The Creation (4/4)

The best of the knowledgeable and just judges is the uppermost among the sons of Adam: Muhammad, may the peace and prayers of Allah be upon him. It is reported in the two books of the sahih, that the Prophet (sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam) said:

"You come to me with your cases, and some of you may be more eloquent and convincing in expression than others. I only judge according to that which I hear, but whoever has received a favorable judgement from me in which I have awarded him what is rightfully his brother’s, should not take it, for I have merely cut for him a piece of the hell fire."

The Prophet here informs us that when he delivers a judgement according to that which he hears, but its reality is other than that, it is not allowed for the one who has been rewarded what is not rightfully his to take it, and that this is nothing more than a piece of the hell fire.

This is a point of consensus among the scholars of Islam in relation to all types of property: If the judge rules according to that which he believes to be a valid legal argument such as evidence or admission, though the reality of the case is other than what it appears, it is not allowed for the one given the reward to accept it. If such a ruling is in the area of contractual obligations or cancellations, it is the opinion of most of the scholars that the one granted his wish though the reality of the case is other than what it appears to be is not allowed to accept the benefits of the ruling. This is the position of Malik, Ash-Shafi'i, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Abu Hanifa differentiated in this regard between the two types of cases, applying the ruling only in cases dealing with property rights.

The word Shar' or Shari'a (law) when it is used to mean the Qur'an and the Sunnah, no ally of Allah nor anyone else has any right to go against it or beyond it. Whoever believes that any ally of Allah has a route to Allah other than the following of the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam) internally and externally and therefore fails to follow him internally and externally is a kafir (disbeliever).

Whoever uses the story of Musa and Al-Khidhr (in Surah Al-Kahf) as a basis for this proposition is mistaken for two reasons:

1) Musa had not been sent to Al-Khidhr, and it was not obligatory upon Al-Khidhr to follow Musa. Musa was sent to the Children of Israil specifically, whereas Muhammad (sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam) was sent with a message for the two free-willed races: humans and jinns. Even if those greater in stature than Al-Khidhr had met the Prophet Muhammad, such as Ibrahim, Musa, or 'Isa, it would have been obligatory upon them to follow him, so what about Al-Khidhr, whether we say that he was a prophet or an ally of Allah? This is why Al-Khidhr said to Musa: "I have knowledge of the knowledge of Allah which He has taught me and which you do not know, and you have knowledge of the knowledge of Allah which He has taught you and which I do not know" (Narrated by Muslim and Bukhari.) No one, neither human nor jinn can make such a statement once the message of the Prophet Muhammad has reached them.

2) The three acts of Al-Khidhr reported in the Qur'an contain no violation of the law of Musa anyway, although Musa did not understand the reasons which made them allowed at first. When Al-Khidhr explained them to him, he accepted them. The puncturing of the boat, and then fixing it later for the benefit of its owners for fear of the oppressor who wished to confiscate it was a favor to them, and is allowed. The killing of tyrants and attackers is allowed even if they are young, and if someone's oppression of his parents cannot be prevented except by his death, he can be killed. Ibn Abbas said to the police of Al-Haruuri when he was asked about killing of young boys: "If you know about them what Al-Khidhr know about the boy in the story, kill them, and if you don't, then do not kill them." (Reported by Bukhari)

As for the good deed done to the orphans (the re-building of the wall), and being patient with hunger, these are good acts in which there is no violation of the law of Allah.

If the intended meaning of the words shar' or shari'a is the ruling delivered by the ruler or judge, he may indeed by an oppressor or he may be just, he may have arrived at the correct ruling or he may be mistaken. Sometimes, the intended meaning of the word is the opinion of the imams of fiqh such as Abu Hanifa, Ath-Thawri, Malik ibn Anas, Al-Awzaa'i, Al-Laith ibn Sa'd, Ash-Shafi'i, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Dawud and others. The opinions of such people are to be supported by evidence from the Qur'an and the Sunnah. To follow the opinion of others in cases where that is allowed is merely allowed: i.e. it is not obligatory upon the nation of Muslims to follow any one of the imams as it is obligatory to follow the Prophet (sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam). It is also not forbidden to follow the opinion of one of them (when one is unable to arrive independently at the ruling from the original sources, and when one is aware of the evidence behind the opinion followed), as it is forbidden to follow the opinions of people who speak without knowledge.

If something is attributed to the law which is not from it, such as forged hadith, or twisting the meanings of the texts in ways not intended by Allah and His Prophet, etc., this is a changing of the law (tabdeel). We must differentiate between the law sent down, the law re-interpreted (twisted), and the law which has been changed, just as we must differentiate between the reality relating to Allah's decree and creation and the reality relating to Allah's order and His deen and between the one who supports his position with evidence from the Qur'an and the Sunnah as opposed to the one who relies solely on his feelings or intuitions.