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 is the ruling on delaying Zakat al-Fitr until after Eid day?

It is forbidden to delay Zakat al-Fitr beyond the sunset of Eid day. If someone delays it past Eid day without a valid excuse, they have committed a sin and must immediately make up for it because their obligation remains unfulfilled, and they must clear their responsibility.

What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on a woman using contraception without her husband's knowledge if he is mistreating her?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is not permissible for a woman to use any means of delaying pregnancy without her husband's knowledge, consent, and mutual agreement. This is because having children is a sharʿī right belonging to both spouses equally in Islamic law. Imām al-Māwardī, may Allah have mercy upon him, stated: "The right to a child from a free woman is shared between them both" — meaning between the two spouses. [al-Ḥāwī al-Kabīr, 9/320]
It is therefore not permissible for either spouse to make a unilateral decision regarding the prevention of pregnancy without the consent of the other. We advise both spouses to discuss the matter with wisdom and mutual respect, so as to resolve any disagreement and arrive at a suitable solution that serves the interests of them both. And Allah the Almighty knows best.