Takfir: Conditions and impediments...

[Laba-X]

Kufr or disbelief may occur as a result of the following:

 

1. Statement (Qawliyya) – statement of kufr by which a person leaves the fold of Islam such as insulting Allah or His messengers

2. Action (ficliyya) – action of kufr or shirk which negates Islam, such as throwing the Musxaf in the toilet or leaving the obligation of Islam such as Salah, Zakat etc.

3. Belief (ictiqaadiyah) – belief of kufr in the heart or acceptance of kufr

 

• In the mas’ala of kufr or shirk, Aljuxuud (that someone is explained the xaq and then denies it) is not a condition

• The condition is that did the person fall into a Naaqid (nullifier) or not?

• That you consider the nullifier legal or xalaal is not a condition, whether it be by action or statement or belief.

• Also al-ictiqaad – that you believe in the nullifier – is not a condition as the deviant Murji’ah would have us believe. This means that if you did an action or said a statement of kufr, it is not a condition that you believe or disbelieve it in your heart. It is enough that you acted or said it. Islam judges the apparent and anything inside is left to Allah to judge

• The condition of Istixlaal or ictiqaad is applicable to the major sins. If a person repeats (israar) a major sin so often and makes it halaal for himself then this nullifies his Islam. If someone commits zina because of his desire then he has committed a major sin, similarly if he drinks. But if he says that it is halaal for him, then this now becomes kufr. Even if he doesn’t say it but ‘believes’ that it is halaal for him or generally halaal, then then it is also kufr.

 

 

The rule of Takfir: Qaacidu Takfiir:

 

The rule of Takfir as explained by Shaykhul Islam Ibn taymiyyah (Majmucul fatawa Vol 35 P101) is as follows:

 

“Man ath-hara qawlan aw ficlan aw-ictiqaadan mukaffira wa thabata calayhi thubuutan sharciyyah fa innahu yuxkamu bi kufrihi itha tawaffarat shuruudul xukmi wantafat mawaanicuhu.”

 

Which translates to:

 

“Whoever manifests (because if someone hides a statement of kufr within his heart, he is a kaafir by Allah and by us he is a Muslim since we cannot judge the hidden) a statement or action or a belief that makes one a kaafir, and this statement or action or belief has become apparent from him according to Sharci (with witnesses or his claims, etc,) then he is judged for his Kufr when the conditions of this xukum are fulfilled and anything that negates this xukum is unavailable.

 

• In order for someone to take the xukum of a kaafir, all the actions, statements of beliefs that nullify his Islam must be apparent or visible, because Shari’ah judges only with what is apparent.

• If someone adopts or utters statements of kufr but hides it in his heart and does not manifest any of them, then he will be judged as a Muslim, no matter how much a Kaafir he is. He takes the Xukm of a Muslim in this world.

• If he performs or utters kufr and manifests it, then we judge him with what is apparent, no matter how full of eemaan his heart is.

• The prophet said: Inni lam u’umar an unaqiba quluuba naas wa an ashuqqa butuunahum

• Umar said: naxnu naxkumu al-thawaahir, wallahu yatawalla-s-saraa’ir

 

 

As for the conditions of the Xukm of Kufr or shrik it is divided into three:

 

• The conditions of faacil (the person who is being judged)

• The conditions of Ficil (the deed of kufr)

• The conditions of Ithbaat (witnesses)

 

1 - The conditions of faacil (the person who is being judged):

 

1. He must be Baaliq (mature): Though the scholars differ – some saying that if he is intelligent enough while committing Kufr, then we take him to account for the kufr but don’t kill him until he matures.

2. He must be caaqil (sane)

3. an yakuna mukhtaaran - he must have been free and not coerced into uttering or committing kufr

4. an yakuna qaasidan lil ficli – he must have meant what he said or done and. If he is sleeping and utters kufr it won’t be ruled on him.

5. an yakuuna caamidan lil macna – he must have been aware of the meaning of his words or action and done them intentionally. (like the man of Bani Israel who said Allahuma anta cabdii wa ana rabbuka – Oh Allah you are my slave and I am your lord - out of delight. He did not mean it that way but came out spontaneously). He was mature, sane and he was not forced to utter these words. In fact he meant to utter these words, but he did not mean this specific meaning.

