Between Following The Evidence, And Imitating The Scholars

Author: Sheikh Sulaymaan bin Naasir al-’Alwaan

Translation by: Abu Sumayyah

All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. And to what follows

Some of the brothers have asked the question:

What is the ruling concerning the one who differ in a fiqh matter? Is it the right of every individual to take the words of the imaam of his madhhab [school of thought], or should they research the matter and look into the evidences? Inform us of the ruling and may Allah reward you greatly.

So he (Sheikh) answered them:

If there isn’t any clear evidence in a matter and the ruling of a matter is based on ijtihaad [1], then it is on the Muslim to follow the one whom he thinks is the most knowledgeable and pious from the people [2], and there is no blame on him if he does that.

As for the matter where there is evidence, then it is not allowed for a Muslim to take the words of his Imaam if those words go against the evidence. Instead, it is on him to leave the words of his Imaam, whoever he may be, if the evidence has reached him, and this is obligatory on the entire creation.

For the words of the scholars are in need of evidence and not vice a versa. Indeed the words of the scholars help to understand the texts and explain the matters and so forth.

As for the words of the scholars being an authority over the words of Allah and His Messenger, then none of the scholars have ever stated this. Instead this goes against the Quran and the Sunnah and the consensus of the Muslims, since Allah has commanded us to follow His Book and to obey His Messenger in many places in the Quran. Allah has said:

وَأَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَالرَّسُولَ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُرْحَمُونَ

And Allah swt said:

And Allah swt said:

And Allah swt said:

Verily the scholars (may Allah’s mercy be upon them), used to advise their students not to blindly follow. Instead they made it binding on them to take the evidence since this is what is obligatory and a must for all the Muslims. So if the evidence reaches someone then he must follow that evidence and leave whatever opposes that evidence. Allah swt has said:

And Allah even bore witness to the guidance of the one who obeys His Messenger, as is mentioned in Surah an-Noor:

So whoever leaves the evidences for the words of Abu Haneefah or Maalik or Ash-Shaafi’ee or Ahmad, then he has gone against a principle that the Muslims have all gathered upon. Imaam A-Shaafi’ee (may Allah’s mercy be upon him), has stated:

And Imaam Maalik (May Allah’s mercy be upon him) said:

So, as for those who are fanatics in following the Imaam of the particular madhhab, then this goes against the guidance of the predecessors, and is in opposition to what the Imaams of those madhhabs were upon. Since they were all agreed upon the dispraise of blind following and fanaticism. Verily, it is obligatory on the Muslim to go with the evidence, whether it be with the Maalikee school, or the Hanafee school, or the Shafi’ee school, or the Hanbalee school, or the Dhaahiree [3] school, or any other school. As Allah did not confine the truth to any of these schools, since the scholars of these schools were men, who were capable of being correct and also making mistakes. They were not infallible from mistakes and errors.

Imaam A-Shafi’ee [may Allah’s mercy be upon him] said:

Verily, the scholars (May Allah have mercy on all of them) have disputed on many matters in the religion. From the rulings concerning purification, prayer, zakah, fasting, Hajj, selling, divorce, adh-Dhihaar [4], and other things. While none of these scholars, who were firm in knowledge, ever said that it was allowed for every individual to take from where he pleases, concerning the different schools, without looking into the evidence, the exception being the blind follower who is not able to research into the evidences.

If it was permitted for every Muslim to follow his desires and pick and choose from all these different opinions and sayings, then the religion would be made up of these various schools of thought, and the Book and the Sunnah would be of little benefit. And we seek refuge with Allah from this!

So I say that which all the Muslims have agreed upon, that it is obligatory to take all matters of dispute back to the Book and the Sunnah, according to the understanding of the scholars of the early generation; looking into their words, and into their reasoning behind certain decisions on matters after looking into the evidences.

For example the scholars have disputed on the matters of what nullifies your purification. Like eating camel meat, touching a woman without sexual contact, and things that exit the body from other than the two private areas [5].  For some have said that these things that exit, nullify your purification and at the same time are impure. Verily, every Imam had a saying about these matters. Concerning the eating of camel meat, Maalik, Abu Haneefah, and Ash-Shaafi’ee, were of the opinion that it does not nullify your purification. But, on the other hand, Imaam Ahmad (May Allah’s mercy be upon him) was of the opinion that it did. And this was also what Ibn Hazm preferred.

The correct opinion concerning this, is the madhhab of Imaam Ahmad, since there are two authentic hadeeths from the Prophet that prove that the eating of camel meat nullify your purification. One of them is the hadeeth of Jaabir bin Samurah in Saheeh Muslim [6], and the other is the hadeeth of Al-Baraa collected by Abu Dawood [7]  and At-Tirmidhee [8], and others.

As for the touching of the women or embracing or similar to this, then Imaam Ash-Shafi’ee was of the opinion that touching a woman nullifies your purification whether it is with passion or not. And Abu Haneefah was of the opinion that unconditional touching does not nullify your purification. And Maalik and Ahmad in one narration were of the opinion that it does not nullify your purification except with passion.

So, for the one who examines the various evidences in this matter will find that the Hanafee school is the closest to the correct opinion. And in one narration, this opinion is also accredited to Imam Ahmad and is also the preference of Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiah. Since there has not reached us any evidence that is authoritative in proving that touching nullifies the purification whether with passion or without. So in the absence of evidence, we return to the origin which is that the purification is not nullified. And the madhhab of Abu Haneefah is more clear on this issue than the other schools, since it has been narrated to us that the Prophet kissed his wives, left to the prayer, and he did not make wudu [ritual ablution]. While, at the same time, it is not narrated to us in the hadiths that it was with or without passion. Even though there is some problem with the authenticity of this hadith. Verily it was narrated by Abu Dawood, At-Tirmidhee, and Ibn Maajah, by the way of Wakee’, on the authority of al-A’mash, on the authority of Hubayb bin abee Thaabit, on the authority of Urwah, on the authority of Aaisha, but there is defficiency in it. As Hubayb did not hear it from Urwah. [9] But there are other hadiths that are authentic concerning this matter. And Allah knows best.

As for the things that exit from the body like blood and other things, then the madhhab of Imaam Ahmad says that these things nullify your purification. But the madhhab of Imaam Ash-Shafi’ee says that any of these absolutely do not nullify your purification. And this is the correct opinion, which is also supported by Imaam Maalik and in one narration from Imaam Ahmad. And this is the conclusion that Ibn Taymiah and many others came to. Since there is no evidence, that anything which exits from your body, other than the two private areas, nullifies your purification.

So these examples that I gave, are to show that the truth is not limited to a specific scholar, group, or school of thought. Verily, the Muslim is not commanded to follow and stick to a specific school of thought. Instead, he should seek out the truth, as every school of thought is correct in some things, and mistaken in others.

As the school of the Hanbalees are correct in many of the rulings in the matters of this religion. likewise the Shaafi’ees, the Maalikees, and the Hanafees (are also right in many rulings). While, at the same time, Imaam Ibn Hazm was alone in some of his opinions which actually are the correct opinion. Many of the scholars differed due to the availability of the evidences, distinguishing between the authentic and the weak, between the things that abrogate and are abrogated, and between the unconditional [mutlaq] and the qualified [muqayyad]. So the one who is in the right follows the one who has the truth with him without being biased. Likewise he opposes the mistakes without slandering or defaming someones person, or putting him at a low level. Since these scholars were striving to reach the correct opinion [mujtahidoon], and whether they were correct or incorrect, they will be rewarded either way.

So, after this, it is not obligatory on anyone to follow one of these scholars. And whoever thinks this has strayed far away from the correct path. Verily, it is not obligatory to follow anyone except the Messenger of Allah , since his saying is all truth and he does not speak from his own desire.

As for any others from the scholars and the Imaams of the various schools of thought, then we don’t take from their words except what agrees with the truth. And this is a serious matter that none deem important except the one who wishes to be guided and save his soul from falling into evil.

How many are the ones who claim to have knowledge and are busy writing, except that they are fanatics headed for destruction, and blind followers. They are angered by those who go against their particular Imaam but are not angered by those who go against the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah.

So the correct one is he who makes the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger the ruling over all sayings. Even if those who disagree, disagree with him and accuse him of heresy. Indeed, it has become a common practice of those who blindly follow and are fanatics, to label those who differ with them as heretics and astray. And this is the status of every liar, and the one who is a deviant from the truth and the straight path since when he is unable to provide the proof and the evidence he resorts to these types of tactics.

Verily, there is evidence in the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet , that the truth will have many enemies fighting against it, trying to prevent it from being manifest. They come with various molds that support their intellects, and satisfy their desires.

For the person on the truth, he should put all his efforts into it so as not to be shaken away from this truth that he is on. He should call others to this truth and Allah will provide him with help and support. And he will remain victorious as long as he is trying to give victory to the religion and the truth, with full sincerity to Allah and their will not cease to be aid from Allah as long as he stays on this way. Allah has said:

Also Allah swt has said:

And whoever Allah helps then that is indeed enough against the evil of His enemies.

But the help will not come until there are first two things:

So if these two conditions are met then nothing can oppose him, even if they were to all come together from the east and the west. Allah swt has said:

And all praise is due to Allah. W’al hamdu lillah rabbil aalameen

Footnotes:

[1] Ijtihaad: The reasoning process by which Islamic Laws are deduced after thorough research.

[2] The devout (scholar) is the one whose piousness prevent from speaking about Allah without having knowledge.

[3] Dhaahiree: A school of thought founded by Daawoud ibn ‘Alee, who took an independent path of reasoning based on the obvious and literal meanings (Dhaahir) of the texts of the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

[4] Adh-Dhihaar: The saying of a husband to his wife: “You are to me like the back of my mother” eg. unlawful for me to approach.

[5] Know that many Fuqaha may Allah have mercy on them take the ruling on the individuals lightly, so they rule on issues that they are Nagis [impure], while there is no evidence or true analogy. And it is stated in the Shar’i evidences that the individuals are Tahirah [pure] unless it’s proven otherwise [i.e. impure]. So until it’s proven with evidence that (something) is impure, it is pure, like the Maniy (semen) and so on, and Allah knows best

[6] an-Nawawi [4/48]

[7] ‘Awn al-Ma’bud 1/315

[8] Volume 1/122-123

[9] See Jaami’ at-Tirmithi 1/133, and Nasb al-Raayah 1/70-76 and Tanqih al-Tahqiq 1/437-442