1 – The deduction of some of the ‘Ulamaa in respect to the bringing of interests (Jalb Al-Masaalih) and the repelling of harms or corrupted matters (Dar’u l-Mafaasid) being representative of an ‘Illah (Shar’i reasoning) for the Ahkaam Ash-Shar’iyah is an invalid deduction.

The proof and evidence for that is that the Aayaat that they used for evidence in their deduction do not indicate ‘Illiyah (reasoning) whether in the form that they have come (Seeghah) or in respect to the reality.

They used as evidence the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa:

The Aayah indicates that the sending of the Messenger (saw) represents a Rahmah (mercy) for mankind which means that the objective and purpose of the Islamic Sharee’ah in its overall description is to bring the Masaalih and repel the Mafaasid whilst the Aayah does not mean that the bringing of the Masaalih and repelling of the Mafaasid is representative of the ‘Illah of the Islamic Sharee’ah in its overall description or that it is the ‘Illah for every single Hukm Shar’iy in itself.

That is because the Aayah guides to the result that comes as a consequence of the Sharee’ah which is the bringing of benefit and the repelling of the Mafaasid whilst it does not indicate that they represent the ‘Illah of the Shar’iyah. There is a difference between the result and the ‘Illah as the result relates to the consequence of the Hukm after its implementation whilst the ‘Illah is the reason or motive (Baa’ith) for the ruling itself i.e. the reason for which the Hukm was legislated. There is therefore a clear difference between the two.

They also used as evidence the Hadeeth of the Messenger (saw):

The most that this Hadeeth can indicate is the negation of the Mafaasid (corrupt and harmful matters) from the Islamic Sharee’ah as a whole whilst it does not mean or indicate Al-‘Illiyah (reasoning), whether it is in respect to the Sharee’ah (as a whole) or to any specific Hukm Shar’iy.

Additionally, this Hadeeth was related to repel the harm from the people whilst the wording ‘In Islaam’ was not mentioned in it. Ibn ‘Abbaas (ra) said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

The Hadeeth was therefore not within the subject area of the Maqaasid of the Sharee’ah but was rather related to preventing or repelling the harm (Darar). Consequently, there is no Dalaalah (implied indication) within it in relation to the subject of bringing the Masaalih and repelling the Mafaasid or to indicate that it represents an ‘Illah for the Ahkaam Ash-Shar’iyah.

Even if the texts of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah have guided to the result that occurs from the implementation of application of the Islamic Sharee’ah manifested in the bringing of the Masaalih and repelling of the Mafaasid, they do not however indicate that they represent an ‘Illah (reasoning) for the legislation of the Sharee’ah or an ‘Illah for every Hukm Shar’iy in itself. As a result, the deduction based upon these evidences is not valid and falls down in respect to this subject area.

2 – The Ghaayah (aim) or Nateejah (result) of the Islamic Sharee’ah to bring the Masaalih and to repel the Mafaasid is only realised from the Sharee’ah in its description as a whole. As for every Hukm in itself then this could be realised just as it may not be realised. So for example, in the lands of Islaam today and under the shade (or rule) of the man-made systems that have been established within them, it is seen that Ribaa, which is Haraam, has become a part of the economic life of the people and so any trader or factory owner who does not deal with Ribaa is afflicted by an economic harm. That is whilst it could be perceived that he would carry a burden of significant losses as the result of his adherence to his Deen, in which case he would be like the one who is holding onto burning embers of coals. So in this case where does the worldly benefit of Maslahah lie?! And where is the Maslahah in relation to the implementation of the Hukm that has been guided to in the Hadeeth of the Messenger of Allah (saw):

Therefore, the acquisition of the Masaalih or the repelling of the Mafaasid do not represent the Ghaayah (aim) or result of the application of every Hukm Shar’iy in itself but rather they represent the aim or result of the Islamic Sharee’ah as a whole.

3 – As for what occurs in terms of interests or benefits (Masaalih) as a result of the application of specific Ahkaam from the Islamic Sharee’ah, then this is not considered to be representative of a Daleel to support that the Ahkaam are Mu’allalah (reasoned) by the Maslahah. Consequently, the occurrence of a benefit or interest from marriage or trade or hiring, for example, could occur just as it may not occur. Someone could get married whilst he does not benefit or he could hire and lose out just as he could trade making a loss. Adherence and commitment to these Ahkaam emanates from the Shar’iyah Adillah (evidences) that have guided to them whilst they have not emanated from the premise that they bring a Maslahah or repel of a Mafsadah.

As such, implicating or involving the acquisition of Masaalih or the repelling of Mafaasid in respect to the Ahkaam Ash-Shar’iyah as an ‘Illah for them or as a result has no place or justification for it, as it does not just represent an implication but rather represents a gross error that distances the people and particularly the Muslims from a precise or accurate adherence to the Ahkaam Ash-Shar’iyah. It attracts leniency in respect to this adherence just as it brings about errors in respect to the legislation and deduction of the rulings as a result of connecting or tying the Hukm itself within the (scope of the) Maslahah that has been perceived to be present in relation to the Hukm.

4 – As for the Shar’iyah ‘Ilal (reasons) then from an examination of the Shar’iyah texts it is found that there are Ahkaam (rulings) that are Mu’allalah (i.e. containing an ‘Illah) just as there are rulings which do not contain an ‘Illah (legal reasoning) for them.

The Ahkaam of the ‘Ibaadaat do not have a Shar’iyah ‘Illah for them. Consequently, the Wudoo’ and performing Ghusl from the Janaabah (state of impurity) was not legislated for the purpose of cleanliness because the address of the legislator does not indicate that ‘Illah. Similarly, the Salaah was not legislated to exercise the body and fasting was not legislated to improve the health of the fasting person, indeed someone could become ill from fasting… and so on.

Other Ahkaam did come with an ‘Illah attached to them within the Mu’aamalaat (transactions) and ‘Uqoobaat (punishments). So the Shaari’ (Legislator) prohibited trade at the time of Salaat ul-Jumu’ah with the ‘Illah (reasoning) of distraction (Al-Ilhaa’) from the Salaah and the Shaari’ has permitted visiting graves after having forbidden that with the ‘Illah that the action reminds the person about the hereafter. The Shaari’ also forbade the Qaadi (judge) from judging whilst he is angry because his anger muddles his mind and influences his judgment. These ‘Ilal (reasons) could be stated in the text by the Shaari’ either Saraahatan (explicitly) or Istinbaatan (by way of deduction). That is because they are ‘Ilal Shar’iyah and not ‘Aqliyah and each ‘Illah from amongst the ‘Ilal is specific to a specific Hukm and does not extend beyond that to another Hukm. Therefore, the statement or opinion that Jalb Al-Masaalih (gaining the benefits) and Dar’u l-Mafaasid (repelling negative consequences) represents an ‘Illah for every Hukm Shar’iy is an opinion that has no basis for it, as the Hukm containing an ‘Illah must have a Shar’iy text indicating that ‘Illah.