"الخفي" 是指其词义（Lafzh）对其所指含义（Dalaalah）的指示是隐晦的（Khafiy）… Translation: خفي是指这样的语词（Lafzh）：其对所指含义（Dalaalah）的指示是明显的（Zhaahir）。

The Khafiy is the Lafzh (wording) which its Dalaalah (implication/indication) upon its meaning is Zhaahir (apparent)

除此之外，它在其某些"Afraad"（即归属于该概念之下的个别事项）的应用上存在模糊与不明确之处。这些情况需要加以考察与深思，才能消除其中的模糊与不明确。

except that there is obscurity and lack of clarity in respect to the application of its meanings to some of its Afraad (individual matters falling within it). These then require some examination and deliberation in order to remove the obscurity and lack of clarity.

消除含糊或不明确之处，需要通过伊jtihād（独立判断）来完成，即分析文本所要应用的现实情况。

The removal of the obscurity or lack of clarity would be undertaken by Ijtihaad in analysing the reality that the text is intended to be applied upon.

这种伊吉提哈德需要进行“Tahqeeq Al-Manaat”（实际情况的考证，即确定经文所针对的现实），也就是精确地研究经文所要适用的现实情况，以判断它是否属于该经文的涵盖范围。

This Ijtihaad requires the Tahqeeq Al-Manaat (ascertaining of the reality) i.e. studying the reality that the Nass (text) is intended to be applied upon in a precise manner, in order to know whether it is encompassed within the text or not.

示例:

Example:

安拉（SWT）说：

Allah (swt) said:

关于“As-Saariq”（小偷）一词，其含义是清楚的；而“As-Saraqah”（盗窃）按照伊斯兰教法（Shar'a）的定义是：暗中从一个正常的保管处（Hirz）取走他人拥有的、具有一定价值的动产。

In respect to the Lafzh ‘As-Saariq’ (thief), its meaning is clear whilst As-Saraqah (theft) in accordance to the Shar’a is: ‘The taking of a movable property of a (certain) value owned by someone else covertly from a normal place of safekeeping (Hirz)’.

而“حِرْز”（Hirz，保管之所）指的是财产通常被放置并妥善保管的地方。

And the Hirz is the place that property is normally put and kept safe in.

然而，法学家们在如何将这一含义适用于各种不同形式的盗窃行为上存在分歧。这些盗窃行为被赋予了不同的专门名称，例如"窃扒"（An-Nashl），即从人们的口袋中迅速且极为隐秘地拿走财物。

However, the Fuqahaa’ differed in respect to the application of this meaning upon different forms of theft which have been given different (specific) names like An-Nashl (pickpocketing) for instance which is the taking of property quickly and in a highly covert manner from the people’s pockets.

那么，扒手(Nash'shaal)是不是窃贼(Saariq)？要知道盗窃(Saraqah)的规定是否适用于扒窃(An-Nashl)，就需要进行知识推导(Ijtihaad)。如果适用，那么盗窃的裁决(Hukm)就同样适用，若盗窃的柱石(Arkaan)齐备，扒手的手就应被截断。因此，部分法学家认为扒手是窃贼，应当受截手之刑；另一些人则不认为他是窃贼，而应对他施以由卡迪(Qaadiy)或伊玛目(Imaam)裁定的塔兹儿(Ta'zeer，酌情)刑罚。他们还就盗墓者(Nabbaash)存在分歧，盗墓者是指盗取坟墓以获取寿衣或死者身上之物的人。这样的人是窃贼还是不是？因此，"窃贼"(Saariq)这一词语在每个窃贼都须截手的义务上是明显的(Zhaahir)；但与此同时，对于扒手和盗墓者而言，它是模糊的(Khafiy)，因为在语言使用者的习惯('Urf)中，他们被赋予了一个不同于窃贼的名称。这是因为给扒手另立名称，是为了赋予盗窃额外的含义：他是从警觉的人身上行窃，而非在隐秘的情况下(Wajh Al-Khafiyah)。另外，给盗墓者另立名称，是因为盗窃的含义有所减弱，他所盗的是并不会守护或保护其财产的死者。因此，所有这些在"窃贼"(Saariq)这一措辞上都是模糊的(Khafiy)。正是出于这个原因，需要进行知识推导(Ijtihaad)，以便将窃贼的裁决同时适用于扒手和盗墓者。

