The Experience of Extracting Jurisprudence and the Political System from the Prophetic Way of the Prophet ( PBUH)
The subject of our discussion is what has been the benefit of the ‘prophetic course’ during the formation of ‘Islamic political jurisprudence’ throughout history?
The basis of this argument is that the use of hadith was in the main jurisprudence, and the Sira’ah was in the second place. However, prophetic news has always been used to corroborate some political verdicts, especially in jihad.
The change that has been going on for the last hundred years is that those who believe in the non-politicization of religion try to use the prophetic method and say that the Prophet (peace be upon him) had established a government and for all political cases was a religious law. have given.
Traditional hadiths were not sufficient for this purpose, so they turned to historical books on the Sira.
In addition, they could also prove the principle of Islamic rule, whether it was a caliphate or a monarchy or a republic.
We begin the discussion with the principle of the question, which is to follow the Prophet (peace be upon him) in the affairs of life and to derive jurisprudence from his hadith and act.
INTRODUCTION Discussion The
discussion of the formation of the prophetic tradition began with the issue of “obedience to the Prophet” (PBUH) and the issue that had been repeated in the Qur’an, and the most prominent example was that of Atiyawa Allah and Atiyawa al-Rasoul.
This obedience could have three meanings:
A. Obedience to what is communicated as a revelation.
B: In addition, obedience to current orders was mainly political, expedient and governmental.
A: Obeying any kind of speech or behavior that is imitative in their life and practice as a complement to religion.
After the death of the Prophet (peace be upon him), the first disagreement on the subject of information arose, and this was in spite of new things that were not ruled in the Qur’an and should be practiced ijtihad. [Like the Obstacle Problem].
But there were at least two points about the plan of the Sira’ah and the necessity of obeying it:
A: We can do what we have received from the Prophet, but we do not have to. Umar believed that whatever happens, if we do not have a quota, we will make ijtihad; if we do, obedience is not obligatory. He was, in principle, expedient and made his own diagnosis.
B: Another point was that we should do whatever the Prophet (pbuh) did.
This idea was gradually raised, and Umar, while not opposed to the principle of action, did not find it necessary and considered the ijtihad of the ruler and the emir. So he repeatedly contradicted Ijtihad. As its cases are evident.
Gradually, the second theory became dominant over the first one, but this was very delayed.
During this time, new issues were raised, or some ambiguous issues arose. It was naturally sought to find out whether something had arrived from the Prophet. This raised the authority of the Companions. The Umayyad rulers were looking for companions who agreed. Then both the subordinates and then the subordinates replaced them. They gradually developed something called hadith, and this was in spite of divergent opinions and infiltration of fabricated news.
But the Shiites, who were critical of the Companions, questioned the authority of the Ahlul-Bayt in question of the prophetic course. They say that we only accept the narrations of Imam Ali (as), the narrations of them narrated by Ja’far ibn Muhammad.
The history of citation in the first century of prophethood is a mystery. But one can find examples in subordinate life. These searches formed the science of hadith, which is about the disadvantages of purity. But it seems that it has gradually developed and strengthened, so that in the second century, contrary to the first century, we have a wealth of hadiths. At the beginning of the third century, this mass would reach thousands – several tens of thousands or more to millions. This is when Sunni scholars decided to refine what was said to be “correct” to extract it.
But the principle of citation to the hadith continued with two tendencies:
a: the minimal tendency that the companions voted for and Abu Hanifa
had in mind;
In the midst of this, the Shafi’i religion and the owner were somewhat intermediate.
The theoretical disagreement was that Abu Hanifa had two issues:
A: First, most of the traditions were false which he did not believe in [except that it was a contradictory hadith that in many cases Mujahid was confused among them. Was. And besides, there was so much new issue that there was no hadith and thought, what to do then?]
Another point was the existence of the works alongside the hadiths. The meaning of the work was that when the prophetic hadiths were diminished, they said that every act they performed was companionship and even obedience. So they commented on what they said in jurisprudence. This led to the accumulation of “hadiths and works” that were backed by jurisprudence. Thousands of these are in the form of Abdul Razaq and Ibn Abi Shayba.
B: He considered wisdom, ijtihad, opinion, analogy, and sensibility more powerful than he wanted to put aside such traditions of reason.
At this time, the prophetic legacy continued in two parts: the
first in jurisprudence with a divergent path in two directions: [one in the form of the companions of the vote and the other in the form of the Hadith.] The
second in the science of sire, a collection of historical news and narratives. It was about the era of Bassat and Maghazi, the Medina period.
Typically, Sunni jurists referred to what had been accepted in the science of hadith in the third century, that is, prophetic traditions, and rarely used the information in the science of sira for use in jurisprudence. Until the third century, scholars such as Ahmad ibn Hanbal extracted from the Sira books what they used in their jurisprudential inferences from Sira news. For example, he read carefully all the authentic books, though he regarded the case as a sage who was not reliable in jurisprudence.
Meanwhile, Sire’s own science was of particular value and many were experts in it.
First, it had a sacredness, because it had the name of the Prophet on it anyway.
Secondly, it could have solved many of the jurisprudential issues.
Thirdly, it was used in ethical and commentary discussions and so on,
so the “science of sire” continued its path, despite having no place in jurisprudence.
Sira had other benefits as well, since its scope was far beyond jurisprudence, so it continued.
From the third century onwards, the path of jurisprudence, referring to prophetic traditions, diverged from the path, though some had fled. One reason for this separation was the formation of religions, which at first were numerous, but were gradually reduced to four religions. So in the old way, it was less ijtihad and this eliminates the need for prophetic guidance as a source of jurisprudence. During this period, even many correct hadiths were left unused in jurisprudence, as fatwa had been formed. However, as mentioned, the Prophetic Sira was interesting for any Muslim, as he supplemented his knowledge of the atmosphere of Islam, knew the Prophet (PBUH) better and used it in ethics and so on.
Converting Sira to Jurisprudence and its Difficulties
The process of converting the prophetic practice of the Prophet (PBUH) into a jurisprudence, was difficult. How can the Prophet of Allah act, oblige, respect, and excommunicate him? There have been discussions about Sunni and Shiite principles.
We mentioned earlier that the principle of obedience was accepted, but first there was discussion about its scope and, second, how to make a religious law a “practice” and a behavior. The most important question was whether the acts quoted by the Prophet (peace be upon him) were trustworthy. This was because the historians did not trust trustees from the very beginning. So it may have been the case that all anthropological historians have cited it, but the jurists did not comment on it.
In other words, was the act of the Prophet (peace be upon him) a special and expedient act of government or a permanent and eternal religious law? In several cases, for example, the assassination of individuals is mentioned in the Sirae narrative. The assassination of these people, according to these sources, is due to their bold language towards the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the poems that they have spoken. Is it possible, according to these quotes, that they are right or wrong, to issue a jurisprudence on the assassination permit – let alone the necessity – of such persons? Most of these can be acts of interest that happened in a particular case, which may never happen again. Document and source forms still exist. It is clear that the documents of many of the sage narrations are not authentic documents, and most of them are from oral narrative-story formations in Medina and often their narrators, who are prominent Sira writers, are in doubt. This is a problem that may be partially remedial, or even complete. This is not what we are looking for, though it is important and a reflection.
But the main problem is turning a news into a jurisprudence, even if there is religious authority behind it. There is no doubt that Allah Almighty has said: and at least the Prophet, peace be upon him, but it is important to deduce a jurisprudential ruling and a legal principle from a historical story.
This issue, namely the use of the Prophet’s eternal injunction in the Prophet’s behavior, has been prescribed and has been partially discussed in the science of principles.
The knowledge of the principles was arranged in two parts. This part had to do with the text of the Qur’an and the words of the Prophet (PBUH), plus the Sunnis from the Companions and the Shiites from the Imams. How and under what conditions and when it is said by God to say “Ahlullah al-Bai and al-Haram al-Ruba” or “Ufa al-Balqud” and how it implies and whether it is specific and general, or absolute and bound Understandably, this is one of the topics in this section.
The second part, however, is the verbs of rasul (pbuh), which include some form of exegesis, though the exegesis is deep and contains a few cases. Here, the implication of the Prophet’s (SAW) behavior for a specific order, from compulsion to permitting or stopping or pleading, must be addressed in a principled context.
The course of the use of the verbs of Rasul (as) in jurisprudence is one of the most probable issues that can be subjected to independent historical exploration. The basis of that argument is the citizenship of God’s Prophet (PBUH) based on Qur’anic verses. The other argument is the proof of the infallibility of the Prophet, and finally, the specific issues that are concerned with the type of its implication for a jurisprudential ruling.
Here’s a brief overview of the three texts in order to get to know the importance of the basic topics of this topic.
One of the authors of this argument is Fakhr Razi in Al-Mulhasul (Third Volume, pp. 265-225), which we briefly quote. From what he said, it is clear that two things are important here:
It is primarily a theological debate concerning the infallibility of the Prophet (peace be upon him). The task must first be clarified. There are several things in this regard, the most important of which are the four most important ones. The least of what Sunnis believe in infallibility is that the Prophet may have inadvertently made a mistake. If one considers the presumption of infallibility as Shiite that there is infallibility in everything, even inadvertently, one can look upon the acts of the Prophet as a justification. Otherwise, even inadvertently, it destroys everything. Fakhr Razi himself says: But al-Sasu lacks the same, but only for the time being, and so on and so forth. [Al-Mulasal, (Fakhr al-Din Razi, Corrected by Taha Jaber al-Alwani, Beirut, al-Rasaleh Institute, 1992), Vol. 3, p. 228] Inadvertently, something happened to them, provided he was aware of it and others at the same time. To let them know that it was inadvertent.
It is important, then, to know whether or not they have awakened the Prophet in due time. If so, is the validity of the verb remaining? Anyway, that’s a problem.
But the second and more important point is whether or not the very act of the Prophet (peace be upon him) implies a ruling for us? Fakhrazi makes four promises in this regard. Necessity, woe, stupidity, stopping. Some have cited verses that obey the necessity of following the Prophet (pbuh), such as the verse of Aswah or the verse “Yalhafar al-Yalfon al-Amirah”. Fakhr Razi responds to each of these verses and the news and consensus argued against them and refuses to accept that the Prophet’s very act requires a mandate. [Al-Mouslou, Vol. 3, p. 245 240 240]
Fakhr, after rejecting the three doctrines of Necessity, Nabdah, and Ahaba, pauses and says: Al-Aqaf and al-Mutazlال: The Qur’ الn of the obligatory and the meaning of اAz علm علna al-Rasولولl (PBUH) Al-Wajub, and not a believer in Kantah Baltanfal, and a non-believer in Ali al-Wahhah, besides the beleaguered worshipers of Lena and Jenna. [Al-Mulhallah, p. 247] The jurists and Mu’tazilites believe that it is obligatory to follow the Prophet (peace be upon him). What this means is that if we find that the Prophet (peace be upon him) has done what is necessary, then we must do it in the obligatory way. If it was a party, we would too. If we find out that it is on the face of it, then we still have to believe it and be allowed to do it.
He then discusses where to find out what the apostle’s verb is from the means of compulsion, consolation, or embarrassment. There are a number of ways to do this, including four ways to know how to get paid. The first is that the Prophet (peace be upon him) made clear his words and the other way … so there are ways to know the necessity or the virtue. [Al-Muqalas, p. 255] The continuation of this debate shows how controversial the use of the jurisprudence of the Prophet (peace be upon him) was.
Among the Shiites there has also been a major debate over the implications of Rasul’s actions. However, and, alas, from a period of time, this discussion has been excluded from the textbooks.
Allameh Halley in the Essential Principle discusses the following acts of the Prophet (peace be upon him): On the necessity of al-Thais al-Balnabi; Lena Qolem of Excellence …. Fatwawe …. [6/154] and Luqdat Kun Lakm fi Rasoolullah Oswal Hassan [33/22] and Qole: Qunn kantam Tahbun Allah Fatbahi Yahbbakm Allah [3/32] , Meaning “No to the Prophet (PBUH)” for now, Ali al-Wajub, Ya’ab al-Ayna al-Wajib al-Wajub, and her dislike to Kenya’s anointed believer, and her affirmation to Al-Wahhab, Kenya’s beloved believer. Azad science of the verb. But here is Yalem Yalm, the Majesty of Ibn Serij: An Anhallojub in Haqqah, and the Landlord Shield, and the Owner: Allah. And most of all, Ali al-Awqaf. And Ho Al-Arab. Lan Ismatah Tafi al-Qabh Anah, and al-Wajub and al-Dinb Zayed, Falmouth Shi al-Jawaz. [Basa al-Wasil al-Alym al-Aul’n, correction by Abdul Hussein Muhammad Ali Baqal, Qom, 1404 AH, p. 169] It is obligatory upon the Prophet, as opposed to those who do not consider it obligatory … It also means that if the Prophet (PBUH) explicitly acts On the side of compulsion, on the one hand, or on the other hand, let us be loyal to that and act in the same way. But if we do not know how to do it, Ibn Serijj said, it is obligatory on us, Shafi’i said it is obligatory, Malik said: it is a matter of law. More Mu’tazilites: They give a stop; that is, a permit. This is closer to the truth. Because the Prophet (peace be upon him) forbids him from doing evil work. Obligations need clarification, but “licensing” is common. They give a halt, that is, a permit. This is closer to the truth. Because the Prophet (peace be upon him) forbids him from doing evil work. Obligations need clarification, but “licensing” is common. They give a halt, that is, a permit. This is closer to the truth. Because the Prophet (peace be upon him) forbids him from doing evil work. Obligations need clarification, but “licensing” is common.
These explanations are not intended to elaborate on the principles of the implications of the rasul verbs, but rather to keep in mind that we cannot derive jurisprudence from a review of what has been learned in the sources. Jurisprudence, or the design and understanding of the subjects of the commandments and the sentences themselves and how to derive them from the main sources of the Qur’an and the Sunnah – including infallible promises and actions – is a difficult task. This is especially important when it comes to the rights of the individual, or when it comes to property and life. Unfortunately, it has been said that for the past hundred years, there has been an inexorable tolerance in this regard.
Alongside what has been said, the term “theorem of fact” was an important issue here and was used to refer to events that refer to a particular act of innocence, but because it was precisely an act or event, for jurists, It did not contain the publicity feature. On the issues of al-‘Aziyah, Mohaqiq Hali, in the discussion of borrowing and borrowing on the basis of it, cites the narrator of Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Amar, who brought in the loan of the Rabbi’s license, saying: And al-Thani they are in fact specially for the folk. [Al-Raysael al-Tassa, p. 147 (Reza Elastadi research, Qom, Marashi, 1413 AH]] Ayat responds to another by referring to a particular case that Imam Ali (AS) has judged: “And, in fact, the judgment.” [Ibid., P. 277] and the like: He writes: And Ali’s act is a virtuous proposition. [Shara’i al-Islam, vol. 1, p. 238 (Qom, 1409)] Allameh Hali also writes in a commentary after a judgment was quoted from Imam Ali (as): And the real case of custom, against Islam; [Tahrir al-Ahkam, vol. 5, p. 554 (Raqqat al-Bahadari, Qom, al-Imam al-Sadiq Institute, 1422]] This is a case that has happened in a particular case and the Prophet ruled it because of its attribute, and in addition to its contagion does not.
This phrase seems to have been introduced in the jurisprudential school of Hilla Bab and then in the works of Ibn Fahd, the first martyr, the second and subsequent jurists. One has to ask: What exactly does this interpretation mean? Is this interpretation applied, whether the sentence quoted in these traditions or the verbs opposed to the same sentence is commonplace in jurisprudence, or is it the criterion that when a particular behavior is performed in certain circumstances, it is virtually void? And it is not possible to argue in support of a legal and legal verdict. In the justification it is said that the event around it was a point that has given the Imam knowledge of a particular issue and a special ruling has been issued. So it is not possible to argue publicly to the extent of a law. In such cases, and when a particular case is brought to light, one must refer to the principles of the Shari’a, the principles which are sharply questionable in their generality and application and have been substantiated.
What further complicates the situation of “true theology” is in behaviors that are not fundamentally specific to specific religious laws that the Qur’an and hadith explicitly address. In other words, here we must distinguish between the two types of verb. The first is actions such as ablution, prayer, fasting, and their components, which can be more easily stated when a particular act of the Messenger of God (PBUH) is observed. But there are other types of actions, social and political behaviors, and even judgments that are first and foremost related to the current situation, and secondly, expediency plays an important role, thirdly, always behind the scenes that may have a significant impact on the behavior. Your Highness. So it would be difficult to deduce an explicit sentence from it.
Recently, Muhammad Suleiman al-Ashqar complained in a two-volume work entitled Verbs of Al-Rasoul, referring to the detailed principles discussed in order to formulate rules of inference from the “verbs” of the small volume of verbal arguments about “verbs”. He considers it poor. [Oral al-Rasoul, Muhammad Suleiman al-Ashghar, 1416 AH, vol. 1, p. 8 سپس 10] Then he lists a number of topics that he himself deals with in this book.
The first chapter is about the apostle’s explicit verbs, which are dealt with in ten chapters:
The first chapter is about the nature of the verb and the fact that we have an explicit and non-explicit verb. It can also be a personal and social verb.
The second chapter is about the nature of the Prophet’s actions originating in the Qur’an, either ijtihad or imposition or non-issuance.
The third chapter is that the actions of the Apostle of God (PBUH) are in accordance with religious law. Here he criticizes those who argue that they do not fundamentally support the actions of the Prophet.
In the fourth chapter, his explicit actions are divided into ten sections: Gibraltar, ordinary, worldly, features, miracles, expressive verb, figurative, transitive, passive awaiting revelation, abstract verb. Each of these has been discussed in detail.
The singular verb, which he considered to be an important discussion, spoke about him independently in Chapter Five.
Chapter six discusses the religious orders that can be used for verbs.
Chapter 7 discusses the nature of the present signification and its nature and whether its signification is adaptive, implicit or implied.
Chapter eight discusses the implications of the prophet’s verb attribution, its cause, its subject, its subject, time, how, material context, the number of acts and its size.
The following is a discussion of the problems that have been raised with regard to the arguments to the verbs, as well as a discussion of the transposition of the verbs of Rasul (PBUH) and how.
The second section discusses non-explicit verbs such as scripture, gesture, abandonment, silence, interpretation, action-taking, and is devoted to each chapter.
