Madhabs???

[ismj]

:salams

I would like to know more about madhabs and would greatly appreciate it if anyone could help me .:jkk: .

[Ahmed Waheed]

:salams

I would like to know more about madhabs and would greatly appreciate it if anyone could help me .:jkk: .

:salams

:S I apologise, but someone else may be able to tell you what you wish to know; I work towards unity; a commonly hated field amongst the people of Mathaahib, so all I can say is stay away from them . . .

:wswrwb:

[ismj]

:jkk: for the advise. I did not have any ill intensions,was jus curious. Sorry.

[faqir]

:salams

:S I apologise, but someone else may be able to tell you what you wish to know; I work towards unity; a commonly hated field amongst the people of Mathaahib, so all I can say is stay away from them . . .

:wswrwb:


I apologise, is it true that people who don't follow a madhab are smelly and we should stay away from them also?

[Ahmed Waheed]

I apologise, is it true that people who don't follow a madhab are smelly and we should stay away from them also?

:salams

It's nice of you to confirm your hatred for unity . . .

:wswrwb:

[moshyman]

SubhanAllah, madhabs against unity? I've heard it all now... :rolleyes:

[Ahmed Waheed]

SubhanAllah, madhabs against unity? I've heard it all now... :rolleyes:

:salams

:2hammers: Try uniting people in the Ummah and you'll see it for yourself . . .

:wswrwb:

[moshyman]

:salams

:2hammers: Try uniting people in the Ummah and you'll see it for yourself . . .

:wswrwb:

hmm... and your suggestions for uniting the ummah? Disband madhabs and get them to follow their own whims and interpret texts however they can? Perhaps madhabs are a manner in which we can follow the deen and not merely a group... the four madhabs actually work well perfectly between themselves and respect each other... indeed there are many interrelations in regards to deen the founders of the madhahib...

[Ahmed Waheed]

hmm... and your suggestions for uniting the ummah? Disband madhabs and get them to follow their own whims and interpret texts however they can? Perhaps madhabs are a manner in which we can follow the deen and not merely a group... the four madhabs actually work well perfectly between themselves and respect each other... indeed there are many interrelations in regards to deen the founders of the madhahib...

:salams

I am not going to try to persuade you on either side; you can only understand; if you are in the field of unity; you see it from one angle, that of a math-hab . . . I never said anything about respect between the four commonly known math-hab Imams . . . But you would be supprised to see the hatred between them for eachother, so I think its best if I stay out; and let you do what you wish . . . I want unity, you want your math-habs . . .

:wswrwb:

[moshyman]

I want unity, you want your math-habs . . .



SubhanAllah, you sure told me... And there was me thinking I wanted unity too...

The 4 madhabs and unity are not antithetical, they can easily work together. Do not judge the madhabs by the actions of a few individuals, you should know better than that, especially in this day and age...

[Ahmed Waheed]

SubhanAllah, you sure told me... And there was me thinking I wanted unity too...

The 4 madhabs and unity are not antithetical, they can easily work together. Do not judge the madhabs by the actions of a few individuals, you should know better than that, especially in this day and age...

:salams

Fee-Aamanillah . . .

:wswrwb:

[Chained_Water]

:salams

Fee-Aamanillah . . .

:wswrwb:
:wswrwb:

Interesting response..

Is that your vision of unity then? When a brother tries to explain his view and reach out to you, you turn around and walk away.. great unity that is!

How about trying to understand the other persons view and in that way creating unity between you.. because that's where it has to start doesn't it.

The madhabs don't create disunity, they're all equally valid and mutually respected.. where is the disunity in that?

[Ahmed Waheed]

:wswrwb:

Interesting response..

Is that your vision of unity then? When a brother tries to explain his view and reach out to you, you turn around and walk away.. great unity that is!

How about trying to understand the other persons view and in that way creating unity between you.. because that's where it has to start doesn't it.

The madhabs don't create disunity, they're all equally valid and mutually respected.. where is the disunity in that?

:salams

Do you not have any understanding of what I wrote? or do you just like being stupid? It means may Allah be with you; meaning; may Allah protect you; can you tell me what's so bad about that?

Also I do not walk away from unity. For your information; I co-ordinate unity programmes to unite Muslims, and unity is always under attack by those who wish to use their math-habs as an excuse to keep their division. Please think before you write; you don't seem to have the slightest knowledge of the topic, so its best if you learn before making stupid comments . . .

:wswrwb:

[Chained_Water]

I know what it means..

And you know what it implied..

LOL@unity programmes.. I'd love to see them bro, do you use the same tone in co-ordinating them?

:wswrwb:

[moshyman]

Do you not have any understanding of what I wrote? or do you just like being stupid?

That's it bro, spread the love and the unity! :up:

I believe the unity is shown first and foremost through character and not mere words. Therefore insulting your fellow brothers and sisters is a prime display of disunity and kind of counter-productive. I wish you luck with whatever it is you do but do not go around insulting the madhahib and creating further aggressions and disunity. Allah knows Best...

[Hafsah]

:salams:

in response to the sisters original question..........
Praise be to Allaah, and blessings and peace be upon His Messenger and his family and companions.

Firstly: the four madhhabs are named after the four imams – Imam Abu Haneefah, Imam Maalik, Imam al-Shaafa’i and Imam Ahmad.

Secondly: These imams learned fiqh (jurisprudence) from the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and they are mujtahideen in this regard. The mujtahid either gets it right, in which case he will have two rewards, the reward for his ijtihaad and the reward for getting it right, or he will get it wrong, in which case he will be rewarded for his ijtihaad and will be forgiven for his mistake.

Thirdly: the one who is able to derive rulings from the Qur’aan and Sunnah should take from them like those who came before him; it is not right for him to follow blindly (taqleed) when he is believes that the truth lies elsewhere. Rather he should follow that which he believes is the truth. It is permissible for him to follow in matters in which he is unable to come to a conclusion based on the Qur’aan and Sunnah and he needs guidelines concerning a particular issue.

Fourthly: Whoever does not have the ability to derive rulings himself is permitted to follow one whom he feels comfortable following. If he is not comfortable following him then he should ask until he finds someone with whom he is comfortable.

Fifthly: From the above it is clear that we should not follow their opinions in all situations and at all times, because they may make mistakes, but we may follow their views that are sound and are based on the evidence.

Fataawa al-Lajnah, 5/28

It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah, no. 3323:

Whoever is qualified to derive rulings from the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and has strong knowledge in that regard, even if that is with the help of the legacy of fiqh that we have inherited from earlier scholars of Islam, has the right to do that, so he can act upon it himself and explain it in disputes and issue fatwas to those who consult him. Whoever is not qualified to do that has to ask trustworthy people who so that he may learn the rulings from their books and act upon that, without limiting his asking or his reading to one of the scholars of the four madhhabs. Rather people refer to the four imams because they are so well known and their books are well written and widely available.

Whoever says that it is obligatory for the learned people to follow the scholars blindly in all cases is making a mistake and being inflexible, and is thinking that these learned people are inadequate, and he is restricting something that is broad in scope.

Whoever says that we should limit following to the four madhhabs is also mistaken, because he is restricting something that is broad in scope with no evidence for doing so. With regard to the common (i.e., uneducated) man there is no difference between the four imams and others such as al-Layth ibn Sa’d, al-Awzaa’i and other fuqaha’.

Fataawa al-Lajnah, 5/41

It says in Fatwa no. 1591:

None of them called people to follow his madhhab, or was partisan in following it, or obliged anyone else to act in accordance with it or with a specific madhhab. Rather they used to call people to follow the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and they would comment on the texts of Islam, and explain its basic principles and discuss minor issues according to general guidelines, and issue fatwas concerning what people asked about, without obliging any of their students or anyone else to follow their views. Rather they criticized those who did that and said that their opinions should be cast aside if they went against a saheeh hadeeth. One of them said: “If the hadeeth is saheeh then that is my madhhab.” May Allaah have mercy on them all.

It is not obligatory for anyone to follow a particular madhhab, rather we should strive to learn the truth if possible, or to seek the help of Allaah in doing so, then to rely on the legacy that the earlier Muslim scholars left behind for those who came after them, thus making it easier for them to understand and apply the texts. Whoever cannot derive rulings from the texts etc for some reason that prevents him from doing so should ask trustworthy scholars for whatever rulings of sharee’ah he needs, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“So ask the people of the Reminder [Scriptures — the Tawraat (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel)] if you do not know”

[al-Anbiya’ 21:7]

So he has to strive to ask one whom he trusts among those who are well known for their knowledge, virtue, piety and righteousness.

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 5/56

The madhhab of Abu Haneefah (may Allaah have mercy on him) is the most widespread madhhab among the Muslims, and perhaps one of the reasons for that is that the Ottoman caliphs followed this madhhab and they ruled the Muslim lands for more than six centuries. That does not mean that the madhhab of Abu Haneefah is the most sound madhhab or that every ijtihaad in it is correct, rather like other madhhabs it contains some things that are correct and some that are incorrect. What the believer must do is to follow the truth and what is correct, regardless of who says it.

And Allaah knows best.

(www.islamqa.com (http://www.islamqa.com))

i would also recommend reading this article... : http://www.islaam.net/main/display.php?id=42&category=7 (print it out and read it... inshaAllaah the issue of madhabs should be clear to you...non of us have the knowledge to make ijtihad so inshaAllaah follow a school of thought you have access to knowledgeable people .. and remember that the four great imaams also made mistakes and never claimed to be infallable..)

[Othman]

Sister isjm,

Allah commands his servants with certain commands and prohibits them with certain prohibitions. It is upon His servants to obey Him (swt). To do this, we need to know what these commands and prohibitions are. This we dont through the primary texts, the Qur'an and the Sunnah. However, this texts are not 'accesible' in the scholarly sense to everybody. Meaning that in order to interpret them and derive rulings from them, one must be adequately qualfied. This qualification includes many aspects including a solid grounding in the Arabic langauge, its grammer, morphology, lexicography etc, in-depth knowlegde of the Qur'an and Ahadith and their respective Sciences, knowlegde of Usul al-Fiqh and a host of other sciences and their ancillaries.

Given the requirement that only someone qualified can derive the commands and prohibitions of Allah, and their necessary details, the question arises as to what someone who isnt qualified does? How do 'lay' Muslims be obedient to Allah??

Answer: which we get from the Qur'an and the Sunnah itself, is that those who dont know should ask those who do. I.e Ask those qualified and follow their rulings.

Now, scholars differ on many rulings, specifically when it comes to the details, so the question for the lay Muslims becomes, "Which scholar do I follow"? Given the basis of 'chosing' between different (valid) rulings is the strength of the evidence (as opposed to the whims and desires of the person seeking the ruling) the lay Muslim is again is no position to pick between different opinions becuase this would require an analysis of the different evidences, which in turn, requires the due qualifications. Therefore it is prudent for the Muslim to stick to one scholar.

This is on a very simple explanatory level. In reality, the major reason for the differences among qualified scholars is their difference in the methodology they used to derive the rulings. It is these differing methodologies which characterise the different madhhabs. This leads us to two general principles:

1) Mixing randomly between various madhhabs is, in essence, mixing between various methodologies, which is, inherently, open to potential irrationalities when it comes to following rulings.
2) It is one or another methodology that a follower of a madhhab follows rather than, a (one) scholar.

In essence, then, no one can claim to not be following a madhhab, because any methodology constitutes a madhhab. The case, more correctly is that some people dont adhere to ONE madhhab but rather choose to follow a mix of more than one (which is open to the problems outlined above).

As to the four widely known and followed madhhabs, they too, essentially represent four different methodologies of deriving rulings from the primary texts. Only, these Four have stood the tests of time and have passed with flying colours. The Ummah has unaminously accepted them. Their fame and wide-spread adherence gives them precedence.

Hope that helps. It's as brief as I could make it without excluding important points. Its doesnt, by any means, exhaust the subject though. Dont hesitate to ask for any clarifications or further questions.

And Allah Knows Best.

[ismj]

Salaam to all.

:jkk: to sis Hafsa and brother Othman for their reply.
As for the rest, i am so sorry. I feel :embar: that my question led to some sort of 'argument'. Please forgive me if i have hurt anyones feelings by bringing up this topic.

[moshyman]

Salaam to all.

:jkk: to sis Hafsa and brother Othman for their reply.
As for the rest, i am so sorry. I feel :embar: that my question led to some sort of 'argument'. Please forgive me if i have hurt anyones feelings by bringing up this topic.

Walykumusalam sis,

Your question did in no way hurt anyone's feelings or bring up an argument. We were simply having a discussion and from what I see it ended amicably. You don't have to blame yourself for anything.

I hope you have a beneficial and enjoyable time on the forum.:)

[Othman]

and remember that the four great imaams also made mistakes and never claimed to be infallable..

What is the purpose or benefit in remembering this? It is true no doubt, but I dont see the point in it being pointed out in the given context. Every Mujtahid is falliable, not only the Four Imams.

[Hafsah]

What is the purpose or benefit in remembering this? It is true no doubt, but I dont see the point in it being pointed out in the given context. Every Mujtahid is falliable, not only the Four Imams.

i'm saying this because some people think that just because their imam said something it must be right...but we gotta remember that at the end of the day they are just people..and make mistakes...

[a mu-min]

they all said if a hadith contradicts with their ways then the hadith must be upheld and forget about what they told their followers.

[Semantic]

Not necessarily.

I follow the Maliki methodology in my application of fiqh and believe that amal (see this piece by Ibn Taymiyyah for more details: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ABewley/Page1.html) has a higher standing than hadith, as Imam Malik (who was of the salaf) did - if an ahad hadith contradicted with amal, it is to be rejected, even if sahih.

Hanafis (and Imam Abu Hanifa) reject ahad sahih hadith that the narrator of said hadith did not act in accordance with - would you say that didn't make sense?

Hence a hadith can be contrary to a ruling and indeed sahih, but the ruling still stands *according that methodology*.

Here is a piece I wrote from a while ago that br Salman al Farsi deleted by graciously sent me - I've included bits of usul al fiqh to try to illustrate some points/address misconceptions:

I personally think it makes sense to adopt one methodology/set of axioms when you are going out to interpret the Qu'ran and Sunnah and insh'Allah be as close to the Shariah as possible. That way you will hopefully remain internally consistent in your understanding of it. I chose the Maliki madhab as I liked the predicate of the amal of the people of medina forming a qati evidence, as well as the interrelation of this with the other evidences utilised in this methodology (you can find a brief overview of this approach here: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Abewley/usul.html)

I would advise the brothers and sisters who take what they view as the strongest position on any matter according to the evidences put forward by whatever scholar of whatever madhab to *please* consider the usul of that particular scholar when judging this.

For example, any non Hanafi would put forward the sahih hadith narrated by Abu Hurayrah concerning washing vessels touched with dog saliva multiple times as an evidence as to what to do when dog saliva gets on something.

However, in the Hanafi methodology, ahad hadith, even sahih ones, are rejected if any of the narrators in the chain acted contrary to the hadith, as Abu Hurayrah did. Hence this hadith, while sahih, is *invalid* for use in a proof if you choose to adopt a Hanafi methodology.

Similarly, the evidences put forward by a Maliki scholar for praying with ones hands by ones sides *only* make sense within the Maliki framework. In any other, they quite simply do not (due to the far lower importance of amal in the rest).

So please consider the usul of the person providing the evidences - all proofs require both evidences and a framework to interrelate them.

Also please consider your own and how you treat these evidences that are given to you, in terms of say hadith and ayat etc. While I understand this probably isn't like any of the four main madhab methodologies, I would posit that is worth the time and effort to try and make ones own approach as coherent as possible, looking at these four major methodologies and how they approach all the types of evidence - books like Kamali's Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence may help in this regard. Otherwise one can make assumptions that are not necessarily correct and easily follow ones own desires, taking the evidences and stitching them up to form a "proof" rather than doing proper ijtihad - looking for the Truth of a matter from all available evidences using a set methodology.

That was in the "what madhab do you follow thread.

It should be borne in mind that all a madhab really is is a methodology for deriving rulings from the source texts.

Each of the four has a different method of doing this - if you want details of the methods/development, pick up a book like Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence by Hisham Kamali (better than Evolution of Fiqh and with far less errors, especially with respect to Maliki usul al fiqh..).

Thats it.

Scholars of the madhab use its methodology to derive new results - they construct proofs using these axioms and theorems.

The evidences used in a proof in the Maliki madhab would not necessarily constitute a proof in the Hanafi madhab as the methodologies are different - please bear this in mind if you choose not to follow one and weigh the "strongest" opinion against whatever absolute you wish to construct.

Hadith is not necessarily equivalent to sunnah unless you make it so in your own personal methodology.

I do not, neither did Imam Malik (a matter of dispute between him and Imam Shafi, who leaned more to that view).

Knowing scholars of all madhabs, I have not as yet seen inter-madhab rivalry or acrimony between them or between their students.

The concept of ikhtilaf is a simple one and the adab of ikhtilaf is a key topic in ones formal studies.

Lay followers are lay followers and sometimes there is intercine trouble.

However, this is in no way different to groups such as certain of the salafi (lay) who reject ikhtilaf altogether and claim their way is the correct way and that your way is *wrong*. Indeed, certain scholars of the salafis say this about the ijtihad of mujtahids of the madhabs, disregarding the fact that their methodology was completely different to their own when formulating their proofs for their rulings.

Sad.

We should all learn to get along and accept each others differences - the great scholars of the madhabs believed that they were right with the possibility that they were wrong. They did not make statements that *this* is haqq and *this* is the correct way with the exclusion of all others. They recognised that ijtihad was fallible.

Do some indepth learning in any madhab and you will see how these provide for unity and diversity.

[Othman]

they all said if a hadith contradicts with their ways then the hadith must be upheld and forget about what they told their followers.

This they said. But not to me and you. To thier students. Specifically to those who were mujtahids in their own right. They meant that, in line with the methodology they have developed, if a hadith, not known to them before, were to come to thier knowledge, they should take it into account and if, again in line with the methodology of the madhhab, it changes a previously given rulings, then that ruling must be discarded.

The present day understanding of this saying of the Imam's is grossly taken out of context by those propogating against taqleed. In reality, given that centuries have past between the Imam and today, this saying has little practical relevance. Why? Because hundreds of fuqaha and mujtahideen have passed in this time. If any new ahadith had to come to litte and rulings changed, they have done this. So for anyone to claim that, in deriving the method of Salat for example, they have found a hadith with Abu Hanifa didnt know and therefore his ruling should be discarded is fanciful. If Abu Hanifa didnt know it (a unlikely scenario to begin with given his standing as a Muhaddith but one we can entertain for arguments sake) then Abu Yusuf or Imam Muhammad would. If they didn't, Imam Tahawi would. If all them them didnt (pretty much impossible) the hundreds of ahnaf mujtahideen between the 3rd century hijri and today would have. It certainly wouldnt require Ibn Baz and Shaykh Al-Albani to do the correcting.

And Allah Knows Best.

[Semantic]

Indeed, to reiterate: the positions of the madhabs on various topics are not necessarily those of their founders, who mainly created the coherent framework from which the madhabs work. For example, the relied upon positions in the Shafi school are related by the mujtahid imams Nawawi and Rafi.