True sunnis follow madhabs

[Naqshbandi]

salam alakim!sorry for qouting this twice,but i just wanted to make a seperate thread about this.
True sunnis follow madhabs,one cannot be considered sunni,if one does not follow a madhab.I will again quote hizmet books on ths from the book,"The Sunni Path".

as) Every Muslim has to follow one of the four Madhhabs when he performs an 'ibada or an act. It is not permissible to follow any alim who is not in one of the four Sunni Madhhabs.


2) Every Muslim may follow any of the four Madhhabs which he likes and which comes easier to him. He may carry out an 'ibada (or an act) in accordance with one Madhhab and another ibada in accordance with another Madhhab.

3) As for carrying out an 'ibada in accordance with more than one Madhhab, it will be necessary to observe all the requirements of one of these Madhhabs for the soundness of that 'ibada, and for that ibada to be sahih in that Madhhab. This is called taqwa, and is very good. One would have followed (taqlid) that Madhhab and would have observed the conditions in the other Madhhabs. Following a Madhhab is permissible provided one will observe all its conditions. If one's 'ibada is not sahih according to any of the Madhhabs he follows, this is called talfiq, which is never permissible.


4) One does not have to always remain attached to the Madhhab one has chosen. One can transfer oneself to another Madhhab any time one likes. Adapting oneself to any Madhhab requires learning well the teachings of fiqh in that Madhhab, which can be learned from 'ilm al-hal books. Therefore, it will be easier to remain attached to one madhhab all the time. It is difficult to transfer oneself to or, for an affair, to imitate another Madhhab. It can be done only in case of a necessity, that is, when there is kharaj, and on condition that one shall observe all its conditions.


Because it is also very difficult to learn the knowledge of fiqh in another Madhhab, scholars of fiqh prohibited the ignorant, that is, those who do not have knowledge of fiqh, to imitate another Madhhab. For example, it is written in Bahr al-fatawa, "If a person in the Hanafi Madhhab has a wound bleeding continuously and if it is difficult for him to make an ablution at every prayer time, it is not permissible for him to perform salat as prescribed in the Shafi'i Madhhab without observing the conditions of this Madhhab." Ibn 'Abidin explains this in detail in the chapter about "Tazir." In order to protect the ignorant's 'ibadat against corruption, scholars of the Ahl as-Sunnat (rahmat-Allahi ta'ala 'alaihim ajmain) did not permit them to imitate another Madhhab except in case of kharaj.


At-Tahtawi writes: "Some scholars of tafsir say that the 103 rd ayat of Surat Al-i 'Imran, 'Hold fast to Allahu ta'ala's rope,' means, 'Hold fast to what the fuqaha say.' People who do not follow books of fiqh will fall into heresy, be deprived of the aid of Allahu ta'ala, and be burned in the fire of Hell. O believers! Meditate over this ayat-i karima and cling to the group of the Ahl as-Sunnat wa l'-Jamaat, who have been given the glad tidings that they shall be saved from Hell. Allahu ta'ala's approval and help are only for those who are in this group. Allahu ta'ala will treat those who are not in this group with wrath and torment in Hell. Today, belonging to the Ahl as-Sunnat requires following one of the four Madhhabs; one who does not follow one of the four Madhhabs is a man of bidat and will go to Hell."[23] A person who has gathered the easy ways of the four Madhhabs will not have followed any of the four Madhhabs. As it is seen, one who does not follow any of the four Madhhabs is a la-madhhabi. One who makes talfiq of the four Madhhabs, that is, by mixing the four, acts according to any Madhhab that comes easy to him, is a la-madhhabi, too. Also, one who follows one of the four Madhhabs but holds a belief unconformable to the Ahl as-Sunnat is a la-madhhabi. These three are not Sunnis, they are people of bidat who follow heresy (dalala). True Muslims, however, follow one of the four Madhhabs, that is, the 'true way.'

FOOTNOTES

[muslim786]

Yes True Sunnis do indeed follow madhabs the madhabs of fiqh, ie Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi and Hanbali. And we do NOT mix the madhabs. Also the above quote explains the concept of madhabs quite nicely, what is the problem?

[Zubair]

salam
I myself follow a madhab but i been thinking about the fact that if everything is derived from the sunnah why can't one just follow any of the rulings from the madhabhib when it is derived through scholarly understanding?
salam

[Abdur_Rahman]

Yes True Sunnis do indeed follow madhabs the madhabs of fiqh, ie Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi and Hanbali. And we do NOT mix the madhabs. Also the above quote explains the concept of madhabs quite nicely, what is the problem?
:salam:

question for you muslims786 if a particualar person from a different region has been given an fiqh answer however chooses to go with something else what it be wrong for him to stray away from his original answer
(for example a person gets an answer from the Hanafi standpoint and then recieve more in-depth info from the shafi'e and or hanbali standpoint)

[muslim786]

:salam:

question for you muslims786 if a particualar person from a different region has been given an fiqh answer however chooses to go with something else what it be wrong for him to stray away from his original answer
(for example a person gets an answer from the Hanafi standpoint and then recieve more in-depth info from the shafi'e and or hanbali standpoint)


If you read the quote from brother Naqshbandi your question should be answered, what the ahle sunnah wal jammah forbid is the mixing of madhabs within a single action, but following a different madhab to your own one in one single action is allowed(eg salah, fasting etc), but mixing the madhabs in this one action is forbiden.

[Mossy]

You can, of course, mix madhabs where they agree with each other. Which is on most things :) It's only when you have elements that make it invalid it other madhabs, or miss required elements.. Optimality comes from completion however.

[muslim786]

You can, of course, mix madhabs where they agree with each other. Which is on most things :) It's only when you have elements that make it invalid it other madhabs, or miss required elements.. Optimality comes from completion however.

Excellently put.

[Zubair]

salam

"one who does not follow one of the four Madhhabs is a man of bidat and will go to Hell"


I dont think thats right where did you get this from, your saying majority of the people in my school who are muslims are going to go to hell this is not right aat all.

[fnaeem]

:salam:

akhi zubair. Its not that they are going to hell just for not following the madhab but because of the following.

First of all none of us is avoiding hell without Allahs mercy, but suppose
that his mercy is contingent upon our actions, then lets look at the following scenario

In all the 4 madhabs 3-divorces uttered in one settings are 3-divorces.
if you say the word 3-times you and your wife are complete strangers. Doesnt matter if you were drunk or angry ( no one divorces when they are in a good mood). Now if you were to form your opinion or follow the opinion of the la-madhabbiya ( salafis etc), they follow a very minority opinion ( possibly only the opinion of Sh Ibn Taimmiya[not sure if its his opinion]) 3-divorces in one sitting count as 1-divorce.

So you understand that ijma is third source of Islamic Law. So at this point you are happily living in sin with a woman, who you think is your wife.
At this point if Allah's mercy was contingent upon your actions, what can we assume about those who dont follow the Ijma.

I hope I have illustrated the point.

:jazak:
Faisal

[Abba]

I see another Ghulooo in full.

Wahabi will say if u follow 4 madhabs u deny Sunnah and do bida'ah and now u say if u do not follow madhab u do bida'ah.

For God's sake people! Give us a break!

What is the Nus for this ruling?

Where does Allah or his Rasool saw tell us that whatever the 4 madhab has told is Final.Were other mujtahids like Sufyaan souri sinners?

And what is the definition of Ijma?when obviosly many Muslims do not agree with this obligation to follow one madhab.

[muslim786]

I see another Ghulooo in full.

Wahabi will say if u follow 4 madhabs u deny Sunnah and do bida'ah and now u say if u do not follow madhab u do bida'ah.

For God's sake people! Give us a break!

What is the Nus for this ruling?

Where does Allah or his Rasool saw tell us that whatever the 4 madhab has told is Final.Were other mujtahids like Sufyaan souri sinners?

And what is the definition of Ijma?when obviosly many Muslims do not agree with this obligation to follow one madhab.
Ijma amomgst scholars NOT ignorant masses. Also you will find that most people do follow madhabs whether u like it or not. Also I don't think you have understood the concept of a madhab, refer to Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murads article on this matter at masud.co.uk and also shaykh nuh ha mim kellers article.

[Abba]

So u consider only those people that follow a madhab scholars and others are not scholars?

May i ask whom did Imam Bukhari followed?Whom did Imam Muslim followed?

What about people in the life of 4 Imams,were they Bida'ati also?R they destined to hell?

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

as far as i know, Imam Bukhari was a muhaddith and dwas capable of following his own ijtihad..... not really surprising.

by far most of the scholars of maddhabs have ruled the necessity of following a maddhab. Shaykh Murabit al-Hajj issued a fatwa stating the obligation of following a maddhab. Shaykh al-Yaqoubi stated recently in his visit to UK that it is fard to follow a maddhab.

99% of the ulama were part of a maddhab. you cannot really include the first 3 or 4 generations, because this is the time the maddhabs were being formed and developing.

but yes, in a nutshell, the scholars of maddhabs are by far more trustworthy... and the MOST trustworthy after the salaf and early generations.

[fnaeem]

:salam:

Abba you are putting words into peoples mouth. Nowhere anyone stated that all those who follow madhabs are scholars. If that was so, there would be no difference between the la-madhabbiya and us. We make a distinction between scholars and lay people.

If you were to think about medical sciences. On one approach you have doctors who have studied under other doctors and in colleges ( madhabs). On the other hand you have people who think of treating diseases after grabbing a copy of Grey's Anatomy and or getting on Web MD. From whom will you feel more comfortable getting your medicine from. Matters of the soul are far more important than matters of the body.

Why do people go to universities, why not just study the curriculum being taught (at the university) by buying books off of amazon. Sounds preposterous doesnt it. At the same time its okay for people to just stick to the six basic books and ignore all the commentaries etc written. Especially when reading translations etc, you lose the meaning of the original Arabic.

I am not sure what your religious education background is, but mine is horribly weak. I dont think that I am going to compare my knowledge with people who have devoted their lives to learning islam.

http://www.saleel.com/article.php?story=20040309175149640

:jazak:

[Zubair]

salam
I still think that people will not go to hell for not following a madhab, the people i know that dont follow a madhab which are alot get rulings fromt he madhahib from books like fiqh us sunnah , which i personally dont like. and about the case of Imam Ibn Taymiya it was his oppinoin and i dont think people follow that i think the salafis in particular follow rulings from different madhahib.
salam

[Abba]

:salam:

Abba you are putting words into peoples mouth. Nowhere anyone stated that all those who follow madhabs are scholars. If that was so, there would be no difference between the la-madhabbiya and us. We make a distinction between scholars and lay people.

If you were to think about medical sciences. On one approach you have doctors who have studied under other doctors and in colleges ( madhabs). On the other hand you have people who think of treating diseases after grabbing a copy of Grey's Anatomy and or getting on Web MD. From whom will you feel more comfortable getting your medicine from. Matters of the soul are far more important than matters of the body.

Why do people go to universities, why not just study the curriculum being taught (at the university) by buying books off of amazon. Sounds preposterous doesnt it. At the same time its okay for people to just stick to the six basic books and ignore all the commentaries etc written. Especially when reading translations etc, you lose the meaning of the original Arabic.

I am not sure what your religious education background is, but mine is horribly weak. I dont think that I am going to compare my knowledge with people who have devoted their lives to learning islam.

http://www.saleel.com/article.php?story=20040309175149640

:jazak:

Well in the past doctors used to force their opinions on patients,not that they were in any way less caring for those of today but it was the norm that ...we know better ....

But,now the doctors tell their patients why we are doing so and so.

I have read the article u have cited but thei are certain things i do not understand plz enlighten me:

Such a fatwa, if it comes from one of the four legal schools of ahlis-sunnah wal-jamaa'ah, is the result of the study, research, and ijtihad of hundreds of the greatest scholars of this ummah, who contributed to, and revised the legal rulings of each school. They were masters of the Islamic disciplines, many of whom memorized over one hundred thousand hadiths of the beloved Prophet (mercy of Allah and peace be upon him).

Well that being true i think scholars have summarised the reasons for Fatwa.

But its not the fatwas individually that i have problem with,its the fact that one now is being asked to put a "Label" on him/herself to be 1 of the 4.

[Zubair]

salam
Is there any Alim that said that people who dont follow one of the four schools are going to hell?
salam

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

exactly, no-one is condeming anyone to hell. its a matter of guidance and misguidance. its a matter of being closest to the sunna and not. its a matter of following the errors of sayid sabiq and albani over the centuries of compiled work from the 4 schools.

to put it simply, either have 4 ways or an infinite number. in the case of the salafis, we already know of the massive amount of differences even amongst the people that claim that title. this is end-product of boldly claiming self-ijtihad and choosing which ruling is strongest (which again is a huge matter of debate) from amongst the 4 schools, and picking up sahih al-bukhari and taking hadith in preference to fiqh, when according to all the classical ulama - fiqh comes first.

[SAFI]

Shaykh Gibril Haddad has written an article about the madhhabs of the imams of hadith (may Allah be pleased with them). You can find it here:

Madhhabs of the Imams of Hadith (http://www.livingislam.org/maimh_e.html)

I hope this is helpful insha'Allah.

[SAFI]

Also another thing that Shaykh Abdul Hakim Murad pointed out in one of his lectures is, that in fact, everyone has a madhhab.

In Arabic madhhab means 'to go' or 'to take as a way' so even if you don't follow one of the Sunni schools of law you must be following something.

Although nowadays, certain groups may appear to be calling for people to relinquish Taqlid in matters of Fiqh and to abandon the four Sunni schools of law - i.e. take your religion directly from the primary evidences (Qur'an, Hadith, Ijma' and Qiyas) without following anyone.

When in ACTUAL fact, what they are doing is calling people to follow their scholars (whoever they may be... Nasir ud-Din al-Albani, Abdul Aziz ibn Baz, Sayyid Sabiq etc).

[Sadiq]

"At this point, it would be useful to quote the great scholar of Usul, Imam al-Shatbi (Allah have mercy on him). The following is the crux of what he stated on this issue in his renowned treatise al-Muwafaqat:

“The most beneficial and effectual way of gaining knowledge is by learning it from those who are masters in their fields. It is necessary to have a teacher in aspects of knowledge that need explanation and interpretation. It is not impossible for one to gain knowledge without a teacher; however, normally it is observed that a teacher is of utmost importance. This is, somewhat, agreed upon by the scholars.

Scholars said: “Sacred knowledge was in the hearts of men, then it moved into the books and the keys to these books are in the hands of scholars (rijal).” This implies the necessity of acquiring knowledge from the people who master it.

The basis for this is the Hadith which states: “Verily Allah does not take away knowledge by snatching it from the people but He takes away knowledge by taking away the scholars, so that when He leaves no learned person, people appoint ignorant as their leaders. They are asked to deliver religious verdicts and they deliver them without knowledge, they go astray, and lead others astray.” (Sahih al-Bukhari & Sahih Muslim) If this is so, then the scholars are without doubt the keys for this knowledge.” (al-Muwafaqat) "

Read more on the importance of isnaad: Learning from a Teacher & the Importance of Isnad from daruliftaa.com

This should answer your question regarding "those who dont follow are going to hell"... Its a sad fact to think you are doing something right, when in actual fact its wrong. How do you know your doing something in line with the sunnah, in line with the shariah, in line with Islam, if you dont have a "teacher"? its to follow the ones who followed, the people to follow, whom followed the best to follow.

The early Muslims used to say: "Safety in religion lies in following the fuqaha."

Search sunniforum.com for other interesting discussions about taqleed.

[FEMTO]

I think the idea of madhabs is a complete innovation to create disunity amongst the Muslims. Furthermore, I have always wondered what mudhabs did Abu Baker al Siddiq (ra), ummar ibn alkataab (ra) and all the other companions of our beloved prophet follow? Also why does having to follow a madhab have to start from either, Imam Abu Hannifah, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi, Imam Hanbal, why not from their own teachers? Or their teachers, teachers. Or why not simply follow the prophet (p.b.u.h), instead of having to say we either follow one of the imams or hellfire is guaranteed for us? It just does not make any sense that I have to say that I belong to a school of thought. If anyone can find any proof that they can share with me that the prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h) said that we must follow a madhab, and must declare that we belong to one of the four schools of thought and if we don’t, than hellfire is surly guaranteed for us. Then I will humbly accept this idea. I for one prefer to say that I follow the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h).

[Zubair]

salam
All the Madhabs are derived from the sunnah and go back to the Prophet(Peace be Upon Him). The Hanafi Madhab is the directly from the Sahaba Abdullah Bin Masud (Ridyallahu Anhu) who was one of the most learned of the sahabas in every science, so in reality people are following the Prophet when they say that we follow this madhab or that one. all of the differences come from the interpretation which are all allowed if from a qualified Scholar, A person can just open up a book and start making rulings this is totally not allowed, and if you read books concerning ikhtilaf the sahabas did disagree on a number of issues and the people of the early cities followed a specific shaykh, and so there is nothing wrong with following a madhab. ANd if one wants to see if a Madhab is according to the sunnah of the Rasul (Peace be Upon Him) let the person go into the books of proof of the Madhab and the person will be extremely satisfied.
(Please Forgive me if i said anything wrong)
Salam

[Omar HH]

Furthermore, I have always wondered what mudhabs did Abu Baker al Siddiq (ra), ummar ibn alkataab (ra) and all the other companions of our beloved prophet follow?

Actually the companions did differ on legal rulings. For example Abdullah ibn Mas'ud is one of the basis of the Hanafi legal school. The people of Madina are the basis of the Maliki legal school.

In the Qur'an it says:
“Fas-aloo Ahl al dhikri in kuntum laa ta’lamoon (Ask Ahl al-Dhikr if you do not know).” (Holy Qur’an, 16:43)

“Yaa ayyuhal lathina aamanoo, Atwee’ullaaha wa Atwee’ur Rasuula wa Ulil Amri minkum! (O you that have eemaan, obey Allah and obey the Rasul and those given the authority to command from among you.)” (Holy Qur’an 4:59)

The Hadith says:

Rasulullah, Sallallahu alaihi wa Sallam, asked Hadrat Mu’adh ibn Jabal Radiyallahu anhu how he was going to judge when he ordered him to go to Yemen as a judge. “According to Allah’s Book,” he said. “What if you cannot find in Allah’s Book?” asked Rasullullah, Sallallahu alaihi wa Sallam. “I will look to Rasulullah’s Sunnah,” he answered. When asked, “If you cannot find it in Rasulullah’s Sunnah, either?” Hadrat Mu’adh said, “I will do it according to what I understand because of my ijtihaad.” Rasulullah Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam put his blessed hand on Hadrat Mu’adh’s chest and said, “Alhamdulillah! Allah Ta’ala made His Rasul’s deputy agree with Rasulullah’s approval.” (Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud and Al-Darimi.)

Rasulullah (SAWS) also said that this Ummah will never agree upon error.

It is necessary to follow legal rulings which are within the bounds of sound scholarship. For everything there is 'ijma (consensus) on, all Muslims agree upon. For everything else there is differences of opinion. Our Prophet (SAWS) said that differences of opinion (in fiqh or jurispudence) in the Ummah are a mercy. For that which there is a difference of opinion one must follow the scholars. Who is a scholar? A scholar learns from a person who learned from a person who learned from a person who eventually learned from Sayyidina Muhammad (SAWS).

At one time there were 13 madhabs of Islamic jurispudence, but many of them died out and eventually only 4 remained. Each of the schools of jurispudence interpret differences of opinion in a different way with different standards and form different rulings. As long as one follows one of those 4 different ways of interpreting evidence (without mixing them in 1 action, for example doing prayer 1/2 Hanafi and 1/2 Maliki) one can be said to be following sound scholarship. Therefore, may scholars have said that if for example you pray and do wudu in a Hanafi way, do your fasting as a Shafii, make Hajj like a Maliki, and give Zakat like a Hanbali you are allowed to do this. But to make things less hard on people, many people follow everything that one madhab has to say.

http://www.ummah.net/Al_adaab/fiqh/taqlid.html (One of my resources)...

Go here:

http://www.saleel.com/article.php?story=20041119225755738&mode=print
http://www.naqshbandi.net/haqqani/Islam/madhabs.html
http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/madhhab.htm
http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/madhhabstlk.htm <-- Read this SECOND
http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/littlk.htm <--- Read this FIRST

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[FEMTO]

I am not arguing that you should not follow the four imams, as they are simply windows or a doorway to the prophet (p.b.u.h). However, what I dislike is the idea that muslims find it necessary that they need to be called either a Hannifi, Maliki, Shafi or a Hanbali. I would rather call my self a Muslim who follows the sunna of Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h) through the guidance on how to do so by one of the following four Imams. However, I will refuse to call myself either one of the four schools of thoughts. This calling each by the name of one of the four schools of thought is so blatantly an innovation, which is simply a creation to disunite the Muslims. Muslims are so easy to manipulate into fighting one another, so we need to be careful of things like this, in my opinion.

[Zubair]

salam
I agree if a person asks me what am i, i wont say i'm a hanafi, i will say i'm a muslim off course and everyone should say that and anyone who says hanafi instead of muslim he got some problems. and i dont think people are disunited if a person doesnt respect the other madhab that means that they dont respect the imams who had great manners towards each other even if they disagreed.
salam

[FEMTO]

Actually the companions did differ on legal rulings. For example Abdullah ibn Mas'ud is one of the basis of the Hanafi legal school. The people of Madina are the basis of the Maliki legal school.




I am sure they did. However, I bet they did not call themselves either a Hannifi, Maliki etc. This whole naming oneself after one of the four Imams troubles me. I am just surprised that Muslims have not managed to call themselves Muhammadani’s.

[Zubair]

salam
why does it matter what one calls oneself as long as they say their muslims why should it disturb a person, just ignore that then.
salam

[Omar HH]

I am sure they did. However, I bet they did not call themselves either a Hannifi, Maliki etc. This whole naming oneself after one of the four Imams troubles me. I am just surprised that Muslims have not managed to call themselves Muhammadani’s.

I see your concerns, but the naming of one as "Hanafi" "Shafii" "Maliki" etc. is just for clarification purposes and a linguistic tool. For example someone asks for a legal ruling and says to the scholar "what are you" he says "i'm hanafi" or for example someone asks "why do you pray like that" and you say "i'm Maliki".

Look up the definition of bid'ah. We do not deem it NECESSARY IN THE RELIGION to call ourselves these things. For example, we do not believe it is part of the Deen. If someone says "Muhammad (SAWS) told us to call oursleves Malikis and Hanafis and this is obligatory" well thats different than someone who says "I'm Maliki, I follow Imam Malik".

It's like this, your Muslim but where do you live? If you live in America you say "i'm an American" is this bid'ah? Or if you say "i'm an ethnic Albanian" is this bid'ah? Or if somebody says "i'm a doctor" or "i'm a student" is this bid'ah? This is analagous to what we mean when we say "I am Maliki" etc. We aren't disunited, the madhabs all agree that the other madhabs are valid in fiqh. Therefore I do not see the commotions.

May Allah (SWT) bless you Sidi,

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[FEMTO]

salam
why does it matter what one calls oneself as long as they say their muslims why should it disturb a person, just ignore that then.
salam


I don’t think it is a matter of simply ignoring it. People tend to start grouping themselves off, and many arguments (not debates) are evolved from such grouping each other off. I have heard on many occasions when someone whose parents are hanafi for example, and that particular person wants to follow a Shafi ruling on a particular issue, then people will say, well your parents are hanafi, therefore you are hanafi and must not follow the ruling of shafi. However, if all schools of thoughts are correct, it should not matter what rulings we follow according to as long as we are following in the way of the Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h).

[FEMTO]

I see your concerns, but the naming of one as "Hanafi" "Shafii" "Maliki" etc. is just for clarification purposes and a linguistic tool. For example someone asks for a legal ruling and says to the scholar "what are you" he says "i'm hanafi" or for example someone asks "why do you pray like that" and you say "i'm Maliki".


Again this concerns me. I would not say that I am a maliki in regard to your argument. However, I would rather say that I am praying in such and such manner because according to Maliki the prophet (p.b.u.h) prayed in such a manner. Rather than simply say “I am maliki”





It's like this, your Muslim but where do you live? If you live in America you say "i'm an American" is this bid'ah? Or if you say "i'm an ethnic Albanian" is this bid'ah? Or if somebody says "i'm a doctor" or "i'm a student" is this bid'ah? This is analagous to what we mean when we say "I am Maliki" etc. We aren't disunited, the madhabs all agree that the other madhabs are valid in fiqh. Therefore I do not see the commotions.



Actually I would not say that I am an “American” I would simply say that I am Muslim. Once you accept that you are American and call your self American then you have become a nationalist. It is better to say that yes I live in America, but call yourself Muslim. But for some reason human beings have to associate themselves or call themselves based on what piece of land they are from.

Also what makes a person an American?

[Zubair]

salam
theres nothing wrong with saying your american or pakistani but the thing that is wrong is if you take pride into it and say that pakistanis are better than indians. and if you look at the history of islam people refer to where they are from, like hasan al Basri, Imam nawawi, imam bukhari and many others so theres nothing wrong with saying that your paki or whatever.salam

[FEMTO]

salam
theres nothing wrong with saying your american or pakistani but the thing that is wrong is if you take pride into it and say that pakistanis are better than indians. and if you look at the history of islam people refer to where they are from, like hasan al Basri, Imam nawawi, imam bukhari and many others so theres nothing wrong with saying that your paki or whatever.salam


Well I think that is wrong. We should not have this need to call ourselves based on where we are from. In fact I think this association with pieces of lands is the greatest pitfall for human beings. Also having the need to call yourself according to the piece of land you were born on is a form pride.

[Omar HH]

Actually I would not say that I am an “American” I would simply say that I am Muslim. Once you accept that you are American and call your self American then you have become a nationalist. It is better to say that yes I live in America, but call yourself Muslim. But for some reason human beings have to associate themselves or call themselves based on what piece of land they are from.



Ok, well how about "I am a Man",
If someone says "are you a man or a woman" would you say "I am Muslim"?

Also, if someone asked "what nationality are you" you would say "I am Muslim"? What if they needed to know where you are going?

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[FEMTO]

Ok, well how about "I am a Man",
If someone says "are you a man or a woman" would you say "I am Muslim"?


That’s completely different from the issue of nationality. I think you are missing my point. My whole argument is in regards to issues of IDENTITY.

Also, why is it important to say what nationality we are? What are the benefits of it?




What if they needed to know where you are going?


I don’t quite understand what this has anything to do with what I am arguing about. All I am saying is that you should not associate your self to a piece of land. I am not saying that we should therefore, remove all names from maps. Just don’t associate yourself to pieces of lands. I bet you all of the conflicts that exist today are all land disputes. The people of today have become so attached to the dunyah that we are willing to die for it. This is the problem of having a national identity.

[Omar HH]

I'm sorry I misunderstood you.

Anyways, read those articles about the necessity of taqleed (following qualified scholarship)

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[alibaba]

Truly i am at a loss to where naqshbandi comes up w/ this stuff.....it almost seems that he prizes those madhab books of his over the Quran.

THERE IS SOMETHING CALLED COMMON SENSE PPL!!!! YOU DONT HAVE TO BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ!!! ITS ALL ABOUT OPINION AND OPINION..........
about if u follow another madhab you will burn in hell??????/
huh?
now heres a simple concise "formula" for determining if its true or not!

Does the Quran say it?
-Of course not
Did the prophet mention or follow any madhab?
-Of course not

So if the quran doesnot say it and since there is no mention by the prophet then to make such an outrageous claim is a complete fabrication ... a biddah!

[Usman]

Does the Quran say it?
-Of course not
Did the prophet mention or follow any madhab?
-Of course not

So if the quran doesnot say it and since there is no mention by the prophet then to make such an outrageous claim is a complete fabrication ... a biddah!

Explain biddah please.

[alibaba]

To my best of knowledge which is very little in the first place
Biddah is a form of innovation in religion.
Somethign which was not followed by the Prophet or his Sahabas

[salman]

To my best of knowledge which is very little in the first place
Biddah is a form of innovation in religion.
Somethign which was not followed by the Prophet or his Sahabas

Tadrib Ar Rawi by Imam Suyuti states there were 7 Sahabas whose Fatwas everyone else followed and who did Ijtihad:

1. Ayesha
2. Ibn Umar
3. Umar
4. Ibn Abbas
5. Ibn Ma'sud
6. Zaid
7. Ali

So it is incorrect to say that "Taqlid" was not present during the time of the Sahaba.

Unfortunately, the Sahaba of the Prophet did not leave behind books or detailed methods of Usul regarding how they derived rulings, what should be done when new situations arise, how do we employ Qiyas, what is the relation between the Qur'an and Hadith, and so forth.

The above was done by the Imams of the Madhahibs, and therefore the schools of thoughts are established in their name.

I follow Imam Abu Hanifa who took Fiqh from:

1. Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman

who took from;

2. Ibrahim ibn Yazid Nakhai

who took from;

3. Alqama ibn Qays and Al Aswad ibn Yazid and Abdullah ibn Hubayb

Alqama and Al Aswad took fiqh from the Sahaba of the Prophet, the knowledgeable and scurpulous, the one whose leg shall be weightiest on the Day, Our Master Abdullah ibn Ma'sud - Allah be well pleased -.

Ibn Hubayb took fiqh from the Wali of Allah, the Gate of the city of knowledge, Our Mawla and Master Sayyidina Ali ibn Abi Talib - Allah be well pleased -.

Both of these Sahaba took from the Best of Creation, the Cause of existence, the guide to mankind, the Habib of Allah - Our Wali and Guide, Our Master Muhammad - Peace and blessings be upon him -!

And Allah knows best.

[muminah]

I havent read through the whole of this thread, but just commenting on the title of the thread, if you are on the level of doing ijtihaad, so according to the title you are not from the ahlu sunnah wal jamaa'ah ?

[Mossy]

I havent read through the whole of this thread, but just commenting on the title of the thread, if you are on the level of doing ijtihaad, so according to the title you are not from the ahlu sunnah wal jamaa'ah ?

If you are at the level of primary ijtihad, you follow your own madhab, which may or may not be one of the existing ones as you can derive from primary sources. Not many of those around of course..

[muminah]

If you are at the level of primary ijtihad, you follow your own madhab, which may or may not be one of the existing ones as you can derive from primary sources. Not many of those around of course..

they are some though, wAllaahu a'lam

[Mossy]

they are some though, wAllaahu a'lam

Depends on your definition of mujtahid and the level of ijtihad you're talking about.

:)

[Omar HH]

Depends on your definition of mujtahid and the level of ijtihad you're talking about.

:)

Hasn't the "gate of ijtihad" been closed through 'ijma?

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[salman]

Hasn't the "gate of ijtihad" been closed through 'ijma?

Jazakallahu Khayrun

Absolute Ijtihad yes, Ijtihad within the Madhab no.

[Zubair]

salam
My teacher who has studied overseas he told me that there are mujtahids within the madhab, and i dont think the gate of ijtihad is closed because of late scholars who were very known as mujtahids like imam Suyuti , imam Ibn Taymiyaa and Imam Shah Waliullah.
salam

[faqir]

salam
My teacher who has studied overseas he told me that there are mujtahids within the madhab, and i dont think the gate of ijtihad is closed because of late scholars who were very known as mujtahids like imam Suyuti , imam Ibn Taymiyaa and Imam Shah Waliullah.
salam


The following thread has some good articles clarifying this issue:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=378&highlight=gates+ijtihad


Wasalam.

[Usman]

Maulana Qasim Nanotwi (Rahimahullah) was questioned on several issues by Muhammad Hussani Batalwi, the famous(or infamous) leader of the pathless. When the sheikh answered, he was astonished, and said to the sheikh :

"I wonder , with all this knowledge, why are you still a muqallid?"
the sheikh replied:
"and I wonder, with this less knowledge, why are you still not a muqallid?"
(Sawaneh' Qasimi Vol 2 , Page 23)

People who, while still admitting that they have "little" knowledge, and cannot even define bid'ah compleletely, are prepared to do "ijtihad".

Ijtihad has its certain requirements, if any "mujtahid" brother (who does not do taqleed), would post the syllabus of a mujtahid,I'll be grateful.

faq't, wassalaam,
Usman

[alibaba]

"one who does not follow one of the four Madhhabs is a man of bidat and will go to Hell"

any person w/ half the brains could tell you in a minute that is the most furthest thing from the truth................becuz the Quran doesnot say it and neither did prophet Muhammad ever mention it

He (Allah) has ordained for you the same religion (Islam) which He ordained for Noah, and that which We have inspired in you (O Muhammad), and that which We ordained for Abraham, Moses, Jesus saying you should establish religion (i.e. to do what it orders you to do practically), and make no divisions in it (religion) (i.e. various sects in religion). Intolerable for the Mushrikoon , is that to which you (O Muhammad) call them. Allah chooses for Himself whom He wills, and guides unto Himself who turns to Him in repentance and in obedience.

(Chapter #42, Verse #13)

a clear Quranic verse outlining the dangers of causing divisions in Islam

Say (O Muhammad SAW): "I warn you only by the revelation (from Allah and not by the opinion of the religious scholars and others). But the deaf (who follow the religious scholars and others blindly) will not hear the call, (even) when they are warned ((i.e. one should follow only the Quran and the Sunnah (legal ways, orders, acts of worship, statements of Prophet Muhammad SAW , as the Companions of the Prophet SAW did)).

(Chapter #21, Verse #45)

Make your own conclusions on this one from ........Tafseer Ibn Kathir


They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allah), and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary), while they (Jews and Christians) were commanded (in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) to worship none but One Ilah (God - Allah) La ilaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He). Praise and glory be to Him, (far above is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)."

(Chapter #9, Verse #31)

This verse clearly applies not only to the jews but muslims nowadays as well.....u know very well what I am talking about!!!!

[alibaba]

remember ....from the verse outlined above.....dont take your scholars as Rabb besides Allah!!!!

[Sadiq]

All i can say is;

One who doesnt know what science is, nor knows what the values and characters of the knowledge of science, nor have any qualifications to understand oxygen, water, nor basic equations, nor do you have any basic knowledge of science, and you post "some" equations on animal life, and try and relate it to human life?.......That is just sheer stupidty

Truly a sad state of affairs, Brother, other members can respond better, what you have posted, is verses without no knowledge of arabic, or basic arabic, nor understanding what you posted, nor what the verses incline, or suggest, or were revealed for, the verses, in what context they can be used, truly a sad state of affairs. how you equate verses to suit your needs?

Please refrain from going to things which you are far from, nor can even handle, the words of Allah are not any text or anything that can be used to fashion your attempts or aims, but the verses you have posted are totally different in context, in tafseer than the thing which is being discussed here.

Why post the chemical code of a animal leg, when we are talking about the human ear? Lack of knowledge, no knowledge, the level of knowledge, level of understanding, lets all be careful.

"Little knowledge is dangerous" as a saying goes, a true statement amougst many who do not follow the ones who should be followed.

Others can respond better, why not scroll up and read the material that have been posted, my dear brother.

Wasallam, Sadiq.

[Azzam]

We must follow the scholars or the ones with knowledge. It does not make sense that we try to do things on our own if we do not have the knowledge.

However, treating people as more than they are may lead to many problems and even tribalism in the madhaaib which was a big problem in the past.

However, there is dispute whether one has to follow one school in all matters or if may follow scholars who will guide them, regardless of their school or if they follow a school in practice anyway.

If one follows a school he will be following a school not a person. So they developed the issues over time.

I say keep in the company of the shuyukh and they will guide you. And we follow as Hasan Al Banna said "The madhab of the laymen is the madhab of his sheikh."

So find the ahl dhikr or the ahl ilm and keep in their company, wether they follow one or not.

[alibaba]

brother sadiq

how can others respond better???......i quoted verses from the Quran itself not from the words of aalim that contradict each other all the time
i think u use the word sad.........way to many times

plus....why do you make the quran absolutely unreachable.....why do you make it a word of God that no one except the scholars can understand?

The quran is meant for the common person.........it is unlike engineering or medicine .... this quran is a guidance for mankind not for a select few....it is meant to be read and understood by everyone not just scholars..........
this is the main conflict between me and my pakistani friends....who put the quran and place it in a high place and from time to time take it down kiss it and then replace it!!.......the quran is meant to be read.....the very meaning of it can be interpreted to recitation so ....what guidance is one receiving if all they do is kiss it and put it in a high place....neither do they recite it and neither do they understand its message...all they do after that is go to some maulana and ask them how to be a better muslim!!!...........there is nothing in the world that can give a better answer to that question then the Quran.....and by doing those actions they are not fulfilling the rights of the Quran .....

This (the quran) is a plain statement for mankind, a guidance and instruction to those who are Al-Muttaqoon (the pious).

(Chapter #3, Verse #138)

[alibaba]

I say keep in the company of the shuyukh and they will guide you. And we follow as Hasan Al Banna said "The madhab of the laymen is the madhab of his sheikh."

So find the ahl dhikr or the ahl ilm and keep in their company, wether they follow one or not.

brother azzam.....i must argue that
it is the quran and the teachings of the prophet (SAW) that guide one to Jannah it is the quran that has been sent as a guidance and a mercy to mankind

Certainly, We have brought to them a Book (the quran) which We have explained in detail with knowledge, - a guidance and a mercy to a people who believe.
(Chapter #7, Verse #52)

If you are adamant on placing a blind belief on anything then it must be nothing other than the quran or the sayings of the prophet because these are the only things for sure that will guide one to jannah....
so you say ok....the scholars follow it and by transitive property i am following it to.....but thats not true....we are all humans and open to mistakes ... no man can say that the scholars are infallible............that the scholars cannot make mistakes!! even the prophets made mistakes .... it is only the word of God that is completely flawless

(This is) a Book (the Quran) which We have sent down to you, full of blessings that they may ponder over its Verses, and that men of understanding may remember.
(Chapter #38, Verse #29)
Salaam

[Sadiq]

Assallamu alaikum, dear brother.

I am not making the Quran unreachable, hope my words did not suggest that, but what you are doing is something totally wrong.

When our christian "friends" use verses of the Quran to change the context, meaning, application of it, we are the first to say its wrong, you cannot just use a verse on its own or you cannot use post your verse without explaining it properly. We hate it when they use it without knowledge.

Can you see my point, what you are doing is the same, pasting the Quran without knowing what it means, what the verses actually refer to nor the context, the direction, the instance it can be used.

"And, ask the People of Knowledge if you do not know." A established quranic principle.

No one is saying we replace Allah or even the Prophet with schools, scholars, or imams.

Please do not misinterpret it like that, as its been discussed before on this thread and many others, the scholars are like doctors, you have a doctor to help you with your illnesses, and he gives you medicine and a prescription based on the large amounts of choices that he has infront of him, if you decide to get it from the cupboard yourself, you will most likely increase your heart problems thinking its a cure for your headache.

Scholars, or Imams are doctors of the deen, doctors of Islam, they are here to "help" us, we do not replace them with our main objective, they give us prescription based on the thousands of verses, hadiths, which we cannot fully understand, or we may be prone to mistake it, and who have become experts in Islam, so they may be consulted in regards to islamic issues.

Why we not question the doctor, when he gives us medicine, yet this deen, this islam is far more serious, far more important for our survival, then our illnesses, we wish to take "our own" medicine? interesting.....

Read the material that has been posted. Its a way for us to "practice" the deen more properly....

[Salafi Da'wa]

Islam is based on the Quran and sunnah! and the sunnah of the 4 khulafah!!

where does it say that we need to follow the 4 Imams? Why not 5 , who limited them to only 4?

hey for those little people who like to play with words! plzz do not reply! only honest and sincere authors are welcomed!

[Mossy]

Here you go, complete with reference from the sunnah and Qu'ran:

http://www.cometoislam.com/fiqh/legal/main.htm


Islam is based on the Quran and sunnah! and the sunnah of the 4 khulafah!!

Sunnah being established how? Hadith? Using what methodology?


where does it say that we need to follow the 4 Imams? Why not 5 , who limited them to only 4?

You don't have to follow them if you know the Qu'ran and Sunnah fully :)


hey for those little people who like to play with words! plzz do not reply! only honest and sincere authors are welcomed!

Little people? Bangladeshis?

Eh, same topic. Merrrrrrrge..

[Usman]

All I have seen during my lifespan, is people taking alalbani,ibn uthaymeen, and saleh Ibn fawzan etc. as their rabbs, they would refute whoever their scholars refute, and will accept whoever their scholars do.


how can others respond better???......i quoted verses from the Quran itself not from the words of aalim that contradict each other all the time

Khawarij, and Mu'tazillah also quoted statements from the Qur'an ,and the good thing about them was, they pasted Ayaat of Jews and Christians on Muslims, read your previous posts , and you'll know where you're headed. Even a small brained person would says that the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah don't take anyone besides Allah for their rab, and please, if you're that much knowledgeable to quote ayaat from the Qur'an , please do yourself a favor, and bring us, and yourself, the meaning of Rab first.


Islam is based on the Quran and sunnah! and the sunnah of the 4 khulafah!!

where does it say that we need to follow the 4 Imams? Why not 5 , who limited them to only 4?

hey for those little people who like to play with words! plzz do not reply! only honest and sincere authors are welcomed!

The entire building of Islam is based on Trust, if this trust is broken, neither was Bukhari(RA) infallible, nor was Ibn Abi Sheyba, or other muhadditheen, and none of the other narrators of the hadeeth.

As far as following 5 Madhabs, and not 4, better go, do some research, and tell us which 5th Way are you talking about? If you are able to find a 5th Madhab, which has been so extensively researched and compiled, we should start thinking over it, until then, the path of the pathless is nothing in real, and nor shall we accept it as a 5th school.

Khuda Ganjay ko Nakhun na day.

[Usman]

You don't have to follow them if you know the Qu'ran and Sunnah fully
edit : but since they don't so they have to. I can't go about thinking , that people who can't read a page or arabic, are out here, telling us that Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Malik, etc. (rahimahumullah) made this claim, that claim.

[Salafi Da'wa]

Hey thanx for the great feed back!
sorry about my signature!

[Usman]

^ Pretty good I must say, but the expected answer to this would be "Quote and Refute", portions.
Let's hope it isn't like that here.

[abu bakr]

i agree brother we cannot interpret the quran and sunnah on our own, there may be ayats in the quran and some hadiht which are very clear and explicit. but there are also many ayats and hadiht whihc are more difficult to undertsand because they may sound contradictory and therefore will require scholars to help us understand them. there is nothing wrong with following any of the 4 madhabs but people should be open minded and tolerant towards people of other madhabs or towards people who dont follow madhabs. people vary in the amount of knowledge and understanding they have so for some people it may be better for them to follow a specific madhab. howver, it is not obligatory to follow one of the four madhabs if it was then it would clearly say in the quran and the sunnah. neither have any of the great 4 imams called for following their madhabs or other great scholars.


how many people nowdays have access to the books of four imams or classical books of fiqh form the 4 respected madhabs? the answer is not many. so people might find it easier to ask contemporary scholars who are in more in tune with many of the contemproary issues. this is a proof that ijtihad doesnt stop after the 4 imams it is a continuous process.

overall people should be open minded and not insisting on following on one of the madhabs on the other hand the 4 madhabs cannot be rejected as the 4 imams have done a lot for the deen and the 4 madahib are a great way of understanding the deen.

[abu bakr]

how many people have acces to the books of the four imams or other classical books of fiqh and can fully undertsand them??

[Usman]

how many people nowdays have access to the books of four imams or classical books of fiqh form the 4 respected madhabs? the answer is not many. so people might find it easier to ask contemporary scholars who are in more in tune with many of the contemproary issues. this is a proof that ijtihad doesnt stop after the 4 imams it is a continuous process.

overall people should be open minded and not insisting on following on one of the madhabs on the other hand the 4 madhabs cannot be rejected as the 4 imams have done a lot for the deen and the 4 madahib are a great way of understanding the deen.

First off, if not many people have access to the books of four Imams, neither do they have access to "all" the books of Hadeeth, no even do they have access to all the Books of Rijal, etc. etc. more than 30,000 tafaseer of Qur'an in Arabic are present, which none except a handful of people even know the name of completely. How can they go about, learning the Qur'an and Sunnah themselves?
Secondly, the Absolute Ijtihad stopped after the four Imams' madhabs' came into common practice, yet, the ijtihad, which can be made now, is the ijtihad based onthe rules defined by the Imams thesmselves, for example, the difference of Imam MuhammaD Ibn al-Hasan Shayebani , Qadhi Abu Yousuf [Rahimahumullah], Imam Zafar, etc. etc.
Thirdly, Taqleed, or following of one particular person, is proven from the times of the Sahabah (Radhi Allahu Ta'ala ahnum). The reason for giving fatwa on the eejab of one of the four madhabs, is, as mentioned before, to keep people from following their desires, which is, by consensus, prohibited in Islam, as following of desires has been always been told as an act of the ones who have gone astray.

Faqat, WaAllahu Aalem bis Sawaab,

[alibaba]

only one thing can be concluded from all these massively long posts.....

The one thing that comes to mind is the protestant reformation led by Martin Luther.

The Roman Catholic Church did exactly that ............ they trusted their scholars way to much....they put their blind beliefs in them....and the popes and cardinals being human...when exposed to such power and blind belief........amassed much wealth from the commoners to the extent they started selling* forgiveness and other such despicable actions.
Martin Luter who was a catholic priest at that time was deeply troubled by this situation because not only did the catholic church have absolute power based on blind belief they were as well successful in keeping the bible in the latin language and they refused to translate it ..... into any other language and since the teachings of the Bible were not readily available to the common man then they could say whatever they want w/ absolute authority.........which led to the protestant reformation....
Now....I'm not saying this is what is happening.....all i'm saying is in pakistan more then anywhere else this is where it is heading .... and there are "shagirds" of scholars who will refute anything their scholars dont accept and accept anything their scholars accept which leads to corruption ...after all we are only human!!.....
I'm not saying that we dont follow the scholars.......it is important* we take advice* from them in matters of religion but it is not imperative to follow every single thing they say.....because we have brains and we can think and research for ourselves...........becauze this is where islam in pakistan seems to be heading ....
I mean who could make such a deluded claim like the brother who started this entire debate about those that dont follow madhabs are heading for hell!!!....does that not the least bother you ppl that how could such a person make that claim??????
and the impression i'm getting from these debates are that .... the Quran is meant to be wrapped up and placed permanently in a high place and any question directed towards what Allah says should be referred to the scholars and not the word of Allah himself!!!



As brother Azzam said in an earlier post
I say keep in the company of the shuyukh and they will guide you

You see ...it is the Quran that is meant as a guidance for mankind not the scholars or the aalim.....it is only the word of God that has the power to guide......the scholars can only advise you or inform you ....not guide you.....this is what bothers me...... not taking advice from the scholars but what such blind belief eventually leads to....acts of Kufr when we start ignoring the Quran and follow no one but what the scholars ....say

And certainly We have brought them a Book which We have made clear with knowledge, a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe.
(Chapter #7, Verse #52)

ppl...read it and understand it ....true...that in an ideal world it is imperative on us to understand the Quran in the language it was revealed ....but its not practically possible for everyone to learn the language so does that mean that we shouldnt @ least read its translation!!!!

I have several cousins and close relatives in pakistan who keep reciting the Quran but they never actually read what it says...they have no idea what the words they read mean...so @ least read the translation......sure its not as good but it is better then not reading and understanding at all

p.s...i dont think my posts are any shorter!

[Usman]

Now....I'm not saying this is what is happening.....all i'm saying is in pakistan more then anywhere else this is where it is heading .... and there are "shagirds" of scholars who will refute anything their scholars dont accept and accept anything their scholars accept which leads to corruption ...after all we are only human!!.....
I'm not saying that we dont follow the scholars.......it is important* we take advice* from them in matters of religion but it is not imperative to follow every single thing they say.....because we have brains and we can think and research for ourselves...........becauze this is where islam in pakistan seems to be heading ....
I mean who could make such a deluded claim like the brother who started this entire debate about those that dont follow madhabs are heading for hell!!!....does that not the least bother you ppl that how could such a person make that claim??????


I have several cousins and close relatives in pakistan who keep reciting the Quran but they never actually read what it says...they have no idea what the words they read mean...so @ least read the translation......sure its not as good but it is better then not reading and understanding at all

All that I see in your posts , is that Taqleed is wrong, because Pakistani Mullahs have done this, they've done that. You seem to know too much about Pakistani Mullahs, and still you can't even read their language. Your judgements are nothing but Prejudice, and one-sidedness, which is what you think the others suffer from.


ppl...read it and understand it ....true...that in an ideal world it is imperative on us to understand the Quran in the language it was revealed ....but its not practically possible for everyone to learn the language so does that mean that we shouldnt @ least read its translation!!!!

The first international translation of Qur'an into english, was by Marmaduke Pithall, which he re-translated from the Urdu translation of Shah Abdul Qadir Muhaddith Dehalwi (Rahimahullah), a Sufi Muqallid Hanafi scholar. In the mid 80s it was declared as un'authentic, then came the translation of Abdullah Yousuf Ali Bohri, a sect which is against the basic teachings of the Shia religion,and even some shia padres have declared them outside of Shia-faith. Only the original, and the newly claimed authentic translation of the Qur'an , nowadays, besides the one of Mohsin's, is by Mufti Taqi Usmani, A pakistani MULLAH, directly translated from Arabic to English.

The moral of all this story is, do you trust the english translations? if so, whose? Ahmed Raza Khan Sahib of Barelvi thought, made a different translation of many verses, and Shah Abul Qadir (RA) made another, Maulana Mahmood Hasan (Rahimahullah) made another, likewise in Farsi, there are various different translations, than the one by Shah Waliullah(RA)'s.

If you are so much knowledgeable, and don't need any help from the mullahs, prove a hadeeth saheeh, without trusting one single non-Nabi, which is impossible on the level of reality. Therefore my brother, as the Qur'an says :

فَاسْأَلُواْ أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ
]النحل : 43 و الانبياء: 7[
"So, ask the people (having the knowledge) of the
Message, if you do not know."(16:43) (21:7)


Therefore, we should ask the scholars what we don't know. And once we become scholars, we should ask the ones of higher authority, until we reach the status of a Mujtahid, when we will be able to deduce the Rulings from the Qur'an and Sunnah by ourselves.

wassalaam,
Usman

[alibaba]

The first international translation of Qur'an into english, was by Marmaduke Pithall, which he re-translated from the Urdu translation of Shah Abdul Qadir Muhaddith Dehalwi (Rahimahullah),

Nothing....and i mean nothing can be more further from the truth....Marmaduke Pickthall a convert studied the language of the Quran the Arabic in which it is written.....after years of "painstaking Knowledge gaining" he directly translated it from the Fushaa arabi in which the Quran is written to English...this claim that it was translated from urdu is a complete and proven lie......

A requirement in translating the Quran is that it must be done solely from the language it was revealed the Fushaa version of arabi....and it cannot be indirectly translated from language to language.....

Other authenticated translations of the Quran include those of Pickthall, Shakir, Mohsin Khan, Yusuf Ali and many many many others......(these are the ones in English) to say that there is no translated version that can be trusted is extremly incorrect

"So, ask the people (having the knowledge) of the
Message, if you do not know."(16:43) (21:7)

exactly...ask them but donot make them a source of guidance...for only Quran can provide guidance..........

And certainly We have brought them a Book which We have made clear with knowledge, a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe.

(Chapter #7, Verse #52)

[alibaba]

I FOR THE LAST TIME AM NOT PASSING ANY FATWAA.... I DONT UNDERSTAND WHERE THAT CAME FROM!!!


If you are so intent on following the Quran and Sunnah "only", dissect this ayah and explain each word part by part, from the Arabic. I want all the Nahw states of all the words. And I want you put all the verbs in their respective girdaans (I doubt you what that even means). I want you to indentify which piece of sh'ir did each word appear in, and I also want you to be able to give me the roots of each word. Furthermore, I want all ahadith pertaining to this ayah. Oh and most imortantly, give me all reports of the Sahaba regarding this ayah.

what you are trying to claim from this is that no one except the scholars should be able to read the quran because a very very very minute population of muslims can do all that ....... if the Quran says this book is a guidance for you ....then that is what it means...........if you further want to enhance your Quran reading experiance then read the Tafseers associated w/ them does not mean you have to do that all by yourself!!!!!.....
you are giving the scholars too much of your blind belief which should only be reserved for Allah.....
I read the quran w/ the Tafseer* becauze me being a laymen cannot possibly fully* understand every verse* in the Quran and when I have trouble I enlighten* myself w/ several questions made to several scholars just to see if the opinion is consistent..........and then move on....i think this is the better alternative for me because in this way I stay in direct contact w/ the word of Allah ....... and not that of the scholars...who are there only to help you not guide you..........

Not upon you (Muhammad SAW) is their guidance, but Allah guides whom He wills. And whatever you spend in good, it is for yourselves, when you spend not except seeking Allahs Countenance. And whatever you spend in good, it will be repaid to you in full, and you shall not be wronged.
(Chapter #2, Verse #272)

[alibaba]

What do you mean by "consistent"? And which scholars do you ask? Babar Choudhry? Farhat Hashmi? Islamhelpline.com? These people don't know the alif/ba of tafsir/fiqh/hadeeth. And then you decide on your own which opinion to follow? Sounds like "Following your nafs" to me.

now.....u seem to further the case ...now not only must I refer to scholars which i completely understand and I do........i must now find a scholar who fits the specific criteria ..of a graduate of the darul uloom aalim madrassah program...and anyone beside that is clearly in your impression wrong.......(your jab at farhat hashmi there provoked this response) i dont need to visit the scholars that fit your requirement or say what you like to hear....I casually go to the ameer around the area where i reside and if its to difficult to come in contact w/ him i read the tafseer .........that is written inside the Quran......Tafsir Ibn Kathir .. .....and I wouldnt mind going to Farhat Hashmi ......just because she has not been trained in the infallible aalim program in the madrassas of Darul uloom in pakistan doesnot make her wrong..........!!!!......u listen to her lectures...and if you find a contradiction w/ what she says and the Quran and Sunnah say then can you pick names and criticize....notice i criticize a lot but i never take names.....furthermore some of the aalims that I have met in the Karachi area while I was there really did not impress me...their thinking was backward and so was their style....notice there were a few.....i did not take names and i didnot say all the scholars are bad....

[alibaba]

First of all I did not know what in the world a salafi is
....nyways....after what i read on the board...the one picture that comes to mind when i think of the words salafi is of a guy w/ long teeth and a horned head....lol ... if u know what i mean....so i decided to e-mail a salafi of what he thought of the accusations ppl make against this group of people ..
and i quote

[I]"With regards to the four Imams, Abu Haneefa, Maalik, Shaafi' and Ahmad
(raheemahumullah), then as Salafis we believe all of them to be from the
greatest of the teachers, carriers and defenders of the religion of Allah
subhaana wa t'ala. We believe that they studied and taught the religion
upon its correct methodology and we love them as we love those believers who
came before and after them.

We accept absolutely everything which is in accordance with the sunnah of
the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) whether it comes from these Imams
or other than them. We do not, as some mistakenly claim about those Muslims
who adhere to the Salafi methodology, disrespect them or say that it is
haram to follow a madhab. Rather, we hold that it is permissible to follow
a madhab. The point that many do not understand correctly is that we say
that it is not permissible to blindly follow a madhab, rejecting the sunnah
of Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), in favour of what is thought to
be the opinion of one of the Imams.

For example, If according to one of the madhabs it is permissible to take
back a gift after giving it, and this teaching is not found anywhere else in
the religion, not from the other 3 madhaaib or from any other scholar.
Rather, this teaching is not even found to have come from the Imam of that
madhab, it is just a ruling which is found in one of the books of fiqh of
that madhab. And on top of this we find many strong ahadith which
completely oppose this ruling, then we say that it is necessary for every
student of that madhab to reject that ruling and follow what is correct from
the Sunnah of Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), whilst not having to
abandon that madhab.

This is what is to be understood from the Imams (raheemahumullah) when they
themselves said:


"When I say something contradicting the Book of Allaah the Exalted or what
is narrated from the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam), then ignore
my saying." - Imam Abu Haneefa, Al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 50)

"Truly I am only a mortal: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct
(sometimes). Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book
and the Sunnah, accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the
Sunnah, ignore it." - Imam Maalik, Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm
(2/32)

"The Muslims are unanimously agreed that if a sunnah of the Messenger of
Allaah (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) is made clear to someone, it is not
permitted for him to leave it for the saying of anyone else." - Imam
Shaafi', Ibn al-Qayyim (2/361)

"The opinion of Awzaa'i, the opinion of Maalik, the opinion of Abu Haneefah:
all of it is opinion, and it is all equal in my eyes. However, the proof is
in the narrations (from the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) and his
Companions)." Imam Ahmad, Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm (2/149)

So we respect and follow the Imams in what is true, and we do not say that
to follow a madhab is haram."

There, there you have it ......what is a salafi from a mouth of a salafi....whatever a salafi is....

[Mossy]

Oh calm down kids.

[alibaba]

salaam

mossy .... u have made 1390 posts???

i dont care if you are the administrator .... dont u think that is a bit excessive??

[Silver Sparrow]

"With regards to the four Imams, Abu Haneefa, Maalik, Shaafi' and Ahmad
(raheemahumullah), then as Salafis we believe all of them to be from the
greatest of the teachers, carriers and defenders of the religion of Allah
subhaana wa t'ala. We believe that they studied and taught the religion
upon its correct methodology and we love them as we love those believers who came before and after them.

Yet still feel the need to denigrate them


We accept absolutely everything which is in accordance with the sunnah of
the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) whether it comes from these Imams
or other than them. We do not, as some mistakenly claim about those Muslims
who adhere to the Salafi methodology, disrespect them or say that it is
haram to follow a madhab. Rather, we hold that it is permissible to follow
a madhab. The point that many do not understand correctly is that we say
that it is not permissible to blindly follow a madhab, rejecting the sunnah
of Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), in favour of what is thought to
be the opinion of one of the Imams.

Please, can you or your salafi friends provide even ONE example of a ruling from even one madhhab going against the sunnah? Just one. Where do the maddhabs reject the sunnah? Examples please.
And heres a question i've wanted the answer to for a while. you keep saying theres nothing wrong with following a madhhab. all the salafis ive spoken to (not many lol) say this. okay, so why dont YOU follow a madhhab, if theres nothing wrong with that?



For example, If according to one of the madhabs it is permissible to take
back a gift after giving it, and this teaching is not found anywhere else in
the religion, not from the other 3 madhaaib or from any other scholar.
Rather, this teaching is not even found to have come from the Imam of that
madhab, it is just a ruling which is found in one of the books of fiqh of
that madhab. And on top of this we find many strong ahadith which
completely oppose this ruling, then we say that it is necessary for every
student of that madhab to reject that ruling and follow what is correct from
the Sunnah of Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), whilst not having to
abandon that madhab.


You say lots of things :|



This is what is to be understood from the Imams (raheemahumullah) when they themselves said:


"When I say something contradicting the Book of Allaah the Exalted or what
is narrated from the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam), then ignore
my saying." - Imam Abu Haneefa, Al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 50)

"Truly I am only a mortal: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct
(sometimes). Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book
and the Sunnah, accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the
Sunnah, ignore it." - Imam Maalik, Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm
(2/32)

"The Muslims are unanimously agreed that if a sunnah of the Messenger of
Allaah (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) is made clear to someone, it is not
permitted for him to leave it for the saying of anyone else." - Imam
Shaafi', Ibn al-Qayyim (2/361)

"The opinion of Awzaa'i, the opinion of Maalik, the opinion of Abu Haneefah:
all of it is opinion, and it is all equal in my eyes. However, the proof is
in the narrations (from the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) and his
Companions)." Imam Ahmad, Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm (2/149)

So we respect and follow the Imams in what is true, and we do not say that
to follow a madhab is haram."

OH PLEASE!! Stop with the same tired arguments! Is every single salafi taught these quotes at madrassah? I'm so sick of haering the same same same same quotes over and over again, as if its supposed to make some kind of point! really people, how many times must these sayings be put into context? dum de dum, they were made to... MUJTAHIDS!! got that? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: mujtahids, not laymen. which is what we common folk are.

::cough cough::

Edit: tut tut, your friend forgot the one about imam Malik (RA) and wiping between the toes in wudu. We really caught you on the hop this time didnt we?




There, there you have it ......what is a salafi from a mouth of a salafi....whatever a salafi is....
thank you for your time
:salam:

[alibaba]

Please, can you or your salafi friends provide even ONE example of a ruling from even one madhhab going against the sunnah? Just one. Where do the maddhabs reject the sunnah? Examples please.
And heres a question i've wanted the answer to for a while. you keep saying theres nothing wrong with following a madhhab. all the salafis ive spoken to (not many lol) say this. okay, so why dont YOU follow a madhhab, if theres nothing wrong with that?

thats not what the dude is saying.......he is making a hypothetical statment ... to try to make a point

hypothetical: Of, relating to, or based on a hypothesis: a hypothetical situation. See Synonyms at theoretical.
Suppositional; uncertain. Conditional; contingent.

sheesh...and nyways...i dont think you have enough knowledge either to go around making a claim that there are no contradictions!!!!....

if you really wanna know ..........I DO FOLLOW A MADHAB but i refuse to say it because i think it is completely irrelevant............ who cares what madhab the other guy follows....i most certainly don't.....i never go past the question
"Are you muslim?"
I refuse to then continue and ask if he/she is a sunni, then what madhab they follow and then what type of sunnni hanafi...deobandi...or ..whatever...
I think asking all those stupid questions and arguing about them is a mark of an ignorant person who is completely removed from the sole reason why he/she is placed on this earth...To obey the command of Allah!

[Silver Sparrow]

The point that many do not understand correctly is that we say
that it is not permissible to blindly follow a madhab, rejecting the sunnah
of Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), in favour of what is thought to
be the opinion of one of the Imams.

hypothetical statement, how are you. that is nothing short of an accusation and you know it.

i think the main reason we are asked to put our maddhabs is merely so that the Q&A responses can be tailored, rather than: i'll give all four rulings since i dont know what school youre from. and i ask you, if you think having multiple madhhabs causes disunity, then we wouldnt all be on this forum would we? do you see anyone having a problem with someone following another school?

if you really wanna know ..........I DO FOLLOW A MADHAB

I refuse to then continue and ask if he/she is a sunni, then what madhab they follow and then what type of sunnni hanafi...deobandi...or ..whatever...
I think asking all those stupid questions and arguing about them is a mark of an ignorant person who is completely removed from the sole reason why he/she is placed on this earth...To obey the command of Allah!

neither do any of we... youre the one trying to make some point that we're mushrikun or whatever, taking imams as rabbs.

so whats with this pathetic debating?

listen bro, i used to believe in this kind of nonsense all this "we dont follow any one madhhab, we just choose whatevers closest to quran and sunnah!"
its not till you break free that u realise just how stupid it sounds.. maybe you should try it some time

sheesh...and nyways...i dont think you have enough knowledge either to go around making a claim that there are no contradictions!!!!....
Your post implied that there are. so i ask you for your evidence. Salafis are always crying 'daleel daleel! (when theyre not crying out haraam haraam!, bidat bidat! or shirk shirk kaafir kaafir!!), so bring your daleel if you are truthful.

And Allah knows best
:salam:

[Silver Sparrow]

salaam

mossy .... u have made 1390 posts???

i dont care if you are the administrator .... dont u think that is a bit excessive??

Don't you think you ought to find more productive things to do than criticise peoples post counts?

Excessive... LOL... one word comes to mind ;)

[Mossy]

alibaba: Total Posts: 49 (4.94 posts per day, 0.14% of sunniforum.com total posts)
mossy: Total Posts: 1,390 (4.66 posts per day, 4.07% of sunniforum.com total posts)

:)

Mmm, the madhab in the username is mainly for the QA secetion, but also so you can get a general idea of the fiqh of the other person in a discussion given the occasional disparate stance, especially in indepth topics. Once you know the methodology of the other person, it does make it much easier to find common ground..

[alibaba]

salaam

My jab at Dr. Hashmai is not without a base. She has gone against known positions held by Sahaba (and these are the Sahaba mind you, not just any scholar). If she had an ijazah, the highest probability is that she would not have gone against the Sahaba's positions.

I really donot know what you are talking about in this quote or what sahaba are you talking about and what positions that were held by the sahaba that she goes against (I'm assuming by sahaba you are referring to the companions of the Prophet)

It would be helpful if you could elaborate on this quote.

[alibaba]

Quote:
sheesh...and nyways...i dont think you have enough knowledge either to go around making a claim that there are no contradictions!!!!....


Your post implied that there are. so i ask you for your evidence. Salafis are always crying 'daleel daleel! (when theyre not crying out haraam haraam!, bidat bidat! or shirk shirk kaafir kaafir!!), so bring your daleel if you are truthful.


I'm not implying anything ..... all I'm saying is that the madhabs prescribed by the Imams are not infallible.....they may* have mistakes in them....plus after hundreds of years like all other books except the quran [which Allah has promised to preserve] they are susceptible to change...so therefore whatever the madhabs state may or may not have been actually said by the Imams it could* have been very well changed from how they drew it up in the first place..........

so i'm not implying anything ... i am clearly stating

**I'm not saying that these changes do exist.......I'm saying is that they may* very well exist.............

[alibaba]

and to state that the madhabs drawn up by the Imams have no mistakes whatesoever ...either by them originally or over time would be a very very tall claim...

[Salafi Da'wa]

Im just cant comprehend how, brothers can accept taqleed, i mean, The madhabs cant all be right, they differed on some issues. while one used ijtihad, another referred back to a (hadith). because certain hadith may have reached him and not the other. i remember a maverilous quote by imam Shaf'ee he said" Imam Ahmed u are better then me in hadeeth, so when a sahih hadith reaches u, inform so i can impliment it"(general meaning) We all know how imam Bukhari travelled to collect hadith, and we all know imam malik did not leave madinah. So can u argue that, Imam Malik had access to all the hadith Imam Bukhari collected, or can u argue that, Imam Abu hanifa had all the hadith Imam Bukhari Collected? surely u dont, can U? futhermore, if an imam makes a ruling upon ijtihad because there is no evidence from quran and sunnah, an another imam bases his ruling on text(ie hadith here), would u still stick to ur imam's position, who derived his ruling from ijtihad ove the clear text????

quick made up example:

Imam Abu Hanafi, is asked about making praying 2 rah'a for rain(when it doesnt rain), he knowns the quran, and finds no ayah pertaining to this, and as for the all the hadith he knowns he can not find a hadith concerning this, so he makes a ruling and say" bases his ruling on ijtihad)

as for Imam Ahmed is asked the same question, but since he travelled and collected hadith from different parts of the world, "he has an authentic hadith" so he is able to derive a ruling based on this hadith"

ofcourse the two imams are great scholars, so they give to different rulings on the same issue,

WHy not just take from imam ahmed, even though he is not from the madhbah u ascribe to?


jazakallahu khair brothers

[Mossy]

Hmm, I would suggest that this is because the madhabs aren't just the opinions/positions of the four Imams and their ijtihad. That's why we have 4 now rather than the 13 or indeed one for every mujtahid imam who came along. Madhab is a methodology for source based rule extraction.

It works something like this:

1) Initial framework formulation with basic axioms decided by mujtahid mutlaq
2) Framework used to derive rulings from source texts
3) Framework debated, refined, taught to students
4) Students analyse source texts, incorporate any additional evidences, critique prior work
5) Books of fiqh produced with daleels for rulings
6) Subsequent scholars of the madhab write critiques of aforementioned books of fiqh, incorporating possible additional hadith /evidences, including those from other madhabs (analysed with the other appropriate frameworks and in consultation with scholars proficient in that madhab)
7) New fiqh books written on the basis of these critiques
8) New fiqh book critiqued and discussed wrt above criterion
9) And so on and so forth..

The four imams were certainly proficient in hadith and their ability to classify these - there would be few indeed sahih hadith (according to his criterion) that Imam Shafi would not have known of. Imam Malik did not predicate his madhab on hadith, but amal was of primacy in derivation of the sunnah, hence the narrations had to be of higher quality for an equivalent importance to say the Hanbali madhab. Hence, for example, if there was a hasan hadith saying x, but the amal of medina was contrary to it, it could form a normative ruling possibly in the Hanbali madhab, but not in the Maliki madhab, given the differential in the predicates for both.

