How do we correct the course of the Salafi da'wah, given that we see today the fanaticism of Salafi youth toward contemporary scholars such as yourselves and the likes of Shaykh Ibn Baz and Shaykh

The questioner : The Salafi da'wah was a pioneer in clarifying the concept of following (ittiba') among the people of the Sunnah and the community, and how the principle is to follow the methodology of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).

The Shaykh : (peace and blessings be upon him).

The questioner : And following the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) according to the understanding of the righteous Salaf (may Allah be pleased with them all). However, it did not mean, and it was known as well, that the Salafi da'wah, from its foundations, among the first issues it clarified, was the prohibition of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and the rejection of this pre-Islamic age of ignorance fanaticism, and the rejection of fanaticism toward the schools of jurisprudence and the like.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : However, we see, with great regret, that the concept of following among Salafi youth, especially in this time, has begun to deviate from its correct course. This is by abandoning and rejecting the old taqlid in favor of a new type of taqlid. Perhaps this matter has occurred frequently, unfortunately, and this is something that has become very apparent. It is known that they have abandoned, for example, the taqlid of Imam al-Shafi'i, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and Abu Hanifa, in favor of the taqlid of Shaykh Al-Albani, and the taqlid of Ibn Baz and Ibn Uthaymeen, and other scholars of the da'wah.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : So we ask: What is the methodology? How do we correct the course of the Salafi da'wah in this matter, especially among Salafi youth? And especially since this matter concerns you. How do you guide the youth to beware of this new fanaticism?

The Shaykh : This fanaticism, my brother, cannot be escaped from except when scholars become numerous first, and the awareness you mentioned previously increases. In truth, I believe that this issue of taqlid and following contains an element of excess and deficiency. If we imagine a small village with one scholar and, for example, one hundred or two hundred people, what is obligatory for these people? The obligatory is what is mentioned in the well-known verse: . So if a matter occurs to one of them and he is ignorant and wants to know the ruling of the Shari'ah in it, the Qur'an commands him to ask that scholar. If he follows that scholar in his fatwa, is it taqlid or is it following? Here lies the detail that the Muslim youth must understand. For example, one hundred or two hundred people, what is obligatory for them? The obligatory is what is mentioned in the well-known verse: . So if a matter occurs to one of them and he is ignorant and wants to know the ruling of the Shari'ah in it, the Qur'an commands him to ask that scholar. If he follows that scholar in his fatwa, is it taqlid or is it following? Here lies the detail that the Muslim youth must understand. There are three levels regarding knowledge: ijtihad (independent legal reasoning), following, and taqlid. Taqlid is the function of the general Muslim public. Following is the function of students of knowledge among the Muslims, not all of them, but only those who can understand the scholar's statement and his evidence if it is presented to them. This undoubtedly requires a certain level of knowledge. The last level is the level of ijtihad and deriving rulings directly from the Book and the Sunnah. So in the miniature picture I described earlier, the people of the village ask this scholar, and he gives them a fatwa. By asking the scholar and basing themselves on his fatwa, they have done what Allah has made obligatory upon them. Let us say that among the people of the village, there are some from the general public and some are students of knowledge. As we said, students of knowledge have categories. One who has the capacity to understand the Shaykh's point of view when he gives a fatwa, and whether his evidence is from the Book, or from the Sunnah, or from ijma' (scholarly consensus), or from qiyas (analogical reasoning)? Undoubtedly, knowing this requires a certain type and culture for the student of knowledge. Now, let us answer with a second example. In this village, there are two scholars. People become fanatical for this one, and people become fanatical for that one. This is the reality of the world, always and forever. I mentioned during the speech how the position of the general Muslim public should be in knowing the truth, whether with this one or that one, without fanaticism toward a specific person, but rather by looking at the characteristics present in this one versus that one. And from this follows the answer, which may be the final word: If this village has two scholars, and a man from the general Muslim public was raised on this explanation we presented earlier—for example, one is young in knowledge and the other is an old scholar in knowledge—so he follows that old scholar. Then a third scholar comes to the village, and if this third one is better and more knowledgeable than the second, and if he becomes fanatical for the second and turns away from this third one, he will be committing the condemned taqlid that the Book and the Sunnah and the scholars of the Salaf prohibit. But if he becomes fanatical for him because this third Shaykh is lower than him in the characteristics we established, then if these characteristics are collectively present, this person is preferred over that one, and it is not fanaticism toward the person. So the matter you are asking about, in my opinion, the answer was given earlier. But this requires, as I said at the beginning of the answer, that there be many scholars in society so that a person can choose between this one and that one, and see the most correct and best characteristics available in Zayd versus Bakr, and so on. But unfortunately, the land is barren, and the witness is forced, and people are forced to become fanatical for Zayd or Bakr or 'Amr. This is the problem.