08شرح النظم الصغير في أصول الفقه - نظم وشرح/ عامر بهجت

Subscribe to the channel

Yes, these are three verses. This is our lesson—our lesson. You made the same mistake, Sheikh.

You said “accepted,” and I said, “It’s our lesson,” one by one.

All right, he said: “As for the Book, its chain of transmission is mass-transmitted.” This lesson has two topics.

First, of course, this whole lesson is about the agreed-upon sources of evidence. The first is the Quran, and it is just one line of verse.

Then we’ll cover the verses concerning the Sunnah in this lesson and the next. As for the Quran, he said: “As for the Book, its chain of transmission is mass-transmitted.”

The Quran has been transmitted through definitive mass transmission, generation after generation, in every era since it was revealed to the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him.

Down to our time and until the Day of Judgment, countless people have memorized the Quran.

Is it authentic or not? It is mass-transmitted, beyond doubt. That is why he said: “As for the Book, its chain of transmission is mass-transmitted.”

All right, “its chain of transmission is mass-transmitted”—this is well-known and clear.

The author did not define the Quran because it is too well-known to need defining for a Muslim. You might explain it to a non-Muslim, saying, “The Quran is such-and-such,” but a Muslim knows the Quran and understands what it means.

So the versifier limited himself to what was needed.

and what necessity called for. As for defining the Quran, that is clear.

Then he said: “The solitary reading has a basis.”

A basis, meaning evidence relied upon in rulings of Islamic law.

What has been mass-transmitted is the Quran between the two covers, and it is definitive proof. Whoever rejects it has cast off the bond of Islam from his neck.

God forbid. As for a solitary reading, it is evidence, but only probabilistic evidence.

An example of this is the reading of a solitary transmitter, which is called an anomalous reading.

But the term “anomalous reading” may be misunderstood by some people.

They may think that an anomalous hadith is weak—which is true, and we have a point of disagreement. But an anomalous reading is evidence.

So he used the phrase “solitary reading,” which scholars also use. What does it mean? It means it was not mass-transmitted.

For example, Ibn Mas‘ud, may God be pleased with him, recited—and it is also reported that he recited:

“God will not call you to account for idle oaths, but He will call you to account for the oaths you have sworn,”

“the expiation is to feed ten needy people with the average of what you feed your families, or clothe them, or free a slave. Whoever cannot find the means must fast three consecutive days.” The word “consecutive” is not in the muṣḥaf.

It is not a mass-transmitted reading, but it is a solitary reading recited by Ibn Mas‘ud. Do we use it as evidence in legal rulings? Yes.

We hold that it can be used as evidence in legal rulings, and the disagreement on this issue is clear.

That is why we treated it as probabilistic evidence. Pay attention: when we say “probabilistic evidence,” some people think probability cannot be acted upon. No—when probability means the more likely view,

the more likely view can be acted upon. This is an important principle in legal theory: many issues in legal theory are not definitive,

but rather based on a preponderant probability. For example, is the indication that a command entails obligation definitive?

No. A command can sometimes indicate recommendation, yet we act on it because it yields a preponderant probability.

Then he moved on to the discussion of the Sunnah and said: “Then, hadith…”

Considering the chain of transmission, there are two types: mutawatir and ahad.

So what is mass-transmitted, and what is solitary? Mass-transmitted is what has been conveyed by such a large group that it is normally impossible for them to have conspired to lie.

This compels you to accept it without examining its chain of transmission. All right?

Is there a city called Tokyo? Sheikh, are you sure? Have you been there and seen it?

How do you know there is a city called Tokyo? And in which country?

It’s also in Japan. How do you know that? Who told you?

Everyone, right? This is something transmitted to us by many people. Could one person lie to us?

But that all these millions are liars, and that there is no such place as Tokyo or Japan—that is something reason cannot accept.