Who is a Taalib-ul-`Ilm

format_quote Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

We are living in a terribly wretched time. We are living in a time wherein people with no knowledge of Qur'aan and Sunnah are speaking on Deen. We are living in a time when a person will not open a surgery if he is not a doctor; he will not open a pharmacy if he is not a pharmacist; he will not try to get hired as a lawyer, attorney or advocate if he has not studied law (in fact, he will not even speak in the field); let alone those fields, he will not even argue with a plumber in the field of plumbing, if he hasn't studied it and isn't a plumber! Yet, everyone feels he or she is entitled to speak in Deen and dish out Fataawaa like Santa Claus is said to give out gifts on Christmas.

What sickness is this? People have respect for every field except Deen? They have too much respect for the field of medicine to speak in that field without knowledge. They will not argue with doctors and specialists in the medical field about medicine, but they will argue in Deen! And the people arguing, many times cannot even recite Qur'aan! Yet they feel they are entitled to "have an opinion" in Deen! Our Deen is based on Qur'aan and Sunnah, not the "opinions" of people! Even an "`Aalim" must speak only based on Qur'aan and Sunnah and cannot give out his own "opinions" if they are in conflict with the Sharee`ah! Moreover, a person has to have studied Deen to a certain extent before he can speak on it.

In this thread, I would like to show what the `Ulamaa have said a person has to have studied and know in order to be a "Taalib-ul-`Ilm" (Student of Deeni Knowledge). After you read this, In Shaa Allaah you will realise how ridiculous people are in thinking every Tom, Dick and Harry has the right to speak on Deen. You will also realise that many of those who go around touting titles like "Shaykh", "Maulana" and "Mufti" know nothing at all.

The senior `Ulamaa have said that in order to be a Taalib-ul-`Ilm, a person must know the following:

1) He must be a Haafiz of the Qur'aan (memorised the entire Qur'aan, cover to cover).

2) He must be fluent in Arabic. He must have studied all of the various fields within Arabic itself, such as Nahw, Sarf, Balaaghah, Fasaahah, Ma`aanee, Badee`, Ishtiqaaq, Tarkeeb (A.K.A. I`raab), etc.

3) He must have studied all of the laws of Usool-ul-Fiqh (Principles of Islaamic Jurisprudence).


4) He must have a comprehensive knowledge of the Taareekh (history) of Islaam, which includes: the history of the 25 Ambiyaa mentioned in the Qur'aan, the Seerah of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم, the history of Sahaabah, Taabi`een, Atbaa`-ut-Taabi`een (the entire Salaf era), and at least a basic knowledge of the events which have taken place in Islaam until the present time, such as the various Khilaafats which have existed, the different dynasties such as the Umayyads, Abbasids, Mamlooks, Uthmaanis, Faatimids, Seljuks, the Dan Fodio dynasty, etc.


5) He must have studied how to extract Furoo` (the branch laws) from the Usool (roots).


6) He must know the Tafseer of each and every Aayah of the Qur'aan; the Sabab-un-Nuzool (reason for revelation of that Aayah); the Naasikh and Mansookh (which Aayaat are abrogators and which were abrogated); al-Muqaaranah baynas Suwar wal-Muqaaranah baynal Aayaat (the link between the Soorahs and the link between the Aayaat, thus knowing the context of each Aayah and how it is connected to the Aayaat before it and the Aayaat after it). Thus, the person would need to have perfected at least one from the reliable, classical Kutub of Tafseer, such as Tafseer ibn Katheer.

7) Have read and memorised at least the meanings (if not the words) of the eight most famous Kutub of Hadeeth (Bukhaari, Muslim, Abu Daawud, Tirmidhee, Nasaa'i, Ibn Maajah, Muwatta' Imaam Maalik, Musnad Imaam Ahmad.)


8) Know all of the events which took place in the life of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم.


9) Have a knowledge of Arabic poetry.


10) Have studied the correct `Aqeedah.


11) Have studied Usool-ut-Tafseer (The Principles of Tafseer).


12) Have studied all of the laws of `Ilm-ul-Faraa'idh (Inheritance).


13) Have studied all of the laws of at least one from the four Madhaahib (be it Hanafi, Maaliki, Shaafi`ee or Hanbali), as well as the evidences behind each of those laws.


14) Have studied al-Qawaa`id al-Fiqhiyyah.


15) Have studied Maqaasid ash-Sharee`ah.


16) Have studied Mustalah al-Hadeeth.


17) Have studied the `Ilm of Jarh wat-Ta`deel.




Once a person knows all this, he is still not an "`Aalim". He is only a "Taalib-ul-`Ilm" (Student of Deeni Knowledge).


A person asked Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, "Is a person a Faqeeh if he has memorised 100,000 Ahaadeeth (with their chains of narrators)?" He said, "No." The person asked, "If he memorised 200,000?" He said, "No." The person asked, "If he memorised 300,000?" He said, "No." The person asked, "If he memorised 400,000?" Imaam Ahmad gestured with his hand (meaning, "maybe" such a person can be considered a Faqeeh. Maybe!)

Therefore, fear Allaah and do not speak in things which you have no knowledge of. Sahaabah used to avoid issuing Fataawaa when there was someone else who could do it instead, out of their Taqwaa of Allaah Ta`aalaa. Only when they had no choice would they issue a Fatwaa. If they were not absolutely certain about a Mas'alah, they would say "I don't know."

The `Ulamaa say that if you see a person saying he's an `Aalim, know that he's a Jaahil. "Whoever says he's `Aalim, then he's Jaahil."

`Ilm is an ocean the depths of which we cannot even comprehend. What we know is only a drop from that ocean.

Even Sahaabah would try to avoid giving Fataawaa and feared to narrate from Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم if they were not absolutely certain about what he had said, yet people today - who have not studied even how to read Qur'aan correctly - are so bold as to feel they are Mujtahideen and can subject the Qur'aan and Sunnah to their own warped and puny understanding! As if the Qur'aan and Sunnah mean what they "feel" it means!

...فإلى الله المشتكى

There is a famous line of poetry from Qatr-un-Nadaa:

زعمتني شيخاً ولست بشيخ *** إنما الشيخ من يدبّ دبيباً

رب زدني علماً

اللهم لا علم لنا إلا ما علّمتنا, إنك أنت العليم الحكيم

والله تعالى أعلم وعلمه أتم وأحكم

والسلام

Brother Huzaifa

I did not read more than 2 points I had a question to ask about my name 'talibilm' itself . so '' talib'' in urdu means ''seeker'', some one who is just seeking knowledge, how can be deemed as better than Aaalim ?

but I got, does talibul ilm is it in Arabic ? the stringent rules you speak about .

Because the same word ''waseelah' in urdu and Arabic have different meaning.

Imam al-Ghazali and the signs of the ‘Ulama


by Mawlana Muhammad Zakariyya Kandhalawi


https://www.deoband.org/2010/11/gene...-of-the-ulama/

format_quote Originally Posted by talibilm

Brother Huzaifa

I did not read more than 2 points I had a question to ask about my name 'talibilm' itself . so '' talib'' in urdu means ''seeker'', some one who is just seeking knowledge, how can be deemed as better than Aaalim ?

but I got, does talibul ilm is it in Arabic ? the stringent rules you speak about .

Because the same word ''waseelah' in urdu and Arabic have different meaning.

1) Your name - in both Arabic and Urdu - means "Seeker of Knowledge".

"Taalib-e-Ilm" is Urdu; "Taalib-ul-`Ilm" is Arabic.

2) A Taalib-ul-`Ilm, once he has reached a certain level of `Ilm, is deemed to be an "`Aalim" (one who has `Ilm). `Aalim literally means "one who knows", as it is the active participle (Ism-ul-Faa`il) of the verb عَلِمَ يَعْلَمُ `Alima - Ya`lamu, which means "to know".

format_quote Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

We are living in a terribly wretched time. We are living in a time wherein people with no knowledge of Qur'aan and Sunnah are speaking on Deen. We are living in a time when a person will not open a surgery if he is not a doctor; he will not open a pharmacy if he is not a pharmacist; he will not try to get hired as a lawyer, attorney or advocate if he has not studied law (in fact, he will not even speak in the field); let alone those fields, he will not even argue with a plumber in the field of plumbing, if he hasn't studied it and isn't a plumber! Yet, everyone feels he or she is entitled to speak in Deen and dish out Fataawaa like Santa Claus is said to give out gifts on Christmas.

What sickness is this? People have respect for every field except Deen? They have too much respect for the field of medicine to speak in that field without knowledge. They will not argue with doctors and specialists in the medical field about medicine, but they will argue in Deen! And the people arguing, many times cannot even recite Qur'aan! Yet they feel they are entitled to "have an opinion" in Deen! Our Deen is based on Qur'aan and Sunnah, not the "opinions" of people! Even an "`Aalim" must speak only based on Qur'aan and Sunnah and cannot give out his own "opinions" if they are in conflict with the Sharee`ah! Moreover, a person has to have studied Deen to a certain extent before he can speak on it.

In this thread, I would like to show what the `Ulamaa have said a person has to have studied and know in order to be a "Taalib-ul-`Ilm" (Student of Deeni Knowledge). After you read this, In Shaa Allaah you will realise how ridiculous people are in thinking every Tom, Dick and Harry has the right to speak on Deen. You will also realise that many of those who go around touting titles like "Shaykh", "Maulana" and "Mufti" know nothing at all.

The senior `Ulamaa have said that in order to be a Taalib-ul-`Ilm, a person must know the following:

1) He must be a Haafiz of the Qur'aan (memorised the entire Qur'aan, cover to cover).

2) He must be fluent in Arabic. He must have studied all of the various fields within Arabic itself, such as Nahw, Sarf, Balaaghah, Fasaahah, Ma`aanee, Badee`, Ishtiqaaq, Tarkeeb (A.K.A. I`raab), etc.

3) He must have studied all of the laws of Usool-ul-Fiqh (Principles of Islaamic Jurisprudence).


4) He must have a comprehensive knowledge of the Taareekh (history) of Islaam, which includes: the history of the 25 Ambiyaa mentioned in the Qur'aan, the Seerah of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم, the history of Sahaabah, Taabi`een, Atbaa`-ut-Taabi`een (the entire Salaf era), and at least a basic knowledge of the events which have taken place in Islaam until the present time, such as the various Khilaafats which have existed, the different dynasties such as the Umayyads, Abbasids, Mamlooks, Uthmaanis, Faatimids, Seljuks, the Dan Fodio dynasty, etc.


5) He must have studied how to extract Furoo` (the branch laws) from the Usool (roots).


6) He must know the Tafseer of each and every Aayah of the Qur'aan; the Sabab-un-Nuzool (reason for revelation of that Aayah); the Naasikh and Mansookh (which Aayaat are abrogators and which were abrogated); al-Muqaaranah baynas Suwar wal-Muqaaranah baynal Aayaat (the link between the Soorahs and the link between the Aayaat, thus knowing the context of each Aayah and how it is connected to the Aayaat before it and the Aayaat after it). Thus, the person would need to have perfected at least one from the reliable, classical Kutub of Tafseer, such as Tafseer ibn Katheer.

7) Have read and memorised at least the meanings (if not the words) of the eight most famous Kutub of Hadeeth (Bukhaari, Muslim, Abu Daawud, Tirmidhee, Nasaa'i, Ibn Maajah, Muwatta' Imaam Maalik, Musnad Imaam Ahmad.)


8) Know all of the events which took place in the life of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم.


9) Have a knowledge of Arabic poetry.


10) Have studied the correct `Aqeedah.


11) Have studied Usool-ut-Tafseer (The Principles of Tafseer).


12) Have studied all of the laws of `Ilm-ul-Faraa'idh (Inheritance).


13) Have studied all of the laws of at least one from the four Madhaahib (be it Hanafi, Maaliki, Shaafi`ee or Hanbali), as well as the evidences behind each of those laws.


14) Have studied al-Qawaa`id al-Fiqhiyyah.


15) Have studied Maqaasid ash-Sharee`ah.


16) Have studied Mustalah al-Hadeeth.


