Dont Add Anything Into The Religion!

[chacha_jalebi]

salaam ma alaykam peoplings

adding things into the religion is baaaaad! because our religion is butifull, we dont need to add anything into it, its purrfecto:D and when something is perfect, it dont need anythin added or taken away, because that will ruin it and spoil it!

also there are loads of topics about bidah, but that just shows how important it is, we should always question whatever we do, is it from the Quran or Sunnah? is there evidence for something we are doing? because just because our parents or imam or mosque does something, does it mean its right? NO! we should know what we are doin and where is the evidence for it!

alsoo if someone is doin a bidaah, we cant like switch on the person just explain to the person, as Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimullah) said "people do bidah either based on a false or weak hadiths, or because of a misunderstanding" maybe they are doing because they dont know, so so we should always be nice to people when telling them stuff, because put it like this, imagine you been wearing the same clothes for 4 years and then someone says to you, them clothes are ugly blud, your likely to be offended, so same with people that are involved in a bidah, they will need time to change, and only Allah (swt) changes the hearts. nowadays we see people goin around refuting muslims lol, over bidahs they do, and they think their "imams"... worreva, like say something to someone once, twice, thrice! after that leave them, if they dont wana accept, let Allah (swt) deal with them innaaay, no need to make their errors part of your life!


so the moral of the story is, follow the way of the Prophet (saw), Allah (Swt) says in surah al Yunus v 32:

"So after the truth, what else can there be, save error?''

also surah al anaam v 38

"We have neglected nothing in the Book"

this also refutes the concept of "bidah hasanah" lol, as the hadiths says "kullu bidaatin dhala3lah ...." EVERY BIDAAH IS A MISGUIDANCE! and if there was anythin good, in somethin it would have been done or mentioned by Allah (Swt). and as the ayah clearly says nothin has been left out of the kitaab of Allah (swt) he has shown us all good and all bad!

and again v 153

"And verily, this is My straight path, so follow it, and follow not (other) paths, for they will separate you away from His path"

sooo follow the way of the Prophet (saw) the ayah is clear!!!

and again the same message is given in surah al imraan v31

"Say (O Muhammad (PBUH) to mankind): 'If you (really) love Allah then follow me (i.e., accept Islamic Monotheism, follow the Qur'an and the Sunnah), Allah will love you and forgive you your sins".

the Prophet (Saw) is bein told to say to mankind, if they really love Allah (Swt) then they should follow his way!!

and what i been sayin all along, is said in surah al nisa v59

"(And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger (PBUH)".

so if someone says to you, what your doin is bidah, dont bite their head off! go yourself and look for evidence for it, if you cant find solid pure authentic evidence then leave it, you will be rewarded for leaving, as another hadiths says "leave what you doubt"

and some hadiths which should nail the point down!!

Ummul Momineen!!! Hadhrat Aisha (ra) narrates a hadiths saying: Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "If anyone introduces in our matter something which does not belong to it, will be rejected".
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim]

now the question bidah.. whaat is it ....

IF IT WERENT DONE DURING THE TIME OF THE PROPHET (sal Allah hu aleyhi wasalam) ITS A BIDAH! taa daa:D

now some clever cloggs is gona turn around and say "cars werent invented during the RasoolAllah's (sal Allah hu aleyhi wasalam) time are they a bidah?

well as the hadiths says anythin introduced into this matter of ours i.e. the religion!!!

another hadiths "If anybody introduces a practice which is not authenticated by me, it is to be rejected". (Sahih Muslim)

if the Prophet (saw) never told us to do anythin, then we shouldnt do it, he has shown us all the good ways!!!


and we all before any khutbah say, what RasoolAllah (saw) used to say ...

"To proceed, the best speech is the Book of Allah and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad (PBUH), the worst practice is the introduction of new practices in Islam and every Bid`ah is a misguidance". [Muslim]

so to finish off!! follow the way of Prophet (saw) if he didnt do somethin, that means there is no religious good in that thin, otherwise he would have didded it:D

capicheee

[pauper]

:sl:

So does that mean add nothing period?

So if the Prophet and the sa7aaba had no four Madhahbs.

are the Madhhabs Bida ? according to your logic?

[snakelegs]

good question. i've wondered about that myself.

[------]

:salamext:

Hmmm...yeh very good question. InshaaAllaah someone wil answer...

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[IbnAbdulHakim]

the sahabi's followed fiqh. Madhabs are like sets of fiqh to follow.

sahabi's followed scholars, madhabs are like following a group of scholars of whom the leaders being imam abu hanifa/malik/shafie/ahma ibn hanbal.


so madhab isnt exactly new, your still taking from the scholars, the only new thing is completely and utterly blind following one scholar although he says things of clear bid'a or shirk such as "wear this ring of mine and such and such will happen" or attributes false statements to the salaaf, of doesnt follow the ways of the salaaf but makes new ways of worship...

etc



if i said anything wrong may Allah forgive me....

[------]

:salamext:

Allaahu Aalim man, this is wy I stay away from these topics. You don't know who to follow, who's wrong, who's right (sectarian stuff).

Assalamu Alaykum

*one confused sister*

[IbnAbdulHakim]

^ assalamu ALaikum

let me make things easy for you sis, always look for an example from the salaf in everything you do. Its not hard, imaam malik said that if it wasnt from the prophet back then its not of the deen today, and i think it was imam ahmad who advised us to look for a statement of the salaf in every thing we practise so as not to deviate from their ways and understanding.


i hope that hellps you even a little inshaAllaah

[jzcasejz]

Bismillaah!

:sl:

So does that mean add nothing period?

So if the Prophet and the sa7aaba had no four Madhahbs.

are the Madhhabs Bida ? according to your logic?

Bro, the objective of these Madhabs were to eventually follow the way of the Sahaabah, so to conclude that the Imaams introduced something new into the religion is wrong.

But as Brother IbnAbdulHakim pointed out, blind following and that such is wrong.

Allaahu Aalim man, this is wy I stay away from these topics. You don't know who to follow, who's wrong, who's right (sectarian stuff).

Allaah (SWT) is Merciful. Since we don't have the adequate knowledge to know who is correct and who's not, we're allowed to follow a Madhab/scholar which we trust (rather some deem it obligatory on us) and there won't be no blame upon us. No need to be confused. :)

[pauper]

Bismillaah!



Bro, the objective of these Madhabs were to eventually follow the way of the Sahaabah, so to conclude that the Imaams introduced something new into the religion is wrong.

But as Brother IbnAbdulHakim pointed out, blind following and that such is wrong.



Allaah (SWT) is Merciful. Since we don't have the adequate knowledge to know who is correct and who's not, we're allowed to follow a Madhab/scholar which we trust (rather some deem it obligatory on us) and there won't be no blame upon us. No need to be confused. :)

Blind following of who is wrong ?

Are you refering to Taqleed of the Four Imams ?

In that case You calling 3/4 of ISlamic scholars wrong .

Simple Question , Why was Ibn Rajab called Al hanbali ?

[IbnAbdulHakim]

Blind following of who is wrong ?

any one person, following scholars or a set of scholars who correct each other or a shurah is permissable :).

Are you refering to Taqleed of the Four Imams ?

by the four imaams you mean the four madhabs and taqleed of the madhaahib is ok for the laymen but not for the ulaama or taalib ul ilm.

In that case You calling 3/4 of ISlamic scholars wrong .

no i think they would agree with us :)

Simple Question , Why was Ibn Rajab called Al hanbali ?

because he followed the hanbali madhab lol, who said its wrong?


Assalamu Alaikum

[jzcasejz]

In that case You calling 3/4 of ISlamic scholars wrong .

When did I say that?

Blind following of who is wrong ?

Refer to my old post:

But as Brother IbnAbdulHakim pointed out, blind following and that such is wrong.

Which begs the question? What DID IbnAbdulHakim say?

the only new thing is completely and utterly blind following one scholar although he says things of clear bid'a or shirk such as "wear this ring of mine and such and such will happen" or attributes false statements to the salaaf, of doesnt follow the ways of the salaaf but makes new ways of worship...

Are you refering to Taqleed of the Four Imams ?

Not in this case no, in fact, if you had read my post, you would've realised I said:

Since we don't have the adequate knowledge to know who is correct and who's not, we're allowed to follow a Madhab/scholar which we trust (rather some deem it obligatory on us) and there won't be no blame upon us.

Simple Question , Why was Ibn Rajab called Al hanbali ?

Simple answer: He followed the Hanbali Madhab.

Bro, I don't see where you're going with this...

[pauper]

When did I say that?



Refer to my old post:



Which begs the question? What DID IbnAbdulHakim say?





Not in this case no, in fact, if you had read my post, you would've realised I said:





Simple answer: He followed the Hanbali Madhab.

Bro, I don't see where you're going with this...

:sl:

Ok what do you mean by blind following ?

[chacha_jalebi]

:sl:

Ok what do you mean by blind following ?

i see it as, when you only accept the opinion of one of the schools, of thought and you disregard the other ones, for example one may follow the hanafi fiqh, and they will say only bring me something from the hanafi fiqh as evidence, im not interested in the other school of thoughts, thats what i classify as blind following!

and thats wrong because none of the 4 imams were wrong, there opinions were based on information they had at that time, and they all said if any one of their opinions went againist the Quraan or Sunnah then throw it!! subhanAllah, shows how great the imams really were

also in answer to your question before pauperryy bro:D

the madhaabs are not a bidaah, they are opinions of the four imams, none of the imams said "only follow my opinion", its like someone writing a sharh on a book, to put it in a similar form they have like written a massive sharh:D and thats there opinions, so its not a bidaah

what should we doo? we should follow the strongest opinions from all schools of fiqh and but have the Quraan and Sunnah as our main guidance, because there is no point in studying the views of the imams, if you aint got a clue about the Quraan and Sunnah!

so the main thing for our guidance is Quraan and Sunnah, and the whole topic was about dont add anything into the religion i.e. - Quraan and Sunnah, :statisfie

[Souljette]

lol ppl ask me wht madhab i follow i'm like ummm...i'm on the Quran and Sunnah ..i'm nt the kind who has one madhab to follow alhamdullah whtever agrees wit it it's fine

[pauper]

So Was Imam Rajab Wrong to Be exclusively Hanbali simple Question to those who say shouldnt blind follow .

[------]

:salamext:

Will u stop getting defensive for no reason?! Allaah knows best. We can't judge anyone, least of those who were great scholars. :-\

[Umar001]

So Was Imam Rajab Wrong to Be exclusively Hanbali simple Question to those who say shouldnt blind follow .

As Salam Alaykum,

Howdy guys, I was wondering, what does being Hanbali mean?

[------]

:salamext:

^

Hanbali (Arabic: حنبلى ) is one of the four schools (Madhhabs) of Fiqh or religious law within Sunni Islam (the other three being Hanafi, Maliki and Shafi`i). It is also a school of aqeedah (creed) in Sunni Islam, also referred to as the Athari (or Textualist) school.

The school was started by the students of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (d. 855).

Source

[pauper]

:salamext:

Will u stop getting defensive for no reason?! Allaah knows best. We can't judge anyone, least of those who were great scholars. :-\

:sl:

Defensive ? am I the one going around talking about rules and secterian accusations :) ?

isnt the purpose of an islamic forum to interact ? are arent muslims allowed to think for themselves and be open minded .

Or do the same people who say dont blind follow actually blind follow their own hand picked scholars of the latter day ?

If Ibn Rajab exclusively followed the Hanbali Madhab , and all scholars did , Look up siyar a3lam al nubalaa and Tabaqaat Al Shafi3iya.

You will Find listings of All Shafi3i and hanbali scholars who followed 1 Madhab .

So Were all those centuries of scholars wrong ? and only the modern day laa madhahbis right ?

[chacha_jalebi]

So Was Imam Rajab Wrong to Be exclusively Hanbali simple Question to those who say shouldnt blind follow .

no, during imam rajabs time many of the top top scholars that had passed away before him like ibn taymiyyah, ibn al jawzi, ibn al qayyim (rahimullah) all these people liked the hanbali tradition, but from their works you can clearly see that they never adhered to one school of tradiiton they always referred back to the Quraan and Sunnah, many times what happens is the people who you learn from might be students or you know ancestors of a certain imam, so people are just associated with that school of thought. but it dont mean they blind followed, like ibn kathir (rahimullah) was a stooodant of ibn taymiyyah and ibn kathir is often associated with being shaafi, and ibn taymiyyah = hanbali

so what im saying, is you can be asoociated with a certain school, by where you were born or whom you studied under

like ibn rajab (rahimullah) was born in baghdad i tinkk i dont know much about him?? and baghdad was predominately hanbali back in them days, but yeh lol no one is wrong and right, all the scholars refer themselfs back to the Quraan and Sunnah, they didnt just base their answers on one school of thought

[------]

:sl:

Defensive ? am I the one going around talking about rules and secterian accusations :) ?

isnt the purpose of an islamic forum to interact ? are arent muslims allowed to think for themselves and be open minded .

Or do the same people who say dont blind follow actually blind follow their own hand picked scholars of the latter day ?

If Ibn Rajab exclusively followed the Hanbali Madhab , and all scholars did , Look up siyar a3lam al nubalaa and Tabaqaat Al Shafi3iya.

You will Find listings of All Shafi3i and hanbali scholars who followed 1 Madhab .

So Were all those centuries of scholars wrong ? and only the modern day laa madhahbis right ?

If u follow the quraan and sunnah u wont go astray

khalaas man

[pauper]

no, during imam rajabs time many of the top top scholars that had passed away before him like ibn taymiyyah, ibn al jawzi, ibn al qayyim (rahimullah) all these people liked the hanbali tradition, but from their works you can clearly see that they never adhered to one school of tradiiton they always referred back to the Quraan and Sunnah, many times what happens is the people who you learn from might be students or you know ancestors of a certain imam, so people are just associated with that school of thought. but it dont mean they blind followed, like ibn kathir (rahimullah) was a stooodant of ibn taymiyyah and ibn kathir is often associated with being shaafi, and ibn taymiyyah = hanbali

so what im saying, is you can be asoociated with a certain school, by where you were born or whom you studied under

like ibn rajab (rahimullah) was born in baghdad i tinkk i dont know much about him?? and baghdad was predominately hanbali back in them days, but yeh lol no one is wrong and right, all the scholars refer themselfs back to the Quraan and Sunnah, they didnt just base their answers on one school of thought

So knowing that why do people say its wrong to Follow a single Madhab ?

If those days Muslims did it , why has it become wrong 600 or more years later by poeple who dont have more knowledge then those people .

If you chop and Choose from Madhabs its called Talfeeq and will lead the normal muslim to following his desires , and he will never be able to meet the conditions of Ijtihad .

Obviously

[pauper]

If u follow the quraan and sunnah u wont go astray

khalaas man

:sl:

Khalaas man ? :)

Sorry sister translate .

[------]

:salamext:

Khalaas = finish, no more to be said

[Umar001]

:salamext:

^

Hanbali (Arabic: حنبلى ) is one of the four schools (Madhhabs) of Fiqh or religious law within Sunni Islam (the other three being Hanafi, Maliki and Shafi`i). It is also a school of aqeedah (creed) in Sunni Islam, also referred to as the Athari (or Textualist) school.

The school was started by the students of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (d. 855).

Source

Wa Alaykum Salaam Wa Rahamatullahi Wa Barakatuh,

I understand that part sister, I didn't get the point where people are saying, so and so is Hanbali, and then saying it is not wrong to blind follow or something. Does it mean that being of a madhhab means you cant disagree with scholars in that madhhab?

If you chop and Choose from Madhabs its called Talfeeq and will lead the normal muslim to following his desires , and he will never be able to meet the conditions of Ijtihad .

What do you mean chop and chose from Madhhabs?

[chacha_jalebi]

So knowing that why do people say its wrong to Follow a single Madhab ?

If those days Muslims did it , why has it become wrong 600 or more years later by poeple who dont have more knowledge then those people .

If you chop and Choose from Madhabs its called Talfeeq and will lead the normal muslim to following his desires , and he will never be able to meet the conditions of Ijtihad .

Obviously

lol your making a mountain of a hill or whatever the saying is :D

as muslims we should follow the righest opinion, what taqleed does is it just restricts you to following what you have been told, and instead of doing taqleed of a madhab, we should do taqleed of RasoolAllah (saw) and the laws of Allah (swt)

but in regards to a madhab, they are all correct so it dont matter which one you choose to follow,

and the people who your talking about bro, were scholars! like il give you example Ibn Hajr was shaafi, he was a mujtahid so he had loads of knowlegde and when he had the evidence, he differed with the original opinion of imam shaafi, but he is still regarded as a shaafi, but if he was practising taqleed, he would have said worreva im sticking to this believe,

so when the imams were presented with stronger evidence, they always followed that, the ones who dont do taqleed, and thats why people say its wrong!

capichee?

also lets try not to talk about scholars decisions and why they were this or why they did that too much, jus incase we say something which is wrong

just thought i should add this in :D

Ibn Taymiyah said:

No one has to blindly follow any particular man in all that he enjoins or forbids or recommends, apart from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). The Muslims should always refer their questions to the Muslim scholars, following this one sometimes and that one sometimes. If the follower decides to follow the view of an imam with regard to a particular matter which he thinks is better for his religious commitment or is more correct etc, that is permissible according to the majority of Muslim scholars, and neither Abu Haneefah, Maalik, al-Shaafa’i or Ahmad said that this was forbidden.

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 23/382.

the four imams said ....

Abu Haneefah said: “This is my opinion, but if there comes someone whose opinion is better than mine, then accept that.” Maalik said: “I am only human, I may be right or I may be wrong, so measure my words by the Qur’aan and Sunnah.” Al-Shaafa’i said: “If the hadeeth is saheeh, then ignore my words. If you see well established evidence, then this is my view.” Imam Ahmad said: “Do not follow me blindly, and do not follow Maalik or al-Shaafa’i or al-Thawri blindly. Learn as we have learned.” And he said, “Do not follow men blindly with regard to your religion, for they can never be safe from error.”

i love the bit where it says LEARN AS WE HAVE LEARNED, where did they learn from? Quraan and Sunnah, thats were all our knowlegde should come from!!

[pauper]

No my friend it does not work that way , cause if what You say is right then why did those scholars follow only one ?

Answer me please .

Why is it only scholars of the past 30 years who came up with this dont blind taqleed theory ?

scholars are scholars not prophets , We shouldnt conceal mistakes in Islam we should point then out so the general ummah dont fall in it too .

Here a List of scholars with reference akhi who followed the Shafie Madhahb :


(iii) 'Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya '- This is a very well known dictionary listing all the famous Shafi'i scholars uptill the death of its author-Imam Taj al-Deen al-Subki (rahimahullah).

(iv) 'Siyar a'lam al-nubala'- This is a biographical dictionary by the famous scholar of Hadith-al-Hafiz Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Dhahabi (rahimahullah).

The Shafi'i Scholars

Imam al-Bayhaqi (d. 458/1066; al-A'lam, 1.116 [xi,6]),
Shaykh Abu Yusuf al-Buweeti [xii],
Shaykh Abul Qasim ad-Daariki [xii],
Hafiz Ibnas-Salah (d. 643/1245; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 8.326 [xii]),
Imam Taqi ad-Deen al-Subki (d. 756/1355; al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyya, 114 [xii,14]),
Imam Abu Nu'aym (d. 430/1038; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 4.18 [xii,52]),
Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256/870; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 2.212-14 [6]),
Imam Muslim (d. 261/875; Siyar a'lam al-nubala, 12.557-61 [6]),
Imam Abu Dawud (d. 275/889; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 2.293 [xiii,14]),
Imam Nisai (d. 309/915; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 3.14-16 [6]),
Imam Tirmidhi (d. 279/892; Siyar a'lam, 13.270-73 [6]),
Imam ibn Majah (d. 209/824; al-A'lam, 7.144 [6]),
Imam al-Suyuti (d. 911/1505; al-A'lam, 3.301-2 [5]),
Hafiz Ibn Khuzaymah (d. 311/924; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 3.109 [16]),
Imam ash-Sha'rani (d. 973/1565; al-A'lam, 4.180-1 [viii,35]),
Imam Hakim (d. 405/1014; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 4.155 [xi,39]),
Imam ibn Asakir (d. 571 AH [xi]),
Hafiz Khateeb al-Baghdadi (d. 463/1072; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 4.29 [xi,52]),
Hafiz al-Dhahabi (d. 748/1348;Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 9.100 [18]),
Hafiz al-Iraqi (d. 806/1404; al-A'lam, 3.344 [18]),
Imam al-Tabarani (d. 360/971; Siyar a'lam, 16.119-23 [18]),
Imam al-Izz ibn Abdas Salam (d. 660/1262; al-A'lam, 4.21 [27]),
Imam ibn Hibban (d. 354/965; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 3.131 [39]),
Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852/1449; al-A'lam, 1.178 [39]),
Hafiz al-Haythami (d. 807/1405; al-A'lam, 4.266 [40]),
Imam al-Haramayn (d.478/1085; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 5.165 [41]),
Imam Abul Qasim al-Qushayri (d. 465/1072; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 5.153 [50]),
Imam al-Razi(d. 606/1210; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 8.81-89 [59]),
Imam al-Baghawi (d. 510/1117; al-A'lam, 2.259 [59]),
Imam Abu Shamah (d. 665 AH [78]),
Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277; al-A'lam, 8.149 [xi,15]).


From this list according to Imam Dhahabi and Imam Taj Adin Al Subki rahimahum Allah it is clear that following a Madhab by these scholars was practiced .

So why are we all wrong to do it then , if we ourselves dont meet the conditions to do ijtihad ?

[jzcasejz]

lol your making a mountain of a hill or whatever the saying is :D

Lol, let me help you out here. ;D It's "mountain out of a molehill". :D:D

[pauper]

Looks more like truth that hurts .

[Danah]

all of us are following Quran and Sunna but for these four madhabs, they are not different in what was stated in quran and Sunna,
as I know, they are expanding in additional things and those small details which were not stated in Quran like where to put your hand when you are praying or some of the Hajj steps and issues

Allah know the Best

[jzcasejz]

Looks more like truth that hurts .

^ LOL, looks more like this is a debate not worth participating in. We've had plenty, and I mean plenty, of Taqleed threads like this in the past... and you're practically bringing nothing new to the table here. We've gone through this time and time again on this forum.

And "truth" hurts? Was there any truth from you to start off with? :rollseyes

[Umar001]

I am still confused, what happens if someone joins a madhhab? I mean, everyone here seems to be debating Madhhab this and why we should, but what actually happens if one ascribes himself to it?

So why are we all wrong to do it then , if we ourselves dont meet the conditions to do ijtihad ?

I think some would argue that it is precisely the fact that we don't meet the conditions of ijtihad that we dont have the same position as those scholars.

Me = layman, I go to a scholar/student of knowledge I trust ask him for the rulings on matters. I don't see why I'd have to go specifically to a Shafi'i or a Hanbali, say I am in town x and there is a Shafi'i scholar I ask him, and if I go back home in town y and theres a Hanbali scholar I ask him, I dont see why I'd have to travel all the way back to the other place to speak to the Shafi'i scholar?


EDIT: Let's remember we are all brothers and sisters here, let's not let shaytan get between us or even our own nafs get between us.

[pauper]

No my friend it does not work that way , cause if what You say is right then why did those scholars follow only one ?

Answer me please .

Why is it only scholars of the past 30 years who came up with this dont blind taqleed theory ?

scholars are scholars not prophets , We shouldnt conceal mistakes in Islam we should point then out so the general ummah dont fall in it too .

Here a List of scholars with reference akhi who followed the Shafie Madhahb :


(iii) 'Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya '- This is a very well known dictionary listing all the famous Shafi'i scholars uptill the death of its author-Imam Taj al-Deen al-Subki (rahimahullah).

(iv) 'Siyar a'lam al-nubala'- This is a biographical dictionary by the famous scholar of Hadith-al-Hafiz Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Dhahabi (rahimahullah).

The Shafi'i Scholars

Imam al-Bayhaqi (d. 458/1066; al-A'lam, 1.116 [xi,6]),
Shaykh Abu Yusuf al-Buweeti [xii],
Shaykh Abul Qasim ad-Daariki [xii],
Hafiz Ibnas-Salah (d. 643/1245; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 8.326 [xii]),
Imam Taqi ad-Deen al-Subki (d. 756/1355; al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyya, 114 [xii,14]),
Imam Abu Nu'aym (d. 430/1038; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 4.18 [xii,52]),
Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256/870; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 2.212-14 [6]),
Imam Muslim (d. 261/875; Siyar a'lam al-nubala, 12.557-61 [6]),
Imam Abu Dawud (d. 275/889; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 2.293 [xiii,14]),
Imam Nisai (d. 309/915; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 3.14-16 [6]),
Imam Tirmidhi (d. 279/892; Siyar a'lam, 13.270-73 [6]),
Imam ibn Majah (d. 209/824; al-A'lam, 7.144 [6]),
Imam al-Suyuti (d. 911/1505; al-A'lam, 3.301-2 [5]),
Hafiz Ibn Khuzaymah (d. 311/924; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 3.109 [16]),
Imam ash-Sha'rani (d. 973/1565; al-A'lam, 4.180-1 [viii,35]),
Imam Hakim (d. 405/1014; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 4.155 [xi,39]),
Imam ibn Asakir (d. 571 AH [xi]),
Hafiz Khateeb al-Baghdadi (d. 463/1072; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 4.29 [xi,52]),
Hafiz al-Dhahabi (d. 748/1348;Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 9.100 [18]),
Hafiz al-Iraqi (d. 806/1404; al-A'lam, 3.344 [18]),
Imam al-Tabarani (d. 360/971; Siyar a'lam, 16.119-23 [18]),
Imam al-Izz ibn Abdas Salam (d. 660/1262; al-A'lam, 4.21 [27]),
Imam ibn Hibban (d. 354/965; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 3.131 [39]),
Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852/1449; al-A'lam, 1.178 [39]),
Hafiz al-Haythami (d. 807/1405; al-A'lam, 4.266 [40]),
Imam al-Haramayn (d.478/1085; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 5.165 [41]),
Imam Abul Qasim al-Qushayri (d. 465/1072; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 5.153 [50]),
Imam al-Razi(d. 606/1210; Tabaqat al-Shafi'iya, 8.81-89 [59]),
Imam al-Baghawi (d. 510/1117; al-A'lam, 2.259 [59]),
Imam Abu Shamah (d. 665 AH [78]),
Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277; al-A'lam, 8.149 [xi,15]).


From this list according to Imam Dhahabi and Imam Taj Adin Al Subki rahimahum Allah it is clear that following a Madhab by these scholars was practiced .

So why are we all wrong to do it then , if we ourselves dont meet the conditions to do ijtihad ?

answer this post head on then , if you are self proclaimed experts on the subject .

are all those scholars wrong and your Khalaf scholars right ? :D

[chacha_jalebi]

answer this post head on then , if you are self proclaimed experts on the subject .

are all those scholars wrong and your Khalaf scholars right ? :D

my other post i think proved a lot, i thought i did a good job pssssh, (destroy my confidence why dont you:p)

il like to re repeat this paragraph

Abu Haneefah said: “This is my opinion, but if there comes someone whose opinion is better than mine, then accept that.” Maalik said: “I am only human, I may be right or I may be wrong, so measure my words by the Qur’aan and Sunnah.” Al-Shaafa’i said: “If the hadeeth is saheeh, then ignore my words. If you see well established evidence, then this is my view.” Imam Ahmad said: “Do not follow me blindly, and do not follow Maalik or al-Shaafa’i or al-Thawri blindly. Learn as we have learned.” And he said, “Do not follow men blindly with regard to your religion, for they can never be safe from error.”

the imams called to Quraan and Sunnah, not to their opinion, and with regards to the imams you mentioned, like i said ibn kathir, was a follower of the shaafi madhab, yet when he found stronger evidence he went againist the shaafi madhab, but he still is regarded as a follower of the shaafi madhab.

its like in GCSE subjects, when you have two teachers for the same subject, you always like the way one teacher teaches, but they are teachin the same thing, but you prefer one teacher over another, thats what the imams did, they preferred one school of thought over the other and if they found evidence, they would accept that, even if it went againist their school.

if you practise taqleed, your most likely not to go againist your madhab even if you are given evidence that is stronger!

and all the scholars you mentioned and all scholars of the pass, preferred a certain school of thought, its like the example i gave you before, two teachers both teach same thing, but have different styles, you will like a certain style innit, thats exactly the same with madhabs. but no matter how good the opinion is, if there is stronger evidence againist it, then any sound minded muslim will follow the stronger evidence!

at the end of the day, if you wana practice taqleed, woo hoo to you, :D innaay

no need to start a riot on a forum,:-[

[pauper]

my other post i think proved a lot, i thought i did a good job pssssh, (destroy my confidence why dont you:p)

il like to re repeat this paragraph

Abu Haneefah said: “This is my opinion, but if there comes someone whose opinion is better than mine, then accept that.” Maalik said: “I am only human, I may be right or I may be wrong, so measure my words by the Qur’aan and Sunnah.” Al-Shaafa’i said: “If the hadeeth is saheeh, then ignore my words. If you see well established evidence, then this is my view.” Imam Ahmad said: “Do not follow me blindly, and do not follow Maalik or al-Shaafa’i or al-Thawri blindly. Learn as we have learned.” And he said, “Do not follow men blindly with regard to your religion, for they can never be safe from error.”

the imams called to Quraan and Sunnah, not to their opinion, and with regards to the imams you mentioned, like i said ibn kathir, was a follower of the shaafi madhab, yet when he found stronger evidence he went againist the shaafi madhab, but he still is regarded as a follower of the shaafi madhab.

its like in GCSE subjects, when you have two teachers for the same subject, you always like the way one teacher teaches, but they are teachin the same thing, but you prefer one teacher over another, thats what the imams did, they preferred one school of thought over the other and if they found evidence, they would accept that, even if it went againist their school.

if you practise taqleed, your most likely not to go againist your madhab even if you are given evidence that is stronger!

and all the scholars you mentioned and all scholars of the pass, preferred a certain school of thought, its like the example i gave you before, two teachers both teach same thing, but have different styles, you will like a certain style innit, thats exactly the same with madhabs. but no matter how good the opinion is, if there is stronger evidence againist it, then any sound minded muslim will follow the stronger evidence!

at the end of the day, if you wana practice taqleed, woo hoo to you, :D innaay

no need to start a riot on a forum,:-[

Exactly so you end up following your nafs :) like all laa mathabis do , thats why the Ummah has deteriorated Islamically over the last 30 years since this doctrine was glorified .

[pauper]

Now really the bigger joke is that the same people who tell you dont blind follow are actually blind following the Khalaf scholars of today who say dont blind follow :D .

[snakelegs]

just a stupid question because i'm confused: are you saying the practice of following a madhab just came in to being within the past 30 years?

[pauper]

just a stupid question because i'm confused: are you saying the practice of following a madhab just came in to being within the past 30 years?

No those who say Dont follow Madhabs blindly came into the limelight , and now they are being followed Blindly :statisfie.

[snakelegs]

thanks. whew - this is confusing. interesting discussion, though.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl:

Shaykh Yasir Qadhi said:

[...]
And I believe one of the greatest factors that damaged the dawah of pure Sunni theology was the incorrect emphasis on fiqh matters and not following a madhab. This really gave the impression (which still exists in the minds of many people) that our scholars were trying to promote an ‘every person is an alim’ type of mentality. The reality is that the extreme anti-madhab stance of some scholars is an aberration, even with pure Sunnism. The vast majority of our scholars, including Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim, came from madhabs and never advise the masses to abandon madhabs. Hence your shock at discovering that Sh. Ibn Uthaymin (and Ibn Baz, and almost ALL the scholars of Islam) actually encouraged following a madhab. I remember once, in my first semester at the University of Madinah, Sh. Ibn Uthaymin came to the University and gave a beautiful lecture (it was the first time I met him). In it, he said, “I advise you all to follow a madhab…” And this advice was being given to us students of knowledge, not just laymen on the streets!! It was one of many hundreds of eye-openers that I myself was exposed to over the years of study that I did there.

Indeed, the more knowledge one gains, the less stubborn and hard-headed he becomes about one position being absolutely right to the exclusion of all others. (Of course this applies to fiqh much more than it does to theology, but even in some issues of theology there is leeway…)

Yasir

http://muslimmatters.org/2007/07/03/.../#comment-3885

At the end of the day, this discussion here is not going to be of benefit to anyone as no one here seems to be on either extreme of the matter, but are all somewhere in the middle area with leanings here and there and we are attacking each other for positions the other does not hold, assuming worst of him. So please, everyone, take a break and move on from this discussion, a year from now if this thread were to be pulled up and you were to read it, you would look back and be like: "Why in the world was I arguing about this for?!". Let's make better use of our time.

[Umar001]

thanks. whew - this is confusing. interesting discussion, though.

There are different types of following, I think this is why its confusing, and not just for you.

For example, a Muslim who does not have the skill to derive the rulings from the sources has to ask someone who can, right? Eg. A layman has to ask a doctor for medicine, why? Becuse the layman has not studied and is not likely to know how to conduct tests to produce good medicine.

Another type of blind following is that which people do to extremes. They follow a person no matter what happens, so much as that some people, extreme, do acts of worsip dictated to them by their 'teachers' which their teachers have made up over time.

I hope that kinda clears the difference between the two and Allah knows best.

[snakelegs]

a couple of things i remember reading here:
"taqleed" refers to scholars - regular people don't have all the knowledge so they have to follow the scholars.
there are no significant/important differences in the 4 madhabs - the reason for sticking to one is to guard against picking and choosing based on your convenience or preference.

[FatimaAsSideqah]

As Salaam Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu

The work of the mujtahid Imams of Sacred Law, those who deduce shari‘ah rulings from Qur’an and hadith, has been the object of my research for some years now, during which I have sometimes heard the question: "Who needs the Imams of Sacred Law when we have the Qur’an and hadith? Why can’t we take our Islam from the word of Allah and His Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace), which are divinely protected from error, instead of taking it from the madhhabs or "schools of jurisprudence" of the mujtahid Imams such as Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi‘i, and Ahmad, which are not?"

It cannot be hidden from any of you how urgent this issue is, or that many of the disagreements we see and hear in our mosques these days are due to lack of knowledge of fiqh or "Islamic jurisprudence" and its relation to Islam as a whole. Now, perhaps more than ever before, it is time for us to get back to basics and ask ourselves how we understand and carry out the commands of Allah.

We will first discuss the knowledge of Islam that all of us possess, and then show where fiqh enters into it. We will look at the qualifications mentioned in the Qur’an and sunna for those who do fiqh, the mujtahid scholars. We will focus first on the extent of the mujtahid scholar’s knowledge—how many hadiths he has to know, and so on—and then we will look at the depth of his knowledge, through actual examples of dalils or "legal proofs" that demonstrate how scholars join between different and even contradictory hadiths to produce a unified and consistent legal ruling.

We will close by discussing the mujtahid’s relation to the science of hadith authentication, and the conditions by which a scholar knows that a given hadith is sahih or "rigorously authenticated," so that he can accept and follow it.

Qur’an and Hadith. The knowledge that you and I take from the Qur’an and the hadith is of several types: the first and most important concerns our faith, and is the knowledge of Allah and His attributes, and the other basic tenets of Islamic belief such as the messengerhood of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), the Last Day, and so on. Every Muslim can and must acquire this knowledge from the Book of Allah and the sunna.

This is also the case with a second type of general knowledge, which does not concern faith, however, but rather works: the general laws of Islam to do good, to avoid evil, to perform the prayer, pay zakat, fast Ramadan, to cooperate with others in good works, and so forth. Anyone can learn and understand these general rules, which summarize the sirat al-mustaqim or "straight path" of our religion.

Fiqh. A third type of knowledge is of the specific details of Islamic practice. Whereas anyone can understand the first two types of knowledge from the Qur’an and hadith, the understanding of this third type has a special name, fiqh, meaning literally "understanding." And people differ in their capacity to do it.

I had a visitor one day in Jordan, for example, who, when we talked about why he hadn’t yet gone on hajj, mentioned the hadith of Anas ibn Malik that

the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "Whoever prays the dawn prayer (fajr) in a group and then sits and does dhikr until the sun rises, then prays two rak‘as, shall have the like of the reward of a hajj and an ‘umra." Anas said, "The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said: ‘Completely, completely, completely’" (Tirmidhi, 2.481).