[Zhulfiqar]

Assalaamu 'Alaikoem wa Rahmatullah brothers,

We know that the 4 Madhahib Imams (Rahmetullahi 'aleyhim) had their own methodology to deduce rulings from various ahadeeth. There were also some ahadeeth not compiled in the time of the Four madhahib Imams (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyhim) but were known later to their students whom were high skilled scholars. My question is what is the difference of the scholars who were direct students of the Madhahib Imams in following the sahih ahadeeth and the Salafis following the Sahih ahadeeth ?

For example;

“Isa bin Aban said: When Abu Yusuf came to Baghdad he held the view of Abu Hanifah regarding the permissibility of selling charitable endowments (awqaf). This was until Ismaeel bin Aliyyah narrated to him from Ibn Awn from Nafi from Ibn Umar regarding his charity (sadaqah) from his share from Khaybar. Abu Yusuf said: This is that which it is not permitted to differ with. If this had reached Abu Hanifah this would have been his view and he would not have differed with it.”

So we can see that one of the outstanding student of Imam Abu Hanifa (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) relied upon his ijtihaad until he came across a hadith narrated by Ibn 'Umar (Radieyallahoe 'Anhoe).

What was the reason to accept this ahadeeth and leave the ijtihaad made by Imam Abu Hanifa (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) ? Was it because he knew that according to the methodology of accepting certain ahadeeth for fiqh was like that of Abu Hanifa (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) or simply because the isnad was sahih ? Because Salafies uses this sort narrations to support their view of accepting every sahih isnad and matn ahadeeth.

I hope my question is clear if there is something unclear please tell me to elaborate on it insha Allah.

Wassalaamu 'Alaikoem.

This post has been edited by Zhulfiqar: 06 February 2009 - 06:48 PM

[faqir]

We are following 'every sahih isnad and matn ahadeeth' - the only difference is that we are following reliable and unanimously accepted qualified scholarship in following the relied upon opinions of the scholars of the four madhhabs. al-kakazai's blog has a good series on these issues

[Hamoudeh]

faqir, on Feb 7 2009, 01:01 AM, said:

the only difference is that we are following reliable and unanimously accepted qualified scholarship in following the relied upon opinions of the scholars of the four madhhabs.

Assalamu `Alaykum

The above quoted is the important point to be made here, the difference between Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad engaging in ijtihad in accordance with the usul of Imam Abu Hanifa and Shaykh Ibn Baz giving his fatawa while claiming it to be in accordance with the usul of Imam Ahmad, comes down to scholarly qualification. This level of engagement is only second to the absolute and independant ijtihad of the 4 Imams and others like them, while Shaykh Ibn Baz's scholarship does not even qualify for the lowest form of ijtihad in the Madhhab - that is if he is to be considered qualified as a scholar of Hanbali fiqh to begin with, which I will assume is indeed the case unlike with other leading Salafi scholars. In conclusion, the point is not the text of a Hadith, nor it's chain, but the qualification to deduce jurisprudence from it, whether this jurisprudence is agreed upon by those who are qualified or not. It is clear however that someone who engages in ijtihad above his own qualifications, is not likely to conclude the same as those who are qualified do, and therefore more likely to contradict them and make strange claims in even the most basic matters of worship.

[tru_Qur'an]

Wa'alaykum salaam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatu,

This was my original post and it is a long post adding to the above example from brother Zhulfiqar. This is taken from Al-Maqasid of Imam Nawawi(rah), english translation, a subsection, by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, named:

HADITHS THAT THE MUJTAHID IMAMS LACKED

pgs.134-144

” Fourthly, in respect to the contention that the Imams “did not incorporate all the hadiths into their madhabs”; while undoubtedly true in some instances ( as knowledge of all hadiths is probably impossible), what they missed was not ignored by the succeeding generations of top scholars who followed them in each school, rechecking their evidence and conclusions, and revised their Imams; madhhabs. The madhhabs certainly did not lack hadith scholars, and as pointed out in the previous section, the Imams enjoined the scholars whom they had trained and who came after them to evaluate and revise, and their injunctions were carried out. This may be shown by examples.

The Shafi’i School

Early scholars debated which of the prescribed prayers is “the most superior prayer” mentioned in Sura al-Baqara in the verse

“Carefully observe the prayers, and [especially] al-salat al-wusta, the most superior prayer”(Qur’an 2:238),

in which wusta ( literally, “midmost”) refers, according to the Arabic idiom, to the choicest or best part of something, as attested by the use of the same comparative adjective, in its masculine form, in Sura al-Qalam:

“The best of them (awsatuhum) said, ‘Did I not tell you if only you would glorify [Allah, in repentance]‘” (Qur’an 68:2

, in which awsatuhum means “the best of them”( Mahalli: Tafsir al-Jalalayn (9.46),759).

Now, the position of Imam Shafi’i was that the salat al-wusta or “most superior prayer” was the dawn prayer (fajr). The evidence for this is not only numerous hadiths about the special merti of the dawn prayer, particularly when performance in a group (jama’a) at the mosque- but secondly, that in the Islamic calendar, the night of a particular date comes before the day, such that the sunset prayer (maghrib) is the first of the five prescribed prayers and the midafternoon prayer (’asr) is the last, making the dawn prayer (fajr) “midmost” between them. Cogent as this reasoning may be, scholars who came after Imam Shafi’i revised his opinion in light of the rigorously authenticated (sahih) hadith related by Muslim that ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib ( Allah ennoble his countenance) said,

When it was the day of the [Battle of the] Confederates (al-Ahzab), the Messenger of Allah ( Allah bless him and give him peace) said, ” May Allah fill their graves and houses with fire: they have detained us and busied us from the midmost prayer ( al-salat al-wusta) until the sun went down” ( Muslim 9.55), I.436:627),

which is a nass or “text capable of only one interpretation” from the Prophet( Allah bless him and give him peace) that al-salat al-wusta as used in Surah al-Baqara means the midafternoon prayer (’asr) and no other. This is the kind of upgrading of the evidences that we are talking about. Imam Nawawi says:

Despite this [wide knowledge of hadiths], Shafi’i( Allah have mercy on him) chose the way of greater precaution, because knowledge of all hadiths is not humanly possible, and he made the statement related from him through numerous narrators, enjoining [scholars] to take the rigorously authenticated hadith and disregard his position should it contravene an explicit, authentic, and unequivocal text(nass). Our scholars ( Allah have mercy on them) have obeyed his injunction and applied it to numerous well-known legal questions.” ( al-Majmu’ (9.62), I.10-11)

The Hanafi School

This revising process is by no means confined to the Shafi’i madhhab, but is found in all schools. An example from the Hanafi school is the sunna of bathing (ghusl) before going to Friday prayer (jumu’a). The recieved position of the school is that the validity of this sunna bath is nullified if one’s ablution (wudu)is broken between the bath and the Friday prayer, in which case one needs to bathe again to attain the reward of the sunna.

Yet we find in the Radd al-muhtar of Ibn ‘Abidin, the foremost fatwa resource for the late Hanafi school, that Imam ‘Abd al-Ghani Nabulusi, after mentioning the above ruling, notes that there are two positions about it among the scholars of the madhhab: The first is the position of those who hold the legal reason for this bath is purification (tahara), in which case nullifying ones’ ablution between it and the prayer would invalidate it. The second is the position of those who hold that the reason for the bath is cleanliness (nadhafa), in which case nullifying ablution and repeating it between the bath and the prayer wouldnot invalidate it, for the extra ablution, if anything increases cleanliness. Nabulusi adopts this second position because in his words

” the hadiths on this matter imply that the aim is attaining cleanliness alone.” ( Radd al-muhtar (9.22), I.114),

and Ibn ‘Abidin inclines towards it also, because of the hadiths about the merit of coming to the mosque from the first hour on Friday morning to wait for the congregational prayer (jumu’a). Abu Hurayra relates that the Prophet ( Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

Whoever bathes on Friday as he would for major ritual impurity (janaba), then goes early [to the mosque] is as though the has sacrificed a she-camel. Whoever goes in the second hour [ of daylight] is as though he has sacrificed a cow. Whoever goes in the third hour is as though he has sacrificed a ram. Whoever goes in the fourth hour is as though he has sacrificed a chicken. Whoever goes in the fifth hour is as though he has offered an egg. And when the imam comes out [ to begin the sermon], the angels [stop recording, and] come to listen to the rememberance” (Bukhari (9.10), 2.3-4:881).

Ibn ‘Abidin says of Nabulusi’s position ( that the bath (ghusl) on Friday is not invalidated by having to renew one’s ablution before the Friday prayer):

It is attested to by the demand to go early to the prayer, best done in the first hour of the day, which extends till sunrise. When doing this, it might prove difficult to keep one’s ablution (wudu) until the time for the prayer arrives, especially on the longest days of the year. Repeating the bath would be even more arduous, while [ Allah says in Sura al-Hajjaj:]

“He has not placed any hardship upon you in religion” ( Qur’an 22:78).

It might also lead to holding back from going to the bathroom while praying, which is unlawful” ( Radd al-muhtar (9.22), 1.114).

Here we see an early position of the Hanafi school ( that the Friday bath is nullified by having to renew one’s ablution after it) reevaluated in light of a hadith by two of the school’s principal later scholars, ‘Abd al-Ghani Nabulusi and Ibn ‘Abidin- just as in the previous example we saw Imam Shafi’i’s opinion that al-salat al-wusta means the dawn prayer (fajr) revised by subsequent scholars to the sound position that it means the midafternoon prayer (’asr).

The Hanbali School

There are hadiths to the effect that someone who neglects the prayer (salat) becomes a non-Muslim (kafir), hadiths which Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, in at least one of two positions related from him, seems to have taken literally. These include the well authenticated (hasan) hadith

“Between the servant and polytheism or unbelief is leaving the prayer” ( Tirmidhi (9.79), 5.13:2619),

and the hadith

“The first thing you shall lose from your religion is the keeping of trusts: the last thing you shall lose from your religion is the prayer.” (Tabarani (9.76), 9:353:9754),

of which Ahmad said,

“Nothing remains of whatever the last has gone.” (al-Mughni (9.36),2.444).

Yet Ibn Qudama Maqdisi, who quotes these hadiths in his eleven volume Hanbali fiqh compendium al-Mughni, understands their wording as zajr or “sharply warning” people from these actions by likening them to the actions of non-Muslims (kuffar), not that the actions themselves constitute outright unbelief. There are many hadiths with such wording, such as

“Reviling a Muslim is wrongdoing, and fighting him is unbelief (kufr)” (Bukhari (9.10, 9.63: 7076),

which emphasizes the enormity of the sin of fighting, not that it actually puts one beyond the pale of Islam. And similarly,

“The drinker of wine is like an idol worshipper” (Majma’ al-zawa’id (9.23), 5.70).

Or like the hadith,

” If a man calls his brother a non-Muslim (kafir), it returns upon one of them” ( Muslim (9.55), 1.79:60 ),

of which commentator Munawi says

that what “returns upon one of them” is “the disobedience of considering him a non-Muslim,” not the fact of being a non-Muslim (Fayd al-Qadir (9.54), 1.295),

and of which Nawawi says in his commentary on Sahih Muslim:

Its outward sense is not intended, for the position of Muslims Orthodoxy (Ahl al-Haqq) is that no Muslim commits unbelief through acts of disobedience such as murder, fornication, or calling one’s brother an ”unbeliever,” unless one [thereby means that one] considers the religion of Islam [ which he follows] to be false (Sharh Sahih Muslim (9.56), 2.49).

So too, the sense of zajr or “sharply warning” is how Ibn Qudama Maqdisi explains the wording of the hadiths that ostensively show that leaving the prayer is unbelief (kufr), interpreting them thus to reach an accord with other evidence, such as the rigorously authenticated (sahih) hadith

Whoever testifies that there is no god but Allah alone without associate, and that Muhammad is His slave and messenger, and that Jesus is the salve of Allah, His messenger, His Word that He imparted to Mary, and a spirit from Him, and that paradise is true and hell is true- Allah shall enter him into paradise, no matter what his actions (Bukhari (9.10), 4.201: 3435).

This shows, like many other hadiths of similar purport, that a Muslim commits kufr only through outright unbelief, not through acts of disobedience, for other wise he would not enter paradise (even if he should be punished first, as in other hadiths) on the generality of

“no matter what his actions.”

Ibn Qudama cites this and other considerations, and gives his judgment that neglecting the prayer, though a heinous sin, is not itself unbelief ( al-Mughni (9.36), 2.446-47). Like the previous examples from the Shafi’i and Hanafi schools above, this illustrates how a top madhhab scholar may restudy hadith evidence and suggest an upgrading of the recieved position of his Imam in light of it.

In point of fatwa or “formal legal opinion,” it should be noted that the authorative position of the Hanbali school is that someone who neglects the prayer is asked to repent and ordered to pray: if he does not, he is executed for unbelief (as he is considered to have denied the obligatoriness of the prayer, which is disbelief), through if he does, he is released. Such a person may not be considered a non-Muslim (kafir) or executed until he has been asked to repent and perform the prayer and has refused (Bahuti: Kashshaf al-qina’ (9.8), I.228-29).

The Maliki School

The recieved position of the Maliki madhhab is that if someone eats or drinks absentmindedly during the fast, this vitiates the fastday, and he is obliged to make it up if it was obligatory, such as a day of Ramadan (Risala Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani (9.64), 174). Yet Maliki scholar ibn Rushd in his Bidaya al-mujtahid [ The beinning of the mujtahid] (al-Hidaya fi takhrij ahadith al-Bidaya (9.18), 5.18 quotes the rigorously authenticated (sahih) hadith of Abu Hurayra in Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet(Allah bless him and give him peace) said,

When someone forgets and eats or drinks, let him complete his fast for it is but Allah who has fed him and given him drink (Bukhari (9.10), 3.40: 1933).

Some Maliki scholars, supporting the position that absentmindedly eating or drinking vitiates the fast, have suggested that what is meant by the hadith’s words

“let him complete the fast”

is the lexical sense of fasting, which is simply

“to refrain from eating”

-the hadith signifying that someone who eats absentmindedly (vitiating his fast, in their view) must refrain from food for the rest of the day, as is also the case with a woman, for example, whose menstrual period ceases in the middle of a day of Ramadan: though the fast-day does not count for her, she is obliged to refrain from food till sundown because of the inviolability of the day. This linquistic sense of “fasting,” they say, is the import of

“let him complete his fast.”

This interpretation fails, as Sheikh Nuh ‘Ali Salman writes,

because the words of primary texts are initially understood in their shari’a sense whenever possible, and only if this is impossible are they interpreted according to their linguistic sense. Here, it ["fasting"] must be understood in its shari’a sense, since the hadith says,

“let him complete his fast,” :

that is, his preceding fast, which was a legal fast [ of a day of Ramadan]. not a linquistic “fast” [ of merely going without food] ( Qada’al-’ibadat (9.65),138).

The Maliki scholar Abu Bakr ibn al-’Arabi disagrees, and explains why he believes the words

” let him complete his fast”

should not be taken literally:

“Fasting” is but refraining from eating, and cannot coexist with eating, for the two are opposites, and a person cannot be performing what he is obliged to or making it up when its integral element and reality does not remain or exist. Consider what vitiates ablution (wudu), which is the necessary procondition of the prayer; namely, the things that nullify ablution (hadath) [e.g. using the bathroom]. When any of them happens, deliberately or not, it vitiates purification (’Arida al-ahwazi (9.80), 3.247).

As for the above hadith, which seems to show that the fast is mullified by absentmindedly eating, Ibn al-’Arabi mentions the Maliki position

that according to the methodology of Malik, if the hadith of a single narrator conflicts with an established principle [namely, that the lack of a rukn or "obligatory integral" (here, refraining from eating) nullifies the action ( a valid fast)], then the hadith cannot be acted upon (’Arida al-ahwazi (9.80), 3.248).

Yet hadith specialist Ahmad al-Ghumari, also a Maliki, in his commentary on Ibn Rushd’s Bidaya al-mujtahid challenges the Maliki position that a fast is vitiated by absentmindedly eating or drinking, adducing variants of the above Bukhari Hadith such as that related in the Sunan of Daraqutni:

When someone fasting absentmindedly eats or drinks, it is but sustenance (rizq) that Allah has sent to him, and he is not obliged to make it up ( Daraqutni (9.12), 2.178:27),

-which is a rigorously authenticated (sahih) hadith proving that the legal act of fasting is what is meant by the above hadith, and that absentmindedly eating or drinking does not vitiate this fast (al-Hidaya fi takhrij ahadith al-Bidaya(9.18), 5.188). One might object that these hadtihs could not be taken to refer to superorgatory fasts, and not obligatory fasts. And in fact, this is the position of the Maliki madhhab; that only obligatory fast-days absentmindedly vitiated need be made up, not superogatory ones (Risala Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayarawani (9.64), 176). But Ghumari adduces another rigorously authenticated (sahih) version of the hadith:

Whoever absentmindedly breaks his fast in the month of Ramadan is not obliged to make it up or expiate it. ( Daraqutni (9.12), 2.178:28),

which he states

“has also been related by Hakim [ al Mustadrak (9.19), 1.430] and Bayhaqi [ Bayhaqi (9.9), 4.229]: Hakim says, ‘It is rigorously authenticated (sahih) according to the standards of Muslim, though neither [Bukhari nor Muslim] related it with this wording’; and Bayhaqi says, ‘[Muhammad ibn 'Abdullah] al Ansari alone related it from Muhammad ibn ‘Amr [ ibn 'Alqama], though all its narrators are reliable’” ( al-Hidaya fi takhrij ahadith al-Bidaya (9.18), 5.189).

These hadiths show Ghumari that first, though it may be intuitively plausible, in Abu Bakr ibn al-’Arabi’s words, that “fasting is but refraining from eating, and cannot coexist with eating,” the Prophet ( Allah bless him and give him peace) has apprised us that eating or drinking absentmindedly is an exception, by saying in the Bukhari hadith that

“when someone forgets and eats or drinks, let him complete his fast.”

The word fast may not, on the one hand, be interpreted in a merely linguistic sense, because the Daraqutni hadith’s words

“and he is not obliged to make it up”

apply only to the legal act of fasting; and cannot refer, on the other hand, to supererogatory fasts alone, for these do not happen

“in the month of Ramadan.”

Secondly, it is not a case of a hadith of a single narrator conflicting with the school’s recieved position, but rather several versions with mutiple and different channels of transmission.

The leads Ghumari to say, in his hadith commentary on the Risala of Ibn Abi Zaid al-Qayrawani where the author writes,

“and if one breaks one’s [supererogatory] fast absentmindedly, one is not obliged to make it up- as opposed to the obligatory [fast]” :

This distinction [between obligatory and nonobligatory] lacks any acceptable proof, nor is there any evidence for it in the Qur’an or hadith at all. Rather, it contradicts the explicit content of the primary texts, and Allah knows better what evidence Malik relied on therin ( Masalik al-Dalala (9.17), 109-10).

To be sure, Imam Malik was greater than contemporary scholars in knowledge of Qur’an and sunna, not the least because of his proximity to the time of the Prophet ( Allah bless him and give him peace) and his personal observation of the ‘amal or “invariable sunna practice” of earliests Muslims- as opposed to the merely verbal channels of transmission of hadiths relied upon by those after him. But it is clear in any case that Ghumari’s discussion is not one of “blind following” of the Maliki madhhab, but rather an example from the literature of the madhhab itself that shows how the school’s evidence has been examined and evaluated by subsequent Maliki scholars.”

This article in its entirety can be found here: http://shadhilitariq...i...t&task=view

[Zhulfiqar]

faqir, on Feb 7 2009, 01:01 AM, said:

We are following 'every sahih isnad and matn ahadeeth' - the only difference is that we are following reliable and unanimously accepted qualified scholarship in following the relied upon opinions of the scholars of the four madhhabs. al-kakazai's blog has a good series on these issues

Yes brother it's true what you stated above but for example Abu Yusuf (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) didn't relied upon a scholar of the Madhab but on the narration he heard in this case so did he use ijtihaad to act upon it or only because of the authenticity of the narration ? So Salafi would take this example to support that whenever you come across an authentic narration to act upon it and not the opinion of a Madhab Imam (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) anymore. So I want to understand for example what the difference is between scholars like Abu Yusuf (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) whom took narration above ijtihaad of Abu Hanifa (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) in few situations and Salafis taking authentic narrations above most of the Madhahib Imams and Scholars (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyhim) ?

Jazakumullah khair wassalamu 'alaikoem.

This post has been edited by Zhulfiqar: 07 February 2009 - 09:40 PM

[Hamoudeh]

Zhulfiqar, on Feb 7 2009, 10:37 PM, said:

So Salafi would take this example to support that whenever you come across an authentic narration to act upon it and not the opinion of a Madhab Imam (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) anymore. So I want to understand for example what the difference is between scholars like Abu Yusuf (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) whom took narration above ijtihaad of Abu Hanifa (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) in few situations and Salafis taking authentic narrations above most of the Madhahib Imams and Scholars (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyhim) ?

He already answered that Sidi in the very quote you respond to, and I expanded on that as well in post #6. The difference is being qualified in order to engage in Ijtihad, this qualification is what Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Abu Muhammad had and what Salafis and other modernists of al-la madhhabiyya lack. You should read Shaykh al-Buti's book Al-La Madhhabiyya [ http://www.sunnipubs...h...t&Itemid=26 it is out of stock, PM me if you need a copy].

See also the words of the Imams al-Nawawi, Abu `Amr, Zafar Uthmani and Yusuf al-Nabhani:

Quote

Imam al-Nawawi: "This which Imaam Shaafi has said does not mean that everyone who sees a Saheeh Hadith should say: 'This is the Math-hab of Shaafi, thus practising on the zaahir (text/external or apparent meaning) of the Hadith. This most certainly applies to only such a person who has the rank of Ijtihaad in the Math-hab. It is a condition that he overwhelmingly believes that Imaam Shaafi was unaware of this Hadith or he was unaware of its authenticity. And this is possible only after having made a research of all the books of Shaafi and similar other books of the Ashaab of Shaafi, those who take (knowledge) from him, and others similar to these (books). This is indeed a difficult condition (to fulfil). Few are there who measure up to this (standard). What we have explained has been made conditional because Imaam Shaafi had abandoned acting on the zaahir (text) of many Ahadith which he saw and knew. However by him was established proof for criticism in the Hadith or its abrogation or its specific circumstance or its interpretation, etc. (hence he was constrained to leave aside the hadith)." (I'laaus Sunan, Vol. 2, page 225)

Shaikh Abu Amr: "It is not easy to act according to the apparent (zaahir) text of what Imaam Shaafi said. It is not lawful for (even) every Faqeeh (qualified Aalim who has deep insight) to act independently with that which he opines to be proof from the Hadith." (I'laaus Sunan, Vol. 2, page 225)

Zafar Ahmad Uthmani: "Imaam Sha'raani has also narrated it (i.e. the statement 'When the authenticity of a Hadith is established it is my Math-hab.'), attributing it to the four Imaams. It is not hidden (from understanding) that this is for the one who has the ability (insight and qualification) in the Nusoos and the knowledge of its clear laws and its abrogations." (Volume 2, page 226)

Shaikh Yusuf Bin Ismail al-Nabhani: "Verily, the statement: 'When the Hadith has been authenticated, then it is my Math-hab' has been narrated from each one of these four Imaams who were free from personal opinion. The audience to whom this statement ('When the Hadith is Saheeh it is my Math-hab.') was directed, is only his (the Imaam's) Ashaab (the Fuqaha of his Math-hab) who were great and illustrious Aimmah fully qualified in the rational and narrational sciences (of the Deen). (And the statement is directed to) those who came after these illustrious Aimmah among the great Ulama of his Math-hab, those who were the Ahlut Tarjeeh (a high category of Ulama). All of them who were the Haafizeen of the Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) were fully aware of the daleels (proofs) of all the Math-habs.........These are the ones whom the Imaam (of the Math-hab) had directed his statement: 'When the Hadith is Saheeh, it is my Math-hab.'....Verily, they (these great Fuqaha) are able to reconcile between the Hadith from which the Imaam had derived proof, and the (latest) Hadith which was established as authentic after the Imaam. They (these illustrious Fuqaha) can see which of the two Hadiths is more authentic, stronger and which of the two Hadiths is the later one so that the later one can be the Naasikh (abrogator) for the earlier one." (Hujjatullah alal Aalameen) - http://www.themajlis.../Article21.html

Wassalam

[tru_Qur'an]

as salamu 'alaykum,

To add to what our brothers have already mentioned see this:

The Grades of the Jurists (Al-Fuqaha) http://www.marifah.n...c...post&id=520

[Zhulfiqar]

Assalaamu 'Alaikoem brothers,

Jazakumullah khayr for the replies. So if I understand it correctly one need the qualification to deduce a ruling from an ahadith and qualification to interpret the ahadeeth. So if we take the example of Abu Yusuf (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) he took the narration because he knew the meaning and the ruling from it which he could deduce because of his qualified scholarship he has in the Hanafi school and knowing the principles of the interpretation laid down by Abu Hanifa (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) which is why he said if this would reach Abu Hanifa (Rahmetullahi 'Aleyh) that it would be his view. On the other hand with Salafis they think you don't need scholarship and you must only find the most authentic ahadeeth while not having the ability (insight and qualification) in the Nusoos and the knowledge of its clear laws and its abrogations.

Jazakumullah khair for the answers brothers wassalaam 'alaikoem.

[tru_Qur'an]

Wa'alaykum salam,

Check out the conditions that Imam Nawawi [RH] mentions before one goes against ones madhab when running into ahadith. He says in his Majmu` vol. 1 p.136:

Quote

"Any Shafi'i who finds a hadith going against his madhhab should look into the matter [as follows]: If he possesses the complete requirements of ijtihad without restriction, or in that chapter, or [even] in that point [alone], he may independently practice upon [the hadith]. If he does not [possess it] and finds it difficult to go against the hadith, and his search for a valid explanation of the hadith [within his madhhab] does not provide a convincing solution, then he may practice upon the hadith with one condition, which is that another independent [mujtahid] imam other than al-Shafi'i should have practiced upon it. This would then be a valid pretext for him to leave the madhhab of his imam."http://www.duai.co.za/touchingwudhu.shtml

Imam Ibn al-Qayyim's [RH] I'lam al-muwaqqi`in, 4.205 says:

Quote

"As for the breadth of a mujtahid's knowledge, it is recorded that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal's student Muhammad ibn 'Ubaydullah ibn al-Munadi

heard a man ask him [Imam Ahmad]: "When a man has memorized 100,000 hadiths, is he a scholar of Sacred Law, a faqih?" And he said, "No." The man asked, "200,000 then?" And he said, "No." The man asked, "Then 300,000?" And he said, "No." The man asked, "400,000?" And Ahmad gestured with his hand to signify "about that many"http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/madhhabstlk.htm

It is also recorded from Imam Abu Yusuf [RH] in Hadayah vol. 1 p.226, regarding the lay person:

Quote

"The lay person must follow the jurists since he is not capable of understanding the Hadith independently."

Imam Ibn Abidin [RH] says (and I think this sheds more light upon the previous statement from Imam Abu Yusuf):

Quote

"Understanding evidences (dalil) is only (truly) possible for someone at the level of ijtihad (mujtahid), for it depends on knowing that the evidence is free of that which opposes it, which depends on having complete awareness of the primary sources, which is not possible for other than a mujtahid. As for merely knowing that a given mujtahid took a given ruling from a given set of evidences, it is of little consequence..." (Sharh Uqud Rasm al-Mufti, in Rasa'il Ibn Abidin, 1: 30)http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=509&CATE=2

Ibn Taymiyah [RH] reported that Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal [RA]

Quote

used to: " Instruct the lay person to ask Ishaaq, Abu Obaid, Abu Thaur and Abu Mus'ab. However, he used to prohibit his own Companions like Abu Dawood, Uthman ibn Sa'eed, Ibrahim al-Harbi, Abu Bakr al-Anthrum, Abu Zar'ah, Abu Hatim and Muslim (among others) to follow anyone. He would say to them: 'You must follow the sources of the Qur'an and Sunnah."' (Abu Yusuf and Ibn Taymiyyah's quote is taken from Muhammad Taqi Usmani's book 'The Legal Status Of Following a Madhab':http://www.cometoislam.com/fiqh/legal/main.htm)

Knowing if the ahadith is true or not is only half of the battle, now we need to draw the understanding of them [collectively] and that is the other half; this is part of fiqh. If this wasn't the case, then any layman could just give a fatwa if he/she possesses Sahih Bukhari and/or Sahih Muslim in ones home. This doesn't mean we cannot read the Sahihayn, but it means we should not give fatwa even though we know the Ahadith in them are true.

Quote

Imam al-Shafi`i said: "You [the scholars of hadith] are the pharmacists but we [the jurists] are the physicians." Mulla Ali al-Qari commented: "The early scholars said: The hadith scholar without knowledge of fiqh is like a seller of drugs who is no physician: he has them but he does not know what to do with them; and the fiqh scholar without knowledge of hadith is like a physician without drugs: he knows what constitutes a remedy, but does not have it available."Al-Qari, Mu`taqad Abi Hanifata al-Imam fi Al baway al-Rasul Alayhi al-Salatwa al-Salam(p. 42).http://www.sunnipath.com/library/Articles/AR00000260.aspx

Wallahu 'Alam

This post has been edited by tru_Qur'an: 07 September 2009 - 05:30 PM

[tru_Qur'an]

just to add...

Having said all of this, this doesn't mean that a person CANNOT question his shaykh; and if questioning is done, one should use the best of adaab(manners) when asking. It is true that some people do give the impression that 'since he's a scholar he must be correct' type of idea....this is far from the truth.

Scholars can be guided or misguided just like anyone else in the Ummah; ESPECIALLY during our times.

Someone once said, ''If you control the scholars of Muslims, you control the Muslims'.

May Allah Ta'ala protect us and grant us guidance away from the corrupt scholars. May Allah Ta'ala continue to aid the true 'Ulama on the path of Tawhid, ameen.

This post has been edited by tru_Qur'an: 19 February 2009 - 08:24 PM

[tru_Qur'an]

Quote

It was once said to Imam Abu Hanifa, "In such and such a mosque there is a circle that discusses fiqh (lit. the "understanding of fine points of the religion")". He asked, "Do they have a master over them?" and they said no. He said, "They will never understand" (Ibn Muflih, al-Adab al-shariyya wa al-minah al-mariyya. 3 vols. Cairo n.d. Reprint. Cairo: Maktaba Ibn Taymiya, 1398/1978, 3.374). http://qa.sunnipath....=...75&CATE=389

[tru_Qur'an]

Quote

Difference Between Traditionists and Jurists

This distinction between the fuqaha’ and the muhaddithūn (traditionists) reaches as far back as to the time of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). Eminent compilers of traditions such as Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him), who despite transmitting more traditions than many other Sahāba (may Allah be pleased with them), very rarely issued formal legal rulings (fatāwa), and despite his immense knowledge of traditions was not regarded as a faqīh among the Sahāba (in comparison to other Companions).

Further clarification of this distinction is Muhammad Rawas al-Qal`aji’s Silsila al-Mawsū`a Fiqh al-Salaf, compendiums illustrating the legal rulings of distinguished Sahāba (may Allah be pleased with them). The work dealing with the fiqh of Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him) is in total a fifth compared with the rulings of other distinguished Sahāba (may Allah be pleased with them), who transmitted far fewer traditions than Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him).

Further illustrations can be found in the following examples:

A person rebuked Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal for leaving the circles of Sufyān b. al-`Uyayna for that of Imam al-Shafi`i. Imam Ahmad replied, “Keep silent! If a tradition with a higher chain eludes you, then you will acquire it through a lower chain. However, if the insight of this young man passes you by, I fear you will never come across it again.” (al-Raf` wa al-Takmīl fi al-Jarh wa al-Ta`dīl, p.71)

On another occasion Imam Ahmad said, “Knowledge of traditions and the fiqh thereof are more beloved to me than the memorisation of traditions.” (al-Raf` wa al-Takmīl fi al-Jarh wa al-Ta`dīl, p.70) `Ali b. al-Madini said, “The most noblest of sciences is the knowledge of fiqh within the ahadith.” (Maqām Abi Hanīfa, p.52)

The deep insight and intellectual excellence needed to attain the status of a faqīh ensured that the fuqaha’ remained considerably fewer in number than the Muhaddithun. Hāfiz al-Ramuhurmizi has stated in al-Muhaddith al-Fāsil bain al-Rāwi al-Wā`i, with his own chain of transmission from Anas b. Sirin that, “I came to Kūfā where I found four thousand seeking traditions and four hundred had become fuqaha’.'” (al-Ta`līq al-Mumajjad `ala Muwatta Muhammad, 1/20) http://justislam.had...hjurisprudence/

[tru_Qur'an]

Quote

The Superiority
Of Fiqh Over Hadith
by Sh. G. F. Haddad



chapters:

0. Introd.

1. Hadîth Misguides Those Devoid of Fiqh

2. Imâms of Hadîth Defer to Imâms of Fiqh

3. Knowledge Is Not Memorization but a Light

4. The Hadîth of the Jurists is Preferable to That of the Non-Jurists

5. Knowing the Hadîth is Different From Practicing It

6. Understanding the Hadîth is Superior to Knowing It

7. Most Hadîth Scholars Do Not Possess Intelligence of the Hadîth

8. Not Every Sound Hadîth Forms Evidence

9. NOTES

Allah Most High said, {He gives wisdom to whomever He will, and whoever receives wisdom receives immense good } (2:269).

The Holy Prophet said, "He for whom Allâh desires great good, He grants him (superlative) understanding in the Religion (yufaqqihhu/yufqihhu fî al-dîn). I only distribute and it is Allâh Who gives. That group shall remain in charge of the Order of Allâh, unharmed by those who oppose them, until the coming of the Order of Allâh."1

"It may be that one carries understanding without being a person of understanding; it may be that one carries understanding to someone who possesses more understanding than he."


Imâm al-Shâfi`î apparently took from Imâm Abû Hanîfa his famous statement, said: "You [the scholars of h.adîth] are the pharmacists but we [the Jurists] are the physicians." This is also reported from al-A`mash and Abu Sulayman Ibn Zubar and was probably proverbial. Mullâ `Alî al-Qârî commented: "The early scholars said: The h.adîth scholar without knowledge of fiqh is like a seller of drugs who is no physician: he has them but he does not know what to do with them; and the fiqh scholar without knowledge of h.adîth is like a physician without drugs: he knows what constitutes a remedy, but does not have it available."2

Imâm Ah.mad is related by his students Abû T.âlib and H.umayd ibn Zanjûyah to say: "I never saw anyone adhere more to h.adîth than al-Shâfi`î. No one preceded him in writing down h.adîth in a book." The meaning of this is that al-Shâfi`î possessed the intelligence of h.adîth after which Ah.mad sought, as evidenced by the latter's statement: "How rare is fiqh among those who know h.adîth!" This is a reference to the h.adîth: "It may be one carries understanding (fiqh) - meaning: memorizes the proof-texts of fiqh - without being a person of understanding (faqîh)."3 The Salaf and Khalaf elucidated this rule in many famous statements showing that, for all the exalted status of the Muh.addith, yet the Faqîh excels him:


H.adîth Misguides Those Devoid of Fiqh

Cautioning against the danger of misusing hadith to the point of committing sin, Imam Ahmad narrated from Muhammad ibn Yahya al-Qattan (d.233) that the latter said: "If one were to follow every rukhsa that is in the hadîth, he would ebcome a transgressor (fâsiq)."


* Ibn Abî Zayd al-Mâlikî reports Sufyân ibn `Uyayna as saying: "H.adîth is a pitfall (mad.illa) except for the fuqahâ'," and Mâlik's companion `Abd Allâh ibn Wahb said: "H.adîth is a pitfall except for the Ulema. Every memorizer of h.adîth that does not have an Imâm in fiqh is misguided (d.âll), and if Allâh had not rescued us with Mâlik and al-Layth [ibn Sa`d], we would have been misguided."4
Ibn Abî Zayd comments: "He [Sufyân] means that other than the jurists might take something in its external meaning when, in fact, it is interpreted in the light of another h.adîth or some evidence which remains hidden to him; or it may in fact consist in discarded evidence due to some other [abrogating] evidence. None can meet the responsibility of knowing this except those who deepened their learning and obtained fiqh." Imâm al-Haytamî said something similar.5
Ibn Wahb is also reported to say: "I met three hundred and sixty learned people of knowledge but, without Mâlik and al-Layth, I would have strayed."6
Another versions states: "Were it not for Mâlik ibn Anas and al-Layth ibn Sa`d I would have perished; I used to think everything that is [authentically] related from the Prophet - Allâh bless and greet him - must be put into practice."7
Another version has: "I gathered a lot of h.adîths and they drove me to confusion. I would consult Mâlik and al-Layth and they would say to me, 'take this and leave this.'"8 Ibn Wahb had compiled 120,000 narrations according to Ah.mad ibn S.âlih..9
Hence, Ibn `Uqda replied to a man who had asked him about a certain narration: "Keep such h.adîths to a minimum for, truly, they are unsuitable except for those who know their interpretation. Yah.yâ ibn Sulayman narrated from Ibn Wahb that he heard Mâlik say: 'Many of these h.adîths are [a cause for] misguidance; some h.adîths were narrated by me and I wish that for each of them I had been flogged with a stick twice. I certainly no longer narrate them!'"10
By his phrase, "Many of these h.adîths are misguidance," Mâlik means their adducing them in the wrong place and meaning, because the Sunna is wisdom and wisdom is to place each thing in its right context.11 An example of this is al-Shâfi`î's report that Mâlik regretted including in the Muwatta the hadith of the pond in which the Prophet is told, "You do not know what they did after you" because of the inevitable abuse at the hands of Shî`îs (or shî`ified Sunnis such as the Ghumârî school and others in our time).

* Ibn al-Mubârak said: "If Allâh had not rescued me with Abû H.anîfa and Sufyân [al-Thawrî] I would have been like the rest of the common people." Al-Dhahabî relates it as: "I would have been an innovator."12


The Imâms of H.adîth Defer to the Imâms of Fiqh

* Imâm Ah.mad's teacher, Yah.yâ ibn Sa`îd al-Qat.t.ân, despite his foremost status as the Master of h.adîth Masters and expert in narrator-recommendation and discreditation, would not venture to extract legal rulings from the evidence but followed in this the fiqh of Abû H.anîfa as he explicitly declared: "We do not belie Allâh. We never heard better than the juridical opinion (ra'î) of Abû H.anîfa, and we followed most of his positions."13
Similarly, Muh.ammad ibn `Abd Allâh ibn `Abd al-H.akam said: "If it were not for al-Shâfi`î I would not have known how to reply to anyone. Because of him I know what I know."14 As for Muh.ammad ibn Yah.yâ al-Dhuhlî (d. 258) of Khurâsân, whom Abû Zur`a ranked above Imâm Muslim and who is considered an Amîr al-Mu'minîn fî al-H.adîth ("Commander of the Faithful in the Science of H.adîth"), he never considered himself a non-muqallid but said: "I have made Ah.mad ibn H.anbal an Imâm in all that stands between me and my Lord."15 Mis`ar ibn Kidâm said the same with regard to Imâm Abû H.anîfa.16


Knowledge Is Not Memorization but a Light

Fiqh is the context of many statements of the Imâms on knowledge consisting in wisdom, benefit, deeds, and light rather than learning and memorization as we already mentioned. Mâlik said: "Wisdom and knowledge are a light by which Allâh guides whomever He pleases; it does not consist in knowing many things"17. Al-Shâfi`î: "Knowledge is what benefits. Knowledge is not what one has memorized."18
Al-Dhahabî: "[Knowledge (al-`ilm) is "not the profusion of narration, but a light which Allâh casts into the heart. Its condition is followership (ittibâ`) and the flight away from egotism (hawâ) and innovation."19


Al-Khatîb in his brief Iqtidâ' al-`Ilm al-`Amal ("Learning Necessitates Deeds") narrates many statements to this effect from Ibn Mas`ûd, Abû Hurayra, Abû al-Dardâ, Abû Qilâba, al-Zuhrî, al-Tustarî, Ibn `Uyayna, and otherrs of the Salaf. This Islamic understanding of knowledge elucidates al-H.asan al-Bas.rî report that the Prophet said: "The energy of the Ulema is care and help while the energy of fools is to quote" (himmat al-`ulamâ' al-ri`âya wa himmat al-sufahâ' al-riwâya).20 and the statement of the `Abbâsî Caliph `Abd Allah ibn Mu`tazz (249-296): "The learning of the hypocrite consists in his discourse while the learning of the Believer consists in his deed."


The H.adîth of the Jurists is Preferable to That of the Non-Jurists

Wakî` ibn al-Jarrâh preferred long-chained narrations through the fuqahâ' to short-chained ones through non-fuqahâ' and said: "The h.adîth current among the jurists is better than the h.adîth that is current among the h.adîth scholars."21 This is a foundational rule in the H.anîfî School, which like Yah.yâ al-Qat.t.ân, Wakî` followed.22

Al-A`mash (Abû Muh.ammad Sulaymân ibn Mahrân al-Asadî the Tâbi`î 61/-148) also said: "The h.adîth that jurists circulate among themselves is better than that which h.adîth narrators circulate among themselves."23

Ibn Rajab said that Abû Dâwûd in his Sunan was more concerned with the jurisprudence of the h.adîth than with its chains of transmission.24

This is also the case with al-Bukhârî's Sahîh while Muslim, Ibn Mâjah, and al-Nasâ'î focussed on the benefits of its transmission chains and text variants - Muslim being the most thorough and reliable in these regards. Al-Tirmidhî gave equal weight to the fiqh of the hadîth and the study of its transmission although Abû Dâwûd is somewhat stricter in hadîth authentification while al-Nasâ'î surpasses them both.


Knowing the H.adîth is Different From Practicing It

Sufyân al-Thawrî used to say to the h.adîth scholars: "Come forward, O weak ones!"25 He also said: "If h.adîth were a good thing it would have vanished just as all goodness has vanished," and "Pursuing the study of h.adîth is not part of the preparation for death, but a disease that preoccupies people." Al-Dhahabî commented: "He said this verbatim. He is right in what he said because pursuing the study of h.adîth is other than the h.adîth itself."26


Understanding the H.adîth is Superior to Knowing It

Ish.âq ibn Râhûyah said: "I would sit in Iraq with Ah.mad ibn H.anbal, Yah.yâ ibn Ma`în, and our companions, rehearsing the narrations from one, two, three routes of transmission... But when I said: What is its intent? What is its explanation? What is its fiqh? They would all remain mute except Ah.mad ibn H.anbal."30

Sufyân al-Thawrî said: "The explanation (tafsîr) of the h.adîth is better than the h.adîth."27 Another wording has: "The explanation of the h.adîth is better than its audition."28


Abû `Alî al-Naysabûrî said: "We consider understanding superior to memorization."29

Ibn Mahdî regretted not having written, after every hadîth he had recorded, its explanation.


The perspicuity and fiqh of Abû Thawr among the h.adîth Masters is famous. A woman stood by a gathering of scholars of h.adîth comprising Yah.yâ ibn Ma`în, Abû Khaythama, Khalaf ibn Salim, and others. She heard them saying: "The Prophet said," and "So-and-so narrated," and "No one other than So-and-so narrated," etc. Whereupon she asked them: "Can a woman in her menses wash the dead?" for that was her occupation. No one in the entire gathering could answer her, and they began to look at one another.
Abû Thawr arrived, and they referred her to him. She asked him the same question and he said: "Yes, she can wash the dead, as per the h.adîth of al-Qâsim from `A'isha: 'Your menses are not in your hand,'31 and her narration whereby she would scrub the Prophet's hair at a time she was menstruating.32 If the head of the living can be washed [by a woman in her menses], then a fortiori the dead!"
Hearing this, the h.adîth scholars said: "Right! So-and-so narrated it, and So-and-so told us, and we know it from such-and-such a chain," and they plunged back into the narrations and chains of transmission.
The woman said: "Where were you all until now?"33

Ibn `Abd al-Barr cites Imâm Ah.mad as saying: "From where does Yah.yâ ibn Ma`în know al-Shâfi`î? He does not know al-Shâfi`î nor has any idea what al-Shâfi`î says!"34 Ibn Râhûyah similarly conceded defeat before al-Shâfi`î's jurisprudence although himself reputed for fiqh.35


Most H.adîth Scholars Do Not Possess Intelligence of the H.adîth

* `Abd al-Razzâq al-S.an`ânî, Sufyân's contemporary, was the teacher of the pillars of h.adîth memorization in their time - Ah.mad, Ibn Râhûyah, Ibn Ma`în, and Muh.ammad ibn Yah.yâ al-Dhuhlî. Yet when Muh.ammad ibn Yazîd al-Mustamlî asked Ah.mad: "Did he [`Abd al-Razzâq] possess fiqh?" Ah.mad replied: "How rare is fiqh among those who know h.adîth!"36

Anas ibn Sîrîn said: "I came to Kûfa and found in it 4,000 persons pursuing h.adîth and 400 persons who had obtained fiqh."37

Sufyân al-Thawrî: "Knowledge in our view is only the dispensation of a trustworthy learned perrson. As for strtictness, anyone can be strict!"

Hujjat al-Islâm al-Ghazâlî in al-Mustasfâ and Imâm Ibn Qudâma in Rawdat al-Nâzir both said that an `Âlim may be an Imâm in a particular science and an uneducated common person in another.

Ibn `Abd al-Salâm said: "Most h.adîth scholars are ignorant in fiqh."38 A majority of 90% according to Anas ibn Sîrîn - among the Salaf!

Al-Dhahabî said: "The majority of the h.adîth scholars have no understanding, no diligence in the actual knowledge of h.adîth, and no fear of Allâh regarding it."39 All of the authorities al-Dhahabî listed as "those who are imitated in Islâm" are Jurisprudents and not merely h.adîth masters.

Al-Sakhâwî in his biography of Ibn H.ajar entitled al-Jawâhir wa al-Durar fi Tarjamat Shaykh al-Islâm Ibn Hajr states that al-Fâriqî said: "One who knows chains of h.adîth but not the legal rulings derived from them cannot be counted among the Scholars of the Law." His student Ibn Abî `As.rûn (d. 585) also followed this view in his book al-Intis.âr.40


Not Every Sound Hadîth Forms Evidence

Ibrâhîm al-Nakha`î said: "Truly, I hear a h.adîth, then I see what part of it applies. I apply it and leave the rest."41 Shaykh Muh.ammad `Awwâma said: "Meaning, what is recognized by the authorities is retained while anything odd (gharî, anomalous (shâdhdh), or condemned (munkar) is put aside."


Yazîd ibn Abî H.abîb said: "When you hear a h.adîth, proclaim it; if it is recognized, [keep it,] otherwise, leave it."42

Ibn Abî Laylâ said: "A man does not understand h.adîth until he knows what to take from it and what to leave."43

`Abd al-Rah.mân ibn Mahdî, the Commander of the believers in H.adîth, said: "It is impermissible for someone to be an Imâm [i.e. to be imitated] until he knows what is sound and what is unsound and until he does not take everything [sound] as evidence, and until he knows the correct way to infer knowledge [in the Religion]."44

Al-Shâfi`î narrated that Mâlik ibn Anas was told: "Ibn `Uyayna narrates from al-Zuhrî things you do not have!" He replied: "Why, should I narrate every single h.adîth I heard? Only if I wanted to misguide people!"45

Shaykh `Abd al-Fattâh. Abû Ghudda mentioned some of the above examples and commented: "If the likes of Yah.yâ al-Qat.t.ân, Wakî` ibn al-Jarrâh., `Abd al-Razzâq, Yah.yâ ibn Ma`în, and those who compare with them, did not dare enter into ijtihâd and fiqh, then how rash are the claimants to ijtihâd in our time! On top of it, they call the Salaf ignorant without the least shame nor modesty! Allâh is our refuge from failure."46

The blessings and peace of Allah on the Prophet
his Family and his Companions!


NOTES

1H.adîth of the Prophet narrated from Mu`âwiya by al-Bukhârî and Muslim.

2Al-Qârî, Mu`taqad Abî H.anîfata al-Imâm fî Abaway al-Rasûl `Alayhi al-S.alât wa al-Salâm (p. 42).

3A nearly-mass-narrated (mashhûr) sound h.adîth of the Prophet - Allâh bless and greet him - reported from several Companions by al-Tirmidhî, Abû Dâwûd, Ibn Mâjah, and Ah.mad.

4Ibn Abî H.âtim in the introduction of al-Jarh. wa al-Ta`dîl (p. 22-23); Ibn Abî Zayd, al-Jâmi` fî al-Sunan (p. 118-119); Ibn `Abd al-Barr, al-Intiqâ' (p. 61); al-Dhahabî. See Shaykh `Abd al-Fattah Abû Ghudda's comments on this statement in his notes on al-Lacknawî's al-Raf` wa al-Takmil (2nd ed. p. 368-369, 3rd ed. p. 90-91).

5In al-Fatâwâ al-H.adîthiyya (p. 283).

6Narrated by Ibn H.ibbân in the introduction to al-Majrûh.în (1:42). He then narrates from Ibn Wahb a similar statement where he adds the names of `Amr ibn al-H.ârith and Ibn Mâjishûn.

7Narrated by Ibn `Asâkir and al-Bayhaqî cf. Ibn Rajab, Sharh. al-`Ilal (1:413) and `Awwâma (p. 76).

8Narrated by Qâd.î `Iyâd.. in Tartîb al-Madârik (2:427).

9In Ibn al-Subkî, T.abaqât al-Shâfi`iyya al-Kubrâ (2:128).

10Narrated by al-Khat.îb, al-Faqîh wal-Mutafaqqih (2:80).

11Shaykh Ismâ`îl al-Ans.ârî as quoted by `Awwâma, Athar (p. 77).

12Ibn H.ajar, Tahdhîb al-Tahdhîb (10:449-452 #817) and al-Dhahabî's Manâqib Abî H.anîfa.

13Narrated by al-Dhahabî in Tadhkirat al-H.uffâz. (1:307) and Ibn H.ajar in Tahdhîb al-Tahdhîb (10:450).

14Narrated by Ibn `Abd al-Barr in al-Intiqâ' (p. 124).

15Narrated by al-Dhahabî in the Siyar (10:205).

16Cf. Ibn Abî al-Wafâ, last page of the Karachi edition of al-Jawâhir al-Mud.iyya.

17In Ibn `Abd al-Barr, Jâmi` Bayân al-`Ilm (1:83-84), al-Qâd.î `Iyâd.., Tartîb al-Madârik (2:62), al-Shât.ibî, al-Muwâfaqât (4:97-98).

18"The Knowledge That Benefits is That Whose Rays Expand in the Breast and Whose Veil is Lifted in the Heart." Ibn `At.â' Allâh, H.ikam (#213).

19Siyar (10:642).

20Narrated mursal from al-H.asan by Ibn `Asâkir in his Târîkh and al-Khat.îb in al-Jâmi` li Akhlâq al-Râwî (1983 ed. 1:88 #27) cf. al-Jâmi` al-S.aghîr (#9598) and Kanz (#29337).

21Cited by al-Dhahabî in the Siyar (al-Arna'ût. ed. 9:158, 12:328-329).

22Cf. al-Dhahabî, Tadhkirat al-H.uffâz. (1:307) and Ibn H.ajar in Tahdhîb al-Tahdhîb (11:126-127).

23In al-Sakhâwî, al-Jawâhir wa al-Durar (p. 21).

24Ibn Rajab, Sharh. `Ilal al-Tirmidhî (1:411).

25Cited from Zayd ibn Abî al-Zarqa' by al-Dhahabî, Siyar (al-Arna'ût. ed. 7:275).

26Al-Sakhâwî, al-Jawâhir wa al-Durar (p. 20-23).

27Narrated by al-Harawî al-Ans.ârî in Dhamm al-Kalâm (4:139 #907).

28In Ibn `Abd al-Barr, Jâmi` Bayân al-`Ilm (2:175).

29In al-Dhahabî, Tadhkirat al-H.uffâz. (2:776).

30Narrated by Ibn Abî H.âtim in the introduction to his al-Jarh. wa al-Ta`dîl (p. 293), Ibn al-Jawzî in Manâqib al-Imâm Ah.mad (p. 63), and al-Dhahabî in Târîkh al-Islâm (chapter on Ah.mad).

31In Muslim and the Four Sunan.

32In al-Bukhârî and Muslim.

33Ibn al-Subkî in T.abaqât al-Shâfi`iyya, al-Sakhâwî in his introduction to al-Jawâhir wa al-Durar, and al-Haytamî in his Fatâwâ H.adîthiyya (p. 283). Something similar is narrated of Ah.mad by Ibn Rajab in his Dhayl T.abaqât al-H.anâbila (1:131) and al-`Ulaymî in al-Manhaj al-Ah.mad (2:208).

34Ibn `Abd al-Barr, Jâmi` Bayân al-`Ilm (2:160).

35Ish.âq ibn Ibrâhîm ibn Makhlad, known as Ish.âq ibn Râhûyah or Râhawayh, Abû Ya`qûb al-Tamîmî al-Marwazî al-Hanzali (d. 238), one of the major h.adîth Masters. Abû Qudâma considered him greater than Imâm Ah.mad in memorization of h.adîth, a remarkable assessment considering Ah.mad's knowledge of 700,000 to a million narrations according to his son `Abd Allâh's and Abû Zur`a al-Râzî's estimations. He once said of himself: "I never wrote anything except I memorized it, and I can now see before me more than 70,000 h.adîths in my book"; "I know the place of 100,000 h.adîths as if I were looking at them, and I memorize 70,000 of them by heart - all sound (s.ah.îh.a) - and 4,000 falsified ones." [Narrated by al-Khat.îb in al-Jâmi` li Akhlâq al-Râwî (2:380-381 #1832-1833).]
He did not reach the same stature in fiqh. Al-Bayhaqî and others narrate that he unsuccessfully debated al-Shâfi`î on a legal question, as a result of which the latter disapproved of his title as the "jurisprudent of Khurâsân." To a Jahmî scholar who said: "I disbelieve in a Lord that descends from one heaven to another heaven," Ibn Râhûyah replied: "I believe in a Lord that does what He wishes." [Narrated by al-Dhahabî who identifies the scholar as Ibrâhîm ibn (Hishâm) Abî S.âlih. in Mukhtas.ar al-`Uluw (p. 191 #234).] Al-Bayhaqî comments: "Ish.âq ibn Ibrâhîm al-Hanzali made it clear, in this report, that he considers the Descent (al-nuzûl) one of the Attributes of Action (min s.ifât al-fî`l). Secondly, he spoke of a descent without `how'. This proves he did not hold displacement (al-intiqâl) and movement from one place to another (al-zawâl) concerning it." [See post titled, "The `Descent' of Allâh Most High".] Sources: Ibn Abî Ya`lâ, T.abaqât al-H.anâbila (1:6, 1:184); al-Bayhaqî, Manâqib al-Shâfi`î (1:213) and al-Asmâ' wa al-S.ifât (2:375-376 #951); al-Dhahabî, Siyar (9:558 #1877); Ibn al-Subkî, T.abaqât al-Shâfi`iyya al-Kubrâ (2:89-90, 9:81).

36Narrated by Abû Ya`lâ in T.abaqât al-H.anâbila (1:329) and cited by Shaykh Abû Ghudda in his introduction to Muh.ammad al-Shaybânî's Muwat.t.a' and his short masterpiece al-Isnâd min al-Dîn (p. 68).

37Narrated by al-Râmahurmuzî in al-Muh.addith al-Fâs.il (p. 560).

38Ibn `Abd al-Salâm, al-Fatâwâ al-Maws.iliyya (p. 132-134).

39In al-Sakhâwî, al-Jawâhir wa al-Durar (p. 18).

40Al-Sakhâwî, al-Jawâhir wa al-Durar (p. 20-23).

41Narrated from Ibn Abî Khaythama by Abû Nu`aym in the H.ilya (4:225) and Ibn Rajab in Sharh. `Ilal al-Tirmidhî (1:413).

42In Ibn Rajab, Sharh. `Ilal al-Tirmidhî (1:413).

43In Ibn `Abd al-Barr, Jâmi` Bayân al-`Ilm (2:130).

44Narrated by Abû Nu`aym in the H.ilya (9:3).

45Narrated by al-Khat.îb in al-Jâmi` li Akhlâq al-Râwî (2:109).

46Abû Ghudda, al-Isnâd min al-Dîn (p. 68). He means by his remarks al-Albânî and others of his ilk. Abû Ghudda's student, Shaykh Muh.ammad `Awwâma, listed several examples of this rule of the Salaf in his Athar al-H.adîth al-Sharîf fî Ikhtilâf al-A'immat al-Fuqahâ' ("The Mark of the Noble H.adîth in the Differences of the Imâms of Jurisprudence").

Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad ©

http://www.livingisl...rg/n/sfh_e.html

This post has been edited by tru_Qur'an: 08 July 2009 - 10:22 PM

[Abu Haneefa]

Assalamu^alaykum

The issue runs much deep when analysed critically. The group in question generally oppose the concept of 'taqleed' (following qualified scholarship in matters of jurisprudence). Though it becomes apparent they themselves are not free from it, and also perform taqleed, unfortunately of those less qualified as the brother has mentioned.

Also most of their anti taqleed rhetoric is self contradictory, as the laymen from their manhaj considers taqleed to range from shirk to haram, where as most of their scholars claim to be 'muqalids' (to a certain degree) of the Madhab of Imam Ahmad and also some of them make it obligatory for the lay person to follow qualified scholarship in the form of madhabs.

[tru_Qur'an]

Madhhab Differences in Islam

http://www.livingislam.org/mdf_e.html