The Majority Of Ulama On Taqleed Shakhsi (Specific Taqleed)

[ummtaalib]

The Majority Of Ulama On Taqleed Shakhsi (Specific Taqleed)

 

As impiety and following of desires became more common, the scholars became more unequivocal of the obligation of following one school exclusively.

However, some opponents go to the absurd extremes of considering taqlīd of any kind to be unlawful, saying that it is in fact the duty of every muslim to derive for himself all the detailed rulings from the Holy Qur’ān and Sunna. One of the reasons they succeed in getting people to believe such baseless and outlandish claims is because they falsely give the impression that this is also the view held by most of the great Islāmic scholars in the past. The actual position of the classical scholars of Islām however, as proven by the quotes below, is very diferent to this. Even a greatly relied-upon scholar by such claimants, namely the late Shaykh muhammad ibn Sālih ʿUthaymīn (رحمه الله) has stated clearly in his Al-Usūl min ʿilm al-Usūl that the layman must do taqlīd of the scholars. In his recorded lectures of the same text, he says that for the average muslim to try to delve into the Holy Qur’ān and Sunna in order to deduce rulings is like a person who has not learnt how to swim swimming in the sea. It will only lead to his destruction.

Another view which is not as dangerous as the frst but none-theless problematic is that it is permissible to follow any scholar, be he from outside the four accepted schools. Thus, the quotations gathered below have intentionally not been restricted to proving that taqlīd shaksī is obligatory, although the vast majority of these quotes will establish that most of the scholars of Ahl al-Sunna wa ’l-Jamāʿa held taqlīd shaksī in particular to be obligatory. The scholars we shall mention are such authorities in the sacred knowledge of the Dīn that it is not unreasonable to assume that this is also the view of their many eminent teachers, students and learned muslims in general.

1) Imām Dhahabī (رحمه الله) writes in Siyar Aʿlam al-Nubalā under Ibn Hazm Zāhirī’s (رحمه الله) comment, “I follow the truth and perform ijtihād, and I do not adhere to any madh’hab”, “I say: yes. Whoever has reached the level of ijtihād and a number of imāms have attested to this regarding him, it is not allowed for him to do taqlīd, just as it is not seeming at all for the beginner layman jurist who has committed the Qur’ān to memory or a great deal of it to perform ijtihād. How is he going to perform ijtihād? What will he say? On what will he base his opinions? How can he fly when his wings have not yet grown?” (vol.18, pg.191)

2) Imām Ibn al-Humām (رحمه الله), author of many unique works in jurisprudence and creed, records the view of the Hanafī scholars in Fath al-Qadīr, his commentary of Al-Hidāya: “(As for the layman) it is obligatory for him to do taqlīd of a single mujtahid…The jurists have stated that the one who moves from one madh’hab to another by his ijtihād and evidence is sinful and deserves to be punished. Thus, one who does so without ijtihād and evidence is even more deserving.” (Fath al-Qadīr, vol.6 pg.360)

3) Imām Nawawī (رحمه الله) says in Al-Majmūʿ Sharh Al-Muhadh’dhab: “The second view is that is obligatory for him to follow one particular school, and that was the defnitive position according to Imām Abū ’l-Hasan (رحمه الله) (the father of Imām al-Haramayn Al-Jawīnī). And this applies to everyone who has not reached the rank of the ijtihād of the jurists and scholars of other disciplines. The reason for this ruling is that if it were permissible to follow any school one wished, it would lead to hand-picking the dispensations of the schools and following one’s desires. He would be choosing between halāl and harām, 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 sufcient in terms of their rulings for newer issues were neither codifed nor widespread. Thus, on this basis it is obligatory for a person to strive in choosing only one madh’hab which he follows.” (Al-Majmūʿ Sharh Al-Muhadh-dhab, vol.1 pg.93)

4) Imām Shaʿrānī (رحمه الله), an undisputed authority in the Shāfʿī school, writes in Al-Mīzān al-Kubrā: “…you (O student) have no excuse for not doing taqlīd of any madh’hab you wish from the schools of the four imāms, for they are all paths to Heaven…” (Al-Mīzān al-Kubrā, vol.1, pg.55)

5) Shaykh Sālih al-Sunūsī (رحمه الله) writes in Fath al-ʿAliyy al-Malik fī ’l-Fatwā ʿalā Madh’hab al-Imām Mālik: “As for the scholar who has not reached the level of ijtihād and the non-scholar, they must do taqlīd of the mujtahid…And the most correct view is that it is obligatory (wājib) to adhere to a particular school from the four schools…” (Fath al-ʿAliyy al-Malik fī ’l-Fatwā ʿalā Madh’hab al-Imām Mālik, pg.40-41)

6) In Tuhfat al-Muhtāj fī Sharh al-Minhāj, Shaykh al-Islām Ahmad Ibn Hajar al-Haythamī (رحمه الله) writes: “The claim that the layman has no madh’hab is rejected, rather it is necessary for him to do taqlīd of a recognised school. (As for the claim: scholars did not obligate following one school), that was before the codifcation of the schools and their establishment.” (Tuhfat al-Muhtāj fī Sharh al-Minhāj, vol.12 pg.491)

7) In the famous twelve-volume mālikī compendium of fatwās, Al-Miʿyār al-Muʿrib ʿan Fatāwā Ahl al-Ifrīqiyya wa ’l-Undulus wa ’l-Maghrib, Imām Ahmad al-Wanshirīsī (رحمه الله) records the fatwā on taqlīd: “It is not permitted for the follower of a scholar to choose the most pleasing to him of the schools and the one that agrees with him the most. It is his duty to do taqlīd of the imām whose school he believes to be right in comparison to the other schools.” (vol.11 pg.163-164)

8) The great authority in usūl, Imām āmidī (رحمه الله) writes in Al-Ihkām fī Usūl al-Ahkām: “The layman and anyone who is not capable of ijtihād, even if he has acquired mastery of some of the disciplines (ʿulūm) related to ijtihād, is obligated with following the positions of the mujtahid imāms and taking their juristic opinions, and this is the view of the experts from the scholars of the principles (al-muhaqqiqūn min ’ l-usūliyyīn). It was the muʿtazilites of Baghdad who prohibited this, except if the soundness of his ijtihād becomes clear to him.” (vol.4 pg.278)

9) Imām Zāhid al-Kawtharī (رحمه الله), Hanafī jurist and senior juridical advisor to the last Shaykh al-Islām of the Ottoman Empire, wrote in an article against the growing modern trend of non-madh’habism, entitled Al-Lā Madh’habiyya Qantarat al-Lā Dīnīyya (Non-madh’habism is a bridge to non-religion): “Those who call the masses to discarding adherance to a madh’hab from the madh’habs of the imāms who are followed, whose lives we briefy 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 permissible 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. This way of thinking is of the muʿtazilites. The (second group) are the Sūfīs who consider all the mujtahids to be right, in the sense that they seek out the hardest opinions from their positions without confning themselves to following one mujtahid.” (published in Al-Maqālāt al-Kawtharī, pg.224-225)

10) In the commentary of the Shāfʿī text Jamʿ al-Jawāmiʿ, Imām Al-Jalāl Shams al-Dīn al-mahallī (رحمه الله) writes: “And the soundest position is that it is obligatory for the non-scholar or layman and those besides them (i.e. scholars) who have not reached the rank of ijtihād to adhere to one particular school from the madh’habs of the mujtahid imāms (iltizām madh’haban muʿayyanan min madhāhib al-mujtahidīn) which he believes to be preferable over another school or equal to it.” (Kitāb al-Ijtihād, pg.93)

