Studying Islam

Discussion Forum: Understanding the Sunnah

Topic: Status of Fiqh

maskxone

If we accept that Sunnah is transmitted through Tawatur and its transmission is independent of Ahadith. Also Ahadith can not add to the corpus of religion. Now as I understand Fiqh is derived from Quran and Ahadith. So the questions are:

1) If Ahadith are not source of Islam then what is the status of Fiqh which is derived from Ahadith.

2) Fiqh makes certain things lawful or unlawful for Muslims based on Qayas. Are we obliged to follow the fiqh?

3) Majority of the Muslims believe that Ahadith are the primary source of Sunnah. Now if a Muslim state is formed and rulers are from the majority. What will be method of forming the constitution? Will they base it on Sunnah or Ahadith or Fiqh. And if its Fiqh which school or sect will they follow? According to your opinion will this be a true Islamic state if they follow the Ahadith strictly or any one of the sects?

Tariq Hashmi

Would like you to keep in mind the following two things and also first resolve the issue what fiqh is. It will make it easier for both of us to understand each other.

1. We believe that all the schools of thought follow the basic contents of religion, the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Some differ only in considering the individual reports as Sunnah. None of them has lost the true source.

2. Ahadith are every important explanatory source. They tell us the Prophetic wisdom and his understanding of the religious directives and his uswah hasanah the way he discharged the religious directives) and his life history.

Also please note that a Muslim state can rightfully make laws based on social customs which have have no basis in religion. The sources of religion and sources of Religious Knowledge in Islam are different things.

Please comment. And explain what do you understand by the Fiqh and the nature of difference between the four schools for example.

ibrahim (Moderator)

1) Surely Ahadith Cannot be THE LONE source for any Religious Matter. On the Other Hand they are The MOST reliable Source for the "Uswa" of Pro. Muhammad (sws) & his Wisdom & Seerah etc. & that's why Hadith is SO Important, So we Do NOT Degrade it.

The Prevailing Fiqhs give us light in many parts of the Shariah of Islam that are based on Qur'an and Sunnah, and what they have said on the basis of Ahadith, that is still very helpful for our Knowledge as it always progresses on the basis of the work done in the past.

2) The things that has been declared lawful or unlawful in The Fiqhs based on Qayas etc. are just the "Ijtihaad" (i.e. opinion) of these great scholars but we are not obliged to follow any thing other than Qur'an & Sunnah. But if one is satisfied with any opinion of these great scholars (in a certain matter) should follow him, This means that one can follow one Fiqh in a matter and can follow any other Fiqh in another matter unless & untill he is doing this on the basis of some solid reasonign & not doing so just because of his mere will/likeness etc.

3) Its only the majority of the current Muslims who believe that the Ahadith are the primary source of Sunnah/Islam. The Fact is that almost allL (more than 90%) Great scholars of the past (including Imam Shafi) are of the Opinion that the Holy Quran and the "Khabar-e-Mutawatir (i.e. the Sunnah)" are the only Primary sources of Islam & Hadith should related to them & should be Accepted behind them as a secondary source but then the Likes of Imam Shafi'i & Imam Ibn-e-Hazam have presented their own opinion based on some other factors that hadith is Always Based on these two primary sources & If there looks some contradiction then that is because of our "Fehm (Understanding)" etc. So one may (or may not) accept their opinion if he agrees (ot Does not agree) with their reasoning.

Please Note that All states of Muslims (eg. Pak. SA, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan ...) are "Muslim" states as Muslims are in majority in them so the method of forming the constitution in them is very simple. All matters shoud be discussed in The parliament & if there is difference of opinion then the vote majority will be the rule (i.e in only those cases where there is no direct/clear order present in Quran & Sunnah) and surely the "ijtihaad of parliament" Will be based on Quran & Sunnah (The direct sources) & it's obvious that they'll benefit too from the guidance present in Ahadith or Fiqh of ALL schools/sects But People will be BOUND to FOLLOW the rules Passed by the Parliament only.

But the people who do not agree the passed rules will adopt the same procedure for trying to change that rule as they do now in their daily.

I hope this will Help us in carrying on this discussion ahead.

maskxone

Thank you for the detailed reply. Sorry for replying late as I am busy with office work. I would like to point out my understanding:

1) By Fiqh I mean the laws. Or the methods to form the laws. I think (i am not sure though) that all these Imams had different approach. e.g. some gave more importance to Sunnah and others gave more Importance to Ahadith.

2) I understand your opinion on the status and meaning of Sunnah and Ahadith. And it seems very logical to me. (I believe in applying logic to religion and MashaAllah our religion is complete in that sense too)

3) Now my confusion is more related to certain laws which are not found in Quran and Sunnah but we get them from Narration which can have some doubt (even if its iota of doubt). E.g. lets take the example of stonning by death. I know the logic behind this punishment and i accept that. Also it has very strict conditions which are very unlikely to exist for this punishment to be executed. Now i am not sure about it but if we say that this law is know through ahadith. And Ahadith are not 100% reliable. But according to fiqh based on ahadith this punishment is allowed. ( I feel that punishments like these are allowed in Islam but not encouraged and it is upto Qazi to decide depending on situation). But if extreme punishments like these are only known by ahadith can these be established as law of the country? Is there a chance that a Qazi giving such punishment may be going beyond the allowed limits?

This was my original question.

Your answers are very nice and explaining. But can you elaborate further on the last point. "Is there a chance that a Qazi giving such punishment may be going beyond the allowed limits?"

Tariq Hashmi

As I tried to explain in my earlier response national laws can be formed even on customs and cultural values. The Ahadith when we have seen that do not go against the Qru'an, the Sunnah, the established historical facts and common sense are also extremely important explanatory source. They tell us the way the Prophet understood and applied the religious directives. Therefore, the Muslim scholarship has used them as a very important tool.

Punishment of rajam cannot be given merely on the pretex that the ahdadith show that some of the people were punished this way. The Qur'an in no unclear terms tells that the punishment of adultery is flogging the criminal with a hundred lashes and cancelling his nikah with a chaste partner and rejection of his testimony in future.

However, the Prophet did stone some people according the Qur'anic directive regarding the punishment of those who create nuisance in the land (fasaad fil ardh). These criminals were not stoned because they were married but because they had started raping the innocent women openly making a mockery of law and putting the society in danger.

This punishment has been mentioned in the Surah Maidah of the Quran verse 4.

A Qazi has to see whether an accused merely committed adultery forced by passion or his act is tantamount to creating disorder in the society. He has to use his full knowledge and do all possible investigation before sentencing the criminal. If he had done this honestly he will not be crossing the limits.

see: http://www.studying-islam.org/forum/topic.aspx?topicid=1798&lang=&forumid=14