Is it possible to prove Taqleed?

In the Name of Allah,

All praise is due to Allah, the owner of the day of judgement.

If I make a mistake, it is from my ego, and if I say good, it is from Allah.

Last night, we had our tafsir of Quran class, and some of you took initiative to join it, and May Allah forgive the sins of who came for the sake of Allah, and enter them into Jannah without the accounting. "Wassabiqoon -as- Sabiqoon" (Surah Waqia) which means the foremost, the foremost was the way of the companion. They use to compete with each other to take intitiatives in the din of Allah. Second attribute that they had was to be consistent or "istiqamat". So, May Allah help us learn the meaning of Quran consistenly.

One of the most improtant verse of the Quran that we discussed was the verse below. Imam will InshAllah be spending more time next week on this subject, and we hope to learn more.

"And before thee also the messengers We sent were but men, to whom We granted inspiration: if ye realise this not, ask of those who possess the Message. " (Quran 16:43)

This is the verse that is referenced by the supporters of Taqleed -as - Shaksi (Blind following of a single person other than the Prophet (PBUH)) to establish the proof from the Quran and Sunnah for blindly following a madhab or school of thought. However, true tafsir of this verse has nothing to do with Taqleed, as proven already from ibn khattir.

What if there are ahadith that we have not read, which can prove that we are being commanded by Allah to ask scholars if we don't know?

Of cource, it is possible. Since our knowledge on din is limited to what we have learnt so far, and it is certainly possible that we have got many things wrong, and will accept it if the proof is presented.

Again, if you pay attention to the verse above, if their claim is true about a second tafsir of this verse telling Muslims to ask a scholar when THEY DON'T KNOW. I think everyone knows that fact that it is a fardh upon muslims to ask someone with knowledge, if they themselves are not capable of knowing the answer of a question. If we know ourselves, this verse doesn't force us to ask the scholar, so this verse cannot be use to prove Taqleed.

For example, can we find out on our own, if Life Insurance is halal?

Of course not. It is a new situation that wasn't present at the time of the Prophet (PBUH) and Abu Hanifa (my favourite of all) dealt with new cases like these all day long. And, we should continue his work with these new cases. So, one sound opinion is that life Insurance is halal, because everything outside worship is halal, unless it is prohibted directly or indirectly. There is no prohibition regarding willing to provide for the family after death. As long as there is no interest or other prohibited clauses in the life insurance. Some find it prohibited, because one doesn't know the date of the profit disbursment (gharar). However, death is guaranteed, so gharar can not be applied here, and statistical models are used to ensure the increase in the profitibility, just like in any other business, where marketing analysis is used before product is sold.

Lets Assume that someone brings the ahadith and sayings of the companions to prove that this verse was not only referring to people of the book, but to Muslims also. If that happens, and someone proves that, they will be doing ijtihad, which is the opposite of taqleed. So, automatically, it will prove that taqleed is not binding on everyone.

Hence, any effort to prove Taqleed from the Quran and Sunnah will be only disproving Taqleed as defined by the most scholars today. In essence, it is impossible to prove Taqleed, because it requires one to follow without asking for proof, which is a violation of the condition of Taqleed-as-shaksi.

Does that mean every dick and harry can issue fatwas from their homes?

No, that will be following ones desire in the matter of din, and will be a sign of hypocrisy. We don't have to go to either extremes, but live in the practical world, where our Prophet (PBUH) asked us to live in.

Rule of thumb is if we don't know, ask someone who knows. If we don't trust the person, don't ask. If we have a little knowledge about Quran and hadith, ask for a proof from the person of knowledge. If there is a disagreement among the people with knowledge, revert to the most trusted opinion, if we can't decipher the proofs ourselves. If someone proves it to us with sound sources, accept the mistake, and follow the new opinion.

What is happening today is that muslims are being asked to surrender their wills to four Imams who have died a long time ago. People are asking us to blindly follow Imams who came within 100 years of Prophet's (PBUH) life, whereas they are asking us not to follow sound, clear, and easy to understand proofs that dates back a few years before these Imams. So, somehow these four Imams settle the fiqh for us 1300 years ago, and nothing need to be debated now, which Prophet (PBUH) himself couldn't do it 100 years before them. What a wonderful logic!

Most of the authentic ahadith compilation that scholars learn today were not present during the time of these four Imams, and they themselves ordered us to not follow them, if there was a contradictory evidence.

This is what I disagree with the most. They do not consider someone as a Muqallid (a follower of the Madhhabs) unless he adheres to the following conditions (as summarized from various books and articles on the subject):

1. Of all the exemplary scholars, the Muslim Ummah has been blessed with; Taqleed is restricted to just four scholars or Imams.

2. The follower of the Madhhab (way) of one Imam has to compulsorily follow the Madhhab in all matters of the religion.

3. The Muqallid does not need to know the proof from the texts, behind the ruling he is supposed to follow, and it is sufficient for him to know that Imam could never have said anything without proof. The saying of the Imam is itself proof for the Muqallid.

4. The Muqallid cannot follow the other three Madhhabs even in minor issues. To follow the other Madhhab is a punishable offence. Even if a Muqallid finds a verse of the Qur’aan or an authentic Hadeeth, which rules different from the ruling of his Madhhab, he still has to stick to his own Madhhab.

We cannot claim to follow the madhab of our forefathers, and reject the truth, because whoever did that in the past ended up in a very painful state. Mushrik of Makkah claimed to be following the madhab of Prophet Ismail, and they pressured Abu Talib to do Taqleed on his deathbed.

Messenger of Allah (PBUH) came to break to chains of submition to creation, and to teach us how to submit to the creator directly. No confessions on Sundays. No Popes making sharia. No Imams decreeing the absolute ruling that can never be challenged. Let us not start chaining ourselves to the creation of Allah, and look away from the commands of Allah that are CLEAR. Whole point of protecting Quran for us was that we can refer to it, if someone misinterprets, original knowledge is not lost. If we are not allowed to examine any rulings done 1300 years ago, then how are we different then Jews?

Following is what we should be following, which people of yemem followed with Muaath. Follow the scholars in the matter of things we don't know, but if something becomes clear for us, and our scholar will not accept, we should not follow the scholar in that matter.

“O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Apostle, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.” (Quran 4:59)

JazakAllah Khairin
A struggling Muslim
AbuArman (Adnan Jumani)