The Shaykh's comment on Ibn Hazm's statement regarding the prohibition of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence).

The student: It is regarding taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence).

The Shaykh : How?
The student: Regarding taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence).

The Shaykh: Taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence), yes.
The student: Yes, indeed. Ibn Hazm says: "And taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is forbidden upon everyone who claims to be a Muslim, whether he is a mujtahid (a scholar qualified to derive rulings) or a muqallid (one who follows a scholar), for both of them fall into what is forbidden." If you follow, and your statement, O our Shaykh, regarding taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is that the uneducated person or the common person is allowed to follow.

The Shaykh: It is not allowed for him; it is obligatory.
The student: It is obligatory for him to follow.

The Shaykh: For the sake of your heart, my brother.
The student: Yes, may Allah bless you. It is obligatory for him to follow. And the student of knowledge who is able to know the evidence, he is a follower. And the mujtahid (a scholar qualified to derive rulings) is known to be a mujtahid; he walks behind the evidence and searches behind the evidence until he brings it. And the evidence with Ibn Hazm, and now you will be asked for the evidence. But I say the evidence with him says: , and he clarifies that if the uneducated person comes to a scholar and says to him, "What is the ruling of Allah and the Messenger in this issue?" He asks like this: "What is your opinion in such-and-such?" No, he says: "What is the ruling of Allah and the Messenger in this issue or in this incident?" Then he is not a muqallid (one who follows), so he does not fall under the accusation of sin here. He has become a mujtahid. So this is the criterion of ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) with him: searching for the Book and the Sunnah.

The Shaykh: To be fair, we are eating, and you are narrating this. Is this fair? I wonder if this is with you by ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) or by taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence)?
The student: This is not fair. I say it is not fair.

The Shaykh: It is not fair. Good, and what is the evidence?
The student: This is a known thing, O our Shaykh. People eat, we eat. People refrain from eating, we refrain from eating, by custom.

The Shaykh: This is your word, meaning evidence. We, by the grace of Allah, are not Hanafis, nor Malikis, nor Shafi'is, nor Hanbalis, let alone being partisan. Rather, we belong to only one school in the world: the school of the righteous Salaf (the earliest generations). You mentioned just now what you mentioned about Abu Muhammad Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him). Do you see if his statement agrees with what the Salaf (the earliest generations) were upon? Do you see all the athar (reports from a Companion or successor) that we look at, in which...The questioner : someone came to one of the Companions and said to him, "What is the ruling of Allah in such-and-such?" Have you seen such a text?
The student : Yes, my Shaykh.

The Shaykh: Yes.
The student: Like it, I saw it. I saw it.

The Shaykh: Bring your proof, as we learned from you just now.
The student: Excuse me, O our Shaykh, may Allah bless you. Ibn Abbas when...

The Shaykh: Yes.
The student: Ibn Abbas when he was speaking to the Companions or to the questioner, he would say to them: "I say: Allah said, and the Messenger said. And you say: Abu Bakr said, and Umar said?!" .

The Shaykh: May Allah forgive you, this is not the answer to my question.
The student: The point, O our Shaykh, is that they were encouraging...

The Shaykh: May Allah guide you. You still want to complete? I am telling you this is not the answer to my question. You want to complete your answer, which is not the answer to my question.
"Sa'd brought them, and Sa'd was wrapped up *** This is not - O Sa'd - how camels are brought in."
And I am telling you with complete frankness, you forgot my question.
The student: I did not forget it.

The Shaykh: Good, repeat it.
The student: What is the evidence that the Companions were asking in every issue or in every incident with this question: "What is the ruling of Allah and the Messenger in this?"

The Shaykh: Did you answer?
The student: I answered with the words of Ibn Abbas that...

The Shaykh: May Allah guide you. Tell me, did you answer or not?
The student: This is within the answer, O our Shaykh.

The Shaykh: O Shaykh, may Allah guide you. You did not mention a questioner and a questionee. When an incident comes with a questioner, he says to the scholar from the Companions, the one being asked, "What is the ruling of Allah in such-and-such?" You did not bring an example.
The student: I did not bring this.

The Shaykh : May Allah guide you, May Allah guide you.
The student: I brought, I brought...

The Shaykh: My brother, I brought, I understood, what did you bring? Do not repeat it to me.
The student: By deduction, O our Shaykh. By deduction, which is what you brought.

The Shaykh: Good, this is the evidence. There is no need for me to repeat the question to you, but you repeat the words to answer the question. And you will not be able to find a way to do that. Enough of partisanship, enough of partisanship. Then if...
The student: Excuse me, O our Shaykh. The Companions or the Salaf (the earliest generations).

The Shaykh: No, if you do not answer, you have no right to speak. If you are not answering the question, you have no right to speak, because it will be off-topic.
The student: Go ahead.