The Ruling on Blind Adherence to a School of Jurisprudence
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Question:
The questioner asks: What is the ruling on blind adherence to a school of jurisprudence and not going beyond it?
Answer:
Blind adherence to a school of jurisprudence is of two types. If the school is correct, then adhering to it is obligatory, and not departing from it is obligatory, provided the school is based on truth and evidence. Adhering to it in this case is obligatory. However, if the school is not based on truth, meaning it is an erroneous school, then it is not permissible to adhere to it by saying, "This is so-and-so's opinion, and so-and-so's opinion." No, we follow the evidence and adhere to the evidence. Instead of saying we adhere to it, we hold fast to it. Hold fast to the evidence, and hold fast to the correct school. There is no objection to that, so the criterion is the evidence. Yes.
The presenter:
May Allah be with you.
The questioner asks: What is the ruling on blind adherence to a school of jurisprudence and not going beyond it?
Answer:
Blind adherence to a school of jurisprudence is of two types. If the school is correct, then adhering to it is obligatory, and not departing from it is obligatory, provided the school is based on truth and evidence. Adhering to it in this case is obligatory. However, if the school is not based on truth, meaning it is an erroneous school, then it is not permissible to adhere to it by saying, "This is so-and-so's opinion, and so-and-so's opinion." No, we follow the evidence and adhere to the evidence. Instead of saying we adhere to it, we hold fast to it. Hold fast to the evidence, and hold fast to the correct school. There is no objection to that, so the criterion is the evidence. Yes.
The presenter:
May Allah be with you.
Source
قناة «العلامة الدكتور صالح الفوزان»، باب من الشرك أن يستغيث بغير الله أو يدعو غيره — youtube.com (45:53)
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.