Need Help with Islamiyat..

[Irfan Atique]

i disagree with the very first point Irfan. It is true that everything is contained within the Quran but some issues are not. For example, the arise of new drugs like cocaine and LSD that were not known during the lifetime of the Prophet (S.A.W). therfore these drugs would become allowed to take and we would turn away from the fold of Islam. therfore Qiyas brings us closer to religion

Dear first understand the question than disagree with me!

 

[Red Viper]

yes it says that why do scholars reject Qiyas? You said that scholars reject Qiyas because "There is detailed description of everything in the Quran so there is no need to follow another source". Well there is not a detailed description of everything in the Quran for example problems arising daily and te example I have already mentioned. And in addition you also wrote that "Resolution of issues through Qiyas takes precedence over Allah and His Messenger which is forbidden in the Quran" . it is true that precedence over Allah and His Messenger is strictly prohibited, but how does Qiyas do that. If scholars make use of Qiyas, then obviously they will be learned scholars and they won't boast of their supremecy as these are just basics of Faith for such people.

 

[Irfan Atique]

yes it says that why do scholars reject Qiyas? You said that scholars reject Qiyas because "There is detailed description of everything in the Quran so there is no need to follow another source". Well there is not a detailed description of everything in the Quran for example problems arising daily and te example I have already mentioned. And in addition you also wrote that "Resolution of issues through Qiyas takes precedence over Allah and His Messenger which is forbidden in the Quran" . it is true that precedence over Allah and His Messenger is strictly prohibited, but how does Qiyas do that. If scholars make use of Qiyas, then obviously they will be learned scholars and they won't boast of their supremecy as these are just basics of Faith for such people.

bro I know but its the point of view of those scholars who reject qiyas!

 

[Red Viper]

well how can you say it is the point of view of those scholars. Every scholar has his own very opinion just as any person would have his very opinion. for example one would favour iphone, while the other sony, while the other samsung!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[princess Anu]

please explain me how does a narrow valley
... reduces amount of materials required for dam/expense
... increases storage capacity of a dam?

 

[Red Viper]

anu please post that in the geography section and not in the Islamiat section

 

[Irfan Atique]

well how can you say it is the point of view of those scholars. Every scholar has his own very opinion just as any person would have his very opinion. for example one would favour iphone, while the other sony, while the other samsung!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now let me open the arguments the scholars who reject Qiyas are shias coz they use Aqal instead of qiyas n in the ans examiner is asking for this ...while we do the qiyas i did it by myself back in Al Azhar University on telephonic divorce........second we r taking about islam n there are no if's and but's in it so its not iphone, o blackberry, or trex to prefer.....

 

[Red Viper]

firstly that was just an example on daily life human choices sceondly, the examiner doesn't even refer to Shia or sunni. This question is from 2009, and if you are a sir then you should know that papers before 2005 were made differently one for Sunnis and the other for shias. after 2005, the pattern changed and no different papers were made for shias and sunnis. you are mistaking this very question for a question in the 2003/2004 papers in which a question is about why do Shia scholars reject the use of Qiyas. this question asks why do scholars reject Qiyas. You are saying that Shia scholars reject Qiyas but in the question it is not mentioned so how can you say it!!!!!!

and faizan could you just give me some points to the answer of the question
what were the difficulties face by Hazrat Usman and the events which led to his martyrdom? (10)

 

[Faizan Muhammmad]

and faizan could you just give me some points to the answer of the question
what were the difficulties face by Hazrat Usman and the events which led to his martyrdom? (10)

okay here are charges and problems u give an intro and then go full swing, a para each
LENIENCY
NEPOTISM
BURNING OF QURAN (MENTION COMPILATION REASONS TOO , THEY WERE PROBLEMS ALSO)
FAVOURING UMMAYADS, NOT TAKING INTEREST IN STATE
REBILLION STORY (ABDULLAH BIN SABA,approach to madina ETC)
EVENT OF MARTYRDOM
guess that would be enough (hopefully), the rest depends on your details and illustration

Red Viper , could you give me a format for
How are the primary sources of shariah used?

