What should we do about our sects?

[iqbal_soofi]

There're many sects in Islam. Only one of them could be right at the most. Who created these sects?; Religious scholars or the ordinary Muslims? What should ordinary Muslims do if they've any doubt about their particular sect? Keep following their specific sects as it is?, move to other sects if they find theirs wrong?, or argue with their religious scholars to make it right?

[Erundur]

:salamext:

one way or another it will hit 73.

:sl:

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


http://www.islamicboard.com/sects-di...aved-sect.html

[------]

:salamext:


I think if u just live ur life according to the Qur'an and Sunnah, then its all good...

Oh and check the above thread out as well lol


:wasalamex

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

[iqbal_soofi]

:salamext:


http://www.islamicboard.com/sects-di...aved-sect.html

The link you provided gives so many things which are common to most of the sects; and every sect doesn't comply with all of the instructions. It also confuses when it says to follow the path of the companions of the messenger of Allah. They followed different paths on many issues. For example, the first four khaleefas chose different paths to be selected as khalifas.

Also this link suggests that only the Ahle-Hadith (wabih) sect is the right one.

[------]

:salamext:


Erm i think that link refers to Ahle Sunnah Wal Jamaah....

Correct me if I'm wrong InshaAllah bro Fi Sabilillah


:wasalamex

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


Brother, Ahlul Hadith is just another way of saying Ahlus Sunnah - which is the people of the sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him.) Isn't that what the companions themselves did?


Also, yes the companions of the Messenger of Allaah did select a khalifah in another way, and as stated by the Messenger of Allaah himself - we follow his way and his close companions (i.e. Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali etc.)

They selected khulafah in different ways, but whose to say they were wrong? Infact it's better for us because we have more just options to get a good khalifah; whether it is by the previous khalifah giving the position to the one who is the most befitting for that position, or whether its the pious scholars who are the inheritors of the prophets who decide who the most worthy one to have the position is etc.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

Also this link suggests that only the Ahle-Hadith (wabih) sect is the right one.

Imaam Ahmad (d.241H) - rahimahullaah - said:

"If this Taa'ifatul-Mansoorah (Victorious and Aided Group) is not Ashaabul-Hadeeth, then I do not know who they are."
[Related by al-Haakim in Ma'rifatu 'Uloomul-Hadeeth (p.3), and al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr declared its isnaad to be Saheeh in Fathul-Baaree (13/293).]

http://www.islamicboard.com/628115-post89.html

Al-Khateeb al-Baghdaadee (d.463H) said:

"And if only the people of blameworthy opinion busied themselves with beneficial knowledge, and seeking the Sunnah of the Messenger of the Lord of Creation, and followed the way of the fuqahaa and muhadditheen - then they would find that this would be sufficient for them. And the narration would take the place of his opinion which he used to hold; since the Hadeeth comprehends the fundamentals of Tawheed, the reported Threats and the Promises, the Attributes of the Lord of Creation - who is High above the saying of the apostates, it also contains information about Paradise and Hell-Fire, and what Allaah has prepared therein for the pious and the wicked, and what Allaah has created in the earths and the heavens, and the remarkable things and great signs, and a mention of the nearest Angels - those drawn up in ranks and those who recite tasbeeh.

And the Hadeeth comprehends stories of the about the pious ascetics and Awliyaa, wonderful admonition and sayings of the Scholars. It contains histories of the kings of the 'Arabs and non-'Arabs, and the accounts of past nations, and descriptions of the battles of the Messenger sal-Allaahu 'alayhe wa sallam; his expeditions, rulings, judgements, sermons, warnings, predictions and miracles. It also contains information about the number of his Wives and Children, his Relatives and Companions, and a mention of their excellence and merit, and a mention of their lives, their actions and their ancestry. And the Hadeeth contains tafseer of the Qur'aan, information and the wise remembrance contained in it. It contains the sayings of the Companions about its preserved rulings, the different sayings they held, as well as those of the Scholars and mujtahids.

And Allaah made Ahlul-Hadeeth (the People of Hadeeth) the pillar of the Sharee'ah and the destroyer of every despicable innovation. So they are Allaah's wardens amongst His creation, and the link between the Prophet sal-Allaahu 'alayhe wa sallam and his Ummah, and the strivers to preserve His Deen. So their light shines brightly, their excellence remains, their signs are clear, their positions evident and their proofs are over-powering. And all the sects coil themselves around vain desires and prefer opinion which they cling to - except for Ahlul-Hadeeth, since the Book is their provision, the Sunnah is their proof, the Messenger their leader and to him is their ascription. They do not deviate upon vain desires, nor turn to mere conjecture. They accept what is reported from the Prophet sal-Allaahu 'alayhe wa sallam and they are the trustworthy and reliable ones, who memorise the Deen and are its treasurers, its storehouses of knowledge and its bearers. If anyone differs about a hadeeth, then it is referred back to them. Thus, their judgement is accepted and listened to. From them is every Scholar and Imaam, and every true ascetic, and one of excellence, and precise reciter and righteous Khateeb. They are the Saved-Sect and their way is the straight one ..."

[Related by Ibn Abee Haatim in Aadaabush-Shaafi'ee (pp.94-95), Abu Nu'aym in Hilyatul-Awliyaa (9/106) and al-Khateeb in Ihtijaaj bish-Shaafi'ee (8/1). It was declared to be Saheeh by Ibn al-Qayyim in al-I'laam (2/325).]

[snakelegs]

what are your thoughts on mazhabs - is it necessary to follow one?

[- Qatada -]

what are your thoughts on mazhabs - is it necessary to follow one?

Madhabs are schools of thought, and there's nothing wrong with following them because we're not knowlegable enough to extract our own rulings from the Qur'an and authentic Sunnah. [i.e. we don't know the context of the hadith etc.] We know that even some of the pious predecessors before us would follow a school of thought. However, if someone was to bring us some Authentic ahadith which contradict what we are doing, then we should ask a trustworthy scholar who is of our time so we understand which is the more correct opinion. And Allaah knows best.


Regards.

[snakelegs]

i know there is nothing wrong with following a mazhab - and in fact, it is encouraged - but is it necessary to?

[iqbal_soofi]

They selected khulafah in different ways, but whose to say they were wrong? Infact it's better for us because we have more just options to get a good khalifah; whether it is by the previous khalifah giving the position to the one who is the most befitting for that position, or whether its the pious scholars who are the inheritors of the prophets who decide who the most worthy one to have the position is etc.

Nobdoy says they were wrong? Did someone say so? Do you mean to say there's no single specific way in Quran or Hadith for choosing a khalifa? There're many paths to reach the same destination and all of them straight. The messenger of Allah drew a straight line to show that there can only be one path which is straight. Now you tell us that all 4 differnt paths were straight. Man you're just confusing.

[- Qatada -]

Nobdoy says they were wrong? Did someone say so? Do you mean to say there's no single specific way in Quran or Hadith for choosing a khalifa? There're many paths to reach the same destination and all of them straight. The messenger of Allah drew a straight line to show that there can only be one path which is straight. Now you tell us that all 4 differnt paths were straight. Man you're just confusing.

If you're a muslim, then i'm sure you accept what the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) said.


He (peace be upon him) said:

"Indeed those from before you from the People of the Book divided into seventy-two groups. And, indeed, this group (Muslims) will divide into seventy-three. Seventy-two groups will be in the Hellfire and one of them will be in Paradise. And it is the Jamaa'ah (group)." 3

And in another narration, he said: "Everyone of them in the Hellfire, except for one group that which I and my companions are upon." 4


So remember that we follow his way, and the way of his companions. As Allaah has stated in the Qur'an that He is pleased with certain companions (i.e. those who were in the treaty of Hudaibia) and in the sunnah of those who fought in Badr.



Snakelegs, i think as someone who doesn't know how to extract rulings from Qur'an and Sunnah, we do need to follow a madhab. And Allaah knows best. I may be wrong.

[snakelegs]

Snakelegs, i think as someone who doesn't know how to extract rulings from Qur'an and Sunnah, we do need to follow a madhab. And Allaah knows best. I may be wrong.

thanks for reply.

[Erundur]

thanks for reply.

hrm. I can't paste a link to an article for some odd reason, it gives me a ***** when I do. :huh:

[AbuAbdallah]

salaam,

I don't think it is necessary at all to follow a madhab. I think someone should just follow scholars that they trust instead of always wondering "what did Abu Hanifa say about this, or say about that." We should focus more on what the Prophet (SAW) said, and how the majority of the scholars understood it, not just sticking to one Imam your whole life, because at the end of the day they are only human.

And Allah Knows Best.

[Umm Yoosuf]

:sl:

I copied this Chapter from the Book called "The Path to Guddance ny Imaam Ibn Al-Qayyim Al-Jawziyyah"

Chapter Eleven

Ibn Al-Qayyim on follwoing a School of though (Madhhab)

Ibn Al-Qayyaim said: "Does the common person have to follwo one of the well known madhhabs or not? There are two sayings regarding this:


Thats it is not obligatory upon him and this is what is correct and definite since there is nothing obligatory except what Allah, the Most High, and His Messenger have made obligatory. Neither Allah nor His Messenger have made obligatory to follow the school of thought (madhhab) of any person from the ummah and to follow him alone in the Religion. The best generations passed by without anyone doing this. Inded the common person cannot have a madhhab, even if he thinks that he does, since the common person has no madhhab at all. This is because the madhhab will be either for the one who is able to research to a certain level and understand evidence and also know about the other madhhabs or for the one who has read a book concerning the details of that madhhab and knows the ruling and saying of his Imaam.


As for the one who is unable to do any of thatbut merely says, 'I am a Shaafi'ee...or 'I am Hanbalee...etc'., then he does not become that just by saying so, just as would be the case if he said 'I am religious scholar...' or 'I am a scholar of grammar...' then does he become that just by saying so. This is futher clarified by the fact that the one who says 'I am shaafi'ee... or a Maalikee...or a Hanafee...' claiming that he follows that Imaam and his way, would only be truthful if he were to follow his way in acquing knolwedge, understanding and extraction of proof. As for this one, with his ignorance and being far from the manners of the Imaam and his knolwedge and way, how can it be correct for him to ascribe himself to him except with mere claims and empty words having no meaning?! How can the common person have a madhhab? Even if it could be imagined it would still not be obligatory upon him or anyone else to ever have to follow the madhhab of a certain amn from the ummah, to the extent that he accepts all his saying and rejects everyone else's sayings.

This is a filthy innovation introuduced tinto the ummah.

No scholar of Islaam has ever said this and they are higher in station and better knowing about Allah than to order the people about this. Even futher from the truth is the saying of those who say that he must stick to the madhhab of a single scholar and futher still from the truth is the one whp says, he must follow one of the four madhhabs! O Allah, how strange!


(Is it that) the madhhabs of the Campanions of Allah's Messneger (pbuh) have died out and those of the taabi'een and those who came after them and those of the rest of the scholars of Islaam and all have invalidated except for the madhhabs of four men only from amongest all the rest of the scholars and Imaams?!



Rather, that which Allah, the Most High, and His Messenger made obligatory upon the Companions, the taabi'een and those who came after them is the same as that which He made obligatory upon those after them util the Day of Resurrection. That which is obligatory does not vary or change, even though how it is achieved may vary or the amount which is obligatory may vary due to varying ability or inability, time, place and condition, but that also follows what Allah and His Messenger have obligated.

Those who say that it is correct for the common person to have a madhhab claim, 'Because he believes that the madhhab which he ascribes himself to is the truth, therefore, he must be sincere to his belief.' If this saying of theirs were true then it would mean that it is forbidden to seek a ruling from anyone other than the people of his own madhhab and likewise thats it is forbidden to take the madhhab of anyone equal or greater than than his own Imaam and would mean other things which all show the falsity of the beleif in the first place. Indeed it would mean that if he saw a text from Alalh's Messenger or a saying from the four Caliphs with other than his own Imaam, he would have to abandon the text and the sayings of the Compainions and give precedence to the saying of his own Imaam.


Rather, he should seek from whom he wishes from the followers of the four madhhabs and others besides them. It is not obligatory upon him or upon the one who delievers verdicts (muftee) to limit himself to one of the four Imaams. Upon this is the consensus of the ummah, just as it is not obligatory upon the scholar to restrict himself to the hadeeths reported by the people of his land or any land in particlular, rather, if any hadeeth is authentic it is obligatory to act upon it, (*) whether it is reported of the people of the Hijaaz, 'Iraaq, Shaam, Egypt or Yeme." (**)
.................................................. .................................................

(*) Aboo Haneefah said, "When I say something contradicting the Book of Allah, the Exalted, or what is narrated from the Messenger, then ignore my saying," al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p.50), tracing it to Imaam Muhammad and then saying, "This does not aplly to the mujtahid, for he is not bound to their view anyway, but it applies to blind-following." Imaam Maalik said, "Truly I am only a mortal. I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes). Therefore, look inot my opinions, all that agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, accept it. And all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, ignore it," Ibn 'Abdul-Barr in Jaami' Bayaanal-Ilm (2/32). Imaam ash-Shaafi'ee said, "The sunnahs of the Messenger of Allah reach, as well as escape from, everyone of us. So whnever I voice my opinion or formulate a principle, where something contrary to my view exists on the authority of the Messnger of Allah, then the correct view is what the Messenger of Allah has said- and it is my view," related by Haakim with a continuous chain of narration to Shaafi'ee, as in Taareekh Dimashq of Ibn 'Asaakir (15/1/3), I'laamul-Muwaqqi'een (2/363, 364). And he also said "The Muslim are unanimously agree that if a sunnah of the Messenger of Allah os made clear to someone, it is not permitted for him to leave it for the saying on anyone else." Ibn al-Qayyim (2/361) and Fulaani (p.68). Imaam Ahmad said, "The opinion of Awaa'ee, the opinion of Maalik, the opinion of Aboo Haneefah- all of it is opinion, and it is all equal in my eyes. However, the proof is in the narrations (from the Prophet and his Companions)," Ibn 'Abul-Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'ilm (2/149).


(**) I'laamul-Mwwaqqi'een (4/261).

[iqbal_soofi]

If you're a muslim, then i'm sure you accept what the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) said.


He (peace be upon him) said:

"Indeed those from before you from the People of the Book divided into seventy-two groups. And, indeed, this group (Muslims) will divide into seventy-three. Seventy-two groups will be in the Hellfire and one of them will be in Paradise. And it is the Jamaa'ah (group)." 3

And in another narration, he said: "Everyone of them in the Hellfire, except for one group that which I and my companions are upon." 4


So remember that we follow his way, and the way of his companions. As Allaah has stated in the Qur'an that He is pleased with certain companions (i.e. those who were in the treaty of Hudaibia) and in the sunnah of those who fought in Badr.

This is not the answer to my question which you quoted for your quote. Your post is nowhere near to that. I don't know why you quoted me. Maybe you made a mistake.

[iqbal_soofi]

:sl:

I copied this Chapter from the Book called "The Path to Guddance ny Imaam Ibn Al-Qayyim Al-Jawziyyah"

Chapter Eleven

Ibn Al-Qayyim on follwoing a School of though (Madhhab)

Ibn Al-Qayyaim said: "Does the common person have to follwo one of the well known madhhabs or not? There are two sayings regarding this:


Thats it is not obligatory upon him and this is what is correct and definite since there is nothing obligatory except what Allah, the Most High, and His Messenger have made obligatory. Neither Allah nor His Messenger have made obligatory to follow the school of thought (madhhab) of any person from the ummah and to follow him alone in the Religion. The best generations passed by without anyone doing this. Inded the common person cannot have a madhhab, even if he thinks that he does, since the common person has no madhhab at all. This is because the madhhab will be either for the one who is able to research to a certain level and understand evidence and also know about the other madhhabs or for the one who has read a book concerning the details of that madhhab and knows the ruling and saying of his Imaam.


As for the one who is unable to do any of thatbut merely says, 'I am a Shaafi'ee...or 'I am Hanbalee...etc'., then he does not become that just by saying so, just as would be the case if he said 'I am religious scholar...' or 'I am a scholar of grammar...' then does he become that just by saying so. This is futher clarified by the fact that the one who says 'I am shaafi'ee... or a Maalikee...or a Hanafee...' claiming that he follows that Imaam and his way, would only be truthful if he were to follow his way in acquing knolwedge, understanding and extraction of proof. As for this one, with his ignorance and being far from the manners of the Imaam and his knolwedge and way, how can it be correct for him to ascribe himself to him except with mere claims and empty words having no meaning?! How can the common person have a madhhab? Even if it could be imagined it would still not be obligatory upon him or anyone else to ever have to follow the madhhab of a certain amn from the ummah, to the extent that he accepts all his saying and rejects everyone else's sayings.

This is a filthy innovation introuduced tinto the ummah.

No scholar of Islaam has ever said this and they are higher in station and better knowing about Allah than to order the people about this. Even futher from the truth is the saying of those who say that he must stick to the madhhab of a single scholar and futher still from the truth is the one whp says, he must follow one of the four madhhabs! O Allah, how strange!


(Is it that) the madhhabs of the Campanions of Allah's Messneger (pbuh) have died out and those of the taabi'een and those who came after them and those of the rest of the scholars of Islaam and all have invalidated except for the madhhabs of four men only from amongest all the rest of the scholars and Imaams?!



Rather, that which Allah, the Most High, and His Messenger made obligatory upon the Companions, the taabi'een and those who came after them is the same as that which He made obligatory upon those after them util the Day of Resurrection. That which is obligatory does not vary or change, even though how it is achieved may vary or the amount which is obligatory may vary due to varying ability or inability, time, place and condition, but that also follows what Allah and His Messenger have obligated.

Those who say that it is correct for the common person to have a madhhab claim, 'Because he believes that the madhhab which he ascribes himself to is the truth, therefore, he must be sincere to his belief.' If this saying of theirs were true then it would mean that it is forbidden to seek a ruling from anyone other than the people of his own madhhab and likewise thats it is forbidden to take the madhhab of anyone equal or greater than than his own Imaam and would mean other things which all show the falsity of the beleif in the first place. Indeed it would mean that if he saw a text from Alalh's Messenger or a saying from the four Caliphs with other than his own Imaam, he would have to abandon the text and the sayings of the Compainions and give precedence to the saying of his own Imaam.


Rather, he should seek from whom he wishes from the followers of the four madhhabs and others besides them. It is not obligatory upon him or upon the one who delievers verdicts (muftee) to limit himself to one of the four Imaams. Upon this is the consensus of the ummah, just as it is not obligatory upon the scholar to restrict himself to the hadeeths reported by the people of his land or any land in particlular, rather, if any hadeeth is authentic it is obligatory to act upon it, (*) whether it is reported of the people of the Hijaaz, 'Iraaq, Shaam, Egypt or Yeme." (**)
.................................................. .................................................

The question is why there was a need to create so many madhabs, sects or schools of thought? When you could find answer to every question from Quran, then why one has to develop a different kind of thought and make people follow him. Who creates a new madhabs? I mean is it only the relgious scholars in whose names some maslaks are made famous or there are some classes whose vested interests are protected by new schools of thoughts? For example we know about one of the new schools of thought which was created and promoted to protects the interests of a royal family.

[FBI]

:sl:

When you could find answer to every question from Quran

But the Quran doesn't answer every single question relating to islam, thats what the role of the prophet was for people to ask him and he would give them rulings and this is how sahih hadith were formed.

[Umm Yoosuf]

:sl:

Firstly, the article i posted was not in reference to your orginal question

Secondly, as foru sayings here:

The question is why there was a need to create so many madhabs, sects or schools of thought?

Who said there was a need to create sect etc? Do you understand what a madhhab is?

Do you reject the hadith of the Prophet peace be upon him?

"Indeed those from before you from the People of the Book divided into seventy-two groups. And, indeed, this group (Muslims) will divide into seventy-three. Seventy-two groups will be in the Hellfire and one of them will be in Paradise. And it is the Jamaa'ah (group)."

When you could find answer to every question from Quran, then why one has to develop a different kind of thought and make people follow him.

Quran and hadiths go hand in hand. Who developed different kind of thought and following?

Who creates a new madhabs? I mean is it only the relgious scholars in whose names some maslaks are made famous or there are some classes whose vested interests are protected by new schools of thoughts? For example we know about one of the new schools of thought which was created and promoted to protects the interests of a royal family.

I don't know what your understanding of the scholars of Islam are but the ones that follow Islam according to Quran and Sunnah do not add or take awat anything, rather they've studied the deen (Islam) for years and are educating the people, following that which Allah revealed to His Messenger Muhammad peace be upon, and His Salaaf, may Alalh be pleased with them. It is compulsory upon us (layman) to ask the people of knowledge as Allaah says,

“So ask the people of the Reminder if you do not know.” - Al-Anbiyah (21):7

And in another verse He says,

“So ask of those who know the Scripture, if you know not. With clear signs and Books (We sent the Messengers).” - An Nahl (16):43-44

[AbuAbdallah]

The question is why there was a need to create so many madhabs, sects or schools of thought? When you could find answer to every question from Quran, then why one has to develop a different kind of thought and make people follow him. Who creates a new madhabs? I mean is it only the relgious scholars in whose names some maslaks are made famous or there are some classes whose vested interests are protected by new schools of thoughts? For example we know about one of the new schools of thought which was created and promoted to protects the interests of a royal family.

salaam,
Let me first make it clear that madhabs are not sects, they are a part of ahlusunnah wal jamaah. The madhabs don't differ in terms of aqeedah, but they differ in terms of fiqh. The Imams would make a ruling about an issue based on the proof they had from the sunnah at the time, and by using their own ijtihad.
A madhab is created when someone who is very knowledgble has devoted students to carry on their rulings and works.
I am not sure about your reference to the madhab for a royal family.

And Allah Knows Best.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl:

Nobdoy says they were wrong? Did someone say so? Do you mean to say there's no single specific way in Quran or Hadith for choosing a khalifa?

Their acts were still within the bounds of Sharia', therefore even though their methods in appointing the next Khalif was different, it was still within the same straight path. Remember the narration where the Messenger commanded us to follow their Sunnah as well.

There're many paths to reach the same destination and all of them straight.

There is only one straight path, and that was the path that the Messenger and his Companions were upon.

10: 32 ...So after the truth, what else can there be, save error?...

The messenger of Allah drew a straight line to show that there can only be one path which is straight. Now you tell us that all 4 differnt paths were straight. Man you're just confusing.

Those 4 paths were within this one 'path'. You do know that the Scholars for example have defined Sirat Al Mustaqim in many ways. Some have said it is the Qur'an, some have said it is Abu Bakr, some have said it is the Sunnah. Were they contradicting one another? No. All of it is part of the Sirat Al Mustaqim.

The question is why there was a need to create so many madhabs, sects or schools of thought?

There is a difference between a sect and a Madhab. Sects were formed when the people deviated from the path of the Salaf. Madhabs are something completely different.

When you could find answer to every question from Quran, then why one has to develop a different kind of thought and make people follow him. Who creates a new madhabs?

Akhi, it seems you don't understand what a Madhab is. Let me explain.

A madhab is a 'machine' per say. The Scholars of the Madhab take the 'ingredients', the foundations of Usul ul Fiqh - the Qur'an, the Sunnah, Ijma' and Qiyas and they put these four things into the 'machine' to derive a ruling. The reason for the four different Madahib is because the four Imams differed on the amount they took from the 4 'ingredients'. For example, Imam Ahmad would take a Hadith even if it was weak over Qiyas. Imam Malik considered the Ijma' of the people of Madinah as a proof. Therefore, there is nothing wrong within the Madahib themselves, because due to the work of the scholars from the Madahib we have our rulings made for us. If someone were to reject them and start all over, they would do fail and at the least do a very poor job. Remember, there can be differences in Fiqh and that is all that distinguishes one madhab from the other, but there can be no differences in Aqidah.

The problem arises when people claim loyalty to one Madahib and fall into Taqlid.

I mean is it only the relgious scholars in whose names some maslaks are made famous or there are some classes whose vested interests are protected by new schools of thoughts?

I think the only Madahib that are agreed upon are the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafiee, and Hanbali. A common misconception is that 'salafi' is a new Madhab. That is no more than a lie.

For example we know about one of the new schools of thought which was created and promoted to protects the interests of a royal family.

Ah so this is the reason for this thread. You are saying that W-ism and Salafism is a Madhab? Then you are indeed very mistaken. Salafi does not equal La Madhabi. Salafism is a movement that has remained around the ages, because a salafi is no more than a person who follows the way of the Salaf. And there are no people who call themselves 'wa habbi'. I ask you to read my previous post.

[Khalid1402]

:salamext:

I think it is okay to decide not to follow a madhab although it may be good to follow one, as it can help you to find clear guidance different situations in which many of the rulings may appeal to you. All four madhab schools are good, none all better than the others, and I have seen that some people tend to follow one madhab for most matters, but they may follow a different madhab in other aspects in when they find the ruling to be more compatible to them than the ruling of their own madhab.

May Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala guide us on the Straight Path.

[snakelegs]

The problem arises when people claim loyalty to one Madahib and fall into Taqlid.
I think the only Madahib that are agreed upon are the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafiee, and Hanbali.

some questions:
i thought you were supposed to stay within a mazhab to avoid choosing rulings that are more convenient for you?
about avoiding taqlid - does this apply to individuals to only to scholars?
the 4 you named above are the only ones i've ever heard of - are there others?
are mazhabs considered "sects" or merely different schools of jurisprudence?
thanks.

[NoName55]

:sl:

"There is no harm in following any of the Imams when it comes to rules of fiqh"

Even when a question is answered properly some folk just don't get it because they don't come here to learn but to teach.

Any sane person would think that there is nothin wrong with following one of the Madhahib or all four where they (Madhahib) agree with Quraan and Sunnah of Muhammad ﷺ (if you have the capacity to memorise the Quraan with meaning/in cotext, not just be a haafiz)

Ma'asalaama

================================================== ====

REGARDING BLIND FOLLOWING OF THE MADHABS

Linguistically, taqleed means: Placing something around the neck, which encircles the neck. Technically it means: Following he whose sayings is not a proof (hujjah).

So long as a Muslim is following the correct evidence (daleel) and has the desire to follow the Sunnah properly, there is no harm in following any of the Imams when it comes to rules of fiqh. In the case of the ordinary Muslim (who is not educated in fiqh), his madhhab (school of thought) is that of the mufti whose knowledge he trusts. But problems of the worst type occur when people become fanatically devoted to one particular Imam or Madhhab, to the extent that they reject the truth or ignore other sound evidence because of this.

Allaah warns against rejecting the word of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) (interpretation of the meaning): “… And let those who oppose the Messenger’s commandment (i.e., his Sunnah) (among the sects) beware, lest some fitnah (disbelief, trials, afflictions, etc.) befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on them.” [al-Noor 24:63]

"Indeed the people of Truth and the Sunnah do not follow anyone [unconditionally] except the messenger of Allaah SAW, the one who does not speak from his desires - it is only revelation revealed to him."

Blind Following (Part -1) (English) By Shaykh Yahya Silmy As-Saylani

Blind Following (Part -2) (English) By Shaykh Yahya Silmy As-Saylani

Salafi Dawah
Misplaced Loyalty
WHAT IS TAQLEED?
Quotes From the SALAF
what is related from the salaf?
THE SACRED SALAFEE METHODOLOGY
The Madhhab of the People of Hadeeth
The Prohibited and Permissible Forms of Taqleed
Who are Salaf? and what the scholars say about a Salafi?
Questions and Answers Concerning ad-Da‘watus- Salafiyyah
The Salaf and their Position Towards The People of Innovations & Desires
imaam shaa'fee (rahimahullaah)
imaam abu haneefah (rahimahullaah)
imaam maalik ibn anas (rahimahullaah)
imaam ahmed ibn hanbal (rahimahullaah)
Using of Dhikr bead, or subhah while reciting Tasbiyyah.
The Basis of Islaam is to Act upon the Book and the Sunnah
DISCOVERED: THE PROPHET'S PRAYER IN HANAFI BOOKS OF FIQH!
Guidelines for Following Madhhabs
Questions and Answers Concerning Manhaj
The Ruling Concerning Multiple Groups and Parties
FATAAWAA OF MAJOR COMMITTEE OF SCHOLARS ON TAQLEED AND MADHHABS
Which Group?

I am hoping this post will no be deleted. Wa Allah Aalim

[MinAhlilHadeeth]

i know there is nothing wrong with following a mazhab - and in fact, it is encouraged - but is it necessary to?

Hi

There is nothing wrong with following a madhab, but what is wrong is to blindly follow a madhab. And that means to take that as your only source of information, and reject any other opinions even when you feel the other opinion is stronger. However, we need to be taking our fataawa from a reliable scholar of our time, as we are not knowledgable enough to make our own fataawah - as Fi_Sabilillah said.

[iqbal_soofi]

Hi

There is nothing wrong with following a madhab, but what is wrong is to blindly follow a madhab. And that means to take that as your only source of information, and reject any other opinions even when you feel the other opinion is stronger. However, we need to be taking our fataawa from a reliable scholar of our time, as we are not knowledgable enough to make our own fataawah - as Fi_Sabilillah said.

You said it right. there's nothing wrong to follow a madhab and the best thing you said is that following any madhab blindly is wrong

Now this is the wrong trend which is going on everywhere. Every Muslim has to follow his madhab blindly. A Muslim cannot open his eyes while following the madhab. A Muslim cannot question whatever the religious scholars of one's particular madhab say about Islam. Any one who points out a single mistake in the religious scholars statements (that keep changing from time to time for the vested interests) is made to shut up and given a lot of anti Islam titles. The religious scholars of all the madhabs are always right although they disagree with each others on almost every issue regarding Islam. Each of them can prove all other religious scholars are wrong. This is our dilema that we've to accept all these wrongs as right. Only wrong we can call is the person who doesn't submit to follow them blindly.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

some questions:
i thought you were supposed to stay within a mazhab to avoid choosing rulings that are more convenient for you?

The layman has no madhab, in the sense that his madhab is the madhab of the scholar who he asks the jurisprudence questions. To follow a madhab, and say I am from a Madhab, the individual needs a certain amount of knowledge that would enable him to research the opinions etc. This was clarified in the post by Sister Al Muminah:

This is because the madhhab will be either for the one who is able to research to a certain level and understand evidence and also know about the other madhhabs or for the one who has read a book concerning the details of that madhhab and knows the ruling and saying of his Imaam.

about avoiding taqlid - does this apply to individuals to only to scholars?

It applies to both, though the laymen are the ones that usually fall into more often.

the 4 you named above are the only ones i've ever heard of - are there others?

There are others, but their students didn't survive enough for them to be on the level of those four. For example, Al Awza'ee was at the level of the 4 Imams and some say higher then some of them, but his school did not survive because of the lack of students and other factors.

are mazhabs considered "sects" or merely different schools of jurisprudence?
thanks.

Just different schools of Jurisprudence.

[Mawaddah]

You said it right. there's nothing wrong to follow a madhab and the best thing you said is that following any madhab blindly is wrong

Now this is the wrong trend which is going on everywhere. Every Muslim has to follow his madhab blindly. A Muslim cannot open his eyes while following the madhab. A Muslim cannot question whatever the religious scholars of one's particular madhab say about Islam. Any one who points out a single mistake in the religious scholars statements (that keep changing from time to time for the vested interests) is made to shut up and given a lot of anti Islam titles. The religious scholars of all the madhabs are always right although they disagree with each others on almost every issue regarding Islam. Each of them can prove all other religious scholars are wrong. This is our dilema that we've to accept all these wrongs as right. Only wrong we can call is the person who doesn't submit to follow them blindly.

:sl:

Like someone mentioned before, All of the scholars of the four Madhaahib do not differ in Aqidah, but they merely differ in Fiqh.
This differing was in existence from the time of the Sahaabah,but it did not effect their relationship and brotherhood in anyway.
What people need to realize is simply that there are different opinions regarding issues and that each opinion of each scholar is backed up with Proof and Daleel. So if you see someone practising something different according to what you are practising (in terms of Fiqh) then do not bash that person, for he may be following the opinion of a different scholar.

So Brother, as long as the Aqeedah is one, then there is no problem really.

[iqbal_soofi]

:sl:

Like someone mentioned before, All of the scholars of the four Madhaahib do not differ in Aqidah, but they merely differ in Fiqh.
This differing was in existence from the time of the Sahaabah,but it did not effect their relationship and brotherhood in anyway.
What people need to realize is simply that there are different opinions regarding issues and that each opinion of each scholar is backed up with Proof and Daleel. So if you see someone practising something different according to what you are practising (in terms of Fiqh) then do not bash that person, for he may be following the opinion of a different scholar.

So Brother, as long as the Aqeedah is one, then there is no problem really.

You said almost the same thing, which I said. You only took a different parth to make your statement, which could be said straightforward, in simple words. The simple conclusion of both of these statments is that we as a common Muslims have to follow any one of the madhab blindly.

So we both disagree with Umm 'Abdullah who thinks that a madhab could be followed with open eyes and not just blindly. Yes you can open your eyes to the extent that you could see only your religious scholars who are leading (misleading) your madhab. You are never allowed to see or say that your religious scholars are misleading. You cannot even think of it. You must agree completely to whatever they say today. (Forget about their statements of yesterday if those are in contradiction to today's statements. Never even mention those otherwise you'd be declared a kafir or a disbeliever acoording to the regulations of the madhabs and their discussion forums). The regulation of every madhab and aqeeda are the almost the same. One of the most imprtant rules of every aqeeda is that you're not a true believer if you don't agree that whatever the religious scholars of your madhab say is 100% right and whatever the religious scholars of other madahbs or aqeeda say is 100% wrong.

[AbuAbdallah]

salaam,

The simple conclusion of both of these statments is that we as a common Muslims have to follow any one or the madhab blindly.

This statement is incorrect.

Yes you can open your eyes to the extent that you could see only your religious scholars who are leading (misleading) your madhab.

I am not sure who you are talking about, but you seem to have had some bad experiences with some scholars.

One of the most imprtant rules of every aqeeda is that you're not a true believer if you don't agree that whatever the religious scholars of your madhab say is 100% right and whatever the religious scholars of other madahbs or aqeeda say is 100% wrong.

I think you need clarification in what Aqeedah is, as well as the difference between a madhab and a sect as they are not interchangeable.

[Mawaddah]

You said almost the same thing, which I said. You only took a different parth to make your statement, which could be said straightforward, in simple words. The simple conclusion of both of these statments is that we as a common Muslims have to follow any one of the madhab blindly.

Not Blindly Akhi, but for the common layman who does not know much about research and such, will he not just adhere to one particular opinion? It's not 'blindly' but because he is not capable of going into lengthy research.

So we both disagree with Umm 'Abdullah who thinks that a madhab could be followed with open eyes and not just blindly. Yes you can open your eyes to the extent that you could see only your religious scholars who are leading (misleading) your madhab. You are never allowed to see or say that your religious scholars are misleading. You cannot even think of it. You must agree completely to whatever they say today. (Forget about their statements of yesterday if those are in contradiction to today's statements. Never even mention those otherwise you'd be declared a kafir or a disbeliever acoording to the regulations of the madhabs and their discussion forums). The regulation of every madhab and aqeeda are the almost the same. One of the most imprtant rules of every aqeeda is that you're not a true believer if you don't agree that whatever the religious scholars of your madhab say is 100% right and whatever the religious scholars of other madahbs or aqeeda say is 100% wrong.

Wrong.

I think it has been repeated a couple times in this thread that there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with the Imaam of such and such a madhab and following the opinion of another.

In fact there were a few Imaams of the past who were followers of a madhab, but at times they differed openly with the Imaams of those Madhabs.

And no, we do not just say yes and agree to whatever the scholars are saying, regardless of whether it is wrong or right, because if we do so that would be taqleed. You see, there's a difference between being from a madhab and taqleed. Taqleed is the blind following which you are referring to when you say that a person cannot differ from the Imaam in any way, and that's Haram.

Again, you're confusing Aqeedah and Madhab

[Umm Yoosuf]

:sl:

One is NOT to blind follow them, in fact they themselves said:

Aboo Haneefah said, "When I say something contradicting the Book of Allah, the Exalted, or what is narrated from the Messenger, then ignore my saying," al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p.50), tracing it to Imaam Muhammad and then saying, "This does not aplly to the mujtahid, for he is not bound to their view anyway, but it applies to blind-following."


Imaam Maalik said, "Truly I am only a mortal. I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes). Therefore, look inot my opinions, all that agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, accept it. And all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, ignore it," Ibn 'Abdul-Barr in Jaami' Bayaanal-Ilm (2/32).

Imaam ash-Shaafi'ee said, "The sunnahs of the Messenger of Allah reach, as well as escape from, everyone of us. So whnever I voice my opinion or formulate a principle, where something contrary to my view exists on the authority of the Messnger of Allah, then the correct view is what the Messenger of Allah has said- and it is my view," related by Haakim with a continuous chain of narration to Shaafi'ee, as in Taareekh Dimashq of Ibn 'Asaakir (15/1/3), I'laamul-Muwaqqi'een (2/363, 364). And he also said "The Muslim are unanimously agree that if a sunnah of the Messenger of Allah os made clear to someone, it is not permitted for him to leave it for the saying on anyone else." Ibn al-Qayyim (2/361) and Fulaani (p.68).


Imaam Ahmad said, "The opinion of Awaa'ee, the opinion of Maalik, the opinion of Aboo Haneefah- all of it is opinion, and it is all equal in my eyes. However, the proof is in the narrations (from the Prophet and his Companions)," Ibn 'Abul-Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'ilm (2/149).

[snakelegs]

thanks for all your responses. i've learned a lot about mazhabs in this thread. i've wanted to start a thread on mazhabs but was afraid it might be viewed as sectarian, even tho i didn't think the mazhabs were viewed as sects.
so it seems mainly an issue of balance and common sense.
you must have a balance as an individual muslim. you are not to do as you jolly well please or what is convenient for you - but at the same time, you are also supposed to think for yourself and question.
the differences between the mazhabs rulings are usually not on matters of major consequence anyway - is that right?
so it is recommended but not mandatory to follow a mazhab, but use your head.
this is good because as noname55 said "problems of the worst type occur when people become fanatically devoted to one particular Imam or Madhhab, to the extent that they reject the truth or ignore other sound evidence because of this."
by the way noname, i found your linguistic explantion of "taqleed" intersting too.
correct me if i'm wrong on my take of all this.

[SirZubair]

Madhabs are schools of thought, and there's nothing wrong with following them because we're not knowlegable enough to extract our own rulings from the Qur'an and authentic Sunnah. [i.e. we don't know the context of the hadith etc.] We know that even some of the pious predecessors before us would follow a school of thought. However, if someone was to bring us some Authentic ahadith which contradict what we are doing, then we should ask a trustworthy scholar who is of our time so we understand which is the more correct opinion. And Allaah knows best.


Regards.

Just want to add abit to that..

..the trustworthy scholar should be one who has the Ijaza to teach Islam. Not just any Scholar. Because, as many of us know, there are many many 'scholars' out there these days, but not many with an Ijaza.

[SirZubair]

The question is why there was a need to create so many madhabs, sects or schools of thought? When you could find answer to every question from Quran, then why one has to develop a different kind of thought and make people follow him.

Can you REALLY say that you can pick up the Qur'an ( Arabic OR English version ), read it, and make sense out of EVERY VERSE of the Qur'an?

I doubt it.

Do you have the time, ability, intellect to STUDY the Qur'an inside out, Day and Night for decades?

I Doubt it.

Do you have the ability to read thru all the Sahih Hadiths and come to conclusions on what is wrong and what is right?

I Doubt it.

Hadiths are not just Sayings that the Prophet ( saw ) threw around left right and centre, they are all connected in one way or another.Do you have the ability to read thru THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of Hadiths and link them all together?

I doubt it.

Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi'i, Imam Hanbal did so.

salaam,

I don't think it is necessary at all to follow a madhab. I think someone should just follow scholars that they trust instead of always wondering "what did Abu Hanifa say about this, or say about that." We should focus more on what the Prophet (SAW) said, and how the majority of the scholars understood it, not just sticking to one Imam your whole life, because at the end of the day they are only human.

And Allah Knows Best.

Check out this website :

The Legal Status Of Following A Madhab

should we all become soofi?

'Sufi' is not a Sect. 'Sufism' is a method of self-purification.

[NoName55]

Whoever Practises Tasawwuf Without Learning Sacred Law Corrupts His Faith, While He Who Learns Sacred Law Without Practising Tasawwuf Corrupts Himself. Only he Who Combines The 2 Pulls Through - Imam Malik.

For the life of me, I can't find this saying in any of my books. Please, could someone give me the name of the book and page number.

Thank you kindly

[SirZubair]

Every Muslim has to follow his madhab blindly

Says who? You? Why should we blindly take your word for it.. :blind:

A Muslim cannot question whatever the religious scholars of one's particular madhab say about Islam

Simply because they had more knowledge than you, i, and millions of muslims put Together will never possess in this lifetime.

The religious scholars of all the madhabs are always right although they disagree with each others on almost every issue regarding Islam.

They've learned to agree to disagree. You should do the same. There is no 'right' and no 'wrong', there are different rulings according to different scholars. Read the link i've provided which explains how madhabs work before you carry on with your rubbish please. You are speaking out of Ignorance over and over, and its getting boring.

Each of them can prove all other religious scholars are wrong.

Show me a Fatwa which has been issued by a Well Known Scholar ( who has an Ijaza ) in which he has dissed the rulings of another madhab. If you are unable to do so, stop making such stupid claims.

This is our dilema that we've to accept all these wrongs as right. Only wrong we can call is the person who doesn't submit to follow them blindly.

I feel for you... theres a tear in my eye which is especially reserved for you..
..not.

Get over it, and go out there and gain some knowledge on topics you wish to 'preach' others on.

[AbuAbdallah]

'Sufi' is not a Sect. 'Sufism' is a method of self-purification.

salaam,
According to the translation of the word that statement is correct. However, there is a difference from the earlier scholars who practiced sufism and the later scholars who have practiced it.

Here is an article about it.

[FBI]

:sl:

Brothers chill out and debate with some adaab please!

[Talha777]

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

I love the following hadith:

حدثنا عبد السلام بن مطهر قال حدثنا عمر بن علي عن معن بن محمد الغفاري عن سعيد بن أبي سعيد المقبري عن أبي هريرة عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال إن الدين يسر ولن يشاد الدين أحد إلا غلبه فسددوا وقاربوا وأبشروا واستعينوا بالغدوة والروحة وشيء من الدلجة

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet (salallahu alaihi wa salam) said, "Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So you should not be extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded; and gain strength by worshipping in the mornings, the nights."
(Sahih al-Bukhari; Kitab-ul-Iman)

I think the message is that Islam is an easy religion, just stick to Holy Quran and Sunnat and there is no need for taqlid.

[snakelegs]

from my reading it is my understanding that:
the 4 mazhabs are not competing or fighting with each other and they agree on the really important things. their differences are over minor points.
are there pious sunnis who realize the importance of hadees but don't follow any mazhabs and if so, are wrong?
thanks.

[Khalid1402]

Jazak Allah khair sister, very well put.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

from my reading it is my understanding that:
the 4 mazhabs are not competing or fighting with each other and they agree on the really important things. their differences are over minor points.

Yes. There is no difference in matters of belief. There are only differences of opinion in jurisprudence issues.

are there pious sunnis who realize the importance of hadees but don't follow any mazhabs and if so, are wrong?
thanks.

This question has two parts.

Firstly, the layman has no madhab, 'his madhab' is the madhab of the scholar who he reffers to for rulings because the scholar has the understanding of the procedure to extract rulings whilst the layman does not. And this remains the case until he is able to extract his own rulings.

Indeed the common person cannot have a madhhab, even if he thinks that he does, since the common person has no madhhab at all. This is because the madhhab will be either for the one who is able to research to a certain level and understand evidence and also know about the other madhhabs or for the one who has read a book concerning the details of that madhhab and knows the ruling and saying of his Imaam.

This is futher clarified by the fact that the one who says 'I am shaafi'ee... or a Maalikee...or a Hanafee...' claiming that he follows that Imaam and his way, would only be truthful if he were to follow his way in acquing knolwedge, understanding and extraction of proof. As for this one, with his ignorance and being far from the manners of the Imaam and his knolwedge and way, how can it be correct for him to ascribe himself to him except with mere claims and empty words having no meaning?! How can the common person have a madhhab?

The second part is whether a person rejects the Madahib completely and refuses to follow them. That is foolish because when he turns to a scholar and asks for a ruling, he will be given a response based on of the Madhabs. And this person fails to realize that if we were to reject the opinions of these Imams, and start trying to derive rulings all over again today, we would fail or do an extremely poor job. Though following a Madhab is not obligatory, it is something which is beneficial for the layman because he can get a valid opinion without needing to refer to everything himself. As for the scholars, they can and are able tp learn the opinions of the different Madahib and then it is upon them to follow the strongest opinion - the one which has the most evidence to support it.

[iqbal_soofi]

salaam,

This statement is incorrect.



I am not sure who you are talking about, but you seem to have had some bad experiences with some scholars.


I think you need clarification in what Aqeedah is, as well as the difference between a madhab and a sect as they are not interchangeable.

1. You commented my statements are wrong. So what's right?

Should we follow them blindly whatever the religious scholars tell us; or

2. Should we question them when we find their two statements opposite to each other on the same issue? Afterall one of the 2 opposite staments has to wrong.

[snakelegs]

thanks, Al Madani.
i understand it much better now.

[Skillganon]

:sl:

I know that madhab arised mainly during different time (correct me if I am wrong,

1. Is not the differernce of opinion due to what has reached (Hadith) the 4 madhabs. For example if something has not reached me, I cannot base my Judgement on it, and I might base my Judgment on something specific to A, by analogy of something that has reached me(Hadith) that is specific to B?

Am I correct?

So, when something has reached you (authenticated hadith) that is more specific to A, than one must base your Judgement on that, as this is more clear?

Thanks in advance for response.

:w:

[iqbal_soofi]

:sl:

I know that madhab arised mainly during different time (correct me if I am wrong,

1. Is not the differernce of opinion due to what has reached (Hadith) the 4 madhabs. For example if something has not reached me, I cannot base my Judgement on it, and I might base my Judgment on something specific to A, by analogy of something that has reached me(Hadith) that is specific to B?

Am I correct?

So, when something has reached you (authenticated hadith) that is more specific to A, than one must base your Judgement on that, as this is more clear?

Thanks in advance for response.

:w:

You're right to some extent. But the first two major sects were created due to a difference of opion about Islam. One group wanted to make opinion based on Quran; whereas the other one from Quran and Sunnah both.

[snakelegs]

You're right to some extent. But the first two major sects were created due to a difference of opion about Islam. One group wanted to make opinion based on Quran; whereas the other one from Quran and Sunnah both.

which madhab wanted to best all their decisions on the qur'an alone and do they still take that position? are you talking about madhabs or sects?

[iqbal_soofi]

which mazhab wanted to best all their decisions on the qur'an alone and do they still take that position? are you talking about mazhabs or sects?

This is a sect. The 2nd largest group in Muslims. I don't want to go into details because it might flare up a secterian debate which is against the rules of this forum.

[SirZubair]

This is a sect. The 2nd largest group in Muslims. I don't want to go into details because it might flare up a secterian debate which is against the rules of this forum.

You are not making any sense akhi, you're confusing everyone.

Please explain yourself.

If you are unable to do so, then stop posting in this thread, because no-one is getting anywhere.

[AbuAbdallah]

salaam,
I am starting to feel like this is going nowhere.:enough!:

[snakelegs]

This is a sect. The 2nd largest group in Muslims. I don't want to go into details because it might flare up a secterian debate which is against the rules of this forum.

oh, ok. you're not talking about one of the 4 madhabs of jurisprudence.
you're right - we can't talk about sects, but madhabs are not considered a sect.

[Skillganon]

salaam,
I am starting to feel like this is going nowhere.:enough!:

Why? :?

I understand what is a madhab and what is a sect. Their is a big difference between the two.

[SirZubair]

Why? :?

Because....
.. the starter of the thread realises that he isn't allowed to talk about sects, and he is trying to have a go at a sect while not directly talking about it, but at the same time, he is making an attempt to talk about it...

... he is as confused as the thread itself.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl:

I know that madhab arised mainly during different time (correct me if I am wrong,

1. Is not the differernce of opinion due to what has reached (Hadith) the 4 madhabs. For example if something has not reached me, I cannot base my Judgement on it, and I might base my Judgment on something specific to A, by analogy of something that has reached me(Hadith) that is specific to B?

Am I correct?

So, when something has reached you (authenticated hadith) that is more specific to A, than one must base your Judgement on that, as this is more clear?

Thanks in advance for response.

