What are the guidelines for unconnected public interests, and who are the ones who determine them?

Al-Halabi : A questioner asks and says: In this era, there has been a lot of talk regarding the issue of unconnected public interests, and there are many independent legal reasoning opinions put forward by some people, whether they are scholars or, even more so, non-scholars. We want you, may Allah reward you, to tell us briefly about the guidelines for this public interest, and who are the ones who determine that this matter or that one is considered an unconnected public interest for Muslims? May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : There is no doubt that those who decide that a matter is among the unlegislated public interests are the scholars of knowledge. And, with great regret, the number of scholars of knowledge is very few in the Islamic world, if we consider what knowledge actually is. Knowledge is knowing the ruling of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) by relying on, or knowing one of the rulings of the Shari'ah by relying on, the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). So, if one of the intellectuals is knowledgeable of the Book and the Sunnah, knowledgeable of the Arabic language—without which there is no way to understand the Book and the Sunnah—and then he is aware of two sciences that are necessary in our time, unlike the first generation of Muslims, namely the Companions of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), for the Companions did not need anything other than being knowledgeable of what is in the Book and knowing what came from, or what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) spoke of. As for us today, in addition to what we mentioned earlier—which was necessary for every scholar in the first century to know the Book and the Sunnah—today it is necessary for every scholar to be well-versed in the Arabic language. I do not say that he must be Arab by birth or lineage, for two reasons. The first reason is that it is possible for one who is not Arab by birth or lineage to become Arab in tongue and knowledge, and history tells of many non-Arab scholars who reached a great height in Islamic knowledge, some of whom were prominent in the science of the Arabic language, even though their origin was non-Arab. So, the point is, I do not say he must be Arab only for this reason I mentioned, and there is another factor that counters this, because many Arabs today have forgotten their language, so they are no longer fit to understand the Book and the Sunnah by their natural Arabic instinct. This is because foreign influence has entered the language of the Arabs in all lands, in this land and others, where they speak the colloquial dialect that the Messenger (peace be upon him) spoke, yet the Arabs among whom this Prophetic hadith is delivered can barely understand it. Therefore, today, even for Arabs, it is necessary to learn their language from the Book of Allah and the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). This is the first of three things we need today. The second thing is that we must know what is called the principles of jurisprudence (usul al-fiqh), because this science has, over time, been encompassed, and rules, principles, and guidelines have been established for it and recorded in books. As for the early Salaf, they did not need that, as we mentioned earlier. The third and final thing is that we need to be knowledgeable of what is called the science of hadith terminology. The first science, the principles of jurisprudence, helps us to understand the Book and the Sunnah and to know what is called the abrogating and the abrogated, the general and the specific, the absolute and the restricted. As for the second science, the science of hadith terminology, the early scholars also did not need this science because they were free from the intermediaries that we must have, and by intermediaries I mean the chains of narration (isnad) of the hadiths. The scholars of hadith who transmitted to us the hadiths of the Messenger (peace be upon him) from the Companions... these two sciences: whoever does not master them is not a scholar. But in the early period, whoever was knowledgeable of the Book and the Sunnah was the jurist. But today, one must add to that what we mentioned earlier, which are three things: knowledge of the Arabic language, knowledge of the principles of jurisprudence, and the principles of the science of hadith, which is called the science of terminology. Often a hadith is read by a beginner in the science of hadith, and he stops at it and understands it correctly, but he may be unaware that he does not know from the principles of jurisprudence that this hadith may be abrogated, or may be a general text that has been specified, or an absolute text that has been restricted. Or he may understand the hadith correctly, but he does not know that this hadith is not valid according to the science of hadith terminology. This second matter, and the first matter to a varying degree, is something in which many of the famous scholars today fall, especially the doctors who graduated from the well-known universities in the modern era, because there is no scholar today who graduated from one of the universities and mastered the science of hadith, at least. He may have mastered the principles of jurisprudence, but there are not even a few individuals among those who graduated from universities and specialized in distinguishing the authentic hadith from the weak one. When we know who the scholar is today, we know his opposite, and we know what is intended by his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): So, these people whom people take as scholars, but they are not scholars, they are asked for rulings, and they issue rulings to people, so they misguide and misguide others. When we know who the scholar is, we say: this type of scholar is the one who can judge whether something is an unlegislated public interest or not? What is an unlegislated public interest, and how can it be known? An unlegislated public interest is a means that occurs and achieves or leads to a legislated matter. This legislated matter is legislated by explicit text, but the means is newly invented. So, is it permissible to adopt this means as long as it achieves a legislated purpose? It appears at first glance that this purpose is legislated, but the means was not. So, is it permissible to adopt this means as long as it leads to a goal or purpose that is legislated? The answer is: sometimes yes and sometimes no. The matter involves details that can only be derived from very few books of the scholars of knowledge. I will give you an example of a means that may be used and achieves a legislated matter, but is this means legislated or not? When we pose the question, you will know that this example is not permissible to adopt, even though it achieves a legislated matter. Today, many mosques are afflicted, or rather, it is rare for a mosque to be free of straightening the rows with a string that is stretched from east to west to straighten the rows. This is a means that did not exist before; there were no strings stretched in the mosques of the Muslims throughout these fourteen centuries to straighten the rows. Straightening the rows is a legislated goal, how could it not be? And we all know that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to urge the Muslims to straighten the rows, and he would sometimes say to them: And he would command it, saying: And in a narration: So, straightening the rows is undoubtedly a legislated objective. This means can be adopted by some who do not know the decisive statement regarding unlegislated public interests and what is permissible and what is not. They say: this is a means that achieves a legislated purpose, so it is therefore among the unlegislated public interests. We say: No. Why? Because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to command straightening the rows and emphasize it, as you heard. Do you not see that he did not adopt a means to organize the straightening of the rows, or did he leave the matter neglected, content only to say a word and not strive to implement it in practice? May he be far from that. Likewise, our righteous predecessors who came after him followed him (peace be upon him) in commanding the straightening of the rows, but do you not think they implemented what they commanded? The answer is yes. What did the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) do when he commanded them to straighten the rows? All of this is clarified in the authentic Sunnah. He would say to so-and-so, "Move forward," and to so-and-so, "Move back," and so on, until it was as if he was straightening arrows. When he finished straightening the rows, he would say, "Allahu Akbar." When the people increased in Madinah after the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and consequently the rows increased, the Rightly Guided Caliph 'Uthman ibn 'Affan (may Allah be pleased with him) appointed a man and ordered him to straighten the rows and move among them. When he saw that the rows were straight, he announced it, and 'Uthman ibn 'Affan would say, "Allahu Akbar." The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), who used to say to this one, "Move forward," and to that one, "Move back," could have stretched a string. This string is a readily available thing; it is not like these inventions that appeared after people became skilled at perfecting and improving them. Strings are well known, easy to obtain, and readily available. He did not do that. So, here we come to something that can be considered a rule that prevents us from adopting a newly invented means and claiming that it is among the unlegislated public interests that achieve a legislated benefit. We say: whatever the reason was for adopting it in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), but he did not do it, it is not permissible for Muslims to adopt it as a means on the claim that it achieves a legislated purpose, because we say that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not do that. I have come to you with an example from our real life. We return now to something that partially occurred and partially did not. It is mentioned in Sahih Muslim that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to pray the two 'Id prayers in the prayer ground without an adhan and without an iqamah. And to this day, as you know, Muslims still go to the 'Id prayer without an adhan and without an iqamah. Why? Because that was the case in his time (peace and blessings be upon him). This is not only about the illegitimacy of the adhan and iqamah in the two 'Id prayers, but also in other prayers where it appears at first glance that calling the adhan and iqamah in them achieves a legislated goal, such as the prayer for rain, for example. Why is no adhan called for the prayer for rain, which does not have a specific time to alert people to it, as they are alerted to the 'Id prayer by their knowledge that the 'Id prayer is after the sun rises and gets high? Because when the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to pray the prayer for rain, he did not call the adhan for it. And stranger than that is the prayer for the eclipse of the sun and the moon. When the sun is eclipsed, people are in their negligence, absorbed in their work, their trade, their jobs. No adhan or iqamah was legislated for this prayer either. And this is the most astonishing of all: the eclipse of the moon, which occurs at night, and may occur in the middle of the night, and people are deep in sleep. Is it permissible for a Muslim to legislate an adhan for these prayers, even though it is very clear that it wakes people from their sleep and alerts them from their negligence, and in that there is a legislated benefit? The answer is no. Why? Because the reason for adopting this means, which is the adhan and iqamah for these prayers for which the Messenger did not call the adhan or perform the iqamah, the reason for adopting it existed in his time, and yet he did not legislate it for the people. So, it is not permissible for us to adopt it either on the basis of unlegislated public interest. Now we come to a benefit that achieves a legislated goal, but it is also, like the string, a newly invented matter, and the issue is related to the state. This is a very important matter to know: is this legislated or not? The benefit of collecting taxes, imposing taxes on people. The goal of this is very clear: to help the state to carry out the affairs of the nation or the affairs of a people among the peoples of this nation. So, this is a legislated purpose. But is it permissible to adopt this means so that the state becomes wealthy and is able to carry out the interests of the nation? The answer is: it is not permissible, and sometimes it is permissible. Here is the detail. It is not permissible because the state that imposes taxes to fill its treasury with money, and it undoubtedly needs this money, has deviated from the path of the Messenger in bringing in and collecting money. We all know that Islam legislated means for the Muslim state so that its treasury is always full of money to carry out and achieve the interests of the Muslim nation, and among these is repelling the enemy if the enemy attacks a part of the lands of Islam. In this case, there must be money in the treasury of the state. What are the means that the Wise Legislator legislated through His noble Prophet? First of all, zakah, as He said: The wealth on which zakah is obligatory is divided into two categories. One category is one for which the Wise Legislator did not task the state with collecting and gathering, and that is the two currencies, gold and silver. The output of zakah on these two currencies is left to the obligated persons, and it is not obligatory, rather it is not permissible, for the state to inspect and verify the wealth of the rich and look into the details of what they have of thousands or millions...