Newsletter No. 15
Winter 2016
idols, which undermines their status and gravity in people’s hearts. However, the Qur’ān prohibits this, because it may be taken as an excuse to insult God: “And do not insult those they invoke other than Allah, lest they insult Allah in enmity without knowledge…” [al-An‘ām 108]. Similarly, from the Prophetic tradition: “it is the gravest of major sins for a person to insult his parents”. It was said: O’ Messenger of Allah how can a person insult his parents? He responded “the person insults the father of the other, who responds by insulting this person’s father”. In addition, there are other examples mentioned in the Prophetic tradition that emphasise the idea of consideration of the means. Indeed, Imām Ibn al-Qayyim considered means as one quarter of religious responsibility (al-taklīf). Subsequently, Professor El-Awa moved to the second type of means, which is “opening the means (fatḥ al-dharāi‘)”. He explained that these were means that led to what is required. He emphasised that it is obligatory to adopt those means that lead to achieving the obligation (al-wājib), while it is recommended to adopt those means that lead to the recommended (al-mandūb), and it is permissible to adopt those means that lead to the permissible (al-mubāḥ). Among those examples presented by the lecturer, was the matter of having sight of the private parts. Indeed, having sight of the private parts of other persons was prohibited in principle, but given the ratio legis (al-‘illah) of the need for diagnosis and treatment to preserve life, this ruling changed. The lecturer indicated that many legal theorists have employed the means intimately connected to closing (al-sadd), as these lead to wrongdoing; however, this is a matter of juristic disputation (khilāf). In contrast, opening the means (fatḥ al-dharāi‘) has not caused any significant
A group picture taken at the end of the lecture
disagreement. Professor El-Awa emphasised that means may be opened as they may be closed. These are covered by five rules, in consideration of what they may lead to, in terms of interests (maṣāliḥ) or evils (mafāsid). In this instance, he mentioned the rule that: it is recommended (mandūb) to close the mean that results in something disliked (makrūh), and it is disliked to open it. Having defined and set the evidential foundation, and also provided examples of means, the lecturer moved on to discuss means in terms of legal theory (uṣūl al-fiqh). He discussed the classification by legal theorists of the means among those evidences over which there is disagreement. Professor ElAwa criticised the consideration of means as evidence (dalīl) or principle (aṣl), arguing that means were a ruling (ḥukm), whose evidence is the concrete interest (al-maṣlaḥah al-muḥaqqaqah) rather than the baseless interest (al-maṣlaḥah almutawahhamah). Therefore, he proposed at the end of his lecture that the means be referred back to those books of rules (qawā‘id) and objectives (maqāṣid), because these represent the area in which the means are located. Following the conclusion of the lecture, the audience had the opportunity to interact with the lecturer. The majority of questions revolved around the necessity of establishing rules for the means. In responding to the audience’s questions, Professor El-Awa explained that such rules were a matter of creative juristic effort (ijtihād), and many were linked to time-dependent issues, which would then change with the changing times, place, and customs. Professor El-Awa concluded his answers by reflecting on women’s issues that have been negatively addressed due to the miss-application of closing the means (sadd al-dharāi‘). He emphasised that the means must not be raised as an obstacle to women, preventing them from realising their civilisational role.
Dr Jamila Tilout’s contribution during the Q&A session
9
WWW.AL-FURQAN.COM