Side Links
Prayer Time
Makkah Tower Prophet Alhamdulillaah Muharram Muharram 2 Muharram 3 Ashura 12 Months Good Advice Sincerity 5

  |      |   

 

Chapter 3

 

The Shareeah’s Fulfilling of the Masaalih of Humankind

 

The scholars have all agreed that the laws of the Islamic Shareeah encompass the masalih of humankind, fulfilling them and providing for them, regardless of whether those masaalih are necessities, needs or amenities.68

 

Shaikh Muhammad Abu Zahrah wrote, “This point [that the masaalih of the Muslim Nation is the basis of the Law] is an accepted principle agreed upon by all Muslim jurists. None of them said that the Islamic Shareeah came with an order that was not consistent with the maslahah of humankind. Also, none of them said that that there is something harmful in the laws and rulings that have been legislated for the Muslims.”69

 

Shaikh al-Islam ibn Taimiyyah stated, “It is not possible for a believer to remove from his faith the fact that the Shareeah has come with what is the reality and truth in its articles of faith and has brought what is beneficial and maslahah in the actions which are included among the beliefs.”70

 

Even given that, the scholars have differed over these masaalih: Are they the goal of the Lawgiver in legislating a law or are they not intended? There are two opinions on this point. The first opinion says that these masaalih are in fact the intent of the Lawgiver and due to them the laws have been legislated. This is the view of the Ahl al-Sunnah and the Mutazilah. The second view is that these masaalih are not the intent of the Lawgiver in legislating the law—they are simply the actual result and product of the laws, which occur by simply being [fortuitously] in accord with the laws. This is the view of the Asharis.

 

This is a philosophical issue that has been discussed and debated at great length among the Ahl al-Sunnah, Mutazilahs and Asharis. The legal theorists have discussed it in more than one place.71  The scholars of kalaam (“theology”) have also discussed it since it is related to the questions of monotheism and preordainment.72 

 

What concerns us here is that given the difference of opinion concerning masaalih being the reason for the laws of Allah, they all agree that the laws of the Shareeah are comprised of the masaalih of humankind and fulfill them for it in this world and in the Hereafter.

 

The matter is very clear in the view of the Mutazilah and the Ahl al-Sunnah. They opine that the laws of Allah are based on consideration of the masaalih of humans. There is no law that Allah legislated except that it contains maslahah. In fact, the Mutazilah believe that tending to these masaalih is obligatory upon Allah, Exalted be He, and that it is obligatory upon to Allah to do what is most upright. And they believe that it is not permissible for Allah to order anything that does not contain some maslahah.73

 

As for the Ahl al-Sunnah, they agree with the Mutazilah that Allah’s laws are based on the masaalih of humankind. However, they differ with them in the claim that this is obligatory upon Allah. In fact, [the Ahl al-Sunnah say] that this is a grace and goodness from Allah. That is, He, Glorified and Exalted be He, does not legislate anything except what is in the best interest of His servants and He does this as a grace from Him and goodness to them, and not as a duty upon Him. In fact, no one other than Him can oblige Him to do anything. He is the One who obliged it upon Himself as a mercy from Him for His servants. This is the determination of His Wisdom, existence and mercy.74

 

Najm al-Deen al-Toofi stated, “The truth is that attending to the masaalih is an obligation from Allah as He has graciously adhered to it and it is not an obligation upon Him. In the same way, we said about the verse, ‘Accepting repentance is upon Allah’ (al-Nisaa 17), that its acceptance is an obligation from Him and not upon Him. Similarly is the case with mercy as in the verse, ‘He has prescribed for Himself mercy’ (al-Anaam 12) and in His statement, ‘Your Lord has prescribed for Himself mercy’ (al-Anaam 54) and so on.”75

 

As for the view of the Asharis who deny that the reasoning for the laws is to attend to the masaalih, the essence of their view is that it is impossible that the masaalih of humans could be the driving force for the legislating of the laws or a goal that requires such laws. They say that if Allah were to legislate laws based on such causes and goals, then the law would be incomplete without those goals and could only be completed by the achievement of those goals. This is because every action that is done for a cause is only completed and perfected by that cause that was non-existent beforehand. Hence, the law or act in and of itself is deficient and completed only by something else. This situation is an impossibility with respect to Allah [and His actions].76

 

They disallow masaalih as being the driving force for the Lawgiver in legislating these laws or that it should be His goal in legislating laws. However, at the same time, they affirm that the Shareeah laws comprise the masaalih of humankind via their [fortuitous] occurrence and concurrence.

 

Al-Amidi, one of the leaders of the Asharis, stated, “We know from the state of the Lawgiver that He would not place any law free of wisdom, as the laws have been legislated for the masaalih of humankind. However, that is not via an obligation upon him. Instead [we know that] from observing the customary results of the legislated laws.”77

 

On another occasion, he mentioned that the laws have been legislated for the goals of the servants. That is indicated by both consensus and human reasoning. Then he stated, “As for the consensus, it is that the Imams of fiqh have all agreed that the laws of Allah are never free of some wisdom and purpose, even though they differ as to whether that is due to an obligation [upon Allah], as the Mutazilah say, or by the judgment of the concurrence and reality without it being an obligation [upon Allah], as our school  states.”79

 

Shihaab al-Deen al-Zanji said, “And how they [i.e., the Islamic laws] are related to the masaalih of humans is that they are fall under them and are a consequence; they are not the essential issue or the main purpose.”80

 

Based on the above, we can see that the difference of opinion is more a question of semantics with no real effect to it.81  All the Muslim nation agrees that the Shareeah comprises the masaalih of humans and has taken upon itself their fulfillment in both this world life and the Hereafter and that there is no law that Allah has implemented except that it contains wisdom and maslahah.

 

More than one legal theorist has stated that there is a consensus on this point, in particular when they speak about “causation.” These scholars include:

(1)     Saif al-Deen al-Amidi, who has just been quoted.

(2)     Ibn al-Haajib who said, “The evidence of the efforts of ‘probing [and division],’82  deriving the legal causes of the laws and so forth demonstrate that there is definitely a legal cause, and because there is a consensus of the jurists on this point and, furthermore, because Allah says, ‘We have not sent you except as a mercy for the worlds’ [al-Anbiyaa 107]. The apparent meaning of this verse is that it is general [applying to all matters].”

 

Its commentator, al-Adhad al-Iji, states, “His conclusion to say that every ruling must have some reasoning to it is based on two matters: First, the consensus of the jurists, either as an obligation [upon Allah] as the Mutazilah say or as a blessing [from Him] as others say; secondly, there is Allah’s statement ‘We have not sent you except as a mercy for the worlds’ [al-Anbiyaa 107] whose apparent meaning is that of generality. That is, it is understood from this statement that Allah attends to their welfare in all that He has legislated for them. Thus, if the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) were sent with a ruling that did not contain maslahah for them, he would be sent for something other than mercy, as that would be a legal responsibility with no benefit, thus contradicting the apparent generality [of the verse].”83

 

(3)     Ibn al-Najaar al-Hanbali also stated, “A consensus has occurred that all of the actions [of Allah] are based on wisdom and masaalih, either as on obligation [upon Him], as the Mutazilah say, or as a possible act [for Him], as the Ahl al-Sunnah say. He does what He wills in accord with His Wisdom.”84

 

(4)     Najm al-Deen al-Toofi al-Hanbali wrote, “As for the consensus, the scholars have all agreed—except for those who are not taken into consideration from among the rigid Literalists85 —that the cause behind the laws is that of masaalih and repelling mafaasid. The most stringent of them in this matter was Imam Malik, who accepted masaalih al-mursalah. In reality, such is not something particular to him. In fact, all the scholars accept it.  However, he resorted to it more often than them.”87

 

(5)     Al-Shaatibi stated in the beginning of his section on al-maqaasid (“the goals”),88

 

Before discussing the point at hand, we shall present an introductory, incontestable, philosophical preface on this topic. It is that the laws have been laid down for both the present and future masaalih of humans. This claim should have evidence concerning its soundness or falsehood presented for it but this is not the proper place for that. In the ilm al-kalaam, there has been some difference of opinion on this point. Al-Raazi89  asserted that the laws of Allah have no [type of legal] causation behind them at all, nor do His actions. The Mutazilah all agree that the cause behind the laws is the consideration of the masaalih of the humans. Most of the later jurists also adopted this view. When the field of Islamic legal theory was forced to affirm such causes for the Shareeah rulings,90  they did affirm them, saying that the causes were recognizable signs for the rulings…91  

 

The basis for it is that we have investigated the Shareeah and have seen through induction that it has been laid down for the masaalih of humans—and this induction is not disputed by al-Raazi or others.92  Verily, Allah has said concerning the sending of the messengers, and that is the essential issue, “Messengers of good tidings and of warning, in order that, after the messengers, mankind may have no argument against Allah” (al-Nisaa 165); “And We have sent you (O Muhammad not but as a mercy for humankind” (al-Anbiyaa 107). About the origin of the creation, Allah says, “And He it is Who has created the heavens and the earth in six Days and His Throne was on the water, that He might try you, which of you is the best in deeds” (Hood 7); “And I (Allah) created not the jinns and humans except they should worship Me (Alone)” (al-Dhaariyaat 56); “[He] Who has created death and life, that He may test you which of you is best in deed” (al-Mulk 2).      

 

As for the cases in which the reasons for the detailed laws have been given in either the Book or the Sunnah, their numbers are too many to count. For example, Allah says after the verse about ablution, “Allah does not intend to place a burden on you, but He intends to purify you and complete His grace upon you, that you may give thanks” (al-Maaidah 6). About the fast, He says, “O you who believe! Fasting is prescribed for you, even as it was prescribed for those before you, that you may ward off evil” (al-Baqarah 183). About the prayers, He says, “Verily, the prayer prevents from great sins of every kind and every kind of evil wicked deed” (al-Ankaboot 45). About the direction of the prayer, Allah says, “And wherever you may be [O Muslims] turn your faces toward it [when you pray] so that people may have no argument against you” (al-Baqarah 150). About jihad, He says, “Permission to fight is given to those who are being fought, because they have been wronged” (al-Hajj 39). About the law of retribution, Allah says, “And there is life for you in the law of retribution, O people of understanding” (al-Baqarah 179). Concerning the affirmation of monotheism, Allah says, “’Am I not your Lord?’ They said, ‘Yes, certainly, we testify [to that].’ (That was) lest you should say on the Day of Resurrection, ‘Truly, we were unaware of this’” (al-Araaf 172). The goal was to alert them to this fact.  

 

Since induction points to this fact and in an issue of this nature it is an indication of sure knowledge, we are certain that the matter continues throughout all of the detailed laws of the Shareeah. From this totality, analogy and ijtihaad are thereby established.

 

Elsewhere he writes, “The Muslim Nation, as well as all other religions, agree that the Law has been prescribed to guard the five essentials: religion, life, familial ties, wealth and mental capacity. The knowledge of this fact among the nation is like a necessity…”93

 

He also wrote, “The affirmation of these three principles—that is, necessities, needs and amenities—is not doubted by anyone who conducts ijtihaad among the people of the Law. [Nor is it doubted that it is] to be considered the goal of the Lawgiver.”94

 

(7) Shaikh Muhammad al-Taahir ibn Ashoor also wrote, “There is a difference of opinion among the dialecticians on this point—a difference that seems to be simply a matter of semantics. All the Muslims agree that the actions of Allah are resultant from a will and choice, in accord with His knowledge and that all of them comprise wisdom and benefit… The dispute is whether we should describe them as being goals and causes to an end or not.”95 

 

After presenting the above, I shall end this discussion with a comprehensive and beneficial quote from ibn al-Qayyim. He wrote,

If you examined the laws of His religion that He has prescribed for His servants, you will find that none are other than achieving a pure masaalih or a predominant one whenever possible—and when there is a conflict between them, allowing for the greater or more important one, even if the lesser one is lost—or the ending of a pure mafaasid or a predominant one whenever possible—and if there is some conflict between them, the ending of the greater evil, even if it means bearing a lesser one.     

 

On this basis has the Most Just of Judges laid down the laws of His faith, pointing to it, witnessing by it to His perfect knowledge and wisdom and His kindness to His Servants and His goodness to them. This generality is not doubted by anyone who has had the slightest taste of the Shareeah and has been fed from its breast or has been provided to drink from its cistern. The more one becomes experienced in it, his witnessing of its goodness and masaalih becomes more complete.    

 

No jurist could possibly speak about the source, cause and legally effective quality of the rulings, with respect to soundness or distinctions, except in this manner.       

 

As for the manner of rejecting the wisdom and legal causes and denying the attributes that determine the goodness of an ordered act and the ugliness of a prohibited act, influenced and determined by the love and disgust which is the source of the command, there is no way that a ruling could be based on such a method [that involves rejecting underlying legal causes]. Indeed, no jurist could ever use such an approach in any of the topics of fiqh.       

 

How could one do that [that is, reject the idea of underlying goals and causes] when the Quran and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) are both filled with justifying the rulings with wisdom and masaalih and tying in the reason for the creation to them? They also point out the different forms of wisdom for which such laws have been legislated and for what purposes such things have been created. If there were only a hundred or two hundred of such examples, we would have listed them here. Actually, their numbers are more than a thousand, presented in various different ways.96  Sometimes, the “[letter] lam of causation” is expressly mentioned. Sometimes the object of the act (al-mafool li-ajilihi) is mentioned, which is the goal of action. Sometimes the phrase, “for the purpose of” is expressly mentioned to show causation. Other times, the particle kai (“for the purpose of”) is mentioned. Other times, the letter fa followed by the particle in is mentioned. Sometimes the particle laal (“so that perchance”) is used for a pure causation in the sense of, when used for the creation, hoping that such will occur. Sometimes the cause is pointed to by explicit mention. Sometimes the derived, relevant characteristic of the rulings is mentioned and is then built upon in the manner of a causer and a cause. Sometimes He rebukes those who claim that He created His creation and legislated His law without purpose and in folly. Similarly, sometimes He refutes those who equate two separate things that result in varying ends. Sometimes mention is made of His complete wisdom and knowledge that demand that He not distinguish between two equivalents nor does He treat as the same two things which are different, and that He gives everything its proper place and puts all things in proper order. Other times He calls upon His servants to ponder, reflect upon, consider and think in order to grasp what He sent His messengers with and what He has legislated for His servants. He also calls upon them to consider and reflect upon His creatures, the wisdom behind them and what they contain of benefit and masaalih. Sometimes He mentions the benefits of His creations, pointing out thereby that there is none worthy of worship except Him. Sometimes, He ends verses about His creation and rules with mention of His names and attributes that are relevant and which determine [those aspects of creation].97

         

The Quran is filled, from its beginning to its end, with mention of the wisdom of the creation and order as well as its masaalih and benefit and what these imply of witnessed signs that point to Him. No one who has the slightest experience with the meaning of the Quran can deny these…         

 

If one reflects in the proper way upon the Shareeah with which Allah sent His Messenger, he will find that from its beginning to its end, it is witnessing to this fact and explicitly stating it. He will find wisdom, maslahah, justice and mercy clearly exhibited on each of its pages, calling to them and calling the intelligent and wise people to those principles…98

 

He also stated,

It is most amazing that a person can allow himself to reject the wisdom, causative legal reason and masaalih that are included in this complete Shareeah, which is part of the greatest evidence testifying to the veracity of the one who came with it and the fact that he was truly the Messenger of Allah. Had he been given no other miracle than that, it would have been sufficient and satisfying. What it contains of wisdom, masaalih, praiseworthy ends and sound results all witness that the One who legislated and revealed this is the Best of all Judges and the Most Merciful of the merciful.  The witnessing of that in its contents and meanings is like what is witnessed of the wisdom, masaalih and benefits that are found in the highest and lowest forms of creation as well as what is between them of animals, vegetation, elements and remnants by which the needs of living are ordered. How could anyone be pleased with himself upon rejecting and denying all of that? If such a person wishes to be polite and shy in front of the intelligent people, he will say, “Those are matters that happened by chance without it being the intent of the rule or the creation.”

         

Perfect is Allah! How could it be possible for anyone to think that the Lord of the Worlds and the Most Just of judges would punish many of His creatures with the strongest eternal punishment without there being a purpose, wisdom or reason behind it? [How could anyone think that this is] purely based on His free will without any wisdom or reason—there is no cause, wisdom or goal there? Isn’t this nothing but the worst thought about the Lord, the Exalted?  

How is it permissible for someone to think that His Lord would command, prohibit, allow, forbid, love, dislike, lay down laws and set down prescribed limits without any wisdom or maslahah that is intended by them? That it is nothing, in fact, other than a pure will that, for example, outweighed a lesser pure will? What mercy could there be in such a law? How could the one who is sent with it be the guiding mercy for the worlds if the matter were as the deniers have claimed? Wouldn’t the orders and prohibitions, in that case, be only punishment, burdens and nonsense? Greatly exalted above that is Allah. If we were to go on and mention all the examples that demonstrate the wisdom of Allah manifested in His creation and command it would cover over tens of thousands of topics, even though our intelligence, knowledge and experience are very limited.

         

Isn’t the denying of the wisdom, relevant characteristics and attributes for which the laws have been legislated nothing other than denying the Law as a whole? Could it be possible for any jurist on the face of this earth to speak about jurisprudence if he believed in the denial of wisdom, relevant aspects, legal causes and goal of the Lawgiver in fulfilling the masaalih of humans via the laws?99 

 

Then he goes on to mention and respond to the dubious arguments of those who deny the presence of any wisdom or reason behind the laws, showing how their arguments logically end up in false conclusions and hypotheses.100  And Allah knows best.

 

____________________________________  

68 See Masaadir al-Tashree al-Islaami feema La Nass feeh, p. 173; Khalaaf, Ilm Usool al-Fiqh, p. 64; Abu Zahrah, Usool al-Fiqh, p. 369; Dhawaabit al-Maslahah fi al-Shareeah al-Islaamiyyah, p. 73; al-Baahusain, Raf’ al-Haraj, p. 324; Ali Hasbullaah, Usool al-Tashree al-Islaami, p. 331; al-Qaradhaawi, Madkhal li-Diraasah al-Shareeah al-Islaamiyyah, p. 57; Zaidaan, Al-Madkhal li-Diraasah al-Shareeah al-Islaamiyyah, p. 46.

69 Abu Zahrah, Maalik, pp. 293-294. He mentioned the same in his book al-Uqoobah, p. 29. On this point also see al-Dahlawi, Hujjah Allah al-Baalighah, vol. 1, p. 27.

70 Majmoo Fataawa ibn Taimiyyah, vol. 11, p. 347.

71 See, for example, al-Mutamad, vol. 2, p. 868; al-Mustasfa, vol. 1, p. 56; al-Mahsool, vol. 1, p. 159; Al-Musawwadah fi Usool al-Fiqh, pp. 56-57, 473 and 577; Haashiyah al-Banaani ala Sharh al-Jalaal al-Muhali li-Jam’ al-Jawaami, vol. 1, p. 57; al-Amidi, al-Ihkaam, vol. 1, p. 79; Ghayaat al-Maraam fi Ilm al-Kalaam, p. 234; al-Taudheeh ala al-Tanqeeh, vol. 2, p. 103; Taiseer al-Tahreer, vol. 2, p. 150; Sharh Tanqeeh al-Fusool, p. 88; Nihaayah al-Sool, vol. 1, pp. 258f; Irshaad al-Fahool, p. 7; Fawaatih al-Rahamoot, vol. 2, pp. 260-261 and vol. 1, pp. 25f; Sharh al-Kaukab al-Muneer, vol. 1, pp. 300-318 and vol. 4, pp. 150-151; al-Toofi, Sharh Hadeeth La Dharar wa Dharaar, p. 213; Sharh al-Adhid ala Mukhtasar ibn al-Haajib ma Haashiyah al-Taftizaani wa al-Jurjaani alaih, vol. 1, pp. 122f; Madaarij al-Saalikeen, vol. 1, pp. 230f.

72 One of the best works written on this topic is Shifaa al-Aleel fi al-Qadhaa wa al-Qadar wa al-Hikmah wa al-Taleel by ibn al-Qayyim.

73 See the earlier mentioned references (footnote 70) in exactly those citations

74 See al-Musawwadah fi Usool al-Fiqh, pp. 56-68; Majmoo Fataawaa ibn Taimiyyah, vol. 11, pp. 356-357; Al-Mahsool, vol. 2, part 2, p. 242; Al-Bahr al-Muheet, vol. 5, p. 207; al-Ghazaali, Shifaa al-Ghaleel, p. 126; al-Muwaafaqaat, vol. 1, p. 238, vol. 2, p. 172; Salam al-Wusool li-Sharh Nihaayah al-Sool, vol. 4, p. 55; al-Ibhaaj fi Sharh al-Minhaaj, vol. 3, p. 62; Miftaah Daar al-Saadah, vol. 2, pp. 60-62; Sharh al-Kaukab al-Muneer, vol. 1, pp. 515-517; Nibraas al-Uqool, vol. 1, p. 270.

75 Sharh Hadeeth Laa Dharar wa la Dharaar, p. 214.

76 See al-Ibhaaj fi Sharh al-Minhaaj, vol. 3, pp. 41 and 62; Haashiyah al-Banaani ala Sharh al-Jalal al-Muhili ala Jam’ al-Jawaami, vol. 2, pp. 232-233; Majmoo Fataawaa ibn Taimiyyah, vol. 8, p. 83; al-Toofi, Sharh Hadeeth Laa Dharar wa laa Dharaar, p. 213; Sharh al-Kaukab al-Muneer, vol. 4, pp. 40-41; Fawaatih al-Rahamoot, vol. 2, p. 261; Shaikh Abdul-Razaaq Afeefi’s comments to al-Amidi, al-Ihkaam, vol. 3, pp. 202 and 260.

77 Al-Ihkaam, vol. 3, p. 260.

78 Meaning the Asharis. As for the third group, the Ahl al-Sunnah, they say, as was mentioned earlier, that it is via the grace and goodness from Allah.

79 Al-Ihkaam, vol. 3, p. 285. He states virtually the same at vol. 3, p. 261. Also refer to the previously mentioned references.

80 Takhreej al-Furoo an al-Usool, pp. 38-39.

81 In al-Tahreer by ibn al-Humaam with the commentary Taiseer al-Tahreer by Ameer Baadishaah (vol. 3, p. 305), after stating the difference over whether the laws have come due to the cause of maslahah, “(What is closest) to the correct position (is that it,) that is, the difference of opinion (is simply semantics revolving around the meaning of ‘goal’). Whoever explains ‘goal’ as a benefit that returns to its doer—who is Allah—will say that there is no source of causation. There should be no dispute about that. The one who explains it by saying that the benefit goes to the humans says that there is a source of causation. Similarly, there can be no dispute about that.” [Note: The text in the parenthesis is the original work al-Tahreer and the remainder is from the commentary.] Abu Zahrah stated in Usool al-Fiqh (p. 370), after stating the dispute on this issue, “This difference is a theoretical one that has no real effect. It is closer to the orientation of juristic opinions because all the jurists agree that the Shareeah laws are the abode of the true masaalih and Islam has come with no law except that it contains maslahah for humans.” Shaikh Muhammad Bakheet al-Muti’ee also wrote in Salam al-Wusool li-Sharh Nihaayah al-Usool, vol. 4, p. 57, “In sum, there is no difference among the scholars concerning the reasons for the rulings. No one rejects that except for the one who rejects analogy, and they are very few… It is nothing but a question of semantics that goes back to the expression that is used to state it…”              
Shaikh ibn Ashoor has said something similar, as shall shortly be noted.

82 [This is one of the means by which scholars attempted to determine the legal cause of a ruling for the purpose of using that legal cause as the basis of analogy. For more on this method, see Ahmad Hasan, Analogical Reasoning in Islamic Jurisprudence (Islamabad: Islamic Research Institute, 1986), pp. 330ff.—Trans.]

83 Sharh al-Adhid ala Mukhtasar ibn al-Haajib, vol. 2, p. 237. Also see al-Asfahaani, al-Mukhtasar Sharh Mukhtasar ibn al-Haajib, vol. 3, p. 108.

84 Sharh al-Kaukab al-Muneer, vol. 1, p. 314.

85 Al-Booti writes in Dhawaabit al-Maslahah (p. 73), “As for what is stated of an opposing view from the Literalists and al-Nidhaam, perhaps their true position is that it is not for a mujtahid to construct legal rulings in accordance with masaalih, based on their view that the true maslahah that is the basis for the ruling cannot truly be discovered. However, this view does not necessitate that the Lawgiver Himself does not base His rulings upon what is in accord with the masaalih of humans, as is clear.” This explanation is good, especially when we know that the Literalists and al-Nidhaam do not apply analogy nor do they consider it acceptable legal evidence. This view is supported by what ibn Taimiyyah quoted in al-Musawwadah fi Usool al-Fiqh (p. 330) from ibn Aqeel who said, “Those who try to avoid the worship of Allah through means of analogy differ with respect to reasoning and with respect to its possibility or the possibility of knowing the legal cause. Some of them said that it is impossible [to worship Allah based on analogy] because one cannot know rulings derived in this way because the rulings are based on masaalih that cannot be comprehended from it nor via any sign that indicates it in any probably manner.”

86 For a detailed analysis of this issue, that all four Imams accept al-masaalih al-mursalah, see al-Qaraafi, Sharh Tanqeeh al-Fusool, p. 446; Sharh Mukhtasar al-Raudhah, vol. 3, pp. 212-213; Irshaad al-Fuhool, p. 242; Mustafa Zaid, al-Maslahah fi al-Tashree al-Islaami, passim; Nadhariyyah al-Maslahah fi al-Fiqh al-Islaami, passim.

87 Sharh Hadeeth Laa Dharar wa laa Dharaar, p. 215. Also see Musalim al-Thaboot with its commentary Fawaatih al-Rahamoot, vol. 2, p. 193.

88 Al-Muwaafaqaat, vol. 2, p. 6.

89 One of the leading figures of the Asharis.

90 That is, because they affirmed analogy as a legal authority.

91 This is open to criticism. Ibn al-Qayyim has denounced this view in three of his excellent works: Shifaa al-Aleel, Miftaah Daar al-Saadah and Madaarij al-Saalikeen. Some of his words shall be quoted shortly.

92 Induction is one of the strongest evidences that affirms that the Shareeah has been prescribed for the masaalih of humans. See its use in proving this point in al-Zarkashi, al-Bahr al-Muheet, vol. 5, p. 207; Sharh Mukhtasar al-Raudhah, vol. 3, pp. 211-212; al-Baidhaawi, al-Minhaaj and its commentary by ibn al-Subki, al-Ibhaaj, vol. 3, p. 62.

93 Al-Muwaafaqaat, vol. 1, p. 38. See a similar discussion in Qawaaid al-Ahkaam, vol. 2, p. 62.

94 Al-Muwaafaqaat, vol. 2, p. 51.

95 Al-Tahreer wa al-Tanweer, vol. 1, pp. 379-381.

96 He had mentioned a good number of them in his noteworthy book Shifaa al-Aleel fi Masaail al-Qadhaa wa al-Qadar wa al-Hikmah wa al-Taleel, pp. 186-206.

97 If one would like to see examples of each of the above-mentioned categories, see ibn al-Qayyim, Shifaa al-Aleel, pp. 190-204. Similarly, for many examples, one could read what the legal theorists have mentioned as the second means of determining an effective legal cause, which is the explicit mention in the Quran and Sunnah, in their section on analogy. See, for example, Sharh al-Kaukab al-Muneer, vol. 4, pp. 117-141; Taiseer al-Tahreer, vol. 4, pp. 39f; al-Amidi, al-Ihkaam, vol. 3, pp. 252-253; Sharh al-Adhid ala Mukhtasar ibn al-Haajib, vol. 2, p. 234; Haashiyah al-Banaani ala Sharh al-Jalaal al-Mahalli, vol. 2, p. 263; Sharh Tanqeeh al-Fusool, p. 390; Irshaad al-Fahool, p. 211; Nashr al-Bunood, vol. 2, p. 155; al-Ibhaaj, vol. 3, pp. 42-53.

98 Miftaah Daar al-Saadah, vol. 2, pp. 22-23.  For similar passages, see Ilaam al-Muwaqieen, vol. 3, p. 3 and Majmoo Fataawaa ibn Taimiyyah, vol. 20, p. 48; vol. 13, p. 96; vol. 11, pp. 352 and 354.

99 Shifaa al-Aleel fi Masaail al-Qadha wa al-Qadar wa al-Hikmah wa al-Taleel, p. 205. He has a similar passage in Madaarij al-Saalikeen, vol. 1, p. 242.

10 If the reader would like more on this topic, he can see al-Amidi, al-Ihkaam, vol. 3, p. 286; al-Mahsool, part 2, vol. 2, pp. 237-242; Sharh al-Kaukab al-Muneer, vol. 4, pp. 117-141; Shifaa al-Aleel, pp. 186-206; Sharh Hadeeth Laa Dharar wa Laa Dharaar, pp. 211-217; Dhawaabit al-Maslahah, p. 75; al-Dahlawi, Hujjah Allah al-Baaligah, vol. 1, pp. 27f. This is in addition to what was cited earlier concerning the consensus on this point.

 

 

NewsLetter

© 2015 - 2016 All rights reserved Islam Message