Google isnt really my Shaykh btw but he's chucking some good stuff at me about Ijtihad and Taqleed. Problem is I dont want good, I want excellent. Any help?
Anything you've already read maybe? And whilst I'm at it, which Q sounds more interesting...
1) Discuss the importance of the 4 schools of Islamic Law. Comment on the concept of taqleed and its alternative tendencies.
2) Discuss the meaning and significance of Ijtihad and taqleed in the history of Islamic Jurisprudence. Comment on the door of ijtihad being closed.
If you can get hold of that, it will be really good insha Allah since it has all the answers to your questions on a basic level and easy to understand.
He explains that closing the doors to ijtihaad caused alot of harm to the ummah so the ummah stopped advancing, and people relied on old fatwas which never took consideration into new factors/technologies etc. in the muslim world - so the muslims became slightly backward since they stuck to old fatwas without doing new ijtihaad for newer matters.
Also, sectarian issues increased because people started dividing based on the madhabs. Some 'ulama even saying that its haraam for people of different madhabs to get married to each other! [whereas nothing in Islam forbids marriage between different madhabs, infact - muslim males can even marry jews and christians.]
There was even warfare between the different madhabs where an 'aalim from one madhab could be imprisoned by people from another madhab, and his books burnt. Ibn Qudamah who was a Hanbali scholar was about to be assasinated in Egypt, because the Egyptians were predominantly Shaf'ie in madhab.
So you see there was alot of harm, and this kind of happened straight away after the Salaf (after about the 4th generation after the sahabah.)
Ibn Taymiyyah was one of the 'ulama who revived Ijtihaad [he was a mujtahid], although he was hanbali in madhab - he would prefer the Qur'an and Sunnah over all matters. And for this, he was imprisoned many times, sometimes people even attempted to assasinate him. But Allah revived ijtihaad a great deal through him alhamdulillah so that you see it becoming more common nowadays alhamdulillah.
Also, in regard to taqleed. Most of the laypeople who aren't students of knowledge can do taqleed on any mujtahid who is trustworthy (no matter what madhab he is from). A student of knowledge however studies under one madhab for starters, but nothing prevents him from studying another madhab [i.e. there is nothing which makes it an obligation upon him to be loyal to one madhab only throughout his life (i.e. he can study the hanafi madhab, then after the hanbali etc. although its better to learn them at separate times to avoid confusion. The reasons for this is because each madhab has a set of principles ['usul] to get to the truth.]
All the 'ulama who started each madhab were students of their respective shaykh [i.e. abu hanifah's student was imam malik whose student was al-shafi'ie - whose student was ahmad ibn hanbal.] Each imam said that his madhab is the sunnah, so if his madhab contradicts an authentic hadith - they accept the authentic hadith over their madhab. They might not have heard all the hadith throughout their lives which made them have different opinions. (i.e. a hadith in iraq may have been heard by abu hanifah but not by malik [because he never left madinah] etc. - causing them to have different rulings on similar issues.] Now that we know the ahadith, we would prefer the authentic hadith's ruling over any imam who did his ijtihaad which may have not been the correct ruling.
Although from your posts it seems my tutor would disapprove of your views lol for the doors of Ijtihaad being closed was a good thing and them being opened again was because some people thought religion was outdated and wanted to modernise it...? I'm talking this day and age and not Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullahs time)
I understand what you mean, and yeh - your teacher would probably get angry at these kind of responses and probably shout out the word which starts with 'W', but we know that ijtihaad isn't closed simply because there is nothing in Islam to forbid it from being closed.
Think about it this way, if - after Allah's Messenger (sal Allah alaihi wasalam) passed away, the sahabah did ijtihaad. Then after them, the tabi'een did, then the generations of the imams did. Then their students did (i.e. on some issues, the students of Imam abu hanifah had differing opinions to him - these different opinions would also be based on the ijtihaad of the students.)
So who then can say that ijtihaad is forbidden? Since no-one can forbid it except Allah's Messenger. If someone was to say its the imams, then why did their students differ to them in some matters? Why did Muhammad ibn al-Hassan Al-Shaybani teach Al-Shafi'ie, who then created his own madhab?
Remember Ibn Taymiyyah came after the 4 imams, he came at a time when the idea of following one madhab only as an obligation was widespread. So he wanted to change that, not to change the religion - but to do ijtihaad (he was qualified) based on the Qur'an and Sunnah like the early Muslims did - since it might have been that one imam never had heard of one of the ahadith before, causing him to get the wrong understanding [but still 1 reward], whereas for someone to get the right ijtihaad would be a source of 2 rewards, as is well known from the famous hadith.
Remember that the famous books like Sahih Al Bukhari, Muslim etc. weren't compiled until after these 4 imams - so its obvious they wouldn't have access to all the authentic ahadith.
Anyway, i recommend you read that book evolution of fiqh at your own time insha Allah.
Last edited by - Qatada -; 12-23-2008 at 05:58 PM.
Nah it wouldnt be the W word, it'd actually be Salafi and Salafiyyah. I'm not sure if I'm recalling correctly but apprantly rather than stick to one of the 4 madhabs Salafiyyah aimed to open the door of Ijtihad again for those who sought to modernise the deen.
Khayr insha'Allah I'll do more reading and buy that book insha'Allah. I understand your point though. JazakAllah khayr
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.
I'm actually confused as to what stance to take in my assignment but since my tutor seems to be against the whole concept of Ijtihad in this day and age and he is Hanafi, I guess I need to read Mufti Taqi Usmani's work again insha'Allah.
But the Bilal Philips one look interesting too and doesnt cost anything.
I just wanted to ask something really lame :$ erm why is it that Salafi's and madhabi's have like a different view on almost everything? Isnt there any concept at all that they agree on? are their works on Tawheed different too?
Remember that 'salafis' and 'madhabis' agree that you should follow a madhab, the only difference is that the 'madhabis' might prefer an opinion of their imam over an authentic saying of Allah's Messenger, and this is when salafis say that they will follow the sahih hadith over the madhab. The imams of the madhabs themselves said they would do similar [the sources are mentioned in that book by bilal philips].
The issue of aqeedah has some slight differences due to greek philosophy which entered islam during a similar time period.
The main difference being in regard to Allah's Attributes [i.e. salafis say we accept Allah's attributes without questioning 'how' they really look like - i.e. they're not similar to the creation but they are real.] Ash'aris deny certain attributes of Allah because they say that you are 'resembling Allah to the creation'. Whereas the 3 best generations of Islam accepted Allah's Attributes - all of them, and said that they are real, but we do not know their 'howness' i.e. how they look like.
"Nothing is like Him; and He is The Hearer, The Seer." (Quran ash-Shura 42:11)
The verse is showing that there is nothing similar to Him, but He is the Hearing, Seeing.
There's other differences in regard to issues of worship too. But insha Allah you already know that you don't call upon anyone else for prayers after they've died - you pray to Allah alone. But alot of other sects permit this [i.e. in some aspects of sufism etc.] Salafis are against such practises since they contradict the Qur'anic teachings.
i.e.; "And the places of worship are for Allah (alone): So invoke [tad'u]* not any one along with Allah; [Quran Jinn 72:18]
*tad'u - coming from du'a.
Last edited by - Qatada -; 12-23-2008 at 06:59 PM.
JazakAllah khayr, yeah I have already read about the concept of Tawassul and Waseelah etc and agree that we pray to Allah (swt) alone.
I was just asking about Tawheed because apparantly Bilal Philips is Salafi and I was told not to read his work on Tawheed (the fundamentals of tawheed). And since I dont claim to be Salafi, I was wondering about the book you recommended also.
I'm not saying we limit our ilm and take from certain scholars only, its just that if those books say something completely different to the Hanafi fiqh I'd rather be safe and read something else. Although your explanation of how their ideas on Allah's attributes differ is helpful. JazakAllah khayr
Sis, the aqeedah issues aren't to do with any madhab or fiqh issue. The aqeedah issues - all of the Muslims have to agree upon them. Since they make up the foundations of our beliefs. So we don't have differences of opinion on them as Muslims, and if people do - this is what causes sects. [most of these sects began from influence from outside religions from other countries which mixed with the new followers of Islam, so their cultural religion was mixed with islam to form the new sects. look at wahdatul wujud for example - its a hindu concept but certain sufis believe in it which makes them go astray from pure islamic teachings].
I've read his book Fundamentals on Tawheed, and i believe that if you read that - you would find nothing wrong with it (you'd probably even question what the person meant when they said you shouldn't read it - since its got nothing controversial and its backed with Qur'an and Sunnah for all chapters.) This usually isn't the case with other sects books.
The main issue with people from pakistan and india etc is to do with issues such as waseelah etc. and i'm paki too, with a similar background to what you're going through. By going past that barrier, i've noticed that you don't need to be called 'salafi' to follow the way of the salaf - you just need to practise their way, so long as you keep the principles of islam as your first priority throughout your life.
i.e. its not compulsory to blindly follow anyone except Allah's Messenger. [although you can do taqleed in fiqh on certain issues due to a lack of knowledge of ijtihad etc.]
That you stick to the aqeedah of the salaf, since they followed the way of the sahabah - who followed the way of Allah's Messenger.
Aqeedah is soo important and its the first thing we should learn as Muslims, simply because our Islam stands upon that. For example, if you ask a certain ash'ari (who is knowledgable on his ash'ari beliefs, remember many who claim to be sufis say they are ash'ari in aqeedah) if Allah speaks - he will say no. He will say that Allah doesn't speak since that is being similar to His creation, rather Allah creates speech - so the Qur'an is not Allah speaking, but something which Allah created of speech and Angel Jibreel spoke to Prophet Muhammad.
You know who Abul-Futuh is? He is the Ash'arite who would leave his mosque, wearing thick armoury, mounting his horse, and then proclaiming in public: "This Quran is not Allah's Speech! This is just paper and ink!" while the Muslim population of Baghdad would stone him and throw filth at him. This was your past, and this still remains your present. But you simply do not have the courage of Abul-Futuh.
Whereas the salaf said that Allah speaks without His speech being similar to the creation. And that Allah really spoke the Qur'an to us.
Now see how these issues are totally crazy and against pure Qur'an and Sunnah? That's why salafis study aqeedah first of all [so they know what they need to know to enter jannah], whereas other sects teach other issues without actually teaching aqeedah properly first. I'm not saying all, but generally.
So what would be more convincing? To study aqeedah with someone who has firm foundations for his faith - backed with Qur'an or Sunnah? Or someone who learns other issues without even knowing what he needs to get to jannah?
I can really tell you through experience that if someone told you to study aqeedah and you asked any good books, they'd simply have books on telling you that Allah exists and that He created everything, and some will inform about Allah's attributes [if the book was for simple people]. If they had to define what 'ibaadah is, they wouldn't. They'd simply say its 'sajdah' and the pillars of islam, and thats it.
Now you might wonder why i'm saying this, but when somethings the truth. It becomes apparent, even if people try to hide it or prevent it from shining forth. The truth seekers, Allah guides them. Ask Allah to guide all of us, ameen.
Last edited by - Qatada -; 12-23-2008 at 07:57 PM.
Honey, no disrespect towards our dear brother -Qatada- whom I respect deeply, but you have a tutor, why don't you ask him, rather than someone from the Net? Nothing against brother -Qatada-, or brother Abu Sayyad whom I'd imagine would join this discussion, but ask your primary sources first, talk with your tutor or others you know in real life that are rather knowledgable. All this, which is said here and which isn't said here, you can find it anywhere in the Net, darling, anywhere. Been there, done that. But it's not the same as hearing it from someone's mouth, really seeing a reaction.
“If only I had checked myself”
—
Guy who wrecked himself
True leaders don't create followers...
.... They create new leaders.
Hmm ok. You say the aqeedah issues all muslims have to agree on them so what is the asharee, athari and maturidi divide about then akhee? (btw I'm not dissing I sincerely want to learn)
And yeh at the waseelah thing, although I've come to my own conclusion regarding that after doing my research and its similar to urs. Alhamdulillah.
And btw, those who call themselves 'Salafi', are they athari in aqeedah?
And also, the works on aqeedah, could you list/name some insha'Allah.
Honey, no disrespect towards our dear brother -Qatada- whom I respect deeply, but you have a tutor, why don't you ask him, rather than someone from the Net? Nothing against brother -Qatada-, or brother Abu Sayyad whom I'd imagine would join this discussion, but ask your primary sources first, talk with your tutor or others you know in real life that are rather knowledgable. All this, which is said here and which isn't said here, you can find it anywhere in the Net, darling, anywhere. Been there, done that. But it's not the same as hearing it from someone's mouth, really seeing a reaction.
JazakAllah khayr hun and I'd do that if it wasnt christmas break. I have a tendency to take over the whole class with my persistent questions which is why I'm not as clueless as I used to be, alhamdulillah.
That is also the reason I'm reading some of bro Qatadah's posts and not taking parts in since it is contrary to what I've read and been taught (no offence bro)
We iyyaki. It's neither what I believe nor what I have been taught. I have been in a confused state due to stuff like this, elhamdulillah I am now being guided.
Glad I could help! Keep asking questions!!
“If only I had checked myself”
—
Guy who wrecked himself
True leaders don't create followers...
.... They create new leaders.
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
Shaykh Google not helping me =(
are their works on Tawheed different too?
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks