So you derive correctly from the Qur’an and the Sunnah for yourself right?
So how do you understand the hadeeth of the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam when he said “Pray as you have seen me pray?” – Have you seen the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wassallam pray? How do you know how the Prophet sal Allau alayhi wasallam prayed if you have not seen him?
O.K, I agree, the description is within the Ahadeeth, however which Ahaadeeth and did you actually go and find these Ahaadeeth for yourself, or just you just simply pick up the book “Kayfiyyah Salat un-Nabi” i.e. How the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam prayed authored by ‘Abdul Azeez Bin ‘Abdullah Bin Baz and then make taqleed of it?
Do you understand ‘Arabic?
Then how do you go to the Ahaadeeth and determine which ahaadeeth are strong, good, weak and fabricated? Or is it a case of Simon says? or better yet – Albaani says? Which, needless to say, would again be taqleed.
O.k, for arguments sake, its coming up to Salah and we have five minutes. We both agree that purification is a pre-requestite for Salah, and yet my taps are not working and my sink is blocked. The only water I have is a sink full of soapy water, a toilet that flushes and a bottle of diluted orange juice. Which one should I purify myself with and why and what is the evidence for that?
The only problem is, the ayah from surat ul-Maa’idah that you have quoted does not desribe the wudu as I and and every Muslim knows it, including yourself. For example do you do wudu in the following order? Do you wash your face then your hands? or do you wash your hands then your face? or is there something we are missing here?
Furthermore, do you when washing your hands do it up to the elbow all in the same action before washing the face? and thirdly, I do not see in the Arabic Qur’an the term wash your feet up to the ankles. What I see is the Arabic “wa-amsahuw bi-ru’usi-kum wa arjulakum” in which wa arjulakum litreally means “your legs”. Do you wash your whole legs before Salah? How is this ayah understood and why? What is the evidence? Remember, theres three minutes left to Salah…tick tock.
If you only knew that the four madh-habs have already compiled all these answers that have left you be-dazzled and struggling to present the masaa’il to my questions sufficently. You see all a Hanafi has to do is put the Qur’an and kitaab al-Athar down on the table and thats the evidences for his madh-hab right there. The same with the Maaliki, all he has to do is put put the Qur’an and al-Muwatta on the table and thats the evidences for his madh-hab right there. The same with the Shaafi, all he has to do is put the Qur’an and Umdat us-Saalik down on the table and thats the evidences for his madh-hab right there. The same with the Hanbali, all he has to do is place put the Qur’an and Umdat al-Ahkaam down on the table and thats the evidences for his madh-hab right there. What we would have done then is proven our evidences for our madh-hab that are strictly Qur’an and Sunnah, and since all four Imaams and their priciples in deriving from the Qur’an and the Sunnah are from the Salaf, we can also boast we are upn the Qur’an and the Sunnah AND the understanding of the first three generations. Can you baost that, or is your argument destroyed?
Today we have the Qur’an, tafaseer, multiple volumes of ahaadeeth and commentary at the click of a button. We are able to reference like never before. Now, your argument is taqleed is wrong and we should follow the Qur’an and the Sunnah by looking up the evidences for ourselves, yet how did the 4th century plus laymen find such evidences and practice them? As they did not have access to Shaykh ul-Islam google.com?
Good answer, they would ask the people of knowledge, I agree a 100% with that. Your only problem now is explaning to me why these people of Knoweledge was upon madh-habs and would teach the laymen the masaa’il from their madh-habs. Can you care to explain this fact.
For example Imaam Quduri was a Hanafi, Imaam Bukhaari was a Shaafi, Imaam Barbahaari was a Hanbali, Imaam Nawawi was a Shaafi, Qadi Iyad ibn Musa was a Maaliki, Shaykh Abd ul-Qaadir, Imaam Abdur Rahmaan ibn al-Jawzi, Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdasi, Ibn Taymiyah, Ibn Qayyum al-Jawzi, Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali are Hanbalis and Ibn Katheer and Imaam Dhahabi are Shaafi. Can you at least explain why such great scholars did taqleed of the four Imaams? Whereas you claim their actions are wrong?
To conclude, this argument with you my brother, is it best to follow the Salaf and the early scholars who all compiled the masaa’il for each madh-hab and the 1400 years of scholarship and knowledge that has been passed unbroken, or is it better to follow somebody who popped his head up in the 11th century and claimed “hey, the true knowledge of Islam has been lost since the first three generations, follow me or be killed as a mushrik”?
16 thoughts on “The Questions for any la-madh-habi DIY Mujtahid”
Pingback: Just a recap of all the articles so far offered at thewahhabithreat.com | The Wahhabi Threat
You have questioned with many premises that need to be substantiated first e.g: You said bukhari was Shafi , did he say that? Infact he wrote an entire book Juz Rafuldayn to refute the prevalent view of Rafuldayn of the Hanfi maslak.
And yes Imams of the past did not have the luxury of access to all hadith of prophet pbuh simply because of logistic and geographic issues with no fault of theirs. Hence they derived rulings from whatever little they had.
Analogy : Einstein may be the most intelligent and scholarly person of his time , but todays MIT physics sophomore undergrad knows and understands many things which were unheard in einstiens time. ,making the lad more knowledgeable (maybe not as intelligent).
Physics has to do with intelligence , creativity, knowledge and analytical abiltiy but Islam has to do with Ilm(knowledge), Taqwa
Scholars of the present may not have the taqwaa comparable to the scholars of past , but most certainly they have more knowledge,wisdom and information which no scholar of the past could’ve even thought of!
Google may not be shaikhul islam but a tool at the hand of a scholar for easy access of Information from trusted sources for the people who know how to use it.
-I myself a former Shia turned “Wahhabi”!! after extensive research and consultations with leaders of all deviant sects!
You is how you greet somebody?
“….after extensive research and consultations with leaders of all deviant sects!” > It implies to me that you already made up your mind that they are deviant before consulting them. How long you were a Shia before becoming Sunni?
I assume the question is for somebody who used to be a Shia.
Great article, keep up the good work. May Allah reward you in abundance. Ameen
Do this site and the articles on this site are related to Barelvi or deoband?
This salafi prayer codified by reading Bukhari and Muslim is itself flawed. Because the Salaf and Imam’s never learnt their prayer by reading Bukhari and Muslim and then step by step creating a prayer. They learnt their prayers through imitation of their own Imams and so on connecting their prayer to the sahabah and the Prophet(peace be upon him) through chain of imitation. While the hadiths acted as a side by textual support or basis. While the salafi prayer is to construct prayer though reading of text only, and this method can never replace physical imitation. Whats more, it was the character of the early salaf to record hadith that were obtained though physical presence of the reporter. This is so that the report is not mere a textual hearing but has the visual confirmation and accuracy too. In other words, when hadiths were reported, there was a stress for physical and visual authenticity and imitation too. The modern day salafis instead only have text without any ability to physical imitate because of their rejection of traditional authority.
Salamun ‘alaykum, I love your style of writing. Do not stop, in fact there is a lot you could do with that skill set.
Amazing post. JazakamuLLahu khayran, bro….Mantiq at its finest! Par excellence!
This was brilliantly written. I’ve never really understood how Sunnis who make taqlid of the Salaf are considered deviant, while a group of people who follow some 19th century Najdi scholar call themselves Salafis. #WahhabiLogic
who wrote this? =s
Salamun ‘alaykum . me
Subahan Allah, Alhamdulillah, Allahu Akbar
its very true may Allah suahanahu ta’ala bless you