The third chapter examines the conflict between prophetic verbs and discusses four chapters. It has thus shown how difficult and vital it is to use the actions of the Apostle of God to infer jurisprudence.
We would like to add that your esteemed friend, Mr. Mehrizi, in an article entitled “The Realm of Hadith from the Shiites’ Viewpoint” published in the Journal of Hadith Sciences and also in Nurmegz, has expressed different views on the division of the Prophet’s actions into What can be extracted from eternal jurisprudential judgment, with what is expedient and governmental or personal or case, has been brought to the attention of the great of the ancients and contemporaries. One of them is quoted by Imam Khomeini who wrote: Prophet (PBUH) had many positions among the Ummah. The office of propagating divine decrees, the office of presiding and leading the community, and the office of judgment … all that exists in the traditions of the Prophet (PBUH) and the Prophet (peace be upon him) with the words “judgment” and “judgment” and “command” and the like. It is not an exegesis of the Shari’ah, except in a virtual way, as the government’s command is sometimes quoted and the context must be understood [Final Principle: p. 97]. Most of the first martyrs in this regard have been described in al-Qua’ad and al-Fuaid [J 1 pp. 214 ـ 217].
The Prophetic Course in Political Jurisprudence Until the Eighth Century
Prophetic news was used in al-Sultanieh’s books and similar ones. These books, like other jurisprudential works, were not meant to be written compellingly, but were generally more general due to their social and political nature and expediency. The discussion of jihad was one of the most common topics based on the prophetic course. Throughout the caliphate, they also referred to hadiths that were often fake and related to the virtues of the caliphs and even their temporal order. There were discussions about obedience to the ruler and the like. As it turned out, most of them were about jihad, the origin of which was the issue of conquests in the first and second centuries. However, the prophetic course in this period, in general, was involved in shaping political issues and was used like other jurisprudents.
In the eighth century, a strange development took place, in that a particular method of formulation was developed that would further classify it for use in political jurisprudence. The classification, begun in a book entitled “al-Dalalat al-Sa’iyyah”, compiled the news of Sira, especially that of the Prophet, which facilitated its use in political jurisprudence. This method was also used in the erection of al-Masa’i al-Muqarriz from this period.
The reason why Ali al-Muhammad Khaza’i, the author of al-Dawlat, has done so, is a remarkable point that he himself made in the introduction. He first quoted a hadith from the Prophet (pbuh) with the subject: The
Prophet’s Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and Selah Mama Khwaja Muslim (2: 85) Rahma Allah Almighty: I am the Messenger of God, and I am God. Allah, and I am the lioness of the lioness, and I am the lord of the lioness of the lioness.
Then he says: I have seen many who have not taken a step in science and who do not know the tools of science except pencils and pens, think that anyone in this age of opinion in many of these practices [political and Brokerage, slow-paced, non-prophetic, followed the postal method, not operating in “Sunni practice.” So I asked God to help me compile a book on what I received from Talekamalat, the brokers. … So I wrote this book and named it al-Dawlat al-Sa’i ‘al-Ma’i kun fi in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). He then adds: “In this book, I talked about any action that the Prophet (pbuh) used to make someone from the companion work” to be clear now, “to clarify the situation today.” [Transfiguration of al-Sama’i, p. 22, 21].
We do not know exactly who believed this and what it meant. This was discussed in Andalusia, and he and his father and grandfather served the kings in the eighth century. The year he died was 789. Whatever the case, entering the government and taking office has been described as “heresy” and he has sought to dispel the heresy by citing the news that later forms the agency in prophetic government. He dedicated the book in 786 to Abu Musa bin al-Mutawakul Ali al-Murini.
This book seems to be a unique work, and with this view, in the old world, there is nothing written about this approach. The editors of the book about it wrote in the preface:
As explained in the introduction to this work, Khazai has arranged the book in ten parts. There are eight components in the “brokers”, the brokers, one in the “letters and tricks” and the last one that ends the book. These components are set at 178 bits and repeat information is tailored to the subject of division and occasionally. The author in the Military Tribunal provided detailed information and the fifth part of the book, which is about one of the largest parts of the book, about 45 books. This chapter, in addition to the two chapters “Al-Amalat al-Ahkamiyyah and Al-Amalat al-Jubaie”, which are the fourth and sixth components, seeks to explain the “composition of the al-Dawlah in the Old Testament” and the caliphs. In his view, the “Al-Haraf and al-Sina’at” section dealing with the Prophet’s occupations, although not based on the principle of authorship in responding to those who accept government agency, are hereditary, but the space of his time. Turns on. [Abstract: p. 11]
The introduction says: This work is a circle of thorns that other contemporary writers of this author have touched upon, such as Ibn Khaldun’s Introduction, Ibn al-Khattib’s Rasil al-Khatib in Politics, Ibn Rizwan’s Al-Shabaab al-Ma’ala, and Wasit al-Salluk. Abi Hammu. All of these works showcase Maghreb’s distinguished heritage in the light of history and in the pursuit of original political thought. The emergence of these works during this period indicates a particular intellectual shift, with Ibn Khaldun using the notion of “evolution” about the concept of government and politics. Ibn Rizwan has put forward a kind of comparative ethics in the politics of the state, and Abu Hammu has based his actual experience on the basis of his plan, and thus Khuza’i has restored the principle. It seems that Khazai does not believe in evolution, but in fact it is not. In fact, it is his implicit belief that he has led Islam to seek the truth at the beginning of Islam. The basis of his belief is that the roots of any kind of military are found in the apostle’s actions and actions. For example, he seeks to be a left wing, right wing, heart, leg and forearm in the time of the Prophet. It is important for him to find this in the scrolls and hadiths, this is his main purpose, but what has changed in the course of history, and that these changes are as if the apostle would have endorsed them Or not, he doesn’t care. Or, for example, this woman, in her lifetime, was taking over the affairs of the market, that is, she was doing the work of muhtasib, but she did not argue to what extent Shariah could be held responsible. For example, he seeks to be a left wing, right wing, heart, leg and forearm in the time of the Prophet. It is important for him to find this in the scrolls and hadiths, this is his main purpose, but what has changed in the course of history, and that these changes are as if the apostle would have endorsed them Or not, he doesn’t care. Or, for example, this woman, in her lifetime, was taking over the affairs of the market, that is, she was doing the work of muhtasib, but she did not argue to what extent Shariah could be held responsible. For example, he seeks to be a left wing, right wing, heart, leg and forearm in the time of the Prophet. It is important for him to find this in the scrolls and hadiths, this is his main purpose, but what has changed in the course of history, and that these changes are as if the apostle would have endorsed them Or not, he doesn’t care. Or, for example, this woman, in her lifetime, was taking over the affairs of the market, that is, she was doing the work of muhtasib, but she did not argue to what extent Shariah could be held responsible.
This book was considered in the new era, and especially in the period when doubts arose about the Islamic caliphate and eventually led to the dissolution of the caliphate. The first person was al-Tawatha al-Tawawi, who was discussing al-Dawlah’s system, and then Abdulahi Katani based it on the basis of a book called al-Atatib al-Adaria, which was called al-Hakam al-Nabawi’s system. He added components, and tried to add materials to each section and chapter. [Excerpt, p. 12; 13].
Converting the Prophetic Course to Political and Governmental Jurisprudence In the last hundred years there
are two fundamental questions:
1. What factors or factors have led us to revisit the prophetic course in the past year and what has been our most important approach to this revision? Is?
2. How and how can we extract the “prophetic course”, the “jurisprudential rules” to govern our individual and social life? By what criteria and by what criteria?
There are also two sub-questions:
1. What is the record of the past hundred years? How has our scientific output been and to what extent?
2. Is there a scientific criterion that Islamic groups even document their own extremist and extravagant behavior?
In answer to these, it should be said:
Nearly a century ago, when the Ottoman government collapsed and the “Islamic Caliphate” with a 1,300-year history collapsed, it was thought to be the beginning of the complete destruction of Islam and Muslims. For this reason, many efforts were made to keep the Islamic Caliphate alive. In fact, the Ottoman caliphate, especially Sultan Abdul Hamid, who had long suspected its dissolution and decline, tried to give the impression in the Muslim world that if I perished, Islam would perish. The notion that many parts of the Islamic world took it seriously and drew a vague future, especially for Sunnis. This situation led to the revival of the caliphate movement throughout the Islamic world, which did not allow the rapid political developments of the Ottoman world and the backdrop of the caliphate, and the Ottoman caliphate disappeared to the utter disbelief of the Muslims.
There was another important factor for our elites and writers to pay attention to Islam’s past. Muslim leaders in the second half of the nineteenth century faced a wave of attacks on Islam. The atmosphere that frightened the Muslims on the basis of this was that the West was aggressively importing its culture into the eastern Islamic countries. The sense of the Muslims was that they were lagging behind, and the fear was that Western secular culture, which was based on secularism and anti-religion, would affect the Muslim youth and the next generation and the Muslim world would collapse. On the eve of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, what was called the Islamic system, and now colonial governments, instead of Islam, were providing the Islamic world with a culture. Christian evangelical propaganda also added to this fear. That is, the likelihood of youth becoming Christians was also high.
It was here that Muslims revisited Islam and Islamic governments and tried to find a new paradigm for both the Islamic system and empower Islam to counter the Western culture that was accompanied by widespread criticism of Islam in the ideological and Shari’a dimension. Stand up.
What part of Islamic history could a Muslim have had such a significance for? The answer was simple and easy, prophetic. This was the best time that Muslims have ever looked at in a sacred way and considered it the best and the most excellent. This sentiment was needed to rethink the prophetic course throughout the Islamic world from the subcontinent to Egypt and many other places.
This read was in two parts. Firstly, how does the Islamic caliphate or the Islamic state come from the prophetic course? In fact, was there any ambiguity that the Islamic caliphate is essentially Islamic, or is it just a form of government that Muslims have created? If a form and shape and of course can be changed, it cannot and will not be otherwise. Those who were Islamists replaced the Islamic state with the Islamic caliphate. They spoke about the implementation of Islamic rule in one country, that the Islamic Sharia should be implemented. Implementation of the law was, at its best, visible and understood in the prophetic course. Therefore, it has become a factor in bringing the prophetic tradition back to the agenda of the Muslims and to start researching it.
Apart from this, some intellectuals in the Muslim world were essentially skeptical of the principle of Islamic rule or caliphate and regarded Islam as a religion without a state religion. The issue in Egypt by Ali Abdul Raziq shook the body of traditional Islamists and led to his expulsion from the Islamic Ummah. After that, the scholars tried to show that Islam has a political system. The best source to prove this was to go to the prophetic course and to prove that Islam has a political system.
I wrote an article about “The Historical and Cultural Background of the Book of Religion in Al-Adaria” in the year 84, 2004, which I posted online on February 22, 2011. That article completes that discussion.
What follows indicates that on the eve of the fourteenth century AH / Twentieth Century, there was a new need for a rethinking of the prophetic course, a need that was different from that of the past. In the past, the Prophetic Sira was considered to be a kind of history while it was an informative source for understanding the Prophet (PBUH) or exactly what the Sira meant. But this time, a new look was made to identify the Sira.
If we look at the other conditions of Islamic society in the early 14th century AH, we will see further losses to the new approach of Muslims to prophetic life. One of them is that Muslims have come to a new understanding of their backwardness. They felt they had nothing to say and the world withdrew their advances. Trying to return to the cycle of civilization and striving to showcase Islamic identity, what once gave Muslims the greatest confidence, has prompted them to re-read Islam and the Prophetic tradition. This reflection, in their imagination, helped them identify and compensate for their weaknesses.
This return was a modern Salafism that emerged among Egyptians and other Muslims, especially in the subcontinent. This Salafism had nothing to do with Wahhabi or even Ibn Taymiyyah Salafism, but it could be linked to it. The major effort was that we should take our example from the golden age of Islam, which is the prophetic course.
What approach did the Prophetic Scripture read?
The purpose of re-reading the prophetic course was to transform it into a doctrine for the Islamic world that had been plagued by various crises on the eve of the fourteenth century. He had lost his political independence, was plagued by cultural weakness and self-esteem in the field of culture, his youth were turning to Western values, his economy was bankrupt, and thousands of other problems and crises that lacked intellectual stability and It was political, security and social.
Islamist militias insisted that Islam be distorted and should be readjusted. Islamic beliefs must be changed and modernized in their old theology, Islamic law and jurisprudence must be ready for reform, and a new spirit will be blown into the body of Muslims.
An important part of this reflection was on the prophetic course. It had to be clear how Islam emerged, what it did to the ignorant society, what kind of struggle it organized against its enemies and infidels, how to train its forces, what political principles it could put in place to form a government. What did he do with the enemies in the matter of jihad? What was the concept of migration? How did the social and ethical relations of society become orderly and orderly? How did the economy look? How did he deal with the Islamic system and the salutation, and many other questions that could be answered well in the prophetic course.
Here I will discuss two important phenomena that resulted from the recitation of sages at the beginning of the fourteenth century and I present the works.
A. The Formation of the Works of the System of Al-Hikam
One of the most important areas of research in the prophetic course in the fourteenth century is to address the question of the system of government in Islam. It was noted that during the emergence of Ali Abdul Razzaq’s book Al-Islam and Nizam al-Hikam and his attempt to prove that he did not recommend the name of a particular political system, attempts were made to prove its opposite, and that Islam has a political system. . Here were two important points.
One is that in Islamic law there are political rules and laws and intertwined politics and religion, the
second is that Islam has a political system, that is, the program of choice for the ruler, the criteria for his election and the quality of his rule.
One might add a third point to these two, and that the writing of such works also shows a corner of Islamic civilization and that Islam was civilized.
One of his earliest works was his book Al-Tawratib al-Adaria, by Nizam al-Hikam al-Nabawi from Abdul Hathani. In this book, not only did the prophetic method but also the later caliphate method were used to prove that the ruling system of the Prophet (pbuh) had all kinds of administrative and organizational systems. This approach was used in most of the later books. The reason for this was the Sunni belief that the Rashidian caliphate was a religious and inviting one.
The important point in these works is mainly to answer the question of whether Islam has a political system or not, but there is almost no mention of the Ottoman caliphate and the need to revive it. However, in the minds of a number of radical Salafists in the last two decades, there is a tendency to revive the Ottoman caliphate, not of its Turkish type but with the Arab leadership. Of course, political treatises written on the eve of the collapse of the Ottoman government in the current issue of the five volumes often emphasize the restoration of the Ottoman caliphate, which was lost and could not be restored.
The main purpose of writing these works, however, was to show that the Prophet (peace be upon him) as a ruler, a military commander, an executive, and having all kinds of systems for managing economic and political affairs, a period He’s also ten years old. In this theory, every time the government was mentioned, the state of the Prophet (PBUH) was introduced. This authoring procedure has continued through the years to come, not only with the term al-Hikam and similar concepts but also with titles such as “Dul al-Rasul” and the like.
B: The Formation of Al-Jurassic Jurisprudence
Another type of work that was the product of new Muslim intellectual conditions in the re-reading of the Prophetic Jurisprudence was the writing of Jurisprudence whose purpose was to convert the intelligence data of the Jurisprudence into Islamic jurisprudence, a form that was more social, public and To be more cultural.
Some of these works were:
Fiqh al-Siri, Muhammad al-Ghazali, Cairo, 1982, 500 pp.
Jurisprudence of al-Nubawi, Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Bouti, Damascus, 1991, 589 pp.
Jurisprudence of Al-Nubawi, Munir Muhammad Ghazban, Mecca, 1992, 751 pp.
Preliminaries in al-Siri fiqh, Muhammad al-Abdi, Riyadh, 1424 AH, 180 pp.
I Jurisprudence Al-Nirbawi, Akram Zia Al-Amri, Beirut, 2012
These are works written under the jurisprudence of al-Sirsah, and of course there may be other examples that are either with other titles or have been left out of our eyes. It should not be conceivable that this style of writing is purely in books entitled Jurisprudence, but in many of the sage works written in Arabic, Persian, Urdu, and Turkish, their approach pointing to a definite path towards the formation of an Islamic state at the same time. Jurisprudence is a prophetic way of establishing a Shari’a-based Islamic society by placing the Prophet (peace be upon him).
Why was the jurisprudence needed?
One should ask, did not our jurists and jurisprudents in the past notice that Sira is one of our jurisprudential sources? If so, what was the reason for this to be regarded as an independent phenomenon? These authors seem to believe that in the past such a tendency was not explicitly stated and although more or less used to infer some jurisprudential verdicts, such a tendency has not been found in jurisprudence. If we have to ask again: Why did we go to Sira for more and more jurisprudential verdicts?
We have already responded to some of the above, and said that returning to the Prophetic Sira was a solution to find a new understanding of the state of Islam and the important issue of Islamic civilization. We wanted to revive both Islamic civilization and build the Islamic state. But there are other things to keep in mind:
One of the points is that in the past, the field of public-humane knowledge had been divided into religious and customary divisions, and while many issues were going on in custom, jurisprudence had its own domain. In the modern world, the incorporation of various aspects of the social system and its take over under the dominance of modern Western culture has led Muslims to realize that they need to have a uniformity in the structure of their public culture. In fact, it seemed that the circle of jurisprudence and the Shari’a should be expanded to include the customary field as a field of religious justification. This was not unprecedented, but this time it was more intense.
This phenomenon was also borne out by another feeling that the principle that Islam has instructions and duties for all subjects, so if our past jurisprudence in this area had not been as it should and perhaps did not go forward, it was because of its prophetic course. Not yet. The view was that now we can, and should, not only respond to Western bugs, but also develop a system that takes into account all our social and individual aspects in explaining and re-reading the prophetic course. In other words, our expectation of Islam grew a little bit higher than it used to be, so we started behaving in ways that the old jurists had not paid attention to. We saw this tendency as a defect among the ancient jurists and considered it a defect and tried to make up for it by deeper study.
What can be explained from another angle is that, at a glance, the way of the Prophet (peace be upon him) is the realization of Islam in the realm of society. In other words, Islam is practically realized in the prophetic course and is an experience that shows Islam in society. So by reading the history of Islam, we can understand Islam as realized and objective. The Prophetic Sira is the first practical experience of Islam in creating a new society based on religious values. So if we study this community properly, we can use it as a model.
Vulnerable points in jurisprudence
A: One thing that should not be overlooked is that this practice, rather than the idea of genuine Islam, is about adapting Islam to the conditions of the day. This is desirable at a time when it is aimed at resolving disputes or so-called nozzles and events, but will fall into chaos when it falls outside the normative framework. For example, al-Bouti’s attempt to infer women’s suffrage from their allegiance, and even equal role and social responsibility for women alongside men, can be cited. [The title of the discussion is: Subscribe to the al-Majlis Ali al-Masas al-Masaawahi request for all the services of the Prophet. See: Al-Sura Jurisprudence: Al-Bouti, p. 414.
B: Turning to any scattered narrative, any quotation from others, any weak narrative, and any scattered and unsupported news is one of the vulnerable points of this approach. The reason is that the author is in the thought of building a jurisprudential intellectual building for the political and life system and, therefore, does not pay much attention to the accuracy of the narrations. In other words, when we think we have to make a Shari’a documentary for everything, or feel that if we find a Shari’a backing and attribution to the Apostle of God for everything, it will be welcomed. We no longer pay attention to the strengths and traditions of traditions. It is as if somebody is trying to make a phenomenon called religious and religious medicine, by resorting to many poor medical traditions. It is interesting to note that Nasser al-Din al-Bani, from this point of view, criticized the jurisprudence of Muhammad Sa’id al-Bouti as defending Anad al-Hadith al-Nabawi and al-Saira al-Fayyad Ali in the book of al-Bouti al-Fayyati (Riyadh, ibid., 2010). The hadiths have led him to use and cite many of the false traditions in his book. Most of his problems appear to be in the Tawassul and Blessed Sections, which Bouti insists on, and Albani opposes.
A: Trying to turn some common and simple behaviors into an important subject and presenting a religious injunction for it is another vulnerable area in the phenomenon of jurisprudence. There are many events recorded in the prophetic course of life. Some of the events are obviously religious or social and legal. These cases have been reflected both in the verses and hadiths and perhaps under the same legal and jurisprudential event. But sometimes things that happen by themselves are commonplace, or are natural and humane, and some are overwhelmed by these issues and are interested in turning them into a religious law issue. Suppose this: The Prophet (PBUH) is negotiating with Arwa bin Massoud and he is very close to the Prophet. Maghrib bin Branch stands above the Prophet and tells him to go back. According to the narration, the command to stand on the head of the Prophet for care has become a problem. Then, to make the case, there is a reference to the treatment of kings by kings, who are always appointed over them. Then there is the verdict and whether it should be done when necessary. [Jurisprudence of Al-Bouti’i, p. 355 (verdict of al-uquf Ali al-Ansan and Hu Qa’ad!)] Or the point that one can legitimately kiss the forehead of a traveler who has come because the Prophet (pbuh) Ja’far ibn Abi Talib Kiss on the return time! [Ibid., P. 365]
One important point here is what behavior should be the basis of a religious law? How is it to be understood that this particular act or act is one that God must necessarily command? Isn’t that part of life, part of the actions and behaviors, the choice of the people themselves? Does one have to order from the Shari’ah to determine his meal time? To know the time, one must have a religious law, and … It is important that we determine its limits elsewhere, not our eyes on what the behaviors of the Prophet, partial and Kelly, have reported, and we necessarily have to obtain a warrant, or if not, a license.
A: It should be noted that much of what has been mentioned in recent jurisprudence as a source of jurisprudence is in fact the narratives that have been used during that time and have been the source and documentary of jurisprudential issues for centuries. As much of what has been attempted to be extracted from the Sira’ah is simply extractable from the Qur’an and there are even Qur’anic revelations about it, though it may be stated in the hadiths or verbs of the Prophet (pbuh) that It has already been considered in jurisprudence. One of the oldest works on the extraction of jurisprudential issues from the Sira’ah is Zad al-Mu’ammad’s Book of Hedayat Khair al-Abad, which, after describing some of the events, illustrates the jurisprudential works and results.
B: Sira jurisprudence also means something else. Here, jurisprudence means to understand and understand, that is to say, we must understand and read, in addition to studying and reading it. It is here that the concept of “teaching and preaching” is derived from Sira. That is, apart from fiqh, it means its word. In the sense of the word, the point is to derive jurisprudential verdicts from the news and events of Sira.
A significant part of the Muslim writers’ approach to the Prophetic Sura over the past hundred years has been that the Prophetic Sura played a more serious role in building an ethno-jurisprudential ethical system for Islamic society. In this regard, Muslim scholars and writers have made some successes and have created several works that examine the prophetic course, providing works that explain Islamic thought and better understand it, as well as its ethical values, as well as its understanding of appropriate legal jurisprudence. To Islamic education.
In the field of jurisprudence, there is a work called “Jurisprudence” which is discussed in this writing. The role of the prophetic course in thought and ethics, though important, is somewhat tolerated, while “jurisprudence” is particularly important because of the importance of legal issues.
The history of the weaknesses of the principles of science in the study of the verbs of rasul, as the scholars have pointed out, coupled with the tolerance of the modern age, led to a more elaborate approach to the needs of the day rather than the principles of science, and extracted a number of jurisprudential rules and laws. Be. This was done both by extremists and religious leaders and by liberals and the deceivers of modern thought, as a result of two extremist and extremist jurisprudential interpretations of Sira that were not in line with Islamic jurisprudence.
While the ancient jurists had tried diligently to build a coherent jurisprudence based on the doctrine of the doctrine, more on the basis of the Qur’an and the Prophet’s explicit acts, in recent times public writers and most historians have attempted to refer Give some sermonists an understanding of Islam.
This in itself is not a problem in the sense of a religious ijtihad, but because it is not within the precise framework of science, and of course, given the importance of this science, it needs to be seriously re-examined. Naturally, this is a deliberate and scientific work that must be done in the scientific and religious centers, with the same precise and precise jurisprudential and ijtihadic precautions that the consideration of the totality of religion, by mastering all texts, along with knowing the aims of religion and observing the strict rules. Principles, not institutions that merely seek to promote Islam or write pamphlets or prepare public lectures.
In other words, a Shari’a community should be governed by the strict ijtihad in jurisprudential texts, the ijtihad which provided a coherent legal system with the Qur’an, tradition and religious values, and this requires more and more careful reflection on religious texts, including prophetic law. It is, and should not be, over-simplified.
In our revolution we
have some kind of integration between different Islamic ideas on some of the theoretical issues of the revolution. In the field of government, we are in the legacy of Egypt [and Pakistan is Moody’s] and Shi’ite thought is the province of the jurisprudent.
