ‫ی ُُنل َکاح ُهَا ُ َوق‬ ُْ ‫ن ُ َمآ لُء ُالزنَا ُیَحْ رمُ ُ َعلَی ُال َّزانل‬ ُْ ‫لم‬
ُ‫تُ َعلَیْک ُْمُا َّم ُهَاتک ُْم‬ ُْ ‫َماُقلنَاُالنَّ ُهَاُبل ْنتُهُ َحقل ْیُقَةُُفَتَ ْدخلُُتَحْ تَُُقَوْ لل لُهُتَ َعالیُ{حر َم‬ ْ
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫ی ُ َووجوْ ل‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫ن ُ لحلُ ُال َوط لا‬ ُْ ‫ن ُ لم‬ُ‫َوبَنَاتک ُْم}ُ َویَتَفَرَّعُ ُ لم ْنهُ ُاالاُحْ َکامُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َم ْذ ُهَبَ ْی ل‬
ُ‫ج‬ُ‫َن ُ ْالخروْ ل‬ ُ‫ث ُ َُو ُ لوالَُیَ لُة ُ ْال َم ْن لُع ُع ل‬ ُ‫ان ُالتَّ َوار ل‬ ُ‫ْال َم ُْه لُر ُ َولزوْ لُم ُالنَّفَُقَ لُة ُ َو لجرْ یَ ل‬
‫َو ْالبروْ لُز‬
The method in which the implication of speech is

recognised are many, of which (the first method is) if a word
has one meaning of Haqeeqat and another of Majaaz then
it is better to practice on the meaning of Haqeeqat.
An example of this is what our Ulama (of the Hanafi School)

say that an illegitimate daughter (conceived by Zinaa) is
Haraam for the fornicator (illegitimate father) to marry,
whereas Imaam Shaafie  says it is permissible (for the
father to marry his illegitimate daughter). The correct view is
what we (the scholars of the Hanafi Madhab) have said
because she is his daughter in reality and will therefore be
included under the (prohibition of the) verse,
ُْ ‫{حر َم‬
}‫تُ َعلَیْک ُْمُا َّم ُهَاتک ُْمُ َوبَنَاتک ُْم‬
154
Usool Shaashi
"Forbidden for you are (it is Haraam for you to marry) your
mothers (and your grandmothers), your daughters (and your
granddaughters)." (Surah Nisaa: 23)
(Since an illegitimate daughter is still one's daughter in

reality it would be Haraam to marry her.) Based upon the
verdict, rulings are derived according to both Madhaahib
(as a result of the opposing verdicts of the Hanafi Madhab and
Shaafie Madhab the rulings differ) with regards to
permissibility of sexual relations (The Hanafi scholars say it
is impermissible because the Nikaah is invalid on account of
her being his daughter whereas Imaam Shaafie says that since
the Nikaah is valid, sexual relations will be permissible),
incumbency of Mehr and maintenance (the Hanafi scholars
say that Mehr and maintenance is not Waajib as the Nikaah is
invalid on account of her being his daughter whereas Imaam
Shaafie says it is Waajib as the Nikaah is valid), the right to
inherit (Imaam Shaafie says she will inherit as she is his wife
whereas Imaam Abu Hanifah says that she will not inherit
because she is not his wife as the Nikaah was invalid on
account of her being his daughter) and the right to prevent
her from leaving the home (Imaam Shaafie says he will have
the right to do so as she is his wife whereas Imaam Abu
Hanifah says that he will not have the right as the Nikaah is
invalid on account of her being his daughter).
If one meaning requires Takhsees and not the

other
ُ‫اآلخَر‬
ُ‫ل‬ ُ َُ‫صیْصا ُفلی ُالنَّصُ ُدوْ ن‬ ‫ب ُت َْخ ل‬ َُ ‫ْن ُال َذا ُاُوْ َج‬ ُ‫ح َُد ُ ْالمحْ تَ َملَی ل‬ َُّ ‫َو لم ْن ُهَا ُُا‬
َُ ‫ن ُا‬
ُ ْ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالی ُ{اَو‬
َُ‫ال‬ ُْ ‫ْص ُاُوْ لی ُ لمثَالُه ُفل‬ َُ ‫صی‬ ‫فَ ْال َح ْملُ ُعَلی ُ َماالَیَ ْست َْل لزمُ ُالت َّ ْخ ل‬
ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫اعُ َکانَُُالنَّصُُ َمعْموْ الُُبل لُهُفل‬ ُ‫تُ َعلَیُ ْال لوقَ ل‬ ُْ َ‫سةُُلَوْ ح لمل‬ َُ ‫َمسْتمُُالن َسآ َُء}ُفَ ْالمالَ َم‬
ُُ‫ت ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َمسُ ُبل ْالیَ لد َکانَُ ُالنَّصُ ُ َم ْخصوْ صا‬ ُْ َ‫َج لمی لُْع ُص َو لُر ُوجوْ لد لُہ ُ َُو ُلَوُْ ُح لمل‬
ُُ‫ْر لُة ُ لجدا َغیْر‬ َُ ‫ص لغی‬ ‫ن ُ َمسَُّ ُ ْال َم َح ل‬
َّ ‫ار لُم ُ َوالط ْفُلَ لُة ُال‬ َُّ ‫ی ُ َکثلیْرُ ُ لمنَُ ُالص َو لُر ُفَا ل‬ ُْ ‫بل لُه ُفل‬
155
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫الاحْ َکامُ ُ َعلَی‬ ُ ‫ی ُال َّشافل لعیُ ُ َویَتَفَرَّعُ ُ لم ْنهُ ُا‬ ُ‫صحُ ُقَوْ لَ ل‬ َ َ‫ی ُا‬ ُْ ‫نَاقلضُ ُلل ْلوض الُو ُفل‬
ُ‫ح لُة‬
َُّ ‫ص‬ ‫ل ُ ْال َمس ل‬
‫ْج لُد ُ َو ل‬ ُ‫ف ُ َُو ُدخوْ ل‬ُ‫اح لُة ُالصَّلو لُة ُ َو َمسُ ُ ْالمصْ َح ل‬ َُ َ‫ن ُالب‬ ُ‫ْال َم ْذ ُهَبَی ل‬
ُْ ‫ْن ُ لم‬
ُ ‫یُاَ ْثنَا لُءُالصَّلو لُة‬
ُْ ‫اال َما َُم لُةُ َُوُلزوْ لُمُالتَّیَم لُمُ لع ْن َُدُ َعد لَُمُ ْال َما لُءُ َوتَ َذک لُرُ ْال َمسُُفل‬
(The second method is) If a word which has two possible
meanings, with one requiring Takhsees (a part of its
constituents to be excluded) and not the other then it is better
to use the meaning of that which does not require
Takhsees.
An example of this is the verse,
ُ ْ‫{اَو‬
}‫الَُ َمسْتمُُالن َسآ َُء‬
"Or from touching (cohabiting) your wives." (Surah Nisaa: 43)
If the words 'Malaamasah' (touching) is said to refer to

sexual relations (cohabiting) then the verse can be practiced
upon in all instances it occurs but if we say 'Malaamasah'
refers to touching by hand then many instances will be
excluded (from this ruling) as touching one's female blood
relatives and infant girls will not break Wudhu according
to the more accurate view of Imaam Shaafie .
Based upon the verdict, rulings are derived according to

both Madhaahib (as a result of the opposing verdicts of the
Hanafi Madhab and Shaafie Madhab the rulings differ) with
regards to permissibility(after having touched a woman by
hand) of Salaah (Imaam Abu Hanifah says that Salaah is
permissible as he is still in a state of Wudhu whereas Imaam
Shaafie says it is impermissible as touching a woman by hand
breaks Wudhu), touching the Quraan (Imaam Abu Hanifah
says that it is permissible as he is still in a state of Wudhu
whereas Imaam Shaafie says it is impermissible as touching a
woman by hand breaks Wudhu),entering the Masjid(Imaam
Abu Hanifah says that entering the Masjid will be permissible
without any Karaahat as he is still in a state of Wudhu whereas
156
Usool Shaashi
Imaam Shaafie says it will be Makruh to enter the Masjid as
touching a woman by hand breaks Wudhu), permissibility of
Imaamat (Imaam Abu Hanifah says that it will be permissible
for him to be Imaam as he is still in a state of Wudhu whereas
Imaam Shaafie says it is impermissible as touching a woman
by hand breaks Wudhu), compulsion of Tayammum if water
is not available (Imam Abu Hanifah says that Tayammum will
not be compulsory on him if water is not available as he is still
in a state of Wudhu whereas Imaam Shaafie says that
Tayammum will be compulsory on him if water is not available
as his Wudhu has broken by touching a woman by hand) and
remembering touching the woman during Salaah (if a
person remembers during Salaah or after Salaah that he
touched a woman by hand earlier the according to Imaam
Shaafie he needs to perform Wudhu again and repeat that
Salaah as Wudhu breaks when touching a woman by hand
whereas Imaam Abu Hanifah says since wudhu does not break
by touching there is no need to repeat the Salaah).
If a word has two different forms of recitation
ُ‫ْن ُ َکانَُ ُ ْال َع َملُ ُبل لُه ُعَلی‬ َُ ‫ْن ُاوُْ ُر لو‬
ُ‫ی ُبل َر َوایَتَی ل‬ َُ‫ن ُالنَّصَُّ ُال َذا ُق لر ا‬
ُ‫ی ُبلقل َراُئَتَی ل‬ َُّ ‫َو لم ْن ُهَا ُُا‬
َُ ‫یُقَوْ لل لُهُتَ َعالیُ{ َواَرْ جلَک ُْم}ُق لر‬
ُ‫ئ‬ ُْ ‫ْنُاَوْ لیُ لمثَالُهُفل‬ ُ‫َوجْ هُُیَکوْ نُُ َع َمالُُبل ْال َوجْ ُهَی ل‬
ُ‫َطفاُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َم ْمسوْ ل‬
ُْ َ‫ح ُفَح لمل‬
ُ‫ت‬ ْ ‫ض ُع‬ ُ‫ل ُ َوبل ْالخَ ْف ل‬ ُ‫َطفاُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َم ْغسوْ ل‬ ْ ‫ب ُع‬ ُ‫بلالنَّصْ ل‬
ُ‫بُعَلیُ َحاُلَ لُةُ َعد لَُمُالتَّخَ ف ل‬
ُ‫ف‬ ُ‫فُ َوقل َرا َُءةُُالنَّصْ ل‬ ُ‫ضُعَلیُ َحاُلَ لُةُالتَّخَ ف ل‬ ُ‫قل َرا َُءةُُ ْالخَ ُْف ل‬
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫ْحُثَبَتَُُبل ْال لکتَا ل‬ ُ‫الُ ْالبَعْضُُ َج َوازُُ ْال َمس ل‬ َُ َ‫ارُهُ َذاُ ْال َمعْنیُق‬ ُ‫َوبلا ْعتلبَ ل‬
If a word is recited in two different forms of recitation or (a
Hadeeth) reported in two different chains of narration (such
that they differ slightly) then practicing on it in a manner
whereby both recitations or chains of narration is practised
upon is best.
An example of this is the verse,
157
Usool Shaashi
"(and wash) your feet up to (and including) your ankles."

(Surah Maa'idah: 6)
The word "feet" is reported (in one form of recitation) with

a Nasab ( ‫ )اَرْ جلَك ُْم‬attached to Ghusal (meaning one should
wash one's feet up to the ankles) and (in another recitation it is
reported) with a Kasra (ُ‫ )اَرْ جللك ْم‬attached to Masah (meaning
that one should make Masah of one's feet up to the ankles).
Thus the recitation with a Kasra applies when one is
wearing Khuffain (leather socks) and the recitation with
Nasab applies when one is not wearing Khuffain (and in this
manner we practice on both forms of recitation). As a result of
this (interpretation) some (scholars) have said that the
permissibility of Masah (on leather socks) is proven by the
Quraan.
Example Two
ُُ‫ْف ُفَی ْع َمل‬ ُ‫ئ ُبلالتَّ ْش لد ْی لُد ُ َُو ُالتَّ ْخفلی ل‬ َُ ‫طهرُْنَُ} ُق لر‬ ْ َ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُقَوْ لُه ُتَ َعالی ُ{ َحتی ُی‬
ُ‫ْف ُفل ْی َما ُال َذا ُ َکانَُ ُاَیَّام ُهَا ُدوْ نَُ ُ ْال َع َش َُر لُة ُ َُو ُبلقل َرا َُء لُة ُالتَّ ْش لد ْی لُد ُفل ْی َما‬
ُ‫بلقل َرا َُء لُة ُالتَّ ْخفلی ل‬
ُ‫ال َذاُ َکانَُُایَّام ُهَاُدوْ نَُُ ْال َع َش َُر لُة‬
In a similar manner (as the example mentioned above) the
verse,
ْ َ‫{ َحتیُی‬
}َُ‫طهرُْن‬
"(and do not have sexual relations with your menstruating
wives) until they are cleansed." (Surah Baqarah: 222)
The word "Cleansed" is recited with a Tashdeed ( َُ‫) یَطَّهَّرْ ن‬

ْ َ‫) ی‬, thus we will act upon the recitation
and a Saakin1( َُ‫طهرْ ن‬
1
The recitation with Tashdeed implies complete purification and would mean that sexual
relations with one's wife after her period of menstruation is only permissible after she performs
Ghusal and the recitation with Saakin merely implies to become purified and would mean that
158
Usool Shaashi
with Saakin if her period of menstruation was ten days
(making sexual relations permissible with her even if she has
not yet performed Ghusal) and we will act upon the
recitation with Tashdeed if her period of menstruation was
less than ten days (such that sexual relations will only be
permissible after she performs Ghusal).
ُ‫ن ُ َع َش َُر لُة ُاُیَّامُ ُلَ ُْم‬ ُْ ‫ل ُ لم‬َُّ َ‫ْض ُالق‬ ُ‫الحی ل‬ َ ُ ُ‫ال ُاُصْ َحابنَا ُال َذا ُا ْنقَطَ َُع ُدَم‬ َُ َ‫َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق‬
ُُْ‫الُ َولَو‬ ُ‫اال ْغتل َس ل‬ ‫ار لُةُیَ ْثبتُُبل ْ ل‬ َُ َ‫الُالطَّ ُه‬ َُ ‫النُ َک َم‬ َُّ ُ‫ل‬ َُ ‫ضُ َحتیُتَ ْغت لَس‬ ُ‫طئُُ ْال َحائل ل‬ ْ ‫یَج ُْزُ َو‬
َُُ‫ار لُة ُثَبَت‬ َُ َ‫ق ُالطَّ ُه‬ َُ َ‫طل‬ ْ ‫ن ُم‬ ُ‫ْل ُ ْالغس ل‬
َُّ َ‫ْل ُ لال‬ َُ ‫طئ ُهَا ُقَب‬ ْ ‫ال ْنقَطَ َُع ُدَم ُهَا ُلل َع َش َُر لُة ُاَیَّامُ ُ َجا َُز ُ َو‬
ُ‫ت‬ ُ‫آخ لُر ُ َو ْق ل‬ ‫یُ ل‬ ُْ ‫ْض ُلل َع َش َُر لُة ُاَی َّامُ ُفل‬ ُ‫اع ُال َّد لُم َوللهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُا ْنقَطَ َُع ُدَمُ ُ ْال َحی ل‬ ُ‫بلا ل ْنقلطَ ل‬
ُُ‫َار ُ َما ُتَ ْغت لَسل‬ َُ ‫ت ُ لم ْقد‬ ُ‫ق ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ َُ ‫ن ُلَ ُْم ُیَ ْب‬ ُْ ‫ت ُ َوال‬ُ‫ْضةُ ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ َُ ‫الصَّلو لُة ُت َْلزَ م ُهَا ُفَ لری‬
ُ‫ی‬ َُ ‫ن ُبَقل‬ُْ ‫ت ُالصَّلو لُة ُال‬ ُ‫آخ لُر ُ َو ْق ل‬ ‫یُ ل‬ ُْ ‫ن ُ َع َش َُر لُة ُاَیَّامُ ُفل‬ ُْ ‫ل ُ لم‬ َُّ َ‫فل ْی لُه ُ َولَ لُو ُا ْنقَطَ َُع ُدَم ُهَا ُ لالَق‬
َُّ ‫ال‬
ُ ‫ْضةُ ُ َُو ُال‬ َُ ‫َار ُ َما ُتَ ْغت لَسلُ ُفل ْی لُه ُ َُو ُتحْ لرمُ ُلللصَّلو لُة ُلَ لز َم ْت ُهَا ُ ْالفَ لری‬ َُ ‫ت ُ لم ْقد‬ُ‫لمنَُ ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬
ُ َ‫ف‬
َ‫ال‬
Based upon this (that we will act upon the recitation with
Saakin if her period of menstruation was ten days and we will
act upon the recitation with Tashdeed if her period of
menstruation was less than ten days) our scholars (of the
Hanafi Madhab) say that if her period of menstruation is
less than ten days, sexual relations will not be permissible
unless she performs Ghusal because complete purification
is attained with Ghusal; and if her period of menstruation
is ten days then sexual relations will be permissible without
Ghusal because coming pure is established when her period
(of menstruation) ends.
Because of this we say that if her period of menstruation is

ten days and ends in the last portion of the Salaah time, the
sexual relations with one's wife after her period of menstruation is permissible even if she has
not yet performed Ghusal.
159
Usool Shaashi
Salaah (of that time) will be Fardh upon her even if there is
not sufficient time to perform Ghusal (as she has attained
purity in accordance with the recitation with Saakin) but if her
period of menstruation is less than ten days and ends in the
last portion of Salaah time then if there is sufficient time
for her to perform Ghusal and say the Takbeer Tahreemah
the Salaah will be Fardh upon her, if not (if there is not
sufficient time to perform Ghusal and say the Takbeer
Tahreemah) then it (the Salaah of that time) will not (be
Fardh on her).
Weak methods in which the implication of

speech is recognised
ُ‫ض لُع‬ ‫ض لع ْیُفَ لُة ُللیَکوْ نَُ ُذللكَُ ُتَ ْنبلیْهاُ ُعَلی ُ َم َوا ل‬ َّ ‫ت ُال‬ ُ‫ث َُّم ُن َْذکرُ ُطرقاُ ُ لمنَُ ُالت َّ َمس َکا ل‬
ُ‫صلَّی ُللاُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬ َ ُ ُ‫َن ُالنَّبلی‬
ُ‫ی ُع ل‬َُ ‫ن ُالتَّ َمسكَُ ُبل َمار لو‬ َُّ ُ‫ع ُ لم ْن ُهَا ُا‬
ُ‫ی ُهُ َذا ُالنَّوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ل ُفل‬ُ‫ْالخَ لَ ل‬
ُ‫ن ُ ْاالَثَ َُر‬َُّ َ‫ض لعیْفُ ُ لال‬
َ ُ ُ‫ْئ ُ َغیْرُ ُنَاقلض‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْالقَی‬ ُ‫ضُْاُ ل لال ْثبَا ل‬
َُّ َ‫ت ُا‬ َّ ‫َو َسلَّ َُم ُاُُنَّه ُقَا َُء ُفَلَ ُْم ُیَت ََو‬
ُ‫الَ ُ لخالَفَُ ُفل ْی لُه ُ َُو ُالنَّ َما‬
ُ ‫ال ُ َو‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫الَ ُیوْ لجبُ ُالوضوُْ َُء ُفل ل‬
ُ‫ی ُال َح ل‬ ُ َ ُ ُْ‫ن ُ ْالقَئ‬ َُّ َ‫یَدلُ ُعَلی ُا‬
ُ ُ‫یُ َکوْ نل لُهُنَاقلضا‬ ُْ ‫ْال لخالَفُُفل‬
We will now discuss weak methods (i.e. it is considered weak
according to the Hanafi school of thought) in which the
implication of speech was recognised so that the flaws of
this method of deduction can be recognised.
(The first example is) Deducing from what has been reported
that Rasulullaah  vomited and did not perform Wudhu
that vomiting does not break Wudhu is weak because the
narration (only) establishes that Wudhu is not Waajib
immediately, in which there is no difference of opinion, but
the difference of opinion is in whether vomiting breaks
Wudhu (and this narration does not establish that it does not
break Wudhu as it is possible that it did break Wudhu and
Rasulullaah  made Wudhu much later).
160
Usool Shaashi
Example Two
ُ‫ت ُفَ َسا لُد ُ ْال َما لُء‬ُ‫ت ُ َعلَیْکمُ ُ ْال َم ْیُتَةُ ُ ل لال ْثبَا ل‬
ُْ ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُالتَّ َمسكُ ُبلقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالی ُحر َم‬
ُ‫الَُ لخالَفَُُفل ْی لُهُ َوالنَّ َما‬ُ ‫نُالنَّصَُُّی ْثبلتُُحرْ َُم ُةَُ ْال َم ْیُتَ لُةُ َو‬
َُّ َ‫ض لعیْفُُ لال‬ َ ُ‫ب‬ ُ‫تُالذبَا ل‬ُ‫بل َموْ ل‬
ْ ُْ ‫ْال لخالَفُُفل‬
ُ ُ‫یُفَ َسا لُدُال َما لُء‬
In a similar manner (to the weak deduction mentioned above)
is deducing from the verse,
"Forbidden for you (to eat) is Mayta (carrion)."

(Surah Maa'idah: 3)
that water becomes impure by a fly dying in it is weak

because the verse (only) establishes that Mayta is Haraam,
in which there is no difference of opinion, but the difference
of opinion is in the impurity of water (which is not proven by
this verse).
Example Three
ُ‫ص ْی لُه ُث َُّم ُا ْغ لسلل ْی لُه ُبل ْال َما لُء‬

‫َوکذلكَُ ُالتَّ َمسكُ ُبقوْ ل لُه ُعلیه ُالسالمُ ُحت ْی لُه ُث َُّم ُا ْقر ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ُ‫بُ َغ ْس ل‬ َُ ْ‫یُوجو‬ ُْ ‫ض‬ ‫النُ ْالخَ بَ َُرُیَ ْقتَ ل‬
َُّ ُُ‫ض لعیْف‬ َ ُ‫س‬ َُ ‫الَُی لزیْلُُالنَّ َج‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ َُّ َ‫نُ ْالخ‬َُّ َ‫تُا‬ ْ
ُ‫الثبَا ل‬
ُ‫الَ ُ لخالَفَُ ُفل ْی لُه ُ َُو ُالنَّ َما‬ ُ ‫ال ُوجوْ لُد ُال َّد لُم ُعَلی ُ ْال َم َحلُ ُ َو‬ ُ‫ال َّد لُم ُبل ْال َمآ لُء ُفَیَتَقَیَّدُ ُبل َح ل‬
ُ‫الُال َّد لُمُبل ْالخَ ل‬
ُ‫ار لُةُ ْال َم َحلُُبَ ْع َُدُزَ َو ل‬
َُ َ‫یُطَ ُه‬ ُْ ‫ْال لخالَفُُفل‬
is deducing from the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "Rub it (the
clothes soiled with blood of menstruation), then scratch it,
then wash it with water" that vinegar does not purify
impurity is weak because the Hadeeth (only) establishes
161
Usool Shaashi
that it is Waajib to wash the blood with water and applies
as long as the blood still remains on the item, in which
there is no difference of opinion. The difference of opinion
is whether the item will be purified after the blood is
removed with vinegar (regarding which the Hadeeth makes
no mention).
Example Four
ُ‫از‬
ُ‫تُ َعد لَُمُ َج َو ل‬ ْ ُُ‫یُاُرْ بَ لعیْنَُُ َشاةُُ َشاة‬
ُ‫الثبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫َو َکذللكَُُالتَّ َمسكُُبلقَوْ لل لُهُ َعلَ ْی لُهُال َّسالَمُُفل‬
ُ ‫ب ُال َّشا لُة ُ َو‬
ُ‫الَ ُ لخالَفَُ ُفل ْی لُه ُ َُو ُالنَّ َما‬ َُ ْ‫ی ُوجو‬ ُْ ‫َض‬‫ض لعیْفُ ُالُنَّه ُیَ ْقت ل‬ َ ُ ‫َد ْف لُع ُ ْالقل ْی َُم لُة‬
‫بُبل ادَا لُءُ ْالقل ْی َُم لُة‬ ‫طُ ْال َو ل‬
ُ‫اج ل‬ ُ‫یُسقوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ْال لخالَفُُفل‬
is deducing from the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "For every
forty sheep (owned), a sheep (is waajib as Zakaat)" that it is
impermissible to give the price of the sheep (as Zakaat) is
weak because it (only) establishes that a sheep is Waajib (as
Zakaat for every forty sheep one owns) in which there is no
difference of opinion, but he difference of opinion is in
whether one will be absolved of the Waajib (will the Zakaat
be fulfilled) if the price is given (regarding which the Hadeeth
makes no mention).
Example Five
ُ‫ب‬
ُ‫ت ُوجوْ ل‬ ُ‫الثبَا ل‬ْ ُ}‫ِل‬ ُ ‫ج ُ َو ْالع ْم َُر ُةَ ُ ل‬َُّ ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُالتَّ َمسكُ ُبلقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالی ُ{ َواَتلموا ُ ْال َح‬
ُ‫ام ُ َو َکذللكَُ ُالنَّ َما‬ ُ‫ب ُاال ْت َم ل‬ َُ ْ‫ی ُوجو‬ ُْ ‫ض‬ ‫الن ُالنَّصَُّ ُیَ ْقتَ ل‬
َُّ ُ ُ‫ض لعیْف‬ َ ُ ُ‫ْالع ْم َُر لُة ُال ْبتلدَاء‬
ُ ُ‫یُوجوْ بل ُهَاُال ْبتلدَاء‬ ُْ ‫الَُ لخالَفَُُفل ْی لُهُ َُوُالنَّ َماُ ْال لخالَفُُفل‬
ُ ‫عُ َو‬ ُ‫یَکوْ نُُبَ ْع َُدُالشروْ ل‬
is deducing from the verse,
"Complete the Hajj and Umrah for (the pleasure of)
ALLAAH" (Surah Baqarah: 196)
162
Usool Shaashi
That Umrah is Waajib from the beginning (that it is Waajib

upon a person to perform Umrah once in his lifetime) is weak
because this verse (only) establishes that it is Waajib to
complete Umrah which only applies after one has begun
(performing Umrah), in which there is no difference of
opinion, the difference is in whether it is Waajib from the
beginning (regarding which the Hadeeth makes no mention).
Example six
َُ‫ال‬ ُ‫الَ ُتَبلیْعوا ُالدرْ ُهَ َُم ُبلالدرْ ُهَ َمی ل‬

ُ ‫ْن ُ َو‬ ُ ُ :‫َُو َکذللكَُ ُالتَّ َمسكُ ُبلقَوْ لل لُه ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَم‬
َُّ ُ ُ‫ض لعیْف‬
ُ‫الن‬ ْ ْ
َ ُ َُ‫الَ ُیفلیْدُ ُال لملك‬ ‫ن ُ ْالبَ ْی َُع ُ ْالفَ ل‬
ُ ُ ‫اس َُد‬ َُّ َ‫ت ُا‬ ْ ُ ‫ْن‬
ُ‫الثبَا ل‬ ُ‫ع ُبلالصَّا َعی ل‬ َُ ‫الصَّا‬
ُ‫ی‬ ْ
ُْ ‫الَ ُ لخالَفَُ ُفَ ْی لُه ُ َُو ُالن َّ َما ُال لخالَفُ ُفل‬
ُ ‫اس لُد ُ َو‬ ْ ْ
‫ی ُتَحْ لر ْی َُم ُالبَی لُْع ُالفَ ل‬ ْ
‫النَّصَُّ ُیَقت ل‬
ُْ ‫َض‬
ُ‫تُ ْال لم ْل ل‬
‫كُ َو َع َد لم لُه‬ ُ‫ثبوُْ ل‬
deducing from the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah, "Do not sell one
dirham for two dirhams or (the contents of) one Sa'a
(measuring utensil) for (the contents of) two Sa'a that Bay'a
Faasid (invalid sales transaction) does not cause transfer of
ownership is weak because the Hadeeth (only) establishes
the prohibition of Bay'a Faasid, in which there is no
difference of opinion, whereas the difference of opinion is
in whether ownership is established (for the buyer) or not
(regarding which the Hadeeth makes no mention).
Example Seven
163
Usool Shaashi
ُُ‫َّامُفَالنَّ ُهَاُاَیَّام‬
ُ‫الای ل‬
ُ ‫یُهُ لذلُہُا‬ُْ ‫الَُتَصوْ موْ اُفل‬ ُ َُ‫ال‬ ُ َ‫َو َکذللكَُُالتَّ َمسكُُبلقَوْ لل لُهُ َعلَ ْی لُهُال َّسالَمُا‬
ُُ‫ض لعیْف‬ َ ُ ُ‫صح‬ َ ‫ن ُالنَّ ْذ َُر ُبل‬
‫صوْ لُم ُیَوْ لُم ُالنَّحْ لُر ُالَیَ ل‬ َُّ َ‫ت ُا‬ ُ‫الثبَا ل‬ ْ ُ ُ‫اَ ْکلُ ُ َُو ُشرْ بُ ُ َُو ُبل َعال‬
ُ ُُ‫یُ َکوْ نل لُهُ َح َراما‬ ُْ ‫الَُ لخالَفَُُفل‬ ُ ‫لُ َو‬ ُ‫یُحرْ َُم ُةَُ ْالفل ُْع ل‬ ‫النُالنَّصَُُّیَ ْقت ل‬
ُْ ‫َض‬ َُّ
deducing from the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "Verily, do not
fast in these days (10, 11, 12, 13 Dhul-Hijjah) as they are
days of eating, drinking and intimacy" that making a vow
to fast on the day of Nahr (10 Dhul-Hijjah) is invalid, is
weak because the verse (only) establishes prohibition of
fasting, in which there is no difference of opinion, whereas
the difference of opinion is whether the laws (which govern
that act) will still apply even though an act is Haraam
(regarding which the Hadeeth makes no mention).
ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫الَُتنَافل‬
ُ ُ‫ْل‬ ُ‫امُ َم َُعُ َکوْ نل لُهُ َح َراماُُ َُوُحرْ َُمةُُ ْالفلع ل‬ ُ‫یُالفَا َُد لُةُاالاَحْ َک ل‬ ُْ ‫َُوُالنَّ َماُ ْال لخالَفُُفل‬
ُ‫ارُیَ ُةَ ُا ْبنل لُه ُیَکوْ نُ ُ َح َراماُ ُ َویَ ْثبتُ ُبل لُه‬
‫ب ُُلَو ُا ْستَوْ لَ َُد ُ َج ل‬ َُ ُ‫ن ُاالا‬ َُّ ‫ام ُفَا ل‬
ُ‫ب ُاالاُحْ َک ل‬ َُ ‫ت ََرت‬
ْ ْ
ُُ‫حُ َشاةُُبل لسکیْنُُ َم ْغصوْ ُبَةُُیَکوْ نُُ َح َراماُُ َُوُیَ لحلُُال َمذبوْ ح‬ َُ َ‫بُ َُوُلَوُُْ َذب‬ ُ‫ْال لم ْلكُُللالاُ ل‬
ُُ‫طهرُُبل لُهُالثَّوْ ب‬ ْ َ‫سُبل َماءُُ َم ْغصوْ بُُیَکوْ نُُ َح َراماُُ َُوُی‬ َُ ‫بُالنَّ لج‬ َُ ْ‫لُالثَّو‬ َُ ‫َُوُلَوُُْ َغ َس‬
ُُ‫صان‬ ْ
َ ْ‫ْض ُیَکوْ نُ ُ َح َراماُ ُ َویَثبتُ ُبل لُه ُالح‬ ْ
ُ‫ی ُ َحاُلَ لُة ُال َحی ل‬ ُْ ‫ی ُال ْم َراُةُ ُفل‬ ُ‫َُو ُلَوُْ ُ َو لط ا‬
ُ‫یُ َویَ ْثبتُُال لحلُُللل َّزوْ ل‬
ُ‫جُاالاُ َّو ل‬
‫ل‬ ْ ُْ ‫اط‬‫ْال َو ل‬
An act being Haraam does not prevent the laws (which
govern that act) from applying. (For example) If a father
impregnates the female slave of his son, the act is Haraam
but ownership will be established for the father (and he will
pay the price of the slave to his son). (Another example is) If a
person slaughters a sheep with an unlawfully seized knife
then using the knife will be Haraam but the animal will be
Halaal (if he recited Tasmiyyah when slaughtering). (Another
example is) If a person washes his clothes with unlawfully
seized water then the using the knife will be Haraam but
the clothes will be purified. (Another example is) If a person
has sexual relations with his wife while she is menstruating,
164
Usool Shaashi
then the act will be Haraam but (the laws related to sexual
relations will still apply such as) the marriage will be
considered as consummated and permissibility (to marry)
will be established for the first husband (who gave her three
Talaaq).
Lesson on Huroof-Ma'aani
The letter '‫'و‬
‫فصلَّفیَّتقريرَّالحروفَّالمعانی‬
ُ‫ب‬ َُّ ‫ن ُال َّشافل لع‬
ُ‫ی ُ َج َعلَهُ ُلللتَّرْ تل ْی ل‬
َُ ‫ب ُ َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُاُوْ َج‬ َُّ ‫ْل ُال‬ ْ ‫اَ ْل َواوُ ُلل ْل َج ْم ُع ُ ْالم‬
ُ‫طلَ ل‬
َُ ‫ق ُ َوقلی‬ ‫ل‬
‫بُ ْالوضو لُء‬ ُ‫یُبَا ل‬ َُ ‫التَّرْ تلی‬
ُْ ‫ْبُفل‬
165
Usool Shaashi
The letter '‫'و‬is used for Mutlaq Jam'a (to link or connect
various words together to the same ruling without any
sequence or order) and it has been said that Imaam
Shaafie‫عليه َّالرحمة‬says it denotes Tarteeb (sequence, which
would mean that the sequence in which the word were
connected needs to be observed) because of which Tarteeb in
Wudhu (to make wudhu in the same sequence as mentioned in
the Quraan) is Waajib (according to Imaam Shaafie as
opposed to Imaam Abu Hanifah who says it is Sunnat).
ُ‫ت‬ُْ ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُفَ َکلَّ ْم‬ ُ‫ت ُزَ یْداُ ُ َو َع ْمروا ُفَُا ْن ل‬ ُ‫ن ُ َکلَّ ْم ل‬ ُْ ‫ال ُال ْم َراتل لُه ُال‬َُ َ‫ال ُعلَ َماوُنَا ُال َذا ُق‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
ُ‫ل‬َُ ‫ارُنَ لُةُ َُوُلَوُُْقَا‬َ َ‫بُ َُوُ ْالمق‬ ُ‫الَُیَ ْشت لَرطُُفل ْی لُهُ َم ْعنَیُالتَّرْ تل ْی ل‬ ُ ‫تُ َو‬ُْ َ‫َع ْمرواُث َُّمُ َزیْداُُطلق‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫ت ُالثَّانلُیَ ُةَ ُث َُّم ُ َدخَ لَ ل‬ ُ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُفَ َدخَ لَ ل‬ ُ‫ار ُفَا َ ْن ل‬َُ ‫ار ُ َو ُهُ لذلُہ ُال َّد‬ ُ‫ن ُ َدخَ ْل ل‬
َُ ‫ت ُهُ لذ لُہ ُال َّد‬ ُْ ‫ال‬
ُ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُتطَلَّقُ ُفلی‬ ُ‫ار ُ َو ُُا ْن ل‬ ُ‫ن ُ َدخَ ْل ل‬
َُ ‫ت ُال َّد‬ َُ َ‫ال ُم َح َّمدُ ُال َذا ُق‬
ُْ ‫ال ُال‬ َُ َ‫ت ُق‬ ُْ َ‫االاُوْ لی ُطلق‬
ُُ‫ل ُ َویَکوْ ن‬ ُ‫الَ ُقُ ُبل لُه ُ َعلَی ُالدخوْ ل‬ ُ َ‫ب ُالط‬ َُ َّ‫ال ُ َولَوُْ ُال ْقتَضی ُذللكَُ ُتَرْ تلیْباُ ُلَت ََرت‬ ُ‫ْال َح ل‬
ُ‫الَُتَ ْن لجیْزا‬
ُ ُُ‫ذللكَُُتَ ْعللیْقا‬
Our Ulama (of the Hanafi Madhab) say that if a person tells
his wife, "If you talk to Zaid and Amr then you are
divorced" and she talks to Amr first then to Zaid, the
Talaaq will apply and the meaning of Tarteeb (sequence)
Maqaaranah (simultaneity) will not apply (thus the Talaaq
will apply whether she talks to Amr first then Zaid and even if
she talks to them separately and not together simultaneously).
(Similarly) If a person says (to his wife) "If you enter this
house and this house, then you are divorced" and she then
enters the second house (which he indicated) first and then
the first house, the Talaaq will apply (regardless of which
house was enters first and even if it they were not entered
consecutively). Imaam Muhammedsays that if a person
says (to his wife) "If you enter this house and you are
divorced" then a Talaaq will apply immediately (even if she
166
Usool Shaashi
does not enter the house). If the letter '‫ 'و‬denoted Tarteeb
then the Talaaq would depend on entrance (into that house)
making it conditional and not immediate (and no one is of
the opinion that it has been used here to denote condition).
The letter '‫ 'و‬sometimes denotes Haal
ُ‫ال ُ َُو ُ لح ْینَئلذُ ُتفلیْدُ ُ َم ْعنَی‬ُ‫ال ُ َو لذی ُ ْال َح ل‬ ُ‫ال ُفَتَجْ َمعُ ُبَیْنَُ ُ ْال َح ل‬
ُ‫َوقَ ُْد ُیَکوْ نُ ُ ْال َواوُ ُلل ْل َح ل‬
ُُ‫یُاَ ْلفاُُ َواَ ْنتَُُحر‬ َُّ َ‫الُلل َع ْب لد لُہُاَدُُُالل‬
َُ َ‫نُال َذاُق‬ُ‫الُم َح َّمدُُفلیُ ْال َم اذوْ ل‬ َُ َ‫طُ لمثَالهُُ َماُق‬ ُ‫ال َّشرْ ل‬
ُُ‫ال ُاال َمام‬َُ َ‫ْر ُال َذا ُق‬ ُ‫ال ُم َح َّمدُ ُفلی ُالسیَ لُر ُ ْال َکبلی ل‬ َُ َ‫یَکوْ نُ ُاالادَاءُ ُشَرْ طاُ ُلل ْلحرُیَ لُة ُ َوق‬
ُ‫ن ُ ْالفَ ْت ل‬
َُ َ‫ح ُ َُو ُلَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫ال‬ ْ
ُ‫الَ ُیَ ا َمنوْ نَُ ُبلدوْ ل‬ َُ َ‫ار ُال ْفتَحوا ُ ْالب‬
ُ ُ َُ‫اب ُ َُو ُاَ ْنت ُْم ُا لمنوْ ن‬ ُ‫لل ْلکفَّ ل‬
ُ‫نُالنزوْ ل‬
‫ل‬ ْ
ُ‫الَُیَ ا َمنُُبلدوْ ل‬ ُ ُُ‫لل ْل َحرْ بلیُُاَ ْن لزلُُْ َُوُاُ ْنتَُُا لمن‬
Sometimes the letter '‫ 'و‬denotes Haal (situation or state)
such that it (the letter '‫ )'و‬will combine the Haal (situation or
state) with the Dhil Haal (the person or object whose situation
or state is being described) and then (when the '‫ 'و‬denotes
Haal) it will support the meaning of condition (in this case
the '‫ 'و‬will denote that the subsequent clause is a precondition
for the application of the ruling). An example of this (where
'‫ 'و‬denotes Haal and will support the meaning of condition) is a
Ma'thoon (a slave who has been given permission to trade by
his master) when his master says to him, "Pay me one
thousand and you are free". Payment of the thousand will
be a condition for his freedom (and he will not be set free
immediately).
Imaam Muhammed has written in 'As-Siyarul Kabeer', "If

the leader of the Muslims says to the Kuffaar, "Open the
door and you are granted sanctuary", they will not be
granted sanctuary without opening the door (as opening the
door is a condition for sanctuary). If he says to an enemy
combatant, "Come down and you are granted sanctuary",
167
Usool Shaashi
he will only be granted sanctuary he comes down (as
coming down is a condition for sanctuary).
Two conditions for the letter '‫ 'و‬to denote Haal
ُ‫ال ُاللَّ ْف ل‬
ُ‫ظ‬ ُ‫ن ُالحْ تل َم ل‬ ُ‫ْق ُ ْال َم َج ل‬
ُ َ‫از ُف‬
ُْ ‫الَ ُب َُّد ُ لم‬ ُ‫ال ُبلطَ لری ل‬ ُ‫َُو ُالنَّ َما ُتحْ َملُ ُ ْال َواوُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َح ل‬
َُُ‫یُاَ ْلفاُُ َُوُاَ ْنت‬ َُّ َ‫لُ ْال َموْ لیُلل َع ْب لد لُہُاَدُُالل‬ ُ‫یُقَوْ ل‬ُْ ‫ذُللكَُُ َُوُقلیَامُُال َّدالَل لُةُعَلیُثبوْ تل لُهُ َک َماُفل‬
ُ‫ن ُ ْال َموْ لی‬ َُّ ‫ت ُال َّدالَلةُ ُعَلی ُ َذللكَُ ُفَا ل‬ ُ‫ل ُاالادَا لُء ُ َوقَا َم ل‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْالحرُیَّ ُةَ ُیَتَ َحقَّقُ ُ َحا‬
َُّ ‫حرُ ُفَا ل‬
َُ ‫حُالتَّ ْعللیْقُُبل لُهُفَح لم‬
ُ‫ل‬ َُّ ‫ص‬ َ ُ‫امُالرقُُفل ْی لُهُ َوقَ ُْد‬ ُ‫الَُیَ ْستَوْ لجبُُعَلیُ َع ْب لد لُہُ َماالُُ َم َُعُقلیَ ل‬ ُ
ْ‫َعلَی لُه‬
The letter '‫ 'و‬denotes Haal as Majaaz (i.e. it is not the literal
meaning of'‫ )'و‬thus it is necessary (two conditions are
necessary) that the word must support the meaning (the
meaning of Haal) and proof must exist that the meaning of
Majaaz is implied, as in the statement of the master to his
servant, "Pay me one thousand and you are free" where
freedom is acquired when payment is made. (The two
conditions are present here as) Proof exists that Majaaz is
implied as the master cannot make a thousand incumbent
upon the slave while he is in his ownership (which proves
that it is a condition for his freedom) and attachment to it is
correct (it is correct to attach or link his freedom to the
payment of one thousand), thus it (the meaning of Haal) will
be conferred to the statement.
ُ‫صلُیَةُ ُتطَلَّقُ ُفلی ُ ْال َح ل‬

ُ‫ال ُ َولَوُْ ُنَ َوی‬ َ ‫ْضةُ ُُاوُْ ُم‬ ُ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُ َواَ ْن ل‬
َُ ‫ت ُ َم لری‬ ُ‫ال ُاَ ْن ل‬
ُُ‫نُ َکانَُُیَحْ تَ لمل‬ ُ ‫النُاللَّ ْف‬
ُْ ‫ظَُ َُوُال‬ َُّ ُ‫للالُتَ َعالی‬ ُْ ‫صح‬
ُ َُُ‫َّتُنلی َّتهُُفل ْی َماُبَ ْینَهُُ َُوُبَیْن‬ َ ُ‫ق‬ َُ ‫التَّ ْعلل ْی‬
َُ‫نُالظَّا لُه َُرُ لخالفهُُ َُوُال َذاُتَُایَّ َُدُذللكَُُبلقَصْ لد لُہُثَبَت‬ َُّ َ‫الَُّا‬ ُ‫َم ْعنَیُ ْال َح ل‬
ُ ‫الُال‬
(An example where these two conditions are not met and the
literal meaning of '‫ 'و‬will be implied is) If a person (tells his
wife), "You are divorced and you are sick or (he tells her,
"You are divorced) and you are performing Salaah" then
168
Usool Shaashi
the Talaaq will apply immediately (and the meaning of Haal
will not be implied here). If he had the intention of
attachment (whereby he intended to attach or link the Talaaq
to her getting sick or performance of Salaah) then his
intention will be correct between him and ALLAAH (but
since Shar'ie rulings are based on what is apparent, we will
rule that Talaaq was issued immediately as is apparent).The
reason for this (ruling that Talaaq was issued immediately) is
that even though the word does support that meaning
(Talaaq can be attached to performance of Salaah or getting
sick) the apparent state opposes it (there is no proof to
support that the meaning of Haal was implied thus its literal
meaning will be taken). If the contrary to the apparent
meaning is supported (that he meant it to be conditional) by
his intention then it will be established (that it is conditional
and the Talaaq will apply only when that condition is fulfilled
between him and ALLAAH. However we will still rule that the
Talaaq was issued immediately as our ruling is based on
apparent conditions which support Talaaq being issued
immediately).
An example when '‫ 'و‬cannot denote Haal
ُ‫الَ ُیَتَقَیَّدُ ُ ْال َع َملُ ُفلی‬

ُ ُ ُ‫ارُبَةُ ُ َُو ُا ْع َملُْ ُبل ُهَا ُفلی ُ ْالبَز‬ َ ‫ض‬ َ ‫ال ُخ ُْذ ُهُ لذ لُہ ُ ْاالَ ْلفَُ ُم‬
ُ‫الَ ُیَصْ لحُ ُ َحاالُ ُ لالَ ْخ لُذ‬ُ ُ ُ‫ل ُفلی ُ ْالبَز‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْال َع َم‬ َُّ َ‫ارُبَةُ ُعَا َُّمةُ ُ لال‬
َ ‫ض‬ َ ‫ْالبَزُ ُ َُو ُیَکوْ نُ ُ ْالم‬
‫ص ْدرُُ ْال َکالَ لُمُبل لُه‬ َ ُُ‫الَُیَتَقَیَّد‬
ُ َ‫ارُبَةُُف‬
َ ‫ض‬ َ ‫فُم‬ ُ‫ْاالَ ْل ل‬
If a person tells another, "Take this thousand for

Madharabah1and use it for trade it textiles (fabric, cloth)"
then the act of Madharabah will not be restricted to trade
in textiles (in other words the letter '‫ 'و‬will not denote Haal
and trade in textiles will not be a condition for taking of the
1
Madharabah is where one person provides the capital for trade; the other provides the labour
and the profits shared between them.
169
Usool Shaashi
thousand) but Madharabah will be general (one may use the
money to trade in anything). The reason for this (why
Mudharabah will not be restricted to trade in textiles only) is
that trade in textiles cannot be the Haal for taking this
thousand for Mudharabah (as they are in two different time
periods; he cannot take the money and be trading in textiles at
the same time but will first take the money and then later trade
in textiles causing them to trade in two different periods,
whereas the Haal and Dhul-Haal need to be in the same time
period), thus it will not be restricted by the subsequent
sentence (of "use it for trade it textiles").
Ruling derived from the above
ُ‫ك‬ ُْ ‫ت ُللزَ وْ لج ُهَا ُطَل ْقنل‬

َُ َ‫ی ُ َول‬ ُْ َ‫ال ُاَبوُْ ُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَُرحمه ُللا ُتعالی ُال َذا ُقَال‬ َُ َ‫َُو ُعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ل‬َُ ‫الَ ُیفلیْدُ ُ َحا‬ُ ُ ُ‫ن ُقَوْ لَ ُهَا ُ َولَكَُ ُاَ ْلف‬ َُّ َ‫الَ ُیَ لجبُ ُلَهُ ُ َعلَ ْی ُهَا ُ َشیْیُ ُ لال‬ ُ ُ ‫اَ ْلفُ ُفَطَلَّقَ ُهَا‬
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫الَُی ْت َركُُ ْال َع َملُُبل لُهُبلدوْ ل‬ ُ َ‫یُمفلیْدُُبلنَ ْف لس لُهُف‬ ُْ ‫فُ َعلَ ْی ُهَاُ َُوُقَوْ ل ُهَاُطَل ْقنل‬ ُ‫بُ ْاالَ ْل ل‬ ُ‫وجوْ ل‬
ُُ‫ار لُة ُیَ ْمنَع‬ ‫ن ُ َدالَُلَ ُةَ ُ ْ ل‬
َُ ‫اال َج‬ َُّ َ‫ع ُ َولَكَُ ُ لدرْ ُهَمُ ُ لال‬ َُ ‫ف ُقَوُْلل لُه ُالحْ َملُْ ُهُذا ُ ْال َمتَا‬ ُ‫ْل ُبل لخالَ ل‬ ُ‫ال َّدللی ل‬
َُ ‫ْال َع َم‬
ُ‫لُبل َحقل ْیُقَ لُةُاللَّ ْف ل‬
‫ظ‬
Based upon this (that the letter '‫ 'و‬will not denote Haal if the
statement does not have the ability to be so) Imaam Abu
Hanifah‫ ع‬ says, "If a woman tells her husband, "Divorce
me and you have a thousand" after which he divorces her,
then (the Talaaq will apply but) nothing will be Waajib upon
her (she will not owe him a thousand) because her statement,
"You have a thousand" does not have the ability to be Haal
(or a condition) for making a thousand Waajib upon her
(since it is merely additional information and actual Talaaq
has no recompense, thus there is no proof that it is a condition
170
Usool Shaashi
for Talaaq) and her request, "Divorce me" is sufficient in
itself (for requesting Talaaq and is not dependent on any
further clause), thus we will not abandon practicing on it
(her request, "Divorce me") without proof (we will not take
the meaning of Haal if there is no proof that it is implied) as
opposed to someone saying, "Lift these goods and you have
a dirham" (where the '‫ 'و‬will denote Haal) because proof of
Ijaarah (that the person labour is being employed or leased)
prevents practicing upon the literal meaning (there is proof
that the meaning of Ijaarah is implied here thus the literal
meaning will be abandoned).
The letter '‫'ف‬
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُُ‫الاجْ لزُیَ لُة ُلل َما ُاَنَّ ُهَا ُتَتَ َعقَّب‬
ُ ‫ل ُ َوللهُ َذا ُت ْستَ ْع َملُ ُفلی ُا‬ ُ‫ب ُ َم َُع ُ ْال َوصْ ل‬
ُ‫اَ ْلفَاءُ ُلللتَّ ْعقل ْی ل‬
ُ:ُ‫ال ُاآلخَ ر‬ َُ َ‫ ُفَق‬،‫ ُبلعْتُ ُ لم ْنكَُ ُهُ َذا ُ ْال َع ْب َُد ُبلُا ْلف‬:‫ال‬
َُ َ‫ ُال َذا ُق‬:‫ال ُاَصْ َحابنَا‬ َُ َ‫طَ ُق‬ ُ ْ‫ال َّشر‬
ُ‫ْبُ ْالبَی لُْع‬
َُ ‫ضاءُُ َویَ ْثبتُُ ْال لع ْتقُُ لم ْنهُُ َعقلی‬ ُ‫فَهُ َُوُحرُُیَکوْ نُُذللكَُُقبوْ الُُلل ْلبَی لْع لٗ ل‬
َ ‫ُٗال ْقتل‬
‫ُ َوهُ َُوُحرُُا َوهُ َُوُحرُُفَالنَّهُُیَکوْ نُُ َرداُلل ْلبَی لُْع‬:‫ال‬ َُ َ‫فُ َمالَوُُْق‬ ُ‫بل لخالَ ل‬
The letter '‫ 'ف‬denotes subsequence with conjunction (will
denote the subsequent action occurred after the statement
made prior to it), which is why it is used in the Jazaa
(consequence of a condition, the letter '‫ 'ف‬will denote that the
sentence subsequent to it is a consequence of the condition
prior to it) because it (Jazaa) is subsequent to a Sharth
(condition). Our scholars (of the Hanafi Madhab) say if a
person says to another, "I am selling this slave to you in
lieu of a thousand" and the other (the buyer) replies, "Then
he is free"; this will be acceptance of the sale through
Iqtidha'un Nas (setting the slave free would require him to
own the slave first thus his statement would necessitate that he
accepts and sets the slave free) and freedom (for the slave)
will be established after the transaction as opposed to if he
171
Usool Shaashi
says "And he is free" (with the letter '‫ )'و‬or "He is free"
(without any prefix before it) as this will be refusal of the sale
(as the statement "and he is free" as well as "he is free" would
be additional information pointing out the slave to be free
because of which the sale is invalid and not like in the letter '‫'ف‬
which indicates that the subsequent action occurred after the
statement made prior to it).
Example Two
َُ َ‫ی ُقَ لمیْصا؟ ُفَنَظَ َُر ُفَق‬

ُ:‫ال‬ ُْ ‫ب ُاُیَ ْکفل ْینل‬ ُ‫ال ُلل ْلخَ ی ل‬
ُ‫ ُا ْنظرُْ ُاللی ُهُ َذا ُالثَّوْ ل‬:‫َّاط‬ َُ َ‫َُو ُال َذا ُق‬
ْ
ُُ‫الَ ُیَ ْکفل ْی لُه ُ َکانَُ ُالخَ یَّاط‬ ْ
ُ ُ ‫ُفَاقطَعْهُ ُفَقَطَ َعهُ ُفَا ل َذا ُهُ َُو‬:‫ب‬ َّ
ُ‫احبُ ُالثوْ ل‬ ‫ص ل‬ َ ُ ‫ال‬ َُ َ‫نَ َع ُْم!ُفَق‬
ْ
ُ‫ ُالقطَعْہ‬:‫ال‬ َُ َ‫ف ُ َما لَوُْ ُق‬ ْ
‫ْب ُال لکفَاُیَ لُة ُبل لخ َال ل‬ ْ ْ
َ ‫ضا لمنا ُ لالَُنَّهُ ُالنَّ َما ُاَ َم َرہ ُبلالقَط لع ُ َعقلی‬
َ
ْ
َ ‫فَقَطَ َُعهُُفَا لُنَّهُُ َالُیَکوْ نُالخَ یَّاط‬
ُ‫ُضا لمنا‬
If a person says to a tailor, "Look at this cloth, will it be

sufficient for (to sow) a shirt" and the tailor replies that it is
(sufficient), on which he instructs the tailor, "Then cut it".
The tailor then cuts it but it is insufficient (to sow a shirt),
the tailor will be responsible for it because he ordered the
tailor to cut it subsequent to the tailor informing him it is
sufficient (thus his instruction, "Then cut it" means "cut it if it
is sufficient"). This ruling is opposed to when he says "Cut
it" or "And cut it" after which it is cut because the tailor
will not be responsible (as in this case his instruction to cut
will not be subsequent and attached to the tailor informing him
it is sufficient).
Example Three
َُ ْ‫ُبلعْتُ ُ لم ْنكَُ ُهُ َذا ُالثَّو‬:‫ال‬

َُُ‫ب ُبل َع َش َُرةُ ُفَا ْقطَعْهُ ُفَقَطَ َعهُ ُ َولَ ُْم ُیَقلُْ ُ َشیْئا ُ َکان‬ َُ َ‫َولَوُْ ُق‬
‫ْالبَیْعُُتَاما‬
172
Usool Shaashi
If a person says to another, "I am selling this cloth to you in
lieu of ten (dirhams), then cut it (if you accept the sale) and
he (the buyer) cuts it, without saying anything (without
verbally consenting) then the sale is complete.
Example Four
ُُ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُفَال َّشرْ طُ ُدخوْ ل‬ ُ‫ار ُفَا َ ْن ل‬

َُ ‫ار ُفَهُ لذ لُہ ُال َّد‬ ُ‫ن ُ َدخَ ْل ل‬
َُ ‫ت ُهُ لذ لُہ ُال َّد‬ ُْ ‫ ُال‬:‫ال‬ َُ َ‫َولَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫تُالثَّانلُیَ ُةَُُاوْ الُُُاوُُْا لخرا‬
ُ‫صالُُبل لُهُ َحتیُلَوُُْ َدخَ لَ ل‬ ‫لُاالاُوْ لیُمتَّ ل‬ ُ‫ْبُدخوْ ل‬ َُ ‫الثَّانلُیَ لُةُ َعقلی‬
ُ ُُ‫الَُیَقَعُُالطَّالَق‬ ُ ُُ‫لـ لکنَّهُُبَ ْع َُدُم َُّدة‬
If a person says (to his wife), "If you enter this house then
this house, you are divorced" the condition (for Talaaq to
apply) is to enter the second house immediately after
entering the first house such that if a person entered the
second house first and then the first house, or entered the
first house but then entered the second house after a
lengthy period, the Talaaq will not apply.
'‫ 'ف‬sometimes describes the Illat
َُُ‫ی ُاَ ْلفا ُفَُا ْنت‬ َُ َ‫ ُال َذا ُق‬:‫ٗ ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ لمثَالُه‬
َُّ ‫ ُاَدُ ُالل‬:‫ال ُلل َع ْب لد لُہ‬ ُ‫َوقَ ُْد ُیَکوْ نُ ُ ْالفَاءُ ُللبَیَا لن ل‬
ُُْ‫ُال ْن لزل‬:ُ‫ل ُلل ْل َحرْ بلی‬َُ ‫ن ُلَّ ُْم ُی اُودُ ُ َشیْئا ُ َولَوُْ ُقَا‬
ُْ ‫ ُ َوال‬،‫ال‬ ‫حر َکانَُ ُ ْال َعبْدُ ُحرا ُفلی ُ ْال َح ل‬
ُْ‫نُلَ ُْمُیَ ْن لزل‬ُْ ‫ُ َوال‬،‫فَُا ْنتَُُا لمنُُ َکانَُُا لمنا‬
Sometimes the '‫ 'ف‬describes the Illat (it will be used to
denote a property or characteristic found in that person or
item). An example of this (how '‫ 'ف‬describes the Illat) is if a
person tells his slave, "Pay me one thousand because you
are free" (in this case) the slave will be set free immediately
and will not have to pay (his master) anything. (Another
example)If a person tells an enemy combatant, "Come
173
Usool Shaashi
down because you have sanctuary", he will be given
sanctuary immediately even if he does not come down.
'‫ 'ف‬is sometimes attached to the ruling of the

Illat
ُ‫س‬ُ‫ی ُبلیَ لدكَُ ُفَطَل ْق ُهَا ُفَطَلَّقَ ُهَا ُفلی ُ ْال َمجْ لل ل‬ُْ ‫ ُاَ ْمرُ ُال ْم َرُاتل‬:‫ال‬ َُ َ‫ی ُ ْال َجا لم لُع ُ َما ُال َذا ُق‬ُْ ‫َوفل‬
ُ‫صا َُر‬ َ
َ ‫ل ُف‬ ‫ا‬
ُ‫ال َّو ل‬ َ
ُ ‫ق ُغی لْرا‬ َ َ
ُ‫ی ُتوْ لکیْالُ ُبلطال ل‬ َ َّ
ُْ ‫ال ُیَکوْ نُ ُالثانل‬ َ َ َ ْ
ُ ‫ت ُتَطلل ْیُقةُ ُبَائلُنةُ ُ َو‬ ْ
ُ َ‫طلق‬
ُ‫ال ُطَل ْق ُهَا ُفَ َج َع ْلتُ ُاَ ْم َر ُهَا‬
َُ َ‫ن ُاَ ْم َر ُهَا ُبلیَ لدكَُ ُ َولَوُْ ُق‬َُّ َ‫ب ُا‬ ُ‫ ُطَل ْق ُهَا ُبل َسبَ ل‬:‫ال‬ َُ َ‫َُکُاُنَّه ُق‬
ْ ‫تُت‬
ُ‫َطلل ْیُقَةُُ َرجْ لعُیَّة‬ ُْ َ‫سُطلق‬ ُ‫بلیَ لدكَُُ َوطَلَّقَ ُهَاُفلیُ ْال َمجْ لل ل‬
In 'Jaamie Kabeer' it is mentioned that if a person says to

another, "My wife's affairs are in your hands so give her
Talaaq (on my behalf)" and he then divorces her in the same
sitting, then one Talaaq Baa'inah (irrevocable Talaaq) will
apply (as the statement "My wife's affairs are in your hands" is
ambiguous because of which Talaaq Baa'inah would apply)
and the second sentence (the instruction "So divorce her")
will not be permission to issue another Talaaq besides the
first. It is as if he said (the meaning of his two statements will
be) "Divorce her because her affairs are in your hands". If
he were to have said, "Divorce her then I will hand her
affairs over to you" after which he divorced her in the same
sitting then a Talaaq Raj'ie (revocable Talaaq) will apply
(as the statement "Divorced her" is clear and unambiguous
because of which Talaaq Raj'ie would apply).
ْ ‫ت ُت‬
ُ‫َطلل ْیقَتَ ْی ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ ُْ َ‫س ُطلق‬ ُ‫ال ُطَل ْق ُهَا ُ َو َج َع ْلتُ ُاَ ْم َر ُهَا ُبلیَ لدكَُ ُفَطَلَّقَ ُهَا ُفلی ُ ْال َمجْ لل ل‬ َُ َ‫َولَوُْ ُق‬
ُْ ‫س ُ َوقَ َع‬
ُ‫ت‬ ُ‫ال ُطَل ْق ُهَا ُ َواَبل ْن ُهَا ُاُوُْ ُاَبل ْن ُهَا ُ َوطَل ْق ُهَا ُفَطَلَّقَ ُهَا ُفلی ُ ْال َمجْ لل ل‬
َُ َ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُلَوُْ ُق‬
ْ ‫ت‬
ُ‫َطلل ْیقَتَا ل‬
‫ن‬
If he were to have said, "Divorce her and I hand her affairs
over to you" after which he divorced her in the same
sitting, then two Talaaq Baa'inah will apply (as the letter '‫'و‬
was used here which indicates that he authorised him to give
174
Usool Shaashi
two separate Talaaq). Similarly if he said, "Divorced her
and separate her (from me)", or (he says) "Separate her
(from me) and divorce her", after which he divorces her in
the same sitting, two Talaaq Baa'inah will apply.
ُُ‫حةُُثَبَتَُُلَ ُهَاُ ْال لخیَارُُ َس َوآء‬ َُ ْ‫تُاالاُ َُمةُُ ْال َم ْنکو‬ ُ‫الُاَصْ َحابنَاُال َذاُا ْعتلقَ ل‬ َُ َ‫َوعَلیُهُ َذاُق‬
ُ‫ت‬ُْ َ‫الن ُقَوْ ُلَه ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُالسَّالمُ ُللبَ لری َُْرة ُ لحیْنَُ ُا ْعتلق‬ َُّ ُ ‫َکانَُ ُزَ وْ ج ُهَا ُ َعبْدا ُاُوُْ ُحرا‬
ُ‫ق‬ُ‫ب ُ لم ْل لک ُهَا ُبضْ َع ُهَا ُبل ْال لع ْت ل‬
ُ‫ار ُلَ ُهَا ُبل َسبَ ل‬ َُ َ‫َاریُْ ُاَ ْثبَتَُ ُ ْال لخی‬ ْ َ‫ك ُف‬
‫اخت ل‬ ُ‫ت ُبضْ َع ل‬ ُ‫َملَ ْک ل‬
‫جُ َعبْداُاُوُُْحرا‬ ُ‫نُالزوْ ل‬ َ َ‫َوهُ َذاُ ْال َمعْنیُالَیَتَف‬
ُ‫اوتُُبَیْنَُُ َکوْ ل‬
Based upon this (that the letter '‫ 'ف‬is sometimes attached to
the ruling of the Illat) our scholars (of the Hanafi Madhab)
that if a married female slave is set free then she will have
Khiyaar (the right to withdraw from the marriage) whether
her husband is a slave or free because the Hadeeth of
Rasulullaah  to Hadhrat Bareerah  when she was set free,
"You have become master of yourself so decide for yourself
(you have the right to withdraw so decide whether you wish to
remain in his wedlock or not)", establishes Khiyaar for her
because of her becoming her own master by being set free,
which is attained whether her husband is a slave or free.
ُُ‫ح لُةُ لم ْلك‬ َُ ْ‫نُبضْ َُعُاالاُ َُم لُةُ ْال َم ْنکو‬ ُ‫ارُالطَّالَ ل‬
َُّ ‫قُبلالن َسآ لُءفَا ل‬ ُ‫َویَتَفَرَّعُُ لم ْنهُُ َم ْسُاُلَةُُال ْعتلبَ ل‬
ُ‫ت ُالضَّروْ َُرةُ ُاللَی ُ ْالقَوْ ل‬
ُ‫ل ُبلا ل ْز لدیَا لُد‬ ُ‫َن ُ لم ْل لک لُه ُبل لع ْتقل ُهَا ُفَ َد َع ل‬
ُْ ‫ج ُ َولَ ُْم ُیَزَ لُْ ُع‬ ُ‫ال َّزوْ ل‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫ك ُبل لع ْتقل ُهَا ُ َحتی ُیَ ْثبتَُ ُلَهُ ُ ْال لم ْلكُ ُفلی ُالزیَا َُد لُة ُ َویَکوْ نُ ُذللكَُ ُ َسبَبا ُللثبوْ ل‬ ُ‫ْال لم ْل ل‬
175
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ار ُالطَّالَ ل‬
ُ‫ق‬ ُ‫ك ُ ْالبضْ لُع ُبل لع ْتقل ُهَا ُ َم ْعنَی ُ َم ْسُاُلَ لُة ُال ْعتلبَ ل‬ ُ‫ار ُلَ ُهَا ُ َوال ْز لدیَادُ ُ لم ْل ل‬
ُ‫ْال لخیَ ل‬
ُ‫ج لُة ُدوْ نَُ ُ لع ْت ل‬
ُ‫ق ُال َّزوْ ل‬
ُ‫ج‬ ُ‫ث ُعَلی ُ لع ْت ل‬
َُ ْ‫ق ُال َّزو‬ ُ‫کُیَّ لُة ُالثَّالَ ل‬
‫بلالن َسآ لُء ُفَیدَارُ ُح ْکمُ ُ َمالل ل‬
ُ ُ‫َک َماُهُ َُوُ َم ْذ ُهَبُُال َّشافل لعی‬
Derived from the Hadeeth mentioned above ("You have
become master of yourself so decide for yourself") is the law
of considering (the number of) Talaaq on (the condition of)
women(whether the husband has the right to issue three
Talaaq or two Talaaq will be based on the state of the woman,
such that if she is a slave the husband will the right to issue
only two Talaaq regardless of whether he is a slave or not and
if she is free then he will have the right to issue three Talaaq
regardless of whether he is a slave or not), the reason for this
is that the right (to sexual relations) over the wife belongs to
the husband and this was not taken away from him by her
being set free (as he still has the same right), thus necessity
dictates that by her being set free his right (over her) also
increased, which is the reason for giving her Khiyaar (in
other words the reason for giving her Khiyaar is that the right
of the husband over the wife increased, which is only possible
by the husband gaining the right to three Talaaqs and in the
Hadeeth it was the wife who was set free, making the condition
of the woman the reason for considering the number of
Talaaq). The increase of the right of the husband by her
being set free is the Illat (principle cause) for considering
(the number of) Talaaq on (the condition of) women, thus the
ruling of gaining right to three Talaaq will be based upon
the condition of the wife and not the husband as is the
opinion of Imaam Shaafie .
'ُ‫ 'ث َّم‬is for suspension
ُ ‫فصل‬
176
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ظُ َو ْالح ْک لُمُ َو لع ْندَهُ َما‬ ُ‫یُفلیُاللَّ ْف ل‬ ‫یُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَُیفلیْدُُالتَّ َر ل‬
َُ ‫اخ‬ ُْ ‫یُل لکُنَّهُ لع ْن َُدُاَبل‬ ُْ ‫ث َُّمُلللتَّ َرا لخ‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫ن ُ َدخَ ْل ل‬ ُ‫ْر ُ ْال َم ْدخوْ ل‬
ُْ ‫ل ُبلهَا ُال‬ َُ َ‫ی ُفلی ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُ َوبَیَانُه ُفل ْی َما ُال َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ال ُلل َغی ل‬ َُ ‫اخ‬ ‫یفلیْدُ ُالتَّ َر ل‬
ُُ‫ل ُ َوتَقَع‬ ُ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُث َُّم ُطَاللقُ ُث َُّم ُطَاللقُ ُفَ لع ْندَہ ُیَتَ َعلَّقُ ُاالاُوْ لی ُبلالدخوْ ل‬ ُ‫ار ُفَا َ ْن ل‬
َُ ‫ال َّد‬
ُ‫ل ُث َُّم ُ لع ْن َُد‬ ُ‫ت ُالثَّاللُثَةُ ُ َو لع ْندَهُ َما ُیَتَ َعلَّقُ ُ ْالکلُ ُبلالدخوْ ل‬ ُ‫الثَّانلُیَةُ ُفلی ُ ْال َح ل‬
ُ‫ال ُ َولَ َغ ل‬
ُ‫تُطَاللقُُث َُّمُطَاللقُُث َُّم‬ ُ‫الُاَ ْن ل‬ ‫الَُّ َو ل‬
َُ َ‫اح َُدةُُ َولَوُُْق‬ ُ ‫الَُیَقَعُُال‬ ُ َ‫ظ ُهَرُُالتَّرْ تلیْبُُف‬ ْ َ ‫ل ُی‬ ُ‫الدخوْ ل‬
ُ‫ت‬ َ
ُ‫ال ُ َول َغ ل‬ ْ
ُ‫ت ُاالاُوْ لی ُفلی ُال َح ل‬ َ َ َ
ُ‫ی ُ َحنل ْیُف ُة ُ َوق َع ل‬ َ ْ َ
ُْ ‫ار ُف لعن َُد ُابل‬ َّ
َُ ‫ت ُالد‬ ْ
ُ‫ن ُ َدخَ ل ل‬ ُ ‫طَاللقُ ُال‬
ْ
‫لُلل َماُ َذکَرْ نَا‬ ُ‫اح َُدةُُ لع ْن َُدُالدخوْ ل‬ ‫الثَّانلُیَةُُ َوالثَّاللُثَةُُ َو لع ْندَهُ َمایَقَعُُ ْال َو ل‬
'َّ‫ 'ثُم‬is for suspension (it indicates a delay between the sentence
before and after it) however (there is a difference of opinion
whether it indicates a delay in speech and ruling or only in the
ruling and) according to Imaam Abu Hanifah  it indicates
a delay in speech and ruling (a delay in speech means that
'‫'ثم‬indicates that the speaker literally paused before making the
next statement and a delay in ruling means that '‫ 'ثم‬indicates
that the statement after it applies after the first statement) and
according to Imaam Abu Yusuf  and Imaam Muhammed
 it indicates a delay in ruling only. The result of this
(difference of opinion) becomes apparent in the example, if a
person tells his wife, with whom he has not consummated
the marriage, "If you enter the house, you are divorced
then divorced then divorced". According to Imaam Abu
Hanifah  (it indicates a delay in speech and ruling and his
statement would be the same as saying "If you enter the house,
you are divorced…then divorced… then divorced", thus) the
first (Talaaq) will apply on entry (will only apply when she
enters the house), the second will apply immediately (as it
will not be attached to the condition of entry since it was said
later) and the third will be void (because an unconsummated
marriage terminates with one Talaaq and will be inapplicable).
Whereas according to Imaam Abu Yusuf  and Imaam

Muhammed  (it indicates a delay in ruling only and) all
177
Usool Shaashi
three Talaaq will only apply when she enters the house and
when she enters the house they will apply in sequence such
that only one will apply (as the marriage will terminate with
it and the other two will be inapplicable).
If he said (to his wife), "You are divorced then divorced

then divorced, if you enter this house" then according to
Imaam Abu Hanifah  (it indicates a delay in speech and
ruling and his statement would be the same as saying "You are
divorced…then divorced… then divorced, if you enter this
house", thus) the first will apply immediately and the second
and third will be void (as the marriage will terminate with it
and the other two will be inapplicable) whereas according to
Imaam Abu Yusuf  and Imaam Muhammed  only one
apply when she enters as we have mentioned (that all three
will be dependent on entry and will apply in sequence when she
enters the house and since the marriage will terminate with the
first the other two will be inapplicable).
ُ‫ل‬ُ‫ت ُاالاُوْ لی ُبلالدخوْ ل‬ ُ‫طَ ُتَ َعلَّقَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ت ُ ْال َمرْ اُةُ ُ َم ْدخوْ الُ ُبل ُهَا ُفَا ل‬
ُ ْ‫ن ُقَ َّد َُم ُال َّشر‬ ُْ ‫َوال‬
ُ‫ن ُ َکانَ ل‬
َُ‫ط‬ َّ َّ
ُ ْ‫ن ُاَخ َُر ُالشر‬ ُْ ‫ی ُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی ُ َوال‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ال ُ لعن َُد ُاَبل‬ ْ
ُ‫َان ُفلی ُال َح ل‬ ْ
ُ‫َویَقَعُ ُثلنت ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ ْ َّ ْ
َُّ ‫ل ُ َو لعندَهُ َما ُیَتَ َعلقُ ُالک‬ َّ
ُ‫ت ُالثاللُثَةُ ُبلالدخوْ ل‬ َّ
ُ‫ال ُ َوتَ َعلقَ ل‬ ْ
ُ‫َان ُفلی ُال َح ل‬ ُ‫َوقَ َُع ُثل ْنت ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫لُفلیُ ْالفَصْ لَ ْی ل‬ُ‫بلالدخوْ ل‬
If the marriage was consummated and the condition

mentioned first (that is he said, "If you enter the house, you
are divorced then divorced then divorced") then the first will
be dependent on entry and the last two will apply
immediately according to Imaam Abu Hanifah  (as
according to him it is as if he said, "If you enter the house, you
are divorced…then divorced… then divorced") and if the
condition was mentioned last (that is he said, "You are
178
Usool Shaashi
divorced then divorced then divorced, if you enter this house",
according to Imaam Abu Hanifah) the first two will apply
immediately and (only) the last will be dependent on entry
(as according to him it is as if he said, "You are divorced…
then divorced… then divorced, if you enter this house").
(However) According to Imaam Abu Yusuf and Imaam

Abu Muhammed  in both instances the all three Talaaq
will depend on entry."
'ُْ‫ 'بَل‬for correction
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُ‫ت‬ ْ َ
ُ‫لُبل ُهَاُان ل‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫ْرُال َمدخوْ ل‬ َ
ُ‫الُللغی ل‬ َ َ
َُ ‫لُفالذاُق‬َ ُ ‫یُ َمقَا َُمُا‬
ُ‫الا َّو ل‬ ُْ ‫طُبلالقَا َُم لُةُالثَّانل‬ ُ‫كُ ْال َغلَ ل‬ُ‫بَلُُْللتَدَار ل‬
ُ‫ن‬
ُ‫ْن ُرجوْ عُ ُ َع ل‬ ُ‫الَ ُبَلُْ ُثل ْنتَی ل‬
ُ ُ ‫الن ُقَوْ ُلَه‬
َُّ ُ ُ‫اح َُدة‬ ‫ت ُ َو ل‬ ُْ ‫ْن ُ َوقَ َع‬ ُ‫الَ ُبَلُْ ُثل ْنتَی ل‬
ُ ُ ُ‫اح لُدة‬ َ ‫طَاللقُ ُ َو‬
ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْبقَی‬
ُ َ‫ح ُرجوْ عُه ُفَیَُقَعُ ُاالاُوْ لی ُف‬ َُّ ‫ص‬ ‫ل ُ َولَ ُْم ُیَ ل‬ ُ ‫ی ُ َمقَا َُم ُا‬
ُ‫الا َّو ل‬ ُْ ‫ل ُبلالقَا َُم لُة ُالثَّانل‬
ُ‫االاُ َّو ل‬
َ َّ َ
ُ‫َتُ َمدخوْ الُُبل ُهَاُیَقعُُالثالث‬ ْ ْ َ َ
ُ ‫ْنُ َولوْ کان‬ ُ‫ْال َم َحلُُ لعن َُدُقوْ لل لُهُثلنتَی ل‬
ْ َ ْ
'َّ‫ 'بَل‬is to correct an error by replacing the first (sentence

before 'َّ‫ )'بَل‬with the second (after 'َّ‫)'بَل‬. (For example) If a
person says to his wife, with whom he has not yet
consummated the marriage, "You are divorced once, no
but rather twice" then only one Talaaq will apply because
his statement "No but rather twice" is correction of the
first statement by replacing it with the second but
179
Usool Shaashi
retraction of the first statement is incorrect1(because it is
Jumla Insha'iyah) so the first Talaaq will apply and the two
will be inapplicable (because a wife with whom the marriage
has not been consummated comes out of his Nikaah with one
Talaaq). If the marriage was consummated then three
Talaaq would apply (since the first cannot be retracted the
second statement will be a further two Talaaq).
ُُ‫الَ ُیَ لجبُ ُثَلُثَة‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ان ُ َحیْث‬ ُ‫الَ ُبَلُْ ُاَ ْلفَ ل‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ی ُاَ ْلف‬ َُّ َ‫ل ُللفالَنُ ُ َعل‬ َُ ‫ف ُ َما ُلَوُْ ُُقَا‬ ُ‫َوهُ َذا ُبل لخالَ ل‬
ُ‫ظ‬ ْ َّ
ُ‫النُ َحقل ْیُقَ ُةَُاللف ل‬َُّ ُُ‫ُیَ لجبُُثَلُثَةُُاآلف‬:‫الُزفَرُُ َر لح َمهُُللاُُتَ َعالی‬ َُ َ‫اآلفُُ لع ْن َدنَاُ َوق‬
ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫ح ُ لع ْن َُد ُال ْبطَ ل‬
ُ‫ال ُاالاُ َّو ل‬ َُّ ‫ص‬ ‫ل ُ َولَ ُْم ُیَ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُ َمقَا َُم ُاالاُ َّو ل‬ ُْ ‫ت ُالثَّانل‬ ْ
ُ‫ط ُبلالثبَا ل‬ ُ‫ك ُ ْال َغلَ ل‬ ُ‫للتَدَار ل‬
ُ‫ف ُ َعلَی‬ ْ ُ‫ل ُ َوذللكَُ ُبلطَ لری ل‬
ُ‫ْق ُ لزیَا َُد لُة ُاالاُل ل‬ ُ‫الا َّو ل‬ُ ‫ی ُ َم َُع ُبَقَا لُء ُا‬ ُْ ‫َصحیْحُ ُالثَّانل‬ ‫فَیَ لجبُ ُت ل‬
ُُ‫ن ُهُ َذا ُال ْن َشاء‬ ُ‫اح َُدةُ ُبَلُْ ُثل ْنتَی ل‬
َُّ َ‫ْن ُال‬ ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُ َو ل‬ ُ‫ ُاَ ْن ل‬:‫ف ُقَوْ لل لُه‬ ُ‫ف ُاالاُ َّو لل ُبل لخالَ ل‬ ُ‫االاُ ْل ل‬
ُُ‫ار ُدوْ نَُ ُاال ْن َشا لُءُفَُا ْم َکنَُ ُتَصْ لحیْح‬ ُ‫اال ْخبَ ل‬ ‫َوذللكَُ ُال ْخبَارُ ُ َو ْال َغلَطُ ُالنَّ َما ُیَکوْ نُ ُفلی ُ ل‬
ُ‫قُ َحتیُلَوْ َکانَُُالطَّالَقُُبلطَ لری ل‬
ُ‫ْق‬ ُ‫ارُدوْ نَُُالطَّالَ ل‬ ُ‫طُفلیُاال ْق َر ل‬ ُ‫كُ ْال َغلَ ل‬ ُ‫ظُبلتَدَار ل‬ ُ‫اللَّ ْف ل‬
ُ ُ‫َانُلل َماُ َذکَرْ نَا‬ ُ‫ْنُیَقَعُُثل ْنت ل‬ ُ‫الَُبَلُُْثل ْنتَی ل‬
ُ ُُ‫اح َُدة‬ ‫سُ َو ل‬ ُ‫كُاُ ْم ل‬ ُ‫الُک ْنتُُطَلَّ ْقت ل‬ َُ َ‫نُق‬ ُْ َ ‫ارُبلا‬ ْ
ُ‫االخبَ ل‬
This ruling (that three Talaaq will apply as mentioned above)
is different from him saying, "I owe a certain person one
thousand no but rather two thousand" (as this is Jumla
Khabariya, wherein retraction of the first statement and
correcting it with 'َّ‫'بَل‬is permissible) such that according to us
(Hanafi scholars) three thousand will not we Waajib on
him. Imaam Zufar is of the opinion that three thousand
will be Waajib. The reason for this (our proof) is that the
actual purpose of 'َّ‫ 'بَل‬is correction of the error (the
statement prior to it) by replacing it with the second
(statement after 'َّ‫ )'بَل‬and (complete) retraction of the first is
not possible (as he cannot retract his admission of debt) so the
second will be put into effect while keeping the first
(admission of debt) intact, and this is possible by making
1
Correcting the previous statement using 'ْ‫ 'بَل‬is only possible when the sentence is Jumla
Khabariya (a sentence which has the possibility of being false) and not in Jumla Insha'iyah (a
sentence which cannot be false).
180
Usool Shaashi
another thousand Waajib upon the first thousand. This
ruling is opposed to his saying, "You are divorced once, no,
but rather twice" because that is Insha'iyah and the
example above is Khabariya and an error can be corrected
in Khabariya and not Insha'iyah, so correcting the word by
retracting the error is possible in Iqraar (admission) and
not in Talaaq (as it is Insha'iyah) such that if the Talaaq was
issued in a manner of Ikhbaar (informing) by saying, "I
gave you one Talaaq yesterday, no but rather two", then
two will apply in the manner mentioned above (that 'َّ‫'بَل‬will
correct the previous statement of one Talaaq being issued and
replace it with the second that two was issued, as it is Jumla
Khabariya).
'‫ 'لكن‬is for clarification
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُ‫ی ُفَیَکوْ نَُ ُ َموْ َجبُه ُ ْاثبَاتُ ُ َما ُبَ ْعدَہُٗ ُفَُا َّما ُنَ ْفیُ ُ َما‬
ُ‫اك ُبَ ْع َُد ُالنَّ ْف ل‬
ُ‫ال ْستل ْد َر ل‬ ‫ن ُلل ل‬ُْ ‫لـ لک‬
‫قَ ْبُلَهُفَثَابلتُُبل َدلل ْیلل لُه‬
'‫ 'لكن‬is for clarification after negation (when something is
negated then a doubt might arise as to whether certain aspects
have been negated as well thus '‫ 'لكن‬will establish that it has
not been negated). Thus it will affirm what comes after it
(that it is has not been negated). As far as the negation before
it (before '‫ )'لكن‬is concerned, it will still apply by it (whatever
has been negated before the '‫ 'لكن‬will still be negated).
Preconditions for it to serve the purpose of

clarification
ُُ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُ ْال َکالَم‬
ُْ ‫اق ُ ْال َکالَ لُم ُفَا ل‬ ْ ‫َو ْال َع‬
ُ‫طفُ ُبلهُ لذ لُہ ُ ْال َکلل َُم لُة ُالنَّ َما ُیَتَ َحقَّقُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُالت َس ل‬
ْ ُ ‫تُالَّ لذیُُْبَ ْعدَہُ َوال‬
ُ‫الَُّفَهُ َُوُم ْستَ انلف‬ ُ‫متَّ لسقاُیَتَ َعلَّقُُالنَّ ْفیُُبلا ل ْثبَا ل‬
Conjunction with '‫( 'لكن‬such that it clarifies the level of
negation by excluding what comes after it from being negated)
181
Usool Shaashi
only applies when the speech is concurrence 1(there is no
pause between the first and second statement). If the speech is
in concurrence then the negation will be attached to the
affirmation that comes after it (whereby whatever comes
after '‫ 'لكن‬will not be negated) and if not (if the speech is not in
concurrence) then it will be a new sentence (and will have no
relation to the negation before it).
Example One
ُُ‫یُاَ ْلف‬ َُّ َ‫لُللفالَنُُ َعل‬ َُ ‫ُال َذاُقَا‬:‫لمثَالُهُ َماُ َذ َک َرہُم َح َّمدُُ َر لح َمهُُللاُُتَ َعالیُفلیُ ْال َجا لم لُع‬
ُ‫الن ُ ْال َکالَ َُم ُمتَّ لسقُ ُفَظَ ُهَ َُر‬
َُّ ُ ُ‫الَُ َول لکُنَّه ُغَصْ بُ ُلَ لز َمهُ ُ ْال َمال‬ ُ ُ:ُ‫ال ُفالَن‬َُ َ‫قَرْ ضُ ُفَق‬
ُ‫سُ ْال َما ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫بُدوْ نَُُنَ ْف ل‬ َُ ‫نُالنَّ ْف‬
ُ‫یُ َکانَُُفلیُال َّسبَ ل‬ َُّ ‫ُا‬
An example of this(where '‫ 'لكن‬is said in concurrence) is what
was mentioned by Imaam Muhammed  in 'Al-Jaamiul
Kabeer', when a person says to another, "I owe a thousand
as debt" and the other person says "No (you do not owe the
money as debt)however(you owe the money) because of illegal
seizure ("you illegally seized it from me)" the amount
(thousand) will we incumbent upon him to pay because the
speech (the statement, "however because of illegal seizure")
was said in concurrence after negation clarifying that the
negation was of the manner in which it is owed and not
(negation) of owing the money itself.
1
In order for '‫ 'لكن‬to act as a conjunction, whereby it clarifies the level of negation by
excluding whatever comes after it from being negated, the speech needs to be in concurrence ,
and in order for speech to be in concurrence two conditions need to be met . These two
conditions are;
1) The speech must be uninterrupted such that there is no pause or break in the speech but
rather the statement after '‫ 'لكن‬is said consecutively and immediately after the first.
2) What is being excluded from negation after '‫ 'لكن‬must not be the very same aspect which is
being negated before it. The same thing which is being negated first cannot be affirmed
thereafter using '‫'لكن‬, in this case '‫ 'لكن‬will not act as a conjunction but will denote a new
sentence having no relation to the negation before it.
182
Usool Shaashi
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ُ :ُ‫ال ُفالَن‬ َُ َ‫ارُیَ لُة ُفَق‬ ‫ن ُهُ لذ لُہ ُ ْال َج ل‬ ُْ ‫ی ُاَ ْلفُ ُ لم‬
ُ‫ن ُثَ َم ل‬ َُّ َ‫ ُ َعل‬:ُ‫ال ُللفالَن‬ َُ َ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُلَوُْ ُق‬
َُُ‫ی ُ َکان‬ َُّ َ‫ی ُ َعلَیْكَُ ُاَ ْلفُ ُیَ ْلزَ مهُ ُ ْال َمالُ ُفَظَ ُهَ َُر ُا‬
َُ ‫ن ُالنَّ ْف‬ ُْ ‫اریَتكَُ ُ َولَ لک‬
ُْ ‫ن ُلل‬ ‫ارُیَةُ ُ َج ل‬‫ْال َج ل‬
ُ‫لُ ْال َم ل‬
ُ‫ال‬ ُ‫یُُاَصْ ل‬ ُْ ‫الَُفل‬
ُ ُ‫ب‬
ُ‫فلیُال َّسبَ ل‬
Similarly (another example of '‫ )'لكن‬is if a person says to
another, "I owe you a thousand in lieu of this slave" and
the other person replies, "No, the slave is yours however
you owe me one thousand (as a debt)".The amount
(thousand) will we incumbent upon him to pay as it is clear
that the negation was of the manner in which it is owed and
not (negation) of owing the money itself.
ُ‫ی ُقَطُ ُ َول لکُنَّه‬ ُْ ‫ُ َما ُ َکانَُ ُلل‬:ُ‫ال ُفالَن‬ َُ َ‫ُهُ َذا ُللفالَنُ ُفَق‬:‫ال‬ َُ َ‫ی ُیَ لد لُہ ُ َعبْدُ ُفَق‬ُْ ‫َولَوْ َکانَُ ُفل‬
ُُ‫ی ُیَتَ َعلَّق‬
َُ ‫الن ُالنَّ ْف‬
َُّ ُ ‫ی‬ ُْ ‫ل ُ ْال َکالَ َُم ُ َکانَُ ُ ْال َعبْدُ ُلل ْلمقَرُ ُلَهُ ُالثَّانل‬
َُ ‫ص‬
َ ‫ن ُ َو‬ ُْ ‫للفالَنُ ُآخَ َُر ُفَا ل‬
ُ‫ل ُفَیَکوْ نُ ُقَوْ لُ ُ ْالمقَرُ ُلَهُ ُ َردا‬ ُ‫ل ُ َکانَُ ُ ْال َعبْدُ ُلل ْلمقَرُ ُلَهُ ُاالاُ َّو ل‬َُ ‫ص‬َ َ‫ن ُف‬ ُْ ‫ت ُ َوال‬ ْ ‫بل‬
ُ‫االثبَا ل‬
ُ‫ال ْق َر ل‬
ُ ‫ار‬ ‫لل ل‬
If a person(e.g. Ali) has a slave in his possession and says,
"This slave belongs to a certain person (e.g. Zaid)" on
which the other person (Zaid) says, "This slave never
belonged to me however it belongs to so and so (e.g. Amr)";
if his statement, ("This slave never belonged to me but it
belongs to so and so")is said in concurrence then the slave
will belong to the other (Amr) because his negation(of the
slave being his) will be attached to the affirmation (of the
slave belonging to Amr). (However) If he delays or pauses
(before saying, "But it belongs to Amr") then the slave will
belong to the one who admitted it belonged to another (i.e.
Ali) and the statement of the person who it was claimed to
be (Zaid) will be denial of the omission (when he paused
before saying, "but it is Amr's" this will be a new sentence,
separating it from his previous statement of denial, and will be
testimony that it is Amr's and since testimony of one person is
not valid, the slave will still belong to Ali).
183
Usool Shaashi
ُ ُ ‫ال ُ ْال َموْ لی‬

َُ‫ال‬ َُ َ‫ن ُ َموْ الَ ُهَا ُبل لماُئَ لُة ُ لدرْ ُهَمُ ُفَق‬ُ‫ْر ُال ْذ ل‬
ُ‫ت ُنَ ْف َس ُهَا ُبل َغی ل‬ ُْ ‫ن ُاَ َُمةُ ُتَ َّز َو َج‬َُّ ‫َولَوُْ ُا‬
ْ
َُّ ُ ُ‫ل ُال َعقد‬
ُ‫الن‬ ْ َُ َ‫ن ُاجیْزہ ُبل لماُئَةُ ُ َوخَ ْم لسیْنَُ ُبَط‬ ْ ْ
ُْ ‫ا لجیْزُ ُال َعق َُد ُبل لماُئَ لُة ُ لدرْ ُهَمُ ُ َولَ لک‬
َّ
ُ‫الَ ُیَت ََحققُ ُفَ َکانَُ ُقَوْ لُه‬ ْ
ُ ُ ‫االجازَُ لُة ُ َوالثبَاتَ ُهَا ُبل َع ْینل ُهَا‬
َ ُ‫ی‬ َُّ ‫ْال َکالَ َُم ُ َغیْرُ ُمتَّ لسقُ ُفَا ل‬
َُ ‫ن ُنَ ْف‬
ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫نُ لز ْدتَنل‬ُْ ‫نُا لجیْزہُُال‬ ُْ ‫الَُاُ لجیْزہُُ َولـ لک‬ ُ َُُ‫نُا لجیْزہُُال ْثبَاتُهُبَ ْع َُدُ َردُُ ْال َع ْق لُدُ َو َکذللك‬ ُْ ‫لـ لک‬
ُ‫ن‬ُْ ‫الن ُ لم‬
َُّ ُ ‫ان‬ ْ
ُ‫ال ُالبَیَ ل‬ُ‫اح ُلل َعد لَُم ُالحْ تل َم ل‬ ْ
ُ‫خَ ْم لسیْنَُ ُ َعلَی ُال لماُئَ لُة ُیَکوْ نُ ُفَسْخا ُلللن َک ل‬
ُ‫ق‬ َُ ‫الَُالت َسا‬ ُ ‫الت َساقُُ َو‬ ُ‫شَرْ لط لُهُُاَ ل‬
If a female slave marries without the permission of her
master (making the validity of her marriage dependent on his
permission) for Mehr of one hundred Dirhams (which would
belong to the master) and the master says, "I do not permit
the contract (of Nikaah) for one hundred Dirhams however
I permit it for one hundred and fifty Dirhams", the
contract (of Nikaah) will be invalidated because the speech
is not in concurrence (which is a condition for'‫ 'لكن‬to act as a
conjunction) since negation of permission and then
affirmation thereafter cannot be concurred (coincide). Thus
his statement "However I permit it" was said after he (just)
negated the contract. Similarly if he says, "I do not permit
it however I permit it if you give me fifty more Dirhams
including the hundred" the contract of Nikaah will be
invalidated as it cannot be regarded as clarification (of
doubt after negation) as its precondition (to act as a
conjunction clarifying the doubt caused by the negation prior
to it) is that it must be in concurrence and it is not in
concurrence here (as the second condition of concurrence has
not been met, namely what is affirmed after '‫ 'لكن‬must not be
what has been negated before it.)
'ُْ‫ 'اَو‬is to grant choice
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُ‫لُاَ َح لُدُ ْال َم ْذکوْ َر ْی لن‬
ُ‫اُوُُْللتَنَاو ل‬
184
Usool Shaashi
'َّ‫ 'اَو‬is to include either one of the two mentioned (choices in
the ruling).
Example One
ُ‫ال ُهُ َذا ُحرُ ُ َوهُ َذا ُ َکانَُ ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُقَوْ لل لُه ُاَ َحدهُ َما ُحرُ ُ َحتی ُ َکانَُ ُُلَه‬
َُ َ‫َوللهُ َذا ُلَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫لوالَُیَةُُ ْالبَیَا ل‬
‫ن‬
Therefore (since 'َّ‫ 'اَو‬will include either one of the two
mentioned choices in the ruling) if a person says (regarding
his slaves), "This one is free or this one", then this will be
the same as him saying, "One of them is free" such that he
will have the right to clarify which one of them is free.
Example Two
ُُ‫الُ َو َّک ْلتُُبلبَی لُْعُهُ َذاُ ْال َع ْب لُدُهُ َذاُاُوُُْهُ َذاُ َکانَُُ ْال َو لکیْلُُاَ َحدَهُ َماُ َویبَاحُُ ْالبَیْع‬ َُ َ‫َولَوُُْق‬
ُُ‫الَُیَکوْ ن‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ْ
ُ‫كُالم َوک ل‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫عُاَ َحدهُ َماُث َُّمُعَا َُدُال َعبْدُُاللیُ لمل ل‬ َُ ‫احدُُ لم ْنهُ َماُ َولَوُُْبَا‬ ‫للکلُُ َو ل‬
ُْ َ‫للالخَ لُرُُا‬
‫نُیَّبل ْی َُعه‬
If a person says regarding his slave), "I have appointed this
person or this person to sell this slave", then either of them
will be his representative (in this sale) and it will be
permissible for either one of them to sell the slave.
(However) If one of them sells the slave and the slave
(eventually) comes back into the ownership of the Muwakkil
(the one who appointed the others as his representatives) then
the other (representative) will not have the right to sell the
slave again (as the Muwakkil granted one of them the right to
sell the slave and when one of them does so, the other will no
longer have the right to sell the slave).
Example Three
185
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫الاوْ لَیَیْ ل‬ ُْ َ‫ْوةُ ُُلَه ُهُ لذ لُہ ُطَاللقُ ُُاوُْ ُهُ لذ لُہ ُ َوهُ لذ لُہ ُطلق‬
ُ ‫ت ُالحْ دَی ُا‬ ُ‫ ُللثَل ل‬:‫ال‬
َُ ‫ث ُنلس‬ َُ َ‫َولَوُْ ُق‬
ُُ‫ال ُال ْن لعطَافل ُهَا ُ َعلَی ُ ْالمطَلَُّقَ لُة ُ لم ْنهُ َما ُ َویَکوْ نُ ُ ْال لخیَار‬ ُ‫ت ُالثَّاللُثَةُ ُفلی ُ ْال َح ل‬ ُ‫َوطلقَ ل‬
‫الُالحْ دُک َماُطَاللقُُ َوهُذ‬ َُ َ‫انُ ْالمطَلَُّقَ لُةُ لم ْنهُ َماُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُةُ َماُلَوُُْق‬
ُ‫یُبَیَ ل‬ُْ ‫جُفل‬ُ‫للل َّزوْ ل‬
If a person, who has three wives, says, "This one or this one
is divorced and this one", then either one of the first two
(which he specifies) will be divorced and the third will be
divorced immediately because it is in conjunction with the
divorced one of the two. The husband will have the right to
clarify which one of them is divorced as in when he says,
"One of you two is divorced and this one" (whereby he will
have to specify which of the first two has been divorced and the
third will be divorced instantly).
Example Four
ُ‫الَ ُاُ َکلمُ ُهُ َذا ُاُوُْ ُهُ َذا ُاُوُْ ُهُ َذا‬ َُ َ‫ُال َذا ُق‬:‫ال ُزفَرُ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی‬
ُ ُ ‫ال‬ َُ َ‫َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق‬
ُ‫الَ ُیَحْ نَثُ ُ َما ُلَ ُْم ُی َکل ُْم ُاُ َح َُد‬ُ َ‫ْن ُ َوهُ َذا ُف‬
ُ‫الَ ُاُ َکلمُ ُاَ َح َُد ُهُ َذی ل‬ ُ ُ ‫َکانَُ ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُقَوْ لل لُه‬
ُ‫ن‬ َّ
ُ‫لُ َوحْ دَہُُٗیَحْ نَثُُ َولَوْ َکل َُمُاَ َح َُدُاال لخ َر ْی ل‬ َّ ُ‫ْنُ َوالثَّالل ل‬
َُ ‫ثُ َو لع ْن َدنَاُلَوُُْ َکل َُمُاالاُ َّو‬ ُ‫االاُ َّولَی ل‬
‫الَُیَحْ نَثُُ َماُلَ ُْمُی َکل ْمهُ َما‬ ُ
Based upon this (ruling of Talaaq mentioned above) Imaam
Zufar  says that if a person says, "I will not speak to this
person or this person and this person" it will be the same as
him saying, "I will not speak to one of these two and this
person" such that he will not break his oath until he speaks
to one of the first two as well as the third. According to us
(the majority of scholars of the Hanafi Madhab) if he speaks
to the first only then his oath will break and if he speaks to
the last two then his oath will only break when he speaks to
them together (as it is the same as him saying "I will not
speak to this person or I will not talk to this person and this
person").
186
Usool Shaashi
Example Five
ُْ ُ‫الُبل ُْعُهُ َذاُ ْال َع ْب َُدُاوْ ُهُ َذاُ َکانَُُُلَهُا‬

ُ‫نُیَّبل ْی َُعُاَ َحدَهُ َماُایَّهُ َماُ َشآ َء‬ َُ َ‫َولَوْ ق‬
If he says, "Sell this slave or this slave" then the person will
have the choice to sell any of the two he wishes.
Example six
ُُ‫ن ُتَ َّز َو َج ُهَا ُعَلی ُهُ َذا ُاُوُْ ُعَلی ُهُ َذا ُی َح َّکمُ ُ َُم ُْهر‬ُْ ‫ل ُاُوُْ ُفلی ُ ْال َمه لْربلُا‬َُ َ‫َُو ُلَوُْ ُادْخ‬
ُ‫َاولُ ُاَ َحدَهُ َما‬ َ ‫الن ُاللَّ ْفظَُ ُیَتَن‬
َُّ ُ ‫ی ُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی‬ ُ‫ْال لم ْث ل‬
ُْ ‫ل ُ لع ْن َُد ُُابل‬
‫لُفَیَت ََرجَّحُُ َماُی َشابلهُه‬ُ‫َو ْالموْ َجبُُاالاُصْ للیُُ َم ُْهرُُ ْال لم ْث ل‬
If a person adds 'َّ‫ 'اَو‬to Mehr by marrying her with this

(Mehr) or this (Mehr), then according to Imaam Abu
Hanifah  Mehr Mithal (the Mehr commonly given in the
area) will be used to decide the matter as his statement
includes both of the two mentioned and Mehr Mithal is
what should be Waajib (as when the Mehr is not stipulated or
unclear then Mehr Mithal is Waajib), thus that which is
closest to it will be specified (that amount of the two which is
closest to Mehr Mithal will be specified to be the Mehr).
َُّ ُ ‫ْس ُبلر ْکنُ ُفلی ُالصَّلو لُة‬

ُ‫الن ُقَوْ ُلَه ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَمُ ُال َذا‬ َُ ‫َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُاَلتَّ َشهدُ ُلَی‬
ُُ‫الَُیَ ْشت لَرط‬ َُ َّ‫صلوتكَُُ َعل‬
ُ َ‫قُاال ْت َما َُمُبل ا َح لد لُه َماُف‬ َ ُ‫ت‬ ُْ ‫ق ْلتَُُهُ َذاُاُوُُْفَ َع ْلتَُُهُ َذاُفَقَ ُْدُتَ َّم‬
‫الَُی ْشت ََرطُُقل َرُاَةُُالتَّ َشه لُد‬ ُ‫تُ ْال َع ْق َُدةُُبلاالتفَ ل‬
ُ َ‫اقُف‬ ُ‫احدُُ لم ْنهُ َماُ َوقَ ُْدُش لرطَ ل‬ ‫کلُُ َو ل‬
Based upon this (that 'َّ‫ 'اَو‬will include either one of the two
mentioned choices in the ruling) we say that Tashahud is not
Fardh in Salaah because the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "If
you say this (recite Tashahud)or do this (sit in the final
187
Usool Shaashi
Qa'adah) then undoubtedly your Salaah is complete" has
made completion of Salaah dependent on either one of
them (i.e. Salaah will be complete by either the recitation of
Tashahud or sitting in the final Qa'adah) such that both
(Tashahud and the final Qa'adah) cannot be a requisite
(Fardh at the same time because 'َّ‫ 'اَو‬will include only one of the
two in the ruling and not both) and the final Qa'adah is
already unanimously (according to all schools of thought)
Fardh, thus recitation of Tashahud will not be Fardh (as
according to this Hadeeth one of the two is a condition for the
completion of Salaah and it has already been established that
the final Qa'adah is Fardh and a condition for the completion
of Salaah, thus the recitation of Tashahud cannot be).
When 'ُْ‫ 'اَو‬is used in negation
ُ‫احدُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َم ْذکوْ َری ل‬

ُ‫ْن ُ َحتی‬ ‫ی ُکلُ ُ َو ل‬ َُ ‫ی ُیوْ لجبُ ُنَ ْف‬ ُ‫ام ُالنَّ ْف ل‬
ُ‫ی ُ َمقَ ل‬ُْ ‫ث َُّم ُهُ لذ لُہ ُ ْال َکلل َُمةُ ُفل‬
َ ‫ت ُیَتَن‬
ُُ‫َاول‬ ْ ُ ‫الَ ُا َکلمُ ُهُ َذا ُاُوُْ ُهُ َذا ُیَحْ نَثُ ُال َذا ُ َکلَّ َُم ُاَ َحدَهُ َما ُ َوفلی‬
ُ‫االثبَا ل‬ ُ ُ ‫ال‬َُ َ‫لَوُْ ُق‬
ْ ُ‫صُفَ لُةُالت َّ ْخیلی ل‬
َُُ‫ْرُ َکقَوْ لل لُه ُْمُخ ُذُهُ َذاُاُوُُْذللك‬ ‫اَ َحدَهُ َماُ َم َُعُ ل‬
Then (another important rule which one should remember
with regards to the usage of 'َّ‫'اَو‬is) if this word ('َّ‫ )'اَو‬is used in
negation (used in a sentence where something is being
negated) then it necessitates the negation of both objects
mentioned such that if a person says, "I will not talk to this
person or this person", he will break his oath if he talks to
anyone of them (and he will not have the choice to specify
who he will not talk to). (However) When it is used for
affirmation it will apply to both objects with the right to
specify (he may clarify which of the two he is referring to) as
188
Usool Shaashi
in when he says, "Take this or that" (one will have the
choice to specify which to take).
The necessity of having choice

ْ ‫ارتُه ُال‬
ُُ‫ط َعام‬ َ َّ‫ ُ{فَ َکف‬:‫ال ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی‬ َُ َ‫اح لُة ُق‬
َُ َ‫ْر ُعموْ مُ ُاالب‬ ُ‫ضروْ َُرلُة ُالتَّ ْخیلی ل‬َ ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫َو لم‬
ُُ‫ط لعموْ نَُ ُا ُْهللیْک ُْم ُاوْ لک ْس َوتهُ ُْم ُاُوُْ ُتَحْ لریْر‬ ْ ‫ط ُ َما ُت‬ُ‫ن ُاَوْ َس ل‬ُْ ‫َع َش َُر لُة ُ َم َسا لکیْنَُ ُ لم‬
}ُ‫َرقَُبَة‬
Amongst the necessities of having choice (the right to choose
any of the specified objects) is general permissibility (to
choose any one of them). (As in) The verse,
"The Kaffaarah for this (for breaking a deliberate oath) is to

either feed ten poor persons with food of average quality
with which you feed your families, or to clothe them (the ten
poor persons with clothing that at least covers a major portion
of the body), or to free a (Muslim or non-Muslim) slave" (in
this verse one is permitted to adopt any of the above as the
method of paying his Kaffaarah and even all three if he is able
and so desires).
'ُْ‫ 'اَو‬comes with the meaning of "unless"
ُ‫ْس ُلَكَُ ُ لمنَُ ُاالاُ ْم لُر ُ َش ا‬

ُُْ‫ی ُاُو‬ َُ ‫ال ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی ُ{لَی‬ َُ َ‫ ُق‬،‫َوقَ ُْد ُیَکوْ نُ ُاُوُْ ُبل َمعْنی ُ َحتی‬
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ُ ‫ال‬َُ َ‫ ُلَوُْ ُق‬:‫ال ُاَصْ َحابنَا‬ َُ َ‫ب ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُْم ُق‬
َُ ْ‫ ُ َم ْعنَاہُ ُ َحتی ُیَتو‬:‫ْل‬ َُ ‫ب ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُْم} ُقلی‬
َُ ْ‫یَتو‬
ُ‫ل‬َُ َ‫ار ُیَکوْ نُ ُاُوُْ ُبل َمعْنی ُ َحتی ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُ َدخ‬ َُ ‫ار ُاُوُْ ُاُ ْدخلُ ُهُ لذ لُہ ُال َّد‬َُ ‫ا ْدخلُ ُهُ لذ لُہ ُال َّد‬
ُْ ‫لُالثَّانلُیَ ُةَُاُ َّوالُُبَ َُّرُفل‬
‫یُیَ لم ْینل لُه‬ َُ َ‫َثُ َولَوُُْ َدخ‬
َُ ‫االاُوْ لیُاوالُُ َحن‬
Sometimes 'َّ‫ 'اَو‬comes with the meaning of unless (which is a
meaning of '‫)'حتّى‬.
َ (As in) The verse,
You have no choice in the matter unless He forgives them"

(Surah Aal-Imraan: 123)
189
Usool Shaashi
in which 'َّ‫ 'اَو‬has the meaning of unless ('‫)'حتّى‬.
َ (Based upon
this) Our scholars say that if a person takes an oath saying,
"I will not enter this house or this house", 'َّ‫ 'اَو‬will have the
meaning of "Unless" (making his oath actually mean, "I will
not enter this house unless I enter this house") such that if he
first enters the house mentioned first then his oath will
break but if he first enters the house mentioned second
then he will be absolved from his oath (as he fulfilled his vow
by not entering the first house unless he first enters in the
second house).
Example Two
ُ ُ‫یُ َد ْینل ْی‬ ‫یُیَکوْ نُُبل َمعْنیُ َحتیُتَ ْق ل‬

َُ ‫ض‬ ُْ ‫یُ َد ْینل‬ ‫ارقكَُُاُوُُْتَ ْق ل‬
َُ ‫ض‬ ‫الَُاُفَ ل‬ َُ َ‫َوبل لم ْثلل لُهُلَوُُْق‬
ُ ُ‫ال‬
Another example (of the above, where 'َّ‫'اَو‬has the meaning of
unless) is if a person says (to one who owes him money), "I
will not separate from you or you pay my debt (the money
you owe me)" which means, "Unless you pay my debt (the
money you owe me)".
'‫'حتى‬
َ indicates limit
ُُ‫َحتی ُلل ْلغَاُیَ لُة ُ َکاللی ُفَا ل َذا ُ َکانَُ ُ َما ُقَ ْبلَ ُهَا ُقَابلالُ ُللال ْمتلدَا لُد ُ َو َما ُبَ ْع َد ُهَا ُیَصْ لحُ ُغَاُیَة‬
ُ‫ال ُم َح َّمدُ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی ُال َذا‬ َُ َ‫ت ُ ْال َکلل َُمةُ ُعَا لمُلَةُ ُبل َحقل ْیقَتل ُهَا ُ لمثَالُه ُ َما ُق‬ ُ‫ُلَه ُ َکانَ ل‬
ُ‫ی‬َُ ‫ک‬‫حُاُوُُْتَشتَ ل‬ ‫نُلَ ُْمُاَضْ لربْكَُُ َحتیُیَ ْشفَ َُعُفالَنُُاُوُُْ َحتیُت ل‬
َُ ‫َص ْی‬ ُْ ‫الُ َع ْب لدیُُْحرُُال‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
ُ‫ب‬َُ ْ‫الن ُالضَّر‬ ْ
َُّ ُ ‫ت ُال َکلل َُمةُ ُعَا لمُلَةُ ُبل َحقل ْیقَتل ُهَا‬ َّ
ُ‫ل ُاللیْلُ ُ َکانَ ل‬ َُ ‫ی ُاُوُْ ُ َحتی ُیَ ْدخ‬ َُّ ‫بَیْنَُ ُیَ َد‬
ُُْ‫بُفَلَو‬
ُ‫عةُُفالَنُُ َواَ ْمثَال ُهَاُتَصْ لحُُغَاُیَةُُلللضَّرْ ل‬ َُ ‫ارُیَحْ تَ لملُُاال ْمتلدَا َُدُ َو َشفَا‬ ُ‫بلالتَّ ْک َر ل‬
‫َث‬ ْ
َُ ‫ْلُالغَاُیَ لُةُ َحن‬ َُ ‫بُقَب‬ ُ‫َنُالضَّرْ ل‬ ُ‫ال ْمتَنَ َُعُع ل‬
190
Usool Shaashi
('‫ )' َحتى‬indicates limit just as '‫'اِلَى‬. If what precedes it ('‫)' َحتى‬
can be prolonged and what comes after it can be its limit
then '‫'حتّى‬َ will be used for its literal meaning (to indicate
limit). An example of this ('‫ ' َحتى‬indicating the limit)is what
Imaam Muhammed has said when a person says (to his
slave), "My slave is free if I do not hit you until a certain
person intercedes" or "My slave is free if I do not hit you
until you scream" or "My slave is free if I do not hit you
until you complain" or "My slave is free if I do not hit you
until the night sets in" then ('‫ )' َحتى‬will be sued for its literal
meaning (to indicate limit) because to hit repeatedly can be
prolonged (until the specified limit) and the intercession of a
certain person and others alike it (screaming, complaining,
night setting in) can be limit for hitting, thus if he stops
hitting before the specified limit, his oath will break (and
the slave will be set free).
Example Two
ُ
ُ‫ضا لُء ُال َّد ْی ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ َ
َ ‫ْل ُق‬ َ َ َ َ
َ ‫ضُیَه ُ َد ْینَهُ ُفف‬
َُ ‫ارقهُ ُقب‬ ْ
‫َر ْی َُمه ُ َحتی ُیَق ل‬
‫ارقُ ُغ ل‬َ َ
‫ال ُیف ل‬ُ ُ َُ‫َولَوُْ ُ َحلف‬
َ
َُ ‫َحن‬
‫َث‬
If a person takes an oath that he will not separate from his

debtor until he pays his debt but then leaves him before the
debt is paid, his oath will break.
If 'Urf' opposes the literal meaning of '‫'حتى‬

َ
ُْ ‫ف ُ َک َما ُلَوُْ ُ َحلَفَُ ُُا‬

ُ‫ن ُیَضْ لربَهُ ُ َحتی‬ ُ‫فَا ل َذا ُتَ َع َّذ َُر ُ ْال َع َملُ ُبل ْال َحقل ْیُقَ لُة ُلل َمانلعُ ُ َک ْالعرْ ل‬
ُ‫ارُ ْالعرْ ل‬
ُ‫ف‬ ُ‫بُال َّش لد ْی لُدُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬
ُ‫لُ َعلَیُالضَّرْ ل‬ َُ ‫یَموْ تَُُُاوُُْ َحتیُیَ ْقتُلَهُح لم‬
If practising upon the literal meaning (of '‫ )' َحتى‬is impeded
by some hindrance such as 'Urf' (then the meaning of 'Urf'
will be considered), as in taking an oath that he will hit him
191
Usool Shaashi
until he dies or until he is killed, this will be taken to imply
a severe hiding based upon 'Urf' (the common usage of this
term implies a sever hiding thus it will be given preference
over the literal meaning).
If the verb cannot be prolonged
ُُ‫الا َّول‬
ُ ‫ح ُا‬َُ ‫صل‬ َ ‫صاللحا ُلل ْلغَاُیَ لُة ُ َو‬َ ُ ُ‫الا َّولُ ُقَابلالُ ُللال ْمتلدَا لُد ُ َواآلخَ ر‬ ُ ‫ن ُا‬ ُ‫ن ُلَّ ُْم ُیَک ل‬ُْ ‫َوال‬
ُُ‫ال ُم َح َّمدُ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللا‬ َ ْ َ
َُ َ‫َسبَبا ُ َواآلخَ رُ ُ َجزَ اءُ ُیحْ َملُ ُ َعلی ُال َجزَ ا لُء ُ لمثالُه ُ َما ُق‬
َ َ
ُ ُ ‫ی ُفَاتَاہُ ُفَل ُْم ُیغَد لُہ‬
َُ‫ال‬ ُْ ‫ن ُلَّ ُْم ُاتلكَُ ُ َحتی ُتغَدیَنل‬
ُْ ‫ُ َع ْب لدیُْ ُحرُ ُال‬:‫ال ُلل َغی لْر لُہ‬ َُ َ‫تَ َعالی ُال َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫ان ُبَلُْ ُهُ َُو ُدَاعُ ُاللی ُ لزیَـا َُد لُة ُاال ْتیَا ل‬ ُ‫الَ ُیَصْ لحُ ُغَاُیَةُ ُللال ْتیَ ل‬ ُ ُ َ‫الن ُالتَّ ْغ لدُیَ ُة‬
َُّ ُ ُ‫یَحْ نَث‬
ُُْ‫ار ُ َک َما ُلَو‬َُ ‫ص‬ َ َ‫ی ُف‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ح ُ َجزَ اءُ ُفَیحْ َملُ ُ َعلَی ُال َجزَ ا لُء ُفَیَکوْ نُ ُبل َمعْنی ُالَ لُم ُ َک‬ َُ ‫صل‬ َ ‫َو‬
ْ ْ
ُُ‫نُل ُْمُاتلكَُُالتیَاناُ َجزَ اءُہُُالتَّغ لدُیَة‬ َّ ُْ ‫الُال‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
If what precedes it ('‫)'حتّى‬
َ cannot be prolonged and what
comes after it cannot be a limit but the first (what precedes
'‫)'حتّى‬
َ has the ability to be a condition (Sharth) and the
second (what comes after '‫)'حتّى‬
َ has the ability to be the result
(consequence of the condition), then it (what comes after '‫)'حتّى‬
َ
will be the result (consequence of the condition). An example
of this (where the verb which precedes cannot be prolonged
and what comes after cannot be a limit) is what Imaam
Muhammed  has said that when a person says to another,
"My slave is free, if I do not come to you so that you can
give me breakfast" after which he goes to him but does not
receive breakfast, then his vow will not break (and the slave
will not be set free). The reason for this is that "breakfast"
cannot be a limit for coming to him but rather serves more
as an incentive for coming to him and (breakfast) has the
ability to be the result (consequence of the condition) because
of which it will be made into the result (consequence of the
condition) having the meaning of 'َّ‫( 'لِ َكى‬so that), thus it will
be as if he said, "If I do not come to you because of which
you will give me breakfast (then my slave is free)" (and since
192
Usool Shaashi
the master fulfilled the condition of coming to him for
breakfast, his slave will not be set free, even though the host
did not serve him breakfast).
ُ‫ف‬ُ‫ط ل‬ ْ ‫ل ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َع‬ َُ ‫ل ُح لم‬ ُ‫الَ ُیَصْ لحُ ُاآلخَ رُ ُ َجزَ اءُ ُللالاُ َّو ل‬ ُ ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫َوال َذا ُتَ َع َّذ َُر ُهُ َذا ُبلُا‬
ُ‫ك‬َُ ‫نُلَّ ُْمُاتل‬ ُْ ‫الُ َع ْب لدیُُْحرُُال‬ َُ َ‫الُم َح َّمدُُ َر لح َمهُُللاُُتَ َعالیُال َذاُق‬ َُ َ‫ضُ لمثَالُهُ َماق‬ ُ‫ْال َمحْ ل‬
ُ‫ی ُ ْالیَوْ َُم ُفَاَتَاہُ ُفَلَ ُْم‬َُ ‫ی ُ َحتی ُتَغَدی ُ لع ْن لد‬ ُْ ‫ن ُلَّ ُْم ُتَ ْاتلنل‬
ُْ ‫َحتی ُاَتَغَدی ُ لع ْندَكَُ ُاَ ْلیَوْ َُم ُ َوال‬
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫احدُُ لمنَُُ ْالفل ْعلَ ْی ل‬ ‫ضیْفَُُکلُُ َو ل‬ ‫ثُ َوذللكَُُالُنَّهُلَ َّماُا ل‬ َُ َ‫یُذللكَُُ ْالیَوْ لُمُ َحُن‬ ُْ ‫یَتَ َغ َُّدُ لع ْندَہُُفل‬
ُ‫ف‬ُ‫ن ُیَکوْ نَُ ُفلعْلُه ُ َجزَ اءُ ُللفل ْعلل لُه ُفَیحْ َملُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َعطَ ل‬ ُْ ‫الَ ُیَصْ لحُ ُُا‬ ُ ُ ُ‫احد‬‫اللی ُ َذاتُ ُ َو ل‬
ْ
ُ ُ‫ضُفَیَکوْ نُُال َمجْ موْ عُُشَرْ طاُلللبر‬ ْ ُ‫ْال َمحْ ل‬
If this (making what precedes it condition and what comes
after the result) is not possible because what is last (after
'‫)'حتّى‬
َ cannot be the result of what is first (before '‫)'حتّى‬
َ then
it ('‫)'حتّى‬
َ will be only for conjunction. An example of this is
what Imaam Muhammed  has said that if a person says,
"My slave is free if I do not come to you then eat breakfast
with you today" or he says, "My slave is free if you do not
come to me and eat breakfast with me today" after which
he comes but does not eat breakfast with him on that day,
then his oath will break (and the slave will be set free). The
reason for this is that when he ascribed both actions (of
coming and eating breakfast) to himself, his own action
cannot be a result (consequence of the condition) of his own
action (as the second action is not in his control) then it will
be merely for conjunction, making (fulfilment of) all (both
coming and eating breakfast) a condition to be absolved (of
the oath).
193
Usool Shaashi
'‫ 'اللَى‬denotes the extremity of the limit
ُ ‫فصل‬
ْ
ُْ ‫ْضُالص َو لُرُیفلیْدُُ َمعْنیُال ْمتلدَا لُد ُالح ْک لُمُ َوفل‬
ُ‫ی‬ ُ‫یُبَع ل‬ ُْ ‫اللیُال ْنُتلهَا لُءُ ْالغَاُیَ لُةُث َُّمُهُ َُوُفل‬
ُ‫الَ ُتَ ْدخلُ ُ ْالغَاُیَةُ ُفلی‬ ُ ُ ‫ن ُاَفَا َُد ُاال ْمتلدَا َُد‬
ُْ ‫ط ُفَا ل‬ُ‫ْض ُالص َو لُر ُیفلیْدُ ُ َم ْعنَی ُاال ْسقَا ل‬ ُ‫بَع ل‬
ُ‫نُاَفَا َُدُاال ْسقَاطَُُتَ ْدخل‬ ُْ ‫ْالح ْک لُمُ َوال‬
'‫ 'اِلَى‬denotes the extremity (farthest point) of the limit. At
times it indicates the action is prolonged (until the limit) and
in some instances it indicates that the action terminates (at
the limit).If it indicates that the action is prolonged then the
limit will not be included in the action (whatever has been
ordered will be carried out until the limit and will not include
or surpass that limit) and if it indicates that the action is
terminates (at the limit) then it will be included (whatever
has been ordered will be carried out until the limit and the
limit will include and at times even surpass that limit).
If '‫ 'اللَى‬indicates that the action is prolonged
ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْدخلُ ُ ْال َحائلطُ ُفلی‬ ُ ُ‫ط‬ ُ‫ل ُال ْشتَ َریْتُ ُهُ َذا ُ ْال َم َکانَُ ُاللی ُهُ َذا ُ ْال َحائل ل‬ُ‫الا َّو ل‬
ُ ‫ن لَظیْرُ ُا‬
ْ
ُ ُ َُ‫ار ُاللی ُثَلُثَ لُة ُاُیَّامُ ُ َوبل لمثلل لُه ُلَوُْ ُ َحلَف‬
َُ‫ال‬ ْ ُ‫ع ُبلشَرْ ل‬
ُ‫ط ُال لخیَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ْالبَی لُْع ُ َون لَظیْرُ ُالثانل‬
َُ ‫ی ُبَا‬ َّ
ُ‫ط‬ُ‫َاخالفلی ُ ْالحُ ْک لُم ُ َوقَ ُْد ُاَفَا َُد ُفَائل َُد ُةَ ُاال ْسقَا ل‬
‫ا َکلمُ ُفالَنا ُاللی ُ َش ُْهرُ ُ َکانَُ ُال َّش ُْهرُ ُد ل‬
‫ههُنَا‬
An example of the first (where it indicates that the action has
been prolonged until the limit) is (if a person says,) "I
purchased this building until this wall" whereby the wall
will not be included in the sale (as '‫ 'الى‬indicates that the area
which has been purchased extends/stretches/ prolongs until the
wall and will therefore not be included in the sale).
An example of the second (where it indicates that the action
terminates at the limit) is (if a person) purchases something
with the right to cancel the transaction until three days (by
194
Usool Shaashi
saying, "I purchase this from you on condition that I have the
right to cancel the transaction until three days" whereby the
third day will be included and on the third day he will still have
the right to cancel, as '‫ 'الى‬indicates that the right to cancel the
transaction terminates after three days and the right to cancel
will still be valid on the third day).
An example of this is if a person takes an oath, "I will not

talk to a person until a month" whereby the entire month
will be included in the ruling, as it indicates termination
here (it indicates the period in which he will not talk to him
terminates after one month).
ُ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه‬ ُْ ‫ْل ُفل‬ ُ‫ن ُتَحْ تَُ ُح ْک لُم ُ ْالغس ل‬ ‫َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُاَ ْل لمرْ فَقُ ُ َو ْال َکعْبُ ُد ل‬
ُ‫َاخالَ ل‬
ُ ُ ‫ط ُفَا لُنَّه ُلَوْ الَ ُهَا‬
َُ‫ال‬ ُ‫ال ْسقَا ل‬‫الن ُ َکلل َُم ُةَ ُاللی ُههُنَا ُلل ل‬ َُّ ُ }‫ق‬ ُ‫ ُ{اللَی ُ ْال َم َرافل ل‬:‫تَ َعالی‬
ُ‫الن ُ َکلل َُم ُةَ ُاللی‬ َُّ ُ ‫ت ُ ْال َو لظ ْیُفَةُ ُ َج لم ْی َُع ُ ْالیَ لُد َوللهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُاَلر ْکُبَةُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َعوْ َُرلُة‬
ُ‫ْستَوْ َعبَ ل‬
ْ
َُ‫ل ُ َما ُتَحْ تَُ ُالسـ َُّر لُة ُاللَی ُالرکُبَ لُة ُتفلیْدُ ُفَائل َُدُة‬ ُ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَمُعَوْ َُرةُ ُالرَّج ل‬ ُْ ‫فل‬
ْ
‫اطُفَتَ ْدخلُُالر ْکُبَةُُفلیُالح ْک لُم‬ ُ‫اال ْسقَ ل‬
Based upon this (that at times'‫ 'اِلَى‬will indicate that the action
terminates at the limit) we say that the elbows and ankles are
included in the order of Ghusal in the verse,
"Wash your faces, your arms up to(and including)the

elbows, pass wet hands over your heads and (wash)your
feet up to(and including)your ankles." (Surah Maa'idah: 6)
The reason for this is that '‫ 'اِلَى‬here indicates termination

(of the action of washing) because if it does not indicate
termination then washing would extend to the entire arm
(one would have to then wash the entire arm if the limit of
washing had not been specified and in accordance with the
195
Usool Shaashi
rule that when '‫ 'ا ِ َلى‬indicates the termination of an action the
limit will be included in the action, we say the elbow and
ankles are included in the act of washing).
This (because at times'‫ 'اِلَى‬will indicate that the action

terminates at the limit) is why we say the knees are a part of
the 'Aurah' (private area which is compulsory to conceal)
because '‫ 'اِلَى‬in the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "The 'Aurah'
of a man is form his navel up to (and including) the knee",
indicates termination (as the 'Aurah' would have extended up
to the feet had its limit not been defined, i.e. the point of
termination not indicated) because of which the knee is
included in the ruling (of being part of the 'Aurah').
'‫ 'اللَى‬can indicate postponement
ُ‫ت‬ َُ َ‫َاخی َْر ْالح ْک لُم ُاللَی ُ ْالغَاُیَ لُة ُ َوللهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ال ُال ْم َراتل لُه ُاَ ْن ل‬ ‫َوقَ ُْد ُتفلیْدُ ُ َکلل َُمةُ ُاللی ُت ل‬
ُ‫ال ُ لع ْن َدنَا ُ لخالَفا ُللزفَر‬ َ ُ ‫الَ ُیَقَعُ ُالطَّالَقُ ُفلی‬
ُ‫الح ل‬ ُ ‫طَاللقُ ُاللی ُ َش ُْهرُ ُ َو‬
ُ ُ ُ‫الَ ُنلُیَ ُةَ ُلَه‬
ُ‫اط ُشَرْ عا‬ ُ‫الَ ُیَصْ لحُ ُلل َمدُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُ َواال ْسقَ ل‬ ُ ُ ‫الن ُ لذ ْک َُر ُال َّش ُْه لُر‬
َُّ ُ ‫َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی‬
ُ ‫ْقُفَیحْ َملُُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬ َُ ‫َوالطَّالَقُُیَحْ تَ لملُُالتَّا لخی‬
ُ‫ْرُبلالتَّ ُْعللی ل‬
At times '‫ 'اِلَى‬will indicate the postponement of the action to

limit indicated (that the action will only apply when that limit
is reached) because of which we say that if a person tells his
wife, "You are divorced up to a month", without any
(specific) intention then the Talaaq will not apply
immediately (but will be postponed to the end of the month
and will only apply then) as opposed to Imaam Zufar  (who
says the Talaaq will apply immediately and the clause of "up to
a month" will be futile). The reason for this (our proof) is that
"up to a month" cannot indicate prolonging the action (of
Talaaq as it is not an act which can continue repeatedly) nor
can it indicate termination (when the act cannot be prolonged
there is no need to indicate its limit) but Talaaq can be
196
Usool Shaashi
postponed by affixing it to the occurrence of something (i.e.
it can be made conditional, whereby it only applies on the
occurrence of something), thus this is what it will be said to
imply.
'‫' َعلَى‬is for obligation
ُ ‫فصل‬
َُ َ‫ی ُ َوللهُ َذا ُلَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫ال‬ ُْ ‫ق ُ َوالتَّ َعل‬ ُ‫ام ُ َواَصْ لُه ُالفَا َُد لُة ُ َم ْعنَی ُالتَّفَو ل‬ ُ‫ال ْلزَ ل‬‫َکلل َُمةُ ُعَلی ُلل ل‬
ُُْ‫ی ُاَو‬ُْ ‫ال ُ لع ْن لدیُْ ُاَوُْ ُ َم لع‬َُ َ‫ف ُ َما ُلَوُْ ُق‬ ُ‫ی ُاَ ْلفُ ُیحْ َملُ ُ َعلَی ُال َّدی ل‬
ُ‫ْن ُبل لخالَ ل‬ َُّ َ‫للفالَنُ ُ َعل‬
ُ‫یُعَلی‬ ُ‫الُ َراسُُ ْال لحصْ ل‬
ُْ ‫نُا لمنوْ نل‬ ْ ُ‫الُفلیُالسیَ لر ْال َکبلی ل‬
َُ َ‫ُال َذاُق‬:‫ْر‬ َُ َ‫یُ َوعَلیُهُ َذاُق‬ ُْ ‫قلبَلل‬
ُ:‫ل‬ َُ ‫ُ َولَوُُْقَا‬،‫ْنُُلَه‬ ُ‫نُفَفَ َع ْلنَاُفَ ْال َع َش َُرةُُ لس َواہُُ َو لخیَارُُالتَّ ْعُیلی ل‬
ُ‫لُ ْال لحصْ ل‬ ُ‫نُا ُْه ل‬ ُْ ‫َع َش َُرةُُ لم‬
ُ‫ی ُ َو َع َش َُرةُ ُُاوُْ ُفَ َع َش َُرةُ ُاُوُْ ُث َُّم ُ َع َش َُرةُ ُفَفَ َع ْلنَا ُفَ َکذللكَُ ُ َو لخیَارُ ُالتَّ ْعیل ْی ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫ا لمنوْ نل‬
ُ ْ ‫لل‬
ُ‫ال لم ل‬
‫ن‬
'‫ ' َعلَى‬is for obligation (i.e. to make something obligatory) and
in reality it gives the meaning of superiority and elevation.
Based on this (that '‫ ' َعلَى‬makes something obligatory while
providing the meaning of superiority) if a person says, "For a
certain person, upon me is one thousand" (which is the
equivalent of saying, "For a certain person, one thousand is
obligatory on me"), it will incumbent upon him as a debt
(and not as a trust as '‫ ' َعلَى‬denotes superiority as well
indicating that the other person is superior to him, in that he is
his creditor) as opposed to having said 'َّ‫' ِعن ِدى‬- in my
possession("For a certain person, one thousand is in my
possession"), 'َّ‫' َم ِعى‬- with me("For a certain person, one
thousand is with me") 'َّ‫'قِبَلِى‬- towards me ("For a certain
person, one thousand is towards me." Whereby in all three
instances the thousand will be incumbent upon him as a trust
and not as a debt).
Based upon this (that '‫ ' َعلَى‬adds the meaning of superiority) it
is mentioned in 'As-Siyarul Kabeer' that when the leader of
197
Usool Shaashi
the fort says, "Give me sanctuary upon ten of those
residing in the fort" and we do then ten in addition to him
(the leader) will be given sanctuary and the leader will have
the right to choose which ten will be given sanctuary (so as
to fulfil the dictates of '‫ ' َعلَى‬granting him superiority over the
other ten). (However) If he were to say, "Give me sanctuary
and ten others from the fort" or "Give me sanctuary then
ten others from the fort" or "Give me sanctuary thereafter
ten others from the fort" and we do then it will be the same
(sanctuary will be for ten people in addition to the leader) and
the right to choose (which ten will be given sanctuary) will be
for the one giving sanctuary (the Muslim leader).
At times '‫ ' َعلَى‬will have the meaning of the letter

'‫'ب‬
ْ
ُُ‫ك ُهُ َذا ُعَلی ُاَلف‬ َُ َ‫َوقَ ُْد ُیَکوْ نُ ُعَلی ُبل َم ْعنَی ُ ْالبَا لُء ُ َم َجازا ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُق‬
َُ ‫ال ُبلعْت‬
‫ض لُة‬ َ ‫امُد ََالُلَ لُةُ ْالم َع‬
َُ ‫او‬ ُ‫یَکوْ نُُعَلیُبل َم ْعنَیُ ْالبَا لُءُللقلیَ ل‬
Sometimes '‫ ' ََّعلَى‬will have the meaning of the letter '‫ 'ب‬as
Majaaz such that if a person says, "I sell this to you on a
thousand", '‫ ' َعلَى‬will have the meaning of '‫( 'ب‬it will be the
same as saying, "I sell this to you in lieu of a thousand")
because of proof being present that it is a transaction of
exchange (the words "I sell" indicate this).
At times '‫ ' َعلَى‬will indicate a condition
ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ُ‫اركَُ ُ َوتَ َعالی ُ{یبایل ْعنَكَُ ُعَلیُ ُا‬ َُ َ‫ط ُق‬
َ َ‫ال ُللاُ ُتَب‬ ُ‫َوقَ ُْد ُیَکوْ نُ ُعَلی ُبل َم ْعنَی ُال َّشرْ ل‬
ُ‫ت‬ ُْ َ‫ ُال َذا ُقَال‬:‫ال ُاَبوْ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی‬ ُ ‫الَّ ُی ْش لر ْکنَُ ُبلا‬
َُ َ‫ِلل ُ َشیْئا} ُ َوللهُ َذا ُق‬ ُ
ْ
َُ‫الن ُال َکلل َُم ُة‬ ْ
َُّ ُ ُ‫الَ ُیَ لجبُ ُال َمال‬ َّ َ ْ َ
‫ی ُثلثا ُعَلی ُالفُ ُفَطلقَ ُهَا ُ َو ل‬
ُ ُ ُ‫اح َُدة‬ َ ْ َ
ُْ ‫للزَ وْ لج ُهَا ُطلقنل‬
ُ‫ل‬ ْ َّ
ُ‫طُفَیَکوْ نَُُالثلثُُشَرْ طاُلللزوْ لُمُال َما ل‬ َّ
ُ‫ههُنَاُتفلیْدُُ َم ْعنَیُالشرْ ل‬
At times '‫علَى‬
ََّ ' will indicate a condition, (such as in) the
verse,
198
Usool Shaashi
"Accept the pledge of allegiance from the Mu'mineen
women and seek forgiveness from ALLAAH on their behalf
when they come to you on condition that they pledge not to
ascribe any partner to ALLAAH." (Surah Maa'idah: 12)
Based on this (that '‫ 'على‬sometimes indicates a condition)

Imaam Abu Hanifahsays that if a woman tells her
husband, "I will give you one thousand on condition you
give me three Talaaq" and he gives her one Talaaq then the
thousand will not we Waajib (for her to give to her husband)
because '‫'على‬here indicates a condition, thus the issuing
three Talaaq will be necessary for the money to be Waajib.
'ُ‫ 'فل ْى‬indicates containment
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُُ‫َصبْت‬ َُ َ‫ ُال َذا ُق‬:‫ال ُاَصْ َحابنَا‬
َ ‫ال ُغ‬ َُ َ‫ل ُق‬ ُ‫ار ُهُ َذا ُاالاُصْ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُلللظَّرْ ل‬
ُ‫ف ُ َوبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬ ُْ ‫َکلل َُمةُ ُفل‬
‫ص َُرةُُلَ لز َماہُُ َج لمیْعا‬
َ ْ‫یُقَو‬ُْ ‫یُ لم ْن لدیْلُُاوُُْتَ ْمراُفل‬ُْ ‫ثَوْ باُفل‬
The word 'َّ‫ 'فِى‬is used for Tharf (to indicate that the item
before it is contained within the item after it). Based upon this
principle (that 'َّ‫ 'فِى‬is used for Tharf) our scholars (of the
Hanafi Madhab) that if a person says, "I (illegally) seized
cloth in a scarf" or "I (illegally) seized dates in a basket"
then all will be Waajib (it will be Waajib to return the cloth
along with the scarf it was taken in and the dates along with
the basket it was taken in).
199
Usool Shaashi
'ُ‫ 'فل ْى‬is also used to denote place or time
ُ‫ت ُفلی‬ ُْ َ‫ْل ُُا َّما ُال َذا ُاسْت ْع لمل‬ُ‫ان ُ َو ْالفلع ل‬ ُ‫ان ُ َو ْال َم َک ل‬
ُ‫ث َُّم ُهُ لذ لُہ ُ ْال َکلل َُمةُ ُت ْستَ ْع َملُ ُفلی ُال َّز َم ل‬
ُُ‫الُاَبوُُْیوْ سفَُُ َر لح َمهُُللاُُتَ َعالیُ َوم َح َّمد‬ َُ َ‫تُطَاللقُُغَداُفَق‬ ُ‫لُاَ ْن ل‬ َُ ْ‫نُیَقو‬ ُْ ‫انُبلُا‬ُ‫ال َّز َم ل‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫ال ُاَ ْن ل‬َُ َ‫ظهَار ُهَا ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُق‬ ْ ‫ی ُذللكَُ ُ َح ْذف ُهَا ُ َوال‬ ُْ ‫َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی ُیَ ْست لَویُْ ُفل‬
ُ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُغَدا ُیَقَعُ ُالطَّالَقُ ُ َک َما ُطَلَ َُع‬ ُ‫ی ُغَدُ ُ َکانَُ ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُقَوْ لل لُه ُاَ ْن ل‬ ُْ ‫طَاللقُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ب ُاَبوْ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی ُاللی ُاَنَّ ُهَا‬ َُ َ‫ْن ُ َج لمیْعا ُ َُو ُ َذ ُه‬ ُ‫ْالفَجْ رُ ُفلی ُالصوْ َرتَی ل‬
ُ‫ع‬َُ ْ‫ت ُ َکانَُ ُ ْالم َرادُ ُوقو‬ ُْ ‫ظ لُه َر‬ ْ ‫ت ُیَقَعُ ُالطَّالَقُ ُ َک َما ُطَلَ َُع ُ ْالفَجْ رُ ُ َُو ُال َذا ُا‬ ُْ َ‫ال َذا ُح لذف‬
ُُ‫الَ ُوجوْ دُ ُالنُیَ لُة ُیَقَع‬ ُ ْ‫ام ُفَلَو‬ ُ‫ْل ُاال ْب ُهَ ل‬ُ‫ی ُج ُْزءُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َغ لُد ُعَلی ُ َسبلی ل‬ ُْ ‫ق ُفل‬ ُ‫الطَّالَ ل‬
ُْ ‫صح‬
ُُ‫َّت ُنلی َّته‬ ُ‫اح لُم ُُلَه ُ َولَوُْ ُنَوی ُا لخ َُر ُالن َّ ُهَ ل‬
َ ُ ‫ار‬ ‫ل ُ ْالج ُْز لُء ُلل َعد لَُم ُ ْالمزَ ل‬ ُ‫الطَّالَقُ ُبلُا َّو ل‬
ُ‫ن ُص ْمتُ ُال َّش ُْه َُر ُفَُا ْنتَُ ُ َک َذا ُفَا لُنَّه ُیَقَعُ ُعَلی‬ ُْ ‫ل ُال‬ ُ‫ل ُالرَّج ل‬ ُ‫ی ُقَوْ ل‬ُْ ‫َو لمثَالُ ُذللكَُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ت ُ َک َذا ُیَقَعُ ُذللكَُ ُ َعلَی‬ ُ‫ت ُفلی ُال َّش ُْه لُر ُفَُا ْن ل‬ ُ‫ن ُص ْم ل‬ ُْ ‫ال ُال‬ َُ َ‫صوْ لُم ُال َّش ُْه لُر ُ َولَوُْ ُق‬ َ
َّ
‫عةُُفلیُالش ُْه لُر‬ َُ ‫اكُ َسا‬ ُ‫اال ْم َس ل‬
Then 'َّ‫ 'فِى‬is (also) used to denote time (that the verb occurred
in a specific time) and place (that the verb occurred in a
specific place). If it is used to denote time such that if a
person says, "You are divorced in tomorrow" then
the ruling(of when Talaaq will occur) will be the same if 'َّ‫'فِى‬
is mentioned or if it is omitted such that if he says, "You
are divorced in tomorrow" it will be the same as saying,
"You are divorced tomorrow", whereby the Talaaq, in
both instances, will apply at first dawn (the next day). (On
the other hand) Imaam Abu Hanifah is of the opinion that
if 'َّ‫ 'فِى‬is omitted (by saying, "You are divorced tomorrow")
then the Talaaq will apply at first dawn (as this indicates the
onset of the next day) and if 'َّ‫ 'فِى‬is mentioned then it would
imply that the Talaaq will apply in a unspecified time
tomorrow and if he has no intention for a specific time then
(only) will the Talaaq apply at first dawn as there is nothing
else to dispute it (as when he does not have an intention of a
200
Usool Shaashi
specific time there is nothing to imply that the Talaaq was
meant to apply on another time) and if he has the intention of
the evening (of tomorrow) then his intention will be correct
(and the Talaaq will only apply on the intended time).
An example of this (how the ruling differs when 'َّ‫ 'فِى‬is

mentioned and omitted) is when a man says (to his wife), "If
you fast a month then you are divorced", whereby the
Talaaq will only apply if she fasts for a (complete) month as
opposed to if he says, "If you fast in the month then you are
divorced", whereby the Talaaq will apply if one fasts for
even a brief period in the month.
When 'ُ‫ 'فل ْى‬denotes place
َُُ‫ک ُةَ ُیَکوْ نُ ُذللك‬ َُّ ‫ی ُ َم‬ ُْ ‫ار ُاُوُْ ُفل‬ ُ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُفلی ُال َّد ل‬ ُ‫ان ُفَ لم ْثلُ ُقَوْ لل لُه ُاُ ْن ل‬ ُ‫َو ُاُ َّما ُفلی ُ ْال َم َک ل‬
ُ‫ار ُ َم ْعنَی ُالظَّرْ فلُیَ لُة ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا‬ ُ‫ن ُ َوبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُ َج لمی لُْع ُاالاُ َما لک ل‬ ُْ ‫ق ُفل‬ ْ ُ ‫طَالقا ُ َعلَی‬
ُ‫االطالَ ل‬
ُُ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُ ْالفلعْلُ ُ لم َّما ُیَتلم‬ ُْ ‫ضاُفَه ُاللی ُزَ َمانُ ُُاوُْ ُ َم َکانُ ُفَا ل‬ َ َ‫َحلَفَُ ُعَلی ُفلعْلُ ُ َوا‬
ُُ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُ ْالفلعْل‬ ُ‫ان ُاُ لُو ُ ْال َم َک ل‬
ُْ ‫ان ُ َوال‬ ُ‫ی ُذللكَُ ُال َّز َم ل‬ ُ‫ل ُُیَ ْشت لَرطُ ُ َکوْ نُ ُ ْالفَا لع ل‬
ُْ ‫ل ُفل‬ ُ‫بل ْالفَا لع ل‬
َُّ ُ ‫ان‬
ُ‫الن‬ ُ‫ن ُاُ لُو ُ ْال َم َک ل‬ ُ‫ی ُذللكَُ ُال َّز َما ل‬ ُْ ‫یَتَ َعدی ُاللی ُ َم َحلُ ُیَ ْشت لَرطُ ُ َکوْ نُ ُ ْال َم َحلُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ال ُم َح َّمدُ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی ُفلی‬ َُ َ‫ْل ُالنَّ َما ُیَت ََحقَّقُ ُبلُا ْث لر لُہ ُ َو ْاثرہ ُفلی ُ ْال َم َحلُ ُق‬ َُ ‫ْالفلع‬
ُ‫ْج لُد ُفَ َک َذا ُفَ َشتَ َُمه ُ َوهُ َُو ُفلی‬ ‫ن ُ َشتَ ْمتكَُ ُفلی ُ ْال َمس ل‬ ُْ ‫ال ُال‬ َُ َ‫ ُال َذا ُق‬:‫ْر‬ ُ‫ْال َجا لم لُع ُ ْال َکبلی ل‬
‫ج ُ ْال َمس ل‬
ُ‫ْج لُد‬ َُ ‫ار‬‫ْج لُد ُیَحْ نَثُ ُ َولَوْ َکانَُ ُال َّشاتلمُ ُخَ ل‬ ‫ج ُ ْال َمس ل‬ َُ ‫َار‬ ‫ْج لُد ُ َو ْال َم ْشتوْ مُ ُخ ل‬ ‫ْال َمس ل‬
ُ‫ض َربْتكَُ ُاُوُْ ُ َش َججْ تكَُ ُفلی‬ َ ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫ ُال‬:‫ال‬َُ َ‫الَ ُیَحْ نَثُ َولَوُْ ُق‬ ُ ُ ‫ْج لُد‬ ‫َو ْال َم ْشتوْ مُ ُفلی ُ ْال َمس ل‬
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ‫ْج لُد ُ َو‬ ‫ج ُفلی ُ ْال َمس ل‬ ُ‫ب ُ َو ْال َم ْشجوْ ل‬ ُ‫ْج لُد ُفَ َک َذا ُیَ ْشت لَرطُ ُ َکوْ نُ ُ ْال َمضْ روْ ل‬ ‫ْال َمس ل‬
ُ‫ی ُیَوْ لُم ُ ْالخَ لمی ل‬
ُ‫ْس‬ ُْ ‫ن ُقَت َْلتكَُ ُفل‬ ُْ ‫ُال‬:‫ل‬ َُ ‫ب ُ َوال َّشاجُ ُفل ْی لُه ُ َُو ُلَوُْ ُقَا‬ ُ‫َّار ل‬ ‫یَ ْشت لَرطُ ُ َکوْ نُ ُالض ل‬
ُ‫حه ُیَوْ َُم‬ َُ ‫ْس ُیَحْ نَثُ ُ َولَوْ َج َر‬ ْ
ُ‫ْس ُ َو َماتَُ ُیَوْ َُم ُالخَ لمی ل‬ ْ
ُ‫ْل ُیَوْ لُم ُالخَ لمی ل‬ َُ ‫حه ُقَب‬ َُ ‫فَ َک َذا ُفَ َج َر‬
ُ‫الَُیَحْ نَث‬ ْ
ُ ُ‫ْسُ َو َماتَُُیَوْ َُمُالجم َُع لُة‬ ُ‫ْالخَ لمی ل‬
If it is used to denote place, for example when a person says

(to his wife), "You are divorced in the house" or "You are
divorced in Makkah" then the Talaaq will apply
unrestrictedly in any place (where it was issued even if not in
the house or Makkah). In consideration that 'َّ‫ ' ِفى‬comes for
201
Usool Shaashi
Tharf (to indicate that the verb before is occurring within the
time or place specified after it) we say that if person takes an
oath to do something and ascribes it to a time or place (that
he will do it in a certain time or in a certain place) then if the
action is such that it can be accomplished by the doer
himself (and the presence of another is not required for it to be
executed, known as 'F'il Laazim') then it is incumbent for the
doer to be present in that time or place. If the action is such
that it is executed on another (whereby the presence of
another is required for it to be executed, known as 'F'il
Muta'ddie') then it is incumbent for the one on whom the
action will be done (Maf'ool) to be present in that time or
place. The reason for this is that an action materialises
when its effects become apparent and (in 'Fil Muta'die) its
effects will become apparent on another (thus the presence
of the other will be required in that time or place in order for
the action to materialise).
(An example of ''F'il Laazim' is what) Imaam Muhammed

has said in 'Al-Jaami'ul Kabeer' that if a person says, "If I
swear you in the Masjid then you are like this (divorced,
free, etc)"and he then swears such that the one who swore
(the doer) is in the Masjid and the one who was sworn at
(Maf'ool) was out of the Masjid, his oath will break (and the
Talaaq, freedom, etc will be in effect as swearing is an action
which can be accomplished by the doer himself ('F'il Laazim')
and requires the doer to be present in the Masjid when the
action occurs) and if the one who swore (the doer) was
outside the Masjid and the one who was sworn at (Maf'ool)
was inside the Masjid then his oath will not break (because
'F'il Laazim' requires the doer to be present in the time or
place when the action was carried out and since the doer was
outside the Masjid when swearing his oath will not break).
202
Usool Shaashi
(An example of 'F'il Muta'ddie' whereby the action was
ascribed to a place is) If a person says, "If I hit you in the
Masjid then you are like this (divorced, free, etc)"or (he
says) "If I wound you in the Masjid then you are like this
(divorced, free, etc)" then it would be necessary for the one
who was struck or wounded to be in the Masjid (when the
action of hitting or wounding is carried out for the oath to
break) and it is not necessary for the one who hit or the one
who wounded him (the doer) to be in the Masjid (at the time
when the action was carried out)1.
(An example of 'F'il Muta'ddie' whereby the action was

ascribed to a place is) If a person says, "If I kill you in a
Thursday then this will happen (my slave will be free, etc)"
and he then attacks him the day before (Wednesday) but
dies on Thursday, then his oath will break (as 'F'il
Muta'ddie' requires that the one on whom the action is done
must be present in the place or time when the action is carried
out, and when the victim died on Thursday, it is established
that he was killed on Thursday) and if he is attacks him on
Thursday but he dies on Friday, then his oath will not
break (because when the victim died on Friday, it is
established that he was killed on Friday).
'ُ‫ 'فل ْى‬sometimes indicates a condition
ُ‫ل ُتفلیْدُ ُ َم ْعنَی ُال َّشرْ ل‬

َُ َ‫ط ُق‬
ُُ‫ال ُم َح َّمدُ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللا‬ ُ‫ت ُ ْال َکلل َُمةُ ُفلی ُ ْالفلعْ ل‬ُ‫َولَوُْ ُ َدخَ لَ ل‬
ُُ‫الَ ُیَقَع‬
ُ َ‫ط ُف‬ َّ
ُ‫ار ُفَهُ َوبل َم ْعنَی ُالشرْ ل‬ َُ ‫ك ُال َّد‬
ُ‫ت ُطاللقُ ُفلی ُدخوْ لل ل‬ َ ْ َُ َ‫ ُال َذا ُق‬:‫تَ َعالی‬
ُ‫ال ُاُن ل‬
ُ‫َت ُفلی‬ ْ
ُ ‫ن ُ َکان‬ ُْ ‫ك ُال‬ ُْ ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُفل‬
َ ‫ی ُ َح ْی‬
ُ‫ضتل ل‬ ْ َُ َ‫ار ُ َولَوْ ق‬
ُ‫ُاُن ل‬:‫ال‬ ُ‫ل ُال َّد ل‬
ُ‫ْل ُدخوْ ل‬ َُ ‫الطَّالَقُ ُقَب‬
1
The scenarios and rulings of the above are as follows;
1) If the one who was hit or wounded was inside the Masjid when the act of hitting or
wounding occurred and the doer, i.e. the one who did the hitting or wounding, was out of the
masjid, then his oath will break.
2) If the one who was hit or wounded was outside the Masjid when the act of hitting or
wounding occurred and the doer, i.e. the one who did the hitting or wounding, was inside the
masjid, then his oath will not break.
203
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ ُ َوفلی‬،‫ْض‬ ‫الَّ ُیَتَ َعلَّقُ ُالطَّالَقُ ُبل ْال َحی ل‬ ُ ‫ال ُ َُو ُال‬ُ‫ْض ُ َوقَ َُع ُالطَّالَقُ ُفلی ُ ْال َح ل‬ ُ‫ْال َحی ل‬
ْ َ‫ق ُ َحتی ُی‬
ُُْ‫طلَ َُع ُ ْالفَجْ رُ ُ َولَو‬ ُْ َّ‫ی ُیَوْ مُ ُلَ ُْم ُتطَل‬
ُ‫ی ُ َم لج لا‬ ُْ ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُفل‬ َُ َ‫ْال َجا لم لُع ُلَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫ُُا ْن ل‬:‫ال‬
ُ‫ْل ُ َوقَ َُع ُالطَّالَقُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُغروْ ل‬
ُ‫ب‬ ُ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُذللكَُ ُفلی ُاللَّی ل‬ ُْ ‫ضیُ ُیَوْ مُ ُال‬ ‫ی ُم ل‬ ُْ ‫ ُفل‬:‫ال‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
َُُ‫ی ُ لمن‬ُ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُفلی ُ ْالیَوْ لُم ُتطَلَّقُ ُ لحیْنَُ ُتَ لج ا‬ ُْ ‫ط ُ َوال‬ُ‫س ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َغ لُد ُللوجوْ لُد ُال َّشرْ ل‬ ُ‫ال َّش ْم ل‬
ُُْ‫للالُتَ َعالی ُُاو‬ ُْ ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُفل‬
ُ ‫ی ُ َم لشُیَّ لة‬ ُ‫ُاَ ْن ل‬:‫ال‬ َُ َ‫ت ُلَوُْ ُق‬ ُ‫ع لُة َوفلی ُالزیَادَا ل‬ َُ ‫ْال َغ لُد ُتل ْلكَُ ُالسَّا‬
ُ َُ‫الَُتطَلَّق‬ ُ ُ‫طُ َحتی‬ ُ‫للالُ َکانَُُذللكَُُبل َم ْعنَیُال َّشرْ ل‬ ُ ُ‫یُال َرا َُد لُة‬ ُْ ‫فل‬
If 'َّ‫ 'فِى‬is attached to an action it will indicate that it (what
follows) is a condition (for the ruling to apply). Imaam
Muhammed  says that if a person says (to his wife), "You
are divorced in your entrance to the house" then this has
the meaning of a condition (it is the same as saying, "You are
Divorced if you enter the house") and the Talaaq will not
apply before entrance into the house.
If a person says (to his wife), "You are divorced in your

menstruation" (which is the same as saying, "You are
divorced if you menstruate") then the Talaaq will apply
immediately if she is already menstruating and if she is not
menstruating (at that time) then it will apply when her (next
period of) menstruation begins.
It is mentioned in 'Al-Jaami'ul Kabeer' it is mentioned that

if a person says (to his wife), "You are divorced in the
coming of day" (which is the same as saying, "You are
divorced if the day comes") then the Talaaq will not apply
until the coming of dawn (as this will establish the coming of
day). If he said, "You are divorced in the passing of a day"
(which is the same as saying, "You are divorced if a day
passes"), if this is said at night, then the Talaaq will apply
at sunset the next day because of the condition being met
(the passing of the day has been established). If this ("You are
divorced in the passing of a day") was said during the day,
then the Talaaq will apply at the same time the next day (as
204
Usool Shaashi
this will establish that a day, which is twenty-four hours, has
passed).
It is mentioned in 'Ziyaadaat' that if a person says (to his

wife),"You are divorced in the Will of ALLAAH" or "You
are divorced in the Wish of ALLAAH" then this will have
the meaning of a condition (it will be the same as saying,
"You are divorced if ALLAAH wills" or "You are divorced if
ALLAAH wishes") such that the Talaaq will not apply (at
all).
The letter '‫ 'ب‬is for correlation
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُ‫الاث َمانَُُ َوتَحْ قلیْقُُهُ َذا‬ ْ ُ ‫یُ َوضْ لُعُالل َُغ لُةُ َوللهُ َذاُتَصْ َحبُُا‬ ُْ ‫اقُفل‬
ُ‫ص ل‬ َ ‫الل‬ ْ ‫َحرْ فُُ ْالبَا لُءُلل‬
ُ‫ن ُ ْال َمبل ْی َُع ُاَصْ لُ ُفلی ُ ْالبَی لُْع ُ َوالثَّ َمنَُ ُشَرْ طُ ُفل ْی لُه ُ َوللهُ َذا ُ ْال َمعْنی ُهَالَكُ ُ ْال َمبلی لُْع‬ َُّ َ‫ا‬
ُْ ‫االصْ لُ ُُا‬
ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫ن ُال َذا ُثَبَتَُ ُهُ َذا ُفَنَقوْ لُ ُ َ ا‬ َّ
ُ‫ك ُالث َم ل‬ ُ‫ع ُالبَی لُْع ُدوْ نَُ ُهَالَ ل‬ ْ َُ ‫یوْ لجبُ ُالرْ تلفَا‬
َُ َ‫صقا ُبلالتَّب لُْع ُفَا ل َذا ُ َدخ‬
ُ‫ل‬ ْ
َ ‫الاصْ لُ ُمل‬ ُ ‫ن ُیَکوْ نَُ ُا‬ ُْ ُ‫الَ ُا‬
ُ ُ‫ل‬ُ‫الاصْ ل‬ ُ ‫صقا ُبلا‬ َ ‫یَّکوْ نَُ ُالتَّبْعُ ُم ْل‬
ُ‫صقُُبلاالاُصْ ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ َ ‫لُذللكَُُعَلیُاَُنَّهُتَبْعُُم ْل‬ َُّ ‫بُ ْالبَی لُْعُ َد‬ُ‫یُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫لُفل‬ ُ‫َحرْ فُُ ْالبَا لُءُفلیُ ْالبَ ْد ل‬
‫الَُیَکوْ نُُ َمبلیْعاُفَیَکوْ نُُثَ َمنا‬ ُ َ‫ف‬
The letter '‫ 'ب‬is for correlation (to link or associate that on
which it is attached with something else). This is why it
usually accompanies (is attached to) the price (in a sales
transaction, known as the 'Thaman'). This(the reason why '‫'ب‬
will be attached to the price) is because the item on sale
(Mabee'a) is the primary entity in a transaction and the
price (Thaman) is merely a condition (for exchange) in the
transaction because(the reason why the Mabee'a is the
primary entity is because) if the item on sale is lost (or
destroyed) the transaction will have to be cancelled as
opposed to when the price is lost (whereby another may be
given in its place, thus establishing that the Mabee'a is the
primary entity). Once this has been established we say the
205
Usool Shaashi
secondary object (Thaman) will be attached to the primary
object (the letter '‫ 'ب‬will be attached to the Thaman) and not
that the primary object will be attached to the secondary.
Thus if the letter '‫'ب‬is attached to an item in a sales
transaction this will prove that it is the secondary object
which is attaché to the primary, making it the price
(Thaman) and not the item on sale (Mabee'a).
ُ ‫ال ُبلعْتُ ُ لم ْنكَُ ُهُ َذا ُ ْال َع ْب َُد ُبلکر لمنَُ ُ ْال لح ْن‬
َ ‫طَ لُة ُ َو َو‬
ُ‫صفَ ُهَا‬ َُ َ‫َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُق‬
َُ ‫ْض َولَوُْ ُقَا‬
ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫ْل ُ ْالقَب ل‬ َُ ‫یَکوْ نُ ُ ْال َعبْدُ ُ َمبلیْعا ُ َو ْالکرثَ َمنا ُفَیَجوْ زاال ْستل ْبدَالُ ُبل لُه ُقَب‬
ُ‫صفَ ُهَا ُبلهُ َذا ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُیَکوْ نَُ ُ ْال َعبْدُ ُثَ َمنا‬ ُ ‫بلعْتُ ُ لم ْنكَُ ُکرا ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال لح ْن‬
َ ‫طَ لُة ُ َو َو‬
ُ‫الَُّم اوجَّال‬
ُ ‫صحُُال‬ ُ ُ‫َو ْالکر َمبلیْعاُ َویَکوْ نُُ ْال َع ْقدُُ َسلَما‬
‫الَُیَ ل‬
Based upon this (that the letter '‫ 'ب‬will be attached to the
Thaman) we say that when a person says, "I sell this slave to
you for a Kur (a specified measurement) of wheat" and
describes it (clarifies the quality, type, and class of wheat), the
slave will be the item on sale (primary object of the
transaction, i.e. Mabee'a) and the wheat will be the price
(secondary object of the transaction, i.e. Thaman), thus it will
be permissible to change it (the wheat) with another before
the other party takes possession of it. If he were to have
said, "I sell this Kur of wheat to you (while mentioning the
quality, type, and class of wheat) for this slave" then the
slave would be the price (Thaman) and the wheat the item
on sale (Mabee'a), making the transaction that of Salam,
which is only permissible on credit.
ُ‫یُبلقدوْ لُمُفالَنُُفَُا ْنتَُُحرُُفَ َذاللكَُُ َعلَی‬ ُْ ‫نُاَ ْخبَرْ تَنل‬ َُ َ‫اونَاُال َذاُق‬
ُْ ‫الُلل َع ْب لد لُہُال‬ ُ‫الُعلَ َم ا‬َُ َ‫َوق‬
ُُْ‫ال ُی ْعتَقُ ُ َولَو‬ ْ
ُ َ ُ ‫صقا ُبلالقدوْ لُم ُفَلَوُْ ُاُ ْخبَ َُر ُ َکا لذبا‬ ْ ْ
َ ‫ق ُللیَکوْ نَُ ُالخَ بَرمل‬ ُ‫ْالخَ بَ لُر ُالصَّا لد ل‬
ُ‫قُ ْالخَ بَ لُرُفَلَوُُْاَ ْخبَ َرہ‬ ُ‫طلَ ل‬ْ ‫نُفالَناُقَ لد َُمُفَُا ْنتَُُحُرفَذللكَُُعَلیُم‬ ُْ ‫نُاَ ْخبَرْ تَنل‬
َُّ َ‫یُا‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
ُْ ‫الُال‬
ُ‫ی ُفَُا ْن ل‬
ُ‫ت ُ َک َذا‬ ْ
ُْ ‫الَّ ُبلالذنل‬
ُ ‫ار ُال‬ُ‫ت ُ لمنَُ ُال َّد ل‬ ُ‫ن ُخَ َرجْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ ُال‬:‫ال ُال ْم َراتل لُه‬ َُ َ‫ُولَوُْ ُق‬ َ ‫ق‬ َ ‫َکا لذبا ُعتل‬
206
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ت‬ُْ ‫نُفَلَوُُْخَ َر َج‬ ْ ‫صقُُبل‬
ُ‫االذ ل‬ َ ‫لُ َم َُّرةُُال لُذ ُ ْالم ْست َْثنیُخروْ جُُم ْل‬ َُّ ‫نُک‬ ْ ُ‫تَحْ تَاجُُاللَی‬
ُ‫االذ ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ُْ ‫الَُُّا‬ ُ‫ت ُ لمنَُ ُال َّد ل‬
ُ ‫ار ُال‬ ُ‫ن ُخَ َرجْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ُال‬:‫ال‬ ُْ َ‫ن ُطلق‬
َُ َ‫ت ُ َولَوْ ق‬ ْ ُ‫ن‬
ُ‫االذ ل‬ ُ‫فلی ُ ْال َم َُّر لُة ُالثَّانلُیَ لُة ُبلدوْ ل‬
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ُ‫ن‬ ْ ُ‫ن‬
ُ‫االذ ل‬ ُ‫تُ َم َُّرةُُا ْخریُبلدوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫نُ َم َُّرةُُ َحتیُلَوُُْخَ َر َج‬ ْ ُ‫كُفَذللكَُُ َعلَی‬
ُ‫االذ ل‬ ُ‫ا َذنَُُلَ ل‬
ُ ُ ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُبل َم ْشُیَّ لُة‬
ُ ُ ‫للال ُتَ َعالی ُُاوُْ ُبلا ل َرا َُد لُة‬
ُ‫للال‬ ُ‫ُُا ْن ل‬:‫ال‬
َُ َ‫ت ُال َذا ُق‬ ُ‫تطَلَّقُ ُ َوفلی ُالزیَادَا ل‬
ُْ َّ‫تَ َعالیُُاوُُْبلح ْک لم لُهُلَ ُْمُتطَل‬
‫ق‬
Our Ulama (of the Hanafi Madhab) says that if a person tells
his slave, "If you inform me of the arrival of a certain
person, then you are free" this will refer to true
information because informing has been correlated (linked
of associated)
with the arrival (of that person make it the same as saying,
"If you inform me when that person arrives, then you are
free"), thus if he gives him false information (of the arrival)
he will not be set free.
If he were to have said, "If you inform me that a certain

person has arrived then you are free"(without the letter '‫)'ب‬,
then this will permit any information such that if he gives
him false information (of the person's arrival), he will be set
free (as he was only asked to be informed and did not attach it
to the arrival of that person).
If a person tells his wife, "If you leave this house except
with my permission then you are divorced", then
permission will be required each time she leaves the house
because the exception to leaving has been attached to
permission (meaning that the only time she is allowed to leave
the house is if she has his permission) such that if she leaves
the house the second time without his permission she will
be divorced.
If he were to have said, "If you leave this house except if I

have permitted you then you are divorced" (without the
letter '‫ )'ب‬then permission will only be required once such
207
Usool Shaashi
that if she leaves the second time without permission she
will not be divorced.
It is mentioned in 'Ziyaadaat' that if a person says (to his

wife), "You are divorced with the will of ALLAAH" or
"You are divorced with the wish of ALLAAH" or "You are
divorced with the order of ALLAAH" then the Talaaq will
not apply (as the Talaaq has been correlate to the will, wish
and order of ALLAAH and since the will, wish and order of
ALLAAH in this regard cannot be ascertained, the Talaaq will
not apply)
Lesson on the methods of clarification
ُ ‫یُوجوْ لُہُ ْالبَیَان‬ ُْ ‫فصلُفل‬

ُ‫ْالبَیَ ل‬
ُُ‫ ُ َوبَیَان‬،‫ ُ َوبَیَانُ ُتَ ْف لسیْرُ ُ َوبَیَانُ ُتَ ْغیلیْر‬،‫ُبَیَانُ ُتَ ْق لریْر‬:ُ‫ان ُعَلی ُ َس ْب َُع لُة ُُا ْن َواع‬
ُ‫َطفُُ َوبَیَانُُتَ ْب لدیْل‬ ْ ‫ضروْ َُرةُُ َُوُبَیَانُُ َحالُُ َوبَیَانُُع‬ َ
The methods of clarification (the manner in which the
implication and purport of the speaker is clarified) are seven
types;
1) 'Bayaanut Taqreer'
2) 'Bayaanut Tafseer'
3)'Bayaanut Taghyeer'
4)'Bayaanudh Dharoorah'
5)'Bayaanul Haal'
6) 'Bayaanul Athaf'
7) 'Bayaanut Tabdeel'
208
Usool Shaashi
'Bayaanut Taqreer'
َُُ‫ظ ُظَا لُهراُ ُلَ لکُنَّه ُیَحْ تَ لملُ ُ َغی َْرہُ ُفَبَی َّن‬ ُ‫ن ُیَّکوْ نَُ ُ َم ْعنَی ُاللَّ ْف ل‬ ُْ ‫الا َّولُ ُفَهُ َُو ُُا‬
ُ ‫ا َّما ُا‬
ُُ‫ال ُللفالَن‬ َُ َ‫ْالم َرا َُد ُبل َما ُهُ َُو ُالظَّا لُهرُ ُفَیَتَقَرَّرُ ُح ْکمُ ُالظَّا له لُر ُبلبَیَانل لُه ُ َو لمثَالُه ُال َذا ُق‬
ُُ‫ن ُنَ ْق لُد ُ ْالبَلَ لُد ُفَا لُنَّه ُیَکوْ نُ ُبَیَانُ ُتَ ْق لریْر‬ ُْ ‫طَةُ ُبلقَفلی لُْز ُ ْالبَلَ لُد ُُاوُْ ُُا ْلفُ ُ لم‬
ُ ‫ی ُقَفلیْزُ ُ لح ْن‬ َُّ َ‫َعل‬
ُ‫ال ُال َرا َُد لُة ُ ْال َغی ل‬
ُ‫ْر‬ ُ‫ْز ُ ْالبَلَ لُد ُ َونَ ْق لد لُہ ُ َم َُع ُالحْ تل َم ل‬
ُ‫ق ُ َکانَُ ُ َمحُْموْ الُ ُعَلی ُقَفلی ل‬ ْ ‫الن ُ ْالم‬
َُ َ‫طل‬ َُّ
ُ‫ن‬َُّ ‫ال ُللفالَنُ ُ لع ْن لدیُُْاَ ْلفُ ُ َو لد ْی َُعةُ ُفَا ل‬ َُ َ‫َّرہ ُبلبَیَانل لُه ُ َو َکذللكَُ ُلَوُْ ُق‬ َُ ‫فَا ل َذا ُبَیَّنَُ ُ َذللكَُ ُفَقَ ُْد ُقَر‬
َُ َ‫ْر ُفَا ل َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ال‬ ُ‫ال ُال َرا َُد لُة ُ ْال َغی ل‬
ُ‫اطالَقل ُهَا ُتفلیْدُ ُاالَ َماُنَ ُةَ ُ َم َُع ُالحْ تل َم ل‬ ْ ‫َت ُبل‬ ُْ ‫َکلل َُم ُةَ ُ لع ْن لدیُْ ُ َکان‬
ُ ‫َّرُح ْک َُمُالظَّا لُه لُرُبلبَیَاُنل لُه‬ َُ ‫َو لد ْی َُعةُُفَقَ ُْدُقَر‬
As for the first ('Bayaanut Taqreer'), when the meaning of a
word is clear but has the possibility of referring to another
meaning besides the literal meaning it ('Bayaanut Taqreer')
will clarify that the literal meaning is implied, thus
establishing the implication of the clear meaning. An
example of this ('Bayaanut Taqreer') is when a person says,
"I owe a certain person a Kafeez (unit of measurement) of
wheat; the Kafeez of this town" or "I owe a person one
thousand from the currency of this town". This (clarifying
the Kafeez and the currency of a that particular town is
implied) will be 'Bayaanut Taqreer' because if it were not
mentioned then the Kafeez and currency of that town
would be considered with the possibility of another being
implied and when it was clarified (by the speaker himself)
then it is established (that the Kafeez and currency of that
town is implied).
Similarly (another example of 'Bayaanut Taqreer') is if a

person says, "A thousand belonging to a certain person is
in my possession as trust" because if he were to only say,
"A thousand belonging to a certain person is in my
possession" then it could imply that it is with him as a trust
or through some other means (he owes him the money as a
209
Usool Shaashi
debt, or he illegally seized the money from him, etc) and by
saying, "as trust" the implication of the apparent meaning
is established.
'Bayaanut Tafseer'
ُ ‫فصل‬
َُُ‫ف ُ ْالم َرا لُد ُفَ َک َشف‬ ُ‫ْر ُفَهُ َو َما ُال َذا ُ َکانَُ ُاللَّ ْفظُ ُ َغیْرُ ُ َم ْکشوْ ل‬ ُ‫َواُ َّما ُبَیَانُ ُالتَّ ْف لسی ل‬
ُ‫ی‬َُّ َ‫ال ُ َعل‬
َُ َ‫ئ ُبلثَوْ بُ ُاُوُْ ُق‬ َُ ‫َّر ُال َّش‬ َُ ‫شئُ ُث َُّم ُفَس‬ َُّ ‫ال ُللفالَنُ ُعَل‬
َُ ُ ‫ی‬ َُ َ‫بلبَیَانل لُه ُ لمثَالُه ُال َذا ُق‬
َُّ َ‫ال ُ َعل‬
ُُ‫ی ُد ََرا لُهمُ ُ َوفَس ََّر ُهَا ُبل َع َش َُرة‬ َُ َ‫َع َش َُرةُ ُد ََرا لُه َُم ُ َونلیْفُ ُث َُّم ُفَ َّس َُر ُالنیْفَُ ُاُوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫َمثَال‬
As for 'Bayaanut Tafseer', it is when the implication of a

word which is unclear is clarified. An example of this
('Bayaanut Tafseer') is when a person says, "I owe a certain
person something" after which he clarifies what that
something is; (for example) a cloth, or he says, "I owe a
certain person ten dirhams and something additional"
after which he clarifies what that additional item is (e.g. a
slave, etc) or he says, "I owe a certain person Dirhams"
after which he clarifies that he owes ten dirhams.
The ruling of 'Bayaanut Taqreer' and 'Bayaanut

Tafseer'
ُ‫َّصحُُ َموْ صوْ الُُ َُوُ َم ْفصوْ ال‬ ُ‫ْنُ لمنَُُ ْالبَیَ ل‬
ُْ َ‫انُُا‬
‫نُی ل‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُُهُ َذی ل‬
ُ‫ْنُالنَّوْ َعی ل‬
The ruling of these two types of clarification ('Bayaanut
Taqreer' and 'Bayaanut Tafseer') is that they are valid (it will
be considered as clarification of the ambiguity) whether made
immediately after the initial statement or after an interval.
210
Usool Shaashi
'Bayaanut Taghyeer'
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُ‫َو ُاَ َّما ُبَیَان ُالتَّ ْغیلی لْر ُُفَهُ َو ُاَ ْن ُیَّتَ َغی ََّر ُبلبَیَاُنل لُه ُ َمعْنیُ َک َال لُم لُه ُ َو ُن لَظیْرُہُ ُالتَّ ْعللیْق ُ َو‬
ْ ‫الُاَصْ َحابن‬
ُ‫َاُالم َعلَّقُبلال َّشرْ لط‬ ْ ‫ُالفُقَ ُهَاءُفل‬
َ َ‫یُالفَصْ لَی لْنُفَق‬ ْ َ‫ُوُقَ ْدُال ْختَلَف‬ َ ‫اال ْستل ْثنَاء‬
‫ْل‬
ُ‫ال‬ ْ
‫ال ُال َّشافل لعیُُؒاَلتَّ ْعللیْق ُ َسبَب ُفلیُال َح ل‬ ُ َ ‫َسبَب ُ لع ْن َد ُوجوْ لد ُال َّشرْ لط‬
َ َ‫ُال ُقَ ْبُلَهُ ُ َو ُق‬
ْ
ُ ُ‫ال َّالُا َّنُ َع َد َمُال َّشرْ لطُ َمانلعُ لمنَ ُالح ْک لم‬
As for 'Bayaanut Taghyeer', it is when clarification

changes the implication of the (initial) speech. This is
possible in two ways; making the previous statement
conditional (that the initial speech will only apply if the
aforementioned condition is fulfilled) or exclusion (if part of
the initial amount or constituents are excluded thereafter). The
Fuqahaa have differed with regards to both (when the
change is caused by making the statement conditional or by
exclusion). Our scholars (of the Hanafi Madhab) say that a
conditional statement will only apply when the condition is
fulfilled and not before it and Imaam Shaafie  says the
conditional statement applies immediately except that that
the condition will prevent it from taking effect (until the
condition is fulfilled).
The outcome of this difference of opinion
ُُْ‫ت ُطَاللقُ ُاَو‬ ُ‫ك ُفَا َ ْن ل‬ ُ‫ن ُتَزَ َّوجْ ت ل‬ ْ ‫ف ُت‬

َُ َ‫َظ ُهَرُ ُفل ْی َما ُال َذا ُق‬
ُْ ‫ال ُ لالَجْ نَبلُیَّةُ ُال‬ ُ‫َوفَاُئل َُدةُ ُ ْال لخالَ ل‬
ُ‫ن ُح ْک َُم‬ َُّ َ‫اطالُ ُ لع ْندَہ ُ لال‬ ‫ن ُ َملَ ْکتكَُ ُفَا َ ْنتَُ ُحرُ ُیَکوْ نُ ُالتَّ ْعللیْقُ ُبَ ل‬ ُ‫ال ُلل َع ْب لُد ُ ْال َغی ل‬
ُْ ‫ْر ُال‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
ُُ‫ص ْد لُر ُ ْال َکالَ لُم ُ لعُلَّةُ ُ َُو ُالطَّالَقُ ُ َو ْال لعتَاقُ ُههُنَا ُلَ ُْم ُیَ ْن َعقل ُْد ُ لعُل َّة‬ َ ُ ُ‫ْق ُال ْن لعقَاد‬ ُ‫التَّ ْعللی ل‬
ُ‫الَ ُیَصحُ ُالتَّعْلیْقُ ُ َو لع ْن َدنَا‬ ُ َ‫ْق ُف‬ ُ‫ل ُح ْکمُ ُالتَّ ْعللی ل‬ َُ َ‫ضافَتل لُه ُاللَی ُ ْال َم َحلُ ُفَبَط‬ َ ‫لل َع ْد لُم ُال‬
ْ َّ
ُُ‫الن ُ َکالَ َُمه ُالن َما ُیَن َعقلد‬ َّ َّ َ
َُّ ُ ُ‫ص لحیْحا ُ َحتی ُلوُْ ُتَز َو َج ُهَا ُیَقَعُ ُالطالَق‬ َ ُ ُ‫َکانَُ ُالتَّ ْعللیْق‬
ُُُ‫صحُ ُالتَّ ْعللیْق‬ ‫ط ُفَیَ ل‬ ُ‫ط ُ َو ْال لم ْلكُ ُثَابلتُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُوجوْ لُد ُال َّشرْ ل‬ ُ‫لعُلَّةُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُوجوْ لُد ُال َّشرْ ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ُْ َ‫ك ُُا‬ ُ‫ی ُصوْ َُرلُة ُ َع ْد لُم ُ ْال لم ْل ل‬ ُْ ‫ع ُفل‬ ُ‫ْق ُلل ْلوقوْ ل‬ُ‫ح لُة ُالتَّ ْعللی ل‬
َُّ ‫ص‬ ‫َوللهُ َذا ُ ْال َمعْنی ُق ْلنَا ُشَرْ طُ ُ ل‬
211
Usool Shaashi
َُ َ‫ك ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُق‬
ُْ ‫ال ُالجْ نَبلُیَّةُ ُال‬
ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫ب ُ ْال لم ْل ل‬ ُ‫ضافا ُاللَی ُ ْال لم ْل ل‬
ُ‫ك ُُاوُْ ُاللَی ُ َسبَ ل‬ َ ‫یَّکوْ نَُ ُم‬
َ َّ َ
ُ‫الُیَقعُُالطالق‬ َ ْ‫ر‬ َّ َ‫َز‬
ُ ُُ‫تُطاللقُُث َُّمُت َّو َج ُهَاُ َوو لج َُدُالش ط‬ َ ْ َ ‫ا‬
ُ‫ارُف ن ل‬ َ ُ‫َدخَ ْل ل‬
َُ ‫تُال َّد‬
The outcome of this difference of opinion becomes

apparent in the example when a person tells an unrelated
woman (a woman to whom he is not married), "If I marry
you, then you are divorced" or he says to the slave
belonging to another, "If I become your master, then you
are free". According to Imaam Shaafie  the condition of
these statements are baseless (and the statement will be
meaningless) because the ruling of making something
conditional is that the initial speech ("You are divorced" and
"You are free") must be able to be the Illat (principle cause
for the ruling of Talaaq and freedom to apply) and both
Talaaq and freedom (the statements "You are divorced" and
"You are free") cannot be an Illat (principle cause for the
ruling of Talaaq and freedom to apply) here as they have not
been attributed to individuals upon whom it can apply (as
she is not in his wedlock nor the slave in his ownership), thus
the requirements for making something conditional are
absent and making the statement conditional is incorrect.
According to us (Hanafi scholars) making the statement

conditional is correct such that if he marries her the Talaaq
will apply (or if he purchases the slave he will be set free)
because his statement ("You are divorced" or "You are free")
only becomes an Illat (principle cause for the ruling of Talaaq
and freedom to apply) when the condition is fulfilled and
ownership (being in his wedlock and in his ownership) is
present at the time when the condition is fulfilled (thus the
Talaaq and freedom will apply), thus making the statement
conditional is correct.
Due to this meaning (that a conditional statement will only

apply when the condition is fulfilled) we say that the
212
Usool Shaashi
requirement for making a statement conditional when one
does not have ownership is that the condition (which will
cause the ruling to apply) must be gaining ownership (the
condition for the Talaaq to apply can only made to be gaining
ownership by saying, "If you become my wife, then you are
divorced") or that which leads to ownership ("If I marry you,
then you are divorced", as marriage is what leads to
"ownership") such that if a person says to an unrelated
woman, "If you enter this house then you are divorced",
then marries her and the condition fulfilled thereafter (i.e.
she enters the house after they are married), the Talaaq will
not apply (as the condition for the Talaaq to apply was not
gaining ownership or what leads to ownership, which is a
requirement for the validity of such conditional statements).
ُ‫ق‬ َُ ‫الن ُ ْال لکت‬

َُ َّ‫َاب ُ َعل‬ َُّ ُ ُ‫ٗ ُاالاُ َُم لُة ُ لع ْندَہ‬ ْ
‫َو َک َذاللكَُ ُطَوْ لُ ُالح َُّر لُة ُیَ ْمنَعُ ُ َج َوازَُ ُنل َک ل‬
ُ‫اح ل‬
ُُ‫ل ُ َکانَُ ُال َّشرْ طُ ُ َعدَما ُ َو َعدَم‬ ُ‫ل ُفَ لع ْن َُد ُوجوْ لُد ُالطوْ ل‬ ُ‫اح ُاالاُ َُم لُة ُبل َع ْد لُم ُالطوْ ل‬ َُ ‫نل َک‬
ُ‫ال ُال َّشافل لعیُ ُ َر لح َُمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی‬ َُ َ‫الَ ُیَجوْ زُ ُ َو َک َذاللكَُ ُق‬ ُ َ‫ط ُ َمانلعُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُف‬ ُ‫ال َّشرْ ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ُ‫ق ُبل ْال َح ْم ل‬ َُ ‫اال ْنفَا‬
‫قُ ل‬ َُ ‫الن ُ ْال لکت‬
َُ َّ‫َاب ُ َعل‬ َُّ ُ ُ‫َت ُ َحا لمال‬ ُ ‫الَ ُنَفَُقَ ُةَ ُلل ْل َمُْبتوْ ُتَ لُة ُال‬
ُْ ‫الَّ ُال َذا ُ َکان‬ ُ
ُ}ُ ‫ن‬ َُّ ُ‫ضعْنَُ ُ َح ْملَه‬ َ َ‫نُ َحتی ُی‬ َُّ ‫ت ُ َح ْملُ ُفَُا ْنفلقوْ اُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬
ُ‫ن ُاوْ الَ ل‬ ُْ ‫{ َوال‬:‫للقَوْ لل لُهُتَ َعالی‬
َُّ ‫ن ُک‬
ُُ‫ل ُ َکانَُ ُال َّشرْ طُ ُ َعدَما ُفَیَجوْ زُ ُنل َکاحُ ُاالَ َُم لُة ُ َویَ لجبُ ُ لاال ْنفَاق‬ ُ‫فَ لع ْن َُد ُ َعد لَُم ُ ْال َح ْم ل‬
ُ‫ت‬ ُ‫بل ْالعموْ َما ل‬
Similarly having the means to marry a free woman

prevents the permissibility of marrying a female slave,
according to Imaam Shaafie, because the Quraan (in the
verse, "Those of you who do not have the means to marry free
Mu'min women, then (they should marry) one of your Mu'min
slave girls") has made permissibility of marrying a free
woman conditional on not having the means to marry a
free woman, thus when one has the ability (it would mean
that) the condition is not present and when the condition is
not present the ruling (of permissibility to marry a female
slave) will not apply, thus it will not be permissible (to
213
Usool Shaashi
marry a female slave when one has the means to marry a free
woman).
Similarly Imaam Shaafie says there is no maintenance for a

woman who has received Talaaq Baa'inah except if she is
expecting (pregnant) because the Quraan has made the
incumbency of maintenance (on the husband) conditional on
pregnancy in the verse "If they (your wives) are expecting,
then (you are obliged to) provide for them (maintain and
house them) until they deliver", thus when she is not
pregnant (it would mean that) the condition is not present
and when the condition is not present the ruling (of
maintenance being Waajib) will not apply, according to
Imaam Shaafie.
According to us (scholars of the Hanafi Madhab) when the

condition not being present does not prevent the ruling
from applying, it is permissible to establish the ruling from
other proof, thus marriage to a female slave (despite having
the ability to marry a free woman) and maintenance will be
compulsory because of the general nature of the verses.
When the ruling is affixed to adjective
ُ‫صُفَةُ ُفَا لُنَّه‬ ُ‫االس لُْم ُ ْال َموْ صوْ ل‬

‫ف ُب ل ل‬ ‫ع ُت ََرتبُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُ َعلَی ُ ل‬ ُ‫ن ُت ََوابل لُع ُهُ َذا ُالنَّوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫َو لم‬
ُُ‫ال ُال َّشافل لعیُ ُ َر لح َمه‬ َُ َ‫ف ُ لع ْندَہ ُ َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫ْق ُالحک لُم ُبل َذاللكَُ ُال َوصْ ل‬ ْ ُ‫بل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُتَ ْعللی ل‬
ْ
ُُ‫ب ُالحک َُم ُعَلی ُاُ َُمة‬ ْ َُ َّ‫الن ُالنَصَُّ ُ َرت‬ ْ
َُّ ُ ‫الَُیَجوْ زُ ُنل َکاحُ ُاالَ َُم لُة ُال لکتَابلُی َّ لُة‬ ُ ُ ‫للاُ ُُتَ َعالی‬
ْ ْ
ُُ‫ت}فَیَتَقَیَّدُ ُبلالم ْاو لمُنَ لُة ُفَیَ ْمتَنلعُ ُالح ْکم‬ ْ
ُ‫ن ُفَتَیَاتلکمُ ُالم ْاو لمنَا ل‬ ُْ ‫{ لم‬:‫م ْاو لمُنَةُ ُللقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالی‬
ْ
‫الَُیَجوْ زُُنل َکاحُُاالَ َُم لُةُال لکتَابلُیَّ لُة‬ ُ َ‫فُف‬ ُ‫لع ْن َُدُ َعد لَُمُ ْال َوصْ ل‬
Also from this category is when a ruling is affixed to an

adjective (the ruling is mentioned with an adjective describing
the one on whom the ruling will apply) which is the same as
making the ruling conditional on that characteristic
214
Usool Shaashi
according to Imaam Shaafie (according to Imaam Shaafie the
ruling will only apply if that quality is present. Ahnaaf say that
the quality being absent will not prevent the ruling from
applying as it is possible for the ruling to be established by
other proof). Based upon this Imaam Shaafie says that
marriage to a female slave from the Ahlul-Kitaab (a
Christian or Jewish female slave) is not permissible because
the Quraan has applied the ruling to a Muslim female slave
in the verse "Then (they should marry) one of your
Mu'min slave girls" thus the ruling will be restricted to a
Muslim female slave only and the ruling (of permissibility to
marry a female slave) will not apply when the characteristic
(of being a female slave) is not present, therefore marriage
to a female slave from the Ahlul-Kitaab is impermissible
(and according to us it is permissible as the absence of the
quality will not prevent the ruling from applying as it can be
established by other proof; namely verse) .
The second method of Taghyeer; Exception
ُُ‫اال ْستل ْثنَا َُء ُتَ َکلم‬‫نُ ل‬ َُّ َ‫ب ُاَصْ َحابنَا ُاللی ُا‬ ْ ‫االس‬
َُ َ‫ْتثنَاءُ ُ َذ ُه‬ ‫ان ُالتَّ ْغیلی لْر ل‬ ُ‫ن ُص َو لُر ُبَیَ ل‬ ُْ ‫َو لم‬
ْ
ُُ‫ص ْدرُُال َکالَ لُمُیَ ْن َعقلدُُ لعُلَة‬ َ ُ‫یُ َو لع ْندَہ‬ ُ ‫یُبَ ْع َُدُالث ْنیَاُ َک اُن َّهُلَ ُْمُیَتَ َکل َّ ُْمُال‬
َُ ‫الَُّبل َماُبَقل‬ ُْ ‫ُبل ْالبَاقل‬
ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫ط ُفل‬ ُ‫اال ْستل ْثنَا َُء ُیَ ْمنَع ُهَا ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َع َم ل‬
ُ‫ل ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُ َع ْد لُم ُال َّشرْ ل‬ ‫نُ ل‬ ُ ‫ب ُ ْالکلُ ُال‬
َُّ ‫الَّ ُُا‬ ُ‫للوجوْ ل‬
ُ‫بُالتَّ ْعللی ل‬
‫ْق‬ ُ‫بَا ل‬
The second manner in which 'Bayaanut Taghyeer' is

possible is exception ('Istithnaa'). Our scholars (of the Hanafi
Madhab) are of the opinion that exception means discussing
what is left after the exception as if he only spoke about
what was not excluded (it is as if the excluded items were
never mentioned in the first place and only what remains was
discussed from the beginning). According to Imaam Shaafie
 the initial speech (before the exclusion) results in all (the
entire amount or all the items mentioned prior to the
215
Usool Shaashi
exception) becoming Waajib except that the exclusion
prevents the action from being carried out on it (the initial
items were all Waajib at first but the exclusion later prevented
the action from being carried out on them), in the same
manner as the condition not being fulfilled when a
statement is made conditional (according to Imaam Shaafie
the conditional statement applies immediately except that that
the condition will prevent it from taking effect).
An example of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer' by way of

exception
ُ ‫الَ ُتَبلیْعوا ُالطَّ َعا َُم ُال‬
ُ‫الَّ ُ َس َواءُ ُبل َس َواءُ ُفَ لع ْن َُد‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَم‬
ُْ ‫َو لمثَالُ ُهُ َذا ُفل‬
َّ َّ ْ ْ
ُ‫ص ْدرُ ُال َکالَ لُم ُالن َعقَ َُد ُ لعُلةُ ُللحرْ َُم لُة ُبَی لُْع ُالط َع ل‬
ُ‫ام‬ َ ُ ُ‫ال َّشافل لعیُ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی‬
ْ
ُ‫اال ْستلثنَا لُء‬ ‫اوا لُةُبل ل‬ ْ ْ
َ ‫َنُهُ لذ لُہُالج ْمُلَ لُةُصوْ َُرةُُالم َس‬ ُْ ‫جُع‬ َُ ‫قُ َوخَ َر‬ ُ‫طالَ ل‬ ْ ‫اال‬‫امُ َعلَیُ ل‬ ُ‫بلالطَّ َع ل‬
ُ‫ْجةُ ُهُ َذا ُحرْ َُمةُ ُبَی لُْع ُ ْال َح ْفُنَ لُة ُ لمنَُ ُالطَّ َع ل‬
ُ‫ام‬ َُ ‫ص ْد لُر ُ َونَتلی‬ َّ ‫ی ُ ْالبَاقلیُ ُتَحْ تَُ ُح ْک لُم ُال‬ َُ ‫فَبَقل‬
ُ‫ن ُالم َرا َُد‬ ْ َُّ ‫الَ ُیَ ْدخلُ ُتَحْ تَُ ُالنَّصُ ُ لال‬ ْ ْ
ُ ُ ‫ْن ُ لم ْنهُ ُ َو لع ْن َدنَا ُبَیْعُ ُال َحفُنَ لُة‬ ُ‫بل ْال َحفنَتَی ل‬
ْ
ُ‫لُفل ْی لُه‬ ُ‫اویُُ َوالتَّفَاض ل‬ ‫تُالتَّ َس ل‬ ُ‫نُال ْثبَا ل‬
ُْ ‫بل ْال َم ْن لُهیُُیَتَقَیَّدُُبلصوْ َُر لُةُبَیْعُُیَتَ َم َّکنُُ ْال َعبْدُُ لم‬
َُُ‫ار ُ ْالم َسوی ُ َکان‬ ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْدخلُ ُتَحْ تَُ ُ ْال َم ْعیَ ل‬ ُ ‫اج لُز ُفَ َما‬ ‫ی ُ ْال َع ل‬
ُ‫ی ُاللَی ُنَ ُْه ل‬ َُ ‫الَ ُی اَود‬
ُ ُ‫ی‬ ُْ ‫َک‬
‫ث‬ ْ
ُ‫َنُقَضْ ُیَ لُةُال َح لد ْی ل‬ ُْ ‫ارجاُع‬ ‫خَ ل‬
An example of this (which illustrates the outcome of this
difference of opinion) is the Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "Do
not sell one (type of) food in exchange for another (type of)
food except in equal quantities". According to Imaam
Shaafie  the initial speech becomes the principle cause for
the impermissibility of selling (any type of) food in exchange
for another (type of) food in whichever manner (it prohibits
the sale of food in exchange for food whether it be in equal
quantities or different) and the sale of it in equal quantities is
then excluded from it (the prohibition) but the remainder
(i.e. sale of food for food in other manners) still falls under
the prohibition. The result of this is that the sale of one
handful of (a type of) food for two handfuls of (a type of)
216
Usool Shaashi
food is prohibited according to Imaam Shaafie  (by the
Hadeeth mentioned above). (However) According to us the
sale of a handful of food (for two handfuls of food) is not
included in this Hadeeth because the prohibition is
restricted to that instance wherein a person is able to
establish equality (between the two items), so that it will not
be ordering a person to perform that which he is incapable
of performing, thus those items in which equality cannot be
established will be excluded from the implication of this
Hadeeth.
Another form of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer'
َُّ َ‫ی ُاَ ْلفُ ُ َو لد ْی َُعةُ ُفَقَوْ لُه ُ َعل‬

ُ‫ی‬ َُّ َ‫ال ُللفالَنُ ُ َعل‬ َُ َ‫ْر ُ َما ُال َذا ُق‬ ُ‫ن ُالتَّ ْغُیلی ل‬ ُ‫ن ُص َو لُر ُبَیَا ل‬ ُْ ‫لو لم‬
ُْ ‫ی ُُاوُْ ُاَ ْسلَ ْفتَنل‬
ُ‫ی‬ ُْ ‫ظ ُ َوقَوْ لُه ُاَ ْعطَ ْیتَنل‬ ُ‫ب ُ َوبلقَوْ لل لُه ُ َو لد ْی َُعةُ ُ َغی ََّرہ ُاللَی ُ ْال لح ْف ل‬
َُ ْ‫یفلیْدُ ُ ْالوجو‬
ُ‫یُاَ ْلفُُزیوْ ف‬ َُّ َ‫الُللفالَنُُ َعل‬ ُ‫انُالت َّ ْغیلی ل‬
َُ َ‫ْرُ َو َک َذاُلَوُُْق‬ ُ‫نُج ْمُلَ لُةُُبَیَ ل‬ ُْ ‫فَلَ ُْمُاَ ْقبلضْ ُهَاُ لم‬
Also of the types of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer' is when a person

says, "Upon me for a certain person is one thousand, as
trust" as the statement "Upon me" makes it Waajib (as
debt) and the statement "as trust" changes it (from a debt)
to safekeeping (trust). (Another example is) The statements
"You have given me one thousand but I have not collected
it" or "You have given me one thousand for Salam (a credit
transaction) but I have not collected it yet" are both
examples of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer'. Similarly (another
example of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer') is if a person says, "I owe a
certain person one thousand, counterfeit."
The ruling of 'Bayaanut Taghyeer'
ُ‫صحُ ُ َم ْفصوْ الُ ُث َُّم ُبَ ْع َُد ُهُ َذا‬ ‫الَ ُیَ ل‬
ُ ‫صحُ ُ َموْ صوْ الُ ُ َو‬ ‫ْر ُاَُنَّه ُیَ ل‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُ ُبَیَا ل‬
ُ‫ن ُالتَّ ْغیلی ل‬
ُ‫َصحُ ُبلشَرْ ل‬
ُ‫ط‬ ‫ان ُالتَّ ْغیلی لُْر ُفَت ل‬ ُْ ‫َم َسائللُ ُال ْختَلَفَُ ُفل ْی ُهَا ُ ْالعلَ َماءُ ُاَنَّ ُهَا ُ لم‬
ُ‫ن ُج ْمُلَ لُة ُبَیَ ل‬
217
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ن‬
ُ‫ی ُبَیَا ل‬ ُْ ‫َصحُ ُ َو َسیَ ْاتل‬
ُْ ‫ی ُطَرْ فُ ُ لم ْن ُهَا ُفل‬ ُ‫ان ُالت َّ ْب لدی ل‬
ُ َ‫ْل ُف‬
‫الَُت ل‬ ُ‫ن ُج ْمُلَ لُةُبَیَ ل‬ ُ‫ْال َوصْ ل‬
ُْ ‫ل ُُاوُْ ُ لم‬
ُُ‫ْل‬ُ‫التَّ ْب لدی ل‬
The ruling of Bayaanut Taghyeer is that it is valid (it will be
considered as clarification of the ambiguity) when made
immediately (after the initial statement) a not after an
interval.
Then after these examples (mentioned previously) of

'Bayaanut Taghyeer' there are some examples regarding
which Ulama have differed as to whether they fall under
'Bayaanut Taghyeer', which is correct if mentioned
immediately or of 'Bayaanut Tabdeel' which is not correct
(whether immediate or after an interval). A few of them will
be discussed in 'Bayaanut Tabdeel'.
'Bayaanudh Dharoorah'
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُ‫ی ُقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالی ُ{ َو َو لرُثَه ُاَبَ َواہُ ُفَالاُم لُہ‬ ُْ ‫َواُ َّما ُبَیَانُ ُالضَّروْ َُر لُة ُفَ لمثَالُه ُفل‬
ُ‫ار ُ َذللكَُ ُبَیَانا‬
َُ ‫ص‬ َ َ‫الامُ ُف‬ ُ ‫ْب ُا‬
َُ ‫صی‬ ‫ْن ُث َُّم ُبَی َّنَُ ُنَ ل‬ ُ ‫ب ُالشرْ َُک ُةَ ُبَیْنَُ ُا‬
ُ‫الابَ َوی ل‬ َُ ‫الثلثُ}ُاوْ َج‬
ُْ ‫ب ُ َو َس َکتَا ُع‬
ُ‫َن‬ ُ‫ار ل‬
‫ض ل‬ َ ‫ْب ُ ْالم‬ ‫ب ُ َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُبَیَّنَُ ُن ل‬
َُ ‫َصی‬ ُ‫الا ل‬ ُ‫َص ْی ل‬
ُ ‫ب ُا‬ ‫للن ل‬
ُ‫ال‬ ْ
ُ‫ْب ُ َربُ ُال َم ل‬ َُ ‫صی‬ َ َ َ
‫ت ُالش ُکةُ ُ َوکذللكَُ ُلوُْ ُبَیَّنَا ُن ل‬ َ ْ‫ر‬ ُ‫ص َّح ل‬ َ ُ ‫ال‬ ْ
ُ‫ب ُ َربُ ُال َم ل‬ ْ
ُ‫َصی ل‬ ‫ن ل‬
ُ‫ع لُة‬
َُ ‫ار‬ َ‫ز‬ ْ ْ َ
َ ‫ب ُکانَُ ُبَیَانا ُ َوعَلی ُهُذا ُحکمُ ُالم‬ َ ُ‫ار ل‬ ‫ض ل‬ َ ‫ب ُالم‬ ْ ُ‫ص ْی ل‬ َ
‫َن ُن ل‬ ْ َ
ُ ‫َو َسکتَا ُع‬
َ َ
َُُ‫ْب ُا َح لد لُه َما ُکانَُ ُذللك‬ َُ ‫صی‬ َ ْ
‫َو َکذللكَُ ُلَوُْ ُاوْ صی ُللفالنُ ُ َوفالنُ ُبلُلفُ ُث َُّم ُبَیَّنَُ ُُن ل‬
‫ا‬ َ َ َ
ُ‫ْبُاال ل‬
‫خَر‬ َُ ‫صی‬ ‫بَیَاناُللنَ ل‬
As far as 'Bayaanudh Dharoorah' is concerned ('Bayaanudh
Dharoorah' is clarification from the obvious conclusion one
can deduce from a statement), an example of this is the verse,
"If he (or she) does not have any children and his parents
are his only heirs, then the mother gets a third", which
(first) mentions that the parents will share the estate
between them and then mentions that the mother (of the
218
Usool Shaashi
deceased) will get a third and in so doing indicates the share
of the father (of the deceased to be the remainder as this is the
unmistakable conclusion one can deduce from the above,
known as 'Bayaanudh Dharoorah'). Based upon this (that if
the share of one party is stated then the obvious conclusion will
be that the remainder will belong to the other partner) we say
that if the share of one of the partners in Mudharabah (a
partnership wherein one partner provides the capital and the
other provides the labour) is stated and the share of the
partner providing the capital is not stated then the
partnership will be correct (as the obvious conclusion is that
the remaining share will belong to him). Similarly if the share
of the partner providing the capital is stated but the share
of the other partner is not (the partnership will be correct
and the obvious conclusion will be that the remaining share
belongs to him). Based upon this (same ruling mentioned
above for Mudharabah) is the ruling of Muzaara'ah (a
partnership in farming whereby one person provides the land
and the other the labour, whereby if the share of only one
person is mentioned the partnership will be correct and
obvious conclusion will be that the remainder will belong to
other partner). Similarly if a person makes a bequest of a
thousand for two people and then only states the share of
one of them it will also clarify the share of the other (by
means of 'Bayaanudh Dharoorah).
ُ‫ق ُفلی‬ ُ‫ی ُالحْ دَاهُ َما ُ َکانَُ ُ َُذللكَُ ُبَیَانا ُلللطَّالَ ل‬ َُ‫ق ُالحْ دی ُال ْم َراَتَ ْی لُه ُث َُّم ُ َو لط ا‬ َُ َّ‫َولَوُْ ُطَل‬
ُ‫یُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَُ َر لح َمهُُللاُُتَ َعالی‬ َ
ُْ ‫قُ ْالم ْب ُهَ لُمُ لع ْن َُدُابل‬ ُ‫یُفلیُ ْال لع ْت ل‬ ْ
ُ‫فُ ْال َوط لا‬ ُ‫اال ْخریُبل لخالَ ل‬
ُ‫الَ ُیَتَ َعی َّنُ ُ لج ُهَةُ ُ ْال لم ْل ل‬
ُ‫ك ُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬
ُ‫ار‬ ُ َ‫ْن ُف‬ ُ‫ی ُفلی ُ لاال َما لُء ُیَ ْثبتُ ُبلطَ لر ْیقَی ل‬ ْ ‫ل ُ ْال َو‬
ُ‫ط لا‬ َُّ
َُّ ‫الن ُ لح‬
ُُ‫ی‬
ُ‫ط لا‬ ْ ‫لحلُُ ْال َو‬
If a person gives Talaaq to one of his two wives (without

specifying by saying, "I divorced one of my wives") and
thereafter he indulges in sexual relations with one of them
this will clarify that the Talaaq was for the other (and not
219
Usool Shaashi
for the wife with whom he indulged in sexual relations) as
opposed to indulging in sexual relations (with one of his
slaves) in unspecified freedom (when he sets one of them free
without specifying by saying, "I set one of you free" and then
indulges in sexual relations with one of them then this will not
clarify that other is free) according to Imaam Abu Hanifah
 because permissibility of sexual relations in slaves is
permissible in two ways (by ownership; sexual relations is
permissible with a female slave because of one having
ownership of her, and by Nikaah; sexual relations is
permissible because of her being in his wedlock), thus
ownership cannot be established by the permissibility of
sexual relations (we cannot deduce that sexual relations with
her proves that he owns her, thus clarifying that the other is
free, because it is possible that she could have been set free
and sexual relations is permissible with her because she is in
his wedlock).
220
Usool Shaashi
'Bayaanul Haal'
‫فصل‬
َُ‫عُاَ ْمراُم َعایَُنَةُُفَلَ ُْمُیَ ْن ُه‬ ُ‫احبُُال َّشرْ ل‬ ‫ص ل‬ َ ُ‫الُفَ لمثَالُهُفل ْی َماُال َذاُ َرای‬ ُ‫ُ َواَ َّماُبَیَانُُ ْال َح ل‬
ُ‫ان ُاَنُه ُ َم ْشروْ عُ ُ َوال َّشفلیْعُ ُال َذا ُ َعلل َُم ُبل ْالبَی لُْع‬ ُ‫َن ُذللكَُ ُ َکانَُ ُسکوْ ُتَه ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُ ْالبَیَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ع‬
ُ‫ت‬ ُْ ‫ان ُبلُاُنَّه ُ َراضُ ُبلذللكَُ ُ َوالبل ْکرالبَالل َُغةُ ُال َذا ُ َعلل َم‬ ُ‫َو َس َکتَُ ُ َکانَُ ُذللكَُ ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُ ْالبَیَ ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫اال ْذ ل‬
‫ضا لُء ُ َو ل‬ َ ‫ن ُبلالر‬ ُ‫الرد َکانَُ ُذللكَُ ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُ ْالبَیَا ل‬ َ ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫َت ُ َع ل‬ ُْ ‫ْج ُ ْال َوللیُ ُ َو َس َکت‬ ُ‫بلت َْز لوی ل‬
ُ‫قُفَ َس َکتَُُ َکانَُُ َذللكَُُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة‬ ُ‫َو ْال َمولیُال َذاُ َراُیُ َع ْبدَہُیَبلیْعُُ َویَ ْشت لَریُُْفلیُالسوْ ل‬
ُ‫س‬ ُ‫ی ُ َمجْ لل ل‬ ُْ ‫ل ُفل‬َُ ‫ت ُ َو ْالم َّدعی ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َذا ُنَ َک‬ ُ‫ارا ل‬ َ ‫صیْرُ ُ َم ْاذوْ نا ُفلی ُالت َج‬ ‫ن ُفَیَ ل‬ ُ‫اال ْذ ل‬
‫ل‬
ُ‫ار‬ ُ‫ال ُبلطَ لریْقُ ُاالَ ْق َر ل‬ ُ‫ضا لُء ُبلللزوْ لُم ُ ْال َم ل‬ َ ‫الر‬ ُ ُ
‫ة‬ َ
‫لَ ل ل‬ ُ
‫ل‬‫ز‬‫ن‬ْ ‫م‬ ‫ب‬ ُ ‫َاع‬
ُ ‫ن‬ ‫ت‬ ‫م‬
‫ل ْل‬ ‫اال‬ ُ ‫ن‬
ُ ْ‫و‬ ‫ک‬ َ ‫ْال َ ل‬
‫ی‬ ُ ُ
‫ء‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ض‬ َ ‫ق‬
ُ‫ض لُع‬ ‫یُ َموْ ل‬ ُْ ‫نُالسکوْ تَُُفل‬ َُّ ُ‫اصلُُا‬ ‫یُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَُفَ ْال َح ل‬ ُْ ‫لُ لع ْن َُدُاُبل‬ ُ‫ْقُ ْالبَ ْذ ل‬ُ‫لع ْندَهُ َماُ َوبلطَ لری ل‬
ُُ‫االجْ َماعُ ُیَ ْن َعقلدُ ُبلنَص‬ ‫ْق ُق ْلنَا ُ ل‬ ُ‫ان ُ َوبل ُهَ َذا ُالطَّ لری ل‬ ُ‫ان ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُ ْالبَیَ ل‬ ُ‫اج لُة ُاللَی ُ ْالبَیَ ل‬َُ ‫ْال َح‬
َُ‫تُ ْالبَاقلیْن‬ ُ‫ْضُ َوسکوْ ل‬ ُ‫البَع ل‬
As far as 'Bayaanul Haal' is concerned ('Bayaanul Haal' is
clarification which is attained by the condition or state of the
speaker), for example if Rasulullaah  saw a specific action
(being carried out in his presence) and he did not prohibit it
then Rasulullaah's  silence is the same as Rasulullaah 
clarifying its permissibility. (Based on this that principle that
silence when speech is required is equivalent to speech we
say)If the Shafee'a (the person who has the first right of
purchase) learns of the sale (of the house or land in which he
has the first right to purchase) and he remains silent then
this (silence) is the same as him clarifying that he approves
of the transaction (to the other person and waves his right to
purchase it). (Another example of silence being equivalent to
speech is) If a mature girl learns that her Shar'ie
representative (Walie, such as her father) arranged her
Nikaah (to a certain person) and she remains silent, not
refusing, then this will be the same as her announcing her
satisfaction and consenting (to the marriage). (In the same
manner as the examples above) If the master sees his slave
221
Usool Shaashi
buying and selling in the marketplace and remains silent
then this will be the same as granting him permission to
trade. (In the same manner as the examples above) If the
defendant refuses to take an oath (in refutation of the
allegation against him) then his denial (of taking the oath, or
in other words silence) will be the same as clarifying his
satisfaction (with the amount or charge against him) but
 it will the same as a confession and according to Imaam
Abu Hanifah  it will be (Waajib upon him) as an act of
generosity. The summary of the above is that silence when
speech is required is the same as the same as speech (and
clarification). Based upon this (principle that silence when
speech is required is equivalent to speech) we say that Ijmaa
(consensus) is established by the clarification of some and
the silence of the few.
'Bayaanul Athaf'
ُ ُ‫ُفَصْ ل‬
222
Usool Shaashi
ُُ‫ن ُتَعطفَُ ُ َم لکیْالُ ُاَوُْ ُ َموْ زوْ نا ُعَلی ُج ْمُلَةُ ُمجْ َمُلَة‬ َُ ‫ف ُفَ لم ْث‬
ُْ َ‫ل ُا‬ ُ‫ط ل‬ ْ ‫َُو ُُاَ َّما ُبیَاَنُ ُ ْال َع‬
ُُْ‫ی ُ لماُئَةُ ُ َو لدرْ ُهَمُ ُاَو‬ َُّ َ‫ال ُللفَالَنُ ُ َعل‬ َُ َ‫یَکوْ نُ ُ َذللكَُ ُبَیَانا ُلل ْلج ْمُلَ لُة ُ ْالمجْ َمُلَ لُة ُ لمثَالُه ُال َذا ُق‬
ُُْ‫س ُ َو َک َذا ُلَو‬ُ‫ك ُ ْال لج ْن ل‬ َُ ‫ن ُذلل‬ ُْ ‫ل ُ لم‬َُّ ‫ن ُ ْالک‬ ُ‫طفُ ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُ ْالبَیَ ل‬
َُّ َ‫ان ُا‬ ْ ‫لماُئَةُ ُ َوقَفلیْزُ ُ َکانَُ ُ ْال َع‬
ُُ‫ال ُ لماُئَةُ ُ َوثَلُثَةُ ُاَ ْث َوابُ ُاَوُْ ُ لماُئَةُ ُ َوثَلُثَةُ ُد ََرا لُه َُم ُاَوُْ ُ لماُئَةُ ُ َوثَلُثَةُ ُاَ ْعبدُ ُفَا لُنَّه ُبَیَان‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
ُُ‫ف‬ُ‫س ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُقَوْ لل لُه ُاَ َحدُ ُ َو لع ْشروْ نَُ ُ لدرْ ُهَما ُبَ لخالَ ل‬ ُ‫ن ُذللكَُ ُ ْال لج ْن ل‬ ُْ ‫ن ُ ْال لماُئَ ُةَ ُ لم‬َُّ َ‫ا‬
َُُّ‫اختص‬ ْ ‫قَوْ لل لُه ُُ لماُئَةُ ُ َوثَوْ بُ ُاَوُْ ُ لماُئَةُ ُ َو َشاةُ ُ َحیْثُ ُ َالیَکوْ نُ ُذللكَُ ُبَیَانا ُلل ْل لماُئَ لُة ُ َو‬
ُ‫ل‬َُ ‫نُ َوقَا‬ ُ‫لُ َو ْال َموْ زوْ ل‬ ُ‫احدُُبل َماُیَصْ لحُُ َدیْناُفلیُالذ َُّم لُةُ َک ْال َم لک ْی ل‬ ‫فُ ْال َو ل‬ ُ‫َط ل‬ ْ ‫ی ُع‬ ُْ ‫ذللكَُُفل‬
ُ ُ‫ل‬ َ ْ َ َ
ُ‫یُمُا لُُئَةُُ َو َشاةُُ َو لماُئَةُُ َوثوْ بُُعَلیُهُذاُاالصْ ل‬ ُْ ‫اَبوُُْیوْ سفَُُیَکوْ نُُبَیَاناُفل‬
As far as 'Bayaanul Athaf' (whereby the ambiguity caused by

the abbreviation of speech, is clarified by a conjunction; i.e. a
word or sentence attached to it) is concerned it is like when a
measurement or weight is affixed to a vague sentence
making that (affixed measurement or weight) clarification of
the vagueness. An example of this is if a person says, "I owe
a certain person one hundred and a dirham" or he says, "I
owe a certain person one hundred and a Kafeez of wheat",
whereby the conjunction ("and one dirham" or "and one
Kafeez of wheat") clarifies that they are all of that class (that
he owes 101 dirhams and 101 Kafeez of wheat). Similarly
when a person says, "I owe a certain person one hundred
and three cloths" or "I owe a certain person one hundred
and three dirhams" or "I owe a certain person one
hundred and three slaves" it (the conjunction "and three
cloths", "and three dirhams" and "and three slaves") clarifies
that the entire amount is of that class (it clarifies that the one
hundred mentioned initially in the statement also refers to
cloth, dirhams or slaves respectively) the same as saying , "I
owe a certain person twenty-one dirhams". This ruling
does not apply1 to when a person says, "I owe a certain
1
This form of clarification is only applies when the affixed sentence is an item which is
classified as 'Makeeli' or 'Mowzooni'. Makeeli refers to items such as wheat, etc which were
sold using her measuring utensil. Mowzooni refers to gold and silver which is sold in weight.
If the item is not 'Makeeli' or 'Mowzooni' then it must be preceded by a numerical figure, such
as in the example, "I owe a certain person one hundred and three cloth".
223
Usool Shaashi
person one hundred and cloth" or "I owe a certain person
one hundred and a sheep" such that this will not clarify
what the one hundred is. This (to affix something to a vague
sentence) is only when something is affixed to that which
can be a debt on him such as items which are measured by
a measuring utensil or weight. Imaam Abu Yusuf 
(disagrees with the rule mentioned above and) says that it will
act as clarification in "One hundred and a sheep" and "one
hundred and a cloth" as well (despite it not being 'Makeeli'
or Mowzooni') based upon this principle (that the ambiguity
caused by the abbreviation of speech can be clarified by a
conjunction).
'Bayaanut Tabdeel'
ُ ُ‫فَصْ ل‬
ُُ‫الَُیَجوْ ز‬ ُ‫بُال َّشرْ ل‬
ُ ‫عُ َو‬ ُ‫اح ل‬
‫ص ل‬ ُْ ‫ْلُ َوهُ َُوُالنَّسْخُُفَیَجوْ زُُذللكَُُ لم‬
َ ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫ُ َواَ َّماُبَیَانُُالتَّ ْب لدی ل‬
ُ ‫ذللكَُُ لمنَُُ ْال لعبَا لُد‬
As far as 'Bayaanut Tabdeel' is concerned, it is (actually)
Abrogation (Naskh, where the previous law or declaration is
cancelled and replaced by another), which is only permissible
for ALLAAH Ta'ala to do and not man.
Exception of all is impermissible
ُ ‫ل ُال ْستل ْثنَاءُ ُ ْالکلُ ُ لالَُنَّه ُنَسْخُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُ َو‬

ُ‫الَ ُیَجوْ زُ ُالرجوْ عُ ُ َع ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ َُ َ‫َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُبَط‬
َُُُ‫ْسُلل ْل َع ْب لُدُذللك‬ ُ‫قُ َو ْال لعت ل‬
َُ ‫َاقُ لالَُن َّهُنَسْخُُ َولَی‬ ُ‫ارُ َوالطَّالَ ل‬ُ‫اال ْق َر ل‬
‫ْل‬
Based upon this (that abrogation is only permissible for
ALLAAH) exception of all from the stipulated amount is not
valid (for example a person says, "I owe him ten dirhams
except ten", whereby he excluded the entire amount which he
confessed to) because this is abrogation of the ruling. It is
224
Usool Shaashi
not permissible to retract (and thereby abrogate) one's
confession, Talaaq, setting free as this (retraction) is
Abrogation and it is not permissible for man to abrogate.
ُ‫ك‬َُ ‫یُزیوْ فُُ َکانَُُذلل‬ َُ ‫الُ لُه‬ َُ َ‫یُاَ ْلفُُقَرْ ضُُاَوُُْثَ َمنُُ ْال َُمبلی لُْعُ َوق‬ َُّ َ‫الُللفَالَنُُ َعل‬ َُ َ‫َولَوُُْق‬
ُُ‫ی ُ َحنل ْیُفَةَ َر لح َمه‬ ُْ ‫ْل ُ لع ْن َُد ُاُبل‬
ُ‫صحُُ َموْ صوالُ ُ َوبَیَانُ ُالتَّ ْب لدی ل‬ ‫ْر ُ لع ْندَهُ َما ُفَیَ ل‬ ُ‫بَیَانُ ُالتَّ ْغیلی ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫ن ُثَ َم ل‬ ُْ ‫ی ُاَ ْلفُ ُ لم‬َُّ َ‫ال ُللفَالَنُ ُ َعل‬ َُ َ‫ل ُ َولَوُْ ُق‬ َُ ‫ص‬ َ ‫ن ُ َو‬ ُْ ‫صحُ ُ َُو ُال‬ ‫الَ ُیَ ل‬ُ َ‫للاُ ُتَ َعالی ُف‬
ُ‫ل‬ُ‫الَ ُاَث َُر ُلَ ُهَا ُ َکانَُ ُذللكَُ ُبَیَانُ ُالت َّ ْب لد ْی ل‬ْ ْ ْ
‫ارُیَةُ ُبَا َعنل ْی ُهَا ُ َولَ ُْم ُاَقبلضْ ُهَا ُ َوال َج ل‬
ُ ُ ُ‫ارُیَة‬ ‫ْال لج ل‬
ُ‫ن ُال ْق َُرارُ ُبل ْالقَب ل‬
ُ‫ْض‬ ُ‫ار ُبللَزوْ لُم ُالثَّ َم ل‬ َُ ‫اال ْق َر‬
‫نُ ْ ل‬ َُّ َ‫ی ُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی ُ لال‬ُْ ‫لع ْن َُد ُاَبل‬
َّ ْ
ُُ‫ْض ُیَ ْنفَ لسخُ ُالبَیْعُ ُفَالَُ ُیَبْقی ُالث َمن‬ ْ
ُ‫ْل ُالقَب ل‬ ْ ْ
َُ ‫ك ُال َمبلی لُْع ُال ُذ ُلَوُْ ُهَلَكَُ ُقَب‬ ُ‫لع ْن َد ُه ََال ل‬
ُ‫الَ لزما‬
If a person says, "I owe a certain person one thousand as
debt" or (he says) "I owe a certain person one thousand as
price of this item (which is purchased)" and thereafter he
says, "counterfeit (i.e. one thousand counterfeit)" then
 this is 'Bayaanut Taghyeer' and only correct if mentioned
immediately (without an interval) and according to Imaam
Abu Hanifah  this is 'Bayaanut Tabdeel' and is not correct
even if mentioned immediately (as abrogation of a
confession is impermissible).
If a person says, "I owe a certain person one thousand as

the price for this slave which I purchased but did not take
possession of" and there is no sign of the slave, then this
will be 'Bayaanut Tabdeel'(and is impermissible resulting in
the thousand still being incumbent upon him) according to
Imaam Abu Hanifah  (as opposed to Imaam Abu Yusuf and
Imaam Muhammed who regard this as 'Bayaanut Taghyeer')
because confessing to owing the money (as price of the slave)
is confessing to having possession at the time the purchased
225
Usool Shaashi
item was lost (as the price can only be
Waajib if he had taken possession) and if
Section Two it had been lost before taking possession
(while still in the possession of the seller)
then the price would not have been
Waajib (upon him, thus his statement,
"but did not take possession of it" is in actual fact an attempt to
abrogate the incumbency of the thousand he confessed to
owing previously, which is impermissible to do).
Sunnat
َُّ ‫اَلبَح‬
َّ َّ‫ثَّالثانِی‬
‫لُ َُوُ ْال َحصی‬ ُْ ‫یُاَ ْکثَرُُ لم‬
ُ‫نُ َع َد لُدُال َّر َم ل‬ َُ ‫للالُُ َو لُه‬ ُ‫یُسُنَّ لُةُُ َر ل‬
ُ ُ‫سول‬ ُْ ‫اَ ْلبَحْ ثُُالثَّانل‬
ُْ ‫یُفل‬
226
Usool Shaashi
The section concerns the Sunnat (Ahaadeeth) of Rasulullaah
, which are more than the grains of sand and stones.
The types of Ahaadeeth
ُ‫ب ُفلی ُ َحقُ ُلزوْ لُم‬ ُ‫للال ُﷺ ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُ ْال لکتَا ل‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫خَ بَرُ ُ َرسوْ ل‬:‫ام ُ ْالخَ بَ لُر‬ ُ‫ی ُاَ ْق َس ل‬ُْ ‫فَصْ لُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ث‬ُ‫ن ُبَحْ ل‬ ُْ ‫للاَ ُفَ َما ُ َم َُّر ُ لذ ْکرہُ ُ لم‬ُ ُ‫ع‬ َُ ‫عه ُفَقَ ُْد ُاَطَا‬ َُ ‫ن ُاَطَا‬ ُْ ‫ن ُ َم‬ ُ‫ْال لع ْل لُم ُ َو ْال َع َم ل‬
َُّ ‫ل ُبل لُه ُفَا ل‬
ُ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُالسُنَّ لُة‬ ُْ ‫ب ُفَهُ َُو ُ َک َذللكَُ ُفل‬ ُ‫ل ُفلی ُ ْال لکتَا ل‬ ُ‫ك ُ َو ْالمجْ َم ل‬ ُ‫ْالخَ اصُ ُ َو ْال َعامُ ُ َو ْالم ْشت ََر ل‬
ُ‫صال لُهُبل لُهُ َولل ُهَ َذا‬ َ َّ ‫للالُُ َُوُالت‬
ُ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫نُ َرسوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫یُثبوْ تل لُهُ لم‬ ُْ ‫بُ ْالخَ بَ لُرُفل‬ ُ‫یُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫نُالش ْب ُهَ ُةَُفل‬ َُّ ‫الَُُّا‬
ُ ‫ال‬
ْ َ
ُُ‫للالُُ َُوُثبَتَُُ لمنه‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫نُ َرسوْ ل‬ ْ
ُ ‫حُ لم‬ َُّ ‫ص‬ ْ ‫ا‬ َ َ
َ ُُ‫ارُالخَ بَرُُعَلیُُثلُث لُةُُق َسامُُقلسْم‬ ْ َُ ‫ص‬ َ ُ‫ْال َمعْنی‬
ُُ‫ضرْ بُ ُش ْب ُهَةُ ُ َو ُهُ َُو ُ ْال َم ْشهُوْ رُ ُ َوقلسْم‬ َ ُ ‫الَ ُش ْب ُهَةُ ُ َُو ُهُ َُو ُ ْالمت ََواتلرُ ُ َُو ُقلسْمُ ُفل ْی لُه‬ ُ ‫بل‬
ُ ُُ‫فل ْی لُهُالحْ تل َمالُُ َُوُش ْب ُهَةُُ َوُهُ َُوُاال َحاد‬
The Hadeeth of Rasulullaah  is the same as the Quraan in
that it is compulsory to believe in it (that it is the true) and
act upon it, as whoever has obeyed Rasulullaah  has in
actual fact obeyed ALLAAH. The same sections of Khaas,
Aam, Mushtarak, and Mujmal, which were discussed in the
section regarding the Quraan apply to Hadeeth as well. The
only difference (between the Quraan and Sunnat) is doubt
with regards to Hadeeth as to whether it is proven from
Rasulullaah  and links up to him. Due to this (that there is
doubt as to whether a Hadeeth is proven to be the words of
Rasulullaah  or not) Hadeeth has been divided into three
categories;
The first category is that which has been authentically

proven to be said by Rasulullaah  without any doubt (as to
its authenticity), which is called Mutawaatir.
The second category is that in which there is a slight

amount of uncertainty, which is called Mashoor.
227
Usool Shaashi
The third category is that which contains the possibility
and doubt (of not being the words of Rasulullaah ), which is
called Khabar Wahid.
Khabar Mutawaatir
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫َص َّورُ ُت ََوافقهُ ُْم ُعَلی ُ ْال لک ْذ ل‬ َ ‫الَ ُیت‬

ُ ُ ُ‫عة‬ ُْ ‫عةُ ُع‬
َُ ‫َن ُ َج َما‬ َُ ‫فَ ْالمت ََواتلرُ ُ َما ُنَقَُلَه ُ َج َما‬
ُ‫ل ُبلكَُ ُهُ َک َذا ُ لمثَالُه ُنَ ْقلُ ُ ْالقرْ ل‬
ُ‫آن ُ َواَ ْعدَادُ ُال َّر َک َعا ل‬
ُُ‫ت ُ َو َمقَا لدیْر‬ َُ ‫ص‬ َ َّ‫لل َک ْث َرتل لُه ُْم ُ َُو ُات‬
ُ ُ‫ال َّزکوُ لُة‬
Mutawaatir is that Hadeeth which has been narrated in

every generation by such a large group of (reliable) people
that it is logically impossible for all of them to be
unanimous on a lie, due to their numbers and reaches one
in this very manner. An example of Hadeeth Mutawaatir is
the narration of the Quraan, the number of Raqaats of
Salaah and amounts for Zakaat.
Khabar Mashoor
ُ‫ث ُ َُو‬ ُْ ‫ ُاَلثَّانل‬،‫َو ْال َم ْشهُوْ رُ ُ َما ُ َکانَُ ُُا َّولُه ُ َکاال َحا لُد ُث َُّم ُا ْشتَ ُهَ َُر ُفلی ُ ْال َعصْ لر‬
ُ‫ی ُ َوالثَّالل ل‬
ُ‫ث‬ُ‫ل ُبلكَُ ُ َو ُذللكَُ ُ لم ْثلُ ُ َح لد ْی ل‬ َُ ‫ص‬َ َّ‫ار ُ َک ْالمت ََواتل لُر ُ َحتی ُالت‬َُ ‫ص‬ َ َ‫ل ُف‬ُ‫تَلَقَّ ْتهُ ُاالاُ َُّمةُ ُبل ْالقَبوْ ل‬
ُ‫ب ُالزنَا ُث َُّم ُ ْالمت ََواتلرُ ُیوْ لجبُ ُ ْال لع ْل َُم‬ ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫ْح ُ ُعَلی ُ ْالخفُ ُ َوالرَّجْ لُم ُفل‬ ُ‫ْال َمس ل‬
ُُ‫ی ُ َُو ُیَکوْ نُ ُ َردہ ُک ْفراُ ُ َو ْال َم ْشهُوْ رُ ُیوْ لجبُ ُ لع ْل َُم ُالطَّ َمانل ْیُنَ لُة ُ َُو ُیَکوْ ن‬ ْ َ‫ْالق‬
َُّ ‫ط لع‬
ُُ‫ل ُبل لُه َما ُ َُو ُالنَّ َما ُ ْال َکالَم‬
ُ‫ی ُلزوْ لُم ُ ْال َع َم ل‬
ُْ ‫الَ ُ لخالَفَُ ُبَیْنَُ ُ ْالعلَ َما لُء ُُفل‬
ُ ‫عةُ ُ َو‬ َُ ‫َردہُٗ ُبل ْد‬
ُ ‫یُاال َحا لُد‬ ُْ ‫فل‬
A Mashoor Hadeeth is that Hadeeth which was Khabar

Wahid in the beginning (in the initial chain of narration, of
the Sahabah, it was only reported by one or two individuals)
but in the second (the age of the Taabi'een) and third
generations (the Taba-Taabi'een) it became more well-
228
Usool Shaashi
known (and was then narrated by a large number of people)
and then accepted by the Ummat becoming like
Mutawaatir (in the second and third generations) and
reaching one in this manner (that from the second or third
generation onwards it continued to be narrated by a large
number of people as in Mutawaatir). An example of Mashoor
is the Hadeeth regarding Masah on leather socks and (the
punishment of) pelting the adulterer in the chapter of Zinaa
(fornication). (The ruling of Khabar Mutawaatir and Khabar
Mashoor is that) the authenticity (and veracity) of
Mutawaatir is unquestionable such that rejection of it is
Kufr (and renders one out of the fold of Islaam) and one can
have confidence in Mashoor (which is slightly weaker than
that of Mutawaatir, which is unquestionable) and rejection of
it is Bid'ah (innovation). There is no difference of opinion
amongst the Ulama that it is compulsory to practice on
them both (Mutawaatir and Mashoor) but there is a
difference of opinion regarding Khabar Wahid.
Khabar Wahid
ُُْ‫عةُ ُُاو‬ ُْ ‫احدُ ُع‬

َُ ‫َن ُ َج َما‬ ‫احدُ ُُاوُْ ُ َو ل‬‫َن ُ َو ل‬ ُ‫احدُ ُع ل‬ ‫اح لُد ُهُ َُو ُ َما ُنَقَُلَه ُ َو ل‬ ‫فَنَقوْ لُ ُخَ بَرُ ُ ْال َو ل‬
ُُ‫ْر ُةَ ُلل ْل َع َُد لُد ُال َذا ُلَ ُْم ُتَبْل ُْغ ُ َح َُّد ُ ْال َم ْشهُوْ لُر ُ َو ُهُ َُو ُیوْ لجب‬
َُ ‫الَ ُ لعب‬
ُ ‫احدُ ُ َو‬
‫َن ُ َو ل‬ ُْ ‫عةُ ُع‬ َُ ‫َج َما‬
ُ‫ضب لْط لُهُ َُو‬ َ َ
‫طُال ْسال لُمُالر ل‬
َ ‫َّاویُُ َو َعدَالتل لُهُ َو‬ ُ‫امُالشرْ لعُیَّ لُةُبلشَرْ ل‬ َّ َ
ُ‫یُاالحْ َک ل‬ ُْ ‫لُبل لُهُفل‬َُ ‫ْال َع َم‬
ُ‫لُللاُﷺُبل ُهَ َذاُال َّشرْ ل‬
‫ط‬ ُ‫نُ َرسوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫صالهُُبلكَُُذللكَُُ لم‬ َ َّ‫َع ْقلل لُهُ َُوُالت‬
We say that Khabar Wahid is that Hadeeth which one
individual has reported from another individual or an
individual from a group or a group from an individual.
Their numbers are of no consequence (many people
narrating it does not matter) when their numbers do not
reach that of Mashoor. It is Waajib to practice upon it in
Ahkaam on condition that the narrators are Muslim, pious,
have strong memory, of sound intellect and these
229
‫‪requirements are found in all the narrators from‬‬
‫‪Rasulullaah  (to the time it reached us).‬‬
‫‪Conditions of narrators‬‬
‫ان ُ َمعْروْ فُ ُبل ْال لع ْل لُم ُ َُو ُا لالجْ تل ُهَا لُد ُ َک ْالخلَفَا لُءُ‬ ‫ل ُقل ْس َم لُ‬ ‫الاصْ لُ‬ ‫َّاویُْ ُفلی ُا ُ‬ ‫ث َُّم ُالر ل‬
‫َ‬
‫ْنُع َم َُرُ َوز ْی لُدُ‬ ‫للالُب لُ‬ ‫ْنُ َعبَّاسُُ َُوُ َع ْب لد ُ‬ ‫ْنُ َمسْعوْ دُُ َُوُ َع ْب لد ُ‬
‫للالُب لُ‬ ‫للالُب لُ‬ ‫االاُرْ بَ َُع لُةُ َُوُ َع ْب لد ُ‬
‫َّتُْ‬
‫صح ُ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ی ُللاُ ُت َعالیُ ُ َعنهُ ُْم ُفالذا ُ َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ض َُ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ا‬
‫ْن ُ َجبَلُ ُ َُو ُُ ْمثاُللهُ ُْم ُ َر ل‬ ‫ْن ُثَابلتُ ُ َُو ُم َعا لُذ ُب لُ‬ ‫ب لُ‬
‫لُ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ْ‬
‫للالُﷺُُیَکوْ نُُال َع َملُُبل َر َوایَتل لُه ُْمُُوْ لیُُ لمنَُُال َع َم لُ‬ ‫لُ ُ‬ ‫َنُ َرسوْ لُ‬ ‫لع ْندَكَُُ لر َوایَتهُ ُْمُع ُ‬
‫ْ‬
‫یُ‬‫ْثُاالاُ ْع َرابلیُُالَّ لذیُُْ َکانَُُفل ُْ‬ ‫اسُ َولل ُهَ َذاُ َر َویُُم َح َّمد َر لح َمهُُللاُُتَ َعالیُ َح لدی َُ‬ ‫بل ْالقلیَ لُ‬
‫ْث ُتَ ا لخی لُْرُ‬ ‫اس ُبل لُه ُ َو َر َویُ ُ َح لدی َُ‬ ‫ی ُ َم َسُاُلَ لُة ُ ْالقَ ْهقَ ُهَ لُة ُو ُت ََركَُ ُ ْالقلیَ َُ‬ ‫َع ْینل لُه ُسوُْءُ ُفل ُْ‬
‫ْثَُ‬
‫ش ُة ُ َح لدی ُ‬‫َ‬ ‫َن ُعَائل َُ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫اس ُبل لُه ُ َو َر َویُ ُع ُ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ت ُ َُو ُت ََركَُ ُالقلیَ َُ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬
‫ی ُ َم ْسُُل لُة ُالم َحا ُذا لُ‬‫ا‬ ‫الن َساُ لُء ُفل ُْ‬
‫ْث ُال َّس ُْه لُو ُبَ ْع َُد ُال َّسالَ لُمُ‬ ‫َ‬
‫ْن ُ َمسْعوْ دُ ُ َح لدی ُ‬ ‫َن ُاب لُ‬
‫اس ُبل لُه ُ َُو ُ َروی ُع لُ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ی ُ َوت ََركَُ ُالقلیَ َُ‬ ‫ْالقَ لاُ‬
‫اسُبل لُه‬‫َُوُت ََركَُُ ْالقلیَ َُ‬
‫‪Then the narrators in the first generation (of Sahabah) are‬‬
‫‪of two types. The first type are those narrators who were‬‬
‫‪well-known for their knowledge and their ability to extract‬‬
‫‪religious rulings such as the four Khulafaa (Hadhrat Abu‬‬
‫‪Bakr, Hadhrat Umar, Hadhrat Uthmaan, Hadhrat Ali),‬‬
‫‪Hadhrat Abdullaah bin Mas'ood , Hadhrat Abdullaah bin‬‬
‫‪Abbaas , Hadhrat Abdullaah bin Umar , Hadhrat Zaid‬‬
‫‪230‬‬
Usool Shaashi
bin Thaabit , Hadhrat Muaadh bin Jabal  and other
Sahabah like them, may ALLAAH be pleased with them.
Thus if the narrations of these Sahabah reach you with an
authentic chain then practicing upon these narrations will
be better than practicing on Qiyaas (we will disregard
Qiyaas and practice upon these narrations).
Based on this (that if the narrations of these Sahabah are

authentically proven, Qiyaas will be disregarded for it) Imaam
Muhammed  has narrated the Hadeeth of the villager who
an ailment in his eyes1 in the law regarding laughing(aloud)
in Salaah and disregarded Qiyaas for it (saying that Wudhu
breaks if one laughs aloud in Salaah).
Imaam Muhammed  also narrated the Hadeeth of

deferring women2(to place them at the back in the last row) in
the law of a man and woman reading Salaah next to each
other and disregarded Qiyaas for it (saying the Salaah of the
man breaks only not the woman).
Imaam Muhammed also narrated the Hadeeth of Hadhrat

Aisha regarding vomiting3(a mouthful) and disregarded
Qiyaas for it (saying that vomiting a mouthful breaks wudhu).
1
Rasulullaah was once performing Salaah and the Sahabah were reading behind him, when a
villager who an ailment in his eyes passed by and fell into a hole, which he did not see. Seeing
this some of the Sahabah laughed, on which Rasulullaah remarked after the Salaah had
completed, "Whomsoever amongst you laughed loudly (while in Salaah) should repeat his
Wudhu and Salaah as well."
2
Hadhrat Abdullaah bin Mas'ood narrates that Rasulullaah said, "Defer the woman (place
them at the back) just as ALLAAH Ta'ala deferred their creation (created them second after
Hadhrat Aadam) ". Since this instruction is to the men we say the Salaah of the man is broken
if a woman reads next to him, as he is the one who did not fulfill what was required of him.
3
Hadhrat Aisha  has narrated that Rasulullaah said, "Whoever vomits or his nose bleeds in
Salaah, he should return, perform Wudhu and continue with his Salaah (from where it broke)
as long as he does not talk (between making wudhu and returning to Salaah)."
231
Usool Shaashi
Imaam Muhammed also narrated the Hadeeth of Hadhrat
Abdullaah Ibn Mas'ood of Sajdah-Sahw1 being after
Salaam and disregarded Qiyaas for it."
The second type of narrators
‫ظ ُ َو ْال َعدَاُلَ لُة ُدوْ نَُ ُ ل‬

ُ‫االجْ تل ُهَا لُد‬ ُ‫ی ُ لمنَُ ُالر َوا لُة ُهُمُ ُ ْال َمعْروْ فوْ نَُ ُبل ْال لح ْف ل‬ ُْ ‫َُو ُ ْالقلسْمُ ُالثَّانل‬
ُ‫ك‬َُ ‫َّت ُ لر َواُیَةُ ُ لم ْثلل لُه َما ُ لع ْن َد‬
ُْ ‫صح‬ َ ُ ‫ْن ُ َُماللكُ ُفَا ل َذا‬ ُ‫ْر ُةَ ُ َُو ُُاَن ل‬
ُ‫َس ُب ل‬ َُ ‫ی ُهُ َری‬ ُْ ‫َُو ُ ْالفَ ْتویُ ُ َکُابل‬
َُُ‫ن ُخَ الَُفَه ُ َکان‬ ُ‫ی ُلزوْ لُم ُ ْال َع َم ل‬
ُْ ‫ل ُبل لُه ُ َُو ُال‬ ُْ ‫الَ ُ لخفَا َُء ُفل‬
ُ َ‫اس ُف‬ َُ َ‫ق ُ ْالخَ بَرُ ُ ْالقلی‬ َُ َ‫ن ُ َواف‬ُْ ‫فَا ل‬
ُُ‫ْر ُةَ ُاَ ْلوضؤَُ ُ لم َّما ُ َم َّس ْتهُ ُالنَّار‬ َُ ‫اس ُاوْ لیُ ُ لمثَالُه ُ َما ُ َر َویُ ُاُبوُْ ُهُ َری‬ َ ُ‫ْال َع َملُ ُبل ْالقلیَ ل‬
ُُ‫ضُا ُ لم ْنه‬ َّ ‫ض اتَُ ُ ُبل َماءُ ُ َس لخیْنُ ُاُک ْنتَُ ُتَت ََو‬ ْ َ
َ ‫ال ُُلَه ُالبْنُ ُ َعبَّاسُ ُا َراُیْتَُ ُلَوُْ ُتَ َّو‬ َُ َ‫فَق‬
ُ‫ك‬َُ ‫اس ُال ُْذ ُلَوْ َکانَُ ُ لع ْندَہ ُخَ بَرُ ُلَ َر َواہُ ُ َوعَلی ُ ُهَ َذا ُت ََر‬ ُ‫فَ َس َکتَُ ُ َُو ُالنَّ َما ُ َر َّدہ ُبل ْالقلیَ ل‬
ُ ُ‫اس‬ُ‫صرَّا لُةُبل ْالقلیَ ل‬ َ ‫یُ َم ْسُاُلَ لُةُ ْالم‬
ُْ ‫ْر ُةَُفل‬
َُ ‫یُهُ َری‬ ُْ ‫اَصْ َحابنَاُ لر َواُیَ ُةَُابل‬
The second type of narrators (from the generation of the
Sahabah) are those who were well-known for their
(excellent) memory, piety but not for their ability to extract
religious rulings such as Hadhrat Abu Hurairah , Hadhrat
Anas bin Maalik , etc. Thus if one of their narrations
reach you authentically and it corresponds with Qiyaas
then there is no doubt that it is Waajib to practice upon it
but if it contradicts Qiyaas then it would be better to
practice upon Qiyaas. An example of this (wherein their
narrations contradict Qiyaas) is what has been narrated
from Hadhrat Abu Hurairah , "Wudhu is incumbent
1
Hadhrat Ibn Mas'ood narrates that Rasulullaah said, "For any error in Salaah there are two
Sajdahs after Salaam".
232
Usool Shaashi
because (of usage) of that which is touched by the fire
(cooked or prepared with fire, such as meat, etc)" on which
Hadhrat Abdullaah Ibn Abbaas  asked him(to refute his
deduction), "Will your Wudhu be complete if you perform
Wudhu with hot water (which is heated by the fire)" on
which Hadhrat Abu Hurairah  remained silent. Thus
Hadhrat Ibn Abbaas  refuted this by Qiyaas because if
Hadhrat Ibn Abbaas  has a Hadeeth (in contradiction to
this), he would have narrated it. Based upon this (that the
Qiyaas will be given preference when these types of Hadeeth
contradict it) our scholars (of the Hanafi Madhab) disregard
the narration of Hadhrat Abu Hurairah  regarding
'Musarraat'1(not milking an animal for a number of days to
give the impression that it produces a lot of milk) because of
Qiyaas (because it contradicts Qiyaas).
A condition for practicing on Khabar Wahid
َُّ ‫ال‬
ُ ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ُ‫اح لُد ُا‬ ‫ل ُبلخَ بَ لُر ُ ْال َو ل‬
ُ‫ال ُالر َوا لُة ُقُْلنَا ُشَرْ طُ ُ ْال َع َم ل‬ ُ‫ف ُاَحْ َو ل‬ُ‫ار ُال ْختلالَ ل‬
ُ‫َُو ُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ َّ
َُ ‫الَُّیَکوْ نَُُمخَاللفاُلللظا لُه لُرُقَا‬ ْ
ُ ُ‫بُ َوالسُن َّ لُةُال َم ْشهُوْ َُر لُةُ َُوُاُن‬ ْ
ُ‫یَکوْ نَُُمخَ اللفاُللل لکتَا ل‬
ُُ‫ی ُ َح لدیْث‬ ُْ ‫ی ُلَک ُْم ُعَن‬ َُ ‫الا َحا لدیْثُ ُبَ ْع لدیُْ ُفَا ل َذا ُر لو‬ ُ ‫َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَ لُم ُتَ ْکثرُ ُلَکمُ ُا‬
ُُُ‫قُفَا ْقبَلوْ ہُُ َو َماُخَالَفَُُفَردوْ ہ‬ َُ َ‫للالُفَ َماُ َواف‬ُ ُ‫ب‬ ُ‫فَ ا ْع لرضوْ ہُُعَلیُ لکتَا ل‬
Based upon the varying conditions of the narrators (of
Hadeeth) we say that the condition for practicing upon
Khabar Wahid is that it must not contradict the Quraan
and the well-known (established) Sunnah (of Rasulullaah )
and that it must not contradict the apparent (the common
practice of the general masses). Rasulullaah  has said, "The
number of Ahaadeeth will increase after me, thus if any of
1
The Hadeeth of Hadhrat Abu Hurairah in this regard is, "Do not leave the milk in the udders
of the camels and goats (i.e. not milk it for days), whoever sells it after this, he (the buyer) will
have one of two choices after he milks it (and discovers that it does not produce abundant milk
as he was led to believe); if he desires he may keep it (for the original price agreed upon) and
if he desires then he should return it along with a Saa'a of dates (for the milk he extracted)."
233
Usool Shaashi
you learns of a Hadeeth he should compare it to the
Quraan, if it concurs with it then accept and that which
contradicts it should be rejected.
The substantiation that the conditions of the

narrators differ
ُُ‫ت ُالر َواة‬ ُ‫ل ُ َکانَ ل‬َُ ‫ی ُطَاللبُ ُاَُنَّه ُقَا‬ ُْ ‫ْن ُاُبل‬
ُ‫َن ُعَلیُ ُب ل‬ ُْ ‫ی ُع‬ َُ ‫َوتَحْ قلیْقُ ُ َذللكَُ ُفل ْی َما ُر لو‬
ُ‫للال ُﷺ ُ َوع ََرفَُ ُ َمعْنی‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ َُ ْ‫ب ُ َرسو‬ َُ ‫ص لح‬ َ ُ ُ‫عَلیُ ُثَلَثُ لُة ُاَ ْق َسامُ ُم ْؤ لمنُ ُمخللص‬
ْ
َُ‫ف ُ َحقل ْیُقَ ُة‬
ُْ ‫ْر‬ ‫ْض ُ َما ُ َس لم َُع ُ َُو ُلَ ُْم ُ ُُیَع ل‬
َُ ‫ن ُقَبل ْیُلَ لُة ُفَ لس َم َُع ُبَع‬
ُْ ‫َکالَ لم لُه ُ َواَ ْع َرابلیُ ُ َجاُ َُء ُ لم‬
ُُ‫للال ُﷺ‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫ظ ُ َرسوْ ل‬ ْ
ُ‫للال ُﷺ ُ ُفَ َر َج َُع ُاللی ُقَبل ْیلَتل لُه ُفَ َروی ُبل َغی لُْر ُلَف ل‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫َکالَ لُم ُ َرسوْ ل‬
ُ‫ف ُنلفَاقُه‬ ُْ ‫اوتُ ُ َُو ُمنَافلقُ ُلَ ُْم ُیع َْر‬ َ َ‫الَ ُیَتَف‬ ْ
ُ ُ ‫ن ُال َمعْنی‬ َُّ َ‫فَتَ َغی ََُّر ُ ْال َمعْنی ُ َُو ُهُ َُو ُیَظنُ ُا‬
ُ‫فَ َروی ُ َمالَ ُْم ُیَ ْس َم ُْع ُ َوا ْفتَری ُفَ َس لم َُع ُ لم ْنهُ ُانَاسُ ُفَظَنوْ ہُ ُم ْؤ لمنا ُم ْخللصاُ ُفَ َر َووْ ا‬
ُ‫ب‬ ُ‫ب ُ َعرْ ضُ ُ ْالخَ بَ لُر ُ َعلَی ُ ْال لکتَا ل‬ َُ ‫اس ُفَللهُ َذا ُ ْال َم ْعنَی ُ َو َج‬ ُ‫َذللكَُ ُ َُو ُا ْشتَ ُهَ َُر ُبَیْنَُ ُالن َّ ل‬
‫َوالسُنَ لُةُ ْال َم ْشهُوْ َُرلُة‬
The substantiation for this (that the conditions of the
narrators vary) is what has been narrated from Hadhrat Ali
 that he said, "The conditions of the narrators are of three
categories; the first is a true Mu'min who accompanied
Rasulullaah (is amongst his close Sahabah) and understood
the meaning of his speech, the second is a Bedouin who
came from his tribe and heard some of the speech of
Rasulullaah  but did not understand the reality of
Rasulullaah's  speech and returns to his tribe and reports
the narration in different words to what Rasulullaah  said,
such that it changes its meaning but he thinks that it has
not changed (and it is what Rasulullaah  had meant when in
reality the meaning has changed), the third is a Munaafiq
whose Nifaaq (hypocrisy) is unknown, who narrates what
Rasulullaah he did not hear and fabricates (narrations)
234
Usool Shaashi
which people hear from him and thinking him to be a
sincere Mu'min report these narrations to others, resulting
in that narration becoming famous amongst people." This
is why it is necessary to compare these Ahaadeeth to the
Quraan and the well-known (established) Sunnah (of
Rasulullaah).
An example of comparing a Hadeeth to the

Quraan
ُ‫ن‬ُْ ‫ث ُ َمسُ ُال َّذ َک لُر ُفل ْی َما ُیرْ وی ُ َع ْنهُ ُ لم‬ ُ‫ی ُ َح لد ْی ل‬ُْ ‫ب ُفل‬ ُ‫ض ُ َعلَی ُ ْال لکتَا ل‬ُ‫َُو ُنَ لظیْرُ ُ ْال َعرْ ل‬
ُُ‫ج ُمخَ اللفا ُللقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالی‬ َُ ‫ب ُفَخَ َر‬ ُ‫ضُا ُفَ َع َرضْ نَاہُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْال لکتَا ل‬ َُّ ‫َمسُ ُ َذ َک َرہ ُفَ ْلیَت ََو‬
ُ‫الاحْ َج ل‬
ُ‫ار ُث َُّم‬ ُ ‫{فل ْی لُه ُ لر َجالُ ُی لحبوْ نَُ ُاُن ُیَّتَطَ ُهَّروْ ا ُ} ُفَالنَّهُ ُْم ُ َکانوْ ا ُیَ ْستَ ْنجوْ نَُ ُبلا‬
ُ‫َط لُهیْرا‬ ْ ‫الَ ُت‬ ُ ُ ‫یَ ْغ لسلوْ نَُ ُبل ْال َما لُء ُ َولَوُْ ُ َکانَُ ُ َمسُ ُال َّذ َک لُر ُ َحدَثا ُلَ َکانَُ ُهُ َذا ُتَ ْن لجیْسا‬
ُ‫ت ُنَ ْف َس ُهَا ُبل َغی لُْر‬ ُْ ‫ق ُ َو َکذللكَُ ُقَوْ لُه ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَمُ ُاَی َما ُال ْم َرُاَةُ ُنَ َک َح‬ ْ ُ ‫َعلَی‬
ُ َ‫ج ُمخَ اللفا ُللقَوْ لل لُه ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{ف‬
َُ‫ال‬ َُ ‫اطلُ ُخَ َر‬ ‫اطلُ ُبَ ل‬ ‫اطلُ ُبَ ل‬ ‫ن ُ َوللی ُهَا ُفَنل َکاح ُهَا ُبَ ل‬ ُ‫ال ْذ ل‬
ُ‫ق ُالن َک ل‬
ُ‫اح‬ َُ ‫َاب ُیوْ لجبُ ُتَحْ قل ْی‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْال لکت‬ َُّ ‫ن} ُفَا ل‬َُّ ُ‫اجه‬ َ ‫ن ُیَ ْن لکحْ نَُ ُاَ ْز َو‬ُْ ‫ن ُُا‬ َُّ ُ‫تَعْضلوْ ه‬
َُّ ُ‫لم ْنه‬
‫ن‬
An example of comparing Khabar Wahid to the Quraan is

in the Hadeeth of touching one's private path, namely what
has been narrated from Rasulullaah , "Whoever touches
his private parts should perform Wudhu". Therefore we
compared it to the Quraan and found it to contradict the
verse, "In it (referring to the Masjid Rasulullaah  built in
Qubaa) are men who love to be extremely pure" as (it has
been reported that they were praised by ALLAAH because)
they used to make Istinjaa with stones and then follow it by
washing (their private parts) with water. Thus if touching
the private parts did break Wudhu then this (method of
Istinjaa) would have been impurifying (a means of rendering
one into a state of impurity) and not purification (as stated in
the verse).
235
Usool Shaashi
In a similar manner (as the Hadeeth mentioned above) the
Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "Whichever women will perform
her Nikaah without the permission of her Walie (father or
Shar'ie representative) then her Nikaah is invalid, invalid,
invalid" contradicts the verse, "Do not prevent them (the
divorced women) from marrying their husbands" because
the Quraan necessitates that the Nikaah of a women is valid
(even if without the permission of her Walie).
When Khabar Wahid contradicts Khabar

Mashoor
ُ‫ضا لُء ُبل َشا لُهدُ ُ َُو ُیَ لمیْنُ ُفَا لُنَّه‬ َ َ‫ض ُ َعلَی ُ ْالخَ بَ لُر ُ ْال َم ْشهُوْ لُر ُ لر َواُیَةُ ُ ْالق‬ ُ‫َو لمثَالُ ُ ْال َعرْ ل‬
ُْ ‫ی ُ َو ْالیَ لمیْنُ ُ َعلَی ُ َم‬
ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫ ُاَلبَیُنَةُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْالم َّد لع‬:‫سالَم‬ َّ ‫ج ُمخَ اللفا ُللقَوْ لل لُه ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال‬
َُ ‫خَ َر‬
‫اَ ْن َک َُر‬
An example of comparing the Khabar Wahid to Khabar

Mashoor is the narration1 of verdict being passed (by
Rasulullaah ) with one witness and (the accuser taking) an
oath (in place of the second witness) which contradicts the
(Mashoor) Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "The accuser must
bring a witness and the defendant must take an oath (if he
denies the accusation).
1
The Hadeeth is, "Rasulullaah passed a verdict with an oath and one witness".
236
Usool Shaashi
When Khabar Wahid contradicts the common
practice
ُُ‫الَ ُی ْع َمل‬ ُ ُ ‫ج ُمخَ اللفا ُلللظَّا لُه لُر‬ ‫ار ُهُ َذا ُ ْال َمعْنی ُق ْلنَا ُ َخبَرُ ُ ْال َو ل‬
َُ ‫اح لُد ُال َذا ُخَ َر‬ ُ‫َُو ُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬
ْ ْ ْ
ُ‫ار ُالخَ بَ لُر ُفل ْی َما ُیَعمُ ُبل لُه ُالبَل َُویُ ُفلی‬ َّ
ُ‫ن ُص َو لُر ُمخَ الَُفَ لُة ُالظا لُه لُر ُ َع ْدم ُال ْشتل ُهَ ل‬ ُْ ‫بل لُه ُ َو لم‬
ُ‫ْرُفلیُمتَابَ َُع لُةُالسُنَّ لُةُفَا ل َذاُلَ ُْم‬
ُ‫صی ل‬ ‫الَُیتَّ ُهَموْ نَُُبلالت َّ ْق ل‬
ُ ُ‫یُ لالنَّهُ ُْم‬ ُْ ‫لُ َوالثَّانل‬
ُ‫ص ْد لُرُاالاُ َّو ل‬ َّ ‫ال‬
ُ‫اج لُة ُ َوعموْ لُم ُ ْالبَ ْل َویُ ُ َکانَُ ُ َذللكَُ ُ َعالَ َُم ُةَ ُ َع ْد لُم‬ َُ ‫یَ ْشتَ لُه لُر ُ ْالخَ بَرُ ُ َم َُع ُ لش َُّد لُة ُ ْال َح‬
‫حتل لُه‬
َُّ ‫ص‬ ‫ل‬
Based upon this (that the conditions of narrators vary) we say
that if Khabar Wahid contradicts the apparent it will not
be practiced upon. An example of Khabar Wahid
contradicting the apparent is when it is not the common
practice of those residing in the first (i.e. of the Sahabah)
and second generation (i.e. of the Taabi'een) because they
cannot be accused of being deficient in practicing upon a
Sunnat. Thus when a Hadeeth is not well-known amongst
them, despite there being a dire necessity for it and the
common practice (of people being contradictory to it), it will
a sign of it not being correct.
An example of Khabar Wahid contradicting the

apparent
237
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫اع‬
ُ‫َّض ل‬ َ ‫ت ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُبلالر‬ ُْ ‫ن ُال ْم َر ْاتُه ُ َحر َم‬ ‫ت ُال َذا ُاَ ْخبَ َُر ُ َو ل‬
َُّ َ‫احدُ ُا‬ ُ‫َو لمثَالهُ ُفلی ُ ْالح ْک لمی َّا ل‬
ُ‫ن ُ ْال َع ْق َُد‬ َُّ َ‫ج ُا ْختَ ُهَا ُ َُو ُلَوُْ ُاَ ْخبَ َُر ُا‬َُ ‫ن ُیَ ْعتَ لم َُد ُعَلیُ ُخَ بَ لر لُہ ُ َُو ُیَتَزَ َّو‬ ‫الطَّ ل‬
ُْ َ‫اریُْ ُ َجازَُ ُا‬
ُ‫ت‬ ُ‫تُ ْال َمرْ ُاَةُُبل َموْ ل‬ ُ‫الَُی ْقبَلُُخَ بَرہُ َو َک َذللكَُُال َذاُا ْخبل َر ل‬ ُ ُ‫اع‬ ُ‫َّض ل‬ َ ‫اطالُُبلح ْک لُمُالر‬ ‫کاَنَُُبَ ل‬
ُ‫ج‬ َُ ‫ن ُتَ ْعتَ َم َُد ُعَلیُ ُخَ بَ لر لُہ ُ َُو ُتَتَزَ َّو‬ ُْ َ‫زَ وْ لج ُهَا ُاَوُْ ُطَالَقل لُه ُالیَّا ُهَا ُ َو ُهُ َُو ُغَائلبُ ُ َجازَُ ُا‬
ُُْ‫ب ُ ْال َع َملُ ُبل لُه ُ َولَو‬ َُ ‫احدُ ُ َع ْن ُهَا ُ َو َج‬ ‫ت ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُ ْالقل ْبُلَ ُةَ ُفَا َ ْخبَ َرہ ُ َو ل‬
ُْ َ‫بل َغی لْر لُہ ُ َولَ لُو ُا ْشتَبَ ُه‬
ُ‫ضُاُبل لُهُبَلُُْتَیَ َّمم‬ َّ ‫الَُیَتَو‬ ُ ُ‫س لُة‬ َُ ‫احدُُعَلیُالنَّ َجا‬ ‫الَُیَ ْعلَمُُ َحاُلَهُفَا َ ْخبَ َرہُ َو ل‬ ُ ُُ‫َو َج َُدُ َماء‬
An example of Khabar Wahid contradicting the apparent

in the laws of Shari'ah is when a person informs him that
his wife has become Haraam upon him through fostering,
during the period she is still being nursed, then it is
permissible to rely upon his information and it will be
permissible to marry her sister (as it will not result in having
two sisters in his wedlock). (However) If he were to inform
him that his Nikaah was invalid because of her being his
foster sister (at the time when the Nikaah occurred) then this
information will be rejected (as it contradicts the apparent,
which is that she is not his foster sister as it is impossible that
this information could not have been known by anyone else at
the time of the Nikaah).
Similarly if a woman is informed of the death of her

husband or that he divorced her, when he is not present,
then it will be permissible to rely upon his information and
remarry (but if he is present then it will not be permissible to
rely on his information because it contradicts the apparent as
it impossible for to be unaware of his death or Talaaq if he is
present.
If a person is in doubt as to which direction is the Qiblah
(and is unable to ascertain its direction) and one person
informs him (of the direction of the Qiblah) then it is Waajib
upon him to act upon it (and perform Salaah in that direction
as it does not contradict the apparent).
238
Usool Shaashi
If a person comes across water and is uncertain as to
whether it is pure or not and one person informs him that it
is impure then he will not make Wudhu with it and will
perform Tayammum (as this does not contradict the
apparent as opposed to if he is unsure about the water and one
person informs him that it is impure but that water is
commonly used by everyone then his information will not be
accepted and it will be Waajib upon him to make Wudhu with
that water).
Khabar Wahid can be mentioned four instances
َُ ‫للال ُتَ َعالیُ ُ َما ُلَی‬
ُ‫ْس‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ض لُع ُخَ اللصُ ُ َحق‬ ‫ی ُاَرْ بَ َُع لُة ُ َم َوا ل‬ ُْ ‫جةُ ُفل‬ َُّ ‫اح لُد ُح‬ َ ُ ُ‫خَ بَر‬
‫الو ل‬
َ ْ ْ
َُ ‫بلعقوْ ُبَةُ ُ َُو ُخَ اللصُ ُ َحقُ ُال َع ْب لُد ُ َما ُفل ْی لُه ُاللزَ امُ ُ َمحْ ضُ ُ َُو ُخَ اللصُ ُ َحق لُه ُ َمالی‬
ُُُ‫ْس‬
َُ ‫للالُﷺُقَبل‬
ُ‫ل‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ‫نُ َوجْ هُُاَ َّماُ ْاالَ َّولُُفَی ْقبَلُُفل ْی لُهُخَ بَرُُ ْال َو ل‬
َُّ ‫اح لُدُفَا ل‬
َُ ْ‫نُ َرسو‬ ُْ ‫فل ْی لُهُال ْلزَ امُُ لم‬
239
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ی ُفَی ْشت ََرطُ ُفل ْی لُه ُ ْال َعدَدُ ُ َُو‬ ُْ ‫ضانَُ ُ َُو ُاَ َّما ُالثَّانل‬ َ ‫ل ُ َر َم‬ ُْ ‫َش ُهَا َُد ُةَ ُ ْاالَ ْع َرابلیُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ی ُ لُهالَ ل‬
َُُ‫اح لُدُ َع ْدالُُکاَن‬ ‫َازعَاتُُ َُوُاَ َّماُالثَّاللثُُفَی ْقبَلُُفل ْی لُهُخَ بَرُُ ْال َو ل‬ ‫ْال َعدَاُلَةُُ َُوُنَ لظیْرہُ ْالمن ل‬
ُُ‫ظیْرہُُ ُْالم َعا َمالَتُُاَ َّماُال َُّرابلعُُفَی ْشت ََُرُطُُفل ْی لُهُال َّماُ ْال َعدَدُُاَ لُوُ ْال َعدَاُلَة‬ ُ‫اسقاُ َُوُنَ ل‬ ‫اَوُُْفَ ل‬
ُ‫حجْ ر‬ َُ ‫یُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَُ َُوُن لَظیْرہُُ ْال َع ْزلُُ َو ْال‬
ُْ ‫لع ْن َُدُُابل‬
Khabar Wahid can be mentioned in four instances;
The first is regarding that which is purely the right of

ALLAAH but not a (Shar'ie) punishment (such as Salaah,
Zakaah, etc).
The second is regarding that which is purely the right of

man which entails making something incumbent upon
another (such as a debt, etc).
The third is regarding that which is purely the right of man

which does not entail making something incumbent upon
another (such as informing someone that he has been anointed
as a representative of another, etc).
The fourth is regarding that which is purely the right of

man which to an extent entails making something
incumbent upon another (revoke the right for one to act as
his representative, etc).
As far as the first is concerned (that which is purely the right
of ALLAAH but not a Shar'ie punishment) Khabar Wahid is
accepted in it as Rasulullaah  accepted the testimony of
one Bedouin regarding the sighting of the crescent of
Ramadaan.
As far as the second is concerned (that which is purely the

right of man which entails making something incumbent upon
another) quantity and faithfulness is required (there must be
two or more witnesses in order for the testimony to be
accepted) an example of which is monetary disputes.
240
Usool Shaashi
As far as the third is concerned (that

Section which is purely the right of man which
Three does not entail making something
incumbent upon another) Khabar Wahid
is accepted in it whether it be from one
who is pious or a sinner. An example of this is transactions
(such as appointing someone as your representative in a sales
transaction).
As far as the fourth is concerned (that which is purely the

right of man which to an extent entails making something
incumbent upon another) according to Imaam Abu Hanifah
 either piety or quantity is required (if one pious person
provides the information then it is accepted and if they are not
pious but are two or more than it will be accepted) an example
of this is revoking the right for one to act as one's
representative and revoking the right for one's slave to
trade.
Ijmaa
241
Usool Shaashi
َّ ‫اع‬ َِّ ‫االج َم‬ َُّ ِ‫ثَّالثال‬
ِ َّ‫ثَّفِی‬ َُّ ‫اَلبَح‬
ُُ‫جة‬
َُّ ‫ْنُح‬
ُ‫عُالدی ل‬
ُ‫یُفروْ ل‬ ُْ ‫للالُﷺُفل‬ ُ ُُ‫الا َُّم لُةُبَ ْع َُدُ َماُت ََوفیُ َرسوْ ل‬ ُ ‫فَصْ لُُالجْ َماعُُهُ لذ لُہُا‬
‫لُبل ُهَاُشَرْ عاُ َک َرا َُمةُُللهُ لذ لُہُاالاُ َُّم لُة‬ ُ‫َموْ لجُبَةُُلل ْل َع َم ل‬
The Ijmaa (consensus) of this Ummat after the demise of
Rasulullaah  regarding laws of Deen is a proof which is
Waajib to practice upon according to Shari'ah, as an
honour to this Ummat.
Ijmaa is of four types
ُ‫َّحاُبَ لُة ُٗ ُعَلیُ ُح ْک لُم ُ ْال َحا لدُثَ لُة‬ َ ‫االجْ َماعُ ُعَلیُ ُاُرْ بَ َُع لُة ُاُ ْق َسامُ ُالجْ َماعُ ُالص‬ ‫ث َُّم ُ ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ُْ ‫الردُ ُث َُّم ُالجْ َماعُ ُ َم‬ َ ُ ‫َن‬ ْ
ُ‫ت ُالبَاقلیْنَُ ُع ل‬
ُ‫ْض ُ َوسکوْ ل‬ ْ
ُ‫نَصاث َُّم ُالجْ َماعهُ ُْم ُبلنَصُ ُالبَع ل‬
ُ‫ف‬ُ‫ال ُال َّسلَ ل‬ ْ
ُ‫ف ُث َُّم ُاالجْ َماعُ ُعَلیُ ُاُ َح لُد ُاُق َو ل‬ ُ‫بَ ْعدَهُ ُْم ُفل ْی َما ُلَ ُْم ُیوْ َج ُْد ُفل ْی لُه ُقَوْ لُ ُال َّسلَ ل‬
ُ‫ْض‬ ْ
ُ‫للال ُتَ َعالیُ ُث َُّم ُالجْ َماعُ ُ ُالبَع ل‬ ُ ُ‫ب‬ ُ‫ن ُ لکتَا ل‬ُْ ‫اُ َّما ُاالاُ َّولُ ُفَهُ َُو ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُاُیَةُ ُ لم‬
ُ‫ن ُبَ ْعدَهُ ُْم ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة‬ ُْ ‫َوسکوْ تُ ُ ْالبَاقلیْنَُ ُفَهُ َُو ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُالمت ََواتل لُر ُث َُّم ُالجْ َماعُ ُ َم‬
ْ
ُ‫فُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة‬
ُ‫الُال َّسلَ ل‬ ُ‫ارُث َُّمُالجْ َماعُُ ْالمتَُاخ لریْنَُُعَلیُاُ َح لُدُاُ ْق َو ل‬ ُ‫ْال َم ْشهُوْ لُرُ لمنَُُاالاُ ْخبَ ل‬
ُ ‫ْحُ لمنَُُاال َحا لُد‬ ُ‫َّحی ل‬‫الص ل‬
Then Ijmaa is of four types;
1- Ijmaa of the Sahabah on the ruling of an incident with

clarification from all (that is they all voiced their approval of
the ruling passed).
2- Ijmaa of the Sahabah by clarification from some and the

silence of the rest from any refutation (a few of the Sahabah
voiced their approval and the remaining Sahabah did not
refute it, which indicates that they agree with the ruling
passed).
242
Usool Shaashi
3- Ijmaa of those that came after them (the Taabi'een and
Mujtahideen) on those laws regarding which they did not
find any clarification from the predecessors (i.e. the
Sahabah).
4- Ijmaa of the later scholars on one of the (from the diverse)

opinions of the predecessors (Sahabah).
The ruling of the first (Ijmaa of the Sahabah on the ruling of

an incident with clarification from all) is that it is similar to a
verse from the Quraan (it will be practiced upon without any
doubt and denial of it is Kufr).
Then the ruling of the Ijmaa of the Sahabah by

clarification from some and silence of the rest from
refutation is that it is similar to Khabar Mutawaatir (it will
be practised upon without any doubt but denial of it will not
result in Kufr).
Then the Ijmaa of those that came after them (the Taabi'een
and Mujtahideen on those laws regarding which they did not
find any clarification from the predecessors) is similar to
Khabar Mashoor (it will be practised upon with conviction).
Then Ijmaa of the latter scholars on one of the (from the

diverse) opinions of the predecessors is similar to the
authentic Ahaadeeth of Khabar Wahid (it will be practiced
upon with the possibility of it being incorrect but will be given
precedence over Qiyaas).
Whose Ijmaa will be considered
ُ‫الَ ُی ْعتَبَرُ ُبلقَوْ ل‬

ُ‫ل‬ ُ َ‫االجْ تل ُهَا لُد ُف‬ ُ‫ل ُال َّر ْا ل‬
ُ‫ی ُ َُو ُ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُهُ َذا ُ ْالبَا ل‬
ُ‫ب ُالجْ َماعُ ُُاَ ُْه ل‬ ُْ ‫َو ْالم ْعتَبَرُ ُفل‬
‫لُ ْالفل ْق لُه‬
ُ‫یُاصوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ْر ُةَُُلَهُفل‬
َُ ‫صی‬‫الَُبَ ل‬ ُ‫امُ َو ْالمتَ َکل لُمُوُ ْالم َحد ل‬
ُ ُُْ‫ثُالَّ لذی‬ ُ‫ْال َع َّو ل‬
243
‫‪The Ijmaa which is considered in this chapter is the Ijmaa‬‬
‫)‪of those being expert in the fields of Fiqh (jurisprudence‬‬
‫‪and Ijtihaad (deriving rulings), thus the opinions (or‬‬
‫‪consensus) of the general masses, Mutakalimeen (those who‬‬
‫‪deliberate over Aqaaid) and those Muhadditheen who lack‬‬
‫‪competency in Fiqh will not be considered.‬‬
‫‪Ijmaa is divided into two categories‬‬
‫ْن ُم َر َّکبُ ُ َو َغیْرُ ُم َر َّکبُ ُفَ ْالم َر َّکبُ ُ َماُ‬ ‫االجْ َماعُ ُعَلیُ ُنَوْ َعی لُ‬ ‫ث َُّم ُبَ ْع َُد ُ َذللكَُ ُ ل‬
‫َّ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ف ُفلی ُال لعُل لُةُ‬ ‫اال ْختلالَ لُ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫اجْ ت لم َُع ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُاال َراءُ ُعَلیُ ُحک لُم ُال َحا لدُثَ لُة ُ َم َُع ُوجوْ لُد ُ ل‬
‫ْ‬
‫ئ ُ َو َمسُ ُال َمرْ اُ لُة ُا َّما ُ لع ْن َدنَاُ‬ ‫اض ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْالقَ لُ‬
‫اال ْنتلقَ لُ‬ ‫االجْ َماعُ ُعَلیُ ُوجوْ لُد ُ ل‬ ‫َو لمثَالُه ُ لُ‬
‫اعُ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ئ ُ َواُ َّما ُ لع ْندَہُٗ ُفَبلنَاءُ ُ َعلَی ُال َمسُ ُث َُّم ُهُ َذا ُالنَّوْ عُ ُ لمنَُ ُاالجْ َم لُ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫َلی ُالقَ لُ‬
‫فَبلنَاءُ ُع َُ‬
‫ئُ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ن ُالقَ َُ‬‫ْن ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُثَبَتَُ ُاُ َُّ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ی ُاُ َح لُد ُال َم اخَ َذی لُ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫جةُ ُبَ ْع َُد ُظهُوْ لُر ُالفَ َسا لُد ُفل ُْ‬ ‫الَ ُیَبْقی ُح َُّ‬ ‫ُ‬
‫ن ُال َمسَُّ ُ َغیْرُُ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫اال ْنتلقَ لُ‬
‫اض ُفل ْی لُه ُ َولَوُْ ُثَبَتَُ ُاُ َُّ‬ ‫الَ ُیَقوْ لُ ُبل ل‬ ‫َغیْرُ ُنَاقلضُ ُفَُابوْ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُ ُ‬
‫ی ُ َعلَ ْی ُهَاُ‬ ‫ی ُبنل َُ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫اض ُفل ْی لُه ُللفَ َسا لُد ُال لعُل لُة ُالتل ُْ‬ ‫الَ ُیَقوْ لُ ُبلاال ْنتلقَ لُ‬ ‫نَاقلضُ ُفَال َّشافل لعیُ ُ ُ‬
‫ْالح ْکمُ‬
‫‪244‬‬
Usool Shaashi
Then Ijmaa is divided into two categories; Murakkab and
Ghair Murakkab.
Ijmaa Murakkab1 is that Ijmaa in which there is consensus

regarding the ruling (the ruling is the same according to all)
but there is difference in opinion regarding the Illat (each
differs in the manner that the ruling is derived). An example
of this (Ijmaa Murakkab) is the Ijmaa of the nullification of
Wudhu when a person vomits (a mouthful) and touches a
woman (there is Ijmaa on the ruling that his Wudhu is
nullified but there is difference of opinion regarding the
manner in which it broke). According to us (Hanafi scholars)
his wudhu breaks because of vomiting (a mouthful) whereas
according to Imaam Shaafie  it breaks because of him
touching a woman. Thus this Ijmaa will no longer remain
when one of the Illat (on which either Imaam based his
ruling) no longer remains such that if it is established that
the vomiting did not break his wudhu (in that he vomited
less than a mouthful) then Imaam Abu Hanifah  will no
longer rule that his Wudhu is nullified and if it is
established that his touching did not break wudhu (in that
he did not touch her skin to skin) then Imaam Shaafie  will
no longer rule that his wudhu is nullified because the Illat
on which the ruling was based no longer remains.
ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫صیْباُ ُ ُفل‬ ‫ن ُیَّکوْ نَُ ُُابوْ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُم ل‬ ُْ ‫از ُُا‬
ُ‫ْن ُلل َج َو ل‬ ُ‫ی ُالطَّ َرفَی ل‬ ُْ ‫َُو ُ ْالفَ َسادُ ُمت ََو ُه َّمُ ُفل‬
ُ‫صیْبا‬ ‫ئ ُ َوال َّشافل لعیُ ُ َر لح َمهُ ُللاُ ُتَ َعالی ُم ل‬ ُ‫ی ُ َم ْسئَُلَ لُة ُ ْالقَ ل‬ُْ ‫َم ْسئَُلَ لُة ُ ْال َمسُ ُم ْخ لطئا ُفل‬
ُ‫الَ ُی اَودیُْ ُهُ َذا ُاللیُ ُبلنَا لُء ُوجوْ لُد‬ ُ َ‫فی ُ َم ْسئَُلَ لُة ُ ْال َمسُ ُف‬ ُْ ٗ ُ‫ئ ُم ْخ لطئا ُ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُ َم ْسئَُلَ لُة ُ ْالقَ ل‬
ُْ ‫فل‬
َّ َ
ُ‫اصلُ ُاُنه ُ َجا َُز‬‫اع ُفال َح ل‬ْ َ ُ‫االجْ َم ل‬ َ
‫ف ُ َما ُتَق َّد َُم ُ لمنَُ ُ ل‬ ُ‫ل ُبل لخالَ ل‬ ُ‫اط ل‬ ‫اع ُعَلی ُالبَ ل‬ ُ‫لاالجْ َم ل‬
َ
ُ ُ‫یُهُ َُوُ َعل ْی لُه‬ ْ
َُ ‫اعُللظهُوْ لُرُالفَ َسا لُدُفل ْی َماُبنل‬ ُ‫االجْ َم ل‬ َ
‫الرْ تلفَاعُُهُذاُ ل‬
1
Ijmaa Ghair Murakkab is the opposite of Ijmaa Murakkab wherein there is consensus
regarding the ruling and the Illat, such that there is no possibility of the Ijmaa not remaining.
245
Usool Shaashi
(If one were to object by saying that this form of Ijmaa is

invalid because each Imaam has a totally opposite view
wherein only one can be right thus opposing the very meaning
of consensus, we would say) The likelihood of error is
possible from both sides as it is possible that Imaam Abu
Hanifah  is correct (in his view) on touching a woman (that
in reality it does not break Wudhu) and in error regarding
vomiting (that in reality it does not break Wudhu) and Imaam
Shaafie could be correct in the ruling of vomiting (that in
reality it does not break Wudhu) and in error regarding
touching a woman (that in reality it does not break Wudhu).
Thus this (possibility of each being in error) will not establish
that this form of Ijmaa is baseless (because the possibility of
error is mere speculation and doubt). (Ijmaa Murakkab will no
longer remain when one of the Illat on which either Imaam
based his ruling no longer remains)As opposed to what was
mentioned previously of (the categories) Ijmaa (referring to
Ijmaa Ghair Murakkab, which does not have the possibility of
not remaining because of a difference of opinion in Illat).
The conclusion is that it is permissible for this Ijmaa to no

longer remain by the Illat on which the rulings are based
no longer remaining.
Examples of the above
ُ‫ی ُ َحا لدُثَةُ ُث َُّم ُظَ ُهَ َُر ُ لرقُ ُالشهُوْ لُد ُاوْ لک ْذبهُ ُْم‬ ُْ ‫ی ُفل‬ ‫ضی ُ ْالقَ ل‬
ُْ ‫اض‬ َ َ‫َُو ُلل ُهَ َذا ُال َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ارُهُ َذا‬ ُ‫یُ َحقُ ُ ْالم َّد لعیُُ َُوُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ظ ُهَرُُْذللكَُُفل‬ ْ َ‫ضاؤہُ َوالنُلَّ ُْمُی‬ َ َ‫لُق‬ َُ َ‫عُبَط‬ُ‫بلالرجوْ ل‬
َّ ْ
ُ‫اع ُال لعُل لُة‬ َ ْ
ُ‫َاف ُالث َمانلُیَ لُة ُ ُالنقلط ل‬ َّ ُ‫الاصْ ن ل‬ ُ ‫َن ُا‬ َ
ُ‫ت ُالمؤَ لُفةُ ُقلوْ بهُ ُْم ُع ل‬َّ ْ ُ‫ْال َمعْنی ُ َسقط ل‬
َ َ
ُ‫ب‬َُ ْ‫ل ُالثَّو‬ َُ ‫اع ُ لعلَّتل لُه ُ َوعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُال َذا ُ َغ َس‬ ُ‫طَ ُ َس ُْهمُ ُ َذ لوی ُ ْالقرْ بیُ ُ لال ْنقلطَ ل‬ ُ َ‫َو َسق‬
َُ‫اع ُ لعلَّتل ُهَا ُ َوبل ُهَذا‬ َ ْ ْ َ ْ
ُ‫سةُ ُبلحک لُم ُط ُهَا َُر لُة ُال َم َحلُ ُ لالنقلط ل‬ َّ
َُ ‫ت ُالن َجا‬ َ ْ
ُ‫س ُبلالخَ لُ ُفَزَ ال ل‬ َُ ‫النَّ لج‬
ُ‫َنُ ْال َم َحلُُفَُا َّما‬ ُ‫س ُةَُع ل‬ َُ ‫لُی لزیْلُُالنَّ َجا‬ َُّ َ‫نُ ْالخ‬
َُّ ‫ثُفَا ل‬ُ‫ثُ َُوُ ْالخَ ْب ل‬ُ‫ثَبَتَُُ ْالفَرْ قُُبَیْنَُُ ْال َح َد ل‬
ُ‫ار ُةَُ ْال َم َحلُُ َوالنَّ َماُیفلیْد ُهَاُاَ ْلمطَهُرُُ َوُهُ َُوُ ْال َماُء‬ ُ ُُ‫ْالخَ ل‬
َُ َ‫الَُیفلیْدُُطَ ُه‬
246
Usool Shaashi
Therefore (since Ijmaa Murakkab will no longer remain if the

Illat no longer remains) when the Qaadhi makes a decision
in a case (based on testimony of witnesses) and thereafter it is
discovered that the witnesses were slaves or that they were
lying as they retracted their testimony then the decision of
the Qaadhi will be invalid(as the Illat on which the ruling
was based has changed), even though this will not affect the
right of the claimant (and the decision made in his favour will
remain and the result of this invalidation will affect the
witnesses and defendant in that the witnesses will now be
responsible for repayment to the defendant).
Based upon this (that the ruling will change if the Illat
changes) when impure clothing is washed with vinegar and
the Impurity is removed then it will be declared to be pure
as the Illat (which makes it impure) no longer remains.
This establishes the difference between Hadath (being in a

state of lesser impurity) and Impurity (such as urine, stool,
etc) as vinegar removes the impurity from the object but
vinegar does aid in purification of the object (the object will
be ruled to be pure because of the impurity, which caused it to
be ruled as impure, being removed and not that it has been
purified). That which benefits purification is water.
Sub-division of Ijmaa
ُ‫ل ُبل ْالفَصُْل ُ َوذللكَُ ُنَوْ عَا ل‬

ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫اع ُ َُو ُهُ َُو ُ َع ْدمُ ُ ْالقَائل ل‬ُ‫االجْ َم ل‬ ‫ث َُّم ُبَ ْع َُد ُ َذللكَُ ُنَوْ عُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ل‬
َُُ‫ی ُ َماال َذا ُ َکان‬ ُْ ‫احداُ ُ َوالثَّانل‬ ‫ْن ُ َو ل‬ ُ‫ف ُفلی ُ ْالفَصْ لَی ل‬ ُ‫اَ َحدهُ َما ُ َما ُال َذا ُ َکانَُ ُ َم ْن َشُا ُ ْال لخالَ ل‬
َُ ‫ل ُفل ْی َما ُخَ َّر‬
ُ‫ج‬ ُ‫الا َّو ل‬ُ ‫جةُ ُ لمثَالُ ُا‬ َُّ ‫ْس ُبلح‬ َُ ‫ی ُلَی‬ ُْ ‫جةُ ُ َوالثَّانل‬َُّ ‫الا َّولُ ُح‬ُ ‫ْال َم ْن َشُا ُم ْختَللفا ُ َوا‬
ُ‫احدُ ُ َونَ لظیْرہ ُال َذا ُاُ ْثبَ ْتنَا ُاَ َّن ُالُنَّ ُْه َی‬ ‫ل ُ ْالفَقل لُهُیَّ لُة ُعَلی ُاَصْ لُ ُ َو ل‬
ُ‫ْالعلَ َماءُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْال َم َسائل ل‬
ُ‫صوْ لم ُیَوْ لم‬ َ ‫صح ُالن َّ ْذر ُبل‬ ُ‫ْر ُهَا ُق ْلنَا ُیَ ل‬ َُ ‫ت ُال َّشرْ لعُیَّ لُة ُیوْ لجب ُتَ ْق لری‬ ‫صرفَا ل‬ َ َّ‫ع لَن ُالت‬
َُ‫ُو ُلَوْ ُق ْلنَاُال َّن ُالُتَّ ْعلل ْیق‬ َ ‫ُالقَائل لل ُبل ْالفَصْ لل‬ ْ ‫ُال لمُْلكَُ ُلل َعد لَم‬
ْ ‫اسد ُیفلیْد‬ ‫ُالفَ ل‬ْ ‫ُالبَیْع‬ ْ ‫ُو‬َ ‫النَّحْ لر‬
247
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫َاق ُبل ْال لمُْل ل‬
‫ك ُاوْ ُ َسبَ ل‬
ُ‫ب‬ ْ ‫ُو‬
‫ُال لعت ل‬ ‫َسبَب ُ لع ْن َد ُوجوْ لد ُال َّشرْ لط ُق ْلنَا ُتَ ْعللیْق ُالطَّ َال ل‬
َ ‫ق‬
ْ ُ‫ص لحیْح‬ َ ُ‫ك‬ ُ‫ْال لمُْل ل‬
After this (explanation of the categories of Ijmaa explained
above) is another type of Ijmaa and that is 'Adamul Qaa'il
bil Fasl' (wherein each of the Fuqahaa do not differ in their
rulings regarding the laws of Shari'ah which they derive from
a certain principle), which is of two types. One type is that in
which the method of disagreement in both (or a number of)
rulings is the same and the second type is that in which the
method of disagreement is different. The first (that in which
the method of disagreement in both rulings is the same) is a
valid Shar'ie proof and the second (that in which the method
of disagreement is different) is not a valid Shar'ie proof.
An example of the first (that in which the method of

disagreement in both rulings is the same) is all those Fiqhi
rulings which the Ulama derived based on one principle,
for example when we established that the prohibition of an
act necessitates that the act be valid, we said a vow to fast
on the day of Eid is correct (and will be valid) and an
invalid sales transaction will establish ownership (fort the
buyer) with 'Adamu Qaa'il bil Fasl' (those Ulama who state
that the prohibition of an act necessitates that the act be valid,
state that the vow is correct and the sale will establish
ownership and do not differentiate between the two. The same
goes for those who say that that a prohibition of an act does
not necessitate that it be valid, i.e. they say that the vow is
incorrect and the sale does not establish ownership).
(Another example of 'Adamu Qaa'il bil Fasl' is) When we said

that making something conditional will cause the ruling to
apply (only) when the condition is fulfilled, we (also) said
that making (the issuing of) Talaaq and setting (a slave) free
conditional on ownership or that which leads to ownership
248
Usool Shaashi
(such as Nikaah)is correct (those Ulama who state that the
ruling will only apply when the condition is fulfilled, state that
the Talaaq and freedom will only apply when the condition to
which it was attached is fulfilled, as long as the condition was
such an act which establishes ownership, that is the right to
issue Talaaq or set the slave free and do not differentiate
between the two. The same goes for those who say that that the
ruling will apply immediately but will be postponed until the
condition is fulfilled, i.e. they say the Talaaq and freedom will
not be valid since it applies immediately but is postponed due
to the condition and at the time when the Talaaq applied he did
not have the authority to issue Talaaq or set the slave free).
ُ‫صُفَةُ ُ َال ُیوْ لجب‬ ‫ُالح ْک لم ُعَلی ُالسْم ُ َموْ صوْ ف ُبل ل‬ ْ ‫ب‬ َ ‫َُو ُ َک َذا ُلَوُْ ُاَ ْثبَ ْتنَا ُاَ َّن ُت ََرت‬
ُ‫ُص َّح ُبلنَ ْق لل‬َ ‫الا َُم لُة ُال ْذ‬ ْ ‫ُالح ْک لم ُُبل لُه ُق ْلنَاُطَوْ ل‬
ُ‫ُالح َُّر لُة ُ َال ُیَ ْمنَع ُ َج َوازَُ ُنل َک ل‬
ُ ‫اح ُا‬ ْ ‫ق‬ َ ‫تَ ْعلل ْی‬
ُ‫ُوُلَوْ ُاَ ْثبَ ْتنَا‬
َ ‫اُاالاصْ لل‬ ْ ‫ُالح َُّر لُةُعَلیُهُ َذ‬ ْ ‫یُفَ َّرعَُ َم ْسئَاُلَ ُةَُطَوْ لل‬ َّ ‫فُاَ َّنُال َّشافل لع‬‫الس َّْل ل‬
ُ‫ل ُ َجازَُ ُنل َکاحُ ُاالاُ َُم لُة ُ ْال لکتَابلُیَ لُة ُبلهُ َذا‬ ُ‫اح ُاالاُ َُم لُة ُ ْالم ْؤ لمُنَ لُة ُ َم َُع ُالطَّوْ ل‬
ُ‫َج َوازَُ ُنل َک ل‬
ُ ُ‫ق‬َُ َ‫لُ َوعَلیُُهُ َذاُ لمثَالُهُ لم َُّماُ َذکَرْ نَاُفل ْی َماُ َسب‬ ُ‫االاُصْ ل‬
In a similar manner (as the two examples mentioned above of
'Adamu Qaa'il bil Fasl' is) when we established that a ruling
affixed to an adjective (when the ruling is mentioned with an
adjective describing the one on whom the ruling will apply)
does not make the ruling conditional on that characteristic
(it is not incumbent for that characteristic to be present in
order for the ruling to apply), we said that having the ability
to marry a free woman does not prohibit one from
marrying a female slave whilst it has been authenticated by
the predecessors that Imaam Shaafie  has derived his
ruling of having the ability to marry a free woman
(prohibits one from marrying a female slave) from this very
principle (that the ruling has been affixed to an adjective and
will thus make the ruling conditional on that characteristic,
according to Imaam Shaafie). Once we have established the
249
Usool Shaashi
permissibility of marrying a Mu'min female slave (even
though one has the ability to marry a free woman) on this
principle then it is (also) permissible to marry a female
slave from the Ahlul-Kitaab (Jews and Christians) based on
this same principle. And all the examples we have
mentioned previously are of the same category.
The second type of 'Adamu Qaa'il bil Fasl'
ُ‫ك‬ُ‫اسدُ ُمفلیْداُ ُلل ْل لم ْل ل‬ ‫ئ ُنَاقلضُ ُفَیَکوْ نُ ُ ْالبَیْعُ ُ ْالفَ ل‬ َُ َ‫ن ُ ْالق‬

َُّ ‫ی ُال َذا ُق ْلنَا ُُا‬ُْ ‫َُو ُنَ لظیْرُ ُالثَّانل‬
ُ‫ل‬ُ‫ل ُبل ْالفَصْ ل‬ ُ‫ل ُاُوُْ ُیَکوْ نُ ُموْ لجبُ ُ ْال َع َم لُد ُ ْالُقَوْ دُ ُلل َع ْد لُم ُالقَائل ل‬ ُ‫ل ُبل ْالفَصْ ل‬ ُ‫لل َع ْد لُم ُ ْالقَائل ل‬
ُ‫ن‬َُّ ‫جةُ ُ لال‬ َُّ ‫ْس ُبلح‬ َُ ‫ل ُهُ َذا ُاَ ْلقَئُ ُ َغیْرُ ُنَاقلضُ ُفَیَکوْ نُ ُ ْال َمسُ ُنَاقلضا ُ َُو ُهُ َذا ُلَی‬ ُ‫َوبل لم ْث ل‬
ُُ‫ح ُةَُاَصْ ل‬ َُّ ‫ص‬ ‫الَُتوْ لجبُ ُ ل‬ ُ ُ ‫ح لُة ُاَصْ لل لُه ُ َولل لکنَّ ُهَا‬
َُّ ‫ص‬
‫ت ُعَلیُ ُ ل‬ ُْ َّ‫ن ُ َدل‬ ُ‫ح ُةَُ ْالفَرْ ل‬
ُْ ‫ع ُ َُو ُال‬ َُّ ‫ص‬ ‫ل‬
ُ ُ‫َتُ َعلَ ْی لُهُ ْال َم ْسئَُلَةُُاال ْخرُی‬ ُْ ‫اخَ َُرُ َحتیُتَفَ َّرع‬
An example of the second (that in which the method of
disagreement is different) is if we were to say; if vomiting a
mouthful breaks Wudhu then an invalid sales transaction
will establish ownership or (if one were to say) vomiting a
mouthful breaks Wudhu then the punishment of
intentional murder is the death penalty, because of 'Adamu
Qaa'il bil Fasl' (this will not be a valid Shar'ie proof because
even though all the Fuqahaa who say that Wudhu breaks if one
vomits a mouthful also say that an invalid sales transaction
establishes ownership or that the punishment for intentional
murder is the death penalty, because the bases of each of these
rulings is different).
Or in a similar manner if one were to say that since

vomiting a mouthful does not break Wudhu then touching
a woman breaks Wudhu (because of 'Adamu Qaa'il bil Fasl',
that all the Fuqahaa who say that vomiting a mouthful does not
break Wudhu say that touching a woman breaks Wudhu).
250
Usool Shaashi
This (second type of 'Adamu Qaa'il bil Fasl') is not a valid
Shar'ie proof because even though a ruling being correct
will establish that its principle (through which it is derived) is
correct, it will not establish the accuracy of another
principle such that another ruling can be derived from it.
Duties of the Mujtahid
ُ‫نُسُن َّ لُة‬ ُْ ‫للالُتَ َعالیُُث َُّمُ لم‬ ُ ُ‫ب‬ ُ‫نُ لکتَا ل‬ ُْ ‫اجبُُ َعلَیُ ْالمجْ تَ لُه لُدُطَلَبُُح ْک لُمُ ْال َحا لدُثَ لُةُ لم‬ ‫اَ ْل َو ل‬
ُ‫ل‬َُ ‫الَ ُ َسبل ْی‬ ُ ُ ‫ٗ ُالنَّصُ ُاوْ دَاللَتل لُه ُعَلی ُ َما ُ َم َّر لذ ْکرہ ُفَا لُنَّه‬ ُ‫ْح ل‬
‫ص لری ل‬ َ ‫للال ُﷺ ُبل‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫َرسوْ ل‬
ُُ‫ت ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُ ْالقل ْبُلَة‬
ُْ َ‫ل ُبلالنَّصُ ُ َولل ُهَ َذا ُال َذا ُال ْشتَبَ ُه‬ ُ‫ن ُ ْال َع َم ل‬
ُ‫ی ُ َم َُع ُال ْم َکا ل‬ ْ ُ‫اللَی ُ ْال َع َم ل‬
ُ‫ل ُبلال َّرا ل‬
ُ‫الَُیَجوْ زُ ُلَهُ ُالُتَّ َحریُْ ُ َولَوُْ ُ َو َج َُد ُ َماءُ ُفَُا ْخبَ َرہُٗ ُ َع ْدلُ ُاَُنَّه‬ ‫فَ اَ ْخبَ َرہ ُ َو ل‬
ُ ُ ‫احدُ ُ َع ْن ُهَا‬
ُْ ‫الَُیَجوْ زُُلَهُُالت َّ َوض‬
ُ ُُ‫یُبل لُهُبَلُُْیَتَیَ َّمم‬ ُ ُُ‫ن ََجس‬
It is Waajib upon the Mujtahid to search for the relevant

ruling (firstly) from the Quraan, then (secondly) from the
Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , which must be clear or
substantiates the ruling, as we have already discussed (in
the previous sections of Quraan and Hadeeth). The reason for
this (why the ruling must first be sought from the Quraan and
Hadeeth) is there is no room for personal opinion when it is
possible to act on narration (of either Quraan or Hadeeth).
As a result of this (that personal opinion is not permissible
when narration is present) if one is in doubt as to the
direction of Qiblah and a person informs him of the
direction of Qiblah then it is not permissible for him to use
his own discretion. (Similarly) If a person finds water and a
trustable person informs him that it is impure then it will
not be permissible (for him to use his own discretion and) to
make Wudhu from it but should perform Tayammum.
251
Usool Shaashi
Discretion is weaker than narration
ُُ‫نُالش ْب ُهَ ُةَُبل ْال َم َحل‬ َُّ ‫لُبلالنَّصُُق ْلنَاُال‬ َُ ‫یُدوْ نَُُ ْال َع َم‬ ُ‫لُبلال َّر ْا ل‬ َُ ‫نُ ْال َع َم‬ َُّ ‫ارُُا‬ُ‫َوعَلیُال ْعتلبَ ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ُ‫الا َّو ل‬
ُ ‫لُا‬ ُ‫طَُال ْعتلبَارُُظَنُُ ْال َع ْب لُدُفلیُ ْالفَصْ ل‬ ُ َ‫اَ ْق َویُُ لمنَُُالش ْب ُهَ لُةُفلیُالظَّنُُ َحتیُ َسق‬
ُ‫ی‬َُّ َ‫ال ُ َعلل ْمتُ ُاَنَّ ُهَا ُ َح َرامُ ُ َعل‬ َُ َ‫ن ُق‬ ُْ ‫الَ ُی َحدُ ُ َوال‬ ُ ُ ‫ارُیَ ُةَ ُا ْبنل لُه‬
‫ی ُ َج ل‬ َُ‫َو لمثَالُه ُفل ْی َما ُال َذا ُ َو لط ا‬
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫اال ْب ل‬
‫ال ُ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُ َم ل‬ ُْ ‫ك ُُلَه ُت َْثبتُ ُبلالنَّصُ ُفل‬ ُ‫ن ُش ْب ُهَ ُةَ ُ ْال لم ْل ل‬ َُّ ‫َُو ُیَ ْثبتُ ُنَ َسبُ ُ ْال َولَ لُد ُ لم ْنهُ ُ لال‬
ُ‫طَ ُال ْعتلبَارُُظَن لُهُفلی‬ ُ َ‫الَبلیْكَُُ’’ ُفَ َسق‬ ‫صلَوُةُُ َوال َّسالَمُ‘‘ُُا ْنتَُُ َو َمالكَُُ ل ا‬ َّ ‫الُ َعلَ ْی لُهُال‬َُ َ‫ق‬
ُُ‫ارُیَ ُةَ ُاَبل ْی لُه ُی ْعتَبَرُ ُظَنُه ُفلی ُ ْال لحل‬ ‫ئ ُا لالبْنُ ُ َج ل‬ َُ ‫ی ُذللكَُ ُ َولَوُْ ُ َو لط‬ ُْ ‫ْال لحلُ ُ َو ْالحرْ َُم لُة ُفل‬
ُُ‫ال ُظَنَ ْنت‬ َُ َ‫ی ُ َح َرامُ ُیَ لجبُ ُ ْال َحدُ ُ َولَوُْ ُق‬ َُّ َ‫ال ُظَنَ ْنتُ ُاَنَّ ُهَا ُ َعل‬ َُ َ‫َو ْالحرْ َُم لُة ُ َحتی ُلَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫ت ُُلَه‬ ُْ ‫ب ُلَ ُْم ُیَ ْثب‬ُ‫ال ُاالاُ ل‬ُ‫ك ُفلی ُ َم ل‬ ُ‫ن ُش ْب ُهَ ُةَ ُ ْال لم ْل ل‬ َُّ ُ‫الَ ُیَ لجبُ ُ ْال َحدُ ُالا‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ی ُ َحالَل‬ َُّ َ‫اَنَّ ُهَا ُ َعل‬
ُ‫نُا َّدعَاہ‬ُ‫الَُیَ ْثبتُُنَ َسبُُ ْال َولَ لُدُ َُوُال ل‬ ْ
ُ ‫بلالنَّصُُفَا ْعتبل َُرُ َرایُهُ َو‬
Based upon this that acting on one's own discretion is

weaker than narration, we say that a doubt caused by
narration ('Shubhah bil Mahal') is stronger than a doubt
caused by misunderstanding ('Shubhah fith Than') such that
the discretion of a person will not be considered in the first
instance (if there is doubt caused by narration then the doubt
will remain despite the discretion of the individual). An
example of this is when a person has sexual relations with
the female slave of his son, whereby he will not be punished
(the punishment of fornication will not be meted out on him),
even if he states that he knew that the slave was Haraam
upon him, and the lineage of the child born from this union
will attributed to him (the father of the owner). The reason
for this is that the doubt of him (the father) having
ownership is established by narration; Rasulullaah  said,
"You and your wealth belong to your father" thus his
discretion of lawfulness and unlawfulness will be not be
considered in this (as the doubt caused by narration is greater
and will remain despite his discretion).
252
Usool Shaashi
(However) If the son has sexual relations with the female
slave of his father then his discretion of lawfulness and
unlawfulness will be considered such that if he says that he
thought that she might be Haraam on him (but still
proceeded to indulge in sexual relations despite this) then the
punishment (for fornication) will be Waajib and if he says
that he thought she was lawful for him, then the
punishment will not be Waajib. The reason for this is that
the doubt of having (a share of) ownership in the wealth of
the father is not caused by narration, thus his discretion in
the matter will be considered, and the lineage of the child
born from this union will not be attributed to him (the son)
even if he claims the child (to be his).
When two proofs contradict each other
ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫ن ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْالمجْ تَ لُه لُد ُفَا ل‬

ُ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُالتَّ َعارضُ ُبَیْنَُ ُالر َوایَتَ ْی ل‬ ُ‫ضا ُال َّدلل ْیالَ ل‬ َ ‫ار‬ َ ‫ث َُّم ُال َذا ُتَ َع‬
ُ ُ‫یَ لمیْلُُاللَیُالسُنَّ لُة‬
Then if two proofs contradict each other according to the

Mujtahideen; if the (apparent) contradiction is between two
verses then one will resort to Hadeeth (and the verse which
is supported by Hadeeth will be taken).
Contradiction of two Ahaadeeth
253
‫ی ُللاُ ُتَ َعالیُ ُ َع ْنهُ ُْم ُ َُوُ‬ ‫ض َُ‬ ‫َّحاُبَ لُة ُ َر ل‬
‫ار ُالص َ‬ ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُبَیْنَُ ُالسنَّتَی لُ‬
‫ْن ُیَ لمیْلُ ُاللی ُاثَ لُ‬ ‫َُو ُال ُْ‬
‫ان ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْالمجْ تَ لُه لُد ُیَت ََحری ُ َویَ ْع َملُُ‬ ‫ض ُ ْالقلیَا َس لُ‬
‫ار َُ‬‫ْح ُث َُّم ُال َذا ُتَ َع َ‬
‫ص لحی لُ‬
‫اس ُال َّ‬‫ْالقلیَ لُ‬
‫صارُُاللَ ْی لُهُ ُ‬
‫اسُ َدللیْلُُشَرْ لعیُُی َ‬ ‫ْسُدوْ نَُُ ْالقلیَ لُ‬ ‫بل ا َح لد لُه َماُالنَّهُُلَی َُ‬
‫‪If the contradiction is between two Ahaadeeth (and one‬‬
‫‪cannot be given preference over the other) then the opinions‬‬
‫‪of the Sahabah will be resorted to and thereafter (if still a‬‬
‫‪decision cannot be made) authentic Qiyaas (will be resorted‬‬
‫‪to).Then if two Qiyaas of the Mujtahideen contradict each‬‬
‫‪other one should use his own discretion and practice on one‬‬
‫‪of them (of the two Qiyaas) as there is no other proof after‬‬
‫‪Qiyaas which one can resort to.‬‬
‫‪Practising one one's discretion‬‬
‫الَُیَت ََحرُیُبَ ْینَهُ َماُ‬ ‫انُطَا لُهرُُ َون ََجسُُ ُ‬ ‫َوعَلیُُهُ َذاُق ْلنَاُال َذاُ َکانَُُ َم َُعُ ْالم َسافل لُرُالنَا َُء لُ‬
‫نُلل ْل َماُ لُءُبَدَالُُ‬ ‫نُطَا لُهرُُ َون ََجسُُیَت ََحریُبَ ْینَهُ َماُ لال َُّ‬ ‫بَلُُْیَتَیَ َّممُُ َولَوُُْ َکانَُُ َم َُعهُثَوْ بَا لُ‬
‫یُ‬‫ل ُبلال َّرا لُ‬ ‫ن ُ ْال َع َم َُ‬ ‫صارُ ُاللَ ْی لُه ُفَثَبَتَُ ُبل ُهَ َذا ُُا َُّ‬ ‫ب ُبَدَلُ ُی َ‬ ‫ْس ُلللثَّوْ لُ‬ ‫َو ُهُ َُو ُالت َرابُ ُ َُو ُلَی َُ‬
‫َام ُ َدللیْلُ ُ لس َواہُ ُشَرْ عاُ ُث َُّم ُال َذا ُت ََحری ُ َوتَُا َّک َُد ُت ََحر ْی لُهُ‬ ‫النَّ َما ُیَکوْ نُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُال ْن لعد لُ‬
‫نُ‬‫ی ُبَیْنَُ ُالثَّوْ بَ ْی لُ‬ ‫الَُیَ ْنتَقلضُ ُ َذللكَُ ُبلم َج َّر لُد ُالتَّ َحریُُْ َوبَیَانُه ُفل ْی َما ُال َذا ُتَ َحر َُ‬ ‫لُ ُ‬ ‫بل ْال َع َم لُ‬
‫الَُ‬
‫ب ُاالخَ لُر ُ ُ‬ ‫صلی ُالظ ُْه َُر ُبل ا َح لد لُه َما ُث َُّم ُ َوقَ َُع ُت ََح لر ْی لُه ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ْال َعصْ لُر ُ َعلَی ُالثَّوْ لُ‬ ‫َو َ‬
‫الَُیَبْطلُُبلم َج َّر لُدُ‬ ‫لُفَ ُ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َّ‬
‫لُتَُاک َُدُبلال َع َم لُ‬ ‫یُال َعصْ َُرُبلاالخَ لُرُ َُّ‬
‫النُاالاُ َّو َُ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫صل َُ‬ ‫نُی َ‬ ‫یَجوْ زُُاُ ُْ‬
‫لُ َرایُهُ َو َوقَ َُعُت ََحر ْی لُهُ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫فُ َماُالذاُت ََحریُفلیُالقل ْبُل لُةُث َُّمُتَبَ َّد َُ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫التَّ َحریُ َوُهُذاُبل لخالَ لُ‬
‫َ‬
‫الن ُ ُْالقل ْبُلَ ُةَ ُ لم َّما ُیَحْ تَ لملُ ُاال ْنتلقَاَل ُفَُا ْم َکنَُ ُنَ ْقلُُ‬ ‫عَلیُ ُ لج ُهَةُ ُا ْخری ُت ََو َّج ُهَ ُاللَ ْی لُه ُ َُّ‬
‫تُ‬‫ی ُتَ ْکبلی َْرا لُ‬ ‫ْخ ُالنَّصُ ُ َوعَلی ُهُ َذا ُ َم َسائللُ ُ َجا لم لُع ُ ْال َکبلی لُْر ُفل ُْ‬ ‫ْالح ْک لُم ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُنَس لُ‬
‫یُ ْال َع ْب لُدُ َک َماُع لرفَُ‬ ‫لُ َرا لُ‬ ‫ْنُ َوتَبَدُ لُ‬‫ْال لع ْی َدی لُ‬
‫‪Based upon this (that one will practice on one's own‬‬
‫)‪discretion when and only there is no other proof to resort to‬‬
‫‪we say that if a traveller has two bottles of water; one‬‬
‫‪containing pure water and one containing impure water,‬‬
‫‪then he will not use his own discretion (and make Wudhu‬‬
‫‪with whichever he thinks is pure) but will make Tayammum.‬‬
‫‪254‬‬
Usool Shaashi
(However) If a traveller has two sets of clothes; one pure
and one impure, then he will use his discretion (to determine
which is pure and wear that set when performing Salaah). The
reason for this (difference in the ruling of the above two
rulings) is that water has a substitute one can resort to,
which is Tayammum but there is no substitute for the
clothing to which he can resort (thus he will use his own
discretion). Thus it is established from this that practising
on one's own discretion is only permitted when no other
Shar'ie proof is present besides it.
Then once his own discretion is reinforced by action (he

practices upon the ruling derived from his discretion) it will
not be invalidated by a mere change in discretion
thereafter.
An explanation of this is when a person uses his discretion

to determine which set of clothing is pure and then
performs Zuhr Salaah in it then later at the time of Asr his
discretion changes to the other set of clothing (he now feels
that the other is pure), it will not be permissible for him to
perform Asr Salaah in the other set of clothing. The reason
for this is that the (purity of the) first has been reinforced by
action (he performed Salaah in it) and will therefore not be
invalidated by (a mere change) in discretion.
This (ruling mentioned above) is opposed to when he uses his
discretion to ascertain the direction of the Qiblah and his
opinion changes to another direction thereafter, whereby
he will face towards that (the second) direction. The reason
(for this difference in ruling) is that the Qiblah is of those
things which can change thus it is possible for its ruling to
change as well such as its abrogation by the Quraan.
In the same manner are the laws of the Takbeeraat of Eid,

as mentioned in 'Al-Jaami'ul Kabeer', and when the
255
Usool Shaashi
opinion of a person changes, as is
commonly known (if a person begins
Section Four performing Eid Salaah adhering to the
Madhab of Imaam Shaafie, whereby he
performs the first Raqaat reciting five
additional Takbeer but then his discretion
changes in the second Raqaat to the Madhab of Imaam Abu
Hanifah such that he will now only recite three additional
Takbeer in the second Raqaat).
Qiyaas
256
Usool Shaashi
َّ ‫س‬َِّ ‫ثَّالرابِ َُّعَّفِیَّالقِيَا‬ َُّ ‫اَلبَح‬
ُ‫َام ُ َمافَوْ ُقَه‬ُ‫ع ُیَ لجبُ ُ ْال َع َملُ ُبل لُه ُ لع ْن َُد ُال ْن لعد ل‬ ُ‫ج ُال َّشرْ ل‬ ُ‫ن ُ لح َج ل‬ ُْ ‫جةُ ُ لم‬ َُّ ‫ ُاَ ْلقلیَاسُ ُح‬:‫فصل‬
َُ َ‫ی ُ َذللكَُ ُاالاَ ْخبَارُ ُ َُو ُاالثَارُ ُق‬
ُ‫ال ُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬ ُْ ‫ْل ُفلی ُ ْال َحا لدُثَ لُة ُ َوقَد ُ َو َر َُد ُفل‬ ُ‫لمنَُ ُال َّدللی ل‬
ُ‫ی ُیَا ُم َعاذ؟‬ ُْ ‫ض‬‫ن ُبل َُم ُتَ ْق ل‬ ُ‫ن ُ َجبَلُ ُ لحیْنَُ ُبَ َعُثَه ُاللَی ُ ْالیَ َم ل‬ ُ‫الصَّلوُةُ ُ َُو ُال َّسالَمُ ُللم َعا لُذ ُُْب ل‬
ُ‫الُفَالنُلَّ ُْم‬َُ َ‫للالُﷺُق‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫الُبلسُنَّ لُةُ َرسوْ ل‬ َُ َ‫الُفالنُلَّ ُْمُت لَجد؟ُق‬ َُ َ‫للالُتَ َعالیُُق‬ ُ ُ‫ب‬ ُ‫الُبل لکتَا ل‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
ُ‫ق‬ ُ ‫ال ُاَ ْل َح ْمدُ ُ ل‬
َُ َّ‫ِلل ُالَّ لذیُْ ُ َوف‬ َُ َ‫ص َّوُبَه ُ َرسوْ لُ ُللاُ ُﷺ ُفَق‬ َ َ‫ی ُف‬ ُ‫ال ُاَجْ تَ لُهدُ ُبل َرا ْئ ل‬َُ َ‫ُتَ لج ْد؟ ُق‬
ُُ‫ضاہ‬ َ ْ‫للالُعَلیُُ َماُی لحبُُ َُوُیَر‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫لُ َرسوْ ل‬ َُ ْ‫َرسو‬
Qiyaas is a proof from the proofs of Shari'ah, which is

Waajib to practise upon when none of the other proofs
mentioned above (Quraan, Sunnat, Ijmaa) are present. This
(that Qiyaas is a valid Shar'ie proof) has been reported in
Hadeeth and Aathaar (narrations of the Sahabah).
Rasulullaah asked Hadhrat Muaadh bin Jabal  when
sending him to Yemen (as governor), "With what will you
pass judgement?" Hadhrat Muaadh  replied, "By the
Quraan." Rasulullaah then asked, "And if you do not find
it (the answer) in the Quraan?" Hadhrat Muaadh replied,
"By the Sunnat of Rasulullaah ." Rasulullaah  again
asked, "And if you do not find it (the answer) in the
Sunnat?" Hadhrat Muaadh  then replied, "I will then use
my discretion." Rasulullaah approved of this and said,
"All praise belongs to ALLAAH who has inspired the
messenger of Rasulullaah with that which pleases him and
brings him pleasure."
ُ‫یُ َکانَُُ َشیْخا‬ ُْ ‫نُاُبل‬َُّ ‫تُال‬ُْ َ‫للالُﷺُفَقَال‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫َتُاللیُُ َرسوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫نُا ْم َراُةُُخَ ْث َع لمُیَّةُُاَت‬ َُّ َ‫یُا‬ َُ ‫َور لو‬
َُ َ‫ج ُ َع ْنهُ ُق‬
ُ‫ال‬ َ
َُّ ‫ن ُاح‬ َ
ُْ ‫ی ُا‬ ُْ ‫َّاحُلَ لُة ُفَیجْ لزئنل‬
‫الَُیَ ْستَ ْم لسكُ ُ َعلَی ُالر ل‬ ُ ‫َکبلیْرا ُاَ ْد َر َکهُ ُ ْال َحجُ ُ َو‬
ُ‫ت‬ُْ َ‫كُفَقَال‬ ُ‫ض ْیتل لُهُاَ َماُ َکانَُُیجْ لزئ ل‬ َ َ‫ْكُ َدیْنُُفَق‬ ُ‫تُلَوُُْ َکانَُُ َعلَیُُابلی ل‬ ُ‫َعلَ ْی لُهُال َّسالَ لُمُاَ َراُ ْی ل‬
ُُ‫للالُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَم‬
ُ ُ ُ‫ق ُ َرسوْ ل‬ َُ ‫للالُاَ َحقُ ُ َواَوْ لی ُاَ ْل َح‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ال ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَمُ ُفَ َدیْن‬ َُ َ‫بَلیُ ُفَق‬
ُ‫ار ُاللیُ ُ لعُلَّةُ ُمؤَث َُرةُ ُفلی‬ َُ ‫ق ُ ْال َماللُیَ لُة ُ َواَ َش‬
ُ‫ی ُبل ْالحقوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ْخ ُاَ ْلفَانل‬
ُ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُال َّشی ل‬ ُْ ‫ج ُفل‬ َُّ ‫اَ ْل َح‬
ُ‫ضاءُُ َُوُهُ َذاُهُ َُوُ ْالقلیَاس‬ َ َ‫یُ ْالق‬ َُ ‫ازُ َوُ لُه‬ ُ‫ْال َج َو ل‬
257
Usool Shaashi
It has been reported that a woman from the tribe of Banu
Khath'am came to Rasulullaah  and asked, "My father is
an elderly man, upon whom Hajj has become Fardh but he
is incapable of riding (he is so aged that he is incapable of
even mounting the conveyance), will it suffice for me to
perform Hajj on his behalf?" Rasulullaah  replied, "If
your father was in debt and you paid it on his behalf, would
this suffice?" when she replied in the affirmative
Rasulullaah  said, "The debt of ALLAAH (i.e. Hajj) is
more deserving and better (to be paid)." (In this Hadeeth)
Rasulullaah  associated (compared) Hajj of the incapable
to monetary rights (that just as it is permissible for another to
fulfil your monetary rights on our behalf so too can another
perform Hajj o your behalf) and pointed out the Illat
(principle cause) which makes it permissible and that (illat
was) Qadhaa (payment or fulfilment). (In essence) This is
Qiyaas (to derive a ruling by comparing it to another ruling
using a common feature between them).
ُ‫ی ُ لکتَابل لُه‬ ُْ ‫ب ُالشفل لعیُ ُفل‬ ُ‫ت ُاَصْ َحا ل‬ ُ‫ن ُ َسادَا ل‬ ُْ ‫اغ ُ َو ُهُ َُو ُ لم‬ ُ‫صبَ ل‬ َّ ‫َُو ُ َر َویُ ُالبْنُ ُال‬
ُُ‫ال ُ َجا َُء ُ َرجلُ ُاللی‬ َّ
َُ َ‫ْن ُ َعللیُ ُانهُ ُق‬ ُ‫ق ُب ل‬ ْ َ
ُ‫ْن ُطل ل‬ ُ‫ْس ُب ل‬ ُ‫َن ُقَی ل‬ ُْ ‫ل ُع‬ ُ‫الم َس َّمیُ ُبلال َّشا لم ل‬
ُُ‫ل ُ َذ َک َرہ‬ ُ‫ی ُ َمسُ ُالرَّج ل‬ ُْ ‫للال ُ َما ُتَ َریُ ُفل‬ ُ ُ‫ی‬ َُّ ‫ال ُیَا ُنَبل‬ َُ َ‫للال ُﷺ ُ َکا َُنَّه ُبَ ْد لویُ ُفَق‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫َرسوْ ل‬
ُُ‫ل ُابْن‬ ْ ْ
َُ ‫ال ُبلضْ َُعةُ ُ لمنهُ ُ َُو ُهُ َذا ُهُ َُو ُالقلیَاسُ ُ َُو ُسئل‬ َّ ُ ‫ال ُ ُهَلُْ ُهُ َُو ُال‬ َُ َ‫ضُا ُفَق‬ َّ ‫بَ ْع َُد ُ َما ُت ََو‬
ْ
ُ‫ج ُُال ُ ْم َراُةُ ُ َولَ ُْم ُی َس َُّم ُلَ ُهَا ُ َم ُْهرا ُُ َُو ُقَ ُْد ُ َماتَُ ُ َعن ُهَا ُزَ وْ ج ُهَا‬ َُ ‫ن ُتَ َز َّو‬ ُْ ‫َمسْعوْ دُ ُ َع َّم‬
َُُ‫ص َواباُفَ لمن‬ َ َُُ‫نُ َکان‬ ُْ ‫یُفَا ل‬ ْ
ُْ ‫الُاَجْ تَ لُهدُُفل ْی لُهُبل َرایل‬ َُ َ‫لُ َش ُْهراُث َُّمُق‬ َُ َ‫لُفَا ْستَ ْم ُه‬ ُ‫ْلُالدخوْ ل‬ َُ ‫قَب‬
َُ‫ال‬ ْ
ُ ُ ‫ال ُا َریُ ُلَ ُهَا ُ َم ُْه َُر ُ لمثل ُنل َسائل ُهَا‬ َُ َ‫ْن ُامُ ُ َعبْدُ ُفَق‬ ُ‫ن ُالب ل‬ُْ ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُخَ طَاءُ ُفَ لم‬ ُْ ‫للال ُ َُو ُال‬
ُ
ُ َُُ‫الَُ َشطَط‬ ُ ‫سُفل ْی ُهَاُ َو‬ َُ ‫َو َک‬
Ibnus Sabbaagh has narrated, who is amongst the esteemed

students of Imaam Shaafie  , in his book entitled 'Ash-
Shaamil' from Qais bin Thalaq bin Ali that a person, who
seemed to be a Bedouin, came to Rasulullaah and asked,
"O Rasulullaah ! What is the ruling if a person touches his
private part after having performed Wudhu?" Rasulullaah
258
Usool Shaashi
 replied, "Is it not but a limb of the body (thus Wudhu will
not break by touching it just as wudhu does not break by
touching other limbs of the body)." (In essence) This is
Qiyaas.
Hadhrat Ibn Mas'ood  was asked about a man who

married a woman but did not stipulate her Mehr and the
husband then passed away before the marriage could be
consummated, on which Hadhrat Ibn Mas'ood requested
some time (to research the answer)saying, "I will deliberate
over the ruling, if my verdict is correct then it is from
ALLAAH and if it is incorrect then it is from myself (it is
due to my own inability)" Thereafter (after some time had
passed) he replied, "I am of the opinion that she will receive
Mehr Mithal of her fellow womenfolk (the Mehr commonly
given to women in that town), no less and no more."
Conditions for the validity of Qiyaas
ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫یُمقَابَُلَ لُةُالنَّصُُ َُوُالثَّانل‬
ُْ ‫الُیَکوْ نَُُفل‬ ُ َ ُ‫ن‬ُْ َ‫سةُُاَ َحد ُهَاُا‬ َُ ‫اسُخَ ْم‬
ُ‫ح لُةُالقلیَ ل‬ َُّ ‫ص‬‫شروْ طُُ ل‬
ُ‫الُیَکوْ نَُُالم َعدی‬ َ ُ ُ‫ن‬ ْ ‫ا‬ َّ
ُ ُُُ‫امُالنصُُ َُوُالثاللث‬ َّ ُ‫نُاحْ َک ل‬َ ْ ْ
ُ ‫ْرُحکمُُ لم‬ ْ
َُ ‫َض َّمنَُُتَغیلی‬ َ ‫الَُیَت‬
ُ ُ‫ن‬ ُْ َ‫ا‬
ُ ُُ‫نُیَّقَ َُعُالتَّ ْعللیْلُُللح ْک لُمُشَرْ لعی‬
ُُ‫الَُ لالَ ْمرُُل ْغ لوی‬ ُْ َ‫الَُی ْعقَلُُ َم ْعنَاہُُ َُوُالرَّابلعُُا‬ ُ ُ‫ح ْکما‬
‫الُیَکوْ نَُُ ْالفَرْ عُُ َم ْنصوْ صاُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬ ُْ َ‫َُوُ ْالخَ ا لمسُُا‬
ُ َ ُ‫ن‬
There are five conditions for the validity of Qiyaas;
1) Qiyaas must not contradict Nas (the Quraan and

