What do the ulema think of one who eats seafood (crab, lobster, etc.)? Is it makruh tahriman? I've heard that the Syrian ahnaf ulema are more relaxed in this matter. Is this true?
The scholars, Allah be pleased with them, think of Allah’s Command, not individuals. The position of the Hanafi madhhab is that only that which is considered to be fish is permitted from seafood. Everything else is prohibitively disliked.
There is considerable difference of opinion about prawn, though. Many great Hanafis gave the fatwa that it is permitted, as there is evidence that Arabs considered it fish-like. This is also that revised position of Mufti Taqi Usmani. Even he says, however, that, even though prawn is considered halal, given the difference of opinion on the issue, it is better to avoid if possible, for “Whoever avoids doubtful matters safeguards his religion,” as our Beloved Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) told us.
At the same time, the majority position is that it is not obligatory for a believer to stick to one madhhab on all points. What is obligatory for them is to follow a legitimate opinion (=a relied upon opinion within the 4madhhabs) in all their actions, without mixing the opinions of different schools within one action in a way their not one of them considers valid. As such, it is not per se blameworthy for a Hanafi to follow another school’s opinion on any given issue, as long as one does not make it an invariable habit to seek out the easiest opinions without due need. This is mentioned by Allama Ibn Abidin in the introduction of his Hashiya (Radd al-Muhtar), by Sayyidi Abdal-Ghanial-Nabulsi in his excellent treatise on ijihad, taqlid and talfiq, by Imam Ibn al-Humamin his Tahrir, and others. This is generally what Damascene scholars seem to teach and follow.
The condition for following another school’s opinion, however, is that one learn of it through a reliable means (=either a qualified scholar of that school, or a text one is able to understand), with the relevant details, such as conditions and integrals. This is often not the case.
Because of this danger, and the danger of people just vainly following their caprice, other scholars, including great Indian Imams from the last 2 centuries, have said that it is not permitted for someone to follow another school’s opinion except under pressing need or hardship. We see this in the writings of great contemporary Indo-Pakistani scholars.
Of course, this is the way of taqwa, for it is closer to unquestioning submission to one’s Lord and Master. This is also the way of Sufis, who shun dispensations and seek out the most precautionary positions, in order to act in the way most pleasing to their Beloved.
However, in our times, the majority position is what we demand of others, while doing our utmost to adhere without exception to our own school, even when it goes against what one’s self or wants dictate.
And Allah knows best.
Wassalam,
Faraz Rabbani
