Written by: Hafiz Muhammad Ishaq Zahid, Kuwait
The scholars and sheikhs of Saudi Arabia adhere to the Salafi school of thought and invite others to it. Their approach in matters of jurisprudential and disputed issues is to follow evidence, not blind imitation (Taqleed). They bow before evidence, whether it aligns with or opposes the Hanbali school of thought. A careful study of the fatwas and writings of Saudi scholars reveals that in every issue, they first refer to Quranic verses, then Hadiths of the Prophet, and then the sayings of the Companions (رضی اللہ عنہم).
If they do not find these three sources, they refer to the opinions of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (رحمہ اللہ) and other Imams, giving preference to the one closest to the evidence. Before discussing the stance of Saudi scholars on Taqleed, let us first consider the testimony of a Saudi scholar, Sheikh Abdul Mohsin Al-Abbad, who has been teaching Hadith in the Prophet’s Mosque for many years and is a student of prominent Saudi sheikhs. In response to a criticism by Yousif Hashim Al-Rifai, Sheikh Al-Abbad wrote an article, published serially in "Al-Furqan" (Kuwait). Addressing one of Al-Rifai’s objections, Sheikh Al-Abbad writes:
"Thus, they have not abandoned the Hanbali school of thought, but they have abandoned the fanaticism towards it. When a sound evidence is found opposing the school of thought, they act upon what the evidence indicates."
(See Al-Furqan, July 2000)
Now let us understand the stance of Saudi scholars on Taqleed:
Regarding his own practice, he states:
"My school of thought in jurisprudence is the school of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (رحمہ اللہ), not by way of blind following, but by way of following the evidence. ... In matters of disagreement, my method is to prefer what the evidence supports, and to issue fatwas accordingly, whether it agrees with the Hanbali school or not, because the truth is more deserving of being followed."
(Fatawa al-Mar’ah al-Muslimah 14/1)
Sheikh Ibn Baz’s words, "not by way of blind following, but by way of following the evidence," are worthy of being written in golden letters. His statement that he does not strictly adhere to the Hanbali school in matters of disagreement but prefers the evidence indicates that despite his association with the Hanbali school in jurisprudence, he does not engage in blind Taqleed. Instead, he issues fatwas based on the evidence. There are numerous examples of this, and we present one to confirm his stance:
When asked whether forty individuals, upon whom prayer is obligatory, are necessary to establish Jumu’ah, Sheikh Ibn Baz replied:
"A group of scholars hold the condition that forty men are required to establish Jumu’ah prayer. Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (رحمہ اللہ) is among them. However, the more correct opinion is that Jumu’ah can be established with fewer than forty individuals. ... Because there is no valid evidence for the condition of forty men, and the Hadith that mentions it is weak."
(Fatawa Samahat Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Baz p. 74)
(Also in Majmoo’ Fatawa wa Maqalaat Mutanawwi’ah 12/327)
Is there anyone among the contemporary Hanafi followers who would demonstrate the same courage as Sheikh Ibn Baz (رحمہ اللہ) and when faced with a sound evidence opposing the Hanafi school, would submit to that evidence instead of interpreting it to fit the Hanafi position or bringing a weak counter-evidence? Instead, we often observe that Hanafi followers, even after recognizing the correct evidence, are unwilling to abandon their school of thought. Let’s look at two examples:
"Every opinion that contradicts the Shari’ah evidence must be rejected and not relied upon, as Allah (عز وجل) says: 'If you differ in anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you believe in Allah and the Last Day; that is best and most suitable for final determination.' And He says, 'And in anything over which you disagree - its ruling is [to be referred] to Allah.'"
(Fatawa Muhimmah Tata'allaq bi al-Salah, p. 58)
In an article titled "The Obligation of Following the Sunnah of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and the Disbelief of One Who Rejects It," Sheikh Ibn Baz writes:
"When some people argued with Ibn Abbas (رضی اللہ عنہما) on the issue of Hajj al-Tamattu’, citing Abu Bakr and Umar (رضی اللہ عنہما) as preferring Hajj al-Ifrad, Ibn Abbas (رضی اللہ عنہما) replied: 'It is possible that stones may rain down upon you from the sky. I say to you: The Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said such and such, and you say: Abu Bakr and Umar (رضی اللہ عنہما) said such and such.'"
Sheikh Ibn Baz (رحمہ اللہ) comments:
"If there is a fear of punishment for opposing the Sunnah for the saying of Abu Bakr and Umar (رضی اللہ عنہما), what would be the condition of someone who opposes it for the saying of someone lesser than them, or merely for his opinion and Ijtihad?"
(Majmoo’ Fatawa wa Maqalaat Mutanawwi’ah, p. 99)
The statement by Sheikh Ibn Baz (رحمہ اللہ) clearly indicates that in his view, no one’s school of thought or Ijtihad holds any significance if it contradicts the Sunnah of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), regardless of whether that Ijtihad comes from an Imam or a pious elder.
Therefore, Hanafi followers who try to align themselves with the Saudi scholars should consider that Saudi scholars do not advocate blind following. When a Shari’ah evidence opposes the Hanbali school, they prioritize the evidence and reject any view that conflicts with the Sunnah of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم). On the other hand, the approach of Hanafi followers is quite the opposite, as their unfair treatment of evidence that opposes the Hanafi school is well known. Hence, it is incorrect to equate the approach of Saudi scholars with that of the Hanafi school.
When asked about his opinion on a teacher who teaches the Hanafi school of thought, Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen replied:
"There is no doubt that the school of Imam Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ) is one of the four renowned schools followed by people. However, it should be understood that the truth is not confined to these four schools; the truth may also be found outside them. Furthermore, agreement among these four Imams on a matter does not constitute a consensus of the entire Ummah. These Imams themselves were aware of their positions and were convinced that their obedience could only be expected in matters that align with the Sunnah of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Hence, they discouraged blind following unless their position was in agreement with the Sunnah."
Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen further states:
"There is no doubt that the school of Imam Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ), the school of Imam Ahmad (رحمہ اللہ), the school of Imam Al-Shafi'i (رحمہ اللہ), the school of Imam Malik (رحمہ اللہ), and others among the scholars can be right or wrong. Every person's statement can be accepted or rejected except that of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Therefore, there is no harm in teaching students according to the school of Imam Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ) on the condition that when evidence contrary to it is found, the teacher follows the evidence and leaves the view of Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ). He should explain to his students that the evidence is the truth and that it is their obligation to follow it."
(Majmoo’ Fatawa wa Rasa’il Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen 28/1)
So, can Hanafi followers claim that they teach their students the Hanafi school according to the method outlined by Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen? If the answer is yes, then this is commendable, but it requires practical evidence. If the answer is no, then what value does their claim of aligning with the scholars of Saudi Arabia hold? The reality is quite different, as in Deobandi schools, students are taught Hanafi jurisprudence for the first four to five years, during which their minds are molded according to it. In the final year, Hadith studies are carried out, but only in a cursory manner, with emphasis on reconciling conflicting Hadiths with the Hanafi school, often disregarding authentic evidence.
Readers, after understanding the position of Saudi scholars on Taqleed, you can decide for yourselves what resemblance remains between the Hanafi Deobandi school of thought and that of Saudi scholars.
In discussing Taqleed, a follower of Rangooni writes:
"According to the non-followers, just as Hanafi followers are guilty of following Imam Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ), the scholars and sheikhs of Saudi Arabia are equally guilty of following Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (رحمہ اللہ)."
It is important to understand that the approach to Taqleed in the subcontinent, where any deviation from the Hanafi school is not tolerated and efforts are made to prove it as absolute truth, as if it were divine revelation, is not found in Saudi Arabia or other Arab countries. Followers in the subcontinent go to the extent of distorting Quranic verses and Hadiths to undermine the Ahl-e-Hadith, which we indeed consider a crime because the Shari’ah does not obligate us to follow any Imam, but rather to follow Shari’ah evidence, whether it aligns with or opposes an Imam’s school. Since it is clear that Saudi scholars do not advocate blind Taqleed and their approach is to follow the evidence, we do not consider this a crime but instead a correct practice, and we invite our Hanafi brothers to adopt the same approach and abandon sectarian bias.
[Text from the book would follow here]
The translation maintains the structure and flow of the original article while ensuring clarity and comprehension for English readers.
Translation:
"I have reflected upon all religious affiliations and found that all of them emerged quite late, long after the era of the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and the Rightly Guided Caliphs (رضي الله عنهم). Whether these affiliations were political, such as the Khawarij, Shia, Qadariyyah, and Murji'ah, or related to beliefs, such as the Mu'tazilah, Ash'arites, and Maturidites, or related to spiritual paths, such as the Sufis and their various groups, or related to rigid adherence in jurisprudential issues, such as the Hanafis, Malikis, Shafi'is, Hanbalis, and Zahiris."
"While discussing these sectarian groups, he writes:
'The error does not lie with the four Imams; they are free from such blame. Each of them forbade following them blindly and instructed their followers to act upon Hadith when their opinions contradicted it. Through these four Imams and the scholars who preceded and succeeded them, Allah has protected His religion. Criticizing such scholars is manifest misguidance. However, the mistake lies with those who excessively exaggerated their views and fell into sectarian bias, leading to strife, wasted efforts, and conflicts of words. The matter escalated further, where things were added to the religion that do not belong to it, such as prohibiting marriage between a Hanafi and a Shafi'i, declaring the prayer behind a follower of the other invalid, and even leading to bloody conflicts, as occurred between the Hanafis and Shafi'is in 'Isfahan' and 'Rayy.' This has left a black mark on these sects, even though Islam is free from such bias, and the Salaf of this Ummah, the Companions and their followers, are innocent of this foolish sectarianism."**
"He further writes:
'Before these sects emerged, Muslims had no other name or title, for they solely represented Islam. However, when these deviant sects appeared, which can be rightly called 'Ahl al-Ahwaa' (people of desires), 'Ahl al-Bid'ah' (people of innovations), and 'Ahl al-Shubuhat' (people of doubts), and since they also claimed affiliation with Islam, some distinct titles and names appeared among Muslims to distinguish themselves from these deviant groups. These names and titles were either established in principle by Shariah, such as 'Al-Jama'ah,' 'Jama'at al-Muslimeen,' 'Al-Firqa al-Najiyah,' and 'Al-Ta'ifah al-Mansurah,' or they emerged due to adherence to the Sunnah of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) in opposition to the people of innovation, such as 'Al-Salaf,' 'Ahl al-Hadith,' 'Ahl al-Athar,' and 'Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah.' These honorable titles differ from all other sectarian titles for several reasons."**
"Sheikh Bakr Abu Zayd (حفظہ اللہ) has detailed these reasons, and here is a summary:
Sheikh Jameel Zainoo has been teaching at Dar al-Hadith al-Khayriyyah in Makkah for the past twenty years. He is now 75 years old. Initially, he followed the Naqshbandi, then the Shadhili, and finally the Qadiri paths. Later, he joined the Tablighi Jamaat. Eventually, Allah guided him to the straight path, and he became Ahl al-Hadith. He has been a teacher in Makkah since 1400 AH and has written numerous important books for societal reform, many of which have been translated into various languages and are being distributed for free. What is his view on Taqleed? Let’s examine some of his quotes. He says:
"So, Ahl al-Hadith (may Allah resurrect us with them) do not show fanaticism towards the opinion of any particular individual, no matter how great an Imam he may be, except Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم). On the other hand, those who do not affiliate themselves with Ahl al-Hadith show fanaticism towards the opinions of their Imams, even though their Imams have prohibited them from this. Ahl al-Hadith only show fanaticism towards the sayings of their Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم), so it is no wonder that Ahl al-Hadith are the Victorious Group and the Saved Sect."
(Majmoo’ Rasail al-Tawjihat al-Islamiyyah 1/164)
In another place, he says:
"Many people, when you say to them, 'Allah said, and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said,' they respond, 'The Sheikh said!' Have they not heard Allah’s statement: ‘O you who have believed, do not put [yourselves] before Allah and His Messenger’—meaning, do not give precedence to anyone’s statement over that of Allah and His Messenger? Ibn Abbas (رضي الله عنه) said: ‘It is possible that stones may rain down upon you from the sky; I say to you that the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said such and such, and you say that Abu Bakr and Umar (رضي الله عنهما) said such and such!’"
(Majmoo’ Rasail al-Tawjihat al-Islamiyyah 1/237)
Consider another excerpt from Sheikh Jameel Zainoo:
"We have only been commanded to follow the Qur’an, which has been revealed from Allah, and the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) has explained it to us through his authentic Hadiths. Allah says: 'Follow what has been sent down to you from your Lord and do not follow any other protectors beside Him.' Therefore, it is not permissible for a Muslim who hears a Sahih Hadith to reject it just because it contradicts his school of thought, as the Imams themselves unanimously agreed on acting upon Sahih Hadith and abandoning any opinion that contradicts it."
(Majmoo’ Rasail al-Tawjihat al-Islamiyyah 1/135)
Sheikh Saud al-Shuraim, Imam and Khateeb of the Grand Mosque:
Sheikh Saud al-Shuraim is the Imam and Khateeb of the Grand Mosque in Makkah and a judge in a high court in Makkah. Three collections of his sermons have been published in book form. The second collection is currently in front of us. Before presenting excerpts to describe his stance, it is necessary to clarify that Rangooni Sahib, through his book, has tried to convey to the Barelvis that they should not harbor any misconceptions about the Imams of the Haramain (the Two Holy Mosques) because, according to Rangooni Sahib, the Imams of the Haramain have a school of thought completely distinct from that of Ahl al-Hadith, and there is no resemblance between the two! However, the truth is quite the opposite, as all the Imams of the Haramain are Ahl al-Hadith Salafis. We will present evidence of this from Sheikh Saud al-Shuraim’s collection of sermons, while Rangooni Sahib has not provided any evidence to support his claim from the Imams of the Haramain and cannot do so, as he is utterly wrong in his claim and is merely trying to propagate a falsehood. So let us examine the school of thought of the Imams of the Haramain...
Sheikh Saud al-Shuraim states:
"Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah, the Saved Sect and the Victorious Group, have placed the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) in the core of their hearts, so the intent of Allah and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) is enshrined in these two revelations (the Qur’an and Sunnah), and no one’s opinion is taken after Allah and His Messenger."
(Majmoo’ Rasail al-Tawjihat al-Islamiyyah 1/164)
At the beginning of the same sermon, he says:
"Know, O people, that the religion of Islam, like other divine laws for which Allah sent the Messengers, is a religion based on following and emulating. Religion is only valid when submission is to the truth alone, for there is no understanding of religion without submission and following."
From these two excerpts, the following points become clear:
Another clear evidence of the resemblance between the Imams of the Haramain and the Ahl al-Hadith can be seen from Sheikh Saud al-Shuraim’s discussion on various issues related to Jumu’ah (Friday prayer). One of the issues he addresses is whether it is permissible to combine the Friday prayer with the Asr prayer due to rain. Sheikh says:
"There remains the issue of combining Jumu’ah with Asr due to rain. The Shafi'is have allowed this, just as they allow combining Dhuhr and Asr. The other three Imams, however, do not hold this view. Insha’Allah, the correct opinion is what the Shafi'is have chosen because the cause that permits combining (rain) is present here as well."
(Wameed min al-Haram, p. 18)
This method of discussion and research in religious matters demonstrates that the Imams of the Haramain are not blind followers. They only follow evidence, whether it supports or opposes the Hanbali school of thought. They have no hesitation in accepting the evidence, something not found among the Hanafi followers.
Sheikh Salih bin Fawzan al-Fawzan (حفظہ اللہ):
Sheikh al-Fawzan is one of the senior scholars of Saudi Arabia, a permanent member of the Saudi Standing Committee for Ifta, and the author of many important books. Regarding Taqleed, Sheikh writes:
"Likewise, the followers of the schools of thought must refer the sayings of their Imams to the Qur’an and Sunnah. Whatever agrees with them, they should adopt, and whatever contradicts them, they should reject without any bias or partisanship."
(Book: Kitab al-Tawhid, p. 49)
At the end of this book, Sheikh mentions a few reasons for the emergence of innovations. One of the reasons is described by Sheikh in the following words:
"Fanaticism towards opinions and people: This prevents a person from following evidence and recognizing the truth. Allah says: 'And when it is said to them, "Follow what Allah has revealed," they say, "Rather, we will follow that which we found our forefathers doing."' And this is the state today of some of those who follow the Sufi sects and grave worshippers. When they are invited to follow the Qur’an and Sunnah and are told to abandon what contradicts them, they argue with their schools of thought, their sheikhs, and their forefathers."
(Book: Kitab al-Tawhid, p. 110)
The scholars and sheikhs of Saudi Arabia adhere to the Salafi school of thought and invite others to it. Their approach in matters of jurisprudential and disputed issues is to follow evidence, not blind imitation (Taqleed). They bow before evidence, whether it aligns with or opposes the Hanbali school of thought. A careful study of the fatwas and writings of Saudi scholars reveals that in every issue, they first refer to Quranic verses, then Hadiths of the Prophet, and then the sayings of the Companions (رضی اللہ عنہم).
If they do not find these three sources, they refer to the opinions of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (رحمہ اللہ) and other Imams, giving preference to the one closest to the evidence. Before discussing the stance of Saudi scholars on Taqleed, let us first consider the testimony of a Saudi scholar, Sheikh Abdul Mohsin Al-Abbad, who has been teaching Hadith in the Prophet’s Mosque for many years and is a student of prominent Saudi sheikhs. In response to a criticism by Yousif Hashim Al-Rifai, Sheikh Al-Abbad wrote an article, published serially in "Al-Furqan" (Kuwait). Addressing one of Al-Rifai’s objections, Sheikh Al-Abbad writes:
"Thus, they have not abandoned the Hanbali school of thought, but they have abandoned the fanaticism towards it. When a sound evidence is found opposing the school of thought, they act upon what the evidence indicates."
(See Al-Furqan, July 2000)
Now let us understand the stance of Saudi scholars on Taqleed:
1. Sheikh Ibn Baz (رحمہ اللہ)
Sheikh Ibn Baz (رحمہ اللہ), who passed away in May 1999, is a well-known figure in the Islamic world. He was known for his knowledge, piety, and insight, and dedicated his life to the service of Islam. He received great respect during his lifetime, and when he passed away, nearly two million people attended his funeral prayer at the Masjid al-Haram. May Allah have mercy on him.Regarding his own practice, he states:
"My school of thought in jurisprudence is the school of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (رحمہ اللہ), not by way of blind following, but by way of following the evidence. ... In matters of disagreement, my method is to prefer what the evidence supports, and to issue fatwas accordingly, whether it agrees with the Hanbali school or not, because the truth is more deserving of being followed."
(Fatawa al-Mar’ah al-Muslimah 14/1)
Sheikh Ibn Baz’s words, "not by way of blind following, but by way of following the evidence," are worthy of being written in golden letters. His statement that he does not strictly adhere to the Hanbali school in matters of disagreement but prefers the evidence indicates that despite his association with the Hanbali school in jurisprudence, he does not engage in blind Taqleed. Instead, he issues fatwas based on the evidence. There are numerous examples of this, and we present one to confirm his stance:
When asked whether forty individuals, upon whom prayer is obligatory, are necessary to establish Jumu’ah, Sheikh Ibn Baz replied:
"A group of scholars hold the condition that forty men are required to establish Jumu’ah prayer. Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (رحمہ اللہ) is among them. However, the more correct opinion is that Jumu’ah can be established with fewer than forty individuals. ... Because there is no valid evidence for the condition of forty men, and the Hadith that mentions it is weak."
