Bismi llāh, wa l-ḥamdu lillāh, wa ṣ-ṣalātu wa s-salāmu ‘alā rasūli llāh, wa ‘alā ālihī wa ṣaḥbihī wa man wālāh. Ammā ba‘d:
You may have heard of the term "madh'hab" before. If you haven't, a madh'hab is a school of Islamic law. There are four mainstream madh'habs:
1) the Ḥanafī, named after Imam Abu Ḥanīfah al-Nu‘mān ibn Thābit
2) the Mālikī, named after Imam Mālik ibn Anas
3) the Shāfi‘ī, named after Imam Muḥammad ibn Idrīs al-Shāfi‘ī
4) the Ḥanbalī, named after Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal (may Allah be well-pleased with them all).
Nowadays, there generally is a vast amount of ignorance, misunderstandings, and misconceptions regarding the madh'habs. This piece aims, in shā’ Allāh, to clarify some of these and shed some light as to the importance of the madh'habs to everyday Islamic practice.
Why are madh'habs so important?
Madh'habs are important as without them, we wouldn't be able to follow the Sharī‘ah the way it ought to be followed. Think of the Sharī‘ah as a highway: the madh'hab is like the car you use to drive on it. The madh'hab is a vehicle you use to implement the Qur’ān and Sunnah.
The scholars of the madh'habs would firstly dive into the ocean that the Qur’ān and Sunnah was. From their deep investigation and research, they would come to conclusions regarding Islamic law and practice. They then would detail in their books these conclusions, such as how to do wuḍū’, how to pray, the rules of fasting, and so on. The laypeople would then adopt one of the four madh'habs and practise their Islam based on the rules laid out by their chosen madh'hab, thus sparing them of the need to quit their livelihoods and devote their entire lives to the study of the Qur’ān and Sunnah.
Do I have to follow a madh'hab?
Now, the original ruling is that a Muslim must base their practice of Islam on the Qur’ān and Sunnah. However, the majority of Muslims do not possess the capability to extract rulings directly from these primary sources. Thus, they're obliged to follow a mujtahid muṭlaq (a scholar who can unrestrictedly derive rulings directly from the Qur’ān and Sunnah) who has mastered the sciences of the Qur’ān and Sunnah, such as Arabic, tafsīr, muṣṭalaḥ al-ḥadīth, uṣūl al-fiqh, etc. – a scholar who has vast knowledge of all areas of the Islamic sciences. As Allah says, “Ask the people of remembrance (i.e. the scholars) if you do not know.” (Qur’ān 16:43)
Initially, there were many such people, and they all had their own madh'habs. However, over time, the ones weaker in argument and scholarship died out, until only four madh'habs remained: the Ḥanafī, Mālikī, Shāfi‘ī, and Ḥanbalī. Thus, in order to soundly follow the Qur’ān and Sunnah, we must follow one of these madh'habs.
Taqlīd (following a madh'hab) is thus necessary for every Muslim, not because Allah or His messenger (ﷺ) said, "Follow a madh'hab," but rather because we have been commanded to obey Allah and His messenger (ﷺ), and following a madh'hab is the only sound way of doing so, as by following a madh'hab, we are following top-class scholars who understood the commandments of Allah and His messenger (ﷺ) better than we ever will.
Note that a madh'hab isn't just a collection of the legal opinions of one imam, but rather the result of the efforts of countless scholars of the highest calibre who put their brilliant minds together over the centuries to evaluate and upgrade the work of their imam, thus ensuring that the legal opinions of their madh'hab were in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Qur’ān and Sunnah.
I grew up never really having an idea about madh'habs, and now it turns out I have to follow one. Which one should I follow?
When deciding to follow a madh'hab, take into account the following factors:
1) Your nationality or family background. First of all, chances are that the way you practise Islam is already based on one of the four madh'habs – you just don't know it. Your parents were probably taught how to do wuḍū’, how to pray, etc. without being told which madh'hab they were being taught according to. This is normal. In Muslim lands, the rules of Islam generally would be taught to the people without it being explained that "this is according to this-and-that madh'hab" – things would simply be taught as "Islam" and "fiqh", full stop, to keep things simple for the people.
Now then. In the Muslim world, it has always been that each madh'hab became prevalent in a different part of the world. For example, the Ḥanafī madh'hab came to be prevalent in the Indian subcontinent, Afghanistan, Central Asia, and Turkey. The Mālikī madh'hab came to be prevalent in Northern and Western Africa. The Shāfi‘ī madh'hab came to be prevalent in Southeastern Asia, Eastern Africa, Yemen, and Egypt. The Ḥanbalī madh'hab came to be prevalent in modern day Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Some areas are mixed, most notably Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Palestine, where both the Ḥanafī and Shāfi‘ī madh'habs have a presence, although the Shāfi‘ī madh'hab tends to be dominant.
From this info, you can figure out which madh'hab to officially adopt.
2) Availability of teachers and resources. Here in Sydney, the dominant madh'habs are the Ḥanafī and the Shāfi‘ī. These two are thus the easiest to learn, also because there's a wide range of resources online for these two madh'habs, such as translated books, Q&A sites, and courses. (The Ḥanbalī madh'hab has a presence here too.)
3) The way you currently practise certain aspects of the Sharī‘ah. For example, do you pray Ṣalāt al-Witr like this or like this? Were you taught to wipe the back of your neck in wuḍū’ (Ḥanafī) or not (the rest)?
One thing to note: if you come from a part of the world which traditionally follows, say, the Mālikī madh'hab but cannot find any Mālikī teachers to teach you your farḍ ‘ayn (personal obligations), you can't just cling on to the Mālikī madh'hab. You need to adopt another madh'hab and practise based on that. We do not cling on to our madh'habs fanatically, as the objective is to faithfully follow the Qur’ān and Sunnah, and clinging onto your heritage madh'hab when you have no one to teach it to you is counter to this.
Can I mix and match between madh'habs?
It is permissible to follow a different madh'hab for different aspects of Sharī‘ah. E.g. following the Shāfi‘ī for ṣalāh, the Ḥanbalī for ṣawm, and the Ḥanafī for transactions.
What you can't do though is mix between the positions of different madh'habs in the one area of Sharī‘ah such that the resulting mixture would be unacceptable to all madh'habs. For example, if you follow the Shāfi‘ī opinion that bleeding does not break wuḍū’, but then pray in a jamā‘ah while following the Ḥanafī position that the ma’mūm (follower) does not recite al-Fātiḥah behind the imam, your ṣalāh would be invalid according to both madh'habs. Both madh'habs would look upon your ṣalāh and say that you have not yet fulfilled what Allah has asked of you.
Optimally, just stick to one madh'hab. It'll make your life easier.
What if I come across an āyah or ḥadīth and I find that it conflicts with my madh'hab? What do I follow?
Good question. Watch this video.
Do the different madh'habs have different beliefs?
No. All the madh'habs are practically the same when it comes to issues of belief – they all espouse the Sunni Muslim creed. They only differed on the specifics of Islamic law.
Also, madh'habs aren't sects or groups, unlike, say, the Sunnī and Shī‘ah. They are just schools of Islamic law that we follow in order to fulfil our obligations before Allah. By following different madh'habs, we are not diving the ummah. Rather, we add to its diversity. Unity does not mean uniformity. Unity is when we can learn to tolerate differences. Because not everyone will think the same. Don't you see that an artwork only looks beautiful because of its many colours?
Which madh'hab is the absolute correct one?
In terms of which madh'hab is the absolute correct one with Allah, Allah knows best. We'll find out in the ākhirah, in shā’ Allāh. However, there is no doubt about the fact that all four are valid to follow, and that whoever follows one of the four is guaranteed to be fulfilling his obligations before Allah the way they ought to be.
But Akhī, we follow Qur’ān and Sunnah! Not Abu Ḥanīfah, Mālik, al-Shāfi‘ī, and Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal!
There are people nowadays who say, “Why do taqlīd of Abu Ḥanīfah, Mālik, al-Shāfi‘ī, or Aḥmad – human beings all prone to error – when you can just follow Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)?” Or they might say, “Brother, Rasulullāh (ﷺ) wasn't Ḥanafī or Mālikī or Shāfi‘ī or Ḥanbalī – he was Muslim, full stop.” Or they might say, “Sister, we have the Qur’ān and the ḥadīth collections such as Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim readily available to us. We can go straight to the Qur’ān and Sunnah instead of blind following these madh'habs.”
Although these statements may sound true on the outside, they are flawed in that they make one fatal assumption: that the four madh'habs are not based on the Qur’ān and Sunnah. What, do you think the four imams just made up the stuff they wrote in their books from the tops of their heads? Of course not! Indeed, the four madh'habs are rooted in the Qur’ān and Sunnah. They only differ with each other because they disagree as to the correct methodology to derive rulings from the Qur’ān and Sunnah (explained in detail later).
Think of it this way: who's more likely to have a misunderstanding of the Qur’ān and Sunnah – the four imams, who were greater than you in knowledge and closer than you to the Prophet (ﷺ), or you and the contemporary sheikh who calls the people to abandon the madh'habs? Yes, the four imams were human beings just like us who were prone to error. And yes, the countless scholars who came after them were also human beings just like us who were prone to error. But which is more prone to error: a madh'hab comprised of thousands of top-notch scholars who over the centuries evaluated and upgraded their madh'hab so as to reduce the chance of error existing within it, or a person today who does ten minutes of research on Sheikh Google and Mufti YouTube to find a couple of āyahs and ḥadīths – in translation, mind you – and then says, "Hey, let's follow Qur’ān and Sunnah directly without these madh'habs"?
Thus, we follow madh'habs not because we don't want to follow the Qur’ān and Sunnah, but rather because by following a madh'hab, we follow a super-scholar who was greater in knowledge and piety than we are, and lived in an age closer to the Messenger (ﷺ) than we do – a super-scholar who was more intimate with the Qur’ān and Sunnah than we will ever be.
And one final note: those who call the people to follow the Qur’ān and Sunnah without madh'habs are insisting that you follow their no-madh'hab understanding of the Qur’ān and Sunnah. It's taqlīd either way. So who's more worthy of your taqlīd?
To quote Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal (Allah have mercy upon him): “Whoever claims that taqlīd is not correct, or that no one is to be followed in religious matters, then he is a fāsiq (open sinner) according to Allah and His messenger (ﷺ). And verily he only intends [by such claim] the destruction of knowledge and the Sunnah…” (Ṭabaqāt al-Ḥanābilah, by the famous Ḥanbalī jurist, Ibn Abī Ya‘lā)
Does that mean I can't read the ḥadīth literature for myself?
It is absolutely fine, in fact encouraged, to read the ḥadīth literature for oneself when it comes to ḥadīths related to matters of belief, general Islamic laws to do the good and avoid the evil, du‘ā’s, and things pertaining to virtues, rewards and punishments. The issue arises when it comes to matters pertaining to the specifics of Islamic law and practice – here, we must draw the line and leave it to the experts who dealt with all the relevant ḥadīths and came to sound and accepted conclusions, instead of coming to our own amateur conclusions.
If all the madh'habs are based on the Qur’ān and Sunnah, why are there differences of opinion between them?
The answer is not because some madh'habs gravely misunderstood the Qur’ān or Sunnah, or because some didn't have the ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīth available to them, or because some used a weak ḥadīth which contradicted a stronger one, or because of some other reasons some people give. So what's the answer?
Before answering, it's worthy of noting that even the Ṣaḥābah had differences of opinion. And not just after the death of the Prophet (ﷺ), but also during his lifetime! One famous example is when the Prophet (ﷺ) instructed a party from the Ṣaḥābah on the day of the Battle of Aḥzāb not to pray ‘Aṣr until they had reached Banū Qurayẓah. Some took it as an exhortation to hurry up such that they arrive at Banū Qurayẓah before ‘Aṣr time expires – this group ended up praying ‘Aṣr within its time and before reaching Banū Qurayẓah. The others though took this statement literally to mean that even if the time for ‘Aṣr were to expire, they should still not pray ‘Aṣr until they got there – this group ended up praying ‘Aṣr after its time. Later on, they informed the Prophet (ﷺ) about this matter. His response? He didn't rebuke either of these groups. He didn't say, "This group was right and that one was wrong." The Prophet (ﷺ) himself tolerated and allowed for the difference of opinion.
Going back to the question, the reason scholars had differences of opinion is due to the fact that they differed on the correct methodology by which to extract rulings from the Qur’ān and Sunnah, as well as the fact that they differed regarding the correct interpretations of certain passages from the Qur’ān and Sunnah.
For example: if a Ṣaḥābī states that the Prophet (ﷺ) did an act of worship in a certain way, but the Ṣaḥābī himself does it in a different way, what do we take? His statement or his action? Scholars differed on this.
Another example: in the chain of narrators (sanad) of a ḥadīth, there may be a narrator whom some deem to be unreliable and so they judge the ḥadīth as being weak. Though some others may deem him as reliable and thus judge the hadīth as being authentic. The scholars hence differed in their judgements of ḥadīths as being authentic or weak.
Another example: the word qur’ (its plural form, qurū’, is mentioned in the Qur’ān) has two meanings: 1) the period of purity between two menses, 2) the actual period of menses. Which one did the Qur’ān mean? Again, scholars differed on this.
One more example: according to Imam Mālik, the actions of the people of Madīnah during his era was a source of Islamic law, even if there was no ḥadīth to back it up. His rationale is as follows: if all the people of Madīnah during his era did an act of worship in a certain way, they must have all inherited it from their fathers, who in turn inherited it from their fathers – the Ṣaḥābah – who in turn learnt it from the Prophet (ﷺ) himself. Other scholars though disagreed and said that there has to be an authentic ḥadīth to back up any legal ruling, otherwise, we can't confirm its establishment by the Prophet (ﷺ). So who's right?
We thus need to understand that the differences of opinion between the scholars are all rooted in the Qur’ān and Sunnah – it's just a matter of which lens is used to view the Qur’ān and Sunnah. Thus, the scholars after the four great imams came and adopted one of their madh'habs (perhaps the madh'hab they thought was the most correct), expanding upon, evaluating, and upgrading their work, all to ensure their madh'hab's coherence with the Qur’ān and Sunnah. These brilliant minds did the hard labour of diving into the Qur’ān and Sunnah and extracting the rulings from them. That's not our job. All we have to do as laypeople is adopt one of these madh'habs and follow the conclusions they have come to.
Now, we're not saying that we can't ask for evidence from the Qur’ān or Sunnah regarding the opinion of a madh'hab on an issue. It's fine to inquire about this, though what we can't do is go a step further and make our own minds up about rulings based on our personal readings of the Qur’ān and Sunnah – limited readings of the Qur’ān and Sunnah, mind you. Furthermore, we can't do what some people do of looking at the opinions of all four madh'habs and deciding for ourselves which one we think is strongest; now, you're being inconsistent in the way you follow the Qur’ān and Sunnah – for one issue, you're endorsing one imam's methodology in extracting rulings from the Qur’ān and Sunnah, while for another issue you're endorsing another imam who has a whole different (and often conflicting) methodology!
Conclusion
In shā’ Allāh, this has clarified various aspects of the whole concept of taqlīd (following qualified scholarship). In particular:
• that it is incumbent upon the lay Muslim to adopt a madh'hab
• chances are that you already worship according to a particular madh'hab – you just don't know it
• all the madh'habs are rooted in the Qur’ān and Sunnah – the differences between them arise due to a difference in perspective when analysing the Qur’ān and Sunnah
• the approach of "following the Qur’ān and Sunnah directly" is flawed.
For further readings, the following are recommended:
• What is a Madhhab (School of Thought) ? – Sh. Nuh Keller
• Legitimate Islamic Learning: Being People of Isnad – Ust. Abu Aaliyah
• Why Muslims Follow Madhhabs? – Sh. Nuh Keller
• Understanding The Four Madhhabs: the problem with anti-madhhabism – Sh. Abdal Hakim Murad
• To Matth’hab or Not To Matth’hab – Why Is It A Question? – Sidi Mohamed Ghilan
Please do not hesitate to seek clarification.
And Allah knows best.
And success lies with Allah alone.
PS. Thought I might provide the following list:
Islamic Courses Within Sydney
Al-Bayan Institute (Ḥanafī)
Abu Hanifa Institute (Ḥanafī)
Daar Ibn Abbas (Shāfi‘ī – brothers only)
Daar Aisha (Shāfi‘ī – sisters only)
Markaz Imam Ahmad (Ḥanbalī)
Some Islamic Resources
Nūr al-Iḍāḥ (The Light of Clarification) (Ḥanafī)
‘Umdah al-Sālik (Reliance of the Traveller) (Shāfi‘ī)
Safīnah al-Najā’ (The Ship of Salvation) (Shāfi‘ī)
Q&A Sites
islamqa.org (Not to be confused with islamqa.com or islamqa.info)
SeekersHub Answers Service
Online Courses
SeekersHub (Ḥanafī, Shafi‘ī, Mālikī)
Qibla (Ḥanafī, Shafi‘ī)
Rayyan Institute (Ḥanafī)
Hadith Guidance (Mālikī)
(Note: This, by no means, is meant to be an exhaustive list.)
