PDA

View Full Version : my thoughts.....



Ummu Sufyaan
11-02-2007, 08:13 AM
:sl:
I dont know how to say this, but i'll just cut to the chase, and if none of it makes sense, let me know, and i'll clarify, inshallah.
something that has been playing on my mind for awhile, but hit home within the last day.

I am deeply saddened and distressed how divided this ummah has become. One thing i have noticed from being on this forum, is how much this ummah has truly differed. Why the mathhabs people? dont get me wrong, i have nothing against the four imams at all, and perhaps i am misunderstanding something, but can someone please exaplin to me why we have to follow a particular imam. To me, it sounds as if The Prophet (sallalahu ayehi wa salam) was not good enough to follow. And no! by no means am I accusing anyone of belittling him (sallalahu ayehi wa salam). And what gets to me even more, is when they are fanatically in support of one of their opinions, although it is quite clear that there has been a mistake in the ruling. Before anyone decides to accuse me of appointing myself as a scolar, no, this is not my intention, i do not even consider myself to be one.

it saddens me deeply when i befriend or atleast hold someone to high respects, yet i find out something disturbing about them, than causes me to loose respet for that person. i am not saying im better than anyone else, im simiply reflecting on all our differences.

iam sick to death of my shiekh versus your shiekh. i cant follow your shiekh because he is a ............. well if my (not me personally, just in general) shiekh happens to have the strongest opinion, than im gonna take it, whter he is a maaliki, or a haanifi. The most disturbing thing is that it goes to show the loop holes amoung the unity of the muslims. why do we even a sheikh to begin with. why should we even have a shiekh to begin with? If we were united, than we would follow the same opinion. i understanbd that the sclaors differed amoung themselves about certain things, but really, the way people go on. get a grip already!! for allah sake, cant we just swallow and move on!!! It dosn't matter if the imam dosn't raise hands during prayer at every takbeer. is it even obligatory to begin wth. no!!!

O brothers and sisters, do we not realise that one more argument left unsolved will result in one more difference, which will result in one more disunity and hatred. for each other!!

I see the muslims treatng the kufaaar, even better than one another. Do da3wah, yes! i dont disagree, but really, what is this people? where is the love and respect we had for one another. by allah!! the way we uncover each others mistake, its as if a leopard is waiting for its pray. we humiliate one another. Sunhanallah. what is becoming of us.

And i am getting quite disturbed at how our scholars are being ridiculed and slandered. Not the dodgy ones, no!! the decent ones, that present sound evidence when making a ruling. Put our scholars aside for a sec. what about the average muslims who has a desire to do good. sheesh!! the way we ridicule him/her.

Oh muslims. how do we expect allah to help us, when we do not help one another. How do we expect our mothers no to have their children torn from them, from having our fathers being tortued, from having our children being mutilated (yes people they are getting mutilpated), our children left parentless, what vulnrable child deseves this??? our sisters being raped, and humiliated all because of this disunity. There is only a hand full of mujaahideen scatterd here and there, fighting for laa ilaaha illah. Am i saying leave you homes and childen. and your work and study? no, (if you wanna, go right ahead, im not gonna stop ya:D). im just pointing out the reason for this small number. our disunity.

thats it, for now, inshallah.
:sl:
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
IbnAbdulHakim
11-02-2007, 11:01 AM
lol wa alaikum ussalaam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

you are upset deeply at the fact that this ummah is divided, sister we all feel that pain... trust me... but its destiny aswell. Rasullulahi sallallahu alaihi wasallaam said this ummah will divide into 73 sects... only one on the straight path.

That straight path is the ahlus sunnah wal jamaah.

As for the madhaahibs, it isnt following "one man", lol to think that is a misconception. Quite a big one, it is actually four huge schools with highly knowledgable respected scholars who have all come together as a shura to discuss fiqhi issues thus resulting in a "school of thought". Imam abu hanifa had 50 of the most highest eminent scholars OF his time, every fatwa would be discussed between all of them, amongst these were Qadhi Abu Yusuf who debated with Imam Abu Hanifa for 7 years regarding the uncreatedness of the Quran, and also Ibn Abidin one of imam abu hanifa's top students, the other madhaahib imaams also did the same EXCEPT FOR imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal who ordered his fatwa not be written down, and to follow only the Quran and Sunnah.

So you see, it is not "ONE MAN", rather it is the opinion of a majority of highly knowledgable scholars.

Even then mistakes can be made wallahu a'lam, but i felt it necessary to clear up that misconception..
Reply

sevgi
11-02-2007, 11:09 AM
:sl:

i understand u.ive had this issue..but not at this frequency before.

as the bro above wud know, i am a lil liberal wen it comes to madhabs.in other terms, i am a hanafi who eats prawns and calamari rings.lol.

umm...the thing is, just to add what IbnAbdulHakim said, madhabs are the massive schools of thought, established in order to get rid of confusion in the contemporary context.

they go deep into sunnah and the quran and draw out solid interpretations for issues which are not clearly or directly expressed in the quran or hadis.

eg) eating prawns...wearing socks in prayer...etc.:)

peace.
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
11-02-2007, 11:12 AM
:sl:
jazakallahu khair for the clarificaiton. but i didn't mean it like that. :X
what i meant is why do people follow a particular school of thought? get it?
:sl:
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
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
sevgi
11-02-2007, 11:14 AM
Originally Posted by maryam11
:sl:
jazakallahu khair for the clarificaiton. but i didn't mean it like that. :X
what i meant is why do people follow a particular school of thought? get it?
:sl:
hmmm

i see.its usually what u grow up with...

its regional...whereever the imaan was closest to when he was teaching...

peace.
Reply

sevgi
11-02-2007, 11:16 AM
ive never met anyone who has chosen or changed their madhab....whoever u learn from...they jst teach u what they know.my parents taught me..they are turkish.turkish ppl are generally hanafi...

kurdish ppl are generally shafii...

my paki frends are hanafi.

my aussie revert frend is shafi coz she learnt from someone shafi...

peace.
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
11-02-2007, 11:18 AM
:sl:
lol..yeah i noticed that particular parts of the world follow a particular mathhab.
i am a hanafi who eats prawns and calamari rings.lol.
wow!! the hanifis dont eat prawns? :X:hiding:
this is what i mean. in not aiming this at anyone, and i dont know the exact ruling about eating prawns, but lets, for arguments sake say that they are okay. if this is the strongest (i mean the one with the most sound evidence,etc), than i dont understand why people stick to that mathhaby opinion, although the opposite is clear.
:sl:
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
11-02-2007, 11:22 AM
Originally Posted by maryam11
:sl:
what i meant is why do people follow a particular school of thought? get it?
:sl:
assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah

if you knew that 50 of the greatest faqihs from amongst the tabi'een conducted a shura to come to a conclusion on an issue, would you not consider their judgement to be trusted?

yes you can ask for the dalaa'il, but you shouldnt dismiss their dalaa'ils so easily...

i hope this helps even a little inshaAllah
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
11-02-2007, 11:27 AM
:sl:
i understand your point, and it does make sense, (im not just saying that). but i think we'll leave it here inshallah. i think we are looking at it from two different angles, and it looks like we are going to go in circles.
and no, i wouldn't dismiss their evidences easily, if that was directed in that sense.
i think also i may be offending:hiding:
:sl:
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
11-02-2007, 11:30 AM
^ Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

ive been contemplating a lot recently over the whole madhab issue, and i cant help but feel that the views intiated by the four madhaahibs have over time slowly been distorted, the pure pristine forms of the madhaabs may have innovations in them.... Allah knows best.

But for many fiqhi issues the madhaabs are the best source, that im sure of, Allahu A'lam !


and sister, rest assured im not offended even the slighest, jizakAllahu khairan for your concern
Reply

sevgi
11-02-2007, 11:33 AM
just to add.

i think everyone follows a madhab bt not everyone is aware of it.

my prawn example is bad...i shudnt do that...but i did a lot of research...teh thing is that abu hanifi didnt say anything abt seafood.he died before the daleel could reach him or before he cud study it...

the other three studied them and said its ok...

its only logical.i dnt think there is a need to be anal on the topic.
Reply

Malaikah
11-02-2007, 11:39 AM
Originally Posted by maryam11
this is what i mean. in not aiming this at anyone, and i dont know the exact ruling about eating prawns, but lets, for arguments sake say that they are okay. if this is the strongest (i mean the one with the most sound evidence,etc), than i dont understand why people stick to that mathhaby opinion, although the opposite is clear.
:sl:

The simple answer is, because we are not scholars are not qualified to be able to tell which opinion is strnger than the other. The very fact that the scholars differ on an issue means that it is not as clear cut as it might seem to us.Fiqh is very complex.

One thing I was taught by my respected teacher that you should never criticize a scholar for having an opinion (as long as it is valid, and not something insane such as saying the 5 daily prayers/ramadhan is not obligatory), and you should respect that he is a scholar and has the right to hold and opinion, even if you or I might not like it or disagree with it. When asking a scholar/student of knowledge for the proof, we should be asking for the purpose of gaining knowledge, not to ascertain whether his opinion is right or not (because we aren't qualified).

As for the issue of madhhabs, I think you don't actually understand what a madhhab is. A madhhab, or school of thought, is the approach taken by a group of scholars to derive rulings from the Quran and sunnah. The reason we have different madhabs is because the scholars have differed on the appraoch to take.

For example, Imam Malik, who lived in Madinah at the time when most of its inhabitants where the children and grandchildren of the sahabah, considered the general actions of the people of Madinah as proof for something, because they learned from their parents who learned from the Prophet pbuh. So, if an act was widespread amongst them, then this is proof that it is permissible. However the other scholars disagree with him and do not consider this to be a valid way to come up with rulings.

Another example, is that because Imam Abu Hanifa lived in Kufah in Iraq, he was isolated from the main source of hadiths (the companions and their students who were concentrated in Madinah). On top of that, hadith fabrication was very wide spread in his city. Because of that, he had very, very strict guidelines for the acceptance of hadith because he had few hadith to start with and there were so many fabricated hadith going around. Because of how strict he was, he even ended up rejecting authentic hadith! And also, because he had few hadith, he had to rely a lot on analogy when coming up with rulings, because of his limited resources.

I hope that helps you understand the why we have different madhhabs. There is nothing wrong with following a madhab. The problem comes when lay people (such as us) are intolerant of people who follow a different opinion. However, in reality we should not criticise others if they are following a different opinion as long as that opinion is valid.

I hope that helps! :) Feel free to ask any more questions.
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
11-02-2007, 11:40 AM
:sl:
brother IAH, thats very true. sometimes i read things that say imam malik said, and im thinking, that dosn't sound like the imam malik that i know....

But for many fiqhi issues the madhaabs are the best source, that im sure of, Allahu A'lam !
i agree, and come to think of it, it maybe alittle worrying if a scholar didn't refer to their views when making a ruling.
i can also see where you're coming from. i dont like it when there is a bias towards a mathhab. i like it if there is a little disagreement over something, and the mufti/shiekh presents all those veiw, like for you to decide. because after certain evidences are presented, your heart is content with a certain one. do you know what i mean?

he died before the daleel could reach him or before he cud study it...
this is what gets to me. not all the daleels reach the imams. but even after relaible evidence is shown to some people, they still stick to the imams opinion, even though its wrong.
:sl:
Reply

Malaikah
11-02-2007, 11:42 AM
:sl:

I also wanted to add- people tend to associate not following a madhhab with 'salafis' and the top Saudi scholars and Madinah university. However this is incorrect, and I have heard it directly from students of the university that their teachers (including, if I remember correctly, Shaykh 'Uthaymeen... I hope I spelled his name right...) that while learning, a student of knowledge should follow a madhab and should not differ from the madhab until he is qualified to tell which opinion is strong than another, something that takes years of study to attain!
Reply

sevgi
11-02-2007, 11:42 AM
^ bt the imaams didnt make rulings on the things which they died before.

when u show someone daleel...if the imaam has said something on the topic...they will go with the imaam coz it invloves more than just a peice of daleel...

bt if they dnt accept daleel on something their imaan didnt talk abt...they cant help but follow the daleel...

get me..?
Reply

------
11-02-2007, 11:43 AM
:salamext:

Meh.... :-\ One of the signs that the Day of judgement is near init.....look at the state of us imsad
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
11-02-2007, 11:50 AM
Originally Posted by Malaikah
:sl:
However, in reality we should not criticise others if they are following a different opinion as long as that opinion is valid.
its not that sis. :sunny: if you're aiming it at me, it dont bother me the difference of opinion. where're humans, of cource were gonna differ. what bothers me is how people get so fanatic. imsad

I hope that helps! :) Feel free to ask any more questions.
jazakalahu khair for your time.
:sl:
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
11-02-2007, 11:50 AM
assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

yes a muqallid must follow a sheikh as his knowledge is very little.
logic also dictates whilst following an a sheikh one trusts as sheikh albaani/uthaymeen and many others rahmatullahi alayh ajmaeen have said naturally if that sheikh is a scholar or a person of high ilm and is searching of knowledge then he will have a madhaahib, it is required is it not? So thus every person in essence does indeed follow a madhab, due to the madhab of their sheikh...


i hope that makes sense, wa allahu a'lam

may Allah give us the tawfeeq to remain true muwahhids, to have adhaab during ikhtilaaf, to accept ikhtilaaf, and to stay upon as-siraatul mustaqeem.

