What should we do about our sects?

[Umm Yoosuf]

Firstly, the article i posted was not in reference to your orginal question

Secondly, as foru sayings here:

The question is why there was a need to create so many madhabs, sects or schools of thought?

Who said there was a need to create sect etc? Do you understand what a madhhab is?

Do you reject the hadith of the Prophet peace be upon him?

"Indeed those from before you from the People of the Book divided into seventy-two groups. And, indeed, this group (Muslims) will divide into seventy-three. Seventy-two groups will be in the Hellfire and one of them will be in Paradise. And it is the Jamaa'ah (group)."

When you could find answer to every question from Quran, then why one has to develop a different kind of thought and make people follow him.

Quran and hadiths go hand in hand. Who developed different kind of thought and following?

Who creates a new madhabs? I mean is it only the relgious scholars in whose names some maslaks are made famous or there are some classes whose vested interests are protected by new schools of thoughts? For example we know about one of the new schools of thought which was created and promoted to protects the interests of a royal family.

I don't know what your understanding of the scholars of Islam are but the ones that follow Islam according to Quran and Sunnah do not add or take awat anything, rather they've studied the deen (Islam) for years and are educating the people, following that which Allah revealed to His Messenger Muhammad peace be upon, and His Salaaf, may Alalh be pleased with them. It is compulsory upon us (layman) to ask the people of knowledge as Allaah says,

“So ask the people of the Reminder if you do not know.” - Al-Anbiyah (21):7

And in another verse He says,

“So ask of those who know the Scripture, if you know not. With clear signs and Books (We sent the Messengers).” - An Nahl (16):43-44

 

[AbuAbdallah]

The question is why there was a need to create so many madhabs, sects or schools of thought? When you could find answer to every question from Quran, then why one has to develop a different kind of thought and make people follow him. Who creates a new madhabs? I mean is it only the relgious scholars in whose names some maslaks are made famous or there are some classes whose vested interests are protected by new schools of thoughts? For example we know about one of the new schools of thought which was created and promoted to protects the interests of a royal family.

salaam,
Let me first make it clear that madhabs are not sects, they are a part of ahlusunnah wal jamaah. The madhabs don't differ in terms of aqeedah, but they differ in terms of fiqh. The Imams would make a ruling about an issue based on the proof they had from the sunnah at the time, and by using their own ijtihad.
A madhab is created when someone who is very knowledgble has devoted students to carry on their rulings and works.
I am not sure about your reference to the madhab for a royal family.

And Allah Knows Best.

 

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

Nobdoy says they were wrong? Did someone say so? Do you mean to say there's no single specific way in Quran or Hadith for choosing a khalifa?

Their acts were still within the bounds of Sharia', therefore even though their methods in appointing the next Khalif was different, it was still within the same straight path. Remember the narration where the Messenger commanded us to follow their Sunnah as well.

There're many paths to reach the same destination and all of them straight.

There is only one straight path, and that was the path that the Messenger and his Companions were upon.

10: 32 ...So after the truth, what else can there be, save error?...

The messenger of Allah drew a straight line to show that there can only be one path which is straight. Now you tell us that all 4 differnt paths were straight. Man you're just confusing.

Those 4 paths were within this one 'path'. You do know that the Scholars for example have defined Sirat Al Mustaqim in many ways. Some have said it is the Qur'an, some have said it is Abu Bakr, some have said it is the Sunnah. Were they contradicting one another? No. All of it is part of the Sirat Al Mustaqim.

The question is why there was a need to create so many madhabs, sects or schools of thought?

There is a difference between a sect and a Madhab. Sects were formed when the people deviated from the path of the Salaf. Madhabs are something completely different.

When you could find answer to every question from Quran, then why one has to develop a different kind of thought and make people follow him. Who creates a new madhabs?

Akhi, it seems you don't understand what a Madhab is. Let me explain.

