پینتیس ہجری میں حضرت عثمان کی مظلومانہ شہادت کے بعد حضرت علی مسلمانوں کے چوتھے خلیفہ مقرر ہوئے ۔ ان کا دور حکومت 24 ذوالحجہ سن 35 ہجری سے 21 رمضان سن 40 ہجری تک کا ہے ۔ ان کو رسول اللہ ﷺ نے خود یمن قاضی بھی بنا کر بھیجا تھا۔ حضرت علی ،حضرت عمر کی طرح خود اعلیٰ پایہ کے قاضی تھے ۔ انہوں نے حضرت عمر اور حضرت عثمان کے دور میں قضاء کے فرائض سر انجام دیئے تھے ۔آپ کوا س کام کا بڑا تجربہ تھا۔ ایک دفعہ رسول اللہﷺ نے حضرت علی سے فرمایا تھا کہ تم سات چیزوں میں دوسرے لوگوں سے افضل ہو ۔ ان سات چیزوں میں سے ایک یہ ہے کہ تم امورِ الہٰی میں بہتر قاسم ہو اور دوسرا یہ کہ مقدما ت کا فیصلہ کرنے کے لیے بہت بڑے قاضی ہو۔ حضرت انس بن مالک سے روایت ہے کہ رسول اللہ ﷺ نے فرمایا
" أرحم أمتي بأمتي أبو بكر . وأشدهم في دين الله عمر . وأصدقهم حياء عثمان . وأقضاهم علي بن أبي طالب۔"306
حدودوقصاص کے حوالے سےحضرت علی کے چند مشہور فیصلے مندرجہ ذیل ہیں:
شراحہ ہمدانیہ کو رجم کرنا
حضرت علی نے بیان کیا جب جمعہ کے دن ایک عورت کو رجم کیا تو کہا کہ میں نے اس کا رجم رسول اللہ ﷺ کی سنت کے مطابق کیا ہے۔
"قيل جلدها يوم الخميس ورجمها يوم الجمعة فقيل له أجمعت بين حدين عليها فقال جلدتها بكتاب الله ورجمتها بسنة رسول الله۔"307
"شراحۃ بنت مالک ہمدانیہ کے بارے میں کہا جاتا ہے کہ آپ نے جمعرات کو کوڑے مارے اور جمعہ کو اسے رجم کیا اور اس پر دونوں حدیں جاری کیں۔ کوڑے قرآن مجید سے لگائے اور رجم سنت رسول اللہ ﷺ...
The importance of this study is to reveal the truth of the case of the response of Imam Malik (179 e) - the leader of the School of Archeology - the story of the atheists by violating the work of the people of the city; The study resulted in the results of the most important response of this lawsuit for several reasons, the first of which is that the work of the people of the city is a frequent occurrence, Rather, the imam has an approach based on the introduction of the frequent on the individual, and that many of the issues of work are supported by the correct hadeeth, and the one that is contrary to it is apparent, and it is permissible to combine or say the copies when proven.
This qualitative case study research in ethnography aimed to investigate the notions of power and hegemony in research consultations around the construct of language ideologies. The study selected two MS (Education) research supervisees with their supervisors as two case studies. The researcher identified unequal power and hegemony in research supervision practices through informal discourses with the supervisees, and designed the study to get an in depth understanding of the phenomenon in detail. It hoped that this research would bring about awareness about the processes and practices of research supervision. There was no attempt at generalization for larger audiences and organizational studies. The research question was: What aspects of power and hegemony are embedded in research supervisees’ and their supervisors’ discourses in higher education around the construct of language ideologies? For the empirical exploration of the notions of power and hegemony in supervision practices, the study used the analytical approach of Norman Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) (1989; 2003). The study followed the critical strand of ideology (Woolard, 2002) which examines power and hegemony in social practices. The findings of the study revealed how language became a source of power relations between the research participants. The discourses of the first case were largely affected by the institutional structure and control, which influenced the supervision practices and gave them a highly structured form. Language was a major concern in the consultation meetings, which became a source of establishing asymmetrical power relations between the participants. Language ideologies played a very important role in sustaining the dominant position of the powerful agent. The voice of the supervisee was silent on many occasions and was affected by the supervisor. The case two was in a sharp contrast with case one in approach and style of supervision. The structure of supervision was very flexible and there was absence of language concern. The notable finding was the element of Islamic references included in research work and a disapproval of western structures of research, which equated English language and education. The voice of the supervisee was given strength and encouragement by the supervisor. This connected the topic to the socio-historical processes of normalization of western structures and English x language in the country. The study filled the gap in knowledge related to language ideologies in research supervision. Based on the findings, the study presents recommendations for the supervisors, university administration, HEC, supervisees, language policy planners and the larger society. The focus of the recommendations is to create equity and give voice to the supervisees who need freedom in academic participation. Based on the findings, it is assumed that this research would lead to more democratic styles of supervision, and equity and emancipation in supervision as a social practice.