So yeah, the four imams may not have been aware of all hadiths. But wouldn't you agree its a pretty good guess that the muhaddiths who followed in each of the madhabs over the last thousand years would have been aware of any sahih hadith?

We're all trying to find the truth - true, the madhabs are not infallible. But they're a damn sight more rigorous in their approach to the truth than I would be picking, choosing and interpreting by my lonesome..

[Mossy]

Um.. The stronger position is that they're not *allowed*? You might want to check up on that one.. In general its best to avoid individuals - we're talking about concepts here after all.

[abu bakr]

with regards to the sahabah preventing women going to the mosque this isnt really true there may have been some sahabh who prevented women going to the mosque but inshallah women are allowed to go to the mosque if they wish.

the following is an excellent link which explains this issue:

http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=46072

[abu bakr]

The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), explicitly told men not to exclude women from going to the Mosque. It is reported that the wife of `Umar Ibn Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) used to attend the congregational prayer in the Mosque at Fajr and `Ishaa' prayers. It was said to her, "Why do you leave home, you know that `Umar does not like that and he feels ashamed (that you leave home at that time)?" She said, "So what prevents him from stopping Me?" The person said, "It is the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) 'Do not prevent the she-servants of Allah from Allah's Mosques.'" (Reported by Al-Bukhari)

[abu bakr]

brother u seem to think that people who dont follow a particular madhab issue rulings and fatwas by themselves. this is completely not true people can follow a number of reliable scholars and take from them. if there is a issue which is very confusing and hard to decide between the two fatwas then he/she should choose the opion of the most reliable and trustworthy scholar.

another question brother ahsanirfan. there are differences amongst the followers of the madahib for example imam abu yusuf and imam shaybani disagreed on a number of things with imam abu hanifah. for example imam abu yusuf recommnded rafa yaadein (rasing ofhands beforeand after ruku) this contradicted the position of imam abu hanifah now whose psotion do u follow imam abu yusufs or imam abu hanifah. bare in mind that ther were many other hanafi scholars who supported rafa yaadein?

u mention that some of imam abu hanifahs rulings were changed as the fiqh school evolved but i still see that many hanfis dont do raf yaadein. so has the hanafi fiqh school changed how do they decide not to follow imam abu hanifahs student and not imam abu hanifah himself.?

[Usman]

Im just cant comprehend how, brothers can accept taqleed, i mean, The madhabs cant all be right, they differed on some issues.

The differences existed on many issues even among the sahabah (Radhi Allahu Anhum), so can we say that they were not all righteous?

InshaAllah, in the next post I'll show the need to make taqleed of an indivisual, from the scholars like Ibn Taymiyyah , Imam Ahmed (Rahimahamullah).

[Abdur_Rahman]

InshaAllah, in the next post I'll show the need to make taqleed of an indivisual, from the scholars like Ibn Taymiyyah , Imam Ahmed (Rahimahamullah).
:salam:

No need there are plenty of searches on Taqleed Links (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=taqleed)

[iqadeer]

The strictest of the Hanafi ulema were taught Bukhari and Muslim, along with the others, yet they chose to remain a Muqallid. How many of us can claim to have read these glorious book in the company of a Shaykh? Also, as I understand, differences exist because of the methodology employed by each imam. Its not the point whether an imam had knowledge to a hadith but if there were other factors that nullified acting upon that hadith. Even today, most of the Hanafi ulema have learned these Ahadith but they will give you an in-depth reason for why they don't act on a certain hadith. Authenticity is but one of the factors in implementing a hadith.

[Silver Sparrow]

You know, this topics gone past 100 posts, and still bro alibaba doesn't seem to have taken in one single point we've made.

::sigh::

[abu bakr]

i read something very inteersting by sheikh nasirudeen albani he said that nowdays people should learn one of the madhabs through a good fiqh book (of that particular madhab). then he should read more expanisive fiqh books which show the differing proofs suhc as al-majmu by imam nawawi for shafi madhab and fathul qadeer by imam ibnul hammam for hanafi fiqh. so through this way the layman can get a better undertsanding of his madhab and it is possible for him to follow the stronger proof. however the proof has to be a clear one and not a marginal one.

allamah albani said this when he was replying to sheikh ali tantawi who is now sheikh al-azhar.

[abu bakr]

i find that a lot of people have a misundertsanding when it cmes to the views of salafis on madhabs.

here is a following link which explains the position of scholars such as sheikh albani, sheikh eed al abbasee and sheikh salih al fawzaan.

http://www.******************.com/sps/sp.cfm?secID=MNJ&subsecID=MNJ06&loadpage=displaysubsection.cfm

[abu bakr]

brother i was talking about the stronger proof from within the madhab for example there are some within the hanafi madhab that beleive that one should do rafa yaadein whereas there r others who beleive that it should be left out. that is what i was talking about.

[Usman]

The Need to make Taqleed of one Madhab.
From "Legal Status of following a madhab" by Mufti Taqi Usmani sahib - [ References verified myself ].

Allamah Ibn Taymiyyah (Rahimahullah) states :


"وقد نص الامام أحمد وغيره على أنه ليس لأحد أن يعتقد الشيء واجبا أو حراما ثم واجب ولا حرام بمجرد هواه مثل أن يكون طالبا لشفعة الجوار فيعتقدها أنها حق له ثم إذا طلبت منه شفعة الجوار اعتقدها أنها ليست ثابتة أو مثل من يعتقد إذا كان أخا مع جد أن الأخوة ۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔ فمثل هذا ممكن فى اعتقاده حل الشئ وحرمته ووجوبه وسقوطه بحسب هواه هو مذموم بخروجه خارج عن العدالة وقد نص أحمد وغيره على أن هذا لا يجوز
"

"Imam Ahmad رحمه الله and others have explained that no one has a right to declare something as forbidden to pursue his base desires and then allowed when he finds that more suitable. Thus, as a neighbour he may claim right of pre-emption according to the Hanafi school, but when his neighbour claims it from him he may reject it on the plea of the Shafa'i school of thought. Or, he may claim inheritance of his dead brother when hi's paternal grandfather is alive as a co-sharer with him, but when he is the paternal grandfather and his grandson dies leaving a brother, he denies him a co-share in inheritance…. Such conduct is unlawful."
[ al-Fatawa al-Kubra, Ibn Taymiyah v2 p237.]



He wrote elsewhere:



"ونظير هذا أن يعتقد الرجل ثبوت شفعة الجوار إذا كان طالبا لها ويعتقد عدم الثبوت إذا كان مشتريا فإن هذا لا يجوز بالإجماع وهذا أمر مبني على صحة ولاية الفاسق في حال نكاحه وبني على فساد ولايته في حال طلاقه فلم يجز ذلك بإجماع المسلمين ولو قال المستفتي المعين أنالم أكن أعرف ذلك وأنا من اليوم ألتزم ذلك لم يكن من ذلك لأن ذلك يفتح باب التلاعب بالدين وفتح للذريعة إلى أن يكون التحليل والتحريم بحسب الأهواء"
"Its example is that when a person is himself in want of it, he opts for preemption. But, if he is the buyer, he is against preemption. This is unlawful conduct. Similarly, when marriage is contracted, a man considers the guardianship of a sinner correct, but when the divorce is effected, he considers that same guardianship invalid so that he may not be guilty of having performed wrong. This conduct is unlawful. Again, if someone says that he had not known of a school of thought which he now joins then too his word is not accepted because it might lead others to play with religion to measure lawful and unlawful on his desires."
[ Fatawa al-Kubra, Ibn Taymiyah v2 pp285-286 ]



This is a great wrong and Allamah Ibn Taymiyah رحمه الله did not subscribe to taqleed of individual, yet he confirms that it is unlawful to switch over sympathies.

In the times of the Sahabah رضي الله عنهم and tabi'een رحمهم الله people were very God-fearing and righteous. So there was not apprehension in absolute taqleed that people would succumb to their base desires and turn to one or other; mujtahid now and then. Hence, there was no distaste in 'absolute taqleed in those days.
When later jurists found that people were becoming unreliable, they gave the verdict that only taqleed of an individual was allowed. This was not a command of Shari'ah but an edict for administrative reasons. Allamah Nawavi رحمه اللهsaid about it:


"The reason taqleed of an individual has been made binding is that if man was allowed to follow whichever school of thought he liked then he would seek ease in every school of thought and act according to his base desires. People will get authority over the lawful and unlawful, the permitted and forbidden. The restrictions of the Shari'ah will be removed finally. In earlier days, the schools of thought were not arranged completely and well-known. (Now that they are compiled and known) it is essential for everyone to select one of them and follow it specifically."
[al-Majmoo' Sharah al-Muhazzib v] p91. Cairo. Muqaddamah, Fasl fi aadab al-mustafta, question no. 3]

[Usman]

When these great scholars [who are obviously greater scholars than Sheikh Albani(RA)] sensed the danger of following of desires............ehhh.... who are ....,

blah,
Assalaamu Alaikum

[abu bakr]

brother of course its wrong to follow your whims and desires but just becuase you dont foloow a specific madhab that doesnt mean that you are gonna follow your whims and desires. if osmeone who has no knowledge of quran and sunnah or who has little knowledge of shariah then he should follow a madhab otherwsie he should engage in ittiba which is reasoned following

[Usman]

brother of course its wrong to follow your whims and desires but just becuase you dont foloow a specific madhab that doesnt mean that you are gonna follow your whims and desires. if osmeone who has no knowledge of quran and sunnah or who has little knowledge of shariah then he should follow a madhab otherwsie he should engage in ittiba which is reasoned following

As said before, what is the criteria of knowing that this this person, has that much knowledge, whcih is sufficient for following the Qur'an and Sunnah itself? The person at that stage is a Mujtahid, and no matter what he does, he has a choice, none other, than to adhere to the rulings of the Mujtahid Mut'laq [ Absolute Mujtahid { one of The four Imams }]. At the present era, great scholars like Allamah Anwar Shah Kashmiri , Sheikh Ubaidullah Sindhi, Allamah Zahid alKawthari, even the famous Hafidhul Hadeeth Maulana Abdullah Darkhwasti etc. [Rahimahumullah] , confined themselves to just one fiqh, And at that high stage of knowledge, they came to realize, that the real aalim was Abu Hanifah (Rahimahullah) all along.

So why should we, the ones who are so much involved into worldly matters, who cannot even pray with the first takbeer of Jama'ah for forty days, worry about going for the "stronger" daleel? Dear brother, this is nothing but a devil's deception. Once we start studying in the high-standard madaris, we will come to know how in-depth knowledge is required to arrive on one single ruling.

Secondly, "ittiba" and "Taqleed" are one and the same thing. The definition you're making [given by Allamah Ibnul Qayyim (Rahimahullah) originally], is rejected by the Ummah unanimously.

Faqat Wallahu Aalam,
[back in a few days, inshaAllah]

[abu bakr]

so brother ur saying that if one follows a madhab he will never commit haram as you said "have u purified your soul do you know whats in your hearts."
brother in everyday life you come across situations where you have to control your inner desires following one madhab strictly does not cure that. if that was the case then it would be clearly mentioned in the quran.

[abu bakr]

brother i have a whole lot of sayings form many great scholars who slam blind following of one madhab. i wont present the sayings of of the 4 imams becuase every1 has heard them.

Shah Waleeyullaah ad-Dehlawee [1] - rahimahullaah - mentioned this saying of his in his valuable book Hujjatullah ul-Baalighah (1/153) and reported the saying of Ibn Hazm - rahimahullaah (1/154-155),
“Blind-following is Haraam and it is not permissible to take the saying of anyone without a proof except for Allaah’s Messenger (Peace be upon him), since Allaah, the Most High says:
“Follow what has been sent down unto you from your Lord and follow not any Awliyaa (protectors and helpers), beside Him. Little do you remember!”

[Sooratul-A’raaf (7): 3]
“When it is said to them: ‘Follow what Allaah has sent down.’ They say: ‘No! We shall follow what we found our fathers following.”

[Sooratul-Baqarah (2):170]
Allaah says, praising those who do not blindly follow, “My slaves, those who listen to the word and follow the best thereof, those are (the ones) whom Allaah has guided and those are men of understanding.”

[Sooratuz-Zumar (39):17-18]
Allaah the Most High also says, “If you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allaah and His Messenger, if you believe in Allaah and in the Last Day.”

So Allaah, the Most High, did not permit referring differences back to anything but the Qur’aan, the Sunnah and ijmaa’ of the Companions ….. It is established that it is prohibited for anyone to take everything that a single man from the Sahabah (Companions) or from the best two generations that followed them. Then he who takes everything from Abu Haneefah or Maalik or ash-Shaafi’ee or Ahmad, not leaving anything from their saying and not relying upon what is in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, then let him know that he has certainly opposed the ijmaa’ of the whole Ummah [2] …. Furthermore, all the scholars forbade being blindly followed and so a muqallid only disobeys his Imaam.

[abu bakr]

Al-Kamaal ibn ul-Hammaam
He was one of the foremost Hanafee scholars. He was author of various large works of Hanafee Fiqh
mentions in at-Tahreer, a book about the basics of the fiqh of the Hanafees that, “Sticking to a particular madhhab is not obligatory in the correct view, since it has not been imposed as a duty, as nothing is obligatory except that which Allaah and His Messenger have obligated; neither Allaah nor His Messenger have made it obligatory for anyone to follow the madhhab of any man of the scholars, so that he follows him in his Deen in everything and leaves what comes from other than him. The best generations passed by without saying that it is binding to follow a particular madhhab, whereas most of the blind-followers say, ‘I am a Hanafee’, ‘I am a Shaafi’ee’, whereas he knows nothing about the way of his Imaam, he does not become his follower just by saying that, in the same way as if he said, ‘I am a scholar ‘ or ‘I am a writer’, he does not become that just by saying it, while he is far away from the way of his Imaam. So how is it correct for him to claim allegiance (to a madhhab) due only to his abstract claims and meaningless saying?! So consider.”


Fakhr ud-Deen ar-Raazee, who died 606H - rahimahullaah - said in Tafseer of the verse in Mafaateeh ul-Ghayb (4/431)
{ The same is mentioned by the reviver of the Sunnah al-Baghawee in Ma’aalim ut-Tanzeel }

“They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and monks as lords besides Allaah” [Soorah at-Tawbah (9): 31]

“I have seen a group of the blind-following men of fiqh and have recited to them many aayaahs from the Book of Allaah, the Most High, concerning some matters which their madhhabs were contrary to those aayaahs and they would not accept these aayaahs or give any attention to them. Instead, they stood looking at me in surprise, meaning, ‘How can it be possible to act upon the clear meaning of these aayaahs, when the reports from our forefathers are at variance with them.’
If you considered carefully, you would find that this poison runs through the veins of most of the people in this world.”

Shah Waliyyullaah ad-Dehlawee says in at-Tafheemaat ul-Ilaahiyyah (1/206), “You will see the masses today, in every region, restricting themselves to a single madhhab from the previous madhhabs and they think that a persons leaving the madhhab of the one he follows even if in a single matter is like his having left the religion, as if that (Imaam) were a prophet sent for him, whom it is obligatory to follow, whereas the first scholars and the best generations, before the fourth century had not used to restrict themselves to a single madhhab.”

[abeer_xyz]

How do you know that you will not follow your nafs? Are you an expert in Tazkiyyah tun Nafs? Have you purified your soul? How do you know that deep inside your heart you do not have the wrong type of inclinations, which will force you to make the wrong type of decisions, especially with regards to the Deen? At least with regards to the Aimmah Arba' we can be sure of that. And this is where Talqeed rolls in.
This thread is very interesting. Both sides have their arguments. But the thing I can not understand follows.

I am a layman. I am a Hanafi. Two Hanafi Mullhas give two different verdicts on a same issue and one is more suitable for me to follow. Whom should I follow then? I am a layman Hanafi who has a desire not to follow his desire.

[salman]

This thread is very interesting. Both sides have their arguments. But the thing I can not understand follows.

I am a layman. I am a Hanafi. Two Hanafi Mullhas give two different verdicts on a same issue and one is more suitable for me to follow. Whom should I follow then? I am a layman Hanafi who has a desire not to follow his desire.

Salamu alaikum

Precaution dictates you follow the Stricter ruling. However, even if you do not then there can really be no blame on you although it is disliked to take "dispensations" or lenient rulings. You are free to follow whichever Fatwa as long as it comes from a recognized Alim and is supported by other Fuqaha.

E.g. The Jamhur of the Ulema in India/Paksitan state that one should keep his clothes above the ankles. However, the Classical references for Hanafi Fiqh state it is only "slightly disliked or simply what is better". The way of the Ahnaaf in Inida and Pak is the Stricter ruling based on the Dhaahir but who can be blamed for following the likes of Ibn Abideen and so forth? However, the Ulema not in the subcontinent state it is superior to follow the Fatwa of the Subcontinent Ulema on this. There is the path of Fatwa and the path of Taqwa.

Wasalam

[alibaba]

"The Quran necessarily doesn't have to mention something for it to be wrong. Drugs are haraam. Is that in the Quran?"

Well ..... it doesn't say per say that cocaine is haram, however Quran has specified that stuff that intoxicates a person ..... is haram....so it can expand to include drugs and alcohols

[alibaba]

Now when the Quran says that we should not follow our nafs, that necessarily means that we do everything that will keep our nafs in check. And that means, follow a madhhab, rather than pick and chose.

well.....not really....because the concept of madhab evolved much after the death of the Prophet and the completion of the Quran...therefore when the Quran states don't follow your nafs it cannot be talking about the madhabs.

Salaam



if you mean face to face by travelling all the way to montreal....because im currently living there...

[alibaba]

and i personally think* to attribute any form of divinity...i.e. have any involvment w/ God ordering it to happen (the madhabs) doesnt seem right

[alibaba]

"No not really. The sahaba who were not capable of making ijtihad followed those who were. So making taqleed isn't really a bida'. Those who followed one Sahaba were in fact following his madhhab. in the strictest sense of the word"

well.......thats not true......if i see a sheikh of a masjid saying a duaa after salat that i had never read before and i think it is a beneficial one...then to read that duaa would make me follow his madhab?
so those who followed one sahaba were not following that sahaba's madhab rather the madhab of the Prophet Muhammad ....


plus.....intoxicants and different types of alcohols....their existence can be traced back thousands and thousands of years.......much much before the Quran was revealed .......however the madhabs were invented much later in history.

Wasalaam

[alibaba]

chill out bro.........i thought u had given up hope on me a long long time ago......u know very well arguments never solved anything....and to think that an argument might lead me to believe and to hold fast to some deobandi, salafi doctrine......is clearly wrong..

[alibaba]

how are you on a win win ....situation........what if the scholars had erred....they are not flawless........and you would be held accountable in that case since u blindly followed some scholar......


remember....the only win win situation is w/ the person who follows the Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet....because it was on the prophet on which the deen was completed

later

[Mossy]

And is a person more likely to follow the Qu'ran and Sunnah with or without scholars. That is the crux of the argument.

It's not a question of, oooh, do I follow Qu'ran and Sunnah OR do taqleed upon a madhab?

It's a case of by doing taqleed upon a madhab I'm doing my best to follow the Qu'ran and Sunnah.

Following a madhab is a means to an end.

[salman]

how are you on a win win ....situation........what if the scholars had erred....they are not flawless........

later

Salamu Alaikum

Are you trying to say that the Jamhur of the Scholars "may" and "can" be in error? If you are then you have just contradicted yourself by not abiding by the Qur'an and Sunnah/Hadith since the Prophet explictly said:

- My Ummah will not agree on error.

and

- Stick to the Jamaah.

and

- Allahs hand is over the Majority.

Since the Jamhur of the Fuqaha have stated that Taqlid is fine and even necessary for the Laymen then it is upto you to decide where you stand. We are the Ahly Sunnah WAL JAMAAH, the people of the Sunna and the CONGREGATION, a name no one rejects.

Then you said:


and you would be held accountable in that case since u blindly followed some scholar......

But you once again contradict yourself by forgetting the hadith:

- He who strives (Ijtihad) and is correct gets two rewards and he who strives and is incorrect gets one reward.

A little pondering will do the trick. In reality those who claim to stick with the Qur'an and Sunnah have no idea of what these two entail in the first place, except for what they get from their Muhsin Khan Bukharis and so forth.

Wasalam

[alibaba]

whoa...whoa....talk about taking things out of context....

i have been accused over the past of quoting ayah of the Quran w/o an explanation.....at least i stated the entire ayah...not just phrases from it............

the shia....(who are by the way muslims and the ummah of the Prophet Muhammad)...have innovated stuff in their religion ...does this mean that there lies a contradiction in the hadith and reality?.........

[alibaba]

And I don't get blamed because Allah himself has asked me to follow him.

asking them is quite different from following them blindly...............you have a brain....so use it

[salman]

whoa...whoa....talk about taking things out of context....

i have been accused over the past of quoting ayah of the Quran w/o an explanation.....at least i stated the entire ayah...not just phrases from it............

the shia....(who are by the way muslims and the ummah of the Prophet Muhammad)...have innovated stuff in their religion ...does this mean that there lies a contradiction in the hadith and reality?.........

Salamu Alaikum

Sidi Ahsan already clarified regarding the Shias - However, anyone who knows about "Shia Hadith" and "Shia Rijal" will see how utterly laughable their whole "science" is.

Plus Shias have their own books and Hadith in which they take from their Imams - whose words to them have the same authority as the Prophets since Both are Ma'sum.

Regardless, Shia do taqlid of their Marja3.

Wasalam

[salman]

And I don't get blamed because Allah himself has asked me to follow him.

asking them is quite different from following them blindly...............you have a brain....so use it

Do you want us to wake up tommorow knowing the intricate details of Arabic, Hadith, qiyas, Ulum al Nasikh Wal Mansukh, Ijma', Qur'an, etc.?

Regardless - If by brain you mean 'Aql, then Intellect is not what dictates law, it is the texts which can only be understood by Ulema.

wasalam

[abeer_xyz]

Precaution dictates you follow the Stricter ruling.
1. One can push the logic one step backward, as follows. I am a layman. I am a Sunni. I find two Faqihs giving two different rulings on a same issue. What shall I follow then? The same argument should also work here. The resulting question may be this: Is it permissible for me to find out all the stricter rulings from the four schools and follow those? Is it not the best way?

2. “the stricture ruling” theory may also be challenged. Why not to follow the correct one? If a scholar like Yusuf Qardawi prefers one from all the rulings on the basis of his knowledge, what is the problem in following him?

[Hypermodestmuslima]

You are following Dr. Hashmir blindly. Did you bother to check her researches? Did you even bother checking her references? Well, sounds like blind following to me.

And yes. I did use my brain. Ultimately I came to the conlusion that no matter how much brain I use, it is going to be futile, simply because I lack the resources to come to conclusions. Therefore, leave it to the 'ulama.

After all, you've left your decisions to Dr. Hashmi. Gives me all the more right to follow Imam Abu Hanifa and his followers now doesn't it?

Would recommend greatly to the brother who was talking about following Dr. Hashmi to listen to Juristic Difference by Shaikh Aboo Yusuf RIyadh AL Haqq it'll answer many of ur questions...If u can't bother buying the tape...which I would also recommend greatly...visit this website

http://www.darulislam.info/

It has the lecture under the downloads section of Aboo Yusuf Riyadh Al Haqq

[alibaba]

You are following Dr. Hashmir blindly. Did you bother to check her researches? Did you even bother checking her references? Well, sounds like blind following to me.

And yes. I did use my brain. Ultimately I came to the conlusion that no matter how much brain I use, it is going to be futile, simply because I lack the resources to come to conclusions. Therefore, leave it to the 'ulama.

After all, you've left your decisions to Dr. Hashmi. Gives me all the more right to follow Imam Abu Hanifa and his followers now doesn't it?


As a matter of fact i dont.............i dont follow anyone blindly*...... I like the fact that all her statments have a backing w/in the Quran and the Hadith ....and she does not teach according to what maulana deobandi....or anyother maulana says.......becuz ultimately .... i really could care less about what a maulana thinks* .....all i care about is what the Quran and the Hadith specifically say.........

eg.....you posted earlier....that the stronger hanafi or deobandi pos'n states that women shouldnt' be allowed to attend the masajid.......again....i really don't care what their position is....the prophet found no objection in this practise and thats that...end of story.....

[alibaba]

Plus Shias have their own books and Hadith in which they take from their Imams - whose words to them have the same authority as the Prophets since Both are Ma'sum.

well....seems very familiar........as if we* don't take our maulvis to have the same authority as the prophet...

[abu bakr]

brother we must not block our intellect, if we can read up on a jurists ruling and undertsand it then we must have no problem in readng the rulings of prophet muhammed saw and undertstanding them. of course brother we will not undertsand everything and in matters which we have dificulty and dont undertsand then we should ask a reliable scholar. this is in accordance with the ayat from the quran which states "ask the pople of knowledge if you dont know". the priority should be the quran and hadith not the scholars words. now u may say that oh u havent obtained the level of qualification. yes i may not have the ability to undertake ijtihad as only a few people have this ability. but there is a difference between drectly looking at the texts extracting rulings and looking at fatwas of scholars and deciding which is closer to quran and sunnah for us to take.

[salman]

Salamu Alaikum


As a matter of fact i dont.............i dont follow anyone blindly*...... I like the fact that all her statments have a backing w/in the Quran and the Hadith ....and she does not teach according to what maulana deobandi....or anyother maulana says.......becuz ultimately .... i really could care less about what a maulana thinks* .....all i care about is what the Quran and the Hadith specifically say.........

Since im assuming that you have knowledge of the Hadith and Qur'an to know whether Dr. Hashmi is speaking correctly, then i want you to translate this:

حدثنا عبد الله بن مسلمة، عن مالك، عن زيد بن أسلم، عن عطاء بن يسار، عن ابن عباس قال:
قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: ( أريت النار فإذا أكثر أهلها النساء، يكفرن ). قيل: أيكفرن بالله؟ قال: ( يكفرن العشير، ويكفرن الإحسان، لو أحسنت إلى إحداعن الدهر، ثم رأت منك شيئا، قالت: ما رأيت منك خير قط

( أريت ) من الرؤية وهي الإبصار، والمعنى أراني الله تعالى. ( يكفرن العشير ) من الكفر وهو الستر والتغطية، أي ينكرن إحسانه. والعشير: الزوج، مأخوذ من المعاشرة وهي المخالطة والملازمة. ( الدهر ) مدة عمرك. ( شيئا ) لا يوافق مزاجها ولا يعجبها مهما كان قليلا. ( قط ) أي فيما مضى من الأزمنة] .

حدثنا عمرو بن خالد قال: حدثنا زهير قال: حدثنا أبو إسحاق، عن البراء، أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم:
كان أول ما قدم المدينة نزل على أجداده، أو قال أخواله من الأنصار، وأنه صلى قبل بيت المقدس ستة عشر شهرا، أو سبعة شهرا، وكان يعجبه أن تكون قبلته قبل البيت، وأنه صلى أول صلاة صلاها صلاة العصر، وصلى معه قوم، فخرج ممن صلى معه، فمر على أهل مسجد وهم راكعون، فقال: أشهد بالله لقد صليت مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قبل مكة، فداروا كما هم قبل البيت، وكانت اليهود قد أعجبهم إذ كان يصلي قبل بيت المقدس، وأهل الكتاب، فلما ولى وجهه قبل البيت، أنكروا ذلك.
قال زهير: حدثنا أبو إسحاق عن البراء في حديثه هذا: أنه مات على القبلة قبل أن تحول رجال وقتلوا، فلم ندر ما نقول فيهم، فأنزل الله تعالى: { وكان الله ليضيع إيمانكم}.



PART 2:

Please tell me whether the following hadith are authentic:

[ 2362 ] حدثنا أبو داود قال حدثنا حماد بن سلمة عن محمد بن عمرو عن أبي سلمة عن أبي هريرة قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم خير يوم طلعت فيه الشمس يوم الجمعة فيه خلق آدم وفيه تقوم الساعة وفيه ساعة لا يسأل الله عز وجل فيها عبد يصلى خير الا أعطاه الله وقللها وقال بيده هكذا انها قليلة

Musnad Taylisi

and also this one

[ 899 ] حدثنا محمد بن مسلم بن عبد الله بن مسلم الجنديسابوري حدثنا إبراهيم بن سالم بن رشيد الهجيمي البصري حدثنا عبد العزيز بن قيس بن عبد الرحمن عن حميد الطويل عن أنس بن مالك قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من صلى علي صلاة واحدة صلى الله عليه عشرا ومن صلي علي عشرا صلى الله عليه مائة ومن صلى علي مائة كتب الله له بين عينيه براءة من النفاق وبراءة من النار وأسكنه الله يوم القيامة مع الشهداء لم يروه عن حميد إلا عبد العزيز بن قيس تفرد به إبراهيم بن سالم بن سالم بن سالم الهجيمي ولم أعرفه وبقية رجاله ثقات وقال أيضا وله عند النسائي من صلى علي واحدة صلى الله عليه وسلم عشرا

Mu'jam As Saghir of Tabarani.

Waiting for your reply.

Wasalam

[alibaba]

hahaha....bro salman...
that looks like chicken scratch to me.......how am I supposed to read that let alone translate it??


I let Imam Bukhari do that for me and I conveniantly read those ahadith...


and i think bro abu bakr summarized it all perfectly

[Muawiyah]

you let Imam Bukhari read and translate for you?

[Sunni_Student786]

As salaamu alaykum.

Ali Baba, how can you blindly accept Imam Bukhari's (ra) opinion and judgement regarding the Authenticity of a hadith? Why don't you go through the books of rijal and check up on the narrators and see whether or not Imam Bukhari was correct in his conclusions regarding the authenticity of those hadith that he has included in his collection?

I would also appreciate it if you could translate those Hadith because I do not know what they say and until I know what they say I can have little idea of as to what implications their contents would have.

Jazakallahu Khair.

Wa'salaam.

[alibaba]

"I would also appreciate it if you could translate those Hadith because I do not know what they say and until I know what they say I can have little idea of as to what implications their contents would have"

I believe I clearly stated earlier that I cannot read what it says.....read the previous posts before.


In regards to the scholars.....the hadith of Imam Bukhari have been accepted as sahih by all branches of the muslims that believe in the hadith..........however fatwas given by the scholars always have opposing viewpoints........plus..........Imam Bukhari cannot be compared to any maulana sahib...because his work was not to issue fatwa but to put forth a collection of ahadith that had gone through rigorous amounts of tests.....i.e. his standards of classification of a sahih hadith were much much more strict then other's.....

[alibaba]

and as a p.s. only the Quran is free from all errors ...and no one can claim that any hadith is 100% pure from the mouth of the prophet to our ears...because Allah has made no promise in regards to them

[Sunni_Student786]

All the fatwa that are recognized as belonging to one of the four Orthodox Madhabs, not being the lone opinion of a particular adherent of one of the Madhabs, have also passed rigorous amounts of tests throughout the ages up to the present day, hence the reason for their continued inclusion in each of the 4 madhabs.

Furthermore, How can WE, who have the ability, as you claim, to check up on whether or not the Ulema were correct in the conclusions regarding matters that were not clear and required detailed inquiry and investigation
( i.e. Determination of the Authenticity of the statements attributed to the Prophet, peace be upon him, and of the permissible, prohibited, required, optional, disliked, recommended, etc. nature of certain acts) simply accept their word on an issue without independently investigating it ourselves?

And although it is true that the whole of the Muslim Ummah, but not if you count the Shi'ites as being part of the Ummah, have accepted ALL the ahadith in Bukhari and Muslim as being "Sahih" on the basis of Isnaad, such is not the case with hadiths from any other collection, so when dealing with hadiths that are to be found in collections other than the Sahih of Bukhari or Muslim, e.g. Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, Abu Dawud, An Nasai, Ad Daarimi, Ibn Abi Shayba, Ahmad, etc. So when dealing with suchs hadiths, how do you ascertain their authenticity, especially since thousands of such hadith have their authenticity disputed? Do you rely, i.e. blindly follow, the opinions of those Muhadditheen, or do you yourself go through the books of Rijal and determine whether or not those Ulema are correct in their classifications?

And are you unable to translate those ahadith because the script is too small? If so, then could hte brother who initially posted it perhaps post a larger version of them?

I am interested in hearing your response.

Wa'salaam.

[abu bakr]

brother there is no need to get all melodramatic of course lyamen like us cannot determine the authenticity of a hadith unless of course if it comes form sahih muslim and sahih bukhari. determig the autehnticity of a hadith is the job of the scholars, the muhadditheen. all we have to do is to seek the opinion of those scholars in relation to those hadith not blindly follow one scholar.

imam abu hanifah once said "when a hadith is found to be sahih then that is my madhab"

now for laymen like us we dont really have a madhab we should ask a scholar who is reliable to give us the answers regardless of what madhab he follows. so the layman's madhab is the madhab of his scholar which he takes from.

imam nawawi has said the following in his famous majmu :
“What is dictated by the evidence is that a person is not obliged to adhere to a Madhab; rather he should ask whoever he wishes.” ( Majmu 20/116)

Ibn Qawan al-Shafi’i says in his al-Tahqiqat, “The truth is that it is not incumbent to adhere to a Madhab; Rather, a person should ask whoever he likes, but without seeking allowances (tatabbu’ al-rukhas).”

[salman]

Salamu alaikum

Ya Abu Bakr, do you want me to tell the truth behind your statements? It s the same as your Imam Razi Tafsir, misquote misattributed.

Bring the Arabic please.

Br. Ali Baba, Imam Bukhari translated his book into English? Thats new...

My questions is fairly simple.

You said : I rely on the Qur'an and Hadith

I said : I rely on the Ulema to explain them to me and to derive rulings from them for me.

You said: NO wrong!

I said: Translate these hadith for me.

You said: I Cant

Which proves you cannot even look at Hadith or the Quran, let alone judge the Mullahs and others who rule by them.

So what makes you trust F. Hashmi when you cannot understand or authenticate hadith?

[alibaba]

Which proves you cannot even look at Hadith or the Quran, let alone judge the Mullahs and others who rule by them.


It is accepted by all muslims minus the shia's that the ahadith of Bukhari are sahih....and they have been translated in english...not by him obviously.......and same w/ the Quran.......

It is fine to take help from the ulema when you need to.....but it doesnt mean that you stick to the ulema ....regardless of whatever he says makes sense or not......

I mean if you want to know what God says....you would read his book and what his messenger said not what someone else thinks* God said.......i mean you donot exactly need a scholar to understand every single hadith in Bukhari...they are fairly understandable!!!!!......

and Farhat Hashmi gives reference of all the ahadith she quotes....from the 6 accepted hadith scholars......she doesnot verify the correctness of the hadith herself!!!


plus...remember that all fatwas of ulema donot complement each other ....they do sometimes contradict each other as well...


Some scholars have given the fatwa that suicide bombing by the palestinians is allowed and they will be considered martyrs....yet some scholars say that suicide is forbidden Period....no ifs or buts about it.....

so who do you accept????????

[salman]

Salamu alaikum


It is accepted by all muslims minus the shia's that the ahadith of Bukhari are sahih....and they have been translated in english...not by him obviously.......and same w/ the Quran.......

It is fine to take help from the ulema when you need to.....but it doesnt mean that you stick to the ulema ....regardless of whatever he says makes sense or not......


It is also unanimous that the hadith in Sahih Bukhari do not even come close to constituing all the "Sahih" narrations that exist.

It is also unanimous that understanding the Qur'an is not based on "translations". The Prophet said: 'Whoever interprets the Qur'an without knowledge, let him take his place in Hell.' Since the Ulema have knowledge, i follow them in this regard.

You said:


I mean if you want to know what God says....you would read his book and what his messenger said not what someone else thinks* God said.......i mean you donot exactly need a scholar to understand every single hadith in Bukhari...they are fairly understandable!!!!!......

You contradict yourself because:

1. People translate based on their understaning. If you had knowledge of the Arabic language you would know its richness and how one word can apply somewhere many times. This is evident in both the Qur'an and Hadith.

2. Allah and the Prophets do not necessarily speak in clear cut terms. Like virtually all languages of mankind, the ancient classical Arabic in which the Holy Qur'an was revealed aswell as the Hadith, abounds in metaphors, metonyms, figures of speech, and rhetorical embellishments - indeed a revelation devoid of such features would have had little claim to eloquence among the Arabs.

3. By relying on these translations you are in fact "blind following". How? Because you do not know the language and you cannot and do not questions others translation.


and Farhat Hashmi gives reference of all the ahadith she quotes....from the 6 accepted hadith scholars......she doesnot verify the correctness of the hadith herself!!!

Good for her - nonetheless, Fiqh and 3qida are not merely what is said in the Sahih Sitta. Further, only Bukhari and Muslim are Sahih through and through whereas the other 4 do consist of weak and some forged hadith (such as Ibn Majah).

What do you think My brother, that Imam Abu Hanifa or Imam shafi or the Ulema of our day speak without evidence from hadith? Not only do they speak with evidence from the Qur'an and hadith but they have access to the the various Arabic Tafsirs from Razi to Tabari to Baydhawi. They also have access to the Hadith collections beyond the Sahih Sitta including the books of Bayhaqi, Suyuti, Tabarani, Ibn Hajar, NAwawi etc.

As for Farhat Hashmi, she has access to none of these unfortunately.


Some scholars have given the fatwa that suicide bombing by the palestinians is allowed and they will be considered martyrs....yet some scholars say that suicide is forbidden Period....no ifs or buts about it.....

so who do you accept????????

It depends on where it occurs and in what situation.

Insha'allah in the upcoming future i will make a series regarding the differences among the Ashab of the Prophet. Let those who wish to criticise them do so - And May Allah forgive those who do.

Wasalam

[Goldi]

Salamu alaikum

It is also unanimous that the hadith in Sahih Bukhari do not even come close to constituing all the "Sahih" narrations that exist.

In the introduction of the Muhsin Khan translation of Bukhari, it is stated that most of the sahih hadith are not present in Bukhari's Sahih. You can't get anymore blatant than that.

[salman]

In the introduction of the Muhsin Khan translation of Bukhari, it is stated that most of the sahih hadith are not present in Bukhari's Sahih. You can't get anymore blatant than that.

Thanks Golds : )

[Sunni_Student786]

But brother Abu Bakr,

How do you ascertain the reliability of the scholars that you pose your questions to? We, those refer to ourselves as "Orthodox Muslims, believe in the obligation of Taqleed, not because it has been explicitly narrated from the Qur'an or Sunnah that one should follow the madhab of Imam Abu Haneefa, Imam Ash Shafi, Imam Malik, or Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, but because in this day and age, the only way to fulfil of the Qur'anic command of asking those who know when we know not, is the through the MEANS of these 4 madhabs which have survived to the present day. We believe this because the only way that one can ascertain the reliability of a scholar is through the "isnaad" of Ijaza, just like the authenticity of a hadith is ascertained through it's "Isnaad". ALL "isnaads" for "Ijaza", after the 3 century Hijri, in the realm of Fiqh, have ONLY come through one of the 4 orthodox Madhabs. All Ijaza go back through one of the 4 madhabs and can be found nowhere else. So how is it possible for any scholar to be "reliable" unless he adheres to at least one of the 4 madhabs that have survived up to the present day, when all "Ijazas", i.e. licenses of authority, are only to be found within them?

And what Imam Nawawi was saying is that one is not obliged to adhere to a Madhab IN ALL MATTERS, rather he should ask whoever (i.e. authorized Ulema who possess Ijaza extending back to the Rasul, peace be upon him) regarding any matter they wish. This is clearly explained by those who studied under those who had studied under him. And Imam Nawawi himself, one of the greatest scholars who lived, was a Mujtahid WITHIN the Shafi'i madhab, i.e. he made Taqleed of the Shafi madhab. So if he felt obliged to make taqleed of a madhab, what then for us?

[alibaba]

"In the introduction of the Muhsin Khan translation of Bukhari, it is stated that most of the sahih hadith are not present in Bukhari's Sahih. You can't get anymore blatant than that."


The Imam Bukhari thing is just a generalization ....... I don't mean only Imam Bukhari's ahadith.........

plus....i wonder why didn't Imam Bukhari not include the multitude of the other ahadith deemed sahih?

[alibaba]

Quote:
Some scholars have given the fatwa that suicide bombing by the palestinians is allowed and they will be considered martyrs....yet some scholars say that suicide is forbidden Period....no ifs or buts about it.....

so who do you accept????????

Salman wrote:
It depends on where it occurs and in what situation.

My question was rhetorical...it wasn't asking your position on suicide bombing.....it was stating that when there are so many contradictory fatwas going around then where do you say...ok ....this one i'm not following and the other one i am??....who makes that decision??.....

[Sunni_Student786]

Brother Ali Baba,

My post above was not solely directed at Abu Bakr. Feel free to chime in yourself.

The issue of suicide bombing is that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the 4 authentic madhabs that have survived up to the present-day, has developed a "Mutamid" (i.e. relied upon) opinion, and as such this issue and question of which ruling to follow, is a unique situation. It is a rather new issue on which Ulema have not yet been able to develop any extensive set of opinions. It is quite unlike the issues that have already been commented upon extensively such as those relating to Salah, Zakat, Hajj, etc.

Furthermore, when Ulema differ on an issue, after consulting the Qur'an, Sunnah, and other secondary sources for the derivation of rulings, e.g. the statements of the Sahaba, so long as they all possess an authentic authorization (i.e. Ijaza) that has a chain (i.e. Isnaad) going back to the Rasul (peace be upon him), one is free to accept any of their positions (Note: ALL "Isnaad"s of "Ijaza" go through one of the 4 surviving madhabs, so it is impossible that any scholar except one who adheres to the one of the 4 surviving madhabs can have those prerequisites necessary in order to be considered reliable).

ANY and ALL positions that have been classed as "Mutamid" (relied upon), or as a valid minority position within one of the 4 authentic madhabs that have survived up to the present day, meet those two criteria. No one has ever proven otherwise. No position, on ANY issue, can become part of the rulings of a madhab, as a "Mutamid" or Minority opinion, unless it is inline with the Qur'an and Sunnah. This ignorance of this fact is one of the reasons it pains me when I see brothers who think that they have found the correct methodology by abandoning the following of madhabs because it is due to ignorance of the madhab concept.

I myself was once a "la-madhabi" and was a "Salafi" in all but name, but once I started to actually study the words and works of the earliest scholars and the history of those who did not believe in the obligation of making Taqleed and that there were among lay men those who had the ability to decide which ruling amongst various rulings was closer with to the Qur'an and Sunnah, and their arguments for such positions in light of the Qur'an and Sunnah, that I saw the entire "la-madhabi" philosophy unravel in front of my eyes. It took me a long while to admit that I was wrong, but once I did so, I realized that refusal to accept when one is wrong is among the largest barriers to attainment of true knowledge.

[abu bakr]

first of all brother imam nawawi was not an absolute mujtahid and he never did taqleed of the shafi madhab. yes he learnt the shafi madhab and followed its principles and disciplines but he essentialy followed the evidences. so whenever hef ound stronger proof outisde his madhab he followed that evidence. from the words of imam nawawi we know that he nver called to one of the 4 madhabs and follow them exclusively. he said one should ask a reliable scholar regardless of what madhab he follows.

brother the problem doesnt lie in following one of the 4 madhabs the problem is blindly accepting everythig in the madhab and turning a blind eye ot everything else this is the kind of taqleed which has been condemned by the ulema.

brother i think some hanafis can be adopting double standards sme times as they claim to follow his madhab but they ignore him on issues such as tawassul, building over graves (for which there is a strong opinion in hanafi madhab against this). haazir and naazir, mawlid and many others.

[samrqandi]

assalaamu ^alaikum

I have been reading some of the posts in this thread and they seem quite lame. However people tend to misqoute people what i do know is the misqoute al-albaniyy does when he cites the book rasm-al-mufti and i know this because my mufti freind has read al-albaniyys book called sifah salah an-nabiyy. the misguidance of al-albaniyy doesnt even need to be mentioned his entire reliance was on prints and some of those prints did have mistakes.

when we cite imam nawawi i dont reckon of these people have studied his texts with any teachers rather just like to qoute a few sentences from his books. how many people have really studied his minhaj et-taliban/rawda et-talibeen, if any sane person reads that book will know its based upon primarly the shafiyy school. then people fail to understand the different ranks of scholars its just sheer ignorance of people trying to argue. the likes of al-albaniyy and these so-called modernists stand no ground, regardless if people have an emotional attachment to these misguided people.

people like to be clever oh well we follow qur'an and sunnah well who doesnt follow that! its just a pathetic claim.

what if scholars from all sides bring proofs and they claim them to be saheeh what happens in that instance? since people testify that they are impotent to verify traditions, so what do they do then? does it become a matter of preference? when in this instance they also dont have the tools to anaylise what is saheeh and what is not. i dont like to coment on this topic its something i have stopped doing.

wassalaamu alaikum i wont coment in this thread agian its a waste of time.

all mistakes are from me allah guide us all ameen

[Goldi]

brother i think some hanafis can be adopting double standards sme times as they claim to follow his madhab but they ignore him on issues such as tawassul, building over graves (for which there is a strong opinion in hanafi madhab against this). haazir and naazir, mawlid and many others.


There is no 'his' madhab. Imam Muhammad Ibn al-Hasan Ash-Shaybani and Abu Yusuf who were direct students of Imam Abu Hanifa comprise the early hanafi texts. There is no hanafi 'risala'. They have differing opinions often times in certain things from Imam Abu Hanifa. So no, there is such concept as follow 'his' madhab.

Because were I to follow his madhab, as you know, Imam Abu Hanifa had many interesting opinions. For one, the definition of Dar-ul-Islam. According to his own opinion, Dar-ul-Islam is any place where one is allowed to pray 5 times a day and perform his obligatory ibada'. According to your logic, hanafis should be making taqleed of this definition.

are they?

[faqir]

The Deception of
the Salafi Sect

When a man wishes to unfetter himself from the restrictions of the Shariah and the Sunnah in the present day, the solution for him is to become a so-called Salafi. o*nce he joins the Salafi deviant sect, he is free to find expression for his nafsaani opinions. In order to draw unwary and ignorant Muslims into its fold of dhalaal and baatil, the modernists salafis employ deception o*n a large scale.

A salient feature of this sect of baatil is their rejection of the Math-habs of the Salf-e-Saalihoon. Inspite of their rejection of the Mathaahib of Haqq espoused by the Salf-e-Saalihoon, these mudhilleen (deviates who lead others astray) seek to bamboozle the unwary and the ignorant by making ostentatious claims of their 'Love' and 'respect' for the Ulama and Fuqaha. The masses are ignorant. They lack the knowledge to distinguish between right and left; they do not possess the ability to verify and understand the statements of the Fuqaha which these salafi deviates selectively quote to bolster their corruptive arguments. Let us examine o*ne example of the deception they employ to hoodwink the unwary and the ignorant.

TAQLEED


While they decry Taqleed; jeer at it; speak mockingly of it and villify the Muqallideen who follow the Ulama and Fuqaha of the Salf with epithets such as 'cows' and 'dogs' 'blindly following' rulings of others, these salafis cite the very great Fuqaha of the Salf to support their baatil contentions of admut taqleed or the renunciation of Taqleed or their blind following of their opinions of desire. In substantiation of their claim they present the well-known statements of the Fuqaha and Aimmah Mujtahideen of the Salf-e-Saalihoon such as:


"When you find in my kitaab anything contradicting the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) then say (i.e. command) the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and leave aside my statement."
(Imaam Shaafi)


"When the Hadith is established as authentic in opposition to my statement, then act according to the Hadith and abandon my statement."
(Imaam Shaafi)


"When the authenticity of the Hadith is established, then that is my Math-hab."(Imaam Shaafi)


Similar statements have been attributed to Imaam Abu Hanifah by Ibn Abdul Barr. Imaam Sha'raani too attributes similar statements to Imaam Abu Hanifah. In Raddul Mukhtaar, Allaamah Beeri narrating from Sharah Hidaayah of Ibn Shuhnah says:


"When the Hadith is authentic then that is my Math-hab."
(Imaam Abu Hanifah)


The authenticity of these statements is not contested. However, neither do these salafis understand the meaning of these statements nor do their audiences. The audience being unschooled in the higher knowledge of the Shariah simply take in what is gorged out by the devious speakers of this sect. The salafis claim to be the followers of the Salf. In their definition of the Salf they quite rightly include the Fuqaha and Ulama of Quroon-e-Thalaathah (the first three glorious epochs of Islam)-the age of the Sahaabah, Taabieen and Tab-e-Taabieen. The Aimmah Mujtahideen which include the four illustrious Imaams of the Four Math-habs of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah are all part of the Salf.

While these salafis seek to eke out unbridled rejection of Taqleed for every man in the street o*n the basis of the aforementioned statements attributed to the great Imaams, the great Ulama who follow these Aimmah Mujtahideen aver otherwise.

Commenting o*n these statements, Imaam Nawawi (rahmatullah alayh) says:

"This which Imaam Shaafi has said does not mean that everyone who sees a Saheeh Hadith should say: 'This is the Math-hab of Shaafi, thus practising o*n the zaahir (text/external or apparent meaning) of the Hadith.

This most certainly applies to o*nly such a person who has the rank of Ijtihaad in the Math-hab. It is a condition that he overwhelmingly believes that Imaam Shaafi was unaware of this Hadith or he was unaware of its authenticity. And this is possible o*nly after having made a research of all the books of Shaafi and similar other books of the Ashaab of Shaafi, those who take (knowledge) from him, and others similar to these (books). This is indeed a difficult condition (to fulfil). Few are there who measure up to this (standard).

What we have explained has been made conditional because Imaam Shaafi had abandoned acting o*n the zaahir (text) of many Ahadith which he saw and knew. However by him was established proof for criticism in the Hadith or its abrogation or its specific circumstance or its interpretation, etc. (hence he was constrained to leave aside the hadith)."
(I'laaus Sunan, Vol. 2, page 225)

Shaikh Abu Amr(rahmatullah alayh) said:

"It is not easy to act according to the apparent (zaahir) text of what Imaam Shaafi said. It is not lawful for (even) every Faqeeh (qualified Aalim who has deep insight) to act independently with that which he opines to be proof from the Hadith."
(I'laaus Sunan, Vol. 2, page 225)


It also appears in I'laaus Sunan of muhaddith Zafar Ahmad Uthmaani (rahmatullah alayh):


"Imaam Sha'raani has also narrated it (i.e. the statement 'When the authenticity of a Hadith is established it is my Math-hab.'), attributing it to the four Imaams. It is not hidden (from understanding) that this is for the o*ne who has the ability (insight and qualification) in the Nusoos and the knowledge of its clear laws and its abrogations."
(Volume 2, page 226)


Discussing this statement in his treatise, Shaikh Yusuf Bin Ismaail Nibhaani says:

"Verily, the statement: 'When the Hadith has been authenticated, then it is my Math-hab' has been narrated from each o*ne of these four Imaams who were free from personal opinion. The audience to whom this statement ('When the Hadith is Saheeh it is my Math-hab.') was directed, is o*nly his (the Imaam's) Ashaab (the Fuqaha of his Math-hab) who were great and illustrious Aimmah fully qualified in the rational and narrational sciences (of the Deen). (And the statement is directed to) those who came after these illustrious Aimmah among the great Ulama of his Math-hab, those who were the Ahlut Tarjeeh (a high category of Ulama). All of them who were the Haafizeen of the Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) were fully aware of the daleels (proofs) of all the Math-habs.........These are the o*nes whom the Imaam (of the Math-hab) had directed his statement: 'When the Hadith is Saheeh, it is my Math-hab.'....Verily, they (these great Fuqaha) are able to reconcile between the Hadith from which the Imaam had derived proof, and the (latest) Hadith which was established as authentic after the Imaam. They (these illustrious Fuqaha) can see which of the two Hadiths is more authentic, stronger and which of the two Hadiths is the later o*ne so that the later o*ne can be the Naasikh (abrogator) for the earlier o*ne."

(Hujjatullah alal Aalameen)



It should now be crystal clear to every unbiased person possessing the least degree of Aql (intelligence) that the statement: "When the Hadith is Saheeh it is my Math-hab.", is directed to an audience of illustrious Fuqaha who were masters and experts in Ijtihaad; who had embraced all sciences of the Shar'i Uloom; who were Muqallideen of their Imaams, who were Huffaz of Hadith; who were experts of both narrational and rational (Manqool and Uqool) branches of knowledge; -in short, who were Ulama and Fuqaha of the highest category, whose likes did not again appear o*n earth after them nor will appear again o*n earth until the Day of Qiyaamah because those illustrious Fuqaha were a Band of Muhaqqiqeen whom Allah Ta'ala had specially created to formulate and systematise the Shariah for posterity in such a manner that no mudhil (deviate who leads astray) can ever hope to escape with his baatil interpolations and nafsaaniyat.

While the illustrious Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen directed their command to their Students (Fuqaha and Ulama of the highest category), these half-baked and raw salafi deviates direct the Aimma's statements to an audience of juhala-people who have yet to become adept in the basics of Tahaarat, Salaat, Saum, etc.

Even the greatest Aalim alive today cannot avail himself of the statement of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen, leave alone the myriads of half-baked Ulama. The masses cannot even be considered in this regard. Here in this context when we say 'half-baked' we are referring to even the present day Ulama-e-Haqq whose duty it is to safeguard the Shariah. Even these highly qualified Ulama of the present age are 'half-baked' and grossly under baked in relation to the giants and stars of the Shar'i Uloom who strode the Firmament of Islamic Knowledge and Piety during the Quroon-e-Thalathah.

The age for weighing the verdicts of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen against the Ahadith has long passed. It is downright silly and stupid for anyone in this age to run away with the puerile notion of having the ability to rectify, amend or refute any of the rulings of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen. Any such amendment to any of the rulings of the Aimmah-e-Arba-ah was affected many centuries ago-a thousand years ago-by their great Students and Ashaab. Indeed these deviate salafis are suffering from the disease of self-conceit and pride in their belief that 'erroneous' fataawa of the Aimmah had remained undetected for the past thousand years and that it was o*nly now in this age that a deviate like Al-Baani acquired the 'honour' to correct the 'mistakes' of the great Imaams of the Mathaahib.


THE DIRECTIVE OF THE AIMMAH


It needs no deep wisdom to understand the reason for the Aimmah's directive to their Ashaab/Students to review their rulings o*n the Standard of the Saheeh Hadith. The Shariah of Islam is the product of Wahi. It is not the product of anyone's opinion, be he the greatest Faqeeh. In that early age of Islam the Shariah had not yet been fully codified in chapter form and systematically reduced to writing and all the Ahadith had not been compiled. The age of Hadith compilation came much later. It was therefore likely that an Imaam was not aware of all the Ahadith o*n a specific subject. He would issue his fatwa o*n the basis of all available Nusoos (Qur'aanic aayat and Ahadith). However, when later he was apprized of a Saheeh Hadith which contradicted his fatwa, he would immediately review his ruling and if the authenticity and other relevant aspects of the Hadith were established, he would revoke his fatwa and issue a new fatwa. Similarly, if the Saheeh Hadith came to the attention of the Imaam's Ashaab after the death of the Imaam or in his absence, they would adopt the same process of review and amend their Imaam's ruling in obedience to his command to do so. Thus, the statement: "When the Hadith is Saheeh, it is my Math-hab", and similar other statements attributed to the Aimmah-e-Arba-ah, had their application during the age of Ijtihaad when the process of the formulation, codification and systematization of the Shariah was in progress. The authorities of the Shariah, viz., the Fuqaha-e-Mujtahideen, to whom the directive was issued by the Aimmah of the Mathaahib, had already given expression to this command. Thus these statements have outlived their utility and are no longer applicable for the simple reason that all the Saheeh Ahadith have already been compiled 1250 years ago. Any reviewing which had to be done, was completed 1250 years ago. The statements of the Aimmah in this regard have o*nly historical importance, and cannot be considered any longer for practical expression.

It is indeed ludicrous to run away with the assumption that for 1200 years any errors of the Aimmah Arbah remained undetected and a man like Al-Baani of this age came to rectify such 'errors'.


INTELLIGENCE


While the masses lack higher Islamic Knowledge, they do possess a degree of natural intelligence by means of which they may discern truth. The discernment for distinguishing between truth and falsehood is inborn in the Muslim. He o*nly has to be sincere and unbiased when hearing naseehat. He will then with the aid of Allah Ta'ala arrive at the avenue of guidance.

It should not be difficult for an unbiased Muslim to understand that it is not possible for thousands and thousands of Ulama and Fuqaha to submit to the Aimmah of the four Math-habs for the past 1250 years if they were in error. If Taqleed was in conflict with the Qur'aan and Sunnah, how could it have been possible for such a vast multitude of Ulama and Fuqaha to uphold this concept for all these centuries? Can it be possible that the entire Ummah was in darkness from the three early ages of Goodness (Quroon-e-Thalaathah) and a man like Al-Baani of this present age be o*n the path of rectitude in his denunciation of the Taqleed of the Four Imaams? Are the multitude of Fuqaha who lived in every age of Islam right or is the modernist salafi sect of this age right? Consult your intelligence with sincerity and you will not fail to see the light of hidaayah.


THE FOUR IMAAMS


The salafi sect make a great play of their supposed following of the Salf-e-Saalihoon. o*n close examination it will be discovered that while they call themselves salafis, they are not the followers of the Salf-e-Saalihoon. In their own definition of the Salf, they include the Fuqaha and Ulama of Khairul Quroon (the Noblest Ages) which according to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) were the ages of the Sahaabah, Taabi-oon and Tab-e-Taabi-oon. o*n this score there is consensus. If these salafis do have love and respect for the Salf-e-Saalihoon as they vociferously claim in their talks to unwary audiences, why do they condemn the Taqleed of the Salf-e-Saalihoon? If they honour and love the Salf-e-Saalihoon, why do they hurl vile epithets at those Muslims who follow the Salf-e-Saalihoon? It should be noted that all the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen (the Four Imaams and other Mujtahideen) belonged to the Quroon-e-Thalaathah. They are the Salf-e-Saalihoon. Ibn Taimiyyah and Ibn Qayyim who are in actual fact the Imaams of the salafi sect (but they do not overtly proclaim this) are not among the Salf-e-Saalihoon. The following dates of birth of these personalities will indicate who the Salf actually are:

Imaam Abu Hanifah 80 Hijri
Imaam Maalik 94 Hijri
Imaam Shaafi 150 Hijri
Imaam Hambal 164 Hijri.

All four illustrious Imaams of the Mathaahib belonged to the initial noble epoch of Islam, hence all are among the Salf-e-Salihoon whose obedience is commanded by the Qur'aan and Hadith.

But Ibn Taimiyyah was born in 661 Hijri, almost six centuries after Imaam Abu Hanifah. Ibn Qayyim was born in 691 Hijri, more than 600 years after Imaam Abu Hanifah. Thus, these two Imaams of the salafi sect are separated from the age of the Salf-e-Saalihoon by six centuries. Inspite of this great gap between the Salf-e-Saalihoon and the Imaams of the salafi sect, the latter heeds the propagations of these two individuals who appear o*n the scene in a belated age, distanced far and wide from the Salf-e-Saalihoon.

While licking up every opinion of their miscreant Imaams, these salafis have volumes of criticism for the followers of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen who were truly the Salf-e-Saalihoon for whom submission by the Ummah is a divine decree. The Qur'aan commands:


"O People of Imaan! Obey Allah, obey the Rasool and the Ulool Amr among you."


The Ulool Amr (the Leaders) mentioned in this Qur'aanic verse apply in the first instance to the Sahaabah, next to the Taabioon and then to the Tab-e-Taabioon. These are the three illustrious groups of the Sunnah singled out for obedience by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). He, therefore said:


"The best of ages is my age, then the next age and then the age following."

These are the ages of the Sahaabah, Taabi-oon and Tab-e-Taabioon. These are the ages of the Salf accepted by even the modernist salafi sect.

Speaking glowingly of the Salf-e-Saalihoon, the Qur'aan Majeed says:
.

"Those who went ahead first (the Sahaabah) among the Muhaajireen and Ansaar, and those who followed them with goodness, Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him...."
(Aayat 100, Surah Taubah)


Allah Ta'ala expresses His pleasure with these Salf-e-Saalihoon, yet the salafis of this age deem it appropriate to condemn the Ummah and brand them as 'cows' and 'dogs' for making Taqleed of the Salf-e-Saalihoon.


WHO ARE THE FOLLOWERS OF THE SALAF?


In the exercise to denigrate Taqleed of the Salf, the salafi sect takes its cue from Ibn Taimiyyah and mainly from Ibn Qayyim, the student of Ibn Taimiyyah, both of whom were not part of the Salf-e-Saalihoon. While these salafis adopted the uninhibited blind following of Ibn Qayyim, they have the rude audacity of vilifying those who follow the Salf-e-Saalihoon-the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen. Every unbiased Muslim can judge for himself and ascertain who the followers of the Salf are. The Muqallidoon who follow the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen or those who follow Ibn Taimiyyah and Ibn Qayyim? While the Shariah commands the following of the Salf-e-Saalihoon, there is no such command to obey Ibn Taimiyyah and Ibn Qayyim. Thus, those who are making Taqleed of the Aimmah Arba-ah are the true followers of the Salf.

It is indeed very surprising to note that the salafis do not have any vile epithets for those who follow Ibn Taimiyyah and Ibn Qayyim, but for the Ummah following the Salf-e-Saalihoon whose obedience has been commanded by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) they have a large armoury of scornful epithets.

In this article we have dealt with o*nly o*ne aspect of the claims made by this deviant sect calling themselves, salafis. That aspect is their misinterpretation of the Aimmah's statement:

"When the Hadith is Saheeh, it is my Math-hab."

Insha'Allah, in future articles all the other baatil aspects of modern-day salafi'ism will be dealt with and exposed for their falsity.

"The Majlis" Vol 12 No 4

http://www.themajlis.net/Sections-article235-p1.html

[Abdur_Rahman]

The Deception of
the Salafi Sect

When a man wishes to unfetter himself from the restrictions of the Shariah and the Sunnah in the present day, the solution for him is to become a so-called Salafi. o*nce he joins the Salafi deviant sect, he is free to find expression for his nafsaani opinions. In order to draw unwary and ignorant Muslims into its fold of dhalaal and baatil, the modernists salafis employ deception o*n a large scale.

A salient feature of this sect of baatil is their rejection of the Math-habs of the Salf-e-Saalihoon. Inspite of their rejection of the Mathaahib of Haqq espoused by the Salf-e-Saalihoon, these mudhilleen (deviates who lead others astray) seek to bamboozle the unwary and the ignorant by making ostentatious claims of their 'Love' and 'respect' for the Ulama and Fuqaha. The masses are ignorant. They lack the knowledge to distinguish between right and left; they do not possess the ability to verify and understand the statements of the Fuqaha which these salafi deviates selectively quote to bolster their corruptive arguments. Let us examine o*ne example of the deception they employ to hoodwink the unwary and the ignorant.

http://www.themajlis.net/Sections-article235-p1.html

:salam:

akhi, it would've been easier to post a few paragraphs and give the link
;)

[Sunni_Student786]

As salaamu alayku.

Brother Abu Bakr, I apologize in advance if my tone seems harsh in this post. Such is not my intention, but my style of analysis and discussion comes off as such online. I apologize once more in advance.

I would like to deal with some of the statements that you made in your last post. I know brother Ahsirfan has already addressed them, but I would like to also address them from another angle.

1) "imam nawawi was not an absolute mujtahid and he never did taqleed of the shafi madhab"

The first part of your statement, i.e. "Imam nawawi was not an absolute Mujtahid" is correct, but no one has said anything to the contrary. The second part of your statement, i.e. "he (Imam Nawawi) never did taqleed of the shafi madhab" is incorrect. He did make Taqleed of the Shafi madhab. Not the whole of its rulings, since he himself was a Mujtahid WITHIN the Shafi madhab, but insofar as following its USUL was concerned (i.e. Methodology used to assign priority to, and verify the relative strengths and weaknesses of evidences, and to classify rulings derived through the use of such a methodology into different categories). The only reason he did not have to make Taqleed of the previous rulings was because he himself was a Mujtahid WITHIN the madhab; anyone else would have to do so.

2) "yes he learnt the shafi madhab and followed its principles and disciplines but he essentialy followed the evidences"

What do you mean by "learning the shafi madhab and following its principles and disciplines" other than making Taqleed of it? Obviously his Taqleed, a Mujtahid WITHIN the madhab, and that of a laymen are different. His Taqleed involves applying the Madhab's USUL to deduce a ruling and our's involves following the rulings deduced by such Mujtahids. Can there be any other meaning or significance to his learning of the shafi madhab and following of its principles and differences than this?

And as for the second part of your sentence, i.e. "...but he essentially followed the evidences", as mentioned by my brother "Ahsirfan", this was possible because he was a Mujtahid WITHIN the Shafi madhab and not a laymen. But even so, HE STILL MADE TAQLEED of the Shafi madhab, but as a Mujtahid within the madhab, which means that he used its USUL when considering and evaluating the evidences in order to derive a ruling. HE STILL MADE TAQLEED.

3) " from the words of imam nawawi we know that he nver called to one of the 4 madhabs and follow them exclusively."

He implicitly did. He said that one should follow a reliable scholar, according to your own statement, regardless of their MADHAB. What this shows is that it is being assumed that any reliable scholar will belong to a Madhab. Their "belonging" to a madhab will be either in terms of (i) them using the USUL of one of the four orthodox madhabs to derive rulings from the evidences, after being authorized by one having an "Isnaad" (chain/link) of "ijaza" (authorization) going back to one of the four Mujtahid Imams, or (ii) by relating the rulings derived by such Ulema as previously described who are collectively considered to BELONG TO THAT MADHAB.

As for the rest of what you said bro, I think that Ahsirfan has explained what's wrong with those statements quite well.

Jazakallahu khair.

Wa'salaam.

[Mushy]

Assalaamu 'alaykum warahmatullah,

I don't get this...


How do you know that there isn't a Sahih hadith which contradicts this one?


THe hadith is from Bukhari's sahih, who has scrutinised the chains of narration and is fairly reliable indeed, if not of the most reliable compilers. If we said that there is a 50:50 possibility of many similar sahih hadith being contradicted then where would we be. THe hadith is there, it is hasan, the knowledge has come and until it is out rightly contradicted why not say 'we hear (the truth) and we obey (the truth)'...?

[Sunni_Student786]

Imam Bukhari has scrutinized the hadith and its chain's and established the fact that such a statement was made, not that it is not contradicted by another hadith, for that is not what a Muhaddith does. A muhaddith, such as Imam Bukhari (ra) ascertains the reliability of the narration only. It is a Faqih, i.e. a specialist in fiqh, that looks at the entire corpus of hadith, after the reliability of those hadith has been ascertained by the Muhadditheen, and then draws rulings from them by determining whether or not there is another reliable narration(s) that seemingly contradicts another one on a matter, if one is abrogated by another, if one was utter in the beginning of Islam while another was the final ruling of the Prophet (pbuh), etc.

The Fuqaha, who had their work preserved in the various madhaahib, have already done the work of looking through all the reliable hadith, whose reliability was ascertained by luminaries such as Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim, and others, figuring out if "contradiction" exist, which hadith are conditioned by others, which represent the Prophet's(peace be upon him) initial and then final judgements on matters, etc. So when people follow the rulings of one of four authentic madhabs on a matter, they do indeed "hear and obey", for all of the madhaahib's rulings have been formed only after carefully considering the WHOLE of the Qur'an and the ENTIRE corpus of hadith.

Think of it this way, "We hear and obey Allah and his Messenger (peace be upon him) by relying on the judgements deduced by Ulema, who have a chain (i.e. Isnad) of authorization (i.e. Ijaza) going back to the Prophet (peace be upon him), who made their judgements after carefully considering the whole of the Qur'an, Sunnah, and Companions understanding of both and by applying derivation principles that devised by those who also had a chain of authorization going back to the Prophet (peace be upon him) for doing so."