The United Federations
Post by alhasan18 on Nov 22, 2020 9:54:15 GMT 10
The Islamic Legal Ruling on Consultation
The question of whether consultation is mandatory or only recom-
mended under Islamic law may appear to be so clear as to require no
discussion, particularly if we view it in light of the two aforementioned
statements by al-Jassas and Ibn ¢Atiyyah. Nevertheless, the question
requires that we make certain distinctions if we are to avoid confusion
and overgeneralization. In the case of governors, presidents and others
in authority to whom the command to “take counsel with them in all
matters of public concern” applies, consultation is unquestionably mandatory. After all, if consultation was required of the Messenger of
God despite his prophetic status and personal virtues, then its necessity
for others is even clearer and more pressing.
The Prophet’s Companion Abu Hurayrah once observed, “Never
have I seen anyone more prone to seeking his Companions’ counsel
than was the Messenger of God.”23 However, we know that there has
never been anyone who could more easily have dispensed with others’
counsel than the Messenger of God and that, conversely, any other
ruler or leader will inevitably be in greater need than he was for his
Companions’ counsel and advice. If we were to assume, as some do,
that God’s injunction to His Messenger to seek out others’ counsel
rendered the practice merely desirable in his case, it would be manda-
tory for others. Hence, if it was mandatory for the Prophet – which, in
fact, it was – then it is even more mandatory and binding for others. It is
for this reason that Ibn ¢Atiyyah, not content merely to classify consul-
tation as obligatory, lists it “among the foundations and most binding
precepts of Islamic law,” after which he goes on to say that it is an
unquestionable duty to dismiss any ruler or leader who fails to consult
those possessed of knowledge and piety.
The question of whether consultation is mandatory or only recom-
mended under Islamic law may appear to be so clear as to require no
discussion, particularly if we view it in light of the two aforementioned
statements by al-Jassas and Ibn ¢Atiyyah. Nevertheless, the question
requires that we make certain distinctions if we are to avoid confusion
and overgeneralization. In the case of governors, presidents and others
in authority to whom the command to “take counsel with them in all
matters of public concern” applies, consultation is unquestionably mandatory. After all, if consultation was required of the Messenger of
God despite his prophetic status and personal virtues, then its necessity
for others is even clearer and more pressing.
The Prophet’s Companion Abu Hurayrah once observed, “Never
have I seen anyone more prone to seeking his Companions’ counsel
than was the Messenger of God.”23 However, we know that there has
never been anyone who could more easily have dispensed with others’
counsel than the Messenger of God and that, conversely, any other
ruler or leader will inevitably be in greater need than he was for his
Companions’ counsel and advice. If we were to assume, as some do,
that God’s injunction to His Messenger to seek out others’ counsel
rendered the practice merely desirable in his case, it would be manda-
tory for others. Hence, if it was mandatory for the Prophet – which, in
fact, it was – then it is even more mandatory and binding for others. It is
for this reason that Ibn ¢Atiyyah, not content merely to classify consul-
tation as obligatory, lists it “among the foundations and most binding
precepts of Islamic law,” after which he goes on to say that it is an
unquestionable duty to dismiss any ruler or leader who fails to consult
those possessed of knowledge and piety.