Ibn 'Uthaymin on Taqlid.

[Abu Zakariya Yahya]

Your comparison with Ml. Rashid Ahmad Gangohi is idiotic to say the least. We have Sh. Bin Baz and his Salafi students stating themselves they are not Hanbali and follow the "proof." So this is not slander.

If you want to prove the opposite: go ahead and cite from his words clearly that he is a Hanbali in its true sense,

http://www.binbaz.org.sa/mat/8225

س1: هل لسماحتكم مذهب فقهي خاص وما هو منهجكم في الفتوى والأدلة؟
ج1: مذهبي في الفقه هو مذهب الإمام أحمد بن حنبل رحمه الله وليس على سبيل التقليد ولكن على سبيل الاتباع في الأصول التي سار عليها، أما مسائل الخلاف فمنهجي فيها هو ترجيح ما يقتضي الدليل ترجيحه والفتوى بذلك سواء وافق ذلك مذهب الحنابلة أم خالفه، لأن الحق أحق بالاتباع، وقد قال الله عز وجل: {يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ذَلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا}

[Rifai]

Only taking fatawa from ´ulama of one madhhab or not doing so is not the issue here, for several reasons.

Firstly,

a- Following a madhhab does not stop you from following your desires if that is what you seek to do. How many times do we not see brothers on this forum criticize others for following opinions who the accusers claim are not strong enough etc, although they might be perfectly permissible to act upon according to the structure of the madhhab of the accused.

If it is said, one should only stick to mu´tamad/mash'hur, then firstly, this is against the general understanding of the Imams of the Shafi´iyah for example, and secondly, most laymen are completely incapable of ascertaining what the mu´tamad/mash'hur of the madhhab is, so he is forced to trust the claims of the scholar he asks. And so the circle is formed.

b- Asking scholars of different madhahib, or alternative asking a scholar who does tarjih/restricted ijtihad etc. does not necessitate "following desires". Some equate desires with the most lenient opinion; this argument is extremely weak, as most Salafis fall under this category, and they obviously do not adhere to all the lenient opinions. As for following desires in general (whether strict or lenient), while this is possible (although far from everyone does it), this is also possible while claiming to adhere to a specific madhhab.

To add to that, if we go back to leniency; many Usuli scholars believed that one is very much permitted to follow the easiest fatwa, and they base this on Sayyidina Rasulu'Allah (salla'Allahu ´alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) choosing the easier of two conflicting matters for his Ummah. While I personally do not adhere to this understanding, nor do I believe that it is correct; it is nevertheless an opinion of some Usuli Imams. And since I am not a Mujtahid, who am I to contest the Usul, right?

On the other hand, often those who say that one can ask any pious and knowledgable Mufti for a fatwa, regardless of madhhab, are inconsistent, for they would criticize a brother from doing the Rifa´i/Shadhili styled hadra, even though he may have asked what he considers to be a reliable Mufti, and been told that it is Mubah, or even Mandub. So we ask for consistency. That's the least to be expected in terms of fairness.

Wa Allahu a´lam.

[ImamGhazzaali]

Assalaamu 'alaykum sidi Rifa'i.

a- Following a madhhab does not stop you from following your desires if that is what you seek to do. How many times do we not see brothers on this forum criticize others for following opinions who the accusers claim are not strong enough etc, although they might be perfectly permissible to act upon according to the structure of the madhhab of the accused.

If it is said, one should only stick to mu´tamad/mash'hur, then firstly, this is against the general understanding of the Imams of the Shafi´iyah for example, and secondly, most laymen are completely incapable of ascertaining what the mu´tamad/mash'hur of the madhhab is, so he is forced to trust the claims of the scholar he asks. And so the circle is formed.

Well said. However, I believe the Hanafi madhhab is stricter in regards to a layman following the mu'tamad view...

To add to that, if we go back to leniency; many Usuli scholars believed that one is very much permitted to follow the easiest fatwa, and they base this on Sayyidina Rasulu'Allah (salla'Allahu ´alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) choosing the easier of two conflicting matters for his Ummah. While I personally do not adhere to this understanding, nor do I believe that it is correct; it is nevertheless an opinion of some Usuli Imams. And since I am not a Mujtahid, who am I to contest the Usul, right?

On the other hand, often those who say that one can ask any pious and knowledgable Mufti for a fatwa, regardless of madhhab, are inconsistent, for they would criticize a brother from doing the Rifa´i/Shadhili styled hadra, even though he may have asked what he considers to be a reliable Mufti, and been told that it is Mubah, or even Mandub. So we ask for consistency. That's the least to be expected in terms of fairness.

Wa Allahu a´lam.

A few questions sidi,

1) Can you please state some Usooli scholars that allowed one to follow the easiest fatwa? Also, did they allow it only when the person is not doing out of desires?
2) Those that are inconsistent, when they say that one can ask any pious and knowledgeable Mufti for a fatwa, why is the case? Could you give an easier example, perhaps to do with salah?

Wassalam.

[Abu Jahid]

Off topic Akhi, but were you Hanbali before or a different Madhab? I think I remember you being Hanafi..

وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته

yes, I changed from Hanafi to Hanbali.

How are you doing akhil karim?
By the way: I'm surprised that you're not banned... ;-)

مع السلامة

[Abu Zakariya Yahya]

Hanbali in its true sense,

What is the meaning exactly of "Hanbali in the true sense"? Does it mean one specifically must call himself Hanbali, or use it as a name? Was Ibn Taymiyah Hanbali "In the true sense"? If you've heard any books of the Hanbali Usool and have found where exactly it says how to be a "True sense Hanbali" please go ahead and post the exact quote and location, as of right now though there is an overwhelming pattern within in the Madhab and that is that the scholar within the Madhab who is NOT a Muqalid, follows the Usool of the Madhab to arrive upon the correct position according to what he understood from the text, if you have noticed something else please explain.

[al_Zayn]

Sh al-Albani says in al-Hadith Hujjah Bi-Nafsih:

الحديث حجة بنفسه في العقائد والأحكام

على أنني أرى إطلاق الكلام في العامي وأنه لا بد له من تقليد لا يخلو من شيء. لأنك إذا تذكرت أن التقليد هو العمل بقول الغير من غير حجة فمن السهل في كثير من الأحيان على بعض أذكياء العامة أن يعرف الحجة لوضوحها في النص الذي بلغه فمن الذي يزعم أن مثل قوله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم: "التيمم ضربة واحدة للوجه والكفين" لا تبين الحجة فيه لهم بل ولمن دونهم في الذكاء؟ ولذلك فالحق أن يقال: إن من عجز عن معرفة الدليل فهو الذي يجب عليه التقليد

Sh al-Albani says:

However, I believe that to generalise about the common folk by saying that they all must perform taqleed is invalid. Taqleed is to follow others without evidence. Many intelligent people can clearly understand evidence if it is presented to them.

Who can deny that a common person can understand the evidence contained in the hadeeth, "Tayammum is one strike (of the hands on the dust) for the face and hands"?

Even people lacking intelligence can understand this hadeeth. Therefore, the truth is that we must say that Taqleed is allowed for whosoever cannot search for or understand the evidence.

This is the proof of the "Neo Salafis / Ahlul Hadith" that say a layman can understand proof by using Sh. al-Albani's words despite the fact that Sh. al-Albani went against the words of Imam Ibn 'Abd al-Barr who said a layman cannot understand proof. How many times i have met a jahil like that who would say "there's the hadith it's simple to understand we should follow it not blind follow Imams", like a gazillions of times. Okay this may not be following the desires, rather Taqleed (even if they don't know) BUT this imitation is dangerous, because this is pure Ta'assub (i am right, you are absolutely wrong - type of behaviour). Lets not deny this.

[Jadeed]

Sh al-Albani says in al-Hadith Hujjah Bi-Nafsih:



This is the proof of the "Neo Salafis / Ahlul Hadith" that say a layman can understand proof by using Sh. al-Albani's words despite the fact that Sh. al-Albani went against the words of Imam Ibn 'Abd al-Barr who said a layman cannot understand proof. How many times i have met a jahil like that who would say "there's the hadith it's simple to understand we should follow it not blind follow Imams", like a gazillions of times. Okay this may not be following the desires, rather Taqleed (even if they don't know) BUT this imitation is dangerous, because this is pure Ta'assub (i am right you are absolutely wrong behaviour). Lets not deny this.

This is an incorrect stance of the Shaikh , like his stance on hukm bi ghayri ma anzal Allah, his stance on hijab, his stance on the nature of kufr and eeman, and some other stances of his that are distant from the Jumhoor. He also said other strange things, like 'a Muhaddith is automatically a Faqeeh by the nature of his condition,' which is clearly not accurate.

[al_Zayn]

This is an incorrect stance of the Shaikh , like his stance on hukm bi ghayri ma anzal Allah, his stance on hijab, his stance on the nature of kufr and eeman, and some other stances of his that are distant from the Jumhoor. He also said other strange things, like 'a Muhaddith is automatically a Faqeeh by the nature of his condition,' which is clearly not accurate.

But try telling that to one of those loud mouthed fanatics.

[Jadeed]

But try telling that to one of those loud mouthed fanatics.

Likewise, try telling a sub-continent Hanafi that it's not waajib on everybody to follow a mad'hab to the exact absolute letter and there's no ijmaa' on it.

[al_Zayn]

Likewise, try telling a sub-continent Hanafi that it's not waajib on everybody to follow a mad'hab to the exact absolute letter and there's no ijmaa' on it.

To imply this view (Wujoob of following a Madh-hab) is that of the sub-continent Hanafis is gross mis-information, Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Nawawi, neither born in the subcontinent nor is a Hanafi says in his Majmu':

المجموع شرح المهذب

" والثاني " : يلزمه وبه قطع أبو الحسن إلكيا ، وهو جار في كل من لم يبلغ رتبة الاجتهاد من الفقهاء وأصحاب سائر العلوم ، ووجهه أنه لو جاز اتباع أي مذهب شاء لأفضى إلى أن يلتقط رخص المذاهب متبعا هواه ، ويتخير بين التحليل والتحريم والوجوب والجواز . وذلك يؤدي إلى انحلال ربقة التكليف بخلاف العصر الأول ، فإنه لم تكن المذاهب الوافية بأحكام الحوادث مهذبة وعرفت ، فعلى هذا يلزمه أن يجتهد في اختيار مذهب يقلده على التعيين ،

Imam al-Nawawi says:

“The second view is that is obligatory for him to follow one particular school, and that was the defnitive position according to Imām Abū ’l-Hasan (رحمه الله) (the father of Imām al-Haramayn Al-Jawīnī). And this applies to everyone who has not reached the rank of the ijtihād of the jurists and scholars of other disciplines. The reason for this ruling is that if it were permissible to follow any school one wished, it would lead to hand-picking the dispensations of the schools and following one’s desires. He would be choosing between halāl and harām, and obligatory and permissible. Ultimately, that would lead to relinquishing oneself from the burden of responsibility. This is not the same as during the first generations, for the schools that were sufcient in terms of their rulings for newer issues were neither codifed nor widespread. Thus, on this basis it is obligatory for a person to strive in choosing only one madh’hab which he follows.”

There may not be a definite Ijma' but this is the ruling the Ahnaf have taken and Scholars of other Schools previously have echoed the same thing, in fact the four Schools surviving and the Muslim population agreeing and following one of these Schools ('Ulama and 'Ammah alike) is sufficient proof that this has become "the way of the believers", which if it is not Ijma definitely is Jamhur!

A layman Neo "Salafi" telling people that he acts upon hadith (which he understands) that he doesn't blind follow anyone (which is Taqlid to him) nor blind follows the Imams and then tries to force his opinion on everyone whilst disregarding other schools and their proofs is a Fanatic to the first degree compared to a sub-continent Hanafi that says it is Wajib to follow a School, and you know that very well.

Wallahu A'lam