المستخلص: |
This research paper discusses one of the important issues related to ijtihad (personal reasoning), mainly a jurist's contravention of the usual (Shari'ah proofs or sources) he had previously used. The paper: • Defines asl in the context of authoritative principles which differ from one madh-hab (school of jurisprudence) to another. • Demonstrates that each jurist relies upon certain usual. • Discusses the difference between usual qat'iya (definitive) and usual dhaniyya (speculative) and shows that the former prevails over the latter. • Explains what it means when a jurist contravenes his relied upon usual, the ruling on this according to Islamic legal theorists, the reasons for a jurist resorting to this, and the unanimous impermissibility of contravening usual in the absence of definitive or apparent proofs. • The juristic impact resulting from a jurist contravening the usual he relies on for rule derivation. However, if the husband is poor, his wife is obliged to serve him even if she comes from a wealthy family. The paper ends with the issue of a wife's financial independence in Islam in that a wife is totally free to dispose of her wealth whether by selling, buying, or donation.
|