Question - Judgement If something is considered Halal in one Madhab and Haram in the other?

Got it. Makes sense. Jazakallah. But I think even if Tajus Shariah's Mureed doesn't follow his rulings in some places and follows a different Ulama (in the Hanafi school) I think it's okay as opposed to following a different Madhab when you belong to one.

Yes actually it depends on the situation and the smoker

In summary:
- if you are addicted to it and it is at the point of harming you, it's Haram
- if you are slightly addicted and it is not harming you at the moment but you have it time-to-time, it's Makruh (but probably makruh tanzeehi)
- if you very occasionally smoke where you don't crave it or for a treatment, it's Halal
By Mufti Akmal

 

This is the kind of question I've had in the past, and for sometime I was rather confused about what to do. Brother Unbeknown has shared a link, so that may help.

One Mufti once told me to go with the fiqh of one's Pir; so if Tajus Shariah was your Pir then you follow his fiqhi rulings in all matters of ikhtilaf like the one you mentioned. If that helps then probably that's all you need for now.

"Makruh" in fiqhi rulings means makruh tahrimi, which does not indicate permissibility.

 

How Should The Common Man Act when faced with multiple opinions of scholars

 

I think I understand it a little bit now. It's like I am in this situation of ikhtilaaf and I follow the Madhab as per my situation like where I live. So even if something is a sin it may be forgiven because we can only think and decide so much. Jazakallah Khair

But another question I had is that what if there is ikhtilaaf between Aalims in the same Madhab?

For example: Mufti Akhtar Raza Khan prohibited digital images, videos as they also come under "tasweer" but Dawat-e-Islami and many more Aalim don't agree with that opinion. Now in this scenario I suppose the outcome is the same as the ikhtilaaf between Madhabs but it still sometimes makes me mad when I see the followers of one Aalim/Mufti fighting, demeaning the other. The Mufti don't fight among themselves they know the concept of ikhtilaaf and that it is fine to have different opinions but the followers just are another level of rudeness

As far as I have seen it is atmost considered Makruh but not Haram. Atleast in India and neighbouring countries

 

A hanafi following his maddhab's fiqh ruling on any matter, even if it happens to be wrong and another maddhab right, will not be sinful. Same with other maddhab followers( shafi, Maliki, and hanbali). You can read Jaa al Haq, chapter on taqlid, for the explanations.

Btw, do all hanafis say smoking is allowed?

 

Translation of which book and where? Sorry I don't read books very often

 

there is a translation on what to do if two muftis give opposite opinions. search and if you find link here.

 

السلام علیكم Everyone!

I got this question randomly today out of nowhere that if a Madhab considers something Halal and another considers the same thing Haram, what will be the judgement on the Halal follower?

Examples:

1. Smoking is Haram in all Madhabs except Hanafi
2. Seafood except fish is Haram in Hanafi except other Madhabs

Now in this situation, let's suppose smoking and seafood except fish both are truly Haram. On the judgement day, a Hanafi smoker and a Non-Hanafi seafood except fish eater, will they be considered sinners?

I find this forum incredibly useful with the true knowledge of Ahlus-Sunnah. So when I had this question I immediately created an account and asked it so I'm here and if there's some code of conduct to follow, please let me know.

Jazakallah Khair