In the Egyptian part, the idea of the Caliphate and the Emirate and the Republic came to us in the form that the Brotherhood had developed. The first discussions of Islamic rule among us were from that area. Even in the constitution there has been much debate about the relationship between Nai and Coqueby. Political messages of this era are important in this respect and I have reviewed them in political messages.
What came out of Egypt usually relies on the same information as in the books on the system of rule.
In fact, in contrast to Western and religious thought, it was important what we had. There were two arguments here. One is that in Islam we do not have the current administration of the world. We already have it but it doesn’t work today. So our discussions have been about “having” and “being able” to run it. More detailed information on how to adapt to the new world situation. The result was that many texts on Islamic rule were written based on the prophetic tradition. Prophetic Sira is one of those areas in which Shiites and Sunnis share a view. So it was easy to get these issues from side to side.
One of the things along this path was a reinterpretation of some of the concepts of the past, as well as Islamic historical contexts, which were interpreted in the light of new approaches to the government.
On the other hand, the Shiite jurists who placed the Imamate not on jurisprudence but on the principles of religion always paid particular attention to the state and the politics. Of course, because they did not have an innocent Imam after the absence, they sought refuge in the jurists. In this regard, and within the confines of their occupation, they disagreed. But before that, because they were minorities, they were basically unable to form a government. They were accustomed to Taqiyya and considered it a principle that was also true for a minority. So they cooperated with governments to the extent that they could safeguard the interests of the Shiites. The Safavid formation opened a new path and made the Shiite political jurisprudence more alive. This situation remained the same until the constitution, although it was not as strong as in the Qajar period. After the constitution, Shiite clerics were dismissed and post-constitutional and Pahlavi governments formed independent state clerics, contrary to the Safavid and Qajar practices. It was impossible to tolerate such a method in Iran, which was Shiite majority.
In 1345 a brochure entitled The Charter of the Islamic Movement was written which was based on the statements of the scholars on various issues of government. This book outlined an Islamic state plan. Before that, the Fadayites of Islam had also given a book about it. Imam Khomeini also gave lessons in the jurisprudence of Velayat-e Faqih in 48 years and formally designed a new theory for its Shiite Islamic policy. Their main citation was the practice of the Prophet (peace be upon him) to form a government and proved their authority to the jurists. At the same time, a book such as the Evolutionary Revolution of Islam by Jalaluddin Farsi explained the basis of government formation based on the prophetic tradition. The book was published 28 times and was unauthorized except for the first edition. In this book, Farsi wrote about the evolution of Islamic rule. The work was first published in 1348. He was already familiar with the thoughts of the Imam and had written a book on the Islamic Movement’s charter which was a blueprint for Islamic rule.
As noted above, following the prophetic course of government, Imam Khomeini’s words were also frequently discussed. The Imam had a more general view of the prophetic course of government formation, and this was due to the response of those who believed that separation of religion from politics meant government.
Brainstorming Salafis and Wahhabis because of new political ideologies
In principle, the Sunni world had four religions in jurisprudence, and one of them was Najd Hanbal, which followed the Hanbal jurisprudence. With the emergence of Wahhabism, this space was broken and a free ijtihad was formed following the method that Ibn Taymiyyah had partly founded. The basis of this change was that one had to pay attention to hadiths, and hadiths that were not related to Hanbal jurisprudence or otherwise. Wahhabism grew in this context, and the Saudi government, with the formation of a cadre of scholars, abolished al-Azhar’s authority. Since the Saudi government was based, it also took control of these scholars. Naturally, because they had been educated for years, they had a framework for their problems.
Since the late 1980s, there have been changes in Wahhabism. The most important of these was that a non-Saudi and non-Saudi Wahhabism was formed. They disagreed with the authority of the ulama’s delegation, calling them the instrument of the Saudi government, and saw Saudi as the instrument of the US. Naturally their ijtihad was different. Because of their political views, this ijtihad, more than anything on Shirk and monotheism, was on Jihad with infidels. New perspectives have emerged in this regard. These views were based on reference to the traditions and prophetic tradition and history of the early days of Islam. Many of them were not well educated. In addition, there was a great deal of diversity among them. Whether bin Laden was considered a scientific authority or a political leader is not clear. Many people in various parts of Islam were disconnected from the mainstream. The result was that each group had a special ijtihad. This created an important dilemma and it was an exceptional and different fatwa. Most of them were for the battlefield. The opposition was strongly condemned, citing prophetic traditions.
Here’s just one interesting example: Abu Basir Tawthusi, a Salafist Sham, in a recent fatwa against Iraqi Salafis in a two-page article entitled Yitrekun from al-Sham and Jund al-Sham and Yalthiqoun Baldul al-Iraqiyi] cites a hadith to prove his point. The dispute has been that the Iraqi Salafists, who have declared the government of Sham and Iraq, should not interfere in Syria and Sham and transfer Syrian forces to Iraq. This person, who has been a Salafist Syrian theorist for many years, says the Prophet (PBUH): Stjendon Ajnadah, Jeddah Balsham, Jeddah Balaqram, and Jeddah Baliman, …. Alikam Balsham, Vanullah Azzul Taleh Lee Balsham and Ahlah. You will provide the troops. The army in the evening, the army in Iraq, the army in Yemen … the dinner is important, because God has given the dinner to the Shamites.
It is interesting to use a hadith to determine a political situation and the difference between al-Qaeda in Iraq and the Syrian Salafis in a hadith that is untrue.
Contemporary Salafi jihadist books are full of such evidence, and this new ijtihad has led the Muslim world to shift from a monotonous past to a divided state.
The difference between the telegraph and the Internet in creating concentration and division in the Islamic world!
The most important dilemma in the Islamic world today is the lack of a coherent and agreed upon theory. In other words, the situation has become such that everybody has created a site, and more recently, a satellite network of a religious authority and made people their own disciples. If, one day, the coming of the telegraph enabled all Muslims, separate Shiites and Sunnis to unite with a telegraph center such as Najaf or Qom or Cairo, the Internet would have created a widespread intellectual divide, and Every educated and uneducated student should take the lead in grouping and writing and interpreting short jurisprudential treatises, commanding jihad and killing and killing