If the Mukallaf undertakes or fulfils the Hukm At-Takleefiy, fulfilling all of its Arkaan (pillars) and Shuroot (conditions), the Shaari’ (Legislator) has judged upon its Sihhah (i.e. that it is valid). Built upon the Sihhah there are effects of the action in the Dunyaa (life of this world) or in the Aakhirah (hereafter) or in both. Consequently, the Sihhah (validity) represents the agreement or conformity to the command of the Shaari’ (Legislator).

So, when we say that the Salaah is Saheeh (valid) we mean that it is counted, has relieved the responsibility and the need to perform Qadaa’ for it (i.e. make it up). Similarly, if the trade fulfilled and met all of its Arkaan and Shuroot it would be Saheeh (valid). We would say that the trade is Saheeh (valid) with the meaning that based upon that there would be effects in the Dunyaa, like the transfer of the right to benefit and utilise the commodity being passed to the buyer and the transfer of the price to the seller through money or debt.

In respect to the Salaah we say that it is Saheeh with the meaning that it is in agreement to the command of the Shaari’ whilst reward is hoped for from the performance in the hereafter. And we say that the trade is Saheeh with the meaning that it is in agreement or in accordance to the command of the Shaari’ and effects in this life are built upon it whilst reward is also hoped for based upon the intention being to comply to the command of Allah Ta’Aalaa.

Al-Butlaan is the non-agreement or non-conformity to the command of the Shaari’ and what is intended by this is that the effects of the action are not consequential in the Dunyaa whilst there is punishment upon it in the Aakhirah. This is the action that does not meet or fulfil its Arkaan or Shuroot.

So if a Rukn (pillar) from the Arkaan of Salaah is left like the Rukoo’ then the Salaah is Baatil (invalid). And if a Shart from amongst its Shuroot like Wudoo’ was to be left it would be Baatil. It would therefore not count, relieve the responsibility or the need for performing Qadaa’.

If a Rukn from the Arkaan of the trade or transaction was left like the ‘Iejaab’ (offer) for example, then the trade would be Baatil and it would not be contracted and any effects in the Dunyaa will not be consequential from it and if they were to be built upon it they would be Baatil (as well) (e.g. the one who has taken possession cannot validly benefit from it and any action undertaken with it would be Baatil).

The Sihhah (validity) in respect to the Mu’aamalaat (transactions) means the permissibility to benefit whilst Al-Butlaan (invalidity) in respect to the Mu’aamalaat means the prohibition of benefiting. This is whilst punishment in the Dunyaa and the Aakhirah is consequentially built upon this Hurmah (prohibition). So whoever takes possession of wealth or property through an invalid ‘Aqd (contract) then that property is Haraam and the one who has done that is deserving of the punishment in the hereafter.

Some of the ‘Ulamaa considered Al-Butlaan and Al-Fasaad as two terms with the same meaning however the reality is that the Fasaad differs from the Butlaan. That is because the Butlaan represents the non-agreement to the command of the Shaari’ in respect to the Asl (origin) of the matter i.e. its Asl (origin) is forbidden by the Shar’a. That is like Al-Khamr or the sale of Malaaqeeh which is what is found in the bellies of living creatures related to impregnation. This therefore represents the non-agreement or non-conformity with the command of the Shaari’ in terms of the absence of a Rukn from the Arkaan of the contract or the absence of a Shart from the Shuroot violating the origin (Asl) of the action or contract, like the condition of Wudoo’ in respect to the Salaah.

As for the Fasaad, then in respect to the Asl (origin) it is in agreement with the command of the Shaari’ however it includes a Wasf (description) that is not from the Asl of the action or the contract that is contrary to the command of the Legislator. This would be like the marriage contract in which the Mahr (dowry) has not been specified as this would make it Faasid but not Baatil. The Fasaad (corruption) would then be removed through the specification of the Mahr. The Fasaad in respect to the contract represents a deficiency that is possible to complete so that the contract can become Saheeh whilst the Butlaan in respect to the contract necessitates a new contract that meets the required and necessary pillars and conditions. Al-Fasaad in respect to the ‘Ibaadaat are not conceivable as the ‘Ibaadaat are either Saheeh or Baatil (valid or invalid). That is because the one who follows their conditions and pillars finds that they are all connected and related to the Asl (origin) (of the action). As such, the Tahaarah (being in a purified state) is a Shart for the Salaah and if this is not fulfilled then the action would be void and invalid (Baatil). Similarly, the Sujood (prostration) is a Rukn of the Salaah and if it does not take place then the Salaah would be Baatil.

As for the Mu’aamalaat (transactions) then Al-Butlaan and Al-Fasaad are both conceivable. Therefore, if a fundamental (Asaasiy) condition of a contract that violates the Asl (origin) of the contract was missing then the contract would be Baatil (void and invalid). If the condition however was not violating the Asl of the contract, the contract would then be Faasid (corrupted).

The Hanafiyah said: The Aqd (contract) that is not Saheeh is divided into two categories: The Baatil and the Fasaad. If the deficiency or violation occurred in the pillar of the contract it would be Baatil and no effects will be built upon this invalid transaction as a consequence of it, like the sale of carrion (Al-Maitah) for example. That is because the ownership of the carrion does not result from it nor does the ownership of its price or value and there is no permissibility in respect to benefitting through the Maitah (carrion) or its price.

If, however, the flaw, violation or deficiency (Khalal) occurred in one of the conditions of the contract then the ‘Aqd would be Faasid and some effects would be consequential to it like the contraction of the marriage without the specification of the Mahr. That is because the consequences of the Saheeh (valid) marriage are built upon it whilst the Fasaad (corruption or corrupted element) is removed by specifying the Mahr.