The Evolution of Fiqh(9.5,9.6 & 9.7 )

Because of the care which the great Imaams took in warning

their Students away from blind initation, those early scholars never

hesitated to reject what the Imaams taught when new Hadeeths

became available. Abu Yoosuf and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan

differed from their teacher Abu Haneefah in about one third of the

rulings of their Madh-hab,Al-Haashiyah, vol. 1, p.62.

 and similarly, al-Muzanee and the others differed from their teacher rash-Shaafi’ee on many rulings.

 

The above mentioned quotations were only a few of the

many sayings of the Four Imaams and their students in which they

demanded strict adherence to the Hadeeths and prohibited the blind

imitation of their opinions, may Allaah be pleased with them. 
 Their statements are perfectly clear and leave no room for

misinterpretation or apologetic explanations. Therefore, whoever

adheres to the Sunnah, even if he finds himself in conflict with some

of the opinions of the Imaam of his Madh-hab will not be opposed to

the spirit of that Madh-habs simultaneously with a firm grip 
“on the rope of Allaah”.

 Conversely, to discard certain reliable Hadeeths

simply because they contradict some of the opinions of the Imaams,

is to be in total opposition to the position taken by the Imaams

themselves. Moreover, the rejection of reliable Hadeeths is in

opposition to Allaah and His messenger(s.w).

Muhammad Naasir ad-Deen al-Albaanee, Sifah Salaah an-Nabee,

foreword pp. 34-35.

 As is evident in Allaah’s statement in the Qur’aan to His
 Prophet (s.w.), “No, by your Lord, they do not believe until they

make you the judge between them in their

disputes without being distressed over your

judgement; nay, accepting it wholeheartedly.”
Soorah an-Nisaa (4):65.

For example, Imaam Muhammad ibn al-Hasan in his

narration of Imaam Maalik’s book, al-Muwatta, contradicted his

teacher Imaam Abu Haneefah in about 20 different rulings. Among

them was the following case in which Imaam Muhammad said, “Abu

Haneefah did not feel that there was any ordained Salaah (prayer) for

Istisqaa, (Prayer for rain in times of drought) but in my opinion, the Imaam should lead the people in two units of Salaah, (for Istisqaa) make a Du’aa(Informal prayer)and reverse his cloak,”

 Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, at-Ta’leeq al-Mumajjid ‘Alaa Muwatta’

Muhammad, p. 158, quoted in Sifah Salaah an-Nabee, p. 38.

 Another example is that of the inheritance of the

grandfather if the father of the dead person is also dead. Abu Yoosuf

and Muhammad both rejected Abu Haneefah’s position and joined

the position of the other three Imaams, giving the grandfather a sixth

of the inheritance which would have gone to the father were he alive.

‘Isaam Ibn Yoosuf al-Balakhee, who was a student of Imaam

Muhammad ibn al-Hasan and a close follower of Abu Yoosuf, used

to make a lot of rulings which differed from those of Abu Haneefah

and his two companions, because the latter were not aware of certain

evidence which later became available to him.

 Ibn ‘Aabideen, Rasm al-Muftee, vol. 1, p. 27, quoted in
 Sifah Salaah an- Nabee, p. 37.

 For example, he used to raise his hands before and 
after Rukoo’ (bowing in Salaah), as described
 in authentic Hadeeths by host of Sahaabah, even 
though the three main Imaams of his Madh-hab ruled

otherwise.
Al-Fawaa’id al-Baahiyah fee Taraajim al-Hanafiyah, p. 116, quoted in

Sifah Salaah an-Nabee, foreword,p. 39.

Allaah also went on to warn those who reject the Sunnah
 of His Prophet (s.w.), saying,

“Let those who contradict your order be warned

that they will be afflicted with trials and a painful

punishment.” 
Soorah an-Noor (24):63.

Nevertheless, the prohibition of Taqleed does not mean that

everyone must return to the sources before doing anything and it

does not mean that all the work of the earlier scholars should be

rejected or neglected, for that would be impractical and in most cases

impossible. It does, however, mean that those who have sufficient

knowledge of the various branches of Islamic sciences should not

hesitate to took at the sources as well as the opinions of all the

scholars, regardless of their Madh-hab. 
 
A scholar should be openminded

in his search for knowledge otherwise his rulings are likely

to be biased and sectarian. Let us not forget that even in searching

through the sources he is obliged to rely on the great works of the

earlier scholars in one way or another.
 In Fiqh, totally independent thought is impossible and 
efforts to achieve it undesirable, as it tends

to lead to deviation and heresy. On any particular issue the true

scholar is likely to either follow a ruling of one or another of the

early scholars, or deduce his ruling from one of their deductions. In

so dong, he will be following one of the early Imaams directly or

indirectly. However, this form of following is not to be considered

Taqleed, (blind rigid imitation), which we have shown was forbidden

categorically by the Imaams. This form is called Ittibaa’ wherein

reliable Hadeeths take precedence over all opinions, or as both Abu

Haneefah and ash-Shaafi’ee said, “If the Hadeeth is found to be

Saheeh, it is my Madh-hab”.

It is obvious that the great majority of Muslims will not be

able to return to the sources, due to their lack of knowledge, and they

will therefore be obliged to apply Ittibaa’ to the degree of their

ability. Many can achieve an awareness of the relevant Hadeeths by

asking questions concerning the basis for rulings given to them and

reading the books of Hadeeth. No true scholar should be offended by

such questions if politely worded. 
Similarly, if the masses are forced to seek answers from books,
 they should try to choose books, which

mention explanations and proofs along with the various rulings, and

books, which are not biased, or sectarian. If such books are not

readily available, then they may still avoid Taqleed by not restricting

themselves to the books of one Madh-hab. As long as they are

prepared to follow the Sunnah, whenever it is presented to them,

regardless of which Madh-hab it may be found in, they are in effect

practicing Ittibaa’, not Taqleed.
 

1. Most Muslims are unaware of the fact that blind following of a

Madh-hab (Taqleed is diametrically opposed to the position and

teachings of the founders of the Madh-habs.

2. All of the Imaams and their students were on record as being

opposed to the blind following of their opinions. Instead they

repeatedly emphasized the importance of referring to the primary

sources, the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, as the basis of legal

rulings.

3. The Imaams and their students continuously emphasized the fact

that their rulings were subject to error.

4. Authentic Hadeeths were given precedence by the Imaams over

their own opinions. On the basis of authentic Hadeeths not

available to the Imaams, their students later overruled several

rulings previously made by the Imaams.

5. Giving preference to the opinion of a Madh-hab over an

authentic Hadeeth borders on Shirk since preference contravenes

the allegiance owed to Allaah and His chosed messenger.

6. All Muslims are repaired to follow with reason (Ittibaa’) the

rulings of the early scholars in order to preserve the pristine

purity of Islaam as revealed to the Prophet (s.w.) and conveyed

to his companions.