The Evolution of Fiqh - History of The Madhāhib

[Caplets]

The Mālikī Madh-hab​

The Founder: Imām Mālik (717-801 CE)

The founding scholar of this Madh-hab, Mālik ibn Anas ibn ‘Āmir, was born in Madīnah in the year 717 CE. His grandfather, ‘Āamir, was among the major Sahābah of Madīnah. Mālik studied Hadīth under az-Zuhrī who was the greatest Hadīth scholar of his time as well as under the great Hadīth narrator, [Nāfi’], the freed slave of the Sahābī ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Umar. Mālik’s only journeys outside of Madīnah were for Hajj, and thus he largely limited himself to the knowledge available in Madīnah.

He was severely beaten in the year 764 CE by the order of the Amīr of Madīnah, because he made a legal ruling that forced divorce was invalid. This ruling opposed the ‘Abbaasid rulers’ practice of adding in the oath of allegiance given to them by the masses the clause that whoever broke the oath was automatically divorced. Mālik was tied and beaten until his arms became severely damaged to such a degree that he became unable to clasp them on his chest in Salāh and thus he began the practice of praying with his hands at his sides according to some reports.

Imām Mālik continued to teach Hadīth in Madīnah over a period of forty years and he managed to compile a book containing Hadīths of the Prophet (s.w.) and Āthārs of the Sahābah and their successors which he named al-Muwatta’ (the Beaten Path). He began his compilation of Hadīths at the request of the ‘Abbaasid caliph, Abū Ja’far al-Mansūr, (754-775 CE) who wanted a comprehensive code of law based on the Prophet’s (صلى الله عليه وسلم ) Sunnah which could be applied uniformly throughout his realm.

But, on its completion, Mālik refused to have it forced on the people pointing out that the
Sahābah had scattered throughout the Islamic empire and had taken with them other parts of the Sunnah which also had to be considered in any laws imposed throughout the state. Caliph Hārūn ar-Rashīd (768-809 CE) also made the same request of the Imām, but he was also turned down. Imām Mālik died in the city of his birth
in the year 801 CE at the venerable age of 83.[SUP]133[/SUP]

Formation of the Mālikee Madh-hab

Imām Mālik’s method of teaching was based on the narration of Hadīths and the discussion of their meanings in the context of problems of that day. He would either narrate to his students Hadīths and Āthārs (statements of the Sahābah) on various topics of Islamic law then discuss their implications, or he would inquire about problems which had arisen in the areas from whence his students came, then narrate appropriate Hadīths or Āthārs which could be used to solve them.

After Mālik completed al-Muwatta’, he used to narrate it to his students as the sum total of his Madh-hab, but would add or subtract from it slightly, whenever new information reached him. He used to strictly avoid speculation and hypothetical Fiqh and thus his school and its followers were reffered to as the people of Hadīth (Ahl al-Hadīth).


Sources of Law Used by the Mālikī Madh-hab

Imām Mālik deduced Islamic law from the following sources which are listed in the order of their importance.

1. The Qur’ān

Like all the other Imāms, Mālik considered the Qur’ān to be the primary source of Islamic law and utlized it without laying any pre-conditions for its applications.

2. The Sunnah

The Sunnah was used by Imām Mālik as the second most important source of Islamic law, but, like Abū Hanīfah, he put some restrictions on its use. If a Hadīth were contradicted by the customary practice of the Madeenites, he rejected it. He did
not, however, insist that a Hadīth be Mash-hūr (well-known) before it could be applied as Abū Hanīfah did. Instead he used any Hadīth that was narrated to him as long as none of the narrators were known liars or extremely weak memorizers.

3. ‘Amal (practices) of the Madeenites

Imām Mālik reasoned that since many of the Madeenites were direct descendants of the Sahābah and Madīnah was where the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم ) spent the last ten years of his life, practices common to all Madeenites must have been allowed, if not
encouraged by the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم ) himself. Thus, Imām Mālik regarded common Madeenite practices as a form of highly authentic Sunnah narrated in deeds rather than words.[SUP]134[/SUP]

4. Ijmā’ of the Sahābah

Mālik like Abū Hanīfah considered the Ijmā’ of the Sahābah, as well as that of later scholars, as the third most important source of Islamic law.

5. Individual Opinion of the Sahābah

Imām Mālik gave full weight to the opinions of the Sahābah, whether they were conflicting or in agreement, and included them in his book of Hadīth, al-Muwatta’. However, the consensus of the Sahābah was given precedence over individual
opinions of the Sahābah. Where there was no consensus, their individual opinions were given precedence over his own opinion.

6. Qiyās

Mālik used to apply his own deductive reasoning on matters not covered by the previously mentioned sources. However, he was very cautious about doing so because of the subectivity of such forms of reasoning.

7. Customs of the Madeenites

Imām Mālik also gave some weight to isolated practices found among a few people of Madīnah so long as they were not in contradiction to known Hadīths. He reasoned that such customs, though occurring only in isolated instances, must also have been handed down from earlier generations and sanctioned by the Sahābah or even the prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم ) himself.

8. Istislāh (Welfare)

The principle of Istihsān developed by Abū Hanīfah was also applied by Mālik and his students except that they called it by the name Istislāh which means seeking that which is more suitable. It deals with things which are for human welfare but
have not been specifically considered by the Sharī’ah.

An exaple of Istislāh is found in Caliph ‘Alī’s ruling that a whole group of people who took part in a murder were guilty even though only one of the group had actually committed the act of murder. Another example is the right of a Muslim leader to
collect taxes from the rich other than Zakāh if the interest of the state demands it, whereas in Sharī’ah only Zakāh has been specified.

Imām Mālik also applied the principle of Istislāh to deduce laws more in keeping with needs which arose from current situations than those deduced by Qiyās.

9. ‘Urf (Custom)

Like Abū Hanīfah, Mālik considered the various customs and social havits of people throughout the Muslim world as possible sources of secondary laws as long as they did not contradict either the letter or the spirit of the Sharī’ah .[SUP]135[/SUP]

According to custom in Syria, for example, the word Dābbah means a horse, whereas its general meaning in Arabic is four legged animal. Hence, a contract made in Syria requiring payment in the form of a Dābbah would legally mean a horse
whereas elsewhere in the Arab world it would have to be more clearly defined as a horse.

Main students of the Mālikī Madh-hab

The most notable of Mālik’s students who did not later form their own Madh-habs were al-Qāsim and Ibn Wahb.

Abū ‘Abdur-Rahmān ibn al-Qāsim (745-813 CE)
Al-Qāsim was born in Egypt but travelled to Madīnah where he studied under his teacher and mentor for a period of more than twenty years. He wrote an extensive book on the Fiqh of the Madh-hab, eclipsing even al-Muwatta’ of Mālik himself and called
it al-Mudawwanah.

Abu ‘Abdillaah ibn Wahb (742-819 CE)
Ibn Wahb also travelled from Egypt to Madīnah in order to study under Imām Mālik. He distinguished himself in th deduction of laws to such a degree that Mālik gave him the title of al-Muftī, which means the official expounderof Islamic law.

Ibn Wahb was offered an appointment as judge of Egypt, but turned it down in order to maintain his integrity as an independent scholar.[SUP]136[/SUP]

Mālik had other famous students from other madh-habs.
Some of them modified their own Madh-habs based on what they learnt from Maalik, for example, Muhammad ash-Shaybānī who was among the foremost students of Abū Hanīfah. There were others who developed their own Madh-habs by combining Mālik’s
teachings with that of others, for example Muhammad ibn Idrīs ash-Shāfi’ī who studied for many years under Imām Mālik as well as under Abū Hanīfah’s student Muhammad as-Shaybānī.

Followers of the Mālikī Madh-hab

Today, the followers of this Madh-hab are found mostly in Upper Egypt, Sudan, North Africa (Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco), West Africa (Mali, Nigeria, Chad, etc) and the Arabian Gulf states (Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain).

 

[Ahmed.]

Assalamu Alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh

In addition to my previous link that debunks anti madhabism, here's another one, together they provide irrefutable evidence:

Combating The Cancer Of Sectarianism : The Muslims Are One Party

Read all my posts in above link, especially the last few

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 100%, align: center"]
[TR][TD] Combating The Cancer Of Sectarianism : The Muslims Are One Party
السلام عليكم From the words of the Shaykh Hamood bin 'Uqalā' Ash-Shu'aybī (May Allāh Have Mercy On Him): '...Question: What do you – may Allāh saf...[/TD][/TR][/TABLE]

 

[Caplets]

The Zaydī Madh-hab​

The Founder: Imām Zayd (700-740 CE)

This Madh-hab traces its origin to one of ‘Alī ibn Abī Tālib’s great grandsons through his son al-Husayn. Imām Zayd’s father, ‘Alī Zayn al-‘Āabidīn, was well known for his great legal knowledge and his narration of Hadīths. Born in al-Madīnah in the year 700 CE, Zayd ibn ‘Alī soon became one of the foremost scholars of the ‘Ālawī family. He narrated Hadīths from all of his relatives including his older brother, Muhammad al-Bāqir.[SUP]137[/SUP] Zayd expanded his knowledge by travelling to the other major centers of
learning in Irāq, Kūfah, Basrah and Wāsit, where he sat and exchanged views with his contemporaries like Abū Hanīfah and Sufyān ath-Thawrī.

The Umayyad caliph, Hishām ibn ‘Abdul-Mālik (reign 724-743 CE) never missed an opportunity to degrade and humiliate the ‘Alawī family and Zayd ibn ‘Alī was often singled out for abuse. He was not allowed to leave the city of Madīnah without the
permission of its governor and his repuests for permission were often turned down repeatedly. Eventually, Zayd became the first of ‘Alī’s descendants to try to wrest the caliphate from the Umayyads after the catstrophe at Karbalā. He travelled secretly to Kūfah where he was joined by the Shi’ites of Irāq, Wāsit and other places, and made
preparation to do battle with the Umayyads. A number of his relatives warned him against depending on the Kufans, as it was their betrayal of Imām Husayn which led to his untimely death, but he did not heed their warnings.

Before his preparations were complete, disputes arose among his new followers when they found out that he did not consider the first caliphs, Abū Bakr and ‘Umar, to be apostates who stole the caliphate from his grandfather. The majority of his followers broke away from him and declared his nephew, Ja’far as-Sādiq, to be the Imām of the time instead of Zayd.

Hishām’s army took advantage of the confusion and made a surprise attack on Kūfah. Only a little more than four hundred followers rallied to Imām Zayd’s side and he was killed during the fighting which ensued.[SUP]138[/SUP]


Formation of the Zaydī Madh-hab

Imām Zayd was a scholar concerned mainly with the narration of Hadīths and recitation of the Qur’ān. He taught in circles of learning in the cities of Madīnah, Basrah, Kūfah and Wāsit, and thus had a large number of students. The method used by Zayd was that of narrating Hadīths and teaching the art of Qur’ānic recitation. If legal questions were raised, he would solve them or choose an opinion of one of his contemporaries like the jurist ‘Abdur-Rahmān ibn Abī Laylā.

The rulings of the Madh-hab were not dictated nor recorded by Zayd himself; but by his students.


Sources of Law used by the Zaydī Madh-hab

The jurists of the Madh-hab evolved the following Sources from Imām Zayd’s rulings as the basis from which they deduced Islamic laws.

1. The Qur’ān

The Qur’ān was considered the primary source of Islamic law. The existing copy of the Qur’ān was considered to be complete without any of the deletions claimed by many
extremist Shi’ite sects.

2. The Sunnah

The sayings, actions and approvals of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) were considered the second most important source of Islamic law. The Sunnah was not restricted to narrations of the ‘Alawī family or their followers, but included all reliable narration.

3. Aqwāl ‘Alī

Rulings and statements of ‘Alī ibn Abī Tālib which were not merely his personal opinions were considered by Imām Zayd to be a part of the Sunnah. That is, If ‘Alī did not say or imply that it was his opinion, then Zayd assumed that it was from the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم). However, Zayd did not accept everything attributed to ‘Alī and somethimes made rulings contrary to what were claimed to be ‘Alī’s rulings. For example, it is reported that ‘Alī ruled that Zakāh could be collected from orphans while Zayd ruled that it could not.


4. Ijmā’ of the Sahābah

Zayd recognized the Ijmā’ of the Sahābah as a source of Islamic law. Hence, although he felt that his grandfather was better suited for leadership than Caliphs Abū Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthmān, the unanimous acceptance of their caliphate by the Sahābah made it, in his opinion, legally binding.

5. Qiyās

According to the jurists of this Madh-hab, both the principles of Istihsān and that of Istislāh involved a form of analogical deduction. Consequently, they considered them a part of what was known a [Qiyās] in the other Madh-hab

6. ‘Aql

Human intellect was considered as a source of Islamic law in [place] where none [of] the previous sources was applicable. As a youth, Imām Zayd had met and studied under Wāsil ibn ‘Atā, founder of the Mu’tazilite school of thought. The Mu’tazilites were the first to propound the principle of ‘Aql; whatever, the
intellect considered good was good and whatever it considered bad was bad. However, according to the Mu’tazilah, ‘Aql came directly after the Qur’ān and Sunnah, and thus they rejected Qiyās, as well as the opinions of the Sahābah[SUP]139[/SUP] whereas Imām Zayd placed the principle of ‘Aql last and recognized Qiyās.


Main Students of the Zaydī Madh-hab

Imām Zayd’s students recorded the Madh-hab. However, they also included the rulings of others scholars form the ‘Alawī family as well as Zayd’s contemporaries.

Abū Khālid, ‘Amr ibn Khālid Al-Wāsitī (d.889 CE)

‘Amr ibn Khālid was perhaps the most famous of Imām Zayd’s students. He spent a long time with him in Madīnah and accompanied him on most of his journeys. ‘Amr compiled Imām Zayd’s teaching in two major works entitled Majmū’ al-Hadīth and Majmū’ al-Fiqh. Together they are called al-Majmū’ al-Kabīr. Although all of the Hadīth narrations in Majmū’ al-Hadīth are from the ‘Alawī family they all have corresponding narrations in the famous six books of Hadīth.

Al-Hādī Ilā al-Haqq, Yahyā ibn al-Husayn (860-911 CE)

The Zaydīs did not restrict themselves to the rulings of the Husaynī side of the ‘Alawī family. Hence, the opinions of al-Qāsim ibn Ibrāhīm al-Hasanī (787-857 CE), who became renowned for his scholarship, were also included in the rulings of the Zaydī Madh-hab. However, al-Qāsim’s grandson, al-Hādī Ilā al-Haqq, who was made the Imām of Yemen, made an even greater impact on the Madh-hab. An Islamic state was set up in Yemen according to the Zaydī Madh-hab which gave it a firm footing and ensured its survival till today.

Al-Hasan ibn ‘Alī al-Husaynī (845-917 CE)

Al-Hasan, known as an-Nāsir al-Kabīr, was a contemporaryof al-Hādī. He taught the Zaydī Madh-hab in Dailam and Jīlan. He was a great scholar and its considered by his successors as the reviver of the Madh-hab.[SUP]140[/SUP]

Followers of the Zaydī Madh-hab

Today, the followers of this Madh-hab are mostly found in Yemen where it is the Madh-hab of the Majority of its inhabitants.

---------------
137 The fifth of the twelve Imāms odolized by the Shi’ite Twelver sect.
138 Tārīkh al-Madhāhib al-Islāmīyah, vol. 2 pp. 749-793.
139 Tarīkh al-Madhāhib al-Islāmīyah, vol. 2, p. 516.
140 Tarīkh al-Madhāhib al-Islāmīyah, vol. 2, pp. 525.

 

[Caplets]

The Laythī Madh-hab
​

The founder: Imām al-Layth (716-791 CE)

This Madh-hab was named after al-Layth ibn Sa’d who was born in Egypt of Persian parentage in the year 716 CE. After an extensive study of all the then known areas of Islamic learning, al-Layth became the major scholar of Egypt. He was contemporary of
both Imām Abū Hanīfah and Imām Mālik. In fact he carried on a debate with Imām Mālik by mail on various points of Islamic law, one of which was Mālik’s inclusion of Madeenite custom as an independent source of Islamic law.

Reasons for the Madh-hab’s Disappearance

Imām al-Layth’s Madh-hab disappeared shortly after his death in 791 CE for the following reasons:
(a) He neither, compiled, dictated, nor instructed his followers to record his legal opinions and their proofs according to his interpretations of the Qur’ān, Sunnah and legal positions of the Sahābah. Thus, very little remains of his Madh-hab beyond a few references in the early books of comparative Fiqh.
(b) The number of students under al-Layth was small and since none of them became outstanding jurists, they were not in an influential position to popularize his Madh-hab.

(c) Ash-Shāfi’ī, one of the most outstanding Fiqh scholars, settled in Egypt Immediately after al-Layth’s death and his Madh-hab quickly displaced [that] of al-Layth.

It is interesting to note that Imām ash-Shāfi’ī who had studied extensively under Mālik and under al-Layth’s students was reported to have observed that al-Layth was a greater jurist than Mālik, but his students neglected him.[SUP]141[/SUP]

-----------------
[SUP]141[/SUP] al-Madkhal, p. 205.

 

[Mountains]

I think the whole ''I follow this madhahib'' is a misunderstanding and should not occur at all and people should stop doing it. The question one must ask is did the first 3 generations follow madhahibs the answer is no and they were the best of us. We should follow them because they simply followed the direct sources which you have access to also

 

[Caplets]

The Thawrī Madh-hab​

The founder: Imām ath-Thawrī (719-777 CE)

Imām Sufyān ath-Thawrī was born in Kūfah in the year 719 CE, and after an extensive study of Hadīth and Fiqh became the main Fiqh scholar of the Hadīth school in Kūfah. He held similar views to those of his contemporary, Abu Hanīfah, however he opposed the latter’s use of Qiyās and Istihsān.

There occurred between Imām Sufyān and officials of the ‘Abbaasid state a series of confrontations due to his outspoken nature and his refusal to support state policies which contradicted the Sharī’ah. Caliph al-Mansūr (rule 759-744 CE) Sent a letter to
Imām ath-Thawrī requesting him to accept the post of Qādī of Kūfah on condition that he not make any judgement or ruling inopposition to the state policy. On receipt of the letter, Sufyān tore it up and threw it into the Tigris river in disgust, but, as a result, he was forced to give up his teaching and flee for his life. He remained in hiding until he died in the year 777 CE.


Reasons For The Madh-hab’s Disappearance

The two main factors are as follows:

(a) The Imām spent the greater part of his life in hiding and thus was unable to attract a large number of students who might subsequently spread his opinions in the circles of learning.

(b) Although he did carry out some fairly extensive compilation of Hadīths and their interpretations, he requested in his will that his main student, ‘Ammār ibn Sayf, erase all his writings and burn whatever could not be erased. ‘Ammār dutifully destroyed
his teacher’s writings, but many of the Imām’s ideas were recorded by students of other Imāms, so they have survived till today but not in an organized form.[SUP]142[/SUP]

-----------------
142 al-Madkhal, pp. 206-7.

 

[Caplets]

The Shāfi'ī Madh-hab​

The founder: Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī (769-820 CE)

The full name of the scholar after whom this school of legal thought has been named was Muhammad ibn Idrīs Ash-Shāfi’ī.

He was born in the town Ghazzah on the Mediterranean coast of what was then known as Shām in the year 796 CE, but travelled to Madīnah in his youth to study Fiqh and Hadīth under Imām Mālik. He succeeded in memorizing the whole of Mālik’s book, al-Muwatta’, and recited it to him from memory, word perfect.

Ash-Shāfi’ī remained under Mālik until the latter died in 801 CE. Then he went to Yemen and taught there. He remained there until he was accused of Shi’ite leanings in the year 805 CE and brought as a prisoner before the ‘Abbaasid Caliph, Harūn ar-Rashīd (rule 786-809 CE) in Irāq. Fortunately, he was able to prove
the correctnes of his beliefs and was subsequently released.

Ash-Shāfi’ī remained in Irāq and studied for a while under Imām Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, the famous student of Abū Hanīfah. Later he traveled to Egypt in order to study under Imām Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, the famous student of Abū Hanīfah.

Later he travelled to Egypt in order to study under Imām al-Layth, but by the time he reached there the Imām had passed away. However, he was able to study the Madh-hab of al-Layth from al-Layth’s students. Ash-Shāfi’ī remained in Egypt until his death in the year 820 CE during the rule of the Caliph al-Ma'mūn (rule 813-832 CE).143

Formation of the Shāfi’ī Madh-hab

Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī combined the Fiqh of Hijāz (Mālikī thought) with that of Irāq, (Hanafī thought) and created a new Madh-hab which he dictated to his students in the form of a book called al-Hujjah (The Evidence). This dictation took place in Irāq in the year 810 CE and a number of his students memorised his book and narrated it to others. This book and period of his scholarship are usually referred to as al-Madh-hab al-Qadīm (the old school of thought) to differentiate it from the second period to his scholarship
which occurred after he reached Egypt. In Egypt he absorbed the Fiqh of Imām al-Layth ibn Sa’d and dictated al-Madh-hab al-Jadīd (the new school of thought) to his students in the form of another book which he named al-Umm (the Essence). Because of his exposure to a completely new set of Hadīths and legal reasoning, in
al-Madh-hab al-Jadīd, he reversed many of the legal positions which he had held while in Irāq. Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī holds the distinction of being the first Imām to systematize the fundamental principles of Fiqh which he recorded in his book called ar-Risālah.

Sources of Law Used by the Ash-Shāfi’ī Madh-hab

1. The Qur’ān

Ash-Shāfi’ī did not differ from the previously mentioned Imāms, in their uncompromising stand in relation to the
primacy of the Qur’ān among the sources of Islamic law. He relied on it as heavily as those before him adding only the new insights which he gained from a deep study of its meaning.

2. The Sunnah

Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī laid down only one condition for the acceptance of Hadīths, namely that they be authentic (Sahīh).

He rejected all the other conditions set by Imāms Abū Hanīfah and Mālik. He was also noted for his great contributions to the science of Hadīth criticism.

3. Ijmā’

Although Ash-Shāfi’ī had serious doubts about the possibility of the Ijmā’ in a number of cases, he conceded that in the few cases where it was known to have occurred, it should be regarded as the third most important source of Islamic law.

4. Individual Opinions of the Sahābah

Credence was given by Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī to the individual opinions of the Sahābah on condition that they were not at variance with each other. If there were conflicting opinions among the Sahābah on a legal point, he like Abū Hanīfah, would choose whichever opinion was the closest to the source and leave the rest.

5. Qiyās

Qiyās was, in the Imām’s opinion, a valid method for deducing further laws from the previous sources. However, he placed it last in order of importance, considering his personal opinions inferior to proofs based on the opinions of the companions.

6. Istis-hāb (Linking)

Both the principle Istihsān used by Abū Hanīfah and Istislāh used by Mālik were rejected by Ash-Shāfi’ī and considered a form of Bid’ah (innovation), since, in his opinion, they were based nostly on human reasoning in areas where revealed laws already existed. However, in dealing with similar issues Ash-Shāfi’ī was obliged to use a principle similar to Istihsān and Istislāh which he called istis-hāb[SUP].144 [/SUP]

Istis-hāb literally means seeking a link, but legally it refers to the process of deducing Fiqh laws by linking a later set of circumstances with an earlier set. It is based on the assumption that the Fiqh laws applicable to certain conditions remain valid so long as it is not certain that these conditions have altered. If, for example, on account of the long absence of someone, it is doubtful whether he is alive or dead, then by Istis-hāb all rules must remain in force that would hold if one knew for certain that he was still alive.

Main students of Shāfi’ī Madh-hab

The most important of Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī ’s students who continued to follow his school of thought were: al-Muzanī, ar-
Rabī’ and Yūsuf ibn Yahyā.

Al-Muzanee (791-876 CE)

Al-Muzanī’s full name was Ismā’īl ibn Yahyā al-Muzanī. He was the constant companion of Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī throughtout his stay in Egypt. Al-Muzanī was noted for writning a book which comprehensively gathered the Fiqh of Ash-Shāfi’ī . Later condensed under the title Mukhtasar al-Muzanī, it became the most widely read Fiqh book of the Ash-Shāfi’ī Madh-hab.

Ar-Rabī’ Al-Marādī (790-873 CE)

Ar-Rabī’ was noted as the main narrator of Ash-Shāfi’ī ’s book al-Umm. He wrote it down during Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī’s lifetime along with ar-Risālah and other books.

Yūsuf ibn Yahyā al-Buwaytī

Yūsuf ibn Yahyā succeeded Ash-Shāfi’ī as the main teacher of the Madh-hab. He was imprisoned and tortured to death in Baghdad because he rejected the officially sanctioned Mu’tazilite philosophy on the creation of the Qur’ān.[SUP]145[/SUP]

Followers of the Shāfi'ī Madh-hab

The majority of the followers of the Shāfi'ī Madh-hab are now to be found in Egypt, Southern Arabia, (Yemen, Hadramout), Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Malaysia, and East Africa (Kenya, Tanzania) and Surinam in South America.

------------

142 al-Madkhal, pp. 206-7.
143 Among these students were Ahmed ibn Hanbal, founder of the
Hanbalī Madh-hab and Abū Thawr founder of the Abū Thawr Madh-hab.
144 Al-Madkhal, pp.
145 Bozena Gajanee Strzyzewska, Tāreekh at-Tashrī’ al-Islāmī, (Beirut, Lebanon: Dār al-Aafāq al-Jadīdah, 1st ed. 1980), pp. 175, 176.

 

[Caplets]

The Hanbalî Madh-hab
​

The Founder: Imâm Ahmad (778-855 CE)


The scholar to whom this madh-hab is attributed is Ahmad ibn Hanbal ash-Shayâbnî, who was born in Baghdâd in the year 778 CE. He became one of the greatest memorizers and narrators of hadîth of his time. Concentrating on the study of hadîth, Ahmad studied fiqh and hadîth science under Imâm Abû Yûsuf, the famous student of Abû Hanîfah, as well as under Imâm ash-Shâfi'î himself. Imâm Ahmad went through a series of persecutions under the caliphs of his time due to their adoption of Mu’tazilite philosophy. He was jailed and beaten for two years by order of Caliph al-Ma’mûn (rule 813-842 CE), because of his rejection of the philosophical concept that the Qur’ân was created. Later set free, he continued teaching in Baghdâd until al-Wâthiq became caliph (rule 842-846 CE) and renewed the persecution. Thereupon, Imâm Ahmad stopped teaching and went into hiding for five years until Caliph al-Mutawakkil (847-862 CE) took over. Caliph al-Mutawakkil ended the inquisition permanently by expelling the Mu’tazilite scholars and officially rejecting their philosophy. Ahmad continued to teach in Baghdâd until he died in the year 855 CE.


Formation of the Hanbalî Madh-hab

Imâm Ahmad’s greatest concern was the collection, narration, and interpretation of hadîth. His teaching method consisted of dictating hadîths from his vast collection known as al-Musnad, which contained over 30,000 hadîths, as well as the various opinions of the Sahâbah concerning their interpretation. He would then apply the hadîths or rulings to various existing problems. If he could not find a suitable hadîth or opinion to solve a problem, he would offer his own opinion while forbidding his students to record any of his own solutions. As a result, his madhhab was recorded, not by his students but by their students.



Sources of Law Used by the Hanbalî Madh-hab


1. The Qur’ân

There was no difference between the way Ahmad ibn Hanbal approached Qur’ân and that of those who preceded him. In other words, the Qur’ân was given precedence over all else under all circumstances.

2. The Sunnah

Likewise, the Sunnah of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) occupied the number two position among the fundamental principles used by the founder of this school in the deduction of laws. His only stipulation was that it be marfû’, i.e. attributed directly to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم).

3. Ijmâ’ of the Sahâbah

Imâm Ahmad recognized the consensus of opinion of the Sahâbah, and placed it in the third position among the fundamental principles. However, he discredited the claims of ijmâ’ out side the era of the Sahâbah as being inaccurate, due to the vast number of scholars and their wide diffusion throughout the Muslim empire. In his opinion ijmâ’ after the era of the Sahâbah was impossible.

4. Individual Opinions of the Sahâbah

If a problem arose in an area where the Sahâbah had expressed conflicting opinions, Ahmad, like Mâlik, would give credence to all the various individual opinions. Because of that, there developed within the madh-hab many instances of multiple rulings for individual issues.

5. Hadîth Da’îf (Weak Hadîth)

For a ruling on a case where none of the previous four principles offered a ready solution, the Imâm used to prefer to use a weak hadîth rather than applying his own deductive reasoning (qiyâs)[SUP]C2[/SUP]. However, this was on condition that the weakness of the hadîth was not due to the fact that one of its narrators was classified as a fâsiq (degenerate), as a kadh-dhâb (liar).

6. Qiyâs

As a last resort, that is when no other major principle could be directly applied, Ahmad would reluctantly apply the principle of qiyâs and deduce a solution based on one or more of the previous principles.[SUP]146[/SUP]



Main Students of the Hanbalî Madh-hab

Imâm Ahmad’s main students were his own two sons, Sâlih (died 873 CE) and ‘Abdullâh (died 903 CE). Imâm Bukhârî and Muslim, compilers of the most outstanding collections of hadîth, were among the great scholars of hadîth who studied under Imâm Ahmad.[SUP]147[/SUP]



Followers of the Hanbalî Madh-hab

The majority of the followers of this madh-hab can now be found in Palestine and Saudi Arabia. Its survival in Saudi Arabia, after almost completely dying out elsewhere in the Muslim world, is due to the fact that the founder of the so called Wahhabî movement[SUP]c3[/SUP], had studied under scholars of the hanbalî madh-hab, and thus it unofficially became the fiqh madh-hab of the movement. When ‘Abdul- ‘Azîz ibn Sa’ûd captured most of the Arabian peninsula and established the Saudi dynasty, he made the hanbalî madh-hab the basis of the kingdom’s legal system.


------------------
C2. “...This conclusion concerning Ahmad's opinion is derived from a number of reports. First and most important is Ahmad's statement, "A weak hadîth is more loved to me than a person's opinion."[SUP]c2a[/SUP] In addition, one time he was asked about a person who had a choice of going to a person who knew hadîth but did not know the authentic from the weak or a person who resorted to personal reasoning. Ahmad said that the person should go ask the one who knew hadîth and not the other one.[SUP]c2b[/SUP] It is also said about him that he would act on the basis of weak hadîth if he could not find any other basis to act upon and there was nothing contradictory to the weak hadîth.[SUP]c2c[/SUP] He never resorted to analogy (Ar., qiyâs) unless he found no textual source whatsoever and even then he would prefer to remain quiet than to give his opinion. Similarly, it is claimed that if Abû Dâwûd found no sahîh or hasan hadîth on a topic, he would record a weak hadîth for he considered that stronger than a person's individual opinion. [SUP]c2d[/SUP]

One interpretation given to Ahmad's statement that weak hadîth are preferred over analogy is that it is in reference to a blatantly wrong analogy (qiyâs fâsid); that is, an analogy between two actions that do not share important common characteristics or an analogy that violates established principles or rulings of the Qur'ân and sunnah. In such cases, Ahmad would reject the analogy, as is considered acceptable practice by the scholars, and, if that were the only alternative open to him, he would prefer to follow a weak narration.

However, an even more important question is the meaning of "weak hadîth" in Ahmad's statement quoted above. One thing is certain, Ahmad did not mean by that hadîth which are very weak. Ibn al-Qayyim points out that when Ahmad used "weak" hadîth, he never used erroneous hadîth, munkar ("rejected") hadîth or hadîth coming from completely non-acceptable sources; he would only use a strong kind of weak hadîth, which is similar to what was later called hasan.[SUP]c2e [/SUP]

According to ibn Taymiyyah and others, before the time of al-Tirmidhî (and Ahmad was before the time of al-Tirmidhî), in general, hadîth were divided into only two categories: sahîh and dhaîf (weak). However, the dhaîf were of different levels. There were dhaîf that were absolutely rejected and there were dhaîf that were close to but not to the level of sahîh. This latter category could be accepted and acted upon. According to this theory, this stronger category of dhaîf is what is known today as hasan. Ibn Taymiyyah wrote,

Weak [among those early scholars] were of two types: weak that cannot be used as evidence, and this is weak in al-Tirmidhî's terminology, and weak that could be used as evidence, and this is hasan in al-Tirmidhî's terminology. This is similar to the case of two different levels of illness in fiqh. One type of illness is where the person is considered to be on his deathbed and he is not allowed to give more than one-third of his wealth in charity. The other is where he is barely sick and may do what he wishes with all of his wealth. That is why one finds in Ahmad's and other jurists' statements that they are using weak hadîth as proofs...[SUP]c2f[/SUP]

[...]

Hence, Ahmad's statements cannot be used as evidence that Ahmad himself ever accepted or acted on the basis of what are today called weak hadîth. This opinion, therefore, was not unique to Imâm Ahmad. This was the way of all of the early scholars, according to al-Shâtibî.[SUP]c2g[/SUP] Ibn al-Qayyim also argues that every scholar would prefer such a "weak" hadîth over analogy or personal reasoning.[SUP]c2h[/SUP] Ibn Hazm points out that it was also the view of all of the Hanafîs that a "weak" hadîth takes precedence over personal opinion and analogy.[SUP]c2i[/SUP]
​

***
​

c2a. He did not mean very weak or fabricated hadîth. This is not the proper place to discuss Ahmad's opinion on weak hadîth in detail (as that would take many pages). The interested reader is referred to Abdullâh al-Turkî, Usûl madhhab al-imâm Ahmad (Riyâdh: Maktaba al-Riyâdh al-Hadîtha, 1977), pp. 274-281.

c2b. Ahmad lbn Hajr, al-Nukat ala Kitâb ibn al-Salâh (Madînah: al-Jâmiat al-lslâmiyyah, 1984), vol. 1, p. 437.

c2c. Quoted in Abdul Azîz al-Uthaim, Tahqîq al-qaul bi-l-'amal bi-l-hadîth al-dhaîf (al-Thuqba, Saudi Arabia: Dâr al-Hijra, 1992), p. 30.

c2d. Ibn Hajr, al-Nukat, vol. 1, p. 436.

c2e. Shams al-Dîn lbn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, I'lâm al-Muwaqi'în (Beirut: Dâr al-Jîl, 1973), vol. 1,p. 31.

c2f. Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah, Sharh hadîth innama al-a'mâlu bi-l-niyyât wa innamâ li-kulli amrin mâ nawâ (Maktaba al-Salâm al-Alamiyyah, 1981), p. 11.

c2g. Ibrâhîm al-Shâtibî, al-i'tisâm (Alexandria, Egypt: Dâr Umar ibn al-Khattâb, n.d.), vol. 1, p. 226.

c2h. Ibn al-Qayyim, I'lâm al-Muwâqi'în, vol. 1, p. 31.

c2i. Quoted by al-Uthaim, p. 31. In his Ph.D. dissertation, al-Hârithî argues that the expression, "a weak hadith takes precedence over rai (opinion, personal reasoning)," does not refer to the case where there is contradiction between but the two, but only when there is agreement. He says that if there is an issue in which rai and a weak hadîth lead to the same conclusion, then it is better to base one's opinion on the weak hadîth rather than on one's opinion. However, if there is a contradiction between "sound analogy" and a weak hadîth, then the weak hadîth is to be ignored and the sound analogy is to be followed. [See Muhammad Qâsim al-Hârithî, Makânah al-Imâm Abû Hanîfah bain al-Muhadithîn (1993), p. 565.] His argument renders the statement, "A weak hadîth is more beloved to us than rai," virtually meaningless or useless. If one only follows a weak hadîth if rai or personal reasoning accepts it, then the true judge or authority is rai and not the hadîth. Rai, therefore, takes precedence and is, in reality, the thing that is more beloved to the person. If al-Hârithî's interpretation is correct, and this author is not convinced of that, then this author's discussion in the text above is inaccurate. Allâh knows best. - End extracts

Adapted extracts (footnotes numbering adapted) from 'Commentary on the Forty Hadith of al-Nawawi' , Vol.1, pp.70-73, by Jamaal al-Din M. Zarabozo.

​

***
​

146. al-Madhkal, pp. 202-203.

147. Târîkh al-Madhâhib al-Islâmîyah, vol. 2, pp. 339-340.

c3. Change made due to probable incomplete meaning/ printing error etc - "so called Wahhab" changed to "so called Wahhabî movement"

 

[Caplets]

THE DHÂHIRÊ MADH-HAB
​

The Founder: Imâm Dâwûd (815-883 CE)

The founder of this school of thought, Dâwûd ibn ‘Alî, was born in Kûfah in the year 815 CE. His early fiqh studies were under Imâm ash-Shâfi’î’s students, but he later inclined towards the study of hadîth and joined the hadîth circle of Imâm Ahmad ibn Hanbal. He continued to study under Ahmad until he was expelled from Ahmad’s classes because he voiced the opinion that the Qur'ân was muhdath (newly existent) and therefore created. After his expulsion, he took and independent path of reasoning based on the obvious and literal meanings (dhâhir) of the texts of the Qur’ân and the Sunnah.

Because of this approach, his madh-hab was called the Dhâhirî Madh-hab and he became known as Dâwûd adh-Dhâhirî.[SUP]148[/SUP]


The Qur’ân and the Sunnah

Like all of the other Imâms, Dâwûd considered the Qur’ân to be the foremost source of Islamic law followed by the Sunnah. However, only literal interpretations of their texts were considered by him to be valid. That is, they were only to be applied in the particular circumstances which they described.


Ijmâ’ of the Sunnah

Imâm Dâwûd gave credence to the Ijmâ’ of the Sahâbah, He reasoned that their unanimity would only have been on points of law revealed to the Prophet saws1 and known to the Sahâbah, but not narrated as hadîths for some reason or other.

Therefore, the ijmâ’ of the Sahâbah were not considered by him as resulting from reasoning (qiyâs).


Qiyâs

Since Imâm Dâwûd limited the application of the Qur’ân and the Sunnah to their literal meaning, he automatically denied the validity of rulings based on any form of reasoned opinion, including Qiyâs.[SUP]149[/SUP] However, the principle of mafhûm (understood meaning) which he applied to the Qur’ân and Sunnah in place of qiyâs turned out to be virtually indistinguishable from qiyâs (analogical deduction).[SUP]150[/SUP]


Main Students of the Dhâhirî Madh-hab

Due to the limited scope of the Dhâhirî Madh-hab and the absense of outstanding scholars to pass on its principles and rulings, it did not last very long. In fact, it did not get a foothold in any area of the Muslim empire during Imâm Dâwûd’s lifetime, nor in the century and a half which followed his death. In later times, all scholars who denied the validity of qiyâs were labelled as Dhâhirîs, even though they had not actually studied under Dâwûd or his students, or even read their works.

The most noted student of the Dhâhirî Madh-hab was a brilliant 11th century CE Spanish scholar named ‘Alî ibn Ahmad ibn Hazm al-Andalûsî (died 1070 CE). Ibn Hazm revived this madh-hab and defended it in the numerous outstanding works which he wrote in various fields of Islamic study; for example, Ihkâm al-Ahkâm in the field of Usûl al-Fiqh, al-Fisâl in theology and al-Muhallâ in fiqh. Due to Ibn Hazm’s tireless efforts, the madh-hab took hold in Islamic Spain where it flourished, and from there it spread to some areas of North Africa and elsewhere. It remained prevalent in Spain until the Islamic State began to crumble there in the early 1400’s. With the disappearance of the Muslim state of Andalus, the madh-hab also disappeared, leaving behind only a number of scholarly writings, most of which were done by Ibn Hazm himself.[SUP]151[/SUP]

-----------
148. Târîkh at-Tashrî’ al-Islâmî, pp. 181, 182.

149. Al-Madkhal, p. 206.

150. J.H. Kramers and H.A.R. Gibb, Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam, (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1953) p. 266.

151. Târîkh al-Madâhhib al-Islâmîyyah vol. 2, pp. 375-409.

c4. Further reading on Ibn Hazm (may Allaah have mercy on him): https://islamqa.info/en/answers/161540/was-ibn-hazm-may-allah-have-mercy-on-him-one-of-ahl-as-sunnah

 

[Caplets]

The Jarîrî Madh-hab
​

The Founder: Imâm at-Tabarî (839-923 CE)


This madh-hab was founded by Muhammad ibn Jarîr ibn Yazîd at-Tabarî who was born in the province of Tabaristan in the year 839 CE. He acquired a high degree of proficiency in the fields of hadîth, fiqh, and history. As a traveling jurist, he studied the systems of Imâm Abû Hanîfah, Imâm Mâlik, Imâm Ash-Shâfi’î and others. For the first ten years after his return from Egypt he strictly followed the Shâfi’î madh-hab. At the end of that period he founded a school of his own, whose followers called themselves Jareerites after his father’s name. But his madh-hab and fell comparatively quickly into oblivion.

​

Ibn Jarîr was most noted for his outstanding tafsîr of the Qur’ân which he called Jâmi’al-Bayân[SUP]c5[/SUP], but which became known as Tafsîr at-Tabarî. Of equal importance and fame was his history of the world called Târîkh ar-Rusul wal-Mulûk[SUP]C6[/SUP], commonly known as Târîkh at-Tabarî.[SUP]152[/SUP]

​

-------------
c5. "... Shaykh al-Islâm Ibn Taymiyah said: With regard to the Tafsîrs that are in circulation among the people, the most sound of them is the Tafsîr of Muhammad ibn Jarîr al-Tabarî, for he mentions the views of the salaf with proven isnâds, and there is no bid’ah (innovation) in it, and he does not transmit reports from dubious sources such as Muqâtil ibn Bukayr and al-Kalbî. [Majmû’ al-Fatâwa, 13/358.]


He also said in Muqaddimah fi Usûl al-Tafsîr (p. 35), concerning the Tafsîr of Ibn Jarîr:

It is one of the best and greatest of Tafsîrs.

He relied on the views of three generations of mufassirîn among the salaf, namely the Sahâbah, the Tâbi’în, and the followers of the Tâbi’în, and he quotes their opinions with isnâds going back to them. This is an important feature of his book which is not present in many of the books of Tafsîr that are in circulation among us. [...]

When he has finished quoting their opinions, he states which he thinks is most likely to be correct, then he describes how he reached that conclusion...."

https://islamqa.info/en/answers/43778/which-is-more-sound-tafseer-ibn-katheer-or-tafseer-al-tabari

C6. 'History of the Messengers and Kings' English Trans. : https://www.kalamullah.com/tabari.h...OYPnxRkEDKnHB5YFvHqh_OFHW_BHcHdf2F2u2aluuJfBX

152. Târîkh At-Tashrî’ Al-Islâmî , pp. 182, 183.

 

[Caplets]

SUMMARY



​

1 - The major madh-habs were : the Hanafî, the Mâlikî, the Shâfi’î, the Hanbalî, and the Zaydî Madh-habs.

These survived largely because of state support and a body of outstanding first generation students.

2 - The most important of the minor madh-habs were: the Awzâ’î, the Laythî, the Thawrî, the Dhâhirî and the Jarîrî madh-habs. These went out of existence either because of political factors or because their students failed to record the rulings of the founders for posterity.

3 - The principal sources of Islamic law agreed upon by all the major madh-habs were: the Qur’ân, the Sunnah, Ijmâ’ of the Sahâbah and Qiyâs.

4 - All of the major madh-habs set conditions for the acceptance of the Sunnah as a primary source of Islamic law:

(a) The Hanafî madh-hab stipulated that the hadîth be widely known (mash-hûr).

(b) The Mâlikî madh-hab required that the hadîth not contradict the Ijmâ’ of the Madeenites.

(c) The Shâfi’î madh-hab insisted that the hadîth be authentic (sahîh)

(d) The Hanbalî madh-hab only required that the hadîth be attributed to the prophet saws1 and not fabricated. Thus, hadîths of doubtful authenticity[SUP]1[/SUP] were considered a part of the Sunnah.


5 - The controversial sources of Islamic were:

(a) Istihsân and Ijmâ’[SUP]2[/SUP] of scholars, held by the Hanafî madh-hab.

(b) Istislâh, Ijmâ’ of the Madeenites and their customs, held by the Mâlikî madh-hab.

(c) ‘Urf, held by both the Hanafî and Mâlikî madh-hab.

(d) Weak hadîth held by the Hanbalî madh-hab.[SUP]3[/SUP]

(e) Aqwâl ‘Alee (rulings and statements of the fourth righteous caliph, ‘Alee), held by the Zaydî madh-hab.


----------
1. See previous note c2.

2. "... Ijmaa‘ is of two types: definitive and presumptive.

1. Definitive is that which well known and well established, such as consensus that the five daily prayers are obligatory and that zina (fornication, adultery) is haraam. No one can deny that this type of ijmaa‘ is proven and established, or that it constitutes proof in and of itself, or that the one who rejects it becomes a kaafir, unless he is ignorant and may be excused for his ignorance.

2. Presumptive is that which can only be known by means of research and study, where the scholars may differ as to whether is ijmaa‘ (on a particular issue) or not. The most correct scholarly opinion concerning that is the view of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, when he said in al-‘Aqeedah al-Waasitiyyah: The type of ijmaa‘ that is to be accepted is that of the righteous early generations (as-salaf as-saalih), because after their time there was a great deal of disagreement and the ummah spread far and wide. End quote...."

3. See previous note c2.