INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2989
www.rsisinternational.org
The Effect of the Conjunctive Particle Wāu 'Ataf on the Istinbāt of
Fiqh Rulings
Ahmad Dahlan Salleh, Ahmad Yunus Mohd Noor
*
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.914MG00228
Received: 07 November 2025; Accepted: 14 November 2025; Published: 26 November 2025
ABSTRACT
The hurūf al-maāni have a profound connection in understanding the meaning of a sentence pattern in the
Arabic language and in deriving legal rulings according to Shariah. This is because most issues related to
dalālah (indication) and fiqh matters depend on the understanding of the meaning of the particles present in the
text. This paper discusses the concept of wāu 'ataf, the importance of its usage by scholars, and its effect on the
istinbāt (deduction) of fiqh rulings. The field of Arabic language is challenging and constantly evolving over
time. These developments necessitate the ijtihad of scholars in determining rulings for specific issues.
Mujtahids derive rulings from authoritative sources, namely the Qur’an, Sunnah, and valid ijma’, while also
referring to the principles of istidlāl (deductive reasoning) and istinbāt in Islamic law. These principles revolve
around the Arabic language, grammar (nahu), and rhetoric (balaghah). This paper analyses the meaning and
significance of wāu 'ataf from the perspectives of both Arabic linguists and scholars of usul al-fiqh in their
classical works. The analysis shows that it has become a supporting source in establishing several rulings,
including various fiqh issues, and serves as a methodology for istinbāt in cases of differing madhhab opinions.
This paper also provides examples of the usage of wāu 'ataf in several fiqh issues.
Keywords: Conjunctive, particle wau, istinbat, fiqh rulings
INTRODUCTION
The huruf al-ma’ani play a crucial role in understanding meanings and deriving rulings from a Shariah
perspective. This is because many issues depend on the indications found within sentence patterns and specific
texts, and fiqh rulings often rely on the guidance conveyed through the huruf al-ma’ani in a given text. Early
scholars paid careful attention to this matter, and many specialists in Qur’anic studies emphasized that it is
essential for anyone interpreting the Qur’an. For example, scholars of Islamic theology discuss the Qur’an
from the perspective of meanings inherent in the text itself, whereas Arabic linguists and literary scholars
address all aspects of phrasing related to the Arabic language. Meanwhile, usul scholars and fuqaha focus only
on phrasing as it exists for the purpose of deriving rulings (al-Subkiy, p. 135). The difference between usul
scholars and linguists in discussing Qur’anic phrasing is that linguists examine wording from all aspects to
establish rules used in the science of language, whereas usul scholars and fuqaha focus only on the phrasing as
it exists and use the rules compiled by linguists as guidance.
Al-Suyuti (d. 911H) asserts: “Know that understanding this (i.e., the huruf al-ma’ani) is among the required
matters because differences exist according to their context. Therefore, the wording and the derived ruling
differ according to the situation” (Al-Suyuti, vol. 1, p. 190). Scholars of usul al-fiqh also give due attention to
the importance of huruf al-ma’ani, as a jurist (faqih) greatly needs this knowledge. Jalaluddin al-Mahalliy (d.
864H) states: “This is a discussion of the letters required by a faqih to understand their meanings, due to their
frequent occurrence in evidences (Al-Mahalli, vol. 1, p. 335) and their role in determining fiqh issues (Al-
Ansariy, vol. 1, p. 229), or because they depend on fiqh rulings and are a matter of difference in usage for
researchers” (AlQadhi, vol. 1, p. 194). Among the huruf al-ma’ani discussed, the ‘ataf particles and the letter
wau serve as the main focus of this discussion, as they share both the phrasing and meaning of a verse.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2990
www.rsisinternational.org
Methodological Framework
This study employs a qualitative, textual, and analytical paradigm rooted in Islamic epistemology, integrating
linguistic analysis (nahu) with jurisprudential reasoning (usul al-fiqh) to examine the meanings of wau among
huruf al-ma’ani. Using comparative textual analysis, it explores interpretations across Arabic grammarians and
usuliyyun, drawing on Qur’anic verses, classical grammar works, and foundational usul al-fiqh texts, supported
by secondary commentaries and modern hermeneutical studies. Data collection involves textual extraction,
comparative review, and historical tracing, while analysis categorizes thematic functions of wau—such as
collection, order, and similarity—synthesizing linguistic universality with fiqh application. Validity is ensured
through triangulation, cross-disciplinary grounding, and transparent citation, with ethical considerations
emphasizing respect for the Qur’anic text and fairness in presenting scholarly differences. The study
acknowledges limitations, focusing solely on wau, relying on classical sources, and recognizing unresolved
interpretive divergences.
1.0 The Meaning of the Letter Wau According to Arabic Grammarians and Usul Fiqh Scholars
Arabic grammarians (ahl al-nahu) argue that the meaning of wau is, in absolute terms, the collection (mutlak
aljam’i) of both sides of a sentence pattern without indicating any particular order. The wau can follow
something in a manner of similarity or adjacency, as in the words of Allah (s.w.t):
Meaning: “Thus We saved him and those with him in the Ark, and We made it a sign (demonstrating Our
power and providing admonition) for all creation”.(al-Ankabut: 15).
Or it may follow what precedes it, as in:
Meaning: “And indeed! We sent Noah and Abraham, and We made among their descendants those of high rank
who received the scriptures; yet some of them were guided, and most of them were defiantly disobedient”. (
alHadid: 26).
Alternatively, it can mean to follow, accompany, or succeed (lahiq), as in:
Meaning: “As revealed to you (O Muhammad) and to the messengers before you, by Allah, the All-Powerful,
the Most Wise"”.( al-Syura: 3).
Thus, if one says () “Zaid and Amr stood up,” it can convey all three meanings ( vol. 1, p. 438)
(AlAnsariy, vol. 2, p. 354) (vol. 2, p. 156) (al-Suyuti, vol. 3, p. 155) exemplified above.
Scholars such as Al-Kasani (d. 189H), Qitrib (d. 206H), al-Farra’ (d. 207H), Hisyam (d. 209H), Abu Ja’far
Ahmad bin Ja’far al-Dinuri (d. 289H), Tha’lab (291H), Qulam Tha’lab Abu Umar al-Zahid (d. 345H), Ibn
Darastawsh (d. 347H), and al-Rabi’ (d. 420H) maintain that wau indicates order (al-tartib) (Al-Andalusiy, vol.
2, p. 633) (Al-Azhariy, vol. 2, p. 156; Al-Suyuti, vol. 3, p. 155). Ibn Kisan (d. 299H) contends that wau implies
genuine simultaneity (al-ma’iyyah) and its application to others is metaphorical (majaz). He emphasizes that
“wau provides probabilistic meaning to three categories and usually serves to collect elements together;
therefore, it indicates gathering within a sentence or text” (Al-Suyuti, vol. 3, p. 156). Al-Radiy (d. 672H)
argues that the use of wau beyond indicating order (al-tartib) is metaphorical (majaz), and that originally its
usage is for order (al-tartib) and conveys a literal meaning (al-haqiqah), not metaphorical) (Al-Suyuti, vol. 3, p.
156). Ibn Malik (d. 672H) states that the letter wau has unique characteristics according to grammatical rules
and conveys probabilistic meaning in terms of similarity (Ibn Malik, p. 174).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2991
www.rsisinternational.org
From the above discussion by Arabic grammarians (nahu), it can be concluded that wau carries three
meanings: (i) collection alone, (ii) order, and (iii) similarity, with the grammarians’ precise position being
collection alone (mutlak al-jam’i).
Usul fiqh scholars also assert that the usage of wau is generally collection alone (mutlak al-jam’i), aside from
the meanings indicated by the grammarians. Al-Sarakhsi (d. 494H) emphasizes: "They assign the letter fa’ as a
connector (wasal) with the following meaning (al-ta’qib), the letter thumma for the next meaning (al-ta’qib)
with distant association (al-tarakhi), and the letter maa to mean continuity or union (al-qiran). If we say that
wau signifies union (al-qiran) or order (al-tartib), it implies repetition from its original usage. If we say wau
indicates ‘ataf absolutely, it provides a new meaning beyond its original usage....” (Al-Sarakhsi, vol. 1, p. 201).
Al-Imam al-Amidiy (d. 631H) says: "As for the letter wau, the majority of Arabic literary scholars agree that
its use is for collection alone (mutlak al-jam’i) without implying order (al-tartib) or similarity (al-ma’iyyah),
although some differ in opinion...” (Al- Amidiy, vol. 1, p. 88). Imam al-Shafi’i holds that it signifies order
(altartib), as does Imam Abu Hanifah. However, Abu Hanifah’s students, Abu Yusuf and Muhammad bin
Hasan, argue that it signifies similarity (al-ma’iyyah) (Al- Amidiy, vol. 1, p. 96).
In conclusion, from the perspective of usul al-fiqh scholars, the usage of wau can be categorized into three
types: (i) order (al-tartib), according to Imam al-Shafi’i and Imam Abu Hanifah, (ii) similarity (al-ma’iyyah),
according to Abu Yusuf and Muhammad bin Hasan, and (iii) collection alone (mutlak al-jam’i) without
implying order or similarity, which is the preferred opinion (al-mukhtar).
2.0 Differences of Opinion in Istinbat of Fiqh Rulings
The differences of opinion between the ahl al-nahu and the scholars of usul fiqh regarding the meaning and
usage of the letter wau, as discussed above, have an impact on the way fiqh rulings are derived. For example:
a) Allah (s.w.t.) says:
Meaning: "O you who have believed, when you are about to perform the prayer (while in a state of minor
impurity), then perform wudu: wash your faces, wash your hands up to the elbows, wipe part of your heads,
and wash your feet up to the ankles. And if you are in a state of major impurity, then perform the obligatory
bath. And if you are ill, on a journey, or one of you comes from relieving oneself, or you have touched women
and cannot find water, then perform tayammum with clean soil – wipe your faces and hands with it. Allah does
not intend to make things difficult for you, but He intends to purify you and complete His Favor upon you so
that you may be grateful”. (al-Maidah: 6).
Fiqh scholars differ on the order (al-tartib) of performing ablution(wudu’). Some argue that the sequence is
recommended, as held by the later Maliki scholars, Imam Abu Hanifah, al-Thawri, and Dawud. Others contend
that the sequence is obligatory, supported by Imam al-Syafie, Imam Ahmad, and Abu Ubaid. According to the
Maliki and Abu Hanifah schools, the order is recommended only for non-obligatory acts (Al-Isnawiy, vol. 1, p.
338; Al-Ansariy, vol. 1, p. 229).
Ibn Rushd (595H) explains that the disagreement stems from two factors:
1. The collective meaning indicated by the letter wau it can signify ‘ataf with sequential order (al-tartib)
2. or without order. Those who interpret wau in the wudu verse as implying sequence consider following
the order obligatory. Those who interpret it without sequence consider it non-obligatory, The second
reason is the difference of opinion regarding the actions of the Prophet (s.a.w.). Do the Prophet’s
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2992
www.rsisinternational.org
actions indicate that they are obligatory or merely recommended? Those who hold that the Prophet’s
actions are obligatory maintain that the sequence in ablution(wudu’) is also obligatory, because there is
no narration showing the Prophet performing ablution(wudu’) without following the order. The second
group contends that the sequence is recommended only; for those who distinguish between
recommended (sunnah) and obligatory (fard) acts, the sequence is obligatory only for obligatory acts.
For those who do not make this distinction, they argue that the requirements imposed on obligatory acts
may also apply to recommended acts.
Most scholars agree that the second factor is the main reason for disagreement, rather than the letter wau itself.
This is because wau merely indicates the aggregation between the preceding clause (al-ma’tuf) and the clause
following wau (al-ma’tuf ‘alaih) without consideration of equivalence (al-ma’iyyah). If sequence (al-tartib) or
equivalence (al-ma’iyyah) is present, it falls outside the main discussion of the letter wau’s usage” (Ibn Rushd,
vol. 1, p. 12).
Furthermore, fiqh scholars differ on sequence (al-muwalaah) in ablution(wudu’). Imam Malik holds that
sequence is fard along with pronunciation and ability, excused in cases of forgetfulness or valid excuses. Imam
al-Syafie and Abu Hanifah consider sequence in ablution(wudu’) non-obligatory. Ibn Rushd notes that the
disagreement stems from the sharing function in the letter wau, as wau sometimes unites (‘ataf) consecutive
actions (al-mutataba’ah) or successive ones (al-mutalahiqah), and sometimes unites actions that are distant (al-
mutarakhiyah). Scholars also differ in interpreting whether such actions are obligatory or recommended (Ibn
Rusd, vol. 1, p. 12). Nevertheless, the main issue here is the difference in interpreting the actions of the
Prophet (s.a.w.), whether they are obligatory or recommended not due to the letter wau itself. a) Allah (s.w.t.)
says:
Meaning: “Indeed, Safa and Marwah are among the symbols of Allah’s religion; so, whoever performs Hajj to
the House or performs Umrah, there is no blame upon him for walking between them. And whoever does good
voluntarily, then indeed Allah is All-Rewarding, All-Knowing”. (al-Baqarah: 158).
In this verse, those who argue that the hurf wau indicates sequence (tartib) state that because when this verse
was revealed, the Companions (r.a.) asked the Prophet (s.a.w.) where they should begin, and the Prophet
(s.a.w.) said:
Meaning: “Begin with what Allah has begun with” (Al-Namlah
, p. 142).
Thus, the practice was to begin in an orderly manner, starting at the hill of Safa and ending at the hill of
Marwah (Al-Amidiy, vol. 1, p. 93; Al-Zamakhshari, vol. 8, p. 93. Ibn Rushd, vol. 1, p. 12).
Those who oppose this view argue that the Prophet (s.a.w.) did not command starting at Safa because the
wording itself implies sequence; rather, the Prophet (s.a.w.) clarified the intended meaning due to the general
nature (ijmal) of the hurf wau. Therefore, the Companions (r.a.) asked, “Where should we begin?” If the hurf
wau implied sequence (tartib), they would have understood this without asking, as they were fluent Arabs and
the Qur’an was revealed in their language. Hence, the hurf wau here means mere aggregation (al-jam’i), not
sequence (tartib) (Al-Zamakhshari, vol. 8, p. 93).
Nevertheless, the majority of scholars (jumhur) hold that the hurf wau in this verse conveys aggregation only
(mutlaq al-jam’i), and the notion of sequence is derived from other commands (al- ‘amr), where the order of
mentioning something in speech indicates emphasis and attention. Thus, this argument is widely accepted (Al-
Saraksi, vol. 1, p. 202). It is clear that the sequence in the practice of sa’i between Safa and Marwa is
obligatory because of the actions of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and his instruction, not because of the wording of the
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2993
www.rsisinternational.org
verse itself. In conclusion, the jumhur maintain that the sa’i must begin at Safa; starting at Marwa would
render it invalid (Ibn Rushd, vol. 1, p 252).
b) Allah (s.w.t.) says:
Meaning: “And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned, for indeed it is
defiance; and indeed, the devils inspire their allies to dispute with you, and if you obey them, you would be
associators”. (al-An’am: 121).
This verse, Allah (s.w.t.) forbids consuming food on which His name is not mentioned, including carrion (al-
maitah), sacrifices performed by polytheists on their idols, and the slaughter and game of disbelievers who are
not the people of the Book (ahl al-kitab) (Al-Mawardi, vol. 1, p. 557). The hurf wau in this verse carries three
interpretations:
1. Wau ‘ataf, without distinction between the preceding and following verses, whether in the form of
command (talab) or information (khabar). This view is supported by the School of Sibawaih.
2. Wau indicates a new discourse or isti’naf, and the verse following the wau is a new statement,
independent of the previous verse.
3. Wau conveys a situational or circumstantial meaning (wau al-hal), where the subsequent verse
constitutes the circumstantial context, meaning do not eat in a state of defiance (Al-Samin, vol. 5, p.
130-131; Al-Syashi, p. 180). Wau here conveys a law that is concurrent or associated (mustarak).
From these interpretations, jurists (fuqaha) differ on the legal ruling concerning the consumption of a sacrifice
by a Muslim if the name of Allah (s.w.t.) (al-tasmiyah) is omitted, either intentionally or by mistake. This
divergence can be categorized into four groups:
First Opinion:
This group holds that mentioning the name of Allah (s.w.t.) or al-tasmiyah is not a condition during hunting or
slaughtering; rather, it is only recommended (sunat muakkadah). If it is not done, whether intentionally or by
forgetfulness, the hunted animal or slaughtered meat remains permissible to eat. This view is supported by the
Shafi‘i school, a narration from Imam Ahmad, some Maliki scholars, Qatadah, Hasan, and also Imam al-
Nakha‘i (Al-Nawawi, vol. 8, p. 308 and 311). They argue that the hurf wau in this verse conveys the meaning
of a situation or circumstance (wau al-hal). This is because there is a discrepancy between the preceding and
following clauses regarding equivalence (al-’ataf) in terms of command (talab) and information (khabar).
Thus, the verse is interpreted as “do not eat it while it is in a state of fasik,” and the word fasik here is general
(mujmal), explained by other verses in the same surah. In conclusion, the prohibition in this verse refers to
eating without mentioning the name of Allah (s.w.t.), as if the verse states: “Do not eat anything over which
Allah’s name is not mentioned, or if another name besides Allah’s is invoked in a state of fasik.” Accordingly,
this group limits the prohibition to carrion (al-maitah) and anything over which Allah’s name is not mentioned.
The arguments put forward by this group are based on several Quranic verses and Hadith of the Prophet
Muhamad (s.a.w.), as follows:
a) Allah (s.w.t.) says:
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2994
www.rsisinternational.org
Meaning: “Forbidden to you are carrion (animals not properly slaughtered), blood, swine flesh, and that which
is sacrificed to other than Allah, and that which is strangled, beaten to death, fallen from a height, or gored by
animals, except what you are able to slaughter and that which is sacrificed on idols; and do not seek divination
by arrows. All that is transgression....”. (al-Ma’dah: 3).
This verse indicates that a slaughter (al-tazkiyah) without mentioning al-tasmiyah is permissible.
Linguistically, slaughter means to open, cut, or tear.
b) Allah (s.w.t.) says:
Meaning: “O day [all] good and wholesome foods have been made lawful for you. And the food of those who
were given the Scripture (ahl al-kitab) is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them (there is no sin in
feeding them) ....”. (al-Maidah: 5).
This verse permits the consumption of slaughtered food by the People of the Book (ahl al-kitab) without
requiring al-tasmiyah.
c) Hadith of ‘Aishah (r.a.)
Meaning: Aishah (r.a.) said: A group asked the Prophet (s.a.w.) about meat brought to them, not knowing
whether Allah’s name had been mentioned over it. The Prophet (s.a.w.) said: “Mention it yourselves and eat it”.
d) Hadith of Ibn ‘Abbas (r.a.):
.Meaning: Ibn ‘Abbas (r.a.) said: The Prophet (s.a.w.) said: “If a
Muslim slaughters without mentioning Allah’s name, eat it, for a Muslim carries one of Allah’s names” (Al Dar
Qutniy hadith 6788).
e) Ibn ‘Abbas, Abu Hurairah (r.a.), and the consensus (ijma‘) of scholars hold that eating food without
mentioning al-tasmiyah does not constitute fasik. Therefore, the verse or text must be interpreted according to
the above explanation (Al-Nawawi, vol. 8, p. 308, 311, vol. 9, p. 75-76; Ibn Qudamah, vol.
8, p. 313, 565; Ibn Rushd vol. 6, p. 236-237).
Second Opinion:
Some groups, including the Zahiri school, al-Sa’biy, and Ibn Sirin, hold that mentioning the name of Allah
(s.w.t.) or performing al-tasmiyah is obligatory, and it is not permissible to eat meat from an animal if Allah’s
name is not pronounced over it, whether intentionally or by forgetfulness. They support their view based on the
following evidence:
a) Allah (s.w.t.) says:
Meaning: “And do not eat from [the slaughtered animals] over which Allah’s name has not been pronounced,
for indeed that is a transgression; and indeed the devils inspire their followers to dispute with you, and if you
obey them, you would indeed be associators”. (al-An’am: 121).
b) Allah (s.w.t.) says:
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2995
www.rsisinternational.org
Meaning: “...Therefore, eat from what they have caught for you and pronounce the name of Allah over it
(when you release it for hunting); and fear Allah (by avoiding what He has forbidden). Indeed, Allah is swift in
account” (al-Ma’idah: 4).
They argue that the wau here conveys the meaning of equivalence (‘ataf) or indicates a new clause (isti’naf) if
the ‘ataf (the declarative verse) is blocked by the preceding imperative verse (talab), rather than indicating a
situation (al-hal). In both cases— ‘ataf and isti’naf—the prohibition or injunction applies to anything over
which the name of Allah has not been pronounced, whether another name is mentioned during slaughter or no
name at all.
c) Hadith:
.
Meaning: From ‘Uday bin Hatim (r.a.), he said: I asked the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), “Indeed, we are hunting using these dogs.” The Prophet (s.a.w.) replied: “If you
send forth your trained dogs and you pronounce the name of Allah over them, then eat whatever they catch for
you” (Ibn al-Athir, vol. 4, p. 492).
This hadith demonstrates that pronouncing the name of Allah is obligatorily required (wajib mutlak).
Third Opinion:
Most scholars (jumhur) from the Hanafi school, the well-known opinion in the Maliki school, one narration in
the school of Imam Ahmad (second narration), Imam al-Thawri, Ishaq, Ja’far bin Muhammad, Rabi’ah, and
Sa’id bin Jubair hold that al-tasmiyah (pronouncing the name of Allah) is a condition for permissibility (halal),
but is excused if forgotten. If the slaughter is performed and the name of Allah (s.w.t.) is omitted by mistake, it
does not invalidate the permissibility; however, if the omission is deliberate, the meat is not halal to eat. They
base their ruling on the same evidence used by the second opinion group, but specifically allow leniency in
cases of forgetfulness. The following are the arguments they provide for the situation of forgetfulness: a)
Hadith:
Meaning: From Ibn ‘Abbas (r.a.):
“Indeed, Allah does not hold my Ummah accountable for mistakes, forgetfulness, or actions done under
compulsion” (Al-Gumari, vol. 1, p. 167-169). b) Hadith: .
Meaning: From Ra’id bin Rabi’ah (r.a.), the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: “The slaughter of a Muslim is
permissible (halal), even if the name of Allah is not pronounced, as long as it was not done intentionally” (Al-
Dar Qutniy, Hadith no. 8967).
c) Forgetfulness is something attributed to Allah (s.w.t.), and no servant can entirely escape it, just as in
the case of fasting. Therefore, the ruling for someone who forgets is the same as for one who performs the act
while observing it, as a way of removing hardship (daf’ al-haraj).
d) The above verse implies that deliberately omitting the tasmiyah (mentioning Allah’s name) during
slaughter is addressed by Allah’s statement that follows: “wa innahu la fisq”. Eating a slaughtered animal
where the tasmiyah was forgotten does not fall under the category of fasik (sinful). In conclusion, someone
who forgets is not considered a fasik.
Fourth Opinion:
This view states that mentioning the name of Allah (s.w.t.) is a condition for the permissibility of the animal. If
it is deliberately omitted or forgotten during hunting, the game becomes carrion (al-maitah), whereas if it is
forgotten during slaughter, it is permissible. This opinion is supported by an authentic and widely cited report
in the Hanbali school, which distinguishes between hunting and slaughter. Mentioning Allah’s name during
hunting is a condition; thus, the game is impermissible to eat whether the omission is deliberate or due to
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2996
www.rsisinternational.org
forgetfulness. In the case of slaughter, if the tasmiyah is deliberately omitted, the slaughtered animal is not
lawful to eat, but if it is forgotten, the meat is permissible.
This opinion argues similarly to the second opinion and explains that the hadith of Ibn ‘Abbas regarding
“Allah does not hold my people accountable for mistakes or forgetfulness…” indicates that Allah (s.w.t.)
absolves the fault rather than creating a condition that does not exist (al-syart al-ma’dum) compared to an
existing condition (al-maujud). They compare this to a situation where one forgets a condition in the ritual
prayer (solat). The argument emphasizes a clear distinction between game (al-said) and slaughtered animals
(al-zabihah), as slaughtering occurs at a specific place (the neck), allowing some leniency (al-tasaamuh) if
forgotten, unlike hunting (Al-Nawawi, vol. 8, p. 311-312; Ibn Qudamah, vol. 8, p. 540-541 and 565; Ibn
Rushd, vol. 6, p. 236237).
CONCLUSION
The Arabic language is a discipline that should be given serious attention by all, especially those educated in
religious studies, when interpreting nass and its content. It serves as a foundation and guide in understanding
and interpreting the nass of the Qur’an and Sunnah in deriving legal rulings (hukm) and formulating thought
and ijtihad. From the analysis above, it can be concluded that the difference in meaning of a single letter—
namely the waw—yields numerous implications in istinbat of fiqh rulings. Therefore, mastery of Arabic is
essential and should be continuously improved, particularly within Islamic education.
From the discussion in this paper, scholars who hold that the waw conveys an absolute meaning
(mutlaq al-jam‘i) base their view on other indications (al-dalalat al-ukhra) presented by scholars, which
involve external contexts (qarinah kharijiyyah) such as the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) sayings, his actions, or the
principles of usul al-fiqh. These include:
1. The beginning of a mention in a verse indicates particular attention to the matter.
2. A close connection (‘ataf ‘ala al-qarib) is given precedence over a distant connection (‘ataf ‘ala al-
ba‘id).
3. A verse that imposes a ruling at its beginning does not alter the ruling of a verse at its end.
When linked with waw ‘ataf, the verse conveys the meaning of equivalence or general aggregation.
REFERENCES:
Al-Quran.
1. Al-Dar Qutniy, Mausuah al-Syamilah, CD.
2. Al-Amidiy, (1400H/1980M), al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiah, Beirut.
3. Al-Amidiy, (1996), Saif al-Din, Abi al-Hasan, Ali bin Abi Ali bin Muhammad al-Syafie, al-Ihkam fi
Usul alAhkam, Dar al-Fikr, Beirut.
4. al-Andalusiy, (w.d.), Abu Hayyan, Irtisyaf al-Darb Min Lisan al-‘Arab, Tahqiq: Dr. Mustafa Ahmad
al-Nammas, Maktabah al-Azhariyyah li al-Turah, Qaherah.
5. Al-Ansari, (1414H/1993M), Abd al-‘Aliy Muhammad ibn Nizamuddin Al-Hindiy, Fawatih al-
Rahamut, 3rd Edition, Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabiy, Beirut,
6. Al-Azhariy, (1387H/1967M), Khalid, al-Tasrih bi Madmun al-Tawdih, tahqiq: Muhammad Basil
‘Uyun al-Sud, 1st Edition, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiah, Beirut.
7. Al-Ghumari, (1407H/1987M), Ahmad bin Muhammad bin al-Siddiq Al-Husainy, Al-Hidayah fi
Takhrij Ahadith al-Bidayah, ‘Alam al-Kutub.
8. Al-Halabiy, (1406H/1986M), Al-Samin, Ahmad bin Yusuf, Al-Durr al-Masun fi Ulum al-Kitab,
Tahqiq: Ahmad Kharrat, Dar al-Qalam.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2997
www.rsisinternational.org
9. Al-Isnawiy, (1420H/1999M), Jamal al-Din Abd al-Rahim Ibn Hasan al-Syafie, Nihayat al-Sul ala
Minhaj alWusul Ila Ilm al-Usul, tahqiq: Dr. Sya’ban Muhammad Ismail, Dar Ibn Hazm, Beirut.
10. Al-Mahaliy, (1996), Jalaluddin, Sharh Jam’ al-Jawami’, Syarikat Maktabah wa Matba’ah Mustafa
al-Babi alHalabi wa Auladuh, Misri.
11. Al-Mawardi, (1987), Tafsir al-Mawardi, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiah, Beirut.
12. Al-Namlah, (2000), Dr. Abd Karim ibn Ali, al-Jami’ li Masail Usul al-Fiqh wa Tatbiqatuha ‘ala al-
Madhab alRajih, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiah, Beirut.
13. Al-Nawawi, (1992), Al-Majmu’ Syarh al-Muhadhab, Maktabah al-Irsyad, Jeddah.
14. Al-Qadhi, (1982), Abi Ya’la, al-Uddah fi Usul al-Fiqh, tahqiq: Ahmad ibn ‘Ali, Muassasah al-
Risalah, Beirut.
15. Al-Qurtubi, (1983), Muhammad bin Ahmad, Tafsir al-Qurtubi, Dar al-Rayyan li al-Turath, Qaherah.
16. Al-Samin, (2001), Syihab al-Din Abu al-Abbas Ahmad bin Yusuf bin Muhammad bin Mas’ud, Al-
Durr alMasun fi Ulum al-Kitab al-Maknun,Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiah, Beirut.
17. Al-Sarakhsi, (1993), Abi Bakr Muhamad bin Ahmad bin Abi Sahl, Usul al-Sarakhsi, Dar al-Ma’rifah
li alTiba’ah wa al-Nasyr, Beirut.
18. Al-Subkiy, (1420H/1999M), Taj al-Din ‘Abd al-Wahhab ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Abd al-Kafi. Man’ al-Mawani’
‘an jam’ al-jawami’, Edited by. Sa’id ibn ‘Ali Muhammad ibn al-Humayriyy, Beirut: Dar al-Basha’ir
alIslamiyyah.
19. Al-Suyuti, (1408H/1998M), Jalaluddin Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Bakr, Ham’ al-Hawami’ fi Syarh
Jam’ alJawami’, Tahqiq: Ahmad Syam al-Din, 1st Edition, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiah, Beirut.
20. Al-Suyuti, (1993), Jalauddin Abd al-Rahman, al-Itqan fi Ulum Quran, 4th Edition, Syarikat
Maktabah wa Matba’ah Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi wa auladuh, Misr.
21. Al-Syashi, (1402H/1982M), Ahmad bin Ishaq, Usul al-Syashi, Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabiy, Beirut.
22. Ibn al-Athir, (1950), Abi al-Saadaat Mubarak bin Muhamad, Jaami’ Al Ushul Min Ahadith Al Rasul,
Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-Arabiy, Beirut.
23. Ibn al-Jazari, (1389H/1969M), Muhyiddin Abi al-Sa’adat, Jami’ al-Usul fi Ahadith al-Rasul, tahqiq:
Abd alQadir al-Arna’uut,
24. Ibn Hisyam, (1992), al-Ansariy, Mughni al-Labib an Kitab al-A’arib, tahqiq: Muhammad Muhy al-
Din Abd alHamid, Matba’ah muhammad ‘Ali Subaih wa auladuhu, Qaherah.
25. Ibn Malik, (1387H/1967M), Tashil al-Fawaid wa Takmil al-Maqasid, Tahqiq: Muhammad Kamil
Barakat, Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabiy li al-Tiba’ah wa al-Nasyr, Qaherah, Misr.
26. Ibn Qudamah, (1401H/1981M), al-Mughni, Maktabah al-Riyadh al-Haditiyyah, Saudi Arabia.
27. Ibn Rusd, (2001), Bidayah al-Mujtahid wa Nihayah al-Muqtasid, Dar al-Fikr, Qaherah.
28. Ibn Ya’ish, (1994), Muwaffiq al-Din Ya’ish bin Ali bin Ya’ish al-Musiliy, Sharh al-Mufassal lil-
Zamakhshari, Dar al-Kutub al-Imiyyah, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiah, Beirut., ‘Alam al-Kutub, Beirut.
29. Sibawaih, (2013), Abu Biysr Amru Bin Sulayman, al-Kitab, Tahqiq: Abd al-Salam bin Harun, ‘Alam
al-Kutub , Beirut.
