:sl:
I had written a post a while back that I hope will be of some benefit here Insha'Allaah:
http://www.islamicboard.com/1039200-post47.html
As I stated there, I'll repeat it a portion from it here:
So personally, I've found the following beneficial. i) Avoiding arguments about these issues. ii) Finding a scholar that I trust, who has learned fiqh traditionally via a madhab, and asking him my questions, because to me at the end of the day, that is me fulfilling the obligations Allaah has placed upon me ('Ask the people of knowledge if you do not know'). After all, the madhab of the layman is the madhab of the scholar he refers to. I've found this to be balance between the two extremes. I might also add, this position (of following a madhab not being wajib, but asking a scholar that one trusts) is supported by many of the previous scholars such as Imam an-Nawawi, Ibn Qawan al-Shafi’i, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Hanafi, Ibn al-Humam al-Hanafi, and even some of the recent scholars such as Shaykh ‘Abdul-Fattah Abu Ghuddah (rahimullah) held this opinion.
format_quote Originally Posted by
Zafran
Salaam
The 4 Madhabs are not just based on one scholar but a chain of scholars who have checked and re-checked the methodology of the madhab in extracting rulings from the Quran and sunnah - its how the muslim scholars have worked for over 1000 years. The difference are not that much between them - but it depends on how they interpret the Quran and sunnah.
They can be equally correct due to the hadith about Asr prayer - where the prophet told the sahaba to pary asr when the reached the city - some prayed on time whilst others prayed when they went into the city - there was a difference but when they asked the prophet of God he said they were both right :) - it would be good if someone would give us a reference for this its preety famous.
Ofcourse the sahaba had varied opinions too.
peace
Akhi, there
is a difference between the usool of the madahib being correct and the actual resulting ruling based on application of that usool. Meaning that, sometimes an opinion of another madhab may be stronger and closer to the truth than the opinion in another madhab - the
methodology used by each to arrive at the ruling is correct - but the resulting opinion may be weak or strong. Notice, I didn't say valid or invalid, both are valid - but one might be more correct than the other.
format_quote Originally Posted by
IbnuFarah
First of all akhi there are more than just 4 Ma'athab, there were orginally 6 main Mathabs, but the rest died out. First of all, all 4 Imams of the famous Mathabs agreed that Bida is wrong, a they warned against it. All four Imams came to an opinion based upon the resources that were available to them (Hadeeth, opinions of the Sahaba, Tabi'een, Qiyaas etc), and they used these things to come to an opinion. Through out there lives they often changed their opinion when evidence or new information was brought to them that was not there before. For example Imam Abu Hanifa's main student Imam Muhammad Ibn Hassan differed in over 50% of his teacher Imam Abu Hanifa in Fiqhee Matters. There is nothing wrong with following a Mathab, but there is something wrong when you follow blindly, and closing your heart to opinions that have much stronger bases. Me personally I follow mostly Hanbalee Mathabs rulings, but when I come across a correct hadeeth that is stronger I take the Hadeeth over the opinion I follow.
Akhi, how can a layman know which opinions are stronger than others? It is quite impossible until he has studied the usool of the madhab, the opinions of the scholars in the madhab itself and examined other madahib as well. A layman simply does not have enough knowledge to decipher the evidences and extract jurisprudential rulings, and evaluate differences all by himself.
To get a glimpse of how intricate the process of deriving rulings is, take a look at this article regarding: 'Why do the Malikis pray with ther Hands to their sides?':
http://www.suhaibwebb.com/blog/gener...ides-part-one/
And this comment:
http://www.suhaibwebb.com/blog/gener...omment-6927537
It's just to give you an insight that these things are not black and white, there are shades of gray.
format_quote Originally Posted by
Zafran
Salaam
no the 4 madhab are not just the wrok of a single scholar but it is a school of thought with many scholars checking and rechecking the opinion or the ruling of the scholar from Quran and sunnah. You follow a madhab because its a specifc methodology in extracting information from Quran and sunnah with unbroken chain of Qualified scholarship.
As most of us are not specilaised in the deen eg a mujtahid then we follow a specific school of thought.
This is true. If one of the Imaams did not come across a hadeeth, then those that came after him in the same madhab definetly did.
format_quote Originally Posted by
IbnuFarah
In that case why did Abu Hanifas main students differ with him on over half of his rulings?
And we know the main books of Hadeeth were compiled after the deaths of the 4 Imams of Fiqh, so there are many Hadeeth they were not aware of, that would effected there rulings.
His students differed with him because they were qualified to do so. They knew Imam Abu Hanifa's methodology and when they learnt something new they would apply it using the Hanafi usool. So when something in the hanafi usool dictated that an opinion be changed, it would be, and vice versa.
When a large group of scholars of Hadeeth tell you this or that Hadeeth is weak or Mowduu, and they say as a group this one is more authentic, you don't need to be a grandmufti to understand that.
But you need to have a certain amount of knowledge before you can give out rulings based on that hadeeth. What should one do when he comes across two ahadeeth that are apparently in contradiction to each other?
I believe one of the Madhabib also told us that, if we found anything they said to be in contradiction with the Qur'an or Sunnah, then we should leave what they have said. I can't remember which one it was who said this.
These sort of statements from the Imaams are not directed at the laymen, but towards their students. In the post I linked to above:
They were intended for the students of the Imaams who maybe werent completely Mujtahid Mutlaq but were knowledgeable enough to decipher the evidences and extract jurisprudential rulings on their own and evaluate differences. In explaining this position, Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says: “[Imam Ahmad] would order the layman to ask (yustafti) Ishaq, Abu ‘Ubaid, Abu Thawr, Abu Mus’ab, whilst he would forbid the scholars from his followers, such as Abu Dawud (the compiler of Sunan), ‘Uthman ibn Sa’id, Ibrahim al-Harbi, Abu Bakr al-Athram, Abu Zur’ah, Abu Hatim al-Sajistani, Muslim (the compiler of Sahih) and others, from making Taqleed of anyone from the scholars. He would say to them: You must refer to the sources, to the Book and the Sunnah.”
See al-Manhaj 373-376, al-Tahqiqat 643-645, Majmu’ah 20/116, 124-126, al-Mustadrak 2/241, 258, al-Furu’ 6/492, al-Insaf 11/147, I’lam 6/203-205, Mukhtasar al-Tahrir 103, Hal al-Muslim Mulzam… 14, Rawdhat al-Talibin 11/117, Usul al-Fiqh al-Islami 2/1166