 

[Irfan Atique]

firstly that was just an example on daily life human choices sceondly, the examiner doesn't even refer to Shia or sunni. This question is from 2009, and if you are a sir then you should know that papers before 2005 were made differently one for Sunnis and the other for shias. after 2005, the pattern changed and no different papers were made for shias and sunnis. you are mistaking this very question for a question in the 2003/2004 papers in which a question is about why do Shia scholars reject the use of Qiyas. this question asks why do scholars reject Qiyas. You are saying that Shia scholars reject Qiyas but in the question it is not mentioned so how can you say it!!!!!!

YOU are a viper............and no m not a sir m a head..............you people didn't notice about who am i... and you are telling me that it came in 2009 paper where as..... back than i was cie examiner and wht you said, ur points, students did wrote and we gave them 1/4 coz they didn't use their brain to under stand the question,,..... do whatever you wanna do or write like you wanna write.....i dont give a damn....... coz your a sir not me........so take a Hick and don't post for me ur stupid learning! remarks...... n do some research work about this question.....oh! sorry ma bad ur The sir so let me help my sir viper .........

AKA VIPER SIR HERE IS A RESEARCH ARTICLE......

• Sheikh Walîd b. Ibrâhîm al-`Ujajî, professor at al-Imam Islamic University
• Tue, 07/03/2007

Qiyâs is a method that uses analogy – comparison – to derive Islamic legal rulings for new developments.

Qiyâs can be defined as taking an established ruling from Islamic Law and applying it to a new case, in virtue of the fact that the new case shares the same essential reason for which the original ruling was applied.

Qiyâs, therefore, is a method that Muslim jurists use to derive a ruling for new situations that are not addressed by the Qur’ân and Sunnah, like many new developments of our age and like the customs of people not encountered in Arabia during the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him). By way of qiyâs, these issues can be referred back to those that are explicitly mentioned in the sacred texts.

When we know the reason why something in Islamic Law is obligatory, preferred, permitted, disliked, or forbidden, then if something else shares the same reason, it can be given the same legal ruling.
Categories of Qiyâs:
There are two major categories of qiyâs with respect to its strength as evidence: overt and obscure.

A. Obvious Comparison (qiyâs jaliyy):

This is where the new situation being investigated is clearly no different in its essentials from a matter that Islamic Law has a clear and established ruling for.

This is especially the case where the sacred texts clearly spell out the reason for the original ruling or where there is unanimous agreement among Muslims as to what that reason is.

In such cases, there is no need for the jurist to try to deduce a quality in the new situation that he can use to make a comparison with some precedent in Islamic Law. Everything is clear and up-front.

Consider the following examples:

1. What is the ruling when the guardian of the orphan’s estate burns all the orphan’s property?

Though there is no direct textual evidence that discusses burning the orphan’s property, the ruling is patently clear. It takes the same ruling as when the guardian squanders the orphan’s wealth on himself.

Allah says: “Lo! Those who devour the wealth of orphans wrongfully, they do but swallow fire into their bellies, and they will be exposed to burning flame.” [Sûrah al-Nisâ’: 10]

It is prohibited for the guardian of the orphan’s estate to wrongfully spend the orphan’s wealth on himself. The reason for this ruling is obvious – it brings loss to the orphan’s property.

This is precisely what would happen if the guardian burns the orphan’s property. The orphan will suffer the loss. There is no material difference between the two cases. Since the two cases share the reason for the ruling, they share the same ruling. It is unquestionably prohibited for the guardian to burn or otherwise vandalize the orphan’s property.

2. What is the ruling on giving one’s parents a good smack?

We will not find any text in our scriptures that directly addresses this question. However, we are in no doubt that it is absolutely prohibited and sinful to do so.

We find in the Qur’ân that it is sinful to even mutter “ugh” or “uff” to our parents in exasperation when they ask us to do something for them.

Allah says: “And your Lord has commanded that you shall not worship any but Him, and that you show kindness to your parents. If either or both of them reach old age with you, say not to them so much as “ugh” nor chide them, but speak to them a generous word.” [Sûrah al-Isrâ’: 23]

We are prohibited to say “ugh” to our parents, because it is abusive behavior. At the very least, it hurts their feelings. We can have no doubt that shoving them or smacking them is even more abusive and hurtful. Since the reason for prohibition is even more evident here, we can be certain that smacking our parents is unlawful and very sinful.

From these examples, there should be no question that qiyâs should be accepted as a legal means for establishing Islamic legislation whenever the comparison is overt and clear.

Some scholars do not consider these examples to even fall under the heading of qiyâs, due to how clear and obvious they are, but consider such rulings to constitute part of what the texts themselves communicate.

B. Obscure Comparison (qiyâs khafiyy):

This is where the new situation being investigated is not so overtly similar in its essentials to the established matter in Islamic Law that it is being compared to.

This is especially the case where the sacred texts do not spell out the reason for the original ruling or where there is disagreement among Muslims as to what that reason is.

Scholars cite as an example that the criminal liability for murder with a bludgeon is the same as that for murder with a knife, since in both cases there is “an intentional and hostile act of killing”.

The difference here to the examples above is that the shared reason for the ruling is one that has been deduced by the jurists from the ruling prohibiting murder. The formula “an intentional and hostile act of killing” is a legal construct developed by legal theorists to define when a killing is legally an act of murder. It is not something that is explicitly stated in the texts, but rather something that is deduced from them.

In such cases, there is a greater burden upon the jurist, who is required to extrapolate and explain the cause of the established ruling and then explain how that cause is also present in the new matter under investigation.

All scholars agree on calling this kind of reasoning by the name qiyâs.
Areas of Scholarly Agreement Regarding the Validity of Qiyâs as a Form of Reasoning:
Muslims are all agreed that qiyâs is a valid approach to reasoning in the following areas of inquiry:

1. Worldly matters: for instance, comparing one medicine to another or pricing one product on the basis of the price of similar products in the market.

2. Any qiyâs that was carried out by the Prophet (peace be upon him): since its consideration become certain on account of its taking place in a context of certainty.

The scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah are also in agreement that qiyâs cannot be applied to certain matters. It cannot be used to answer essential questions of belief or to investigate matters relating to Allah’s nature and attributes if it leads to comparing Allah to His creation. Qiyâs can only be validly applied in these matters to extent of demonstrating that Allah is superior and transcendent to created things. Otherwise, the use of qiyâs will lead to the mistake of considering both Creator and His creation equally under the aegis of more general concepts. It will also lead to considering Allah as being similar to created things.

Allah says: “To Allah applies the highest similitude: for He is the Exalted in Power, full of Wisdom.” [Sûrah al-Nahl: 60]

Allah says: “There is none like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.” [Sûrah al-Shûrâ: 11]

As Muslims, we must believe that Allah is free from every deficiency that exists in created beings. By contrast, every aspect of perfection applies more to the Creator than it can to anything in creation.

These matters are agreed upon.
Areas of Scholarly Disagreement Regarding the Validity of Qiyâs:
Scholars disagree regarding the applicability of the second type of qiyâs (qiyâs khafiyy) in matters of Islamic Law. The discussion that follows will be dealing specifically with this second type. ( CONTINUE )

 

[Irfan Atique]

All of the leading scholars from among the Prophet’s Companions, as well as the Islamic legal scholars from all the major schools of thought agree that qiyâs is a source of Islamic legislation. It can be used as evidence to establish Islamic legal rulings on matters that are not directly addressed by the sacred texts. Ahmad b. Hanbal said: “No one can entirely dispense with qiyâs.”