You may have heard of the term "madh'hab" before. If you haven't, a madh'hab is a school of Islamic law. There are four mainstream madh'habs:
1) the Ḥanafī, named after Imam Abu Ḥanīfah al-Nu‘mān ibn Thābit
2) the Mālikī, named after Imam Mālik ibn Anas
3) the Shāfi‘ī, named after Imam Muḥammad ibn Idrīs al-Shāfi‘ī
4) the Ḥanbalī, named after Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal (may Allah be well-pleased with them all).
Nowadays, there generally is a vast amount of ignorance, misunderstandings, and misconceptions regarding the madh'habs. This piece aims, in shā’ Allāh, to clarify some of these and shed some light as to the importance of the madh'habs to everyday Islamic practice.
Why are madh'habs so important?
Madh'habs are important as without them, we wouldn't be able to follow the Sharī‘ah the way it ought to be followed. Think of the Sharī‘ah as a highway: the madh'hab is like the car you use to drive on it. The madh'hab is a vehicle you use to implement the Qur’ān and Sunnah.
The scholars of the madh'habs would firstly dive into the ocean that the Qur’ān and Sunnah was. From their deep investigation and research, they would come to conclusions regarding Islamic law and practice. They then would detail in their books these conclusions, such as how to do wuḍū’, how to pray, the rules of fasting, and so on. The laypeople would then adopt one of the four madh'habs and practise their Islam based on the rules laid out by their chosen madh'hab, thus sparing them of the need to quit their livelihoods and devote their entire lives to the study of the Qur’ān and Sunnah.
Do I have to follow a madh'hab?
Now, the original ruling is that a Muslim must base their practice of Islam on the Qur’ān and Sunnah. However, the majority of Muslims do not possess the capability to extract rulings directly from these primary sources. Thus, they're obliged to follow a mujtahid muṭlaq (a scholar who can unrestrictedly derive rulings directly from the Qur’ān and Sunnah) who has mastered the sciences of the Qur’ān and Sunnah, such as Arabic, tafsīr, muṣṭalaḥ al-ḥadīth, uṣūl al-fiqh, etc. – a scholar who has vast knowledge of all areas of the Islamic sciences. As Allah says, “Ask the people of remembrance (i.e. the scholars) if you do not know.” (Qur’ān 16:43)
Initially, there were many such people, and they all had their own madh'habs. However, over time, the ones weaker in argument and scholarship died out, until only four madh'habs remained: the Ḥanafī, Mālikī, Shāfi‘ī, and Ḥanbalī. Thus, in order to soundly follow the Qur’ān and Sunnah, we must follow one of these madh'habs.
Taqlīd (following a madh'hab) is thus necessary for every Muslim, not because Allah or His messenger (ﷺ) said, "Follow a madh'hab," but rather because we have been commanded to obey Allah and His messenger (ﷺ), and following a madh'hab is the only sound way of doing so, as by following a madh'hab, we are following top-class scholars who understood the commandments of Allah and His messenger (ﷺ) better than we ever will.
Note that a madh'hab isn't just a collection of the legal opinions of one imam, but rather the result of the efforts of countless scholars of the highest calibre who put their brilliant minds together over the centuries to evaluate and upgrade the work of their imam, thus ensuring that the legal opinions of their madh'hab were in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Qur’ān and Sunnah.
I grew up never really having an idea about madh'habs, and now it turns out I have to follow one. Which one should I follow?
When deciding to follow a madh'hab, take into account the following factors:
1) Your nationality or family background. First of all, chances are that the way you practise Islam is already based on one of the four madh'habs – you just don't know it. Your parents were probably taught how to do wuḍū’, how to pray, etc. without being told which madh'hab they were being taught according to. This is normal. In Muslim lands, the rules of Islam generally would be taught to the people without it being explained that "this is according to this-and-that madh'hab" – things would simply be taught as "Islam" and "fiqh", full stop, to keep things simple for the people.
Now then. In the Muslim world, it has always been that each madh'hab became prevalent in a different part of the world. For example, the Ḥanafī madh'hab came to be prevalent in the Indian subcontinent, Afghanistan, Central Asia, and Turkey. The Mālikī madh'hab came to be prevalent in Northern and Western Africa. The Shāfi‘ī madh'hab came to be prevalent in Southeastern Asia, Eastern Africa, Yemen, and Egypt. The Ḥanbalī madh'hab came to be prevalent in modern day Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Some areas are mixed, most notably Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Palestine, where both the Ḥanafī and Shāfi‘ī madh'habs have a presence, although the Shāfi‘ī madh'hab tends to be dominant.
From this info, you can figure out which madh'hab to officially adopt.
2) Availability of teachers and resources. Here in Sydney, the dominant madh'habs are the Ḥanafī and the Shāfi‘ī. These two are thus the easiest to learn, also because there's a wide range of resources online for these two madh'habs, such as translated books, Q&A sites, and courses. (The Ḥanbalī madh'hab has a presence here too.)
3) The way you currently practise certain aspects of the Sharī‘ah. For example, do you pray Ṣalāt al-Witr like this or like this? Were you taught to wipe the back of your neck in wuḍū’ (Ḥanafī) or not (the rest)?
One thing to note: if you come from a part of the world which traditionally follows, say, the Mālikī madh'hab but cannot find any Mālikī teachers to teach you your farḍ ‘ayn (personal obligations), you can't just cling on to the Mālikī madh'hab. You need to adopt another madh'hab and practise based on that. We do not cling on to our madh'habs fanatically, as the objective is to faithfully follow the Qur’ān and Sunnah, and clinging onto your heritage madh'hab when you have no one to teach it to you is counter to this.
Can I mix and match between madh'habs?
It is permissible to follow a different madh'hab for different aspects of Sharī‘ah. E.g. following the Shāfi‘ī for ṣalāh, the Ḥanbalī for ṣawm, and the Ḥanafī for transactions.
What you can't do though is mix between the positions of different madh'habs in the one area of Sharī‘ah such that the resulting mixture would be unacceptable to all madh'habs. For example, if you follow the Shāfi‘ī opinion that bleeding does not break wuḍū’, but then pray in a jamā‘ah while following the Ḥanafī position that the ma’mūm (follower) does not recite al-Fātiḥah behind the imam, your ṣalāh would be invalid according to both madh'habs. Both madh'habs would look upon your ṣalāh and say that you have not yet fulfilled what Allah has asked of you.
Optimally, just stick to one madh'hab. It'll make your life easier.
What if I come across an āyah or ḥadīth and I find that it conflicts with my madh'hab? What do I follow?
Good question. Watch this video.
Do the different madh'habs have different beliefs?
No. All the madh'habs are practically the same when it comes to issues of belief – they all espouse the Sunni Muslim creed. They only differed on the specifics of Islamic law.
Also, madh'habs aren't sects or groups, unlike, say, the Sunnī and Shī‘ah. They are just schools of Islamic law that we follow in order to fulfil our obligations before Allah. By following different madh'habs, we are not diving the ummah. Rather, we add to its diversity. Unity does not mean uniformity. Unity is when we can learn to tolerate differences. Because not everyone will think the same. Don't you see that an artwork only looks beautiful because of its many colours?
Which madh'hab is the absolute correct one?
In terms of which madh'hab is the absolute correct one with Allah, Allah knows best. We'll find out in the ākhirah, in shā’ Allāh. However, there is no doubt about the fact that all four are valid to follow, and that whoever follows one of the four is guaranteed to be fulfilling his obligations before Allah the way they ought to be.
But Akhī, we follow Qur’ān and Sunnah! Not Abu Ḥanīfah, Mālik, al-Shāfi‘ī, and Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal!
There are people nowadays who say, “Why do taqlīd of Abu Ḥanīfah, Mālik, al-Shāfi‘ī, or Aḥmad – human beings all prone to error – when you can just follow Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)?” Or they might say, “Brother, Rasulullāh (ﷺ) wasn't Ḥanafī or Mālikī or Shāfi‘ī or Ḥanbalī – he was Muslim, full stop.” Or they might say, “Sister, we have the Qur’ān and the ḥadīth collections such as Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim readily available to us. We can go straight to the Qur’ān and Sunnah instead of blind following these madh'habs.”
Although these statements may sound true on the outside, they are flawed in that they make one fatal assumption: that the four madh'habs are not based on the Qur’ān and Sunnah. What, do you think the four imams just made up the stuff they wrote in their books from the tops of their heads? Of course not! Indeed, the four madh'habs are rooted in the Qur’ān and Sunnah. They only differ with each other because they disagree as to the correct methodology to derive rulings from the Qur’ān and Sunnah (explained in detail later).
Think of it this way: who's more likely to have a misunderstanding of the Qur’ān and Sunnah – the four imams, who were greater than you in knowledge and closer than you to the Prophet (ﷺ), or you and the contemporary sheikh who calls the people to abandon the madh'habs? Yes, the four imams were human beings just like us who were prone to error. And yes, the countless scholars who came after them were also human beings just like us who were prone to error. But which is more prone to error: a madh'hab comprised of thousands of top-notch scholars who over the centuries evaluated and upgraded their madh'hab so as to reduce the chance of error existing within it, or a person today who does ten minutes of research on Sheikh Google and Mufti YouTube to find a couple of āyahs and ḥadīths – in translation, mind you – and then says, "Hey, let's follow Qur’ān and Sunnah directly without these madh'habs"?
Thus, we follow madh'habs not because we don't want to follow the Qur’ān and Sunnah, but rather because by following a madh'hab, we follow a super-scholar who was greater in knowledge and piety than we are, and lived in an age closer to the Messenger (ﷺ) than we do – a super-scholar who was more intimate with the Qur’ān and Sunnah than we will ever be.
And one final note: those who call the people to follow the Qur’ān and Sunnah without madh'habs are insisting that you follow their no-madh'hab understanding of the Qur’ān and Sunnah. It's taqlīd either way. So who's more worthy of your taqlīd?
To quote Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal (Allah have mercy upon him): “Whoever claims that taqlīd is not correct, or that no one is to be followed in religious matters, then he is a fāsiq (open sinner) according to Allah and His messenger (ﷺ). And verily he only intends [by such claim] the destruction of knowledge and the Sunnah…” (Ṭabaqāt al-Ḥanābilah, by the famous Ḥanbalī jurist, Ibn Abī Ya‘lā)
Does that mean I can't read the ḥadīth literature for myself?
It is absolutely fine, in fact encouraged, to read the ḥadīth literature for oneself when it comes to ḥadīths related to matters of belief, general Islamic laws to do the good and avoid the evil, du‘ā’s, and things pertaining to virtues, rewards and punishments. The issue arises when it comes to matters pertaining to the specifics of Islamic law and practice – here, we must draw the line and leave it to the experts who dealt with all the relevant ḥadīths and came to sound and accepted conclusions, instead of coming to our own amateur conclusions.
If all the madh'habs are based on the Qur’ān and Sunnah, why are there differences of opinion between them?
The answer is not because some madh'habs gravely misunderstood the Qur’ān or Sunnah, or because some didn't have the ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīth available to them, or because some used a weak ḥadīth which contradicted a stronger one, or because of some other reasons some people give. So what's the answer?
Before answering, it's worthy of noting that even the Ṣaḥābah had differences of opinion. And not just after the death of the Prophet (ﷺ), but also during his lifetime! One famous example is when the Prophet (ﷺ) instructed a party from the Ṣaḥābah on the day of the Battle of Aḥzāb not to pray ‘Aṣr until they had reached Banū Qurayẓah. Some took it as an exhortation to hurry up such that they arrive at Banū Qurayẓah before ‘Aṣr time expires – this group ended up praying ‘Aṣr within its time and before reaching Banū Qurayẓah. The others though took this statement literally to mean that even if the time for ‘Aṣr were to expire, they should still not pray ‘Aṣr until they got there – this group ended up praying ‘Aṣr after its time. Later on, they informed the Prophet (ﷺ) about this matter. His response? He didn't rebuke either of these groups. He didn't say, "This group was right and that one was wrong." The Prophet (ﷺ) himself tolerated and allowed for the difference of opinion.
Going back to the question, the reason scholars had differences of opinion is due to the fact that they differed on the correct methodology by which to extract rulings from the Qur’ān and Sunnah, as well as the fact that they differed regarding the correct interpretations of certain passages from the Qur’ān and Sunnah.
For example: if a Ṣaḥābī states that the Prophet (ﷺ) did an act of worship in a certain way, but the Ṣaḥābī himself does it in a different way, what do we take? His statement or his action? Scholars differed on this.
Another example: in the chain of narrators (sanad) of a ḥadīth, there may be a narrator whom some deem to be unreliable and so they judge the ḥadīth as being weak. Though some others may deem him as reliable and thus judge the hadīth as being authentic. The scholars hence differed in their judgements of ḥadīths as being authentic or weak.
Another example: the word qur’ (its plural form, qurū’, is mentioned in the Qur’ān) has two meanings: 1) the period of purity between two menses, 2) the actual period of menses. Which one did the Qur’ān mean? Again, scholars differed on this.
One more example: according to Imam Mālik, the actions of the people of Madīnah during his era was a source of Islamic law, even if there was no ḥadīth to back it up. His rationale is as follows: if all the people of Madīnah during his era did an act of worship in a certain way, they must have all inherited it from their fathers, who in turn inherited it from their fathers – the Ṣaḥābah – who in turn learnt it from the Prophet (ﷺ) himself. Other scholars though disagreed and said that there has to be an authentic ḥadīth to back up any legal ruling, otherwise, we can't confirm its establishment by the Prophet (ﷺ). So who's right?
We thus need to understand that the differences of opinion between the scholars are all rooted in the Qur’ān and Sunnah – it's just a matter of which lens is used to view the Qur’ān and Sunnah. Thus, the scholars after the four great imams came and adopted one of their madh'habs (perhaps the madh'hab they thought was the most correct), expanding upon, evaluating, and upgrading their work, all to ensure their madh'hab's coherence with the Qur’ān and Sunnah. These brilliant minds did the hard labour of diving into the Qur’ān and Sunnah and extracting the rulings from them. That's not our job. All we have to do as laypeople is adopt one of these madh'habs and follow the conclusions they have come to.
Now, we're not saying that we can't ask for evidence from the Qur’ān or Sunnah regarding the opinion of a madh'hab on an issue. It's fine to inquire about this, though what we can't do is go a step further and make our own minds up about rulings based on our personal readings of the Qur’ān and Sunnah – limited readings of the Qur’ān and Sunnah, mind you. Furthermore, we can't do what some people do of looking at the opinions of all four madh'habs and deciding for ourselves which one we think is strongest; now, you're being inconsistent in the way you follow the Qur’ān and Sunnah – for one issue, you're endorsing one imam's methodology in extracting rulings from the Qur’ān and Sunnah, while for another issue you're endorsing another imam who has a whole different (and often conflicting) methodology!
Conclusion
In shā’ Allāh, this has clarified various aspects of the whole concept of taqlīd (following qualified scholarship). In particular:
• that it is incumbent upon the lay Muslim to adopt a madh'hab
• chances are that you already worship according to a particular madh'hab – you just don't know it
• all the madh'habs are rooted in the Qur’ān and Sunnah – the differences between them arise due to a difference in perspective when analysing the Qur’ān and Sunnah
• the approach of "following the Qur’ān and Sunnah directly" is flawed.
For further readings, the following are recommended:
• What is a Madhhab (School of Thought) ? – Sh. Nuh Keller
• Legitimate Islamic Learning: Being People of Isnad – Ust. Abu Aaliyah
• Why Muslims Follow Madhhabs? – Sh. Nuh Keller
• Understanding The Four Madhhabs: the problem with anti-madhhabism – Sh. Abdal Hakim Murad
• To Matth’hab or Not To Matth’hab – Why Is It A Question? – Sidi Mohamed Ghilan
Please do not hesitate to seek clarification.
And Allah knows best.
And success lies with Allah alone.
PS. Thought I might provide the following list:
Islamic Courses Within Sydney
Al-Bayan Institute (Ḥanafī)
Abu Hanifa Institute (Ḥanafī)
Daar Ibn Abbas (Shāfi‘ī – brothers only)
Daar Aisha (Shāfi‘ī – sisters only)
Markaz Imam Ahmad (Ḥanbalī)
Some Islamic Resources
Nūr al-Iḍāḥ (The Light of Clarification) (Ḥanafī)
‘Umdah al-Sālik (Reliance of the Traveller) (Shāfi‘ī)
Safīnah al-Najā’ (The Ship of Salvation) (Shāfi‘ī)
Q&A Sites
islamqa.org (Not to be confused with islamqa.com or islamqa.info)
SeekersHub Answers Service
Online Courses
SeekersHub (Ḥanafī, Shafi‘ī, Mālikī)
Qibla (Ḥanafī, Shafi‘ī)
Rayyan Institute (Ḥanafī)
Hadith Guidance (Mālikī)
(Note: This, by no means, is meant to be an exhaustive list.)
No comments:
Post a Comment