Khilaf
*Khilaf* is a genuine disagreement among scholars about a ruling, reached for real scholarly reasons rather than carelessness.
What it means for me: Hearing 'there is khilaf on this' can sound like a door closing on you. It is not. It is a description of the question's history, not a refusal to answer. Your own situation still needs describing, and a mufti can still give you one clear answer for it. Read What do scholars mean by 'there is a difference of opinion'?.
Example: A woman is told there is khilaf on her question and thinks she has received no answer at all. She describes her exact situation, and one clear answer follows. The first reply named the question's history, not her case.
Do not confuse with: *Khilaf mu'tabar*, a recognized difference. Not every claimed disagreement counts as real khilaf; distinguishing a recognized difference from a rejected view is work for qualified scholars.
If scholars differ: Even legal theorists differ on a deeper question behind khilaf itself. Some hold that only one side can be objectively correct; others hold every sincere, qualified effort is rewarded regardless. The difference is named here as a difference and not decided; the mufti is the reference.
See the term in context
What is the wording used by a jurist to indicate that he considers the ruling on an issue to be "contrary to what is preferable" (khilāf al-awlā)? And does his statement that what is preferable or better in an issue is to do such-and-such, mean that not doing it is contrary to what is preferable, or not?
"Khilaf al-awla" (contrary to what is better) is a status between makrooh (disliked) and mubah (permissible). Some jurists consider it a category of makrooh, believing that the degrees of makrooh vary. That which has an…
How are we to understand the ruling of "illicit" (Ghayr Mashrou')? Does it refer to committing the forbidden (muharram) or the disliked (makruh), neglecting an obligation (wajib), or doing that which is contrary to what is superior (khilaf al-awla)? And what are the consequences of committing an "illicit" act in examples such as offering the funeral prayer in absentia (salat al-gha'ib) for someone who has already been prayed over, the congregant reciting Al-Fatiha, and offering salutations (taslim) to interrupt the prayer?
The term "illicit" (غير مشروع) among jurists means that which is neither obligatory nor sunnah (recommended), and it implies a lack of obligation and recommendation. Ibn 'Uthaymeen stated that "not prescribed" (لا يشرع)…
What is Ibn Uthaymeen's view on the ruling regarding the exchange of greetings (saying and returning "Salam") between women and men? Is it disliked (makruh), contrary to what is better (khilaf al-awla), or forbidden (haram) if it is not between acquaintances or over the phone as needed?
Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen states that it is impermissible for men to greet women, or women to greet men who are not their mahram, except when there is no fear of fitnah (temptation). Exceptions to this include greetings…
Questions that use it
Is Al-Insaf fi Ma'rifat al-Rajih min al-Khilaf by al-Mardawi al-Hanbali considered among the books of the preferred view within the Hanbali school of thought, or across all schools of thought? And what is a book of preferred views across all schools of thought that would be beneficial?
When is a jurisprudential issue considered one of difference, such that it is permissible for a Muslim to adopt one of the opinions therein, and what is the basis upon which a choice is made between these opinions?
Why have scholars differed in interpreting the Holy Qur’an, while Christians claim that their Gospel has one version and one interpretation?