Customs & Acts Of Worship

A very important distinction – العبادات والعادات

Imam al-Shaatibi al-Maliki wrote 700 years ago:

الأصل في العبادات بالنسبة للمكلف: التعبد, دون الالتفات إلى المعاني
وأصل العادات. الالتفات إلى المعاني

“The general principle, when it comes to rituals of worship (Ibaadaat) is that they are to be religiously followed, without delving into their objectives/reasoning.

The general principle, when it comes to customary practices (‘Aadaat) is that we delve into their objectives/reasoning.”

[‘Al-Muwafaqaat’, 2/513].

———————————

RITUALS OF WORSHIP:

Generally speaking, religious rituals of worship (العبادات) CANNOT be LOGICALLY RATIONALISED, we just apply them out of devotion (تعبدي).

– A person has to renew his Wudhu (wash his arms, face, mouth, nose, etc), for passing wind.
– A person wipes the top of his socks, during Wudhu (while the bottom of it touches the ground).
– A person will be considered clean to pray, by just doing Tayamum with dust.

So the actual outcome is not always the physical purity per-se – because a persons face does not get physically impure by passing wind – but it still needs to be washed again.

We don’t ask questions in this realm, we hear and obey.

CUSTOMARY PRACTICES:

When it comes to customary practices (العادات), interpersonal interactions in worldly life, they CAN be RATIONALISED and understood LOGICALLY – for example:

– A judge should not decide between two people while he is angry, because anger blurs his judgement.
– A woman should not travel far without her guardian, for security reasons.
– Dragging clothes below the ankles is forbidden, because it entails pride/arrogance.

You can clearly pinpoint the LOGIC/REASON behind these rulings.

In this realm, the jurists start investigating and ask questions, to find the actual reasons for these rulings and apply them in light of those objectives.

This is why you find many jurists from the 4 madhabs say things like:

– If a man shakes hand with an elderly woman, its OK, because the reason for that prohibition was TEMPTATION.

– If a man extends his pants below his ankles WITHOUT PRIDE, its OK, because the reason prohibition was pride/arrogance.

– If a woman wears fake hair WITHOUT DECEIVING anyone, its OK, because the reason for that prohibition was deception.

– If a woman plucks her eyebrows for her husband, its OK, because the reason for the prohibition was attracting STRANGERS.

– If a man dyes his hair black without DECEIT, it’s OK, because the reason for the prohibition was deceit (for example: to look younger for marriage proposal).

– If safety is guaranteed, a woman can travel without her guardian with other women, because the reason for the prohibition was DANGER.

And you will find many more examples like this.

These jurists were not trying to find LOOPHOLES, they were trying to CONTEXTUALISE the TEXTS and find their true OBJECTIVES and REASONS.

They did NOT claim that any of these texts don’t apply anymore. They explained in which context they DO apply and in which context they DO NOT apply.

That is the entire purpose of FIQH – to put every TEXT in its proper CONTEXT.

CONCLUSION:

Islam is a logical religion, but unfortunately some people apply TEXTS out of CONTEXT.

That’s why Islam looks rigid and like a burden.

It’s not like that.