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 : Also, this is a long field of research, and I do not wish to delve into it, for I am in the process of explaining the point of disagreement. We Salafis, who share with the majority of Muslims in our estimation and respect of the imams, differ on this point. We consider the imams to be means and intermediaries who convey the knowledge of Allah and His Messenger. Therefore, we do not follow them for their own sake, nor do we make following them an end in itself, for the only end 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. We take these distinguished scholars as intermediaries to convey to us the call of the Book and the Sunnah. As for the masses who share with us in their estimation and respect of these scholars, they sought this truth and made following the scholars—if it is correct to use this term for them—made following them, made their taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) of these imams the end and the evidence. He said"and by its opposite things become clear"The evidence is that each of them was satisfied with an imam and held fast to all of his sayings, and did not hold fast to anything of the sayings of the other scholars, and they are more numerous. It is more numerous to say three imams, or that the sayings of three imams are undoubtedly more numerous than the saying of one imam. Therefore, every one who follows an imam from these imams is a loser, losing more than he gained from his taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence), in the portion where the imam he follows was correct.
As for us, we have known the status of the imams in their knowledge on one hand, and we have known that they are means and intermediaries, not intended in themselves for following, just as they clarified this clearly in those statements we referred to from the introduction of the book *Sifat al-Salah* (The Description of Prayer). They say, for example, to their followers and companions: "Take from where we took". "Take from where we took" is an affirmation of what we say: that they are not intended for following, but rather the one intended for following is Allah, then His Messenger, and he (peace and blessings be upon him) is the only one who must be followed, without the rest of people. He is the only prophet whom Allah (Mighty and Majestic) made following Him a proof, or the proof, of loving Allah (Mighty and Majestic), as in the famous verse: . So the difference is significant and can be summarized in a short word: our call is confined to singling out the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) for following. He has no equal or partner for us in following. We do not follow any human being at all, except the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). As for others, the ones followed among them are many, as is well known. I wish the matter of following among them were confined to following the four imams, and I wish this following were confined to following the students of these imams. I wish, I wish, but there is no benefit in "I wish" at all. However, this detail in clarifying that the matter is very serious: as days succeed and years pass, the ones followed by those who claim to follow the four imams cannot be counted in thousands. If you come to a man who is well-versed in a certain madhhab (school of jurisprudence) and you argue with him using a book by one of these imams, and this imam is the imam of the man he belongs to, such as a Hanafi or a Shafi'i, and you bring him the text from the imam's book, he says, "No, we do not follow these texts!" So, you are a Hanafi or a Shafi'i who says, "We cannot take from the same imam." If so, then 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 early imams. The problem, in reality, is that we imagine it is confined between our call to follow the Book and the Sunnah and singling out the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) for following, without the four imams, the four poles in truth in knowledge. And the problem is greater than that, for they also refuse to be followers of the imams. They do not have the knowledge, culture, and awareness, in principles and branches, to find in themselves the ability and capacity to follow the imams themselves. Rather, they follow from... from... from... until they reach the jurist in the present age. And we have many proofs and witnesses in our old discussions... the spread of the Salafi call.