Itikof qonunda tavsiya etilgan va nazr qilingandan keyin vojib bo‘ladi. Bu borada hech qanday ixtilof yo‘q, faqat Molikdan rivoyat qilinganki, u uning shartlari bajarilmay qolishi xavfi tufayli itikofga kirishni ma’qul ko‘rmagan. Ramazonda, ayniqsa uning oxirgi o‘n kunida, boshqa vaqtlarga qaraganda savob ko‘proq, chunki Payg‘ambar ﷺ ning oxirgi itikofi shu vaqtda bo‘lgan. U odatda ma’lum vazifalardan, ma’lum joyda, ma’lum vaqtda, maxsus shartlar bilan va alohida turdagi tiyilishlar bilan amalga oshiriladi.

Ftikif is recommended in the law and is obligatory after a vow. There is no dispute about this, except what is related from Malik that he disapproved undertaking it under the apprehension that its conditions would not be met. It has greater merit in Ramadan than at other times, especially during its last ten days, as that was when the last iHikaf of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) took place. It generally consists of specific tasks, at a specific location, at a particular time, with special conditions, and with specific kinds of abstention.

Xususiy ibodatlarga oid ikki xil qarash mavjud. Aytilishicha, Allohga yaqinlashish va taqvo uchun faqat namoz, Allohni zikr qilish (qalb bilan va til bilan) hamda Qur'on tilovati talab qilinadigan amallardir. Bu Ibn al-Qosimning qarashidir. Shuningdek, aytilishicha, bu Allohga yaqinlashish va taqvo uchun talab qilinadigan hamda faqat oxiratga oid bo'lgan barcha amallarni o'z ichiga oladi. Bu Ibn Vahbning qarashidir. Ushbu qarashga ko'ra, ibodat qiluvchi janozalarda qatnashishi, kasallarni ziyorat qilishi va ilm bilan shug'ullanishi mumkin, ammo birinchi qarashga ko'ra bunday emas. Bu al-Savriyning ham qarashidir, birinchisi esa ash-Shofe'iy va Abu Hanifaning qarashidir.

There are two opinions about the acts that are specific to it. It is said that prayer, remembrance of Allah [by heart and by tongue], and the recitation of the Qur’an are the only acts required for piety and nearness to Allah. This is the opinion of Ibn al-Qasim. It is also said that it includes all the acts required for seeking nearness to Allah and for piety and that are specific to the hereafter. This is the opinion of Ibn Wahb. In accordance with this opinion the worshipper may attend funerals, visit the sick, and be engaged in studies, but not in accordance with the first opinion. This is also the opinion of al- Thawri, while the first is the opinion of a!-Shafi T and Abu HanTfa.

Ixtikofning ma'nosi borasida ularning ixtilofining sababi shundaki, bu masala shariatda ifodalanmagan, ya'ni unga oid aniq huquqiy ta'riflar belgilanmagan. Ixtikofni masjidlarga xos amallarga o'zini bag'ishlash deb tushunganlar, mu'takifga faqat namoz va Qur'on tilovatiga ruxsat berilgan, deydilar. Ixtikofni Allohga yaqinlashishni istagan barcha amallarga o'zini bag'ishlash deb tushunganlar esa, mu'takifga biz yuqorida zikr qilgan boshqa amallarni bajarishga ruxsat beradilar. Ro'yat qilinadiki, Ali ibn Abu Tolib (Alloh undan rozi bo'lsin) shunday degan: "Masjidda ixtikof qilgan kishi fahshli gaplarni gapirmasligi, so'kinishlarni almashtirmasligi kerak. U juma jamoat namoziga, shuningdek janozalarga qatnashishi mumkin. Zarurat tug'ilsa, oila a'zolari bilan muloqot qilishi mumkin, ammo buni o'tirgan holda emas, balki turgan holda qilishi lozim". Bu rivoyatni Abdurrazzoq keltirgan. Oisha (Alloh undan rozi bo'lsin) dan esa bunga zid rivoyat nақл qilingan: ya'ni mu'takifning sunnati janozalarda qatnashmaslik va kasallarni ziyorat qilmaslikdir. Bu ham ma'nosi bo'yicha ixtilofga sabab bo'lgan omillardan biridir.

The reason for their disagreement is that this is something not expressed in the law, that is, there are no legal definitions laid down for it. Those who understood ihikaf to mean the dedication of the self to acts that are specific to mosques said that only prayer and recitation are permitted to the muStakif (person retiring to the mosque). Those who understood it to mean the devotion of the self to all acts seeking spiritual nearness permitted him to engage in other acts that we have mentioned. It is related from CA1T (God be pleased with him) that he said, “The person who retires to a mosque is not to indulge in obscenities or exchange abuses, he is to attend the Friday congregation prayer as well as funerals, he is to communicate with his family members if the need arises, but he is to do this while standing and not seated”. This has been mentioned by cAbd al-Razzaq. The opposite of this has been related from cA’isha, which is that the sunna for the mt/ta&fis not to attend funerals or visit the. sick. This is also one of the factors that led to a disagreement over its meaning.

