Only three muslims were lashed 80 times after Allah cleared aisha, the wife of prophet regarding ifk It is evident from biography of the prophet that more and more people were involved in gossip and tale carrying. Does islam view the initiator of slander only deserving punishment and not the people who gossip about the same?

Did Fuqaha distinguish between Restricting something which is Mubah and Making Something Mubah as Haram?

What conditions as per Fuqaha make an act eligible to be called Mubah? Example: If a scholar says Nikah is Mubah, how did he arrive at this conclusion? **Note: I have given an assumed example not real example**

I was told initially that 2 things are infallible, Quran and the sunnah. Later on I learnt 3 things are infallible A. Quran. B. Sunnah. C. Ijma of companions (proof was given as 4:115) When I came across a report, it made me think if ijma of ummah is infallible. > ***Whatever the Muslims view as good is good to Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil to Allah***.” Source: Musnad Ahmad 3600 Since, the view of Allah is infallible, face value it appears the ijma of muslims is infallible as per report of musnad Ahmed. Hence the main question which muslims scholars say the ijma(consensus) of Muslim ummah is infallible.

In this video , Adnan Ibrahim argues against Ijma'. He also quotes Imam Ahmed: > "قال " من ادَّعى الإجماع فقد كذب ، وما يدريه لعل الناس اختلفوا Imam Ahmed said: "The one calling upon ijma' has lied!" The same quote is found here , more context of it: > والإجماع إجماعان ، إجماع ظني وإجماع قطعي ، والأول هو الذي يثبت بالبحث والتحري عن أقوال الأئمة ، ويحتاج من مثبته إلى استقراء لكتب الخلاف ، وهو الذي أنكره الإمام أحمد وقال " من ادَّعى الإجماع فقد كذب ، وما يدريه لعل الناس اختلفوا " . In this video , he denies ijma' to be a part of his methods of usul al fiqh. **Which sunni scholars denied ijma' as a method among the methods in usul al fiqh?** *This question is of course based on another question, did any sunni scholars really deny ijma?* ---------- *Disclaimer: I am not supposing these quotes are proofs too deny ijma', rather it seems some have used them when aruging against ijma'. I know they are possible to be interpreted in another way in its context. Also, it seems to be different interpretations of what exactly is ijma'. And the person denying ijma' isn't necessary denying the matters as five prayers a day and such.*

The four fundamental sources of the osol al-fiqh I heard are - Qur'an - Sunnah - consensus of Muslim jurists (ijma), - qiyas (analogical reasoning) **a) Do all four of these sources, have equal authority, or one prevails over the other?** For example: 1. Qur'an 2. Sunnah 3. consensus of Muslim jurists (ijma) 4. qiyas (analogical reasoning) **b) Do most of the scholar accept these four Sources?** For example: Ibn Taymiyyah opposed the use of consensus of jurists, replacing it with the consensus of the sahaba. --- Reason of question: I see some question on this site, regarding the scholar view even though there is clear Quran/Hadith indication, so are the scholar views at par with Quran/Sunnah.

This [question](https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/46494/ "Is Hijab an outdated or an old age remedy to keep the society away from a lot of sins?") raised the point that it is hard to distinguish the term _'illah_ (criterion, Arabic: عله) from _hikmah_ (benefit, Arabic: حكمه) when it comes to *ahkām al-fiqh* (rulings of jurisprudence, Arabic: أحكام الفقه) which may cause misunderstandings of the rulings and their applications. **Question:** What are the characteristics of _'illah_ and what is its governance? The governance of _'illah_ is a bonus part. By governance of _'illah_, I am referring to the principles of jurisprudence that provide the applicability of the ruling (the ruling is tied to the criterion's presence and absence, Arabic: الحكم يدور مع علته وجودا وعدما), the interpretation of its wording (what counts is the general meaning of the words, not the specific reason for revelation, Arabic: العبرة بعموم اللفظ لا بخصوص السبب), and accepted deduction methodologies (setting criteria based on perceived benefit or through qiyās for permissibility, Arabic: التعليل بالحكمه او بالقياس فى الرخص), as examples. An answer using a single school of jurisprudence is sufficient.

I was reading this statement by a Scholar That some of them (People of Knowledge) do not differentiate between ikrāh (compulsion) and ḍarūrah (necessity), so they make what is permitted in the case of ḍarūrah to be permitted in the case of ikrāh. This is based upon the ḥadīth of Muḥammad b. Maslamah when he killed Kaʿb Ibn al-Ashraf and based upon the ḥadīth of al-Ḥajjāj Ibn ʿalat There was no Specific people named so i was wondering if there was any references for scholars who held this opinion. Thank you very much

I was just wondering if someone could explain the difference between istislah and qiyas to me and perhaps provide some examples for me. They both seem to involve the use of deductive reasoning and the use of ones' ijtihad and I just wanted to clarify any misconceptions I may have.

I understand this question would be pretty opinion based, and broad, because most of the scholars differ with each other whether different subjects are fard (obligatory) or not. Examples: - To say in sha Allah on intended acts (**not fard**):1 > وَلَا تَقُولَنَّ لِشَيْءٍ إِنِّي فَاعِلٌ ذَٰلِكَ غَدًا إِلَّا أَن يَشَاءَ اللَّهُ > > And do not say of anything: Surely I will do it tomorrow, Except [when adding], "If Allah wills." - To eat with right hand (mostly say **not fard**):2 ,3 > ... إِذَا أَكَلَ أَحَدُكُمْ فَلْيَأْكُلْ بِيَمِينِهِ ... > > ... When any one of you intends to eat (meal), he should eat with his right hand... - To only eat meat where the name of God has been provoked. (disagreements, many say it is **not fard**):4 ,5 > ... وَلَا تَأْكُلُوا مِمَّا لَمْ يُذْكَرِ اسْمُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ > > And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned - To make ghusl in fridays (**not fard**):6 ,7 ,8 > إِذَا رَاحَ أَحَدُكُمْ إِلَى الْجُمُعَةِ فَلْيَغْتَسِلْ > > Anyone of you going out for the Jumua prayer should take a bath - To read the Quran with tajweed (many say it is **fard** if you know how to):9 ,10 ,11 > رَتِّلِ الْقُرْآنَ تَرْتِيلًا > > and recite the Qur'an with measured recitation. - To grow a beard (for men), (**fard** according to most, while disagreements exists):12 ,13 > خَالِفُوا الْمُشْرِكِينَ، وَفِّرُوا اللِّحَى، وَأَحْفُوا الشَّوَارِبَ > > Do the opposite of what the pagans do. Keep the beards and cut the mustaches short. - To say Bismillah over food (**not fard**):14 > إِذَا أَكَلَ أَحَدُكُمْ فَلْيَذْكُرِ اسْمَ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى > > When one of you eats, he should mention Allah's name. - To pray Friday prayer/Jumu'a (for men), (**fard**):15 > يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا نُودِيَ لِلصَّلَاةِ مِن يَوْمِ الْجُمُعَةِ **فَاسْعَوْا** إِلَىٰ ذِكْرِ اللَّهِ **وَذَرُوا** الْبَيْعَ > > O you who have believed, when [the adhan] is called for the prayer on the day of Jumu'ah [Friday], **then proceed to the remembrance of Allah and leave trade.** ---------- There are of course many more cases. #When does an order constitute fard? I understand that scholars have different opinions about this, so when answering. please try to add which view you are quoting or explaining. I am looking for a structured answer with rules/conditions which (different) scholars use to conclude that an order (fi'l amr) is fard. Relevant: Is the lack of information in a hadith a proof of something being allowed? What does “wajib” mean in this hadith about doing ghusl in Jumua (Friday)?

In Usool-al-Fiqh Shia uses Aql or intellect as a source of legislation as mentioned in this answer- - http://islam.stackexchange.com And the Sunni uses Qiyas or analogy in Fiqh. In my understanding, both are related with reasoning. How do they differ?

Muslims are commanded by Allah(SWT) to obey Him and His Messenger without exception: > O you who believe, obey Allah, the Messenger, and those in command > among you. If you disagree about something, refer it back to Allah and > the Messenger, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the > best thing to do and gives the best result. > > **Surat an-Nisa`: 59** But I find differences in opinion among scholars on some issues whether it is obligatory or sunnah. Like in the case of shaving the beard: > Ibn 'Umar (May Allah be pleased with them) reported: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, > "Trim the moustaches and let the beard grow." > > **Al-Bukhari and Muslim **. Here the Prophet() is commanding as it seems from the text, but still there is a difference in opinion. Similarly, the below hadith also seems like a command, but most scholars interpret it as makrooh: > Narrated by Jabir bin `Abdullah: > > The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Whoever has eaten garlic or onion should keep > away from us (or should keep away from our mosque).' > > **Sahih al-Bukhari 5452** So, the verdicts on whether a command by the Prophet is obligatory vary. How is this methodology of usool-ul-fiqh compatible with the Ayat above and other similar ayats in the Qur'an?

Often when reading a fatwa we read that there's consensus (ijma' الاجماع). Or the majority of scholars say so sometimes the majority in Arabic is referred to by jomhoor (al-'Ulama') جمهور العلماء or الجمهور and sometimes by jamaheer (al-'Ulama') جماهير العلماء. My question is what is the difference between these terms expressing "majorties" and when can we use one of these definitions?

