[Subject] [Date] [Moderator] Home

['Aalim Network QR] Implications of A. Seestani's rulings on Dr. Sachedina


________________________________________________________________________
|                          w           w     w                          |\
|                           ||          ||   | ||                       |\
|                    o_,_7 _||  . _o_7 _|| 4_|_||  o_w_,                |\
|                   ( :   /    (_)    /           (   .                 |\
|                                                                       |\
|           ||  ||         |  ||   |T              |     | ||    |      |\
|   . _, _8 |_D_|| . _,_,_,_D_|| 4_|| q ]_o_7_o   _|_c 4_|_||   _|,_p q |\
|  (_): /         (_): . :            /        (_S           (_S      / |\
|                                                                       |\
|       In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the All-Merciful       |\
|  Greeting of Allah be upon Muhammad and the pure members of his House |\
|_______________________________________________________________________|\
Salaamun 'Alaykum

The following question was answered by Mulla Bashir Rahim.


Fee Amaanillah,

Akil Karim
Moderator - 'Aalim Network

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

QUESTION:

What are extent and implications of the recent ruling of Ayatullah Seestani
on the speeches and writings of Dr. Abdul Aziz Sachedina?


ANSWER:

Ayatullah Seestani's ruling with regard to Dr Sachedina is not just a
fatwa. It is a hukm of general application and would apply to both his
muqallids and non-muqallids.  We have to appreciate that on the face of it,
the hukm relates to one scholar and all the mu'mineen "are enjoined to
refrain from inviting him for lecturing at religious gatherings, and not to
approach him for seeking answers to questions pertaining to belief."

However, taking into account the genesis of the ruling, it would apply in
relation to any person who makes use of the minbar (pulpit) and then to
impose his own personal views on the aqaaid and shari'ah, and thus attempt
to destabilise the beliefs of his audience.

Furthermore, such rulings are like judgments in a case, and therefore
remain valid even after the death of the mujtahid.

People like me who are entrusted by the community with their religious
education must ensure that we never attempt to mislead them.  We have to
follow the path trodden by eminent scholars and not to bring about
confusion to issues relating to aqaaid and shari'ah.

We also have to ensure that the questions of ijtihaad and taqlid are
properly understood and that we do not ever cast slur on the integrity or
knowledge or authority of the fuqaha for any personal agenda.

I trust that I have responded to your question comprehensively.  If there
are any questions please refer to the 'Aalim Network.

With salaams and dua's and with a request to remember me in your duas,

Bashir Rahim

=============================================

Also, in "The Message of Thaqalayn," a quarterly journal of Islamic
Studies, Vol 4 No.1 Spring 1998/1418, the difference between Fatwa and Hukm
has been extensively dealt with by Muhammad Sadiq Mazinani. I quote three
paragraphs from it:

QUOTE

Fatwa, as termed by the jurists, is stating of a view by a faqih in
religious and related matters on the basis of divine sources, while hukm is
issued by the hakim (supreme religous leader or ruler) for implementation
of religious decrees and compulsion on performance or avoidance of an
action for any best reason. Therefore Fatwa and Faqih are different from
Hukm and Hakim.

The relation between people and jurist is the relation of a specialist or
skillful person with non-specialists or lay persons and nothing more. But
the people's relation with the ruler is the relation of the Ummah with the
Imam. The faqih, thus possessing qualifications of leadership is the hakim
and the leader of the Ummah.

The territory of a faqih's fatwa is confined to himself and his followers
and is not binding on other fuqaha. However, the hukm of a hakim is not
only to be followed by other fuqaha, but is also binding even if it does
not coincide with their own fatwa. Therefore in matters of contradiction,
the hukm has the priority over fatwa.

UNQUOTE

It is also understood that the historic ruling of prohibiting Tobacco
issued by Ayatullah Mirza Shirazi was a Hukm as was the most recent one
issued by Ayatullah Khomeini on Salman Rushdie.



Back: ['Aalim Network QR] Imam Smoking
Forward: ['Aalim Network QR] Implications of A. Seestani's rulings on Dr. Sachedina (Follow-up)
Home