instead of derailing this thread, i thought id start one here...
and Akhee Qatadah, if you can reply in this thread, it would be much appreciated, inshallah...
also, i dont want this thread to become "world war 3" so please no killing each other...i do not want this thread closed :blind:
Im in the middle of reading The Evolution of Fiqh, by Bilal Phillips. I havnt read the whole book myself, but have skimmed over some other parts of it and have stumbled across an interesting thing concerning the following of Mathhabs...
But to this day, the majority of scholars remain firmly bound to sectarian Islam in the form of one of the four Mathhabs, in doing so they knowingly perpetuate division among the ranks of the Muslim nation
...
But i don't get what on earth adhering to any of the Mathhabs has anything to do with division and splitting up of the Ummah. i mean i do get when people go into extremes etc than that maybe one of the causes- and i agree- but to "ditch" the adherence of following the Mathhabs isn't that a little far fetched...
Okay, so rather than leaving the Mathhabs, shouldn't we just revert to sticking to the original "purity" of them... i don't get why one needs to get rid of the Mathhabs. The Mathhabs themselves, their Usool,etc (fundamentals) aren't at fault, but rather (some) or their followers (and scholars) have gone into extremes with their rulings etc...Because if you flip the "other side of the coin," i.e not adhering to the mathhabs you'll have people doing their own ijtihaad and just that's stupid because not only are you deriving meaning/ruling of the Quran and Sunnah without the proper knowledge (i.e that which is found in the Mathhabs), it’ll will probably only result in further division, no?
and secondly, i find it really odd how the authors all "anti Sectarian" (which is good), but then goes on to say
and also other scholars of the 20th century, such as Hasan al-Banna (d.1949), founder of the ikhwaan ul-Muslimeen.......
so he goes on to say that the Mathhabs, etc are the causes of divisions, but then praises the founder of the Ikwaanis...which is just strange because (correct me if im wrong) the ikwaani movement is a sect itself...so what the heck
i mean don't get me wrong, the book is great, but its just these point that left me a little confused...
------------------------
and also going back to the other thread, I don’t agree that the doors of ijtihaad should be closed (if they are), but I do agree that we should still implement/use the Mathhabs to derive rulings...because one can only do ijtihaad through the Mathhabs, right And not leave them (which was the gist I was getting)
and if one didn't implement the use of the mathhabs when making a ruling than that means any random person can pick up a verse/hadith and twist it out of proper context (whether intentionally or not), no?
And also isnt that an advantage of the mathhabs: to help us understand the Quran and Sunnah as the Prophet/Sahabis, etc did...so without them then, again, verses/hadiths could be taken out of their contexts...
btw when i say adhering to a mathhab im generally referring to the scholars when they make a ruling on something...
and another thing you said in the other thread
format_quote Originally Posted by - Qatada -
If someone uses the authentic Qur'an an Sunnah for ijtihaad - they can't really modernise the deen, try looking at a site like IslamQA which implements this today.
But you still need the mathhabs to direct you on how to perform that Itihaad, right I mean its either that or you understand the Quran and sunnah by your own reasoning...i mean i do use islamqa, but at the same time i do think they follow a mathhab in their rulings (Im sure they're hanbalis---not that i think that there is anything wrong with that or that their validity is questioned)
...desperate for husnul-khitaam...
please make dua that Allah grants me a good end (to my life). please make dua that Allah guides me.
they'll be willing to help you out properly with proper info and answers to specific questions insha Allah.
i think what bilal philips condemned was the fact that some scholars from the madhabs preferred the opinions of their madhabs scholars over authentic ahadith, something which the creators of the madhabs would never do since they said their madhab is the authentic hadith [they just never had access to all the ahadith at that time].
i think he praised hasan al banna and people who were willing to surpass these opinions [which may have been wrong] and prefer authentic ahadith over blindly following the madhab alone. you might have seen that on that page [p120] footnote he quotes the author of Fiqh Al-Sunnah (sayyid sabiq) who was ikhwani, but alot of salafis (i heard waleed basyouni on a talk) mention that its a good book too because its based on sunnah.
basically, the madhabs are there to get to the final truth on what was really meant from the Qur'an and Sunnah. it should help us reach that destination and not cause divisions - but reach a final truth. thats why ijtihad continues to get to that final truth. we're mistaken when some say that all the ijtihads are correct in their own way, instead the imams would say that there is one truth and ijtihads are done to get to that truth.
just ask on that forum insha Allah, trust me you'll get good info to your specific questions insha Allah.
Last edited by - Qatada -; 12-26-2008 at 01:26 PM.
Islam is greater than one sect or another, and self proclaimed salafi's are no less sectarian then any. all the sects have deficiencies, no matter how much they claim to be following "truth". most of what is called fiqh, was taken up from the cultures and religions of the people the arabs conquered.
Other scholars of the twentieth century, such as Hassan al-Bannaa (d.1949), founder of the Ikhwaan Muslimoon movement Sayyid, Abul-A’laa Mawdudi (1903-1979), founder of the Jama’at Islami movement, and more recently the great Hadeeth scholar of our era, Naasir ad-Deen al-Albaanee have picked up the banner of Islamic Revival and have called for the unfication of the Madh-habs.
196
Footnote; 196
The book, Fiqh as-Sunnah, by as-Sayyid Saabiq, one of al-Bannaa’s followers, represents a serious attempt to answer that call
i think that the best thing sis would b 4 u to refer to a true scholar not some1 whos just read a few pages here and there of islam!!!!......other wise it will turn out into ww3.......as a student of fiqh myself i happen to come across many books on this topic and knw that refuting the foundations of the schools of thought is not based on true understanding of shariah.....i have no objection to 1 who follows the salafi mathab as long as they dont abuse the gr8 scholars and predecesors!
In the end arent we all "1 ummah" and isnt our aim 2 "help 1 another"? and "not to insult each other".....whatever certain individuals may write or say doesnt really represnt a major view!!!!!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
And not leave them (which was the gist I was getting)
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks