The Safest Method of Dealing with the Statements of Scholars and Schools of Jurisprudence

Question:
May Allah reward you with good. Your Eminence the Shaykh, between the extremism of some youth in not accepting the statements of scholars, and the rigidity of some youth who engage in taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) by limiting themselves to the madhhab (school of jurisprudence), what is the safest method in this matter?

Answer:
There is no good in taqlid, nor in independence and not consulting the words of the people of knowledge. All of this is dangerous. Taqlid is wrong and not permissible. The one who is unable to perform ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) asks the people of knowledge, and strives to identify who among them is closest to good, and who is the most knowledgeable in his opinion and ijtihad, based on what he hears from people, until he asks him about what is difficult for him, and until he benefits from his knowledge, even if it requires traveling from one country to another, so that he learns and benefits. As for the one who has knowledge, it is obligatory for him to strive to prefer the stronger position with evidence in matters of scholarly disagreement. As for matters of ijma' (scholarly consensus), they are settled, and he must adhere to them. As for matters of disagreement, it is obligatory for him to pay attention to the evidence of the Shari'ah (Islamic sacred law) and benefit from the words of the scholars, so that he benefits and adds knowledge to his knowledge. As for adhering to the scholars while despising them and trusting himself, its danger is great, and he may fall into major errors and great dangers. The scholars are the leaders of the prophets.
And they expanded the knowledge, may Allah have mercy on them, and spread it among the people, and explained the hadiths and interpreted the Noble Qur'an, and gathered knowledge, such as al-Mughni by al-Muqaddam ibn Qudamah, and al-Sharh al-Mu'addab by al-Nawawi, and its completion, and other books, such as the books of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, the books of Ibn al-Qayyim, the books of the noble hadith, the books of ijma' and khilaf (scholarly disagreement) by Ibn Hazm and others. All of them are beneficial, and a student of knowledge should never do without them. Rather, he should benefit from them, look into them, and know the stronger position by evidence. These books help him in knowing the stronger position; they help him. If he does without them and relies on his own opinion, he falls into much danger, and there is no power or strength except with Allah. As for blind taqlid, this is not permissible. If he follows a scholar, or says, "The Hanafi madhhab is sufficient for me," or "The Shafi'i madhhab," or "The Hanbali madhhab," or "The Maliki madhhab," no, four scholars are not sufficient with this. Rather, he looks into matters of disagreement, and pays attention to the evidence. Whatever the evidence prefers from any of the four madhahib, or from the words of the imams, it is obligatory to accept it, even if it contradicts the madhhab he grew up with. The truth takes precedence in any of the four madhahib, or in what came from the Salaf (the earliest generations), or in the madhhab of the Zahiris. The point is that the ruling belongs to the evidence, not to the opinion of so-and-so or so-and-so, just because, for example, he thinks the Maliki madhhab is stronger, or the Hanafi, or the Shafi'i. No, this is not sufficient. It is necessary to pay attention to the evidence, even if he leans toward one of the madhahib, but he does not take the ruling for the sake of so-and-so's madhhab. No, he may take it because the evidence indicated it in matters of disagreement. Yes.

The presenter:
May Allah reward you with good. Your Eminence the Shaykh