This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: uld the word rush (fa's aw) be taken literally or in the sense of an emphasis on diligence at attending the Friday prayers? A similar question can be raised with regard to the second part of the same ayah which commands the Muslims to 'abandon sale' (wa dharu'l-bay'). Should this be taken to imply that a sale which has occurred at the specified time is actually unlawful and void, or should it once again be taken as an order that requires perseverance and consistent observance? Should one follow the main objective of the Lawgiver or the literal requirements of the text which convey a command or a prohibition? These are but some of the questions which are asked concerning the correct understanding of Qur'anic injunctions. [21. For a detailed treatment of commands and prohibitions see Shatibi, Muwafaqat, III, 90-140] The implicit injunctions are also divided into two types. The first of these is when a ruling of the Qur'an is conveyed in implicit terms but has been substantiated by the explicit terms of the Hadith, in which case it becomes equivalent to an explicit ruling. [22. Shatibi, Muwafaqat, III, 92.] The second type of implicit injunction is when a ruling of the Qur'an occurs, not in the form of a command or a prohibition, but as praise or condemnation of a certain conduct. The precise import of such provisions cannot always be ascertained as to whether they convey an injunction or a mere warning or recommendation as the case may be. Note for example the text which reads that `God does not love the prodigals (al-musrifin)' (alA'raf, 7:31). The text of this ayah does not indicate the precise legal or religious enormity of extravagance, and it cannot be ascertained whether extravagance is prohibited or merely disapproved. Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~ Kamali 137 Another question which merits attention in the study of commands and prohibitions is related to the means that lead to the performance of a command, or the avoidance of a prohibition. The question is whether the means should also be covered by the rules which regulate their ends. Briefly, the answer to this question is in the affirmative. The means which lead to the observance of commands and prohibitions are covered by the same ruling which applies to the command/prohibition in the first place. [23. Shatibi, Muwafaqat, 93.] A mujtahid who deduces the law from a given text must be adequately familiar with the language of the Qur'an and must know that the ahkam are not only expressed in the imperative but that a praise or a promise of reward may in effect be equivalent to a command. Similarly, a mere denunciation, a threat of punishment in the hereafter, or a reference to the adverse consequences of a form of conduct, may be equivalent to a prohibition. [24. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p.72.] The distinction as to whether a command in the Qur'an conveys an obligation (wujub), a recommendation (nadb) or mere permissibility (ibahah) must be determined in the light of the objectives of the Shari'ah as well as by looking at the meaning of the words of the Qur'an. To determine the value (hukm) of a command, at...
View Full Document
- Spring '13