Chapter Two – The Issue of Taqlid (Imitation)
Literal Definition of Taqlid:
In the dictionary, Taqlid means to hang something around the neck, as Allama Zamakhshari Hanafi has written.
But when it is used in the context of religion, it means to accept someone’s statement without evidence and reflection. As found in reliable lexicons such as
, etc.
Maulana Sarfaraz Khan Safdar states that in the modern and well-known dictionary
, it is mentioned: “Qaladah fi kaza” means he followed someone’s statement without reflection.
Technical Definition:
The scholars of Usul (principles) have defined Taqlid as follows.
((التقليد العمل بقول الغير من غير حجة ))
That is, Taqlid (imitation) is the name of an action that is done based on someone’s statement without evidence. This very definition has been given by Allama Al-Amidi, who died in 613 AH
, by Bahr al-Uloom Abdul Ali, in Fawaid al-Rahmat pp. 400, Vol. 2, Egypt edition 1324 AH, by Allama Nawawi
, by Ibn Hajib (Mukhtasar 231), by Hadrami
, by Mufti Ahmad Yar Gujarati
, and by Maulvi Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Hanafi Barelvi in his Sharh
.
Maulana Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Hanafi Deobandi states that: Terminologically, Taqlid means acting upon the statement of one whose statement is not proof.
From this definition, it is established that Taqlid without evidence is obedience and following in which knowledge and reasoning are replaced by good opinion. It is an obvious fact that humans are endowed with knowledge, research, and inquiry; no one likes to follow someone blindly merely based on good opinion without thinking. Similarly, referring to scholars in unknown matters is not considered blameworthy by anyone.
It is clear that declaring any person from the Ummah as obligatory to follow and the most perfect example, and considering his statement as the final word, practically accepting his statement verbatim, describing deviation from him as misguidance or religious error, and even addressing those who differ with him as non-sectarian (La Madhhab) is Shirk (polytheism). Because the only one who is obligatory to obey is Allah alone, and following the Prophets is in reality obedience and submission to Allah.
As the Creator of the earth and sky says:
(ومن يطع الرسول فقد اطاع الله )
That is, whoever obeys the Messenger of Allah has indeed obeyed Allah.
From our introductory statement, the misconception of our contemporaries that Taqlid is Shirk has also been removed.
Is Imitation (Taqleed) not Shirk?
We will provide its details at the end, but first, let us quote the respected teacher of the author of Tuhfa Ahl al-Hadith. He says: If any unfortunate and stubborn follower decides in his heart that even if evidence from the Quran and Hadith is established against the statement of my Imam, I will not leave my sect, then he is a polytheist. We also say so. لاحنفہ فيه (There is no doubt in this)
See also page 298.
Hanafi: To deviate from this reality, Abu Bilal has also opened a backdoor. He says this definition you have taken from some noble Hadith.
Muhammadi: It is very regrettable that you commit the crime and ask us for evidence. Dear brother, this definition has been made by your follower scholars of Usul. If Taqlid (imitation) were a Shariah ruling and we also practiced it, then your question would have been correct. But we call it an innovation in religion, which is shirk in obedience. Yet, out of forgetfulness, you are asking us for Hadith on this definition. You should know that the definition of innovations in religion is accepted only from the innovators themselves.
Remember this: according to us, the Quran and Hadith alone are sufficient for Shariah rulings. We do not say that the Quran and Hadith are sufficient for every action. For example, if a Jat (farmer) says, “Show me from the Quran and Hadith when to sow the paddy crop,” or someone asks, “When should wheat be sown?” and you respond by quoting the Imam’s statement, surely you would advise such a questioner to undergo brain surgery rather than answer. However, if we ask you whether Taqlid is a Shariah ruling and you are a follower of Imam Abu Hanifa, then show us the definition of Taqlid you have stated from the Imam’s statement. Despite pondering, you will not be able to answer this until the Day of Judgment.
Difference Between Taqlid and Ittiba
In the above lines, you have read that following someone without evidence is called Taqlid (imitation), whereas Ittiba (following) is with evidence, due to which the following of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم cannot be called Taqlid because it is following evidence.
Imam Ibn Qayyim has given a very fitting commentary on this in ‘I’lam al-Muwaqqi’in’. He says:
والاتباع ما ثبت عليه حجة
Page 137, Volume 2; that is, Taqlid is without evidence and Ittiba is with evidence. Maulana Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Hanafi Barelvi says: Taqlid means acting upon the statement of an Imam without considering the evidence, and Ittiba means adopting the statement of an Imam after finding it in accordance with the Book and Sunnah and confirmed by Shariah evidence.
The author of Tuhfa Ahl al-Hadith, respected teacher Maulana Sarfaraz Khan says: It is an established fact that Iqtidha (following) and Ittiba (adherence) are one thing, and Taqlid is another.
From this, it becomes clear that a layperson’s turning to a scholar when necessary is not Taqlid because the scholar will include the Quran and Hadith in his fatwa, which the questioner was already obliged to accept. Thus, the scholar has made him understand the issue from the Quran and Hadith.
Fazil Kandhari and Mulla Hasan Shar Nablusi have said the same in ‘Aqd al-Fareed’ that a layperson’s turning to a Mufti is not Taqlid.
Rejection of Taqlid
From the Holy Quran: In the Holy Quran, numerous verses negate imitation; we briefly point out a few verses to the esteemed readers. In Surah Zukhruf, it is stated:
فَاسْتَمْسِكْ بِالَّذِي أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ ۖ إِنَّكَ عَلَىٰ صِرَاطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ
Hold firmly to the word which has been revealed to you by inspiration. Surely, you are on a straight path. (Thunai)
In Surah Al-Ma’idah, it is stated:
وَأَنِ احْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ
So judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their desires, departing from the truth that has come to you.
These verses command that following should be only and only of the revelation, and in the presence of revelation, one should not follow whims and desires.
In Surah An-Nahl, it is stated:
وَلَا تَقُولُوا لِمَا تَصِفُ أَلْسِنَتُكُمُ الْكَذِبَ هَٰذَا حَلَالٌ وَهَٰذَا حَرَامٌ لِّتَفْتَرُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ ۚ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَفْتَرُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ لَا يُفْلِحُونَ
And do not say concerning that which your tongues assert of untruth, “This is lawful and this is forbidden,” to invent a lie against Allah. Indeed, those who invent lies against Allah will not succeed. For them is a little enjoyment, then a painful punishment. (Thunai)
The verse is very clear in its purpose that declaring something lawful or unlawful is the exclusive prerogative of Allah Almighty, and that declaring something lawful or unlawful on one’s own is to attribute falsehood to the True Owner. The Lord Most Merciful has also stated this in Surah Yunus, verse 59. In short, the permissibility or prohibition of anything is exclusively related to Allah’s essence. Now, a person who declares imitation of Imam Abu Hanifa as lawful and makes it obligatory and compulsory is evidently attributing falsehood to Allah because Allah has not commanded or instructed imitation of Imam Abu Hanifa anywhere. Another point derived from this verse is that when a person declares something lawful or unlawful, it is obligatory upon him to provide evidence from the Quran and Sunnah for its permissibility or prohibition; otherwise, it is a slander against Allah. Moreover, the person who accepts such a ruling without question and gives it more importance than all obligations, invites others towards it, and considers deviation from it as equivalent to rebellion against Islam, and counts those who deny this baseless ruling among the misguided, astray, and innovators, is ignorant and foolish and associates partners with Allah’s attribute.
Our contemporary scholar has highly praised the book Dur al-Mukhtar in his Tuhfa Ahl al-Hadith and has called it a composition of Medina. (Page 79)
We have quoted some Hanafi fiqh issues from this very book in Part Three, Chapter Eight, and have also mentioned their being declared as fatwa, and have quoted confirmations from other Hanafi fiqh books. If they have moral courage, then prove all these issues from the Quran and Sunnah; otherwise, accept that our invitation towards Dur al-Mukhtar falls under the severe warning mentioned in the aforementioned verse.
Was the practice of imitation present among the People of the Book?
In reality, imitation of the People of the Book and the Arab polytheists is a bad custom; it has no connection whatsoever with the religion of Islam. The Divine command is:
اتَّخَذُوا أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَانَهُمْ أَرْبَابًا مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ وَالْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ وَمَا أُمِرُوا إِلَّا لِيَعْبُدُوا إِلَٰهًا وَاحِدًا ۖ لَّا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ ۚ سُبْحَانَهُ عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ
They have taken their priests and monks and Christ, the son of Mary, as gods besides Allah, whereas the command was only to worship the One God, besides whom there is no deity. He is free from their polytheism.
The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ himself explained the interpretation of this verse, as narrated by Hazrat Uday bin Hatim (RA) who said that I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ reciting this verse, and I said, “O Messenger of Allah ﷺ, we never worshipped them nor did we consider the clerics and monks as lords.” The Prophet ﷺ replied:
((اما انهم لم يكونوا يعبدونهم ولكن هم اذا احلو الهم شيئا استحلوه واذا حرموا عليهم شيئا حرموه)).
They did not worship their scholars, but when their scholars declared something lawful, they accepted it as lawful, and when they declared something forbidden, they also accepted it as forbidden.
The scholars of Deoband also hold the same position regarding the interpretation of this verse, that the People of the Book were like this. Accordingly, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi states: The Jews and Christians abandoned the monotheism of obedience to God and made their scholars and sheikhs their lords in terms of obedience, so that their obedience in permitting and forbidding was like obedience to God, as they preferred their sayings over the texts, and such obedience is indeed worship.
In the margin of the same page, under the title Masail al-Suluk (Issues of Conduct), it is stated that this is a condemnation of imitation in opposition to the texts, as is the habit of the ignorant that when forbidden from reprehensible customs, they cling to their sheikhs.
Maulana Thanvi acknowledged in this excerpt that imitation in opposition to the texts is essentially worship of scholars and sheikhs. Add to this that when the imitators imitate, they either imitate their Imam in some issues or in all issues; if they imitate in all issues, certainly they do so. Do they compare the texts with the issues of their Imam that they imitate? The answer is certainly negative because if there is distrust in the Imam’s issues and they are investigated, then it is no longer imitation, because imitation means accepting someone’s statement without evidence, as mentioned earlier. Furthermore, listen to what Hafiz Ibn Hajar narrates from Allama Al-Amdi in the commentary of Sahih Bukhari regarding the definition of imitation:
((بان المراد بالتقليد اخذ قول الغير بغير حجة ومن قامت عليه حجة لم يكن مقلد لانه لم يا خذ بقول غيره بغير حجة ))
Meaning, imitation refers to accepting the statement of another without evidence.
And whoever has evidence is not an imitator because he does not accept another’s statement without evidence. باب ما جاء فى دعا النبى الله امته الى توحيد الله تبارك و تعالى In short, in the mentioned verse, accepting the sayings of scholars and sheikhs without evidence is described as worship, and this is another name for imitation. When their sayings are compared with the texts, it is called abandoning imitation.
Some time ago, from the Deobandi school of thought, Maulana Abdul Haq Haqqani authored and published a book titled “Defense of Imam Abu Hanifa.” In its preface, Qazi Muhammad Zahid al-Husayni states: (Hanafi) Muslims are becoming so negligent of Hanafi jurisprudence that they have lost even the sense of Hanafism. Similarly, in our beloved homeland Pakistan, some institutions and groups that should have worked to promote and protect orthodoxy are either intentionally or unintentionally neglecting it. The jurisprudential curriculum in religious seminaries is being shortened to the minimum. The result is a shortage of Muftis in the country. Instead of reasoning, the study of the Quran and Hadith for Hanafi jurisprudence is being emphasized, resulting in scrutinizing issues compiled over twelve hundred years. Hadith books are only being translated into Urdu, opening the door to non-imitation. As a result, instead of learned scholars, only Urdu readers and speakers are spreading deviation (extremism), whereas for every imitator, the final proof is the statement of the Mujtahid, as stated in Muslim al-Thubut:
((اما المقلد فمستندہ قول المجتھد )) Meaning, the imitator only needs the statement of the Mujtahid.
Thus, Qazi Sahib has made all decisions that for the imitator only the statement of his Imam is binding, and whoever reads, teaches, and publishes the Quran and Hadith is opening the door to abandoning imitation, resulting in the spread of the Khawarij sect.
اناللہ وانا الیہ راجعون
Furthermore, reading the Quran and Hadith to seek evidence for the Imam’s statement is also abandoning imitation and scrutinizing the Imam’s issues, whereas for the imitator the statement of the Mujtahid alone suffices. This is exactly what the People of the Book did; their evidence was the sayings of scholars and sheikhs, and the Quran has refuted this position and viewpoint.
The Behavior of Followers
Complaining about this, Imam Razi wrote under Surah At-Tawbah, verse 31, in Tafsir Kabir:
((قال شيخنا ومولانا خاتمة المحققين و المجتهدين رضى الله عنه قد شاهدت جماعة من مقلدة الفقهاء قرات عليهم آيات كثيرة من كتاب الله تعالى في بعض مسائل وكانت ومذاهبم بخلاف تلك الايات ولم يقبلوا تلك الآيات ولم يلتفتوا اليها وبقوا ينظرون الى كالمتعجب يعني كيف يمكن العمل بظواهر هذه الايات مع ان روأية سلفنا وردت على خلافها ولو تاملت حق لاتامل وجدت هذا الداء ساريا في عروق الاكثرين من أهل الدنيا ))
That is, our Sheikh and the Seal of the Muhadditheen and Mujtahideen says that I observed a group of follower jurists whom I recited many verses of the Book of Allah that were against their predecessors, but they not only turned their faces away from accepting them, they did not pay any attention at all and began to look at me with astonished eyes, wondering how the apparent meaning of these verses could be acted upon when our elders have spoken against them. Imam Razi says: O addressee! If you think carefully and precisely, you will find this disease deeply ingrained in most followers who are people of the world.
Hakim al-Ummah Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dehlvi says:
((فان شئت ان تدى أموذج اليهود فانظر الى علماء السوء من الذين يطلبون الدنيا وقد اعتادوا تقليد السلف واعرضوا عن نصوص الكتاب والسنة وتمسكوا بتعمق عالم و تشدده واستحسانه فاعرضوا عن كلام الشارع المعصوم وتمسكو بأحاديث موضوعة وتأويلات فاسدة كانت سبب هلاكهم))
That is, if you want to see the example of the Jews, then look at those evil scholars who are busy in seeking novelty, in whom the disease of blind imitation has settled, who have turned their faces away from the Book and Sunnah and have attached themselves to only one Imam, abandoning the speech of the infallible Lawgiver (i.e., the Hadith), and have strengthened the sayings of the Imam with fabricated narrations and futile interpretations and are holding on to that. This very method became the cause of the destruction of the Jews and Christians.
In similar words, he has said in Tadhhimat, the necessary details of which have been excellently explained by Hafiz Salahuddin Yusuf, may Allah preserve him, in Sirat al-Mustaqim, p. 49. In this regard, Qazi Ibn Abi al-‘Izz, the commentator of Aqeedah Tahawiyyah, Allama Muhammad Hayat Sindhi, Imam Abdul Rahman bin Ismail, Allama Shahrani, Allama Saleh al-Qalani, and Allama Lakhnawi, may Allah have mercy on them, have also pointed out the same attitude of some followers who do not care at all about the texts in imitation and adhere to the sayings of the Imam as if they were the sayings of the Prophet ﷺ.
Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Hanafi Deobandi, in one of his letters says that most followers, even the elite, are so rigid that if they hear a verse or hadith contrary to the statement of a Mujtahid, their hearts do not feel relief or joy but first produce rejection of the heart, then they think of interpretation, no matter how far-fetched it may be, even if another strong evidence opposes it, or even if the Mujtahid’s argument in this matter is nothing but conjecture, and even if the heart itself does not accept that interpretation, yet for the support of the Hanafi school, they consider interpretation necessary; the heart does not accept acting on a correct explicit hadith instead of the statement of the Mujtahid.
He further says:
Some followers consider their Imam infallible from error and calamity and assume him to be absolutely to be obeyed, and firmly resolve that no matter what, even if a correct hadith opposes the Imam’s statement and the authentic statement of the Imam is nothing but conjecture, they will still find many defects and flaws in the hadith or interpret it in a far-fetched way and reject the hadith. Such imitation is forbidden and is the meaning of the Almighty’s statement, (اتخذوا اخبار هم … الخ ), and is contrary to the will of the late Imams.
After this clarification by Maulana Thanwi, there is no need to present testimonies of this mindset of the followers, however, it is necessary to point out that followers have written as a principle that even if the Imam’s statement opposes a sahih hadith, it is not permissible for the follower to act on it. Accordingly, in response to the book “Miyar Haq” authored by the Deobandi school’s Afzal al-Fudala Maulvi Irshad al-Hasan Rampuri Muhaddith Dehlvi, Mujaddid al-Fani quotes that:
We followers cannot abandon the religion of our Imam for the apparent texts of the hadith.
From these statements, the misconception of the author of “Tuhfa Ahl al-Hadith” is also removed, who said: “My brother! You have accused us again that we accept jurisprudence instead of the hadith of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم. You have neither understood the position nor the purpose of the Hanafis; if you had understood, you would never have made this objection” (p. 34).
Brother, if this is an accusation, then it is not we who accuse but the elders of the Hanafis, among whom your Hakim al-Ummah is also included. If even Hakim Sahib did not understand the purpose, then you followers who are sick with imitation must consider it dust. The reality is what we have already stated; your denial is only falsehood and a temporary refutation.
Principles of Following a Scholar
Dear! For us, that is, the Hanafis, the Quran is looked at first; if the issue is found in the Holy Quran, then Alhamdulillah, otherwise we look at the Hadith of the Prophet. If it is found, then fine; otherwise, we look at consensus (Ijma). If it is not found in consensus either, then the issue is resolved through jurisprudence, that is, legal analogy (Qiyas). Jurisprudence comes fourth in order. For us, even a weak Hadith is given priority and precedence over Qiyas.
Answer:
Firstly:-
Dear readers! This is such a huge lie spoken in the name of religion that even after searching, no example can be found, and those who say it, Mashallah, claim to be the sole custodians of religion and possess perfect faith. Listen, it is written in the principles of Hanafi jurisprudence that only a Mujtahid can benefit from the four sources of evidence; a follower (Muqallid) only needs the statement of the Imam. The head of Hanafi scholars says:
(فالادلة الاربعة انما يتوصل بها المجتهد لا المقلد فاما المقلد فالدليل عنده قول المجتهد فالمقلد يقول هذا الحكم واقع عندى لانه اوی الیه رای ابی حنيفة وكل ما أوى اليه رايه فهو واقع عندى)
Meaning, only a Mujtahid can derive something from the four sources of evidence (Quran, Hadith, consensus, and analogy), not a follower, because for a follower the only proof is the statement of his Mujtahid Imam. The follower only says that according to me, the ruling on this issue is such and such because my Imam Abu Hanifa holds this opinion, and whatever ruling his opinion leads me to, that alone is correct in my view. (End)
This statement needs no commentary; it explains itself that referring to the four sources of evidence is the work of a Mujtahid, and the proof for a follower is the statement of the Imam.
Secondly:-
It is also your misrepresentation that according to the followers, weak hadith is preferred over qiyas (analogical reasoning). The Malajiun Usuli Hanafi writes that
(وان عرف بالعدالة والضبط دون الفقة كانس وأبي هريرة أن وافق حديثه القياس عمل به و هو أن خالفه لم يترك الا بالضرورة وهي أنه لو عمل بالحديث لانسد باب الراي)
meaning if the narrator is just and precise but not a jurist, like Anas bin Malik (RA) and Abu Hurairah (RA), then if the hadith they narrate is in accordance with qiyas, it will be acted upon, and if it is against qiyas, it will necessarily be abandoned; because if a hadith contrary to qiyas is acted upon, the door of qiyas will be closed.
Maulana Muhammad Taqi Usmani Hanafi Deobandi states that in every case, taqlid (imitation) is obligatory and it is not permissible to depart from the statement of one’s Imam or Mufti, even if their statement apparently seems to be against hadith.
Because now the matter is clear that it is not permissible to act upon a hadith that is against qiyas, and that even if the Imam’s statement is apparently against hadith, it is still obligatory to act upon the Imam’s statement.
Thirdly:-
If you truly see the issue in the Quran and Sunnah first, then you deserve congratulations. May Allah bless your action. Ameen.
But my dear brother, this is not imitation but abandonment of imitation, as we have already acknowledged from a reliable Hanafi Deobandi scholar in the defense of Imam Abu Hanifa. Further observe, the Grand Mufti of the Deobandis and jurist of the era, Maulvi Rashid Ahmad Sahib, states that referring to Hadith is not the duty of a follower.
The well-known Hanafi scholar Qazi Muhibullah Bahari says that
(وأما المقلد فمستنده قول مجتهده الاظنه ولا ظنه)
Meaning, the evidence for a follower is only the statement of his Mujtahid Imam; neither can he conduct his own research nor can he scrutinize his Imam’s research.
Difference between Imitation and Guidance
He says that we accept the Sunnah of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, but under the guidance and following of the Imam; we accept the Shariah of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, but under the guidance of the Imam; we take the method of prayer of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, but under the following and guidance of the Imam.
Answer:
Firstly:-
In the Arabic language, words like تحت‘ قيادة‘ بالار شاد‘ etc. are used for guidance
. The author, Maulvi Waheed uz-Zaman Qasmi Kiranwali Hanafi Deobandi, had the right to prove from the Arabic lexicon that taqlid (imitation) means tahta qiyadat (under guidance), and then make this claim. But this task was difficult, even impossible, so the author made the claim without evidence, and in this was his safety.
Secondly:-
If your intention was only to ascertain the Sunnah, Shariah, and method of prayer, then whatever information you obtained from reliable sources about them, you should have accepted it. But you did not do so; rather, you restricted it to one only, and you have no evidence for this restriction.
Thirdly:-
When you have singled out one and turned away from other reliable sources, even practically declaring them unreliable and interpreting some rulings of Sharia to the extent of distortion, denying some Sunnahs, creating sects within the Muslim community, and practically abandoning the Quranic command that
(وَاعْتَصِمُوا بِحَبْلِ اللَّهِ جَمِيعاً وَلَا تَفَرَّقُو)
which means hold firmly to the rope of Allah (Quran and Sunnah) and do not become divided into sects among yourselves!
But you have mocked this divine command by forming groups like Hanafi, Shafi’i, Maliki, Hanbali, etc., which is clear to every sensible person.
Fourthly:-
Even if your point is accepted as correct, the question to you is why do you consider imitation (taqlid) forbidden in beliefs? For example, followers believe in Allah but under the guidance of an Imam. They believe in the Prophets but under the guidance of an Imam. Followers believe in the Quran, but under the guidance of an Imam, etc. Many such similar examples can be given. But our intention is only to make the public understand, not to count or enumerate.
In short, you people do not consider imitation permissible in beliefs. This is why the Hanafis are Maturidis in beliefs, which clearly shows that you accept the Sunnah as Abu Hanifa calls it Sunnah; you accept the Shariah as Imam Abu Hanifa calls it Shariah; the method of prayer you accept is the one Abu Hanifa teaches; besides this, you do not accept anyone else’s words, whether they contradict the Quran or Hadith, consensus of the Ummah, the practice of the people of Medina, or the constitution of the era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs. You even consider translating the Quran and translations of Hadith books as heresy, as we have already mentioned in reference to
. In fact, anyone who reconsiders the Imam’s statement is declared irreligious. This, in other words, is called imitation (taqlid). To say that this has nothing to do with “guidance” is like a person who wants to go to Karachi and needs guidance about the well-known places there; he needs information from anyone who knows, regardless of who it is. It does not mean that I will only ask Abu Bilal, whether he tells the truth or falsehood, and I will act on that alone and will not accept any well-reasoned argument against it. The first method is guidance; the second method is imitation, which no sensible person is ready to accept.
Fifthly:-
Your esteemed teacher says:
“Taqlid (imitation) is permissible in those emerging issues which are neither explicitly proven from the Holy Quran nor from authentic and explicit Ahadith, nor from the sayings of the noble Companions.”
Whereas you have called taqlid guidance and given examples such as Sunnah, Shariah, and the method of prayer, etc. Tell me, are these emerging issues or are they illuminated by the Quran, Sunnah, and the sayings of the Companions? If these are not emerging issues, then certainly not; so tell me, who is correct, you or your teacher?
Hadith Chains and Taqlid
He says, “The Muhaddithin (Hadith scholars) were also from the Ummah; which of the Muhaddithin were Prophets? The matter again and again returns to the Ummah. But in Sahih Bukhari or any other Hadith books, before every Hadith there is a chain of narration (Isnad). This chain of names is called Isnad, and all in the Isnad are from the Ummah. The Ummah has to be the intermediary, then the Hadith of the Prophet ﷺ is obtained.”
Answer:-
Firstly:-
Isnad (chain of transmission) falls under the category of testimony. This is why when the narrator is not trustworthy but weak and abandoned, suffers from forgetfulness, accepts falsehood, makes mistakes in the isnad and the text, then his testimony becomes unreliable and the narration becomes weak. Accepting the testimony of a reliable person is the command of Allah and His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم. The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم himself issued judgments based on testimony, which proves that we accept the testimony of a witness in accordance with the Quran and Sunnah, that what he is narrating as an eyewitness account is true. Whereas Taqlid (imitation) means accepting the ijtihad of a Mujtahid without evidence, while testimony contains evidence that I have seen the event or heard the conversation of so-and-so.
Secondly:-
Being a Mujtahid is not a condition for the testimony of a witness, so is Taqlid of a non-Mujtahid also permissible? The answer is certainly negative, so then how did this become an argument for Taqlid?
Thirdly:-
If a follower imitates only one mujtahid, is it also correct that a judge issues a verdict based on the testimony of only one witness? Furthermore, if a judge says that I will only accept the testimony of a particular person and all other testimonies are invalid, or if a person says that I only accept the narration that is transmitted from a particular person, then is such a judge or person blameworthy? If they are blameworthy, then how has this become an argument for taqlid (imitation)?
Ra’iaan:-
In taqlid, the statement of the mujtahid is accepted as evidence, whereas in testimony and the chain of narration of hadith, the report of the narrator is accepted. Obviously, there is a clear difference between the two. Because in taqlid, the ijtihad of the Imam is accepted without evidence, whereas in the chain of narration of hadith, the narrator expresses his sense that he saw the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم doing such and such.
Do Ahl al-Hadith also invite to taqlid?
The stance and viewpoint of the followers (Muqallideen) is that initially there was only absolute imitation (taqlid mutlaq), where anyone could imitate whomever they wished. Eventually, defects began to arise in this, or there was a fear that if absolute imitation continued to be allowed, defects would emerge. To prevent these, according to Maulana Usmani, scholars in the fourth century Hijri declared personal imitation (taqlid shakhsī) obligatory.
Then Maulana Usmani also quotes arguments in favor of making it obligatory, but these arguments have no direct relation to the core issue, which ultimately forces him to say that “the obligation of personal imitation is not a Shariah ruling but an administrative fatwa.”
In short, Maulana’s writing is confused; he insists on declaring it obligatory but simultaneously contradicts himself by calling it an administrative fatwa. In any case, even if Maulana and other followers’ confused thoughts are accepted, personal imitation has failed miserably to curb the desires of the self (hawa-e-nafs), because from among the Hanafis themselves, the issue of the createdness of the Quran arose; the Mu’tazila also developed from here; a large group among the Hanafis became fond of grave worship and innovations; in fact, among those who imitate Hanafi jurisprudence, the majority are irreligious and even abandon important pillars of Islam like prayer. In this God-given Islamic state of Pakistan, the owners of cinemas and the like are generally Hanafis. If imitation was the cure for idolatry, then why are these acts of idolatry present everywhere today? The entire country is afflicted with idolatry; if personal imitation was the remedy and cure for these diseases, then obviously it has not proven beneficial and has become useless due to its ineffectiveness as an administrative fatwa. Yet the entire Hanafi school still tirelessly promotes these benefits with full vigor. Then, even within personal imitation, these people have restricted it to the four Imams, declaring that imitation of anyone else is not permissible.
Then, one of these four Imams must be preferred and selected; obviously, choosing one from these four is ijtihad, not imitation (and ijtihad is done based on the Quran and Hadith, for which knowledge of them is necessary). According to the followers, ijtihad is only the work of a mujtahid, and imitation is not permissible for a mujtahid.
And if choosing one from the four Imams is considered imitation, then obviously it is imitation in principle, and imitation in principle is not permissible according to the followers themselves, as we have already mentioned with reference to
.
This matter also caused confusion in the heart of the author of Tuhfa Ahl al-Hadith, so he crudely quoted the Ahl al-Hadith position, saying, “Why do you take the words of Imam Abu Hanifa and not the words of the other Imams?” Then, entangled in irrelevant matters, he finally twists his tune by saying, “If imitation of Imam Abu Hanifa is shirk, then imitation of all four is a much greater shirk, indeed four times greater. You are dragging me from shirk to shirk. If prostrating to one idol is forbidden, then how has prostrating to four idols become monotheism? Wow, your logic is that imitation of one Imam is shirk, but imitation of all four is monotheism.”
Consider the question carefully, then look at our brother’s answer; what relevance is there between the two? The question concerns the reason for preferring Imam Abu Hanifa’s imitation, while the answer concerns the imitation itself. This answer would have been correct if we only called the imitation of Imam Abu Hanifa shirk and considered the rest pure monotheism. But our position is free from this; according to us, the ruling on imitation of all mujtahids is the same. We are neither advocates nor promoters of abandoning the imitation of Imam Abu Hanifa and adopting the imitation of any one of the three Imams (Imam Malik, Imam Shafi’i, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal). Mixing topics is not befitting of scholars, so please consider the original question and then provide an appropriate answer.
Reason for Preference in Following Imam Abu Hanifa
Maulana states, “My brothers, the reason is that Imam Azam Abu Hanifa is closer to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in terms of time compared to other Imams. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:
(خیرامتي قرني ثم الذي يلونهم ثم الذين يلونهم)
The best generation is that of my time, then the generation of the Tabi‘in, and then the generation of the Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘in.
So, Imam Sahib lived in the generation closest to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, and we prefer his opinion.”
Answer:-
Firstly:-
It appears that the author of Tuhfa Ahl al-Hadith was anxious while writing this argument. The evidence of his restlessness, agitation, and unease is that after the word “Qarni” he quoted “ثم الذي” whereas the correct phrase is “ثم الذين“.
Secondly:-
Are Imam Abu Hanifa unique in this virtue? Or is the entire blessed generation of Khair al-Qurun included in it? Certainly, it is included. Then how did this reason become a preference? If you say that among the four Imams, this greatness was only given to Imam Abu Hanifa, then this statement is based on falsehood because you yourself have admitted that the era of Khair al-Qurun extends up to the Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘in, and the era of Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘in ends in 220 AH, as the commentators of Hadith have explicitly stated.
Maulana Shaid Ahmad Gangohi states that
“In this Hadith, Khair al-Qurun includes both the Tabi‘ and the Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘in, and the era of Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘in lasted up to two hundred years later.”
Keeping this in mind, the three Imams are included in this virtue. Imam Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) was born in 85 AH and died in 179 AH,
Imam Shafi‘i was born in 150 AH and died in 204 AH, and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (may Allah be pleased with him) was born in 164 AH and died in 241 AH. Considering the time period, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal is also included in it, although it is not proven that he met any Tabi‘i; still, there is no objection because Imam Malik and Imam Shafi‘i have this greatness and eminence in any case.
Benefits of Taqlid and Their Reality
Maulana says that the great Imams did not create a separate religion. Imam Azam Abu Hanifa, who is the Imam of the best of generations, was given glad tidings by the Prophet ﷺ that a person will arise from Persia who, even if faith has reached as far as the Thuraiya stars, will bring it from there and present it to the people.
There is considerable disagreement in the authentic ahadith. The reason for this disagreement is that sometimes the Prophet ﷺ would issue one ruling, and after some time, issue another ruling. Now, there are ahadith both permitting and forbidding certain actions. How can one decide which ruling abrogates the other in the fifteenth century? Look, the companions testified before you, and in Abu Dawood there is a hadith where the Prophet ﷺ forbade that ablution is broken by food cooked on fire. Your practice is contrary to this hadith. The companions drinking wine at one time is proven by hadith, and later forbidding it is also proven by hadith. Wiping the head once, wiping the head three times, praying nawafil after Asr — there are hadiths permitting and forbidding these. Gargling once in the nose with water is mentioned in one hadith, and thrice in another. Praying Fajr in daylight and praying it in darkness — both ahadith exist.
See, these are various types of ahadith, and hundreds of such ahadith can be presented, many of which contain contradictions and conflicts. Now, among these conflicting narrations, which hadith continued to be acted upon, which was discontinued, which practice of the Prophet ﷺ was final, and which was from an earlier time — only someone who is an expert in Shariah and a contemporary of the companions can resolve this contradiction. Imam Abu Hanifa is a Tabi‘i and the Imam of his era; we take issues from him. He reconciles these narrations and applies the final practice of the Prophet ﷺ. He is not stubborn about enforcing his opinion against hadith.
Answer:-
Firstly:-
The answer to those Ahadith in which you see contradiction is available in detail at its place; please refer to it there. First of all, prove with an authentic chain from Imam Abu Hanifa that he resolved those contradictions (which according to you are conflicting). I swear by the Owner of my life that the author of Tuhfa Ahl al-Hadith, even if he tries his whole life along with his companions, cannot provide proof of this. Resolving those contradictions is one thing; it cannot even be proven with authentic and reliable chains that Imam Abu Hanifa was even aware of these narrations and that he actually received them with authentic chains.
Secondly:
Declaring the abrogating and abrogated as contradictory is a result of ignorance; no scholar has ever declared them contradictory. This claim is made only out of enmity towards Ahl al-Hadith, نصرۃ العلوم is training such a person who has neither intellect nor death. This enemy of intellect, if he had studied “Hujjatullah al-Baligha”
, would not have been mocked in scholarly gatherings, but the enmity towards the Muhaddithin has blinded him.
Thirdly:
The respected person did not present any argument regarding Imam Sahib being a Tabi’i; otherwise, we would have examined it in detail. Still, briefly, if you say Imam Sahib is a Tabi’i based on Taqlid (imitation) or personal research, if you say it is Taqlid, then this claim contradicts and opposes the statement of Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, because it is authentically narrated from him with a sound chain of transmission that
(يقول ما رايت فيمن رايت افضل من عطاء ولا لقيت فيمن لقيت اكذب من جابر الجعفي)
meaning Imam Abu Hanifa used to say that among those whom I have seen, I have not seen anyone superior to Ata ibn Abi Rabah, and among those whom I have seen, I have not seen anyone more deceitful than Jabir al-Ju’fi.
From this statement of Imam Sahib, it is proven that he did not meet any Sahabi (Companion), otherwise, he would have mentioned them, and he would not have considered Imam Ata ibn Abi Rabah, who is a non-Sahabi (a Tabi’i), as the best among those he met, because a Sahabi is certainly superior to a Tabi’i. However, the author of “Tuhfat Ahl al-Hadith” expresses distrust in his Imam’s statement, which is abandoning Taqlid, which our benefactor describes as misguidance.
Now, we leave it to them to decide whether by abandoning Taqlid here, they have chosen misguidance or whether despite abandoning Taqlid, they are on the path of guidance? If you have already considered Imam Sahib a Tabi’i in abandoning Taqlid, then you have no evidence for it. Brother, without evidence, we do not accept “Tuhfa”; this is the method and slogan of the imitators that they fear every baseless claim. And if you have any evidence in your heart, it is also useless and unworthy of being considered evidence. Allama Muhammad Tahir Fatni Hanafi (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
(وكان في أيامه أربعة صحابة انس وعبدالله بن ابی اوفى وسهل بن سعد وابو الطفيل ولم يلق احداً منهم ولا أخذ منه واصحابه يقولون انه لقي جماعة من الصحابة وروى عنهم ولا يثبت عنداهل النقل)
Meaning, during the time of Imam Abu Hanifa, four Sahabah (Companions) were alive: Hazrat Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), Hazrat Abdullah ibn Abi Awfa (may Allah be pleased with him), Hazrat Sahl (may Allah be pleased with him), and Hazrat Abu al-Tufail (may Allah be pleased with him), but it is not proven that he met or acquired knowledge from any of them. And the followers of Imam Abu Hanifa claim that he met a group of Sahabah and narrated Hadith from them, but according to researchers, none of this is proven.
This is the testimony of a reliable Hanafi follower, after which we do not feel the need to write more on this. However, if the need arises and we are compelled, we will present a detailed discussion on this.
Fourth:-
The author of Tuhfa Ahl al-Hadith has made a futile attempt to prove the excellence of Imam Abu Hanifa through a certain hadith. Briefly regarding this, the author should have first established that Imam Abu Hanifa was Persian, and then proven the greatness of the Imam; that would have been one thing. But our brother has sworn that he will run all matters solely on claims and will not tolerate anyone bothering to establish evidence for them. Since he himself is a blind follower, he considers the addressee also not in need of evidence and relies solely on convincing and satisfying with words. Just as a blind person in the monsoon sees greenery everywhere, similarly he sees the Ahl al-Hadith as followers like himself, which is why he is giving this gift without evidence.
(1) Brother, this hadith contains the word “رجال” and
have agreed on the authentication of this word. And the narrator himself, Sulaiman, doubts saying the words ( اور جل من هؤلاء), but there is no hesitation in the narration of Abdul Aziz, which is why the words of the narrators are reliable. See
. Once this is established, it should be clear that Rijal (narrators) is the plural of Rajul (man), and the prediction about Rijal relates to the Muhaddithin (hadith scholars) of the Persians, not to Imam Abu Hanifa who lived in Kufa.
(2) It is not correct that the Imam was originally Persian, the details of which can be seen in Al-Lamahat, volume two. Even if it is accepted that Imam Abu Hanifa was of Persian origin as the followers claim
, still this does not prove the excellence of the Imam. Because the hadith does not mention Persian origin but rather Persian (Farsi) as a matter, and there is a difference between the two. Being of Persian origin means that the ancestors of the Imam had migrated from Persia, whereas Persian means one who resides in Persia, like the meaning of Pakistani, etc. The jurists have explicitly stated that the place where a person resides for four years is considered his homeland.
.
(3) Even if the claim of the Hanafis is accepted that this proves the honor and greatness of Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him), still this is not evidence for personal imitation (taqlid). Because this proves that the Imam was a believer, and who denies that he was a Muslim and a perfect believer, worshiper, and ascetic? The denial is of his taqlid, which is not proven by this hadith. Therefore, present a sahih hadith in which the Messenger of Allah ﷺ instructed to follow Imam Abu Hanifa.
Is Trusting the Translator Considered Following Them?
First, let us quote the question: “I come across many hadiths, and I have studied hadith extensively. Should I also follow (taqlid) someone?”
The answer is given: Do you know Arabic? No, I look at translated books. Those translations are also done by some sect members. Trusting their translations is indeed following them.
Answer:-
Firstly:-
Among the Hanafis, scholars of the Deobandi school of thought such as Maulana Mahmood Hasan (may Allah have mercy on him), Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, etc., have translated the Quran, and Deobandi scholars trust these translations. So, have all Deobandis abandoned following Imam Abu Hanifa and become followers of Mahmood Hasan Khan and Ashraf Ali Thanvi? The answer is certainly no. Similarly, translations of hadith and fiqh books also exist, which Deobandi scholars trust. So, have they become followers of these translators? Use your intellect; what are you saying?
Secondly:-
Trusting a reliable translator is not imitation; if you prove from the dictionary that imitation and trust are synonymous, then you will receive an unasked-for reward. Do not make such immature statements and reveal the limits of your knowledge.
The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم himself trusted the translator. It is mentioned in Sahih Bukhari that during the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, the representative of the disbelievers of Mecca objected to the word “Messenger of Allah ﷺ” in the written terms and demanded it be cut out and replaced with “Muhammad bin Abdullah (صلى الله عليه وسلم).” However, Hazrat Ali did not cut it out initially, but when he pointed it out, the Prophet ﷺ himself cut the words “Messenger of Allah ﷺ” with his blessed hand.
It is a well-known incident narrated in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim in the Book of Hudood and in the books of Seerah that when the Jews accepted the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم as the arbitrator in the case of a married adulterer, the Prophet ﷺ ordered that the Torah be brought. One of their scholars began reciting the verses at night where the verses about stoning were written, but he covered those verses with his hand so that no one could see them. Hazrat Abdullah bin Salam رضي الله عنه was sitting nearby and saw this action. Unable to bear it, he grabbed the scholar’s hand and forcefully pushed it away and said:
(هذه يا نبي الله آية الرجم يابي ان يتلوها عليك)
“O Prophet of Allah ﷺ, this is the verse of stoning, and this person is refusing to recite it.”
Accordingly, the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم ordered the Jew to be stoned at night in Medina. The night was in Syriac, a language the Prophet ﷺ did not know, which indicates that Hazrat Abdullah bin Salam رضي الله عنه translated the stoning verse from Syriac into Arabic for the Prophet ﷺ. Hazrat Zaid bin Thabit narrates that the Prophet ﷺ commanded him to learn the language of the Jews and said:
انی والله ما امن يهود لى كتابي فتعلمته فلم يمر بي الا نصف شهر حتى حذقته فكنت اكتب له اذا كتب واقراء له اذا كتب اليه
“By Allah, I do not trust the Jews to write correctly to me.” (Zaid says) “It was not even half a month before I had learned their writing and language well. Then whenever you wanted to write something, I would write it, and whenever a letter came from somewhere, I would read it.”
Imam Tirmidhi, Hakim, and Allama Dhahabi have declared this hadith authentic. Its meaning is very clear that the Prophet ﷺ ordered Sayyid Zaid to learn the language of the Jews for interpretation purposes, which Sayyid Zaid رضي الله عنه learned within half a month. After that, Sayyid Zaid continued to serve as an interpreter for the Prophet ﷺ. Considering these facts, Imam Tirmidhi classified this under باب السریانیتہ and explained that learning the language of disbelievers out of necessity is permissible. Imam Hakim also included this in his Mustadrak in the chapter on the permissibility of learning the writing of the Jews, drawing attention to the same point. In short, the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم trusted Zaid’s interpretation.
Now, Abu Bilal (Ajad), trained by Nasrat-ul-Uloom, may perhaps call this “imitation” and say that the Prophet ﷺ was also an imitator of Zaid bin Ali Murtaza رضي الله عنه and Abdullah bin Salam رضي الله عنه. But no scholar calls it imitation because an interpreter or translator does not speak their own words but conveys the literal meaning of another person’s words. Therefore, if the person being interpreted or whose sayings are being rendered into another language is authoritative in religion, then this is following evidence; if not authoritative, then it is imitation. Keep this distinction in mind. Referring to translations of the Quran and Hadith is not imitation but following evidence, which is part of following the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. However, referring to translations of jurisprudential books is imitation because it is not following evidence but accepting the compiler’s opinion based on good faith, which is imitation. What do you say?
The Prophet ﷺ himself trusted in religious and worldly matters. When Jibreel (Gabriel) brought revelation, he accepted it. The scribes of revelation among the Companions wrote the Quran down, some Companions were given permission to write Hadith and Sunnah, letters were written to kings, etc. All these actions were based on trust, yet no one has ever called this imitation. Scholars categorize it under testimony and witnessing because trusting a reliable person and accepting their testimony is the Islamic norm. Only you have called it imitation. Perhaps you lack mastery over the dictionary besides the Quran and Hadith, have not studied the fundamentals of Usul (principles), and do not trust the predecessors; otherwise, you would not give such baseless arguments against imitation. You claim it is imitation but provide no innovative evidence for it.
Were the Authors of Sahih Sitta Followers (Muqallids)?
It is stated that Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim, Imam Tirmidhi, Imam Nasa’i, Imam Ibn Majah, were followers of Imam Shafi’i, and Imam Abu Dawood was a follower of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal.
Answer:-
Firstly:-
If there is truth in your statement, then prove from these noble Imams that we are followers (Muqallids). Otherwise, fear the severe warning of La’nat Allah ‘ala al-Kandibin (curse of Allah upon the liars) and fear Allah, for you have become accustomed to lying in the name of religion.
Secondly:-
We have mentioned with reference to Al-Tawdhih, page 44, that only a Mujtahid can derive something from the four proofs; a Muqallid cannot, because for a Muqallid the proof is only the statement of the Mujtahid. On the contrary, if you study the Sahih Sittah, you will find that each of them organizes chapters in their own Sunnahs and Sahihs, then narrates the Hadith of the Prophet, mentions the traces of the Companions, argues from Quranic verses, explains the jurisprudence of Hadith, and at some places also mentions the opinions of the scholars of the Ummah, sometimes agreeing with them and sometimes refuting them. For example, take Imam Bukhari; he, in
etc., disagreed with Imam Shafi’i and agreed with the Hanafi school. Imam Tirmidhi even refuted Imam Shafi’i by name in the chapter on postponement الظہر في شدة الحر.
Hazrat Shah Waliullah says:
(وكان صاحب الحديث ايضاً قد ينسب الى احد المذاهب لكثرة موافقته له كالنسائي والبيهقي ينسبان الى الشافعي)
Meaning, sometimes Ahl al-Hadith are attributed to a particular madhhab due to the abundance of agreement, such as Nasai and Bayhaqi being attributed to Shafi’ism, although they were not Muqallids.
Muhaddith Mubarakpuri has strongly refuted this in
that the authors of the Sahih were Muqallids.
If you study the books written on the hadiths of the Hanafi Muqallids, from Tahawi to Athar al-Sunan, and then pick any book from the Sahih Sittah and study them deeply, without bias and with an open mind, you will find a world of difference between their way of thinking and the methods of the Muqallids. Whether it is Imam Muhammad’s Muwatta or Tahawi’s Sharh Ma’ani al-Athar, you will see how weak, feeble, and even meaningless excuses are sought to reject authentic hadiths. They tirelessly argue on technicalities to support the opinions of the Imam. In contrast, the authors of the Sahih compile hadiths chapter-wise, sometimes discuss the authenticity and meanings of hadiths, and Tirmidhi also explains the madhhabs. They sometimes agree with some and sometimes refute others, but unlike Tahawi, they do not rely on weak and feeble narrations to reject authentic hadiths. You cannot even present one example of this.
Thirdly:-
By the author’s admission
, a mujtahid is not a follower (muqallid), and all the authors of the Sahih Sitta were mujtahids. For details, see the introduction of Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi
.
Here, we only want to say something about Imam Bukhari, may Allah have mercy on him. Sheikh Ibrahim bin Abdul Latif Hanafi, late Sindhi, says that
(البخاری امام مجتهد براسه كابي حنيفة والشافعي ومالك واحمد وسفيان الثوري و محمد بن الحسن )
meaning Imam Bukhari, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafi’i, Imam Malik, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Sufyan al-Thawri, and Muhammad were all top mujtahids.
Mulla Ali al-Qari Hanafi says that
(امير المؤمنين في الحديث وناصر الاحاديث النبوية وناشر المواريث المحمدية قيل لم ير في زمانه مثله من جهة حفظ الحديث واتقانه وفهم معاني كتاب الله وسنة رسوله ومن حيثية حدة ذهنه ودقة نظره و وفور فقهه وكمال زهده وغاية ورعه وكثرة اطلاعه على طرق الحديث وعلله وقوة اجتهاده و استنباطه )
meaning Imam Bukhari is the commander of the faithful in hadith, the supporter of the Prophetic traditions, and the transmitter of Muhammad’s legacy. The era has not seen a hadith memorizer like him, neither in piety nor in understanding the meanings of the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Messenger. In this regard, the era has not seen anyone with a mind as firm and keen as his, nor with such strength in jurisprudence. Indeed, in the perfection of asceticism and piety, no one was like him. In the methods of hadith, knowledge of its defects, and ijtihad and deduction of issues, he was unparalleled.
He further says that
(كثر ثناء الائمة عليه حتى صح عن احمد بن حنبل انه قال ما اخرجت خراسان مثله وقال غير واحد هو فقيه هذه الامة وقال اسحاق بن راهويه يا معشر اصحاب الحديث انظروا الى هذا الشاب واكتبوا عنه فانه لوكان في زمن الحسن البصرى لاحتاج اليه لمعرفته بالحديث وفقهه وقد فضله بعضهم فى الفقه والحديث على احمد واسحاق وقال ابن خزيمة ماتحت اديم السماء اعلم بالحديث منه )
meaning many great imams have praised and commended him (Bukhari), so much so that it is authentically narrated from Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, may Allah have mercy on him, that no one like him was born in Khorasan. And many imams have called him the jurist of this blessed Ummah. Imam Ishaq bin Rahwayh says: O people of Ahl al-Hadith! Pay attention to this young man and write hadith from him, for if he had lived in the time of Hasan al-Basri, even he would have been in need of him. Due to his knowledge of hadith and jurisprudence, some have even preferred Imam Bukhari over Imam Ahmad and Ishaq in fiqh and hadith. Imam Ibn Khuzaymah says that under the sky, no one knows hadith more than him (the utmost).
If we comprehend these statements that have called Imam Bukhari a mujtahid, a booklet could be prepared. But our purpose is to indicate a handful from many. We conclude this topic by quoting the last statement. In the recent past, from the Deobandi school of thought, a book titled “انوار الباری” containing the statements of Maulana Anwar Shah Kashmiri, Sheikh al-Hadith of Darul Uloom Deoband, was published by his student Syed Ahmad Raza Bijnori. In it, he says:
“Since Imam Bukhari himself held the rank of ijtihad, he compiled the collection of hadith according to his own viewpoint, arranged according to chapters and headings.”
Definition of a Non-Follower
It is stated that a non-follower is one who neither performs ijtihad himself nor follows a mujtahid, but rather insults the jurists and calls their followers polytheists.
Answer:-
Firstly:-
According to the definition you have given, a follower would be one who performs ijtihad and then follows, whereas a mujtahid is a scholar and it is unanimously agreed among scholars that a follower is not counted among the scholars.
Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi Hanafi Deobandi states that we ourselves believe in and follow a non-follower because it is certain that Imam Azam was a non-follower,
compiled by Mufti Muhammad Shafi Sahib, see also
. Jhangvi Sahib should clarify according to his stated definition whether Imam Abu Hanifa was a mujtahid or not? And whether he used to insult the Imams of the religion and the elders of the community or not?
Secondly:-
The definition of Ghair Muqallid (non-followers) that you have given, in which book of Hanafi Fiqh and Usul al-Fiqh is it recorded? Please specify with reference clearly, otherwise refrain from falsehood and slander, as you will be questioned about this on the Day of Judgment.
Thirdly:-
The writer has never heard any of his teachers curse the revered Imams. If your statement is true, then provide proof; otherwise, fear the warning of لعنتہ اللہ علی الکذبین. This collar of curse will fall upon your neck and drown you.
We swear by Allah that the Ahl al-Hadith sincerely respect all the great scholars of the religion, the revered Imams, and the great jurists. However, we do not consider their sayings as divine revelation in which revision is blasphemy, nor do we consider them infallible from error. Rather, we interpret their statements that contradict the Quran and Sunnah as their human weaknesses and mistakes, and we value their correct ijtihads. We have special love for the great scholars of the entire past Ummah. We consider enmity towards them as a loss of faith and regard those who curse them as sinners by the command of the Messenger.
We have expressed this not only today but several years ago in
, yet Abu Bilal shamelessly disregards modesty and truth, spreading lies and slander against us, which is, in any case, a greater sin than cursing.
Fourth:-
Those who claim to be the custodians of manners and respect! There is no one more disrespectful and insolent than the Hanafis. Your elders have reported every opponent in such a way that, God forbid, in Usool Shashi and
, Hazrat Abu Huraira (RA) and Hazrat Anas (RA) are described as non-jurists, and between the lines of Usool Shashi, Hazrat Uqbah bin Malik (RA) and all the companions of the surrounding villages are labeled as non-jurists. In the Urdu language, the exact meaning of non-jurist is fool. Your Imam Abu Hanifa rejected the hadith of Hazrat Wail bin Hujr (RA) by calling it Arab (wild and Bedouin)
.
describe Imam Shafi’i as ignorant and Amir Muawiya (RA) as an innovator.
Perhaps you consider them to be respectful and honorable titles, but muster some courage and when you publish the advertisement for the نصرۃ العلوم Bukhari gathering, write your teacher’s name in the advertisement with titles such as so-and-so Sheikh al-Hadith, who is a non-jurist, ignorant Arab, and innovator, and that he will teach the last hadith of Bukhari. Rise and have courage and address a Deobandi scholar with these titles, then witness the miracle of nature that Deobandis from all sides will pray for your destruction so much that your life will be in danger.
Alas, you do not like words such as ignorant, innovator, non-jurist, and Arab for your elders, but you gladly accept them for the companions of the Prophet and the supporters of the Sunnah of Imam Shafi’i (may Allah have mercy on him), even calling it knowledge. These are the sole custodians of manners. انا للہ وانا الیہ راجعون
Why did the Four Imams not follow Taqlid?
He says, it is not known where you have heard the phrase that the Four Imams were non-followers (ghair muqallid). Your question is like someone saying, “I will not pray as a follower of any name.” If we ask him why he does not become a follower, he would say, “First show me whose follower this Imam is,” or he might say, “I am not a follower of any Prophet because our Prophets are not followers of anyone; first prove that the Prophet is a follower, then I will become a follower.” Or, “First show me whose follower this Imam is, then I will become a follower,” or “I am not a subject of this king because who is this king’s subject?” “I am not a follower because the Four Imams were not followers of anyone.” We will lovingly explain that an Imam is an Imam; a king is not counted among subjects, and subjects are not kings. Prophets are not followers. A Mujtahid is a Mujtahid; how can he be a follower? Imitation (taqlid) is done by one who is not a Mujtahid, who has not attained the rank of Ijtihad.
Answer:-
Firstly:-
Brother, we have already explained the difference between following (Iqtidā) and imitation (Taqleed). If you have any reasonable answer to this, please provide it.
Secondly:-
Brother, what relation is there between a king and imitation? A king can be a non-mujtahid as well; in fact, he can be ignorant of religion and even a heretic. Perhaps you have not studied history, otherwise you would not behave like this. Ask any FA or BA student whether Akbar’s Din-e-Ilahi was a thing and whether the king was its founder or not? You also said well that kings do not come by themselves. Perhaps you have not studied the Quran. The Divine command is:
قُلِ اللَّهُمَّ مَالِكَ الْمُلْكِ تُؤْتِي الْمُلْكَ مَن تَشَاءُ وَتَنزِعُ الْمُلْكَ مِمَّن تَشَاءُ وَتُعِزُّ مَن تَشَاءُ وَتُذِلُّ مَن تَشَاءُ ۖ بِيَدِكَ الْخَيْرُ ۖ إِنَّكَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ
O Allah, Owner of Sovereignty, You give sovereignty to whom You will and You take sovereignty away from whom You will.
Here, sir, your two demands are fulfilled in this verse:
(1) Allah can also take away sovereignty; when He takes it away, that person is no longer a king but counted among the subjects.
(2) The Owner of sovereignty is Allah alone, and the true King is He.
Thirdly:-
You did not consider the word ‘ummah,’ which caused you to err or deliberately mislead. Listen, ummah means a group, whether it is of humans, animals, or birds. The Divine command is:
وَ مَا مِنْ دَآبَّةٍ فِی الْاَرْضِ وَ لَا طٰٓىٕرٍ یَّطِیْرُ بِجَنَاحَیْهِ اِلَّاۤ اُمَمٌ اَمْثَالُكُمْؕ
Meaning, those creatures that walk on the earth or those that fly with two wings, they too have groups like you do.
And when this word is applied to humans, it refers to those who share the same belief.
The command of Allah Almighty is:
(كَانَ النَّاسُ أُمَّةٍ وَاحِدَةً )
(At first, all) people were of one religion.
(2:213)
And commonly, ummah refers to the group of people who share the same belief, formed by a prophet or messenger. The Divine command is:
(كنتم خير امةٍ أُخْرِجَتْ لِلنَّاسِ )
(Among the believers) you are the best community raised for mankind.
Keeping these meanings in mind, anyone who asks such a question (first clarify whose ummah the prophet is) can only be ignorant and unwise; no knowledgeable and sensible person would ask this. This is not the meaning of taqlid (imitation), which is why your attention is misplaced and your example is incorrect. It is because of the ignorance of people like you that groups denying hadith have emerged. Now, even if someone ignorant and unlearned in religious knowledge stubbornly holds on to this, that alone is enough for you to bear the sin. You may certainly disagree with us, even maintain enmity and prejudice, but do not spoil the appearance of religion by bringing up baseless objections, nor turn the ignorant away from religion. If you cannot improve their condition, then at least do not worsen it. Then it should be clear to you that if someone says that you yourself are their inventor, this is not even worthy of being called a retaliatory response, because a retaliatory response requires the other party to be a Muslim. You may vent your anger on a non-Muslim, but no wise person would call that a response. Consider that the question you quote is that the four Imams did not follow anyone’s taqlid; this question is based on your own assumptions. Its answer is given to us by non-Muslims. Brother, perhaps such things have some value among the ignorant, but according to the scholars, your answer is at least the worst example of a confused argument.
Fourth:
Your answer that the Four Imams were mujtahids, and since it is not permissible to follow a mujtahid, does not answer the question! There are many objections to this answer. Please clarify whether the Four Imams were born mujtahids or whether they acquired this status over time, as a result of which they reached the level of ijtihad. If you say they were born mujtahids, then provide proof from the Quran and Hadith. If you cannot provide proof, then it must be accepted that they were not mujtahids in the early period, and that they acquired religious knowledge for some time before reaching the level of ijtihad. Therefore, it is incumbent upon you to prove whom they followed before attaining the level of ijtihad. If you can prove with authentic chains of narration that initially we followed so-and-so, but now since we have become mujtahids, we have abandoned taqlid (imitation), then we will reward you handsomely. But remember, despite the strenuous efforts of followers worldwide, they will fail miserably in this. ان شاء الله
Even if you say in the context of following the scholars of Deoband that ijtihad is not something acquired or a skill that can be obtained through effort, but rather it is a divine gift (malakah ‘ata al-ilahi).
In response to this, we say that ijtihad is not the knowledge of the entire religion alone; rather, everything a person has is a divine gift. However, nothing is bestowed without the person’s effort and acquisition. The Divine command is:
يَهَبُ لِمَن يَشَاءُ إِنَاثًا وَيَهَبُ لِمَن يَشَاءُ الذُّكُورَ
Meaning: We grant a boy to whom We will, and We grant a girl to whom We will.
Similarly,
states that We granted Abraham Isaac and Jacob, indicating that offspring is a gift from Allah. Does this mean that no human effort is required to obtain offspring?
The Quran testifies that Allah provides sustenance to the entire world. Does this mean that no effort is needed to earn sustenance? Or the Hadith that all people will enter Paradise by Allah’s mercy (Bukhari, Kitab ar-Riqaq, Bab al-Qasd wal-Mudawamah… Muslim, Kitab Sifat al-Munafiqin) (باب لن يدخل احد الجنة بعمله) — does this mean that no righteous deeds are required to attain Allah’s mercy? In short, from this entire discussion, it is established that for a period, the Four Imams were not mujtahids. Therefore, prove that during that time they were followed, or else our unanswerable objection will remain unanswered. ان شاء اللہ
When you have no proof, then fear Allah and do not confuse the issue; this is not befitting of scholars. Moreover, if personal taqlid were obligatory or recommended, or if it were necessary for the Ummah to follow any one of the Four Imams, then these four elders would not have prohibited their followers from taqlid.
(1) Imam Abu Hanifa says:
(لا يحل لاحد ان ياخذ يقولى مالم يعلم من أين قلت ونهى من التقليد وندب إلى معرفة الدليل )
It is not permissible for a person to take my opinion who does not know on what evidence I based it. The Imam forbade taqlid and encouraged seeking the evidence.
(2) Imam Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) says:
(انما انا بشر اخطى واصيب فانظروا في رائي فكلما وافق الكتاب والسنة فخذوه وكلما لم يوافق فاتركوه )
Meaning: I am just a human being; I make both correct and incorrect judgments (in ijtihad). You should consider my opinion only when it agrees with the Quran and Hadith, and abandon it when it contradicts them.
(3) Imam Shafi’i (may Allah be pleased with him) says:
( نهى عن التقليده وتقليد غيره )
Meaning: Imam Shafi’i forbade following himself or anyone else blindly.
(4) Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal says:
(لا تقلدوني ولا تقلدن مالكا ولا الاوزاعي ولا النخعي ولا غيرهم وخذ الاحكام من حيث اخذوا من الكتاب والسنة )
Meaning: To follow me is the same as following Malik, Awza’i, or any other person, and to take rulings from where they took them, i.e., from the Quran and Sunnah.
