Usool Al-Fiqh
Date:
Channel: Bilal Philips
File Size: 24.06MB
Episode Notes
Transcript ©
alameen Salatu was Salam ala rasulillah Karim, Allah Allah He was Harvey Coleman Eastern medicine at laomi. Dean
operates due to a law and the law of Peace and blessings in his last prophet muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, and on all those who follow the path of righteousness until the last day,
this afternoon,
we'll be looking at
the fundamentals of Islamic law, soul.
Before going into it,
it is important for us to understand the distinction between Sharia and fear.
Because both of these terms are translated as Islamic law.
Sharia
most terms are translated around the globe, but we need to really be clear.
So we don't use them in a manner which is inappropriate. Both of them are related to Islamic law, they do represent Islamic law but different facets.
itself literally means
the true understanding of what is intended by something
you know,
there's a statement of the problems I send them in which you said
whoever Allah which is good for he gives him the true understanding of the religion and he said you thought this would be
your fault.
Because
literally means I said, understanding the law gives us full understanding to those who he wishes would
Sharia actually literally means a waterhole
a place where water collects that the animals come to, to drink from us what it literally means water
or it is sometimes used to indicate the straight path, the correct path.
This can be found in verse 18, of Surah 45, which is the mafia
in which a lot says the Madonna can actually act in mineral armor,
then we have put you on a straight path in your affairs.
However, when we're looking at
the two terms, technically speaking with regards to the whole area of Islamic law,
the Sharia represents
divine revelation
are divinely revealed law.
That is,
for an
IT IS WHAT IS THE LAW based on revelation which is itself revelation.
Whereas
represents
the human attempt
to apply this divine law in their daily lives.
The human understanding of the Divine Law and its application that is the fifth.
Now
the important difference between the two
from a practical point of view
is that the Divine Law is unchangeable.
This is unchangeable
Whereas
intangible
classical example of that is what we spoke about in the case of smoking.
When I gave you the the explanation as to the the law concerning smoking smoking cigarettes, we said that Initially, it was held
that smoking
was mokou. disliked,
based on the evidence concerning smoking at the time when Muslims first came in contact with it. However, from 1980 onwards, where it was identified as being cancer causing, then it shifted from the category of being moku. disliked, to one of being harassed, because it causes human deaths. Now, the evidence used to prove that this mcru came from Syria. The evidence used to prove that it is haram came from Syria.
The SEC, ruling has changed from macro to Haram. But the evidence from the Sharia has not changed. The evidence still remains and wherever a circumstance arises, which is applicable to the first piece of evidence which was that all eating garlic, remember, we said the proof used by the early scholars were saying talking with moku was that it caused bad breath.
And eating garlic parmesan Solomon said that those who eat garlic should not come to our matches.
Because of the odorous
breath which comes which is offensive when you know makes people uncomfortable. So those who are eating garlic raw garlic should not come to the masjid. So on the basis of that, it was ruled that of course, eating raw garlic is mcru. Similarly, for persons who smoke cigarettes, it would be similarly approved. However, the evidence for it being haraam was that from us, as Alan said, Whoever kills himself in this life, will find himself in the next life, killing himself as he killed himself in this life perpetually.
So the evidence has not changed in the Sharia. Whenever we come across something, which has to do with bad breath, we go back to that same evidence use from the Sharia, concerning eating garlic, whenever we find something which causes death, then we use the other law, as you said, a person who is a diabetic, if the doctor tells them you take sugar you will die, then the second lies applicable to those sugars Hello,
but for that person, sugar becomes Haram. So here the ruling on a particular substance may vary according to the person the effects that it has on that person.
So,
that was the first major distinction between the two.
The second distinction exists in the actual definition itself, was that this was based on divine revelation was this is based on human understanding. Okay, this was the second point, this is divine revelation,
human understanding.
And the third point
is that the laws of sherry
are general
in the most fun, whereas those of them are specific,
the general the laws of Sharia, they tend to govern general circumstances, whereas the laws of physics applied to are applied to specific instances.
So,
this is how, because some people will question how it is that we can have laws which were revealed 1400 years ago, and still want to apply these laws today.
See, from a Western point of view, where laws are made by human beings,
it is not practical to try to apply laws made by human beings. They consider laws made by human beings 1400 years ago
Today, because our circumstances have changed.
The circumstances of life have changed. The outlook of people 1400 years ago have changed the outlook of people today, the August app system or organization of society has changed everything, no social economic structure on the side societies change. So the laws of 1400 years ago, are not applicable to today.
This is
Western
concepts of law, that law will vary, and must change according to the needs of the society as time goes on. And because society changes, the laws must change. So that's why the question Will they say the Sharia Islamic law, this is something like trying to go back to the Dark Ages, to the times of the Dark Ages, and you know, it's not practical.
However,
the sick is changing as time goes on.
The Sharia doesn't change that is the foundation because it is revealed by a law, who knows
human beings in and out, he is the one who created human beings.
He knows the inner and outer concerning human beings. He then could reveal the laws, which were to stand for all times,
laws which address the basic nature of the human being.
And human nature does not change.
So
alameen wa Salatu was Salam ala rasulillah, Kadim
II
was Javi.
As my
appraiser due to a lot and a lot of peace and blessings be on his last prophet Mohammed
and all his companions.
We stopped at
the distinction between Shari and Phil.
And the purpose of this
was basically to lay a foundation for going into the fundamentals of Islamic law.
Since we said that the foundation of
Islamic law
is divine revelation.
It means then, that when we look at
the fundamentals, or the basic sources of have to begin with,
because it is the source, primary source of Revelation.
And in our topic, on the sciences of the crime, we went into the definition of what the crime is, etc, etc.
And we discuss also the miracle, miraculous aspects of the plant.
Now, with regard to the laws of the Quran,
which will be applied in
what we found,
when we were discussing the Tafseer of the crime, was that much of what is in the Koran is in a general format. A lot says praise
gives that guy make hatch, but the details of how to pray,
gives a car coupons to charity, and to make Hajj pilgrimage, this is left to the Sunnah. So for the most part,
though, when we are approaching any issue, because we're looking at sick now is the practical application of Syria. When we're looking at any issue or issue arises amongst us, we have to determine how to handle this situation. We first look to the client
to see if there are any general laws that's covered.
If we can't find it, then we have to go on to the next source.
These are basic sources of Revelation, this is our basic
source of guidance.
Now,
though, as a general rule,
the laws, as I said are of the Quran are not that specific, you do have some examples of specificity.
And that is, in the case of inheritance, you find the
verses which deal with it like in 25 verse 11, a lot advises you concerning your children's inheritance, the males should get a portion equal to two females
there are only doctors who are more should receive two thirds of the inheritance and if only one per share is a half and it goes on breaking down the details.
However, when we come to for example,
theft, or somebody steals the law in the pipeline, what sided for what what side for a side
idea, Homer Jessa, Jessa, Bhima casaba
minima for longwise season hockey
cut off the hands of the male and female thief as a punishment, by example, from a law for their crimes.
Now, in Arabic, the word hand
refers from here to here,
it includes this, and it all goes all the way up to here.
So, how do we know how much the cutoff
according to the laws of the climate could be any
that it is required for us to go to the swim now, to find out what the department is under when this law was revealed, what the department was
specified with regard to the amount to be cut off and we find that
the or even the, as what you know, when you say, is there a minimum or a maximum focus in the end, you want to go into the sooner the fact that
we find out that he defines
the hand
as being up to the wrist. And that the amount minimum amounts for which a hand may be amputated is that of a dinner.
Of course, quarter of a dinar acts
as the minimum amount stolen was stolen underneath or less than that one does not cut the handoff. And there are other conditions to which come out from the Sunnah was clarified, for example, that's if it isn't a time of
hunger, and somebody steals,
you don't cut their hand off.
Or if somebody steals from them, the person they're working for, and the one who they're working for hours not paying them, their wages, then again, the hand is not cut off.
Because there's justification.
And also, if this
is
an open set in the sense that you left your watch on the table, and you came back and it is gone. They will not cut your hand off for that watch. But if you had your watch in your pocket, and somebody put their hand in their pocket and took it, they will cut the hand off
to see because what's on the table is temptation. You know, everybody gets weak in an instant and they will snatch it, you know.
But the one who is going in the pocket, this is not a question of temptation. Now this is a professional criminal. Right? This is this is a difference. Again, to the law, though we have the general law coming up and most people don't know that there actually is finer points, the details is clarify At what point do you cut the hand off? How much do you cut off under what circumstance
actually even you go back into the inheritance so much detail is there, you still will find additional detail given by the cinder block most often and said that a Muslim may not inherit from a non Muslim. Normally a non Muslim inherits from a Muslim.
If a man marries a Christian woman
and he dies, she cannot inherit from him.
If she dies, he cannot inherit from her.
Of course I know what is going on here.
It's quite the opposite, right? However, according to Islamic law, that is the law.
However, the men law, the woman may not be able to inherit from him, he is allowed to give a gift, he knows he's gonna die, or whatever he may give a gift called he was he
was he can give, which is up to one third of his property, that's the maximum is free to give that much to his wife.
And he has given only to those who would not normally inherit by the normal laws of inheritance.
So there is Islam, in the wisdom of Islam know, the general rule is no Muslim cat. But at the same time, Islam does take into account this man has been married to this woman, she has done good, you know, in raising the children looking after the home etc, she does deserve something. So there is provision there in the law, allowing that man to give
those the general rule is
that they cannot inherit each other.
Now,
if we leave the sooner,
the sooner what we find is that after the time of
when issues arose during the time of the Sahaba,
they would go back tries to find in the Quran, or the Sunnah, some kind of support for whatever
solution they were trying to develop to the problems that will arise. Remember, I told you the story
of the time of aboubaker and the collection of the crime when the
Caliph Omar recognized he was mechanic at the time, but he recognized that a number of the Muslims who had memorized large portion declined were dying in the battle, he came to all mine suggested to him to collect the current aboubaker to collect the class one.
So that he may not.
And what was our backers response
response was how can I do that something was
very, very careful, not wanting to bring anything new into the religion to to preserve the religion as it was because the past ones I had said so many times,
warning them about any kind of changes in the religion.
Because this was the final message of God's man
had to be preserved, as none of the earlier messages were to be preserved.
So the warnings were there.
So the righteous to take full care to preserve that message.
And of course, Allah
chose to preserve the message because he was carrying the because he had chosen Mohammed Salim to be the last of the messenger. And furthermore,
he It was he who raised up amongst the Muslims, those who take on the responsibility of preserving
my instruction from the past.
So the companions
whenever they have to make a decision, a decision, they would go back and look to see from the crime and assuming that the find
now
once they found sufficient evidence,
then they would agree together.
That this was the path that they're going to take
because they had mutual consultations or with aboubaker and Omar was having a discussion, the other companions were also brought in. So it was a group decision made
with Abu Bakr being the leader of the group making the final acceptance of that decision. That group decision is known as h Ma.
h ma
or consensus,
consensus of opinion
and it's specifically referring to of the Sahaba
HMR.
Now, this has been extended
by some scholars
To go beyond the time of the Sahaba. But,
the most safe position concerning this principle is
to stay within the period of the Sahaba because this was the period when they were
close together as possible to get the consensus once you go beyond their period,
then the consensus of the leading Muslims becomes very difficult because of communications etc.
Another example of H Ma,
or a decision made
in Islamic law concerning
the
being done by consensus is that of the advance of Juma
that
in the time of automatic calicos man
the phrase surrounding the masjid must be the level it was like this right before their houses all around, the
houses are right next to them
all around.
That's why sometimes now, you'll find they have one called Baba Omar, those of you have been to Israel because this is the one which used to go five years almost house, Rama
they were living all around the wives of the Father.
He died in ISIS home
because he had to leave right at the door and leave the Salah.
All the homes also they all enjoyed going to the mosque.
And later he was very, very died.
And the masjid during the time of the Sahaba it's such a they expanded this way.
But after the time of the Sahaba they expanded also this way.
They demolished all the other homes
leaving the home
and this ended up inside the machine.
But in fact according to Islamic law, that
should not be inside the machine.
The situation today in a much later time in the time of the Turks, they put over it the green dome.
You know, traditionally when you see the the the
the picture of Medina the symbol of Medina is the green dome.
But actually this green dome is innovation,
the building of the dome over the grave. The problem is that lm is forbidden. Farmers are seldom told to go and anywhere that you found any grapes
which was more than a palms with above the ground.
You should never look to the ground. Any structures built over grave
site or
these things were to be removed and the grave level plus the Muslim graveyard
doesn't look with the proper Muslim graveyard. You don't see any kind of you know,
structures and nameplates and you know, tombstones and all those kinds of things. There's not the Muslim graveyard was engraved on the plain areas the way you will notice, for example
Okay, well what they do they have a wall they put numbers here 123
then down here, maybe they put ABC so you have rows
you know your father was in to be that's why it's great.
So
what happened was, in the time of
the Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu Masjid, the city had gone through a big
marketplace over here marketplace got very large. Llamas spread rapidly a lot of goods that come into the marketplace and enlarge itself.
So the event which was being made from inside of the Masters actually was made to stand on this upper log or something on the outside, the land could no longer be heard inside up.
Market
Business trading etc, was so loud and drowned out the event. So they decided because they need to let these people in the marketplace law that allows companies. So about an hour before the time for the advantage of Joomla, there's only one advantage
to send somebody into the marketplace. And he would call him and then hear
a prayer that in order to let the people know that are there that was going to be coming. So close up your business and prepare yourself.
That's where
the trust of that came from. And as the marketplace got bigger in time, they sent another person over here, and he would call a time.
Now when it got bigger, they added another
all of them going to different parts of the marketplace, calling the event to let them know, the city got bigger.
Now, once they develop
once they develop the microphone,
right, we're inside of the machine, you're calling water run that can be heard all over the
money.
But what happened is that people were caught individual.
So now even you all hear at least, you know, in rehab,
you'll hear that earlier than one hour before.
You know, if the lights 12 o'clock, around 1030
people know the event for Juma will be coming.
But you all in your place here now you are whatever that is me. And as soon as you sit down, the man gets up he says another man is made totally pointless.
That previous event there is totally pointless. What you may as well do is go back to what was done in the time of proper moments, I felt alone, the time of aboubaker and the time of Omar. And halfway through in the reign of the timer was man what they did was when the problem was I fell again in the masjid. He says our Lake Wa Barakatuh sat down. And
that is
the fifth is living changeable. What happens is that unfortunately, people get caught up in the ritual, and it becomes rigid.
And that is very dangerous. Because Islam is a living religion.
The way of life, the flexibility is there, it's supposed to change with the changing circumstances where the need arises, something develops where the need is no longer there, it just drops. You go on. That's how it should be. However, what has happened is that many of these earlier practices now became standard rituals, which are handed down. Nobody knows why they're doing it anymore. Even as a matter fact, in Pakistan, what is common there, India and Pakistan, when they make the first event.
When they make the first event.
They invented to Sonos, which come after that event. So the people will come into the master, they come in and sit down and wait for the first time. When the first event is made, then they get up and make
the two signals after the event, total innovation.
This one, as Alan said is when you come into the masses you need to before you sit down, but they will come in and sit down wait for the rest of them then again, they get up and make soup. So they have invented two units of prayer, you know for that space between
no origin.
So
this is important, you know, as you are studying, that you keep this in mind. And we're in this area, you find you know these kind of things which have been handed down. The meaning has now been lost. Nobody knows why they're doing it anymore. You know, you need to research them. If it is pointless things then clear them away and get back to the
very important
now
what the
companions would do, in order to come to some consensus, you know, the opinion concerning any of these issues.
We said that they would base their, their their decisions or their ideas on something from quirements. In the process that they use
to arrive at this decision because look at this, what happened? Where did they get this from this idea of sending somebody else to make a free event, where's this come from?
farmers didn't do.
However,
for
Ramadan,
the prophet SAW Selim instructed
the LAO, to make an advance.
A few minutes before the advent of Roger
stone, there was a pre event brought in
one before to let the people know they're eating and the stands to horse to let them know that they are then of fudger is coming,
allow us to make the event a few minutes, five minutes before the event. And even omak tomb is the one who used to make the event for fashion.
So, here is the basis the idea of informing people using an event which is not considered to be now the event but they freer than in order to let people know that the event is coming. They
now this principle of analogy,
where a need existed for those who are eating, to hear it and to be made aware that the the event is coming, the need arose here where people could no longer hear their than inside.
They made an analogy between VR than the freer than of fasting and the
need for a prayer then for tomorrow.
That process is called
Sophia is your fourth principle.
And it is by a theist represents
the methodology of deduction
of laws
from the Quran, and Sunnah.
It is the fundamental or basic methodology used in deducing laws from the Quran, and the Sunnah.
Now, the thing to note,
these basic four are common to most of what became known as the schools of Islamic law.
These schools evolved
sometime after the companions
really
around the latter part of the Omega dynasty,
which is ending around the middle of the a century
and into the early a Baptist dynasty, which continues down to the middle of the 10th century.
