Posted by: Seeker of the Sacred Knowledge | August 8, 2012

Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi addressing the ‘Ulama of Morocco 2012

Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi addressing the ‘Ulama of Morocco:

Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi delivering a wonderful insight into the prerequisites, manners, and conditions of Islamic judiciary – focusing on fatwas and judging.

The noble Shaykh also thanked the King for sending aid to Syria.

News Story covering Sayyiduna Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi at Durus Hassaniyyah Morocco:

An article about the Majlis where Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi Hafizullah Ta’ala addressed the King of Morocco and many Ulama in the Durus al-Hassaniyah:أمير-المؤمنين-يترأس-درسا-دينيا-جديدا-من-سلسلة-الدروس-الحسنية-الرمضانية-3

From Ustadh Ahmad Ali Al-Adani in the speech of Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi yesterday during Durus Hasaniyyah: 

1. The Shaykh mentioned the famous instance where Maalik was asked several questions and accepted to reply to some of them only.

However, as the Shaykh made us understand, there are situations, such as “smoking in Islam”, where you have to give a crisp answer, and one which is clear-cut and unwavering. The Shaykh himself has done so in declaring smoking a clear haraam and no-go area, instead of an opportunistically generic “laa adri” (I do not know). That is a far cry from the fatwaa we discussed in this group about the young “mawlaana” from Bury and his offer to be a muhallil. That’s a scenario where to keep quiet might be countenanced = There is context and context. As the savants say, li-kulli maqaamin maqaal.


2. The Shaykh correctly emphasizes that this is an age of far too many fataawaa, especially cyber ones as he specifies (and far too few aqdiyah or judgments between litigants). Issuing a fatwaa is easy and involves no hard fight to establish decision-making among Muslims and manly stomach the critical darts and hostility of a) Muslims who do not want their matters to be judged by the sharee`ah, and b) those litigants who are dissatisfied with verdicts given even if they submit to the jurisdiction of an Islamic dispute-resolver.


3. The Shaykh places the beat on the fact that a fatwaa does not legalize something as halaal or interdicts something as haraam. It only, he says, clarifies the hukm of the Law in a particular matter. Hence, if one (like the Shaykh himself) declares smoking to be haraam in a fatwaa, he is merely elucidating an existing ruling and not raising himself to the status of an authority decreeing the halaal or the haraam into existence. That is the prerogative of the Lawgiver, ash-Shaari`.


4. The Shaykh pointedly asks the Mufti to focus more on probing the question, since a sound answer follows inevitably from a sound apprehension of the question that has been addressed. Let me refer again to the ruling of the 5 pronouncements of divorce and the young would-be muhallil from Bury. Had the Mufti there paused to probe the question, the questioner and the circumstances around the question as comprehensively as necessary, he would have realized that the mustafti (questioner or seeker of fatwaa) was painting a deliberately distorted picture where he played down his negligence and the fact that he had more opportunities at his disposal to verify the correct ruling than he was prepared to admit. That had to be taken into account by analyzing the question and related matters more deeply, unhurriedly and fastidiously, as it would have yielded the different conclusion in our madhhab that the mustafti could not be excused on the ground of ignorance of the Law.


5. The Shaykh wisely underlines that it is not for the Mufti to point the questioner to an existing juristic disagreement on the mas’alah. He is not there to display his competence in the field, and he is not there to confuse the questioner. As the Shaykh says, he must provide a straight, unequivocal answer free from hesitation in accordance with what he deems right, so that the mustafti can act on it with full confidence and armed with a “conclusive” authority on the mas’alah. The Mufti hands the mustafti a light-casting torch, and it must be a truly functional and guiding torch.


6. Linked to it is what the Shaykh sagely marks, to the effect that the Mufti must not offer the questioner a choice between a madhhab and another. He would cloud the issue and sow uncertainty and convenience by doing so. Indeed, in the “Bury” example, it was wrong for the questioner to ask “what do the 4 madhhabs say on that” (seeking a crafty way out of his culpable haste in divorcing his wife and then repenting), and it was wrong for the Mufti to second that, pick up a qaa`idah of a madhhab he himself did not adhere to, and offer it as a safe way out after incorrectly pointing the mustafti to the “divergent” view of all the other madhaahib of Ahl as-Sunnah = to an existing khilaaf.


7. As the Shaykh stresses, In that sense a fatwaa is analogous to a hukm or judicial/quasi-judicial determination of a legal dispute. It must clearly lay down an answer which is not vague, just as a tribunal issues an order couched in straight wording and unequivocal terms. 8. One should not hasten to issue a fatwaa, is the Shaykh’s last bit of advice. If the matter is too complex, tell the questioner it and leave it at that; or ask for more time to research and consult, and Allah knows best.

Taken from The Lovers of Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi Facebook Page:



  1. Thanks for the Video post , If you translate in to English will be highly appreciated.

Bismillah Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: