Two Types of Taqlid are Well Known:
1. Non-personal Taqlid (Absolute Taqlid):
In this, the one who performs taqlid (the follower) accepts the baseless statement of a non-prophet blindly, without any specification or determination, without thinking.
Warning:
It is completely right and correct for a ignorant person to ask a scholar about an issue; this is not called taqlid, as has been referenced on previous pages. Some people mistakenly call it taqlid due to error and misunderstanding, but this is incorrect. When an ignorant person asks Taqi Usmani Deobandi or Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Barelvi about an issue and acts accordingly, no one says or thinks that this person is a follower of Taqi Usmani (Taqi Usmani-vi) or a follower of Ghulam Rasool (Ghulam Rasool-vi).
2. Personal Taqlid:
In this, the one who follows (the follower) blindly accepts every word (saying and action) of a single person other than the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, without thought or consideration, with determination and specification. There are two types of personal imitation (taqlid):
First: Personal imitation of a specific living or deceased person other than the Four Imams.
Second: Personal imitation of only one of the Four Imams (Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi’i, and Ahmad), that is, blindly, without thought, accepting every word (saying and action) with closed eyes. This second type has two subtypes:
❀ Claiming that we accept the Quran, Hadith, consensus, and ijtihad, and do not imitate in explicit issues; we only imitate Imam Abu Hanifa and Hanafi Mufti in ijtihadi issues. If the Imam’s statement contradicts the Quran and Hadith, we leave it. This claim is that of modern Deobandi and Barelvi debaters such as Yunus Naumani, etc.
❀ Imitating Imam Abu Hanifa and Hanafi Mufti in all issues, even if these issues contradict the Quran and Hadith and are unproven. Rejecting the book, Sunnah, and consensus against the Mufti’s statement.
This is the imitation that the majority of present-day Deobandi and Barelvi masses and scholars are practicing, as will be referenced later. All types of imitation without evidence are wrong and invalid, but this type of imitation is extremely dangerous and misleading. This is the type that Ahl al-Hadith and Salafi scholars and masses oppose from the Mufti. Our teacher Hafiz Abdul Mannan Nurpuri explains this imitation in the following words:
Imitation means accepting or acting upon any saying or action contrary to the Book and Sunnah.
The expert in Usul al-Fiqh, Hafiz Sanaullah al-Zahidi, writes:
الإلتزام بفقه معين من الفقهاء والجمود عليه بكل شدة وعصبية، والإحتيال بتصحيح أخطائه إن أمكن وإلا فالإصرار عليها، مع التكلف بتضعيف ما صح من حيث الأدلة من رأى غيره من الفقهاء
Meaning: To adhere rigidly and with every intensity and bias to the jurisprudence of one specific jurist among the jurists, and to use tricks (and cunning) as much as possible to correct his mistakes, and if not possible, then insist on it; to strive with full effort to weaken the arguments of other jurists whose proofs are correct.
(The meaning of the Arabic text is written by the author)
It is quite possible that some Deobandi and Barelvi persons deny this “personal imitation,” so a few references are presented for your service:
It is narrated from Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Umar رضي الله عنهما that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said:
إن المتبايعين بالخيار فى بيعهما ما لم يتفرقا أو يكون البيع خيارا
The merchant and the buyer have the option of return in their transaction until they separate physically or the transaction is completed by mutual consent.
(Nafi says): Ibn Umar رضي الله عنهما, when he wanted to buy something desirable, would separate physically from his companion (the seller).
The Hanafi scholars do not accept this issue, while Imam Shafi’i and the great hadith scholars accept and practice this issue due to these authentic hadiths. Mahmood al-Hasan Deobandi says:
يترجح مذهبه وقال: الحق والإنصاف أن الترجيح للشافعي فى هذه المسئلة ونحن مقلدون يجب علينا تقليد إمامنا أبى حنيفة والله أعلم
Translation: That is, his (Imam Shafi’i’s) school is dominant. And (Mahmood al-Hasan said): The truth and justice is that Imam Shafi’i has preference in this issue, and we are followers; it is obligatory for us to follow our Imam Abu Hanifa. And Allah knows best.
Consider how, abandoning truth and justice, the alleged imitation of their Imam has been embraced wholeheartedly. Mahmood al-Hasan clearly declares:
But it is far from reason to establish proof upon us except from the Imam or someone else’s statement.
Mahmood al-Hasan Deobandi further states:
Because the statement of a Mujtahid is also considered the statement of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم.
Janab Muhammad Hussain Batalvi asked for proof of the obligation of personal imitation from Deobandis and Barelvis; in response, Mahmood al-Hasan demanded:
You ask us for proof of the obligation of imitation. We ask you for proof of the obligation of following Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم and the Quran.
During the time of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, a woman insulted the Prophet’s honor, so her husband killed her. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said:
الا اشهدوا أن دمها هدر
Translation: Listen, bear witness that the blood of this woman is wasted.
From this hadith and other evidences, it is established that one who insults the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم is liable to be killed. This is the doctrine of Imam Shafi’i and the great hadith scholars, while according to the Hanafis, the responsibility of the blasphemer remains; see Al-Hidayah
.
Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah رحمه الله writes:
وأما أبو حنيفة وأصحابه فقالوا: لا ينتقض العهد بالسب ولا يقتل الذمي بذلك لكن يعزر على إظهار ذلك إلخ
Abu Hanifa and his companions (students and followers) said: Insulting (the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم) does not break the covenant (responsibility) and the dhimmi will not be killed for this reason. But if he does this openly, he will be punished with ta’zir, etc.
On this delicate issue, Ibn Najim Hanafi wrote:
نعم نفس المؤمن تميل إلى قول المخالف فى مسئلة السب لكن اتباعنا للمذهب واجب
Yes, in the matter of insult, the heart of the believer inclines towards the statement of our opponents, but for us, following (imitating) our madhhab is obligatory.
Hussain Ahmad Madani Tandwi writes:
An incident occurred when three scholars (Hanafi, Shafi’i, and Hanbali) went together to a Maliki and asked why he practices irsal (transmission). He replied: I am a follower of Imam Malik; ask him for proofs. If I knew the proofs, why would I imitate? Then those people remained silent.
Irsal: Leaving the hands while praying
Sakit: Silent
In one narration it is mentioned:
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم used to pray Witr and would talk between the two rak’ahs of Witr and the single rak’ah.
Quoting such a narration from Al-Mustadrak by Al-Hakim, Anwar Shah Kashmiri Deobandi says:
ولقد تفكرت فيه قريبا من أربعة عشر سنة ثم استخرجت جوابه شافيا وذلك الحديث قوي السند إلخ
Translation: And I have pondered over this hadith’s response for about fourteen years. Then I found its Shafi’i (healing and sufficient) answer. And this hadith is strong in terms of chain, etc.
Tafakkur: Reflection
Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi Barelvi writes:
Now I present a decisive answer: Our proofs are not these narrations. Our main proof is the statement of Imam Azam Abu Hanifa رضي الله عنه. We present these verses and hadiths to support the issues; the hadiths or verses are proofs for Imam Abu Hanifa رضي الله عنه.
Naeemi further writes:
Because the Hanafi proofs are not these narrations; their proof is only the statement of the Imam, etc.
A man wrote a letter to Mufti Muhammad (Deobandi) [Head of Dar al-Ifta wa al-Irshad, Nazimabad Karachi]:
A person joined the Imam in the third rak’ah; if the Imam turns for sujood al-sahw salam, should the one who joined in the third rak’ah also turn salam or not? Someone is arguing here that if he does not turn salam, then there is no following of the Imam. Please satisfy with proof.
Deobandi Sahib gave the following answer to this question:
Answer: The one who joined (Masbuq), meaning who joined the Imam after the first rak’ah, should not turn salam with the Imam in sujood al-sahw; if he deliberately turns salam, the prayer is invalid; if he turns salam by mistake, sujood al-sahw is obligatory; if he turns salam due to ignorance of the issue, the prayer is also invalid. It is not permissible for the common people to demand proofs, nor is it permissible to argue over Shariah issues among themselves; rather, it is necessary to consult a reliable Mufti and act accordingly.
Mufti Muhammad Sahib further writes:
For the follower, the statement of his Imam is the greatest proof.
In an authentic hadith it is mentioned:
من أدرك من الصبح ركعة قبل أن تطلع الشمس فقد أدرك الصبح
Whoever prays one rak’ah of Fajr before the sun rises, he has certainly attained (the Fajr prayer).
