And We did not send before you except men, towards whom We sent divine revelations - so O people, ask the people of knowledge if you do not know. (* All the Prophets were men.)
"And, ask the People of Knowledge if you do not know."
Thus the general principle of Taqleed is enshrined in the Qur’aan Majeed. Denial of this principle is, therefore, an act of kufr which expels the denier from the fold of Islam.
Daleel (proof) of Taqleed
Aswad bin Yazid narrates, "Mu'aath came to us in Yemen as a teacher and commander. We questioned him regarding a man who had died leaving (as his heirs) a brother and sister. He decreed half the estate for the daughter and half for the sister. This was while the Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam was alive." [Kitaabul Faraa-idh: Bukhari and Muslim Shareef]
It will be realised from this Hadith Shareef that Taqleed was in vogue during the time of the Prophet sallallahu alaihe wasallam.
The questioner (in the Hadith) did not demand proof or basis for the decree. He accepted the ruling, relying on the integrity, piety and up-righteousness of Hazrat Mu,aath radiyallahu anhu. This is precisely Taqleed.
Secondly, Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam did not criticise or reject the people of his age, who followed Hazrat Mu-aath radiyallahu anhu, nor has any rejection or difference on the issue been narrated by anyone else. The permissibility and validity of Taqleed are therefore evident, especially so because of it’s prevalence in the glorious time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam.
This Hadith further furnishes proof for the concept of Taqleed-us-Shakhsi. Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam had appointed Hazrat Mu-aath radiyallahu anhu to provide religious instruction to the people of Yemen. It is, hence, evident and certain thatRasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam granted the people of Yemen the right and permission to refer to Hazrat Mu-aath radiyallahu anhu in all affairs of Deen.
Huthail bin Shurgbeel said, ‘Abu Musa was questioned, then Ibn Mas’ud was questioned. Ibn Mas’ud was informed of Abu Musa’s statement. Ibn Mas’ud differed with it. Thereafter Abu Musa was informed (of his difference). He then said: "Do not ask me as long as this Aalim of Deen is among you."
It will be understood that Abu Musa radiyallahu anhu in directing the people towards Ibn Mas’ud radiyallahu anhu by his command, "Do not ask me as long as this Aalim of Deen is among you," was mandatory regarding all matters of Deen.
This, in fact, is Taqleed-us-Shaksi which means to refer every religious question to a particular Aalim because of some determining factor, and to act according to his verdict.
These Ahaadith indicate that ‘Taqleed-us-Shakhsi’ is not a new concept which can refuted. Its existence is from the very epoch of Khairul Qurun (the three eras adjacent to the age ofRasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam is an established fact).
The faculty of Taqleed is inherently existent in us. If we had refrained from the Taqleed of our parents and teachers then today we would have been deprived of even the basic and preliminary needs of humanity. By nature man is endowed with the ability to imitate and follow others. If this was not the case, we would not have been able to learn our home language. If we had refused to accept unquestioningly (without demanding proof) every command, beck and call of our teachers, then we would have been ignorant of even the alphabet of a language, let alone the study and writing of our books. Our whole life – every facet of it, eating, drinking, donning garments, walking, earning, etc., is connected with this very concept of Taqleed.
If the fundamentals and technical terminology of every branch of knowledge was not acquired on the basis of Taqleed, i.e. without questioning the authority of the masters, then the proficiency in such knowledge could not have been attained.
There are two types of wujoob (compulsory nature of something) in jurisprudence: 1) wujoob biz zaat 2) wujoob bil ghair.
- Wujoob biz zaat means compulsory in itself, for example the commission or omission brings about the compulsion, as the commission of salaah and the commission of polytheism etc.
- Wujoob bil ghair – these are such acts which are not normally compulsory in themselves, but they constitute the basis for actions commanded in the Qur’aan and hadith and normally it is not possible to execute the commanded practises without also executing their basis. Therefore, wujoob bil ghair means compulsory by virtue of an external factor. It is from here we derived the universal rule, ‘ the basis of a wajib is also wajib’ and this is the exact rule which governs the compulsory nature of Taqleed ush Shakhsi.
Evils of Discarding Taqleed
It is established by observation and experience that in this age most people are governed by selfishness, baneful motives, lust, insincerity, mischief, strife, anarchy, opposition to the consensus of the Ahdul-Haq, and subjection of the Deen to desire. This is manifest and self-evident. The Ahadith on fitan (strife) have forewarned us of the rise of these baneful traits in man. The Ulama are well aware of this. It is for this reason (baneful traits) that in the absence ofTaqleed-us-Shakhsi, great harm, mischief, disruption and corruption will reign in the Deen. One of the destructive evils which will raise its head in the absence of Taqleed-us-Shakhsi is self- appointed Mujtahids. Some persons will consider themselves to be Mujtahids and embark on the process of Qiyas (Shar’i analogical reasoning) and they will consider themselves to be of equal or greater rank than the illustrious Mujtahideen of the early ages of Islam. The previous Mujtahideen have reliably stated that some laws are Mu’all’al (based on certain causes). Citing this some modernists have claimed that the command of wudhu for salaah is mu’all’al, it being the consequence of the early Arabs being camel-herds and goatherds. Since their occupation of tending animals exposed them constantly to impurities, the command of wudhu was formulated. On this basis they claim that since people of the present time live in environments and occupations of greater hygienic conditions, wudhu is no longer necessary for salaah. They conclude thus, the permissibility of salaah without wudhu.
Similarly, it is claimed (by such self-styled mujtahids) that the wujub of witnesses in the Nikah ceremony is mu’all’al, the need of witnesses being occasioned by the occurrence of a dispute which may arrive in the future. The presence of witnesses will facilitate the resolving of disputes between the contending marriage parties. On this basis they conclude that where there exists no danger of dispute, the Nikah will be valid without witnesses.
Another evil resulting from the discarding of Taqleed us Shukhsi is to practice in accordance if the esoteric (zahir) façade of certain Ahaadith whereas such a practice is certainly not lawful. Since the discarder of Taqleed-us-Shakhsi sees himself unchecked and unfettered he follows the dictates of his nafs.
An example of this type of Hadith is as follows:
"Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam performed Zuhr and Asr together and Maghrib and Isha together without (the expediency) of fear and journey. [Muslim Shareef]
At face value the Hadith indicates the permissibility of performing Zuhr and Asr as well as Maghrib and Isha even if there exists no valid reason for this practice.
But, without any doubt, the unification of salaah without reason is not held permissible by any authority. The correct meaning of the hadith is arrived at by ta’weel (interpretation) via the faculty of Ijtihaad. Practice in accordance with the mere façade of the words used in such cases will result in an opposition to Ijma (consensus of the Ummat), and such conflict is Haraam.
The summary of what has been said is; Taqleed-us-Shakhsi is the basis for a wajib aspect (viz., acting in accordance with the commands of the Shariah) and the basis of a Wajib is also Wajib, hence Taqleed-us-Shakhsi is likewise Wajib.
One who has discarded Taqleed, even if he does not resort to Ijtihaad himself, nor follows the meaning conveyed superficially by the words, will, in difficult Masa’il accept the verdict of any authority. He will at times follow one Imaam and at other, another. In this way he will sometimes practice in opposition to Ijma, and on occasions, even if the result is not in conflict with Ijma he will resort to the verdict which appeals to his whims and fancies and by means of which worldly motives are available. Thus, he will submit the Deen to the dictates of the nafs. We seek Allah’s protection from such deviation.
Taqleed Restricted To The Four Madhaa’hib
There are numerous Mujtahideen. It may therefore be argued that Taqleed of any Mujtahid should suffice. What is the reason for restricting Taqleed to the four Madhaa’hib?
It was realised from the exposition of the wujub of Taqleed that adoption of different verdicts leads to anarchy. It is therefore imperative to make Taqleed of a Madhab which has been so formulated and arranged in regard to principles (Usul) and details (Furu) that answers to all questions could be obtained either in specific form or in deducted form based on principles, thereby obviating the need to refer to an external source. This all-embracing quality by an act of Allah Ta’aala is found existing in only the four Madhaa'hib. It is therefore imperative to adopt one of the four Madhaa'hib’. This has been the accepted practice coming down the ages from the early times in an unbroken chain of transmission, from generation to generation.
The emphasis on this aspect of Taqleed is so profound that certain Ulama have restricted theAhle-Sunnah wal jama within the confines of the four Madhaa'hib.
The anti-Taqleed lobby attempts to hoodwink unwary Muslims by asking the question:
"Did the Madh’habs exist during the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam and the Sahaabah?"
In response it could be asked:
Did Bukhari Shareef exist in the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam?
Did the Qur’aan (in the form we have it) exist during the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam)?
If they respond by saying "Yes", then we to shall retort that the Madh’habs did exists in the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam.
In fact, this very question posed by deviants', exhibits either their gross ignorance or their deliberate to hoodwink the unwary.
If the madhab did not exist during the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam and the Sahaabah, the logical conclusion is that the entire Shar'iah which the illustrious Imaam have expounded is not the Shar'iah taught Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam and the Sahaabah. But, this is absurd and preposterous.
The madhab of all the teaching of the Madhabs are in fact the teachings of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. Nothing in the Madhabs conflicts with the Qur’aan and Hadith. The different ways methods of Ibaadat, etc., which the Madhabs are applying, are the ways and methods of the Sahaabah which they had acquired from Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam.
The differences were inherited from the Sahaabah and such differences are by Divine Decree, hence Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam said:
"The differences of my Ummat is a Rahmat."
Whether anyone understands this fact that, ‘Rahmat’ (Mercy) is emanating out of the authoritative differences of the Fuqahah of the Ummat is of no substance. The fact thatRasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam proclaimed such differences to be the effects of Allah’s mercy is sufficient. Thus, there is nothing detestable in the differences prevailing among the Madhabs. These valid and authentic differences do not bring about disunity, as is stupidly asserted by the modernist deviants'. The ignorance of people and their desires are the causes of disunity.
While the terms, Hanafi, Shaaf'i...etc. did not exist in the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam and the Sahaabah, the teachings of these Madhabs, all had existed.
While Bukhari Shareef did not exist, the Ahaadith contained in the book did exist. It is, therefore, stupid to pose the question of the Madhabs during the time of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam. There is unity in this diversity. Deen is the product of wahi, not the result of man’s desires. Since the hawa (desire) cannot find free-play within the chains of Taqleed the aim of the deviates is to refute the concept of Taqleed. But, breaking the chains of Taqleed is to enchain oneself with the shackles of the nafs.
Why Is It Necessary To Make Taqleed Of Only One Imaam? (Taqleed-us-Shakhsi).
The question arises, Why is it necessary to follow one Imaam only?
What is wrong if one mas’ala is taken from one Imaam and another from another Imaam, as was done in the time of the Sahaabah radiyallahu anhum and Tabe’ien. In those times the whole Madhab was not confined to one person.
The answer is that in those times good was prevalent. Generally the lowly desires did not have any matters in the matters of Deen. Whoever used to refer to any of his elders regarding any mas’ala, used to do so sincerely and he also used to act upon the verdict given to him whether it be to his benefit and desires or not.
Later sincerity to that degree and piety did not remain amongst the people. Such urge was present in people to ask one Aalim a mas’ala, if it did not suit them, then they referred that mas’ala to another Aalim until they found a verdict that suited their desires. Gradually, for every mas’ala they had the urge to look for a suitable reply. It is obvious that such people are not seeking the truth.