Ameen
Reply

Malaikah
11-02-2007, 11:51 AM
Originally Posted by maryam11
its not that sis. :sunny: if you're aiming it at me, it dont bother me the difference of opinion. where're humans, of cource were gonna differ. what bothers me is how people get so fanatic. imsad
I wasn't referring to you sis. :)

This is an excellent artcile that might help, it was recommended by Shaykh Tawfique Chowdary. It looks at differences in opinions and the problem with 'following the evidence' and gives the example of the shafi'i opinion of whether touching a person of the opposite gender breaks wudu or not:

Question


I came across the following in an email attachment. I would like to know if the Shafi`i fuqaha hold this view. Also what is the reasoning behind it? Jazak Allahu khayran.

Here is the excerpt from the email attachment (attributed to Dr. Zakir Naik).

"Imam Shafi said that when a woman touches a man who is in a state of wudhu the wudhu breaks. However this ruling of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet. Narrated Aishah, the Prophet [may peace be upon Him] kissed one of His wives and went out for saying prayer. He did not perform ablution. (Sunan Abu Dawood, vol. 1, Chapter 70, Hadith 179)

Thus this particular teaching of Imam Shafi`i contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet. So I reject this specific ruling of Imam Shafi`i who himself said, "If I say something, then compare it to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, if it agrees to them then accept it and that which goes against them, then reject it and throw my saying against the wall." This is a saying of as-Shaafi`ee rahimahullah. See al-Majmoo` of an-Nawawee (1/63).

Thus by rejecting this particular teaching of Imam Shafi`i which contradicts the authentic hadith, I am practically a better follower of Imam Shafi`i than those who call themselves Shafi`i."

Answer

by Ml. Taha Karaan

The excerp that you qoute is very significant in that it bespeaks of a tendency that is at once welcome and worrisome. It is welcome on account that it indicates a desire to live as close as possible to the Quan and Sunnah; but worrisome because it initially oversimplifies matters of considerable complexity, and subsequently develops into the passing of judgment by persons, that if truth be told, are vastly unqualified for the task.

In asserting that he does that the hadith cited is authentic, and that Imam Shafi is contradicting it the good doctor - if it is indeed he that is the author of the excerpt - has cerainly overstepped the boundaries of his expertise. It would be easy enough to accept without question a ruling of authenticity by some scholar or the other but that would in itself be an act of blind imitation - the very same unquestioning taqlid which is so strongly condemned by the opponents of madhahib.

AUTHENTICITY

It appears to escape his attention that the authenticity of the hadith he qoutes has been called into question by the greatest of hadith scholars. Aside from Imam Shafi`i the authenticity of this hadith has been called into question by a number of eminent muhaddithun, both on the basis of the identity of `Urwah who narrates the hadith from Sayyidah `Aishah radiyallah `anha and at times on grounds of a problem with continuity in the chain between the narrator Habib ibn Abi Thabit and `Urwah. Many of the Muhaddithun were of the opinion that this `Urwah is not the famous `Urwah ibn Zubayr, the nephew and pupil of Sayyidah `Aishah, but an unknown person known as `Urwah al-Muzani; and quite a few were of the persuasion that Habib did not hear this hadith from `Urwah. It has even been suggested by some experts that one of the narrators confused the hadith of kissing not invalidating the fast with kissing not invalidating wudhu. Here follows a list of hadith critics and their criticism against the hadith:

al-Bukhari: His student Tirmidhi states: I heard Muhammad ibn Isma`il [al-Bukhari] declaring this hadith as weak. He said: Habib ibn Abi Thabit [one of the narrators in the chain] did not hear [hadith] from [his purported source] `Urwah. Jami` al-Tirmidhi. nr 86.

Yahya ibn Sa‘id al-Qattan: He denounced two of Habib ibn Abi Thabit's narrations as "akin to nothing". This hadith one of the two. (cited by Abu Dawud, al-Sunan no's. 179-180)

al-Tirmidhi: After narrating the hadith he states: Our companions (i.e. the scholars of hadith) have abandoned the hadith of ‘A’ishah on this issue because it is not authentic due to the state of its chain of narration. (Jami‘ al-Tirmidhi no. 86)

Yahya ibn Ma‘in: When asked by his pupil ‘Abbas al-Duri about the status of Habib ibn Abi Thabit he declared him as a reliable narrator, but pointed at two of his ahadith as defective. One of the two is this hadith. (cited by al-Bayhaqi, Ma‘rifat al-Sunan wal-Athar vol. 1 p. 216, al-Dhahabi, Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala vol. 5 p. 290, and al-Mizzi, Tahdhib al-Kamal vol. 5 p. 362)

Abu Hatim al-Razi: Ibn Abi Hatim states: I heard my father say: The hadith of ‘A’ishah on not making wudu due to kissing, i.e. the hadith of al-A‘mash from Habib from ‘Urwah, is not authentic. (Ibn Abi Hatim, al-‘Ilal no. 110)

Sufyan al-Thawri: This hadith was mentioned to Yahya ibn Sa‘id, and he said: Sufyan al-Thawri amongst all men knew this matter best. He claimed that Habib did not hear any [hadith] from ‘Urwah. (cited by al-Daraqutni, al-Sunan vol. 1 p. 139) He also stated that the ‘Urwah from whom Habib narrates the hadith is not ‘Urwah ibn al-Zubayr, but the unknown ‘Urwah al-Muzani. (cited by Abu Dawud, al-Sunan no's. 179-180)

al-Daraqutni: In his Sunan Imam al-Daraqutni points out the defects of all the various versions of the hadith. He also points out how the hadith of invalidating fasting came to be confused with the hadith of invalidating wudu. (al-Daraqutni, al-Sunan vol. 1 pp. 135-145)

al-Bayhaqi: After pointing out the defects in the chain of the hadith he states that the authentic version of the hadith concerns the invalidation of fasting, but that some unreliable narrators reshaped it into the invalidation of wudu. He also states that had the hadith about invalidating fasting been authentic, he would certainly have followed it. (al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra vol. 1 pp. 126-127)

DIVIDED OPINION

The above does not mean, however, that there has been consensus upon the weakness of the hadith. Other experts (eg. Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr) were of the opinion that the hadith is passably authentic. Serious students of the subject would know that the process of authentication does not always lead to clear and unambiguous outcomes. While it is quite true that it often yields an unequivocal result, either of authenticity or otherwise, it is equally true that there sometimes ensues a situation of divided opinion, with some scholars accepting, and some rejecting authenticity. The present hadith happens to be one such case.

The difficulty of passing decisive and unambiguous judgement on the authenticity of this particular hadith can well be gauged from the fact that even the late Shaykh al-Albani fell victim to equivocation on the issue. In his Da‘if Sunan Abi Dawud (p.16) he lists the hadith as unauthentic; while in Sahih Sunan Abi Dawud (p. 36) and Da‘if Sunan al-Tirmidhi (no.75) he takes the diametrically opposite view. One cannot help wondering how the good doctor was able to make an absolutely decisive judgement on this hadith when even al-Albani appears to have been unsure.

CONTRADICTION

From the aforementioned it becomes clear that the charge of contradicting the hadith which is leveled against Imam al-Shafi‘i is based upon nothing but blind acceptance of one opinion in a disputed case. Imam al-Shafi‘i was most certainly aware of the hadith, but like al-Bukhari, al-Tirmidhi, Sufyan al-Thawri, Abu Hatim al-Razi, Yahya ibn Sa‘id and others, he was not convinced of its authenticity, and therefore he made a conscious and informed decision not to employ it to restrict the generality of Allah's words in the verse of wudu: or you touched women. (5:6) Thus, in step with eminent fuqaha of the Sahabah such as Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud and Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar radiyallahu ‘anhum, he asserted that this verse covers even a man's act of kissing his wife, and as such this act would render his wudu invalid.

THE SHAFI‘I MADHHAB AND HADITH

Imam al-Shafi‘i's well-documented instruction to abandon his madhhab in favour of authentic hadith has always been a matter of special pride for the fuqaha of his madhhab, and while similar statements have been recorded from the other imams as well, it was amongst the Shafi‘i fuqaha more than anyone else that this instruction blossomed into practical application.

However, they understood well enough that this instruction was conditioned by a number of parameters. Had the author of this excerpt actually consulted Imam al-Nawawi's al-Majmu‘ Sharh al-Muhadhdhab which he cites as his source for Imam al-Shafi‘i's statement, he would have found a full discussion of these parameters. Imam al-Nawawi states:

"What al-Shafi‘i states here does not mean that anyone who sees an authentic hadith can say, "This is the [proper] view of al-Shafi‘i," and [can therefore proceed to] practice upon its apparent [meaning]. It is only for one who possesses the ability of ijtihad within the madhhab… or something close to it. [Furthermore] it is subject to the condition that one be reasonably convinced that al-Shafi‘i was not aware of the hadith or did not know it to be authentic. This [level of knowledge] can only be [acquired] after perusing all of al-Shafi‘i's works, a similar amount of works of his immediate students, and other similar works. This is a difficult condition, and few are those who fulfil it. The condition which we mentioned was stipulated only because [it is known that] al-Shafi‘i desisted from practising upon many ahadith which he saw and knew, due to the fact that he had evidence which indicated that those ahadith were somehow impugned, abrogated, particularised, or subject to interpretation."

It appears however that the doctor, for reasons of his own, preferred to use secondary or tertiary sources where the quotation is given in isolation of its parameters.

One of the most obvious parameters is that the hadith on the basis of which a person decides to abandon Imam al-Shafi‘i's view has to be authentic. The contentiousness of the claim of authenticity has already been discussed. Suffice to say here that when Imam al-Shafi‘i himself has discarded the hadith as unauthentic (as al-Bayhaqi indicates in Ma‘rifat al-Sunan wal-Athar vol. 1 p. 215) it is certainly unbecoming of a well intentioned scholar to state that he "rejects" Imam al-Shafi‘i's view because the imam "contradicts the authentic hadith".

Another parameter is that the person who abandons the view of the madhhab in favour of the authentic hadith should at least be suitably qualified to do so. There is certainly no intention of withholding anyone from practicing upon authentic ahadith, whether he is personally qualified to do so or whether he merely depends upon the opinion of a suitably qualified scholar other than himself. But when it comes to pointing fingers of criticism at our great mujtahid imams and blatantly accusing them of contradicting ahadith, one would think that an intelligent man would know better than to pit his extremely imperfect grasp of matters against the universally acclaimed erudition of the great imams.

LEAVING THE BOUNDS OF THE MADHHAB

There will inevitably be instances where followers of a particular madhhab come face to face with ahadith to which their madhhab apparently does not conform. What is to be done in such cases? Should the person summarily abandon the teaching of the madhhab in favour of the hadith? Or should he dutifully stick to the madhhab and ignore the hadith?

Neither of these two approaches is free from certain undesirable outcomes. The fuqaha of our madhhab have therefore resolved the issue in a most ingenious manner that addresses both the praiseworthy desire to practice upon the hadith and the apprehension that this may lead to chaotic fiqh. In his introduction to al-Majmu‘ (vol. 1 p. 136) Imam al-Nawawi provides us with the following guidelines:

"Any Shafi‘i who finds a hadith going against his madhhab should look into the matter [as follows]: If he possesses the complete requirements of ijtihad without restriction, or in that chapter, or [even] in that point [alone], he may independently practice upon [the hadith]. If he does not [possess it] and finds it difficult to go against the hadith, and his search for a valid explanation of the hadith [within his madhhab] does not provide a convincing solution, then he may practice upon the hadith with one condition, which is that another independent [mujtahid] imam other than al-Shafi‘i should have practiced upon it. This would then be a valid pretext for him to leave the madhhab of his imam."

It is of interest here to note that all the other major schools of thought have, with varying degrees of moderation, looked upon skin contact between male and female as nullifying wudu. The Hanbalis and Malikis add the condition of deriving pleasure from such contact, while the Hanafis regard only such contact to nullify the wudu whereby there is mutual touching of the sexual organs without penetration. It should be admitted, though, that this position of the Hanafi madhhab is not founded upon the verse that speaks of touching women, but rather upon the contention that such touching almost invariably leads to the emission of fluid, which in itself is factor that nullifies the wudu.

The idea behind following madhahib is not to turn people into prisoners of their madhahib, but rather to facilitate practicing upon the Qur’an and the Sunnah. No madhhab has ever purported to be a replacement for the Qur’an and the Sunnah, nor can it ever be. The facility that a madhhab provides is that of a systematic approach to the sources of our law, accompanied by the benefit of generation after generation of the best, purest and most capable minds. And even then, there has been recognition of the fact that situations do arise when the follower of a madhhab finds it difficult to practice contrary to the apparent meaning of a hadith that he has come across. Technically speaking, all that is required for a person faced by such a situation is that his practice be based upon the ijtihad of a valid mujtahid.

But beyond the technical aspect there is another angle: that of conduct and etiquette. When the situation warrants departure from one's own maddhab and all the requirements are met, this does not mean that one now has a licence to indulge in disparagement of the imam from whose madhhab one has departed in that one particular issue. Never must sight be lost of the fact that one's own minuscule smidgen of pseudo-insight is still aeons away from the knowledge possessed by those paragons of scholarship and virtue. No one who is acutely aware of his own deficiencies would ever descend into using disrespectful language against the mujtahid imams of the Ummah.

The true Shafi‘i or Hanafi, therefore, is not only he who is prepared abandon the opinions of Abu Hanifah and al-Shafi‘i when he perceives them to be in apparent contradiction to the hadith. At a deeper level it is he who is able to differ with the position of another without sliding into egotism and disparagement.

http://www.duai.co.za/fatawa/touching_women.html
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
11-02-2007, 11:52 AM
Originally Posted by sumeyye
^ bt the imaams didnt make rulings on the things which they died before.

when u show someone daleel...if the imaam has said something on the topic...they will go with the imaam coz it invloves more than just a peice of daleel...

bt if they dnt accept daleel on something their imaan didnt talk abt...they cant help but follow the daleel...

get me..?
:sl:
the bolded bit i didn't get, but the rest, i totally understand. it feels weird to follow other than that of the daleel. im right with ya.

:sl:
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
11-02-2007, 11:56 AM
Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim
assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

yes a muqallid must follow a sheikh as his knowledge is very little.
logic also dictates whilst following an a sheikh one trusts as sheikh albaani/uthaymeen and many others rahmatullahi alayh ajmaeen have said naturally if that sheikh is a scholar or a person of high ilm and is searching of knowledge then he will have a madhaahib, it is required is it not? So thus every person in essence does indeed follow a madhab, due to the madhab of their sheikh...


i hope that makes sense, wa allahu a'lam

may Allah give us the tawfeeq to remain true muwahhids, to have adhaab during ikhtilaaf, to accept ikhtilaaf, and to stay upon as-siraatul mustaqeem.

Ameen
:sl:
i didn't get that bit. i did, but i thought that when someone learns the deen, they dont get taught according to certain mathhab? generally speaking.
btw, out of my whole post, why are we picking on this point. lol
:sl:
Reply

sevgi
11-02-2007, 11:58 AM
i said:

he died before the daleel could reach him or before he cud study it...

then u quoted and said:

this is what gets to me. not all the daleels reach the imams. but even after relaible evidence is shown to some people, they still stick to the imams opinion, even though its wrong.

so i said that they didnt say anything abt issues they didnt recieve daleel on...

i dnt think the imaams made wrong rulings...ppl are rite in following them...

but if there is a topic which was left blank..then they shud look for the best interpretation...

and yes,...they shudnt get too fanatic.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
11-02-2007, 12:00 PM
Originally Posted by maryam11
:sl:
i didn't get that bit. i did, but i thought that when someone learns the deen, they dont get taught according to certain mathhab? generally speaking.
btw, out of my whole post, why are we picking on this point. lol
:sl:
assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah

sister where do you think usool ul fiqh, usool ul hadith etc has come from? it was from the shurah of 50 scholars that imam abu hanifa had conducted. The very method of gaining knowledge, the system and foundation was laid by these great eminent fuqaaha/ulaama/mujtahids/muhaditheen ! they were worried about the future of this ummah, how will they know right from wrong? what fiqh will they follow? will they take knowledge from those who have none etc etc thus they put forth this huge effort. Over 150,000 fiqh issues were covered within 10 years by the noble council.

So after expounding on that sister i want to tell you that people do initially begin gaining knowledge by learning the positions of the madhaahib, then they learn the dalaa'il, if they reach a very high level they can get further. But initially it is learning the madhaahib where it starts...
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
11-02-2007, 12:04 PM
:sl:
jazakallahu kahir. im with ya now sis sumeyye. i feel alot better about this now. all of ya's. perhaps i can see it from a different window. i shall sleep with a more relaxed mind, inshallah.
jazakallah sis malaikah, inshallah ill read the article later, my brain is slowly shutting down.
:sl:
Reply

sevgi
11-02-2007, 12:05 PM
madhabs deal with everyday issues which are vital today..

someone learning new would need to learn these....

tahts why they start with madhab...or are taught with madhab...

peace.
Reply

Malaikah
11-02-2007, 12:13 PM
Originally Posted by maryam11
the bolded bit i didn't get, but the rest, i totally understand. it feels weird to follow other than that of the daleel. im right with ya.
Even when you follow a madhab, you can still look at the proofs. That way you are following the madhab but you know the proofs for it too.

Originally Posted by maryam11
i didn't get that bit. i did, but i thought that when someone learns the deen, they dont get taught according to certain mathhab? generally speaking.
btw, out of my whole post, why are we picking on this point. lol
The only way to study Islam is through a madhab. There is no other way, as far as I know. After you learn on madhab, then you compare between other madhabs etc.

jazakallah sis malaikah, inshallah ill read the article later, my brain is slowly shutting down.
0kay, just make sure you read it, it is brilliant.
Reply

InToTheRain
11-02-2007, 12:17 PM
Originally Posted by maryam11
:sl:
it saddens me deeply when i befriend or atleast hold someone to high respects, yet i find out something disturbing about them, than causes me to loose respet for that person. i am not saying im better than anyone else, im simiply reflecting on all our differences. :sl:
:sl:

Reflect more on the similirities Insha'Allah and maybe you will gain respect for them.

If you read the Biographies of the past scholars and history you will learn that the knowledge they had was by far superior to ours. This makes sense as Hadith from Bukhari stated several times that the best Generation is his generation (The Sahabas), the Tabien and then the Tabi-Tabi'ien. So we follow the Madhab because we think it is the closest to the Sunnah of the Prophet(SAW) one will get. For example Ibn Kathir(RA), a student of ibn Taymiah(RA) used to follow the Shafi school of thought.

No one has to Blindly follow a Madhab, the Ulema have said one can change Madhab if one finds it easier to understand and practice or if they genuinely believe the Madhab has stronger Opinion. It was something that was required because Muslim with little knowledge were taking Fatwas from several scholars regarding the same issue and applying them to suit their desires.

Also Mutjahid can defer in his opinion, for example Imam Tahawi(RA) was born under a family which follows Shafi Madhab, then he changed to Hanafi Madhab, but he deffered in some opinion yet he claimed to follow Hanafi school of thought.

Why would scholars of such great Knowledge follow a Madhab? Do we have scholars of this calibre this day and age? What is it common during their times not to follow a Madhab? something to think about.

Also something to think about, if we are left to decide for ourselves how to interpret hadiths from Bukhari without the knowledge of a Faqih or Mutjahid do you not think that would leed to more devisions?

Let's all try our best to follow the sunnah and accept the words of a brother or sister who says he or she is trying their level best to follow the sunnah and if in their hearts they deviate then that is Allah Azza Wa Jal aware of what is in it.

:w:
Reply

Ibn Abi Ahmed
11-02-2007, 07:33 PM
:sl:

If you're in the US or Canada, I really really recommend that you take this class:

http://www.almaghrib.org/seminar_tce.php

It's taught by Shaykh Yaser Birjas, and well...just take the class, you'll understand why after.

The class teaches you to respect each Madhab and you learn why rulings are different in each. You'll learn how awesome the Imaams were and how much hard work they did, how they derived their principles, and how they were effected due to time period and location. And you'll come to understand why there are differences of opinion and you'll gain something - that's respect for each madhab and the amount work scholars have done. Here's some testimonials from people that have taken the class:

http://forums.almaghrib.org/showthread.php?t=17446

:w:
Reply

Ibn Abi Ahmed
11-02-2007, 08:41 PM
:sl:

If you're going to choose a school to study, id say go for the Hanbali school. It encompasses both Aqeedah and Fiqh, so you'll get the entire package. Plus alot of known scholars were Hanbali (and these are minus the students of Imam Ahmad), Ibn Hamid, al Qadhi Abu Yala, Abu Ismail al Harrawi, Abdul Qadir al Jilani, Ibn Jawzi, Ibn Qudama, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Qayyim, Ibn Rajab and others. Abu Isma’il al-Harawi infact would say:

Ana Hanbaliyun Mahayiytu fa in amut
Fa wasiyati li al-Nasi an yatahanbalu

I am a Hanbali as long as I live, and when I die
My legacy to the people is to become Hanbalis

EXCEPT FOR imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal who ordered his fatwa not be written down, and to follow only the Quran and Sunnah.
His fatwa and responses were collected by al Khallal who travelled the Khilafa during his time seeking out Imam Ahmad's students. He then compiled it into a book entitled al-Jami'. al Jami' was then summarized into Mukhtasar al-Khiraqi, by al Khiraqi (d 334) and it was the first Fiqh manual written in the history of the madhab. But in regards to Aqeedah, we have Imam Ahmad's own books like Kitaab us Sunnah and Radd Ala' al Zanadiqah wal Jahmiyyah plus letters which he wrote to personalities in his time explaining the Sunnah.

So it isn't thaat bad over on the Hanbali side :p
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
11-05-2007, 04:50 AM
:sl:
before i go any further, i just want to clarfiy someting (which i have come to accept since i last posted on this thead). im not against being bias towards a particular mathhab IF genuinley one believes that the opinion taken by the particular imam, on a particular issue is the most correct. i also understand why one will be bias towrds a praticulr mathhab: because this what they have been taught, and sheehsh! we not gonna question our teachers now, are we? why should we? What i mean is, im assuming that the teacher him/herself is knowledgeable/fleunt if you like, with regards to that paticular mathhab, and therefore feels that he/she cannot teach other than with that mathhab, becasue this the only evidence that they have at hand. so inother words, if this is genuneinly all the knowledge you can get your hands on (as well as the only evicences they have been exposed to-becaue if your're only exosed to a particluar thing, its not really going to occur to you, to explore any further), then i understand why you would give an opnion bias to that mathhab, if any of that even makes sense.

However having saying all that, I have question(which are based on the article sis malaikah postes -btw, it was good..lol...)

With regards to follwong stricly a mathhab, (taking into account that this is what you have been taught, and this is the strongest evidence at hand, (as well as the only evicences they have been exposed to), my question now is: if someone gives me an opinion of lets say the Imam malik (rahimahullah), taking innto considration, that there are differences with amoung the mathabs, and therefore, there is a possiblity that this could be a 'weak' opinion. Would it be then my responsibily to reaserch, (obviouly by asking one with knowledge), for the strongest opinion? And considring the fact that i may not be able to get in contact with someone with more knowledge than, is it then better for me to stick to the opinion of Imam Malik (rahimahullah), (because my knowledge is obviuosly alot less then his)although there could be a stronger opinion?
Another parameter is that the person who abandons the view of the madhhab in favour of the authentic hadith should at least be suitably qualified to do so.
before i comment, lets read the following incident frst
Ibn Wahb said: "I heard Maalik being asked about cleaning between the toes during ablution. He said, 'The people do not have to do that.' I did not approach him until the crowd had lessened, when I said to him, 'We know of a sunnah about that.' He said, 'What is that ?' I said, 'Laith ibn Sa'd, Ibn Lahee'ah and 'Amr ibn al-Haarith narrated to us from Yazeed ibn 'Amr al-Ma'aafiri from Abu 'Abdur-Rahman al-Hubuli from Mustawrid ibn Shaddaad al-Qurashi who said, 'I saw the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) rubbing between his toes with his little finger.' He said, 'This hadeeth is sound; I had not heard of it at all until now.' Afterwards, I heard him being asked about the same thing, on which he ordered cleaning between the toes."30
-------
[30]From the Introduction to Al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel of Ibn Abi Haatim, pp. 31-2.
taken from sheikh al-albaai's "the prophets prayer described' book.
you see, if ibn wahb had not pointed that the hadith to imam malik, and i, coming centeries after, had seen that, than i would have out aside the opinion of imam malik, because of the hadith. i know, i know im not qualified, but it dosent feel right to put aside the hadith, Which clearly states that it is acceptable and go opposite to it.

