Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other Mad'habs' started by Aqdas, Apr 7, 2019.
iraqi in his sharh of subki's work; ghayth al-hawamiy, p711-712:
am sorry to interrupt but i think people are going off in tangents without context.
muqayyad and muTlaq are thrown to the wind and statements from one case are used to justify the other.
it is cringeworthy how some people post citations without understanding the context or import of those statements.
i am sorry, but YOUR opinion does not count - particularly when you have no respect or regard for research scholars such as alahazrat or bajuri or a host of others. if you have any citation to back your claim, please do. else, your opinion is of little consequence. on one hand you show contempt to opinions of ulama, and on the other hand you bring the same ulama as proof of your statements. yet, you accuse US of acting like wahabis!
if freethinkers and mujtahid muTlaqs wish to argue with me, i have recused myself from engaging with people who are utterly incapable of thinking in an organised fashion and indulge freely in whataboutery. i have no time to waste satisfying their idle curiosities.
if someone wants to talk about qarafi, then they have to stick to qarafi and the explanations etc, by maliki fuqaha. if you talk of suyuti's comment in jam' al-jawamiy, then be prepared to examine and discuss all the shuruh of jam' al-jawamiy.
not grab from here and there and posit: 'what about...?' stick to the topic, stick to the subject, stick to one issue at a time. and one should be brave and answer when asked objective questions.
here, we have people who cannot understand the very quotes they cite, but so pompously and arrogantly admit and dismiss at will, opinions of senior ulama respected by generations of scholars. when asked to explain what they have cited, people go off in a huff only to ridicule those who asked them by berating their intelligence etc. i am still willing to discuss ibn SalaH's quote on weak hadith provided the person who posted it translates it and makes clear what HE thinks of it.
i dunno why it was not posted here. khayr, maybe technical issues. but notice that in those screen shots, p415 is highlighted and the next page is p417. one would think that p416 might not have a relevant portion - or perhaps p416 actually refutes you? here is p416 for you:
people do not understand the basic terminology of authors in their saying qeel, that it is used to mention weak positions - not necessarily the author's own - still happily make ta'weel and hold to it as an irrefutable daleel. attributing this position of following whom you like when you like whatever you like regardless of the circumstance, is worse than the salafi manhaj. the salafi takes the wordings of the prophet without proper interpretation and right context to suit his whim; and this mulaffiq takes the opinions of non-prophets to suit his caprice.
here is the actual position of suyuti (p415-416):
according to suyuti: 'whether and aammi or an aalim, unless he is a mujtahid, it is imperative upon him do follow (taqlid) a mujtahid imam'.
one ought to examine all the available shuruh of jam' al-jawamiy to fairly present the position of subki/jam' al-jawamiy;
and if it is about suyuti's opinion, then one ought to examine his views from various books - not just a passing comment such as: "it is also said..." to be THE opinion of suyuti.
nas'alu Allaha al-aafiyah.
Allah ta'ala knows best.
so let me get this straight:
1) i specifically requested aH to comment in my opening comment on this thread but despite that you felt the need to take part and as a result, you have now ruined the thread with pointless comments.
2) now that you have nothing left to offer, 'shaykh abu hasan will reply to you in a much more efficient manner?' in all honestly, you're beginning to sound extremely childish, i don't know why you keep mentioning the beard, it has absolutely nothing to do with this thread, it seems you're bitter, let it go, you'll feel better in sha allah.
this forum is for educational purposes, not to get one over the other, allah grant us all ikhlas!
*** please don't comment any further, jazakallahu khayr
believe me, the only reason im not replying to you is because shaykh abu hasan will reply to you in a much more efficient manner; btw if you hadnt noticed, i provided the citations "i couldn't provide" regarding the beard.
note - i never once said taking from other maddhahib is impermissible. it's just another one of your false accusations. and plus i dont care if you name me, just shows your immaturity. seems like you're the one clutching at straws mufti sahib.
two key points are addressed in this excerpt:
# is it wajib on the layman and others who have not reached the level of ijtihad to adhere to a specific madhab from the madhahib of the mujtahidin?
there are two answers: 1) yes, he must. 2) no, this was the position of nawawi (as long as he doesn't do so seeking concessions). this is also the position mentioned by al-bajuri - minus the concessions (which i will mention later on).
# the one who adheres to a specific madhab, can he leave it and adopt another?
answer: 1) permissible in every instance 2) permissible in some matters and not in others (samhudi quotes similar positions in al-iqd ul-farid.
bazdawi sahib: it seems you are now coming to terms with where this is going which is why you've changed your tune, and it's also why you keep calling upon mawlana aH, you clearly haven't understood the topic (which is why i did not want to entertain you to start with) and your list of questions (some of which have been answered) reflect your level of ignorance in this matter (with all due respect), but i implore you to remain objective, we are yet to hear what the likes of nawawi, ibn ul-human, al-nabalusi, samhudi, al-izz ibn abd al-salam, bajuri and others have to say on the issue.
allah knows best
subhan'allah, now it's 'everyone knows there is some degree of ikhtilaf regarding the issue?!' wah allamah muhammad ali (bazdawi sahib), you've changed your tune, allah guides whom he wills.
as for your 'naqd' on my understanding of imam al-kawthari's rebuttal of imam al-juwayni's statement, i suggest you read the passage again, you seem to have missed the point (also, refer to my very first post on this thread whilst you're at it, you seem to be falling behind).
continuing from the previous point wherein i mentioned imam zahid al-kawtharis position, the following works support the very same idea (which further illustrates allama bazdawis misunderstanding of the actual text)
# is it wajib upon a muqallid that he restrict himself in following a specific madhab in every instant?
answer (summarised): there are three famous positions
# the overwhelming majority (jamhur) of fuqaha and usuliyun take the position that it is not wajib to make taqlid of a specific imam in every occurrence... rather, it is permissible for him to make taqlid of any mujtahid he wants. If he adheres to a specific madhab, it is permissible for him to transfer to another. allah azawajal has not ordered us to restrict ourselves to one madhab, as a consequence, adhering to a specific madhab is not wajib..allah has obligated that we follow the people of knowledge without specifying one alim over the other, he says (most high): ‘and ask the people of ‘dhikr’ if you do not know’ (al-nahl, 43).
# Furthermore, the sahaba and ta’biyin would not prevent a layman from asking whosoever he wished to ask, and neither did they make it imperative upon a person to strictly abide to the ijtihad of one of them in every matter.
# disagreements (ikhtilaf) of the ummah in matters pertaining to fiqh is a mercy for the ummah and allows room for manoeuvre (sometimes which sher e ahle sunnat bazdawi seems to disagree with).
everyone knows there is some degree of ikhtilaf regarding the issue; what i want to ask shaykh abu hasan is:
1) what is the view of the majority of the ulema?
2) what is the view of the hanafi ulema with regards to this?
3) is it permissible to change to another maddhab for reasons such as:
a) one maddhab permits keeping a shorter beard.
b) one maddhab has differing rulings regarding hurmat-e musarahat.
c) one maddhab doesn't require permission of the guardians to get married to another person.4) is the following allowed - in the morning, he wakes up a follower of imam shafiyi in issues of salah, then in the afternoon he misses dhuhr according to the shafiyis so he chooses the hanafi school and prays dhuhr on time, then at night he wants to go sleep early so he chooses to follow the shafiyi position with regards to isha time?
5) is it allowed to go through books like imam tahawi's ikhtilaf al-ulema and imam juzayri's al-fiqh ala al-maddhahib al-arba'a and find a ruling which suits oneself and then follow it; then declare that - 'i consider this position strongest'?
6) what about when the usul of one madhhab clashses with the madhhab of another?
7) if a hanafi chooses to follow the shafiyi position on the beard [and since shafiyis do not exactly have an equivalent of wajib in their maddhab] then what about the other things which hanafis consider wajib whilst imam shafiyi considers as 'not fard' such as the witr prayer?
8) can i follow imam shafiyis position of witr of isha not being fard when i am in a rush? and change back the next day?
9) should the urf be taken into account? if the awam are informed they can follow any position from any maddhab then wouldn't this cause fitna? isn't sidd al-zarayi important especially in this day and age?
(there may be overlap and repetition so I am apologise to shaykh abu hasan from before.)
its all hunky-dory telling people they dont have to keep a beard as they can follow imam shafiyis position but what about the fitan and repercussions?
which aalim has ever permitted chasing rukhas? chasing dispensations is haram according to everyone, following the nafs and hawa is haram.
sorry to interrupt, but here is something to support your position, Abu Hamza
Straight from Suyuti https://jpst.it/ZREI
Sharḥ al-Kawkab al-sāṭiʻ : naẓm Jamʻ al-jawāmiʻ
Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī ;
taḥqīq Muḥammad Ibrāhīm al-Ḥafnāwī.
شرح الكوكب الساطع : نظم جمع الجوامع
pdf available on the internet
هل يجب على العامي وغيره ممن لم يبلغ رتبة الاجتهاد التزام مذهب معين من مذاهب المجتهدين
من التزم مذهبا معينا هل يجوز له الخروج عنه
Screen shots for you
Some attachments missing click here https://jpst.it/ZREI
maqalat al-kawthari, p.134
and those who invite others to abandoning the madhhab - from the maddhahib of the imams which are followed - are either:
1) those who believe the mujtahid imams were correct in all their dervied rulings so that they permit every non-mujtahid individual to take from any view from the views of the many mujtahids; without the need to stick to one mujtahid whom he chooses to follow. this is a position of the mu'tazilis.
2) as for the sufis, they also consider the mujtahids to be correct, in the sense that they take from the specific azayim [and not dispensations] from amongst their statements without sticking to one specific mujtahid.
so if people want to follow the opinion of a different maddhab just because it would allow them to trim their beard or allow them to get married without permission of parents then this would be following the mu'tazilis.
coincidentally, the topic of taking from different maddhahib popped up 2 days ago when the hanafi position of the beard was being discussed. once it was mentioned that the hanafi scholars consider fistful beard to be wajib, then the individual raised the question of whether its permissible to follow opinions from different madhhahib.
if this isnt following the hawa and nafs, and chasing rukhas then I don't know what is?!
though what mufti sahib posted doesnt support his view at all, there is some text of the shaykhs which seems to allude towards the permissibility of following other madhhahib. if shaykh abu hasan could elucidate the matter for us.
to suggest that this paragraph is referring taqleed shakhsi is against the position of the jamhoor ulema. it can't possibly be conceived that imam kawthari was suggesting that the majority of the muslims are incorrect in following one imam?!
apologies mufti sahib. i wasnt going to post on this respecting your wishes but i just have a few doubts regarding your understanding of what imam zahid al-kawthari is saying.
ihqaq al-haqq, page 20/21
and he (imam juwayni) himself accepts that the imamah of the (4) imams which are followed (by the ummah)...[n.b.]
and with this statement, he opposes his own position wherein he said:
"and it is necessary upon all sane people and the muslims in general, in the east and west, close and far, to adopt the madhhab of imam shafiyi"
whereas the notion that it is necessary upon all muslims, in the east and west, to follow one person cannot be imagined (i.e. it is impossible) except if that person is a Prophet who has been sent by Allah.
so juwayni bestows that position for his own imam which was actually for the Messenger of Allah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam[...] is his imam not a mujtahid - who is sometimes correct and sometimes wrong? so how can you raise him to the level of infallibility? we ask Allah for His protection.
in the next paragraph, imam zahid al-kawthari says that imam shafiyi forbade people from following him so imam juwayni is himself excluded from the madhhab of imam shafiyi. straight after this comes the paragraph which mawlana abu hamza has posted.
is imam zahid al-kawthari telling people that it is incorrect to follow one imam? of course not! anyone who knows basic arabic and reads the entire discussion of imam kawthari will realise that imam kawthari is rejecting the notion that only one imam be followed, like imam juwayni suggested people do. in no way, shape or form is he telling people not to follow one imam.
what he is saying is - follow imam shafiyi if you want, follow imam abu hanifa if you want, follow imam malik if you want and follow imam ahmad if you want. BUT don't tell the people to only follow imam shafiyi or only follow imam abu hanifa or only follow imam malik or only follow imam ahmad.
so mufti sahib, this is what imam zahid al-kawthari means by [مجتهد واحد معين] and not what you thought it meant.
alhamdu lillah, look at what imam juwayni said regarding mixing and matching from different maddhahib and imam zahid al-kawthari didnt refute him at all on this point. rather he challenged him on his statement regarding following just one specific imam (imam shafiyi). this seems to be imam kawthari actually agreeing with him on this point, if he didn't agree then why not refute it?!
on a lighter note, Hazrat - i do apologise for going against your wishes of no one posting but i thought that there was no need for shaykh abu hasan to reply to your misreading of imam zahid al kawthari. when you do post something (which actually supports your stance) then i wont comment in sha Allah.
imam kawthari is referring to an extract of imam juwayni wherein he says that imamah is only for the quraysh (citing the hadith) and since imam shafiyi was from the quraysh, he is the only imam who ought to be followed as the rest of the mujtahid imams were not from amongst the quraysh. but imam juwayni contradicts himself and his understanding of the hadith [الأئمة من القريش] by accepting the imamah of the other imams.
imam zahid al-kawtahri's response (summarised)
# to suggest that it is wajib upon all muslims to follow one specific mujtahid is incorrect, this is with the exception of those who deem a mujtahid who has erred in his ijtihad to be sinful in every single matter. now, to consider such a mujtahid to be sinful (after he has erred) is the madhab of ibrahim ibn aliyya (or ilya) and bishr ibn ghiyath and other innovators.
# to suggest that it is wajib upon all muslims to follow one specific imam contradicts the consensus (ijma) and the understanding of the jurists, al-shihab ahmad ibn idris al-qarafi said in the commentary to 'tanfih ul-fusul': 'consensus has been established for the one who accepts islam that he can follow (qallada) whosoever he wishes from the scholars without any hindrance. what's more, the sahaba (radiy'allahu anhum) were unanimous that the one who took a legal opinion from abu bakr and umar (radiy'allahu anhuma), or he followed them both, that he could also follow abu hurayra and muadh ibn jabal and others.
# the one who claims that these two consensus rulings (ijma'ayn) have been raised and are no longer applicable need to bring forth substantial proof to support their claim.
note: imam zahid al-kawthari is refuting imam al-juwayni's arguments which come much later in the book.
***on the previous post, there is a typo in the title of the book, if admin can kindly ammend that.
the following is imam al-juwayni's famous work 'al-mugith ul-khalq' in which he implores people to forsake the school of imam abu hanifa and flock to the madhab of al-shafiyi..
can a layman adopt the madhab of al-shafiyi in some matters and the madhab of abu hanifa or other than him in some matters?
#question: is it permissible for the layman to adopt the madhab of al-shafiyi in some matters and abu hanifa in others...?
# imam al-juwayni's response (summarised):
it is not permissible, rather it is wajib upon him to remain resolute by specifying a particular madhab from these madhahib, either the madhab of al-shafiyi in all matters, or the madhab of malik, abu hanifa or other than them (ahmad), he cannot adopt the madhab of al-shafiyi in some matters which he desires and the madhab of abu hanifa in the rest...'
... now for imam zahid al-kawthari's rebuttal
this thread will discuss the following two points:
# is it permissible for a hanafi (or any other adherent of a madhab) to sporadically transfer from one school to another?
# is it permissible to take rulings from other schools?
this discussion will be fruitless if there's no objectivity, i understand that for some, 'yes' to the above two questions goes against everything that they know, but that doesn't mean you can't remain objective, for this reason, i would prefer if aH comments and nobody else.
note: i have limited access to a laptop and will therefore comment and reply as and when i can. secondly, don't just simply 'post' a reference, give a quick overview of the point that's being made for those who can't/won't open/read the file.