The Evolution of Fiqh(9.THE IMAAMS AND TAQLEED)

In the preceding chapters we have traced the historical

development of Fiqh and the Madh-habs, showing their

interrelationship and their contribution to a general, as well as

specific, understanding of Islaam as revealed in the Qur’aan and the

Sunnah. It should be noted that both Fiqh (Islamic law) and the

Madh-habs (schools of Islamic thought) were and are necessary

additions complementing the divine revelations which define the

basic principles giverning man’s rights and responsibilities in his

relationships with Allaah and his fellow man.
 It is through specific applications of the interpretations
 of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah that

Allaah’s divine will can be made manifest to man over time and

through space. With God-given intellectual powers man (specifically

Islamic scholars) can provide relevant interpretations of the general

to meet the particular: thence relevance of the Madh-hab (the circle

of Islamic scholars) and Fiqh (the body of Islamic laws together with

principles for deducing these laws). Herein lies the true importance

of Fiqh and the Madh-hab in Islaam.

Now since Islaam is a religion divinely ordained for all men

at all times and in all climes, it was given to scholars in different

regions and times to evolve principles of Fiqh as well as specific

laws of Fiqh in order to resolve various new issues as they arose. The

correctness of their interpretations was proportional to their innate

capabilities and to the type and quantity of evidence available to

them at the time of making rulings. Some were faced with the

additional factor of cultural differences, and many were deprived of

the assistance to be gained from mural consultation, owing to their

distance from their colleagues and the consequent difficulties of

communication.
Hence the differences of opinion that arose from

region to region. Despite various handicaps, the early scholars

discharged their duties to Islaam and to their fellowmen by using

their God-given powers of intellect to interpret Allaah’s purposes for

men. Situated in different parts of the Muslim state, they became the

founders of different schools of Islamic thought, hence the

multiplication of Madh-habs at one stage in the evolution of the

Islamic law and the Muslim state. Historically, therefore, the

appearance of more than one Madh-hab was inevitable. 

 

Furthermore, as the numbers of Madh-habs increased 
and communication and other factors exercised their influence,
 difference and contradictions, too, were a natural outcome. 
However, so long as scholars managed to keep the goal 
to truth foremost in mind and were not led astray by

sectarianism, fanaticism, or a desire for personal glory and reward,

the essential spirit of Islaam was preserved in their Madh-habs. 
In such circumstances, scholars were in no way reluctant to 
abandon their individual opinions in favor of rulings by others 
which were clearly shown to be nearer the intended 
meaning deducible from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. 

 

In others words, there was a continuing

search for truth up until such time as the negative factors previously

mentioned (sectarianism and desire for personal glory) became

dominant in the lives of some of the scholars. Then, indeed, blind

following of Madh-hab (Taqleed) coupled with the ban on Ijtihaad

led to the widespread promotion of sectarianism among the masses

and the general decline in the search for truth among many scholars.

Thereafter, the four survining Madh-habs, with their different 
and sometimes contradictory rulings, assumed the
 character of infallibility, and spurious Hadeeths arose to
 bolster this anti-Islamic trait. 

As a counter to this decline, various reform movements through

the ages have called for a unification of the Madh-habs or, in some

cases, rejection of the need for any Madh-hab. The former position is

a legitimate one, as we have shown; the latter is an extremist one,

possibly heretical since it overlooks the importance of a unified

school of Islamic thought as a necessary complement to the Qur’aan

and the Sunnah, for a better understanding and appreciation of

Allaah’s divine laws.

 

From the historical development of Fiqh and the evolution of

the Madh-habs described in the preceding chapters, we have seen

that there was a period during which natural differences among the

various Madh-habs became extremely exaggerated to the point of

sectarianism, so much so that scholars of that time discarded Ijtihaad

and imposed upon the generality of Muslims the blind following

(Taqleed) of one of the four major Madh-habs. 
However, the Imaams to whom the four schools are attributed were themselves totally against the enthronement of these differences 
and fought vehemently against Taqleed either among their 
own followers or among the masses in general.
 Yet, till today, many people feel that if an authentic Hadeeth should
 be discarded because, accepting it would mean declaring that 
the Imaam of one’s Madh-hab was mistaken in his ruling
 which, in their opinion is an act of disrespect akin to blasphemy.

 Little do they realize that their preference of their

Imaam’s opinion over the Prophet’s (s.w.) statement is itself in total

opposition to the stand taken by their own Imaam, and is in fact

bordering on a form of Shirk[Association of other gods with
 Allaah (i.e. idolatry] known as “Shirk fee Tawheed al- Ittibaa‘”,
 that is sharing the unquestioned following which belongs
 only to theProphet (s.w.).

 For in the declaration of one’s Islaam

(there is no god but Allaah and Muhammad is the messenger of

Allaah), the Prophet (s.w.) is accepted as being the only person who

should be followed unquestioningly, since following him is

equivalent to following Allaah.

As most Muslims today are unaware of the contradiction

between the position of the early Imaams hand that of their Madhhab

is it exists today, it is appropriate there to take a closer look at

the stand taken by the early Imaams and their students towards

Taqleed as revealed in their actual statements.