 

2 - The conditions of Ficil (the deed of kufr):

 

There are two conditions of knowing whether the statement, action and belief is kufr:

 

1. that the statement, action or belief is kufr must be according to the Qur’an and Sunnah and consensus of the scholars of the salaf

2. that the statement, action or belief are clear kufr without any doubts

(illaa an taraw kufran bawaaxan, fiihi cindakum minallahi burhan) as the prophet said. No room for uncertainties or sarbeeb

 

3 - The conditions of Ithbaat (evidence against the person):

 

Clear evidence must be brought against the person in the forms of:

• Ictiraaf: . i.e. two witnesses stepping forth, self confession from the person himself, etc.

• Istifaatha: meaning general knowledge of the public being aware of that person’s kufr. If someone declares publicly his kufr, then the public’s knowledge of his Kufr is a testimony.

 

Impediments:

 

Nullifiers (Mawaanic) of the Xukm:

 

After mounting all the evidence against the person, there are some thing that must be absent from the person in order for him/her to take the Xukm of a Kaafir. If the person has fallen into kufr and all evidence is set against him with witnesses, BUT is forced into it, then we have a nullifier of the xukm of Kufr.

 

The nullifiers that prevent the person from taking the xukm of a kaafir are divided into two:

 

1. the nullifiers in Ficil (the deed):

 

• the deed or statement of kufr could have been ambiguous and not clear

• the evidence in Qur’an or Sunnah is not clear enough and the scholars are not in clear agreement about it

• the witnesses’ account is weak or they are immature, or not caadil, or insane, etc

 

2. the nullifiers in Faacil (the doer):

 

The mawaanic in the doer of the deed are called Al-cawaaridh al Ahliyyah in Usuulul Figh. These are things that overcome the person suddenly and change his character or personality. They are of two types:

• One in which the person has no choice, e.g. a sudden form of insanity that inflicts the person

• One in which the person has a choice and plays a part

 

• The nullifiers of the Faacil stem out from the conditions of the Faacil and they are:

 

o Baaliq: this excludes the immature

o Sane: this excludes the insane. If someone were to shout ‘I am a prophet’ and we know that he is sane, does that mean we judge him with the Xukm?

o Free: this excludes the coerced. If someone is forced to utter words of Kufr, and his life is in danger, then the Xukm cannot be applied to him for doing so.

o He should have meant what he said: this excludes those who didn’t mean to utter words of kufr or actions. Again this is not for all statements and actions of Kufr. Can someone who openly insults Allah be asked for his intentions of insulting Allah? Can someone who burns the Qur’an be asked what his intentions were for burning it? No, because these are actions that come to manifest only after the passing away of the heart as the scholars have said. And this is contradiction to what the deviant Murji’ah believe.

o He should have meant it in meaning: this excludes those who intend different meaning

 

 

What if someone errs:

 

• Maanicul Khata’a (Error): if someone errs in the statements or actions and beliefs of Kufr, the xukm doesn’t apply to him. If someone who wanted to shoot a deer accidentally shoots a person, then this wasn’t intentional but he erred. He still takes the xukm of killing a Muslim, but by mistake, not intentionally. He meant to shoot; he meant to kill, but not the person.

The prophet said: Innalaaha tajaawaza can ummatii al khata’a wan nisyaana wama-s-tukrihuu calayhi.

 

• Khata’ fil iraada (error in intention): Before the prohibition of wine was brought down, Ali said that one day Abdrahman bin Awf invited them to a feast. After they ate, he brought them some drinks including some wine. They drank the wine and soon became intoxicated and said some things. Soon came the time for prayer and Ali was asked to lead the prayer (some narrations say it was not Ali but another sahaba). In the prayer he read Suratul kaafirun in which he said ‘Qul ya ayyuhal kafirun, Acbudu ma tacbudun, wa naxnu nacbudu ma tacbudun.’ The Sahabi was sane, he was mature, he did intend to pray and he intended to read the Surah. He fulfilled all of the conditions for the Xukm to be applicable to him save for one. He did not mean it in that meaning – in the way he uttered it and because of the intoxicant, he uttered words of Kufr. Remember that wine was legal by then and the prophet did not perform the xukm on them or call them kuffar because of the Maanic of the Xukm. The hadith is in Sunan Abi Da’ud and Tirmidhi

 

• Khata’ fi a-ta’weel (error in interpretation): If the person blamed is using some Ay’ah from the Qur’an or Hadith as evidence to support his deeds of Kufr, though the Ayah or hadith are not applicable but that he had misunderstood or misconstrued them in meaning (wadcu-l-daliili fi qayri mawdhicihi or placing evidence where it is not applicable), then this negates applying the Xukm on him. This is called Khata’ fi –t-ta’weel or error in interpretation.

 

• If after proving that he had made an error in interpretation, the person is corrected and he still adheres to his former belief, statement or action of Kufr, then the Xukm of Kufr becomes applicable to him.

 

Proof of Khata’ fi Ta’weel (error in interpretation) s a nullifier of the Xukm:

 

• Ijma’ of the Sahaba: During the khilafa of Cumar, a man known as Qudama ibn Madcuun and his friends became drunk with wine. They were caught and brought to justice. But Qudama said that I have an Ayah to prove that wine is xalaal. The people were perplexed. Didn’t Allah made wine xaraam in Surah Ma’ida. Qudama read the Ayah in the same Surah (leysa cala-ladiina aamanu junaaxun fiimaa dacimuu ithaa mat-taqaw…). The issue was taken to Umar, who ordered the Sahaba to read to him the Ayahs that prohibit wine and clean him of his wrong understanding of the Ayahs. If after this he is still bent on his wrong interpretation and belief, he is a kaafir, said Umar, kill him and his friends. If however, he accepts the proofs and has simply made a wrong interpretation of the Ayah, then he is just a Muslim who has erred, then make sure you flog him for the Hadd of wine.

 

• There was a time when Umar and Ammaar were on a journey. The time for prayer came but no water could be found. Some of the men had Janaaba too. Ammaar who had Janaaba, rolled on the sand and after filling himself with sand, as if to cleanse himself, went to pray. Umar however, did not pray. He did not pray because he refused to and he was well aware of the hadith the one who leaves prayer. But at the time, the prophet did not teach them how Tayammum was done. Ammaar made an ijtihaad by rolling himself in the sand and then prayed. The prophet corrected him, saying that rubbing the hands and face alone was enough. Umar however was not reprimanded for not praying. He was a Mujtahid, his Ijtihaad was wrong but he was not scolded, or called a kaafir for leaving the prayer.

 

• Abu Dhar took a few goats he had along with some goats of the prophet and went outside Madina to a place known as Rabada (the place where he resorted to in old age and finally died). His family went with him and soon there was scarcity of water. For a whole week he did not pray because he had Janaba. This is before the prophet taught them how to bathe from Janaba. After one week Abu Dharr came back to Madina and told the prophet of his situation, saying how can he pray without water to bathe. The prophet told him As-saciidu tayyib, wuduu’ul muslim, walaw lam yajidil maa’a cashara siniin, in the narration of At-tabarani he says twenty years. This sahabi was not applied with the xukm of kufr.

 

• Adiyy ibn abi xaatib misinterpreted the Ayah of the Qur’an (wa kulu washrabu xataa yatabayyana lakumul khaytul abyadu minal khaytil aswadi minal fajr…). Meaning (...and eat and drink until the white thread (light) of dawn appears to you distinct from the black thread (darkness of night), then complete your fast till the nightfall.). Adiyy used to take two ropes, one black and one white and place them under his head. He used to eat until he could visibly differentiate between the two ropes, and often this would be when day breaks. When at a later time the prophet came to know of this, he reprimanded him saying inna wisaadaka la cariidh (indeed your pillow is wide – meaning wide enough to cover the rising sun) but he did not tell him to repeat the fasts that he performed in this manner. The prophet corrected him saying innamaa thaalika bayaadu nahaari wa sawaadul layli – meaning the Ayah refers to the light of the day and the darkness of the night and not the ropes as he thought.

 

In many such examples, Shariah shows that when a person makes an error in interpretation and falls into kufr, he can be pardoned due to his false interpretation. But NOT all errors in interpretation can act as a valid excuse for kufr committed, thereby preventing one from being applied with the xukm of takfiir.

 

For Ta’weel or error in interpretation to be applicable as a valid nullifier of the Xukm of kufr, it must meet three conditions:

 

a – The Ta’weel that you’ve used has to have a basis or root in the Arabic language. E.g. the case of Adiyy ibn abi Xaatid when he misinterpreted (khaytul abyadu minal khaytil aswad ‘Khayd’ in the Arabic language means rope

 

b – Your Ta’weel and interpretation has to have basis in Shari’ah. i.e. there must be an Ayah or a hadith or a Ijmac of the scholars that you have erred in its interpretation.

 

c – The person using the Ta’weel has to have some concrete knowledge of Ta’weel and tafseer. If everyone went about his own interpretation, the religion would be reduced to mere personal interpretation.

 

Qadi Iyaad says: if the Ta’weel in the Ayah is clear on its meaning, it will not be accepted from the person to have misunderstood it.

 

 

Ignorance (Jahli):

 

To say that ignorance is always a valid excuse is wrong and to say that ignorance is never a valid excuse is also wrong. The truth is between the two:

 

1. First we look t the type of action or kufr that the person has committed by which he is said to be ignorant of:

• If it is a general thing of the shar’ah, known in religion by necessity, etc then ignorance will not serve as an excuse. E.g. if he says I did not know that Zakat was obligatory on me.

• If it is a complicated aspect of the religion, which the scholars know but most of the people don’t, then ignorance can be applicable. E.g a man marries a woman along with her aunt without knowledge that it was forbidden.

2. We look at the situation of the ignorant person – is he newly reverted to Islam or has he been a Muslim all along?

3. Then we look at the place where the person has committed the act, whether it is Darul Islam or Darul Kufr. E.g someone reverted and doesn’t live in a Muslim community to teach him all the necessary information! Ignorance would not prevent one from taking the xukm of takfir if he lives in a Muslim land.

4. We also look at where the person grew up – deserted Bedouin land and villages or towns?

5. We also look whether the person who claims ignorance was mutamakkin li-tacallum wal cilmi – i.e. was he in a place where he was able to attain knowledge and had access to it? The person who is a mutamakkin and had access cannot be excused for ignorance.

 

For further information you can read Al majmuucul mudh-hab fi qawaacidil madh-hab by Xaafid Salaaxudin al caalaa’i, Vol 1, or Al manthur lil qawaacid by Zarkashi, vol 2.

[Nur]

Well Said Laba-X

 

A Timely explanation to show fallacies of the Modern Murji'ah Aqeedah.

 

 

Nur

[Shaakirullaah]

A beneficial clarification and excellent rebuttal to those who propagate falsehood.

JazakAllaahu khayran.

[xiinfaniin]

LX wrote:

 

o He should have meant what he said: this excludes those who didn’t mean to utter words of kufr or actions. Again this is not for all statements and actions of Kufr. Can someone who openly insults Allah be asked for his intentions of insulting Allah? Can someone who burns the Qur’an be asked what his intentions were for burning it? No, because these are actions that come to manifest only after the passing away of the heart as the scholars have said. And this is contradiction to what the deviant Murji’ah believe.

 

^^

 

For the record, the third Kalif of Muslims (Othman bin Afan) burned Quran, and his intention was different than what brother LX espouses here.

[NGONGE]

Stuff and nonsense.

[Shaakirullaah]

For the record, the third Kalif of Muslims (Othman bin Afan) burned Quran, and his intention was different than what brother LX espouses here.

This action of 'Uthmaan (radhiAllaahu' anhu) that you've mentioned only relates to the correction of one specific example which was listed and which in fact doesn't even fulfill the set conditions in all cases because burning the Qur'aan is allowed in some instances.

So thanks for the correction with regard to this example, but you failed to address the essential core of the matter, namely, the presented principles regarding the conditions and impediments of takfeer.

[xiinfaniin]

^^ S & N.

 

Refere to NGOGE for full explanation.

[NGONGE]

Originally posted by Shaakirullaah:

quote:For the record, the third Kalif of Muslims (Othman bin Afan) burned Quran, and his intention was different than what brother LX espouses here.

This action of 'Uthmaan (radhiAllaahu' anhu) that you've mentioned only relates to the correction of one specific example which was listed and which in fact doesn't even fulfill the set conditions in all cases because burning the Qur'aan is allowed in some instances.

So thanks for the correction with regard to this example, but you failed to address the essential core of the matter, namely, the presented principles regarding the conditions and impediments of takfeer.

It's all nonsense though. What's the point of starting various threads with different lists if you do not want to stick your neck out and apply these Xukums to what is happening in Somalia?

 

After all, all readers know that THIS is the ultimate aim here and not a casual conversation about the conditions of Takfir.

[Nur]

It's all nonsense though. What's the point of starting various threads with different lists if you do not want to stick your neck out and apply these Xukums to what is happening in Somalia?

 

 

What a waste of a great talent, if only you had patience!

 

Expediency is the mother of all blunders, what Laba-X is trying to do is to reach a conclusion on the issue of the Xukum, the basis of the main question on the board, because, without a solid conclusion on this pivotal issue, its rather useless discussing the latter part of the problem, the TFG's Riddah which brother Xiin has posted.

 

 

Nur

[NGONGE]

Nur, don't let my waste of talent worry you too much. Just stop waffling and get into the crux of this argument if you can. Ama naga dhix bax and let Laba-X do it.

 

Xiin and Laba have been circling each other for days now and, whilst Xiin (rightly or wrongly) has been trying to link his 'research' to actual real situations, you and Laba keep waffling and telling us that we need to establish the basics first. We've already done it on the nail thread of yours, we've done it on the spilling blood of Muslims thread that Laba-X started a month ago and now (after three or four similar threads from Xiin) we have this thread. If any talent is being wasted here, it is being done by the whole lot of you.

 

Xiin says he does not approve of Al Shabab because of such and such reasons and he accompanies it with (what he believes to be) proofs. Whilst, on the other hand, you and Laba assume that none of your readers have access to google or any sources of information (or at least that is how it seems) and would rather patronise us with endless waffle.

 

For instance, I think the first post in this thread is informative, educational and all round great. But I fail to see how it applies to the TFG or anyone that is opposed to Al Shabab.

 

Deal with the issues head on ama naga daaya.

[Nur]

Akhi Ngonge

 

The issue at hand is critical, and this forum was meant for intellectual debates, not expediency, there are many readers who regularly follow and read every line that is posted, for the sake of Allah, let us discuss the issue from the Aqeedah and Fiqh perspectives, this will undoubtedly enrich the discussion and it may inspire some readers to change their views toward the right course inshAllah.

 

I am extremely busy these days chasing my daily bread, but once the bread chasing project is closed, I will take the time to devote my time for this topic, and it will be worth your while inshAllah.

 

 

Nur

[NGONGE]

^^ Khaaf Allah ya Nur and LX. If you don't know, can't articulate yourself or are confused just say so.

 

Here is where things stand and me (and most readers I'm sure) want from you.

 

There is a problem in Somalia. It has become a problem of faith where one group is accusing another of Kufur. We are asking, on what grounds are you accusing these others of Kufur?

 

Now, in your mind you may believe you are right. Fair enough. But explain to us how you are right. Dot the Is and cross the Ts. Don't just give us a manual (which is what you are doing here) and expect us to understand how you arrived at this interpertation of yours (for it is an interpertation after all). On all the threads that LX started and you supported him on, not once did either of you come out straight and say Sh. Sharif (or the TFG) is a Kafir because of A, B and C.

 

To waffle and go on and on about Xukums, details and scholarly minutia is to avoid dealing with the issues head on. To me, that looks like deception, and if I start suspecting you of deception, I need not worry about your sincerity anymore. The Takfiri notions become null and void.

 

Am I being harsh and confrontational? You bet I am. You are being very evasive (intentionally or otherwise) and I want you to stand still for a minute and see how frustrating this cat and mouse game is getting.

 

P.S.

Take a month to compose your reply if you must. Just make sure it deals with the issues on the ground rather than being an essay by a second year Islamic studies student at Om Al Qura.

[Nur]

Akhi Ngonge

 

you write:

 

^^ Khaaf Allah ya Nur and LX. If you don't know, can't articulate yourself or are confused just say so.

 

 

Best advice on the forum, may Allah reward you for that great advice and make me heed it always.

 

Akhi, Wallahi, I am juggling many balls these days, and I hardly have time to articulate and post. This problem is compounded by the fact that my habit ha always been to write my thoughts on the go, and lately, all the time I get is enough for checking the content on the board to make sure that everyone is abiding by SOL golden rules.

