What is the best method by which a student of knowledge can study Islamic jurisprudence, and is it possible to rely on books and study them without consulting and seeking explanation from jurists and scholars?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : This is a message that arrived from Libya. The listener, Muftah Musa, says: “Peace be upon you, and Allah’s mercy and blessings. What is the best method by which a student of knowledge can study Islamic jurisprudence, and is it possible to rely on books and study them without consulting and seeking explanation from jurists and scholars? I ask for clarification. May you be rewarded.”
The Shaykh : And upon you be peace, and Allah’s mercy and blessings. The seeking of knowledge has two paths. The first path is receiving it from the shaykhs, and the second path is reviewing books. However, the first path requires that the shaykh from whom one receives knowledge be trustworthy in his knowledge and trustworthy in his religion, in both creed and practice. This is because some shaykhs claim the title of shaykh and appoint themselves as teachers and muftis, yet they are ignorant and know only a little of the knowledge, thereby misleading people without knowledge. But if the man is known for his uprightness, knowledge, religion, trustworthiness, soundness of creed, and soundness of thought, then knowledge is received from him.
The path of receiving knowledge from scholars is easier than the path of reading books, because the scholar is like a cook who gives you the food cooked and finished. Thus, receiving knowledge through him is the shorter path. Also, when you receive from a scholar, he teaches you how to receive knowledge, how to derive rulings from the evidence, how to weigh the opinions of scholars, and so on.
As for receiving knowledge from books, this is resorted to out of dire necessity, when a person does not find a scholar in his country whom he trusts in knowledge, religion, character, and thought. In that case, he has no path except receiving knowledge from books. But receiving knowledge from books is a long path that requires great effort, patience, and reflection. It also requires reviewing the books of jurists in general, because if you limit yourself to reviewing the books of a specific school of jurisprudence, there may be evidence with the other jurists that is not with this one. So the path is long.
For this reason, some people have said that whoever’s evidence is his book, his error is more than his correctness. But this is not an absolute statement, for some scholars received knowledge from books, and Allah made the matter easy for them, and they excelled in knowledge and became imams in it.
As for how one receives knowledge, we say: he looks to the school of jurisprudence closest to the truth, takes it, and studies jurisprudence based on it. But this does not mean that he does not take what the evidence indicates from the other schools of jurisprudence. Rather, he takes the evidence, even if it contradicts the school of jurisprudence he has adopted. I am not calling for following a scholar without knowing his evidence by this, but I am calling for a person to have a specific path through which he reaches jurisprudence, and not to make the words of scholars the primary basis. Rather, the primary basis is the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). This does not harm the fact that I study jurisprudence, for example, based on the school of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal and the rules of this school. If the truth becomes clear to me in another school of jurisprudence, I take the truth, as was the path of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, and other prominent, meticulous scholars. This does not mean that I do not study jurisprudence based on the Book and the Sunnah. I do study jurisprudence based on the Book and the Sunnah, but I make for myself something through which I pass to the Book and the Sunnah.
And on this basis, we say: if you choose, for example, the school of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, it has concise books, medium-length books, and lengthy books. So first memorize the concise books in this school. Then, if you have a scholar from whom you receive knowledge, read this book to him after you have memorized it, and he will clarify its meanings to you and explain it to you. If he has breadth of knowledge, he will show you the stronger position versus the weaker position, and show you the scholars’ points of derivation, and you will gain much good. But do not leave yourself without books of hadith. Memorize what is easy from the books of hadith. If it is easy for you to memorize “Bulugh al-Maram min Adillat al-Ahkam”, that is very good. If it is not easy, then “Umdat al-Ahkam”, so that you have a share of the evidence to rely on. And all of this is after memorizing the Book of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) and understanding its meanings, because it is the foundation.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : So this order that I mentioned is, in my view, among the best things for a student of knowledge to follow. And success is from Allah.
The questioner : May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : And upon you be peace, and Allah’s mercy and blessings. The seeking of knowledge has two paths. The first path is receiving it from the shaykhs, and the second path is reviewing books. However, the first path requires that the shaykh from whom one receives knowledge be trustworthy in his knowledge and trustworthy in his religion, in both creed and practice. This is because some shaykhs claim the title of shaykh and appoint themselves as teachers and muftis, yet they are ignorant and know only a little of the knowledge, thereby misleading people without knowledge. But if the man is known for his uprightness, knowledge, religion, trustworthiness, soundness of creed, and soundness of thought, then knowledge is received from him.
The path of receiving knowledge from scholars is easier than the path of reading books, because the scholar is like a cook who gives you the food cooked and finished. Thus, receiving knowledge through him is the shorter path. Also, when you receive from a scholar, he teaches you how to receive knowledge, how to derive rulings from the evidence, how to weigh the opinions of scholars, and so on.
As for receiving knowledge from books, this is resorted to out of dire necessity, when a person does not find a scholar in his country whom he trusts in knowledge, religion, character, and thought. In that case, he has no path except receiving knowledge from books. But receiving knowledge from books is a long path that requires great effort, patience, and reflection. It also requires reviewing the books of jurists in general, because if you limit yourself to reviewing the books of a specific school of jurisprudence, there may be evidence with the other jurists that is not with this one. So the path is long.
For this reason, some people have said that whoever’s evidence is his book, his error is more than his correctness. But this is not an absolute statement, for some scholars received knowledge from books, and Allah made the matter easy for them, and they excelled in knowledge and became imams in it.
As for how one receives knowledge, we say: he looks to the school of jurisprudence closest to the truth, takes it, and studies jurisprudence based on it. But this does not mean that he does not take what the evidence indicates from the other schools of jurisprudence. Rather, he takes the evidence, even if it contradicts the school of jurisprudence he has adopted. I am not calling for following a scholar without knowing his evidence by this, but I am calling for a person to have a specific path through which he reaches jurisprudence, and not to make the words of scholars the primary basis. Rather, the primary basis is the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). This does not harm the fact that I study jurisprudence, for example, based on the school of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal and the rules of this school. If the truth becomes clear to me in another school of jurisprudence, I take the truth, as was the path of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, and other prominent, meticulous scholars. This does not mean that I do not study jurisprudence based on the Book and the Sunnah. I do study jurisprudence based on the Book and the Sunnah, but I make for myself something through which I pass to the Book and the Sunnah.
And on this basis, we say: if you choose, for example, the school of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, it has concise books, medium-length books, and lengthy books. So first memorize the concise books in this school. Then, if you have a scholar from whom you receive knowledge, read this book to him after you have memorized it, and he will clarify its meanings to you and explain it to you. If he has breadth of knowledge, he will show you the stronger position versus the weaker position, and show you the scholars’ points of derivation, and you will gain much good. But do not leave yourself without books of hadith. Memorize what is easy from the books of hadith. If it is easy for you to memorize “Bulugh al-Maram min Adillat al-Ahkam”, that is very good. If it is not easy, then “Umdat al-Ahkam”, so that you have a share of the evidence to rely on. And all of this is after memorizing the Book of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) and understanding its meanings, because it is the foundation.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : So this order that I mentioned is, in my view, among the best things for a student of knowledge to follow. And success is from Allah.
The questioner : May Allah reward you.