Iwapo 'Udhr (udhuru) itakapotokea, ambayo ndiyo Sababu ya Rukhsah, inaruhusiwa kwa Mukallaf kutenda kwa lolote analotaka. Anaweza kuchagua kutenda kulingana na 'Azeemah au kulingana na Rukhsah. Hiyo ni kwa sababu maandiko yanayohusu Rukhas (ruhusa maalum) yameonyesha hilo. Allah (SWT) amesema:

If the ‘Udhr (excuse) arises, which is the Sabab (cause) for the Rukhsah, it is permitted for the Mukallaf to act with whichever one he wishes. He can choose to act in accordance to the ‘Azeemah or in accordance to the Rukhsah. That is because the texts related to the Rukhas (special permissions) have indicated that. Allah (swt) said:

Kuondolewa kwa ‘Junaah’ (lawama) iliyotajwa katika Aya kunamaanisha Al-Ibaahah (kuruhusiwa). Hivyo basi, Msafiri anayesafiri umbali wa kufupisha anapewa uchaguzi kati ya ‘Azeemah, ambayo ni kukamilisha Swalah kwa Rak’aa nne, na kati ya kuchukua Rukhsa na kufupisha Swalah kwa kuswali Swalah zenye Rak’aa nne kwa Rak’aa mbili (yaani Adhuhuri, Alasiri na Isha).

The lifting of the ‘Junaah’ (blame) mentioned in the Aayah means Al-Ibaahah (permissibility). As such, the Musaafir who travels the distance of shortening is provided with the choice between the ‘Azeemah, which is to complete the Salaah with four Rak’aaat, and between taking the Rukhsah and shortening the Salaah by praying the prayers consisting of four Rak’aaat with two Rak’ah (i.e. Zhohr, Asr and ‘Ishaa).

Allah (SWT) alisema:

Allah (swt) said:

Hii pia inaonyesha Al-Ibaahah (kuruhusiwa), yani kuna uchaguzi kati ya kufunga na kufuturu (au kutofunga).

This also indicates Al-Ibaahah (permissibility) i.e. a choice between fasting and breaking the fast (or not fasting).

Na Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisema:

And the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

Hii inaeleza kwamba wote wako sawa katika suala la utiifu kwa Allah kwa upande wa utekelezaji wao au uendeshaji wao, ilhali ombi (Talab) la mmoja wao halina nafasi ya kutangulia juu ya ombi la mwingine.

This explains that they are equal in respect to the obedience of Allah in regards to their performance or undertaking whilst the Talab (request) of one of them does not have precedence over the Talab of the other.

Shaari’ ameeleza kwa kutumia Adillah (dalili) kwamba kuna hali ambazo kutenda kwa ‘Azeemah kunatangulizwa kuliko kutenda kwa Rukhsah, na baadhi ya ‘Ulamaa walilichukulia hilo kuwa Mandoob (lililopendekezwa). Hili ni kama lilivyo kuhusu Kauli ya Allah Ta’Aalaa:

The Shaari’ has explained by the Adillah (evidences) that there are circumstances when acting with the ‘Azeemah takes precedence over acting with the Rukhsah and some of the ‘Ulamaa considered it to be Mandoob (recommended). This is like in respect to the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa:

Aya hii inaonyesha kwamba kufunga wakati wa Safar (safari) ni bora zaidi (Awlaa) kuliko kuvunja funga.

The Aayah indicates that fasting during the Safar (travel) is Awlaa (preferential) than breaking the fast.

Ilisimuliwa kuwa wawili kati ya Maswahaba (rah) walitishiwa kuuawa na Washirikina kwa sababu ya kuukubali Uislamu kwao. Mmoja wao kisha akatamka maneno ya kukufuru, wakati mwingine alikataa kufanya hivyo. Basi Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ akasema kuhusu yule aliyekataa: “Yeye ni bora wa Mashahidi, na ni mwenzangu Peponi.” Hii ni, kwa hiyo, Daliili inayoonyesha kwamba kutenda kwa 'Azeemah katika hali hii ni bora kuliko kutenda kwa Rukhsah.

It was related that two of the Sahaabah (rah) were threatened with death by the Mushrikeen due to their embracing of Islaam. One of them then pronounced words of disbelief whilst the other refrained from doing so. So the Messenger of Allah (saw) said in respect to the one who refrained: “He is the best of the Shuhadaa’ and he is my companion in Jannah”. This is therefore a Daleel indicating that acting by the ‘Azeemah in this situation is preferential to acting by the Rukhsah

Katika hali ambayo kufuata ‘Azeemah kutaleta kifo kisichoepukika, kufuata Rukhsah ni Waajib (lazima), huku kushikamana na ‘Azeemah ni Haraam. Hili ni kama ruhusa maalum ya kula nyama ya mzoga (Al-Maitah) kwa yule anayeogopa kufa. Ni Mubaah kutokana na Rukhsah kimsingi, lakini itakuwa Waajib iwapo kifo kitakuwa jambo lililo hakika na lisiloepukika. Kushikamana na ‘Azeemah kungekuwa Haraam basi kwa sababu ya Qaa’idah Ash-Shar’iyah:

In the case where acting in accordance to the ‘Azeemah will lead to sure death, acting in accordance to the Rukhsah is Waajib (obligatory) whilst adhering to the ‘Azeemah is Haraam. This is like the special permission to eat the carrion meat (Al-Maitah) in regards to the one who fears death. It is Mubaah due to the Rukhsah in origin, however, it would become Waajib if the death becomes a confirmed inevitable reality. Adherence to the ‘Azeemah would then become Haraam due to the Qaa’idah Ash-Shar’iyah:

Kuangamia kwa mtu au kwa uhai wake ni haramu, na hivyo kushikamana na ‘Azeemah, ambayo katika mfano huu inadhihirika katika kutokula Maitah (nyama ya mzoga), ni haramu.

The destruction of the person or life is Haraam and so adherence to the ‘Azeemah, which in this example is manifested in not eating the Maitah (carrion meat), is Haraam.

Visa hivi ambavyo Rukhsa ni Waajib na kutenda kwa mujibu wake ni Waajib, kwa kweli si uwakilishi wa Rukhsa. Badala yake vinawakilisha Hukmu ya Takleefi, na jambo hilo hilo linatumika pia katika hali ambapo jambo lilikuwa Mandoob na kutenda kwa mujibu wake kulikuwa Mandoob.

These cases in which the Rukhsah is Waajib and acting by it is Waajib, are not however actually a representation of the Rukhsah. Rather they represent a Takleefiy Hukm and the same applies in the case if it was Mandoob and acting by it was Mandoob.

Hiyo ni kwa sababu Rukhsah, kwa upande wa uhalisia wake, na kwa upande wa kuwekwa kwake kisheria kama Rukhsah, ni Mubaah kwa upande wa Hukm yake. Kisha ikiwa kwa kuiacha na kutenda kwa 'Azeemah kunapelekea bila shaka kwenye Haraam, Rukhsah, ambayo ni Mubaah, itageuka kuwa Waajib. Hali hii basi itaiondoa kutoka kuwa Rukhsah na itakuwa Hukm Takleefiy wala si Hukm Wad'iy.

That is because the Rukhsah, in respect to its reality, and in respect to it being legislated as a Rukhsah, is Mubaah in regards to its Hukm. Then if by leaving it and acting by the ‘Azeemah, it leads inevitably to Haraam, the Rukhsah, which is Mubaah, would become Waajib. This circumstance would then take it out from being a Rukhsah and it would become a Hukm Takleefiy and not a Hukm Wad’iy.

Kwa hiyo inachukuliwa kuwa ni Rukhsah mradi hukumu yake ni ya Al-Ibaahah (kuruhusiwa), na mradi Mukallaf amepewa uhuru wa kuchagua kulifanya au kufanya 'Azeemah.

It is therefore considered to be a Rukhsah as long as its Hukm is that of Al-Ibaahah (permissibility) and as long as the Mukallaf is given the choice between doing it or doing the ‘Azeemah.

Kwa hiyo, Saumu ya Ramadhani ni Waajib, ilhali kufungua saumu (au kutofunga) kwa mgonjwa ni Rukhsa, ambayo ni Mubaah.

So the Sawm of Ramadhaan is Waajib whilst the breaking of the fast (or not fasting) for the ill person represents a Rukhsah which is Mubaah.

Hata hivyo, ikiwa kutofungua saumu kungepelekea kifo cha mgonjwa, basi katika hali hiyo Saumu (kufunga) ingekuwa Haramu na kufungua saumu kungekuwa Wajibu. Hali hii mpya au mazingira haya basi yangetolewa nje ya wigo wa Rukhsa na 'Azimah, na yangekuwa mfano wa jambo ambalo kanuni ifuatayo ya Shari'ah inatumika kwake: