(I). Acts are judged by their goals and purposes (Al Umuru Bimaqasidiha(
Evidence of the maxim
This maxim has its origin from the Hadith of the prophet (S.A.W) which said that "deeds are judged by intentions and every person is judged according to his intentions". This Hadith stated that all deeds are judged according to intention. The legal implications of certain deeds are also based on the intention . Another Hadith narrated by Anas (R.A) the prophet ( S.A.W) is reported to have said " there is no deeds to those who have no intention". According to the general meaning of the maxim , intention refers to the will directed towards an action, or the direction of the will towards the action ...view middle of the document...
The Shafi'i school held that it is recommended to pronounce the intention in order to support the intention in the heart. The Hanbalis held that uttering of intention is not recommended and considered it as a form of Bidah (innovation). The Malikis have different views in which they said uttering of intention is permitted but it is better not to utter it , if uttering of intention will distract the concentration of a person in performing Ibadah, it is better not to practice it, if it can assist a person in backing his intention , then it is recommended to utter it.
The intention and the outward expression
The maxim gives rise to the question of difference between the intention and the outward expression. In the event of such differences, the judgment should be in accordance with the intention. In the event of a difference between the wording of an expression and its meaning, consideration should be given to the intention and the outward connotation and there is difficulty in determining the intention, effect should be given to outward connotation.
Application of the maxim
The rules captured in this maxim has been applied by early jurists mostly in different applications, such as:
a) The liability of a person who finds somebody's goods lying in the way and picks it up will be contingent upon the intention with which he has picked it up. If he intends to hand it over to the owner and has made it known to others he will be treated as a trustee and will not be required to indemnify the owner in case the property is destroyed while in his possession. But if he has kept it as owner he would be treated as usurper...