Blind Following one of The Four Madhabs

[شمله ور خراساني]

Imaam Abu Haneefah He said: “It is not permissible for anyone to follow what we say if they do not know where we got it from.”
According to another report he said: “It is haraam for the one who does not know my evidence to issue a fatwa based on my words.”
and he said: “woe be to you Ya’qoob. Do not write down everything you hear from me, for surely I may hold an opinion today and leave it tomorrow, hold another tomorrow and leave it the day after”
And he said: “If I say something that goes against the Book of Allaah or the report of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), then ignore what I say.”
And he said: “”Adhere to the athaar and the way of the salaf and beware of newly invented matters, for all of it is an innovation.”
He also said: “if a hadeeth is found to be authentic, that is my madhab”
Now, the opposers to the dawah salafiyyah, the dawah of ahl as-sunnah, claim that these statements were only for “Abu Haneefah’s students” which is an absurd saying! As what will the students do with such saying if not act according to them and teach this to their followers!?
Imaam Malik
He said: “I am only human, sometimes I make mistakes and sometimes I get things right. Look at my opinion and whatever is in accordance with the Qur’aan and Sunnah, take it, and whatever is not in accordance with the Qur’aan and Sunnah, ignore it.”
And he said: “There is no one after the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) whose words cannot be taken or left, apart from the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم).”
Imaam al-Shafi’ee
He said: “There is no one who will not be unaware of some of the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Whatever I say or whatever guidelines I establish, if there is a report from the Messenger of Allaah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) which is different to what I said, then what matters is what the Messenger of Allaah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said, and that is my opinion.”
according to al-Haakim, Imaam Shafi’ee said: “There is no one among us who has not had a sunnah of Allaah’s messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) elude him or have one slip his mind; so no matter what rulings I have made or fundamental principles I have proposed, there will be in them things contrary to the rulings of Allaah’s messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Therefore, the correct ruling is according to what Allaah’s messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said, and that is my ruling.”
He also said: “The Muslims (of my time) were of a unanimous opinion that one who comes across an authentic sunnah of Allaah’s messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) is not allowed to disregard it in favour of someone else’s opinion.”
al-Haakim also collected from Imaam ash-Shafi’ee a similar statement to that of Imaam Abu Haneefah, that being “If a hadeeth is found to be saheeh, it is my madhab.”
He also said: “If I say something then compare it to the Book of Allaah and the sunnah of His messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and if it agrees with them, then accept it and that which goes against them, then reject it and throw my saying against the wall!”
Imaam an-Nawawi in Tahdheeb al-Asma wa’l-Lughaat mentioned under the biography of Imaam Shafi’ee: “…then he travelled to al-’Iraaq where he spread the knowledge of hadeeth and he established the madhab of its people – that is the madhab of the Ahl al-Hadeeth.”
Imaam Ahmad said: “Do not follow me blindly and do not follow Maalik or al-Shafi’ee or al-Awzaa’i or ath-Thawri blindly. Learn from where they learned.”
And he said: “The opinion of al-Awzaa’i and the opinion of Maalik and the opinion of Abu Haneefah are all mere conjecture and it is all the same to me. Rather evidence is to be found in the reports – i.e., in the shar’i evidence.”
Ibn Abdul-Barr stated in Jaami’Bayaan al-’ilm that, “There are no scholars from this ummah to whom a hadeeth of the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم) was established and then they rejected it… If they had done so, their trustworthiness would have been in question, let alone them being taken as Imaams, since doing so (rejecting hadeeth) necessitates sinfulness.”
Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said: “No one has to blindly follow any particular man in all that he enjoins or forbids or recommends, apart from the Messenger of Allaah (صلى الله عليه وسلم). The Muslims should always refer their questions to the Muslim scholars, following this one sometimes and that one sometimes. If the follower decides to follow the view of an imam with regard to a particular matter which he thinks is better for his religious commitment or is more correct etc, that is permissible according to the majority of Muslim scholars, and neither Abu Haneefah, Maalik, al- Shafi’ee or Ahmad said that this was forbidden.”
Ibn al-Qayyim said: in his Qaeedah Nuniyyah:

“If you say “Allaah said, and His Messenger said”
the ignorant one will say “where is the saying of so and so?”

(adapted from the works of Shaykh Muhammad Salih al-Munajjid and also the book ‘Refutation of Zayd Shaakir’s ‘Introduction to Following a Madhab’‘)




Blind Following one of The Four Madhabs « Ahl al-Hadeeth

[Mujib]

This was posted a while back, and was answered thus:

And he said: “If I say something that goes against the Book of Allaah or the report of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), then ignore what I say.”

Unfortunately, not a single source is given for the statements attributed to Imam al-A`zam Abu Hanifa (ra).

These and similar statements are often cited by those who are opposed to the following of qualified scholarship. The statements are often misquoted and always misinterpreted. For example, the statement of Imam al-Shafi`i (ra), “When the authenticity of the hadith is established, that is my madhhab.” Commenting on this statement, the great Shafi`i imam, Imam al-Nawawi (ra), said that Imam al-Shafi`i's (ra) statement does not apply to just anyone, but only to mujtahid scholars within the madhhab. He said:

What Imam al-Shafi‘i said does not mean that everyone who sees a sahih hadith should say “This is the madhhab of al-Shafi‘i,” applying the purely external or apparent meaning of his statement. What he said most certainly applies only to such a person as has the rank of ijtihad in the madhhab. It is a condition for such a person that he be firmly convinced that either Imam al-Shafi‘i was unaware of this hadith or he was unaware of its authenticity. And this is possible only after having researched all the books of al-Shafi‘i and similar other books of the companions of al-Shafi‘i, those who took knowledge from him and others similar to them. This is indeed a difficult condition to fulfill. Few are those who measure up to this standard in our times. ("The Statement 'If the Hadith is Authentic, that is my Madhhab'")

Commenting on Imam al-Nawawi's words, "Few are those who measure up to this standard in our times," Shaykh Gibril Haddad notes:

I.e. al-Nawawi’s times, a fortiori ours. Among those who lived in al-Nawawi’s century were al-Fakhr al-Razi, Ibn al-Salah, al-Mundhiri, Ibn ‘Abd al-Salam, al-Qurtubi, Ibn al-Munayyir, Ibn al-Qattan, al- Diya’ al-Maqdisi, Ibn Qudama, and Ibn Daqiq al-‘Id! (Ibid)

[Haneef]

Ibn Rajab on Fraudulent Taqlid

The hadith master and imam, Ibn Rajab Al-Hanbali, authored a wonderful work where he demonstrated the various ways in which Allah Most High has preserved the ummah of Muhammad . In addition to illustrating how the Qur'an, hadith, and sunnah of the Prophet were recorded and showing how students should be inspired by the example of Imam Ahmad (Allah be well pleased with him), he talks a bit about taqlid. Since taqlid was one of yesterday's issues, it seems appropriate to quote a small passage from it.
The hadith master and imam, Ibn Rajab Al-Hanbali, wrote:

If it is asked: “So what do you say about another imam's school if it has been recorded, corrected, and memorized, just like their schools?”

It is said: Firstly, this is not known to exist right now. If we assumed that it did take place right now and conceded the permissibility of following it and affiliating with it, this would not be permissible except for someone who visibly shows affiliation to it, gives fatawa according to it and defends his school.

As for someone who outwardly shows affiliation to one of the famous imams while he is secretly affiliated with someone else, firmly believing in his school, this is absolutely impermissible. It is a form of hypocrisy and outward dissimulation (taqiya): especially if he took money reserved for the followers of that famous school (such as endowments) or deceived people (making them believe that the fatwa he gives from the school he secretly affiliates with is really from the school of the famous imam).

This certainly is impermissible. It is a deception toward the umma and a lie toward the scholars of the umma. Whoever ascribes to the imams of Islam something they did not say, or something known to be contrary to what they say, is a liar worthy of punishment; just as if he had authored a book following a particular school and, in it, mentions an opinion he believes to be from the one he secretly affiliated to without ascribing it to its proponent; or if the authored book is not confined to a specific school, and the author outwardly affiliated with a particular imam while secretly affiliating with another imam, mentions the opinion of the one he secretly affiliates with without clarifying that they disagree with the school he outwardly affiliates with.

All of this is impermissible fraud and deception, leading to tainting and confusing the scholars' schools.

If he also claims ijtihad, it is more crafty and bitter, and of greater corruption and more pig-headed. This is absolutely impermissible except for someone possessing the complete tools of ijtihad: knowing the Qur'an, sunna, legal rulings of the Companions and the Successors , knowing areas of consensus and difference, and the rest of the well-known conditions for ijtihad. This requires much inspection of the sunna, knowing its sound from its sick, knowing the schools of the Companions and their Successors , and the accounts related from them concerning this.

Because of this, Imam Ahmad was strict in the matter of fatwa, and held back from it anyone who did not memorize one hundred thousand hadiths, two hundred thousand, and more. The indication of the proof of his claim is that concerning issues he was independent in his opinions; just like the other imams, his opinions are not taken from someone else. As for someone who relies solely on conveying someone else's words (whether it be the ruling or the ruling with evidence): the goal of his toil is to understand it. Perhaps he did not understand it well, corrupted it, or changed it. How far this is from ijtihad!