The Companions' ruling on the analogy in hunting: Is it binding?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The Companions' ruling...
The Shaykh : No, no. Their ruling resolves the disagreement, for Allah delegated the matter to them. He said: "Let two just men among you judge." So He delegated the matter to them, and what they ruled is what must be returned to in their judgment.
The questioner : ... ؟
The Shaykh : He asks, saying: Why do we apply the five [acts] to shaving the head, but not to the marriage contract? And another asks: Why do we not apply the marriage contract to these five, because... the marriage contract exists?
In any case, this is the statement of the jurists (may Allah have mercy on them), and what the jurists said is the position of the majority. You know that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did not perform Hajj more than once after Hajj became obligatory. Therefore, you will find that most of the scholars' rulings are analogies, some clear and some obscure. Sometimes it is an arbitrary decision by some jurists without evidence, or based on an incorrect view. So if someone were to say: "I want to sit down with the principle that the presumption is the innocence of the conscience until it is proven that there is a fidyah (ransom payment) in this, because Allah says: 'And We have sent down to you the Book as an explanation of everything.' If Allah says: 'This is forbidden' and does not mention a fidyah in it, then it is forbidden and there is no fidyah in it. It is sufficient for the believer to be told: 'If you do such and such, you are sinful.' Yes, but considering that the majority of scholars say this, and that imposing a fidyah on people is a matter of policy—the policy that prevents them from falling into what is prohibited."
The Shaykh : No, no. Their ruling resolves the disagreement, for Allah delegated the matter to them. He said: "Let two just men among you judge." So He delegated the matter to them, and what they ruled is what must be returned to in their judgment.
The questioner : ... ؟
The Shaykh : He asks, saying: Why do we apply the five [acts] to shaving the head, but not to the marriage contract? And another asks: Why do we not apply the marriage contract to these five, because... the marriage contract exists?
In any case, this is the statement of the jurists (may Allah have mercy on them), and what the jurists said is the position of the majority. You know that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did not perform Hajj more than once after Hajj became obligatory. Therefore, you will find that most of the scholars' rulings are analogies, some clear and some obscure. Sometimes it is an arbitrary decision by some jurists without evidence, or based on an incorrect view. So if someone were to say: "I want to sit down with the principle that the presumption is the innocence of the conscience until it is proven that there is a fidyah (ransom payment) in this, because Allah says: 'And We have sent down to you the Book as an explanation of everything.' If Allah says: 'This is forbidden' and does not mention a fidyah in it, then it is forbidden and there is no fidyah in it. It is sufficient for the believer to be told: 'If you do such and such, you are sinful.' Yes, but considering that the majority of scholars say this, and that imposing a fidyah on people is a matter of policy—the policy that prevents them from falling into what is prohibited."