TAQLID - Ibn Qayyim al Jawziyyah

[faqir]

Ibn Qayyim Al Jawziyyah on Taqlid


In Ilam Al Mawqaqqiin (The Instruction of those who sign formal legal opinions) Ibn Qayyim Al Jawziyyah says,

"To Those who reject Taqlid, it should be said that they have rejected Taqlid because they fear that the person who imitates (Muqallid) will fall into grave error should the person who imitating be wrong in his legal opinion. Moreover, they have obligated this person to seek out for himself and exert his own effort in determining the rulings himself and exert his own effort in determining the rulings himself in seeking the truth, yet it is without any doubt that the probability of his being correct when following a valid scholar is much greater than should he use his own reasoning skills by himself.

A useful analogy is that a person who wishes to purchase some commercial good and has no expertise in the object of his purchase. Should he ask a trustworthy expert who is sincere in his advice as to which type is the best to buy and then follow his advice, it is quite obvious that it is much more likely that by doing so he will choose the correct one and achieve his desired object as opposed to relying upon his own unqualified opinion. This is a fact agreed upon by all people of intellect everywhere!

All of the Imams have clearly declared the permissibility of taqlid.

Hafs Ibn Ghiyath said, "I heard Sufyan say, "If you see a man doing some action that scholars have differed about, and you deem it to be impermissible, don�t prohibit him from doing it!""

Muhammad Ibn Al Hadan said, "It is acceptable for a scholar to imitate (taqlid) someone more learned than himself, but it is not permissible for him to imitate someone who is at his own level."

Imam Shafi has clearly declared the validity of taqlid when he said, "The expiation of killing a hyena in ihram is one camel, and I say that in accordance with Umar (Taqlidan li Umar)."

Also, in the matter concerning selling an animal with the condition that it is free of blemishes, he (Imam Shafi) said, "I permit it in accordance with Uthman (taqlidan li Uthman)."

Furthermore, in the case of inheritance where a grandfather and brother exist, he (Imam Shafi) said, "The Grandfather has a share with them. I say that because that is what Zayd said, and we accepted most of the inheritance rulings from Zayd."

He (Imam Shafi) also said in one of his books, "I say this in accordance with Ata (Taqlidan li Ata)." (Ata was a Tabi'in not a Sahabi)

Consider Abu Hanifah, who says about a matter concerning wells, "We have nothing to do here but follow (taqlid) those who preceded us from the Successors of the Companions."

Malik, who never abandons the actions of the people of Madinah, has clearly states many times, "This is what the actions are in our city." And again, "This is what we fund the people of knowledge in our city doing." In many places, he makes the remark, "I did not see anyone among those who should be imitated (uqtudiya bihi) doing it." If we gathered all such remarks from his words, it would be quite extensive.

Imam Shafi stated, "The opinions of the Companions are better than our own opinions."

And we (Ibn Qayyim) say, "We believe that the opinions of Al Shafi and the other Imams with him are better for us than our own opinions!"

In addition, Allah has made it the inherent nature of His servants that students imitate their teachers and scholars. Moreover, the benefits of humanity would not be achieved if this were not a fact. Indeed this is true of every knowledge and skill, and Allah has diversified the strength of intellects just as He has diversified the strength of bodies. Thus, it cannot be reasonable that He, in his Wisdom and Mercy, has obligated His entire creation to know the truth with a proof (dalil) and to be able to refute the one who disagrees with him in all the matters of the din, both the subtle and the obvious. Had that been the case, then everyone would have to be at the same level as our scholars. On the contrary, Allah has made one man a scholar, another a student, and this one a follower of the scholar, who considers him an Imam, just as one who follows his Imam in prayer.

In what verse has Allah prohibited ignorant people from following and imitating learned people, moving when they move and stopping when they stop? Given that Allah knew that there would always be concerns afflicting people, did HE oblige each person to be able to discern for himself what His rulings was for each matter based on the legal rulings of the Scared Law with all of its conditions and requisites? Indeed, is it even within the realm of possibility for everyone, let alone an obligation?! Consider the Companions themselves, they conquered many lands, and many people embraced Islam and would seek legal rulings from them. The Companions would simple give their legal opinions and nowhere do the Companions say to them, �Go seek knowledge of the truth of this fatwa with a sound proof (Dalil).� Never do we find this, not once! Indeed, is not taqlid a necessary part of existence and responsibility; and there for of the Sacred Law and the Divine Decree?"

(Ilam Al Muqaqqiin, (Al Qahira: Maktabat al Kuliat al Aharia 2-205)

[faqir]

Interesting.

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Can you give the arabic title of the chapter of I'lam Al Muwaqiin, then Insha Allah I will explain you what the madhab of Allamah ibnul Qayem is, after checking this translation.

But I know for sure that Ibnul Qayem say it is forbiden for scholars to do Taqleed, knowing that other madhab have rajih opinion

He also talks about the mufti shoulr give daleel, and when a muftee gives daleel then it is called Ittiba' and not taqleed

Also he said that restricting to one madhab is an innovation, the layman can ask any scholar

Like Sahabah asked knoledgable of the, none of them said you should only ask Abu Bakr, or only Umar, or only Uthman or Ali or Ibn Mas'ood.

And Allah mentionned Ahle zikr mutalqan, so Ahnaaf need a mashoor Hadeeth to limit these Ahle zikr to fourt scholars, also another Mashoor hadeeth saying one should only take in one of four.

And here in this translation, I see more ibnul Qayem saying that Layman should not do Ijtihad and try to understand religion alone, rather ask scholars, and this is what Salafee do

But the difference with Muqalid is that they do not restrict to one scholar to ask, and also put stress on knowing the daleel

There are two opinions about Taqleed of the ignorant

Some salafee scholars say it is permsiible for him, like Ibn Taymiyah and others, but they forbid Taqleed shakhsee, meaning of one individual, they say he should make taqleed of any mujtahid.

Second view is that of Imam Shawkanee and others, that it is forbidden even for laymen, they should try to undesrtand the fatwa of the mufti, and when they know daleel, it is not taqleed.

As for saying a layman cannot understand religion even explained according to his level, then it is saying the religion of Islam is complicate, not Baleegh. and there is no daleel making it permissible for Layman. Allaj orderes to obey Him and His Messanger saw, so it is for all people, not only scholars.

Rather some people find difficulty to explain them rules, why theu di accept some hadeeth, why not others, so layman do not see any contradictions.

But All Salafee agree that Taqleed Shaksee is haram,

And there are clear tanbeeh about in the Quran warning about Taqleed, like Allah asking Mushrik proves of their innovations, Allah telling they have taken their Rabbis and monks as Lord and in hadeeth of timridhi it is explained as their scholars were making the Halal haram and they were following them and the Haram Halal.

So if one does not know daleel of his Imam, he might fall in this category, And the scholars of christians might be from their mujtahid...

And Imam Abu Haneefah also said it is forbiden to everu body to act on his saying without knowing daleel see Sha'ranee in his Mizan, vol 1 p 55.

So Imam Abu haneefah forbade his taqleed, and as said by Imam Shawkanee in his Irshad Al Fuhul fi Tqhqeeq Al Usul, he did not restrict that to scholars, but every body including Laymen

So brothert Faqir, I am expection title of the chapter in arabic, so I can have a look

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Also the book is online

http://arabic.islamicweb.com/Books/taimiya.asp?book=94

So if you could even give the link of the page, that would be easier for me.

If you cannot then plesae at least name of the chapter in arabic

As for the book Mursalah, it is not in full, only partial, So I could not find what Abul hassan said when I made search with the words he gave.

[Abul Hasan]

Interesting.


:salam:

Let's have a look at another interesting point(s) on Taqleed by al-Albani and ibn Uthaymee here:

ALBANI AND IBN UTHAYMEEN ON TAQLEED (http://www.salafitalk.net/st/printthread.cfm?Forum=23&Topic=2749)

Wassalam

Abul Hasan

[Hamood]

:salam:

Let's have a look at another interesting point(s) on Taqleed by al-Albani and ibn Uthaymee here:

ALBANI AND IBN UTHAYMEEN ON TAQLEED (http://www.salafitalk.net/st/printthread.cfm?Forum=23&Topic=2749)

Wassalam

Abul Hasan

I can guarantee you a whole lot of salafis do taqleed shakhsi of Albani.

[Mossy]

Not really. The statements have always been there, its just that some salafi are more severe and loud than others in their condemning that which has perhaps been advised against by their scholars - blocking the means and forbidding the evil taken to an extreme.

http://www.islaam.net/main/display_article_printview.php?id=41

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Majority of Salafee view Taqleed permissible for Laymen, but the reality is that it is forbidden, because shaykh ALbanee and ibn Utheymeen gave no daleel

They say that the Layman cannot deduce law from himself, he does not know manshookh ahadeeth or other things, but nobody forbids him to understand the Mujtahid's fatwa, so it is not taqleed anymore

And there is no difference among salafee for other than that

All agree that taqleed shaksee is a Bid'ah

All agree that Muftee should give a daleel

And it can also be shirk when one follows them in their making Halal haram or else wise, knowing it is not, this is worship of them.

Imam Shawkanee in his Irshad Al Fuhul mentionned that Imams forbade their taqleed, and said some people say taqleed is wajib for every body, some other say taqleed is haram for every body, and there is some people making taweel of the Imam's saying anmd say the saying of Imam is only for Mujtahid, not for ignorants

And Imam Shawkanee criticised this taweel, and said they did not exclude any body from forbidance of their taqleed

Insha Allah I will check ibn AL Qayem's words as soon as I find the chapter in arabic

Also from problems of taqleed for laymen, is that if a Movi gives fatwa of shirk or bid'ah, what will protec laymen except their asking for daleel

Did the Prophet saw order this ?
Did Sahabah do that ?

And you find masha Allah no shirk ands bid'a in Ahle hadeeth laymen because they are taught that only Allah and His Prophet are to be followed, and you need to refer to them for judgement when there is ikhtilaf.

As for Ijma and Qias, then they have aslo sources from Kitab and Sunnah.

But Layman should know this fatwa was taken qias on this hadeeth or this Ayat from the Quran, because 'Ilah is the same

May Allah give us tawfeeq to refer judgementy only to Allah and his Prophet saw

The Hukm is for Allah only

Declaring Halal and Haram is Allah's sole right

[Hamood]

salam aleykum

Majority of Salafee view Taqleed permissible for Laymen, but the reality is that it is forbidden, because shaykh ALbanee and ibn Utheymeen gave no daleel

They say that the Layman cannot deduce law from himself, he does not know manshookh ahadeeth or other things, but nobody forbids him to understand the Mujtahid's fatwa, so it is not taqleed anymore


You said the layman cannot deduce law himself...



And there is no difference among salafee for other than that

All agree that taqleed shaksee is a Bid'ah

All agree that Muftee should give a daleel


So how does a salafi layman determine the authenticity of the daleel? You youself said the layman:


does not know manshookh ahadeeth or other things

I see some contradiction there. Typical salafi problem of not making sense.

['abd al 'aziz]

as salaamu alaykum.

i had a question of two on madhabism.

from my understanding, if a person is a follower of a madhab, he is to follow all rulings only deduced by that madhab, and not of any other of the 3 madahab. (correct me if i am wrong)

on another thread, a brother gave an example and said it would be sinful of a Hanafi to do something in his prayer that was NOT applicible to the Hanafi madhab, but WAS in accordance to another madhab (Malik for ex). To take rulings from a madhab other than your own is considered wrong/sinful (correct me if i am wrong)

So therin lies my question, if a person of madhab X does something according to madhab X, he, insha'allah, is doing something correct. And if a person of madhab Y does treat an issue in accordance with madhab Y, he, insha'allah, is doing something correct.

But why, when an X brother treats or solves an issue accordance with Y madhab, is it sinful, when if a Y brother did it...it would be correct?

From what i understand, the 4 imams have declared thier schools of thought not to be infallible. So if this is true, my question was why would it be wrong for a person of madhab X to deviate and take a ruling from madhab Y, when he is not leaving a body of knowledge that is free from error?

Saying that a madhab X brother was wrong/sinful to take from another madhab implies that his original madhab from which he deviated is to be strictly followed, in all manners. But, this is not the case as the madhab from which he deviated from is not infallible.

Im not questioning the issue of following desires, therefore picking and choosing fatawa based on your desires, i understand that, insha'allah, and i seek refuge in Allah subhanu wa ta'ala from following the desires.

But rather my question lies in the concept of sticking to a particular madhab, when followers of all 4 madhab are correct in thier action when following thier madhab. As of now, my issue doesnt lie in following a madhab, but it lies in the concept of sticking to that particular madhab and not following or considering any other ruling from the other 3 madhahib., why so?

ill leave you with this, if a muslim took any other jurisidiction than the Qur'anic ruling (for ex, inheritance, etc.) he/she would be in plain error as the Laws of Allah, as we all know, are obviously free from error.

But why is a hanafi in clear error if he takes a hanbali ruling, or vice versa, when the schools of which they let for these rulings are not perfect? Are we asking for the same type of adherance towards the schools of thought as we do to the Qur'an?

jazakallah khair for reading, please treat my post as a question and not an attack, i am sincerely looking for answers.

[Mossy]

Ok, let's try to keep this simple iA..

1. What is a madhab? A madhab is a set of axioms/legal framework for deriving normative laws from the available evidences in its base state - eg the Maliki madhab is predicated on Qu'ran and amal, the Shafi madhab relies more on ahad sahih hadith within its framework.

2. Madhabs in the commonly taken meaning also refers to the body of scholars who utilise this framework and use it to derive law (mujtahids) and also to follow these derivations (muqallids)

3. A given normative law in madhab X was derived with the usul (axiomatic basis) of madhab X.

4. Let's assume that a similar action/law was derived with the usul of madhab Y.

5. The combined action, mixing parts 3 and 4 may not then be valid in either methodological basis - this is where the agreed upon sin in mixing (talfiq) comes in.

6. Why? Because it's inconsistent in any given set of axioms and thus really not likely to be correct. It is, in effect, ijtihad of one's own without a coherent basis and the final set of actions has not been verified by the scholars of any axiomatic basis (another advantage of madhabs, removing it from the single person reliance of taqleed).

If you look at the scholars who adhere to madhab, the basic divide is that the position is that mixing madhabs is permitted in *whole* actions as these will be valid in a given axiomatic basis. Mixing and matching bits is not allowed due to the possible incoherence.

Subcontinental Hanafis go one step further and indicate that it is not permissable to follow positions from other madhabs by way of blocking the means given the paucity of other scholarship in the subcontinent, the insular nature of the lay society and the tendency to systematically search for lenient positions leading to impermissable talfiq that they noted.

Scholars from other regions are fine with taking from other madhabs when required in whole matters, although they advise to stick to one and learn it thoroughly to be on the safe side. There's enough minority positions and dispensations in most madhabs to allow for this.

Hope that helps.

[Abu Usama]

Salam,

to make it even simpler for brother abd' al aziz:

It is not sinful for a follower of madhab x to follow a ruling of madhab y. It is however wrong to seek out the easiest positions from each madhab, because then in reality you are following your nafs. Thats why its said that you have to stick to one madhab. Therefore, to protect from this, the scholars have said that you should only follow a different madhab if a reliable scholar has said you can follow that issue from that madhab.

Taqleed is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

[Abu Usama]

salam aleykum

Majority of Salafee view Taqleed permissible for Laymen, but the reality is that it is forbidden, because shaykh ALbanee and ibn Utheymeen gave no daleel

They say that the Layman cannot deduce law from himself, he does not know manshookh ahadeeth or other things, but nobody forbids him to understand the Mujtahid's fatwa, so it is not taqleed anymore

And there is no difference among salafee for other than that



According to what criterion does the layman decide what "daleel" is? Is any criteria needed at all? And please bring some daleel in reference to this question.

Where is your daleel that the layman cannot deduce fatwa himself?

Where is your daleel that taqleed for the layman is not permissable?

[Abdur_Rahman]

Shaikh Muhammad bin Saalih al-
`Uthaymeen (May Allah have mercy on him):

"It is good if a person focuses on one Shaikh and makes him his main
source, especially if he is a young beginner, for if the young
beginner seeks knowledge from a number of people he will be
confused. For people are not all of one opinion, especially
nowadays. In the past, here in the Kingdom (Saudi Arabia) people
never deviated from [the books] al-Iqnaa' [Book of Hanbalee Fiqh by
Al-Buhuti Al-Hanbalee] and al-Muntahaa, [Book of Hanbalee fiqh by
Mar`i bin Yusuf] so their fatawa were all the same and the bases of
their fatawa were all the same; no one differed from another, except
in his delivery and style. But now, everyone who has memorized a
hadeeth or two says, "I am the Imaam to be followed. Imaam Ahmad was
a man and we are men." So now there is chaos. Everyone is issuing
fatawa and sometimes you hear fatawa from these people which may you
weep and laugh at the same time. I was thinking of recording these
fatawa, but I was afraid that this might make me one of those who
seek out their faults of their brothers, so I did not do it lest we
transmit things that are as far from the truth as the earth is from
the Pleiades.

I say: adhering to one scholar is very important when the seeker of
knowledge is just starting out, so that he will not be confused.
Hence our shaikhs forbade us to read al-Mughni and Sharh al-
Muhadhdhab and other books, which contain numerous opinions when we
were starting out. One of our shaikhs told us that Shaikh `Abdullah
bin `AbdulRahmaan Baabiteen (may Allah have mercy on him), who was
one of the great shaikhs of Najd, only read al-Rawd al-Murabba'
[Book of Hanbalee Fiqh by Al-Buhuti Al-Hanbalee] and never read
anything else. He read it repeatedly but he discussed it in great
detail and in great depth.