Ular i'tikofning qaysi joylarda amalga oshirilishi haqida ixtilof qilishgan. Faqihlarning bir guruhi aytdi: i'tikof faqat uch masjidda bo'ladi — Allohning uyi (al-Masjid al-Haram, Makka), Quddusdagi masjid va Madinadagi Payg'ambar ﷺ masjidi. Bu Hudayfa va Sa'id ibn al-Musayyabning fikri edi. Boshqalar i'tikofni cheklab bo'lmasligini, uni barcha masjidlarda o'tash mumkinligini aytishdi. Bu ash-Shofi'iy, Abu Hanifa va ath-Savriy fikri bo'lib, Molikdan ham mashhur rivoyat shu edi. Yana boshqa faqihlar aytdi: i'tikof faqat jome namozi o'qiladigan masjidda bo'ladi. Bu Ibn Abd al-Hakamning Molikdan rivoyatidir. Ular barchasi bir narsada kelishdilar: i'tikof masjidda amalga oshirilishi shart, faqat Ibn Lubabadan rivoyat qilinganidan tashqari, unga ko'ra i'tikof masjiddan tashqari joylarda ham to'g'ri bo'ladi. Shuningdek, ular i'tikofga kirgan kishi masjidga o'tirgan bo'lsa, ayollar bilan jinsiy aloqa qilish harom ekanida ham kelishdilar. Biroq Abu Hanifa ayolning i'tikofini uyidagi ibodat joyida o'tashi mumkin, deb hisobladi.

They disagreed about the locations at which i'tikdf is to be practised. One group of jurists said that there is no Ftikdf, except in three mosques: the House of Allah (al-Masjid al-Haram, Mecca), the mosque at Jerusalem, and the mosque of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) at Medina. This was the opinion of Hudhayfa and SacTd ibn al-Musayyab. Others maintained that fitikaf is unrestricted, and can be undertaken in all mosques. This was the opinion of al-Shafi T, Abu HanTfa, and al-ThawrT, and c it is the well-known opinion from Malik. Some other jurists said that there is no frikaf except in a mosque where the Friday congregational prayers are held. This is a narration by Ibn <Abd al-Hakam from Malik. All of them agreed, however, that a condition for Ptikdf is that it be undertaken in a mosque, except what is related from Ibn Lubaba that it is valid in places other than the mosque. They also agreed that intercourse with women is prohibited for the muStakif if he retires to a mosque. Abu HanTfa, however, maintained that a woman is to undertake MWf in the place of worship in her house.

Ulardan bir qismining masjid shartini belgilash yoki bu shartni tashlab yuborish bo'yicha ixtilof qilishlarining sababi Allohning Oliy Zoti aytgan so'zlaridagi ma'nolarning ehtimollaridan kelib chiqadi: "Masjidlarda e'tikofda bo'lganingizda ularga yaqinlik qilmang"233, ya'ni bu yerda matnning ishorasi bormi yoki yo'qmi degan masalada. Matnda ishora borligini aytganlar: e'tikof faqat masjidda bo'ladi, e'tikofning sharti esa jinsiy aloqadan saqlanishdir, dedilar. Matnda (bilvosita) ishora yo'qligini aytganlar esa: bu yerdagi ma'no shuki, jinsiy aloqaga cheklov bo'lmagan masjiddan boshqa joylarda ham e'tikofga ruxsat beriladi, chunki agar kishi: "Falon kishiga, u uyning ichida bo'lganda, hech narsa berma", desa, matnning bilvosita ma'nosi uning uydan tashqarida bo'lsa, unga narsani berish kerakligidir, dedilar. Biroq bu noto'g'ri fikrdir, aksariyat ulamolar esa masjidlar e'tikof bilan bog'liq qilib qo'yilgan, chunki bu uning shartlaridan biridir, deb hisoblaganlar.

The reason for their disagreement over the stipulation of a mosque or the dropping of this stipulation stem from the probabilities of interpretation in the words of the Exalted, “And touch them not while you are undertaking iStikdf in the mosques”,233 as to whether there is an indication of the text here. Those who maintained that there is an indication of the text said that there is no iStikdf, except in a mosque, and a condition of the ftikdfh the avoidance of intercourse. Those who maintained that there is no (indirect) indication of the text said that the meaning here is that Ftikdf is permitted in places other than the mosque where there is no restriction upon intercourse, because if one were to say, “Do not give such and such person anything while he is inside the house”, the (indirect) implication of the text would be that he be given the thing if he is outside the house. It is, however, a deviant opinion, and the majority held that mosques have been associated with iStikdf as that is one of its conditions.

Ulamolarning bu masalada – i'tikof faqat ma'lum masjidlarda bo'ladimi yoki yo'qmi – ixtilof qilishlarining sababi umumiy ma'no bilan uni cheklab turuvchi qiyos o'rtasidagi to'qnashuvdan kelib chiqadi. Umumiy ma'noni tanlaganlar, oyatning zohiriy ma'nosiga ko'ra, i'tikofning barcha masjidlarda sahih ekanini aytdilar. Qiyos orqali umumiy ma'no ichiga kiruvchi ba'zi masjidlar bilan cheklaganlar esa, i'tikof qilувчи kishi juma namozi uchun chiqishi bilan ibodatidan chalg'imasligi uchun, juma namozi o'qiladigan masjid bo'lishi shart qilib qo'ydilar yoki u uch masjiddan biri bo'lishi kerak, ya'ni safar qilish savob bo'lgan masjidlardan biri bo'lishi kerak, masalan, Payg'ambar ﷺ i'tikof o'tirgan masjid kabi, deb shart qildilar. Qolgan masjidlarga esa ular qiyos qilmadilar, chunki ularning muqaddaslik darajasi teng emas.

