‹ Previous · Contents · Next ›
طَبَقَاتُ الْأَقْوَالِ · Tabaqat al-Aqwal (Imam Hierarchy)
تَنْبِيهٌ · Editorial Note
[مُلْحَقٌ] هَذِهِ الطَّبَقَاتُ مَبْنِيَّةٌ عَلَى شَرْحِ ابْنِ عَابِدِينَ وَتَعْلِيقَاتِ الدَّارِسِينَ عَلَيْهِ — وَهِيَ تَتَعَلَّقُ بِمَنْ يُقَدَّمُ قَوْلُهُ مِنَ الْأَئِمَّةِ عِنْدَ التَّعَارُضِ
- These tabaqat are drawn from Ibn ʿAbidin's Sharh and its scholarly commentary; they concern which imam's opinion is given precedence when views conflict
↑ Top of page
قَوْلُ الْإِمَامِ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ · View of Imam Abu Hanifa (first tier)
[مَعْنًى] قَوْلُ الْإِمَامِ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ هُوَ الْأَصْلُ الْمُقَدَّمُ — وَيُؤْخَذُ بِقَوْلِهِ فِي الْعِبَادَاتِ مُطْلَقًا، وَفِيمَا كَانَ مَعَهُ أَحَدُ صَاحِبَيْهِ لِوُفُورِ الشَّرَائِطِ وَاجْتِمَاعِ أَدِلَّةِ الصَّوَابِ
- Imam Abu Hanifa's view is the default first tier; his opinion is taken in 'ibadat without qualification, and in issues where one of the two companions (sahibayn) agrees with him
[النَّصُّ] أَشَرْتُ هُنَا إِلَى أَنَّهُمْ إِذَا اخْتَلَفُوا يُقَدَّمُ مَا اخْتَارَهُ أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ، سَوَاءٌ وَافَقَهُ أَحَدُ أَصْحَابِهِ أَوْ لَا
- When they [the Imam and his two students] differ, what Abu Hanifa himself chose takes precedence, whether or not one of his students agrees with him
📖 مَصْدَرُ النَّصِّ (طَبَعَةُ اسْطَنْبُول ١٣٢٥هـ، شَامِلَة رَقْم ١٦٠٦)، ص ٢٦؛ وَمَوْضِعُ الْمَعْنَى شَرْحُ عُقُودِ رَسْمِ الْمُفْتِي، فَصْلُ طَبَقَاتِ الْأَقْوَالِ — Istanbul print 1325H (Shamela ed. #1606), p. 26; the paraphrase above draws on the same Sharh ʿUqud Rasm al-Mufti passage
↑ Top of page
إِذَا صَحَّ الْحَدِيثُ فَهُوَ مَذْهَبِي · "If the Hadith Is Sound, It Is My Madhhab" — and Its Two Conditions
[النَّصُّ] إِذَا صَحَّ الْحَدِيثُ فَهُوَ مَذْهَبِي؛ وَإِذَا صَحَّ الْحَدِيثُ وَكَانَ عَلَى خِلَافِ الْمَذْهَبِ، عُمِلَ بِالْحَدِيثِ، وَيَكُونُ ذَلِكَ مَذْهَبًا، وَلَا يَخْرُجُ مُقَلِّدُهُ عَنْ كَوْنِهِ حَنَفِيًّا بِالْعَمَلِ بِهِ
- Authentically related from Abu Hanifa (and, per al-Sha'rani (d. 973H), from all four imams): "if the hadith is sound, it is my madhhab." Acting on a sound hadith even against the apparent madhhab position still counts as the madhhab, and the muqallid who acts on it does not thereby cease to be Hanafi
[الشَّرْطُ الْأَوَّلُ] أَنْ يَكُونَ الْحَدِيثُ صَحِيحًا صَرِيحًا غَيْرَ مُعَارَضٍ وَلَا مُؤَوَّلٍ، وَلَمْ يُوجَدْ لَهُ نَاسِخٌ وَلَا مُخَصِّصٌ وَلَا مُقَيِّدٌ، وَلَمْ يُطَّلَعْ عَلَى مَانِعٍ مِنْ تَرْكِ الْإِمَامِ لَهُ؛ وَأَنْ يَكُونَ الْعَامِلُ بِهِ مِمَّنْ لَهُ أَهْلِيَّةُ النَّظَرِ فِي النُّصُوصِ وَالتَّمْيِيزِ بَيْنَ النَّاسِخِ وَالْمَنْسُوخِ
- Condition one: the hadith must be authentic, explicit, unopposed and not figuratively reinterpreted, with no known abrogator, specifier, or qualifier, and no discoverable reason why the Imam himself left it unacted upon; and whoever acts on it must be qualified to examine such texts and distinguish abrogating from abrogated
[الشَّرْطُ الثَّانِي] يَنْبَغِي تَقْيِيدُ ذَلِكَ بِمَا إِذَا وَافَقَ قَوْلًا فِي الْمَذْهَبِ؛ إِذْ لَمْ يَأْذَنُوا فِي الِاجْتِهَادِ فِيمَا خَرَجَ عَنِ الْمَذْهَبِ بِالْكُلِّيَّةِ مِمَّا اتَّفَقَ عَلَيْهِ أَئِمَّتُنَا
- Condition two: this must be restricted to a hadith that agrees with SOME existing view already within the madhhab; the Hanafi imams never authorized independent ijtihad on a point their school entirely and unanimously rejects
📖 مَوْضِعٌ ص ٩٧-٩٨ — pp. 97-98
↑ Top of page
أَقْوَالُ أَصْحَابِ الْإِمَامِ فِي الْحَقِيقَةِ أَقْوَالُهُ: "إِنْ تَوَجَّهَ لَكُمْ دَلِيلٌ فَقُولُوا بِهِ" · The Companions' Views Are, in Reality, Abu Hanifa's Own — "If a Proof Becomes Clear to You, Hold to It"
[النَّصُّ] إِنْ تَوَجَّهَ لَكُمْ دَلِيلٌ فَقُولُوا بِهِ (قَالَهُ أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ لِأَصْحَابِهِ، رَوَاهُ الدُّرُّ الْمُخْتَارُ)؛ وَقَالَ أَبُو يُوسُفَ: مَا قُلْتُ قَوْلًا خَالَفْتُ فِيهِ أَبَا حَنِيفَةَ إِلَّا قَوْلًا قَدْ كَانَ قَالَهُ؛ وَقَالَ زُفَرُ: مَا خَالَفْتُ أَبَا حَنِيفَةَ فِي شَيْءٍ إِلَّا قَدْ قَالَهُ ثُمَّ رَجَعَ عَنْهُ
- Abu Hanifa to his companions: "if a proof becomes clear to you, hold to it." Abu Yusuf: "I never held an opinion contrary to Abu Hanifa except one he himself had also held at some point." Zufar (d. 158H): "I never differed from Abu Hanifa on anything except something he himself had said and then retracted"
[مَعْنًى] خَالَفَ الصَّاحِبَانِ أَبَا حَنِيفَةَ فِي نَحْوِ ثُلُثَيْ مَذْهَبِهِ، لَكِنَّ الِاعْتِمَادَ فِي الْعَمَلِ لَا يَزَالُ عَلَى رَأْيِ الْإِمَامِ؛ وَقَدْ كَانَ يُشَاوِرُ أَرْبَعِينَ مِنْ أَصْحَابِهِ بَلَغُوا رُتْبَةَ الِاجْتِهَادِ شَهْرًا كَامِلًا حَتَّى يَسْتَقِرَّ الْقَوْلُ، فَبُنِيَ الْمَذْهَبُ بِالشُّورَى لَا بِرَأْيِهِ وَحْدَهُ
- The two companions differed from Abu Hanifa in roughly two-thirds of the madhhab's rulings, yet practical reliance still rests on the Imam's own view; he would consult forty of his companions who had reached ijtihad for a full month before a position settled — the madhhab was built collectively, by shura, not by his opinion alone
📖 مَوْضِعٌ ص ٩٥-٩٦ — pp. 95-96
↑ Top of page
قَوْلُ الصَّاحِبَيْنِ (أَبِي يُوسُفَ وَمُحَمَّدٍ) · View of the Sahibayn: Abu Yusuf and Muhammad (second tier)
[مَعْنًى] إِذَا خَالَفَ الصَّاحِبَانِ الْإِمَامَ فِي مَسَائِلَ اخْتِلَافِ عَصْرٍ وَزَمَانٍ — كَالْقَضَاءِ بِظَاهِرِ الْعَدَالَةِ — يُؤْخَذُ بِقَوْلِهِمَا؛ لِتَغَيُّرِ أَحْوَالِ النَّاسِ
- When the sahibayn differ from the Imam in issues of era-based change (ikhtilaf al-ʿasr) such as ruling on apparent probity, their view is taken because of changed circumstances
📖 الْمَصْدَرُ شَرْحُ عُقُودِ رَسْمِ الْمُفْتِي، فِي مَسَائِلِ اخْتِلَافِ الْعَصْرِ (مَعْنًى) — Sharh ʿUqud Rasm al-Mufti, on issues of era-based change (paraphrase)
[النَّصُّ] وَقِيلَ إِذَا كَانَ أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ فِي جَانِبٍ وَصَاحِبَاهُ فِي جَانِبٍ فَالْمُفْتِي بِالْخِيَارِ، وَالْأَوَّلُ أَصَحُّ إِذَا لَمْ يَكُنِ الْمُفْتِي مُجْتَهِدًا
- Some say: when Abu Hanifa stands on one side and his two students stand together on the other, the mufti may choose between them; but the more correct view is to take Abu Hanifa's side, unless the mufti is himself a mujtahid, in which case he weighs the proofs for himself
📖 مَوْضِعٌ (طَبَعَةُ اسْطَنْبُول ١٣٢٥هـ، شَامِلَة رَقْم ١٦٠٦)، ص ٢٦ — Istanbul print 1325H (Shamela ed. #1606), p. 26
↑ Top of page
قَوْلُ زُفَرَ وَالْحَسَنِ بْنِ زِيَادٍ · View of Zufar and al-Hasan b. Ziyad (third tier)
[النَّصُّ] فَإِنْ لَمْ يُوجَدْ لَهُ اخْتِيَارٌ قُدِّمَ قَوْلُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْحَسَنِ أَجَلِّ أَصْحَابِ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ بَعْدَ أَبِي يُوسُفَ، ثُمَّ بَعْدَهُ يُقَدَّمُ قَوْلُ زُفَرَ وَالْحَسَنِ بْنِ زِيَادٍ، فَقَوْلُهُمَا فِي رُتْبَةٍ وَاحِدَةٍ
- If no choice is found from him [Abu Yusuf], the view of Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, the greatest of Abu Hanifa's students after Abu Yusuf, is given precedence. Then after him comes the view of Zufar and al-Hasan ibn Ziyad; their two views stand at one and the same rank
[التَّرْتِيبُ] فِي الْفَتَاوَى السِّرَاجِيَّةِ: ثُمَّ الْفَتْوَى عَلَى الْإِطْلَاقِ عَلَى قَوْلِ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ، ثُمَّ قَوْلِ أَبِي يُوسُفَ، ثُمَّ قَوْلِ مُحَمَّدٍ، ثُمَّ قَوْلِ زُفَرَ وَالْحَسَنِ بْنِ زِيَادٍ
- Per al-Fatawa al-Sirajiyya: fatwa, absolutely, follows Abu Hanifa's view, then Abu Yusuf's, then Muhammad's, then Zufar's and al-Hasan ibn Ziyad's
📖 مَوْضِعٌ (طَبَعَةُ اسْطَنْبُول ١٣٢٥هـ، شَامِلَة رَقْم ١٦٠٦)، ص ٢٦ — Istanbul print 1325H (Shamela ed. #1606), p. 26
[تَنْبِيهٌ] لَكِنْ عِبَارَةُ "النَّهْرِ" تُفِيدُ أَنَّ رُتْبَةَ الْحَسَنِ بَعْدَ زُفَرَ بِخِلَافِ الْعِبَارَةِ السَّابِقَةِ، وَإِنْ كَانَتِ الْعِبَارَةُ السَّابِقَةُ (تَسَاوِيهِمَا) هِيَ الْمَشْهُورَةُ فِي الْكُتُبِ
- A caveat: al-Nahr's own wording suggests al-Hasan ibn Ziyad actually ranks just after Zufar rather than tied with him, though the "tied at one rank" wording is the one better known across the books
📖 مَوْضِعٌ (طَبَعَةُ الرَّشِيدِ، كَرَاتْشِي، بِحَاشِيَةِ أَبِي لُبَابَةَ)، ص ١٠٤ — al-Rashid Trust print, Karachi, Abu Lubaba hashiya ed., p. 104
↑ Top of page
عَدَمُ التَّخْيِيرِ لِلْمُقَلِّدِ فِي زَمَانِنَا: وُجُوبُ اتِّبَاعِ التَّرْتِيبِ الْمَذْهَبِيِّ · No Free Choice for the Muqallid Mufti Today — Must Follow the Ranked Order
[النَّصُّ] الْأَصَحُّ تَخْيِيرُ الْمُفْتِي الْمُجْتَهِدِ فَيُفْتِي بِمَا يَكُونُ دَلِيلُهُ أَقْوَى؛ وَلَمَّا انْقَطَعَ الْمُفْتِي الْمُجْتَهِدُ فِي زَمَانِنَا وَلَمْ يَبْقَ إِلَّا الْمُقَلِّدُ الْمَحْضُ، وَجَبَ عَلَيْنَا اتِّبَاعُ التَّرْتِيبِ، فَنُفْتِي أَوَّلًا بِقَوْلِ الْإِمَامِ ثُمَّ وَثُمَّ، إِلَّا أَنْ يَكُونَ الْمُجْتَهِدُونَ الْمُتَأَخِّرُونَ فِي الْمَذْهَبِ قَدْ صَحَّحُوا خِلَافَهُ
- The more correct view is that a mujtahid mufti may freely choose whichever imam's position has the stronger proof, without regard for rank. But since the age of the mujtahid mufti has ended and only the plain follower remains, we must follow the ranked order instead — giving fatwa first on the Imam's view, then the next in line — unless later mujtahids of the school have themselves ruled the opposite sound
📖 مَوْضِعٌ ص ١١١ — p. 111
↑ Top of page
مَسَائِلُ تَرْجِيحِ قَوْلِ الصَّاحِبَيْنِ أَوْ زُفَرَ: عِشْرُونَ مَوْضِعًا فِي مَنْظُومَةِ ابْنِ عَابِدِينَ · Places Where the Companions' or Zufar's View Is Preferred — Twenty Cases in Ibn ʿAbidin's Own Poem
[النَّصُّ] رَأَيْنَاهُمْ قَدْ يُرَجِّحُونَ قَوْلَ صَاحِبَيْهِ تَارَةً، وَقَوْلَ أَحَدِهِمَا تَارَةً، وَتَارَةً قَوْلَ زُفَرَ؛ ذَكَرَهَا الْبِيرِيُّ فِي رِسَالَةٍ، وَنَظَمَهَا أَحْمَدُ الْحَمَوِيُّ، لَكِنْ بَعْضَ مَسَائِلِهَا مُسْتَدْرَكٌ؛ وَقَدْ نَظَمْتُ فِي ذَلِكَ مَنْظُومَةً أَسْقَطْتُ مِنْهَا مَا هُوَ مُسْتَدْرَكٌ، وَزِدْتُ عَلَى مَا نَظَمَهُ الْحَمَوِيُّ عِدَّةَ مَسَائِلَ
- Ibn ʿAbidin notes that later scholars are sometimes found preferring the two companions' view, sometimes one companion alone, and sometimes Zufar's view; al-Bayri (d. 1099H) first listed these cases and al-Hamawi (d. 1098H) versified them, though some of his cases were wrongly added. Ibn ʿAbidin composed his own poem, dropping the invalid additions and adding several more, bringing the total to twenty verified cases (recorded in his own Radd al-Muhtar, chapter on nafaqa)
📖 مَوْضِعٌ ص ١١١ — p. 111
↑ Top of page
لِمَاذَا أَفْتَى الْمَشَايِخُ بِخِلَافِ قَوْلِ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ نَفْسِهِ مَعَ كَوْنِهِمْ مُقَلِّدِينَ؟ · Puzzle: How Could the Later Mashayikh Give Fatwa Against Abu Hanifa's Own View If They Were His Muqallids?
[النَّصُّ] كَيْفَ جَازَ لِلْمَشَايِخِ الْإِفْتَاءُ بِقَوْلِ غَيْرِ الْإِمَامِ الْأَعْظَمِ مَعَ أَنَّهُمْ مُقَلِّدُونَ؟ قُلْتُ: قَدْ أَشْكَلَ عَلَيَّ ذَلِكَ مُدَّةً طَوِيلَةً، حَتَّى فَهِمْتُ أَنَّهُمْ نَقَلُوا عَنْ أَصْحَابِنَا: أَنَّهُ لَا يَحِلُّ لِأَحَدٍ أَنْ يُفْتِيَ بِقَوْلِنَا حَتَّى يَعْلَمَ مِنْ أَيْنَ قُلْنَا
- Ibn Nujaym (d. 970H) (in his Bahr) says he was long puzzled how the Hanafi mashayikh could give fatwa contrary to Abu Hanifa's own view despite being his muqallids — until he understood from their own words that the Imams themselves had transmitted the rule: no one may give fatwa by our saying until he knows where it came from
[تَعْرِيفٌ] مَعْنَى "حَتَّى يَعْلَمَ مِنْ أَيْنَ قُلْنَا": أَيْ مَا لَمْ يَعْرِفْ مَأْخَذَهُ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَالسُّنَّةِ أَوْ إِجْمَاعِ الْأُمَّةِ أَوِ الْقِيَاسِ الْجَلِيِّ وَالْخَفِيِّ فِي الْمَسْأَلَةِ
- Abu Lubaba's gloss: "until he knows where we said it" means until the mufti knows the ruling's real basis — Qur'an, Sunna, ijma', or clear or hidden analogy on the issue
📖 مَوْضِعٌ ص ١١٢ — p. 112
↑ Top of page
الْإِفْتَاءُ بِقَوْلِ غَيْرِ الْإِمَامِ · Fatwa with a Non-Imam Position (when no imam answer exists)
[مَعْنًى] إِذَا لَمْ يُوجَدْ جَوَابٌ عَنِ الْأَئِمَّةِ الْمُسْتَقِلِّينَ فِي الْمَسْأَلَةِ أُخِذَ بِقَوْلِ الْأَكْثَرِينَ مِنَ الْكِبَارِ الْمَعْرُوفِينَ كَأَبِي حَفْصٍ وَأَبِي جَعْفَرٍ وَأَبِي اللَّيْثِ وَالطَّحَاوِيِّ وَغَيْرِهِمْ فَيُعْتَمَدُ عَلَيْهِ
- When no answer is found from the independent imams, the view of the majority of the recognized senior scholars is relied upon: Abu Hafs, Abu Jaʿfar, Abu al-Layth, al-Tahawi, and their peers
📖 مَوْضِعٌ ص ١٣٣ (شَرْحُ عُقُودِ رَسْمِ الْمُفْتِي) — p. 133 (Sharh ʿUqud Rasm al-Mufti)
↑ Top of page
إِذَا لَمْ يُعْرَفْ تَارِيخُ قَوْلَيْنِ مُتَعَارِضَيْنِ لِلْإِمَامِ: ثَلَاثُ مَرَاتِبَ لِمَنْ يَخْتَارُ · When Two of the Imam's Views Conflict With No Known Chronology: Three Tiers of Resolution
[مَعْنًى] لَا يَصِحُّ لِمُجْتَهِدٍ وَاحِدٍ قَوْلَانِ مُتَنَاقِضَانِ فِي زَمَانٍ وَاحِدٍ؛ فَإِنْ عُرِفَ الْمُتَأَخِّرُ مِنْهُمَا تَعَيَّنَ كَوْنُهُ رُجُوعًا عَنِ الْأَوَّلِ، وَإِلَّا فَإِنْ نُقِلَ فِي أَحَدِهِمَا مَا يُقَوِّيهِ فَهُوَ الصَّحِيحُ عِنْدَهُ
- A single mujtahid cannot validly hold two contradictory positions at one time; if it is known which came later, that one is treated as his retraction from the first; if unknown, whichever view has a transmitted supporting report is the correct one
[مَعْنًى] فَإِنْ لَمْ يُوجَدْ مُرَجِّحٌ: الْمُجْتَهِدُ فِي الْمَذْهَبِ يُرَجِّحُ بِمُرَجِّحَاتِ الْأَقْوَالِ، وَإِلَّا يَعْمَلُ بِأَيِّهِمَا شَاءَ بِشَهَادَةِ قَلْبِهِ؛ وَالْمُتَفَقِّهُ الَّذِي لَمْ يَبْلُغِ الِاجْتِهَادَ (كَأَكْثَرِ أَهْلِ الْإِفْتَاءِ فِي زَمَانِنَا) يَتَّبِعُ الْمُتَأَخِّرِينَ وَيَعْمَلُ بِمَا هُوَ أَصْوَبُ وَأَحْوَطُ عِنْدَهُ؛ وَالْعَامِّيُّ الصِّرْفُ يَتَّبِعُ فَتْوَى الْمُفْتِي الْأَوْثَقِ الْأَعْلَمِ
- Absent any such preference-marker: a mujtahid within the madhhab weighs by the recognized criteria of preference, or else acts on whichever view he wishes by the testimony of his own heart; a mutafaqqih who has not reached ijtihad (like most muftis of our own time) simply follows the later scholars, adopting whichever position seems to him more correct and cautious; and a pure layman follows the fatwa of the most trustworthy, most knowledgeable mufti he can find
📖 مَوْضِعٌ ص ٨٤-٨٥ — pp. 84-85
↑ Top of page
جُنَّةُ الْعَالِمِ "لَا أَدْرِي" · The Scholar's Shield Is "I Don't Know"
[النَّصُّ] إِذَا أَغْفَلَ الْعَالِمُ "لَا أَدْرِي" أُصِيبَتْ مَقَاتِلُهُ
- Whenever a scholar neglects to say "I don't know" when he truly doesn't, his vital point is struck — a report Ibn al-Salah (d. 643H) called a rare, noble chain uniting imams of three schools narrating one from another
[مِثَالٌ] تَوَقَّفَ الْإِمَامُ أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ فِي أَرْبَعَ عَشْرَةَ مَسْأَلَةً؛ وَتَوَقَّفَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ إِذْ سُئِلَ عَنْ أَفْضَلِ الْبِقَاعِ فَقَالَ: لَا أَدْرِي حَتَّى أَسْأَلَ جِبْرِيلَ، فَسَأَلَهُ، فَقَالَ: لَا أَدْرِي حَتَّى أَسْأَلَ رَبِّي
- Abu Hanifa himself withheld judgment on fourteen separate issues; even the Prophet, asked once about the best of places, said "I don't know until I ask Jibril" — who in turn said he did not know until he asked his Lord, Who then revealed that mosques are best, and the first to enter and last to leave them are the best of their people
[مَعْنًى] الْغَالِبُ أَنَّ عَدَمَ وِجْدَانِ النَّصِّ سَبَبُهُ قِلَّةُ اطِّلَاعِ الْمُفْتِي لَا وُجُودُ ثَغْرَةٍ حَقِيقِيَّةٍ فِي الْمَذْهَبِ؛ إِذْ قَلَّ أَنْ تَقَعَ حَادِثَةٌ إِلَّا وَلَهَا فِي كُتُبِ الْمَذْهَبِ ذِكْرٌ، إِمَّا بِعَيْنِهَا أَوْ بِقَاعِدَةٍ كُلِّيَّةٍ تَشْمَلُهَا
- Usually, a mufti's failure to find an explicit ruling reflects his own limited research rather than a real gap in the madhhab — a genuine case rarely arises that the madhhab's books do not already address, whether by name or through a universal principle covering it
📖 مَوْضِعٌ ص ١٣١-١٣٢ — pp. 131-132
↑ Top of page
لَا يَجُوزُ الِاعْتِمَادُ عَلَى الْقَاعِدَةِ الْكُلِّيَّةِ وَحْدَهَا فِي الْإِفْتَاءِ · A Bare Legal Maxim Alone May Not Be the Basis of a Fatwa
[تَعْرِيفٌ] الْقَاعِدَةُ فِي اصْطِلَاحِ الْفُقَهَاءِ: حُكْمٌ كُلِّيٌّ يَنْطَبِقُ عَلَى جُزْئِيَّاتٍ كَثِيرَةٍ مِنْ أَبْوَابٍ مُتَعَدِّدَةٍ؛ وَالضَّابِطُ الْفِقْهِيُّ أَضْيَقُ: يَنْطَبِقُ عَلَى جُزْئِيَّاتٍ مِنْ بَابٍ وَاحِدٍ فَقَطْ
- Technically, a qa'ida (legal maxim) is a universal ruling applying to many particular cases drawn from multiple chapters of fiqh; a dabit (regulative principle) is narrower, applying only within a single chapter
[النَّصُّ] الْمُقَرَّرُ فِي الْأَرْبَعَةِ الْمَذَاهِبِ أَنَّ قَوَاعِدَ الْفِقْهِ أَكْثَرِيَّةٌ لَا كُلِّيَّةٌ؛ فَإِنَّمَا عَلَى الْمُفْتِي حِكَايَةُ النَّقْلِ الصَّرِيحِ، وَمَنْ لَمْ يَجِدْ نَقْلًا صَرِيحًا وَجَبَ عَلَيْهِ التَّوَقُّفُ أَوْ سُؤَالُ مَنْ هُوَ أَعْلَمُ مِنْهُ وَلَوْ فِي بَلْدَةٍ أُخْرَى
- It is established across all four madhhabs that fiqh maxims hold true in the majority of cases, not universally — every one of them carries exceptions. So the mufti's real duty is simply to relate the explicit transmitted text; whoever cannot find one must withhold judgment, or ask someone more learned, even if that person is in another town
📖 مَوْضِعٌ ص ١٣٢-١٣٤ — pp. 132-134
↑ Top of page
التَّطْبِيقُ أَوْلَى مِنَ التَّرْجِيحِ (الشَّيْخُ أَنْوَرُ شَاهْ الْكَشْمِيرِيُّ) · Reconciling Two Views Is Preferable to Choosing Between Them
[النَّصُّ] التَّطْبِيقُ أَوْلَى مِنَ التَّرْجِيحِ؛ لِأَنَّ فِيهِ إِعْمَالَ الْقَوْلَيْنِ، وَإِعْمَالَهُمَا أَوْلَى مِنْ إِهْمَالِ أَحَدِهِمَا، لَا سِيَّمَا إِذَا تَأَيَّدَ الْقَوْلُ الْآخَرُ بِالْحَدِيثِ؛ إِلَّا أَنْ لَا يُمْكِنَ الْجَمْعُ أَوْ يَقُومَ الدَّلِيلُ بِخِلَافِهِ، فَحِينَئِذٍ يَجِبُ التَّرْجِيحُ
- Anwar Shah al-Kashmiri (d. 1352H): reconciling two apparently conflicting views is preferable to simply picking between them, because reconciliation puts both to use, and using both beats discarding one — especially if the other view also has hadith support — unless no reconciliation is possible or the evidence proves otherwise, in which case preference becomes obligatory, exactly as hadith scholars do with seemingly conflicting hadiths
📖 مَوْضِعٌ ص ٨٥ (فَيْضُ الْبَارِي ١/٣٥٧) — p. 85 (citing Fayd al-Bari 1/357)
↑ Top of page
‹ Previous · Contents · Next ›