What is your comment on Ibn Hazm's statement regarding the famous jurisprudential maxim, which is: "The prohibitive takes precedence over the permissive," and what is the validity of this maxim and its evidence?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good. It is a simple issue.
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : First: May Allah bless you and reward you with good.
The Shaykh : And may Allah reward you, my brother.
The questioner : For the knowledge you have taken from us.
The Shaykh : May Allah reward you.
The questioner : And may Allah bless you and reward you with good.
The Shaykh : May Allah reward you all with good.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, the issue that has been much discussed and spoken about is the well-known jurisprudential maxim: "Giving precedence to the prohibitive over the permissive." Our Shaykh, Ibn Hazm has a long discussion on this maxim in his book *Al-Ihkam*, where he says: "There is no evidence for this statement."
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : So I hope?
The Shaykh : And what is the evidence for it?
The questioner : You have not finished your question, our Shaykh. May Allah bless you!
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : So the issue is, he says: "There is no evidence that the prohibitive takes precedence over the permissive, so whoever says that, he must provide the evidence."
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : This statement was made in response to the view that all things are originally permissible. Then he said: "The thing that is in accordance with the original ruling is the maxim, not the prohibitive over the permissive. The thing that is in accordance with the original ruling. So if something comes that contradicts it, it is an exception to this. He said this is the maxim, and the prohibitive does not take precedence over the permissive, and there is no evidence for it." And may Allah reward you with good, this is what I understood from it, and I ask you to clarify?
The Shaykh : Very good.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : Did you understand what you quoted from Ibn Hazm well?
The questioner : I think I understood.
The Shaykh : So then, the statement contradicts itself!
The questioner : Clarify, may Allah bless you?
The Shaykh : Is not the original ruling permissibility?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Okay, is not the prohibitive a transfer from permissibility?
The questioner : Yes, the prohibitive!
The Shaykh : A transfer from permissibility.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Okay, so the prohibitive takes precedence over the permissive!
The questioner : So the statement is a tautology.
The Shaykh : A tautology.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : May Allah preserve you.
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : First: May Allah bless you and reward you with good.
The Shaykh : And may Allah reward you, my brother.
The questioner : For the knowledge you have taken from us.
The Shaykh : May Allah reward you.
The questioner : And may Allah bless you and reward you with good.
The Shaykh : May Allah reward you all with good.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, the issue that has been much discussed and spoken about is the well-known jurisprudential maxim: "Giving precedence to the prohibitive over the permissive." Our Shaykh, Ibn Hazm has a long discussion on this maxim in his book *Al-Ihkam*, where he says: "There is no evidence for this statement."
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : So I hope?
The Shaykh : And what is the evidence for it?
The questioner : You have not finished your question, our Shaykh. May Allah bless you!
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : So the issue is, he says: "There is no evidence that the prohibitive takes precedence over the permissive, so whoever says that, he must provide the evidence."
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : This statement was made in response to the view that all things are originally permissible. Then he said: "The thing that is in accordance with the original ruling is the maxim, not the prohibitive over the permissive. The thing that is in accordance with the original ruling. So if something comes that contradicts it, it is an exception to this. He said this is the maxim, and the prohibitive does not take precedence over the permissive, and there is no evidence for it." And may Allah reward you with good, this is what I understood from it, and I ask you to clarify?
The Shaykh : Very good.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : Did you understand what you quoted from Ibn Hazm well?
The questioner : I think I understood.
The Shaykh : So then, the statement contradicts itself!
The questioner : Clarify, may Allah bless you?
The Shaykh : Is not the original ruling permissibility?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Okay, is not the prohibitive a transfer from permissibility?
The questioner : Yes, the prohibitive!
The Shaykh : A transfer from permissibility.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Okay, so the prohibitive takes precedence over the permissive!
The questioner : So the statement is a tautology.
The Shaykh : A tautology.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : May Allah preserve you.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.