Sometimes the consequences is very serious, e.g. a person in the state of wudhu touches his wife. A person following the Shaaf'i madhab tells him that "Your wudhu is broken, therefore remake your wudhu". He replies "No, I am a muqalid of Imaam Abu Hanifa Rahmatullahi alaihe; according to him this does not cause the wudhu to break. I can read salaah with the wudhu.
Then the person vomits a mouthful, a person following the Hanafi madhab advises him to make wudhu as his wudhu has broken, according to Imaam Abu Hanifa Rahmatullahi alaihe; this person replies that I am making Taqleed of Imaam Sha’fi Rahmatullahi alaihe, (in this mas’ala) and according to Imaam Shaaf'i Rahmatullahi alaihe vomiting does not cause the wudhu to break. A person can read salaah with such a wudhu. If this person reads his salaah with this wudhu then his salaah will not be valid according to Imaam Sha’fi Rahmatullahi alaiheand not according to Imaam Abu Hanifa Rahmatullahi alaihe.
This is called talfeeq and there is ijma and consensus of opinion that talfeeq is ba’til and impermissible. In reality by doing this a person does not make taqleed of Imaam Shaaf'iRahmatullahi alaihe or Imaam Abu Hanifa Rahmatullahi alaihe, but he is following his desires, and the Shariah has prohibited us from following our desires. Its result is going astray from the path of Allah Taa’la.
Allah Taa’la says in Surah Hud, Ayaat 26:
‘And do not follow your desires (in future too) for it will lead you astray from the path of Allah.’
Therefore it is Necessary to make Taqleed of one Imaam only.
It is for this reason that the Qur’aan-e-Kareem has commended adherence towards Allah (repeatedly). Allah Ta'aala says:
"And follow the way of that person that person who turns towards me."
Generally someone feels according to his strong presumption that Al-Imaam al-A'zam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullahi alaihe is most probably correct and munib (has the quality of ibaadat), that is, his Ijtihaad conforms more with the Holy Qur'aan and Hadith.
That is why he has opted to make Taqleed of Imaam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullahi alaihe. Another person has this strong feeling that Imaam Maalik Rahmatullahi alaiheijtihaad conforms with the Holy Qur’aan and Hadith, therefore, he makes Taqleed of Imaam Maalik Rahmatullahi alaihe.
Someone has this feeling regarding Imaam Shaaf'i Rahmatullahi alaihe ijtihaad, that is why he makes Imaam Shaaf'i Rahmatullahi alaihe taqleed and someone for this very reason makes taqleed of Imaam Ahmed bin Hanbal Rahmatullahi alaihe.
Talfeeq And Changing Madhabs Is Not Permissible
It is not permissible to leave taqleed made upon one Imaam and follow another Imaam when one wishes. When this is done without permission from the Shariah it leads to talfeeq, it also causes one to follow one’s desires resulting in going far away from the truth and being led astray.
What is the hukm (law) for a convert to Islam or for one who wishes to switch from his state of non-taqleed to taqleed? Which Madhab does he have to follow?
If such a person lives in a place where a particular Madhab is dominant, then he should follow the Madhab by virtue of its dominance. If he happens to be in a place where several madhaa’hib are in operation on a more or less equivalent basis, then he will be free to choose any Madhab acceptable to him. However, once the choice is made he will be obliged to remain steadfast on the Madhab of his choice.
In cases where it is difficult to act in accordance with one’s Madhab due to a dearth of Ulama of one’s Madhab; moreover for the one who is not an Aalim, it will be permissible, in fact compulsory, to adopt the Madhab which happens to be predominant in the place where one happens to be. For a person in such circumstances Taqleed-us-Shakhsi of his former Madhab will not be compulsory. He will be obliged to choose from the four madhaaib the madhab which is dominant in his particular circumstance. However, such cases are rare. The general rule in force is the wujub of Taqleed-us-Shakhsi.
The Disease Of Admut-Taqleed
Admut-taqleed (abandonment of taqleed) is a disease spread by Shaitaan.
Shaitaan’s plot is always to destroy the Deen and the best and the most effective way to achieve this evil aim is to negate the concept of taqleed. The Sunnah is inextricably interwoven into the fabric of taqleed. Once a man abandons taqleed of the Madhabs he is left with no guidance other than the deviation of his nafs. While he pretends to possess the ability to formulate the Shari'ah directly from the Qur’aan and Hadith, he can venture no further than picking and choosing from the various opinions and rulings of the illustrious Imaams. In so doing, he follows the base desires of his nafs.
Once the authority of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen has been shrugged off, the Muslim is cut off from his Imaani moorings. He will then drift in the ocean of deception and desire which shaitaan has prepared for him. Admut-taqleed is thus a fatal spiritual disease which can lead to the destruction of one’s Imaan.
In the present time the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah is confined to the four Madhabs. Whoever searches for the path of the Sunnah beyond the confines of the four Madhabs will deviate in to Baa’til. Since every teaching of the four Madhabs is the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, deviation therefrom is to deviate from the Sunnah. Those who deviate from the Sunnah are destined for Jahannum according to the explicit pronouncement of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallamwho said:
"Bani Israael split into seventy-two sects. My Ummat will split into seventy-three sects. All of which, save one, will be in the fire"
When he was asked regarding the sects which will be saved from the fire Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam said:
"That path on which I and my Sahaabah are."
Salvation (Najaat) in the hereafter (Aakhirah) therefore depends on donning the mantle of Taqleed. We should strive to ensure our safety from the ingeniously subtle designs of Shaitaan todrag us with him into eternal punishment.
------------------
"Do you want Pick or Fiqh?"
Here's
a classic example where combining things from two madhhabs results in an act
that's invalid in all four:
Imam Malik considers a marriage contract
valid as long as the wali is there.
Two
witnesses are not needed. (However, that's only for the contract; in order to
proceed to consummation, the witnesses are needed.)
Meanwhile Imam
Abu Hanifa requires witnesses but does not require a wali.
A
woman can
represent herself.
If
these two are combined, you have a marriage conducted with
no wali and no witnesses.
That's
an invalid contract in all four madhhabs.
Fiqh
is all
about consistency in methodology in handling the evidences. This is why the end
up with different results. Combining statements of fuqaha is like mixing two
medicines that are both beneficial alone, but toxic when combined.
---
Al-La Madhhabiyya
Abandoning the Schools of Law is
the Most Dangerous Innovation
Threatening the Sacred Law
Shaykh Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan al-Buti(ra)
Sunni Publications, Rotterdam. Second
Edition., 2017
Paperback, 160 pages, 190 grams. ISBN 9789079294244
In the last century, a
movement has appeared calling for the abandonment
of the traditional schools of law [madhahib]. This misleading call, which scholars have termed al-la madhhabiyya, was presented as ‘following
the Quran and the Sunna’ and caused much confusion amongst ordinary
muslims.
One of the sources for the spread of this innovation was a book written by Muhammad Sultan al-Ma‘sumi al-Khajnadi al-Makki, which
was translated and distributed to English and published as ‘Should a Muslim Follow a Particular Madhhab?’
and ‘The Blind Following of Madhhabs’.
It was in response to this book,
taught and revered by prominent opponents of the schools of law, that Shaykh
al-Buti first wrote his ground breaking work. Later editions
of this work, the translation of which we have before us, included the
aftermath of various debates Shaykh al-Buti was subsequently challenged
to by his opponents and also incorporated counter-replies to the likes of
Shaykh Nasir al-Din al-Albani,
Muhammad ‘Id `Abbasi,
Mahmud Mahdi al-Istanbuli and Khayr
al-Din Wanli.
This book is a decisive refutation of those who
call to the misguidance of abandoning the schools of law, for it is the most dangerous
innovation threatening the Sacred Law.
--------------------------
How
is Taqlid Ordained by Prophet
(Peace be upon him)?
The Ahlus
Sunnah wa'l Jammah
and all their scholars endorse Taqlid.
Now let us look at a hadith about scholars and
their superiority.
Imam
at-Tirmidhi
made a whole chapter with title:
What
Has Been Related About The Superiority Of Fiqh Over Worship
He
brought this hadith under it.
[Note: Salafis
have wrongly declared all the hadiths under this chapter as weak except this
one as they are ill in Usool ul hadith. However this one even they could not
have declared weak]
Narrated
Abu Umamah Al-Bahili:
"Two men were mentioned before the Messenger of Allah(s). One of them a
worshiper, "AND THE OTHER A SCHOLAR" So the Messenger of Allah (s) said: "THE SUPERIORITY OF THE SCHOLAR OVER THE WORSHIPER IS LIKE MY
SUPERIORITY OVER THE LEAST OF YOU" ' Then the Messenger of Allah (s) said: 'Indeed Allah,
His Angels, the inhabitants of the heavens and the earths - even the ant in his
hole, even the fish - say Salat upon the one who "TEACHES
THE PEOPLE TO DO GOOD"
[Jami
Tirmidhi. Vol. 5, Book 39, Hadith 2685. Kitab ul ILM (Knowledge), Chapter 19.
Declared Hasan (good) in Wahabi Dar us Salam version]
---
The Blindest Following
is the Taqlid of "Salafis"
NOTE: Taqlid is the term used in Islamic Law for the following of the Four Imams(Mathabs) a Shaikh, or Wali. It is used by enemies of Ahl-e-Sunnah to attack the Lovers ofAllah, The Holy Last Messenger (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wa Sallam) and His Deen; calling it “Blind Following.”
People who follow their desires and opinions in conflict with the Shari’ah are described in the Holy Qur’an as the followers of Hawaa (lowly or Nafsani prompting). Such people, while attempting to advertise themselves as intellectuals of independent reasoning, are actually the blindest of followers. They follow their desires, abandoning a superior form of following (Taqlid of the Salaf-as-Saaliheen[1]) for the sake of the Taqlid of their nafs[2]. They suffer from the malady of oblique vision, rendering them worse than the blind.
Those who criticize the illustrious Imams of the Four Madhahib of the Sunnah, and renounce the Islamic concept of Taqlid, have placed around their necks the taqlid of their nafs. They labor in self-deception without even understanding their deviation. They pretend to create the impression that they are men of profound knowledge, hence they themselves have no need for following the A’immah-e-Mujtahideen, such as Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Malik ibn Anas, etc. They dupe ignorant people into believing that they possess the capability of interpreting Holy Qur’an and Hadith and to deduct the problems based on Shari’ah by their self-study. But their following (taqlid) is of the worst kind. They have rejected to follow those authorities that acquired their knowledge from the Sahabah Ikram.
Then they feel proud to announce their taqlid of Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 782 AH) or Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah[3], both of whom appeared centuries after the illustrious A’immah-e-Mujtahideen. While they claim to be mujtahideen capable of interpreting and understanding the Holy Qur’an and Hadith, they make taqlid of Ibn Taymiyyah, who is the limit of their knowledge. They have no further source of knowledge.
Whatever interpretation Ibn Taymiyyah presents, it is blindly and stupidly accepted by the Ghairi muqallideen who dub themselves “Salafis”. But they have no relationship with the noble Salaf-as-Saaliheen.
Ibn Taymiyyah was not among the Salaf-as-Saaliheen, therefore this title is a great misnomer for those who have adopted blind following of their nafs.