I sometimes come across the term that a ruling is "mu'tamad" within a school of law - what does this mean? I am aware that some rulings are foundational and universally shared among the adherents of a madhhab, so perhaps that is what it means, but I'm not sure. Is that what it means? I've also come across the remark that al-Ghazali once made with regard to some ruling of ash-Shafii, basically saying "I wish ash-Shafii was more lenient in this point" (i think it was related to ritual purity, or prayer, but I don't remember the precise issue now), yet he felt compelled to follow ash-Shafii's view. In that respect I'd be interested to know what levels of bindingness rulings within a madhhab have, and to what degree this applies to fuqaha. I'm aware that there is ijtihad with regard to rulings within the madhhab and (full-fledged, so to speak) ijtihad where a scholar may and must rely on his own findings in all matters. The nuances and legal categories here escape me, and if anyone knows, I'd be interested to see them clarified.

Bismillah. Alhamdulillahi rabbil-'alamin was-Salatu was-Salam 'ala Sayyidil-Mursalin wa 'ala 'Alihi wa Sahbihi Ajma'in. ---------- **What do Rajih and Marjuh mean in Usool-ul-Fiqh?** I am a simple Muslim trying to better understand Islam and issues of Fiqh. Couldn't find good explanation of these notions. Can anyone explain?

Even if the meaning is to some extent clear from "https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/1306/how-aql-is-different-from-qiyas " but a clear example or two to make clear how this source of fiqh is applied would be very helpful to understand it and this is the goal of this question. I'm honestly assuming according the only given example that it is more or less part of what sunni scholars may call maslaha or istihsaan or covered in the fiqh rules... For example: - The basic fiqh rule الضرورات تبيح المحضورات "the (forced) necessities allow the (application of) unlawful (things/acts)" based on (2:173 ) would already cover a solution for that example issue! - Assuming this fiqh rule doesn't exist, the hanfis might solve the issue by their osol like trickery and istihssan, the malikis by istihissan and maslaha al mursala and their maqasid considerations, the hanbali also via the maslaha mursala only the shafi'i and dhahiri seem not to have a direct solution in their osol, but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't have one!

According to the muhaddith scholar Ibn Hibban (270 - 354 hijri), all khabar are as its best *ahad*: > وأنكر الحافظ ابن حبان في صدر صحيحه الخبر المتواتر ، فقال : وأما الأخبار فإنها كلها أخبار آحاد > > ... He said: Regarding the akhbar, all of them are ahad. > > Source **Question:** Which scholars denied ahadith being mutawatir? *I also heard that some scholars claim only one hadith is mutawwatir (while others like Nawawi, say even that one might not be): "man kaddaba aliya ...." (i'll try to add references about this later)*

On Islamqa.info they discuss different opinions of a particular topic from the 4 schools and perhaps others then say "... But the strongest opinion is..." The same applies on Q & A shows on channels such as Huda TV or Islam Channel. How do the scholars determine the strongest or most correct opinion?

I have been reading that some scholars do not differentiate between *'illa* العلة and *sabab* السبب in usul al fiqh, while others do. **Question:** What is the difference between 'illa and sabab in usul al fiqh? ---------- Provide examples with verses. If possible, also add which scholars that doesn't differentiate between the two terms, and which does. Also explaining how some of them conclude that there is *or* isn't a difference between the terms. For instance the verse 5:91: > إِنَّمَا **يُرِيدُ** الشَّيْطَانُ **أَن يُوقِعَ بَيْنَكُمُ** الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ فِي الْخَمْرِ وَالْمَيْسِرِ وَيَصُدَّكُمْ عَن ذِكْرِ اللَّهِ وَعَنِ الصَّلَاةِ ۖ فَهَلْ أَنتُم مُّنتَهُونَ if there is a difference between the terms; then maybe to comment whether this would be a sabab or 'illa. *All views are welcome, I do however hope that the one answering has been studying usul al fiqh or is familiar with it, i.e just linking to a website is not what i am looking for.*

To me, "ijtihad" is an opinion of a person in matters of religion when, no direct guidance is available from Quran and Sunnah of our prophet, Muhammad (PBUH), about that topic. This person is usually a religious scholar. My point is that, Islam is religion from God, which was conveyed, firstly, by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and then through generations of muslims, to us. Since, the religion is an eternal guidance from God, no one has the right to add, remove or change anything in it. If this is so, then, any opinion provided by him should be taken as a opinion and not an order from God. Thus "ijtihad" can not be a valid source of religion. Is this reasoning correct? or is there any proof in Quran and Sunnah that "ijtihad" can be add, remove or change anything in the religion of God?