Choices For Students & Laymen in Fiqh: Ijtihaad, Tarjeeh, Mathabi/Non-Mathabi Taqleed, or Ittibaa'?

Discussion in 'Fundamentals of Law (Usul)' started by hearandobey, May 12, 2008.

  1. hearandobey

    hearandobey الحمدلله

    assalamu alaykum,

    i have the opportunity to study hanafi fiqh with a renowned scholar but i wanted to ask you some questions/guidelines about studying fiqh...

    firstly, i've never followed any madhab. i've always been "salafi" if that's the right way to put it.

    if i study hanafi fiqh with a shaykh, am i required to continue studying that madhab only or to follow it, since i know it's rulings?

    the text will be mukhtasar al-qudoori... is it good? or are there things said about it?

    any other advice you could give about studying fiqh based upon a madhab, would be much appreciated!

    jazakAllahu khayran
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 18, 2009
  2. hearandobey

    hearandobey الحمدلله

    bump..... az?
  3. Umm Ahmed

    Umm Ahmed 2C oursels as ithers C us

    He is busy , he will answer eventually InshaAllaah.
  4. Anikaa

    Anikaa Inna aqabit lil mutaqeen!

    No offence intended, but what kind of status does abuz zubair have? Is he a shaykh? Or just a knowledgeable brother a lot of people like asking questions to?
  5. Yasir

    Yasir لك الله يا مهبط الوحي

    wa’alaikum as-salaam,

    I think it’ll do you good insha’Allah, as it’ll give you an informative glimpse into the richness of a madhab and the depth of their arguments.

    Are you using a particular sharh for al-Qudoori? Will you also be reading some Usul?
  6. saqqid qutb

    saqqid qutb New Member

    why dont you ask a scholar,instead of always asking abu zubair.he aint a his studied abit,wow,many brothers have gone abroad and studied,doesnt make them scholars
  7. Adnan Jalaal

    Adnan Jalaal New Member

    Well, he could have asked many people. But he chose Abuz Zubair. What is the problem? If Abuz Zubair is an appropriate and a reliable person, than people can ask him as they wish. Stop trying to create animosity among people.
  8. hearandobey

    hearandobey الحمدلله

    jzk bro adnan, i'm a sister btw.

    and yes i decided to ask him since he was the one that translated quotes from classical scholars regarding laymen and following a madhhab (ie. taqleed) and i thought since this topic is related why not ask for general advice?
  9. Expergefactionist

    Expergefactionist hmmm... Staff Member

    You are only required to follow that which you believe to be the truth. All madhabs have element of truth in them, so where a madhab differs with the truth, you leave the madhab for the truth. In issues where you aren't certain you may follow the madhab. The madhabs are only there to facilitate for us the learning of fiqh and not to form a religion within a religion.

    Yasir is the best person to answer, iA.
    Yunus(nickname) likes this.
  10. Ismail Ibrahim

    Ismail Ibrahim Formerly Harris Hammam

    That was stating the obvious. Of course a Muslim is required to follow the truth.

    But to say that one should leave a Mazhab for the truth is shocking. Give us one concrete example where a Mazhab has not corrected itself via its later scholars, or has remained on Batil for 1200 years.

    Or maybe you are referring to your personal Tarjihaat. In that case, the truth is not constrained to what you think. The truth (Allah's intended law) in most fiqhi issues shall never be found out until Qiyaamah. Bring us an example where the truth is clear but the Mazhab (or, more precisely, the muftaa bihi of the Mazhab) has failed to identify it for 1200 years.

    As for when you talked about certainty and uncertainty, this does not give you the right to follow what you think is certainly right and leave what is certainly worng according to your own standards. What if your convictions contradict an authentic Hadith or consensus? What do you follow then?

    When one has the capacity to do Ijtihad and Tarjih, AND one is sure of not falling into Talfiq, then only should one consider doing so.

    These neo-Mujtahid Salafis we see today are not even aware of the basic Usool of fiqh. They blast out slogans of anti-Taqlid, but then fall into Talfiq without realising. A person MUST start off with ONE whole school in its entirety and master its fiqh and usool before venturing out to other legal systems.

    I could say a lot here, but I shall leave it at that.
    acekhurasaan likes this.
  11. justabro

    justabro Salafi (Retd.)

    For the sake of learning and practicing, my personal suggestion would be to opt for Shafi'i or Hanbali fiqh (I am studying Hanbali fiqh, after having before studied Shawkani's sharh of his Durar al-Bahiyah and al-San'ani's Subul al-Salam).

    I have more to say, but later, in sha Allah.
  12. Daniel

    Daniel TAFKA BM

    Personally I'd love to study the Shafi'i and\or Maliki madhahb. These are the two that interest me the most. (Though, for purely academic reasons, I think it would be interesting to study the Zaydi and Ibadhi fiqh.)
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2008
  13. hshad

    hshad New Member

    And, we will be waiting to hear more on this from you. I second the suggestion. Do you say this because there would be instances where you would have to leave the madhhab for the truth if you adopt Shafi' or Hanbali fiqh? For example, in Hanafi fiqh there are many instances, especially with fiqh related to worship (not just salah), where a balanced scholar or student would have to leave the madhhab that he may end up question why he is evening studying it in the first place. What say you?
  14. 'Abd al-Kareem

    'Abd al-Kareem Scaffolding

    Good idea.
  15. This is exactly the dilemma I'm facing, I live in an area where Hanafi fiqh is dominant, however there are many basic fiqhi positions of Hanafi madhhab that I'm bound to leave for something that I believe is better- such as raf' ul-yadain, so this is restraining me from learning Hanafi madhhab. I'm not sure if I should?

    (I have Reliance and Maqasid- and I pray the shafi'i way)
  16. Captain Gora

    Captain Gora RefuteEverythingThatMoves

    What do you mean by talfiq exactly?

    I agree that many people are too daring with ijtihad and tarjih, but what is the forbidden talfiq firstly and what proof makes you this strict about it?

    One school of the four? Is there an agreement about this and where can this agreement be seen? And no doubt, one doesn't venture out on his own without the tools, agreed.

    I have to say that I've seen a type of hype and fashion going on about the issue of talfiq for some time now. Even the words the issue of talfiq makes us sound so scholarly like we are aware of deep fiqh issues. That's why I'm asking, not to say that you are truly one of these extreme people like the salafis are extreme in their view.
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2008
  17. hearandobey

    hearandobey الحمدلله

    jazakumAllahu khayran, pls share more with us justabro.
  18. WM

    WM <A HREF="showthread.php?t=70991"></A>

    Hanafis and the wali-free marriage?
    Abdulink and Yunus(nickname) like this.
  19. Captain Gora

    Captain Gora RefuteEverythingThatMoves

    And by the way, I don't think Abuz Zubair meant absolute certainty but rather what seems certain to an individual even if he is a layman, since everybody knows that we are talking about probalistic evidences here, not definite ones. Am I right or am I wrong?

    If I'm right, then he has taken a valid path insha-Allah, and for a layman to claim that it is haram for a layman to not stick to a specific madhab is ignorance of valid differences of opinion.

    Also, it is a valid opinion that ijtihad can be partial, and a mujtahid makes taqlid of no one, even if he is a mujtahid just in one area of law. It is not a condition for his ijtihad that he masters the furu' of one madhab even in the area of this ijtihad of his since he is the one coming up with a ruling and has no need to know the ruling of another mujtahid in this.

    So why get all humpy bumpy when we could unite atleast in such issues as this.
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2008
  20. Abu Treika

    Abu Treika Magoo

    im in pretty much the same dilemna akhi, i cannot even say i am hanafi in fiqh anymore

    raf' ul yadain is an issue, also the witr issue had me confused for a while and now i pray 2 & 1, not being able to combine while travelling, not reciting fatiha behind an imam in the silent prayers and the list goes on, the hanafi alims gave no leeway on any of these issues

    but there is good in the fact that the hanafis will not generally pick and choose what suits them and look to scholars when taking their rulings unlike some salafi brothers who i see combining and shortening their prayers when they drive up the road about half a mile, also they will wipe over ankle socks, have their feet joint in salah but have them so wide that shoulders do not touch at all etc...

    its hard to find that balanced talib ul ilm or scholar locally, its normally one extreme or the other


Share This Page