Moderation in Dealing with the Statements of Jurists

Question:
Honorable Shaykh! There is a group of people who are fanatical about one of the schools of jurisprudence or a particular scholar, and another group that throws the whole thing out of the window and ignores the statements of the scholars and imams. What is your guidance in this matter, may Allah preserve you?

Answer:
Yes, these two are at opposite extremes. Some people go to the extreme in following a scholar without knowing his evidence (taqlid) to the point of being fanatical about the opinions of men, even if they contradict the evidence. This is blameworthy. The one who is fanatical about the statements of scholars, even if they contradict the evidence, is blameworthy, and it may lead to disbelief, may Allah protect us from that. The other extreme is the one who rejects the statements of scholars entirely and does not benefit from them, even if they are in agreement with the Book and the Sunnah.
This is also a form of division. The first group is excessive, and this group is excessive. There is good in the statements of the scholars, especially the jurisprudence (fiqh) of the Salaf, the jurisprudence of the Companions, the Tabi'un, the four imams, and the jurists whom the Muslim community has attested to as having deep knowledge of the religion. We benefit from their statements and derive profit from them, but they are not taken as an established fact. If we know that a statement contradicts the evidence, we must take the evidence. As long as a statement does not contradict any evidence from the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of His Messenger, there is no harm in it. There is no harm in adopting it. This is not a matter of fanaticism, but rather a matter of benefiting from the jurisprudence of our righteous predecessors, learning from it, and drawing light from it. It is a means to understanding the meanings of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). It is a means to knowing the meanings of the Book of Allah and understanding the Book of Allah; it is a means, not an end. This is the true, moderate position: we take from the statements of jurists and scholars what does not contradict evidence from the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, and we leave what contradicts the evidence. What becomes clear to us as being contrary to the evidence, we leave, and we excuse its author, because this is independent legal reasoning (ijtihad), and the one who exercises ijtihad may err or be correct. A person is human, and this does not indicate a deficiency in him. Rather, he has a reward for it if he is among those qualified for ijtihad. He has a reward. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said: and the error is forgiven. This is for those who meet the conditions of ijtihad. As for the ijtihad of the ignorant or the beginner, that is not it. That is not ijtihad. It is not permissible for the ignorant to exercise ijtihad. The ignorant and the beginner are not permitted to exercise ijtihad. Their only path is following a scholar without knowing his evidence (taqlid) of the people of knowledge. But they should follow from among the people of knowledge one who possesses trustworthiness, knowledge, and piety. And if it becomes clear to him that something contradicts the evidence in certain matters, he leaves what contradicts the evidence and takes what agrees with the evidence. For example, we adopt the school of Imam Ahmad in general, but if it becomes clear to us in some issues that the evidence is with someone else, that the evidence is with someone other than Imam Ahmad, then we take what agrees with the evidence, even if it is from the school of Imam Malik, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam al-Shafi'i, or from the imams before them, such as Sufyan al-Thawri, al-Awza'i, and other mujtahids in the Muslim community. The criterion is the evidence. Yes.