So is the Nash’shaal (pickpocket) a Saariq (thief)? Ijtihaad is therefore required to know whether the Saraqah (theft) applies to An-Nashl (pickpocketing). If it does apply, then the Hukm of Saraqah (thievery) would apply and the hand of the pickpocket would be cut if the Arkaan (pillars) of the crime of theft are met. Consequently, some of the Fuqahaa considered the pickpocket to be a Saariq (thief) and deserving of the cutting whilst others did not consider him to be so and as such a Ta’zeer (discretionary) punishment would be applied upon him as determined by the Qaadiy (judge) or the Imaam (ruler) would. They also differed in respect to the Nabbaash (grave robber) who is the one who robs the graves to take the shrouds or what is upon the dead. Is such a person a Saariq (thief) or not? Consequently, the Lafzh (wording) ‘Saariq’ is Zhaahir (apparent) in relation to the obligation of amputating the hand in regards to every Saariq. This is whilst it is, at the same time, Khafiy (unclear) in regards to the pickpocket and the grave robber because they have been specified with a name that is different to the thief within the ‘Urf (custom/tradition) of the people of the language. That is because specifying the pickpocket with another name has been done for the purpose of providing additional meaning to the Saraqah (theft). That is because he is stealing from the one who is alert and not upon the angle of hiddenness (Wajh Al-Khafiyah). In addition, the specifying of the name of the ‘Nabbaash’ (grave robber) is due to a decrease in respect to the meaning of the theft (Saraqah) because he is stealing from the dead who is not intending to safeguard or preserve his property. Consequently, all of this is Khafiy (unclear) in regards to the Lafzh (worded expression) of the ‘Saariq’ (thief). For that reason, Ijtihaad is required in order to apply the Hukm of the Saariq (thief) upon both the pickpocket and the grave robber.

1 – 当一项经文（Nass）并不适用于那些个别事例（Afraad）时，若对其是否纳入该经文的普遍所指含义（Al-Madlool Al-‘Aamm）之内存在疑问，则该经文不适用于这些个别事例。

1 – The Nass (text) does not apply to the Afraad (individual matters) in which there is doubt in respect to them entering within its general indicated meaning (Al-Madlool Al-‘Aamm).

2 ——它适用于那些经由伊扎哈德（ijtihaad）已确定其词义（lafzh）所涵盖的各个个体（afraad），在这种情况下，该裁决即适用于它们。

2 – It is applied upon the Afraad which the Ijtihaad has shown the realisation of the meaning of the Lafzh (wording) within them and in that case the Hukm is applied upon them.

3 – фуқаha（伊斯兰教法学家）们在其伊吉提哈德（独立推理）的结论上既可以一致，也可以不一致。因此，有些人将经文适用于具体的个案，而另一些人则不将其适用于同样的个案，正如扒手与盗墓者之事所发生的那样。这是因为，有些фуқаha将盗窃（Saraqah）的判决同时适用于两者；另有些人则将二者都排除在经文的含义之外；还有些人则只将其适用于扒手，而不适用于盗墓者。

3 – The Fuqahaa could agree and they could disagree in respect to the result of their Ijtihaadaat and so some of them apply the text to the Afraad (individual elements) whilst others do not apply it upon the same Afraad, just as what happened in regards to the subject of the pickpocket and the grave robber. That is because some of the Fuqahaa applied the Hukm of Saraqah (theft) to both, others took them both outside of the meaning of the text whilst others still applied it upon the pickpocket but not the grave robber.