by Sh. Abdullah Hasan
What is the meaning of the statement by the four Imams: Abu
Hanifah, Malik, al-Shafi'i, and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, that 'when a hadith is
found to be authentic that is my adopted position (in fiqh)'?
Summary:
·
Statements
such as these by the illustrious Fuqaha are to be understood in their
proper context. They were addressing them to their students and scholars
alike and not to any lay people and non-specialists in fiqh and hadith.
·
The
statements could also be interpreted to mean that an individual scholar will
be given license to investigate Ahadith (if he is capable) but must
not contradict theUsul or the principles of the imām (madhab) in its
entirety.
·
Language
should not be (always) taken literally. Speech should be understood in their
correct context by considering the addresser and the addressee of a
particular statement(s).
·
Single
or a group of Ahadith are not sufficient for deducing Ahkam
(rulings) from the sources.
·
Those
who are competent and fulfil the criterion of ijtihad are only
suitable to directly investigate and deduce rulings from the Qur'an
and Sunnah.
·
Those
who are novices in the Arabic language and fiqh (jurisprudence) are
required to conform to the views and investigations of qualified scholarship.
·
Each
of the great mujtahidun scholars opined certain methodology when
investigating Ahadith and fiqh. If a competent scholar ignores
to apply a particular authentic hadith it does not necessarily imply
that he is neglecting the narration intentionally nor does it necessarily
mean that he was unaware of the narration.
Understanding language
One of the most important branches of Usul
al Fiqh, Tafseer and other sciences is the study of language.
Linguistics includes principles relating to the way in which words convey
their meanings, and to the clarity and ambiguity of words and their
interpretation. The knowledge of these principles is essential to the proper
understanding of the sources of the Shari'ah, the Qur'an and the authentic
Ahadith of the Prophet, which laws and rulings are deduced.
Language[1] is employed by people to
communicate with each other; teach, express emotions and feelings. Without
the correct understanding of language there would be much difficulty in the way
in which people and civilisation develops.
However, although there are universal modes
of language, the way in which we express our thoughts and communicate our
speech will vary from country to country, culture to culture and person to
person. An educated man, for example, will differ in expression and the
method of articulation of his thoughts from the way a man who has a simple
elementary education; a doctor's level of communication will differ from that
of a farmer; a lawyers method of expression and choice of phrases and words
will differ with a student; a university professor's writing and usage of
prose and rhymes therein will differ from a beginner learning a language, so
on and so forth.
Furthermore our language or the words and
phrases we employ in our day to day conduct and communication with other
people will differ immensely when we consider our environment, context or to
whom we address our message etc. Our cognitive and emotional state of mind
will also effect and influence, to a large extent, the way in which we
communicate and express our feelings and inner understanding. An intelligent
person will survey the listener and articulate his or her thoughts
appropriately. Conversely and, depending on the level of the understanding of
the audience, each person or group will determine or interpret the conveyed
message in varied forms and elucidations.
Speech and its objectives
Ibn 'Ashur explains this very succinctly in
his treatise on Maqasid al-Shari'ah under the chapter heading
'Insufficiency of the literal methodology without knowledge of the Higher
Objectives':
''Never has speech in any human language,
nor of its genres and styles in a particular language, been sufficient by
itself to indicate the intent (Maqsad) of the speaker in such a
way that would preclude any possibility of doubt about the signification (dalalah)
of his words. I mean the kind of signification referred to as explicit
expression (nass) that is unequivocal in denoting one particular meaning to
the exclusion of others. However, the meaning of words in different
languages, and the meanings of different types of speech in the same
language, vary greatly in the degree of doubt and probability (ihtimal)
arising in the mind about the purport (murad) of that speech. Some
types of speech are more open to interpretation than others, just as speech
authors differ in their capacity to articulate in an unequivocal way the
meanings they intend by the words they use. Hence, some speakers are
described as fluent or eloquent.''[2]
He also highlights that the understanding of
the listeners or the audience of a particular speech will vary depending on
their capacity to understand the various contours of language,
''Similarly, in so far as their
understanding of its import is concerned, the share of listeners to a speech
also varies according to their understanding and practice of the idioms of
that speech and the styles of those who belong to the same category as the
author of that speech. Likewise, neither speakers nor listeners can afford to
ignore certain features that surround a speech act, namely the context, the
capacity (maqam) from which that act flows as well as its background
information. All these elements consolidate one another in such a way as
would exclude some possibilities of interpretation that might concur to the
listener's mind concerning the speaker's intention. This is the reason why
the speaker's direct words to his listeners express his intention more
clearly than when they are conveyed by another person. Likewise, a speech
conveyed to others in writing is more open to different interpretations that
a speech conveyed verbatim, let alone speech that is addressed directly. This
is because a written speech loses the connotations of context and the
features of both the speaker and the conveyer, despite the fact that it is
more accurate for it is less subject to distortion, omission, or having its
meaning expressed in different words when the conveyer fails to retain the
original words of the speaker.''[3]
Additionally he clarifies the mistake of
those who only take the literal words in a speech without considering the
context and import of the conveyer and the variant capacity of the listeners.
It is in this light that the reported
statements 'when a hadith is found to be authentic then that is my adopted
position' (and similar statements) by the illustrious Imams of the four
acceptable and popular schools of thought have been and should be understood
and interpreted. Ibn 'Ashur in his treatise on Maqasid further
explained:
''It is here also that we can realise the
inaccuracy and unsoundness of the statement attributed to al-Shafi'i, in
which he is reported to have said: ''If a tradition (khabar) from God's
Apostle is proven authentic, then that is my adopted position,'' for such as
statement cannot be uttered by a scholar who has attained the level of a
mujtahid. Moreover, evidence from al-Shafi'i's juristic doctrines compels us
to believe that this statement is either wrongly attributed to him or has
been distorted, unless he means by authenticity the perfect signification
based on the considerations that we have explained, and provided it is free
from opposition from what we have warned against.''[4]
Ibn 'Ashur then clarifies how this statement
from al-Shafi'i (and others) should be understood,
''Accordingly al-Shafi'i's statement can be
interpreted as follows: When you examine my juristic views, you should know
that they are based on authentic tradition.''[5]
The issue and the confusion
Unfortunately in recent times these
statements by these great scholars of Islamic law have been taken out of
context and sometimes used to substantiate an adopted methodology in fiqh by
certain individuals and groups. Many books have been authored on denouncing
the concept of taqlid (conformation) by all, even the non-specialists
who may not have the basic understanding of the Arabic language or even
unable appreciate the vast intellectual differences in the areas of Usul
al-Fiqh, Usul al-Hadith, Usul al-Tafseer and other such disciplines
in Islamic law.
Countless articles, YouTube videos,
discussions on forums and even lectures have been produced to propagate the
notion of completely rejecting the views of these scholars when an
'authentic' narration, according to them, is found which stands incongruity
to the perceived authentic narration they have.
Much confusion and sedition (fitnah)
arose from these inaccurate interpretations of these scholars to the extent
that lay people or non-specialists in the sciences of the Arabic language and
Islamic law have been going around shouting and screaming to shun conforming
to the views of the four established schools of thought and take from where
they took, i.e., directly from the Qur'an and Sunnah (prophetic traditions),
without understanding or possessing the qualifications of the precepts and
principle of language and methodology of deduction.
Henceforth I shall endeavour to further
explain the correct and sound purport of these scholars when they uttered
such statements and how we the audience and listeners should understand and
analyse them.
Following are some of the reports by the
heads of these schools of thought and their brief analysis:
Abu Hanifah:
1.
“When
a hadith is found to be sahih (authentic), then that is my adopted
position.”[6]
2.
''It
is not permitted for anyone to accept our views if they do not know from
where we got them from.''[7]
3.
''It
is not permissible for someone to give legal verdicts from my books that he
should do so without knowing from where I took from.''[8]
4.
''It
is prohibited for someone who does not know my evidence to give verdicts on
the basis of my words.''[9]
5.
''For
indeed we are human: we say one thing one day, and take it back the next
day.''[10]
6.
''Woe
to you, O Ya'qub! Do not write down everything you hear from me, for it
happens that I hold one opinion today and reject it tomorrow, or hold one
opinion tomorrow and reject it the day after tomorrow.''[11]
7.
''When
I say something contradicting the Book of Allāh the Exalted or what is
narrated from the Messenger
, then ignore my saying.''[12]
8.
''What
has come from the Prophet
, then we take it without
hesitation, and what has come from his companions we select from them as long
as we do not depart from their sayings (in totality).''[13]
Malik Ibn Anas:
1.
Indeed
I am only a human: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes).
Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book and the
Sunnah accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah,
ignore it.''[14]
2.
''Everyone
after the Prophet
will have his sayings accepted
and rejected – except the Prophet
.''[15]
3.
''The
Messenger of Allāh
passed away and the affair has
been completed; therefore the athar (narrations) of the Prophet
should be followed, and (mere)
opinions should not be followed.''[16]
Muḥammad Ibn Idris
al-Shafi'i:
1.
''In
every issue where the people of narration find a report from the Messenger
ofAllāh
to be sahih which is
contrary to what I have said, then I take my saying back, whether during my
life or after my death.''[17]
2.
''Every
hadith on the authority of the Prophet
is also my view, even if you do
not hear it from me.''[18]
3.
''For
everything I say, if there is something authentic from the Prophet
contrary to my saying, then the
hadith of the Prophet
comes first, therefore do not taqlidof
my opinion.''[19]
4.
''The
sunnah of the Messenger of Allāh
reach, as well as escape from,
every one of us. So whenever I voice my opinion, or formulate a principle,
where something contrary to my view exists on the authority of the Messenger
of Allāh
then the correct view is what
the Messenger of Allāh
has stated, and it is my
view.''[20]
5.
''The
Muslims are unanimously agreed that if a sunnah of the Messenger of Allāh
is made clear to someone, it is
not permitted for him to leave it for the saying of anyone else.''[21]
6.
''If
you find in my book (writings) something different to the Sunnah of the
Messenger of Allāh
, then speak on the basis of the
Sunnah of the Messenger of Allāh
, and leave what I have
said.''[22]
7.
''When
a hadith is found to be sahih (authentic), then that is my adopted
position.''[23]
Ahmad ibn Hanbal:
1.
''
Do not follow my opinion; neither follow the opinion of Malik, nor Shafi'i,
nor Awza'i, nor Thawri, but take from where they took.''[24]
2.
''The
opinion of Awza'i, the opinion of Malik, the opinion of Abu Hanifah: all of
it is opinion, and it is all equal in my eyes. However, the proof is in the athar(narrations).''[25]
3.
''Whoever
rejects a statement of the Messenger of Allāh
is on the brink of
destruction.''[26]
4.
''From
the lack of understanding of a man is to follow his religion from men.''[27]
Brief discussion:
·
Every
scholar is bound to follow this precept of following the authentic narration
over anything else. However, not all authentic hadith is to be implemented
and actioned. Some could be abrogated; others could be specified or
qualified. Furthermore there are varied opinions among the scholars in a
given hadith as regards to the authenticity of it. Not all authentic Ahadith
are in the same level of authenticity. There are countless number of Ahadith
upon which the hadith specialists and Fuqaha have differed upon its
authenticity and grade of authenticity. Therefore whose gradation does one
follow? One who is not qualified to sieve through the corpus of hadith
collections must conform to the experts and specialists in that field.
