AL-QANÍARA

XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre de 2007

pp. 307-348
ISSN 0211-3589

IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC

LEGAL THEORY (II)

ADAM SABRA
University of Georgia

The Sufficient Tract on the Rules [Derived from]

the Sources of Religion (II)

Ibn ·azm of Cordoba

Chapter: The Narration of an Upright Person with Poor

Memory is not to be Accepted

For Exalted God commanded us to accept the oath of one who un-
derstands what he hears and one whose memory is poor does not un-
derstand what he hears. For understanding is merely comprehension
and reflection on the legal command which one bears in order to issue
it exactly as one hears it. It is impossible for one whose memory is
poor and who is uncertain about the reports he bears to understand
that which he is uncertain about and does not know precisely.
Women, male slaves, and female slaves are no different in what we
have mentioned, due to the generality of Exalted God’s saying, “a
group”. There is a valid consensus that religion is obligatory upon
women, male slaves, and female slaves, just as it is obligatory upon
free persons and men, with no difference, although the ruling differs
with regard to some of them where there is a proof text, but not with-
out proof.

Chapter

When a report comes from a reliable narrator from similarly reli-

able narrators in a continuous chain back to the Messenger of God
308 ADAM SABRA

(pbuh) it is known with certainty that it is the truth from God, the
all-powerful, the sublime. The reliability of a report obligates one to
rule on its basis, if all of its narrators are agreed to be upright, or are
among those whose uprightness has been proven, even if someone
whose objection is invalid objects, or someone makes an invalid ob-
jection to one of them. The proof of this is Exalted God’s saying, “It
is We who have sent down the Remembrance, and We preserve it”. 55
It is certainly true that He has obliged us to accept reports narrated by
reliable narrators. Since Exalted God preserves the religion, it is cer-
tainly incorrect that He would oblige us to accept a false law, which
Exalted God never commanded us [to obey].
This is something we have been assured by Exalted God’s guaran-
tee to us, unlike the testimony of witnesses. For Exalted God never
guaranteed us that witnesses would only bear true testimony. Indeed,
the Messenger of God (pbuh) has made it clear to us that they may
bear false witness, when he said (pbuh), “Whomever I judge in favor
of against his brother and refuses to accept the judgment is allotted a
place in Hell.” It is known that those who sought his judgment were
not merely two adversaries, since one could be more articulate than
the other in presenting his evidence. In some cases, the judgment was
only based on the testimony of one whose testimony necessarily leads
to the truth, while in others the judgment was determined be one’s be-
ing more articulate than the other.
We know with certainty that he (pbuh) always judged rightly in
the eyes of Exalted God. It is true that we are commanded to act in ac-
cordance with the testimony of those witnesses we think to be up-
right, even if, unknown to us, it be false, and that we execute one
whom it would not be licit for us to execute if we knew that the wit-
nesses were lying or mistaken, and, similarly, that we render judg-
ment concerning property which it is forbidden for one who knows
the hidden truth of the matter to order seized. It is the same with re-
gard to sexual offenses. It is forbidden for us to make any of this licit,
when it is present in religion. Similarly, we pay money to ransom a
prisoner from an infidel or tyrant, and it is an obligation upon us to
pay this money if it is the only way for us to gain his freedom, al-
though it is forbidden for he who receives the money to [receive it].
55 Al-·ijr, 9.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 309

Receiving divine laws is not like that, because they are the Remem-
brance whose preservation Exalted God guaranteed.
Similarly, we are certain that every tradition which only reaches
us as discontinuous, or which is only narrated by an unknown narra-
tor, whose reliability is unknown by the scholars, or whose lack of re-
liability is agreed upon or proven, is a false report which the Messen-
ger of God (pbuh) never said and was never the basis for his reaching
a legal ruling. For it is impossible that divine law be true except by
means of Exalted God’s guaranteeing the Remembrance which He
sends down, which He revealed to His Prophet (pbuh) with [God’s]
guarantee, may He exalted, that He has made all of the religion clear
to us. Through these two proofs, we are certain that He did not leave
anything out of the religion, nor will anything ever be lost from it.
With every age, there must be a scholar who knows what is concealed
from others, and another must know what is concealed from him, so
that the religion will certainly be preserved until the Day of Resurrec-
tion. And success comes from Exalted God.

Chapter

As for a narrator who appears to us to be upright, while another re-

gards him as unreliable, and about whom he who disagrees with us is
right according to Exalted God, similarly with a narrator about whom
one person is ignorant, while another knows him to be upright, he
who knows with certainty that the narrator who is upright is right ac-
cording to Exalted God. But it is necessary that Exalted God not con-
ceal the truth from His creation, nor conceal any of His religion from
all of His creation, lest no one know the certain truth from falsehood.
This is something which could only occur by Exalted God’s guaran-
tee to preserve the religion, and due to His bearing witness, may He
be exalted, that He has perfected it, and that by it He has completed
His blessing upon us and approved Islam for our religion. He said,
may His mention be sublime, “Today, I have perfected your religion
for you, and I have completed My blessing upon you, and I have ap-
proved Islam for your religion.” 56
56 Al-M×’ida, 3.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

310 ADAM SABRA

Chapter

Whoever claims that a report about the Prophet (pbuh) about which
it is true that it has been narrated by reliable narrators, is wrong, is not
to be believed without clear proof from a reliable narrator who testifies
that he met that narrator and that the narrator made a mistake and al-
tered the report, or that the narrator admits that he made a mistake.
Similarly, whoever claims that a valid report or verse from the Qur’×n
has been abrogated or particularized, his opinion is false unless he
quotes another text as evidence for this or a certain consensus on what
he has claimed. Otherwise, his opinion is false, because Exalted God
says, “O believers, obey God, and obey the Messenger.” 57 Whoever
says that a verse or authentic report is abrogated, or that it is not to be
interpreted as general, or not to be interpreted literally, is saying to us,
do not obey this verse or this report; his statement is to be rejected.
God’s statement is truer and more credible. Had Exalted God intended
what this person said, He would have made it clear in accordance with
this person’s claim. He, may He be exalted said, “Making clear every-
thing.” 58 He, may He be exalted, said, “That thou mayest make clear to
mankind what was sent down to them.” 59

Chapter

It is impermissible for anyone to change the meaning of a verse

from its literal sense, or to change the meaning of a report from its lit-
eral sense, because Exalted God says, “In a clear, Arabic tongue.” 60
He, may He be exalted, said, blaming a people, “They perverted words
from their meanings.” 61 Whoever changes the meaning of a text from
its literal meaning in the language without proof from another text or a
consensus, claims that there is no clarification in the text. He has per-
verted the meaning of Exalted God’s speech and His revelation to His
Prophet (pbuh) and this is a terrible deed. Even if he were innocent of
these great sins, he would be making an unproven claim.

57 Al-Nis×’, 59.
58 Al-Naçl, 89.
59 Al-Naçl, 44.
60 Al-Shu‘ar×’, 195.
61 Al-M×’ida, 13.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 311

It is not permissible for anyone to pervert any person’s speech.

How can it be with the speech of God, may He be exalted, and the
speech of His messenger (pbuh) which is prophecy from God, may
He be exalted. Whoever uses the opinion of a scholar to stir up con-
troversy about this, the opinion of someone other than the Messenger
of God (pbuh) is not proof. We have made it clear that whoever
among them stirs up controversy, they, among all of Exalted God’s
creation, most frequently abandon the opinions of the Companions,
may God be pleased with them, let alone others, while the Ô×hirês,
among the partisans of tradition, may God be pleased with them, are
those more assiduous in following and agreeing with the Compan-
ions, may God be pleased with them. We have made this clear, point
by point, in our book entitled, “Reaching Understanding of the Char-
acteristics.” Praise God, Lord of the worlds.
It is obligatory to avoid altering the meaning of a text from its lit-
eral sense without another authentic text that reports that it is not in-
tended literally. Concerning this matter, let us follow Exalted God’s
statement and the statement of His Messenger (pbuh) as he (pbuh)
clarified [God’s] statement, may He be exalted, “And have not con-
founded their faith with evildoing.” 62 By which, Exalted God meant
infidelity. As [God,] the all-powerful, the sublime, said, “To associate
others with God is a mighty wrong.” 63 Or unless there be a certain
consensus, such as the consensus of the community that His saying,
may He be exalted, “God charges you, concerning your children, to
the male the like of the portion of two females”, 64 did not refer to
slaves, nor to the sons of daughters when there is a universal heir
(‘×óib) — and there are many such similar cases. Or due to necessity
that prevents one from interpreting that literally, such as His saying,
may He be exalted, “Those to whom the people said, ‘The people
have gathered against you, therefore fear them.’” 65 With the certainty
that come from intuition and experience, we known that not all of the
people said, “The people have gathered against you.” 66 The proof of
what we have said, that words should be interpreted in their literal

62 Al-An‘×m, 82.
63 Luqm×n, 13.
64 Al-Nis×’, 11.
65 ¨l ‘Imr×n, 173.
66 ¨l ‘Imr×n, 173.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

312 ADAM SABRA

sense, is Exalted God’s saying in the Qur’×n, “In a pure, Arabic

tongue”, 67 and His saying, may He be exalted, “We have sent no
Messenger save with the tongue of his people, that he might make all
clear to them.” 68 So it is true that explanation according to us is sim-
ply to interpret the words of the Qur’×n and Sunna according to the
literal meaning and in accordance with the meaning for which those
words were coined. Whoever wishes to shift the meaning from [their
literal meaning] to an allegorical interpretation without a supporting
text or a consensus slanders Exalted God and His Messenger (pbuh),
contradicts the Qur’×n, makes unsupported claims, and perverts
words from their meanings.
Also, it should be said to whosoever wishes to change the mean-
ing of speech from its literal sense without any proof: this is what
causes skepticism and the denial of the existence of truth, because
whenever you or anyone else says anything, it could be said to you,
this is not meant literally. Rather, you mean something else. Every
time you reaffirm your meaning, it would be said to you, this too is
not meant literally. And you will never be rid of those who say to you,
perhaps the denial of the literal meaning is not intended literally. And
so on, as you can see. And success comes from God.

