Usul al-Fiqh #06
Channel: Ibrahim Hindy
Series: Ibrahim Hindy - Usul al-Fiqh
File Size: 55.12MB
Episode Transcript ©
Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate and at times crude. We are considering building a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system. No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever.
models would have value on it, he was being
published a piece of the USMLE MD.
I don't know what's happening with projectors, but so all of this works out.
I did Mark everyone's test, one who took it, and and then I left the stack at home. So next week, I'm sure who Hall will give the vote, which I think is better. Some people didn't take the test yet. So next week, hopefully, everybody will have to take it. And then we can go through all the questions together.
That everybody passed, everybody got over 50%. So that's good, that some, some people came very close to getting perfect, but just a little bit short. But you know, everybody did pretty good Insha Allah, and we can go over Mashallah. All the questions at the end.
You know, just a small thing. I think sometimes when there's a test, people get afraid, you start thinking about what it was like to be in grade school, and you don't take the test and you look for excuses, and but knowledge, you know, need some courage. So sometimes you just have to take the test. But in the end, you know, the number doesn't matter. None of that matters. What matters is we retain the information, we learn this knowledge, and that's all that matters in the end of the day. So
it's just, you know, means for us to improve and to memorize and to understand a little bit better.
So, we said from the beginning, there are four different categories of oscillation.
There is it's not showing up for some reason.
ultimate rule, which is the ruling, and this is what we talked about way at the beginning. We spoke about, you know, haram, and mcru and mandovi, and MOBA and Hokanson, LiFi, for commodity, all of that falls into that Matthew, and we spoke about the evidence and the source. What did we speak about? We mentioned the Quran. We mentioned the Sunnah, we mentioned HTML.
Now we're going to move to a data which is the inferred meanings. Now somebody's gonna say hold on a second. We didn't finish the deal, which is true. We didn't finish it, because they're gonna say the Yes. Is it that either analogies, then there's the other Adela. There are the other evidences or sources of law
that are disagreed upon by the scholars like POTUS Sahabi the statement of the Sahaba like, is this and like it's this hub of all these different categories we mentioned earlier, we didn't talk about any of them. So why are we going to talk about the data right now?
The reason is because
I did enter the inferred meaning what is the inferred meaning? How do we infer meaning out of
the Quran and the Sunnah? What are the sources of law
that applies almost exclusively to the Quran and Sunnah and to very small degree, the draft, right? So at DeLanda
is connected to the Quran and Sunnah. How do we read the Quran and Sunnah? How do we extract rulings from how do we infer meanings out of them?
And it doesn't apply to a PST and it doesn't really apply to hold as a hobby and it doesn't really apply to all those other categories. Right. So this is a mechanism that is applied to the Quran and Sunnah primarily. So since we already finished talking about the Quran and Sunnah, it makes sense. Let's talk about the data right now let's talk about the inference. How do we infer meanings from the Quran and Sunnah? And then after we finish this, we'll go back to the Delete to the source of law and inshallah we'll take it from there. And you can tell by the fact that we have a midterm we're roughly halfway through Inshallah, all the content that we're going to take in the last part
is we talked about yesterday, are you the which times and the qualifications of HD hat?
Okay, so, Delilah channel FOV Delilah means the inferences and FOV literally means wordings or, you know, lexical meanings like the words that are there. So how do we infer from the words? How do we infer from the words of the Quran and Sunnah? How do we take a meaning out of it? Now this is in reference to the strength of the inferences some inferences when we infer something? Some of them are stronger than other inferences.
So what do we mean by that?
Dinagat Innes is the first category that we have that a nurse, a nurse we mentioned the translation of a nurse before what does this mean? When we say it's
a Quran and Hadith right. So here when we say that I think this is the textual inference, but what it actually means its definition you will hear
People in OSU talking about that at NUS. Often, the definition is that when you have something in the Quran and in the Sunnah aversary Hadith, and that verse and Hadith can only possibly have one meaning, it cannot potentially have more than one meaning there's only one meaning possible for it.
So an example of this, when Allah subhanaw taala speaks about the person who goes for hajj and they make a mistake and they have to take a photo. They have to pay the expiation for men imagined whoever doesn't have an animal that they can slaughter for men. lineagen fills the yam with health at a yam and Finn hedge was said that it is our job to cashola tune Kameelah. Allah says, Whoever does not find an animal does not have the means for an animal to slaughter, then they should fast three days during Hajj and seven days when they return 10 cashola twin Kameena such as 10 Complete days. Can anyone read this verse? And say Allah is commanding us to fast 20 days or Allah's command
as to fast nine days? Or 11 days? No, it's not possible. It's explicitly clear that we're fasting 10 days till cashola from Kenya, right. So this is a meaning a verse that has a meaning that can only mean one thing and cannot mean anything other than that one thing.
And this is the law that tells us right and of course, if the data did not exist, we follow the analysis. We don't follow other than they never tell us.
Then there are and this is most scenarios.
You have a hadith, or an area that may have multiple meanings more than one meanings. It could be two meanings, three meanings for meetings more than one.
And yet one meaning is more likely than the other.
So we can potentially mean more than one thing.
But one of them is more likely than the other. The one that is more likely is called Dianna to volume. A lawyer. void means that which is apparent. So we can call this the apparently inferred or the apparent meaning.
And the one that is less likely is Elmo with the interpreted meaning, the meaning that we interpret. So with one example I'll give you both.
We use this example all the time in this class. The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said, I will tell you Yeah, I will Quran. He said, Pray witted or people of the Quran.
when the Prophet says this, what is the meaning is the meaning that which is wajib? Or is the meaning that Witcher is meant to?
It can mean either. So this is a text that carries more than one possible meaning. Right? There's more than one possible meaning in this in this heavy, it could have meant that the prophet is telling us this is no obligation upon you, I would say, oh pray, which is a commandment. Or it could mean that he's telling us to pray it because it's a good thing to do. But not that it's watching.
Which one is the law hit? And which one is the well when?
Which one is barred?
The obligatory is the lawyer. That's absolutely correct. What is apparent from this hadith is that the prophet is commanding us to pray wait.
And what is the less likely meaning is that the prophets Allah is encouraging us to pray with.
So if you're Hanafy and you take the opinion that once it is wajib, you are taking bullheaded Hadith you're taking the apparent meaning the rest of them are that had, including the humbling, we will take from Elwood will take you less likely meaning, even though we acknowledge we say yes, we know this is the less likely meaning. But because of other evidences, because of other a hadith. We say in this case, the less likely meaning is actually the better meaning is actually the stronger meaning be interpreted meaning as the stronger than what is stronger in this case.
But this is important for us to understand because many Muslims make these mistakes. What mistakes one they think the law that added to Valhalla is exactly like the Nautilus. No, they're not the same. Some, as in a hadith can only have one meaning, right? So we will say Why aren't you taking the Hadith, but they bring you a hadith that is vile I have not NUS. Understand. Then when we bring the law here, usually we take the volume, but sometimes there could be other reasons why we say we understand this is the law here, but we are taking them while we were taking the interpreted meaning there could be circumstances there. Like in this case.
The last category is
that L module
and module, which is the ambivalent
the meanings that are unclear, ambiguous ambivalent.
So this is when the idea or the Hadith can have potentially more than one meaning. But there is neither of the meanings is more likely than the other.
And the example the scholars who was used here is the idea. Well, not only what was the logic, the robustness, the unforeseen, the theoretical, that the divorced women should remain in the Ragda in their waiting period. Third, if it's a little three, Peru, what is the purpose
in the language for it can have two meanings. It can mean the menstruation or it can mean the purity after the menstruation.
So if you take the one meaning that it means the divorced woman has her waiting period, and she gets her period, then she has a period of purity, then she gets her period, then she has a period of puberty, then she gets her period and her does done. Whereas if you take the definition, that the photo is the period of purity, then she gets her period, and then she gets a period of purity.
And then she gets her period, and she gets a period of purity at number two, and she gets her period and then a period of purity, she ends that period of purity, when she gets her next period, and then her does over. So basically adds roughly a month or something like that less than 20 days or something like that. Right? You understand the difference between those two? Which one is more likely, there is no more likely the scholars of the language will look at this word and say it can mean this and it can mean this equally. So what do we do with it? When we come across it, we don't take either of them. Basically, we set it aside, we take this this verse, we set it aside, we said
we don't know which one is more likely. Let's look for other evidences in the Quran and Sunnah that can point us in the right direction. So when it's so a good way to understand, and thus we have to take it, there's no other interpretation. There's no possibilities, right? Other than what is in us avoid and then well, when we take advantage over them well, when unless there's a good reason to take in while we're overbought and emotional, we don't take it at all. We set it aside, we say Let's look for some other evidences in the Quran answer.
Okay, so this is the info, this is the based on the strength of the inference, right? So this is the strength of what we are inferring. If it's not, it's stronger, if it's above that it's less strong than in us, if it's well when it's less strong than a wire, if it's much when it's less strong than Allah understand. Now, we want to talk about that attitude alpha the categories of lexical inferences or lexical meanings on the basis of the contexts, the place the context of the words itself, the context of the words itself and not the place or good translation, but the context of the words itself. And so
it can be it can be when we read something in the Quran and Sunnah it can be one of two it can be el Mompou and it can be a muffin Montreux, literally not as to honor something to say something right. So, it is the spoken word we speak a lot of meaning what is explicit and with whom comes from firm which means to understand I what we have understood what we have what has been implied, the implicit okay.
So, how do we understand these two?
Month walk is where we are inferring based on something that has been said, something has been uttered has been spoken or has been said, my form is when we are inferring based on something that has not been said.
So if someone were to say,
we have a class on the soil and filled
in metadata to Tawheed
taught by Ibrahim Hindi,
okay? The Hmong talk is
that we have a class on the sword of truth in the masjid, right. That's what's being spoken. Now someone came to you and said, is Ibrahim Hindi holding a class on Musudan? Fifth after Sultana Aisha at Masjid Anatolia?
What would you say?
And say no.
Did I say anything about Mr. Lentil?
No. But it was implied that when we said there's a class and measured thought it took me that there isn't going to be a class. And the other question, right. So even though it was not spoken, you understood it. It was
Okay, so when we talk about LM unfold, when we talk about the explicit
there are two categories A sorry that which is clear and allow you to study that which is unclear.
What is an example? So when we said that I have a class in metadata Tawheed today
that there is a masjid called daata Tawheed. There is a messenger that exists it's called auditory.
We say this is Montreux. But it is the latest study. It's unclear. Why is it unclear, because the purpose of my my statement, that there is a class taking place that was not meant to address the issue of the existence of metadata Tauheed.
Understand, my words were meant to address the existence of the class, not of the messages.
So we say this is montolo, because we spoke about the messages. So it's spoken. But it's the latest study, it is not
from the clear parts, the explicit parts of the spoken word.
There is also allow you to study
when something is not said explicitly,
but its existence is necessary for the validity of the phrase itself.
So the phrase cannot be valid. What do we mean by it's not valid, it's not valid either logically, or it's not valid shattering. The phrase cannot be valid unless we
take an implication we imply something in it. So I'll give you an example. Allah subhanaw taala says, For Mecanim in Meridian Ellada suffering for either two men am and Ohan. Whoever amongst you is ill or on a journey, then they should make up an equal number of days. So verse in the Quran about fasting.
Does this mean
that if the person is ill, or traveling, and they fast, and they complete their fast that they still need to make it up on another day?
No. But if you read the verse is this for men can I mean cool Maria von Ellada. Suffer, whoever amongst you is Marie the sick, or Anna suffer or is traveling, then make it up.
We say this verse cannot logically make sense. But not sorry, not logically can not show her and make sense legally makes sense. Unless we infer
that what Allah subhanaw taala saying is whoever is sick, or traveling and has broken their fast, then they can make it up on other days, and they should make it up on other days. So even though the statement and you break your fast is not in the verse,
we have to understand that it's the meaning of the verse.
And so this is not considered a form this is considered mental. But it's called mempool. Later Solea. It's called the spoken, but the unclear because the spoken words cannot make sense without us inferring.
you have the Saudi and the latest Saudi Saudi Yeah, is that which conforms to the speech and is included to it. So we say we have a class on the solid Philip and metadata to heat.
And the person says, they are going to talk about
data or data that in this class,
somebody says they're going to speak about that in this class. That is sorry, because the implication of Musudan filth is that it contains within it a dead LS right? So that would be considered Muntu sadiya.
As for a latest idea,
there are three categories. By the way,
this is the most complicated part of the course. These this probably this class next class are the most complicated part. So if you feel a little bit confused, Inshallah, don't worry, I think everybody feels a little bit confused right now, but that's fine.
