Islam considers a human being as an integrated being (indivisible whole), and addresses his or her actions with AHkam Sharai’ah in a consistent and balanced manner regardless of the number and type of these actions. These AHkam Sharai’ah are the Islamic systems which address the problems of human beings. When problems are addressed, human beings deal with them considering that every problem requires a solution i.e. considering it as a problem that requires a Hukm Shara’i. Thus Islam addresses all problems as human problems and nothing else. So when Islam treats an economic problem such as the husband’s financial support (nafaqah) of his wife or a ruling problem such as the appointment of a Khaleefah or a social problem such as marriage, it does not solve that problem as an economic, ruling or as a social problem but rather treats the problem as a human problem to which a solution should be derived i.e. a Hukm shara’i should be derived. Islam has one method in addressing the problems of human beings, which is to understand the reality of the problem and then derive the rule of Allah for it from the detailed shar’ai evidences.

The Islamic systems are composed of AHkam Sharai’ah related to ‘ibadat, morals, foodstuffs, clothing, mu’amalat (transactions) and penal code.

The divine rules related to ‘ibadat, morals, food-stuffs, and clothing cannot be reasoned by ‘illah (legal reason). The Messenger (saw) said; “Wine (khamr) was forbidden for itself.”.

However the AHkam Shara’iah related to transactions and penal code are are reasoned by an ‘illah. This is because the Hukm Shar’ai in these matters are built upon an ‘illah, which is the reason for legislating the rule. Many people have become used to justifying all the Sharee’ah rules according to benefit (maslaHah), because they are influenced by the Western ideology and Western culture, which views benefit alone as a criterion for actions. Such an understanding contradicts the Islamic intellectual leadership which considers spirit as the basis for all actions; and makes the mixing of the spirit with the material the regulator of all actions. The AHkam Sharai’ah related to ‘ibadat, morals, foodstuffs, and clothing are absolutely not reasoned, since there is no ‘illah for these rules. They should be taken as they came in the text and should not be based upon an ‘illah. Prayer (Salaah), fasting (Sawm), the Hajj, zakaah, the method of praying the Salaah and the number of its rak’at, the rites of Hajj and the minimum amount of property liable to payment of zakaah (niSaab of zakaah) and the like, should be taken, accepted and submitted to as they came in the text (tawqeefiyyah) and no ‘illah is sought for them. The same thing applies to the prohibition of eating the meat of a dead animal, pork and the like. Seeking an ‘illah for these rules is wrong and dangerous. This is because if an ‘illah was sought the result would be that if the ‘illah of the rule ceased to exist then the rule would no longer exist. The ‘illah is connected to the rule in existence and absence. As an example, if we assumed cleanliness was the ‘illah for the wudu, and physical exercise as the ‘illah for salaah, and hygiene as the ‘illah for fasting (Sawm) etc., then in these situations, whenever the ‘illah does not exist, the rule would not exist either, though the matter is not like this. Therefore seeking an ‘illah is dangerous for the rule and its performance. Thus, it is obligatory to take rules of ‘ibadat as they are, without seeking an ‘illah for them. As for the Hikmah (wisdom) behind a rule, Allah alone knows it, since our mind cannot conceive the essence of Allah, and hence we cannot comprehend His Hikmah. As for the Hikmah mentioned in the texts, such as the saying of Allah (swt),

“Lo! Prayer (Salah) preserves from lewdness and iniquity.” [TMQ Al-’Ankabut:45]

And Allah (swt) words,

“That they may witness the benefits (provided) for them” [TMQ Al-Hajj:28] and for His (swt) words,

“That which you give in Zakah seeking Allah’s countenance, has increased manifold.” [TMQ Ar- Rum:39]

And other sorts of Hikmah that are stated in the texts, they should be taken literally as mentioned in the text without making comparison to them. Unless the Hikmah of the rule is mentioned in a text, neither Hikmah and nor an ‘illah has to be sought for the rule.

This is in respect to ‘ibadat. Morals (Aqhlaaq) are however values for which rules have been established to illustrate the virtues and noble deeds and the things that contradict them. They also result from ‘ibadat, as well as being observed in mu’amalat. This is because Islam aims in its legislation to take man on the road towards perfection so as to reach the highest achievable level. Therefore man has to work towards acquiring the supreme qualities and to maintain them. The good Aqhlaaq is a value which one intends to realise when exhibiting it. It is specific to the virtues (faDaa`il) stated by the Shar’, and its value is targeted when performing these virtues and acquiring them. Aqhlaaq are a part of the Islamic Shari’ah, and a part of the commands and prohibitions of Allah, which must be achieved by every Muslim so that his observance of Islam becomes complete, and his undertaking of the commands and prohibitions of Allah is perfected.

A Muslim neither acquires Aqhlaaq attributes for their sake, nor for the perceived benefit. Rather he or she acquires them only because Allah commanded him with them and for no other reason. So a Muslim is not characterised with truthfulness for the sake of truthfulness in itself, nor for the perceived benefit, rather because Shar’a ordered it.

As for the fact that the Muslim does not acquire Aqhlaaq for the sake of Aqhlaaq, this is because of the description of the actions. An action which human beings perform might be by itself qabeeh but they thought it hasan so they performed it. The attribute which human beings are characterised with might be by itself qabeeh but they consider it a hasan attribute so they acquire it and thus errors would arise because man observed Aqhlaaq for their own sake. Unless Islam defines for the Muslim the hasan attributes and the qabeeh attributes and unless the Muslim performs them according to this definition, then their acquiring of these attributes would not be in compliance with the AHkam Sharai’ah. Therefore Muslims should not be characterised with truthfulness for the sake of truthfulness, nor should they be characterised with compassion for the sake of compassion, nor should they be characterised with all the Aqhlaaq for their own sake. Rather they should be characterised with them because they are commands from Allah because the fundamental fact is that these Aqhlaaq are based on the Islamic ‘aqeedah. Observing this issue would guarantee the acquisition of the Aqhlaaq in individuals thus purifying the soul of any impurity and distancing it from any corrupting factors. The best way to protect Aqhlaaq is to confine them to what is stated in the text (Qur’an and Sunnah), restrict them to the spiritual basis and build them upon the Islamic ‘aqeedah.

As for not acquiring Aqhlaaq for the sake of benefit, this is because one does not seek or aim to acquire benefit from the Aqhlaaq, lest it corrupts it and makes it revolve around the benefit. Aqhlaaq are attributes which man must be characterised with, freely and willingly, by the incentive of taqwa (the fear of Allah). Muslims do not abide by Aqhlaaq simply because they benefit or harm them in life; rather they do so in response to the commands and prohibitions of Allah. With this understanding the characterisation with good Aqhlaaq is constant and steadfast and does not revolve around benefit.

Such Aqhlaaq built on the exchange of benefit would make the individual a hypocrite, revealing certain behaviour while concealing his true nature. This is because their Aqhlaaq are built on benefit, so their Aqhlaaq revolve around the benefit, for they make the reasoned rules revolve around their ‘illah and they do not believe in the existence of the rules nor in their obligation if the ‘illah ceased to be present.

Aqhlaaq are not reasoned and should never be taken by their ‘illah. They must be accepted as they came in Shar’a, irrespective of any ‘illah. It is erroneous and dangerous to seek ‘illah for Aqhlaaq, so as not to abandon the characterisation with Aqhlaaq when their ‘illah has ceased.

It becomes evident that the aim of the ‘ibadat is the spiritual value only and the aim of acquiring Aqhlaaq is the moral value only. They must be restricted to these intended values. Benefit or interest should not be manifested in the ‘ibadat and Aqhlaaq, because such a manifestation is dangerous, causing hypocrisy in those who worship and those who are virtuous people. It will also lead to the abandonment of the ‘ibadat and Aqhlaaq when their benefit or interest does not appear.

In regard to the AHkam Sharia’ah related to man’s actions in his relation with others, some of the texts that came as evidence to them include an ‘illah such as in respect to giving the spoils of Bani Nadhir to the Muhajireen and not the Ansar. Allah (swt) says regarding this,

“that it does not become a commodity between the rich among you.” [TMQ Al-Hashr:7]

While some other texts do not include an ‘illah at all such as,

“Allah has permitted bai’a (trading) and has forbidden Riba (interest).” [Al-Baqara:275]

Therefore any rules where the text included an ‘illah are reasoned and Qiyas may be made to them; whereas for the rules whose text is without an ‘illah, an ‘illah is not sought and Qiyas cannot be used. The valid ‘illah is the Shar’ai ‘illah that is mentioned in the text from Qur’an and Sunnah, for only these two are the Shar’ai texts. The ‘illah upon which the reasoned Hukm Shar’ai is built is a Shar’ai ‘illah and not a rational ‘illah. In other words the ‘illah must be mentioned in the text either explicitly or implicitly or by deduction or through Qiyas. This ‘illah is connected with the reasoned Hukm in presence and absence. Thus the rules revolve with their ‘illah. So we find a thing is prohibited in a situation due to the existence of a Shar’ai ‘illah, and if this ‘illah disappears that very thing becomes permissible. So the Hukm Shar’ai revolves with the ‘illah in existence and in absence, when it exists the Hukm exists and if the ‘illah does not exist the Hukm does not exist.

The absence of the Hukm due to the absence of the ‘illah does not at all mean that the Hukm Shar’ai has changed, rather the Hukm Shar’ai of the question remains as it is without change. It is only that the Hukm is no longer applied due to the absence of the ‘illah and will be applied if the ‘illah is present.

The relationship of the rule with the ‘illah in existence and in absence does not mean that the rules change due to the change of the time and place, therefore claiming that bringing about the benefit and preventing corruption is the ‘illah of the Hukm Shar’ai, which changes as the time and place change, so the Hukm Shar’ai changes accordingly. Bringing about benefit and preventing harm are not at all the ‘illah of the AHkam, since no text came to denote that bringing about benefit and preventing corruption are ‘illah for all the AHkam, nor to denote that they are an ‘illah for a specific Hukm. Consequently, it cannot be taken as a Shar’ai ‘illah.

The Shar’’ai ‘illah is that which is taken from a Shar’ai text and should be restricted to it and its meaning. The Shar’ai text has neither indicated that bringing about a benefit nor warding off corruption as being the ‘illah. The Shar’ai ‘illah is that which the Shar’ai text has brought, not the bringing about of benefit or warding off corruption. That which is brought in the text is not indicated by the time or the place nor indicated by the action itself. It is rather indicated by the text in manifesting the ‘illah of the Hukm. This text never changes, so no consideration is given to the time and place in this context, nor is there a value to bringing about benefit and preventing corruption.

Consequently, AHkam Shara’iah do not change with the changing of the time and place, they remain as they are regardless of this change.

As for the change of traditions and customs of people, this does not have an effect in changing the rule, for the tradition is not an ‘illah of the Hukm Shar’ai and neither a source for it. The traditions may agree or disagree with the Shar’a. If they disagree with the Shar’a then the Shar’a has come to abrogate and change them, since the function of the Shar’a is to change the corrupted traditions and customs, because they are the factors that cause corruption in society. Hence they are not taken as a source for the Hukm Shar’ai nor an ‘illah for it and the Hukm does not change. If the traditions were in agreement with shar’a, then the Hukm is proved by its Shar’ai evidence and by its Shar’ai ‘illah and not by these traditions, even if these traditions do not contradict the Shar’a. The customs cannot rule over the Shar’a, rather the Shar’a rules over the traditions and customs. The AHkam Shara’iah have their own evidences, which is the text and they have Shar’ai ‘illah and the traditions and customs are not a part of that at all.

As for the suitability of the Islamic Shari’ah for every time and place, it results from the fact that the Islamic Shari’ah addresses man’s problems by its rules through all times and places and is capable of solving all problems of human beings irrespective of how diverse and numerous they are. This is because when it addresses their problems, it treats them in their capacity as a human being and not in any other capacity. Whatever the time and place, human beings remain the same with respect to their instincts and biological needs without changing at all. Hence the rules which solve their problems do not change. What does change for human beings, are the patterns of life, which do not affect their viewpoint about life. As for the constant new and numerous demands of human beings, they emerge as a result of the humans endeavour to satisfy their instincts and biological needs. The Shari’ah was revealed to solve such new and numerous demands, regardless of their number or how their patterns change. This was one of the factors which contributed towards the growth of fiqh. However this vast capacity of the Sharee’ah does not mean that it is flexible and adapts to everything or to every issue even if it contradicts it. Nor does it mean that it evolves thereby it changes with time. It rather means that the texts have the capacity to derive numerous rules from them. It also means that the rules have the ability to apply on many issues. So for example, Allah (swt) says; “Then if they give suckle for you (your children) give them their due payment.” [TMQ At-Talaq: 6]

From this verse a Hukm Shar’ai is derived, that the divorced woman deserves a compensation for suckling the baby. Another Hukm Shar’ai is derived from it, that the hired person is entitled to a wage if he or she has carried out their work, whether they are a private or common employee. This rule applies to numerous areas, such as the government employee, the labourer in the factory, the farmer on the farm and the like. So every one of them is entitled to their wage if they have completed their work, this is because they are private employees. The same applies to the carpenter who makes the cupboard, the tailor who sews the dress, the shoemaker who makes the shoe and the like. All of them are entitled to their wage if they have carried out their work because they are common employees. Since the employment is a contract between an employer and an employee the ruler (Haakim) is not included, because he is not hired by the Ummah, but rather he executes the AHkam Shar’aiah i.e. implements Islam. The Khaleefah is not entitled to a wage for carrying out his work, since he was given the pledge to implement the Shar’a and to convey the Islamic Da’wah, so he is not employed by the Ummah. Similarly, his assistants (deputies), i.e. the members of the executive and the Walis (governors) are not entitled to a wage for carrying out their work since their work is ruling, thus they are not employees. They do not take a salary but an amount is assigned to them to meet their needs due to being kept preoccupied from practising their own affairs and occupations.

This capacity of the texts to derive many rules and the capacity of the rules to be applied to many problems is what makes the Islamic Sharee’ah suitable to address all problems in life at all places and times as well as to all peoples and generations. This cannot be described as flexibility and evolution.

The Daleel of the Hukm Shar’ai taken from the text, either Qur’an or Sunnah, is to address existing problems, because the Legislator intended that we follow the meanings of the texts rather than halting at the literal meaning of the text. Therefore, when deriving the AHkam Shar’aiah, attention has to be paid to the meaning of the ‘illah i.e. to observe the legislative aspect in the text when deducing the rule.