Chapter

If a word occurs equally with two or more meanings in language,

it is not permissible to restrict it to one meaning except on the basis of
a text or consensus. Rather, speech should be understood in accor-
dance with all of the meanings which occur in language. Due to what
we have mentioned, one must censure whoever perverts words from
their meanings. If an Arabic word occurs in the Qur’×n whose mean-
ing is changed from its meaning in the language to another meaning,
like “prayer” (óal×÷), “alms tax” (zak×h), “fasting” (óawm), and “pil-
grimage” (çajj). These words of the language have been changed to
legal meanings which the Arabs did not previously know. This is not
figurative usage, rather it is a valid assignment of a name. Because
God is the creator of languages, we worship Him by calling these

67 Al-Shu‘ar×’, 195.
68 Ibr×hêm, 4.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 313

meanings by these names. If a word in the language occurs changed

from its lexicographical meaning, Exalted God does not bid us wor-
ship Him by calling these meanings by these names. This is figurative
usage, like Exalted God’s saying, “And lower to them the wing of
humbleness out of mercy”, 69 and the like.

Chapter

It is not permissible to say concerning a verse or an authentic re-

port, this is abrogated, due to what we have mentioned that the opin-
ion of whoever says that this is invalid because one must obey this
text, unless one quotes another text which makes clear that it is abro-
gated or there is a certain consensus on its being abrogated. Other-
wise, no one could make use of a text. But so long as it is possible for
us to combine the texts of the Qur’×n and the Sunna, it is not permis-
sible to leave them both aside, or to leave one of them aside, because
they oblige one to obey equally. Neither is more entitled to the obliga-
tion of being obeyed than the other. [God], may He be exalted, says,
“Whosoever obeys the Messenger, thereby obeys God.” 70 In those
circumstances it is obligatory to make the minority an exception from
the majority, since only in this way will one arrive at a way of making
use of them all. If we are unable to do this, it is not permissible to ar-
bitrarily combine them in a manner different from what we have men-
tioned, because it is an arbitrary choice without proof. Such as one
saying, this text is to be used in this way, and that text is to be used in
that way. This is not licit for him to say, because it is legislating reli-
gion, which Exalted God has not permitted.
We are not permitted to report on the intention of God, the
all-powerful, the sublime, nor about the intention of the Messenger of
God (pbuh) without a report on that coming from Exalted God or
from the Messenger of God (pbuh). Among these reports is the au-
thentic report of the Messenger of God (pbuh) forbidding facing or
turning one’s back on the direction of prayer when urinating or defe-
cating, by way of Abù Ayyùb al-Anó×rê and others.

69 Al-Isr×’, 24.
70 Al-Nis×’, 80.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

314 ADAM SABRA

From Abù ‘Umar, he saw the Messenger of God (pbuh) facing Je-
rusalem, with his back facing the Ka‘ba, while relieving himself.
Some people said, the prohibition is to be used when one is in the
desert, and the license is to be used when one is indoors. This is mis-
taken because the Prophet (pbuh) never said, I have made this licit
when one is indoors and prohibited it when one is in the desert. There
is no difference between what these persons say and one who says, I
only regard this as licit in Medina, if one is sitting on two bricks, oth-
erwise, not.
It is impermissible to hold any such opinion, because that would
be legislating religion, which Exalted God does not permit. What is
obligatory in this case is none other than to act in accordance with the
addition to the usual meaning of the source [text].
The proof of this is that we know that if there are two texts, one of
which removes a duty, while the other makes the same duty obliga-
tory, or one of which makes something licit, while the other contains
a prohibition of the same thing, we know with certainty that those
Muslims were with their Prophet (pbuh) a short time, when this duty
was not obligatory for them and that thing was not forbidden to them.
Therefore, we know with certainty that when the Prophet (pbuh) pro-
nounced this thing obligatory or forbade what he forbade, that the
first situation has been abrogated and has come to an end; this is cer-
tain, no doubt about it. It is invalid to leave aside what one is certain
has been abrogated. If this were permissible, it would be permissible
for the first situation, which one is certain has been abrogated, to re-
turn, and for the second situation, which one is certain is the
abrogator, to be invalidated. If this happened, what they did would
amount to leaving certainty aside and rendering judgment based on
one’s surmise. Exalted God has forbidden this, saying, “They have
not any knowledge thereof; they follow only surmise, and surmise
avails naught against truth.” 71 He, may He be exalted, said, “Beware
of surmises, they are the most false speech.” How can one do this,
when we are certain and we are witnesses to Exalted God’s testifying
He, may He be exalted, has guaranteed us that He preserves the Re-
membrance and the religion, and that it has been perfected. For if the
abrogator had been abrogated, this would have been made perfectly

71 Al-Najm, 28.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 315

clear. Since He, may He be exalted, did not do this, we bear witness
to God’s testimony, may He be exalted, that the abrogator remains the
basis for judgment until the Day of Judgment, and that the abrogated
remains abrogated until the Day of Judgment. We do not doubt this. It
is not at all possible for something in religion to be so obscure that the
truth is hidden from everyone, and a ruling must be made on it on the
basis of surmise. We disavow ourselves before Exalted God from this
opinion, just as we disavow ourselves before him, may He be exalted,
from polytheism. Praise God, Lord of the worlds.

Chapter

Hastening to obey God’s commands is an obligation, due to his

saying, may He be exalted, “And hasten to forgiveness from your
Lord, and to a garden whose breadth is as the heavens and the earth,
prepared for the god-fearing.” 72 Whoever delays does not hasten un-
less a text makes his delay licit. He delays [performing his duty], as
occurs in making it licit to delay prayer until the end of its time frame.

Chapter

It is not possible for the time frame in which it is obligatory to act

in accordance with this command to be delayed, since this delay
would contain concealment. We have been given a guarantee against
Exalted God’s concealing His religion from us. Rather, He has made
it clear on the tongue of He whom He imposed the obligation of mak-
ing it clear, and success comes from Exalted God.

Chapter

The Qur’×n can abrogate the Qur’×n, and the Sunna can abrogate
the Qur’×n too. Exalted God said, “Nor speaks he out of caprice. This
is naught but revelation revealed.” 73 If this is so, then it all comes
72 ¨l ‘Imr×n, 133.
73 Al-Najm, 3-4.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

316 ADAM SABRA

from God, may He be exalted, and His revelation. One is called the
Book and the other is called Sunna and wisdom. He, may He be ex-
alted, said, “And remember that which is recited in your houses of the
signs of God and the Wisdom; God is all-subtle and all-aware.” 74 If it
is said, the Sunna is not of the same kind as the Qur’×n, nor better
than it, it is merely an explanation of the Qur’×n, we say, and success
comes from Exalted God, the Sunna is like the Qur’×n in one’s being
obliged to obey it, provided the sunna is authentic. He, may He be ex-
alted, said, “Whosever obeys the Messenger, thereby obeys God.” 75
Abrogation is a clarification and the lifting of a command. The
abrogator makes it clear that the abrogated judgment has been lifted
and its command has come to an end. He, may He be exalted, said,
“That thou mayest make clear to mankind what was sent down to
them.” 76 A report may bring something better than what is in the
Qur’×n with respect to gentleness and lightening one’s burden. The
Qur’×n may also clarify the Sunna. He, may He be exalted, said,
“Making clear everything.” 77

Chapter

It is only possible for commands or reports, the meaning of whose

words is a command, to be abrogated. It is not possible for informa-
tion to be abrogated, since it would then be false. Exalted God is
above that, as are His Messengers. As for the evidence of the validity
of abrogation, it is Exalted God’s saying, “And for whatever verse
We abrogate or cast into oblivion, We bring a better or the like of
it.” 78 And success comes from Exalted God.

Chapter: On Commands and Prohibitions

All of the commands of Exalted God and His Messenger (pbuh)

are obligatory duties, and all of the interdictions of Exalted God and

74 Al-Açz×b, 34.
75 Al-Nis×’, 80.
76 Al-Naçl, 44.
77 Al-Naçl, 89.
78 Al-Baqara, 106.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 317

His Messenger (pbuh) are prohibitions. As we have said with regard

to abrogation, it is not licit for anyone to say concerning one of them,
this is a recommendation or a dissuasion without an authentic text
that makes this clear or a consensus. He, may He be exalted, said, “So
let those who go against His command beware, lest a trial befall them,
or there befall them a painful chastisement.” 79 And He, may He be
exalted, said, “Whatever the Messenger gives you, take; whatever he
forbids you, give over.” 80 The meaning of recommendation and dis-
suasion is, if you wish, do it, if you do not wish, don’t do it; this is
their lexicographical meaning. One does not understand do it, if you
wish to mean don’t do it, nor does one understand don’t do it, if you
wish to mean do it. Whoever claims this claims the impossible. Ex-
alted God has imposed upon us the obligation of obeying his Messen-
ger (pbuh) so whoever says, this command is a recommendation, this
prohibition is dissuasion, is really saying, you are not obliged to obey
this command or this prohibition. This is a naked contradiction of
God, the all-powerful, the sublime.

Chapter

Permissibility falls into three parts: a recommendation where one

who delays performing the action does not disobey God, nor will one
be rewarded by abstaining from the action; a dissuasion, where one
will be rewarded for abstaining from it, but will not sin or be re-
warded for performing it; and absolute permission where one will not
be rewarded for performing it or abstaining from it, nor sin by per-
forming it or abstaining from it.

Chapter: On Acts

The Prophet’s acts (pbuh) are recommended, not obligatory, un-

less they contain a statement of command or a statement that a judg-
ment should be carried out, such as his saying (pbuh), “Your blood,
property, honor, and flesh [literally, skin] are forbidden to you”, then
79 Al-Nùr, 63.
80 Al-·ashr, 7.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

318 ADAM SABRA

we find that the Messenger of God (pbuh) shed blood, broke skin, or
made someone’s property or honor licit. We know that carrying out
this act on his part (pbuh) was an obligation because, having forbid-
den this, he never made some of it licit unless that was an obligatory
duty. This is true if it occurs in the context of a command, such as his
reporting, whoever does such-and-such, such-and-such is incumbent
upon him, and he punishes whoever does this, after which he himself
(pbuh) performs a certain act, this is an obligation, because it is a
statement of command. If it lacks a command, then it is only replac-
ing prohibition with licitness, because we are certain that it has
shifted from prohibition to licitness, and there is doubt about its being
obligatory.
The proof of what we have said concerning his acts is the Prophet
(pbuh) saying, “Were it not a burden for my community, I would
have commanded them to use the toothpick (siw×k) before every
prayer.” He (pbuh) frequently used the toothpick and he states un-
equivocally that had he commanded them to do that it would be oblig-
atory and be a burden for them. Since he did not command them to do
so, they are not obliged to do it.
Also, what was narrated by ‘Abd All×h b. Yùsuf, from Açmad b.
Fatç, from ‘Abd al-Wahh×b b. ‘½sa, from Açmad b. Muçammad,
from Açmad b. ‘Alê, from Muslim b. al-Hajj×j, from Zuhayr b. ·arb,
from Yazêd b. H×rùn, from al-Rabê‘ b. Muslim al-Qurashê, from
Muçammad b. Ziy×d, from Abù ·urayra, the Messenger of God
(pbuh) preached to us, “‘O people, God has imposed the pilgrimage
upon you, so make the pilgrimage.’ A man asked, ‘Every year, Mes-
senger of God?’” He said, “then he was silent, having asked three
times. The Messenger of God (pbuh) said, If I said yes, it would be
obligatory and you would be unable to do it. Leave alone what I have
left to you. Your predecessors were destroyed by their frequent ques-
tions and by their quarreling with their prophets. If I command you to
do something, do it as best you can. If I forbid you from doing some-
thing, cease doing it.”
There is notice here of the invalidity of analogical reasoning and
the lack of veracity of its surmises. If one compares the pilgrimage to
prayer, which is repeated five times every day and night, to fasting,
which is obligatory every year, and to the alms tax, one would not
find why they are obligatory. Such a person should be answered with
rejection and told to cease asking questions as Exalted God com-
Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589
 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 319

manded. This is proof that no one has the right to introduce a new
judgment concerning a matter on which God is silent.
Abù Muçammad said, these two reports are valid proof that oblig-
atory duties are obligatory, and that the claim that they are recom-
mended or that [judgment based on them] is suspended are false. The
second [report] [indicates] that those commanded by God are obliged
to do what he commands to the best of their ability, and to abstain
from what He forbids. Whatever He has left without a ruling, neither
commanding nor forbidding, is undecided, left without a legal ruling.
So we know intuitively that what [God] has neither commanded nor
forbidden is neither obligatory nor prohibited and [those of the
Prophet’s] acts which [God] neither commanded nor forbade are nei-
ther obligatory nor prohibited. Also, Exalted God said, “O believers,
question not concerning things which, if they were revealed to you,
would vex you; yet if you question concerning them when the Qur’×n
is being sent down, they will be revealed to you. God left those things
undecided, for God is all-forgiving, all-clement.” 81 It is true that
whatever was not sent down in the Qur’×n and revelation is unde-
cided and [the Prophet’s] acts (pbuh), which were not obligated by
that which was sent down in the Qur’×n are undecided. He, may He
be exalted, said, “So let those who go against His command beware,
lest a trial befall them, or there befall them a painful chastisement.” 82
Punishment only results from violating the command which He an-
nounced. He, may He be exalted, said, “You have a good example in
God’s Messenger.” 83 He, may He be exalted, instructed us to imitate
[the Prophet’s] actions (pbuh).
If it is said, Exalted God said, “So let those who go against His
command beware, lest a trial befall them, or there befall them a pain-
ful chastisement”, 84 and this includes [the Prophet’s] acts (pbuh), be-
cause the state is expressed by the command.
We say, a command differs from a conclusion reached by surmise,
that is, a state. We say, and success comes from Exalted God, this is
impossible because of Exalted God’s lightening our burden by the
Prophet’s (pbuh) being silent on certain matters, by there being no
81 Al-M×’ida, 101.
82 Al-Nùr, 63.
83 Al-Açz×b, 21.
84 Al-Nùr, 63.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

320 ADAM SABRA

revelation sent down dealing with them, is a supererogatory act, and

supererogatory acts cannot be abrogated. Also, this verse was only re-
vealed immediately after the mention of those who slip away surrepti-
tiously, seeking refuge from him and his prayers. It is true that the
command mentioned in the verse is only a spoken command. Also,
there is no difference of opinion that the acts of the Prophet (pbuh), in
and of themselves, are not obligatory upon him, and are not obliga-
tory because they are not obligatory in principle, and so cannot be-
come obligatory upon us by a mere claim, without their being com-
manded.
Abù Muçammad, may Exalted God have mercy on him, said,
there is no evidence in His saying, may He be exalted, “Whatever the
Messenger gives you, take; whatever he forbids you, give over”, 85 to
support one who says that the Prophet’s acts, in and of themselves,
are obligatory. Because “giving” in the language of the Arabs means
“bestowing”. Bestowing is never used in the language to mean acts. It
only refers to the commands and prohibitions, especially since a verse
has reached us in which He says, the all-powerful, the sublime,
“Whatever he forbids you, give over.” 86 If the Prophet’s acts, in and
of themselves, indicated obligation, we would be obligated beyond
our capabilities to walk where the Messenger of God (pbuh) walked,
to eat as he ate, to drink as he drank, yes, even to reside where he re-
sided, and the like of that.
There is a consensus that it is invalid for this to be obligatory. It
also conflicts with our following him because the real meaning of fol-
lowing [the Prophet] is that whatever is licit for him, and nothing licit
has been made obligatory upon him, is not obligatory upon us, and
whatever he (pbuh) was permitted to abstain from, we are permitted
to abstain from. There is only merit in it for us, just as there was merit
in it for him, no more.
We must not particularize some acts to the exclusion of others and
differentiate between different types without any proof, except with
regard to those acts which are commanded, since commands make
these acts obligatory, not the acts in and of themselves. If someone
says, Exalted God says, “You have had a good example in them for
whoever hopes for God and the Last Day. And whosoever turns
85 Al-·ashr, 7.
86 Al-·ashr, 7.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 321

away, surely God is the All-sufficient, the All-laudable.” 87 They said,

His saying, “Whoever hopes for God and the Last Day. And whoso-
ever turns away, surely God is the all-sufficient, the all-laudable”, 88
is a threat and a warning. Then, His saying, “Surely God is the all-suf-
ficient, the all-laudable”, 89 is a reinforcement of the threat and the
warning. The meaning of this text is not as he has interpreted it. There
is no threat at all in His saying, may He be exalted, “Surely God is the
all-sufficient, the all-laudable.” 90 If it imposed an obligation or was a
threat or a warning, these words would threaten those who hope for
God and the Last Day. Since the text reads the words, “For whoever
hopes for God”, 91 it is true that it is in favor of the people who pos-
sess this characteristic, not against them. This is perfectly clear.
Also, one does not say about what is obligatory upon us, “You
have had in the Messenger of God”, 92 concerning this duty being
obligatory upon him, “A good example.” 93 Also, if the Prophet’s acts
were obligatory, as his commands are, nothing would remain for him
(pbuh) to be a good example of, and the meaning and point of the
verse would be invalid. This is impossible.
Another aspect is that Exalted God only recommended the Mus-
lims, not the infidels, to imitate the Prophet (pbuh). It is the Muslims
who hope for Exalted God and the Last Day. He never recommended
that any infidel imitate the Prophet (pbuh) in this verse, nor are they
prevented from doing so either. Thus, the claim that these words are a
threat is totally false. And success comes from God.
As for His saying, “And whosoever turns away, surely God is the
all-sufficient, the all-laudable”, 94 this is a independent judgment, suf-
ficient to indicate its ruling, unconnected to what precedes it. And
what precedes this passage has no need of it and is unconnected with
it. There is no proof of this at all, so they have made a second un-
proven claim. Also, were we to say concerning His saying, may He be

87 Al-Mumtaçana, 6.
88 Al-Mumtaçana, 6.
89 Al-Mumtaçana, 6.
90 Al-Mumtaçana, 6.
91 Al-Mumtaçana, 6.
92 Al-Mumtaçana, 6.
93 Al-Mumtaçana, 6.
94 Al-Mumtaçana, 6.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

322 ADAM SABRA

exalted, “And whosoever turns away.” 95 God has no need of whoever

turns away, in accordance with the literal meaning of the verse. Who-
soever turns away says that [the Prophet] (pbuh) is not a good exam-
ple for me, not even in that which he is a good example of. Whoever
says this is an infidel. This truly is the one who turns away from the
verse, not whoever abstains from imitating the Prophet, without re-
fusing or disliking this imitation. If this were the case, this would be
an irrefutable statement. This is perfectly clear.
Also, those who hold this opinion, stick to it in very few ques-
tions, and abstain from innumerable acts of his (pbuh) so they have
contradicted themselves. If they claim that there is a consensus that
the Prophet’s acts are not obligatory this is another baseless claim and
slander against the community. Every claim that lacks proof of its ve-
racity is false. Exalted God said, “Say, ‘Produce your proof, if you
speak truly.’” 96

Another Chapter

If one scholar disagrees with the rest, there is no proof in numbers

because Exalted God says, having mentioned the righteous, “Few
they are.” 97 He, may He be exalted, said, “If you should quarrel on
anything, refer it to God and the Messenger, if you believe in God and
the Last Day.” 98 One person’s disagreement is a sufficient quarrel to
oblige one to refer it to the Qur’×n and Sunna. Exalted God never
commanded one to refer it to the majority. Isolation is contradicting
the truth, even if they are not one but the population of the whole
earth.
The proof of this is that isolation is worthy of censure and the truth
is worthy of praise. It is not possible for what is worthy of censure to
be worthy of praise in any respect. Whoever differs with this opinion
should be asked about the dissent of two persons against the opinion
of the group, then the dissent of three persons against them, then four,
and so on forever. If he defines a limit, he is being arbitrary, without a

95 Al-Mumtaçana, 6.
96 Al-Naml, 64.
97 Ԭd, 24.
98 Al-Nis×’, 59.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 323

proof. Abù Bakr, may God be pleased with him, disagreed with the
mass of the Companions, may God be pleased with them, and was
isolated from them all concerning making war on the apostates. It was
he who was right, those who disagreed with him were wrong. The
proof of this is that the Qur’×n testifies in favor of his opinion, hence
they all returned to it.

Chapter

There is no ruling concerning an act performed mistakenly, from

forgetfulness, or under compulsion except where a text obliges a rul-
ing concerning it. Otherwise, none of these things invalidates an act
or validates it. An example of this is one who is forced to walk while
praying, or who forgets. His prayer is complete. Or one who forgets
and prays before the prescribed time or is compelled to do so will not
be rewarded for his prayer. The same is true for everything.
The proof of this is His saying, may He be exalted, “There is no
fault in you if you make mistakes, but only in what your hearts pre-
meditate”, 99 and the authentic reports from the Prophet (pbuh) that
He forgave His community their errors, forgetfulness, and that which
they are compelled to do.

Chapter

No act in divine law is valid without an intention continuous with

beginning the act, when no period of time at all intervenes between
the intention and entering into the act.
The proof of this is Exalted God’s saying, “They were com-
manded only to serve God, making the religion His sincerely, men of
pure faith”, 100 and [the Prophet’s] saying (pbuh), “One’s acts are
judged in accordance with one’s intentions, to every person what he
intends.” It is clear that all the deeds of the divine law are worship and
religion. Exalted God merely commanded us in the text of the Qur’×n
99 Al-Açz×b, 5.
100 Al-Bayyina, 5.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

324 ADAM SABRA

to perform all of this with sincerity. Sincerity is purposing this in

one’s heart, which is intention itself.

Chapter

Everything which is certainly true cannot be invalidated by doubt,

whether it be ritual purity, divorce, marriage, ownership, manumis-
sion, life, death, faith, polytheism, conveyance of property, transfer of
ownership, etc.
The proof of this is His saying, may He be exalted, “And surmise
avails naught against truth.” 101 Doubt and surmise are the same thing
because both of them are the absence of certainty. Although surmise
is closer to one side, it is not certainty, and whatever is not certainty is
doubt, and it is not licit to be certain about it.

Chapter

Every act in divine law is either conditional on its being performed

within a timeframe whose beginning and whose end are defined, or on
a timeframe whose beginning is defined and whose end is undefined. It
is not permissible to perform an act that is conditional on its being per-
formed in a timeframe whose beginning and end are defined, outside of
that timeframe, neither before its timeframe, nor after it, without there
being a text or a consensus on the validity of performing it outside of
its timeframe which he observes. Otherwise, [such an act is] not
[valid]. Such as prayer, fasting Ramadan, pilgrimage, slaughtering, etc.
One will not be rewarded for performing an act which is conditional on
being performed within a time frame whose beginning is defined and
whose end is undefined, before its time frame. Once it becomes obliga-
tory due to the beginning of its time frame, it never lapses, like the alms
tax, expiations, the making up of a missed obligation by a traveler, a
sick person, a menstruating woman, a woman in childbed, or a person
who vomits in Ramadan, and the like. 102

101 Al-Najm, 28.

102 Due to an apparent scribal error, all published editions of the Nubdha read mubqê
instead of mutaqayyi’. For the correct reading, see al-Muçall×, iv, 313.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 325

The proof of this is the statement of God, the all-powerful, the

sublime, “Those are God’s bounds; do not transgress them”, 103 and
His saying, may He be exalted, “Those are God’s bounds; whosoever
trespasses the bounds of God has done wrong to himself”, 104 and the
statement of the Messenger of God (pbuh), “Whoever performs an act
in a manner which we have not commanded, is rejected.” Everyone
possessed of his senses knows with certainty that whoever intention-
ally says a prayer before its time frame or after the end of its time
frame, intentionally fasts Ramadan before its time frame or after its
time frame, pays the alms tax before its time frame, or makes the pil-
grimage before its time frame, transgresses the bounds of God and
thus does harm to himself, his deed is harmful, and he will not be re-
warded for obedience. Similarly, everyone knows without a doubt
that he has performed an act which Exalted God has not commanded,
and performed his act inappropriately, so it is rejected, without a
doubt.

Chapter

Whatever is valid without regard to time on the basis of a text or

consensus can only be invalidated by a text or consensus. Whatever is
not obligatory can only become obligatory on the basis of a text or
consensus.
The proof of this is His saying, may He be exalted, “O believers,
obey God, and obey the Messenger and those in authority among
you.” 105 So it is true that nothing is obligatory except on the basis of a
text or consensus. Once something becomes valid on the basis of a
text or consensus, whoever claims that it is invalid without the sup-
port of a text or consensus opposes his own rejection to Exalted
God’s command. His command is certainly rejected and discarded.
As for God’s command, it is accepted and binding. Similarly, who-
ever wishes to make something binding without the support of a text
or consensus makes a law concerning religion which God has not per-
mitted; it is invalid. Exalted God says, “And do not say, as to what
103 Al-Baqara, 229.
104 Al-Íal×q, 1.
105 Al-Nis×’, 59.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

326 ADAM SABRA

your tongues falsely describe, “This is lawful, and this is forbidden”,

so that you may forge against God falsehood.” 106

Chapter

Error is only binding on a rational, mature person whom the com-

mand has reached. Exalted God says, “For men possessed of
minds.” 107 He, may He be exalted, says, “That I may warn you
thereby, and whomsoever it may reach.” 108
The Messenger of God (pbuh), said, “The pen is lifted from
three.” He mentioned children until they reach maturity, and the in-
sane until they return to sanity. This is with regard to the laws con-
cerning bodily deeds. As for the obligations related to property, they
differ from this because it is the judges who are instructed to seize
[property].

Chapter

It is possible for something be excepted from its class or from an-

other class. He, may He be exalted, said, “Save Iblês, he was one of
the jinn.” 109 This is the beginning of a discourse. Similarly an excep-
tion from a group remains part of its original group, because excep-
tion is known to exist in the language of the Arabs. Thus it is not licit
to prohibit it without the support of a text or consensus.

Chapter

Every report narrated on the authority of an unnamed companion,

if the narrator is one who is not ignorant of the distinction between
the authentic and unauthentic claims to be a Companion, is continu-
ous and the basis for proof, because all of the Companions are upright
persons. Exalted God says, “It is for the poor emigrants, who were ex-

106 Al-Naçl, 116.

107 Al-Zumar, 21.
108 Al-An‘×m, 19.
109 Al-Kahf.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 327

pelled from their habitations and their possessions, seeking bounty

from God and good pleasure, and helping God and His Messenger;
those — they are the truthful persons. And those who made their
dwelling in the abode, and in belief, before them, love whosoever has
emigrated to them, not finding in their breasts any need for what they
have been given, and preferring others above themselves, even
though poverty be their portion. And whoso is guarded against the av-
arice of his own soul, those — they are the prosperers.” 110 Exalted
God testified that all of emigrants and helpers are truthful and will
prosper. Thus we are certain of their being upright.
If the report’s narrator is one who may be ignorant of the authen-
ticity of claims of being a Companion, it is a disconnected tradition.
Anyone whom one cannot be sure is not a dissolute person and claims
to be a Companion to one who does not know the Companions,
makes a false claim in this. As for if a trustworthy narrator narrates a
report from one of the wives of the Prophet (pbuh) the report is a
proof, because they were incapable of concealing something from
anyone possessed of a discriminating mind at that time.

Chapter
If a Companion narrates a tradition about the Prophet (pbuh) and it
is narrated about the same Companion that he acted contrary to what
he narrated, then the true obligation is to accept his narration and ig-
nore what is narrated about him. This means that what he narrated is
accepted, not what he was seen to do, or the legal opinion he is related
to have issued.
The proofs [of this] are:
First, that our obligation is to accept what he narrated from the
Prophet (pbuh), not [the Companion’s] choice, since the no one’s
opinion but that of the Prophet (pbuh) is proof.
Second, that a Companion may forget what he related at that time.
Perhaps he forgets it entirely, just as ‘Umar forgot Exalted God’s say-
ing, “Thou art mortal, and they are mortal”, 111 and His saying, may He
be exalted, “And you have given them a hundredweight.” 112 So that he
110 Al-·ashr, 8-9.
111 Al-Zumar, 30.
112 Al-Nis×’, 20.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

328 ADAM SABRA

said, “the Messenger of God (pbuh) has not died, and will not die until
he is the last of us.” When he was reminded of the verse, he fell to the
ground. And when he said on the pulpit, “Let none of you pay women
marriage gifts in excess of four hundred dirhams.” When the woman
reminded him of the verse, he remembered and yielded. A Companion
may mention a report which he narrated but which he interpreted alle-
gorically, causing him to change its meaning from its literal sense, such
as Qud×ma b. Maû‘ùn’s interpretation, may God be pleased with him,
of Exalted God’s saying, “There is no fault in those who believe and do
deeds of righteousness in what they may eat”, 113 etc.
Third, it is not licit at all for anyone to surmise that a Companion
could be aware that what he narrates has been abrogated, be silent
about it, and transmit to us the abrogated. For Exalted God says,
“Those who conceal the clear signs and guidance which We have sent
down, after We have shown them clearly in the Book — they shall be
cursed by God and the cursers.” 114 Exalted God has raised them
above this.
Fourth, that Exalted God says, “It is We who have sent down the
Remembrance, and We preserve it.” 115 Exalted God’s guarantee is
true in preserving everything the Messenger of God (pbuh) said.
Thus, it is false that any one of the Companions, may God be pleased
with them, received anything from the Prophet (pbuh) which he did
not transmit. Although the Companions are not incapable of error in
their choices, they are incapable of hiding or concealing the guidance.
Fifth, it is said, one must find fault with one of the narrations, so it
is more appropriate to find fault with a Companion’s narration of his
acting contrary to what he narrated than to find fault with a report he
narrated from the Prophet (pbuh) which we are obliged to accept. As
for what is based on the opinion of a Companion, we are not obliged
to obey it. And success comes from God.
[Acting in accordance with] an opinion based on a proof text
which only bears one interpretation is obligatory, such as his saying,
may He be exalted, “Abraham was clement, passionate, penitent.” 116
It is true that he was not a fool. And like the Prophet (pbuh) saying,
113 Al-M×’ida, 93.
114 Al-Baqara, 159.
115 Al-·ijr, 9.
116 Hùd, 75.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 329

“Every intoxicant is wine, and every wine is forbidden.” Thus, it is

true that every intoxicant is forbidden. The proof is the text itself.

Chapter

The unclear passages in the Qur’×n are limited to the disconnected

letters and oaths. There is no text or consensus to explain them. Oth-
erwise, there are no unclear passages at all. The Messenger of God
(pbuh) said, “The permitted is clear, and the forbidden is clear. Be-
tween these are the unclear passages which many people do not un-
derstand.” Thus it is true that some people understand them. Exalted
God said, “Making clear everything.” 117

Chapter

An obligatory duty is only obligatory for whoever is capable of

performing it, unless a text or consensus indicates that it is obligatory,
it can be performed on his behalf, and one will be rewarded for it. Ex-
alted God said, “God places no soul under obligation save to its ca-
pacity.” 118 He said, may He be exalted, “And has laid upon you no
impediment in your religion.” 119 [Such as] when the Prophet (pbuh)
commanded the woman to perform the pilgrimage on her father’s be-
half, he being an old, chronically ill man incapable of making the
journey. And the Prophet (pbuh) said, “Whoever dies, while he owes
a period of fasting, let his guardian fast on his behalf.” And he or-
dered that the pilgrimage be performed on behalf of the dead, saying,
“God’s debt has a greater right to be paid” or “to payment.” It is
obligatory to obey all this so that the pilgrim fulfills his obligation
and his oath on behalf of the dead and on behalf of the living person
who is incapable of performing it, and so the oath-taker’s fast will be
performed, [as will] the obligation on the menstruating woman, and
so the neglected prayer will be performed, the prayer which has been
slept through, and the other oaths.
117 Al-Naçl, 89.
118 Al-Baqara, 286.
119 Al-·ajj, 78.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

330 ADAM SABRA

Chapter

Whatever authentically existed in the age of the Prophet (pbuh) is

not proof until we know that he (pbuh) knew of it, and did not censure
it. For no one else’s opinions are proof. Exalted God said, “So that
mankind might have proof against God, after the Messengers.” 120

Chapter

Proof only exists in the text of the Qur’×n, in the text of a continu-
ous report which is proven to come from the Messenger of God
(pbuh) or in something which he (pbuh) saw and consented to. For it
is He (pbuh) who was obliged to make things clear. [God], may He be
exalted, said, “We have sent down to thee the Remembrance that thou
mayest make clear to mankind what was sent down to them.” 121 He,
may He be exalted, said, “O Messenger, deliver that which has been
sent down to thee from thy Lord; for if thou does not, thou wilt not
have delivered His Message. God will protect you from men.” 122 He,
may He be exalted, said, “Nor speaks he out of caprice. This is naught
but a revelation revealed.” 123 He, may He exalted, said, “It is He who
sent among the illiterate a Messenger from among them, to recite His
signs to them and to purify them, and teach them the Book and the
Wisdom, though before that they were in manifest error.” 124 The
signs are the Qur’×n which [God], may He be exalted, sent down. The
Wisdom is the Sunna which was revealed to [the Prophet].
It is certainly true that [the Prophet] (pbuh) omitted nothing from
the religion without clarifying it from the Book with the Book, or
from the Book with the Sunna, or from the Sunna with the Sunna. He
(pbuh) never consented to a reprehensible act. Whatever He (pbuh)
knew of and did not censure is licit and permitted. No one else is like
that, because others err, forget, refuse, and are corrected about some
things.

120 Al-Nis×’, 165.

121 Al-Naçl, 44.
122 Al-M×’ida, 68.
123 Al-Najm, 3-4.
124 Al-Jum‘a, 2.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 331

Chapter

Among all opinions, one is true; the others are mistaken. Exalted
God said, “What is there, after truth, but error?” 125 He, may He be ex-
alted, said, “If it had been from other than God surely they would
have found in it much inconsistency.” 126 And success comes from
Exalted God. Even if there are a limited number of opinions on a
question, all but one is false, and that one is certainly the truth, for
none other remains. The truth cannot but be one of the opinions of the
entire community due to what we have mentioned concerning the in-
fallibility of consensus.

Chapter

It is not licit to judge in accordance with the law of a prior prophet,

due to [God’s] saying, may He be exalted, “To every one of you We
have appointed a law and an open road.” 127 If they mention Exalted
God’s saying, “So follow their guidance”, 128 we say, yes, on that
which they agree, [but] not concerning matters where their laws differ.
Exalted God said, “Naught is said to thee but what already was said to
the Messengers before thee. Surely thy Lord is a Lord of forgiveness
and of painful retribution.” 129 What they agree upon, such as divine
unity and the like, is the truth. What they differ on cannot be accepted
in its entirety, not is it possible to accept part to the exclusion of the
other part, because that would be an arbitrary, unproven choice. If it is
said, we accept the law of Jesus, may peace be upon him, because he is
the last of the Prophets, we say, this is false due to two proofs.
First, Exalted God forbade this when he said, “The creed of your
father Abraham.” 130
Thus, He reported that what He made valid for us is the creed of
Abraham, may peace be upon him, which is the creed of Muçammad
(pbuh). Exalted God said, “The Torah was not sent down, neither the
125 Yùnus, 32.
126 Al-Nis×’, 82.
127 Al-M×’ida, 48.
128 Al-An‘×m, 90.
129 Fuóóilat, 43.
130 Al-·ajj, 78.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

332 ADAM SABRA

Gospel, but after him.” 131 Thus, God, the all-powerful, the sublime,
by making it valid for us to follow the law of Abraham, may peace be
upon him, has forbidden us to accept the Torah or the Gospels re-
vealed to Jesus, may peace be upon him.
The second proof is [the Prophet’s], (pbuh) saying, “I have been
preferred to the Prophets in six ways.” Among these six, it has been
mentioned, “It used to be that a Prophet was sent exclusively to his
own people, but he (pbuh) was sent to the red and the black, to all
mankind.” If this is true then it is false that among the Prophets, may
peace be upon them, only the law of Muçammad (pbuh) is valid for
us. For Exalted God sent none of the Prophets to us but him (pbuh).
The others were only sent to their peoples, not to anyone else.

Chapter

It is obligatory to render judgment on every believer and infidel in

accordance with the rulings of Islam, whether they are willing or un-
willing, due to Exalted God’s saying, “Fight them until there is no
persecution and the religion is God’s entirely”, 132 and due to Exalted
God’s saying, “So judge between them according to what God has
sent down, and do not follow their caprices, to forsake the truth that
has come to thee.” 133

Chapter: On Personal Opinion

It is not permissible for anyone to render judgment in accordance

with his personal opinion. Exalted God said, “We have neglected
nothing in the Book.” 134 He, may He be exalted, “O believers, obey
God, and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. If
you should quarrel on anything, refer it to God and the Messenger, if
you believe in God and the Last Day.” 135 The Messenger of God
(pbuh), “The people will appoint ignorant leaders who will issue rul-

131 ¨l ‘Imr×n, 65.

132 Al-Anf×l, 39.
133 Al-M×’ida, 49.
134 Al-An‘×m, 38.
135 Al-Nis×’, 59.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 333

ings in accordance with personal opinion. So they will go astray and

lead others astray.” And as he (pbuh) said, and this is an authentic tra-
dition narrated by al-Bukh×rê and others. From Abù Bakr ·amm×m b.
Açmad al-Q×Ýê, who said, from Abù Muçammad ‘Abd All×h b.
Muçammad al-T×jê, who said, from Muçammad b. ‘Abd al-Malik b.
Ayman, who said, from Abù Thawr Ibr×hêm b. Kh×lid, who said,
from Wakê‘ b. Hish×m b. ‘Urwa , from his father, from ‘Abd All×h b.
‘Amr b. al-‘¨ó, who said, the Messenger of God (pbuh) said,
“Knowledge cannot be removed from men’s breasts, but knowledge
is lost with the death of the learned. If no learned man remains, the
people will appoint ignorant leaders who issue rulings in accordance
with personal opinion. They will go astray and lead others astray.”
‘Abd All×h b. ‘Amr b. al-‘¨ó said, “The affairs of the Children of Is-
rael remained righteous until the children of slave peoples were raised
among them who decided in accordance with personal opinion. They
went astray and led others astray.”
Abù Muçammad, may God be pleased with him, said, an authen-
tic report from ‘Umar b. al-Kha÷÷×b, may God be pleased with him,
says that he said, “Be suspicious of personal opinion.” Sahl b. ·unayf
said, “Be suspicious of your personal opinions concerning your reli-
gion.” ‘Alê b. Abê Í×lib, may God be pleased with him, said, “Were
religion determined by personal opinion, it would be more correct to
wipe the underside of one’s shoes.” Similar reports have come from
other Companions, may God be pleased with them.
If they mention Mu‘×dh’s tradition, “I will do my utmost to exer-
cise my own judgment”, this is a false tradition, which was narrated
by no one but al-·×rith b. ‘Amr who is an unknown narrator who is
unknown among the people of Homs, from whom he never heard tra-
ditions. It is certainly false that the Messenger of God (pbuh) said to
Mu‘×dh, “If you don’t find the answer in the Book of God or the
Sunna of the Messenger of God”, when he had heard God’s revelation
to him, “We have neglected nothing in the Book”, 136 and, “Today I
have perfected your religion for you.” 137 Since, as Exalted God has
testified, it has been perfected, it is false that there is a single legal
case in religion which lacks a ruling. Thus, personal opinion is totally
invalid in religion.
136 Al-An‘×m, 38.
137 Al-M×’ida, 3.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

334 ADAM SABRA

Chapter

Were it valid, either it would be specific to Mu‘×dh, due to some-

thing about him which the Messenger of God (pbuh) knew, which his
statement (pbuh), “I will teach you the permissible and the impermis-
sible, Mu‘×dh”, indicates, leading him to make it permissible for
Mu‘×dh to legislate this, or it would be general, including Mu‘×dh
and everyone else. If it is specific to Mu‘×dh, then it is not permissi-
ble to accept the personal opinion of anyone but Mu‘×dh. That is
something no one on earth would say. If it is general, including
Mu‘×dh and everyone else, no one’s personal opinion is more authori-
tative than anyone else’s. Thus the religion would be destroyed and
become nonsense, and everyone could legislate whatever he wished
in accordance with his personal opinion. This is pure infidelity. Also,
either personal opinion is required in matters concerning which there
is a relevant text, which is something no one says because if this were
the case one would be obliged by personal opinion to prohibit the
licit, make licit the prohibited, make what isn’t obligatory, obligatory,
and declare the obligatory to not be obligatory, which is pure infidel-
ity, or it is required in matters concerning which there is no relevant
text, which is invalid in two ways.
First, Exalted God’s saying, “We have neglected nothing in the
Book”, 138 and His saying, may He be exalted, “Making clear every-
thing”, 139 and His saying, may He be exalted, “Today I have per-
fected your religion for you”, 140 and His saying, may He be exalted,
“That thou mayest make clear to mankind what was sent down to
them.” 141 If it is certainly true according to the report of Exalted God,
whom no believer would accuse of falsehood, that He neglected noth-
ing in the Book, and that He made everything clear, and that the entire
religion has been perfected, and that the Messenger of God (pbuh)
made clear to mankind what was sent down to them, it is certainly
false, without a doubt, that there is anything in religion for which
there is no relevant text or ruling from Exalted God and His Messen-
ger (pbuh).
138 Al-An‘×m, 38.
139 Al-Naçl, 89.
140 Al-M×’ida, 3.
141 Al-Naçl, 44.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 335

Second, even if that existed, and Exalted God has guarded against
and prevented this from existing, whoever legislated something con-
cerning this would have legislated something in religion without
God’s permission. This is forbidden, the Qur’×n has prohibited it, so
personal opinion is invalid, praise God, Lord of the worlds.
If they say, the Companions, may God be pleased with them, ruled
on the basis of personal opinion, we say, if you find any one of them
who validated rulings on the basis of personal opinion you will find
that he was ostracized. We have made this perfectly clear in our book,
“Perfection in Legal Theory” and in “The Epistle on Points”. And
success comes from God.

Chapter: On Analogical Reasoning

It is not permissible to rule in religion on the basis of analogical

reasoning. Supporting it is invalid, and it is known with certainty that
it is invalid in the eyes of Exalted God.
The proof of this is what we have mentioned previously on the in-
validity of personal opinion.
If they say, there is support for analogical reasoning in the Qur’×n,
and they mention Exalted God’s saying, “They destroyed their houses
with their own hands, and the hands of the believers, therefore take
heed you who have eyes”, 142 and the compensation for [unlawfully
killed] game, and similarly for injuries, we say to them, “take heed”
does not mean make an analogy in the language of the Arabs, nor has
any lexicographer agreed with this. The meaning of “take heed” is
marvel and be warned. Exalted God said, “In their stories is surely a
lesson to men possessed of minds”, 143 that is, a marvel and a warning.
He, may He be exalted, said, “And surely in the cattle there is a lesson
for you; We give you to drink of what is in their bellies, between filth
and blood, pure milk, sweet to drinkers. And of the fruits of the palms
and the vines, you take therefrom an intoxicant, and a provision fair.
Surely in that is a sign for those who understand”, 144 that is, a marvel.
142 Al-·ashr, 2.
143 Yùsuf, 111.
144 Al-Naçl, 66-7.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

336 ADAM SABRA

Rather, the invalidity of analogical reasoning is contained within

these verses. For [God], may He be exalted, reported that milk is licit,
although it is located between illicit filth and blood, and that a licit,
fair provision and an forbidden intoxicant come from the same fruit,
so it is false that two similar things share the same ruling.
If “take heed” meant make an analogy, we would be obliged to de-
stroy our houses just as they destroyed their houses, but this is not so.
So His saying, may He be exalted, “take heed” invalidates analogical
reasoning. Even if the meaning of “take heed” was make an analogy,
and it could have no other meaning, this would not make analogical
reasoning obligatory as they claim. For in that case it would be an am-
biguous passage whose meaning could not be understood from the
text. Rather, it would be like His statement, may He be exalted, “And
perform the prayer and pay the alms”, 145 and like His statement, may
He be exalted, “And pay the due thereof on the day of its harvest.” 146
It was not possible to understand from this command what prayers
and alms are, nor what Exalted God’s due was with regard to the un-
specified crop which was harvested, nor how prayer should be per-
formed and alms given until the explanation of the Prophet (pbuh)
came on all of this. Had the meaning of “take heed” been make an
analogy, and we stipulated this, no one would know how to use this
analogical reasoning, nor what should be compared or what it should
be compared to. For that we would need the Prophet’s (pbuh) expla-
nation of this. If no explanation of all this came, what would we do?
So we know with certainty that Exalted God did not place us under
obligation to do something we don’t know how to do, or what it is,
nor did he place us under obligation to act on the basis of differing,
unproven, opinions. It is false that these opinions are understood with
certainty from this verse, and it is certainly true, without a doubt, that
[God], may he be exalted, never intended it to mean analogical rea-
soning. And success comes from God.
As for the compensation for hunting, there is no room at all for an-
alogical reasoning concerning it, because it is merely Exalted God’s
command that whoever intentionally kills game while in the state of
ritual consecration must compensate for it with a like number of live-
stock, not with game. Thus the verse testifies to the invalidity of ana-

145 Al-Baqara, 43.

146 Al-An‘×m, 141.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 337

logical reasoning. And as for, “Even so is the coming forth”, 147 it in-
validates analogical reasoning, without a doubt, that the coming forth
of the dead once in an eternity bears fruit in an eternity in Hell or Par-
adise, and the coming forth of plants from the earth occurs every year
and then ceases. It is not permissible to use anything we have men-
tioned concerning this case and others to prohibit the sale of figs for a
non-equivalent amount of figs, to be received at a later date.
A decisive proof concerning all of the errors they make concerning
the Qur’×n and the ·adêth is our saying that truth in religion is none
other than what is contained in the Qur’×n and the ·adêth of the Mes-
senger of God (pbuh). Then they supported analogical reasoning and
we have shown it to be invalid. Every verse they cite to us, every tradi-
tion they mention to us, all of this is true, and everything they add to it
is false. They did nothing more than to merely repeat to us their support
for analogical reasoning, and we quarreled with them about this. They
cannot use their own opinions to prove their opinions. These reports
would contain proof of their opinion only if any of them included,
“Make an analogy between what resembles a text and the text it resem-
bles.” So if they don’t find it, and they cannot find it, then they have no
proof in any of the Qur’×n or reports, since, as we have mentioned, the
entire Qur’×n and authentic tradition are true. As for what they wish to
add to them, it is false. We have demanded their proof for their opinion,
which they will not find. And success comes from God.
Among the proofs of analogical reasoning is Exalted God’s say-
ing, “And it is God who brought you forth from your mothers’
wombs”, 148 and His saying, may He be exalted, “And teach you that
you knew not”, 149 and He said, may He be exalted, “Say: My Lord
has only forbidden indecencies, the inward and the outward, and sin,
and unjust insolence, and that you associate with God that for which
He never sent down authority, and that you say concerning God such
as you know not.” 150
Thus Exalted God forbade us to say what we know not, and that
which He did not teach us. Having found that God neither com-
manded the use of analogical reasoning nor taught us how to use it,
147 Q×f, 11.
148 Al-Naçl, 78.
149 Al-Baqara, 151.
150 Al-A‘r×f, 33.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

338 ADAM SABRA

we know that it is invalid and it is unlawful to base opinions about re-

ligion on it.
Also, it should be said, What is analogical reasoning needed for? Is
it for matters stipulated in a text and rulings by Exalted God and His
Messenger (pbuh)? Or in matters not stipulated by a text or ruling by
Exalted God or his Messenger (pbuh)? There is no third alternative.
If they say, in matters stipulated in a text, it is known that this is
invalid. For if [the situation] were like this, one would be obliged to
forbid based on analogical reasoning some things which Exalted God
has permitted, to permit some things which Exalted God has forbid-
den, to make obligatory things Exalted God has not make obligatory,
and to remove some of the obligations Exalted God has imposed.
If they say, rather, in matters not stipulated in a text, we say, Ex-
alted God has censured this [opinion] and discredited those who hold
support this view. He censured it when He said, may He be exalted,
“Or have they associates who have legislated for them as religion that
which God did permit?” 151 He, may He be exalted, discredited [the
proponent of this view] when He said, may He be exalted, “We have
neglected nothing in the Book”, 152 and, “Today I have perfected your
religion for you.” 153 Thus it is certainly true that analogical reasoning
is invalid.
Also, according to its supporters, analogical reasoning yields a
ruling on something based on a ruling on a similar thing due to their
sharing a ratio which obliges this ruling or due to one’s resembling
the other in one of its qualities according to the opinion of one such
[supporter of analogical reasoning]. It should be said to them, inform
us as to this ratio, which you claim exists, and which you have made
the ratio for prohibiting something, making it licit, or making it oblig-
atory. Who told you that this is the ratio for this ruling? Who made it
the ratio for this ruling?
If they say, Exalted God made it the ratio for this ruling, they at-
tribute statements falsely to God, the all-powerful, the sublime, unless
they produce a text from Exalted God in the Qur’×n, or on the tongue
of the Messenger of God (pbuh), that this [ratio] is the ratio of this
ruling. This is something they cannot find.

151 Al-Shùr×, 21.

152 Al-Naçl, 89.
153 Al-M×’ida, 3.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 339

If they say, we have legislated it, then they have legislated a law in
religion, which Exalted God does not permit. According to the text of
the Qur’×n, this is forbidden.
If they say, it is most likely a ratio, and this is actually their opin-
ion, we say to them, you have done what Exalted God forbade you to
do, for He says, “They follow only surmise, and surmise avails
naught against the truth.” 154 For the Messenger of God (pbuh) says,
“Beware surmise; surmise is the most false of speech.”
Abù Muçammad, may Exalted God have mercy on him, said, they
disagree about the ratios, so how do they know that this ratio is what
Exalted God desires from us without His explicitly stipulating this to
[the one who performs these deeds]? He, may He be exalted, forbade
us to speak about what we know not or to form opinions based on sur-
mise. The same should be said to them about their making analogies
between one thing or another based on a similarity.
We say further to them, what is this similarity? Is it present in all
of their qualities, or only in some and not in others?
If they say, in all of its qualities, this is false because no two things
in the world are similar in all of their qualities. If they say, in some of
their qualities, we say, how do you know that? What is the difference
between you and one who considers the qualities with which you
make analogies, but does not make analogies on their basis, and con-
templates the qualities with which you do not make analogies, but
does make analogies with them?
It should be said to them, what is the difference between you and
the one who says, rather, I distinguish between the rulings of the two
things some of whose qualities must differ? How is it that one is
obliged to reach the same ruling on them both due to their sharing
certain qualities, and not differentiate between them due to their dif-
fering in other qualities? This is something from which they cannot
escape at all.
If it is true that supporting the use of analogical reasoning and de-
termining the ratio is invalid and false, and that it constitutes saying
about Exalted God what one knows not, then it is forbidden and not at
all licit. For either one makes declarations about Exalted God based
on false surmises, which is forbidden, or one legislates in religion
154 Al-Najm, 28.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

340 ADAM SABRA

without Exalted God’s permission. Both things are invalid, without a

doubt. Praise God, Lord of the worlds. If they say, reason requires
that one rule on a thing as one would rule on an equivalent thing, we
say to them, as for its equivalent in species or genus, yes. As for what
they claim, on the basis of unproven personal opinions, to be Exalted
God’s intent, no.
Thus is our opinion with regard to the divine law. For if Exalted
God rules on wheat, that applies to all wheat, and if he rules on a for-
nicator, that applies to every fornicator, similarly with everything.
Otherwise, neither reason nor divine law ever ruled that the ruling for
figs should be the same as that for wheat, nor that the ruling for wal-
nuts should be the same as that for dates. Indeed, all of these are rul-
ings on things based on rulings on other things which are not their
equivalents. Similarly, with regard to rational arguments: whoever
rules on accidents based on the ruling for bodies, or rules on humans
based on the ruling for donkeys, errs. If, however, a ruling is obliga-
tory with regard to the universal body, this applies to each body. If a
ruling is made concerning a human being, that [ruling] applies to each
human being. Reason never consented to anything but this.

Chapter

The entirety of the divine law is made up of obligatory duties,

which are valid obligations, forbidden acts, which are prohibited and
interdicted, and licit acts, which are either recommended, voluntary
acts or absolutely licit acts. We find that Exalted God has said, “He
created for you all that is in the earth.” 155 He, may He be exalted said,
“He had distinguished for you what He has forbidden you.” 156 He,
may He be exalted, said, “So let those who go against His command
beware, lest a trial befall them, or there befall them a painful chastise-
ment.” 157 There is an authentic report that the Prophet (pbuh) said,
“Leave alone what I leave to you. Those who came before you were
only destroyed by their frequent questioning and arguing with their

155 Al-Baqara, 29.

156 Al-An‘×m, 119.
157 Al-Nùr, 63.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 341

prophets. If I command you to do something, do it to the best of your

ability. If I forbid you from doing something, cease doing it.”
In accordance with this text, it is true that whatever Exalted God
or His Messenger (pbuh) commanded us to do is an obligatory duty
unless there is a text or consensus that it is recommended, specific, or
abrogated, and whatever Exalted God or His Messenger (pbuh)
clearly prohibited is forbidden unless there is a text or consensus that
it is reprehensible, specific or abrogated, and whatever is neither
commanded nor forbidden is licit, due to His saying, may He be ex-
alted, “He created for you all that is in the earth.” 158 [The Prophet]
(pbuh) commands us to cease doing only that which he has forbidden,
and his command only obliges us to do our best.
And due to the authentic report that [the Prophet] (pbuh) said,
“Whatever things He is silent about are indeterminate.” [God], may
He be exalted, said, “Question not concerning things which, if they
were revealed to you, would vex you; yet if you question concerning
them when the Qur’×n is being sent down, they will be revealed to
you. God has effaced those things, for God is all-forgiving, all-clem-
ent.” 159 Nothing in the world escapes His judgment, so there is no
need whatsoever for analogical reasoning, and it is true that it is not at
all licit to rule on its basis in religion. And success comes from God.
Know that there is no report from any one of the Companions,
may God be pleased with them, supporting analogical reasoning, ex-
cept in the forged letter attributed to ‘Umar, may God be pleased with
him. It is not at all authentic since only two men, whose narrations are
ignored, narrated it. It is reported of ‘Umar, may God be pleased with
him, by similar paths of narration, that he regarded analogical reason-
ing to be forbidden. Indeed, this is an authentic report that the Com-
panions, may God be pleased with them, agreed on the invalidity of
analogical reasoning and personal opinion. For they, and all of the
people of Islam, believe without a doubt in obeying the Qur’×n and
the example set by the Messenger of God, (pbuh) and in forbidding
anyone but Exalted God from legislating in religion. This is a consen-
sus that forbids personal opinion and analogical reasoning, because
they are not stipulated in the Qur’×n and Sunna. And success comes
from Exalted God.
158 Al-Baqara, 29.
159 Al-M×’ida, 101.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

342 ADAM SABRA

Chapter

If the Prophet (pbuh) stipulates such-and-such ruling in

such-and-such matter, it is not permitted to extend this ruling beyond
its subject. Whoever dissents from this transgresses God’s bound-
aries, and we take refuge in God from that. This is similar to his state-
ment (pbuh), “Teeth are bones, fingernails are Ethiopia’s knives.”
Thus, it is not permissible to extend the ruling from teeth to finger-
nails.

Chapter: On Implied Meaning and Particularization

It is not permissible to claim implied meaning. This is one’s claim

that, if there is a text from Exalted God or His Messenger (pbuh) stip-
ulating a quality, state, time period, or place, then any other [quality,
state, time, period] must require a different ruling. For example, if
[the Prophet] (pbuh) stipulates a herd animal, then anything other
than a herd animal must differ with regard to the alms tax. Or, for ex-
ample, if [God], may He be exalted, stipulates that one who lacks af-
fluence should marry believing handmaids, then one who fears [he
will commit] fornication should marry unbelieving women, rather
than believing women. Or, for example, if [God], may He be exalted,
stipulates the obligation to pay reparations for an accidental killing, a
killing which is not an accident must differ from an accident. Know
that this doctrine and analogical reasoning are mutually invalidating
opposites. For analogical reasoning is ruling on something on which
God is silent on the basis of something God stipulates. Both doctrines
are invalid because they are transgressions of God’s bounds and ad-
vancement before God and His Messenger. Exalted God said, “Who-
soever transgresses the bounds of God has done wrong to himself.” 160
He, may He be exalted, said, “O believers, advance not before God
and His Messenger.” 161 The truth is merely to accept God’s com-
mands as they come, and not to apply their rulings to matters not cov-
ered by them. Rather, the rulings in these matters should be sought in
other texts, for Exalted God has neglected nothing in the Book. Simi-

160 Al-Íal×q, 1.
161 Al-·ujur×t, 1.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 343

larly, the claim of specificity is false. It is the opposite of analogical

reasoning and implied meaning because analogical reasoning in-
cludes something about which God is silent under a ruling stipulated
by God, while implied meaning removes something about which God
is silent from the ruling of something God stipulates, on the basis of
the very same ruling. This too is not licit.
All of these claims are slanders against Exalted God. Exalted God
forbid that He should intend to remove some of what He has stipu-
lated to us from the ruling of the sum of what He stipulated without
making this clear. Thus is it is necessarily true that if a text exists, it is
an obligatory duty to accept it as it is. None of it should be particular-
ized without another text or a consensus, and nothing should be added
to it that is not contained in another text or a consensus. This is obedi-
ence to Exalted God, a guarantee against disobeying Him, and a proof
in our favor on the Day of Resurrection. Let every individual take
care lest he pronounce forbidden that which neither Exalted God nor
His Messenger (pbuh) have informed him is prohibited, and lest he
deny that what Exalted God or His Messenger (pbuh) commanded is
obligatory, lest he meet Exalted God in disobedience to Him, contra-
dicting His command, legislating in religion without God’s permis-
sion, may He be exalted, saying about God, may He be exalted, what
he knows not, and attributing to His Messenger (pbuh) things he
never said. Let him take his seat in Hell. And lest he rule based on
surmise, which is the most false speech, and which avails not against
truth. We take refuge in Exalted God from the trial.

