Rawd Al-Afham Explanation of Bulugh Al-Maram 8/1

A brief about the book Rawd al-Iffah Sharh Bulugh al-Maram 8/1 - Muhammad al-Qannas: Part of the introduction to the explanation 2- It is known that the Hadiths of Bulugh al-Maram are Hadiths of rulings except for what came in the book Al-Jami' which is at the end of the book, as they are Hadiths of manners, and these Hadiths include the fundamentals of the Hadiths of rulings that the imams of ijtihad relied upon in building jurisprudential issues and evidence, in addition to other Hadiths not mentioned in Bulugh. There is no doubt that the imams of ijtihad — especially the four Imams of the well-known jurisprudential schools — have principles and rules derived from the Book and the Sunnah, which represent generalities and fundamentals under which many branches and details fall. Al-Hafiz Ibn Rajab said: "The people of knowledge and understanding, when they gather with one of the words of the Book and the Sunnah and their meanings, and the speech of the Companions and the Tabi‘un, what Allah has made easy for them, they make that into principles and rules upon which they build and derive. For Allah, the Most High, revealed the Book with truth and the balance, and in the Book are many words that are general principles and broad issues that include many types and numerous details, and not everyone is guided to include them under those words; rather, that is from the understanding Allah grants whom He wills in His Book. As for the balance, it is the correct consideration, and it is from justice and fairness, which Allah has commanded to uphold, like combining the similar because they share attributes that necessitate gathering; and distinguishing the different because of their differing attributes that necessitate separation. Often, the reason for the unity or separation is hidden and its understanding is subtle." (2) Ibn al-Qayyim briefly pointed out some of the principles of the four Imams, saying: "Among the principles of Malik: following the practice of the people of Madinah even if it contradicts the hadith, closing the means, invalidating tricks, considering intentions and purposes in contracts, considering evidence and signs of the situation in claims and rulings, and speaking of interests and Islamic policy. Among the principles of Abu Hanifa: istihsan (juridical preference), prioritizing analogy, abandoning the understanding (of the text), abrogating the specific earlier with the general later, and the use of tricks. Among the principles of Shafi‘i: considering the words and standing with them, and prioritizing the hadith over other sources. And among the principles of Ahmad: taking the hadith as far as he could find a way to it, and if impossible, then the speech of the Companion unless it contradicts, and if they differ, then taking from their sayings the strongest proof. Often, their sayings differ when the sayings of the Companions differ. If all that is impossible, then he takes analogy out of necessity, and this is close to the principles of Shafi‘i, and they agree on it (1). It is noticeable that these imams may not work with some of the rulings’ Hadiths because they conflict with principles or rules they have adopted. If the scholar knows the reason why an imam among the imams did not take a certain Hadith, he excuses him — regardless of whether his statement is considered stronger or weaker. This requires clearing the blame from these great imams (2). It also reminds the jurist that he must have principles and rules from the Book and the Sunnah.