Hadeeth).
2) Qiyaas must not alter any ruling already established by

Nas.
259
Usool Shaashi
3) The Qiyaas must not be based on a ruling contrary to
reason (the ruling which one is using to derive a verdict from
must not be contrary to reason, i.e. Khilaaf Qiyaas).
4) The method in which the Illat (principle cause of the

ruling) is identified is in accordance with the principles of
Shari'ah and not based upon diction (the Illat must not be
ascertained by analysing the literal meaning of a word).
5) The Qiyaas must not seek a ruling for that which is

mentioned in Nas.
Example of Qiyaas contradicting Nas
ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫ل ُ َع ل‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْال َح َسنَُ ُبْنَُ ُ لزیَادُ ُسئل‬ َُ ‫ی ُمقَابَُلَ لُة ُالنَّصُ ُفل ْی َما ُح لک‬
َُّ َ‫ی ُا‬ ُ‫َُو ُ لمثَالُ ُ ْالقلیَ ل‬
ُْ ‫اس ُفل‬
َُُ‫ال ُالسَّائللُ ُلَوُْ ُقَ َذف‬ َُ َ‫ارةُ ُبل ُهَا ُق‬ َُ َ‫ت ُالطَّ ُه‬
ُ‫ض ل‬ َ َ‫ال ُال ْنتَق‬َُ َ‫ْالقَ ْهقَ ُْه لُة ُ ُفلی ُالصَّلوُ لُة ُفَق‬
ُُ‫صُنَ لُة ُاَ ْعظَم‬ ‫ن ُقَ ْذفَُ ُ ْالمحْ ل‬ َُّ َ‫الَ ُیَ ْنتَقلضُ ُبل لُه ُ ْالوضؤُ ُ َم َُع ُا‬ ُ ُ ‫صلَوُ لُة‬َّ ‫صُنَةُ ُفلی ُال‬ َ ْ‫مح‬
ُ‫ی ُمقَابَُلَ لُة ُالنَّصُ ُ َُو‬ ُْ ‫ی ُدوْ ُنَه ُفَهُ َذا ُقلیْاسُ ُفل‬ َُ ‫لجنَاُیَةُ ُفَ َکیْفَُ ُیَ ْنتَقلضُ ُبل ْالقَ ْهقَ ُهَ لُة ُ َو ُ لُه‬
ُ‫ی ُ َع ْینل لُه ُسوُْءُ ُ َو َکذللكَُ ُال َذا ُق ْلنَا ُ َجازَُ ُ َحجُ ُ ْال َمرْ اُ لُة‬ ُْ ‫اال ْع َرابلیُ ُالَّ لذیُْ ُ لف‬ ‫هُ َُو ُ َح لدیْثُ ُ ل‬
ُ‫ت ُ َکانَُ ُهُ َذا ُقلیَاسا ُبلمقَابَُلَ لُة ُالنَّصُ ُ َُو ُهُ َُو ُقَوْ لُه‬ ُ‫َم َُع ُ ْال َمحْ َر لُم ُفَیَجوْ زُ ُ َم َُع ُاالاُ لم ْینَا ل‬
َُ‫ق ُثَلُثَ ُة‬
َُ ْ‫ن ُت َسافل َُر ُفَو‬ ُْ ُ‫ِلل ُ َو ْالیَوْ لُم ُاال لخ لُر ُا‬
ُ ‫الَ ُیَ لحلُ ُال ْم َراُةُ ُت ْؤ لمنُ ُبلا‬ ُ ُ ُ‫َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَم‬
‫الَُّ َو َم َع ُهَاُابوْ ُهَاُاُوُُْزَ وْ ج ُهَاُُاوُُْذوُُْ َرحْ مُُ َمحْ َرمُُ لم ْن ُهَا‬ ُ ‫اُیَّامُُ َولَیَالل ْی ُهَاُال‬
An example of the first, that is Qiyaas contradicting Nas

(and will therefore be invalid), is what has been reported that
Hasan bin Ziyaad was asked about laughing (loud) in
Salaah to which he replied that it breaks Wudhu. The
person then asked, "If a person falsely accuses a chaste
woman of fornication while in Salaah then his Wudhu will
not break even though false accusation is a greater crime
260
Usool Shaashi
(than laughing aloud in Salaah), so how is it possible that
Wudhu breaks by laughing aloud in Salaah when it is
lesser." This is an example of Qiyaas contradicting Nas;
that is (it contradicts) the Hadeeth of the Bedouin who had
an ailment in his eyes (and fell into a hole which he did not
see, causing some of the Sahabah to laugh in their Salaah and
after which Rasulullaah  said "Whomsoever amongst you
laughed loudly (while in Salaah) should repeat his Wudhu and
Salaah as well.")
Similarly(Qiyaas will be invalid) if we were to say that since

a woman can perform Hajj when accompanied by her
Mahram (blood relative)it is permissible for her to perform
Hajj when accompanied by a group of trustable women, it
would be Qiyaas in contradiction to Nas; and that is the
Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "It is not permissible for a
woman to travel (to a distance) further than three days and
nights except if accompanied by her father , husband, or
Mahram (blood relative)."
Example of Qiyaas altering a ruling established by

Nas
ُُ‫ام ُالنَّصُ ُ َما ُیقَال‬ ُْ ‫ْر ُح ْکمُ ُ لم‬

ُ‫ن ُاَحْ َک ل‬ َُ ‫َض َّمنُ ُتَ ْغیلی‬
َ ‫ی ُ َُو ُهُ َُو ُ َما ُیَت‬ ُْ ‫َُو ُ لمثَالُ ُالثَّانل‬
َُ ‫ن ُهُ َذا ُیوْ لجبُ ُتَ ْغُیلی‬
ُ‫ْر ُاُیَ لُة‬ َُّ ‫اس ُ َعلَی ُالتَّیَم لُم ُفَا ل‬ ُ‫النُیَّةُ ُشَرْ طُ ُفلی ُ ْالوض لُؤ ُبل ْالقلیَ ل‬
ُُ‫صلَوُة‬ َ ُ‫ت‬ ُ‫ق ُاللَی ُالت َّ ْقیل ْی لُد ُ َو َک َذللكَُ ُال َذا ُق ْلنَا ُاَلطَّ َوافُ ُبل ْالبَ ْی ل‬ ْ ُ َُ‫ْالوض لُؤ ُ لمن‬
ُُ‫ارةُُ َو َس ْترُُ ْال َعوْ َُر لُةُ َکالصَّلوُ لُةُ َکانَُُهُ َذاُقلیَاساُُیوْ لجب‬ َُ َ‫بل ْالخَ بَ لُرُفَیَ ْشت لَرطُُلَهُُالطَّ ُه‬
ُ ‫قُاللَیُ ْالقَ ْی لُد‬ ُ‫طالَ ل‬ ْ ‫اال‬
‫افُ لمنَُُ ل‬ ُ‫ْرُنَصُُالطَّ َو ل‬ َُ ‫تَ ْغیلی‬
An example of the second, that is Qiyaas altering the ruling

established by Nas(and will therefore be invalid) is what has
been said (by Imaam Shaafie) that intention is a condition
for (the validity of) Wudhu by making Qiyaas on
Tayammum (wherein intention is a condition for its validity)
261
Usool Shaashi
because this (qiyaas) will alter the verse of Wudhu from
being Mutlaq(having no restrictive clauses) to Muqayyad
(which is impermissible as has been discussed under the
section of Mutlaq in the Quraan).
Similarly (Qiyaas will be invalid) if we were to say that

Tawaaf of the Ka'abah is Salaah because of what has been
stated in Hadeeth ("Tawaaf is Salaah except that ALLAAH
Ta'ala has made talking permissible in Tawaaf") and
therefore Tahaarat (Wudhu) and concealing the Aurah
(private area which must be concealed) is compulsory in
Tawaaf, just as (it is compulsory) in Salaah, it will result in
altering the Nas of Tawaaf from being Mutlaq to
Muqayyad.
Example of Qiyaas based on a ruling contrary to

reason
ُ‫ی ُبلنَبل ْی لُذ ُالتَّ َم لُر‬

ُْ ‫از ُالتَّوض‬ ُ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُ َج َو ل‬ ُْ ‫الَ ُی ْعقَلُ ُ َم ْعنَاہُ ُفل‬ ُ ُ ‫ث ُهُ َُو ُ َُما‬ ُ‫َو لمثَالُ ُالثَّالل ل‬
ُ‫ج‬َُّ ‫ال ُلَوُْ ُ َش‬ َُ َ‫اس ُعَلیُ ُنَبل ْی لُذ ُالتَّ َم لراَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫بالقلیَ ل‬ ْ ُ ‫ل ُ َجازَُ ُبل َغی لْر لُہ ُ لمنَُ ُاالاُ ْنبل َُذ لُة‬ َُ ‫فَا لُنَّه ُلَوُْ ُقَا‬
ُُ‫اس ُعَلیُ ُ َما ُال َذا ُ َسبَقَهُ ُ ْال َحدَث‬ ُ‫صلَوتل لُه ُبل ْالقلیَ ل‬
َ ُ ُ‫صلوت لُه ُُاوُْ ُُالحْ تَلَ َُم ُیَبنلی ُعَلی‬ َ ُ‫ی‬ ُْ ‫فل‬
ُ‫ع‬ ْ َ
ُ‫لُتَ ْع لدیَتُهُاللیُالفَرْ ل‬ َُ ‫لُل ُْمُی ْعقَلُُْ َم ْعنَاہُُفَا ْست ََحا‬ َ ُ‫الاصْ ل‬ ُ ‫النُالحک َُمُفلیُا‬ ْ ْ َُّ ُُ‫صح‬ ‫الَُیَ ل‬ُ
ُ‫صا َرتَا‬ َ
َ ُ ‫َان ُالذا ُالُجْ تَ َم َعتَا‬ َّ َّ
ُ‫ال ُاصْ َحابُ ُالشافلعیُ ُقلت ل‬
ُ‫َان ُن لَج َست ل‬ َ َ
َُ َ‫ل ُهُذا ُق‬ ْ
ُ‫َُو ُبل لمث ل‬
ُ‫ت‬ ُ‫اس ُعَلیُ ُ َما ُال َذا ُ َوقَ َع ل‬ ْ
ُ‫ار لُة ُبلالقلیَ ل‬ َّ
َُ َ‫ْن ُفَا ل َذا ُافت ََرقَتَا ُبَقلیَتَا ُعَلی ُالط ُه‬ ْ ُ‫طَا لُه َرتَی ل‬
ُ‫لُ َکانَُُ َغیْرُُ َمعْقوْ لُُ َم ْعنَاہ‬ ُ‫النُ ْالح ْک َُمُلَوُُْثَبَتَُُفلیُاالاُصْ ل‬ َُّ ُ‫ْن‬ ُ‫سةُُفلیُ ْالقلَّتَی ل‬ َُ ‫النَّ َجا‬
An example of the third, that is Qiyaas based on a ruling
contrary to reason (and will therefore be invalid) is with
regards to the permissibility of performing Wudhu with
date juice (water sweetened by leaving dates to soak in it) in
the sense that if a person were to say that Wudhu is
permissible with other juices as well by making Qiyaas on
date juice (when permissibility of performing Wudhu with date
juice is established contrary to reason).
262
Usool Shaashi
Or(Qiyaas will be invalid) if a person were to say that if a

person is inflicted with a head injury or has a wet-dream in
Salaah then he may continue with his Salaah (from the point
that his Wudhu broke after attaining purity) by making
Qiyaas on that person whose Wudhu broke while in Salaah
(whereby he will perform Wudhu and continue with his Salaah
from the point that his Wudhu broke), this Qiyaas will be
incorrect because the ruling of the original law (on which
the derived ruling is based) is contrary to reason (Khilaaf
Qiyaas) and it is therefore impossible to apply the same
ruling (of the that which is Khilaaf Qiyaas)to that for which a
ruling is being sought.
In a similar manner(Qiyaas will be invalid) the students of

Imaam Shaafie  have said if two impure jars of water are
collected together (in one jar) then they become pure and if
separated thereafter (into two separate jars) will still remain
pure by making Qiyaas on the Hadeeth of impurity falling
into that amount of water which can fill two jars (such that
it will not become pure), (this Qiyaas is incorrect) because
even if it (purity) is established in the original (from the
Hadeeth in that amount of water that fills two jars) it is
contrary to reason (Khilaaf Qiyaas and another ruling cannot
be derived from it).
Example of Qiyaas whereby the Illat was identified

by diction
ُ‫ی‬ ُ ُ ُ‫َُو ُ لمثَالُ ُالرَّابل لُع ُ َُو ُهُ َُو ُ َما ُیَکوْ نُ ُالتَّ ْعللیْلُ ُالاُ ْمرُ ُشَرْ لعی‬
ُْ ‫الَ ُالَ ُْمرُ ُلغ لَویُ ُفل‬
ُُ‫ن ُ ْالخَ ْم َُر ُالنَّ َما ُ َکانَُ ُخَ ْمراُ ُالُنَّه ُیخَ ا لمر‬ َُّ ‫طبوْ خُ ُ ْالمنَصَّفُ ُ َخ ْمرُ ُ لال‬ ْ ‫قَوْ لل لُه ُْم ُاَ ْل َم‬
ُ‫ل‬َُ ‫ارقاُالُنَّهُاَخَ َُذُ َما‬
‫َّارقُُالنَّ َماُ َکانَُُ َس ل‬ ‫اسُ َوالس ل‬ ُ‫لُاُیْضاُفَیَکوْ نُُخَ ْمراُبل ْالقلیَ ل‬ َُ ‫ْال َع ْق‬
ُ‫ارقا‬ ‫ی ُهُ َذا ُ ْال َمعْنی ُفَیَکوْ نُ ُ َس ل‬ُْ ‫ار َکهُ ُالنَُّبَّاشُ ُفل‬ َ ‫ْق ُالخ ْفُیَ لُة ُ َُو ُقَ ُْد ُ َش‬
ُ‫ْر ُبلطَ لری ل‬ ُ‫ْال َغی ل‬
ُ‫ض ُْعُُلَهُفلیُالل َُغ لُة‬َ ْ‫اال ْس َُمُلَ ُْمُیو‬
‫نُ ل‬ َُّ َ‫اسُ َُوُهُ َذاُقلیَاسُُفلیُالل َُغ لُةُ َم َُعُال ْعتل َرافل لُهُا‬ ُ‫بل ْالقلیَ ل‬
263
Usool Shaashi
َُ ‫ب ُی َسمی ُ ْالفَ َر‬
ُ‫س ُاَ ْد ُهَ َُم‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْال َع َر‬ ُ‫ع ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالقلیَ ل‬
َُّ ‫اس ُُا‬ ُ‫َوال َّدللیْلُ ُعَلیُ ُفَ َسا لُد ُهُ َذا ُالنَّوْ ل‬
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫االسْمُ ُعَلی ُال َّز ْن لجیُ ُ َُو ُالثَّوْ ل‬ ‫طلَقُ ُهُ َذا ُ ل‬ ْ ‫الَ ُی‬ُ ُ ‫لل َس َوا لد لُہ ُ َُو ُک َّمیْتا ُللح ْم َرتل لُه ُث َُّم‬
َّ ْ َ
ُ‫سةُُفلیُاالا َسا لمیُاللغ لَوُیَّ لُةُل َجازَُُذللكَُُللوجوْ لُدُال لعُل لُة‬ َ َُ َ‫تُالمقَای‬ ُ‫االاُحْ َم لُرُ َُوُلَوُُْ َج َر ل‬
ُ‫ل‬َُ ‫ع ُ َج َُع‬ َُ ْ‫ن ُال َّشر‬ ُ ‫ب ُال َّش لر لعُیَّ لُة ُ َو َذللكَُ ُ ل‬
َُّ َ‫ال‬ ُ‫ل ُ ْاالَ ْسبَا ل‬ ُ‫ن ُهُ َذا ُیؤَدیُْ ُاللی ُال ْبطَا ل‬ َُّ َ‫َُو ُ لال‬
ُ‫ام ُفَا ل َذا ُ َعل َّ ْقنَا ُ ْالح ْک َُم ُبل َما ُهُ َُو ُُاعَمُ ُ لمنَُ ُالس لَّرُقَ لُة‬ ُ‫االَحْ َک ل‬ُ ْ ُ َُ‫ع ُ لمن‬ ُ‫الس ََّرُقَ ُةَ ُ َسبَبا ُللنَوْ ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ُ‫بُ َکانَُُفلیُاالاُصْ ل‬ َُ َ‫نُال َّسب‬ َُّ ‫ْقُالخ ْفُیَ لُةُتَبَی َّنَُُُا‬ ُ‫ْرُُعَلیُطَ لری ل‬ ُ‫الُ ْال َغی ل‬ُ‫َُوُهُ َُوُاَ ْخذُُ َم ل‬
ُ‫بُ ْالخَ َم لُرُ َسبَباُللنَوْ عُُ لمنَُُاالاُحْ َک ل‬
ُ‫ام‬ ُ‫لُشرْ ل‬ َُ ‫َمعْنیُهُ َُوُ َغیْرُُالس لَّرُقَ لُةُ َو َک َذللكَُُ َج َع‬
ُ‫ل‬ُ‫ب ُ َکانَُ ُفلی ُاالاُصْ ل‬ َُ َ‫ن ُال َّسب‬ َُّ ‫فَا ل َذا ُ َعلَّ ْقنَا ُ ْالح ْک َُم ُبلُا ْمرُ ُاَعَمُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالخَ ْم لُر ُتَبَیَّنَُ ُُا‬
ُ‫بُ ْالخَ ْم لُرُ َسبَباُُللنَوْ عُُ لمنَُُاالاُحْ َک ل‬
ُ‫ام‬ ُ‫َمعْنیُهُ َُوُ َغیْرُُالس لَّرُقَ لُةُ َو َک َذللكَُُ َج َعلُُشرْ ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ُ‫ن ُ ْالح ْک َُم ُ َکانَُ ُفلی ُاالاُصْ ل‬ َُّ ‫فَا ل َذا ُ َعلَّ ْقنَا ُ ْالح ْک َُم ُبلُا ْم لُر ُُاعَمُ ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالخَ ْم لرتَبَیَّنَُ ُُا‬
ُ ‫متَ َعلقاُبل َغی لْر ْالخَ ْم لُر‬
An example of the fourth, that is Qiyaas wherein the Illat

(principle cause of the ruling) was indentified using diction
(and will therefore be invalid) is the ruling of Imaam Shaafie
 and his students that grape juice which has been cooked
until half has evaporated (thus becoming intoxicating) is
Khabar (and the same laws relating to Khamar will apply to
other intoxicating substances as well). The reason for this is
that Khamar is called Khamar because it intoxicates and
other substances intoxicate as well thus they too will be
regarded as Khamar (because of them both having the same
Illat of being intoxicating, which was derived from the
dictionary meaning of Khamar).
(Similarly)A thief (Saariq) is called Saariq because he steals

the wealth of others secretly (without being seen) and a
grave robber also shares this meaning (he also steals the
Shrouds, etc from the deceased secretly without being seen),
thus a grave robber will also be regarded as a Saariq by
Qiyaas (on the dictionary meaning of Saariq, thus the same
laws which apply to a Saariq will apply to a grave robber).
264
Usool Shaashi
This is making Qiyaas on the dictionary meaning (of words)
even though he (Imaam Shaafie) admits that the word was
not intended for that meaning (the word Khamar and Saariq
was not intended to refer to all intoxicants nor grave robbers).
The proof that this form of Qiyaas is invalid is that the

Arabs refer to a horse as "Adham" because of it being
black and "Kumayt" because of it being red but these
words are not used when referring to a African person or
red clothes (despite them having the same Illat). Thus if
Qiyaas of dictionary meanings was permitted then it would
be permissible (to call an African person "Adham" and red
clothes "Kumayt") because of them having the same Illat.
(Another reason why this form of Qiyaas is impermissible is)

Because this leads to nullifying the Sabab of Shari'ah (it
nullifies the method in which the Shari'ah derives the ruling).
This is (it nullifies the Sabab of Shari'ah) because the
Shari'ah has made Theft (Saraqah) a Sabab for certain
rulings to apply (the hand of the thief to be cut) and if we
were to affix the ruling to that which is more broader in
meaning than theft (Saraqah), that is stealing the wealth of
others secretly, then this will mean that the Sabab for the
ruling (that the hand be cut off)in the first instance was
something other than theft (Saraqah, which was explicitly
mentioned by Shari'ah).
Similarly Shari'ah has made drinking Khamar a Sabab for

certain laws to apply (for the perpetrator to be given eighty
lashes) and if we were to affix the ruling to that which is
broader in meaning than drinking Khamar (that is
becoming intoxicated) then it would mean that the Sabab for
the ruling in the first instance was something other than
Khamar (and in both instances in will result in a person
changing the ruling of Shari'ah, which is impermissible).
265
Usool Shaashi
Example of Qiyaas wherein the ruling is being
sought for something mentioned in Nas
ُُ‫الَُیَکوْ نُُ ْالفَرْ عُُ َم ْنصوْ صاُ َعلَ ْی لُهُ َک َماُیقَال‬ ُ ُ‫سُ َوُهُ َُوُ َما‬ ُ‫طُالخَ ا لم ل‬ ُ‫َو لمثَالُُال َّشرْ ل‬
ُُ‫اسُعَلی‬ ْ
ُ‫الَُیَجوْ زُُبلالقلیَ ل‬ ُ ُ‫ارُ َُو‬
ُ‫ْنُ َوالظ ُهَ ل‬ ْ َُ َّ‫یُ َکف‬
ُ‫ار لُةُالیَ لمی ل‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ال ْعتَاقُُال َّرقَُبَ لُةُال َکافل َُر لُةُفل‬
ْ
ُ‫االط َعا َُم‬ ْ
‫ام ُیَ ْستَ انلفُ ُ ل‬ ْ
ُ‫االط َع ل‬ ‫لُ ل‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ل ُ َُو ُلَوُْ ُ َجا َم َُع ُالمظَا لُهرُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ی ُ لخالَ ل‬ ُ‫ار لُة ُ ْالقَ ْت ل‬
َُ َّ‫َکف‬
‫اسُ َعلَیُالصَّوْ لُم‬ ُ‫بل ْالقلیَ ل‬
An example of the fifth, that is Qiyaas wherein the ruling is

being sought for something mentioned in Nas (and will
therefore be invalid) is saying that setting a Kaafir slave free
in the Kaffaarah (compensation) of (breaking an) oath and
Thihaar (comparing one's wife to a blood relative) is not
permissible by making Qiyaas on the compensation for
murder (wherein only a Muslim slave can be set free).
(Another example where the Qiyaas will be invalid is) If a

person has sexual relations with his Mathaahir (wife whom
he compared to a blood relative) while feeding (the sixty poor
people as Kaffaarah) then saying he must repeat the feeding
by making Qiyaas on fasting (whereby if he has sexual
relations with his wife during the period of fasting two months
as Kaffaarah then he has to repeat it).
ُ‫اس ُ َعلَی ُالمتَ َمت لُع ُ َو ْالمتَ َمتعُ ُال َذا‬

ُ‫ل ُبلالصَّوْ لُم ُبل ْالقلیَ ل‬َُ َّ‫ن ُیَت ََحل‬ َ ْ‫َُو ُیَجوْ زُ ُلل ْلمح‬
ُْ ‫ص لر ُُا‬
َُ‫ضان‬ َ ‫ضا لُءُ َر َم‬ َ َ‫اسُعَلیُق‬ ُ‫ْقُیَصوْ مُُبَ ْع َُدُہَاُبل ْالقلیَ ل‬ ُ‫َّامُالتَّ ْش لری ل‬ ُْ ‫لَ ُْمُیَص ُْمُفل‬
ُ‫یُاُی ل‬
(The third example of Qiyaas wherein the ruling is being
sought for something mentioned in Nas is saying that) It is
permissible for one prevented from performing Hajj1(after
already donning the Ihraam) to become Halaal (be free from
1
The ruling stipulated in the Quraan is that if one has been prevented from performing Hajj
after already having donned the Ihraam, then he should have a sacrifice carried out on his
behalf in the boundaries of the Haram and only thereafter will be free from Ihraam.
266
Usool Shaashi
Ihraam) by fasting (instead of ordering a sacrifice to be made
in the boundaries of the Haram) by making Qiyaas on one
performing Hajj Tamattu (who can fast three days before
Hajj and seven after if he cannot afford the Waajib sacrifice of
Hajj Tamattu). (This Qiyaas is invalid as the verse of the
Quraan is explicit in stating that the only manner in which one
can become free from Ihraam is by having a sacrifice made on
his behalf in the boundaries of the Haram and permitting this
we will be changing the ruling of the Quraan.)
And (another example of Qiyaas wherein the ruling is being

sought for something mentioned in Nas is saying that) if a
person performing Hajj Tamattu (and could not afford the
Waajib sacrifice of Hajj Tamattu, resulting in him having to
fast for three days prior to Hajj seven after Hajj) does not fast
(for three days) before Hajj then he may fast after Hajj
(keep the three missed fasts in addition to the seven all after
Hajj) by making Qiyaas on the missed fasts of Ramadaan
(that in the same manner as the missed fasts of Ramadaan may
be kept at a later date so too can these missed fasts of Hajj be
kept later). (This Qiyaas is invalid as the verse of the Quraan is
explicit in stating that if one cannot afford the sacrifice then he
must fast for three days before Hajj and seven after and in
permitting this we will be changing the ruling of the Quraan.)
Definition of Qiyaas
ُ ‫فصل‬
ْ
ُ‫ْر ُال َم ْنصوْ ل‬
ُ‫ص ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُعَلیُ ُ َمعْنی‬ ُ‫ی ُ َغی ل‬ ُْ ‫اَ ْلقلیَاسُ ُال َّشرْ لعیُ ُهُ َُو ُت ََرتبُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُفل‬
ُ ‫صُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬ ُ‫هُ َُوُ لعُلَّةُُلل َذللكَُُ ْالح ْک لُمُفلیُ ْال َم ْنصوْ ل‬
Qiyaas in Shari'ah is to establish the ruling in that not

mentioned in Nas(in what has not been defined) based on a
characteristic (found in it), which is an Illat for the ruling in
267
Usool Shaashi
that mentioned in Nas(they both have a common Illat because
of which the same ruing can be passed).
Ascertaining the Illat
ُ‫اع ُ َُو‬ ُ‫االجْ َم ل‬‫ب ُ َُو ُبلالسنَّ لُة ُ َُو ُبل ل‬ ُ‫کتَا ل‬ ‫ث َُّم ُالنَّ َما ُیع َْرفُ ُ َکوْ نُ ُ ْال َم ْعنَی ُ لعُلَّةُ ُبل ْال ل‬
ُ‫ب ُ َک ْث َُرةُ ُالطَّ َو ل‬
ُ‫اف ُفَالنَّ ُهَا‬ ُ‫ط ُفَ لمثَالُ ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ ْال َمعْلوْ َُم لُة ُبل ْال لکتَا ل‬ ُ‫اال ْستل ْنبَا ل‬ ‫االجْ تل ُهَا لُد ُ َُو ُ ل‬
‫بل ل‬
ُ ‫ْسُ َعلَیْک ُْمُ َو‬
َُ‫ال‬ َُ ‫یُقَوْ لل لُهُتَ َعالیُُ{لَی‬ ُْ ‫انُفل‬ ُ‫اال ْستل ْی َذ ل‬ ‫جُفلیُ ل‬ ُ‫طُ ْال َح َر ل‬ ُ‫تُ لعُلَّةُُللسقوْ ل‬ ُْ َ‫ج لعل‬
َُ‫ط‬
ُ َ‫ن ُطَ َّوافوْ نَُ ُ َعلَیْک ُْم ُبَعْضک ُْم ُعَلی ُبَعْضُ} ُث َُّم ُاَ ْسق‬ َُّ ُ‫َعلَ ْی لُه ُْم ُجنَاحُ ُبَ ْعدَه‬
َُ َ‫س لُةُس ْاو لُرُ ْال لُه َُّر لُةُبلح ْک لُمُهُ لذ لُہُ ْال لعُلَّ لُةُفَق‬
ُُ‫الُ َعلَ ْی لُهُال َّسالَم‬ َُ ‫جُن ََجا‬ َُ ‫للالُﷺُ َح َر‬ ُ ُُ‫َرسوْ ل‬
ُ‫اسُاصْ َحابنَا‬ َ َ
َُ ‫تُفق‬ َ َ َّ َ َّ
ُ‫سةُُفالن ُهَاُ لمنَُُالط َّوافلیْنَُُ َعلیْک ُْمُ َوالط َّوافا ل‬ َّ َ ُ ‫اَ ْل لُه َُّرةُُلَ ْی َس‬
َُ ‫تُبلن ََج‬ ْ
ُ‫ار لُةُ َو ْال َحُی َّ لُةُ َعلَیُ ْال لُه َُّر لُةُبل لعُل َّ لُةُالطَّ َو ل‬
‫اف‬ َُ َ‫تُ َک ْالف‬
ُ‫َج لم ْی َُعُ َماُیَسْکنُُفلیُ ْالبیوْ ل‬
The characteristic being the Illat (principle cause of the
ruling) is ascertained through the Quraan, Sunnat, Ijmaa,
deliberation and derivation.
An example of an Illat ascertained from the Quraan is

constant coming and going ('Kathratut Tawaaf'), as Shari'ah
has made this an Illat for removing the difficulty of having
to repeatedly seek permission to enter, as mentioned in the
verse,
"There is no sin on yourselves or on them (for not asking

permission because) they often come and go from your
presence, one from the other." (Surah Noor: 58)
And Rasulullaah then later removed the difficulty of

impurity being caused by the saliva of cats based on this
same Illat (Rasulullaah ruled that the saliva of cats is not
impure because cats often come and go in the home) and said,
"Cats are not impure as they often come and go amongst
you (they often come in and out of the house)". Thus our
scholars (of the Hanafi Madhab) made Qiyaas (based on this
268
Usool Shaashi
Illat) on all those creatures that reside in the home, such as
rats and snakes, based on this same Illat (that since they too
often go in and out of the house, there saliva is also not
impure).
َُُ‫ْر ُ} ُبَی َّن‬ َُ ‫الَ ُی لریْدُ ُبلکمُ ُ ْالعس‬ ُ ‫ْر ُ َو‬ َُ ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُقَوْ لهُ ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{ی لریْدُ ُللاُ ُبلکمُ ُ ْالیس‬
ُ‫ن‬ُْ ‫ْر ُاالاُ ْم لُر ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُْم ُللیَتَ َم َّکنوْ ا ُ لم‬ ُ‫ْض ُ َو ْالم َسافل لُر ُللتَ ْی لسی ل‬ُ‫ار ُلل ْل َم لری ل‬ َُ َ‫اال ْفط‬
‫نُ ل‬ َُّ ُ‫ال َّشرْ عُ ُا‬
ْ
ُ‫ت ُاُوُْ ُتَ ا لخی لْر لُہ ُاللی‬ ُ‫ان ُبل َو لظ ْیُفَ لُة ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ ُ‫َظ لر لُه ُْم ُ لمنَُ ُاال ْتیَ ل‬ْ ‫ی ُن‬ ُْ ‫ْق ُ َما ُیَت ََرجَّح ُفل‬ ُ‫تَحْ قلی ل‬
َ ْ َ
ُ‫ال ُاُبوْ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُالم َسافلرُ ُالذا ُن ََویُ ُفلی ُاُی ل‬
ُ‫َّام‬ ْ
َُ َ‫ار ُهُذا ُال َمعْنی ُق‬ َ ُ‫اُیَّامُ ُاخَ َُر ُ َوبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬
َّ
ُ‫اجبُ ُاخَ َُر ُالُنه ُلَ َّما ُثَبَتَُ ُلَهُ ُالت َرخصُ ُبل َما‬ َّ ُْ ‫ضانَُ ُ َوا لجباُ ُاخَ َُر ُیَقَعُ ُع‬
‫َن ُ َو ل‬ َ ‫َر َم‬
ُُ‫الن ُیَثبتَُ ُُلَه ُ َذللكَُ ُبل َُما ُیَرْ لجعُ ُاللی‬ ْ َ ْ
ُْ َ‫ح ُبَ َدنل لُه ُ َُو ُهُ َُو ُاالفطارُ ُف‬ َ ‫یَرْ لجعُ ُاللیُ ُ َم‬
ُ‫صالل ل‬
ُ‫ح‬ُ‫صالل ل‬ َ ‫االفطَارُ ُفَالَن ُیَّثبتَُ ُُلَه ُذللكَُ ُبل َما ُیَرْ لجعُ ُاللی ُ َم‬ ْ ْ ْ
‫ح ُبَ َدنل لُه ُ َُو ُهُ َُو ُ ل‬ َُ ‫صالل‬َ ‫َم‬
‫بُاَوْ لی‬ ُ‫اج ل‬ ْ
‫سُعَنُع ُْه َُد لُةُال َو ل‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫لد ْیُنلهُ َوهُ َُوُالخ َراجُُالنَّف ل‬

"ALLAAH desires ease for you (by allowing travellers and
the ill to fast at a later time) and does not desire hardship for
you". (Surah Baqarah: 185)
The Shari'ah explains that granting permission to the ill

and the travellers to fast at a later time is to make ease for
them by allowing them to adopt that which is easier for
them to carry out, by either fasting in that time or delaying
the fast to a later time(when it is easier for them to fast).
Considering this meaning (that fasting is not incumbent on

the Musaafir and the ill i order to make ease for them) Imaam
Abu Hanifah  says that if a Musaafir makes the intention
for another Waajib fast (such as Qadhaa fast, or for a vow)
in the month of Ramadaan then the fast will be for that
other Waajib fast (and not the fast of Ramadaan). The reason
for this is that when permission to adopt that which is
beneficial for his body has been established (that is not to
fast) then it would most certainly establish permission to
269
Usool Shaashi
adopt that which is beneficial for his Deen, and that is
clearing that which is Waajib upon him from his
obligation.
Illat ascertained from the Sunnat
َُ ‫ی ُقَوْ ُلله ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُالصَّلوةُ ُ َوال َّسالَ لُم ُلَی‬

ُ‫ْس‬ ُْ ‫َُو ُ لمثَالُه ُاَ ْل لعُلَّةُ ُ ْال َمعْلوْ ُلَةُ ُبلالسُنَّ لُة ُفل‬
ُُ‫اجدا ُالنَّ َما ُ ْالوضوُْء‬ ‫ن ُنَا َُم ُقَائلما ُاَوُْ ُقَا لعدا ُاَوُْ ُ َرا لکعا ُاَوُْ ُ َس ل‬ُْ ‫ْالوضوُْءُ ُعَلی ُ َم‬
ُ‫ل‬َُ ‫اصلُه ُج لع‬ ‫خَت ُ َمفَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ن ُنَا َُم ُمضْ طَ لجعا ُفَا لُنَّه ُال َذا ُنَا َُم ُمضْ طَ لجعا ُال ْست ََر‬ ُْ ‫عَلی ُ َم‬
َّ ْ ْ ْ َّ
ُُْ‫ْل ُ لعلتُه ُفَیَتَ َع َّدی ُالحکمُ ُبلهُ لذ لُہ ُال لعُل لُة ُاللی ُالنَّوْ لُم ُم ْستَنلدا ُاَو‬ ُ‫صی ل‬ ْ
‫ال ْستلرْ خَ اءُ ُال َمفَا ل‬
َّ ْ ْ ْ
ُ‫ْل ُ َع ْنهُ ُلَ َسقَطَُ ُ َو َکذللكَُ ُیَتَ َع َّدی ُالحک َُم ُبلهُ لذ لُہ ُال لعُل لُة ُاللی‬
َُ ‫متَّ لکئا ُاللیُ ُ َشیْئُ ُلَوُْ ُا لزی‬
ُ ُ‫ْاالَ ْغ َما لُءُ َوالس ْک لُر‬
An example of an Illat ascertained from Sunnat is in the

Hadeeth of Rasulullaah , "Wudhu is not incumbent upon
one who sleeps standing, sitting, in Ruku or in Sajdah
(wudhu will not breaks in these instances). (However) Wudhu
is incumbent upon one who sleeps lying down because
when he sleeps lying down his limbs slack (he does not have
control of his limbs and is most likely to pass wind without
realising)" In this Hadeeth the limbs slacking was made
Illat (for Wudhu breaking), thus the same ruling (of Wudhu
breaking) will apply when this Illat is found while sleeping
leaning against something, such that if the item (on which
he is leaning) is removed he will fall. Similarly, the same
ruling (of Wudhu breaking) will apply when this Illat is
found when a person falls unconscious or is drunk.
ُ‫صی لُْر‬ ‫ط َُر ُال َّدمُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َح ل‬ ْ َ‫ن ُق‬ُْ ‫ی ُ َُو ُال‬ُْ ‫صل‬ َ ُ ‫ی ُ َُو‬ُْ ‫ضئل‬َّ ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُقَوْ لُه ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال َّسالَ لُم ُتَ َو‬
ُ‫لُال ْنفل َجارُُال َّد لُمُ لعُلَّةُُفَتَ َع َّدیُ ْالح ْک َُمُبلهُ لذ لُہُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة‬
َُ ‫طراُفَا لُنَّهُدَمُُ لعرْ قُُ ْالفَ َج َُرُ َج َع‬ ْ َ‫ق‬
ُ ‫اللَیُ ْالفَصْ لُدُ َُوُ ْال َح َجا َُم لُة‬
In a similar manner (the illat has been ascertained from
Sunnat) in the Hadeeth, "Make Wudhu and perform
Salaah, even if the blood continues to drip onto the mat,
270
Usool Shaashi
because this is blood flowing from the veins (and is not
Haidh but Istihaadhah)." The Illat (for Wudhu breaking) was
flowing blood, thus the same ruling (of Wudhu breaking) will
apply to one who bleeds or has cupping done on him.
Illat ascertained by Ijmaa
ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫ب ُفل‬ ُ‫اع ُفل ْی َما ُق ْلنَا ُاَلص ْغرُ ُ لعُل َّةُ ُلل لوالُیَ لُة ُاالاُ ل‬ ُ‫َو لمثَالُ ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ ْال َمعْلوْ َُم لُة ُبلاالجْ َم ل‬
ُْ ‫ْر لُة ُللوجوْ لُد ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ َو ْالبلوْ غُ ُع‬
ُ‫َن‬ َُ ‫ص لغی‬
َّ ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُال‬ ُْ ‫ْر ُفَیَ ْثبتُ ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُفل‬ ُ‫ص لغی ل‬ َّ ‫َحقُ ُال‬
‫ی ُ َحقُ ُ ْالغالَ لُم ُفَیَتَ َع َّدی ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُاللَی ُ ْال َج ل‬
ُ‫ارُیَ لُة‬ ُْ ‫ب ُفل‬ ُ‫َع ْقلُ ُ لعُلَّةُ ُللزَ َو ل‬
ُ‫ال ُ لوالَُیَ لُة ُاالاُ ل‬
ُ‫اض لُة‬َُ ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُ ْالم ْست ََح‬ َُ َ‫اض ُالطَّ ُه‬
ُْ ‫ار لُة ُفل‬ ُ‫بلهُ لذ لُہ ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ َوا ْنفل َجارُ ُال َّد لُم ُ لعُلَّةُ ُال ْنتلقَ ل‬
‫فَیَتَ َع َّدیُ ْالح ْکمُُاللیُُ َغی لُْر ُهَاُللوجوْ لُدُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة‬
An example of Illat ascertained from Ijmaa is what we have

said that not attaining puberty is an Illat for the father
having the right of decision over his immature son, thus the
same ruling (which is established for the immature son) will
apply to the immature daughter as well because of the same
Illat being found. (Thereafter) Attaining puberty, with
sanity is Illat for the relinquishment of the right of decision
for the father in favour of his immature son thus the same
ruling will apply to his immature daughter as well (that
when she attains puberty and is sane, the father will no longer
have the right of decision over her).
(Similarly) The flowing of blood is the Illat for Wudhu

breaking with regards to a Mustahaadhah (a woman who
bleeds more than the maximum number of days of Haidh), thus
the same ruling will apply to others besides her when the
same Illat is found.
Two types of Qiyaas
271
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ن ُیَّکوْ نُ ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُ ْالم َعدی‬ ُْ ‫ن ُاَ َحدهُ َما ُُا‬ ُ‫ث َُّم ُبَ ْع َُد ُذللكَُ ُنَقوْ لُ ُاَ ْلقلیَاسُ ُعَلیُ ُنَوْ َع ْی ل‬
ُُ‫ن ُ لج ْن لس لُه ُ لمثَال‬ ُْ ‫ن ُیَّکوْ نَُ ُ لم‬ ُْ ‫ی ُُا‬ ُْ ‫ل ُ َوالثَّانل‬ ُ ‫ع ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُالثَّابلت ُفلی ُا‬
ُ‫الاصْ ل‬ ُ‫ن ُنَوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫لم‬
ُ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُ ْالغالَ لُم‬ ُْ ‫اح ُفل‬ُ‫ن ُالص ْغ َُر ُ لعُلَّةُ ُلل لوالَُیَ لُة ُالن َک ل‬ َُّ ‫ع ُ َما ُق ْلنَا ُال‬ ُ‫االت َحا لُد ُفلی ُالنَّوْ ل‬
ُُ‫ارُیَ لُة ُللوجوْ لُد ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُفل ْی ُهَا ُ َوبل لُه ُیَ ْثبتُ ُ ْالح ْکم‬ ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُ ْال َج ل‬ ُ‫فَیَ ْثبتُ ُ لوالَُیَةُ ُا لال ْن َک ل‬
ُْ ‫اح ُفل‬
ُ‫س لُة ُالس ْاو لُر ُفلی‬ َُ ‫ط ُنَ َجا‬ُ‫ْر لُة ُ َو َکذللكَُ ُق ْلنَا ُاَلطَّ َوافُ ُ لعُلَّةُ ُسقوْ ل‬ َُ ‫ص لغی‬ َّ ‫ب ُال‬ ُ‫فلی ُالثَّ ْی ل‬
ُ‫غ‬ُ‫ت ُللوجوْ لُد ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ َُو ُبلوْ ل‬ ُ‫ن ُ ْالبیوْ ل‬ ُ‫سوْ لُر ُ ْال لُه َُّر لُة ُفَیَتَ َع َّدی ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُاللَی ُس ْاو لُر ُ َس َوا لک ل‬
‫َن ُ ْال َج ل‬
ُ‫ارُیَ لُة‬ ُ‫الوالَُیَةُ ُع ل‬ ‫اح ُفَیَزوْ لُ ُ ل‬ ُ‫ال ُ لوالَُیَ لُة ُاال ْن َک ل‬ ُ‫َن ُ َع ْقلُ ُ لعُل َّةُ ُزَ َو ل‬ ُْ ‫ْالغالَ لُم ُع‬
‫بلح ْک لُمُهُ لذ لُہُال لعُلَّ لُة‬
Thereafter (after discussing the manners in which the Illat is

ascertained) we say that Qiyaas is of two types. One type is
where the ruling which is being applied is the same as the
ruling in the original (known as ‘Itiehaadun Noa’)’ and the
second (type of Qiyaas) is where the ruling which is being
applied is (is not the exact same but) similar to the ruling
applied in the original (known as ‘Itiehaadul Jins’).
An example of ‘Itiehaadun No’a’ (where the ruling which is

being applied is the same as the ruling in the original) is what
we have said that not reaching puberty is the Illat for
granting (the father) the right to perform the Nikaah of his
immature son as well as for his immature daughter because
of the Illat being the same in both (the very same ruling
applies to the immature daughter in the same manner that it
applies to the immature son) and the same ruling will apply
to the immature girl who was previously married as well
(the father will have the right to perform her Nikaah as well in
the same manner as stated above).
Similarly we say that constantly coming and going is the

Illat for removing the ruling of impurity for the saliva of a
cat, thus the very same ruling applies to the saliva of other
animals that reside in the home because of the same Illat
272
Usool Shaashi
being present (in both cats and other animals that reside in
the home).
(Similarly, just as) Attaining puberty with sanity is the Illat

for the relinquishment of the right of decision from the
father in the case of the son, so too will the right of decision
be relinquished from the father because of the same Illat
(when the daughter reaches puberty and is sane then in a
similar manner the right will be relinquished from the father).
Example of ‘Itiehaadul Jins’

ُ‫ج‬ُ‫ط ُ َح َر ل‬ ُ‫اف ُ لعُلَّةُ ُسقوْ ل‬ ُ‫س ُ َما ُیقَالُ ُ َک ْث َُرةُ ُالطَّ َو ل‬ ُ‫َو لمثَالُ ُ لاالت َحا لُد ُفلی ُ ْال لج ْن ل‬
ُ‫س لُةُالس ْاو لُرُبلهُ لذ لُہُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة‬ َُ ‫تُاَ ْی َماننَاُفَیَسْقطُُ َح َرجُُن ََجا‬ ُْ ‫یُ َحقُُ َماُ َملَ َک‬ ُ‫اال ْستل ْی َذ ل‬
ُْ ‫انُفل‬ ‫ل‬
ُُ‫ن ُنَوْ لع لُه ُ َو َک َذللكَُ ُالص ْغرُ ُ لعُلَّة‬ ُْ ‫ج ُالَ لم‬ُ‫س ُذللكَُ ُ ْال َح َر ل‬ ُ‫ن ُ لج ْن ل‬ ُْ ‫ج ُ لم‬َُ ‫ن ُهُ َذا ُ ْال َح َر‬ َُّ ‫فَا ل‬
ُ‫س ُبلح ْک لُم‬ ُ‫ف ُفلی ُالنَّ ْف ل‬ ُ‫صر ل‬ َ َّ‫ال ُفَیَ ْثبتُ ُ لوالَُیَةُ ُالت‬ ُ‫ب ُفلی ُ ْال َم ل‬ ُ‫الا ل‬ ُ ‫ف ُل ل‬
ُ‫صر ل‬ َ َّ‫لوالَُیَ لُة ُالت‬
ُ‫ال‬ ُ‫ب ُفلی ُ ْال َم ل‬ ُ ‫ال ُ لوالَُیَ لُة ُا‬
ُ‫الا ل‬ ُ‫َن ُ َع ْقلُ ُ لعُلَّةُ ُزَ َو ل‬
ُْ ‫ارُیَ لُة ُع‬ ‫غ ُ ْال َج ل‬ َُ ْ‫ن ُبلو‬ َُّ ‫هُ لذ لُہ ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ َوال‬
‫سُبلهُ لذ لُہُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة‬ُ‫یُ َحقُُالنَّ ْف ل‬ ُْ ‫فَیَزوْ لُُفل‬
An example of ‘Itiehaadul Jins’ is what has been said that
constantly coming and going is the Illat for removing the
difficulty of seeking permission for those slaves that we
own (each time they enter) and (in a similar manner) removes
the ruling of impurity from the saliva of a cat, because of it
having the same Illat (of constantly coming and going). This
difficulty (caused by the cat’s saliva being impure) is similar
to that difficulty (caused by one’s slaves having to seek
permission every time they enter) but not exactly the same.
Similarly not reaching puberty is the Illat for granting the

father the right to make decision in the wealth of his
immature child and in a similar manner, because of the
same Illat, grants him the right to make decisions
concerning her person as well (such as to perform her
Nikaah) and just as the girl reaching puberty, when she is
273
Usool Shaashi
sane, is the Illat for relinquishing the fathers right of
decision in her wealth so too does this same Illat relinquish
his right to make decision regarding her person.
The Illat must be wide-ranging
ُُ‫ل ُالنَّ َما ُیَ ْثبت‬ ُْ ‫ْس ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُبلُا‬
َُ ْ‫ن ُنَقو‬ ُ‫اس ُ لمن ُتَجْ نلی ل‬ ُ‫ع ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالقلُیَ ل‬ُ‫ی ُهُ َذا ُالنَّوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ث َُّم ُالَب َُّد ُفل‬
ْ ْ
َُُ‫ف ُبلنَف لس ُهَا ُفَُاثبَت‬
ُ‫صر ل‬ َّ
َ ‫َن ُالت‬ ُ‫َاج َُزةُ ُع ل‬ َّ
‫ْر لُة ُالن ُهَا ُع ل‬ َُ ‫ص لغی‬َّ ‫ال ُال‬ ُ‫ی ُ َم ل‬ ُْ ‫ب ُفل‬ ُ‫لوالَُیَةُ ُاالاَ ل‬
ُْ ‫صاللح ُهَا ُ ْالمتَ َعلُقَةُ ُُبلذللكَُ ُ َوقَ ُْد ُع ََج‬
ُ‫زَت‬ َ ‫ل ُ َم‬ َُ َّ‫الَ ُیَتَ َعط‬
ُ ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫ب ُ َک‬ ُ‫ال َّشرْ عُ ُ لوالَُیَ ُةَ ُاالاُ ل‬
ُ‫ب ُ َعلَ ْی ُهَا ُ َوعَلی ُهُ َذا‬ ُ‫ب ُ ْالقَوْ لُ ُبل لوالَُیَ لُة ُاالاُ ل‬ َُ ‫ی ُنَ ْف لس ُهَا ُفَ َو َج‬ ُْ ‫ف ُفل‬ُ‫صر ل‬ َ َّ‫َن ُالت‬ ُ‫ع ل‬
ُ ‫نَظَائلرہ‬
Then it is necessary in this type of Qiyaas (Qiyaas in
‘Itiehaadul Jins’)for the Illat to wide-ranging (comprehensive
and inclusive such that it can be applied in both the original
and derived rulings)that we say that the right to make
decision in the wealth of the immature girl is established
for the father because she is incapable of administrating it
on her own, which is why the Shari’ah has established the
right of decision for the father so that she may not be
deprived of the capabilities required to administer her
wealth. (In a similar manner) She is most definitely
incapable of making decision regarding her own person
(due to her immaturity), thus it became necessary to establish
the right of decision for her father over her (so that she will
not be deprived of the capabilities needed to decide on that
which will benefit her). Other similar rulings are dealt with
in the same manner.
The ruling of ‘Itiehaadun No’a’
ُ‫ل ُ َم َُع ُ ْالفَرْ ل‬

ُ‫ع ُلَ َّما ُاتَّ َح َُد‬ َُ ْ‫الاص‬ َُّ ُ ‫ق‬
ُ ‫الن ُا‬ ُ‫ل ُبل ْالفَرْ ل‬ ُ ُ ‫ل ُُان‬
َُ ‫الَ ُیَبْط‬ ُ‫الا َّو ل‬ ُ‫َوح ْکمُ ُ ْالقلیَ ل‬
ُ ‫اس ُا‬
ُُ‫ْرُهُ لذ لُہُ ْال لعُلَّ لُةُ َوح ْکم‬ ُ‫یُ َغی ل‬ ُ‫یُ ْالح ْک لُمُ َُوُال ل‬
ُْ ‫نُا ْفت ََرقَاُفل‬ ُْ ‫بُالتَّ َحادهُ َماُفل‬ َُ ‫فلیُ ْال لعُلَّ لُةُ َو َج‬
ْ
ُ‫ن ُتَ اثل ْی َُر‬
َُّ ‫اص ُهُ َُو ُبَیَانُ ُُا‬ُ‫ق ُ ْالخَ ل‬ ُ‫ْس ُ َوالفَرْ ل‬ُ‫ی ُفَ َسادہُ ُبلم َمانَ َُع لُة ُالتَّجْ نلی ل‬ ُ‫ْالقلیَ ل‬
ُْ ‫اس ُالثَّانل‬
274
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ی‬
ُْ ‫فُفل‬ َ َّ‫یُ لوالَُیَ لُةُالت‬
ُ‫صر ل‬ ُْ ‫قُتَ اثلی لْر لُہُفل‬ ُ‫فُفلیُ ْال َم ل‬
َُ ْ‫الُفَو‬ ُ‫صر ل‬ ُْ ‫الص ْغ لُرُفل‬
َ َّ‫یُ لوالَُیَ لُةُالت‬
ُ‫النَّ ْف ل‬
‫س‬
The ruling of the first type of Qiyaas (‘Itiehaadun No’a’,
where the ruling which is being applied is the same as the
ruling in the original) is that the Qiyaas will not be invalid
because of the difference (between the original and that for
which the ruling was derived) because once the Illat is the
same in both then it is necessary for the ruling to be the
same as well, even if there characteristics may be different
in everything else besides this Illat.
The ruling for 'Itiehaadul Jins'

The ruling of the second type of Qiyaas (‘Itiehaadul Jins’,
where the ruling which is being applied is not the exact same
but similar to the ruling applied in the original) is that the
Qiyaas will be invalid if the Illat is not wide-ranging
(comprehensive and inclusive) or a vast difference (between
the original and that for which the ruling is being derived) is
pointed out, (for example if one were) to point out that
having the right of decision in the wealth (of an immature
child) is required more frequently than having the right of
decision over her person (thus the necessity required in both
is vastly different and the ruling can therefore not be the
same).
The third type of Qiyaas
ُُ‫االجْ تل ُهَا لُدُظَا لُهر‬

‫یُ َُوُ ل‬ ُ‫ثُ َُوُهُ َُوُ ْالقلیَاسُُبل لعُلَّةُُم ْستَ ْنبَطَُةُُبلال َّر ْا ل‬ ُ‫َوبَیَانُُ ْالقلس لُْمُالثَّالل ل‬
َُُ‫َوتَحْ قلیْقُ ُ َذللكَُ ُال َذا ُ َو َج ْدنَا ُ َوصْ فا ُمنَا لسباُ ُلل ْلح ْک لُم ُ َو ُهُ َُو ُبل َحالُ ُیوْ لجبُ ُثبوْ ت‬
ُ‫اع‬ ُ‫ضعُ ُاالجْ َم ل‬ ‫ظ لُر ُاللَ ْی لُه ُ َوقَ لُد ُا ْقت ََرنَُ ُبل لُه ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُفلی ُ َموْ ل‬ ْ َّ‫اضاہُ ُبلالن‬ َ َ‫ْالح ْک لُم ُ َویَتَق‬
ُ‫ع ُبل َکوْ نل لُه ُ لعُلَّةُ ُ َُو ُن لَظیْرہ ُال َذا‬ُ‫ضافُ ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُاللَ ْی لُه ُلل ْلمنَا َسُبَ لُة ُالَلل َش ُهَا َُد لُة ُال َّشرْ ل‬ َ ‫ی‬
ُ‫ن ُاال ْعطَا َُء ُلل َد ْف لُع‬ َّ
َُّ ُ‫ب ُ َعلَی ُالظنُ ُا‬ َُ َ‫َراُ ْینَا ُ َش ْخصاُ ُاَ ْعطی ُفَقلیْراُ ُ لدرْ ُهَما ُ َغل‬
275
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ب ُال َذا ُع لرفَُ ُهُ َذا ُفَنَقوْ لُ ُال َذا ُ َرُا ْینَا‬ ُ‫ح ُالثَّ َوا ل‬
ُ‫صالل ل‬ َ ‫ْل ُ َم‬ ‫ْر ُ َوتَحْ ل‬
ُ‫صی ل‬ ُ‫اج لُة ُ ْالفَقلی ل‬
َُ ‫َح‬
َّ
ُُ‫اعُیَغللبُُالظن‬ ْ ُ‫َم ل‬ ْ‫االج‬ ُُ‫ضع‬ ‫یُ َموْ ل‬ ْ ْ ْ َ ْ ْ
ُْ ‫َوصْ فامنَا لسباُُلللحک لُمُ َوق لُدُاقت ََرنَُُبل لُهُالحکمُُفل‬
ُ‫ل‬َُ ‫ع ُتوْ لجبُ ُ ْال َع َم‬ ُ‫ف ُ َو َغلَُبَةُ ُالظَّنُ ُفلی ُال َّشرْ ل‬ ُ‫ضاُفَ لُة ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُاللی ُ َذللكَُ ُ ْال َوصْ ل‬ َ ‫بلا ل‬
َُّ‫ن‬ ‫ا‬ َ
ُ ُُ ُ ‫ب ُ َعلی ُظن لُه‬ َ َ َ َ ْ َ ْ
َُ ‫ْل ُبل َمن لزُل لُة ُالم َسافل لرالذا ُغل‬ َّ َ َ ُ‫لع ْن َُد ُالن لعد ل‬
ُ‫َام ُ َما ُفوْ ق ُهَا ُ لمنَُ ُالدللی ل‬ ْ
ُْ‫بلقرْ بل لُهُ َماُءُُلَ ُْمُیَج ُْزُلَهُُالتَیَممُُ َُوعَلیُُهُ َذاُ َم َسائللُُالتَّ َحری‬
The third type of Qiyaas, which is that Qiyaas wherein the
Illat was ascertained through deliberation and reflection, is
clear (obvious). The details of this (form of Qiyaas) is that
when we find a characteristic suitable for the ruling and
that characteristic is such that it necessitates the
application of a ruling and apparently requires it when
examined, and a ruling has already been affixed to it (in a
previous ruling) through Ijmaa, then the ruling will
attributed to that characteristic (it will be considered to be
the Illat) because of it being suitable (to serve as the Illat)
and not because it has been affirmed by Shari'ah to be the
Illat.
An example of this is if we see a person giving the poor a

dirham. The obvious reason for this (the reason for giving
the poor a dirham) that comes to mind is that he gave it so
that the needs of the poor can be fulfilled and he may
receive reward (and we will say the Illat here is the neediness
of the poor, even though it has not been clearly stated).
Once this (example above) is understood then we will (again)

say that when we see a characteristic that is suitable for the
ruling to be applied and a ruling has already been applied
(previously) to that characteristic through Ijmaa, discretion
dictates that the ruling be affixed to that characteristic (that
it should be considered the Illat for that ruling). The Shari'ah
has made acting on one's discretion Waajib when none of
the other above mentioned proofs (Quraan, Sunnat, Ijmaa)
are present, such as when according to the discretion of a
276
Usool Shaashi
traveller he believes that there is water close by, it will not
be permissible for him to perform Tayammum (it is Waajib
upon him to act upon his discretion). In a similar manner is
(it is Waajib to act upon one's discretion in) ascertaining the
direction of Qiblah.
The ruling of this type of Qiyaas
ُُ‫َاسب‬ ‫الن ُ لع ْندَہ ُیوْ َجدُ ُمن ل‬ َُّ ُ ‫ب‬ ُ‫َاس ل‬‫ق ُ ْالمن ل‬ ُ‫ل ُبل ْالفَ َر ل‬
َُ ‫ن ُیَبْط‬ ُْ ‫اس ُُا‬ُ‫َوح ْکمُ ُهُ َذا ُ ْالقلیَ ل‬
ُُ‫الَ ُیَ ْثبت‬ ُ َ‫ضاُفَ لُة ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُاللَ ْی لُه ُف‬ َ ‫الَ ُیَ ْبقَی ُالظَّنُ ُبلا ل‬ ُ َ‫ی ُصوْ رُ لُة ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُف‬ ُْ ‫لس َواہُ ُفل‬
َُ‫قُ َوعَلیُُهُذا‬ ْ
ُ‫لُذللكَُُبلالفَرْ ل‬ َُ ‫ْالح ْکمُُبل لُهُالنهُُ َکانَُُبلنَاءُُعَلیُُ َغلُبَ لُةُالظنُُ َوقَ ُْدُبَط‬
َ َّ َ َّ
ُ‫ل ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُبلال َّش ُهَا َُد لُة ُبَ ْع َُد ُت َْز لکُیَ لُة ُال َّشا لُه لُد‬ ُ‫الا َّو ل‬
ُ ‫ع ُا‬ ُ‫َکانَُ ُ ْال َع َملُ ُبلالنَّوْ ل‬
َُ ‫ی ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُال َّش ُهَا َُد لُة ُ لع ْن َُد ُظهُوْ لُر ُ ْال َعدَاُلَ لُة ُقَب‬
ُ‫ْل ُالتَّ ْز لکُیَ لُة‬ ُْ ‫ع ُالثَّانل‬ ُ‫َوتَ ْع لد ْیلل لُه ُ َوالنَّوْ ل‬
ُ ُ‫ثُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُةُ َش ُهَا َُد لُةُ ْال َمسْتوْ لُر‬
ُ‫عُالثَّالل ل‬ ُ‫َوالنَّوْ ل‬
The ruling of this type of Qiyaas (wherein the illat was
ascertained through deliberation) is that it will be invalid if a
difference is established (between the ruling one is making
Qiyaas upon and that for which it is being sought). The reason
for this (why it will be invalid) is that once a difference is
established another characteristic for the ruling is found,
besides that which was initially considered (to be the Illat),
thus discretion will no longer dictate that the ruling should
be affixed to it and the ruling will not be established by it
(the first characteristic cannot be the Illat). The reason for
this is that (it was first considered to be the illat) by strong
discretion, which no longer remains due to the difference
which has been established.
Based upon this (the three types of Qiyaas and the difference
between them), the first type of Qiyaas (where the Illat was
ascertained by the Quraan or Sunnat) is similar to passing
judgement on testimony after the integrity and reliability of
the witnesses have been established (and there will be no
277
Usool Shaashi
doubt to its validity and authenticity), the second type of
Qiyaas (where the illat was ascertained through Ijmaa) is
similar to passing judgement on testimony when the
witnesses appear to be reliable before their credibility has
been established (and it will be Waajib to act upon) and the
third type of Qiyaas (where the illat was ascertained by
discretion) is similar to passing judgement on the testimony
of witnesses whose condition is unknown (and it will be
Waajib to act upon until proven to be false).
Objecting to Qiyaas
ُ ‫فصل‬
َّ ْ ْ ْ ُ‫اَالس لْوُلَةُ ُ ُْالمتَ َوج ُهَةُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْالقلیَ ل‬
ُ‫اس ُثَ َمانلُیَةُ ُالم َمان َُعةُ ُ َوالقوْ لُ ُبلموْ َج ل‬
ُ‫ب ُال لعُل لُة‬ َ َ َ
ُ‫ضة‬
َُ ‫ار‬َ ‫َو ْالقَ ْلبُُ َو ْال َع ْکسُُ َوفَ َسادُُ ْال َوضْ لُعُ َو ْالفَرْ قُُ َوالنَّ ْقضُُ َو ْالم َع‬
Objections to Qiyaas can occur in eight ways; refutation,
what the Illat infers to, by reversal, 'Aks', by the Illat being
inappropriate for the ruling, differentiation, disproval,
Mua'aaridhah.
Objection through refutation
ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫ی ُ َم ْنعُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُ َو لمثَالُه ُفل‬ ُْ ‫فُ َوالثَّانل‬ ُ‫ان ُاَ َحدهُ َما ُ َم ْنعُ ُ ْال َوصْ ل‬
ُ‫ع ل‬ َُ ْ‫اُ َّما ُ ْالم َمانَ َُعةُ ُفَنَو‬
ُ ُ ‫ط لُر ُق ْلنَا‬
َُ‫ال‬ ْ ‫الَ ُتَسْقطُ ُبل َموْ تل لُه ُلَ ْیُلَ ُةَ ُ ْالفل‬ ْ ‫ت ُبل ْالفل‬
ُ َ‫ط لُر ُف‬ ُْ َ‫ط لُر ُ َو َجب‬ ْ ‫ص َدُقَةُ ُ ْالفل‬َ ُ ‫قَوْ لل لُه ُْم‬
‫سُیَموْ ُنَهُ َویَللیُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬ ْ ْ ْ ْ
ُ‫ن َسلمُُوجوْ بَ ُهَاُبلالفلط لُرُبَلُُْ لعن َدنَاُت لَجبُُبل َرا ل‬
Refutation (in Qiyaas) is of two types; refutation of the Illat

and refutation of the ruling. An example of this (i.e.
refutation of the Illat) is there (Imaam Shaafie and his
students) saying that Sadaqaatul Fitr becomes Waajib
because of the period of fasting coming to end, thus he will
not be absolved from it if he passes away on the eve of Eid
(according to Imaam Shaafie). We (the Hanafi scholars) say
278
Usool Shaashi
that we do not accept that it is Waajib because of the
period of fasting coming to an end (that is we refute the Illat)
but according to us it is Waajib because (the illat is) the
presence of that person (at the time when the period of fasting
ends) and those for whom he is responsible (those under his
care such as his children, etc).
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫صا ل‬ َ ‫الك ُالن‬ ُ‫الَ ُیَسْقطُ ُبلهَ ل‬ ُ َ‫اجبُ ُفلی ُالذ َُّم لُة ُف‬ ‫ْل ُقَ ْدرُ ُال َّز َکوُ لُة ُ ُ َو ل‬ َُ ‫َو َک َذللكَُ ُال َذا ُقلی‬
ُ‫ن‬ُْ ‫اجبُُ َُوُللئل‬ ‫اجبُُفلیُالذ َُّم لُةُبَلُُُْادَائُهُ َو ل‬ ‫نُقَ ْد َُرُال َّز َکوُ لُةُ َو ل‬ َُّ ‫الَُن َسلمُُُا‬ ُ ُ‫ْنُق ْلنَا‬
ُ‫َکال َّدی ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ ‫ا‬
َُّ ُُُ‫الَُن َسلم‬ ْ َ َ ْ
ُ ُ‫ْنُبَ ْع َُدُالمطالُبَ لُةُقلنَا‬ ُ‫کُ َکال َّدی ل‬ ْ
ُ‫الُُیَسْقطُُبلال ُهَالَ ل‬ َ َ
ُ َ ‫اجبُُادَائُهُف‬ ‫الُاَ ْل َو ل‬َُ َ‫ق‬
ُ‫َن ُ ْالع ُْه َُد لُة‬
ُ‫ج ُع ل‬ َُ ‫ْن ُبَلُْ ُ َحر َُم ُ ْال َم ْنعُ ُ َحتی ُُیَ ْخر‬ ُ‫ی ُصوْ َُر لُة ُال َّدی ل‬ ُْ ‫اجبُ ُفل‬ ‫االاَدَا َُء ُ َو ل‬
‫ْلُ َم ْن لُعُ ْالح ْک لُم‬ ُ‫نُقَبلی ل‬ ُْ ‫بلالتَّ ْخللُیَ لُةُ َوهُ َذاُ لم‬
Similarly if it is said that the amount of Zakaat is Waajib

on a person and will therefore not fall away by the loss of
that amount (the Zakaat will still need to be paid even if his
wealth is lost after it became Waajib upon him, according to
Imaam Shaafie) such as in the case of debt (if one person
owes another money as debt it will not fall away if his wealth is
lost), we say (the Hanafi scholars) that we do not accept that
Zakaat is Waajib on a person but rather to pay it is
Waajib.
If you were to (object and) say that even if only paying it is

Waajib, it will still not fall away if his wealth is destroyed
(but will still remain Waajib for him to pay) just as when
payment for a debt is sought (it still remains Waajib to pay
even if all his wealth is destroyed) then we will reply that we
do not accept that payment is Waajib in the case when
payment of the debt is sought but rather we say that refusal
(to pay the debt) is Haraam such that he may be freed from
this obligation through 'Takhleeyah' (the creditor can take
possession of his property to the value of the debt that he is
owed). This is an example of refutation of the ruling.
279
Usool Shaashi
ُ ُ ‫ْل ُق ْلنَا‬
َُ‫ال‬ ُ‫ن ُت َْثللیْثُه ُ َک ْال َغس ل‬
َُّ ‫ب ُ ْالوض لُؤ ُفَ ْلی َس‬ ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ُْ ‫ال ُاَل َمسْحُ ُر ْکنُ ُفل‬ َُ َ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُال َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ض‬ُ‫ی ُ َم َحلُ ُ ْالفَرْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ْل ُفل‬ ُ‫ْل ُبَلُْ ُالطَاُلَةُ ُ ْالفلع ل‬ ُ‫ْث ُ َمسْنوْ نُ ُفلی ُ ْال َغس ل‬ َُ ‫ن ُالت َّ ْثللی‬
َُّ ‫ن َسلمُ ُُا‬
ُ‫ن‬َُّ ‫ْر ُُا‬
َُ ‫ب ُالصَّلو لُة ُ َغی‬ ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫ام ُ َو ْالقل َرُا لُة ُفل‬
ُ‫ض ُ َکالطَاُلَ لُة ُ ْالقلیَ ل‬ُ‫لزیَا َُدةُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َمفروْ ل‬
ُ‫ل‬َُّ ‫ْل ُک‬ ُ‫ب ُ ْالفلع ل‬
ُ‫ار ُال ْستل ْی َعا ل‬ ُ‫الَّ ُبلالتَّ ْک َر ل‬ ُ ‫ص َّورُ ُال‬َ َ‫الَ ُیت‬ ُ ُ ‫ْل‬ُ‫ب ُ ْالغُس ل‬
ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫االطَاُلَ ُةَ ُفل‬
ُ‫ن ُاالطَاُلَ ُةَ ُ َمسْنوْ نُ ُبلطَ لری ل‬
ُ‫ْق‬ َُّ ‫ْح ُبلُا‬ ُ‫ب ُ ْال َمس ل‬ ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫ْال َم َحلُ ُ َوبل لم ْثلل لُه ُنَقوْ لُ ُفل‬
ُ‫اال ْستل ْی َعا ل‬
‫ب‬
Similarly (another example of refutation of the ruling is) when
it is said (by the Shaafie scholars) that Masah is a
fundamental act in Wudhu (Fardh just as washing the face,
hands, and feet), then to make Masah three times will be
Sunnat just as washing (the face, hands and feet is Sunnat to
wash three times), we say that we do not accept that washing
each limb three times is Sunnat but rather prolonging the
act to more than what has been made Fardh (is what is
actually Sunnat) such as lengthening Qiyaam and Qiraat in
Salaah (to more than what is Fardh is Sunnat) except that
lengthening the act (of washing) in Wudhu is not possible
except by repetition (i.e. washing three times) as the act
already extends to the entire portion (since the act cannot be
lengthened by increasing the area to washed because the entire
area is already washed as part of the Fardh, we cannot only
lengthen it by washing it three times instead of three) and we
say the same for Masah (that it is Sunnat to lengthen the act
of washing by increasing the area to be washed) whereby
lengthening the act is possible by making Masah of the
entire head (thus there is no need for repetition as the exact
requirement of Sunnat is fulfilled here, and that is prolonging
the Fardh act to more than what has been made Fardh).
ُ‫ن‬ ُ ُ ‫ام ُشَرْ طُ ُ َکالنقوْ لُد ُق ْلنَا‬

َُّ ‫الَُن َسلمُ ُُا‬ ُ‫ام ُبلالطَّ َع ل‬
ُ‫ی ُبَی لُْع ُالطَّ َع ل‬ُْ ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُیقَالُ ُالتَّقَابلُ ُُفل‬
ُ‫الَُیَکوْ نَُُبَیْعُُالنَّ ْسُئَ لُة‬ ُْ ‫لُال َّشرْ طُُتَ ْعیلیْن ُهَاُ َک‬
ُ ُ‫ی‬ ُ‫بُالنقوْ لُدُبَ ل‬ ُ‫یُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫ضُشَرْ طُُفل‬ َُ ‫التَّقَاب‬
ُ‫الَُّبل ْالقَب ل‬
‫ْضُ لع ْن َدنَا‬ ُ ‫الَُتَتَ َعیَّنُُال‬
ُ ُ‫نُالنقوْ َُد‬ َُ ‫باللنَّ لس ْیُئَ لُةُ َغی‬
َُّ ‫ْرُُا‬
280
Usool Shaashi
Similarly (the third example of refutation of the ruling) it has
been said that taking possession at the same time is a
condition (for the validity of the transaction) in sale of food
for food just as (it is a condition) in the sale of gold (for gold)
and silver (for silver). We say we do not accept that taking
possession at the same time is a condition for the validity in
the sale of gold (for gold) and silver (for silver) but rather
the condition is specification (of the gold or silver) so that it
will not lead to sale of credit for credit (whereby the price
and goods will both be handed over at a later date) except
that according to us (Hanafi scholars) specification is only
possible in the case of gold and silver by taking possession.
Objection to the inference of the Illat
ُ‫ن‬َُّ ‫ف ُ لعُلَّةُ ُ َُو ُبَیَانُ ُُا‬ُ‫ن ُ ْال َوصْ ل‬ ُ‫ب ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُفَهُ َُو ُتَ ْسللیْمُ ُ َکوْ ل‬ُ‫َُو ُاُ َّما ُ ْالقَوْ لُ ُبلموْ َج ل‬
ُ َ‫ب ُ ْالوض لُؤ ُف‬
َُ‫ال‬ ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫َمعْلوْ لَ ُهَا ُ َغیْرُ ُ َما ُال َّدعَاہُ ُ ْال َم َعللُ ُ َو لمثَالُه ُاَ ْل لمرْ فَقُ ُ َحدُ ُفل‬
ُُ‫الَ ُیَ ْدخلُ ُتَحْ تَُ ُال َمحْ دوْ لُد ُق ْلنَا ُاَ ْل لمرْ فَقُ ُ َحد‬ ُ ُ ‫الن ُ ْال َح َُّد‬ ُ‫یَ ْدخلُ ُتَحْ تَُ ُ ْالغس ل‬
َُّ ُ ‫ْل‬
ُ ُ‫الَُیَ ْدخلُُفلیُ ْال َمحْ دوْ لُد‬ ُ ُ‫النُ ْال َح َُّد‬
َُّ ُ‫ط‬ ُ‫الَُیَ ْدخلُُتَحْ تَُُح ْک لُمُالسَّاقل ل‬ ُ َ‫طُف‬ ُ‫السَّاقل ل‬
As far as the objection to the inference of the Illat is

concerned; it is where you accept the Illat but explain that
it infers to other than what the Mu'alil (one who derived the
Illat) claims it infers to. An example of this is (what Imaam
Zufar says that) the elbow is the limit (for washing) in
Wudhu and will therefore not be compulsory to wash
because the limit is not included in the action. We (the
scholars of the Hanafi Madhab) say that the elbow is limit of
termination (that is it indicates where the action terminates)
and will therefore not be included in the ruling of
termination because the limit is not included in the action.
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫ن ُالتَّ ْعیل ْی ل‬ُ‫الَ ُیَجوْ زُ ُبلدوْ ل‬ ُ َ‫صوْ مُ ُفَرْ ضُ ُف‬ َ ُ َُ‫ضان‬ َ ُ ُ‫َو َکذللكَُ ُیقَال‬
َ ‫صوْ مُ ُ َر َم‬
َّ
ُُ‫ال ُاَُن َّه ُو لج َُد ُالتَّ ْعیلیْن‬ ُ‫ن ُالتَّ ْعیلی ل‬
ُ ‫ْن ُال‬ ُ‫الَ ُیَجوْ زُ ُبلدوْ ل‬ ْ
ُ‫صوْ مُ ُالفَرْ ل‬
ُ ُ‫ض‬ َ ُ ‫ضا لُء ُق ْلنَا‬
َ َ‫َک ْالق‬
281
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫ن ُالتَّ ْعیل ْی ل‬ُ‫الَُیَجوْ زُ ُبلدوْ ل‬ ُ َُُ‫ضان‬ َ ‫صوْ مُ ُ َر َم‬ َ ُ ‫ال‬َُ َ‫ن ُق‬
ُْ ‫عُ َُو ُللئل‬ ُ‫ٗال َّشرْ ل‬ُ‫نُ لج ُهَةُ ل‬ ُْ ‫ههُنَا ُ لم‬
َُّ ‫الَّ ُُا‬
ُ‫ن ُالتَّ ْعیلیْنَُ ُلَ ُْم‬ ُ‫ن ُالتَّ ْعُیلی ل‬
ُ ‫ْن ُال‬ ُ‫ضاءُ ُبلدوْ ل‬ َ َ‫الَ ُیَجوْ زُ ُ ْالق‬ُ ُ ‫ضا لُء ُق ْلنَا‬ َُ َ‫لمنَُ ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُ َک ْالق‬
ُ‫ضا لُء ُفَلل َذللكَُ ُیَ ْشت لَرطُ ُتَ ْعیلیْنُ ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُ َو ُهُنَا ُو لج َُد‬ َ َ‫ع ُفلی ُ ْالق‬ ُ‫ن ُ لج ُهَ لُة ُال َّشرْ ل‬
ُْ ‫ت ُ لم‬ ُْ ‫یَ ْثب‬
‫الَُیَ ْشت لَرطُُتَ ْعیلیْنُُ ْال َع ْب لُد‬
ُ َ‫عُف‬ ُ‫نُ لج ُهَ لُةُال َّشرْ ل‬ ُْ ‫التَّ ْعیلیْنُُ لم‬
Similarly (another example of objection to the inference of the
Illat) is what has been said (Imaam Shaafie) that the fast of
Ramadaan is a Fardh fast and will therefore not be
permissible except with specification (that it is a fast of
Ramadaan) such as in the case of Qadhaa fasts (where by it
is only permissible if specified to be a Qadhaa fast). We say
that Fardh fast is only permissible with specification (just
as Imaam Shaafie says) except that in this case (of the fasts of
Ramadaan) the Shari'ah has already specified it (to be only
for the fast of Ramadaan, thus there is no need for
specification and mere intention to fast will suffice).
If Imaam Shaafie  were to say that it is only permissible

with specification from a person just as Qadhaa fasts (need
to be specified by a person) then we would say that most
definitely Qadhaa fasts are only permissible with
specification, and since the Shari'ah has not specified it, it
become necessary for a person to specify it himself.
Whereas in the case of Ramadaan, specification has been
made by Shari'ah, thus there is no need for a person to
specify it himself.
Objection by reversal
ُُ‫لُ َماُ َج َعلَهُُ ْالم َعللُُ لعُل َّةُُلل ْلح ْک لُمُ َمعْلوْ ال‬ َُ ‫نُیَجْ َع‬ُْ ُ‫َانُاَ َحدهُ َماُا‬ ُ‫َُوُاُ َّماُ ْالقَ ْلبُُفَنَوْ ع ل‬
ُُ‫ْر ُیوْ لجب‬ ُ‫ت ُ َجرْ یَانُ ُالربَوا ُفلی ُ ْال َکثلی ل‬ ُ‫شرْ لعیَا ل‬ َّ ‫للذللكَُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُ َو لمثَالُه ُفلی ُال‬
ُ‫ام ُبل ْال َح ْفنَتَی ل‬
ُُ‫ْن ُ لم ْنه‬ ُ‫ان ُفَیَحْ رمُ ُبَیْعُ ُ ْال َح ْفُنَ لُة ُ لمنَُ ُالطَّ َع ل‬ ُ‫ل ُ َکاال ْاث َم ل‬
ُ‫َجرْ یَاُنَه ُفلی ُ ْالقَلل ْی ل‬
ُ‫الا ْث َما ل‬
‫ن‬ ُ ‫ْلُیوْ لجبُُ َج َریَانَهُُفلیُ ْال َکثلی لُْرُ َکا‬ ُ‫الَُبَلُُْ َج َریَانُُالربواُفلیُ ْالقَللی ل‬ ُ ُ‫ق ْلنَا‬
282
Usool Shaashi
Reversal is of two types; (the first type of reversal is) to take

what the Mu'alil has made the Illat of the ruling to be the
result of the ruling (that is instead of the stipulated Illat being
the cause of the ruling it is taken to be the result of the ruling).
An example of this in the laws of Shari'ah is the occurrence
of Riba in large quantities necessitating the occurrence of
Riba in small quantities as is the case with gold and silver
(whereby it will Riba whether the amount are small or large, if
not in equal quantities), thus (this will necessitate that) sale of
one handful of food for two handfuls of food will be
Haraam (as excess in small quantities is also Haraam based
on this rationale). We say that it is the opposite, in that the
occurrence of Riba in small quantities necessitates the
occurrence of Riba in large quantities as well as is the case
of gold and silver (and since the smallest quantity of
measurement in which Riba can occur is half a Saa'a as there
is no Shar'ie measurement smaller than this, the sale of one
handful of food for two will be permissible).
َُ‫س ُیوْ لجبُ ُحرْ َُم ُة‬ ُ‫ف ُالنَّ ْف ل‬ ُ‫ی ُ َم ْسئَُلَ لُة ُ ْالم ْلت لَجئُ ُبل ْال َح َر لُم ُحرْ َُمةُ ُال ْتالَ ل‬ ُْ ‫َو َک َذللكَُ ُفل‬
َُ‫ف ُیوْ لجبُ ُحرْ َُم ُة‬ ُ‫ف ُالطَّ َر ل‬ ُ‫ص ْی لُد ُق ْلنَا ُبَلُْ ُحرْ َُمةُ ُال ْتالَ ل‬ َّ ‫ف ُ َکال‬ ُ‫ف ُالطَّ َر ل‬ ُ‫ال ْتالَ ل‬
ُ ُ‫تُ لعلَّتهُُ َمعْلوْ الُُلل َذللكَُُ ْالح ْک لُم‬
ُ‫الَُتَبْقیُُ لعُلَّةُُُلَه‬ ُْ َ‫ص ْی لُدُفَا ل َذاُج لعل‬
َّ ‫سُ َکال‬ ُ‫فُالنَّ ْف ل‬ ُ‫ال ْتالَ ل‬
ُ ُ‫عُ َو َمعْلوْ الُُُلَه‬ ‫نُیَکوْ نَُُال َّشئُُ ْال َو ل‬
ُ‫احدُُ لعُلَّةُُللل َّشرْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ال ْستل َحاُلَ لُةُُا‬
ُ‫ل‬
Similarly in the ruling of taking refuge in the Haram; the

prohibition of killing (a person as punishment for murder)
necessitates the prohibition of severing limbs (as punishment
for a crime such stealing) as is the case with hunting (the
prohibition of hunting and killing an animal necessitates the
prohibition of severing its limbs). We say (it is the other way
around) that the prohibition of severing limbs necessitates
the prohibition of killing as is the case in hunting (where the
prohibition of severing the limb of an animal necessitates the
prohibition of hunting an animal).
283
Usool Shaashi
Once the illat has been made the result of the ruling then it
will no longer remain as the Illat for the ruling because of it
being impossible for one thing to be the Illat for the ruling
and the result as well.
The second type of reversal
ُُ‫لُالسَّائللُُ َماُ َج َعلَهُُ ْالم َعللُُ لعُلَّةُُلل َماُا َّدعَاہ‬ َُ ‫ن ُیَجْ َع‬ ُ‫یُ لمنَُُ ْالقَ ْل ل‬
ُْ ُ‫بُا‬ ُْ ‫َُوُالنَّوْ عُُالثَّانل‬
ُُ‫جة‬َُّ ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُح‬ ُْ ُ‫ل ُبَ ْع َُد ُا‬
ُ‫جةُ ُلللسَّائل ل‬ ‫ضدُ ُ َذللكَُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُفَیَ ل‬
َُّ ‫صیْرح‬ ‫لمنَُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُ لعُلَّةُ ُلل ل‬
َُُ‫صوْ مُُفَرْ ضُُفَیَ ْشت لَرطُُالتَّ ْعیلیْنُُلَهُُبَ ْع َُدُ َماُتَ َعُیَّن‬ َ َُُ‫ضان‬ َ ‫صوْ مُُ َر َم‬ َ ُ‫لُ لمثَالُه‬ ُ‫لل ْلم َعل ل‬
َ َ‫ْالیَوْ مُُُلَهُ َک ْالق‬
‫ضا لُء‬
The second type of reversal is when the same Illat which is
claimed to derive the ruling is used to prove the opposite of
that ruling, thus becoming a proof for the objector after
being a proof for the one who derived the Illat first. An
example of this is (saying that) the fast of Ramadaan is
Fardh Fast therefore specification of the fast (to be of
Ramadaan) is a condition (for its validity) as is the case of
Qadhaa fasts. We say that since the fast of Ramadaan are
Fardh Fasts specification is not a condition after the
Shari'ah has specified a day for it as is the case with
Qadhaa Fasts (whereby if a particular day has been specified
for a Qadhaa fast then it will be specified to be for that fast).
Objection by 'Aks
ُُ‫ل ُعَلی ُ َوجْ هُ ُیَکوْ ن‬ ُ‫ل ُ ْالم َعل ل‬ ُْ ‫َواُ َّما ُ ْال َع ْکسُ ُفَنَ ْعنل‬
ُ‫ی ُبل لُه ُُان ُیَّتَ َمسَّكَُ ُالسَّائللُ ُبلُاصْ ل‬
ُُ‫ل ُ َو ْالفَرْ ع ُ َو لمثَالُه ُاَ ْلحللی‬ َ َ‫ْالم َعللُ ُ َمضْ طَرا ُاللی ُ َوجْ لُه ُ ْالمف‬
ُ‫ارُقَ لُة ُبَیْنَُ ُاالاُصْ ل‬
ُ‫ُالحللی‬ْ َ‫ب ُ ْالبَ ْذُلَ لُة ُق ْلنَا ُلَوْ ُ َکان‬ ُ‫الَ ُیَ لجبُ ُفل ْی ُهَا ُال َّزکوُةُ ُ َکثلیَا ل‬
ُ َ‫ال ُف‬ ُ‫ال ْبتل َذ ل‬ ُْ ‫ا لع َّد‬
‫ت ُلل ل‬
ُ ‫ُالبَ ْذُلَ لُة‬
ْ ‫ب‬ ‫الُ َکثلیَا ل‬ ‫بُفَ َالُت لَجبُال َّزکوُةُُفل ْیُحللیُالر َج ل‬ ‫بل َم ْن لزُلَ لُةُالثیَا ل‬
284
Usool Shaashi
As far as 'Aks' is concerned, it refers to where the objector
derives a ruling from the original which the Mu'alil made
Qiyaas on in such a manner that forces the Mu'alil to
differentiate between the original and that for which the
ruling was derived. An example of this is jewellery made
for adornment whereby Zakaat is not Waajib on it (for
women according to Imaam Shaafie) just as the clothing one
wears (has no Zakaat on it). We say that if jewellery is the
same as clothing then Zakaat is not Waajib on the jewellery
of men just as the clothing one wears (has no Zakaat on it)
Objection by the Illat being inappropriate for

the ruling
ُ‫الَُیَللیْقُ ُبلذللكَُ ُ ْالح ْک لُم‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ل ُ ْال لعُلَّةُ ُ َوصْ فا‬ َُ ‫ن ُیجْ َع‬ُْ ‫َُو ُُا َّما ُفَ َسادُ ُ ْال َوضْ لُع ُفَ ْالم َرادُ ُُبل لُه ُُا‬
ُ‫اح‬ُ‫ْنُطَ َرُاُ َعلَیُالن َک ل‬ ُ‫ْنُال ْختلالَفُُال َّدی ل‬ ُ‫یُال ْسالَ لُمُُا َح لُدُال َّزوْ َجی ل‬ ُْ ‫یُقَوْ لل لُه ُْمُفل‬ ُْ ‫لمثَالُهُُفل‬
ُ‫ك ُق ْلنَا‬ ُ‫ال ُ ْال لم ْل ل‬
ُ‫اال ْسالَ َُم ُ لعُلَّةُ ُللزَ َو ل‬
‫لُ ْ ل‬ ُ‫فَی ْف لسدہ ُکَارْ تلدَا لُد ُاَ َح لُد ُال َّزوْ َجی ل‬
َُ ‫ْن ُفَا لُنَّه ُ َج َع‬
ُ‫ی‬ ُْ ‫كُ َُوُ َکذللكَُُفل‬ ُ‫الُ ْال لم ْل ل‬
ُ‫یُزَ َو ل‬ ُْ ‫الَُیَکوْ نُُمؤَثراُفل‬ ُ َ‫كُف‬ ُ‫َاصماُلل ْل لم ْل ل‬
‫اَ ْ لال ْسالَمُُع لُه َُدُع ل‬
ُُْ‫الَ ُیَجوْ زُ ُلَهُ ُ ْاالَ َُمةُ ُ َک َما ُلَو‬ ُ‫ل ُ ْالح َُّر لُة ُاَُنَّه ُحرُ ُقَا لدرُ ُ َعلَی ُالن َک ل‬
ُ َ‫اح ُف‬ ُ‫َم ْسئَُلَ لُة ُطَوْ ل‬
َُُ‫اح ُفَال‬ ُ‫ی ُ َج َوازَُ ُالن َک ل‬ ‫َت ُتَحْ تَه ُحُ َُّرةُ ُق ْـلنَا ُ َوصُْفُ ُ َکوْ ُنله ُحُرا ُُقَا لدرا ُیَ ْقت ل‬
ُْ ‫َض‬ ُْ ‫َکان‬
ُ‫یُ َعد لَُمُ ْال َج َو ل‬
‫از‬ ُْ ‫یَکوْ نُُمؤَثراُفل‬
As far as the Illat not being appropriate for the ruling is
concerned; it is where that Illat is made to be such a
characteristic that does not fit with that ruling. An example
of this is in their (Imaam Shaafie's) saying regarding the
acceptance of Islaam by one of the spouses that difference
of Deen has come into the Nikaah therefore it (this
difference of Deen) invalidates the Nikaah, as in the case of
one of the spouses abandoning Islaam (whereby the Nikaah
will be invalidated). Here Imaam Shaafie  made the
acceptance of Islaam an Illat for the invalidation of the
right of Nikaah. We say that Islaam is known to secure
285
Usool Shaashi
rights and will therefore have no role in the invalidation of
the right of Nikaah.
Similarly in the law of having the ability to marry a free

woman, (imaam Shaafie says) he is free and capable of
marrying (a free woman) therefore a slave will not be
permissible for him (to marry) just as if there was a free
woman in his wedlock (whereby it would be impermissible for
him to marry a slave). We say him being free and capable of
marrying necessitates the permissibility of Nikaah and will
therefore not have any effect in making it impermissible.
Objection by disproval
ُ‫ارةُ ُفَیَ ْشت لَرطُ ُلَهُ ُالنُیَّةُ ُ َکالتَّیَم لُم ُق ْلنَا‬

َُ َ‫َُو ُاَ َّما ُالنَّ ْقضُ ُفَ لم ْثلُ ُ َما ُیقَالُ ُاَ ْلوضوْ ءُ ُطَ ُه‬
‫االنَا لُء‬ ُ‫ْلُالثَّوْ ل‬
‫بُ َو ْ ل‬ ُ‫یَ ْنتَقلضُُبل َغس ل‬
As far as disproval is concerned (whereby the stipulated Illat
is disproven because in some instance the same ruling will not
apply despite the presence of that Illat), for example what has
been said (by Imaam Shaafie) that Wudhu is means of
attaining purity thus Niyyat (intention) is a precondition
(for its validity) just as in Tayammum (Niyyat is a condition).
We say that this Qiyaas will be disproved by washing
(impure) clothing and (impure) utensils (as washing is also a
means of attaining purity of the clothing or utensils but despite
the Illat being present your do not state that Niyyat is a
precondition for its validity).
Objection by counteraction
ُ‫ضةُ ُفَ لم ْثلُ ُ َما ُیقَالُ ُاَ ْل َمسْحُ ُر ْکنُ ُفلی ُ ْالوضوُْ لُء ُفَ ْلی َسنُ ُت َْثللیْثُه‬
َُ ‫ار‬ َ ‫َُو ُاَ َّما ُ ْالم َع‬
‫ْحُ ْالخفُُ َوالتَّیَم لُم‬
ُ‫الَُی َسنُُت َْثللیْثُهُ َک َمس ل‬
ُ َ‫ْلُق ْلنَاُاَ ْل َمسْحُُر ْکنُُف‬
ُ‫َک ْال َغس ل‬
286
Usool Shaashi
As far as counteraction is concerned (whereby a proof is
cited which counters the deduction of the Mu'alil), for
example what has been said (by Imaam Shaafie) that Masah
(of the head) is a fundamental act of Wudhu (just as washing
the face, hands and feet), thus make Masah three times will
be Sunnat just as in washing (the face, hands and feet it is
Sunnat to wash each part three times). We say that Masah is
a fundamental act of Wudhu and therefore washing three
times will not be Sunnat just as in Masah of leather socks
(Masah is also a fundamental act here but it is not Sunnat to
make Masah three times) and in Tayammum (to make Masah
of the face and hands is a fundamental act but it is not Sunnat
to make Masah three times).
Definition of Sabab, Illat and Sharth
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُُ‫طه ُفَال َّسبَبُ ُ َما ُیَکوْ ن‬ ُ‫اَ ْلح ْکمُ ُیَتَ َعلَّقُ ُبل َسبَُبله ُُ َویَ ْثبتُ ُبل لعلَُّتله ُ َُو ُیوْ َجدُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُشَرْ ل‬
ُ‫ص لُد‬ َ ‫ل ُاللی ُ ْال َم ْق‬ ُ‫ْق ُفَا لُنَّه ُ َسبَبُ ُلل ْلوصوْ ل‬ ُ‫اسطَُتله ُ َکالطَّ لری ل‬ ‫ْئ ُبل َو ل‬ُ‫لی ُال َّشی ل‬َُ ‫طَ لریْقا ُال‬
َُُ‫الَ لُء ُفَ َعلی ُهُ َذا ُکلُ ُ َما ُ َکان‬ ُ ‫اال ْد‬ ‫ْل ُ َسبَبُ ُاللُی ُ ْال َما لُء ُبل ْ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُ َُو ُ ْال َحب ل‬ُ‫اسطَُ لُة ُ ْال َم ْش ل‬
‫بل َو ل‬
ُُ‫طَةُ ُ لعُل َّة‬
ُ ‫اس‬‫اسطَُتله ُی َسمی ُ َسبَبا ُُلَه ُشَرْ عا ُ َُو ُی َس َّمی ُ ْال َو ل‬ ‫طَ لریْقا ُاللَی ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُبل َو ل‬
ُ‫ف‬ُ‫ص ُ َو َحلُ ُقَ ْی لُد ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُفَا لُنَّه ُ َسبَبُ ُلللتَّ ْل ل‬ ُ‫ل ُ َُو ُ ْالقَفَ ل‬
ُ‫ب ُ ْاالَصْ طَبَ ل‬ ُ‫لمثَالُه ُفَ ْتحُ ُبَا ل‬
‫ْرُ َُوُ ْال َع ْب لُد‬
ُ‫طَةُُتوْ َجدُُ لمنَُُال َّداب لُةُ َُوُالطَّی ل‬ ُ ‫اس‬
‫بل َو ل‬
A ruling is linked to its Sabab (method in which the ruling is
derived), is established by its Illat (principle cause of the
ruling) and is found when its Sharth (condition) is fulfilled.
Thus Sabab is that which leads to something (the ruling) by
means of something, such as a path. Thus the path (Sabab)
by walking (Illat) leads to the destination (Ruling).
(Similarly) The rope is the Sabab of obtaining water by
throwing the bucket into the well (the rope is the Sabab as it
leads to water being obtained by means of throwing). Thus
based upon this, whatever leads to the ruling being
287
Usool Shaashi
obtained by means of something will be called the Sabab
according to Shari'ah and the means (through which the
ruling is obtained) is called the Illat. An example of this is
opening the door of the stable, cage or shackles of the slave.
As this (opening the door or shackles) is the Sabab for the
loss by means of an action from the animal, bird or slave
(when the slave or animal runs away then the act of opening
will be the Sabab for the loss by the slave or animal running
away, which is the Illat).
The ruling will linked to the Illat
ُ‫الَُّال َذا‬
ُ ‫ب ُال‬ُ‫ضافُ ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُاللَی ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُدوْ نَُ ُال َّسبَ ل‬ َ ‫َوال َّسبَبُ ُ َم َُع ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُال َذا ُاجْ تَ َم َعا ُی‬
َُ َ‫ب ُ لح ْینَئلذُ ُ َُو ُعَلی ُهُ َذا ُق‬
ُ‫ال‬ ُ‫ضافُ ُاللَی ُال َّسبَ ل‬ َ ‫ضاُفَةُ ُاللَی ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُفَی‬ َ ‫اال‬ ‫ت ُُ ْ ل‬ ُْ ‫تَ َع َّذ َر‬
َُ‫ط‬
ُ َ‫الَ ُیَضْ َمنُ ُ َُو ُلَوُْ ُ َسق‬ ُ ُ ‫سه‬ َُ ‫صبلیُ ُفَقَت ََُل ُُبله ُنَ ْف‬ َ ُ ُ‫اَصْ َحابنَا ُال َذا ُ َدفَ َُع ُالسکیْنَُ ُاللی‬
ُ‫ی ُعَلیُ ُدَا ُُبَّةُ ُفَ َسی ََّر ُهَا‬ َُّ ‫صبل‬ َّ ‫ل ُال‬ َُ ‫حه ُیَضْ َمنُ ُ َولَوُْ ُ َح َم‬ َُ ‫صبلیُ ُفَ َج َر‬ َّ ‫ن ُیَ لُد ُال‬ ُْ ‫لم‬
ُ‫ل ُال ْن َسانا ُعَلیُ ُ َم ل‬
ُ‫ال‬ َُّ ‫الَ ُیَضْ َمنُ ُ َُو ُلَوُْ ُ َد‬ ُ ُ َُ‫طَ ُ َو َمات‬
ُ َ‫ْرةُ ُفَ َسق‬ َُ ‫ت ُی ْمُنَةُ ُ َُو ُیس‬ ُْ َ‫فَ َجال‬
َُ‫ال‬
ُ ُ‫ق‬ َُ ‫ْر ُفَ َس َرُقَه ُاَوُْ ُعَلی ُنَ ْف لس لُه ُفَقَتَُلَه ُاَوُْ ُعَلیُ ُقَافلُلَةُ ُفَقَطَ َُع ُ َعلَ ْی لُهمُ ُالطَّ لر ْی‬ ُ‫ْال َغی ل‬
ُ‫ض َمانُُعَلیُال َّدال‬ َّ ‫یَ لجبُُال‬
When both the Illat and Sabab are present then the ruling
will be linked to the Illat and not the Sabab (we will say that
the ruling came into being as a result of the Illat) except if it is
not possible to link it to the Illat, whereby it will then be
linked to the Sabab.
Based upon this our scholars (of the Hanafi Madhab) say
that if a knife is given to a child and the child kills himself
with it, then the one who handed the knife over will not be
accountable for the death (giving the knife is the Sabab for
the death and the Illat for the death is the child using the knife,
thus the ruling will be linked to the Illat and it will be said that
the child died because of him using the knife) but if the knife
fell from the hand of the child and injured him then the one
288
Usool Shaashi
who handed over the knife will be accountable for the
injury (giving the knife is the Sabab for the injury and the Illat
for the injury is the knife falling, and since the ruling cannot be
linked to the Illat, because the act of falling was not the act o0f
the child, it will be linked to the Sabab and it will be said that
the child was injured because the knife was given to him).
If a person placed a child on an animal and he rode it (on

his own), on which the animal began trying to shake him
off, resulting in the child falling and passing away, the one
who placed him on the animal will not be accountable for
his death (placing the child on the animal is the Sabab for the
death and the child riding the animal is the Illat, thus the
ruling will be linked to the Illat and it will be said that the child
died because of him riding the animal).
If a person informs another of a certain person's wealth,

which the other person then goes on to steal or he informs
him of (the whereabouts of) another person who he then
proceeds to murder or he informs him of (the travelling
plans of) a caravan which he then hijacks, the informant
will not be held accountable (informing is the Sabab for theft
or murder, the act of stealing and murder is the Illat, thus the
ruling will be linked to Illat and it will be said that the person
was robbed or killed because of the action of the robber or
murderer).
A reply to a misconception
ُُ‫لُ ْالمحْ لرم‬ َُّ ‫قُ َعلَیُ ْال َو لد ْی َُع لُةُفَ َس َرقَ ُهَاُاَوْ َد‬
َُ ‫َّار‬
‫لُالس ل‬ َُّ ‫َعُال َذاُ َد‬ ُ‫فُ ُْالموْ د ل‬ ُ‫َُوُهُ َذاُبل لخالَ ل‬
ُ‫ار‬ُ‫َع ُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬ ُ‫ن ُ َعلَی ُ ْالموْ د ل‬ ُ‫ض َما ل‬ َّ ‫ب ُُال‬ َُ ْ‫ن ُوجو‬ َُّ َ‫ص ْی لُد ُ ْال َح َر لُم ُفَقَتَُلَهُ لال‬
َ ُ ُ‫َغی َْرہ ُعَلی‬
َُ‫ن ُال َّدالَُلَ ُة‬
َُّ َ‫ار ُا‬ُ‫ال ُبلال َّد َالُلَ لُة ُ َُو ُ َعلَی ُ ْالمحْ لر لُم ُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬ ُ َ ُُ ‫ب ُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬ُ‫اج ل‬‫ظ ُ ْال َو ل‬ ُ‫ك ُ ْال لح ْف ل‬
ُ‫تَرْ ل‬
ُ‫ب‬ ُ‫ْط ُفَیَضْ َمنُ ُبلالرْ تل َکا ل‬ ُ‫ْس ُ ْال َم لخی ل‬ ُ‫َمحْ ظوْ رُ ُالحْ َرا لم لُه ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُ َمسُ ُالطیْب ُ َُو ُلب ل‬
289
Usool Shaashi
ُ َ‫لُ َُوُاَ َّماُقَ ْبُلَهُف‬
َُ‫ال‬ ُ‫نُ ْال لجنَاُیَ ُةَُالنَّ َماُیَتَقَرَّرُُبل َحقل ْیُقَ لُةُ ْالقَ ْت ل‬ َُّ َ‫الَُّا‬ ُ ُ‫ْال َمحْ ظوْ لُر‬
ُ ‫الَُبلال َّد َالُلَ لُةُال‬
َُ ‫بُ ْال َج َر‬
‫اح لُة‬ ُ‫یُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫الُفل‬ ‫اعُاَ ْث لُرُ ْال لجنَاُیَ لُةُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُةُ ْ ل‬
ُ‫اال ْن لُدُ َم ل‬ ُ‫ازُالرْ تلفَ ل‬ ُ‫ح ْک َُمُُلَهُلل َج َو ل‬
This ruling (mentioned above) is contrary to when a trustee
informs a thief to the whereabouts of the trust, such that he
steals it or if a person in Ihraam informs another of the
whereabouts of game, such that he kills it (whereby the
informant in the above cases, despite only being the Sabab will
be held accountable). The reason for Dhamaan being
Waajib on the trustee is because of him abandoning the
safekeeping which was Waajib on him (by informing the
thief of the whereabouts of the trust) and not because of
informing (the ruling is not being linked to him because he is
the Sabab but rather because he abandoned what was
incumbent upon him). And (Dhamaan is Waajib on) the one
on Ihraam because the act of informing (the hunter of the
presence of game) is prohibited in the state of Ihraam, just
as applying perfume and wearing sown clothes in
prohibited, thus (in the above cases) he is accountable
because of him indulging in what was prohibited on him
and not because of informing (that is not because he was the
Sabab).
However the crime will only be established if the game is

actually killed (that is he will only be held accountable after
the animal is killed) as for before (the animal is killed), there
is no ruling for that because it is possible that the effects of
the crime may be eliminated (by the hunter not killing the
game) as in the case of a wound healing when injured (such
that the one who injured him will not be held accountable if the
wound healed).
Sabab will have the meaning of the Illat
290
Usool Shaashi
ُُ‫ضافُ ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُاللَ ْی لُه ُ َو لمثَالُه ُفل ْی َما ُیَ ْثبت‬ َ ‫سبَبُ ُبل َمعْنی ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُفَی‬ َّ ‫َُو ُقَ ُْد ُیَکوْ نُ ُال‬
ُ‫ضافُ ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُُُاللَ ْی لُه ُ َُو‬ َ ‫ی ُ َمعْنی ُ لعُلَّ لُة ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُفَی‬ ُْ ‫ب ُفَیَکوْ نُ ُال َّسبَبُ ُفل‬ ُ‫ْال لعُلَّةُ ُبلال َّسبَ ل‬
َُُ‫ض لمنَُ ُالسَّائلقُ ُ َوال َّشا لُهدُ ُال َذا ُاَ ْتلَف‬ َ ُ ‫ق ُدَاُبَّةُ ُفَُا ْتلَفَُ ُ َشیْئا‬ َُ ‫للهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُ َسا‬
ُ‫ضافُ ُاللَی‬ َ ‫ْر ُال َّداب لُة ُی‬ َُّ َُُ‫ض لمن‬
َُ ‫الن ُ َسی‬ َ ُ‫ع‬ ُ‫طالَن ُهَاُبلالرجوْ ل‬ ْ ‫بل َشهَا َدتل لُه ُ َماالُ ُفَظَ ُهَ َُرُب‬
ُُ‫الَ ُیَ َسعُه ُتَرْ ك‬ ُ ُ ‫ضافُ ُاللَی ُال َّش ُهَا َُد لُة ُ ُلل َما ُُاُنَّه‬ َ ‫اضی ُی‬ ‫ضاءُ ُ ْالقَ ل‬ َ َ‫ق ُ َُو ُق‬ ُ‫السَّوْ ل‬
َُُ‫ار ُکال َمجْ بوْ لُر ُفلی ُذللك‬ ْ َ َُ ‫ص‬ َ
َ ‫ل ُ لعندَہُ ُف‬ ْ ْ ْ ْ
ُ‫ضا لُء ُبَ ْع َُد ُظهُوْ لُر ُال َحقُ ُبل َش ُهَا َُد لُة ُال َعد ل‬ َ َ‫ْالق‬
ُ ُ‫ائق‬
ُ‫ْلُالس ل‬ ُ‫بل َم ْن لزُلَ لُةُ ْالبَ لُه ْی َُم لُةُبلفلع ل‬
Sometimes the Sabab will have the meaning of the Illat
because of which the ruling will linked to it. An example of
where this can occur is where the Illat is a direct result of
the Sabab as in such a case the Sabab will have the
meaning of the Illat because when the Illat is a direct result
of the Sabab it becomes the Illat (principle cause) of the
Illat, thus the ruling will be linked to it.
As a result of this (that the Sabab will sometimes have the

meaning of the Illat) we say if a shepherd herds his flock
whereby it results in the damage of something, the
shepherd will be responsible for the damage and if a
witness causes loss of wealth as a result of his testimony,
after which the invalidity of his testimony becomes
apparent by retraction (he retracted his testimony), then the
witness will be responsible for the loss. The reason for this
(why the ruling will linked to the Sabab in the above cases) is
that the movement of the flock (which is the Illat) is a direct
result of the herding of the shepherd (that is the cause of the
Illat is the Sabab) and the decision of the Qaadhi (which is
the Illat) is a direct result of the testimony because it is not
possible for the Qaadhi not to pass judgement after the
testimony of a reliable witness, making him compelled (to
pass judgement), in the same manner as the flock with the
herding of the shepherd (who have no choice but to move).
291
Usool Shaashi
Sabab will take the place of the Illat
ُُ‫ع ُعَلیُ ُ َحقل ْیُقَ لُة ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُتَی لْسیْرا‬ ُ‫ث َُّم ُال َّسبَبُ ُقَ ُْد ُیقَامُ ُ َمقَا َُم ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ لع ْن َُد ُتَ َعذ لُر ُاالطالَ ل‬
ُ‫ب ُ َُو‬ ُ‫ف ُ َویَسْقطُ ُبل لُه ُال ْعتلبَارُ ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ َویدَارُ ُ ْالح ْکمُ ُ َعلَی ُال َّسبَ ل‬ ُ‫للالاُ ْم لُر ُعَلی ُ ْالم َکلَّ ل‬
ُُ‫ث ُ َسقَطَُ ُال ْعتلبَار‬ ُ‫ت ُاَلنَّوْ مُ ُ ْال َکا لملُ ُفَا لُنَّه ُُلَ َّما ُاقل ْی َُم ُ َمقَا َُم ُ ْال َح َد ل‬ ُ‫لمثَالُه ُفلی ُال َّشرْ لعیَا ل‬
ْ ْ
ُُ‫ال ُالنَّوْ لُم ُ َُو ُ َکذللكَُ ُالخَ ل َُوة‬ ُ‫اال ْنتلقَاضُ ُعَلی ُ َک َم ل‬ ‫ث ُ َُو ُیدَارُ ُ ل‬ ُ‫َحقل ْیُقَ لُة ُ ْال َح َد ل‬
ُُ‫ی ُفَیدَارُ ُ ْالح ْکم‬ ُ‫ط لا‬ ْ ‫ی ُ َسقَطَُ ُال ْعتلبَار َحقل ْیُقَ لُة ُ ْال َو‬ ُ‫ط لا‬ ْ ‫ت ُ َمقَا َُم ُ ْال َو‬
ُْ ‫ْحةُ ُلَ َّما ُاقل ْی َم‬ َُ ‫َّحی‬
‫الص ل‬
ْ
ُ‫ال ُال َم ُْه لُر ُ َولزوْ لُم ُال لع َُّد لُة ُ َو َکذللكَُ ُال َّسفَرُ ُلَ َّما‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫ح لُة ُالخَ ل َُو لُة ُفلی ُ َحقُ ُ َک َم ل‬ ْ َُّ ‫ص‬ ‫عَلی ُ ل‬
ْ
ُُ‫ص لُة ُ َسقَطَُ ُال ْعتلبَارُ ُ َحقل ْیُقَ لُة ُالم َشُقَّ لُة ُ َُو ُیدَار‬ َُ ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُالر ْخ‬ ْ
ُْ ‫اقل ْی َُم ُ َمقَا َُم ُالم َشُقَّ لُة ُفل‬
ُ‫اف ُ َم ْمل َکتل لُه‬ُ‫ی ُاُط َر ل‬ ْ ُْ ‫ن ُالس ْلطَانَُ ُلَوْ طَافَُ ُفل‬ َُّ ُ‫س ُال َّسفَ لُر ُ َحتَّی ُا‬ ُ‫ْالح ْکمُ ُعَلی ُنَ ْف ل‬
ُ ُ‫ارُ َُوُ ْالقَصْ لُر‬ ُ‫یُاال ْفطَ ل‬ ُْ ‫صةُُفل‬ َُ ‫َارُال َّسفَ لُرُ َکانَُُلَهُُالر ْخ‬ َُ ‫یَ ْقصدُُبل لُهُ لم ْقد‬
Then the Sabab will sometimes take the place of the Illat
when determining the occurrence of the Illat is difficult, in
order to make ease upon those to whom the laws of
Shari'ah apply. Thereafter (once the Sabab takes the place of
the Illat) the Illat will not be considered and the ruling will
be dependent upon the Sabab (such that the ruling will apply
with the occurrence of the Sabab regardless of whether the
Illat has occurred or not).
An example of this (where the Sabab takes the place of the

Illat) in the laws of Shari'ah is deep sleep, as once it takes
the place of passing wind (which is the actual Illat for Wudhu
breaking) then whether wind was passed or not will not be
considered and the ruling of Wudhu breaking will be
dependent on deep sleep (whereby the Wudhu will break if
one falls asleep, regardless of whether wind was passed or
not).
292
Usool Shaashi
Similarly once 'Khalwatus Saheehah'1 takes the place of
sexual relations (which is the actual Illat for the
consummation of the marriage) then whether sexual relations
occurs or not will not be considered and the ruling will be
dependent on 'Khalwatus Saheehah' with regards to the
complete Mehr (the entire Mehr will become Waajib after
'Khalwatus Saheehah') and incumbency of Iddah (if the wife
is divorced after 'Khalwatus Saheehah' then she will have to
remain in Iddah).
Similarly once travelling (more than 80 km) takes the place

of difficulty (which is the actual Illat for lessening Salaah on a
journey) with regards to lessening Salaah (Qasr while on a
journey) then whether there is actually difficulty or not will
not be considered and the ruling of lessening Salaah (Qasr)
will be dependent on travelling (more than 80 km) such that
if the king travels on the outskirts of his kingdom in order
to the extent of a journey (80 km), he will be excused from
fasting and may lessen Salaah (even if there is no difficulty in
that journey).
Other than the Sabab can be called the Sabab
َُ َّ‫ْن ُی َسمی ُ َسبَباُ ُلل ْل َکف‬

ُ‫ار لُة ُ َُو ُالنَّ ُهَا‬ ُ‫ب ُ َسبَباُ ُُ َم َجازا ُ َک ْالیَ لمی ل‬ ُ‫َُو ُقَ ُْد ُی َسمی ُ َغیْرُ ُال َّسبَ ل‬
َّ
َُ‫نُال َکفا َُرُة‬ْ َُّ ‫ار لُةُفَا ل‬ َّ
َُ ‫کف‬ ْ
َُ ‫بُال‬
َُ ْ‫یُوجو‬ ُْ ‫الَُینَافل‬ُ ُ‫ب‬ َُ َ‫نُال َّسب‬ َُّ ‫تُبل َسبَبُُفلیُ ْال َحقل ْیُقَ لُةُفَا ل‬ ُْ ‫لَ ْی َس‬
ُ‫ط‬ ْ ْ ْ
ُ‫ث ُ َوبل لُه ُیَ ْنتَ لُهی ُالیَ لمیْنُ ُ َو َکذللكَُ ُتَ ْعللیْقُ ُالحک لُم ُبلال َّشرْ ل‬ ْ
ُ‫النَّ َما ُُتَ لجبُ ُبلال لح ْن ل‬
ْ
َُّ ُ ‫ْس ُبل َسبَبُ ُفلی ُال َحقل ْیُقَ لُة‬
ُ‫الن‬ َُ ‫َاق ُی َسمی ُ َسبَباُ ُ َم َجازا ُ َو ُاُُنَّه ُلَی‬ ُ‫ق ُ َو ْال لعت ل‬
ُ‫َکالطَّالَ ل‬
َُُ‫ط ُفَال‬ ُ‫ط ُ َوالتَّ ْعللیْقُ ُیَ ْنتَ لُهی ُبلوجوْ لُد ُال َّشرْ ل‬ ُ‫ْالح ْک َُم ُالنَّ َما ُیَ ْثبتُ ُ لع ْن َُد ُوجوْ لُد ُال َّشرْ ل‬
ُْ ‫یَکوْ نُُ َسبَباُُ َم َُعُوجوْ لُدُالتَّنَافل‬
‫یُبَ ْینَهُ َما‬
1
'Khalwatus Saheehah' occurs when the bride and groom seclude themselves, such that if they
wished to indulge in sexual intercourse they would be able to do so, even though they do not
do so. After 'Khalwatus Saheehah' the marriage will be regarded as consummated.
293
Usool Shaashi
Sometimes other than the Sabab can be called the Sabab in
a manner of Majaaz. For example taking an oath is called
the Sabab for Kaffaarah, whereas in reality it is not the
Sabab, as the Sabab cannot oppose the ruling and taking
an oath opposes the incumbency of Kaffaarah because
Kaffaarah becomes Waajib on the breaking of an oath and
that (breaking an oath) ends the oath (taking an oath cannot
be the Sabab for Kaffaarah because Kaffaarah only becomes
Waajib when the oath is broken).
Similarly making a ruling conditional, such as Talaaq or

freedom, has been called the Sabab (of Talaaq) in a manner
of Majaaz, whereas it is not the Sabab in reality because
the ruling will only apply when the condition is fulfilled and
once the condition is fulfilled it will no longer remain
conditional, thus it cannot be the (actual) Sabab when they
oppose each other.
The laws of Shari'ah are affixed to the Sabab
ُ ‫فصل‬
َُ‫ال‬ُ َ‫ب ُغَائلبُ ُ َعنَّا ُف‬ َُ ْ‫الن ُالوجو‬ ْ َُّ ُ َُ‫ُاَالاَحْ َکامُ ُال َّشرْ لعُیَّةُ ُیَتَ َعلَّقُ ُبل ا ْسبَابل ُهَا ُ َوذللك‬
َُُ‫ضیْف‬ ‫ار ُا ل‬ ُ‫ب ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُ َُو ُبلهُ َذا ُاال ْعتلبَ ل‬ َُ ْ‫ْرفُ ُبل ُهَا ُ ْال َعبْدُ ُوجو‬ ‫ن ُ َعالَ َُمةُ ُیَع ل‬ ُْ ‫ب َّد لم‬
ُ‫اب‬ َُ َ‫ن ُ ْال لخط‬ ُ‫ب ُالصَّلوُ لُة ُاَ ْل َو ْقتُ ُبل َدللی ل‬
َُّ َ‫ْل ُا‬ ُ‫ب ُفَ َسبَبُ ُوجوْ ل‬ ُ‫االاُحْ َکامُ ُاللَی ُاالاُ ْسبَا ل‬
ُ‫ت‬ ُ‫ل ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬
ُ‫ت ُ َوالنَّ َما ُیَت ََوجَّهُ ُبَ ْع َُد ُدخوْ ل‬ ُ‫ل ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬
ُ‫ْل ُدخوْ ل‬ َُ ‫الَ ُیَت ََوجَّهُ ُقَب‬ ُ ُ ‫بل ادَا لُء ُالصَّلو لُة‬
ُ‫ب ُوُجوْ بُ ُقَ ْبُلَه ُ َُو ُهُ َذا‬ َُ َ‫ب ُاالادَا لُء ُ َوم َعرفُ ُ لل ْل َع ْب لُد ُ َسب‬ ُ‫َو ْال لخطَابُ ُم ْثبلتُ ُللوجوْ ل‬
ُ ‫الَُ َموْ جوْ َُدُی َعرفهُُ ْال َع ْب َُدُههُنَاُال‬
َُّ ‫ال‬ ُ ‫ح لُةُ َو‬ َُ ْ‫َکقَوْ للنَاُاُدُُثَ َمنَُُ ْال َمبلی لُْعُ َُوُاُدُُنَفَُقَ ُةَُ ْال َم ْنکو‬
ُ‫ب‬ َُ ْ‫الن ُ ْالوجو‬ َُّ ُ ‫ت ُ َُو‬ ُ‫ل ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ ُ‫ب ُیَ ْثبتُ ُبلدخوْ ل‬ َُ ْ‫ن ُ ْالوجو‬ ُ‫دخوْ لُ ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬
َُّ ُ‫ت ُفَتَبَیَّنَُ ُا‬
ُ‫ل‬ َُ ‫ب ُقَ ْب‬
َُ ْ‫الَ ُوجو‬ ُ ‫َاولهُ ُ ْال لخطَابُ ُ َکالنَّائل لُم ُ َوالم ْغمیُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُ َو‬ َ ‫ثَابلتُ ُعَلی ُ َمن ُالَّیَتَن‬
ُُ‫ل ُ َسبَب‬ َُ ‫ن ُ ْالج ُْز َُء ُاالاُ َّو‬ َُّ ُ‫ت ُ َُو ُبلهُ َذا ُظَ ُهَ َُر ُا‬ ُ‫ل ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ُ‫ت ُفَ َکانَُ ُثَابلتاُ ُبلدخوْ ل‬ ُ‫ْال َو ْق ل‬
ُ‫لل ْلوجوْ ل‬
‫ب‬
The laws of Shari'ah are affixed to the Sabab for it (the law
becomes incumbent when the Sabab is present). The reason
294
Usool Shaashi
for this is that ALLAAH, who makes the laws Waajib upon
us is not visible to us (so we will not be able to discern when
ALLAAH Ta'ala has made it Waajib to carry out), therefore
there is a need for such a sign, from which we will be able
to determine that is when the law is Waajib. Based upon
this (that we need a sign from which we will be able to discern
when the law is Waajib to carry out) we affixed the laws of
Shari'ah to the its Sabab, such that the Sabab of Salaah
being Waajib will be time (when the time of that Salaah sets
in then only will it become Waajib) based on the proof that
the instruction to perform Salaah does not apply before the
time has set in but only after. The instruction (to perform
Salaah) establishes that it is incumbent to perform and
informs a person (as well) of the Sabab that makes it
Waajib before the time sets in. This (that the act itself being
Waajib is established from the Sabab and that it is Waajib to
perform is established from the instruction) is the same as us
saying, "Pay the price of the goods" (the price has already
become incumbent upon him by the Sabab, which is the
transaction itself, and our statement indicates that it is now
Waajib to pay it) and "Pay the maintenance of your wife"
(the maintenance has already become incumbent upon him by
the Sabab, which is the Nikaah itself, and our statement
indicates that it is now Waajib to pay it). There is nothing
present here by which a person can ascertain that it is
Waajib except for time, thus it will establish that Salaah
becomes Waajib when the time sets in.
(Another proof that the Sabab for Salaah being Waajib is) Also
that Salaah is Waajib on that person who cannot hear the
instruction, such as one who is asleep or unconscious (at the
time of Salaah) and (we all accept that) it is not Waajib
before the time sets in, therefore it is established that
Salaah becomes Waajib when the time sets in (as this Sabab
295
Usool Shaashi
applies to all, even one how cannot hear the instruction such
as one who is asleep or unconscious).
This also establishes that the first portion of the time is the
Sabab for it being Waajib (because if the last portion were
the Sabab then the Salaah can only be performed after it,
which would result in the Salaah becoming Qadhaa as it will
be performed out of its time).
ُ‫ی ُال َذا‬ ُْ ‫ل ُاللَی ُالثَّانل‬ ُ‫الا َّو ل‬ُ ‫ان ُاَ َحدُهُ َما ُنَ ْقلُ ُال َّسبَبلُیَّ لُة ُ لمنَُ ُ ْالج ُْز لُء ُا‬ ُ‫ث َُّم ُبَ ْع َُد ُذللكَُ ُطَ لر ْیقَ ل‬
ُ‫ی ُاللیُ ُا لخ لُر‬ َُ ‫ث ُ َوالرَّابل لُع ُاللیُ ُاَن ُیَ ْنتَ لُه‬ ُ‫ل ُث َُّم ُاللَی ُالثَّالل ل‬ ُ ‫لَ ُْم ُی اُودُ ُفلی ُ ْالج ُْز لُء ُا‬
ُ‫الا َّو ل‬
ُ‫ی ُذللكَُ ُ ْالج ُْز لُء‬ ُْ ‫ت ُفَیَتَقَرَّرُ ُ ْالوجوْ بُ ُ لح ْینَئلذُ ُ َُو ُی ْعتَبَر َحالُ ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُفل‬ ُ‫ْال َو ْق ل‬
ُ‫صبلیا‬ َ ُ َُ‫ال ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُفل ْی لُه ُاَُنَّه ُلَوُْ ُ َکان‬ ُ‫ار ُ َح ل‬ ُ‫صُفَةُ ُذللكَُ ُ ْالج ُْز لُء ُ َُو ُبَیَانُ ُال ْعتلبَ ل‬ ‫َوی ْعتَبَر ل‬
ُُ‫ت ُم ْسللما‬ ْ ْ
ُ‫ل ُال َوق ل‬ ‫ا‬
ُ‫ی ُُ َّو ل‬ ‫ا‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ی ُذللكَُ ُالج ُز لُء ُُوُْ ُ َکانَُ ُ َکافلراُ ُفل‬ ْ ُْ ‫ت ُبَاللغا ُفل‬ ْ
ُ‫ل ُال َوق ل‬ْ ُ‫ی ُُا َّو ل‬
ُْ ‫فل‬
َُُ‫ی ُذللك‬َ ُْ ‫ت ُطا لُه َُرةُ ُفل‬ َ ْ ْ
ُ‫ل ُال َُوق ل‬ ‫ا‬
ُ‫ی ُ َّو ل‬ َ ‫ا‬ ‫ا‬
ُْ ‫ی ُذللكَُ ُالج ُز لُء ُُوْ َکانَُ ُ َحائلضاُ ُُوُْ ُنف َساُ َُء ُفل‬ ْ ْ َ ُْ ‫فل‬
ُ‫ی ُا لخ لُر‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ث ُاالاُهللُیَ لُة ُفل‬ َ
ُ‫ت ُالصَّلوُةُ ُ َوعَلیُ ُهُذا ُ َج لمیْعُ ُص َو لرحدوْ ل‬ ُ‫ْالج ُز لُء ُ َو َجبَ ل‬
ْ
ُُْ‫ث ُ َحیْضُ ُُاوُْ ُنلفَاسُ ُُاوُْ ُجنوْ نُ ُم ْستَوْ لعبُ ُُاو‬ َُ ‫ن ُیَحْ د‬ ُْ ‫س ُبلُا‬ُ‫ت ُ َو َعلَی ُ ْال َع ْک ل‬ ُ‫ْال َو ْق ل‬
ُ‫ل‬ُ‫ی ُاُ َّو ل‬ ُْ ‫ت ُ َع ْنهُ ُالصَّلوُةُ ُ َولَوْ َکانَُُم َسافلراُ ُفل‬ ُْ َ‫ی ُذللكَُ ُ ْالج ُْز لُء ُ َسقَط‬ ُْ ‫ال ْغ َماءُ ُم ْمتَدُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫ل ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ ُ‫ی ُاُ َّو ل‬ ُْ ‫صلی ُاَرْ بَعاُ ُ َُو ُلَوُْ ُ َکانَُ ُمقلیْماُ ُفل‬ َ ‫ی ُا لخ لر لُہ ُی‬ ُْ ‫ت ُمقلیْماُ ُفل‬ ُ‫ْال َو ْق ل‬
ُ‫صلیُ َر َک َعتَ ْی ل‬
‫ن‬ َ ‫یُا لخ لر لُہُی‬ ُْ ‫م َسافلراُُفل‬
Thereafter (after it has been established that the first portion
of the time is the Sabab for Salaah being Waajib) there are
two methods (in which the remaining time is also a Sabab).
One of these methods is that the Sabab transfers from the
first portion to the second portion, when Salaah has not
been performed in the first portion and then to the third
and the forth until the last portion of the time (if the Salaah
has not been performed) where Salaah being Waajib will
remain. The condition of the person in that (last) time will
be considered as well as the condition of that (last) time.
What is meant by the condition of the person will be

considered in that (last) time is that if a person was
296
Usool Shaashi
immature (not reached puberty) in the first portion but
became mature in that (last) portion or if a person was
Kaafir in the first portion and then accepted Islaam in
that(last) portion or was in a state of Haidh or Nifaas in the
first portion but became pure in that (last) portion, then
Salaah will be Waajib upon them (Salaah will be Waajib on
the child who reached puberty, Kaafir who accepted Islaam, or
woman in Haidh or Nifaas who attained purity in the last
portion of the Salaah time). In a similar manner will all the
cases wherein a person became capable of Salaah in the last
portion be dealt with (Salaah will be Waajib on them if they
were able to perform Salaah in the last portion) and the
opposite as well, whereby a woman's Haidh or Nifaas
begins, or a person goes insane for longer than a day and
night, or unconscious for the remaining period of that last
time, in the last portion such that Salaah will not be Waajib
on them.
If a person was a traveller in the first portion of the time

and a resident in the last portion of the time, then he will
read four Raqaats of Salaah (he will not shorten his salaah)
and if he was a resident in the first portion of the time and
a traveller in the last portion, then he will read two Raqaats
of Salaah (he will make Qasr, that is shorten his Salaah).
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫ن ُ َکانَُ ُ َکا لمالُ ُتَقَر ََّر ل‬ ُْ ‫ن ُ َذللكَُ ُ ْالج ُْزءُ ُال‬ َُّ ُ‫صُفَ لُة ُذُللكَُ ُ ْالج ُْز لُء ُا‬ ‫ار ُ ل‬ ُ‫َُو ُبَیَانُ ُال ْعتلبَ ل‬
ْ
ُ‫ت ُال َمکروْ ُهَ لُة‬ْ ُ‫الاوْ قَا ل‬ َ
ُ ‫َن ُالع ُْه َُد لُة ُبلادَائل ُهَا ُفلی ُا‬ ْ ُ‫الَ ُیَخرجُ ُع ل‬ ْ ُ َ‫ْال َو لظ ْیُفَةُ ُ َکا لمُلَةُ ُف‬
ُُ‫صیْرُ ُ ْال َو ْقت‬ ‫ت ُفلی ُ ْالفَ َج لُر ُ َکا لملُ ُ َُو ُالنَّ َما ُیَ ل‬ ُ‫ن ُا لخ َُر ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ َُّ ‫َو لمثَالُه ُفل ْی َما ُیقَالُ ُال‬
ُ‫ف‬ُ‫اجبُ ُبل َوصْ ل‬ ‫ت ُفَیَتَقَرَّرُ ُ ْال َو ل‬ُ‫ج ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ُ‫ك ُبَ ْع َُد ُخروْ ل‬ ُ‫ع ُال َّش ْم ل‬
َُ ‫س ُ َُو ُ َذلل‬ ُ‫اسداُ ُبلطلوْ ل‬ ‫فَ ل‬
ُ‫الَ ُی ْم لکنُه‬ َّ
ُ ُ ‫ل ُالفَرْ ضُ ُالُنه‬ ْ َ
َُ ‫صلَوُ لُة ُبَط‬ َّ ‫ی ُاَثنَا لُء ُال‬ْ َّ َ
ُْ ‫ال ُفَا ل َذا ُطلَ َُع ُالش ْمسُ ُفل‬ ُ‫ْال َک َم ل‬
ُُ‫ت ُ َُو ُلَوُْ ُ َکانَُ ُ َذللكَُ ُ ْالج ُْزء‬ ُ‫ار ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬
ُ‫ان ُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬ ُ‫ص ل‬ َ ‫ف ُالن ْق‬ ُ‫الَّ ُبل َوصْ ل‬ ُ ‫صلَوُ لُة ُال‬َّ ‫ال ْت َمامُ ُال‬
ُ‫س‬ُ‫ار ُال َّش ْم ل‬ ُ‫ت ُ َو ْقتُ ُالحْ لم َر ل‬ ُ‫ن ُا لخ َُر ُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ َُّ ‫صلو لُة ُ ْال َعصْ لُر ُفَا ل‬ َ ُ‫ی‬ ُْ ‫نَاقلصاُ ُ َک َما ُفل‬
ْ
ُُ‫ب ُالقَوْ ل‬ َُ ‫ان ُ َُو ُللهُ َذا ُ َو َج‬
ُ‫ص ل‬ ْ
َ ‫صُفَ لُة ُالنق‬ ‫ت ُال َو لظ ْیُفَةُ ُبل ل‬ ْ ُ‫اسدُ ُفَتَقر ََّر ل‬ ‫َو ْال َو ْقتُ ُ لع ْندَہ ُفَ ل‬
ُ‫ازُ لع ْن َُدہُ َم َُعُفَ َسا لُدُ ْال َو ْق ل‬
‫ت‬ ُ‫بل ْال َج َو ل‬
297
Usool Shaashi
What is meant by the condition of that (last) time will be

considered is that if the last portion of time is Kaamil (that
is it is not defective) then the Salaah will become Waajib on
a person Kaamil (without defect) and a person will not be
absolved from it by performing it in prohibited times
(Makruh time). An example of this is what has been said that
the last portion of time for Fajr Salaah is Kaamil and it
becomes defective as the sunrises, which is after the time of
Fajr has passed, thus Fajr Salaah becomes Waajib on a
person (who has not performed it as yet) Kaamil. Therefore if
the sun rises while he is performing Salaah then the Salaah
will be invalid because it is not possible to perform the
Salaah except with defect as the time is defective (and since
the Salaah became Waajib on hi Kaamil it has to be performed
Kaamil).
If the last portion of time is defective, such as in Salaatul

