The difference between the Salafis' view of the imams of the schools of jurisprudence and the view of others who claim affiliation with them, and whether following the imams is the ultimate goal or a means to the truth?

The Shaykh : This is also a long field of research, and I do not wish to delve into it; because I am in the process of clarifying the point of difference between us, the Salafis, who share with the majority of Muslims in appreciating and respecting the imams. We differ on this point: we consider the imams as means and intermediaries to convey to us the knowledge from Allah and His Messenger. We do not follow them for their own sake, nor do we make following them one of our goals; because the only goal is to know what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was upon, from what his Lord revealed to him in His Book or what he (peace and blessings be upon him) clarified in his Sunnah. So, these eminent scholars, we take them as intermediaries to convey to us the call of the Book and the Sunnah. As for the masses who share with us in appreciating and respecting these scholars, they sought this truth and made following the scholars—if it is correct to use this term for them—made following them, rather, they made their imitation of these imams the goal. The evidence is the saying: "Things are made clear by their opposites." The evidence is that each of them is satisfied with an imam and holds fast to all his statements, and does not hold fast to anything from the statements of the other imams, which are more and more; because the statements of the imams are three, or rather, the statements of the three imams are undoubtedly more and more than the statements of one imam. Therefore, every imitator of one of these imams is a loser in more than what he gained from his imitation, in the portion where the imam he imitates hit the truth.
As for us, we have known the status of the imams in their knowledge from one side, and we have known that they are means and intermediaries, not intended in themselves for following, as they clarified this clearly in those statements we referred to from the introduction of our book "The Description of Prayer." They say, for example, to their followers and companions: "Take from where we took." Take from where we took, confirming what we say that they are not intended for following, but rather the one intended for following is Allah, then the Messenger of Allah, and he (peace and blessings be upon him) is the only one who must be followed without the rest of people, and he is the only prophet whom Allah (Mighty and Majestic) made following him a proof, or the proof, of the love of Allah (Mighty and Majestic), as in the famous verse: .
So the difference is significant, and it can be summarized in a short word; our call is confined to singling out the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in following. He is, in our view, without a like or a partner in following. We do not follow any human being absolutely, except the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). As for others, the followed ones among them are many, as is known. If only the matter of following among them were confined to following the four imams. If only the matter were confined among them to following the students of these imams. If only, if only, and there is no benefit from "if only" at all!! But this is a detail and clarification that the matter is very serious.
With the passage of days and the passing of years, the followed ones among those who claim following the four imams cannot be counted in thousands. If you come to a man who is versed in a certain school of jurisprudence, and you argue with him using a book of one of these imams, and this imam is the imam of this man who belongs to it, like the Hanafi or the Shafi'i, for example, and you bring him the text from the imam's book; he says: No, we do not follow these texts!! Okay; are you a Hanafi or a Shafi'i? He says: We are not able to take from the same imam. So he takes from whoever took from whoever took from whoever took until he reaches the imam. So they take from the later scholars, and do not take from the earlier imams. The problem was, in fact, we imagined it was confined between our call to follow the Book and the Sunnah and singling out the Messenger (peace be upon him) in following without the four imams, the four poles truly in knowledge. And if the problem is greater than that; for they also refuse to us that they remain followers of the imams. They do not have, in terms of knowledge, culture, and awareness, in principles and branches, the ability and capacity to follow the imams themselves, but rather they follow who, who, who, who, until he comes to the jurist in the present age.
And we have many proofs and witnesses in our old discussions before the spread of the Salafi call.