If a person has gained a great deal of knowledge, then he should
look at the views of the scholars so as to benefit from them in both
academic and practical terms. But when one is just starting out, my
advice is to focus on one particular scholar and not go to anyone
else.

[Fataawa al-Shaikh Muhammad bin Saalih al-`Uthaymeen, Kitaab al-
`Ilm, page # 107]

[Abdur_Rahman]

doesnt it seem like the salafis are changing their positions..? before such fatawaa came along every single salafi site i went to was like.. "taqleed is haraam/wrong" some went as far as to say "taqleed is kufr shirk bidah" etc etc

ive been noticing a trend in the opposite direction from the salafis now.... can someone explain this?
:salam:

akhi, I'm curious to find out who in their right mind who stated that taqleed is kufr, shirk, bidah? :confused: or is this some kind of exageration from others!

Also if you continue to be patient with others and make dua for them, people will obviously (allahu alim) change their ways on how they used to look at things ;)

Allahu alim

Furthermore we as a ummah still don't realize is that for some, agenda will be dished out to have their type of program accepted.

[Abdur_Rahman]

There are some in my local community, and some websites too. The ahwa site was like that. But since I haven't been there in ages I cannot say what their current position is. There are tons of Salafis out there, who knows what they believe individually.Akhi, I agree with you, and yes some of the people tend to take issues a weeeeeeeeeeeee bit further than most. (Ahya forums) I've seen some of their stuff I pretty much don't have a position with them. They have some good articles and yet some "controversial" statements on their as well. Likewise there are some others " talk-sites " out there that are probably off the hook.
Allahu alim





I do always make dua for everyone's guidance (including ours). Ameen
:mash: just be consistant with ya akhi :D

[Sunni_Student786]

Regarding Salafis and Taqleed, even though some people like Al Albani and ibn Uthaymeen spoke of it in a manner that would lead one to believe that they, particularly ibn Uthaymeen, thought it not to be objectionable, I think most of the Salafis who have taken the helm of the leadership of "Salafiyyah", or at least those who are the most vocal, have become more and more intolerant of Taqleed.

Furthermore, what always perplexes me is the fact that I have yet to meet a "Salafi" who considers himself a laymen, since I do not see any of them making Taqleed of any madhab, which they claim, at various times, is either permitted or wajib for a laymen.

[Usman]

Although most of the posts of Abu Taymiyyah are funny and contain "escape routes", I 'll just like to comment on these :


Did the Prophet saw order this ?
Did Sahabah do that ?

And you find masha Allah no shirk ands bid'a in Ahle hadeeth laymen because they are taught that only Allah and His Prophet are to be followed, and you need to refer to them for judgement when there is ikhtilaf.

As for Ijma and Qias, then they have aslo sources from Kitab and Sunnah.

But Layman should know this fatwa was taken qias on this hadeeth or this Ayat from the Quran, because 'Ilah is the same

May Allah give us tawfeeq to refer judgementy only to Allah and his Prophet saw

The Hukm is for Allah only

Declaring Halal and Haram is Allah's sole right

a ) Taqleed is proven , and was existent during the times of the Sahabah over various issues.

b) The Book "Barood" written by Syed Talibur Rahman Zaidi [ a so-called ahle-hadeeth ] is against the people calling themselves "Ahle-Hadeeth", and offer the Non-Present(Ghayibana) Salaatul Janazah of the Shaheed. There is no hadeeth, whatsoever, of praying the non-Present (Ghayibana) Salaatul Janazah of a Shaheed .

Moreover, there are hundreds of Masail of the Ahlul Hadeeth(so-called) in which they have no evidence whatsoever from the Qur'an and Sunnah.

c) Ijma and Qiyas is proven from the Qur'an and SUnnah, as you mentioned. So, where can I obtain the Fatawa against the people like "Allamah Waheeduz Zaman", Nawab Siddique Hasan Khan, and ofcourse, Muhammad JoonaGarhi etc.
P.S : Allamah Waheeduz Zaman is also the grand teacher of Hafiz Zubayr Alee Zayee , see his magazine's first publication.

Also :


Majority of Salafee view Taqleed permissible for Laymen, but the reality is that it is forbidden, because shaykh ALbanee and ibn Utheymeen gave no daleel


The Hukm is for Allah only

Declaring Halal and Haram is Allah's sole right
Reply With Quote

So please tell me from the Qur'an where the Taqleed of Mujtahideen is impermissible.

[Hamood]

Although most of the posts of Abu Taymiyyah are funny and contain "escape routes",

He dodges most questions and has yet to answer the queries above, I don't think he has the answers to them as no salafi does. Its like being a robot, you keep saying the same thing over and over (obviously after doing the salafi shaykh's taqlid and listening to the same thing over and over) and contradict yourself all the time. There is something called 'logical reasoning' ... and the salafi's being the literalist they are, competely lack it.

[Abdur_Rahman]

... and the salafi's being the literalist they are, competely lack it.A muslim should refer to the "texts" at hand to seek answers, so what do you mean by the term literalist?

[muslim786]

u would be surprised if u knew.... try doing a little more research... start by going to masud.co.uk and looking for the article .."literalism and the attributes of Allah".. and all aqeedah related articles... they shud give u an idea how "literalism" applies in this case... and no a muslim should NOT refer to texts at hand because he does not know how to process them.. he should always refer to texts under the guidance of a teacher... who will show him how to process the texts... and he can crosscheck wht the teacher tells him.. but shud not process them himself
Ameen

[Abdur_Rahman]

u would be surprised if u knew.... try doing a little more research... start by going to masud.co.uk and looking for the article .."literalism and the attributes of Allah".. and all aqeedah related articles... they shud give u an idea how "literalism" applies in this case... and no a muslim should NOT refer to texts at hand because he does not know how to process them.. he should always refer to texts under the guidance of a teacher... who will show him how to process the texts... and he can crosscheck wht the teacher tells him.. but shud not process them himself
:salam:

I agree however at the end of the day the (authentic) texts are still being referred to, an scholar may have a different 'interpretation' than another :D

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

a ) Taqleed is proven , and was existent during the times of the Sahabah over various issues.

Can we have any Daleel about taqleed Shalsee ?

Meaning Sahabah only taking fatwa from Abnu Bakr, or only from Umar ?

Also about Taqleed at all ?

b) The Book "Barood" written by Syed Talibur Rahman Zaidi [ a so-called ahle-hadeeth ] is against the people calling themselves "Ahle-Hadeeth", and offer the Non-Present(Ghayibana) Salaatul Janazah of the Shaheed. There is no hadeeth, whatsoever, of praying the non-Present (Ghayibana) Salaatul Janazah of a Shaheed .

This is a foroo'i masallah, not relateds to taqleed.

Moreover, there are hundreds of Masail of the Ahlul Hadeeth(so-called) in which they have no evidence whatsoever from the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Can we have some exempls ?

c) Ijma and Qiyas is proven from the Qur'an and SUnnah, as you mentioned. So, where can I obtain the Fatawa against the people like "Allamah Waheeduz Zaman", Nawab Siddique Hasan Khan, and ofcourse, Muhammad JoonaGarhi etc.

First show where did they deny Qias and Ijma ?

As far as I know Zahiri deny Qias.

Also :


Quote:
Majority of Salafee view Taqleed permissible for Laymen, but the reality is that it is forbidden, because shaykh ALbanee and ibn Utheymeen gave no daleel

Quote:
The Hukm is for Allah only

Declaring Halal and Haram is Allah's sole right
Reply With Quote

So please tell me from the Qur'an where the Taqleed of Mujtahideen is impermissible.


Read this chapter from Shaykh Fawzan in his kitab Tawheed

Legislating rulings for the slaves of Allaah to follow in their acts of worship, transactions, settling the disputes, litigation, and in the rest of their affairs is an exclusive right of Allaah, the Exalted, the Rabb of mankind, and the Creator of the creatures.

Allaah says: "Verily the creation and the command belong to Him, and He is the blessing Granter, the Rubb of the Worlds." (7:54)

He knows what suits His slaves, and legislates it for them. By virtue of His Ruboobiyyah, He legislates for them, and by virtue of their servitude to Him, they accept His judgements; whichever case it is in their interest. Allaah, the Exalted, says: "And if you dispute over anything, refer it to Allaah and His Messenger if you really believe in Allaah and the Last Day, that is best in terms of consequences." (4:59)

And He also says: "And in whatever you differ, the decision thereof rests with Allaah. Say: 'This is Allaah, my Rubb:" (42:10) Allaah, Glory be to Him, denies that His slaves should accept a lawmaker other than Himself. He says: "Or do they have partners to Allaah to legislate for them in the deen what Allah does not allow?" (42:21)

Hence, he who accepts a law other than Allah's ascribes a partner to Allaah. Whatever act of worship that is not legislated by Allaah and His Messenger is Bid'ah, and every Bid'ah is a means of deviation. The Prophet said: "He who introduces in our deen, anything which does not belong to it, it shall be rejected." [Bukhari & Muslim]

In another version, he said: "He who practices an act of worship, that is not endorsed by our deen it is to be rejected." [Muslim]

While any other law which is legislated by neither Allaah nor His Messenger in politics, or for judging in people's disputes, it is considered as the law of Taghoot, and Jahiliyyah (Pre-Islamic era) Allaah says: "Do they seek the judgment of Jahiliyyah? And who is better than Allaah as a judge for a people who have firm faith?" (5:50)

The right of legalizing and illegalizing, belongs to Allaah too, and no one is permitted to share this right with Him. Allaah says: "And do not eat of that on which the name of Allaah is not pronounced, for surely that is disobedience. And certainly Satans inspire their friends to argue with you. And if you obey them, then you are polytheists." (6:121)

Thus Allaah, the Exalted, considers obeying Satans and their followers, with regard to legalizing what Allaah prohibits as Shirk. Likewise, whoever obeys scholars and rulers in prohibiting what Allaah made lawful, or legalizing what He prohibited, he would be considered as taking them as lords to the exclusion of Allaah. Allaah, the Exalted, says: "They have taken their learned men and their monks, and the Messiah, the son of Maryam for lords aside from Allaah. And they are commanded to worship the One God. There is no true god but He. Far is He removed from what they ascribe to Him!" (9:31)

At-Tirmidhi and others reported that the Prophet recited the above Ayaat to Adi bin Hatim at-Ta'i (just before he accepted Islam) may Allaah be pleased with him, who said: "O Messenger of Allaah, we do not worship them! The Prophet said: Do they not make legal for you what Allaah makes illegal? and you deem it as legal, and they illegalize what Allah made legal and you deem it as illegal?' He said: 'Certainly!' Thereupon, the Prophet said: 'That is how you worship them." (Tirmidhi and others)

Hence, the obedience of the Christians to their learned men, with regards to illegalization and legalization is considered as worship and major Shirk, which contradicts the Tawheed, which is signified by the Testimony of Faith, La ilahah illal Allah. [Fath al-Majid p.107] This Testimony which signifies that legalization and illegalization is an exclusive right of Allaah, the Exalted.

If obeying scholars and worshippers in illegal and legal matters that oppose the law of Allaah, is considered as Shirk; even though the scholars and worshippers are religious people whose mistake may be forgiven if it were made after exerting their efforts, and they will be rewarded for that. If obeying such people constitutes major Shirk, then how about those who obey man-made laws that are the work of the unbelievers and the atheists, imported into Muslim countries and applied? They are much worse than the former. There is no altering of one condition into another, nor is there power except through Allaah. For the latter take the unbelievers as lords aside from Allaah to legislate laws for him, and legalize the illegal, and rule people by such laws.



So did not Prophet saw called shirk to follow their mujtahid in declaring Haram and Halal what Allah made other wise.

So whoever does that with full knowledge that he is opposing Nass, then he might be in great danger

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Also you do have in Musnad Ahmad the saying of ibn Abbas ( 1 :337) and shaykh Ahmad Shakir said it is saheeh

Ibn Abbas said : Stones are about to descend upon you from heavens, I say Allah's Messenger saw said and you all say ( in reply) Abu Bakr and Umar said.

Also there is the Ayat of Allah : " Warn those who oppose his command that they will be stricken with a fitnah or they will suffer a lasting punishment" Surah Noor, 24 ; 63


So if someone finds Hadeeth of Prophet saw saying it is recomended to pray two rak'a after Azan of Maghrib, or than one should turn Rida in salah Istisqa, and that Prophet saw prayed 5 and made s sajdah Sahw, and his prayer was not Batil

And he takes words of scholars opposing these ahadeeth without clear daleel.

Then following his scholar, who might be excused, would that not be worshipiong them.

May Allah protect us from not following His Messenger saw

[Usman]

salam aleykum

a ) Taqleed is proven , and was existent during the times of the Sahabah over various issues.

Can we have any Daleel about taqleed Shalsee ?

Meaning Sahabah only taking fatwa from Abnu Bakr, or only from Umar ?

Also about Taqleed at all ?


روی ابن سعد باسناد صحیح عن ابن عباس رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہ، قال اذا حدثنا ثقة عن علی لم نتجاوزھا
(Fathul bari, Vol7, pg-60),
Allamah Ibn Sa'ad , with saheeh chain of narrators, quotes Syyidina Abdullah Ibn Abbad (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh), "When some authentic person brings us the fatwa of Syyidina Ali (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh), then we will not move from it a bit.

Nawab Siddique Hasan Khan sahib relates from Bukhari,Vol1-Page 217, Abu Dawood, Vol1-page 278, Qur'atul Aynayn,Pg, 64) :
During the time of Khilafah of Syyidina Umar (Radhi Allahu tA'ala anh), Syyidina Shyba Bin Uthman (Radhiu Allahu Talana anh) was visited by the Khaleefah, and said "It is my intention to distribute whatever (treasure) is in the Ka'abah, to the Muslims.
Syyidina Shyba said : You can't
Syyidina Umar said : Why not
Syyidna Shyba said : Because This was not done by Rasoolullah (SallAllahu Alaihi wasallam) and Abu Bakr (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala anh).
Syyidina Umar (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala anh) said , ھم المرآن اقتدی بھما [those two are such elders whom I follow]

Also it is well known that when Syyidina Umar Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh ordered a constant practice of 20 raka'at of Taraveeh, it was never opposed, these are all "Taqleed" and "Taqleed Shakhsi".

This is just one of the few examples. Nobody asked for a daleel from Qur'an and Hadeeth.........


b) The Book "Barood" written by Syed Talibur Rahman Zaidi [ a so-called ahle-hadeeth ] is against the people calling themselves "Ahle-Hadeeth", and offer the Non-Present(Ghayibana) Salaatul Janazah of the Shaheed. There is no hadeeth, whatsoever, of praying the non-Present (Ghayibana) Salaatul Janazah of a Shaheed .

This is a foroo'i masallah, not relateds to taqleed.

Moreover, there are hundreds of Masail of the Ahlul Hadeeth(so-called) in which they have no evidence whatsoever from the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Can we have some exempls ?

first off, Syed Talibur Rahman Zaidi does not include those who pray Ghayebana Janazah of SHaheed among the Ahlul Hadeeth anymore, This is mentioned in his book.
Secondly ,when it is not proven from the Qur'an and Hadeeth, it is an example of a) the Bid'ah, and b) the actions of so-called Ahlul Hadeeth against Qur'an and Sunnah.
Qur'an says that Shaheed are alive...... probably the Ahlul Hadeeth beleive their shaheed to be dead.

Also, Nawab Hydarabadi in his Kanzud-Daqaiq writes :

ولا یکفن ولا یصلی علیہ ویدفن بدمہ ( ص ۴۳)۔
That there should be no Janazah , no Kafan(coffin of cloth) and they should be burried with blood.

The question is , if the Ahlul Hadeeth dont do any bidah, and everything is proven from Qur'an and Hadeeth, then just tell us about the Burrial of Syyidush Shuhada Syyid Hamza Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh, who was burried by Rasoolullah SallAllahu alalih wasallam, himself, that Syyidush Shuhada was burried without coffin. In Tirmizi, there is a Hadeeth through Syyidina Anas (Radhi Allahu ta'ala Anh) that :

ثم دعا بنمرۃ فکفنہ فیھا that Rasoolullah (SallAllahu alaihi wasallam) called for a striped-Cloth and gave coffin to him.

In the very same Hadeeth, it is also mentioned about the other Shuhada that :
فکثر قتلی وقلت الثیاب فکفن الرجل و الرجلان و الثلاثة فی الثوب الواحد
that due to the lack of coffin cloths, that two or three people were burried within a single coffin cloth.


May Allah protect us from not following His Messenger saw


c) Ijma and Qiyas is proven from the Qur'an and SUnnah, as you mentioned. So, where can I obtain the Fatawa against the people like "Allamah Waheeduz Zaman", Nawab Siddique Hasan Khan, and ofcourse, Muhammad JoonaGarhi etc.

First show where did they deny Qias and Ijma ?

The booklets "Dirayat-e-Muhammadi", and "Tareeq-e-Muhammadi" are filled with filth against Ijma and Qiyas, [ by Muhammad Joonagarhi ].
He even called Qiyas to be the work of Shaytaan, more impure than urine or dead... etc. etc.(Tareeq-e-muhammad).

Qiyaas is like a swine( Irshad-e-Muhammadi - vol2-page-3)


Read this chapter from Shaykh Fawzan in his ...............