Some legal theorists of the Mu`tazilî persuasion denied the validity of qiyâs. The leading proponent of this line of thinking was al-Nazzâm, who was followed by Ja`far b. Harb, Ka`far b. Mubashshir, and Muhammad b. `Abd Allah al-Iskâfî.

This line of thinking was also adopted by some scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah, most notably Dâwûd al-Zâhirî.

These scholars, in turn, differed among themselves regarding the reasons why they dismissed qiyâs. Some of them argued that qiyâs is contrary to reason. One argument given in this light was that: “Delving into this method is intellectually repugnant in its own right”. Another argument was: “Islamic legal rulings are based on human well-being, and no one knows human well-being except the One who gave us the sacred law. Therefore, the only way we can know the sacred law is from the revelation.”

Other scholars said that qiyâs is not contrary to reason, but prohibited by the sacred law itself. There were two schools of though that propounded this general idea.

1. The first was that of Ibn Hazm, the most prominent scholar of the Zâhirî school of law. He argued that the Qur’ân and Sunnah came with everything that is needed, so there is no need for qiyâs.

2. A second school of thought considered it a sin to even acknowledge the validity of qiyâs.

The Hanafî jurist Abû Zayd al-Dâbûsî summarizes the opinions of those who reject qiyâs as follows:
Those who reject qiyâs are four groups. First, there are those who reject all rational evidence, and reject qiyâs because it is based on reason. Then there are those who hold that the only valid source of knowledge is that which is founded in rational necessity, and they argue that qiyâs is not founded on rational necessity.

Then there are those who do not regard qiyâs as a valid source of evidence for matters of Islamic Law.

Finally, there are those who argue that qiyâs would only a valid source of evidence for matters of Islamic Law in cases of necessity. However, there is never a need to resort to qiyâs, because in the absence of direct textual evidence, the default legal ruling is one of permissibility.
The truth is that qiyâs is a valid source of Islamic Law. The disagreements that developed regarding its validity came about after the Companions agreed unanimously that it is a valid approach, and after the Successors – the students of the Companions – applied qiyâs and endorsed it without hesitation.. This means that the disagreement came about after it had been a matter of consensus (ijmâ`).
General Rules for the Valid Application of Qiyâs:
There are a number of guidelines that must be observed for qiyâs to be correctly applied. We will mention these in a very brief and summarized form:

1. Qiyâs can never be used to establish a ruling that contravenes a ruling or legal principle established by direct scriptural evidence. This is because qiyâs is not to be resorted to in a matter where we have a text that gives a ruling.

2. The person who engages in deriving a ruling through qiyâs must have the qualifications to engage in independent juristic reasoning (ijtihâd).

3. The qiyâs itself must be reasoned through properly. It must comply with all of the considerations that Islamic legal theorists have discussed in the books of jurisprudence.

Otherwise, the qiyâs will not be valid. It will be of the type that the earliest scholars condemned. However, they did not ever categorically condemn qiyâs.

Al-Ghazâlî writes: “Whoever rejects qiyâs in principle is certainly mistaken in his thinking, and should be deemed as sinful.”

 

[Irfan Atique]

firstly that was just an example on daily life human choices sceondly, the examiner doesn't even refer to Shia or sunni. This question is from 2009, and if you are a sir then you should know that papers before 2005 were made differently one for Sunnis and the other for shias. after 2005, the pattern changed and no different papers were made for shias and sunnis. you are mistaking this very question for a question in the 2003/2004 papers in which a question is about why do Shia scholars reject the use of Qiyas. this question asks why do scholars reject Qiyas. You are saying that Shia scholars reject Qiyas but in the question it is not mentioned so how can you say it!!!!!!

Here is another ANSWER FOR YOU SIR AKA V.I.P.E.R........
Qiyas and why some scholars rejects it
Definitions
Although qiyas is normally translated as analogy, it may include non-analogical arguments in Sunnite law. In Shi’ite traditions when the word qiyas describes a procedure that the Imams reject, it refers to simple, restricted or juridical forms of analogical reasoning. As Shi’ite scholars developed a coherent legal theory, the rejection of qiyas was explained in greater detail.
Views of Early Scholars
Al-Shaykh al-Mufid (d. 413/1022) rejected qiyas on epistemological grounds. He argued that, while qiyas is not necessarily an illegitimate procedure in itself, it does not result in knowledge of the law. Both al-Sharif al-Murtada (d. 436/1044) and Shaykh al-Ta’ifa (d. 460/1067) considered qiyas illegitimate because the procedure is not supported by textual evidence and not because it is epistemologically inadequate. So, in the formative period of Shi’ite legal theory, there were two arguments against qiyas: epistemological uncertainty and lack of textual evidence in support of it.
Views of Later Scholars
Al-Muhaqqiq al-Hilli (d. 676/1277) picked up where al-Mufid left off. Like al-Mufid, he rejected qiyas on epistemological grounds. By qiyas al-Muhaqqiq meant an analogy in which the common element (‘illah), on the basis of which a ruling in a known case is transferred to an unknown case, is not known, but supposed. However, if the ‘illah is recorded in a proof-text (nass) then it is known and the resulting procedure is not qiyas but the transference of a ruling (ta‘diyat al-hukm), which is acceptable so long as there is textual evidence that the original ruling is transferable.
So, at this stage in the development of Shi’ite legal theory, the ruling in a known case may be transferred to an unknown case if the common element is recorded in a proof-text and if there is textual evidence that the ruling in the first case is transferable.
Although al-Muhaqqiq gave some examples of how to recognize a recorded ‘illah, al-‘Allama al-Hilli (d. 726/1325) expanded this list to include phrases such as “on account of” (li-ajl) and “because of” (li-sabab) which signify the introduction of an ‘illah. Al-‘Allama dropped al-Muhaqqiq’s condition that there must be textual evidence that a ruling is transferable.
At this point the rejection of qiyas boils down to a rejection of analogies in which the ‘illah is not recorded but derived (mustanbata) by one of six Sunnite means: munasaba, mu’aththir, shabah, dawran, al-sabr wa’l-taqsim and tard. This became the prevalent view and later scholars upheld al-‘Allama’s view over that of al-Murtada.
There was however one apparent contradiction in al-'Allama's theory which later scholars took up. Al-'Allama rejected qiyas because it is uncertain (zanni) yet he accepted epistemological uncerainty (zann) in the law. Later scholars resolved this by arguing that it is not the uncertainty of a ruling which is problematic, for it was accepted that the jurisconsult's opinion is uncertain, but the uncertainty of the cause of a ruling, which must be certain. Proposing an uncertain ruling was not problematic for scholars, but proposing that the means of arriving at an uncertain ruling are themselves uncertain was controversial.

 

[Master Minds]

Now let me open the arguments the scholars who reject Qiyas are shias coz they use Aqal instead of qiyas n in the ans examiner is asking for this ...while we do the qiyas i did it by myself back in Al Azhar University on telephonic divorce........second we r taking about islam n there are no if's and but's in it so its not iphone, o blackberry, or trex to prefer.....

sir by the way what conclusion u drew from ur qiyas about telephonic divorce. I really want to know about it. Also is telephonic nikkah valid?

 

[Irfan Atique]

sir by the way what conclusion u drew from ur qiyas about telephonic divorce. I really want to know about it. Also is telephonic nikkah valid?

NO DEAR FOR THE DIVORCE PHYSICAL PRESENCE OF BOTH HUSBAND AND WIFE IS MUST SO THE TELEPHONIC DIVORCE IS INVALID ALONG WITH THE NIKKAH COZ PRESENCE OF BRIDE AND GROOM ALONG WITH THREE WITNESSES IS MUST..... AND ITS IN SURAH BAQARAH, AND SURAH AT TALAQ INCLUDING THE PRACTICE IMPLEMENTATION BY RASOOL ALLAH (S.A.W).

 

[Red Viper]

oh yeah irfan you gave the students 1/4 for no valid reason thats they kicked your a** out and also because you have no sense you are just a mentally retired geek who calls himself an "O Level examiner" ha ha ha ha in your dreams and by the way take a chill pill An O level examiner would always give a valid point for an answer and not talk rudely to any of his students he would be a rolemodel for others not like you you are no role model

well faizan the primary sources of Shariah are used collectively
in the first paragraph, just give out some details about what is Quran and Hadith
in the second paragraph, mention that Quran contains all the details but some details are not discussed by the Quran or are not fully explained. bu the Hadith elaborates and explains tha non-discuused topic of the Quran
in the third paragraph write that the Quran says ,"Establish regular prayers" Prophet said "there is no prayer for the one who does not recite the opening chapter of the book"
4th para : Quran says "and establish regular prayers and pay the charity tax" but no reference as to how much Zakat hadith, "There is no charity tax..."
5th para: Quran says "cut off the hands of the male and female theives" but no reference as to how much amount stolen then this action take place hadith says that his hand should only be cut if he steals something equal to dinar
6th prara: Quran says "O children of Adam, We Have Revealed unto you...but noreference as to which parts to be exposed or covered and from whom Prophets Hadith
7th para : Quran says that wine are forbidden as well as strong drinks but prescribes no punishment Hadith says that 40 lashes be lashed to consummator
8th para : Optional to mention adultery

 

[Faizan Muhammmad]

well faizan the primary sources of Shariah are used collectively
in the first paragraph, just give out some details about what is Quran and Hadith
in the second paragraph, mention that Quran contains all the details but some details are not discussed by the Quran or are not fully explained. bu the Hadith elaborates and explains tha non-discuused topic of the Quran
in the third paragraph write that the Quran says ,"Establish regular prayers" Prophet said "there is no prayer for the one who does not recite the opening chapter of the book"
4th para : Quran says "and establish regular prayers and pay the charity tax" but no reference as to how much Zakat hadith, "There is no charity tax..."
5th para: Quran says "cut off the hands of the male and female theives" but no reference as to how much amount stolen then this action take place hadith says that his hand should only be cut if he steals something equal to dinar
6th prara: Quran says "O children of Adam, We Have Revealed unto you...but noreference as to which parts to be exposed or covered and from whom Prophets Hadith
7th para : Quran says that wine are forbidden as well as strong drinks but prescribes no punishment Hadith says that 40 lashes be lashed to consummator
8th para : Optional to mention adultery

thanks bro i used to spend majority on validity ,process etc and give a few examples in the end but ur method is right , our sir gave about the same to

 

[Lilly2318]

I hav this grave problem
ive found a contradicting situation.
In mustafa draper book its written dat Umme Kulsoom was Prophet's 2nd daughter
But in oder books ( farkhanda noor, ghulam shabbir & m. bilal aslam ) it is ritten she was third daughter
PLZ ANSWER AND CONFIRM!

 

[Red Viper]

well write whatever is in the Mustafa Draper book as he is an O Level examiner, unlike Irfan Attique the "Mega O Level examiner"
NEVER EVER ACCEPT WHATEVER IRFAN ATTIQUE WRITES OTHER THAN THE SHAHADAT

 

[Lilly2318]

well write whatever is in the Mustafa Draper book as he is an O Level examiner, unlike Irfan Attique the "Mega O Level examiner"
NEVER EVER ACCEPT WHATEVER IRFAN ATTIQUE WRITES OTHER THAN THE SHAHADAT

WAT? WATS WID U AND HIM?

 

[Red Viper]

well he really is nothing but an arrogant brat. all I did was contradict one of his points on QIyas. he responded by sarcastically calling me sir and sir aka viper when i contradicted him and boasted of him being an "O Level Examiner" I gave him a decent reply and but am still waiting for his reply
hope it comes soon