A madhab is a 'machine' per say. The Scholars of the Madhab take the 'ingredients', the foundations of Usul ul Fiqh - the Qur'an, the Sunnah, Ijma' and Qiyas and they put these four things into the 'machine' to derive a ruling. The reason for the four different Madahib is because the four Imams differed on the amount they took from the 4 'ingredients'. For example, Imam Ahmad would take a Hadith even if it was weak over Qiyas. Imam Malik considered the Ijma' of the people of Madinah as a proof. Therefore, there is nothing wrong within the Madahib themselves, because due to the work of the scholars from the Madahib we have our rulings made for us. If someone were to reject them and start all over, they would do fail and at the least do a very poor job. Remember, there can be differences in Fiqh and that is all that distinguishes one madhab from the other, but there can be no differences in Aqidah.

The problem arises when people claim loyalty to one Madahib and fall into Taqlid.

I mean is it only the relgious scholars in whose names some maslaks are made famous or there are some classes whose vested interests are protected by new schools of thoughts?

I think the only Madahib that are agreed upon are the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafiee, and Hanbali. A common misconception is that 'salafi' is a new Madhab. That is no more than a lie.

For example we know about one of the new schools of thought which was created and promoted to protects the interests of a royal family.

Ah so this is the reason for this thread. You are saying that W-ism and Salafism is a Madhab? Then you are indeed very mistaken. Salafi does not equal La Madhabi. Salafism is a movement that has remained around the ages, because a salafi is no more than a person who follows the way of the Salaf. And there are no people who call themselves 'wa habbi'. I ask you to read my previous post.

 

[Khalid1402]

:salamext:

I think it is okay to decide not to follow a madhab although it may be good to follow one, as it can help you to find clear guidance different situations in which many of the rulings may appeal to you. All four madhab schools are good, none all better than the others, and I have seen that some people tend to follow one madhab for most matters, but they may follow a different madhab in other aspects in when they find the ruling to be more compatible to them than the ruling of their own madhab.

May Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala guide us on the Straight Path.

 

[snakelegs]

The problem arises when people claim loyalty to one Madahib and fall into Taqlid.
I think the only Madahib that are agreed upon are the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafiee, and Hanbali.

some questions:
i thought you were supposed to stay within a mazhab to avoid choosing rulings that are more convenient for you?
about avoiding taqlid - does this apply to individuals to only to scholars?
the 4 you named above are the only ones i've ever heard of - are there others?
are mazhabs considered "sects" or merely different schools of jurisprudence?
thanks.

 

[NoName55]

​

"There is no harm in following any of the Imams when it comes to rules of fiqh"
​

​

Even when a question is answered properly some folk just don't get it because they don't come here to learn but to teach.
​

Any sane person would think that there is nothin wrong with following one of the Madhahib or all four where they (Madhahib) agree with Quraan and Sunnah of Muhammad ﷺ (if you have the capacity to memorise the Quraan with meaning/in cotext, not just be a haafiz)

Ma'asalaama
​

======================================================

REGARDING BLIND FOLLOWING OF THE MADHABS ​

Linguistically, taqleed means: Placing something around the neck, which encircles the neck. Technically it means: Following he whose sayings is not a proof (hujjah).

So long as a Muslim is following the correct evidence (daleel) and has the desire to follow the Sunnah properly, there is no harm in following any of the Imams when it comes to rules of fiqh. In the case of the ordinary Muslim (who is not educated in fiqh), his madhhab (school of thought) is that of the mufti whose knowledge he trusts. But problems of the worst type occur when people become fanatically devoted to one particular Imam or Madhhab, to the extent that they reject the truth or ignore other sound evidence because of this.

Allaah warns against rejecting the word of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) (interpretation of the meaning): “… And let those who oppose the Messenger’s commandment (i.e., his Sunnah) (among the sects) beware, lest some fitnah (disbelief, trials, afflictions, etc.) befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on them.” [al-Noor 24:63]

"Indeed the people of Truth and the Sunnah do not follow anyone [unconditionally] except the messenger of Allaah SAW, the one who does not speak from his desires - it is only revelation revealed to him."

