The madhabs and Albani - SBC masjid

Discussion in 'Events' started by Aqdas, Jan 10, 2022.

You can not RSVP for this event...

This event has already begun, or has already passed; RSVP has been since closed.
The madh'habs and Albani
SBC masjid
Confirmed Attendees: 1
Posted By: Aqdas
Start Date: Jan 15, 2022 07:00 PM
End Date: Jan 15, 2022 09:00 PM
Time Zone: Europe/London +00:00 GMT
The following users have RSVP'd "Yes": 1
The following users have RSVP'd "Maybe":
Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    And when they said that others are incorrect, they didn't mean absolutely and certainly incorrect, but only in the light of available proofs - i.e. - they conceded a possibility that their peers might in fact be correct. That is what we mean when we say "all four are correct".

    But the thick salafi doesn't understand this and says, "truth is one. so how can all four be correct?" Our scholars explain that "One is correct in the Knowledge of Allah ta'ala. But with our limited knowledge we can't say for sure which one is that. We each hold that ours is most likely the correct one and those who disagree with us are most likely incorrect."

    And the khalaf have agreed that truth is now exhausted between these four madhhabs (i.e. one of the four is definitely correct) and it's impermissible to follow any of the old or new schools (if it comes about) until the arrival of the Mahdi - who shall be a Mujtahid mutlaq, and the entire ummah shall unite in following his judgement and there shall not be any madhhab differences thereafter.

    Allah knows best.
     
    AliNaqshbandi likes this.
  2. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    not just any shaykh.

    Madhhabs began to form when mujtahids disagreed with each other.

    Then those who acquired enough following, whose students spent sufficient efforts to preserve their usul and fataawa and whose rules were dynamic enough to suit the changing social realities, survived and spread, while others lapsed into history when their early students and proponents passed away.

    Allah knows best.
     
    AliNaqshbandi likes this.
  3. AliNaqshbandi

    AliNaqshbandi New Member

    but the reason for having madhhabs is because the shaykhs disagree and believe the other is incorrect.
     
  4. AliNaqshbandi

    AliNaqshbandi New Member

    I understand.
     
  5. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Ok, perhaps that is salafis.

    But, the point stands: if you allow laity to choose from all four, it definitely opens the door to nafsanic following.
     
  6. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    really, I have only ever heard that line from salafis.
    I thought sunnis knew that tarjih is not everyone's cup of tea.

    What does this leave us with then?

    On the one hand are those who say people can hop madhhabs because they can tell a strong from a weak position and on the other those who say people can hop because they can't tell positions apart!
     
  7. Alf

    Alf Active Member

    For a Hanafi, will following the Shafi ruling on beard be similar to following the sea food ruling? Or will that lead to talfiq?
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2022 at 4:29 AM
  8. Alf

    Alf Active Member

    Just in case you missed it, the 4 maddhabs are legitimate schools of fiqh while deobandi is not. Deobandi is a heretical sect, and we don't even seek answers to fiqh questions from them even if they happen to quote hanafi authorities.
     
  9. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    These types claim this all the time. Meaning, for a lot of them, it is their argument.
     
  10. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    with due respect sidi, that is not their argument at all.

    their argument is precisely that the layman can never know which is more correct and hence he need not attempt to differentiate between rulings of different madhhab.

    If the claim was that people should be allowed to follow whatever they think is most correct, that would still be tolerable. Because, in that case, the bases of selection would be overwhelming conviction about something/someone having stronger proofs. So the switcher would not merely be following whim or ease.

    The best analogy from their point of view is that of a room with four doors. Whichever door you enter from you will end up in the same place. So then, why take pains to differentiate? What sense does it make to always enter from the same door?

    For a layman (and this includes every non-mujtahid, so even people like Mufti Akmal or Nizamuddin or Alahazrat himself) - can't tell the right hand from the left (metaphorically speaking), so why burden them with choosing between things which, as far as they are concerned, are all equally right?

    So then the only bases for choosing one over the other would be whim/mood/ease (provided the condition of knowing all relevant details is met).
     
  11. AliNaqshbandi

    AliNaqshbandi New Member

    AbdalQadir said I can't compare Barelwi and Deobandi aqeedah to one school of fiqh vs another, but I was referring to Barelwi and Deobandi fiqh, not aqeedah.
     
  12. Abdullah Ahmed

    Abdullah Ahmed Well-Known Member

    what??

    “Apples are different than oranges, so yes I can compare them to each other”

    ‍♂️
     
  13. AliNaqshbandi

    AliNaqshbandi New Member

    Barelwi and Deobandi fiqh is different than their aqeedah, so yes, i can compare them to this issue
     
  14. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    I am not so sure. Will elaborate later in sha'Allah.
     
  15. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    no.

    In the past "some people" who insist on taqleed shakhsi have been referred to as "Machiavellian" (search the forums) - and that is what I was talking about.

    Because that charge would apply to many great scholars - as they were the ones who laid down the principle - we are merely quoting and following.
     
  16. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    sorry you're comparing apples and oranges.

    Barelwi and devbandi is an issue of Sunni 3aqidah vs a cocktail of non-Sunni 3aqaid

    Maliki and Hanafi are issues of fiqh within Ahlus Sunnah. The reason you can't mix and match across mazahib (in rukhas) is because many people including scholars are not aware of the length and breadth of the usul and furu3 of the 4 mazhabs, and people can fall into fisq where they're not following any mazhab at all.

    Just a crude example - Hanafi fiqh permits marriage without consent of wali for a girl under some conditions. Maliki fiqh permits lack of witnesses under some conditions. Let's say a couple decide to follow both simultaneously and forego permission of wali, as well as witnesses. What you get is outright fisq - a non-marriage and a de facto partnership!

    As abu Hasan replied to Alf, at certain times people of one mazhab can take rukhsah from another mazhab following all the stipulated conditions of that mazhab for that matter, consulting a good mufti. Sometimes the permission is widespread. Example, most people in the world today follow the Hanafi ruling for Zakat Al-Fitr payable in cash, as opposed to other mazhabs strictly stipulating giving grains or dates.

    Sometimes, people follow one mazhab in one entire bab of fiqh, and another mazhab in another. Mostly otherwise Hanafi Arab and Turkish folks (barring some scrupulous scholars) follow the Shafi3i permissions on sea food (prawns, scallops, mussels, oysters, crabs, octopuses etc.), as eating is a different issue on its own merit. It's not the same as dangerously mixing conditions and rulings across mazahib on an individual matter such as wudu for instance.

    The flip side of rukhsah is 3azeemah where you follow the most scrupulous opinion across mazhabs. This is commendable. Example, in Hanafi mazhab gargling the mouth and rinsing the nose is necessary for ghusl, and the flowing of water on every spec of the body is necessary, rubbing by hand not a necessity. In Maliki mazhab, gargling and inserting water in the nose is not necessary; however, rubbing water on the body by hands is a necessity. In Shafi3i mazhab pronouncing the niyah by mouth is a necessity. Now if someone pronounces the niyah by mouth for ghusl, gargles the mouth, rinses the nose, and also rubs water on the body by hand, he is staying in the scrupulous confines of all of Hanafi, Maliki and Shafi3i mazhabs. This is commendable.

    So you can't say that the issue of different mazhabs within Ahlus Sunnah is the same things as Sunni/non-Sunni issue in beliefs.

    afaik, Ghawthe A3zam radi Allahu 3anhu was well versed with the usul and furu3 of both Hanbali and Shafi3i mazhabs and used to issue rulings from either of the mazhab (depending on the questioner's mazhab). I've heard Mufti Akmal say (not yet read myself) that he was formerly a Hanafi and changed his mazhab to Hanbali as the number of people in the Hanbali mazhab was dwindling in his times.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2022 at 7:39 AM
    Abdullah Ahmed, Alf and abu Hasan like this.
  17. AliNaqshbandi

    AliNaqshbandi New Member

    You have to choose one school, you can't be Hanafi and Maliki, like how you can't be Deobandi and Barelwi.
     
  18. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    these are exceptions. a mufti can find ruling either in the madh'hab or other madh'habs for rukhsah.
     
    Umar99 and Alf like this.
  19. Alf

    Alf Active Member

    How about a hanafi, who suffers from OCD, decides to take the maliki ruling on purity of water, which actually helps him beat his OCD problem?
     
  20. Alf

    Alf Active Member

    Sorry, but don't you mean sunnis who insist on taqleed ghayr shakhsi(taqlid mutlaq?)?
     

Share This Page