A student of knowledge following a specific school of jurisprudence without looking at the other schools
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner:
Honorable Shaykh, is it permissible for a student of knowledge to follow a specific school of jurisprudence without looking at the other schools, such as restricting himself to the Hanbali school? This may have the opposite effect if he is asked for a ruling and issues a fatwa based on the Hanbali opinion, which might be the weaker position. And is he considered a scholar by doing so, or is it not necessary?
The Shaykh:
Repeat the question.
The questioner:
He says: Is it permissible for a student of knowledge to follow a specific school of jurisprudence without looking at the other schools, such as restricting himself to the Hanbali school?
The Shaykh:
A student of knowledge does not settle for a specific school of jurisprudence. A student of knowledge follows the truth. He learns to benefit, so that he knows the errors of the Hanbali school, the errors of the Shafi'i school, the errors of the Maliki school, the errors of the Hanafi school, the errors of the Zahiri school, and others. A student of knowledge follows what he finds to be correct in the Hanbali school and takes it, and what is incorrect he leaves, and so on in the Shafi'i school or the Maliki school or the Hanbali school, like that. However, being fanatical about one of them, or restricting oneself to it, and being rigid about it, is not the affair of scholars. This is an error. Ibn 'Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) stated that the scholars agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence (mقلid) is not counted among the scholars. He is not a scholar. Rather, the scholar is the one who seeks evidence, learns, and understands the religion, and takes the argument, and reads the argument with the argument, whether he is affiliated with the Hanbalis, the Shafi'is, the Malikis, the Hanafis, or others. Affiliation does not harm; affiliation is not harmful. Following a scholar without knowing his evidence (taqlid) is what harms. As for saying he is affiliated as a Hanbali or otherwise, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah is among the greatest of those who perform independent legal reasoning (mujtahids), and among the largest of those who perform independent legal reasoning, and he is affiliated as a Hanbali. And Ibn al-Qayyim, Ibn Muflih, and Ibn Kathir are affiliated with the Shafi'is. So affiliation does not harm, but he does not follow a scholar without knowing his evidence. If he says he is a Shafi'i, or a Hanafi, or a Maliki, or a Hanbali, merely as an affiliation because he lived in their land or lived under the instruction of some of them, he does not become one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence by that. No, affiliation does not harm, but he pays attention to the evidence and prefers the stronger position, whether it agrees with his school of jurisprudence or contradicts his school of jurisprudence. His criterion is the evidence, what Allah said and what His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said, along with the followed principles and the followed rules.
Honorable Shaykh, is it permissible for a student of knowledge to follow a specific school of jurisprudence without looking at the other schools, such as restricting himself to the Hanbali school? This may have the opposite effect if he is asked for a ruling and issues a fatwa based on the Hanbali opinion, which might be the weaker position. And is he considered a scholar by doing so, or is it not necessary?
The Shaykh:
Repeat the question.
The questioner:
He says: Is it permissible for a student of knowledge to follow a specific school of jurisprudence without looking at the other schools, such as restricting himself to the Hanbali school?
The Shaykh:
A student of knowledge does not settle for a specific school of jurisprudence. A student of knowledge follows the truth. He learns to benefit, so that he knows the errors of the Hanbali school, the errors of the Shafi'i school, the errors of the Maliki school, the errors of the Hanafi school, the errors of the Zahiri school, and others. A student of knowledge follows what he finds to be correct in the Hanbali school and takes it, and what is incorrect he leaves, and so on in the Shafi'i school or the Maliki school or the Hanbali school, like that. However, being fanatical about one of them, or restricting oneself to it, and being rigid about it, is not the affair of scholars. This is an error. Ibn 'Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) stated that the scholars agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence (mقلid) is not counted among the scholars. He is not a scholar. Rather, the scholar is the one who seeks evidence, learns, and understands the religion, and takes the argument, and reads the argument with the argument, whether he is affiliated with the Hanbalis, the Shafi'is, the Malikis, the Hanafis, or others. Affiliation does not harm; affiliation is not harmful. Following a scholar without knowing his evidence (taqlid) is what harms. As for saying he is affiliated as a Hanbali or otherwise, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah is among the greatest of those who perform independent legal reasoning (mujtahids), and among the largest of those who perform independent legal reasoning, and he is affiliated as a Hanbali. And Ibn al-Qayyim, Ibn Muflih, and Ibn Kathir are affiliated with the Shafi'is. So affiliation does not harm, but he does not follow a scholar without knowing his evidence. If he says he is a Shafi'i, or a Hanafi, or a Maliki, or a Hanbali, merely as an affiliation because he lived in their land or lived under the instruction of some of them, he does not become one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence by that. No, affiliation does not harm, but he pays attention to the evidence and prefers the stronger position, whether it agrees with his school of jurisprudence or contradicts his school of jurisprudence. His criterion is the evidence, what Allah said and what His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said, along with the followed principles and the followed rules.
Source
رحلتي مع الكتاب — islamhouse.com (43:56)
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.