 |
Aqeedah - Beliefs The Blind Following of Madhhabs
Page 10 of 13 | << Previous | NEXT >>
15. A very Important Note Know that the ijtihaad and opinion of the mujtahid are not the judgements of Allaah. If it was the judgement of Allaah, then it would not have been permissible for Abu Yoosuf, Muhammad and others to oppose the view of Imaam Abu Haneefah and his ijtihaad and therefore Imaam Abu Haneefah - rahimahullaah - said, “This is my opinion, so he who comes with a better one, then I will accept it.”. ? And as was mentioned before Abu Yoosuf and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ash-Shaibaanee differed with Imaam, Abu Haneefah in a third of the entire madhhab [1].
We ask everyone who blindly follows a particular person to the exclusion of others, ‘What has given the one whom you follow more right to be followed than the others?’ If he says, ‘Because he was the most knowledgeable of his time and his excellence was greater than those before him.’ Then we say, ‘How do you know that, when you have declared that you are not one of the people of knowledge, rather this can only be known by someone who knows the different madhhabs and their proofs and that which is preferable therefrom? So, how can a blind man check the coinage? If it is that you do not follow except the most knowledgeable, then why not Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthmaan, ‘Alee and Ibn Mas’ood - radiallaahu ‘anhum - since they are more knowledgeable than the one you are following by consensus of the Muslims?’It is said to the blind-follower: then what had the people used to do before the birth of the one whom you blindly follow, to whose sayings you have given the status of revealed texts? Woe to you! That you had stopped at that, but instead, you gave them precedence in following over the texts of the Sharee’ah. Were the people before the presence of those Imaams upon guidance or error?
They have to admit that they were upon guidance. So it is said to them: What were they upon except following the Qur’aan, the Sunnah and narrations and giving precedence to the saying of Allaah and His Messenger and the narrations from the Companions - radiallaahu ‘anhum - in any disagreement and referring back to that and not to the sayings and the opinions of individuals! If that is the guidance, then what is there after the truth except misguidance.
It is not hidden how each party of the blind-followers have relegated all of the Companions, the Taabi’een and the scholars of the Ummah from their first to their last, except the one whom they follow, to the level that their sayings and their fatwaas are ignored and they are not to be given any attention unless it is to refute them, if their saying goes against that of the Imaam whom they are blindly-following. It is to the extent that if the saying of the one they follow, contradicts a text from Allaah and His Messenger , then with them it is binding to explain the text away and twist it from its meaning and employ every conceivable trick to rebut it, so that the saying of their Imaam should appear to be correct [2] . Taking the sayings of the scholars and their analogies is like the use of tayammum which is only used when water is not found. So when a text of the Book and the Sunnah and the sayings of the Companions - radiallaahu ‘anhum - are to be found, then it is obligatory to take that and not to turn away from that to the saying of the scholars [3]
16. The Ummah will only be Corrected by that which Corrected its Beginning
Imaam Maalik - rahimahullaah - said, “The latter part of this Ummah will only be set right by that which set right its beginning.”
There is no doubt that the first and best of the Ummah clung to the Book and the Sunnah. When the Muslims turned away from that which Allaah, the Most High, prescribed, to that which they invented. Then it is not surprising that they were prevented from the victory which Allaah promised to the Believers, since they were stripped of all the attributes of the Believers which Allaah mentioned. There never was in the first two centuries, anything of this blind-following and the actions which they are now performing.
If an intelligent person became a Muslim now, then he would not know what he is supposed to do or which madhhab and which books of the fundamentals he should depend upon. It would be difficult to convince him that this alone is the straight religion or that all the madhhabs despite their differences are the same thing, just as has happened now in Japan. If we Muslims had halted at the limits quoted in the Qur’aan and explained in the light of Prophetic guidance, then it would have been easy to understand the true religion which contains no crookedness or hardship. That is the pure Deen which contains no deviation or discrepancy.
F O O T N O T E S [1] Haashiyah lbn ‘Aabideen (1/62). And this can be seen throughout the history of the Imaams and their students. For example …..
And this list is endless. However just one example from above is enough to destroy all the arguments of the Blind-Followers, who rule that it is necessary for scholars and the common man alike to make Taqleed of a perticular Imaam.
- Imaam Abu Haneefah had ruled that the Islaamic prohibition of Khamr covered only the product of fermented grape juice (the literal meaning of Khamr) and did not extend to intoxicants in general. According to this ruling. Intoxicating drinks made from other sources were allowable so long as the consumer did not become drunk. However, Abu Haneefah’s three main students (Abu Yoosuf, Muhammad ibn al-Hasan and Zufar) later rejected the ruling of their teacher, since they encountered reliable Hadeeths of the Prophet clearly indicating that all intoxicants were to be included in the meaning of Khamr. [Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Rushd, Bidaayah al-Mujtahid, vol.1, p.405. See also as-Sayyid Saabiq. Fiqh as-Sunnah, (Beirut: Daar al-Kitaab al-’Arabee, 3rd. ed. 1977), vol.2, p. 378. ]
- Imaam Abu Haneefah, Abu Yoosuf and Muhammed ash-Shaybanee agree that the eating of spiny tailed lizard (ad-dabb) is unlawful. Al-Tahawi discusses this problem at full length and refutes the arguments of ash-Shaybaanee in his Sharh Ma’ani al-Aathar. [See at-Tahawi, Mukhtasar at-Tahawi, p.439 and Sharh Ma’ani al-Aathar, (Deoband, n.d., I) p.260-263.
- Moulana Zachariya, the author of Tableeghi Nisaab says in the virtues of Ramadhan, “The well known opinion of Imaam Abu Haneefah is that Laylatul-Qadr moves throughout the year, while another view is that it moves throughout the month of Ramadhan. His famous students, Imam Muhammed and Imam Abu Yoosuf, however, were of the opinion that the night is fixed on one specific night which is unknown during the Holy Month.” [Fazaail Aamal, Vol.1 {The virtues of Ramadhan} (english trans) (Dini Book Depot:Delhi – April - 1985} p.60]
- For a nafl (non-obligatory) I’tikaaf, the minimum time period should not be less than an entire day according to Imaam Abu Haneefah. According to Imam Muhammed there is no limit as to the minimum time period. Moulana Zachariyah supports the Fataawa (ruling) of Imaam Muhammed ash-Shaybaanee. [Fazaail Aamal, Vol.1 {The virtues of Ramadhan} (english trans) p.65.]
- Imaam Abu Hanefah stipulates that the I’tikaaf should be done in a masjid where the five daily prayers are said, where as according to Abu Yoosuf and Muhammed ash-Shaybanee any masjid according to the Sharee’ah can be entered for I’tikaaf. [Fazaail Aamal, vol.1 {The virtues of Ramadhan} p.67.]
- ‘Isaam ibn Yoosuf al-Balakhee, who was a student of Imaam Muhammad ibn al-Hasan and a close follower of Abu Yoosuf, used to make a lot of rulings which differed from those of Abu Haneefah and his two companions, because the latter were not aware of certain evidence which later became available to him. [Ibn ‘Aabideen, Rasm al-Muftee, vol. 1, p. 27, quoted in Sifah Salaah an-Nabee, p.37.] For example, he used to raise his hands before and after Rukoo’ (bowing in Salaah). [‘Al-Fawaa’id al-Baahiyah fee Taraajim al-Hanafiyah, p.116, quoted in Sifah Salaah an-Nabee, foreword, p.39]
- Imaam Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ash-Shaybaanee in his narration of Imaam Maalik’s book, al-Muwa!ta, contradicted his teacher Imaam Abu Haneefah in about 20 different rulings. Imaam Muhammad said, “Abe Haneefah did not feel that there was any ordained Salaah (prayer) for Istisqaa (Prayer for rain in times of drought), but in my opinion, the Imaam should lead the people in two units of Salaah, (for Istisqaa) make a Du’aa and reverse his cloak,” [Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, at-Ta’leeq al-Mumajjid ‘Alaa Muwatta’ Muhammad, p. 158, quoted in Sifah Salaah an-Nabee, p. 38.] Imaam Abu Yoosuf agrees with Imaam Muhammed in this. (see Saheeh al-Muslim (english trans. vol. 1, no.1948) [Ref: al-Mughnee, vol.2, p.320. Also al-Bidaayah al-Mujtahid wa Nihaayah al-Muqtasid, vol.1, p.182 by Muhammed ibn Ahmed Ibn Rushd].
- The sale of salve-mothers is valid according the Imaam Abu Haneefah and Abu Yoosuf, while Imaam Muhammed ash-Shaybaanee differes with them both. [al-Saraksi, op.cit., I, 319-20, Abd al-Aziz al-Bukhari, op. cit., III, 968 and al-Jassas, op. cit., fo.232.]
[2] This can be seen in the writings of Abu’l-Hasan al-Karkhi (d.340 A.H.), who produced a tract on the principles of Hanafi law. In this tract he lays down the following rules: “Any Qur’anic verse which contradicts the opinion of ‘our masters’ will be construed as having been abrogated, or the rule of preference will apply thereto. It is better that the verse in question be interpreted in such a way that it conforms to their opinion.” Further he remarks: “Any tradition (Hadeeth) which contradicts the opinion of ‘our masters will be construed as having been abrogated, or it will be deemed that the tradition in question contradicts some other parallel tradition (which coincides with the opinion of the masters). The argument will, therefore, be based on the parallel tradition (which conforms to their opinion). or, if there is no parallel tradition, the rule of preference will be applied as was done by ‘our masters’. In case the rule of preference is not applicable, the tradition will be interpreted in such a way that it harmonizes with their opinion.”
[3] This saying of al-Ma’soomee - rahimahullaah - is like what ash-Shaafi’ee said in ar-Risaalah (p. 599-600, printing of Shaakir), where he clearly states, “…since analogy is not permissible when a text is present, just as tayammum is a means of purification only when water is not to be found..”
|
» It hurts us to see people die on Shirk «