All praise is due to Allah, Lord of the Worlds and may the best of prayers and peace be upon the clear light, the mercy to the worlds, Muhammad, and upon his family and companions, and upon all those who follow his guidance and emulate his Sunna until the Day of Judgment.
Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) is the practical aspect of Islamic law (Sharia), and it illuminates the way for those who are accountable, guiding them on what is required of them. It is an inexhaustible source with its rulings and interpretations, which are suitable for all times and places.
The wisdom of Allah, Exalted be He, has decreed that Islamic jurisprudence be built upon firm principles and solid foundations to ensure its stability and steadfastness. At the same time, it is based on flexible branches and permissible ijtihad (independent reasoning), which guarantee its continuity and applicability to everyone across different times. Many rulings are derived from a few textual sources, and it is well known that the primary and main sources of Fiqh are the Qur'an and Sunna. However, what is the understanding of the Qur'an and Sunna for those who study Fiqh, derive rulings from it, and issue fatwas to people? And how do they approach the Qur'an and Sunna?
Undoubtedly, each Imam has their own unique method of dealing with the Quran and Sunna in their ijtihad and Fiqh. This is evident in the school of thought they founded and the teachings they imparted to their students, resulting in established principles and foundations known to all.
This is precisely what happened with the four renowned Imams, who established their respective schools of jurisprudence based on unique principles and foundations. These principles were used to understand the texts of the Quran and Sunna, and to determine how to deal with them. They possessed a deep understanding of Islamic law and its wisdom, and Allah blessed them with sound minds and insightful perspectives.
On the other hand, there is a group of people who claim to adhere to Islamic jurisprudence but say: "The Sharia is the Qur'an and the Sunna; these are the primary and sufficient sources. We do not accept the sayings of men" – meaning the Mujtahids (those who engage in independent legal reasoning). Whatever we find in the Quran and Sunna, we act upon it and it is sufficient for us.
In addition, Islamic jurisprudence is not derived from a single hadith, but from a collection of texts. This is because a hadith might contradict a fundamental principle for the Mujtahid. For example, Imam Malik would sometimes refrain from acting upon a hadith, even if it was included in his Muwatta, because it contradicted the practice of the people of Medina. This demonstrates his deep understanding of jurisprudence, may Allah be pleased with him. He would narrate a hadith that contradicted his own opinion, based on a principle he held, to prevent the assumption that the hadith had not reached him.
We say to these people: Allah, the Exalted, Says in His Noble Book (What means): "And ask the people of knowledge if you do not know." [An-Nahil/43]. Moreover, why did the Prophet, peace be upon him, says: "He should follow my Sunna and the Sunna of the rightly guided, rightly directed successors, holding fast to it with his molars"? [At-Tirmidhi].
In any case, I do not wish to debate this matter as this is not the appropriate place for it. Rather, I wanted to present a scholarly school of jurisprudence with deep-rooted principles and foundations in ijtihad, a school that approached the claim of the Quran and Sunna with the utmost reverence for and adherence to them: the school of Imam Malik, may Allah be pleased with him.
Imam Malik is a prominent scholar of hadith, spent his life serving it and was among those who defended it. No reasonable person who examines Imam Malik's opinions and writings could doubt his unwavering commitment to the Prophetic hadith. Any claims that Imam Malik contradicted the Prophetic hadith are mere fabrications. Those who make such claims clearly do not understand Imam Malik or his Madhhab. If one were to carefully examine the hadiths narrated by Imam Malik but not acted upon by him, they would find a legitimate Islamic reason for the Imam's actions, and there are numerous examples of this.
Imam Malik, may Allah be pleased with him, was so committed to the textual evidence of the Quran and Sunna that he never neglected a hadith. He would not leave any established text without acting upon it, and he would never deliberately prioritize one text over another until he had exhausted all efforts to reconcile them. He derived legal rulings from the totality of hadiths, and did not limit himself to a single hadith as some jurists do. In fact, he made every effort to utilize every hadith, even if it meant applying it to a specific legal issue, even if the hadith seemed to contradict his own principles.
An example of this is one of his fundamental principles, may Allah be pleased with him: worship is specific to the individual and no one can perform worship on behalf of another. Hajj is included in this. If Hajj becomes obligatory for someone and they perform it, they are cleared from liability before Allah the Almighty. However, if someone else performs Hajj on his or her behalf, it is not valid.
However, there is a sound hadith narrated by Bukhari from the Khath'amiya woman who asked the Prophet, peace be upon him: "O Messenger of Allah, the obligation of Hajj upon Allah's servants has come upon my father, an old man who cannot endure the journey. Can I perform Hajj on his behalf?' He said: "Yes." This took place during the Farewell Pilgrimage. Imam Malik also narrated this hadith in his Muwatta.
Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'It is permissible to perform the optional pilgrimage on behalf of a deceased person, but it is disliked to do so for the obligatory pilgrimage.' Here, Imam Malik has applied his general principle while also taking into account the specific hadith, not neglecting it, even in a particular aspect of the overall issue.
Imam Al-Dasuqi said: "The prevailing opinion is to prohibit delegation [in Hajj] for the living, absolutely, whether they are healthy or sick, whether it is for the obligatory or optional pilgrimage... What is mentioned in Sharh al-Ummdah about delegation in Hajj being good if it is without payment, because it is a charitable act, and being disliked if it is with payment, as stated by Malik, because it involves profiting from worldly matters in exchange for an act of the afterlife, indicates that the discussion of delegation is primarily about the dead, not the living." [Hashiya Al-Dasuqi Ala Al-Sharh Al-Kabir,Vol. 2/P.18].
Similar to this is the case of someone who eats or drinks while fasting, forgetting that they are fasting. The general principle is that anything that enters the body, whether food or drink, breaks the fast, even if it is unintentional. However, due to the sound hadith narrated by the Prophet, peace be upon him: "Whoever eats or drinks while fasting, forgetting that they are fasting, should not break their fast, for that is sustenance provided by Allah," narrated by Tirmidhi, Imam Malik, in consideration of this hadith, stated that eating or drinking due to forgetfulness breaks the obligatory (Fard) fast; not the voluntary (Nafil).
Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: "Whoever eats or drinks during Ramadan, whether out of forgetfulness or absentmindedness, and it was an obligatory fast upon them, then they must make up that day." [Muwatta Malik, Vol. 1/P. 304].
In addition, eating locusts is permissible according to the majority of jurists without the need for slaughtering, due to the hadith narrated from Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with them both, who said: "The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: 'Two dead creatures and two types of blood have been made lawful for us. The two dead creatures are the fish and the locust, and the two types of blood are, I think he said, the liver and the spleen.'" [Sunn Al-Kubra by Al-Bayhaqi].
Imam Malik said, 'Eating anything without slaughtering is not permissible, due to the general principle that anything that dies a natural death is considered carrion and cannot be eaten. Therefore, locusts must be slaughtered. However, in consideration of the hadith, Imam Malik did not require the complete slaughtering of locusts, but rather any action that would kill the locust, such as dropping it in oil, would suffice.
In the matter of eating locusts, Imam Malik applied the general principle that anything that dies a natural death is considered carrion and cannot be eaten. He also applied the principle of Islamic slaughtering and took into account the hadith that permitted eating dead locusts. He neglected nothing of these matters. May Allah have mercy upon Imam Malik, who founded a comprehensive school of jurisprudence for those who came after him. It is no wonder that the Maliki Madhhab is a Madhhab of general principles, legal texts, objectives, consequences, and interests. This is true jurisprudence, comprehensive jurisprudence.
May Allah benefit us from these eminent scholars and make us follow in their footsteps. Our final supplication is that all praise is due to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds.
