

When a scholar is described as being a shafi'i or a hanafi or a maliki or a hambali, what is intended is :
-he based his judgements on the usool of this particular school he ascribed to
-he followed in most of his verdicts, the verdicts which has been made by the previous (or contemporary) scholars of this school
-never it is intended that in all matters he follows the verdicts of this imam even if it said that this scholars was a "muqallid" of such and such imam.
I'm not aware of a scholar who has followed in all the matters one single Imam. Even the students of Abu Hanifa(rh) have disagreed with him, but yet Imam Abu Yusuf(rh) for example is still considered as a hanafi.
The same can be said about the deobandis, who described themselves as "hanafi" but in some fiqhi rules have chose to follow other opinions that the opinion of Imam Abu Hanifa(rh).
wAllahu a'lam.
It is reported from Abu Umamah from the Prophet (Sallallahu 'Alayhi WaSallam) that he said:
اتَّقُوا فِرَاسَةَ الْمُؤْمِنِ ، فَإِنَّهُ يَنْظُرُ بِنُورِ اللَّهِ
" Fear the Insight of the Believer, for verily he sees with the Light of God"
رقم الحديث: 3362
المعجم الأوسط للطبراني

Ask this fool why he did not ascribe himself as Hanbali or Hanafi or Maliki. Why as Shafi'i only if it only meant that you agree with someone who has the proof, he should have also called himself as Hanbali etc?
As said earlier, it means he followed the usul of the Imam but it does not mean he agrees everything with what the Imam syas. This poor la madhabi does not seems to udnerstand that a madhab develops and different opinions in a madhab can arise.
These scholars clearly talk about their school as "our scholars" (ashaabunaa) said this or that, meaning, our scholars of the Shafi'i madhhab etc.
And if he were to ask for a gentle lady in marriage, he would be refused, and when he leaves the world it does not miss him, and if he goes out, his going out is not noticed, and if he falls sick, he is not attended to, and if he dies, he is not accompanied to his grave.

You mean to say the one who abides by any one of the schools and may not neccesarily accept or follow every ruling of that school is doing Taqleed of that school. If so, what does "Usool" mean here.
And then why can't a la-mazhabi say that I follow the imam to whom thier practises more so go inline with .... say imam ahmed bin humble r.e.h in Usool but do not agree with all the practises that they do. Thus they get an authority to pick and choose. This is exactly what the la-mazhabi's are doing aren't they ?
I have seen them shower great respect more so to Imam Ahmed bin Humble r.e.h yet they claim not to do his Taqleed.

Brother Colonel,
This part of his tafseer indicates he was against Taqleed the last few lines of the tafseer.
. وَقَوْله " فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْء فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه وَالرَّسُول " قَالَ مُجَاهِد وَغَيْر وَاحِد مِنْ السَّلَف أَيْ إِلَى كِتَاب اللَّه وَسُنَّة رَسُوله. وَهَذَا أَمْر مِنْ اللَّه عَزَّ وَجَلَّ " بِأَنَّ كُلّ شَيْء تَنَازَعَ النَّاس فِيهِ مِنْ أُصُول الدِّين وَفُرُوعه أَنْ يُرَدّ التَّنَازُع فِي ذَلِكَ إِلَى الْكِتَاب وَالسُّنَّة كَمَا قَالَ تَعَالَى وَمَا اِخْتَلَفْتُمْ فِيهِ مِنْ شَيْء فَحُكْمه إِلَى اللَّه فَمَا حَكَمَ بِهِ الْكِتَاب وَالسُّنَّة وَشَهِدَا لَهُ بِالصِّحَّةِ فَهُوَ الْحَقّ وَمَاذَا بَعْد الْحَقّ إِلَّا الضَّلَال وَلِهَذَا قَالَ تَعَالَى " إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاَللَّهِ وَالْيَوْم الْآخِر " أَيْ رُدُّوا الْخُصُومَات وَالْجَهَالَات إِلَى كِتَاب اللَّه وَسُنَّة رَسُوله فَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَيْهِمَا فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنكُمْ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاَللَّهِ وَالْيَوْم الْآخِر فَدَلَّ عَلَى أَنَّ مَنْ لَمْ يَتَحَاكَم فِي مَحَلّ النِّزَاع إِلَى الْكِتَاب وَالسُّنَّة وَلَا يَرْجِع إِلَيْهِمَا فِي ذَلِكَ فَلَيْسَ مُؤْمِنًا بِاَللَّهِ وَلَا بِالْيَوْمِ الْآخِر وَقَوْله " ذَلِكَ خَيْر أَيْ التَّحَاكُم إِلَى كِتَاب اللَّه " وَسُنَّة رَسُوله وَالرُّجُوع إِلَيْهِمَا فِي فَصْل النِّزَاع خَيْر وَأَحْسَن تَأْوِيلًا أَيْ وَأَحْسَن عَاقِبَة وَمَآلًا كَمَا قَالَهُ السُّدِّيّ وَغَيْر وَاحِد . وَقَالَ مُجَاهِد : وَأَحْسَن جَزَاء وَهُوَ قَرِيب .
Last edited by mohtashims; 09-08-2012 at 10:39 AM.
An earlier authority under the Tafseer of this verse clearly indicated something different, Abu Bakr al-Jassas (D. 370 ah) in his Ahkam al-Qur'an:
http://feqh.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?p...D=53&TOCID=217
( فإن تنازعتم في شيء فردوه إلى الله والرسول ) يدل على أن أولي الأمر هم الفقهاء ؛ لأنه أمر سائر الناس بطاعتهم ثم قال : ( فإن تنازعتم في شيء فردوه إلى الله والرسول ) ، فأمر أولي الأمر برد المتنازع فيه إلى كتاب الله وسنة نبيه صلى الله عليه وسلم ؛ إذ كانت العامة ومن ليس من أهل العلم ليست هذه منزلتهم ؛ لأنهم لا يعرفون كيفية الرد إلى كتاب الله والسنة ووجوه دلائلهما على أحكام الحوادث فثبت أنه خطاب للعلماء .
Anyway the question remains to be answered, can a layman understand and comprehend proof?
![]()
It is reported from Abu Umamah from the Prophet (Sallallahu 'Alayhi WaSallam) that he said:
اتَّقُوا فِرَاسَةَ الْمُؤْمِنِ ، فَإِنَّهُ يَنْظُرُ بِنُورِ اللَّهِ
" Fear the Insight of the Believer, for verily he sees with the Light of God"
رقم الحديث: 3362
المعجم الأوسط للطبراني

Brother Zayn, Can you please translate this to english ?
The question posed is about a non-hanafi scholar and especially ibn Katheer r.e.h. with regards to Aayat 59 of Surah Nisa and whether he did Taqleed or not.
Below is his Tafseer that showcases that it is not the ulema (jurists) but anyone who difers needs to lookout for Quran and Sunnah.
Also,وَقَوْله " فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْء فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه وَالرَّسُول " قَالَ مُجَاهِد وَغَيْر وَاحِد[SIZE=3][B][COLOR="#0000CD"] مِنْ السَّلَف أَيْ إِلَى كِتَاب اللَّه وَسُنَّة رَسُوله. وَهَذَا أَمْر مِنْ اللَّه عَزَّ وَجَلَّ " بِأَنَّ كُلّ شَيْء تَنَازَعَ النَّاس فِيهِ مِنْ أُصُول الدِّين وَفُرُوعه أَنْ يُرَدّ التَّنَازُع فِي ذَلِكَ إِلَى الْكِتَاب وَالسُّنَّة كَمَا قَالَ تَعَالَى وَمَا اِخْتَلَفْتُمْ فِيهِ مِنْ شَيْء فَحُكْمه إِلَى اللَّه فَمَا حَكَمَ بِهِ الْكِتَاب وَالسُّنَّة وَشَهِدَا لَهُ بِالصِّحَّةِ فَهُوَ الْحَقّ وَمَاذَا بَعْد الْحَقّ إِلَّا الضَّلَال وَلِهَذَا قَالَ تَعَالَى " إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاَللَّهِ وَالْيَوْم الْآخِر " أَيْ رُدُّوا الْخُصُومَات وَالْجَهَالَات إِلَى كِتَاب اللَّه وَسُنَّة رَسُوله فَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَيْهِمَا فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنكُمْ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاَللَّهِ وَالْيَوْم الْآخِر فَدَلَّ عَلَى أَنَّ مَنْ لَمْ يَتَحَاكَم فِي مَحَلّ النِّزَاع إِلَى الْكِتَاب وَالسُّنَّة وَلَا يَرْجِع إِلَيْهِمَا فِي ذَلِكَ فَلَيْسَ مُؤْمِنًا بِاَللَّهِ وَلَا بِالْيَوْمِ الْآخِر وَقَوْله " ذَلِكَ خَيْر أَيْ التَّحَاكُم إِلَى كِتَاب اللَّه " وَسُنَّة رَسُوله وَالرُّجُوع إِلَيْهِمَا فِي فَصْل النِّزَاع خَيْر وَأَحْسَن تَأْوِيلًا أَيْ وَأَحْسَن عَاقِبَة وَمَآلًا كَمَا قَالَهُ السُّدِّيّ وَغَيْر وَاحِد . وَقَالَ مُجَاهِد : وَأَحْسَن جَزَاء وَهُوَ قَرِيب .
You mean to say the one who abides by any one of the schools and may not neccesarily accept or follow every ruling of that school is doing Taqleed of that school. If so, what does "Usool" mean here.
And then why can't a la-mazhabi say that I follow the imam to whom thier practises more so go inline with .... say imam ahmed bin humble r.e.h in Usool but do not agree with all the practises that they do. Thus they get an authority to pick and choose. This is exactly what the la-mazhabi's are doing aren't they ?
I have seen them shower great respect more so to Imam Ahmed bin Humble r.e.h yet they claim not to do his Taqleed.
Why can't the rule that fits ibn Katheer and Ibn Hajar r.e.h of deviating from the school not fit for some "Ghair Mukallid" ?
Also, if you say about Shafa'ee school having differing issues on awara ... isn't a Shafa'e's mukallids ordained to follow any of the differing opinions ?
Last edited by mohtashims; 09-08-2012 at 10:53 AM.

"Usool" basically means "foundation". In fiqh, it is sometimes use as a synonym for "methodology". So, when, I wrote that he follows the usool, it means, to answer to a given question he adopts the same methodology of the school he follows. For example, if he's shafi'i, he will use the methodology of the shafi'i scholars to extract rules. And yes the same can be said about some (not all) la-mazhabi, they tend to be close to the hanbali school.
For your second question : I don't know. : )
wAllahû a'lam.
The ultimate point is, you have to establish whether a layman can understand and comprehend proof?? now tell this GM to prove via the Scholars (of the Salaf and the Mutaqaddimoon) that a layman can understand and comprehend proof?
Edit: In the quote of al-Jassas he says that the verse ("Fa In Tanaaza'tum....") refers to the Fuqaha, he goes on to say the layman is not from the Ahlul 'Ilm, and they cannot "understand" / "comprehend" the Qur'an and Sunnah.
Wallahu A'lam.
It is reported from Abu Umamah from the Prophet (Sallallahu 'Alayhi WaSallam) that he said:
اتَّقُوا فِرَاسَةَ الْمُؤْمِنِ ، فَإِنَّهُ يَنْظُرُ بِنُورِ اللَّهِ
" Fear the Insight of the Believer, for verily he sees with the Light of God"
رقم الحديث: 3362
المعجم الأوسط للطبراني
Bookmarks