Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other Mad'habs' started by Aqdas, Apr 7, 2019.
Shaykh asrar mentions taking from other schools in this video
Agreed. And we must do all we can to contain it. This 6 pages are valuable for this specific issue as well as a principle of fiqh that is sadd al-dharayiy.
that is the nature of fitnah - once it is awakened it spreads and is not easily contained.
it is fate that it should be awakened at this hour, when we are already surrounded by countless other challenges in regards to our deen.
"When troubles come, they don't come as single spies, but in battalions."
It is the duty of the conscious scholar to speak out and his ajr will be with his Lord (subHanu wa ta'ala).
Someone would do very well to translate these pages as the fitnah of mixing schools is very much alive thanks to short sighted speakers.
ramaDan mubarak to all
frankly, we could have discussed this offline if you wanted only my opinion on this issue. my email is available. anyway, it is too late now, and we will continue, in sha'Allah.
on a lighter note, a sheyr of ghalib comes to mind:
jam'a kartey ho kyuN raqiboN ko
ek tamasha huwa, gila na huwa
jazak'allahu khayr for taking on the arduous duty of moderating this thread, allah reward you.
i am not a scholar, and the darsi books which i teach are very basic ones, just thought i'd clarify that.
if you could respond to my post (no. 27), then we can take the discussion forward, at the moment we're at a standstill, there are a lot of assumptions flying around about my view regarding taqlid - i have made this clear in post 27, i have also clarified (at your behest), the difference between this position and the salafi/ghayr muqalidin manhaj.
Now, if you are saying this view is absolutely rejected, then you are rejecting the likes of:
imam abd al-ghani
sayf ul-din al-aamadi
sha'rani (who i haven't quoted yet)
izz ul-din ibn abd al-salam (yet to state his position)
ra'fi (yet to post his position)
shah waliullah (yet to mention him)
kawthari and many others.
I have answered your questions directly - you've acknowledged that, i think it's time for you to do the same by answering the two questions i have asked.
Note: if i am mistaken, i will acknowledge it and I will seek Allah's forgiveness publicly on this forum, there is no shame in that, but so far i have quoted scholar after scholar, translated numerous passages for the benefit of neutral observers who cannot make heads or tails of it, and as of yet, I have not been proven wrong. I must be incredibly incompetent if i'm misinterpreting scores of ibaraat wrong! If i am, i would like you to point those out.
I await your response mawlana
we should respect ulama. i was only recently made aware that abu hamza sahib is a scholar and a mudarris. i had assumed that he wished to be anonymous too, hence i did not change the tone or addressed him with a title. it appears that he is known, so the change. i have an ongoing discussion with shaykh abu hamza, and brothers are requested to leave it as an academic discussion as he has originally requested. let us not trade insults.
i will reply to the comments when i can, at the moment, i am away from the laptop.
sidi aH, it's your job to moderate this thread especially since i've made it clear that my posts are directed at you, you have acknowledged my responses to your questions but you have failed to answer my simple questions (post 27).
in order to take this discussion forward, you first have to answer the questions on post 27, then we can discuss the question pertaining to the position of ibn ul-humam from the ibarat you have presented from al-khulasa'
I look forward to your response.
The Kalaam written in the honour of Imam Ahmad Raza Al Qadri Rahimahumullahu Ta 'Alaa by Dr Jameel Nazar, SubhaanAllah.
Bang on point
A few observations:
- Abu Hamza has not answered Abu Hasan's questions. That alone should tell people that this whole thread is futile.
- Those that say the following of one specific Madhhab should be abandoned and rulings can be taken from any are merely following their Nafs. I say this because what tends to happen to students of knowledge is that they will read a few books and then arrogance overtakes them. They then begin to believe that they are something, and that they have an opinion, or that they can deduce matters from their own reasoning when the reality is far from this. This leaves the individual worshiping and following their very own Nafs. May Allah protect us from this.
- The scans brought forward from the various Imams on this issue have been misunderstood. In some cases, I have noticed that the brother may have mistaken himself when trying to determine where the damir returns to in the sentence; thus, rendering an imperfect understanding of the text.
- The matter is clear. Ala Hazrat read more than anyone (from this forum) will ever read and wrote accordingly to what he read. So the brother who has kindled this discussion should understand that and sit down.
alfaz beh rahe hain, daleelon ki dhaar par,
chalta hua qalam hai ke dhaara raza ka hai
nuqtein ibaraton se ubhartay hain khud ba khud,
naqd-o-nazar pe aisa ijara raza ka hai
jo likh diya hai usne, sanad hai woh deen main,
ahl-e-qalam ki aabru nukta raza ka hai
this is al-'ilm.
of course, harris not that you can understand the below; so disregard alahazrat and follow your friend abu hamzah.
you beat me to it hazrat. but here are the scans i was about to post from ajla al-iylam:
vol.1 pages 205-210
So regarding this we may accept that if a person chooses to adhere to an opinion which allows to trim below fist length he is regarding that opinion stronger (via tarjih) than that of the first length, and therefore must stick by it. From what I know clearly the jamhur Hanafi opinion with regards to fist length beard is strongest and stick to it, and each imam from the other 3 schools all had fist length beards btw.
Is my understanding correct, or am I missing something?
simply put, the common man puts on the mantle of the mujtahid, when he takes the opinion of the 4 imams, and chooses one that suits him or he considers best (despite his inferior knowledge - remember he is a commoner)
khulasat al-taHqiq of abd al-ghani nablusi, p6 citing ibn humam:
ibn humam said:
the position of a muqallid [follower] in issues of ijtihad [mas'alah al-ijtihad] is similar to that of a mujtahid; because if there are two opinions on one issue and he has acted upon one of them, by choosing one of them to act upon it and has signed it off by acting upon it, then he cannot revert from his opinion towards another [other than the one he first acted upon] except by reason of precedence [i.e., consider the other better than the first, tarjiH],
similar to a person who is confused about the direction of the qiblah in two or more different directions, then he chooses one of them by selecting one of the many directions, so long as any of the other direction is not given given precedence. so also, is a judge, when has to choose from two opinions and after he has issued the judgement and signed the verdict [by selecting] one of the two opinions.
thus, a muqallid, when having acted upon a ruling of a madh'hab cannot revert from it to [the other ruling of] another madh'hab.
here are some more clarifications i am looking for:
if a person claims to be a mujtahid and hence free from taqlid in our time, would you accept it? if not, why? is it impossible in principle, to be a mujtahid after four centuries? what is the jumhur position?
you have been kind to me, i won't deny that. and i will reciprocate. in sha'Allah i will answer these questions - or even acknowledge if i don't know. wa billahi't tawfiq.
imam abd al-ghani al-nablusi:
‘...as for those who are not mujtahidin, then they are the general masses, it is not wajib upon them to cling to the actions of a specific madhab from the four madhahib according to the preferred (ra’jih) opinion, like what has already come to pass, rather it is permissible for anyone from amongst them (the awaam) to perform, in terms of ibadah and mua’malat , any madhab he wishes, however, only after consulting all the conditions which that particular school has stipulated, otherwise his actions are rendered void by consensus’.
i've highlighted certain parts in order to answer your question:
according to all the ulema i have cited thus far, it's absolutely fine for a common man to take rulings from different schools as long as he knows the conditions and limits, there is absolutely no similarity whatsoever between him (the common man) and the mujtahid, why?
1. as imam abd al-ghani al-nablusi has said, those who are not mujtahidin are common men, i.e, they have not reached the level of ijtihad which prevents them from deriving rulings for themselves (according to him, even the likes of imam abu yusuf and imam muhammad al-shaybani are not considered 'mujtahid mutlaq', they fall under the category on mujtahid muqayyad, so whilst it's not wajib upon them to make taqlid of a mujtahid mutlaq in the subsidiary branches of fiqh (furu'), it is wajib upon them to make taqlid of them in usul). so whilst you can draw some similarities between a mujtahid muqayyad and a mujtahid mutlaq, it's preposterous to draw similarities between common men and mujtahid imams!
2. a mujtahid imam acts according to whatever his ijtihad brings about - the common man is incapable of doing this.
3. having confined himself to the four schools, there is nothing to suggest he has to restrict himself to one school in every matter (unless of course you follow the position of jalal ul-din al-mahali in that he has to confine himself to one school - again, the weaker position of the two), he can adopt the ruling of a different school but only if he knows the conditions and limitations, this is deemed a necessary stipulation because if he doesn't take into consideration the limits and conditions of the second school, he runs the risk of talfiq and as a result, his actions are rendered null and void according to both imams.
an example of the above is this:
'a common man makes taqlid of imam abu hanifa in that touching a woman does not nullify wudu, and he follows imam al-shafiyi in that flowing blood does not negate wudu, then he performs salah. his actions are futile according to both imams.'
another example is:
'nikah which takes place without the womans guardian, the contract/dowry and witnesses, in such a circumstance, nikah will not been considered valid by consensus of the ulema'.
** shaykh khudri bek gives these examples in his work usul ul-fiqh, if you require the original arabic, i will most certainly post them, if you could now answer the questions i asked, they were:
1. If you think this position of shaykh abd al-ghani (in post 27) is incorrect, then i would like you to explain why?
2. If you think i have misunderstood what these Ulema are actually saying, then i would like for you to highlight exactly where I’m mistaken.
Allah knows best
you are free to make assumptions. i have absolutely no obligation to answer you and if you misbehave, you can stay away and rant on facebook.