1 – 主张以“al-Maṣāliḥ al-Mursalah”（不依附特定经文的公益）作为一种沙里尔证据的学者认为：立法者（Shāri‘）已将“al-Maṣāliḥ al-Mursalah”这一类别归入沙里尔的律例（al-Aḥkām ash-Shar‘iyyah）之列，并以下面这段经文作为依据：

1 – Those who took Al-Masaalih Al-Mursalah as representing a Daleel Shar’iy say that the Shaari’ (legislator) considered the type or category (Jins) of Al-Masaalih Al-Mursalah to fall under the category (Jins) of the Ahkaam Ash-Shar’iyah and they use the following Aayah to support that:

他们将仁慈（Rahmah）视为Maslahah（公益），并以之作为每一项Hukm Ash-Shar'iy（沙里尔律例）的'Illah（效因）。然而，这一经文并不表明'Illiyah（即存在理由）无论在其形式上还是在含义上。经文的本意是：伊斯兰教施行于人类之后所产生的结果将成为他们的Rahmah（仁慈），因此，沙里尔是对全人类的Rahmah（仁慈），而不是立法沙里尔的'Illah（理由）。毋宁说，这只是其施行之后所产生的结果。

This is as they consider the Rahmah (mercy), which they view to be the Maslahah, as an ‘Illah for every Hukm Ash-Shar’iy. This is despite the Aayah not indicating ‘Illiyah (the presence of reasoning) whether in its form or in meaning. The intent of the Aayah is that the result of the application of Islaam upon the people would be a Rahmah (mercy) for them and so the Sharee’ah is a Rahmah for mankind and not an ‘Illah (reason) for the legislation of the Sharee’ah. Rather it is only the result that happens as a result of its application.

2 – 来自《古兰经》和《逊奈》的沙里尔经文（Shar'iyah Nusoos）涉及具体的行为，它们与“马斯莱哈”（Maslahah）或“玛夫萨代”（Mafsadah）并无直接关联。例如，安拉至高无上说：

2 – The Shar’iyah Nusoos (texts) from the Kitaab and the Sunnah relate to specific actions and they are not related to the Maslahah or the Mafsadah. So for instance Allah Ta’Aalaa says:

这是在解释安全（الأمان）的裁决，以及真主至高（تعالى）所说的经文：

This is explaining the ruling of the security and also when He Ta’Aalaa says:

这是在解释作证（Shahaadah）的裁定。然而，没有任何经文或文本提到，这些律例的“Illah”（效因）是为了获取利益或排除伤害或有害之事（Mafsadah）。

This is explaining the Hukm of the Shahaadah (witnessing). This is whilst there is no text that has been brought or mentioned stating that the ‘Illah for these Ahkaam is to bring or acquire the benefit or to repel the harm or detrimental thing (Mafsadah).

然后，当经文中出现某个沙里尔（Shar'iyah）的“illah”（效因）时，这个效因并非获取玛斯拉哈（Maslahah，利益）或排除玛斯代（Mafsadah，损害），而是另有所指。我们在讨论类比（Al-Qiyaas）的课题时已经提到，禁止在主麻拜（Salaat ul-Jumu'ah）的宣礼时进行买卖，其效因是分散注意力（Al-Ilhaa'），使人从拜功中分心。而经文中并未将这种分心描述为代表某种利益或伤害，也不是对有害之事或损害（Mafsadah）的排除。

Then when a text comes and it includes a Shar’iyah ‘Illah that ‘Illah is not the acquisition of the Maslahah or repelling of the Mafsadah but is rather something else other than that. We have already mentioned when discussing the subject of Al-Qiyaas that the ‘Illah for the prohibition of trading at the time of the call to prayer for Salaat ul-Jumu’ah is Al-Ilhaa’ (distraction or to be diverted) from the Salaah. That is while the Ilhaa’ (distraction) has not been described in the text as being representative of a benefit or harm or as a repellent to a detrimental thing or harmful matter (Mafsadah).

关于祂的话，至高者说：

And in respect to His Qawl Ta’Aalaa:

"Al-Qisaas"的产生，是由于一个从Shar'iy Nass（经文）中所理解出的'Illah（effective cause），即它代表生命（Hayaat），而非因为它带来了某种Maslahah（利益）或排除了某种Mafsadah（害处）。

The occurrence of Al-Qisaas is due to an ‘Illah that has been understood from the Shar’iy Nass (text) and this is it’s being (or representing) life (Hayaat) and it is not because it brought about a Maslahah or repelled a Mafsadah.

