Explanation of the author's statement: "A mujtahid, even if only within his madhhab"

The Shaykh : Now, "a mujtahid" is a condition that has always been problematic. The judge must be a mujtahid. Ijtihad is of two types: absolute ijtihad, which is ijtihad in the opinions of all scholars, such that he applies these opinions to the texts and chooses what is correct; and the second is ijtihad within a madhhab, meaning he does not go outside the madhhab and does not consult opinions other than those of the madhhab, but within the madhhab he is a mujtahid who compares the opinions, presents them to the Book and the Sunnah, and knows the stronger position from the weaker one. The apparent meaning of their words is that if he knows the stronger position from the weaker one, even by considering the words of the jurists of the madhhab, he is called a mujtahid within his madhhab. So the mujtahid within his madhhab is either one who knows the opinions of the followers of the madhhab in light of the Book and the Sunnah and knows the stronger position, or one who presents the opinions of the followers of the madhhab to the imams of the madhhab and looks at what the imams held and chooses it. I think the difference between the two scenarios is clear. The difference between the two scenarios: the mujtahid within his madhhab, we say, can exercise ijtihad within his madhhab by considering the evidence of the Book and the Sunnah, or by considering the imams of the madhhab. The first knows the opinions in his madhhab and then presents them to the Book and the Sunnah. The second knows the opinions in his madhhab and then presents them to the imams of the madhhab. So he takes what the imams of the madhhab held and does not pay attention to the evidence or look into them. Clear. This excludes the muqallid. The muqallid who never exercises ijtihad takes, for example, al-Rawd al-Murba' and follows it, or takes al-Muntaha al-Iradat and follows it, or takes al-Iqna' and follows it, and does not look into the opinions or compare between them. So it is not permissible for him to be a judge, why? Because he is a muqallid, not a mujtahid; he does not compare between the opinions and choose the strongest. And the muqallid, Ibn 'Abd al-Barr said, "he is not among the scholars by the consensus of the scholars", and he spoke the truth, because Allah says . So whoever needs to refer to the opinion of another is not among the people of knowledge and is not among the people of learning. On this basis, we say that it is a condition for the judge to be a mujtahid. Then we divided ijtihad into two parts: absolute and restricted. Absolute ijtihad is that in which its practitioner looks into the opinions of all the people of knowledge and prefers what the Book and the Sunnah prefer. This is an absolute mujtahid. The restricted mujtahid is the mujtahid within his madhhab. This has two scenarios. The first scenario is that he is a mujtahid within his madhhab, presenting the opinions of the madhhab to the Book and the Sunnah and preferring what the Book and the Sunnah prefer. The second is a mujtahid within his madhhab regarding the imams of the madhhab: he knows the evidence, so he takes what the imams of the madhhab held and leaves the rest. The fourth category remains, which is the muqallid. He has no share in judging, and it is not permissible for him to be appointed as a judge because he is a muqallid. Just as it is not permissible for a muqallid to issue fatwas, it is not permissible for a muqallid to issue fatwas. Rather, if he wants to issue a fatwa and necessity calls for asking him, he says, "Imam Ahmad said so-and-so," or "The author of al-Kafi said so-and-so," or "The author of al-Iqna' said so-and-so," attributing the opinion to its speaker. Just as the layperson, if he hears a scholar speaking about something, does not issue a fatwa for him, but says, "So-and-so the scholar said such and such," because he has not reached the level of issuing fatwas until the opinion issues from himself, but he attributes the opinion to its speaker. Like the Companion who says, "I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) say such and such," attributing the hadith to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). Now, this last condition, "a mujtahid, even if only within his madhhab," he says it is a condition, but according to what? According to possibility. So if we do not find anything but a muqallid judge, he is better than the pure layperson, because the pure layperson does not benefit from anything ever and does not benefit others. And the muqallid relies on some books, some books of the madhhab he follows, so he has some knowledge. He is a mujtahid, even if only within his madhhab. I have a statement from Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah. He said, "The Shaykh said these conditions. The Shaykh Taqiy al-Din said, 'And these conditions are considered according to possibility, and the appointment of the most suitable is obligatory. So the most suitable, and this is indicated by the words of Ahmad and others. So he is appointed, for the most beneficial of the two wrongdoers, the least evil of them, the most just of the muqallids, and the most knowledgeable of them regarding taqlid'." He said in al-Furu', "And it is as he said, as the Shaykh said," meaning the Shaykh spoke the truth, may Allah have mercy on him. These ten conditions are conditions if it is possible to apply them. If it is not possible, the most suitable is appointed. So the most suitable, and this is indicated by the words of Allah the Exalted. Allah the Exalted said, And He said, So if we do not find anyone who possesses these attributes, but only possesses some of them, we take what is possible. Yes.