Info on Salafism made easy

It should be noted that all the work in said forums are mostly the works of scholars who have narrated incidents from their own experiance or is a collection of work done by Ulama of past and present.

It is not based on one group of people as how it is being looked at. There are many different variants of the Salafi group. I personally have come across some very good brothers as well as some not so good, and they both have differences with each other.

So to class a group and base all the findings is not 100% correct.

I think it would be wiser to have Just the main differences highlighted and have that as one post.

The main differences would be
* The followers of the four schools of thought are agreed upon and accepted by each other. It has been so for over 1000 years.
* The Salafi school take from all four schools and find the strongest opinion (in their opinion). But bear in mind that not all Hadith are accepted by them. The Salafi school use the only the strongest of the Hadith from the famous books only.
The other four schools have taken many many other Hadith and Hadiths books into consideration.

* The Aqeedah is more or less the same, The Salafi give descriptions taken from Quran and Hadith and use them literally, whereas the Hanafi school also use the same description but dont go into physical details.
* Differences in rules arrise when there are many Hadith with different views, the four schools have formulated a method and use that method to come to conclusions.
* The Salafi act on what they believe is the strongest view, the followers of the four schools act on what their school has fixed as rules.

The Hanafi do not like to pick and mix rulings from other schools, as the following rule may not match up with the next rule in line.

Following One Particular Imam In Every Juristic Issue

It is generally believed that each one of the four schools (Hanafi, Shaf'i, Maliki and Hanbali), all being possible interpretations of the Shari'a, are correct and none of them can be held as something in contradiction with the Shari'a. However, a non professional who lacks the ability to compare between the arguments of each school cannot pick and mix between different views to satisfy his personal desires.The reason for this approach is twofold.

Allah has empathically ordered in a number of verses of the Holy Qur'an to follow the guidance of the shari'a, and has made it suictly prohibited for one to follow one's desires vis-a.-vis the rules of the Shari'a. The Muslim jurists, when interpreting the sources of the Shari'a, attempt never to satisfY their personal desires. They attempt to make their best effort to discover the spirit of Shari'a, and they base their opinions on the force of evidence and not merely on the search for convenience. They do not choose an interpretation on the basis of its suitability to their personal fancies; they choose it only on the basis of the strength of the evidence before them.

Now, if someone who has not studied Islamic law is allowed to choose any juristic view without consulting the arguments pertaining to those views, he will be at liberty to select only those views which seem to be more fulfilling to his personal requirements. This attitude will lead him to follow his own desires and not the guidance-a practice totally condemned in the Holy Qur'an.

For example, Imam Abu Hanifa رضي الله عنه is of the opinion that bleeding from any part of the body breaks the wudu', while Imam Shaf'i رضي الله عنه believes that bleeding does not break the wudu: On the other hand, Imam Shaf'i رضي الله عنه says that if a man touches a woman, his wudu'stands broken and he is obligated to make fresh wudu'before offering prayer, while Imam Abu Hanifa رضي الله عنه insists that merely touching a woman does not break the wudu.

How can the practice of "pick-and-mix" be allowed? A layman may well choose the Hanafi opinion in the matter of touching a woman and the Shaf'i view in the matter of bleeding. Consequently, he will deem his wudu' unbroken even when experiencing both situations together (i.e. he has bled and happened to touch a women) even though his wudu'stands broken now according to both Hanafi and Shaf'i opinions.

Similarly, according to the Shaf'i view, a traveller can combine the two prayers of Zuhr and 'Asr. However, at the same time, if a traveller makes up his mind to stay in a town for four days, he is no longer regarded as a traveller in the Shaf'i view. Hence, he cannot avail himself of the concession of shortening the prayers [qasr] nor of combining two prayers. On the other hand, the period of travel, according to the Hanafi view, is fourteen days, and a person can continue to shorten his prayers as long as he does not resolve to stay in a town for more than fourteen days.

A traveler who has entered a city to stay there for five days, cannot combine two prayers, according to both Imam Shaf'i and Imam Abu Hanifa رضى الله عنها. This is because, by staying for five days, he cannot use the two concessions of qasr and of combining two prayers according to Imam Shaf'i, and because combining two prayers is not allowed according to Imam Abu Hanifa. Nevertheless, the approach of "pick and mix" still leads some people to adopt the Shaf'i view in the matter of combining prayers and the Hanafi view in the matter of the period of journey.

It is evident from these examples that the selection of different views in different cases is not based on the force of arguments leading to them, but on the facility provided by each. Obviously this practice is tantamount to following one's desires, which is totally prohibited by the Holy Qur'an. If such an attitude is permitted, it will render the Shari'a a plaything in the hands of the ignorant, and no rule of Shari'a will remain immune to distortion. This is why the practice of "pick-and-mix" has been condemned by all the renowned scholars of Sharia. Imam Ibn Taymiya رضي الله عنه, the famous Hadith scholar and jurist, says in his Fatawa:

Some people follow at one time an Imam who holds marriage invalid, and at another time they follow an Imam who holds it valid. They do so only to serve their individual purpose and satisfY their desires. Such a practice is impermissible according to the consensus of all the Imams. (Fatawa Ibn Taymiya 2: 285-286).

This was the basic cause for the policy adopted by the later jurists, who made it necessary for the common people to adopt a particular school in its totality. If one prefers the Madhhab of Imam Abu Hanifa رضي الله عنه, then one should adopt it in all matters and with all its details. However, if one prefers another Madhhab one should adopt that one in full. One should not pick and mix between the different views of the schools for one's own benefit.

Info on Salafism made easy

Font Size

Font Weight