Now, I have a couple of questions for the followers of the mathhabs.(sorry, it may sound a little offence, i dont mean it though)
lets read the followiung fatwa:
my question is (sorry, it may sound a little offence, i dont mean it though)for those who are of the opnion that wiping part of the head if suffiecnet, after seeing the evidence, willy you still stick to your mathaby veiw, although reliabe evidence suggests otherwise.

also, when you give da3wah, or when/or if someone asks you a question about islam, and you know that there is more than one opinion, and you know that your imams opinion is not the most correct, what answer do you give the person? the strongest opinion, or otherwise.
~~~~~~~
btw, has anyone taken the course brother ubaydullah is refering to. perhaps you could post your notes.....
"I only follow the Qu'ran, not humans!" Huh? "You must be a *******!"
lol @ that comment. dont even get me started.:mad:
:sl:
Reply

Malaikah
11-05-2007, 05:59 AM
Originally Posted by maryam11
With regards to follwong stricly a mathhab, (taking into account that this is what you have been taught, and this is the strongest evidence at hand, (as well as the only evicences they have been exposed to), my question now is: if someone gives me an opinion of lets say the Imam malik (rahimahullah), taking innto considration, that there are differences with amoung the mathabs, and therefore, there is a possiblity that this could be a 'weak' opinion. Would it be then my responsibily to reaserch, (obviouly by asking one with knowledge), for the strongest opinion? And considring the fact that i may not be able to get in contact with someone with more knowledge than, is it then better for me to stick to the opinion of Imam Malik (rahimahullah), (because my knowledge is obviuosly alot less then his)although there could be a stronger opinion?
Well, depending on who you ask, different people will tell you different opinions are stronger!

taken from sheikh al-albaai's "the prophets prayer described' book.
you see, if ibn wahb had not pointed that the hadith to imam malik, and i, coming centeries after, had seen that, than i would have out aside the opinion of imam malik, because of the hadith. i know, i know im not qualified, but it dosent feel right to put aside the hadith, Which clearly states that it is acceptable and go opposite to it.
Yes, but I don't think followers of a modern madhab still follow the original opinions of the four shaykhs... don't they follow the opinions of contemporary scholars of that madhhab? :?

fatwa:
my question is (sorry, it may sound a little offence, i dont mean it though)for those who are of the opnion that wiping part of the head if suffiecnet, after seeing the evidence, willy you still stick to your mathaby veiw, although reliabe evidence suggests otherwise.
If a person follows a madhab and follows X opinion of that madhab, and then hears of a different opinion that contradicts his opinion X and has hadiths/verses as proof. The person should not immediately change his opinion to follow the new opinion, but he should ask a person (shaykh, student of knowledge, scholar) to explain opinion X to him and why he follows opinion X even though there is verse/hadith that contradicts it. If, after that, he is content with the explanation of opinion X then alhamdulilah but if he feels uncomfortable/uncertain about it than there is nothing wrong with him following other other opinion.

But the key point here is that he research the opinion of his madhab before changing it. This is what my shaykh taught us.

also, when you give da3wah, or when/or if someone asks you a question about islam, and you know that there is more than one opinion, and you know that your imams opinion is not the most correct, what answer do you give the person? the strongest opinion, or otherwise.
I think it really depends on what they ask. Safest option is to say there are different opinions, I follow opinion X, others follow opinion Y...
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
11-06-2007, 05:15 AM
:sl:
Originally Posted by Malaikah

Yes, but I don't think followers of a modern madhab still follow the original opinions of the four shaykhs... don't they follow the opinions of contemporary scholars of that madhhab? :?
no, no, no dear. you misuderstood :sunny: what i meant was if i saw the hadith, and without consulting a person of knowledge, than instinctivley i would have put the opinion of the imam aside, a went for the hadith, because i would have felt that that the proper thing to do.

If a person follows a madhab and follows X opinion of that madhab, and then hears of a different opinion that contradicts his opinion X and has hadiths/verses as proof. The person should not immediately change his opinion to follow the new opinion, but he should ask a person (shaykh, student of knowledge, scholar) to explain opinion X to him and why he follows opinion X even though there is verse/hadith that contradicts it. If, after that, he is content with the explanation of opinion X then alhamdulilah but if he feels uncomfortable/uncertain about it than there is nothing wrong with him following other other opinion.
but why not sis? In the case where the shiekh has explained why it is nessesary, using evidences, to wipe the full head. why would then one need to go to their teacher, etc to get that further explained, when the evidences is right there. i dont get! this is what is frustrating me.

But the key point here is that he research the opinion of his madhab before changing it. This is what my shaykh taught us.
im not saying change your mathhab, im saying whats wroong with accepting a differenent view, after acceptable evidences has been shown. this is what im having trouble digesting.
:sl:
Reply

ayesha309
11-06-2007, 04:57 PM
I use to follow a madhab and then poeple told me i shouldn't becuase that is how the Muslim Ummah gets divided. they said i should stick to the Qur'an and Sunnah. but then after that in a Jum'a Khutbah i heard a hadith that the Prophet SAW said the Day of Judgement will be near when
..... and there were 15 items listed.
one of them was when poeple will disrespect the Ulema and I was told that by not following a particular Imam we are disrespecting all of them. But i dont disrespect them. I think Masha'Allah they were all excellent people and they have excellent schools of thought. i dunt know what to do. im confused :?
am i doing something wrong??
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
11-06-2007, 05:02 PM
^ the way i understand it is that... a madhab is to follow a huge list of qualified mujtaahids opinions and to follow other then that is to follow opinions of other scholars??

for example, hanafi madhab follows - abu hanifa/ibn abidin/abu yusuf etc etc... soooo many others..

la adree..
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
11-06-2007, 05:10 PM
someone said:

Not following a madhab is sort of like saying I'll do this differential equation using an equation concocted by my friend. "I won't use Lagrange multiples, because I trust my friend." It doesn't work like that.
Reply

MinAhlilHadeeth
11-06-2007, 05:13 PM
Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Saalih Al-Uthaymeen was asked:

When encountering a difficult issue, do you advise the student of knowledge not to stick to a madhhab, or [do you advise] to turn to a particular madhhab?

The Shaykh, hafidhahullaah, responded:

If what is intended by sticking to a madhhab is that a person sticks to that madhhab, and turns away from everything else; whether the correct view lies in his madhhab or another madhhab - then this is not permissible, and is from the blameworthy and bigotted partisanship. But if a person ascribes to a particular madhhab in order to benefit from its principles and guidelines, but he refers it back to the Book and the Sunnah; [such that] if it becomes clear to him that the preferred view lies in another madhhab, he then adopts that view - then there is no problem with this. [Note: this is for a student of knowledge, not the common muslim].