The reason for their disagreement about restricting or not restricting it to some mosques arises from the conflict of the general meaning with analogy that restricts it. Those who preferred the general implication said that it is valid in all mosques according to the apparent meaning of the verse. Those who subjected it to restriction through analogy specifying some mosques included in the general meaning, stipulated that it be in a mosque where Friday prayers are held so that the muHakifs devotion is not interrupted by going out for the Friday prayer, or that it should be one of the three mosques to which journeying is a pious act, like the mosque of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) where his ftikaf was undertaken.234 They did not extend it by analogy to the remaining mosques because they are not equal in terms of their sanctity.

Ularning ayolning i'tikofni qanday bajarishi bo'yicha ixtilofining sababi yana bir narsadan kelib chiqadi: qiyosning hadis bilan to'qnashuvidan. Ma'lumki, Hafsa, Oisha va Zaynab (bint Jahsh), Payg'ambarning (ﷺ) xotinlari, masjidda i'tikof qilish uchun Allohning Elchisi (ﷺ) dan ruxsat so'ragan, u ularga ruxsat bergan va shundan so'ng ular masjidda o'zlari uchun pardali joylar o'rnatganlar. Bu hadis ayolning masjidda i'tikof qilishi joiz ekanligiga dalildir. Unga zid keladigan qiyos esa namoz bilan bog'liq qiyosdir. Rivoyatda aytilganidek, ayolning uyidagi namozi masjiddagi namozidan afzal bo'lgani uchun, uning i'tikofi ham xonasida afzal bo'lishi kerak, deyiladi. Ular aytdilar: ayolga masjidda i'tikof qilish faqat eri bilan birga bo'lgan holda joizdir, xuddi Payg'ambarning (ﷺ) xotinlari uning yonida i'tikof qilgani haqida bayon qilinganidek. Xuddi ayol faqat eri bilan safar qilishi, yolg'iz sayohat qilmasligi kabi. Bu rivoyat bilan qiyos o'rtasidagi bir xil murosaga o'xshaydi.

The reason for their disagreement over the Ftikdf undertaken by a woman also arises from the conflict of analogy with'a'tradition. It is established that Hafsa, ^Visha, and Zaynab (bint Jash) the wives of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) sought permission from the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) for fitikaf in the mosque, he permitted them after which they set up their curtained spaces in it. This tradition is an evidence for the permissibility of a woman’s fitikdf in the mosque. The analogy that conflicts with this is the one constructed from prayer. As the prayer of a woman in her residence [or house] is better than her prayer in the mosque, as is laid down in a report, it is necessary that her iHikdfbc preferable in her room. They said that it is permitted for a woman to undertake i'-tikdfxn a mosque only with her husband in the manner that has been described about the i'tikdf of the wives of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) with him, just as a wife is to travel only with her husband and not alone. It appears to be a kind of reconciliation between the tradition and analogy.

Ularning nazarida i'tikofning eng ko'p muddati uchun chegara yo'q, garchi ularning barchasi Ramazonning oxirgi o'n kunida i'tikofni katta savobli deb hisoblasa ham. Shunday ekan, doimiy i'tikof ruxsat etiladi: ya'ni, ro'zani uning shartlaridan deb hisoblamaydiganlarning fikricha, hech qanday cheklovsiz; yoki ro'zani shartlardan deb hisoblaydiganlarning fikricha, ro'za tutish man etilgan kunlardan boshqa kunlarda.

There is no limit, in their view, for the maximum amount of time to be assigned for f-tikafy even though all of them consider it as having greater merit during the last ten days of Ramadan. Thus; perpetual fyikdf is permitted, either without qualifications by those who do not consider fasting to be one of its conditions, or for days other than those in which fasting is not allowed in the view of those who consider fasting, to be one of its conditions.

Ular bu (i'tikofning) eng kam muddati haqida ixtilof qilishgan. Shuningdek, ular muʼtakif i'tikofni qachon boshlashi va qachon tugatishi vaqti haqida ham ixtilof qilishgan. Ash-Shofiʼiy, Abu Hanifa va faqihlarning ko'pchiligining fikricha, i'tikofning eng kam muddati uchun chegara yo'q. Molik'dan turli qarashlar rivoyat qilingan. Aytilishicha, u uch kun bo'lishi kerak, yana aytilishicha, bir kun va bir kecha. Ibn al-Qosim undan rivoyat qilishicha, eng kam muddat o'n kundir. Uning Bag'dodlik shogirdlari esa o'n kun afzal bo'lsa-da, eng kam muddat bir kun va bir kecha ekanini aytishgan.

They disagreed' over the minimum time-limit for it. Likewise, they disagreed about the time when the muHakif commences his ftikaf and about the time when he terminates it. There is no limit for the minimum duration of the iHikdf in the view of al-Shafici, Abu Harnfa, and the majority of the jurists. There are different views from Malik. It is said it is three days, and it is said that it is one day and a night. Ibn al-Qasim has related from him that the minimum is ten days. His disciples from Baghdad said that ten days is desirable, but the minimum is one day and one night.

Ularning ixtilofining sababi hadis bilan qiyosning to'qnashuvidan kelib chiqadi. Qiyos shundan iboratki, ro'za itikofning shartlaridan biri deb hisoblaganlar aytadilarki, itikof kechasi joiz emas, va agar kechasi joiz bo'lmasa, u holda bir kecha-kunduzdan kam bo'lishi mumkin emas, chunki ro'za uchun niyat kechasi qilinishi kerak. Unga zid bo'lgan hadis al-Buxoriy tomonidan rivoyat qilingan: "Umar, Alloh u zotdan rozi bo'lsin, bir kecha itikof qilishni nazr qildi. Allohning Elchisi ﷺ esa uni nazrini ado etishga buyurdilar". Sobit hadisga asoslangan fikr qarshisida mulohaza yuritish befoydadir.