To
perform ijtihad is a challenging task. Scholars cite some conditions:
- Knowing the Arabic Language which
includes: Nahu [grammar] sarf [Arabic morphology],Balagha
[science of rhetoric] and the knowledge of al-huruf ['Ilm al Huruf]
- Knowledge of the Qur'an which includes:
Ahkam al-Qur'an, the knowledge of the nuzul of the Qur'an, the science of
Nasikh and Mansukh, the science of the Qira'at, and the science of tafsir.
- Knowledge of the Sunnah which includes:
Mustalah hadith [also jarh wa ta'dil and the ilal of hadith], the legal
ordinances contained in the Sunnah, the causes or instances of the ahadith
[asbab wurud al hadith] etc.
- Usul al Fiqh which includes: Knowing the
general and the specific texts, the mutlaq and the muqayyad, the abrogating
and the abrogated, and the qawi'd al fiqhiyiat and their application, and the
Maqasid ash Shari'ah.
- Knowledge of those matters that have
consensus [ijma' as sahih].[28]
·
The
canons of hadith collections were not available during their era.
Scholars were still collecting Ahadith from various locations and hadith
masters, it was not till later that the books of hadith we have today
were codified and written. The narrations were not available to the masses
but mostly restricted to students and scholars. It is quite impossible to infer
from the Imams that they were referring to non-specialists. Even if they were
the statements of the Imams such as 'when a hadith is found to be
authentic then that is my adopted position' are referring to competent
scholars to make that judgement.
·
Statements
such as 'take from where they took' suggest that the Imams are making
it clear that one should investigate the root sources, i.e., the Qur'an and
Sunnah directly and evaluate the verses and narrations. This surely is
suggesting that the one who should do so should be well versed in the
sciences of the Arabic language and possesses the tools of ijtihad and
istinbat, does it not? The Imams are not referring to a novice in the
Arabic language nor are they referring to ill-equipped and unqualified individuals.
·
Reading
the writings and the Usul of imām Malik, for example, makes it clear
that he did not mean what some suggest in our times; he followed certain Usul
or principles in fiqh and accepting Ahadith. For example, he would give
preference to the 'amal ahlal Madīnah when a narration contradicts the
widespread action of the people ofMadīnah.
·
Statements
such as 'do not follow my opinion but follow the narrations' or 'whoever
is rejecting a narration is on the brink of destruction' if taken
literally from the Imams seems contradictory since they themselves
disregarded certain Ahadith in their writings because they believed
certain particular Ahadith have been abrogated or specified or even
there are other more authentic Ahadith to a particular narration.
Why it is not possible to extract rulings from a single hadith or a group of Ahadith:
This has been
clarified by many scholars. For example, imām al-Razi explains why it is not
possible to extract rulings from a single hadith or a group of Ahadith
without looking at the verses and Ahadith in their entirety and
comprehensively. This can be done only by a specialist in that field.
The
following is a summary of the reasons:
1. There is a possibility that the ruling
that one conclude from the single evidence has been restricted to certain
circumstances, without one's knowledge.
2. There is a possibility that the
expression of the single evidence is metaphoric.
3. Our reference in language is linguists,
which are people who could err.
4. Arabic grammar is conveyed to us via
ancient Arabic poetry, which was narrated through individuals' narrations
(riwayat ahad). These narrations are not certain and the original poets
themselves could have made grammatical mistakes.
5. There is a possibility that one or more
of the words of this single evidence have multiple meanings.
6. There is a possibility that one or more
of the words of the single evidence have been altered, over time, in a way
that alters the original meaning.
7. There is a possibility that the
expression has a hidden (khafī) meaning that we do not understand.
8. There is a possibility that the ruling
that we conclude from the single evidence has been abrogated, without
evidence our knowledge.
9. There is a possibility that a ruling that
we conclude from single evidence is at odds with 'reason.' In such case
(al-Razi says), if both reason and narration are confirmed, then one of them
is wrong. Moreover, reason is our means to confirm the validity of narration
itself. Therefore, reason has precedence over narrations. Thus, we should
follow reason, and not the linguistic evidence of the narration.[29]
·
Each
of these mujtahidun were addressing competent students, who themselves
were qualified to deduce rulings directly from the Qur'an and Sunnah;
students like Abu Yusuf, al-Shaybani were qualified to make judgements on the
sources.
