I read this off a website and wanted to get other people's opinion.
1. We believe in Allaah and in His Names and Attributes, as they were mentioned in the Book of Allaah and in the Sunnah of the messenger of Allaah, without tahreef (distortion, nor ta'weel (fiqurative interpretation ), nor tamtheel (likening) ,nor tashbeeh ( resemblance), nor ta'teel (denial).
2. We love the Companions of the Messenger of Allaah, and we hate those who speak againest them. We believe that to speak ill of them is to speak ill of the Religion, because they are the ones who conveyed it to us. And we love the Family of the Prophet with love that is permitted by the Sharee'ah.
3. We love the People of hadeeth and all of the Salaf of the Ummah from Ahlus-Sunnah.
4. We despise 'ilmul-kalaam (knowledge of theological rhetoric), and we view it to be from amongst the greatest reasons for the division in the Ummah.
5. We do not accept anything from the books of fiqh (jurisprudence), nor from the books of tafseer (explanation of the Qur'aan), nor from the ancient stories, nor from the Seerah (biography) of the Prophet, except that which has been confirmed from Allaah or from His Messenger. We do not mean that we have rejected them, nor do we claim that we are not in need of them. rather we benefit from the discoveries of our Scholars and the jurists and other then them. However, we do not accept a ruling, except with an authentic proof.
6. We do not write in our books, nor do we cover in our lessons, nor do we give sermons with anything except the Qur'aan, or the autehentic and authoritive hadeeth. And we detest what emanates from the many books and admonishers in terms of false stories and weak and fabricated ahaadeeth.
7. We do not perform takfeer upon any Muslim due to any sin, except Shirk with Allaah, or the abandonment of Prayer, or apostasy.We seek refuge in Allaah from that.
8. We believe that the Qur'aan is the Speech of Allaah, it is not created.
9. We hold that our obligation is to co-operate with the group that traverses the methodology of the book and the Sunnah, and what the Salaf of the Ummah were upon; in terms of calling to Allaah the Glorified, and being sincere in worship of Him, and warning from Shirk, innovations, and disobedience, and to advise all of the groups that oppose this. 'So cooperating upon righteousness and piety (taqwaa) and mutual advising necessitates warning againest evil and not co-operating with the wicked."'
10. We do not deem it correct to revolt againest the Muslim rulers as long as they are Muslims, nor do we feel that revolutions bring about reconciliation. Rather, they corrupt the community.
11. We hold that this multiplicity of present day parties is a reason for the division of the Muslims and their weakness. So therefore we set about 'freeing the minds from the fetters of blind-following and the darkness of sectarianism and part spirit.'
12. We restrict our understanding of the Book of Allaah and of the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah to the understanding of the Salaf of the Ummah from the scholars of hadeeth.,not the blind-followers of their individuals. Rather, we take the truth from wherever it comes. And we knowthat there are those who claim Salafiyyah, yet Salafiyyah is free from them, since they bring to the society what Allaah has prohibited. We believe in cultivating the young generation upon this Islaam, purified from all that we have mentioned, giving to them a correct Islaamic education from the start~ without any influence from the disbelieving western education.
13. We believe that politics is a part of the Religion, and those who try to separate Religion from politics are only attempting to destroy the Religion and to spread chaos.
14. We believe there will be no honour or victory for the Muslims until they return to the Book of Allaah and to the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah.
15. We oppose those who divide the Religion into trivialities and important issues. And we know that this is destructive da'wah.
16. We oppose those who put down the knowledge of the Sunnah, and say that this is not the time for it. Likewise, we oppose those who put down acting upon the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah.
17. Our da'wah and 'aqeedah is more beloved to us than our own selves, our wealth and our offspring. So we are not prepared to part with it for gold, nor silver. We say this so that no one may habe hope in buying out our da'wah, nor should he think that is possible for him to purchase it from us for deenaar or dirham.
18. We love the present day Scholars of the Sunnah and hope to benefit from them and regret the passing away of many of them
19. We do not accept a fatwaa except from the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah.
It is generally pretty good, but I have issues with this bit:
It is assuming that the books of fiqh, tafseer, seerah etc are using sources OTHER than the qur'an and sunnah.
It may not sound too bad until you consider:
1. Many books of hadith such as Sahih Bukhari etc were compiled a generation AFTER the main schools of thought had done their work, so if you consider each generation as something that is more separated, weaker, the books of hadith come a level below the books on fiqh.
2. Not everything is always recorded. Assume that person A carries out an act, person B sees it copies, person C sees Person B and copies. Now if Person D questions this act, person B may not have any proof that it was originally from person A.
In the same way, proofs for traditions may be lost over time - due to either weak links in the chain or because the act was considered so normal that no one questioned it and considered documenting it as something new - while the actions continue.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
i understand what you're saying... I dont know how anyone can invent verses of the Qur'an but some ahadiths ARE fabricated.
It may not sound too bad until you consider:
really??? wait...When was Bukhari alive? wasnt it before the school of thoughts? Arent Ahadith different? as they have chain of narration that can be verified and therefore can be ruled authentic, weak or fabricated and this, at any time in History
That's why person B, C AND D should have questionned it, or at least ask for some evidence.
Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
After.
Imam Abu Hanifa lived from 80 — 148 AH, while Imam Bukhari lived 194 —256 AH. Meaning there were almost 50 years between the death of Imam Abu Hanifa and the birth of Imam Bukhari.
Extend the perion of time long enough and the number of persons in the chains long enough, Person B, C and maybe more could have long died.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
alright...thanks
but if person A got the knowledge, passes it on to B (who now has it) or if B sees it and copies, (which he shouldnt and should ask for proof) then B would have the knowledge. Then the knowledge is passed down to C then to D etc...
We shouldnt follow blindly, and the knowledge needs to be passed down and if it from generation to generation then how can it be lost?
Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
I am not against questioning things.
But I think care needs to be shown when doing so as processes that have been in place for centuries could be destroyed simple because a single person or generation or part of a generation either cannot find the reasoning for it, or for some reason decide to reject it.
An example of this I would say is the graves at Jannatul Baqee in Madina. For centuries the graves were maintained, the locations of the sahabahs bodies known. But then the saudis came along and thought "hang on, this could lead to shirk..." and demilished them, destroyed the maps etc.
They never considered that those graves had survived through the times of teh sahabahs, the taba'ees, their students, the imams, the muhadditheen and many more generations so there must be a good reason for how things are - because well, we would expect the early generations to be MORE practicing and knowledgeable than us.
Either way, most of us do not know enough to go our own way and determine everything ourselves. at some point we do blindly follow a scholars or someone. There is too much for every individual to start from scratch - more, if people have already done the work, it is not needed.
(in this I include the ghair muqallids too - because even if the scholars may not do taqleed, their followers do. The ordinary people have lives to live so cannot be expected to learn everything from scratch.)
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
we do follow blindly, but thats because we KNOW that they are right. Because they've got the proof if you ever need to look at it. There's nothing wrong with that! Just imagine if every single one of us had to decipher the Qur'an by ourselves... No! this is definitely not what i meant...
It's all about understanding WHY we do it. If you understand why then it's fine.
please define "ghair muqallids" and "taqleed" =/
Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
in broad strokes, people who follow a "madhab" are muallids - people who follow Imam Abu Haneefa, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi'i, or Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal.
People who don't are considered ghair muqallids - though some still do taqleed in a way but of more recent scholars.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
what do they follow then??
recent scholars??
Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
the ghair muqallids try to follow the sources directly. Or if they are not scholars, they follow scholars who try to do that.
But if they are following scholars who do that, not much of a difference from following other scholars who did the research aaages ago...
As for following one or more... they are all correct, but if you follow only one, then you use a consistent methodology, so its best to try to stick to one as much as possible.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
There is a big difference between classical and contemporary scholars. When someone says they are following the Hanafi school it doesn't mean that they are following Imam Abu Hanifa, they are in fact following the many mujtahid imams from the Hanafi school.
When someone calls themselves salafi (non-muqallid), they are actually following a contemporary scholar whilst claiming to be following the salafs.
As for the strict conditions of ijtihad and who can do that, that is another discussion. There is no scholar alive today who is known to fulfill the conditions of ijtihad. And if they are doing ijtihad whilst not meeting the conditions of ijtihad then they shouldn't be doing it in the first place.
If anyone has doubts re madhabs, I recommend you read this book with an open mind.
But don't you think the conditions set were unrealistic and marked against legends instead of fact?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Not at all. The conditions are realistic and the various mujtahid scholars of past has shown this. There are btw 7 different levels of a mujtahid. The 4 imams of the madhabs hold the highest qualification of ijtihad.
If a person is not a mujtahid then they should simply follow a madhab; it's that simple. By doing ijtihad without necessary qualifications they are only burdening themselves and making things harder. Why go through all that unnecessary hardship when the fuqaha of the past have made things easier for us by them doing all the hard work. But no, some people claim that they want to follow Quran and Sunnah. As if the mujtahid imams didn't follow Quran and Sunnah.....
Yes but we learn new things everyday, so maybe some of the research the classical scholars did become irrevelant and maybe even wrong. Didn’t those scholars themselves say that if new ahadith come along and prove what they said was wrong then follow the new stuff and don’t follow us blindly. I didn’t understand that Taqleed meant following blindly blindy, even if everyone knows it’s wrong.
The following the new scholars thing, its just like an update, what’s the point in NOT installing the updates, its just better software that’s been improved based on the new technology (research) available. The “new” scholars, where did they get their knowledge from? Obviously, they didn’t start from the basics, they build on the traditional scholars’ research.
And being ghair mugallid doesn’t mean you don’t respect and acknowledge the research done by the 4 imaams OR believe that they didn’t follow the Qur’an and Sunnah, you just don’t follow any school or you could follow ALL schools AND the contemporary scholars.
Should we really call each other people of the Bid’ah? Just because some don’t follow a school of thoughts, others follow them blindly and all the inbetween. And how can trying to follow the Qur’an and Sunnah be a bid’ah? As this was the aim of the 4 imaams?
Do you think that having this discussion is going to change anything? We’re so adamant about our beliefs, would we be ready to change them based on an online discussion?
Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
If they made a right ijtihad they will get 2 rewards and if they make a mistake in their ijtihad they will still get 1 reward.
This is what Imam Nawawi mention in this book Al-Majmu:
"Our Companions (Shawafi') acted according to this in the matter of Tathweeb, the conditions on coming out of Ihram due to illness and other issues well-known in books of the Madhab (Shafii). Among those of our Companions who are reported to have passed judgment on the basis of the Hadeeth (rather then saying of Shafii) are Abu Ya'qoob Al Buweeti and Abul Qasim Ad Dariki. Of our companions from the Muhaditheen, Imam Abu Bakr Al Bayhaqi and others employed this approach. Many of our earliest companions, if they faced an issue for which there was a hadeeth, and the madhab of Shafii was contrary to it, would act according to the Hadeeth and give verdicts based on it saying : " The Madhab of Shafii is whatever agrees with the Hadeeth. This which Imam ash-Shaafi has said does not mean that everyone who sees a sahih Hadith should say "This is the mathhab of ash-Shaafi," thus practicing on the zaahir (text/external or apparent meaning) of the Hadith. This most certainly applies to only such a person who has the rank of ijtihad in the mathhab. It is a condition that he overwhelmingly believes that Imam ash-Shaafi was unaware of this Hadith or he was unaware of its authenticity. And this is possible only after having made a research of all the books of ash-Shaafi and similar other books of the Ashaab of ash-Shaafi, those who take (knowledge) from him and others similar to these (books). This is indeed a difficult condition (to fulfill). Few are there who measure up to this (standard). What we have explained has been made conditional because Imam ash-Shaafi had abandoned acting on the zaahir (text) of many Ahadith, which he say and knew. However, by him was established proof for criticism in the Hadith or its abrogation or it's specific circumstance or its interpretation, etc. Hence, he was constrained to leave aside the hadith." Shaykh Abu ‘Amr [Ibn al-Salâh] said: “It is no trivial matter to act according to the apparent meaning of what Imâm al-Shâfi‘î said. For it is not permissible for every faqîh – let alone a layman (‘âmmî) – to act independently with what he takes to be a proof from the hadîth..................Shaykh Abu 'Amr ( Ibnu Salah) says : " Whoever among the Shafii found a hadeeth contradicting his Madhab, he would consider whether he fulfilled the conditions of Ijtihad generally, or in that particular topic or issue, in which case he would be free to act on the hadeeth, if not ( having reached ijtihad in this topic or generally), but nevertheless he found it hard to cantradict the hadeeth after further analysis, he would be left, he would not be able to find a convincing justification for opposing the hadeethy, hence it would be left for him to act according to the Hadeeth if an independant Imam other than Shafii had acted on it, and this would be justification for his leaving the madhab of his Imam in that issue" What he ( Abu 'Amr) has said is correct and established. Allah knows best"
And this is what Hafiz ibn Hajar Al Asqalani mentions in his book Fath ul Bari:
Under the chapter of 'Raising both the hands when standing from ruku'. He narrates a quote from ibn Daqeequl Eid who said "According to the usul of Imam Shafi raising the hands should be desirable". Hafiz comments on ibn Daqeequl Eid's statement by saying " As far as the statement that this 'Should be the madhab of Imam Shafi RA becasue Imam Shafi RA said "When a hadith is authentic it is my madhab" is objectionable. Hafiz ibn Hajr continues: The reason for objection is that we can only practice upon this statement of Imam Shafi RA when it is known that the hadith did not reach him. But if it did and he did not accept it or made some interpretation to it, then we cannot accept this statment.
"Following the new scholars thing"..... by abandoning madhabs and following scholars who do ijtihad without necessary qualifications is like uninstalling the software you already have and installing a corrupt software which is harmful for your computer.
It is not specifically obligatory to stick to one madhhab for all one's actions - as long as one doesn't merely follow one's whims or engage in mixing between the positions of mujtahids in a way not valid according to either.
Scholars nowadays cannot even master one single madhab, yet we see some people today mixing all 4 madhabs and giving rulings left right and centre.
The majority of the ummah and most scholars (some who were very high in rank), such as Yahya ibn Ma'in who was known to have memorised every single hadith followed a madhab (Hanafi), yet today we see people calling for the abandonment of madhabs. Not only can we call it a bid'ah, we can say it is probably the most dangerous bid'ah.
It's not up to you or me whether someone changes.
About those massive quotes you posted. I've read them, but i don't understand them, can you explain? then maybe when i re-read them i'll understand.
How so? and how do you know they are doing it "without necessary qualifications"?? what are the qualifications needed?
agreed. But i still dont think that separating each other under different names is helping the ummah as a whole. I'm Muslim, you're muslim. Why differ when there is no reason to?
Did the Imaams of the four school of thought ever said to follow them exclusively?
Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
I am not going to waste any more time as I don't think you fully understand.
The issue of madhabs has been discussed before, dig that up and read it.
If you're still confused talk to an aalim, and try and read the book I've mentioned above.
Not really, it takes time thinking and replying to topics such as this. I couldn't be bothered as I probably had more important things to do.
Actually, why am I even here. I'm off.
wait!
you pointed to this topic, so you're nominated to answer the questions!
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
No.
and people follow others too. The four madhabs were tolerated by the political classes though, so they had a bigger following and when contemporaries tried to change things etc, their knowledge etc was found wanting.
Even now, there are others that are followed - like the followers of Jamaat-e-Islami, more or less follow the founder of that group, so they are in effect doing his taqleed.
In the same way, we all do taqleed to some degree of whoever we use for knowledge, whichever scholars we listen to etc.
The question however is in matters that the great jurists decided centuries ago, will we go by their decisions knowing that they had met the sahabah and lived in a better more religious time, or follow the decisions of current jurists who are that much further from the time of the prophet (saw).
There is a case to both to some degree too - some laws and decisions will be timeless while others will be circumstantial, so if those change, the decision may be able to be revisited. Saying that, most scholars are extremely var of doing this as it opens doors to fitnah (and some would suggest that some of the current bloodshed and violence is a result of some people revisiting past decisions and making new but wrong decisions that some people follow and that that has led to chaos).
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Thanks for te answer You, really appreciate ot BUT i still wished that topic was page 59..im asking so many questions, its embarrasing... How did it end up on page one again?
Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
Thanks to your dearest friend MuslimBro.
Besides, there is no shame in learning.
You should be proud of asking questions if anything - some people (:oops:) can be too proud or cowardly to ask them.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
I'm back. Thought the following would answer a few questions.
@ MuslimBro - in that answer you can substitute "following a madhab" with "asking a scholar".
"if you dont know better, ask a scholar."
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
He's right, it really does. Back in the sectarian days, I used to spend hours a day just writng three or four posts. Nowadays if someone is talking rubbish I just leave them to it and go some place else.
Gentleness and kindness were never a part of anything except that it made it beautiful, and harshness was never a part of anything except that it made it ugly.
Through cheating, stealing, and lying, one may get required results but finally one becomes
@You: Disagree with these too.
Gentleness and kindness were never a part of anything except that it made it beautiful, and harshness was never a part of anything except that it made it ugly.
Through cheating, stealing, and lying, one may get required results but finally one becomes
The thing is some people are not looking for an argument, but to simply learn.
If they are overlooked evne when they are asking to be taught, that is a bad bad thing.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
@Lilly: I get that you're saying, the scholars of the past did their best, but they weren't perfect. So why should we not try to guide ourselves to Allah?
It's been a long time since I've tried to answer that but you're not attacking anyone and spreading hate, so I figure you deserve to have your question answered. Work with me though, because it's going to be a bumbling, imperfect answer.
What is our Deen?
Our religion was taught to us BY the Messenger of God SAW who was taught by Allah SWT directly and indirectly through Angel Gabriel AS - the religion and knowledge of it came from God.
It is a religion for teaching the people how to worship Allah SWT, become faithful to Allah SWT and to gain His nearness, His forgiveness and His deliverance of us from the fire and into paradise. The scope of this is that we render the rights due to Allah SWT and the rights due to people - both are from His worship.
So now the question becomes one of 'how'? How do we worship Allah? How do we be faithful to Him, How do we gain his forgiveness and deliverance? What are his rights and how do we observe them? What are the rights of the people and how do observe them?
As a starting point we have what the Muhaditheen call 'Umm us-Sunnah' (the mother of the sunnah) - The Hadith of Gabriel AS in which the Angel Gabriel AS came to the Prophet SAW showed him courtesy and then asked what is Islam (to which the Prophet SAW replied with what we call the five pillars), what is Iman (to which the Prophet SAW gave the six articles of faith), what is Ihsan (to which the Prophet SAW spoke about the realities of worship and spiritual states) and tell me about signs of the last hour (to which the Prophet SAW responded with signs of its coming).
Importantly, when the Angel departed, the prophet SAW said to Sayyiduna Umar RA "That was Jibra-eel, he came to teach you about your deen."
So this hadith is teaching us about what the religion is, and its key points are Islam (which is primarily: Shahadah, Salah, Zakah, Hajj, Saum), Iman (Faith in God, the Angels, The messengers, the books, the last day and that fate is from God.) and Ihsan (that you worship Allah with the state of his prescence being upon you.) And it is important to understand - as one non-Muslim skillfully pointed out - The Prophet SAW taught Islam for 23 years, any explanation of the deen which takes less than 23 years can only be a summary of it. So the hadith of Gabriel AS is only a summary of the deen, covering the key features.
How do we worship Allah?
If we take just one element of the religion - Salaah. How do we perform the prayer that Allah SWT has commanded? The answer is not in the QUr'an, it is in the Sunnah of the Prophet SAW. Problem solved? No. The Prophet's life was not recorded on HD camera from beginning to end...by any one person. His holy life was recorded by many, many people from amongst over 100,000 companions RA!
It is a miracle of Allah that som many people helped preserve the Prophet's biography for posterity, but it throws in another difficulty for those who would seriously study it; authenticity. With so many people recording the biography first-hand, their reliabilty as witnesses, in their memories, in their truthfulness needs to be examined.
Further to this, the prophet SAW was teaching and trainning a living generation, so things were changed and abrogated as the recipients of that trainning became more eligible for it e.g. the prohibition of wine: first it was permitted with conditions, then once the companions had become more dicsiplined with it, it was completely and utterly forbidden. So abrogattion is another issue to consider, when is one instancce of teaching something which has bveen replaced?
Thirdly there is the problem of situational context. Some ayat of Qur'an and teachings from sunnah were taught for specific situations e.g. joining the zuhr and asr prayer is only for the day of arafat.
Fourthly people context. The Prophet SAW had more than 100,000 companions, He SAW did not teach them all the same, identical thing, nor give them the same responsibilities in their worship. So you have to discover which commandments are for everyone, which are for some people depending on their level and which are not for anyone today. Some people, the Prophet SAW told to wake up at night and pray, other were told to restrict their fasting, so the specifics of worship varied and you have to realise what is obligatory and what can be optional.
With regards salah, Hanafis take a lot of their ahadith for salah from sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Mas'ud RA. There are many other Sihaba RA who narrate ahadith on salaah but Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Mas'ud RA has many special qualifications including that the Prophet SAW recommended people take their religion from him. Remeber I said there were many ahadith from amny sihaba about salaah? Well some of them contradictory or apparantly contradictory, so which ones do you take, whcih ones do you leave?
Imam Shafi'i RA devoted his encyclopeadic knowledge of QUr'an and Sunnah as well as his prodigeous genius to resolving apparant conflicts in hadith, which is in fact discovering which ahadith were time specific, or people specific or indeed abrogated and replaced by others. WHich could be due to weaknesses in the anrrators etc. The only way he could do this was because he had memorised hundreds of thousands of ahadith AND knew about the thousands of people who narrated them (their strengths, weaknesses, reliability etc) and had studied the Qur'an (just for one detail in his reasoning, he read the Qur'an 300 times until he found a relevant proof!). He was the teacher of Imam Ahmad bin Hnabal RA who said after the appearance of people of bid'ah we began to take seriously the qualifications of the narrators of ahadith and deen. He was the student of Imam Malik RA who was approached by Sayyiduna Sufya Ath-thawri RA, whom the scholars call the leader of the believers in hadith, when Sufyan was going through a state of crises. Sayyiduna Sufyan told him that he knew so many ahadaith that some were contradictory and he was in a crisis about how to do his worship. Imam Malik said tell me what you know and so for three full days Sufyan told Imam Malik every hadith he ahd memorised and Imam Malik said "take this hadith" or "leave this hadith" based on his deeper knowledge of the people-context and situational-context of the hadith!
This somes up the question concisely, is there a need to follow Imam Malik, or study the Qr'an and sunnah ourselves? Sufyan Ath-Thawri knew more hadith than practically anybody ever will, and he knew Qur'an, plus he was a tabi'ee, but still he needed to follow Imam Malik RA! Why? Because not only did Imam Malik have Sufyan's Ahadith of the Prophet SAW or most of them, but he had a deeper understanding that comes not just with studying the ancillary sciences, but being possessed with an ingenuity AND eidetic memory that Allah gave to the early Imams. See, you have ten hard-driver full of Ahadith and also be a genius, but that is not equal to a person who has memorised 10 hard drives and is a genius. Imam Malik said his knowledge was in the chest (not the books) so when he needed to know about a single issue, he had the evidence of thousands of books at his disposal because his heart's light would illuminate all his knowledge for him. Yet if we had thousands of books, how long would it take to find the relevant parts and assemble them, forget about comapring, analysing and collating like Imam Malik RA could. Complete memorisation coupled with genius and further the light of Allah that He gifts to the pious - in this case the whole is INFINATELY greater than the sum of the parts.
These people were gifts from God. It is the consensus of the Ummah that they deserve paradise by Allah's Mercy. Allah gave them memory, intellect and dedication to spend every hour of every day in acquiring knowledge of His religion. People like that don't grow on trees. Forget us, look at the prodigious greats of our times, still they haven't reached the heights of what Allah gave us in Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Malik, Imam SHafi'i or Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal RA. Their madhaahib are never out of date, and they can be re-interpreted for new situations when they arise. The newer the situation the more relevant the madhabs are! Because they are not just answers, they are prescribed methoiologies for arriving at thsoe answers. So the situation is simple, you can follow your own research which is certain to be flawed and hope that it conatins enough truth amongst the error for Allah to accept your worship...OR you can follow the research of the great Imamas which was further refined by the great Imams who came after them, and know that the consensus of the ummah is that that worship IS definatively acceptable with Allah as far as it's performance is concerned!
One Maliki scholar was asked (by a person who didn't like madhhabs) but Imam Malik was human, what if he mad e a mistake? The scholar replied, Imam Malik was of that calliber that (even if he did make a mistake, knowing that the mistake is according to the pedigree of his unparalelled standards) I feel safer with Malik's mistakes than your corrections.
Gentleness and kindness were never a part of anything except that it made it beautiful, and harshness was never a part of anything except that it made it ugly.
Through cheating, stealing, and lying, one may get required results but finally one becomes
True.
The above post took me an hour and ten minutes to write.
Gentleness and kindness were never a part of anything except that it made it beautiful, and harshness was never a part of anything except that it made it ugly.
Through cheating, stealing, and lying, one may get required results but finally one becomes
I dont know how to go about thanking you Dawud. Jazakallahou khair.
And may Allah reward you for the time you spend writing this and that it wasnt a waste of time.
the only thing i can do, is pray for you inshallah.
Again, Barakallahoufiq.
Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
Jazak'Allah for your time Dawud!
i don't want to sound like an idiot but erm, did you say all that just for salaah?
or
So you wouldn't follow any other shaykh if one or all four madhabs said something else about a certain matter?
The example that comes to mind is that Noor said Dr Tahir Ul Qadri says women can travel without a mahram any distance yet all the madhabs agree you can't and only one madhab says you can but only for Hajj.
"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi
Pages