Text copied Link copied

Al-Fatawa – home

﴿ فَاسْأَلُوا أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ ﴾

Scholar
Search mode

Does the apposition of explanation fall within the definition of substitution, and what is excluded from the followers through the definition?

Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : So, does anything other than apposition fall in?

The Shaykh : What is it?

The questioner : The apposition of explanation falls in.

The Shaykh : All of them fall in, except the apposition with *bal*; he excluded it by his statement: "without an intermediary".

The questioner : Are there differences in it?

The Shaykh : No, my brother, because "without an intermediary" excludes only the apposition with *bal*. As for the intended meaning of the ruling, it includes all the particles of conjunction. Yes, they fall in; it includes all the particles of conjunction, and it also includes the adjective and the apposition of explanation.
But his statement: "without an intermediary": what is excluded in it is only the conjoined with *bal*. Now, if I say: "Zayd stood up, but 'Umar," the intended meaning now is to inform of 'Umar's standing, but through an intermediary, which is: *bal*. So that would not be a substitute because it is through an intermediary.
Source alathar.net

The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.

Similar fatwas