Chapter

If Exalted God gave a command to His Messenger (pbuh) it is

valid for every Muslim unless there is an authentic text or a certain
consensus that it has been particularized.
The proof of this is His saying, may He be exalted, “So let those
who go against His command beware, lest a trial befall them, or there
befall them a painful chastisement.” 162 His saying, may He be ex-
alted, “against His command” implies that the command in the prepo-
162 Al-Nùr, 63.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

344 ADAM SABRA

sitional phrase is what He is the commander of, so no verse is to be

particularized without a proof.

Chapter

Delegating authority is forbidden. It is not licit for anyone to ac-

cept another’s claim without proof.
The proof of this is Exalted God’s saying, “Follow what has been
sent down to you from your Lord, and follow no friends other than
He, little do you remember”, 163 and His saying, may He be exalted,
“And when it is said them, “Follow what God has sent down”, they
say, “No; but we will follow such things as we found our fathers do-
ing”,” 164 and His statement, may He be exalted, praising a people
who did not delegate authority, “So give tidings to My servants who
give ear to the Word and follow the fairest of it. Those are they whom
God has guided; those — they are men possessed of minds.” 165 So let
no person stint in praising Exalted God who has guided him and made
him possessed of a mind. He said, may He be exalted, “If you should
quarrel on anything, refer it to God and the Messenger, if you believe
in God and the Last Day.” 166 Exalted God did not make it licit to refer
to anyone in a quarrel other than the Qur’×n and the Sunna of His
Prophet (pbuh). It is true that there is consensus of the Companions,
may God be pleased with them, first to last, and a consensus of all of
the Followers, first to last, on the impossibility of, and prohibition on,
any one of them seeking out the opinion of any person among them,
and accepting all of his opinions. So know that whoever accepts all of
the opinions of Abù ·anêfa, all of the opinions of M×lik, all of the
opinions of al-Sh×fi‘ê, or all of the opinions of Açmad b. ·anbal, may
God be pleased with them, who is capable of investigating and does-
n’t abandon the one he follows for another, has contradicted the con-
sensus of the entire community and deviated from the path of the be-
lievers. We take refuge in God from such a position.

163 Al-A‘r×f, 3.
164 Al-Baqara, 170.
165 Al-Zumar, 17-18.
166 Al-Nis×’, 59.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 345

Also, those virtuous men forbade others to delegate authority to

them, or to delegate authority to others. So whoever delegates author-
ity to them contradicts them. Also, what makes one of these men or
anybody else more deserving of being delegated authority than the
Commander of the Faithful, ‘Umar b. al-Kha÷÷×b, ‘Alê b. Abê Í×lib,
Ibn ‘Abb×s, or ‘¨’isha, Mother of the Believers? If delegating author-
ity were valid, these people would be more deserving of being fol-
lowed than Abù ·anêfa, M×lik, al-Sh×fi‘ê, or Açmad. Whoever
among those who affiliate themselves with [one of these scholars]
claims that he is not delegating authority [to him] is himself the first
to know that he is lying, then everyone who hears him [knows that he
is lying]. For we see him supporting every opinion of the one with
whom he is affiliated that reaches him, even if he previously had no
knowledge of that opinion. This is delegation of authority itself.

Chapter

Abù Muçammad, may Exalted God be pleased with him, said:

common men and scholars are the same in this. Each one has his
share of independent reasoning of which he is capable.
The proof of this is that we have previously mentioned the texts on
this, and Exalted God does not differentiate between common men
and scholars, “And thy Lord is never forgetful.” 167 If they mention
Exalted God’s saying, “Question the People of Remembrance”, 168 it
should be said to them, the People of Remembrance are not one par-
ticular person. It is not permissible for you to speak falsely of God,
may He be exalted. We only question the People of Remembrance so
that they may inform us of those commands of Exalted God which
came on the tongue of his Messenger (pbuh) with which they are fa-
miliar. We do not question them about any law they might legislate
for us.
Also, we say to whoever thinks it is permissible for a commoner
to delegate authority, tell us, to whom should he delegate? If he says
the most learned man in the city, we say, what if there are two learned
men in the city who disagree, what is he to do? Should he accept the
167 Maryam, 64.
168 Al-Anbiy×’, 7.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

346 ADAM SABRA

opinion of whichever one he chooses? This would be a new religion.

God forbid that there should be two different rulings on the same
question, permitted and prohibited at the same time, according to Ex-
alted God.
The most amazing thing is that the obligatory duty of a commoner
who lives in al-Andalus is to delegate authority to M×lik, in Yemen,
to delegate to al-Sh×fi‘ê, and in Khurasan, to delegate authority to
Abù ·anêfa, although their legal opinions are opposed. Is this the reli-
gion of Exalted God? By God, Exalted God never commanded this;
rather religion is one. Exalted God’s ruling has been made clear to us:
“If it had been from other than God surely they would have found in it
much inconsistency.” 169 Commoners and blacks imported from
Ghana and those like them, if they become Muslims, know without a
doubt what this Islam is that they have entered into and testify that
there is no god but God and that Muçammad is the Messenger of God
to them, and that they have entered into the religion which
Muçammad (pbuh) brought. This something which cannot be con-
cealed from anyone who becomes a Muslim now.
What about someone who has acquired some understanding?
There is no doubt about [his situation]. The questioner merely asks
about what Exalted God has made obligatory for him in the religion
he has entered into. If this is so, then without a doubt God has made it
obligatory for him to say to the mufti, when he issues a legal opinion,
is such-and-such the command of Exalted God and His Messenger
(pbuh)? If the mufti says yes, then he is obliged to accept it. If he says
no, is silent, drives him away, or mentions to him the opinion of a per-
son other than the Prophet (pbuh) as his understanding increases, and
his independent judgment grows more acute, he must ask: is this truly
from the Prophet (pbuh) or not? If his understanding increases, he
must ask whether the tradition is continuous or disconnected, the nar-
rators trustworthy or untrustworthy. If his understanding increases
further, he must ask about the opinions on the question, each dispu-
tant’s proof, and this will lead to his rising through the ranks of
knowledge. We ask Exalted God to make us among the people of
knowledge. Amen, amen, Lord of the worlds.

169 Al-Nis×’, 82.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

 IBN ·AZM’S LITERALISM: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAMIC LEGAL THEORY (II) 347

Chapter

Exalted God only imposed on us the obligation of following His

Messenger, Muçammad (pbuh). Whoever follows him, and testifies
to his truthfulness with his heart and tongue is saved; he is truly a be-
liever, whether he knows this by deduction or without deduction. For
Exalted God never imposed on us any obligation but this, nor did he
command us to proselytize for anything else, nor did the Caliphs or
righteous proselytize for anything else.
Whoever is narrated a tradition which does not authentically come
from the Prophet (pbuh) without him knowing that it is inauthentic,
will be rewarded once, due to his saying (pbuh), “If a judge exercises
his independent judgment and is incorrect, he will receive one re-
ward. If he is correct, he will receive two rewards.” Or, as [the
Prophet] (pbuh) said. Whoever accepts a matter has ruled in favor of
its acceptance and exercised his independent judgment in doing so.
This person, and none other, is an independent jurist, because inde-
pendent judgment is merely expending effort in seeking a ruling in re-
ligion in the Qur’×n, Sunna, and consensus, whence Exalted God
commanded one to take one’s rulings, and nowhere else. Whoever
does this correctly will receive two rewards. Whoever errs will re-
ceive one reward, and does not sin.

Chapter

As for one who delegates authority to someone other than the

Prophet (pbuh) and, in so doing, accidentally comes upon the com-
mand of the Prophet (pbuh), he disobeys Exalted God and sins in his
delegation of authority. There is no safety or reward for him in his
coming upon the truth. Who knows how he did this? He did not seek
the truth, and if he errs, he sins twice: the sin of delegating authority
and the sin of diverging from the truth. And he will not be rewarded at
all. We take refuge in God from deception.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589

348 ADAM SABRA

Chapter

Whoever is unaware of the proof is excused. Whoever is aware of

the proof has no excuse. Exalted God said, “But whosoever makes a
breach with the Messenger after the guidance has become clear to
him, and follows a way other than that of the believers’, him We shall
turn over to what he has turned to and we shall roast him in Gehenna
— an evil homecoming.” 170

Chapter

Whoever knows the truth of one matter or more from the Qur’×n
or Sunna is permitted to issue legal opinions on it. Whoever knows
the whole religion is the same. And whoever is ignorant, even if in
only one matter, is permitted to issue legal opinions on what he
knows, and is not permitted to issue opinions on what he does not
know. If only someone who knew the entire religion could issue legal
opinions, none after the Messenger of God (pbuh) could issue legal
opinions. “Over every man of knowledge is One who knows.” 171
“God is sufficient for us; an excellent Guardian is He.” 172 [The book,
“The Sufficient...” is complete, praise God, with His aid and the
goodness of the success He grants. Praise God, Lord of the worlds.
May God bless our Lord Muçammad, his family, and his Compan-
ions, and save him.]

Recibido: 12/01/06
Aceptado: 29/06/06

170 Al-Nis×’, 115.

171 Yùsuf, 76.
172 ¨l ‘Imr×n, 173.

Al-Qan÷ara (AQ) XXVIII 2, julio-diciembre 2007, pp. 307-348 ISSN 0211-3589