this is the work of abu ameenah bilal philips on taqleed.. it is taken from his book
evolution of fiqh.. i am posting the 6th part of the book which is about taqleed.. it is very good work on taqleed. he refutes blind following(taqleed).. this book describes the details of fiqh,history of fiqh, 4 fiqhi schools, awzaa'ee school, zaahiri school, jareeree school etc
so here is the part about taqleed.
THE SIXTH STAGE: STAGNATION AND DECLINE
This stage covers approximately six centuries starting with
the sacking of Baghdad in 1258 CE and the execution of the last
‘Abbaasid caliph, al-Musta’sim, and ending around the middle of the
nineteenth century of the Christian era. This period also represents
the rise of the Ottoman Empire, founded in 1299 CE by the Turkish
leader ‘Uthmaan I, until its decline under the attacks of European
colonialism.
The prevailing characteristic of this period was that of
Taqleed (the blind following of a Madh-hab) and factionalism. This
degenerative trend resulted in the dropping of all forms of Ijtihaad
and the evolution of the Madh-habs into totally separate entities
closely resembling sects. The compilation of Fiqh during this period
was limited to commenting on previous works and was directed
toward the promotion of individual Madh-habs. Thus, the dynamism
of Fiqh was lost and many of the laws became increasingly
outmoded and inapplicable in their existing forms. In order to fill this
legislative gap, European law codes were gradually introduced in
place of some of the Islamic laws, which had fallen into disuse.
Eventually with the advance of European colonialism and the
breaking up of the Muslim Empire, European laws supplanted
Islamic law. Certain reformers sought to stem the tide of stagnation
and decline, calling for a return to the original purity of Islaam and
its laws. However, factionalism has continued to the present day, in
spite of an increase in institutional teaching of comparative Fiqh.
Emergence of Taqleed
The scholars of this period left all forms of Ijtihaad and
unanimously issued a legal ruling, which was intended to close the
door of Ijtihaad permanently. They reasoned that all possible issues
had already been raised and addressed, and there was therefore no
need for further Ijtihaad.
With that step, a new concept of Madhhab arose, namely that one of the four Madh-habs had to be followed
for one’s Islaam to be valid. In time this concept became firmly
embedded among the masses as well as the scholars of Fiqh. Thus,
the
religion of Islaam itself became restricted within the confines of
the four existing Madh-habs; Hanafee, Maalikee, Shaafi’ee and
Hamblee. These schools of law came to be
considered divinely
ordained manifestations of Islaam.
All of them were supposed to be
completely correct, equal and representative of true Islaam, yet there
were innumerable differences among them. In fact there were
scholars in this period who interpreted
some Hadeeths in such a way
as to prove that the Prophet (s.w.) him-self had predicted the
appearance of the Imaams and their Madh-habs. Consequently, any
attempt to go beyond these canonical Madh-habs was considered
heretical and anyone who refused to follow one of these Madh-hab
was classified an apostle. The hyper conservative scholars of this
stage even went so far as to rule that whoever was caught
transferring from one Madh-hab to another was liable to punishment
at he discretion of the local judge.
A ruling was also made in the
Hanafee Madh-hab prohibiting the marriage of a Hanafee to a
Shaafi’ee.
And even the second most important pillar of Islaam,
Salaah, was not spared the effects of Madh-hab fanaticism. The
followers of the various Madh-habs began to refuse to pray behind
the Imaams from other Madh-habs. This resulted in the building of
separate prayer niches in the masjid
communities where more than
one Madh-hab existed. Masjids of this type can still be seen in places
like Syria, where Sunni Muslims follow either the Hanafee or
Shaafi’ee Madh-hab. Even the most holy masjid, al-Masjid alHaraam of Makkah, which represents the unity of Muslims and the religion of Islaam, was affected. Separate prayer niches were set up
around the Ka’bah: one for an Imaam from each of the schools. And
when the time for Salaah came, an Imaam from one of the Madhhabs would lead a congregation of followers from his Madh-hab in
prayer; then another Imaam from one of the other Madh-habs would
lead his congregation of followers and so on. It is interesting to note
that separate places of prayer for each of the Madh-habs remained
around the Ka’bah until the first quarter of the twentieth century
when
‘Abdul-‘Azeez ibn Sa’oud and his army conquered Makkah
(October of 1924) and united all worshippers behind a single Imaam
regardless of his or their Madh-habs.
Reasons for Taqleed
Taqleed (blind following) has to be distinguished from Ittibaa’
(reasoned following). The principle of following the rulings of our
predecessors is normal and natural. In fact, it is by closely following
earlier interpretations of Islaam that the message of Islaam remains
uncorrupted through time. For, those early interpretations were
founded on the Prophet’s (s.w.) divine inspiration and his divinely
guided life style. The Prophet (s.w.) himself said that the best
generation was his generation, then the generation following his, and
then the generation following that.
However, since Muslims of
earlier generation, with the exeption of the Prophet (s.w.), were not
infallible, even those earlier interpretations should not be followed
blindly without without regard to certain basic principles of reason
which enable us to distinguish between right and wrong.
In this book
the term Taqleed (blind following) is used to refer to the actions to
those who slavishly follow a single Madh-hab regardless of errors
that they see. As for the common people who do not have the
knowledge to make independent decisions in doubtful situations, it is
for them to follow whatever knowledge is available to them, keep
their minds open and rely on open-minded scholars as much as
possible
Taqleed was the result of a number of factors, internal and
external to the Madh-habs, which affected the development of Fiqh
and the attitude of scholars. No one cause can be singled out as the
main cause nor can all of the factors be identified. The following
only a few of the more obvious factors which led to this stage of
stagnation.
1. The schools of Fiqh were completely formed and the minutest of
details worked out. The laws for what had occurred, as well as
what might occur, were already deduced and recorded due to the
extensive development of speculative Fiqh. This left little room
for Ijtihaad and originality. As a result, they’re developed and
over dependence on the works of earlier scholars of the Madhhabs.
2. The ‘Abbaasid caliphate, which had come to power under the
banner of restoring Islamic law to its former place , lost its
power to the King’s ministers (wazeers), many of whom were
shi’ites, and the empire eventually broke up into mini-stages.
The new rules-by-proxy were more interested in private power
struggles than in either religious scholarship or government
according to Islamic laws.
3. The crumbling of the ‘Abbaasid empire into mini-states was
accompanied by each state following the Madh-hab, Spain the
Maalikee Madh-hab, and Turkey and India the Hanafee. Each
state began the practice of choosing its governors, administrators
and judges only from those who followed its official Madh-hab.
Consequently, scholars who wanted to become Qaadees (judges)
in the courts of these states had to follow the official Madh-hab
of the state.
4. Some unqualified individuals began to claim the right to make
ijtihaad in order to twist the religion to suit their wishes.
Consequently, many incompetent scholars began making rulings,
which misguided the masses on a number of issues. In the
ensuring confusion, the reputable scholars of the day tried to
close the door of Ijtihaad in order to protect the Sharee’ah from
being tampered with.
Compilation of Fiqh
The same factors which led to Taqleed also caused scholars
to confine their creative activity to merely editing and revising
previous works. The Fiqh books of earlier scholars were condensed
and abridgements of them were made. These abridgements were later
shortened in order to make them easy to memorize, and many of
them were actually put to rhyme. This process of condensing
continued until the summaries, which resulted, became virtual ridles
to the students of the day. The following generation of scholars
began to write explanations of the summaries and poems. Later
scholars wrote commentaries on the explanations and others added
footnotes to the commentaries.
During this period some books on the fundamentals of Fiqh
(Usool al-Fiqh) were written. In these works, the correct method of
making Ijtihaad was outlined and the conditions which were laid
down by these scholars were so strict that they excluded not only the
scholars of their time but also many of the earlier scholars who had
made Ijtihaad.
There were also a few books, which were written, on
comparative Fiqh during this period. As in the previous period, the
opinions of the Madh-habs and their proofs were collected and
criticized in these books. The authors then defined as most accurate
those opinions, which were held by their particular Madh-hab.
Toward the end of this period, an attempt was made to
codify Islamic law under the auspices of the ottoman caliphs. A
panel of seven top ranking scholars of Fiqh was formed and
entrusted with the job. It was completed in 1876 CE and enforced as
law by the Sultan throughout the Ottoman Empire under the title
Majallah al-Ahkaam al-‘Aadilah (The Just Codes)
. However, even
this seemingly noble attempt was affected by Madh-hab fanaticism.
All of the scholars on the committee were appointed from the Hanafee Madh-hab. Consequently, the resulting code totally ignored
the contributions of the other Madh-habs to Fiqh.
With the expeditions of Columbus and Vasco de Gama,
Western European states began to capture the routes and sources of
international trade. Subsequently, European imperialism beginning
with Java, which fell to the Dutch in 1684, absorbed Muslim East
Asian states. After Transyvania and Hungary fell from ottoman
hands to Austria in 1699 and the defeat of the Ottomans by Russia in
the Russo-Turkish war of 1768-74, the European territories of the
Ottoman Empire were soon lost, one after another.
This process
culminated in the total dissolution the Ottoman Empire during the
First World War and its division into colonies and protectorates.
Consequently, European law codes replaced Islamic laws throughout
the Muslim world.
Although European colonialism was officially ended some
years ago, Islamic law has remained in disuse in all Muslim
countries with the exception of Saudi Arabia which has codified
Islamic law according to the Hambalee Madh-hab, Pakistan to a
large degree according to the Hanafee Madh-hab and Iran which has
recently done so according to the Ja’faree Madh-hab
Reformers
In spite of the general decay described above, there existed
from time to time throughout this period a few outstanding scholars
who opposed Taqleed and dared to raise the banner of Ijtihaad. They
called for a return to the roots of the religion, to the true sources of
Islamic law and to reliance on these foundations above all else.
Some of these reformers and their contributions are described
hereafter.
Ahmad ibn Taymeeyah (1263-1328 CE) was not foremost
among the reformers of this period. Because of his challenge of the status quo, many of his contemporaries declared him an apostate and
had the authorities jail him repeatedly. Ibn Taymeeyah was,
however, one of the greatest scholars of his time. Initially, he had
studied Fiqh according to the Hambalee Madh-hab, but did not
restrict himself to it. He studied the sources of Islamic law in depth
and mastered all the Islamic sciences which were known at that time.
Furthermore, he examined the writings of various sects which had
broken off from islaam, studied the religious books of the Christians,
the Jews and their various sects and wrote extensive critiques on all
of them. Ibn Taymeeyah also took part in the Jihaad against the
Mongols who had occupied the eastern and northern provinces of the
former ‘Abbaasid state and were at that were among the greatest
Islamic scholars of their time and carried on to the next generation
the banner of Ijtihaad and a return to the pure sources of Islaam
which he had raised. Among them was Ibn Qayyim, a great scholar
in the fields of Fiqh and Hadeeth criticism and Ibn Katheer, a master
in Tafseer, History and Hadeeth.
Muhammad ibn ‘Alee ash-Shawkaanee (1757-1835 CE)
born near the town of Shawkaan in Yemen, was also among the
reformers to this Period. Ash-Shawkaanee studied Fiqh according to
the Zaydee Madh-hab
and became one of its outstanding scholars.
He then went into an in-depth study of the Hadeeth of his time. At
this point he freed him self of the Madh-hab and began making
independent Ijtihaad. He wrote a number of works in Fiqh and its
fundamentals in which issues studied from the points of view of all
the Madh-habs were concluded with solutions based solely on the
most accurate proofs and the most convincing arguments. Imaam
ash-Shawkaanee took the position that Taqleed was Haraam and
wrote a number of books on the topic, for example, Al-Qawl alMufeed fee Hukm at-Taqleed. Consequently, he also came under
attack from most of the scholars of his time.
Another noteworthy reformer was the great schoar Ahmad
ibn ‘Abdur-Raheem better known as Shah Walee Allaah Dihlawee
(1703-1762 CE). He was born in the Indian sub-continent where Taqleed was, perhaps, most rampant. After he had mastered the
various Islamic sciences, he called for the re-opening of the door of
Ijtihaad and the re-unification of the schools of Fiqh. In this efforts to
re-examine Islamic principles and to find out on what authority the
legal schools based their regulations, Shah Walee Allaah rejuvenated
the study of Hadeeth. Although he did not go so far as to reject the
existing Fiqh schools, nevertheless he tought that everyone was free
to choose a particular decision different from that taken by the school
to which he belonged himself, if he was convinced that the case was
better confirmed by Hadeeth.
However the over all state of degeneration and stagnation
has continued until today, despite the efforts of modern thinkers like
Jamaal ad-Deen al-Afghaanee (1839-1897 CE) who traveled
throughout the Muslim world calling for reform. Jamaal ad-Deen
traveled to India, Makkah, and Constantinople, settling finally in
Egypt. He called for free political, religious and scientific thought
and denounced Taqleed and state corruption. Jamaal ad-Deen
thought these ideas at the University of Jamaal ad-Deen’s ideas were
extremist. For example, he elevated the human mind and its logical
deductions to a level equal to that of Divine Revelation. His
intentions also became suspect due to his involvement with the
Masonic movement which was at that time establishing new
branches in the Middle-East.
Muhammad ‘Abduh (1849-1905 CE) was among
Afghaanee’s most famous students. Under the influence of
Afghaanee and Ibn Muhammad ‘Abduh, and Taqleed and its
supporters were systematically attacked.
But, due to Muhammad
‘Abduh’s leaning toward extreme modernism, he eventually deviated
in some of his interpretations and legal rulings. For example, in his
Tafseer of the Qur’aan he Prophets of directly performed by God
through the forces of nature. To him the flocks of birds which dropped clay pebbles on the army of Abrahah and his elephant
during their attack on the Ka’bah were
simply airborne microbes
which spread disease among them. Likewise, he made a Fatwaa
allowing Muslims to be involved in business transactions involving
interest. He based this ruling on the Fiqh principle that dire necessity
makes the forbidden allowable. The fallacy of his ruling lay in the
fact that Fiqh specifically defines dire necessity as involving matters
of life and death or loss of limb, and this was simply not the case
where business transactions are concerned. Muhammad ‘Abduh’s
main student,
Muhammad Rashed Ridaa (d. 1935), carried on his
mentor’s attack on Taqleed, but rejected most of his teacher’s
excesses. However, other students of Muhammad ‘Abduh became
the nucleus of the extreme modernist movement and deviated in
many areas even more than their teacher. For example, his student
Qaasim Ameen (died 1908) was the first to make a vehement attack
on polygamy, the simplicity of Islamic divorce and the use of the
veil.
Other scholars of the twentieth century, such as
Hassan alBannaa (d.1949), founder of the Ikhwaan Muslimoon movement
Sayyid, Abul-A’laa Mawdudi (1903-1979), founder of the Jama’at
Islami movement, and more recently the great Hadeeth scholar of our
era,
Naasir ad-Deen al-Albaanee have picked up the banner of
Islamic Revival and have called for the unfication of the Madhhabs.
But, to this day, the
majority of scholars remain firmly
bound to sectarian Islaam in the form of one of the four Madh-habs.
In doing so, they unknowingly perpetuate division among the ranks
of the Muslim nation. Nor does there appear to be much hope for an
end to this process in the near future; for, with very few exceptions,
present day Islamic institutions of learning throughout the Muslim
world actively propagate a sectarian view of Islaam.
It is true that comparative Fiqh is now being given a
prominent place in the syllabuses of these institutions, and the study
of Hadeeth has become more popular than it was only a century ago.
But, the reality is that these two potentially dynamic and regenerative subjects have been defused by the sectarian system of Islamic
education. Each university adheres to the official Madh-hab of the
country in which it is situated and thus all the core Fiqh courses of
the Islamic law Syllabus (called Sharee’ah or Usool al-Deen) are
taught according to the state Madh-hab.
. This is done to fulfill the
local government’s need for judges who conform to the Madh-hab
used in the civil law system of the state. For example, the University
of al-Azhar in Egypt, the most venerated institution in the Muslim
world, is the only university in which all of the major Madh-habs are
taught. However, students entering the university are required to
indicate their Madh-hab are placed in the same class. From the
beginning of their studies until they graduate, all of their professors
will be from their own Madh-hab. Accordingly, the positions of the
other Madh-habs are studied merely as oddities, and the great books
of Hadeeth are read more for the blessing than for the revelation of
truth. Whenever a conflicting opinion is encountered in the course of
these studies, the teacher in the sectarian institution examines it
superficially and rejects it in the light of the compelling arguments,
which he develops to support the position of his particular Madhhab. Thus, although other positions may be supported by very strong
proofs, the sectarian teacher’s treatment denies them the
consideration they deserve. Similarly, if a strong Hadeeth which
appears contrary to the position taken by the Madh-hab is met while
reading the books of Hadeeth, the teacher either re-interprets it to
support his Madh-hab or he deftly explains it away. And if neither of
the two is possible, a series of weak Hadeeths are quoted in support
of the Madh-hab’s position without the slightest mention that they
are weak. In that way, it appears that there is a greater number of
Hadeeths supporting the Madh-hab’s position, and the students are
convinced of the correctness of their Madh-hab.
Section Summary
1. Ijtihaad in all its forms was put aside, and the blind following
(Taqleed) of one of the four Madh-habs was made compulsory
on all Muslims.
2. The four Madh-habs became totally incompatible and the
Muslim Ummah was virtually split into four religeous sects.
3. Scholarly activity was restricted to writing commentaries on
previous works and promoting the position of the author’s
particular Madh-hab as in the period of consolidation.
4. There were commendable attepts by certain reformers to revive
the original and dynamic nature of Fiqh, but their efforts proved
unequal to the task of eradicating Madh-hab fanaticism which
had became so deeply ingrained.
5. Attempts at the codification of Islamic law were made, but the
results suffered from sectarian views, and with the advent of
European colonialism they were supplanted by European law
codes.
6. There has been some lessening of Madh-hab fanaticism in recent
years as a result of the reformist movements and the wide-spread
teaching of comparative Fiqh in modern institutions of learning.
7. The state of stagnation and decline of Fiqh and the existence of
Madh-hab factionalism have continued until the present day.