​

Blind Following (Part -1) (English) By Shaykh Yahya Silmy As-Saylani
​

Blind Following (Part -2) (English) By Shaykh Yahya Silmy As-Saylani ​

[FONT=&quot]Salafi Dawah[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Misplaced Loyalty[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]WHAT IS TAQLEED?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Quotes From the SALAF[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]what is related from the salaf?[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]THE SACRED SALAFEE METHODOLOGY[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The Madhhab of the People of Hadeeth[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Prohibited and Permissible Forms of Taqleed[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[FONT=&quot]Who are Salaf? and what the scholars say about a Salafi?[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Questions and Answers Concerning ad-Da‘watus- Salafiyyah[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Salaf and their Position Towards The People of Innovations & Desires[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]imaam shaa'fee (rahimahullaah)[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]imaam abu haneefah (rahimahullaah)[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]imaam maalik ibn anas (rahimahullaah)[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]imaam ahmed ibn hanbal (rahimahullaah)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Using of Dhikr bead, or subhah while reciting Tasbiyyah.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The Basis of Islaam is to Act upon the Book and the Sunnah[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]DISCOVERED: THE PROPHET'S PRAYER IN HANAFI BOOKS OF FIQH![/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Guidelines for Following Madhhabs[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Questions and Answers Concerning Manhaj[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The Ruling Concerning Multiple Groups and Parties[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]FATAAWAA OF MAJOR COMMITTEE OF SCHOLARS ON TAQLEED AND MADHHABS[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Which Group?[/FONT]
​

I am hoping this post will no be deleted. Wa Allah Aalim
​

 

[MinAhlilHadeeth]

i know there is nothing wrong with following a mazhab - and in fact, it is encouraged - but is it necessary to?

Hi

There is nothing wrong with following a madhab, but what is wrong is to blindly follow a madhab. And that means to take that as your only source of information, and reject any other opinions even when you feel the other opinion is stronger. However, we need to be taking our fataawa from a reliable scholar of our time, as we are not knowledgable enough to make our own fataawah - as Fi_Sabilillah said.

 

[iqbal_soofi]

Hi

There is nothing wrong with following a madhab, but what is wrong is to blindly follow a madhab. And that means to take that as your only source of information, and reject any other opinions even when you feel the other opinion is stronger. However, we need to be taking our fataawa from a reliable scholar of our time, as we are not knowledgable enough to make our own fataawah - as Fi_Sabilillah said.

You said it right. there's nothing wrong to follow a madhab and the best thing you said is that following any madhab blindly is wrong

Now this is the wrong trend which is going on everywhere. Every Muslim has to follow his madhab blindly. A Muslim cannot open his eyes while following the madhab. A Muslim cannot question whatever the religious scholars of one's particular madhab say about Islam. Any one who points out a single mistake in the religious scholars statements (that keep changing from time to time for the vested interests) is made to shut up and given a lot of anti Islam titles. The religious scholars of all the madhabs are always right although they disagree with each others on almost every issue regarding Islam. Each of them can prove all other religious scholars are wrong. This is our dilema that we've to accept all these wrongs as right. Only wrong we can call is the person who doesn't submit to follow them blindly.

 

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

some questions:
i thought you were supposed to stay within a mazhab to avoid choosing rulings that are more convenient for you?

The layman has no madhab, in the sense that his madhab is the madhab of the scholar who he asks the jurisprudence questions. To follow a madhab, and say I am from a Madhab, the individual needs a certain amount of knowledge that would enable him to research the opinions etc. This was clarified in the post by Sister Al Muminah:

This is because the madhhab will be either for the one who is able to research to a certain level and understand evidence and also know about the other madhhabs or for the one who has read a book concerning the details of that madhhab and knows the ruling and saying of his Imaam.
​

about avoiding taqlid - does this apply to individuals to only to scholars?

It applies to both, though the laymen are the ones that usually fall into more often.

the 4 you named above are the only ones i've ever heard of - are there others?

There are others, but their students didn't survive enough for them to be on the level of those four. For example, Al Awza'ee was at the level of the 4 Imams and some say higher then some of them, but his school did not survive because of the lack of students and other factors.

are mazhabs considered "sects" or merely different schools of jurisprudence?
thanks.

Just different schools of Jurisprudence.

 

[Mawaddah]

You said it right. there's nothing wrong to follow a madhab and the best thing you said is that following any madhab blindly is wrong

Now this is the wrong trend which is going on everywhere. Every Muslim has to follow his madhab blindly. A Muslim cannot open his eyes while following the madhab. A Muslim cannot question whatever the religious scholars of one's particular madhab say about Islam. Any one who points out a single mistake in the religious scholars statements (that keep changing from time to time for the vested interests) is made to shut up and given a lot of anti Islam titles. The religious scholars of all the madhabs are always right although they disagree with each others on almost every issue regarding Islam. Each of them can prove all other religious scholars are wrong. This is our dilema that we've to accept all these wrongs as right. Only wrong we can call is the person who doesn't submit to follow them blindly.

Like someone mentioned before, All of the scholars of the four Madhaahib do not differ in Aqidah, but they merely differ in Fiqh.
This differing was in existence from the time of the Sahaabah,but it did not effect their relationship and brotherhood in anyway.
What people need to realize is simply that there are different opinions regarding issues and that each opinion of each scholar is backed up with Proof and Daleel. So if you see someone practising something different according to what you are practising (in terms of Fiqh) then do not bash that person, for he may be following the opinion of a different scholar.

So Brother, as long as the Aqeedah is one, then there is no problem really.

 

[iqbal_soofi]

Like someone mentioned before, All of the scholars of the four Madhaahib do not differ in Aqidah, but they merely differ in Fiqh.
This differing was in existence from the time of the Sahaabah,but it did not effect their relationship and brotherhood in anyway.
What people need to realize is simply that there are different opinions regarding issues and that each opinion of each scholar is backed up with Proof and Daleel. So if you see someone practising something different according to what you are practising (in terms of Fiqh) then do not bash that person, for he may be following the opinion of a different scholar.

So Brother, as long as the Aqeedah is one, then there is no problem really.

You said almost the same thing, which I said. You only took a different parth to make your statement, which could be said straightforward, in simple words. The simple conclusion of both of these statments is that we as a common Muslims have to follow any one of the madhab blindly.

So we both disagree with Umm 'Abdullah who thinks that a madhab could be followed with open eyes and not just blindly. Yes you can open your eyes to the extent that you could see only your religious scholars who are leading (misleading) your madhab. You are never allowed to see or say that your religious scholars are misleading. You cannot even think of it. You must agree completely to whatever they say today. (Forget about their statements of yesterday if those are in contradiction to today's statements. Never even mention those otherwise you'd be declared a kafir or a disbeliever acoording to the regulations of the madhabs and their discussion forums). The regulation of every madhab and aqeeda are the almost the same. One of the most imprtant rules of every aqeeda is that you're not a true believer if you don't agree that whatever the religious scholars of your madhab say is 100% right and whatever the religious scholars of other madahbs or aqeeda say is 100% wrong.

 

[AbuAbdallah]

salaam,

The simple conclusion of both of these statments is that we as a common Muslims have to follow any one or the madhab blindly.

This statement is incorrect.

Yes you can open your eyes to the extent that you could see only your religious scholars who are leading (misleading) your madhab.

I am not sure who you are talking about, but you seem to have had some bad experiences with some scholars.

One of the most imprtant rules of every aqeeda is that you're not a true believer if you don't agree that whatever the religious scholars of your madhab say is 100% right and whatever the religious scholars of other madahbs or aqeeda say is 100% wrong.

I think you need clarification in what Aqeedah is, as well as the difference between a madhab and a sect as they are not interchangeable.

 

[Mawaddah]

You said almost the same thing, which I said. You only took a different parth to make your statement, which could be said straightforward, in simple words. The simple conclusion of both of these statments is that we as a common Muslims have to follow any one of the madhab blindly.

Not Blindly Akhi, but for the common layman who does not know much about research and such, will he not just adhere to one particular opinion? It's not 'blindly' but because he is not capable of going into lengthy research.

So we both disagree with Umm 'Abdullah who thinks that a madhab could be followed with open eyes and not just blindly. Yes you can open your eyes to the extent that you could see only your religious scholars who are leading (misleading) your madhab. You are never allowed to see or say that your religious scholars are misleading. You cannot even think of it. You must agree completely to whatever they say today. (Forget about their statements of yesterday if those are in contradiction to today's statements. Never even mention those otherwise you'd be declared a kafir or a disbeliever acoording to the regulations of the madhabs and their discussion forums). The regulation of every madhab and aqeeda are the almost the same. One of the most imprtant rules of every aqeeda is that you're not a true believer if you don't agree that whatever the religious scholars of your madhab say is 100% right and whatever the religious scholars of other madahbs or aqeeda say is 100% wrong.

Wrong.

I think it has been repeated a couple times in this thread that there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with the Imaam of such and such a madhab and following the opinion of another.

In fact there were a few Imaams of the past who were followers of a madhab, but at times they differed openly with the Imaams of those Madhabs.

And no, we do not just say yes and agree to whatever the scholars are saying, regardless of whether it is wrong or right, because if we do so that would be taqleed. You see, there's a difference between being from a madhab and taqleed. Taqleed is the blind following which you are referring to when you say that a person cannot differ from the Imaam in any way, and that's Haram.

Again, you're confusing Aqeedah and Madhab

 

[Umm Yoosuf]

One is NOT to blind follow them, in fact they themselves said:

Aboo Haneefah said, "When I say something contradicting the Book of Allah, the Exalted, or what is narrated from the Messenger, then ignore my saying," al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p.50), tracing it to Imaam Muhammad and then saying, "This does not aplly to the mujtahid, for he is not bound to their view anyway, but it applies to blind-following."


Imaam Maalik said, "Truly I am only a mortal. I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes). Therefore, look inot 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," Ibn 'Abdul-Barr in Jaami' Bayaanal-Ilm (2/32).

Imaam ash-Shaafi'ee said, "The sunnahs of the Messenger of Allah reach, as well as escape from, everyone of us. So whnever I voice my opinion or formulate a principle, where something contrary to my view exists on the authority of the Messnger of Allah, then the correct view is what the Messenger of Allah has said- and it is my view," related by Haakim with a continuous chain of narration to Shaafi'ee, as in Taareekh Dimashq of Ibn 'Asaakir (15/1/3), I'laamul-Muwaqqi'een (2/363, 364). And he also said "The Muslim are unanimously agree that if a sunnah of the Messenger of Allah os made clear to someone, it is not permitted for him to leave it for the saying on anyone else." Ibn al-Qayyim (2/361) and Fulaani (p.68).


Imaam Ahmad said, "The opinion of Awaa'ee, the opinion of Maalik, the opinion of Aboo Haneefah- all of it is opinion, and it is all equal in my eyes. However, the proof is in the narrations (from the Prophet and his Companions)," Ibn 'Abul-Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'ilm (2/149).

 

[snakelegs]

thanks for all your responses. i've learned a lot about mazhabs in this thread. i've wanted to start a thread on mazhabs but was afraid it might be viewed as sectarian, even tho i didn't think the mazhabs were viewed as sects.
so it seems mainly an issue of balance and common sense.
you must have a balance as an individual muslim. you are not to do as you jolly well please or what is convenient for you - but at the same time, you are also supposed to think for yourself and question.
the differences between the mazhabs rulings are usually not on matters of major consequence anyway - is that right?
so it is recommended but not mandatory to follow a mazhab, but use your head.
this is good because as noname55 said "problems of the worst type occur when people become fanatically devoted to one particular Imam or Madhhab, to the extent that they reject the truth or ignore other sound evidence because of this."
by the way noname, i found your linguistic explantion of "taqleed" intersting too.
correct me if i'm wrong on my take of all this.

 

[SirZubair]

Madhabs are schools of thought, and there's nothing wrong with following them because we're not knowlegable enough to extract our own rulings from the Qur'an and authentic Sunnah. [i.e. we don't know the context of the hadith etc.] We know that even some of the pious predecessors before us would follow a school of thought. However, if someone was to bring us some Authentic ahadith which contradict what we are doing, then we should ask a trustworthy scholar who is of our time so we understand which is the more correct opinion. And Allaah knows best.


Regards.

Just want to add abit to that..

..the trustworthy scholar should be one who has the Ijaza to teach Islam. Not just any Scholar. Because, as many of us know, there are many many 'scholars' out there these days, but not many with an Ijaza.

 

[SirZubair]

The question is why there was a need to create so many madhabs, sects or schools of thought? When you could find answer to every question from Quran, then why one has to develop a different kind of thought and make people follow him.

Can you REALLY say that you can pick up the Qur'an ( Arabic OR English version ), read it, and make sense out of EVERY VERSE of the Qur'an?

I doubt it.

Do you have the time, ability, intellect to STUDY the Qur'an inside out, Day and Night for decades?

I Doubt it.

Do you have the ability to read thru all the Sahih Hadiths and come to conclusions on what is wrong and what is right?

I Doubt it.

Hadiths are not just Sayings that the Prophet ( saw ) threw around left right and centre, they are all connected in one way or another.Do you have the ability to read thru THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of Hadiths and link them all together?

I doubt it.

Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi'i, Imam Hanbal did so.

salaam,

I don't think it is necessary at all to follow a madhab. I think someone should just follow scholars that they trust instead of always wondering "what did Abu Hanifa say about this, or say about that." We should focus more on what the Prophet (SAW) said, and how the majority of the scholars understood it, not just sticking to one Imam your whole life, because at the end of the day they are only human.

And Allah Knows Best.

Check out this website :

The Legal Status Of Following A Madhab

should we all become soofi?

'Sufi' is not a Sect. 'Sufism' is a method of self-purification.

 

[NoName55]

Which book?

Whoever Practises Tasawwuf Without Learning Sacred Law Corrupts His Faith, While He Who Learns Sacred Law Without Practising Tasawwuf Corrupts Himself. Only he Who Combines The 2 Pulls Through - Imam Malik.

For the life of me, I can't find this saying in any of my books. Please, could someone give me the name of the book and page number.

Thank you kindly

 

[SirZubair]

Every Muslim has to follow his madhab blindly

Says who? You? Why should we blindly take your word for it.. :blind:

A Muslim cannot question whatever the religious scholars of one's particular madhab say about Islam

Simply because they had more knowledge than you, i, and millions of muslims put Together will never possess in this lifetime.

The religious scholars of all the madhabs are always right although they disagree with each others on almost every issue regarding Islam.

They've learned to agree to disagree. You should do the same. There is no 'right' and no 'wrong', there are different rulings according to different scholars. Read the link i've provided which explains how madhabs work before you carry on with your rubbish please. You are speaking out of Ignorance over and over, and its getting boring.

Each of them can prove all other religious scholars are wrong.

Show me a Fatwa which has been issued by a Well Known Scholar ( who has an Ijaza ) in which he has dissed the rulings of another madhab. If you are unable to do so, stop making such stupid claims.

This is our dilema that we've to accept all these wrongs as right. Only wrong we can call is the person who doesn't submit to follow them blindly.

I feel for you... theres a tear in my eye which is especially reserved for you..
..not.

Get over it, and go out there and gain some knowledge on topics you wish to 'preach' others on.

 

[AbuAbdallah]

'Sufi' is not a Sect. 'Sufism' is a method of self-purification.

salaam,
According to the translation of the word that statement is correct. However, there is a difference from the earlier scholars who practiced sufism and the later scholars who have practiced it.

Here is an article about it.