Ma'anar kalmar "canons" a harshen Larabci ita ce ka'idoji na asali (usul), kuma kalmar mufuradi ita ce "canon" (qanun). Kalma ce ta baƙo da aka mayar da ita Larabci. A terminology na baƙi, canon na nufin umarni da sarki ko mai mulki ya fitar domin mutane su bi shi. Haka kuma ana kiran canon da "tarin dokokin da mai mulki ke tilasta wa mutane su bi a cikin alaƙarsu." Canon a asali yana kasu kashi biyu. Na farko, dokokin da ke tsara alaƙoƙi daga tushensu, waɗanda suna da nau'i biyu. Nau'i na farko shi ne canon na asali, wato kundin tsarin mulki (constitution); nau'i na biyu shi ne sauran canons waɗanda ba sashe ne na kundin tsarin mulki ba. Kashi na biyu kuwa, su ne waɗanda ke tsara ayyuka na biyu waɗanda ba su da wata doka ta musamman, amma tushensu yana da doka ta gaba ɗaya. Ko kuma suna tsara hanyoyi, watau salon da ake aiwatar da ayyukan asali, waɗanda suna da doka ta gaba ɗaya amma reshensu ba shi da doka ta musamman. Ko kuma suna tsara kayan aiki. Ana kiran waɗannan da canons na gudanarwa (administrative canons) ko tsarin gudanarwa ko wani abu makamancin haka. Tun da maganar Mai Shari'a (Ash-Shaari') ta zo ne game da ayyukan bayi da kuma wajabta wa mutum takura wa kansa da su, to tsara su yana fitowa daga Allah (SWT). Shari'ar Musulunci ta zo ne game da dukkan ayyukan mutane da dukkan alaƙoƙinsu, ko alakarsu da Allah, ko alakarsu da kansu, ko alakarsu da wasu. Saboda haka babu wani wuri a Musulunci da mutane za su yi dokokin canons domin tsara tsarin rayuwa, domin shari'a ta takura su. Allah (SWT) ya ce:

The meaning of the word “canons” in the Arabic language is fundamentals (usul) with the singular being “canon” (qanun). It is a foreign word which has been arabicised. The canon in the foreigner’s terminology means the command published by the ruler so that the people follow it. The canon is also known as “the collection of rules which the ruler compels people to follow in their relationships.” The canon is essentially of two categories. Firstly, the rules which organise the relationships from their basis are of two types. The first is the basic canon which is the constitution, the second is the rest of the canons which are not (part of) the constitution. As for the second category of canons, they are the ones which organise secondary actions which do not have a rule specific to them but whose basis has a general rule. Or it organises the means i.e. the styles by which the basic actions, which have a general rule but whose branch has no specific rule for it, are performed. Or it organises the tools. They are termed as administrative canons or administrative systems or something similar. Since the speech of the Legislator actions came related to the actions of the slaves and obliging the restriction of oneself to them, therefore their organization comes from Allah (swt). The Islamic Shari’ah came related to all actions of the people and all their relationships, whether their relationship with Allah or their relationship with themselves or their relationship with others. Therefore there is no place in Islam for people to legislate canons to organise the systems as they are restricted by the Shari’ah. Allah (swt) said:

Da kuma:

And:

Da kuma:

And:

Muslim ya ruwaito daga Aisha cewa Manzon Allah ﷺ ya ce:

Muslim narrated from Aisha that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

Allah (SWT) ne Wanda ke shar'anta dokoki ga mutane, ba sarki ba, kuma Yana tilasta su da sarki su bi su cikin mu'amalarsu, su takaita kansu da su, kuma su hana su bin (duk) wasu dokoki. Saboda haka babu wurin mutum ya kafa dokoki don tsara mu'amalar mutane, kuma babu wurin sarki ya tilasta mutane ko ya ba su zabi su bi ka'idoji da dokokin da mutane suka kafa don tsara mu'amalarsu. Amma dokokin Shari'ah, wato maganar Mai shar'anta da ta shafi ayyukan bayi, sun zo ne a cikin Alkur'ani da Sunnah, kuma akwai abubuwa masu yawa a cikinsu da ke ɗauke da ma'anoni daban-daban (a yuwu) bisa ga harshen Larabci da na Shari'a. Don haka al'ada ce kuma babu makawa mutane su sha bamban wajen fahimtar su, kuma wannan sabani wajen fahimta yakan kai ga rabuwa da bambance-bambance a cikin ma'anar da aka nufa. Saboda haka babu makawa a samu fahimta daban-daban da sabani, har ta yiwu saboda haka a samu ra'ayoyi daban-daban da rabuwa a cikin hukunci guda. Lokacin da Manzon Allah ﷺ ya ce a yakin Ahzab:

Allah (swt) is the One who legislates laws for the people, not the ruler, and He compels them and the ruler to follow them in their relationships, to restrict themselves by them and to prevent them from following (any) other (rules). Therefore there is no place for the human being to lay down rules to organise people’s relationships, nor any place for the ruler to compel people or give them an option to follow principles and rules laid done by human beings organising their relationships. However the Shari’ah rules, which is the speech of the Legislator related to the actions of the slaves, came in the Qur’an and the Sunnah and there is much with them that carries (potentially) different meanings according to the Arabic language and the Shar’a. So it is natural and inevitable that people differ in understanding them, and that this difference in understanding leads to the limit of separation and differences in the intended meaning(s). Therefore it is inevitable to have separated and different understandings so that due to this, there can be separated and differing opinions in one rule. When the Messenger (saw) said in the battle of the Allies:

Wasu mutane sun fahimci cewa abin da yake nufi shi ne yin gaggawa, don haka suka yi sallar Asr a hanya, yayin da wasu mutane kuwa suka fahimci ma'anar jumlar kamar yadda take (a zahiri), don haka ba su yi sallar Asr ba, suka jinkirta ta har suka isa Banu Quraydha, inda suka yi ta a can. Lamarin ya kai ga Manzon Allah ﷺ, sai ya amince da ƙungiyoyin biyu, kowannensu bisa ga fahimtarsa. Manzon Allah ﷺ ya ce:

Some people understood that he meant hurrying and they prayed Asr along the way, while (other) people understood he meant the meaning of the sentence (literally) so they did not pray Asr and delayed it until they reached Banu Quraydha where they then prayed it. When (the matter) reached the Messenger (saw), he consented to the two groups each (according to) their understanding. When the Messenger (saw) said:

Mutane sun fahimci cewa abin da yake nufi shi ne babu salla ingantacciya (saheeh), don haka suka ce karatun Fatiha rukuni ne na salla, ta yadda sallar wanda bai karanta ta ba ba ta inganta. Amma wasu mutane kuwa sun fahimci cewa yana nufin cikakkiyar salla, don haka suka ce karatun Fatiha ba rukuni ne na salla ba; a maimakon haka, karatun Alqur'ani ne rukuni, ta yadda idan mutum bai karanta Fatiha ba amma ya karanta kowace aya ta Alqur'ani, to sallarsa ingantacciya ce. Haka kuma sun sabawa juna game da maganarsa ﷺ:

People understood that he meant no correct (saheeh) prayer so they said that reciting the Fatiha is a pillar of the prayer such that the prayer of the one who does not recite it is invalidated. Whereas other people understood that he meant the complete prayer so they said that reciting the Fatiha is not a pillar of the prayer; rather, reciting the Qur’an is the pillar such that if one doesn’t recite the Fatiha but recites any ayah of the Qur’an then his prayer is correct. Similarly, they differed over his (saw) statement:

Wasu ƙungiya sun fahimta cewa idan Musulmi ya kashe kafiri, ba a kashe shi saboda hakan (a matsayin ramuwa).

A group understood that if the Muslim killed a disbeliever, he is not killed for it (in retaliation)

...ana hukunta shi, misali, da ɗaurin kurkuku, bisa ga maganar Manzon Allah ﷺ

but is punished, for example, by imprisonment since the Messenger’s (saw) statement

Yana bayyana a sarari cewa ba a kashe shi ba. Wasu kuma sun fahimci cewa ya bambanta tsakanin kafirin yaki (kaffir harbi) da kafirin dhimmi (kaffir dhimmi), don haka ana kashe Musulmi saboda kafirin da ke karkashin alkawari idan ya kashe shi. Haka kuma, ana yin hakan ga kafirin da ke karkashin yarjejeniya (kaffir mu'ahid) da kafirin da ke samun kariya (kaffir must'aman), tun da fadin Manzon Allah ﷺ a cikin wannan hadisi ya nuna haka a cikin maganarsa:

Is explicit in not killing him. Others understood that he distinguished between the belligerent disbeliever (kaffir harbi) and the pledged disbeliever (kaffir dhimmi) so the Muslim is killed for the covenanted disbeliever if he kills, and likewise the disbeliever under treaty (kaffir mu’ahid) and the protected disbeliever (kaffir must’aman) since the Messenger’s (saw) statement in the same hadith indicated this in his saying:

Ma'anarsa ita ce cewa ba a kashe Musulmi saboda kafiri, kuma ba a kashe mutumin da ke da alkawari saboda kafiri. Tun da mutumin da ke da alkawari kafiri ne, hakan yana nufin kalmar "kafiri" a nan tana nufin kafirin da ke yaki, watau mutumin da ke da alkawari ba a kashe shi saboda kafirin da ke yaki. Don haka ma'anar hadisin ita ce: ba a kashe Musulmi saboda kafirin da ke yaki ba, kuma ba a kashe mutumin da ke da alkawari saboda kafirin da ke yaki ba; fahimtar hakan kuma ita ce ana kashe Musulmi saboda kafirin da ba ya yaki, kuma ana kashe mutumin da ke da alkawari saboda kafirin da ba ya yaki. Mutumin da ke da alkawari kafiri ne, kuma kasancewarsa kamar Musulmin da ba a kashe shi saboda kafiri ba, yana nuna cewa ma'anar kalmar "kafiri" a cikin hadisin ita ce kafirin da ke yaki, ba zimmi ba. Wannan yana kara karfi da abin da aka ruwaito cewa an kawo wa Manzon Allah (saw) wani Musulmi wanda ya kashe wani Bayahude, sai ya kashe shi. Tare da wannan bambancin fahimta, hukunci ma yana bambanta. Haka abin yake ga ayoyi da hadisai da yawa. Sabanin ra'ayi a kan hukunci guda daya yana sa wajibi ga Musulmi ya karbi daya daga cikin ra'ayoyin, domin dukkansu hukunce-hukuncen Shari'ah ne, kuma hukuncin Allah a kan mutum daya ba zai iya zama fiye da daya ba. Saboda haka wajibi ne a tabbatar da hukunci guda daya daga cikinsu domin a aiki da shi, kuma karbar hukuncin Shari'ah wajibi ne ga Musulmi, babu wata hanyar tsira daga hakan ta kowace fuska idan mutum zai aikata wani abu. Duk wani aiki da za a yi bisa daya daga cikin hukunce-hukunce, ko na wajibi ne ko mustahabbi ko haramun ne ko makaruhi ne ko mubahi ne, yana bukatar a karbi takamaiman hukunci. Saboda haka wajibi ne ga kowane Musulmi, ko mujtahidi ne ko mai bi (muqallid), halifa ne ko ba halifa ba, ya karbi hukunci. Idan ya karbi wani takamaiman hukunci, wannan hukuncin Shari'ah ya zama hukuncin Allah a kansa, kuma ya zama wajibi a gare shi ya yi aiki da shi kadai, ya koyar da mutane da shi, ya kuma yi kira zuwa ga Musulunci bisa gare shi. Ma'anar Musulmi ya karɓi wata hukunci shi ne ya yi aiki da ita, yana koyar da ita ga wasu, kuma yana kiran mutane zuwa gare ta idan ya yi kira zuwa ga hukunce-hukuncen Musulunci da tunanin Musulunci. Idan Musulmi ya karɓi wata takamaiman hukunci, wannan hukunci ta zama a kansa hukuncin Allah da kansa, kuma ba a yarda ya bar ta ba sai a cikin hali uku: Na farko, idan rauni na hujjar ya bayyana a gare shi, kuma ya bayyana wata hujja mai ƙarfi fiye da hujjarta wadda aka danganta ga hukuncin Allah cewa hukuncin Allah shi ne wanda hujja mai ƙarfi ta nuna. A wannan hali, ya zama wajibi a kansa ya bar abin da ya karɓa, ya karɓi sabuwar ra'ayin, tun da ta zama hukuncin Allah a kansa. Na biyu: Idan ya fara tunanin cewa sabuwar ra'ayin wani mai ilimi fiye da shi ne ya karɓe ta wajen fitar da hukunci, kuma mafi daidai a fitar da hukunci, ko kuma yana da cikakken ilimi game da Shari'a. A wannan hali, ana yarda ya bar abin da ya karɓa ya karɓi wani abu daban, saboda abin da aka tabbatar game da sanannun Sahabbai waɗanda suka bar ra'ayoyinsu suka karɓi ra'ayin wasu. Abu Bakr (ra) ya karɓi ra'ayin Ali (ra) ya bar nasa, kuma Umar (ra) ya karɓi ra'ayin Ali (ra) ya bar nasa. Na uku: Idan niyyar ita ce a haɗa matsayin Musulmi a kan ra'ayi guda. A wannan hali, ana yarda Musulmi ya bar ra'ayin da ya karɓa ya karɓi ra'ayin da yake so a haɗa matsayin Musulmi a kansa, saboda abin da aka tabbatar game da Uthman wanda ya amince ya karɓi alkawari daga mutane bisa Littafin Allah da Sunnar Manzonsa da ra'ayin(n) biyu Shaykhai bayansa, Abu Bakr da Umar. Sahabbai sun yarda da abin da ya yi, wato ya bar abin da ya karɓa ya karɓi abin da Abu Bakr (ra) da Umar (ra) suka karɓa. A cikin waɗannan yanayi, Musulmi yana barin abin da ya riƙa, ya riƙi wani abu daban; banda waɗannan yanayi, ba a halatta masa ya bar shi ta kowace hanya ba, domin Shari'a ta yi magana ga kowane mutum ɗaya, kuma wajibi ne ga kowane Musulmi ya riƙi abin da ya kai ga ta hanyar ijtihadi ko bin malami (taqleed). Da zarar ya riƙe, yana wajibi a kansa abin da ya riƙa, sai dai yanayin da dalilin Shari'a ya keɓe.