Which saleh fauzan? who wrote the preface of a book filled with false allegations against the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah? and even without any research?

I suggest you stop doing taqleed of these Jahils, and come under the fold of the AHlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah, by doing the Taqleed of the Madhahib of the mujtahideen mutlaq, in the masail Mansoos Alaiha Muta'ariz feeha and Masail Ghayr Mansoos alaiha.


And he takes words of scholars opposing these ahadeeth without clear daleel.

Then following his scholar, who might be excused, would that not be worshipiong them.

May Allah protect us from not following His Messenger saw

[Abdur_Rahman]

a scholar at a very high level ONLY can formulate his own opinion... muftis and ulema who do not have a high level do NOT and can NOT formulate their own opinions.... they have to rely on previous opinions.. off course knowing the proofs of these opinions is quite a different matter altogether....
:salam:

Therefore different opinions harbors different interpretations then?

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Fathul bari, Vol7, pg-60),
Allamah Ibn Sa'ad , with saheeh chain of narrators, quotes Syyidina Abdullah Ibn Abbad (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh), "When some authentic person brings us the fatwa of Syyidina Ali (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh), then we will not move from it a bit.

Answer : This is not clear, fatwa with daleel or without Daleel ?

Id the fatwa of Hadhart Ali comes with daleel, as Sahabah used to give it is not taqleed anymore

Nawab Siddique Hasan Khan sahib relates from Bukhari,Vol1-Page 217, Abu Dawood, Vol1-page 278, Qur'atul Aynayn,Pg, 64) :
During the time of Khilafah of Syyidina Umar (Radhi Allahu tA'ala anh), Syyidina Shyba Bin Uthman (Radhiu Allahu Talana anh) was visited by the Khaleefah, and said "It is my intention to distribute whatever (treasure) is in the Ka'abah, to the Muslims.
Syyidina Shyba said : You can't
Syyidina Umar said : Why not
Syyidna Shyba said : Because This was not done by Rasoolullah (SallAllahu Alaihi wasallam) and Abu Bakr (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala anh).
Syyidina Umar (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala anh) said , ھم المرآن اقتدی بھما [those two are such elders whom I follow]

Anwser : This is not taqleed, following the Prophet saw is not taqleed. Rather a shar'i daleel.

Also it is well known that when Syyidina Umar Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh ordered a constant practice of 20 raka'at of Taraveeh, it was never opposed, these are all "Taqleed" and "Taqleed Shakhsi".

Answer : There is not one saheeh Isnad telling Umar ordered to pray 11, and even if it was, this has nothong to do with taqleed, since one can pray how many nafl prayers he wants

As for being Ijma on this, look at Umdatul Qaree and you will find that Umar ibnAbdel Azeez prayed 36 or 40, and many from salaf were praying 40.

So is this taqleed.

And I can quote you hundreds of cases of Ikhtilaf between Sahabah, between Abu Bakr, Umar, Ali, Uthman, Abdallah ibn Mas'ood, ibn Umar, Ibn Abbas

Ibnul Qayem gave hundreds of exemple showing Sahabah differted in issues

They used not to make taqleed from each other.

Specially when you see Ibn Abbas about hajj Tanmatu' where Abu Bakr and Umar did not give its permssion while Ali and ibn Abbas were giving, and ibn Abbas criticised laymen who took saying of Abu Bakr and Umar instead of hadeeth of Prophet saw

Did ibn Abbas say you are layman, follow Abu Bakr and Umar and leave acting on saheeh Hadeeth

So one should act on faqih having strong daleel.

As for quoting Hadeeth of imam Tirmidhee, don't you like the saying of the Prophet saw

Following scholars in haram and Halal while Allah said else wise being worship of these scholars

Also, please why do you leave taqleed of Sahabh for taqleed of Aimah ?

What daleel do you have to restrrict Ahle Zikr to four ?

And some people would hvae liked to add to the Quran

" If you differ in anything refer to Allah and his Prophet saw"

Some people would have wish to add " and refer to Ulul Amr"

But these words do not appear here.

May Allah give us tawfeeq to prefer the sayiung of Fuqahas having stronger daleel,

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

As far as I know Ahle Hadeeth do condemn qias that is opposing Hadeeth, and not qias mutlqan

Because they found a lot of people saying about saheeh ahadeeth they are against qias.

[Abdur_Rahman]

different interpretations are different opinions.. these opinions reflect the bases one uses.. not necessarily their *personal* opinionsexactly and these well learned indivduals base their opinions to the best of their ability by the texts that have been presented to them

therefore I'm not stating that it's more for a personal gain akhi :)

However there are some adhubillah who do it for recognition

Allahu alim!

[Usman]

As far as I know Ahle Hadeeth do condemn qias that is opposing Hadeeth, and not qias mutlqan

Because they found a lot of people saying about saheeh ahadeeth they are against qias.

I see, so all other people beleive that Qiyaas is against Ahadeeth, and is A-okay? inna lillahi wa inna ilaihi rajiyoon................

Now that's another "defense". Muhammad JoonaGarhi, and many other people , denied qiyas all over. Instead of reading small booklets, you should refer to the books of the so-called Ahlul Hadeeth.

salam aleykum


Fathul bari, Vol7, pg-60),
Allamah Ibn Sa'ad , with saheeh chain of narrators, quotes Syyidina Abdullah Ibn Abbad (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh), "When some authentic person brings us the fatwa of Syyidina Ali (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh), then we will not move from it a bit.

Answer : This is not clear, fatwa with daleel or without Daleel ?

Id the fatwa of Hadhart Ali comes with daleel, as Sahabah used to give it is not taqleed anymore

This is your very own perception, there is no mention of "Daleel" over here, neither is there a mention that Sahabah Always gave daleel for what they told.

Here's another example:

(2) Sayyidina Saalim رضي الله عنه said that someone asked Sayyidina Abdullah Ibn Umar ,that a man borrowed some amount of money from another for a specified period. The creditor was willing to waive a portion of the debt if the debtor repaid before the due date. Sayyidina Ibn Umar .did not like it and he disallowed it.

There is no clear Hadith on this question traceable to the Prophet. So, this is the ijtihad of Sayyidina Ibn Umar رضي الله عنه and his own analogical conclusion. Neither the person enquiring asked for reasoning nor did Sayyidina Ibn Umar disclose it. This is taqleed.



Nawab Siddique Hasan Khan sahib relates from Bukhari,Vol1-Page 217, Abu Dawood, Vol1-page 278, Qur'atul Aynayn,Pg, 64) :
During the time of Khilafah of Syyidina Umar (Radhi Allahu tA'ala anh), Syyidina Shyba Bin Uthman (Radhiu Allahu Talana anh) was visited by the Khaleefah, and said "It is my intention to distribute whatever (treasure) is in the Ka'abah, to the Muslims.
Syyidina Shyba said : You can't
Syyidina Umar said : Why not
Syyidna Shyba said : Because This was not done by Rasoolullah (SallAllahu Alaihi wasallam) and Abu Bakr (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala anh).
Syyidina Umar (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala anh) said , ھم المرآن اقتدی بھما [those two are such elders whom I follow]

Anwser : This is not taqleed, following the Prophet saw is not taqleed. Rather a shar'i daleel.

Sheikhul Islam ibn Taymiyyah (Rahimahullah) wrote at many places in his Majmua-alFatawa that Sahabah (Ridhwanullah alaihim ajmaeen) did Taqleed of Rasoolullah (SallAllahu Alaihi wasallam).

Moreover, Syyidina Abi Bakr (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh) is also mentioned, so following him is taqleed.



Answer : There is not one saheeh Isnad telling Umar ordered to pray 11, and even if it was, this has nothong to do with taqleed, since one can pray how many nafl prayers he wants
[QUOTE]

I fully agree that there is not one saheeh sanad(not Isnad) saying Umar (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala anh) ordered to pray 11. It's 20.
Taraveeh in itself is Sunnah Maukkadah, so Nawafil are not included in it.



[QUOTE]As for being Ijma on this, look at Umdatul Qaree and you will find that Umar ibnAbdel Azeez prayed 36 or 40, and many from salaf were praying 40.

So is this taqleed.

Would you do me the favor and tell me where was Syyidina Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz(Rahimahullah) situated when he did that? ............. I'll answer after there's one from your side.
Rather ask malikis why they pray 36.(20 rakaat + 16 nawafil).



And I can quote you hundreds of cases of Ikhtilaf between Sahabah, between Abu Bakr, Umar, Ali, Uthman, Abdallah ibn Mas'ood, ibn Umar, Ibn Abbas

Ibnul Qayem gave hundreds of exemple showing Sahabah differted in issues

They used not to make taqleed from each other.


First off, nobody does taqleed while leaving the Qur'an and Hadeeth, now this is another thing that people who can't even read the arabic correctly, go about reading the Tarjumah of Ahadeeth, and try to find mistakes of the Aimmah(Rahimahumullah).

Sahabah [ Radhi Allahu anhum ] differed in issues, is a clear proof that that they did Taqleed, waAllahu Aalam where on earth do you jump on these conclusions.



Specially when you see Ibn Abbas about hajj Tanmatu' where Abu Bakr and Umar did not give its permssion while Ali and ibn Abbas were giving, and ibn Abbas criticised laymen who took saying of Abu Bakr and Umar instead of hadeeth of Prophet saw


Nawab Siddique Hasan Khan sahib writes in his "Ad-Deenul Khalis":

"After Rasoolullah SallAllahu alaihi wasallam the rulings set forth by the Khulafa-ir-Rashideen are followed due to the fact that Rasoolullah (sallAllahu alaihi wasallam) Himself had ordered to follow the "Sunnat" of Khulafa-ir-Rashideen, "ESPECIALLY" Abu Bakr and Umar [ Radhi Allahu anhuma] are told to be followed.


Did ibn Abbas say you are layman, follow Abu Bakr and Umar and leave acting on saheeh Hadeeth

So one should act on faqih having strong daleel.

As for quoting Hadeeth of imam Tirmidhee, don't you like the saying of the Prophet saw

Following scholars in haram and Halal while Allah said else wise being worship of these scholars

Would you tell this to Syyidina Ibn Abbas (Radhi Allahu Anh) who said that if there is a fatwa by Ali (Radhi Allahu Anh) I will not move from it a bit?
He probably had not heard this hadeeth you're telling me, is it so? Inna lillahi wa inna ilaihi rajiyoon..............

Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) has quoted Syyidina Aswad Ibn Yazeed [ Rahimahumullah ] in his Jamius Saheeh :

اتانا معاذ ابن جبل بالیمن معلماً اوامیراً فسألناہ عن رجل توفی و ترک ابنته اخته فاعطی الابنة النصف والاخت النصف(Vol-2,Page 997).
And this is during the life-time of Rasoolullah (SallAllahu alaihi wasallam) among them. Nobody said we should go and ask for a hadeeth from Syyidina Muaz (Radhi Allahu Anh)........


Also, please why do you leave taqleed of Sahabh for taqleed of Aimah ?
What daleel do you have to restrrict Ahle Zikr to four ?

First off, it's not use who called the Hadeeth "As'haabi Kal'Nujoom........" to be a fabricated one, it's the deniars of Taqleed themselves, who says following the sahabah is not allowed even.

We never left the Taqleed of the Sahabah, but tell me, where are the books of Usool by Syyidina Abi Bakr (Radhi Allahu anh), or have we compiled the Masail of Ijtihad and Usool by Syyidina Umar (Radhi Allahu Anh)?

The simpler answer could be, why do you leave the ahadeeth of Rasoolullah (sallAllahu Alaihi wasallam) for the ahadeeth of Bukhari? The answer you have for this, is the answer we have for the prior.

Restricting Ahluz Zikr to four is not our work. You bring us the complete Usool and Madhab of the fifth school , and we'll look into that. BTW, we don't just follow 4 people.


And some people would hvae liked to add to the Quran

" If you differ in anything refer to Allah and his Prophet saw"

Some people would have wish to add " and refer to Ulul Amr"

But these words do not appear here.

I had judged from your very first posts that you lack ikhlas, and are just here to accuse and debate worthlessly. Anyway, leave this for later, don't try to find another escape route.

May Allah bring Ikhlas into ourselves.Aameen

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

salam aleykum

Also you do have in Musnad Ahmad the saying of ibn Abbas ( 1 :337) and shaykh Ahmad Shakir said it is saheeh

Ibn Abbas said : Stones are about to descend upon you from heavens, I say Allah's Messenger saw said and you all say ( in reply) Abu Bakr and Umar said.

Brother, are you going to quote Shaykh Ahmad Shakir's opinion without knowing his daleel? That is like blindly following Ahmad Shakir, and it is tantamount to worshippping him! Shame on you, brother! First, learn exactly what proofs Ahmad Shakir (whoever that is) had for claiming this narration to be sound: learn about the chain of narrators and their conditions, whether they met or not and then come and tell us that it is sound.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

salam aleykum

Fathul bari, Vol7, pg-60),
Allamah Ibn Sa'ad , with saheeh chain of narrators, quotes Syyidina Abdullah Ibn Abbad (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh), "When some authentic person brings us the fatwa of Syyidina Ali (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh), then we will not move from it a bit.

Answer : This is not clear, fatwa with daleel or without Daleel ?



No, it is perfectly clear.

Obviously, the narration implies that the daleel is irrelevant, as otherwise Ibn Abbas would have said something similar to: "When a fatwa from Ali comes we examine its daleel first and then we decide whether or not to act on it."

The statement "we will not move from it a bit" alludes to the fact that for Ibn 'Abbas, a fatwa of 'Ali was trustworthy in itself, and did not need independent checking of any kind.

"We will not move from it a bit" is not the statement of someone who is constantly checking the daleel of the fatwas of Ali. That shuld be obvious to anyone with a bit of common sense.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

salam aleykum

Fathul bari, Vol7, pg-60),
Allamah Ibn Sa'ad , with saheeh chain of narrators, quotes Syyidina Abdullah Ibn Abbad (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh), "When some authentic person brings us the fatwa of Syyidina Ali (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh), then we will not move from it a bit.

Answer : This is not clear, fatwa with daleel or without Daleel ?

Id the fatwa of Hadhart Ali comes with daleel, as Sahabah used to give it is not taqleed anymore

Nawab Siddique Hasan Khan sahib relates from Bukhari,Vol1-Page 217, Abu Dawood, Vol1-page 278, Qur'atul Aynayn,Pg, 64) :
During the time of Khilafah of Syyidina Umar (Radhi Allahu tA'ala anh), Syyidina Shyba Bin Uthman (Radhiu Allahu Talana anh) was visited by the Khaleefah, and said "It is my intention to distribute whatever (treasure) is in the Ka'abah, to the Muslims.
Syyidina Shyba said : You can't
Syyidina Umar said : Why not
Syyidna Shyba said : Because This was not done by Rasoolullah (SallAllahu Alaihi wasallam) and Abu Bakr (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala anh).
Syyidina Umar (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala anh) said , ھم المرآن اقتدی بھما [those two are such elders whom I follow]

Anwser : This is not taqleed, following the Prophet saw is not taqleed. Rather a shar'i daleel.

Also it is well known that when Syyidina Umar Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh ordered a constant practice of 20 raka'at of Taraveeh, it was never opposed, these are all "Taqleed" and "Taqleed Shakhsi".

Answer : There is not one saheeh Isnad telling Umar ordered to pray 11, and even if it was, this has nothong to do with taqleed, since one can pray how many nafl prayers he wants

As for being Ijma on this, look at Umdatul Qaree and you will find that Umar ibnAbdel Azeez prayed 36 or 40, and many from salaf were praying 40.

So is this taqleed.

And I can quote you hundreds of cases of Ikhtilaf between Sahabah, between Abu Bakr, Umar, Ali, Uthman, Abdallah ibn Mas'ood, ibn Umar, Ibn Abbas

Ibnul Qayem gave hundreds of exemple showing Sahabah differted in issues

They used not to make taqleed from each other.

Specially when you see Ibn Abbas about hajj Tanmatu' where Abu Bakr and Umar did not give its permssion while Ali and ibn Abbas were giving, and ibn Abbas criticised laymen who took saying of Abu Bakr and Umar instead of hadeeth of Prophet saw

Did ibn Abbas say you are layman, follow Abu Bakr and Umar and leave acting on saheeh Hadeeth
,

Only about seven of the Sahaba regularly gave fatwas. At a maximal count, only about 80 are known to have given fatwas. And this was out of about 120,000 Companions. So yes, the majority of them relied on the fatwas of the few who were qualified to give fatwas.

As for the incident of Ibn Abbas, it is NOT CLEAR. He may have said what he did only because he already knew that Abu Bakr and Umar's restrictions were for particular situations.

Besides, please show us that the hadith about Ibn Abbas is sound.

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Brother, are you going to quote Shaykh Ahmad Shakir's opinion without knowing his daleel? That is like blindly following Ahmad Shakir, and it is tantamount to worshippping him! Shame on you, brother! First, learn exactly what proofs Ahmad Shakir (whoever that is) had for claiming this narration to be sound: learn about the chain of narrators and their conditions, whether they met or not and then come and tell us that it is sound.

Answer : His accepting and following the testimony of a thiqah muslim taqleed ?

As far as I know accpepting testimonies and judjement of qadhi is not part of taqleed, as said by Ibn Humam in his tahreer.

Saying that narration is meeting conditions of saheeh, all men being trustworthy, chain being connected, is this the right of men or exclusive right of Allah ?

As for declaring things Haram or Halal, then it is Sole right of Allah.

