{"id":9319,"date":"2022-06-20T19:14:26","date_gmt":"2022-06-20T23:14:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/?p=9319"},"modified":"2023-08-04T22:51:55","modified_gmt":"2023-08-04T22:51:55","slug":"truth-and-falsehood","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/?p=9319","title":{"rendered":"Khabr: \u1e62\u0101diq or K\u0101dhib"},"content":{"rendered":"

c<\/sup><\/i>Ilm al-Ma<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>\u0101n\u012b<\/i> is the c<\/sup><\/i>ilm <\/i>(knowledge) through which the forms of Arabic expressions suitable to the dictates of the current situation are recognized.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

It is said [that] yu<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>raf<\/i> [grasping a thing by pondering and thinking about its traces] not yu<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>lam<\/i> [grasping a thing with its true nature] is used in consideration of what some of the learned have expressed with respect to c<\/sup><\/i>ilm<\/i> being specific to universals and ma<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>rifah<\/i> to particulars, as the author of al-Q\u0101n\u016bn<\/i> [i.e Shaykh Ab\u016b c<\/sup>\u0100l\u012b \u1e24usayn ibn c<\/sup>Abdull\u0101h, aka Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 (d.428 A.H.)] mentioned in the definition of al-\u1e6cib<\/i>, \u201cal-\u1e6cib<\/i> (medicine) is the knowledge by which the states of human bodies are yu<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>raf<\/i>\u00a0 <\/span>[recognized].\u201d Similarly, Shaykh Ab\u016b c<\/sup>Amr [c<\/sup>Uthm\u0101n ibn c<\/sup>Umar, aka ibn al-\u1e24\u0101jib (d. 646 A.H.)], may All\u0101h have mercy on him, said, \u201cAl-Ta\u1e63r\u012bf<\/i>\u00a0 <\/span>[inflection] is the knowledge of the foundational principles by means of which the states of speech construction are yu<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>raf<\/i>\u00a0 <\/span>[recognized].\u201d<\/p>\n

[c<\/sup>All\u0101mah Sirajudd\u012bn Y\u016bsuf ibn Ab\u012b Bakr ibn Mu\u1e25ammad] al-Sakk\u0101k\u012b \u00a0[d. 626 A.H.] said,\u201cc<\/sup><\/i>Ilm al-Ma<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>\u0101n\u012b <\/i>is the examination of the special characteristics of speech composition with respect to communication, and that which is connected to it (i.e. what is commendable, wa ghayrihi<\/i> [etc.]), so that one may refrain from mistakes in making speech suit the dictates of the situation.\u201d<\/p>\n

This needs to be discussed, since examination is not knowledge, nor is it [i.e the term examination] \u1e63\u0101diq <\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>alayh<\/i> (true of it), therefore defining any of the sciences with it is not correct.<\/p>\n

Later on he says, \u201cBy composition, I mean the composition of those who are profound and eloquent.\u201d<\/p>\n

There is no doubt that recognizing an eloquent person, from the aspect of them being eloquent, is suspended on recognizing bal\u0101gha<\/i> (eloquence). Previously, he defined bal\u0101gha<\/i> in his book when he said, \u201cBal\u0101gha<\/i> is the speaker attaining a high degree with respect to conveying meaning; it\u2019s features are: giving the composition choices their due and properly employing a variety of tashb\u012b<\/i> (similies), maj\u0101z<\/i> (tropes), and kin\u0101yah<\/i> (indirect speech).\u201d<\/p>\n

If, in defining bal\u0101gha<\/i>, he meant by the term \u201ccomposition\u201d\u00a0 <\/span>the composition of those who are profound and eloquent, which is the literal meaning of what was said, then he has come to a vicious circle but if he meant something else he did not clarify it given the fact that his statement,\u201dwa ghayrihi<\/i> [etc.],\u201d is ambiguous, his intent with it unclear.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Now, the objective of c<\/sup><\/i>Ilm al-Ma<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>\u0101n\u012b<\/i> is confined to eight topics:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. a\u1e25w\u0101l al-isn\u0101d al-khabar\u012b<\/i><\/li>\n
  2. a\u1e25w\u0101l al-musnad ilayh<\/i><\/li>\n
  3. a\u1e25w\u0101l al-musnad<\/i><\/li>\n
  4. a\u1e25w\u0101l mutallaq\u0101t al-fi<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>l<\/i><\/li>\n
  5. qa\u1e63r<\/i><\/li>\n
  6. al-\u2018insh\u0101\u2019<\/i><\/li>\n
  7. al-ij\u0101z wa al-i\u1e6dn\u0101b wa al-mus\u0101w\u0101h<\/i><\/li>\n
  8. al-fa\u1e63l wa al-wa\u1e63l<\/i><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    What is meant by this restriction [i.e. that the purpose of c<\/sup><\/i>Ilm al-Ma<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>\u0101n\u012b<\/i> is confined to eight topics] is that kal\u0101m<\/i> [speech] is either khabr<\/i> [an informative statement\/assertive utterance] or \u2018insh\u0101<\/i> [also called \u1e6dalab<\/i>1<\/sup>; an expression of desire\/a non-assertive utterance] since in its relation to al-kh\u0101rij<\/i> [i.e. reality, tangible or nontangible2<\/sup>] it either conforms to it or does not, or possesses no external [relation]. The first [.i.e that which has a connection to reality and is either in conformity with it or not] is an informative statement, and the second is an expression of desire.<\/p>\n

    An informative statement must possess an isn\u0101d<\/em> [complete sentence], musnad ilayh<\/i> [subject], and musnad<\/i> [predicate], and the a\u1e25w\u0101l<\/i> [states] of these three are [the domain of] the first three topics [i.e. a\u1e25w\u0101l al-isn\u0101d al-khabar\u012b<\/i>, a\u1e25w\u0101l al-musnad ilayh<\/i>, and a\u1e25w\u0101l al-musnad<\/i>].\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

    Furthermore, the musnad<\/i> may have [a multitude of] connections when it is a verb, or connected to a verb, or within the mental concept of a verb (e.g . an \u2018ism al-f\u0101<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>il<\/i> [verbal noun], etc.); this is the fourth topic [i.e. a\u1e25w\u0101l mutallaq\u0101t al-fi<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>l<\/i>].<\/p>\n

    Additionally, the complete sentence and the relationship [between the subject and predicate] may be by means of qa\u1e63r<\/i>3<\/sup> [qualification] or not. This is the fifth field [i.e. al-qa\u1e63r<\/i>], [and] al-\u2018insh\u0101\u2019<\/i> is the sixth topic.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

    Moreover, when a jumlah<\/i> [clause] is linked to another, the second will either be attached to the first, or not, and this is the seventh topic [i.e. al-fa\u1e63l wa al-wa\u1e63l<\/i>].\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

    The formulation and articulation of eloquent speech is either in excess of the original intent due to some benefit, or not, and this is the eighth topic [i.e. al-ij\u0101z wa al-i\u1e6dn\u0101b wa al-mus\u0101w\u0101h<\/i>].<\/p>\n

    N.b. The scholars have differing views concerning the restriction of informative statements to \u1e63\u0101diq<\/i> (truthful) and k\u0101dhib<\/i> (false)<\/p>\n

    Majority of the scholars are of the view that it is restricted to these two, but then differed, [with] majority of them saying, \u201cIt\u2019s \u1e63idq<\/i> (veracity) is the conformity of its \u1e25ukm<\/i> [conclusion] to reality, and its kidhb<\/i> [falsehood] is the nonconformity of its conclusion to [reality].\u201d4<\/sup> This is the canonical and trusted view.<\/p>\n

    Some5<\/sup> of the people said,\u201cIt\u2019s veracity [lies] in the conformity of its conclusion to the c<\/sup><\/i>aq\u012bdah<\/i> [i.e. \u062d\u0643\u0645 \u062c\u0627\u0632\u0645 \u064a\u0642\u0628\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0643; a definite conclusion that accepts doubt; a conviction]6<\/sup> of the mukhbir<\/i> [informant], whether they were correct or mistaken [in what they said], and its falsehood is the nonconformity of its conclusion to it.<\/p>\n

    [They] advanced two reasons in support [of this]:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. A person may be convinced something is true and relate it [to others], but later on it becomes apparent that his information contradicts reality. About this person, it is said, \u201cHe did not utter a lie, but he akh\u1e6da\u2019a<\/i> [erred].\u201d Similar is narrated about c<\/sup>\u0100ishah, may All\u0101h be pleased with her, who said of someone in a similar state, \u201cHe did not lie but he wahima<\/i> [was mistaken].\u201dThis is refuted by the fact that what is being negated is a deliberate lie, not lying, as evidenced by [our] repudiation of a k\u0101fir <\/i>[disbeliever] (e.g. a Jew) when they say, \u201cIsl\u0101m is false,\u201d and [our] attestation of [the same] when he says, \u201cIsl\u0101m is true.\u201c Thus, her statement, \u201cHe did not lie,\u201d is understood to mean, \u201cHe did not deliberately lie.\u201d<\/li>\n
    2. The Exalted One\u2019s statement: \u0648 \u0627\u0644\u0644\u0647 \u064a\u0634\u0647\u062f \u0625\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646\u0627\u0641\u0642\u064a\u0646 \u0644\u0643\u0627\u0630\u0628\u0648\u0646 \u201cAll\u0101h bears witness that the hypocrites are liars,\u201d7<\/sup> calls them liars with respect to their statement: \u0625\u0646\u0643 \u0644\u0631\u0633\u0648\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0644\u0647 \u201cUndoubtedly, you are the Messenger of All\u0101h,\u201d even though it conformed to reality, because they were not convinced that it was true.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      I give a few responses:<\/p>\n

      1. The meaning of [their statement] nashhadu<\/i> [we testify] is a testimony in which [one\u2019s] heart and tongue are in agreement, as the \u0625\u0646, the \u0644\u0627\u0645, and the clause being <\/i>nominal explain [since each of the three emphasizes the informative statement]:<\/p>\n

      \u0625\u0650\u0630\u064e\u0627 \u062c\u064e\u0622\u0621\u064e\u0643\u064e \u0671\u0644\u0652\u0645\u064f\u0646\u064e\u0670\u0641\u0650\u0642\u064f\u0648\u0646\u064e \u0642\u064e\u0627\u0644\u064f\u0648\u0627\u0652 \u0646\u064e\u0634\u0652\u0647\u064e\u062f\u064f \u0625\u0650\u0646\u064e\u0651\u0643\u064e \u0644\u064e\u0631\u064e\u0633\u064f\u0648\u0644\u064f \u0671\u0644\u0644\u064e\u0651\u0647\u0650 \u06d7 \u0648\u064e\u0671\u0644\u0644\u064e\u0651\u0647\u064f \u064a\u064e\u0639\u0652\u0644\u064e\u0645\u064f \u0625\u0650\u0646\u064e\u0651\u0643\u064e \u0644\u064e\u0631\u064e\u0633\u064f\u0648\u0644\u064f\u0647\u064f\u06e5 \u0648\u064e\u0671\u0644\u0644\u064e\u0651\u0647\u064f \u064a\u064e\u0634\u0652\u0647\u064e\u062f\u064f \u0625\u0650\u0646\u064e\u0651 \u0671\u0644\u0652\u0645\u064f\u0646\u064e\u0670\u0641\u0650\u0642\u0650\u064a\u0646\u064e \u0644\u064e\u0643\u064e\u0670\u0630\u0650\u0628\u064f\u0648\u0646\u064e\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

      \u201cWhen the hypocrites came they said, \u2018We testify that, undoubtedly, you are the Messenger of All\u0101h.\u2019 All\u0101h knows that you are, without a shadow of a doubt, the Messenger of All\u0101h; All\u0101h bears witness that the hypocrites are liars.\u201d8<\/sup><\/p>\n

      The rebuttal is for their statement, \u201cwe testify,\u201d and their claim within it that [their hearts and tongues] are in agreement. It is not [a denial] of their statement, \u201cUndoubtedly, you are the Messenger of All\u0101h.\u201d<\/p>\n

      2. The refutation and denial is concerned with their naming the information they give shah\u0101dah<\/i> [testimony], because notification that is void of [heart-tongue] conformity cannot be testimony in reality.<\/p>\n

      3. The meaning of \u0644\u064e\u0643\u064e\u0670\u0630\u0650\u0628\u064f\u0648\u0646\u064e [bold-faced liars] regarding their statement: \u0625\u0650\u0646\u064e\u0651\u0643\u064e \u0644\u064e\u0631\u064e\u0633\u064f\u0648\u0644\u064f \u0671\u0644\u0644\u064e\u0651\u0647\u0650 \u201cUndoubtedly, you are the Messenger of All\u0101h,\u201d concerns themselves [i.e. they don\u2019t consider themselves to be telling the truth], due to their conviction that this is information in contradiction to the state of the one they are informing about.<\/p>\n

      [Ab\u016b c<\/sup>Uthm\u0101n c<\/sup>Amr ibn Ba\u1e25r ibn Ma\u1e25b\u016bb] al-J\u0101\u1e25i\u1e93\u00a0[d. 255 A.H.]rejects the restriction of informative statements to two categories and claims that it is [divided into] three: truthful, false, and neither truthful nor false. This is due to the fact that the conclusion either conforms to reality and is accompanied by the conviction of the informant, or is not; [or is] not in conformity to reality and is accompanied by the conviction [of the informant], or is not.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

      In the first case (i.e conformity accompanied by conviction) [the informative statement] is true, while in the third case (i.e. not in conformity to reality accompanied by conviction) it is false, and in the second and fourth case (i.e. conformity or nonconformity without conviction) both are neither true nor false.<\/p>\n

      [A] true [statement], according to him, is the conclusion conforming to reality accompanied by [the] conviction [of the informant], and [a] false [statement] is the absence of its conformity accompanied by [the] conviction [of the informant], while the other two types are:<\/p>\n

      a. [The] conformity [of the conclusion to reality] that is not accompanied by [the] conviction [of the informant].<\/p>\n

      b. [The conclusion] not conforming [to reality], accompanied by [the] absence of the conviction [of the informant].<\/p>\n

      As support for his argument he cites the Exalted One\u2019s statement:<\/p>\n

      \u0623\u064e\u0641\u0652\u062a\u064e\u0631\u064e\u0649\u0670 \u0639\u064e\u0644\u064e\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0644\u064e\u0651\u0647\u0650 \u0643\u064e\u0630\u0650\u0628\u064b\u0627 \u0623\u064e\u0645 \u0628\u0650\u0647\u0650 \u062c\u0650\u0646\u064e\u0651\u0629\u064c<\/span><\/p>\n

      \u201cHas he fabricated a lie against All\u0101h or is he mad?\u201d9<\/sup><\/p>\n

      [He uses this] because they limited the Prophet\u2019s \u0635\u0644\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0644\u0647 \u0639\u0644\u064a\u0647 \u0648 \u0633\u0644\u0645\u00a0 <\/span>claim of prophethood\u00a0 <\/span>to iftir\u0101<\/i>\u2019 (a fabrication) or information given while in the state of insanity, with the idea that [that the two are] m\u0101ni<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>ah al-khul\u016b<\/i> [mutually inclusive].10<\/sup> [They were] not [claiming] that the information given in the state of insanity was a lie, since they used fabrication in place of it [i.e the word kidhb<\/i>], nor [were they claiming it was] true, since they did not accept its veracity within their hearts. Thus, it is established [according to him] that there are types of informative statements that are neither truthful nor false.<\/p>\n

      My response to him is that fabrication is an intentional falsehood, and thus a type of lie. Furthermore, it is not impossible for information given in the state of insanity to be a falsehood as well, since it is conceivable that [this] is another type of lie, that is, a lie that is unintentional.<\/p>\n

      Thus, the categorization [of al-J\u0101\u1e25i\u1e93] would be for false information [which would be divided into intentional and unintentional lies]11<\/sup>, not information, generally speaking, and the meaning [of their statement] is: did he fabricate it or not?12<\/sup>\u00a0<\/span><\/sup><\/p>\n

      This second [point] is what they are expressing in His statement: \u0623\u064e\u0645 \u0628\u0650\u0647\u0650 \u062c\u0650\u0646\u064e\u0651\u0629\u064c<\/span> \u201cor is he mad,\u201d since someone who is insane cannot fabricate [things].13<\/sup><\/p>\n

      Conclusion<\/p>\n

      Before, summarizing the discussion above, there is one important objection that must be addressed. A person may object that people use mub\u0101lagah<\/i> (exaggeration) and even though the definition of kidhb<\/i> is applicable, according to them it is not a kidhb<\/i>. Shaykh al-Hind Ma\u1e25m\u016bd \u1e24asan (d. 1339 A.H.\/1920 C.E.) quotes al-Tajr\u012bd<\/i> to respond to this:<\/p>\n

      \u201cIf one intended the literal meaning of the words then it is a falsehood, but if one intended a metaphorical mental concept (e.g. abundance) in the example then it is true because of the conformity of the intended mental concept to reality. Thus, what was intended was conformity with the intended mental concept (al-ma<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>na al-mur\u0101d<\/i>) not the conventional usage (al-wa\u1e0d<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>\u012b<\/i>).\u201d14<\/sup><\/p>\n

      Here it seems that there is a distinction being drawn between an assertive utterance that is being used majazan<\/i> (in the form of a trope, like the example, \u201cToday, I visited you a thousand times.\u201d) and \u1e25aq\u012bqatan <\/i>(as an accurate representation of reality). That is, if the words in the assertive sentence are being used \u1e25aqiqatan<\/i>, with a view to accurately representing reality, then the definition we have seen al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b use for khabr<\/i> would be correct, but if one is using these words in the form of a trope what would be considered is the intended mental concept of the speaker (i.e. what they are trying to say: in our example, \u201cToday, I visited you a large number of times.\u201d), not how the words are normally used, and therefore al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b\u2019s definition would not be applicable.<\/p>\n

      To sum up, we have seen that the scholars affirm an objective reality (\u1e25aq\u012bqah<\/i>) that can be known, and for which we can use language to make verifiable and objective statements. We have also seen that al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b divided speech into assertive utterances and non-assertive utterances. We learned that assertive utterances that are being deployed as an accurate representation of reality are either true if they conform to objective reality, or false if they do not, and that a person considering what they say to be true, or not considering it to be true, or even being mistaken, or not intending to lie, will not affect whether the assertive utterance is true or false.<\/p>\n

      Building on this, we will now examine the relationship between two assertive utterances and reality as a practical application in distinguishing true assertive utterances from false ones. We begin with the example of a person saying, \u201cZayd is standing.\u201d This is an assertive utterance whose truthfulness or not is tied to its conformity to reality and as al-Taftaz\u0101n\u012b tells us about this conformity and nonconformity,\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

      \u201cIt means that the two objects [in our case \u201cZayd\u201d and \u201cstanding\u201d] which one has made a connection between in the assertive utterance must have a connection in reality (i.e. without regard to what is in the mind), thus the conformity of that connection signified by the speech to<\/i> the connection which is extra-mental by the two objects both being affirmed or negated is \u1e63idq<\/i> and its nonconformity by one of them being affirmed and the other negated is kidhb<\/i>.\u201d15<\/sup><\/p>\n

      Coming back to our example, if one says that, \u201cZayd is standing,\u201d but the reality is that Zayd has not stood up and is in fact sitting, this assertive utterance would be called a lie because of its nonconformity to reality. The same would be the case if we said, \u201cZayd is not standing,\u201d when the reality was that Zayd was indeed standing.<\/p>\n

      We will conclude this exercise with the following example: \u201cZayd is a lion.\u201d As Shaykh Ma\u1e25m\u016bd \u1e24asan has pointed out, if the above sentence is taken as a figurative or metaphorical utterance, and what is meant is that some quality of the animal signified by the word lion (e.g. bravery, fierceness etc.) is found in Mary, then this would be a true statement. This is similar to the way \u1e24afi\u1e93 A\u1e25mad ibn c<\/sup>Al\u012b ibn al-\u1e24ajr al-c<\/sup>Asqal\u0101n\u012b al-Mi\u1e63r\u012b (d. 852 A.H.) approaches the word \u2018creation\u2019 used in a certain narration when he says, \u201c\u2026it is like one saying, in describing a woman of excellence and good character, \u2019There isn\u2019t a man like her among the people\u2019 meaning she is better than men, not that she is a man.\u201d16<\/sup><\/p>\n

      However, if this assertive utterance is being made as an accurate description of reality, and we are saying that the human being named Zayd is in reality the animal signified by the word lion, al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b\u2019s definition of kidhb<\/i> would apply due to the fact that this assertive utterance does not conform to reality. A human being is not a lion, and a lion is not a human being.<\/p>\n

      Source: Shaykh Mu\u1e25ammad ibn c<\/sup>Abd al-Ra\u1e25man ibn c<\/sup>Umar17<\/sup> al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b\u2019s al-\u2018\u012a\u1e0d\u0101\u1e25 f\u012b c<\/sup>Ulum al-Bal\u0101ghah al-Mac<\/sup>\u0101n\u012b wa al-Bay\u0101n wa al-Bad\u012bc<\/sup><\/em>, D\u0101r al-Kutub al-c<\/sup>Ilmiyyah, pp. 24-26<\/p>\n

      \n

      Footnotes:
      \n[1] For example: Expressing hope and longing for something, asking a question, commanding, prohibiting, and exclamations.<\/p>\n

      [2] Baghyah al-\u2018Iy\u1e0d\u0101\u1e25 li Talkh\u012b\u1e63 al-Mift\u0101\u1e25 fi c<\/sup>Ul\u016bm al-Bal\u0101ghah<\/em>, Maktabah al-\u0100d\u0101b, 1:37<\/p>\n

      [3] Qa\u1e63r<\/em> is of two categories (real and not) and those two are broken down into two types: limiting the person being described to a specific quality, or restricting a certain quality to a specific person. Some examples of Qa\u1e63r<\/em> are:
      \n1. \u201cZayd is only a scribe.\u201d This strips him of all descriptors except one, with the possibility that others also share his descriptor.
      \n2. \u201cOnly Zayd is in the house.\u201d This specifies him with a descriptor that no one else possesses.
      \n3. \u201cZayd is only a scribe.\u201d This sentence can also be used to address someone who thinks Zayd is a scribe and poet, informing them that he is one and not the other.<\/p>\n

      4. \u201cThere is no poet except Zayd.\u201d This sentence can be used to address someone who accepts that Zayd is a poet but thinks c<\/sup>Umar is also a poet. p.98-99<\/p>\n

      [4] The reason it is possible for an informative statement to be true or false is the ability to check the conclusion in relation to each one. (Mift\u0101\u1e25 al-c<\/sup>Ul\u016bm<\/em>, D\u0101r al-Kutub al-c<\/sup>Ilmiyyah, p.166)<\/p>\n

      [5] The phrase \u2018some of the people\u2019 is a reference to Ibr\u0101h\u012bm ibn Sayy\u0101r, known as al-Na\u1e93\u1e93\u0101m, a Muttazil\u012b shaykh<\/em> and teacher of al-J\u0101\u1e25i\u1e93 who died in 223\/7 A.H. after reportedly falling off a roof while drunk. (Baghyah al-\u2018Iy\u1e0d\u0101\u1e25 li Talkh\u012b\u1e63 al-Mift\u0101\u1e25 fi c<\/sup>Ul\u016bm al-Bal\u0101ghah<\/em>, 1:38; Siyar \u2018Ac<\/sup>l\u0101m al-Nubal\u0101\u2019<\/em>, Muassas al-Ris\u0101lah, 10:541-542)<\/p>\n

      [6] I use the term \u2018firmly convinced\u2019 as a short hand translation for the definition of caq\u012bdah written in the hashiyah of Shaykh Ma\u1e25m\u016bd al-\u1e24asan (\u0631\u062d\u0645\u0647 \u0627\u0644\u0644\u0647) : \u062d\u0643\u0645 \u062c\u0627\u0632\u0645 \u064a\u0642\u0628\u0644\u0647; a definite conclusion that accepts doubt, as opposed to cilm: a definite conclusion that doesn\u2019t accepts doubt<\/p>\n

      [7] S\u016brah al-Mun\u0101fiq\u016bn, \u0100yah 1<\/p>\n

      [8] Ibid.<\/p>\n

      [9] S\u016brah Sab\u2019a, \u0100yah 8<\/p>\n

      [10] Disjunction: A type of hypothetical proposition since they are either conditional [if\u2026then], that is, those [propositions] where a judgement is on the truthfulness of the proposition or on its untruth with the assumption of another proposition being true, for example: \u201cIf this is a human then it is a living thing, and if this is not a human then it is an inanimate object,\u201d; or they are disjointed [either\u2026or] which are [propositions] in which a judgment of incompatibility between the two propositions is given.<\/p>\n

      If the incompatibility is related to both truth and untruth then it is literal, for example, \u201cThis number is either even or odd.\u201d<\/p>\n

      If it is only related to untruth, then it is m\u0101nic<\/sup>ah al-khul\u016b<\/em>, for example, \u201cEither Zayd is in the ocean or he did not drown.\u201d<\/p>\n

      If\u00a0 it is only related to truth then it is m\u0101nic<\/sup>ah al-jamc<\/sup><\/em>, for example, \u201cEither this thing is a tree or a rock.\u201d<\/p>\n

      Manic<\/sup>ah al-Khul\u016b<\/em> is a disjointed proposition in which a ruling of incompatibility between its parts is passed, solely with respect to being untrue as was mentioned in the examples.<\/p>\n

      M\u0101nic<\/sup>ah al-Jamc<\/sup><\/em> is a disjointed proposition in which a judgement of incompatibility between its two parts is passed, with respect to being true like the previously written example. [http:\/\/arabiclexicon.hawramani.com\/?p=40614#4669f6] Accessed 2-12-22<\/p>\n

      [11] al-Talkh\u012b\u1e63 fi c<\/sup>Ilm al-Bal\u0101ghah<\/em>, D\u0101r al-Fikr al-c<\/sup>Arab\u012b, p.40<\/p>\n

      [12] It is apparent that His statement, \u201cDid he fabricate,\u201d is part of the statement some of them said to others (i.e. he is fabricating a lie against All\u0101h with respect to that which he is attributing to Him concerning resurrection, or there is some madness affecting him that makes him imagine that and utter it with his tongue), equating and treating fabrication and madness as equals, since this statement, in their eyes, would only emanate from one of these two. (Tafs\u012br al-Ba\u1e25r al-Mu\u1e25\u012b\u1e6d<\/em>, D\u0101r al-Kutub al-c<\/sup>Ilmiyyah,7:251)<\/p>\n

      [13] The meaning of, \u201cor is he mad,\u201d is: \u201cor did he not fabricate [it].\u201d They expressed the absence of fabrication by means [of the word] madness because it is an essential characteristic of an insane person that they cannot fabricate, since [fabrication] \u2013 according to that which has been transmitted from the a\u2019immah [experts] and the usage of the Arab \u2013 is an intentional lie, and there is no intentionality for a mad person. Thus the [word] \u2018madness\u2019 is not a correlative of \u2018false\u2019, rather \u2018fabrication\u2019, which is more specific, [is its correlative].\u00a0Hence, according to them, false informative statements are limited to two types: intentionally false, and unintentionally false. If it is accepted that ‘fabrication’ has the meaning of ‘false’, without any restrictions, then the meaning is: did he intend to fabricate [it] (i.e. did he intend to lie) or did he not intend [to lie], rather, he lied without intending to because of the madness possessing him.<\/p>\n

      It is said, \u201cThe meaning is: did he fabricate it or not, rather he is mad, and the speech of the insane is not informative since there is no aim that he is regarding, nor awareness. Therefore their intended meaning is limiting [his speech] to being false information, or not information, hence an informative statement that is neither true nor false is not established.\u201d (R\u016b\u1e25 al-Mac<\/sup>\u0101n\u012b<\/em>, Muassasah al-Ris\u0101lah, 22:24)<\/p>\n

      [14] Mukhta\u1e63ar al-Mac<\/sup>\u0101n\u012b<\/em>, Maktabah al-Bushr\u0101, p.84, footnote on al-W\u0101qic<\/sup><\/p>\n

      [15] Mukhta\u1e63ar al-Mac<\/sup>\u0101n\u012b<\/em>, p. 84<\/p>\n

      [16] Fat\u1e25 al-B\u0101r\u012b<\/em>, D\u0101r \u1e6caybah, 17:385<\/p>\n

      [17] The Sh\u0101fic<\/sup>\u012b Chief Justice Jal\u0101ludd\u012bn Mu\u1e25ammad ibn c<\/sup>Abd al-Ra\u1e25m\u0101n ibn c<\/sup>Umar al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b al-Sh\u0101fic<\/sup>\u012b (aka al-Kha\u1e6d\u012bb al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b<\/i>) was born in Mo\u1e63ul in the year 666 A.H.\/1268 C.E. and died around the age of 70 in Damascus in Jum\u0101d al-Awwal of the year 739 A.H.\/1338 C.E.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

      al-Kha\u1e6d\u012bb al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b<\/i> first studied Islamic jurisprudence with his father, and after he and his brother, Chief Justice c<\/sup>Umar ibn c<\/sup>Abd al-Ra\u1e25m\u0101n al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b al-Sh\u0101fic<\/sup>\u012b (d. 699 A.H.), moved to Damascus in 690 A.H. during the rule of the Mamluk Sultanate, he continued his studies there, eventually becoming an expert in Arabic, Rhetoric, and other sciences.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

      He subsequently took up teaching positions in the various colleges (s. madrasah\/<\/i>pl. mad\u0101ris<\/i>) of Damascus, such as: Madrasah al-c<\/sup>\u0100daliyyah, Madrasah al-Masr\u016briyyah, Madrasah al-Am\u012bniyyah, as well as Madrasah Umm al-\u1e62\u0101li\u1e25, and later became the khat\u012bb<\/i> of the great al-J\u0101mic<\/sup> al-Umaw\u012b built by the Umayyad Khal\u012bfah Al-Wal\u012bd ibn c<\/sup>Abd al-Malik ibn Marw\u0101n (d. 96 A.H.).<\/p>\n

      In the year 699 A.H., the Ilkhanid Mongols encroached on the Syrian region, causing massive amounts of damage and the loss of countless lives. In the face of this devastation many of the people of Damascus, including Jal\u0101ludd\u012bn\u2019s brother c<\/sup>Umar ibn c<\/sup>Abd al-Ra\u1e25m\u0101n, fled to Egypt. A few weeks after arriving in Egypt, c<\/sup>Umar ibn c<\/sup>Abd al-Ra\u1e25m\u0101n passed away. He was buried near the grave of Im\u0101m al-Sh\u0101fic<\/sup>\u012b.<\/p>\n

      Jal\u0101ludd\u012bn al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b was appointed as the Sh\u0101fic<\/sup>\u012b Judge of Damascus in the year 725 A.H. After two years in that position, a role that he must have excelled at, he was summoned to Egypt to be the Chief Justice of the Shaw\u0101fic<\/sup>. al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b spent over a decade in Egypt, teaching in the local mad\u0101ris<\/i> and adjudicating. He distributed the awq\u0101f<\/i> (endowments) amongst the poor, who found a place of refuge in him, and those in need.\u00a0 <\/span>In 732 A.H. he accompanied the Sul\u1e6d\u0101n to Makkah for \u1e25\u0101j<\/i>. Unfortunately, as time went on the ruler became displeased with him on some account and sent him back to Sham.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

      al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b\u2019s return to Sham coincided with the death of its Chief Justice, Shih\u0101budd\u012bn Mu\u1e25ammad ibn al-Majd al-Sh\u0101fic<\/sup>\u012b (d. 738 A.H.). Consequently, al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b was given Shih\u0101budd\u012bn\u2019s former judgeship, a position he retained until he was afflicted with hemiplegia, and returned to His Lord.<\/p>\n

      Im\u0101m Mu\u1e25ammad al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b left behind Badrudd\u012bn Mu\u1e25ammad (d. 742 A.H.), an expert in oration,\u00a0 <\/span>Jam\u0101ludd\u012bn c<\/sup>Abdull\u0101h (d. 743 A.H.), the kha\u1e6d\u012bb<\/i> of al-J\u0101mic<\/sup> al-Umaw\u012b where his father had served before, T\u0101judd\u012bn c<\/sup>Abd al-Ra\u1e25\u012bm ibn Mu\u1e25ammad ibn c<\/sup>Abd al-Ra\u1e25m\u0101n (d. ~710 A.H.) who was the kha\u1e6d\u012bb<\/i> of al-J\u0101mic<\/sup> al-Kha\u1e6d\u012bb, and \u1e62adrudd\u012bn c<\/sup>Abd al-Kar\u012bm. These last two died two days apart during the plague of 749 A.H. The first three brothers are all explicitly mentioned as being buried together with their father in the \u1e62\u016bfiyyah graveyard of Damascus.<\/p>\n

      Jal\u0101ludd\u012bn al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b was a man of clemency, culture and refinement; he was well-educated in Arabic, Turkish, and Persian, possessed a sharp mind, and was generous. Im\u0101m Dhahab\u012b (d. 748 A.H.) describes him in the following manner: \u201cHe studied fiqh <\/i>(Islamic Jursiprudence), debated, gave fat\u0101w\u0101 <\/i>(formal legal opinions), and exerted himself in Damascus; many students graduated at his hands (tukharriju bihi al-a\u1e63\u1e25\u0101b<\/i>).\u201d Shaykh \u1e62al\u0101\u1e25udd\u012bn Khal\u012bl ibn Aybak (d. 764 A.H.) writes about him, \u201cHe loved literature (al-adab<\/i>), would give lectures on it, was well skilled in it, and would draw out its subtleties.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

      al-Talkh\u012bs <\/i>and al-\u2018\u012a\u1e0d\u0101\u1e25<\/i><\/p>\n

      Im\u0101m Mu\u1e25ammad al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b is the author of Talkh\u012b\u1e63 al-Mift\u0101\u1e25 fi <\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>Ilm al-Ma<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>\u0101n\u012b wa al-Bay\u0101n <\/i>(The Abridgement of the Key: On the Science of Pragmatics and the Rhetorical Arts), a summarization of the third section of c<\/sup>All\u0101mah Sirajudd\u012bn Y\u016bsuf ibn Ab\u012b Bakr ibn Mu\u1e25ammad al-Sakk\u0101k\u012b\u2019s (d. 626 A.H.) al-Mift\u0101\u1e25 al-<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>Ul\u016bm <\/i>(The Key to the Sciences). These two books, and others written on this subject (i.e. c<\/sup><\/i>Ilm al-Ma<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>\u0101n\u012b wa al-Bay\u0101n<\/i>), were studied by Muslim scholars to comprehend the miraculous nature of the Qur\u2019\u0101n.<\/p>\n

      In a statement that highlights the importance of these two works, Dr. Lara Harb asserts that they \u201crepresent a standardization of literary theory\u201d that has remained in place up to the 21st century. While documenting the changes to the Darse Ni\u1e93\u0101mi curriculum, especially as it was studied in the Indian subcontinent, Dr. Aamir Bashir shows that al-Taftaz\u0101ni\u2019s abridged commentary on the Talkh\u012bs<\/i> was part of the original curriculum (c. 1740 C.E.), and continues as part of Darul Uloom Deoband\u2019s articulation of the curriculum right into the early 2000s.<\/p>\n

      Im\u0101m Mu\u1e25ammad al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b\u2019s Talkh\u012bs<\/i> attracted a number of abridgments, versifications, and commentaries, the most famous commentaries, according to Kashf al-Dhun\u016bn<\/i>, being the two (one lengthy and the other an abridged version) authored by Im\u0101m Sac<\/sup>ddud\u012bn Masc<\/sup>\u016bd ibn c<\/sup>Umar al-Taftaz\u0101n\u012b. al-Qazw\u012bn\u012b also penned his own commentary on Talkh\u012bs<\/i> that he titled al-\u2018\u012a\u1e0d\u0101\u1e25 f\u012b <\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>Ulum al-Bal\u0101ghah wa al-Ma<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>\u0101n\u012b wa al-Bay\u0101n wa al-Bad\u012b<\/i>c<\/sup><\/i>, and it is a section of this commentary that is the subject of the translation to follow.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      cIlm al-Mac\u0101n\u012b is the cilm (knowledge) through which the forms of Arabic expressions suitable to the dictates of the current situation are recognized.\u00a0 It is…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_editorskit_title_hidden":false,"_editorskit_reading_time":0,"_editorskit_is_block_options_detached":false,"_editorskit_block_options_position":"{}","footnotes":""},"categories":[80,31],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-9319","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-balaaghah","category-arabic-language","wpcat-80-id","wpcat-31-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9319","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=9319"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9319\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11260,"href":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9319\/revisions\/11260"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9319"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9319"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fiqhulislam.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9319"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}