(Fatawa Samahat Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Baz p. 74)
(Also in Majmoo’ Fatawa wa Maqalaat Mutanawwi’ah 12/327)
Is there anyone among the contemporary Hanafi followers who would demonstrate the same courage as Sheikh Ibn Baz (رحمہ اللہ) and when faced with a sound evidence opposing the Hanafi school, would submit to that evidence instead of interpreting it to fit the Hanafi position or bringing a weak counter-evidence? Instead, we often observe that Hanafi followers, even after recognizing the correct evidence, are unwilling to abandon their school of thought. Let’s look at two examples:
- "The truth and justice lie with the Shafi’i school in this issue, but since we are followers, it is obligatory for us to follow Imam Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ)."
(Taqreer Tirmidhi, p. 39) - Ibn Nujaym al-Hanafi says:
"The heart of a believer inclines towards the opposing view in the matter of the cause, but following the Hanafi school is obligatory."
(Al-Bahr al-Ra’iq 5/125)
"Every opinion that contradicts the Shari’ah evidence must be rejected and not relied upon, as Allah (عز وجل) says: 'If you differ in anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you believe in Allah and the Last Day; that is best and most suitable for final determination.' And He says, 'And in anything over which you disagree - its ruling is [to be referred] to Allah.'"
(Fatawa Muhimmah Tata'allaq bi al-Salah, p. 58)
In an article titled "The Obligation of Following the Sunnah of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and the Disbelief of One Who Rejects It," Sheikh Ibn Baz writes:
"When some people argued with Ibn Abbas (رضی اللہ عنہما) on the issue of Hajj al-Tamattu’, citing Abu Bakr and Umar (رضی اللہ عنہما) as preferring Hajj al-Ifrad, Ibn Abbas (رضی اللہ عنہما) replied: 'It is possible that stones may rain down upon you from the sky. I say to you: The Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said such and such, and you say: Abu Bakr and Umar (رضی اللہ عنہما) said such and such.'"
Sheikh Ibn Baz (رحمہ اللہ) comments:
"If there is a fear of punishment for opposing the Sunnah for the saying of Abu Bakr and Umar (رضی اللہ عنہما), what would be the condition of someone who opposes it for the saying of someone lesser than them, or merely for his opinion and Ijtihad?"
(Majmoo’ Fatawa wa Maqalaat Mutanawwi’ah, p. 99)
The statement by Sheikh Ibn Baz (رحمہ اللہ) clearly indicates that in his view, no one’s school of thought or Ijtihad holds any significance if it contradicts the Sunnah of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), regardless of whether that Ijtihad comes from an Imam or a pious elder.
Therefore, Hanafi followers who try to align themselves with the Saudi scholars should consider that Saudi scholars do not advocate blind following. When a Shari’ah evidence opposes the Hanbali school, they prioritize the evidence and reject any view that conflicts with the Sunnah of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم). On the other hand, the approach of Hanafi followers is quite the opposite, as their unfair treatment of evidence that opposes the Hanafi school is well known. Hence, it is incorrect to equate the approach of Saudi scholars with that of the Hanafi school.
2. Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen (حفظہ اللہ)
Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen (حفظہ اللہ) is a student of Sheikh Abdul Rahman Al-Sa’di (رحمہ اللہ) and Sheikh Ibn Baz (رحمہ اللہ). He is currently a professor at the College of Sharia and Fundamentals of Religion in Qassim, the author of numerous books, and highly regarded among scholars. After Sheikh Ibn Baz (رحمہ اللہ), his fatwas are highly respected, and therefore, he is always surrounded by students and scholars. Let's review his stance on Taqleed:When asked about his opinion on a teacher who teaches the Hanafi school of thought, Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen replied:
"There is no doubt that the school of Imam Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ) is one of the four renowned schools followed by people. However, it should be understood that the truth is not confined to these four schools; the truth may also be found outside them. Furthermore, agreement among these four Imams on a matter does not constitute a consensus of the entire Ummah. These Imams themselves were aware of their positions and were convinced that their obedience could only be expected in matters that align with the Sunnah of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Hence, they discouraged blind following unless their position was in agreement with the Sunnah."
Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen further states:
"There is no doubt that the school of Imam Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ), the school of Imam Ahmad (رحمہ اللہ), the school of Imam Al-Shafi'i (رحمہ اللہ), the school of Imam Malik (رحمہ اللہ), and others among the scholars can be right or wrong. Every person's statement can be accepted or rejected except that of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Therefore, there is no harm in teaching students according to the school of Imam Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ) on the condition that when evidence contrary to it is found, the teacher follows the evidence and leaves the view of Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ). He should explain to his students that the evidence is the truth and that it is their obligation to follow it."
(Majmoo’ Fatawa wa Rasa’il Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen 28/1)
So, can Hanafi followers claim that they teach their students the Hanafi school according to the method outlined by Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen? If the answer is yes, then this is commendable, but it requires practical evidence. If the answer is no, then what value does their claim of aligning with the scholars of Saudi Arabia hold? The reality is quite different, as in Deobandi schools, students are taught Hanafi jurisprudence for the first four to five years, during which their minds are molded according to it. In the final year, Hadith studies are carried out, but only in a cursory manner, with emphasis on reconciling conflicting Hadiths with the Hanafi school, often disregarding authentic evidence.
Readers, after understanding the position of Saudi scholars on Taqleed, you can decide for yourselves what resemblance remains between the Hanafi Deobandi school of thought and that of Saudi scholars.
- Hanafi followers blindly follow Imam Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ) and Hanafi scholars, while Saudi scholars do not.
- When Hanafi followers encounter a sound evidence against the Hanafi school, they dismiss it, interpret it unjustifiably, or prefer a weaker evidence. Saudi scholars, however, submit to the evidence.
- Hanafi followers believe that truth is confined to the four schools of thought, while Saudi scholars believe that truth can exist outside these schools.
- Saudi scholars teach their students directly from Hadith collections and adhere to evidence, whether it supports or opposes the Hanbali school. Hanafi followers, however, do not follow this practice.
In discussing Taqleed, a follower of Rangooni writes:
"According to the non-followers, just as Hanafi followers are guilty of following Imam Abu Hanifa (رحمہ اللہ), the scholars and sheikhs of Saudi Arabia are equally guilty of following Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (رحمہ اللہ)."
It is important to understand that the approach to Taqleed in the subcontinent, where any deviation from the Hanafi school is not tolerated and efforts are made to prove it as absolute truth, as if it were divine revelation, is not found in Saudi Arabia or other Arab countries. Followers in the subcontinent go to the extent of distorting Quranic verses and Hadiths to undermine the Ahl-e-Hadith, which we indeed consider a crime because the Shari’ah does not obligate us to follow any Imam, but rather to follow Shari’ah evidence, whether it aligns with or opposes an Imam’s school. Since it is clear that Saudi scholars do not advocate blind Taqleed and their approach is to follow the evidence, we do not consider this a crime but instead a correct practice, and we invite our Hanafi brothers to adopt the same approach and abandon sectarian bias.
3. Sheikh Bakr Abu Zayd (حفظہ اللہ)
Sheikh Bakr Abu Zayd is a member of the Senior Scholars of Saudi Arabia and the author of numerous books, which are highly regarded for their eloquence and scholarly depth. He has an extensive study of religious sciences, and when he discusses an issue, he provides a wealth of information. He has also written a book on sectarianism and religious groups titled "Hukm al-Intima ila al-Firaq wal-Ahzab wal-Jama’at al-Islamiyyah" in which he states on page 33:[Text from the book would follow here]
The translation maintains the structure and flow of the original article while ensuring clarity and comprehension for English readers.
Translation:
"I have reflected upon all religious affiliations and found that all of them emerged quite late, long after the era of the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and the Rightly Guided Caliphs (رضي الله عنهم). Whether these affiliations were political, such as the Khawarij, Shia, Qadariyyah, and Murji'ah, or related to beliefs, such as the Mu'tazilah, Ash'arites, and Maturidites, or related to spiritual paths, such as the Sufis and their various groups, or related to rigid adherence in jurisprudential issues, such as the Hanafis, Malikis, Shafi'is, Hanbalis, and Zahiris."
"While discussing these sectarian groups, he writes:
'The error does not lie with the four Imams; they are free from such blame. Each of them forbade following them blindly and instructed their followers to act upon Hadith when their opinions contradicted it. Through these four Imams and the scholars who preceded and succeeded them, Allah has protected His religion. Criticizing such scholars is manifest misguidance. However, the mistake lies with those who excessively exaggerated their views and fell into sectarian bias, leading to strife, wasted efforts, and conflicts of words. The matter escalated further, where things were added to the religion that do not belong to it, such as prohibiting marriage between a Hanafi and a Shafi'i, declaring the prayer behind a follower of the other invalid, and even leading to bloody conflicts, as occurred between the Hanafis and Shafi'is in 'Isfahan' and 'Rayy.' This has left a black mark on these sects, even though Islam is free from such bias, and the Salaf of this Ummah, the Companions and their followers, are innocent of this foolish sectarianism."**
"He further writes:
'Before these sects emerged, Muslims had no other name or title, for they solely represented Islam. However, when these deviant sects appeared, which can be rightly called 'Ahl al-Ahwaa' (people of desires), 'Ahl al-Bid'ah' (people of innovations), and 'Ahl al-Shubuhat' (people of doubts), and since they also claimed affiliation with Islam, some distinct titles and names appeared among Muslims to distinguish themselves from these deviant groups. These names and titles were either established in principle by Shariah, such as 'Al-Jama'ah,' 'Jama'at al-Muslimeen,' 'Al-Firqa al-Najiyah,' and 'Al-Ta'ifah al-Mansurah,' or they emerged due to adherence to the Sunnah of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) in opposition to the people of innovation, such as 'Al-Salaf,' 'Ahl al-Hadith,' 'Ahl al-Athar,' and 'Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah.' These honorable titles differ from all other sectarian titles for several reasons."**
"Sheikh Bakr Abu Zayd (حفظہ اللہ) has detailed these reasons, and here is a summary:
- Since the Ummah of Islam was established on the Manhaj of Prophethood, these titles have always been associated with it. It should be understood that the bearers of these titles did not emerge at a specific point in history but have been present from the beginning and will continue until the Day of Judgment. The Ahl al-Hadith are the Ta'ifah Mansurah, as mentioned in the prophetic Hadith: 'A group of my Ummah will remain steadfast on the truth, and those who oppose them or abandon them will not harm them.'
- These titles encompass the entirety of Islam, meaning the Qur'an and the Sunnah, and are not exclusive to any group that opposes the Qur'an and Sunnah to any degree.
- Some of these titles are proven by authentic Hadith, while others emerged in opposition to the people of desires and deviant sects, to differentiate between them. When innovations appeared, they clung to the Sunnah, which is why they were called 'Ahl al-Sunnah.' When the opinions of Imams were made decisive, they held fast to the Hadith and Athar, which is why they were called 'Ahl al-Hadith' and 'Ahl al-Athar.'
- The bearers of these titles base their loyalty and enmity solely on Islam, i.e., the Qur'an and Sunnah, not on any specific group or ideology.
- The bearers of these titles have loyalty only to the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and not to any Imam or specific ideology.
- The Ahl al-Hadith are indeed Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah because they are the ones who, when confronted with innovations, were called 'Ahl al-Sunnah.' And when confronted with groups that deviated from the Muslim community, they were called 'Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah.' Since they respect the Sunnah and gather around it, calling others to unity based on the Sunnah, they are the true bearers of the title 'Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah.'For more details, see: (Book: Hukm al-Intima ila al-Firaq wa’l-Ahzab wa’l-Jama'at al-Islamiyyah, p. 33-51)
- In the beginning, Muslims solely represented Islam and had no other names or titles.
- When innovations appeared and some Muslims divided into sects due to political reasons or jurisprudential differences, those who truly represented Islam were given titles like Ahl al-Hadith, Ahl al-Athar, Al-Salaf, and Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah to distinguish them from the sectarian groups.
- The bearers of these titles are the original followers, adhering to the Sunnah, and they are the ones who uphold the principles of unity for the Ummah. Hence, they are called Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah, and even today, they are the Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah, and they are the Saved Sect (Al-Firqa al-Najiyah) and the Victorious Group (Al-Ta'ifah al-Mansurah).
- The Imams themselves are from the Ahl al-Hadith and Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah because they forbade their followers from blindly following them and instructed them to follow the Hadith. The sects that emerged in the name of these Imams did not adhere to their methodology. The fault lies with these sectarian groups, not with the Imams.
- The sectarian groups are a later development. Before them, people were Ahl al-Hadith, who were followers of the Sunnah rather than blind followers of an Imam.
Sheikh Jameel Zainoo has been teaching at Dar al-Hadith al-Khayriyyah in Makkah for the past twenty years. He is now 75 years old. Initially, he followed the Naqshbandi, then the Shadhili, and finally the Qadiri paths. Later, he joined the Tablighi Jamaat. Eventually, Allah guided him to the straight path, and he became Ahl al-Hadith. He has been a teacher in Makkah since 1400 AH and has written numerous important books for societal reform, many of which have been translated into various languages and are being distributed for free. What is his view on Taqleed? Let’s examine some of his quotes. He says:
"So, Ahl al-Hadith (may Allah resurrect us with them) do not show fanaticism towards the opinion of any particular individual, no matter how great an Imam he may be, except Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم). On the other hand, those who do not affiliate themselves with Ahl al-Hadith show fanaticism towards the opinions of their Imams, even though their Imams have prohibited them from this. Ahl al-Hadith only show fanaticism towards the sayings of their Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم), so it is no wonder that Ahl al-Hadith are the Victorious Group and the Saved Sect."
(Majmoo’ Rasail al-Tawjihat al-Islamiyyah 1/164)
In another place, he says:
"Many people, when you say to them, 'Allah said, and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said,' they respond, 'The Sheikh said!' Have they not heard Allah’s statement: ‘O you who have believed, do not put [yourselves] before Allah and His Messenger’—meaning, do not give precedence to anyone’s statement over that of Allah and His Messenger? Ibn Abbas (رضي الله عنه) said: ‘It is possible that stones may rain down upon you from the sky; I say to you that the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said such and such, and you say that Abu Bakr and Umar (رضي الله عنهما) said such and such!’"
(Majmoo’ Rasail al-Tawjihat al-Islamiyyah 1/237)
Consider another excerpt from Sheikh Jameel Zainoo:
"We have only been commanded to follow the Qur’an, which has been revealed from Allah, and the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) has explained it to us through his authentic Hadiths. Allah says: 'Follow what has been sent down to you from your Lord and do not follow any other protectors beside Him.' Therefore, it is not permissible for a Muslim who hears a Sahih Hadith to reject it just because it contradicts his school of thought, as the Imams themselves unanimously agreed on acting upon Sahih Hadith and abandoning any opinion that contradicts it."
(Majmoo’ Rasail al-Tawjihat al-Islamiyyah 1/135)
Sheikh Saud al-Shuraim, Imam and Khateeb of the Grand Mosque:
Sheikh Saud al-Shuraim is the Imam and Khateeb of the Grand Mosque in Makkah and a judge in a high court in Makkah. Three collections of his sermons have been published in book form. The second collection is currently in front of us. Before presenting excerpts to describe his stance, it is necessary to clarify that Rangooni Sahib, through his book, has tried to convey to the Barelvis that they should not harbor any misconceptions about the Imams of the Haramain (the Two Holy Mosques) because, according to Rangooni Sahib, the Imams of the Haramain have a school of thought completely distinct from that of Ahl al-Hadith, and there is no resemblance between the two! However, the truth is quite the opposite, as all the Imams of the Haramain are Ahl al-Hadith Salafis. We will present evidence of this from Sheikh Saud al-Shuraim’s collection of sermons, while Rangooni Sahib has not provided any evidence to support his claim from the Imams of the Haramain and cannot do so, as he is utterly wrong in his claim and is merely trying to propagate a falsehood. So let us examine the school of thought of the Imams of the Haramain...
Sheikh Saud al-Shuraim states:
"Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah, the Saved Sect and the Victorious Group, have placed the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) in the core of their hearts, so the intent of Allah and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) is enshrined in these two revelations (the Qur’an and Sunnah), and no one’s opinion is taken after Allah and His Messenger."
(Majmoo’ Rasail al-Tawjihat al-Islamiyyah 1/164)
At the beginning of the same sermon, he says:
"Know, O people, that the religion of Islam, like other divine laws for which Allah sent the Messengers, is a religion based on following and emulating. Religion is only valid when submission is to the truth alone, for there is no understanding of religion without submission and following."
From these two excerpts, the following points become clear:
- Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah have only the Qur’an and Sunnah in their hearts, and anything that contradicts them has no significance in their view.
- After the commands of Allah and His Messenger, no one’s personal opinion holds any significance, nor has any room been left for it in the religion.
- The religion consists of only two things: worship of Allah and following the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم).
Another clear evidence of the resemblance between the Imams of the Haramain and the Ahl al-Hadith can be seen from Sheikh Saud al-Shuraim’s discussion on various issues related to Jumu’ah (Friday prayer). One of the issues he addresses is whether it is permissible to combine the Friday prayer with the Asr prayer due to rain. Sheikh says:
"There remains the issue of combining Jumu’ah with Asr due to rain. The Shafi'is have allowed this, just as they allow combining Dhuhr and Asr. The other three Imams, however, do not hold this view. Insha’Allah, the correct opinion is what the Shafi'is have chosen because the cause that permits combining (rain) is present here as well."
(Wameed min al-Haram, p. 18)
This method of discussion and research in religious matters demonstrates that the Imams of the Haramain are not blind followers. They only follow evidence, whether it supports or opposes the Hanbali school of thought. They have no hesitation in accepting the evidence, something not found among the Hanafi followers.
Sheikh Salih bin Fawzan al-Fawzan (حفظہ اللہ):
Sheikh al-Fawzan is one of the senior scholars of Saudi Arabia, a permanent member of the Saudi Standing Committee for Ifta, and the author of many important books. Regarding Taqleed, Sheikh writes:
"Likewise, the followers of the schools of thought must refer the sayings of their Imams to the Qur’an and Sunnah. Whatever agrees with them, they should adopt, and whatever contradicts them, they should reject without any bias or partisanship."
(Book: Kitab al-Tawhid, p. 49)
At the end of this book, Sheikh mentions a few reasons for the emergence of innovations. One of the reasons is described by Sheikh in the following words:
"Fanaticism towards opinions and people: This prevents a person from following evidence and recognizing the truth. Allah says: 'And when it is said to them, "Follow what Allah has revealed," they say, "Rather, we will follow that which we found our forefathers doing."' And this is the state today of some of those who follow the Sufi sects and grave worshippers. When they are invited to follow the Qur’an and Sunnah and are told to abandon what contradicts them, they argue with their schools of thought, their sheikhs, and their forefathers."
(Book: Kitab al-Tawhid, p. 110)