Ibn al-Jazari says in his introduction: "And taking on tajwid is a necessary obligation; whoever does not beautify the Qur'an is sinful, for it is by it that the Divine was sent down, and thus it has reached us from Him."

The questioner : A questioner says: Ibn al-Jazari said in his introduction:
"And taking on tajwid is a necessary obligation *** Whoever does not beautify the Qur'an is sinful
For it is by it that the Divine was sent down *** And thus it has reached us from Him"
What is your opinion, may Allah reward you with good, regarding this statement, and what is obligatory for the Muslim in this matter?

The Shaykh : The truth is that I do not find in myself knowledge to answer this question. I only say that all knowledge should be taken from those who specialize in it. Imam Ibn al-Jazari (may Allah have mercy on him), in addition to his leadership in the sciences of the Qur'an and tajwid, is also one of the scholars of hadith. He shares this aspect with Ibn Kathir, in that he combined many sciences such as tafsir, hadith, and history. So if he says this word, it is obligatory to follow him in it, considering that our Lord (Mighty and Majestic) commands us to do so in the generality of His saying (Mighty and Majestic) . And as we say on many occasions, it is true that we combat taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and we forbid making it a religion to be followed. But regarding taqlid, we say, as Imam al-Shafi'i said about qiyas (analogical reasoning): qiyas, although it is one of the four pieces of evidence in the Shari'ah, is, as Imam al-Shafi'i said, not resorted to except in cases of dire necessity.
... So taqlid, at the time when we combat making it a religion and adopting it as a madhhab (school of jurisprudence), as is the case with most Muslims today, unfortunately, but at the same time we say it is like qiyas. Regarding qiyas, Imam al-Shafi'i said it is a dire necessity and is not resorted to except in cases of dire necessity. Similarly, taqlid is not resorted to except in cases of dire necessity. For example, a man who is knowledgeable in the Arabic language but does not have fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) and does not have knowledge of hadith regarding its authenticity or weakness, this man must follow the jurists and follow the hadith scholars. But whoever has some culture, his taqlid is lighter, because he has some awareness and general culture that helps him to understand the method of deduction, for example, in hadith. But what do the general people do? The general people ask the scholar. Their obligation is to seek out a scholar who is knowledgeable of the Book and the Sunnah; this is their obligation. But if he says this is haram (forbidden), they must follow him. If they are able to understand where the prohibition came from, its source from the Book, the Sunnah, or ijtihad (independent legal reasoning), that is good. But not everyone can do that, so taqlid is necessary.
I personally say a brief word regarding this question. I understand that the Ummah (the Muslim community) received the Qur'an with these rulings on which all the reciters agreed, for example, ikhfa (concealment), idhhar (clarification), ghunnah (nasalization), and the natural, connected, and disconnected madd (elongation). These things were accepted by the Ummah, and there is no one who opposes them. So it is not permissible for a man who has no knowledge to say, "What is the evidence that the natural madd is elongated for two movements and no more?" and the like. We say this is a received tradition, just as we received the Qur'an, we also received its recitation in this manner. This is exactly like fiqh. Just as a large part of fiqh refers to the Book and the Sunnah, fiqh issues are also of two types: a type for which there is evidence from the Book and the Sunnah, which are the references... and a type that are deductive issues. As for those of the deductive type, the matter is easy. If the student of knowledge is able to prefer one opinion over another with a criterion from the criteria mentioned in the books of usul al-fiqh (the principles of jurisprudence), then that is fine. Otherwise, whichever opinion he adopts, he is, if Allah wills, excused by Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He). Similarly, regarding the science of qira'at (the canonical recitations) and tajwid, there are issues on which there is agreement, so it is necessary to follow them in these without any discussion or argument. And there are issues on which there is disagreement. Whoever is able to prefer one opinion, as we said earlier regarding fiqh issues, let him do so. And whoever is not able, let him follow whichever opinion seems to him. Among the issues on which there is disagreement among the reciters is stopping at the beginnings of verses, even if they are connected to the verse that follows. Some say stopping is correct, and this is what I adopt. And some say no, because the meaning is not complete, as in the saying of Allah the Exalted . So stopping for these people would be an error, and rather, the connection should be maintained.
We were able, when we looked at the text and were supported by many of the early scholars of qira'at, to determine that the correct view is to stop at the beginnings of verses, even if the meaning of the verse is connected to the one that follows. So in such a case, we were able to prefer one opinion. But in other cases, the person, as we said earlier, follows one opinion and is, if Allah wills, excused.
So this statement of Ibn al-Jazari in this poem is the statement of a specialist scholar in his field. It should be followed unless his error becomes apparent to us, and that is far from happening.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : And you as well.