To whom should a Muslim turn when scholars differ on a single issue, such as

The questioner : Please clarify the question you asked. If a person faces a matter in which there is disagreement, he turns to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). If he does not find the answer, does he turn to the statement of one of the Imams, or does he mean to single out one of the Imams and follow him in all his answers? Or is it possible to take from one of the four Imams? For example, in a case where Imam Malik says: "The thigh is not an awrah," and the evidence for the view that it is an awrah is that when our master 'Umar entered upon the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), he covered his awrah. In a ruling like this, the thing that is best for me is that I cannot accept that it is not an awrah, so I consider it an awrah. Some of the brothers say it is not an awrah outside of prayer, so they follow them, and so on...

The Shaykh : There is nothing new in the matter. The issue comes down to whether there are scholars around you or not. If there are scholars, the answer is given by the previous verse . If there are no scholars, then you need to follow one of the established schools of jurisprudence. But this following is subject to the problem we raised regarding our uncle Abu Tahir, and he says, "I don't know, by Allah, the issue is difficult because in the single issue in the school you want to follow, there are two or three opinions."The questioner : Or four.The Shaykh : How do you know? It comes back to the same question. Perhaps you remember that he was speaking about the Hanafi school. After his speech, you completed the discussion about the three schools that differed on the issue. I told you that this is like someone who wants to live according to one school, but there are three opinions in the same school. How is he to prefer one? Again, the same question arises: how is he to prefer one? There are two ways to preference, and no third. Either the one who prefers must be from those qualified for preference, meaning from the people of knowledge. And I explained to you what "people of knowledge" means: he knows the Arabic language, he knows the authentic hadiths from the weak ones, he knows the abrogating from the abrogated, and so on.

The questioner : If he does not know.

The Shaykh : If he does not know, the second solution comes to you, which is to follow a specific school or a scholar specialized in a specific school whose knowledge you trust, and you ask him. But for you, or Zayd, or Bakr, to come and say, "My heart is open to this statement" or "My heart is not open," this is a matter with no limits. Now, look at your situation. I am as certain as if I were one of the group who play basketball, for example, or football. You cannot control yourself; you go and lean toward the school of Malik, right? But like my story, you like to watch but you do not like to play... The point is, you say there is no necessity for you to say the thigh is not an awrah. No, the thigh is an awrah. But here, it became like the meat of the camel; you hit the Sunnah because the story of 'Umar does not yield a ruling that contradicts the statement of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), which is . Do you see? This hadith has many routes, but in terms of authenticity, it is not like the hadith of 'Umar or the hadith of Anas that al-Bukhari narrated. In al-Bukhari's Sahih, he mentioned the hadith of Anas in the chapter on whether the thigh is an awrah or not. The hadith of Anas is long; its summary is that when the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) campaigned to Khaybar, he and his Companions were riding on horses. When he opened Khaybar, he pursued [the enemy], and his garment slipped down from his thigh until Anas said, "I saw the whiteness of his thigh." This hadith was mentioned by al-Bukhari in his Sahih, and then he mentioned a report without a chain, saying, "It was narrated from Jarhad," and he mentioned two or three that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . He said, "He became more learned from him." The hadith of Anas is more supported, meaning it has a stronger chain, and the hadith of Jarhad is more cautious. But al-Bukhari's practice does not indicate that the hadith of Jarhad is authentic, except that when the scholars followed the routes of this hadith, they found no way except to authenticate it. And at that time, they find the way to reconcile the hadith of Jarhad with the hadith of Anas is easy. Because the hadith of Anas, first, has a problem in al-Bukhari's Sahih. The hadith of Anas in the wording "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) uncovered," in Sahih Muslim it is "it slipped down." So here there is a difference in wording and meaning between "uncovered," meaning he raised it and exposed his thigh, and "slipped down," without his intention. If we assume that the correct narration is the narration of Muslim, there is no problem, like the saying of Allah the Exalted: . What did he do with it? If he exposes it, it has another ruling. But if the narration of al-Bukhari is the most correct, then it appears there is a problem, meaning how did he expose his thigh while the hadith says: . The jurisprudential answer, as I said earlier, is that it is easy. If two hadiths conflict, one from his statement (peace and blessings be upon him) and the other from his action, the statement is preferred over the action, because the statement is a general legislation, and the action may be a specificity for the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). It may be before the prohibition of the thigh and the ruling that it is an awrah. There are possibilities that affect the Prophetic actions. So at that time, it is recommended to rely on the hadith , especially since there is another hadith that supports it, which is . This scientific preference is based on proof. But when a person wants to turn to personal preference, the issue changes, like the example I gave from one person to another, or from a person who is in one situation and becomes in another situation, the issue changes. And therefore, knowledge, when it is derived from the Book and the Sunnah, is a protection for this scholar or for thisThe student : knowledge, whereas if his knowledge is "so-and-so said it," it is exposed to the slightest reasons to deviate from it, to remain upright in his whole life, no matter how circumstances and life develop for him.The Shaykh : So-and-so is exposed to the most trivial causes that might lead him to deviate from the straight path in his entire life, no matter how circumstances and life develop for him.
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, no offense, regarding the two narrations you mentioned in al-Bukhari, "uncovered" and "slipped down," cannot it be said, my teacher, that there is no conflict between them, because the action of "uncovering" is from the actions of passivity? "I uncovered it, so it slipped down," and "I broke it, so it broke," and so on.

The Shaykh : Yes, this is possible if the narration is from two Companions. But the narration is from one route, which is Anas, and from Anas, I no longer remember. So the narrator must either say "he uncovered" or say "it slipped down." As for this reconciliation and this combination, it is possible if the hadith has multiple aspects, otherwise, from the Arabic perspective, it is exactly as I mentioned.

Another questioner : The view of the brother 'Ali is strengthened by the fact that it is from one narrator, meaning the narrator intended the meaning and not the wording. The meaning is one, that it slipped down.

The Shaykh : How does it strengthen it?

The questioner : I mean, it strengthens the view that it is from one narrator, that the meaning is one, and the narrator, when he changed the wording, made a mistake in the wording, or once he narrated with this wording and once with the other wording, meaning in terms of meaning, for example, the meaning is "uncovered" and the second is "slipped down," whereas "slipped down" does not mean "slipped down"...

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you, this is said if we take the narrator from above to the level of the two Shaykhs, al-Bukhari and Muslim, but the issue is not like that;
Al-Halabi : ...differences of narrators...

The Shaykh : And then a question arises related to . A person would exclude that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) intentionally exposed the thigh, and the closest is that it slipped down without his intention, because the issue was a pursuit.

The questioner : Yes, my master, by Allah, it did not occur to my mind here now that it is far from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) to expose his thigh without a doubt.

The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah, yes, without a cause.
Al-Halabi : If the hadith is like that, what is the answer to the hadith of 'Umar?

The Shaykh : Yes, the hadith of 'Umar is completely clear. The answer to the hadith of Anas has already been given. Yes, meaning this is an action of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), so it is possible that it was a specificity for him, or it was before the thigh became an awrah, and so on.
Al-Halabi : If this answer is more precise in my opinion than the previous answer, which was that it was from the character of the Messenger or something like that, from a scientific perspective, meaning so that there is no loophole; well, is there no way here to say it was character or something like that, especially since the Messenger exposed his thigh in the hadith of 'Umar? It is said that this may have been before, or a specificity for the Messenger, which is better than that answer, and Allah knows best.

The Shaykh : We said this and that, we said this and that, no, and we also said, my brother, the incident is that we can assume the absence of specificity, because it was a pursuit.
Al-Halabi : Correct, and this is very clear, and it is better.

The Shaykh : Yes, this is it.

The questioner : You mentioned in this topic once that this situation happened and his action, and the Salaf... that they would go out to the streets and sit in public gatherings exposing their thighs.

The Shaykh : Yes, and for this reason, the Hanafi jurists say regarding such an incident, "This is a specific occurrence with no general application." It has no general application. There are many things like this. For example, Abdullah ibn Umar says, "One day I went up to the house of my sister Hafsa and saw the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) relieving himself with his back to the Ka'bah." This is a specific incident that you cannot explain; the place was narrow and crowded. We do not make it a rule, as the Shafi'i scholars say, that this is evidence that facing or turning one's back to the qiblah while urinating or defecating in a building is permissible. Why? Because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) was seen in this non-legislated vision. This vision is non-legislated in the sense that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) was covering his situation, and that person went up for some purpose and his gaze fell upon it. This action was not intended by the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) to be conveyed to people, but it happened and was transmitted casually. Meanwhile, there is a statement: , which is a general legislation. And by Allah, it happened that way. Yes, it happened, but we have nothing that makes us confident that what happened was intended by him (peace and blessings be upon him). How could it be intended when he was between four walls? If that person had not gone up to the roof, he would not have seen him. The hadith is completely contrary to this explanation, but praise be to Allah, it is not authentic. The hadith is narrated in Sunan Abu Dawud and others from the path of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), but with a weak chain. It was said to the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) that there are people who dislike facing the qiblah with urine or feces, so he said: . This is a rhetorical question of denial. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is saying, "Or have they done it? They turned my toilet toward the qiblah." By Allah, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) does not do this. This means intentionally turning the toilet seat one sits on to relieve oneself toward the qiblah. How is that possible when he (peace and blessings be upon him) says in the authentic hadith: ? And this spitting, what is it regarding urine or feces? It does not mention anything. It is trivial and has no value. Nevertheless, I tell you: . This is the one who teaches people good morals and proper etiquette. He says this to spite those who are too proud to act according to his words: "Do not face the qiblah with urine or feces." Or have they done it? They turned my toilet toward the qiblah. And praise be to Allah, this hadith is weak.

The questioner : ... We understood that as long as there are walls and inside houses, it is permissible...

The Shaykh : No, this is contrary to our school of thought.

The questioner : Regardless of whether there is a wall or not...

The Shaykh : We said the hadith is , and this hadith is narrated by Abu Ayyub al-Ansari and it was publishedThe Shaykh : in both their Sahihs. Abu Ayyub said, "When we came to Sham, we found the toilets facing the qiblah, so we seek forgiveness from Allah." This is evidence from the narrator that this is a clear, established ruling. Therefore, he says the toilets are facing the qiblah, but we seek forgiveness from Allah.

The questioner : Our Shaykh, regarding the issue of facing east or west, in the design of houses and buildings, sometimes the direction of the plot of land does not allow for east or west. For example, there might be an angle relative to the qiblah. We try to ensure it is not toward the qiblah, but if we deviate from the qiblah by, say, forty-five degrees, is that enough if it is neither east nor west?

The Shaykh : I can say it is enough, but one must strive to deviate completely so that all degrees are directed away from the qiblah toward the west or toward the east.

The questioner : If there are one thousand two hundred kilometers between us and the qiblah, if we shift 1 cm from here, it means shifting many kilometers over there.
Al-Halabi : This statement cannot be correct unless it shifts like this or like that, meaning it is shifted by five thousand.

Another questioner : No, actually, the degree means that when you pray and deviate from the qiblah, you have taken the general and correct direction. When you deviate from it by an angle, you have deviated by the amount of that angle.

Another questioner : I mean, if you stand at an angle of twenty-three or thirty degrees, the difference is seven degrees because you have deviated and faced Abu Dhabi.

The Shaykh : But Abu Tahir means the Ka'bah in his statement. The hadith is not what I mean. What I mean is the direction, the entire direction. Therefore, we say, as you said, if we deviate 1 cm from here, we deviate by several kilometers, correct. Therefore, the deviation must be such that the entire direction is to your left or to your right.

The questioner : And if there is difficulty because of the division of the land plots, like here, this plot is in the north, so the qiblah in your house has a deviation. It is very difficult with the building lines here, unless we want to share the entire building, to try to make the directions of the walls east and west.

The Shaykh : I do not think so, and I do not want to overstep on you. I might overstep on you considering you are an engineer and I am not an engineer. How much is the area of the place where the toilet is? Give me a distance for this house.

The questioner : Two meters by one and a half meters, or by two meters, meaning four meters or three meters.

The Shaykh : Four meters. Is it not possible to turn this toilet, which is two meters by two meters, completely away from the qiblah?

The questioner : The same toilet seat, specifically, not the room as a room.

The Shaykh : Of course, what are we talking about?

The questioner : I mean the sitting.

The Shaykh : I mean, are you all imagining the building or the toilet seat?

The questioner : The toilet seat.

The Shaykh : Okay, so where is the problem?

The questioner : It is because usually the toilet seat is adjacent to the wall.

The Shaykh : That is it. This is the problem we always complain about. The systems in place today are non-Islamic systems.

The questioner : No, but it is easy and correct that in that specific area...

The Shaykh : What do we want more than this? It is easy if you are not overstepping...

The questioner: No.

The questioner : Last: The sitting, the same person sitting, meaning he sits and relieves himself and shifts his position slightly.

The Shaykh : This is if it is possible, this is if it is possible... My brother, there is always a rule in fiqh, glory be to Allah, as I say, where did we say the hadith ? I do not know if you were with us or not?
Al-Halabi : Yes, in a house.Abu Layla .

The Shaykh : In a house.Abu Layla .
Al-Halabi : No, my professor, the day before yesterday we were at Abu Mahmoud's, the day before yesterday at Abu Mahmoud al-Sufi's.
Abu Layla : The Sufi who wants to hand you over to his sheikhs.

The Shaykh : In any case, I repeat this statement and now is the time for it. One of the favors of Islam is that, yes, it gives us rulings and it gives us rules, but we utilize the rules even in our worldly affairs. I often use his (peace and blessings be upon him) saying: , and he said it regarding the death of a person to the end . We can transfer this hadith to worldly matters. So I say, I have a worker who recommends someone to me, so I tell him, "Deeds are judged by their endings. Be patient until we see the end," and so on.

The questioner : He ate it this time.

The Shaykh : Ah, he ate it. The important thing is that I wanted to say that the foundation is more important than the derivation. This is also a principle of usul al-fiqh. We want to establish the toilet seat so that the disbeliever and the open sinner sits in the legislated position, even against his will. We do not burden the Muslim by saying, "Here, take precaution. This is facing the qiblah, so you do not face the qiblah." This is not a practical issue. We want to establish the foundation according to the Shari'ah in the first place. Therefore, I hope that my brother Tahir will convey this to the absent one... I mean, our brother engineers must keep this issue in mind.

The questioner : By Allah, we put it in, but now the problem is difficult. When you have a customer who is cooperative and understands you regarding the direction, you can turn the toilet seat inside the bathroom. But when it is a person with whom you might not even be able to open the topic, because of the type of person, you try as much as possible to move it away from the qiblah, but you cannot say to him, "This specific chair, I want to put it inside the room turned thirty degrees." He might not cooperate with you, or he might not respond.

The questioner : Then his sin is on his side.

The Shaykh : No, it is not his sin on his side, no, the engineer.

The questioner : The engineer, for him, it is on the site, thirty degrees. He wants to deter that man, but he is not convinced by this.

The Shaykh : The important thing is that he planned according to the Shari'ah, and that one was not implemented. Here, lifting the responsibility is good, but he is saying he does not respond to me, so it seems to me that since he does not respond, I am forced to plan for him.

The questioner : The limits are such that, as we said, you can deviate by half a right angle without it appearing that you are trying to aim for a specific direction; but if you are aiming for that specific angle, it will become clear in the design of the bathroom and toilet that it is not normal.

The Shaykh : Why are we strangers? Because we want to be explicit in our calling. It is not a condition that a Muslim be a Muslim only in his prayer and worship; he must be a Muslim in his dealings with people as well.

The questioner : I say here that this removes the blame of sin from him, in that he states his opinion, saying, "I want it here because this is the Shari'ah." If he does not want to apply it, the burden falls on himself.

The questioner : If you know that he will not be convinced by the Shari'ah, you want to tell him, "From an aesthetic standpoint, this would be more pleasant..."

The Shaykh : Yes, but there is a condition regarding him; he does not respond to it in the planning. He states his position and leaves. He places the plan according to the Shari'ah and that is the end of it. Then the other party may object. But if he modifies it as a compromise, as you heard earlier, meaning he distorts it a bit so that it seems to include him, and we say, "We applied the Shari'ah," that is not how the Shari'ah is applied...

The questioner : The two hadiths we were talking about in the car, both of them came up with them...
Al-Halabi : My teacher, regarding facing the qiblah...

The Shaykh : Can you see if Umm al-Fadl is sitting or sleeping? It is time for her to be sitting and facing us...
Al-Halabi : Our teacher, regarding the issue of facing it or turning one's back to it, I think some schools of jurisprudence say that even facing east and turning one's back to it is not permissible.

The Shaykh : Yes, these are the Hanbalis.