The Distinguished Jurists Primer by Ibn Rushd

Ftikif is recommended in the law and is obligatory after a vow. There is no dispute about this, except what is related from Malik that he disapproved undertaking it under the apprehension that its conditions would not be met. It has greater merit in Ramadan than at other times, especially during its last ten days, as that was when the last iHikaf of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) took place. It generally consists of specific tasks, at a specific location, at a particular time, with special conditions, and with specific kinds of abstention.

There are two opinions about the acts that are specific to it. It is said that prayer, remembrance of Allah [by heart and by tongue], and the recitation of the Qur’an are the only acts required for piety and nearness to Allah. This is the opinion of Ibn al-Qasim. It is also said that it includes all the acts required for seeking nearness to Allah and for piety and that are specific to the hereafter. This is the opinion of Ibn Wahb. In accordance with this opinion the worshipper may attend funerals, visit the sick, and be engaged in studies, but not in accordance with the first opinion. This is also the opinion of al- Thawri, while the first is the opinion of a!-Shafi T and Abu HanTfa.

The reason for their disagreement is that this is something not expressed in the law, that is, there are no legal definitions laid down for it. Those who understood ihikaf to mean the dedication of the self to acts that are specific to mosques said that only prayer and recitation are permitted to the muStakif (person retiring to the mosque). Those who understood it to mean the devotion of the self to all acts seeking spiritual nearness permitted him to engage in other acts that we have mentioned. It is related from CA1T (God be pleased with him) that he said, “The person who retires to a mosque is not to indulge in obscenities or exchange abuses, he is to attend the Friday congregation prayer as well as funerals, he is to communicate with his family members if the need arises, but he is to do this while standing and not seated”. This has been mentioned by cAbd al-Razzaq. The opposite of this has been related from cA’isha, which is that the sunna for the mt/ta&fis not to attend funerals or visit the. sick. This is also one of the factors that led to a disagreement over its meaning.

They disagreed about the locations at which i'tikdf is to be practised. One group of jurists said that there is no Ftikdf, except in three mosques: the House of Allah (al-Masjid al-Haram, Mecca), the mosque at Jerusalem, and the mosque of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) at Medina. This was the opinion of Hudhayfa and SacTd ibn al-Musayyab. Others maintained that fitikaf is unrestricted, and can be undertaken in all mosques. This was the opinion of al-Shafi T, Abu HanTfa, and al-ThawrT, and c it is the well-known opinion from Malik. Some other jurists said that there is no frikaf except in a mosque where the Friday congregational prayers are held. This is a narration by Ibn <Abd al-Hakam from Malik. All of them agreed, however, that a condition for Ptikdf is that it be undertaken in a mosque, except what is related from Ibn Lubaba that it is valid in places other than the mosque. They also agreed that intercourse with women is prohibited for the muStakif if he retires to a mosque. Abu HanTfa, however, maintained that a woman is to undertake MWf in the place of worship in her house.

The reason for their disagreement over the stipulation of a mosque or the dropping of this stipulation stem from the probabilities of interpretation in the words of the Exalted, “And touch them not while you are undertaking iStikdf in the mosques”,233 as to whether there is an indication of the text here. Those who maintained that there is an indication of the text said that there is no iStikdf, except in a mosque, and a condition of the ftikdfh the avoidance of intercourse. Those who maintained that there is no (indirect) indication of the text said that the meaning here is that Ftikdf is permitted in places other than the mosque where there is no restriction upon intercourse, because if one were to say, “Do not give such and such person anything while he is inside the house”, the (indirect) implication of the text would be that he be given the thing if he is outside the house. It is, however, a deviant opinion, and the majority held that mosques have been associated with iStikdf as that is one of its conditions.

The reason for their disagreement about restricting or not restricting it to some mosques arises from the conflict of the general meaning with analogy that restricts it. Those who preferred the general implication said that it is valid in all mosques according to the apparent meaning of the verse. Those who subjected it to restriction through analogy specifying some mosques included in the general meaning, stipulated that it be in a mosque where Friday prayers are held so that the muHakifs devotion is not interrupted by going out for the Friday prayer, or that it should be one of the three mosques to which journeying is a pious act, like the mosque of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) where his ftikaf was undertaken.234 They did not extend it by analogy to the remaining mosques because they are not equal in terms of their sanctity.

The reason for their disagreement over the Ftikdf undertaken by a woman also arises from the conflict of analogy with'a'tradition. It is established that Hafsa, ^Visha, and Zaynab (bint Jash) the wives of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) sought permission from the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) for fitikaf in the mosque, he permitted them after which they set up their curtained spaces in it. This tradition is an evidence for the permissibility of a woman’s fitikdf in the mosque. The analogy that conflicts with this is the one constructed from prayer. As the prayer of a woman in her residence [or house] is better than her prayer in the mosque, as is laid down in a report, it is necessary that her iHikdfbc preferable in her room. They said that it is permitted for a woman to undertake i'-tikdfxn a mosque only with her husband in the manner that has been described about the i'tikdf of the wives of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) with him, just as a wife is to travel only with her husband and not alone. It appears to be a kind of reconciliation between the tradition and analogy.

There is no limit, in their view, for the maximum amount of time to be assigned for f-tikafy even though all of them consider it as having greater merit during the last ten days of Ramadan. Thus; perpetual fyikdf is permitted, either without qualifications by those who do not consider fasting to be one of its conditions, or for days other than those in which fasting is not allowed in the view of those who consider fasting, to be one of its conditions.

They disagreed' over the minimum time-limit for it. Likewise, they disagreed about the time when the muHakif commences his ftikaf and about the time when he terminates it. There is no limit for the minimum duration of the iHikdf in the view of al-Shafici, Abu Harnfa, and the majority of the jurists. There are different views from Malik. It is said it is three days, and it is said that it is one day and a night. Ibn al-Qasim has related from him that the minimum is ten days. His disciples from Baghdad said that ten days is desirable, but the minimum is one day and one night.

The reason for their disagreement stems from the conflict of analogy with a tradition. The analogy is that those who considered fasting to be one of its conditions said that fitikdf is not permitted during the night, and if it is not permitted during the night, then, it cannot be for less than a day and a night, for the forming of intention for the fast has to be during the night. The tradition opposing it is recorded by al-Bukhari that “Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, made a vow for undertaking Ftikaf for a night. The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) ordered" him to abide by his vow”. Reasoning in the face of an opinion based upon an established tradition is meaningless.

With respect to their disagreement about the time when the mu^takif is to commence his i^tikaf, if he has made a vow for a determined number of days or for one day, Malik, al-Shafici, and Abu HanTfa agreed that the person who has made a vow for an faikaf of one month must enter the mosque before sunset. About the person who has made a vow for one day al-Shafi i c said that the person who intends to undertake ftikaf for one day should enter the mosque before dawn and should come out after sunset. Malik’s opinion is exactly the same whether it is for one day and for one month. Zufar and al- Layth said that he is to enter before dawn; but whether for one day or one month for them it is the same. Abu Thawr made a distinction between vows made for the night and those for the day. He said: “If he makes a vow that he will undertake iHikaf for ten days, he should enter before dawn, but if he makes a vow for ten nights he should enter before sunset”. Al-AwzaT said that he should commence the i'tikdf after the morning prayer.

The reason for their disagreement emanates from .the conflict of analogies, some w ith the others, and the conflict of a tradition with all of them. This is so as those who thought that a month begins with a night, and they took into consideration the nights, said that he is to begin before the disappearance of the sun. Those who did hot take the nights into account said that he is to enter before dawn. Those who said that the term yawm is applied to mean both night and day together made it obligatory that if the vow is for a yawm he should enter prior to sunset. Those who maintained that this term is applied to mean day made the entry before dawn obligatory. Those who said that the term yawm is applicable to the day and the term layl to night made a distinction between vows made for the night and those made for the day. The truth is that the term yawm in the usage of the Arabs is sometimes applied to day alone and sometimes to the day and the night together, but it appears that its primary application is specific for the day, and its implication for the night is consequential.

