. J "" (cont.)

Al-Haitami stated, Pardoning those aspects [that is, the sin of unintentional acts, acts done out of forgetfulness or coercion] is the requirement of wisdom, even though if Allah were to hold one to account for those acts He would be just [since they are the person's acts3]. However, the benefit of responsibility and its goal is to distinguish between the obedient one and the sinner, and to destroy the one who is to be destroyed after he received clear guidance and to give real life to the alive on the basis of clear guidance. Any act of obedience or disobedience needs an intention for it to be tied to reward or punishment. The three cases [described in this hadith] are devoid of such intention. The first two cases are clear in and of themselves. As for the 1 Al-Haitami, Fath, p. 274. 2 Saalih ibn Humaid, Raf al-Haraj ft al-Shareeah al-Islaamiyyah (Makkah: Umm al-Qura University, 1403 A.H.), p. 2 14. 3 For example, among human beings, one person may forget to do something or do something by mistake and another person may not be willing to forgive or overlook what he has done. This is because it is recognized that even if the act was done out or forgetfulness or due to a mistake, it was in fact the person's act and he is sometimes held fully responsible for what he has done. Commentary on the Forty Hadith of al-Nawawi third case, the intention is from the one doing the coercing and not the coerced himself, he is simply like a tool. 1 What Exactly Has Been Pardoned? It is obvious that mistakes, forgetfulness and coercion occur among the Muslim nation. This hadith does not imply that such would not occur among this nation, although some of the narrations of the hadith could give that impression. Important questions that arise are: What exactly has been pardoned? Has the entire act been pardoned including both the sinful nature of the act as well as its legal ruling in this world?2 Or has just the possible sinful nature been pardoned while the worldly ruling and consequences must still be tended to by the individual involved? If the act performed was a permissible, non-sinful act, is the worldly ruling then considered void or is it enforceable? In some cases, there are explicit texts from the Quran and sunnah stating what should be done in the case of mistake, forgetfulness or coercion. For example, in the case of mistakenly killing another believer, the Quran has laid down the expiation for that act. Those cases that have been explicitly addressed in other texts are not problematic. One simply follows the specific text related to that case. The problem arises when no other relevant text exists. 3 In those cases, there is a difference of opinion among the different schools of fiqh as to the understanding and application of this particular hadith. The hadith itself is open to being interpreted as the sinful nature of the act is overlooked and pardoned. It is also open to mean that all of the rulings associated with that act are to be pardoned, as if the act itself never occurred. All scholars seem to agree that the sinful nature of the act has definitely been removed. They differ only with respect to the worldly legal ramifications. 4 1 Al-Haitami, Fath, pp. 274-275. 2 For example, to speak while in prayer is a sin. Its worldly ruling is that it invalidates the prayer. Therefore, the issues in question here are the following: If a person speaks by mistake while in prayer, is he a sinner due to that act? That is the question with respect to the sinful nature of the act. The question with respect to the worldly ruling is: Does the one who speaks in prayer by mistake invalidate his prayer or not? 3 In some commentaries to this hadith, the impression is given that under each case, one must act according to the relevant evidence. (Such is the approach of Sultaan, p. 345.) However, that is simply begging the question. The question is: If there is no other evidence, does this one hadith constitute enough evidence to say that both the sin and the worldly ruling of the act is overlooked? 4 In fact, one approach to this hadith is that there is no ambiguity in the hadith and there is no need to assume anything further for the hadith. This is because its wording is clear, even before the coming of the shareeah, and its meaning jumps to the person's mind: a person will not be held responsible or punished for anything he does by mistake, out of forgetfulness or while under duress. Hence, it is literally correct and true either linguistically or because of an understanding that already exists among the people. [Cf., Muhammad ibn al-Najaar, Sharh al-Kaukab al­ Muneer (Riyadh: Maktabah al-Ubaikaan, 1993), vol. 3, p. 202.] However, that is not the most common approach to understanding this hadith. Hadith #39: "Allah has pardoned . . . " The Concept of Umoom al-Muqtadhaa.