Saturday, October 18, 2008

Sectarianism and Sects - II


Difference between Sects and School of Thought:

"QUOTE"

Which School of Thought is Correct:

Allaah has made our worship based on His Book and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). The right way is to understand the texts of sharee’ah as they were understood by the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and their followers among the scholars who are qualified and prominent mujtahids. This includes the imaams whose sincerity, fairness and leadership in religion, knowledge, virtue, goodness and righteousness is a matter of record. The four imaams and founders of the schools of Islamic fiqh (Imaam Abu Haneefah, Imaam Maalik, Imaam al-Shaafa’i and Imaam Ahmad) – may Allaah have mercy on them all – all followed the texts of the Sharee’ah and their efforts were all focused on teaching and spreading sound Islamic knowledge. All of them were on the right path, and all were devoted followers of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). If mistakes happened, then the Sahaabah made mistakes too. The things to be followed in Sharee’ah are those for which evidence (daleel) is established. In some cases, some scholars may not have known of daleel whilst others did, but this does not mean that their knowledge and ability is to be discredited. All of them were seeking to find and propagate the truth. If a person wants to follow one of the Imaams and adopt his madhhab, then he should follow him in matters for which there is clear, sound daleel, for this is what is required in Islam, but he should not develop partisan or sectarian feelings towards anybody. It is not permissible for the Muslim to believe that he has to follow anybody in all that he says except the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

The person who is suitably qualified can examine what the scholars said and see what is supported by sound daleel. The “rank and file” Muslim who does not know how to examine the evidence and weigh it up should follow a scholar whose religious commitment and knowledge he trusts, and act according to his fatwas. And Allaah knows best.

A Particular School of Thought:

With regard to ijtihaad and taqleed, people in a country fall into two categories:

1 – The scholars and mujtahids who have reached a level of shar’i knowledge where they have the tools of ijtihaad and instinbaat, whereby they are able to derive rulings. Their duty is to follow the truth wherever they see it, on the basis of evidence.

2 – The vast majority of people – those who have not specialized in study of shar’i sciences or have not reached the level of being able to engage in ijtihaad and being qualified to issue fatwas. These are the majority of people, or those who are educated and specialized in other fields of knowledge.

Their duty – in both shar’i and natural terms – is to ask the people of knowledge and take from them. We see this in the words of Allaah



وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ إِلاَّ رِجَالاً نُّوحِي إِلَيْهِمْ فَاسْأَلُواْ أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ


[al-Nahl 16:43]


(interpretation of the meaning):

“So ask of those who know the Scripture, if you know not”

So the people of each country are obliged to ask the scholars and follow their fatwas, but they are not to follow absolutely in the sense that they regard the one whom they follow as infallible and sacred, with the right to legislate and decide religious issues on the basis of their own ideas– as happened among the Jews, Christians, Raafidis, extreme Sufis and Baatinis – because that is going beyond the bounds of religion and taking rivals and gods besides Allaah, and Allaah says



اتَّخَذُواْ أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَانَهُمْ أَرْبَابًا مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ وَالْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ وَمَا أُمِرُواْ إِلاَّ لِيَعْبُدُواْ إِلَـهًا وَاحِدًا لاَّ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ سُبْحَانَهُ عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ



[al-Tawbah 9:31]

(interpretation of the meaning):

“They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allaah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allaah), and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary), while they (Jews and Christians) were commanded [in the Tawraat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] to worship none but One Ilaah (God — Allaah) Laa ilaaha 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)”


The idea behind obliging people to follow the fatwas of the scholars is to enable them to learn the rulings of sharee’ah via the specialists who have studied the principles and usool of sharee’ah and have reached the stage of being qualified in that field of knowledge based on evidence, not sanctity given in the name of the Lord or in the name of “sainthood” and other such false notions.


Ibn Taymiyah said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (20/211):


Allaah has enjoined upon mankind to obey Him and obey His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), but He has not enjoined upon this ummah to obey anyone in particular in all that he enjoins or forbids, apart from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Even the Siddeeq of this ummah and the best of them after its Prophet (i.e., Abu Bakr) said: “Obey me so long as I obey Allaah, but if I disobey Allaah, then you are not obliged to obey me.” They are all unanimously agreed that there is no one who is infallible in all that he enjoins or forbids except the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Hence more than one of the imams said: The words of any person may be adopted or abandoned except the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). End quote.

Secondly:

There remains the question of defining the scholars or scholarly references who are to be relied upon.

We may say that there are two scholarly sources to whom reference should be made at an ummah-wide level and at an individual level. They are:

1. Contemporary resources, represented by fiqh councils and sharee’ah committees which are established by trustworthy religious scholars; individual scholars who are qualified and specialized in shar’i sciences, from whom the people should learn and benefit from their guidance, especially with regard to issues in people’s daily lives and in novel, contemporary issues, and also with regard to matters which need to be reviewed and thoroughly re-examined in the light of shar’i and rational evidence, paying attention to people’s interests and warding off evils, alleviating difficulty and avoiding hardship, in cases where following one of the four madhhabs may cause difficulty and hardship, because one of the basic aims of sharee’ah is to make things easy, not cause hardship.

2. Classical resources, namely the four well known madhhabs, the Hanafi, Maaliki, Shaafa’i and Hanbali. These resources are more deserving of being followed and their teachings adhered to, because the laws that people agree to refer to and use to judge between themselves; the curriculum that is decided for seekers of knowledge in halaqahs and schools and at different academic stages that those who specialize in sharee’ah and fiqhi knowledge go through; the legacy which should be well established in people’s minds, and form their fiqhi culture; the source that everyone who does not have the opportunities that the mujtahideen have to study many issues and reach a conclusion concerning it; and the discipline that puts an end to conflicts and disputes in society and blocks the door to whims and desires and weird opinions – all of that is represented in the four madhhabs, which is the greatest reason why they should be followed.

Al-Haafiz ibn Rajab says in his essay entitled al-Radd ‘ala man attaba’a ghayra al-Madhaahib al-Arba’ah (2/624) (which was published in a collection of his essays):

The wisdom of Allaah dictated that this religion and its guidelines should be protected by means of appointing leaders of the people concerning whom the ummah is unanimously on their knowledge and understanding, and that they reached the highest level of knowledge of rulings and fatwas among ahl al-ra’y wa’l-hadeeth. So the people became dependent on them for fatwas, and referred to them to understand rulings. So Allaah guided them to set guidelines for their madhhabs and explain foundations and principles, so that the madhhab of each imam has its own guidelines, principles and categories, in the light of which rulings and issues of halaal and haraam are to be understood.

This is by the mercy of Allaah towards His slaves, and it is one of the ways in which He preserves this religion.

Were it not for that, people would have seen strange things, whereby every fool who was filled with self-admiration could have tried to mislead the people; so you would have seen such fools claiming to be great imams, saying that they were the guide of this ummah and the only ones to whom people should refer and rely on, to the exclusion of all others.

But by the mercy and grace of Allaah, this door, which could have lead to grave danger, has been blocked and these great evils have been kept away. That is a sign of His great mercy and kindness towards His slaves.

Despite this, there are still those who claim to have reached the level of ijtihaad and talk about issues of knowledge without following any of these four imams.

The claims of some of them may be accepted because of evidence which proves their claims, and others may be rejected. As for those who did not reach this level, they have no choice but to follow those imams and join in what all the ummah joined in. End quote.

He also said (2/628):

If it is asked: What do you say about the fact that Imam Ahmad and other imams forbade imitating or following them, or writing their words, as Imam Ahmad said: Do not write down my words or the words of So and so; learn as we learned? This appears often in their words.

We say: No doubt Imam Ahmad (may Allaah be pleased with him) told them not to study the opinions of the fuqaha’ and spending time on memorizing them and writing them down, and he enjoined instead: spending time on studying the Qur’aan and Sunnah, seeking to memorize and understand and write and study them; writing down the reports of the Sahaabah and Taabi’een rather than the words of those who came after them; determining which reports were sound and which were unsound, what may be followed and what is odd and should be rejected. No doubt this is what one should pay attention to and spend one’s time learning, before anything else.

Whoever studies that and attains a high level of knowledge – as Imam Ahmad enjoined people to do – his knowledge will become close to that of Ahmad. For this person there are no restrictions, and we are not speaking about him here. Rather what we are speaking about is restraining those who have not reached this pinnacle, who understand only a little, as is the case with people nowadays, and as has been the case for a long time; even though many claim to have reached this pinnacle, most of them have not progressed beyond a beginner level.

The one who studies the history of fiqh and legislation will realize that throughout all stages it was built on the efforts of some scholars who became known among people for their knowledge, and news of their virtue and piety spread far and wide, then people began taking religious rulings from them, in most cases referring to their statements and fatwas.

Ibn al-Qayyim said in I’laam al-Muwaqqi’een (1/17):

Religion, fiqh and knowledge became widespread in the ummah, narrated from the companions of Ibn Mas’ood, the companions of Zayd ibn Thaabit, the companions of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar and the companions of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas. Most of the knowledge that the people have comes from the companions of these four. For the people of Madeenah, their knowledge came from the companions of Zayd ibn Thaabit and ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar. For the people of Makkah, their knowledge came from the companions of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas. For the people of Iraq, their knowledge came from the companions of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood. End quote.

The scholar and commentator Ahmad Pasha Taymoor (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Madhaahib al-Fiqhiyyah al-Arba’ah (16-17): Before the emergence of these madhhabs, at the time of the Sahaabah and Taabi’een, fatwas were taken from the qurra’s among them, who were the bearers of the Book of Allaah and understood its meanings. When their era finished and the generation of the Taabi’een came after them, the people of each country followed the fatwas of the Sahaabah who had been among them, and they did not go beyond that except in a few matters that reached them from others. So the people of Madeenah for the most part followed the fatwas of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar; the people of Kufah followed the fatwas of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood; the people of Makkah followed the fatwas of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas; and the people of Egypt followed the fatwas of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas.

After the Taabi’een came the fuqaha’ of the various regions, such as Abu Haneefah, Maalik and others whom we have mentioned and whom we have not mentioned. So the people of each region followed the madhhab of the faqeeh for the most part. There are reasons why some of these madhhabs spread in other lands and some became extinct… End quote.

That does not mean that one should blindly adhere to one madhhab or opinion, in the sense of obliging people to follow it to the letter without any ijtihaad or effort to correct it. Rather the point is that the school of fiqhi thought that people, seekers of knowledge and scholars should study should be taken from one of the four madhhabs. Then, if it becomes clear to one who is qualified to engage in ijtihaad that the madhhab is mistaken on a specific issue, he should reject that fatwa and follow the view that he thinks is correct from the other madhhabs.

Thus people may adhere to the academic way which was followed by the salaf and imams, and they may rid themselves of some of the negatives that resulted from ignorance and blind following.

It says in Fataawa al-Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibraheem (2/10, tape 2):

Following one of the four madhhabs is correct, rather it is like consensus, and there are no reservations about that, such as saying that one follows one of the four, because they are qualified imams according to consensus.

People have two extremes and a moderate way with regard to that:

Some people do not think that we should follow any madhhab at all. This is wrong.

Some follow their madhhab to the letter without paying any attention to study or research.

Some people think that following a madhhab is correct and there are no reservations about it, so wherever they find stronger evidence with one of the four or with someone else, they follow it. In cases where the issue is supported by a text or is clear, no attention should be paid to the madhhabs, but if there is an issue concerning which there is no text or it is not clear, but there are some views concerning it in these madhhabs, and you see stronger evidence with a scholar who differs from these four madhhabs, then you may follow that. End quote.

It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (5/28):

What is the ruling on restricting oneself to the four madhhabs and following their opinions in all circumstances and at all times?

Answer:

- The one who is able to derive rulings directly from the Qur’aan and Sunnah should derive them as those who came before him did. There is no justification for him to follow a view when he believes that the correct view is something opposite. Rather he should follow what he believes is true. It is permissible for him to follow (another scholar) with regard to that which he is not able to work out himself and he needs an answer concerning it.

- It is permissible for one who is not able to derive rulings to follow one whom he feels comfortable following. But if he feels any sense of unease he should ask until he feels comfortable.

- From the above it is clear that their views should not be followed in all situations and at all times, because they may be wrong; rather the truth of what they say, for which there is evidence, should be followed. End quote.

It also says (5/54-55):

All of these came after the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and were among the best people of their time (may Allaah be pleased with them). They strove hard to base their rulings on the Qur’aan and the ahaadeeth of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). That on which the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) were unanimously agreed and which they explained to the people is the truth. Their views have been transmitted to us and have spread among Muslims in all lands. Many of the scholars who came after them followed them because they trusted them and felt comfortable entrusting their religious commitment to them, because they agreed on the general principles that they followed and spread their views among the people. Those who followed them of the ordinary people and acted according to what they learned of their views may be attributed to the ones they followed. Yet (the ordinary Muslim) has to ask those whom he trusts of the scholars of his own era and cooperate with them in order to understand the correct view on the basis of evidence.

From the above it is clear that they are followers of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and the Messenger is not a follower of them. Rather what he brought from Allaah of the laws of Islam is the basis to which all these imams and others referred. Any Muslim may be called haneefi because he follows the easy haneefi way which is the way of Ibraaheem and the way of our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Preferring School of Thought over Hadith:

What is obligatory is to follow that which is indicated by the evidence (daleel) of the Qur’aan and Sunnah, even if it differs from what the madhhab says. But it is essential to understand the Qur’aan and Sunnah as they were understood by the Salaf, and not only by our understanding of them. What is meant by the Salaf is the Sahaabah and the Taabi’een.

Concerning the example which you gave, touching a woman does not break wudoo’ at all, whether it is done with desire or not – because of the hadeeth that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) kissed one of his wives and then went out to pray, and he did not repeat his wudoo’. But if a man emits something (madhiy) because of desire, then he has to do wudoo’ – not because of the act of touching, but because something came out from him.

With regard to the aayah


أَوْ لاَمَسْتُمُ النِّسَاء فَلَمْ تَجِدُواْ مَاء فَتَيَمَّمُواْ صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُواْ



[al-Maa’idah 5:6]

(interpretation of the meaning): “…or you have been in contact with [lit. touched] women…” –

this is referring to sexual intercourse, according to the correct view.

2- There is no need to move from one madhhab to another. The obligatory duties of hajj should be performed as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) performed them, because he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Take your rituals from me.”

The correct view concerning Qunoot in Fajr prayer is that it is Sunnah at times of calamity only, i.e., if a disaster has befallen the Muslims or some of them, then it is mustahabb to do Qunoot and to pray to Allaah to grant them relief. But under normal circumstances, the correct view is that this is not mustahabb, and this is what the daleel (evidence) refers to. So whoever does not do Qunoot, his prayer is still valid, even according to the Shaafa’is, may Allaah have mercy on them.

Imitation (taqleed), following the evidence (daleel):

The followers of the madhhabs are not all the same. Some of them are mujtahids within their madhhab, and some are followers (muqallids) who do not go against their madhhabs in any regard.

Al-Buwayti, al-Muzani, al-Nawawi and Ibn Hajr were followers of Imam al-Shaafa’i, but they were also mujtahids in their own right and differed with their imam when they had evidence. Similarly Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr was a Maaliki but he differed with Maalik if the correct view was held by someone else. The same may be said of the Hanafi imams such as Abu Yoosuf and Muhammad al-Shaybaani, and the Hanbali imams such as Ibn Qudaamah, Ibn Muflih and others.

The fact that a student studied with a madhhab does not mean that he cannot go beyond it if he finds sound evidence elsewhere; the only one who stubbornly clings to a particular madhhab (regardless of the evidence) is one who lacking in religious commitment and intellect, or he is doing that because of partisan attachment to his madhhab.

The advice of the leading imams is that students should acquire knowledge from where they acquired it, and they should ignore the words of their imams if they go against the hadeeth of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Abu Haneefah said: “This is my opinion, but if there comes someone whose opinion is better than mine, then accept that.” Maalik said: “I am only human, I may be right or I may be wrong, so measure my words by the Qur’aan and Sunnah.” Al-Shaafa’i said: “If the hadeeth is saheeh, then ignore my words. If you see well established evidence, then this is my view.” Imam Ahmad said: “Do not follow me blindly, and do not follow Maalik or al-Shaafa’i or al-Thawri blindly. Learn as we have learned.” And he said, “Do not follow men blindly with regard to your religion, for they can never be safe from error.”

No one has the right to follow an imam blindly and never accept anything but his worlds. Rather what he must do is accept that which is in accordance with the truth, whether it is from his imam or anyone else.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:

No one has to blindly follow any particular man in all that he enjoins or forbids or recommends, apart from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). The Muslims should always refer their questions to the Muslim scholars, following this one sometimes and that one sometimes. If the follower decides to follow the view of an imam with regard to a particular matter which he thinks is better for his religious commitment or is more correct etc, that is permissible according to the majority of Muslim scholars, and neither Abu Haneefah, Maalik, al-Shaafa’i or Ahmad said that this was forbidden.

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 23/382.

Shaykh Sulaymaan ibn ‘Abd-Allaah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

Rather what the believer must do, if the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) have reached him and he understands them with regard to any matter, is to act in accordance with them, no matter who he may be disagreeing with. This is what our Lord and our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) have enjoined upon us, and all the scholars are unanimously agreed on that, apart from the ignorant blind followers and the hard-hearted. Such people are not scholars.

Tayseer al-‘Azeez al-Hameed, p. 546

Based on this, there is nothing wrong with a Muslim being a follower of a certain madhhab, but if it becomes clear to him that the truth (concerning a given matter) is different from the view of his madhhab, then he must follow the truth.

With regard to Ibn Hazm, he was an imam and a mujtahid, and he regarded blind following as haraam. He was not a follower of any of the imams, neither Imam Ahmad nor any other imam. Rather he was the imam of ahl al-zaahir (the Zaahiris or literalists) during his own time and until now. Perhaps the view that he was a follower of Imam Ahmad (if this report is true) has to do with matters of aqeedah and Tawheed, even though he held different opinions and reckless views with regard to issues pertaining to the divine names and attributes.

See his biography in Siyar A’laam al-Nubala’, 18/184-212

Blind Following [Andhi Taqleed of a Maslak] over Hadith:

If a person adheres to a particular madhhab, then he finds out that it is likely that another madhhab has stronger evidence, this is a serious error. It is not permissible to do that. This is included in what is mentioned in the aayah:


اتَّخَذُواْ أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَانَهُمْ أَرْبَابًا مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ وَالْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ وَمَا أُمِرُواْ إِلاَّ لِيَعْبُدُواْ إِلَـهًا وَاحِدًا لاَّ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ سُبْحَانَهُ عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ



[al-Tawbah 9:31]

(interpretation of the meaning):

“They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allaah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allaah), and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary), while they (Jews and Christians) were commanded [in the Tawraat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] to worship none but One Ilaah (God — Allaah) Laa ilaaha 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)”

[al-Tawbah 9:31]

This implies turning away from the guidance of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Courtesy: Sheikh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid

Late. Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him).

"Unquote"

No comments: