What I don't understand is, if all 4 are correct then why can't we follow an opinion from another madhab in an issue because that opinion is also correct, since all 4 are correct.
Each Imaam has based his Madhab on certain principles and on the basis of these principles were the rulings issued. By picking and choosing from these rulings, one would inevitably end up contradicting himself in the principles.
An example to illustrate it to you in our daily lives would be, American pronounce the last letter of the alphabet as 'zee', while the British pronounce it as 'Zead'. This is a principle and pronounciation of words is based on this principle, this zebra is pronounced 'Zeebra' by Americans and Zebra by the British. If a person pronounced the letter as Zead but Zebra as Zeebra, it would be pointed out to him that what you are doing is unacceptable.
Similar is the case with regard to picking and choosing between Madhabs.
Secondly, while all the Imaam are right, if you pick rulings, your desires will lead you astray by causing you to pick those rulings that suit your whims and fancies and no sooner does a person do that, than he goes astray.
And Allah Knows Best
Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Source:
http://www.askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.php?askid=4dc4141599e720202eda454efa45a03d
Further explanation:
Why one of four?
There were many
mujtahids in the past. Why do I have to restrict myself to following one of the four
madhāhib? Why can’t I follow any other
madhhab?
One of the conditions in following a
madhhab is that it should continue to develop after the founder of the
madhhab. For example, in the
Hanafi madhhab the students of Imām Abu Hanifa Imām, Imām Abu Yusuf and Imām Muhammad رحمهم الله تعالىcontinued to build on the foundation laid by Imām Abu Hanifa رحمه الله تعالى.
Ulama and scholars who came later on continued to review, codify, explain and expand on the
Hanafi madhhab. It is in this manner that we have a fully codified and systemic
madhhab. This has been the case with the other three
madhāhib also. In contrast to other schools of thought which were not codified, researched and recorded as the above mentioned
madhāhib. The views of other
mujtahids were passed on as knowledge (i.e. their views were quoted when discussing a
mas’alah but it was not accepted as a
madhhab to be followed). It is for this reason that some of their views are found scattered in different books.
From the above explanation we also understand that the four
madhāhib are not the works of a single individual. However, it is the conglomeration of the united efforts of the
ulama throughout the ages.
Why one madhhab?
If all four
madhāhab are correct why do I have to restrict myself to only one
madhhab?
If a person does not confine himself to one
madhhab he will ultimately fall prey to the evil of his
nafs. He will always be looking for what suits his whims and desires. This will cause a lot of harm to his religion. If someone decides to pick and choose the most prudent view he will be putting himself in difficulty. Therefore there is security and ease in confining oneself to one
madhhab.
Following one scholar is an established practice from the time of the honourable Sahaba and Tabi’oon رضوان الله تعالى عليهم اجمعين. Imām Bukhari رحمه الله تعالى narrates on the authority of Ikrimah رحمه الله تعالى:
حدثنا أبو النعمان حدثنا حماد عن أيوب عن عكرمة : أن أهل المدينة سألوا ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما عن امرأة طافت ثم حاضت قال لهم تنفر قالوا لا نأخذ بقولك وندع قول زيد قال إذا قدمتم المدينة فسلوا فقدموا المدينة فسألوا فكان فيمن سألوا أم سليم فذكرت حديث صفية رواه خالد وقتادة عن عكرمة – صحيح البخاري 1758 دار الفكر
The people of Madina asked Ibn Abbās the ruling of a woman who makes (her first
tawāf) of the Ka’ba and thereafter experiences her menses (before she can make her final
tawaf). Ibn Abbās told them that she may go home without completing her final
tawāf. The people of Madina said, “We will not follow your verdict and abandon the verdict of Zayd.” Ibn Abbās replied, “When you reach Madina then enquire from him…” (Bukhāri 1758)
Ibn Shihāb az-Zuhri رحمه الله تعالىcommanded his student Yunus ibn Yazīd al-Ayli رحمه الهه تعالىthat obey him and make wudhu if you eat anything cooked on a fire. Yunus رحمه الله تعالىreplied I will not follow you and leave the view of Sa’eed ibnul Musayyab. Zuhri رحمه الله تعالىkept silent. (Atharul Hadīthish Sharīf 79)
Why should I follow an Imām of fiqh?
Why do I have to follow an Imām of
fiqh? Why can’t I follow an Imām of
hadīth? It is unanimously accepted that the Sahīh of Imām Bukhāri is the most authentic book after the book of Allah Ta’ala. Why can’t I follow Sahīh Bukhāri?
The sphere of a
muhaddīth is different from that of a
faqīh. A
muhaddīth deals with matters relating to the chain of narrators and the words of a
hadīth whereas a
faqīh deals with the understanding and the practical implications of a
hadīth. Furthermore, the
muhaddīthoon do not have a fully codified
madhhab. This is accepted fact to which even the
muhaddīthoon agree. Whenever Imām Tīrmīdhī رحمه الله تعالى commented on anything relating to the
sanad of any narration he always quoted the
muhaddīthoon and whenever he related some relating to a
fiqhi ruling he only quoted the
fuqaha.
The great muhaddīth, Imām Suyfān ibn Uyaynah رحمه الله تعالى mentioned:
التسليم للفقهاء سلامة في الدين
Submitting to the fuqahā is safety in Dīn. (Atharul Hadīthish Sharīf 116)
Imām Tirmidhi رحمه الله تعالى said:
سنن الترمذى - (ج 3 / ص 316 رقم الحديث 990 )
وكذلك قال الفقهاء وهم أعلم بمعاني الحديث
The fuqahā are more knowledgeable of the meaning of ahādīth.
Shaykh Awwamah حفظه الله تعالىquoting Mawlana Binnorī رحمه الله تعالىexplains that it is important to understand that the
muhaddithoon followed certain
fiqhi rulings. Based on the rulings they followed they chose which
ahādīth to add in their compilations. For example, Imām Bukhāri رحمه الله تعالىopined that a person should do
raful yadayn therefore, he added those narrations which prove his viewpoint. So his
ahādīth are based on his
fiqh and not vice versa. (Atharul Hadīthish Sharīf 152)
Our honourable ustadh Shaykhul Hadīth Mawlāna Fadhlur Rahmān حفظه الله تعالىexplains that when our illustrious
ulama mention that Bukhāri and Muslim are the most authentic books it does not mean that each and every narration is the most authentic and given preference over other
ahādīth. What is meant is that on a whole these two books are the most authentic. (Who are the blind followers? 78)
It should also be understood that by default it does not mean that any narration appearing in Bukhāri is given preference. Allāmah Irāqi رحمه الله تعالىmentioned 110 reasons of any narration been given preference. It is only at number 102 that he mentioned if any narration is in Bukhāri or Muslim will it be given preference over other narration.
Allāmah Shawkāni رحمه الله تعالى listed forty-two reasons which pertaining to the
sanad which could be a means of giving preference to any narration. Only at listed number 41 did he mention that a
hadīth appearing in Bukhāri or Muslim could also be a reason of preference. (Atharul Hadīthish Sharīf 150)
Why I can’t follow the most authentic view?
On what basis will a person determine which view is that most authentic? If he uses his own discretion to ascertain the most authentic view, he is incapable in accomplishing this. If he has reached the stage whereby he is able to determine the most authentic view then there is nothing wrong with this. (Atharul Hadīthish Sharīf 112) However, it is important to note that for a person to reach this position he should be well qualified in all branches of knowledge starting from basic Arabic grammar right up to the intricacies of
hadith and
tafseer. Furthermore, in determining whether a person is fit for this lofty position or not his personal opinion will not be accepted.
If a narration is authentic it is my madh’hab
When a narration is established as
saheeh then this will be my
madh’hab. This has been narrated from all our illustrious
fuqaha and in fact it is the maxim of every believer. However, it is important to understand what is meant by this statement and to whom it is addressed.
It is important to realize that any hadith cannot be taken on face value, even though it might be
saheeh. There are many factors which could affect the status of practicing on any hadith. Our illustrious
fuqaha رحمهم الله تعالى have made painstaking efforts in sifting out and clarifying for us which Ahadith should be used and which should be left out. Not every hadith is
ma’mool bih (practiced upon).
Ibn Wahb رحمه الله تعالى narrates that he heard Imam Malik رحمه الله تعالى say:
“Many ahadith could be a means of misguidance.”
What did this great Imām mean by saying hadith could be a source of misguidance? He meant that not all ahadith are suitable to be practiced upon. Even though it might be authentic but it could be abrogated, there could be other Ahadith on the topic too, it could be a speciality of Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم, or the hadith could be going against other principles of Islam (despite the fact that it is
saheeh. An example of this is found in
Saheeh Muslim).
Ibn Wahb رحمه الله تعالى also explains:
“Any person who has hadith but does not have an Imām in fiqh is astray.”
Great words from a great personality! This great scholar is pointing to the fact that merely having a lot of narrations is not sufficient. One has to have the understanding of how to apply them. Which narration fits where? How to join the puzzle together?
The statement “when a hadith is authentic it is my madh’hab” has been addressed to those people who have reached this level; the level of ijtihād.
Furthermore, in trying to attribute any narration as the
madh’hab of an Imām, one needs to be certain that the Imām did not know of this narration. It is very possible that the Imām did not act upon this narration despite knowing about it. In order to know if the Imām knew about the narration, one needs to study all the works of the Imām and his students. This is an extremely studious task. Imām Ghazāli رحمه الله تعالىcommenting on one narration says that this hadith did not reach Abu Hanifa. Ibnul Humām رحمه الله تعالىcomments on what Imām Ghazāli رحمه الله تعالىsaid by saying that Imām Abu Hanifa رحمه الله تعالىdid know about it and he mentioned it in his
musnad. Even after reading all the books of an Imām we can still not say with certainty that the Imām did not know about it. If a narration is not found in Saheeh Bukhari it does not mean he did not know about it. Similar is the case here.
Many great scholars the likes of Ibn Abil Jarood who was a
student of Imām Shafi’i , Abul Waleed an-Nisaburi and Abul Hasan al-Karaji رحمهم الله تعالى tried to follow this statement. However, those who came after them criticized them and showed where they slipped up. It was no ordinary people who tried to apply the above statement. They were great scholars of their times. Therefore, if they erred in their endeavour despite their lofty academic ranks, does it make sense for any laymen like me or you to try to implement this statement???
Above we have seen how scholars of
hadith differ in their conditions in classifying a narration as
saheeh. According to whose classification of
saheeh will we apply the statement if a
hadith is authentic?
These are just a few glimpses into the intricacies of what
taqleed and
ijtihād entails. This should be sufficient for a person with sober understanding to realize that:
التسليم للفقهاء سلامة في الدين
Submitting to the fuqahā is safety in Dīn.
And Allah knows best
Wassalamu Alaikum
Ml. Ishaq E. Moosa,
Student Darul Iftaa
Checked and Approved by:
Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Darul Iftaa,
Madrassah In'aamiyyah
----
Please also read:
Islamic Law: Between ‘Selecting’ and ‘Negating’ a Position