因此,那些断言伊斯兰教法(Shar'a)以公益(Masaalih)作为律例(Ahkaam)之"Illah(理由)"的说法,是缺乏证据和依据的。无论是包含"Illah"的律例,还是不包含"Illah"的律例,伊斯兰教法的律例之中,都不存在任何指示或引导至此的内容。

Consequently, the claims that the Shar’a has considered the Masaalih (interests) as the ‘Illah (reasoning) for the Ahkaam are claims devoid of proof and evidence. There is nothing that indicates and guides to it within the Ahkaam Ash-Shar’iyah; whether in the Ahkaam which contain an ‘Illah or those which do not contain and ‘Illah.

因此，不允许说zina（通奸）之所以被禁止，是为了排除一种败坏（Mafsadah），而圣战（Al-Jihaad）之所以成为义务，是因为它是一种公益（Maslahah）。这样的说法是不对的，因为沙里尔（Shar’iy）经文根本没有这样说，无论从其明文之义（Mantooq）还是隐含之义（Mafhoom）中，都不能理解出这一点。因此，这些说法是无效的（Baatil），既违背沙里尔，也违背现实。

For this reason, it is not permissible to say that Zinaa was prohibited to repel a Mafsadah and Al-Jihaad was made obligatory because it is a Maslahah. That is not said because the Shar’iy text did not say that at all and that was not understood from it whether in its Mantooq (explicitly expressed meaning) or its Mafhoom (implied meaning). The claims are therefore Baatil (False, invalid) and contrary to the Shar’a and the reality.

至于考虑律法（Hukm）所指示和引导的内容是否属于利益（Maslahah）或防止败坏（Mafsadah），或考虑法理上的因由（'Illah Ash-Shar'iyah）所引导的内容是否属于利益或防止败坏，这仅仅是依照穆斯林和伊斯兰社会的观点而言。至于非穆斯林，他并不这样看待，因为一件事物是否属于利益或防止败坏，只源于其人生观的视角。因此，伊斯兰教法在文本中规定的允许（Ibaahah）、义务（Fard）或推荐（Mandoob）之事，在穆斯林看来即是利益，因为立法者（Ash-Shaari'）为此设立了经文；而立法者规定为禁止（Haraam）之事，在穆斯林看来即是败坏，因为立法者已明确说明了这一点。

As for considering what the Hukm has indicated and guided to as a Maslahah or repelling of a Mafsadah or considering that which the ‘Illah Ash-Shar’iyah has guided to as a Maslahah or repelling of a Mafsadah, then this is only in accordance to the view of the Muslim and the Islamic society. As for the non-Muslim then he does not see that because a matter or thing being a Maslahah or repelling of a Mafsadah only stems from the viewpoint in life. Consequently, that which the Shar’a has mentioned in the text in terms of Ibaahah (permissibility), or the Fard or the Mandoob, then in the viewpoint of the Muslim it represents a Maslahah because the Shaari’ has brought a text for it. This is whilst what the Shaari’ has made Haraam represents a Mafsadah because the Shaari’ has stated that.

因此,在穆斯林看来,是经文(Nass)界定并说明了利益(Maslahah)与害处(Mafsadah),而不是利益决定了律例(Hukm)。这是因为律例本身只说明某件事是禁戒(Haraam)、允许(Mubaah)、厌恶(Makrooh)、天命(Fard)或劝励(Mandoob),却并不说明这件事是利益或害处。实际上,是穆斯林依据自己的人生观来诠释其为利益或害处。

因此,在艾布·伯克尔(愿真主喜悦他)时期编纂《古兰经》,以及在奥斯曼(愿真主喜悦他)时期制作经本抄本,是出于担心《古兰经》散失,以及穆斯林之间在诵读方面产生分歧的考虑,而这一做法是基于真主的使者(愿真主赐予他福安)所提出的一条教法原则:

Therefore, the compilation of the Qur’aan in the time of Abu Bakr (ra) and the making of a copy in the time of ‘Uthmaan (ra) due to the fear of it being lost and due to differences amongst the Muslims in respect to its recitation, was based upon a Qaa’idah Shar’iyah (Legal principal) that the Messenger of Allah (saw) mentioned:

对古兰经遗失的担忧，以及其诵读方式的差异，仅仅构成一种伤害（Darar），穆斯林的哈里发根据上述先知圣训的文本将其消除，这并非建立在公益（Maslahah）之上；而圣门弟子（愿真主喜悦他们）就此达成了共识（Ijmaa'）。

The fear of losing the Qur’aan and the difference in its recitation only represented a Darar (harm) that the Khalifah of the Muslims removed based on the text of the above mentioned Hadeeth An-Nabawiy and it is not built upon Maslahah whilst the Sahaabah (rah) held a consensus (Ijmaa’) upon that.

至于倒掉掺了水的牛奶这一做法（由‘Umar (ra)所为），这是对欺诈或作弊者的惩罚，此人违背了先知（ﷺ）的教导。

As for pouring out the milk (by ‘Umar (ra)) that had been mixed with water in an act of deception then this was a punishment for the one who defrauds or cheats who has contravened the Qawl of the Messenger (saw):

对欺诈掺假牛奶的惩罚，即倾倒掉掺假的牛奶，属于塔泽尔（酌定惩罚）。伊斯兰教法认可这种惩罚，其具体评估交由哈里发或卡迪（法官）依其所见而定。这种惩罚并非以马斯拉哈（公益）为证据的沙里发命令（Hukm Shar'iy），而是以圣行（Sunnah）为证据的沙里发命令。 据传，安拉的使者ﷺ看到一堆小麦，伸手进去，发现里面是湿的。于是他问小麦的主人：这是什么？对方答道：天降雨淋到了我们。使者ﷺ说：那你为什么不把湿的放在上面，让人看见？“欺骗我们的人不是我们的人。”（穆斯林和提尔米兹圣训集）因此，使者ﷺ的塔泽尔是以言语的方式进行的，而欧麦尔的塔泽尔则是通过倾倒掺假的牛奶来实施的。

The punishment manifested in the pouring out of the fraudulent milk was from the Ta’zeer (discretionary punishment) and it is a punishment that the Shar’a has approved of and made its evaluation up to the Khalifah or the Qaadi (judge) where he evaluates it as he sees. This punishment does not represent a Hukm Shar’iy the Daleel of which is the Maslahah but rather it is a Hukm Shar’iy the Daleel of which is the Sunnah. It has been related that the Messenger of Allah (saw), upon seeing a pile of wheat, extended his hand in it and found that it was wet. So he said to the one whose pile it was: What is this? He replied: The sky rained upon us. So he (saw) said: Place the wet in sight (visibly). “Whoever cheats us is not from us” (Muslim and At-Tirmidhi). Therefore, the Ta’zeer of the Messenger (saw) was by way of speech whilst the Ta’zeer of ‘Umar was by pouring out the fraudulent milk.

4 – 真的，安拉至高在《放逐篇》中说：

4 – Verily Allah Ta’Aalaa says in Soorat ul-Hashr:

这是因为使者(saw)并未带来"Al-Maslahah Al-Mursalah"(无经文依据的公益考量)。这是因为采用它的人也承认,这些"Masaalih"在Shar'a中并没有专门的经文依据。因此,使者ﷺ并没有带来它们,由此也就不允许采用它们,或将其视为Hukm(法律裁决)的Daleel Shar'iy(legal evidence)。(注:这是因为高贵的Aayah命令穆斯林只能遵循使者ﷺ所带来的东西,即有经文依据的东西。)

This is whilst the Messenger (saw) did not come with Al-Maslahah Al-Mursalah and that is because those who adopt it admit that these Masaalih do not have a specific text for them from the Shar’a. Therefore, the Messenger (saw) did not come with them and consequently it is not permissible to adopt them or to consider them as a Daleel Shar’iy for the Hukm (legal ruling). (Note: That is because the Noble Aayah commands the Muslims to only take that which the Messenger (saw) came with i.e. that which has a text).

- 除上述内容外，还有其他证据表明“al-Masaalih al-Mursalah”（公益/未经指定的公共利益）不能作为证据。我们在前面“未采用al-Masaalih al-Mursalah者的证据”这一标题下已提及这些证据，因此可以回头参照，并将那些论据与这四条一并纳入考虑。

- There are, in addition to the above, other evidences establishing Al-Masaalih Al-Mursalah to be invalid as a proof and we mentioned them previously under the heading of: “The evidences of those who did not adopt Al-Masaalih Al-Mursalah” and so it is possible to refer back to and then add those arguments to these four.