Wannan ma'auni biyu yana kama da ma'auni biyu na 'aamm da khaass. Babban bambanci shi ne cewa kalmar da take 'aamm tana shafar kowane memba na rukunin da ta ambata, yayin da kalmar mutlaq yawanci tana shafar kowane ɗaya daga cikin dimbin mutane, amma ba ga duka ba. Misali, idan na ce wa wani bawa, "Ka ba kowane wanda ya gama makarantar sakandare kuɗi dala goma idan ya zo gida," wannan magana tana 'aamm.

This pair of concepts is similar to the paired concepts, ‘aamm and khaass. A major difference is that the word which is ‘aamm encompasses every member of the category it names, whereas the mutlaq word usually applies to any one of a multitude, but not to all.93 For instance, if I say to a servant, “Give ten dollars to every high school graduate who comes to the house,” this expression is ‘aamm.

Bawa ba zai kasance yana bin umarnina ba sai ya ba kowane mutum da ya cika waɗancan sharuɗɗa dalar Amurka goma. Sai dai idan na ce masa, "Ka ba wani miskīn (mabukaci) dalar Amurka goma," to wannan magana tana cikin nau'in mutlaq. Zai kasance yana cika umarnin idan ya ba mutum ɗaya mabukaci kawai.

The servant would not be in compliance with my command unless he gives ten dollars to every individual who meets those qualifications. On the other hand, if I told him, “Give ten dollars to a (miskeen) poor person,” 94 this expression is mutlaq. He would be in compliance if he gave it to a single individual who is poor.

Ma'anar mutlaq shi ne kalma ko jumla da ke bayyana ma'ana ta zahiri ba tare da sanya wata iyaka a kanta ba. Yana nuni ga wani nau'i na abu ba tare da an ƙayyade shi ba, kuma yakan zo ne a sifar isim nakira (wanda ba a ƙayyade ba) a cikin jumla mai kyautatawa. Kalmomi irin su "bawa," "kujera," ko "kare" za su zama mutlaq, yayin da "bawa mai imani," "kujera ta ƙarfe," ko "wani mutumin Filipino" duk za su zama muqayyad, saboda kowane isim nakira ya samu sifa (siffa) wadda ta takaita shi.

The mutlaq may be defined as a word or phrase which expresses a nonfigurative idea without placing any limitations on it. It refers to one type of thing without being specific and usually occurs in the form of an indefinite noun (annakirah) in an affirmative statement. Terms like “a slave,” “a chair,” or “a dog” would be mutlaq, whereas “a believing slave,” “a metal chair,” or “a Filipino man” would all be muqayyad, because each indefinite noun has been qualified and restricted by an adjective (sifah).

Allah ya ce a cikin Alkur'ani cewa kaffarar karya rantsuwa da sunan Allah shi ne ko dai,

Allaah states in the Qur’aan that the expiation for breaking oaths in God’s name is either,

Babu wani takura game da irin bawan da za a iya 'yantarwa. Sai dai, nau'in bawan an takaita shi a cikin wannan ayar:

There are no limitations as to what type of slave may be freed. However, the type of slave has been restricted in the following verse:

Ɗaya daga cikin batutuwan da malaman usul al-fiqh suke tattaunawa a kai shi ne halaccin amfani da lafazin da aka takaita (muqayyad) daga wata nassi na Alkur'ani ko Sunna a kan lafazin da ba a takaita ba (mutlaq) a wata nassi. Akwai wasu yanayi da malamai suka yi ijma'i a kan halaccin wannan kayan aikin shari'a na yin hukunci, akwai wasu yanayi kuma da malamai suka yarda cewa ba a halatta a yi haka ba, akwai kuma yanayin da malamai suka sami sabani a kansu. Domin bayyana wannan batu, an raba ayoyin mutlaq da muqayyad zuwa manyan rukuni guda huɗu, bisa ga dalilin saukarsu (sabab) da kuma yarjejeniya ko sabanin hukunce-hukuncen (hukm) da suka ƙunsa.

One of the issues discussed by the scholars of usool al-fiqh is the permissibly of applying a muqayyad expression from one text of the Qur’aan or Sunnah to a mutlaq expression in another text. There are certain circumstances in which there is consensus of the permissibility of this deductive tool, and there are other circumstances where scholars agree it is not allowed to do so, and there are circumstances in which there is some difference of opinion. In order to clarify the issue, the mutlaq and muqayyad verses have been placed in four main categories in relation to the underlying reason (sabab) for their revelation and the agreement or disagreement of the rules (hukm) which they contain.

Misali shi ne zabi na huɗu a cikin kaffara (ramuwa) saboda karya rantsuwar da aka yi da sunan Allah, wato azumin kwana uku. Wannan ƙa'ida tana zuwa a mutlaq (ba a ƙayyade ta ba) a cikin Alƙur'ani kamar haka:

An example is the fourth option in atoning (kaffaarah) for breaking an oath taken in Allaah’s name, i.e., to fast three days. This principle is mutlaq in the Qur’aan as follows:

Duk da haka, a karatun Ibn Mas‘ood, an yi shi da muqayyad.

However, in the recitation of Ibn Mas‘ood, it was muqayyad:

Saboda haka, wasu malamai sun yanke hukunci cewa tun da sabab (karya rantsuwar da aka yi da sunan Allah) ya kasance iri ɗaya a cikin karatun biyu, kuma hukuncin (azumi) ya kasance iri ɗaya, to ya kamata a fahimci ƙa'idar mutlaq bisa ga karatun muqayyad. Akwai yarjejeniya gabaɗaya game da halascin amfani da nassin muqayyad ga nassin mutlaq a wannan rukuni, muddin nassoshin biyu ingantattu ne.

Thus, some scholars ruled that since the sabab (breaking an oath taken in Allaah’s name) was the same in both recitations, and the hukm (fasting) was the same, the mutlaq rule should be understood according to the muqayyad recitation. There is general agreement about the validity of applying the muqayyad text to the mutlaq text in this category, as long as both texts are authentic.

Wata shari'a mai kama da wannan, inda yawancin malamai suka yarda cewa ana aiwatar da abin da aka takaita (muqayyad) a kan abin da aka saki (mutlaq), ita ce haramcin cin jini. A wasu ayoyin Alƙur'ani da yawa, an haramta jini da salon magana na mutlaq.

A similar case where most scholars agree on the validity of applying the muqayyad to the mutlaq is the prohibition of eating blood. In several verses of the Qur’aan, blood is prohibited with a mutlaq expression:

Amma, a cikin aya ta 145 ta Suratul An'am, Allah yana cewa,

However, in verse 145 of Soorah al-An‘aam, Allaah says,

Tun da mutlaq da muqayyad duka suna magana ne akan abincin da aka haramta, yana da inganci a ce nau'in jinin da aka haramta shi ne wanda ake zubarwa kawai. Saboda haka, jinin da ke zuba daga nama yayin da ake dafa shi ba haram ba ne.99

Since the mutlaq and the muqayyad both deal with prohibited foods, it is valid to say that the only type of prohibited blood is that which is poured forth. Therefore, the blood that seeps from meat while it is being cooked is not prohibited.99

Misali na wannan rukuni shi ne batun tsaftace hannu101 a lokacin yin wudu'u da tayammum.100 A cikin ayar tsarkakewa,

An example of this category is the case of cleaning the hands100 during the performance of wudoo’ and tayammum.101 In the verse on purification,

Kalmar "hannu" a cikin alwala wata ce mai ƙayyadaddiyar ma'ana (muqayyad); amma a cikin ayar guda game da tayammum, an bar ta a fili, ba tare da ƙayyadewa ba (mutlaq).103

the word “hands” in making wudoo’ is muqayyad; whereas in the same verse concerning tayammum, it is left mutlaq:103

A cikin waɗannan misalan, sabab (asarar yanayin tsarki) iri ɗaya ce a bangarorin biyu; sai dai hukm ɗin ya bambanta, domin ana amfani da ruwa a alwala kuma ana wanke sassan jiki da yawa; yayin da ake amfani da turɓaya a tayammum a kan fuska da hannaye kawai. Saboda haka, bai kamata a fassara mutlaq bisa ga muqayyad ba. Haka kuma, ingantattun hadisai da ke bayanin tayammum sun ƙayyade wuyan hannu a matsayin iyaka. Sahabi ‘Ammaar ibn Yaasir ya ruwaito cewa Manzon Allah ﷺ ya umarce shi da ya buga hannayensa biyu a ƙasa sau ɗaya, ya busa su, sannan ya shafa fuskarsa da hannayensa, na hagu bisa na dama, har zuwa wuyan hannu.105

In these examples, the sabab (loss of one’s state of purity) is the same in both cases; however, the hukm is different in that water is used in the case of wudoo’ and more body parts are cleaned; whereas dust is used only on the face and hands in the case of tayammum. Hence, the mutlaq should not be interpreted according to the muqayyad. In fact, authentic hadeeths describing tayammum specify the wrists as the limit. The sahaabee ‘Ammaar ibn Yaasir reported that the Prophet (ﷺ) told him to strike both of his hands on the ground once, blow on them, and then wipe his face and hands, left hand on right, up to the wrists.105

Kaffarar 'yantar da bawa misali ne mai kyau na wannan rukuni. A yanayin kisan kai ba da gangan ba, kalmar bawa tana cikin ma'anar muƙayyad (ƙayyadaddiya):

The atonement (kaffaarah) of freeing a slave is a good example of this category. In the case of accidental murder, the word slave is muqayyad:

Amma a yanayin zihaar 107, kalmar ita ce mutlaq.

But in the case of thihaar 107 the word is mutlaq:

A bayyana cewa babu wata hujja a nan ta fassara mutlaq bisa muqayyad. An kashe rayuwar mumini, saboda haka sharadin shi ne bawan da za a 'yanta ya zama mumini; amma a yanayin karya rantsuwa da aka yi ta zihar ko kuma wata hanya, 'yantar da kowane bawa ya isa.

There is obviously no basis here for interpreting the mutlaq according to the muqayyad. A believer’s life was taken, hence the requirement is that the freed slave be a believer; whereas in the case of breaking of oaths made by thihaar or otherwise, the freeing of any slave is sufficient.

Misali na wannan rukuni shi ne batun hannu a cikin wudu’ da sata. A cikin ayar tsarkake jiki da aka ambata a baya, an takaita hannu da jumlar, "har zuwa gwiwar hannu," amma a cikin batun sata, an bar shi mutlaq (ba tare da takaitawa ba).

An example of this category is in the case of the hand in wudoo’ and theft. In the verse on purification previously mentioned, the hand is made muqayyad by the phrase, “up to the elbows,” but in the case of theft, it is left mutlaq. Consider the following:

Anan kuma, ba za a iya takaita mutlaq da muqayyad ba, musamman ma saboda an ruwaito cewa Annabi (ﷺ) ya takaita yanke hannu zuwa wuyan hannu, haka kuma Khulafa'u Rashidun suka yi.110

Here again, the mutlaq cannot be specified by the muqayyad, especially since it was reported that the Prophet (ﷺ) limited the amputation of hands to the wrist and so did the Righteous Caliphs.110