Dalili na iya ƙunsar da 'illah ga Hukuncin, ko kuma a iya samun 'illar daga wata ko wasu hujjoji. Duk da cewa ana samo Hukuncin daga dalili, duk da haka ana lura da ma'anar 'illar da ke cikinsa, ba tare da an manne wa irin tsarin da aka ambata a cikin nassin da ya zo domin magance matsalar a lokacin ba. Misali shi ne faɗin Allah (SWT),

The Daleel may include an ‘illah for the Hukm, or the ‘illah may be taken from one or more other evidences. Although the Hukm is derived from the daleel, nevertheless the sense of the ‘illah in it is observed, without adhering to the mode mentioned in the text that came to treat the problem at that time. An example is that the saying of Allah (swt),

"Ku shirya musu duk abin da za ku iya na ƙarfi (na yaƙi) da dawakai da aka daure, don da shi ku tsoratar da maƙiyin Allah da maƙiyinku." [TMQ Al-Anfal: 60]

“Prepare for them all you can of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby you strike fear in the heart of the enemy of Allah and your enemy.” [TMQ Al-Anfal: 60]

Hukm ya shafi shirya ƙarfi. Matsalar da aka yi magana a kanta a lokacin ita ce shirya ƙarfi (ta hanyar ɗaure dawakai), kuma ma'anar 'illah daga wannan Hukm ita ce; tsoratar da maƙiya. Saboda haka, idan a yau muka samo ƙa'idar shirya ƙarfi daga wannan daleel, muna kuma lura da ma'anar 'illah daga Hukm, kuma bisa haka muna shirya duk abin da ake buƙata don tsoratar da maƙiya; ba tare da mun takaita kanmu ga hanyar da aka ambata a cikin nassi ba (watau ɗaure dawakai), wajen magance matsalar da ke gabanmu a lokacin.

The Hukm concerns the preparation of force. The issue addressed at the time is preparing the force (via the tethering of horses), and the meaning of the ‘illah from this Hukm is; to strike fear in the enemy. Therefore, when we derive today the rule of preparation of force from this daleel, we also observe the meaning of the ‘illah from the Hukm, and accordingly we prepare whatever is needed to alarm the enemy; without restricting ourselves to the mode mentioned in the text (i.e. tethering the horses), in treating the problem at hand at the time.

Saboda haka wannan hanya ya kamata a bi ta cikin kowace dalili wadda daga cikinta ake samo hukunci, tun da manufar ita ce cika ma'anar 'illah da aka nufa daga hukuncin. Saboda haka, Shari'ar Musulunci tana bukatar dokokin da suka shafi alakokin al'umma (mu'amalat) su dogara ne a kan 'illarsu, kuma mu lura da bangaren shari'a da ke cikin nassoshi, ba siffar da suka zo a cikinta ba, idan muna samo dokoki daga wadannan nassoshi.

Therefore this approach should be followed in every daleel from which a Hukm is derived, since the purpose is to fulfil the meaning of ‘illah intended from the Hukm. Accordingly, the Islamic Sharee’ah requires that the rules related to the societal relations (mu’amalat) be based upon their ‘illah and that we observe the legislative aspect in the texts and not the form that they came in when deriving the rules from these texts.

Kamar yadda nassin Alqur'ani da Sunnah suke zama hujja ga Hukuncin Shari'a, haka nan Ijma'in Sahabbai (abokan Manzon Allah ﷺ) da Qiyasi (hukunci ta hanyar kwatance) suma ana daukar su a matsayin hujja ga Hukuncin Shari'a. Saboda haka, hujjojin gaba daya (adillah ijmaaliyyah) na hukunce-hukuncen shari'a sune: Alqur'ani, Sunnah, Ijma'in Sahabbai da Qiyasi. Amma ra'ayin wani Sahabi game da al'amuran da ya yi ijtihadi a kansu, ba hujja ba ce, domin Sahabi kamar kowane Mujtahidi yake, kuma yana iya yin kuskure. Bugu da kari, Sahabbai sun sabawa juna a wasu al'amura, inda kowannensu yake da nasa ra'ayin daban da na sauran. Don haka, idan an dauki ra'ayin Sahabi a matsayin hujja, to hujjoji za su bambanta kuma su yi karo da juna. Saboda haka, ra'ayin Sahabi ba a daukarsa a matsayin hujjar shari'a, sai dai an halatta a bi shi kamar sauran ra'ayoyi da mazhabobi da aka amince da su. Hukunce-hukuncen da Sahabbai suka amince a kansu kuwa, ba mazhaba ce a gare su ba, sai dai Ijma'i ne.

Just as the text of the Qur’an and Sunnah are an evidence for the Hukm Shar’ai, the Ijma’a (consensus) of the Sahabah (companions) and the Qiyas (analogical deduction) are also considered as an evidence for the Hukm Shar’ai. Accordingly, the general evidences (adillah ijmaaliyyah) for the shar’ai rules are; the Qur’an, the Sunnah, Ijma’a as- Sahaba and Qiyas. As for the opinion of a Sahabi related to matters of his Ijtihad, it is not a daleel, because the Sahabi is like any Mujtahid, and is subject to error. In addition, the Sahabah differed over some issues, holding differing opinions to one another. So if the opinion of the Sahabi was taken as a daleel, then the proofs would be different and contradictory. Consequently, the opinion of the Sahabi is not considered a shar’ai daleel, but rather it is allowed to be followed like the other acknowledged opinions and schools of thought (madhaahib). The rules that are agreed upon by the Sahabah are not a madhhab for them, but rather they are Ijma’a.

Game da Shari'ar al'ummun da suka gabace mu (Shar'a min qablina), ba a ɗaukarta a matsayin shari'a a gare mu, kuma ba a ɗaukarta a matsayin tushen dokoki. Duk da cewa akidar Musulunci ta wajabta mana mu yi imani da dukan annabawa da manzanni, da kuma littattafan da aka saukar musu. Ma'anar imani da su shi ne imani da annabcinsu da saƙonsu da littattafan da aka saukar musu, kuma ba yana nufin bin su ba. Bayan annabcin Muhammadu ﷺ, an umarci dukan al'ummu da su bar addinansu su rungumi Musulunci, domin ba a karɓar wani addiniban da Musulunci. Allah (SWT) ya ce,

As for the Shar’a of the earlier nations (Shar’a min qablina), it is neither considered a Shar’a for us, nor is it considered to be a source of legislation. Although the Islamic ‘aqeedah mandates for us to believe in all the prophets and messengers, and in the Books revealed to them. The meaning of the belief in them is belief in their prophethood and their messages and in the Books revealed to them, and does not mean to follow them. After the prophethood of Muhammad (saw) all peoples are ordered to give up their Deen and to embrace Islam, since no Deen other than Islam is accepted. Allah (swt) said,

"Lallai, addini a wurin Allah shi ne Musulunci." [TMQ Al-i-Imran:19]

“Lo! The Deen with Allah is Islam.” [TMQ Al-i-Imran:19]

Allah (SWT) kuma yana cewa,

Allah (swt) also says,

"Duk wanda ya nemi addini wanin Musulunci, ba za a karɓa daga gare shi ba." [TMQ Al-i- Imran:85]

“And whosoever seeks a Deen other than Islam it will not be accepted from him.” [TMQ Al-i- Imran:85]

Wannan ayar a bayyane take a ma'anarta. Daga wannan ayar aka samo ƙa'ida mai zuwa,

This ayah is explicit (SareeH) in meaning. From this ayah the following principle was derived,

"Shari'ar mutanen da suka gabace mu ba shari'a ce a gare mu ba." Wata hujja ga wannan ka'ida ita ce, Sahabbai sun yi ijma'i (yarjejeniya) cewa shari'ar Muhammad ﷺ ta soke duk shari'o'in da suka gabata (dokokin Allah na baya). Haka kuma Allah (SWT) ya ce,

“Shar’a of the people before us is not a Shar’a for us.” Another evidence for this principle is the fact that the SaHaabah had a consensus (Ijmaa’) that the Shari’ah of Muhammad (saw) abrogates all the previous Shari’ah (divine laws). Also Allah (swt) says,

Kuma mun saukar da Littafi zuwa gare ka da gaskiya, yana mai tabbatar da abin da yake gabansa na Littattafai, kuma yana mai tsaron gare su. [TMQ Al-Maida:48]

“And unto you have We revealed the Book with the truth, confirming whatever Book was before it and controlling over it.” [TMQ Al-Maida:48]

wato, yana nufin samun iko da mulki a kansa. Mulkin Alƙur'ani a kan littattafan da suka gabace shi yana nufin soke shari'o'in da suka gabata, watau Alƙur'ani yana tabbatar da shari'o'in da suka gabata, kuma yana soke su. An rawaito cewa lokacin da Manzon Allah ﷺ ya ga 'Umar Ibn Al-Khattab yana karatu daga wata takarda ta Attaura, sai ya yi fushi ya ce:

i.e. to have control and supremacy over it. The supremacy of the Qur’an over the previous Books means the abrogation of the previous Sharee’ahs i.e. the Qur’an confirms and abrogates the previous Sharee’ahs. It was narrated that when the Messenger (saw) saw ‘Umar Ibn Al-Khattab reading from a leaf of the Torah, he (saw) got angry and said,

"Ashe ban kawo muku shi tsarkakke kuma mai tsabta ba? Kuma wallahi, da ɗan'uwana Musa yana nan yanzu, ba zai sami zaɓi ba sai ya bi ni."

“Didn’t I bring it pure and clean, and By Allah, had my brother Musa been present now he would have no choice but to follow me.”.

Yawancin ayyukan Hajji kamar Tawaf a kewayen Ka'aba, taɓawa da sumbatar Hajarul Aswad, da gudu tsakanin Safa da Marwa an yi su ne a zamanin jahiliyya. Duk da haka, idan muka yi su a matsayin ibada, ba ma yin su saboda muna ɗaukar su a matsayin ayyukan wata shari'ar da ta gabata. Maimakon haka, muna yin su ne a matsayin wani ɓangare na Shari'ar Musulunci, tun da Musulunci ya kawo su a matsayin sababbin hukunce-hukuncen shari'a, ba a matsayin wani ɓangare na wata shari'a ta da ba. Haka nan, ba ma yin wani abu na abin da addinan da suka gabata suka shar'anta, kuma ba ma bin sa, sai dai abin da Musulunci ya kawo mana kawai. Yahudawa da Nasara ana yi musu magana da Shari'ar Musulunci kuma ana umurtar su su bar nasu, saboda Musulunci ya soke shi. Idan wannan shi ne wajibi a kan mabiya shari'ar Yahudawa da Nasara, ta yaya za a umurci Musulmi ya ɗauki shari'o'in da suka gabata a matsayin shari'arsa? Game da faɗin Allah (SWT),

Many of the rituals of Hajj such as Tawaf around the Ka’abah, touching and kissing the black stone and running between Safa and Marwah were practised at the time of jahiliyyah. However when we perform them as ‘ibadat, we don’t practise them considering them as rituals of a previous Shari’ah. Rather we perform them as part of the Islamic Shari’ah, since Islam brought them as new AHkam Sharai’ah, and not as part of a previous Shari’ah. Similarly, we do not at all perform nor abide by what previous Deens prescribed, rather we only follow what Islam brought us. The Christians and the Jews are addressed with the Islamic Shari’ah and ordered to leave theirs, because Islam abrogated it. If this is the obligation on the followers of the Jewish Shari’ah and they are Jews and the Christians, then how can a Muslim be ordered to take the previous Sharee’ahs as his Sharee’ah? With regards to the saying of Allah (swt),

"Mun yi wahayi zuwa gare ka kamar yadda muka yi wahayi zuwa ga Nuhu." [TMQ An-Nisaa:163]

“We revealed to you as we revealed to Noah.” [TMQ An-Nisaa:163]

Abin da ake nufi da wannan shi ne cewa Shi (SWT) ya yi wa Muhammad ﷺ wahayi irin yadda ya yi wa sauran annabawa wahayi. Kuma,

What is meant by this is that He (swt) revealed to Muhammad (saw) the same way as He revealed to the other prophets. And,

"Ya shar'anta muku addinin da Ya umarci Nuhu da shi." [Tmq Ash-Shura:13]

“He has ordained for you that Deen which He commanded unto Noah.” [Tmq Ash-Shura:13]

Wannan yana nufin cewa Ya shimfida asalin tawhid, wanda Ya shar'anta wa Nuhu. A cikin Ayar,

This means that He ordained the origin of tawHeed, which He ordained for Noah. In the Ayah,

Sa'an nan Mun yi maka wahayi cewa: "Ka bi addinin Ibrahim." [TMQ An-Nahl:123]

“Then we revealed to you to follow the faith (mellah) of Ibrahim.” [TMQ An-Nahl:123]

Wannan yana nufin bin asalin tauhidi, domin 'millah' na nufin asalin tauhidi. Fahimtar dukkan wadannan ayoyi da makamantansu ita ce, Manzon Allah ﷺ ba bidi'a ya zo da ita a cikin manzannin Allah ba, sai dai an aike shi kamar sauran, kuma asalin tauhidi shi ne addinin da dukkan annabawa da manzanni suka yi tarayya a kansa. Kowane manzo an aike shi ne da wani addini na musamman; Allah (SWT) yana cewa,

This means to follow the origin of tawHid, because ‘mellah’ means the origin of tawHeed. The understanding of all these verses and the like is that the Messenger (saw) is not an innovator among the messengers (of Allah), rather he was sent (as a messenger) like them and that the origin of tawHeed is the Deen common to all prophets and messengers. Every messenger had been sent with a specific Deen; Allah (swt) says,

"Ga kowannensu mun sanya shari'a da kuma hanya bayyananniya." [TMQ Al-Maidah:48]

“For each we have appointed a Sharee’ah and an open way.” [TMQ Al-Maidah:48]

Saboda haka, Shari'ar al'ummomin da suka gabata ba Shari'a ce a gare mu ba, kuma ba a la'akari da ita a matsayin ɗaya daga cikin tushen dokoki da ake fitar da hukunce-hukunce daga cikinsu.

Accordingly the Shar’a of previous nations is neither a Shar’a for us and nor is it considered one of the legislative sources from which the rules are derived.

Istinbaatin hukunce-hukunce (Ahkam) ana aiwatar da shi ne ta hannun mujtahidai, domin sanin hukuncin Allah a kan wata mas'ala ta musamman ba zai yiwu ba sai ta hanyar Ijtihadi. Dole ne a sami Ijtihadi. Malaman ilimin usul sun bayyana cewa Ijtihadi fardi ne na kifaya (wajibi na al'umma) a kan Musulmi, kuma babu wani zamani da zai zama babu mujtahid a cikinsa. Idan dukkan Musulmi suka yarda su bar Ijtihadi, za su yi zunubi, saboda hanya kadai ta sanin hukunce-hukuncen Allah ita ce Ijtihadi. Idan wani zamani ya kasance babu mujtahid mai iya istinbaatin hukunce-hukunce, hakan zai haifar da barin Shari'a da kuma kawar da dokokin shari'a, lamarin da aka haramta a fili. Duk da haka, Ijtihadi yana da sharuddan da malaman ilimin usul suka yi bayaninsu. Yana bukatar fadin ilimi, fahimta daidai ta nassoshi, da gamsasshen ilimin harshen Larabci da ilimin nahawu, kuma yana bukatar sanin al'amuran Shari'a da fahimtar hujjojinsu (adillah).

Deriving AHkam is performed by mujtahids, because knowing the Hukm of Allah on a specific issue cannot be reached except by Ijtihad. There must be Ijtihad. The scholars of usool have stated that Ijtihad is a fard kifayah (collective obligation) on Muslims and that no generation should be without a mujtahid. If all Muslims agree to leave Ijtihad they would be sinful, this is because the only way of finding out the divine rules is by Ijtihad. If any generation was without a mujtahid who is able to derive AHkam, this would result in the abandoning of Shari’ah and lead to the elimination of the shar’ai rules, a matter which is expressly forbidden. Nevertheless, Ijtihad has conditions which have been elaborated by the scholars of usool. It requires broad knowledge, a correct understanding of the texts and a satisfactory knowledge of Arabic linguistics and it needs knowledge of the Shar’ai matters and an understanding of their evidences (adillah).

Cirar hukunci ba tare da nazari mai kyau da bincike mai zurfi ba ba ake kiransa istinbadi ba (fitar da hukunce-hukunce). Haka kuma, kasancewar wata maslaha a wani hukunci, sannan a karkatar da nassoshi a fassara su ba daidai ba domin a fitar da wannan hukunci, ba ake kiransa ijtihadi ba; face dai wulakanta addinin Allah (SWT) ne, kuma duk wanda ya aikata hakan ya cancanci azaba daga Allah (SWT).

Extracting AHkam without careful study and without careful examination is not called Istinbat (deriving rules). Likewise, the mere presence of a benefit in a certain Hukm followed by misconstruing the texts and misinterpreting them to derive that rule is not called Ijtihad, it is rather an insult to the Deen of Allah (swt), and whoever commits that deserves the punishment of Allah (swt).

Gaskiya ne cewa ƙofar Ijtihadi a buɗe take, amma a buɗe take ga malamai (ulema), ba ga jahilai ba. Mujtahidai iri uku ne: mujtahid mutlaq da mujtahid madhhab, waɗannan biyu suna da sharuɗɗa na musamman. Amma nau'i na uku shi ne mujtahid wanda yake yin Ijtihadi a kan wata mas'ala guda ɗaya (mujtahid mas'alah). Irin wannan mujtahid ya kamata ya kasance mai iya fahimtar nassi da bincikar mas'alar, da dalilinta, da dalilin sauran mujtahidai game da mas'alar. Wannan nau'in Ijtihadi wajibi ne ga kowane Musulmi wanda yake buƙatar sanin hukuncin Allah, tun da Shari'a ta fara ƙaddara cewa Musulmi su samo hukunci da kansu daga dalili, watau su zama mujtahidai a cikin mas'alolin addini da suka zama wajibi a gare su.

It is true that the door of Ijtihad is open but it is open for the scholars (ulema) not for the ignorant. mujtahids are of three types; mujtahid mutlaq and mujtahid madhab, these two have specific prerequisites. As for the third type it is the mujtahid who performs Ijtihad on one issue (mujtahid masa’alah). Such a mujtahid should be capable of understanding the text and to pursue the issue, its daleel and the daleel of other mujtahids concerning the issue. This type of Ijtihad is necessary for every Muslim who needs to know the AHkam of Allah, since Shar’a has originally ordained that Muslims derive by themselves the Hukm from the evidence, i.e. to be a mujtahid in the issues of the Deen necessary to them.

Amma bayan an rubuta mazhabobin mujtahidai da ka'idojin ijtihadi, kuma aka samo hukunce-hukunce daga gare su, sai ra'ayin ijtihadi ya yi rauni a tsakanin mutane, adadin mujtahidai kuma ya ragu. Taqlidi ya yadu a tsakanin Musulmai, ijtihadi kuma ya zama abin mamaki a tsakaninsu, har ya kai ga cewa wasu mutane suka fara kira da a rufe kofar ijtihadi, suna kuma cewa taqlidi wajibi ne. Saboda haka, mafi yawan Musulmai, idan ba duka ba, suka zama muqallidai (masu bin mazhaba).

However, after recording the madhabs of the mujtahids and the principles of Ijtihad and the AHkam were derived, the notion of Ijtihad became weak amongst individuals and the number of mujtahids decreased. Taqleed became prevalent amongst the Muslims and Ijtihad amongst them became unusual until the concept of taqleed prevailed to such an extent that some people started to call for closing the door of Ijtihad and to speak of taqleed as obligatory. Accordingly the overwhelming majority of Muslims, if not all of them, became muqallideen (followers).

Muqallid yana da nau'i biyu: muttabi'i (mabiyi) da 'ammi (mai bin taqlidi kawai). Bambancin da ke tsakanin muttabi'i da 'ammi shi ne, muttabi'i yana karɓar hukuncin da mujtahid ya fitar bayan ya gamsu da dalilin da mujtahid ya dogara da shi, kuma ba ya bin hukuncin sai ya san dalilin. 'Ammi kuwa shi ne wanda ke bin mujtahid a hukuncin shari'a ba tare da neman dalilin ba. Muttabi'i yana da matsayi mafi daraja fiye da 'ammi, kuma yawancin al'ummomin farko muttabi'ai ne, domin suna matuƙar damuwa da koyon dalili. Lokacin da zamanin raguwa ya zo, kuma ya zama da wahala mutane su bi mujtahidai, sai suka fara bin malamai da mujtahidai a hukunce-hukuncen da suka shafe su ba tare da neman dalili ba. Abin da ya ƙarfafa wannan yanayi shi ne shiru da amincewar malamai cewa mutum zai iya zama 'ammi ko da yana da ilimi. Malamai sun yi shiru a kan haka ne domin taqlidi yana halatta, ko mai taqlidi ya zama muttabi'i ko 'ammi. Duk da haka, musulmi ya kamata asali ya kasance yana iya fitar da hukunce-hukunce daga dalilansu, ko da yake an ba shi izinin yin koyi, don haka yana da izinin ya zama muttabi'i, watau ya san hukuncin, ya san dalilinsa, kuma ya gamsu da shi. Wannan yana sa musulmi ya cancanci ijtihadi, ko da a mas'ala guda ɗaya, abin da yake wajibi ne a gare mu a zamaninmu na yanzu. To sai dai, bayar da fatawa ba a ɗaukarsa ijtihadi a mas'ala, domin ba ya cikin rukunin ijtihadi. Yana daga cikin mafi munin nau'ukan rubuce-rubuce a fiqhu. Wannan kuwa saboda bayan zamanin mujtahidai, ɗalibansu da ɗalibai na ɗalibansu sun bi sawunsu, sai suka karkata zuwa yin bayani kan maganganun madhhabi, da kafa tushensa, da ƙarfafa maganganunsa. Wannan zamani ana ɗaukarsa zamanin zinariya na fiqhu, wanda a cikinsa aka rubuta manyan littattafan tunani na fiqhu a madhhabai daban-daban. Waɗannan littattafai ana ɗaukarsu ginshiƙin mas'alolin fiqhu. Wannan zamani ya ci gaba har zuwa karni na bakwai na Miladiyya, bayan haka sai ilimin fiqh ya fara raguwa. A wadannan zamuna aka fara yin sharhi da hasiya, mafi yawansu ba su da wani sabon abu na asali, da kuma istinbadi (fitar da hukunce-hukunce) da ijtihadi ko da a kan mas'ala guda daya. Sai kuma wani zamani da raguwar ta fi zurfi, inda malamai suka bi hanyar lissafa mas'aloli da hukunce-hukunce ba tare da ambaton bangarori daban-daban da cikakkun bayanansu ba. Suka kira wadannan mas'aloli da fatawa. Ba daidai ba ne a dauki wadannan fatawoyi a matsayin tushen magana a cikin fiqh, kuma ba daidai ba ne a dauke su a matsayin tushen Ahkamus-Shari'ah ma, saboda ba su bi hanyar ijtihadi wajen fitar da hukunce-hukunce ba.

The muqallid is of two types; muttabi’a (follower) and ‘aammi (layman). The difference between the muttabi’a and the ‘aammi is that the muttabi’a takes the rule derived by a mujtahid after they are convinced of the daleel which the mujtahid depended upon, and they do not follow it unless they are aware of the daleel. The ‘aammi is the one who follows the mujtahid in the shar’ai rule without looking for the daleel. The muttabi’a has a better level than the ‘aammi and most of the earlier generations were the muttabi’a, for they were greatly concerned with learning the daleel. When the age of decline came and it became difficult for the people to follow the mujtahids, they began to follow the scholars and mujtahids in the rules concerning them without seeking the daleel. What encouraged this situation was the silence and consent of the ulema that a person could be ‘ammi even if he was an educated person. The ulema were silent about this because taqleed is permissible, whether the muqallid is a muttabi’a or ‘ammi. However, the Muslim should originally be able to take the AHkam from its daleel, although they are allowed to imitate thus they are allowed to be muttabi’a, i.e. they know the rule and knows its daleel and becomes convinced of it. This makes the Muslim qualified for Ijtihad, even in a single issue, a matter which is necessary for us in our current age. However, issuing a fatwa is not considered Ijtihad in an issue, because it does not belong to the category of Ijtihad. It is of the worst type of writings in fiqh. This is because after the age of the mujtahids, their students and the students of their students followed and these turned to elaborating on the opinions of the madhab, laying down its foundations and consolidating its opinions. That age was considered to be the golden age of fiqh in which the master references of fiqh books in the various madhabs were written. These books are considered the backbone of the issues of fiqh. This era continued until the seventh century C.E., after which the decline of fiqh followed. In these ages commenting and footnotes began, most lacking originality, Istinbat (deduction of rules) and Ijtihad even on just a single issue. Then came an age in which the decline was deeper, where the ulema followed the way of listing the issues and the rules without making reference to their different aspects and details. They called these issues fatawa. It is incorrect to make these fatawa as a reference in fiqh and it is incorrect to take them as a reference for the AHkam Sharee’ah as well, because they do not follow the method of Ijtihad in deriving the rules.

Ba a halatta a dogara da littattafan bayani irin waɗanda aka rubuta a salon tsara dokokin littattafan shari'ar Yammacin Turai ba a matsayin hujja ga hukunce-hukuncen Shari'ah. Wannan saboda waɗannan littattafai nau'i ne na koyi da dokokin Yammacin Turai, kuma irin wannan tsarawa yana rage fiqhu, kuma ana mamaye shi da ɗaukar mas'alolin fiqhu ba tare da wata dalili ba ko da dalili mai rauni. Haka kuma yana mamayuwa da ra'ayin daidaita shari'a da zamani da karkatar da fassarori don su dace da ra'ayin Yammacin Turai wajen warware matsaloli. Baya ga haka, waɗannan littattafai ba su da bangaren shari'a (ƙa'idojin doka) kuma babu ijtihadi a cikinsu. Don haka ba su dace da aiki da su ko a yi amfani da su a matsayin tushe ba. Kasancewarsu ta zama masifa ga fiqhu da shari'a, domin an yi ƙoƙarin koyi wanda ya raunana fahimtar mutane game da fiqhun Musulunci, duk da yawan fiqhun Musulunci da kasancewarsa mafi wadatar ilimin shari'a a cikin dukkan al'ummomi. Wannan fiqhu yana da matuƙar muhimmanci ga alƙalai da shugabanni, amma tsara shi cikin tsarin da ke kwaikwayon tsarin littattafan asali ya rage darajarsa da kuma wulakanta shi, har ya sa alƙalai, idan suka takaita kansu ga ilimin waɗannan ƙa'idoji, sun zama jahilai a fiqhu. Bugu da ƙari, waɗannan littattafai ba su da salon kalmomin doka da ya dace, domin tarin rubuce-rubucen fiqhu ne na wasu malamai da aka gabatar a tsarin lamba-lamba. Ba a yi ƙoƙari ba wajen samar da ƙa'idoji gabaɗaya da za a iya ɗaukar su a matsayin jigon sassan da mas'aloli daban-daban za su shiga ƙarƙashinsu. Maimakon haka, an shirya mas'alolin kansu a matsayin sassa daban-daban, kuma wannan bai dace da tsarin littattafan asali ba. Ko da wasu sassan sun zo a cikin sigar ƙa'idoji, ba a bayyana su ta hanya cikakkiya ba. Sun kasance ba fiye da ma'anoni daga littattafan fiqhu ba, kuma kusan dukkan sassan sun bi wannan salo. Saboda haka, ba halal ba ne a ɗauki waɗannan ƙa'idodi a matsayin tushen dogaro, saboda kuskuren salon su, zurfafa bayanansu da ba su da yawa, da kuma nisan su daga ƙa'idodin Shari'ah da aka sani, waɗanda suka dogara da hujjoji dalla-dalla (adillah tafSeeliyyah).

It is not permitted to refer to reference works written along the lines of the codification of western law books as a reference for Sharee’ah rules. This is because these books are a form of imitation of Western laws and such codification reduces the fiqh and is dominated by taking fiqh issues without any daleel or with a weak daleel. It is also dominated by the notion of adapting to the age and twisted interpretations to comply with the Western viewpoint in solving the problems. This is in addition to the lack of the legislative aspect and the absence of Ijtihad in these books. So they are not suitable for application or as a reference. Their existence was a disaster for fiqh and legislation because it was an attempt at imitation that weakened the people’s perception of Islamic fiqh. This is in spite of the vast amount of Islamic fiqh and it being the richest jurisprudence of all nations. This fiqh is indispensable for the judges and rulers, but codifying it in a form which imitates the canonical format has reduced and disgraced it and made the judges, when they confined themselves to the knowledge of these canons, ignorant in fiqh. In addition, these books lack the appropriate legal wording, because they are a host of jurisprudence texts of some jurists that have been introduced under numerical listing. No attempt has been made to generate general principles that could then themselves be taken as the subject of the articles under which different issues would fall. Instead the issues themselves were arranged as separate articles and this is incompatible with the canonical format. Even when some of the articles came in the form of principles they were not stated in a comprehensive manner. Rather they were no more than definitions from the fiqh books and almost all articles followed this style. Consequently, it is not permissible to take those canons as a reference, because of their erroneous style, superficial information, and remoteness from the recognised Sharee’ah rules which are based on the detailed evidences (adillah tafSeeliyyah).

Domin a samar da kundin tsarin mulki da dokoki waɗanda alƙalai da shugabanni za su iya fahimta da bi, ya kamata a bi wannan hanya ta yin doka:

In order to put together a constitution and cannons that can be comprehended and followed by the judges and rulers, the following method in legislation should be followed:

1. Matsalolin mutane suna bukatar a yi nazarinsu, saboda haka ana rubuta kundin tsarin mulki na gaba ɗaya wanda ke magance su ta hanyar ka'idoji gama-gari masu cikakken ma'ana ko dokokin Shari'a cikakku. Wadannan ka'idoji da dokoki dole ne a samo su daga fiqhu na Musulunci, bisa sharadin cewa an ɗauke su ne daga ɗaya daga cikin mujtahidai, tare da ambaton dalilinsa da kuma gamsuwa da shi, ko kuma daga Alkur'ani, Sunnah, Ijma'in Sahabbai ko Qiyasi, amma kawai ta hanyar Ijtihadi daidai, koda kuwa Ijtihadi ne akan mas'ala guda ɗaya. A cikin gabatarwar kowace kasida dole ne a ambaci mazhabar da aka ɗauke ta daga cikinta tare da dalilinta, ko kuma dalilin da aka cire ta daga gare shi. Ba za a yi la'akari da mummunan halin da Musulmai ke ciki ba, ko halin sauran al'ummomi, ko tsarin wadanda ba Musulmai ba, a lokacin rubuta irin wannan kundin tsarin mulki.

1. Human problems have to be studied, so a general constitution is written addressing them in the form of general comprehensive principles or comprehensive Shar’ai rules. These principles and rules have to be derived from Islamic fiqh, on condition that they are either taken from one of the mujtahids, mentioning their daleel and being convinced of them or from the Qur’an, the Sunnah, Ijma’a as-Sahaba or Qiyas, but only through a correct Ijtihad, even if it is Ijtihad on a single issue. In the introduction for each article, the madhab from which it is taken together with its daleel, or the daleel from which it was deduced, must be mentioned. Neither the influence of the bad situation of the Muslims nor the situation of the other nations or the non-Islamic systems should be taken into consideration when putting down such a constitution.

2. Ahkamus Shari'ah ya kamata a tsara su a matsayin dokoki na farko (draft canons) don kundin laifuffuka da hukunce-hukunce ('Uqubaat), hakkoki (Huquq) da hujjojin shaida (Bayyinaat). Wannan ya kasance bisa ga ka'idojin da aka ambata a sama, ya dace da kundin tsarin mulki, tare da komawa ga madhhab da dalili, bisa sharadin cewa tsarin dokokin ya kunshi ka'idoji na gaba ɗaya, domin su zama abin dogaro ga alƙalai da shugabanni.

2. AHkam Shara’iah should be put down as draft canons for the penal code (‘uqubaat), rights (Huqooq) and testimonial proofs (bayyinaat). This should be according to the aforementioned criteria, be compatible with the constitution, with reference to the madhab and the daleel on the condition that its legal composition is with general principles so to serve as a reference for the judges and the rulers.

3. Littattafan Shari'a, da fiqhu na Musulunci, da usulul-fiqhi su ne ya kamata a dogara da su wajen fassara kundin tsarin mulki da dokoki ga alkalai da shugabanni, domin a sauwaka hanyoyin fahimta mai zurfi. Alkali ba shi da izinin yanke hukunce-hukuncen da suka saba wa abin da gwamnati ta karɓa, saboda

3. The Shar’ai texts, the Islamic fiqh and usool-ul-fiqh should be the reference point when interpreting the constitution and the laws by the judges and rulers, in order to facilitate the means of deep understanding. The judge is not permitted to issue verdicts contradictory to what the state has adopted because,

"Hukuncin Imam za a aiwatar da shi a fili da kuma a ɓoye." A cikin lokutan da Jiha ba ta karɓi dokoki ba, alƙali zai yanke hukunci bisa ga Hukm Shar'i da ya ga ya dace da lamarin, ko wannan ra'ayi ya fito daga ɗaya daga cikin mujtahidai ne ko kuma ra'ayin da ya samo ta hanyar nasa Ijtihadi.

“The decree of the Imam is to be executed overtly and covertly.” In cases where the State has not adopted rules, the judge will issue the verdict based on the Hukm Shar’ai he views as applicable to the case, whether this opinion is of one from the mujtahids or an opinion derived by his own Ijtihad.

4. Yayin da ake ciro hukunce-hukunce da karɓe su, wajibi ne a fahimci gaskiyar al'amarin (a fahimce shi sosai), kuma a fahimci abin da ake buƙata domin magance wannan gaskiya daga dalilan Shar'i; wato a fahimci hukuncin Allah (SWT) kan wannan al'amari, sannan a yi amfani da hukuncin a kan gaskiyar al'amarin. Watau, a isa ga Hukunci Shar'i ta hanyar fahimta da cikakken sanin gaskiyar al'amarin.

4. When deriving the rules and adopting them, it is necessary to understand the reality (of the issue and comprehend it) and to understand what is necessary to treat the reality from the Shar’ai evidence; in other words to understand the rule of Allah (swt) on this issue and then to apply the rule on the reality. That is, to arrive at the Hukm Shar’ai by understanding and fully comprehending the reality of the issue.