Multiple Madhabs

[Hamza Asadullah]

Asalaamu Alaikum

The 2 comments that you suggested I made were erroneous are not. Because I said I want to follow the madhab of the Prophet (saw) and his companions. There is nothing wrong with that? We all do. And secondly I said blind following is wrong, in the sense that when you find sufficient proof that goes against something then you must go with that proof.

My brother as i have also explained in my last post in response to your post the madhabs of the 4 imaams did not stop after they had died but has continued to be worked on and developed using proofs from the Qur'an and Sunnah. So if you were to give me one opinion with proofs from Qur'an and Sunnah then i can give you another opinion of another imaam also from Qur'an and Sunnah. So therefore this statement of yours is not valid because the fiqhi opnions of the four imams which have been developed for over a thousand years by some of the greatest scholars of our times all have proofs from the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Again there is NO such thing as "one right way" for all four of the fiqhi opinions of the imaams are going in the right direction but in slightly different angles using the Qur'an and Sunnah. All four have opinions which have been approved by the greatest scholars for over a thousand years. Non of the examples you gave proved anything because all those examples have proofs from the Qur'an and Sunnah but as you have mentioned you are a humble student as am i so just because we have not seen the proofs for the other opinions or do not have adequate knowledge to know about those opnions then does that mean the other opinions are any less valid? Definatley not.

I totally understand what you saying though about the blind following issue, and it is very well said I must say, and I agree fully. But I will repeat to emphasize, by blind following I mean when your imaam makes a mistake and the truth is presented to you, you MUST go with the truth. And what you simply wrote in that long essay there is very very erroneous if I understood correctly. But before I have a go at you I am going to ask you a question, Are you implying these Imaams do not make mistakes? Are they not human?

Of course they are human for they were the most humble of people and that is why they have been quoted as saying that if they had made any errors then leave that opinion and go with that which is valid or closer to the truth. They had to say this because they were not arrogant that they would tell others to follow their opinion and not anyone elses. Scholars do not take this stance because they know that other opinions are also valid.

For example there was a meeting between Imaam Maalik and Imaam Abu Hanifa May Allahs mercy be on both. Out of that meeting both imaams discussed certain topics and after the meeting both imaams left having a different perspective on certain topics but still maintained their core opinions on certain matters and this is proof that the differences of opinions between the imaams were accepted and were also highly respected between each other and scholars throughout the ages have also taken this stance of accepting and respecting differences of opinion because in fiqh there is NO such thing as ONE opinion being more valid than the other because different scholars will see things in a different perspective according to their understanding of Qur'ana nd Sunnah.

Akhi whether you were offended by the holes I presented in the madhabs or not, whether I was right about them being wrong or not. Whether the opinions I pointed out were wrong or not. The point I was simply trying to portray is that EVERYONE makes mistakes, no one is perfect exept The Prophet Mohammad (saw). You saying their opinions are valid because they thought it was valid doesn't make it so. Sure without a shadow of a doubt they wouldn''t have given a fatwa on something if they didn't think it was right now would they?? In their opinion they are right, but it doesn't mean that single thing they say is right and set in stone. Thats all I am saying. What if you are a hanafi, and you find a "possible mistake" (I won't give an example now, I might get shot down again, lol) then are you saying that you are not allowed to take a hanbali opinion on something? I agree the Prophet Mohammad (saw) did certain things differently, thats why there are certain minor differences, but some differences are like total 180 degrees differences, like the total oposite opinions. So you cannot say He (saw) did both, so he (saw) must have done one. And tbh akhi I have explained this in my first or second post on how and why the differences occurred, and how the imaams themselves changed their opinions (imaam shaafi) and how the very best students of imaam abu hanifah changed their prayer style after they moved to a different country. I am not going to repeat myself (even though I kind of did there, please be kind enough to read what I have already said).

And I do not blind follow a scholar to an extreme extent where whatever he says I believe it is set in 10000000% stone, and it cannot change. To combat this I follow and learn and read books of many many credible scholars. But like I said I do not blindly follow one or a group... For example one of the most credible muhadith of recent times Sheikh Al Albani, I respect his opinions and is one of the ones I can truly trust. But there are some fatwa or opinions that I do not agree with because I have found or learnt of a better and stronger proof for the contrary. E.g. He said that if alcohol is in a drink such as coke, and that the alcohol amount is very very minute so much so that if it was drank on a larger scale and you do not get drunk of it then that is permissable and not haram. I do not agree with this even though my sheikh said so. He also emphasized the fact that we MUST call ourselves salafi (to differentiate from deviancy because everyone calls themselves ahlul sunnah even the hardcore sufis), but again I do not agree with this even though my sheikh said so. He also said that you move your finger while sitting in prayer, and even though his point is valid (saheeh proof) I go with the opinion that you keep the finger up but do not move it (saheeh hadith in Muslim).

Brother the only holes that were found were in your lack of basic understanding of matters pertaining to fiqh and deriving rulings from the Qur'an and Sunnah. You gave an example of Sheikh Albani's view on minute percentages of alcohol, but what he said was valid and proven by Qur'an and Sunnah so again this has exposed your flawed understanding of matters pertaining to fiqh. You also mentioned in Salaah where there is a difference of opinion regarding the pointing of the finger. Again both those opinions you have mentioned have proofs from Sunnah so what basis have you made the decision that one is valid over the other? You cannot just pick and choose what you desire when both are proven by the Sunnah.

Just because you may disagree with an opinion using emotional fallacy it does not mean that it is not valid or permissable. Again i repeat the imaams as well as learned scholars are entitled to their opinions if they have been derived with sound reasoning from the Qur'an and Sunnah and they will not be responsible for this on the day of judgement unless they were totally ignorant.

You are clearly picking and choosing whichever fatwa or opinion you want to accept and disregarding the other without any sound proof. You have just exposed the biggest danger of not sticking to one madhab and that is "fatwa shopping". You are clearly choosing the opinion you want to accept and disregarding the one you do not want to accept even though the other opinion has proofs from the Qur'an and Sunnah. Why? Because you "think" it is less valid than the other opinion. Why? You just do. Is that a good enough reason to disregard a valid opinion which has proofs from the Qur'an or sunnah? Certainly not.

My brother this fatwa shopping is VERY dangerous and causes one to choose whichever opinion he wants according to his desires and whims. Therefore you must stop doing this. You cannot dsisregard an opinion just because you choose not to believe in it. This is the main reason for sticking to one madhab as you or i have no where near enough knowledge to derive rulings from the Qur'an or hadith for we need to have the level of knowledge of a mujtahid to be able to do so and are we anywhere near that level? Certainly not.

Is your understanding of fiqh greater than over a thousand years of scholars who have developed the four madhabs ever since? Of course not so me and you neing lay person are totally ignorant if we were to say this opinion is valid and that is not according to our lack of understanding and knowledge of Qur'an and hadith and deriving rulings from them in order to be able to differentiate between different opinions.

You post attacking following one madhab when you have proven here that you go "fatwa shopping" picking whichever opinion you choose to believe in not knowling anything about the proofs that all of the opinions have in the Qur'an and Sunnah but clearly you have picked them out of your desires. You are not a mujtahid to be picking and choosing whatever opinion you fancy.

Shaykh Said Ramadan al-Buti said:

"If ones child is seriously ill", he asks, "does one look for oneself in the medical textbooks for the proper diagnosis and cure, or should one go to a trained medical practitioner?" Clearly, sanity dictates the latter option. And so it is in matters of religion, which are in reality even more important and potentially hazardous: we would be both foolish and irresponsible to try to look through the sources ourselves, and become our own muftis. Instead, we should recognise that those who have spent their entire lives studying the Sunnah and the principles of law are far less likely to be mistaken than we are.

The fact that all the great scholars of the religion, including the hadith experts, themselves belonged to madhhabs, and required their students to belong to madhhabs, seems to have been forgotten.

These four madhabs are a blessing for this ummah and if it were not for these madhabs we would have had hundreds of thousands of madhabs and "mujtahid wannabes" all creating their own madhabs. These madhabs have been developed for over a thousand years by the greatest of scholars so who are you or me to question any opinion they hold when we lack even basic understanding of fiqh and Islam.

We must not be so arrogant to dismiss taqleed in these matters when it is a must for those of our level and without it we would be lost for Allah tells us in te Qur'an to refer to those who know and those who know are those with knolwedge. Therefore you must stop this practice of fatwa shopping and stop dismissing rulings just because you "think" it is not valid or you do not "prefer" it over the other opinions because you do not have anywhere near enough knowledge to be able to reach the level of a mujtahid to be able to do so.

Knowing a Qur’anic verse or hadith may be worlds apart from knowing the shari‘a ruling, unless one is a qualified mujtahid or is citing one. A madhhab is, after all, nothing more than a piece of precision equipment enabling us to see Islam with the maximum clarity possible. If we use our own devices, our amateurish attempts will inevitably distort our vision.

Imam al-Nawawi said in the introduction of al-Majmu (1/93):

It is incumbent on him-to adhere to a Madhab- and it applies to all those from the jurists and scholars of all the sciences who do not reach the rank of ijtihad. The reason for it is that if it was permissible to follow any Madhab he pleases it would lead to seeking out dispensations of the Madhab’s by following his desires. Thus he would choose between the lawful and prohibited, obligation and permissibility, and that would lead to the freeing of the leash of legal responsibility.


If you want to learn more about following madhabs then this link has some good links:

The Four Madhabs

http://www.themodernreligion.com/madhab.html


And Allah knows best in all matters

 

[Little_Lion]

*muffled voice from under the rock*

I've been told that what I am is Salafi as well, though I'm not quite sure I want to ascribe that term to myself quite yet without a lot more research. But if it makes others on the board more comfortable with the concept of not following a particular madhab to be able to put a name to it, I don't think I'd necessarily be offended either. It might also give others a jumping-off point for their own research into alternative approaches to scholars, without coming to misunderstandings, insha'Allah.

BTW Woodrow, your scorpion is fine, I've been feeding him crickets and he dozes on my head at night to stay warm.

 

[Salafi1407]

Waalaikum Salam

Read this

"The Sayings of the Four Imams on Taqlid


Abu Haneefah (rahimahullaah)

The first of them is Abu Haneefah Nu'maan ibn Thaabit, whose companions have narrated from him various sayings and diverse warnings, all of them leading to one thing: the obligation to accept the Hadeeth, and to give up following the opinions of the imaams which contradict it:

1. "When a hadeeth is found to be saheeh, then that is my madhhab."[20]

2. "It is not permitted[21] for anyone to accept our views if they do not know from where we got them."[22]

Another narration adds, "... for we are mortals: we say one thing one day, and take it back the next day."

In another narration, "Woe to you, O Ya'qub[25]! Do not write down everything you hear from me, for it happens that I hold one opinion today and reject it tomorrow, or hold one opinion tomorrow and reject it the day after tomorrow."[26]

3. "When I say something contradicting the Book of Allaah the Exalted or what is narrated from the Messenger (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam), then ignore my saying."[27]

Maalik ibn Anas (rahimahullaah)

As for Imaam Maalik ibn Anas, he said:

1. "Truly I am only a mortal: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes). Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, ignore it."[28]

2. "Everyone after the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) will have his sayings accepted and rejected - not so the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam)."[29]

3. 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]


Shaafi'i (rahimahullaah)

As for Imaam Shaafi'i, the quotations from him are most numerous and beautiful[31], and his followers were the best in sticking to them:

1. "The sunnahs of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) reach, as well as escape from, every one of us. So whenever I voice my opinion, or formulate a principle, where something contrary to my view exists on the authority of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam), then the correct view is what the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) has said, and it is my view."[32]

2. "The Muslims are unanimously agreed that if a sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) is made clear to someone, it is not permitted[33] for him to leave it for the saying of anyone else."[34]

3. "If you find in my writings something different to the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam), then speak on the basis of the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam), and leave what I have said."

In one narration: "... then follow it (the Sunnah), and do not look sideways at anyone else's saying."[35]

4. "When a hadeeth is found to be saheeh, then that is my madhhab."[36]

5. "You[37] are more knowledgeable about Hadeeth than I, so when a hadeeth is saheeh, inform me of it, whether it is from Kufah, Basrah or Syria, so that I may take the view of the hadeeth, as long as it is saheeh."[38]

6. "In every issue where the people of narration find a report from the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) to be saheeh which is contrary to what I have said, then I take my saying back, whether during my life or after my death."[39]

7. "If you see me saying something, and contrary to it is authentically-reported from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam), then know that my intelligence has departed."[40]

8. "For everything I say, if there is something authentic from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) contrary to my saying, then the hadeeth of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) comes first, so do not follow my opinion."[41]

9. "Every statement on the authority of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) is also my view, even if you do not hear it from me."[42]

Ahmad ibn Hanbal (rahimahullaah)

Imaam Ahmad was the foremost among the Imaams in collecting the Sunnah and sticking to it, so much so that he even "disliked that a book consisting of deductions and opinions be written."[43] Because of this he said:

1. "Do not follow my opinion; neither follow the opinion of Maalik, nor Shaafi'i, nor Awzaa'i, nor Thawri, but take from where they took."[44]

In one narration: "Do not copy your Deen from anyone of these, but whatever comes from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) and his Companions, take it; next are their Successors, where a man has a choice."

Once he said: "Following[45] means that a man follows what comes from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) and his Companions; after the Successors, he has a choice."[46]

2. "The opinion of Awzaa'i, the opinion of Maalik, the opinion of Abu Haneefah: all of it is opinion, and it is all equal in my eyes. However, the proof is in the narrations (from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) and his Companions)."[47]

3. "Whoever rejects a statement of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) is on the brink of destruction."[48]


FOOT NOTES

20 Ibn `Aabideen in al-Haashiyah (1/63), and in his essay Rasm al-Mufti (1/4 from the Compilation of the Essays of Ibn `Aabideen), Shaikh Saalih al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 62) & others. Ibn `Aabideen quoted from Sharh al-Hidaayah by Ibn al-Shahnah al-Kabeer, the teacher of Ibn al-Humaam, as follows:

"When a hadeeth contrary to the Madhhab is found to be saheeh, one should act on the hadeeth, and make that his madhhab. Acting on the hadeeth will not invalidate the follower's being a Hanafi, for it is authentically reported that Abu Haneefah said, `When a hadeeth is found to be saheeh, then that is my madhhab', and this has been related by Imaam Ibn `Abdul Barr from Abu Haneefah and from other imaams."

This is part of the completeness of the knowledge and piety of the Imaams, for they indicated by saying this that they were not versed in the whole of the Sunnah, and Imaam Shaafi'i has elucidated this thoroughly (see later). It would happen that they would contradict a sunnah because they were unaware of it, so they commanded us to stick to the Sunnah and regard it as part of their Madhhab. May Allaah shower His mercy on them all.

21Ar.: halaal

22 Ibn `Abdul Barr in Al-Intiqaa' fi Fadaa'il ath-Thalaathah al- A'immah al-Fuqahaa' (p. 145), Ibn al-Qayyim in I'laam al- Mooqi'een (2/309), Ibn `Aabideen in his Footnotes on Al-Bahr ar-Raa'iq (6/293) and in Rasm al-Mufti (pp. 29,32) & Sha'raani in Al-Meezaan (1/55) with the second narration. The last narration was collected by `Abbaas ad-Dawri in At- Taareekh by Ibn Ma'een (6/77/1) with a saheeh sanad on the authority of Zafar, the student of Imaam Abu Haneefah. Similar narrations exist on the authority of Abu Haneefah's companions Zafar, Abu Yoosuf and `Aafiyah ibn Yazeed; cf. Eeqaaz (p. 52). Ibn al-Qayyim firmly certified its authenticity on the authority of Abu Yoosuf in I'laam al-Mooqi'een (2/344). The addition to the second narration is referenced by the editor of Eeqaaz (p. 65) to Ibn `Abdul Barr, Ibn al-Qayyim and others.

If this is what they say of someone who does not know their evidence, what would be their response to one who knows that the evidence contradicts their saying, but still gives verdicts opposed to the evidence?! Therefore, reflect on this saying, for it alone is enough to smash blind following of opinion; that is why one of the muqallid shaikhs, when I criticised his giving a verdict using Abu Haneefah's words without knowing the evidence, refused to believe that it was a saying of Abu Haneefah!

23 Ar.:haraam

24 Ar.: fatwaa

25 i.e. Imaam Abu Haneefah's illustrious student, Abu Yoosuf (rahimahullaah). 26 This was because the Imaam would often base his view on Qiyaas (Analogy), after which a more potent analogy would occur to him, or a hadeeth of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) would reach him, so he would accept that and ignore his previous view. Sha'raani's words in Al-Meezaan (1/62) are summarised as:

"Our belief, as well as that of every researcher into Imaam Abu Haneefah (radi Allaahu `anhu), is that, had he lived until the recording of the Sharee'ah, and the journeys of the Preservers of Hadeeth to the various cities and frontiers in order to collect and acquire it, he would have accepted it and ignored all the analogies he had employed. The amount of qiyaas in his Madhhab would have been just as little as that in other Madhhabs, but since the evidences of the Sharee'ah had been scattered with the Successors and their successors, and had not been collected in his lifetime, it was necessary that there be a lot of qiyaas in his Madhhab compared to that of other imaams. The later scholars then made their journeys to find and collect ahaadeeth from the various cities and towns and wrote them down; hence, some ahaadeeth of the Sharee'ah explained others. This is the reason behind the large amount of qiyaas in his Madhhab, whereas there was little of it in other Madhhabs."

Abul-Hasanaat Al-Lucknowi quoted his words in full in An- Naafi' al-Kabeer (p. 135), endorsing and expanding on it in his footnotes, so whoever wishes to consult it should do so there.

Since this is the justification for why Abu Haneefah has sometimes unintentionally contradicted the authentic ahaadeeth - and it is a perfectly acceptable reason, for Allaah does not burden a soul with more than it can bear - it is not permissible to insult him for it, as some ignorant people have done. In fact, it is obligatory to respect him, for he is one of the imaams of the Muslims through whom this Deen has been preserved and handed down to us, in all its branches; also, for he is rewarded under any circumstance: whether he is correct or wrong. Nor is it permissible for his devotees to continue sticking to those of his statements which contradict the authentic ahaadeeth, for those statements are effectively not part of his Madhhab, as the above sayings show. Hence, these are two extremes, and the truth lies in between. "Our Lord! Forgive us, and our brethren who came before us into the Faith; and leave not, in our hearts, any rancour against those who have believed. Our Lord! You are indeed Full of Kindness, Most Merciful." (Al-Hashr 59:10)

27 Al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 50), tracing it to Imaam Muhammad and then saying, "This does not apply to the mujtahid, for he is not bound to their views anyway, but it applies to the muqallid."

Sha'raani expanded on that in Al-Meezaan (1/26):

"If it is said: `What should I do with the ahaadeeth which my Imaam did not use, and which were found to be authentic after his death?' The answer which is fitting for you is: `That you act on them, for had your Imaam come across them and found them to be authentic, he would have instructed you to act on them, because all the Imaams were captives in the hand of the Sharee'ah.' He who does so will have gathered all the good with both his hands, but he who says, `I will not act according to a hadeeth unless my Imaam did so', he will miss a great amount of benefit, as is the case with many followers of the Imaams of the Madhhabs. It would be better for them to act on every hadeeth found to be authentic after the Imaam's time, hence implementing the will of the Imaams; for it is our firm belief about the Imaams that had they lived longer and come to know of those ahaadeeth which were found authentic after their time, they would have definitely accepted and acted according to them, ignoring any analogies they may have previously made, and any views they may have previously held."

28 Ibn `Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm (2/32), Ibn Hazm, quoting from the former in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/149), & similarly Al-Fulaani (p. 72)

29 This iswell known among the later scholars to be a saying of Maalik. Ibn `Abdul Haadi declared it saheeh in Irshaad as- Saalik (227/1); Ibn `Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm (2/91) & Ibn Hazm in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/145, 179) had narrated it as a saying of Al-Hakam ibn `Utaibah and Mujaahid; Taqi ad- Deen as-Subki gave it, delighted with its beauty, in al- Fataawaa (1/148) as a saying of Ibn `Abbaas, and then said: "These words were originally those of Ibn `Abbaas and Mujaahid, from whom Maalik (radi Allaahu `anhu) took them, and he became famous for them." It seems that Imaam Ahmad then took this saying from them, as Abu Daawood has said in Masaa'il of Imaam Ahmad (p. 276): "I heard Ahmad say, `Everyone is accepted and rejected in his opinions, with the exception of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam)'."

