Al-Waadih Fee Usool ul-Fiqh by Muhammad Hussein Abdullah

Al-Mutlaq is a Lafzh (wording) that indicates a Madlool (indicated meaning) that is Shaa’i (widespread or universal) in its Jins (kind/type).

In other words, it is the Lafzh that indicates a Fard (individual element or matter) or non-specified Afraad (individual elements or matters) and without an expressional restriction. This is like the Alfaazh (worded expressions): Rajul (man), Rijaal (men), Kitaab (book) and Kutub (books).

For instance if it was to be said:

The Lafzh ‘Rijaal’ (men) does not specify who the men are and so they are any men, and the Lafzh ‘Kitaab’ (book) means any book without being specified or being restricted (Taqyeed).

Al-Muqayyad (the restricted) is the Lafzh that has indicated to a meaning (Madlool) that is widespread or universal in its Jins (kind/type) whilst being restricted (Taqyeed) by a Wasf (description) from amongst the Awsaaf (descriptions).

In other words, it is from the Alfaazh (worded expressions) indicating a Fard from the Afraad (individual element from the individual elements) that are not specified whilst being linked to a Siffah (description/attribute/adjective) that indicates restriction and specification.

Example: Rajul Urduniy (A Jordanian man) – ‘Man’ is restricted by the Wasf or Siffah Jordanian.

Rijaal ‘Iraaqiyoon (Iraqi men) – ‘Men’ are restricted by the description Iraqi.

Kitaab Taareekhiy (A Historical book) – ‘Book’ is restricted by the Siffah (adjective) ‘Historical’.

The Mutlaq (unrestricted) becomes Muqayyad (restricted) by the placing of a Siffah (adjective/descriptive word/attribute) after it. What is meant by Siffah here is not its linguistic meaning of Na’t (النعت/adjective) as this Siffah could be represented in the form of a Jaar or Majroor, or Zharf, or Harf Al-Ghaayah amongst other matters.

Examples:

I washed my hand – Meaning Mutlaq Al-Yad (hand without a restriction).

I washed my hand to the wrists (restricted by Al-Jaar And Majroor).

I slept two hours (Mutlaq (unrestricted) two hours).

I slept two hours at Zhohr time (restricted (Muqayyad) by a Zharf (participle of time)).

When the Mutlaq (unrestricted) Lafzh (wording) is mentioned within the Daleel Shar’iy then the Mutlaq will function in its unrestricted form. This is like in the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa:

The word ‘Raqabah’ (slave) is a Mutlaq (unrestricted) Lafzh and free from any restriction. It is therefore carried and understood upon its absolute or unrestricted form. The obligation is therefore the freeing of any slave, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, male or female.

And it is like the Qawl of Allah (swt):

The Lafzh (wording) ‘Thalaathati Ayyaamin’ (Three days) is a Mutlaq Lafzh and so it can be fasted separately (on different days) or it can be fasted consecutively (three days in a row).

When the Muqayyad (restricted) Lafzh is mentioned within the Nass Shar’iy (text) then it is not permissible to cancel that Qaid (restriction) unless there is a Daleel (evidence) to do so and it is obligatory to follow it as it has come mentioned in the text. That is like the Qawl of Allah (swt) in respect to the Kaffaarah (expiation) for Azh-Zhihaar:

The fasting of two months is Muqayyad (restricted) with consecutiveness and therefore, for the Kaffaarah (to count), two months must be fasted consecutively without that being broken by the Iftaar (breaking of fast) on a single day within that period. If he was to break his fast or not fast for a day or more during his fasting, his Kaffaarah (expiation) would be invalidated and would not count.

Another example of this is found in the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa:

Therefore, it would not count if the freed slave was not a believer.

