What is Taqlid?
The word Taqlid has been used in various meanings. Some scholars have called following (Ittiba) as Taqlid, where the literal meaning of Taqlid is intended, while the technical Taqlid is considered impermissible by them. The Hanafi school believes in and practices technical Taqlid. It is a great injustice by the followers to present the sayings of the scholars of the Ummah in favor of their Taqlid; the great Imams are free from such Taqlid.
Referring to Hadith is called following (Ittiba). Some Imams have called it Taqlid, as Imam Tahawi said:
فذهب قوم إلى هذا الحديث فقلدوه
So a people went towards this Hadith, so they have done Taqlid of this Hadith.
Similarly, Shah Waliullah Dehlawi said:
وجـمہـور الـمـجتهدين لا يقلدون إلا صاحب الشرع .
The majority of the Mujtahids did not do Taqlid of anyone except the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Some have also applied this term to a layperson asking a scholar, as Imam Khateeb Baghdadi and others have called asking scholars Taqlid.
Similarly, accepting the consensus of the Ummah has also been called Taqlid by some, as Imam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) states:
فإن علم أن مقلده مصیب كتقليد الرسول أو أهل الإجماع فقد قـلـده بـحـجة وهو العلم بأنه عالم وليس هو التقليد المذكور وهذا التـقـلـيـد واجب؛ للعلم بأن الرسول معصوم؛ وأهل الإجماع معصومون .
If the follower is certain that the one he is following is upon the truth, such as following the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and the people of consensus, then it is as if he has followed the evidence, and that is knowledge. This is not the mentioned (common) Taqlid, and this Taqlid (i.e., accepting Hadith and consensus) is obligatory because the Messenger of Allah ﷺ is infallible and the people of consensus are also infallible.
Benefit:
The aforementioned statement of Allama Ibn Taymiyyah has been presented by Manzoor Mingal Sahib in favor of his Taqlid.
And half of the text has been presented, we have presented the complete text, and it should also be known that a page or two before this text, Allama Ibn Taymiyyah has refuted the prevailing imitation in detail, which Mr. Mingle did not notice at all. Also, in the explanation of the book Wasat and Sunnah, some scholars have called following the traces of the pious predecessors imitation.
The reality is that believing in Hadith and the consensus of the Ummah, following the traces of the pious predecessors, and a layman asking a scholar about issues should not be called imitation. Because accepting Hadith is called following (ittiba’), not imitation (taqlid), as Abu Ishaq Ibrahim bin Ali al-Shirazi (died 476 AH) said:
” ولا يلزم قبول قول النبي عليهم لأن ذلك ليس بتقليد لأن التقليد قبول قول الغير حجة وقول رسول الله حجة . ”
Accepting the words of the Prophet ﷺ does not necessarily mean imitation because imitation is accepting the words of a non-Prophet as evidence, whereas the words of the Prophet ﷺ are themselves evidence.
Hazrat Ashraf Ali Thanwi Sahib said:
Taqlid is called accepting the statement of a sect without evidence. Accepting the command of Allah and the Messenger will not be called taqlid; it is called following.
Furthermore, taqlid is done without evidence as is clear from its definition, whereas Hadith itself is evidence.
Similarly, it is obligatory under divine command for a layperson to ask scholars about issues. Allah Almighty says:
( فَسْــٴَـلُـوْۤا اَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ اِنْ كُنْتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُوْنَ)
This has also been stated by the Imams of Hadith and even the Hanafi scholars. In the famous and authentic Hanafi Usul al-Fiqh book “Muslim al-Thuboot,” it is written:
فالرجوع الى النبي عليه الصلاة والسلام أو إلى الإجماع ليس منه وكذا العامي إلى المفتي والقاضي الى العدول لايجاب النص ذلك عليهما .
So turning towards the Prophet ﷺ (i.e., accepting Hadith) and towards consensus is not among this (taqlid), likewise, a layperson turning to a Mufti and a judge turning to witnesses is not taqlid because it has been made obligatory by the text (evidence from the Book and Sunnah).
