The Delineation of Boundaries between Aysar al-Madhāhib and Ittibāʿ al-Hawā

ایسر المذاہب اور اتباع ھویٰ میں حدبندی

Abstract

This research focuses on the objections regarding the use of leniency in juristic problems (Aysar al-Madhāhib) and presents a methodology for legislation based on this approach of diligence. In the context of the legality of juristic leniency, two broad opinions exist among Muslim jurists: Lenients (who favor the use of Aysar al-Madhāhib) and Non-Lenients (who oppose it). The Lenients argue that no Qurʾānic verse or Ḥadīth explicitly prohibits the adoption of the lenient opinion. In contrast, the Non-Lenients regard it as capriciousness (ittibāʿ al-hawā) as well as a violation of scholarly consensus (ijmāʿ). This research examines both objections in detail and concludes that juristic leniency does not amount to capriciousness if applied in a manner that does not affect the core principles of Dīn, the legality of acts of worship (ʿibādāt), ḥalāl and ḥarām rulings, and the rights of Allāh as well as the rights of people. Similarly, in response to the objection of violating ijmāʿ, the study notes that the consistent presence of Lenients across different eras and regions undermines this claim. The paper further presents a methodology and suggestions for legislation in light of leniency. Methodologically, it emphasizes that such legislation should relate to derivative issues, remain consistent with the core principles of Sharīʿah, avoid prohibited talfīq, and not violate the objectives of Sharīʿah. As recommendations, the research suggests separating changeable and unchangeable injunctions of Sharīʿah, establishing a consultative council, adopting favorable solutions, exercising diligence in line with the objectives of Sharīʿah, and prioritizing the welfare of weaker sections of society.