Source

JazaakAllah Khair

Wa'Alaykum Salaam wa-Rahmatullaah

Jazaakillaah Khayr!

thank you for this useful and oh so true post

This is really useful too insha Allah:

http://islamtoday.com/show_quest_sec...sub_cat_id=149

Selam aleykum we rahmetallahu we berekathu,


I believe you all should also read this, inshaAllah:

The Four Schools of Thought in Islam (Madhab)




Question:



"There are some people who say that Taqleed (following the madhhab of one imam) is haram (prohibited) in Shariah. They insist that only the Qur'an al-Kareem and Sunnah should be followed by a true Muslim, and it is tantamount to the shirk that some human being is being followed in the matters of Shariah. They also claim that all the madhahib formed such as Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki and Hanbali schools are created one to two hundred years after the Most Beloved Prophet Salla Allahu Ta'ala alayhi Wa Sallam and they are bidah (an invention not warranted by the Qur'an al-Kareem and Sunnah). They also maintain that a Muslim should seek guidance directly from the Qur'an al-Kareem and Sunnah, and no intervention of any Imam is needed for the knowledge of Shariah.


Please explain how far this view is correct.

Answer:



This view is based upon certain misconceptions arising out of superfluous treatment of the complex issues involved. The full clarification of these misconceptions requires a detailed article. However, I would try to explain the basic points as briefly as possible.



It is true that “obedience”, in its true sense, belongs to Allah Almighty alone. He is the only One who deserves our obedience, and we are not supposed to obey any one other than Him. This is the logical requirement of the doctrine of “Tawhid” (belief in the Oneness of Allah). Even the obedience of the Most Beloved Prophet (Salla Allahu Ta'ala alayhi Wa Sallam) has been prescribed for us only because he is the Beloved Messenger (Salla Allahu Ta'ala alayhi Wa Sallam) of Allah (Subhanhu wa Ta'ala) who conveys to us the divine commandments. Otherwise he has no divine status deserving our obedience per se. We are ordered to obey and follow him only because Allah’s (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) pleasure has been epitomised in his sayings and acts.



We are, therefore, required to follow the Qur'an al-kareem, being the direct commandment of Allah, and the Sunnah of the Beloved Prophet (Salla Allahu Ta'ala alayhi Wa Sallam) being an indirect form of the divine commandments.



But the point is that the interpretation of the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah is not an easy job. It requires an intensive and extensive study of both these sacred sources of Shariah, which cannot be undertaken by every layman. If it is made obligatory on each and every muslim to consult the Qur'an al-kareem and the Sunnah in each and every problem arising before him, it will burden him with a responsibility which is almost impossible for him to discharge, because the inference of the rules of Shariah from the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah requires a thorough knowledge of the Arabic language and all the relevant material which a layman is not supposed to have. The only solution to this problem is that a group of persons should equip themselves with the required knowledge of Shariah, and the others should ask them about the injunctions of Shariah in their day-to-day affairs. This is exactly what the Qur’an al-kareem has ordained for the Muslims in the following words:



“So, a section from each group of them should go forth, so that they may acquire the knowledge and perception in the matters of religion, and so that they may warn their people when they return to them that they may be watchful.”



This verse of the Qur'an al-kareem indicates in clear terms that a group of muslims should devote itself for acquiring the knowledge of Shariah, and all others should consult them in the matters of Shariah.



Now, if a person asks an authentic ‘alim (knowledgeable person) about the Shariah ruling in a specific matter, and acts upon his advice, can a reasonable person accuse him of committing shirk on the ground that he has followed the advice of a human being instead of Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah? Certainly not. The reason is obvious. He has not abandoned the obedience of Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) and His Most Beloved Messenger (Salla Allahu Ta'ala alayhi Wa Sallam) ; rather, he wants nothing but to obey them. However, being ignorant of their commands, he has consulted an ‘alim in order to know what he is required by Allah to do. He has not taken that ‘alim as the subject of his obedience, but he has taken him as an interpreter of the divine commandments. Nobody can blame him and say he is committing shirk (which means ascribing partners to God).



This is exactly what the term ‘taqleed’ means. A person who has no ability to understand the Qur'an-e-Paak and Sunnah consults a muslim jurist, often termed as Imam, and acts according to his interpretation of Shariah. He never deems him worthy of obedience per se, but he seeks his guidance for knowing the requirements of Shariah, because he has no direct access to the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah or does not have adequate knowledge for inferring the rules of Shariah. This behaviour is called taqleed of that jurist or imam. How can it be said that taqleed is tantamount to shirk?



The qualified muslim jurists or imams have devoted their lives for the study of the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah and have collected the rules of Shariah; according to their respective interpretation of Shariah, in an almost codified and systematic form. This collection of the Shariah rules according to the interpretation of a particular jurist/scholar Imam is called the ‘madhhab’ of that jurist. Thus the madhhab of an imam is not something parallel to shariah, or something alien to it; in fact it is a particular interpretation of Shariah and a collection of the major Shariah rules inferred from the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah by some authentic jurists and arranged subject wise for the convenience of the followers of the Shariah. So, the one who follows a particular madhhab actually follows the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah according to the interpretation of a particular authentic jurist whom he believes to be the most trustworthy and the most knowledgeable in matters of Shariah.



As for the difference of the madhaib it has emerged through the different possible interpretations of the rules mentioned in or inferred from the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah. In order to understand this point properly, it will be relevant to note that the rules mentioned in the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah are of two different types. Some rules are mentioned in these sacred sources in such clear and unambiguous expressions that they permit only one interpretation, and no other interpretation is possible thereof, such as the obligation of Salaah, Zakaah, fasting and Hajj, the prohibition of pork, wine, etc. With regard to this set of rules, no difference of opinion has ever taken place. All the schools of jurists are unanimous on their interpretation, hence there is no room for ijtihad or taqleed in these matters, and because every layman can easily understand them from the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah, no intervention of a jurist or imam is called for. But there are some rules of Shariah derived from the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah where either of the following different situations may arise:



The expression used in the Sacred Sources may permit more than one interpretation. For example, while mentioning the period of ‘iddah (waiting period) for the divorced women, the Qur'an al-kareem has used the following expression:



“And the divorced women shall wait for three periods of ‘Qur’ “



1]. The word ‘Qur’ used in this verse has two meanings lexically. It covers both the period of menstruation and the period of purity (i.e. the tuhr). Both meanings are possible in the verse and each of them has different legal consequences. The question that requires juristic effort is which of the two meanings are intended here. While answering this question, the juristic opinions may naturally differ, and have actually differed. Imam Shafi’I Radi Allahu Ta'ala anhu interprets the word ‘Qur’ as the period of tuhr (purity) while Imam Abu Hanifah Radi Allahu Ta'ala anhu interprets it as ‘the period of menstruation.’ Both of them have a number of arguments in support of their respective views, and no one interpretation can be rejected outright. It is in this way that the differences among certain madhaib have emerged.



2]. Sometimes there appears some sort of contradiction between two traditions of the Most Beloved Prophet Salla Allahu Ta'ala alayhi Wa Sallam and a jurist has to reconcile them or prefer one of them over the other. In this case also, the viewpoints of the jurists may differ from each other.



For example, there are two sets of traditions found in the books of hadith attributing different behaviour to the Most Beloved Prophet Salla Allahu Ta'ala alayhi Wa Sallam while going for ruku in prayer. The first set of ahadith mentions that he used to raise his hands before bowing down for ruku while the other traditions mention that he did not raise his hands except in the beginning of the Salaah.



The muslim jurists, while accepting that both methods are correct, have expressed different views about the question which of the two methods is more advisable and rewardable. This is another cause of difference between various madhaib.



3]. There are many problems or issues which have not been mentioned in the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah in specific or express terms. The solution to such problems is sought either through analogy or through some expressions found in the Sacred Sources which have an indirect bearing on the subject. Here again the jurists may have different approaches while they infer the required solution from the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah.





Such are the basic causes of difference between the madhaib. This difference is in no way a defect in Shariah; rather, it is a source of dynamism and flexibility.



A muslim jurist who has all the necessary qualifications for ijtihad is supposed, in the aforesaid situation, to exert the best of his efforts to discover the actual intention of the Qur'an al-kareem and Sunnah. If he does this to the best of his ability and with all his sincerity, his obligation towards Allah is discharged, and nobody can blame him for violating the Shariah, even though his view seems to be weaker when compared to the other ones. This is a natural and logical phenomenon certain to be found in every legal system. The enacted laws in every legal framework do not contain each and every minute detail of the possible situations. The expressions used in a statute are often open to more than one interpretation, and different courts of law, while applying such provisions to the practical situations, often disagree in the matter of their interpretation. One court explains the law in a particular way while the other court takes it in a quite different sense. Nobody ever blames any one of them for the violation of the law. Not only this, if the former court is a High Court, all the lower courts and all the people living within the jurisdiction of that High Court are bound to follow the interpretation laid down by it even though their personal opinion does not conform to the approach of the superior court. In this case, if they follow the decision of the superior Court nobody can say that they are not following the law, or that they are holding the Court as the Sovereign authority instead of the real legislator, because, in fact, they are following the decision of the Court only as a trust-worthy interpreter of law, and not as a legislator.



Exactly in the same way, the madhab of a muslim jurist is nothing but a credible interpretation of the Shariah. Another competent jurist may disagree with this interpretation, but he can never accuse him of the violation of Shariah, nor can anyone blame the followers of that particular madhab for following something other than Shariah, or for committing shirk by following the imam of that madhab instead of obeying Allah and His Most Beloved Messenger Salla Allahu Ta'ala alayhi Wa Sallam, because, they are following the madhab as a credible interpretation of Shariah, and not as a law-making authority.

Jazakallahu khair, akhee...

Selam aleykum we rahmetallahu we berekathu,


I believe this short and simple article is very useful aswell, elhamdulillah!

http://www.modernmuslima.com/madhhabs.htm

jazaki Allahu khair ukht ramlah

Mega bump.

no problems.

JazaakAllaah Khayr. Very good (and reliable) information here.

Jazakallah Khair

I am no body but this is what i have understood from this issue

The definition of taqleed is that when you follow the opinion of a scholar without knowing the evidence and you must always follow what the Imam of his madhab says even if the Imam's opinion is against the Qur'an and Sunnah.

regarding taqleed this is what Imam Ahmad bin Hanbil (May Allah be pleased with him) said: "Do not do my taqleed, nor Malik's, nor Shafi's, nor Awza'ee's, nor Thawri's, rather where they took their rulings [Qur'an and Sunnah] from, you should also take from there" [Aqyadhul Ahm p 113, A'lamul mwaq'yeen 2/302]

In another place he (rahimahullah) said: "Do not blindly follow me, nor
Maalik, nor Awzaa’ee and not anyone else, rather as they took their rulings and issues from the Qur’aan and Sunnah; you also take from them.” [Aqdul Jayid p.8]

It is not correct to say that all of the four Imams were correct because many times their opinions clearly contradict each other; how can they both be correct at the same time i.e. Shafi's view is that your wadu breaks if you touch a women with or without desire whereas Hanfi's view is that it does not (which is correct according to the Sunnah). So how can you be in the satate of wadu and not wadu at the same time?

Also, there are many issues for which we do not require rocket science to understand.

the definition of taqleed at its root, is to follow someone without proof.

the scholars like Fawzaan, and other like Ibn Uthaymeen divided taqleed between that which is
1. haraam
2. mubah (permissible)
3. mandatory

the haraam aspect of taqleed is the avenue in which soemone has the ability to find the sources of knowledge, and who knows the difference between the texts that are general and specific, the knowledge of nasikh wa mansookh, and has a more detailed level of fiqh. upon such a person, it is haraam for them to follow someone blindly.

as for the person who mrely has a rudimentary level of fiqh, then taqleed in this case is mubah, which in actuality is understood according to the sunni s*lafi understanding of 'ittibaa which in this case is following which is in accordance with the ayaah of the quraan to ask the people of dhikr if you do not know.

the scholars, in explaining this ayaah, said that the purpose of asking these people, is so that they are to be followed, this taqleed in this case is placed under mubah for it is allowed to followed them in this regard even if you do not know the proof specifically in the texts, rather merely statting shaykh so and so is enough, provided that the people know that the asl (foundation) of this person is a sunni who implements and restricts himself to the methodology of the salafu-salih. If a scholar is upon this level and methodology, then asking for how he extracting proof about a ruling is not beffiting someone who is asking, but rather what is upon that person is to follow.

In the case where taqleed is mandatory, is like when soemone who has very little to no access to knowledge, and for a scholar to come to his region, then it is required to ask and take his ruling in the religion provided that this scholar is a sunni scholar who follows the methodology of the salafu-saalih.

in cases like this, o