حكم الزيادة على ما يندفع به الواجب عند الأصوليين و أثر ذلك في التفريعات الفقهية : دراسة و تطبيقا

Abstract EN

The present research paper aims to shed light on the impact of going beyond the minimum requirement of a prescribed duty and its legal ruling, whether it is obligatory or recommended.

It also reveals the impact of such increase on related detailed issues of jurisprudence.

The present researcher adopts a descriptive, analytical and deductive approach which is represented in collecting academic materials from their original and authentic sources in the discipline of Fundamentals of Jurisprudence, mentioning jurists' views on each jurisprudential issue, mentioning some corroborative pieces of evidence, bringing them up for discussion, and demonstrating the more adequately preferable view together with the reason behind adopting it.

I have documented the Qur'anic verses quoted by providing the numbers of the verses within their respective Surahs.

I have also documented the Prophetic hadiths and the reported accounts quoted in the study.

I have provided a concise biography of the prominent figures mentioned in the study.

I have provided indexes of the Qur'anic verses, the Prophetic hadiths, accounts, prominent figures, references, and topics.

I have drawn some important conclusions that include the following: Disagreement is an inevitable fact due to differences in people's perceptions and mentalities and due to the legitimacy of ijtihad (exercising discretionary independent judgment) in presumptive texts.

There is a difference between a ruling on the one hand and its related subject matters on the other.

The unremarkable increase beyond duty fulfillment is the cause of disagreement among the scholars.

The increased amount beyond the prescribed duty is recommended because the adult sane Muslim will be rewarded twice for bringing about it; there is no doubt that two rewards are greater than one reward.

The increase in rubbing (by passing wet hands over) some part of the head during ablution is recommended not obligatory.

Giving a camel, instead of an ewe, as Zakat for every five camels in possession is recommended.

Standing on Mount ˁArafāt by a pilgrim for a long period of time that exceeds the prescribed duty is deemed recommended or optional.

As for a camel given as Zakat for every five camels in possession, one-seventh of this camel is obligatory because it is in exchange for the obligatory ewe or ram, while the remaining six-sevenths are deemed recommended or optional.

The increased amount beyond the prescribed duty in religiously-valid vows and sacrifices is deemed optional, so it is permissible for the person making a vow and to others to eat from this additional part.