 

Akhi, if there is any topic that I have spent most of my time reading, researching and then simplifying for others, it is the Tawheed, Shirk, Kufr and Nifaaq topics. The reason that I have posted pointers on the Dawlah Riddah thread instead of fully developed thesis, is due to scarcity of time. I have thus opted to post parts of the argument blocks as place holders for me as well as food for thought for the audience follwing the topic. InshAllah, I will connect the dots in time ( A Month is an ample period, hopefully I wouldn't need it)

 

Rest assured akhi that I never take any criticism as personal, never sensed harshness at all, but a brotherly advice and empathy. My job requires Islamic Ethics of " Quuluu lil naasi xusnaa" and " Quulluu qawlan sadiidaa"

 

 

Nur

[Nur]

Ngonge says:

 

" There is a problem in Somalia. It has become a problem of faith where one group is accusing another of Kufur. We are asking, on what grounds are you accusing these others of Kufur?"

 

"On all the threads that LX started and you supported him on, not once did either of you come out straight and say Sh. Sharif (or the TFG) is a Kafir because of A, B and C.

 

 

This thread is general in nature, Islam is a set of beliefs and actions/non-actions, being a Muslim begins with total surrender to Allah SWT ( no selective pick and choose) and a recognition of His Sovereignty and Denial of any Competitor with Allah in His Domain which encompasses all of Time and Space everywhere. Let not Somalia tiny problems blind you from our assured destination, which can present HUGE problems forever.

 

Cosmologists tell us that there are some 100 -200 Billion Galaxies scattered in space as debris after the big Explosion known as the Big Bang, they are hurling apart at speeds that boggle the mind, our own galaxy being one of them, is 100 thousand light years in Diameter. Our Sun being the a tiny star of 200 to 400 billion other stars lies between W3OH star breeding region and Sagittarius, is hurling with all the stars toward the center of the Galaxy black hole, where this planet of ours and your Somalia are finally expected to come to rest in peace.

 

Its true that there are ONLY two groups on earth, as Allah SWT says in Quraan "Its He who created you, and thus there are among you (those who surrender to Allah) Muslims, and among you are Kaafir, (those who rejected to surrender to Allah)" but, you have to be careful in defining the two groups, like the cosmology analogy above, all of us, believers and non believers are destined to a point of no return. One group, believes that we are heading for Dar ul Qaraar, ( Home of Permanence, the other group, does not believe in that concept).

 

In Somalia, when confused on who is who, just see where everyone stands on issues and with who they have an alliance, that should make it easy for readers and this is what should be discussed.

 

Calling a specific person to be Kaafir, is at best immature, its also subjective, its more productive being objective, when an argument is presented for or against a person or a government the right way is to let the reader make up her/his mind by giving her/him the tools for decision making, it also respects their intellect.

 

The current government of Somalia presents a very complex plethora of characters. The Shariah Judgment in their case will largely depend on clarifying their stand on many issues as well as their beliefs which are hidden, it will look at exceptions, such as if they are mentally challenged (a legitimate defense), ( qualified Ignorance), (free Choice) etc which are all in the Fiqh.

 

It therefore follows that after such an intellectual journey is exhausted, that a committee of sincere, learned , free scholars who have a firm grip on current issues, politics and the Fiqh, issue a fatwaa in their case.

 

But like I always say, if all the news that we read is true, I thank Allah that I am not in their shoes, nor encourage anyone to join them.

 

 

Nur

[yaa tahay]

The barriers of the Takfir are three and two extended conditions. First three conditions "mistake, forgetting and ikrah" are the barriers under every condition includes both usuluddeen and furuuddeen. The extended two conditions "ignorance and ta'wil" are not real excuses. The latter ones will be an excuse with the relation with the first three in the secondary matters of tawhed and fiqh etc. (furuuddeen). The principle of "fault will not render permissible another fault" will also give you the same answer. Ignorance is itself a fault how could it be an acceptable excuse in the usuluddeen while "it is fard upon every Muslim to seek ilm". For the taw'il it has its own conditions to be an acceptable excuse. Unless this conditions and requirements are fullfilled; it will never be an acceptable excuse. Therefore there is no place for ignorance or mistaken ta'wil in the matters of usuluddeen but furuuddeen. If anyone performs an action of (minor) shirk/kufr because of being ignorant or making mistaken taw'il in the matters of furuudden he will not be performed Takfir but he will be a sinner and he should learn the knowledge (of 'ilm'i-haal) to get rid of his ignorance/mistaken taw'il.