The beginning and ending of the knowledge Salafis ascribe to themselves is Ibn Taymiyyah who appeared on the Islamic Horizon seven centuries after Sayyidina Rasulullah(Sallallahu ‘Alaihi wa Sallam) and five centuries after Imam Bukhari (Rahmatullahi ‘alaih). Many, if not all, Salafis glean their interpretation of Hadith from the writings of Ibn Taymiyyah and send the message across that their views are the product of their study of Holy Qur’an and Hadith.
While they denounce the superior Taqlid of the Salaf-e-Saliheen!
They readily embrace the taqlid of Ibn Taymiyyah?
Worse than this, they have appointed for themselves as Imam Nasiruddeen al-Albani, who holds no rank in the knowledge of the Shar’iah.
Al-Albani was a man of this present century who died just some months back (1999 AD). So, while they brazenly reject Taqlid, they have adopted the Taqlid of juniors and nonentities. While they denounce the Taqlid of the students of the Sahabah and the Students of the Salaf-e-Saliheen (Tabi’een & Taba’at-Tabi’een), they embrace the taqlid of those who have absolutely no comparison to the rank and status of the Salaf-e-Saaliheen, radiyallahu ‘anhum ajma’een.
All Muslims know that Rasulullah (Sallallahu-‘Alayhi-Wa-Sallam) described three ages as the Khairul Quroon (Noblest Ages). These are the eras attached to the era of Rasulullah(Sallallahu ‘Alaihi wa Sallam). These were the ages of the A'immati Mujtahideen, Fuqaha, Muhadditheen, Mufassireen, and all the great Souls of al-Islam. These are the ages of theSahabah, Tabi’een and Taba’at-Tabi’een. The illustrious authorities of these ages are termed the Salaf-us-Saliheen.
The degree of spiritual blindness of the so-called Salafis can now be gauged. What Islamic rationale requires a man to reject and denounce the following of the Taqlid of the Salaf-us-Saliheen and substitute it with the miserable taqlid of incompetent nonentities?
How can Muslims of intelligence reject the Taqlid of the Awliya and the A’immah of the epoch of Khairul Quroon and adopt the taqlid of men who do not possess the quality and character of a Wali of Allah Ta’ala.
Although they claim to be following the Holy Qur’an and Sunnah, they blindly follow Ibn Taymiyyah writings and opinions as interpreted by al-Albani. Yes they are quick to lay claim to be obtaining their rules directly from the Hadith; they lack the courage to state that they are following the Sunnah in the way Ibn Taymiyyah has understood it. In fact, few of them have access to the [real] works of Ibn Taymiyyah.
They simply blindly follow Al-Albani and others whom they have appointed as their Imams, yet they are vociferous in their denunciation of the Islamic Taqlid of the A’immat-i-Mujtahideen of the era of the true Salaf.
The Salafis are quick to cite Imam Bukhari (Rahmatullahi ‘alaih) and the other competent Muhadditheen as evidence for their opinions which they gleaned from the writings of Ibn Taymiyyah. While they cite Imam Bukhari (Rahmatullahi ‘alaih), they follow the interpretation of the Hadith offered by Ibn Taymiyyah and expounded by the modernist Al-Albani.
Never be deceived by those who denounce Taqlid of the Fuqaha, and Awliya of Allah Ta’ala. They are not in reality rejecting the actual concept of Taqlid. They are in fact denouncing the ILLUSTRIOUS PREDECESSORS, the SALAF-E-SALIHEEN. They possess some deep dislike for these Predecessors, hence their criticism. As far as following is concerned, these Salafis also follow, yet they follow blindly.
They offer blind taqlid to Ibn Taymiyyah, Al-Albani, and Ben Baz. And they follow the Madhhab-e-Taymiyyah, Baaziyyah, Albaaniyyah and Wahhaabiyyah.
Their crude criticism of the A’immah Mujtahideen is in fulfillment of the prediction made by Sayyidina Rasulullah (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wa Sallam) who said that among the signs of the Qiyamah is that people of the age will revile the Pious Predecessors (Salaf-as-Saaliheen) of former times. This is what precisely what these deviants are doing. Intelligent people will not be surprised by the miserable conduct of those who denounce the Imams of the Four Madhahib of the Ahlus Sunnah and the Awliya of Allah.
It should be well understood that in every sphere of life, be it mundane or spiritual, taqlid is indispensable, as the Salafis themselves are displaying by their Tariqah of blindly following their Imams. The appropriate designations for the modernist denouncers of Taqlid are “Albanis” or “Baazis,” but not Salafis. There is no relationship between them and the Salaf-us-Saliheen.
When in the presence of the Ulama [and educated] of Ahlus Sunnah, the Salafis pretend to honor and respect the A’immah of the four Madhahib. However, when they preach to unwary and ignorant laymen, they pour out their hidden venom for the Saaliheen Imams in general and for Imam al-A’zam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullahi Ta’ala ‘alaih) in particular. In this despicable two-facedness, they are emulating the Shi’ah who conceal their true ideologies behind a facade of falsehood.
The Salafis of our time are guilty of having incorporated the Shi’ah concept of Taqiyah[4] into their ideology. May Allah Ta’ala save the Ummah from the evil of the nafs and the snares of Shaitan.
--------------------------------------------------
ENDNOTES
- Salaf, in Arabic, literally means predecessors. The Islamic definition of Salaf-us-Saaliheen (Saaliheen Predecessors) defines three, and only three, generations of ‘Ulama who expounded Islamic Law (Shari’ah): 1.) Sahaba Ikram, 2.) Tabi’een, 3.) Taba’at-Tabi’een.
- Carnal desires.
- Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, one of Ibn Taymiyyah’s students. Do not confuse him with Ibn al-Jawzi (Abu-l-Faraj ibn al-Jawzi), the Hanbali Alim.
- Taqiyah is a form of ‘Ibadah practiced in Shi’ism, not al-Islam. Shi’ah believe they absolutely must lie to Muslims and conceal their beliefs and agendas from Muslims, irregardless of the conditions surrounding them. For the adherents of Shi’ism, holy hypocrisy, Taqiyah, is a sacred act that brings great reward when done to Muslims.
- Note: In a manner that mirrors the Salafis, the Shi’ah also profess the same nature, where as Salafis profess to follow only the Salaf-as-Saaliheen, yet they cling more to Ben Baz & al-Albani. Shi'ah do the exact same, professing to follow only the A’immati Ahlul-Bayt (radiyallahu ‘anhum), yet they actually adhere to the corrupt and extremely foul ways of their clergymen, commonly known as “Ayatollahs.” This pertains specifically to the Rawafid, who now hide under such names as:
- Jafria (also spelled Jafariyya).
- “Ja’fari Madhhab.”
- Imamiyyah.
- Hussainiyyah (the dear reader should note that this sectarianist naming convention does notpertain to Hadrat Imam al-Husain ibn Ali ibn Abu Talib, radiyallahu ‘anh, nor his descendents).
- Karbala’iyyah.
- Ithnaa ‘Ashariyyah (“Twelvers”)
-----------------------------------
Taqleed can be defined as the acceptance of a Mujtahid’s‘ statements (Fatwa, without knowing his references (evidences).
[Tazeeb, by Imam-Nawai and Irshaad-ul-Fahool by Qadhi Shawkani].
There is a consensus amongst the majority of Muslims that we should follow the four major Imams in matters of Shari’ah.
Such as:
* Those matters in which there is no direct, single and clear meaning in sources of Shari’ah.
* When there exists a difference of opinion between the Sahabah upon an issue, the Imams have tried to show the similarities in them.
We only observe Taqleed in matters of fiqh, not in our Aqeedah.
The unity of Allah, the finality of the Prophet Muhammad (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) and the Day of Judgement etc – are matters of Aqeedah so they are not concerned with Taqleed.
Some say that it is a form of shirk (polytheism) to observe Taqleed of anyone apart from Allah. In particular, to follow only one Imam is a bid’ah. They say that the evidence from all the Imams should be read and weighed in order that only those verdicts based upon strong evidence can be accepted and weak ones rejected.
The view of the Ahl-us-sunnah wa’l Jamaa is that it is impossible for an ordinary Muslim to go directly to the Qur’an and Sunnah and extract religious laws.
This is due to the fact that these sources of knowledge contain many matters which are unclear – thus requiring research into many other sources along with the application of rules which assist in understanding the matter under study. In order to do this, a person needs to possess both a deep and broad knowledge of Islam. Which is both impractical and not incumbent upon each and every Muslim. Allah does not expect all Muslims to become scholars, instead, He orders them to refer to those who have knowledge.
Consider the following verse:
And ask those who recall, if you know not. (Surah 16:43)
and in Surah Nisa :
If they had referred it to the messenger and to those of authority among them, then those of them whose tasks it is to find it out would have known the matter, (4:83).
For those who have the necessary pre-requisites, such as being a master of Uloom-ul-Qur’an, master of Ahadith and their principles, Aqaa’id, fiqh principles, Tafsir and its principles, and al-jarhu wa’ ta’deel (the science of Hadith narrators). They are allowed to take ahkaam from the Shari’ah.
Such a person can be called a Mujtahid. However, many great scholars who were qualified to perform Ijtihad, followed Imams. For example, Qadi Abu Yusuf, Imam Muhammad and Imam Zufar were able to perform Ijtihad but followed the opinionof Abu Hanifah,
There are many categories of Hadith such as Mutawaatir, authentic, none authentic, weak and those which are fabricated. Some are Mansookh which means that certain matters were at first permissible but later made impermissible, for instance talking during the Salaah during the early period of Islam was permissiblebut later on made unlawful. This is why Taqleed is a necessity – the scholars have taken all the above into consideration before issuing their verdict.
Rejectors of Taqleed
---
Wahhabiyah (Salafi/Ahlehadith) sect say:
The layperson
(those who have no deep learning of the Islamic sciences) should follow the ‘stronger’
proofs and not to ‘blindly follow’ any Scholar.
This
Wahhabi sect is against any sort of
innovation in religion, yet
they are guilty of the biggest innovation,
which is forcing the laity to delve into
the sources of the religion to do DIY Ijtihād.
---
Abū
Bakr Ahmad al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī (d.463 AH),
he mentions in his book al-Faqīh wa ‘l-Mutafaqqih (2/133):
وحكي عن بعض المعتزلة , أنه قال : لا يجوز للعامي العمل بقول العالم حتى
يعرف علة الحكم , وإذا سأل العالم فإنما يسأله أن يعرفه طريق الحكم , فإذا عرفه
وقف عليه وعمل به وهذا غلط لأنه لا سبيل للعامي إلى الوقوف على ذلك , إلا بعد أن
يتفقه سنين كثيرة , ويخالط الفقهاء المدة الطويلة , ويتحقق طرق القياس
“It
is related that some of the Muʾtazilites said: ‘It is not
permitted for a layman to act upon the fatwa of an ʿĀlim until he knows the reason behind such ruling (ie. proof). So
when he (does) ask the ʿĀlim he should ask him so he
(himself) comes to understand the ruling (ie. knowing the proof himself). After
he does understand it he should apply it (ie. the ruling)’.
(Al-Khatīb then says:) This is
wrong! There is absolutely no way for the layman to do that, except after
studying many years, mixing with the fuqahā’ for long periods of time and
(then) understand the intricacies of analogical reasoning”.