Shaykh Saalih Al-Fawzaan was asked:

Is it permissible for one who sticks to a particular madhhab in matters of worship, to turn away from it and stick to another madhhab whenever he wants? Or is it binding upon a Muslim to stick to just one madhhab until he dies? And is there a difference in how the Prayer should be performed between the four madhhabs or not? And what has been related from the Prophet sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam concerning how the Prayer should be prayed?

The Shaykh, hafidhahullaah, responded:

The issue of sticking to a madhhab has in it some detail. If a person has the ability to know the ruling from its proof, and to deduce the ruling from its proof, then it is not permitted for him to cling to a madhhab. rather, it is upon him to take the ruling from the evidence - if he has the ability to do so. However, this is rare amongst the people, since this is a quality of the mujtahideen from the people of knowledge; those that have reaced the levels of ijtihaad. As for one who is not like that, then he cannot take the rulings directly from the evidences. And this is the predominant case amongst the people, especially in these latter times. So [in such a case] there is no harm in adopting one of the four madhhabs and making taqleed of one of them. However, he should not make blind taqleed such that he takes all that is in the madhhab; whether it is correct or incorrect. Rather, it is upon him to take from the madhhab that which - in his view - does not clearly oppose the evidence.

As for those views in the madhhab which clearly oppose the evidence, then it is not permissible for the Muslim to take it. Rather it is upon him to adopt what is established by the proof, even if it is in another madhhab So his leaving the madhhab for another madhhab in order to follow the evidence is something good; this is a matter which is good - rather it is obligatory;since following the evidence is an madhhab in order to follow the evidence is something good; this is a matter which is good - rather it is obligatory;since following the evidence is an obligation. As for adopting one madhhab sometimes and another at other times, then this moving is from the angle of following ones desires and seeking concessions, and this is not permissible. Meaning, that whatever accords with ones whims and desires, from the sayings of the people of knowledge, is taken - even if it opposes the proof; and whatever opposes ones whims and desires is left - even if it has a proof.

This is the following of whims and desires, and we seek refuge in Allaah [from that]. Thus, moving from one madhhab to another, due to following ones desires, or due to ease or seeking concession; then this is not permissible. As for moving from one madhhab to another due to following an evidence, or to flee from a saying that does not have a proof, or from an erroneous view - then this is a matter that is encouraged and sought from a Muslim. And Allaah knows best. As for the issue concerning the differences between the four madhhabs in the Prayer, then the four madhhabs - and all praise is for Allaah -are in Prayer, then the four madhhabs - and all praise is for Allaah - are in agreement about most of the rulings concerning the Prayer, in general. Their differences are in some of the details of the Prayer. From [such differences] are, for example, that [one of them] may consider something to be prescribed, whilst another may not consider it to be prescribed; one may consider something to be obligatory, whilst another may consider it to be recommended; and so on. So the differences are in the details of the Prayer. But as for the rulings of the Prayer in general, then there is no difference - and all praise is for Allaah

Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhaab said:

If a person is learning fiqh from one of the four madhhabs, then he sees a hadeeth that opposes his madhhab; and so he follows it and leaves his madhhab - then this is recommended, rather it is obligatory upon him when the proof has been made clear to him. This would not be considered as opposing his Imaam that he follows, since they - Abu Haneefah, Maalik, ash-Shaafiee and Ahmad, radiallaahu anhum ajmaeen - were all agreed upon this fundamental principle. ... As for the case whereby a person does not have any evidence which opposes the view of the scholars of the madhhab, then we hope that it is permissible to act upon it (the madhhab), since their opinions are better than our own opinions; they took their proofs from the sayings of the Companions and those who came after them. However, it is not essential to declare with certainty (al-jazm) that this is the Shareeah of Allaah and His Messenger, until the proof that is not contradicted in this issue is made clear. This is the action of the Salaf of this Ummah and its scholars - both previous and recent - as well as that which they criticised: namely having bigotted partisanship for particular madhhabs (at-taassubul-madhaahib) and leaving off following the proof... However, if there becomes clear to him something which necessitates preferring one saying over another; either due to detailed proofs if he knows and understands them,or because he holds one of the two people to be more knowledgeable about this matter and having more piety about what he says, and so he leaves the saying of that one for the saying of the other one - then this is permissible, rather it is obligatory. And there is a text from Imaam Ahmad concerning this.

REFERENCES

1. As-Sahwatul-Islaamiyyah (pp.141-142).
2. Muntaqaa min Fataawaa (5/365-366).
3. Ad-Durur-Saniyyah (4/7)
.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
11-06-2007, 05:23 PM
The Shaykh, hafidhahullaah, responded:

The issue of sticking to a madhhab has in it some detail. If a person has the ability to know the ruling from its proof, and to deduce the ruling from its proof, then it is not permitted for him to cling to a madhhab. rather, it is upon him to take the ruling from the evidence - if he has the ability to do so. However, this is rare amongst the people, since this is a quality of the mujtahideen from the people of knowledge; those that have reaced the levels of ijtihaad. As for one who is not like that, then he cannot take the rulings directly from the evidences. And this is the predominant case amongst the people, especially in these latter times. So [in such a case] there is no harm in adopting one of the four madhhabs and making taqleed of one of them. However, he should not make blind taqleed such that he takes all that is in the madhhab; whether it is correct or incorrect. Rather, it is upon him to take from the madhhab that which - in his view - does not clearly oppose the evidence.
mashaAllah, jizakAllahu khairan
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
11-07-2007, 04:59 AM
Originally Posted by Ayesha000
I use to follow a madhab and then poeple told me i shouldn't becuase that is how the Muslim Ummah gets divided. they said i should stick to the Qur'an and Sunnah. but then after that in a Jum'a Khutbah i heard a hadith that the Prophet SAW said the Day of Judgement will be near when
..... and there were 15 items listed.
one of them was when poeple will disrespect the Ulema and I was told that by not following a particular Imam we are disrespecting all of them. But i dont disrespect them. I think Masha'Allah they were all excellent people and they have excellent schools of thought. i dunt know what to do. im confused :?
am i doing something wrong??
:sl:
i dont think that this is what divides the ummah, i think the ummah becomes divided when people strictly follow one mathhab, although a stronger opinion lies within another, and get so fanatical about it, and extreme, although it is quite simple.
jazakallahu khair sis Al Muwahhidah.
:sl:
Reply

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-16-2009, 12:36 AM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-25-2009, 03:31 AM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-29-2006, 08:08 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!