17) Have studied the `Ilm of Jarh wat-Ta`deel.




Once a person knows all this, he is still not an "`Aalim". He is only a "Taalib-ul-`Ilm" (Student of Deeni Knowledge).


A person asked Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, "Is a person a Faqeeh if he has memorised 100,000 Ahaadeeth (with their chains of narrators)?" He said, "No." The person asked, "If he memorised 200,000?" He said, "No." The person asked, "If he memorised 300,000?" He said, "No." The person asked, "If he memorised 400,000?" Imaam Ahmad gestured with his hand (meaning, "maybe" such a person can be considered a Faqeeh. Maybe!)

Therefore, fear Allaah and do not speak in things which you have no knowledge of. Sahaabah used to avoid issuing Fataawaa when there was someone else who could do it instead, out of their Taqwaa of Allaah Ta`aalaa. Only when they had no choice would they issue a Fatwaa. If they were not absolutely certain about a Mas'alah, they would say "I don't know."

The `Ulamaa say that if you see a person saying he's an `Aalim, know that he's a Jaahil. "Whoever says he's `Aalim, then he's Jaahil."

`Ilm is an ocean the depths of which we cannot even comprehend. What we know is only a drop from that ocean.

Even Sahaabah would try to avoid giving Fataawaa and feared to narrate from Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم if they were not absolutely certain about what he had said, yet people today - who have not studied even how to read Qur'aan correctly - are so bold as to feel they are Mujtahideen and can subject the Qur'aan and Sunnah to their own warped and puny understanding! As if the Qur'aan and Sunnah mean what they "feel" it means!

...فإلى الله المشتكى

There is a famous line of poetry from Qatr-un-Nadaa:

زعمتني شيخاً ولست بشيخ *** إنما الشيخ من يدبّ دبيباً


رب زدني علماً

اللهم لا علم لنا إلا ما علّمتنا, إنك أنت العليم الحكيم

والله تعالى أعلم وعلمه أتم وأحكم

والسلام

While 80% of what you have said is true, I think your scholars have either confused a student of knowledge with a Mujtahid or you forget that they were talking about a Mujtahid and not a seeker of knowledge since we live in times where everyone acts like a Mujtahid.

I never speak without reference.

Go read this and tell me what you read?

It is the conditions for being a Mujtahid.

Where does it say that a Mujtahid has to be an Imaam in the Arabic language or needs to know history?

Your scholars are saying a seeker of knowledge has to do this? Are you serious?

Also read this book to say what the majority of the scholars of Usuul say.

Let me help you. Scroll down to the part about knowing the Sunnah and read where it says


The majority of scholars of Usuul say that it is not a necessary condition for Ijtihaad to know all of the Sunnah....

Rather, what is a condition is that one knows all the Sunnah related to 'ahkaam to the exclusion of other things like 'adaab....


They are talking about the conditions of a Mujtahid and your scholars are going overboard in defining as student of knowledge?!?!?!

Which scholars are these? Contemporary ones? Ones who are unaware of what the scholars of Usuul have said in the past? Or are they trying to be strict to close the Fitnah which they see so they decided to all out? Or do they want everyone to adhere to blind taqliid?


Second, scroll down in the book and read what al-Qaadi Abu Ya'laa says about the saying of Imaam Ahmad you have posted

He says it is not based on its Zaahir meaning. He said what he said this is so that people are cautious in giving Fatwaa....


Is this what your scholars are doing? Exaggerating given the dire circumstances today and being cautious to discourage people?


As for the language the majority say he should be able to understand the address [in the Qur'aan and Sunnah] and how the Arabs use their language and that which suffices in understanding the Qur'aan and Sunnah.


This is for the Mujtahid while your scholars seem to want the student to be an Imaam in the Arabic language!


Finally, find me where any classical scholar stipulated that a Mujtahid needs to be learned of Islamic Taarikh let alone a student of knowledge!


On a final note, you have student of knowledge under your name. Do you fulfill all the conditions you have mentioned?

format_quote Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

We are living in a terribly wretched time.

You should be careful with phrases such as that lest you fall under those who inveigh against time.

Without having any worldly certificate in Arabic, i can state with confidence that tuaalib al 'ilm means....... hold your breath, suuspense builds, everyone eagerly straining their ears..... seeker of knowledge.
And 'aalim means "knower",
It could be 'ilm of deen based strictly on Quran, which encompasses many aspects of life including personal, spiritual, social, political, medical, scientific, military etc.

Or it could be specifically based on architecture, history, genetics, magic, agriculture, accounting etc.

But of course, you would normally go to an 'aalim of architecture if you needed a 200 storey building.
Or to a brain surgeon if you have a piece of silicon stuck in your head, and if non of them help, you do your best in the circumstances whilst having trust in Allah.
But hey, I don't ever ask someone if they're a nutritionist if they serve me fish n chips, or if one of my kids says they're hungry and another one rushes to get them some biscuits, even though I know that the grease from chips can be a bit cloggy and that the sugar in biscuits could raise their blood sugar levels.
Man that would be overkill. But maybe in a few years there'll be cheap or free devices to measure exactly what nutrients you need, google can make it illegal to serve normal biscuits without an app blood or breath test then but right now, if I'm hungry, I know it's not just halaal, but also essential to grab something from the kitchen based on my hunch that a good few halal bites will lawfully satiate my hunger. But if a nutritionist is available and willing to talk, I'll give them a good history of my past week's diet and ask them what the best choice might be.
Remember the brother with the head injury who was advised to bathe with water and he died of infection? They could've asked since there was someone to ask.

If you need to go from Makkah to Madeenah without leaving a trail, you find a guide who has 'ilm of those paths, if you can - even if you're a Prophet - as long as that guide can be trusted suffieniently to fulfil the task.

And of course, when the Arabic word 'aalim is used, it usually means 'aalim of deen.
What gets me a little confused is when people stop seeking knowledge and make comments on things like evidence based history and human biology without much research (which is available at the fingertips these days), and base their taqleed assumptions on statements and opinions of scholars of the past few centuries who also had not much research or knowledge on the subjects.
Still, I know now that there's no end to seeking knowledge up until the day of judgement and even Musa was surprised.

Here appears to be a true and sincere seeker of knowledge




THE CONGREGATION, FRIDAY, CHAPTER NO. 062


062.001 Whatever is in the heavens and on earth, doth declare the Praises and Glory
of God,- the Sovereign, the Holy One, the Exalted in Might, the Wise.

062.002 It is He Who has sent amongst the Unlettered a messenger from among
themselves, to rehearse to them His Signs, to sanctify them, and to instruct them in
Scripture and Wisdom,- although they had been, before, in manifest error;-

062.003 As well as (to confer all these benefits upon) others of them, who have not
already joined them: And He is exalted in Might, Wise.

062.004 Such is the Bounty of God, which He bestows on whom He will: and God is
the Lord of the highest bounty.

062.005 The similitude of those who were charged with the (obligations of the)
Taurat (Torah), but who subsequently failed in those (obligations), is that of a donkey
which carries huge tomes (but understands them not). Evil is the similitude of people
who falsify the Signs of God: and God guides not people who do wrong.
.

format_quote Originally Posted by ZeeshanParvez

adhere to blind taqliid?

How often that phrase gets thrown around these days. "Blind Taqleed". "Blind following." "Don't be a cow." They refer to following a Madh-hab as "being a cow with a rope around its neck being led blindly by a man."

The reality, brother, is that the very people who scream the loudest about "Blind Taqleed" themselves are the most guilty of "Blind Taqleed".

You get a man screaming "Don't do blind Taqleed of a Madh-hab!" And he's waving around that book of al-Albaani, "Sifatu Salaatin Nabi Sallallaahu `Alayhi wa Sallam minat Takbeer ilat Tasleem Ka-Annaka Taraahu". He wants everyone to throw out the four Madhaahib and follow that book instead, when it comes to performing Salaah. Leave off the four A'immah and follow al-Albaani instead. Ridiculous.

Why do they blindly follow the Hadeeth gradings of al-Albaani? Have they themselves studied `Ilm-ur-Rijaal, Jarh wat-Ta`deel, Mustalahul Hadeeth, etc. in order to be able to objectively gauge the correctness of al-Albaani's gradings? No, they haven't, because some of them cannot read Qur'aan correctly let alone know all of that. You get a 13-year old boy and he thinks he knows better than the A'immah of Islaam for the last 1,438 years. He walks in the Masjid with a tight t-shirt and a tight pants over his ankles and halfway down his backside, and he'll tell you, "You're all making Salaah wrong. Stop blind following the Madhabs." And he'll quote something he read online or that book of al-Albaani as though it's a Daleel.

You will deny this, vehemently in fact, but it's a reality: Those who throw around the phrase of "blind followers" themselves are blind followers of al-Albaani, Shaykh bin Baaz, Shaykh ibn al-`Uthaymeen, al-Fawzaan, Rabee` ibn Haadi al-Madkhali (for the Madkhali brand), Shaykh ibn Jibreen, Aal ash-Shaykh, etc. and the rest of the Lajnat-ud-Daa'imah.

You're either a Mujtahid, capable of deriving your own rulings, or you're not. If you're not, you end up having to take from a Mujtahid. You can either take from Imaam Abu Haneefah, Imaam Maalik, Imaam ash-Shaafi`ee, Imaam Ahmad, in fact, taking from an entire "School of Thought", or you can take from al-Albaani. But either way, you're making Taqleed of somebody, and that's an undeniable fact.

format_quote Originally Posted by ZeeshanParvez

You should be careful with phrases such as that lest you fall under those who inveigh against time.

Just a question:

You don't happen to be one of those who subscribe to the "A-Theory of Time", like Bassam does, right?

format_quote Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam

How often that phrase gets thrown around these days. "Blind Taqleed". "Blind following." "Don't be a cow." They refer to following a Madh-hab as "being a cow with a rope around its neck being led blindly by a man."

The reality, brother, is that the very people who scream the loudest about "Blind Taqleed" themselves are the most guilty of "Blind Taqleed".

You get a man screaming "Don't do blind Taqleed of a Madh-hab!" And he's waving around that book of al-Albaani, "Sifatu Salaatin Nabi Sallallaahu `Alayhi wa Sallam minat Takbeer ilat Tasleem Ka-Annaka Taraahu". He wants everyone to throw out the four Madhaahib and follow that book instead, when it comes to performing Salaah. Leave off the four A'immah and follow al-Albaani instead. Ridiculous.

Why do they blindly follow the Hadeeth gradings of al-Albaani? Have they themselves studied `Ilm-ur-Rijaal, Jarh wat-Ta`deel, Mustalahul Hadeeth, etc. in order to be able to objectively gauge the correctness of al-Albaani's gradings? No, they haven't, because some of them cannot read Qur'aan correctly let alone know all of that. You get a 13-year old boy and he thinks he knows better than the A'immah of Islaam for the last 1,438 years. He walks in the Masjid with a tight t-shirt and a tight pants over his ankles and halfway down his backside, and he'll tell you, "You're all making Salaah wrong. Stop blind following the Madhabs." And he'll quote something he read online or that book of al-Albaani as though it's a Daleel.

You will deny this, vehemently in fact, but it's a reality: Those who throw around the phrase of "blind followers" themselves are blind followers of al-Albaani, Shaykh bin Baaz, Shaykh ibn al-`Uthaymeen, al-Fawzaan, Rabee` ibn Haadi al-Madkhali (for the Madkhali brand), Shaykh ibn Jibreen, Aal ash-Shaykh, etc. and the rest of the Lajnat-ud-Daa'imah.

You're either a Mujtahid, capable of deriving your own rulings, or you're not. If you're not, you end up having to take from a Mujtahid. You can either take from Imaam Abu Haneefah, Imaam Maalik, Imaam ash-Shaafi`ee, Imaam Ahmad, in fact, taking from an entire "School of Thought", or you can take from al-Albaani. But either way, you're making Taqleed of somebody, and that's an undeniable fact.

Now that you are done avoiding the question.

Let's come back to it.

You were the one saying I will not take al-Albaani's grading if it conflicts with the scholars of old!!!!

Now you know full well that what your scholars say is against what the scholars of the past said.

Stop beating around the bush. Either admit you confused what they said or you have double standards.

Which one is it going to be?

format_quote Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam

10) Have studied the correct `Aqeedah.

Since you claim to be a student of knowledge who has fulfilled all the requirements of a Mujtahid, tell us what is correct Aqiidah.

Is it that of the Asha'ri.
Is it of the Maturidi.
Is it of the Athari.

Ok, I put my hands up and admit - this convo is about as dumb as two oxen.

I consider myself a student of knowledge - but will I be recognised by the Scholars of Islam as one? Heck no.

Do I need their acceptance? Again - HECK NO.

So why do I care?

Answer is - I DO NOT

I do not learn things to attain a certificate or gain some reputation - no. I study because "I WANT TO KNOW THINGS". - this makes me a student of knolwedge - and even then, not every branch of it - just those I am interested in.

However, when it comes to Islamic knowledge - there is a BIG DIFFERENCE because laymen do not know how nuanced Arabic is, or Arabic history is, because the anthropology is hardly available in the way it is with other societies and cultures in history.

So, while I have my way of learning - so does Huzaifah and that method of learning, is doctrinal, tested and accepted - I have no issue with him ascribing to a set of principles outlined for him by the pious ones who came before us - not at all - that's actually a good thing.

Same way he should not have an issue with me attempting to find truths the way I would like to.

How many ways to make chicken curry? Just one? Or 1001? The latter is the better option. Hence whateveryou are saying vs whatever huzaifah is saying, is neither here nor there - I'm just in it for the popcorn. Like I said before.

I love being entertained in halal ways - and you two are bloody fantastic

Scimi

format_quote Originally Posted by ZeeshanParvez

Now that you are done avoiding the question.

Let's come back to it.

You were the one saying I will not take al-Albaani's grading if it conflicts with the scholars of old!!!!

Now you know full well that what your scholars say is against what the scholars of the past said.

Stop beating around the bush. Either admit you confused what they said or you have double standards.

Which one is it going to be?

If you read Imaam ibn `Aabideen ash-Shaami's عقود رسم المفتي you would find out - in his chapter on the "Tabaqaat-ul-Fuqahaa" - that a person possessing all of the qualities I mentioned would not be regarded by him as even being a "Mujtahid fil-Madhab", let alone a "Mujtahid Mutlaq" like you believe. By "your scholars" you're most likely referring to the old `Ulamaa of Deoband. If so, there is no contradiction: they would tell you exactly what I'm telling you here, that even a person possessing all of those qualities is not even a "half-baked Mujtahid". Take the example of `Allaamah `Abdul Hayy al-Lakhnawi. He was on a level more than ten times higher than what I described in that post, yet when he ventured into the field of Ijtihaad all of the `Ulamaa of Deoband - especially Hadhrat Thanvi - criticised him quite severely for it. You'll respond to this by saying that their criterion for who is a Mujtahid and who isn't is irrelevant, and those on the other side will simply respond to you by saying that your criterion for who is a Mujtahid and who isn't is irrelevant.

I mentioned in point #13:

"13) Have studied all of the laws of at least one from the four Madhaahib (be it Hanafi, Maaliki, Shaafi`ee or Hanbali), as well as the evidences behind each of those laws."

Now, any of the Salafi `Ulamaa - be in al-Munajjid or otherwise - would tell you very clearly that a person who has only studied one Madh-hab can definitely not be a Mujtahid. He only knows the Dalaa'il of his Madh-hab. He's not even able to do Muqaaranah baynal Madhaahib. He would still have to study the Maaliki Madh-hab under Maaliki `Ulamaa, and the Shaafi`ee Madh-hab under Shaafi`ee `Ulamaa, and the Hanbali Madh-hab under Hanbali `Ulamaa, and know all four the Madhaahib and the Dalaa'il of each Madh-hab before they would regard him as being a Mujtahid.

If you had bothered to read the post properly, you would have noticed that in each point I mentioned "have studied". I didn't say "have mastered". In every single Daarul Uloom, you study those subjects that I mentioned. In response to your question: Yes, I studied all of those subjects, Alhamdulillaah. In Deoband - and Deobandi affiliated Madaaris like Jalaalabad, Binnori Town in Karachi, etc - back in the early days, they used to teach even more subjects than what I mentioned. When the students would complete, Hadhratji (Maulana Maseehullah رحمة الله عليه) used to say, "Now that you have qualified, you are now qualified to know that you are a Jaahil. You are not an `Aalim yet. You have now only become "Insaan" (a human being)."

A Mujtahid needs to have attained a mastery in those subjects, not just have done a shallow, surface-level studying of each one. To aver that a person can become a Mujtahid by simply having done a basic study of each of those points I mentioned is ludicrous. The Fuqahaa were masters in the Deen. You want to make every "Mickey Mouse" and "Donald Duck" a Mujtahid Mutlaq who can create his own Madh-hab.

See, your way lowers the "bar" which decides who is an `Aalim capable of doing Ijtihaad and speaking on the Deen and who isn't. Let's say there was a device that could measure how much knowledge a person needs to have in order to "pass" that bar. Maybe, his knowledge has to be at least 4,000, for example. The Fuqahaa of the past had "knowledge levels" of 100,000+. However, people studying today aren't becoming Mujtahidoon and Fuqahaa, so they're able to get by with a knowledge level of 4,000. So, they'll study hard and reach that 4,000 "knowledge level" mark, and now they can pass. What you want to do is take that bar and move it all the way down to "25", so that even a person with a knowledge level of 25 can pass and be graded as not just an `Aalim, but a "Mujtahid" and "Faqeeh" who is capable of independent Ijtihaad and Takhreej-ul-Ahkaam, and who can speak on the Deen and everyone has to accept from him. We can't have that. We can't have the bar being lowered to 25.

It's like, here in South Africa, the government decided to drop the pass rate for maths all the way down to 20%. So, if a student gets asked 10 questions on maths he only needs to answer two correctly in order to pass. This student who only managed to answer two questions right can then go on to become a doctor and mess up people's health, because the rate needed to pass everything else has dropped as well.

It's a lowering of standards. if one person comes along and drops the "bar" down to 25, another can come and drop it further. To 15. Another can drop it to 9. Afterwards, it's so low that every person and his grandmother is a "Mujtahid". The whole world will then be "Mujtahids" and you'll have to hunt far and wide to find a person who isn't a "Mujtahid". And yet, if you asked these "Mujtahids" even a couple of basic questions on Fiqh they wouldn't be able to answer.

i do not.

Scimi

format_quote Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam

If you had bothered to read the post properly, you would have noticed that in each point I mentioned "have studied". I didn't say "have mastered". In every single Daarul Uloom, you study those subjects that I mentioned. In response to your question: Yes, I studied all of those subjects, Alhamdulillaah. In Deoband - and Deobandi affiliated Madaaris like Jalaalabad, Binnori Town in Karachi, etc - back in the early days, they used to teach even more subjects than what I mentioned. When the students would complete, Hadhratji (Maulana Maseehullah رحمة الله عليه) used to say, "Now that you have qualified, you are now qualified to know that you are a Jaahil. You are not an `Aalim yet. You have now only become "Insaan" (a human being)."

I live in Pakistan. It is the hub for Deobandi Madaaris. They do an 8 year course called Darse Nizami and are called scholars ['aalims].

They then do a two year course and attain the title of Mufti.

They issue Fatwaas from there.

Now, let me shed some light on how ignorant these scholars and Muftis are.

One sits on a pulpit on Friday and gives a sermon. He has completed this make you a scholar sanad. Yet, he mis-translates the Qur'aan in front of the whole crowd. A salafi elder gets up from his chair and corrects him. He throws a fit, comes down from the pulpit, and says why don't you come and start preaching.

His ego was so big he never apologized for mis-translating the Qur'aan. His ignorance was so much that he translated tulhikum as destruction.

Yet, he was a "scholar."

I personally have students of knowledge from these Madaaris come to me and admit they cannot understand a word of Arabic. One even asked me to teach him.

You want me to believe that these Madaaris, where parents send their children because they do not have enough money for other forms of education, produce scholars?