rami wrote: Bi ismillahir rahmanir rahim assalamu alaikum Principles of Ijtihad -La ijtihaada ma'al-nass; There is no Ijtihaad on a matter when the rule is explicitly stated in the Quran and Sunnah, where ther is no possibility of another meaning being derived. For example, "Pray at perscribed times","one hundred stripes"(it is a punishment), etc. -Ijtihad must lead to the intent of the law giver, Allah Ta'ala. Note: There can be no Ijtihad for inovation.

 Es_Selam'un Aleykum ve Rahmetullahi ve Berakatuh,

 Very nice statements brother,i cry for some of the scholars who give fatwas from the opposite side of the Qur'an and Sunnah;while they are so clear to be understood...Wa Salaam...

Community wrote: 22:78 And strive in His cause as ye ought to strive, He has chosen you, and has imposed no difficulties on you in religion; it is the way(trod)of your father Abraham. It is He Who has named you Muslims, both before and in this (Revelation); that the Messenger may be a witness over you, and ye be witnesses over mankind! So establish Prayer(salaat), give Charity, and hold fast to Allah. He is your Protector - the Best to protect and the Best to help! There is no mention of the word ijtihad in the koran i must note, just jihad, striving for His cause. I have a question for you, In the koran it says that the punishment for an adulterer or adulteress is 100 lashes, after ofcourse the act of adultery has been witnessed by 4 witnesses, there is no mention of stoning of the adulterer or adulteress in the koran, in the hadith there is, but if we look closely we will see that this stoning was for a jewish adulterer, and the jewish law say that the punishment for adultery is stoning, so the prophet saws basically implemented the jewish law when those involved were jewish, so how come "the shari'ah" implements stoning for adultery when it involves muslims?

Es_Selam'un Aleykum,

 I don't agree...there are so many examples in the life of the last prophet that he made ijtihad with his companions...then you are claiming that there is no fiqh?,think about more...wa salaam...

Community wrote: Fiqh?, if you mean the knowledge on how to preform the salat for instance then i say, there are different ways in which muslims preform salat, the basics are all the same but they differ in details, more over the knowledge on how to pray should be passed on through people, not books, the prophet taught his companions and they taught their childeren and others and so on, for us to learn how to pray should depend on whom we trust for that sort of knowledge, the best way is listening to what the person, if what he says is true and good and if the person is of a higher moral standard, basically how much he fears Allah. Nowadays people look into books too much concerning the faith, remember the prophet is the unlettered prophet. Anyway my question still stands for those who believe in the words of man i.e "the scholars" who believe in their set rules and regulations on how to derive "knowledge"....another question is: where did all these regulations and rules come from? if you can prove it please do so with the koran, because i see what trusting man's words does, just look at the jews with their "obey the scholars", and the christians with their "the holy spirit came upon me and i wrote it down it is God's work".

 Brother,fiqh includes the knowledge more than salat, please work more on qur'an then u will understand how the scholars take decisions from...i can suggest u a book which i have newly conducted to the board which may help u,it's name is way to the Qur'an,so many answers are waiting u...wa salaam...

a note:the book is at the qur'an and sunnah section...sorry for my short answer,i am outside the discussions...wa salaam...

On the term Illa, i dont have a proper defanition but insha allah the following will make it more clear:

the underlying legal principles ('illa)

Empirical:

1. 1. Relying on or derived from observation or experiment: empirical results that supported the hypothesis.
   2. Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment: empirical laws.

Before one can answer this question, one must understand there the scholars of usul al-fiqh have identified at least three types of ijtihad:

(1) takhrij al-manat;

(2) tanqih al-manat; and

(3) tahqiq al-manat.  

Takhrij al-manat roughly means "extraction of the grounds [of a divine ruling]. An obvious example would be that the grounds for the prohibition of khamr (grape wine) is its capacity to intoxicate.  While this example is obvious, other texts of revelation prove much more difficult in the extraction of the manat, and hence, the mujtahids have differed greatly in their opinions regarding the grounds of the divine ruling.  [note: "manat" when used in the context of takhrij al-manat is virtually synonymous with the term "'illa. " Of course, the scholars of usul al-fiqh have identified various types of 'illas of differing strength, something I am only superficially familiar with. A good source discussing this question is Imam al-Ghazali's "Shifa` al-ghalil fi masalik al'ta'lil," wherein the Imam discusses the various types of 'illas and their use in juridical analogy (qiyas). Wa-allahu a'lam. 

Because takhrij al-manat requires proper understand of the indicants of the divine ruling (the dalil), it is this type of ijtihad that requires mastery of the full spectrum of religious sciences with the additional stipulation of 'adala and piety. Obviously, the minimum required is that the mujtahid know all the proof texts that are relevant to solving the question before him, and that there is no unequivocal divine communication (khitab) governing the case. [Note: there are three types of "dalil" of a divine ruling, Qur'an, sunna and consensus. With the exception of the Qur'an, the different mujtahids had different opinions with regard to the manner in which the other two dalils had to be transmitted so as to constitute a valid dalil]. 

I believe Sidi Haddad only recently posted on the attributes of a mujtahid mutlaq, i.e., that scholar who is qualified to issue religious opinions on any matter based on his direct interpretation of divine revelation. It is commonly accepted that no one satisfies these requirements today. 

While this is erroneously claimed to be a defect, in fact, because we have the legacy of the mujtahid-imams, the advanced students of these Imams, by following the doctrines of their Imams, are able to derive rulings for unprecedented cases rather easily.  Indeed, according to Ibn al-Salah, it is easier for the muqallid of an Imam to arrive at a ruling on an unprecedented case by relying on the principles of his Imam than it would be to derive the rule solely on the dalils of shar', wa-allahu a'lam. This level of scholar is deemed mujtahid fi-l-madhhab (a mujtahid within a madhhab). 

[also "mujtahid muntasib = affiliated mujtahid") GFH:. ]

The second type of ijtihad, tanqih al-manat, is an intermediary step preceding takhrij al-manat, where the mujtahid, working as a scientist does, confronts a dalil, and hypothesizes that the ground for the rule contained in the dalil is X, Y or Z. He then tests this hypothesis against other data to see if the theory is sound. The mujtahid continues doing this until he determines which of X, Y or Z, or a combination of them, is the actual ground for the rule. 

It seems to me that at this stage of ijtihad, non-specialists in religious sciences have a critical, though ancillary role, to play in aiding the mujtahid's inquiry. Often, when a mujtahid is attempting to determine whether the 'illa is X, Y or Z, he will rely on some empirical theory, especially if the mujtahid believes that the 'illa should be "appropriate (munasib)" to the ruling. Appropriate in this case means that it serves one of the five maqasid kulliyya [comprehensive objectives] of the Shari'a, i.e.,

[1] the promotion of religion,

[2] the protection and/or enhancement of life,

[3] property,

[4] progeny and

[5] reason ('aql).  

Where a fatwa incorporates an empirical judgment, the mufti must take steps to ensure that the empirical judgment he is adopting is not clearly erroneous. 

Finally, tahqiq al-manat is that type of ijtihad concerned with accurate perception of the empirical world. Allah, subhanahu wa ta'ala, in His mercy, obliged us to worship Him only conditionally, i.e., when certain conditions are met. Likewise, in His mercy, He also removes certain obligations from us when certain impediments exist. The conditions whereby an act becomes obligatory is called a "sabab," and a condition whereby an obligation is suspended is called a "mani'", literally, "an obstacle. "A common example of a sabab is the sun reaching its zenith in the sky being the condition for the obligation to pray zuhr. An obstacle removing the obligation of Pilgrimage would be, at least for Malikis, an absence of secure carriage to the Hijaz. In other situations, the divine rule itself requires the application of some empirical knowledge, e.g., facing the qibla at the time of prayer, or in the circumstance of the destruction of private property, an empirical determination of its fair market value. 

The point is simply that in many situations, properly obeying Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala requires making an accurate determination of an empirical situation, and this type of knowledge is not necessarily within the preserve of a mujtahid, unless he is also, independently of his mastery of religious sciences, also a master of the particular empirical science at issue. 

Al-Qarafi gives a good example of an empirical error underlying Imam Malik's (may Allah be please with him!) opinion regarding the beginning of the lunar months in the Islamic calendar. The mashhur of the madhhab is that once the moon is seen anywhere, the month begins for the entire Muslim community. This position is known as "ittihad al-matali'. "The other position, adopted by the Shafi'is, at least according to al-Qarafi, is that each town has its own moon, i.e., months begin and end according to local moonsightings. Qarafi explains, however, that Malik's position was based on the erroneous empirical theory that the moon was visible at the same time everywhere.   Al-Qarafi, being trained in astronomy, knew this to be false, and stated that the position of the moon relative to human observers varies depending upon the position of the human observer, and therefore, the Shafi'i position is correct. (See, al-Furuq, al-farq al-awwal, al-farq bayna al-riwaya wa-l-shahada). 

Thus, as a general matter, one can say that any fatwa that is based on an empirical premise known to be wrong is itself certainly wrong, although the pure rule that the mujtahid relied on in issuing his opinion may nonetheless be sound. 

[The Matali` or visible moon positions per Malik and the Hanafi School are unified in effect for Ramadan and Shawwal on the grounds - Allah knows best - not of the empirical theory that the moon should be visible at the same time everywhere, but the explicit wording of the Prophet (saws) said to "fast at its sighting and cease fasting at its sighting" in absolute sighting terms, i.e. no matter where, one true sighting sufficing for the whole Umma, - which is what is meant by ittihad al-Matali` - and this is why Ramadan and `Eid al-Fitr are or should be unified.  This is the agreement of the Four Schools according the Jedda-based International Fiqh Council including the Shafi`i Ulema such as the late Shaykh Mustafa al-Zarqa, Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Dr.  Wahbe al-Zuhayli. . .  so the present orientation of the Umma has endorsed the fatwa of Imam Malik after all, regardless of his or the Hanafi Imams' knowledge in astronomy.  Whereas for Dhul Hijja the Matali` must be precisely differentiated in every respective area and it is therefore allowed that their respective dates for `Eid al-Adha differ.  WAllahu a`lam.  G. F.  Haddad. ]

Another example might make this more clear:according to Imam Malik, any land that the Muslims conquered by force is waqf, and therefore, not eligible to be privately owned. Imam Malik also gave the fatwa that the land of Egypt was a waqf based on the historical (empirical) assumption that Egypt had been conquered, not that it had voluntarily (sulh) entered Islam.  Qarafi points out that whether Egypt was or was not conquered is a matter of shahada (empirical knowledge) not riwaya (transmission of revelatory knowledge), and therefore, Imam Malik's opinion on this empirical fact is not an appropriate object of taqlid. Indeed, others, e.g., al-Layth b.  Sa'ad, who were closer to events, who reported the opposite, are more worthy to be believed, not because their knowledge of revelation exceeded that of Malik, but rather that their specialized empirical knowledge regarding the circumstances whereby the territory of Egypt entered Islamic dominion is more accurate than that of Malik. 

One can conclude by a general observation. Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala has blessed this umma by making His commands consistent with reason ('aql), the attribute by which He distinguished the descendants of Adam, 'alayhi al-salam, from the rest of His creation.  Accordingly, we Muslims, when called upon to exercise our mental process in the process of obeying our Creator, are always obliged to follow the best information we can find. Thus, as non-specialists in the revelatory sciences, we know that the opinions of the mujtahid-Imams are superior to the opinions of the unlearned, and accordingly, we follow their opinions, not those of the uninformed. Likewise, we also know that mujtahid imams are not necessarily the best source of information on empirical matters, and accordingly, where our worship of Allah, subhanahu wa ta'ala, requires ascertaining that a certain empirical circumstance be confirmed, or negated, we must rely on experts in that empirical field for that piece of information. 

In short, valid ijtihad consists in following the best available evidence, whether that evidence is revelatory or empirical, as the context requires.  Wa-allahu 'alam.

[QUOTE=rami] Bi ismillahir rahmanir raheem

Assalamu alaikum

Before i reply i should make something clear, What i posted above are some of the laws Governing the process of ijtihad as defined by our scholars, This is part of Usul al Fiqh not Fiqh it self.
Fiqh means To Understand, it is narated from rasul allah (salla llahu alaihi wa sallam) that he said " He who seeks from Allah for Goodness, Allah will Give him Understanding in the Deen". Fiqh is understanding in the Deen.

I will repeat the defanition of Ijtihad.

- Ijtihad is exerting or striving of one to his utmost (synonymous with sincerity) abilities to extract rulings and principles compatible with the Shariah. How about striving with utmost abilities to extract ruling compatible with the koran? since unfortunatly the shariah is not always compatable with the koran(see the unanswered question in my first post)

Basicaly ijtihad is the striving or process of extracting Fiqh(or Law as it is known today) from the Shariah. So Fiqh is now law and not understanding anymore? who changed the word Fiqh from understanding(according to the prophet) into law(as it is known today)?

Saying there is no ijtihad in Islam is not corect since any shaykh which has come up with a new ruling in Islam is doing Ijtihad(extracting rulings). Shaykh, it depends who listens to him right? so what are the criteria for a sheykh to be followed? the loudness of his voice? the financial resources he has? or his fear of Allah? and how does one measure that?

What you have basicaly said or implied is that it is not permisable "to extract rulings and principles compatible with the Shariah." you are correct, since the shariah is not always compatable with the koran. how is this possible? men can be wrong, and sometimes killed and opressed for speaking the truth, and through the ages only the koran has remained the same, not men's opinions, rulings and regulations even as to how to derive knowledge "....indeed,(who) fear(dread) Allah are those who have knowledge,verily Allah is mighty (again and again) forgiving" chapter 35:28 the originator(faatir)so this means those who have knowledge fear, dread Him.

The result of your second argument on not trusting scholars is that every person should become his or her own Mujtahid which is kind of contradictory when you ask them to rely on someone they trust. Let me explain this to you, everyone will stand alone before Him with the decisions they made in this life, Allah wishes two things from us, to fear Him and at the same time hope for His mercy. This should be done in everything we do even "Ijtihad" deriving knowledge, and if one does this, He will forgive him his sins and better his works, as promised in the koran. So yes everyone needs to fear Him and hope for His mercy and with those 2 qualities seek the truth in matters.

Please dont be so Quick to label our scholars with terms such as bidah when the only way you have recieved the Quran and ahadith which you trust is through them and the methodology they developed to preserve them. All the scholars of Islam followed a Madhhab and many of them have the madhhab they followed in there names."Man yahdi Allaho fa huwal muhtad waman yudhlil fa laa hadiya lah". In English: who ever Allah guides this one then is the guided and who ever He leads astray there is none who can guide him" This sounds like a verse from the koran, but is it?, it is what i have heard "shuyukh and scholars" use, the verse that i know is:" who ever Allah guides then this is the guided and who ever He leads astray these are the losers" (chapter 7 Al A'raaf "The high places" verse: 178) Shame on me if i am wrong.

When you have a Sytem of Governence like the Khalifha that Government also requires a Law system by which to rule, Islam has Four systems namely the four Madhhabs. When the leader comes, the believers will recognize him, and will follow him, make sure you are on the right, and on the right means to fear Allah and hope for His mercy.

We are not discussing the islamic legal system just one aspect of it, insha allah we can stay on topic. .Insha Allah.

Bi ismillahir rahmanir raheem

Assalamu alaikum

How about striving with utmost abilities to extract ruling compatible with the koran? since unfortunatly the shariah is not always compatable with the koran(see the unanswered question in my first post)

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/glossary/term.SHARIAH.html - Shari'ah

The root of this word is Shara'a; and some other names of it are Shar', Shir'ah and Tashri'. The Shari'ah is the revealed and the canonical laws of the religion of Islam.

- Ijtihad is exerting or striving of one to his utmost (synonymous with sincerity) abilities to extract rulings and principles compatible with the Shariah (revealed Law etc)

Basicaly ijtihad is the striving or process of extracting Fiqh(or Law as it is known today) from the Shariah. So Fiqh is now law and not understanding anymore? who changed the word Fiqh from understanding(according to the prophet) into law(as it is known today)?

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/glossary/term.FIQH.html - Fiqh

The meaning of the word fiqh is understanding, comprehension, knowledge, and jurisprudence in Islam. A jurist is called a Faqih who is an expert in matters of Islamic legal matters.

What is in the brakets is the context of that definition, meaning many people today simply view it as islamic law. The Islamic defanition is above.

Saying there is no ijtihad in Islam is not corect since any shaykh which has come up with a new ruling in Islam is doing Ijtihad(extracting rulings). Shaykh, it depends who listens to him right? so what are the criteria for a sheykh to be followed? the loudness of his voice? the financial resources he has? or his fear of Allah? and how does one measure that?

The point is, any shaykh who has atempted to derive a new law in islam regardless of whether it is acepted or not has performed ijtihad, this is the meaning of the word. Not every shaykh is accepted but that is not the argument at all. It is those who do not follow a madhhab which the Scholars of this Ummah reject, syaing otherwise is like trying to re-write history.

you are correct, since the shariah is not always compatable with the koran. how is this possible? men can be wrong, and sometimes killed and opressed for speaking the truth, and through the ages only the koran has remained the same, not men's opinions, rulings and regulations even as to how to derive knowledge "....indeed,(who) fear(dread) Allah are those who have knowledge,verily Allah is mighty (again and again) forgiving" chapter 35:28 the originator(faatir)so this means those who have knowledge fear, dread Him.

This is wrong, how can the shariah contradict the Quran when the Quran is part of the Shariah. In the context of ijtihad and the defanition of it above Shariah means revealed law in the Quran and Sunnah. General arguments are not efective when discussing Usul al Fiqh since it is a finite discussion and atention to detail is utmost. General arguments ignore to much to be of any value.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/glossary/term.IJTIHAD.html - Ijtihad

Exerting the sum total of one's ability attempting to uncover Allah's rulings on issues from their sources (Qur'an, Sunnah, Ijma', etc.). Sometimes divided into complete ijtihad (the ability of one to independently arrive at Allah's rulings in all areas of fiqh) and partial ijtihad (the ability of one to do so only in certain areas of fiqh in which they have exerted such efforts). 

How can anyone say this is not in Islam, it basicaly means Finding out what Laws Allah has revealed to us in The Quran and Sunnah of rasul allah (sallah llahu alaihi wa sallam).

You are confusding it With Qiyas which "in fiqh means to use analogy to conclude towards a ruling." not specificaly mentioned in the Shariah.(corection it is mentioned by rasul allah himself in a hadith instructing a shaba upone sending him to teach a tribe to use this aspect of ijtihad if he cannot find anything Specificaly mentioned in the Quran and Sunnah on an issue which may come up.)

Let me explain this to you, everyone will stand alone before Him with the decisions they made in this life, Allah wishes two things from us, to fear Him and at the same time hope for His mercy. This should be done in everything we do even "Ijtihad" deriving knowledge, and if one does this, He will forgive him his sins and better his works, as promised in the koran. So yes everyone needs to fear Him and hope for His mercy and with those 2 qualities seek the truth in matters.

Man yahdi Allaho fa huwal muhtad waman yudhlil fa laa hadiya lah". In English: who ever Allah guides this one then is the guided and who ever He leads astray there is none who can guide him" This sounds like a verse from the koran, but is it?, it is what i have heard "shuyukh and scholars" use, the verse that i know is:" who ever Allah guides then this is the guided and who ever He leads astray these are the losers" (chapter 7 Al A'raaf "The high places" verse: 178) Shame on me if i am wrong.

no wahabi here, if you look at the question about adultery you should have known that, i am one who submits to Allah wishing His peace(a muslim) you have quoted me inproperly in some occasions but nevertheless, My question was, is this a verse from the koran or not? "whoever Allah guides he then is the guided and whoever he leads astray there is non who can guide him" i heard this "phrase" come from "salafi" mouths, i don't know if others use it also. my other question was about stoning of adulterers, In the koran it states that the punishment for this sin is 100 lashes, in the hadith the prophet implemented stoning, but if we look closely into the matter we discover it involved jews, since stoning of adulterers is a law from the torah, so he judged them according to their book, today in the "shariah" the punishment for adulterers who are muslims, is stoning when they are married and commit this sin, and 100 lashes when they are not married. Since stoning is not mentioned in the koran and it being such a severe punishment, and taking a closer look at this hadith and that it involved jews and not muslims, the only possible explanation is that somehow a jewish law was made into an "islamic" law, it became a part of the islamic "shari'ah" even though it goes against the koranic teachings(100 lashes the punishment for adultery), and even the way of the prophet saws(in aplying this punishment only when it concerned the jews, since it is a law from their book the torah). I wonder how you could confuse me with a wahabi or one who uses their rethoric? or is it just a word to use when you want to dismiss something when it does n't go along with what you are taught and accepted as truth? is this not the same thing that those who you call "wahabis" do? i hope you understand i am not trying to humiliate you, but please read, think and reason, and wish for His mercy, i wish it for you already, may Allah open our eyes and ears, and may He write for us the fear of Him on both, and all our senses. ameen.

no wahabi here, if you look at the question about adultery you should have known that,

I dont read every post, You may not be a wahabi but your comments certainly are. What you said above is the exact argument they like to use against the madhhabs. Maybe you have read some articles without knowing the ideology of the auther Allahu alam but there is no mistake you have even phrased the argument the same.

i am one who submits to Allah wishing His peace(a muslim) you have quoted me inproperly in some occasions but nevertheless, My question was, is this a verse from the koran or not? "whoever Allah guides he then is the guided and whoever he leads astray there is non who can guide him" i heard this "phrase" come from "salafi" mouths, i don't know if others use it also.

I am refering to other comments as well as this, it is used to call scholars ignorant simply becouse they can not comprahend what they say. This is a verse from the Quran, if my memory is correct it was revealed in relation to Kafirs, they tend to use these arguments aimed at non muslims agaisnt muslims.

my other question was about stoning of adulterers, In the koran it states that the punishment for this sin is 100 lashes, in the hadith the prophet implemented stoning, but if we look closely into the matter we discover it involved jews, since stoning of adulterers is a law from the torah, so he judged them according to their book, today in the "shariah" the punishment for adulterers who are muslims, is stoning when they are married and commit this sin, and 100 lashes when they are not married. Since stoning is not mentioned in the koran and it being such a severe punishment, and taking a closer look at this hadith and that it involved jews and not muslims, the only possible explanation is that somehow a jewish law was made into an "islamic" law, it became a part of the islamic "shari'ah" even though it goes against the koranic teachings(100 lashes the punishment for adultery), and even the way of the prophet saws(in aplying this punishment only when it concerned the jews, since it is a law from their book the torah).

your analysis is not correct, in the Quran it self it says look to past scriptures to confirm what is in Islam, similarly rasul allah (sallah llahu alaihi wa sallam) many times has said i have recieved a revelation which no other prophet has recieved before me, meaning part of what is in the Quran and sunnah other prophets have recieved. I dont know if what you are saying is correct about the the 100 lashes only being in relation to a jew, but stonning was certailny a punishment for muslims and i know of two cases in the time of rasul allah.

Even if the  only evidence was one hadith about a jew, you would have to look at the Usul used behind the ruling to disprove it not simply argue that this is the only evidence.

I wonder how you could confuse me with a wahabi or one who uses their rethoric? or is it just a word to use when you want to dismiss something when it does n't go along with what you are taught and accepted as truth?

Hardly your comments are cetainly from them, any person who does not follow a madhhab does so only becouse of what they have done. Muslims have been following the Madhhabs for over 1200 years and there status is agreed upon by ALL scholars. You need to understand history and the development of Islamic Law to know and understand this matter.

is this not the same thing that those who you call "wahabis" do? i hope you understand i am not trying to humiliate you, but please read, think and reason, and wish for His mercy, i wish it for you already, may Allah open our eyes and ears, and may He write for us the fear of Him on both, and all our senses. ameen.

No br, read the articles in the post on madhhabs and insha allah you will see were i am coming from.

is it not proof enough for you that nowhere in the koran it tells us to stone adulterers? ofcourse lashing is severe but stoning till death is more severe since it is a punishment that leads to death. If it was a law for muslims looking at it's severity it would have been in the koran or atleast the distinction would be made between unmarried and married adulterers like the shariah does.

No your line of reasoning is weak and would not even be considered as an argument Under the laws of Usul al Fiqh. I believe in the Quran and Sunnah, rasul allah ordered the stoning of at least two muslims for this act.

1200 years is not 1426 years and before since islam existed before even the last prophet.

A general statment which means nothing.

So you mean to say that only someone who studies history and the shariah is guided?

Allah Guides to what is correct, "are those who know equal with those who dont".

 I see enough already.

You dont see anything at all.

The topic is Ijtihad so far i dont see it being discussed?