30 From the Introduction to Al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel of Ibn Abi Haatim, pp. 31-2.

31 Ibn Hazm says in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/118):

"Indeed, all the fuqahaa' whose opinions are followed were opposed to taqleed, and they forbade their companions from following their opinion blindly. The sternest among them in this regard was Shaafi'i (rahimahullaah), for he repeatedly emphasised, more than anyone else, following the authentic narrations and accepting whatever the proof dictated; he also made himself innocent of being followed totally, and announced this to those around him. May this benefit him in front of Allaah, and may his reward be of the highest, for he was the cause of great good."

32 Related by Haakim with a continuous sanad up to Shaafi'i, as in Taareekh Dimashq of Ibn `Asaakir (15/1/3), I'laam al- Mooqi'een (2/363, 364) & Eeqaaz (p. 100).

33 Ar.: halaal

34 Ibn al-Qayyim (2/361) & Fulaani (p. 68) 35 Harawi in Dhamm al-Kalaam (3/47/1), Khateeb in Al-Ihtijaaj bi ash-Shaafi'i (8/2), Ibn `Asaakir (15/9/10), Nawawi in Al- Majmoo' (1/63), Ibn al-Qayyim (2/361) & Fulaani (p. 100); the second narration is from Hilyah al-Awliyaa' of Abu Nu'aim. 36 Nawawi in Al-Majmoo' (1/63), Sha'raani (1/57), giving its sources as Haakim and Baihaqi, & Fulaani (p. 107). Sha'raani said, "Ibn Hazm said, `That is, ... found to be saheeh by him or by any other Imaam'." His saying given next confirms this understanding.

Nawawi says: "Our companions acted according to this in the matter of tathweeb (calling to prayer in addition to the adhaan), the conditions on coming out of ihraam due to illness, and other issues well-known in the books of the Madhhab. Among those of our companions who are reported to have passed judgment on the basis of the hadeeth (i.e. rather than the saying of Shaafi'i) are Abu Ya'qoob al-Buweeti and Abu l-Qaasim ad-Daariki. Of our companions from the muhadditheen, Imaam Abu Bakr Al-Baihaqi and others employed this approach. Many of our earliest companions, if they faced an issue for which there was a hadeeth, and the madhhab of Shaafi'i was contrary to it, would act according to the hadeeth and give verdicts based on it, saying, `The madhhab of Shaafi'i is whatever agrees with the hadeeth.' Shaikh Abu `Amr (Ibn as-Salaah) says, `Whoever among the Shaafi'is found a hadeeth contradicting his Madhhab, he would consider whether he fulfilled the conditions of ijtihaad generally, or in that particular topic or issue, in which case he would be free to act on the hadeeth; if not, but nevertheless he found it hard to contradict the hadeeth after further analysis, he would not be able to find a convincing justification for opposing the hadeeth. Hence, it would be left for him to act according to the hadeeth if an independent imaam other than Shaafi'i had acted on it, and this would be justification for his leaving the Madhhab of his Imaam in that issue.' What he (Abu `Amr) has said is correct and established. Allaah knows best."

There is another possibility which Ibn as-Salaah forgot to mention: what would one do if he did not find anyone else who acted according to the hadeeth? This has been answered by Taqi ad-Deen as-Subki in his article, The Meaning of Shaafi'i's saying, "When a hadeeth is found to be saheeh, then that is my madhhab" (p. 102, vol. 3): "For me, the best thing is to follow the hadeeth. A person should imagine himself in front of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam), just having heard it from him: would there be leeway for him to delay acting on it? No, by Allaah ... and everyone bears a responsibility according to his understanding."

The rest of this discussion is given and analysed in I'laam al- Muwaqqi'een (2/302, 370) and in the book of al-Fulaane, (full title Eeqaaz Himam ulu l-Absaar, lil-Iqtidaa' bi Sayyid al- Muhaajireen wal-Ansaar, wa Tahdheeruhum `an al-Ibtidaa' ash- Shaa'i' fi l-Quraa wal-Amsaar, min Taqleed al-Madhaahib ma'a l- Hamiyyah wal-'Asabiyyah bain al-Fuqahaa' al-A'saar (Awakening the Minds of those who have Perception, towards following the Leader of the Emigrants and Helpers, and Warning them against the Innovation Widespread among Contemporary Jurists in the Towns and Cities, of following Madhhabs with Zeal and Party- Spirit). The latter is a unique book in its field, which every desirer of truth should study with understanding and reflection. 37 addressing Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (rahimahullaah).

38 Related by Ibn Abi Haatim in Aadaab ash-Shaafi'i (pp. 94-5), Abu Nu'aim in Hulyah al-Awliyaa' (9/106), al-Khateeb in Al- Ihtijaaj bish-Shaafi'i (8/1), and from him Ibn `Asaakir (15/9/1), Ibn `Abdul Barr in al-Intiqaa' (p. 75), Ibn al-Jawzi in Manaaqib al-Imaam Ahmad (p. 499) & Harawi (2/47/2) with three routes from `Abdullaah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal from his father that Shaafi'i said to him: ...etc; thus, it is authentic on the authority of Shaafi'i. This is why Ibn al- Qayyim attributed it definitely to him in I'laam (2/325), as did Fulaani in Eeqaaz (p. 152) and then said: "Baihaqi said, `This is why he - i.e. Shaafi'i - used hadeeth so much, because he gathered knowledge from the people of Hijaaz, Syria, Yemen and `Iraq, and so accepted all that he found to be authentic, without leaning towards or looking at what he had considered out of the Madhhab of the people of his land when the truth was clear to him elsewhere. Some of those before him would limit themselves to what they found in the Madhhab of the people of their land, without attempting to ascertain the authenticity of what opposed it. May Allaah forgive all of us'."

39 Abu Nu'aim (9/107), Harawi (47/1), Ibn al-Qayyim in I'laam al-Muwaqqi'een (2/363) & Fulaani (p. 104).

40 Ibn Abi Haatim in al-Aadaab (p. 93), Abul Qaasim Samarqandi in al-Amaali, as in the selection from it by Abu Hafs al- Mu'addab (234/1), Abu Nu'aim (9/106) & Ibn `Asaakir (15/10/1) with a saheeh sanad.

41 Ibn Abi Haatim, Abu Nu'aim & Ibn `Asaakir (15/9/2).

42 Ibn Abi Haatim (pp. 93-4).

43 Ibn al-Jawzi in al-Manaaqib (p. 192)

44 Fulaani (p. 113) & Ibn al-Qayyim in I'laam (2/302).

45 Ar.: ittibaa'

46 Abu Daawood in Masaa'il of Imaam Ahmad (pp. 276-7)

47 Ibn `Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm (2/149).

48 Ibn al-Jawzi (p. 182)2) "

Brother Hamza, there are 2 extremes here, one is complete blind following and one is fatwa shopping or following whims and desires. Like I said I am student of knowledge, I am learning from top top learned scholars who have pertained knowledge from the top scholars of recent times. And always quote these scholars or the quran and sunnah for proof.

I do not fatwa shop, as that would mean I am following my whims and desires. But I follow the proof as presented by the scholars I follow, if there is a difference in opinion I go with the scholar that provides the stronger proof.

I can ask you the question, how can you be so sure that what you are following is definately the teaching or opinion of Imaam Abu Hanifah?

And you still are implying that these 4 madhabs are infalible. How on earth can you say that? Not all the opinions are correct. And my examples are perfect examples. Blood either breaks your wudhu or not. You either pray with your hands on your chest or on your sides, you cannot do both. Dua Qunoot is wajib after Fajr or it is not. Touching a woman breaks the wudhu or it does not. You can't say both opinions are valid. Sure the madhabs think that their respective opinions were valid but that does not mean both opinions are correct, if so explain to me how this is, using the examples I gave.

I know akhi this is a never ending debate and we are going to get nowhere, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I will conclude by saying I wish, I really do wish the muslims of today would follow the 4 Imaams correctly because if they did we wouldn't have so many innovations. I mean for example many if not all hardcore sufis and brelwis call themselves hanafi, and I seriously doubt Imaam Abu Hanifah or any of his students would condemn any of their deviant acts (I am sure you know what they are and you do not need me to list them). Thats the problem you see, people start to follow Scholars who solely quote what Imaam Abu Hanifa or the other 3 instead of the Quran and Sunnah, and they somehow justify their position. Many Hanafis (other madhabs too but I know hanafis) for example do not have beards and if you tell them that it is Wajib to have a beard according to Imaam Abu Hanifah and all the madhabs as a matter of fact, they will refute you passionately saying it is only a sunnah, why? their local imaam said so, who is a hanafi, so in their opinion it must be in the hanafi madhab.

 

[Hamza Asadullah]

Waalaikum Salam

Read this



Brother Hamza, there are 2 extremes here, one is complete blind following and one is fatwa shopping or following whims and desires. Like I said I am student of knowledge, I am learning from top top learned scholars who have pertained knowledge from the top scholars of recent times. And always quote these scholars or the quran and sunnah for proof.

I do not fatwa shop, as that would mean I am following my whims and desires. But I follow the proof as presented by the scholars I follow, if there is a difference in opinion I go with the scholar that provides the stronger proof.

I can ask you the question, how can you be so sure that what you are following is definately the teaching or opinion of Imaam Abu Hanifah?

And you still are implying that these 4 madhabs are infalible. How on earth can you say that? Not all the opinions are correct. And my examples are perfect examples. Blood either breaks your wudhu or not. You either pray with your hands on your chest or on your sides, you cannot do both. Dua Qunoot is wajib after Fajr or it is not. Touching a woman breaks the wudhu or it does not. You can't say both opinions are valid. Sure the madhabs think that their respective opinions were valid but that does not mean both opinions are correct, if so explain to me how this is, using the examples I gave.

I know akhi this is a never ending debate and we are going to get nowhere, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I will conclude by saying I wish, I really do wish the muslims of today would follow the 4 Imaams correctly because if they did we wouldn't have so many innovations. I mean for example many if not all hardcore sufis and brelwis call themselves hanafi, and I seriously doubt Imaam Abu Hanifah or any of his students would condemn any of their deviant acts (I am sure you know what they are and you do not need me to list them). Thats the problem you see, people start to follow Scholars who solely quote what Imaam Abu Hanifa or the other 3 instead of the Quran and Sunnah, and they somehow justify their position. Many Hanafis (other madhabs too but I know hanafis) for example do not have beards and if you tell them that it is Wajib to have a beard according to Imaam Abu Hanifah and all the madhabs as a matter of fact, they will refute you passionately saying it is only a sunnah, why? their local imaam said so, who is a hanafi, so in their opinion it must be in the hanafi madhab.

Asalaamu Alaikum, you have not commented on any of the points i made in my last post rather you have just repeated the same one point regarding following scholars with the stronger opinion not knowing for sure which scholar has the stronger opinion if all claimed to have stronger opinion on a mater. This clearly shows that you are not able to prove the stance you have taken in regards to madhab but instead have proven to all that in order to avoid fatwa shopping and following ones desires it is incumbant for lay people like us to follow a madhab "properly".

You still havent given me a clear answer on this question: "if there are two top scholars whom you both follow and both claim to have the stronger opinion on a particular matter then which opinion will you follow?"

Clearly me or you do not have the knowledge to go fatwa shopping or to be able to differentiate which scholars have a stronger opinion on a certain matter.

So you proved once again in your responses that you blindly follow scholars because you mentioned you follow the opinions of your scholars but i am sure if your scholars said that their opinion is the stronger one and another scholar said the same thing then you would follow "your" scholar which is clearly blind following. You are making blind taqleed yet criticise others for doing the same. You have proven this without doubt as others can also clearly see from your posts. It is then clear that you make blind taqleed because you will never have sufficient knowledge of Qur'an and Sunnah to be able to establish which scholar has a stronger opinion but you will be inclined to follow the opinion of "your" scholar believing it to be the stronger opinion but not knowing for sure if it is the stronger opinion so you are in fact making blind taqleed to "your" scholars.

You have also contradicted yourself because you mentioned in your last post that you dont agree with Sheikh Albani when he said we should label ourselves as "salafis" yet you have just changed your user name from "Ruhul" to "Salafi". If that is the case then what credibility do your words now have and why the sudden turn around?

In regards to your question whether or not i am sure whether or not what i am following are truly the teachings of Imaam Abu Hanifa then yes i am sure because the scholars i follow quote the famous Hanafi book of law Radd al-Muhtar ala ad-Dur al-Mukhtar by the eminent 19th century scholar Ibn Abidin which is a commentary on Imam al-Haskafi's Durr al-Mukhtar, it is commonly known as Radd al-Mukhtar and it is a compilation of the great fatwas of Imam Abu Hanifa. Ask any scholar about it for it is an authority on Hanafi jurispudence.

Concluding what you mentioned about those who innovate and speak without knolwedge then this applies to all Muslims but i do agree that many brelwees in particular do tend to mix tradition with faith and find it hard to distinguish between the two. This clearly comes down to a lack of knolwedge.

This can also apply to certain "neo-salafi" lay people who seem to believe they have the authority to give takfeer and can label anyone who does not follow what they believe to be the right path as "deviants, ahlul bida and even kaafir".

So i believe that it is incumbant that all Muslims should make effort to attain and acquire adequate amount of knowledge of their deen to be able to distinguish between what is right and wrong and what is halal and haraam and what is permissable and what is impermissable. Surely those who don't will be held accountable as will be those who go fatwa shopping and pick and choose a fatwa that suits them best and is convenient for them.


And Allah knows best in all matters

 

[Hamza Asadullah]

Asalaamu Alaikum,

The necessity of Taqleed from the Shari’ point of view

By a student of Darul Uloom, Holcombe, Bury, U.K.

Introduction:

Question: Some people say that Taqleed (Adherence to a madhab of an Imaam) is haraam in the Shari’ah. They insist that a true Muslim should only follow the Qur'aan and Sunnah, and they say that it is equivalent to shirk (polytheism) to follow an Imaam in matters of Shar’iah. They also claim that the Hanafi, Shaaf’i, Maliki and Hanbali schools were formed some two hundred years after the Holy Prophet sallallahu alaihe wasallam, therefore they are bid’ah (an innovation not approved in the Qur’an and Sunnah). They also stress that a Muslim should seek guidance directly form the Qur’an and Sunnah, and that no intervention of an Imaam is needed to practice upon the Shari’ah. Please explain to what extent this view is correct?

The answer to the above mentioned question follows and among the first things to be determined is what is Taqleed.

Definition of Taqleed:

Literal: Taqleed is a verbal noun of the root ‘Qa' 'la' 'da’ in the second form. The verb Qalada means to place, to gird or to adorn with a necklace. When used in conjunction with human beings, it refers to the wearing of a necklace, pendant or any other such similar ornament.

Technical: The acceptance of a statement of another without demanding proof or evidence on the belief that the statement is being made in accordance with fact and proof, is called Taqleed, or, for the purist, Taqleed-ush-shakhsi.

Taqleed – A Qur’aanic Command:

The basis for Taqleed is a Qur’aanic command.

"And, ask the People of Knowledge if you do not know."

Thus the general principle of Taqleed is enshrined in the Qur’aan Majeed. Denial of this principle is, therefore, an act of kufr which expels the denier from the fold of Islam.

Daleel (proof) of Taqleed:

Aswad bin Yazid narrates, "Mu'aath came to us in Yemen as a teacher and commander. We questioned him regarding a man who had died leaving (as his heirs) a brother and sister. He decreed half the estate for the daughter and half for the sister. This was while the Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam was alive."

[Kitaabul Faraa-idh: Bukhari and Muslim Shareef]

It will be realised from this Hadith Shareef that Taqleed was in vogue during the time of the Prophet sallallahu alaihe wasallam. The questioner (in the Hadith) did not demand proof or basis for the decree. He accepted the ruling, relying on the integrity, piety and up-righteousness of Hazrat Mu,aath radiyallahu anhu. This is precisely Taqleed.

Secondly Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam did not criticise or reject the people of his age, who followed Hazrat Mu-aath radiyallahu anhu, nor has any rejection or difference on the issue been narrated by anyone else. The permissibility and validity of Taqleed are therefore evident, especially so because of it’s prevalence in the glorious time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam.

This Hadith further furnishes proof for the concept of Taqleed-us-Shakhsi. Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam had appointed Hazrat Mu-aath radiyallahu anhu to provide religious instruction to the people of Yemen. It is, hence, evident and certain that Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam granted the people of Yemen the right and permission to refer to Hazrat Mu-aath radiyallahu anhu in all affairs of Deen.

Huthail bin Shurgbeel said, ‘Abu Musa was questioned, then Ibn Masiud was questioned. Ibn Mas’ud was informed of Abu Musa’s statement. Ibn Mas’ud differed with it. Thereafter Abu Musa was informed (of his difference). He then said: "Do not ask me as long as this Aalim of deen is among you."

It will be understood that Abu Musa radiyallahu anhu in directing the people towards Ibn Mas’ud radiyallahu anhu by his command, "Do not ask me as long as this Aalim of Deen is among you," was mandatory regarding all matters of Deen. This, in fact, is Taqleed-us-Shaksi which means to refer every religious question to a particular Aalim because of some determining factor, and to act according to his verdict.

These Ahaadith indicate that ‘Taqleed-us-Shakhsi’ is not a new concept which can refuted. Its existence is from the very epoch of Khairul Qurun (the three eras adjacent to the age of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam is an established fact).

Taqleed in General:

The faculty of Taqleed is inherently existent in us. If we had refrained from the Taqleed of our parents and teachers then today we would have been deprived of even the basic and preliminary needs of humanity. By nature man is endowed with the ability to imitate and follow others. If this was not the case, we would not have been able to learn our home language. If we had refused to accept unquestioningly (without demanding proof) every command, beck and call of our teachers, then we would have been ignorant of even the alphabet of a language, let alone the study and writing of our books. Our whole life – every facet of it, eating, drinking, donning garments, walking, earning, etc., is connected with this very concept of Taqleed.

If the fundamentals and technical terminology of every branch of knowledge was not acquired on the basis of Taqleed, i.e. without questioning the authority of the masters, then the proficiency in such knowledge could not have been attained.

The Necessity of Taqleed:

There are two types of wujoob (compulsory nature of something) in jurisprudence: 1) wujoob biz zaat 2) wujoob bil ghair.

1) Wujoob biz zaat means compulsory in itself, for example the commission or omission brings about the compulsion, as the commission of salaah and the commission of polytheism etc.

2) Wujoob bil ghair – these are such acts which are not normally compulsory in themselves, but they constitute the basis for actions commanded in the Qur’aan and hadith and normally it is not possible to execute the commanded practises without also executing their basis. Therefore, wujoob bil ghair means compulsory by virtue of an external factor. It is from here we derived the universal rule, ‘ the basis of a wajib is also wajib’ and this is the exact rule which governs the compulsory nature of Taqleed ush Shakhsi.

Evils of Discarding Taqleed:

It is established by observation and experience that in this age most people are governed by selfishness, baneful motives, lust, insincerity, mischief, strife, anarchy, opposition to the consensus of the Ahdul-Haq, and subjection of the Deen to desire. This is manifest and self-evident. The Ahadith on fitan (strife) have forewarned us of the rise of these baneful traits in man. The Ulama are well aware of this. It is for this reason (baneful traits) that in the absence of Taqleed-us-Shakhsi, great harm, mischief, disruption and corruption will reign in the Deen. One of the destructive evils which will raise its head in the absence of Taqleed-us-Shakhsi is self- appointed Mujtahids. Some persons will consider themselves to be Mujtahids and embark on the process of Qiyas (Shar’i analogical reasoning) and they will consider themselves to be of equal or greater rank than the illustrious Mujtahideen of the early ages of Islam. The previous Mujtahideen have reliably stated that some laws are Mu’all’al (based on certain causes). Citing this some modernists have claimed that the command of wudhu for salaah is mu’all’al, it being the consequence of the early Arabs being camel-herds and goatherds. Since their occupation of tending animals exposed them constantly to impurities, the command of wudhu was formulated. On this basis they claim that since people of the present time live in environments and occupations of greater hygienic conditions, wudhu is no longer necessary for salaah. They conclude thus, the permissibility of salaah without wudhu.

Similarly, it is claimed (by such self-styled mujtahids) that the wujub of witnesses in the Nikah ceremony is mu’all’al, the need of witnesses being occasioned by the occurrence of a dispute which may arrive in the future. The presence of witnesses will facilitate the resolving of disputes between the contending marriage parties. On this basis they conclude that where there exists no danger of dispute, the Nikah will be valid without witnesses.

Another evil resulting from the discarding of Taqleed us Shukhsi is to practice in accordance if the esoteric (zahir) façade of certain Ahaadith whereas such a practice is certainly not lawful. Since the discarder of Taqleed-us-Shakhsi sees himself unchecked and unfettered he follows the dictates of his nafs. An example of this type of Hadith is as follows:

"Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam performed Zuhr and Asr together and Maghrib and Isha together without (the expediency) of fear and journey.
[Muslim Shareef]

At face value the Hadith indicates the permissibility of performing Zuhr and Asr as well as Maghrib and Isha even if there exists no valid reason for this practice.

But, without any doubt, the unification of salaah without reason is not held permissible by any authority. The correct meaning of the hadith is arrived at by ta’weel (interpretation) via the faculty of Ijtihaad. Practice in accordance with the mere façade of the words used in such cases will result in an opposition to Ijma (consensus of the Ummat), and such conflict is Haraam.

The summary of what has been said is; Taqleed-us-Shakhsi is the basis for a wajib aspect (viz., acting in accordance with the commands of the Shariah) and the basis of a Wajib is also Wajib, hence Taqleed-us-Shakhsi is likewise Wajib.

One who has discarded Taqleed, even if he does not resort to Ijtihaad himself, nor follows the meaning conveyed superficially by the words, will, in difficult Masa’il accept the verdict of any authority. He will at times follow one Imaam and at other, another. In this way he will sometimes practice in opposition to Ijma, and on occasions, even if the result is not in conflict with Ijma he will resort to the verdict which appeals to his whims and fancies and by means of which worldly motives are available. Thus, he will submit the Deen to the dictates of the nafs. We seek Allah's protection from such deviation.

Taqleed Restricted To The Four Madhaa’hib:

There are numerous Mujtahideen. It may therefore be argued that Taqleed of any Mujtahid should suffice. What is the reason for restricting Taqleed to the four Madhaa’hib?

It was realised from the exposition of the wujub of Taqleed that adoption of different verdicts leads to anarchy. It is therefore imperative to make Taqleed of a Madhab which has been so formulated and arranged in regard to principles (Usul) and details (Furu) that answers to all questions could be obtained either in specific form or in deducted form based on principles, thereby obviating the need to refer to an external source. This all-embracing quality by an act of Allah Ta’aala is found existing in only the four Madhaa'hib. It is therefore imperative to adopt one of the four Madhaa'hib’. This has been the accepted practice coming down the ages from the early times in an unbroken chain of transmission, from generation to generation.

The emphasis on this aspect of Taqleed is so profound that certain Ulama have restricted the Ahle-Sunnah wal jama within the confines of the Four Madhahib

A Baseless Question:

Some modernists tend to pose other Muslims the following question: " Did the Madh’habs exist during the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam and the Sahaabah?

In response it could be asked: Did Bukhari Shareef exist in the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam. Did the Qur'aan (in the form we have it) exist during the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam)? If they respond by saying "Yes", then we to shall retort that the Madh’habs did exists in the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam.

If the madhab did not exist during the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam and the Sahaabah, the logical conclusion is that the entire Shar'iah which the illustrious Imaam have expounded is not the Shar'iah taught Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam and the Sahaabah. But, this is absurd and preposterous.

The madhab of all the teaching of the Madhabs are in fact the teachings of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. Nothing in the Madhabs conflicts with the Qur’aan and Hadith. The different ways methods of Ibaadat, etc., which the Madhabs are applying, are the ways and methods of the Sahaabah which they had acquired from Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam. The differences were inherited from the Sahaabah and such differences are by Divine Decree, hence Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam said:

"The differences of my Ummat is a Rahmat".

Whether anyone understands this fact that, ‘Rahmat’ (Mercy) is emanating out of the authoritative differences of the Fuqahah of the Ummat is of no substance. The fact that Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam proclaimed such differences to be the effects of Allah’s mercy is sufficient. Thus, there is nothing detestable in the differences prevailing among the Madhabs. These valid and authentic differences do not bring about disunity, as is asserted by some modernists. A lot of the times it is the ignorance of people and their desires are the causes of disunity.

While the terms, Hanafi, Shaaf'i, etc. did not exist in the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam and the Sahaabah, the teachings of these Madhabs, all had existed. While Bukhari Shareef did not exist, the Ahaadith contained in the book did exist. It is, therefore, incorrect to pose the question of the Madhabs during the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam. There is unity in this diversity. Deen is the product of wahi, not the result of man’s desires. Since the hawa (desire) cannot find free-play within the chains of Taqleed the aim of the some modernists is to try and refute the concept of Taqleed. But, breaking the chains of Taqleed is to enchain oneself with the shackles of the nafs.

Why Is It Necessary To Make Taqleed Of Only One Imaan (Taqleed-us-Shakhsi):

The question arises, Why is it necessary to follow one Imaam only? What is wrong if one mas’ala is taken from one Imaam and another from another Imaam, as was done in the time of the Sahaabah radiyallahu anhum and Tabi’een. In those times the whole Madhab was not confined to one person. The answer is that in those times good was prevalent. Generally the lowly desires did not have any matters in the matters of Deen. Whoever used to refer to any of his elders regarding any mas’ala, used to do so sincerely and he also used to act upon the verdict given to him whether it be to his benefit and desires or not. Later sincerity to that degree and piety did not remain amongst the people. Such urge was present in people to ask one Aalim a mas’ala, if it did not suit them, then they referred that mas’ala to another Aalim until they found a verdict that suited their desires. Gradually, for every mas’ala they had the urge to look for a suitable reply. It is obvious that such people are not seeking the truth. Sometimes the consequences is very serious, e.g. a person in the state of wudhu touches his wife. A person following the Shaaf'i madhab tells him that "Your wudhu is broken, therefore remake your wudhu". He replies "No, I am a muqalid of Imaam Abu Hanifa Rahmatullahi alaihe; according to him this does not cause the wudhu to break. I can read salaah with the wudhu. Then the person vomits a mouthful, a person following the Hanafi madhab advises him to make wudhu as his wudhu has broken, according to Imaam Abu Hanifa Rahmatullahi alaihe; this person replies that I am making Taqleed of Imaam Sha’fi Rahmatullahi alaihe, (in this mas’ala) and according to Imaam Shaaf'i Rahmatullahi alaihe vomiting does not cause the wudhu to break. A person can read salaah with such a wudhu. If this person reads his salaah with this wudhu then his salaah will not be valid according to Imaam Sha’fi Rahmatullahi alaihe and not according to Imaam Abu Hanifa Rahmatullahi alaihe. This is called talfeeq and there is ijma and consensus of opinion that talfeeq is ba’til and impermissible. In reality by doing this a person does not make taqleed of Imaam Shaaf'i Rahmatullahi alaihe or Imaam Abu Hanifa Rahmatullahi alaihe, but he is following his desires, and the Shariah has prohibited us from following our desires. Its result is going astray from the path of Allah Taa’la.

Allah Taa’la says in Surah Hud Ayaat 26:

‘And do not follow your desires (in future too) for it will lead you astray from the path of Allah.’

Therefore it is Necessary to make Taqleed of one Imaam only.

It is for this reason that the Qur’aan-e-Kareem has commended adherence towards Allah (repeatedly). Allah Ta'aala says:

"And follow the way of that person that person who turns towards me."

Generally someone feels according to his strong presumption that Imaam Abu Hanifa Rahmatullahi alaihe is most probably correct and munib (has the quality of ibaadat), that is, his Ijtihaad conforms more with the Qur'aan and Hadith. That is why he has opted to make Taqleed of Imaam Abu Hanifa Rahmatullahi alaihe. Another person has this strong feeling that Imaam Maalik Rahmatullahi alaihe ijtihaad conforms with the Qur’aan and Hadith, therefore, he makes Taqleed of Imaam Maalik Rahmatullahi alaihe. Someone has this feeling regarding Imaam Shaaf'i Rahmatullahi alaihe ijtihaad, that is why he makes Imaam Shaaf'i Rahmatullahi alaihe taqleed and someone for this very reason makes taqleed of Imaam Ahmed bin Hanbal Rahmatullahi alaihe.

Talfeeq And Changing Madhabs Is Not Permissible:

It is not permissible to leave taqleed made upon one Imaam and follow another Imaam when one wishes. When this is done without permission from the Shariah it leads to talfeeq, it also causes one to follow one’s desires resulting in going far away from the truth and being led astray.

Madhab Of The Convert:

What is the hukm (law) for a convert to Islam or for one who wishes to switch from his state of non-taqleed to taqleed? Which Madhab does he have to follow?

If such a person lives in a place where a particular Madhab is dominant, then he should follow the Madhab by virtue of its dominance. If he happens to be in a place where several madhaa’hib are in operation on a more or less equivalent basis, then he will be free to choose any Madhab acceptable to him. However, once the choice is made he will be obliged to remain steadfast on the Madhab of his choice.

In cases where it is difficult to act in accordance with one’s Madhab due to a dearth of Ulama of one’s Madhab; moreover for the one who is not an Aalim, it will be permissible, in fact compulsory, to adopt the Madhab which happens to be predominant in the place where one happens to be. For a person in such circumstances Taqleed-us-Shakhsi of his former Madhab will not be compulsory. He will be obliged to choose from the four madhaaib the madhab which is dominant in his particular circumstance. However, such cases are rare. The general rule in force is the wujub of Taqleed-us-Shakhsi.

The Disease Of Admut-Taqleed:

Admut-taqleed (abandonment of taqleed) is a disease spread by Shaitaan’. Shaitaan’s plot is always to destroy the Deen and the best and the most effective way to achieve this evil aim is to negate the concept of taqleed. The Sunnah is inextricably interwoven into the fabric of taqleed. Once a man abandons taqleed of the Madhabs he is left with no guidance other than the deviation of his nafs. While he pretends to possess the ability to formulate the Shari'ah directly from the Qur’aan and Hadith, he can venture no further than picking and choosing from the various opinions and rulings of the illustrious Imaams. In so doing, he follows the base desires of his nafs.

Once the authority of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen has been shrugged off, the Muslim is cut off from his Imaani moorings. He will then drift in the ocean of deception and desire which shaitaan has prepared for him. Admut-taqleed is thus a fatal spiritual disease which can lead to the destruction of one’s Imaan.

The Sunnah:

In the present time the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah is confined to the four Madhabs. Whoever searches for the path of the Sunnah beyond the confines of the four Madhabs will deviate in to Baa’til. Since every teaching of the four Madhabs is the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, deviation therefrom is to deviate from the Sunnah. Those who deviate from the Sunnah are destined for Jahannum according to the explicit pronouncement of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam who said:

"Bani Israael split into seventy-two sects. My Ummat will split into seventy-three sects. All of which, save one, will be in the fire"

When he was asked regarding the sects which will be saved from the fire Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam said:

"That path on which I and my Sahaabah are."

Salvation (Najaat) in the Hereafter (Aakhirah) therefore depends on donning the mantle of Taqleed. We should strive to ensure our safety from the ingeniously subtle designs of Shaitaan to drag us with him into eternal punishment.

Source: http://www.central-mosque.com/fiqh/ver_taqleed.htm

Please click on the following link which is a direct PDF download of "The Legal Status of Following a Madhab" which gives a balanced view on the issue of following a madhab and is written by the eminent scholar of Islam Sheikh Mufti Muhammad Taqi Uthmani:

The Legal Status of Following a Madhab

http://kalamullah.com/Books/LegalStatusOfFollowingAMadhab.pdf

 

[Hamza Asadullah]

Please listen to these wonderful lectures about following madhabs and taqleed by some of the greatest scholars of today:


Following a Madhab in Islam - Part 1 of 6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z94ty00F7dQ

Following a Madhab in Islam - Part 2 of 6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWAYO4kl3Uc

Following a Madhab in Islam - Part 3 of 6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0Byob0Wsls

Following a Madhab in Islam - Part 4 of 6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQMCecmTq2s

Following a Madhab in Islam - Part 5 of 6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jymYGXZIT6c

Following a Madhab in Islam - Part 6 of 6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szkB5B7yLM0&feature=related


Following a Madhab - Mufti Abdur-Rahman ibn Yusuf Mangera

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yORmU1h3-18

Taqleed- Sheikh Ahmed Ali

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X22RMgjOAz8

A Description of Taqleed - Shaykh Abu Yusuf Riyadh ul Haq

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qFrcj0-STY

Great Muqallids of the past- Sheikh Ahmed Ali

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pI1F6QyJG8Q

History of 4 imams Download all 8 parts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOlpi4APNCM


Just to conclude:

Whatever the differences of opinions of the madhabs they are all valid and acceopted and have been for the past 1400 years. If one chooses to make taqleed to one of the four imaams which has also been established and recommended to lay people for the past 1400 years then they should be able to do so without certain modernists making absurd claims that they are making blind taqleed when it is apparent that they are also making blind taqleed to their scholars because it is impossible for a lay person not to make taqleed because they have not got the knowledge or understanding of Qur'an and Sunnah to be able to distinguish between the differences of opinions with regards to fiqhi matters.

So let there be tolerance from those who follow a particular madhab and those who do not. If these differences have been accepted for 1400 years then they are some making such a big fuss now? Surely this is a way to disunite Muslims and for shaythan to play his evil hand in order to create friction, dissention and partition within Islam.

So let us unite and accepted our differences as they have always been accepted and NEVER let shaythan split us apart. Let us concentrate on what is most important which is to do our best in our daily lives in order to please Allah and refrain from anything which angers or displeases him.


And Allah knows best in all matters