good points - but how about where ulama themselves have come to an ijmaa on an issue for a particular opinion contradicting what is attributed to a particular school of thought.
I dont think those you refer to as ghair muqallids (not the informed ones anyway) go and dig up a hadith and then just apply it like that. They generally refer to the strngest opinion as expressed by the jamhoor al ulama. Indeed isnt that safer then sticking to just one school rigidly?
Doesnt Allah AWJ Himself command us to refer back to Him and His messenger(saw) on matters in which we differ? So then how could we justify following all of the opinions of one school rigidly when we know that some of the opinions may be incorrect and contested by other mujtahideen. Eg; Would it be wrong for a Shafi to abandon the ruling that touching a woman breaks wudu? Especially after knowing the the majority of ulama of the salaf oppose this understanding of shafi (ra).
A person thus following only the commands of a particular madhab would be doing injustice by not attaining the correct ruling on ertain issues.
Also when Allah refers to obedience, one of the categories He mentions are those in power over us. This has been interpreted in tafseer as the leaders and the ulama. Allah didnt singularise and ask us to follow just one alim here did he?
Also when Allah(saw) says (translation) fas'aloo ahl ad dhikr he refered to the asking the 'people of dhikr' , not a singular alim?
Thus the concept of following only one imam blindly is not balanced, especially when Islam does not rigidly state that to be correct.
JazaakhAllah- sorry brother but I don not know how to post on the forum.
In answer to your wise questions:
1)But being a Hanafi myself, can you tell me one Mas'ala in the Hanafi school that contradicts the Quran or the Sunnah?
Off the top of my head, I recall a much deeper matter. And that is that according to (need to verify this) Ali al-Qari's naming two chapter-titles of his Sharh al-fiqh al-akbar: "Belief neither increases nor decreases".
Also according to Mufti Ebrahim Desai, in Mirqaat Vol. 1 pg. 49 Ashrafiyyah , Imaam Abu Hanifah, the Ashaa'irah (according to one narration) and the Maaturidiyyah hold that 'A'amaal are not a condition for Imaan.
This is completely at odds with both Quraan, sunnah and ijma.
Therefore, in this aspect , naturally one who follows the illustrious hanafi school will have to differ, otherwise he will end up with irjaa.
'see my other posts regarding the comments of Imam Abu Hanifa by the teachers of Imam Bukhari. These teachers were also Hanafi and were more knowledgable that imam Bukhari. '
Yes but Bukharee himself is reported to have classed Imam Abu Hanifa as weak in hadith. Also, Ibn Al Mubarak (ra) who was known as the scholar of the east and west left the hanafi school whilst Imam Tahawi joined the Hanafi school- these things show that those in the past would take and leave rulings once establishing possibly what was correct for them.
'Sometimes these Ulama of the Salaf (i.e. Imam Malik) would go against the Hadith they would quote in their own books and practice something completely different. For example, Imam Malik narrates the Hadith of Raful Yadain in his Muwatta but this is not part of their school. Now if the Ulama say that we have all the evidence in the world in one database, and we think that Imam Malik was wrong here, what would you say?'
But Raf Al Yadain is also not part of the hanafi school , yet we see hanafi ulama like Shawkani allowing it. We also see illustrious students of Abu Hanifa like Abu yusuf differing with him on fiqhi matters in aspects that also are not officially recognised by the hanafi school. This is not something strange.
'So why follow the Hadith which shows clearly the practice of Raful Yadain. The actions of the people of Madinah was evidence for the abrogation'
But there were also sahabah whos words indicate that the Prophet (saw) never left Raf alyadain (an indication for non abrogation)- so why negate what they said? Wouldnt it be more balanced to quote this aspect of salah as an ikhtilaaf? If Malik didnt do it, thewhat about ahmed ibn Hambal and Shafi who did recognise it? Surely we should recognise it at the most as an ikhtilaf since that was how our pre-decessors dealt with it.
Also is what you said about Malik accurate?
Ibn Abdilbirr said "No one narrates from Maalik leaving raf'ul yadein except Ibn Qaasim. And the one we follow is raising hands based upon the hadith of Ibn Umar and this is what Ibn Wahb and others have narrated from Maalik and Tirmizi narrated from Maalik nothing except this." And Khattabi said and Qurtubi followed him in Almufhim that this (doing raful yadein) is the last and more correct of Maalik's opinion.
For the sake of argument, even if it was not in existance in Madinah, then can we negate the indicated practice of some sahabah following it as shown in Bulugh al Maram? If that is the case then we would be indirectly saying that some sahabah were wrong. And that would be wrong in itself. BTW if you could bring me the authenticated quote of Ibn Umars student then it would be helpful.
Because as far as I know the reality of the quote is very murky.
I know that you are speaking based on the narration of Mujahid form Ibn Umar that he did not do it. And they (muhadditheen) replied with criticizind the chain of narrators saying its narrator 'Abubakr bin Ayyash's' memory became bad inhis later years. Even if its chain is correct then Saalim, Naafi and others who were studentsof Ibn Umar affirm Raful Yadein from Ibn Umar And more is preferred over less (number of narrators), especially if the majority is affirming and the single person (mujahid) is negating. Also the combining of the two narrations is possible that Ibn Umar did not think it is Waajib, doing it sometimes and leaving it at other times. And what tells you about the weakness of it is what is narrated by Bukhari in Juzz Raful Yadein from Maalik that Ibn Umar whenever he used to see a person not raising hands when going for rukoo and when getting up from it, he would through pebbles at him.
Thus your narration regarding Mujahid is very weak to say the least with all due respect.
'he Concept of following one school is safer rather than trying to select the strongest opinions by our selves. I would only pick and choose the strongest opinions if I had a time machine, I would be able to go back and see/hear the Hadith they way it should have been heard etc.. '
I think we have quotes from the sahabah that nobody is to be followed blindly except Muhammad (saw).
BaarakAllaahu feek for your enlightening discussion brother - I truly have gained much. May Allahj reward you for your zeal and guide us all to what pleases him, ameen
ps : Some further information regarding Bukharis teachers who you mentioned:
Bukhari narrated from his teacher Ali Alnmadini right after the hadith of Ibn Umar in this chapter: It is Haq (right) upon the Muslims to raise their hands when doing rukoo and when getting up fro it beacause of this hadith of Ibn Umar, as in the narration of Ibn Asaakir. Bukhari narrated this in Juzz Raf'ul Yadein and added: Ali Almadeeni was the most knowledgeable of his contemporaries. And opposing it is the saying of some hanafis that raf'ul yadein nullifies the prayers. And some people of the West who came later said the doer of Raf'ul yadein is an innovator, and so some of their (probably the muhadditheen) researchers were inclined to stop doing raf'ul yadein as a means of stopping this evil (of being labelled innovators), as narrated by Ibn Daqeeq Aleed. And Bukhari said in Juzz Raf'ul Yadein "Whovever claimed thisis an innovation has criticized the Sahabah, because none of them have been narrated of not doing raf'ul yadein" and he said "and neither are the narrations of not doing more authentic than the narrations of doing Raf'ul Yadein". And Allah knows best. And Bukhari also mentions that 17 sahabah narrated this. Alhaakim and Abulqaasim bin mandah mentioned that among them are the Asharah Mubasharrah bil jannah (10 sahabah promised paradise)
Please fell free to add this to the forum dear brother- and I apologise for not being able to add it myself.
I do not hold the view that AbuHanifa (ra) was weak in hadith. However, there are quotes attributed to the salaf that this was the caes.
I think Ibn al Mubarak was the one who praised Abu Hanifa in fiqh yet classed him as weak in hadith. Thus the status of Abu Hanifah as a master faqeeh is not being questioned.
Ibn Al Mubarak became independent of the hanafi school at a later time- correct me if im wrong.
It is possible that Bikahri didnt agree with ibn Qattan on the discussed issue.
I deleved into Raf al yadayn in more detail in order to establish that the quotes you were relying on have been criticized heavily bu ulama. This is an example of where one opinion is given weight over another or reconciliation is made.
Just one question brother, do you agree that Iman goes up and down or are you of the belief that it is constant?
ps: Please accept my apologies for the terrible grammar in my writing!
another reason why raf alyadayn may be beneficial to discuss is because after looking around at this website, it is apparent that there is a lot of (or what seems to be) anti raf al yadayn sentiment expressed in some the articles.
btw - i do not necessarily agree with the criticisms of Abu Haniah (ra) regarding hadith as metioned by some- just wanted to point out that these issues whether true or false do exist-
for example Nasa'i included Abu Hanifa in his book al-Du`afa' wa al-matrukin (p. 233 #614) where he said: Nu`man ibn Thabit Abu Hanifa, laysa bi al-qawi fi al-hadith, kufi "He is not strong in hadith."
Ibn Hibban's outlandish declaration in his Kitab al-majruhin (3:63-64) that Abu Hanifa is not to be relied upon because "he was a Murji' and an innovator."
According to Imam Muslim , Abu Hanifah and other proponents relate that Jibril asked the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم "What are the rites (shara'i) of Islam" rather than "What is Islam?"
Abu Dawood seems to disagree with Muslim that Abu Hanifa changed the wording of hadith here.
Imam Muslim is alos reported to have said In al-asma wa al-kina i "mudhtaribul hadith 'ala qillati riwayatihi" (confusing texts despite the small number of texts he narrated
It would be eye opening if muftisays would point out criticisms and then refute them aswell- i checked the link you pasted-JazaakhAllah it was very nice
no problem akhee- i understand that you may be busy at work
I think we should not rely on what Shaykh Albani said, rather we should go to the references themselves.
also I have not met many people who do not rigidly stick to one madhab rejecting scholars be they classical or contemporary.
For example if you look at who some call the 'salafis' , it is clear that the majority if not all of their fiqh falls within the four madhabs.
You will find that where they disagree with the opinion of a particular madhab on an issue, then that disagreement has plenty of scholarly backing and evidence behind it. Aside from the laws on talaq(which i dont think aevry salafi adheres to Ibn Taymiyyah on) there is not really much that I can see.
Even Ibn Taymiyyah himself said that it is rare to find the truth outside of the four madhahib.
The point is that every scholar can be right or wrong. We follow him in what is right and where other scholars do not agree with a particular ruling of his, we need to delve further if we are capable
i agree with you that we have funny and so called 'scholars' of the 2oth century brother-particularly those liars associated with the modern day Saudi salafi cult, however this does not negate the fact that mujaddideen will always come at the head of every 100 years as indicated inthe hadith.
I dont think following the strongest opinion based upon ijma is following desires-rather ijmaa is evidence and following it means following the evidence. The opposite of this where we choose the opinion of one scholar over ijmaa is closer to following desires in this case-wouldnt you agree?
'Looks like the 20th centuary has given birth to some new Fuqaha who will now disect the four schools of fiqh and create fitna amongst the Ummah and cause even more confusion. '
I think that ulama criticising what they felt was wrong with each others opinion was around since the time of the four imams-looking at the criticisms is evidence of that-
As far as i know the only translation of any thing i have seen by MohsinKhan is the english transalationof the Qur'aan lol!
bro if the hanafi school did not initially believe that iman is constant and have issues with iman, then why do we have ulama from the past criticising proponents of the school for irjaa?
I would advise you to research the statements of ulama dear brother, IN ARABIC and not based upon transalations of Muhsin Khan etc, since it clear that you do not trust these transalations and that only the original references may bring peace to your heart and a final opinion on such issues- my sincere advice to you my dear brother
u people r playing with fire
Do you see the description in the 1st paragraph.. well let's try it as if you were talking about your own YOURSELF... you'll be amazed at how well it fits.
The Deception of the YOU [you, who hide behind YOUR OWN interpretation of the 4 Madhabs, which had nothing to do with the madhaahib of the illustrious 4 Imaams of the Sunnah].
When a YOU wish to unfetter YOURself from the restrictions of the Shariah and the Sunnah in the present day, the solution for YOU is to become a so-called MADHABI. Once YOU join this deviant sect, YOU are free to find expression for his nafsaani opinions. In order to draw unwary and ignorant Muslims into its fold of dhalaal and baatil, the modernists employ deception on a large scale.
A salient feature of this sect of baatil is YOUR TWISTING of the Madhabs of the Salf-e-Saalihoon. Inspite of YOUR TWISTING of the Madhaahib of Haqq espoused by the Salf-e-Saalihoon, YOU mudhill (deviate who lead others astray) seek to bamboozle the unwary and the ignorant by making ostentatious claims of YOUR 'Love' and 'respect' for the Ulama and Fuqaha. YOU are ignorant. YOU lack the knowledge to distinguish between right and left; YOU [CLAIM] not possess the ability to verify and understand the statements of the Fuqaha which YOU selectively quote to bolster their corruptive arguments.
This is one example of the deception YOU employ to hoodwink the unwary and the ignorant.
Amazing.. how well it fits YOU.. Ask yourself.. when you pray, do you perform raf-al-yadayn (the raising of the hands like the Prophet, salAllahu alayhi wa sallam)?? If you're a staunched 'hanafi', you probably dont, even though there are AUTHENTIC AHADEETH IN SAHIH AL-BUKHARI do support it... as a matter of fact, Imaam al-Bukhari has a whole book on this one topic.. but YOU, you know better that Imaam Bukhari and what is sahih and what isnt.