Many scholars past
and present have explained the correct way to understand these statements.
For example, Taqi al-Din al-Subki's Ma'na Qawl al-Imamal-Muttalibi Idha
Sahha al-Hadithu Fahuwa Madhhabi; Ibn al-ṣalāh's Adab al-Mufti waal-Mustafti;
and the first volume of al-Nawawi's al-Majmu', all have understood these
famous statements in the manner that have been clarified above. Please refer
to these writings in particular for a more detailed discussion.
The correct way to understand these
statements may be summarised as follows:
1. Is that the Imams restricted the
instructions to qualified individuals in the various sciences who are capable
of sifting the abrogating and sound Ahadith from the abrogated and
unsound ones as well as extract the rulings from their collective evidence
according to the principles of the Law and those of the Arabic language.
Al-Nawawi explained:
''What imām al-Shafi'i said does not mean that everyone who sees a sahih
hadith should say “This is the madhhab of al-Shafi'i,” applying the purely
external or apparent meaning of his statement. What he said most certainly
applies only to such a person as has the rank of ijtihad in the madhhab. It
is a condition for such a person that he be firmly convinced that either imām
al-Shafi'i was unaware of this hadith or he was unaware of its authenticity.
And this is possible only after having researched all the books of al-Shafi'i
and similar other books of the companions of al-Shafi'i, those who took
knowledge from him and others similar to them. This is indeed a difficult
condition to fulfil. Few are those who measure up to this standard in our
times. What we have explained has been made conditional because imām
al-Shafi'i had abandoned acting purely on the external meaning of many
hadiths, which he declared and knew. However, he established proofs for
criticism of the hadith or its abrogation or specific circumstances or
interpretation and so forth. Shaykh Abu 'Amr [Ibn al-ṣalāh] said: “It is no
trivial matter to act according to the apparent meaning of what imām
al-Shafi'i said. For it is not permissible for every faqih – let alone a
layman ('ammi) – to act independently with what he takes to be a proof from
the hadith… Therefore, whoever among the Shafi'i's finds a hadith that
contradicts his School must examine whether he is absolutely accomplished in
all the disciplines of ijtihad, or in that particular topic, or specific
question. [If he is,] then he has the right to apply it independently. If he
is not, but finds that contravening the hadith bears too heavily upon
him–after having researched it and found no justification for contravening
it–then he may apply it if another independent imām other than al-Shafi'i
applies it. This is a good excuse for him to leave the madhab of his imām in
such a case.”[30]
Ibn Abidin wrote: ''It is not hidden that
this is for one qualified to examine the texts and has knowledge of its
non-abrogated from its abrogated, so when the scholars of the madhhab
deliberate on an evidence and act upon it, its attribution to the madhhab is sound
due to it issuing by permission from the founder of the madhhab, since there
is no doubt that if he knew the weakness of his proof, he would go back on it
and follow the stronger proof.''[31]
2. That the scholar should not contradict
the Usul of the madhab in its entirety. As mentioned before each
scholar is certain Usul in accepting or applying hadith etc. If a
scholar wishes to implement a hadith then he should not go against the
madhab in its entirety.
Ibn Abidin stated: ''That must be
conditional within the madhab whether the view agrees to a view in the
madhab. Since he is not given permission to perform ijtihad in so far as that
goes against the school in its entirety in which the Imams (of the school)
have agreed upon, because their reasoning (ijtihad) is stronger than his.
Therefore the clear thing is that they saw evidence more strong than what he
understood and did not act upon it.''[32]
An example:
Abu al-Walid Ibn Abi al-Jarud, a scholar of
the Shafi'i school pronounced that al-Shafi'i's position in the issue of
cupping while fasting is that one's fast is nullified as per the rigorously
authenticated hadith of the Prophet
:
''The one administering the cupping and the
one being cupped have both broken their fasts.''[33]
However, the view of al-Shafi'i and other
scholars including Abu Hanifah, Malik, al-Thawri, and Companions, like Abu
Sa`id al-Khudri, Ibn Mas`ud, `A'ishah, and Umm Salamah, and Successors like
`Urwah and Sa`id b. Jubayr, was that cupping does not invalidate the fasting
nor the one who is administering it.
How did al-Shafi'i and others understand or
interpret the above authentic narration?
A number of explanations have been forwarded
by these scholars. One plausible justification they gave is that of
abrogation. They argued that that the above hadith has been abrogated
by other authentic narrations, for example, “The Prophet
granted permission for a fasting
person to sit for cupping.''[34]
Here is a clear example of how scholars
interpreted certain authentic narrations. If a person were to exclaim the
slogan of 'follow sahih hadith only' and ignore the view of al-Shafi'i
and others on this particular issue without knowing and understanding the
scholastic heritage and Usul al-Hadith interpretations, how silly
would he sound!
1. If indeed the Imams were ignorant of a
particular hadith around a given issue the scholars of the school or
competent masters of hadith and fiqh later came and adjusted
the position of the madhab. This arduous task has been carried out by
scholars over the centuries, and of course this can only be done by qualified
and competent scholars.
An example:
In the Hanafi school the Sunnah of
bathing (ghusl) before going to Friday prayer (Jumu'ah). The position of the
school is that the validity of this Sunnah bath is nullified if one's
ablution (wudhu) is broken between the bath and the Friday prayer, in which
case one needs to bathe again to attain the reward of the Sunnah.
Yet we find in the
Radd al-muhtar of Ibn 'Abidin, the foremost fatwa resource for the late
Hanafi school, that imām 'Abd al-Ghani Nabulusi, after mentioning the above
ruling, notes that there are two positions about it among scholars of the
madhhab: The first is the position of those who hold the legal reason for
this bath is purification (Taharah), in which case nullifying one's ablution
between it and the prayer would invalidate it. The second is the position of
those who hold that the reason for the bath is cleanliness (nadhafa), in
which case nullifying ablution and repeating it between the bath and the
prayer would not invalidate it, for the extra ablution, if anything,
increases cleanliness. Nabulusi adopts this second position because in his
words “the hadiths on this matter imply that the aim is attaining cleanliness
alone”,[35] and Ibn 'Abidin inclines towards it also, because of theAhadith
about the merit of coming to the mosque from the first hour on Friday morning
to wait for the congregational prayer (Jumu'ah). Abu Hurayra relates that the
Prophet
said:
''Whoever bathes on
Friday as he would for major ritual impurity (janaba), then goes early [to
the mosque] is as though he has sacrificed a she-camel. Whoever goes in the
second hour [of daylight] is as though he has sacrificed a cow. Whoever goes
in the third hour is as though he has sacrificed a ram. Whoever goes in the
fourth hour is as though he has sacrificed a chicken. Whoever goes in the
fifth hour is as though he has offered an egg. And when the imām comes out
[to begin the sermon], the angels [stop recording, and] come to listen to the
remembrance.''[36]
Ibn 'Abidin says of Nabulusi's position
(that the bath (ghusl) on Friday is not invalidated by having to renew one's ablution
before the Friday prayer):
''It is attested to
by the demand to go early to the prayer, best done in the first hour of the
day, which extends till sunrise. When doing this, it might prove difficult to
keep one's ablution (wudhu) until the time for the prayer arrives, especially
on the longest days of the year. Repeating the bath would be even more
arduous, while [Allāh says in Surah al-Hajj:] “He has not placed any hardship
upon you in religion” (Qur'an 22:78). It might also lead to holding back from
going to the bathroom while praying, which is unlawful.''[37]
Here we see an early position of the Hanafi
School (that the Friday bath is nullified by having to renew one's ablution
after it) re-evaluated in light of a hadith by two of the school's
principal later scholars, 'Abd al-Ghani Nabulusi and Ibn 'Abidin.
