The Required Meaning (Iqtida' al-Nass)
IV. The Required Meaning (Iqtida' al-Nass)
This is a meaning on which the text itself is silent and yet which must be read into it if it is to fulfill its proper objective. To give an example, the Qur'an proclaims concerning the prohibited degrees of relations in marriage: 'unlawful to you are your mothers and your daughters . . .' (al-Nisa', 4:22). This
To give a slightly different example of iqtida' al-nass, we may refer to the Hadith which provides: "There is no fast (la siyama) for anyone who has not intended it from the night before."
The missing element could either be that the fasting is 'invalid' or that it is 'incomplete'. The Hanafis have upheld the latter whereas the Shafi'is have read the former meaning into this Hadith. Whichever
meaning is upheld, the consequences that it may lead to will vary accordingly. [10. Ibn Majah, Sunan, I, 542, Hadith
no. 1700; Badran, Usul, p. 424.]
To summarise, a legal text may be interpreted through the application of any one or more of the four varieties of textual implications. The meaning that is arrived at may be indicated in the words of the text, by the signs which occur therein, by inference, or by the supplementation of a missing element. These methods of legal construction may be applied individually or in combination with one another, and they are all designed to carry the text to its proper and logical conclusions.
As stated above, in the event of a conflict between the 'ibarah al-nass and the isharah al-nass, the former prevails over the latter. This may be illustrated by a reference to the two Qur'anic ayat concerning the punishment of murder. One of these explicitly proclaims that 'retaliation is prescribed for you in cases of murder' (al-Baqarah, 2:178). But elsewhere in the Qur'an, it is provided: 'Whoever deliberately kills a believer, his punishment will be permanent hellfire' (al-Nisa', 4:93). The explicit meaning of the first ayah provides that the murderer must be retaliated against; the explicit meaning of the second ayah is that the murderer is punished with permanent hellfire. The alluded meaning of the second ayah is that retaliation is not a required punishment for murder; instead the murderer will, according to the explicit terms of this ayah be punished in the hereafter. There is no conflict in the explicit meanings of the two texts, but only between the explicit meaning of the first and the alluded meaning of the second. A conflict thus arises as to which of the two punishments are to be upheld. But since the first ruling constitutes the explicit meaning of the text and the second is an alluded meaning,
the former prevails over the latter. [11. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p.115; Khallaf, 'Ilm, p.150.]
For another illustration of a conflict between the explicit and the alluded meanings, we refer to the Qur'anic text which informs the believers of the dignified status of the martyrs, as follows: 'And think
meaning of this second text and it prevails over the alluded meaning of the first. [12. Badran, Usul, p. 428.]
To illustrate the conflict between the alluded meaning and the inferred meaning, we refer firstly to the Qur'anic text on the expiation of erroneous homicide which provides: 'The expiation (kaffarah) of anyone who erroneously kills a believer is to set free a Muslim slave' (al-Nisa', 4:92). The explicit meaning of this ayah is that erroneous homicide must be expiated by releasing a Muslim slave. By way of inference, it is further understood that freeing a Muslim slave would also be required in intentional homicide. For the purpose of kaffarah is compensation and atonement for a sin. It is argued that the murderer is also a sinner and has committed a sin far greater then the one who kills as a result of error. The inferred meaning derived in this way is that the murderer is liable, at least, to the same kaffarah which is required in erroneous homicide. However, according to the next ayah in the same passage, to which reference has already been made: 'Whoever deliberately kills a believer, his punishment is permanent hellfire' (al-Nisa', 4:93). The alluded meaning of this text is that freeing a slave is not required in intentional killing. This meaning is understood from the explicit terms of this ayah which provide that the punishment of deliberate homicide is a permanent abode in hell. This would in turn imply that murder is an unpardonable sin, and as such there is no room for kaffarah in cases of murder. This is the alluded meaning of the second ayah; and a conflict arises between this and the inferred meaning of the first ayah. The alluded meaning, which is that the murderer is not required to pay a
kaffarah, takes priority over the inferred meaning that renders him liable to payment. [13. Badran, Usul, p. 429;
Khallaf, 'Ilm, p. 153.]
The Shafi'is are in disagreement with the Hanafis on the priority of the alluded meaning over the inferred meaning. According to the Shafi'is, the inferred meaning takes priority over the alluded meaning. The reason given for this is that the former is founded in both the language and rationale of the text whereas the latter is not; that the alluded meaning is only derived from a sign which is basically weaker than the words and the rationale of the text, and that the inferred meaning is a closer meaning and should therefore be given priority over the alluded meaning. It is on the basis of this analysis that, in the foregoing example, the Shafi'is have given priority to the inferred meaning of the text with the result that the murderer is also required to pay the kaffarah. [14. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p.115.]