The reason for their disagreement stems from the conflict of analogy with a tradition. The analogy is that those who considered fasting to be one of its conditions said that fitikdf is not permitted during the night, and if it is not permitted during the night, then, it cannot be for less than a day and a night, for the forming of intention for the fast has to be during the night. The tradition opposing it is recorded by al-Bukhari that “Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, made a vow for undertaking Ftikaf for a night. The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) ordered" him to abide by his vow”. Reasoning in the face of an opinion based upon an established tradition is meaningless.

Относительно их разногласия о времени, когда муътакиф должен начинать свой итикаф: если он дал обет на определённое число дней или на один день, то Малик, аш-Шафиʿи и Абу Ханифа согласились, что человек, давший обет итикафа на один месяц, должен войти в мечеть до захода солнца. Что касается человека, давшего обет на один день, аш-Шафиʿи сказал, что тот, кто намерен совершить итикаф на один день, должен войти в мечеть до рассвета и выйти после захода солнца. Мнение Малика полностью то же самое, будь то один день или один месяц. Зуфар и аль-Лайс сказали, что он должен войти до рассвета; но будь то один день или один месяц, для них это одинаково. Абу Савр провёл различие между обетами, данными на ночь, и обетами, данными на день. Он сказал: «Если он даёт обет совершить итикаф на десять дней, он должен войти до рассвета, а если он даёт обет на десять ночей, он должен войти до захода солнца». Аль- Авзаʿи сказал, что он должен начинать итикаф после утренней молитвы.

With respect to their disagreement about the time when the mu^takif is to commence his i^tikaf, if he has made a vow for a determined number of days or for one day, Malik, al-Shafici, and Abu HanTfa agreed that the person who has made a vow for an faikaf of one month must enter the mosque before sunset. About the person who has made a vow for one day al-Shafi i c said that the person who intends to undertake ftikaf for one day should enter the mosque before dawn and should come out after sunset. Malik’s opinion is exactly the same whether it is for one day and for one month. Zufar and al- Layth said that he is to enter before dawn; but whether for one day or one month for them it is the same. Abu Thawr made a distinction between vows made for the night and those for the day. He said: “If he makes a vow that he will undertake iHikaf for ten days, he should enter before dawn, but if he makes a vow for ten nights he should enter before sunset”. Al-AwzaT said that he should commence the i'tikdf after the morning prayer.

Ixtilofning sababi ularning qiyoslarining bir-biriga zid kelishidan, hamda hadisning ularning barchasiga zid kelishidan kelib chiqadi. Bunga sabab, oy kecha bilan boshlanadi deb hisoblaganlar va kechalarni e'tiborga olganlar, oy quyosh botishidan oldin kirishi kerak deganlar. Kechalarni e'tiborga olmaganlar esa, oy tong oldidan kirishi kerak deganlar. "Yavm" so'zi kecha va kunduzni birgalikda anglatadi, deganlar esa, agar nazr yavm uchun bo'lsa, quyosh botishidan oldin kirish vojib bo'ladi, deganlar. Bu so'z kunduzni anglatadi, deganlar esa, tong oldidan kirish vojib, deganlar. "Yavm" so'zi kunduzga, "layl" so'zi kechaga nisbatan qo'llanadi, deganlar esa, kechaga yoki kunduzga qilingan nazrlar o'rtasida farq qildilar. Haqiqat shuki, arablar tilida "yavm" so'zi ba'zan faqat kunduzni, ba'zan esa kun va kechani birgalikda anglatadi, ammo uning asosiy ma'nosi kunduzga xos bo'lib, kechaga nisbatan ma'nosi ikkinchi darajalidir.

The reason for their disagreement emanates from .the conflict of analogies, some w ith the others, and the conflict of a tradition with all of them. This is so as those who thought that a month begins with a night, and they took into consideration the nights, said that he is to begin before the disappearance of the sun. Those who did hot take the nights into account said that he is to enter before dawn. Those who said that the term yawm is applied to mean both night and day together made it obligatory that if the vow is for a yawm he should enter prior to sunset. Those who maintained that this term is applied to mean day made the entry before dawn obligatory. Those who said that the term yawm is applicable to the day and the term layl to night made a distinction between vows made for the night and those made for the day. The truth is that the term yawm in the usage of the Arabs is sometimes applied to day alone and sometimes to the day and the night together, but it appears that its primary application is specific for the day, and its implication for the night is consequential.

Bu hadislarga qarshi turadigan rivoyat al-Buxoriy va boshqa sahih hadislar to'plovchilarining Oisha (roziyallohu anho) dan qilgan rivoyatidir. U aytdi: "Allohning Elchisi ﷺ Ramazon oyida i'tikof qilar edilar va bomdod namozini o'qigach, i'tikof qiladigan joyiga kirardilar".

The tradition that opposes all these analogies is what is recorded by al- Bukhari and other compilers of the sahih traditions from (A5isha, who said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to undertake filikaf during Ramadan, and after observing the morning prayer he would enter the place where is undertook ftikaf*.