The tradition that opposes all these analogies is what is recorded by al- Bukhari and other compilers of the sahih traditions from (A5isha, who said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to undertake filikaf during Ramadan, and after observing the morning prayer he would enter the place where is undertook ftikaf*.

About the time of coming out from fitikaf, Malik held that the person who was undertaking i'tikaf in the last ten days of Ramadan should come out of the mosque for the <id prayer, and this was desirable, but if he came out after sunset (on the last day) his act is valid. Al-ShafiH and Abu Hamfa said that he is to come out after sunset. Sahnun and Ibn al-Majishun said that if he goes to his house first prior to .the 47/ prayer his ftikaf becomes invalid. The reason for disagreement is whether the remaining night is included in the ten days. The conditions for faikdf are three: intention, fasting, and avoidance of mixing with women. I do not know of any disagreement in the case of intention. They disagreed about fasting. Malik, Abu HanTfa, and a group of jurists said that there is no ftikdf without fasting, while al-ShaficT said that ftikdf is permitted without fasting. An opinion similar to Malik’s was expressed by Ibn TJmar and Ibn (Abbas, with some dispute, from among the Companions, and one similar to al-ShaficFs was expressed’by Ibn Mascud and cAIl The reason for their disagreement is ‘‘that the ttikdf of the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) occurred during Ramadan”. Those who maintained that the fasting accompanying his fitikafis a condition for the iStikdf., even though the fasting was . not observed because of the said that fasting is a must with i'-tikdf. Those who maintained that this was a mere coincidence and it does not mean that it was the aim of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) in his ifakaf said that fasting is not a condition for it. There is another reason for this, which is its association with fasting in the same verse. Al-ShaficT argued on the basis of the tradition of TJmar that has preceded where the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) ordered him to undertake ftikdffor a night, and the night is not the time for siydm. The Malikites argued on the basis of what is related by cAbd al-Rahman ibn Ishaq from TJrwa from cA>isha that she said, “The sunna for the mu'takifis that he should not be interrupted by such things as visiting the sick and attending a funeral. He is not to touch a woman \ nor have intercourse with her nor go out for anything that is not extremely necessary, and there is no i'tikaf without fasting and no ftikdf except in a congregational mosque”. Abu °Umar ibn cAbd al-Barr said: “No one has used the words the ‘the sunna' in the tradition of < Alisha, except cAbd al- Rahman ibn Ishaq, and such a narration is not valid in their view, unless it is related by al-Zuhn. If that is the case it is no longer valid to hold it similar to a musnad".

They agreed about the third condition, which is about the prohibition of sexual intercourse, that if the mtfitakifhas intercourse intentionally his i^tikdf is invalidated, except what is related from Ibn Lubaba in the case of locations other than the mosque. They disagreed about the situation when he has intercourse out of forgetfulness. They also disagreed about the effect on iStikdf resulting from of acts other than intercourse, like kissing or touching. Malik held that all this invalidates the Ftikdf. Abu HanTfa said that there is no invalidity through mubdshara, unless he ejaculates. Al-ShaficT had two opinions: the first is the same as the opinion of Malik, and the second like that of Abu Hamfa.

The reason for their disagreement is whether the word vacillating hetween its actual and figurative application has a general implication. This is one kind of the equivocal word. Those who maintained that it does have a general implication said that the term mubdshara (touching) in the words of the Exalted, “And touch them not while you are undertaking Ptikif in the mosques”,235 is applied to mean sexual intercourse or what is less than that. Those who maintained that it does not have a general implication, which is the better known and usual application, said that it sometimes indicates sexual intercourse and at other times what is less than that. If we were to say that it indicates sexual intercourse by consensus all other indications would be invalidated, because a single term cannot denote its actual application and the figurative meaning at the same time. Those who deemed ejaculation to be the same as intercourse did so as it is covered by the meaning, while those who did the opposite of this did so as the term in its actual application does not indicate this.

They disagreed about the liability of the person who does have intercourse (during iHikdj), The majority said that he is not liable for anything, while a group of jurists said that he is liable for expiation. Some of the latter jurists said that it is the expiation offered by one having had sexual intercourse during Ramadan. This was the opinion of al-Hasan. One group said that he is to give two dinars as alms. This was the opinion of Mujahid. Another group said that he is to manumit a slave, and if he does not have a slave that he is to sacrifice a she-camel, if he does not have one he should make alms to the amount of twenty s&s of dried dates. The basis for the dispute is whether analogy is permitted in cases of expiation. The better opinion is that it is not permitted.

They disagreed about a vow made for an undetermined f-tikdfy whether it should be consecutive (without interruption). Malik and Abu HanTfa said that it is a condition for it, while al-ShaficT said that it is not. The reason for their disagreement * stems from the analogy drawn for it from a vow for undetermined fasting.

They agreed that the acts proscribed for i'tikdf are all those that are besides the integral acts of fitikaf, and that it is not permitted to him to go out of the mosque except for answering the call of nature or for those that have the same intent and that are required due to necessity. This is because of what is established from the .tradition of ‘A’isha, who said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) when he performed i'tikdf would move his head near me and I used to comb it [his hair], and he did not enter the house unless it was to answer the call of nature”. They disagreed about the length of the period which invalidates Ftikdf, if the person came out without a (permitted) need. Al-ShaficT said that his Ftikaf is terminated as soon as he steps out. Some made an exemption for one hour, while others made it for a day.

They disagreed about whether he should enter a room other than a room in his mosque (for sleeping). Some made an exemption for him in this, and these are the majority—Malik, al-ShaficT, and Abu Hanifa—while others held that this invalidates his iHikaf. Malik permitted him to buy and sell and to supervise a marriage, but others opposed him in this. The reason for their disagreement arises from the fact that there is no determination on these things except ijtihdd and a comparison of things that they agreed upon with those they disputed.

They also disagreed over whether it is permitted to the mu^takif to stipulate an act that is prevented by the Ptikdfin order that his stipulation may benefit him in making it permissible, like the stipulation of attending a funeral or some other thing. The majority of the jurists maintain that such stipulation is of no avail, and if he commits that act his fyikdfis nullified. Al-ShaficT said that his stipulation does benefit him. The reason for their disagreement comes from, the similarity between i^tikaf and hajj, as both are kinds of worship that prevent the undertaking of many permissible acts. Stipulations in hajj were decided’ upon, by those who upheld them, on the basis of the tradition of Daba<a that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said to her, “Form the niyya of hajj and stipulate to free yourself from the hajj restrictions where you encountered me”. But the (operation of the) principle is disputed in hajj. Thus, there is weakness in this analogy in the view of the opposing contender.

They disagreed when the person stipulates continuity in the vow or when continuity itself is binding. In an unqualified vow, for those who uphold it, what are the things by which the ittikdf is interrupted and is either renewed or is continued, for example, illness. Some of them said that if illness cuts off the fitikaf the mifitakif can resume it (from the point of interruption). This is the opinion of Malik, Abu Hanifa, and al-ShafiT. Some of them said that he is to start the iStikdf from the beginning, and this is the opinion of al-Thawn. There is no disagreement, as fas as I know, that a menstruating woman continues (from the point of interruption). They disagreed on whether she is to move out of the mosque. Similarly, they disagreed on when the mtftakif suffers a fit of insanity or faints, whether he is to continue (later) or to start again on recovering. The reason for their disagreement on this topic is that there is nothing determined on it through transmission. Thus, disputes arise on the basis of their comparisons between what they agreed upon and what they disputed, that is, what they agreed upon in this worship or in those kinds o f worship in which continuing after interruption is stipulated like the fast of one attaining the period of purity and others like it.

The majority maintain that if a voluntary Ptikafis cut off without an excuse qadd is obligatory in it, because of the tradition “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) intended to observe iStikdfin the last ten days of Ramadan, but he did not, and, therefore, observed fitikaf in ten days of Shawwal”. In the case of an obligatory due to a vow, there is no dispute about its qadd, as far as I think.

The majority maintain that the iftikaf of a person who commits a grave sin is cut off.

This is all that we sought to establish about the principles and rules of this subject, Allah is the Grantor of success and support, and prayers and blessings upon our master Muhammad, his family, and his companions.