In Reply To The Salafi Beliefs

key: In blue itallics you will find the references and/or point of view of the Salafis (usually with reference links provided below; mainly the following: http://ahnazeer19.arabblogs.com/archive/2008/4/519791.html & http://www.muftisays.com/viewarticle.php?article=zntaqleed). In green Itallics you will find the references or quotes that I have provided with their respective links provided with them.

The Holy Prophet-SAAW brought us one deen and that is Islam, and that is one which brings ease for everyone. All four Fiqh's are accepted as authentic Islam, with very slight variations in the do's and dont's all agree on the exact same beliefs, there is no variation there. And the do's and don'ts are all such that the Prophet-SAAW taught on different times and occasions and all are considered valid and authentic.

My question to the Salafis is that do they believe that they or anyone else today has more knowledge and authority regarding Islam than a Taba’ee (Imam Abu Hanifa) who met atleast four Sahabis-RAU during his life time, which include Hazrat Anas-RAU?

Are the Salafis attempting to or trying to claim that the Prophet-SAAW never offered his-SAAW salah according to the Hanafi Fiqh? ... yet all the other 3 Fiqh's have no issues with the Hanafi Fiqh or vice versa ...

A direction from the Hadith informs us:

"Also perform your prayer just as you see me perform my prayer." (Bukhari Vol. 1, p. 1076)

It is not said: "Perform your prayer in the manner you may infer from the Holy Qurãn."

Masa'il or precepts are of four kinds:-

1Clear instructions from the Holy Qurãn and Ahadith. No Qiyas is allowed nor Taqlid permissible. The order is to practice on the clear injunction.

2In such propositions where there are two injunctions, one earlier, and one later, and through historical evidence both renown, then the earlier proposition is abrogated (Mansukh), whilst the latter command is ordered. Here too Qiyas and Taqlid ~ not permitted.

3Those propositions that have two clear injunctions but it is not known which is earlier and which later, i.e. no historical evidence.

4Those propositions of which there exist no clear injunctions.

(http://reformationofheart.blogspot.com/2012/04/what-is-taqleed-taqlid-falsification-of.html)

The Taba’een visually saw the Sahabah-RAU performing the Salah in manners they learnt from visually seeing the Holy Prophet-SAAW performing the Salah in person, live in front of them. Now how can one expect us to accept the statements and rulings of those random common Muslims (who have no knowledge of Islamic Jurisprudence, who casually come across one Sahih Hadith and base their entire understanding of the complete matter on the basis of that one Hadith) over that of a Taba’ee like Hadhrat Imam Abu Hanifa-RUA?

 With all due respect are all Salafis Muftis? Or masters of Islamic Jurisprudence? or these points are not infact their own learnings and deductions but are the learnings of those whom they consider a valid scholar?

The mentioned four schools are derived from the Sunnah and the Hadith and the practical demonstration of how and where they are applied; First taught directly by the Prophet-SAAW to the Sahabi-RAU and then from the Sahabi-RAU to the Tabaee-RUA. Thus yes their interpretation of the Islamic Law's and rituals of worships will be considered more accurate and authentic as compared to one who got up today studied some Hadith and decided as per his understanding and imagination how they should apply to our practical lives and rituals of worship.

Also in regard to the matter concerning the slight differences in the manner of offering Salah, that is because the Prophet-SAAW at different time periods in his-SAAW used all of the prescribed methods and none of them were specifically asked to be abandoned. Therefore all four are correct. The Fiqhs have been derived bearing different era's of the Prophet-SAAW's life, Imam Abu Hanifa followed the teachings and methods of the last era of the Prophet-SAAW's life (I believe, I'm not 100% sure on this one, I will have to validate the time period), thus the Hanafi Fiqh is derived from the rules of Islamic Jurisprudence according to the Hadith and Sunnah of that time.

“quote from the Holy Quran is from Chapter 4 Surah Nisaa verse 59: O you who believe, obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those entrusted with authority amongst you. Then if there arises any dispute about anything, refer the dispute to Allah and the Messenger, if you truly believe in Allah and the Last Day. That would be the best way and most suitable for final determination.
The Arabic word 'ati' means obey.. In the above aayah, Allah commands the believers to obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those entrusted with authority (olil-amr) amongst you. The above verse is extremely clear whereby Allah says:
'Ati-Allah' meaning 'obey Allah'
'wa ati-ar Rasool' meaning 'obey the Messenger'
'wa olil-amr minkum' meaning 'and those entrusted with authority amongst you.'
Allah does not say 'wa ati olil amr minkum'. The command 'ati' (obey) is not placed independently before the 'olil-amr'. And anyone who knows even basic Arabic grammar will confirm with you that because the word 'ati' (obey) is not placed before 'olil-amr' (those entrusted with authority), then it becomes a 'mashroot' (condition), that you have to obey those entrusted with authority amongst you, ONLY IF THEY OBEY ALLAH AND THE MESSENGER!
Then Allah states in the same aayah, that if there arises a dispute about anything, refer the dispute back to Allah (the Quran) and the Messenger (His Sunnah or Way).... If you truly believe in Allah and the Last Day.”



Before I delve any further, into this discussion, I would like to reply to their above comment. The insinuation of “ONLY IF THEY OBEY ALLAH AND THE MESSENGER!” as per the context of this discussion and their point of view or rather the salafi point of view is, that (na’uzubillah) they did not obey Allah-SWT and the Messenger, and therefore we (the ones who believe in the Taqleed of either of the 4 Aimah-e-Fiqh) are wrong in doing their Taqleed.

Whereas our stance is this that according to the above mentioned ayat, after Allah-SWT and the Prophet-SAAW if we are to do anyone’s Taqleed it is of “those entrusted with authority amongst us” and in the order of precedence they would be as follows Sahabah-RAU, Tabaee-RUA, Taba Tabaee-RUA and the learned Fuqaha (Mufti or masters of Islamic Jurisprudence). 

We take as further reference of this, the famous Hadith (which I will not be surprised if the salafi conveniently declare unauthentic) in which the Prophet-SAAW clearly stated that if only one Sahabi-RAU from the Ghazwa of Badr were to remain alive amongst all other Sahabis-RAU. And a conflict arose over a matter and all the other Sahabis-RAU were unanimously agreeing upon one stance while the Sahabi-RAU of Badr was the only one upholding the conflicting stance. Thereupon it would be incumbent upon them all to do the Taqleed of the Sahabi-RAU of Badr, as his-RAU understanding of the Quran and Sunnah would be considered superior in authenticity and his spiritual connection with the Holy Prophet-SAAW and Love for Allah-SWT would far supersede them all.

Thus when the matter arises of conflict today and we have the clear teachings of a Tabaee. Whom we believe to be an ardent and obedient follower of the Quran and Sunnah, we believe that there is no question regarding whose teachings we should adhere to: a Tabaee’s or some random scholars of today (no matter how qualified they claim to be or how many medals they may have hanging around their necks)?

For us the matter is of no conflict at all, for we shall abide by the Quran and the Sunnah and we believe that the four respective Imams did an immaculate job of doing the Taqleed of the Quran and Sunnah and deriving the Fiqh thereof. May Allah-SWT be pleased with them all, and rightly guide those who are audacious enough to get up centuries later under various pretexts and justifications pointing fingers at them and proclaiming themselves to be more authentic then them (nau’zubillah). Aameen! (The act itself seems nothing but replicating that of Ibn Muljam and the khwarij and this has always been the way of satan, to confuse people with a play of words and then secretly fill their hearts with self-love and the belief of their own superiority of beliefs and ideology etc. Truly it is them, who are the misguided and they know not. They have harboured arrogance in their hearts and blasphemed through their actions and their beliefs such that they do not even know and all their acts are lost. For such only the Judgment Day will be proof enough of who was right and who was wrong, and they might be shocked to find the four blessed Imam-e-Fiqh standing amongst the Muqaraboon in the plain of Arafat while they are standing on the left side wondering what happened.)

May Allah-SWT protect us from such an end and such a fate and allow our hearts to be opened to the truth and cleansed and purified such that every heartbeat of ours, every pulse, every breath is engaged in zikr-Allah. And our hearts are softened with love for Allah-SWT, His-SWT’s beloved Prophet-SAAW, the Prophets-AS, the Khulfa-e-Rashidoon-RAU, the Ahl-e-Bayt-RAU, the Sahabi-RAU, the khair-ul-Quroon-RUA, the Aulia-e-Ikram-RUA, and the rest of the Ummah and all of humanity and all of the creation of Allah-SWT. Aameen!

… Now in an attempt to only provide clarity to those who might get mislead after this debate, if I leave some matters unanswered and unsubstantiated. Therefore, I will make my utmost effort in replying with all earnestness regarding the links and references provided.

the reference salafi comment from the link provided below are given in quotes and italics: whereas my reply is provided in black font without italics.

http://ahnazeer19.jeeran.com/archive/2008/4/519791.html -

“No doubt these imams were very high in their knowledge and deeds,and there were lot of others of similar caliber and even of higher than these imams in rank and caliber. And beside these four scholars, three other scholars were also followed by people similar to "Hanafi" "Maliki" "Shafaee" and "Hanbali" as we find today people only following them. There are some important points to be kept in mind here.”



What is the reference of the comment in bold and who are they to randomly get up today and make claims in regard to which imam supersedes which in rank and caliber, especially when one of the Imam’s under discussion was a Tabaee?

“v Whatever Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) had given us that is intact and not lost, and can not be lost as Allah Himself is its Guardian.”



No doubt about that. Islam is preserved in its most authentic form through the four duties of the Prophet-SAAW being upheld todate by the four respective fields: i) Hufaaz-e-Quran; who learn each and every word (with its perfect pronunciation) and punctuation of the Quran by heart. ii) Sufia-e-ikram; tassawwuf /tazkeeyah for the purification of the heart and the spirit. iii) the Ulema-e-Ikram: the Muhadith and the Mufasir, iv) the Fuqaha; masters of Islamic Jurisprudence who tell us how the Quran and Sunnah apply to our practical lives.

“v Secondly that very religion was in practice in the time of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and after him, even till the time of imams who were born in the 2nd and 3rd century Hijri. Then they compiled their books. It is very clear here that a lot of time of Ummat al Muslima had passed practicing the same religion of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) without following any sect and Prophet said about those people who followed his way (other than any sect). "Khair al-qaroon qarnee thummalazeena yalonahum thummalazeena yalonahum"

Means, the best period is of mine, then that which is adjacent to the period of mine then which is connected to that and so on. All these three spans of time which are said to be the best by Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) had passed before these 4 imams came in this world. Therefore the best people of this umma had gone before the "Hanafi" "Maliki" "Shafaee" and "Hanbali" periods. Whose followers were these best people of umma and to whom they never followed? The period of imams came long after the period of the best followers of Prophet.”



What lies do they go around stating. They should atleast authenticate their nonsense with some reference and not their unqualified opinions.

Nuʿmān ibn Thābit ibn Zūṭā ibn Marzubān[4] (Persian:نعمان بن ثابت بن زوطا بن مرزبان), better known as Imām Abū Ḥanīfah, (699 — 767 CE / 80 — 148 AH) was the founder of the Sunni Hanafi school of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence). Status as a Tabi‘i.
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah was born 67 years after the death of Muhammad, but during the time of the Sahaba of Muhammad, some of whom lived on until Abū Ḥanīfah's youth. Anas bin Malik, Muhammad's personal attendant, died in 93 AH and another companion, Abul Tufail Amir bin Wathilah, died in 100 AH, when Abū Ḥanīfah was 20 years old.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ab%C5%AB_%E1%B8%A4an%C4%ABfa) 

Mālik ibn Anas ibn Mālik ibn Abī 'Āmir al-Asbahī (Arabic مالك بن أنس) (c. 711 – 795) (93 AH – 179 AH ) is known as "Imam Malik, Malik took advantage of the fact that he was contemporary to many of the Tabi‘in to formulate his school of thought, which gave precedence to the acts of the people of Medina over the Hadith if they were in conflict. This was done due to the sizeable amount of scholars, and companions of Muhammad residing in the city where Malik's reputation grew immensely. Imam Malik died at the age of 86 in Medina in 795 and is buried in the famous Jannat ul-Baqi cemetery across from the Masjid al Nabawi.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malik_ibn_Anas)

Abū ʿAbdullāh Muhammad ibn Idrīs al-Shāfi‘ī (Arabic: ابو عبدالله محمد بن إدريس الشافعيّ‎) was a Muslim jurist, who lived from 767 CE to 820 CE. He was active in juridical matters and his teaching eventually led to the Shafi'i school of fiqh (or Madh'hab) named after him. Hence he is often called Imam al-Shafi'i. He is considered the founder of Islamic jurisprudence.[2]:1 al-Shāfi‘ī belonged to the Qurayshi clan Banu Muttalib which was the sister clan of the Banu Hashim to which Muhammad and the Abbasidcaliphs belonged.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_ibn_Idris_ash-Shafi%27i)

Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Hanbal Abu `Abd Allah al-Shaybani (Arabic: احمد بن محمد بن حنبل ابو عبد الله الشيباني‎) was an important Muslim scholarand theologian. He is considered the founder of the Hanbali school of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence). Imam Ahmad is one of the most celebratedSunni theologians, often referred to as "Sheikh ul-Islam"[8] or the "Imam of Ahl al-Sunnah," honorifics given to the most esteemed doctrinal authorities in the Sunni tradition. Imam Ahmad personified the theological views of the early orthodox scholars, including the founders of the other extant schools of Sunni fiqh, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik ibn Anas, and Imam ash-Shafi`i. Born 780 CE/164 AH- died 855 CE/241 AH (aged 77) On Friday, the 12 of Rabi' al-Awwal 241 AH, the legendary Imam breathed his last.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_ibn_Hanbal)

Muhammad Ibn Ismail Ibn Ibrahim Ibn al-Mughirah Ibn Bardizbah al-Bukhari (Persian/Arabic: محمد بن اسماعيل بن ابراهيم بن مغيره بن بردزبه بخاری), popularly known as Bukhari or Imam Bukhari, (196-256AH / 810-870AD), was a Sunni Islamic scholar of Persia.[3][4] He authored the hadith collection named Sahih Bukhari, a collection which Sunni Muslims regard as the most authentic of all hadith compilations.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_al-Bukhari)

provided above with the clear references are the time periods of these respective Imams. Which clearly shows Imam Abu Hanifa to be a respected Tabaee, and Imam Malik I believe was a Taba Tabaeen. Thus they were both from the Khair-ul-Quroon to say the least! I also added the details and reference of Imam Bukhari who is famous for his compilation of Sahi Hadith and as one can see that he and Imam Hanbal had an over lapping era.

“v In so many issues these scholars had used their rational power, as the collection work of Aadeeths (Tradition of our Prophet) could not be done in their period, as now easily available to every Muslim. So these imams had used their rational power and later on it is found Ahadeeths were there on those issues.”



If one were to go over the various links provided above under each Imam’s details, one  would see that they themselves were well versed in Hadith and are used as authentic sources of compiled Hadith. They were the Muhadith, the Mufasir and the Fuqaha of their respective eras. So this nonsense regarding their knowledge of Hadith being less authentic then those of today is preposterous. Our knowledge of our religion especially the Hadith and the Sunnah has survived through their sacrifices and their efforts to begin with. It is unbelievable and unacceptable to anyone with any amount of religious devotion and sense that a Tabaees understanding of the Quran and Sunnah would be less authentic to some scholar of today!

“Now I give you an example. Suppose you are traveling in the night, at the time of Isha' prayer you were not certain of the side of Qibla. You seriously ponder and decided to pray choosing one, same you did in Fajr prayer. After the dawn, you realized that your selection of Qibla side was wrong. Your Isha' and Fajr which you have prayed are correct in absence of any authentic source of correction, so no need to repeat those prayers. But which side would you choose for your Zuhar prayer in the open light of sun? Obviously towards the true Qibla side, as it is now day light to guide you. Your Zuhar prayer would not be accepted by Allah (SWT) if prayed toward the same side you prayed Isha.

Similarly whatever decision imams have taken, as well as their followers did, in the light of their best knowledge, in absence of Hadeeth, was correct. As it is obligatory to decide after proper consultation (Ijtihad) in absence of any Hadeeth on any particular problem, so their act was quite correct. But when all the Ahadeeth have been collected and it is found that some of the decisions were against the Ahadeeth of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), then there is no room to follow imams' decision which contradicts with Hadeeth of Prophet Mohammad.

It is similar to your Zuhar prayer which can not be prayed towards the wrong side of Qibla you had chosen previous night, for your Isha prayer and followed the same for your Fajr prayer, because you are now in daylight.”


I think with the provided references I have already refuted these preposterous claims and twisted beliefs and logic of these salafis. I would like here to provide three links below which clearly provide evidences of the forgeries, tampering and tehreef done by the salafis in their Darussalam printed editions of various (previously authentic and pure works of renowned Ulema-e-Haq).

(http://www.marifah.net/forums/topic/3246-examples-of-salafis-salafi-publishing-houses-tamperingalteringforging-texts/)
(http://www.marifah.net/forums/topic/3246-examples-of-salafis-salafi-publishing-houses-tamperingalteringforging-texts/page__st__15)
(http://www.marifah.net/forums/topic/3246-examples-of-salafis-salafi-publishing-houses-tamperingalteringforging-texts/page__st__30)

You will find this:_“Translated and abridged by a group of scholars under the supervision of Sheikh Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri. Written and complied by Hafiz Ibn Kathir - The Qur'an is the revelation of Allah's Own Words for the guidance of His creatures. Since the Qur'an is the primary source of Islamic teachings, the correct understanding for the Qur'an is necessary for every Muslim. The Tafsir of Ibn Kathir is the most renowned and accepted explanation of the Qur'an in the entire world. In it one finds the best presentation of Ahadith, history, and scholarly commentary. - Dar-us-Salam is proud to present for the first time this abridged version of Tafsir Ibn Kathir, which is free from unauthentic Ahadith.”_ On the link provided : (http://www.meccabooks.com/quran-tafsir-commentary/418-tafsir-ibn-kathir-10-volume-set-9781591440208.html)

And my question would be that who has given any one of them the authority to tamper with the authentic works of Ibn-Kathir? If they actually believed that his Tafseer contained supposed unauthentic Hadith they should take the matter up in Sharaee court with dalail and make their own learned scholars write their own Tafseer rather than confusing other Muslims that their abridged version is infact the authentic Tafsir Ibn-Kathir. Which true to God person needs to do such devious acts as tampering with renowned religious works of others to promote their own wicked concepts and ideologies? Which man of Allah-SWT needs to tamper with the authentic works of renowned scholars and pass them of as the originals in order to prove or spread his own point of view. If one disagrees with the works or some parts thereof, of renowned scholars, he should clearly provide his chain of knowledge and religious background, point of difference and write his own works and spread them under his own name, leaving it to the people if they choose to read or agree with his point of view. This stance of attempting to mislead people into believing that the edited versions of the authentic works are the original works themselves is in fact not the way of a Muslim, let alone a man posing to be a religious authority or scholar or cleric etc.

“About twelve centuries have passed to the period of imams while the period of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) is of more 225 years older. Suppose Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) comes to you alive and asks you to do any deed and tells you the way how to do that, same time imam also comes to you alive and ask you to do the same task in different way, who would be obeyed. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) or imam?

There is no confusion in its answer that imam's way would be rejected and Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) would be followed. Yes, you are ordered to follow and obey the right path of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and not the path of contradiction. While a clear path is in front of us lead by our Prophet, why to accept the wrong one.”

“Neither the prophet is alive now, nor the imams but their paths are in front of us. Since there is no doubt that the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) would be obeyed and imams' contradictory path would be rejected if they come alive, there must not be any hesitation to follow the path of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in the light of his Ahadeeth rest all would be rejected.”



The above is a clear example of the hypothetical nonsense they come up with in order to confuse those with little or even less knowledge. These are weapons of satan to cause a rift and confusion amongst the Ummah. These questions are exactly like the one’s the atheists put forth saying “can GOD create a rock that HE cannot break? And if there would be a rock that HE cannot break than HE would not be GOD and if HE cannot make such a rock, then HE is not GOD because HE cannot make anything and everything!” All this is rubbish and a ploy of satan. The respective Imams followed the Quran and Sunnah immaculately and would continue to do so, if all were to come alive even today. We follow the Quran and Sunnah in doing their respective Taqleed, as was the way taught to us through the times of the Khulfa-e-Rashideen-RAU. All did the Taqleed of the Khaleefa of the time, irrespective of the fact that the rest of the people might also have been Sahabi-RAU.

“Interestingly the same is taught by these four imams in their teachings. None of them said whatever I adopt you have to follow. Imam Shafaee (RA) said " Iza saha al-hadeeth fa hua mazhabee"means "when there is authentic hadeeth available that is my religion". Imam Abu Hanifa said " when you find a Hadeeth contradicting my mandate, throw my decision on wall, means DO NOT FOLLOW MY SAYINGS.”

Please show me an authentic reference whereby I know that Imam Abu Hanifa-RUA said what they claim he has stated about throwing his ruling against the wall... secondly what my understanding of this matter is - that if he did state this it was because of his surety that there is no contradiction between his qiyas and understanding of the Quran and Sunnah, therefore no such issue will arise. The above statement of Imam Abu Hanifa-RUA (if true) only goes to show how sure he was of his qiyas being in absolute adherence to the Quran and Sunnah that he would say "when you find a Hadeeth contradicting my mandate, throw my decision on wall, means DO NOT FOLLOW MY SAYINGS.” Because he knew there was no such issue whatsoever. It is exactly as when the Prophet-SAAW proposed the Mubahala challenge with the Arab Christians (Al-Quran 3:61), that whichever one is wrong may the wrath of Allah-SWT seize him, because he-SAAW was absolutely sure of his-SAAW validity. Just like in the case of the proposed Mubahala challenge by the Prophet-SAAW, whereby he-SAAW wanted to invoke Allah-SWT's curse on the liar/the deviant, because he-SAAW was certain that he-SAAW was absolutely TRUTHFUL!

Hazrat Abu Hurairah (RAU), reported that the Messenger of Allah (SAW) said:
"Allah the Almighty has said: 'Whosoever acts with enmity towards a Wali (of Allah), I will indeed declare war against him. Nothing endears My servant to Me than doing of what I have made obligatory upon him to do. And My servant continues to draw nearer to Me with nawafil prayers so that I shall love him. When I love him, I shall be his hearing with which he shall hear, his sight with which he shall see, his hands with which he shall hold, and his feet with which he shall walk. And if he asks (something) of Me, I shall surely give it to him, and if he takes refuge in Me, I shall certainly grant him it.”

Our belief regarding the Aimah-e-Fiqh. We believe them to be devout followers of the Quran and Sunnah. We believe them to be fully adept in Islamic Jurisprudence thereby their understanding and interpretation would be considered to be correct and authentic one, even if we seemingly came across a hadith that apparently seemed contradictory; however, recognizing the fact that we are not masters in Tafseer-e-Quran or Tafseer-e-Hadith and neither Islamic Jurisprudence. We have no knowledge of when and where and under which circumstances that hadith took place and how it was meant to apply to our practical lives unless first the Prophet-SAAW enacted it or approved it in the actions of the Sahabi-RAU who in turn taught the pristine actions, meanings, and message to the Tabaee-RUA. We would still go by with the understanding or verdict provided by the Aimah-e-Fiqh - especially Imam Abu Hanifa as he himself was a Tabaee. Because we believe that he is immaculate in his understanding and depiction of the Quran and Sunnah. Thus in emulating his Law, we are infact attempting to authentically emulate the Quran and Sunnah and not deviate as per our convenient understanding or lack therefof.

“When imams (RAA) in absence of Hadeeth did "Ijtehad" and instructed that do not follow this path if Hadeeth is available on this subject, REJECT US PLUNTLY. They got free with this expression, in the sight of Allah. Those who systematically follow the way of their imams rigidly are introducing a new thing which was never introduced before in Islamic Sharia.”



just imagine that during the time of the Imam the Hadith was absent and its suddenly present now, yet those who do taqleed are introducing new things into Islamic Sharia! Unbelievable! What can one say to such absurdity?

Also to further explain this point I would like to recommend the reading of the following book “The Status of Imam Abu Haneefah in the Science of Hadith” By Shaykh Abu ‘Umar ‘Irfan Kabeeruddin, on the below provided link. I think it will clarify the misconceptions of many an individual and many an ignoramous who questions Imam Abu Hanifa’s authority in regards to Islamic Jurisprudence and his knowledge of the Ahadith.
http://www.muhammadiyah.info/Books/The%20Status%20of%20Imam%20Abu%20Hanifa%20in%20Hadees.pdf

please read the following:http://reformationofheart.blogspot.com/2012/04/aqeedah-tahawiyyah-aqaidbeliefs-of.html ...


"73. We follow the Sunna of the Prophet-SAAW and the Congregation of the Muslims (Khair-ul-Quroon), and avoid deviation, differences and divisions."


"97. The learned men of the Predecessors, both the first community and those who immediately followed (Khair-ul-Quroon: Sahabah, Tabaee, Taba Tabaeen): the people of virtue, the narrators of hadith, the jurists, and the analysts-- they must only be spoken of in the best way, and anyone who says anything bad about them is not on the right path."


"101. We do not accept as true what soothsayers and fortune-tellers say, nor do we accept the claims of those who affirm anything which goes against the Book, the Sunna, and the consensus of the Muslim Community (Khair-ul-Quroon, Fuqaha, the learned scholars, and Aulia)."

... I think as Muslims we really need to be very clear about our Aqeedah/Aqaid in depth.

May Allah-SWT guide us all to the right path and choose us to become His-SWT Muqariboon, and on the Day of Judgement may we be amongst those who receive salvation without accountability and May He-SWT make us a source of pride and pleasure for the Prophet-SAAW, the Sahabah-RAU, the Khair-ul-Quroon and the Aulia-e-ikraam. Aameen!

I believe in the Quran and Sunnah and Authentic Hadith books (in their original prints), I believe in the authenticity of the four Fiqhs, I believe the pious Predecessors (the Khair-ul-Quroon) as the authority for upholding the most authentic and correct Islam. I believe they were living examples / embodiment of the teachings of the Holy Prophet-SAAW. I take their word over any later scholars any day. I believe in their Taqleed as tantamounting to being the closest to the correct Sunnah. I believe deviations and sects would not have arisen had everyone simply done Taqleed of the four Aimah-e-Fiqh in the most sincere way. The day we stopped doing that and started issuing our own ideas and logic as means of acceptance of Hadith and Sunnah and Fiqh, we fell prey to satan and his attacks and divided into endless sects.

below is a abstract from the post(article)
Taqlîd or Ittibâ in essence, simply refers to the practice of an unqualified, lay person (in a specific field of specialisation) submitting to and accepting the authority of an expert in that field, without demanding proof and justification for every view, opinion or verdict expressed by such an expert authority
will you agree with the above blindly?
how came ?you go to shop and just blindly purchase something without investigating and search ?

I was asked the above and my reply is YES! I would believe it and yes when I go shopping and a box of eatables is stamped with the halaal seal, I just pick it up blindly and eat it without further investigating who and how and when and where and why was this stamped as halaal. The stamp of Imam Abu Hanifa-RUA on a verdict or ruling or teaching is more authentic to me than the present day stamp of “halaal” on the eatables world over.

_"Narrated Aisha
The Prophet (may peace be upon him) kissed one of his wives and went out for saying prayer. He did not perform ablution. (Sunan Abu Dawood Vol. 1 Chapter No. 70 Hadith No. 179)_

Thus this particular teaching of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet. So I reject this specific ruling of Imam Shafi who himself said , “ If I say something, then compare it to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His messenger and if it agrees to them, then accept it and that which goes against them, then reject it and throw my saying against the wall” – This is a saying of ash-Shafi’ee-rahimaullah. See Al-Majmoo’ of an-Nawawee (1/63).

Thus by rejecting this particular teaching of Imam Shafi which contradicts the authentic Hadith, I am practically a better follower of Imam Shafi than those who call themselves ‘Shafi’."

(http://www.muftisays.com/viewarticle.php?article=zntaqleed)

A strange tragedy of today is that whereas we do have the exact chain of transmission of the knowledge and education that the Aimah-e-Fiqah received and how it traces back to the Prophet-SAAW. Today random scholars make absurd claims regarding these Aimah-e-Fiqh and we have no knowledge of the chain of education or transmission of knowledge that they have received and how it traces back to the Prophet-SAAW. Yet we are ever so willing to believe them over these Aimah-e-Fiqh solely because their beliefs and ideologies suit our fancy and give way and room for our own desires and change of Fiqh as per our own likes and preferences. For example: We want to kiss our wives and not bother to do wuzu again, so let’s completely deny the authenticity of the Islamic Jurisprudence of Imam Shafee

The teachings of 4 imams are within the parameters of ahadith! and we just cannot interpret the meaning of a hadees with our own understanding.

Have these people never heard of the fact that the Fiqh of the Prophets-AS is different to those of the masses? The Prophet-SAAW had more than 4 wives at a given time. Then as per the Ayat and the Hadith mentioning that should all Muslim men be allowed more than 4 wives? Please understand that the matter of Islamic Jurisprudence is not a joke. People of great Eemaan and spiritual enlightenment and purification, dedicated their entire lives, sacrificing all their energies, efforts, money etc for achieving perfection of Islamic Jurisprudence. We today, who dare to question their works and are audacious enough to believe that our knowledge is more enduring than theirs, must be certain that we have devolped such an illness and hardness in our hearts that can only be cured through constant zikr-Allah. And May Allah-SWT grant us the taufeeq to do it (Aameen), for otherwise we are cetainly doomed in our arrogance, the stench of which will never allow us to come close to the gardens of Allah-SWT's beloveds.

in whole of the Christian world Pope is the last word, why shouldn't in Islam every one just consult Imam-e-Kabah

Also regarding the matter of doing taqleed of the Imam-e-Kaba. Well the Imam-e-Kaba himself is ghair Muqalid, then how come he would accept that others should do his Taqleed, when he considers even the Taqleed of a Tabaee an unnecessary bidah? Besides that everyone should consult the Ameer-ul-Momineen - for that the revival of Khilafat is required. Which as per the prophecy of Prophet Muhammad-SAAW will now be at the hands of Hazrat Imam Mehdi. Until then we have the Sunnah and we have the four valid and authentic Fiqhs which are good enough for us Muslims. - We do not emulate the Christians and their Pope in any which way.

How abnormal or normal would I be considered if I had a bunch of law books lying in my shelf and even after never having formally studied Law, I began to claim that I was equipped in matters of law because now I had the authentic books????

And just for the record I would like to clarify: Taqleed of the four Imam-e-Fiqh is not obligatory if one is himself well equipped with the formal knowledge of Islamic Jurisprudence, and is a master of the Tafseer and the Hadith (Muffasir-e-Quran and Muhadith), thereupon one may derive one’s own Islamic law and practice it. But he will still not be considered authentic enough that others should do his Taqleed.

And Allah-SWT knows best!


...
In conclusion:
I read a book that a friend shared with me sometime back, called "the devils deception" there was a part in there which I want to mention here ...

page 9:

Any comprehensive study of Shi'ism has to include the Khawaarij, because to a large degree the Shi'ite deviation represents an extreme reaction to the extremes of the Khawaarij. The Khawaarij declared 'Alee(RAU) ibn Abee Taalib to be a Coffer (disbeliever) and the Shi'ite elevated him and some of his descendants to the leval of demi-gods. Meanwhile mainstream Islaam, often referred to as Sunni Islaam, considers him to be neither a coffer nor a demi-god, but one of the greatest companions of the Prophet (SAAW), and the fourth of the Righteous Caliphs (RAU). No serious historical study of the Shee'ah could be considered complete without a look at what it gave birth to, the ultra-deviant sects of the Baatineeyah.

page 26:

The arbitration was subsequently delayed till the month of Ramadaan.During this period, the very validity of men deciding something which lay in Allaah's jurisdiction, was questioned by one of 'Alee's followers by the name of 'Urwah ibn Uthainah39 who said, "Judgement belongs only to Allaah." When 'Alee turned his army away from the plain of Siffeen and entered Kufah, about twelve thousand of his followers did not enter the city with him. Instead, they camped at the town of Harooraa4 0 and raised their voices in unison reciting the slogan, 'Judgement belongs only to Allaah!'This incident marks the first appearance of the Khawaarij as a sectarian movement. They subsequently appointed Shuaib4 1 ibn Rib'ee at-Tameemee as their Ameer for battle, and 'Abdullaah ibn al-Kawwaa al-Yashkaree as their Ameer for Salaah. These Khawaarij were initially very pious and meticulous about the performance of the various acts of worship. *However, their belief that they were more knowledgeable than the Prophet's (SAAW) companion (RAU), 'Alee (RAU) ibn Abee Taalib, became the basis of a terrible sickness which afflicted them and led them astray.

you can read the rest of it yourself, however I shall share you the catastrophic and detrimental result of this blaphemous audaciousness of these cursed men:

page 34:

“Muhammad ibn Sa'd reported from his teachers that three Khaarijites, 'Abdur-Rahmaan ibn Muljam, al-Burak ibn 'Abdillaah and 'Amr ibn Bakr at-Tameemee, gathered in Makkah and pledged to kill 'Alee-RAU,65 Mu'aawiyah and 'Amr ibn al-'Aas respectively and not betray one another.

Ibn Muljam went to Kufah and on the appointed night when 'Alee left his house to lead the early morning prayers (Salaah al-Fajr), he struck him a vicious blow on the forehead which penetrated to his brain. 66

'Alee-RAU cried out to the people not to let him escape and they caught him. When Umm Kulthoom-RAU 67 screamed at him, 'Oh enemy of Allaah, you have killed the Ameer al-Mumineen-RAU wrongly, he replied, 'Cry then.' He then went on to say, 'I poisoned my sword, so if he survives me, I pray that Allaah banishes him and destroys him.' So when 'Alee-RAU died, Ibn Muljam was brought out to be executed and even though Abdullaah ibn Ja'far cut off both of his hands and feet, he did not cry out or speak. Next both of his eyes were pierced by red hot nails, but he still did not cry out. Instead he began to recite Soorah al-'Alaq: “Read in the name of your Lord who created mankind from a leach-like clot” - and he finished it while blood flowed from his eye-sockets. However, when a section of his tongue was burned, he cried out and when asked why he did so at this point, he replied, 'I hate to die in this world with other than Allaah's remembrance on my tongue.'

Looking at the skin on his forehead one could see brownness; the effects of constant prostration in prayer - may Allaah curse him!”
....

my point here is this ... during those times, after the Holy Prophet-SAAW, the pious Sahabi-RAU and that too the Khulfa-e-Rashideen, faced people such who decide to go against them and declare themselves as being more authentic. And in their actions, they were very staunch in their worships and presentation. Yet the arrogance they harboured inside their hearts was such that they were audacious enough to declare their knowledge superior to that of the Sahabi-RAU. Nowadays we do that with the Khair-ul-Quroon. But the fact remains that this act is the one that made Satan become the accursed one. It was his arrogance in his own knowledge that made him undermine the status of Hazrat Adam-AS, to the extent of defying Allah-SWT's Command. The fact of the matter is that the Quran clearly states the reason for satan's defiance to prostrate before Adam-AS, however had his reason been solely that no-one other than Allah-SWT should be prostrated before, even then he would have been the accursed one, since no one has the right to pick and choose the commands of Allah-SWT and decide as per his own whim and will how and where they apply! When Allah-SWT commands us to do something, we look at the Prophet-SAAW (and his-SAAW's Companions-RAU and their Companions-RUA and their Companions-RUA) as to how and where that  Command is applied and we comply and adhere to it as immaculately as we can, with utmost sincerity in our hearts.

Allah-SWT knows best ... and may He-SWT rightly guide us, even if we have the slightest sincerity towards Allah-SWT, the Prophet-SAAW, the Sahaba-RAU, the Khulfa-e-Rashideen-RUA and Islam, in our hearts. Aameen (for Islam would have never survived in its pure and pristine form if it were not for the efforts, sacrifices and dedication of the khair-ul-Quroon) May Allah-SWT bless them all. Aameen

I have more or less read the claims made by these salafis on the provided links. They are preposterous to say the least and exceptionally audacious at most. I have found similarity in their behavior, debates and their beliefs with those of Jews, Khwarij and the Shi’ites. The Jews disregarded and undermined the Prophet-AS. The Khwarij and Shi’ites did the same with the Sahaba-RAU, the Salafi’s do the same with the Khair-ul-Quroon-RUA and the pious predecesors. All of them claim to be more authentic and more ardent followers of Allah-SWT and uphold themselves as the chosen authentic true beloveds of Allah-SWT. I find in my dealing over the years with them, the same two-faced bigotry.

I find them focusing mainly on their outward following and practices of their religions and that too more so publically. I find that privately or in their homes they live dual lives, with their main focus being on creating public impressions of authenticity. For example one would not find TV’s in their lounge, but one would find them hidden away in their bedrooms. I find many of them running dual internet accounts on public platforms, either a fake one for their un-Islamic activities or a fake one for preaching. I have found them to lie at their convenience, even in matters pertaining to deen just to uphold their arguments. They make light to undermining the khair-ul-Quroon, yet when anyone of the scholars they accept as authentic is undermined, they would cut throat. What is OK for them, is not OK for others. I find them judgmental and hardened of heart. They are quick to point fingers at others and engage in long extensive arguments and almost invariably redundantly repeating over and over again the same lines they have been brain washed / indoctrinated with. They are quick to assume everyone else is bound for hell whereas they are the only ones worthy of receiving Allah-SWT’s mercy. I find in their beliefs, behaviour and arguments like those of the Qadiyani's or any of these similar people or groups who wish to distort the teachings and interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah to propagate their own heretic beliefs for vested interests. May Allah-SWT protect us from these ever forming new fitnas. Aameen!

The matter of these salafis is similar to:
'A serious doubt of pharmacists' - if a poison has an expiry date, would it become more poisonous or less?

I would like to highlight and anyone can go and look this up, the salafis tamper with religious texts and books in matters of Tassawuff and Taqleed. The two things which, if one removes, there is no way left to keep a Muslim safe from the satanic whispering of self-love, arrogance and conceit!


Surah Az-Zumar (39:22-23)
Is one whose breast Allah has opened [wide with willingness] to Islam, so that he is illumined by a light [that flows] from his Sustainer [follows a Light from Allah], [no better than or be likened to the blind and deaf of heart, one hardened of heart]? Woe to those whose hearts are hardened against the [dhikr] remembrance of Allah. They are manifestly wandering [in error]! Allah bestows [Light, inspiration, revelation] from on high the best of all teachings [manifest] in the shape of a divine writ [the Quran] fully consistent within itself, repeating each statement [of the truth] in manifold forms [a divine writ] whereat shiver [tremble, vibrate] the skins of all, who stand in awe of their Sustainer: Then their skins and their hearts do soften with the remembrance [dhikr] of Allah. Such is Allah’s guidance: HE guides therewith him that wills [to be guided] whereas he whom Allah lets go astray can never find any guide.

I know the teachings of the Salafis and their redundant arguments,  all I can say is, that May Allah-SWT protect all earnest and sincere Muslims from falling victim to them and falling into their trap. Aameen! If there is an iota of truth and khuloos in us may Allah-SWT guide us to the true and authentic Islam and bless us with the taufeeq to engage in constant zikr-Allah. Aameen!

“Your (Muhammad's s.a.w) duty is only to convey (the Message) ..." [3:20]

" The Messenger's (Muhammad's s.a.w) duty is nothing but to convey ..." [5:99]

"... Your (Muhammad's s.a.w) duty is nothing but to convey (the Message) ..." [42:48]

I have done my duty ... you may believe what you wish.

JazakAllah Khair

What is Taqleed? - Taqlid & the falsification of Islamic History

[21:7]

Ask the people of Remembrance if you know not.

What is Taqleed?

Taqlid or Ittiba' is Wajib (compulsory) upon Muslims:

Taqlid or Ittiba' is Wâjib (compulsory) upon Muslims. Yet there are many Muslims in the present age who have hardly heard of the words Taqlid or Ittiba'. Others who may have heard about it, do not fully comprehend its meaning. This has led to people even rejecting Taqlid – thereby rejecting a Wâjib. As a general rule, man is suspicious and afraid of that which he does not know. Therefore a proper understanding of the issue of Taqlîd or Ittibâ would dispel the ignorance surrounding it, Inshâ Allah.

Taqlid is a part of everyday life:

Taqlîd or Ittibâ in essence, simply refers to the practice of an unqualified, lay person (in a specific field of specialisation) submitting to and accepting the authority of an expert in that field, without demanding proof and justification for every view, opinion or verdict expressed by such an expert authority. This is a natural state of human existence, practised by millions of people worldwide in every facet of life. The simplest and most tangible example of Taqlîd or Ittibâ is that of a child learning his basic alphabets at school. Every child learning his alphabets is unconsciously practising Taqlîd. A learner driver taking instructions from a driving instructor is practising Taqlîd. People going to a specialist doctor for medical treatment and following his instructions is another glaring example of Taqlîd or Ittibâ. A lay person soliciting a legal opinion from an advocate or following the advice of a tax consultant is another common case of Taqlîd. A client at an engineering firm, asking for the engineer's advice on complex engineering calculations is yet another instance of Taqlîd or Ittibâ in action. The millions of 'facts' in the myriad of sciences such as astronomy, archaeology, etc. are all distinct examples of Taqlîd or Ittibâ Who ever questions the 'fact' or asks for proof that the sun is really 93 million miles away from the earth! It is taken for granted that this is the findings of the 'experts' in these fields and everyone simply accepts it as such. School teachers teach these to their pupils as 'gospel truth' and children learn and memorise these 'facts' with the hope of succeeding in their exams. There are countless such examples of Taqlîd or Ittibâ in everyday existence. It is quite clear from the above, that Taqlîd or Ittibâ is a natural way of life, and is not specific to Islam or Islamic Fiqh alone.

Taqlid is the easy option for ordinary people:

In the context of Islamic Fiqh or Law, Taqlîd or Ittibâ simply refers to accepting and following the verdicts of expert scholars of Islamic Fiqh in their exposition and interpretation of Islamic Law, without demanding from them an in-depth explanation of the intricate processes required in arriving at such a verdict, called Ijtihad. It simply means that ordinary folk do not have to do Ijtihâd, i.e. the intricate and complicated procedures involved in deriving Islamic rulings that scholars exercise when issuing a Fatwâ (legal verdict). The duty of ordinary people is to trustingly accept the authority of the learned scholars in this matter and act upon their verdicts.

In this sense, Taqlîd is a great blessing for common people, for it is beyond their capacity to understand the extremely complex and complicated mechanics of Ijtihâd. The ability to do Ijtihâd requires many long years of study and erudition and a great deal of exertion (Ijtihâd means to exert one self) in acquiring a mastery of various Islamic sciences, among other varying requirements.

Misunderstandings regarding Taqlid:

Recently, misunderstandings have arisen regarding the issue of Taqlîd. It has become a theme of major debate in many parts of the world among Muslims. This debate has naturally resulted in arguments being promulgated by both the protagonists and the antagonists of Taqlîd.

The best way of removing such misunderstanding is to view the original sources of Islam – the Qurân and Hadîth and the teachings of the learned elders of Islam on this subject. After a study of this subject, the correct interpretation and understanding of Taqlîd and Ittibâ would emerge. This would lead to a better understanding and analysis of the arguments and counter-arguments of protagonists and antagonists. (Elsewhere in this issue, check the article on Taqlîd and Ittibâ in the light of Qur'an and Hadith)

Shar'ee role of Taqleed:

The essence of guidance is derived from the Holy Qurãn - "Hudan li al-Nas" ("A Guidance for Mankind). But this guidance and its laws are based on fundamental principles, the details of which have been entrusted to and consigned by the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) in order to explain them to mankind.

For example, the Holy Qurãn says: "Aqimus-Salaat" ("establish prayer"). It does not define the method as to how the prayer should be established; how the various postures should be performed; the mode of recitation of Surah, etc. The complete method of prayer i.e. "Salaat" is explained by the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam).

"Wa 'Atuz-Zakat" ("And give charity"). Now the Zakaat amounts payable on gold, silver, cattle, land, produce, etc. are only known through the Ahadith and there is no mention of it in the Holy Qurãn.

"Wa Lillahi 'ala an-Nas Hij Al-baiti" ("It is obligatory on people to perform the Hajj of the House of Allah.) Here again, the method of Tawaf, the number of circumambulations, the details regarding Arafat, Mina, Muzdalifah, the stoning at the Jimar, etc. have all been explained by the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam).

Thus it becomes imperative to understand the Holy Qurãn in the light of the Ahadith even for major obligatory acts like Salaat, Zakat and Hajj without which it is impossible to act and understand the commands of the Holy Qurãn. The believers are commanded to attain guidance from the Holy Qurãn in accordance with the details explained by the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam). Therefore Allah specifies: "Whosoever obeys the Messenger has indeed obeyed Allah." This obedience to the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) would in reality be obedience to Allah Himself.

A direction from the Hadith informs us:

"Also perform your prayer just as you see me perform my prayer." (Bukhari Vol. 1, p. 1076)

It is not said: "Perform your prayer in the manner you may infer from the Holy Qurãn."

Hadith is divided into different categories:-

The sayings of the Holy prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam),

The acts and doings of the Holy prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam),

The sayings, acts and doings of others, approved by the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam).

All these categories of Ahadith give guidance to the Umma.

Qiyas:

When the Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) was asked a question he answered and also counter-questioned the questioner, on a similar (analogical) matter, the answer of which was known to him. On the correct reply being given by the questioner, the Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) would say: "The question you had asked is in the same category as this answer of yours."

EXAMPLE: A lady once asked: "Hajj was obligatory on my mother but she passed away. Can I perform it on her behalf?" The Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) replied: "Yes, it would be accepted on her behalf. Tell me, if your mother had a debt would you pay it." She replied in the affirmative. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said: "Fulfill what is on her behalf. Certainly, the duty and right of Allah would be more acceptable." This kind of reasoning is called Qiyas, Ijtihaad, or Istimbat in Shari'a.

These are only used in Shari'a when the Qurãnic or Traditional directives are not specifically spelt out. The Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) sent Hadrat Mu'adh ibn Jabal (Radhiyallaahu Ánhu) as a Governor and Qaadhi to Yemen. The Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) gave to Hadrat Mu'adh many instructions and advices even while he held the reins and led the horse with Hadrat Mu'adh mounted on it. The Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) also asked: "By which law would you dispense justice." He replied: "By the Law of the Holy Qurãn."

"And if you do not find it (i.e. what you seek) in the Holy Qurãn."

He replied: "By the Prophetic Traditions."

"And if you do not find it in there also, then!"

He replied: "Then I would make Ijtihad." The Holy Prophet, (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) expressed his happiness with his reply and fully endorsed and supported his stand and thanked Allah for it. (Abu Daawud Vol 2. p. 149)

When after such an Ijtihad all the scholars agree to its conclusion, it is termed "Ijma", for it must be understood that Qiyas or Ijtihad does not prove an order or command; it only makes it evident and known. It was hidden in the Holy Qurãn or the Ahadith; the Mujtahid, by Dalalatan, 'Isharatan or Iqtdha'an, brought it in the open for the generality of people.

The person who does not have the power of Ijtihad is bound and compelled to follow a Mujtahid and this act of following a Mujtahid is termed Taqlid. The Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) sent Hadrat Mu'adh ibn Jabal as Qadi so that people could act upon his instructions and guidance derived from the Holy Qurãn, the Ahadith and his Ijtihad. To accept all three would in reality be obedience to Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) as mentioned in Mishkãt Sharif (p. 310). Hadhrat Abu Hurayrah (Radhiyallaahu Ánhu) reported that the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said, "Who has obeyed me, has obeyed Allah and who was disobedient to me has been disobedient to Allah and who obeyed the Amir was obedient to me and who was disobedient to the Amir has been disobedient to me."

Precepts, Propositions & their kinds:

Masa'il or precepts are of four kinds:-

1Clear instructions from the Holy Qurãn and Ahadith. No Qiyas is allowed nor Taqlid permissible. The order is to practice on the clear injunction.

2In such propositions where there are two injunctions, one earlier, and one later, and through historical evidence both renown, then the earlier proposition is abrogated (Mansukh), whilst the latter command is ordered. Here too Qiyas and Taqlid ~ not permitted.

3Those propositions that have two clear injunctions but it is not known which is earlier and which later, i.e. no historical evidence.

4Those propositions of which there exist no clear injunctions.

Propositions 1 (and 2) are clear. the last two (Propositions 3 and 4) need explanations. Since 3 and 4 are not clear, what must a person do? If he does not practice upon them, he is yet not allowed to go free. The Qurãnic verses state: "Is man under the notion that he will be left free?"'

"Do you think that you have been created in vain?" It is not so, you have to obey Allah's command every second. Now how are we going to obey when it is not known, which is abrogated and which is not. In the fourth kind of proposition when one has no knowledge what is he going to practice on? Allah says: "Do not practice on anything without knowledge:"

Thus the need of Qiyas and Ijtihad. In the third kind of proposition the need is to verify the clear injunction and in the fourth kind it is to find a clear order and command. This is a known fact that everybody does not have the ability or power to make Ijtihad and this verse also makes it clear.

Everybody makes claims of giving opinions but only that ruling is accepted which is in accordance with Shar'iah and of a Mujtahid. The verdict of a Muqallid will not be accepted. The Mujtahid makes Ijtihad while the Muqallid makes Taqlid. Even if the Mujtahid makes a mistake he is rewarded as mentioned in Bukhari, Vol. 1 p. I1092.

Here exists a doubt that there were many Mujtahids among the Sahaaba (Radhiyallaahu Ánhum), the Tabi'in and Tabi' Tibi'n; But only the 'I'ima 'Arba' i.e. Imaam Abu Hanifah, Imam Maalik, Imam Shaafi'i and Imam Ahmad (Rahmatullaahi Álayhim) are followed and Taqlid made of them. What Is wrong in following the Sahaaba (Radhiyallaahu Ánhum) whose virtues have been abundantly mentioned in the Holy Qurãn and the Ahadith?

There is no doubt that the Sahaaba (Radhiyallaahu Ánhum) have a far greater status and position than the I'ima Arba'a does not make Taqlid of any one of the I'ima Arba' ever thinking them to be greater than the Sahaaba but its simple reason is that for Taqlid it is necessary to know those injunctions in which Taqlid has to be made. The detailed knowledge which can be found in every section and chapter from Kitaab- at-Taharat to Kitab al-Fara'idh, whether it concerns acts of worship, or social and cultural aspects, in every department of knowledge, these were the first and only 'I'ima that gathered them all in every detail. They were schools of knowledge in their own right that codified knowledge in every field. We do not find such codification either of the Sahaaba or other Tabi'in. The only choice we have is to follow them. It must also be borne in mind that Allah had bestowed on them the perfection of knowledge of the Holy Qurãn and the Ahadith. It is said by Shah Waliullah (Rahmatullaahu Álayhi) in the commentary of Muwatta' Imaam Malik, p.6 that these four Imaams together have encompassed the entire knowledge of the Holy Qurãn and Ahaadith to such a degree that not a single Hadith which was reported by the Sahaaba was omitted by them.

Clarification is further required regarding another doubt in most minds: What is the necessity of making Taqlid of only one Imaam? One should be allowed to follow any of the four Imaams in the different Masa'il as was the method in the time of the Sahaaba and Tabi'in. Mazhab was not confined to a single Imam. Why must such concessions not be allowed in our times?

In the time of the Sahaaba, which was the best of times, there was no ulterior motives regarding religious questions. A question was asked to know the correct method and to practice on it. It was not asked for one's convenience as in later times. For example, A person with Wudhu touched his wife which according to the Shafi Mazhab nullifies Wudhu: Now when he is told to make Wudhu, he replies: "I make Taqlid of Imaam Abu Hanifah and it is not a breaker of Wudhu according to his Mazhab, therefore my Salaat will be valid."

Now this person vomits, which according to Hanafi Mazhab, breaks Wudhu. He is now told to make Wudhu. He replies: 'I make Taqlid of Imam Shafi'i; it is not a nullifier of Wudhu, therefore my Salaat is valid'. If this person (who has on the one hand, touched his spouse, and on the other hand, vomited) has to perform his Salaat with such a Wudhu, it would neither be correct by Imaam Abu Hanifah nor by Imam Shafi'i. In terminology this is known as Talfiq which is agreed upon unanimously to be void and not permitted. This is not Taqlid but following one's passions and desires for one's personal convenience which lead one astray. The necessity of following a Mazhab, Imam or Mujtahid is that one would not fall into the temptations of following one's own desires. The Holy Qurãn states:

'And do not follow desires. You would be led astray from the path of Allah." Thus the need of following only one Imam.

For centuries we have heard of great scholars, jurists, 'Ulama' and Auliya who had the treasures of knowledge, who were in their personal capacities libraries with encyclopedic knowledge. Their piety constituted perfect examples in emulation of the Sahaaba. Their entire life was spent in accordance with the Sunnah of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam). They also followed the 'I'ima Arba'' and it would not be incorrect to say that it was because of this Taqlid that they attained the heights of perfection.

Islamic Jurisprudence (Fiqh) is confined to the four schools. Those that do not confirm to any one of them are called Ahle Hadith or Ghair Muqallid.

.......

Taqlid & the falsification of Islamic History

Shaykh (Mufti) Mohammed Sajaad (HA)

Taqlid means following the legal opinions of a scholar without gaining knowledge of the detailed evidences for those opinions. A person is compelled to do this as he is not able to encompass the evidences to assert his own view on any particular detailed issue related to the Deen. This reliance upon a group of highly trained individuals is seen in every aspect of human life from when we wish to build an extension to our homes to when we wish to cure ourselves; we unquestioningly defer to the experts. The sick person never tries to diagnose himself, let alone be bold enough to prescribe using his own knowledge, the course of medicine he needs to take. Rather he sits humbly and accepts everything his doctor tells him and prescribes him. It would seem, Islam alone has been singled out as being that one thing that any person not only may exercise his mental abilities (however deficient they are) to determine its detailed teachings, but moreover it is said to be his duty.

It is an undisputed fact that Taqlid existed from the very beginning of Islam, as that is the normative procedure for learning. The Companions and Successors (Tabieen) of other Companions were compelled to do Taqlid of their seniors, those of the Companions and Successors who were not scholars, simply took the Deen from those who were scholars. Their basis for their doing Taqlid, apart from the obvious reason mentioned above, was the evidences that made it an obligation for them. Allah (SWT) said in the Holy Qur'an:

Ask the people of Remembrance if you know not (Sura al-Anbiya:7)

Elsewhere in the Holy Qur'an Allah (SWT) commanded the believers thus:

Obey Allah, the Messenger and those authorities amongst you.

Ibn Abbas (R.A.), Mujahid, and many authorities in Tafsir (Exegesis of the Holy Qur'an) stated "Those authorities amongst you" are the Islamic Jurists, see Tafsir Tabari and Al-Tafsir al-Kabir of Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi.

Amongst the many hadith that prove Taqlid is a hadith recorded in Sunnan Abu Daud, in which the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "Verily the cure to not knowing is asking."

Taqlid in the age of the Sahabah

There are many examples in the hadith books where we find the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings upon him) doing Taqlid of other more learned Companions.

1.Abu Ayub al-Ansari (R.A.) was once on his way to Hajj and lost his camels he brought to be sacrificed (and by which a person comes out of Ihram). On the day of sacrifice he came to Umar and asked him what to do? Umar (R.A.) told him to do as those who perform Umrah do (that is to shave or cut their hair), and you will be out of Ihram. Then in the next year do Hajj and make the sacrifice. Note, here neither did Abu Ayub (R.A.) ask for proof nor was it given, a clear example of Taqlid (Muwatta Imam Malik).

2.Once Umar (R.A.) saw Talha (R.A.) wearing a coloured piece of cloth while he was in the state of Ihram (So long as the cloth is not scented such coloured sheets would be permitted for Ihram). Umar (R.A.) asked him the reason for wearing such sheets. Talha (R.A.) replied that the cloth was from a material which had not been scented. Umar (R.A.) said: "You are people who are followed by others. If an unknowing person saw this cloth, he would think Talha wore this cloth in Ihram (thus he would assume scented cloth is permitted). Refrain from using coloured sheets." (Muwatta)

This shows, that there is nothing essentially wrong with following scholars without evidence, rather it was always one of the ways the masses learnt their Deen as is shown by Umar's (R.A.) statement.

3.One of the \most obvious examples of Taqlid was that of when the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings upon him) sent Muadh Ibn Jabal (R.A.) to Yemen as a teacher. Whilst in Yemen the people, took exclusively what he taught them as Deen, in old and new issues, which is but Taqlid. For example, he was asked concerning a man who had been survived by daughter and a sister only, how would his inheritance be distributed amongst them. He ruled that they should receive half each and he did this as a Mufti and without mentioning the proof for his view to the people for his opinion. (Sahih al-Bukhari).

4.We also find a clear example of Sahabah doing Taqlid Shakhsi (specific Taqlid). It is narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari from Ikrimah (R.A.) that the people of Medina asked Ibn Abbas (R.A.) concerning a woman who did Tawaf and then experienced her menstrual cycle (i.e. despite having Tawaf al-Wida upon her, is she permitted to return home or should she wait till her period passes?). Ibn Abbas (R.A.) replied: "She may return." The people said: "We will not accept your opinion over the opinion of Zayd (Ibn Thabit)." (Sahih al-Bukhari).

Two things become abundantly clear from this incident. The first is that the Medinans did Specific Taqlid (Taqlid Shakhsi) of Zayd Ibn Thabit (R.A.), and consequently they would not accept the opinions of another scholar from the Sahabah. Secondly, Ibn Abbas (R.A.) himself never blamed them for following his opinions exclusively.

It would be fair to say that up to the second century, two kinds of Taqlid were common in the Ummah, the non-specific kind (Taqlid ghayr Shakhsi) and specific Taqlid (Taqlid Shakhsi). Most muslims, when wanting to know Islam's ruling on an issue, would simply go to any scholar in the community who they considered an authority. But examples can be found, such as those mentioned above, where Muslims also did specific Taqlid of a particular Companion or Successor exclusively. Thus we learn from this that there is nothing essentially blameworthy with someone being a Hanafi or Maliki, for there were people who were Masudis (followers of the opinions of Ibn Masud), Muadhis, Abbasis, etc. only they did not go by those names.

One of the factors in the consolidation of Taqlid Shakhsi and the phasing out of the other kind of Taqlid was the emergence of four scholars who gained such recognition for their learning and piety that students and even other scholars flocked around them. All four were blessed with long lives such that they could encompass each and every chapter of legal rulings and importantly were undisputed Mujtahids. A mujtahid is a master scholar who has reached the highest and most difficult level of Ijtihad (Independent juridical reasoning). There are many kinds of lesser scholars; however the one who is permitted to exercise his Ijtihad in elaborating rulings is one who has spent many years acquiring the skills, primary religious sciences and auxiliary sciences enabling him to soundly interpret the Holy Texts and thus deserving of being considered an authority in the important matters of the Deen. Briefly, this entails Deep knowledge of the Arabic language; grammar, semantics and rhetoric.

Intimate knowledge of the Holy Qur'an, its well established Tafsir, verses that are abrogated and the occasions of revelation. Knowledge of the Hadith; having obtained the narrations from their narrators, to also know the state of the chain and its narrators. In this regard it was the view of Imam Ahmad that a person cannot be considered a Mujtahid until he has not memorised three hundred thousand hadith.

The students of these four Imams further elaborated their legal opinions, their principles (the tools of interpretation), and most importantly preserved them and then transmitted the scholar's school (Madhab) to the next generation. These four scholars were:

Imam Abu Hanifa (R.A.) - 80-150 A.H.

Imam Malik Ibn Anas (R.A.) - 93-179 A.H.

Imam Muhammad Ibn Idris al-Shafi (R.A.) - 150-204 A.H.

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (R.A.) - 164-241 A.H.

If we take a snapshot of the Ummah by the end of the second century, we see Taqlid was of other than the above four sunni scholars and these four Imams. With time, the majority of people ended up doing Taqlid of these four schools. By virtue of them being fully formed, propagated, and codified, more and more scholars received training in these codified school. The Ummah's convergence upon the acceptance of these four schools was coincidental, and not divinely revealed. Having said this, the mercy that lay in the converging on the four for the Ummah is not hidden, and hence it was seen as divine intervention to ensure the preservation of the Deen, as Allah (SWT) had promised:

Indeed We who have revealed the Remembrance and it is for Us to preserve it (sura Al-Hijr:9)

This is not to say there have only ever been four scholars in the Ummah who had reached the high rank of Ijtihad. There were several others, but their schools did not receive that same kind of attention that these four Imams received, thus it is not actually possible to do Taqlid of them. They may have had a thriving circle of students once, but they, for whatever reason, did not fully document, codify or transmit the school. One may find some of their legal opinions have been persevered, but that is not sufficient to consider that school fit for Taqlid. Just to give one glaring danger inherent in permitting this, leaving aside the fact there are but a handful of their legal opinions that have come down to us, it is not known if that particular opinion was the final opinion of that scholar, or did he change his view in later life. For that would require commentaries written by his students, as well as a strong transmission of all his opinions. This problem is carefully taken care of in the four established schools.

Thus the four schools became to represent de facto Sunni Islam. Anyone who wished to seriously study Islamic law, as a beginner, was compelled, by virtue of the schools' undisputed academic prowess and chapter by chapter preservation, to align themselves with one of them.

It is for this reason that we have another inexplicable fact that non-Muqallids (those who deny Taqlid and consider it unlawful) try to avoid. That is the fact that the vast majority of sunni scholastic geniuses followed one of the four schools. For example ,the following is just a selection of unquestionable authorities in our Deen who were known to have adhered to one Madhab from the four:

Imam Abu Isa al-Tirmidhi (Shafi)

Imam Abu Jafar al-Tahavi (Hanafi)

Imam Fakr al-Din al-Razi (Shafi)

Imam Ibn abd al-Bar (Maliki)

Imam Abu Zakariyya al-Nawawi (Shafi)

Imam Abu Bakr Jassas (Hanafi)

Imam Ibn al-Hummam (Hanafi)

Imam Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi (Maliki)

Imam Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani (Shafi)

Imam Abu al-Abbas al-Qurtubi (Maliki)

Imam Badr al-Din al-Ayni (Hanafi)

Imam Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (Shafi)

Certainly, there is a difference in the way the scholar follows (does Taqlid) of a school and how others do it. A true well-grounded scholar in the Islamic sciences can also and did look at the evidences and if he believed that other than what the school teaches was the true position then he would leave the school on that issue. For the masses however, this is beyond their capabilities usually and nor is it required of each believer to become an Alim or Mujtahid as that would have demanded for everyone to leave devotion to other important academic areas such as medicine, engineering etc, seeking a livelihood, but our merciful divine Shariah inherently does not demand of us things that are impossible, as Allah (SWT) says:

Allah does not burden a person with more than he can bear (sura Al-Baqara:286)

Hence their duty is to simply follow true scholars as ordered in the verse in Sura Al-Anbiya.

It is interesting to note that even though the likes of the scholars mentioned above did have a level of ijtihad, in their views they themselves did not feel themselves able to dispense with Taqlid of one of the four Imams they followed. The hadith collection Al-Jami' of Imam Tirmidhi is a testament to this. If a person, acquainted with the shafi school, goes through this book he will see that the hadith are brought in support of this school, as is plain to see from the chapter headings and Imam Tirmidhi's commentary.

In the second century there was a kind of consensus of the scholars that it was the interest of the Deen that for the layman, Taqlid be only done of the four schools. Having said this, a person was not restricted in who he asked for legal opinions from the four codified schools. This kind of non-specific Taqlid is known as "Taqlid ghayr Shaksi." Because of the general greater religiosity in those first generations a person would, even though he was not restricted by the scholars in whose Taqlid he did, seek out the most pious scholar and even if he ever gained more than one opinion, he would incline to side of precaution in the opinion he chose, and the threat of following desires was little.

Taqlid ghayr Shakhsi to Taqlid Shakhsi

The further we get away in time from the best of generations, in particular after the second century, as impiety and following desires become more common, the scholars become more unequivocal of the obligatoriness of following only one school for every Muslim. The historical facts make this abundantly clear and anyone who contends otherwise is frankly out of touch with the reality. He is neither aware of the countless illustrious jurists who have stated this view, he seems oblivious of the state of the people of that time let alone his own time. Thus the fact is that by the end of the second century, and also the end of the best of generations, there was shift in the attitude of the masses and personal desires started becoming prominent in the opinions being followed. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) himself had forewarned of this when he said, "then falsehood (kadhib) would become widespread." It was then the scholars unanimously agreed, that no longer will people be able to have the option to hand pick opinions, rather they must follow one school only whichever that maybe from the four. Imam Shah Waliullah, states:

After the second century adherence to specific schools appeared amongst the Muslims.... And this was the obligation at that time see Al-Insaf fi Bayan Asbab al-Ikhtilaf, p.70.

Shaikh Wahbah al-Zuhaili in Al-Fiqh al-Islami wa adillatuh, vol.1 p.94, however has stated that the position of the majority of scholars was that only Taqlid of any scholar is wajib (Taqlid ghayr Shakhsi), and only a few scholars held Taqlid to be wajib of a specific school (Taqlid Shakhsi).

This claim however not only conflicts with the patent need of the Deen and Ummah that lye in making Taqlid Shakhsi Wajib, it is also not corroborated by the facts, the most incontrovertible of which is the great number of jurists who stated this very view as we will be recorded below. On the other hand, Shaikh Wahbah supported his view by citing only two or three authors, which it is hard to see how constitute a majority?

To be sure the claim is an error, the argument presented by Shaikh Wahbah, that underlies this view, we see is also clearly flawed. The reasoning he gives for why specific Taqlid (Taqlid Shakhsi) cannot be wajib, in his own words is:

Allah only obligated following the scholars without specification of one and not another, He said: "Ask the people of Remembrance if you do not know" (Sura Anbiya:7) (Op.Cit).

The reality however is that in this verse Allah (SWT) made generic Taqlid obligatory or Taqlid in general (Jins of Taqlid or Mutlaq Taqlid). Now Taqlid in this general sense has under it two, call them, constituents or kinds or sub-categories (Anwa' or Afrad):

Taqlid ghayr Shakhsi (non-specific Taqlid of any scholar)

Taqlid Shakhsi (specific Taqlid of a particular scholar)

Thus it becomes apparent that Taqlid itself is an obligation (wajib), with all the kinds of Taqlid that come under it logically taking that ruling, as they are but kinds of the same thing. Though indeed there is a choice, in acting upon the Deen, which of the two kinds one practices.

Just as if a mother ordered her son to buy her "fruit," under this general term (Mutlaq) would come many kinds of fruits, for example apple, orange, pear etc. It would be true to say that the obligation applied to all these fruits, that there is a choice in which fruit he chooses is another issue. What matters is that he chooses any fruit, and whichever fruit the son chooses he'll have fulfilled his duty. But what cannot be said is that to buy apples on the one hand is obligatory, but as for oranges, that is just permissible (and to say unlawful is just absurd). To take another example, this time from the Deen, if someone broke an oath he would have to give the atonement (Kafaarah). The atonement for breaking an oath is Fard (Obligatory), however under this generic/general term or Mutlaq are three constituents/kinds (afrad): (1) Feeding the poor, (2) Clothing the poor, (3) Freeing a slave. Each one will take the ruling of the atonement, namely Fard, and what is Mubah or permissible is the choosing one any one of these three.

Thus the upshot of this discussion is that the verse in Sura Anbiya actually made both kinds of Taqlid wajib, and by an individual doing either one of the two, he would have fulfilled the obligation upon him. It was for this reason we find examples of both kinds of Taqlid being practised by the first generations as recorded above. As for why the scholars prohibited the option of Taqlid Ghayr Shakhsi, it was due to a change in the condition of the people, the juristic basis for which we will speak more on later.

The Majority of Ulema on Taqlid Shakhsi

In this section of the essay my primary concern was to bring such quotes from undisputed experts of the Deen showing Taqlid Shakhsi as an obligation had become the common view amongst scholars throughout most of Islamic History. Having said this, I have also taken the opportunity to add some other quotations, not specifically on Taqlid Shakhsi, in order to refute two other views being promoted today, which though marginal, their fallacy and heretical nature require exposing. The first view is that Taqlid, whatever kind it is, is unlawful and that rather it is the duty of every Muslim to derive for himself all the detailed rulings from the Holy Qur'an and Sunna. This view is held by groups known as the "Ahle-hadith" or "Salafis." One of the reasons, they succeed in getting people to believe such baseless and outlandish claims is they falsely give the impression this is also the view of most of the great Islamic scholars in the past. The actual position of the classical scholars of Islam, as proven by the quotes below, however is very different to this. Furthermore, it is quite startling that a scholar who they themselves rely upon greatly, namely the late Shaikh Salih bin Uthaymin, has stated unequivocally the non-scholar must do Taqlid of the scholars in his Al-Usul min 'ilm al-Usul. In his recorded lectures of the same text he says that for the average Muslim to try to delve into the Holy Qur'an and Sunna in order to deduct rulings is like a person who has not learnt swimming to swim in a sea. It will only lead to his destruction. His is the final quote in the selection.

The second view is less heretical and dangerous for at least it acknowledges the sacred Deen cannot be left in the hands of absolute infants in terms of Islamic learning. The holders of this view say it is permitted to follow any scholar, even if he be from other than the four schools. But of course the main intent behind the following texts is to show that the view of the vast majority of the Scholars of Ahl al-Sunna, was and is that Taqlid Shakhsi in particular is wajib. The scholars we mention are such authorities in the Sacred Knowledge of the Deen, that it is not unreasonable to assume that this ruling, that Taqlid shakhsi is obligatory, was also the view of their many eminent teachers, students and the whole school they belonged to.

Imam Ibn al-Hummam, author of many unique works in Jurisprudence and Doctrine records the view of the Hanafi scholars on Taqlid of a single Mujtahid in the commentary of Hidayah Fath al-Qadir:

(As for the layman) it is obligatory for him (Al-wajib alayh) to do Taqlid of a single Mujtahid....The jurists have stated that the one who switches from one Madhab to another by his Ijtihad and evidence is sinful deserving of being punished. Thus one who does so without Ijtihad and evidence is even more deserving. (vol.6 p.360)

Imam Nawawi writes in Al-Majmu' Sharh Al-Muhadhdhab:

The second view is it is obligatory (yalzimuhu) for him to follow one particular school, and that was the definitive position according to Imam Abul-Hassan (the father of Imam al-Haramayn Al-Juwayni). And this applies to everyone who has not reached the rank of Ijtihad of the jurists and scholars of other disciplines. The reasoning for this ruling is that if it was permitted to follow any school one wished it would lead to hand-picking the dispensations of the schools, following one's desires. He would be choosing between Halal and Haram, and obligatory and permissible. Ultimately that would lead to relinquishing oneself from the burden of responsibility. This is not the same as during the first generations, for the schools that were sufficient in terms of their rulings for newer issues, were neither codified or did they became popular. Thus on this basis it is obligatory for a person to strive in choosing a Madhab which alone he follows. (Vol.1 p.93)

Imam Sharani, an undisputed authority in the Shafi school writes in Al-Mizan al-Kubra:

...You (O student) have no excuse left for not doing Taqlid of any Madhab you wish from the schools of the four Imams, for they are all paths to Heaven.... (p.55 vol.1)

Shaikh Salih al-Sunusi writes in Fath al-'Alee al-Malik fil-Fatwa 'ala Madhab al-Imam Malik:

As for the scholar who has not reached the level of Ijtihad and the non-scholar, they must do Taqlid of the Mujtahid....And the most correct view is that it is obligatory (wajib) to adhere to a particular school from the four schools... (Section on Usul al-Fiqh p.40-41)

In Tuhfa al-Muhtaj fi Sharh al-Minhaj, Shaikh al-Islam Ahmad Ibn Hajr al-Haytami writes:

The claim the layman has no Madhab is proscribed, rather it is necessary (yalzamuhu) for him to do Taqlid of a recognised school. (As for the claim: scholars did not obligate following one school), that was before the codification of the schools and their establishment. (Vol.12 p.491-Kitab al-Zakah)

In the famous 12 volume Maliki compendium of Fataawa, Al-Mi'yar al-Mu'rib an Fataawa ahl al-Ifriqiyya wa al-Andalus wa al-Maghrib, Imam Ahmad al-Wanshirisi records the Fatwa on Taqlid:

It is not permitted (laa yajoozu) for the follower of a scholar to choose the most pleasing to him of the schools and one that agrees the most with him. It is his duty to do Taqlid of the Imam whose school he believes to be right in comparison to the other schools. (vol.11 p.163-164)

The great authority in Usul Imam Aamidi writes in Al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam:

The layman and anyone who is not capable of Ijtihad, even if he has acquired mastery of some of the disciplines (Ulum) related to Ijtihad, is obligated (yalzimuh) with following the positions of the Mujtahid Imams and taking his juristic opinions and this is the view of the experts from the scholars of the principles (Al-Muhaqqiqin minnal-Usulyyin). It was the Mutazila of Baghdad who prohibited that except if the soundness of his Ijtihad becomes clear to him. (vol.4 p.278)

Imam Zahid al-Kawthari, Hanafi jurist and senior juridical advisor to the last Shaikh al-Islam of the Ottoman Empire, wrote in a impassioned article against the growing modern trend of non-Madhabism, entitled Al-Laa Madhabiyya Qantara al-Laa Deeniyya ("Non-Madhabism is a bridge to Non-religion"):

Those who call the masses to throwing away adhering to a madhab from the Madhabs of the followed Imams, whose lives we briefly mentioned in what has passed, will be of two groups; those who consider that all the derived opinions of the Mujtahid are right, such that it is permitted for the layman to follow any opinion of any Mujtahid, not restricting himself to the opinions of a single Mujtahid whom he selects to be followed, such thinking belongs to the Mutazila. The (second group) are the Sufis who consider the Mujtahids to be all right in the sense that they seek out the hardest opinions from their positions without confining themselves to following one Mujtahid. (Published in Maqalaat al-Kawthari, p.224-225)

Imam Al-Jalaal Shams al-Din al-Muhalli writes in the commentary of the Shafi text Jam' al-Jawami,':

And the soundest position (wal-Asahh) is that it is obligatory (yajibu) for the non-scholar/layman and other than him of those who have not reached the rank of Ijtihad, adherence of one particular school from the Madhabs of the Mujtahid Imams (iltizam Madhab Muayyan min madaahib al-Mujtahideen) that he beliefs to be preferable to another school or equal to it. (Kitab al-Ijtihad, p.93)

Imam Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, the Faqih of the 19th Century, writes in Fataawa Rashidyya:

When the corruption that comes from non-specific Taqlid is obvious, and no one will deny this provided he is fair, then when specific Taqlid is termed obligatory for other than itself (Wajib li-ghayrihi), and non-specific Taqld is termed unlawful, this will not be by mere opinion, rather it is by the command of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), for he commanded that removing corruption is an obligation upon every individual. (p.205)

Imam Abd al-Hay al-Lakhnawi writes in his Majmuat al-Fataawa, after mentioning the various views of the scholars on Taqlid:

On this subject the soundest view is that the laypeople will be prevented from such (choosing) of different opinions, especially the people of this time, for whom there is no cure but the following of a particular Madhab. If these people were allowed to choose between their Madhab and another, it would give rise to great tribulations. (vol.3 p.195)

Imam Rajab al-Hanbali writes in his book: "Refutation of anyone who follows other than the four schools":

...that is the Mujtahid, assuming his existence, his duty (Farduhu) is to follow what becomes apparent to him of the Truth. As for the non-Mujtahid his duty is Taqlid (p.6)

In the well known Maliki text Maraqi al-Saud, it is stated:

(Taqlid) is necessary (yalzimu) for other than the one who has achieved the rank of absolute ijtihad. Even if he is limited (mujtahid) who is unable (to perform absolute Ijtihad). (Point 957, p.39) He writes further on: "Every school from the schools of the (four) Mujtahids is a means that reaches one to Paradise."

In one of the most authoritative juristic commentaries of the Holy Qur'an, Al-Jami' li-ahkam al-Qar'an, by the scholar Imam Qurtubi, commenting on verse 7 in Sura Anbiya, he writes:

The scholars did not disagree that it is obligatory for the non-scholars (al-'Aamah) to do Taqlid of their scholars and they are meant in the verse: Ask the people of Remembrance if you do not know. And the scholars by consensus (Ajma'oo) stated it is necessary (laa budda) for he who is unable to see to do Taqlid of someone else who will tell him of the direction of the Qiblah, if it becomes difficult for him. Similarly, one who does no possess knowledge or insight of what the Deen teaches, then it is necessary (laa budda) for him to do Taqlid of that scholar who does. (p.181 vol.11)

The internationally renowned scholar Mufti Taqi Uthmani writes in his commentary on the Book: Al-Misbah fi Rasm al-Mufti wa Manaahij al-Ifta:

The sound view, and upon which are the majority of the scholars, is that it is obligatory (Yajibu) for all those who have not reached the rank of Ijtihad to adhere to a particular school from the four well known, codified and definitively transmitted schools. This is in order to regulate a person's actions and control his worldly dealings in a way that protects from confusion, errors and fulfils the compelling need. (vol.1, pp 251-252)

Shaikh Salih bin al-Uthaymin writes in his book Al-Usul min 'ilm al-Usul in the chapter on Taqlid:

Taqlid takes place in two places; the first is that the person doing Taqlid be a layman, incapable of discerning the ruling by himself, so his duty (Farduhu) is to do Taqlid due to the statement of Allah (SWT):

"Ask the people of Remembrance if you know not (Sura al-Nahl:43). (p.68)

Shaikh al-Uthaymin also outlines in the chapter preceding this one what is needed for a person to be fit to deduce rulings from the Sacred texts, in other words the Pre-requisites of Ijtihad. He records six conditions, the first of which is the condition of encompassing all the verses and ahadith on the subject. This would, at the very first hurdle, lose most of us who have not learnt, let alone mastered, the Arabic language. Translations can never convey the linguistic intricacies, rhetorical devices and semantic nuances of the original Arabic, and furthermore a vast number of the hadith have yet to be translated into English.

Juristic basis for Taqlid Shaksi alone being obligatory

It is important to elaborate in detail what led to the change in ruling from permissibility to asking any of the scholars of the four schools to following one school from the four exclusively? As already stated both kinds of Taqlid (non-specific of the four and specific) were obligatory for the layman. However the option was open to him of following one school, as some did, and if he was not particularly discerning as the average lay person is, he simply asked any scholar he considered to be a reliable scholar regardless of his school. The first kind of Taqlid however produced a danger which with the passing of time became more and more real. Namely, people would "shop" for opinions. They would ask different scholars and often would follow a scholar merely due to ease in that view and it according with his whim. The early blessed generations were largely saved from this. In fact all Muslim scholars by consensus consider it absolutely for forbidden for a person to want to do something and then look for justification through texts and opinions of the scholars. The Holy Qur'an itself condemns those who act in this way when it says:

Have you seen he who takes his desire as his god. (Al-Jaathiyah:23)

The great jurist of the Hanafi school, Imam Ibn Aabideen records the following eye-opening incident that shows us the gravity of this problem. There was a student of Imam Abu Hanifa who once approached the Ashab al-Hadith (those who clam to only follow hadith), for the hand of his daughter in marriage. The father in law to be refused, and said he would only marry her to him if he started raising his hands (raf' al-yadayn) in Salah, reciting behind the Imam and pronouncing the Ameen loudly. The student agreed and consequently was wed to his wife. When the hanafi jurist Abu Bakr al-Jawzajani was informed of this he replied: "As for the nikah it is sound, but I fear that he (the student) may have left the Deen because he left what he believed to be the truth for his personal desire."

Imam Shatibi amongst other jurists has explained the danger in leaving Fiqh unregulated further, saying; ultimately the very purpose of the Shariah which is Takleef, or charging people with duties and responsibilities and taking them away from merely following their desires, with all the corruption and harm this brings, would become defunct as lay people sought refuge in the weak opinions of inferior scholars or from within the other three schools.

Thus to prevent the doors of irreligion from opening the scholars concurred that it was now obligatory to follow one school whichever that be from those that had been thoroughly debated by the geniuses of the Ummah, documented and transmitted. There is no doubt that such lofty credentials belonged exclusively to the four schools.

It was only due to the dangers mentioned earlier that lay in allowing Taqlid ghar Shakhsi (non-specific Taqlid) that the scholars declared it unlawful. What was the legal evidence or basis by which they effectively declared something unlawful which was clearly permissible previously?

The jurists appreciate well that rulings change with time and there are many examples in the Shariah where something at one time was permitted, is made unlawful and vice versa in consideration of other greater principles of the Deen. Selling arms in an Islamic State is something permitted, however jurists declared selling arms unlawful at a time of civil war, as killing the life of a believer is from the gravest of sins whichever side he may be on. Another example is, the action of Uthman (R.A.) in standardising the recitation of the Holy Qur'an. The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings upon him, prayed to Allah (SWT) for the Holy Qur'an to be revealed in seven independent dialects of the Arabs, so that it would be easy for them to recite. During the life of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) the various Arabs would recite it according to one of these dialects. Soon after the death of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) Islam had spread across to persia, asia and africa. With the spread of Islam also meant the new Muslims of these non-Arab lands would be learning and reciting the Book of Allah. It was at this time, during the Khilafah of the Khalif Uthman, that the existence of several dialects became a cause for confusion for these new Muslims. What had initially been for the purpose of facilitation and ease was becoming, in this new context, a means of difficulty and confusion. Thus Uthman (R.A.) declared the writing down, reciting and instruction of six dialects of the Holy Qur'an as unlawful and this was done in the presence of companions who concurred with him. Hence what was once permitted was made unlawful.

Similarly, when the jurists saw, with the variety of opinions existent in the community and the threat of following desires and irreligion, they made Taqlid of only the four schools obligatory. Then as moral uprightness became less and less amongst the masses and the tendency to follow one's desires in legal opinions increased, the ruling was given that Taqlid of only one school is permitted for the layman. This ruling was given on the basis of preventing the evil of following desires from coming into being, technically termed "Blocking the means" and in order to preserve the obligation of the duties and responsibilities believers have been charged with.

Some may bring a criticism here that, other jurists do not accept the juristic principle of blocking the means. The truth however is that all jurists have acknowledged this principle, even if they have done so using other names for it. Imam Shatibi in his Muwafaqat, vol. 4 p.66 quotes Imam Qarafi as saying that there is Ijma (Mujma' alayh) of the scholars on its acceptance. Imam Abu Zahra, in his Usul al-Fiqh, p.253, has confirmed it to be the view of all four schools. The reason for its general acceptance is that it is in reality a law based on common sense of looking to the end result of an action. If something is evil or unlawful then it is nonsensical to think there is nothing wrong with the presence of those things that directly lead to that evil. In fact, we see it in action in our daily lives, in every aspect of life. If we prevent our children from going out alone, though they may not understand this, it is not because stepping outside is in itself forbidden, rather it is due to the threat of being abducted etc. It is logical and obvious that things that lead to an unlawful also be forbidden.

Man-made laws are incapable of acknowledging this truth such that even though studies prove pornography leads to rape and other sexual offences, they do not even make a feeble attempt to curb it. The Divine law of Allah Almighty and Wise could never be so deficient and for which reason we see that many of the laws of the Islamic State are based upon it.

Another juristic principle similar to the "blocking the mean" principle, is the principle of "Acquiring of the means" by which an obligation can only be fulfilled. Usul books speak of this as Muqadimat al-wajib wajib or maa laa yutimmu al-wajib illa bihi fa huwa wajib. In this case some act needs to come into existence due to the command of Allah (SWT), however to achieve that act sometimes another thing maybe required, thus in order to fulfil the order the other thing will also become obligatory even when it has not been explicitly commanded by the Lawgiver.

An example of the latter principle (of acquiring the means) is the order in the Holy Qur'an to give Zakah. Now it is obvious a person will only be able to carry out this command properly, if he has the detailed knowledge of Zakah rules, what is Nisab, on what things must Zakah be given, what makes a person illegible to give Zakah and so on. Thus, though there is no text specifically making study of the rules of Zakah wajib, based on this juristic principle, it would be said that it is wajib for a Muslim to learn the fiqh of Zakah and even to attend a Zakah course teaching such a course, being held at a particular Institute in his locality.

Thus the unlawful consequence of people following their desires, a thing forbidden clearly in the Holy Qur'an, establishes the unlawfulness of unrestricted Taqlid or Taqlid ghayr shakhsi. Similarly, the obligation to preserve the Shariah from distortion and corruption, establishes the obligation of adherence to Taqlid Shakhsi. Furthermore, one will note, whereas in the case of other issues, their rulings are established by one of either of these two usuli principles, the necessity of Taqlid Shakshi is established by both principles.

There are other issues related to this topic deserving discussion, but are beyond the scope of the article, such as what are the conditions under which a Madhab is left and answering the evidences usually quoted against Taqlid. For these and other topics works that can be consulted are: Jawahir al-Fiqh by Mufti Muhammad Shafi, vol.1; Qawaid fi Ulum al-Fiqh by Shaikh Habib Ahmad al-Kairawani (punlished as an introduction to Imam Zafar Ahmad Uthmani's Iila al-Sunnan); Al-Kalam al-Mufid fi Ithbat al-Taqlid by Maulana Muhammad Sarfraz Khan Safdar; The legal Status of following a Madhab by Mufti Taqi Uthmani; Al-Laa Madhabiyya Akhtar Bida'h tuhaddi al-Shariat al-Islamiyya by Shaikh Ramadan al-Buti.

http://central-mosque.com/index.php/taqleed/taqlid-a-the-falsification-of-islamic-history.html