I'tikofdan chiqish vaqti haqida: Molik ruxsat berilgan deb hisoblagan: Ramazonning oxirgi o'n kunida i'tikof qilayotgan kishi ro'za hayitining namozi uchun masjiddan chiqishi kerak; bu mustahab, ammo agar u (oxirgi kuni) quyosh botganidan keyin chiqsa, uning amali to'g'ri hisoblanadi. Ash-Shofi'iy va Abu Hanifa esa u quyosh botgandan keyin chiqishi kerak, deganlar. Sahnun va Ibn al-Majishun esa, agar u avval uyiga borib, so'ng hayit namoziga kelsa, uning i'tikofi batil bo'ladi, deganlar. Ixtilofning sababi shuki, qolgan kecha o'n kunga kiradimi yoki yo'qmi. I'tikofning shartlari uchta: niyat, ro'za va ayollar bilan aralashmaslik. Niyat borasida hech qanday ixtilofni bilmayman. Ro'za borasida ixtilof qilishgan: Molik, Abu Hanifa va bir guruh fuqahо ro'zasiz i'tikof bo'lmaydi, deganlar, Ash-Shofi'iy esa ro'zasiz i'tikof joiz, deganlar. Molikning fikriga o'xshash fikrni Ibn Umar va Ibn Abbos sahobalar orasida bir oz ixtilof bilan aytganlar, Ash-Shofi'iynikiga o'xshash fikrni esa Ibn Mas'ud vaAli aytganlar. Ularning ixtilofining sababi shuki, "Allohning Rasuli (Allohning rahmati va salomi uning ustida bo'lsin) i'tikofni Ramazonda qilgan". Rasulullohning i'tikofi bilan birga kelgan ro'zani i'tikofning sharti deb bilganlar, garchi ro'za u zotning ... sababli tutilmagan bo'lsa ham, i'tikof bilan ro'za lozim, deganlar. Bu tasodif bo'lib, Nabiy (Allohning rahmati va salomi uning ustida bo'lsin) i'tikofda maqsad qilgan narsa emas, deganlar esa ro'zani shart emas, deganlar. Yana bir sabab bor: bu ro'zaga bir oyatda bog'liqligidir. Ash-Shofi'iy Umarning yuqorida o'tgan rivoyatiga tayanib dalil keltirgan: Nabiy (Allohning rahmati va salomi uning ustida bo'lsin) unga bir kecha i'tikof qilishni buyurgan, kecha esa ro'za vaqti emas. Malikiylar cAbd al-Rahman ibn Ishaq orqali Urva'dan, u Oisha'dan rivoyat qilgan hadisga tayanib dalil keltirdilar. Oisha dedi: "Mu'takif uchun sunnat shuki, u kasallarni ziyorat qilish va janozada qatnashish kabi narsalar bilan chalg'itilmasin. U ayolga tegmasin, u bilan jinsiy aloqada bo'lmasin va juda zarur bo'lmagan hech narsa uchun chiqmasin. Ro'za tutmasdan i'tikof yo'q, jome' masjidda bo'lmasa ham i'tikof yo'q." Abu Umar ibn Abd al-Barr dedi: "Oisha rivoyatida 'sunnat' so'zini cAbd al-Rahman ibn Ishaqdan boshqa hech kim ishlatmagan, va ularning nazarida bunday rivoyat, agar uni az-Zuhriy rivoyat qilmagan bo'lsa, to'g'ri hisoblanmaydi. Agar shunday bo'lsa, uni musnad hadisga o'xshash deb hisoblash endi to'g'ri emas."

About the time of coming out from fitikaf, Malik held that the person who was undertaking i'tikaf in the last ten days of Ramadan should come out of the mosque for the <id prayer, and this was desirable, but if he came out after sunset (on the last day) his act is valid. Al-ShafiH and Abu Hamfa said that he is to come out after sunset. Sahnun and Ibn al-Majishun said that if he goes to his house first prior to .the 47/ prayer his ftikaf becomes invalid. The reason for disagreement is whether the remaining night is included in the ten days. The conditions for faikdf are three: intention, fasting, and avoidance of mixing with women. I do not know of any disagreement in the case of intention. They disagreed about fasting. Malik, Abu HanTfa, and a group of jurists said that there is no ftikdf without fasting, while al-ShaficT said that ftikdf is permitted without fasting. An opinion similar to Malik’s was expressed by Ibn TJmar and Ibn (Abbas, with some dispute, from among the Companions, and one similar to al-ShaficFs was expressed’by Ibn Mascud and cAIl The reason for their disagreement is ‘‘that the ttikdf of the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) occurred during Ramadan”. Those who maintained that the fasting accompanying his fitikafis a condition for the iStikdf., even though the fasting was . not observed because of the said that fasting is a must with i'-tikdf. Those who maintained that this was a mere coincidence and it does not mean that it was the aim of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) in his ifakaf said that fasting is not a condition for it. There is another reason for this, which is its association with fasting in the same verse. Al-ShaficT argued on the basis of the tradition of TJmar that has preceded where the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) ordered him to undertake ftikdffor a night, and the night is not the time for siydm. The Malikites argued on the basis of what is related by cAbd al-Rahman ibn Ishaq from TJrwa from cA>isha that she said, “The sunna for the mu'takifis that he should not be interrupted by such things as visiting the sick and attending a funeral. He is not to touch a woman \ nor have intercourse with her nor go out for anything that is not extremely necessary, and there is no i'tikaf without fasting and no ftikdf except in a congregational mosque”. Abu °Umar ibn cAbd al-Barr said: “No one has used the words the ‘the sunna' in the tradition of < Alisha, except cAbd al- Rahman ibn Ishaq, and such a narration is not valid in their view, unless it is related by al-Zuhn. If that is the case it is no longer valid to hold it similar to a musnad".