This is not exclusive to the Hanafi madhab
but all other schools have similar evaluations and developments made by their
leading accolades.[38]
Conclusion:
From the cursory discussion above it is
evidently clear that the statements by the four illustrious Imams 'when a
hadith is found to be authentic then that is my adopted position' and similar
remarks are to be understood in the proper context as explained above. A),
they were instructions to qualified individuals in fiqh and language. B),
they are encouragement for people to study language and fiqh with scholars.
To understand these statement in any other
light than the way in which has been clarified is trying to interpolate the
comments of the Imams, which no classical scholar understood, to a meaning
they did not intend.
Allāh knows best.
References:
[1] There has been much debate surrounding
the origins of Language. A number of theories have been forwarded. As far as
Islam is concerned. It is the believe and conviction of all believers that
God, Almighty, taught and instructed Adam (peace be upon him), the first
human on earth, the names and manufacturing of all things, “And He taught
Adam the names of all things then he presented them to the angels…” Thus from
the Islamic and Qur'anic paradigm language is a divine providence bestowed
upon man from the beginning of the human creation and not merely intelligent
human codification. The difference between human beings and animal: Human
beings, in contrast to other Animals, are capable of far more complex
communication and thinking. Communication is not unique to humans, but the
level of communication is of such a profoundly more rich and subtle nature as
to give rise to a shared conceptual world. This is the one of the most
important feature that distinguishes us from the animal kingdom. The
authoritative Atlas of Languages confirms this fact and also the fact that
animals can never be taught to speak. ''Language is perhaps the most
important single characteristic that distinguishes human beings from other
animal species. . . . Because of the different structure of the vocal
apparatus in humans and chimpanzees, it is not possible for chimpanzees to
imitate the sounds of human language, so they have been taught to use
gestures or tokens in place of sounds . . . but chimpanzees never attain a
level of linguistic complexity beyond the approximate level of a two-year-old
child.'' (Stephen Matthews, Bernard Comrie, and Marcia Polinsky, editors:
Atlas of Languages: The Origin and Development of Languages Throughout the
World (New York: Facts on File, Inc., 1996), p. 10.)
Similarly, Lewis Thomas, the distinguished
medical scientist who was the long-time director and chancellor of the Sloan
Kettering Cancer Centre in Manhattan has affirmed that: ''. . . Language
is so incomprehensible a problem that the language we use for discussing the
matter is itself becoming incomprehensible.'' (Lewis Thomas, “On Science
and Uncertainty,” Discover (vol. 1, October 1980), p. 59).
Dr. Noam Chomsky, Professor of Linguistics
at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, writes, ''Human language
appears to be a unique phenomenon, without significant analogue in the animal
world. . . . There is no reason to suppose that the “gaps” are bridgeable.
There is no more of a basis for assuming an evolutionary development of
“higher” from “lower” stages in this case, than there is for assuming an
evolutionary development from breathing to walking.'' (Noam Chomsky,
Language and Mind (New York: Harvourt, Brace, Jovan-ovich, 1972), pp. 67,
68).
Not only is there no animal that is capable
of achieving anything like human speech, but also there is, at the other end
of the scale, no human tribe that does not have a true language. 'No language-less
community has ever been found.' There are no normal humans that cannot speak
and no animals that ever can. This is the great unbridgeable gap between all
mankind and every component of the animal kingdom. Therefore language is a
unique characteristic of the human creation and cannot be fully and
comprehensively imitated by any other known species in the universe.
[2]Ibn 'Ashur, Maqasid p, 26 IIT,
[3] Ibid
[4] Ibn 'Ashur, Maqasid p, 27 IIT
[5] Ibid
[6] Hashiya of Ibn
'Abidin, Vol 1 p, 63. Iqadh Himam Ulil albab by imām Salih al Fulani, p.62.
[7] Ibid
[8] Iqadh Himam Ulil
albab by imām Salih al Fulani, p, 52
[9] Ibn Abd al Barr, Al-Intiqa fi fadhail
ath-thalatha al-aimmah al-fuqaha, p.145.
[10] Al-Bani, Sifat Salatun Nabi, p.46.
[11] Ibid
[12] Iqadh Himam
Ulil albab by imām Salih al Fulani, p, 50.
[13] Ibn Abd al Barr, Al-Intiqa fi fadhail
ath-thalatha al-aimmah al-fuqaha, p.144.
[14] Ibn Abd al Barr, Jami' Bayan al-Ilm wa
fadhlihi, Vol 1, p.775 no, 1435.
[15] Al Bani, Sifat Salatun nabi, p.49.
[16] Iqadh Himam
Ulil albab by imām Salih al Fulani, p, 18.
[17] Ibn Naim, Hilyatul Awlaiya, vol 9,
p.107.
[18] Ibn Abi Hatim, Adab al-Shafi'I, p.94,
al-dhahabi, Siyar 'alam al-nubala, vol 10, p.35.
[19] Ibn Abi Hatim, Adab al-Shafi'I, p.94,
Hilyatul awliya, vol 9 p.107, al-Bayhaqi, Manaqib al-Shafi'i, vol 1 p.473.
[20] Al-Bayhaqi, Manaqib al-Shafi'i, vol 1,
p.475, al-Fulani, 63,100.
[21] Ibn al-Qayyim, I'lam al-Muwaqqi'in, vol
2, p.361
[22] Ibid
[23] An-Nawawi, Majmu', vol 1, p.63
[24] Ibn al-Qayyim, 'Ilam al-Muwaqi'in, vol
2, p.201
[25] Ibn Abd al-Barr, Jami' Bayan al-'Ilm,
vol 2, p.1072 no:2107
[26] Ibn al-Jawzi,
Manaqib imām Ahmad, p.172.
[27] Ibn al-Qayyim, 'Ilam al-Muwaqi'in, vol
2, p. 201
[28] Al-Judai, Usul al-Fiqh, p.381
[29] Cited. Muḥammad
Ibn Umar al-Razi, Al-Mahsul, ed. Taha Jabir al-Alwani, vol.1, p.547-73.
[30] Al-Nawawi,
al-Majmu' Sharh al-Muhadhdhab (1:64), citing Ibn al-ṣalāh's Fatawa wa Masa'il
(1:54, 1:58-59). Cf. al-Tahanawi, I'la' al-Sunan (2:290-291).
[31] Hashiya of Ibn 'Abidin 1:68
[32] Ibn Abidin, Rasm al-Mufti, p.56.
[33] This is an
authentic hadith that has been related by at least fifteen different
Companions. The most authentic narrations of these hadith, perhaps, are the
ones that reach us from the following Companions: Shidad b. Aws [Sunan Abi
Dawud (2368, 2369) and Sunan Ibn Majah (1681)] Thawban [Sunan Abu Dawud
(2367, 2370, and 2371) and Sunan Ibn Majah (1680)]. Rafi` b. Khadij [Sunan
al-Tirmidhi (774)]. This hadith is also related from Companions like `Ali b.
Abi Talib, Sa`d b. Abi Waqqas, `Abd Allāh b. `Umar, Ibn `Abbas, Abu Musa
al-Ash`ari, Abu Hurayrah, Bilal, Usamah b. Zayd, `A'ishah, and Safiyyah. Its
chains of transmission are indeed numerous.
[34] Sunan al-Nasa'i al-Kubra (3224, 3228)
and Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah (1967)
[35] Radd al-muhtar (9.00), 1.114
[36] Bukhāri (9.00),
2.3–4: 881
[37] Radd al-muhtar (9.00), 1.114
|
