The Methodology of the Salaf Concerning Ijtihad and Taqlid

[Idris16]

Pretty simple. Those qualified to do Ijtihaad do ijtihaad and the laymen do Taqleed of the scholar/s whom they trust.

Taqleed - a layman follows a scholar he trusts.

Ijtihad - a scholar follows the best evidence according to him.

Sorry what I meant was to ask, how exactly should taqleed be done, I mean, there's this Afghan man in my masjid who comes for every salat, but he doesn't put his feet next to his brothers' feet, he is doing taqleed but is his taqleed correct. Why does he remove his feet everytime we put our feet next to him?? What's his proof that it's wrong?

 

[Harris Hammam]

Sorry what I meant was to ask, how exactly should taqleed be done, I mean, there's this Afghan man in my masjid who comes for every salat, but he doesn't put his feet next to his brothers' feet, he is doing taqleed but is his taqleed correct. Why does he remove his feet everytime we put our feet next to him?? What's his proof that it's wrong?

This is such a minor issue. Both of you are following scholars, both are doing Taqleed, both have their evidences.

Overwhelming majority of scholars never joined their feet. In fact, they didn't even mention this in their books, indicating that this wasn't an intended Sunnah. The Prophet peace be upon him never himself encouraged this practice. But those who say one should do so base this on a Hadith where the Sahabah started joining their ankles. (The wording of the Hadith is ankles, not feet.)

Of course, everybody agrees that shoulders are the most important. Some people spread their legs so wide that joining shoulders becomes an impossibility!

 

[thariq2005]

Overwhelming majority of scholars never joined their feet. In fact, they didn't even mention this in their books, indicating that this wasn't an intended Sunnah. The Prophet peace be upon him never himself encouraged this practice. But those who say one should do so base this on a Hadith where the Sahabah started joining their ankles. (The wording of the Hadith is ankles, not feet.)

Of course, everybody agrees that shoulders are the most important. Some people spread their legs so wide that joining shoulders becomes an impossibility!

Shaykh ibn 'Uthaymeen and shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd held that view as well. They had a very interesting discussion on this issue, especially shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd in his book 'La jaded fee ahkaam al-salaah'.

If I can remember correctly, ibn Rajab Rahimahullaah said that the narrations indicating to feet to feet are metaphorical.

Also HH had a discussion about this on Multaqa.

As HH said this is a really minor issue.

 

[Harris Hammam]

Shaykh ibn 'Uthaymeen and shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd held that view as well. They had a very interesting discussion on this issue, especially shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd in his book 'La jaded fee ahkaam al-salaah'.

If I can remember correctly, ibn Rajab Rahimahullaah said that the narrations indicating to feet to feet are metaphorical.

Also HH had a discussion about this on Multaqa.

As HH said this is a really minor issue.

It's actually impossible to join ankles to ankles. In fact, some narrations mention knees! It is clear therefore that the narration means to make sure they are in line, and not actually joining physically.

Overwhelming majority of people who join feet today only do so by joining up their little toes, which is clearly a form of Bid`ah.

The only physically-joint part should be the shoulders. That is where Satan enters from to disturb.

Some people spread their legs so wide there is a huge chance that Satan is able to squeeze himself through! I believe that all legs in one row should be of equal distance to each other, like the bars of a jail:

http://www.patriotrising.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/jail-bars1.jpg

 

[Abu Hurairah]

I think we're getting off topic slightly, but how do we respond to the narration of the Sahabah's practise?

 

[Harris Hammam]

It was a coincidence.

The Prophet peace be upon him was very strict about straightening rows that day: the Sahabah must have kept looking down at their feet and the feet of the one standing next to them; the tendency is that the feet are spread out wider and wider as the order of straightening the line is continuously emphasised.

It is certainly not a Sunnah in itself. The only Sunnah is straighten the row and not to leave gaps between the shoulders. Abu Dawud has a Hadith in which it is said:

كان يسوي الصفوف يمسح مناكبهم وصدورهم من أول الصف إلى آخره​

[The Prophet peace be upon him] used to straighten the rows and pass his hand over their shoulders and chests from the beginning to the end of the row.

Point is there is no active or verbal specification by the Prophet for ankles in any Hadith.

 

[Harris Hammam]

This was the viewpoint from the era of the Salaf:

Ma`mar said: If I did this today, the person standing next to me would run like a stubborn mule.

لو فعلت ذلك بأحدهم اليوم لنفر كأنه بغل شموس​

---

Ironically, it is some Hanafis - out of all people - who reported a fabricated narration that obliges the joining of ankles in Salah! No point mentioning who said this, though I'm glad none of the Hanafis have actually ever practised on that baseless Hadith.

 

[thariq2005]

Just to drag the discussion back to Taqleed now...

If a layman trusts two scholars: for example, scholar A and scholar B. He trusts scholar A more than B, however the layman follows scholar B in some masaa'il over scholar A just over the fact that scholar B showed/mentioned "evidences" and scholar A did not.

Now, how correct would it be for the layman to follow scholar B due to him giving evidence? And what is more correct to do- to follow the scholar he trusts more or?

 

[Harris Hammam]

Just to drag the discussion back to Taqleed now...

If a layman trusts two scholars: for example, scholar A and scholar B. He trusts scholar A more than B, however the layman follows scholar B in some masaa'il over scholar A just over the fact that scholar B showed/mentioned "evidences" and scholar A did not.

Now, how correct would it be for the layman to follow scholar B due to him giving evidence? And what is more correct to do- to follow the scholar he trusts more or?

This simple answer is: He can follow any trustworthy scholar he likes according to the vast majority.

A large group of scholars do say though that he must follow the best according to his own estimation.

Both have their evidences.

Some scholars have taken a middle path: It is preferable but not necessary to follow the best scholar available.

As you can see, because of the difference, this becomes a relatively minor issue.

According to opinions 1 and 3 (and also 2 if he feels another scholar is better in other areas of the law), it is permissible for the layman to change the Mufti he takes his fatwa from in other matters. Like take finance law from one scholar and Salah laws from another.

That was in relation to scholars, and is for the most part applicable when you don't know what fatwa they are going to give you.

As for when faced with conflicting opinions, then it is largely modelled on the same difference of opinion mentioned above - follow the best scholar's opinion or follow any scholar.

In opinions 1 and 3, he can in fact change opinions in a different situation of the same genre. Like in the issue of Salah timings, on one day he can take the Hanafi opinion; on another day he can take the Maliki opinion, etc. This is valid Talfeeq.

Of course, the condition to all of this is you don't actively and obsessively look out for the easiest opinion, and this is all down to self-regulation. Nobody can stop you from following desire - you have to do it yourself, just like you wake up for Fajr.

Sorry if I come across a bit messy here, but the point is this: This is really a minor issue.

 

[Idris16]

Shaykh ibn 'Uthaymeen and shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd held that view as well. They had a very interesting discussion on this issue, especially shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd in his book 'La jaded fee ahkaam al-salaah'.

If I can remember correctly, ibn Rajab Rahimahullaah said that the narrations indicating to feet to feet are metaphorical.

Also HH had a discussion about this on Multaqa.

As HH said this is a really minor issue.

Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd said:

One of the new things that we see some people doing, with no evidence in sharee’ah, is that in prayer they try to align themselves with a person on the right if they are on the right hand side of the row, or to align themselves with a person on their left if they are on the left hand side of the row, and they turn their feet inward so that their ankles are touching the ankles of the people next to them.

This is something for which there is no basis in sharee’ah and it is going to the extreme in implementing the Sunnah. This is wrong on two counts.

The alignment of the row should begin from where the imam is standing. Whoever is on the right of the row should align himself by looking at those who are to his left (i.e., closer to the imam). Thus the line will be straightened and the gaps will be filled. Alignment is done by lining up necks, shoulders and ankles, and by completing the front rows.

But to try to spread the legs wide and turn the feet inward so that one's ankles touch one’s neighbours’ ankles is an obvious mistake and an exaggeration, and a new interpretation which is indicative of going to extremes in trying to apply the Sunnah. It causes annoyance and is not prescribed in sharee’ah, and it widens the gaps between people standing in prayer.

That becomes apparent when the people prostrate, and when they stand up again they become distracted in trying to fill the gaps and turning their feet to make their ankles touch their neighbours’ ankles, which makes them miss out on what they should be doing, which is to make the toes point in the direction of the qiblah.

Doing that is like competing with one’s neighbour and trying to take his place. All of that is not prescribed in sharee’ah.

Laa jadeed fi Ahkaam al-Salaah, 12. 13.

 

[Harris Hammam]

People who join ankles should consider pondering over this principle:

From an Ummul Qura University Makkah webpage:

http://uqu.edu.sa/page/ar/101008

نقل عن الإمام أحمد أنه قال لتلميذه الميموني : لا تتكلم في مسألة ليس لك فيها إمام​

Al-Maymuni reported from Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal who said: Never speak in an issue for which you have no Imam therein

There isn't any Imam of Fiqh in history that I know of who ever propagated the idea of joining ankles to ankles.

 

[thariq2005]

Polite request to Idris16: Please stick to the topic of Taqleed. You are free to PM HH anything you want.

 

[thariq2005]

Another question:

How would a layman know that there is a 'valid' ikhtilaaf?

For example there are many masaa'il, where according to one opinion there is an ijmaa` and according to another opinion there is no ijmaa` or the understanding of the ijmaa` is different. How does a layman who holds a view upon which there is ijmaa`, deal with the other opinion?

Opinions like: Taarik al-Salaah, Mass al-Qur'aan (for a person who has no wudoo') or even like the ruling on Tahiyyah al-Masjid (as according to one view there is a consensus that it is mustahabb).

 

[Seeking Allah's Mercy]

I would like to learn where he used the term Bid`ah in this matter. Thanks

Asalamom`Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Baraakaatuh,

I apologize for the late reply, I got a lil preoccupied. It not really important and "sort of" not related to the discussion anymore. Khair here goes:

For wiping the neck:

http://islamqa.info/en/ref/70120/wiping the neck

is proven in Saheeh Muslim and elsewhere that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The worst of matters are those which are newly-invented, and every innovation is a going astray.”

In al-Saheehayn it is narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever introduces anything into our religion that is not part of it, will have it rejected.:”According to a version narrated by Muslim: “Whoever does any action that is not in accordance with this matter of ours will have it rejected,:

For prostration of forgetfulness. I read it here that it's wrong way to perform tashahhud after it and that the prophet didn't do it this way.
http://islamqa.info/en/ref/7895/sahw

You need to ask a scholar then and get a fatwa off him. All I can say to you is to be clever about who you ask.

What do you mean get a fatwa off him?

 

[Harris Hammam]

Wassalam

Another question:

How would a layman know that there is a 'valid' ikhtilaaf?

He doesn't know, and he would never know, even if he thinks he knows - not until he studies properly.

For prostration of forgetfulness. I read it here that it's wrong way to perform tashahhud after it and that the prophet didn't do it this way.
http://islamqa.info/en/ref/7895/sahw

Well that is his opinion. He didn't really say that the Hanafi method is totally invalid.

But once again, the method of Sajdat 'l-Sahw, is an extremely minor issue. In fact, you can do it in any method you want.

 

[Harris Hammam]

I'd like to share some quotes I've been working from Shafi`i scholars. I've been compiling these to highlight that many, many scholars did not oblige the adherence to one Madhhab when doing Taqleed; the quotes are as equally important in proving that Taqleed for layman is something that exists.

Note that these quotes have never been shared in the English language as far as I'm aware. I'm still working on these so please excuse any mistakes.

Though these quotes were first supposed to go on IA and Multaqa, I thought it would be good for members this forum thread to see these first as a sneak preview. I'll share just ten quotes out of the fifty I have.

You will notice that there is an evident difference of opinion between some of the quotes: some say the layman must ask the best available scholar; others say he can ask any trustworthy scholar.

Regarding Abū Bakr Muḥammad bin ʿAlī bin Ismāʿīl ál-Qaffāl ál-Shāshī (died 365 A.H.), ál-Ṭahṭāwī (died 1231 A.H.) said (Ḥāshiyaŧ 'l-Ṭahṭāwī ʿAlā ál-Durr ál-Mukhtār, King Saʿūd University Riyadh manuscript number 6242, pg. 50-51):
Abū ʿĀṣim Muḥammad bin Aḥmad ál-ʿĀmirī [a Ḥanafī - died around 400 A.H.] used to pass verdicts by the door of ál-Qaffāl’s mosque. The [Shāfiʿī] muezzin [once] called for prayer, so [ál-ʿĀmirī] left [his place] and entered the mosque. When ál-Qaffāl saw him, he ordered the muezzin to double the prayer announcement [i.e. the Iqāmaħ, as per the Ḥanafī position] and put [ál-ʿĀmirī] forward [to lead prayer]. He stepped forward [to lead], read Basmalaħ aloud and performed prayer on the Shāfiʿī method.

Abū 'l-Ḥasan Aḥmad bin Muḥammad ál-Ḍabbī ál-Maḥāmilī (died 415 A.H.) said (taken from Ḥāshiyaŧ 'l-ʿAbbādī ʿAlā Sharḥ 'l-Maḥallī by ál-ʿAbbādī (died 994 A.H.), 4/267-268, ál-Maṭbaʿaħ ál-Amīriyyaħ Cairo, 1st edition, 1289 A.H.):
The evident stance is that the fifth position (i.e. he can choose and take the opinion of whomsoever out of the two he likes) is the strongest.

Regarding Abū 'l-Ṭayyib Ṭāhir bin ʿAbd 'llāh bin Ṭāhir bin ʿUmar ál-Ṭabarī (450 A.H.), Abū Isḥāq ál-Shīrāzī (died 476 A.H.) said (taken from ál-Baḥr ál-Muḥīṭ by ál-Zarkashī (died 794 A.H.), 6/311-312, Ministry of Awqāf & Islāmic Affairs Kuwait; 2nd edition reprint Dār 'l-Ṣafwaħ Hurghadah, 1413 A.H.):
A man came to the Ḥanafī jurist ál-Ṣaymarī [a Ḥanafī - died 436 A.H.] with the Shāfiʿī verdict that if a marriage representative is a sinner and her husband divorced her thrice that the divorce would not pass, and may marry her with a new contract [as the previous contracted never existed]. Ál-Ṣaymarī said, “They have told you that, all this time, you were with an illegal pudenda, and that she can become legal for you today [with a new contract]! I am telling you that she was legal for you all this time until you divorced her, and now she is illegal for you!” By this, ál-Ṣaymarī intended to sway the layman to the Ḥanafī School.
(Abū Isḥāq says) I came to Abū 'l-Ṭayyib ál-Ṭabarī and informed him of the story. He replied, “... but Allāh has not ordained the layman to follow ál-Ṣaymarī; rather he has ordained him to follow any scholar he wishes, so when the layman follows a trustworthy Shāfiʿī, he would have liberated himself of sin and liability until the Day of Judgement.”

Abū 'l-Maʿālī ʿAbd 'l-Malik bin ʿAbd 'llāh bin Yūsuf al-Juwaynī (died 478 A.H.) said (Ál-Burhān, 2/1343-1344, Government of Qatar, 1st edition, 1399 A.H.):
As for [seeking for a] legal edict, it is not obligatory to refer to the best scholar according to me, because the Companions of the Messenger of Allāh (peace be upon him) used to refer to [any and all] jurists when they were present in abundance and did not only refer the best amongst them…
If a situation is [brought forth to] two jurists… and the answer [of each contradicts the other], the questioner would follow the most knowledgeable…

Abū 'l-Muẓaffar Manṣūr bin Muḥammad bin ʿAbd 'l-Jabbār al-Samʿānī (died 489 A.H.) said (Qawāṭiʿ 'l-Adillaħ, 5/142, Maktabaŧ 'l-Tawbaħ Riyadh, 1st edition, 1419 A.H.):
If the questioner finds another [jurist as well], then [taking] the verdict of [the first jurist] would be good, not a specified obligation.

Abū 'l-Maḥāsin ʿAbd 'l-Wāḥid bin Ismāʿīl ál-Rūyānī (died 502 A.H.) said (Baḥr 'l-Madhhab, 1/35, Dār Iḥyā' 'l-Turāth ál-ʿArabī Beirut, 1st edition, 1423 A.H.):
If a layman intends to follow a scholar, does he have to undertake Ijtihād in regards to specific individuals? Ibn Surayj said he must do so, because [this] is not difficult… Others from our disciples say – and this is the most correct view – that he does not have to, and he can follow whichever famous scholar he likes, just like it is not necessary for him to undertake Ijtihād in regards to finding evidence…

Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad bin Muḥammad bin Muḥammad ál-Ghazzālī (died 505 A.H.) said (Ál-Mustaṣfā, 2/390-392, ál-Maṭbaʿaħ ál-Amīriyyaħ Cairo, 1st edition, 1324 A.H.):
If there is only one jurist in the city, the layman [de facto] must refer [only] to him. If there is a number [of them], he may ask whomsoever he wishes: it is not necessary to refer to the most knowledgeable as was the case in the time of the Companions, as laymen used to ask [both] the lesser and the superior [jurists], and no interdiction was placed on the people from asking others apart from Abū Bakr, ʿUmar and other caliphs…
If two jurists differ in front of him in a ruling, he should refer back to them if they are equal [in knowledge and piety] and should say, “Your ruling are conflicting, and you are both equal according to me, so what is binding on me?”. If they give him a choice, he would have a choice; if they agree upon the safer position or a specific [ruling], he should do so; [but] if they insist upon differing, then the only option remaining would be that he would have a choice…
According to me, the most appropriate position is that he must follow the best [if two jurists conflict in front of him], so whosoever believes that ál-Shāfiʿī (may Allāh have mercy on him) is the most knowledgeable, and that the truth is most likely in his scholastic position, he may not take the scholastic position of his opponent out of mere desire. A layman must not choose the most pleasing scholastic position for himself in every issue and do so everywhere else, but rather his execution of preference is tantamount to the execution of preference exercised by a jurist between two conflicting evidences [and] would follow his [personal] belief in his preference – likewise in this situation [concerning the layman].
This is the research, which is that we believe Allāh has a secret in making servants refer back to their personal convictions so that they are left idle, following predilection, allowed to roam loose like wild animals, without being constrained by the rein of legal liability… so that they are reminded of [their] status as servants and the applicability of the law of Allāh Most High in their selves in each [period of] movement and inactivity… So as long as we are able to manage [laymen] with this principle, then that is better than giving them a choice and leaving them idle like animals and children…
[Just like when choosing doctors, t]hen likewise, in relation to scholars, the best can be identified via fame and signs without the need to investigate [their] knowledge. A layman is qualified to do this. Therefore, it is inappropriate to differ with one’s personal conviction just for desire. This is the most correct position according to us and the most apt [in achieving] the universal ruling vis-à-vis managing the people with the rein of piety and legal liability.

Muḥammad bin ʿUmar bin 'l-Ḥusayn ál-Rāzī (died 606 A.H.) said (Ál-Maḥṣūl, 6/81, Mu'assasaŧ 'l-Risālaħ Beirut, 3rd edition, 1418 A.H.):
If [the Mujtahids] differ, a groups said that he must undertake Ijtihād to ascertain the most knowledgeable and the most pious, because that is the way for his belief to be strengthened, which is tantamount to the strengthening of the belief of a Mujtahid [who undertakes Ijtihād to ascertain the strongest of evidences]. Others said that he does not have to undertake this Ijtihād, because scholars of all times have not condemned laymen for abandoning the vetting process vis-à-vis the situation of the scholars.

Abū 'l-Ḥasan ʿAlī bin Muḥammad ál-Āmidī (died 631 A.H.) said (Ál-Iḥkām Fī Uṣūl 'l-Aḥkām, 4/290, Dār 'l-Ṣamīʿī Riyadh, 1st edition, 1424 A.H.):
The preferred position is that of a differentiation, which is that he cannot follow another school in any issue in which his action has a connection to the first school, [but] as long as his action has no connection has no connection to [the first the first school], then there is no prevention from following another [school] in [that issue].

Ibn 'l-Ṣalāḥ Abū ʿAmr ʿUthmān bin ʿAbd 'l-Raḥmān ál-Kurdī (died 643 A.H.) said (Fatāwā Wa-Masā'il Ibn 'l-Ṣalāḥ, pg. 87, Dār 'l-Maʿrifah Beirut, 1st edition, 1406 A.H.):
The first position [that he can ask whomsoever he likes] is more correct, and it is the apparent state of the ancients.

 

[Hammy]

Overwhelming majority of people who join feet today only do so by joining up their little toes, which is clearly a form of Bid`ah.

The only physically-joint part should be the shoulders. That is where Satan enters from to disturb.

http://www.patriotrising.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/jail-bars1.jpg

since you talk about joining feet is Bidah than how about this?

Sahih Bukhari 1.692:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet (saw) said, "Straighten your rows for I see you from behind my back." Anas added, "Everyone of us used to put his shoulder with the shoulder of his companion and his foot with the foot of his companion."

Strange! will you follow Prophet (saww) or the opinions of scholars?

 

[Harris Hammam]

since you talk about joining feet is Bidah than how about this?

Sahih Bukhari 1.692:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet (saw) said, "Straighten your rows for I see you from behind my back." Anas added, "Everyone of us used to put his shoulder with the shoulder of his companion and his foot with the foot of his companion."

Strange! will you follow Prophet (saww) or the opinions of scholars?

This is off-topic, but since you are the only scholar of Islam to have ever lived:

1. The Prophet never commanded for this activity. You'll never find any such Hadith where he told anybody to do this.

2. Do you join ankles to the next person in Sujood and Jalsah as well?

3. In Sunan Abi Dawud:
فرأيت الرجل يلزق منكبه بمنكب صاحبه, وركبته بركبة صاحبه, وكعبه بكعبه
Do you join your knees to the next person as well? Good luck.

4. Do you know that the word 'neck' as also come in a narration? What type of neck do you have that clings onto the neck of the next person?

5. When you are in Sujood and sitting, do you join your ankles to the next person?

 

[thariq2005]

He doesn't know, and he would never know, even if he thinks he knows - not until he studies properly.

Apologies, didn't make my question clearly.

You mentioned that there is no 'forbiding the evil and enjoining the good' in valid ikhtilaaf. So, in the cases where the layman doesn't know as to whether there is a valid ikhtilaaf or not on an issue and he is forcing his opinion on other people, what would be the ruling on such a scenario.

 

[Harris Hammam]

Apologies, didn't make my question clearly.

You mentioned that there is no 'forbiding the evil and enjoining the good' in valid ikhtilaaf. So, in the cases where the layman doesn't know as to whether there is a valid ikhtilaaf or not on an issue and he is forcing his opinion on other people, what would be the ruling on such a scenario.

He should take the advice of a trustworthy scholar, or even better, leave it to the scholar if possible.