Usul Fiqh

And as stated by Ali رضي الله عنه about drinker wine: because when he drinks he becomes intoxicated, and when he becomes intoxicated he talk confusedly, and when he talks confusedly he lies, thus he opine that delimit the limit of slanderer, thus not oppose each other in this explanation.

Part 288: And now the second type of proof on validity of defect (illah) is Istinbat, and it have two ways: one of that is impact (taksir), and second is witness of origin (shahadatu usul).

Thus now the impact (taksir) is that exist law with exist meaning, thus overtone on surmising indeed for reason of proven law. And knows that it from two ways:

Firstly: with denial and existences, and it exist a law with it existences, and disappear with it disappearance, and the example of statement on wine: truly drinkable of it severity that give enjoyment, thus truly before happening severity was halal, then when the severity that give enjoyment happened thus it haram, then it disappear of severity thus it halal, then that known as defect (illah).

Second: with partition (taqsim), and that it invalidate all meaning of origin except one only thus know that is defect (illah) and the example of that is what we said about wine: truly that prohibit (haram) for it riba, thus not to be free either that can be for measurement, or for food, or for weight, therefore invalidate that can be for measurement and for weight, thus we know that for food.

Part 289: And the witness of origin (shahadatu usul) that specialize with prove of analogy (qiyas dalalah), it shows that the validity of defect (illah) with witness of origin (shahadatu usul), and so like to said about horselaugh (qahqahah) : what is does not lack of purity outside of prayer does not lack inside of prayer like talking, then it indicates that the origin is prove by levelling between outside of prayer and inside of prayer, do not we see that as a lack of purity within the prayer is not a lack of inside and outside, such as the events of all, and what does not lack outside the prayer not lack the inside, it must be horselaugh like that.

Part 290: As for except / this methods are not indicative on validity of defect (illah). And some of jurist said: if you do not find anything to oppose it and what do not damage it that indicate on the validity. And Abu Bakar Alsairafi said: estrange it shows on the validity.

As for evidence (dalil) on someone said: the lack of damage the proof on it validity, it is that if can make this evidence on it validity for answer if quoted with the news is not known it validity that being said: What not to oppose it and spoil it shows on his validity, and this not said one.

The evidence on Alsairafi is that estrange action different, and action different no with evidence in syari’, and because of stated: thus it estrange meaning that not here lack of it damage, and explain that no damage not show of it validity.

It is about sacrifice. It switches alert when heard. The first beaten and blindness by prevention.

It followed in statement with little adjective. It understands from mentioning meaning which entails that capacity not hand alarm such as saying of the prophet “ The judge did not and he is angry. “

And such as the saying of the prophet about mouse fell in butter. Fluid, it will shed. They understood beating of thought, but it prevents uttered from the judiciary to the functioning of his heart, and the hungry and thirsty for example. And but it is throwing about a mouse in butter if it is frozen/static