Da

And

Da

And

Watau, a tsakanin shi da mutane biyayya ga Dawla ce, kuma a tsakaninsa da Allah (SWT) abin da Imam ya karɓa ya zama hukuncin Allah a kansa game da aiki. Sai dai biyayyar mutane ga umurnin Imam, da wajibcin da ke kansu na aiki bisa abin da ya karɓa na hukunce-hukunce, ba tare da aiki bisa ra'ayinsu da abin da suka karɓa ba, ba a ɗaukarsa karɓar abin da Imam ya karɓa ba. Hakika biyayya ce ga umurninsa (Khalifah) da aiwatar da abin da ya karɓa game da aiki, ba karɓar abin da ya karɓa ba. Saboda haka ya halatta ga kowane Musulmi ya koyar da hukunce-hukuncen da ya karɓa, ya kuma yi kira zuwa gare su a lokacin da yake kiran mutane zuwa Musulunci, koda sun saɓa da karɓar Imam. Wannan kuwa saboda Ijma'in Sahabbai yana kan wajibcin aiki bisa karɓar Khalifah, ba koyarwa ko kira (da'wah) ba; yana keɓe ga aiki ne kawai. Misali, Abu Bakr (RA) yana raba dukiya daidai tsakanin Musulmi ba tare da duba wanda ya fara karɓar Musulunci ko wanda bai fara ba, amma Umar (RA) yana da ra'ayi daban, wato ya duba mutum da fifikonsa wajen karɓar Musulunci da kuma wani mutum da makararsa. Ya yi muhawara da Abu Bakr (RA) a kan haka, amma ya yi biyayya ga abin da Abu Bakr (RA) ya karɓa, kuma ya ci gaba da riƙe ra'ayinsa a zuciya. Lokacin da aka naɗa shi Khalifah, ya soke aiki bisa ra'ayin Abu Bakr (RA) ya yi aiki bisa ra'ayinsa. Saboda haka akwai bambanci tsakanin Musulmi ya karɓi ra'ayi da biyayyarsa ga abin da Khalifah ya karɓa. Biyayya ga karɓar Khalifah tana wajabta aiki bisa gare shi kawai, ba kiran mutane zuwa gare shi ko koyar da shi ba. Amma karɓar ra'ayi shi ne koyar da shi, kira zuwa gare shi, da aiki bisa gare shi. Don haka ya halatta a sami ƙungiyoyin siyasa, watau... jam'iyyoyin da suke ɗaukar ra'ayoyi mabambanta da waɗanda Khalifa ya ɗauka, amma su duka kamar sauran Musulmi ne, wajibi ne a kansu, ta fuskar aiki, su yi aiki bisa abin da Khalifa ya ɗauka kawai, ba wani abu ba.

I.e. between him and the people is the obedience to the State, and between him and Allah (swt) is that what the Imam adopts becomes the rule of Allah upon him in respect of action. However, the obedience of the people to the Imam’s command, the obligation upon them to act according to what he adopted in the rules, and not acting upon their opinions and what they adopted is not considered an adoption of what the Imam adopted. It is rather obedience to his (the Khalifah’s) command and executing what he adopted in terms of action not the adoption of what he adopted. Therefore it is permitted for any Muslim to teach what he adopted of the rules and to call to them when he invites to Islam even if they differed from the Imam’s adoption. This is because the Ijma’a of the Sahabah is upon the obligation to act according to the Khalifah’s adoption not teaching or invitation (da’wah); it is specific to action. Thus we find that whereas Abu Bakr (ra) would divide wealth between Muslims equally without looking into who embraced Islam early or not, Umar (ra) had a different opinion which is (considering) a man and his precedence (in embracing) Islam and another man and his lateness. He debated Abu Bakr (ra) in this, but he obeyed what Abu Bakr (ra) adopted and remained adopting his opinion. When he was appointed Khalifah, he invalidated acting upon Abu Bakr’s (ra) opinion and acted upon his opinion. Therefore there is a distinction between the Muslim adopting the opinion and his obedience to what the Khalifah adopted. Obedience to the Khalifah’s adoption obliges acting upon it only and not calling towards it or teaching it. As for adopting the opinion, it is (for) teaching it, calling to it and acting upon it. Therefore it is allowed for there to exist political groups i.e. parties which adopt opinions different from those adopted by the Khalifah, but they are all like the rest of the Muslims, obliged in respect of action to act according to what the Khalifah adopted and nothing else.

Saboda haka, ba a halatta ga Imam ya mayar da abin da yake halal haram, ko ya mayar da abin da yake haram halal, ko ya soke wata hukunci ko ya hana aiki da wata hukunci, domin wannan haram ne ga Khalifah kamar yadda yake haram ga kowane Musulmi. Haka kuma, ba za a ce maslahar Musulmi tana bukatar a haramta irin wannan abu ba, tun da Allah ya ƙayyade maslahar Musulmi ta hanyar takamaiman hukunce-hukunce; idan Khalifah ya zo ya duba maslaha ta wata hanyaban da waɗannan (hukunce-hukuncen), to zai kasance ya soke su, wanda ba a taɓa halatta hakan ba. Don haka, ba za a ce kula da al'amuran Musulmi ya ba shi izinin tafiyar da su bisa ijtihadinsa ba, domin Allah ya ba shi izinin kula da al'amuran Musulmi ta Littafi da Sunnah, wato hukunce-hukuncen Shari'a, kuma ya ba shi izinin yin ijtihadi cikin iyakokinsu. Yana yin ijtihadi a cikin al'amuran sakandare waɗanda ba su da nassi bayyananne, amma tushensu (usul) ya zo da nassi gabaɗaya; yana yin ijtihadi don zaɓar abin da yake ganin ya fi dacewa da amfani. Amma abin da hukuncin Allah (swt) ya zo a kansa, babu wurin ijtihadin Khalifah a cikin wannan al'amari; a maimakon haka, wajibi ne ya aiwatar da hukunce-hukuncen Shari'a yadda suke ba tare da canji ko musanya ba. I, yana iya ganin wani aiki a matsayin halal amma yana kaiwa ga haramun da Shari'a ta haramta, kamar ganin cewa musayar wani littafi takamaimai zai kai ga lalacewar mutane a addininsu, ko zai kai ga yaɗuwar fasikanci a tsakanin mutane, sai ya hana shi. Yana iya ganin aiki a matsayin halal amma zai kai ga cutarwa wadda Shari'a ta zo ta wajabta kawar da ita, kamar ganin cewa sanya kaya a gaban shaguna zai hana mutane wucewa a hanya ko zai dame masu wucewa; a wannan yanayi sai ya hana abin da yake halal kuma ya hukunta duk wanda ya aikata shi. Amma wannan ba haramta halal ba ne, a maimakon haka aiwatar da hukuncin Shari'a ne da ya samo daga ka'idar Shari'a:

Therefore it is not permitted for the Imam to make the allowed (halal) forbidden (haram) or make the forbidden allowed, nor to abolish a rule or prevent acting upon a rule since this is haram for the Khalifah as it is haram for every Muslim. Nor should one say that the benefit of the Muslims requires forbidding such and such since Allah has specified the Muslims’ benefit by specific rules; if the Khalifah comes and views the benefit in other than these (rules), then he would have abrogated them which is never permitted. Thus one cannot say that taking care of the Muslims’ affairs has allowed him to direct them according to his ijtihad because Allah has allowed him to take care of the Muslims’ affairs by the Book and Sunnah i.e. the Shari’ah rules and allowed him to (perform) ijtihad within their limits. He does ijtihad in the secondary actions which have no explicit text but whose origins (usul) came with an explicit text which is general; he does ijtihad to choose what he sees as more suitable and beneficial. As for what came with the rule of Allah (swt) upon it, there is no place for the Khalifah’s ijtihad in this affair; rather he is obliged to execute the Shari’ah rules as they are without any substitution or change. Yes, he can view an action as allowed but it leads to a haram which the Shar’a forbade such as viewing that the exchange of a specific book would inevitably lead to corruption of the people in their deen or would inevitably lead to spreading debauchery among the people so he prevents it. He can see an action as allowed but it would inevitably lead to a harm which the Shar’a came obliging its removal such as seeing that placing goods before the stores would prevent people passing by the road in the road or annoy by passers so in this case he prevents the allowed and punish whoever does it. However this is not forbidding the halal but rather executing a Shari’ah rule he deduced from the shari’ah principle:

Kuma ƙa'ida

And the principle

Ko kuma wani ya yi wannan istinbadi, sai Khalifah ya karɓe shi ya aiwatar da shi. A wannan yanayi, wajibi ne a kan Khalifah ya aiwatar da hakan, domin hukunci ne na Shari'a wanda wajibi ne a aiwatar da shi. Don haka zai hana abin haram ne, ba abin da aka halatta ba. Haka kuma, idan akwai wani al'amari ko wata hukunci da za a iya aiwatar da shi ta hanyoyi da dama na sakandare, wanda asalinsa dalili ne na gaba ɗaya, to a wannan yanayi duk hanyoyin da ta yiwu a aiwatar da hukuncin ko al'amarin ta cikin su, na cikin ayyuka halatattu ne. Misali wannan shi ne Khalifah ya san ra'ayin mutane, ko ra'ayinsu game da wanda zai wakilce su a Majlisu Ash-Shura, wanda hakan yayi kama da abin da ake kira da dokar zaɓe. Duk waɗannan hanyoyin sakandare suna cikin ayyuka halatattu, don haka ya halatta ga Khalifah ya umarta da ɗayansu, banda sauran, kuma biyayya gare shi ta zama wajibi a cikin hukuncin da ya karɓa da kuma aikin da ke kaiwa gare shi. A wannan yanayi bai wajabta wani aiki halal ba, ko ya hana wani aiki halal ɗin, sai dai ya karɓi hukunci ya karɓi hanyar da za a aiwatar da hukunci ta cikinta. A wannan matsayi, biyayya wajibi ne a cikin hukuncin da ya karɓa da aikin da ke kaiwa gare shi, domin yana bin hukunci, kuma mai bi yana ɗaukar hukuncin wanda aka bi. Irin wannan ne dukkan dokokin tsari da gudanarwa, domin suna tilasta aiki halal kamar yadda suke tilasta abin da ya biyo bayan hukunci da Khalifah ya karɓa. Tilasta shi kuma yana buƙatar barin duk wani abu banda shi, watau hana shi. Kamar karɓar hukunce-hukunce yake, kuma ba ya fitowa daga hukunce-hukuncen Shari'a. Bai wajabta wani aiki halal ba, ko ya haramta wani aiki halal ɗin, sai dai ya aikata abin da Shari'a ta halatta masa na karɓar hukunce-hukunce da abin da zai kai ga aiwatar da su. A cikin waɗannan yanayi uku: hana abin da ke kai ga haram, ko hana abin da ke kai ga cutarwa, ko tilasta wani salo na musamman daga cikin salo da dama, Khalifah bai bar dokokin Shari'ah ko ikonsa na ɗaukar su ba, kuma akwai dalili ga kowane ɗaya daga cikinsu. Babu wani abu a nan da zai halasta wa Khalifah ko ya ba shi izinin canza wata dokar Shari'ah da sunan maslaha; a maimakon haka, dole ne ya takaita gaba ɗaya ga dukkan dokokin Shari'ah cikin komai.

Or someone else deduced it and he (the Khalifah) adopted and executed it. In this case it is obliged upon him to do this as it is a Shari’ah rule which is obligatory to be executed. So he would have prevented haram and not what is allowed. Similarly, if there is a matter or a rule which can potentially be performed via numerous secondary actions for whose origin came general evidence, then in this case all the actions through which it is possible to perform the rule or matter are of the permissible actions. This is like the Khalifah reaching the knowledge of the people’s opinion, or their opinion concerning who should represent them in the Majlis Ash-Shura which is similar to what is known as the electoral canon. All these secondary actions are from the permissible actions, so it is permitted for the Khalifah to command with one of them in exception among the others, wherein obeying him is obligatory. In this case he would not have obliged a permissible action or prevented another permissible action, but would have adopted a rule and adopted a means by which to execute a rule. At this point, obeying him is obliged in the rule he adopted and the action leading to it since it follows the rule and the follower takes the rule of the followed. Similar to this are all the organizational and administrative canons as they are compelling a permissible action as it is compelling what follows a rule adopted by the Khalifah and compelling it requires leaving anything other than it i.e. preventing it. It is just like adopting rules and it does not come from the Shari’ah rules. He would not have obliged a permissible action or prohibited another permissible action, but rather he did of what the Shari’ah allowed him in adopting rules and what would lead to performing them. In these three situations: Preventing what leads to haram, or (preventing) what leads to harm, or compelling specific styles among many, the Khalifah has not left the Shari’ah rules or his competency from adoption and there is an evidence for each one of them. There is nothing here to legitimise and permit the Khalifah to change any Shari’ah rule under the pretext of benefit; rather he must completely restrict (himself) to all the Shari’ah rules in everything.

Yana kama daga wannan misali cewa Manzon Allah (saw) ya hana abin da aka halatta, sai ya haramta abin da aka halatta, alhali hakikanin lamarin ba haka yake ba. Hakika, hakikanin lamarin shi ne Manzo ya hana wani takamaiman abu daga cikin abubuwan da aka halatta, ba wata hukuncin halal ko wani abin halal ba. Wannan takamaiman abu zai kai babu makawa ga wata cuta, wadda wata nassi ya zo ya haramta faruwarta. Manzon Allah (saw) ya san cewa shan ruwa daga wannan rijiyar zai haifar da wata cuta tabbatacciya, don haka abin da Manzon Allah (saw) ya yi ba haramta wani aiki halal ba ne, a'a, haramta abin da zai kai ga cutar da Shari'a ta haramta, wato cutar da za ta samu rundunar soja. Haka kuma hanawarsa cewa kowa ya fita shi kaɗai sai dai yana da abokin tafiya, haramta takamaiman aiki ne daga cikin abubuwan da aka halatta, takamaiman aikin da tabbas zai kai ga cutar da Shari'a ta haramta. Shaida a kan haka ita ce, mutanen da Manzon Allah (saw) ya umarta sun aikata abin da aka umarce su, sai dai mutum biyu daga Banu Sa'ida. Ɗaya ya fita don ya yi bayan gida, ɗayan kuma ya fita yana neman raƙumarsa. Wanda ya fita bayan gida ya faɗi a inda yake, wanda kuma ya tafi neman raƙumarsa, iska ta ɗauke shi ta jefa shi a kan duwatsun Tayyi biyu. Sa'ad da aka sanar da Manzon Allah (saw) game da haka, sai ya ce:

It appears from this example that the Messenger (saw) prohibited the use of an allowed thing so he forbade an allowed thing, whereas the reality of the incident is not like this. Rather, its reality is that the Messenger prohibited a specific thing of the allowed things not an allowed rule or an allowed thing. This specific thing would inevitably lead to a harm for which a text came forbidding its occurrence. The Messenger (saw) knew that drinking water from this well would result in a definite harm such that what the Messenger (saw) did was not forbidding an allowed action but rather forbidding what would lead to a harm forbidden by Shar’a which is harm befalling the army. Similarly his prohibition of anyone going out alone except that he have a companion is the prohibition of a specific action of the allowed matters, a specific action which would definitely lead to a harm that is forbidden by the Shar’a. The evidence for this is that those people whom the Messenger (saw) commanded did what they were commanded except two men from Banu Sa’ida. One went out to relieve himself and the other went out searching for his camel. As for the one who went out to relieve himself he collapsed in his place and the one who went to find his camel, the wind carried him and cast him on the two mountains of Tayyi. When the Messenger of Allah (saw) was informed about this he said:

Sai Manzon Allah ﷺ ya yi wa wanda ya fadi ya kuma yi masa addu'a, sai ya warke; amma wanda ya fadi tsakanin duwatsun Tayyi, daga baya mutanen Tayyi suka kawo shi wurin Annabi ﷺ a Madina. Wata hujja a kan haka ita ce, lokacin da Manzon Allah ﷺ ya wuce Al-Hijr, ya rufe fuskarsa da tufafinsa, ya kuma sa wa rakumansa kaho, sannan ya ce:

Then the Messenger of Allah made du’a for the one who had collapsed and and he was cured; as for the one who fell between the two Mountains of Tayyi, he was later brought back to the prophet (saw) in Madinah by the people of Tayyi. Another evidence for this is that when the Messenger of Allah (saw) passed by Al-Hijr, he covered his face with his cloth and spurred his camel and said:

Anan dole ne mu lura da bambanci tsakanin haramta wani aiki na cikin ayyukan da aka halatta ko haramta wani abu na cikin abubuwan da aka halatta, da kuma haramta aikin da aka halatta ko haramta abin da aka halatta. Haramta abin da aka halatta shi ne lokacin da Shari'a ta riga ta halatta aikin, sannan shugaba ya zo ya haramta shi bisa uzurin cewa akwai cutarwa a cikinsa; misali, shigo da kaya daga waje Shari'a ta halatta shi, amma shugaba ya ga cewa barin shigo da kaya yana cutar da masana'antun cikin gida, sai ya haramta shi. Wannan haramta aikin da aka halatta ne, kuma hakan ba ya halatta wa shugaba, domin Shari'a ta san, a lokacin da ta halatta shi, ko zai kawo amfani ko cutarwa, kuma ta ba shi hukuncin halal. Haramta shi ba ya halatta, domin hakan zai zama soke hukuncin Shari'a, wanda ba ya ingantuwa a kowane hali. Amma haramta wani abu cikin abubuwan da aka halatta, shi ne lokacin da ya bayyana gare shi cewa wani abu daga cikin abubuwan da aka halatta zai kai ga cutarwar da Shari'a ta zo ta haramta, sai shugaba ya ga ya dace ya haramta wannan abu domin ya kawar da cutarwar. Misali, shugaba ya ga cewa shigo da sukari yana kai ga rufe masana'antun sukari a cikin kasa da kuma fatara a cikinsu, har ta zama kasar tana dogara ga kafirai wajen shigo da sukari. A wannan lokaci, halal ne shugaba ya hana shigo da sukari domin kare Ummah baki daya daga cutarwar dogaro da kafirai wajen daya daga cikin bukatunta, wato rashin wadatuwa. A wannan yanayi, halal ne a hana wannan abu da aka halatta, kuma wannan ba haramta abin da aka halatta ba ne; abin da aka halatta, wato shigo da kaya, yana nan a halaccinsa. Abin da aka haramta shi ne shigo da sukari kawai. Wannan kamar yadda Manzon Allah ﷺ ya hana shan ruwa daga wata rijiya ta musamman, domin ya san akwai cutarwa a cikinta. Haramcinsa bai haramta wani abu da aka halatta ba, wato... Bai hana ruwa ba, sai dai ya hana wani takamaiman abu daga cikin abubuwan halal, wato shan ruwa daga wannan rijiya. Saboda haka, hana wani takamaiman abu daga cikin ayyukan halal abu ne mai izini, amma hana abin da yake halal ba ya taɓa halatta ba.

Here we must note the distinction between forbidding a specific action of the allowed actions or forbidding a specific thing of the allowed things, and forbidding an allowed action or forbidding an allowed thing. Forbidding an allowed thing is where the action has been allowed by the Shar’a, then the ruler comes and forbids it on the pretext that there is a harm existing in it; such as importing goods from outside has been allowed by Shar’a but the ruler views that allowing importing causes harm to (internal) factories and forbids it. This is forbidding an allowed action which is never allowed for the ruler since the Shar’a knew, when it allowed it, that it would be beneficial or harmful and gave it the rule of permissibility. Forbidding it is not allowed as this would be abrogating the Shar’a rule which is void in all circumstances. As for forbidding a specific thing among the allowed things, this is when it occurs to him that one of the allowed matters would lead to a harm which the Shar’a came to forbid so the ruler considers it correct to forbid this matter to lift the harm. For instance, the ruler considers that importing sugar leads to closing and the bankruptcy of sugar factories within the country making it dependent upon the kuffar in importing sugar. At this point, it is allowed for the ruler to prevent importation of sugar to prevent the harm to the whole Ummah which is her dependency upon the kuffar for one of its necessities and it's the lack of sufficiency. In this case, it is allowed to prevent this allowed matter and it is not forbidding an allowed thing; rather, the allowed thing i.e. importing remains allowed. It is rather the forbidding of an allowed matter which is importing sugar. This is like the Messenger (saw) forbidding the drinking of water from a specific well in which he knew there was harm. His forbidding did not forbid an allowed matter i.e. he did not forbid water, but rather he forbade a specific matter of the allowed matter which is drinking from this well. Accordingly, forbidding a specific thing of the allowed actions is permitted whereas forbidding an allowed thing is never permitted.

Kuma ya hana shi haɗuwa da mutane. Wannan ba hana abin da aka halatta ba ne, a'a, hana aiki ne wanda zai kai ga cutarwa. Saboda haka, an zo da wani hadisi a wani wuri wanda Ahmad ya ruwaito ta hanyar Tareeq bin Hurayra:

And he (saw) prevented him from mixing with the people. This is not forbidding the allowed, rather it is forbidding an action which would lead to harm. Due to this, it has come in another hadith narrated by Ahmad via Tareeq bin Hurayra:

Ta haka ne kawai zai bayyana ga mai bibiya abin da ake amfani da shi a matsayin hujja a wannan al'amari daga hadisin Manzon Allah ﷺ, cewa babu haramta wani abu mai halal a cikinsu. Maimakon haka, haramta wani takamammen abu ne daga cikin abu mai halal, wannan takamammen abu kuwa yana kai ga cutarwa wadda Shari'a ta zo ta hana ta. Saboda haka wannan shari'a ce da hujja cewa Imam na iya hana takamammun abubuwa daga cikin abubuwa masu halal, da takamammun ayyuka daga cikin ayyuka masu halal, idan hakan yana kai ga cutarwa wadda Shari'a ta zo don hanawa. Game da abin da aka ruwaito game da Sahabbai dangane da wasu al'amura, ga duk wanda ya bi su a bayyane yake cewa suna hana aiki mai halal wanda ke kai ga haram ko kai ga cutarwa wadda Shari'a ta zo don hanawa. Wasu daga cikinsu kuma suna tilasta aiki mai halal (mubah) domin aiwatar da wata hukuncin Shari'a ko wani al'amari da Shari'a ta umarta a wasu lokuta ta hana a wasu, kamar karbuwa a salo. Wannan halal ne ga Imam, misali: tattara rajista (diwan) da Umar (ra) ya yi, da kuma tilasta mushafi guda daya da kona dukkan sauran mushafai da Uthman (ra) ya yi. Daga cikin irin wannan ita ce yadda Umar (ra) ya tilasta Sahabbai su daina tattaunawa kan hadisi lokacin da hakan ya shagaltar da su daga Alkur'ani, da kuma yadda ya hana fitattun Sahabbai barin Madina zuwa kasashen da aka ci don kada mutane su yi sha'awar su, kuma kada su yi sha'awar duniya. Kamar wannan ita ce abin da gwamnoni, sarakuna da Khulafa'u suka yi wajen tilastawa masu kullun kullu su sanya rawani a goshinsu don kada gumin jikinsu ya fada cikin kullun, da sanya wani yanki na zane a kan hancinsu don kada wani abu daga gare shi ya fada cikin kullun, da askin gashin hammata don kada wani abu daga gare shi ya fada cikin kullun, da sauran irin wadannan abubuwa da suka zo a littattafan Fiqhu. Dukkan wadannan suna shiga cikin ka'idar shari'a.

In this way it becomes clear to the one following what is used as evidence in this matter from the Messenger’s (saw) hadith that there is no forbidding of an allowed (matter) in them. Rather it is forbidding a specific thing of the allowed thing, and this specific thing leads to a harm which the Shar’a came forbidding it. Therefore this is legislation and evidence that the Imam can prevent specific things from the allowed things, and specific actions of the allowed actions, this is if it leads to harm which the Shar’a came to prevent. As for what is narrated about the Sahabah regarding (certain) incidents, it is clear to anyone who follows them that they are forbidding an allowed (action) which leads to haram or leads to a harm which the Shar’a came to prevent, and some of them are compelling an allowed (mubah) action (in order) to perform a Shari’ah rule or a matter the Shar’a commanded some and prevented others such as the adoption in styles. This is allowed for the Imam, for eg; the compilation of the registers (diwan) by Umar (ra), and obliging one mushaf and burning all (other) mushafs by Uthman. Of this type is Umar (ra) obliging the Sahabah to stop (discussing the) hadith when this preoccupied them from the Qur’an, and his preventing the prominent Sahabah from leaving Madinah to the conquered lands so that the people are not enchanted by them and they are not enchanted by the world. Similar to this is what the governors, rulers and Khulafaa did in compelling those who knead dough to placing their turbans on their forehead so that their sweat does not fall in his dough, and to place a piece of cloth upon their nose so that nothing from it falls into the dough and shave their armpits so that nothing from it falls into the dough, and other similar things which came in the Fiqh books. All of them fall within the shari’ah principle

Da kuma ka'idar shari'a

And the shari’ah principle

Babu wani abu a nan da ke nuna cewa halal ne ga Khalifah ya haramta abin da yake mubah ko ya halatta abin da yake haram bisa uzurin kula da al'amuran jama'a. Saboda haka, dokokin da ake cewa bisa fahimtar waje, wato cewa umarnin mai mulki ne ba tare da wani sharadi ba, ba wajibi ba ne a bi su muddin umarnin Khalifah ba shi ne ya karɓi wata hukuncin Shari'a ya kuma wajabta ta ba. Dokokin su ne abin da Khalifah ya karɓa daga hukunce-hukuncen Shari'a. Sai dai Khalifah na iya umartar abin da ya ga ya dace daga cikin ka'idoji don aiwatar da hukunce-hukuncen Shari'a, ko ayyuka ko al'amuran da Shari'a ta nema, kamar dokokin gudanarwa ko tsarin mulki. Wannan ana ɗaukarsa karɓar salo wanda ke bin hukunce-hukuncen da aka karɓa, kuma waɗannan dokoki wajibi ne a bi su kamar yadda Khalifah ya karɓe su, saboda suna cikin maganar Mai tsarki da ɗaukaka:

There is nothing here which indicates that it is allowed for the Khalifah to forbid a mubah or allow a haram under the pretext of taking care of the affairs. Therefore the canons according to the foreign understanding i.e. that they are the ruler’s commands in an unrestricted (manner) are not obligatory to be obeyed as long as the Khalifah’s command is not in adopting a Shari’ah rule and obliging this rule. The canons are what the Khalifah adopted from the Shari’ah rules. However, the Khalifah may command what he considered of the principles to perform the Shari’ah rules or the actions or matters requested by the Shar’a such as the administrative canons or systems. This is considered adoption of styles which follows the adopted rules and these canons are obligatory to be obeyed as the Khalifah adopted them and because they are within the statement of the Glorified:

Tun da biyayya ta zo a gaba ɗaya, tana rufe duk abin da Shari'a ba ta zo don hanawa ba.

Since the obedience came in general covering everything the Shar’a did not come to prevent.