Islamic term in the context of "Matn"

Mustahabb (Arabic: مُسْتَحَبّ, lit. 'beloved thing') or Mandub (Arabic: المندوب, lit. 'delegate') is an Islamic term referring to an action or thing that is recommended and favoured.

Mustahabb actions are those whose ruling (ahkam) in Islamic law falls between mubah (neutral; neither encouraged nor discouraged) and wajib (compulsory). One definition is "duties recommended, but not essential; fulfilment of which is rewarded, though they may be neglected without punishment". Synonyms of mustahabb include masnun and mandub. The opposite of mustahabb is makruh (discouraged).

Islah or Al-Islah (الإصلاح ,إصلاح, al-ʾIṣlāḥ) is an Arabic word, usually translated as "reform", in the sense of "to improve, to better, to put something into a better position, correction, correcting something and removing vice, reworking, emendation, reparation, restoration, rectitude, probability, reconciliation." It is an important term in Islam. The Islamic concept of "Islah" advocates for moral advancement through a reformation based on the rudimental standards of the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Islah is characterised by an attitude of bypassing classical legal works in preference to literature from the early Muslim generations (Salaf al-Salih). Islahi ulema oppose taqlid, strongly argue for the necessity of ijtihad and are often referred to as salafis.

The word is opposite to the word Ifsad, another important Islamic term meaning "corruption". It is also used in politics (including as a name for political parties), and is also used as a personal and place name.

Qisas or Qiṣāṣ (Arabic: قِصَاص, romanized: Qiṣāṣ, lit. 'accountability, following up after, pursuing or prosecuting') is an Islamic term interpreted to mean "retaliation in kind", "eye for an eye", or retributive justice. Qisas (along with its alternative punishment blood money, aka Diyya, compensation paid by the offender, which is applied in cases where retaliation conditions are not met) is one of several forms of punishment in classical/traditional Islamic criminal jurisprudence, the others being Hudud and Ta'zir.

According to James Lindgren it is standard wisdom among legal historians that collective responsibility in ancient law has given way to individual responsibility in modern law. In ancient societies, the person perpetrating a crime or the family or tribe to which they belonged was commonly punished following the principle, "Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal."