مفہوم مخالف اور اس پر منطبق ہونے والے مسائل كا تحقیقی جائزہ (ہدايہ اور فتاویٰ شامى کى روشنى ميں منتخب فقہى ابواب كا مطالعہ)

Abstract

Mafhūm Mukhālif, also known as Dalīl al-Khitāb (argument from the opposite meaning), is a critical yet debated principle in Islamic jurisprudence, functioning as a tool for deriving legal rulings from unspoken implications of textual commands. This study explores the linguistic and technical definitions of Mafhūm Mukhālif and examines its practical application in selected jurisprudential chapters, with a special focus on Al-Hidāyah and Fatāwa Shami two key texts in Hanafi fiqh.

Through an analytical and comparative methodology, the paper investigates how Ḥanafi scholars, alongside other jurists, apply or reject Mafhūm Mukhālif in diverse areas such as acts of worship (‘Ibādāt), marriage contracts (Nikāh), ritual purity, funeral prayers, and the interpretation of Qur᾿anic injunctions. The findings reveal significant methodological differences among juristic schools regarding the authority and limits of Mafhūm Mukhālif as a source of legal inference. While some schools accept its evidentiary value, others advocate caution or reject its standalone authority in certain contexts. This research highlights that Mafhūm Mukhālif, when applied cautiously and within contextual limits, remains a valuable interpretive tool in Islamic law, aiding scholars in deriving rulings where explicit texts remain silent. By examining classical juristic approaches, this paper offers a structured understanding of Mafhūm Mukhālif’s practical significance and contributes to contemporary discussions in Usul al-Fiqh and applied Islamic jurisprudence.