So, if the statement is there is a class almost sort of ship today. And the person says the person implies they will speak about or they will teach a debt and that in this class, we would say this is that inference is considered Montreux consolidate.
Yes. Because when you say we're studying Azulon Philip, we then also did have is a dental labs
No, because it was with the statement of law school it contains with it.
So what conforms to the speech and the intent of the speech?
Later, son, yeah, there are three categories. See, and this is the time where it gets.
There's a few reasons why this, this part of the course is the most complicated. Number one, the differences between these categories are very slim differences, so you can get confused. Number two, we're going to talk about non talk and then I don't know if we have enough time today to talk about the film, but some categories in the film, the scholars will say this actually belongs to them. And some categories in the month, some scholars will say it belongs in the film. And this is one of the reasons why people get confused in this area, which is makes sense there are issues that are clearly mental and there are clashing issues that are clearly my home. And then there are some issues in the
gray area where scholars will put them in different categories.
Okay, so they just thought, there are three categories. The first is that added to the genre.
And genre means like a sign or something that has eluded the eluded meaning.
So these are influences based on that which the words have not been uttered for its sake.
So the words have not been uttered for the sake of the meaning that we are taking.
So an example
is the only example I had found in the book that I was looking at.
But I will try my best to explain.
Some scholars, they say
that if a child became asleep,
if someone became asleep, and then their mother and their father purchased them.
As soon as they are purchased, they're automatically freed. Their mother and their father doesn't have to sit there father doesn't have to say you are free. As soon as he purchases his son or his daughter, they are automatically free.
What is their evidence for this statement?
They said the verse in the Quran pull in candidate Rahmani? Well, I don't know what would be the Allah says in the Quran, say tell them oh Mohammed in candidate Rukmani, what if Rama and had a son for an hour what would I be doing and I am the first to worship? I am the first of the worshipers.
Now, does this verse say anything about buying and selling slaves or anything like that? No.
What is the study? What is the intent of this verse? The intent of the verse is to remove Allah subhanaw taala from the concept of having children, right?
And also, the intent of the verse is to say that
no, people like that the intent of the verse is that we remove Allah Subhana Allah from the concept of having children. So how did they come to this conclusion in this area?
They said look at the ISS, if Allah had a child,
the prophet would do what
would worship Him? So the inference here is that if Allah had a child with either Biller, would the child be a slave? Or would the child be an object of worship? Free cetera, could be a deity itself, right?
So it wouldn't be a slave. So they infer from this, that, therefore the child of the master cannot be asleep.
So if someone
purchased their child who was in slavery, automatically, they're free.
Because the master can not have their child cannot be asleep.
This is a very convoluted example I understand.
Where's the jump
so this is ishara because they're saying that
the verse says, if Allah has had a son, that he wouldn't be worshipped.
Right. But the verse did not intend to talk about the issue of slaves and freeing of slaves and the child of a person being a slave or anything like that.
So they'll say it is one Pope.
And his latest idea as considered that you saw
K another example.
was part of
a 92nd front
the intent is sorry, when it conforms to the copy the text and the attendance audio.
Here, the intent is not there. It's not the it's not the intention to say this, but it is the latest.
It's spoken, but the intent is not to talk about it. So it's one two clips.
So another example they mentioned that Allah subhanaw taala says,
well, hamdulillah to Office Office Office, who fed everyone the chakra, that the gestation and the weaning period is 30 months. And then in another verse? Well, if you saw the movie, I mean, the waning the weaning period of the child is two years. So once it's 30 months, and one says two years. So some scholars say, the minimum period for a pregnancy of the of the justice, the gestation period, the pregnancy period, is six months. Why
is 30 months minus 24 months, brings us to six months. Now, did these verses intend to say anything about the minimum minimum period of a pregnancy? They didn't say that.
But they state infer this based on the signal.
This they saw this as a signal
ishara based on the existing words of the two verses.
So when the inference is made based on the spoken words, for which
the words were not uttered for its sake,
So the first verse we're having to move inside, but within everyone a chakra, Allah says the gestation the weaning period is 30 months. And then the other verse says, Well, if you saw the Wolfie, I mean, his weaning period is two years. So 30 months minus two years, which is 24 months, is six months. So they said the minimum time period of time of a pregnancy is six months,
based on these two verses. Now, did these two verses was the intent of these two verses to talk about the minimum period of a pregnancy? No. But they inferred based on the spoken word. They inferred a meaning that was not the intent of the words.
So that's what the data is. And ishara is when the inference is made based on the spoken words.
But the words were not honored for its sake. Yes.
Three years or 36 months, yes.
30 months, that as long as it lasts 30 months, 24 months?
So if you minus the one from the other, you'll have to six months. They said that's the minimum
of what's considered.
So I haven't already
It got a tough one.
But it was born, his wife in the waiting period for one, because the pregnancy and the weaning period, two years, one verse, and the other verses 30 months. So two, and then two and a half years, I guess, two and a half years.
So when they minus those two together, they say the minimum period of the pregnancy is going to be six months.
But that the whole the concept that we're trying to relate is that they're inferring this out of spoken words. But neither of these verses are meant to even address the issue of what is the minimum period of a pregnancy. Right. So it's based on spoken words, but these words were not spoken for the sake of this meeting.
That's the definition.
The second type is Dinanath iniquity law, which is the required meaning. This is what we kind of already spoke about. So for instance, the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam says
in them at the end
by their intentions.
Does this hadith mean that actions cannot exist except if they are intended
or does the Hadith mean that the actions are not valid Islamically except if they have intentions.
The second one, I can't be the first why, if you read the Hadith literally word for word, it would mean that actions cannot exist, except if they have intentions. In the mill Atmel orbignya. If you read it literally, it means the actions cannot exist except with intentions. But of course, this is not true. People act without intention all the time, animals make actions without intentions, right? Children Act without intentions. So that's not the the meaning of it. So the meaning of the Hadith logically would not make sense, unless we have a required meaning that what the prophet means is that actions are not valid Islamically without intentions, right? So this is the required meaning
that it's an if the law it is not spoken, yet it is considered from them on top, because the spoken word would not make any sense would not logically make sense without its existence.
Stick to the slide.
So it's an unspoken meaning required to make the statement valid, either logically, or Islamically. So in the case of in the metal metal vignette,
logically, the words don't make any sense, unless we understand the required meaning, which is that the profit means actions are not valid Islamically without contentions. And then we already gave the other example
a fasting for mechanical Medela milanesa. Right, this is considered the ladder to the feedlot, right? Because if we understood the words, literally, it means whoever is sick, or traveling, whether they fasted, or they didn't fast, they have to make it up. Right, but Islamically, that doesn't make any sense. So we have to infer a required inference here, which is that what the verse means is whoever is fasting or whoever is traveling, or sick, and breaks their fast than they must make it up.
Doesn't mean like, nobody can actually believe?
You want to be like,
you, you become
this gift? Yeah, it's important.
So it's a concern that answer, basically, it seems like it does. But I haven't heard a scholar use that example. So I'm a little bit shy to say that that's the case. But it's it feels, it seems like that wouldn't be the case.
He's asking about the example of the problem says none of you believe unless you love for your brother, what you love for yourself. So does that fall under that additive to the law? Right. So I said, it doesn't make sense that that would be the case. But
I don't know. 100%? I haven't heard another scholar use it in that context. So I'm a bit shy to say that.
Okay, the last category, that it's an email, which is the acknowledged meaning.
So when the wording is uttered, for its sake, without
any missing words.
So an example here
was sad. I was sad if it was sad if I thought to add a woman. As for the thief, the male or the female, cuts off their hands.
What is the ruling of this verse?
What's the hook? Yes.
Cutting off the hands of the thief, what is the Isla?
What is the cause? The basis of this ruling?
Can someone say
reading this verse can someone say no, you know what, that Allah is their love of money. Because they love money. That's why we cut off their hands.
We say no, you can't say that. Why? Because if the Shetty I wanted that meaning it would have used different words.
And for us to infer that meaning we basically infer that the Quran and Sunnah is not eloquent.
So would render the Quran and Sunnah inelegant. I'll give you another example.
Let's say someone said
give every poor students
Sounds like go give every poor student $100 What's their inner of that commandment?
What's the basis?
But the report? Correct?
Okay, now what if someone takes the money?
So I give you some money I say here go give the money to every poor student give them $100 You take the money and you say no.
What he really meant is give the the money to all the students who are students of HD hat.
And he says when Ibrahim said give money to the poor students, he knows that all the students have interesting heads are poor. So what he really meant is giving the money to all the students of HD hat.
We would say
this concept with Conte contradicts the fossa, the eloquence of the Quran and Sunnah. Right?
So and the Quran and Sunnah, the principles the Quran and Sunnah is interpreted on the basis that they are eloquent. So they wouldn't use such convoluted phrasing.
So this is the data to email
Let's do a little bit of exercises in sha Allah.
Okay, the first the Prophet some of these are going to be tricky. I'm telling you from now.
The prophets of Allah where alayhi wa sallam said Charleville caribou, fina haidakhan for the officer who said our Murat. If a dog drinks from the vessel of one of you let him wash it seven times. If we are to infer the ruling, that there is a legal ruling, ie
there is something the Sharia is commanding us to do something. We're not seeing what it is regarding washing the vessel that the dog drank from it.
Which type of Delilah would this be?
So if we're seeing there is a Heroku shout out, there is a legal ruling. Regarding Washington the vessel that I dog drank from
which case type of data with this fee with this be the length in US only has one meaning, but if he did, attaboy it has multiple meanings, but one of them is more likely than the other.
Because the volume
Not is correct.
Now, the second question,
same Hadith, but we say if we infer the ruling that there is a obligation it is wajib to wash the vessel that a drug dog drinks from seven times.
Would that be delighted to Nasir that Attaboy?
That would be via
understand the difference here? For sure the prophet is legislating something, whether it is wajib whether it is Mr. hab he's legislating something.
But when we say he is legislating for sure, would you that is it's an obligation. This is liable. It's the appearance meaning it is the stronger meaning, but it's not the definitive meaning.
Right so the first one is that it's not the definitive textual meaning. The second one we say that as a buyer
Allah subhanaw taala says, Hold on a metallic Mater to a demo Lemelson 01 will hinder the lead in that he be prohibited upon you is to eat the dead animals blood in the flesh of the swine and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah. So if we were to infer the meaning from this verse, that eating dead meat is haram what would be the type of inference here would it be that added fitness or that adds a lot or that adds him I wonder?
So we'd be delighted fineness because look, the nurse says clearly proto limit it is haram.
So there is no possible other meaning. Other than that, it's haram.
When Allah says what was the cat and gives the cat, somebody says the, we infer from this verse, the obligation of Zakat is this data to notice or the little boy here underneath
Before it's correct
Of course we know is a cat because this is why I'm not saying the cat isn't legit. I'm seeing from this verse by itself. If we took this verse in isolation, Allah tells you it was a cat give us a cat. Does that mean only? The only possibility is that it's Weijun? Or could there possibly be a possibility that it is for instance was to happen? It could be muster. Of course we know it's not we know it's what we know have other Hadith we have other verses but I'm just saying from this verse by itself understand
okay, how to limit to an equal one meter to one demo. Zero Matt will handle any lead Allah He the same verse, If someone were to infer the ruling, that it is haram
to 10 the skin of a dead animals use the skin of a dead animal to tannic and to use it
what type of data is this? They like to know sort of wider and more aware I
feel like I forgot it, but I'm pretty sure to my with with this is we are interpreting this I would have it
labeled as a cat.
If we say the ruling out of this verse, we are able to rule the amount of nisab there is no within Assad is the minimum threshold for things occur and the amount that is required to be paid. What kind of data would we take from this verse in regards to those two things?
Nasr law has a word or mantra
last one, which is much longer because it's unclear it doesn't say anything about the sob I didn't say anything about the amount of the cancer
I don't know if I mean a mistake on this one.
I have to double check.
Well, what is the less likely man is you can't tell it's their equal.
Swine, we're seeing the dead animals. It's gonna be
it might be long and actually.
it doesn't say younger.
But it just says, right. So I think it is.
I'll go back and double check.
Okay, what time is it?
Okay, we'll start with whom?
But we won't finish it. So I'll just wait. Don't get too long.
For the class. Okay, did I let them have fun? So we talked about non talk. Now we're on two elements home. In my phone, like we said, what the text implies beyond what is stated. That's the definition of what the text implies beyond what has been stated.
And this category is true in every legal code.
Look at the Canadian law, British law, any law in the world will have this concept of
what we infer beyond what is stated.
And there are two types of Mattoon there's some of whom who Africa and with whom Wuhan.
My wife, and Mo Africa means that which is an agreement that agrees convergence, they agree together. makan infer means the opposite.
So when we say Metformin mawatha
We are saying when there is something in the text, something that is not in the text that we are implying,
that will take the same ruling as what is in the text.
And will hide the fact is when we say when there's something not mentioned, and we give it the opposite ruling of what is mentioned.
That's the difference between a formula for quantum or formal qualifiers. Let me give you an example. Allah subhanaw taala says, when a topological map of when it comes to your parents, he says Do not say off to your parents. Okay, what is the mantra
assume that motto, don't say off to your parents, it is forbidden to say off to your parents. That is the motto. Okay? Now,
if someone says, Well, what is the ruling of saying?
No. Has it been explicitly stated in the verse, those other expressions? No.
But we give it the same ruling, as what has been mentioned in the verse. This is my phone more.
So many of whom will qualify has two categories. I will away and MUSAWAH.
formula for has two categories. The first is LLP and the second is MUSAWAH. LLP means priority.
And was that women means equal to one another.
So, LLP priority, this is what they call the argument of greater force, an argument of greater force. So, the verse says,
would add to, don't say love to your parents.
That means out of greed or for some arguments, that it is haram to curse your parents. It is haram to hit your parents. If Allah is making just seeing of haram, then it is of a greater priority. That beating up your parents is totally right.
So that would be called Mfu. Africa, Allah we, it has even greater priority. There's a greater force of arguments here.
And Musa would be using the same example what would Misawa be?
Yes, exactly another expression similar to UF. But not exactly what that would be muffin Wafaa. And its masala is equal to what is mentioned in the verse.
Should I keep going? Should we stop here?
With all the
basics, right? Yes, no. So the ruling will be the same of what is spoken and what is not spoken? There will be the same.
They both have you seen.
That's that's a way to look at it. But there are other examples that might not be exactly like that. But what we say like the strict definition of it is we have them on tools don't say off to them. And then the food all the other expressions to them will all take the same ruling as what is spoken, which is they're all haram.
The full Maha differ is when what is spoken has a ruling and what is not spoken has the opposite rule.
And there's many obviously examples of this, that we can go through.
So we'll start off with a couple of one go too long was kind of stopped maybe in five minutes or so. He has to keep going or stop. Five minutes. It's good. Okay, Inshallah, we'll stop in five minutes. We'll just go through a couple of examples to understand the formula. And then next week, we'll go through this whole slide again, inshallah. So the first category of FOMO Khalifa is Al hustle, which is, we can say that which is limited limitations. So the first category
there's two categories of hustle, which I don't have written down here. One of them for example, in the Malama Robinette, the hadith of our Prophet sallallahu, some actions are according to attentions.
This hadith is saying that
actions that have intentions are valid.
What is the ruling of all the actions that don't have intentions?
You will get reward for them.
There's no reward. So they are invalid from an aesthetic perspective. Right? So actions that don't have intentions don't get rewarded. They're considered invalid. So you have the man talk
and then with whom receives the opposite ruling.
From untruth is actions that have intentions are valid Islamically and then the form is all
All the other actions that don't have intentions are invalid centered.
Right? Why is this the case because of this concept of hustle and the phrase in Nama is used, the scholars will mention this phrase in Nana whether in the Quran and the Sunnah as a phrase of August in we translate everything in English as indeed whether it's in or in the mirror and we all say indeed right? But there's a difference in Arabic. So in nama means this to the exclusion of everything else. So in Armello, vignette, these actions I have intention actions, I have intentions are Islamically valid to the exclusion of all the other actions that don't have intentions. They're not valid snugly.
The other type of house
is a driving limitation between two parts. So if we say, someone said Zaid is Ay ay ay ay ay them.
We've established from this statement that Zed has knowledge, but nothing beyond it. Right. Now, if someone came to you and said, Who is the person that I can learn from? Who's the person I can take photo from? And you said to him, Zaid, hola Anna, Zaid is the scholar
he is the scholar
that freezing entails What
are you gonna say
yes, I guess is the best.
More than that.
He's the only scholar Cyclops. Exactly. He is the only scholar. So he says aid is the scholar in response to a question like that it means it's the only scholar. There's no scholar, I didn't think
so what's an example of this? Allah Subhana. Allah in the Quran says
what's the verse? I'm tripping on it right now?
In the la hora, zap.
COVID-19 Indeed, Allah Hua a result, he is a result. That phrase means there is no result other than Allah subhanaw taala?
Or are prophets of Allah who and even send them saying, in an equally coalminer eat waha Ivana or?
oh, we need to have that every nation has their eat, and this is early. So it limits the shorter eat to the two reads the prophets of Allah is and I'm speaking about.
So this category of house is one that the scholars disagree about whether it's considered with whom or mental. So this is why I was telling you, naturally, this part of the course is complicated, because even there's this area, that's great, where even the scholars disagree, what is considered before my book, so we put it in the film category, but some scholars will say hast is part of the mantra
we can stop here
in the baseline.
And the second one is when they derive a limitation, its technical meaning is deriving limitation between two parts, right.
Any other questions? Is?
Any kind of ethic?
it can't mean that. Because we know logically.
There are actions without intentions. So this is the part I know you came a little bit late, when we were talking about
the data to the UK the law, the required meaning. We said there are certain things that if you read it, literally, it would bring you a meeting that is either illogical or an Islamic. So if you read the Hadith in the AMA Lavinia, literally, it means only actions.
Sorry, actions can only exist if they have intentions, right, like you said, but that meaning logically doesn't make sense because children act without intentions. Animals Act without intentions. people all the time act without intentions. So that verse has, there's a required meeting we have to insert into it. There's a meme that's required to be inserted into it, which is that the Prophet is saying actions are not valid Islamically unless they have intentions
Yes, it will count. It's not valid, your actions are not valid, shut on for a word with Allah subhanaw taala unless they have intentions, if you do an evil action, whether you have good intentions or bad intentions,
it's still gonna it's, you're still not gonna receive reward for it right?
Just saying that the hadith is saying the action that will receive reward from Allah azza wa jal
will not be valid without intention, it doesn't mean that the action itself is the correct action. You can have a good intention and do something that you still won't get reward.
Right? So it's giving you one shot, TV one condition, you need intentions, it's not giving you the other condition, which is that the action has to be valid in STEM, it has to be according to recordings or has to be in accordance to or should
katiba and Yquem would mean that this obligation explicitly, well, Hala will be for example, Allah has made
business speak say that nurses that business is permissible.
Or, like, what about you like something about?
Yeah, so it would be nice that it is Hello. The nurses that nobody can read what happened Hola. Hola. Hola. And say, maybe Beyonce, McCrone, maybe VR is, you know, is haram, or you can't take those meanings. It's very clear that it's hella.
So that's all that's meant by when we have a hadith or an AI. That commands you to do something we're going to talk later, there's a whole category about an amateur nahi commandments and prohibitions, right? When there's a commandment, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's an obligation.
It probably means it's an obligation, but it doesn't necessarily mean an obligation. This is why we say it's a lawyer. Right? It's law and it's more most likely an obligation, but it's not necessary, it could have another meaning. It carries possible the other possible means.
You can do
Good question. It is my phone. And we're gonna get to that. Because after we talked about the form, we talked about the conditions of when we can apply the form and when we cannot apply. So I'll give you like a very
short answer. This would be considered the conditions is that the verse is not based on a statement of amplification. So Allah saying a lot of them walk Mudaraba to talk about amplifying the worst scenarios of using Ribba to make us understand that using Ribba is a terrible thing. Another example
one or two people for theatrical Marlon Pillai
was proud to Alice's don't force the slave girls to prostitution. If they intend chastity, does that mean that if the slave girl doesn't want chastity, you're allowed to force her into prostitution? No, Allah is bringing you the worst case scenario of imagine a slave girl that wants to be pure, and her master is forcing her to do prostitute. It's something terrible makes your heart feel disgusted, right? Allah is amplifying this scenario to tell us that this is an evil thing. We should abandon all of it. Any form of prostitution, right? So this is a statement based on amplification. This would be one of the conditions we can't apply before Mahadeva if it's a statement based on
amplification of something right, so we'll get to this inshallah next week.
Just have more
stuff Rolo, Rahim. If the brothers can stay behind this helped me pack up all the tables and chairs