That is, accepting a hadith, asking scholars, and accepting the testimony of witnesses is not called taqlid (blind imitation). This also proves that accepting criticism of narrators is not taqlid because it is also testimony. The same has been stated by other Hanafi scholars such as Allama Ibn Hammam, Ibn Ameer al-Hajj, Muhammad bin Abdul Rahman al-Jurjani, Qazi Muhammad Aala Thanvi, etc. For references, refer to the book “The Issue of Taqlid in Religion” by Muhaddith al-Asr Hafiz Zubair Ali Zaee (pp. 8 to 12).
Furthermore, Mr. Sarfaraz Safdar Sahib, in explaining the above statement of Muslim al-Thuboot, writes:
From this statement, it is clear that technically taqlid means acting upon the statement of someone whose statement is not a proof.
For example:
Accepting the statement of a layman as that of a layman, and the statement of a Mujtahid as that of a Mujtahid is not a proof. Contrary to this, referring to the Prophet ﷺ is not Taqlid because his command is a proof, and similarly, Ijma (consensus) is also a proof. Likewise, it is obligatory under ( فَسْــٴَـلُـوْۤا اَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ اِنْ كُنْتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُوْنَ ) for a common person to refer to a Mufti, and similarly, it is not Taqlid for a Qazi to refer to the ruling based on the texts of (مِمَّنْ تَرْضَوْنَ مِنَ الشُّهَدَاءِ ) and (يَحْكُمُ بِهِ ذَوَا عَدْلٍ مِنْكُمْ) because their statements are legally binding.
The famous scholar of the Barelvi school of thought, Janab Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Sahib writes:
Sheikh Abu Ishaq said:
Accepting a statement without evidence and acting upon it is Taqlid. But referring to the statement of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, or to the consensus of the Mujtahids, or a common person referring to a Mufti, or a Qazi deciding based on the statements of witnesses is not Taqlid.
Another famous scholar of the Barelvi school of thought, Janab Ahmad Yar Khan Sahib writes:
It is stated in Muslim Al-Thuboot:
التقليد العمل بقول الغير من غير حجة .
Translation:
It is as stated above; from this definition, it is understood that obeying the Prophet ﷺ cannot be called taqlid (imitation). Because his words and actions are a legal proof. Therefore, we will be called his followers (ummah) and not imitators (muqallid). Similarly, the Companions and the Imams of the religion are followers of the Prophet ﷺ and not imitators. Likewise, the obedience of the scholars that common Muslims perform should not be called taqlid either, because no one takes the words or actions of these scholars as a binding proof for themselves, but rather accepts their words thinking that they are learned men who must be speaking based on the Book.
From these statements, four points are established:
➊ Referring to the Prophet ﷺ (i.e., accepting Hadith) is not taqlid.
➋ Accepting the consensus (ijma) of the Ummah is not taqlid.
➌ A layman asking a scholar about a matter is not taqlid.
➍ A judge deciding based on the testimony of witnesses is not taqlid.
Followers of a particular school also ask their religious scholars about religious matters; despite this, they do not call themselves followers of their scholars and muftis but insist on being called Hanafi. This shows that, according to them, asking scholars questions is not considered following (taqlid). Muhaddith al-Asr Hafiz Zubair Ali Zaee (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
Some people, due to error and misunderstanding, call it (i.e., asking scholars questions) taqlid, whereas this is incorrect. When an ignorant person asks Taqi Usmani Deobandi or Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Barelvi about a matter and acts upon it, no one considers that person a follower of Taqi Usmani (Taqi Usmani-vi) or a follower of Ghulam Rasool (Ghulam Rasool-vi).
Similarly, some have literally called deriving explanations and details of the Book and Sunnah and solutions to ijtihadi issues from deceased scholars and muhaddithin as taqlid. Some refer to this as absolute taqlid, but we do not call it taqlid. This is also our verbal disagreement with them (Khatib Baghdadi, Ibn Taymiyyah, etc.) because in understanding the Book and Sunnah, the understanding of the Imams of the Salaf and the great scholars of the Ummah (Sahabah, Tabi‘in, and Imams of the religion) is authoritative. It is this understanding that the Ahl al-Hadith scholars uphold; this is the creed of Ahl al-Hadith.
الحمد للہ
Shaikh al-Islam Maulana Sanaullah Amritsari (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
Our belief is that we are commanded to follow the Salaf; we are not commanded to perform taqlid of the Salaf. There is a great difference between taqlid and following. Taqlid is merely accepting a statement without knowledge or evidence, whereas following is accepting with insight and understanding.
A common person will also perform ijtihad; the ijtihad of a common person (the effort to reach the truth) is to ask the scholars about the truth. It should also be kept in mind that there are many levels of ijtihad. The ijtihad of a common person is to ask the scholars and seek evidence from the Book and Sunnah, and demanding evidence is not imitation.
Imam Shirazi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“قلنا إنما استـوى الـعـامـي والعالم في العقليات لأنهما متساويان في آلة الإجتهاد فيها وطلب الدليل عليها”
We say that in matters of intellect, the scholar and the common person are equal because in this their faculty for ijtihad is equal, and the ability to demand evidence is also equal.
Allama Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“و الـعـامي والعالم في ذلك سواء وعلى كل أحد حظه الذي يقدر عليه من الإجتهاد”
The scholar and the common person are equal in this regard; each will perform ijtihad according to his own strength and capability.
Sheikh al-Islam Allama Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“و أما أن يقول قائل إنه يجب على العامة تقليد فلان أو فلان فهذا لا يقوله مسلم”
And if anyone says that it is obligatory to imitate so-and-so or so-and-so upon the common people, then this statement is not from any Muslim.
The famous scholar of Yemen, Allama Abu Abdur-Rahman Maqbil bin Hadi al-Madkhali (died 1422 AH) said:
“فالتقليد لا يجوز، والذين يبيحون تقليد العامي للعالم نقول لهم: أين الدليل؟ ثم هل العامة أكثر أم العلماء؟”
Imitation is not permissible, and those who say imitation is permissible for the layman, we ask them: where is the evidence for this? Then, are there more laymen or scholars?
Shah Waliullah Dehlawi (d. 1176 AH) states:
”وقال النووي الذي يــقـتـضـيـه الدليل أنه لا يلزمه المتذهب بمذهب بل يستفتي من شاء“
Nawawi says the evidence requires that the layman is not bound by any (jurisprudential) school, rather he has the choice to ask the issue from whichever (scholar) he wishes.
He further said:
”أن العامي لا مذهب له عامی کا کوئی فقہی مذہب نہیں ہوتا۔“
That is, according to Shah Waliullah, the layman will not imitate a particular person but will ask questions from various scholars and act accordingly.
Muhaddith al-Asr Hafiz Zubair Ali Zaee says:
We also say that it is necessary for an ignorant person to ask the issue from a scholar who has correct belief based on the Book and Sunnah and act upon it, but calling this imitation is wrong.
Question to the Imitators:
Advocates of conventional Taqlid say that Taqlid is not permissible in matters of beliefs, faith, and essentials of religion, as Mufti Taqi Usmani Sahib has stated:
And Taqlid in the fundamental beliefs of religion is not permissible in our view either. It is written in all the principles of Fiqh books that Taqlid does not apply to beliefs and essentials of religion because these are the domain of Ijtihad, not Taqlid.
It has been established that even according to the followers of Taqlid, Taqlid is not permissible in matters of beliefs and essentials of religion. So, will issues related to beliefs and essentials of religion not be asked from scholars? When the common people ask scholars about these issues and yet do not become followers (Muqallid), then how will they become followers in subsidiary issues? If asking questions itself is Taqlid, then impose a ban on asking questions about these mentioned issues.
Has the door of Ijtihad been closed?
Mr. Amin Okaraavi writes:
Shah Waliullah Sahib Muhaddith Dehlavi says:
After 300 AH, no absolute Mujtahid has appeared, and Imam Nawawi has also stated the same in Sharh al-Muhadhdhab. Now, the coming of an absolute Mujtahid is neither legally impossible nor logically impossible; yes, it is practically unlikely, but what would he do if he came?
Regarding the continuation of Ijtihad, Allama Jalaluddin Suyuti wrote a dedicated treatise titled “الرد علی من أخلد إلى الأرض“. In the same book, he quotes Imam Dhahabi:
O followers and those who believe that Ijtihad no longer exists! You have no need to study Usul al-Fiqh; the benefit of studying Usul al-Fiqh is only for the person who can become a Mujtahid. If a person, despite knowing Usul al-Fiqh, does not free himself from the bondage of Taqlid (imitation), then he has done nothing but unnecessarily burdened himself. And if this knowledge is acquired for a salary, then it is a great calamity.
