The Hukm (passing judgment) upon the actions and things in terms of Tahseen or Taqbeeh (determining their prettiness or ugliness) can occur from three directions:

1 – From the direction of the reality of things and actions and what they (intrinsically) are?

2 – From the direction of its appropriateness or suitability to the natural disposition of the human or its aversion to it.

3 – From the direction of the Thawaab and ‘Iqaab (reward and punishment) applied to them or the Mad’h (commendation/praise) or Dhamm (disapproval/blameworthiness). As for passing judgment upon the actions and things from the perspective of their reality and from the perspective of their agreeability, suitability or appropriateness to the natural disposition of the human or their non-agreeability or aversion to the natural disposition, then there is no doubt that this judgment belongs to the human himself to make i.e. it belongs to the ‘Aql and not to the Shar’a. Consequently, it is the ‘Aql that passes judgment upon actions and things from these two perspectives.

So the human judges that the honey is sweet and inclines towards eating it and that the colocynth (Mediterranean plant) is bitter and so he avoids it. From this perspective the honey would be Hasan and the colocynth ugly.

Similarly, he judges that wealth is Hasan and poverty Qabeeh and that knowledge is Hasan and ignorance is Qabeeh due to what their realities encompass in terms of completeness or deficiency (Al-Kamaal or An-Naqs).

This judgement upon the things and actions and the Tahseen and Taqbeeh (determination of prettiness and ugliness) for things and actions in these two areas returns back to the reality of the matter that the Insaan (human) perceives and comprehends by his ‘Aql (mind) and upon which his senses fall or it returns back to the natural disposition of the Insaan and his Fitrah and what he feels and his mind comprehends.

Therefore, it is the ‘Aql that passes judgment upon the action or thing in terms of its Husn or Qubh from these two perspectives or angles. As such, the Hukm belongs to the human.

As for the third direction and that relates to the passing of judgement upon the things and actions from the perspective of rewards and punishment in the Aakhirah or commendation and blame in the life of this world (Ad-Dunyaa), then there is no doubt or question that this returns to Allah alone and it does not belong to the human. This means that it belongs to the Shar’a to determine and not the ‘Aql. This is like the Husn of Imaan and the Qubh of Kufr, the Husn of lying in warfare and its Qubh when undertaken with the unjust ruler in a situation other than war, and the Husn of grapes and the Qubh of Khamr that is produced from them. The Hukm upon the things and actions belonging to Allah in terms of the Thawaab (reward) and the ‘Iqaab (punishment) and from the perspective of Al-Mad’h (commendation/praise) and Adh-Dhamm (blame) has two evidences for it: A Daleel ‘Aqliy and a Daleel Shar’iy.

The reality of the ‘Aql consists of sensation (Ihsaas), a reality, previous information and a brain. The sensation therefore represents a fundamental part from the components of the mind, as when the person does not sense a matter, it is not possible for his ‘Aql to issue a judgment (Hukm) upon it because the ‘Aql is restricted in passing judgements over matters sensed by one of the five senses whilst it is not possible for him to pass a judgment upon matters which cannot be sensed. Therefore, Al-Hudaa (guidance) and Al-Iemaan (belief), Ad-Dalaal (misguidance/disbelief) and Al-Kufr (disbelief), Al-‘Adl (justice), Azh-Zhulm (oppression/injustice), As-Sidq (truthfulness) and Al-Kadhib (the lie/deceit), the grape and Khamr (intoxicatant) amongst other matters are not from the things and actions which are within the capability of the ‘Aql to determine whether they anger Allah Ta’Aalaa and are deserving of a punishment. That is because the ‘Aql (mind) does not sense the commendation of praise (Mad’h) of Allah (swt) or his Dhamm (censure or blame) in respect to these things and actions. The mind does not sense the reward or the punishment attached to a thing or action unless Allah (swt) informs of that through His messengers (as).

From another angle, if the human was left to pass judgment upon the actions and things in terms of praise and blame (Mad’h and Dhamm) then the Hukm would inevitably differ according to the different people issuing it or in different times and places. That is because it is from the nature of the people for there to be disparity in their minds and natural dispositions in addition for them to be affected by the environments that they live in. The reality that has been consistently seen is that the person judges upon matters to be Hasanah (good or praiseworthy) on a certain day and then view them to be Qabeehah (ugly or blameworthy) on another day or at a later time. In this way the Hukm (judgment) upon one single issue differs, is not consistent and errors inevitably occur.

For this reason, it is not permitted for the (right of the) judgment upon things and actions to belong to the ‘Aql or the human in respect to praiseworthiness and blameworthiness (Al-Mad’h and Adh-Dhamm).

Consequently, the Haakim (judge) upon the actions and upon the things related to them in terms of Al-Mad’h and Adh-Dhamm must be Allah Ta’Aalaa i.e. the judge must be the Shar’a and not the ‘Aql.

The above relates to the Daleel Al-‘Aqliy in respect to determining the Husn and Qubh. As for the Daleel Ash-Shar’iy then the Shar’a has made the determination of the Tahseen (judging something to be good and praiseworthy) and the Taqbeeh (judging something to be ugly and blameworthy) to Allah i.e. to the Shar’a. Allah (swt) said:

And he (swt) said:

And the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

Therefore, the issuing of the Hukm (judgement) upon the actions and things belongs to the Shar’a and not to the ‘Aql. That is in terms of Al-Mad’h and Adh-Dhamm for them in the Dunyaa (life of this world) and in terms of the Thawaab and ‘Iqaab (reward and punishment) in the Aakhirah (Hereafter). As such, the human is able to judge with his mind that ‘Ilm (knowledge) is Hasan however the mind is not capable of judging that there is Thawaab (reward) attached to the ‘Ilm but rather that is determined by the Shar’a. Similarly, he is able to judge that oppression is Qabeeh but he is unable to judge that there is a punishment for that in the Aakhirah because the Hukm in respect to that belongs to the Shar’a and not the ‘Aql.

In respect to the things in relation to the Shar’a, then as we have explained they can either take the ruling of Ibaahah (permissibility) or Tahreem (prohibition) whilst the Qaa’idah Ash-Shar’iyah states:

As for the Hukm for the actions (Af’aal) then it falls into five categories:

Al-Waajib, Al-Mandoob, Al-Haraam, Al-Makrooh and Al-Mubaah, and these are the types of the Hukm At-Takleefiy.

As for the Hukm Al-Wad’iy then this is also represented in five types and they are: As-Sabab, Ash-Shart, Al-Maani’, As-Sihhah, Al-Butlaan and Al-Fasaad, and Ar-Rukshah and Al-‘Azeemah.

Therefore, in conclusion, the Haakim (judge) over the actions, upon the things attached or related to the actions and the matters related to both of these is the Shar’a alone.