A Mutlaq Lafzh could be mentioned in a Shar’iy text whilst the same Lafzh is mentioned Muqayyad (restricted) in another Shar’iy text. And so in this case, is the Mutlaq carried over to the Muqayyad which means: The intended meaning of the Mutlaq Lafzh is that of the Muqayyad Lafzh? Or, is the Mutlaq worked with in its unrestricted state in the Nass (text) that it was found and mentioned within whilst the Muqayyad works in accordance to its restriction found within the text it was mentioned in? To answer this, it is necessary to have knowledge of the Hukm (ruling) and the Sabab (cause) for each of the two texts:

1 – If the Hukm and Sabab in both texts are unified or one and the same then the Mutlaq is carried over to the Muqayyad (i.e. the Muqayyad prevails). An example of that:

Allah (swt) said:

And He (swt) said:

The Lafzh ‘Dam’ (blood) in the first Aayah is Mutlaq (unrestricted) applying to that which pours and that which is congealed whilst the Lafzh ‘Dam’ (blood) in the second Aayah is a Muqayyad (restricted) Lafzh (wording) by the Wasf (descriptive attribute) ‘Masfooh’ (poured forth/gushing). Therefore, the Hukm in respect to both of the Aayahs is unified and one and the same, which is the Hurmah (prohibition) of blood, and the Sabab of the Hukm is unified or one and the same, as some ‘Ulamaa’ consider it, and that is the Darar (harm) arising from the yielding of the blood.

Here, in the case of the unification of the Hukm and the Sabab within the two texts, then the Mutlaq is carried over to the Muqayyad (i.e. the Muqayyad prevails and restricts and applies upon the Mutlaq). Consequently, what is intended in respect to the prohibition of the blood is the ‘Masfooh’ blood which refers to the blood that pours out from the slaughtered animal whilst the blood which is not of that type is Halaal like that of the liver, spleen and the blood that remains within the meat (flesh) and the veins.

2 – The Mutlaq is not carried over to the Muqayyad if they differ in respect to the Hukm or in respect to the Sabab or in respect to both:

Example:

Allah (swt) said:

And He (swt) said:

The Lafzh ‘Aideekum Ilaa l-Maraafiq’ (your arms to the elbows) is Muqayyad in the first text.

And the Lafzh ‘Aideekum’ (your hands) is Mutlaq in the second text.

The Mutlaq is not carried over to the Muqayyad in these two texts due to the difference in respect to the Hukm. The first relates to the Wudoo’ whilst the second relates to At-Tayammum even though the Sabab (reason) for both is one and the same and that it is the wish to perform the Salaah.

Another example:

Allah (swt) said in respect to the Kaffaarah (expiation) of Azh-Zhihaar:

And Allah (swt) said in respect to the mistaken or unintentional killing:

The Lafzh ‘Raqabah’ (slave) came in the first text Mutlaqan (unrestricted).

The Lafzh ‘Raqabah Muminah’ (believing slave) in the second text came Muqayyadan (restricted)

In the first the Sabab (cause) was Azh-Zhihaar and in the second the Sabab was Al-Qatl (killing) even if they are unified in respect to the Hukm which is the obligation of Al-Kaffaarah (expiation).

Another example:

Allah (swt) said in the Aayah of Wudoo’:

And He (swt) said in the Aayah about the Hadd (prescribed punishment) for Saraqah (theft):

The Lafzh (wording) ‘Aideekum Ilaa l-Maraafiq’ (hands to the elbows) is Muqayyad (restricted).

And the Lafzh ‘Aideehimaa’ in the second text is Mutlaq.

The Mutlaq is not carried over to the Muqayyad due the difference in respect to the Hukm and in respect to the Sabab. That is because the obligation of washing the hands (or arms) is due to the Sabab (reason) of wanting to perform the Salaah. And in the second text the obligation of cutting the hand is due to the Sabab of theft.

The Taqyeed (restriction) of the Mutlaq (unrestricted) is like the Takhsees (specification) of the ‘Aamm (general) and so what happens between the ‘Aamm and the Khaass happens between the Mutlaq and Muqayyad.

Therefore, the Kitaab is restricted by the Kitaab, the Sunnah, Ijmaa’ As-Sahaabah and Al-Qiyaas. And the Sunnah is restricted (Muqayyad) by the Kitaab, the Sunnah, Ijmaa’ As-Sahaabah and Al-Qiyaas.