Hanafi fiqh opposes this authentic hadith. Mufti Rashid Ahmad Ludhianvi Deobandi discusses this issue and writes:
In short, this issue is still in need of research. However, our fatwa and practice will remain according to the statement of the Imam, may Allah have mercy on him, because we are followers of the Imam, and for the follower, the statement of the Imam is proof, not the four sources from which the Mujtahid derives proofs.
Ludhianvi Sahib writes elsewhere:
For the sake of broadening the scope, the people of innovation leave Hanafi fiqh and deduce from the Quran and Hadith, and for loosening the reins, we also accept this method; otherwise, for the follower, only the statement of the Imam is proof.
Mufti Rashid Ahmad Ludhianvi Sahib writes:
This discussion is written out of generosity; otherwise, referring to hadith is not the duty of the follower.
Qazi Zahid Aksini Deobandi writes:
While for every follower, the final proof is the statement of the Mujtahid, as is in Muslim al-Thubut:
أما المقلد فمستنده قول المجتهد
Now if a person claims to be a follower of Imam Abu Hanifa and simultaneously demands the Quran and Sunnah as proof along with or separate from the Imam’s statement, then in other words, he does not believe in the reasoning of his Imam and guide.
Aamir Usmani was written to:
Answer from the Hadith of the Prophet.
Aamir Usmani Sahib replied:
Now let me say a few words about the phrase you wrote at the end of the question: “Answer from the Hadith of the Prophet.”
This type of demand is often made by questioners. This is actually due to unfamiliarity with the rule that followers do not need references from Hadith and Quran but need the decisions and fatwas of Imams and jurists.
Sheikh Ahmad Sirhindi writes:
It is not appropriate for a follower to derive rulings from the Book and Sunnah contrary to the opinion of the Mujtahid and act upon them.
Sirhindi Sahib said about pointing with the index finger during Tashahhud:
When the prohibition of pointing is established in authentic narrations and a fatwa is issued on its dislike, and pointing and contracting are forbidden, and this is called the apparent principle of the companions, then it is not appropriate for us followers to dare to act according to the hadiths by pointing and thus commit something forbidden, disliked, and prohibited while the fatwas of learned Mujtahids exist.
Sirhindi quoted from Khawaja Muhammad Parsa’s Fusus Sitta:
After the descent, Hazrat Isa عليه السلام will act according to the madhhab of Imam Azam رضي الله عنه.
Abu al-Hasan al-Karkhi al-Hanafi said:
الأصل إن كل آية تخالف قول أصحابنا فإنها تحمل على النسخ أو على الترجيح والأولى أن تحمل على التأويل من جهة التوفيق
The principle is that every verse contrary to our companions (jurists) will be considered abrogated or rejected; it is better to interpret it while applying.
Shabbir Ahmad Usmani Deobandi writes:
Note: The duration of weaning mentioned here as two years is according to the prevailing and majority custom. Imam Abu Hanifa, who mentions mostly two and a half years, must have another proof. According to the majority, it is two years only, and Allah knows best.
From these references, it is understood that those who imitate neither accept the Quran nor the Hadith nor consensus as proof for themselves; their only proof is the statement of the Imam.
Shah Waliullah Dehlawi wrote:
فإن شئت أن ترى أنموذج اليهود فانظر إلى علماء السوء من الذين يطلبون الدنيا وقد اعتادوا تقليد السلف وأعرضوا عن نصوص الكتاب والسنة وتمسكوا بتعمق عالم وتشدده واستحسانه فاعرضوا كلام الشارع المعصوم وتمسكوا بأحاديث موضوعة وتأويلات فاسدة، كانت سبب هلاكهم
If you want to see the example of the Jews, then look at the evil scholars of our time, who are attached to worldly desires and imitation of their predecessors. These people turn away from the texts (proofs) of the Book and Sunnah and firmly hold onto the elaboration, severity, and preference of some (their favorite) scholar. They have abandoned the speech of the infallible Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم and embraced fabricated narrations and corrupt interpretations. Because of this, these people have perished.
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi writes:
Our teacher, who is among the Seal of the Truthful and Mujtahids, says that I observed a group of jurists of the followers and showed them many verses of the Book of Allah which were against their imitative madhhab, and they not only avoided accepting them but did not pay any attention to them.
