Question about Salah and Madhab

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

I think we need to try and understand that this issue regarding the madahib (which shouldn't be an issue at all) is not a question of bringing a person into camp x or camp y - it's about answering the question in a way that will satisfy the questioner. There's no need whatsoever to get people involved in matters that 1) they have no need to know about (i.e. which are completely irrelevent to the topic) 2) will only confuse them further.

And second point, can we please all move on from bashing the madahib, especially the Hanafis? There was a time when I was anti-Hanafi but when one sits down and studies even basics of Fiqh and how the schools evolved - he gains a respect and tolerance for all the Madahib. Even the Hanafiyyah, the school is vast and very beautiful and Imam Abu Hanifa (rahimullah) was truly a genius masha'Allaah. The more knowledge we have, the less argumentative we become and the less knowledge we have the more argumentative we are. The more knowledge we gain, the more we know and understand our limits while the less knowledge we have, we forget and don’t know our limits.

Just to point out some stuff that worried me:

Sayings Of The Imaams Regarding Following The Sunnah And Ignoring Their Views Contradictory To It

This post is completely irrelevent to the topic on hand. Quoting this shows that the one who is quoting this is completely unaware of the context in which they were said. Let's allow Ibn Taymiyyah to clear that up for us shall we? He said:

“[Imam Ahmad] would order the layman to ask (yustafti) Ishaq, Abu ‘Ubaid, Abu Thawr, Abu Mus’ab, whilst he would forbid the scholars from his followers, such as Abu Dawud (the compiler of Sunan), ‘Uthman ibn Sa’id, Ibrahim al-Harbi, Abu Bakr al-Athram, Abu Zur’ah, Abu Hatim al-Sajistani, Muslim (the compiler of Sahih) and others, from making Taqleed of anyone from the scholars. He would say to them: You must refer to the sources, to the Book and the Sunnah.”

See al-Manhaj 373-376, al-Tahqiqat 643-645, Majmu’ah 20/116, 124-126, al-Mustadrak 2/241, 258, al-Furu’ 6/492, al-Insaf 11/147, I’lam 6/203-205, Mukhtasar al-Tahrir 103, Hal al-Muslim Mulzam… 14, Rawdhat al-Talibin 11/117, Usul al-Fiqh al-Islami 2/1166

The Imaams' Followers Leaving their Views if these Contradicted the Sunnah

With all due respect Akhi, I know you're triyng to help the questioner - but posting this will not serve to help him at all. It only confuses him further or anyone else who does not have a basic knowledge of the history and development of the Madahib. I mean seriously, has the questioner heard of or is even aware of the differences between Imaam Muhammad, al-Balkhi, Abu Yusuf, al-Muzani, the differences of opinion of Salat al-Istisqa which are all mentioned in that post? It will only confuse the reader further!

one thing u MUST keep in mind my bro is that just because these great imams said these statements (above) that does NOT mean that we reject their teachings and throw them all in the bin or out the window.... Nay one learns from them ALL and where abu hanifah (for example) may have given a fatwa based on ijtihaa (comming to conclusions for a topic due to not having a specific hadith on the subject), and other scholars have given a different fatwa BASED UPON A HADITH, we take from the later one, because all of them had the same foundation

By definition when a scholar is forced to make Ijithaad, it implies that there are no clear cut texts that tell him what to do in that situation. Ijithad (which the scholar tries to base on the texts) and the methodology of giving fatawa only from a hadeeth are generally mutually exclusive.

A scholar looks at mutliple things when he gives a fatwa, it's not just let me take Hadith X and say Y. It has to conform to many things including the principles of usool al Fiqh (Quran, Sunnah, ijma' qiyaas), application of those very Usools in a certain madhab (Malikis include actions of ahl al Madinah), conformity and extensive knowledge of the qawaa'id al-Fiqhiyyah (the legal maxims) and more. It's not simply 1+1 = 2.

one imam may have thought that a particular hadith was ahad, when in fact it was mutawaatir yet the other hadith did not reach him..

Akhi, this has nothing to do with the topic. Not to mention that the scholars differed in regards to the categories of the ahad ahadeeth as well as well as the number that constitutes mutawaatir. This has nothing to do with the topic here.

qualifications dont mean anything as shaykh saalih al fawzaan has clearly mentioned. qualifications just mean that u have studies in a place that gives a certificate, there r millions of places (i.e, msjid an-nabawi and masjid al haram) where circles are going on with the top ulama and no certificate is given.... so by the where is abu hanifahs certificate? obviously he has none. so what im tryna say is that certfcts, in and of themselves mean nothing.

So according to you what makes a scholar a scholar?

scared our bro might follow the sunnah, and go away from ur way?

With all due respect Akhi, it is very arrogant to assume that the way you're following is the exclusive sunnah and nothing else.

i know its directd to schlrs & stdnts f knwldg, where did i say otherwise? ths is a misconception ppl have against us. no1 is saying that ANY1 and EVERY! can derive rulings. plz read my words carefully without letting ur emotions drive u t oconclusions.

Then wisdom would have dictated akhi, that one not post that topic here when those reading it are but lay people.

we go to scholars who understand the texts and get from them, and scholars (SACHOLARS!!!) have clearly refuted opinions of each imams respectfully.

Do you know that each of the scholars, including Ibn Taymiyyah start from a madhab?

Refuting is for the laypeople. Scholars respectfully disagree and are tolerant if another scholar holds a different opinion in matters of jurisprudential differences. They have adab, respect and tolerance because their differences are based upon knowledge, not emotions.

IMAM BUKHARI for example, has written a treatise on rafayadain (raising the hands after and before rukuh) and has cleared all misconceptions that it is/was abrogated. so WE are not saying it is wrong just bcz we want to, nay the scholars and imaams have already stated this and we are just presenting to the world that which u may not know due to ignorance.

likewise, the 2 famous imams (abu yusuf and imam muhammad) who where the TOP hanafi scholars who learned directly from abu hanifah, both differed with the imam (abu hanifah) on more than a third of his madhab. and both of these used to do rafayadain!

Don't make a mountain out of a mole hill. Imam Ibn Qayyim has said that Raf al-Yadain is an issue which has valid differences of opinion. We don't criticize either party.

Imam bukhari also for example has stated that the hadith about saying ameen quitely is week, likewise with the hadith about putting the hands below the navel. likewise about the hadith which says wipe ur face after ur hands after dua, and the list could go on.

Talk about Hanafi-bashing. One thing you need to learn akhi is tolerance - these are issues which are not from the Usool and as such there can be differences of opinion. Maybe you can care to share the education that gives you the authority to point at other people's practice, one that has been sanctioned by scholars for over 1400 years and say that it is a mistake? You're right in your assumption you make that we should follow the Prophet, but at the end of the day, it is only via the understanding of the people of knowledge that we can be certain that our following is correct.

1) SOME of the fatwaas these great imams have given HAVE been proven to be a weak opinion. maybe if people done more research OUTSIDE of their madhab they would realise this...

And you have done said research? And on top of that, you have the knowledge to discern between both opinions to see which is stronger?

"How do you know that the math-hab way of praying salah is not in accordance with sunnah?" because in SOME cases, there are no authentic hadith to back up the position, and OTHER imams had hadith to prove their position... the SCHOLARS have written extensively on this.

So you're saying that the thousands of scholars in a madhab have overlooked the fact that some of their opinions supposedly don't have evidence? I can't believe you're making such a misinformed statement.

u sed: "Are you aware of daleel from each math-hab?" subhaanAllaah how many times do i have to say that it is the SCHOLARS who do this job, not the layman! u clearly have a BIG misconception about us, thinking that we all (laymen) come up with our own conclusions

But isn't that exactly what you're doing in this thread?

u sed: "Do you know why it contradicts the sunnah and which statements of the Prophet (sal-allahu alayhi wa sallam)?"
this makes no sense. y is the sky blue?

It actually makes a lot of sense. If you don't know how and why a Hanafi (or any other) opinion 'contradicts' the Sunnah - then you should remain silent and not make bogus claims.

obviously 1 opinion is correct and the other isn't shouldn't you be finding out which is closer to the sunnah from a scholar of hadith??

That is why you simply have to go to a Mufti you trust and ask him for a ruling and go with what he gives you. Everything else you have no concern with at all.

 

[Uthman]

From IslamQA: Is it obligatory to follow a particular madhhab?

 

[Muhammad]

Some more useful links:

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/23280/
http://www.islamicawakening.com/viewarticle.php?articleID=160

 

[Banu_Hashim]

Jazakallah Khair. I think a useful thing to do is to, like Muraad, study the evolution of the Madhhabs before jumping to conclusions.

 

[InToTheRain]

Mufti Ibn Adam did some excellent audios on the importance of the Madhab and why they are followed. You can find the Audios here. Download the ones titles Taqlid (has 4 parts)

http://www.tauheed-sunnat.com/sunnat/category/author/audio/english-islamic-lecturers-talks-by-scholor/mufti-muhammad-ibn-adam

 

[MSalman]

assalaam o alaykum my beloved hanafi brother in islam!

:wa: ya akhee al-kareem

Could you please tell me if you know ilm al-ghayb or can read people's mind or heart? And who told you that I am a hanafi? I am a layman who asks the scholars, and mostly these scholars are hanabli. So I am a hanabli if you wanna put it that way. Maybe my brother you should first learn some adaab of discussions and adaab of islah before jumping into discussions and doing da'wah. I would like to remind you of evils of tongues and not having husn al-dhan for other Muslims and jumping to conclusions.

point 1) qualifications dont mean anything as shaykh saalih al fawzaan has clearly mentioned. qualifications just mean that u have studies in a place that gives a certificate, there r millions of places (i.e, msjid an-nabawi and masjid al haram) where circles are going on with the top ulama and no certificate is given.... so by the where is abu hanifahs certificate? obviously he has none. so what im tryna say is that certfcts, in and of themselves mean nothing.

when I said qualifications then i was talking about it in Islamic sense and not modern understanding of certificates. In fact, the idea of certificate has always been present in entire Islamic history in the form of ijaza. When I said qualifications, I am talking being a person of knowledge so that you can look into text and weigh opinions etc.

btw, just in case you didn't know, Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan (may Allah preserve him) is a hanabli. He is one of the scholars from whom I take.

point 2) u told me to shut up, i forgive u for tht. but let me ask u, y r u so angry? scared our bro might follow the sunnah, and go away from ur way? la hawla wa la quwata illaah billaah!

I apologize if it was offensive as I didn't mean to. I was simply reminding you of your duty as a layman. As layman, you take fatawa from a scholar and simply remain quite. If you want to give da'wah or naseeah or islah then it is done in a proper manner and while keeping in mind your own position. You are not in position to tell us what is against the sunnah and what is not.

Secondly, you don't know me akhee; you have no clue about my manhaj and aqeedah. Yet, you have to problem claiming that I am somehow against the sunnah and those who follow it. Even if I am math-habi, when did math-habi were regarded as someone who are against the sunnah or and those who follow the sunnah?

point 3) i know its directd to schlrs & stdnts f knwldg, where did i say otherwise?

then why are you quoting them to laypeople? Why are you bringing them here and telling math-habi laypeople that their way of praying salah is against the sunnah and according to the imaams we should reject it? what is the point?

ths is a misconception ppl have against us. no1 is saying that ANY1 and EVERY! can derive rulings. plz read my words carefully without letting ur emotions drive u t oconclusions.

it maybe a misconception; however, it has truth to it when bunch of laypeople like yourself act this way. when you tell laypeople that we need to abandon saying of the scholars if it is against the sunnah and fullan saying of the scholars is against the sunnah, then you are indirectly implying that we can all look into the text or when two opinions given we can weigh them. How in the world laymen are going to do what you are telling them to do when all they oblige to do is ask the scholars? You are asking a scholar and they are doing the same. What is the difference here? You are saying their scholars' understanding is wrong then you must be a scholar to utter that statement and it is scholars job to refute each other and not bunch of laypeople forcing fatawas from their own scholars on others.

IMAM BUKHARI for example, has written a treatise on rafayadain (raising the hands after and before rukuh) and has cleared all misconceptions that it is/was abrogated. so WE are not saying it is wrong just bcz we want to, nay the scholars and imaams have already stated this and we are just presenting to the world that which u may not know due to ignorance.

1 - rafayadain is not wajib arkan of the salah and I know that ahl al-hadith put a great emphasize on this and it is a matter which cannot be brushed aside with simply saying "valid ikhtilaf" or not wajib arkan. It is fine that you want to share what some scholars have said. However, you as layman cannot "force" it on other laypeople or say your position is stronger and other is weak or against the sunnah, because 1) you are saying what your scholars are saying 2) the issue is no longer simple and not following the sunnah - it involves more factors as the scholars have differed.

Imam bukhari also for example has stated that the hadith about saying ameen quitely is week, likewise with the hadith about putting the hands below the navel. likewise about the hadith which says wipe ur face after ur hands after dua, and the list could go on.

there are differences of opinions among scholars on these issues and some of them are valid ikhtilaf. You as layman, have no authority to say if you don't do this way then it is against the sunnah.

1 - saying ameen loudly is not a wajib arkaan. Saying Ameen loudly

2 - Imam Ahmad and ibn Qayyim (rahimahumullah) have said that there is nothing authentic from the sunnah regarding placing hands during salah. Some of the salaf placed it above navel whereas others placed below navel. Only recently some of the scholars became extreme about issue of placing hand above navel and that was their ijthihad.

The problem with people like you akhee is that due to lack of their knowledge they don't know that many of these ikthilaf are valid or they are sunnah arkan and there is no blame on a person if he leaves it.

and Allah knows best

I would advise everyone to go through this thread regarding how to pray salah. Some good questions were asked and answered by a very good shaykh. The person who started the thread has same username as sister rasema here and I think it is the same person.

 

[MSalman]

as-salamu alaykum

two more links from me:

Following a Madhab (help me understand)
All about following a Madhab and taqleed

 

[Uthman]

Sheikh Bilal Philips has an excellent book called The Evolution of Fiqh which I highly recommend. It clears up a lot of confusion.

 

[KittenLover]

^ I second that, make sure you get that book it's very good mashallah.

 

[MSalman]

I have to apologize to brother Ali for continuing on like this but few things need to be clarified

DO I HAVE TO QUESTION THIS???? DO YOU KNOW WHAT IS A METHOLOGY??

I am sure I am aware of what is a methodology sister. and why do you bring it up?

btw, the videos you posted describes hanabli/shafi'i way of praying salah. since according to you that is in accordance with sunnah then I dont know why you were earlier supporting that math-habi way of praying salah is against the sunnah.

I don't have to repeat myself. I hope not. No one is telling you that your way of offering Salat will be invalidated

at the same time you are supporting that math-habi way of praying salah is against the sunnah.

our scholars have determined that our hadeeths are stronger. Scholars do know anc can trace back the narrations, they know, I don't.

exactly my point - that is what your scholars are saying and you have no daleel to say that your scholars' sayings are stronger and others are against the sunnah. I am not saying that your scholars may not have stronger daleel; I am saying that you as a layman cannot do that because you don't have the tools to check and verify statements of your scholars. The thing is that these are fiqhi matters and not aqeedah issues; so, we don't have to make a big deal and these opinions are not even shadd where correction is must and we need to do islah in a proper manner. Also, the scholars you take from are mostly hanbalis, just like myself

If you follow a madhab, but not a Selefi manhaj(ageedah) you are an innnovator

Allhamdulillah, agreed upon.

and Allah knows best

 

[Rasema2]

Jazakallah Khair. I think a useful thing to do is to, like Muraad, study the evolution of the Madhhabs before jumping to conclusions.

I would like to apologize to brother islamiclife; I request forgiveness for my obnoxious behavior.

No one was jumping to conclusions about madhabs. You (whoever) keep jumping to that propaganda of innovators that we "pick, choose and derive rulings our selves.”
Now, allow me to quote fatwas:


SHAYKH MUHAMMAD IBN SAALIH AL-UTHAYMEEN was asked: When encountering a difficult issue, do you advise the student of knowledge not to stick to a madhhab, or [do you advise] to turn to a particular madhhab?

The Shaykh, rahim'ullah, responded: If what is intended by sticking to a madhhab is that a person sticks to that madhhab, and turns away from everything else; whether the correct view lies in his madhhab or another madhhab - then this is not permissible, and is from the blameworthy and bigotted partisanship. But if a person ascribes to a particular madhhab in order to benefit from its principles and guidelines, but he refers it back to the Book and the Sunnah; [such that] if it becomes clear to him that the preferred view lies in another madhhab, he then adopts that view - then there is no problem with this. [Note: this is for a student of knowledge, not the common muslim].

SHAYKH SAALIH AL-FAWZAAN was asked: Is it permissible for one who sticks to a particular madhhab in matters of worship, to turn away from it and stick to another madhhab whenever he wants? Or is it binding upon a Muslim to stick to just one madhhab until he dies? And is there a difference in how the Prayer should be performed between the four madhhabs or not? And what has been related from the Prophet sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam concerning how the Prayer should be prayed?

The Shaykh, hafidhahullaah, responded: The issue of sticking to a madhhab has in it some detail. If a person has the ability to know the ruling from its proof, and to deduce the ruling from its proof, then it is not permitted for him to cling to a madhhab. rather, it is upon him to take the ruling from the evidence - if he has the ability to do so. However, this is rare amongst the people, since this is a quality of the mujtahideen from the people of knowledge; those that have reached the levels of ijtihaad. As for one who is not like that, then he cannot take the rulings directly from the evidences. And this is the predominant case amongst the people, especially in these latter times. So [in such a case] there is no harm in adopting one of the four madhhabs and making taqleed of one of them. However, he should not make blind taqleed such that he takes all that is in the madhhab; whether it is correct or incorrect. Rather, it is upon him to take from the madhhab that which - in his view - does not clearly oppose the evidence. As for those views in the madhhab which clearly oppose the evidence, then it is not permissible for the Muslim to take it. Rather it is upon him to adopt what is established by the proof, even if it is in another madhhab So his leaving the madhhab for another madhhab in order to follow the evidence is something good; this is a matter which is good - rather it is obligatory; since following the evidence is an madhhab in order to follow the evidence is something good; this is a matter which is good - rather it is obligatory;since following the evidence is an obligation.

As for adopting one madhhab sometimes and another at other times, then this moving is from the angle of following ones desires and seeking concessions, and this is not permissible. Meaning, that whatever accords with ones whims and desires, from the sayings of the people of knowledge, is taken - even if it opposes the proof; and whatever opposes ones whims and desires is left - even if it has a proof. This is the following of whims and desires, and we seek refuge in Allaah [from that]. Thus, moving from one madhhab to another, due to following ones desires, or due to ease or seeking concession; then this is not permissible. As for moving from one madhhab to another due to following an evidence, or to flee from a saying that does not have a proof, or from an erroneous view - then this is a matter that is encouraged and sought from a Muslim. And Allaah knows best.

As for the issue concerning the differences between the four madhhabs in the Prayer, then the four madhhabs - and all praise is for Allaah - are in Prayer, then the four madhhabs - and all praise is for Allaah - are in agreement about most of the rulings concerning the Prayer, in general. Their differences are in some of the details of the Prayer. From [such differences] are, for example, that [one of them] may consider something to be prescribed, whilst another may not consider it to be prescribed; one may consider something to be obligatory, whilst another may consider it to be recommended; and so on. So the differences are in the details of the Prayer. But as for the rulings of the Prayer in general, then there is no difference - and all praise is for Allaah

SHAYKH MUHAMMAD IBN ABDUL-WAHHAAB said: If a person is learning fiqh from one of the four madhhabs, then he sees a hadeeth that opposes his madhhab; and so he follows it and leaves his madhhab - then this is recommended, rather it is obligatory upon him when the proof has been made clear to him. This would not be considered as opposing his Imaam that he follows, since they - Abu Haneefah, Maalik, ash-Shaafiee and Ahmad, radiallaahu anhum ajmaeen - were all agreed upon this fundamental principle.

... As for the case whereby a person does not have any evidence which opposes the view of the scholars of the madhhab, then we hope that it is permissible to act upon it (the madhhab), since their opinions are better than our own opinions; they took their proofs from the sayings of the Companions and those who came after them. However, it is not essential to declare with certainty (al-jazm) that this is the Shareeah of Allaah and His Messenger, until the proof that is not contradicted in this issue is made clear. This is the action of the Salaf of this Ummah and its scholars - both previous and recent - as well as that which they criticised: namely having bigotted partisanship for particular madhhabs (at-taassubul-madhaahib) and leaving off following the proof... However, if there becomes clear to him something which necessitates preferring one saying over another; either due to detailed proofs if he knows and understands them, or because he holds one of the two people to be more knowledgeable about this matter and having more piety about what he says, and so he leaves the saying of that one for the saying of the other one - then this is permissible, rather it is obligatory. And there is a text from Imaam Ahmad concerning this.

REFERENCES

1.As-Sahwatul-Islaamiyyah(pp.141-142).
2.Muntaqaa min Fataawaa(5/365-366).
3.Ad-Durur-Saniyyah (4/7).
4.Majmoo' Fataawaa (20/220-221).