Jarh wa Ta'dil

Bismillahiramanhiraheem

This post will be an original piece by yours truly, The Ghazzali Blogger! I have been meaning to write an article on this topic for a long time but always decided not to because I may get over passionate and offensive. Furthermore I told myself it was not my place to write about this topic. However the more I read the more I kept coming back to this. It did not matter if I read about hadith or fiqh or madhabs or a tafseer this topic just kept creeping back up and haunting me. So I finally decided to speak out and Alhamdulilah I believe Allah willed that I would put off this topic because he wanted me to read more and obtain more sources. InshAllah the Ramadan fasting post will also be posted up today or tomorrow.

Jarh wa ta’dil

"The people shall always be in a good state as long as they take their knowledge from their elders, their trusted ones, and their people of knowledge. When they start taking it from their boys and their reprobates, they shall be destroyed." - Abd Allah ibn Mas'ud
When people listen to a speech or read a book or observe any type of media retain different things. Someone might watch a movie and appreciate the stunts while others may appreciate the story telling or dialogue, the artists may appreciate the rendering and lighting of the movie, others may appreciate that the movie addressed many different philosophies of a certain part of life, while some people may appreciate the fact they can draw parallels from the movie to real life; I have met people who believed the last Lord Of The Rings movie was about the Palestine and Israel conflict. Furthermore something that may seem interesting to one person can be dull to someone else. Sometimes when listening to a speaker, we may misunderstand and our understanding of their talk may be the complete opposite of what they were saying. The same holds true when reading Islamic books or when listening to a Muslim scholar give a talk. Why people appreciate different things or are impacted differently or obtain a different message by the same speech or book maybe because of their values, upbringing, environment, their psyche and their experiences.

One time listening to a talk given by a graduate of the Islamic University of Medinah, I witnessed this first hand. The speaker talked about the history of Muslim communities in the United States and how active and how much we have grown since the 70’s. In my mind this talk was to encourage the up and coming generation to ride the momentum of the previous generation to make bigger and better marks on the world that the previous generations, when they first started off, could not have imagined. I believe we should be grateful for the tedious foundational work the previous generation did so that my generation has an easier time to do more extravagant work. However my colleague sitting right next to me understood the talk as the complete opposite. He believed that our parents came here for money and were not interested in Islam and if they were it was because of culture and not out of sincerity. Furthermore he claimed that our parents did not teach us anything about Islam and that it must be sour for them to see us (their children) not to go after materialistic goals but rather be religious.

To children with that type of attitude I ask; how many Masjids did we build? The hundreds of Masjids in New York City alone, did our generation build them or did our parent generation? The very conference we are attending to listen to the talk we cite as evidence that our parents are materialistic and not good Muslims, did we organize that conference? Did we even start the organization that held that conference or did our parent generation? If our parent generation did not care about Islam and came here for material wealth only then who laid the foundation that allows us to learn Islam in America from people who studied in places such as the Islamic University of Medinah? Furthermore when we claim our parents did not teach us anything about Islam then why did some of us keep our relationship with our girlfriend a secret when we were not practicing? Why did we hide our tattoo from our parents? Why did we hide our piercings from them? How did we learn about the word Muslim and Islam that allowed us to seek out guidance in the first place? And when we claim it must be sour for our parents to see we are religious are we sure it is not because that we do not have the manners that the scholars have told us to have and we talk to our parents as if they were the children and not us?
Point is our parents did teach us. They taught us we were Muslims and we followed a religion called Islam. Otherwise why else did we hide our wrong doings? Some of our parents do not observe all the practices of Islam and we may observe more of the practices. But it is the job of the parent to make their children better Muslim than they were. Our parents did not pray but told us we were Muslims and we followed Islam. We took what our parents taught us and then we pray and do the rest of the five pillars Alhamdulilah. Then InshAllah our children will take what the previous two generations did and become scholars and then their children will inshAllah be greater. The mere fact we are more religious than our parents proves that our parents did their duty when they raised us. So we should give due credit to them and until we can raise a child to be better than us, we should keep quiet because we have not succeeded like our parents have. The child is supposed to be better than his or her parent.
Humility and moderation should come with knowledge but instead arrogance and extremism is implanted into the Muslim youth. The arrogance has become so unbearable that not only do we attack our parents but start to call righteous scholars deviants and throw 1400 years of scholarship out the window. We fall into the false assumption that “stricter is better”. When we hear a scholar give a fatwa which is laxer than something we follow we do not hesitate one second to say that the scholar is ignorant; often forgetting that the scholar studied more years than we have been alive!

Then the arrogance becomes even more! We start to act like we are scholars; we sit and preach without having paid our learning dues at the feet of the Ulema because we cannot wait for others to sit at our own feet. We start to take fatwas from websites and quote them to seem like we have authority and if someone comes with another fatwa we say that the hadiths our dissenter used were weak and fabricated; not only do we believe ourselves to be faqihs but also muhaddiths! We start to rank hadiths and anything we do not think are strict enough we call it fabricated. Not realizing “that as long as the proof of forgery is un-established beyond reasonable doubt and short of compelling assumption regarding a weak report, it becomes a lie to cry forgery and bar people from the benefit of belief in it. This holds true even if the chain of transmission falls short of the rank of “sound” (sahih). God fearing precaution toward the Prophet (pbuh) goes both ways: not only with respect to steering clear from attributing to him what he never said or did, but also with respect to steering clear from belying what he might have said or done.” We start to give our opinions on everything and anything as if we are experts on all Islamic knowledge when two of the greatest scholars, Hujjat al-Islam Imam al-Ghazzaali and Imam Ibn Qudama in their respective books al-Mustasfa and Rawdat al-Nazir said that an Alim may be an Imam in a particular science and an uneducated common person in another. In the end we believe ourselves to be absolute mujtahids like the four great Imams, saying such things as “Abu Hanifa did not have that evidence” implying that we know more than the Mujtahid Imam of the Tabieen.

Then when we are called out on the fact that we are acting as if we are absolute mujtahids we counter by saying, “we are only students of knowledge and only teaching what the righteous Ulema who are on the Quran and Sunnah have said.” (As if the four Mujtahids were not on the Quran and Sunnah and as if people who sacrificed their time and livelihood to learn Islam and spread it to the west and east are not on the Quran and Sunnah) How do we claim to be “students of knowledge” when we never sat at the feet of the Ulema and drank from their knowledge? Are we really teaching what the Ulema have taught or are we only regurgitating what we read on the internet or in some book? When Ishaq ibn Rahuyah sat in Iraq with the likes of Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Yahya ibn Ma’in he would rehearse many transmissions and evidences just like his fellow companions but when he asked what was the intent or explanation or fiqh, all remained mute except for Ahmad ibn Hanbal. They understood anyone can quote and recite hadiths and evidences but only a few can determine and understand what they mean; do we understand what we read? Have any of the Ulema told us to be of ill manners towards non-Muslims let alone our parents who we believe to be deviants just because they do not have a beard like we do? Did the Ulema give us the right to call any scholar who we think is lax in his rulings a deviant?
Real knowledge is a light, not what is memorized and quoted by individuals to look smart in front of his peers. Al-Shafi says, “Knowledge is what benefits. Knowledge is not what one has memorized.” How does knowledge benefit us? Al-Dhahabi says “Knowledge (al- ‘ilm) is not the profusion of narration, but a light which Allah casts into the heart. Its condition is followership (ittiba’ and the flight away from egotism (hawa) and innovation”
Which brings us to the narration that I began with: “Sa'id ibn Wahb narrated that Abd Allah ibn Mas'ud said "The people shall always be in a good state as long as they take their knowledge from their elders, their trusted ones, and their people of knowledge. When they start taking it from their boys and their reprobates, they shall be destroyed." Notice who are the first people Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud (rA) mention; it is the same people that we accuse of only caring about money and do not want us to practice Islam but rather pursue materialistic goals. Either we want to admit it or not our elders are the first people we learned Islam from. Even if your family does not observe all of Islam and in the past you were not religious and now you are you still learned about Islam from them. The second people mentioned are our trusted ones not the most educated. An example of this is when Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (rA), a absolute mujtahid whose school still exists today, and Ihya ibn Mayen could not agree on a certain matter they would go to Maruf Karkhi, a man who was not their equal in the sciences of practical religion. They said to Maruf Karkhi:“The Prophet (pbuh) said, “What will you do when you will not find a matter in the Quran or Sunnah? He said: “Ask the pious men among you and consult them in this matter.” We (Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Ihya ibn Mayen) have come to you for this. The last people who we should take knowledge from are the people of knowledge or the scholars. If someone sacrificed blood, sweat and tears for years and years to learn Islam at any of the prestigious learning centers he should be considered a scholar, specially one who could have lived a materialistic life but chose to study Islam. Then after all that sacrifice he or she came to us, regardless of where we are, to give the knowledge to us. There is this new ideology going around that claims that “there are no scholars in the west”. Someone does not forget what they have learned if they sit on a plane and travel to the west or the east, knowledge stays with you no matter where one is! The first people who we should not follow according to Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud (rA) are the boys. And the truth is we are all still boys who are barely into our mid-twenties and think we are more intelligent than anyone else. We throw hissy fits when someone does not agree with us as if Islam was not a way of life but a philosophy. We treat discussions of fiqh as if it was a prelaw college class where instead of saying something is unconstitutional (which students say when they do not agree with a law when in truth the law is constitutional) we say it is not the sunnah (when it does fall under the sunnah) and just like a prelaw class where three quarter of the people do not know what constitutional means, we do not know what sunnah means.

The truth is we need to be active and stop sitting and talking about those who are active. We are too lazy to do anything so we pick out faults of those who actually help the community. We feel good about picking out faults in people who actual do something and act like we are practicing Jarh wa ta’dil when in reality we are only back biting. We are back biting not only our parents, the people who are either the door to Jannah or have it under their feet, but also people who are fulfilling our Fard-i-Kafiyah. We need to stop attacking our parents and our teachers by quoting obscure sources and do something useful with our time. If we really want to be scholars then we should know of al-Hasan al-Basri’s report that the Prophet (pbuh) said, “The energy of the Ulema is care and help while the energy of fools is to quote” and the statement of the Abbasi Caliph ‘Abd Allah ibn al-Mu’tazz: “The learning of the hypocrite consists in his discourse while the learning of the Believer consists in his deed.”



1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LumwYGp729w A Great talk given by Nouman Ali Khan
entitled Contradicting Community advising Muslim youth and new Muslims on how to deal
with their Families. This talk is very closely related to this article which is also about religious
youngsters and their parents. At 36:00 he makes a point that some speakers will have
different impact on different people. Some speakers are purely entertaining but impact
non-practicing Muslims to pray while the educated practicing Muslim did not learn anything
because he wanted more academics such as more hadith quotations. Similarly an Academic
talk will have less impact on non-practicing Muslims.
2. G.F. Haddad, Sunna Notes Volume 1 Hadith History & Principles, Aqsa publications UK, pg.
53
3. Ibid., 45
4. Narrated from al-Khallal by al-Bayhaqi in Manaqib al-Shafi’i
5. Siyar A’lam al Nubala’
6. Narrated by Abu Ubayd and Ya’qub ibn Shayba as cited by Ibn Hajar in the Fath, Ibn
al-Mubarak in al-Zuhd, Ma’mar ibn Rashid with a sound chain in his Jami, al-Tabarani in
al-Kabir and al-Awsat through narrators that were declared trusthworthy according to
al-Haythami, al-Khatib chainless in al-Faqih wal-Mutafaqqih, Ibn Abd al-Barr in Jami’
Bayan al-‘ilm and Abu Khaythama in al- ‘Ilm.
7. Imam Ghazzali Ihya Ulum-Id-din (trans:Al-Haj Maulana Fazlul Karim) pg.37
8. Narrated mursal from al-Hasan by Ibn ‘Asakir and al-Khatib, al-Jami’ li Akhlaq al-Rawi
(1983 ed. 1:88) cf. al-Jami’ al Saghir and Kanz.
9. Narrated by al-Khatib in Iqtida’ al-Ilm al-‘Amal pg.38

Read more...

The Meaning of Biddah (good biddah, bad biddah)

Bismillahiramanhiraheem
This article was written by Dr. Buti and I believe somes up the whole good biddah and bad biddah debate.

The Meaning of Bid ' a by Dr. al-Buti

The first innovation (bid'a) that took place after the Messenger of Allah 0. was satiety (al-shab`). - Aisha 40151
The lexical meaning of bid' a in the Arabic language is "novelty" while its technical meaning in Islam is a novelty begun after the time of the Tabi' in in contravention of the Qur'an and Sunna as defined variously by the authorities:
Al-Jurjani: "Whatever contrivance (1' latun) contradicts the Sunna, and it is named bid'a because whoever supports it innovated it without basis from an Imam. It consists in a novel matter which the Companions and Successors did not follow and which is unsupported by a legal proof."'
Imam Abu Shama and Imam al-Suyilti: "Everything invented without precedent" (kullu mukhtard in min ghayri aslin sabaq);'53
Imam al-Lacknawi: All that did not exist in the first three centuries and for which there is no basis among the Four Foundations of Islam" i.e., Qur'an, Sunna, , and Qiyas.'
Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami: "Bid'a in terms of the Law is everything innovated in contravention of the Lawgiver's command and the latter's specific and general proof's'
Ibn al-Jawzi: "Bid'a in legal convention is whatever is blameworthy in contravening the foundations of the Law."
Qadi Abu Bakr Ibn al-'Arabi: "Only the bid' a that contradicts the Sunna is blameworthy.'
All of this elucidates Imam al-Shafi's luminous subdivision of bid' a into two types, which we examine below. Thus, it is not enough for something to be novel to be a bid'a, contrary to the misunderstanding of those who use that term most vocally nowadays.
Some of the best works on the precise definition of bid` a are:
[1] Imam `Abd al-Hayy al-Lacknawi's Tuhfat al-Akhyar and
[2] the first part of his lqamat al-Hujja - both with a comment tary by Shaykh `Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda;
[3] Al-Sayyid `Abd Allah Mahfuz al-Haddad's masterpiece alSunna wal-Bid` a;
[4] The most concise, most practical textbook on the topic to date. Kalimatun Ilmiyyatun Hadiyatun fil-Bid'ati wa-Ahkamiha by our beloved teacher Shaykh Wahbi Sulayman Ghawji al-Albani;
[5] Dr. Izzat `Atiyya's al-Bid` a: Tahdiduha wa-Mawqif minha;
[6] Al-Sayyid `Abd Allah ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghumarrs Itqan aiSun'a fi Tahqiq Ma' ria al-Bid` a ("Precise Handiwork in Ascertaining the Meaning of Innovation");
[7] Shaykh isa al-Himyari's two works, Daw' al-Sham` a fi T Ma' na al-Bid' a ("The Candlelight in Verifying the Meaning Bid' a") and
[8] al-Bid' atu al-Hasanatu Aslun min usul al-Tashri` ("The lent Innovation is One of the Sources of Islamic Legislation");

The fourth part of Sayyid Muhammad ibn 'Alawi's book haj
[Chapter 15 of al-Sayyid Abul-Hasanayn Abd Allah ashimi's al-Salafiyya al-Mu` asira and
1] his al-Ittiba' wal-lbtida' .158
ykh Muhammad Sa'id Ramadan al-Buti said:
There is no doubt that innovation (bid `a) is absolutely prohibited and that it is misguidance. [...] However, what is innovation? Innovation is "every matter that was innovated and injected into the Religion while it is not part of it (al-bid` atu kullu amrin ustuhditha wa-uqhima fit-dini wa-huwa laysa minh)." As much as the expressions of the Ulema differ in explaining bid' a and defining it, none of those various expressions differs from this comprehensive meaning: "every matter that was innovated; that is, it did not exist beforehand; "and injected into the Religion while it is not part of it." In this [specific] way, an innovation cannot be other than an innovation of misguidance.
An example of this [innovation of misguidance] is if a person should invent a prayer other than the five prayers which Allah Most High has made Law. Another example would be those invented additions pertaining to funerals, such as the supplications that are raised out loud at the forefront of funerals,' the adhan that was innovated upon lowering the deceased into his grave, and those invented states during dhikr such jumping [up and down] and what the jurists "dancing
call "dancing and
swaying from side to side" (al-rag wa1-tamayul)1 and the matters were innovated and injected into the Religion al-h they are not part of the Religion in any way whatsoever.
As for the matters that were innovated and were not existent re but were not injected into the Religion, the people iced them as habits and procedures in which they found lness for themselves, whether such were connected with worldly sphere or with their Religion. f...]
There are many, many examples of this type. We can give an ple for these many habits and procedures which the *ms have innovated after the death of the Messenger of
0, or even in his time. Among them are the innovations ected with food and drink. Also among them are the connections connected with dwellings, their decoration and their architecture. Among them also are the matters connected with ufacture, commerce, agriculture and the like. Among them are the matters connected with dress in all its variety. (...1
All of those are innovated matters but they were not injected
- o the Religion. That is, the people did not practice them as ifthey
were part of the Religion. Hence, the definition of the legal
[innovation does not apply to them.
No doubt, someone is bound to ask: "What does the Law sayabout
these innovations which entered like waves into the life
the Muslims?" Let us hear what the Messenger of Allah said in his authentic hadith: "Whoever institutes a good practice in Islam has its reward and the reward of all those who practice it until the Day of Judgment, and whoever institutes a Ind practice in Islam bears its onus and the onus of all those rwho practice it until the Day of Judgment"' which is part of a well-known longer hadith. Many are those who imagine a contradiction between the dith of the Messenger of Allah 0 "Every innovation is mis ance" and this hadith. They see a problem here and confused when in reality there is no problem at all.
Innovated matters that are injected into the Religion and not part of it are aptly described by his hadith 0, "Ev innovation is misguidance." As for innovated matters am habits and procedures that are connected to daily life in their varieties, without people intending them as Religion without their being injected into the Divine Law (such matt not being part of it): they fall under the [twofold] distincti mentioned by the Messenger of Allah ["Whoever institutes good practice.."]. We look at the results of these habits regimens. Whatever of them have a good effect on the life people or their Religion are classed under the "good sunna" which the Messenger of Allah 0 called. And whatever of thee leave bad effects on the Religion or on the worldly affairs people - for Allah Most High commanded people to take
of their religious and worldly interests - then such are cl under the "bad sunnas" against which the Messenger of Allah I warned. The Ulema of the Law have explained this at length and in great detail under the subheading of "matters of welfare" (masalih al-mursala).
When are such matters of public welfare lawful and notwithstanding their being "widespread" (mursala), since Book and the Sunna did not say anything about them? IN are such matters imaginary and corrupt, that is, part of the sunna? The Ulema of Islamic Law have clarified this. In
case, what the people innovated without injecting it into the Religion - of which it is not a part at all - is not part of meaning of the legal innovation which is always misguidance and always a forbidden practice.
The conferences which are held here and there are among those innovated matters. How are they assessed? We look at the types of these conferences and the effect they have. Whichever of them supports the Religion is classed among the good sunnas; whichever has a harmful effect is classed among the bad sunnas. All those universities which were innovated out of nonexistence; the various media, including publishing houses and all kinds of means for disseminating information; all these are innovated matters that did not exist before. This development which has touched the script of the Qur'an including dotting, vowelization, division into tenths, and so forth - and the chain of developments is endless - all these are among innovated matters. However, those that innovated them at no time claimed that they were part of the Religion or part of the Divine Law.
All of those matters are assessed on the basis of this scale of which the Messenger of Allah 0s informed us. Whatever part of that serves the Religion of Allah Most High or preserves the lawful worldly matters of public welfare for people is classed together with the good sunna and one is invited to practice it, and whoever does so with sincere intention toward Allah is rewarded. And whatever part of those newly innovated matters is harmful to the Religion or harmful to the lawful worldly matters of public welfare for people, is classed together with the bad sunna against which the Messenger of Allah warned.
People have this custom of celebrating the memory of their great personalities. They may do this on the occasion of the L birthday of one of them or on that of his death. This is among innovated matters; but no one ever said that they belong to the Religion. Nor has anyone ever said that they are an integral part of worship or of the Law which Allah Most High has commanded. They can only be described as cultural or social activities by which a certain goal is sought. We examine this .211 goal: if this goal is good and benefits the Muslims in thew Religion or in their lawful worldly matters, then it is a good sunna as the Messenger of Allah said. [...]
Let us now look at the people's celebration of the commemoration of the birth of the Messenger of Allah 4ia. Is it a 1 matter that was innovated and injected into the Religion and I then considered one of the types of worship that was made law I for us? If anyone celebrates this event to that intention then he I is an innovator! For this celebration is not an integral part of the Religion, that is, not one of the types of worship that was made law for us, nor a ruling from the Divine rulings that cane down in the Qur'an or came in the Sunna.
As for those that celebrate the commemoration of the birth of the Messenger of Allah after the model of those who organize conferences to publicize a legitimate principle or a cause or a right which Allah Most High ordered us to uphold, or to defend something which Allah Most High allows in His Lot this is a social activity by which good in the Religion is sought
This is exactly like those who organize conferences and seminars to commemorate one of their great personalities. I toil you once how I was invited to a conference in one of our dear Arab countries on the occasion of the passing of this or
many years after the death of Muhammad ibn Abd al-W
I am not among those that say that such activities are innovation or express disapproval and warn people them. This is because the brothers who organized this ference only did so as a social activity, like all conferences. did it on the basis of a benefit which they considered such activity would bring about. The criterion [of assessment] this is the same as that for information media or television channels - innovated matters by which is sought, When Muslims use them well, a spiritual or temporal benefit Allah has allowed in His Law. What is sought in all this is same good sought by those people who refined the writing of the Arabic language by developing the script of the Qur'an and including in it the dotting and vowelization and division into tenths which you can see, and of which all the Ulema approved. Is there any person who proceeds from a sound and meticulous basis of knowledge who will say: "A conference that is organized to commemorate the passing of this or that many years after the death of Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab is a forbidden, innovative act?" I do not think so. Not at all. And since this is the case, then why is such an act [of commemoration] licit or even a good sunna when it is for the sake of Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab, Allah have mercy on him, but it becomes a "forbidden, innovative act" when the very same act is for the sake of Muhammad ibn `Abd Allah ?? There is no difference.' I believe that this discourse ends all noise and din over the issue.'

Read more...

Why does one have to follow a madhab

Bismillahirahmaniraheem
We are taking a break from the Ihya Ulum id-din and revisiting a topic that I feel very strong about, Madhabs. Anyways the conversation below was between the sharia professor Muhammed Sa'id al-Buti and a man against Madhabs. Now many of the things discussed such as the divorce rulings do differ from school to school however the point is NOT the actually rulings themselves the point is that we (the common people) need to follow a school AND be tolerant towards other schools and recognize they have different rulings but have evidence based on/in (have no idea what preposition to use because I just did my Arabic homework and 'in" and "on" are used differently in Arabic) the same texts (the Quran and Sunnah).

The conversation

Buti: “What is your method for understanding the rulings of Allah? Do you take them from the Qur’an and sunna, or from the Imams of ijtihad?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “I examine the positions of the Imams and their evidences for them, and then take the closest of them to the evidence of the Qur’an and Sunna.”

Buti: “You have five thousand Syrian pounds that you have saved for six months. You then buy merchandise and begin trading with it. When do you pay zakat on the merchandise, after six months, or after one year?”

Anti-Madhab brother: [He thought, and said,] “Your question implies you believe zakat should be paid on business capital.”

Buti: “I am just asking. You should answer in your own way. Here in front of you is a library containing books of Qur’anic exegesis, hadith, and the works of the mujtahid Imams.”

Anti-Madhab brother: [He reflected for a moment, then said,] “Brother, this is din, and not simple matter. One could answer from the top of one’s head, but it would require thought, research, and study; all of which take time. And we have come to discuss something else.”

Buti: I dropped the question and said, “All right. Is it obligatory for every Muslim to examine the evidences for the positions of the Imams, and adopt the closest of them to the Qur’an and Sunna?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “Yes.”

Buti: “This means that all people possess the same capacity for ijtihad that the Imams of the madhhabs have; or even greater, since without a doubt, anyone who can judge the positions of the Imams and evaluate them according to the measure of the Qur’an and sunna must know more than all of them.”

Anti-Madhab brother: He said, “In reality, people are of three categories: the muqallid or ‘follower of qualified scholarship without knowing the primary textual evidence (of Qur’an and hadith)’; the muttabi‘, or ‘follower of primary textual evidence’; and the mujtahid, or scholar who can deduce rulings directly from the primary textual evidence (ijtihad). He who compares between madhhabs and chooses the closest of them to the Qur’an is a muttabi‘, a follower of primary textual evidence, which is an intermediate degree between following scholarship (taqlid) and deducing rulings from primary texts (ijtihad).”

Buti: “Then what is the follower of scholarship (muqallid) obliged to do?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “To follow the mujtahid he agrees with.”

Buti: “Is there any difficulty in his following one of them, adhering to him, and not changing?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “Yes there is. It is unlawful (haram).”

Buti: “What is the proof that it is unlawful?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “The proof is that he is obliging himself to do something Allah Mighty and Majestic has not obligated him to.”

Buti: I said, “Which of the seven canonical readings (qira’at) do you recite the Qur’an in?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “That of Hafs.”

Buti: “Do you recite only in it, or in a different canonical reading each day.”

Anti-Madhab brother: “No, I recite only in it.”

Buti: “Why do you read only it when Allah Mighty and Majestic has not obliged you to do anything except to recite the Qur’an as it has been conveyed—with the total certainty of tawatur (being conveyed by witnesses so numerous at every stage of transmission that their sheer numbers obviate the possibility of forgery or alteration), from the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “Because I have not had a opportunity to study other canonical readings, or recite the Qur’an except in this way.”

Buti: “But the individual who learns the fiqh of the Shafi‘i school—he too has not been able to study other madhhabs or had the opportunity to understand the rules of his religion except from this Imam. So if you say that he must know all the ijtihads of the Imams so as to go by all of them, it follows that you too must learn all the canonical readings so as to recite in all of them. And if you excuse yourself because you cannot, you should excuse him also. In any case, what I say is: where did you get that it is obligatory for a follower of scholarship (muqallid) to keep changing from one madhhab to another, when Allah has not obliged him to? That is, just as he is not obliged to adhere to a particular madhhab, neither is he obliged to keep changing.”

Anti-Madhab brother: “What is unlawful for him is adhering to one while believing that Allah has commanded him to do so.”

Buti: “That is something else, and is true without a doubt and without any disagreement among scholars. But is there any problem with his following a particular mujtahid, knowing that Allah has not obliged him to do that?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “There is no problem.”

Buti: [Al-Khajnadi’s] al-Karras, which you teach from, contradicts you. It says this is unlawful, in some places actually asserting that someone who adheres to a particular Imam and no other is an unbeliever (kafir).”

Anti-Madhab brother: He said, “Where?” and then began looking at the Karras, considering its texts and expressions, reflecting on the words of the author “Whoever follows one of them in particular in all questions is a blind, imitating, mistaken bigot, and is “among those who have divided their religion and are parties” [Qur’an 30:32]. He said, “By follows, he means someone who believes it legally obligatory for him to do so. The wording is a little incomplete.”

Buti: I said, “What evidence is there that that’s what he meant? Why don’t you just say the author was mistaken?”

Anti-Madhab brother: He insisted that the expression was correct, that it should be understood as containing an unexpressed condition [i.e. “provided one believes it is legally obligatory”], and he exonerated the writer from any mistake in it.

Buti: I said, “But interpreted in this fashion, the expression does not address any opponent or have any significance. Not a single Muslim is unaware that following such and such a particular Imam is not legally obligatory. No Muslim does so except from his own free will and choice.”

Anti-Madhab brother: “How should this be, when I hear from many common people and some scholars that it is legally obligatory to follow one particular school, and that a person may not change to another?”

Buti: “Name one person from the ordinary people or scholars who said that to you.”

He said nothing, and seemed surprised that what I said could be true, and kept repeating that he had thought that many people considered it unlawful to change from one madhhab to another.

I said, “You won’t find anyone today who believes this misconception, though it is related from the latter times of the Ottoman period that they considered a Hanafi changing from his own school to another to be an enormity. And without a doubt, if true, this was something that was complete nonsense from them; a blind, hateful bigotry.”

I then said, “Where did you get this distinction between the muqallid “follower of scholarship” and the muttabi‘ “follower of evidence”: Is there a original, lexical distinction [in the Arabic language], or is it merely terminological?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “There is a lexical difference.”

Buti: I brought him lexicons with which to establish the lexical difference between the two words, and he could not find anything. I then said: “Abu Bakr (Allah be well pleased with him) said to a desert Arab who had objected to the alotment for him agreed upon by the Muslims, ‘If the Emigrants accept, you are but followers’—using the word "followers" (tabi‘) to mean ‘without any prerogative to consider, question, or discuss.’” (Similar to this is the word of Allah Most High, “When those who were followed (uttubi‘u) disown those those who followed (attaba‘u) upon seeing the torment, and their relations are sundered” (Qur’an 2:166), which uses follow (ittiba‘) for the most basic blind imitation).

Anti-Madhab brother: He said, “Then let it be a technical difference: don’t I have a right to establish a terminological usage?”

Buti: “Of course. But this term of yours does not alter the facts. This person you term a muttabi‘ (follower of scholarly evidence) will either be an expert in evidences and the means of textual deduction from them, in which case he is a mujtahid. Or, if not an expert or unable to deduce rulings from them, then he is muqallid (follower of scholarly conclusions). And if he is one of these on some questions, and the other on others, then he is a muqallid for some and a mujtahid for others. In any case, it is an either-or distinction, and the ruling for each is clear and plain.”

Anti-Madhab brother: He said, “The muttabi‘ is someone able to distinguish between scholarly positions and the evidences for them, and to judge one to be stronger than others. This is a level different to merely accepting scholarly conclusions.

Buti: “If you mean,” I said, “by distinguishing between positions differentiating them according to the strength or weakness of the evidence, this is the highest level of ijtihad. Are you personally able to do this?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “I do so as much as I can.”

Buti: “I am aware,” I said, “that you give as a fatwas that a three fold pronouncement of divorce on a single occasion only counts as one time. Did you check, before this fatwa of yours, the positions of the Imams and their evidences on this, then differentiate between them, so to give the fatwa accordingly? Now, ‘Uwaymir al-‘Ajlani pronounced a three fold divorce at one time in the presence of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) after he had made public imprecation against her for adultery (li‘an), saying, ‘If I retain her, O Messenger of Allah, I will have lied against her: she is [hereby] thrice divorced.’ What do you know about this hadith and its relation to this question, and its bearing as evidence for the position of the scholarly majority [that a threefold divorce pronounced on a single occasion is legally finalized and binding] as opposed to the position of Ibn Taymiya [that a threefold divorce on a single occasion only counts as once]?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “I did not know this hadith.”

Buti: “Then how could you give a fatwa on this question that contradicts what the four madhhabs unanimously concur upon, without even knowing their evidence, or how strong or weak it was? Here you are, discarding the principle you say you have enjoined on yourself and mean to enjoin on us, the principle of “following scholarly evidence (ittiba‘)” in the meaning you have terminologically adopted.”

Anti-Madhab brother: “At the time I didn’t own enough books to review the positions of the Imams and their evidence.”

Buti: “Then what made you rush into giving a fatwa contravening the vast majority of Muslims, when you hadn’t even seen any of their evidences?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “What else could I do? I asked and I only had a limited amount of scholarly resources.”

Buti: “You could have done what all scholars and Imams have done; namely, say “I didn’t know,” or told the questioner the postition of both the four madhhabs and the postion of those who contravene them; without givng a fatwa for either side. You could have done this, or rather, this was what was obligatory for you, especially since the poblem was not personally yours so as to force you to reach some solution or another. As for your giving a fatwa contradicting the consensus (ijma‘) of the four Imams without knowing—by your own admission—their evidences, sufficing yourself with the agreement in your heart for the evidences of the opposition, this is the very utmost of the kind of bigotry you accuse us of.”

Anti-Madhab brother: “I read the Imams’ opinions in [Nayl al-awtar, by] Shawkani, Subul al-salam [by al-Amir al-San‘ani], and Fiqh al-sunna by Sayyid Sabiq.”

Buti: These are the books of the opponents of the four Imams on this question. All of them speak from one side of the question, mentioning the proofs that buttress their side. Would you be willing to judge one litigant on the basis of his words alone, and that of his witnesses and relatives?”

Anti-Madhab brother: I see nothing blameworthy in what I have done. I was obliged to give the questioner an answer, and this was as much as I was able to reach with my understanding.”

Buti: “You say you are a “follower of scholarly evidence (muttabi‘)” and we should all be likewise. You have explained “following evidence” as reviewing the positions of all madhhabs, studying their evidences, and adopting the closest of them to the correct evidence—while in doing what you have done, you have discarded the principle completely. You know that the unanimous consensus of the four madhhabs is that a threefold pronouncement of divorce on one occasion counts as a three fold, finalized divorce, and you know that they have evidences for this that you arae unaware of, despite which you turn from their consensus to the opinion that your personal preference desires. Were you certain beforehand that the evidence of the four Imams deserved to be rejected?”

Anti-Madhab brother: No; but I wasn’t aware of them, since I didn’t have any reference works on them.”

Buti: “Then why didn’t you wait? Why rush into it, when Allah never obligated you to do anything of the sort? Was your not knowing the evidences of the scholarly majority a proof tht Ibn Taymiya was right? Is the bigotry you wrongly accuse us of anything besides this?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “I read evidences in the books available to me that convinced me. Allah has not enjoined me to do more than that.”

Buti: “If a Muslim sees a proof for something in a the books he reads, is that a sufficient reason to disregard the madhhabs that contradict his understanding, even if he doesn’t know their evidences?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “It is sufficient.”

Buti: “A young man, newly religious, without any Islamic education, reads the word of Allah Most High “To Allah belongs the place where the sun rises and where it sets: wherever you turn, there is the countenance of Allah. Verily, Allah is the All-encompassing, the All-knowing (Qur’an 2:115), and gathers from it that a Muslim may face any direction he wishes in his prescribed prayers, as the ostensive purport of the verse implies. But he has heard that the four Imams unanimously concur upon the necessity of his facing towards the Kaaba, and he knows they have evidences for it that he is unaware of. What should he do when he wants to pray? Should he follow his conviction from the evidence available to him, or follow the Imam who unanimously concur on the contrary of what he has understood?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “He should follow his conviction.”

Buti: “And pray towards the east for example. And his prayer would be legally valid?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “Yes. He is morally responsible for following his personal conviction.”

Buti: “What if his personal conviction leads him to believe there is no harm in making love to his neighbor’s wife, or to fill his belly with wine, or wrongfully take others’ property: will all this be mitigated in Allah’s reckoning by “personal conviction”?

Anti-Madhab brother: [He was silent for a moment, then said,] “Anyway, the examples you ask about are all fantasies that do not occur.”

Buti: “They are not fantasies; how often the like of them occurs, or even stranger. A young man without any knowledge of Islam, its Book, its sunna, who happens to hear or read this verse by chance, and understands from it what any Arab would from its owtward purport, that there is no harm in someone praying facing any direction he wants—despite seeing people’s facing towards the Kaaba rather than any other direction. This is an ordinary matter, theoretically and practically, as long as there are those among Muslims who don’t know a thing about Islam. In any event, you have pronounced upon this example—imaginary or real—a judgement that is not imaginary, and have judged “personal conviction” to be the decisive criterion in any event. This contradicts your differentiating people into three groups: followers of scholars without knowing their evidence (muqallidin), followers of scholars’ evidence (muttabi‘in), and mujtahids.”

Anti-Madhab brother: “Such a person is obliged to investigate. Didn’t he read any hadith, or any other Qur’anic verse?”

Buti: He didn’t have any reference works available to him, just as you didn’t have any when you gave your fatwa on the question of [threefold] divorce. And he was unable to read anything other than this verse connected with facing the qibla and its obligatory character. Do you still insist that he must follow his personal conviction and disregard the Imams’ consensus?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “Yes. If he is unable to evaluate and investigate further, he is excused, and it is enough for him to rely on the conclusions his evaluation and investigation lead him to.”

Buti: “I intend to publish these remarks as yours. They are dangerous, and strange.”

Anti-Madhab brother: “Publish whatever you want. I’m not afraid.”

Buti: “How should you be afraid of me, when you are not afraid of Allah Mighty and Majestic, utterly discarding by these words the word of Allah Mighty and Majestic [in Sura al-Nahl] ‘Ask those who recall if you know not’ (Qur’an 16:43).”

Anti-Madhab brother: “My brother,” he said, “These Imams are not divinely protected from error (ma‘sum). As for the Quranic verse that this person followed [in praying any direction], it is the word of Him Who Is Protected from All Error, may His glory be exalted. How should he leave the divinely protected and attach himself to the tail of the non-divinely-protected?”

Buti: “Good man, what is divinely protected from error is the true meaning that Allah intended by saying, “To Allah belongs the place where the sun rises and where it sets . . .”—not the understanding of the young man who is as far as can be from knowing Islam, its rulings, and the nature of its Qur’an. That is to say, the comparison I am asking you to make is between two understandings: the understanding of this ignorant youth, and the understanding of the mujtahid Imams, neither of which is divinely protected from error, but one of which is rooted in ignorance and superficiality, and the other of which is rooted in investigation, knowledge, and accuracy.”

Anti-Madhab brother: “Allah does not make him responsible for more than his effort can do.”

Buti: “Then answer me this question. A man has a child who suffers from some infections, and is under the care of all the doctors in town, who agree he should have a certain medicine, and warn his father against giving him an injection of penicillin, and that if he does, he will be exposing the child’s life to destruction. Now, the father knows from having read a medical publication that penicillin helps in cases of infection. So he relies on his own knowledge about it, disregards the advice of the doctors since he doesn’t know the proof for what they say, and employing instead his own personal conviction, treats the child with a penicillin injection, and thereafter the child dies. Should such a person be tried, and is he guilty of a wrong for what he did, or not?”

Anti-Madhab brother: [He thought for a moment and then said,] “This is not the same as that.”

Buti: “It is exactly the same. The father has heard the unanimous judgement of the doctors, just as the young man has heard the unanimous judgement of the Imams. One has followed a single text he read in a medical publication, the other has followed a single text he has read in the Book of Allah Mighty and and Majestic. This one has gone by personal conviction, and so has that.”

Anti-Madhab brother: “Brother, the Qur’an is light. Light. In its clarity as evidence, is light like any other words?”

Buti: “And the light of the Qur’an is reflected by anyone who looks into it or recites it, such that he understands it as light, as Allah meant it? Then what is the difference between those who recall [Qur’an 16:43] and anyone else, as long as all partake of this light? Rather, the two above examples are comparable, there is no difference between them at all; you must answer me: does the person investigating—in each of the two examples—follow his personal conviction, or does he follow and imitate specialists?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “Personal conviction is the basis.”

Buti: “He used personal conviction, and it resulted in the death of the child. Does this entail any responsibility, moral or legal?”

Anti-Madhab brother: “It doesn’t entail any responsibility at all.”

Buti: I said, “Then let us end the investigation and discussion on this last remark of yours, since it closes the way to any common ground between you and me on which we can base a discussion. It is sufficient that with this bizarre answer of yours, you have departed from the consensus of the entire Islamic religion. By Allah, there is no meaning on the face of the earth for disgusting bigotry if it is not what you people have” (al-Lamadhhabiyya (b01), 99–108).

Buti concludes the story by saying: I do not know then, why these people don’t just let us be, to use our own “personal conviction” that someone ignorant of the rules of religion and the proofs for them must adhere to one of the mujtahid Imams, imitating him because of the latter’s being more aware than himself of the Book of Allah and sunna of His messenger. Whatever the mistake in this opinion in their view let it be given the general amnesty of “personal conviction.” like the example of him who turns his back to the qibla and is his prayer is valid, or him who kills a child and the killing is “ijtihad” and “medical treatment”

Read more...

Imam Abu Hanifa

Bismillahirahmaniraheem
This is an aside and a break from the Ihya Ulum Id-din. So I took this from a Friend from facebook. I post this because recently "certain people' have been attacking madhabs and in particular Imam Abu Hanifa. Notice what Imam Shafi the student of Imam Malik and teacher of Imam Hanbal says about Abu Hanifa. Also notice What imam Dhahabi the student of Ibn Tayimiyyah who some say surpassed Ibn Taymiyah says about Abu Hanifa. This also addresses the issue of Asr prayer being later in the Hanafi Madhab.

On Abu Hanifa

Al-Nu`man ibn Thabit al-Taymi, al-Imam Abu Hanifa (d. 150), called "The Imam" by Abu Dawud, and "The Imam, one of those who have reached the sky" by Ibn Hajar, he is known in the Islamic world as "The Greatest Imam" (al-imâm al-a`zam) and his school has the largest number of followers among the four schools of Ahl al-Sunna. He is the first of the four mujtahid imams and the only Successor (tâbi`i) among them, having seen the Companions Anas ibn Malik, `Abd Allah ibn Abi Awfa, Sahl ibn Sa`d al-Sa`idi, Abu al-Tufayl, and `Amir ibn Wathila.

Abu Hanifa is the first in Islam to organize the writing of fiqh under sub-headings embracing the whole of the Law, beginning with purity (tahara) followed by prayer (sala), an order which was retained by all subsequent scholars such as Malik, Shafi`i, Abu Dawud, Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, and others. All these and their followers are indebted to him and give him a share of their reward because he was the first to open that road for them, according to the hadith of the Prophet: "He who starts something good in Islam has its reward and the reward of those who practice it until the Day of Judgement, without lessening in the least the reward of those who practice it. The one who starts something bad in Islam will incur its punishment and the punishment of all those who practice it until the Day of Judgement without lessening their punishment in the least." Al-Shafi`i referred to this when he said: "People are all the children of Abu Hanifa in fiqh, of Ibn Ishaq in history, of Malik in hadith, and of Muqatil in tafsîr."

Al-Khatib narrated from Abu Hanifa’s student Abu Nu`aym that the latter said: "Muslims should make du`a to Allah on behalf of Abu Hanifa in their prayers, because the Sunan and the fiqh were preserved for them through him. Al-Dhahabi wrote one volume on the life of each of the other three great Imams and said: "The account of Abu Hanifa’s life requires two volumes." His son Hammad said as he washed his father’s body for burial: "May Allah have mercy on you! You have exhausted whoever tries to catch up with you."

Abu Hanifa was scrupulously pious and refused Ibn Hubayra’s offer of a judgeship even when the latter had him whipped. Like al-Bukhari and al-Shafi`i, he used to make 60 complete recitations (khatma) of Qur’an every Ramadan: one in the day, one in the night, besides his teaching and other duties. Ibrahim ibn Rustum al-Marwazi said: "Four are the Imams that recited the entire Qur’an in a single rak`a: `Uthman ibn `Affan, Tamim al-Dari, Sa`id ibn Jubayr, and Abu Hanifa." Ibn al-Mubarak said: "Abu Hanifa for a long time would pray all five prayers with a single ablution."

Al-Suyuti relates in Tabyid al-Sahifa that a certain visitor came to observe Abu Hanifa and saw him all day long in the mosque, teaching relentlessly, answering every question from both the scholars and the common people, not stopping except to pray, then standing at home in prayer when people were asleep, hardly ever eating or sleeping, and yet the most handsome and gracious of people, always alert and never tired, day after day for a long time, so that in the end the visitor said: "I became convinced that this was not an ordinary matter, but wilâya (Friendship with Allah)."

Al-Shafi`i said: "Knowledge revolves around three men: Malik, al-Layth, and Ibn `Uyayna." Al-Dhahabi commented: "Rather, it revolves also around al-Awza`i, al-Thawri, Ma`mar, Abu Hanifa, Shu`ba, and the two Hammads [ibn Zayd and ibn Salama]."

Sufyan al-Thawri praised Abu Hanifa when he said: "We were in front of Abu Hanifa like small birds in front of the falcon," and Sufyan stood up for him when Abu Hanifa visited him after his brother’s death, and he said: "This man holds a high rank in knowledge, and if I did not stand up for his science I would stand up for his age, and if not for his age then for his Godwariness (wara`), and if not for his Godwariness then for his jurisprudence (fiqh)." Ibn al-Mubarak praised Abu Hanifa and called him a sign of Allah. Both Ibn al-Mubarak and Sufyan al-Thawri said: "Abu Hanifa was in his time the most knowledgeable of all people on earth." Ibn Hajar also related that Ibn al-Mubarak said: "If Allah had not rescued me with Abu Hanifa and Sufyan [al-Thawri] I would have been like the rest of the common people." Dhahabi relates it as: "I would have been an innovator."

An example of Abu Hanifa’s perspicuity in inferring legal rulings from source-texts is his reading of the following hadith:

The Prophet said: "Your life in comparison to the lifetime of past nations is like the period between the time of the mid-afternoon prayer (‘asr) and sunset. Your example and the example of the Jews and Christians is that of a man who employed laborers and said to them: ‘Who will work for me until mid-day for one qirât (a unit of measure, part of a dinar) each?’ The Jews worked until mid-day for one qirât each. Then the man said: ‘Who will work for me from mid-day until the ‘asr prayer for one qirât each?’ The Christians worked from mid-day until the ‘asr prayer for one qirât each. Then the man said: ‘Who will work for me from the `asr prayer until the maghrib prayer for two qirât each?’ And that, in truth, is all of you. In truth, you have double the wages. The Jews and the Christians became angry and said: ‘We did more labor but took less wages.’ But Allah said: ‘Have I wronged you in any of your rights?’ They replied no. Then He said: ‘This is My Blessing which I give to whom I wish.’"

It was deduced from the phrase "We did more labor" that the time of mid-day to `asr must always be longer than that between `asr and maghrib. This is confirmed by authentic reports whereby:

The Prophet hastened to pray zuhr and delayed praying `asr.

The Prophet said: "May Allah have mercy on someone who prays four rak`as before `asr.

`Ali delayed praying `asr until shortly before the sun changed, and he reprimanded the mu’adhdhin who was hurrying him with the words: "He is trying to teach us the Sunna!"

Ibrahim al-Nakha`i said: "Those that came before you used to hasten more than you to pray zuhr and delay more than you in praying `asr." Al-Tahanawi said: "Those that came before you" are the Companions.

Ibn Mas`ud delayed praying `asr.

Sufyan al-Thawri, Abu Hanifa, and his two companions Muhammad ibn a-Hasan and Abu Yusuf therefore considered it better to lengthen the time between zuhr and `asr by delaying the latter prayer as long as the sun did not begin to redden, while the majority of the authorities considered that praying `asr early is better, on the basis of other sound evidence to that effect.

Like every Friend of Allah, Abu Hanifa had his enemies. `Abdan said that he heard Ibn al-Mubarak say: "If you hear them mention Abu Hanifa derogatively then they are mentioning me derogatively. In truth I fear for them Allah’s displeasure." Authentically related from Bishr al-Hafi is the statement: "No-one criticizes Abu Hanifa except an envier or an ignoramus." Hamid ibn Adam al-Marwazi said: I heard Ibn al-Mubarak say: "I never saw anyone more fearful of Allah than Abu Hanifa, even on trial under the whip and through money and property." Abu Mu`awiya al-Darir said: "Love of Abu Hanifa is part of the Sunna."

Read more...

Following a Madhab (Part 3): Zaid Shakir

Bismillahirahmaniraheem
Okay here is the final following a madhab post. Again these are embedded videos so if you are subscribed by video be sure to visit the site. And I just realize my last post did not have Bismillahirahmaniraheem in the beginning. May Allah bless it as if I did start it with his name.

Read more...

Follwoing a Madhab (Part 2)

More on Usul ul fiqh and following a madhab. I decided that my next couple of posts will be on following a madhab because a lot of people nowadays are so quick to say Abu Hanifa was wrong or "I'm not a Maliki, I'm Ahlul Sunnah" or "Don't follow an Imam that is taqleed/blind following." Anyways the videos are embedded and just like all video posts if you are subscribed via E-mail then you'll need to actually visit the site.

Read more...

Following a Madhab - Hamza Yusuf explains Shaykh Murabtal Haaj's fatwa

Bismillahirahmaniraheem
This is a fatwa by Shaykh Murabtal http://www.themodernreligion.com/basic/madhab/madhab-fatwa.htm and below is the video/audio of Hamza Yusuf commenting on it. If you are subscribed by E-mail you'll have to visit the site.

Read more...