:w:

:w:

The point to realize here is that, even if the respective Ulema (Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafiee, Ahmad) did not recieve a Hadith, then the scholars of their madahib, those that came after them, following their Madhab, definetly recieved it and going back to my analogy earlier of the 'machine', they inserted what they recieved into the 'machine' and if they felt the original opinion was still stronger, then there is no harm in that. This is because each of the 4 Imams differed on their taking from the foundations of Usul ul Fiqh (Qur'an, Hadith, Ijm'a and Qiyas) some preferred one over the other like Imam Ahmad preferred taking a weak hadith over making Qiyas etc.

[Skillganon]

:w:

The point to realize here is that, even if the respective Ulema (Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafiee, Ahmad) did not recieve a Hadith, then the scholars of their madahib, those that came after them, following their Madhab, definetly recieved it and going back to my analogy earlier of the 'machine', they inserted what they recieved into the 'machine' and if they felt the original opinion was still stronger, then there is no harm in that. This is because each of the 4 Imams differed on their taking from the foundations of Usul ul Fiqh (Qur'an, Hadith, Ijm'a and Qiyas) some preferred one over the other like Imam Ahmad preferred taking a weak hadith over making Qiyas etc.

JazakAllahkhair for that.

Next question:

Is it not correct to say that the opinion that has stronger evidence, whatever the madhab that comes from or the in some case individual (aslong as the individual is good and reliable) than does it not become obligatory to follow in that?

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

JazakAllahkhair for that.

Next question:

Is it not correct to say that the opinion that has stronger evidence, whatever the madhab that comes from or the in some case individual (aslong as the individual is good and reliable) than does it not become obligatory to follow in that?

But the layman does not have the knowledge nor the means to examine all the evidences, arguements, and opinions to judge which is more correct. This would apply to the scholars who have studied each of the Madahib to decide which is a stronger opinion after they have studied each opinion and its proofs and sometimes scholars can themselves differ over whether opinion A or opinion B is stronger. So if one scholar feels one opinion is strongest, another may consider another one to be stronger. The safest option for a layman is to simply ask a scholar he trusts and take his ruling on a matter, if the opinion is correct the scholar recieves two rewards, and if he erred, then he recieves one reward.

[Musalmaan]

:sl:

i thinks its the benficial discussion. may Allah make it truly beneficial.

one wrong thing that is repeated in few posts which needs to be corrected is that taqleed does not mean blind following, taqleed is ittiba (to follow), and technically on shari'i basis here it means to follow who are Allah's favored people.

Following the righteous ppl. will lead to path of jannah,
leaving them and choosing other way will eventually leads to destruction.

Every body is doing taqleed. matter of concern is whose taqleed are they doing?

The safest option for a layman is to simply ask a scholar he trusts and take his ruling on a matter, if the opinion is correct the scholar recieves two rewards, and if he erred, then he recieves one reward.

masha'Allah. that's correct. In any case the Muqallid and Scholar is majoor(rewarded).

but those who are Non-muqallids people, what rewards are the really earning???

are there pious sunnis who realize the importance of hadees but don't follow any mazhabs and if so, are wrong?
thanks.

In respect of Mujtahid, answer is YES, in respect of Layman answer is No.


For the layman the safest and the God-fearing(taqwah) way to follow the shariah of Muhammad Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam is to adopt a particular madhab out of 4 (usually the scholars of madhab that are easily accesible) and to do taqleed(ittiba) of the madhab and finally avoid the ignorant La madhabi people or those people who confuse or put waswasa onto other that you're salaah is like jewish or is not acceptable, incomplete etc etc, just avoid them and stick to madhab for every action and matter that is being defined, is defined by the Quran and Hadith and the jamaah(group) of the companions of prophet.

madhab is the good solution for contradicting and ijtihadi matter and are the best and safest way for the ummah. the foundation of madhab is by the salaf sualiheen and every later scholars for 1200 years are just building up on this foundation.

:w:

[Musalmaan]

:sl:

Chapter Eleven

Ibn Al-Qayyim on follwoing a School of though (Madhhab)

Ibn Al-Qayyaim said: "Does the common person have to follwo one of the well known madhhabs or not? There are two sayings regarding this:


Thats it is not obligatory upon him and this is what is correct and definite since there is nothing obligatory except what Allah, the Most High, and His Messenger have made obligatory. Neither Allah nor His Messenger have made obligatory to follow the school of thought (madhhab) of any person from the ummah and to follow him alone in the Religion.

I'll just answer this part of it, and alhamdulilah, it can be explained through the post that was made by another Moderator posted few weeks ago.
the fatwa is from Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-Uthaymeen, respected scholar among you and here he is rightly expalining an Usool in Fiqh.

Is not knowing Arabic an Excuse

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-Uthaymeen



Barak Allaahu Feekum, is the fact that the Qur-aan was revealed in the Arabic language a justification or an excuse for non-Arabs (for not acting upon it) due to it not being revealed in their language?


No, non-Arabs do not have an excuse or a justification in that the Qur-aan is not in their language; rather it is upon them to learn the language of the Qur-aan, because if understanding the Book of Allaah or the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم) is dependant upon learning the Arabic language, then learning Arabic becomes Waajib. This is because every action that has to be carried out, in order to be able to perform an obligation, acquires the ruling of being obligatory [or - All actions which if not performed first, an obligatory act can not be performed, acquire the ruling of being obligatory (even if they are not an obligation within themselves, such as walking to the Masjid for Salaatul Jamaa’ah (for men), since one cannot perform Jamaa’ah in the Masjid unless he walks there, the act of walking in order to get to the Masjid becomes Waajib upon that individual, and so on...)].

Fataawa Nur ‘ala ad Darb

Translator: Nadir Ahmad, Abu Abdul-Waahid

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl: Br Musalmaan,

Your post was good Masha'Allaah, but I don't agree with the following.

For the layman the safest and the God-fearing(taqwah) way to follow the shariah of Muhammad Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam is to adopt a particular madhab out of 4 (usually the scholars of madhab that are easily accesible)

I have explained this point before, and the excerpt from Ibn Qayyim's book also explains the fact that a layman cannot have a madhab. He does not have the neccasary knowledge to do the research,

Inded the common person cannot have a madhhab, even if he thinks that he does, since the common person has no madhhab at all. This is because the madhhab will be either for the one who is able to research to a certain level and understand evidence and also know about the other madhhabs or for the one who has read a book concerning the details of that madhhab and knows the ruling and saying of his Imaam.

and to do taqleed(ittiba) of the madhab

If you mean simply following a scholar of a particular Madhab then that is correct. He must do taqlid to a certain extent of the scholar,not the madhab, until he has gained the knowledge to research and examine the evidences and is able to then decide for himself which opinion he considers to be strongest.

However, for example, there is a brother who prays with his hands down (he is a Shafiee), and when he was told that the Messenger (saw) used to fold his hands, he says: "I am a Shafiee". He does not know that the reason Imam Shafiee prayed with his hands down was because he was tortured, and even Imam Shafiee writes in a book of his that the Messenger used to fold his hands. This is an example of blindly following a Madhab, and not of a scholar, and this is what is looked down upon.

Going back to an earlier post of mine,

But the layman does not have the knowledge nor the means to examine all the evidences, arguements, and opinions to judge which is more correct.

So when the scholar tells him that a particular opinion is stronger, even if the opinion is not from his (the scholar's) Madhab, then he (the layman) should follow it because that is closer to Sharia.

and finally avoid the ignorant La madhabi people or those people who confuse or put waswasa onto other that you're salaah is like jewish or is not acceptable, incomplete etc etc, just avoid them

This I agree with. And a common misconception is that 'salafis' and 'wa habbism/wa habbis' are La Madhabi and this not the case.

and stick to madhab for every action and matter that is being defined, is defined by the Quran and Hadith and the jamaah(group) of the companions of prophet.

I agree, but you have to understand that each opinion from each madhab has proof and evidence and a layman does not have the capabilities to research, understand and decide which is the strongest opinion. It is best for him to follow a scholar that he trusts and not say 'I am Hanafi' or 'I am Shafiee' etc. The problems this partisanship by the laymans has caused is great. If you were to travel to some countries, the ignorant masses fight with each other and have Wala and Bara over madahib. They do not go to a particular Masjid because the ones there follow a different Madhab. This is a sad reality. This is what Ibn Qayyim was putting down.

Even if it could be imagined it would still not be obligatory upon him or anyone else to ever have to follow the madhhab of a certain man from the ummah, to the extent that he accepts all his saying and rejects everyone else's sayings.

This is a filthy innovation introuduced tinto the ummah.

He means that the results this kind of firm sticking to one madhab cause are greater then the benefits of it.

No scholar of Islaam has ever said this and they are higher in station and better knowing about Allah than to order the people about this. Even futher from the truth is the saying of those who say that he must stick to the madhhab of a single scholar and futher still from the truth is the one who says, he must follow one of the four madhhabs! O Allah, how strange!

[...]

Those who say that it is correct for the common person to have a madhhab claim, 'Because he believes that the madhhab which he ascribes himself to is the truth, therefore, he must be sincere to his belief.' If this saying of theirs were true then it would mean that it is forbidden to seek a ruling from anyone other than the people of his own madhhab and likewise that it is forbidden to take the madhhab of anyone equal or greater than than his own Imaam and would mean other things which all show the falsity of the belief in the first place. Indeed it would mean that if he saw a text from Allaah's Messenger or a saying from the four Caliphs with other than his own Imaam, he would have to abandon the text and the sayings of the Compainions and give precedence to the saying of his own Imaam.

And this is exactly what is occuring amongst many ignorant muslims, if they know something, and a Scholar tells them that another opinion is stronger or more correct, they will not adopt it due to the fact that they consider the opinion they are following to be more correct though they themselves do not have the sufficient knowledge to judge!

:w:

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl:

Btw, I thought I'd quote some posts by Br. Abuz Zubair of IslamicAwakening here as they explained the issue better:

People are ranked into three categories:

1) Mujtahids, even if it be in an issue. These people must make ijtihad in issues in which they are qualified without resorting to taqlid, which for them is haram.