Accepting testimony of Aimah Jarh wa Tadeel that this man is a liar, this man did not meet this one, this one is a mudalis, this one has bad memory

All of this is the right of men, and is under his scope.

And if a thiqah muslim comes to me, and tells me that this man met this man, and they are all thiqah, then I can act on his testimony.

Allah said in Surah Hujurat, that is a dasiq comes to you then check his information

The mafhoom Mukhailfa is that the trustworthy, it is not obligatory to check his information.

In same way, relaying on a scholar's quote or translation is not taqleed Istilhahi.

But some people try to confuse matters, between what is Allah's right and men's right, so to brain wash ignorants in taqleed

Allahul Musta'anu

As for other things, insha Allah there are a lot of narrations in saheeh and others where Sahabi objected to people talking saying of someone instead of saheeh hadeeth, like ibn Umar after his son said we will forbid women from praying in mosques, and ibn Umar said to him, I tell you the Prophet saw gave them permission and you say we will forbid, and ibn Umar did not speak to his son for this reason.

So even if some people showed that some Sahabi were accepting Fatwa of others withoit daleel then it will show that qawl sahabi is not a hujjah when ikhtilaf occurs

Also there are clear sayings of wakee about him telling that Ish'ar is Sunnah and some poeople saying Ibnrahim Nakh'i por seomeone else said that, and Wakee objecting to him, that I say Allah's messnegr said this and you say that.

You can find this in Sunan Tirmidhee in kitab Al Hajj, chapter isha'r

If I quote Wakee's full narration, I fear it will be censored, so you can have a look at yourself.

And Wakee is told to be a hanafee .

May Allah guide us to make Kitab wa Sunnah Hakim

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

In Saheeh Muslim, ibn Umar stringly opposing people who act contrary to hadeeth,


Book 004, Number 0885:

Abdullah b. Umar reported: I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) say: Don't prevent your women from going to the mosque when they seek your permission. Bilal b. 'Abdullah said: By Allah, we shall certainly prevent them. On this'Abdullah b. Umar turned towards him and reprimanded him to harshly as I had never heard him do before. He ('Abdullah b. Umar) said: I am narrating to you that which comes from the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and you (have the audicity) to say: By Allah, we shall certainly prevent them.


Book 004, Number 0888:

Ibn 'Umar reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Do not prevent women from going to the mosque at night. A boy said to 'Abdullah b. Umar: We would never let them go out, that they may not be caught in evil. He (the narrator) said: Ibn Umar reprimanded him and said.. I am saying that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said this, but you say: We would not allow!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 004, Number 0889:
A hadith like this has been narrated by A'mash with the same chain of transmitters.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 004, Number 0890:

Ibn 'Umar reported: Grant permission to women for going to the mosque in the night. His son who was called Waqid said: Then they would make mischief. He (the narrator) said: He thumped his (son's) chest and said: I am narrating to you the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), and you say: No!


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

Book 004, Number 0891:
Ibn Umar reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Do not deprive women of their share of the mosques, when they seek permission from you. Bilal said: By Allah, we would certainly prevent them. 'Abdullah said: I say that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said it and you say: We would certainly prevent them!

So we see here that ibn Umar forbade action on other than Hadeeth, and one should leave opinion in front of hadeeth

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Brother Uthman wrote : Sayyidina Saalim رضي الله عنه said that someone asked Sayyidina Abdullah Ibn Umar ,that a man borrowed some amount of money from another for a specified period. The creditor was willing to waive a portion of the debt if the debtor repaid before the due date. Sayyidina Ibn Umar .did not like it and he disallowed it.

There is no clear Hadith on this question traceable to the Prophet. So, this is the ijtihad of Sayyidina Ibn Umar رضي الله عنه and his own analogical conclusion. Neither the person enquiring asked for reasoning nor did Sayyidina Ibn Umar disclose it. This is taqleed.

Answer :

1) In which book does this Athar appear ?

2) How do you know that Ibn Umar did not heard this from the Prophet saw ?

3) Where is the mention that Ibn umar did not give any daleel ?

Are you Zahiri ?

Absence of zikr of something is not a daleel of absence of Wujud.

There is not mention of the talk that happened between Ibn Umar and this man, so when we do not have details of their sayings, there can be a lot of ihtimalat ( possibilites)

And when Ihtimal comes, then Ihtijaj is Saqit.


Also there not being a hadeeth from the Prophet saw does not prevent Ibn Umar from hearing this from the Prophet saw.

Do not Ahnaaf say that our Imam must have some hadeeth on some issues, but we do not find them yet ?

Like Ahnnaf doing raf yadayn in witr, do Ahnaaf have any marfu narration from the Prophet saw ?

Or they believe he learned that from his teachers, and at their must be something done by the Prophet saw.

While they cannot show any marfu hadeeth.

As for saying of Sahabi, then I saw in Ilam al Muwaqiin, that following saying of Sahabi is also not taqleed, because the Sahabi gave judgement of the Prophet saw.

In fact Qawl or Amal Sahabi is a shar'i Hujjah for 4 madhaib, when there is no ikhtilaf, Hambali saying that it is a kind of ijma Sukuti. Other saying he must have learned this from the Prophet saw.

For Thahiri and imam Shawkani, the saying of a Sahabi is not Hujjah at all, and they say that he must have learned from the Prophet saw is a thann, and for ijma Sukuti, then it is also Thann, it is possible some sahabi did differ.

And they say that Nusus do not tell us to act on saying of Sahabah, except when there is ijma, then one should follow sabilul Moumineen.

They also argue that Muhammad saw is the Prophet of Allah, and Sahabi' views are better than ours, but they are not hujjah, if they do not link their saying to the Book or Sunnah or Ijma.

And if Ahnaaf do criticise saying of Shawkanee and ibn Hazm, then we can ask them on the issue of khyar Majilis, that Ibn Umar and othert sahabah interpreattaed the separation between seller and buyer to be physyical, and not seperatrion of kalam.

So if Ahnaaf say the separation mentionned in hadeeth is separation of kalam, then why are they not taking saying of ibn Umar as hujjah ?

Do they even know any ikhtilaf of Sahabah in this ?




Also Hafiz ibnul Qayem also said that following saying of rawi is not taqleed, accepting testimonies and witnesses is not part of taqleed, rather Allah ordered us to act on their saying.

So their narrations can have mistakes, as a thiqah can err, but following it is not taqleed Istilahan.

Also Ibnul Qayem asked muqalideen that when some sahabis were accepting informations from other Sahabi, were they muqalid.

Was Abu Bakr muqalid when he changed his view about hineriterance of great mother when some sahabi told them they heard the Prophet saw gave them inheriterance

The hadeeth is in Sunnan Abu Dawood and others.

So was Abu Bakr a muqalid, never he was a mujtahid who accepted narrations of thiqqah.

So I would like muqalideen brothers, do you have any daleel that any sahabi told his students to take and blindly follow his saying even when he founds a saheeh hadeeth acted upon by other Sahabi ?

Or even Any Tabieen telling his students to make taqleed of him, or telling laymen to stick to their sayings, even if they do found hadeeth acted by other tabi'een

Rather books are filled with narrations of Imams of Salaf to leave their saying when there is a saheeh hadeeth


May Allah protect us from any system that forbids people to follow saheeh ahadeeth acted upon by this Ummah.

[Usman]

wa'alaikumus salaam,
hmm, after all these days, finally Mr. Abbu found some help from his "muftis", let's examine.




Answer :

1) In which book does this Athar appear ?

2) How do you know that Ibn Umar did not heard this from the Prophet saw ?

3) Where is the mention that Ibn umar did not give any daleel ?

Are you Zahiri ?

Absence of zikr of something is not a daleel of absence of Wujud.

There is not mention of the talk that happened between Ibn Umar and this man, so when we do not have details of their sayings, there can be a lot of ihtimalat ( possibilites)

And when Ihtimal comes, then Ihtijaj is Saqit


It's not answer, it's "questions", see the "?"
Anyway,

Answer - 1 : [ Muwatta Imam Maalik 4,رحمه الله p279 ]

Answer - 3 : Better tell this to your padres, who keep iterating that there is no daleel for what the Imams of Fiqh told. They simply did not give.

Answer - 2 : We are Nafy' , and to Nafi's responsibility, there is no daleel. You bring evidence that he did hear this from the Prophet(SallAllahu alaihi wasallam).


Also there not being a hadeeth from the Prophet saw does not prevent Ibn Umar from hearing this from the Prophet saw.

Do not Ahnaaf say that our Imam must have some hadeeth on some issues, but we do not find them yet ?

Like Ahnnaf doing raf yadayn in witr, do Ahnaaf have any marfu narration from the Prophet saw ?

Or they believe he learned that from his teachers, and at their must be something done by the Prophet saw.

While they cannot show any marfu hadeeth.

duh.

a) Marfu' hadeeth is not the only daleel to the Ahnaaf,

b) Don't try to run away from the topic of Taqleed by going to the part of "Witr".





As for saying of Sahabi, then I saw in Ilam al Muwaqiin, that following saying of Sahabi is also not taqleed, because the Sahabi gave judgement of the Prophet saw.

In fact Qawl or Amal Sahabi is a shar'i Hujjah for 4 madhaib, when there is no ikhtilaf, Hambali saying that it is a kind of ijma Sukuti. Other saying he must have learned this from the Prophet saw.

For Thahiri and imam Shawkani, the saying of a Sahabi is not Hujjah at all, and they say that he must have learned from the Prophet saw is a thann, and for ijma Sukuti, then it is also Thann, it is possible some sahabi did differ.

And they say that Nusus do not tell us to act on saying of Sahabah, except when there is ijma, then one should follow sabilul Moumineen.

They also argue that Muhammad saw is the Prophet of Allah, and Sahabi' views are better than ours, but they are not hujjah, if they do not link their saying to the Book or Sunnah or Ijma.

And if Ahnaaf do criticise saying of Shawkanee and ibn Hazm, then we can ask them on the issue of khyar Majilis, that Ibn Umar and othert sahabah interpreattaed the separation between seller and buyer to be physyical, and not seperatrion of kalam.

So if Ahnaaf say the separation mentionned in hadeeth is separation of kalam, then why are they not taking saying of ibn Umar as hujjah ?

Do they even know any ikhtilaf of Sahabah in this ?

Totally unrelated.


Also Hafiz ibnul Qayem also said that following saying of rawi is not taqleed, accepting testimonies and witnesses is not part of taqleed, rather Allah ordered us to act on their saying.

So their narrations can have mistakes, as a thiqah can err, but following it is not taqleed Istilahan.

Also Ibnul Qayem asked muqalideen that when some sahabis were accepting informations from other Sahabi, were they muqalid.

Was Abu Bakr muqalid when he changed his view about hineriterance of great mother when some sahabi told them they heard the Prophet saw gave them inheriterance

erm.............
جلد النبی صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم اربعین و ابوبکر اربعین و عمر ثمانین و کل سنة
Saheeh Muslim (vol2, pg 72)
Here's a saying of Rasoolullah (SallAllahu alaihi wasallam) [ Narrated by Syyidina Ali(RAA)], then the act of Syyidina Abi Bakr (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh), and then a clear act of Syyidina Umar (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh).

Imam Hakin went ahead, and quoted the saying of Syyidina Ali [ Radhi Allahu Ta'ala anh] that :

ثم جلد عثمان ثمانین و اربعین( مستدرک ، ج 4 ص 375) قال الحاکم و الذہبی صحیح۔

As for quoting Ibnul Qayyim's saying , please provide reference, or rather ,look into Ibnul Qayyim's own teacher's majmua al Fatawa, where he has said that the Sahabah were Muqallid of Rasoolullah(sallAllahu alaihi wasallam).


So I would like muqalideen brothers, do you have any daleel that any sahabi told his students to take and blindly follow his saying even when he founds a saheeh hadeeth acted upon by other Sahabi ?

This has previously been answered with reference to Ibn Abbas(Radhi Allahu anh).



Or even Any Tabieen telling his students to make taqleed of him, or telling laymen to stick to their sayings, even if they do found hadeeth acted by other tabi'een

Rather books are filled with narrations of Imams of Salaf to leave their saying when there is a saheeh hadeeth

Tabi'een have told people to stick to one tabi'ee. for example :

The saying of Imam Abu Bakr al-Hindi [ Rahimahullah ]

الزم الشعبی فلقد رأیته یستفتیٰ والصحابة متوافرون (تذکرۃ الحفاظ لذہبی ، ص 76 ج ۱ )۔

Gosh!

May Allah make us firm on the sirat-alMustaqeem.

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Where di Nafi denied any daleel ?

Adm zikr is not adm wujud.

As for qawl Sahabi being a shar'i Hujjah, this is not unrelated, rather if a tabii follows a fatwa of a sahabi without daleel, this won't be taqleed, since for many people qawl sahabi is a shr'i hujjah

While Saying of later Imam is not a shari hujjah

Also about following rawi not being taqleed, then some brothers said to me when I relied on Ahmad Shakir's tahqeeq that it was taqleed, and I showed that following a thiqah mulsim's claim on people being thiqah and meeting each other is not taqleed istilahan.

As for saying Ibn Al Qayem and others said, Ibn Humam says taqleed is following the saying of someone which is not from hujaj Shari'ah, without prove.

And follwoing Prophet saw or shabaah for people who consider their saying as Hujjah, is not taqleed

It might be taqleed lughwi

Can you give me the definition of taqleed from any hanafee Usuli ?

So we do not lose our time in what is taqleed and what is not.

As for the case of weeping put from 40 to 80, then some scholars said the ahdd is fourty and fourty added was ta'zeer because wine drinking spread.

In no way did Ali left the Prophet saw, he just made ijtihad to add for ta'zeer

other people give other explanation

But in no way there is zikr of rejection of Hadeeth.


Can you put saying of Shabee that he did taqleed of someone in particular, even rejecting ahadeeth opposing the man he made taqleed of.

And even proven this won't be any shar'i daleel

Rather Wakee Hanafee said whover said opinion of Wakee and other people about Ishar should be put in jail until they say according to the Prophet saw

May Allah guide us to accet Saheeh hadeeth

[Usman]

Where di Nafi denied any daleel ?

Adm zikr is not adm wujud.

Nafy' is someone who does not claim something, therefore, the daleel is the responsibility upon the claimant. You are making a claim that Ibn Umar (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala Anh) could have heard that from Rasoolullah(SallAllahu alaihi wasallam), not me, so you have to provide the evidence for that.

Adam of Zikr not being adam of wujud is when there is a wujud present in other riwayaat. So bring the evidence, and fulfil the rule you mentioned.


As for qawl Sahabi being a shar'i Hujjah, this is not unrelated, rather if a tabii follows a fatwa of a sahabi without daleel, this won't be taqleed, since for many people qawl sahabi is a shr'i hujjah


And follwoing Prophet saw or shabaah for people who consider their saying as Hujjah, is not taqleed

For pathless, like you and your elders, saying, or deed of a sahabi is not hujjah, so the explanation of taqleed should be sufficient for you.

People like Nawab Siddique Hasan Khan sahib have denied that deed of Any sahabi is not hujjah.


As for saying Ibn Al Qayem and others said, Ibn Humam says taqleed is following the saying of someone which is not from hujaj Shari'ah, without prove.

So much for the saying of Ibnul Qayyim (RA) and his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah (Rahimahullah).


Can you give me the definition of taqleed from any hanafee Usuli ?

So we do not lose our time in what is taqleed and what is not.

Qazi Muhammad A'ala Al-Thanvi (Rahimahullah) writes :

التقلید اتباع الانسان غیرہ فیما یقول او یفعل معتقداً للھقیة من غیر نظر الیٰ الدلیل کانّ ھذا متّبع جعل قول الغیر او فعله قلادۃ فی عنقه من غیر مطالبة دلیل۔( کشاف اصلاحات الفنون ص ۱۱۷۸)۔


As for the case of weeping put from 40 to 80, then some scholars said the ahdd is fourty and fourty added was ta'zeer because wine drinking spread.

In no way did Ali left the Prophet saw, he just made ijtihad to add for ta'zeer

other people give other explanation

But in no way there is zikr of rejection of Hadeeth.

This is your own perception , or of "some scholars" , while it is clearly apparent that 3 out of the 4 khulafa ir Rashideen (Radhi Allahu Anhum) clearly did something different from what was being done in the time of Rasoolullah (SallAllahu alaihi wasallam). May Allah give you some sight.



Can you put saying of Shabee that he did taqleed of someone in particular, even rejecting ahadeeth opposing the man he made taqleed of.
Nobody denies hadeeth for the saying of the imams. Taqleed is done in the Masail Mansoos alaiha Muta'ariz feeha, and the Masail Ghair-Mansoos alaiha.


And even proven this won't be any shar'i daleel

Would you mind telling us first what is a daleel to you , and what is not? On one side,you keep iterating that Saying of a Sahabi is hujjah, and now not a shar'ee daleel?elaborate please.



Rather Wakee Hanafee said whover said opinion of Wakee and other people about Ishar should be put in jail until they say according to the Prophet saw

Another stolen lie from Mubarakpuri . Oh well,Regarding Wakee b. Jurrah (Rahimahullah), Allamah Dhahabi (Rahimahullah) writes :

کان یفتی بقول ابی حنیفة( تذکرۃ ج ۱، ص ۲۸۲)۔

And still, Im looking forward for an answer to the sayings of Syyidina Muaz Ibn Jabal and Abdullah Ibn Masood (radhi Allahu ta'ala Anhuma).

May Allah make us do taqleed of fuqaha, and not the Sufaha