fiqh ittiba al-hawa

Discussion in 'General Topics' started by Unbeknown, Dec 19, 2019.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    Form FR shareef vol#27: see pages 593-594


    The entire risalah shareef is a scathing refutation of this school - dunno how I missed this gem last time.
  2. Bazdawi

    Bazdawi Well-Known Member

    khulasatul tahqiq of imam nablusi is often quoted by these people to support their standpoint but it is strange that such caveats are ignored by the very same people.

    [khulasat al-tahqiq, p7]

    "... he is not obligated to follow one specific madhhab rather he can ask whichever mufti he wants but with the condition that he does not seek dispensations and perhaps those who forbade him did not believe that he would not seek dispensations."
    in a time where information was not widespread, when fitna and evil were much less common, when it was hard to find literate people and people had a genuine cause to ask muftis from different madhhahib, scholars were already questioning whether such a man would ask different muftis without following dispensations. and yet, now we're meant to believe these youth openly doing ayyashi that they won't be seeking dispensations.

    pir sahib is not a faqih. a faqih understands his time. a faqih understands his people. a faqih understands the hikmah behind rulings. as a wise man once said "he who remains chained to the letter of the text will never reach the depths of its meaning"

    its strange that since one year they have been telling people it is fine to take from different maddhahib but not once have i ever heard anyone from this camp saying not to follow rukhas or not to follow their desires. i guess this is the summary of the pick and choose madhhab. they even pick and choose from the books they are quoting to support their stance.

    "so will you not desist?"
    IslamIsTheTruth, Unbeknown and Aqdas like this.
  3. Juwayni

    Juwayni Veteran

    They're straight up promoting pornography.
  4. Bazdawi

    Bazdawi Well-Known Member

    ala hazrat writes that ‘these scholars did not agree with their own position in their hearts’ and then explains himself:

    [Fatawa Ridawiyyah, v1, p207]

    I say: the reason [for them saying it is permissible] is because a thing has:
    1. A ruling disregarding any external factors
    2. A ruling taking these external factors into account.

    The first is a theoretical ruling and the second one is the practical ruling which is acted upon due to the necessity of abstaining from corruption and evil, even though this evil is not conceived from the intrinsic nature of the thing, as is apparent.

    apparent to who? clearly not apparent to a “world renowned research scholar” but it will be apparent to a faqih and those who have a clear understanding of fiqh; those whom Allah has willed goodness for.

    There are a multitude of examples in the books of fiqh of issues being mukhtalaf-fiyh or even permissible in their essence but the ruling of impermissibility is given taking external factors into consideration.

    allama shami writes in radd al-Muhtar, kitab al-ashriba about the ikhtilaf regarding strong non-wine beverages which may intoxicate in large amounts, imam abu hanifa and imam abu yusuf believed it to be permissible if taken in small amounts which do not intoxicate however the fatwa is given according to the fatwa of imam muhammad of absolute impermissibility, why?


    [radd al-muhtar, volume 10, page 36] also mention in fatwa hindiyya, badayi al sanayi, fathul qadeer.

    “the fatwa is upon the stance of imam muhammad due to corruption being rife. and some said that the reason for imam muhammad’s stance was due to the fact that fussaq gathered to drink such beverages with the intention of self-gratification and intoxication.

    I say: it is clear that they meant it is absolutely impermissible in order to close the door to potential corruption in its entirety. or else when the intention is self-gratification, it is not a matter of dispute that it is haram, rather it is agreed upon [mutaffaq alayh]. That is, when the majority of people in this time would drink with the intention of self-gratification, and not pious intentions, then this will be forbidden entirely. So contemplate.”

    contemplate, think, use your brains. imagine, in the time of imam muhammad he was already seeing corruption and fussaq following their desires and thus he gave the fatwa of impermissibility taking into account external factors and the later scholars agreed with him that if given the chance people will undoubtedly follow their desires so in order to close the door to this fitna, the fatwa was given according to the stance of imam muhammad of total hurmat.

    these were fuqaha, not "world renowned research scholars" who understood that fiqh is about practicality, reality and wisdom. a forum-member tried to separate the issue of taking from other madhhahib and the issue of following the desires whereas in reality, in this day and age, we cannot just think in terms of theory but we have to take reality into account. we cannot just say, lets discuss ittiba al-hawa after and discuss theoretical points for now. no. that isnt how fiqh works.

    like allama shaami said: “he who doesn’t know the people of his time is an ignoramus.” so now we have it: people who were formerly hanafi posing in their shorts (adopting the maliki position) with their trimmed beards (shafiyi position) wearing shirts promoting obscene magazines (dunno which position) all thanks to pir sahib. all this following of the desires under the guise of taking from different maddhahib. and such kids will now preach to pious sincere ulema about how amazing this mix-and-match madhhab is and how stupid they are for not realising the brilliance and piety of taking from different madhhahib.

    so welcome to the 21st century – the age of ignoramuses of the first degree quoting bajuri, aamidi and nablusi (as if they actually know who these people are) all to justify their own ayyashi. and don’t forget, not only should we refrain from reproaching these people, we should be commending and praising such fussaq juhhal for taking from other schools. after all, they only have noble intentions of wanting to follow the other imams.
  5. Bazdawi

    Bazdawi Well-Known Member

    it seems nowadays there is an agenda to make the masses totally liberal with regards to their fiqh and subsequently embolden the laity to take from other madhahib as they so desire. to do this, quotes are presented from the books of various fuqaha and usuliyin in order to substantiate their claim and provide the masses with a justification to 'take from another madhhab' without fear of any reproach. after all, if all these scholars permitted it then who are we to say otherwise?

    along with the blatant lack of wisdom and ignorance with regards to the current state of muslims, there is also a (un)healthy dose of intellectual dishonesty when such excerpts are put forth. these so-called scholars will totally ignore and fail to address very important and relevant clauses in almost all the quotes presented simply because it does not fit in with their agenda of 'fiqh being a free-for-all.'

    as prophesied by the Messenger of Allah [SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam] - the true righteous scholars will be lifted, taking their knowledge with them and then "the people will take ignoramuses as their leaders who will issue edicts without knowledge, being astray themselves and leading others astray"

    ala Hazrat explained this issue in his inimitable manner in a few paragraphs which undoubtedly outweigh an entire book written by any contemporary 'world renowned research scholar'; however, the narrative which is being depicted to the layman is that: although ala hazrat didn't permit it but all these scholars did whereas in reality, ala hazrat was the one who understood what all these past scholars said, clarified it and gave the fatwa according to the hukm e haqiqi. the past scholars and ala hazrat are in conformity.

    when seniors of this camp haven’t even understood the ‘faa’ of fatawa ridawiyyah then how will they and their followers understand the subtleties of fiqh? supposedly their leader understands the fuqaha and usuliyin better than ala hazrat. or is this just a scheme and charade to propel the leader into the limelight no matter what chaos and fitna follows?

    ham talib e shohrat hai, hamein nang se kya kaam?
    badnaam agar honge to kya naam na hoga?

Share This Page