assalamu alaykum a request: This is an attempted translation from urdu book. Language and grammatical errors are possible. Ignore them and take the message part from this post. During a debate between moulana ameen safdar okarvi ra and gair muqallid/la-madhabee/salafee: person: imam abu haneefa ra was dhaeef (weak) moulana: you are thousand times dhaeef (weakest) person:(gets wild) do you have any solid proof that i am dhaeef. No court accepts a ambiguous proof, when a conventional court doesn’t accept ambiguous proof, then what about something related to deen, deen is more important. How can an ambiguous proof be accepted. moulana: when ambiguous proof cannot be accepted for a ignorant like you, then how is that we accept ambiguous proof against imam abu haneefa ra, whose imamath was universally accepted by fuqha, muhadditeen, ulema, sufiah, kings to general public, arab and non-arabs. person: that is the decision of muhaddith ibn-addi. moulana: the decision is accepted when is based on accepted proofs, what shara’ee proofs do you have against our imam ra? person: we accept the decisions of muhadditeen blind folded, without proofs. moulana:: Your group calls that “blind following” (taqleed) and declares that as shirk. person:: Oh, yes!! That is blind following. But taqleed is acceptable to you! Hence you can accept this. moulana: who told you i am muqallid of ibn addi. I am not a muqallid (follower) of imam shafaee ra as well, imam shafaee ra is the shaykh of ibn addi.