37.7 Hotuba ya tamko [khitāb al-wad’] - Utu wa Kiislamu | Quran Course

37.7 Hotuba ya tamko [khitāb al-wad’] - Utu wa Kiislamu | Quran Course

0% read · 2 min left

Utu wa Kiislamu Bookmark

This chapter was translated automatically from English and may contain mistakes. Read the original

Show original

37.7 Hotuba ya tamko [khitāb al-wad’]

37.7 The declaratory address [khitāb al-wad’]

by Sheikh Taqīuddīn An-Nabahānī2 min readViewed 119 times

Hukumu ya Mwenye Kutunga Sheria hufafanua hukumu za wajibu na uchaguzi, kuhusu vitendo vilivyopo katika uhalisia. Hukumu hii pia huweka kwa ajili ya hukumu hizi kile zinachohitaji ili zitimie [tahaqquq] au zikamilike [ikmāl]. Yaani, huwekwa kwa ajili ya kile ambacho hukmu shar'i inakihitaji. Hivyo, hukumu ya Mwenye Kutunga Sheria inajumuisha lazima [iqtidā'] na uchaguzi [takhyīr], pamoja na kile ambacho lazima na uchaguzi vinakihitaji. Hiki cha mwisho hufanyika kwa kufanya kitu kuwa sababu [sabab], sharti [shart], kizuizi [māni'], sahihi [sahīh], batili [bātil], fasidi [fāsid], kanuni ya msingi [azimah] au ruhusa ya kipekee [rukhsah]. Zaidi ya hayo, kama hukumu ya lazima na uchaguzi (hukumu ya taklīf) inajumuisha kanuni zinazohusu vitendo vya binadamu, ndivyo pia hukumu ya kutangaza inajumuisha kanuni zinazohusu kanuni hizi na yanayohusiana nazo.

The legislator’s address clarifies the rulings, of obligation and choice, of the actions which exist in reality. This address also enacts for these rulings that which they require for their fulfillment [tahaqquq] or their completion [ikmāl]. That is, they are enacted for that which the hukm shar’i requires. Thus the address of the legislator comprises of both the compulsion [iqtidā’] and choice [takhyīr], as well as that which the compulsion and choice require. The latter is by the making of a thing the a cause [sabab], a condition [shart], a preventative factor [māni’], valid [sahīh], invalid [bātil], void [fāsid], an original rule [azimah] or a concession [rukhsah]. Further, as the address of compulsion of choice (the address of taklīf) comprises of rules which deal with the actions of man, so too does the address of declaration comprise of rules which deal with these rules and what is related to them.

Kwa hiyo, khitabu cha kulazimishwa na cha hiari ni hukumu za vitendo vya mwanadamu, na khitabu cha kutangaza ni hukumu za hukumu hizo, zikiwapa sifa maalum. Kuwa kwake hivyo, hata hivyo, hakufanyi kuwa hakuhusiani na vitendo vya mwanadamu, kwa sababu kile kinachohusiana na kile kinachohusiana na jambo pia kinahusiana na jambo hilo. Hivyo, dharura kali (idtirār) ndiyo sababu ya kuruhusiwa kula mzoga, hofu ya mateso ndiyo sababu ya kuruhusiwa kuoa wanawake watumwa, kukosa kujizuia haja (kukojoa au kutoa kinyesi mara kwa mara) ndiyo sababu ya wajibu wa kutawadha baada ya kutoa haja kwa ajili ya swala kuondolewa (kiasi kwamba wudhuu mmoja unatosha kwa kila swala hata kama mtu atatoa haja wakati wa swala), kupindukia kwa jua (zawāl) au kuzama kwake, au kuchomoza kwa alfajiri, ndiyo sababu ya wajibu wa swala, na mfano wa hayo. Yote haya ni khitabu kutoka kwa Mwenye kutunga sheria kinachohusiana na hukumu, kama vile kuruhusiwa kula mzoga, kuruhusiwa kuoa wanawake watumwa, wajibu wa kutawadha baada ya kutoa haja kwa ajili ya swala kuondolewa, na wajibu wa kuwepo kwa swala. Hivyo sababu ni katika khitabu cha wad'.

Hence the address of compulsion and choice are rulings for the actions of man, and the address of declaration are rulings for those rulings, giving them specific attributes. Their being such however does not make them unrelated to the actions of man, because that which is related to that which is related to a thing is also related to that thing. Thus dire necessity [idtirār] is the sabab for the permissibility of consuming carrion, the fear of afflication is the sabab for the permissibility of marrying the slave women, incontinence is the sabab for the obligation of making wudu upon excrement for prayer being dropped (such that one wudu suffices for every salat even if one excretes during the salat), the zawāl of the sun or it setting, or the rise of dawn is the sabab for the obligation of prayers, and the like - all of these are an address from the legislator related to the hukm, such as the permissibility of consuming carrion, the permissibility of marrying the slave women, the obligation of doing wudu upon excrement for the salat being dropped, and the obligation of the presence of the salat. Thus the sabab is from the khitāb al-wad’.

Kuhusu yale yanayohusu athari za vitendo katika dunia hii, khitābu cha kutangaza (al-khiṭāb al-waḍʿī) huonekana katika athari hizo. Kwa mfano, tunasema kwamba swala ni sahihi [ṣaḥīḥ] iwapo nguzo zake zote (arkān) zimetimizwa, kwamba biashara ni sahihi iwapo masharti yake yote yametimizwa, na kwamba ushirikiano ni sahihi iwapo masharti yake ya kisheria yametimizwa. Hii ni maelezo ya hukmu kwa mujibu wa utekelezaji wake, si kwa mujibu wa utungaji wake, na ni Mwenye Kutunga Sheria (al-Shāriʿ) aliyeweka maelezo haya. Vivyo hivyo, iwapo biashara haijumuishi ijabu, au swala haijumuishi rukuu, au ushirikiano haujumuishi kukubali, basi itakuwa batili [bāṭil]. Kuwa kwake batili ni maelezo ya hukmu kwa mujibu wa utekelezaji wake, si kwa mujibu wa utungaji wake, ingawa ni Mwenye Kutunga Sheria aliyeweka maelezo hayo na kuiona kuwa batili. Hivyo basi, usahihi [ṣiḥḥa] na ubatili [buṭlān] ni kundi moja, kwa kuwa khitābu cha Mwenye Kutunga Sheria ndani yake kinahusiana na hukmu moja, ambayo ni sahihi au batili, na kwa kuwa usahihi ndio msingi, na ubatili unategemea kanuni za usahihi.

As for what is related to the effects of acts in this world, the declaratory address appears in these effects. For example we say that the salat is valid [sahīh] if all its arkān are fulfilled, that trade is valid is all its conditions are met, that the partnership is valid if all its legal conditions are met. This is a description of the ruling in terms of its performance, not its legislation, and it is the Legislator who has established these descriptions. Similarly if the trade does not include the offer, or the salat does not include the rukū’, or the partnership does not include the acceptance, it will then be invalid [bātil]. Its being invalid is a description of the ruling in terms of its performance, not its legislation, yet it is the Legislator who established the description and considered it invalid. Thus the validity [sihhah] and invalidity [butlān] are one category, because the address of the legislator in them is relation to one hukm, either valid or invalid, and because the validity is the orgin and the invalidity depends on the rules of validity.