Is the issue of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and itiba' (following) a matter of ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) or a matter of explicit text in the Book and the Sunnah?

The Shaykh : The issue of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and itiba' (following); is this a matter of ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) or a matter of explicit text in the Book and the Sunnah?

The questioner : Taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and itiba' (following)?

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : ... I see that ... and we have not heard it, I have not seen it from the scholars, so it began to be called by this name as if it were a text.

The Shaykh : I am asking you now; in your opinion, do you say: is the issue of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and itiba' (following) based on a text or on ijtihad (independent legal reasoning)?

The questioner : If I told you: it is based on a text, I would be close to having established it, and I have not established it at all.

The Shaykh : You have not established taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence)?

The questioner : I have established taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and I have not established itiba' (following) if it is ... distinct.

The Shaykh : What am I asking you about?

The questioner : Taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and itiba' (following) as distinct or as proof?

The Shaykh : How do you understand it?

The questioner : By Allah, Professor, I may be according to what you were citing for distinctness; because you made the area of itiba' (following) different from the area of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence).

The Shaykh : And it is so.

The questioner : ... distinctness, we have not established it.

The Shaykh : Allow me a moment, when a person asks a question, he does not ask according to his understanding ...?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay, I am asking you now; the topic of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and ijtihad (independent legal reasoning).

The questioner : And independent legal reasoning (ijtihad)?

The Shaykh : And itiba' (following), is it a matter of ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) or is it textually established in the Book and the Sunnah?

The questioner : And I told you ... .

The Shaykh : A rank ... Professor.

The questioner : ... It is not so, allow me, you posed a question and made its premise as if it were agreed upon, I am answering you on a question whose premises are not agreed upon ... .

The Shaykh : You answer, Professor.

The questioner : ... not agreed upon regarding the existence of the muqallid (one who follows a scholar) and itiba' (following).

The Shaykh : Allow me, my lord, I am not asking you about this.

The questioner : Then clarify the question ... .

The Shaykh : I am telling you: when a question with two parts comes to you; one of which you do not believe in, and the other you do believe in; then you speak about the thing you believe in within the limits of the question directed to you, so you believe in taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence), correct?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : I believe in taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and itiba' (following), you do not believe in something called itiba' (following), correct?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay, so you take from the question which has two parts and you answer the part that you believe in.

The questioner: Go ahead.

The Shaykh : Correct?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Then ... you believe in one thing and do not believe in another, so now in order to clarify the question for you, I tell you: the topic of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is a matter of a school of thought that a person follows in his life in his worship of his Lord - Mighty and Majestic - called conventionally taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence); is this a derivation or is it textually established in the Book and the Sunnah?

The questioner: A text.

The Shaykh : A text?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : And what is it?

The questioner : .

The Shaykh : This is not taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence), I am saying taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence), Shaykh, the word taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence).

The questioner : Not ... taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence).

The Shaykh : Meaning placing the necklace around the neck of the other.

The questioner, is this not a text regarding the rank of the muqallids (those who follow scholars)?

The Shaykh : Do you not distinguish between a questioner asking about a matter that has a text in the Book and the Sunnah; so the respondent only presents the text to him, and a matter that has a derivation; so the person asks: is khamr (intoxicants) haram (forbidden) or halal (lawful)? You tell him: Allah said so and so , this is a matter that is textually established, and between one who asks you about smoking; you came and told him: in its rank there are five opinions or the five rulings apply to it?

The questioner : Yes, it is clear.

The Shaykh : There is a difference between the two, my lord; therefore these who are commanded to ask may ask about a text in the Qur'an, and they may ask about a text in the hadith, so this has no relation then to taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence).

The questioner : And they may ask - also - about a ruling.

The Shaykh : Coming, coming, the speech.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : I care about this regarding the question, I care about this branch not that one, so you say that taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is textually established.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Why? ... No, my lord, includes two types, meaning this command for you is like ... for me, taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) plus zero, taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) plus hadith; you did not believe in this! Meaning as a naming of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence); likewise here the questioner who ... may ask about a verse, may ask about a hadith, so he believes the respondent, and he may ask him about a derived ruling he does not know and has no way of knowing it except through the scholar; this is taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence); this is its naming, this is the derivation and ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) of the scholars.

The questioner : The word taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is a convention.

The Shaykh : That is it.

The questioner : The meaning of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and it is textually established by the text.

The Shaykh : Allow me, no, my lord, no, my lord.

The questioner : .

The Shaykh : Be patient, our brothers; is derived from it a derivation for taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) in some of its forms, it is derived from it a derivation of the taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) that we agree on in some of its forms, but it is not correct as long as something is derived by derivation that you say there is a text on it; because we agreed that the thing that is textually established is one thing and the thing that is derived is another; and therefore now you know that the Hanafi jurists and and, you are Hanafi; when the verse is apparent in its meaning and indication, they take from it if the command is taken from it obligation, and if the indication is definitive they take from it the obligation of fard (obligatory); so the derivation from the Qur'an is not all in one rank.

The questioner: Correct.

The Shaykh : Okay, so then this taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) which is of the type of submission to the scholar, this is haram (forbidden), this is halal (lawful), this is fard (obligatory), this is sunnah (recommended practice), and so on; it is not scientifically correct for a person to say: this is textually established in the Noble Qur'an; because the indication of this word is textually established means a command that is definitive.

Another questioner : Explicitly.

The Shaykh : Yes, not only explicitly, more than explicitly, definitive that does not allow ... at all, while this is apparent that the scholars derived, and we are with them in this, we do not want ... so your saying then: this is textually established not ijtihadi (independent legal reasoning) is like you are saying: it is definitive in the Qur'an and the Sunnah.

The questioner : And I am still saying.

The Shaykh : What do you say?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence), Professor.

The questioner : Yes, yes, without doubt it is definitive in the Qur'an ... .

The Shaykh : Permission from the owner of the house.

The questioner : ... textually established in the Book and the Sunnah or is it a rank that was derived by derivation from these evidences? I say that the Qur'anic text regarding it is apparent, and the existence of the rank of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) for the Qur'anic text is apparent, the saying of Allah - the Exalted - : the apparent text for obligation; because what is the meaning of asking without following the obligation of following ...?

The Shaykh : Notice your saying, you are saying: apparent, we are speaking in the science of usul (the principles of jurisprudence), you are saying: apparent, and I am with you in "apparent"; while the question: is it a text? What is wrong with you, Shaykh?! You are speaking in the science of usul (the principles of jurisprudence).

The questioner : Yes, yes, yes.

The Shaykh : And you do not distinguish between "apparent" and "text" despite ... !!

The questioner : Yes, you are right.
Here, my lord.

The Shaykh : Do you insist on the word apparent?

The questioner : I insist on the word apparent ... .

The Shaykh : Finished, finished ... then may Allah bless.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : No, I am summarizing now; taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) does not have a text in the Book and the Sunnah that is definitive, rather the scholars derived it by derivation from some of the apparent evidences, including ... at that time we say: why do we stop at this point as long as the issue is not definitive? ... the issue is apparent, and the scholars differed on fundamental matters; why was this research raised when it is not one of the textual matters? Meaning: it is not one of the matters that if some Muslims misunderstand it, whether he is a scholar, a student, or ignorant, he is taken out of the circle of Muslims? It is not of this kind! And if it were definitive.

The questioner : Then there is disagreement on it.

The Shaykh : Ah; then this is a matter of ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) and derivation.

The questioner : Meaning it was taken from the apparent text.

The Shaykh : From the apparent text, not from the definitive text.
Fine.

The questioner : But this is not ... .

The Shaykh : Now, you say: ... I do not like this speech - without blame - why? It is a tautology, is there ... here?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Okay, let us return and say: do you not know now that the Muslims' problem is the problem, better than this problem?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Very beautiful, why do we not research some of the matters that relate to 'aqidah (creed)?

The questioner : To 'aqidah (creed).

The Shaykh : Yes, what is your opinion?

The questioner : ... .