Do you advise adopting the principles of Ibn Hazm in his book *Al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam*?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Okay, do you have anything else from his time now?
The questioner : Regarding adopting the principles of Ibn Hazm al-Zahiri in the book *Al-Ahkam*, is there anything wrong with it? I mean, adopting these principles in understanding jurisprudence and applying them in jurisprudence?
The Shaykh : This is, of course, if he adopts them based on understanding and conviction, not based on taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence). There is no difference if he adopts the principles of Ibn Hazm, or the principles of al-Shafi'i in his *Risalah*, or the principles of al-Shatibi, or something similar. The important thing is that he adopts what he adopts from the scientific usul (principles of jurisprudence) rules and is convinced of them. As for taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) of Ibn Hazm, we are not pleased to be followers of someone who is of a higher rank and more noble in knowledge than Ibn Hazm. So if taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is absolutely necessary, we follow those who came before him. But we use our intellect as our Lord, Mighty and Majestic, commanded in His saying:[Yusuf 12:108]. The one who studies the principles of Ibn Hazm is like the one who studies the branches of Ibn Hazm in *Muhallad*, for example. If it is based on conviction and following the evidence, then welcome. But if it is based on rigidity, taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence), and fanaticism, then this is what we do not approve of for a Muslim. Please proceed.
The questioner : If you please, I mean in the principles of Ibn Hazm, the denial of qiyas (analogical reasoning) and not considering the statement of a Companion. I think this is what the brother intends.
Another questioner: No, that is not what I intend.
The questioner : Do you not intend this?
The Shaykh : Then let it be. His question is general, and we answered it, and I believe so.
The questioner : And in its generality, these things are included.
The Shaykh : It must be so.
The questioner : So is it permissible for him to deny qiyas (analogical reasoning)?
The Shaykh : I do not believe there is any book that is entirely free from criticism. "Allah did not intend for any book to be complete except His own", as is narrated from Imam al-Shafi'i. In my opinion, *Al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam* by Ibn Hazm is the best book written on the principles of jurisprudence, despite its anomalies, because it is truly a book of principles. In contrast, you find that books on the principles are merely a claim, just a foundational rule they establish and proceed with. Yes?
The questioner : Theories.
The Shaykh : Yes, there is no evidence. Whereas the principles that are built upon branch out into thousands of subsidiary issues. These principles must be supported by strong rules from the Book of Allah and the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) so that a person is reassured in relying on and depending upon them. In my knowledge, I have not found a book that took the path of Ibn Hazm in establishing those usul (principles of jurisprudence) rules with the evidence he sees, while avoiding his strictness and anomaly in some issues. Please proceed.
The questioner : I say Abu Muhammad Ibn Hazm, his book is on the methodology of the scholars of hadith.
The Shaykh : No, that is not the case. The scholars of hadith do not deny qiyas (analogical reasoning).
The questioner : Regarding adopting the principles of Ibn Hazm al-Zahiri in the book *Al-Ahkam*, is there anything wrong with it? I mean, adopting these principles in understanding jurisprudence and applying them in jurisprudence?
The Shaykh : This is, of course, if he adopts them based on understanding and conviction, not based on taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence). There is no difference if he adopts the principles of Ibn Hazm, or the principles of al-Shafi'i in his *Risalah*, or the principles of al-Shatibi, or something similar. The important thing is that he adopts what he adopts from the scientific usul (principles of jurisprudence) rules and is convinced of them. As for taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) of Ibn Hazm, we are not pleased to be followers of someone who is of a higher rank and more noble in knowledge than Ibn Hazm. So if taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is absolutely necessary, we follow those who came before him. But we use our intellect as our Lord, Mighty and Majestic, commanded in His saying:
Say, "This is my way; I invite to Allah with insight, I and those who follow me. And exalted is Allah; and I am not of those who associate others with Him."
قل هذه سبيلي أدعو إلى الله على بصيرة أنا ومَن اتبعني وسبحان الله وما أنا من المشركينThe questioner : If you please, I mean in the principles of Ibn Hazm, the denial of qiyas (analogical reasoning) and not considering the statement of a Companion. I think this is what the brother intends.
Another questioner: No, that is not what I intend.
The questioner : Do you not intend this?
The Shaykh : Then let it be. His question is general, and we answered it, and I believe so.
The questioner : And in its generality, these things are included.
The Shaykh : It must be so.
The questioner : So is it permissible for him to deny qiyas (analogical reasoning)?
The Shaykh : I do not believe there is any book that is entirely free from criticism. "Allah did not intend for any book to be complete except His own", as is narrated from Imam al-Shafi'i. In my opinion, *Al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam* by Ibn Hazm is the best book written on the principles of jurisprudence, despite its anomalies, because it is truly a book of principles. In contrast, you find that books on the principles are merely a claim, just a foundational rule they establish and proceed with. Yes?
The questioner : Theories.
The Shaykh : Yes, there is no evidence. Whereas the principles that are built upon branch out into thousands of subsidiary issues. These principles must be supported by strong rules from the Book of Allah and the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) so that a person is reassured in relying on and depending upon them. In my knowledge, I have not found a book that took the path of Ibn Hazm in establishing those usul (principles of jurisprudence) rules with the evidence he sees, while avoiding his strictness and anomaly in some issues. Please proceed.
The questioner : I say Abu Muhammad Ibn Hazm, his book is on the methodology of the scholars of hadith.
The Shaykh : No, that is not the case. The scholars of hadith do not deny qiyas (analogical reasoning).