The Difference Between the Follower, the Imitator, and the Mujtahid.

The question: Answer this question briefly; because the time has run late.
He said - the Exalted - : Does this mean blind imitation here? If so, then what is the difference between the follower, the imitator, and the mujtahid? And does the mujtahid oblige people to follow him, or is it only for himself? And are we capable of exercising independent legal reasoning so that we can dispense with the schools of jurisprudence and be content with that?

The Shaykh: First: Following, in terms of language, is broader than being in good or in evil; it comes in good and it comes in evil. Here, as you see, it came in evil: ... But the fact that following here came in evil does not mean that it always comes in evil. There are many verses where following comes in the sense of following in good. The most famous verse, and the one closest to our thoughts and minds, is His saying - Blessed and Exalted is He - : .
So, following, in terms of language, is not specific to either good or evil. Following is interpreted by looking at the context in which this word appears. In the verse that contradicts ... it is clear that the following was in evil. And in the verse I recited to you, it is clear that the following in that is in good; because Allah - Mighty and Majestic - makes the evidence of our love for Him and Allah's love for us following the path of the Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) -; so this is following in good.
So the issue, in terms of language, does not have a specific meaning of good or evil. Therefore, when he saidThe questioner: Does following mean blind imitation here? If so, then what is the difference between the follower, the imitator, and the mujtahid?
We say: The difference here is technical. After we have known that following in language is broader than being in good or in evil, when it is said "mujtahid," and when it is said "follower," and when it is said "imitator"; this is a technical term. Because the word "imitator" - what is the meaning of the word "imitator" in terms of language? The imitator is the one who puts a necklace on another person. But this meaning was borrowed for the ignorant Muslim who imitates others in his religion ... .
Likewise, following or the follower. The scholars who verify and call for enlightening minds by keeping the door of independent legal reasoning open for its qualified people distinguished this, so that whoever wishes may lie and fabricate against us by saying that we transfer independent legal reasoning even to the common people. This is a lie and a slander and a fabrication. We say: Those scholars who see that it is good, indeed obligatory, for the door of independent legal reasoning to remain open for its qualified people, these, through their independent legal reasoning and understanding, found that people are not all the same. Those who are not mujtahids are not all the same. That is, they saw it as unjust to make those who are not mujtahids imitators; because imitation in the technical scientific sense is what the original linguistic derivation indicates: blind imitation; without knowing the viewpoint of this scholar who says this is forbidden, or this is lawful, or this is obligatory, or this is a recommended practice. He tells you so, and you say to him with your state: Amen, you are right.
This is blind imitation, and not all people are like this. There are people who have some knowledge and some understanding and perception; such that when two opinions from two eminent scholars of the Muslims are presented to him, the evidence for this is such and the evidence for that is such, he uses his mind and understanding without him exercising independent legal reasoning, without him searching in the depths of books and verses and hadiths, and authentic and weak, and interpreted and not interpreted, and so on. No, rather he listens. Two or more opinions are presented to him with the evidence for each opinion, so he distinguishes this from that, and he prefers this over that.
But if such a presentation is made to the common people, what do the common people know? ... They are confused, as will come, if Allah wills, in the next lesson or the one after it, that a questioner will ask: We are confused; everyone claims that the truth is with him. He is completely excused, but he is the one who lived in the Salafi call for a period of time, and knew how the Salafi common person should live, does not fall into this confusion. He is still in confusion because he is far from the Salafi methodology.
In summary: Do we consider equal - for example - some of our noble brothers among the professors; do we treat this person as we treat a man from the common Muslims who does not know the hidden alif - as the common people here say - while this one studied the science of language and the science of hadith, and obtained a degree from the College of Sharia as well? Is this like that? They are not equal, for example; therefore this reality made these verifying imams to be just to those who are above the level of the common Muslims and their ignorance and their imitation, so they called them followers; so that ... between the imitator who knows nothing but saidThe Shaykh : and that is all, but the second one tells you: He saidThe Shaykh : and its operative cause is such, and so-and-so responded to him and his argument is such, but this hadith is weak, but this is a figurative interpretation, and this is contrary to the command, and so on. So we distinguish ... the person and we place him in the position that Allah placed him in, not ... with the common Muslims; this is a clear injustice.
Therefore, the scholars proposed making the levels of knowledge three:
Independent legal reasoning, which is the highest level, and it is the one who is able to understand the issue directly from the Book and the Sunnah.
A second level: Following, where one is able to understand the words of the correct ones and their evidence after they are presented, and he discerns ... the stronger from the one below him.
The imitator, like the common person completely ... This one tells him it is forbidden, he tells him: Amen. That one tells him: It is lawful, he tells him: Amen. He does not know that ... .
Therefore, it is from ignorance, indeed from stupidity, to equate a graduate of the College of Sharia, let alone a professor in the College of Sharia, with the ignorant man who knows nothing of knowledge, of jurisprudence, of hadith, ever. The one who says this wrongs himself before he wrongs others, and that is the clear injustice.
Here is an important question: Does the mujtahid oblige people to follow him, or does he only exercise independent legal reasoning for himself?
The answer: Such a question is driven by two contradictory matters in this time. The first matter: The imitator today and the one who follows a school of jurisprudence, all of them, assume that the four imams called people to follow their schools of jurisprudence. This is a mistake and a fabrication against them. No imam of the imams of the Muslims, ever, not these four, nor those before them, nor those after them, calls all people to follow him in the individual one of them. May they be far from that! How, when Ibn Mas'ud used to say: "This is my opinion, so if anyone has something better than it, let him bring it to us"?
How can it be said that the imam mujtahid obligated his followers to follow him?! Here this very verse is true: . Let not one who deviates from the Sunnah say: This verse was revealed regarding the disbelievers.
Yes, it was revealed regarding the disbelievers; but Allah revealed it in the Qur'an for what? For us not to do the action of the disbelievers, not to follow our imams blindly, but with insight. And from this blindness is attributing to them something they did not say. They did not obligate any of their first followers, let alone the others, to follow them. And if we claim this; then they are a group - may Allah forbid, may Allah forbid, may Allah forbid - of false gods, calling people to follow them without following Islam. Does the Muslim think any of this of the imams of the Muslims?!
No one! But these people must say this; when they say: Call their followers to follow them, it necessitated that these are false gods. And we exonerate them from what is far less than that. This wrong understanding resulted in a new wrong understanding; and that is these followers are like us, we call Muslims to follow the Book and the Sunnah, and on the methodology of the Salaf of the Ummah. They say about us that we are mujtahids, and we do not deny, we do not fear, we do not be afraid. We exercise independent legal reasoning in many of the issues that occur today where the imitators cannot exercise independent legal reasoning in them. And we say with clear insight: ... the issues in which they differed, and every imam and his followers, with time, clarify what they have of evidence, what is correct and what is not correct. These are presented before us, and we have no choice but to choose.