Asr (whereby the last portion in which Asr may be read is
defective) because it is the time when the sun reddens,
which is a defective time, then the Salaah becomes Waajib
with defect, therefore it becomes incumbent to say that
(Asr) Salaah in this time is permissible with defect.
The second method
ُ‫الَُعَلیُُطَ لری ل‬
ُ‫ْق‬ ُ ُُ‫تُ َسبَبا‬ُ‫نُاَجْ زَ ا لُءُ ْال َو ْق ل‬ ُْ ‫لُکلُُج ُْزءُُ لم‬ َُ ‫یُاُنُی َج َع‬ ُْ ‫َوالطَّ لریْقُُالثَّانل‬
ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْلزَمُ ُعَلی‬ ُ‫ال ُال َّسبَبلُی َّ لُة ُالثَّابلُتَ لُة ُبلال َّشرْ ل‬
ُ ‫ع ُ َو‬ َُ ْ‫ن ُ ْالقَو‬
ُ‫ل ُبل لُه ُقَوْ لُ ُبلا ل ْبطَ ل‬ ُ‫اال ْنتلقَ ل‬
َُّ ‫ال ُفَا ل‬ ‫ل‬
ْ ْ ْ ْ
ُُ‫ی ُالنَّ َما ُُاثبَتَُ ُ َعیْنَُ ُ َما ُاَثبَتَهُ ُالج ُزء‬ َّ ْ ْ
ُْ ‫ن ُالج ُز َُء ُالثانل‬ َُّ ‫ب ُفَا ل‬ُ‫اج ل‬ ْ
‫َضاعفُ ُال َو ل‬ َ ‫ُهَ َذا ُت‬
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ ْ
ُْ ‫ل ُ َُو ُ َکث َُر لُة ُالشهُوْ لُد ُفل‬ ْ
ُ‫ف ُال لعلَ ل‬ ُ‫ب ُت ََراد ل‬ ُ‫ن ُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫االاُ َّولُ ُفَ َکانَُ ُفَهُ َذا ُ لم‬
ُ‫ْالخصوْ َما ل‬
‫ت‬
The second method (in which the remaining time is also the
Sabab) is making each portion of the time a Sabab (all at
once) and not by transferring (the Sabab from one portion to
298
Usool Shaashi
the next) because saying that the Sabab transfers from
portion to the next is claiming that the portion which the
Shari'ah has made the Sabab is not the Sabab (as once it
transfers to the next portion, it would mean that the previous
portion is no longer the Sabab whereas the Shari'ah has made
it the Sabab). (If someone were to object by saying that this
method makes multiple Salaah Waajib as in this case each
portion makes a Salaah Waajib, we would say) This does not
make multiple Salaah Waajib (in that time) because the
second portion establishes exactly what was established in
the first portion (and not another Salaah), thus it will be the
same as claiming that one ruling ahs many Illat (which will
not necessitate there being many rulings) and the same as
having many witnesses to one case.
The Sabab for fasting and Zakaat
ُ‫ب ُالصَّوْ لُم ُشهُوْ دُ ُال َّش ُْه لُر ُللت ََوج لُه ُ ْال لخطَا ل‬
ُ‫ب ُ لع ْن َُد ُشهُوْ لُد ُال َّش ُْه لُر‬ ُ‫َو َسبَبُ ُوجوْ ل‬
َّ
ُُْ‫بُالنا لمیُُ َحقل ْیقَةُُاُو‬ ُ‫صا ل‬ ْ َّ
َ ‫بُالز َکوُ لُةُ لمُلكُُالن‬ َ
ُ‫ضاُفَ لُةُالصَّوْ لُمُالل ْی لُهُ َو َسبَبُُوجوْ ل‬ َ ‫َوال‬
‫بُاالادَا لُء‬ُ‫یُبَا ل‬
ُْ ‫ْجیْلُُفل‬ َّ
‫بُ َجازَُُالتع ل‬ ُ‫ح ْکماُُ َُوُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬
ُ‫ارُوجوْ لُدُال َّسبَ ل‬
The Sabab for fasting being Waajib is the coming of the

month of Ramadaan because the instruction to fast applies
then and fasting has been affixed to it (the fast of this month
are called 'Soumu Ramadaan', which indicate that it is the
Sabab).
The Sabab for Zakaat being Waajib is having possession of

the growing wealth (wealth which increase in value) whether
in Haqeeqat (such as stock for trade) or Hukman (such as
gold and silver) and when the Sabab is present then prior
fulfilment is permissible (if a person has possession of
growing wealth then he may pay the Zakaat due on it before a
year passes).
299
Usool Shaashi
The Sabab for Hajj
ُ‫ار ْال َو لظ ْیُفَ لُة ُفلی‬ ُ‫الضافَتل لُه ُاللَی ُ ْالبَ ْی ل‬

‫ت ُ َُو ُ َع ْد لُمُتَ ْک َر ل‬ َ ُُ‫ب ُ ْال َحجُ ُاَ ْلبَیْت‬ ُ‫َو َسبَبُ ُوجوْ ل‬
ُ‫ج لُة‬
َُّ ‫َن ُ َح‬ ُْ ‫ع لُة ُیَنوْ بُ ُذُللكَُ ُع‬ َُ ‫ْل ُوجوْ لُد ُاال ْستلطَا‬ َُ ‫ج ُقَب‬ َُّ ‫ْالع ْم لُر َو َعلَیُ ُهُ َذا ُلَوُْ ُ َح‬
ُ‫ب ُلل َع ْد لُم‬
ُ‫صا ل‬ َ ‫ْل ُوجوْ لُد ُالن‬ َُ ‫ق ُاَدَاءُ ُال َّز َکوُ لُة ُقَب‬ َ َ‫ب ُ َوبل لُه ُف‬
َُ ‫ار‬ ُ‫اال ْسالَ لُم ُللوجوْ لُد ُال َّسبَ ل‬
ُ‫ال َّسبَ ل‬
‫ب‬
The Sabab for Hajj being Waajib is the Ka'abah because of

Hajj being affixed to it (the act of Hajj is referred to as
"Hajjul Bait") and the fact that it is Waajib only once in a
life time (which indicates that the Sabab is singular and
occurs once, which is the Ka'abah). Based upon this (that the
Sabab for Haaj being Waajib is the Ka'abah) if a person
performs Hajj before having the (financial) ability to do so
then this will suffice for his Fardh Hajj because the Sabab
(for the Hajj being Waajib) is present.
This (Hajj sufficing for Fardh Hajj even if one did not have the
financial ability because of the Sabab being present)
differentiates it from payment of Zakaat before having
possession of the wealth, because (in this instance of Zakaat)
the Sabab is not present.
Sabab for Sadaqaatul Fitr
ُ‫ب‬ُ‫ار ُال َّسبَ ل‬ َُ ‫ط لُر ُ َر ْاسُ ُیَموْ نُه ُ َُو ُیَلل‬

ُ‫ی ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُ َُو ُبلا ل ْعتلبَ ل‬ ْ ‫ص َدُقَ لُة ُ ْالفل‬
َ ُ‫ب‬ ُ‫َو َسبَبُ ُوجوْ ل‬
ُ‫ب ُ ْالع ْش لُر‬
ُ‫ط لُر ُ َُو ُ َسبَبُ ُوجوْ ل‬ ْ ‫ْل ُیَوْ لُم ُ ْالفل‬ َُ ‫حتی ُ َجازَُ ُاَدَائ ُهَا ُقَب‬ َُ ُ ُ‫ْجیْل‬ ‫یَجوْ زُ ُالتَّع ل‬
ُُ‫ضی‬ ‫اج ُاالاُ َرا ل‬ ُ‫ب ُ ْال لخ َر ل‬ ُ‫اضیُ ُالنَّا لمُیَةُ ُبل َحقل ْیُقَ لُة ُال َّری لُْع ُ َو َسبَبُ ُوجوْ ل‬ ‫اَالاُ َر ل‬
ُُ‫ب ُ ْالوضوُْ لُء ُاَلصَّلوة‬ ُ‫َت ُنَا لمُیَةُ ُح ْکما ُ َُو ُ َسبَبُ ُوجوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫ع لُة ُفَ َکان‬ َُ ‫حةُ ُللل َّز َرا‬ َُ ‫الصَّالل‬
ُ ‫صلَوُةُ ُ َو‬
َُ‫ال‬ َّ ‫ت ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُال‬ ُْ َ‫ن ُ َو َجب‬ ُْ ‫ب ُ ْالوضؤُ ُ لعلی ُ َم‬ َُ ‫ْض ُ َو ُللهُ َذا ُ َو َج‬ ُ‫لع ْن َُد ُ ْالبَع ل‬
ُُ‫ال ُ ْالبَعْضُ ُ َسبَبُ ُوجوْ بل لُه ُ ْال َحدَث‬ َُ َ‫صلَوُ ُةَ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُ َُو ُق‬َ ُ َ‫ال‬ ُ ُ‫ن‬ ُْ ‫وضؤَُ ُعَلی ُ َم‬
ُ‫َن ُم َح َّمدُؒ ُ َذللكَُ ُنَصا ُ َُو ُ َسبَب ُ َُو‬ ُْ ‫ی ُع‬ َُ ‫صلَوُ لُة ُ ُشَرْ طُ ُ َُو ُقَ ُْد ُر لو‬ َّ ‫َووجوْ بُ ُال‬
ْ َ
ُ‫ْلُال َحیْضُُ َوالنفاسُُ َوال َجنَاُبَة‬ ْ َ ُ‫بُ ْالغس ل‬ ُ‫وجوْ ل‬
300
Usool Shaashi
The Sabab for Sadaqaatul Fitr being Waajib is the

presence of the person whose expenses he bears and those
under him (on the day of Eid) and as a result of the Sabab
(being present) it is permissible to pay the Sadaqaatul Fitr
before the day of Eid.
The Sabab of Ushr1 being Waajib is the land being

productive (that is it yields a produce).
The Sabab of Khiraaj being Waajib is that the land must

be fertile for cultivation, which will result in it being
termed productive.
The Sabab for Wudhu being Waajib is Salaah, according to

some, because of which Wudhu is Waajib upon those whom
Salaah is Waajib upon and Wudhu is not Waajib n those
upon whom Salaah is not Waajib upon. Some are of the
opinion that the Sabab for Wudhu being Waajib is being in
a state of lesser impurity (Hadath) and the Salaah being
Waajib is a condition 9for Wudhu being Waajib, thus it will
become Waajib when the condition is fulfilled)., which has
been reported to be the opinion of Imaam Muhammed .
The Sabab for Ghusal being Waajib is being in a state of

Haidh, Nifaas and Janaabat (being in a state of higher
impurity).
Prevention of the Illat and ruling
ُ ‫فصل‬
ُ‫اضیُُاال َمامُُاُبوُُْزَ یْدُُاَ ْل َم َوانلعُُاَرْ بَ َُعةُُاَ ْق َسامُُ َمانلعُُیَ ْمنَعُُال ْن لعقَا َُدُال لعُل لُةُ َُو‬
َّ ْ ‫الُ ْالقَ ل‬ َُ َ‫ق‬
ْ
ُُ‫َمانلعُ ُیَ ْمنَعُ ُتَ َما َم ُهَا ُ َُو ُ َمانلعُ ُیَ ْمنَعُ ُال ْبتلدَا َُء ُالح ْک لُم ُ َُو ُ َمانلعُ ُیَ ْمنَعُ ُد ََوا َُمه ُن لَظیْر‬
1
Ushr is a tax on the produce of land and Khiraaj is a land tax.
301
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ف‬ُ‫صر ل‬ َ َّ‫ن ُ َع َد َُم ُ ْال َم َحلُیَ لُة ُیَ ْمنَعُ ُال ْن لعقَا َُد ُالت‬ َُّ ‫ل ُبَیْعُ ُ ْالحرُ ُ َُو ُ ْال َم ْیُتَ لُة ُ َُو ُال َّد لُم ُفَا ل‬ ُ‫الا َّو ل‬ُ‫ا‬
ُُ‫ق ُیَ ْمنَع‬ ْ ْ َّ
َُ ‫ن ُالتعللی‬ َّ َ ْ
ُ ‫ت ُ لعن َدنَا ُفا ل‬ َ ْ ْ َّ َ
ُ‫لعُلةُ ُالفا َُد لُة ُالحک لُم ُ َوعَلیُ ُهُذا ُ َسائلرُ ُالتعللیقا ل‬ ْ ْ َ َّ
ُ َُُ‫طُ َعلَیُ َماُذکَرْ نَاہُُ َولل ُهَذاُلوُُْ َحلف‬
َُ‫ال‬ َ َ َ َ ُ‫لُوجوْ لُدُال َّشرْ ل‬ َُ ‫فُ لعُلَّةُُقَُْب‬ ُ‫صر ل‬ َ َّ‫ال ْن لعقَا َُدُالت‬
ُ‫الَُیَحْ نَث‬ ُ ُ‫ار‬ ُ‫لُال َّد ل‬ ُ‫قُال ْم َراتل لُهُبلدخوْ ل‬ َُ َ‫قُطَال‬ َُ َّ‫یطَلقُُال ْم َرُاُتَهُفَ َعل‬
Qaadhi Abu Zaid says that prevention can occur in four
ways;
1- Prevention of the Illat from occurring.
2- Prevention of the Illat from completing.
3- Prevention of the ruling from applying from inception.
4- Prevention of the ruling from applying perpetually.
An example of the first (prevention of the Illat from

occurring) is the sale of a free person, carrion and blood.
The reason for this is these items not being objects of sale
(they cannot be bought or sold) prevents the Illat from
occurring (which is offering to sell and acceptance) which in
turn prevents the ruling (of change of ownership) from
applying. In a similar manner (also examples of this type of
prevention) are all conditional statements according to us
(Hanafi scholars) because conditional statements prevent
the occurrence of the illat for the ruling before the
condition is fulfilled (it only becomes Illat once the condition
is met), as we have mentioned previously (under the
discussion of whether the ruling of a conditional statement
applies immediately or not). This is why if a person takes an
oath that he will not divorce his wife and then gives a
Talaaq conditional on entry (where he says, "You are
divorced if you enter the house"), his oath will not break (as
the Talaaq does apply till the condition is met).
302
Usool Shaashi
ُ‫ن‬
ُ‫ْنُ َع ل‬ ُ‫یُُاَ ْثُنَا لُءُ ْال َحوْ ل‬
ُ‫لُ َُوُال ْمتلنَاعُُاَ َح لُدُال َّشا لُه َدی ل‬ ُْ ‫بُفل‬ َ ‫یُهَالَكُُالن‬
ُ‫صا ل‬ ُْ ‫َو لمثَالُُالثَّانل‬
ْ ‫ال َّش ُهَا َُد لُةُ َو َردُُ َش‬
‫ط لُرُ ْال َع ْق لُد‬
An example of the second (prevention of the Illat from
completing) is loss of the Nisaab (amount which makes Zakaat
Waajib) during the course of the year (as having the Nisaab
is the illat for Zakaat being Waajib and possessing it for a full
year completes it) and refusal of one of the two witnesses to
testify (testimony is the illat for establishing the right of
another and is complete with the testimony of two) and
declining to purchase (ownership is established in a sales
transaction by proposal to purchase and acceptance and is
completed with the acceptance of the buyer).
ُ ‫بُ ْالع ْذ لُر‬

ُ‫اح ل‬
‫ص ل‬َ ُُ‫یُ َحق‬ ُ‫ارُ َوبَقَاءُُ ْال َو ْق ل‬
ُْ ‫تُفل‬ ُ‫طُ ْال لخیَ ل‬
ُ‫ثُاَ ْلبَیْعُُبلشَرْ ل‬
ُ‫َو لمثَالُُالثَّالل ل‬
An example of the third (prevention of the ruling from
applying from inception) is a sales transaction with the right
to cancel or approve the transaction (the illat which
establishes ownership is complete by proposal and acceptance
but ownership will not apply from inception because of the
right to cancel or approve the transaction) and time
remaining for one who is excused (from Tahaarat, the ruling
of Wudhu breaking is prevented from applying as long as the
time for that Salaah remains).
ُْ ‫ق ُ َوالر ْؤُیَ لُة ُ َو َعد لَُم ُ ْال َکفَاُئَ لُة ُ َواال ْن لد َمالُ ُفل‬
ُ‫ی‬ ُ‫غ ُ َو ْال لع ْت ل‬
ُ‫َو لمثَالُ ُالرَّابل لُع ُ لخیَارُ ُ ْالبلوْ ل‬
ُ‫الاصْ ل‬
‫ل‬ ُ ‫تُعَلیُهُ َذاُا‬ ُ‫احا ل‬ َ ‫ج َر‬ َُ ‫بُ ْال‬
ُ‫بَا ل‬
An example of the fourth (Prevention of the ruling from
applying perpetually) is Khiyaar Buloogh1 (the ruling of
Nikaah applies but does not remain perpetually as once the
1
Khiyaar Buloogh:- If the Nikaah of an immature child was performed by someone other than
the father or grandfather then once the child reaches Puberty he will have the right to annul the
Nikaah.
303
Usool Shaashi
child reaches puberty then she may have the Nikaah annulled),
Khiyaar Itq1 (the ruling of Nikaah applies but does not remain
perpetually as when the slave is set free, she may have the
Nikaah annulled), Khiyaar Ru'yat2 (ownership is established
but does not remain perpetually as once the buyer sees the item
he may cancel the transaction), lack of compatibility (the
ruling of Nikaah applies but the representatives of the bride
she may have the Nikaah annulled) and if the wound heals
(the ruling of Diyyah applies but is lifted once the wound
heals).
ُ َ ُ‫ن‬
ُ‫ال‬ ُْ ‫لُ َم‬ ُ‫ْصُ ْال لعُلَّ لُةُال َّشرْ لعُیَّ لُةُفَا َ َّماُعَلیُُقَوْ ل‬ُ‫صی ل‬ ‫ازُُت َْخ ل‬ ُ‫ارُ َج َو ل‬ ُ‫َوُهُ َذاُعَلیُُال ْعتلبَ ل‬
ُ‫یص ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُفَ ْال َمانلعُ ُ لع ْندَہ ُثَلُثَةُ ُاَ ْق َسامُ ُ َمانلعُ ُیَ ْمنَعُ ُال ْبتلدَا َُء‬ ُ‫ص ل‬ ‫از ُت َْخ ل‬ ُ‫یَ ْقوْ لُ ُبل َج َو ل‬
ُ‫ام ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة‬
ُ‫ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ َو َمانلعُ ُیَ ْمنَعُ ُتَ َما َم ُهَا ُ َُو ُ َمانلعُ ُیَ ْمنَعُ ُد ََوا َُم ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُ َُو ُاَ َّما ُ لع ْن َُد ُتَ َم ل‬
ُ‫ت‬ُ‫الَُم َحاُلَ ُةَُ َُوُعَلیُُهُذاُکلُُ َماُ َج َعلَهُُ ْالفَ لریْقُُ ْاالَ َّولُُ َمانلعاُللثبوْ ل‬ ُ ُ‫فَیَ ْثبتُُ ْالح ْک َُم‬
ُُ‫ل ُیَدوْ ر‬ ُ‫ام ُ ْال لعُلَّ لُة ُ َُو ُعَلیُ ُهُذا ُ ْاالَصْ ل‬ ُ‫ی ُ َمانلعا ُللتَ َم ل‬ُْ ‫ْالح ْک لُم ُ َج َعلَهُ ُ ْالفَ لریْقُ ُالثَّانل‬
ُ‫ْال َکالَمُُبَیْنَُُ ْالفَ لر ْیقَ ْی ل‬
‫ن‬
This (division of the types of prevention) is based on
considering 'Takhseesul Illat' (acceptance of the principle
that the Illat will be present but the ruling may not apply) but
if you do not accept 'Takhseesul Illat' then prevention will
be of three types;
1- Prevention of the Illat from beginning.
2- Prevention of the Illat from completing.
3- Prevention of the ruling from applying perpetually.
1
Khiyaar itq:- A married slave will have the right to annul the Nikaah when they are set free.
2
Khiyaar Ru'yat:- If a person purchases something without seeing it, the he will have the right
to either cancel or approve the transaction when he sees it.
304
Usool Shaashi
As far as when the illat is complete is concerned, the ruling
will apply without a doubt. In this manner whatever the
first group has made an example of prevention of the ruling
the second group has made an example of the Illat being
incomplete. On this principle (that the second group has
incorporated the third type into the second) the opinions vary
between the two groups.
Fardh and Waajib
ُُ‫الَ ُیَحْ تَ لمل‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ع ُمقَ َّد َراتُه ُبل َحیْث‬ ُ‫ضاتُ ُُال َّشرْ ل‬ َ ْ‫اَ ْلفَرْ ضُ ُل َُغةُ ُهُ َُو ُالتَّ ْق لدیْرُ ُ َُو ُ َم ْفرو‬
ُ‫الَ ُش ْب ُهَ ُةَ ُفل ْی لُه ُ َُو‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ط لعی‬ ْ َ‫ع ُ َما ُثَبَتَُ ُبل َدللیلُ ُق‬ ُ‫ی ُال َّشرْ ل‬ ُْ ‫صانَُ ُ َُو ُفل‬ َ ‫الزیَا َُد ُةَ ُ َُو ُالن ْق‬
ُ‫ی ُ َما‬ ُْ ‫اال ْعتلقَا لُد ُبل لُه َُو ْالوجوْ بُ ُهُ َُو ُالسقوْ طُ ُیَ ْعنل‬ ُ‫ح ْکمُه ُلزوْ مُ ُ ْال َع َم ل‬
‫ل ُبل لُه ُ ُ َُو ُ ْ ل‬
ُُ‫االضْ لط َراب‬ ‫الو َجُبَ لُة ُ َُو ُهُ َُو ُ ْ ل‬
َ ُ َُ‫ْل ُهُ َُو ُ لمن‬َُ ‫ار ُ لم ْنهُ ُ َوقلی‬ ُ ‫یَسْقطُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْال َع ْب لُد ُبل‬
ُ‫الَ ُال ْختلیَ ل‬
ُُ‫ارُفَرْ ضا‬ َُ ‫ص‬ َ َ‫لُف‬ ُ‫ضُ َُوُالنَّ ْف ل‬ ُ‫ُٗمضْ طَ لرباُُبَیْنَُُ ْالفَرْ ل‬ ُ‫اجبُُْبلذللكَُُلل َکوْ نل له ل‬ ‫یُ ْال َو ل‬َُ ‫سم‬
ْ
ُ‫الَ ُیَلزَ منَا‬ ُ َ‫اال ْعتلقَا لُد ُف‬ ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُ ل‬ ْ
ُْ ‫الَ ُیَجوْ زُ ُتَرْ کُه ُ َُو ُنَفالُ ُفل‬ ُ ُ ‫ل ُ َحتی‬ ْ
ُ‫ی ُ َحقُ ُال َع َم ل‬ ُْ ‫فل‬
َ
ُ‫ٗ ُهُ َُو ُ َما ُثبَت ُبل َدللیْلُ ُفل ْی لُه ُش ْب ُهَةُ ُ َکاالُیَ لُة‬ ُ‫ع ل‬ َّ ْ
‫اال ْعتلقَادُ ُبل لُه ُ َجزماُ ُ َُو ُفلی ُالشرْ ل‬
َ ْ
ُ‫ص لحیْحُُ لمنَُُاال َحا لُدُ َُوُحکمُهُ َماُذکَرْ نَا‬ َّ ‫ْالم اُو َّوُلَ لُةُ َُوُال‬
The dictionary meaning of Fardh is to stipulate and the

Faraaidh (plural of Fardh) of Shari'ah is what it has
stipulated such that it cannot be increased or decreased (but
exactly what the Shari'ah has stipulated is compulsory to
fulfil), in Shari'ah, Fardh refers to whatever has been
established by convincing proof, which has no doubt in it.
The ruling of Fardh is that it is obligatory to act upon it
and believe in it (such that if a person denies its incumbency,
he will be out of the fold of Islaam).
The dictionary meaning of Waajib is fall, that is it (Waajib)

fell on to a person without his choice. It has also been said
that it is derived from 'ُ‫' َو َجبَ لة‬, which means undecided.
Waajib has been called Waajib because it is undecided
305
Usool Shaashi
between being Fardh and Nafl, thus it is regarded as Fardh
as far as practice is concerned (it is compulsory to practice
upon it) such that it is impermissible to discard it, and Nafl
as far as belief is concerned such that it is not incumbent
upon us to believe it to be certain (whereby the one who
denies will not be out of the fold of Islaam). In Shari'ah,
Waajib is that which has been established by proof which
has a slight amount of uncertainty, such as verses which
have been interpreted (the derived meaning is a result of
Ta'weel)and Saheeh Ahaadeeth and the ruling of Waajib is
what we have already mentioned (it is compulsory to
practice upon but one who denies it's incumbency will not cast
out of the fold of Islaam).
Sunnat and Nafl
ُُ‫ْن ُ َس َواء‬ ُ‫ب ُالدی ل‬ ُ‫ی ُبَا ل‬ ‫َن ُالطَّ لر ْیُقَ لُة ُ ْال َمسْلوْ َُک لُة ُ ْال َمرْ ل‬
ُْ ‫ضُیَّ لُة ُفل‬ ُ‫ارةُ ُع ل‬ َُ َ‫َُو ُالسُنَّةُ ُ لعب‬
ُ‫ی‬ُْ ‫ٗبسنَّتل‬ ُ‫الُ َعلَ ْی لُهُال َّسالَمُ َعلَیْک ُْمُ ل‬
َُ َ‫َّحاُبَ لُةُق‬ َ ‫للالُﷺُُاوُُْ لمنَُُالص‬ ُ ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫نُ َرسوْ ل‬ ُْ ‫َکان‬
ُْ ‫َتُ لم‬
ُُ‫بُ ْال َمرُْء‬ َُ َ‫نُیطَال‬ ُْ ‫اج ُْذُ َوح ْکمهُاُُا‬ ‫نُبَ ْع لدیُُْعَضوْ اُ َعلَ ْی ُهَاُبلالنَّ َو ل‬ ُْ ‫َوسُنَّ لُةُ ْالخلَفَا لُءُ لم‬
ُ‫ن‬ُ‫ارةُ ُ َع ل‬ َُ َ‫ن ُیَ ْتر َک ُهَا ُبلع ْذرُ ُ َوالنَّ ْفلُ ُ لعب‬
ُْ ُ‫الَُّا‬ُ ‫بلالحْ یَائل ُهَاُ َُو ُیَ ْست لَحقُ ُ ْال َمالَ َُم ُةَُبلتَرْ لک ُهَا ُال‬
ُ‫الزیَا َُد لُةُ َُوُ ْال َغنل ْی َُم لُةُت َسمیُنَ ْفالُُالنَّ ُهَاُ لزیَا َُدةُُعَلیُ َماُهُ َُوُ ْال َم ْقصوْ دُُ لمنَُُ ْال لج ُهَا لُد‬
ُ‫ت ُ َوح ْکمُه‬ ُ‫اجبَا ل‬‫ض ُ َُو ُ ْال َو ل‬
ُ‫ارةُ ُ َع َّما ُهُ َُو ُ لزیَا َُدةُ ُ َعلَی ُ ْالفَ َرائل ل‬ َُ َ‫ع ُ لعب‬ُ‫َُو ُفلی ُال َّشرْ ل‬
ُ‫الَُی َعاقَبُُبلتَرْ لک لُهُ َوالن َّ ْفلُُ َُوُالتَّطَوعُُن لَظی َْرا ل‬
‫ن‬ ُ ُ‫ابُ ْال َمرُْءُُعَلیُفل ْعلل لُهُ َُو‬ َُ َ‫نُیث‬ ُْ ‫ُا‬
Sunnat refers to the preferred path adopted in matters of

Deen, whether it be the practice of Rasulullaah  or of the
Sahabah. Rasulullaah  has said, "Mu Sunnat is incumbent
upon you and the Sunnat of the Khulafaa after me, hold on
to it firmly". The ruling of Sunnat is that a person should
attempt to revive it and show contempt on its disregard
except where it is disregarded with a valid (Shar'ie) excuse.
Nafl literally means additional and the spoils of war are

referred to as Nafl because it is additional to the actual
306
Usool Shaashi
purpose of Jihaad (which is to establish the Deen of
ALLAAH). In Shari'ah, Nafl refers to those acts which are
additional to those which are Fardh and Waajib and the
ruling of Nafl is that one will be rewarded by practicing
upon it and will not be punished for disregarding it. Nafl
ِ ‫ )'تَطَ ُّو‬are the same (according to the
and 'Tathouwu'a' ('َّ‫ع‬
terminology of the Fuqahaa).
Definition of Azeemat
ُ ‫فصل‬
َ ْ
ُ‫ن ُال َعز َُم ُ َعلی‬ ْ َُّ ‫ی ُنل ُهَاُیَ لُة ُ ْالو َکا َُد لُة ُ َُو ُللهُذا ُقلنَا ُال‬
ْ َ ُْ ‫ی ُ ْالقَصْ دُ ُال َذا ُ َکانَُ ُفل‬
َُ ‫اَ ْل َع لز ْی َُمةُ ُ لُه‬
ُ‫نُی ْعتَبَ َُرُ َموْ جوْ داُُ لع ْن َُد‬ ُْ ‫ارُالُنَّهُ َک ْال َموْ جوْ لُدُفَ َجازَُُُا‬ ُ‫بُالظ ُهَ ل‬ ُ‫یُبَا ل‬ ُْ ‫ئُعَوْ دُُفل‬ ْ ‫ْال َو‬
ُ‫ط ل‬
ُ‫ارةُ ُ َع َّما‬َُ َ‫ع ُ لعب‬ ُ‫ال ُاَ ْع لزمُ ُیَکوْ نُ ُ َحاللفاُ ُ َُو ُفلی ُال َّشرْ ل‬ َُ َ‫ام ُال َّدالَُلَ لُة ُ َو ُللهُ َذا ُلَوُْ ُق‬
ُ‫قلیَ ل‬
ُ‫ی ُغَاُیَ لُة ُلل َو َکا َُدةُ ُ َسبَب ُهَا ُ َُو‬ َّ
ُْ ‫َز ْی َُمةُ ُالن ُهَا ُفل‬‫ت ُع ل‬ ْ
ُ َ‫ام ُال ْبتلدَاءُ ُسمی‬ ُ‫لَ لز َمنَا ُ لمنَُ ُاالاُحْ َک ل‬
ُُ‫ع لُة ُبلح ْک لُم ُُاُنَّه ُاللهُنَا ُ َونَحْ نُ ُ َعبلیْدہ ُ َُو ُاَ ْق َسام‬ َُ ‫ض ُالطَّا‬ َُ ‫هُ َُو ُ َکوْ نُ ُاال لم لُر ُم ْفت لَر‬
ُ‫اج ل‬
‫ب‬ ‫ضُ َُوُ ْال َو ل‬ ُ‫ْال َع لز ْی َُم لُةُ َماُ َذکَرْ نَاُ لمنَُُ ْالفَرْ ل‬
Azeemat literally means firm resolve, which is why we say
that if a person firmly resolves to indulge in sexual
relations with his spouse whom he has compared to his
blood relative is retraction (and the Kaffaarah of Thihaar will
become Waajib upon him just as if he actually indulged in
sexual relations with her) because it is the same as sexual
relations and will therefore be permissible to consider it as
perpetrated when proof for it is established. Based upon
this (that firmly resolving to do something is the same as carry
the act out) if a person says, "I firmly resolved to..." (for
example, "I firmly resolved to give you a dirham") it will be
taking an oath (and his statement will actually mean, "I take
an oath to give you a dirham", whereby Kaffaarah will be
incumbent upon him if he fails to do so). In Shari'ah, Azeemat
refers to those laws of Shari'ah which are incumbent upon
us from the beginning as they are compulsory because of
307
Usool Shaashi
their Sabab being compulsory. The Sabab of the laws of
Shari'ah is that it is compulsory to obey the One giving the
orders (i.e. ALLAAH Ta'ala) because ALLAAH is our
Master and we are His servants (and it is compulsory for the
servant to obey his master). The constituents of Azeemat is
what we have already mentioned of Fardh and Waajib.
Definition of Rukhsat
ُ‫صرْ فُ ُاالاُ ْم لُر‬ َ ُ‫ع‬ ُ‫ْر ُ َُو ُالسهُوْ ُلَ لُة ُ َُو ُفلی ُال َّشرْ ل‬ ُ‫َن ُ ْالیس ل‬ ُ‫ارةُ ُع ل‬ َُ َ‫صةُ ُفَ لعب‬َُ ‫َُو ُاَ َّما ُالر ْخ‬
ُ‫ف‬ُ‫ال ْختلالَ ل‬ ُ‫فُ َُوُاَ ْن َواع ُهَاُم ْختَللُفَةُُ ل ل‬ ُ‫اسطَُ لُةُع ْذرُُفلیُ ْالم َکلَّ ل‬ ‫نُعسْرُُاللیُیسْرُُبل َو ل‬ ُْ ‫لم‬
ُ‫ْن ُُاَ َحدهُ َما‬ ُ‫ی ُاَ ْع َذارُ ُ ْال لعبَا لُد ُ َُو ُفلی ُ ْال َعاقلُبَ لُة ُتَؤوْ لُ ُاللی ُنَوْ َعی ل‬ َُ ‫اَ ْسبَابل ُهَا ُ َُو ُ لُه‬
ُُ‫اب ُ ْال لجنَاُیَ لُة ُ َُو ُذللكَُ ُنَحْ و‬ َُ َ‫ی ُب‬ ُْ ‫ْل ُ َم َُع ُبَقَا لُء ُ ْالحرْ َُم لُة ُبل َم ْن لزُلَ لُة ُ ْال َع ْف لُو ُفل‬
ُ‫صةُ ُ ْالفلع ل‬ َُ ‫ر ْخ‬
ُُ‫اال ْک َرا لُہ ُ َُو ُ َسب‬ ُ‫ب ُ لع ْن َُد ُ ل‬ ُ‫َان ُ ْالقَ ْل ل‬
ُ‫ط لم ْین ل‬ ْ ‫ان ُ َم َُع ُال‬ ُ‫الجْ َرا لُء ُ َکلل َُم لُة ُ ْالک ْف لُر ُ َعلَی ُاللُ َس ل‬
ُ‫صبَ َُر‬ َ ُ ُْ‫س ُظ ْلماُ ُ َوح ْکمُه ُاَُنَّه ُلَو‬ ُ‫ل ُالنَّ ْف ل‬ ُ‫ال ُ ْالم ْسلل لُم ُ َوقَ ْت ل‬ ُ‫ف ُ َم ل‬ ُ‫النَّبلیُ ُﷺ ُ َُو ُال ْتالَ ل‬
ُ‫عُ َعلَ ْی لُه‬ ‫یُال َّش ل‬
ُ‫ار ل‬ ُ‫امُتَ ْع لظیْماُُللنَ ُْه ل‬ ُ‫َنُ ْال َح َر ل‬ ُ‫ال ْمتلنَا لع لُهُع ل‬ ُ‫لُیَکوْ نُُ َماجوْ راُُ ل‬ َُ ‫َحتیُقتل‬
ُ‫ل‬َُ ‫ی ُ َحق لُه ُقَا‬ ُْ ‫ْر ُمبَاحاُ ُفل‬ َُ ‫صی‬ ‫ن ُیَّ ل‬ ُْ ‫ْل ُبلُا‬ُ‫صُفَ لُة ُ ْالفلع ل‬ ‫ی ُتَ ْغیلیْرُ ُ ل‬ ُْ ‫ال َّسالَمُ ُ َوالنَّوْ عُ ُالثَّانل‬
ُ‫ل‬ُ‫صةُ ُ} ُ َُو ُذللكَُ ُنَحْ َُو ُاال ْک َرا لُہ ُعَلیُ ُاَ ْک ل‬ َُ ‫ی ُ َم ْخ َم‬ ُْ ‫ن ُاضْ ط َُّر ُفل‬ ُ‫للاُ ُتَ َعالیُ ُ{فَ َم ل‬
ُُ‫َن ُتَنَاولل لُه ُ َحتی ُیَکوْ نَُ ُاثلما‬ ُْ ‫ب ُ ْالخَ ْم لُر ُ َُو ُح ْکمُه ُاَُنَّه ُلَوُْ ُال ْمتَنَ َُع ُع‬ ُ‫ْال َم ْیُتَ لُة ُ َُو ُشرْ ل‬
‫لُنَ ْف لس لُه‬ ُ‫ارُ َکقَاتل ل‬ َُ ‫ص‬ َ ُ‫احُ َُو‬ ُ‫َنُ ْالمبَ ل‬ ُ‫بلا ل ْمتلنَا لع لُهُع ل‬
Rukhsat literally means ease and ease in Shari'ah is

changing the order from one of difficulty to ease due to a
(valid Shar'ie) excuse. The types of Rukhsat vary due to
difference in the Sabab, which is the excuse of the servant
(which warrants ease).
In punishments, Rukhsat is of two types. One type is

permission to carry out the act while it still remains
Haraam, such as forgiveness of a violent act (whereby the
violent act still remains Haraam despite being pardoned by the
victim), or similar to uttering a statement of Kufr, swearing
Nabi , destroying the property of another Muslim and
308
Usool Shaashi
killing another wrongfully all under duress, while having
Imaan in one's heart (even thought the uttering of such
statements of Kufr remain Haraam, it is permitted under
duress). The ruling (of the first type, whereby the act still
remains Haraam despite permission being granted to carry it
out) is that if the person will be patient (and not indulge in
that act) until he is killed, he will be greatly rewarded (in the
Aakhirah) because of abstaining from that which was
prohibited by Rasulullaah .
The second type is altering the characteristic of the act such

that it becomes permissible for him to carry out. ALLAAH
Ta'ala has said,
"So whoever is forced (to eat these forbidden goods) because

of starvation" (Surah Maa'idah: 3)
This (second type of Rukhsat) is like consuming carrion and

drinking wine (in dire circumstances such as starvation). The
ruling of this second type is that if he abstains from eating
until he is killed (or dies) then he will be sinful because he
abstained from that which was permissible for him, like a
person who commits suicide.
Substantiating without proof
ُ ‫فَصل‬
ْ َّ ْ
ُ‫ال ْستل ْدالَلُ ُبل َعد لَُم ُال لعُل لُة ُعَلی ُ َعد لَُم ُالح ْک لُم‬
ُ‫الَ ُ َدللیْلُ ُاَ ْن َواعُ ُ لم ْن ُهَا ُاَ ل‬
ُ ‫اَالحْ تل َجاجُ ُبل‬
ُ‫الَ ُیَ ْعتلقُ ُ َعلَی‬
ُ ُ ُ‫الاخ‬ ُ‫لمثَالُه ُاَ ْلقَئُ ُ َغیْرُ ُنَالقضُ ُالُن َّه ُلَ ُْم ُیَ ْخرجُ ُ لمنَُ ُال َّسبل ْیلَی ل‬
ُ ‫ْن ُ َُو ُا‬
‫خُالُنَّهُالَ لوالَ َُدُبَ ْینَهُ َما‬
ُ‫االاُ ل‬
Substantiating without proof is of many types; amongst

them (one method is) is substantiating that the non-existence
of the Illat results in the ruling not being present. An
example of this is (saying that) vomiting does not break
309
Usool Shaashi
Wudhu because it has not been excreted from one of the
two privates parts (since the Illat, excretion from the private
parts, is not present the ruling, that Wudhu breaks, will not
apply) and that a person becoming owner of his brother will
not result in him being set free because there is not
parentage (since one is not the parent of the other, which is
the Illat for freedom, the ruling, of the slave being set free, will
not apply).
ُ‫ی‬َُّ ‫صبل‬ َّ ‫ن ُال‬َُّ ‫ال‬ ُ ‫الَ ُ ل‬ َُ َ‫صبلیُ ُق‬

ُ ُ ‫ال‬ ُ‫صاصُ ُ َعُلَی ُ َش لری ل‬
َّ ‫ْك ُال‬ َ ‫ل ُم َح َّمدُ ُُایَ لجبُ ُ ْالقل‬ َُ ‫َوسئل‬
َ
ُ‫بُل ُْم‬ َُ ُ‫نُاالا‬ َّ
ُ ُ‫بُالا‬ ُ‫الا ل‬
ُ ‫ْكُا‬ َ
ُ‫بُعَلیُُش لری ل‬ َُ ‫نُیَ لج‬ ْ ‫ا‬
ُ ُُ‫ب‬ َ
َُ ‫الُالسَّائللُُف َو َج‬ َ َ َ ْ ْ
َُ ‫رفل َُعُ َعنهُُالقلمُُق‬
َ َ ْ ْ ْ َّ ْ
ُُ‫ارُالت َمسكُُبل َعد لَُمُال لعُل لُةُعَلیُُ َعد لَُمُالحک لُمُبل َمن لزُل لُةُ َماُیقال‬ َّ َُ ‫ص‬َ َ‫یرْ فَ ُْعُ َع ْنهُُ ْالقَلَمُُف‬
ْ ‫طُ لمنَُُالس‬
ُ‫َّط ل‬
‫ح‬ ُْ ‫الاُنَّهُلَ ُْمُیَسْق‬
ُ ُُ‫تُفالَن‬ ُْ ‫لَ ُْمُُیَم‬
(Another example of substantiating that the non-existence of
the Illat results in the ruling not being present is when) Imaam
Muhammed was asked whether there is Qisaas (death
penalty) on a person who assisted a child in murder, to
which he replied, "No (Qisaas will not be Waajib on both),
because the child is not accountable for his actions." The
questioner said, "It is proven that Qisaas will be Waajib on
the person who assisted the father (in the murder of his son)
because the father is accountable for his actions (thus just as
the Qisaas will only be Waajib on the assistant, in the above
ruling it should also only be Waajib on the assistant of the
child). (The author says) Substantiating that the non-
existence of the Illat results in the ruling not being present
(as the questioner did) is like saying that a certain person
did not die because he did not fall from the roof (whereas
there are other ways in which he could have died, thus
similarly the non-existence of the Illat does not necessarily
guarantee that the ruling will not apply, as it is possible that it
can be applied through another means).
310
Usool Shaashi
ُُ‫ی ُ َمعْنی ُفَیَکوْ نُ ُذللكَُ ُ ْال َمعْنی ُ َال لزما‬ ُْ ‫ص َُرةُ ُفل‬ ‫َت ُ لعُلَّ ُةَ ُ ْالح ْک لُم ُم ْن َح ل‬
ُْ ‫الَّ ُال َذا ُ َکان‬ ُ ‫ال‬
ُ‫ال‬ َ َّ َ
َُ ‫َنُم َح َّمدُُؒاُنهُق‬ ْ
ُ ‫یُع‬ َُ ‫لل ْلحک لُمُفیستدَلُُبلالنتلفائل لُهُعَلیُ َعد لَُمُالحک لُمُ لمثالهُُ َماُر لو‬
َ ْ ْ َ ْ َ ْ َ ْ
ُ‫اص ُ َعلَی‬ َُ ‫ص‬ ُ ُ ‫ْس ُبل َم ْغصوْ بُ ُ َُو‬
َ ‫الَ ُقل‬ َُ ‫ن ُ لالَُن َّه ُلَی‬
ُ‫ْس ُبل َمضْ موْ ل‬ َُ ‫َولَدُ ُ ْال َم ْغصوْ ُبَ لُة ُلَی‬
ُ‫ن‬ َُ ‫اصُال َذاُ َر َجعوْ اُ لالَُنَّهُلَی‬
َُّ َ‫ْسُبلقَاتللُُ َُوُذللكَُُ لال‬ ُ‫ص ل‬ َ ‫یُ َم ْسئَُلَ لُةُشهُوْ لُدُ ْالقل‬ ُْ ‫ال َّشا لُه لُدُفل‬
ُ‫اص‬
ُ‫ص ل‬ َ ‫بُ َُوُ ْالقَ ْتلُُالَ لزمُُللوجوْ لُدُ ْالقل‬ ُ‫انُ ْالغَصْ ل‬ ُ‫ض َم ل‬ َ ‫بُالَ لزمُُلل‬ َُ ْ‫ْالغَص‬
(Substantiating the non-existence of the Illat results in the
ruling not applying is substantiating without proof) Except
when the ruling is limited to that one characteristic (Illat),
whereby that characteristic is incumbent for the
application of the ruling. In such an instance it will be
correct to substantiate that the ruling does not apply when
the Illat is not present. An example of this is what has been
narrated from Imaam Muhammed that the child born
from an illegally seized slave is will not be recompensed as
it was not seized and there is no Qisaas on the witness in
the case where a witness retracts his testimony (when he
testified against someone in a murder trial) because he did
not murder anyone because illegal seizure is what makes
recompense Waajib and murder is what makes Qisaas
Waajib.
ُ ُ ُْ‫ْل ُال ُْذ ُوجوْ دُ ُال َّشئ‬

َُ‫ال‬ ُ‫ال ُتَ َمسكُ ُبل َعد لَُم ُال َّدللی ل‬ ُ‫ب ُ ْال َح ل‬ ُ‫َُو ُ َکذللكَُ ُالتَّ َمسكُ ُبلا ل ْستلصْ َحا ل‬
ُُْ‫ب ُلَو‬ُ‫زَام َوعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُ َمجْ هُوْ لُ ُالنَّ َس ل‬ ُ‫اال ْل ل‬ُ‫یوْ لجبُ ُبَقَاُئَه ُفَیَصْ لحُ ُلل ْل َّد ْف لُع ُدوْ نَُ ُ ْ ل‬
ُ‫ن‬ ُ ُ ُ‫الَ ُیَ لجبُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُاَرْ شُ ُ ْالحر‬
َُّ ‫الا‬ ُ ُ ُ‫ال َّدعی ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُاَ َحدُ ُ لرقاُ ُث َُّم ُ َجنَیُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُ لجنَاُیَة‬
ُ ‫الَُیَ ْثبتُُبل‬
ُ‫الَُ َدللیْل‬ ُ َ‫شُ ْالحرُُال ْلزَ امُُف‬ ُ‫ابُاَرْ ل‬ َُ ‫الی َْج‬
In a similar manner (as substantiating that the non-existence

of the Illat results in the ruling not being present is
substantiating without proof so too is) substantiating from
the condition of a something (in the past) is substantiating
without proof. The reason for this is that the presence of
something (for a period of time) does not necessitate its
perpetuity (that it remained like that forever), thus the
311
Usool Shaashi
condition of something (in the past) can be used to negate
but not to affirm (as it is possible that its condition changed).
Based upon this (that it can be used to negate but not to
affirm) we say that a person whose lineage is unknown is a
free person, if someone claims him to be his slave (here the
condition of his lineage being unknown is used to negate him
being a slave) and if a person then injures him (the person
whose lineage is unknown) then the punishment of having
injured a free man will not be carried out n the perpetrator
(because his condition of his lineage being unknown can only
be used to negate and not to affirm) because making the
punishment of injuring a free person is affirming (that he is
free) and this cannot be established without proof.
ُُ‫ْض ُ َولل ْل َمراُ لُة ُعَا َُدة‬ ُ‫َُو ُعَلیُ ُهُ َذا ُق ْلنَا ُال َذا ُزَ ا َُد ُال َّدمُ ُعَلیُ ُ ْال َع ْش َُر لُة ُفلی ُ ْال َحی ل‬
ُ‫ن ُال َّزائل َُد ُعَلیُ ُ ْال َعا َُد لُة‬ َُّ ‫الا‬ َُ ‫َّام ُعَا َدتل ُهَا ُ َُو ُال َّزائلدُ ُال ْستل َح‬
ُ ُ ُ‫اضة‬ ُ‫ت ُاللیُ ُاُی ل‬ُْ ‫َمعْروْ ُفَةُ ُر َّد‬
ُ‫ْنُ َج لمیْعاُفَلَوُُْ َح َک ْمنَا‬ ُ‫لُاالاُ ْم َری ل‬ َُ ‫ض لُةُفَاحْ تَ َم‬ َُ ‫ْضُ َُوُبلد لَُمُاال ْستل َحا‬ ُ‫لُبلد لَُمُ ْال َحی ل‬ َ َّ‫الت‬
َُ ‫ص‬
ُ‫غ‬ُ‫ت ُ َم َُع ُ ْالبلوْ ل‬ ُْ ُ‫الَ ُ َدللیْلُ ُ َُو ُ َک َذللكَُ ُال َذا ُا ْبتَ َدا‬ ُ ‫ض ُ ْال َعا َُد لُة ُلَ لز َمنَا ُ ْال َع َملُ ُبل‬ ُ‫بلنَ ْق ل‬
ُ‫اض ُةَ ُفَلَوُْ ُ َح َک ْمنَا‬ َُ ‫اال ْستل َح‬ َُ ‫ْضت ُهَا ُ َع َش َُرةُ ُُتَحْ تَ لملُ ُ ْال َحی‬
‫ْض ُ َُو ُ ْ ل‬ َ ‫ضةُ ُفَ َحی‬ َُ ‫م ْست ََحا‬
ُ‫ل‬ ُ‫فُ َماُبَ ْع َُدُ ْال َع َش َُر لُةُللقلیَ ل‬
ُ‫امُال َّدلل ْی ل‬ ُ‫الَُ َدللیْلُُبل لخالَ ل‬ ُ ‫ْضُلَ لز َمنَاُ ْال َع َملُُبل‬
ُ‫اعُ ْال َحی ل‬ ُ‫بلالرْ تلفَ ل‬
‫الُت لَزیْدُُ َعلَیُ ْال َع َش َُر لُة‬ َُ ‫نُ ْال َحی‬
ُ َ ُ‫ْض‬ َُّ ُ‫عَلیُُا‬
Based upon this (that a ruling cannot be established without
proof) we say that if a woman bleeds for more than ten days
and she has a previous known habit, then (the number of
days of) her previous habit will be Haidh and the extra days
(more than her previous habit) will be Istihaadhah. The
reason for this is that the days which exceed her previous
habit consist of the blood of Haidh and Istihaadhah, having
the possibility of being either one. If we were to say that her
Habit changed then we would be cancelling her previous
habit without proof (which is impermissible as mentioned
previously).
312
Usool Shaashi
Similarly if a girl attains maturity (begins to menstruate)

with Istihaadhah (she bleeds longer than ten days the first
time she menstruates), then her period of Haidh will be ten
days (and the extra days Istihaadhah). The reason for this is
the bleeding before ten days can be Haidh or Istihaadhah
and if we were to say that Haidh ended (before ten days and
the other days are Istihaadhah) then we would be acting
without proof as opposed to (saying) the blood which
exceeds ten days (is Istihaadhah) because there is proof that
Haidh does not exceed ten days (the Hadeeth, "Haidh does
not exceed ten days").
ُُ‫ام ُ َم ْسئَُلَة‬ ُ‫اال ْلزَ ل‬
ُ‫فع ُدوْ نَُ ُ ل‬ ُ‫جةُ ُللل َّد ل‬ َُّ ‫الَّ ُح‬ َُ ‫الَ ُ َد للی‬
ُ ‫ْل ُفل ْی لُه ُال‬ َُّ ُ‫ْل ُعَلیُ ُا‬
ُ ُ‫ن‬ ُ‫َُو ُ لمنَُ ُال َّدللی ل‬
ُ َ ُ ‫ال ُفَ ْق لد لُہ‬
ُ‫ال‬ ‫ن ُاَقَ ل‬
َُ ‫اربل لُه ُ َح‬ ُْ ‫الَ ُیَ ْست لَحقُ ُ َغیْرہ ُ لمی َْراثَهُ ُ َُو ُلَوُْ ُ َماتَُ ُ لم‬ ُ ُ ‫ْال َم ْفقوْ لُد ُفانه‬
ُ ‫اال ْستلحْ قَاقُُبل‬
َُ‫ال‬ ‫الَُ َدللیْلُُ َُوُلَ ُْمُیَ ْثبتُُلَهُُ ْ ل‬
ُ ‫ْرُبل‬ُ‫یَ لرثُُهُ َُوُ لم ْنهُُفَا ْن َدفَ َُعُال ْستلحْ قَاقُُ ْال َغی ل‬
ُ‫َدُللیْل‬
A proof that the condition of something (in the past) is a
proof for negation and not affirmation is the ruling
regarding a missing person (whose whereabouts or death
cannot be ascertained) because no person will have the right
to inherit from him and if one of his relatives were to die
while he is missing, he will not inherit thus (his previous
condition of being alive) will negate the right of another to
inherit from him and (his previous condition of being alive)
will not affirm his right to inherit.
ُ‫ن ُ ْاالَ ْث َُر‬ ُ ‫ی ُ ْال َع ْنبَ لُر ُ ل‬

َُّ ‫الا‬ ُْ ‫س ُفل‬ َُ ‫الَ ُخ ْم‬ ُ ُ ‫ال‬َُ َ‫ی ُ َحنل ْیُفَ ُةَ ُاُُنَّه ُق‬
ُْ ‫َن ُاَبل‬ َُ ‫ْل ُقَ ُْد ُر لو‬
ُْ ‫ی ُع‬ َُ ‫ن ُقلی‬ ُْ ‫فَا ل‬
ْ
ُ‫ان ُعذ لرلُہ‬ ُ‫ی ُبَیَ ل‬ ُْ ‫ْل ُقلنَا ُالنَّ َما ُذ لک َُر ُ َذللكَُ ُفل‬ْ َُ ‫لَ ْمَُٗ ُُیَ لر ُْد ُبل لُه ُ َُو ُهُ َُو ُالتَّ َمسكُ ُبل َعد لَُم ُال َّدللی‬
ُ‫ن ُم َح َّمدا ُ َس الَهُ ُع ل‬
ُ‫َن‬ َُّ َ‫ی ُا‬َُ ‫س ُفلی ُ ْال َع ْنبَ لُر ُ َُو ُللهُ َذا ُر لو‬ ُ‫ی ُاَُنَّه ُلَ ُْم ُیَقلُْ ُبل ْالخ ْم ل‬ ُْ ‫فل‬
ُ‫ال ُ َما‬ َُ َ‫ك ُفَق‬ ُ‫ال ُ لالَُن َّه ُ َکال َّس َم ل‬ َُ َ‫س ُفل ْی لُه ُق‬
َُ ‫الَ ُخ ْم‬ ْ ْ
ُ ُ ‫س ُفلی ُال َع ْنبَ لُر ُ َما ُبَالُ ُال َع ْنبَ لُر‬ ُ‫ْالخ ْم ل‬
313
Usool Shaashi
ُُ‫سُفل ْی لُهُ َُوُللاُُتَ َعالیُُاَ ْعلَم‬ ُ ُ‫الُ لالَُنَّهُ َک ْال َما لُءُ َُو‬
َُ ‫الَُخ ْم‬ َُ َ‫سُفل ْی لُهُق‬
َُ ‫الَُخ ْم‬
ُ ُ‫ك‬
ُ‫بَالُُال َّس َم ل‬
ُ‫بلالص ََّوا ل‬
‫ب‬
If someone were to say that it has been reported that

Imaam Abu Hanifah said, "There is no Khums in whales
because there is no narration regarding it" whereas this is
substantiation without proof (which is impermissible). We
would say that Imaam Abu Hanifah said "because there is
no narration regarding it" so as to make clear his excuse
for (making Qiyaas and) not saying that Khums is due
(Imaam Abu Hanifah did not pass the ruling without proof but
derive this ruling through Qiyaas). Because of this (that his
statement, "because there is no narration regarding it" is in
actual fact his excuse for making Qiyaas) it has been narrated
that Imaam Muhammed asked him regarding Khums in
whales enquiring "what is it about whales that there is no
Khums in it?" To which Imaam Abu Hanifah replied, "It is
like fish and there is no Khums in it". Imaam Muhammed
then asked, "What is it about fish that there is no Khums in
it?" Imaam Abu Hanifah replied, "It is like water (because
it lives in water) and there is no Khums in water".
Translation edited by
A.H.Elias (Mufti)
(May ALLAAH protect him)
314

Usool Shaashi With Arabic Matan PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Usool Shaashi With Arabic Matan PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Usool Shaashi

All praise belongs to ALLAAH, who has elevated the status

ُْ ‫َوالصَّلوةُُ َعلَیُالنَّبلیُُ َواَصْ َحابل لُهُ َوال َّسالَمُُعَلیُُاَبل‬

The principles of Fiqh

1- The Book of ALLAAH (the Quraan),

It is necessary to research and discuss each of these

The Book of ALLAAH

Khaas and Aam

ُ‫اال ْنفل َرا لُدُ َکقَوْ للنَا‬

Khaas is a word which refers to a specific meaning or

Aam is a word which refers to a number of individuals or

The ruling of Khaas

The ruling of Khaas is to practise upon it entirely without

An example of this (disregarding Qiyaas for Khaas) is the

ُ}‫{یَتَ َربَّصْ نَ ُبل اَ ْنف لس له َّنُثَلثَةَُقروْ ئ‬

The word "three" is Khaas, representing a (single and)

(the words "We have stipulated) is Khaas (specific) in the

(the words "She marries" is Khaas which means that the

As a result of this (difference of opinion that a woman can

Aam Ghair Makhsoosul Ba'adh

ُ‫یُ َحقُُلزوْ لُمُ ْال َع َم ل‬

Based upon this (That 'Aam Ghair Makhsoosul Ba'adh' is the

ُ"ُ‫َّارقَةُفَا ْقطَعوْ اُاَ ْی لدیَه َماُ َجزَ اءُُبل َماُ َك َسبَا‬

Proof that '‫ 'ما‬is Aam

In a similar manner we say regarding the verse,

ْ َ‫{فَا ْق َراوْ اُ َماُتَیَس ََّر لمن‬

That it is Aam and includes the entire Quraan whichever

ُ ُ ُ‫الَُتَ اکلوْ ا ُ لم َّما ُلَ ُْم ُی ْذ َک لر ُاسْم‬

}‫ُٗ{ُ َوالَُتَ اکلوْ اُ لم َّماُلَ ْمُی ْذ َک لرُاسْمُللالُ َعلَ ْی له‬

ُ‫ی ُبلعموْ لم لُه‬ ُْ ‫َض‬ َ ْ‫ی ُاَر‬

Similarly is the verse,

َ ْ‫{واَ َّمهَاتکمُالالَُّتل ْیُاَر‬

The general connotation of which dictates that it is

Aam Makhsoosul Ba'adh

‫صیْصهُٗ ُبلخَ بَ لُر ُ ْال َو ل‬

Thus if proof is established which excludes the rest then it

َُ ‫َنُ ْالج ْملَ لُةُلَوُُْاَ ْخ َر‬

ُ‫لُتَحْ تَُُ َدللی ل‬

Thus when a Shar'ie proof has been established that it is

If the proof which excludes part of its known constituents

Lesson on Mutlaq and Muqayyad

Note: - Muqayyad is a word having a specific meaning that has

An example of this (that it is not permissible to add a clause

}‫{فَا ْغ لسلوْ اوجوْ هَک ْم‬

"Wash your faces" (Surah Maa'idah: 6)

Ghusal with no additional clauses has been ordered in this

Similarly (just as in the example above where the Mutlaq of

The Quraan has made one hundred lashes the punishment

Which is Mutlaq (free from any restrictive clauses) in

Similarly (just as in the example above where the Mutlaq of

}ُ َ‫{وارْ َکعوْ اُ َم َُعُالرَّا لک لع ْین‬

A deduction made from the ruling of Mutlaq

The reason for this (permissibility to use such water) is that

}‫{ول لک ْنُی لریْدُللیطَه َرک ْم‬

As Najas (impure water) does not aid in purification. We

ُُ‫الَ ُیزَ ادُ ُ َعلَ ْی لُه ُشَرْ ط‬ ْ ‫ْن ُم‬

In a similar manner (as the ruling just mentioned above of

Lesson on Mushtarak and Mu'awwal

The ruling of Mushtarak

‫ك ُاَنَّهُٗ ُال َذا ُتَ َعی َّنَُ ُ ْال َو ل‬

ُُ‫صیْر ُمؤَ َّوالُ ُ َوح ْکم‬ ُ‫ب ُال َّر ْا ل‬

Example One of Mu'awwal

If the meaning of Mushtarak has been clarified by the