--
Imām
Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī (d.505 AH), he mentions in al-Mustaṣfā fī ʿIlm ‘l-Usūl (pg.373):
العامي يجب عليه الاستفتاء واتباع العلماء . وقال قوم من القدرية :
يلزمهم النظر في الدليل واتباع الإمام المعصوم وهذا باطل بمسلكين : أحدهما : إجماع
الصحابة فإنهم كانوا يفتون العوام ولا يأمرونهم بنيل درجة الاجتهاد… المسلك الثاني
: أن الإجماع منعقد على أن العامي مكلف بالأحكام ، وتكليفه طلب رتبة الاجتهاد محال
; لأنه يؤدي إلى أن ينقطع الحرث والنسل وتتعطل الحرف والصنائع ويؤدي إلى خراب
الدنيا
“It
is obligatory upon the layman to seek religious edicts (fatāwā) and follow the
Scholars, while a group from the Qadarites said:
‘It is obligatory upon the laity to seek the proof
and follow Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم.’
(Al-Ghazzālī then
says) ‘This (view of the Qadarites) is bāṭil in two ways, one is; the consensus (Ijmāʾ) of the Companions رضي الله عنهم, for they used to
issue rulings to the laity (ʿawām), and they did not command them to attain the level of
Ijtihād…
The second (reason why it is bāṭil) is; that the
consensus is upheld that the layperson will be overwhelmed with the religious
rulings. His overburdening to attain the level of Ijtihād would be absurd
because it will lead to the abandonment of work and future posterity, it will
damage trading and craftsmanship which will then lead to the destruction of our
world”.
In
al-Ihkām fī Usūl al-Ahkām of Imām Sayf al-Dīn al-Āmidī (d.631 AH), he says regarding Taqlīd (4/229):
العامي ومن
ليس له أهلية الاجتهاد ، وإن كان محصلا لبعض العلوم المعتبرة في الاجتهاد يلزمه
اتباع قول المجتهدين والأخذ بفتواه عند المحققين من الأصوليين . ومنع من ذلك بعض
معتزلة البغداديين وقالوا : لا يجوز ذلك إلا بعد أن يتبين له صحة اجتهاده بدليله
ونقل عن الجبائي أنه أباح ذلك في مسائل الاجتهاد دون غيرها كالعبادات الخمس
والمختار إنما هو المذهب الأول ، ويدل عليه النص والإجماع والمعقول .
“The
laity are not from those that have the quality of ijtihād, even if they were to
acquaint themselves with some decent knowledge of the sciences related to ijtihād,
it is (still) mandatory upon them to follow the Mujtahidīn and take their
fatāwā, (this being) in accordance with the verifiers from the Usūliyyīn.
(However) Some of the Muʾtazilites of Baghdād
prohibited this and said: ‘(even) that is not permitted (ie. taking of the
fatwā of the Muftī by the layperson) unless he distinguishes the authenticity
of his (Muftī’s) ijtihād with proof’. It is related from al-Jubbā’ī that he
permitted that in matters of ijtihād with the exception of a few things like
praying of the five (obligatory prayers). The correct view is that of the first
school (that it is mandatory for the laymen to take the fatwā of their Muftī
without knowing the proof), and upon this is clear proof, Ijmāʾ and common sense”.
--
Imām
Muwaffaq al-Dīn Ibn Qudāmah al-Maqdisī (d.620 AH),
the erudite Ḥanbalī Scholar also
echoes the exact sentiments mentioned by al-Ghazālī, in his Rawdhat al-Nāẓir wa Jannat al-Manāẓir (1/383):
وأما التقليد
في الفروع فهو جائز إجماعا فكانت الحجة فيه الإجماع ولأن المجتهد في الفروع إما
مصيب وإما مخطىء مثاب غير مأثوم…وذهب بعض القدرية إلى أن العامة يلزمهم النظر في
الدليل في الفروع أيضا وهو باطل بإجماع الصحابة فإنهم كانوا يفتون العامة ولا
يأمرونهم بنيل درجة الاجتهاد وذلك معلوم بالضرورة والتواتر من علمائهم وعوامهم
ولأن الإجماع منعقد على تكليف العامي الأحكام وتكليفه رتبة الاجتهاد يؤدي إلى
انقطاع الحرث والنسل وتعطيل الحرف والصنائع فيؤدي إلى خراب الدنيا
“As
for taqlīd in peripheral issues (furūʿ) then it is permitted according to the
scholarly consensus, for there is proof in the scholarly consensus. This is
because whether the Mujtahid is correct (in his religious edicts) or whether he
errs, (regardless) is rewarded without sin… while a group from the Qadarites said: ‘It is
obligatory upon the laity to seek the proof for peripheral issues (furūʿ) also’,
(Ibn
Qudāmah then says) and it (this opinion of the Qadarites) is bāṭil (null) according to
the consensus (Ijmāʾ) of the Companions رضي الله عنهم, for they used to issue rulings to the
laity (ʿawām), and they did not
command them to attain the level of Ijtihād as that is known in our religion by
necessity and what was multiply narrated from their scholars and their laity,
because the consensus is upheld that the layperson will be overwhelmed with the
religious rulings. His overburdening to attain the level of Ijtihād would be
absurd because it will lead to the abandonment of work and future posterity, it
will damage trading and craftsmanship which will then lead to the destruction
of our world”.
Another
Ḥanbalī Scholar to add is Imām
Muḥammad al-Saffārīnī (d.1188 AH), who
mentions in his Lawāmiʾ al-Anwār al-Bahiyyah
(2/465):
قال الإمام
موفق الدين في الروضة: وأما التقليد في الفروع فهو جائز إجماعا، قال: وذهب بعض
القدرية إلى أن العامة يلزمهم النظر في الدليل، واستدل لجواز التقليد بقوله تعالى:
(فاسألوا أهل الذكر إن كنتم لا تعلمون)… وأيضا الإجماع فإن العوام يقلدون العلماء
من غير إبداء مستند من غير نكير، وأيضا عدم القول بذلك يؤدي إلى خراب الدنيا بترك
المعاش والصنائع… قال الإمام مالك: يجب على العوام تقليد المجتهدين في الأحكام،
كما يجب على المجتهدين الاجتهاد في أعيان الأدلة، خلافا للمعتزلة البغدادية فإنهم
وافقوا القدرية في إيجابهم على العوام الاجتهاد
“Imām
Ibn Qudāmah mentioned in Rawdhah:
‘As for taqlīd in peripheral issues (furūʿ) then it is permitted
according to the scholarly consensus (ijmāʿ)’. He also said: ‘Some of the Qadarites are of
the view that it is obligatory upon the laity to look at the proof’. (al-Saffārīnī
says) The proof that bases the permissibility of taqlīd is taken from the
following verse: ‘Ask the people of knowledge if you do not know’… also there
is consensus that the laity do taqlīd of the Scholars without (their scholars)
providing proof and without being rebuked. Without this opinion (the
permissibility of taqlīd) it will lead to the downfall of our worldly life, the
abandonment of livelihood and trade…
Imām
Mālik
said: ‘Taqlīd is obligatory upon the laity of the Mujtahidīn in the Aḥkām just as it is
obligatory upon the Mujtahidīn to do Ijtihād with suitable proofs’. (al-Saffārīnī
says) the Muʾtazilites of Baghdād were
against this for they agreed with the Qadarites that the laymen are obliged to
do Ijtihād (also)”.
The
above quotes have made it abundantly clear that the common-folk do
not look at the proofs of their Scholars in fiqh, nor do they weigh the
opinions according to the strength of the proof, and upon this – as clearly
mentioned – is ijmā‘, even if they may have some decent amount of knowledge (as
mentioned by the Uṣūlī Scholar, al-Āmidī).
The
laypeople cannot be given authority over nusūs (religious texts) and
dīnī affairs, just like they cannot be given authority in dunyawī affairs if
they do not have knowledge in that particular field, like for example diagnosing illnesses, prescribing medicine, or even operating at the theatre; all of which
requires vast knowledge in the subject area, certification and even experience.
This
view has gained popularity among the Wahhabiyah/Salafi/Ahlehadith
sect
Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī advocates this view in his book al-Ḥadīth Ḥujjah
bi-Nafsih (1/81),
first he quotes
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr:
ولم تختلف
العلماء أن العامة عليها تقليد علمائها وأنهم المرادون بقول الله عز وجل:
{فَاسْأَلوا أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ لا تَعْلَمُونَ} وأجمعوا على أن
الأعمى لا بد له من تقليد غيره ممن يثق بمعرفته بالقبلة إذا أشكلت عليه فكذلك من
لا علم له ولا بصر بمعنى ما يدين به لا بد له من تقليد عالمه وكذلك لم يختلف
العلماء أنه لا يجوز للعامة الفتيا وذلك – والله أعلم – لجهلها بالمعاني التي منها
يجوز التحليل والتحريم”
“There
is no disagreement amongst the Scholars regarding the obligation upon the
common folk to do taqlīd. For they are the ones that are being referred to in
the following verse, ‘And ask the people of knowledge if you do not know.’
Scholars also have agreed that the blind must do taqlīd of others, from those
who he trusts if he wants to know the direction of the Qiblah when he finds it
difficult upon himself to find it. Similarly, one who has no knowledge and
insight of what the understanding is regarding what is in front of him, will
have to do taqlīd of his scholar. Also, there is no disagreements amongst the
Scholars that it is not permitted for the laity to issue religious edicts and
that is because – and Allāh knows best – the laity are ignorant of the meanings
(meaning they do not undersand it) from that which is permitted and not
permitted.”
Before
al-Albānī’s view is given, it is imperative
to know – from the above – the views Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in a nutshell:
1.
Taqlīd is an obligation upon the common-folk.
2.
The common-folk do not understand the detailed proofs.
al-Albānī then makes a distinction:
على
أنني أرى إطلاق الكلام في العامي وأنه لا بد له من تقليد لا يخلو من شيء. لأنك إذا
تذكرت أن التقليد هو العمل بقول الغير من غير حجة فمن السهل في كثير من الأحيان
على بعض أذكياء العامة أن يعرف الحجة لوضوحها في النص الذي بلغه فمن الذي يزعم أن
مثل قوله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم: “التيمم ضربة واحدة للوجه والكفين” لا تبين
الحجة فيه لهم بل ولمن دونهم في الذكاء؟ ولذلك فالحق أن يقال: إن من عجز عن معرفة
الدليل فهو الذي يجب عليه التقليد
(Translation
available online)
“However, I (al-Albānī) believe that to generalise
about commoners, saying that they all must perform Taqleed, is invalid.
Taqleed is following sayings of others without evidence to prove
these sayings.
Many smart commoners can clearly understand evidence if it is
presented to them.
Who can deny that a commoner can understand the evidence
contained in the Hadeeth, ‘Tayammum (performing dry ablution with sand when
water is scarce) is one strike (on the sand) for the face and hands!’
Even those people, who are of minor comprehension, can
understand this Hadeeth. Therefore, the truth is that we must say that
Taqleed is allowed for whoever cannot search for or understand the evidence”.
Due
to the above tacit approval of their Imam it has given way to the illiterates
in this sect to always want to look at proofs and weigh up their strengths.
This
is known as the ‘rājih qawl’ fitnah that is in vogue.
Truth be told many from this Wahhabi sect are
oblivious with regards to how to recite the Qur’ān properly with its Ahkām, let
alone trying to understand complex issues.
---
(Edited by ADHM)
