What is your opinion of the Salafis' condemnation of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) while they themselves follow Al-Albani and others?

The questioner : The second question on this topic: taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) that is not accompanied by condemnation?

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : The matter is actually in need of some detail, and I say frankly: regarding some of the people I alluded to, they say: "This hadith is valid," and you ask, "What is your knowledge of it?"The Shaykh : Al-Albani graded it as valid, this hadith is weak, what is your knowledge of it?The Shaykh : Al-Albani graded it as weak.

The questioner : I mean, they might mention names, not likeThe Shaykh : Nasser!

The Shaykh : No, I, correct.

The questioner : I mean, their share of knowledge is simple.

The Shaykh : I understand you. I will tell you something you might find strange. I say the truth, by the permission of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He): the Salafi da'wah (calling others to Islam) has been afflicted with what other da'wahs have been afflicted with, which you referred to earlier. Many people have attached themselves to the Salafi da'wah who love to proceed without restriction or condition. They validate as they please and weaken as they please. They forbid, they permit, this is an individual obligation, this is a collective obligation, and so on. I have seen many examples of this type in the Hijaz, and some of them became victims of this deviation in the incident at the Sacred Mosque. My advice, and the person next to you knows that I advise our Salafi brothers who are beginners in seeking knowledge, and even those at an intermediate level, is that none of them should rush to write a small treatise until he feels that he has matured and is established in his field. After that, he begins to publish the knowledge that Allah has bestowed upon him. Because I know from my own experience that a person begins, as everything does, small and grows and grows until he is established. So the student of knowledge, especially in the Salafi da'wah, begins to proceed slowly. But he does not know the details of matters and rulings, and does not know the terminology of hadith and the biographies of the narrators with precision. So perhaps he rushes to issue a ruling while he is not yet competent in it. We have many, and very many, examples of these hasty people. I know better than others that it is not valid for him to say: "I validated, I weakened, I see it this way," even if so-and-so sees it that way. This deviation exists today, unfortunately. But I want to mention an issue that was a point of contention between me and some doctors in Damascus.
We have three levels of knowledge. Knowledge, which is mentioned in the Noble Qur'an, and as Ibn al-Qayyim says in some of his poetry:
"Knowledge is: Allah said, His Messenger said, *** The Companions said, it is not deception.
Knowledge is not setting yourself up for foolish disagreement *** Between the Messenger and the opinion of a jurist.
No, nor denying the attributes and negating them, *** Out of fear of denial of the divine attributes and likening Allah to creation."
The first level of knowledge is: Allah said, the Messenger of Allah said. The second level is following: the Companions said. The third level is taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence).
And we, the Salafis, who are known for fighting taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence), and I am among them specifically, see that taqlid is necessary. The greatest scholar cannot escape taqlid one hundred percent. Taqlid is necessary. But the difference between our da'wah and the da'wah of others is that others make taqlid a religion, while we make it a necessity. The difference is by a very clear example: We say: it is permissible to eat pork out of dire necessity. And a person might say: we draw near to Allah by eating pork. How great is the difference between this and that! This example is not reality; there are no people, praise be to Allah, who draw near to Allah by eating pork. In the example, taqlid corresponds to pork. So those who make taqlid a religion, their example is like one who worships and draws near to Allah by eating forbidden things. We make taqlid a necessity that a person is exposed to and must face. So inverting this reality is the point of disagreement between us and the majority of Shaykhs today. For example, what is studied even today in al-Azhar and other than al-Azhar: "And it is obligatory to follow a scholar from them." This is in al-Jawharah, "The Creed of al-Jawharah." Obligatory, meaning legislated. So on this, the majority of scholars today proceed. We say: No, taqlid is forbidden. They say: It is obligatory. But this forbidden thing, sometimes a person is compelled to it. And this is what we quoted and benefited from the words of Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him), this scholar whose rights his followers have not known to this day. He says: "Analogical reasoning is a necessity." Analogical reasoning is not taqlid, even though analogical reasoning is part of the taqlid in which the majority fall. Why is analogical reasoning a necessity? Because when does a person resort to it? When he lacks a text from the Book or the Sunnah or the practice of the righteous Salaf. Then he is compelled to use analogical reasoning. So he says analogical reasoning is a necessity. This is fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) completely. We say: taqlid is also for necessity.
The difference, or the fruit of the difference between the two opinions, is a very, very different fruit. Today, hundreds of Islamic writers write about the problems of the present age and try to address them from the Islamic jurisprudential perspective. They can exercise independent legal reasoning in hundreds of issues where they found their Shaykhs, and choose the closest opinions of the previous Imams in these issues, and not remain so-and-so a Shafi'i one hundred percent, and so-and-so a Hanafi one hundred percent, as the "Jawharah" obligates them: "And it is obligatory to follow a scholar from them." So when taqlid became a religion for them, they no longer exit it, like one who exits his religion. But these rulings that are emerging now, necessity compels them to exercise independent legal reasoning. And they do not know how to exercise independent legal reasoning, as I said to some of them verbally. I said: The one who has not practiced independent legal reasoning in previously raised and studied issues, where every proponent of an opinion mentioned his evidence, cannot exercise independent legal reasoning in these issues. So he is even less able to exercise independent legal reasoning in emerging issues where there is no previous effort in evaluating them, and in clarifying the evidence for what he goes to.
So I say: I do not deny taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence). I deny making taqlid a religion. That is: the one who is able not to follow a scholar without knowing his evidence, it is forbidden for him to do so. As for the general people, they are compelled to taqlid, especially in the time when the people of knowledge, specifically, are stagnant in taqlid. What will the general people come up with, as long as the specialists are followers? But I say: there is a level between taqlid and knowledge, which is the path to independent legal reasoning. And this is what we call, following some of our righteous Salaf from the Imams of hadith and others, like Ibn 'Abd al-Barr the Andalusian, for example, this level is called the level of following (ittiba'). So the level of following, we can call it taqlid with knowledge of the evidence of the one followed. We say: follower plus zero, follower plus evidence. This is of course better than taqlid plus zero. So we are now callers to the entire Muslim community, both the specialists and the general people. We call the general people not to taqlid, we call them to following. Because this following is the original duty of the Muslim. As He (Glorified and Exalted is He) said, as you know in the Noble Qur'an: . So the one who wants to follow the Messenger (peace be upon him) must follow him with insight. And this is not specific to the specialists, but to the general Muslims. So because of this stagnation and this sectarian rigidity that has passed over the Muslims for centuries in this state, taqlid became the religion, and becoming aware became against the religion.
Now, after this brief introduction, I say: It is not permissible for one who has not prepared himself to understand the Book and the Sunnah in terms of Arabic style, and who has not mastered the ability to distinguish an authentic hadith from a weak one, to climb to the rank of independent legal reasoning (ijtihad). His limit is that he should be a follower (muttabi'); otherwise, he remains a mere imitator (muqallid). Furthermore, this imitator is not obligated to adhere to a specific school of jurisprudence, as some claim. No, he may follow any scholar among the Muslim scholars who issues a fatwa based on what Allah said and what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, and the matter is settled. As for compelling him to stick to one single school, that is compelling him to do what is not obligatory. For example, I, today, having spent nearly half a century specializing in the science of hadith, am often compelled to say: "Al-Bukhari said such and such." Why? Because I do not have the means to examine the chain of the hadith and verify its authenticity or weakness. But when Al-Bukhari, or Ahmad, or someone else presents a chain and authenticates or weakens it, I have the ability, I believe, to participate in the research on this topic. However, if Al-Bukhari brings me a hadith without a chain (mursal) and authenticates it, I follow him. This following can be called imitation (taqlid), or it can be called following (ittiba'), depending on the reality of the person who is following: is he constantly trying to be on the path of insight, and here the path is blocked before him? So here comes the Qur'anic text addressed to the masses of Muslims: . If there are people among the Salafis—and I know some of them—who are not able to read a verse and use it as evidence for a ruling, and if only that ruling had been preceded by a scholarly opinion! And our methodology is that we do not adopt an understanding of a text in the Qur'an and Sunnah unless one of the scholars of the righteous Salaf preceded us in it.
So, in short—Professor—we said that within the details of our answer to the first question, it is possible that among the Companions there were some who, for example, urinated on their backs, and among the Companions there were some who were seen in Ramadan eating okra (barad) = -- And peace be upon you, and Allah's mercy and blessings -- = some of the Companions were seen in Ramadan =
-- And peace be upon you, and Allah's mercy and blessings. Welcome. Allah is sufficient for me. I am compelled to go home now. Welcome, greetings... Excuse me, if there is anyone in the house... No problem. I, praise be to Allah, am patient and stay up late, possibly in a specific situation at home -- .
= Okay, regarding this question, is it almost finished?

The questioner: It is finished, meaning a little bit follows it, if we pray or something.

The Shaykh: Okay; we will pray and see.