Support for Taqleed of One Madhab

[MillatIbraheem]

as-Salaam 'Alaykum

That's great, as I said earlier you're entitled to your opinion as so am I, Taqleed and Mathhahib are two separate issues and can't be entertained or joined together as neither of the two are Shareeah defined

The only relevant matter from the Sahaabah was their ijmaa', their individual practices aren't considered daleel for a Muslim

There's more important things to be done than verbal gymnastics, you've chosen your path and I have chosen mines, we will see whose correct only on the Day of Resurrection

[Zahed]

as-Salaam 'Alaykum

That's great, as I said earlier you're entitled to your opinion as so am I, Taqleed and Mathhahib are two separate issues and can't be entertained or joined together as neither of the two are Shareeah defined

The same tedious lecture! It's your own evaluation.

The only relevant matter from the Sahaabah was their ijmaa', their individual practices aren't considered daleel for a Muslim

And Taqleed is our ijma. Individual practices were according to Quran and Sunnah, then why those won't be considered as daleel?

There's more important things to be done than verbal gymnastics, you've chosen your path and I have chosen mines, we will see whose correct only on the Day of Resurrection

This is the worst thing that you are challenging him because he is a muqallid. And you are considering him misguided.

[al_Zayn]

as-Salaam 'Alaykum

That's great, as I said earlier you're entitled to your opinion as so am I, Taqleed and Mathhahib are two separate issues and can't be entertained or joined together as neither of the two are Shareeah defined

Obviously it's great, it's great to make assumptions and claims but what is even greater is to provide substance and backing to every claim made.

Taqleed and Madhaahib go hand in hand, you can't seperate Doctors from their Patients. Otherwise the actions of the Ummah (Scholars and laymen alike) over the past millenium is clear proof of this.

But if your implying that Taqleed of anyone can be done, then please answer my question previously:

So are you implying that if someone wanted to do Taqleed of Hisham Kabbani or Tahir al-Qadri because this layperson trusted them for their knowledge and piety, then it is okay?

you say:

The only relevant matter from the Sahaabah was their ijmaa', their individual practices aren't considered daleel for a Muslim

Who said the practice of the Sahaabah are no proof? i believe Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned their practices are Hujjah.

What strikes me odd is that the Laa Madh-habiyyah know very well that not only the Sahaabah are proof but also the Salaf too. It's just when it suits their whims they will resort in saying their practices are not proof.

Anyway, Rasulullah sent Mu'adh Bin Jabal to Yemen to give them Fatawa and to be followed in Islamic verdicts also Mu'adh wasn't questioned on the fatawa he gave regarding it's Daleel from where he took it - so you had Mu'adhees at the time of Rasulillah just that they didn't go by that name. Clear proof of Taqleed al-Shakhsi - approved by none other than Rasulullah

There's more important things to be done than verbal gymnastics, you've chosen your path and I have chosen mines, we will see whose correct only on the Day of Resurrection

Correct! people cant give substance to their lip service.

[Nawawi619]

As Salamu Alaykum


I think the problem with Anfal's logic and argument is he claims to be following the Quran and Sunnah yet, unless he lived during the time of the Prophet salla llahu alayhi wa alihi wa sallam, he has to rely on centuries of scholars to even have access to the Quran and Sunnah. He also puts out a fallacious argument that a madhhab is only the work of one Imam or scholar. In fact the madhhab is a collective work of thousands of scholars from each generation starting with the mujtahid mutlaq imam who laid out the principles and preliminary rulings only to have them revised (if necessary), reevaluated, and transmitted to the next generation of top ranked scholars. For example the soundest positions of the Shafi'i school isnt necessarily the work of Imam Shafi'i alone but a collective of scholars through the centuries that have upgraded, reevaluated, etc the rulings from the previous generations. That is why Imam Nawawi and Imam Rafi'i became the main reference of the later Shafi'i school and not Imam Shafi'i. Another thing is Anfal assumes that we just blindly follow. If one looks at the countless classical works of fiqh from the madhahib there are muktasars, there are mabsut, there are fatawa collections all play a role in the madhhab. If one wanted to see the detailed methodology or proofs for a particular school one could, for example in the shafii school turn to al Majmu' of imam nawawi which runs into around 25-30 volumes (depending on publisher).

Anfal is either ignoring or is ignorant of the centuries of Islamic scholarship and its history in the role of fiqh. The fact that he is quoting ibn Kathir, or bukhari means he is making taqlid of their (in ibn kathir's case) interpretation of Quran or the scholarship in hadith of imam bukhari. Since he reject the works of scholars and only go by the Quran and Sunnah can he with his own knowledge ascertain which hadith are authentic to what isnt authentic? Can he supply us the methodology on how he came about relying on that hadith since taqlid and blindly following isnt ok with him? Also, can he confirm that the quran he is reading from is in fact the quran that was revealed to our prophet salla llahu alayhi wa sallam? Does he know with certainty that the publisher of the quran copy he has is in fact reliable?

[MillatIbraheem]

as-Salaam 'Alaykum

Taqleed is an issue that has been debated by actual 'Olema for centuries, some have claimed it to be Haraam for individual who have studied, others went as far as to claim it to be Fard, one can find 'Olema for nearly all view points

Individual Sahaabah are not Hujjah except through ijmaa, as their ijmaa is the Sunnah. The only individual whose actions and words are intrinsically Hujjah was Rasoollullaah as evident from the kalamullaah wamaa yantiqu 'anil-hawaa, in howa illaa wahiyun yooha, if you disagree, that's your choice

I choose to not follow a Mathhab, as in my Imaan, it's the safest route and nearest to the Sunnah without adding onto the religion. It's my choice and has no affect on you or your aakhirah

The Yemenites weren't prohibited from following other individuals and they weren't obliged to follow one Sahaabi, the example has been proven to be irrelevant

Once again, you're entitled to whatever opinion you've adopted, there's no room for pushing one's view on another, differing is acceptable and debating it with me won't change my Imaan

[al_Zayn]

as-Salaam 'Alaykum

Taqleed is an issue that has been debated by actual 'Olema for centuries, some have claimed it to be Haraam for individual who have studied, others went as far as to claim it to be Fard, one can find 'Olema for nearly all view points

If you disagreed then fine, state your opinion and keep it at that - but dont make assumptions and claims on other peoples works then not provide any substance for it.

By all means hold your view, i ain't putting a gun to your head to change it.

Individual Sahaabah are not Hujjah except through ijmaa, as their ijmaa is the Sunnah. The only individual whose actions and words are intrinsically Hujjah was Rasoollullaah as evident from the kalamullaah wamaa yantiqu 'anil-hawaa, in howa illaa wahiyun yooha, if you disagree, that's your choice

130+ Fuqahaa amongst the Hundreds of Thousands of Sahaabah . Majority of the Sahaabah who weren't Mujthahideen did Taqleed. Infact some of them did Taqleed al-Shakhsi as has been recorded by Sahih al-Bukhari and others.

Whatever the case Taqleed al-Shakhsi was in vogue at the time of the Sahaabah

Is this one individual Sahaabi doing Taqleed al-Shakhsi to another individual Sahaabi? no! its many of them abiding by the opinions of one of the learned Sahaabi.

So how can this be even classed as am individual opinion?

I choose to not follow a Mathhab, as in my Imaan, it's the safest route and nearest to the Sunnah without adding onto the religion. It's my choice and has no affect on you or your aakhirah

So you dont abide by a Madh-hab, but you do Taqleed? correct?

If you want to talk about safest route for the Imaan, then the Madh-habs are the nearest to the Sunnah not someone who came 1400 years later. and obviously these Imams were the Imaams - and they are people far from the innovators.

The Yemenites weren't prohibited from following other individuals and they weren't obliged to follow one Sahaabi, the example has been proven to be irrelevant

So Rasulullah ordered Mu'adh to teach and the yemenites to learn from him and take him as their leader in Islamic affiars, is not proof? how many Sahaabah were sent? ONE. How many Sahabah did the yemenites ask? ONE. How many issued Fatawa in Yemen? ONE. Did the Yemenites says: "where is the Daleel"? No.

I fail to see how it is ir-relevant.

Once again, you're entitled to whatever opinion you've adopted, there's no room for pushing one's view on another, differing is acceptable and debating it with me won't change my Imaan

hold your view, but dont make claims then not provide substance for it - that is what i am saying

[naqshbandiosmanli]

As Salamu Alaykum


I think the problem with Anfal's logic and argument is he claims to be following the Quran and Sunnah yet, unless he lived during the time of the Prophet salla llahu alayhi wa alihi wa sallam, he has to rely on centuries of scholars to even have access to the Quran and Sunnah. He also puts out a fallacious argument that a madhhab is only the work of one Imam or scholar. In fact the madhhab is a collective work of thousands of scholars from each generation starting with the mujtahid mutlaq imam who laid out the principles and preliminary rulings only to have them revised (if necessary), reevaluated, and transmitted to the next generation of top ranked scholars. For example the soundest positions of the Shafi'i school isnt necessarily the work of Imam Shafi'i alone but a collective of scholars through the centuries that have upgraded, reevaluated, etc the rulings from the previous generations. That is why Imam Nawawi and Imam Rafi'i became the main reference of the later Shafi'i school and not Imam Shafi'i. Another thing is Anfal assumes that we just blindly follow. If one looks at the countless classical works of fiqh from the madhahib there are muktasars, there are mabsut, there are fatawa collections all play a role in the madhhab. If one wanted to see the detailed methodology or proofs for a particular school one could, for example in the shafii school turn to al Majmu' of imam nawawi which runs into around 25-30 volumes (depending on publisher).

Anfal is either ignoring or is ignorant of the centuries of Islamic scholarship and its history in the role of fiqh. The fact that he is quoting ibn Kathir, or bukhari means he is making taqlid of their (in ibn kathir's case) interpretation of Quran or the scholarship in hadith of imam bukhari. Since he reject the works of scholars and only go by the Quran and Sunnah can he with his own knowledge ascertain which hadith are authentic to what isnt authentic? Can he supply us the methodology on how he came about relying on that hadith since taqlid and blindly following isnt ok with him? Also, can he confirm that the quran he is reading from is in fact the quran that was revealed to our prophet salla llahu alayhi wa sallam? Does he know with certainty that the publisher of the quran copy he has is in fact reliable?

Bismillah
Salaam alaikum,

These are excellent points made here, and I would further it them.

Often we here from the modern heterodoxy that the only proof used in Islam is the Quran and Sahih Hadith; but where does this categorical injunction reside? Which ayah says,"Only follow the Qur'an and Sahih Hadith" in such a decisive fashion that it would eliminate all other avenues of knowledge? Where is the ayah or sahih hadith that outlines the criteria of the various grades of ahadith; did the Prophet salallahu alaihi wa salim tell us what constitutes a sahih hadith, hasan hadith, da'if hadith, etc? Now how stupid would a person be to say, "if the Prophet salallahu alaihi wa salim did not state that there is such a thing as grades and classifications of hadith, I won't believe in it, and give me the daleel that I have to believe in them"? After all, the sahih, hasan, da'if grading systems have been made by 'ulama, who I guess can't be trusted as some of the posts here opine. Allah save us from stupidity and small mindedness.

I find it to be particularly abhorrent how many people who convert to Islam immediately fall into this arrogant stance as though they know what Islam is better than 'ulama. You were in kufr and shirk and completely jahil for most of your life, aka, you were completely WRONG about everything for most of your life, have you under gone such a transformation that you think you yourself are infallible? You are quick to accuse of ulama (all of whom the ummah owes everything to, as without them, we would no absolutely nothing about Islam) of being corrupt, and as though their corruption was so widespread that you have to challenge everything they said, but do you ever challenge yourselves? Since you were in complete ignorance the majority of your life, does it ever cross your mind that you could be absolutely wrong?

You should know that the only du'a that is fard/wajib in Islam is asking Allah for guidence; ihdinas siratulmustaqim, and you have to say this more than a dozen times a day. So how can you call Allah and say, "Guide me" and then turn around and feel as though you are rightly guided? Why so much confidence in yourself, when you were so confident in your kufr for most of your life?

This is a deen for the humble and meek slaves, not the proud and arrogant. Learn from your past and how you lived day by day thinking all was well, until Allah gave you a drop of guidance and showed you that your whole kaafir life was absolutely WRONG. Be humble, and don't say things and accuse people of things that you will regret for eternity.