The Shaykh quoted beneficial words from Abu al-Hasan al-Laknawi, citing 'Isam al-Balkhi, regarding abandoning taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) and madhhab (school of jurisprudence) fanaticism, along with al-Laknawi’s commentary on it.

Those who follow a specific imam’s madhhab (school of jurisprudence) are in contradiction to the Book and the Sunnah and are not following the sayings of the imams. Thus, they have strayed from following the Book and the Sunnah and from following the imams. Therefore, on this occasion, I am pleased with what was mentioned by one of the great scholars of India, known as Abu al-Hasan al-Laknawi, in his book titled "Al-Fawa'id al-Bahiyyah fi Tabaqat 'Ulama' al-Hanafiyyah" (The Beautiful Benefits on the Generations of Hanafi Scholars). In the biography of one of the Hanafi scholars, named 'Isam al-Balkhi, he mentioned that 'Isam al-Balkhi was of the second generation, among the students of Abu Hanifah, because 'Isam al-Balkhi’s teacher was Abu Yusuf, and Abu Yusuf, as is well known, was a student of Abu Hanifah. 'Isam al-Balkhi was a student of Abu Yusuf. Abu al-Hasan al-Laknawi mentioned in his biography that he used to raise his hands in prayer when bowing and when rising from it. This is, without a doubt, as those knowledgeable about the biographies of the Hanafis know, a strange and anomalous matter for the Hanafi scholars; because they strictly follow their three imams: Abu Hanifah, Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani, and Abu Yusuf the Qadi. All three of these said that raising the hands in prayer when bowing and when rising from it is not prescribed (mashru'). Rather, they said that this raising is disliked to the extent of being forbidden (makruh tahrim). So when 'Isam al-Balkhi was seen, and he was one of them, raising his hands in prayer, he was asked: "How is it that you raise your hands in prayer, when you follow Abu Yusuf, and Abu Yusuf is a student of Abu Hanifah, and all of them said that this raising is not prescribed?" He said, and this is a word of truth: "Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He, has obligated each of us to act according to what he knows. And I know that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) raised his hands when bowing and when rising from it. And Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has not obligated us to understand the Shari'ah of our Lord with the intellect of Abu Hanifah, but rather each person with his own intellect and knowledge. And on the Day we meet Him, He will not say to me, 'Why did you contradict Abu Hanifah?' On the contrary, if I had left this Sunnah, He would say to me, 'Why did you leave this Sunnah, when you knew that your Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to raise his hands when bowing and when rising from it?'" He commented on 'Isam’s action, or in other words, on his following of this Sunnah and his contradiction of his imam Abu Hanifah and Abu Yusuf, with a very beautiful and wonderful commentary, where he said: "From this it is understood that if one abandons the taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) of his imam in a specific issue, following the strength of the evidence of his opponent, he does not thereby exit from taqlid, meaning the taqlid of the imam. Rather, he is in the bonds of taqlid, in the form of abandoning taqlid. If the hadith is authentic, it is my madhhab. Since the hadith was authentic for 'Isam, he left the saying of the imam and followed the hadith. And when he followed the hadith, he followed the imam, because he said: 'If the hadith is authentic, it is my madhhab.' Therefore, Abu al-Hasan said this word, and he is also a Hanafi and a distinguished scholar among the Indian scholars. We take from this issue, or it is understood from this issue, that if a Hanafi leaves an issue from the issues of his imam, following the strength of the evidence of his opponent, he does not thereby exit from taqlid, but rather he is in the bonds of taqlid, in the form of abandoning taqlid. So the Book and the Sunnah and the consensus of all the imams command the Muslims to take their religion from the Book and the Sunnah, each according to his capacity: the people of knowledge from the Book and the Sunnah, and those without knowledge by asking the people of knowledge, and not by asking just one scholar. If you know this reality, it is obligatory for the general Muslims, whether scholars or non-scholars, to revive this direction that our righteous predecessors (Salaf) were upon. And that is that no group among them should be fanatical about one imam, and another group fanatical about another imam, and thereby the Muslims fall into a great danger, which is disagreement and division. And this is not permissible in the religion of Allah, as He said: And whoever reads in Islamic history, and what occurred between the fanatics of the madhahib (schools of jurisprudence) in terms of fitnah (trial, discord or temptation), the necessity of the Muslims returning to following the Book and the Sunnah, as detailed previously, becomes clear to him. I know and I repeat: the scholar by his knowledge, and the non-scholar by asking the people of knowledge, and not by being religious by following a specific madhhab. For example, until recently, I think you did not witness what we witnessed in the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus. There is the Umayyad Mosque, and in it are four mihrabs (prayer niches). In these four mihrabs, four imams pray: the Hanafi, the Shafi'i, the Maliki, and the Hanbali. You find people sitting while the prayer is being performed. Why? This is not our imam. So when his prayer ended, a second imam stood up and prayed, and the people were sitting and not praying with this imam. This is not your imam, and so on. The congregation of the Muslims was divided because of their fanaticism for one imam, each of them being satisfied with his imam. This phenomenon did not exist at all in the era of the righteous predecessors (Salaf). One imam used to lead all the Muslims in prayer, even though we know that some of the Companions differed in some issues, and so did the Tabi'un (the generation after the Companions) and those after them. But despite that, they prayed as one congregation in one mosque. Do you see why this difference occurred, whereas it was not so, and whereas it is so for us today? It is that the scientific methodology they were upon, we have deviated from it, and we clung to a methodology that deviated from what they were upon, so we deviated from the Book and the Sunnah, and each of us followed an imam he was satisfied with, as we mentioned: a Hanafi, a Shafi'i, and so on. This statement does not mean anything that occurs to some people’s minds, and they may transmit it and accuse the innocent with it. This statement does not mean that we today, when we call for following the Book and the Sunnah, do not give weight to these imams and their like. Far be it from Allah, Mighty and Majestic. Rather, we appreciate and respect them with full appreciation and respect. And among that is that we took this methodology that we explained earlier from their words. They are the ones who said, "If the hadith is authentic, it is my madhhab," and so on from the sayings I collected and deposited in the introduction of my book, "The Description of the Prayer of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) from the Takbir (saying Allahu akbar) to the Taslim (the closing salam of prayer), as if you see it." So we follow them and adhere to them in this methodology, which Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He, commanded all people to follow. Exalting the imams and appreciating them is one thing, and exalting the ruling of the Shari'ah issued by Allah and His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is another thing. The ultimate goal in following among humans is the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). As for the imams, all the imams, we do not exclude any of them, whether they are from the Companions, the Tabi'un, or those after them. They are guides, they are intermediaries between us and our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). So whoever clings to one of them has lost the knowledge of the others. And we must emphasize this and establish it in our minds, if we remember the previous reality, that the knowledge of the Messenger (peace be upon him) was not deposited in the chest of one Companion, but rather in the chests of all the Companions. And this knowledge that was transferred from the chests of the Companions was not transferred to the chest of one of the Tabi'un, but rather to the group of scholars of the Tabi'un. Then this knowledge also was not transferred from the group of chests of the Tabi'un to the chest of one imam of the imams of the generation after the Tabi'un. So the knowledge is distributed among all the scholars. We should, if we want to receive knowledge, receive it from all of them, not excluding any of them, not being fanatical for one over another, but rather all of them, as is said on other occasions: "And all of them are seeking from the Messenger of Allah." I say they say this on other occasions, because when we clarify to people that the Companions differed in some issues, we must look with whom the truth is and follow him. Likewise, the imams after them differed in some issues. They confront us with their saying, "And all of them are seeking from the Messenger of Allah." We say this, but the difference is very great between what we say and what these people say.
We say that each of them had as their goal and objective following the Book and the Sunnah, but this does not mean that each of them hit the truth in every issue; otherwise, the statements of the Imams would have contradicted one another, and consequently, the Shari'ah would have been contradictory. This is impossible, for Allah (Mighty and Majestic) says regarding the noble Qur'an: But this is from the revelation of the sky, to which falsehood does not come from before it or from behind it. However, in reality, we find much disagreement among the Imams. Some examples by which people are frequently tested are sufficient for you. For example, does the emergence of blood invalidate the wudu' or not? There are three madhhabs, three opinions. It is impossible that these opinions could ever be from Allah, due to the previous verse:
"Blood invalidates [wudu'], whether it is much or little" is one opinion. "Blood does not invalidate [wudu'], whether it is much or little" is another opinion. And the third opinion is: "If it is much, it invalidates, and if it is little, it does not invalidate." Three opinions. Do we say that all of this is from the Messenger of Allah? Far be it from the Messenger of Allah to say such contradictory things. This is one of the examples by which all people, men and women, are tested. Take another example, which is more precise in that it has a social relationship. The Hanafi madhhab, for example, says that when a woman reaches the age of maturity, she may marry herself even if her guardian has not given her permission. Al-Shafi'i and the majority say, "No, this marriage is not valid."