Is Dr Akram Nadwi Reliable In Aqida And Fiqh?

Unspecified

141

Brother

112

#16 [Permalink] Posted on 9th April 2017 22:12

Quote:

A valid reason should not be understood as simply referring to cases of real need or necessity. Rather, even convenience cab be a valid reason to follow another opinion. For example, you may choose to pray Asr according to the earlier time because it is easier for you from a scheduling perspective, something important for this working and studying. Similarly, you may choose to eat seafood because your family does so.

This is really a very poor answer and does nothing but open the floodgates to fitnah in a far worse way than the salafis ever could by being ghair muqallid (at least the salafis stick to the opinion which they think will bring them closer to Allah tala, not picking and choosing one of convenience/whims).

There is a very thin line between convenience and whims, indeed if any. This answer, generally goes against the principles stated in the quotes of your earlier post.

So if I decided to pray asr at the earlier time becasue it'll make my life a tiny bit easier, does my wudhu also need to be in line with shafi madhab?

And just as an example of the fitnah this answer can open up:

1: It's convenient for me not to redo my wudhu if I touch a female as there's too many females in my house, so I'll adopt the hanafi madhab in this issue.
2: It's convenienet for me to pray Asr earlier so I'll adopt the shafi Madhab in this issue.
3: It's convenient for me not to wear leather socks as my feet get sweaty, so I'll just do masha over cotton socks.
4: It's convenient for me to allow my children to draw animate pictures becasue I want them to become decent artists, So i'll adopt the maliki madhab in this issue.
5. It's extremely conveneient for me not to go to jummah when I'm at work, so I'll just adopt a hanafi opinion of this being a land of war and jummah not neccassary.

Islam just became a whole lot easier!

I can probably think up of a conveneince or whimsical need for just about any opinion I want to adopt.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Ryder

Unspecified

1,012

Brother

466

#17 [Permalink] Posted on 10th April 2017 00:11

Be Ryder all of these things could be discussed, but it doesn't take away from the original point being discussed, which is that scholars from all of the madhaib throughout history, despite knowing all of this, still did not enforce taqleed shaqsi on everyone , and did not state that taqlid shaksi is the only accepted position of the madhab. I only brought this post to show that a need or necessity does not have to be a life or death situation.

As I said, the point being made in the answer is not to clear either, as it could be speaking to being very lenient when choosing between issues only within a particular madhab.

And to be fair , let's look at the examples given:
1) praying asr salah in the earlier time is the view of three of the madhabs plus Imam Abu Hanifah's 2 students. So what's the big deal here?
2) three of the madhabs are more lenient when it comes to seafood, so its not like you are following some minority opinion in this case either. Actually if you want to be strict here, then you can't eat with your family because there is a possibly of seafood contaminating the utensils used to prepare the other halal meats etc.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Concerned

Unspecified

1,012

Brother

466

#18 [Permalink] Posted on 10th April 2017 00:35

This is not just theory it has real practical implications as well, depending on your situation. For example,a deobandi Gujarati growing up in a village in India, or in the UK, where there is a deobandi majority and the people only marry gujratis and within family, may not see this in the same way as a gujrati in the USA, or someone from a different ethnicity living in Canada for example. When you have family from all backgrounds its quite difficult to be staunch on the taqleed shaksi view.

Although today everyone is still exposed to all the various views from interacting with others on Facebook etc.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Concerned

Unspecified

1,012

Brother

466

#19 [Permalink] Posted on 10th April 2017 01:58

Can this thread be split from Ryder's first post?

The following is taken from Savious of Islamic Spirit, Vol 4. by Ml. Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi R.A. Note that this is not me quoting snippets from Shah Waliullah and trying to show his view on taqleed rather these are the words of Ml Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi regarding the Shah Waliullah's R.A. view on taqleed. I would assume this explanation also gives some insight into Ml Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi's own views. Download the pdf to read the full section and the direct quotes from Shah Waliullah.

The M o d e ra te View

A distinguishing feature of Shah Waliullah’s revivalist endeavour which was the result of his instinctive perception, was the moderate and balanced approach he had adopted in regard to ijtihad (individual reasoning) and taqleed (the unquestioning acceptance of the rulings of earlier jurists of one's own school). The Shah's approach in this matter showed his strong common sense, realism and discernment. On the one hand, there were scholars who deemed it incumbent on all Muslims, whether a scholar or a commoner, to follow the Qur’an and Sunnah and to derive legal rulings directly from these sources. They considered taqleed to be forbidden. This way of thought, though not explicitly spelt out by them, is the logical conclusion of the views expressed in the writings of the scholars of this school, headed by ‘Allama Ibn Hazm among the earlier academicians. But this was impracticable since it was beyond the competence of every Muslim to exercise individual reasoning in legal matters. On the other hand, there were those who considered taqlid obligatory for every Muslim and held the opinion that the least deviation from it amounted to waywardness and errancy almost in the same way as the former group deprecated taqlid of anyparticular school of jurisprudence. Those who favoured taqlid closed their eyes to the fact that the adoption of any particular juristic school was just a means to keep the common people away from following their own whims and personal predilections, to protect the Muslim society from confusion and anarchy, to bring about orderliness and uniformity in religious observances and, finally, to make it easier for the common people to abide by the injunctions of the shariah. But they took the means for the end and insisted on it so dogmatically that the entire issue which pertained to legal methodology was ossified as if it were an article of faith, abiding and immutable. The viewpoint of the Shah in this regard was nearer to the spirit of shari'ah. He drew inspiration from the practice followed in the earliest era of Islam which showed greater practical sense and feasibility since it met the demands of human life and psyche. In a chapter dealing with the practice followed by the people upto fourth century A.H. and thereafter in the investigation and scrutiny o f religious issues he has given in the Hujjat Allah al-Baligha a detailed account of the method of legal inquiry of those times-..........

The Shah adopted the course o f moderation between ijtihad and taqlid which chimed with the objectives Of the shari'ah,human psychology and the realities of life. He approved of taqlid on the conditions that intention was seemly and proper and one was clear in his mind about emulating the Prophet (on whom be peace). and following the injunctions of the Qur’an and the 'sunnah. He permitted dependence on an scholar solely on the ground of one’s confidence in his being an exponent and interpreter o f shan'ah by virtue of his being learned in the Qur'an and the sunnah. Such reliance was also to be accompanied by a willingness to discard a scholar in case the trust reposed in him proved to be misplaced. He held that a believer should not have the least hesitation in accepting a directive contained in a hadith if the opinion of the jurist was found to differ from it.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Concerned

Unspecified

1,012

Brother

466

#20 [Permalink] Posted on 10th April 2017 19:55

As mentioned , Shaykh Taha karaan said that the view of Imam Nawawi R.A which he quoted is also found in the writings of Shah Waliullah R.A. here is the text from Shah Waliullah's Hujjat Allah All Baligha. The entire section in that book dealing with taqleed and ijtihad is very interesting. Most of it is also mentioned in alinsaf fi bayan Sabab al ikhtilaf.

IMG_20170410_144415.jpg

Downloads: 90

[2116.16 kB]

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Concerned

Unspecified

1,012

Brother

466

#21 [Permalink] Posted on 12th April 2017 16:18

I happened to come across this which speaks on the issue of "need and necessity" when following a different madhab. Of course there are some other conditions mentioned when acting on this. It is from the Shafiifiqh.com Fatwa Dept:

Quote:

With that, it is valid for one to follow (i.e. taqlid), in whole or in part, any authority (i.e. mujtahid) that one wishes. This permission is not contingent on need or hardship.

www.islamqa.org/shafii/shafiifiqh/29999

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Informative x 1

Concerned

Unspecified

1,012

Brother

466

#22 [Permalink] Posted on 13th May 2017 23:54

The following is from Ml Ashraf Ali Thanwi's book on ijtihad and taqleed. In theory is very similar to what Shah Waliullah quoted from Imam Nawawi who quoted from Ibn Salah, may Allah have mercy on all of them. In practice it would be almost impossible to act on it due to the additional condition of following the weaker position first if possible.

Quote:

"Just as rejecting taqlid is deserving of censure, extremism and rigidity therein is also deserving of condemnation. It has preceded that a mujtahid is not imitated with the belief that he is the lawgiver and bringer of laws, but he is only imitated with the belief that he is a clarifier of the laws and an elucidator of the legislations and one who reveals the intent of Allah (Exalted is He) and the Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace). This is why taqlid is only acted upon when a matter negating that belief or eliminating it does not arise.
Thus, if it is clear to a scholar with depth of insight, perception of mind, fairness of temperament, by his investigation, or to a layperson through the medium of that scholar by the testimony of his heart – with the condition that he is fearful [of Allah] (muttaqi) – that the stronger [position] in this issue is another opinion, it will be examined if there is any possibility for the permissibility of acting on the weaker position based on the evidence of the Shari‘ah or not? If there is scope there, and it is feared that in publicising the disagreement there will be tribulation and confusion amongst the commoners, it is better in such a situation to act on the weaker position, to save the common Muslims from division. This is proven by what ‘A’ishah (Allah – Exalted is He – be pleased with her) narrate........However, if the weaker option does not allow for permissibility, rather it necessitates the omission of an obligation or the performance of a prohibition, and it has no evidence besides analogy, and there is an explicit authentic hadith for the stronger side, it is necessary to act on the hadith without hesitation, and taqlid is not permissible in this situation at all, because the foundation of religion is the Noble Qur’an and the Sunnah, and the objective of taqlid is nothing besides acting on them with ease and safety. So when the harmony between them [i.e. taqlid and acting on the Qur’an and Sunnah] is negated, it is necessary to act on the Qur’an and Sunnah, and rigidity on taqlid in such a situation is the taqlid on which censure has occurred in the Qur’an and Sunnah and the statement of the ‘ulama’. Thus it is narrated from ‘Adiyy ibn Hatim (Allah – Exalted is He – be pleased with him), he said: “I came to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace), and I heard him recite: ‘They have taken their rabbis and their monks as gods beside Allah’ (9:31) He said: ‘They would not worship them, but when they made anything halal, they considered it halal, and when they made anything haram, they made it haram.’” Al-Tirmidhi transmitted it.......[/quote]

The above translation is from an article by Mufti Taqi Uthmani, but the entire book (in poor english) can be read here www.scribd.com/document/76388042/Essence-of-Taqleed-Madha...

Earlier in the book,however, he mentioned this:

[quote]where there all maz-habs are spread, why are you still Hanafi over there?Answer: Because of above mentioned vital importance, we were following Hanafi maz-haball along. Now switch to other maz-hab, will be abandonment of individual Taqleed.Consequences are spoken already. Furthermore, there should be a reason for leaving onemaz-hab and take another. The person wants to switch the maz-hab; he should be qualifiedto make preferences. If he does not have the ability of Ijtihad, he would not know thereason of preferences, even if he understands a bit. it will open up a door for commonpeople who like to follow the desires and abandon individual Taqleed. If anything, whichleads common people to do mischief, elites are prevented from that. That is why scholarsprohibit switching the maz-hab.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Concerned

Is Dr Akram Nadwi Reliable In Aqida And Fiqh?

Font Size

Font Weight