The Methodology of the Salaf Concerning Ijtihad and Taqlid

[Harris Hammam]

Two people were very disrespectful on this thread. When they rightly got put in their place, they started with the abusing. They were stubborn on their wrong opinion, they weren't prepared to listen what the other side was saying. In the process, they suggested that all the scholars of Islam made a mistake. Even the scholars they quoted from, like al-`Uthaymeen, and Albani, ended up on the wrong side of the fence when it was shown to them that they obliged Taqleed on the layman.

Only them two are to blame for what transpired. Why some people are blaming others for this fiasco I have no idea. Any perceived harshness that was meted out to them was the least they deserved. Harshness in its place is wisdom.

What I would say is that this Deen is very simple. A layman asks a trustworthy scholar - how more simple could it get!? Those who complicate it - by forcibly obliging Muslims to stick to a Madhhab on one extreme, or force them to investigate evidences that is beyond their comprehension on another extreme - are cheating the Muslims. They are especially cheating new Muslims. Imagine what a new Muslim would feel like if all this nonsense appeared.

A few questions remain:
- S. Albani and his quote on Taqleed in the Tayammum issue
- Taqleed in `Aqeedah and scholarly mistakes
- Why did this Zawah brother miss the answers to his questions

Anything else left before we proceed?

 

[samiha]

JazaakAllahu khayra brother Itqan Ullah for bringing this thread a little bit more back on track.

I'd like to request that posts henceforth follow the same pattern please - this is an important topic, so those who would like to remain involved in it and want to understand, please continue to do so, and those who feel they are not benefiting, please read what does benefit you insha'Allah. I don't want this thread to be further twisted, but to have a positive outcome on our community bi'ithnillah.

And just to make a clarification, it's not that I mind sharing recipes, or doing word games now and again, however - there is a time for this and a time for that. Nobody should undermine this topic, and simply because they have difficulty understanding, this is not the case for everyone. If there are confusions - ask as the brother above did; even I want to go back and read some points so I can understand them better insha'Allah.

 

[Aapa]

Assalaam walaikum,

Yes, brother proceed. But before we proceed what gives you authority and truth? This should be an easy one.

 

[samiha]

Okay, I have a bit of a question - the principle is simple, a layman asks a scholar. And this is easy in the lands that are rich in knowledge and scholars.

What of those areas that lack most of that? What advice would you give a layman to see whether or not a scholar is trustworthy?

Often this anti-taqleed mentality is created, when people come across 'fake' scholars, who often say odd things such as a woman has to cover her head every time she goes to the bathroom, whenever she eats, whenever the adhaan goes off etc.. and so when these sisters notice people blindly following this, when it's not really legislated, they begin sneering at every scholar unless they provide Daleel. And I can understand some of this - its like a counter negative reaction.

So how would you encourage people, both in areas like America, or the sub-continentals to seek trustworthy scholars? What are the characteristics to encourage towards if it is not the daleel that is necessary?

I was also curious as to the conditions you mentioned that would obligate a layman to follow an opinion. Would it just be the case that this occurs when they have no access to any other opinion?

(I'm still reading this post so these questions are as they come...)

So a layman who follows an opinion known to be odd/isolated - even if he feels this is most trustworthy - he is not to be condemned by other laymen?

And lastly, what extents then does a layman have responsibility over commanding the good and forbidding the evil? Only over that which has ijmaa' ?

 

[Harris Hammam]

ok let' start off with S. Albani then:

Though we did quote him before that he obliged Taqleed upon the layman, he drastically lowered the bar for following Hadith by saying

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, Ibn al-Qayyim also was of this opinion.

It must be said that this is not the position of anybody else before him, and even if it was then it is a severely minority opinion.

As we stated, the layman's job is to refer to a trustworthy scholar, nothing more.

As for when a layman finds a Hadith that he 'understands', S. Albani is suggesting that he should follow it and discard anything that opposes it.

However, this does not take into account that the Hadith may be abrogated later on in the lifetime of the Prophet, or may have another Hadith that conflicts with it, or other variables that is the job of the scholar to discern, not the layman.

The most that can be said is that if a layman's current practise is in apparently in conflict with a Hadith that he just came across and understood, he should ask a trustworthy scholar about it, or should get a scholarly fatwa from somewhere that sanctions the practise according to the Hadith (since the layman's evidence is Mufti), or what is the explanation of the Hadith.

And Allah knows better.

 

[Aapa]

Assalaam akaylum,

Brother,

Before we start as you say please be so kind as to give us reason as to what makes you an authority. I ask not out of rudeness but, you say you were asked to respond to this thread.

You want to teach thus tell us what makes you be able to teach. This way there will not be arguments down the road. What sets you apart from the layman.

 

[Harris Hammam]

As far as Taqleed in Aqeedah goes, Sheikh al-Shathri in his book on Taqleed:
http://ia600408.us.archive.org/15/items/waq6213/6213.pdf
covers these issues in brief from pages 39 to 112. The topics are:


- Taqleed (i.e. accepting a scholar's statement) in monotheism (Tawheed)
He says the the overwhelming majority of Sunni scholars said that Taqleed is Haram in this, i.e. he must believe in this out of conviction, not by merely following a a scholar or because someone told him so.


- Taqleed in considering the Message of the Prophet to be correct
He says that this is like the first hence it is Haram to do Taqleed in this. I guess this and the above are the Kalimah, لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله - one must believe in the meanings of this out of self-conviction and acceptance of the evidence (called Ittiba`, because it is clear-cut, not Ijtihad), not out of Taqleed.


- Taqleed in the [other specific] fundamentals of the religion [at a granular level], like the Sifat of Allah, destiny, etc.
He says that it appears that it is permissible to do Taqleed of a scholar in these items, because these are granular pieces of information and in that sense resemble like plain Fiqh (Furoo`) insofar as the layman is concerned.


- Taqleed in the pillars of Islam (i.e. those items of practice in the faith which are known by necessity, there is no doubt about them, like the necessity of Salah and fasting)
Taqleed is Haram in this. One must believe that these are established in the Deen of Allah without having to resort to a scholar's verdict (Taqleed) to actually believe. The knowledge of a scholar and a layman in the necessity of these things - like Salah and fasting - is equal.


- Taqleed in Usool 'l-Fiqh
(This is mainly a rule for scholars and Mujtahids, whether they are allowed to do Taqleed of other scholars in this subject or not; nothing to do with laymen)


- Taqleed in the Furoo` (standard Fiqh)
After mentioning the two opinion, he brings the evidences for both and concludes that the opinion of the overwhelming is that Taqleed is permissible (i.e. not Haram) for people who have no knowledge, i.e. it is not necessary that they go out of their way to do Ijtihad and go searching for evidence.


- Taqleed in innovations
He says that if he is in a place where there is innovation and he has no idea of the true Sunnah, then he would be excused and would not be sinning. However, if he is in a place where people oppose that innovation, he should assess the situation and ask the trustworthy scholars about it. (I add that if he is still confused about it, then he would be excused).


Now these are not hard categories, there might be a bit of overlap between each other, but this is just to start a person off in understanding the matter.

 

[Harris Hammam]

Wassalam

Assalaam akaylum,

Brother,

Before we start as you say please be so kind as to give us reason as to what makes you an authority. I ask not out of rudeness but, you say you were asked to respond to this thread.

You want to teach thus tell us what makes you be able to teach. This way there will not be arguments down the road. What sets you apart from the layman.

I quote classical authorities, contemporary scholars, and textual evidence that is easy to comprehend for the reader.

 

[Aapa]

Assalaam alaykum,

To quote is easy for anyone. How did you get your understanding and why did you decide to join us..welcome by the way...I am not trying to be difficult.

The members and readers are very interested. They are reading and responding. Trust me we need this on the site.

Now, convince me to read you.

 

[Harris Hammam]

It is haram to follow an imam when evidence of the Qur'an and Hadeeth comes to you disproving his statements.

Well of course its Haram. Who says it's allowed? My problem with your statement is that you feel the scholars of Islam coming after the Imams didn't tell the people that the Imam made a mistake, and provided the Sunnah. Can you bring one example where a whole school of Fiqh is contradicting a Nass from the Prophet (Nass i.e. Hadith that is a) clear in it meaning, b) authentic, c) not abrogated, and d) not contradicted by another piece of evidence)

It is haram to follow him blindly when the Qur'an contradicts what he says.

Ditto

It is haram to say/think that this man is more knowledgeable then Muhammad (pbuh)

Who even thinks this!?

That is taqleed.

That's YOUR definition of Taqleed, which is of course Haram. We generally use another definition of Taqleed. That definition, for easiness, is the verse of the Quran, "Ask the People of Dhikr if you do not know".

Also, I can easily understand the Hadeeth anyone can it is not meant to be hard to understand but for some people there are certain situations which they are confused on what to do then they can go to scholar and through the wisdom and knowledge Allah has granted him they can get an answer AND they would understand the wisdom of the scholars words and thus become wiser themselves.

You are opposing what the great scholars of Islam are saying! Understanding the Hadith to be able to understand the Fiqh coming out of them is not the job of every person. It is the job of specialists who have years of study behind them. Do you know who al-Khatib al-Baghdadi is, a Hadith master? He said:
... a layman has no way in understanding that unless he learns Fiqh for many years and sits by the jurists for a long period, learns of the ways of analogy and learns of what validates and invalidates [analogy], and [he learns] of what evidences have priority over others. Obliging the layman to do this is obliging them with that which they are unable of, and they have no chance in doing so.

Also, a-Subki recognises that evidences might not be every layman's cup of tea:
A layman may ask [the Mufti] for his source [from which he took the ruling] as a matter of guidance, and then [the Mufti] should explain it [to him] if it is not unclear.

This is the end of this dispute ALL OF YOU asta'd men al shaytan seek refuge with Allah all you people are arguing about now is technicalities as long as we understand what Allah had meant in this Qur'an and this Hadeeth we do not need to quarrel about if taqleed is with a Capital T or lower case.

Hmm. Only Muqallids who have no comprehension of Taqleed talk like this. Problem with you guys is that you don't admit you do Taqleed of someone else; rather you just call it something else. I'd stick to the terminology of over 1000 years rooted in tradition, than whatever newly-invented you would like to propose.

Seriously, end this topic now .

That ain't going to happen.

 

[Harris Hammam]

Wassalam

Assalaam alaykum,

To quote is easy for anyone. How did you get your understanding and why did you decide to join us..welcome by the way...I am not trying to be difficult.

The members and readers are very interested. They are reading and responding. Trust me we need this on the site.

Now, convince me to read you.

I'm not trying to be difficult either. I studied by some scholars. Most of my knowledge on Taqleed comes through self-research, studying the classical texts. FYI, I'm currenty after a book on the laws of Taqleed called العقد الفريد في أحكام التقليد by a scholar called al-Samhudi, a Shafi`i scholar, died 911 A.H. They sell it in Saudi, and I'll be trying to get my hands on it to learn what he says.

Quoting is easy, yes I agree. I would like to think though that content packaging, persuasive power and the originality in presentation comes with experience.

I decided to join for this thread to help out a member here, insha'allah.

 

[Harris Hammam]

PS I'd like my posts to be judged for what they are, not for who I am or what I may be. I don't have any authority of my own. I'd just like to help and be helped through tough questioning and constructive feedback.

 

[Aapa]

ASWK,

Thanks.

 

[Harris Hammam]

Wassalam

If I understood your Q correctly:

If according to definition of taqleed being discussed here, a person who has knowledge of ayahs, hadeeths & statements of salaf (with verification of chain of transmission), scholarly conses,etc is a ghair-muqallid and everyone else is a blind follower in some respect.

Firstly, this Ghayr Muqallid term is so Desi (Indian Sub-Continent). Nobody else uses it.

By Ghayr Muqallid, people mean one who does not adhere to one of the Four Madhhabs. People think this is a new issue; however this has been discussed in the classical texts, if people were not lazy long enough actually study what is contained in them.

The correct terminology for a Muqallid layman not adhering to one of the Four Madhhabs is Ghayr Multazim, literally a non-adherent. He is still a Muqallid though.

Even though nobody these days uses the term Ghayr Multazim, the fact is this term exists and should be used. The term Ghayr Muqallid is a false term as far as I am concerned, because these layman who claim not to do Taqleed are still - according to our definition (the definition of the overwhelming majority) - doing Taqleed.

So they aren't in reality associated with the Baghdadi Mu`tazilites at all. It's just that when they militantly and religiously insist against the term Taqleed - coupled with their empty rhetoric of following only Quran and Sunnah and not scholars (even though the likelihood is that they are following somebody) - that we feel the need to inform them that it was Baghdadi Mu`tazilites who started all this anti-Taqleed nonsense and you are reviving their understanding of Taqleed.

So Aziboy and Hammy are by name reviving the Baghdadi Mu`tazilites' position. In reality, according to our definition of Taqleed, they are doing Taqleed. They just need to shut up for a change and accept our terminology.

Then how there is no Taqleed in aqeedah? I mean aren't these topics like Istigha, tawassul or "where is Allah?" dealt in same way with regards to understanding?

When people say there is no Taqleed in Aqeedah, it means the big big Aqeedah items, like the Kalimah. Then you have granular aspects of Aqeedah, Taqleed is fine therein.

The prohibition of Istighathah and Tawassul to the creation is the same as the prohibition of Shirk. Just like the Kalimah, one must know these out of self-conviction, not Taqleed.

Istighathah i.e. asking for help as an act of worship, i.e. where only Allah can help. So when people upon dead people, that would be Shirk.

Tawassul that is Haram i.e. worshipping the creation with the belief that these creations will get one to Allah. This is the Shirki Tawassul of the Jahiliyyah which is mentioned in the second verse of Surat Zumar.

However, there is another type of Tawassul that slightly resembles this but is not Shirk. There is a difference of opinion about it - some say it is allowed because they feel the evidence is there, some say it is an innovation because they feel there is no authentic evidence, and this latter is the safer option. The Tawassul I'm talking about here is when a person says 'Oh Allah forgive me through so and so'. This is Tawassul to Allah through a creation. This is not the Shriki type of Tawassul where one does Tawassul to the creation itself (i.e. worship the creation to get to Allah). So this Tawassul, although has an element of Aqeedah, is more of a Fiqhi issue. Scholars have differed about this.

(Then you have other types of Tawassul, many are allowed, some are differed over. You can find info on this in various fatwas and websites).

"Where is Allah" is to do with the Sifat of Allah. As mentioned, one can follow a scholar on the granular aspects of the Sifat. As a principle, one must believe in all the Sifat of Allah as they have come. It would be dangerous to do Taqleed in this. The first thing I was taught as a child was آمنت بالله كما هو بأسمائه وصفاته - "I believe in Allah as He is with His Names and Attributes." So we believe in this for what it is, not because so and so scholar said so.

 

[Harris Hammam]

Okay, I have a bit of a question - the principle is simple, a layman asks a scholar. And this is easy in the lands that are rich in knowledge and scholars.

What of those areas that lack most of that?

People should refer to the highest available authority. If there are none, they should do Hijrah. However, in this era of mass communication, that ruling has become slightly redundant. Still, it might apply though. Each practical case would have to be assessed individually.

Often this anti-taqleed mentality is created, when people come across 'fake' scholars, who often say odd things such as a woman has to cover her head every time she goes to the bathroom, whenever she eats, whenever the adhaan goes off etc.. and so when these sisters notice people blindly following this, when it's not really legislated, they begin sneering at every scholar unless they provide Daleel. And I can understand some of this - its like a counter negative reaction.

That's a tough question. I'm unable to answer. Seems to be more of a psychological issue than a Fiqhi one. What I would say though is when living in this unhealthy environment where knowledge is not being implemented properly, and Allah gives one the Tawfeeq to know that there is something wrong, then by all means become a student of knowledge to one's best ability and capacity. Respectfully build up on basic information on where specific rulings come from, and discard those which have no basis. Until a low-level act of worship (or innovation if it has no evidence) - like the examples you mention - cannot be verified, discard it because there is a possibility of it being an innovation. Then with wisdom proceed to educate yourself further and those around you, stressing the importance of the Sunnah and the danger of Bid`ah.

What advice would you give a layman to see whether or not a scholar is trustworthy?

So how would you encourage people, both in areas like America, or the sub-continentals to seek trustworthy scholars? What are the characteristics to encourage towards if it is not the daleel that is necessary?

A person's Taqwa is of paramount importance. One reads five time Salah, and visibly practices upon the Sunnah. People ask him for fatwas. You have extra bonus points that can help you identify that such a person is trustworthy, like:
- he is good in his social conduct
- he is humble
- he is as normal as the people, not like a Sufi living away from the people, as if there were a barrier between himself and laypeople
- does not make his living out of Deen

There are also red flags that help you assist in understanding a person is not to be trusted.

I was also curious as to the conditions you mentioned that would obligate a layman to follow an opinion. Would it just be the case that this occurs when they have no access to any other opinion?

You call that a de facto obligation, i.e. you must follow that scholar because there is no other scholar around.

When I said "A layman does not have to rigidly adhere to one particular opinion, or Imam, or school (This is with the a few conditions)", the conditions I was referring to are:
- doesn't constantly look out for easier opinions
- doesn't perpetrate a fatal cocktail of mixing up opinions that lead to a situation nobody believes in (known as Talfeeq Batil)

So a layman who follows an opinion known to be odd/isolated - even if he feels this is most trustworthy - he is not to be condemned by other laymen?

Well layman means you don't condemn others at all. However, such a Muqallid may find other students or scholars condemning him, in which case the layman should instruct the scholar/student about the ruling, and if he feels it is a dangerous matter, he ought to get a second opinion, then decide based on what his heart says according to the guidelines given previously.

And lastly, what extents then does a layman have responsibility over commanding the good and forbidding the evil? Only over that which has ijmaa' ?

Well there is no such thing as commanding the good and forbidding the evil in matters of difference of opinion in Fiqh. You can't command the good/forbid the evil for example in reading behind an Imam, as the quote I mentioned from al-Qasim bin Muhammad outlines.

Laymen can always give Da`wah, like all other people, in matters that are clear, like the obligation of Salah, fasting, charity, social conduct, etc. You know, the big things of Deen that don't require a lot of comprehension.


Allah knows better

 

[Itqan Ullah]

Wassalam
Firstly, this Ghayr Muqallid term is so Desi (Indian Sub-Continent). Nobody else uses it.

Alright, plz cope up with me here.

The prohibition of Istighathah and Tawassul to the creation is the same as the prohibition of Shirk. Just like the Kalimah, one must know these out of self-conviction, not Taqleed.

Istighathah i.e. asking for help as an act of worship, i.e. where only Allah can help. So when people upon dead people, that would be Shirk.

Tawassul that is Haram i.e. worshipping the creation with the belief that these creations will get one to Allah. This is the Shirki Tawassul of the Jahiliyyah which is mentioned in the second verse of Surat Zumar....

This is the point I was trying to ask, those who practise Istighathah or Tawassul aren't doing it absolutely baselessly. Isn't it? Their "Evidences" can be Weak, Fabricated or a misinterpretation of something Authentic but it's something that exists (I mean on paper). For example they may alllege Sahaba (ra) visiting prophet grave or Imam Shafi (rh) visiting grave of Imam Abu Hanifa (rh), or they may assert 'Don't you say "ya ayyuhanabiyyu" in your Salah? or Is this also Shirk?',etc...
So how will a layperson check the authenticity of these narrations/statements without blind following muhaddith or historian (in example 2)?
And Doesn't resorting to "safe opinions" also Taqleed?

Rest is clear. Jazakallah Khairan.

 

[al-fajr]

Assalamu'alaykum,

I know Hanafi's in particular, tend to making it haraam on their followers to look at any other opinion from a non-hanafi scholar. I can see benefits to sticking to the one, but on what basis do they enforce following just one Madhab? So if there is a scholar of sound knowledge and character in their communities but not of the madhab they have opted to follow, they don't take anything from him at all, even if they have no other option, they'd quicker settle for a deviant who at least claims to be of their madhab.

I'd quite like to know who/where this understanding is coming from.

 

[slaveofAllah88]

aslam o aliakum wr wb,

ya habibies lil babies of Adam (a.s)

May Allah (swt) reward you for the knowledge you shared and forgive where you hurt other or did wrong - ameen


Rasoolullah (SAW) said,*!“I guarantee a house in Jannah (Paradise) for one who gives up arguing, even if he is in the right; and I guarantee a house in the middle of Jannah for one who abandons lying even when joking / for the sake of fun; and I guarantee a house in the highest part of Jannah for one who has good manners.”*![narrated by Abu Dawud]

reading over it i think the thread crossed more into personal egos than knowledge Allah knows best and we are one muslim ummah so stick together close to each other

 

[Harris Hammam]

aslam o aliakum wr wb,

ya habibies lil babies of Adam (a.s)

May Allah (swt) reward you for the knowledge you shared and forgive where you hurt other or did wrong - ameen


Rasoolullah (SAW) said,*!“I guarantee a house in Jannah (Paradise) for one who gives up arguing, even if he is in the right; and I guarantee a house in the middle of Jannah for one who abandons lying even when joking / for the sake of fun; and I guarantee a house in the highest part of Jannah for one who has good manners.”*![narrated by Abu Dawud]

reading over it i think the thread crossed more into personal egos than knowledge Allah knows best and we are one muslim ummah so stick together close to each other

I feel sorry for you, quoting Hadith out of its place. You should have stated another Hadith that would have been more appropriate for this thread:

يحمل هذا العلم من كل خلف عُدوله ينفون عنه تحريف الغالين وانتحال المبطلين وتأويل الجاهلين
This knowledge will be taken by the upright amongst every successive generation. [Protecting the knowledge, t]hey will drive out the the distortions of the extremists, the sabotage attempts of those on falsehood, and the misinterpretations of the ignorant.

Why you are selectively quoting some Hadith and leaving out others is for you to explain. If this thread isn't your cup of tea, kindly remain silent.

 

[Harris Hammam]

This is the point I was trying to ask, those who practise Istighathah or Tawassul aren't doing it absolutely baselessly. Isn't it? Their "Evidences" can be Weak, Fabricated or a misinterpretation of something Authentic but it's something that exists (I mean on paper). For example they may alllege Sahaba (ra) visiting prophet grave or Imam Shafi (rh) visiting grave of Imam Abu Hanifa (rh), or they may assert 'Don't you say "ya ayyuhanabiyyu" in your Salah? or Is this also Shirk?',etc...
So how will a layperson check the authenticity of these narrations/statements without blind following muhaddith or historian (in example 2)?

All of this a granular fine aspects way beyond the comprehension of laymen hence they are not responsible. They are only obliged to follow a trustworthy scholar.

You see, the problem with obliging responsibility on laymen in these matters is that a) not only there is no evidence for it, but b) the evidence is against it as the last verse of Baqarah suggests.

This does not detract, however, from the seriousness of the issue within academic circles.