The Issues in Which the Shafi‘i School Explicitly Differentiated Between Fāsid and Bāṭil in Financial Transactions: An Analytical Study

Abstract

This study addresses the distinction between “fasād” (defectiveness) and “buṭlān” (nullity) in the Shāfiʿī school regarding financial transactions. It seeks to identify the cases in which the Shāfiʿīs differentiate between them, along with the reasons for such distinctions. The researchers adopted a documentary approach by collecting relevant juristic issues, an analytical method to clarify the rules and subtle differences within the school, and a comparative method to examine differing opinions.

The findings reveal nearly fifty cases—beyond the four well-known ones—where the Shāfiʿīs made this distinction, most of which occur in permissible contracts. This leads to consequences such as the validity of actions by the contracting parties, entitlement to fair wages, and liability in defective contracts. In conclusion, the Shāfiʿī distinction between nullity and defectiveness is tied to specific terminology and reasons unique to each branch, and is entirely different from the Ḥanafī usage.