What happened is that in the time of the Prophet Muhammad SAW Salaam Alaikum, Allah was coming from him from the Quran.
However, he did train his companions in deduction of law in understanding and applying the law. He trained them in what was known as HDR.
HDR, that is studying a circumstance gathering the evidence with regard to it and coming up with a ruling or a decision as to how to handle that so called HTS. The Obama subelements said that whoever
Seek to find out the correct ruling
and is wrong gets one reward.
And if he is right, or she is right, they get two rewards.
However, he also said that there are three judges to inhale. And one in paradise. We have two sides of the coin though. One is that if you strive to find out the correct ruling,
and you are wrong, allow will reward you one reward for the effort that you made. And if you are correct, you get to reward but at the same time, he says something as a warning to the other side of the coin. He said there are three judges who are in hell and one in paradise
that his judges may be put into three categories. Two of those categories are heading for health and one heading for paradise.
The judge, the one who judges
without knowledge is going to help whether he is writing his judgments or wrong.
Okay, first one going to help whether right or wrong is going to help because he's put himself in a situation where he's making a ruling. And it's not based on knowledge.
That is a sin in Islam.
Allah says in the Quran, Allah Allah decree in consume la Solomon, if you don't know, ask those who know, don't make decisions for people. And you know, you don't have knowledge.
Because that is such a dangerous situation.
The bugs are seldom said such a person, even if they are right, if they found the right decision, they made the right decision turned out to be right, their full voice.
You can't deal with that.
The second group
are those who know the evidence, they know the correct decision, and they make the wrong ruling.
They know what is right. And they choose the wrong ruling for one reason or the other because it involves their family, or somebody who's paying them off, or whatever. But they're not making the ruling according to the knowledge that they have.
That one's going to hell off.
And the one was going to Paradise is the one who judges according to knowledge is going to die that whether he's right or wrong.
So can you see the two sides of the coin, we are encouraged to seek correct knowledge in the course of making decisions.
It is not permissible for us to just make knowledge is off the top of my head.
giving my own opinion, you know, I think it's alright, you know, if you make this test do you make having trouble with your fingers? Counting you can keep track of the number of users of these
ideas off the top of your head.
But the idea of the final decision being made by one person in Islam, this is not something which is considered
unacceptable. That's one form of leadership that is okay. But you see the leader in Islam, whether it be an individual or a group, their decisions are only executive decisions.
They're not legislative decisions through different legislation belongs only to God's
legislation, the law establishing the law this belongs only to God executing that law. That's man's domain.
Islamic point of view concerning the government so you can have one person who will make the decision in terms of the execution or you can have a group beside
About the execution, but the making of the law itself.
That legislation belongs only to law.
We have to according to Islam, our leaders no matter what, in Islam, if the oma decides
on a law of canceling a law from Sharia is unacceptable. Even if everybody feels it is in the best interest of all of us to cancel this law, it is unacceptable. Since
we all agree
not to use a particular law, for example, law, the law is applicable. Since
our job is only in the application aspects, we cannot cancel any law, nor can we make any new law fundamental law.
We can make laws or secondary laws on the basis of the fundamental law.
Like traffic lights, for example, you have traffic laws,
you're supposed to stop when the light is red.
Lights not in Syria,
cannot say that we can find one. And so now where it says to
traffic, you know, traffic laws for climate.
I agree that homosexuality is no longer a thing.
Death for the homosexual,
homosexual is caught in the punishment according to Mosaic law, the law was followed by Jesus's death, and in Islam is the same thing.
Same law.
However, Christians today have Chancellor.
Whereas in Islam, no matter if the whole oma agrees that homosexuality was okay, it is not acceptable, it's a sin, it remains a sin, it can never be changed
as the difference.
In any case, the point that we were raising here was that during the time of the Sahaba,
he trained his companions in making it she had
making decisions of their own based on things that he sold them.
And instead, he gave them these warnings to understand that, you know, the decisions should be based on knowledge. The classical example given is the command that he gave to his companions, that they should make
their prayer of answer in the area of the clan of bunny forever.
They are going to do battle with them. And he told them, they set up groups around him, and he told them
don't make after, except in the area of the clan live and operate in their territory.
On the way the group that was going ahead, on the way,
the time for Africa,
they have to make a decision. What
do you mean that we should hurry up so that we get to buy the arrays and make offer there
are they actually literally mean that we will keep going until which rather than the cost?
To meaning could be understood from that signal?
Half of them felted men, one and a half, 1000 men, the other half of them pray there, and then the others continued, and they joined up together. And afterwards frontwards I fell and kin and they related it to him.
And he didn't say either was wrong. However,
he himself prayed up there on the way
and he informed them that the best is to pray Salah at his side.
He didn't say the wrong because what he said to them
implied two possibilities. So for one to make a decision based on the meaning of what you said here was something which could not be blameworthy you cannot say this person is wrong because however the best decision was the fray
when it came in,
he demonstrated by his own practice, and that's
what he led us
circumstance they quit because if he would wish, he could have given them the details, but this was training them in the process of
making certain decisions on their own.
And of course, after the time of farmers I tell them, we find
the
we find that the companions started to apply these principles quite extensively.
Now, during the period of aboubaker, the rights such as Calif
this school of thought
was that of the caliber
of the caliber, whoever it was in the time of aboubaker.
The final thing was his
people had other opinions, but everybody submitted to
when avoca died, Omar took over. And he changed the iPhone opinions which are different from Obamacare. He changed them in his time, when he was now the final decision maker. And the way the school of thought was there was that
and so on.
Afterwards, when things shifted,
when the leadership shifted from Caliphate, righteous Caliphate into kingship, in the time of the omegas, you'll find that the calories started to bring in the new the Kings column or the columns of calories, they were starting to bring in certain innovations.
And the scholars in the time of Abu Bakr, Omar Ali,
there were amongst the companions, some of them who are most noteworthy, scholarly, you know, noted for their abilities to deduce
gathered a large portions of the sunlight, etc.
So they were known to be like the fuqaha, or the scholars and most of the hava, famous amongst them were what they're called, they call the Abadi law. All of them have the name Abdullah, Abdullah,
Abdullah even of the lives and Omar
Abdullah.
But they were called the Abadi law, meaning the up to laws, they were known as
a group of them.
What would happen in a time of the caliphate, the righteous calluses, that these scholars would always be close to the galaxy could always call on them, they would always be there to provide information for him, you know, there was that constant exchange between them. However, when the leadership changed into kingship, and the leaders were now not the choice of the people anymore, because we're being imposed imposed upon the people, the scholars started to distance themselves from this leadership because they did not want to be identified with corruption.
So the scholars spread out the center of Islam used to be Mecca and Medina, the rich without going into Iraq into Damascus, Egypt is spreading out to different parts.
And in the different areas of course, people had problems which were arising in their areas and the outstanding scholars is not only Baba knows the generation after they would try to make rulings for the people the process of the collection of the Sun now was starting to take place at this time also. And because the Muslim states was so wide you had people so far in so many different areas,
individual scholars would appear to be the most notable in different areas.
And they were many they are around and students will study with me and gathered statements of the problem of asylum they were member had memorized the Quran and well versed in the various these the areas of the language etc. And they would make rulings for the people.
This period of time there was a a abundance of schools of thought which you call the Muslims. There are many there are hundreds.
However,
in time,
these numbers started to decrease
for a number of different factors. Some of them were political.
Some of them were just historical.
The numbers of the different math have started to decrease as the communication network increased.
The leading scholars
themselves
began to choose in, in an area certain areas, some who were the most outstanding and left rulings to them, others became more like teachers, in fencers as opposed to ones making rulings. This is a factor involved. Another factor was a some of the scholars ran into conflicts with the kings of the side, you made kings.
And when they wouldn't give ruling in accordance to what the Kings wanted, they have to go into hiding. So they could not students anymore. So they disappeared, there's a school of thought that ideas will disappear.
And
in the process, in this process, nowhere there was that flowering that increase.
Some other principles arose
as being sources recognized sources with law.
The fifth principle came to be known as Estefan
fans.
CRC segment deduction,
my analogy,
comparing two things, where we find there's a similarity between the two, then we bring the ruling from one to the other.
In the case of st span,
the term is the span actually
comes from the word
or the verb Hakuna, to become good
as original Arjuna. And the name happen comes from it.
Mohsen estan, all of them come from the same route, meaning good.
Anytime you see this combination in front of a verb in Arabic,
St.
st, it means seeking to seek. Right?
So
literally, this means seeking the better
or seeking the best seeking the goods.
As this you know, it's been put into
layman's term as legal
preference.
Legal preference.
What is meant by this
is that if you came to a decision, you know, you're looking into your an issue arises you have to make a decision you're using your car.
Your car gives you
a conclusion which is not appropriate
to your circumstance.
You choose another ruling
over your conclusion by PR
based on the output the inappropriateness of the ruling which came from Korea,
for example.
The problem is, as Alan said, Whoever sells food should not do so until he has it in his own possession.
Right whoever sells food should not do so until he has it in his own possession.
What is understood from this
is that
if one doesn't have
a product, you cannot sell it.
This is the general conclusion which may be joined by a PR firm.
If one doesn't have
the product, you cannot sell it
In
Nevada, saying the principal,
whoever sells food should not do so until he has this in his own possession.
You're selling food, you cannot do so, unless you have it in your own possession, you have cooked the food at this point you can sell it, this is the statement of the profit monster, which is awesome.
However,
this implies
that
you cannot make any contracts for manufacturing anything,
you want somebody to build a house for you,
you cannot go into a contract with this person, because until that house is there, he cannot sell it
is not in his possession.
That is the conclusion which will be drawn from this segment of the platform.
I want to sell you Apple,
I cannot tell you, I cannot sell your coin to Islamic law.
I cannot tell you apples with geometry.
If I'm going to sell you apples, you have to see these apples here in front of you must know you have this possession in your possession.
I cannot sell you I cannot say I'm gonna sell you two kilos of apples, I got it on the tree. I'll go get it and bring it tomorrow No.
See, this is why it was this principle here. This principle is there to avoid deception. Because when I bring you the two kilos or apples, half of them are rotten and they look at the two kilos, you agree to buy my two kilos. So to avoid deception,
the sale of food it was required that the food be in your possession. So you could see what you're buying
very reasonable principle.
However, if you take the implications of this principle, into the area of contracts for manufacturing things, that it means you cannot make such contrast.
I cannot buy a house, I cannot make a contract with a contractor. I pay you so much money you build a house according to this design whenever you can, until that house is made, I can only go like for example some people have contractors they build houses and they put them up for sale. That means that's the only way you could buy.
However,
since the issue since the practice of buying
things by way of contracts,
is universally practiced around the world and accepted in society. Then
it was chosen the ruling was
that it was permissible to make such contracts, where this is a legal preference, we are preferring
the common acceptable practice over a conclusion which may come from chaos, because the conclusion is not actually revelation. It is a conclusion by deduction.
So, it doesn't mean that every deduction is correct or applicable. Sometimes it may be but sometimes it may not be. So when I prefer another circumstance due to other factors, whether it be the universal practice in a given year etc. This then becomes a step.
last principle which came into being
was that of
our
if it means really custom
and the principle here
was that
whenever there were customs amongst the people, which did not contradict
principles from Sharia, these customs would be acceptable
as a basis for legislation in a society
the customs of people became basis for legislation in society. For example,
the word doc,
according to the language linguistically means
any animal which crawls on for
any animals walks or crawls on four feet, that's called a data. Okay?
data
engineering Syria.
In Syria, that means
they use it just to refer to horses.
They
don't the classical Arabic word, it's because adapa is their horse.
But not every dog, but is a horse. But every horse is adopted.
Specific in general, but in Syria, when you use the term dapaah it means once right away, specifically, that is the custom that is the order.
So now if we need a contract,
right in Syria,
which says that, I will sell you at DARPA at
$1,000.
Technically, according to the language, somebody could bring an answer and say, okay, you gotta collect in $2,000, give him an answer, because the answer is also done.
But because the ORF the custom in Syria, that dappen comes worse than you are obliged to give only because that is the custom of that area.
So the ruling will be according to the local council.
Is that clear?
Okay.
Now,
there's one thing that we are faced with,
which is important for us to understand, you know,
because there are some things that I've mentioned to you which go against local practices.
You know, those who belong to a particular magnet school of thought, legal thought to call like sharp high school here, you have other practices, which are attributed to other schools of thought, you know, how do we understand the differences amongst these different schools?
How does one deal with these different questions? Are we required to follow a particular school of legal thought?
Some people propose that you must, you must follow it.
Some people teach that all the school of thoughts are correct, schools of thought are correct. There are four main ones, they're all correct.
But you must follow one.
However,
if one accepts this principle, then one ends up like Christians.
According to the shop, a school of thought,
if you make wooden
and you accidentally brush against a woman,
you're
is nullified.
Your states of purity is nullified, you have to make ablution over again.
However, according to the Hanafi school of thought,
if you make wudu and you pass again, a person
you're with do is in fact.
Now if both of these schools of thought were correct,
then it means technically that it is possible for you to be in a state of the impurity and out of a state of Indiana State of purity at the same time, is that possible?
Is it possible to be in a state of whoo and out of Voodoo at the same time?
Is it possible? Could you have what do and not have to do at the same time?
You're supposed to be teachers come on, is that possible? Is it conceivable that you could have will do
and not have to do at the same time?
At the same time,
at the same time, I know you could have to do now, at a later time you could not have to do but is it possible for me in this one instance to have to do and not have to do at the same time?
It is possible.
It is possible. Okay. Explain to me how it is possible that you could have wood? And yes, not have to do at the same time. Explain how?
No, but in fact, in fact,
I'm gonna talk about the opinion, we're talking about, in fact, is it possible
for you not to have
and yet have we do at the same time? In fact, this is theory, various research you have to do. Serious chocolate says you don't have to, but can you actually be in a state of Voodoo and out of Voodoo at the same time?
as possible?
Yeah, after you can get out
after it's possible to have and then not have after, but at the same time?
No, that's not possible.
It is not. That's not reality.
It means that
if you because think about this way, you are if you have will do you can make prayer.
If you don't have glue, you cannot make prayer. So, is it possible that you can make prayer which is acceptable and not and make prayer which is that same prayer, which is not cannot prayer be acceptable and not acceptable at the same time
either to acceptable or not acceptable?
These are two opposites.
opposites cannot exist simultaneously.
You cannot be up and down at the same time.
Now, you're changing,
but these are not thinking our thing is not the opposite of acting. These things can see that there are things which can exist, can coexist.
Things can coexist. There are certain things which can coexist, but opposites cannot coexist. The opposite things that are opposites. Can you be short and tall at the same time?
Can you be fast and sin at the same time? No. See, these are opposites. These opposites cannot coexist.
Being in hoodoo, being out of opposites.
Being no do allows you to pray. Being out of you who do does not allow you to pray.
So it is impossible for you to be in a state where you can pray. And at the same time you can't pray you know, either you can pray or you can pray. It's either one or the other. Either you
How
do you cannot have enough house at the same time.
If you accept that you can have or not have at the same time, then you become, as I said, like Christians who accept that God can be one and three at the same time.
see something which is illogical, which goes against all logic, everything tells you that one plus one plus one equals three, but you turn your brain off when you accept that one plus one plus one equals one.
Only one is right, is in this is why when Mr. Malik was asked, If we were to follow a companion of the prophet in every single thing that he did, would we be on the right path? Malik said no, unless what they were doing was correct.
Because the truth is one
The truth is one
t shirts
are going to
be
so funny to them.
See,
what happens here as I said,
there are some times when things are opposites,
which cannot coexist at the same time, then there are some times when there are more than one ways to do the same thing which can coexist at the same size. For example, in the case of
Muhammad wa sallam, he raised his hand sometimes to the level of his shoulders. Sometimes he raised his hands to the level of his ears. He did both in something like that you can do one or the other because why? Because they're both divinely revealed.
Wait, wait, no. Okay, I'm gonna try to show you the two the difference between the two. You see, we have two methodologies in terms of salon. Why? Because he didn't say such as yours. Some people go back and they want to touch the air then you know, I just said he raised his hand the level of is yours. Yeah, let me want to put your thumb you're not sure where your ears are, you know, making sure so he raised his hands to the level of his ears
or to the level of his shoulders.
Now, these are two actions which the problem about the lungs as such, we have a choice in what causes following one arches and others following the others, we can choose either one we wish or we can do both. Sometimes we do one or the other. Because that was
perfectly okay. However,
there are some things
as in the case of Voodoo,
which cannot coexist.
You cannot consider your prayer valid and invalid at the same time.
See, if you are going to use this principle in the same way then it becomes only a choice by women.
I pass and touch this woman today I think okay, I have to upgrade. Because I don't feel like going to make another day I pass and I touch another woman I don't have to do because there's water nearby. So I make wood again.
That is the point when How do you
either you have or you don't have so how do you know which What is your situation? You have to now go back?
Go back to the sources of Islamic law to see where is the evidence.
When you go back you find clear evidence that Prophet Muhammad wa sallam
used to kiss his wife, Ayesha and go into the masculine lead the people in prayer.
Now, if touching a woman broke your will do then it's saying that the problems that someone was making
that is inconceivable.
Unacceptable.
So on the basis of the practice of province,
the correct ruling is that if you accidentally touch somebody, your wound is intact.
It does not break.
The department keeps it by accident.
Intentionally, intentionally.
So it is not an issue of intention or not intention. The issue is that the act of touching somebody out does not gracias theta booboo. The thing was way overdue are clearly defined by fathered moms are either you have urinated you've deprecated. You know, did you find all the things you pass when you fell asleep, all the things that we do are clearly defined.
And the reality is that because the schools of thought
they were based on inch the hat,
HDR that he had
picked based on the information that was available to them, they were in different parts of the oma,
which had not all been gathered, all of the things, the problems or some of them, so they made rulings based on the information which they had
received. And as such, each madhab has errors.
Each of them has errors.
But all of them contain
the rulings of Islam.
All of them contain the rulings of Islam.
And you are not required to stay in one school of thought that you can only follow this one or no, you can go according to school as you choose. But the choice must be based on what
what must it be based on?
based on knowledge? Because if you're making a decision based on your whims, that is, you go to Shafi, when it's easier, you're going to find another issue, either an RFP or 100. When it's easier as a molecule molecule, it's easier to humbly humbly learn, you're following your wills you're not following. You're not seeking the truth.
That is haram, for you to run around. just choosing which one seems to be the easier one for you, that becomes Haram. Because it's not based on knowledge. It's based on whim. Right? Based on whim. Whereas what is what is perfectly okay, is for you to go according to the evidence.
Wherever the schools have the evidence, the one which is the correct evidence, that's the one you're following.
That is the correct evidence. They are correct evidence that is the correct ruling. So that's how you should approach not to say that whatever you've studied, so finally, you have to throw it out the door because it was all Shafi.
What's your basis is from Sharpies. Fine. You carry on but you know that whenever an issue arises, and the evidence concerning that issue is in another school of thought, then you will leave that position from the shop or at school and follow the evidence. Because the mom shafa himself is a Sahil hobbies, for whom as a hobby, if, if the evidence is the authentic tradition for them, that is the school of thought that I intended to follow.
So he's there he's telling you that you You follow what is correct. Don't just follow me blindly.
You follow what is correct. And is that also whenever you find a ruling of mine, which conflicts with the Koran or the Sunnah, throw my ruling aside and follow the code.
That was the man
that was all the scholars, they took that same position,
but in ignorance,
after what is known as the fall of Baghdad in 1268.
In that period, the period starts with the period afterwards, there was a great decline in study of silk, actually, prior to the fall of that that two things occurred.
You had the translation of the Greek classics,
Aristotle, Plato, etc.
and Greek ideas of logic and reasoning.
came in,
scholars were involved in
where they found principles which were useful, they added it in their lines of reasoning, etc.
However,
Greek philosophy, if you're not careful, it can turn you into a person who can never be pinned down.
a philosopher who always has an excuse to get out, you know, it's an issue about, you know, he will always find a loophole here, and then you can never pin him down.
Remember Greek philosophy, I pointed out to you this before. Greek philosophers argue
that if you walk through the wall, you will never reach it.
No two bodies collide.
Remember?
Remember, why? why if you walk to the wall, you will never reach it? And why no two bodies collide? Why?
Why?
Right, because for you to make contact with anybody, for me to reach out and touch this, I must have the distance between me and that object.
And after having it, a mathematics teacher can tell us that you can continue having infinitely. So you keep having the halves of the house of the house of the house, you never reach it. But reality is your research is finished. You have the other half of infinity to infinity and come back at you, okay? That's the reality. But theoretically, philosophically, you never reach the wall, you cannot touch no two things collide. That is the danger that is involved there.
And unfortunately, that aspect was also included in the schools of thought. And it was, it was exaggerated by practice, which began in the course of the Abbas's.
Now the cabinets,
in the lab in the middle to latter part of the Abbasid caliphate.
They used to have in their court, different people to entertain the the victim, the Caliph and his entourage, it without people around him, right. Among them, they may have some dancers, you know, singing girls, we'll go to the forbidden things. They would have musicians, they would have jugglers, you know, comedian, you know, a different time people come and perform, you know, to entertain the college and his entourage? Well, amongst the entertainers was the court scholar
of course,
he would have one scholar from the shop
any would have another scholar from the Hanafi man
and then they would invent some problem
and the two scholars would debate what is the correct ruling
whoever won the debate would get a little bag of gold you know prize.
Now, what that promoted
two things one speculating
going into areas which have no reality you find in the books of secrets in this time, where people got caught up in this
in the shop a book to find actually these books are still around today, the modern books on 15 or find it in there, but the older books are still there, you will find the issue if somebody has to wind into a bag
you're passing when to park you notice when
the pass when
it when comes out, you behind the
recording is passing wind and English.
Passing wins. This is a nice way to say you know it's gonna fight
against if not if you did that and caught it in a bank. Right? If you caught it in a bag, right?
That when training is called passing wins. Okay?
Now, if you pass when this we're back and you close this back, right, and you made we'll do and then we leave the bag and the wind came out, does not break.
This is an issue, which is stupid. It's just nonsense, total nonsense. But this came up in these debates and became
appointment ended ended up in some books.
Also, there in the heart of the book, you'll find the issue. For example,
if a man has sex with a fish, what is the ruling?
But it became it ended up in books.
Because it came out of this circumstance here where people are just making up circumstances which really didn't exist, or sentences will refer to the relevance. So you'll find a body of sickness that developing which is what we call purely speculative, having no, you know, link to reality. But
what happened is that because these two scholars will be arguing, right,
the one who reached out who won the argument
was
the victor.
And he was not funny, the individual victory was the fixer for his madhab.
That is superiority of the heart of the matter.
So what happened is that that Shafi ignored this, arguing on an issue, he wouldn't give up.
He would be fighting to the last tooth and nail he was pulling all his Greek philosophers over here and they're trying to get out of it. Because they left the boat that truth anymore. It's about winning the argument.
So the issues of being a hanafy became, you know, you're 100, free until you died. This was a Shafi until he died, see the rigidness the rigid attitude towards belonging to one school, developed out of this period.
And this rigidness reached the point that,
around the Kaaba,
around the Kaaba, and
they built the Blackstone, they built four
places for a mom's from the different methods, one over here,
one over here,
one over here, one over here. That is when the time for prayer came,
all of the people who are making the loss or from the chaff a lot of there was the mom who would stand up here and all the sharp rays of common center behind him and praise them.
When they were finished, and the amount of the humbling my dad would stand up here, all the humbling to come up with liner behind him.
When it's finished, then the Maliki mommy would come up here line up on all the mannequins would line up here behind him. And
this is the this is where the widget
concerning the different schools of thought left.
It's remained
insensitive as it used to be in the past, actually, in my book here called the evolution of six, there's a picture of the map, Mecca, you know, this was taken
in 84. And here you can see in the picture different different places around the masters.
It wasn't until the 1920s when
the Saudi family that our family took over Saudi Arabia, right. At that point, they removed the different branches and said, We will pray behind one doesn't matter what it is, leave the prayer everybody must pray that they stop at that time
is again,
remembering all of these thoughts are the product of HDI you know, in understanding there was right and there was wrong. Some things you may have a variety of different ways to do it. But where there's right and wrong, it is important for us to find out what is the evidence and choose the correct method.
Now, I'll just mention
briefly,
some of the main reasons why scholars differ is why you have these differences occurring in the first place. Okay.
The first one has to do with the meanings of words. Arabic words.
Some words at shared meanings.
For example,
in Arabic
could mean either
period of purity
every 28 days
from one month to the other method
the term for an Arabic can refer either to the mentees themselves, or it's been referred to the period of purity between the two that is Arabic language it has that word implied
in every language to find the words the child shared meaning
for example, in English, we have the word
Bower,
Bower both
in the contract is going to tell you which one it is. Bow or bow, okay, right.
opposed to be a boy in the hair, there's nothing to be boring to hear, you know, now, or it could be a bow like a bow and arrow has a variety of different meanings, many meanings for the Red Bull and the word bow,
it could mean Bow Bow like that, or if I use the word bow, it could also refer to the bow of a tree,
the bow the front of the tree, you know,
you have this these are the shared meanings or context is going to tell you which one is right and which one is wrong. Now, sometimes the context doesn't actually tell you because the context could still carry both implications as in the first
two slides a lot this one refers to
the divorce women should wait for three quarters.
Now what is it is three menses are the three periods of purity between events. Now, a person may say, Well, what difference does it make you have menses?
One
period of purity.
purity, three,
okay, three, if they say three
men,
three men says you have 123. And if you say it's true the purity of God, this period
and you also have
right right up until the beginning of this next month.
Right
now
sharpei, Maliki and hanbali schools roads that
determine the period of purity
whereas the Hanafi school rule that it meant the man sees itself.
We have a statement from Ayesha,
which is in
an entire novel nabooda OHS authentic image she said Habiba had irregular menses. And she asked the Prophet about he told her to stop praying during the days of her portal
men's
the men's
or men's, the men's
now, the ruling is that
divorce cannot
be pronounced in a period of purity
in which sexual relations have taken place.
Since the law
and divorce cannot be pronounced at the time of medicine.
Either
this is Islamic law
right?
Because, in principle, if I might have sexual relations with his wife during that period of purity, then he is he loves her enough that his relations with her shouldn't be the most
serious, then you would have finished
with you anymore. If he really wants to work.
Then if he commands
for Nasus divorce, which is interference, it couldn't be because of the biological,
psychological biological factors which have led him to do that. Because a woman when a Memphis is coming on, changes their psychology to the sexes, she becomes crabby or whatever becomes down or
it changes. So she may say things when she doesn't really need
them, because you may be pronouncing it over an issue, which is back to her biological changes. So Islamism alone.
So, you must wait for this period of purity, in which you did not relations then after a period of method which you did not, so there has to be one period of purity. Right? So then, your first menses becomes here, your second menses become here. And actually, this is where your third man comes.
In the case of both positions, and still ends up being three periods,
right, either way it comes. But the difference is comes where it comes right here.
If you believe
that the core is the menses,
then the divorce doesn't end until the menses is over.
The divorce doesn't end until the man is over. Because you have to wait for three months.
So the man says the reverse will be over it's five days or whatever the divorce will be over on the fifth day of the month. Whereas if you believe that, that that core was the period of purity, then the divorce ends at the end of the
the third period of purity. In other words, at the beginning of the
the third month. That's where the difference.
The correct position is that it ends with
Archie this issue shows you that in this case, three of the schools of thought that it was
only one school held that it was
not a question some people they grew up quite into the majority, the majority say this one that's the one must be right. No, not necessarily. There was a case of the majority thinking believing it was the period of purity, when in fact that minority of one now that he was the Memphis and that was the correct one because that's the one supported by the evidence.
The other example is that
it's related to these are words which are literal
and figurative meanings.
And I already gave you the example of that one, as in the case of love, if you such women. The verse says
when I'm ready to match for a move identify Eva, that is what if you have touched women and cannot find what is the neck piombo that is you have to come back into theta will do if you have touched women the word use lump.
It literally means touch.
The shaft a score if you touch if you add