This is a good resource that provides tools necessary to become knowledgeable in Islam. May Allah allow us to gain benefit from it.
As I think we all can agree on: Becoming qualified as a scholar takes time, effort, and most important of all – Allah’s help and guidance. With our zeal for knowledge and intent to help the Ummah, we must make sure that we maintain the proper perspective. There are some things that I believe need to be clarified for this perspective to be maintained.
On page 10 of his work
Fiqh Al-Imam,
Mufti Abdur Rahman bin Yusuf writes:
With that said, let's take a look at some of these concerning issues.
format_quote Originally Posted by
startingarabic
The fact that a student studied with a madhhab does not mean that he cannot go beyond it if he finds sound evidence elsewhere; the only one who stubbornly clings to a particular madhhab (regardless of the evidence) is one who lacking in religious commitment and intellect, or he is doing that because of partisan attachment to his madhhab.
The author of these statements is implying that he is an expert of all the Madhaaib. He is also implying that
he understands what sound evidence is. There doesn't seem to be room for differences of opinion. Furthermore, he doesn't express the fact here that his statements are
his own interpretations of evidence.
It is also sad to see that he labels Ulama who don't accept
his interpretations as either partisan or lacking in religious commitment and intellect.
format_quote Originally Posted by
startingarabic
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.”
Of course. These trustworthy Ulama of the Golden Age of Islam always knew that
Allah Knows Best in all affairs. The Salf-i-Saliheen had a high level of taqwa. Allah has raised their status' in the Ummah accordingly.
Far from that, these new psuedo-Salafis instead are saying that they know how to evaluate evidence better than the actual Salf-i-Saliheen - "
I know better because they said they were human and could make mistakes". We'll have a quote on this below.
The proponents of this
following blindly thing are, in reality, severely deficient in their knowledge of the Madhaaib.
For example:
From my experience with the Hanafi Ulama, I am aware that there is leeway to accept the ruling(s) of another Madhab. This acceptance is contingent on the exhaustion of all avenues within the precedent rulings and Usool of the Hanafi Madhab – which is rare.
Mufti Abdur Rahman bin Yusuf writes in relation to this on pages xv - xvi of
Fiqh Al-Imam:
format_quote Originally Posted by
startingarabic
No one has the right to follow an imam blindly and never accept anything but his words. Rather what he must do is accept that which is in accordance with the truth, whether it is from his imam or anyone else.
Albeit I believe unintentional but nevertheless, these are severely misleading statements that contradict the legality of laypeople to follow trustworthy Ulama.
format_quote Originally Posted by
startingarabic
Shaykh Sulaymaan ibn ‘Abd-Allaah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
Rather what the believer must do, if the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) have reached him and he understands them with regard to any matter, is to act in accordance with them, no matter who he may be disagreeing with.This is what our Lord and our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) have enjoined upon us, and all the scholars are unanimously agreed on that, apart from the ignorant blind followers and the hard-hearted. Such people are not scholars.
Tayseer al-‘Azeez al-Hameed, p. 546
Among other things, the statements in red have major implications in relation to a person's arrogance. This makes it clear that the author is not fully acquainted with the robust nature of the Madhaaib. There is definitely no room for differences of opinion with him either. If a person chooses to follow these statements, he or she is actually blindly following this scholar's opinion.
format_quote Originally Posted by
startingarabic
From the above it is clear that we should not follow their opinions in all situations and at all times, because they may make mistakes, but we may follow their views that are sound and are based on the evidence.
Fataawa al-Lajnah, 5/28
The author of this statement is implying that he can correct the mistakes of the Salf-i-Saliheen. In reality, as mentioned earlier, it's likely he's not well versed in, at the very least, the Hanafi Madhab.
These foundations of the Madhaaib were not based on personalities of modern times – but of the Golden Age of Islam, the Khair al-Kuroon. In relation to this:
Source: Mufti Abdur Rahman bin Yusuf,Fiqh Al-Imam, p. 31
format_quote Originally Posted by
startingarabic
Whoever is not qualified to do that has to ask trustworthy people who so that he may learn the rulings from their books and act upon that, without limiting his asking or his reading to one of the scholars of the four madhhabs. Rather people refer to the four imams because they are so well known and their books are well written and widely available.
Yes, whoever is not qualified have to ask trustworthy Ulama. However, the author of this statement is implying that his interpretations are just as good as the Four Imams and better than those Ulama who stick to the Usool and rulings of a particular Madhab. He doesn't even consider the latter to
be Ulama - and has choice words for them.
format_quote Originally Posted by
startingarabic
With regard to Ibn Hazm, he was an imam and a mujtahid, and he regarded blind following as haraam. He was not a follower of any of the imams, neither Imam Ahmad nor any other imam. Rather he was the imam of ahl al-zaahir (the Zaahiris or literalists) during his own time and until now. Perhaps the view that he was a follower of Imam Ahmad (if this report is true) has to do with matters of aqeedah and Tawheed, even though he held different opinions and reckless views with regard to issues pertaining to the divine names and attributes.
It is indeed necessary to follow the systematic approach that the Salf-i-Saliheen laid out. Not doing so opens one up to make reckless mistakes and misleading people.
When the talk about referring back to the Messenger of Allah (:saws:) arises that implies that the Mujtahid Imams didn’t do so themselves.
What proponents of this statement are doing is in fact creating another Madhab for themselves – which they believe hold better interpretations than the established Madhaaib.
One of the reasons why sincere brothers and sisters are opposed to certain established things in Islam is because of the fanaticism they've experienced. Unfortunately, there are people who have extremist views. This extremism can be related to any of a number of issues (i.e. fiqh, tasawwuf, etc.).
For example:
One of the reasons why I stay away from getting intimate with my local Tablighi Jamaat is because of a variety of different types of extremism within it. It’s important to note, however, that the actual teachings of the Tablighi Jamaat are far from extreme and something that I hold dear.
This is the same with extremists of all types (i.e. followers of other Shuyookh and Madhaaib aren't Muslims). This isn’t what the actual Shuyookh and Fuqaha teach/taught – far from it. This extremism is misrepresenting Islamic teachings and is a major put off for many people and has given rise to different types of protestant groups and interpretations. The ironic thing that happens here is that these groups are in fact creating their own Madhaaib – which I am supposed to believe are more trustworthy than the ones established during the Golden Age of Islam – the Best of Generations.
Several months ago a respected brother on this forum commented on a post I had made related to following the Madhaaib. His reply took my post out of context and missed pertinent information. When I responded and pointed out the issue, he apologized and said he had recently read a paper on Madhab fanaticism which influenced him in his response to me.
Additionally, it can be argued that those that strictly limit their quotations to a few select scholars such as Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (R.A.) and Shaykh Sulaymaan ibn ‘Abd-Allaah (may Allaah have mercy on him) are blindly following
them. After all, their statements are their opinions (i.e. interpretations of evidence). They aren’t from the Khair al-Kuroon either.
Furthermore, it is evident that the proponents of this are not acquainted with the vast amount of literature and robust nature of the Madhaaib. In my experience they have developed their perceptions from literature written by authors of this persuasion who themselves aren’t experts in any of the Madhaaib. For example, Fiqh us-Sunnah seems like a kitab that presents the views of the Madhaaib in a fair and balanced way. In reality, the author presents material according to how he interprets it – which is a serious misrepresentation.
So while yes, we should study Islamic knowledge, it is imperative to have a qualified teacher. Please listen to the following 1-hour lecture by clicking on the green-titled link. It's by
Shaykh Ibrahim Madani and will be worth your time.
Everyone needs a teacher
In need of duas.