2) Student of knowledge. They study a particular madhab in order to eventually reach the status of a mujtahid even if it be in one issue. In issues in which they remain non-Mujtahids, what's obligatory on them is what is obligatory on the rest of the laymen, and that is to ask any mufti they trust and make taqlid, irrespective of whatever madhab he may be from.

3) Layman (all of us here). They have absolutely nothing to do with any madhab at all whatsoever. Their entire responsibility is to approach a mufti they trust and simply make taqlid of his fatwa, irrespective of whatever madhab he is from.

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/s...4&postcount=23

---

According to the correct opinion and the majority, the layman's only job is to look for a qualified mufti. If he fails in that and ends up asking someone who is NOT qualified, then the layman IS to blame.

However, if he does his job, i.e. he looks for a qualified mufti and asks him the question, then technically, he has done his job, and whatever fatwa he is given he may act upon it if he wishes.

Can he ask the mufti for the evidence? Some scholars said he should, whilst the majority said that he shouldn't because a) it is considered bad manners, and he should wait and ask him in another gathering or another time, and b) evidences are of no relevance to him, rather his proof is the mufti's fatwa.

If he is not satisfied with the fatwa, he may go to a different mufti and ask him for fatwa, since a fatwa is not binding on a person especially if there is more than one mufti available.

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/s...6&postcount=28

---

[...]

Referring to the Book and the Sunnah are for those who understand the book and the Sunnah. Someone who does not know Arabic, has no hope of understanding most of the legal aspects of Sharia embedded in the Quran and Sunnah. Someone who knows Arabic with perfect grammar, yet does not know Usul al-Fiqh, he cannot derive rulings from texts. Someone who knows Usul al-Fiqh and Arabic, yet does not know Mustalah al-hadeeth and the science of jarh, is bound to base fiqhi rulings on mawdu'at.

Legislation process in Islam is only for those who inherit the Prophet's knowledge, and not every 'Ali, Zayd and 'Amr in the Ummah. This much is common sense.

[...]
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/s...6&postcount=36

---

[...]

Rather, the correct opinion is that since the layman has no madhab, he may go to any of the muftis irrespective of his Madhab, be he a hanafi, maliki, Shafi'i or whoever, so long as he is well-known and recognised mufti in the community, the layman can refer to him, thereby fulfilling Allah's command: Ask the people of dhikr, if you know not --- that is it, no more, no less.

[...]

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/s...8&postcount=31

[AbuAbdallah]

salaam,

2) Student of knowledge. They study a particular madhab in order to eventually reach the status of a mujtahid even if it be in one issue.

Why a particular madhab?

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

salaam,
Why a particular madhab?

:w:

To make it easier on the student. It's easier to study one then get into another, instead of doing it all at the same time which could confuse etc.

[SirZubair]

salaam,



Why a particular madhab?

I wish people would click on this link that i have provided on this forum many many times..

The Legal Status Of Following A Madhab

Please, before anyone asks anymore questions regarding Madhabs, read that book. It IS online, and it IS Free. So no1 has any excuses not to read it.

[AbuAbdallah]

I wish people would click on this link that i have provided on this forum many many times..

This book seems to be referring to laymen, I am talking about a student of knowledge.

To make it easier on the student. It's easier to study one then get into another, instead of doing it all at the same time which could confuse etc.

Maybe if that person is studying Fiqh, but I don't see a need to follow a madhab if you are studying other sciences. Wallahu Alim.

[IB-Staff]

:sl:

Lets stick to the topic please :)

Sufism is discussed in this thread:
http://www.islamicboard.com/680118-post3.html

[Musalmaan]

:sl:

:w:

First of all, thanks for being nice. That was the best part of your post.

I'll just try to answer the major point of your post.

I have explained this point before, and the excerpt from Ibn Qayyim's book also explains the fact that a layman cannot have a madhab. He does not have the neccasary knowledge to do the research,

brother, when i call myself hanafi (in some specific case), then that does not mean that I am telling that I have studied all the evidences of all the four madhabs and judging according to it, rather
within the differences of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah, differences which is Haq, i am following tha hanafi Mujhtahideen and I am taking their rulings.

like one of your shaykh fatwa (right now i am not able to search that fatwa) that layman's madhabs is the madhab of the scholars he refers.

so also through this i am hanafi (in terms of fiqh, madhab) as my all scholars here are hanafi. I do not take any opinions from other madhab even though i respect them love them and their scholars and they are the scholar of this ummah, but for me Imam Abu Hanfia rahimahulla and those who followed his Usool is enough for me to learn shariah (salaah, haj, fasts, purity etc etc). this is not hisbiyyah, or one should not get offended over it.

A glimpse of Sahabah (companions of prophet) and Tabaein era recorded in Bukhari.

Imam Bukhari narrates from Ikrimah that the people of Madinah asked Ibn Abbas about a woman who, during Hajj, makes her first tawwaf and then enters her menstrual period before she can make her final tawwaf. Ibn Abbas told them that she could go home without completing her final tawwaf. The people of Madinah said,“We will not take your opinion over the opinion of Zaid ibn Thabit.”

Source - a recent fatwa in askimam.org

However, for example, there is a brother who prays with his hands down (he is a Shafiee), and when he was told that the Messenger (saw) used to fold his hands, he says: "I am a Shafiee". He does not know that the reason Imam Shafiee prayed with his hands down was because he was tortured, and even Imam Shafiee writes in a book of his that the Messenger used to fold his hands. This is an example of blindly following a Madhab, and not of a scholar, and this is what is looked down upon.

Actually here it's proving blindly following a scholar rather than madhab, for if he was following the madhab he would follow the matter written on books or told by scholars.

And a common misconception is that 'salafis' and 'wa habbism/wa habbis' are La Madhabi and this not the case.

brother, there is difference between salafi and hanbali. there is also difference between wahaabee and salafi. You can confirm to this with hanbali scholar. i dont want to go in its detail.

I feel the later of all your post is the summary of the following. so i'll just reply to it.

And this is exactly what is occuring amongst many ignorant muslims, if they know something, and a Scholar tells them that another opinion is stronger or more correct, they will not adopt it due to the fact that they consider the opinion they are following to be more correct though they themselves do not have the sufficient knowledge to judge!

i agree, and thats the point which need to be understood. when he do not have the sufficient knowledge to judge then how can he judge that scholar A is really with the stronger opinion?? when he himself didnt study all the eveidences related to it?

I hope you understand that practically.

If i know some layman is in shafii madhab (thats he take the opinion of mujhtahideen in that madhab), i will never tease him or say this is makrooh, this is wrong, or raf'al'dayn within salaah was being abrogated later in prophet 's life etc etc, i'll never do that because i know he is following the mujhtahideen and Even if he is wrong insha'ALlah, by the mercy of Allah Taala, they are being still rewarded, for they are sincere in their religion and following the right way.

but ofcourse, if some non-muqallid (whatever label they keep) approach to me then my attitude to them will not remain similar. thats the major problem with the non-muqallid, they become the source of fitnah and fasaad where ever they go, they do thing against the sunnah which is established in that region part. in pakistan they speak against hanafi madhab, in sri lanka they speak against shafi madhab. Thats why they are being disliked by the scholars as well majority of the people.


One companion of prophet lead a long salaah in jamaat, such that few companions broke the salaah and went off, some came to prophet and complain about that's companion lenghty salaah, our prophet showed his anger towards that companion and marked it as fitnah. Praying long salaah is praiseworthy but when it becomes the source of disunity prophet disliked it. Now, sunnah which is established in particualr country (say hanafi madhab in south east asia) but some outsider comes and speak against that sunnah and marked it as biddah then they will not be termed as khidmah of Hadith but a source of fasaad and fitnah. One should really sincere and follow the right way, insha'Allah the destination is same the way may be slightly different but our ultimate guide is Quran and Sunnah, and some furoo masaail we agree to disagree, and by the baakah of this, prophet's every sunnah is alive and is being carried out by his followers. sallallahu alaihi wa sallam.


:w:

[Skillganon]

I agree that I really do not have a madhab, nor I have anything like a local imam that I an go to who knows about fiqh, but I listen and learn from few people I trust.

However I do not take any of the madhab,
or say "I am from any madhab and I will not listen to you in a particular issue even if you have stronger evidence"

So if you know that the other madhab has a stronger evidence and it is clear, than take it. (The Key word is "know")

because:

They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allaah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allaah), and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary), while they (Jews and Christians) were commanded [in the Tawraat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] to worship none but One Ilaah (God — Allaah) Laa ilaaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He). Praise and glory be to Him (far above is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)”

[al-Tawbah 9:31]

[Musalmaan]

I agree that I really do not have a madhab, nor I have anything like a local imam that I an go to who knows about fiqh, but I listen and learn from few people I trust.

you are listening and learning from few people you trust so thus we. If Scholar of Islamic Jurisprudence come to know that Hadith is saheeh, then why he will listen to other, and Muqallid of that mujhtahid will follow him.

I feel like practically there is no arguement, everybody is on same track and theoritically it can be become long arguements with only theories, claiming something else and doing something else.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:w: Br Musalmaan,

brother, when i call myself hanafi (in some specific case), then that does not mean that I am telling that I have studied all the evidences of all the four madhabs and judging according to it, rather
within the differences of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah, differences which is Haq, i am following tha hanafi Mujhtahideen and I am taking their rulings.

When this happens amongst a large amount of laymen, this leads to the partisanship and I gave examples in my last post. The layman does not need a madhab, all that is his duty is to seek a scholar he trusts and make taqlid of the fatwa he recieves.

According to the correct opinion and the majority, the layman's only job is to look for a qualified mufti. If he fails in that and ends up asking someone who is NOT qualified, then the layman IS to blame.

And this is also the most simple thing for a layman, instead of trying to find a Hanafi scholar, he can simply refer to one he trusts and take his opinion. And then his duty is done.

like one of your shaykh fatwa (right now i am not able to search that fatwa) that layman's madhabs is the madhab of the scholars he refers.

Yes, I have said this in my previous posts. And the subtle point to understand is that, the scholar that he refers to can be from any madhab and may give rulings on that which he feels is the strongest opinion. Thus some times giving a Shafiee opinion, and other times a Hanbali one and this is to the extent of his knowledge.

Another point to note is that the layman has no concern with the Madahib because he lacks the knowledge to understand them. Referring to the Book and the Sunnah are for those who understand the book and the Sunnah.

so also through this i am hanafi (in terms of fiqh, madhab) as my all scholars here are hanafi.

It's better that you say, 'The scholars I refer to are Hanafi'. That would be more precise.

I do not take any opinions from other madhab even though i respect them love them and their scholars and they are the scholar of this ummah, but for me Imam Abu Hanfia rahimahulla and those who followed his Usool is enough for me to learn shariah (salaah, haj, fasts, purity etc etc). this is not hisbiyyah, or one should not get offended over it.

But the question remains, how do you know Imam Abu Hanifa's methadology in his rulings to claim to be his follower? This can only be done by one who has studied the madhab itself and this was explained before.

A glimpse of Sahabah (companions of prophet) and Tabaein era recorded in Bukhari.

Imam Bukhari narrates from Ikrimah that the people of Madinah asked Ibn Abbas about a woman who, during Hajj, makes her first tawwaf and then enters her menstrual period before she can make her final tawwaf. Ibn Abbas told them that she could go home without completing her final tawwaf. The people of Madinah said,“We will not take your opinion over the opinion of Zaid ibn Thabit.”

Source - a recent fatwa in askimam.org

Br. Abuz Zubair's post refers to this as well.

If he is not satisfied with the fatwa, he may go to a different mufti and ask him for fatwa, since a fatwa is not binding on a person especially if there is more than one mufti available.

So this is what they did.

Actually here it's proving blindly following a scholar rather than madhab, for if he was following the madhab he would follow the matter written on books or told by scholars.

Note he ascribes himself to the madhab, not the scholar. He says: "I am a Shafiee" assuming this is the official opinion of the Shafiee madhab.

brother, there is difference between salafi and hanbali. there is also difference between wahaabee and salafi. You can confirm to this with hanbali scholar. i dont want to go in its detail.

Br. Abuz Zubair actually explained this point in that thread I linked to i above. He says:

The reason why most of the Salafis are Hanbalis is precisely because nearly all of the Hanbalis are Salafis. And if it wasn't for the mu'tazili and/or maturidi hijacking of the Hanafi madhab, and Ash'ari hijacking of the Shafi'i and Maliki madhab, the vast majority of them, too, would be Salafis.

But let's not get into this Insha'Allaah. Salafis = Those that follow the way of the Salaf. Not the modern day Hizb called 'The Salafis'.

There is the way of the salaf, and there is a party (hizb) called "the salafis".

Explanation, see here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/sects-di...tarianism.html

I feel the later of all your post is the summary of the following. so i'll just reply to it.

I agree with the rest of your post for the most part.

[Musalmaan]

:w: Br Musalmaan,
The layman does not need a madhab, all that is his duty is to seek a scholar he trusts and make taqlid of the fatwa he recieves.

hmm .. Do you know what is talfeeq? anytime in your life heard of it. :)


secondly, do you know what really the ignorant masses doing. a big fitnah that has spread out widely in india/pakistan (n else where Allah hu alam) that husband after giving her wife three talaaqs in one sitting, later realizing and reverting back, he go on with asking the Non-muqallid Muftis (there are some non-muqallid present here) only because those husbands know that non-muqallid mufti give fatwa of one talaaq for three talaaqs. I am not going into debate with you (if you are also with the same ruling that three talaaq is really one talaaq) but all the four Khulfah Raashidoun Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddique r.a, Umer r.a Usman r.a Ali r.a, AND all the four Aima Mujhtahids i.e Imam Abu Hanifa r.a, Imam Maalik r.a , Imaam Shafai'i r.a and Imam Ahmed ibn Hmabal r.a gave the fatwa that three talaaq in one sitting is three talaaq,

but since that faasiq needs his own answer he choose his own people.


Thats the problem which is happening by abondaning taqleed. Fasaad of 8 rakaah taraweeh is widely knowm.

Br. Abuz Zubair actually explained this point in that thread I linked to i above.

thats funny.
Dont ask the person who himself is (psuedo) salafi, if you ask shia if Khoomeini is not ayatullah, ofcourse he answers affirmativetly.

Ask hanbali scholar if you have met any one of them.


:w:

[AbuAbdallah]

salaam,

but some outsider comes and speak against that sunnah and marked it as biddah then they will not be termed as khidmah of Hadith but a source of fasaad and fitnah.

What if it really is a biddah? Then they will be doing their duty as Muslims.

but for me Imam Abu Hanfia rahimahulla and those who followed his Usool is enough for me to learn shariah (salaah, haj, fasts, purity etc etc).

Why does your sharia have to be according to Abu Hanifa's understanding?

Do you know what is talfeeq?

No, what is it?

[NoName55]

:sl:


First of all let me declare that I respect and admire Br. Al-Madani, It won't be an exaggeration If I was to say I love him for sake of Allah Ta'ala, for he has shown me (and others) nothing but kindness and respect. Yet I can't think how I can defend him in face of insult without being done for being off-topic/sectarian .etc.

So instead I am going to attempt to use the forum rules to see if that helps me.

Here goes...
Faq > General Guidelines > Post Etiquettes > Post Content
9. Beef will not be tolerated in any forum. Differences in opinion are expected, but please debate respectfully. (Beef are comments made for the purpose of insulting somebody else with negative intent, looking for a negative reaction, or blatantly insulting somebody)

hmm .. Do you know what is talfeeq? anytime in your life heard of it.

Is this not a blatant insult against Br. Al-Madani? Is this person not implying that we shop for fataawa?


12.This is not a Fiqh discussion board. Prolonged threads arguing over Fatwas and the details of Islamic law will be closed.
Has this tread not become just that?


18. Do not say "Islam says X" unless your position is based upon sound evidence - which means the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Always cite your sources. If quoting the Qur'an, give Surah (chapter) and ayah (verse) number. For ahadeeth, you must the name of the collection, volume/book number and hadeeth number.

do you know what really the ignorant masses doing. a big fitnah that has spread out widely in india/pakistan (n else where Allah hu alam) that husband after giving her wife three talaaqs in one sitting, later realizing and reverting back, he go on with asking the Non-muqallid Muftis (there are some non-muqallid present here) only because those husbands know that non-muqallid mufti give fatwa of one talaaq for three talaaqs. I am not going into debate with you (if you are also with the same ruling that three talaaq is really one talaaq) but all the four Khulfah Raashidoun Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddique r.a, Umer r.a Usman r.a Ali r.a, AND all the four Aima Mujhtahids i.e Imam Abu Hanifa r.a, Imam Maalik r.a , Imaam Shafai'i r.a and Imam Ahmed ibn Hmabal r.a gave the fatwa that three talaaq in one sitting is three talaaq,

but since that faasiq needs his own answer he choose his own people.


Thats the problem which is happening by abondaning taqleed. Fasaad of 8 rakaah taraweeh is widely knowm.

where does he give sources/evidences

:w:

[Musalmaan]

salaam,


What if it really is a biddah? Then they will be doing their duty as Muslims.

:w:

Those matter are not of issue of biddah, but there is difference of opinions over it in madhabs. These fasaadi, in the name of islaah, try to show that hanafi is rejecting hadith for Imam Abu Hanifa's opinion. Maybe it will be surprise for you to kow that they also distributed books and pamphlet that those who do not do rafa'al dain in salaah are kaafir. they became such extremous in their shar and fasaad. but alhamdulilah due to barakah of madarsa here their influence has remained limited.

Why does your sharia have to be according to Abu Hanifa's understanding?

do you want us to follow POPE understanding rabbi understanding, BUSH's understaning tony blairs, tom cruise or shahrukh khan understanding??? whose understanding you want us to follow.

We follow Imam Abu Hanifa r.a in term interpretation of shariah for we feel he was the most knowledgeable, most pious, most brilliant scholar, among the tabaein and He was absolute Mujhtahid and later mujtahid follow his usool in interprating shariah laws, so we take them in learning shariah.

secondly, Imam Abu Hanifa r.a is the teacher directly or indirectly of Imam like Imam Maalik r.a Imam Shafai r.a Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal r.a Im am Bukhari, Imam Muslim Abu dawud trimize etc, so his greatness also become due to itis fact.

thirdly, Imam Abu Hanfia rahimahulla has been referred Imam Azam by all the scholars in field of islamic science.

These are some of reasons we follow their interpretation and not our own interpretation. About 70% of ummah have been following Hanafi madhab which also show its acceptance in the court of Allah.

Their interpreation is what they learn from sahabah, the companion of prophet, who directly learn the revelation of Allah from His messenger.

The deen completed in the time of prophet, (surah maidah),
the khulfah Rashideen period was the establishment of deen of ALlah (Surah Noor)
and in era of tabaein and taba abaein the era was compilation of all the matter of deen as understood and implemented by the jamaah of companion of prophet Muhammad sallalahu alaihi wa sallam.

and later generation follow them in guidance, for they truly were the guided ones.

Almighty Allah is the protector of His deen.

No, what is it?

A good explaination here,

Verdict on Taqleed (Adherence)

[Silver Pearl]

:wasalamex

Six pages on and there is no verdict or any agreement, as a matter of fact things are only starting to heat up now. I think it would be beneficial if this thread was closed, momentarily at least until everyone has calmed down and had time to reflect over what they have written.

Please let us remember we are not scholars and we should constantly be aware of what we write to ensure we do not wrong ourselves.

May Allaah grant our scholars paradise and may Allaah forgive us for the sins we commit knowingly and unknowingly.

Jazakallaah khayr

Until further notice, :threadclo