11) Imām Rashīd Ahmad Gangohī (رحمه الله), the great jurist of the 19th century, writes in Fatāwā Rashīdīya: “When the corruption that comes from non-specifc taqlīd (taqlīd ghayr shakhsī) is obvious - and no one will deny this provided he is fair - then when specifc taqlīd is termed obligatory due to an external factor (wājib li-ghayrihī) and non-specific taqlīd is termed unlawful, this will not be by mere opinion, rather it is by the command of Allāh’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), for he commanded that removing corruption is an obligation upon every individual.” (pg.205)

13) Imām ʿAbd al-Hayy al-Lakhnawī (رحمه الله) writes in his Majmūʿat al-Fatāwā, afer mentioning the various views of the scholars on taqlīd: “On this subject, the soundest view is that laymen will be prevented from such (choosing) of diferent opinions, especially the people of this time, for whom there is no cure besides following a particular madh’hab. If these people were allowed to choose between their madh’hab and another, it would cause great tribulations.” (vol.3 pg.195)

14)Imām Ibn Rajab al-Hanbalī (رحمه الله) writes in his book, Al Rad ʿalā Man ittabaʿa Ghayr al-Madhāhib al-Arbaʿa: “…that is the mujtahid, assuming his existence, his duty is to follow what becomes apparent to him of the truth. As for the non-mujtahid, his duty is taqlīd.” (pg.6)

15) In the renowned mālikī text, Marāqiʿ al-Saʿūd, it states: “(Taqlīd) is necessary for other than the one who has achieved the rank of absolute ijtihād, even if he is a limited (mujtahid) who is unable (to perform absolute ijtihād)” (pg.39). He further writes: “Every school from the schools of the (four) mujtahids is a means that conveys one to paradise.”

16) In one of the most authoritative juristic commentaries of the Holy Qur’ān, Al-Jāmiʿ li-Ahkām al-Qur’ān, Imām Qurtubī (رحمه الله) writes in commentary of the seventh verse of Sura Anbiyā: “The scholars did not disagree regarding the obligation of non-scholars (al-ʿāmma) to do taqlīd of their scholars, and they are meant in the verse: 'Ask the people of remembrance if you do not know.' The scholars by consensus stated it is necessary for one who is blind to do taqlīd of someone who will inform him of the direction of the qibla if it becomes difcult for him. Similarly, one who does not possess knowledge or insight regarding the teachings of the Dīn, it is necessary for him to do taqlīd of the scholar who does.” (vol.11 pg.181)

17) It is stated in Al-Misbāh fī Rasm ’l-Mufī wa Manāhij al-Ifā that the internationally renowned jurist Mufti Taqi Usmani (حفظه الله) says: “The sound view, by which the majority of the scholars abide, is that it is obligatory for all who have not reached the rank of ijtihād to adhere to a particular school from the four well-known, codifed and defnitively transmitted schools. Tis is in order to regulate a person’s actions and control his worldly dealings in a way that pro-tects from confusion and errors, fulflling the compelling need.” (vol.1, pg. 251-252)

18) Shaykh muhammad ibn Sālih ʿUthaymīn (رحمه الله) writes in his Al-Usūl min ʿIlm al-Usūl in the chapter on taqlīd: “Taqlīd takes place in two places; the frst is that the person doing taqlīd be a layman, incapable of discerning the ruling by himself, so his duty is to do taqlīd due to the statement of Allāh Taʿāla: Ask the people of remembrance if you know not (Sura Nahl: 43).” (pg.68)

Shaykh muhammad ibn Sālih ʿUthaymīn (رحمه الله) also outlines in the preceding chapter what is required for a person to be capable of deducing rulings from the sacred texts, in other words the prerequisites of ijtihād. He records six conditions, the frst of which is the condition of encompassing all the verses and hadīths on the subject. This would at the very frst 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 hadīth collections have yet to be translated into English.

(Understanding Taqleed: Following One Of The Four Great Imams, Mufti Muhammad Sajjad)

Source