Ular uchinchi shart bo'yicha kelishdilar, u jinsiy aloqani taqiqlashga oid bo'lib, agar mu'takif ataylab jinsiy aloqada bo'lsa, uning i'tikofi batil bo'ladi, faqat Ibn Lubaba'dan masjiddan boshqa joylarda bo'lgan holat bo'yicha rivoyat qilingan narsa bundan mustasno. Ular unutgan holda jinsiy aloqada bo'lgan vaziyat haqida ixtilof qildilar. Ular, shuningdek, o'pish yoki tegish kabi jinsiy aloqadan boshqa harakatlarning i'tikofga ta'siri haqida ham ixtilof qildilar. Molik bularning barchasi i'tikofni batil qiladi, deb hisobladi. Abu Hanifa esa, maniy chiqarmasa, mubashara orqali i'tikof batil bo'lmaydi, dedi. Ash-Shofi'iyning ikki qarashi bor edi: birinchisi Molikning qarashi bilan bir xil, ikkinchisi esa Abu Hanifaning qarashiga o'xshash.

They agreed about the third condition, which is about the prohibition of sexual intercourse, that if the mtfitakifhas intercourse intentionally his i^tikdf is invalidated, except what is related from Ibn Lubaba in the case of locations other than the mosque. They disagreed about the situation when he has intercourse out of forgetfulness. They also disagreed about the effect on iStikdf resulting from of acts other than intercourse, like kissing or touching. Malik held that all this invalidates the Ftikdf. Abu HanTfa said that there is no invalidity through mubdshara, unless he ejaculates. Al-ShaficT had two opinions: the first is the same as the opinion of Malik, and the second like that of Abu Hamfa.

Ikki tomon o‘rtasidagi ixtilofning sababi shundaki, so‘z o‘zining haqiqiy ma’nosi va majoziy ma’nosi o‘rtasida tebranadimi, ya’ni unda umumiy ma’no (umum ma’nosi) mavjudmi yoki yo‘qmi. Bu ikki ma’noli (mushtarak) so‘zning bir turidir. Unda umumiy ma’no bor, deganlar Allohning: «Masjidlarda e’tikofda bo‘lganingizda ularga yaqinlashmang» degan oyatidagi «mubosharat» (yaqinlashish, tegish) so‘zi jinsiy aloqani yoki undan kamroq narsani anglatish uchun qo‘llanadi, deyishgan. Unda umumiy ma’no yo‘q, deganlar esa, bu ko‘proq tanilgan va odatiy qo‘llanish bo‘lib, so‘z ba’zan jinsiy aloqani, ba’zan esa undan kamroq narsani bildiradi, deyishgan. Agar uni jinsiy aloqani bildiradi, deb ijmo bilan qabul qilsak, boshqa barcha dalolatlar bekor bo‘lib qolardi, chunki bitta so‘z bir vaqtning o‘zida haqiqiy qo‘llanishini ham, majoziy ma’nosini ham bildira olmaydi. Maniyning chiqishini jinsiy aloqaga teng deb hisoblaganlar, bu ma’no umumiy ma’no doirasiga kirgani uchun shunday qilganlar. Bunga qarshi fikrda bo‘lganlar esa, so‘zning haqiqiy qo‘llanishi bunga dalolat qilmagani uchun shunday deganlar.

The reason for their disagreement is whether the word vacillating hetween its actual and figurative application has a general implication. This is one kind of the equivocal word. Those who maintained that it does have a general implication said that the term mubdshara (touching) in the words of the Exalted, “And touch them not while you are undertaking Ptikif in the mosques”,235 is applied to mean sexual intercourse or what is less than that. Those who maintained that it does not have a general implication, which is the better known and usual application, said that it sometimes indicates sexual intercourse and at other times what is less than that. If we were to say that it indicates sexual intercourse by consensus all other indications would be invalidated, because a single term cannot denote its actual application and the figurative meaning at the same time. Those who deemed ejaculation to be the same as intercourse did so as it is covered by the meaning, while those who did the opposite of this did so as the term in its actual application does not indicate this.

Ihrom holatida jinsiy aloqaga kirgan shaxsning javobgarligi haqida ulamolar ixtilof qilganlar. Ko'pchilik u hech narsa uchun javobgar emas, deb aytgan. Boshqa bir guruh fuqaholar esa u kafforat (keffaret) to'lashi lozim, deb aytgan. Keyingi fuqaholarning ba'zilari bu Ramazonda jinsiy aloqaga kirgan kishining kafforati, deganlar. Bu al-Hasanning fikri edi. Bir guruh esa u ikki dinor sadaqa berishi kerak, deganlar. Bu Mujohidning fikri edi. Yana bir guruh esa u bir qulni ozod qilishi kerak, agar qulga ega bo'lmasa, bir urg'ochi tuya qurbonlik qilishi kerak, agar uning ham imkoni bo'lmasa, yigirma so'm (sa') quruq xurmo miqdorida sadaqa berishi kerak, deganlar. Ixtilofning asosi kafforat masalalarida qiyos qilish joizmi yo'qmi, degan savoldir. Afzal fikr esa bunday qiyos joiz emas, degan fikrdir.

They disagreed about the liability of the person who does have intercourse (during iHikdj), The majority said that he is not liable for anything, while a group of jurists said that he is liable for expiation. Some of the latter jurists said that it is the expiation offered by one having had sexual intercourse during Ramadan. This was the opinion of al-Hasan. One group said that he is to give two dinars as alms. This was the opinion of Mujahid. Another group said that he is to manumit a slave, and if he does not have a slave that he is to sacrifice a she-camel, if he does not have one he should make alms to the amount of twenty s&s of dried dates. The basis for the dispute is whether analogy is permitted in cases of expiation. The better opinion is that it is not permitted.

Ular aniq belgilanmagan qazo ro'zasi uchun qilingan nazr uzluksiz (uzilishsiz) bo'lishi kerakmi, shu haqda ixtilof qilishdi. Molik va Abu Hanifa buni uning sharti deb aytdilar, al-Shofi'iy esa shart emas deb aytdi. Ularning ixtilofi sababi aniqlanmagan nazr ro'zasi uchun nazr qilingan ro'za bilan qiyos qilinishidan kelib chiqadi.

They disagreed about a vow made for an undetermined f-tikdfy whether it should be consecutive (without interruption). Malik and Abu HanTfa said that it is a condition for it, while al-ShaficT said that it is not. The reason for their disagreement * stems from the analogy drawn for it from a vow for undetermined fasting.

Ular i'tikofga xos bo'lmagan, uning mohiyatiga kirmaydigan barcha ishlar i'tikofda man etilgan ishlar ekaniga kelishdilar. Shuningdek, tabiiy ehtiyojni qondirish yoki zarurat tufayli shu maqsadga o'xshash sabablar bundan mustasno, odamga masjiddan chiqish joiz emas. Bunga sabab Oisha roziyallohu anhoning rivoyati bo'lib, u shunday degan: "Allohning Elchisi ﷺ i'tikof o'tirganlarida boshlarini menga yaqin tutar, men esa ularning sochlarini tarar edim. U tabiiy ehtiyoj bo'lmasa, uyga kirmas edilar". Chiqish sababsiz amalga oshirilganda i'tikofni buzadigan muddat uzunligi borasida esa ixtilof qilishdi. Imom Shofe'iy: "Odam chiqqan zahoti uning i'tikofi tugaydi", dedi. Ba'zilar bir soatgacha bo'lgan chiqishni kechirilishi mumkin deb hisobladilar, boshqalar esa bir kungacha bo'lgan muddatni kechirdilar.

They agreed that the acts proscribed for i'tikdf are all those that are besides the integral acts of fitikaf, and that it is not permitted to him to go out of the mosque except for answering the call of nature or for those that have the same intent and that are required due to necessity. This is because of what is established from the .tradition of ‘A’isha, who said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) when he performed i'tikdf would move his head near me and I used to comb it [his hair], and he did not enter the house unless it was to answer the call of nature”. They disagreed about the length of the period which invalidates Ftikdf, if the person came out without a (permitted) need. Al-ShaficT said that his Ftikaf is terminated as soon as he steps out. Some made an exemption for one hour, while others made it for a day.

Ular uning masjiddan boshqa, (uxlash uchun) xonaga kirishi kerakmi-yo'qmi, degan masalada ixtilof qilishdi. Ba'zilar bu borada unga istisno berdilar — va ular ko'pchilik bo'lib, Molik, ash-Shofi'iy va Abu Hanifa shular jumlasidandir — boshqalari esa bu narsa uning i'tikofini batil qiladi, deb hisobladilar. Molik unga sotish-sotib olish bilan shug'ullanishga va nikoh o'tkazishni nazorat qilishga ruxsat berdi, ammo boshqalar bu borada unga qarshi chiqdilar. Ularning ixtilofining sababi shundaki, bu masalalarda ijtihod va ixtilof qilingan narsalarni ittifoq qilingan narsalar bilan qiyoslashdan boshqa hech qanday qat'iy hukm yo'q.

They disagreed about whether he should enter a room other than a room in his mosque (for sleeping). Some made an exemption for him in this, and these are the majority—Malik, al-ShaficT, and Abu Hanifa—while others held that this invalidates his iHikaf. Malik permitted him to buy and sell and to supervise a marriage, but others opposed him in this. The reason for their disagreement arises from the fact that there is no determination on these things except ijtihdd and a comparison of things that they agreed upon with those they disputed.

Ular, shuningdek, itikof qilayotgan kishi Shari' buyrug'i bilan man etilgan ishni shart qilib qo'yishi, ya'ni janoza yoki boshqa biror narsada qatnashish shartini qo'yishi, bu shart unga foyda berib, o'sha ishni qilishini joiz qilishi mumkinmi, degan masalada ham ixtilof qilganlar. Jumhur fuqaholar bunday shartning hech qanday foydasi yo'q, deb hisoblaydi va agar u shu ishni qilsa, itikofi buziladi. Imom Shofe'iy esa uning shartining unga foyda berishini aytgan. Ularning ixtilofi sababi itikof bilan hajning o'xshashligidadir, chunki ikkalasi ham ko'plab mubox ishlarni man qiladigan ibodatlardir. Hajdagi shartlar, ularni qabul qilganlar tomonidan, Zubay'a rivoyatiga asoslanib qabul qilingan. Unga Allohning Elchisi ﷺ shunday degan: "Haj niyatini qil va to'xtagan joyingda ihromdan chiqishni shart qil". Lekin bu asos hajda ham ixtilofli. Shunday ekan, qarshi tomon nazarida bu qiyosda zaiflik bor.

They also disagreed over whether it is permitted to the mu^takif to stipulate an act that is prevented by the Ptikdfin order that his stipulation may benefit him in making it permissible, like the stipulation of attending a funeral or some other thing. The majority of the jurists maintain that such stipulation is of no avail, and if he commits that act his fyikdfis nullified. Al-ShaficT said that his stipulation does benefit him. The reason for their disagreement comes from, the similarity between i^tikaf and hajj, as both are kinds of worship that prevent the undertaking of many permissible acts. Stipulations in hajj were decided’ upon, by those who upheld them, on the basis of the tradition of Daba<a that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said to her, “Form the niyya of hajj and stipulate to free yourself from the hajj restrictions where you encountered me”. But the (operation of the) principle is disputed in hajj. Thus, there is weakness in this analogy in the view of the opposing contender.

Ular shart qo'yilgan holatda uzluksizlik nazr ichida majburiymi yoki uzluksizlikning o'zi bog'liqmi, degan masalada ixtilof qilishdi. Shartsiz nazr bo'lganda, uni tutadiganlar uchun itikofning qaysi holatlarda uzilishi va qayta tiklanishi yoki davom ettirilishi, masalan, kasallik, haqida gap ketadi. Ulardan ba'zilari aytdiki, agar kasallik itikofni uzsa, mu'takif uni uzilgan joyidan davom ettirishi mumkin. Bu Molik, Abu Hanifa va ash-Shofi'iyning qarashidir. Ba'zilari esa aytdiki, u itikofni boshidan boshlashi kerak, bu as-Save'iy qarashidir. Men biladigan darajada, hayz ko'rayotgan ayol uzilgan joyidan davom ettirishi haqida ixtilof yo'q. Ular esa u masjiddan chiqishi kerakmi yoki yo'qmi, degan masalada ixtilof qilishdi. Xuddi shunday, mu'takif aqldan ozish yoki hushidan ketish holatiga tushganda, u keyinroq davom ettiradimi yoki tuzalgach qaytadan boshlaydimi, degan masalada ham ixtilof qilishdi. Bu mavzudagi ixtilofning sababi shuki, bu borada rivoyat orqali aniq hukm yo'q. Shuning uchun ularning kelishilgan va ixtilof qilingan masalalarni o'zaro qiyoslashi asosida bahslar yuzaga keladi, ya'ni bu ibodatda yoki uzilishdan keyin davom ettirish shart qilingan boshqa ibodatlarda, masalan, poklik davriga erishgan kishining roziligi va boshqalarda nimaga kelishilgan bo'lsa, shunga asoslanadi.

They disagreed when the person stipulates continuity in the vow or when continuity itself is binding. In an unqualified vow, for those who uphold it, what are the things by which the ittikdf is interrupted and is either renewed or is continued, for example, illness. Some of them said that if illness cuts off the fitikaf the mifitakif can resume it (from the point of interruption). This is the opinion of Malik, Abu Hanifa, and al-ShafiT. Some of them said that he is to start the iStikdf from the beginning, and this is the opinion of al-Thawn. There is no disagreement, as fas as I know, that a menstruating woman continues (from the point of interruption). They disagreed on whether she is to move out of the mosque. Similarly, they disagreed on when the mtftakif suffers a fit of insanity or faints, whether he is to continue (later) or to start again on recovering. The reason for their disagreement on this topic is that there is nothing determined on it through transmission. Thus, disputes arise on the basis of their comparisons between what they agreed upon and what they disputed, that is, what they agreed upon in this worship or in those kinds o f worship in which continuing after interruption is stipulated like the fast of one attaining the period of purity and others like it.

Aksariyat ulamolar, agar ixtiyoriy e'tikof biror uzr bo'lmasdan buzilsa, uni qazo qilish vojib bo'ladi, deb hisoblaydilar. Ular bunga Payg'ambar ﷺ Ramazonning oxirgi o'n kunida e'tikof qilishni niyat qilgan, lekin bajara olmagan, shuning uchun Shavvol oyining o'n kunida e'tikof qilgan, degan rivoyatni dalil qilib keltiradilar. Nazr sababli vojib bo'lgan e'tikofning qazo qilinishi haqida esa, menimcha, hech qanday ixtilof yo'q.

The majority maintain that if a voluntary Ptikafis cut off without an excuse qadd is obligatory in it, because of the tradition “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) intended to observe iStikdfin the last ten days of Ramadan, but he did not, and, therefore, observed fitikaf in ten days of Shawwal”. In the case of an obligatory due to a vow, there is no dispute about its qadd, as far as I think.

Aksariyat ulamolar, gunohi katta bo'lgan kishining e'tikofi bekor bo'ladi, deb hisoblaydilar.

The majority maintain that the iftikaf of a person who commits a grave sin is cut off.

Biz ushbu mavzuning asosiy qoidalari va tamoyillari haqida isbotlashni maqsad qilganlarimizning hammasi shu edi. Allohning o'zi muvaffaqiyat va yordam beruvchidir. Sallallohu alayhi va sallam ﷺ, uning oilasi va sahobalariga salovat va barakalar bo'lsin.

This is all that we sought to establish about the principles and rules of this subject, Allah is the Grantor of success and support, and prayers and blessings upon our master Muhammad, his family, and his companions.