⌘ K
In plain terms
Rukn
Pronunciation guide not yet available.
Source entry · Editorial review pending ↗
Rukn names a part so essential to an act or contract that without it, nothing recognizable as that act exists at all.
What it means for me: Rukn tells you a piece is load-bearing. Remove it, and there is no flawed version of the act left standing; there is no act at all.
Example: A scholar explains a sale's two pillars: an offer and an acceptance. Without either one, no contract exists at all, not merely an imperfect one. The rest of the deal's details would not matter yet.
Do not confuse with: Shart, condition. A rukn is part of the act's own makeup. A shart stands outside it, required for the act to count but not one of its parts.
If scholars differ: The majority define rukn as anything belonging to an act's essential makeup. In contract law, the Hanafi school narrows rukn to the offer and acceptance alone, treating other elements as conditions instead.
Related terms
Shart
Shart names something required for an act to count, standing outside the act itself rather than forming one of its essential parts.
Sihhah
Sihhah names an act or contract that met every pillar and condition required, so its intended legal effect applies in full.
Batil
Batil names an act or contract lacking a pillar or condition of its formation, producing no legal effect.
Wajib
Wajib names an act classed as obligatory in Islamic law. Leaving it without a valid excuse carries accountability. It sits at one end of a five-part scale: wajib, mustahab…
Sabab
Sabab names something the law treats as a marker that triggers a ruling once it exists, noticed or not.
Khilaf
Khilaf is a genuine disagreement among scholars about a ruling, reached for real scholarly reasons rather than carelessness.