Articles

Jurisprudential Madhhabism: A Middle Path between Two Extremes
Author : Dr. Mufti. Jadallah Bassam
Date Added : 05-01-2025

Jurisprudential Madhhabism: A Middle Path between Two Extremes

An Islamic legal ruling is based on established principles and evidence, serving as the foundation for all reasoning and issues, as it reflects the will of Allah The Almighty. He is the One who commands and prohibits, defining what is lawful (Halal) and unlawful (Haram). These determinations are not subject to human opinions, nor are they left to the whims and desires of people. The role of scholars, jurists, and muftis is to clarify the ruling of Allah. We are instructed to adhere strictly to Allah's commandments without exceeding them. Allah Says in the Quran (What means): "But say not - for any false thing that your tongues may put forth,- "This is lawful, and this is forbidden," so as to ascribe false things to God. For those who ascribe false things to God, will never prosper." [An-Nahl/116].
This foundational understanding of the concept of Islamic legal rulings, and its clear impact on defining the duties of muftis, judges, and scholars, is best demonstrated in its pure and correct form according to the principles of Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jama'ah. This stands in contrast to those who deviate into extremism, being either excessive or unjust, transgressing and overstepping the boundaries of what Allah The Almighty has revealed to His Messenger (PBUH). The clarification of this includes the following:
Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jama'ah have taken a balanced position between two extremes of extremism:
The First Group: This group prohibits examining evidence altogether and forbids Ijtihad (independent reasoning). Among the early sects holding such views were the Hashawiyyah, Batiniyyah, Ta'limiyyah, and extreme factions of the Hashashin, among others. They believe in following a particular teacher without any critical consideration, whether in matters of creed or jurisprudence and its principles. They claim that truth can only be known through the teachings of this teacher, whom they refer to as "the instructor" (Al-Mu'allim), hence their designation as the Ta'limiyyah or People of Instruction. The Second Group: This group mandates examining evidence in all cases and prohibits seeking guidance from scholars. In early sects, they included certain factions of the Qadariyyah. Some within this group denied consensus (Ijma'), claiming that one must rely solely on evidence. Examples include the Khawarij, some Mu'tazilah, and certain Shi'ah. Among contemporary intellectual movements, they include modernists, self-proclaimed "enlightened" and "rationalists," and those who reject adherence to traditional Islamic schools of thought (Madhahib). These groups obligate individuals to derive all rulings from the primary sources of Islamic law, whether related to creed or jurisprudence. They even reject referring to the opinions of esteemed scholars and the major schools of Islamic jurisprudence in the most intricate of issues. All of these factions assert that a person must derive the rulings they need directly from the foundational texts without relying on the expertise of jurists and scholars, though each faction expresses its views and beliefs in its own terms.
As for Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jama'ah, their stance is balanced and moderate, adhering to the definitive evidences of Shariah and the consensus (Ijma') of the Ummah. They uphold the obligation of Ijtihad, contemplation, and adherence to both rational and textual evidence in matters of creed and foundational principles. They believe it is a religious obligation upon every accountable individual (Mukallaf) to ascertain these matters through evidence and to recognize the principle of adhering to the established and credible schools of jurisprudence (Madhahib) while refraining from deviating from them. For this reason, consensus was reached on the necessity of following these schools after their establishment and widespread acceptance, as narrated by numerous scholars in works on jurisprudence and its principles.
This balanced stance of Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jama'ah, emphasizing the obligation of laypeople to follow qualified jurists and experts among the scholars of jurisprudence (Fuqaha), is supported by numerous Shariah evidences. Among them are:
The verse: "if ye realise this not, ask of those who possess the Message."
[An-Nahl/43].
The verse:" When there comes to them some matter touching (Public) safety or fear, they divulge it. If they had only referred it to the Apostle, or to those charged with authority among them, the proper investigators would have Tested it from them (direct). Were it not for the Grace and Mercy of God unto you, all but a few of you would have fallen into the clutches of Satan."
[An-Nisa/83].
The verse: "Nor should the Believers all go forth together: if a contingent from every expedition remained behind, they could devote themselves to studies in religion, and admonish the people when they return to them,- that thus they (may learn) to guard themselves (against evil)."
[At-Tawbah/122].
This is in addition to other similar evidences from the Shariah.                       The positions of the deviant sects, driven by extremism, have caused significant disruption in the structure of the Islamic society. This has led to the spread of Fitan (trials) such as Takfir (excommunication), Tazlil (misguidance), and Tabdi' (innovation), as well as the proliferation of movements that applied erroneous principles, either in the form of intellectual or military calls. This disruption is not limited to a single aspect of life; rather, it has a broad and pervasive impact, affecting all areas of individual and family life. It extends further to institutions and the sectors overseen by the state.
Hence, the methodology of Ahl Al-Sunnah, and what they have unanimously agreed upon in following the established jurisprudential schools, is a solid scientific foundation in demonstrating servitude to the Lord of the worlds and practicing aspects of worldly life with ease and openness. Their methodology is the most just and the most appropriate in attaining human interests, preventing harms to people, and achieving both worldly and eternal happiness. It is therefore obligatory upon us to follow the path laid down by our scholars and the methods they have derived from sound scientific principles.

 

 

 

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

What are the conditions for the validity of the slaughtering process according to Sharia?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Regarding the Sharia-mandated conditions for the validity of the slaughtering process (Adh-Dhabh), they are as follows:
 
The Identity of the Slaughterer: The person performing the slaughter must be either a Muslim or from the People of the Book (Christian or Jewish).
 
The Required Cuts: Both the trachea (windpipe/breathing passage) and the esophagus (food passage) must be completely severed.
 
Stability of Life: The animal must possess stable life at the start of the slaughtering process. This is identified by clear signs, such as vigorous movement or the forceful gushing of blood after the throat and esophagus are cut.
 
The Tool of Slaughter: The tool used must be sharp, capable of cutting or piercing by its edge and not by its sheer weight or blunt force.
 
And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is incumbent upon the one offering the sacrifice if, after slaughtering the animal, they discover that one of its internal organs is damaged or diseased?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The presence of disease or defect in the internal organs of a sheep does not affect the validity of the sacrificial animal, unless the disease leads to the animal becoming emaciated and its meat becoming corrupted.
 
It is stated in al-Iqnā' (2/590) by Imam al-Shirbīnī: "The third disqualifying condition: an animal with a manifest illness — meaning one whose illness visibly results in emaciation and corruption of its meat. However, if the illness is minor and does not produce such effects, it doesn`t affect the validity of the sacrificed animal." And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on one who vows to fast a specific or non-specific year? Are the two Eids, the days of Tashreeq, Ramadan, and the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding included in them? And do these days break the consecutiveness if it was intended?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If someone makes a vow (Nadr) to fast a specific, designated year, this vow does not include the days of Eid, the days of Tashreeq (the three days following Eid al-Adha), Ramadan, or the days of menstruation (Hayd) and postnatal bleeding (Nifas). Furthermore, there is no requirement to make up (Qada) these specific days.
 
However, if someone vows to fast a year that is not specifically designated (i.e., any twelve-month period) and stipulates that the fasting must be consecutive, they are bound by that condition. They must not fast on the days of Eid, during Ramadan, or during menstruation, but they are required to make up these days afterward—with the exception of the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, which do not need to be made up.
 
It is stated in Hashiyat al-Bajuri ‘ala Sharh Ibn Qasim ({Vol.2/P.606): 'If one vows to fast a specific year, the Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, and days of menstruation or postnatal bleeding are not included. This is because Ramadan does not accept any fast other than its own, and the others do not accept fasting at all. Therefore, they do not enter into the vow, and no makeup is required for them because they are legally excluded—contrary to Al-Rafi’i regarding menstruation and postnatal bleeding.
 
If one vows to fast a non-designated year: if they stipulated consecutiveness (Tatuabu’) in their vow, they must fulfill it; otherwise, they are not bound to it. Consecutiveness is not broken by the days that do not enter into the specific year vow (Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, menstruation, and postnatal bleeding). However, one must make up the days missed—excluding the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding—immediately following the end of the year. As for the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, it is not made up, contrary to Ibn al-Rif’ah, who argued that it must be made up just like Ramadan.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.

What is the ruling on making up missed prayers during prohibited times?

 

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to make up (qada’) missed prayers at any time, even during the periods when prayer is generally prohibited. The prayers that are forbidden and considered invalid during these times are 'absolute voluntary prayers' (nafl mutlaq)—which have no specific cause—and voluntary prayers whose cause follows the prayer itself, such as the Sunnah of entering Ihram or the Sunnah of the Istikharah prayer. Furthermore, no prayer is considered disliked (makruh) during these prohibited times when performed within the Meccan Sanctuary (Makkah al-Mukarramah).
 
It is stated in Bushra al-Karim (Vol.1/P.181), one of the Shafi’i texts: 'It is not forbidden to perform prayers that have a cause that is not delayed (i.e., the cause is preceding), such as making up a missed prayer (fa’itah)—even if it was a voluntary one—and the funeral prayer (janazah); or a cause that is simultaneous, such as the prayer for rain (istisqa’) or the eclipse prayer (kusuf)... and the Sunnah of wudu, the greeting of the mosque (tahiyyat al-masjid), the Sunnah of circumambulation (tawaf), the Sunnah of arrival, and the prostrations of recitation (tilawah) or thankfulness (shukr). These mentioned prayers and their like are not forbidden provided that one does not specifically intend (ta'ammud) to perform them during the disliked time because it is a disliked time. If one does so intentionally, it becomes forbidden, even if it is a mandatory makeup prayer that is due immediately; because in that case, one is acting in defiance of the Sharia. This is in contrast to when one does not specifically seek out that time, even if the prayer happens to fall within it, or if one seeks it for another purpose—such as delaying a funeral prayer to that time so that a larger number of people may pray over the deceased; in such cases, it is permissible and valid... And it is forbidden to perform prayers with no cause at all, like absolute nafl, or those with a delayed cause, such as the Istikharah prayer, the prayer for Ihram, the prayer for a need (hajah), the prayer before leaving the house, or the prayer before execution; because their causes occur after the prayer itself.' And Allah the Exalted knows best."